> The “grasping” in the case is your drooling
> idiot’s counter-proposal, that they carried the
> stone from Tura to Akhet-Khufu and then carried
> it back again.
Apparently, you missed my post.
> ..Point of information: there is no mention of their
> stopping at She-Khufu on the return journey.
You mean as opposed to all those things he didn't mention about the work he did at Akhet-Khufu? There also no mention of him doing any work at Akhet-Khufu. For that matter, according to Merer, he never got off the boat that night.
Point of information: There is no mention of many other things in that log besides what happened at that one stop at Akhet-Khufu. But go ahead and conveniently ignore all those other contradictions and omissions.
And you really are arguing about one solitary night among the couple of months covered by that diary? You believe that log says he spent one day delivering stones to G1 out of those couple of months transporting stones, the vast majority apparently going to the dyke? How does that support the notion that building the king's tomb was an extremely high priority to be sure it's completed befor the king dies? Was once every 2 months the standard delivery schedule for large cargo ships in the scramble to finish the king's tomb in his lifetime? You don't see the problem with that?
You neglect all the contradictions and obvious omissions and instead focus on the least likely possibility (in my opinion).
The fact is, there is nothing in Merer that provides anything close to compelling evidence that G1 was built by Khufu in the 3rd millennium. The best we can say is that Merer doesn't contradict the notion that G1 was built in the 3rd millennium BC.
> > Forget the fact that such a recorded stop could be
> > an artifact among the many other enigmas,
> > contradictions, and apparent omissions in that
> > incomplete log.
> That’s not a fact. It’s not
> established, it’s not agreed upon, or any other
> description or definition of a fact. All
> it is is another of your idle speculations, with
> no evidential or argumentative status.
Surely you are not saying that it is simply not possible that the papyrus is a scribe's copy that contains transcription errors.
You seem to have a problem with anything that falls between 0% and 100% certainty.
> As for “the many other enigmas, contradictions,
> and apparent omissions”: these are serious
> charges. Where have you proven them? All I’ve
> seen are examples of your strictly remedial
They're observations, not "serious charges".
It does indeed appear that you are missing some of my posts.
> “What makes a copy more likely to travel? The
> missing step in your argument.”
The answer is obvous. And yet you instead believe that when you consider the entirety of that log, you conclude that it provides strong evidence (perhaps even proof) that Khufu built G1 in the 3rd millennium BC?
Thanks, but I'll stick to my own standards of proof.
> Of course there is no such step. This is merely
> another of your idle speculations: an ersatz for
> evidence or argument.
You mean as opposed to the clear proof of all the work he did at G1...but never mentions?
Where/what do you think the Chapels of Khufu are?
> And you don’t know what “logically
> impossible” means, so don’t use the phrase: it
> offends those of us who do.
> Enough comment on this liar’s trash.
Then perhaps you can explain how he can depart from Tura and head to Akhet-Khufu on one day, and then on the very next day, depart from Tura on his way to Akhet-Khufu again.
"Liar's trash" is right.
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 24-Jan-18 15:43 by Origyptian.