> To date you have shared exactly zero concerning
> same..after all these years....ZERO
I'm just an average Joe with no credentials at all who doesn't think like you do. How I earned my living is irrelevant.
> What am I supposed to better understand by your
> calling yourself an alt?
...that I don't agree at all with Egyptology. Their methodology is highly flawed and this is relevant only because ALL of their assumptions are incorrect. I have far more in common with alts than I do with Egyptology. Most alts have arrived at new hypotheses through observation and intuition. Some of their ideas are apparently correct or nearly correct. Nothing about Egyptology is correct. They have misapprehended everything about ancient people and their thinking.
I don't side with alts so much because I believe they are always right but I always side with logic and science. I side with alts because the tactics of Egyptology are to divide and conquer. They single out different alts and then beat them up with "cultural context" which is essentially the four big assumptions; that the builders were changeless and superstitious as they dragged tombs up ramps. None of these assumptions is correct.
> Egyptology (or whatever you wish to call it) is a
> field of study first and a body of knowledge
The "body of knowledge" as it applies to the great pyramid builders is predicated on erroneous assumptions. When these are stripped from "Egyptology" there is almost nothing at all left except pictures, pot shards, and bone orientations.
They've done some good work and important work but, I believe, all their ideas are outdated. They are parsing words that can't be parsed and looking at pyramids instead of studying them. Their assumptions have hamstrung them for 150 years and they are stuck in the 19th century.
This is simple; I don't agree with Egyptology on any point at all.
> within the field there is almost as much
> disagreement as there is outside of it.
Ironic is it not? They agree only on the erroneous assumptions and because they are erroneous they can never agree on details of the stinky footed beliefs and religion. I believe the answers are right in front of us but we don't see them because our assumptions are wrong. We assume that when the builders said "HE IS THE PYRAMID" that they meant something stupid and they can't agree on exactly what that is. I believe that when they said "HE IS THE PYRAMID" what they really meant was "HE IS THE PYRAMID". They meant exactly this. The king was remembered by a star in heaven and he remained alive in peoples' memories because he was the pyramid; "he did protect".
We simply don't think this way so no matter how many times they said the pyramid was the ka of the dead king we still can't see it.
> You appear to disagree with the field as a whole
> IOW's you alone are right because you know you
> must be, because nothing else makes sense to YOU.
No. I might be essentially correct and this would make many alts correct in whole or in part as well.
> As such your posts are in fact a complete waste of
Probably true. Either Egyptology is a complete waste of time or my posts are.
If Egyptology would actually perform some science and take basic measurements then we'd know who needs to change.
> You market ignorance as if it' an attribute to be
Homo Omnisciencis is busily committing suicide. I do not suggest "ignorance" for everybody but I strongly believe the world can be saved by understanding ancient science. I believe the world needs more generalists. We must suspend unsustainable processes and activities. We have an economy based on waste and greed where a few grow wealthier every time new ways to waste human and natural resources are invented.
"Generalism" isn't really 'ignorance" as I sometimes present it but one must understand that nothing is known and he is no exception to that rule. One can't be a generalist without various perspectives and knowing the meaning of the word "metaphysics". One should be acquainted with concepts like the different meanings that can be interpreted from any utterance.
> you claim all those with knowledge are wrong
> because they have knowledge that you don't think
> is knowledge.
Nonsense. Specialization is critical to modern humans and the specialized knowledge is difficult to acquire. Even Egyptologists have a great deal of specialized knowledge. But it is much more wrong than most specialties.
But this doesn't mean that anyone knows everything ore even anything at all.
I've addressed most of these issues before and don't understand why you keep bringing them up. This isn't about you, me, Egyptology or any alternative theories. This is about physical evidence, logic, and science. It's about the simple fact that Egyptology is ignoring existing facts and ignoring gathering new facts. I don't understand why they get as much support as they do. Of what use is standing on the shoulders of giants when the giants are stuck in a 19th century rut?
I'm a mental midget but I can sometimes find the highest terra firma around and in this case that's at 81' 3". The irony being this is the exact same perspective as "sekhmet", "Beloved of Art", from which vantage most Egyptian art originated.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 19-Dec-17 15:25 by cladking.