Wednesday, September 30, 2009



Many people repeat what they read because they actually believe it, but after they find it is false and continue to repeat it, should we label them scholars, Egyptologist or should we label them liars.

Ahmose autobiography, The door jamb from Tell el-Dab'a, Khamudy hieroglyphics, Merneptah Stela ... all said to identify Asiatics, Hyksos or Israelites.

The hieroglyphic said to have that meaning in Ahmose autobiography does not exist in any of the other hieroglyphics.

The hieroglyphic said to have that meaning in the door jamb from Tell el-Dab'a does not exist in any of the other hieroglyphics.

The hieroglyphic said to have that meaning in the Khamudy hieroglyphics does not exist in any of the other hieroglyphics.

The hieroglyphic said to have that meaning in the Merneptah Stela does not exist in any of the other hieroglyphics.

In the multiple hieroglyphic sources said to have the word Asiatic, how is it all the words in the sources are different hieroglyphic spellings?


When a population encounters a population of a different language, they can learn the meanings of each other's words.

When a population attempts to hide the meaning of their words or the population speaking that language no longer exists, then the process of code breaking is used.

Code breaking works by finding patterns. Trying to find out what a word of another language also is a search for patterns .... and if/when some of the words are known, the meanings of words can be found by looking at in the context.

* If an unknown word is in a sentence and there is no information in the sentence to identify the meaning ... there is no understanding of that word.

* If a word is only found once in a language (with no accompanying information) the meaning of that word can never be known.

* If a word is found many times in different writings, then the examination of the word in each context will be evidence of it's possible meaning.


A source of hieroglyphics was found in 1896 and the glyphs on a line was translated to foreigners .... decades later in 1976 another 'expert' translated the same glyphs to Israel.

How did they get "Israel" out of foreigners?

Amalekites, Amorites, Arvadites, Edomites, Girgashites, Hamathite, Hittites, Horites, Ishmaelites, Jebusites, Kadmoites, Kenizzites, Midianites, Moabites, Perizzites, Philistines, Zemarites ... ALL of these and More tribes were foreigners and they were in Canaan, so how does these experts, chose Israel to be the foreigners and change the translation?

Does this source of hieroglyphics state they were circumcised, does it say they would not work on a certain day of the week, does the hieroglyphic say they performed burnt sacrifices.. NO, NO, NO !

Ashkelon is conquered, Gezer seized, Yanoam made nonexistent; the foreigners are wasted, bare of seed, Khor is become a widow for Egypt.

I would suggest you find any one who translates that word to Israel, to find that set of glyphs in ANY OTHER EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPHS or to explain how they determined those particular foreigners can be identified as Israelites.... Take all challengers, ask them to have a trained translator of hieroglyphics to publish how they concluded the word identifies Israel and see if they will sign their name to their assertion on a public web page.


The Merneptah Stele is non-descript. There is NO information to identify those foreigners as "Amalekites, Amorites, Arvadites, Edomites, Girgashites, Hamathite, Hittites, Horites, Ishmaelites, Jebusites, Kadmoites, Kenizzites, Midianites, Moabites, Perizzites, Philistines or Zemarites" .. NOTHING in the context to identify that word as Israel.

Identifying that word as Israel would be as idiotic as reading an account about a football fan throwing a beer bottle at a ref.


What fan, goofy? The one with his hand in the air? NO, to remove a word from the abstract/unknown to the defined department, there would have to be a unique identification that identified them.

The guy with his hat on backwards, would eliminate all girls and all who did not have their hat on backwards.

Why would any one inject the word Israel, when there is NOTHING to identify that word as Israel? To appease the religious who invent evidence for their make believe stories.

Why would any one who knows there is NO evidence that word is Israel, jump on the band wagon and promote that BS?

I guess it is more fun to jump on the band wagon and get along with the ignorant or liars, then it is to be truthful?

It is quite funny how they call the Merneptah Stele, "The Israel Stele" when there are only 5 words in the complete context and none of these words are identified as Israel.

IF a word is only found once in an unknown language and there is nothing in the context to identify it's meaning, then it's meaning is UNKNOWN !

If a word is found multiple times in an unknown language, then the linguist can examine the word in the multiple context and get an insight of the word's meaning.

Show how any translator arrived at the decision the word in the Merneptah Stele identifies Israel, then show us the name of the translator, their translation training and where they will testify to the meaning of this word in a public web page.


This is only one example of the concocted definitions used by BSERS who call themselves scholars/Egyptologist.




Tuesday, September 29, 2009




The pdf file this information comes from is here. You must right click on it, left click on save target as .. a location on your hard drive, and open it from your hard drive.

I add links to images in case they do not appear in the web pages.


Golenischeff / Moller vs Davies vs Allen vs Fairman

The pdf file uses the word Hyksos 4 times (but this is not a word translated from the hieroglyphic). All the BS about Hyksos is attributed by "historians" who's source is their own lips and not any hieroglyphic text. (If you chose the word Asiatic or Hyksos, FINE, then point out the hieroglyphic glyphs you use and we will document it for later cross examination)

"Davies copy stands in the original"

Golenischeff did provide poor photographs.

