A QUOTE

buitre162.gif

THIS TIME

and make of it what you will. 

And yes, extrapolation is allowed (encouraged, actually).

Before most of the audience had arrived, I was checking the focus on the slides in my PowerPoint presentation prior to giving my talk and I put up on the screen an image which shows the Orion/Pyramids correlation and the Sphinx/Leo correlation at Giza in the epoch of 10,500 BC. Rightly and properly since the Orion correlation is Robert Bauval’s discovery I included a portrait of Robert Bauval in the slide. As soon as Zahi saw Robert’s image he became furiously angry, shouted at me, made insulting and demeaning comments about Robert, and told me that if I dared to mention a single word about Robert in my talk he would walk out and refuse to debate me.

This is a modern ‘scientist’ in frank and open debate? (No, I’m not referring to the gentle Mr Hancock —I mean the nice Mr Hawass.)

I explained that the alternative view of history that I was on stage to represent could not exclude the Orion correlation and therefore could not exclude Robert Bauval. At that, again shouting, Zahi marched out of the debating room. Frantic negotiations then took place off stage between the conference organisers and Zahi. Finally Zahi agreed to return and give his talk and answer questions from the audience, but he refused absolutely to hear or see my talk, or to engage in any debate with me. I therefore gave my talk to the audience without Zahi present (he sat in a room outside the conference hall while I spoke). When I had finished I answered questions from the audience. Then Zahi entered, gave his talk, answered questions from the audience and left.

well now ....png

One of the few members of the audience who had arrived early did manage to record part of the scene of Zahi storming out of the conference room — see here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ziu2ygE_Wc

The whole illustrates the arrogant pignorance of the gentleman who had/has (?) his grip tightly around the neck of power at the actual site itself. Not good—but he would doubtlessly disagree; and I imagine that if I tried to debate the point would flounce petulantly out of the room with petticoats aflurry and spitting spiders in all directions.

 

For Source:  CLICK HERE

 

IT’S A ‘cultural’ thing?

So I (why always me?) must bend over backwards to accommodate such open-minded, well mannered, couth and cultured, scientifically inquisitive little oiks as  this nice man? (Unless I do I shan’t earn my Snowflake badge) (Bugger~!)

No, my apologies to any deserving sensitivities I may ruffle—this guy is often both desperate to be liked and desperate to appear unbiassed. But the mask drops easily to reveal the thug within (desperate thug, I must add). (Is he Islamic, by any chance—and thus entirely open to unchallenged debate?)

IF THE NICE MR HAWASS

represents the ‘scientific’ establishment of Egyptian studies and antiquities I think our world is a sorry place.

Perhaps he learned his objectivity—if not his manners—at the Adolf Hitler School of Fine Arts in Berlin (and is older than he claims).

But he has style—those ‘Indiana Jones’ hats  … ’nuff sed.

Snowflake

For ol’ Zahi, the very antithesis of The Snowflake

* Yes, Little Ollivia … that was indeed sarcasm. Pure, unsubtle, unadulterated, and the quintessentially genuine article.

SNOWFLAKE AWARD

SnowflakeNOW ALSO AWARDED TO

anyone who finds the historical and time-honoured term “Gypsy Day” offensive. (Actually, such a Snowflake would really have to work at it. As far as I know it’s academic anyway—we don’t have real  gypsies in Kiwiland.)

IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD

and the word was used—in a familiar but not derogatory sense—to cover someone whose ‘gypsy’ life style included a fair bit of travel. That’s all it meant, Snowflake. Now go take your pathetic little mind to a dictionary and if the words aren’t too big for you, look up ‘nomadic’ while you are there. I can wait whilst you get your mommy to do it for you, no rush—my own gypsy days are over.

I guess this means that the travelling once-a-year Gypsy Fair will have to change its name too … but how long before ‘travelling’ gets tarred with the same (EEK~!) brush?

SNOWFLAKE:

pleeeeeease … before you go off half-cocked (oops, am I still allowed to say ‘cock’ in public?) look at historical before you opt hysterical. Go on, I know you really wish you could …

buitre16

NZH.png

buitre16FOR OUTSIDERS

I had it explained to me that the sales/taking possession of farms down here is finalised and actuated on the first day of June each year—and that’s when everyone moves their stock (animals) to suit.

The roads can be quite busy with cattle movers shifting loads of cows and things all over the place. The name ‘Gypsy Day’ crept into the local lingo by a natural process of evolution—not by any manner of deriding anyone.

If you cannot see that, Snowflake, let me lay this upon your shivering shoulders (no frogs will be harmed in the course of my experiment, I assure you) —

finger-pointing-down-animation-gif.gif

 

HONI SOIT

QUI MAL Y PENSE

 

AND FOR SOMEONE SETTING

his (oops … sexist term. My apologies, of course I meant setting ‘their’) (or should that be ‘its’?) sails to the wind (politicians, anyone?) let me close with this snippet followed by some ruminations—

“The term ‘Gypsy Day’ might be still in common use within the farming community as a shorthand term for the mass movement of stock, but it has undertones that aren’t in tune with New Zealand society today. ORC won’t be using the term in the future,” Bodeker said.

for source: CLICK HERE

In a land with no gypsies of its own you really have to work at it to be offended. I guess the Snowflake vote is worth cultivating, no? Whatever happened to electing folks into office based on their performance and objective merit, hmmm?

cerberus-2

“Mr Argus, Sir?”

