> Sorry, no, I don't get it.
> I only asked on what basis you made your claim
> about the age of the papyrus. I didn't "disagree
> with a statement from you". And so the "basis of
> my challenge" is simply to understand why you
> consider that papyrus to be "the oldest one ever
> I admit it's sometimes difficult to tell when
> you're being sarcastic. So if you provided that
> link to the GH.com article in the spirit of
> levity, then message received (the article
> challenges many aspects of those papyri), but if
> you truly do believe that those papyri date to
> mid-3rd mill. BC and are indeed the oldest ever
> found, then I just would like to know why you
> believe that. For example, is it context, RCD, the
> English translation, the inherent credibility
> imbued in Tallet, et al., etc.?
Yes. The was some levity in my post that sparked the question. The first line was entirely sarcastic something like tell'n Thanos and et.al. (all) "they were clutzzez for not understanding that the AE did not know the pyramids (beautiful in their day I sure with nice crisp lines) were not natural formations"
There is nothing seriously funnier ever said here than that original ori assertion IMHO!
.... but ADVERTISMENT Molders/Jim's jokes in Misc board are sometimes pants tearing funny!
I do not believe...
I don't even necessarily accept...
I told you already in reply something like "I am not qualified to date and have not physically seen them"
Lots have, and also discussed it, that's why I suggested you read about it.. perhaps some more?
I do not know of any other claim for any other papyrus being older
I don't think there is a major (impossible) conspiracy going on!
However, the only real point directed at you (re papyri) is that it (AE stuff) is really, really rare!
> And I've never heard of a teacher putting the
> burden on the student as you described. If a
> teacher in earth science teaches the class "You
> cannot survive for very long at an altitude higher
> than 26,000' above sea level" and the students
> ask why that is, the competent teacher will
> provide the appropriate backup information such as
> "...because there's not enough oxygen", or
> "there's not enough water" or whatever. The
> teacher will not say "Now hold on a second, you
> can't challenge my assertion unless you explain
> the basis of your challenge". The "basis of the
> challenge" is simply that the students are trying
> to understand the reason for the "26,000'"
That is nothing like what I suggested. No worries here !