> Why couldn't you do it when I asked you for a
> source to back up your claims this sand came from
> "elsewhere" which you claimed could only be 100
> miles away in the Sinai?
I'll lay you long odds Stadelmann didn't dig up Abu Roasch looking for how this sand was laid down and its exact pattern.
If he had I bet he'd have found it came from a point source just like the sand at Giza and the sand at Saqqara.
> "Laboratory tests showed it came from another part
> of Egypt and was sifted and enriched with minerals
> before being placed inside the pyramid by the
> ancient architects." [/quote]
> I'm pretty sure this was from the copy that
> originally went out on the wire from Reuters.
"Enriched with minerals". This would be just like carbonic acid flowing under a sandstone cap; enriched with minerals. It would have be enriched up to the eyeballs; the eyes of horus.
> As far as I can tell, the whole Sinai thing
> appears to have been offered as nothing more than
> a "possibility" for apparently no other reason
> than it sounded good to an alternative author
> given it tied into the whole "singing sand" meme
> to impose these acoustic properties on G1.
I don't know. There's a whole lot I don't know. But I contacted several famous geologists who told me there was no such thing as CO2 geysers, too. While I don't know much of anything at all there's one thing I know that you don't and very very few people know: No one else knows anything either. We all simply kowtow to the status quo which exists because people are afraid to think for themselves and there's so much knowledge today nobody can even scratch the surface. So we have geologists who don't believe in cold water geysers and Egyptologists who believe in ramps.
> Yeah, [i]now[/i].
Nothing in nature ever really changes. We can pass laws that tilt the playing field but reality is unaffected and mother nature keeps her own books. She always evens up in the long run.
The ancients called it "maat".