Martin Stower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Origyptian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > I tell you what, learn how to ask for a reply
> > civillly [sic] and you might actually get one.
>
> This civility—is it exemplified in your interjection here?
>
> http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,1099133,1101011#msg-1101011
>
> M.

Absolutely.

Not every Egyptologist believes Sneferu is responsible for the Meidum Pyramid.
Not every Egyptologist believes the pyramids were build by using huge construction ramps.
Not every Egyptologist subscribes tightly to every detail of the traditional timeline.

Not every alt believes it's possible that G1 wasn't built in the 3rd millennium BC.
Not every alt believes a funicular system may have been used to construct G1.
Not every alt believes the pyramids are graneries, or sound generators, or electromagnetic wave systems, or built by aliens.

To refer to "Egyptology" as a distinct entity in light of such diversity is just as "real" -- and just as "fictitious" -- as referring to "alts", with its own diversity, as being a distinct entity as well.

My comment in that post referred to the similar nature of the broad diversity in the various beliefs within both "Egyptology" as well as that entity referred to as "alts". My post was completely civil.




Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 23-Apr-17 15:32 by Origyptian.