Origyptian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Corpuscles Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > In your schooling did you ever disagree with a
> > statement from teacher or lecturer or Professor?
> > Surely you must have?
> > Did you just blurt out "I challenge that!" or "I
> > disagree with that!"?
> > I reckon the only first response would be
> > ....please explain the basis of your challenge.
> > If you persist and then it will eventually turn
> > into ignore or ridicule!
> >
> > Get it?
>
> Sorry, no, I don't get it.

No, Doctor, you won’t get it. Significant difference.

> I only asked on what basis you made your claim
> about the age of the papyrus. I didn't "disagree
> with a statement from you". And so the "basis of
> my challenge" is simply to understand why you
> consider that papyrus to be "the oldest one ever
> found".

I really should keep a bucket by me when I read this board.

Doctor Femano conveniently “forgets” that “challenge” is his chosen wording and “challenger” the status he claimed.

The object of his “challenge” being given in these words: “I need no evidence to challenge the claim that those papyri are the oldest ever found.” A simple request for information, in pursuit of understanding⸮ I don’t think so.

> I admit it's sometimes difficult to tell when
> you're being sarcastic. So if you provided that
> link to the GH.com article in the spirit of
> levity, then message received (the article
> challenges many aspects of those papyri), but if
> you truly do believe that those papyri date to
> mid-3rd mill. BC and are indeed the oldest ever
> found, then I just would like to know why you
> believe that. For example, is it context, RCD, the
> English translation, the inherent credibility
> imbued in Tallet, et al., etc.?
>
> And I've never heard of a teacher putting the
> burden on the student as you described. If a
> teacher in earth science teaches the class "You
> cannot survive for very long at an altitude higher
> than 26,000' above sea level" and the students
> ask why that is, the competent teacher will
> provide the appropriate backup information such as
> "...because there's not enough oxygen", or
> "there's not enough water" or whatever. The
> teacher will not say "Now hold on a second, you
> can't challenge my assertion unless you explain
> the basis of your challenge". The "basis of the
> challenge" is simply that the students are trying
> to understand the reason for the "26,000'"
> assertion.

The liar just can’t help lying.

Notice how he’s changed the example. The student’s “challenge” becomes (as above) an innocent request for information, with naming it a “challenge” put in the teacher’s mouth. Doctor Femano again conveniently “forgets” that “challenge” is his chosen wording, “challenger” his self-description and “to challenge the claim that those papyri are the oldest ever found” his stated object. No, he is not just asking for background information: he’s hinting, suggesting, implicating that the “claim” is wrong, an insinuation for which he offers no evidence or argument other than the conspiracy theory which he assumes as a default.

I’ve had one or two things to say before now about his “privileged challenger” bullshit. A selection:

http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,1041326,1042980#msg-1042980

http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,1041326,1043084#msg-1043084

http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,1083792,1085293#msg-1085293

http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,1087882,1089520#msg-1089520

http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,1092259,1093560#msg-1093560

Funny how our Prophet of Higher Standards is so lax and indulgent in those he sets for himself.

M.