cladking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Martin Stower Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > Warwick Wrote:
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > > Frankly, anyone who sets out to study the AEs by
> > > concentrating on the GP is guilty of jumping to
> > > conclusions
> >
> > They don’t think they’re doing that. They
> > think they’re studying their imaginary
> > “lost” civilisation and for that purpose a
> > misleading starting point is a positive
> > advantage.
>
> Anyone who starts out thinking that the great
> pyramids are just larger versions of the tiny
> little imitation pyramids that were built later is
> assuming the conclusion. Anyone who starts out
> thinking great pyramids are simply extension of
> mastabas is assumning the conclusion. Any who
> starts out with the ideas that great pyramids are
> tombs dragged up ramps by superstitious and
> changeless bumpkins is assuming the conclusion.
>
> Egyptology assumed the conclusion 150 years ago so
> are incapable of seeing or understanding any
> argument whatsoever that doesn't share each of
> their assumptions. Their conclusions don't even
> apply to any argument that doesn't share their
> assumptions but they can't see this. They see
> only what they assumed they'd see 150 years ago.
>
>
> This is simply reality. Whether they're right or
> wrong they can't argue outside the assumptions.
> For the main part they won't even talk to
> individuals who don't share their assumptions.

No one starts out thinking these things, no one other than you that I’ve noticed calls them “bumpkins” and “imitation” is question-begging in itself.

Some of these later pyramids contain remarkable examples of stonework in their interiors.

I don’t much care what assumptions other people work within.

M.