There’s a Giant Flaw in Human History

[stevevw]

Why haven't you done so already?

I have. I cited Chris Dunn with 50 plus years experience including working in Aerospace prcision tooling. I linked Nick Sierra and Alex Dunn both experts in precision tooling at the Aerospace level. Christopher King of Precision Components an expert in precision tooling. Also Yousef Awyan an expert stone mason and Egyptologist who makes these vases at the foot of the pyramids and grew up among these ancient works.

But I have also cited articles that are not about precision vases and before this was an issue. Just ordinary archeologists on the history who refer to lathes or rotating devices that were needed to make these vases. I even cited skeptics on this thread who claim to be experts and agreed that some sort of lathing was required.

Ironically it seems its ok for those disagreeing to cite their own opinion without any qualification and evidence but when I cite actual qualified experts at NASA level they are whackos and don't count.

Fact: you don't know for sure what they had.

Thats a silly arguement. I could say you don't know. We could be forever dismissing stuff under that logic. We do know from what is current factual evidence that there was no lathe or wheel. It is cited as the consensus in archeology.

Some on this thread were just saying that because I can't show what created these signatures therefore its not evidence. They used the absense of any device as evidence that it did not exist. Now your using the exact same logic to say that non existent devices may have been available as evidence.

 

[Aaron112]

The flaw in human history is humans. History is re-written countless times for devious reasons - profit, prestige, vain glory, vanity.
As written God made everything (everything) simple;
men came up with many devices (not a good thing).

counterfeits

Fact: you don't know for sure what they had.

hmmmm..... maybe they had .....

a dremel ?

 

[BCP1928]

I have. I cited Chris Dunn with 50 plus years experience including working in Aerospace prcision tooling. I linked Nick Sierra and Alex Dunn both experts in precision tooling at the Aerospace level. Christopher King of Precision Components an expert in precision tooling. Also Yousef Awyan an expert stone mason and Egyptologist who makes these vases at the foot of the pyramids and grew up among these ancient works.

But I have also cited articles that are not about precision vases and before this was an issue. Just ordinary archeologists on the history who refer to lathes or rotating devices that were needed to make these vases. I even cited skeptics on this thread who claim to be experts and agreed that some sort of lathing was required.

Some sort of lathing was probably required. I don't think you are getting much pushback on that alone.

Ironically it seems its ok for those disagreeing to cite their own opinion without any qualification and evidence but when I cite actual qualified experts at NASA level they are whackos and don't count.

On what basis do you show contempt for my training and experience? How about sjastro? He's got the expertise and knows more about metrology than I ever will, as he has amply demonstrated here. On what basis do you distain his contributions?

Thats a silly arguement. I could say you don't know. We could be forever dismissing stuff under that logic. We do know from what is current factual evidence that there was no lathe or wheel. It is cited as the consensus in archeology.

We don't know that there wasn't any lathing. Stonecutting lathes didn't necessarily contain any moving parts, so the absence of evidence for a wheel is of no account.

Some on this thread were just saying that because I can't show what created these signatures therefore its not evidence.

No, you misunderstood them. The signatures are what they are and they are evidence of something, some process that we didn't know the Egyptians used. That's what they are evidence of. Period, The signatures resemble those of a modern machine tool process, but they are not evidence of such a process. Think that through a few times before you respond.

They used the absense of any device as evidence that it did not exist. Now your using the exact same logic to say that non existent devices may have been available as evidence.

Not quite, and you will have to pay attention because it is an important point. Non-existant devices are not evidence, Non-existant evidence is not evidence of anything, Nobody used the absence of any device to prove that it did not exist. No one is using the absence of any device to prove that it did exist. If you thought that was happening then you were just confused or maybe we were not clear. Think that through a few times before you respond.

Remember you are the one who asserts that not only is there is no evidence that the Naqada craftsmen had a suitable technique to produce those vases, but moreover that it was impossible for them to even devise it. Impossible is a pretty big word, and I don't think even the looniest of your sources goes that far. And that is what you are getting all the heat about.

 

[Aaron112]

Back to Bible: In Bible, Who Gives Skill to the Craftsmen?

