Mysteries :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Thanos5150 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

To summarize your claims that I've accused Reisner of engaging in "conspiracy" and "deception":

    "You have repeatedly stated or implied Reiser's narrative to be a deliberate attempt to deceive..."
    "was not some wilful "deception" as you make it out to be on Reisner's part..."
    "...is hardly some form of "deception"."
    "You have invented a conspiracy that otherwise does not exist."
    [grahamhancock.com]

    "...you like to cry some kind of conspiracy regarding Reiser's interpretation..."
    "Why you think this is some kind of "conspiracy" is beyond me."
    [grahamhancock.com]

    "...by no means did Reisner attempt to engage in any deception as you have irresponsibly portrayed it..."
    "...there is no conspiracy here..."
    [grahamhancock.com]

    "Reisner was no more trying to "deceive the world" as Lehner was about the worker's town"
    [grahamhancock.com]

    "Does Lehner or anyone else ever state or imply Reisner was trying to "deceive" anyone"
    "Reisner was not out to "deceive" anyone"
    [grahamhancock.com]

These are deflections that do not represent what I said in my posts. Certainly, Reisner can be accused of inventing a conspiracy in which Khufu's team coordinated a secret reburial of Hetepheres from Dashur to Giza. And he might also be accused of inventing a deception in which Khufu's team tried to slip the sealed but empty sarcophagus past Khufu without him knowing it didn't contain the remains of Hetepheres I. But I've never stated or implied that Reisner, himself, engaged in conspiracy or deception. On the contrary, I've stated several times that I thought Reisner's "motives were pure" but that he simply applied an obsolete standard of proof and his peers swallowed it whole.



> As I said: "Reisner offered a theory which was clearly
> based on ample conjecture and it was the fault of
> others it was ever passed off as "fact"."

Thanks, I got it the first time, but that's simply not born out in Reisner's writings on Hetepheres. In fact, he repeats segments of his fictional narrative elsewhere, for example:

    "We already knew that the contents of the box had been gathered up from the original tomb, and that the original tomb had been broken into by thieves."

    "The chipping of the upper edge of the coffin and the lower edge of the lid had been noted when the tomb was first opened and understood as proving that the coffin had been closed and opened again before deposition in the secret tomb."

    "I reached the conclusion that the deposit was a reburial brought here from another tomb..."

As another example, Reisner was not only certain that the sarcophagus originally occupied a different tomb and was relocated to G7000x by command of Khufu, but he was also 100% convinced that the remains of Hetepheres was in the sealed alabaster box:

    "In a preliminary statement I set forth the facts as known at that time and outlined the various possibilities arising from the known facts...I never doubted that the mummy was in the coffin...In my preliminary statement I had mentioned every possibility except the one which lay patent before us. There was no mummy in the coffin. It had seemed to me inconceivable that Cheops should have ordered the remains of his mother's burial transferred to Giza and hidden under a hundred feet of masonry unless the body, the most essential part of any burial, had been brought along with the coffin."

Reisner wasn't presenting a hypothesis, he was presenting what he considered to be the facts with strong conviction. If you read Reisner differently, then we must agree to disagree.



> Like I also said:
> "Regardless, it was the norm amongst
> antiquarians of the day, and really expected of
> them, to offer such "hypotheticals", "stories" if
> you will, to create a narrative around such
> discoveries which as we can see still happens in
> the field today."

That's exactly the problem I've been describing. The narratives that were created by a "norm" that loosely portrays "hypotheticals" as facts confirm that what was "really expected of them" was a low standard of proof when presenting their "stories". The fact is, the field did NOT accept his presentation merely as a "hypothetical" but rather, as Lehner pointed out, it was accepted as "historical fact" by peers in the field, for 60 years. And many of those hypotheticals are still accepted as fact today.



> These people are not out to "deceive" anyone but
> rather is a problem systemic to fields that given
> the incomplete nature of the information more
> often than not relies on interpretation.

Again, I didn't accuse Reisner of deception. And while some modern investigators might be able to see through this systemic problem after Lehner published his 1985 alternative explanation, that "systemic problem" has made a long-lasting contribution to strengthening the overall context and structure of the narrative and timeline, nevertheless. The damage is done. The jury is unable to ignore what it heard.

For example, what corroborating evidence do we have to support that Hetepheres I was Khufu's mother other than what Reisner reported in G7000x? Objects were found that included the name "Hetepheres" and "Mother of the King of Upper and Lower Egypt". Those objects don't mention Khufu. And Lehner (p.83) describes a different connotation of "Mother" with respect to traveling into the afterlife.

