MS: Before you presume to deliver lectures on laziness, I suggest you do the following:
Stop lazily plagiarising other people’s bad ideas. As here: Sitchin’s ‘he got it all from a book’ (with the very minor adjustment of naming Rosellini instead of Wilkinson) and the late Alan Alford’s ‘all he needed to do was find an inscription elsewhere and copy it’.
SC: Stower – stop lazily trying to attribute the argument I present to others. Try dealing with what I am arguing now, not what others have argued in the past.
MS: Do the work it would take to understand the issue and understand what’s being said to you. You have very plainly understood neither.
SC: Well – you just keep telling yourself that, Stower and I am sure you will feel all the better for it. But hey, guess what - when you wake up tomorrow I will still be here and so will my argument.
MS: It’s already been explained to you that Rosellini misread and misattributed the name Xnmw xwfw. And which cartouche name appears most frequently in the chambers? That’s right! Xnmw xwfw, the name a forger guided by Rosellini would not have used! The name xwfw appears just once.
SC: And how many times does it have to be explained to you that xwfw (Khufu) with hatched disc was published by Rosellini five years BEFORE Tricky Dicky went to Egypt? 'KHUFU' is all the fraudster needed to know. Whatever else he may have found alongside the Khufu inscription e.g. Khnum-Khuf, Medjedu etc, he simply had these copied too even though he would not have understood them - but whatever these were they clearly related to Khufu because they were found alongside Khufu's name (hypothetically, of course). End of.
MS: This before we note the presence in the chambers of the Horus name of Khufu, Hr mDdw, which no one so much as recognised as a name in 1837.
SC: Er, Earth calling Stower – you don’t need to know what something actually is or says to be able to copy it. And Tricky Dicky and his accomplice were very good copiers.
MS: Canonically, a Horus name appears in a serekh. Whoever wrote the relevant inscriptions knew, not only that is was a name but also that such a name could appear without the serekh in a linear (horizontal) inscription. This is nontrivial knowledge: anyone who possessed it in 1837 would have a strong claim to being the leading Egyptologist of the day — and that, Creighton, would have given Vyse all the fame he could handle, without the crazy risk of resorting to forgery. Needs must not.
SC: Knock, knock McFly! Tricky Dicky wouldn’t have had a clue what he was copying and he didn't have to know – he would have simply copied what was there alongside the only thing that he DID recognise – the Khufu cartouche. Thus, in so doing, he connects the Great Pyramid to Khufu. Thus he achieves the holy grail of Egyptology. Thus his name is immortalised.
MS: As for the character which tells us that these names — comprising the royal names, plus the other characters — are crew names: that wasn’t understood until the early 20th century.
SC: And your point is? Copy, copy, copy…… but to be fair, let us not forget either that Humphries Brewer told his family that some of the faint “marks” were repainted and some were new. This, of course, implies that these chambers did indeed have some ancient marks in them already. The question is – which are ancient and which aren’t? Were the Khnum-Khuf marks already there or were the Khufu marks already there? Or none? Or both? Let’s end this he said, he said, he said nonsense now and simply agree that the only way this question might be settled is by getting the forensic people in there, Stower – you know it makes sense. Why are you afraid to concede that that is the most sensible approach that might help settle this question? What is it you are afraid of? It is pretty obvious that you are afraid of something - your resistance to forensic science getting involved, when clearly it is needed, speaks volumes.
MS: All he had to do was find inscriptions and copy them . . . Yeah, right:
MS: …first of all, he’d have to recognise them as the right inscriptions to copy.
SC: This is the lazy, shallow and wholly inept thinking that has led consensus Egyptology and its Egypt-apologists into this mess. One more time - all that Tricky Dicky needed to recognise was the cartouche of Khufu. And that cartouche had been published five years BEFORE he went to Egypt and, if I recall, you already accept that it is likely that Howard-Vyse understood how the Khufu cartouche should look. And that is ALL Tricky Dicky needed to know. If he finds a piece of text from somewhere outside the pyramid that bears the Khufu cartouche that he recognises, then he simply copies whatever the text that accompanies the Khufu cartouche into the chamber. Whatever this text says, even though Ticky Dicky hasn’t the first idea of what it says, he KNOWS it relates to Khufu. 'KHUFU' is ALL he needed to know. Are you getting this yet? Is it registering with you?
MS: Brighter readers will work out how difficult that would be from what I’ve written above.
SC: And anyone with half a brain will know how easy it is to copy a piece of text from one place into another. For some odd reason you seem to be the only one here that is having difficulty grasping such a simple concept.
MS: In short, Creighton, Merrell is completely right: it would have taken a time machine.
SC: Well, you just keep believing that complete fantasy, Stower. I am sure it will, afterall, help soothe your anxieties over this.
MS: You are completely wrong…
SC: Really? Prove it.
MS:…which makes your ill-mannered sarcasm (unacceptable in any case) doubly unwarranted.
SC: Oh well – it’s a real shame I upset you. I really didn’t mean to do that. Is it too late to ask you to forgive me?
Post Edited (21-May-13 08:27)