I did not know Hawass returned to make a presentation. This makes him look a lot less bad.

The problem is always the same; we see what we expect. This means all evidence is interpreted in terms of the prevailing paradigm and obviously Bauval's and Hancock's theories are very weak in terms of the prevailing definitions and interpretations. If the pyramid builders really did use savage and primitive means to build tombs for their kings and their superstitions persisted for thousands of years then it's improbable that Bauval's ideas are tenable. "Evidence" interpreted in terms of the paradigm as well as the work of decades of Egyptology in terms of these paradigms make Bauval's ideas unlikely at best.

But Hawass doesn't seem to recognize the paradigms are hardly founded on bedrock. Much of it has never been tested at all or has already been put in doubt by modern science. Perhaps if he shored up the foundations he could show just cause for sayingBauval's theories are bogus, perhaps not.

____________
Man fears the pyramid, time fears man.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/21/2023 02:45PM by cladking.