It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by theAymen
Originally posted by Byrd
Could you point to the texts that show that he was known as a god at the same time Djoser was (he actually served several pharaohs)...[or]... hieroglyphs that show he's worshipped before the time of his death?
imhotep was the first to class himself as a Demi-god, son of ptah
khnum (god of nile/rebirth) was there before the time of imhotep, yes.....but, Imhotep started the” cult of khnum”, after the droughts, on the source of the nile, in Elephantine.
The teachings from this cult later became the cult of imhotep in the new kingdom.. the make up of the cult became what was basically a group of covenant priests who ultimately controlled Egypt. They influenced pharaoh, the people and the state....Though to take the throne, proved difficult....they needed proof of their divinity...
even soliman used this template of imhotep
ok firstly...Osiris – is the only god concerned with the divine right to rule by pharaoh – he wears the Atef of upper Egypt. Horus`s crown was worn by new kingdom pharaohs who classed themselves as demigods...sons of gods like horus was. the worship of ra coinsided with its rays possesing a ruler on earth. sungod.
. It's a character in a fantasy novel. (and that's not an Egyptian name, anyway. Nor is Tetisheri, to the best of my knowledge)
haha...taharraqa was a 25th dynasty ku*hite pharaoh. from upper egypt..the last real pharaoh...why would you think he was a fantasy character lol.
The hitties were defeated by the end of the 18th dynasty. In the 19th dynasty Seti1 ventured to destroy them. But there priests were captured and lived under his rule within the state, mainly to build his temple. He brought them back due to their extensive knowledge which they took out of Egypt prior, if anything he introduced them back into the state.
His Sons Wife, nefertari, an upper Egyptian was the cause of the major exodus of the hitties powerful priests. It became apparent to nefartari that these preists were attempting to outbreed the upper Egyptian lineage out from the crown by cross breeding with the pharaoh. though ramsees marrying nefartari annoyed the preists. Which is why they killed one of his first born.
??.... Ay ruled for a brief period then horemheb took over.... as those two were non-royals they went about starting the19th dynasty with ramsees1.
my point was Ramsees2 was affirming his soverignty by marrying an upper egyptian royal. bearing in mind those days there was only one lineage that ruled.(marrying relatives was common).. him marrying a royal upset the hittite priests.
It *might* be... except that this isn't a long line of father-to-son inheritances. The importance of a demigod in your past makes you divine, but if you're an usurper you have to introduce a new line of gods. Ramses II wasn't an usurper -- he was the son and grandson and great-grandson of pharaohs.
i didnt say ramsees was an usurper, i said the 18th dynasty pharaohs were...: tuthmosis,amenhotep,akhenaten.
as well as persians and greco-romans.
more importantly this is the foundations of a religon.
Which religion?
the new kingdom interpretation of old kingdom gods. was in fact a new religon
as for the coptics..its not modern greek or ancient egyptian...its an ancient language spoken by mediteranean greeks written in arabic.
to add ....The Wadjet of lower Egypt (red hollow crown) – worn by hitties and most 18th dynasty pharaohs onwards, was not the soverign ruler. Nekhbet (upper egypt eagle) holding wadjet (lower egyptserpent) in its claws
Originally posted by Byrd
Could you point to the texts that show that he was known as a god at the same time Djoser was (he actually served several pharaohs)...[or]... hieroglyphs that show he's worshipped before the time of his death?
What are you using as proof that he called himself the Son of Ptah? None of his writings survived (if he wrote anything at all). To the best of my knowledge, the "Son of Ptah" is applied to him several hundred years after his death. Can you link to something that I can read that shows he's called "son of Ptah" during the time of Djoser?
That's on the Famine Stela, yes -- but note that it is written 2,000 years after the time of Imhotep and Djoser, and on the Stela, Djoser is shown making offerings to three gods, not just Khnum:
en.wikipedia.org...
I don't think you'll find a good match with Egyptian history here. Cults changed throughout the centuries as gods became blended or took over new functions. Imhotep doesn't become a god until around 600 BC and the priests (as seen with Ahkenaten) certainly didn't control the state. Pharaohs didn't need to "claim a relationship to a god" -- they were "god on earth". Their names are "sayings" about their patron god (like "He of Beauty" (Sneferu) or "Body of the gods" (Djoser) or "Beautiful is Re" (Neferere.)
