> "The crux of this entire debate is not as to whether or not
> one accepts credence from presentations or papers etc. -
> again the fact remains that here is a theory of S & W's which
> cannot be disproven."
> No, it is up to S&W to prove their theory. The weathering can
> be shown to be consistent with Old kingdom conditions. There
> is also the huge problem of no archaeological evidence for
> their theory... therefore it is way too much of a strecth
> to say that theirs is the simpler explanation.
Correction - the weathering is only assumed to be consistent with Old kingdom conditions - and there is no exclusive evidence that the weathering only started with the Old Kingdom. The Old Kingdom thesis sounds nice to conventional ears; but that's no justification for scientifically concluding that it fits properly. S & W are saying that the geological record suggests proof that vindicates their theory - surely not the only time that Geology has differed with Egyptology ?