The pdf file reveals the controversy in the translations and goes into great detail.


From what I have already been given this is the James P. Allen, "The Speos Artemidos Inscription of Hatshepsut", Bulletin of the Egyptological Seminar 16 (2002), pp.1-17, pls.1+2.

Hear ye, all people and folk as many as they may be, I have done these things through the counsel of my heart. I have not slept forgetfully, (but) I have restored that which had been ruined. I have raised up that which had gone to pieces formerly, since the Asiatics were in the midst of Avaris of the Northland, and vagabonds were in the midst of them, overthrowing that which had been made.

(What sketch or photo was the above translation made from?)


From the pdf file this appears to be the Davies translation of this same section.

Speos Artemidos

Hearken, all ye patricians, and common folk as many as ye be, I have done these things by the

36 device of my heart. 12 I never slumbered as one forgetful, but have made strong what was de-

37 cayed. I have raised up what was dismembered, t even from the first time when 13 the Asiatics

38 were in Avaris of the North land, (with) roving hordes in the midst of them overthrowing what

had been made; they ruled with out I Rec, and he acted not by divine command (?) down to my

39 august self, u I being firm established on the throne of Rec


Below is the section of the sketch (lines 36-38) that the translation was made from.

Point out the glyphs that you translate to Asiatic/Hyksos so I may compare that word with other hieroglyphics which are supposed to contain that word.

If the word in this sketch is NEVER used in any other hieroglyph, how does one decide it's meaning?

Show us what other hieroglyphic source is  the word you translate to Asiatic/Hyksos is found.


So point out the word Asiatic/Hyksos !



Sunday, September 20, 2009


Nations that did and did not rule Egypt
Empires that expanded into Egypt
These are boundary maps.. just outlines of ancient empires. I have multiple map programs. I used my Map Maker Toolkit for most of them. It is a mapping program used in schools and has ancient empires already prepared. What the program did not have, I got off the internet.
They do not have to be accurate, because no such maps are. Maps give you the general outline of borders or empires.
Would I be so goofy to say no outsiders ever ruled Egypt? Here are a few and I am only looking at populations north of Egypt.
By the outline of these maps..
The Israelites never ruled Canaan. They just won some and lost some battles. These other sub tribes of Canaan was there before and long after the Israelites were scattered through out Asia and north Africa.
Through the Israelites were commanded to drive out the inhabitants of the land, it Never happened:
Joshua 15:63  As for the Jebusites the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the children of Judah could not drive them out; but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day
Joshua 17:12  Yet the children of Manasseh could not drive out the inhabitants of those cities; but the Canaanites would dwell in that land
Judges 1:19  And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.
Judges 1:21  And the children of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites that inhabited Jerusalem; but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem unto this day
Judges 1:32  But the Asherites dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land: for they did not drive them out.
The Canaanite Empire never ruled Egypt. Canaan was like Africa having MANY divided nations inside of its land area.
In the bible accounts of the Israelites they were just a family of less than 70 before they went into Egypt. They were in captivity for 430 years. When they returned they held power at times for a few hundred years, then by the time of 2nd Kings, they were scattered again.
They NEVER drove out the original Asian tribes of Canaan.
The other tribes lived right in the midst of the Israelites.. such as the Hittites.
2 Samuel 11:3 David's neighbor was a Hittite.
These multiple tribes remained there long after the Israelites were dispersed .
Canaan was not a united empire at any time, just a pot luck of divided factions that fought among themselves
The Akkadian Empire only reached as far as the Sinia, so they never ruled.
(Greeks) Alexandria ruled Egypt
Assyria ruled Egypt
Babylon only reached as far as the Sinia
The Byzantine empire ruled Egypt
The Hittites never ruled Egypt
The Ottoman Empire ruled Egypt
The Persian Empire ruled Egypt
The Roman Empire ruled Egypt
Of course multiple empires ruled Egypt through the centuries and they are documented. The idea that any of the divided factions of the tribes of Canaan ruled Egypt, is only in the vapor from flapping lips.
If I have missed any empires that reached into Egypt, let me know. The album in the link below contains all the empires listed above.





Saturday, September 19, 2009



As for Canaanites ruling Egypt, give me a break. Canaan was not an empire united under one power. Canaan was divided into dozens of tribes/nations. The artifacts from Canaan/Palestine are nothing compared to the Egyptian civilization.

In the bible stories, the Israelites did not come riding in on chariots

Genesis 41:42 And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck;

Genesis 41:43 And he made him to ride in the second chariot which he had.

Joseph got to ride in on Pharaoh's second chariot he had parked in the garage.

Genesis 46:5 And Jacob rose up from Beersheba: and the sons of Israel carried Jacob their father, and their little ones, and their wives, in the wagons which Pharaoh had sent to carry him. .. The Israelites did not even have their own transportation, Pharaoh had to send wagons to pick them up.

