all interesting points. Sorry this string has derailed. curious to know how old you think Great, middle and Red pyramids are? I'm pretty comfortable thinking of them as older than the younger dryas. I'm not up on all the Egyptology details, but there is obviously some mention and evidence of building, but I don't think it was pyramids. I suspect there was a period in Egypt's past during the time we have the most evidence from, (2.5 to 5 thousand years ago), where they probably were doing pretty well. No wars, happy people, good king, etc. When they had enough trade and wealth to take on a refurbish project of the old pyramids. Sort of "pride of ownership" phase. I suspect this is what they were doing that might have been confused with the building of the pyramids. Perhaps a great flood did some damage, or maybe those pyramids are so very old they were just falling apart and needed some work to restore the cover stones, etc. It would seem like a perfect expression of the mind set of a people who set up camp and prospered in the Giza area. Sort of respect for their elders kind of thing. But I can't seem to see any evidence of anyone in the past 5000 years that had anything even remotely close enough to the advanced tech needed to even understand these structures and all the engineering implications of them. Not even Egyptologists are attempting to substantiate that high level of tech. The ones who actually don't understand the necessity for it are the sad ones. Pretending to have a hope of any contribution in that aspect of the modern opbservations just wrecklessly marginalizes and disrespects the discipline. The more aware Egyptologists should control these kids.