The Real Truth About Abydos, Visitors (Just not what you were expecting)

[7redorbs]

VISITORS

Fox's world-wide Egyptian Television Special "Opening the Lost Tombs: Live from Egypt" were broadcast live from Egypt's Giza Plateau on march 2nd 1998, this included a segment where Richard C. Hoagland presented evidence that had never been seen on network television before, hinting towards a prior 'high-tech' civilization period prior to the known Egyptian Civilization.

Such glyphs were made popular by this "Enterprise Discovery", and the glyphs discovered carved into ceiling beams of a 3000-year old New Kingdom Temple, just over a hundred miles south of Cairo and the Giza Plateau, at Abydos. The glyphs can be found located just below the several hundred ton ceiling. Hoagland alleged that these admittedly 'astonishingly-modern-looking flying machines would have been completely impossible under any current archaeological views of the sophistication of ancient Egyptian Technology.




Of course, any Egyptian Archaeologist knows that such talk is nonsense, it is clear the Egyptians could not have created such technology as current archaeological discovery stands, and if they did - no archaeological discoveries remain, at least known or seen. An investigave journalist with a degree of occult knowledge and a general scientific understanding could lean towards the Egyptian Remote Viewing explanation, that the Egyptian Dynasties possessed divination systems and teachings (extremely likely to be sourced from Sumaria ref: Annuna Ki, the 50 gods of earth sand-script/Hebrew text ['This is not our knowledge, it was given to us by the Annuna Ki]'). Of course such notions are more than amazing, however in conventional thinking Remote Viewing is still, somewhat considered Metaphysical Pseudoscience, with no real evidence in a Lab (i.e. Randii et al).

The much more favoured archaeological explanation for the Abydos tablet is that it was a Palimpsest ( a re-used / reworked tablet), the reasoning behind this specifically is that the 'symbols' in this one tablet appear bizarre, astounding even. With an imagination one can easily see markings that look like modern vehicles, the Pampliset explanation presented by many well known archaeologists such as Katherine Griffis-Greenberg suggests:

"It is acknowledged by all (AFAIK), that it is a carved limestone that was altered in antiquity with plaster, to give a new meaning to the phrases. That is, BTW, part of the definition of a pampliset, of which these inscriptions are a prime example" - K G G - International Association of Egyptologists University of Alabama at Birmingham , Member, American Research Enter in Egypt

The Problem

That the scene is a palimpsest of course! - and not a single work?

What difference would it make if it was not a palimpsest?

None, The abydos scene would not be judged on its own, but be judged by extrapolation from the rest of archaeology, and indeed reality, which is then presented monolithically opposed.

Leaving any decisive verdict in relegation , still, even not as a palimpsest entrenched in conservative consensus. Clearly, there are many similar itineraries of controversy in the Egytpian Dynasties, but none quite so strange as this. So, if the scene was not a palimpsest , it could not be hieroglyphic either (the symbols are improperly formed), and would have to be considered an artwork or derivative artwork (palimpsest). Since arts realms merge into reality and fantasy, we would end up with at the beginning again, with the conclusion based on the chance and artistic endeavor.


The conclusion that any archaeologist is forced to take can only be dependant on the assumption of Chaos as a ruling force behind the Glyph. The only real way to destroy this consensus is to

prove that the fundamental nature of the glyphs is not subject to chaotic forces, but instead to rational order. * vejprty.com

Not only do we have to prove that the objects in the glyphs were created deliberately, but we have to establish that the creator was more than an artist. To make the glyphs scientifically meaningful, they would have to be custom designed, constructed and encrypted with exact order. Then the glyphs would take on special significance. Geometrical engineering of the glyphs draws parallels with engineering of advanced transportation technology, which it may be showing.

Another Great Mystery

Another great mystery similar to the Abydos mystery is the Golden Section, some research might suggest that the Egyptians DID NOT know the Golden Section. This may not be valid, and we can explain why.

In fact, under geometrical analysis, not only does the Abydos Tablet hold up to displaying deliberate, non chaotic, precise creation. It is order of the highest magnitude, and the reconstruction of the Abydos tablets below serve as proof to this premise.



Geometrical Analysis

As the Abydos columns text does look fairly auspicious, it begs testing for orderly, and the findings are simply astounding, totally blowing up this case in whole new lights.

