Warwick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>...other than your doubts re their
> technology(which are your doubts, not established
> facts) on what grounds do you dismiss the
> possibility that they did build them??

When did I ever dismiss the possibility that they built them? I only dismiss the likelihood they did because there isn't any hard evidence they did despite the huge volume of evidence that remains from them. I consider that pretty damning evidence against the notion that they did that work, that's all. I never said it was an impossibility though. This is why I'm fascinated at all the hostility. And the fact that there is so much hostility targeting the simple opinion that since there is no hard evidence they did that work then perhaps we should also consider other possibilities as well simply voiced my opinion, signals to me how tenuous the OK provenance narrative actually is.



> And if someone else built them, who,when,why?

I do not know. I doubt you do either.



> > Meanwhile, what seems to be "elusive" is direct
> > evidence to support the notion that the Dynastic
> > built those things despite the huge volume of
> > artifacts they left behind.
>
>
> There is very little DIRECT evidence that is
> universally accepted about our past in general.
> Without Arab scholars and a few irish monks there
> would be even less.
>
> The past is a jig saw puzzle. you can move the
> pieces you have around but throwing some out
> without being sure they do not fit doesn't work.

And this lack of certainty is precisely why consideration of more than possibility is warranted.

j