Fascinating!

[Dan From Smithville]

I believe animals can't help using logic because their brains are wired by it. The exact same natural logic as is quantified to create math creates the brain.

I am not aware of the application of logic by animals. Clearly, I do not know what you mean by their brains being wired by logic.

Logic worked well for humans but it was expressed in language and as knowledge and science became more complex, language did as well. Human language, Ancient Language, became so complex few individuals could be fluent and lack of fluency not only put individuals at extreme disadvantage but impeded further progress.

What do you mean by Ancient Language? Are you referring to all of them in general, or one in particular?

Yes, exactly my theory. It is a perfectly natural language used by all animals or is at least species specific.

It would be hypothetical I think, since theory would indicate that much testing had already been carried out and an hypothesis had been accepted.

My theory as it applies to original humans is highly speculative and is based principally in logic.

So you have not tested it using real world data?

Each change likely had unique causations.

Very likely, that is the most often encountered case. Even similar selection events can drive different changes in different organisms.

I could be wrong about "adam and eve" or most anything else. But ancient people used stars as mnemonics to remember important people. The two most prominent stars are logically the first important people and the attributes assigned these individuals are consistent with our understanding of adam and eve. It's also logical that the two most prominent stars would be the most likely to be remembered. I don't know but it's logical and I believe there is a cheat sheet that will tell us everything we need top know about history starting 40 (or 50) thousand years ago. This cheat sheet is barely out of our reach right now.

I view Adam and Eve as metaphorical representatives of the first humans and not as actual individuals. The message of the story is the important part and not whether the events are actual or allegorical.

This is sound advice but it is far out of my wheelhouse. As time goes by it gets further out.

Testing, review and revision of ideas need not be restricted to one wheelhouse. The important thing is to test and refine so that the ideas reflect the best thinking and adhere optimally to a logical framework.

This is NOT opinion. It is fact. I've read every single word that survives from Ancient Language hundreds of times and there are no words for "belief" or "thought" and it breaks a bevy of linguistic laws. It is also a fact that Egyptologists never noticed it. No opinion is involved.

To be fair, it started with opinion followed by assertions that you clearly feel are facts.

Most of my "work" in evolution was just thinking about it. It largely formed as an unimportant adjunct to thinking about thought and other activities and thinking which take up most of my time. I stumbled on the rediscovery of ancient science ten years ago and it reinforced and made some tweaks to my existing beliefs. I did not know until then that there was another kind of science and it was very very similar to the kind I've used since a young age. From my perspective metaphysics was a very natural thing to attend to since it was apparent from my "generalism" and intuitive processes.

Is your background in philosophy?

Most of my argument about evolution, in my opinion, boils down to logic. Of course, "logic" to modern humans is largely a reflection of perspective but since individuals can understand their own thoughts there can also be a mathematical "precision" to logic. Of course I can be wrong but in my opinion the only logical explanation for such evidence as exists is that there is no such thing as intelligence and humans succeed principally from standing on shoulders. It really all makes perfect sense but we are used to seeing the world from somewhere else.

Do you not think that the shoulders that you say we stand on had to have intelligence to begin with to impart knowledge to those on their shoulders? Do you disagree that it still requires some level of intelligence to learn well, even if the knowledge is not novel to the student?

My knowledge and understanding of evolution comes from study of the theory, the evidence, communication with others, and decades of personal observation of the natural world.

 

[Deeje]

There is no such thing as atheistic science. There is just science. It is the same for atheists, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Spanish, Canadians, Australians, Africans, the Dutch, boy scouts, Republicans, etc., etc., etc.

I'm sorry, but when I see atheists report the same things that you do about the possibility of all things being intelligently and deliberately designed and created, I begin to wonder. It is true that science knows no nationality or faith, but when a "Christian" church can stand bold faced and declare that God and evolution are compatible, I don't wonder about the science because I know its godless...but I do wonder about the Christianity. How can I not?

When the evidence of reality conflicts with the claims of ancient men, the logical and reasonable person will use the gifts of intellect that God has given them to come to rational conclusions.

"Rational conclusions"? Are you saying that the Bible has no rational conclusions just because it was written so long ago? The "claims of ancient men" include the teachings of Jesus Christ which your church claims to uphold.....? All I can conclude is that your teachers have little knowledge of scripture if that is the case.
Genesis is quite compatible with what science *knows*....but it doesn't support what science *believes*. Have you swapped one erroneous belief for another?

Science is not part of some fusion, but the tool to identify and explain the evidence leading to rational conclusions. To do otherwise, is to lie to oneself. No problem.

Who says that their conclusions are correct? Them? You can believe them if you wish....I believe that they are lying to themselves and everyone else. They know how to market their product...but do you know who manufactured it? (1 John 5:19)

Why do the claims of Genesis conflict with the evidence of the natural world? What difference does it make to a belief in God? How is a human demand it is all infallible recounting of actual events, not deification?

The claims of Genesis do not conflict with the evidence of the natural world at all....they conflict with Christendom's version of the creation account. You have obviously never considered the possibility that the Genesis account can be read very differently from the way it is taken by the YEC churches?

Science could be misleading all those who see that the YEC churches are dead wrong about a 6 literal day creation only a few thousand years ago......People naturally assume that they have to choose one or the other.....and only one seems to provide 'evidence' for its validity.....but I don't believe that is true. There is another very plausible scenario that fits both science and the Bible.

The accounts of science are not accepted because they are popular. That is a creationist falsehood. They are accepted based on logic, reason and evidence. False witness is a sin.

I always thought that giving false witness was a sin....that is why I would never engage in it. I just know that God is never wrong....nor does he speak untruth. What appears to be the wisdom of this world is utter foolishness with him.

Paul wrote at Romans 3:3-4..."... If some lacked faith, will their lack of faith invalidate the faithfulness of God? 4 Certainly not! But let God be found true, even if every man be found a liar...." (Romans 3:3-4)

I will believe God before I believe any man.

Again, Paul's word ring true for me....1 Corinthians 3:18-19....
"Let no one deceive himself: If anyone among you thinks he is wise in this system of things, let him become a fool, so that he may become wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God, for it is written: “He catches the wise in their own cunning.”

I believe that this is a warning for all Christians.....just because something 'sounds' convincing, doesn't mean that its true. What we might think is sound scientific knowledge from the worldly wise, might be complete garbage manufactured by the great deceiver. Jesus spoke about him being a liar. (John 8:44)

I find it interesting that so far, you have chosen your words carefully, to paint a very poor picture of me. How is vilifying me support of your claims against science and support for the Bible? There is no reason to do it, other than mean spirited anger and dislike. Doing it flies in the face of all your denials about how opposition to your personal belief does not bother you. If it did not bother you, all you would say to me, is that is an interesting view, but I reject it based on my belief.

You are taking things quite personally, but I am aiming my barbs at your church and what it teaches. I was once part of Christendom and I have studied its doctrines and compared them with the scriptures. Both the church system in all its many factions, and modern science serve the interests of God's enemy IMO. They all lead people away from God, not to him. (Matthew 7:13-14)

I was right when I said that you could not respond to me in any way that was not nasty overtly or covertly no matter how I delivered my position. It does not appear to be in your nature to respond to these discussions without malice unless it is with a cohort.

Your sensibilities are yours. My posts concern the topic at hand and how it relates to things happening without intelligent direction. If you wish to take offense, then that is up to you....its the ideas that are attacked not you.

When someone presents themselves as a 'Christian' and yet denies that the Creator did what he said he did, then I will question that Christian as to why their church will throw God under the bus and promote the teachings of godless men instead?

I do not know the mind of God and cannot comment knowledgeably on what He chooses to do. I will leave it to others that claim to know God's mind.

He tells us clearly in the Bible what his intentions are, and in the teachings of Jesus Christ you have a first hand example of exactly what he says to us....you just have to read them.

I do not know. But I also do not pretend to know.

Ignorance of the scriptures is no excuse...is it? ( 2 Thessalonians 1:6-9)

For one thing, there are two accounts of Genesis and biblical scholars have determined it is from two different sources. Likely two different versions of the original oral tradition, copied and combined into one written story.

