Richard Fusniak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Martin,
>
> What you say is true. Confusion was created by
> film maker Frank Hoefer who was in Germany at the
> time in saying prematurely that the sample was
> from the Cartouche. Irrespective of what you may
> interpret about this, the fact remains that Dr.
> Gorlitz DID NOT TAKE THE SAMPLE FROM THE
> CARTOUCHE but from another graffiti area about
> one meter away (Femano is on the right lines) and
> this has been proven with photography beyond any
> doubt as you should very well know.

I’m aware of what’s in the visual material (video included). As stated here:

http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,1050359,1050585#msg-1050585

—I noted in 2013 that Görlitz is seen attacking a graffito near the cartouche and not the cartouche itself. As far as I know (can anyone show otherwise?), I was the first person to do so. I identified the graffito in question and Colette Dowell found her photograph of it, showing clearly what it was like before Görlitz got to it.

I have no problem with the suggestion that Görlitz sampled this graffito only and not the cartouche. Why would I? I made it myself in the first place. It’s a possibility. It’s also possible (just to be clear on the logic of the case) that he sampled both: showing him sampling one graffito is no proof that he didn’t sample another—but, given the small size of the sample, I’m inclined to go with the simpler explanation, that he sampled just the one.

What I do not accept is the attempt by Femano (and apparently others) to place all of the blame for apparent misreporting (in the early publicity for Das Cheops Projekt) on Frank Höfer. This I regard as absurd and unconscionable. I mean, come on: how difficult is it in this day and ago for someone in one country to run copy past someone in another? The first preview of Das Cheops Projekt (on YouTube) and the original crowdsourcing campaign (on Indiegogo) both had text (identically worded) stating that the cartouche had been sampled. Are we really to believe that Görlitz and Erdmann looked at neither of them? Höfer remains a close associate of Görlitz at least. As Femano keeps telling us (in the hope that this red herring will lead us astray), he is not a topic expert. All the more reason to consult Görlitz and Erdmann and not just make things up off the top of his head.

> Lets see what Dominique Gorlitz says in his
> official forthcoming statement in the days to come
> before more confusion builds on previous confusion
> shall we?

You are more confident than I am that a statement from Dominique Görlitz will diminish the confusion.

M.