Gunpowder, Treason & Plot :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
This is the board for you if you wish to discuss or explore conspiracies of any kind, historical or current. 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Go to: Forum HomeBoardNew Topic

Current Page: 660 of 670
Results 19771 - 19800 of 20095
10 years ago
drrayeye
Arion, You not only need to post threads--you need to read: Best, Ray
Forum: Mysteries
10 years ago
drrayeye
Hi Michael, Thanks. Those are great images! Best, Ray
Forum: Mysteries
10 years ago
drrayeye
Hi Wendy, Thanks, but . . . . . . I was already aware of your opinion and your conclusion. What I was interested in was how you got there. Since you haven't posted any links or made any detailed statements, it appears that you are just going with the flow. What have you read and what was your analysis of what you read? What programs have you seen--and what aspects of the programs impressed
Forum: Mysteries
10 years ago
drrayeye
Lee, the post wasn't meant for you. The judgments you make seem inappropriate--I'm not sure that you are qualified to make them--and are a questionable contribution to the discussion. Best, Ray
Forum: Mysteries
10 years ago
drrayeye
Hi Wendy, from your posts, it appears that you view Andy as a "scientist" debating fundamentalist believers. If you check the links as well as the posts, you'll find that the discussion is far more complicated (and interesting) than that. Andy quotes and rephrases arguments from skeptic websites that convey their POV. If you check the credentials of all of them (including Andy), you
Forum: Mysteries
10 years ago
drrayeye
19776. Hello?
Ian, If after reading more than 200 posts, all you can come up with is a one liner, no matter how sincere, I wonder what you have been thinking. Aren't we entitled to a paragraph or two--and maybe a few links? If you haven't read the 200 posts, maybe you should read them. Best, Ray
Forum: Mysteries
10 years ago
drrayeye
For your part in a great discussion. I've just read all the threads and must complement you on your defense of the latest Shroud study. I've read about some of the earlier studies, so I could follow the discussion quite well. I don't think that anyone can "prove" that the shroud somehow has preserved the likeness of Jesus Christ. You have done a terrific job of showing that one c
Forum: Mysteries
10 years ago
drrayeye
Great post, Gill, Hope to see more of your posts on this board. Best, Ray
Forum: Mysteries
10 years ago
drrayeye
Hi Fuzzy, Interesting post and digital recreation. Are you or Robert involved? I suspect that there will be a firestorm of comments--especially after the TV program. Archae is already "in." Best, Ray
Forum: Mysteries
10 years ago
drrayeye
Warren, Fox News? Can't you do better than that? Ray
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
19781. We disagree
John, I've read enough to know what I don't know. I don't know the age of the Sphinx because there is no independent scientific verification of the historical dates that takes all of the disputed factors into account. Best, Ray
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
John, If it ever comes to clear methodologies and empirical data that would allow the determination of confidence limits, and the use of inferential statistics, I'll do fine. You, on the other hand, would be lost. I'm not a historian--and you're not a scientist. Let's not throw stones at each other. Best, Ray
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
Hi Archae, I believe you have made contributions, but coming to a determination independent of the field of Egyptology is clearly not feasible at this time. The necessary geological science is not there yet. Whenever we have these kinds of issues discussed, we will have another repeat of these posts, IMO. Best, Ray
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
John, I'm not a clinician. I have nothing to do with eyeglasses. Ray
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
Ray, You might have noticed my warning to Raja on Sept. 1. I've witnessed almost identical exchanges on this Board in hundreds of posts. Based on tradition, Egyptologists have reached an informal consensus on the type of issue that you raise. Robert Schoch departed from that tradition in the direction of geology, but only offered an informed opinion buttressed by a few new observations. Th
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
Hi Amy, That is a very dangerous thread to bring back at this time. It makes Gustav look feeble by comparison. Head North and head for high ground! Best, Ray
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
Thanks for clarifying, Jonny, but my point was also different. I didn't intend for your explanation to have anything to do with salt exfoliation, but rather with subjectivity in estimating age. My point was that some of us look at things in terms of science and others look at things in terms of history. Even the way that you just explained your idea challenges a traditional analysis of salt e
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
MichaelHP wrote: MichaelHP: Are you suggesting that the salt exfoliation we see every day > in the Sphinx enclosure is not really happening as a result of > the salt in the limestone expanding and contracting? Ray: Jonny supposed that salt might have been added to the surface of the limestone through a salty fog, mist, or rain that dried unto the surface at some point in time or period
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
Archae, You are not really responding to the points being made either by Jonny or Bobajot. Jonny is pointing out that the salt could have come from an external source with the rain. The fact that the limestone may contain some salt already is a completely different factor. Jonny's factor is hard to rule out. Bobajot is pointing out that one must show a significant difference or concurrence t
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
Pat, You wouldn't want to be more specific about the "snorting" part, would you? Best, Ray
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
Hi Guy, I'm with you 100%. I even did a "correction" similar to the Person A vs. Person B example you provided once. I notice and appreciate your efforts on this board. Best, Ray
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
I don't know, Guy, Although I certainly agree with you about peer review and politeness, our GHMB problems may be deeper than polite communication. Someone might have said that: Quoteno credible Egyptologist or any other peer reviewed historian had ever considered swimming pools on even the bright side of the moon, and besides, what credible evidence links the culture of the moon to Khafre, t
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
Hi MicyhaelHP, You're getting Solonhofenesque in your comments while he's getting brief, cogent, and to his point. Interesting. Our perspectives on the geologists' role in Giza plateau dating couldn't be much different. One of the biggest problems that I have with all the geologists is their tendency to be influenced by the type of cultural and historical/pseudo historical dating you feel is
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
John, I'd like Michael to become a regular contributer on this Board, and I think that you might well help him. You have clearly gone through a learning curve on this Board, and I'm very happy that you are still here. I am aware of the posts that you cited concerning Mr. Hunter, but I personally didn't take this thread as an attack on Michael--and I'm reasonably confident that Mr. Hunter will
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
MichaelHP, The best proof that you have a contribution to make on this board is your quality reply to Graham as part of the "Schoch Responds to his Critics" thread: In this response you stay focused and avoid unnecessary side issues. Legionromanes appears to share much of your perspective. Maybe he can help "coach" you on communications "do's" and "don't&q
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
John, MichaelHP doesn't need my help in the insulting department. He could use some encouragement in getting himself into a different business. Ray
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
Hi Deep, He's got a way to go, but I've see signs of progress. He's made himself into a straw man, not a red herring so far. I think that MichaelHP has important things to contribute. Best, Ray
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
Hi Andy, Great post. Had me waiting for the mods to come at you--not. In my view, we are here to brainstorm and learn. I can't distinguish between the sand at Laguna Beach or the Sahara Desert, but I enjoy lurking when knowledgeable people like you articulate interesting POVs related to the Giza Plateau and ancient civilization. I'll look for your future posts. Best, Ray
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
MichaelHP, I know that you have claimed to have read thousands of posts from this site, but from your 137 posts so far, it does not seem that you have graduated much beyond rookie status yet. Keith claims to have posted only a few hundred times, but he's done it over years with thought, and he comes off as an enlightened veteran. You say: QuoteHow sadly ironic that on a messageboard dedicated
Forum: Mysteries
11 years ago
drrayeye
MichaelHP, The tone has not improved, but you at least have, for the first time, presented some detail on your POV, so your tune corresponds better with your tone---if you only could now edit out the posturing and handwaving. You must be learning from Archae--you've managed to produce your own tapestry! More rookie mistakes. We've already had a zeitschrift for the aging of the Sphinx at G
Forum: Mysteries
Current Page: 660 of 670