Challenge Match: titorite v Andrew E. Wiggin: Electric Pyramids...Part Deuce

page: 1
4

log in

join

posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 05:19 PM
link   
The topic for this debate is “The Ancient Egyptians Had The Electric Light Bulb.”

titorite will be arguing the pro position and will open the debate.
Andrew E. Wiggin will argue the con position.

Each debater will have one opening statement each. This will be followed by 3 alternating replies each. There will then be one closing statement each and no rebuttal.

There are no limits on the length of posts, but you may only use 1 post per turn.

Editing is strictly forbidden. For reasons of time, mod edits should not be expected except in critical situations.

Opening and closing statements must not contain any images and must have no more than 3 references.

Excluding both the opening and closing statements, only two images and no more than 5 references can be included for each post. Each individual post may contain up to 10 sentences of external source material, totaled from all external sources.

Links to multiple pages within a single domain count as 1 reference but there is a maximum of 3 individual links per reference, then further links from that domain count as a new reference. Excess quotes and excess links will be removed before judging.

The Socratic Debate Rule is in effect. Each debater may ask up to 5 questions in each post, except for in closing statements- no questions are permitted in closing statements. These questions should be clearly labeled as "Question 1, Question 2, etc.

When asked a question, a debater must give a straight forward answer in his next post. Explanations and qualifications to an answer are acceptable, but must be preceded by a direct answer.

This Is The Time Limit Policy
Each debate must post within 24 hours of the timestamp on the last post. If your opponent is late, you may post immediately without waiting for an announcement of turn forfeiture. If you are late, you may post late, unless your opponent has already posted.

Each debater is entitled to one extension of 24 hours. The request should be posted in this thread and is automatically granted- the 24 hour extension begins at the expiration of the previous deadline, not at the time of the extension request.

In the unlikely event that tardiness results in simultaneous posting by both debaters, the late post will be deleted unless it appears in its proper order in the thread.

Judging will be done by a panel of anonymous judges. After each debate is completed it will be locked and the judges will begin making their decision. One of the debate forum moderators will then make a final post announcing the winner.

[edit on 21-8-2008 by MemoryShock]




posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 06:25 PM
link   
To open I would like to thank Andrew E. Wiggins and MemoryShock for indulging me in this neat new experience.

I shall be arguing for the existence of the Egyptian having the ability to utilize the electric light.

Egyptology is a very mysterious science unlike no other. I have often said, "their is no Britishology or Canadianology why then is their an Egptyology"?
Often I wonder how academics the field of can take themselves seriously when major discoveries disregarded as anomalies. Anomalies that include but are not limited to the model airplane, the baghdad battery, and the Dendera light bulb hieroglyphics.

Often, throughout history, great advances are forgotten only to be rediscovered by later civilizations. The law of water displacement by Archimedes is an excellent example of this and I cite him because their is an abundance of anomalous evidence that the Egyptian empire were masters of water , in many ways surpassing are own understanding of its practical applications. Most notable would be the Great Pyramid. When such achievements are still not understood by today's accredited scholars how can we expect them to offer explanations for wonders equally as grand?


A few questions for my opponent:

1. How can we judge the level of a cultures technology when artifacts from said culture are disregarded as anomalous and therefore not worth further study?

2. In the Dendera hieroglyphs we can see an old glyph under the end of the bulb that consists of three horizontal lines crossing one larger vertical line that resembles a modern day electric insulator. Do these glyphs appear anywhere else in all of the Egyptian hieroglyphs?

3. What is the English translation of the afore described glyph?

Much regards,
Titorite



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 09:25 PM
link   

titorite v.s. Andrew Ender Wiggin - Opening Statement




First off, a VERY big thank you to MemoryShock for conducting this tournament. The organizational skills exhibited by this staff member are second to none. Thank you for allowing us lowly mortals a medium to settle our differences. Thank you for the sacrifices you must have endured to allow this to take place.

Thank you to my opponent for graciously accepting this challenge so to further the discussion of this very intriguing argument:




Did the Ancient Egyptians possess the electric light bulb?


I will start by answering the questions of my opponent:


Answer to Question 1:

How can we judge the level of a cultures technology when artifacts from said culture are disregarded as anomalous and therefore not worth further study?

Simply put – you cannot. It is impossible to gauge the fullest extent of technology of any civilization if you disregard findings from that civilization as anomalous. To be truly unbiased, you have to take into consideration all findings especially when its from an ancient civilization.






Answer to Question2

In the Dendera hieroglyphs we can see an old glyph under the end of the bulb that consists of three horizontal lines crossing one larger vertical line that resembles a modern day electric insulator. Do these glyphs appear anywhere else in all of the Egyptian hieroglyphs?

Yes. These glyphs appear everywhere in Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs. The proper name of this Glyph of which you speak is the Djed. It is a symbol that resembles a column, a base, and a capital, which is divided by four parallel bars (in its most basic description that is)
The Djed pillar had been an object of worship since it has appeared in many carvings since the pre-dynastic period. There is a lot of disagreement over its true meaning, and it varies from “stability” to “fertility fetish”
Source 1: Reference 1 backs this claim


The Djed is argued to represent the spine of Osiris. (same source as above)

What a lot of people don’t realize is that the Ancient Egyptians believed that semen (male reproductive liquid) is created in the spinal column. Therefore, to the Ancient Egyptians, the spinal cord would be a sign of virility, stability….a sign of life. A very important notion when discussing Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs….they didn’t think the same way we do.
If you apply modern culture to the pictures we see in the carvings inside the pyramids, it’d be like a scary story version of Dr. Seuss.
Needless to say – the Djed is as common in the Ancient Egyptian written language as the letter S is to the English written Language. It appears everywhere.
As we can see from this study of the Djed symbol as it pertains to importance in the Egyptians hieroglyphs:

(study Here in Source 2: Reference 1 ) it does, indeed, appear in many more places aside from the Denderah Carvings.
It appears as :

  • The backbone of Osiris
  • The symbol to mean “pillar”
  • They also represent The Four Sons of Horus (source 1: reference 2).
  • Only until recently – after some visual interpretation of the Denderah Carvings, has the symbol come to represent some sort of conduit for electricity, for a select few individuals that is.







Answer to Question3

What is the English translation of the afore described glyph?

The most widely accepted (among experts of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphs) is that the Djed represents Stability.

( Source 1: Reference 3 supports that.)









My Opening Statement



I’d like to start with my opponents first question as the basis for my opening statement.
Certainly it is impossible to gauge the technological achievements of any civilization if you are to disregard the artifacts of that civilization. But – in the case of this debate, the Egyptian light bulb – what artifacts are we left to examine?

We have one reference, as the theory goes, to the Ancient Egyptian light bulb, in the Denderah Carvings, and from those carvings, some are able to extrapolate reasons why the light bulb could have existed.
Within the actual Denderah carving its self, however, is where this notion gets dispelled.

