I asked you: How do you know that the Great Pyramid of Giza does not contain a yet to be discovered actual burial chamber?’
As you see fit to respond to this simple question with a load of waffle, allow me to answer the question for you in plain English and succinctly.
You don’t know.
I asked you: How many pyramids have not been raided by tomb robbers?
As you failed to answer, allow me to answer the question for you: all known pyramids.
I asked you: Is it not at all possible that the pyramids are symbolic tombs?
The answer that escaped you is: yes, they could originally have been designed to be symbolic tombs.
> Your bias is showing.
And yours, of course, is not . . .
I said "has not been found"
> and "has not been shown to contain". I did not say
> " does not contain".
Coming from you, Origyptian, "has not been found" actually implies very strongly ‘does not contain’.
> Meanwhile, if you're basing the entire funerary
> context on "it might still
> contain...", I consider that to be a weak premise
> for that particular paradigm.
But, then, you don’t know how the Great Pyramid of Giza was designed . . .
> Sure it's possible the pyamids served as
> symbolic tombs, but I see nothing at all in the
> evidence to suggest they were originaly
> designed to be built as any kind of tomb,
> symbolic or otherwise.
This, too, is down to your not knowing how the Great Pyramid of Giza was designed . . .
> And I have no idea why so
> many kings would agree to consume so much of their
> citizenry and economy to construct such massive
> "symbolic tombs". In fact, by today's standards
> such a practice might be considered a crime
> against humanity depending on how it was conducted
> and received by the populous.
As far as I know you are not an Ancient Egyptian king, consequently your having no idea, etc., is totally irrelevant.
> Nor can I fathom why no one, among the untold
> number of Egyptians living during the Old Kingdom,
> ever presented any evidence that at any time they
> were actually capable of building such pyramids or
> that any pyramid was originally constructed during
> that time, let alone a pyramid that was designed
> for such a funerary purpose. No such statement in
> grafitti, no statement by any builder, vizier,
> designer, priest, farmer. No sign of the
> industrial tools and methods. Not a single
> plausible eyewitness acouunt. Not a blessed thing
> from anyone during those centuries, despite all
> the other documentation of virtually every other
> aspect of life during that time. It's simply not
> plausible to me that such a massive focus of
> resources remains so completely devoid of physical
> evidence in an otherwise such well represented
Re your comment: ‘Not a blessed thing from anyone during those centuries, despite all the other documentation of virtually every other aspect of life during that time.’
Actually, there is a dearth of text from the early Dynasties, consequently very little is known about them with any certainty (see ‘Texts from the Pyramid Age’ by Nigel C. Strudwick, for examples).
Then there is the simple observation by Hawass that 90% (?) of Ancient Egypt is under sand - all of which questions your take here.