MA: In your book, is the RVT "stated definitively" or is it "an unproven hypothesis"?
SC: Read the book. The RVT is indeed stated in our book (p.284) as perhaps the reason why these structures were built. The hypothesis is presented with supporting evidence. Can we conclusively prove the RVT hypothesis? Well, can anyone conclusively prove ANY hypothesis regarding these early, giant pyramids? No, they can't because there is no one from that time alive today to definitively tell us who is right and who is wrong. What we are saying is that the RVT hypothesis better explains much of the available evidence than any other hypothesis. So, if you want to suggest it is an unproven hypothesis, go right ahead. But it is no more so than any other hypothesis regarding these monuments and, as stated, better explains the extant evidence. In short, the RVT is a better answer supported by evidence.