Mysteries :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Thanos5150 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

To summarize your claims that I've accused Reisner of engaging in "conspiracy" and "deception":

    "You have repeatedly stated or implied Reiser's narrative to be a deliberate attempt to deceive..."
    "was not some wilful "deception" as you make it out to be on Reisner's part..."
    "...is hardly some form of "deception"."
    "You have invented a conspiracy that otherwise does not exist."
    [grahamhancock.com]

    "...you like to cry some kind of conspiracy regarding Reiser's interpretation..."
    "Why you think this is some kind of "conspiracy" is beyond me."
    [grahamhancock.com]

    "...by no means did Reisner attempt to engage in any deception as you have irresponsibly portrayed it..."
    "...there is no conspiracy here..."
    [grahamhancock.com]

    "Reisner was no more trying to "deceive the world" as Lehner was about the worker's town"
    [grahamhancock.com]

    "Does Lehner or anyone else ever state or imply Reisner was trying to "deceive" anyone"
    "Reisner was not out to "deceive" anyone"
    [grahamhancock.com]

These are deflections that do not represent what I said in my posts. Certainly, Reisner can be accused of inventing a conspiracy in which Khufu's team coordinated a secret reburial of Hetepheres from Dashur to Giza. And he might also be accused of inventing a deception in which Khufu's team tried to slip the sealed but empty sarcophagus past Khufu without him knowing it didn't contain the remains of Hetepheres I. But I've never stated or implied that Reisner, himself, engaged in conspiracy or deception. On the contrary, I've stated several times that I thought Reisner's "motives were pure" but that he simply applied an obsolete standard of proof and his peers swallowed it whole.



> As I said: "Reisner offered a theory which was clearly
> based on ample conjecture and it was the fault of
> others it was ever passed off as "fact"."

Thanks, I got it the first time, but that's simply not born out in Reisner's writings on Hetepheres. In fact, he repeats segments of his fictional narrative elsewhere, for example:

    "We already knew that the contents of the box had been gathered up from the original tomb, and that the original tomb had been broken into by thieves."

    "The chipping of the upper edge of the coffin and the lower edge of the lid had been noted when the tomb was first opened and understood as proving that the coffin had been closed and opened again before deposition in the secret tomb."

    "I reached the conclusion that the deposit was a reburial brought here from another tomb..."

As another example, Reisner was not only certain that the sarcophagus originally occupied a different tomb and was relocated to G7000x by command of Khufu, but he was also 100% convinced that the remains of Hetepheres was in the sealed alabaster box:

    "In a preliminary statement I set forth the facts as known at that time and outlined the various possibilities arising from the known facts...I never doubted that the mummy was in the coffin...In my preliminary statement I had mentioned every possibility except the one which lay patent before us. There was no mummy in the coffin. It had seemed to me inconceivable that Cheops should have ordered the remains of his mother's burial transferred to Giza and hidden under a hundred feet of masonry unless the body, the most essential part of any burial, had been brought along with the coffin."

Reisner wasn't presenting a hypothesis, he was presenting what he considered to be the facts with strong conviction. If you read Reisner differently, then we must agree to disagree.



> Like I also said:
> "Regardless, it was the norm amongst
> antiquarians of the day, and really expected of
> them, to offer such "hypotheticals", "stories" if
> you will, to create a narrative around such
> discoveries which as we can see still happens in
> the field today."

That's exactly the problem I've been describing. The narratives that were created by a "norm" that loosely portrays "hypotheticals" as facts confirm that what was "really expected of them" was a low standard of proof when presenting their "stories". The fact is, the field did NOT accept his presentation merely as a "hypothetical" but rather, as Lehner pointed out, it was accepted as "historical fact" by peers in the field, for 60 years. And many of those hypotheticals are still accepted as fact today.



> These people are not out to "deceive" anyone but
> rather is a problem systemic to fields that given
> the incomplete nature of the information more
> often than not relies on interpretation.

