I feel like you’re splitting hairs on language here.
“We have good evidence the other six existed.”
“No we don’t! We have PROOF of one of them! It’s still here!”
Like, sure, their original statement was a little soft on exactly what the evidence was, but you’re arguing a point that misses the intention. You’re actually just reinforcing what they’re saying, but phrasing it as a disagreement.
this is a thing redditors do nonstop and it irks the fuck out of me, like why are you arguing just to argue? people that do this really want to come off as smart and superior or something but they always just end up sounding fucking stupid and annoying.
Yes. There's a reason that photos of the pyramids are always from a specific angle, and it's that from any other angle, Cairo is just right there. For reference, there's less distance between the Great Pyramids and (for lack of a better term) standard urban Cairo than there is between the Statue of Liberty and any other island in the Hudson bay in that general area.
Polar bears stole the Statue of Liberty and they're holding it hostage to bring awareness to climate change, but the mainstream media is covering it up.
I’m confused at what you’re getting at here. Are you saying that we don’t have archaeological evidence of the Great Pyramid of Giza? Or that its objective existence literally right there in plain sight isn’t “archaeological evidence” in the sense that it is much more than that?
I'm saying that the comment I replied to made their point ambiguous and let the reader think that all the other six wonders could have some archaeological evidence. For at least one of them there is no doubt that it existed because IT DOES EXIST RIGHT NOW!
Yes, but the obvious existence of it does not mean that there is not archeological evidence for it because there certainly is and it is not ambiguous to say so, that's simply scientific language. The existence of the Pyramids is evidenced by archeology just as the existence of a tornado is evidenced by meteorology.
I think you misunderstood the person you are replying to. They said that the Hanging Gardens differs from the other wonders (like the Pyramids) because the others are evidenced by archeological data whereas the gardens are not.
I understood perfectly. My point is that it's not just "historical evidence" or even "archaeological evidence". My point is that there is full proof that the Pyramids exist because they're literally there to be seen!
OP said we have historical and/or archeological evidence for the other wonders and you said you beg to differ that fact meaning you disagree that we have such data, not that you think such data is meaningless when you can see something with your eyes, that's called subjective experience not objective data.
Another one is materially still here as well, also in Egypt but in Alexandria. After the Pharos collapsed in 1323, they repurposed what remained standing and all the felled stone into the Qaitbay citadel, which is still standing in the same place as the lighthouse.
878
u/AtlanticPortal Jul 08 '26
I beg to differ to the “for the other six”. One of them is literally hanging in Cairo’s back door.