Thanos5150 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Martin Stower Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > Where (if anywhere) does he justify “bull
> > bones”? Seeing as how he claims the status
> > of FACT for them.
>
> The first bone fragment Belzoni and Pieri found,
> "having rummaging through the rubbish inside the
> sarcophagus", they thought belonged to a human. It
> was only upon more searching they found several
> other fragments. They later sent these to London
> of which all Belzoni says of it is that they
> "proved to be the bones of a bull".

. . . which is pretty much bull on Belzoni’s part. Watching too much television tells me that determining gender by looking at bones is not all that easy.

I see that MJT raised some cogent points, as reproduced here:

http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,351331,351469#msg-351469

> From Belzoni's account and the fact that it took a naturalist
> (William Clift. Royal College of Surgeons) to identify the
> bones as bovine, then there can only have been a small number
> of bits and pieces of bone.

> What happened to the easily-identifiable-as-not-human skull,
> the knee joints, tail, hooves, vertebrae, etc.?
> Is it really okay to base a hypothesis on the opinion of one
> person (in this case, William Clift)?

—while Creighton had this to say:

http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,351331,351461#msg-351461

Quote

I think Belzoni perhaps believed they were human bones so, obviously, not that big. I imagine that a specialist in human anatomy examined them, realised they were not human bones and then they were passed to William Clift at the RCS. . . .

He imagines? Doesn’t he know? Hasn’t this world-class researcher found out?

So, if the bones were mistaken for human bones, then likely they were not that many of them. Likely those bones more easily identifiable as non-human were absent. Likely (as Creighton knows perfectly well) they were not all that large, not large suggesting that the animal was not fully grown, but rather a calf.

Yet Creighton continues to bullshit “bull bones” as FACT.

In 2013 he huffed and puffed about “a bit more info on those old Belzoni bull bones” in his next book:

http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,322193,322655#msg-322655

—but what turned up in SCOO was unimpressive.

M.