Jupiter and the Eye of Horus

[gentleman-farmer]

The Pyramid Texts (speaking of the hieroglyphs in the pyramids in Saqqara, and not the translations that go by that name) are a treasure that give us an insight into an ancient world.

 

Within the hieroglyphs is a vocabulary (meaning, a system of symbols with word meanings) that contain both sound-signs (phonograms) and sense-signs (ideograms). There are symbols for the singular and the plural. There are first, second, and third person dialogues. There are the usual nuances of expression, and within a single short paragraph or sentence the dialogue will change from one speaker to another.

 

The world is fortunate to have in Zahi Hawass, Secretary General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities, a person who sees the extreme value of these ancient hieroglyphs and does what is required to protect them

 

The world is fortunate too, that a person of the quality of the late Dr. R. O. Faulkner, (the leading modern British authority on hieroglyphic antiquities at the time) put this treasure into modern English that they could be read by all in the world

 

To try to second guess Dr. R. O. Faulkner's English translation, IMO, would be the height of arrogance.

 

I use his translation exclusively (as written without interpretation) for no way in the world have I, (or anyone except those with absolute superior skills and world wide recognition) have earned the right to correct him.

 

gf

/

[Klaynos]

That is the same logical fallisy as has been pointed out previously. I also note how you have ignored our last comments and my above request for photos oh the glyphs for the passages you mentioned shortly before to back up your statement. I assume that's because they are not in support of your claims.

[insane_alien]

The world is fortunate too, that a person of the quality of the late Dr. R. O. Faulkner, (the leading modern British authority on hieroglyphic antiquities at the time) put this treasure into modern English that they could be read by all in the world

 

To try to second guess Dr. R. O. Faulkner's English translation, IMO, would be the height of arrogance.

 

 

emphasis mine.

 

newton was the best at physics in his time.

 

now his work has been superceeded by einsteinin mechanics on the grand scale and quantum mechanics on the small scale. put shortly, newton was inaccurate in his deductions.

 

as time progresses we get a better understanding as further study is conducted. it has already been said you are using outdated translations yet you seem to hold this faulkner guy above error.

 

you are also dodging questions again.

 

i ask you again, assume that we are not utter morons.

[Moontanman]

gf, how could the ancient Egyptians have received the knowledge of the great red spot on Jupiter? If you can't answer this the idea becomes nothing more than a meaningless coincidence... No mater how close the description is...

[gentleman-farmer]

moontanman

gf, how could the ancient Egyptians have received the knowledge of the great red spot on Jupiter? If you can't answer this the idea becomes nothing more than a meaningless coincidence... No matter how close the description is...

 

gf) We don't know how, but that they did is clear from the many artifacts that exist that re-affirm the interpretation of the Eye of Horus Icon

 

One of the more convincing is a mural that is on the wall of a temple in Thebes. I have a photo - but the propensity for those on this panel to attack anything and everything prevents me from posting a photo.

 

What I know would be the nature of the ensuing responses would do the mural a great injustice

 

Another point I might make is that with the Eye of Horus interpretation - we can trace the origin of the hawk - without it - the hawk makes no sense

___________________

Insane_alien

Newton was the best at physics in his time.

 

now his work has been superceded by Einstein

 

gf) Nonsense - Newton's laws are used the world over and are taught at all appropriate levels of education (as written without modification)

 

They were written for velocity "v" (in the visible range) Einstein's were written for velocity "c," at or near the speed of light

 

No way does Einstein's supercede nor address the same level of issues as Newton - nor does Einstein's have an equivalent to Newton's first three laws

 

To suggest otherwise is Pure Nonsense

gf

/

[Moontanman]

moontanman

 

gf) We don't know how, but that they did is clear from the many artifacts that exist that re-affirm the interpretation of the Eye of Horus Icon

 

One of the more convincing is a mural that is on the wall of a temple in Thebes. I have a photo - but the propensity for those on this panel to attack anything and everything prevents me from posting a photo.

 

What I know would be the nature of the ensuing responses would do the mural a great injustice

 

 

There are glyphs that seem to portray helicopters and jet airplanes quite convincingly but they are just coincidence of combined shapes. if you can't come up with a mechanism for the Egyptians to have known about the great red spot then your interpretation is no better than coincidence and thus meaningless. I suggest you give the people more credit and post the photo.

[insane_alien]

gf) Nonsense - Newton's laws are used the world over and are taught at all appropriate levels of education (as written without modification)

 

They were written for velocity "v" (in the visible range) Einstein's were written for velocity "c," at or near the speed of light

 

wow, just wow. this tells use you haven't even seen the equations for einsteinian mechanics. they are capable of describing the mechanicsof movement accurately from 0m/s to c. Newtonian mechanics is only accurate up until about 0.1c when relativistic effects(handled by einsteinian mechanics and not by newtonian) become significant and the two theories diverge.

 

No way does Einstein's supercede nor address the same level of issues as Newton

 

you're right here actually(well, if taking that sentence literally. I feel that you meant to say that einstein addresses fewer circumstances which is a false proposition). einstein addresses far MORE circumstances than newton could hope to.

 

- nor does Einstein's have an equivalent to Newton's first three laws

 

actually, einsteinian mechanics DOES have its own version of newtons laws of motion. you should look them up, you might learn something.

 

To suggest otherwise is Pure Nonsense

gf

/

 

then reality is pure nonsense, oh no! a unicorn ate my hat and a honey badger fell out of my nostril.

[Klaynos]

I'm pretty bored of this cherry picking what to reply to. And still.avoiding questions and evidence you don't like. Incidentally you can replace newton laws with relativity in all microscopic situations they only produce very different results when speeds are close to c or very large scale gravity predictions.

[gentleman-farmer]

By way of example, I wrote

the leading modern British authority on hieroglyphic antiquities at the time in acknowledgment of his having passed on and out of respect. But you can see in the above post that it was used to suggest his work is outdated. Where does anyone earn the right to suggest that?

[insane_alien]

By way of example, I wrote

 

people who keep up to date with the latest in the field of translation for one.

 

so, what about the physics? to which you still haven't gave a reply that indicates sentience.

[Klaynos]

Logical fallisy. You're going to have to do better than that.

[Sayonara]

While Jupiter is visible to the naked eye, Egyptian technology was far behind producing the requisite tools for observing its atmospheric features.

 

This entire thread is ridiculous.