"THE EXODUS REVEALED" VIDEO

Dried up, that is and after having observed multitudes of others preceeding across. Get it right, now, Jar. Let's be fair and objective in our pursuit of truth here. Ok?

Woops, double click, double post. Deleted for disappearance of double data.This message has been edited by buzsaw, 07-21-2004 11:54 PM

None of the photos presented in this thread or linked to include ANY other identifiable debris. If you know of any on the web then I suggest that you post links to them.Perhaps you would like to produce your sources for the claim that the wheels would "likely" have iron rims.Sources on the web make no mention of metal rims at all:
The Chariot in Egyptian Warfare
http://robotica.mecc.polimi.it/...2/BO-2-Sulkies_25_2_00.htmAnd might I suggest that given the lack of evidence - as well as the invented "facts" - coming from your side that you avoid using phrases like "desperately grasping". If you HAD proof you would have produced it when I asked for it. You don't have it and you know that you don't.

The link I provided did only mention bronze wheels as one of the few sources we have for burials with chariots. There have been no chariots found outside ones found in burials (apart from this alleged 14th BC one where we're talking about).Extracarricular logo's are a modern invention. Troops all dressed up the same way is a Napoleontic invention. The Greeks (a part of history we know something about) might have had markings on their shields or homogenous helmets. But apart from vase drawings which can not be used as evidence, because they had to promote homogenity to make it logical, we have no prove.
Dressing up wheels is expensive, difficult and not strengthening the chariot structure. It's pointless to do it (although some think it would have avoided squeeking).After freshening up, I will admitt that the Egyptians were the last to use chariots in any great number as a machine of war, probably even reaching considerable speed but still mainly used to move archers in battle positions (using the chariot solely for hunting and transportation seems to be a later occurence), but I agree that the fact that they had them admitts that they could use them to pursuit the jews.Some pictures:
One of the alleged wheels.

Typical Egyptian wheels of their era.


Rebuild chariot from Tut's grave
Well, we know that Egytpian chariots (from Tut's tomb and grave paintings) were lightweight and all pictures (and chariots found so far) show 6 spokes connecting the rim to the axle. This is the standard Egyptian version, so the above picture is not Egytpian. It looks like a wheel, admitted, but definitely not Egytptian, because it has four spokes and is more massive that the Egywpian ones. (Paulk's link mentions 4 spokes, but doesn't show one, neither can I find one)About the coralWell. I will not look up and give you a website for each statement I make here, so simply follow along:
1- Stone & Soft coral need currents (for food) and something hard to cling on to.
2- Stony & soft coral need sunlight.
3- What isn't buried under the sand and has coral on it, is exposed to sunlight.
4- Wood will rot when exposed to water (unless certain conditions, like the Wasa ship near Stockholm, or prepared wood for modern buildings,,,, I presume)
5- Soft coral might use wood. It is seen on sunk WWII materials, but they're quickly rotting away.I will agree, that when it's soft coral it might use exposed wood to cling on to, but the picture from worldnetdaily doesn't show soft coral in my view
When soft coral has a chance to get a grip on wood, it will definitely rot away. Hard coral will not get a foothold on wood. Since coral which gets no sunlight will not live, I can only assume that it has a hold on something else than 3500 years old wood. If this is the case, someone must explain to me, why it hasn't rotted yet.Lucy

---

Bible
Search Results
"Death & Dead" were found 827 times in 751 verses.Thats a Whole Lotta Suffering

Thanks again. So it seems that the "wheels" are probably not wood, and have only been exposed on the seabed for a few decades. That doesn't leave much chance that they really are 3500-year-old Egyptian chariot wheels.

As a last matter of opinion.
I prefer archaeological excavations to have an open mind when they go to/prepare a dig. People who go to an excavation site with the assumption to find something, and especially those who seem to be funded well, go to huge extremes to get a result.
In my opinion, this excavation had to have a different start and in the parts I've seen (I'm not going to buy it) I've seen no arhcaeological equipment, other than diving apparatus and a metal detector. Maybe there were vacuum pomps and measuring equipment, but I didn't see it in the clips provided. Just going under with metal detectors is amateur archaeology at best.Lucy

---

Bible
Search Results
"Death & Dead" were found 827 times in 751 verses.Thats a Whole Lotta Suffering

