> charly wrote:
> > You admit you can't prove the "literal meaning" was intended
> > yet you use it as evidence all the time...
> > There is no coherent literal meaning, unless you begin to
> > imagine un-evidenced machinery and un-evidenced geysers. Then
> > you get a coherent picture...for a sf/fantasy novel.
> I can't prove that it was meant literally but the very fact it
> can be taken literally nearly proves this was the intent.
Problem is, if taken literally they mean nothing (unless you begin to imagine there are hidden meanings such as Osiris=geyser etc.)
> The only reason to believe that the orthodox interpretation is
> correct is that it is an earlier version of a book of magic.
> This is nothing at all!!! It simply doesn't matter into what it
> evolved. This is little more than a hunch.
This is everything!!! Pyramid texts evolve in Coffin text, Coffin Texts into the Book of the Dead. The evolution is clear: Coffin texts appear for the first time with PT on walls of pyramids, BoD texts appear for the first time together with Coffin texts on coffins. It's not a hunch, it's a fact. To claim the PT are an explanation of building methods used is totally unreasonable.
> But the literal meaning supports itself by definition.
> The literal meaning says that orthodoxy is wrong. It literally
> says that it is a book of ritual used in conjunction with a
> holy book to be read at the king's ascension. I don't know how
> orthodoxy got this wrong but it's very apparent thy got it
Your imagination says "orthodoxy" is wrong. It's apparent that someone who doesn't even read hieroglyps isn't in a position to make any reasonable statements about the PT that contradict the findings of someone who has studied the language and culture of the AE.
> I can't stress enough that the builders agree with me and not
> with orthodoxy. It's easy enough to disprove the literal
> meaning but the ball is in Hawass' court. I have shown that he
> is wrong and how he can prove I am (if I am).
The "builders" don't agree with you, you just imagine that.
You haven't shown egyptology is wrong since you don't have a single shred of (real, not imagined) evidence. You have shown to have a vivid imagination, that's all.
> > Reality-check: no evidence for complicated machinery or
> > (unless you imagine them in the PT of course).
> Ramps are significantly more complicated than balance. Ramps
> are so complicated no one yet has figured out a configuration
> that might work. Yet the people use balance for the simplest of
> tasks. There are no ramps depicted in the culture but there
> are balances everywhere.
> No! It is ramps that are complicated and un-evidenced while a
> standard weight was even found in an air shaft.
The facts, a recap:
- evolution of the pyramids: from mastaba (tomb) to step mastaba (tomb), to step pyramid (tomb) to true pyramid (tomb): no reason whatsoever to assume that some pyramids with internal chambers (some with sarcophagi no less) should be something completely different than a tomb.
- nearly all AE tombs have been partially of completely robbed, especially the biggest pyramids since they attract the most attention. Even after being robbed they still atract attention, just because they are the biggest. Even the lid of the sarcophagus in the GP has been removed during the 16th century.
- ramps have been found; no trace of complicated geyser powered block lifting machinery though (unless you imagine it's there).
Ignoring, dismissing, ridiculing and denying these facts won't change reality or make your imagination become reality.
> Orthodoxy is simply ignoring the evidence because they've made
> up their minds 150 years ago. It doesn't matter their theories
> don't work because they're so much fun to make up.
Egyptology doesn't ignore the evidence, they review it al the time, a lot of things have changed since the start 150 years ago. But you do not wan't to accept that even when pointed to sources like "Egyptology Today". You refuse to know and prefer to immagine.
The only one who makes things up Cladking, is you. When people point that out you just ignore them in spite of the evidence.
Your methodology consists off ignoring, denial, dismissal, ridicule and a lot of imagination.
IOW a reasonable discussion with you is just impossible (at the moment).
A pity, if you would put your energy into learning about AE culture you would discover the real mysteries. Perhaps one day...