> Nonsense. We each see only what we expect.
No we don't why do keep repeating this stupid phrase?
Did the finders of GT not see it because they certain weren't expecting it? Try to do some thinking
Is this why YOU refuse to accept that your belief in an ability to translate the PT has been falsified - because you didn't expect your substitution to not work?
So when you gonna accept your idea failed?
We probably could even
> reverse engineer the language with a little effort
> since it is apparently mathematical in nature.
Oh then go do so and impress us.....
> I don't know what "Demonstrative aspect" means but
> if you are suggesting the pyramid represents
> something(s), the D'uh. Of course it represents
> something; no doubt dozen and dozens of things.
> But we'll never solve any of them until we solve
> their math and learn the real meaning of what they
> said. We'll never know the first thing about the
> builders so long as we see them through modern
> eyes. We must see them through their own eyes and
> their own "beliefs' to understand them.
> I believe this won't be nearly so hard as it seems
> to you.
> > that is but one example of symbolism. It is an
> > inescapable aspect of Human Nature.
> It is OUR nature.
> > YOU have NO GROUNDS for saying they did not
> > basic human emotions.
> Of course they had emotions. They were very very
> very very alive and each were very very in touch
> with their emotions. They had many words for
> 'love", "friendship", "grief" etc etc etc etc.
> They did NOT HAVE ANY WORDS for "thought" or
> "belief" and logically they had neither thought
> nor belief.
Friendship is an abstraction as is love and grief - Jesus you cannot even follow your only kooky ideas.