> I thought that parsing the PT was what you spent
> most of your time doing, Sam.
The ancient language loses all of its meaning if you parse it because meaning is made by defining a perspective in context. If you parse it the context disappears. If you parse it you mistake the perspective as the meaning of the sentence.
It was meant literally exactly as it was written and any other attempt at understanding it is doomed to failure.
> After all, you've studied it for that long and
> that closely that you proclaim loudly, to any fool
> who will listen,...
I say the exact same thing to wise men and even those who refuse to listen.
> that you alone have discovered
> the "true" meaning of the hieroglyphic inscription...
I've discovered nothing at all.
I've merely rediscovered how to understand the ancient language.
> and that Egyptologists are plain wrong in their
> interpretation of it.
You can't "interpret" ancient writing. It means eactly what it says, no more, no less. When you interpret it you change it into what you think it would mean if it were like the book of the dead or something an et al wrote.
There's nothing wrong with their "interpretation" since it lends great insight into the thinking of the authors of the book of the dead. But it has absolutely no bearing at all on the great pyramid builders.
> Despite this, you have never submitted your
> findings for peer review and instead just bleat on
> about their failings.
They won't listen. They won't return eMails. They are so insular and trapped into their preconceptions they can't even imagine they could be wrong. They can't imagine a world where the average ancient Egyptian is a better scientist than ANY Egyptologist. It's beyond their comprehension so I might as well be suggesting that the PT has incantations that caused the stones to fly like the fledglings of swallows... ...then again... ...they might be amused enough by this to at least hear me out.
> Change the world, publish your radical
> interpretation and let scholars explain why you
> are mistaken.
From the tiniest acorns the mighty oak emerges.
The world will change if I'm right. There are other ways than logic and known fact to solve this. Right this moment they are sitting on proof the mn-canal exists and trying to figure out how to publish the data. They are afraid of the pyramid in exactly the same way they are afraid of the tri-lobed disc; they know by looking at them that there was far more to the Egyptians than their conclusion demand. This is why we're well into the third millineum and they still won't apply 20th century technology to the pyramids or the artefacts.
> You are to be commended though for writing a post
> which did not feature the phrase "stinky footed
> bumpkin" or the dreaded "ramps".
> Well done!
Dang! I'm slipping.
The way Egyptologists view these people is insulting to any scientist and would be exceedingly insulting to the ancient people. I tend to point this out a lot with catch phrases. The ancients are spinning in their graves... ...at least the few whose graves haven't been desicrated by Egyptologist.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 23-Dec-16 17:15 by cladking.