"Hi Warwick,

Warwick wrote: If you mean what is/are my belief/conclusions based on....the sum total of my research.

So is it just a belief without expressible evidence to back it up?"


No. I didn't think a basic review of Egyptology 101 was required to be included in every post. Was there an aspect of what I stated that differs in any way from what you understand to be the general position within Egyptology? If so I 'd be happy to elaborate on that specific point.

I will say that much of my research of late has been concentrated on the Early pre and proto dynastic...The era wherein the icons/fetishes/totems/symbols of their beliefs and the role of the King within same were laid down.

" Why would you choose to believe something that has basis in non expressible criteria? "

Not applicable

"
No disrespect intended, just expressing an opinion here, but let me attempt answer that question for you! It is something which you were obviously taught by rote indoctrination and kindheartedly believe it to be correct, whether it is true or not! "

actually...that was mostly true up until the late 90's. Which is when I again became a student. Didn't take long to find that almost all that I had thought I knew , about the Old Kingdom was mostly mistaken.

"There is a genius in the mathematics of the Pyramids that would stagger most imaginations; because of the information obtained by rote indoctrination most would be unable to see that genius.

Just my humble opinion"

IOW's

it is just a belief without expressible evidence to back it up

What I am or am not capable of appreciating, understanding or being able to explain...doesn't have Aunt Fanny to do with anything


"it would be highly unlikely you would wish to see anything that does not conform to your preconceived perspective of the Ancient Egyptian peoples created by the rote indoctrination because you are so secure in your knowledge regarding this culture being correct."

that is a pretty base assessment of my detachment. Good thing you don[t mean any disprespect by it


" This is propagating the "I can't see anything there, so there isn't anything there to see" logic, that is prolific amongst much of academia today. "

Then why the hell do I spend so much time LOOKING at stuff?

"Tell me Warwick,Is there really any point in having a discussions when one of those involved is so absolutely sure he is correct and assuredly there is no way he can be wrong?"

I wouldn't know as I have never been absolutely sure about anything other than the fact that I woke up this morning....and the Nile is rivewr in Egypt

"In my humble opinion there are individuals on this message board who suffer this affliction."

Glad to hear you're so open minded about it

"When it comes to alternative research and new information, they resort to ridicule and harassment of the messenger rather than engaging in debate and offering proof the material’s error. "

let's go back a couple of posts to where I posted the vile insidious comment that has proked your tirade..

"I believe the need to interact with the divine was the denominator of 3rd and 4th dynasty stone architecture. Pharaoh's finger did however Point the way. "

ridicule and harassment indeed

"Is it because there are no valid proofs to be offered rebutting the subject matter?"

rendered non applicable

"You ask alternative researchers for proofs of beliefs and theories, when you are unable produce anything other than speculations and consensus to support your own. "

That is a ridiculous generalisation

"Speculation and consensus is not science, it is a poor basis on which to build a perspective. "

""I believe the need to interact with the divine was the denominator of 3rd and 4th dynasty stone architecture. "

so I could have been referring to divine genius..could I not? I could have been agreeing that the demonstration of certain mathematical/geometric/astronomical relationships was the prime denominator.



" Pharaoh's finger did however Point the way. "

I could have easily said hand. What I should and meant to say was that each Complex was different according to the dictates of that REIGN..they were all similar within the dictates of tradition and beliefs.

There is an observable pattern of developement of Royal Funerary and commenmorative architecture from Naqada on through to the end of the 6th dynasty.

That of Stone inclusion (other than protcullis's) from Khasekhemwy on.

That of the employment of the Cartouche from Netjerikhet (his son?) on. By including this I have to cede that there is an argument to be made that the cartouche's evolvement of the Shen ring is emblematic of the perfect circle rather than what I conclude to be simply 'encirclement'. So again there is room for your homage to maths/whatever there as well





I think you jumped the gun because you are convinced that those who disagree with you WANT to disagree with you.

Thank you for including me amongst the acadmics BTW

Warwick




















" I have always found that the main obstacle to free
association on these boards is the broad
misconception that what we do not know is more
significant than what we do know."

Warwick L Nixon, March 8, 2019