Repeating your nonsense will not make it so.
Utter nonsense. I’ll just chalk it up to you not being aware of the simple facts and missing my post about the mothers of horus.
Nothing could possibly be more nonsenical than Egyptological interpretation of horrus’ mothers;
Utterance 417.
741a. To say: A Great One slept on his mother, Nut.
741b. Thy mother Tȝi.t clothed thee;
741c. she carried thee to heaven, in her name of “Kite,”
741d. the fondling whom she found, her Horus.
741e. Thy Horus is this one, O Isis; mayest thou bring his certificate (lit. arm) to Rē‘, to the horizon.
This couldn’t make more sense in my interpretation but Egyptologists just try tooverlook the fact that horus has three mothers, nut (the sky), tayet (the quarry), and isis (nephthys harmonious sister).
Then isis goes on to say that she gave him birth;
1964d. as Isis said to Nun:
1965a. “I have given birth to him for thee; I have deposited him for thee; 1 have certainly spit him out for thee.”
1965b. He has no feet; he has no arms,
So now we have a stinky footed god with no feet!
How stupid does this have to get before anyone admits there’s a problem here, Houston.
It gets a million times worse because it goes on to say he has feet and wings to boot. Our interpretation is simple madness and the cure is that they are continually retranslating it to make it more like the book of the dead which does make perfect sense in a superstitious medium.
People are hanging onto sinking ramps like they are life preservers and superstition for life itself. It’s all founded on thin air and it’s crashing.
Evidence and logic in the debunkment (post #152) mean nothing. Evidence they pulled stones straight up the side oner step at a time mean nothing.
But if you keep saying “they mustta used ramps” enough times you’ll be on solid ground!
You can’t expect to wield supreme power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you! 
Forget about the damn acid because it’s confusing you. Just think of it as carbonated water and remember carbonated water is highly erosive. As the carbonation leaves the water it becomes less erosive.
They added a little natron to the water caught at 81’ 3" because they didn’t want CO2 building up at the “Lake of the Jackal” since men worked in the area.
The water under the ground, “the waters of the abyss”, was so heavily carbonated all that was often required to make it erupt was a trigger. They used 1.1 gallons of water saturated with natron inserted at the djed to serve as this trigger.
As the water degassed it deposited various compounds which had enterred solution when it was carbonated. “The eye of horus is young with thee, the eye of horus is large with thee.” This is all soimple. Try looking at it from the inside!
Now you’re getting the spirit(s).
First thing you got right!
Actually you are wrong on this one, if the theory of Houdin is debunked as the experiments that a proper debunking could do, then other theories that also include lifting stones with leavers will be looked then more closely, there is no need to dismiss ramps at all.
As the ground were the natron water had to be injected would had made many huge caves, I prefer to be indeed in more solid ground than the cave-ins one would had encountered in your idea that has less evidence than what it is found about ramps around pyramids.
Cave-ins galore underground. If it had worked, in reality 1.1 gallons of water would not had done much of anything. Just enough to purify a body for mummification. Now that is an idea!
Sorry, no evidence for that kind of geyser nor the huge remaining caves.
Why are you expecting it to make sense? What actual evidence do you have that these writings are not just a load of rambling poetic bullshit about assorted gods and heroes?
I think cladking thinks the ancient Egyptians had some sort of perfect wisdom and logic beyond current human understanding (except for cladking, who is the only human alive to understand it) and they would never write anything that wasn’t perfectly wise and logical. Apparently poetry, metaphor, and belief in the supernatural are (according to cladking) incompatible with this perfect logic/wisdom of the ancient Egyptians.
“Metaphysics” has two dictionary definitions. Sometimes I wish I had used the word “epistomology” but this application isn’t quite right.
Opinions are a dime a dozen. All else being equal you’re always better off with professional opinion. All else isn’t always equal. In the 1860’s all surgeons thought washing their hands was a waste of time and their patients died. Today “all” Egyptologists believe they must haver used ramps.
Whether they used ramps or not is an engineering question anyway and has nothing to do with Egyptology. It is almost strictly a reverse engineering question. It hasn’t been solved in 150 years of turning a blind eye to most of the evidence and interpreting the PT.
There’s no inherent reason it must make sense, it was merely an assumption that it made sense when I started trying to solve it. At that tiome I thought there was a high probability (bordering on certainty) that I was wrong and it didn’t make sense. I thought as I started trying to solve it there would be no patterns and I’d have to give up. Don’t take me wrong here; the original writing almostr had to have a lot of internal consistency even if it was a book off magic as I was told. One doesn’t have only mothers and fathers nor are they fathers of their own father. This lack of consistency I thought then was largely translation error. Egyptologists believe there are numerous errors in the text and at that time I had no reason to doubt them. Between illiterate authors and translators unfamiliar with the writing it was simply possible that the inconsistencies would vanish.
But as I worked more and more of these non sequiturs and inconsistencies appeared. And more and more they then disappeared as the word meanings were solved.
Why would you expect it not to make sense?
