Despite all your deflection, the article you posted very clearly states:
- "Even though cartouche of Khufu wasn't touched by the two researchers (but paint from a different spot) Dr. Dominique Goerlitz and Stefan Erdmann were accused of damaging it a few months later."
You made an incorrect statement by saying,
- "...their statements about what they did are wildly contradictory: they sampled the cartouche/they did not sample the cartouche...
They made no such statements. Other authors may have confused whether those phyle glyphs that were sampled were part of a cartouche and whether it was the true "Khufu" cartouche vs. another carouche up there, but the investigators never made the contradictory statement you claimed they made. Regarding your quip about the value of physical evidence, the article states that they presented,
- "...hard evidence that exonerated them from the accusation of damaging the cartouche of Khufu."
I particularly loved this pearl from you:
- > Höfer is a producer, director, cinematographer and editor..
I assume you have researched his scholarly degrees, certifications, and other training/experience he's had. After all, you hammered Scott for merely stating he was an engineer. So let's see all the data you've collected about Hr. Höfer. Yes I think it's possible that Höfer may have made a sloppy mistake in his rush to promote what his clients did. No, I do not think Höfer understood the difference between this or that cartouche. He might very well not have known there was more than one cartouche up there and simply assumed that any discussion about sampling was about the Khufu cartouche. On the other hand, if statements from uninformed promotional authors and film makers are what Hawass et al. use as a basis for prosecuting those investigators, then THAT nonsense is indeed criminal.
All I know is that you keep posting references to articles, and in none of them are Görlitz or Erdmann ever quoted as acknowledging that they sampled the Khufu cartouche and yet you specifically vilified Görlitz and Erdmann for saying they said that. You blindly accept Höfer's expertise as a "producer, director, cinematographer and editor" without requiring a single shred of evidence of his qualifications, and yet you exhibit great obsession in trying to assassinate Scott's character for simply claiming he is an engineer.
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 31-May-16 18:30 by Origyptian.