The whole 'Hyksos' caper is the promotion of European 'Jews' who try to make the world believe their ancestors ruled Egypt.


There is no hieroglyphics that tie any of the Egyptian enemy to the same population.

Hieroglyphics are just little pictures instead of letters. The pictures (glyphs) AND the sequence they were arranged, determined the meaning of the hieroglyphic text.

In this example

1 Identified a people in a tomb in the 12th dynasty
2 Identified a people in the 14th dynasty
3 Identified a people in the 15th dynasty
4 and 5 identified a people in the 18th dynasty

These hieroglyphics were found in different areas in different decades. Ok, Mr. Translator were the Egyptians identifying the same population or are these the identifications of different populations?

To generate these hypothetical names I used a silly hieroglyphic generator and each word is from 1 Germans, 2 Spanish, 3 Russians, 4 Americans, 5 French.

It is that simple, if you use the characters of Europeans, swap which character and which arrangement, that particular arrangement identifies a specific people.. and if it is a different arrangement, then it is the identification of a different people.

Look at countries around the world. They have conflicts with others from multiple outside nations and from inside factions. Why would any one just assume the reference in the different hieroglyphic sources are a reference to the same population?

There are multiple different sources from different decades and different parts of Egypt in which people assert, identify Hyksos.

The test is simple, extract the word said to be Hyksos or Asiatic from each source and place them where you can see them all, and see if they are the same or totally different hieroglyphic words.

Germans, Spanish, Russians, Americans, French .. hieroglyphic or European character sets, different characters in different arrangements is a different word.

Take all the hieroglyphics in which the Egyptians identify their enemy ... take that word which they call their enemy .. and place the hieroglyphic name of each enemy like the above example.

I don't know, but I am guessing most or all of these hieroglyphic sources identify each of their enemy with different hieroglyphic words?

It does not prove conclusively they were not the same people, but it does prove conclusively that there is not a shred of evidence connecting the enemy in one hieroglyphic source with an enemy in another hieroglyphic source ... The Egyptians were surrounded with other tribes/nations on all sides.





Hatsheput / Speos Artemidos Inscription

Near Beni Hasan

A little over a month ago I was told of another source identifying the Hyksos.

From this web page

The doorway leads into a hall, its ceiling is decorated with hieroglyphs and relief's which are now very worn and difficult to read in some parts.

The most important was inscribed by Hatshepsut on the architrave over the entrance and denounces the 'Asiatics of Avaris' (the Hyksos) who ruled Egypt.

Hatshepsut describes the chaos of Hyksos rule


#1 I can not find one photo of the specific area where these hieroglyphics exist.

#2 I can not find one image of a sketch of any who was supposed to have sketched the hieroglyphics.

#3 I can not find one photograph of the hieroglyphic, that any sketch was made from

I have communicated with lots of people who tell what is in the inscription but NONE of them can produce an image of the hieroglyphic sketch or a photo of the original glyphs.

So far I have read something about these guys in connection with the inscription.

Norman de Garis Davies, Professor Sethe, James Henry Breasted

From what I have read , there are claims that these guys created sketches of the hieroglyphic... BUT no where can I find an image of their sketches, so far.

Assuming they actually do exist, it would be great to place the sketches side by side for a comparison.

In the information on Breasted, he is depicted as an excellent photographer and knew how to arrange lighting to bring out the best detail.

A camera and the proper lighting can produce details that can not be seen with the human eye.

So far, every one I have heard tells about the information from a sketch they have never seen.. and the location where the hieroglyphic is said to be, has deteriorated and the image can not be seen today.

I like to include images of the statue/image/hieroglyphic in the topic, but until some one produces an image of it, I could only include a picture of a puff of smoke... When I asked about the hieroglyphic, this is the reply:

The inscription is written on the facade of a rock cut shrine in Middle Egypt known today as the Speos Artemidos, which is near Beni Hasan. The inscription is almost impossible to see and photograph as it is in shadow most of the time.

Of course flash or time delay photography would give excellent photos in the dark. One can even take photos of a flower at night with a cloud covered sky (with out flash or any kind of lighting).

When they find something of great importance, they plaster images of it all over the world, but when they speak of something with a big problem, they are as camera shy as a teen ager with a big pimple on their nose, could it be they can not show what they can't see themselves with or with out light?


Let's say the hieroglyph was in tact and the Egyptians wrote exactly what is found in the present translations.

Hear ye, all people and folk as many as they may be, I have done these things through the counsel of my heart. I have not slept forgetfully, (but)
a) I have restored that which had been ruined.
b) I have raised up that which had gone to pieces formerly,
c) since the Asiatics were in the midst of Avaris of the Northland,
d) and vagabonds were in the midst of them, overthrowing that which had been made.

