Warwick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Origyptian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Warwick Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Jon Ellison Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > > Origyptian Wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > How did they determine what a "right
> angle"
> > is?
> > > > > And how does that reveal "North" to them?
> > > >
> > > > How did they know that they were living on
> a
> > sphere?
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't know that they did
> >
> > Then on what basis would they know about the
> > methods Dash proposed, since his method
> presumes
> > knowledge of spheres, orbits, polar axes, etc.?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Have you done any research on the Ancient
> > > Egyptians at all?
> > >
> > > I already suggested to Origyptian that a
> > > discussion of AE Cosmology would be best
> served
> > on
> > > a new thread.
> >
> > Respectfully, that's a deflection from the main
> > questions about how the Egyptians knew enough
> > about the Earth's shape, orbit, axis tilt, and
> > revoluation around the Sun to be able to even
> know
> > about the cardinal points at all, let alone
> > calculate where they are per Dash's "obvious"
> and
> > "simple extrapolation" method.
> >
> >
> >
> > > You guys can't seem to stick to the topic of
> a
> > given thread.
> >
> > Excuse me? We were on the topic of Trog's OP
> about
> > Dash's article in which he seems to credit the
> 3rd
> > millennium BC Egypt with this knowledge. We are
> > simply probing whether there is any evidence
> that
> > they AE actually did have such knowledge. Dash
> > seems to think there isn't really any evidence
> > they did have that knowledge but he still
> believes
> > they were capable of doing such a thing,
> > apparently simply on the basis that such a
> method
> > has an "appeal".
> >
> > What topic were you on?
>
> I didn't say they used the method Dash proposed.
>
>
> what I said amounts to. once you have a cardinal
> point you can extrapolate them all
>
> I didn't mention knowledge of shape or axis tilt
> etc etc
>
> They didnot need to Know these things to find east
> west...the path of the sun.
>
> For all we know that is the only alignment that
> concerned them
>
> And for that there are any number of possible
> methods that they could have used
>
>
> If anything your Introducing these salient
> questions is the deflection or should I say
> obfuscation
>
>
> Warwick

It's obfuscation to simply try to determine whether Dash's perspective (as presented in the OP) has a basis in fact?

What was the point of Trog's post if not to present Dash's take of "how they did it"? Dash certainly seems to be implying such a claim with the title he chose for that article as well as his narrative in both articles. Surely you're not suggesting we should just swallow Dash's opinion about it.

If you don't think it's important to verify whether a hypothesis is fact before calling it a fact, that's your prerogative, but please don't impose that standard on others by claiming it's a deflection and obfuscation to simply attempt to suss out the claim that's presented to us in the OP.