If this is indeed an artifact to examine to support the idea of an electric light bulb, based on its visual representation of an object that might resemble a light bulb with a wire inside of it emitting light, which is connected to an insulator (another “new” interpretation of the Djed). But if we apply a very basic understanding of how an electric light bulb works, we realize that a light bulb’s glass its self insulates the filament – and no extra insulator is required (the Djed).

The story of the Denderah Light Bulb is that it’s a visual story given to us by the Ancient Egyptians that they were able to use electricity and light. What is missing from this rendition of the story is that the Carving in no way represents HOW they were able to generate electricity – which would have been an achievement far beyond the pyramids for their time – and further more, this theory completely leaves out the writings passed on to us from the original artists which appear with the carving its self.

If you refer to Source 3: Reference 1 you can find a much better description of the actual depiction as we see it in the carvings. Bear in mind that this interpretation is in sync with the writings left behind by the original artists.



1. The "cable" is described in the text beside the depiction as a symbolic sun barge moving across the sky (in a form which is by no means unique to these carvings).

2. It seems to be a bit of a stretch to describe this as a cable, although I suppose you could argue that the movement of the sun mirrored the movement of electricity.

3. However, the "cable" is attached to what proponents describe as a "socket", but is in fact a lotus flower.

4 .This flower appears in this form all over Egypt, and is always a lotus flower. Furthermore, the text beside the depiction confirms that it is a lotus flower.

5. Unfortunately, it seems that modern eyes have seen what they want to see in an ancient scene without considering the text provided by the ancient people to explain exactly what they were doing.

6. In the carvings, Harsamtawy (a form of Horus known as Horus who joins the two lands), son of Hathor, takes the form of a serpent (although he also appears as a hawk).

7. According to one myth, Horus sprung into existence out of a lotus flower which blossomed in the watery abyss of Nun at dawn at the beginning of every year.

8. The "light-bulbs" are in fact lotus flower bulbs, mythologically giving birth to the snake.

9. Another panel shows the bulb opening into a lotus blossom and the snake standing erect in the centre as a representation of the god Horus.

10. On the southern wall of the last room, a falcon, preceded by a snake emerges from a lotus blossom within a boat.

As we can see from this evaluation of the text and known Ancient Egyptian mythology, these images do not, in fact, represent a light bulb. They represent something much more divine, which could be why the image also portrays the existence of other Gods as described in Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphs.


So as I pointed out earlier – if the Denderah light bulbs are any indication as to the existence of electric light bulbs in Ancient Egyptian culture – then the actual writings which accompany the carvings themselves, are proof enough to dispel such a notion. This is why the theory of the light bulb – as it pertains to this Denderah theory – is cast aside as anomalous and therefore not worth further study. Basically – it tells us a very ancient rendition of their own God’s “Christmas”, nothing more.






Questions for my Opponent:




Question 1


Inventions exist to meet a need. What would be some problems that Ancient Egyptians faced which would require them to seek alternate means of illumination, aside from the commonly themed torch on the wall?



Question 2


Certainly if artifacts exist which suggest the Egyptians had an electric light bulb, I would agree with you that further investigation is needed, but as the texts provided with the Denderah carvings show us, the carvings themselves are no such artifact.
If the Ancient Egyptians possessed the electric light bulb, certainly evidence of its existence would still be around today. Are there any theories OR artifacts which might suggest such a light bulbs existence?



Question 3


Are there any theories that exist today which attempt to describe how the Egyptians were to create the electricity used to power a light bulb?



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 11:14 AM
link   
Excellent. So in response to my first question you state:

"Simply put – you cannot. It is impossible to gauge the fullest extent of technology of any civilization if you disregard findings from that civilization as anomalous. To be truly unbiased, you have to take into consideration all findings especially when its from an ancient civilization. "

In that spirit and in the spirit of pursuing truth I hope we can consider and incorporate all findings both conventionally understood and unexplainable.

In response to my second question you reply:

"Yes. These glyphs appear everywhere in Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs."

Now to the best of my abilities I could not find this Djed glyph everywhere, however I could find numerous references with it. Mostly in conjunction with symbols of the sun, amongst other glyphs. The sun a source of power seems to be a reoccurring theme where the Djed is involved.

Now as to your first source reference 3, I would like to point out that when I checked out the links, one link directed to a website about animal domestication and the other link lead to a site about an anthropoid inner coffin. Upon seeking out the credentials of Melissa Littlefield Applegate, all I could find out was that she is a channeler who has been initiated by his holiness the Dali Lama. Upon further investigation I found that the Djed, while commonly accepted as representing stability, is also one of the most mysterious and least understood hieroglyphs. With this in mind it is difficult to understand how any definition of the Djed glyph can be commonly accepted.

The most notable Djed I was able to find would be in the Kings Chamber of the Great Pyramid. Unlike the Ivory Djeds of the First Dynasty tomb at Helwan, the Chamber itself is built as a Djed. When one views the Great Pyramid as a machine of some type that incorporates the principles of the hydraulic ram pump (amongst many other physical principles) ,it changes the meaning and purpose of the Djed. It in fact may well of been a power production center as stated in this Reference.


In response to the questions:

1.Inventions exist to meet a need. What would be some problems that Ancient Egyptians faced which would require them to seek alternate means of illumination, aside from the commonly themed torch on the wall?

Such problems might include the construction and wall writings in the many confined tombs of Egypt. With limited air supply a torch would be both impractical and dangerous to construction crews and wall writers. Whats more, the lack of soot on the majority of the tomb walls infers that no matter what the method of illumination was, fire was not used to light the Egyptians work areas.

2.Certainly if artifacts exist which suggest the Egyptians had an electric light bulb, I would agree with you that further investigation is needed, but as the texts provided with the Denderah carvings show us, the carvings themselves are no such artifact.
If the Ancient Egyptians possessed the electric light bulb, certainly evidence of its existence would still be around today. Are there any theories OR artifacts which might suggest such a light bulbs existence?

Light bulbs being the fragile things that they are, it is not inconceivable that few to no light bulbs from antiquity would survive to the present day. Now their are many theories from the legends of the Pharaohs light house to the modern day writings of Christopher Dunn. There are no hard artifacts that I am aware of however working from the Temple of Hathor Glyphs a working model of the Denderah light has been re-created as demonstrated at this link .


3.Are there any theories that exist today which attempt to describe how the Egyptians were to create the electricity used to power a light bulb?

Yes, many from a variety of researchers Including but not limited too, Erich Von Daniken, Christopher Dunn, Doug Elwell , just to name a few. One theory in particular of how the Egyptians could create electricity would be through Piezoelectricity.


And now a few Questions for my opponent.