Again, I didn't accuse Reisner of deception. And while some modern investigators might be able to see through this systemic problem after Lehner published his 1985 alternative explanation, that "systemic problem" has made a long-lasting contribution to strengthening the overall context and structure of the narrative and timeline, nevertheless. The damage is done. The jury is unable to ignore what it heard.

For example, what corroborating evidence do we have to support that Hetepheres I was Khufu's mother other than what Reisner reported in G7000x? Objects were found that included the name "Hetepheres" and "Mother of the King of Upper and Lower Egypt". Those objects don't mention Khufu. And Lehner (p.83) describes a different connotation of "Mother" with respect to traveling into the afterlife.

Also, what corroborating evidence do we have to support that Hetepheres I was Sneferu's wife other than what's in G7000x? Reisner drew the inference from objects which included either the name "Sneferu" or the name of "Hetepheres", but nothing directly linked the two other than the co-residence of the objects within the same G7000x cache. The sealed (when first discovered) but empty alabaster box in G7000x is still considered to be the sarcophagus of Hetepheres despite its lack of markings. Since it has been suggested that Khufu is responsible for installing the contents of G7000x, Münch suggests that the sarcophagus for a woman of Hetepheres I's status should have been made of granite, not alabaster (in G7000x), similar to that of Khufu's daughter, Meresankh II.

And yet, Egyptology in the 21st century still portrays Hetepheres I as Khufu's mother and Sneferu's wife,that G7000x was Hetepheres' tomb, and that it represents a reburial site.



> Just because Reisner's theory did not pan out under
> closer scrutiny or further discovery of evidence
> to support it does not mean therefore everything
> is "all wrong" opening the door to whatever anyone
> can imagine.

I never said that. You keep inflating the issue, not me: first conspiracy, then deception, then "everything is all wrong". Rather, as I've said many times, G7000x is simply yet another clear example among many, committed by early investigators who applied a low standard of proof. I'm sorry if you're getting tired of hearing that, but it's obviously not getting across yet since you still are trying to reframe it into "conspiracy", "deception", etc. I'll say it again, I am not claiming Reisner is guilty of conspiracy or deception.



> You are trying use one meaningless
> example to throw the "baby out with the bathwater"
> which otherwise does not apply at large.


"Meaningless"? I'm not so sure about that. First of all, this Reisner episode is certainly not the only example of low standards applied by earlier investigators that's enjoyed a long-lasting, deap-seated influence. Also, this "meaningless" incident has had long-lasting consequences in Egyptology because of how Reisner framed it to neatly reinforce the self-consistent paradigm of the funerary context and timeline. Despite your insight to see through it, and Lehner's "alternative explanation", I think Reisner's fabrication nevertheless has demonstrated significant staying power by virtue of the great credibility of its luminary source. So in my opinion, maybe not so harmless.

______________________________________________________________
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08-Jun-16 03:50 by Origyptian.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Creighton Persists Part 2 4181 JonnyMcA 19-May-16 14:30
That chemical analysis . . . 718 Martin Stower 19-May-16 17:30
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 636 Origyptian 19-May-16 20:50
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 613 Jon Ellison 19-May-16 21:31
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 585 Martin Stower 19-May-16 22:01
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 574 Martin Stower 19-May-16 21:42
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 551 Origyptian 19-May-16 22:12
The unfounded accusations continue..... 669 DScribr 19-May-16 22:46
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 650 Martin Stower 20-May-16 00:14
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 573 Thanos5150 20-May-16 00:35
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 461 Jon Ellison 20-May-16 01:57
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 578 Origyptian 20-May-16 02:47
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 463 Jon Ellison 20-May-16 03:20
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 544 Martin Stower 20-May-16 19:10
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 572 DScribr 20-May-16 23:23
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 560 Jon Ellison 20-May-16 23:35
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 544 DScribr 20-May-16 23:40
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 519 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:07
Re: The unfounded accusations continue..... 419 DScribr 20-May-16 02:58
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 568 Martin Stower 19-May-16 22:55
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 575 DScribr 19-May-16 22:43
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 557 Martin Stower 19-May-16 23:30
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 619 Origyptian 20-May-16 02:48
The lack of analysis . . . 673 DScribr 20-May-16 03:05
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 609 Audrey 20-May-16 04:13
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 531 Jon Ellison 20-May-16 06:58
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 561 DScribr 20-May-16 23:42
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 692 Origyptian 20-May-16 15:46
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 521 Martin Stower 21-May-16 01:28
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 516 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:32
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 564 Martin Stower 21-May-16 02:07
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 546 Jon Ellison 21-May-16 06:43
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 559 Origyptian 21-May-16 14:58
So much for chemical analysis . . . 548 DScribr 21-May-16 19:54
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 548 Martin Stower 21-May-16 22:49
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 543 Martin Stower 21-May-16 23:00
Re: What's the end game with this? 644 Thunderbird 20-May-16 17:20
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 542 Martin Stower 20-May-16 19:04
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 529 Audrey 20-May-16 22:43
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 484 Martin Stower 20-May-16 22:54
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 522 Audrey 20-May-16 23:12
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 462 Martin Stower 20-May-16 23:52
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 543 Audrey 21-May-16 00:33
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 615 Martin Stower 21-May-16 00:45
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 457 DScribr 21-May-16 01:35
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 405 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:06
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 489 Martin Stower 21-May-16 01:33
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 563 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:36
