> of Ipuur. He's trying to broadly present some basic concepts
> from a book just released that few of us, if any, have yet
The purpose of this thread is, to my understanding, to debate the RVT.
Scott presented The dialogue of Ipuur as supporting evidence.
> This theory has foundations that go far beyond the literature
> of Egyptology. Unlike you, who apparently have a scholarly
> knowledge of Egyptology, I don't have a scholarly knowledge of
> any of the relevent disciplines Recovery Vault Theory might
> rely on.
That is my point Ray. People who do not know the text are presented half a stanza - the half that, when (and only when) presented isolated, seems to support Scott´s claims.
> Why not try to further draw out and explore the broad claims
> before quibbling about an aspect of one of the many detailed
> analyses Scott and Gary have made?
The validity of any theory rests on the evidence supporting it.