<HTML>You are really a funny little person :-) Your argumentation is somewhere around "Now I go and get my bigger brother".
It seems to have escaped your mind that credentials of persons don't count in a scientific debate, but inly the presented facts. And unless the basic questions aren't answered sufficiently, the supporters of Davidovits can have any credentials they
by
Frank Doernenburg
-
Ancient History
<HTML>Why, thank you Sandy.
That's as perfectly helpful as a Margaret Morris response. You must be using her "How to Completely Muddy a Conversation" Rulebook.
Here's a reference for you...
Einstein, 1951. Hawking, 1983. Gates, 1994. Buffett, 1996.
Since my people are FAR more intelligent and successful than YOUR people, we have clearly shown where MY arg
by
Anthony
-
Ancient History
<HTML>I see she cites Aigner and quotes Lehner. Gauri for the Sphinx quarry. Davidovits's demonstration on Nova.
Sandy</HTML>
by
Sandy J. Perkins
-
Ancient History
<HTML>Margaret Morris has not presented good info or data to address the deathblows to the geopolymer theory.
Period.
If you can't see that, then I am afraid the word "dense" has been severely misdirected.
Oh, I'm not saying that the stuff she puts out isn't all groovy and cool and technical...
Unfortunately, it's all <b>IRRELEVANT</b> when it d
by
Anthony
-
Ancient History
<HTML>Sandy,
I must COMPLETELY disagree with you on your points about Frank.
There is such a thing as courtesy, but Ms. Morris' continual denial and inability to explain simple facts have frustrated both Frank and myself to the point where we start yelling those simple questions, and ask for simple answers.
And we keep getting bogus references and irrelevant data.
And then, without
by
Anthony
-
Ancient History
<HTML>Please, Sandy, Don't stop posting. It would be a loss for this group. I enjoy every single of your posts :-)
And when I have time I promise to be more respectful and bow to the specialists who are so specialistic that they cannot answer the simplest questions :-)
I am not ignoring evidence, in contrast tor Morris and Davidovits. Who are ignoring all the visible evidence. To the
by
Frank Doernenburg
-
Ancient History
<HTML>FD problem 1, objectivity
FD problem 2, comprehension
FD problem 2, qualifications
FD problem 4, professionalism
Objectivity - the observation of a problem without preconceived ideas. FD you start with the preconceived belief there wasn’t rockmaking. You insist its so but they cite references for fabricated sandstone and basalt - you have an objectivity problem. The sandstone and bas
by
Sandy J. Perkins
-
Ancient History
<HTML>Conveniently forgetting your own ugly remarks, in which anyone opposing Davidovits and Morris is assumed to have dubious motives.
Tell me, Sandy, how does your earlier remark about `non-scientists' function in the case of non-scientist Margaret Morris?
For all your talk of `science', you seem to have difficulty in so basic a thing as separating `data' from one tendent
by
Martin Stower
-
Ancient History
<HTML>I'm not pretending to be a "junior publicist" or anything else. I deem this to be good science--take it from a science freak. There's a lot out there these days. Try visiting Davidovits's home on the web. You might see what I mean.
Sandy</HTML>
by
Sandy J. Perkins
-
Ancient History
<HTML>Davidovits has made major contributions to materials science. Try visiting his website. I call what he has done creative genius.
Try looking at the data on the pyramids. Unless you can find fault with this science, you have no grounds for any of your ugly remarks. People are entitled to be enthusiastic without being denounced by people like you.
There is a lot of brilliant science
by
Sandy J. Perkins
-
Ancient History
<HTML>Dear Frank,
I believe my Morris v Dunn article mentions that Dr. Davidovits went to see Dr. Klemm in Munich, and that Dr. Klemm was unwilling to allow any one of his samples to be investigated by Dr. Davidovits et al.
For more on the Colossi of Memnon and pyramid blocks, please await my next rebuttal to your last several comments.
Bye for now,
Margaret</HTML>
by
Margaret Morris
-
Ancient History
<HTML>Dear Martin,
I hope my reply below to Sandy answers your questions.
Margaret
Dear Sandy,
Thank you for contacting me. I am sorry I did not see your email message. You are right that, like most people, I have little free time. Preparing referenced written projects does take quite a bit time when there are so many objections to address all at once. For the rebuttal to Archae I am wo
by
Margaret Morris
-
Ancient History
<HTML>An objective observer? Would that be you? You've not even given a good impression of one (never mind the naïveté of the notion).
On the contrary, Sandy, your posts read like the output of a junior publicist - but well done on working in that Davidovits is a `genius'; that his website is `a remarkable place with unique knowledge in all the world';
by
Martin Stower
-
Ancient History
<HTML>I have no "ideas" but I presented Mrs. Morris several big faults in their ideas, beginning with the Famina stela (where there is no word about Djoser building his pyramid or about processing stones), continuing with the visible evidence of quarried blocks (tool- and breaking marks, ununiform design, impossible to cast details etc), ending with the chemical fingerprints done
by
Frank Doernenburg
-
Ancient History
<HTML>Martin: I wrote to her.
"Dear Margaret:
Someone at the Ma'at message board asked who Zeller appealed to for samples.
I figured that, since you have not answered this question, I would bring it to your attention because the fellow did not want to contact you himself after I suggested he write to you.
I guess with all the rock formulas and such you guys are engaged in, tha
by
Sandy J. Perkins
-
Ancient History
<HTML>Sandy J. Perkins wrote:
>
> It would be fair to call me a supporter of good
> science. Look at the names of the scientists involved here.
