> Thanos5150 wrote:
> > Origyptian wrote:
> > [snip]
> > No where in your reply do you acknowledge the fact you were
> > mistaken regarding the ostraca dating to the 2nd century AD,
> > the same era of Roman construction using stone from MC and
> > "long before".
> > You will no doubt ignore it once again and say "this is not
> > point", but it is the point. Honesty. Respect. Contrition.
> I have denied nothing. I took your comment in stride. Thanks
> for focusing the timeline.
> But the only point I was making is that it was written after
> the fact and was not a daily journal but rather was written "in
> hindsight" with no explanation given. I'm sure you realize that
> was my point; does it matter whether the hindsight was 1 mo., 1
> yr., or 10 years?
> It's interesting that you would express indignance about the
> lack of "respect".
> >Thanos, " when you do not display these things to your fellow posters
> > quite frankly expend great effort trying to communicate and
> > educate you with little in return, personally I find this
> > behavior infinitely more "hostile" and "disrespectful" than
> I could ever be to you."
Ori, " Sorry, but this sounds like a deflection. Perhaps it's a
> cultural difference that makes you so nonchalantly hostile when
> you are disagreed with but you don't notice it. Go back and
> read the escalation. I've treated others far better here than
> they have treated me.
I've only asked a very simple question
> and at least three of you have pulled out all the stops in an
> attempt to excoriate me. The record is very clear on that. On
> the other hand, I have repeatedly tried to clarify my question
> the best I can, I have posted each relevant ostraca I have come
> across in my reading, and have complimented the content of your
> posts despite your constant insults back. "
> Post Edited (26-Jun-15 15:33)
Sounds like Thanos is absolutely correct to me, and I agree w/ him here 100%. You've made a bad habit of disrespecting many here by constantly and consistently refusing to accept the valid evidence they've provided. Extremely poor forum conduct on your part....not to mention us wasting our time searching for, and posting this evidence at YOUR request.
"I've only asked a very simple question..."
Simply not true. You dismiss/disregard any and all facts that you don't agree w/, but offer nothing to counter these facts. (You still don't play 'Little Miss Innocent' very well....poorly, in fact.) You make claims, never provide evidence for these claims, and then deny making them....ALL while requesting evidence from all others.
The 3 of us haven't 'pulled out all the stops'; we simply gave our opinions of your conduct. BUT, you continue unfazed, and unchanging....obfuscation, diversion, outright denial, and making false statements is a way of life for you here. You spend most of your time ignoring and avoiding the truth. The record is very clear on this, anyway.
You asked for examples on the now closed thread, and I could spend ALL day posting them, but this ONE will suffice: Remember SC's 'Plaster Thread'??? In that one you absolutely refused to accept the FACT that the Roof blocks in C's Chamber ARE Tura Limestone....despite the posting of 3 eye-witness accounts which all stated that they are indeed Tura Limestone. (GR even put forth extra effort as he had emailed Mr. Houdin for confirmation.)
This goes well beyond 'intellectual dishonesty' and IS simply plain dishonest.
By all means, let the reader decide.
Campbell's Chamber roof blocks are Tura Limestone until proven otherwise.
THE Cartouche in Campbell's Chamber IS Authentic, as are ALL other RC's Glyphs, until proven otherwise.
"This Forgery 'theory' has more holes than a sieve basket."