Also, what corroborating evidence do we have to support that Hetepheres I was Sneferu's wife other than what's in G7000x? Reisner drew the inference from objects which included either the name "Sneferu" or the name of "Hetepheres", but nothing directly linked the two other than the co-residence of the objects within the same G7000x cache. The sealed (when first discovered) but empty alabaster box in G7000x is still considered to be the sarcophagus of Hetepheres despite its lack of markings. Since it has been suggested that Khufu is responsible for installing the contents of G7000x, Münch suggests that the sarcophagus for a woman of Hetepheres I's status should have been made of granite, not alabaster (in G7000x), similar to that of Khufu's daughter, Meresankh II.

And yet, Egyptology in the 21st century still portrays Hetepheres I as Khufu's mother and Sneferu's wife,that G7000x was Hetepheres' tomb, and that it represents a reburial site.



> Just because Reisner's theory did not pan out under
> closer scrutiny or further discovery of evidence
> to support it does not mean therefore everything
> is "all wrong" opening the door to whatever anyone
> can imagine.

I never said that. You keep inflating the issue, not me: first conspiracy, then deception, then "everything is all wrong". Rather, as I've said many times, G7000x is simply yet another clear example among many, committed by early investigators who applied a low standard of proof. I'm sorry if you're getting tired of hearing that, but it's obviously not getting across yet since you still are trying to reframe it into "conspiracy", "deception", etc. I'll say it again, I am not claiming Reisner is guilty of conspiracy or deception.



> You are trying use one meaningless
> example to throw the "baby out with the bathwater"
> which otherwise does not apply at large.


"Meaningless"? I'm not so sure about that. First of all, this Reisner episode is certainly not the only example of low standards applied by earlier investigators that's enjoyed a long-lasting, deap-seated influence. Also, this "meaningless" incident has had long-lasting consequences in Egyptology because of how Reisner framed it to neatly reinforce the self-consistent paradigm of the funerary context and timeline. Despite your insight to see through it, and Lehner's "alternative explanation", I think Reisner's fabrication nevertheless has demonstrated significant staying power by virtue of the great credibility of its luminary source. So in my opinion, maybe not so harmless.