Actually, if you read it, one is a rundown of events as they transpired in order of their occurrence, and the other is a "history" in broader terms outlining some points not detailed in the first account. Have you read them yourself or do you just take the word of men again? Scholars can have vastly different opinions....pick your scholar....pick your opinion.

Yes. I suppose time will tell. Though I have enough evidence for coming to my own conclusions now.

That is fine.....we all need to come to our own conclusions because this is the basis for God's judgment of all of us. This life is all about making decisions....of our own free will. We all have access to the same evidence, though we will interpret it in ways that suit ourselves. We can't all be right....can we?

This is just another of your veiled hti pieces. I wonder why you feel compelled to take the stance that you do when talking to others. You seem so at odds with your own claims. I wish you peace. I may respond to your posts in the future at my discretion, but I do not think a lengthy back and forth will be very profitable. Have a good day.

What on earth is a "veiled hti piece"? Nothing is 'veiled'...I though I was being quite specific.
I was happy to finish the exchange but you dragged me back in.....like I said, these exchanges are for the benefit of those who read them. Might I say that you too seem to be at odds with your own claims....most specifically a Christian church denying creation.

People are free to take from these posts what they will....

 

[ecco]

I try not to be enigmatic because the message is far too unusual for such a tactic.

The message is that you are a Biblical Literalist - that's not unusual.


EDIT:

Based on...

We sprang into existence with a mutation in an individual we confusedly call "Adam". The ancients who understood his real nature called him "S3h".

...I will revise the above to read:
The message is that you are a Biblical Literalist with a huge dose of woo included.

 

[ecco]

"Evolution" leaves our ancestors at the mercy of sabre toothed tigers and mass starvation from changes in migration routes or loss of rain at critical times.

NATURE leaves our ancestors at the mercy of sabre toothed tigers and mass starvation from changes in migration routes or loss of rain at critical times.

 

[ecco]

ecco:

If Einstein was right about "reasoning power" then he was probably right about Christianity being naive and childish. So, I guess you also believe that Christianity is naive and childish.​

Mainstream religions in Christendom, ie., the clergy, support the conflicts of their respective countries, killing their brothers in opposing countries. (They've ignored Jesus' teaching. John 13:34-35.) So....yep.

Notice he didn't say Christians are naive and childish. He said Christianity is naive and childish. IOW the whole concept of Genesis and Moses and Jesus and the resurrection and three gods for the price of one is naive and childish.

 

[ecco]

What if it was a simple case of Christendom misinterpreting the Genesis account? What if the Bible didn't say that God created the heavens and the earth 6,000 years ago? What if the "days" were thousands or ever millions of years in length? That would make the earth and the first forms of life very ancient. It would also make creation itself a slow and deliberate process over millenniums of unknown time. It would give the Creator plenty of time to fashion his creation to his satisfaction, tweaking things as he went, so that the final result met with his satisfaction.
God is a Creator, an artisan, not a magician. He is also not constrained by earth time.

Regardless of how much you want to fudge the length of Biblical Creation Days, there is no disputing that the bible clearly states that The Great Flood took place around 4367 years ago.

The World: Born in 4004 BC?
Age of the Earth Event Scripture Date
1656 Flood when Noah was 600 Genesis 7:6 2348 BC
1658 Arphaxad born when Shem was 100 Genesis 11:10 2346 BC
1693 Salah born when Arphaxad was 35 Genesis 11:12 2311 BC
1723 Eber born when Salah was 30 Genesis 11:14 2281 BC
1758 Peleg born when Eber was 34 Genesis 11:16 2246 BC
1787 Reu born when Peleg was 30 Genesis 11:18 2217 BC
1819 Serug born when Reu was 32 Genesis 11:20 2185 BC
1849 Nahor born when Serug was 30 Genesis 11:22 2155 BC
1878 Terah born when Nahor was 29 Genesis 11:24 2126 BC
2008 Abraham born when Terah was 130 Genesis 11:32; 12:4 1996 BC
2083 Abraham enters Canaan at 75 Genesis 12:4 1921 BC
2513 Exodus of the Jews from Egypt (430 years of slavery) Exodus 12:40 1491 BC
3420 Last deportation of the Jews 584 BC
4000 Birth of Christ​

 

[Revoltingest]

I am not aware of the application of logic by animals.