Assuming this text did exist before it crumbled..

a) Does not mention that Hatsheput encountered any Hyksos, but this line states she had repaired/restored that which had been ruined.

b) Nothing about any encounter with any foreigners, information about the restoration of that which had gone to pieces.

c) Does not say the Asaitics and Hatsheput were in a rumble, but it says the Asiatics were (past tense) in Avaris.

d) Vagabonds .. is a reference to slackers, hippies... Vagabond: 1. A person without a permanent home who moves from place to place. 2. A vagrant; a tramp. 3. A wanderer; Of, relating to, or characteristic of a wanderer; nomadic.

Of course this would include shepherds .. and Egypt was full of shepherds centuries before and after the Hyksos accounts.

"The vagabonds were in the midst of them (speaking about Asiatics) overthrowing that which had been made"

If this translation is correct, it would appear the vagabonds were destructive to the Asiatics.

e) In the mythical stories of the Hyksos, Avaris was their capital. If this were the capital of the Hyksos, they would not be destroying their own pad.

The only way Hyksos destruction of Avaris fits, is IF it were ruled by the Egyptians and the Hyksos invaded the capital of the Egyptians.

f) As for the word translated to Asiatics, it is important to see the actual photographic or sketched image of this word so it can be compared to other text in which hieroglyphics are translated to Asiatics.

We can see if this word identifies the same subset of enemy or if the Egyptians were writing about different groups.


18th Dynasty 1550-1295 BC

Ahmose ... drove out the unidentified enemy ... he died

Amenhotep I ... grew up, ruled and died

Thutmose I ... grew up, ruled and died

Thutmose II... grew up, ruled and died

Hatshepsut ... grew up.

.. put her thoughts on this surface.

So of course this enemy was driven out long before Hatsheput was ever born.

IF this translation is of a hieroglyphic that actually existed, there is nothing about any encounter of Hatsheput with the 'Hatsheput', but the basic information is about Hatshepsut's clean up/rebuilding after the 'Hyksos' were long gone.

A man sitting in his cabin shooting at the Indians does not destroy that which he has built. The destroyers will be the Indians who shoot flaming arrows to destroy the man and his family.

g) NOTHING here states this enemy ever ruled Avaris. If they ruled Avaris they would have protected it (not destroyed it). The only way this enemy would have destroyed this city is if the Egyptians ruled it, and the enemy invaded it.

These invaders were invaders who came into Egypt like Pancho Villa. Their siege lasted longer but they were driven out. They never ruled northern Egypt, Ahmose gives the exact identification of who did rule Egypt... all of Egypt !


Not Ahmose the ruler, but this is Ahmose the military leader

The Autobiography of Ahmose, Son of Abana

Ahmose: I grew up in the town of Nekheb, my father being a soldier of the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Sekenenre, the justified. Baba son of Reinet was his name.


NO where did the Egyptians EVER write the enemy ruled northern Egypt, but here the military leader Ahmose, reveals his father served the EGYPTIAN KING who ruled southern and northern Egypt !



In your translation from this hieroglyphic sketch/photo (Hatsheput speaking of the Asiatics) you have never seen.

h) Give the line(s) which speaks of Hatshepsut repairing/rebuilding that city

i) Give the line in which this enemy is identified by where they originated from.

j) Give the line in which it states that Hatshepsut encountered this enemy.

k) Give the line in which this enemy is said to have ruled Avaris

I always thought that those who knowingly promoted false information was identified as liars, but here I guess, most are just Lemmings who parriot what they have heard.

By the translation you embrace, show me which of this information does exist and which of this information does NOT exist?



Sunday, September 13, 2009


Vague speech / letters


Tonight (Sep 12, 2009) they had a segment about the rage of tennis players and reported a great deal of the controversy can no longer be spouted because of the camera system that takes away human judgment. Photography / instant replay in football has also provided the exact way events took place and removed the error of human judgment

Though photography can be faked, it remains a valuable tool in court, because a faked photo would prove the intent forge false evidence. On the stand a witness can blubber around and try to be misleading, but when they present a photo, they are being precise.

It is a common practice for some one to provide photos to prove the amount of damaged property.

Can you imagine some one going into a court room and presenting their sketched interpretation of the damage instead of a photo?


1827 Frenchman Joseph Nicphore Nipce

On 13 April 1841 The Australasian Chronicle announced the arrival of the daguerreotype in New South Wales:

  • Abraham Lincoln, 1860
  • Mathew Brady
  • Salted-paper print, 3.4"x2.1"
  • National Portrait Gallery
  • Image No. NPG.96.179


Why do we read about all the Egyptologist in the early 1900s sketching the images in the tombs instead of photographing them?


I am guessing 99% of all who will ever read this page are not professional Egyptologist.. just the average bear like the rest of us.

I doubt if 10% of you have ever been to Egypt and if you have, you spent two weeks or less on a tour that was all planned out where you would stop and how long you would be in any particular location.

If you studied hieroglyphics for a long time before your trip and actually memorized all the glyphs, on your stop at each location, you may have seen lots of hieroglyphs.

Do you also have a photographic memory?

If you did have all the glyphs memorized and you have a photographic memory of what words were on each hieroglyphic source you saw, then you still only have the knowledge of the hieroglyphs you saw and memorized on your tour.


