Hermione Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Er ... you might want to have a closer look at
> "Legends of the Pyramids" before coming to such a
> conclusion. Might be a bit premature.

Ta. Will do.


> > This is according to the long established
> > scientific consensus.
>
> According to historical and archaeological
> evidence from many sources.

Yes, I hoped that 'scientific consensus' encompassed that.


> So, if it dated to 12,000 YA, why did work-gangs
> or crews (dated to the mid-3rd millennium BC)
> leave traces of their names - indicating how they
> were organising the work, e.g., which of them was
> working on the south wall, or north wall - in the
> relieving chambers?

As you say, 'evidence from many sources'.

But there are also those who question that evidence, e.g. [www.scribd.com]


> And why did Inspector Merer leave copious notes of
> how he and his colleagues transported stone blocks
> to Giza? Does he, and his journal, date to 12,000
> TYA, too?

That Merer transported stone blocks to/from the vicinity of Giza, does not necessarily indicate the transport of megalithic blocks to construct the GP.

But anyway, while I daresay you have dozens of other pieces of evidence to cite (and I will also be unable to refute those to your satisfaction), I state at the beginning of my thesis that it flies in the face of the evidence, and is based on the premise that the GP was built by a technologically advanced, antediluvian civilisation over a dozen millennia ago.

So, unless you can countenance such a premise, it may be best to treat my thesis as speculative fiction, and if you have heeded my warnings, you might try pretending to entertain such a premise (a la Doublethink) simply in order to appreciate the coherence of the thesis it's based on.

It's a conundrum. How can The Earth orbit The Sun, when The Sun clearly orbits The Earth?