Warwick L Nixon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You just said it yourself. You look to G1 because
> that is the one that is studied the most, by the
> most. Yet when you are apprised of any results of
> same that do not fit with your theory, you throw
> them out as being specualtive.
I never said this. I don't believe anyone should look at G1 in a vacuum. This is one of the barbs tossed at anyone who disagrees with orthodoxy but it does not apply.
> In fact you listen to no one, trust one, and
> basically regard us all as idiots whose opinions
> are based on the opinions of others.
I don't care about opinion and never have. Even things which are statements of fact I accept only provisionally and never globally. This hardly makes anyone an idiot (me sometimes) but it does mean that my beliefs are often somewhat different.
I do learn who to "trust" rather quickly usually.
> You hijack everythread and turn to a discussion of
> ramping
Everytime I make any comment someone believes I'm pushing geysers and will bring it up. This isn't always extremely far from the truth. Of course we all know that my knowledge of this culture is limited but I am unique in having a focus on the only the OK and its pyramids. I do have a great deal of knowledge now about this with very little opinion. I try to contribute when I can. On this forum I try to get people to see what I believe is obvious; that the ancients employed some sort of natural motive force named Osiris to build G1. But if you look at my posts even in this thread, I was not the one to bring up geysers. Someone else did and I responded. This is the way it usually works here. When I want to talk geysers I have started my own thread right here for the main part.
> YOUmade up your mind about Pyramid construction
> before you made your first post here.
This isn't true either. Anthony will be pleased to know he drove me in this direction by telling me I could never understand the ancients without studying what they wrote. I've read every word of it and looked at the bulk of the evidence.
> you haven't changed your posiions one iota, other
> than to pick up a lot os useful Pseudohistorical
> badinage about Academic sloth.
Frankly I've never had an extremely high regard for specialists. Not because they are ignorant or stupid but because they tend to be so focused on some minutia that they don't see the big picture. I believe life is the big picture and that there is too little of it in science and industry.
We're allindividuals and such considerations apply to us unequally.
> You insist that the historical record is a
> fabrication..except of course for those aspects
> that might be construed as not negating your wild
> ideas.
No. Actually I have a lot more respect for the writings of ancient authors than more recent ones. While 19th century sciebntists are generally trustworthy many others are less so. Of course the nature of the claim and the individual making it affect how seriously I can accept it. Some of my investigation is simply assuming that there were geysers and following the implications.
Wait until you hear it!
> And when all else fails you accuse this panel of
> not entertaining alternate theory
Not this so much as I accuse the powers that be in Egypt to be blindered. I believe many egyptologists are very poor scientists and far too focused. I think this would be apparent to anyone who investigated the pyramids as an amateur or outsider.
____________
Man fears the pyramid, time fears man.