> I haven't once mentioned any discussion of the
> mechanism of construction. That's what you keep
> trying to turn this discussion into. It's not the
> topic. My point was you and others marvel with
> such astonishment at the works of Khufu, when
> Khafre's is only 3m smaller, and Sneferu did more
> in terms of pyramid building....yet it's all
> focused on Khufu. Khufu is plopped right smack
> into the middle of an already established
> infrastructure specifically developed for pyramid
> construction, and the experience gained by
> builders transition into his reign. Nefermaat was
> literally the chief architect for both Sneferu and
> Khufu, before Heminu.
Of course it's not about how it was built. It's about what the ancioents actually believed and what they actually said. But by continually citing expert opinion and the work of Egypotologists it's also about what Egyptologists believe. Egyptologists believe that it's irrelevant that the bui;lders saidf the pyramid is no tomb exactly as they believe it's irrelevant the Egytians said they used ladders and stairs to build. Egyptological theory is a ball of wax based on the premise that the ancients were superstitious bumpkins who dragged tombs up ramps and never changed. It all makes perfect sense to Egyptologists that people who believed in many gods would strap on stones and then never leave evidence. It makes perfect sense that theonly thing important enough to be "robbed" or even built by dragging stones would be the tomb of the king.
Egyptologists acquired this mind set honestly enough but they can't shake it. They can't even see the evidence that says they are wrong. Why don't you respond to points like there's no direct evidence of any soirt that any great pyramid was a tomb. It's Egyptology that maintains these mountains and maintains they have a mountain of evidence but they can't show that anyone ever even implied that Khufu was buried in the tomb. They can't even see that this tomb thing is a recent idea that isn't supported culturally or historically. Everyone who disagrees with the concept of bumpkins dragging tombs up ramps is sun addled or if still living is a pyramidiot by definition.
Egytology is right about a couple things. The means and reasons to build pyramids are part of a whole and so long as the Egyptologists refuse to apply science this will have to be solved by "cultural context". What they don't comprehend is they wholly fail to understand the root of that context; The Pyramid Texts. They are even blind to the simple fact that the builders said over and over in many ways that the pyramid is not a tomb.
egyptologists discount everything they said, I don't.