Page 1 of 1
More Trouble for Das Klub
Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 11:46 am
by Minimalist
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... l?ITO=1490
English geologist Colin Reader said the Sphinx was not only older than previously thought, but may have originally had an entirely different face.
Egyptologists who have studied the Sphinx over the last two hundred years have long argued that it was built soon after the first pyramid - around 4,500 years ago.
But Mr Reader's study has found that rainwater erosion on the Sphinx’s enclosure appears to be consistent with the monument being created before the Great Pyramid in Giza.
A sunken palace on the Giza plateau provides further evidence that there was activity in the area before the building of the pyramids, Mr Reader said.
Its style implies that it is older than the other tombs at the site. Mr Reader said the tomb would have been adapted and embellished by later inhabitants of the area.
and
Because these conclusions require a re-dating of the Sphinx to an earlier time before the construction of large monuments, this theory has not been accepted by mainstream Egyptologists.
What a surprise.
Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:22 pm
by Digit
And he appears to have the support of other geologists.
What makes me smile Min is the insistence of archaeologists that a geologist doesn't know what he's talking about 'cos he disagrees with them.
Roy.
Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 2:29 pm
by Minimalist
Yep.
As Schoch famously replied when the Club shrieked that "there was no one there to build it in 5,000 BC!!!!!""
"It's not my job to tell you who built it.....I'm just telling you when it was built."
Reader seems to be trying to divide the baby but it doesn't matter. If you attack the idea that Khafre built it, it doesn't matter if it was by 300 years or 3,000 years. The Club will still go apeshit.
Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:39 pm
by Donna
Is it just me or does it always seem the first person to come up with an alternative to the accepted theory gets blasted and then a couple of years later someone else says the same thing and it is accepted. Maybe not accepted but at least the second person to go against the popular view point isn't flayed and skinned.
Donna
Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 8:18 pm
by Minimalist
No, there is a certain logic to your point. The first soldier to stick his head up over the trench risks getting it blasted off.
Art Buchwald said it best:
“If you attack the establishment long enough and hard enough, they will make you a member of it.”
However, the Egyptology Club is nowhere near that point of surrender.
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 8:50 am
by Digit
No Donna, it runs something like...
The man's a damn fool!....
Some suggest that....
It is reasonable to suggest...
The consensus amongst....
We knew that all along!
Roy.