Question 1: With a lack of soot in many decorated Egyptian buildings it is obvious torchlight was not used. This means some other form of illumination was used to light the work areas. While it is conceivable that mirrors could of been used for illumination , these would have to of been large industrial mirrors. Many smaller ancient Egyptian mirrors have survived to the present day. Can you list any large mirrors from Egyptian antiquity that have survived to the present day or any references to mirrors being used for the illumination of the ancient Egyptians?

Question 2: The Pharaohs light house was one of the seven wonders of the world. According to legend it could be seen from over 30 miles away and burn ships before the reached the shore. If this light house was not electrically powered then could you explain how or if, it is even possible to utilize fire to burn bright enough to be seen from a distance of 30 miles?

Question 3: All advanced cultures have buildings of research or academia. Schools, Libraries, scientific facilities etc. etc., With all the great achievements of the ancient Egyptians how temples of knowledge or areas where Egyptian scholars congratulated have been discovered?

Question 4: Do you think it is possible that the temple of Hathor could of been one of these areas of scientific study where the results of greater experiments adorned the walls rather than a tomb?



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 02:03 PM
link   

titorite v.s. Andrew Ender Wiggin – First Response




I will start by answering my opponents questions:


Answer to Question 1


As for the first part of this two part first question – “Can you list any large mirrors from Egyptian antiquity” –

no I cannot.



As for the second part of this two part first question – “Can I list any references to mirrors being used for the illumination of the ancient pyramids” -

No. I cannot. However – the theory rests on the idea that they did possess smaller hand sized mirrors, so it was possible that they could have incorporated the same technology on a larger scale. This is not the only theory for illumination however, further evaluation later.







Answer to Question 2


The Pharos Light house was among the tallest man-made structure for many centuries, and was identified as one of the Seven Wonders of the World by Antipater of Sidon.

Very tall building + night sky + large fire = 30 mile visibility.





Answer to Question 3

I think what my opponent is asking is “how many temples of knowledge or areas have been discovered”

There is no discernable answer to this question, because we are only left to speculate what a civilization 3000+ years ago could have used a – now – very desolate and barren room for.

Its easy to recognize that a room was used for burial – if there was a corpse. Its easy to recognize that a room was used for sacrifice if there are altars and text to accompany the notion.

First, you must prove your claim that All advanced cultures have buildings of research or academia applies to ancient cultures as well. The fact that the Egyptians left no descriptions behind as to how they were actually constructed further supports this. If rooms that were solely used for academia and scientific experiments existed in Ancient Egypt – and they are in some way labeled so – then we, as a modern civilization, have yet to find them.

Only speculation can prove what a room was used for outside the obvious of “burial chamber” and “place of worship” – as they are clearly labeled as such.


Answer to Question 4


Yes. I think that it is a possibility.


My First Response



My opponent makes the claim that

“With a lack of soot in many decorated Egyptian buildings it is obvious torchlight was not used.”

But this simply is not true. We know that the Egyptians were very advanced for their day. They took great pride in appearance, and adorned everything, even in death, with riches and wealth, gold and jewels. Why is it that they would leave behind “soot” so carelessly? If you manage to get soot from your fireplace all over your living room – would you leave it?

As for avoiding/removing soot from the temples themselves, there are actually very logical explanations and methods.

Mud. You simply line your ceilings with mud, the soot collects in the mud, you remove the mud after you’re done, and the problem is solved. If you are carving the ceilings – then you can use a covered lamp (as you can see from Source 1: Reference 1 the ancient Egyptians did, indeed, use oil lamps.



The Eygptians may have been using some sort of vegetable oil – which would produce a lot less soot. Intentionally? That’s another discussion. But it is a possibility to describe absence of soot, and it’s a realistic possibility – because of the proof we have to suggest they used vegetable oils.


My opponent also tells us :

Such problems might include the construction and wall writings in the many confined tombs of Egypt. With limited air supply a torch would be both impractical and dangerous to construction crews and wall writers. Whats more, the lack of soot on the majority of the tomb walls infers that no matter what the method of illumination was, fire was not used to light the Egyptians work areas.


But what we speculate about the construction of the pyramids certainly suggests that physical well being was not an issue of Ancient Egypt, there was no O.S.H.A. in the year 3000 B.C. So inferring that torches were not used because they could be harmful to the lungs and a Pharaoh’s slave certainly does not agree with the mindset of the times of which we speak.







Next, my opponent makes the claim that without electricity, it would not be possible to see the Light house from 30 miles away.

This is a matter for discussion, of course, but it does bring up another interesting theory. How is it possible to produce the electricity that would be required for such a feat, and even furthered… no evidence of any such power station exists. There are no wires, there are no nodes, there is no metal conductors, there’s nothing to suggest that electricity was used. Certainly in order for the power to reach the top – it had to travel through something. If this were possible – then what happened to the “something” of which electricity traveled, and what happened to the “something” that produced the massive amounts of electricity?



So we are left with the problem of “how did they carve and paint in pitch dark”

We haven’t ruled out oil lamps.
We haven’t ruled out candles.

Giant mirrors do not seem to be plausible

All known references to the electric light bulb in ancient Egypt, left to us by Egyptians, have been ruled out as a story as the birth of one of their gods.

For further study of the Denderah Carvings, let us evaluate a key piece of the argument. The squiggly line that some call a snake, and some call a filament for a light bulb.


In this first image, we see the figure in question as it appears in the Denderah Carvings.




In this image we see the same exact figure in a different carving, clearly representing a snake God on a boat. Pay special attention to the first image, and the relationship of the face of that image. Compare it to the second image, and you can see very distinct similarities. The Denderah Carvings depict a snake. The text provided with the carvings themselves backs this claim.


So – if we choose to take a hypothetical route for a moment, and lets pretend that all of the above are ruled out.


  • No electricity
  • No torches
  • No mirrors
  • No candles
  • No Lamps


Then how could they possibly have made all of those carvings inside the pyramids in the pitch dark?

I propose that the answer is rather quite simple: The carvings were made on each block prior to being put into place.

Is it really outside the realm of possibilities that they would carve the immaculate images into stone before setting them into place? When building a pyramid, its most definite that there was planning involved as to where each stone should go – and how big each should be, why would it not be appropriate to further that slightly and say that one “Stone A” you would do carvings for the interior of the pyramid?


When all is said and done – we have to examine what we know, in order to seek out answers to questions like “did the Ancient Egyptians have an electric light bulb?”.


The ancient Egyptians have left behind nearly flawless preserved bodies in the form of mummies. We have pottery, hand mirrors, statues, gold, jewelry, etc etc etc, left from this marvelous civilization.

What we don’t have is a single shred of evidence to support the notion that they had a light bulb.

There is no metal socket.
There is no wiring.
There is no source of electricity.

The only conceivable item in existence that even supports this notion is the Denderah Carvings. It is from the visual representation and a “wishful thinking” see what you want to see type of mindset, that we can guess that they are holding a light bulb in those carvings.

But that interpretation is only possible if you leave out the writings on the actual carvings themselves completely spelling out what story the carvings are telling us.

