No, that is a falsehood, for example: 2 apples + 2 apples = 5 oranges is a false model.

@ Tim on May 2, 2011 at 3:52 AM said:
Rather than attacking the validity of someone’s work on the basis of their professional qualifications or lack thereof, i consider the smarter money would respond to the content of their hypothesis.

As far as the Butcher, the Baker and the Candlestick maker: everyone might have a great scientific idea or excpetional aptitude, but that does not mean blind acceptance is required, nor does it mean that challenge is forbidden.

That is precisely why we seek:

– the doctor to perform surgery, rather than the Butcher.
– the pilot to fly our families, rather the Baker.
– the engineer to design our bridges, rather than the Candlestick maker.

With just a small amount of math and with minimal research, it was quite easy to establish the falsity, baselessness, or triviality of Jeff’s assertions. He did not have any supporting content whatsoever, other than the opinions of his sources, which he parroted without proof or evidence.

Unlike your example of Albert Einstein, none of his Jeff’s sources submitted any peer-reviewed material (speaking of Einstein…)

@ Tim on May 2, 2011 at 3:52 AM said:
Bear in mind that Einstein was a desk clerk when he came up with the theory of relativity…

Einstein was one of those math/physics guys (you know, big on models and theory) and was extremely well versed in classical physics. He looked at the problems that classical physics was having in its explanation of certain natural phenomena (things like Mercury’s orbit and the Photoelectric Effect).

Einstein crafted mathematically-intensive physics theories to explain these phenomena as natural processes. He then submitted his work for scrutiny and had them published — not as popular novels or paperbacks — but rather in serious scientific peer-reviewed journals (i.e., mainstream/academia).

(In light of your previous comment about mathematical models, your example of Einstein was most ironic and I much enjoyed it . Thank you.)

Yes, there are studies on all of these items. Have a look at the recommended books (the one entitled “Egyptian Building” is especially good).

Also, I would think there would be a earth impact trail much like the old wagon train trails in the United states from the heavy traffic year after year after year. I would think they should be able to identify the actual drag trail the Egyptians used to drag tese stones to the building site.In fact, the wear on the ground should have cause them to do constant maintenance on the trail or to continuosely move their trail as they dug a ditch by dragging these stones. I know there’s places in western Kansas where there were notches cut 2 feet deep or more in a short period of time just by wagon wheels. I can only imagine the wear of dragging 20 ton stones and what damage that caused to the terrain.

I guess it is possible they built a bridge across the Nile to drag the blocks across instead of floating them on boats – but to my knowledge no one has ever discussed that before.