The god most often cited in their names is Re, not Khnum (Horus and Set are also popular but nowhere near the popularity of Re)
The source where you found that information is a site where someone's making stuff up. No artifacts have ever been found showing that Solomon existed (though a really convincing fake showed up in 2001) and I've never seen Imhotep's name linked with Solomon, even in the Bible
Except that in temples and inscriptions, it's Wadjet and Nekhbet shown crowning the pharaoh (an example is here of Pharaoh Ptolemy being crowned)
And Horus and Wadjet:
www.specialx.net...
Seti with Nekhbet (copy of panel.. not the original panel)
Different pharaoh, coronation, Nekhbet and Wadjet with Sobek and Isis
(and lots of other examples.) Osiris is not shown crowning anyone.
Well, because when you google his name, it says he's a character in a fantasy book. And #2, when you look at the pharaohs from Kush, you don't see that name anywhere:
en.wikipedia.org...
What's your source for this? Temples weren't built by priests (they didn't do manual labor.) They were built by skilled stonemasons. The Hittites actually never came in Egypt (they were rebuffed)
What's your source for this -- particularly for their killing his firstborn son? Also, what's your source saying that Egypt's hated enemies (Hittites, who worshipped different gods), became priests in Egypt?
Yes. In the section I was replying to, you claimed that Ramses attacked the hometowns of Ay and Horemheb. So I said "Horemheb died before Ay, who died before Rameses I came to the throne. He's the grandfather of Ramses II. So... what were you using as evidence that Ramses attacked the towns of Henen-nesut (the capital of the 20th Nome of Egypt) and Ipu (capital of the 9th Nome of Egypt)?"
Err... where did you get this notion from? His official wives were Nefertari, Isetnofret, Maathorneferure, Meritamen, Bintanath, Nebettawy, Henutmire and his concubines were never numbered. Henutmire was the daughter of Seti 1 and was already royal. Nefertari was greatly beloved but she wasn't the one who produced his heir. Isisnofret was the mother of his appointed heir. Between the time he married Isisnofret and Maathoneferure, he married his daughters Meritamen (who was one of the most influential figures of her time), Nebettawy and Bintanath. Maathoneferure was Hittite, but doesn't marry Ramses until the 34th year of his reign.
It *might* be... except that this isn't a long line of father-to-son inheritances. The importance of a demigod in your past makes you divine, but if you're an usurper you have to introduce a new line of gods. Ramses II wasn't an usurper -- he was the son and grandson and great-grandson of pharaohs.
That would mean that each pharaoh of each group of dynasties were usurpers. I don't think I buy this.
I gave links to the Coptic language saying that it was a variant of ancient Egyptian. Can you post some links to help prove your point that it was "an ancient language spoken by Mediterranean Greeks written in Arabic" The Wikipedia article shows a tablet written in Coptic which, if you look at it closely, is written with the Greek alphabet:
en.wikipedia.org...
Err, all pharaohs wore it after Narmer unified Egypt.
And Nekhbet is a vulture. Not an eagle.
Originally posted by theAymen
(re Imhotep)firstly, he was in the old kingdom..most relics from then are lost or DESTROYED.
He is the first to make his pharaoh prey/give offerings to a lesser god.
The preists of khnum...in 2nd century bc....which was just before hittite rule ...rewrote this stella, demanding rights for land...with this land. they got a foothold.....then, the Hittites took over...WHO HAD A COVENANCE/AGREEMENT WITH THE PREISTHOOD.
BUT KHNUM BECAME A GOD THE PHARAOH HAD TO MAKE OFFERINGS TO??.... ASK WHY.....
firstly imhotep became the god of medicine for the greeks and persians.
though he was always classed as a demigod...cmon ffs... even ramsees2 classed himself as a demigod.
as for akhenatens relationship with preists...lolol
Of course Ahenaten woudnt hold thembclose..he was himself a non royal.
khnum is lower than re...but this cult was a cult that controled pharaoh...he became part of the holy triad
Theyr name changes, the Nubians of today were known as ku#es in the late new kingdom.
