Even in an attempt to clarify and be conciliatory, Creighton talks with forked tongue, or with the intention to further deceive.

Scott Creighton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>> SC: What correction? What are you talking about?
> Hans - you seem to be misunderstanding something
> rather fundamental here. If you go through my
> posts here on GHMB (and elsewhere), one thing you
> will notice is that I have always accepted that
> Khufu/Suphis/Saurid built the pyramid.

> So why
> wouldn't we find the Khufu/Suphis/Saurid
> name on the core stones?

"We" who is this we? SC hasn't even seen them in person, was denied permission to reproduce promised HD photographs, yet thinks he is in a position to render critical analysis and promote in print a claim of fictitious chemical analysis.

Col Vyse was the first to find such.

No not "Khufu/Suphis/Saurid"

There is no Suphis (Greek: Σοῦφις ) inscriptions only used by the mysterious Manetho thought to be of the Ptolemaic period.

There is no Saurid (Arabic: سوريد‎) inscriptions. Comes from an 11thC AD Arabic copy of a purported earlier 3rd C AD Arabic copy of a purported rendition, of unknown providence , unevidenced ,more ancient Coptic folk tales.


But Hans - that STILL
> does not make the marks Vyse claimed to have
> discovered authentic. It simply doesn't. For me
> (and many others) there are simply far too many
> anomalies, inconsistencies, contradictions in the
> Vyse narrative; a whole bunch of circumstantial
> evidence that calls Vyse's claimed discoveries
> into question. But just because I point to all of
> this and call Vyse's claimed discovery into
> question doesn't mean I don't accept the GP was
> built by Khufu/Suphis/Saurid.

One wonders on what basis? Especially since he constantly bleats insistently that G1 is much older than the Ancient Egyptian Old Kingdom dynastic period.
Does he mean to suggest another pre flood person (circa 10,000BC or before) that happened to be referred to in Old Kingdom style Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics?



> Vyse was a known
> fraudster and there is much to convince me that he
> also perpetrated a fraud within the GP.

No not "known", conveniently concocted by SC despite prior clarification. M Stower had provided the actual court document reference that the court exonerated (found Col. Vyse not guilty) to electoral vote corruption based on the fact he had broken no law. Whilst almost certainly charitable in his electorate, it was and is not unusual and is called "pork barrelling" even today as it still continues.


But that
> doesn't mean I hold the view that
> Khufu/Suphis/Saurid did not build the structure.
> They're two different and separate issues. Do you
> understand?
>
>

Caveat Emptor - Let the buyer beware.

In the recent kooky radio show (other thread) SC announces he has gathered "whole ton of new evidence " and is currently writing another book to follow his original "Hoax"

He is subtly trying to place in your mind that the 11th C AD Arabic fables (source for "Saurid") which include stuff like the pyramids had "spirits that manifested as a mad naked woman with big teeth (fangs?)" are more reliable than the continuous professional study of Egyptology over the last 200 years!

If you are stupid enough to swallow that steaming bovine manure then no sympathy but I post such because I am grateful to many others who have previously exposed this devious fraud , just in case there is someone out there wanting some clarification and direction to better or closer to the truth.