On one side of the debate stands 'Classic Egyptology': more interested in the New Kingdom (1500 to 1000 BC: Tutankhamun, Akenaten, Hatchepsut, Rameses, Seti, etc.) than the Old Kingdom (circa 2700 to 2200 BC), the alleged period of the Giza Pyramid's construction - and an era about which "we have no historical documentation", to quote Jean Leclant, one of the world's most lettered Egyptologist.
On the other, 'Alternative Egyptology', a "club" of "pyramidiots" or "pyramidomaniacs", as they are sometimes mockingly designated by orthodox Egyptologists. Often linked with the American 'New Age' movement, their starting point is always a hypothesis - Atlantis, God, extraterrestrials - always an unexplained factor to validate their thesis.
On both sides, beliefs prevail over reason. No proof is offered. Conclusions rest on opinions rather than on facts, with each side accusing the other of lack of objectivity.
Our approach diverges radically from these trends: we simply want to demonstrate the facts fairly and rigorously.