Just because the carvings represent something we could closely associate with a light bulb, does not make it so. The writings with the carving prove that.


Questions for my Opponent:

Question 1


If the Pharos’ Light Tower was indeed powered by electricity, why is there no sign of a power source, anywhere?

Question 2


A light bulb for such a monumental task (as the light house) would surely leave behind some trace of its existence, be it a socket, a plug, wires, what have you. Do any such traces exist?

Question 3


As the official theory describes it: can you please explain for us why there are striking similarities in the snake God on a boat and the “filament” in the “light bulb” on the Denderah carvings? Refer to the image links above for visual definition of “striking similarities”

Question 4


How is the presence lotus flower at the end of the object you call a light bulb, in the Denderah carvings, explained? What I mean is – is this picture telling us that the light bulb plugs into a flower? No theory that I’ve seen personally that supports the idea of an electric light bulb, will touch the presence of the Lotus flower being present giving birth to a snake.

Question 5



In the actual Dendera carvings seen in this external image link


We are able to see the carving in question. My question is – if the Djed is actually representing an insulator for the electrical current on the right side – then why is there a completely different image supporting the “light bulb” on the left side? Wouldnt both need an insulator to work properly?



posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 06:25 PM
link   
My second response.

I believe we are in agreement that mirrors for illumination would of been impractical. Not to mention the lack of any evidence or writings suggesting the use of mirror illumination.

As for the Pharaohs light house, after some researching I found that your average fire illuminated light house had a visibility range of ten to twenty miles and that is with triple order Fresnel lenses. However, once mecury vapor and other types of electric bulbs over took fire illuminated light houses the visibility ranges increased to ranges of 30 , 40 and sometimes even 50 miles.

Now when I spoke of academia or "learning centers" what I had in mind is a place of innovation. Plato had the Academy , Archimedes had his workshop, The world used to have the library of Alexandria, and so on and so forth. It seems to be the trend that when a civilization or society grows to a certain population size that they begin to encourage the congregation of there brightest minds so that those that are smart may learn off one another and become even smarter or innovate even more. In Egypt we see a certain lack of this according to the Egyptologists. Of course these Egyptologists are the same folks that insist the Sphinx only has wind erosion despite geologists proof of long term running water erosion. With all the great monuments and mathematical understanding , I find it highly doubtful that this knowledge was passed on to others by word of mouth. It is much more logical to presume that the Egyptians had fine schools where they taught their best knowledge to their brightest pupils.

Now, when I spoke of torches being impractical due to a lack of air supply I, had no thought of any humans well being, not slave nor paid worker. In my mind it does not make sense to lose your best artisans or skilled craftsman if you can avoid it. Quality workers are an asset to anyone but a dead man does very little work. So as the built, painted, and chiseled in rooms without sunlight something had to provide illumination. And with today's technology we are able to find the smallest trace amounts mud and soot inside the nooks and carnies. Yet I can not find any research with evidence of mud or soot inside the Egyptian temples and tombs except in the top of the Grand Galley of the Great Pyramid, which has no hieroglyphics to speak of upon that chambers walls.

I am not sure about the story of the birth of one of their gods being depicted at Hathor. Lacking a formal education in the subject matter I can not translate the hieroglyphs but I can recognize things like human figures and animal forms. Inside the bulb a snake is clearly perceivable. This does not automatically mean that it is the representation of a god. It is just as possible that the form of the snake was chosen for the filament because of its association with knowledge of which light also represents knowledge.

In the following image
we can see more of the bulbs and Djeds. Some have arms out stretched and some do not. Symbolically thinking, the Djeds with arms out stretched look to be giving something to the bulbs. Perhaps electricity. You may also note that these "lotus flowers" seem to have very long stems. These stems may not be conduits of electricity but gas for the bulb itself. They hieroglyphic images of Hathor, may well be the story of the bulbs invention and purpose.

Also, this work is meant to be viewed. Things are written down and recorded to be read. In a pitch black room with no trace of carbon one must wonder how these writings were meant to be read and why they were placed in rooms without light. Knowledge is power and power is coveted. What better way to protect your sacred knowledge then by putting it in a room with out light. And should anyone violate the dark room with a torch then the evidence would be there in the form of ash or soot and the authorities of the time could take action upon the carbon soot evidence.

You brought the theory of carving and painting the blocks before setting them. This seems like an impractical method. The risk of damaging the artisans work in transit would be too great in my mind to risk. Not only would you be risking the random accident but you would also be opening yourself up to the vandalism of your average disgruntled citizen.


AND NOW, to answer your questions:

1.If the Pharos’ Light Tower was indeed powered by electricity, why is there no sign of a power source, anywhere?

It could be the power source in question consists of an apparatus we are unfamiliar with and therefor would be unrecognizable to us.

2. A light bulb for such a monumental task (as the light house) would surely leave behind some trace of its existence, be it a socket, a plug, wires, what have you. Do any such traces exist?

Due to earthquakes and stone scavenging virtually no trace at all of the Pharaohs light house remains.

3.As the official theory describes it: can you please explain for us why there are striking similarities in the snake God on a boat and the “filament” in the “light bulb” on the Denderah carvings? Refer to the image links above for visual definition of “striking similarities”

As I stated previously, I believe the similarities have to do with the snake being seen as a source of knowledge aswell as light being seen as a source of knowledge.

4.How is the presence lotus flower at the end of the object you call a light bulb, in the Denderah carvings, explained? What I mean is – is this picture telling us that the light bulb plugs into a flower? No theory that I’ve seen personally that supports the idea of an electric light bulb, will touch the presence of the Lotus flower being present giving birth to a snake.


Again, I would offer the the flower and stem before it is supplying the gas to the light bulb. The flower my be a trap valve meant to ensure the right flow a gas... a light bulb with adjustable illumination if you will.

5.My question is – if the Djed is actually representing an insulator for the electrical current on the right side – then why is there a completely different image supporting the “light bulb” on the left side? Wouldnt both need an insulator to work properly?

The arms may symbolize something being given. The Djed with arms outstretched may mean a Djed turned on and giving the electricity needed for the light. The Djed without arms may symbolize a bulb that is not turned on but still present.


OK my turn for questions!

Question 1: When the Temple of Hathor was first discovered was any evidence of candle wax, ash, soot, or any other by-product of fire found anywhere with in the complex?

Question 2: Around the area of the hieroglyphs are there any spots to place a torch?

Question 3: The Kings Chamber of the Great Pyramid is constructed like a Djed. Can it create Piezoelectricity? I mean is it a possibility?



posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Second Supporting Post



First allow me to start off by pointing out that in my last post, my 5th question was



if the Djed is actually representing an insulator for the electrical current on the right side – then why is there a completely different image supporting the “light bulb” on the left side? Wouldnt both need an insulator to work properly?



