> Whoa! Take it easy. :) Remember this is his first
> attempt at a video, and no doubt a large part was
> ad-libbed. No, he didn't have the structure of a
> TV show or TED presentation, but that isn't the
> point. It is only a beginning, and I would verily
> attest he has a much deeper support base of
If he can't handle criticism he shouldn't advertise it here. I have no intention of pampering every author and video maker on this board (and there be many). He's given no indication of a "deeper support base of knowledge". I would say he's done the opposite by ignoring questions.
Take for example the Princess in a box. She was found in the Department of Anatomy, Qasr el Aini Medical faculty, Cairo University, in a box labeled "Skull of a young woman, a princess of the third dynasty”. For some reason it is said she was found in Djosers. But I'll bet the ranch the box was not labeled "Djoser's pyramid". So Professor Strouhal scientifically tests these remains and finds they are of a 16 yr old dating to 3532bc-2878bc, 300 years before the 3rd dyn. Pete's video lacks detail, he speaks in generalities and makes no mention of scientific testing.
Intrusive burials prove one thing..... others found a way in. It does not show original intent.
> *grins* I've known Pete about 20 years in this
> online world of ancient Egypt, and I can tell you
> he is not just a puppet. :) In fact, he and I and
> a few others (proudly?) claim the distinction of
> being involved in the same way you are right now.
So you must have know Pete online since he was in diapers, he looks to be all of 30. I don't see as how you are involved in the same way I am. I'm an alt and you sound totally mainstream.
> Do you know why the tomb theory was
> questioned in the first place?
How far back do you want to go? The middle ages when tomb theory was questioned or to the 1800's when the question had not died out. It is not a modern question. Or why don't we go back to Manetho & Herodotus who put forth the tomb nonsense in the first place.