Yes, they're amateurs - and they've already decided that the site was where the Exodus crossing happened. Their rewriting of Egyptian history relies on jumping to conclusions and even some misrepresentation of the evidence, too. Although it is claimed teay have "experts" they seem to be rather shy (I've seen none named) and I find it very hard to believe that an Egyptologist could not see the problems in the rewriting of history - but if they haven't got an Egyptologist of any calibre with them then what sort of "experts" are they recruiting ?The guy who orignally identified the site - the late Ron Wyatt - did so at least partly because he misunderstood the limits of the topographic database he was using. Worse he has a record of claiming to find things from the Bible and in some cases he is almost certainly wrong (his "Ark" site) or lying (his claim to have found Jesus' blood and to have had it DNA tested). Even worse there are grounds to suspect him of "planting" evidence at this site and at least one other, which is why I am wondering what these "wheels" might really be made of.Still if they are using real metal detectors that puts the current team one up on Wyatt who favoured a pseudo-scientific variation on a dowsing rod called a "molecular frequency generator".

If there is a rank of 5, then the column alone would be over 300 miles long. And that is only assuming 4 feet between ranks. If you put a few pack animals in there, say an average of 6 feet between ranks, the length of the column gets down right silly, over 450 miles long. Since the distance between Damascus and Cairo is only 382 miles, you can see just how improbable the Biblical account really is.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

So the Bible is disproving itself contrary to its intended meaning.What is more difficult, raining the 10 plagues, parting the Red Sea, or having the Israelites march in groups of five ?Your point is stronger by omitting the groups of five.

PaulK, there is one name that Wyatt/Moller supporters throw around quite a bit - Dr. Nassif Mohammed Hassan. But there is a minor oddity. They usually refer to him as the 'director of Antiquities in Cairo' (note the lower case on 'director'), and say that he identified one of the chariot wheels brought to him (which supposedly disappeared mysteriously). But a Google search reveals no reference to a Dr. Nassif Mohammed Hassan OTHER THAN sites related to the Gulf of Aqaba controversy. This is odd given that we are told he is an important official.Now, I focus in stuff on different continents, so I'm not all that familiar with famous Egyptologists short of Zahi Hawass. Can any of the more knowledgeable people here tell me who Nassif Mohammed Hassan is/was, and what his exact position and credentials are/were?I'd like Lys to explain something as well. I was treated to an interesting story at another forum regarding why Wyatt and Moller have disregarded the fundamental practices of archaeology and either not kept records of precisely what was found were (in other words, excavation maps and schematics) or have decided not to release that crucial information. So, Lys or one of the other believers, why do they refuse to give us that information? After all, we're told that the chariots are all in a straight line from coast to coast, but we're not given the excavation records that would tell us not only where sites were found but also where no dives or excavation occured (which could have serious implications for assessments of the distribution of artifacts throughout the Gulf of Aqaba).I apologise if that question has already been adressed, but when I brought it up at another forum I was told that I was crazy for saying we needed the maps since nobody here had had a problem with the missing information, so I assume it has not been asked as of yet.

A couple of general questions:#1 Does anyone here know any scholars who are seriously well versed in Egyptian chariot hub construction?As Prince Lucianus (message #377) has observed, the "metal covered wheel", as reproduced in his post above, appears to be too massively constructed to be a chariot wheel.Something else that has always bothered me about that wheel is the hub. The hubs on wagon and chariot wheels usually have relatively lengthy protrusions on either side (called a hub sleeve) so that the weight is distributed between the rim and the hub sleeve.This is further exampled in the following close up image of the chariot image reproduced by Prince Lucianus in his post: Also, I have been unable to find the exact measured dimensions of either the wheel diameter or the diameter of the hub opening, but the hub opening in the "metal covered wheel" appears to be inordinately small in comparison to that of the wheel pictured on the chariot. To me, the metal wheel actually looks as though it has been machined, and its construction appears to be more that of a heavy machined flywheel than anything I have ever seen pictured on a chariot.I'm not making an argument here, merely stating an observation. I would be interested in the opinion of anyone with a professional knowledge of hub construction in ancient chariot wheels.Also, question #2: Were the photos of the alleged coral encrusted chariot wheels all taken extremely close to the shoreline? The reason I ask is that according to the bathymetric charts that have been kindly provided in this thread, the water depth reaches c. 100 meters in what appears to be a short distance from the shoreline. One meter = approx. 39.37 inches, so a depth approaching 100 meters is already well over 300 feet; i.e., serious decompression diving depth.But what I find especially curious is the even light distribution in the provided photographs. At anything approaching the above mentioned depths, it would take an extremely sophisticated lighting array to provide this type of illumination. Were all of these photos taken in water shallow enough to be illuminated by natural sunlight?Just curious,Amlodhi[edited to correct minor typo]This message has been edited by Amlodhi, 07-22-2004 10:25 PM