Which of course refers to the image which is linked and contained within the actual question its self. My opponent did not answer the question outright, but instead gave an answer for an entirely different and unasked question.


My opponent’s response was:

The arms may symbolize something being given. The Djed with arms outstretched may mean a Djed turned on and giving the electricity needed for the light. The Djed without arms may symbolize a bulb that is not turned on but still present.



My opponents answer tries to suggest that within the provided image are two Djeds. But there is only one. The image which appears on the left is obviously not a Djed, it is a human depicted with outstretched arms. Just so the record reflects the unanswered question.





Now I will answer my opponent’s questions:

Answer to Question 1

When the Temple of Hathor was first discovered was any evidence of candle wax, ash, soot, or any other by-product of fire found anywhere with in the complex?



There is not a single link I can find that would suggest there was evidence of any candle wax, ash, soot, or any other by-product of fire upon its discovery.


There is however, many accounts of soot being found in other area’s outside the specific realm of “beneath the Temple of Hathor” as we can see in Source 2: reference 1 which contains this image as proof

Exert from the aforementioned link about the picture provided:



Well, I have been in Egypt several times now, and I never had a problem to detect soot in pyramids and tombs. As an example here the soot covered burial chamber walls of the Red Pyramid of Dahschur






Answer to Question 2



Around the area of the hieroglyphs are there any spots to place a torch?

I cannot find any testimony or pictures which would suggest there are “holes” for a torch to slide into. I also cannot find anything that says there is not.


Answer to Question 3

The Kings Chamber of the Great Pyramid is constructed like a Djed. Can it create Piezoelectricity? I mean is it a possibility?

Certainly. When studying the realms of what we don’t fully understand, nearly anything is possible.
Is it plausible ?? That’s another question all together.





My second support argument



Possible and plausible are two entirely different concepts – no doubt. What we do know about the Ancient Egyptian civilization is that they were a great and powerful people.

Some things are spelled out for us – and we are able to apply clues left behind to interpret the meaning of many things. Other things are mysterious – and we are left to apply what we do know about their culture and way of life to the mysterious objects of antiquity.

In the case of the Electric Light bulb – we are left with definitive proof that the argument doesn’t exist to favor the idea. The Dendera Carvings are just like all other Egyptian carvings: They tell a story. What story do the Dendera Carvings tell us?

Well – upon first glance, just LOOKING at the panels of stone, it is very easy to interpret what you see as a light bulb. After all, it does mimic very much what we today have as light bulbs. But that also suggests that we today have a perfected form of the light bulb, one that has never had to evolve and change, aside from the newer “soft serve ice cream swirl” light bulbs.

Those who support these Dendera Carvings as proof of light bulbs are doing nothing more than willingly leaving out the text (hieroglyphics) that are accompanied with the carvings themselves. Think of these panels as editorial cartoons. They are a symbolic picture representing many things – and we are given direction to steer our imagination with the subtext contained within the image.

Without taking into account the text accompanying this Dendera Carving – you could interpret that you are looking at a light bulb, no doubt.
I will draw a comparative argument to show you of what im talking about.

Take a look at a $1.00 bill (USD) (source 1: reference 1)

On the front side you have a picture of George Washington, with multiple markings denoting it’s worth $1.00 – more importantly off to the right of George Washington you have a big “ONE” (very relevant for this argument)


On the back side we see the key words “In God We Trust” with a great big “ONE” right underneath it. To either side you have the all seeing eye – and the eagle from the presidential seal.

Now – lets say 5,000 years from now – after the Great War, or the Great Flood or the _____ (insert apocalyptic theory here) someone rediscovers the American Culture in the United States.

They would know very little about US history (same as we currently know very little about Egyptian history) so it would be very easy for these futuristic archaeologists to draw numerous types of conclusions based on the discovery of our dollar.

If you were to apply the same logic used to come to the conclusion of “the Egyptians had the electric light bulb” from the Dendera Carvings – you could say that the future Archaeologists would say that our God was George Washington, because it has a picture of him on the front, with “ONE” to the right of his picture which they could argue would designate his title in other American literature as “The One” (most notably the bible)

Which is further argued by the back of the bill, which could be misconstrued as saying “In God We Trust – THE ONE”

We – of course – know the sheer absurdity of this line of thinking. It exaggerates, to a great length, our culture and our mindset as American citizens. Surely, George Washington is greatly revered, but not immortalized as *the* God in which we trust.

But if they referenced our U.S. History books and applied his picture with the picture in the books – you would see that he is a president, and that we put presidents on our currency, not Gods.

Same concept applies to the Dendera Carvings. It’s nothing more than a skewed visual interpretation that selectively leaves out the text provided with it.

Without the text, you are left with an image, which you are free to interpret how you will.

When I first saw these carvings, my thought was that it was the plant its self which was the light bulb, and the extruding bubble was the illustrative representation of “light” emitted from the bulb.

Of course the “main argument” differs from my first impression of the carving. And the text provided with the carving proves that this is indeed a story of something all together different.
You cannot judge a book by its cover. The words inside tell the story.

Questions for my Opponent:




Question 1




We have, so far, talked about many different theories that would support the Egyptians having electricity – but have almost entirely avoided the Light Bulb its self. Are the Dendera carvings, located beneath the Temple of Hathor, the only visual, or written, clues left behind from the Ancient Egyptians which would support the idea of the Ancient Egyptians possessing a light bulb.





Question 2




In your last post you had talked about the credibility of the sources I provided. I am curious as to what credibility the sources you provide bring to the table? What evidence to they use to support their claim of a light bulbs existence in Ancient Egypt?




Question 3



In reference to the text provided with the Dendera Carvings (Sources here… Source 3: Reference 1) what explanations are by the people who support the theory that the light bulbs could have existed in ancient Egypt, to explain the translations of the text provided to us by the original artists?

Question 4



A widely accepted explanation of the symbol of the Djed is that it represents the spine of Osiris. We know from studying Ancient Egyptian writings that the Egyptians believe that semen was created in the spinal column, and traveled to the testicles, in order to be ejected to create life.

If the writings that accompany the Dendera Carvings are telling us the truth – then could it not be that the appearance of the Djed is actually depicting that Osiris is helping give birth to the snake God through the Lotus blossom (as Ancient Egyptian mythology suggests)




question 5



A widely accepted meaning for the pyramids and temples is that they are burial chambers for the sacred rules of Ancient Egypt. We carry the same forms of reverence for our loved ones who pass on to the other side. Your argument seems to rest on the idea that since soot is not found in bountiful quantities, then alternate means of illumination must be the explanation.
Why would the Ancient Egyptians choose to leave any possible traces of soot behind to potentially desecrate the tombs of their sacred rulers?



posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Interesting topic and I am eager to respond but I am gonna need that 24 hour extension.



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 11:34 AM
link   
Sorry about the delay. As you can imagine life happens.. and As life is an ongoing process the quality of this last response may not reflect the quality of my previous replies. So if you were wondering if my grammatical errors could get worse or if I had another answers for unasked questions the answer is indeed yes.