The internet delivers....
Wasps are the first invertebrates seen to use a type of logic
Wolves Beat Dogs on Logic Test
https://phys.org/news/2011-06-chimps-capable-insightful-ability.html

 

[cladking]

NATURE leaves our ancestors at the mercy of sabre toothed tigers and mass starvation from changes in migration routes or loss of rain at critical times.

Nature/ God/ Reality did no such think because our ancestors had consciousness (ancient science) to protect themselves from predators or neighboring people who would eat their lunch.

It is illogical to suppose that ancient people could afford to have superstitions or any beliefs at all. Superstition kills but science is knowledge/ creation/ understanding. Without science they were tiger chow.

We simply imagine ancient people were superstitious but there's no evidence to support this belief.

 

[cladking]

I am not aware of the application of logic by animals. Clearly, I do not know what you mean by their brains being wired by logic.

Reality is logic. Math is quantified logic. The brain is (and nervous system) is the logic of life.

What do you mean by Ancient Language? Are you referring to all of them in general, or one in particular?

There was a single language natural to humans but it was spoken in numerous mutually intelligible dialects which were static over time except they became increasingly complex because they were metaphysical.

Pidgin forms arose beginning in 3200 BC when slower people couldn't keep up. These changed quickly over time and formed the basis of modern languages. All these dialects and distinct pidgin languages shared a vocabulary.

I view Adam and Eve as metaphorical representatives of the first humans and not as actual individuals. The message of the story is the important part and not whether the events are actual or allegorical.

I misspoke. "Eve" is remembered by the star Sirius and was known as "Sothis". Little of the mnemonic is preserved in texst but she was, apparently, very goal oriented.

To be fair, it started with opinion followed by assertions that you clearly feel are facts.

My chief assumption is that people ALWAYS make sense in terms of their premises but this assumption does not affect the simple fact that ancient people had no word for "belief". This is observable fact.

Is your background in philosophy?

I'm a generalist (nexialist) who began trying to understand the nature of thought at a young age. My origin is heavy in math but now I'm more word oriented.

Do you not think that the shoulders that you say we stand on had to have intelligence to begin with to impart knowledge to those on their shoulders?

There is no human quality called "intelligence". It doesn't exist in nature.

Obviously there is an "event" we could call "intelligence" but I prefer to call it "cleverness" to use as a root for similar sorts of events. There is a propensity in individuals to behave cleverly and this could be called "intelligence" but I don't like the concept because it implies people who lack the quality are genetically inferior. This propensity is more closely correlated with habits of thought than it is with genes. Some people are fast and good thinkers and some are slower and poor. Most animals are fast thinkers but they don't think like we do so it's difficult to understand them. Most animals would be "intelligent" if it existed because in animals this propensity is more directly and closely related to consciousness.

Modern language doesn't so much impede thought as it directs it. Our digital brains are programmed by an analog language. It is not natural and many individuals have errors in the creation of their broccas area. I believe autism is merely an extreme example of this. Children sometimes have the natural language with which we are born reinforced and this impedes the proper formation in the brain that allows communication with the speech center and language acquisition. They are left with incomplete or no program at all to operate the brain.

My knowledge and understanding of evolution comes from study of the theory, the evidence, communication with others, and decades of personal observation of the natural world.

I don't doubt that such conclusion can be logically drawn. I doubt that the "logic" that we used to draw such conclusion is real rather than a manifestation of the confusion we call language. Without experiment to underpin everything our preconceptions will necessarily be reflected in our conclusions. This is the way the brain works. We necessarily reach conclusions that fit our assumptions. Some of our assumptions related to "evolution" are wrong.

 

[ecco]

I could be wrong about "adam and eve" or most anything else. But ancient people used stars as mnemonics to remember important people. The two most prominent stars are logically the first important people and the attributes assigned these individuals are consistent with our understanding of adam and eve. It's also logical that the two most prominent stars would be the most likely to be remembered.

What stars or star formations (constellations) are of Adam & Eve?

 

[ecco]

I've read every single word that survives from Ancient Language hundreds of times

What is "Ancient Language"? Where did you find readable segments?

