Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

The Old World is a reference to those parts of Earth known to Europeans before the voyages of Christopher Columbus; it includes Europe, Asia and Africa.

Moderators: Minimalist, MichelleH

Re: Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

Postby Tiompan » Fri Mar 30, 2018 2:50 pm

[

The problem is that you are confused .
First you thought that Awad's thinking was "very important " then didn't respond to the problems inherent in that thinking .
You then changed tack to wonder "did the alignments of major structures within a nome bear some relation to "its" constellation?"
The failed to respond to the problems with that .
Then the problem became " figuring out the relation of the sun to the constellations which was held by the ancient Egyptians."
That was pointed as not being anything to do with your original point , and hardly difficult to calculate .
So we got another change of tack with "Could the assignation of different constellations to different nomes explain the different solar alignments of the temples found in those different nomes?"
Which was also shown to be problematic , but again no response to the problems .
Then you returned to something that has already been explained and had previously failed to respond to .
Tiompan
 
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

Postby Tiompan » Fri Mar 30, 2018 3:05 pm

What I refer to as a henge is the commonly accepted definition of the monument type used worldwide .

It doesn't matter what you call a henge , nobody will pay attention to someone who knows nothing about the subject and makes up his own definitions to cover his ignorance and inability to face the facts .
Tiompan
 
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

Postby circumspice » Sat Mar 31, 2018 2:31 am

E.P. Grondine wrote:
circumspice wrote:2. the allocation or attribution of someone or something as belonging to something[/size].


That one.


In the future, I will refer to what tiompan calls a "henge" as a "circulus",
so that circular earthworks are not confused with henges.


EP, stop flogging that poor dead horse. You KNOW that Tiompan is correct & that you are wrong. You're just trying to make Tiompan have a stroke or a heart attack because of your intransigence. That, oh white haired one, is most definitely not amusing.
"Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, and, without sneering, teach the rest to sneer." ~ Alexander Pope
User avatar
circumspice
 
Posts: 767
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Re: Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

Postby E.P. Grondine » Sat Mar 31, 2018 10:37 am

spice -

Since tiompan wants to insist on using an Anglo-Saxon definition,
the least I can do is insist on using a Latin definition:

circulus m (genitive circulī); second declension

circle (geometric figure)
An orbit (circular path)
A ring, hoop
A necklace, chain
A company, social gathering, group
(Medieval) A calendrical cycle

Aside from that, I will be f**cked if I have to deal with usual nuts building imaginary Celtic empires in North America
due to their confusion over the word "henge".

And then there is the little problem of having a convenient word to refer to wood henges and stone henges.
Usually people believe what they want to believe until reality intrudes.
User avatar
E.P. Grondine
 
Posts: 2309
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

Postby Tiompan » Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:32 am

Yet again you are showing your ignorance , on more than one level .
You have been told often enough . Here goes yet again.
"The component henge in Stonehenge probably comes from Old English “hencg “ = hinge or hencen =hang or gallows . "
Note ,that it is not henge .
"The term Henge was first used by Kendrick in the early 1930's to describe a type of monument , see above for a definition ."
" Woodhenge was prior to the use of the term Henge as a type of monument ,that is why your formulation wood +henge is nonsense "
Henge is an english word ,the same language we are using here ,the one you have difficulty understanding .
The definition found in both major English language dictionaries i.e. British and American is what is understood to be the correct one by those who know about the subject .
The alt nuts make up their own .

Not only were you wrong when you first attempted to use the term the more you tried to cover it up the bigger the hole you dug for yourself .
Keep going , you couldn't possibly appreciate how ridiculous you appear to anyone who comes across your madness , but it does provide the odd chortle moments in between the boredom .
Tiompan
 
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

Postby E.P. Grondine » Sun Apr 01, 2018 12:40 pm

If you are going to talk about circuli, use the correct term.
Usually people believe what they want to believe until reality intrudes.
User avatar
E.P. Grondine
 
Posts: 2309
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

Postby Tiompan » Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:23 pm

Lol .
As ever a complete failure to respond to the highlighting of your multiple errors ,and by evading them and coming up with non sequiturs and red herrings you only manage to make further errors .
Tiompan
 
