Archaeologica.org

There are Asian equivalents of the Atlantis myth....I believe the missing civilization was referred to as Mu.

I remember that back in the 60s one of my roommates read a series of books on Mu. She and some of our friends were really into it and from what she told me I thought I would read them when she finished but I never got around to it. The whole concept was kinda far out but they all thought the idea was worth exploring.

archaeologist wrote:

... egyptologists ... are worse than most christians ...

This is really off-topic, but I had to make the observation. "Christians" seems to be a title variously applied - many fundamentalist Protestants, for example, disdain the use of the title when referring to Cahtolics, Anglicans, and most Espicoplains (not to mention the majority of the congregation at Glide Memorial Methodist Church in San Francisco). Sometimes, within the different fundamentalist sects they become even more narrow.

However, yesterday a Cadinal of the Roman Catholic Church referred in both general terms, and in specific ones to his fellow congregants, as "Christians" who should be rising up in protest over the "Da Vinci Code" movie.

(Actually, I have no problem with protesting that film, for it is indeed a melange of old garbage and supersitions and other crap that is once again becoming part of the popular culture's "belief system" I had been so glad to know that for the most part that pseudo-history had been buried and forgotten and was most distressed when Dan Brown and others resurrected it. But I don't protest the film for ANY religious reasons at all, just that it is complete fabrication that too many of the gullible are ready to accept.)

"Egyptologists" apparently was intended when you see the full context of the statement, to specifically refer to EGYPTIAN archaeologists studying their own past, as opposed to all Egyptologists. Nonetheless the reference by itself is a blanket statement.

MOST Egyptologists are and have been "Christian" in the broader definition of the term. A great many Egyptologists in Egypt are Christian, too - of various sects including Greek Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Coptic, and Protestant.

Now please understand that I do ge the point of the original post and think it had some merit. It was the language structure that drew this off-to-the-side comment.

This is really off-topic, but I had to make the observation. "Christians" seems to be a title variously applied - many fundamentalist Protestants, for example, disdain the use of the title when referring to Cahtolics, Anglicans, and most Espicoplains (not to mention the majority of the congregation at Glide Memorial Methodist Church in San Francisco). Sometimes, within the different fundamentalist sects they become even more narrow.

Ah, yes...one of the lesser known beatitudes....

"Blessed be he who knocketh the shit out of unbelievers."


(Right up there with 'Blessed are the cheesemakers.')

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - In the latest Vatican broadside against "The Da Vinci Code", a leading cardinal says Christians should respond to the book and film with legal action because both offend Christ and the Church he founded.

This is rather absurd...could be following the example of the ID crowd...
too much like the Taliban for me.
Do you think Mr. Christ would agree bring charges?

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - In the latest Vatican broadside against "The Da Vinci Code", a leading cardinal says Christians should respond to the book and film with legal action because both offend Christ and the Church he founded.

Actually, it makes complete sense to me. The 'guardians' of one novel do not want anyone else cutting in on their action.

but I had to make the observation. "Christians" seems to be a title variously applied - many fundamentalist Protestants

the term christian is used to loosely these days. i prefer the term 'believer' for those who truly believe in Christ.

as "Christians" who should be rising up in protest over the "Da Vinci Code" movie.

it is a novel and a movie...who cares? it isn't real and it isn't true so why protest. if we protest that we might as well protest everything else that brings out some theory that is different than what the Bible says.

which means we would have to picket all evolutionists, all science labs, shut down all schools, and so on.

sorry but for me dan brown can have his moment in the sun, i know he is false and his words are no threat to christianity.

LOL....I actually thought that the DaVinci Code was a perils-of-pauline action novel with overtures of Art History 101.

Still.....it's better written than the bible.

i started to read schoch's book, the journey of the pyramid builders, (only started) and he seems to know his pyramids and their history. though his classification of some i would not include in a list defining a pyramid.

the book looks interesting so i shall try to get it read this week.

More on Schoch and West.

http://members.aol.com/davidpb4/sphinx1.html

To the problem of archaeological context for an earlier Sphinx, Schoch replied that urban centers had existed in the eastern Mediterranean at Catal Huyuk from the seventh millennium and at Jericho from the ninth millennium BCE.[22] At Jericho there were large stone walls and a thirty foot tower. No such settlement had been found in Egypt itself but clearly there was civilization in the region. More evidence could be under millennia of Nile river silt. [23] An advanced civilization may not have been necessary. A Neolithic culture was able to erect Stonehenge in Britain.[24]

The AAAS meeting broke up in words that, according to The New York Times, "skated on the icy edge of scientific politeness."[25] A writer for the AAAS magazine Science wrote that Schoch "hadn't convinced many archaeologists or geologists" of his findings.[26] In fact, Schoch had received offers of support from geologists after the October and February meetings. Even some archaeologists accepted his geological findings without conceding the conclusion to which they pointed.[27] West spent the next eighteen months producing a documentary for television that attracted thirty million viewers when it aired in the United States on November 10, 1993.[28]

I can't remember if it has been mentioned in the board or not, but the temple to the left front of the Sphinx shows the same kind of weathering. It was seemingly constructed using blocks cut from the enclosure area. That would date it to the time of the Sphinx construction.

Interestingly, the architectural construction is more archaic than the other temple and tombs at Giza. It is more like the megalithic structures on Malta.

There are also identifiable 4th dynasty tombs ( identified by inscriptions ) made of mud brick at Giza which show no signs of heavy weathering by rain water.

Egyptologists dated the Sphinx to Khafra from several kinds of evidence

khafra could have easily assumed credit for the structure and built minor ones around it to ad to the complex.

There are also identifiable 4th dynasty tombs ( identified by inscriptions ) made of mud brick at Giza which show no signs of heavy weathering by rain water.

so you are saying that schoch and west are right?

that is an interesting article.

I have West's book around somewhere and he discusses the other tombs and structures. It's a slow night, maybe I'll go look for the exact comment.