> Origyptian Wrote:
> You are bat___ crazy. One minute you are
> questioning whether they are even tombs wondering
> "where are the bodies" yet many bodies have been
> found buried in all of the cemeteries, all in the
> traditional AE way, which I know is weird because
> they are frikin cemeteries. Now that you know
> there are bodies in these cemeteries you magically
> deflect your denialism to being an issue of
> whether or not they were "pyramid workers" or not.
> Classic Origyptian.
> Hawass is an incompetent liar, how do we know
> these are even from the OK, the medical issues are
> not from working hard but rather from "crimes
> against humanity? Lol. Spin, spin, spin.
Versus what? That they willingly suffered for a ticket to the afterlife? That they brought in their wives and kids to wear themselves out as they suck their economy dry to build some of the most enormous monuments to narcissism in the history of mankind? What are you saying?
And why must you always resort to calling people liars or claiming they've called others liars just because those others say things that haven't been proven true...or have been proven wrong? How many times have I said that I thought Reisner, Hawass, Stocks, et all were pure in their motives, that they meant well, that they believed strongly in what they preached? I've never called any of htem liars. But that's the only way you know of to categorize someone who says something that's not true. It must be devious motive, eh? They must be trying to fool someone, eh? If what my hero said isn't true, then he must be a liar and we can't have that, so everything he says must be true. No "spin" there, huh?
> Whatever you can imagine to argue against something without
> ever putting in the work to educate yourself
> before you speak.
Oh whatever, stop torturing yourself, Thanos. I put in my fair share of work and my posts speak of an enormous amount of research to wade through all the muck that's built up by untold thousands of traditionalists over the past few centuries. Sure, it's easy to ride the traditional tide without putting in the effort to scrutinize old ideas; it's a piece of cake to simply say "the answer is in this long reading list" than to take the effort to actually cite the detailed evidence that supports the contention; it's a clever ploy to accuse someone of calling your hero a liar when the hero simply said something inaccurate even though he didn't deliberately tell an untruth. It takes hard work to rethink the entrenched mainstream ideology. Lots of research to wade though hundreds of pages of evidence and historic documentation. It takes thousands of dollars to build a library of 1st and 2nd editions by the great masters.
So don't you dare try to claim I am lazy and don't ever put in the work to educate myself; you'll just embarrass yourself. Better to argue the evidence and we'll see who has the stamina to research the topic. We'll see what evidence there is to support this or that contention. We'll see who is able to reconcile the contradictions. But name calling, sarcasm, and attempts at intimidation simply signal a weak argument and signals the concession that the other side might actually have pretty good standing.
> There is no doubt these people
> worked on the pyramids and the complex,
Of course there is doubt! We're talking about doubt right now and you seem to be having a hard time citing hard evidence to counter the doubt. Who here has been able to produce a shred of evidence indicating those corpses had anything at all to do with building a pyramid...or are you now softening the claim to simply "working" on the pyramids "and the complex" as custodial and restoration?
> ...problem though is that are from the 5th Dynasty, not the
> 4th. Not to mention the overwhelming majority of
> the burials at the main cemeteries date to the 5th
> and 6th Dynasties as well. Hmm. And of the 4th
> Dynasty burials the overwhelming majority of the
> are from the late 4th. I wonder if there tombs
> might have anything to say. Like this (again):
As for this tomb, it was the king of Upper
> and Lower Egypt, Menkure, [living forever], who
> caused that it be [made], when [his majesty] was
> [upon] the road beside the pyramid, HirC (HY), in
> order to inspect the work on the pyramid: "
--- [there camel] the [naval]
> commander and the two high priests of Memphis, and
> the [workmen, standing upon it, to inspect the
> work on [the pyramid, "Divine-is-Menkure"]. - 50
> men were assigned to do the work on it every day,
> besides [exacting of them, that which the r-1
> desired. His majesty commanded that [no man
> should be taken] for any forced labor, except to
> do the work on it, to his satisfaction.
You mean that pesky inscription from the tomb by the Sphinx that Hassan admitted could have been made at any time during the Dynastic period? There is absolutely no reason to believe that inscription was made contemporaneous to the construction of G3, that the word "pyramid" is a valid translation, and that reference to Menkaure is specifically to the living king vs. some other reference to that name. The translations vary and are not consistent. The guy claims he had the audacity to ask Menkaure if he could make his tomb within the complex after never being offered by Menkaure to do so, and yet not only does he claim Menkaure allowed it, Menkaure also devoted 50 workers to build the guy's tomb? That makes sense to you? This is the king that required the men and women to slave away in such interminable construction to the point of causing such physical debilitation as fused vertebra, broken bones, amputations, and other deformities? Sorry, but I simply do not accept that inscription as a valid indication that the interred worked on the original construction of an OK pyramid.
As if you proved any point you were trying to make. All you did was show how over-reaching the traditional paradigm really is.
> If one wants to make the argument the
> construction of the pyramids did not begin in the
> 4th Dynasty you are welcome to it, but there is no
> doubt the people buried in these tombs worked on
> them. None.
Wrong. I doubt it. Others doubt it. And that's based on evidence, not "authority". Only the arrogant deny that there can be no doubt. And such arrogance is what has gotten traditional Egyptology in the trouble it's in today.
> > It's as if you're trying to prove my own case
> for me.
> You need no help from me. You've "proved your
> case" countless times day after day all by your lonesome.
Look, interpret it however you like, but I certainly don't wonder where the bodies are. I only wonder what bodies gave traditionalists the idea that the "workers" village had anything to do with building a pyramid (not restoring an ancient pyramid). You act as if there's no search on google that would easily reveal such bodies. I asked that question not because I thought there were no bodies. I asked the question to find out what bodies the traditionalists are seeing that leads them to believe such farfetched things.
And for the thousandth time, just because something was "used" as a tomb means nothing about the original function of the thing. "Dumpster" comes to mind. Traditionalists simply do not want to hear that. They read Hawass' wild claims, and by virtue of him stating it, it must be true. Just like Reisner, Stocks, et al. Forget the evidence; who would dare question authority? If anyone is willing to remain lazy and uneducated, it seems like traditionalists are serving as the ironic role model.
Hawass sees what looks like a tomb that contains pieces of the same kinds of stone used to build the pyramid and "temples" and he jumps to the wild conclusions that the guy whose tomb it is must have worked to build that same pyramid. Forget that the guy would have been drawn and quartered for pilfering stone from contemporaneous royal buildings. Forget that the so-called tomb has no way of being definitively dated, forget that it makes far more logical sense to pilfer stone from an abandoned building than to start from scratch in the quarry.
Good heavens, traditionalists don't even know what those cylinders are that all those statues are holding in their fists, and yet they presume to insist they know what the pyramids are? Talk about "spin".
Please go back to making photo bombs. They're far more productive than your silly "bat crazy" name calling.
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?