> G1 contains within its structure irrefutable
> evidence of advanced applied mathematics.
> Archaeology tells us that the early dynastic
> Egyptians were incapable of and had no knowledge
> of these maths.
> That leaves two possibilities open.
> 1. The pyramid was constructed at a time
> substantially after dynastic Egypt during a period
> in known history when those mathematical tools had
> been developed and were available to the
> 2. The pyramid was constructed at a time
> substantially before dynastic Egypt during a
> period in unknown history when those mathematical
> tools had been developed and were available to the
> builders. The unknown period in history by
> definition having been lost along with those
> mathematical tools and for which there is no known
> record other than the structures themselves.
> No tools or implements used in the construction of
> G1 have been discovered or are in the
> archaeological record.
> Therefore for total sensitization to have
> occurred, enough time must elapse between
> construction and today for the total elimination
> of all tools and implements through natural
> There are no artworks or visual representations of
> the conceptualization, planning or construction of
> Again enough time must have elapsed to ensure the
> complete and total elimination.
> The builder culture had no requirement to make
> artworks or visual representations of their
> activities. It wasn't in their culture.
The tell-tale sign of bluster here being the “irrefutable” and the basis of the claim being the simple fallacy of assuming that every aspect of a mathematical description of the pyramid was known to and intended by the builders.
So, when it comes to such things as the aprw names, far from considering the evidence strictly on its merits, you approach the question with a prior theoretical bias which tells you that they “must” be fakes.
Thanks for confirming.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 13-Jul-16 02:08 by Martin Stower.