Hi Willie,

PS hope I got my writing correct.

Quoting Willie from this URL:

[www.grahamhancock.com]
Author: DScribr (68.229.10.---)
Date: 12-Jan-15 15:51

"At least ours are practical, fact-based, and realistic."

COLETTE writing:

I asked if there was any documentation that could be cited. When you Willie, write, "fact -based," where is the evidence to deem the explanations as fact?

Well, you do not have to be a "Rocket Scientist" to be able to realize that some of these convenient and common explanations of the posturing of the stones and painting of some of the glyphs on my already published photographs do not seemingly tell the same story as the photographic evidence.

When I read explanations of what happened back then and how the stones and glyphs ended up the way they did in the end as we view them now in 2015.....I think to myself , "Realistic?...".....Yeah, and what are the odds that it all truly happened that way?" An example being,

Quoting Willie from URL posted below this paragraph:

"THE Cartouche was once orientated horizontally, (in the Quarry) and was turned, etc. in the construction process into the position we now see. Most likely, the lower end of this block was cut on the job to fit, and this would explain why THE Cartouche is so close to the edge of this particular block."


Quoting Willie in full:

[www.grahamhancock.com]
Author: DScribr (68.229.10.---)
Date: 11-Jan-15 16:56

"Hi Colette, you said, "If the Cartouche in Campbell's was painted before it was placed in the chamber, and it was painted to be horizontal, then the stone would not have been cut properly to fit in that particular location. The stone itself would have been fashioned as a more vertical stone, not a horizontal cut????"

IMO, The builders communicated w/ the quarrymen ahead of time and 'put their order in' for stone blocks they required of certain types, and sizes to be cut and delivered to the Construction Project.

The Quarrymen didn't (need to) know the final placement of any of the blocks, they simply cut it to a close approx. size and rough-dressed it for eventual delivery, etc. and they painted the quarry marks on the most convenient location available.


THE Cartouche was once orientated horizontally, (in the Quarry) and was turned, etc. in the construction process into the position we now see. Most likely, the lower end of this block was cut on the job to fit, and this would explain why THE Cartouche is so close to the edge of this particular block.

It's possible that there ARE more quarry marks on the top faces of the Tura limestone roof blocks in C's Chamber that we cannot see."

COLETTE WRITING:
However, I understand if a person does not have any expertise in the fields necessary to help determine various methodologies, they will not understand the evidence that is before their eyes. They lack the knowledge to recognize and determine techniques involved to either do or not do something or to obtain particular results and so on....

Quoting Willie again:

[www.grahamhancock.com]

Author: DScribr (68.229.10.---)
Date: 12-Jan-15 16:12

"You're welcome.


Our explanations are practical, fact-based, and realistic...we came to logical conclusions based on all the available info.


Quoting CD, "I ask this, because some of the explanations I have read ( through out my years of searching) do not seem logical as a builder dealing with the issue of having to maneuver such large stones. Also, from what I see in my photographs, some of the various statements/theories I have read on the painting of the Cartouche and the positioning of the stones, et. al. ---and bla bla bla.....do not "seem" (no hard statements) to have any standing/merit; the explanation does not match the reality the camera captured of the modern visual data."

No offence, but we've heard the, "I have new evidence" claim here many times.

Normally, I'd suggest posting these pics, but judging from past threads, etc. their visual evidence most likely will not be interpretated objectively here."

NOW COLETTE writing here:

I have not claimed any theories. And I am not claiming any new evidence. I have sat back and read what others have written the past few months, I have viewed my photographs and kept my personal opinions to myself more so. I am just saying that there are some statements being made that are seemingly without standing.

So, is there is NO evidence of what I requested, standing to merit those speculations other than they are convenient and "seem" to be logical .....?????

I am open minded. I just want to see proof of what some are claiming.

Some of the statements I have read, have not "seemed" practical from an experienced builder's point of view or an experienced artist's point of view.

Okay, thank you. And please note, I am not attempting to be aggressive or 'bitchy', I am expressing what my thoughts are. Since Dr. Trog posted this new Khufu Cartouche, it has brought things to my attention and more things are clearer to me.....Like more data for my wee little brain to analyse; it passes the time of day for me.

Regards,
Colette