Now I want to answer your question 5 again. The short answer is no. because the glass is already an insulator I believe.

Unfortunately life insists that I must be more brief. To that end I am going to skip further commentary and just answer you questions.





Question 1. We have, so far, talked about many different theories that would support the Egyptians having electricity – but have almost entirely avoided the Light Bulb its self. Are the Dendera carvings, located beneath the Temple of Hathor, the only visual, or written, clues left behind from the Ancient Egyptians which would support the idea of the Ancient Egyptians possessing a light bulb.

The answer is No. I found a number references pointing to the ahnk on top of the Djed providing what looked to be light... this type of stylized glyph appears in a few places and peaked my interest quite a bit.

Question 2.
In your last post you had talked about the credibility of the sources I provided. I am curious as to what credibility the sources you provide bring to the table? What evidence to they use to support their claim of a light bulbs existence in Ancient Egypt?

Curiosity is great! You will need it to find the answer as to the validity of the sources I cited because as far as I know they are mostly solid sources. I just thought that wiki source was kinda....not the best, in so many words. And I do not know what if any evidence my sources use to support their claims... other than the re-created light bulb based of the hathro glyphs.. I am not sure how you would consider a working model?


Question 3 In reference to the text provided with the Dendera Carvings (Sources here… Source 3: Reference 1) what explanations are by the people who support the theory that the light bulbs could have existed in ancient Egypt, to explain the translations of the text provided to us by the original artists?

Again I apologize but for the sake of berivity I must say "shrug" Exellent question, Forgive me for ignoring it.

Question 4 A widely accepted explanation of the symbol of the Djed is that it represents the spine of Osiris. We know from studying Ancient Egyptian writings that the Egyptians believe that semen was created in the spinal column, and traveled to the testicles, in order to be ejected to create life.

If the writings that accompany the Dendera Carvings are telling us the truth – then could it not be that the appearance of the Djed is actually depicting that Osiris is helping give birth to the snake God through the Lotus blossom (as Ancient Egyptian mythology suggests)

I have no idea. After reading the translation you provided for the previous question I am not sure how you get that interpretation... but again I did not have time to read all of that so the explination maybe in further reading....

Question 5 A widely accepted meaning for the pyramids and temples is that they are burial chambers for the sacred rules of Ancient Egypt. We carry the same forms of reverence for our loved ones who pass on to the other side. Your argument seems to rest on the idea that since soot is not found in bountiful quantities, then alternate means of illumination must be the explanation.
Why would the Ancient Egyptians choose to leave any possible traces of soot behind to potentially desecrate the tombs of their sacred rulers?


Short answer is, If you use fire regularly you can not hide the soot/ carbon evidence. Fire creates carbon which no mater what, leaves its evidence when burned over long periods of time in a variety of ways. Soot on steps then yes fire was there. No soot, carbon, proof of regularly washed alls nothing inside near the glyphs with no means of hanging torches... that kinda raises more questions and is not a short answer.


OK as I am late but eager I shall close this portion of the debate with out questions. Time insists that I attend to other things so I shall let the bulk of my debate rest on my first few responses and my closing response. Very cool experience and I thank my opponent, the mods, and the audience for your attention and appreciation.



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Third Response



I’d like to start by trying to clarify question #5 from a few posts ago... It was no longer an official question after the first attempt – but I just want to point out that my opponent seems to be unable to answer the question – and instead keeps offering us run-around-the-bush style attempts.




The Question


In the actual Dendera carvings seen in this external image link



We are able to see the carving in question. My question is – if the Djed is actually representing an insulator for the electrical current on the right side – then why is there a completely different image supporting the “light bulb” on the left side? Wouldn’t both need an insulator to work properly?



This question exists because one of the main supporting arguments that my opponent offers us to try and prove that the Egyptians had a light bulb, is that the symbol “Djed” is actually a reference to an insulator used in a light bulb, simply because it looks like a modern day piece of technology.



My opponent’s first attempt to answer the question was:

The arms may symbolize something being given. The Djed with arms outstretched may mean a Djed turned on and giving the electricity needed for the light. The Djed without arms may symbolize a bulb that is not turned on but still present.


But there are not two Djeds. My opponent seems to have been looking at a different image. But this answer certainly alludes to calling the Djed an insulator, as my opponent says that when the “Djed is turned on it is giving the electricity needed for the light”





My opponent’s second attempt to answer the same question was:

The short answer is no. because the glass is already an insulator I believe.


But we have already seen the arguments that say the Djed is the insulator for the light bulb. A modern day light bulb is insulated by the glass its self, no doubt. So if the Djed is not the insulator, then what other purpose could it have by being carved into this stone slab?




Again – we have to reference the descriptions left behind for us by the actual artists themselves. You can refer to my opening statement in this debate for the “external source” entry which clearly tells us what the writings next to this carving are telling us.



Now I would like to respond to some of the answers to my questions that my opponent has offered us in his last thread:
My Question was :


Are the Dendera carvings, located beneath the Temple of Hathor, the only visual, or written, clues left behind from the Ancient Egyptians which would support the idea of the Ancient Egyptians possessing a light bulb.




His answer was:



The answer is No. I found a number references pointing to the ahnk on top of the Djed providing what looked to be light... this type of stylized glyph appears in a few places and peaked my interest quite a bit.



Whatever references my opponent may have found – we have yet to receive a link to support this claim in any of his previous posts


My second Question was:



In your last post you had talked about the credibility of the sources I provided. I am curious as to what credibility the sources you provide bring to the table? What evidence to they use to support their claim of a light bulbs existence in Ancient Egypt?




To which my opponent responds:



Curiosity is great! You will need it to find the answer as to the validity of the sources I cited because as far as I know they are mostly solid sources.




Once again – my opponent makes a claim – but issues nothing to back his claim with. When you make an argument – is it not proper to provide evidence to back it up? If the sources of my opponents argument are credible – there surely is suitable proof which exists to support the idea…






My third question:


In reference to the text provided with the Dendera Carvings (Sources here… Source 3: Reference 1) what explanations are by the people who support the theory that the light bulbs could have existed in ancient Egypt, to explain the translations of the text provided to us by the original artists?




And titorites answer:


Again I apologize but for the sake of berivity I must say "shrug" Exellent question, Forgive me for ignoring it.


So we do have an admission of no answer. Proof enough that says any theory that suggests the Ancient Egyptians had an electric light bulb, only exists by omitting the FACTS inscribed into the walls by the same Ancient Egyptians who carved the pictures we see, like on the Dendera walls.

These arguments that support the idea that the Egyptians had the light bulb are deliberately cherry picking "facts" and presenting them as a possibility...but what intetions would they have to omit the writings left by the Ancient Egyptian artists?

To ignore the writings left for us to read in favor of supporting a theory of Ancient electricity completely goes against all known forms of modern science, and instead delves into the realm of literary works in all Sci-Fi novels which exist today. The idea of Electricity in ancient Egypt certainly makes for a great story – and makes for lots of day dreaming – but there is simply no PROOF to back up the theory.



Next Question:


If the writings that accompany the Dendera Carvings are telling us the truth – then could it not be that the appearance of the Djed is actually depicting that Osiris is helping give birth to the snake God through the Lotus blossom (as Ancient Egyptian mythology suggests)




My opponent answers:


I have no idea. After reading the translation you provided for the previous question I am not sure how you get that interpretation... but again I did not have time to read all of that so the explination maybe in further reading....



In order to come to any conclusions about the writings that are left behind with the Dendera carvings – you have to apply everything we know about Ancient Egyptian history. We know that the Djed is a mysterious object, but we DO know from other writings and artifacts, for sure, that the Djed sometimes represents the spine of Osiris. (please refer to my previous threads for sources to back that up)


So – if the Djed represents the Spine of Osiris, then you can see how one may come to the conclusion of his “place” given by the artists in this scene that depicts a snake being born from a lotus blossom (also, very abundant in Ancient Egyptian mythology) – again refer to my previous posts for sources to back that up.



Last question:


Why would the Ancient Egyptians choose to leave any possible traces of soot behind to potentially desecrate the tombs of their sacred rulers?



To which my opponent responds:


Short answer is, If you use fire regularly you can not hide the soot/ carbon evidence. Fire creates carbon which no mater what, leaves its evidence when burned over long periods of time in a variety of ways. Soot on steps then yes fire was there. No soot, carbon, proof of regularly washed alls nothing inside near the glyphs with no means of hanging torches... that kinda raises more questions and is not a short answer.



But, from what we know today – we can tell that hiding soot/carbon is not impossible. We can clean our fireplaces and make them like new again with simple cleaners from the store and a little elbow grease.

Certainly to suggest that the Egyptians didn’t have the means to clean soot off of the ground – but did possess something much more sophisticated and technologically advanced as Electricity seems to be a very peculiar conundrum.

They couldn’t clean soot, but they could harness electricity? Even if removal of soot was enough after its had time to set in – what about cleaning it up like you would sweep it off your kitchen floor?
Soot is not permanent the second it hits the floor.

The Egyptians also had oil lamps (refer to my previous posts for sources to back this claim) and if burning vegetable oils – they would have produced dramatically less amounts of soot which could easily be maintained. Or even still – what if these images were carved on the stones before they were ever set into place?

The possibility certainly exists – and does seem a little more in line with Ancient Egyptian technology than something as modern as domesticated electricity.

Once again – we have talked about electricity and not the light bulb.









Questions for my opponent:




Question 1



Other than the Dendera carvings – can you show us other evidence that proves that the electric light bulb existed in Ancient Egypt?




Question 2



You have stated that you don’t believe the Djed is the insulator in the Dendera Carvings, because the glass its self is the insulator. (I agree with you)

But if it is not an insulator, and it does not represent the spine of Osiris, then what other explanation is given by people who support your side of this argument?






Question 3



I have, in my last few posts, provided interpretations of the Dendera carvings from my own perspective, as well as people in the field who agree with my side of the argument.

I have shown you what these same people give us as a translation for the writings that accompany these very carvings being discussed.

My question is: Can you show us what proponents for your side of the argument offer as a translation of the written information provided with the same images?



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   
To close my statement on this I would like to quote the first answer and question in this debate.


Answer to Question 1:

How can we judge the level of a cultures technology when artifacts from said culture are disregarded as anomalous and therefore not worth further study?

Simply put – you cannot. It is impossible to gauge the fullest extent of technology of any civilization if you disregard findings from that civilization as anomalous. To be truly unbiased, you have to take into consideration all findings especially when its from an ancient civilization.


In this we have the heart of the matter. The modern Egyptian academic community trusted to evaluate the truth of the history of their area of expertise, are doing a less than perfect job. We have aerodynamic models, Glyphs that clearly point to something other than what we are told is the translation, Method of building we still do not understand in this Digital age, what we do not have is unbiased scholars seeking to understand truth.

By no means is this a condemnation of my opponent. It is just a critical examination of all of our references. Experts who value profit above knowledge. And when the rare scholar goes against the mainstream academic thought, those in positions of seniority have a tendency discredit finds that are to radical to be "accepted". The Great Pyramid is still seen as a tomb when it is clearly not. The Sphinx has water erosion on it but that remains in dispute. Weather or not they had the electric light is left onto us to decide for ourselves.

AS to the last of my opponents questions I shall answer thus:

Question one:

Other than the Dendera carvings – can you show us other evidence that proves that the electric light bulb existed in Ancient Egypt?

Perhaps. As I mentioned before I had seen some other interesting things but I would recommend a google search. My apologies for not being able to show you myself.

Question two:
You have stated that you don’t believe the Djed is the insulator in the Dendera Carvings, because the glass its self is the insulator. (I agree with you)

But if it is not an insulator, and it does not represent the spine of Osiris, then what other explanation is given by people who support your side of this argument?

Other explanations include the theory that it is the power source.

Question 3:
Can you show us what proponents for your side of the argument offer as a translation of the written information provided with the same images?

No.


In closing I would like to thank Andrew E Wiggin for such fine stimulating debate and memory shock for hosting this. My apologies for cutting my answers shorter but I assure they were still well thought out.

Be well.

Titorite



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Closing Argument



Well there ya have it folks. You’ve seen the evidence given to us by my opponent which he claims is sufficient to prove that the Ancient Egyptians had the electric light bulb.



Before I go into that a little further, I’d like to say that this is a very exciting debate. I love the topic, and even though I disagree that they had electricity or even a light bulb, I must admit that it certainly is an enriching thought, that can make for hours of day dreaming.



But an Ancient Light bulb is just that – it’s a day dream. The topic for this debate was to argue that the Ancient Egyptians had an electric light bulb. But we see no proof.



The only proof that has been brought to the table is what we see in the Dendera Carvings with an image which resembles a light bulb.

But proponents of the “electric light bulb” theory are only able to use these carvings as PROOF by completely ignoring the writings that accompany the carvings themselves.





Cherry picking “facts” in order to suit a theory is not a sound scientific process. It makes for a great Sci-Fi novel – but doesn’t make for a great scientific theory which is based on facts. Because its not based on facts at all. It’s based on disregarding the very facts of the argument. How can you “prove” something by choosing to ignore concrete facts about it?



I gave the example earlier about the 1 dollar bill, and how, 5000 years from now, Future Archaeologists could just as easily misinterpret our current rendition of God as George Washington by taking the same approach to our Dollar, as my opponent and those who agree with him, take to the Ancient Electric Light bulb.

My opponent has presented other claims that he says supports his side of the argument, but could not produce a single result to back a single claim.


However, it was a very good debate. I do wish my opponent had more time to dedicate to the debate before the challenge was issued – this topic would have made for a very interesting argument…


No matter which “side” you personally agree with – I ask you to base your decision off of the facts and how they were presented.



One side presents you with a carving on a wall and chooses to try and blind to you to the text which accompanies the carving

While the other side shows you what is written there, and why it disproves the carvings as proof of a “light bulb”
So, if the answer to the topic of “The Ancient Egyptians had the Electric Light Bulb” can be justified by trying to conceal and hide factual evidence in order to back the claim, then it is very easy to say that they had the light bulb.



Was it possible they had a light bulb?
If the Universe is truly infinite, then so must be the possibilities, so sure, it is possible.


Is it plausible that the Ancient Egyptians had an electric light bulb? Absolutely not.

And there is not a shred of evidence which support the idea that the Ancient Egyptians had a light bulb. My opponent even concurs through his answer to the following question:




Can you show us what proponents for your side of the argument offer as a translation of the written information provided with the same images?


To which my opponent answered


No...





And most importantly



The question




Other than the Dendera carvings – can you show us other evidence that proves that the electric light bulb existed in Ancient Egypt?



To which my opponent answers:


Perhaps. As I mentioned before I had seen some other interesting things but I would recommend a Google search. My apologies for not being able to show you myself.








However, the burden of proof rests upon my opponent to bring forth evidence which supports his claim. I have made the Google searches, and the only theory I come across, time and time again – is the Dendera Carvings.




So I say again (one last time) if the Dendera carvings are only “proof” if you intentionally ignore the text provided with them from the Carvers themselves – then how can you make a credible argument from this that supports the Electric Light Bulb?




My opponents argument seems to rest on the illogical theory of Absence of proof is not proof of absence


But – we know that Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof.





Its no different than staring up at the clouds on a summer day and seeing what appears to be a horse.


By taking the “ Absence of proof is not proof of absence approach – you could make the endless argument that the image in the clouds is actually representative of a spiritual link to a horse God from 5200 B.C.
But its only when you realize that the FACT is all you are staring at is just water in a gaseous form combined with dust particles in a highly intensive state of energy.



And that your brain is doing nothing more than seeking out recognizable patterns in the random shapes of that the clouds represent depending on which perspective you look at them from.

Which is why you would see a Horse, and the person next to you would see a bird.


All it boils down to is a different perspective and different expectations. But its still the same set of gaseous clouds that never changed in the first place.






I leave the facts for the judges to consider when making their decision for a victor… and I hope that we have made this an interesting discussion for you all – and you have walked away having learned something new from it.



I thank my opponent for issuing the challenge to me for a “round 2” of this topic. I had been looking forward to debating it with my Tournament Opponent, Jezus, but it appears Jezus seems to have forgotten to set his alarm.





I give my tremendous thanks to MemoryShock for allowing titorite and I to debate this topic in a round 2, despite all the other things that MemoryShock involves himself in for the greater good of ATS, he still makes time for a simple challenge debate.





And I thank you – our audience – for helping support this thread and the member debates forum.



Without an audience, we’d be two simple guys arguing back and forth with nobody to tell us who’s doing a good job and who isn’t.




It’s been a great debate, and I look forward to the Judges response.



posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 11:45 PM
link   
I too have been looking forward to the judges decision. Me and Andrew have been looking forward to it for awhile now. Not trying to rush anyone here just saying that we are both eager to get a result. Especially me as this is my first match ever.



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 10:26 AM
link   
The winner by majority decision is Andrew E. Wiggin. The judges comments:



Andrew E. Wiggins is the winner.

Titorite and Andrew both had concise arguments, and fairly valid explanations for their viewpoints.

Andrew took the lead with his documentation showing that these "light bulbs" are actually representations of the birth of a god (literally the formation and birth of 'stability' in a religious based society). Not only did he provide significant evidence for this, he also explained his point logically, and equivocally.

Titorite presented a strong argument for their viewpoints, and a good first debate for a debater. They fell into the same hole I (no body knows me...) fall into on occasion. Titorite argued with their opinion as opposed to the facts available to them. I felt they believed what they were saying, but that wasn't enough for me to believe as well.

A great effort on a first debate for Titorite, and a well rounded argument for Andrew E. Wiggins.

Also kudos to both on an intriguing debate topic.

Keep up the activity, titorite. you will be an asset to the ATS Debate forums...





I'd first like to thank both titorite and Andrew E. Wiggin for participating in this challenge match. Also, I'd like to thank Memoryshock for pointing me onto this debate to judge. You guys debated a hard topic that is difficult to fight in either direction.

titorite,

You gave a great introduction, and even kicked it off with some really good supporting evidence. The glyphs look to me too to be those of a light bulb, upon first inspection.

You asked pertinent questions of Andrew, and you answered the ones given to you in the beginning very well, and even had some links to lend credence to your argument.

However, starting at your 3rd reply, you began to have issues with keeping up with the debate. While I can totally understand the problems experienced by real-life events, and their impacts on the debate, when you make a reply, it would be best to provide sources for your evidence. If you had time to look up the answers to these questions, then there shouldn't have been a problem with providing the links to your supporting evidence, now should there?

In my opinion, this hurt you significantly.


Andrew,

You started off strong, and you quickly established what you were aiming to accomplish. You answered titorite's questions with sourced materials, and then went about calling into question the credibility of his sources. While this is a commonly-used tactic, it proved to hurt you as much as it helped you.

You asked great questions, and made it clear what you were aiming to accomplish by asking them. One point that I found especially important was the point you made about the snake in the tube, and it's relation with the other snake.

I'm surprised that titorite didn't pick up on this subtle difference, and utilize it to his advantage, but I'll ask the pertinent question here:

Why in the Dendera glyphs do we see the snake in the tube, and yet in the other one, we don't see a tube? In the Dendera glyph as well, we see the snake at an angle, while in the other one, we see the snake standing vertical. What is the significance of their respective positions, and the presence of the "tube" around the Dendera snake?

In hieroglyphics, position and portrayal determine intent. How do we overcome this seeming lack of clarity?

In the end though, it is my opinion that Andrew E. Wiggin put up the better of the arguments. He used the sources he had strongly, and his opponent couldn't refute the claims that he made, due to real-life issues, as well as a lack of supporting evidence.

A brave fight by both members, but Andrew, Congratulations!!!

titorite,

Keep up the good work man!! You're going to be a major player in the next round of debates I feel. If you can devote the time and gather the proper sources, and cite them, you'll be nearly unstoppable. You had me until the middle when you had extenuating circumstances.

Quite a good fight though, for all that was going on man. Next time, do what I do. Have a list of sources available before you even begin. That way, there's no problem linking to them mid-post.

All in all, I loved this!! Kudos to both members for one heck of a fight!!!



new topics
 
4

log in

join