But it crosses the line when they then try to claim that their belief is the only plausible possibility and that anyone who believes differently is dead wrong. I really don't have any problem with Egyptology's take on the timeline, ramps, and tombs. I do have a major problem with its attempt to snuff out any other discussion. Some of us don't just want a self-consistent paradigm that simply makes "sense". Some of us actually want the truth and are not so much in a rush to simply have things make sense if taking more time in analysis might reveal the facts.
In my view, the traditional narrative ignores too much physical evidence that contradicts that narrative, and presumes too much for which there is virtually zero evidence. In some cases there is no more evidence than there is in proposing that aliens were responsible. And just as proposing aliens makes sense for some people, the funerary paradigm makes sense for others. But that doesn't make the evidence and contradictions go away. Even if there was only one solitary 1000 ton block in Baalbek, or one single 80 ton granite slab up there in the RCs, it all needs to be reconciled, not just the bulk of the stuff that happens to fit neatly into the self-consistent narrative.
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?