 

[cladking]

The message is that you are a Biblical Literalist with a huge dose of woo included.

Not really.

I believe much of the Bible was originally expressed in a language whose meaning was literal. But this language couldn't be translated and those who interpreted it for the ancient "holy" books often preserved enough of the literal meaning to be able to deduce that meaning. The very ancient people were scientifically sophisticated and they used a metaphysical language but the interpreters had no science and didn't understand the language. They copied it the best they could (think I Corinthians 14) and left instructions to do no further interpretation (change no words).

The Bible is a very important book because there is still a lot of literal truth in it. It can be important for other reasons as well but "to each his own...".

 

[ecco]

Nature/ God/ Reality did no such think because our ancestors had consciousness (ancient science) to protect themselves from predators or neighboring people who would eat their lunch.

So, it is your considered opinion that "our ancestors" never fell prey to animals of the time. That is an extraordinary claim. Now, if only you could provide some evidence for that.

It is illogical to suppose that ancient people could afford to have superstitions or any beliefs at all. Superstition kills but science is knowledge/ creation/ understanding. Without science they were tiger chow.

"Science" was certainly helpful in learning to build fires and knowing which stones could be sharpened into weapons.


Superstitions, then as now, do little to enhance the human experience. But that is not a good reason to believe that ancient peoples were not superstitious.

13 Superstitions That Still Scare the Bejesus Out of Us | HuffPost
2. Knock on Wood

Knocking on wood for good luck is one of history’s most enduring superstitions. It comes from thousands of years of mythology, folklore, and religious belief that trees were sacred. Ancient people, from Chaldea to Sumatra to the British Isles, believed that trees housed gods and nature spirits, who controlled the seasons. People would seek favors by lay hands on the trunk of a sacred tree.

4. Spilling Salt

For thousands of years, salt has been an object of magic and superstition. In the ancient world salt was a preservative, for food and for mummification, giving it a connection to immortality. In the European Middle Ages, village dwellers left a line of salt outside their doors believing that witches would be compelled to count every grain before entering.

9. Rabbit’s Foot

The “lucky” rabbit’s foot is a must-have for every superstitious gambler or risk taker. Ancient people from the Aztecs to the Chinese ascribed magical properties to the rabbit, seeing it as a symbol of cunning and survival. German and Scottish folklore placed special emphasis on the rabbit’s relative, the hare, which was considered capable of placing an “evil eye” on people​

We simply imagine ancient people were superstitious but there's no evidence to support this belief.

Religions predate written history. Religions are the ultimate expression of superstitious beliefs. Superstitious beliefs permeate religions.

​

The Role of Superstition in Religion - Bad News About Christianity

Superstition is the religion of feeble minds.
Edmund Burke (1729-1794), Reflections on the Revolution in France


To ancient and medieval peoples, the world was a perplexing place. Explanations were needed to satisfy the curiosity of enquiring minds, and these explanations are for the most part what we now call superstitions. Superstition is often founded in pre-scientific attempts to provide explanations for natural phenomena, and many superstitious beliefs found their way into Christianity, sometimes through Judaism and sometimes directly.

Ancient peoples practised various types of divination. They inspected the entrails of sacrificial victims, threw dice, scattered bundles of arrows, watched the flight of birds, observed the shapes of clouds or flames, and consulted oracles. The Bible suggests that at least some forms of divination worked. Joseph made a name for himself foretelling the future by interpreting dreams (Genesis 41). The sailors on Jonah's ship discovered that he was the cause of God's displeasure by casting lots (Jonah 1:7).​

 

[ecco]

The message is that you are a Biblical Literalist with a huge dose of woo included.

Not really.

The Bible is a very important book because there is still a lot of literal truth in it. It can be important for other reasons as well but "to each his own...".

As I said...

Yes really. The message is that you are a Biblical Literalist with a huge dose of woo included.

The very ancient people were scientifically sophisticated and they used a metaphysical language but the interpreters had no science and didn't understand the language.

Do you have any evidence that "very ancient people were scientifically sophisticated and they used a metaphysical language"? Please note: your opinion cannot be considered evidence.

