> Actually, cladking's endless ramblings on the Pyramid Texts
> (which he/she/they interpret in a way that is not supported by
> anybody else anywhere) are about as straightforward as quantum
> mechanics formulae (what's the betting that CK will respond to
> this with something along the lines of, 'quantum mechanics
> formulae are actually quite simple and easy to understand'?)
So your contention is then that if you don't want to think about it then it can't be correct. It doesn't matter if the builders agree or not because you might slip a gear trying to understand a simple concept like; "The fire is laid, the fire shines, the incense is laid on the fire, the incense shines. Thy fragrance comes to the dead king, O Incense; the fragrance of dead king comes to thee, O Incense.".
Why risk a mental hernia trying to understand simple English when you know that superstitious bumpkins only spoke gobblety gook. You aren't supposed to groke gobblety gook any more than you are quantum mechanics. So you, predictably, choose to attack the messenger and pretend the message doesn't exist.
Why not look for a flaw or show a better interpretation instead? I'll tell you why. It's because you fear I'm right and don't want to look. You don't want to risk agreeing with me.
> Recreational Vehicle - hmm, certainly more plausible than
> Scott's 'Recovery Vault'. :)
I could put together quite an argument it was a recovery vault. All we know for certain is that it wasn't a tomb per se since the king was cremated.
> Cladking wrote, 'I did promise everyone that once the ramp
> "theory" died all the Egyptological assumptions would fall like
> dominoes. The ramp assumption is dead; ...'
> Only in your imagination, Cladking, only in your imagination.
It's not going to go away because you ignore it.
Maybe aliens built it or the stones grew wings but the one thing we can forever more be sure of is that they did not use ramps. Being "debunked" doesn't require anyone's acceptance. Being debunked doesn't even require that it's widely known. Being "debunked" only requires logic, reasons, and facts. Ramps are debunked.