______________________________________________________________
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08-Jun-16 03:50 by Origyptian.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Creighton Persists Part 2 4041 JonnyMcA 19-May-16 14:30
That chemical analysis . . . 642 Martin Stower 19-May-16 17:30
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 572 Origyptian 19-May-16 20:50
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 546 Jon Ellison 19-May-16 21:31
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 516 Martin Stower 19-May-16 22:01
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 510 Martin Stower 19-May-16 21:42
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 492 Origyptian 19-May-16 22:12
The unfounded accusations continue..... 596 DScribr 19-May-16 22:46
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 578 Martin Stower 20-May-16 00:14
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 501 Thanos5150 20-May-16 00:35
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 386 Jon Ellison 20-May-16 01:57
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 517 Origyptian 20-May-16 02:47
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 396 Jon Ellison 20-May-16 03:20
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 476 Martin Stower 20-May-16 19:10
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 468 DScribr 20-May-16 23:23
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 496 Jon Ellison 20-May-16 23:35
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 477 DScribr 20-May-16 23:40
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 431 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:07
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 349 DScribr 20-May-16 02:58
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 503 Martin Stower 19-May-16 22:55
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 504 DScribr 19-May-16 22:43
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 486 Martin Stower 19-May-16 23:30
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 550 Origyptian 20-May-16 02:48
The lack of analysis . . . 577 DScribr 20-May-16 03:05
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 537 Audrey 20-May-16 04:13
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 457 Jon Ellison 20-May-16 06:58
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 492 DScribr 20-May-16 23:42
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 625 Origyptian 20-May-16 15:46
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 451 Martin Stower 21-May-16 01:28
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 446 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:32
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 491 Martin Stower 21-May-16 02:07
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 471 Jon Ellison 21-May-16 06:43
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 495 Origyptian 21-May-16 14:58
So much for chemical analysis . . . 466 DScribr 21-May-16 19:54
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 476 Martin Stower 21-May-16 22:49
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 467 Martin Stower 21-May-16 23:00
Re: What's the end game with this? 576 Thunderbird 20-May-16 17:20
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 469 Martin Stower 20-May-16 19:04
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 454 Audrey 20-May-16 22:43
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 423 Martin Stower 20-May-16 22:54
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 462 Audrey 20-May-16 23:12
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 395 Martin Stower 20-May-16 23:52
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 472 Audrey 21-May-16 00:33
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 543 Martin Stower 21-May-16 00:45
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 397 DScribr 21-May-16 01:35
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 348 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:06
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 428 Martin Stower 21-May-16 01:33
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 504 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:36
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 601 Martin Stower 21-May-16 02:49
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 529 Martin Stower 20-May-16 18:28
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 543 Origyptian 20-May-16 20:00
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 445 Thanos5150 20-May-16 20:13
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 463 Origyptian 20-May-16 21:03
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 489 Martin Stower 20-May-16 23:44
Höfer and Görlitz meet Stein 420 Martin Stower 21-May-16 00:36
Re: Höfer and Görlitz meet Stein 400 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:23
Re: Höfer and Görlitz meet Stein 598 Martin Stower 21-May-16 01:55
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 457 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:34