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

Postby shawomet » Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:37 pm

Tiompan wrote:Yet again you are showing your ignorance , on more than one level .
You have been told often enough . Here goes yet again.
"The component henge in Stonehenge probably comes from Old English “hencg “ = hinge or hencen =hang or gallows . "
Note ,that it is not henge .
"The term Henge was first used by Kendrick in the early 1930's to describe a type of monument , see above for a definition ."
" Woodhenge was prior to the use of the term Henge as a type of monument ,that is why your formulation wood +henge is nonsense "
Henge is an english word ,the same language we are using here ,the one you have difficulty understanding .
The definition found in both major English language dictionaries i.e. British and American is what is understood to be the correct one by those who know about the subject .
The alt nuts make up their own .

Not only were you wrong when you first attempted to use the term the more you tried to cover it up the bigger the hole you dug for yourself .
Keep going , you couldn't possibly appreciate how ridiculous you appear to anyone who comes across your madness , but it does provide the odd chortle moments in between the boredom .


Spending years trying to get someone to stop using their own definition of henge, page after page, thread after thread, might very well appear ridiculous in the extreme to some. Many? I mean, I was lulled into thinking that was a reasonable expectation as well, using a consensus definition, but after a certain point, nobody cares. Has it ever occurred to you that E.P. Is never going to concede your point? Never. You must know that by now since you've repeatedly avoided holding your breath. There's madness, and then there's madness.
shawomet
 
Posts: 357
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 9:14 am

Re: Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

Postby E.P. Grondine » Sat Apr 07, 2018 4:40 pm

Hi shawomet -
Its not my definition of henge - it is the one commonly used here and elsewhere.
But let' compare "errors" - Tiompan not only has missed a massive comet impact, he uses whatever he can to deny it occurred.
I enjoy watching him squirm,
Usually people believe what they want to believe until reality intrudes.
User avatar
E.P. Grondine
 
Posts: 2309
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

Postby Tiompan » Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:16 am

Maybe EP is never going to concede that his definition is demonstrably wrong , i.e. ignoring the multiple links to the correct definition ,
and accepted by those who know about the subject , whilst never providing anything that supports his definitions .
There is so much more wrong than simply getting the definition wrong . These problems have been highlighted too ,and always evaded .
It is not my definition ,or the "english" definition , as opposed to the american definition ,it's the accepted versus a made up one that doesn't even make sense , never mind being wrong .

I realise it is incredibly boring but shouldn't you speak out against the BS ?
Ok maybe not . Let the nuts have their way , but if you don't respond you'll finish up with nothing else here .
Last edited by Tiompan on Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Tiompan
 
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

Postby Tiompan » Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:18 am

E.P. Grondine wrote:Hi shawomet -
Its not my definition of henge - it is the one commonly used here and elsewhere.


Then why can't you provide the evidence to support that , whilst ignoring the evidence that shows that not to be the case ?
PS .Anything that I have said that is wrong about impacts , please provide the quotes , I'm more than happy to be informed of errors .
Tiompan
 
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

Postby circumspice » Mon Apr 09, 2018 3:40 am

*whispers Vee-ger*...
"Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, and, without sneering, teach the rest to sneer." ~ Alexander Pope
User avatar
circumspice
 
Posts: 767
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Re: Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

Postby E.P. Grondine » Mon Apr 09, 2018 5:04 am

Usually people believe what they want to believe until reality intrudes.
User avatar
E.P. Grondine
 
Posts: 2309
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

Postby Simon21 » Tue Apr 10, 2018 2:13 am

circumspice wrote:*whispers Vee-ger*...


Who or what is Vee-ger? Is it a star, the name of a character from one of those rubbish superhero movies?
Simon21
 
Posts: 389
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 4:40 am

Re: Solar alignments in ancient Egypt

Postby Simon21 » Tue Apr 10, 2018 2:14 am

Tiompan wrote:
E.P. Grondine wrote:Hi shawomet -
Its not my definition of henge - it is the one commonly used here and elsewhere.


Then why can't you provide the evidence to support that , whilst ignoring the evidence that shows that not to be the case ?
PS .Anything that I have said that is wrong about impacts , please provide the quotes , I'm more than happy to be informed of errors .


Well that is certainly not true
Simon21
 
Posts: 389
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 4:40 am

PreviousNext

Return to Old World

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests