Wlad is not a top 20 HW, he has never beaten anyone of significance

I'll dig up some articles that deal with this subject and post them here...

 

That seems an overly time-consuming standard for this level of debate. As I already mentioned, I don't want to pore through my bookshelves and cite-check each individual assertion that I make.

I do enough of that in real life. This is recreation.

We're debating in a boxing forum, and I'm perfectly happy to hold you to a lower burden of proof than an academic debate or courtroom contest would entail. This especially makes sense when one considers that you and I don't intend to whisk ourselves off to a library and cite-check each other's books anyway. I therefore suggest that we give the general source (the book, article, etc.) where the information can be found. That gives us some idea of where the other guy is getting his ideas, and the level of authority that those ideas have.

Are these terms acceptable?

Let's take the technology example as a start.

Since you contend the existence of Egyptian technological superiority (or at least equality) with their neighbors, perhaps you can give me sourced examples of impressive technological achievements that lead you to this conclusion. You mentioned pyramids. Anything else?

 

Great. I look forward to seeing them.

As a preview, I'm basically asking you why the Great Pyramid (pictured in light brown) is significantly more impressive than--for instance--the Great Pyramid of Cholula (lime green), which has a greater volume, or the Pyramid of the Sun (army greenish brown), which is bigger than all but the largest Egyptian pyramids:

This content is protected

 

The fact that the Egyptian Pyramids outdate the Meso American Pyramids by more than 3 millennia...

 

No, they are not but I will cut you a break.

I'll be happy to post links to my sources to back my arguments. If you wish to refute those argument, you will have to be willing to do the same. Otherwise, you will have to accept said arguments as fact and move on.

 

I'm talking level of development. Time doesn't matter.

Basically, my reasoning runs like this:

Egypt's neighbors were AT LEAST as advanced as the Meso-American civilizations --> The Meso-American civilizations built pyramids that rivaled the Egyptian pyramids --> Egypt's neighbors could also have built pyramids if they'd wanted to.

My argument doesn't rely at all on when the Meso-American civilizations built the pyramids.

When the Meso-American civilizations first developed, we basically got to see a replay of the rise of civilization in the Old World, since Old World and New World civilizations were cut off from one another. It's a great "natural experiment".

The experiment suggested that a lot of civilizations at the level of technological development that the Egyptians and their neighbors reached could build pyramids. By contrast, it showed that a Sumerian achievement -- the wheel -- was unique.*

Now, if the Egyptian pyramids differed from the Maya, Aztec, or Toltec structures in overall sophistication despite their general similarity, then it might be a unique accomplishment.



...I assume that you were planning to make such an argument?



* Technically, the Aztecs used wheels for children's toys, but this really doesn't have any bearing on how advanced they were.

 

So you are routinely in the habit of posting the large number of pincited sources necessary to construct an academic argument for the sake of winning a debate on a boxing forum?

Fair enough, except that some "refutations" by their nature don't rely on sources. They rely on logical reasoning.

You seem to implicitly acknowledge this in your own breakdown of the sources that other people posted.

 

Actually, yeah, time DOES matter. While the Meso American Pyramids are impressive - the fact is they came 3000 years after the Egyptian Pyramids.

Now, you keep trumpeting that Egypt's contemporary neighbors could have built Pyramids but my question is; where is the evidence that they possessed the technical know how?

 

On this particular topic, yes.

It's not my fault that other people don't read their own sources. Sometimes people rely on a source that ends up undermining their own argument. The previous C.L. Brace quote being an excellent example.

 

Same, I didn't even rank Wlad when we did the top 20 in "Classic" as I recall no disrespect but jesus so many greats, but the Haye win kind of tipped him in there, no choice, he's just too successful. I have no problem with him making a top 15, incredible for a fighter who's career isn't even finished.

My only issue is "WLAD CAN'T BE IN YOUR TOP 20, YOUR STUPID, YOU KNOW NOTHING, 1+1=2, HE BEAT NOBODY." Get the **** out with that stuff.

 

He's fighting everyone the division has to offer, if that's not enough to you then watch another division. You idiots that start threads like this make it sound like there's an Ali, Frazier, Tyson and Foreman that both Klitschkos are avoiding.

 

And BTW: You should try being more intellectually honest.

The Great Pyramid is twice as tall as either of the Mesoamerican examples.

I'm sure you see the relevance in the height disparity...

 

No, time doesn't matter in this context. Pretty obviously, in fact.

If a bunch of !Kung nomads built pyramids TODAY using ancient tools, it would also devalue the Egyptians' achievement, because it would show that it's pretty easy.

Similarly, if the Maya or Aztecs built pyramids with a LOWER LEVEL OF TECHNOLOGY than the Egyptians, then the pyramids don't look that impressive.

Haven't we just covered this a couple seconds ago?

* Civilizations more primitive than the Egyptians built pyramids.

* Aside from the pyramids, you haven't mentioned anything that the Egyptians did that proved they were more advanced than their neighbors. (Since that's what you're trying to prove).

...So why wouldn't their neighbors be able to build pyramids? Were the Egyptians privy to engineering knowledge that their Levantine and Mesopotamian neighbors didn't have? If so, say what it was. And don't reply "pyramid building", unless you can show some qualitative difference between the Mesoamerican pyramids and the Egyptian pyramids.

It couldn't have been that special, since the Aztecs, Maya, and Toltecs built similar structures with less advanced technological systems than the Egyptians or their neighbors.

 

Yeah, and it's also a lot smaller in terms of total mass. The Cholula pyramid is enormous.

Perhaps, instead of impugning my intellectual honesty, you should follow your own advice and SHOW WHY the Mesoamerican examples are so much less impressive.

Also, you're subtly shifting your ground here. First you said that the Egyptian pyramids in general show Egypt's superiority. Now, you rely on the Great Pyramid and the few other pyramids that are taller than the Pyramid of the Sun.

So are you conceding that all of the Egyptian pyramids shorter than the Pyramid of the Sun do not show Egypt's superiority over its neighbors?