Thanos5150 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jon Ellison Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > There you go, as you clearly stated, the
> > embellishments were a later, not originally
> > designed addition..
>
> What is your malfunction? Can you quote me where I
> said they weren't? In fact, was it not I that
> explained why this is when you brought it up in
> the first place:


I said the embellishments were not part of the original design. Effectively graffiti.
You said they were original.
Furthermore you, as per usual got yourself into an overemotional, hormonal, hissy fit because someone dared to disagree with you.
If there was a disagreement, I said we will have to agree to disagree. Fair enough?
You said that I was an "idiot", presumably because I'd stated that the embellishments were not part of the original design.
Which you disagreed with, which is also fair enough.
You can think whatever you like. I don't give a monkeys what you think.
You then stated that the embellishments were added 100- 200 or whatever years later. By a "Dick". Is that correct?
So we are in agreement.
The embellishments were not part of the original design. As I originally stated.
They were added some time later.
By a according to you a "Dick".
Which is what Ori found so hilarious.

If I do have a malfunction it's my willingness to remain in any kind of communication with a back peddling retard, namely yourself.
I will immediately rectify the above malfunction.



>
> "Temple construction was begun by Ptolemy III
> in 237BC and completed nearly 200yrs later in 57BC
> by Ptolemy XII, who is also your "graffiti
> artist". The scenes relate how Ptolemy XII
> defeated his enemies for Horus."
>
> Just because I disagree with your observations
> regarding why the figures are placed where they
> are, which they were for a reason and not because
> they "ran out of room", does not change the fact
> they were added later regardless. There is no
> mystery here. What is so hard to understand about
> this?

Get a life you sad little man. The point I was making through discussion was that the embellishments were added at a later date than original construction and by a different design culture.
I understand you trying to salvage your pathetic little ego, Unfortunately for you, You're just digging yourself deeper into your own heap of self generated BS.

>
> And save the nonsense as you are not just
> "pointing it out", but doing so with the express
> purpose of pinning the original construction on
> some lost civilization without caring/knowing a
> whit about the actual history of the site.

There you go with that crystal ball again. Your self styled ability to see into the mind of another.
Had it ever occurred to you that this discussion was about analyses through design and resolution?
Here's a tip... Engage brain before mouth.
Although I sincerely doubt that's possible.

Beyond hilarious..