During the Hittites they were known as kemits, as hitties went as far south as “mount amun”.
In the old kingdom they were the pharaohs.
THIS IS HOW DJET WAS SYMBOLISED IN THE 4TH DYNASTY...THE OLD KINGDOM
hmmm...looks like he is being contained somehow
yes new kingdom would assoicitate horus with wadjet...which is blasphemy in the old kingdom.
he should only be assoiciated with nekhbet.
What's your source for this -- particularly for their killing his firstborn son? Also, what's your source saying that Egypt's hated enemies (Hittites, who worshipped different gods), became priests in Egypt?
"Seti I, the second king of the 19th Dynasty was the son of Ramesses I and Queen Sitre. He reconciled with the Hittites who were becoming the most powerful state in the region"
a BBC documentary about 4 weeks ago stated that set1 brought them back so i checked it out..turns out set1 brought them back.
Yes. In the section I was replying to, you claimed that Ramses attacked the hometowns of Ay and Horemheb. So I said "Horemheb died before Ay, who died before Rameses I came to the throne. He's the grandfather of Ramses II. So... what were you using as evidence that Ramses attacked the towns of Henen-nesut (the capital of the 20th Nome of Egypt) and Ipu (capital of the 9th Nome of Egypt)?"
oh, ok...the hittite priests...tried to use ramsees and his army...to remove the threat that destroyed the hitties in the 18th dynasty. Ay @ horemheb... bearing in mind that their villages and relatives must of been formiddable during the start of the 19th dynasty
coptics hey tut tut...i read in an earlier post that you noticed a transition from ancient religon to christianity.
so i pointed out that they are the only religon in that area. that is the oldest and unchanged through from the ancient religon to modern christianity. it is christianity... from before jesus!!!??.
iv been to a coptic church...their bible texts are written in arabic...though the language is not.
its an ancient mix if you like...but its the greeks religon in egypt from the time of the late new kingdom.
firstly it was a greek who helped join the kingdoms.
and an american calling nekhbet a vulture is very cute
by the way i dont have sources ....I AM THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION... i dont want anyone elses poisonous thoughts on egypt
Originally posted by Byrd
(re Imhotep)firstly, he was in the old kingdom..most relics from then are lost or DESTROYED.
I'm afraid that the existing material from Egypt gives a different picture... things with Imhotep on them survived from the age of the Old Kingdom.
I showed you two inscriptions made during his lifetime. They don't call him the son of a god. They give his title as "Chancellor of the King of Lower Egypt; First after the King of Upper Egypt; Administrator of the Great Palace; Hereditary nobleman; High Priest of Heliopolis; Builder; Chief Carpenter; Chief Sculptor and Maker of Vases in Chief."
Not "Son of Ptah". That doesn't come until almost 600 BC.
He is the first to make his pharaoh prey/give offerings to a lesser god.
Pharaohs made offerings to many gods (including what you would call a "lesser god.")
You might want to read up a bit more on both civilizations. The Hittites never ruled Egypt. The Lybians and the Nubians both did, but they are from Africa. The Hittites are from Anatolia.
I'm afraid you're not going to find any inscriptions that support your claim. In the time of Ramses he was called the "Father of Medicine" in several papyri.
I'm afraid you're not going to find any inscriptions that support your claim. Ahkenaten was the son of the pharaoh and his royal wife.
You might want to do a bit more reading on Egyptian religion. There wasn't a triad, though there were enneads. Wikipedia has a good article on enneads and the many different types of them.
I think you got your timeline tangled. Kush doesn't develop until the 22nd Dynasty. Kemt is the general name for Egypt. Wikipedia really does have a decent timeline for the kings and kingdoms here.
You will want to do more reading about ancient Egypt and learn to read heiroglyphs. This as a serekh; the temple of Horus and the oldest way of designating the king's name (dates to first dynasty):
en.wikipedia.org...
what's your source for this -- particularly for their killing his firstborn son? Also, what's your source saying that Egypt's hated enemies (Hittites, who worshipped different gods), became priests in Egypt?
