Is the Sphinx 10,000 years old?

Well, what exactly could anyone do to sway an opinion? Just because something is commonly accepted doesn't make it true. Of course, I have a personal opinion on this subject but I know just saying "well, I believe it just because that's how I feel" won't cut it, which is why I try to argue the best way I can using facts, pointing out inconsistencies and raising questions that the other side may not have considered.

Again this works both ways. Often times a theory is held up by the official experts but generally it's just the most accepted explanation (almost never for sure for whole full truth) or the consensus, again not the for sure truth. A popular theory is the Big Bang and while it's a stretch to say it's the consensus for how the universe began, it is certainly looked at as one of the best if not THE best explanation for the subject, certainly more so than anything involving God in any way (and no, I don't buy the Abrahamic story of it).

Remember, logic =/= truth.

It's pretty much statistically impossible not to build an ideology of some kind not matter who you are or how you, I or anyone feels about something. The key is not to let it blind/cloud your thoughts so much to the point that it can't be altered and not consider the other side's point of view. Having an ideology is how you are able to connect dots and try to rationally figure out how an argument on a subject fits into your ideology.

For example, I think world history is different than we're told. Why I feel that isn't important (for now) but basically I feel The Powers That Be are hiding info. We reach this subject: TPTB have hidden facts in the past (imo), therefore the true age, builders and civilization that built the Sphinx is not what/who we're told (again, imo).

Then it's argued and evidence is presented and I'm persuaded by you guys here that the commonly accepted view is true. My eyes are opened and I see my take on it was wrong and I move on (in theory, because I haven't been persuaded much here).

What's transpired here is that my views and arguments for this subject were wrong BUT I still move on with idea that information is hidden from us, my ideology.

Long story short, it is possible to have an ideology but still think rationally and come to a conclusion against that ideology for a subject. It's not about "want[ing] and desir[ing]" a certain answer but looking into a subject with a certain frame of mind but still being able to weigh the facts and make the most reasonable conclusion. And then, if you come across enough answers to another subject/argument that go against your ideology, then it's possible for it to be changed.

 

"And then, if you come across enough answers to other subjects/arguments that go against your ideology, then it's possible for it to be changed."

Sorry, that's how that final sentence should read.

 

To be fair, it's not the only place I've seen it and not the only person who's talked about the issue.

It was the first thing that came up on Google and after carefully examining it to make sure it wasn't pure non-sense (i.e. at least written by an expert of some kind that argues what I've come across and not some random internet weirdo) I decided to post this one.

 

What about Sir Francis Bac--err I mean, William Shakespeare? Or Salvador Fernando Zarco?