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 743 Martin Stower 21-May-16 02:49
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 603 Martin Stower 20-May-16 18:28
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 612 Origyptian 20-May-16 20:00
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 520 Thanos5150 20-May-16 20:13
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 553 Origyptian 20-May-16 21:03
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 549 Martin Stower 20-May-16 23:44
Höfer and Görlitz meet Stein 486 Martin Stower 21-May-16 00:36
Re: Höfer and Görlitz meet Stein 463 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:23
Re: Höfer and Görlitz meet Stein 680 Martin Stower 21-May-16 01:55
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 532 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:34
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 553 Martin Stower 21-May-16 03:15
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 483 Origyptian 21-May-16 04:08
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 548 Martin Stower 21-May-16 23:33
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 642 Origyptian 22-May-16 00:09
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 500 Martin Stower 22-May-16 00:49
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 589 Origyptian 22-May-16 00:57
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 565 Origyptian 22-May-16 01:11
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 549 Jon Ellison 22-May-16 01:14
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 579 Martin Stower 22-May-16 01:51
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 533 Origyptian 22-May-16 04:21
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 581 Martin Stower 22-May-16 14:20
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 538 Origyptian 22-May-16 17:32
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 588 Martin Stower 22-May-16 18:33
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 548 Origyptian 22-May-16 20:34
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 472 Martin Stower 22-May-16 21:30
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 572 Origyptian 22-May-16 23:04
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 589 Martin Stower 23-May-16 00:03
Re: That chemical analysis is all but forgotten...... 536 DScribr 23-May-16 03:11
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 571 Richard Fusniak 21-May-16 08:47
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 541 Origyptian 21-May-16 13:26
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 503 Martin Stower 22-May-16 00:32
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 534 Origyptian 22-May-16 00:50
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 567 Martin Stower 22-May-16 01:39
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 461 Origyptian 22-May-16 04:45
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 477 Martin Stower 22-May-16 16:13
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 464 Martin Stower 21-May-16 22:44
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 669 Origyptian 21-May-16 23:58
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 508 Martin Stower 22-May-16 01:28
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 755 Martin Stower 20-May-16 22:44
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 517 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:41
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 591 Martin Stower 21-May-16 03:28
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 596 Origyptian 21-May-16 04:14
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 437 Martin Stower 21-May-16 23:11
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 577 Thanos5150 19-May-16 22:50
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 557 Martin Stower 19-May-16 23:18
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 464 DScribr 20-May-16 03:07
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 561 Origyptian 20-May-16 02:52
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 503 DScribr 20-May-16 03:12
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 575 Thanos5150 20-May-16 05:20