 

[BCP1928]

Back to Bible: In Bible, Who Gives Skill to the Craftsmen?

Amen. But Steve apparently doesn't think God gave much of it to the Naqada craftsmen.

 

[Aaron112]

Amen. But Steve apparently doesn't think God gave much of it to the Naqada craftsmen.

What I think, what you think, what anyone thinks, does not matter.

What God thinks, what God does, matters.

 

[Aaron112]

Who / when were they who were idolaters who craved evil things? And they were revelers and drunkards who acted immorally.

And they were those who tested God and who grumbled against the Lord and Moses, God’s servant,

thinking that God would not punish them for their rebellion and disobedience.

And these things happened as examples for us, so that we would not crave evil things as they also craved. And they were written down for our instruction as examples.

So, what is the message for us here? We need to be careful that we do not come up short of entering into God’s eternal rest. And how might that happen? The same way in which it happened to the Israelites who disobeyed God, who continued to walk in sin, in direct defiance of God’s commands, and for whom obedience to God and to his commands was not their practice.

For they did not desire obedience to God, but they craved evil things.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Who / when were they who were idolaters who craved evil things? And they were revelers and drunkards who acted immorally.

And they were those who tested God and who grumbled against the Lord and Moses, God’s servant,

thinking that God would not punish them for their rebellion and disobedience.

And these things happened as examples for us, so that we would not crave evil things as they also craved. And they were written down for our instruction as examples.

So, what is the message for us here? We need to be careful that we do not come up short of entering into God’s eternal rest. And how might that happen? The same way in which it happened to the Israelites who disobeyed God, who continued to walk in sin, in direct defiance of God’s commands, and for whom obedience to God and to his commands was not their practice.

For they did not desire obedience to God, but they craved evil things.

Take it to another thread.

 

[Stopped_lurking]

I am saying you naturally referred to some sort of turntable because its logical and common sense to do so. We don't even know we are doing it because its such an accepted and natural conslusion to pottery or vases with high roundness. You think what could create such good roundness. You thinkl of a turning device and not the coil method or by chisel ect.

Are you trying to be some kind psychologist here? Please note, I'm using turntables for the forebearers to the potter's wheel , and they were around in the near east during the time period. If they were used by the Naqada culture is as of now uncertain, and we might never know with certainty that is just how science goes. I'm not opposed to anyone trying to find out, but there is no guarantee that we ever get an answer.

I was actually thinking of another example that may be interesting to investigate. The electromagnetism and possible energy generation from the ancients. There may be some interesting discoveries. I am not saying there is anything to this. But that it would be interesting to investigate because well it would be amazing of true and would add strong evidence of adbanced knowledge.

Have you read the simulation study yet? Is there anyone actually measuring the the radiowaves in the chambers? What do the electromagnetism guys (the non-academic ones) think is the source of the electromagnetic waves?

 

[stevevw]

Some sort of lathing was probably required. I don't think you are getting much pushback on that alone.

Hum I am not sure. The problem is according to the orthodoxy there was no lathe or potters wheel or bore stick. This was pre all that. They made pots by the coil method so not wheel or lathe required.

But then this leaves an out of place artifact that is found in a culture that did not have the knowledge or tech. Then you have to start getting into spectulation as to how this can be.

On what basis do you show contempt for my training and experience? How about sjastro? He's got the expertise and knows more about metrology than I ever will, as he has amply demonstrated here. On what basis do you distain his contributions?

Did I say anything about your personal ability or expertise.

I said that the logic you are using in citing your own expertise is the same as me linking the experts I have. So if you are going to use authority as the evidence then it works both ways. We get into a game about who can supply the most authoritive expert. Its not a good way to argue.

We don't know that there wasn't any lathing. Stonecutting lathes didn't necessarily contain any moving parts, so the absence of evidence for a wheel is of no account.

We can only go by what we know. But its not just based on the Naqada. We have evidence in other parts of the world such as when the potters wheel was first invented in Mesopotamia around 5,000 to 4,000 years ago. The bore stick tech came from that area into Egypt around 2600BC.

It could be as we have found that ancients were more advanced than we thought in other ways. Like the 300,000 year old calved wooden joint. As though ancients had a pretty sophisticated level of carpentry.