Yes. In the section I was replying to, you claimed that Ramses attacked the hometowns of Ay and Horemheb. So I said "Horemheb died before Ay, who died before Rameses I came to the throne. He's the grandfather of Ramses II. So... what were you using as evidence that Ramses attacked the towns of Henen-nesut (the capital of the 20th Nome of Egypt) and Ipu (capital of the 9th Nome of Egypt)?"
I see from your closing remark that you're not interested in the fact that these cities were capitals of their regions and didn't revolt against the pharaohs... so nobody came in and attacked them.
No, Christianity didn't start until around 100 AD.
Yes, they're written in Arabic *NOW*... but they were originally written in Greek. And it's a Christian religion that dates from about 100 AD. However, your closing remarks indicate that you're not really interested in learning about them.
The Greeks didn't exist in Narmer's times.
I take it you haven't seen any of the pictures of Nekhbet and aren't interested in learning about her.
by the way i dont have sources ....I AM THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION... i dont want anyone elses poisonous thoughts on egypt
Yes, we could tell. That's why you couldn't provide links as the proof of what you said.
Originally posted by Byrd
Originally posted by astrogolf
reply to post by Scott Creighton
The pyramids line up with their appropriate constellations.....at approximately 10,500 BC. This is due to the procession of the equinoxes. There is currently a debate between the actual scientists....astronomers, geologists, vs. the Egyptologists regarding this matter. So much of history is lost.
Actually, there's no real debate on this -- the consensus is that they don't believe the pyramids line up with the constellations at 10,500 BC. There are many websites (including Wikipedia) that show how Hancock manipulated the data (turning the constellation upside down, and changing the proportions of the positions of the stars to make it fit)
en.wikipedia.org...
In contrast, however, Archie Roy, professor Emeritus of Astronomy at Glasgow University, and Percy Seymour, astronomer and astrophysicist at Plymouth University U.K., have both publicly rejected several of Krupp's arguments, including the speculation that Bauval and Gilbert purposefully inverted the pyramid map. Both Roy and Seymour argue, for several reasons, that the orientation on the ground does not require the map to be "inverted to fit" the sky map in which Roy concludes "The accusation that the maps were placed upside down is therefore unfounded"
Originally posted by Scott Creighton
I see you are still up to your old tricks - spreading disinformation. Why is it that you failed to make mention of the scientists (indeed the former Astronomer Royal for Scotland, Professory Archie Roy) who actually debunked Krupp? Play fair.
Indeed, even Ed Krupp's wife when asked to draw the Belt Stars on a blank sheet of paper drew Mintaka to the TOP of the page (top equating to our North)
And, of course, when you observe Orion's Belt (looking south because you cannot observe it in the northern sky) you find that Mintaka is uppermost in the sky i.e. the top-most star.
See how, when looking at the belt stars on the southern meridian, Mintaka/G3 is the star that is UPPERMOST in the sky? The ancient Egyptians, as I am sure you well know, saw south as 'UP' since this was the source of the sacred Nile. Why then in making this design using the belt stars would they not have placed Mintaka/G3 in the UPMOST position?
I am sorry to have to say but continuing to spread this complete disinformation about the OCT having to be "turned upside-down" only serves to make you appear somewhat foolish.
Originally posted by Scott Creighton
reply to post by Byrd
Hello Byrd,
I have to say, your complete silence to my previous post is quite revealing but not - I have to say - entirely unexpected. Now, I may well be wrong here but it does seem to me that when you have run out of answers or reasonable objections you simply disappear and do not respond.
Originally posted by Scott Creighton
Yes or no? Silence on this important question is simply not an option.
Originally posted by Byrd
Originally posted by Scott Creighton
I see you are still up to your old tricks - spreading disinformation. Why is it that you failed to make mention of the scientists (indeed the former Astronomer Royal for Scotland, Professory Archie Roy) who actually debunked Krupp? Play fair.
Byrd: Actually, my source was 1) hearing the claim, 2) checking on the declination of Cairo (Cairo, Egypt 30 degrees 2 minutes North, 31 degrees 21 minutes East), looking on the sky map to decide the declination of Orion (5 degrees north.)
