SD: ...to follow the pseudo path without keeping a stronger hold on the scientific one would be a mistake.
SC: You give the impression that "Pseudo" should be equated with "unscientific". This is wrong. It is a question of how scientific evidence is to be interpreted. The errosion of the Sphinx and its enclosure is a good example of this. Some scientists argue in favour of one errosion mechanism whilst other scientists argue in favour of a different mechanism. Each mechanism offers a different date. How do you regard this as "pseudo"?