No, you misunderstood them.

No I'm not lol. Anyway.

The signatures are what they are and they are evidence of something, some process that we didn't know the Egyptians used.

Very good as thats exactly what I said. They are what we see right before our eyes. Knowing or not knowing what caused them makes no difference.

That's what they are evidence of. Period, The signatures resemble those of a modern machine tool process, but they are not evidence of such a process. Think that through a few times before you respond.

Yes and I have clarified this and even said it would be silly to say that theres all these lost computers and NASA level CNC machines everywhere. That theres more than one way to skin a cat. We just havn't worked out how they did it.

Not quite, and you will have to pay attention because it is an important point. Non-existant devices are not evidence, Non-existant evidence is not evidence of anything, Nobody used the absence of any device to prove that it did not exist.

Yes they have and this is one of the logical fallacies thats used against lost knowledge and tech. That we have not found any of it. If theres lost knowledge and tech then where is it. I can go back and find several arguements like this. And its sort of true in a way when you think. Ok so if its not like modern tech and its not the traditional then what is it. It gets frustrating not knowing because it would then complete the picture.

No one is using the absence of any device to prove that it did exist. If you thought that was happening then you were just confused or maybe we were not clear. Think that through a few times before you respond.

Please don't tell me what I know lol.

Remember you are the one who asserts that not only is there is no evidence that the Naqada craftsmen had a suitable technique to produce those vases, but moreover that it was impossible for them to even devise it.

Yes I more or less said that above. Their level of development had not reach the level of inventing the potters wheel or lathe I don't think. The consensus is they made pottery by coil and slab methoth because they had no rotating device. Plus we are more or less saying the Naqada invented the potters wheel as their culture Naqada one extends back almost as early as when Mesopotamia invented it.

Impossible is a pretty big word, and I don't think even the looniest of your sources goes that far. And that is what you are getting all the heat about.

Yeah fair enough. But then this is not evidence. We can say all sorts of things are possible. What then.

 

[Ophiolite]

I said that the logic you are using in citing your own expertise is the same as me linking the experts I have. So if you are going to use authority as the evidence then it works both ways. We get into a game about who can supply the most authoritive expert. Its not a good way to argue.

Almost every paragraph, every sentence, sometimes even every clause that you type can be contested. Most of the time I forego the effort, since you routinely misunderstand, or ignore whatever I say. But . . .

It has been amply demonstrated, I think to the satisfaction of all save yourself, that your experts are not experts. Consequently, comparing their expertise - demonstrably of limited quality and probably less relevance - to that of a practitioner of the topics under discussion (whom you are free to interrogate to the test that expertise) is inappropriate.

I repeat an earlier comment, to which I got zero reaction: show evidence that you have critically examined the speculations and claims you are throwing around and then I shall treat your ramblings with a measure of respect.

 

[stevevw]

Almost every paragraph, every sentence, sometimes even every clause that you type can be contested. Most of the time I forego the effort, since you routinely misunderstand, or ignore whatever I say. But . . .

It has been amply demonstrated, I think to the satisfaction of all save yourself, that your experts are not experts.

This is getting silly now. So you have just made what you seem to say is a factual statement and you have used the opinion of others as the evidence. This is exactly what I just said. That using merely expert opinion is not a good way to argue and support a fact or truth.

So lets look at the facts. You say that those involved in the tests ect are not experts. Yet I had provided the qualifications. For example Chris Dunn is an engineer, machinst and precision tool maker with over 50 years experience. Has worked to the level of Aerospace engineering, pioneered precision tooling and has worked with all levels of machines from the 60s to present.

There could be no more a qualified person on the precision made vases and the tools and machining involved to make them. Then theres Christopher King of Precision Components with similar experience and expertise. Then there is Flinders Petrie one of the worlds greatest archeologists and Egyptologists and also a machinist.

So already you are making unsupported claims. If we are going to play those games then my experts say your experts are wrong lol. Whose opinion should we listen to. Someone who has already been shown to make false claims and provide no evidence. Or the well evidenced support for the qualifications of those involved in the vase scan projects.