Byrd: So I get a similar view (from Houston, TX Houston TX (29.77°N, 95.39°W) and almost exactly the same view of Orion when I stand in New Braunfels, just south of Austin, TX (Austin is 30.27°N 97.74°W)
Byrd: I see the same view of Orion as the ancient Egyptians did.
Byrd: The westernmost star is the highest one, the easternmost is the lowest one.
SC: Indeed, even Ed Krupp's wife when asked to draw the Belt stars on a blank sheet of paper drew Mintaka to the TOP of the page (top equating to our North)
Byrd: I'm not following you here -- what does an image drawn by someone's wife have to do with the subject of legendary kings of Egypt?
SC: And, of course, when you observe Orion's Belt (looking south because you cannot observe it in the northern sky) you find that Mintaka is uppermost in the sky i.e. the top-most star.
Byrd: Yes, the westernmost star is the northernmost star. Many people have made this point.
SC: See how, when looking at the belt stars on the southern meridian, Mintaka/G3 is the star that is UPPERMOST in the sky? The ancient Egyptians, as I am sure you well know, saw south as 'UP' since this was the source of the sacred Nile. Why then in making this design using the belt stars would they not have placed Mintaka/G3 in the UPMOST position?
Byrd: I'm not sure what this has to do with ancient kings.
Byrd: However, I wonder why you would make this claim when Cairo and cities around it were called the "Upper Nomes" and the ones closer to the source of the Nile the "Lower Nomes."
SC: I am sorry to have to say but continuing to spread this complete disinformation about the OCT having to be "turned upside-down" only serves to make you appear somewhat foolish.
Byrd: I just walked outside here in Texas and looked at the stars, Scott. Then I looked at Orion. Then I made a copy of Orion on the ground. The northernmost point is always the westernmost point.
Byrd: However, this does not address the "when did the legendary kings first appear and how is this all attested." As I recall, you were looking for sources earlier than Rameses II.
Originally posted by Scott Creighton
SC: “declination of Orion (5 degrees north)”? I hate to break it to you, Byrd, but the Orion constellation cannot – let me repeat CANNOT – be observed in the northern sky so how do you come up with this “declination of Orion (5 degrees north)”?
Byrd: So I get a similar view (from Houston, TX Houston TX (29.77°N, 95.39°W) and almost exactly the same view of Orion when I stand in New Braunfels, just south of Austin, TX (Austin is 30.27°N 97.74°W)
SC: So you’re saying here that from the locations quoted above, you get a similar view of the Orion constellation at a “declination of Orion (5 degrees north)”? How is that possible when Orion is NOT present in the northern sky?
Byrd: I see the same view of Orion as the ancient Egyptians did.
SC: I doubt this very much since the ancient Egyptians would have observed the constellation in the southern sky.
SC: You made a comment in the main thread regarding the orientation of the Belt stars/Gizamids being upside-down. I feel it is important to take you to task on that comment since this is not the first time you have made that comment, hence this sub-issue.
SC: No, Byrd. The rightmost star is the UPPERMOST star.
SC: This is a great example, Byrd. If you are looking at the Belt stars in the night sky you are looking SOUTH. If you then draw the stars (looking south) on the ground exactly as you see them which of your three dots (stars) in the ground is furthest south and furthest right?
Byrd: However, this does not address the "when did the legendary kings first appear and how is this all attested." As I recall, you were looking for sources earlier than Rameses II.
SC: No, it does not address the main issue of the thread. But nevertheless, if you continue to perpetuate a blatant untruth within a thread then you are inviting someone to take you to task over it. I think it is important that folks reading your posts are given the full facts of the matter and not a corrupted version of them. I am sure you can agree with that?
SC: “declination of Orion (5 degrees north)”? I hate to break it to you, Byrd, but the Orion constellation cannot – let me repeat CANNOT – be observed in the northern sky so how do you come up with this “declination of Orion (5 degrees north)”?
Byrd: Every sky map in existence. Try Wikipedia for starters: en.wikipedia.org...
