Ed1 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 18, 2022 7:22 pm
Marcus wrote: ↑Fri Mar 18, 2022 5:36 pm
That is absolutely incorrect. My beliefs had no basis in my analysis.
The fact that you think your critques are "logic based" is the point. There is no logic to your point. You only want to get away with stupid, nonsense criticisms.
if there’s no logic to my points, it will be simple to refute them logically. I haven’t seen that happen.
You don't get the point that this is both a list of pictograms, and at the same time actually says something in Egyptian. And that those pictograms have a secondary usage, and that ordering is based on what they say in Egyptian, not what they interpret to as far as numbers go as if a numerical ordering would have significance. There is no need for numerical ordering when it actually has to say someting in egyptian as well.
okay, but that doesn’t address my question.
You only care about being able to do an analysis that is like a hit and run driver. When an Egyptian jams crap together that has 2 separate purposes in two separate contexts, yes, those two contexts actually have an effect on each other for the end product. But all you care about is to do a drive by shooting type of analysis. Of course there are two hieroglyphs that are the same, because gramatically to actaully say something in Egyptian as well as have the numbers, the author had no choice. And the point of the repetition is not to add meaning or extra numbers, but to cause a coherent grammar in Egyptian. How would you, because you don't give a rip about technical issues.
Actually no, I am exactly asking about a technical issue with regard to this. I am specifically asking why you left one of the 13 symbols out of your analysis, which allowed you to conclude a 12 number result which you compared to a calendar. You gave no explanation for that, and definitely no grammatical explanation. If you’d like to explain that, I’m interested.
…You think that each and every pun has to match the puns from Ifrah. Not at all. There are all kinds of puns that are unique to many Egyptian documents, and the point of quoting and showing Ifrah's work is to point out the principle, not to establish the expectation that the puns that exist in the hypocephalus would match Ifrah's. He was just making a point with examples.
Okay. You spent a majority of your article explaining his puns as they relate to mostly numbers 1-15, but not only do not “each and every pun” match, but not one single pun from your arguments matches anything Ifrah wrote. That’s what I am asking about.
But of course you don't give a damn, because you are a drive by shooter and a hit and run driver. You have no concept of an actual critique any more than you would notice if a dog bit your butt. Because you are numb and ignorant to what is actually going on here. And your ignorance is manifest with every continual statement you make.
again, no. I am asking legitimate questions, and you are attacking, not me.
You are not a specialist in this area. I happen to be a specialist in what I have studied for years on this matter. You are not qualified to critique this.
no, I’m not a specialist. Your techniques, however, don’t match anything I’ve read in this area at all, so just stating you are a specialist isn’t sufficient. Can you answer the questions?
Marcus wrote:
I'b be interested in hearing your basis for:
1) choosing to leave one of the 13 symbols out of your analysis, which allowed you to conclude a 12 number result which you compared to a calendar; and
2) why you referenced Ifrah so much, but ultimately not one of your 'puns' matched anything he documented as a pun, even for the same numbers.
Thanks.
If you’d rather not, fine. But please stop with the personal attacks.