Of course, if you’re wrong about the PT, and it’s a collection of religious incantation rather than a construction manual inexplicably addressed to dead kings and written inside pyramids, then it’s no surprise that construction terms aren’t part of it. The word “lever” doesn’t appear in the Bible; does that prove that the people who wrote it didn’t use levers?
:rolleyes:
It’s funny, and I know it’s frowned on to link to another board, but this thread has some similarities to the discussion here. 
If we take the bible into account cats also do not exist in the typical research that cladking is making.
And the Old Testament does not mention the Chicken either. 
“The many references to “fatted fowl” in these older records, in accordance with the text and the history of the other nations, were pigeons, guineas, ducks, geese and swans.” - International Standard Bible Encyclopedia.
Gotta love Cladking’s avatar there.
Yeah, it’s funny AND kind of appropriate with the seemingly fancy footwork and hoof waving…
My favorite exchange in that thread (and I only skimmed it) was the last one, where one of the guys asked the King of Clad whether all the other pre-historical megalithic sites also had geysers at them (to enable them to be built of course) and Clad basically said yeah, they did (well, something like funny you should ask then spun some more bullshit about other sites). The guy had obviously had enough shark jumping at that point and was like cool story bro and dropped it there (they were a bit smarter than us and only wasted 20 pages before giving it up as a bad job).
And the guy who patiently shows him a bunch of evidence for ramps, his title is “Country Bumpkin”. Funny.
Guy was obviously an Egyptologist lover…
I kinda get the vibe of a poster that unwittingly remembers who got the best of him in a previous discussion, and the pseudo scientist stills needs to tell himself that the “discussion” is not over.* One can notice here an opponent still mentioning variations of the most knowledgeable poster’s handle months or years after a long winded encounter.
- it really is until extraordinary evidence for a fanciful theory like cladking has is brought forward.
Yeah, I agree. I often call people un-Gigged O’Busters for some reason…never have figured out why though.
I think the main trouble with combating the King of Clad’s assertion isn’t that we don’t all know it’s bullshit. It’s that Egyptology is a vertical specialty and there is so much psudo-science and new age crap on the internet about Egypt and the pyramids that sifting through it to counter his claims is fairly arduous unless you know exactly where to look. I remember seeing Egyptian art showing people moving things up ramps but damned if I could find the specific paintings. I recall archeological evidence of ramps as well, but do a search in Google and you get millions of links of horseshit, or you get stuff that’s so vertically specialized it’s fairly useless in the discussion. I was trying to get Clad to be specific about his theory (i.e. how his water machine actually worked), because unlike his flights of woo and spiritualist crap it’s something tangible we could actually debunk. We know what the tensile strength for given lengths of rope are, after all, and how much would be needed to make them and what it would require to lift certain loads…and we can at least approximate a failure rate and what that would mean AND what it would show and what evidence exists (zero) for the use of Clad’s machine, outside of his own mind.
Yeah, no amount of logic, evidence, or abuse will change his mind or inspire him to actually produce anything. Lost cause, I presume there are other examples of him playing the same game elsewhere?
I’m sure. I actually came across that one because I was Googling whether there was a hieroglyph for ‘ramp’ in Old Kingdom script and that thread popped up. I was just curious, though whether there was one or not (or it’s even known for sure) doesn’t prove really anything…it’s a silly point, since the Egyptians used ramps in their architecture (such as this temple…though this temple was from a later era, they didn’t just figure it out right then), so whether they had a word for it or not they used the things so obviously knew what they were.
Maybe a better analogy is that the writing is the operating program for living things. It is the way that digital thought is transformed into analog behavior. These connections and the way the program works is apparent from the horrid translations that have been made. They are so bad not because they got the words wrong but because words aren’t the way meaning is expressed in metaphysical language. We use words to make statements that each individual must appraise for himself. They used words to direct the listener to their thinking; not one at a time but by drawing a picture from everything known and defining the perspective.
The language can’t be properly “translated” until author intent is reflected in the translation. But it can’t truly be translated at all because the format of metaphysical language and modern languages are incompatible.
Don’t forget the very definition of “translation” is to put author intent from one language into another. The current translation is believed to be nothing but incantation and nonsense so it has never been really “translated” at all. It’s merely words which have been translated rather than author intent. If they understood author intent then they’d know how the ankh originated or why “djed” meant “stable and enduring”. Instead, even the most basic concepts aren’t understood.
Maybe an even better analogy is that you have no idea what you are talking about and yet continue to shovel BS as fast as you can type. Cause that’s what the above paragraph says to me. Perhaps I’m bad at translating your metaphysical intent.
Sure. Your logic is all sound but you’re missing two key points and these points are why I keep reminding people that the word “ramp” isn’t attested.
First is that in order to have built with ramps tens of thousands of men would have spent their entire productive lives building them and dragging stones on them. It would be the second most common occupation in Egypt and not so very far behind “farmer” or “farm hand”. There are many words related to other occupations but none at all survive related to stone dragging. Why wouldn’t superstitious people who lived and died on ramps have a “god of ramps”.
Second, and this might be even more important, it simply destroys Egyptology’s key weapon in arguing against all theories that don’t involve ramps, tombs, and changeless bumpkins. Their tactic has always been to divide and conquer and then to mop up with “cultural context”.
There is no cultural context because the word “ramp” isn’t even attested and there is no direct evidence of any sort that the great pyramids were tombs. Since they don’t understand the ONLY book that survives they can’t prove these people were changeless. Without the assumption they didn’t change there is no culture.
Egyptology has been using tactics and strategy to win arguments, not science. Hawass leaving the meeting was poor logistics in the long term.
Pulling on a rope to lift stones is so simple a caveman could do it.
But there’s no evidence ramp technology evolved because the first pyramid was a great pyramid.
Easier to find by googling “stinky footed bumpkin.”
[QUOTE=cladking]
Pulling on a rope to lift stones is so simple a caveman could do it.
[/QUOTE]
No, it wasn’t that simple.
No, it wasn’t the first pyramid. You are simply wrong…again. Repeating this claim does not make it correct.
I told y’all all this back in post 805. But would you listen? Noooooo, you’re all like, ‘hey, let’s see how far down claddy’s rabbit hole goes!’ Well, don’t ask me to drill you a geyser to lift you up 81’3 to reality. You’ll just hafta build a ramp…