> 2) Robert and I are just about to go public with
> something like that and I am ready for the
> flogging. I am actually looking forward to it.
> It's got some real stunners.
Cat o’ nine tails at the ready.
> 4) I was up against something like that when I
> submitted the Pyramid Code Paper to ARCE. The
> reviewer didn't like the corner approach, but I
> supplied proof that corners mattered in early
> dynastic temples in Egypt. I think one needs
> another piece of evidence to settle it. In that
> case the PT helped. In this case I am sure you'll
> find something on the the site which no one has
> noticed before which will help sway this. I am
> always amazed what in-your-face-features have
> gotten over-looked by generations of researchers.
I brought this up, I assume you know, because aligning to the corners was the Mesopotamian way as well as the 1st/2nd Dynasty Egyptians. Looking at a map briefly, the corners don't appear to exactly line up, but the corners may have been the extension (expansion) of the center axis that was aligned this way.
> Re Ekur vs Baalbek: The Anti-Lebanon mountains
> delay visibility, and thus horizontally shift, the
> appearance of the sun and the helically rising
> stars. Not so in the plane of Nippur. That might
> explain how two temples could be looking at the
> same thing but from different directions. What I
> need is a good aerial photo of the long axis of
> Enlil's temple and a heading. Then I will have to
> recreate the 3500 BC sky and see when what shows
> up. If that era matches Baal-bek's experience you
> might just get a hot lead out of this no one has
> picked up on so far.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 13-Apr-18 20:54 by Thanos5150.