> The scribe of the Rhind papyrus states explicitly
> that it is a copy of an older document,
> which is lost and which, itself, may have been a
> copy of a much older document ... and so on.
> The scribe writes:
> "This book was copied in regnal year 33, month 4
> of Akhet, under the majesty of the King of Upper
> and Lower Egypt, Awserre, given life, from an
> ancient copy made in the time of the King of Upper
> and Lower Egypt Nimaatre. The scribe Ahmose
> writes this copy."
> Nimaatre, also known as Amenemhet III, dates the
> ancient copy to 1850 BCE.
> Not so far away from your dating of G1 after all
> ... especially is the Nimaatre papyrus was itself
> a copy of a yet earlier, and also lost, papyrus.
> It helps if you know what you are writing about,
And here was have more uncalled-for rudeness initiated by orthodoxy in an attempt to diffuse the issue with "may have been" and putting such credibility into those ancient accounts which may just as likely are gross presumptions made by later generations.
For example, please explain how someone in 1550BC might define "ancient" and "copy". Also, please explain how Nimaatre is dated to 1850BC.
Contrary to the point you think you're making, even if we put credibility in all the assumptions regarding the 1850BC date, I do not consider a 700 year disparity to be "not so far away" from 2550BC. Go back 700 years from modern times and you get a rather different take on technology, religion, standards of proof, and just about every other aspect of human life.
Egyptology teaches us that all of the early stone pyramids were built within a 200 year span still in the OK. So even if we subscribe to the orthodox narrative, that's still 500 years before that geometry lesson allegedly surfaced. So how does that at all relate to the knowledge and capabilities of the culture that Egyptology insists built those pyramids? I mean, today we give our kids lessons about the speed of light, nuclear physics, etc., but that doesn't mean this was all understood back in 1518 AD.
I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about here.
From my perspective, you're bending pedantics to the breaking point.
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 16-Jan-18 17:48 by Origyptian.