> Thanos5150 Wrote:
> > Moderators: if you want to "snap back" at me
> > call me personally "stupid" for saying the idea
> > the AE not making any stone vessels in their
> > 3500+yr history is a stupid one you are more
> > welcome to. Please, by all means have at it.
> In that case whom were you referring to as
> Who actually said that the Egyptians did not make
> stone vessels during their entire 3500 year
> I was of the understanding that the issue was
> about hard stone, high volume, narrow necked,
> stone vessels that defy current explanation to
> such an extent that Stocks, Egyptologist and
> author, found it necessary to carry out
> experiments to ascertain a possible method of
> production. His results and conclusions were duly
> published in is book.
> Some disagree with the validity of his
> What on earth is wrong with that?
Jon, at this point I'm challenging Thanos on that. I'm sick of his twisted nonsense. I'm specifically stating that the unproven notion of AEs making full blown authentic vessels out of solid rock without having any evidence of tooling or methods is indeed a mystery. Period. Sure it's possible they did, but we have no proof of that, so it's a mystery. We might find a few sloppy vases that represent failed attempts to mimic the quality pieces we see in huge quantity all over ancient Egypt, but that doesn't qualify as "making stone vessels" because what we're talking about are all the examples we've seen posted in this discussion which clearly speak to the high quality, delicate, precise, accurate, smooth pieces that exist in the thousands and which have been attributed to the dynastic from Dynasty 0 onward.
Show me any proof that makes it 100% definitive, removing all mystery. Better yet, show me anyone who doesn't feel insulted when someone ways their thoughts are incredibly stupid. And I'm not talking about a slip of the tongue or something said quickly which, on reflection was clearly unintended and therefore an isolated moment of stupidity. Rather, I'm talking about passionate, sincere, points of contention that form the core of what is purported to be a scholarly debate.
Example, Einstein had a big dog and so he cut a big hole in his door with a plastic flap so the dog could have its own access in and out of the house. He then got a 2nd smaller dog and cut a 2nd smaller flapped hole in the door next to the big one. When he was asked why he didn't just let the small dog use the bigger hole, he said he never thought of that! And on reflection, he realized that people were right in considering that to be a pretty dumb thing to do and he didn't feel insulted by it at all. However, try telling Einstein that his Theory of Relativity was incredibly stupid and see if he might feel a bit of a twinge of insult there.
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?