There’san Egyptological explanation for the reason this stuff is utter nonsense. They have an explanation for everything because this is how confirmation bias works. No matter who does it the evidence is filtered, massaged, and interpreted to fit our beliefs or models. The major problem with Egyptology is that so much of the physical evidence has to be simply held aside as being irrelrevant and the bulk of what is accepted is believed to represent magic and religion. This is necessary toi make a self consistent paradigm with the known evidence. In this case Egyptologists simply believe in the “many origins” theory. According to this the gods and their parts arose in many different places and times so each time one is mentioned it has a different meaning.
It’s a shame the word “ramp” doesn’t appear and that they can’t account for all the sand though. It’s really a shame that none of the evidence fits the paradigm. I often call it the “teflon paradigm” because nothing will stick to it. I also call it “frankenstein’s paradigm” not because it’s so scary (it is), but because all the facts have to be bolted or nailed to it.
I don’t think it’s terribly important if it “has” to make sense. But the fact is that it does make sense and I seriously doubt anything can be reflective of logic and reality uinless it’s made by the hand of God or man. It seems more likely people created the logic of the PT and whether this was at the hand of God(s) or not is a question for someone else since I don’t know how to study it.
No. No perfect wisdom. But there were advantages (and disadvantages) to the ancient language. Everyone was on the same page. The degree to which words didn’t even need to be spoken may have been extensive. Everyone understood one another and if they didn’t they knew it immediately. One could ask for clarification and then they’d be on the same page again. The language fascilitated thought and prevented misunderstanding of nature. Since reality was axiomatic almost all scientific learning could be immediately applied to culture and individual lives. There was no gap between theory and practice.
But their understanding was primitive and it lacked the kind of extensive knowledge we have today. It was impossible for them to gain this knowledge ever.
I personally can’t really employ ancient thought. To some extent I had already thought similarly to ancient people and I can understand much (at least some) of their science.
Nobody should think ancient thought was better but ancient communication was more effective albeit only sufficed for simplistic concepts. It wasn’t so much better or worse, as it was different. It was extremely different. They thought of themselves as an extension of nature like animals. In this regard their thinking was “better”.
How could you possibly know this? What properties, verified by linguists and researchers, are present in the ancient Egyptian language that are not present in modern languages?
Again, how do you know? How can we possibly evaluate this kind of assertion about the way long-dead people thought?
No, a website wouldn’t give cladking what he wants. This is just me speaking ex cathedra from my bellybutton, of course, but I think cladking is not really - well, not only - interested in his pyramid construction theories; he’s also out for the validation and excitement of, well, being the center of attention. Look at this thread; over 1900 posts that are pretty much all about him.
I’m not being snarky, or even unsympathetic - I always get a little ego rush when some other poster quotes or acknowledges me; I think we all do. I think cladking posts his ideas to various fora because he enjoys the response he gets. And also because he thinks he’s come up with some novel insight into the pyramids. That’s why he keeps posting to this thread, despite the obvious fact that everyone else posting thinks his theories are full of shit. He knows he’s not going to convince anyone here; he simply likes that we’re talking about him at all.
Just my $0.02.
Because he has thought and thought about it, and if you think about something long enough, you will arrive at the truth. Much easier than having to deal with contradicting evidence.
How do you know this?
How do you know this?
How do you know this?
How do you know this?
How do you know this?
How do you know this?
How do you know this?
How do you know any of this?
I think I mightta heard the ancestors slow down spinning in their graves when I invented this term. It has an ancient language “feel” to it. They are partially vindicated just by coming up with the term.
You have claimed both, but since it doesn’t seem to get through let me try again…I don’t accept YOUR debunkment of ramps, internal or external. I don’t accept your non-supported assertions that they are debunked. I don’t accept your assertions from mystical authority, I don’t accept your non-evidence of mystical magical machines using cold geysers, I don’t accept your assertions OF geysers, cold or otherwise on the Giza plateau or really anything else you’ve asserted without a shred of evidence outside of your appeal to an authority you don’t have with a language you don’t understand and interpretations of translations you aren’t qualified to interpret. Does that make it clear? You can continue to assert, over and over again that ramps have been debunked, but realistically only YOU believe this to be the case.
As you’ve SAID numerous time…yes, we all get that. I admit, you have said this numerous times. But that doesn’t make it so, and your unsupported assertions are just so much wind in the end. Ramps HAVE NOT BEEN DEBUNKED BY ANYONE BUT YOU.
Yeah, we all know that models, real world testing and using real math aren’t things you are interested in or impressed by. You’d rather go with flights of fancy, your gut feelings and dubious translations of a language you’ve admitted you don’t understand as well as cut and paste (without research) ‘facts’ about Giza that you cherry pick to create this narrative in your head.
Again, you assert this without any sort of proof…and in the very face of evidence to the contrary that there HAVE been ‘Egyptological ramp theories’ that indeed have been modeled (and tested, and in some cases overturned with that testing with new theories or refinements added…you know, how science actually works as opposed to the out of your ass method you prefer).
“The ancestors”? Feeling a little royal blood in our veins, are we? :rolleyes: