Rick Baudé Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Rick, I have not seen you present any images
> of
> > the so-called Seth animal that is not an
> image of
> > Seth himself. Do you have an image of the
> animal
> > that is not Seth? If so, post it and the
> source,
> > because I have not seen it yet.
> >
>
> I presented 3 images of the seth animal. That's
> it. One with his head on a human body, 2 in his
> full form that should be instantly recognrizable
> to anybody's who's the least bit familiar with
> egyptology.
Please explain how you determined that these are not images of Seth.
> > Where have you presented this evidence, Rick?
> I
> > have seen only images of Seth. Please post
> the
> > links to the images of the creatures
> themselves,
> > apart from Seth.
>
> Uh the pictures I presented them before.
Please explain how you determined that these are not images of Seth.
> > What you have shown are images of the god,
> who was
> > depicted as a composite, imaginary creature.
> Show
> > me a pack of these creatures hunting, show me
> a
> > herd of them grazing, show one kept as a pet.
>
> > That's all I'm asking. Just one image from
> > anytime in a 3000 year period.
>
> Oh please. You must be joking. This a classic case
> "absence of evidence is evidence of absence". Sure
> I'll show you the pix write after you show me a
> pix of that imaginary architect Imhotep designing
> a pyramid. Nice try I've shown you three there
> must be hundreds more images of Seth. It's your
> turn to do a google search.
Yes, Rick, you showed me images of Seth....but that is
NOT what I asked you for! Now show me an image of the animal itself THAT IS
NOT SETH! Or surrender.
> > It's no analogy because again, I am NOT
> asking for
> > a mummy! I asked you for evidence in the
> form of
> > an image of the creature separate from the
> god.
>
> Uhm yes in previous post you said if there was a
> seth animal where are the seth mummies?
Please show where I said this; I have told you several times already I never asked you about any Seth mummies. Do you actually read what I write? What you are doing here is a strawman argument.
> Dazzling display of circular reasoning; The AE's
> made fabulous beasts that are imaginary. The seth
> animal is a fabulous beast. conclusion the seth
> animal is imaginary.
No, what you have just written is a dazzling display of an actual strawman. If you cannot or will not discuss the points I have made and will not answer questions and simply want to make silly accusations, I'm done here. If you ever find a single image of Seth animal anywhere, let us know.
