> A late pronunciation of (what had been)
> “Khufu” might have been something like
> “Shoof” or “Soof”. Add a Greek ending and
> we get Σοῦφις. It’s not a separate name,
> just a Grecianised form of the same.
Thanks. Fortunate "scholars" like you :-) can unravel such, and give understandable instruction, but "Saurid"? LOL!
> And what is this “I have always accepted”
> eyewash? That’s not what we find in the
> Introduction to HOAX. There we are told that
> “the question as to who really was the
> builder” has been reopened. Does he think we
> can’t read?
You are at a complete advantage. I read only a free of charge review copy and will not in principle buy any Scott Creighton fantasy book!
He doesn't appear to think "reading" (see Sfbeys post above) has any merit!
> > > Vyse was a known fraudster and there is much
> > > convince me that he also perpetrated a fraud
> > > within the GP.
> > When it’s been put to Creighton that Vyse
> wasn’t so bad by the standards of his time,
> Creighton has insisted on the legal (or
> legalistic) point: Vyse was guilty of a crime.
> Watch out for his u-turn when it sinks in that he
> hasn’t this leg to stand on, and keep a bucket
> handy for when he starts his next bout of
How many U turns are you allowed to do in Glasgow, surely it more resembles burn out circles including associated crashes?
Nothing in "Operations" ,even though written by Vyse , if, and even if there was any conjecture or doubt, that a fraction of his benevolence is true, then he was no crook or fraud.
But....Claiming non existent chemical analysis ???? LOL!
Hey, did you know the Scottish parliament and Irish are following the European court example and have been debating and proposing bills to cater for defamation of deceased persons?
Thanks for advising that descendants are unlikely to take any notice of him. A relief to one individual and his publisher, I would have thought?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08-Feb-19 01:39 by Corpuscles.