Mysteries :
The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board).
> Sorry, but, if the builders having left it as we
> find it is implausible, then making it look like
> they did so could only undermine the deception.
> That’s the point of the question. Why would our
> (imaginary) forgers do this?
The question is. Trying to establish whether or not the cartouche does or even can extend down and behind the granite beam.
If the limestone sidewall block and thus the half cartouche is sitting on top of the granite beam as per the Perring drawing. There being, according to the Perring drawing no limestone sidewall block concealed behind the granite beam. The granite beam penetrating the sidewall.
Why would the AE have painted only the second half of a cartouche at the lower extremity of the sidewall block?
According to the Perring drawing.
Is the Perring drawing accurate?
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 14-Mar-17 16:04 by Jon Ellison.
> find it is implausible, then making it look like
> they did so could only undermine the deception.
> That’s the point of the question. Why would our
> (imaginary) forgers do this?
The question is. Trying to establish whether or not the cartouche does or even can extend down and behind the granite beam.
If the limestone sidewall block and thus the half cartouche is sitting on top of the granite beam as per the Perring drawing. There being, according to the Perring drawing no limestone sidewall block concealed behind the granite beam. The granite beam penetrating the sidewall.
Why would the AE have painted only the second half of a cartouche at the lower extremity of the sidewall block?
According to the Perring drawing.
Is the Perring drawing accurate?
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 14-Mar-17 16:04 by Jon Ellison.
