> Martin Stower Wrote:
> > Origyptian wrote:
> > > When did Görlitz say he sampled the Khufu
> > > cartouche? How could he have sampled the Khufu
> > > cartouche when those same scratches have been
> > > there for years before he was ever up there?
> > http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,329195,329260#msg-329260
> > You will note that the Indiegogo link, valid at
> > time of posting, is now stale. The relevant quote
> > (reproduced for your convenience) is this:
> > “A first sample of the cartridge [kartusche] was
> > taken during a first expedition with our camera
> > crew and is now in the hands of a well known
> > institute for lab analysis in Germany.”
> > Said, I think, by the maker of the film, Frank
> > Höfer.
> Yes, the link is dead.
This is the revised version currently available:
> And you "think" it was the Hofer who said
As I’ve stated already, I (unlike you) was following this at the time (December 2013 in this case). I, unlike you, anticipated what would happen and saved the page in question. Now that I’m where I can access what I saved, I find that, yes, at the bottom it has this: “Created By: Frank Höfer Producer”
> So you are acknowledging that it really
> wasn't Görlitz or Erdmann who
> claimed the Khufu cartouche was sampled!
Do try not to be utterly stupid. Frank Höfer (of NuoViso Filmproduktion, which seems to be essentially himself) was (is) the filmmaker. Naturally he handled publicity for the film, including the crowdsourcing campaign on Indiegogo.
Take a look at the current page which everyone else can see and then try telling us that Höfer was and is acting without the authorisation of Görlitz and Erdmann.
> And what "cartouche" did the "film maker" mean?
> You know with certainty he meant the "Khufu"
> cartouche and not the "phyle" glyphs farther back
> toward the end of the wall?
Do try not to be utterly stupid. Which cartouche is pictured on the current page? Same as on the old one, for your information.
For your further information, here is the relevant text from the old one (Deutsch and English, verbatim):
1837 entdeckte der britische Pyramidenforscher Howard Vyse in den Entlastungskammern der Cheopspyramide Inschriften und eine Kartusche des Cheops, die ihn als Bauherrn belegen. Die Echtheit dieser Königskartusche ist schon seit langem ein Streitpunkt.
Während Ägyptologen von der Echtheit der Kartusche überzeugt sind, geriet Vyse schnell unter Verdacht diese selbst gefälscht zu haben um eine sensationelle Entdeckung für sich verbuchen zu können. Sollte man dies tatsächlich nachweisen können, würden sich die ohnehin zahlreichen Spekulationen um die tatsächlichen Erbauer der Gizeh-Pyramiden um einige Fragen erweitern.
Drehte es sich bei der Frage der Echtheit der Kartusche bisher lediglich um die korrekte Schreibweise des Namenszuges von Cheops, haben es sich Dr. Dominique Görlitz (bekannt aus den Abora Expeditionen nach dem Vorbild Thor Heyerdahls) und Buchautor Stefan Erdmann zur Aufgabe gemacht, die Echtheit der Kartusche auf Basis neuester Untersuchungs- und Datierungsmethoden zu bestimmen. Bei einer ersten Forschungsreise mit unserem Filmteam konnten bereits Materialproben der Kartusche entnommen werden, welche nun von einem renommierten Institut für Laboranalytik in Deutschland auf Auswertung warten.
In 1837 the British pyramid researcher Howard Vyse discovered hieroglyphs and the cartridge of Cheops in the relieving chambers of the Great Pyramid that proove him as the principal. The authenticity of this cartridge has been a contentious point for a long time.
While egyptologists are confident on the authenticity of the cartridge, Vyse very quickly came under suspicion to have faked it by himself so he can claim the sensational discovery for him. If this can be prooven a lot of questions will be added to the speculations on the builders of the Giza pyramids.
While in the past only the correct spelling of Cheops name was in focus during the controversy of the cartridge's authenticity, Dr.Dominique Goerlitz ( known for the Abora expeditions along the lines of Thor Heyerdahl) and author Stefan Erdmann want to determine it's validity based on the newest examination and dating methods. A first sample of the cartridge was taken during a first expedition with our camera crew and is now in the hands of a well known institute for lab analysis in Germany.
Is it beginning to sink in, yet?
> That's your proof that Görlitz claimed the
> samples were from the "Khufu cartouche"?
Femano. You’re playing catch-up. Do try not to let your overweening conceit get in the way of learning from one who was following this at the time and knows more about it than you do.
This is your proof otherwise: a feeble, speculative argument that Görlitz allowed his colleague in the exercise to grossly misrepresent him? No, Femano, the page stayed up through the first (and largely abortive) crowdsourcing campaign. It was only pulled when the whole thing exploded and Görlitz and Erdmann and Höfer realised how much trouble they were in—which (I’ll remind you again) I saw coming.
> So quick to vilify the investigators by quoting
> their technician who's [sic]
> expertise clearly is not archeology. Well done.
Well, no, actually. Indication is that Höfer is a producer, director, cinematographer and editor—and certainly the director (and apparently the producer) of Das Cheops Projekt. How you get “technician” from this escapes me, other than by a dishonest attempt to downplay his involvement.
Your point? I noted what these show in 2013:
You’re playing catch-up, Femano. Get over yourself.
> Are you really suggesting that Höfer was at all
> qualified to be the Görlitz-Erdmann spokesperson
> regarding things archeological? Here are more
> examples of Höfer's scholarly filmmaking
> Unter falscher Flagge
> Die Premiere
Your point? Höfer was a filmmaker. He made films. I’m sure he was perfectly competent to talk about their content and represent correctly the claims made by Görlitz and Erdmann in a film he made himself.
Again, Femano, Höfer’s claims remained on the site for the entire duration of the initial crowdsourcing campaign. Do you imagine that this happened in the teeth of protests from Görlitz?
> Of course, the irony is that those glyphs back at
> the end corner of that wall are indeed the "phyle"
> suffix that follow an anticipated cartouche which
> is very possibly concealed behind the wall joint.
> So Höfer might not have been that far off by
> associating those glyphs as being part of the
> "cartouche" which would make him essentially
> Whacky fun.
Mr Catch-Up “knows better” again, on a purely speculative (and entirely spurious) basis. As usual.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 20-May-16 22:45 by Martin Stower.