Mysteries :
The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board).
Origyptian wrote:
> How ridiculous.
>
> The entire reason I'm WITHHOLDING my hypothesis is its lack of
> enough physical evidence at this point, unlike several others
> here who insist on proselytizing things like tombs, stonework
> capabilities, and the ability to divine the intentions of the
> designers without having any real basis for doing so.
>
> And you wonder why I didn't embrace your little game.
>
> What "hard evidence" do YOU have that G1 was first on
> Giza?
Are you responding to me or Loveritas? What is "all true" is your behavior.
I am not playing a game nor have I said G1 was built 1st. In fact, in the OP which I doubt anyone will read, I said I don;t know and that was the point of the thread. But instead of talking about the subject at hand it devolves into more stupidity about the Romans.
> How ridiculous.
>
> The entire reason I'm WITHHOLDING my hypothesis is its lack of
> enough physical evidence at this point, unlike several others
> here who insist on proselytizing things like tombs, stonework
> capabilities, and the ability to divine the intentions of the
> designers without having any real basis for doing so.
>
> And you wonder why I didn't embrace your little game.
>
> What "hard evidence" do YOU have that G1 was first on
> Giza?
Are you responding to me or Loveritas? What is "all true" is your behavior.
I am not playing a game nor have I said G1 was built 1st. In fact, in the OP which I doubt anyone will read, I said I don;t know and that was the point of the thread. But instead of talking about the subject at hand it devolves into more stupidity about the Romans.
Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.