Consequently, comparing their expertise - demonstrably of limited quality and probably less relevance - to that of a practitioner of the topics under discussion (whom you are free to interrogate to the test that expertise) is inappropriate.

Ok so Dunn and King have had over 50 years working in the industries. Flinders Petrie actually discovered and pioneered measuring and describing them. Yousef Awyan and his family have been making vases at the foot of the pyramids for generations.

I repeat an earlier comment, to which I got zero reaction: show evidence that you have critically examined the speculations and claims you are throwing around and then I shall treat your ramblings with a measure of respect.

Which spectualtions and claims. I am not sure what you mean. You do know spectulations don't usually have the evidence. You have to find the evidence to support the spectulation. But thats different to the science of determining what the signatures tell us about possible tools or methods used.

 

[BCP1928]

Hum I am not sure. The problem is according to the orthodoxy there was no lathe or potters wheel or bore stick. This was pre all that. They made pots by the coil method so not wheel or lathe required.

But then this leaves an out of place artifact that is found in a culture that did not have the knowledge or tech. Then you have to start getting into spectulation as to how this can be.

Did I say anything about your personal ability or expertise.

Yes, all of it derogatory. As you know, I am a journeyman machinist (retired) and recognize that you were not being condescending to me personally, but merely expressing your distain for skilled craftsmen generally (including those of ancient Egypt.) You clearly hold your own personal ability and expertise to be higher than mine, but it's interesting that despite repeated questioning, you won't tell us what it is.

I said that the logic you are using in citing your own expertise is the same as me linking the experts I have. So if you are going to use authority as the evidence then it works both ways. We get into a game about who can supply the most authoritive expert. Its not a good way to argue.

We can only go by what we know. But its not just based on the Naqada. We have evidence in other parts of the world such as when the potters wheel was first invented in Mesopotamia around 5,000 to 4,000 years ago. The bore stick tech came from that area into Egypt around 2600BC.

It could be as we have found that ancients were more advanced than we thought in other ways. Like the 300,000 year old calved wooden joint. As though ancients had a pretty sophisticated level of carpentry.

No I'm not lol. Anyway.

Very good as thats exactly what I said. They are what we see right before our eyes. Knowing or not knowing what caused them makes no difference.

Yes and I have clarified this and even said it would be silly to say that theres all these lost computers and NASA level CNC machines everywhere. That theres more than one way to skin a cat. We just havn't worked out how they did it.

Yes they have and this is one of the logical fallacies thats used against lost knowledge and tech. That we have not found any of it. If theres lost knowledge and tech then where is it. I can go back and find several arguements like this. And its sort of true in a way when you think. Ok so if its not like modern tech and its not the traditional then what is it. It gets frustrating not knowing because it would then complete the picture.

Please don't tell me what I know lol.

Yes I more or less said that above. Their level of development had not reach the level of inventing the potters wheel or lathe I don't think. The consensus is they made pottery by coil and slab methoth because they had no rotating device. Plus we are more or less saying the Naqada invented the potters wheel as their culture Naqada one extends back almost as early as when Mesopotamia invented it.

Yeah fair enough. But then this is not evidence. We can say all sorts of things are possible. What then.

Then we wait for more evidence. At least, that's the "orthodox" thing to do. Apparently that doesn't stop you from making certain conclusions without it.

 

[BCP1928]

So already you are making unsupported claims. If we are going to play those games then my experts say your experts are wrong lol. Whose opinion should we listen to. Someone who has already been shown to make false claims and provide no evidence. Or the well evidenced support for the qualifications of those involved in the vase scan projects.

So now you are accusing us of making false claims without evidence? You really are an arrogant little twit.

Ok so Dunn and King have had over 50 years working in the industries. Flinders Petrie actually discovered and pioneered measuring and describing them. Yousef Awyan and his family have been making vases at the foot of the pyramids for generations.

Which spectualtions and claims. I am not sure what you mean. You do know spectulations don't usually have the evidence. You have to find the evidence to support the spectulation.

It's easier the way you do it--just ignore the evidence that doesn't support your speculation.

But thats different to the science of determining what the signatures tell us about possible tools or methods used.

Why bother with science when you've already decided what kind of tools were used?