However you know that the fact is quite the opposite.
If a scientist or engineer were to analyse the planes in great detail he may well come to the correct conclusion irrespective of superficial appearances.
For example, advances in artificial fabrics technology, metallurgy and computer aided design. All of which the jet plane designer could have only dreamt of over half a century earlier.
The devil being in the detail.
A problem with Egyptology and those that follow Egyptology is that they often present statements didactically as proven facts when in fact they are based on little more than often over simplistic observation and conjecture.
I know of no other discipline that does this, even in the soft sciences and humanities.
I'm happy to accept your arguments as unproven hypothesis, but not as facts.
In exactly the same way that I accept any other unproven hypothesis for what it is.
The burden of proof is on those making the claim.
What is your proof?
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 06-Jan-18 22:28 by Jon Ellison.