> R & D is much different. Scientists are trying to
> learn things that have never existed before. All
> mainstream and alts are doing is trying to uncover
> the acient superstition, knowledge, techniques, or
> science. Not even I believe there is any
> knowledge here with direct military implications
"Secrecy" is not just determine by whether it has a military implication. Secrecy is necessary in virtually any commercial arena in which the development of a potentially profitable competitive product must be kept confidential.
> ...I seriously doubt the Egyptian government or
> the Supreme Council of Antiquities believes there
> is anything of commercial value beyond its ability
> to increase tourism.
I'm astonished that you are so willing to downplay the importance of keeping secret anything that might jeopardize that potentially huge (but painfully dwindled) tourism revenue stream. If it could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the "Khufu" cartouche in Campbell's Chamber was indeed a hoax (e.g., by dating brush hairs embedded in the paint strokes to the 19th century AD, discovery of additional authenticated pages from Vyse's journal, etc.), do you honestly believe the SCA would allow that to go public or agree with the authentication of such 'evidence'?
> Let me say it this way... If Egyptology is
> correct in their assumptions then 150 years
> without any progress in solving these mysteries is
> of no value to increasing tourism. If scientists
> could start turning up huge caches of gold in mere
> months then why keep the Egyptologists?
That's a big 'if'. Don't you think that thermal anomaly has been investigated by now? Do you really think there will be a publicly disclosed scientific investigation of that without the SCA already knowing what's behind those blocks?
> It's hard to understand the thinking behind this
> little bit of the status quo. If you want to know
> about something you call in a scientist. If it's
> for ancient Egypt then the scientist might often
> need to cosult with Egyptologists. Why put the
> cart before the horse? ;)
What makes you so sure the SCA "wants to know", I mean for the sake of simply "knowing"? Does it not make sense to you that the SCA only wants to "know" as long as it doesn't further jeopardize tourist revenue?
Just look at the tobacco industry and the decades it tried to suppress the research that eventually led to the decline of tobacco sales. And that secrecy resulted in untold deaths! By comparison, the SCA is only concerned with a revenue stream, no humans will be harmed in the process, so what's the big deal?...
> Egyptologists are very good at some things and
> back in Petrie's day they used to gather evidence.
> Those days are very long past.
Tourism wasn't that big of an industry back then, and the "science" in Petrie's day did not yet challenge the tomb/ramp/timeline narratives. Today such untenable tenets have generated an immense revenue stream but are becoming more vulnerable, and so any research that might make the house of cards less stable won't be very welcomed by those in charge of granting access.
> Now they tie the
> hands and muzzle the few scientists they allow in
> to work.
I assume this is the deal the scientists made right from the start, and so they must find peace with it. I assume they signed a research agreement that includes terms of compensation as well as a non-disclosure agreement. Otherwise, there would be no legal basis preventing them from divulging anything they've discovered. The scientists are party to the secrecy, not victims of it.
> They don't want any ancient secrets
> getting out especially if those ancient forgotten
> secrets throw cold water on their dreams of tombs
> dragged up ramps.
Pardon my cynicism, but if the SCA thought that they'd enjoy a long-term hike in tourist revenue by claiming Vyse's discovery was a fraud, then I'm pretty sure we'd be seeing headlines and TV commercials from the SCA beckoning tourists to come see the greatest hoax in the history of the world.
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 14-Feb-16 17:23 by Origyptian.