> Specialised experience is not a credential?
> Is it not evident that shouting about credentials
> is suicide for the fringe?
Experience writing about Egypt and "skepticism" is not experience at all. If it were sports writers would be stars. Even if it weren't for the fact that most "skeptics" now are just people who accept orthodoxy on faith and without question this still wouldn't be experience.
I respect the "credentials" not the argument. Having credentials doesn't make one's argument superior in any way. Arguments must rest solely on logic and evidence.
I'm not the one here running around damning sources, sites, individuals, and arguments because they aren't properly credentialed, vetted, orthodox, or representative of consensus. This would be the you and those who support your beliefs.
Jason Colavito is simply seeking ideas that differ from orthodoxy and claiming they are wrong. Does anyoe really think that the alts don't know where their ideas conflict with established beliefs? Why isn't he pointing out where things don't agree with facts and logic?
Let me answer that question for the 1000th time; it's because every single thing in the paradigm is founded on the four assumptions that the great ptyramids are tombs dragged up ramps by superstitious and changeless people. Everyone who supports the paradigm can not support the paradigm without these assumptions because every single et al is founded on the assumptions. Everything they know is in terms of these assumptions.
Why do you think Egyptologists don't just show up here and straighten us all out? They can't because they can only tell us what is in the database and it's built on quicksand. It's built by individuals who can't even get a degree in the field unless they believe in tombs, ramps, and superstition.
In this case you could say that even though credentials are worthless and Colavito has none that such credentials would only "prove" Creighton is wrong because his ideas don't fit with tombs.
Everything about our understanding and study of the pyramids is iroinic.