Where do the masses (including those who call themselves Egyptologist) get their information about hieroglyphics.

* You get it by reading what some one else wrote about the hieroglyph ... or

* You get your information from seeing photos you (or some one else) took photos of the hieroglyphs.


When people create the web pages about 'Hyksos' they site this source and that source.. but they never show a photo of the original source.

BEFORE any one translated any thing to hieroglyphics they either went to Egypt and sat in front of each source translating it, OR they made their translation from photos.

IF any information actually exists in a photo of any hieroglyphic, then those who know where it is can

a) Identify the source.. show us a photo of what you were looking at.

b) Show what line from the top their information is found.

I keep on reading things about what the Hyksos did in ancient Egypt, but the only way any one would know this is, if it is written in the hieroglyphics (and the only people who were writing the hieroglyphics in the tombs were the Egyptians)

* Show us the source and give us the line from the top where the Egyptians wrote "The Hyksos ruled northern Egypt"

* Show us the source and give us the line from the top where the Egyptians wrote "Avaris was the Hyksos capital"

* Show us the source and give us the line from the top where the Egyptians wrote (those modern writers call Hyksos rulers), show us where the Egyptians identified any of them as kings or rulers.

IF any of this information is written by the Egyptians then the 'experts' can show us the source where it is written and the very line it is written on.

Instead of quoting gossip from web authors who copied their gossip from other web authors, show us a photo of your source and where this information is written.

IF it is not written in the hieroglyphics, it is mythology, BS concocted and spread by those who get their info from those who do not have a photo of the source or could not read hieroglyphics, if they did.

Any one who can not point to a photo of the hieroglyphic source and show you what line that information is written on, is no more than a puppet repeating that which they have no knowledge of.



Thursday, September 10, 2009



Deciphering hieroglyphics is still far from an exact science. The Rosette Stone was found over 200 years ago and there is still an ongoing conflict about the translation.

Is the field of Egyptology to include mythology and fairy tales as well?

I suppose it would expedite research if the make believe were branded for what it is and ignored.


In make believe, any one, any time in history can concoct any thing. When it is challenged the ignorant argument is produced. It goes something like this:

There is no evidence of The Lost City of Atlantis.

-Prove it does not exist.

The ignorant argument is based on proving what did not happen, proving the negative.

What you do not know, what you can not prove, is evidence of nothing but your ignorance.

In concocted history any BSER can fabricate any amount of lies they wish and never be caught because * There is no way to go back in history with out a time machine.

Josephus wrote the accounts about the Hyksos.

John Hanna and his wife were abducted by aliens

King Tut played a game similar to bowling.

Moses sold stones he called magic to the Israelites.

No one can prove what did NOT happen .. the stupid argument is based on what can not be proven, ignorance.

Research/Science is not based on ignorance, but research is based on evidence/facts/what can be proven.

Before you could consider the validity of any account, you would first have to look for any supporting evidence.


When a jury finds a defendant guilty or innocent.. guilty = yes they did do the bad thing, not guilty = no, they did not do that thing.

You are on the Judge

Case (A)

Tom was accused of robbery. In his garage the authorities found money bags from the bank

(You would hand the case over to the Jury or throw it out)


Case (B)

George was accused of starting a fire

The accuser was man who said he read in a letter, that a dead man wrote in a letter, that dead man read in another letter of another man who died before him, that George started a fire 20 years ago. (None of the letters existed)

Not a shred of evidence existed. The case was based on what two dead men were supposed to have written, and there is no evidence that those men ever existed.

Neither of the dead men were around when the fire started.

Neither of the letters of the two dead men existed

(You would hand the case over to the Jury or throw it out)


Case (C)

Mike was accused of the murder of his wife. (He claimed to have been out of town at the time)

On his computer they found searches how to murder and get away with it.

On the murder weapon they found his prints.

On his shoes they found the blood of his wife.

(You would hand the case over to the Jury or throw it out)


As the judge, would you allow all of the cases above to go to a jury ?

If you would through out any of the cases, which would it be?


In Egyptology there are literally tons of hieroglyphics written in stone and physical, age dated artifacts. Why would any one calling themselves a scientist/researcher waste their time with mythology?

In the past books and those who could read were few. People retold stories verbally from one generation to another.

Ghost stories, Robin Hood, The Legend of Sleep Hollow ... Does a fairy tale become fact after the verbal citations are put in print?

IF there is no evidence to base any past events on, they remain a myth if by print or the flapping of the lips.

Well they could be true.. you can not prove it is not true.. the only support of myths is the stupid argument.. ignorance, what can not be proved.

Science/research is based on what can be proven. Myths are based on the imagination.


Myths are usually embraced when they conform with wishful thinking.

Finding the lost city of Atlantis.

I am the descendant of some great leader of the past

Being abducted by friendly aliens

The Israelites ruling Egypt

Finding the lost Ark

When a myth, tickles their fancy, it is swallowed hook, line and sinker, but when a myth goes against their grain, they spit it out?