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 484 Martin Stower 21-May-16 03:15
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 413 Origyptian 21-May-16 04:08
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 484 Martin Stower 21-May-16 23:33
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 553 Origyptian 22-May-16 00:09
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 431 Martin Stower 22-May-16 00:49
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 521 Origyptian 22-May-16 00:57
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 492 Origyptian 22-May-16 01:11
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 486 Jon Ellison 22-May-16 01:14
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 490 Martin Stower 22-May-16 01:51
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 464 Origyptian 22-May-16 04:21
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 509 Martin Stower 22-May-16 14:20
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 475 Origyptian 22-May-16 17:32
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 493 Martin Stower 22-May-16 18:33
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 445 Origyptian 22-May-16 20:34
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 408 Martin Stower 22-May-16 21:30
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 501 Origyptian 22-May-16 23:04
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 518 Martin Stower 23-May-16 00:03
Re: That chemical analysis is all but forgotten...... 469 DScribr 23-May-16 03:11
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 503 Richard Fusniak 21-May-16 08:47
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 474 Origyptian 21-May-16 13:26
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 438 Martin Stower 22-May-16 00:32
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 466 Origyptian 22-May-16 00:50
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 499 Martin Stower 22-May-16 01:39
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 400 Origyptian 22-May-16 04:45
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 408 Martin Stower 22-May-16 16:13
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 402 Martin Stower 21-May-16 22:44
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 590 Origyptian 21-May-16 23:58
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 441 Martin Stower 22-May-16 01:28
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 688 Martin Stower 20-May-16 22:44
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 442 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:41
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 523 Martin Stower 21-May-16 03:28
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 548 Origyptian 21-May-16 04:14
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 365 Martin Stower 21-May-16 23:11
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 508 Thanos5150 19-May-16 22:50
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 490 Martin Stower 19-May-16 23:18
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 406 DScribr 20-May-16 03:07
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 487 Origyptian 20-May-16 02:52
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 433 DScribr 20-May-16 03:12
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 508 Thanos5150 20-May-16 05:20
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 401 Origyptian 20-May-16 13:36
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 512 Thanos5150 20-May-16 17:57
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 514 Jon Ellison 20-May-16 18:56
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 488 Martin Stower 20-May-16 19:23
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 555 Thanos5150 20-May-16 19:27
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 432 Jon Ellison 20-May-16 19:29
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 462 Audrey 20-May-16 21:02
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 474 Origyptian 20-May-16 21:12
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 467 Jon Ellison 20-May-16 21:26
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 525 Thanos5150 20-May-16 22:08
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 506 Audrey 20-May-16 22:34
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 420 Thanos5150 20-May-16 22:36
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 485 Audrey 20-May-16 22:47
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 406 Thanos5150 20-May-16 23:00
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 425 Audrey 20-May-16 23:11
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 408 Thanos5150 21-May-16 00:01
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 419 Audrey 21-May-16 00:23
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 472 Thanos5150 21-May-16 03:14
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 467 Audrey 21-May-16 05:02
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 402 Jon Ellison 21-May-16 09:10
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 546 Jon Ellison 21-May-16 09:28