Byrd: So I get a similar view (from Houston, TX Houston TX (29.77°N, 95.39°W) and almost exactly the same view of Orion when I stand in New Braunfels, just south of Austin, TX (Austin is 30.27°N 97.74°W)
SC: So you’re saying here that from the locations quoted above, you get a similar view of the Orion constellation at a “declination of Orion (5 degrees north)”? How is that possible when Orion is NOT present in the northern sky?
Byrd: I have no clue where you're getting your star maps from, but astronomy's a longtime hobby of mine and Orion was a constellation I learned as a child.
Byrd: In any case, you can check here (first constellation under "non-circumpolar constellations) or any sky map at all. And I live close to the same latitude as the people at Cairo/Giza do. There are places here in Texas that are on the same latitude as Cairo: www.summitpost.org...
Byrd: I see the same view of Orion as the ancient Egyptians did.
SC: I doubt this very much since the ancient Egyptians would have observed the constellation in the southern sky.
Byrd: I take it you're not a backyard star watcher. I'm at the same latitude as Cairo. Hence, I see the same night sky.
SC: You made a comment in the main thread regarding the orientation of the Belt stars/Gizamids being upside-down. I feel it is important to take you to task on that comment since this is not the first time you have made that comment, hence this sub-issue.
Byrd: So... what does the drawing of someone's wife who may not be an astronomer or skywatcher have to do anything.
SC: No, Byrd. The rightmost star is the UPPERMOST star.
Byrd: Scott... the rightmost star IS the westernmost star.
SC: This is a great example, Byrd. If you are looking at the Belt stars in the night sky you are looking SOUTH. If you then draw the stars (looking south) on the ground exactly as you see them which of your three dots (stars) in the ground is furthest south and furthest right?
Byrd: No, the furthest south is not Mintaka. It is, however the furthest west.
Byrd: And if they saw the south as north then on the ground they would still see the furthest west star in its same position.
Byrd: However, this does not address the "when did the legendary kings first appear and how is this all attested." As I recall, you were looking for sources earlier than Rameses II.
SC: No, it does not address the main issue of the thread. But nevertheless, if you continue to perpetuate a blatant untruth within a thread then you are inviting someone to take you to task over it. I think it is important that folks reading your posts are given the full facts of the matter and not a corrupted version of them. I am sure you can agree with that?
Byrd: No. I think you should bring it up in a separate thread.
Byrd: I'm still interested in the first attestations to the legendary kings.
Byrd: And for the record, since you were not the originator of the Orion theory, I hardly blame any misinterpretations or bad research on you.
Byrd: I do, however, think your sources are unreliable and are not well versed in Egyptology.
Byrd: You are welcome to bring them up, and I will still wave star maps and other material as rebuttals.
Byrd: However, that's not the point of this thread. The topic was the interesting topic of the legendary kings with less-than-believable ancestry and lifespans.
SC: “declination of Orion (5 degrees north)”? I hate to break it to you, Byrd, but the Orion constellation cannot – let me repeat CANNOT – be observed in the northern sky so how do you come up with this “declination of Orion (5 degrees north)”?
SC: Then you will have learned that Orion is NEVER viewed in the northern sky. At night you can ONLY see Orion in the SOUTHERN sky. Do you accept this? Yes or no?
SC: I know where Orion can be observed in the night sky, Byrd. By looking SOUTH. Do you agree with this – yes or no?
SC: “declination of Orion (5 degrees north)”? I hate to break it to you, Byrd, but the Orion constellation cannot – let me repeat CANNOT – be observed in the northern sky so how do you come up with this “declination of Orion (5 degrees north)”?
Kandinksy: It's not often you're right, but you're wrong again.
Kandinsky: The entire constellation of Orion is visible in the Northern sky from just after 10pm tonight until after 5am.
Kandinsky: You can write every post with caps-lock and it doesn't make you any closer to being right.
SC: Then you will have learned that Orion is NEVER viewed in the northern sky. At night you can ONLY see Orion in the SOUTHERN sky. Do you accept this? Yes or no?
Kandinsky...I'm embarrassed for you.
