You were using your theory of the Gravity Cubit to say "there was no need to invoke the speed of light" in creating a measuring system. So I wanted to see if you had a valid point, you may well have been right but when I read your theory I was a bit surprised to see the term "almost exact" used several times when presenting a theory on the root of an exact measuring system that in my opinion most certainly should not only include light but would be most logical to be based upon it.
I have presented a very logical, exact mathematical formula for the measuring system that includes the speed of light, the sound frequency wave length and the Great Year, (light, sound and time) that fits with ancient cosmology very accurately. I discovered that formula by following the geometry I am proposing in my work the Giza Template. The template can be created using only a compass and straight edge with no need to measure, and does not depend on an "as built" survey or to be more precise, conflicting surveys. I want to note here also that I have not yet shown all of the evidence I have for this as I am way behind on my E-Book release due to circumstances beyond my control, so not having some of the evidence to present here is a bit frustrating for me. I did post some images from the book to help and maybe I'll post more.
As far as throwing stones goes I was simply stating that if your are holding me to these high standards, and you very well should be, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", I couldn't agree with you more, but I felt you should hold yourself to those same high standards. I feel that the evidence I have presented especially for the measuring system is as close to extraordinary evidence that has been found to date. There is nothing in my equations that are not exact, they logically fit the cosmology and are encoded within the geometry without taking one measurement from Giza, that is a point you and Don seem to be missing, without taking one measurement from Giza, I think thats worthy of considering very closely. So what more can I say except just try to look at this work without any preconceived notions, you seem to not accept that someone or culture could have known these things in ancient times and that is an assumption that I do not adhere to.
Kind regards as well,