Posted by Steve Price on December 07, 1998 at 10:23:42:
In Reply to: Re: Clarification, please posted by James Allen on December 07, 1998 at 09:03:13:
Dear Jim,
Thanks for the reference to Barber's book.
I'm still unclear about the meaning of the rest of your post. I'm going to put what I think I read into my own words. Please correct it as appropriate.
Here goes:
1. The sphinx is more than 10,000 years old, and is made of a red stone. There are carvings in red granite on several continents, including Africa, depicting naked horsemen holding tridents over their heads.
2. The sphinx is related to the red granite carvings showing naked horsement with tridents. Is it the red color of the stone that links them? Since the red granite carvings occur on several continents (Which ones? How old are these carvings?), including Africa, and Egypt is an African country in which the sphinx is located, is the geography the link?
3. Is the conjecture that the tridents were some kind of receiver for an unknown (to us) form of energy the response to my skepticism about massive stone structures being products of nomads? That is, is it being argued that they were able to accomplish this feat by having an energy source other than human labor with which to work?
4. If that is the case, what evidence is there in support of the hypothesized high technology society having existed? Tridents on rock carvings, in and of themselves, are not evidence of anything much more high tech than a spear. Archeologists seem to find mostly stone tools, animal skins and bones in sites more than, say, 10,000 years old. Egyptian tombs provide no evidence of any form of labor more sophisticated than human power for construction of their massive structures. Nor am I aware of anything else found in old digs, biblical accounts, etc. that suggests such a thing.
5. Is it being asserted that the basis of your preference for "other people's art" is that humankind has been degenerating for thousands of years and, I guess, what we think of as the developed world is the most degenerate of all?
Regards,
Steve