> 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 sort that any great pyramid was a
Djoser's is a great pyramid, correct? I see you agree on that, quote from your first post to this discussion:
Cladking: "There's very little evidence any of the great pyramid were intended or built as tombs other than Djoser's and it obviously started out as a mastaba which so far as we know were tombs."
I want to clarify: Are you separating Giza's pyramids from the rest? Are they the only one's that qualify as 'great'?
> 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.
When you've covered all of the reports from the Giza cemetery you'd say differently. :)
> can't even see that this tomb thing is a recent
> idea that isn't supported culturally or
Eh? The culture and history of AE certainly does suggest they had tombs in mind. In the beginning, they (burial sites) were just 'tombs', then it got more complex in meaning ... then it got more complex in design ... then it got more complex in size ... then they realized gargantuanism was not necessary ... scaled down the size, et voila!
> Everyone who disagrees with the
> concept of bumpkins dragging tombs [stones?] up ramps is sun
> addled or if still living is a pyramidiot by
I think it'a more important the stones are there, as opposed to how they got there. Whether it was ramps or some other function is irrelevant to a pyramid being a tomb or not.
And they weren't just tombs. This is a key point.
> 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.
Then you'll need to cite where they explicitly sated, "This is not a tomb." Not your interpretation of what they saw the pyramid as.
That they saw an abstract function alive in the facade does not translate as 'not a tomb'.