Men Who Vandalized Great Pyramid To Prove 'Theory' Face Charges

originally posted by: Scott Creighton

originally posted by: mstower

originally posted by: Scott Creighton
a reply to: mstower

MS: A simple citation of evidence would suffice.

Hello mstower,

Patience. All will be explained soon enough.

Regards,

SC

We’ve already exercised patience, Creighton. More than a month’s worth.

Here you are making promises. You made promises a month ago. Still nothing showing.

M.

Hello mstower,

So much for me being ignored by mainstream Egyptology.

We have waited almost 200 years to get to the bottom of this issue. I'm sure a few more months isn't going to kill you.

Patience will be rewarded.

SC

So much and quite enough.

Creighton,

I am not the personifcation of mainstream Egyptology (otherwise known as Egyptology: there is no other).

I am not an Egyptologist and I would not claim to be an Egyptologist without fluency in the language and scripts of ancient Egypt.

I am someone with a purely amateur interest in topics within Egyptology and Egyptian Archaeology.

“We” have not been waiting 200 years to get to the fictitious bottom of this alleged issue. It’s only self-promoting fantasts who believe (or pretend) that such is the case.

I expect our patience to be fully rewarded by the huge laugh you’re going to give us.

M.

originally posted by: mstower

originally posted by: Scott Creighton

originally posted by: mstower

originally posted by: Scott Creighton
a reply to: mstower

MS: A simple citation of evidence would suffice.

Hello mstower,

Patience. All will be explained soon enough.

Regards,

SC

We’ve already exercised patience, Creighton. More than a month’s worth.

Here you are making promises. You made promises a month ago. Still nothing showing.

M.

Hello mstower,

So much for me being ignored by mainstream Egyptology.

We have waited almost 200 years to get to the bottom of this issue. I'm sure a few more months isn't going to kill you.

Patience will be rewarded.

SC

So much and quite enough.

Creighton,

I am not the personifcation of mainstream Egyptology (otherwise known as Egyptology: there is no other).

I am not an Egyptologist and I would not claim to be an Egyptologist without fluency in the language and scripts of ancient Egypt.

I am someone with a purely amateur interest in topics within Egyptology and Egyptian Archaeology.

“We” have not been waiting 200 years to get to the fictitious bottom of this alleged issue. It’s only self-promoting fantasts who believe (or pretend) that such is the case.

I expect our patience to be fully rewarded by the huge laugh you’re going to give us.

M.

Hello mstower,

First you say that Egyptology will ignore me.

Then you say Egyptology will laugh at me.

I am sure you know how the rest goes.

Patience.

Regards,

SC

originally posted by: The only 1 who knows the
a reply to: TDawg61 I believe the GP is over 10,000 years if not more. I remember reading that when they were digging on info to find a way to preserve the GP etc., the water table below the Sphinx was at least 10,000 or more years old. In fact what was found under the Sphinx was a underground network of interconnect tunnels leading to various rooms that contained vast knowledge of man kinds whole history. The technology that was found was not of this world but of a ET origin. The underground cities that was found there was quite out of this world. There was electric lights there in the cities as there was on the earth. Our true origins we kept secret by the elite to keep us in check with there secrets. It is there way to control the masses or better know on ATS as we the Sheepies.

You probably dont see the logic error in your statement do you? Ok you claim this stuff was buried under the sphinx 10000 years ago but than you claim it has a record of mankinds whole history. Where these people psychic?? Because you can bury something before it happens also you said the water table is 10000 years old its probably alot older than that but water tables exist everywhere and frankly how would you date water???? Next we move on to underground cities with electricity under the Sphinx you are aware there is no way the sphinx could have existed then arent you? because if it did it would have eroded away to nothing by now. look at the damage 2500 years did to it imagine it would have been hit by rain floods than a desert all we would have found was a mound if that.

originally posted by: Scott Creighton

originally posted by: mstower

originally posted by: Scott Creighton

originally posted by: mstower

originally posted by: Scott Creighton
a reply to: mstower

MS: A simple citation of evidence would suffice.

Hello mstower,

Patience. All will be explained soon enough.

Regards,

SC

We’ve already exercised patience, Creighton. More than a month’s worth.

Here you are making promises. You made promises a month ago. Still nothing showing.

M.

Hello mstower,

So much for me being ignored by mainstream Egyptology.

We have waited almost 200 years to get to the bottom of this issue. I'm sure a few more months isn't going to kill you.

Patience will be rewarded.

SC

So much and quite enough.

Creighton,

I am not the personifcation of mainstream Egyptology (otherwise known as Egyptology: there is no other).

I am not an Egyptologist and I would not claim to be an Egyptologist without fluency in the language and scripts of ancient Egypt.

I am someone with a purely amateur interest in topics within Egyptology and Egyptian Archaeology.

“We” have not been waiting 200 years to get to the fictitious bottom of this alleged issue. It’s only self-promoting fantasts who believe (or pretend) that such is the case.

I expect our patience to be fully rewarded by the huge laugh you’re going to give us.

M.

Hello mstower,

First you say that Egyptology will ignore me.

Then you say Egyptology will laugh at me.

I am sure you know how the rest goes.

Patience.

Regards,

SC

Er, no, Creighton. You’re still relying on the same misidentification.

Egyptology will ignore you and we (a group of likeminded people brought together by the ’net) will laugh at you. Like I said in the first place.

But while you’re here, explain this to us. Why the insistence that Howard Vyse was in Egypt in 1842? Are you really still trying to rationalise Sitchin’s claim about a confrontation between Vyse and Lepsius?

