SC: Finally! Someone who 'gets' what we are saying and who is actually taking the time to look properly at what we are presenting. I thank you for that even though you have come to a different conclusion.
Audrey: Actually I didn't come to a conclusion. The most I can say is; it's dam close. My problem is I'm a perfectionist. I've done a lot of this same thing, plotting the relationships of the monuments. And it's always dam close. And close hasn't been good enough to convince me, even in my own diagrams. That is why I haven't put any of them up on this board.
I guess I expect perfection in the layout because there is perfection in the pyramids themselves. To level a structure covering 13 acres within 1", and all the other details of perfection, makes me think; if they could do that, they certainly could have laid out the site with the same precision. It just doesn't follow that they would have been a little sloppy in the site plan.
SC: As I pointed out elsewhere, there is not a single perfectly square pyramid at Giza nor is a single one of them perfectly aligned to the cardinal directions. However, the error is small enough that we can infer the intent of the builders. And it is this small error that allows for the Lehner-Goedek line to also be inferred as the intent of the builders. What I think is truly remarkable about the GSF is that the simple dot-to-dot, step-by-step procedure brings G3 to be a rectangle (and ONLY a rectangle), it brings the Lehner-Goedek line into existence and allows us to see why there are two very large pyramids and a much smaller one and it allows us to see how the relative proportions of the structures may have been achieved. No, it’s not perfect but then I have the benefit of re-creating the design using high definition photos of the Belt stars and plotting the lines using a computer. The ancient designers did not have such tools and so they may have designed their own plan a fraction different to mine. And then there are the building tolerances on building such a plan on such a scale.
SC: These lines are not parallel and G1 and G2 are different sizes precisely because G3 is a rectangle as predicted by the GSF.
Audrey: Every time I've plotted something, it seems that G1 isn't completely square. I mean it seems to be off by more than the few inches Petrie and others measured. Have you run into this? Or it could just be the satellite images.
SC: As mentioned above – none of the Gizamids are perfectly square or perfectly aligned to the cardinal directions. This can be seen with the hi-res Giza plateau mapping project drawing. As I mention above, the errors, however, are so small that it is not unreasonable to infer what the intention of the builders was.