SF: Both authors, through further self discovery, now
>concur that the Gizamids were built ~ 2,500 B.C. and that the
>size of some of the stones were overstated in the past.
>SC: I think a small correction is needed here, Syd. It is my
>understanding that Graham and Robert misquoted the location of
>the megaliths and overstated the quantity. That DOES NOT MEAN
>that there are no 200+ ton blocks elsewhere in the Giza plateau
>structures - there are a few 200+ ton blocks in use in G2
>complex and G3 pyramid as Archae well knows. This is nothing
>but smoke and mirrors from him.
>So, whilst Graham and Robert have put right their original
>assessments of these blocks, they were still correct to point
>out that there ARE INDEED a number of 200+ ton megaliths used
>in the Giza necropolis that had to be quaried, raised and moved
>into position with only the bronze age technology available to
>the AE of the 4th Dynasty.
>Isn't that correct, Archae?
Make sure when you elude to "smoke an mirrors" that you make a little more of an effort to point out the 1 possibly 200 ton block in the pavement of Khafre's Pyramid is right in the quarry from which it was extracted and is at ground level, and the 4 in Menkaure's Mortuary temple are right next to the quarry from which they were extracted and that they also are at ground level as well. More than just considerably different than claiming there were hundreds used in the construction of 40 m high walls in Khafre's Valley temple. Maybe you would like to also explain to us all why the ancient Egyptians of the 4th dynasty can not move these 5 block with the simple ools modern Egyptology ascribes to them?
Archae Solenhofen (firstname.lastname@example.org)