>>Considering the AE who laid out Giza during the 3rd millennium BCE had no knowledge of ancient Greek (iirc it would develop as a language for over 1,000 years), numerology on their language is a meaningless fact.<<
AE did not lay out Giza, they simply physically construted it. The issue is thus not what the AE knew but what the entities who designed Giza knew. They were the ones that designed the alphabet based on the pyramids they laid out. Then it was easy to create words with a specific numerical value to fit the data and needed notions. Chronology is not an issue – see relativity and time dilation.

>>The AE should have had no knowledge whatever of Ceres data you claim under-pinned their plan.<<
This is correct.

>>Have you ever heard of the "Law of Coincidence"? I'm not making this up, it's a real law... check it out.<<
The Law of Coincidence is the law of truly large numbers. It is based on statistics, something I gather you know nothing about. There is truly a large numbers of ways the Giza layout could be defined. But when one presents one – not an infinite number of notions from where you start and step by step define everyhting based on common sence and the existing archeological data, then the coincidence factor is truly rediculous to consider.

>>I believe we've seen enough of this to understand you also have an agenda; to wit, you believe alien star travelers who would be in a position to measure all this data DID the design layout.<<
Since I don’t see you presenting an alternative explanation does this mean you agree. Are you basing the validity of a theory on whether an alien thought of it or an Egytian? Isn’t this a bit racist and more importantly un-scientific?