Learning who's best/ making civilization *LINK*

>CP: Hi Mark, Must be a fun youth group that you lead!

-M: That youth group is led by a sustainable agriculture activist in Pakistan named Timur. They were hit by the Kashmiri quake, and I have heard little from them. :-(

>CP: Certainly the Internet search engines have invented new ways of ranking web sites. People are "voting" with their mouse clickers all the time.

-M: Some search engines place 'hits' as a way of how they rank web sites. The most popular engine, Google, uses *link analysis* as a way to rank web sites. My method, SD2, analyzes votes in a very similar way to how Google analyzes links.

>CP: In the publishing world, new companies have sprung up to tap the alternative market, such as Inner Traditions that reprints Ahmed Osman's books. Alternative history/religion/science researchers are I think by nature very independent and tend not to seek out alliances that might restrict their thinking.

-M: Their thinking is already restricted by themselves and by those that they seek advice from.

I am suggesting that my proposed publishing house would have the top controversial authors in control. They would have editorial control meaning that there would be minimum quality control standards(this would keep the kooks away) and they may slip editorial notes into the books, such as telling the reader about points of disagreement that higher ranked authors may have with the author.

The idea here is to serve the READER, and to serve the ongoing debate of knowledge.

Right now, I only know about ONE point of disagreement, and supporting reasons, between you and R.Ellis.

How do I know who is right? Where is the AUTHORITY to tell me so?

I could figure all this out for myself, but that would require me to become a historian, which I am not. If you and him had published books by my proposed publishing house, perhaps the editors would place a chart in the book showing you all's relative ranks, and your points of agreement and disagreement, as well a references to supporting arguements.

The idea here is that the job of the editorial board would not be to support a worldview, but to support quality ongoing debate.

>CP: And those who do want a partner may not get one. When I started my work I went to various professional meetings but found no one interested.

-M: Understood. This is why REAL professionals need to be found.

>CP: So I hacked my way forward alone. I have now done the part that requires a solitary mind. [...]

-M: You bounce ideas off of others, and you read the works of others. Have you ever really been solitary?

To change the subject, I have seen your Kings Lists on this group. I noticed that you didn't list the Indian kings. LA Waddell matched the Sumerian kings with the Indian kings in his book "The Makers of Civilization" on page482.

And you timeline seems off. Most seem to place Abraham at around 1900bce. This matches a large earthquake in the Indus valley, and possible diasporia westward toward Canaan. Imagine a tribe of Brahman"Abraham" from the Saraswati"Sarah" valley. I imagine that they would be a proto-Pali speaking Semetic people who would quickly learn the local language and religion, favoring the Yahweh god and associating with the Habiru. Maybe this was a group that became sympathetic with the Atenists of Egypt. How is this model?

Mark, Seattle

Responses To This Message

Pope and Ellis