1 unit (diameter of semi circle)
2 an axis

Above - The semicircle in the glyph looks quite true, when tested by a circle.

The usual construction begins with the six operations, or steps, as shown above. Circles '4', and '5' help in obtaining the axial cross, and are discarded afterwards. After this we have a choice of two operations, which will produce the Φ-ratio in the position. The diagram below uses the big green circle concentric with the red circle. The yellow circle represents the glyphic semicircle, and becomes the red circle in the diagram below. The green circle from above is replaced by the blue square below.

The diagram of the classic Golden Section was imported into the Abydos image by scaling the unit circle to the semicircle in the image. As seen below, this experiment worked like a charm.

"We are looking at the proof that the glyphs are proportioned by the Golden Section along the horizontal axis. The area under the helicopter is sectioned by vertical lines into Φ proportions.

If the semi-circle's radius counts as 1 then the breadth of the row of six columns on the horizontal axis is (Φ²) 2.618.. From the semi-circle to the left on the axis we see successively the distances of:"

0.5 ←→ 0.5 ←→ Φ-1 (0.618..) ←→ Φ-1 x Φ-1 (0.381966..) ←→ Φ-1

and combined distances like

1 ←→ Φ (1.618..) ←→ 2 ←→ Φ² ( 2.618..)

The square that we employed for the Golden Section turns out to fit the square formation of columns, and triangles. To get to its present location, the square rotates 45 degrees, and slides to the area's boundary on the left. Then it slides down, until the x-axis becomes the square's upper Golden Section divide (below).

The square fits the glyphic square of columns, and triangles very well on three sides, but we do see a bit of imprecision at the top. But, this is amply made up for by the accuracy of the Φ-rectangles within this square. Here, it should be pointed out that it is the triangles, which give us the width of the square, and actuate the golden proportion. According to Egyptologists' chronology, the columns came first, but according to the reconstruction by the Golden Section, the points of the square had been given before any corresponding columns could be created!

Horizontal lines from E, and F, with the vertical line from H, divide the square into golden sections. The lines are set by both the top and bottom of the middle triangle row, the upper columns, and by the upper edges of the inner rectangles at bottom left . The square as above contains no less than eight Golden Rectangles, plus corresponding squares. All fit the layout of the engraved square really well.

Two big golden rectangles: horizontal width = 2.618..units, height = 1.618 units



Golden rectangles based on the unit circle (base 1 unit long, height 0.618)

We can recreate the golden rectangle limiting the area under the helicopter, because its left bottom corner coincides with the square's corner. The big rectangle from under the helicopter just happens to also be the perfect container for the upper two craft on the right, as well, if we see the plane as transporting a suspended object. The plane's horizontal axis, which seems engraved in, is at the same time a Golden Section line for the rectangle. The rectangle on the left contains five smaller golden-rectangles, and they all fit the engraving. The entire area under the helicopter forms a perfect Golden Rectangle, when the helicopter's belly rests upon the upper line of the rectangle, although it's hard to see atthis resolution. Fortunately, this marvellous fit is easy to see in the blow-up below .

A part of the rectangle line was cut away, because it was screening out the belly line of the helicopter. The fit is visually perfect. Mindful of the excellent fit of the other three sides, we can say that this rectangle is highly accurate.

Another close-up then shows how the other rectangle also fits right on, at the top.

Layout

There are containers for all the objects, the 'Abydos Craft' have rectangular frames, which size is determined by the size of the object.

The rectangle frames two of the suspected craft together with visual perfection (it is the tightest rectangular container for these two objects). Again it is a perfect (CAD drawn) GOLDEN RECTANGLE. (the ratio between its sides is Φ). Just like the helicopter reposes on a golden-rectangle, so does the boat/tank .

a. All the area under the 'helicopter' is contained in a golden rectangle
b. The Helicopter and 'boat/tank' sit on golden rectangles
c. Four of the rectangles originate from the lower left corner and two from the right
d - the two yellow rectangles are of the same size
e - the rectangle on the lower right also contains a perfect square and a smaller rectangle. Adding, or subtracting a square from a golden rectangle makes for another golden rectangle. So, the smaller rectangle is also a golden rectangle!

Each of the four Φ-rectangles above (two yellow, two cyan, with bases equal to the semicircle's base) has an engraved line, which divides it into a square, and another golden rectangle. That's altogether eight golden rectangles. Evidently, the whole area is carefully planned.

