It's Bauval's hypocrisy that's really entertaining

If you read his not-so-dynamic journal board he says:

"I have always maintained that honest and fair criticism, even if it
is thrown hard against my theories and my work, is something that I
condone and indeed welcome. The same goes for sceptical reviews." -
this is the first part of his posting.

However, it's a blatant porky as the reality is diametrically opposed
to that !

His "method" of attempting to deal with his "critics" is interesting.
There used to be, but is now deleted, fairly explicit "promises" on
his not-so-dynamic journal board to "deal with" certain people - me in
particular:-)

He and his sycophant of a webmaster - the hirsute gollum - half inched
material of mine and posted it to try and embarress me. They were
trying to make out that I couldn't possibly have a "real" life as I
spent all my time debunking Bauval's nonesense. Unfortunately, but
unsurprisingly, they missed the real point that Bauval's stuff is such
low calibre that it doesn't need much debunking - dealing with it is
analogous to swatting an irritating insect. I had the devil's own job
getting my material off his board - I don't know who talked him into
some sense !

Another hilarity from Bauval - and his halfcocked colleague and fellow
conspirator - is the way he keeps on about his "reputation" !

Let's see:-)

He's misrepresented Prof. Fairall of the University of Cape Town:

http://www.hallofmaat.com/maat/article.php?sid=26

He's fiddled the astronomy to get his 10,500BC:

http://www.hallofmaat.com/maat/article.php?sid=16

He's selectively quoted:

http://www.hallofmaat.com/maat/article.php?sid=53

And the "campaign" he, his halfcocked colleague, and their "disciples"
have perpetrated against Dr Krupp of Griffith Observatory, Los
Angeles, amongst others, is close to a witch hunt.

Yes, he's got a "reputation" - and it's deserved.

There's a lot of stuff against his much vaunted "Orion Correlation
Theory" he

http://www.hallofmaat.com/maat/searc...uery=&topic=34

To all intents and purposes it's a dead duck and has been for a
v-e-r-y long time....

John

Hmmm....

Why didn't my message thread under the Glasgow one ?

John

(John Wall) wrote:

Hmmm....

Why didn't my message thread under the Glasgow one ?

It looks like you posted via google groups. I don't know about
posting, but their archive is broken in terms of threading and subject
lines (two entirely different things). Your post had no references
header, which is what defines a thread. Why there was no references
header is another question...


Tim
--
Google is not the only search engine.