After I read people claiming to be 'Egyptologist' repeating myths to promote their assertions, I like to bring up an unpopular myth:


In a tomb is an image of some farmers/herders with animals. They are wearing striped clothes. From this image, on their web pages they write:

This is an image of the Israelites migrating into Egypt.

(They use the striped clothes as evidence it is the Israelites)

When I post the account of Professor L. Englehart who reported in his journal that he witnessed crooked Egyptologist in the tomb after hours, painting the stripes on those images.

When I write the account that image never had any striped clothes before several years before 1900 ... it is instant rage.

When a myth is produced that is contrary to their wishful thinking.

* Englehart was a @#$ liar.

* Where is the journal right now?

With out the journal, I suppose the paint could be age dated and examined for chemical content, or if there were some kind of published photos before 1900, one might examine it for stripes.

The Egyptian common people are very poor. It would have been easy to bribe guards to allow wealthy foreigners in after the tombs were closed.

It is quite possible that 'Egyptologist' create forgeries. In my section on forgeries, some of the actual cases are listed. Faked antiques is a multi million dollar industry.

NO matter that no one can not prove this did NOT happen, it remains a myth and is not worth spit.



When forgers concoct 'historic events', one of the best tricks is sprinkle some known information in with the lies.

If you wanted to create a fake letter to George Washington and make it believable, you would sprinkle in some facts such as the year, names of people he encountered, places he was at that particular time.

A good forgery takes information already established to mix in with the concoction.


When people write that Josephus said... I like to counter:

#1 The ancient Egyptians wrote in hieroglyphs, didn't Josephus write in Latin?

#2 Josephus was not born until centuries after the Hyksos were expelled and he lived in another country. How could Josephus be a witness of events that took place before he was born?

#3 You can not make a copy of that which you do not have to copy from. In the books published of what Josephus wrote, show us where the writings are that these authors copied their publications from?

#4 Josephus was supposed to have gotten his information from Manethos. Manethos lived in another country and died centuries before Josephus was ever born.

Show us what museum the writings of Manethos is today so we can go there?

#5 Manethos was not born until 200 years until after the Hyksos were expelled.

Explain how Manethos could record events that he could not be a witness to?

Recently I was accused of calling Joesphus a liar. Before I could call Josephus a liar, there would first have to be a Josephus.

The ONLY evidence that a Josephus ever existed is by the text he was said to have written.

Show us the museum where we can see the text written by Josephus.

Judge: What would you do if the validity of evidence in the Josephus account, was presented evidence in a court. Scroll back to Case B and see what your decision was in a case of non existence evidence.


There will be a never ending stream of mythology accounts mixed into Egyptology by those who concoct them and the lemmings who are pleased by them.

I would suggest that myths be documented in the encyclopedia of Egyptology and marked with a symbol denoting myth

(M) Josephus

(M) Manethos

When researchers go to that reference, a detailed file would lay out the case these are only myths with on existing evidence.


Other than the honest, even the experts can and do publish false information.

On 10/6/2009 The PBS channel had a program on The History Channel.

In this particular segment a southern city had placed a marker where a bridge was destroyed and where General Sherman crossed on a pontoon bridge.

This particular place was arrived at by engineers and maps.

The crossing took place less than 100 years before the marker was placed.

One of the local guys observed that there were giant cut stones along the river bank in an entirely different location and believed the marker was wrong.

After involving the History Detectives and an investigation following, the city authorities said ooops and changed the marker.

Why it took an investigation I am not sure. When there were giant stones weighing tons on the river bank and in the river, a little deduction would leave little doubt of what was on top of those foundation stones.

I suppose the resistance would be the lemmings not wanting to rock the boat of the experts?

In less than 100 years, with experts at hand, false information was expelled.

Egyptology research is difficult in the beginning when it is based on actual information that DOES exist.

(M) Josephus ... Mythology should be like a fart in the wind which quickly passes and is not smelled again.

As the Englehart Journal which reported the stripes were painted by forgers, it should be stored on the same shelf as Josephus.


To begin to consider what the Egyptians wrote, you would need to first see it, transcribe it, then translate it.

If the surface of Egyptology to be scratched, mythology must be identified, labeled and then ignored.





Monday, September 7, 2009



This hypothetical stela had 18 lines.

An image was made of it to scale.

2  The full scale image then had reference numbers added to each line.


The image below is the transcribed text from the photograph. It is an image here, but in the working situation, you would be looking at typed hieroglyphs. Those of you with a program that types Hebrew, Greek, Arabic or Hydrographic fonts, would be looking at typed fonts in the example below.

