>Archae Solenhofen wrote:
>>Good work inadvertently implying everyone who claims
>exaggerated block >sizes are liars including all fringe authors
>who claimed such to a more than >just an extraordinary extent.
>"Fringe" authors like Dr I.E.S. Edwards: The Pyramids of Egypt
>1986/1947 p. 147-163 who cites Reiser's estimates for the
>largest block of the Valley Temple being upwards of "220 tons"?
Not in the Valley temple..... and he does not exaggerate what is actually there. That block is at ground level and right next to the quarry from which it was extracted, and it's no where near the Sphinx. Enlighten us as to how many 200 ton blocks are at Giza and show us where any fringe author ever pointed that out correctly before one of them let out what was in their book was all just a "gross exaggeration"?
>Granted, those other "fringe" authors Siliotti, Alberto, Zahi
>Hawass, 1997 "Guide to the Pyramids of Egypt" p.63-9 only say
>that the largest are somewhere "over 100 tons".
So what.... Where do they claim there are 100s of 200+ ton ones?
>Or how about those same nut-job fringe authors Alberto and
>Hawass (p.62) claiming the foundation blocks of the Sphinx
>Temple weigh as much as "400 tons"?
No they don't..... it's in the pavement of Khafre's mortuary temple and the thickness is in unknown.... it can be anywhere between 400 and 150 tons depending on thickness and it's still in the quarry from which it was extracted and at ground level (i.e. was not moved very far or lifted very high).
>What is your point "Ancient Limestone"? Are you calling Resier,
>Edwards, Alberto and Hawass "liars"?
I never called anyone a liar in this..... that is entirely someone else's claim.
Archae Solenhofen (firstname.lastname@example.org)