> You said months ago in this same thread:
> If I'm wrong about this then I'm stupid and
> arrogant for ever even suggesting it and if
> I'm right then everything Egyptologists
> believe will have to be chucked out and rethought.
> No matter what I'm insulting to what Egyptologists
> believe. So I am ignored for the main part.
> If "everything", then that includes
> decipherment of heiroglyphs, which means Sethe,
> Allen, Mercer (et al) :-) PT translations or
> attempts, not to mention heiroglyph translation in
> total are, according to you, incorrect, and
> therefore cannot be the basis of your interpretive
> fantasy! You 'pull the rug out from under your own
> feet!' and highlight the lack of substantial basis
> for the fantasy.
If a kid scribbles on the whiteboard that 2 + 2 = 3 it doesn't mean that the concepts of equals, addition, two, and three don't exist; it merely demonstrates that he doesn't understand one or more of these concepts. All I've done is read the nonsense that Egyptology has translated and shown that it can make sense if it is taken literally. It is up to experts to fix the math and show exactly where they went wrong. But solving the PT in terms of book that didn't exist for 1000 years is a real good place to start the search.
> Egyptology does not claim to have all the answers
> but has employed some methodology and documented
> it. You have NONE! You do not even have even the
> lowest standards of evidence!.... rather
> ABSOLUTELY NONE!
The Great Pyramid is a tomb dragged up ramps by stinky footed and changeless bumpkins is ALL OF THE ANSWERS.
They are ALL wrong however.
> As Hanslune pointed out you have failed to produce
> any coherent clear document with any supporting
> evidence so there is nothing to argue with other
> than wild bizarre fantasies:
The PT is sufficient documentation and this goes double in light of the fact I debunked ramps and shown proof that stones were pulled straight up the sides of five step pyramids one step at a time. My theory includes more of the actual evidence and logic than any other. This doesn't preclude any other from being essentially correct but it is consistent with this theory being correct.
> So somehow ancients knew about modern language
> speakers... they had time travel your fantasy
Ancient Language got geometrically more complex as total knowledge increased arithmetically. Knowledge began exploding in 3200 BC when writing was invented and growing numbers of people couldn't keep up and began speaking sort of pidgin language with the same formatting as modern language. By 2750 BC large percentages of the population spoke this new language. By 2000 BC there weren't even enough Ancient Language speakers to run the nation and it had to be abandoned. This is remembered in a confused way as the "Tower of Babel".
> In your comedy message board routine, or troll
> efforts, (if any of that is what it is intended
> )or mental affliction, you make such a huge
> contradictory mess of it no one can take you
> seriously enough to argue with you.
It requires effort to understand.
> So you think that "Great Pyramid" builders decided
> to describe their construction technique
> exclusively in what you call "tiny little
> piles of rubble "!?
The "Pyramid" Texts were ancient when they were inscribed in the rubble piles.
> Look if over the last decade you have backed
> yourself into a corner, are merely stubbornly
> defending your pride for the sake of killing time
> and pretending you know what you are talking about
> perhaps some of that time might be better spent at
> a quality library (Chicago will have several)
> reading and learning the basics of hieroglyphic
> language decipher.
There are no contradictions in my theory.
Obviously in anything so complex as ancient society, Ancient Language, and this theory there are a few inconsistencies and if you actually understood the theory you might find one of these. I usually remember to post them once I have them resolved. I'd post them sooner but that wouldn't leave any of the work for my detractors.