The chemical analysis is of little help without R-C Dating 504 DScribr 21-May-16 13:37
Re: The chemical analysis is of little help without R-C Dating 420 Origyptian 21-May-16 13:56
Re: The chemical analysis is of little help without R-C Dating 466 Jon Ellison 21-May-16 17:48
Willful ignorance continues....... 492 DScribr 21-May-16 19:49
Re: Willful ignorance continues....... 520 Jon Ellison 21-May-16 21:28
Re: Stealing IS a crime! Willful ignorance continues....... 426 DScribr 22-May-16 00:39
Re: The chemical analysis is of little help without R-C Dating 500 Richard Fusniak 21-May-16 18:17
Re: The chemical analysis is of little help without R-C Dating 388 DScribr 21-May-16 19:57
Re: The chemical analysis is of little help without R-C Dating 516 Richard Fusniak 21-May-16 20:24
Stealing IS A Crime!!! 498 DScribr 22-May-16 00:32
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 496 Origyptian 21-May-16 15:04
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 404 Jon Ellison 21-May-16 17:53
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 473 Origyptian 21-May-16 21:39
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 459 Jon Ellison 22-May-16 00:46
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 419 Martin Stower 21-May-16 00:09
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 498 Audrey 21-May-16 00:26
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 505 Martin Stower 21-May-16 00:42
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 457 Audrey 21-May-16 01:04
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 524 Martin Stower 21-May-16 01:41
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 489 Jon Ellison 21-May-16 11:00
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 451 DScribr 21-May-16 01:44
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 460 Origyptian 20-May-16 19:25
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 470 Thanos5150 20-May-16 19:31
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 423 Origyptian 20-May-16 20:35
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 489 Thanos5150 20-May-16 22:03
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 413 Origyptian 20-May-16 22:38
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 497 Thanos5150 20-May-16 22:52
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 429 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:31
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 493 Martin Stower 21-May-16 01:05
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 434 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:27
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 453 Martin Stower 21-May-16 03:31
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 432 Audrey 21-May-16 01:42
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 507 Martin Stower 21-May-16 03:34
Pending statement from Dr. Gorlitz 732 Richard Fusniak 20-May-16 12:04
Re: Pending statement from Dr. Gorlitz 522 Martin Stower 20-May-16 19:25
Martin Persists 569 drrayeye 23-May-16 01:30
Re: Martin Persists 538 Martin Stower 23-May-16 12:01
Re: Martin Persists 412 R Avry Wilson 24-May-16 19:58
Mainstream Persists 447 DScribr 25-May-16 00:56
Re: Martin Persists 623 Merrell 28-May-16 09:00
Re: Martin Persists 442 Martin Stower 28-May-16 11:11
as long as we are counting 548 Warwick 25-May-16 16:42
Re: as long as we are counting 509 DScribr 26-May-16 01:53
Re: as long as we are counting 556 cladking 26-May-16 16:57
Re: as long as we are counting 463 Martin Stower 26-May-16 17:31
Re: as long as we are counting 477 Origyptian 26-May-16 17:40
Re: as long as we are counting 399 cladking 27-May-16 00:21
Re: as long as we are counting 483 Warwick 27-May-16 01:27
Re: as long as we are counting 312 Origyptian 27-May-16 02:53
And work hard at obfuscation. 378 DScribr 27-May-16 00:57
Re: And work hard at obfuscation. 438 cladking 27-May-16 02:55
Re: as long as we are counting 407 Warwick 27-May-16 01:29
Re: as long as we are counting 514 cladking 27-May-16 02:59
Re: as long as we are counting 488 Warwick 27-May-16 03:35
Re: as long as we are counting 476 Audrey 27-May-16 04:32
Re: as long as we are counting 432 Warwick 27-May-16 05:34
Re: as long as we are counting 523 cladking 27-May-16 13:35
Re: as long as we are counting 479 Warwick 27-May-16 14:56
The original page on Indiegogo etc. 571 Martin Stower 25-May-16 22:10
Another performance . . . 463 Martin Stower 26-May-16 13:47
Re: Another performance . . . 414 Warwick 26-May-16 13:57
Re: Another performance . . . 362 Origyptian 26-May-16 14:53
Re: Another performance . . . 449 Martin Stower 26-May-16 16:09
Re: Another performance . . . 465 cladking 26-May-16 16:18
Re: Another performance . . . 370 Martin Stower 26-May-16 16:31
Re: Another performance . . . 632 cladking 26-May-16 17:54
Re: Another performance . . . 484 Martin Stower 26-May-16 18:29
Re: Another performance . . . 351 cladking 26-May-16 23:52
Re: Another performance . . . 486 eyeofhorus33 26-May-16 19:00
Re: Another performance . . . 391 cladking 27-May-16 00:05
Re: Another performance . . . 420 Audrey 27-May-16 00:23