SC: I know where Orion can be observed in the night sky, Byrd. By looking SOUTH. Do you agree with this – yes or no?
Kandinsky: Scott, you're somehow confused about what the Northern and Southern Hemisphere constellations mean. There are some constellations that can only be seen in the Southern Hemisphere...southern sky. Likewise, there are some constellations that can only be seen in the Northern Hemisphere...northern skies.
Kandinksy: Looking south doesn't mean you're looking at the 'southern skies' in any astronomical sense. Orion is an equatorial constellation that can be seen in the winter months in the 'northern sky (doh!)' and in summer months in the 'southern sky (doh!).'
Kandinksy: I think Byrd's very decent in allowing your thread to remain in the Ancient and Lost Civilisations forum. In fairness, you should have posted it in your own section. In there, you get a far more positive response to your ideas.
Kandinsky: Last year, I made the point that I would no longer reply to your posts. It's been over a year and I kept my word.
Kandinsky: This post is inspired by your contemptuous attitude and hectoring BS to Byrd.
Kandinsky: You seem to want it both ways...academics are all lying and to be dismissed …
Kandinsky:… yet you expect this forum's academic to respond immediately to your posts.
Kandinsky: It's as ironic as it's absurd. If you'd got past a high school education, you'd respect how much time is involved at academic levels. Allow me to be as dismissive of you as you are of her. Fair enough?
Kandinsky: You'll drag your thread out with ridiculous and lengthy replies that will not concede a single point or read supporting links.
Kandinksy: It's still a source of amusement that you even attempted to re-write evolution to avoid admitting you were wrong in threads last year. The memorable 'Pre-Cambrian Parallel Evolution model' still beggars belief in how far a guy will go to avoid saying they were wrong.
Kandinsky: I won't go on about it, you're well aware of my thoughts. I'd like to add that despite my antipathy to your ideas, I was happy to see you got a chapter in that guy's book. Well done. It's always nice to see somebody enjoying some success.
Kandinsky: Sincerely, it'd be cool if you got to publish a whole book one day.
Kandinsky: Download Stellarium.
Kandinsjy: It's a very useful astronomy tool for viewing the constellations.
Kandinsky: By simply inputting 'Austin, Texas,' it can show you a real-time view of the skies. It just showed me Orion wheeling across the skies over Austin.
Kandinsky: Locations in the program include Egypt so you'll have a lot of fun with it...
Kandinksjy: I'm not getting into an argument about your low opinions of academics.
Kandinsky: Politely, I'm pointing out that an abrasive tone isn't conducive to a reasonable discussion.
Kandinsky: Neither does proclamation increase accuracy over evidence or academic research.
Kandinky: Take it easy.
Kandinsky: 1, Looking south doesn't mean you're looking at the 'Southern Sky' in astronomy.
Kandinsky: Your replies to Byrd are provocative and contemptuous.
Originally posted by Scott Creighton
SC: Byrd, check the co-ordinates given in the link you provided from Wikipedia. Here they are: Coordinates: 05h 30m 00s, +00° 00′ 00″
Do you see the “s” in the co-ordinates, Byrd? That ‘s’ denotes SOUTH and NOT north.
SC: Then you will have learned that Orion is NEVER viewed in the northern sky. At night you can ONLY see Orion in the SOUTHERN sky. Do you accept this? Yes or no?
Byrd: I see the same view of Orion as the ancient Egyptians did.
SC: I doubt this very much since the ancient Egyptians would have observed the constellation in the southern sky.
SC: This is COMPLETE NONSENSE! If you are observing Orion in the southern sky and placing each dot on the ground (still facing south) you simply MUST place Mintaka furthest right and furthest south. This is inescapable.
SC: Then, with all due respect, I think you should not be making completely erroneous claims in the main thread. Start another thread if you want to do that.
SC: Actually (and I believe I said this previously to you), I am NOT speaking of the “legendary kings” of the pre-dynastic period but rather (if Africanus and Eusebius are to be believed) the missing kings of the early dynastic period (dynasties 1-8).
SC: No, not the “legendary kings” but the potentially 123 missing kings of the early dynastic period (according to Africanus and Eusebius using Manetho as their source).