From this great archaeological work one is now forced to believe, that not only did the Egyptians understand how to use the Golden Ratio, but that the archaeology itself is not a palimpsest, for if it were, it would truly be the most unique archaelogical evidence ever found in a palimpsest to date, it is the opinion of the writer that much distortion arrives in Egyptian Archaeology either intentional or otherwise, especially in the case of the Abydos tablet, it has been subject to much debate and venom.

It would appear, yet again, the sheer sophistication and expertise of the Egyptian empire are missed on our modern ideas of expertise, either by error or by wish, by fact or fiction, and there is more - this tablet, if not an artwork, and if not a hieroglyph, what? Not only is it not a palimpsest but it has a great amount of order to it, are we supposed to believe that the Egyptians were remote viewers? No, theirs no archaeological evidence for that.

There is archaeological evidence to support this tablet in the old Sumeria though, now known as Iraq, there are many popularized Sumerian tablets that lay out quite clearly our local star system of planets, and in Sumerian text it actually says the "50 Gods of Earth" or, the Annuna Ki are the ones who 'gave them' that evidence. Richard C. Hoagland is indeed one of my heroes, and I could not thank him enough for getting the publicity and hype this needs in our modernized version of society.

I think however, that even Hoagland will have to step aside on this one. The archaeology doesn't point towards RV, the archaeology doesn't point towards our technology either! It points towards something that will astound you all... and it is quite obvious when you see. The Egyptians used hieroglyphics techniques to create much of their art, this tablet was rushed, quickly, and was a little sloppy, why? The tablet uses similar heiroglyphic shapes to draw the symbols, why? The golden rectangles indicates 2 ships are sitting on top , and one ship goes into 2 golden rectangles, why? Is this intentional, yes, but why?

I think we know why, because the ships are intentionally linked together (look at the tablet) - it's implying they are 'inside eachother' or part of a union. We're being visited folks, and someone doesn't want us to know, and whoever drew that tablet, probably did as well. Aliens have been visiting Sumeria, Egyptians and Americans for a very long time indeed. One doesn't have to look in prophecy far, but yet again the sciences and 'experts' mislead us, until they get some more upto date information or technology. Well, the Egyptians didn't wait around for that, and apparently they never needed to either. The writer sits back in his seat, surprised it got this far in history at all. It's the writers opinion, history and Egyptology books are going to change, and if they don't then the history books are just plain wrong.

There is one aspect of the inscription which is puzzling. The temple in Abydos (or Abdjou, as the location was called by Egyptians), is quite a remarkable edifice, especially as far as the quality of glyphs is concerned. They are all very precise and as far as I can judge, there's no trace of sloppy workmanship anywhere in the temple, bare the above inscription. " - Lumir G Janku

Thanks Lumir G. Janku, but in archaeological fact, the truth is diametrically opposite. It really doesn't leave much to ponder as to why Graham Hancock thinks experts should be banned altogether.

What you've all been waiting for...













The Enterprise Mission
The Abydos Helicopter & The Golden Section

[KA-Bar]

All very interesting but there are more convincing proofs. I'll list a few that mankind cannot explain....

1. Erosion on the Sphinx inconsistant with current dating. Egypt did not have enough rain to erode the sandstone unless it was 12,000 years old.

2. Plalcement of the Sphinx and the pyramids are inconsistant with current dating. Alignmnet is better at 12,000 years.

3. Buildings in the South American Andes are also placed to align with stars of 12,000 years ago.

4. Poured Iron "keys" were used to interlink stone blocks in the Andes, but even if more modern, Iron was not easily melted and poured to make individual "keys" for blocks. The Iron smelting would have to somehow travel with construction to allow an even work flow, or they had a very sophisticated production line for melting and carrying iron in the bronze age. You cannot put molten iron into a bronze ladle.

5. (This one confounds me) About 30 years ago, a Texas oil well driller brought up a petrified screw in the material from his prospective well. The screw had dimensions that matched no current measuring system, and the threads ran in the opposite direction from today's conventions.

6. A tiny, humanoid mummy was found in the recesses of a cave in the South West of the US. This too was about 30 years ago. Reports were on the front page of most newspapers for these last two items. Then all trace vanished. I cannot find any mention of them today, but I read them personally about that long ago as they made front page news.

