>> I think you didn't understand the post. Ori used
> the words "pure fabrication" which is not the same
> as a "hoax". I don't read it as implying a "hoax"
> or a "charlatan".
> As I read it Ori is referring to instances such as this by Professor Strouhal :
A coffin with a mummy in the depository of the British Museum were attributed to King Mycerinus. According to our examination in 1990, the Egyptological dating of the coffin was confirmed by 14C date (range 12th-9th cent. BC), while the mummy was found to be a natural one and as late as from 7th-9th cent. AD.
> This isn't a simple matter of - oops, guessed
> wrong. Being off by 3200 yrs is INCOMPETENCE that
> would not be tolerated in the business world,
> someone would be held accountable and probably
> fired and it should not be tolerated in the
> academic world. But you chalk it up to an innocent
> "guess". The question is - just how much of
> Egyptology is merely "guess".
> And what is the "massive amount of in situ
> evidence" Avry? So far neither you or Pete have
> discussed individual pieces of evidence, but are
> only waving the general consensus as fact. You
> believe intrusive burials to be evidence of
> original intent, but when we look at each
> intrusive burial individually, which you two seem
> unwilling to do, the entire theory falls apart. We
> (the alts) are bringing up each piece of this
> mountain, but you two seem to refuse to examine
> its components, being content with the assumed
> 'fact' that noted Egyptologists have based their
> conclusions on solid evidence and not "guesses".
> If anyone is deflecting I would say it is you.
It's hard to get into the minds of people 100 years ago to understand their motives. Today, Reisner's fabrication of the "tomb of Hetepheres" might certainly be called a "hoax" in that it was a conscious, deliberate fabrication, and yet expected people to accept it as fact. In the very least, he'd be admonished by his peers in the discipline and might have even risked losing his tenure.
But if "hoax" also implies "try to fool people into believing something you know isn't true" then I do NOT think it was a hoax since I honestly believe Reisner subscribed to his own BS.
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12-Feb-16 23:37 by Origyptian.