It’s not even what Walter Allen said.

Look at what was published in Ancient Skies, July/August 1983:

In 1842, Humphries Brewer was invited by the University of Berlin to return to Egypt on a project, but Col. Vyse would not permit him to do so.

M.

a reply to: mstower

Hello mstower,

Patience.

Regards,

SC

originally posted by: Scott Creighton
a reply to: mstower

Hello mstower,

Patience.

Regards,

SC

Creighton,

Why are you spamming this board with evasive non-posts?

M.

a reply to: mstower

Hello mstower,

It is not my intention to spam the Board here at ATS. I am merely responding to your comments, asking you to be patient. It is entirely my prerogative what information I present and when I present it. I have told you I will present it here on ATS in due course. You are effectively demanding that I do so upon your insistence and that is simply not going to happen. I shall present my information in due course when I am good and ready to do so and not a moment before. I ask you again that you remain patient.

Regards,

SC

originally posted by: Scott Creighton
a reply to: mstower

Hello mstower,

It is not my intention to spam the Board here at ATS. I am merely responding to your comments, asking you to be patient. It is entirely my prerogative what information I present and when I present it. I have told you I will present it here on ATS in due course. You are effectively demanding that I do so upon your insistence and that is simply not going to happen. I shall present my information in due course when I am good and ready to do so and not a moment before. I ask you again that you remain patient.

Regards,

SC

If it is our patience that you require, perhaps you should yourself exercise that same patience prior to making unfounded claims, rather than state as factual a claim that you cannot support even after a month of desperately trying to dig something up.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: Scott Creighton
a reply to: mstower

Hello mstower,

It is not my intention to spam the Board here at ATS. I am merely responding to your comments, asking you to be patient. It is entirely my prerogative what information I present and when I present it. I have told you I will present it here on ATS in due course. You are effectively demanding that I do so upon your insistence and that is simply not going to happen. I shall present my information in due course when I am good and ready to do so and not a moment before. I ask you again that you remain patient.

Regards,

SC

If it is our patience that you require, perhaps you should yourself exercise that same patience prior to making unfounded claims, rather than state as factual a claim that you cannot support even after a month of desperately trying to dig something up.

Harte

Hello Harte,

We will see what claims I can and cannot substantiate in the fullness of time.

Regards,

SC

To whom it may concern,

May I remind everyone that the original topic of this thread was the actions of Görlitz and Erdmann?

M.

originally posted by: Harte
If it is our patience that you require, perhaps you should yourself exercise that same patience prior to making unfounded claims, rather than state as factual a claim that you cannot support even after a month of desperately trying to dig something up. Harte

That be 'dig something up' in the figurative or literal sense?

I popped in to see if Creighton had answered that question yet.

Imagine my surprise on finding that he hasn’t.

M.

originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
Martin you ought to consider compiling all this into an eBook on the topic, it would make a great resource to those interested in Vyse and his role in opening the GP to modern archeology.

Regarding the vilification of Vyse, having read several of your sources and Vyse's Operations, the letters he and Caviglia penned display that Vyse was the true scientist interested in recording for posterity their discoveries. Caviglia appeared only interested in a treasure hunt, and it was not Vyse who fired him or dismissed him, rather it was Campbell. Among Vyse's and Campbells complaints about Caviglia was his rush to dynamite open chambers without bothering to record or catalog discoveries or inscriptions. He wasn't interested in History, he was interested in Egyptian gold. Vyse opposed this rushing, and insisted on taking the time to carefully record and measure everything they observed. Hardly matches the description given by Sitchin, that he was in a hurry to make some big discovery before he was due to leave Egypt.

Crumbs, I meant to reply to this . . .

If only I had the time or (more important) the energy to put up even the modestly improved version of my old Web site I got part done.

But I am working (not entirely alone) on related topics, so something may come of it.

Caviglia has been arbitrarily elevated to sainthood by those who would do down Vyse in contrast. It’s a crude substitute for argument. Caviglia’s approach was also destructive (he just wasnt as good at digging tunnels) while Vyse was very obviously emulating Belzoni. Norms of archaeological procedure which we take for granted weren’t even on the horizon.

M.

a reply to: mstower

Sainthood indeed, yet he showed signs of not caring about true academic research. He was also fired in 1817 by Henry Salt excavating the Sphinx, over accusations he was instead hunting for mummy pits and loot and ignoring the Sphinx he was being paid to excavate.

Here’s the nearest we’re likely ever to get to an explantion of Creighton’s claim that Vyse was in Egypt in 1842:

www.nationalarchives.gov.uk...-6

—because (as suspected) Creighton has finally got onto this material:

atlantisrising.com...

—and (as expected) is spouting nonsense about it:

www.grahamhancock.com...



M.

Here is an update from Rober Bauvals FB page on the issue.

*Can we please stay on topic. I dont' want to go thru pages of non topic stuff. Thanks. SC can make his own darn thread instead of posting his thoughts and theories in another members thread. He does have his own forum people!

There are screen shots from his FB page. I had to take it in two parts but they are continued exactly.

a reply to: mblahnikluver

Ok if they admitted they took a paint sample than somebody not noticing they did is irrelevant isnt it? Unless they didnt actually scrape off a sample and lied in the first place so im not sure of the logic involved here. Be like me grabing a DNA sample from someone without permission i can get in lots of trouble even if they didnt notice.

originally posted by: mstower
Hancock changed his mind, then he changed it again. He’s a very mercurial fellow.

Quite right. A real scientist never changes his mind.