Mysteries :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Warwick wrote:

> <<<<<> How have I insulted you??
>
> The comment was uncalled for and simply a distraction to the
> content posted.
>
> > If you are referring to my comment about reading..you are the
> > one that stated that the Library was not a good source of
> > Information
> >
> > what was I to conclude?
>
> Your giving examples of coming to a conclusion against the
> character with one statement..
> However, your against coming to conclusion given solid theorem
> data extracted from the ancients??>>>>
>
> for Pete's sake!!!

the comment "what was i to conclude" informs us...that a "conclusion" has been reached. I'm pointing out that you have displayed a conflict of methodolgy in that enables you to make "conclusions" regarding the "individual" presenting.... however, is not applied for the actual data being presented.

For Pete's sake is right!

>
> I offered sources of info to Titus
>
> You THREW OUT the Library as a source of info

No, I simply did not convey my thoughts on the matter clearly enough for you to gauge what i was intending....
>
> "i see conflict in methodology. sorry."
>
> what methodology?? WE are discussing sources of review for
> Titus

>see above. systems analysts ..."Analyze" everything.

>
> "of course not.... but, where did i state an "expert" opinion?"
>
> "I am a system analyst."

What is your point? A system Analyst qualifies as an expert opinion on the topic of AE?

> I trust that you are convinced that your observations are
> correct..

I believe the math is correct, yes. And, given that the math was extracted via ancient rhinds, objects,art and structures all linked... then it appears to convey intention..
hence, why I am detrmined to obtain feedback.

> now can you place your observations with a cultural context or
> not??

Is not binding the EMP/RMP with the GP sufficient enough? This relates to the mathematical engineering processes...not the "meaning" behind the GP. the knew math... building a structure of that magnitude wouldrequire math... we find correlating data in the units of both structure and rhind.

>
> "You have answered the question... you've pointed out my flaws
> in character."
>
> I have done nothing of the sort
>
> I have absolutely no ideas pertaining to your character

okay.

> I assumed that you were honest in your calculations,,,but now
> you have told me I am misguided for doing so

not so... the twisted interpretations have to stop. Isimply stated that it would be irresponsible to take anyones word versus doing the work yourself to test it.
>
> If I were to check the maths of every person who puts forward
> maths here and at the Hof M...I would never have any time to
> discuss the Old Kingdom Egyptians

Fortunately for you, the AE had a simpler system of math and only requires visual understanding versus pages of mathematical calculations... :)
ofcourse they both have to be joined to prove the theorems.

this line of discussion appears unproductive and is caught in a cyclic spin.
please either review the data and offer what ever you feel ...
Or, simply go the other direction. I cannot waste anymore time here.

Thanks for "trying"....


Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
debunking alternative theories 356 Titus Livius 02-Jul-09 19:10
Re: debunking alternative theories 270 cladking 02-Jul-09 19:55
Re: debunking alternative theories 220 drew 02-Jul-09 23:11
Re: debunking alternative theories 236 Scott Creighton 02-Jul-09 23:52
Re: debunking alternative theories 220 survivalcell 03-Jul-09 00:01
Re: debunking alternative theories 237 cladking 03-Jul-09 01:37
Re: debunking alternative theories 247 survivalcell 03-Jul-09 18:18
Re: debunking alternative theories 233 cladking 04-Jul-09 00:07
Re: debunking alternative theories 309 Susan Doris 04-Jul-09 07:14
Re: debunking alternative theories 255 cladking 04-Jul-09 07:26
Re: debunking alternative theories 294 Susan Doris 04-Jul-09 07:31
Re: debunking alternative theories 257 Rob Miller 04-Jul-09 07:31
Re: debunking alternative theories 238 Titus Livius 03-Jul-09 17:10
Re: debunking alternative theories 274 cladking 03-Jul-09 22:56
Re: debunking alternative theories 224 papalou 05-Jul-09 22:27
Re: debunking alternative theories 267 Susan Doris 06-Jul-09 06:34
Re: debunking alternative theories 316 carolb 06-Jul-09 18:13
Re: debunking alternative theories 243 Susan Doris 06-Jul-09 20:34
Re: debunking alternative theories 241 papalou 06-Jul-09 23:29
Re: debunking alternative theories 313 carolb 07-Jul-09 16:43
Re: debunking alternative theories 228 NetWorkAngel 07-Jul-09 16:51
Re: debunking alternative theories 238 Bobajot 08-Jul-09 03:49
Re: debunking alternative theories 177 Andy McCallum 02-Jul-09 22:40
Re: debunking alternative theories 236 Archae Solenhofen 02-Jul-09 23:18
Re: debunking alternative theories 221 Scott Creighton 03-Jul-09 00:03
Re: debunking alternative theories 261 Archae Solenhofen 03-Jul-09 03:17
Re: debunking alternative theories 261 Scott Creighton 03-Jul-09 10:23
Re: debunking alternative theories 249 Titus Livius 03-Jul-09 17:20
Scott 255 Warwick 03-Jul-09 17:54
Re: debunking alternative theories 268 Archae Solenhofen 03-Jul-09 18:13
Re: debunking alternative theories 265 cladking 03-Jul-09 23:08
Re: debunking alternative theories 244 Archae Solenhofen 03-Jul-09 23:59
Re: debunking alternative theories 262 cladking 04-Jul-09 01:34
Re: debunking alternative theories 266 Archae Solenhofen 04-Jul-09 18:18
Re: debunking alternative theories 268 cladking 04-Jul-09 18:54
Re: debunking alternative theories 232 papalou 05-Jul-09 22:47
The coiled serpent 237 Morph 06-Jul-09 13:58
Re: debunking alternative theories 252 Susan Doris 06-Jul-09 07:03
Re: debunking alternative theories 248 cladking 06-Jul-09 21:46
Re: debunking alternative theories 290 Susan Doris 07-Jul-09 07:18
Re: debunking alternative theories 249 Titus Livius 03-Jul-09 17:16
Re: debunking alternative theories 287 Archae Solenhofen 03-Jul-09 18:47
Re: debunking alternative theories 248 Morph 02-Jul-09 23:22
Re: debunking alternative theories 244 drew 02-Jul-09 23:25
Re: debunking alternative theories 252 Titus Livius 03-Jul-09 17:48
Re: debunking alternative theories 223 Warwick 03-Jul-09 18:08
Re: debunking alternative theories 282 richarddullum 03-Jul-09 05:50
Re: debunking alternative theories 252 Titus Livius 03-Jul-09 17:38
Re: debunking alternative theories 257 cladking 03-Jul-09 23:36
Re: debunking alternative theories 260 Titus Livius 04-Jul-09 11:57
Re: debunking alternative theories 280 cladking 04-Jul-09 19:14
Re: debunking alternative theories 232 Titus Livius 05-Jul-09 10:22
Re: debunking alternative theories 246 cladking 05-Jul-09 20:18
Re: debunking alternative theories 280 Susan Doris 03-Jul-09 07:36
Re: debunking alternative theories 305 Susan Doris 03-Jul-09 07:43
Re: debunking alternative theories 229 Scott Creighton 03-Jul-09 10:58
Re: debunking alternative theories 237 Essan 03-Jul-09 08:52
Re: debunking alternative theories 224 Laird Scranton 03-Jul-09 15:05
Re: debunking alternative theories 254 Warwick 03-Jul-09 17:47
more scholarly feedback 187 Warwick 03-Jul-09 18:00
Re: more scholarly feedback 239 cladking 03-Jul-09 23:45
Re: debunking alternative theories 354 Rob Miller 03-Jul-09 18:42
actually.. 256 Warwick 03-Jul-09 19:08
Re: actually.. 226 Rob Miller 03-Jul-09 19:17
Re: actually.. 223 Warwick 03-Jul-09 19:39
Re: actually.. 274 Rob Miller 03-Jul-09 19:43
Re: actually.. 263 Warwick 03-Jul-09 19:50
Re: actually.. 223 Rob Miller 03-Jul-09 19:56
Re: actually.. 226 Warwick 03-Jul-09 20:13
Re: actually.. 211 Rob Miller 03-Jul-09 20:33
Posturing.. 243 Warwick 03-Jul-09 20:46
Re: Posturing.. 258 Rob Miller 03-Jul-09 20:54
Re: Posturing.. 242 Warwick 03-Jul-09 21:01
Re:Opinion Alert! 259 Sirfiroth 04-Jul-09 06:03
Re:Opinion Alert! 261 Warwick 04-Jul-09 17:58
Re:Opinion Alert! 218 Sirfiroth 04-Jul-09 19:49
Re:Opinion Alert! 219 Rob Miller 04-Jul-09 20:03
Re:Opinion Alert! 238 Warwick 05-Jul-09 18:45
Re:Opinion Alert! 248 Sirfiroth 05-Jul-09 20:21
Re:Opinion Alert! 304 Warwick 05-Jul-09 21:05
Re: Posturing.. 274 Rob Miller 04-Jul-09 08:15
Re: Posturing.. 234 Warwick 04-Jul-09 18:10
Re: Posturing.. 237 Rob Miller 04-Jul-09 18:33
Re: Posturing.. 235 Warwick 04-Jul-09 19:09
Re: Posturing.. 283 Rob Miller 04-Jul-09 19:27
Re: Posturing.. 246 cladking 04-Jul-09 20:01
Re: actually.. 313 Warwick 03-Jul-09 20:15
Re: debunking alternative theories 249 drew 04-Jul-09 03:24
Titus 249 Warwick 03-Jul-09 20:34
Re: debunking alternative theories 221 Diomede 05-Jul-09 22:39
Re: debunking alternative theories 299 Susan Doris 06-Jul-09 06:49
Re: debunking alternative theories 251 Laird Scranton 06-Jul-09 14:56
Re: debunking alternative theories 263 Titus Livius 06-Jul-09 18:39
Re: debunking alternative theories 295 Laird Scranton 06-Jul-09 20:40
Re: debunking alternative theories 268 bookwise 06-Jul-09 15:24
Re: debunking alternative theories 243 Laird Scranton 06-Jul-09 15:47
Re: debunking alternative theories 222 Diomede 06-Jul-09 20:11
Re: debunking alternative theories 232 bookwise 06-Jul-09 20:49
Re: debunking alternative theories 273 Susan Doris 07-Jul-09 07:38
Re: debunking alternative theories 269 Titus Livius 08-Jul-09 18:34
Re: debunking alternative theories 211 Warwick 08-Jul-09 19:03


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.