> SC: And I’ll be bumping these gums of mine for a long time to
> come. Look out for my next book, 'Ark of the Gods' - gives a
> bit more info on those old Belzoni bull bones. I'm sure you'll
> hate it.
Not that you’re showing here and elsewhere in your post any sign of ego-involvement.
If you know all about the bones, then why tell readers of this board that it was “plain old earth”? (But I see that you’ve mentioned the bones elsewhere.)
The one thing you could find which would be of interest is that the bones are extant and have been dated. Robert Bauval looked into this, without result. Did you get further? Go on, you old tease, tell us.
> SC: If you want real knowledge then that comes from REAL
> EVIDENCE like the evidence that was actually found in the stone
> box of G2 and not the theorized evidence that Belzoni and you
> imagine musta
> been there. To quote you again:
Let’s not quote me again.
> SC: Nothing strange about it. There is very much a growing
> consensus from alternative thinkers that the one thing this
> broad church can agree on is that consensus Egyptology is wrong
See what I mean. Consensus is good, when it suits you.
> SC: No – I am advancing a theory that actually has some
> empirical evidence to support it.
Proving if proof were needed that your views on theory and evidence remain as primitive and rhetoric-laden as before.
> SC: It has been ASSUMED by Belzoni and every Egyptologist and
> Egypt-apologist since that the body of the king musta
Yada yada ya. Same tired old rhetoric.
Look what happens when there really is a case for things having been found exactly as the builders left them, as with the “graffiti” found by Vyse. The sainted consensus of “alternative thinkers” bends over backwards to deny it. Pardon my being unimpressed.
What this has to do with Menkaure escapes me.