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 465 Origyptian 20-May-16 13:36
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 582 Thanos5150 20-May-16 17:57
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 578 Jon Ellison 20-May-16 18:56
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 565 Martin Stower 20-May-16 19:23
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 636 Thanos5150 20-May-16 19:27
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 496 Jon Ellison 20-May-16 19:29
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 528 Audrey 20-May-16 21:02
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 551 Origyptian 20-May-16 21:12
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 528 Jon Ellison 20-May-16 21:26
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 594 Thanos5150 20-May-16 22:08
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 581 Audrey 20-May-16 22:34
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 481 Thanos5150 20-May-16 22:36
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 567 Audrey 20-May-16 22:47
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 474 Thanos5150 20-May-16 23:00
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 495 Audrey 20-May-16 23:11
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 480 Thanos5150 21-May-16 00:01
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 491 Audrey 21-May-16 00:23
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 539 Thanos5150 21-May-16 03:14
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 532 Audrey 21-May-16 05:02
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 469 Jon Ellison 21-May-16 09:10
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 599 Jon Ellison 21-May-16 09:28
The chemical analysis is of little help without R-C Dating 615 DScribr 21-May-16 13:37
Re: The chemical analysis is of little help without R-C Dating 482 Origyptian 21-May-16 13:56
Re: The chemical analysis is of little help without R-C Dating 525 Jon Ellison 21-May-16 17:48
Willful ignorance continues....... 561 DScribr 21-May-16 19:49
Re: Willful ignorance continues....... 578 Jon Ellison 21-May-16 21:28
Re: Stealing IS a crime! Willful ignorance continues....... 478 DScribr 22-May-16 00:39
Re: The chemical analysis is of little help without R-C Dating 573 Richard Fusniak 21-May-16 18:17
Re: The chemical analysis is of little help without R-C Dating 455 DScribr 21-May-16 19:57
Re: The chemical analysis is of little help without R-C Dating 584 Richard Fusniak 21-May-16 20:24
Stealing IS A Crime!!! 565 DScribr 22-May-16 00:32
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 557 Origyptian 21-May-16 15:04
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 476 Jon Ellison 21-May-16 17:53
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 534 Origyptian 21-May-16 21:39
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 534 Jon Ellison 22-May-16 00:46
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 484 Martin Stower 21-May-16 00:09
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 566 Audrey 21-May-16 00:26
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 567 Martin Stower 21-May-16 00:42
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 524 Audrey 21-May-16 01:04
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 599 Martin Stower 21-May-16 01:41
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 553 Jon Ellison 21-May-16 11:00
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 517 DScribr 21-May-16 01:44
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 518 Origyptian 20-May-16 19:25
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 531 Thanos5150 20-May-16 19:31
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 482 Origyptian 20-May-16 20:35
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 560 Thanos5150 20-May-16 22:03
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 479 Origyptian 20-May-16 22:38
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 563 Thanos5150 20-May-16 22:52
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 497 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:31
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 567 Martin Stower 21-May-16 01:05