7. The climate in the Andes at any time from about 10,000 years ago to present was such that no sufficient food crops could be grown at the altitude of the buildings to support the evident population. However, if the sea level were higher for one example, the air pressure would be higher at that altitude and would moderate the climate. That might have been so 12,000 years ago or more. No one is sure except that now the air pressure is too low.

And, Hoagland has been pretty much discredited in his Face on Mars story. Currently, he is an advocate of 2012. I have read his Face on Mars book and there are more claims in it than most realize. He includes claims about artifacts on the Moon as well. I think a better read was "The Gentle Giants of Ganymead".

K

[Mr X]

I think, if the stele is genuine, the Egyptians were recalling a long past higher civilisation. See my theory in VekzeN's introduction thread.

[7redorbs]

Hey KA-Bar!

1. I agree, the archaeological evidence collected and presented by geologists were a smoking gun, the water erosion theory, to hold this theory would have to account for 12,000 years ago of erosion (mostly because it didn't rain much the last 6000-8000 years in that location) an inconsistency with current archaeology.

2. The astrological alignment is 12,000 years, I have heard about this, and have read a little on this (Hancock, Dunn, Melchizedek, et al). I agree. Again much like with the palimpsest issue, archaeologists are quick to make theories that are contradicted in dipole to scientific facts (in the case of the abydos glyph we would specifically referring to Janku), in the case of Hoagland, I do not believe the RV theory is based on archaeology. A major problem, but in fact the hypothesis and line of questioning I have presented can be based on other Archaeology

Just to be clear, I am not condoning Janku or Hoagland theories, or confirming, but applying current research to show that the current conclusions about Abydos are subject to the same 'cover up' as the Sphinx Geological data is, as well as the truth about the Sumerian empire (specifically how they knew about pluto).
('cover up' as in the bias/ misrepresentation of (by purposeful or non purposeful actions) and direct suppression, and sometimes intentional discrediting of an expert witness or archaeologists)

It was my intention to point out that the remote viewing hypothesis was a nice idea, but incomplete and somewhat unfounded, as was Janku's. By comparing and contrasting this research, the conclusion that, in fact, it is not the device that is to be conceived in the future that determined the Egyptian Writing via Hoaglands remote viewing, but something far more deeper and surprising, that in order to achieve certain configurations of flight in the atmosphere and space, it is the nature of space determining the optimal layouts, and not the technology

My article is attempting to challenge the broken hypotheses of Janku and Hoagland, which are not holding up to all scrutiny, and put forward a much more archaeologically backed, reviewable expose that the nature of our craft do not have to be from traded alien technology (now), or the Egyptians remote viewing our future craft.

As is often the case in science, the simplest and most obvious answer is usually correct, and the simplest scientific answer for me would have to be

the universe dictates design, not design dictates universe

Until we get out of that way of thinking, I think a lot of people are going to look at the Abydos glyphs thinking much like yourself, 'this is old news' or 'this is not important' - that may end up being so, but not as a result of prior erroneous and incomplete/broken theories of Janku/Hoagland - but it isn't. Just like any other archaeological finding they are not treated separately but held in account of other archaeology, so the Sphinx and the Abydos tablet, if postulation allowed, could indeed be extremely relevant and counter-confirmatory, the only problem being the limited access allowed by the Cairo Archaeological Institute. In contrasting re-inspection of accepted theories or interpretations with archaeological data , without postulation and assumption, as shown to be the case with the previous exposures of this Abydos theory, any explanation couldn't be further from remote viewing, or the reworking of a palimpsest, in my opinion. This is HIGHLY significant

Given that most of the Sumerian archaeology supports a premise for visitors not from earth, and a plethora of knowledge including the existance of pluto , not discovered till the early 20th century, one is forced to assume, since the archaeological presence of high technology has not found or presented by either by archaeology or reference in hieroglyph one must be forced to consider the possibility that they were either told stuff, had some kind of help, or had witnessed 'stuff' that wasn't theirs, now how much more likely is that than remote viewing? Or sloppy hieroglyphs? You know what if I'd seen a UFO (which I have) I might be in a rush drawing it down too (conjecture) . This article actually 'plays NASA and the archaeologist at its own scientific quoting' game, and although usually a bad thing - I really hope this article will get some people thinking.