> Look at the strength of the data. Do you see that kind of
> supporting data for Schoch, Hancock or Dunn? There are posts
> on this message board and on websites for all to read that go
> into detail. Davidovits' website
by
Martin Stower
-
Ancient History
<HTML>It would be fair to call me a supporter of good science. Look at the names of the scientists involved here. Look at the strength of the data. Do you see that kind of supporting data for Schoch, Hancock or Dunn? There are posts on this message board and on websites for all to read that go into detail. Davidovits' website is a remarkable place with unique knowledge in all the world
by
Sandy J. Perkins
-
Ancient History
<HTML>On my anti-Davidovits-page is a picture of a prepared but not used block in the former Chufu-quarry...
FD :-)</HTML>
by
Frank Doernenburg
-
Ancient History
<HTML>The pearls cast above are very meticulously chosen for their luster, and do not represent the overall quality of all the pearls in the necklace that is being "sold" to us.
I would say that we are only being shown one side of the peals, as well. The other sides are pretty hideous.
As a matter of fact, the actual line that holds all the pearls together is so flimsy, it coul
by
Anthony
-
Ancient History
<HTML>When I see objections to this Data Summary like those posted on this message board—I think of pearls before swine.
When more than three independent research teams show chemically bound water in the overall pyramid masonry, and when Davidovits has shown through chemical analyses that his zeolitic binder matches pyramid cement (and independent anayses show the same), and pertrographer
by
Sandy J. Perkins
-
Ancient History
<HTML>at August-23-01 12:01:
Anthonyšwrote
>Your own quote:
>"In science, a fundamental rule holds that data must
>be duplicated by independent experiments. "
>
>Speaks volumes about what Davidovits must do
>in order to prove his theory.
>
>Simply, build us a 2.5 ton block of his geopolymer.
In a similar vein, I would certainly challange Margaret
to al
by
Keith Littleton
-
Ancient History
<HTML>Margaret:
I have followed your arguments, reasoning and logic as far as I can reasonably go.
You appear to focus on minutea, while GIANT evidence screams to the contrary.
Your own quote:
"In science, a fundamental rule holds that data must be duplicated by independent experiments. "
Speaks volumes about what Davidovits must do in order to prove his theory.
Simply, buil
by
Anthony
-
Ancient History
<HTML>Margaret Morris v Chris Dunn
Correcting the Misinformation
Summary: Chris Dunn has wrongly asserted that the published scientific literature proves that the geopolymer theory is wrong. In reality, the opposite is true. Independent experiments satisfy the scientific process of duplication and verification (see the Data Summary below).
Chris Dunn writes, “In The Giza Power Plant, my
by
Margaret Morris
-
Ancient History
<HTML>Morris v Doernenburg: Part 11
Part 11 – Chemistry of the Giza Quarries:
Summary: Frank Doernenburg’s remarks concerning the chemistry of the Giza quarries are wrong, another example of his torture of the scientific literature. To make his point, he confuses soluble magnesium salts with insoluble magnesium carbonate.
Frank Doernenburg’s responds, “wrong: on page 193, Klemm states t
by
Margaret Morris
-
Ancient History
<HTML>PART 10: Concluding Statements; References
Concluding Statements
Margaret Morris: It is one thing for someone to ask questions when that person does not understand something. But that is not what is going on here. What Frank Doernenburg is doing amounts to a malicious and unfounded attack on research that he shows himself to be unable to comprehend.
He is broadcasting misinformati
by
Margaret Morris
-
Ancient History
<HTML>PART 9: Block Features; Disaggregating Rock; More On Lift Lines; Subterranean Structures Again
Block Features
Frank Doernenburg quotes me as follows, “I cannot tell if Doernenburg's photograph of Menkaure's pyramid shows limestone or granite. In any case, Egyptologists believe that this pyramid was restored in the 19th Dynasty or possibly later. Doernenburg presents the p
by
Margaret Morris
-
Ancient History
<HTML>PART 9: Block Features; Disaggregating Rock; More On Lift Lines; Subterranean Structures Again
Block Features
Frank Doernenburg quotes me as follows, “I cannot tell if Doernenburg's photograph of Menkaure's pyramid shows limestone or granite. In any case, Egyptologists believe that this pyramid was restored in the 19th Dynasty or possibly later. Doernenburg presents the p
by
Margaret Morris
-
Ancient History
<HTML>PART 8: Tomb Scenes; Frank Doernenburg’s Methodology; Cut Blocks; Block Raising Again; The Famine Stele Again
Tomb Scenes
Frank Doernenburg adds, “And, as I said, the Egyptians themselves must have been great liars, showing Dozends of stone dressing reliefs, and even block/statue-movieng reliefs although they couldn't do it: Bad, bad Egyptians.”
Margaret Morris replies: Fran
by
Margaret Morris
-
Ancient History
<HTML>PART 7: Matching Original Blocks
Matching Original Blocks
Frank Doernenburg adds, “…you could not provide a singel block which can be compared with the "original" ones.”
Margaret Morris replies: I have shown above that the opposite is true. Petrie and geologists of the Japanese team are among researchers who have observed that the quarries do not match the pyramid blocks
by
Margaret Morris
-
Ancient History
<HTML>PART 5: Tool Marks; Subterranean Tunnels and Vaults; Break Patterns; Block Sizes Again; Quality
Tool Marks
Frank Doernenburg continues, “…the tool markings in the quarries…”
Margaret Morris replies: As previously explained, there is an insufficient amount of block quarrying at Giza to account for the Great Pyramid. Petrie was the first to examine the problem of the vastly insuffici
by
Margaret Morris
-
Ancient History
