Don Barone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>> Ronald's point is that the Giza plateau is one
> example of how apparent geometric relationships
> can be created by unrelated structures.
>
> Says who ? Prove this statement please. Prove that
> they are unrelated. You can't no more than we can
> prove that they are so please don't make such
> sweeping erroneous statements.

My apologies. I should have been more careful about my use of the word "unrelated". As we know, the Gizamids are architecturally very similar constructions (although differing in size), and were put in place on the orders of Khufu and his successors; so, to that extent, they are related. It would probably have been better if I had said: "Ronald's point is that the Giza plateau is one example of how apparent geometric relationships can be created by structures that were nevertheless not planned from the outset to bear any geometric relationship to one another." In other words, the existence of such geometric relationships cannot be used as evidence on which to base the theory that what we have at Giza is the result of transgenerational architectural planning (if that is the real point of your argument here).

On a slightly different note, this I suppose might also demonstrate Ronald's point (given the authors' theory has not, TBMK, received wide acceptance.)

Hermione
Director/Moderator - The Hall of Ma'at

Rules and Guidelines

hallofmaatforum@proton.me