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 494 Origyptian 21-May-16 01:27
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 518 Martin Stower 21-May-16 03:31
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 499 Audrey 21-May-16 01:42
Re: That chemical analysis . . . 596 Martin Stower 21-May-16 03:34
Pending statement from Dr. Gorlitz 825 Richard Fusniak 20-May-16 12:04
Re: Pending statement from Dr. Gorlitz 588 Martin Stower 20-May-16 19:25
Martin Persists 633 drrayeye 23-May-16 01:30
Re: Martin Persists 611 Martin Stower 23-May-16 12:01
Re: Martin Persists 472 R Avry Wilson 24-May-16 19:58
Mainstream Persists 565 DScribr 25-May-16 00:56
Re: Martin Persists 691 Merrell 28-May-16 09:00
Re: Martin Persists 524 Martin Stower 28-May-16 11:11
as long as we are counting 621 Warwick 25-May-16 16:42
Re: as long as we are counting 580 DScribr 26-May-16 01:53
Re: as long as we are counting 618 cladking 26-May-16 16:57
Re: as long as we are counting 540 Martin Stower 26-May-16 17:31
Re: as long as we are counting 546 Origyptian 26-May-16 17:40
Re: as long as we are counting 465 cladking 27-May-16 00:21
Re: as long as we are counting 554 Warwick 27-May-16 01:27
Re: as long as we are counting 369 Origyptian 27-May-16 02:53
And work hard at obfuscation. 442 DScribr 27-May-16 00:57
Re: And work hard at obfuscation. 506 cladking 27-May-16 02:55
Re: as long as we are counting 477 Warwick 27-May-16 01:29
Re: as long as we are counting 576 cladking 27-May-16 02:59
Re: as long as we are counting 557 Warwick 27-May-16 03:35
Re: as long as we are counting 535 Audrey 27-May-16 04:32
Re: as long as we are counting 490 Warwick 27-May-16 05:34
Re: as long as we are counting 590 cladking 27-May-16 13:35
Re: as long as we are counting 548 Warwick 27-May-16 14:56
The original page on Indiegogo etc. 636 Martin Stower 25-May-16 22:10
Another performance . . . 520 Martin Stower 26-May-16 13:47
Re: Another performance . . . 475 Warwick 26-May-16 13:57
Re: Another performance . . . 415 Origyptian 26-May-16 14:53
Re: Another performance . . . 516 Martin Stower 26-May-16 16:09
Re: Another performance . . . 521 cladking 26-May-16 16:18
Re: Another performance . . . 427 Martin Stower 26-May-16 16:31
Re: Another performance . . . 741 cladking 26-May-16 17:54
Re: Another performance . . . 580 Martin Stower 26-May-16 18:29
Re: Another performance . . . 406 cladking 26-May-16 23:52
Re: Another performance . . . 562 eyeofhorus33 26-May-16 19:00
Re: Another performance . . . 449 cladking 27-May-16 00:05
Re: Another performance . . . 482 Audrey 27-May-16 00:23
Re: Another performance . . . 468 Warwick 27-May-16 01:42
Re: Another performance . . . 553 cladking 27-May-16 02:07
Re: Another performance . . . 498 Warwick 27-May-16 02:15
Re: Another performance . . . 531 cladking 27-May-16 02:48
Re: Another performance . . . 507 Warwick 27-May-16 03:48
Re: Another performance . . . 567 cladking 27-May-16 03:53
Re: Another performance . . . 593 Warwick 27-May-16 05:41
Re: Another performance . . . 495 Audrey 27-May-16 04:51
Re: Another performance . . . 527 Warwick 27-May-16 05:18
NOT Primitive, Low-Tech 484 DScribr 28-May-16 14:09
Re: NOT Primitive, Low-Tech 532 cladking 28-May-16 14:31
Re: Another performance . . . 567 Thanos5150 26-May-16 16:38
Re: Another performance . . . 458 cladking 26-May-16 16:44
Re: Another performance . . . 545 Origyptian 26-May-16 17:33
Re: Another performance . . . 577 cladking 26-May-16 17:40
Re: Another performance . . . 552 Martin Stower 26-May-16 17:49
Re: Another performance . . . 576 cladking 27-May-16 00:15
Re: Another performance . . . 557 Martin Stower 27-May-16 19:17
Re: Another performance . . . 575 Warwick 27-May-16 20:00
Re: Another performance . . . 500 cladking 27-May-16 20:21
Re: Another performance . . . 609 Martin Stower 27-May-16 23:06
Re: Oops....we missed the Basalt flooring and machine disc cuts 412 Thunderbird 27-May-16 23:28
Re: Oops....we missed the Basalt flooring and machine disc cuts 544 Martin Stower 27-May-16 23:41
Re: Another performance . . . 553 cladking 28-May-16 00:33
Re: Another performance . . . 537 Martin Stower 28-May-16 00:59
Re: Another performance . . . 532 cladking 28-May-16 02:36
Re: Another performance . . . 519 Martin Stower 28-May-16 23:55
