> There is no compelling reason to assume the KC
> shaft was designed to be open to the outside
> environment from the beginning. First, we know
> that the QC shafts aren't open to the outside.
> Second, we don't know whether the casing skin may
> have sealed the upper portal of that shaft (fwiw,
> Zahi asserts in Whitehead's Djedi paper that this
> was the case). This would mean that the stain on
> the KC wall is the result of limestone power
> accumulation only for the past 1200 years, of from
> the time the casing were stripped off, allegedly
> circa 800 AD which is a plausible amount of time
> to accumulate such a subtle stain from such a
> narrow, long shaft of masonry in which limestone
> power could certainly have accumulated over the
If I remember rightly the Gantenbrink Autocad schematics show similarities in the upper reaches of the KC air shafts and the QC air shafts. The principle difference being that any hypothetical KC air shaft blocking stone and void would have been in much closer proximity with the outer casing and therefore totally destroyed when the casing was removed.
It may be that the discovery of a KC airshaft, copper pinned, blocking stone during casing removal prompted the original attempted excavation of the "Mankiller"???
The upper QC air shaft blocking stone and final blocks are reportedly carved from Tura Limestone. It would be interesting to know if this internal Tura Limestone was once in direct communication with the casing external Tura Limestone.