Re: Another performance . . . 405 Warwick 27-May-16 01:42
Re: Another performance . . . 486 cladking 27-May-16 02:07
Re: Another performance . . . 427 Warwick 27-May-16 02:15
Re: Another performance . . . 466 cladking 27-May-16 02:48
Re: Another performance . . . 446 Warwick 27-May-16 03:48
Re: Another performance . . . 471 cladking 27-May-16 03:53
Re: Another performance . . . 532 Warwick 27-May-16 05:41
Re: Another performance . . . 425 Audrey 27-May-16 04:51
Re: Another performance . . . 437 Warwick 27-May-16 05:18
NOT Primitive, Low-Tech 425 DScribr 28-May-16 14:09
Re: NOT Primitive, Low-Tech 469 cladking 28-May-16 14:31
Re: Another performance . . . 501 Thanos5150 26-May-16 16:38
Re: Another performance . . . 388 cladking 26-May-16 16:44
Re: Another performance . . . 491 Origyptian 26-May-16 17:33
Re: Another performance . . . 503 cladking 26-May-16 17:40
Re: Another performance . . . 497 Martin Stower 26-May-16 17:49
Re: Another performance . . . 499 cladking 27-May-16 00:15
Re: Another performance . . . 491 Martin Stower 27-May-16 19:17
Re: Another performance . . . 506 Warwick 27-May-16 20:00
Re: Another performance . . . 443 cladking 27-May-16 20:21
Re: Another performance . . . 545 Martin Stower 27-May-16 23:06
Re: Oops....we missed the Basalt flooring and machine disc cuts 355 Thunderbird 27-May-16 23:28
Re: Oops....we missed the Basalt flooring and machine disc cuts 466 Martin Stower 27-May-16 23:41
Re: Another performance . . . 488 cladking 28-May-16 00:33
Re: Another performance . . . 474 Martin Stower 28-May-16 00:59
Re: Another performance . . . 468 cladking 28-May-16 02:36
Re: Another performance . . . 450 Martin Stower 28-May-16 23:55
Re: Another performance . . . 394 cladking 29-May-16 01:23
Re: Another performance . . . 431 Martin Stower 29-May-16 19:35
Re: Another performance . . . 579 cladking 29-May-16 20:43
Re: Another performance . . . 486 R Avry Wilson 28-May-16 02:39
Re: Another performance . . . 507 cladking 28-May-16 03:41
Re: Another performance . . . 452 Thanos5150 28-May-16 06:20
Re: Another performance . . . 529 cladking 28-May-16 13:40
Re: Another performance . . . 477 Origyptian 28-May-16 15:04
Re: Another performance . . . 478 Jon Ellison 28-May-16 16:38
Re: Another performance . . . 340 cladking 28-May-16 17:52
Re: Another performance . . . 438 Jon Ellison 28-May-16 17:58
Re: Another performance . . . 365 Origyptian 29-May-16 02:51
Re: Another performance . . . 386 cladking 29-May-16 03:08
Re: Another performance . . . 448 Origyptian 29-May-16 04:03
Re: Another performance . . . 464 Thanos5150 29-May-16 05:03
Re: Another performance . . . 496 Origyptian 29-May-16 13:18
Re: Another performance . . . 510 Thanos5150 29-May-16 15:03
Focus on the axiom 458 Origyptian 29-May-16 15:27
Re: Focus on everything BUT the facts 506 DScribr 29-May-16 15:41
Re: Focus on everything BUT the facts 411 cladking 29-May-16 17:29
Re: Focus on the axiom 398 Thanos5150 30-May-16 01:49
Re: Focus on the axiom 451 Origyptian 30-May-16 05:32
Re: Focus on the axiom 447 Thanos5150 31-May-16 02:35
Re: Focus on the axiom 479 Origyptian 31-May-16 06:41
Re: Focus on the axiom 479 Thanos5150 01-Jun-16 00:28
Re: Focus on reality. 437 DScribr 01-Jun-16 00:51
Re: Focus on the axiom 426 Origyptian 01-Jun-16 06:20
Re: Focus on the axiom 472 Thanos5150 02-Jun-16 03:08
Re: Focus on the axiom 446 cladking 02-Jun-16 04:00
Re: Focus on the axiom 399 Origyptian 02-Jun-16 04:25
Re: Focus on the axiom 401 Thanos5150 02-Jun-16 16:34
Re: Focus on the axiom 407 cladking 02-Jun-16 18:20
Re: Focus on the axiom 451 Origyptian 03-Jun-16 18:04
Re: Focus on the axiom 442 R Avry Wilson 03-Jun-16 18:43
Re: Focus on the axiom 418 Origyptian 03-Jun-16 21:24
Re: Focus on the axiom 439 Corpuscles 03-Jun-16 23:59
Re: Focus on the axiom 302 Origyptian 04-Jun-16 06:29
Re: Focus on the axiom 364 R Avry Wilson 04-Jun-16 00:12
Re: Focus on the axiom 359 Origyptian 04-Jun-16 07:02
Re: Focus on the axiom 488 Jon Ellison 04-Jun-16 10:18
Re: Focus on the axiom 424 R Avry Wilson 05-Jun-16 04:15
Re: Focus on the axiom 417 Martin Stower 03-Jun-16 22:28
Re: Focus on the axiom 434 cladking 03-Jun-16 22:51
Re: Focus on the axiom 551 Thanos5150 04-Jun-16 01:08
Re: Focus on the axiom 439 Origyptian 05-Jun-16 01:25
Re: Focus on the axiom 488 Thanos5150 05-Jun-16 04:15
Re: Focus on the axiom 431 Origyptian 05-Jun-16 17:29
Re: Focus on the axiom 480 Martin Stower 05-Jun-16 19:35
Re: Focus on the axiom 490 Origyptian 05-Jun-16 22:48
Re: Focus on the axiom 413 Martin Stower 05-Jun-16 23:47
Re: Focus on the axiom 441 Origyptian 06-Jun-16 00:54
Re: Focus on the axiom 401 Origyptian 06-Jun-16 01:01
Re: Focus on the axiom 446 Thanos5150 06-Jun-16 01:05
Re: Focus on the axiom 421 Origyptian 06-Jun-16 02:40
Re: Focus on the axiom 446 R Avry Wilson 06-Jun-16 03:39
Re: Focus on the axiom 367 Audrey 06-Jun-16 04:59
Re: Focus on the axiom 381 Jon Ellison 06-Jun-16 07:59
Re: Focus on the axiom 383 Origyptian 06-Jun-16 14:00
Re: Focus on the axiom 448 cladking 06-Jun-16 16:13
Re: Focus on the axiom 401 Corpuscles 07-Jun-16 00:20
Re: Focus on the axiom 447 Origyptian 07-Jun-16 02:55