Re: Another performance . . . 440 cladking 29-May-16 01:23
Re: Another performance . . . 490 Martin Stower 29-May-16 19:35
Re: Another performance . . . 657 cladking 29-May-16 20:43
Re: Another performance . . . 546 R Avry Wilson 28-May-16 02:39
Re: Another performance . . . 573 cladking 28-May-16 03:41
Re: Another performance . . . 516 Thanos5150 28-May-16 06:20
Re: Another performance . . . 581 cladking 28-May-16 13:40
Re: Another performance . . . 555 Origyptian 28-May-16 15:04
Re: Another performance . . . 535 Jon Ellison 28-May-16 16:38
Re: Another performance . . . 406 cladking 28-May-16 17:52
Re: Another performance . . . 498 Jon Ellison 28-May-16 17:58
Re: Another performance . . . 430 Origyptian 29-May-16 02:51
Re: Another performance . . . 449 cladking 29-May-16 03:08
Re: Another performance . . . 511 Origyptian 29-May-16 04:03
Re: Another performance . . . 528 Thanos5150 29-May-16 05:03
Re: Another performance . . . 555 Origyptian 29-May-16 13:18
Re: Another performance . . . 575 Thanos5150 29-May-16 15:03
Focus on the axiom 513 Origyptian 29-May-16 15:27
Re: Focus on everything BUT the facts 596 DScribr 29-May-16 15:41
Re: Focus on everything BUT the facts 475 cladking 29-May-16 17:29
Re: Focus on the axiom 453 Thanos5150 30-May-16 01:49
Re: Focus on the axiom 524 Origyptian 30-May-16 05:32
Re: Focus on the axiom 511 Thanos5150 31-May-16 02:35
Re: Focus on the axiom 539 Origyptian 31-May-16 06:41
Re: Focus on the axiom 544 Thanos5150 01-Jun-16 00:28
Re: Focus on reality. 501 DScribr 01-Jun-16 00:51
Re: Focus on the axiom 486 Origyptian 01-Jun-16 06:20
Re: Focus on the axiom 532 Thanos5150 02-Jun-16 03:08
Re: Focus on the axiom 509 cladking 02-Jun-16 04:00
Re: Focus on the axiom 453 Origyptian 02-Jun-16 04:25
Re: Focus on the axiom 462 Thanos5150 02-Jun-16 16:34
Re: Focus on the axiom 475 cladking 02-Jun-16 18:20
Re: Focus on the axiom 528 Origyptian 03-Jun-16 18:04
Re: Focus on the axiom 524 R Avry Wilson 03-Jun-16 18:43
Re: Focus on the axiom 508 Origyptian 03-Jun-16 21:24
Re: Focus on the axiom 506 Corpuscles 03-Jun-16 23:59
Re: Focus on the axiom 354 Origyptian 04-Jun-16 06:29
Re: Focus on the axiom 432 R Avry Wilson 04-Jun-16 00:12
Re: Focus on the axiom 422 Origyptian 04-Jun-16 07:02
Re: Focus on the axiom 545 Jon Ellison 04-Jun-16 10:18
Re: Focus on the axiom 487 R Avry Wilson 05-Jun-16 04:15
Re: Focus on the axiom 494 Martin Stower 03-Jun-16 22:28
Re: Focus on the axiom 492 cladking 03-Jun-16 22:51
Re: Focus on the axiom 618 Thanos5150 04-Jun-16 01:08
Re: Focus on the axiom 504 Origyptian 05-Jun-16 01:25
Re: Focus on the axiom 545 Thanos5150 05-Jun-16 04:15
Re: Focus on the axiom 507 Origyptian 05-Jun-16 17:29
Re: Focus on the axiom 539 Martin Stower 05-Jun-16 19:35
Re: Focus on the axiom 554 Origyptian 05-Jun-16 22:48
Re: Focus on the axiom 467 Martin Stower 05-Jun-16 23:47
Re: Focus on the axiom 514 Origyptian 06-Jun-16 00:54
Re: Focus on the axiom 479 Origyptian 06-Jun-16 01:01
Re: Focus on the axiom 518 Thanos5150 06-Jun-16 01:05
Re: Focus on the axiom 503 Origyptian 06-Jun-16 02:40
Re: Focus on the axiom 521 R Avry Wilson 06-Jun-16 03:39
Re: Focus on the axiom 443 Audrey 06-Jun-16 04:59
Re: Focus on the axiom 430 Jon Ellison 06-Jun-16 07:59
Re: Focus on the axiom 455 Origyptian 06-Jun-16 14:00
Re: Focus on the axiom 502 cladking 06-Jun-16 16:13
Re: Focus on the axiom 461 Corpuscles 07-Jun-16 00:20
Re: Focus on the axiom 506 Origyptian 07-Jun-16 02:55
Re: Focus on the axiom 448 Thanos5150 06-Jun-16 15:33
Re: Focus on the axiom 396 Warwick 06-Jun-16 16:17
Re: Focus on the axiom 528 Audrey 06-Jun-16 16:39
Re: Focus on the axiom 521 Warwick 06-Jun-16 16:58
Re: Focus on the axiom 421 Audrey 06-Jun-16 17:46
Re: Focus on the axiom 463 Warwick 06-Jun-16 18:13
Re: Focus on the axiom 400 Audrey 06-Jun-16 23:44
Read what I wrote 419 Warwick 07-Jun-16 17:15
Re: Read what I wrote 445 Audrey 08-Jun-16 00:22
Re: Read what I wrote 436 Martin Stower 08-Jun-16 01:40
Re: Read what I wrote 602 Audrey 08-Jun-16 01:52
Re: Read what I wrote 466 Martin Stower 08-Jun-16 13:47
Vyse's veracity.... 458 Warwick 09-Jun-16 16:29
Re: Vyse's veracity.... 379 Audrey 09-Jun-16 16:51
Re: Vyse's veracity.... 489 Warwick 09-Jun-16 17:19
Re: Vyse's veracity.... 518 Audrey 09-Jun-16 17:45