Prince Lucianus,I gather you are knew, and are behind the times. Based on your response, I can clearly see that you have not read a number of posts that have already clearly identified the gold gilded wheel as Egyptian. They are Egyption Lucy, and no Egyptologist or authority has disputed it. Coral also does attach to wood. Please do read carefully my posts on the chariot wheels:http://EvC Forum: Theory: Why The Exodus Myth Exists -->EvC Forum: Theory: Why The Exodus Myth ExistsPlease read messages 81 and 82 very carefully. Also bear in mind that those posts I wrote are quite old, and I have read new information since that confirms the four spoke wheels to be during the 18th dynasty. It is a shame that PaulK blindly accepts you in here without being noble enough to share with you past information that is already explained. He delights to see someone disagree with me, and then jumps on the bandwaggon to team up against his foes.As for the identifying the number of spokes and which dynasty the wheels are from, please carefully read Message 267 in this link:http://EvC Forum: "THE EXODUS REVEALED" VIDEO -->EvC Forum: "THE EXODUS REVEALED" VIDEOGwyddyonWelcome to EVC . However, I pray that you are not here to try and make my life more complicated. I enjoy debating here much for the fact that debators here seem somewhat more reasonable and sensible in their debating, rather "the whole bible is all wet and there's nothing good about it" type of attitude exerted so adamantly at SPSW. At least this forum has people from all sides, creationists, biblical archaeologists, archaeologists, and evolutionists alike. At least here you are not hounded on by a group of hound dogs like at SPSW, where 99% of the members are athiests and completely defy the biblical narrative and all jump on you making it rather impossible to have a sensible discussion.I will answer your questions regarding Nassif Moammed Hassan later.AmlodhiGive me some time, but Dr. Moller has pictures of a number of hub caps that have been preserved. The hub caps are from war chariots, and very few wheels have been preserved. The chariots that have been found at the bottom of Aqaba parallel sharply with numerious inscriptions (not to mention that the 4 spoke gold gilded wheel matches sharply with inscriptions, and sources that heavily state that the Egyptian's used 4 spoke gold covered chariot wheels--specifically designed for the priesthood and nobility. That gold gilded wheel you see there belongs to a priest, not a war chariot.)You guys are far from proper research in this area, and now I don't have the time to start from the beginning. It would be beneficial for ALL of you to purchase that book, The Exodus Case, by Dr. lennart Moller. He has a total of 71 References from reputable sources around the globe--including books solely focussed on the evolving chariot wheel and the makeup of these chariot wheels. Moller has done is research in this area, and it has been proven without a shadow of doubt that the chariot wheels identified at the bottom of Aqaba are indeed Egyptian. They are the only chariot wheels in the world that we know of that physically exist that match the inscriptions, since we only have 11 wheels preserved that were made for the Pharaoh's and nobility.

Thanks for the welcome, Lys. But I'm not here to debate the merits of SPSW. I look forward to your response to my questions (two of them, you'll notice).As for purchasing The Exodus Case: not going to happen until I see some real evidence. If it's good, solid archaeology, there are certain things we should see. Maps are one of those things. Until then, it joins 1421 and Chariots of the Gods in the list of books I will not purchase on principle: it only encourages more scammers, con artists, and flat-out poor archaeology. But I will keep my eyes open at the library.

buzsawHere are three:Emuseum – Minnesota State University, MankatoNO REDIRECT - - Ask for others if you wish.

Let`s pull on the deerstalker and investigate this. Wheels built of wood sitting exposed on sea bottom with some coral growth. Since the minumun rate of growth sits around 0.8-23mm per year, can we agree that the wheels have been exposed for approx.6-10 years. (I think somewhere back in the thread, someone said Ron found them in 1986?)But, no matter. While I don`t think the wood would (stutter) rot in that period of time, a far more insidious enemy must have appeared. Teredo. Shipworm. Can we detect any of those little grub-holes in the wood section of the wheel? Just to fill you in on Teredo activity,try Seite wurde nicht gefunden. - CRM - Coastal Research & Management
No sign of those critters either 3500 years ago,or from recent uncovering. After viewing those long slugs, I am forced to say 'Alimentary,my dear Watkins.':-)