Re: Focus on the axiom 378 Thanos5150 06-Jun-16 15:33
Re: Focus on the axiom 327 Warwick 06-Jun-16 16:17
Re: Focus on the axiom 458 Audrey 06-Jun-16 16:39
Re: Focus on the axiom 451 Warwick 06-Jun-16 16:58
Re: Focus on the axiom 357 Audrey 06-Jun-16 17:46
Re: Focus on the axiom 396 Warwick 06-Jun-16 18:13
Re: Focus on the axiom 345 Audrey 06-Jun-16 23:44
Read what I wrote 343 Warwick 07-Jun-16 17:15
Re: Read what I wrote 378 Audrey 08-Jun-16 00:22
Re: Read what I wrote 370 Martin Stower 08-Jun-16 01:40
Re: Read what I wrote 536 Audrey 08-Jun-16 01:52
Re: Read what I wrote 396 Martin Stower 08-Jun-16 13:47
Vyse's veracity.... 397 Warwick 09-Jun-16 16:29
Re: Vyse's veracity.... 323 Audrey 09-Jun-16 16:51
Re: Vyse's veracity.... 418 Warwick 09-Jun-16 17:19
Re: Vyse's veracity.... 457 Audrey 09-Jun-16 17:45
Wilkinson's opinions 380 Warwick 09-Jun-16 18:47
Re: Wilkinson's opinions 388 Origyptian 09-Jun-16 20:57
Ori's opinions 531 DScribr 10-Jun-16 01:45
Re: The incredible Teflon Red Ochre 379 Thunderbird 10-Jun-16 04:07
Re: The incredible Teflon Red Ochre 497 Martin Stower 10-Jun-16 14:49
Re: The incredible Red Ochre lasted 4500 yrs. 419 DScribr 11-Jun-16 00:40
Re: Wilkinson's opinions 337 Martin Stower 10-Jun-16 02:28
Re: Wilkinson's opinions 337 Audrey 10-Jun-16 03:05
Re: Wilkinson's opinions 455 Martin Stower 10-Jun-16 14:09
Bibliography 391 Warwick 10-Jun-16 18:07
Re: Bibliography 405 Origyptian 10-Jun-16 18:35
Re: Bibliography 402 Warwick 10-Jun-16 20:01
Re: Bibliography 452 Origyptian 10-Jun-16 21:54
Re: Bibliography 469 Corpuscles 10-Jun-16 23:45
Re: Bibliography 292 Origyptian 11-Jun-16 17:01
Re: Bibliography 414 Corpuscles 11-Jun-16 22:36
Re: Bibliography 381 Audrey 11-Jun-16 23:08
Re: Bibliography 392 Corpuscles 11-Jun-16 23:26
Re: Bibliography 315 Audrey 12-Jun-16 02:30
Re: Bibliography 364 Corpuscles 12-Jun-16 03:19
Re: Bibliography 305 Audrey 12-Jun-16 03:32
Re: Bibliography 338 Corpuscles 12-Jun-16 03:40
Re: Bibliography 340 Audrey 12-Jun-16 03:50
Re: Bibliography 322 Corpuscles 12-Jun-16 04:30
Re: Bibliography 302 Audrey 12-Jun-16 04:47
Re: Bibliography 296 Corpuscles 12-Jun-16 05:02
Re: Bibliography 427 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 10:49
Re: Bibliography 388 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 15:56
Re: Bibliography 315 R Avry Wilson 12-Jun-16 17:41
But Avry.. 358 Warwick 12-Jun-16 17:58
Re: But Avry.. 429 R Avry Wilson 12-Jun-16 18:14
Re: But Avry.. 390 Audrey 12-Jun-16 18:37
Re: But Avry.. 402 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 20:15
Re: But Avry.. 410 Audrey 12-Jun-16 18:44
Re: But Avry.. 373 Warwick 12-Jun-16 18:59
Re: But Avry.. 369 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 20:11
This whole discussion is a boondoggle 424 DScribr 13-Jun-16 01:04
Re: This whole discussion is a boondoggle 406 Warwick 13-Jun-16 16:24
Re: Bibliography 287 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 10:28
Re: Bibliography 372 Origyptian 11-Jun-16 23:35
Re: Bibliography 407 Corpuscles 11-Jun-16 23:58
Re: Bibliography 380 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 00:48
Re: Bibliography 417 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 01:13
Re: Bibliography 446 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 01:33
Re: Bibliography 446 Martin Stower 11-Jun-16 02:05
Re: Bibliography 436 Origyptian 11-Jun-16 18:09
Re: Bibliography 420 Martin Stower 11-Jun-16 19:22
Re: Bibliography 367 Origyptian 11-Jun-16 19:56
Re: Bibliography 295 Martin Stower 11-Jun-16 20:47
Re: Bibliography 405 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 00:03
Re: Bibliography 400 Corpuscles 12-Jun-16 00:22
Re: Bibliography 298 Audrey 12-Jun-16 01:58
Re: Bibliography 423 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 02:24
Re: Bibliography 347 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 12:23
Re: Bibliography 363 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 14:50
Re: Bibliography 367 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 16:46
Re: Bibliography 286 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 00:10
Re: Bibliography 405 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 00:18
Re: Bibliography 390 Corpuscles 12-Jun-16 00:35
Re: Bibliography 426 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 00:39
Re: Bibliography 352 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 01:23
Re: Bibliography 354 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 02:18
Re: Bibliography 303 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 13:55
Re: Bibliography 360 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 15:45
Re: Bibliography 401 R Avry Wilson 12-Jun-16 17:32
Re: Bibliography 334 Warwick 12-Jun-16 17:41
Re: Bibliography 398 R Avry Wilson 12-Jun-16 18:08
Re: Bibliography 378 Audrey 12-Jun-16 18:48
Re: Bibliography 386 Audrey 12-Jun-16 18:35
Re: Bibliography 338 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 19:09
Gonna ignore the noise and try again 379 Warwick 12-Jun-16 19:53
Re: Gonna ignore the noise and try again 390 Thunderbird 12-Jun-16 20:18
Re: Gonna ignore the noise and try again 358 Audrey 12-Jun-16 21:04