 

[cladking]

What stars or star formations (constellations) are of Adam & Eve?

Orion and Sirius.

S3h and Sothis.

What is "Ancient Language"? Where did you find readable segments?

Ancient Language was a world wide language natural to the human species that arose 40,000 years ago as a mutation (in S3h). This mutation tied the speech center more closely to higher brain functions allowing complex language. Complex language created the human species because now complex knowledge could be passed down through the generations instead of each individual needing to begin at square one. Humanity is complex language. This first complex language was an elaboration on the existing animal language already used by their ancestors.

The language contained all human knowledge and the means to acquire it. Because it reflected the natural wiring of the nervous system it was unique to humans and a reflection of human needs. It was metaphysical meaning that it had to change to keep up with new discovery and invention. As a rule the men were scientists and the women were metaphysicians but there was a great deal of overlap and the distinction could sometimes be difficult to apply.

Virtually every shred of readable papyrus was destroyed by about 1000 BC. The language was a reflection of reality and its nature so it can not be translated. We see our beliefs and we must parse everything we read or hear. When AL is parsed its meaning evaporates. It means exactly and literally what it says and if you fail to take this meaning for any reason at all you hear disjointed word soup. They always knew when they didn't understand something, we rarely do. We tweak word meanings until almost any utterance sounds like it has a meaning. The writing was essentially " loved to death". Everyone knew the ancients were wise, knowledgeable, and powerful but they couldn't read the writing. Much of it was copied verbatim or interpreted and survives in disparate places like the Bible and Hermetic Texts but it is indecipherable unless you understand the original formatting and there's enough to make deductions about how it was changed.

I discovered this by solving the only corpus that exists from before the "tower of babel" by means of solving word meanings in context while simultaneously coming to understand (via reverse engineering) what the writing concerned. This required hundreds of thousands of google searches because nobody has the depth of scientific knowledge necessary to translate a metaphysical language from a book of ritual read to the crowds at funerals.

https://www.sacred-texts.com/egy/pyt/index.htm

 

[cladking]

So, it is your considered opinion that "our ancestors" never fell prey to animals of the time.

Look! They didn't sidestep sabretoothed tigers by asking their gods to protect them or by consulting a mystic. They also didn't google "ways to repel tigers" or run down to the store to buy weapons or tiger detectors. They observed nature and formed hypotheses and theory. This CAN'T WORK FOR US because our programming is confused and we conclude whatever preconceptions we had. They had a metaphysical language that used the exact same logic as mathematics.

Of course some animals always fall prey to predators but humans had complex language and science to tell each other how to avoid it.

 

[cladking]

Do you have any evidence that "very ancient people were scientifically sophisticated and they used a metaphysical language"? Please note: your opinion cannot be considered evidence.

The very facts that they survived long enough to create agriculture should be sufficient. Anything I can show you as proof will be dismissed because you already have an explanation for everything and you'll invent new ones as fast as you see new evidence. This is the nature of all individuals programmed with modern language. It's what we do.

MERCER TRANSLATION
502a. To say: The phallus of Bȝ-bii [i.e. Babi, the baboon sky god] is drawn; the double doors of heaven are opened.
502b. The double doors of heaven are locked; the way goes over the flames under that which the gods create,
503a. which allows each Horus to glide through, in which N. will glide through, in this flame under that which the gods create.
503b. They make a way for N., that N. may pass by it. N. is a Horus.

ALLEN TRANSLATION
Pull back, Baboon’s penis! Open, [sky’s door!
You sealed the door, open a path for Unis] on the blast of heat where the gods scoop water.
Horus’s glide path--TWICE--will Unis glide on, in this blast of heat where the gods scoop water, and they will make a path for Unis that Unis may pass on it: Unis is Horus.

MORROW TRANSLATION
The sword of Orion opens the doors of the sky.
Before the doors close again the gate to the path
over the fire, beneath the holy ones as they grow dark
As a falcon flies as a falcon flies, may Unis rise into this fire
Beneath the holy ones as they grow dark.
They make a path for Unis, Unis takes the path,
Unis becomes the falcon star, Sirius.