Wilkinson's opinions 444 Warwick 09-Jun-16 18:47
Re: Wilkinson's opinions 460 Origyptian 09-Jun-16 20:57
Ori's opinions 607 DScribr 10-Jun-16 01:45
Re: The incredible Teflon Red Ochre 433 Thunderbird 10-Jun-16 04:07
Re: The incredible Teflon Red Ochre 558 Martin Stower 10-Jun-16 14:49
Re: The incredible Red Ochre lasted 4500 yrs. 478 DScribr 11-Jun-16 00:40
Re: Wilkinson's opinions 405 Martin Stower 10-Jun-16 02:28
Re: Wilkinson's opinions 396 Audrey 10-Jun-16 03:05
Re: Wilkinson's opinions 531 Martin Stower 10-Jun-16 14:09
Bibliography 471 Warwick 10-Jun-16 18:07
Re: Bibliography 485 Origyptian 10-Jun-16 18:35
Re: Bibliography 462 Warwick 10-Jun-16 20:01
Re: Bibliography 514 Origyptian 10-Jun-16 21:54
Re: Bibliography 535 Corpuscles 10-Jun-16 23:45
Re: Bibliography 349 Origyptian 11-Jun-16 17:01
Re: Bibliography 484 Corpuscles 11-Jun-16 22:36
Re: Bibliography 440 Audrey 11-Jun-16 23:08
Re: Bibliography 466 Corpuscles 11-Jun-16 23:26
Re: Bibliography 376 Audrey 12-Jun-16 02:30
Re: Bibliography 420 Corpuscles 12-Jun-16 03:19
Re: Bibliography 368 Audrey 12-Jun-16 03:32
Re: Bibliography 407 Corpuscles 12-Jun-16 03:40
Re: Bibliography 418 Audrey 12-Jun-16 03:50
Re: Bibliography 373 Corpuscles 12-Jun-16 04:30
Re: Bibliography 369 Audrey 12-Jun-16 04:47
Re: Bibliography 349 Corpuscles 12-Jun-16 05:02
Re: Bibliography 490 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 10:49
Re: Bibliography 446 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 15:56
Re: Bibliography 371 R Avry Wilson 12-Jun-16 17:41
But Avry.. 419 Warwick 12-Jun-16 17:58
Re: But Avry.. 499 R Avry Wilson 12-Jun-16 18:14
Re: But Avry.. 483 Audrey 12-Jun-16 18:37
Re: But Avry.. 464 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 20:15
Re: But Avry.. 469 Audrey 12-Jun-16 18:44
Re: But Avry.. 439 Warwick 12-Jun-16 18:59
Re: But Avry.. 418 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 20:11
This whole discussion is a boondoggle 496 DScribr 13-Jun-16 01:04
Re: This whole discussion is a boondoggle 478 Warwick 13-Jun-16 16:24
Re: Bibliography 345 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 10:28
Re: Bibliography 440 Origyptian 11-Jun-16 23:35
Re: Bibliography 466 Corpuscles 11-Jun-16 23:58
Re: Bibliography 439 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 00:48
Re: Bibliography 477 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 01:13
Re: Bibliography 507 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 01:33
Re: Bibliography 526 Martin Stower 11-Jun-16 02:05
Re: Bibliography 495 Origyptian 11-Jun-16 18:09
Re: Bibliography 485 Martin Stower 11-Jun-16 19:22
Re: Bibliography 423 Origyptian 11-Jun-16 19:56
Re: Bibliography 351 Martin Stower 11-Jun-16 20:47
Re: Bibliography 477 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 00:03
Re: Bibliography 462 Corpuscles 12-Jun-16 00:22
Re: Bibliography 357 Audrey 12-Jun-16 01:58
Re: Bibliography 496 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 02:24
Re: Bibliography 410 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 12:23
Re: Bibliography 437 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 14:50
Re: Bibliography 450 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 16:46
Re: Bibliography 368 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 00:10
Re: Bibliography 463 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 00:18
Re: Bibliography 455 Corpuscles 12-Jun-16 00:35
Re: Bibliography 516 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 00:39
Re: Bibliography 412 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 01:23
Re: Bibliography 412 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 02:18
Re: Bibliography 360 Martin Stower 12-Jun-16 13:55
Re: Bibliography 433 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 15:45
Re: Bibliography 463 R Avry Wilson 12-Jun-16 17:32
Re: Bibliography 410 Warwick 12-Jun-16 17:41
Re: Bibliography 457 R Avry Wilson 12-Jun-16 18:08
Re: Bibliography 450 Audrey 12-Jun-16 18:48
Re: Bibliography 450 Audrey 12-Jun-16 18:35
Re: Bibliography 398 Origyptian 12-Jun-16 19:09
Gonna ignore the noise and try again 446 Warwick 12-Jun-16 19:53
Re: Gonna ignore the noise and try again 459 Thunderbird 12-Jun-16 20:18
Re: Gonna ignore the noise and try again 419 Audrey 12-Jun-16 21:04