“Yes, Little Ollivia?”

 

“Sir … will the de-denigration of the term be applied to all users—past, present and future, retrospectively?”

“Oink?”

“Sir, I mean will the Day be officially renamed Moooooving Day, as the nice Orcs say, and all other uses of the word revamped? Will that lovely biplane no longer be a Gypsy Moth but become perhaps a Butter Fly?”

“?”

“Will the late great Chichester’s yacht be renamed Traveller Moth?”

“Ye gods—”

“And the wee bay in the Falkland Islands, will that be—”

“Enough, Child~”

“Will we be going back through all literature to expunge every use of the word Gypsy, even the most inoffensive and accurate, lest someone somewhere somehow find an excuse to be offended—”

“Oh dear, is that the time? I really must rush—”

 

—WOOSH

 

OINK?

buitre16              (the traditional query of a flummoxed pig)

I HAVE OFTEN

wondered. The answer though, is self-obvious. No?

Have a quick squizz at this wee snap copied from an webbie I haven’t even finished reading yet (I like to reveal my ignorance whilst still fresh):

2.png

Interestingly enough it ties in with my also still unfinished—thus flabbergasting—copy of Hapgood’s “Maps Of The Ancient Sea Kings”..

MY PUZZLEMENT

is who exactly determined which way is ‘west’ in Antarctica? And why ’tis so, and how the hell does anyone in the field (ok, on the ice) use it?

Stop for a moment and consider a hypothetical case … there you are with your buddies in a wee tent right on the unarguable South Pole, having overnighted. And feeling a desperate need to answer a call of nature, you rug up and bimble out with your wee (ouch) shovel. You slither just a few hundred yards/meters and do your thing, but the unexpected snow flurrying now completely obliterates your tracks. Not good. But never fear, you have your trusty radio and (God be praised~!) it is working. You call your buddies for help, and (God be praised~!) they answer …

“Okay, Argus. Shuddup and simmer down; you went which way to do what—?”

You explain again, as patiently as the every-increasing frostbites will allow, you went north just a few hundred yards—

Okay, Buddy, we goddit—you went north. Here we come …”

So: what do you give your chances now?

In full clear daylight I’d give possibly a score or so chances in three hundred and sixty; and that without relying on the blasted compass. How so?

doomed

In the dark, or in ‘inclement’ conditions … you’d have been much better off unrolling a ball of string behind you, or even better, doing what needed be done within the tent and to hell with everyone’s sensitivities. No?

CLUE:

which way is north?

SO HOW THE HELL

did ‘they’ figure out which is the west and which the east, especially at the pole itself?

I still think that if you are at the south pole, you are facing north; easy peasy.

080721_dodo

 

 

AND SO IT

Flag_of_the_NSDAP_(1920–1945).svgBEGINS

and who can come up with a viable alternative? (The first to mention Godwin’s Law gets the official raspberry~!)*

Here, have a nice quote from a source that I must admit I was directed to (not usually my taste) …

snip 1.png

—the image above is an active link to source (UK’s Daily Mail).

ANYONE SUGGESTING SUCH

obvious action will be accused of trying to resurrect Guantanamo Bay, but in Britain. Oops, I meant reconstruct. Replicate. Dammit …

QUERY

In our Lands Of The Free, would such action be tolerable? Or do we continue to hang ourselves from the nearest and highest rafters by our own testimonials? It’s a bit of a toughie …

FOR MYSELF pc

if given draconian powers (or the gift of swaying enough voters) (which means the same thing) I’d very swiftly move to—

a.     emphasise that we have absolute Freedom of speech

b.     in all forms of communication …

—simultaneously followed by a do-gooder-&-snowflake-shocking purge of permissibles in any and all forms of communication such that:

c.     any exhortation to the use of

d.     any force or violence

e.     not specifically authorised by The Law**, or

f.    not demonstrably in spontaneous self-defence …

be banned outright, with severe penalties for anyone ‘inciting’ unlawful violence. As such I’m very happy to announce that the Islamics within our nation must either cleanse their sick literatures and behaviours to conform to civilised (our) standards—or buzz off back to the Islamic paradises they migrated from.

IN FACT

they’d have to meet our standards in all respects. No such thing as religious exemptions from ‘common’ law … or, of course, the rest of us may also go around ‘marrying’ six-year-old little girls and ‘lawfully’ copulating with nine-year-olds; sawing/chopping the heads off disbelievers and generally being a bit inventive in forcing compliance.

THE NICE POLICEMAN

in the image above should realise, surely, that us Snowflakes will never allow anyone to slide us into Naziism ‘by the back door’~! Not even for our own good … concentration camps? (Brrrr … but for Islamics at least, the idea has a certain piquancy) (you’re allowed to advocate such when you’d talking theory).