Recreating the original text using the standard fonts

Top line, the original foreign/ancient text

Directly below is the translation of the ancient text


18 lines in the original ancient text

18 lines of translations

Each line of ancient text has the translation (using the same reference number)

Close up the way it would appear
10 Top typed ancient text using a standard font
10 Below typed translation
If the ancient source was given the title: Josephus Stela and I wanted to point out that there was one female grand daughter that entered into Egypt, my statement would be something like
Josephus Stela:10 Israel had one grand daughter that entered into Egypt
When ever any one has knowledge that exists in the bible, quran, torah ... they quote the source and the location in that source.
Genesis 46:8-26
In my this hypothetical stela, given the official title Joseph Stela, the reference is Josephus Stela:line number where my information exists.
So far we have two parts completed
A full scale image of the original source with reference numbers added.
A word processor file with fonts to create the same glyphs and below each glyph line is the translation.
Before we get to the translation part, we must do the transcribing part.






(The images here will be small and hard to read, but the purpose here is to explain the process of entering new sources into an international data base.

The actual images are large enough to see, but you will have to download them from the photo album )

I don't have any hieroglyphic fonts, so this hypothetical story will use Hebrew script.

In this hypothetical tale, when Joseph's brothers entered Egypt, Israel created a stela to record those who entered Egypt from Canaan.

When the stela was discovered, it had cracks and was difficult to read.

The first task in collecting data to enter this information in the international data base

#1 Take the best possible picture with the hieroglyphs being the actual size.

#2 On the left side of the image of the original source, each line would be numbered. (18 is the last numbered line)

Remember this is a hypothetical image of original text, with reference numbers added to each line.




Friday, September 4, 2009




How many thousands of researchers will repeat the same research over and over and over.

Wasting their resources to find that which is already found and available.?

In order to sort out endless mis-understandings / confusion:

An International Egyptology Standard

would expedite the needs for all Egyptology researchers to find existing information and to publish their own new information so it can be shared with the world.


In order for people using different standards to work with other standards, they must use conversion.

In the field of Egyptology there are so many different standards in different phases, it is chaos.

Cubits, Feet, Meters

Celsius, Fahrenheit, Kelvin

Acres, Hectares

The reason why carpenters can go into a house built years ago and find, fix or add new structures is the standards created.

The reason you can go to the store and get plumbing parts to replace your own, is because of parts being made with standard measurements.

When there are optional elements instead of a standard, the flow of information is hampered.


I would suggest a university in Egypt for the hub of An International Egyptology Standard organization.

Working with other universities around the world, to create an international standard that Egyptologist around the world would base their research on.


a) Multiple spellings of the same name
b) Different spellings for the same person
c) Different Egyptians with the same names

a) When there are multiple spellings, the standard organization would pick which is the standard

b) When there are different spellings for the same person, the organization would pick the standard.


car, automobile, motor vehicle

standard, alternate, alternate


By the creation of an Egyptologist spell checker, any one could use their own word processor and dump their file in the program.

When the word processor encountered an alternate spelling, it would be replaces with the standard.

The man drove his automobile to the next down

would become

The man drove his § car to the next down.

There could be a standard symbol { § what ever} to note the word was replaced with the standard.


c) When there were more than one Egyptian with the same spelling { Ahmose King/Military man), an alternate name would be assigned as the standard to one of them.

When the spell checker encountered a name that could be two different people, it would pause for the correction

Ahmose the King

Ahmose the military commander.

Just like a regular spell checker you would click on the correct choice.



Not only are the same place given different names or different spellings, but there are also different places with the same names.

The spell checker would perform the same task, replacing alternate spellings with the standard and pausing to allow the author to chose the correct place when two places have the same names.

With this Egyptologist spell checker, it could also add other information to the places.

Information that would take hours in a large text to enter, would be done with the spell checker.

When ever the spell checker encountered the standard or alternate spelling of a place, it would create roll over text giving the global position of that place.

[ Roll over text = text that appears when you place the mouse over a word ]



Any one who has ever created maps, knows if you try to draw all the detail of lots of places, the text gets so small, it can not be read.

The map I suggest begins with an outline of Egypt with the major locations on it. With pixels representing a particular global position.

When the spell checker created the standard for a place on the map, that place would become a link.

If that link was clicked on, the map would appear with that place in Egypt would appear.


When future publishers created books ... when professors taught Egyptology, the standard spellings would be taught.



There are people downloading font software and creating fonts for glyphs daily. By the creation of standard glyphs, made public domain, by all researchers using the same glyph fonts, their hard copies could use finger print technology to be read and the typed text could create a universal ASCII code that could be shared in a common data base.

To get from hieroglyphics to translations, the standard would be created first by transcribing existing hieroglyphics to a computer file.

Once any hieroglyphic had been transcribed, future researchers would not have to view poorly photographed images in an attempt to even figure out which glyphs were on the actual source.

I recently asked about one hieroglyphic source that people are talking about all over the internet. When I finally found some who knew where the source was, they said you could no longer make out the writing.

It appears that most 'Egyptologist' go to tombs or such locations and pick a small area of interest. Before they vanish, it is essential for every remaining hieroglyphic source to be photographed in high definition, or it will be lost forever.


The Egyptologist standard dictionary I suggest would

* Replace all alternate persons names with the standard

* Give the option of which person it was when more than one person had the same name.

* Replace alternate place names with the standard, give the location of that place in a roll over text.

All of this (and more) could be done after any author finished their work, by simply pasting their text into the dictionary program.


