reply to post by whatukno
Not to seem like I'm focussing on you for extra attention, but men like Jonathan Gray and Mike Creamo have a lot of very interesting things to say
about our past, with the proof to back it up. All we ever hear in rebuttals is mostly nonsensical technobabble from the likes of Hawass and other so
called experts about how they "know" what they are talking about, and no one else is qualified to speak on such subjects, and a chorus of their
supporters (see: worshippers) stand up and cheer, without even questioning these claims. It is repugnant, and specifically why only about 10% of the
public believes them. The rest of us know instinctively that something isn`t right.
We aren`t the slow witted peasants of the past that fall for what ever some academic tells us is the truth.
I`ve had the misfortune in the past to be in contact with people that were phd`s and higher, and my overall impression was a self satisfied smugness
that infected everthing they did. You could not even play a simple game of chess with them (or monopoly for that matter). If they lost the tantrum
would ensue because someone with a supposedly lower intellect than themselves couldn`t possibly be able to beat them, therefore I must have cheated. I
dare say that that is the attitude these so called experts have, hence their refusal to even entertain anything other than the ``party`` line.
[edit on 3-6-2008 by morthn1waytoskinacat]