> <<> 1. I cannot reply here without first referring you to the
> > of Ma'at as a site where evidence comes first
> Not in my experience Mr Warwick. "evidence" has been presented
> @ Ma'at and in my opinion ignored or not properly addressed by
> those that convey a level of knowledge and understanding of the
> AE above and beyond anybody else that tries to present
> evidenced data that has the potential to alter orthodox beliefs
> if not disproven.>>
> That's too bad
> Strange then that the likes that of Robert Bauval have used the
> site to vet their ideas since it's inception
> There is allways the possibility that what you presented is not
There also exists the possibility that it is correct Warwick. given i stated they are "proven" theorems....and, I show you how they were derived from the GP structure then correlate to the AE Rhind.
> "> 2. the best site for debunking theory is not on the
> > internet..it is your public library.
> disagree. Books @ a library are only a snapshot of historical
> data and understandings at the time of their print."
> but the books in print ARE Dated...Where else do you suggest
> one gets a background in AE history??
I'm simply conveying that what one sets their foundation upon must be revisted and tested for any "new" information that might apply if utilizing old texts.
> and the Photos within are hard evidence/reference
> I'm sorry but I cannot take seriously any reserarcher who does
> not read
hugh? where did that comment come from? I provide data linked to the AE Rhind? And I apparently did this without reading? come on man.
> "I respect your input Warwick.... this data is made possbile
> with the help of the many great re-searchers right here @ GHMB.
> I had hoped to gain the orthodox's opinions through Ma'at...
> however, that has turned into another learning experience...
> I simply find it difficult to see orthodox's argument that no
> mathematical concepts would be embedded within their
> try seeing what is actually there
I did...and show proof of it.
> the orthodox argument, if such can actually be said to exist,
> is that the encodation of mathematical concepts does not fit
> with our understanding of their beliefs.
> any theory that purports to Solve the Mystery of the Pyramids
> without cultural corroboration is not an Egyptological one
> But we are here to guide Titus in his seach for feedback
> I'd like to think that we can allow him to draw his own
> I cannot see how attempting to revive the Ortho Alterno
> Nonsense that he is asking that we got beyond is anything but
> disinformational and non constructive.
thanks for your brief time.... pretty much what i expected.
Time to go enjoy the day.... this is a waste of time.