Below are two working examples. By moving the cursor over the purple/yellow icon, you can see the text.

Hypothetical text entry would be pasted in the dictionary with out the references and come out with the standard words and references.

The Crew Commander This is the military commander Ahmose, not the King AhmoseAhmose son of Abana, the justified; he says. I speak to
you, all people.

King Tuts' tomb is in  Click here to see the location on the opposite side of the Nile from the red K The Valley of the Kings.

It is the same icon but the bottom displays text and can take you to a map.




Tuesday, September 1, 2009



In discussions/debates, others often point out my ignorance (what I do not know)

ONLY if my point is based on my assertion of a particular knowledge, in which I am ignorant of, could my ignorance be a relative point.

Recently in a discussion about Egyptology, one pointed out my ignorance of hieroglyphics.


"If I couldn't read hieroglyphs, I certainly would *not* venture to have any opinions as to just what a tomb scene was or was not all about."


Up front, I always admit, I am totally ignorant about translations of hieroglyphs. Now the question, does this ignorance have any bearing on the many other assertions I make about Egyptology.


I am totally ignorant about French, Russian, Hieroglyphs or Spanish, but I could say:

The French had a revolution in which heads rolled.

A Russian big shot family was murdered.

A guy sailed from Spain to the Americas ...

I could go into some detail, but the point is, I and millions of other people do have extensive information about events that were recorded in a language they are ignorant of because some one who knew how to translate, rendered the information into our own language.

Every thing I write is based on the translations of those who call themselves archeologist/Egyptologist.

If these 'experts' have accurately translated this information, then it would be as silly for me to learn to read German, in order to read a book that has already been translated into English.

The validity of what I write is based on the validity of the translation of the 'experts' who rendered it into English.

It is those "Egyptologist/experts" information that I examine, by their own words/publications.


When those who communicate in a foreign language are alive and willing to teach their language, learning to translate takes a while.

When those who communicated in another language attempt to hide their meanings or if they are long dead, then learning to translate is a matter of code breaking.

Code breaking consists of (a) finding patterns, (b) finding the same word in different context or if luck prevails (c) finding text of the unknown language with text of a known language (i.e. the Rosette Stone)


What is the value of some one who had great translation abilities, but what they wrote was based on what some other person wrote on the topic.

IF / WHEN their translation abilities have not been applied to their research/publications, then they have no more merit than any of millions of people who sit in front of a computer to copy and paste information they read off of some one else's web sites.

Of course we all have our own interest. Unless that 'expert' shares our interest they will know only parts of the things we discuss.

Unless they have been to all hieroglyphs, and photographed them all, then their translation abilities have no more knowledge of what Egyptians wrote than you do.

When they get their information from some web site or book, when they have not seen the actual hieroglyph, they are nothing more than any one else who puppets what they have read.


My topic being the study of "Hyksos", I make the point there are about a dozen hieroglyphic sources used.

The points I make are such as:

The 'experts' say the word Asiatic is used in these multiple sources, but when I ask them to show me the set of glyphs that form the meaning Asiatic, then ask them if the same set of glyphs are used in all references, they do not reply.

Semitic, Asiatic, Hebrew ... depending who I am communicating with, these kind of words keep on popping up .. "The Egyptians called them A, B, C"

When I ask them to

* Identify the source (papyrus, pylon, wall painting, obelisk)

* Show the line and the number of glyphs from the right the word is found over, I can see exactly what the word looks like in hieroglyphs.

When I am told the Egyptians identified them as Asiatic in different sources, I find what the word looks like, then my question is: where is this word Asiatic in all these different sources?

What I am ignorant, does not establish their own knowledge. If they can read hieroglyphs and the word Asiatic is found in multiple sources, then these experts can show us that word.


Do I assert the Egyptians never had any conflicts with any foreigners? NO

My ignorance is a bottomless pit. Pointing out what I do not know does not establish your own knowledge.

My quest is this:

* If you can point to physical artifacts found that were left in Egypt by foreigners and NOT Egyptians, provide your science that establishes that claim.

* If the Egyptians identified those from the 12th to the 18th dynasty as a population that came from the same place, expert translators, show us the source and the line this information is written on.

* If the Egyptians wrote that foreigners ruled any part of Egypt, expert translators, show us the source and the line this information is written on.

* If the Egyptians identified any of the enemy they fought against as kings, expert translators, show us the source and the line this information is written on.


I have separated my blog into individual post because I use so many pictures. Any one who will challenge/add to what I have written can start here

And at the bottom of each page, click on newer post, to continue to the next post.


While I have no ability to read hieroglyphs, I know how translation works which I will discuss in the next post.

The bible has nothing to do with Egyptology, but because the intensive interest in the bible by millions of people for centuries, a translation method has been established so any novice can glean the knowledge of the experts.

In the past, only the priest had the text which was written in a language only they understood. It was unlawful to create a bible in a language of the commoners... after all if the commoners could read it for themselves, the top dogs importance would be decreased.