> "There is no good explanation for the existence of
> the Causeway"
> seeing as the evidence suggests that virtually all
> the Pyramid complexes from the Old Kingdom have
> them, including those constructed out of MUD
> BRICKS, the only suggestion I can provide is you
> improve on your one dimensional definition of
> Considering we are discussing the Beliefs of an
> entire race of humans, or rather you are throwing
> them aside like so much bathwater,t I'd like to
> think you can at least allow that a ritual
> explanation cannot be ruled out entirely.
> While it may also have been employed as a
> materials ramp, the fact that it was not
> disassembled after use, support my outrageous
> notion to boot.
Even mud requires water and good earth. It likely would also need to be imported from an off site manufacturing location. Desert sand does not make good mud bricks.
I have no issues with using the causeway in a ceremonial fashion, though only after the Pyramid(s) were finished and the causeway was no longer required to move materials. Why do you think, there would be a need to "disassemble" the causeway, once the Pyramid was finished. The very fact, that they are seen throughout Egypt, contests to this. It's not part of the ramp proposition, where they took it apart, and used it in building the Pyramid. That's only a conjured up story, to try and explain, why there is no evidence of a long ramp.
And remember, currently the Funicular can not be proven, any more than men pulled stones up ramps. It's all conjecture.
It's just that, the Funicular conjecture/concept addresses the engineering requirement, and does so in an efficient time frame.
Pulling stones up grades cannot accomplish this. If you feel animate men were pulling stones, to build the Pyramid(s), then show us your math to substantiate your claim. This we will not see from you, as it is unattainable.
I on the other hand, have no problem providing the same.