Warwick L Nixon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> they are cherry picked shots in the dark based
> upon your predetermined conclusion that the
> Utterances talk about geysers


If there's any cherry picking going on it's in what parts of
my arguments people are willing to respond to. If I say something
about the flood coming at the peak growing season (as it does) it
will take 20 posts to get back on topic and my main point will be
swept under the rug.

If you want me to cite chapter and verse of the PT I can do that
but I seriously doubt people are reading the snippets with an open
mind so quoting long passages that agree with exactly what I'm say-
ing would prove counterproductive. The fact is that the PT agree
with my contention. Saying it's just Mercer is an evasion. This
work says what it does whether anyone's interpretation is right or
wrong. It says THE EXACT SAME THING regardless of what translator
is used. You can't change this by claiming I'm taking things out
of context because it simply isn't true. I'd grant that if I were
quoting Faulkner's translations for the exact same thing then much
of the stuff I picked would be "cherry-picked" as you say. This is
because Faulkner is only about 60% consistent while Mercer is well
over 80%.

I'll tell the truth here; If reality were determined by argument then
I'd say there's a virtual certainty that the Egyptians had cold water
geysers and the case is closed. This is not because it's been estab-
lished that Osiris is powered by yeast gas...

[www.hallofmaat.com]

...but the significant physical and mountainous circumstantial evidence.
But no amount of argument, no amount of scolarship, and no amount of
science determines reality. Reality is determined by mother nature.
It doesn't matter one whit what ANY individual or group of individuals
believe. It doesn't even matter that someone can prove something
since reality and mother nature are the final arbitors.

You say cherry picking but haven't cited one word in this thread or any
other to suggest where I'm wrong. Instead you hold up the existence
of scholars and their understanding to refute it.

This is a simple (exceedingly simple) question; what was the primary
means of lifting the stones on the Egyptian great pyramids. It's a fact
no one knows. I just found a quote by Petrie the other day that this
was the one thing which wasn't known. It's still not known. Excluding
any idea by suggesting it's not in agreement with the scholars is short
sighted and will NEVER lead to an answer unless the scholars find it.

This isn't rocket science.

You say it's cherry picking but have never shown it. If you were right
then you could show that these things right here in this thread don't
fit in context but most of them fit just fine. I'll even help. Use this
format with the quotations in google to find anything at all in the PT;

[www.google.com]

Go on, try it. Prove me wrong.



____________
Man fears the pyramid, time fears man.