Loveritas: Maybe, you can explain how the public was conned into believing that he had a chemical analysis of the Khufu cartouche in his book.
SC: Here is the blurb from my book, Loveritas:
As you can clearly see, the book states quite clearly: "He examines recent chemical analysis of the marks..."
Nowhere does the book blurb specifically state "...chemical analysis of the Khufu cartouche..." as you claim above. You have either imagined this specific claim or you are making it up (which can only be for malicious reasons).
HOAX presents the chemical analysis results of the painted mark removed by Gorlitz from Campbell's Chamber as related to me by him. HOAX clearly informs the reader what was tested (i.e. it clearly states in the book that it was NOT the cartouche that was tested) and openly states that the sample taken by Gorlitz was too small for radiocarbon dating and also that the painted mark he removed had been painted onto a surface of calcium sulphate (as opposed to the expected calcium carbonate).
Those are the facts of the chemical analysis as it was related to me. If you doubt the findings presented in HOAX of the chemical analysis of this mark then there is little I can do about that other than to suggest, if you can, find a way to get your own chemical analysis done.
In the interim, however, please desist from spreading your untruths.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 13-Feb-19 23:17 by Scott Creighton.