In fact, the sumerians stated that they're knowledge wasn't made up by them, but given to them by the Annunaki. Precident exists archaeologically for the Abydos tablet, and it is unfortunate that it is seen as an 'un-unique' peice, which is close to shameful, yet not surprising given the exposure of the RV hypothesis, or Janku's, neither are archaeologically sound or supported.

3. Incas? I know a lot of the prophecies are shared between the tribe's, even in seemingly isolated cultures, I believe this could be related to these glyphs. In fact I believe these glyphs and the comparative NASA pictures will one day be some form of smoking gun in an archaeological and scientific way.

4. Yes, this is very interesting isn't it? What do you think this means, as I said, no archaeology seems to remain, or be made public about such technology. My article is attempting to get at what you are (they had some form of help), and this is archaelogically supported by many tribes i.e. Sumerian Culture (iraq), as well as the Dogon tribe (look just like the STS smoking gun NASA footage)

5. Extremely interesting, I believe civilizations grow and die faster than we realise. As do ELE's. Few days ago asteroid missed us by 6000miles. Thats damn close!

6. All traces always do vanish. I cant remember if it was Melchizedek, Dunn or Hancock, but he was invited to open the sphinx if he would discredit another archaeologists work. This is the sort of world we live in. I'm trying to uncover the conspiracy of the Abydos glyphs with an article designed to make people think. Perhaps I need to be more direct? but then it wouldn't be based on scientific or archaeological evidence, but assumption too. I have tried to limit assumptions in my article, and here. However I have somewhat been forced to directly state what this could 'mean', (abydos glyphs) , and how important they could actually be, as previously mistaken and postulated by other researchers.

7. I didn't know that to be quite honest.

I know Hoagland received a lot of discrediting on this, I see why completely, mainly for the problems with his RV hypothesis, It's flawed, Hoagland is an extremely clever man, and I hope he hasn't been 'got to by them' - that is, the popularization of this tablet via Hoagland and the likes of egyptologists such as Janku, is not only contradicted by a body of archaeology, but actually contradicted by the assumption that design precedes physics,

no, physics determines design, THATS why they look familiar, because they HAVE to be similar, or they don't do the job of moving through space properly, look at the designs of modern aircraft..

it doesn't - so for those who have studied Hoaglands work, yes the likes of Janku are mistaken about the palimpsest, that's real archaeology, but no the Egyptians weren't seeing the future, that's hard to believe. What's less difficult to believe, and more scientific (especially if you are a dedicated UFO researcher) , is that there are presences of other civilizations that did interact with mankind, and probably has for a very long time indeed.

I don't believe man never reached the moon, I do believe in remote viewing, I've done it, I don't believe in Janku or the lies of the elitist egyptological researchers, I do believe that Hoaglands hypothesis (and any person with some sense) can see what the diagrams are, the question is without the sophistication of our aerospace and military technology, the things only present in advanced civilizations, would we recognize these symbols?

I think not.

So I will say again This is important.. at least as important as the 7 other things you listed, most especially if more evidence can be added or carried over from this small article.

Design is determined by Physics, not physics determined by our designs

Thanks so much for posting KA-Bar, I really enjoy reading your posts, and I hope to hear more from you soon. Would be interesting to have a quick chat on the LVL39 instant messenger if you feel up for it one day,

Thanks so much,
A

[7redorbs]

'I think, if the stele is genuine, the Egyptians were recalling a long past higher civilisation'

Hey. Smith! Not a bad theory at all chap, it's clear we've not found the high technology the Egyptians had yet, or we'll never find it because it's not there, or it's just not there because there was none. If there was none, maybe they were 'recalling Sumeria' or some other civilization. (perhaps one in the sky? )

In any case, it's clear at least the sumerians were in contact with 'Gods of Earth', and possessed a much more sophisticated or equal technology than Egypt, which would seem counterproductive, however I truly believe one day children will be taught about Sumarians, instead of Egyptians as the first real human 'civilization'.

Either way these technologies and understandings came from somewhere, and if not from Sumeria, or previous advanced cultures, where? And why is Egyptian technology findings so rare to none? Perhaps our resistance to there being aliens (as commented in Suma text 6000 years old and sandscript and the Torah I believe, (hope thats spelt right :< ))

Question: Did the Egyptians build the pyramid? If so, then Egypt preceded sumarian culture? That's big news, and just isn't supported archaeologically, as a body, unless you just look at the Sphinx. Again, maybe our resistance to previous advaned cultures / alien help / alien craft - is the one thing making this enigma so difficult to ponder.