I believe that this can't be understood by us at all unless we take it literally. It has no meaning in any modern language but it clearly says the KING IS THE PYRAMID.

CLADKING INTERPRETATION
The potency (vitality) of human progress is manifested as the open doors (which allow pyramid construction).
The doors are locked open and the way through these doors leads over the fire-pan (mks-sceptre) which is under that which is being built. (ie-the fire pan is on the first step and the path goes over the first step)
The doors being locked open allows each stone to glide through in the light of the fire-pan under the area being worked on (by natural processes) above.
The doors and path are the way of the dead king and the dead king is a stone (because the pyramid is stone and is the dead king).

If you'll compare this to Mercer's more accurate translation you'll see it's in very strict agreement because this is where the interpretation originated. This is the literal meaning of their words expressed in a language that must be parsed. It is not really translation at all.

MERCER TRANSLATION
502a. To say: The phallus of Bȝ-bii [i.e. Babi, the baboon sky god] is drawn; the double doors of heaven are opened.
502b. The double doors of heaven are locked; the way goes over the flames under that which the gods create,
503a. which allows each Horus to glide through, in which N. will glide through, in this flame under that which the gods create.
503b. They make a way for N., that N. may pass by it. N. is a Horus.

Mercer was true to Sethe, who was true to Masperro, who was true to the literal translation. Modern translators are true to the "book of the dead" which ultimately sprang from it.

The king is the pyramid exactly as they said 100 times!!! No matter who translates this they still talk about the king being the pyramid and of rainbows in heaven. Allen calls these "rainbows", "sky arcs" but a rose by any other name is still red (roy g biv). My interpretation is what the Pyramid Texts are about; the rituals associated with the king becoming the pyramid and the rainbows which necessarily accompany this event.

You should take especial note of the fact that Mercer, Faulkner, Allen, and even Morrow have NEVER said what they believe their translations mean. This is because modern humans take everything at face value. They simply see these words as the musings of highly superstitious people whose specific beliefs can never be deduced. No two Egyptologists agree on meanings and even their translations can be wholly different. No Egyptologist ever noticed they had no words for belief or thought.

Most of this post is a copy and paste of something I wrote a couple months back that was inspired by Jason Colavito;

Susan Brind Morrow Claims Egyptologists Have Completely Misunderstood the Pyramid Texts

 

[cladking]

The internet delivers....
Wasps are the first invertebrates seen to use a type of logic
Wolves Beat Dogs on Logic Test
https://phys.org/news/2011-06-chimps-capable-insightful-ability.html

To our eyes "logic" is species specific.

But each species uses the exact same logic expressed in the terms necessary for its own (individual) survival. Our digital brains are programmed by an analog language so without science and understanding we can't recognize logic if it bites us on the nose.

 

[cladking]

"Eve" is remembered by the star Sirius and was known as "Sothis". Little of the mnemonic is preserved in texst but she was, apparently, very goal oriented.

Obviously "Eve" did not command complex language as "Adam" did. But some things are obvious to animals (especially clever animals like proto-humans) that are invisible to modern language speakers. Eve was well aware that her babies were likely to share Adam's penchant for yacking and seeing new things. She was just as clever as Adam and science was still sufficiently in its infancy to be understood by her. My guess is that her goals were related to being the first metaphysician and spreading Adam's knowledge and genes. Of course she thought exactly like her husband making communication easier than might be expected.

She was probably the woman behind the man so was remembered as one of the greats despite the lack of complex language. Remember that Adam would have sought a mate that was most suitable so her linguistic capabilities was probably among the best of her species. There are three distinct species here; Eve, Adam, and those who interpreted their story for the Bible. Adam was created by God and Eve sprang from his ribs. The first human arose through natural processes (mutation) and his mate from his ability to contain life. Knowledge is the breath of life and the lungs are consciousness. The Bible (especially Genesis) is a confused derivation of ancient science.

 

[Revoltingest]

To our eyes "logic" is species specific.

But each species uses the exact same logic expressed in the terms necessary for its own (individual) survival. Our digital brains are programmed by an analog language so without science and understanding we can't recognize logic if it bites us on the nose.

Are our brains really analog...why do you think so?
They seem digital to me, ie, neurons firing or not.