SAUCE FOR THE GOOSE

should be equally stuffed up the gander, right? So why single out the sickness that is Islam’s unique true word of God—why pick on just the big guy? Why not purge all such literatures in any so-called ‘religious’ treatises? As a start I offer that all literature pertaining to the Abrahamics be so cleansed.

OR—

civilised (I use it to mean possessing Free Speech and secular Justice based on unhung juries of oafs off the street) nations adopt the methods employed by Islam—if no ‘infidels’ be allowed into Mecca, declare the whole of the west (Britain at least) to be similarly sacred.

Boot out/forbid anyone not of my persuasions. The Meccanese (Meccanix?) could never object—they, after all, set the precedents; so they’d continue selling us their oil and we’d keep selling them modern weaponry with which to spread their systems of Love, Truth, Peace, Compassion, Charity and Mercy: win/win.

OH GOD

I’m a genius, the world’s problems solved and before my second coffee too.

So: what do YOU say—

snowflake

?

screen-shot-2016-10-04-at-00-15-05

* Pretty bloody obvious, though, ain’t it?

** By OUR law, you silly little invading immigrant ‘refugee’, you …

WHY SHOULD WE WORRY?

pcSO LONG AS

the loot keeps rolling in.

This is, after all, the age of total ‘Liberation’* and ‘Equality’ … no?

KEY POINTS

•Six Saudi students have been allowed to pass an electrical course despite cheating in their final exam. •They submitted almost identical answers in the exam, but could not answer a question verbally after the cheating was discovered. •Two Saudi government officials attended a key meeting when Unitec began investigating the case. •Unitec says the Saudi students were not treated any differently from other students who cheat. •It says “academic misconduct” including cheating was detected in 10 per cent of last year’s engineering exams. •The Saudi students’ lecturer has resigned in protest and NZQA is investigating.

Six Saudi Arabian students at Unitec have been allowed to pass an electrical course despite cheating in their final exam.

BUT WAIT

it gets better—

He also gave all seven students C-minus grades for the course, the lowest passing grade. Unitec said later that this was an error and changed one student to a fail grade…

 

Oh wow. And awwww, shucks too.

uni.pngAnd not in the least related, here’s a nice screenshot (active link) for you:
It may be relative/pertinent/germane or wotever, I haven’t read it myself ‘cos all this academic stuff doesn’t concern me so long as we kiwis stay the world leaders in everything—never forgetting that if ever we lose at rugby it’s only because the ref is biassed, paid off, or blind. We invented flying, we invented splitting atoms, we were/are/will always be the best sailors in the universe—so of course our educators are infallible and the guy/guyette who wrote this BS article should be stood against the wall and pelted with bales of Saudi shekels until they recants**.

cerberus-2

* Liberation from integrity. (Nasty word that:  in-teg-rity) (sounds like something you’d slip on after a dog with dysentry passed ahead. Yuk. Thank heavens they’re clearing it out) …

** I too am a product of New Zealand education. Boom boom!

YE GODS

AKA BB D 2.png

“Beam me up, Scotty—

buitre16

—there’s not a great deal of intelligent life down here~!”

WE ALL HAVE

our little idiosyncrasies. Some of us even dedicate our lives to idiot-syncrasies, which is more than doubleplus ungood.

Like wee cutie, here   ——>

who seems to have slipped the leash back in chapter 1. I no longer trust anything I read in modern media, it could be simple typos (nothing wrong with that if no wars are started because of them) or even the deplorable state of modern journalism. By way of anticipating rebuttitive squawks I offer this verbatim snippet —

Though her eyes are naturally large, she wears contact lenses to enhance them, boosting the size of her iris from 13.5cm to 16.2cm …

—and leave it for you to make any decisions (although I am reminded of a sketch in a Billy Connolley show where he convinces his short-sighted Dad that ‘prescription windscreens’ would obviate the need to wear glasses when driving—

“…but can you imagine the effect on a driver coming the other way? …

‘Eek! What the f**k is that~!?

Damn. He tells it much better than I. Perhaps it really is just a proofing error, the mind would boggle otherwise. Anyway, here’s your link:  CLICK HERE

And if you do go there be prepared to gast your flabbers …

 

BB D 3.png

And now, with a set precedent preceding me: I wonder how much it would cost to have my own visage enhanced …

argus

 

DERE YOUNIVERSHITTY

PLEZE EMALE ME*

One PHd (any subjik wil du) three awe fawe Masters (oops, sylly me) Persons Degreas (agane in enny subjik) and arf a doze  oops, we bin gon metrik … maike it ten then of yore hard ernned and highley esteimed degrees.

I wil be sending a couple of stamps to cover yore costs and tooeeshun feez.

Yores with lots of luv and kisses

              ARGUS

Arguscave canem

PS

 *  Ime fourwording the link for peeple to c wair Ime cumi’ng from:

 

Awe ... shucks.png

 

(four unedjucated foks out thair, clik on it.)