I don't know I hope in time we will get a clearer picture and move on from the RV / palimpsest analogies being applied, because not are they unscientific and lack archaeological and geometrical analysis (why perform a symmetrical analysis on a palimpsest? - Because they were mistaken, it's not a palimpsest) - that is why i think this is big news and requires proper analysis by some more archaeologists and UFO experts.

Calling Bob Dean on all channels, OVER. I think he could solve it. Those NRO guys know how to bake a cookie, it's just getting them to talk about it, lol

A

[KA-Bar]

Well, I can discredit my own #6 above. It was pointed out to me a few years after that report of the mummy that the scientists were confounded by the age, but recent dating puts man here on the Americaan continents much much earlier than supposed about 30 years ago, and so a mummy of great age is not so surprising and no evidence has cropped up to explain or refute the dating other than man was there. I remembered this after my post above.

As for flying in ancient times, look up the Hindu flying cars and the pictures of them in inscriptions. Also remember that story of Shiva describes the detonation of a nuclear weapon. I believe that it mentions that the "cars" became inoperative afterwards, but that might be someone adding to the story.

During a nuclear explosion, if you are at the right distance, all that will be left is a pile of salty ash in the form of a person. Does this sound familiar?

Try explaining the Piri Reis map! Antarctica with no ice cap, drawn in a polar projection. That can only be done from a polar orbit. How did this old admiral get such a map? He was executed for heresy by the Moslems IIRC (no offence intended to anyone - every religion did that at the time).

K

[Mr X]

Read the Ramayana and Mahabarat to learn more about the Hindu flying machines or Vimana.

[gi]

OH GOD!!!!!!!Although i believe there is a mystery here but think the claims made are nonsence,!!! we know how ancient egyptians set out heiroglyphs using phi,to the best of my knowledge the geometery used here is wrong, i will check my claim later and keep you informed as to my findings,first of the egyptians were perfectionists

[KA-Bar]

Well, Gi, to be a perfectionist, iit is PI not PHI.

On a serious note now, I can say that Egyptologists and cranks alike agree that Egyptians measured out dimensions by using a rolling drum which involved the use of PI due to the drum being a cylinder. So, we know they knew about the properties of a circle. They also knew about the earth being a sphere, as they could measure the length of a shadow at the east and west border of the country at a given time and see the difference in angle and length. This gave them a pretty good measure of the diameter of the earth. The real problem was the clumsy way they used math. This inhibited all mathematicians until the use of Arabic numerals BTW.

K

[7redorbs]

Well, I didn't expect to be taken seriously, So I've emailed Hancock and Burisch, as weird as it sounds we all have some strange connection to egypt that started with a particular unnamed person.

I think some people are put here to make a difference to other peoples lives, and sometimes others can't always see that. If anyone can help straighten this enigma out and give the questions and contrasts I put in the main article article - then the proper 'pro' guys can. However I believe everyone has a mind to think, who was it who said experts should be banned?

GI: I'm not making assumptions but contrasting two peoples research, and my own, as well as NASA STS88 telemetry how is that an assumption? 75% of this article is talking about the establishment of paradigms, the history, and contrasting existing archaeological and alternative paradigms. I specifically don't make any assumptions but put challenging questions and facts about the archaeological status of the Abydos glyph to get people thinking,

The source of the STS 88 photo's is the NASA EOL JPL FTP site.

Although you are welcome to say I am talking nonsense I would appreciate some specificity, and although my article lacks exact specificity itself, that does not make it wrong, it makes it contrasting enough not to make silly assumptions, the EXACT thing that caused the abydos 'discreditation' in the first place, which is highly annoying; anyone who knows this topic well should see what I am trying to get at, I sincerely hope that others can see it and know it - and that is - the thought process - not assumption or conclusion but re-evaluation and question asking on broken theories being disproved now - and to me that cannot be anything but the opposite of nonsense.

A


ps. the only guilt or responsibility I can infer in the article would be the sensationalist headline and that would be because I genuinely believe it is sensational story, and in title is clearly where such sensationalism ends.. the rest is intent on careful comparisons and important questions, that are highly significant ones to be asking in my opinion.

pss. I am happy at least I've got peoples attention on the subject so, thanks very much for your feedback