Scientific dating methods in archaeology
A simple test could be designed and arranged by impartial engineers that would either prove or disprove their longstanding disputed theory--that it was built using the primitive tools and methods of the day, circa 2500 BC. The answer is so obvious, it seems impossible: they know that the theory is bogus.
Could a trained, highly educated scientist really believe that 2.3 million tons of stone, some blocks weighing 70 tons, could have been transported and lifted by primitive methods?
This points to a questionable assumption that is part of the establishment's arsenal: only degreed scientists can practice science.
Two filters keep the uncredentialled, independent researcher out of the loop: (1) credentials, and (2) peer review.
We think it is incumbent upon any scientist to bear the burden of proof of his/her thesis; however, the social scientists who make these claims have never stood up to that kind of scrutiny. No other scientific discipline would get away with bending the rules of science.
All that Egyptologists have ever done is bat down alternative theories using underhanded tactics.
Self-taught Egyptologist John Anthony West brought the water erosion issue to the attention of geologist Dr Robert Schoch.Any time you allege a conspiracy is afoot, especially in the field of science, you are treading on thin ice.We tend to be very skeptical about conspiracies--unless the Mafia or some Muslim radicals are behind the alleged plot.You do not get to number two unless you have number one.
Science is a method that anyone can learn and apply.
Dr Zahi Hawass, the Giza Monuments chief, wasted no time in firing a barrage of public criticism at the pair.