It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Thoughts On Graham Hancock?

page: 4
27
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2014 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Harte

Maybe I was a little too optimistic about his abillity to perform research at university standard. As you say... he did admit he is wrong which is a rare quality among mainstream specialists in their field. And that proves that Hancock considers the truth above his own ego.

If Hancock will be just a little bit right it will stil be a contibution and can hopefully still initiate a snowbal effect when mainstream scientist take a closer look at what he is a little right about. Maybe it will open up a new understanding of what these early ancient civillisations were about.

What comes to mind is Göbekli Tepe. That research by a mainstream scientist confirms that Hancock is on the right track when it comes to the existance of civilizations earlier than the one in Mesopotamia.




posted on Aug, 15 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: MadhatterTheGreat
I read Fingerprints of the Gods years ago and discussed it with an archaeologist who had worked on the quarries that were the source of building material for the pyramids. He patiently explained how much of what I was quoting him was poop, and he was in a position to know first hand.

On the other hand, Hancock was at the end of a long line of fringe writers I had checked out...staring with Von Daniken. All this prompted me to actually study archaeology on a university level, and attain a Provincial licence as well. For that I am grateful to the 'speculative' writers who inspired me. I still poke around on the fringes, but now require a higher level of proof than Hancock et al are inclined to provide.




edit on 15-8-2014 by JohnnyCanuck because: ...just because.



posted on Aug, 15 2014 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck
I still poke around on the fringes, but now require a higher level of proof than Hancock et al are inclined to provide.

A lot of damned good archeology has been done over they years by people inspired by adventurous fiction. And these days with ground- and tree-penetrating radar able to find old settlements that would otherwise never be found, there's a chance to make some interesting discoveries that illuminate our understanding of prehistory. There are still a lot of places to look for stuff, although it's unlikely we're going to find Hancock's global civilization.



posted on Aug, 15 2014 @ 05:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

Absolutely, I started looking for it in the late 60's but by the mid 70's decided it was highly improbable given the evidence that existed them. In the 90's it went to near impossible.

As noted above what we'll find in those thousands of un-excavated sites and mounds are smaller more regional and local cultures.



posted on Aug, 15 2014 @ 05:13 PM
link   
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

Thor Heyerdahl and Aku Aku was my introduction to the world of archaeology.



posted on Aug, 15 2014 @ 08:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift


A lot of damned good archeology has been done over they years by people inspired by adventurous fiction.


A good example of that would be Mark Lehner, who was inspired to research Egyptian origins by the writings of Edgar Cayce. He is now the director of AERA and good friends with Hawass.



posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 06:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: DazDaKing
a reply to: Blue Shift

We have one-off, amazingly well sculpted 'Lion-man' statuette from around 40,000 BC.



I just want to jump on this before you start a new meme that will be seized upon by others Daz.

I dont know where you came across the Lionman of Hohlenstein, maybe you saw the thread i wrote about it a short time ago.

It is not a "one off" as the Aurignacians in Swabia at the time had a rich Ivory carving tradition, of which the figure you speak is the greatest find so far... It took about 400 hours to make with flint tools as far as we know see my thread to see a repro made in authentic style.

There are some other contemporary Ivory carvings in this paper - if you want to discuss any of this it would make in interesting addition to my thread, but please don't suggest that this find is indicative of darkly hidden history rather than our ancestor's ability to feed/fund an artist in making a wonderful cultural artefact.
edit on 16-8-2014 by skalla because: linky prob



posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 06:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: The Vagabond
a reply to: Hanslune

Number one with a bullet, since I don't want to continue my overly long and meandering posts, is why it took the vast majority of our species history to figure out exceptionally basic things like pottery, but that immediately after that, in order for things to get the way that we know they were by the time of the Egyptians, there would have to be this unbelievable progression of quantum leaps one after the other starting before the advent of writing (which would of course explain a lot and truncate the period of slow development I propose a little closer to your comfort level if it went back further than is known).

Writing not only made knowledge transferable over time, it also made it transferable over distance, so yes, writing has everything to do with the advance of cultures.

Regarding pottery, we don't actually know when it was invented. The oldest pottery we've found is around 20k years old, but that doesn't mean there's not older examples out there waiting to be found.

What I'm referring here to is fired clay pottery. Obviously, if you include stone pottery, it dates back much, MUCH further.

Harte



posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 06:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: zatara
a reply to: Harte

Maybe I was a little too optimistic about his abillity to perform research at university standard. As you say... he did admit he is wrong which is a rare quality among mainstream specialists in their field. And that proves that Hancock considers the truth above his own ego.

I do give him some credit for that. He admitted it in a foreward to a reprinted edition of the book.

Also, when Zahi Hawass led him into the relieving chambers above the King's Chamber in the GP and Hancock saw the evidence, he later wrote that there can be no doubt at all that the GP was constructed by the Ancient Egyptians - directly contradicting his previous claims.

He did, however, continue to cling (tenuously) to the idea that some of the glyphs he saw could have been forged by Vyse.

Ah well, can't expect too much, can we?


originally posted by: zataraIf Hancock will be just a little bit right it will stil be a contibution and can hopefully still initiate a snowbal effect when mainstream scientist take a closer look at what he is a little right about. Maybe it will open up a new understanding of what these early ancient civillisations were about.

What comes to mind is Göbekli Tepe. That research by a mainstream scientist confirms that Hancock is on the right track when it comes to the existance of civilizations earlier than the one in Mesopotamia.

Actually,no, Gobekli Tepe indicates no such thing as far as what we've found there.

Understand that terms like "civilization" have a more constrained definition when used by academia (or are supposed to.)

There is no evidence for any civilization (Anthropology defintion) aywhere around the time frame of GT.

Hancock is not even just "a little bit right" in anything he comes up with. To the extent that he reports what Archaeology has told us, he's sometimes right about that but far more often he's completely out of date about it. My contention is that he states outdated archaeological theories purposefully, specifically to support whatever nonsense he's trying to sell in whatever book he's writing at the time.

Harte
edit on 8/16/2014 by Harte because: of the wonderful things he does!



posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 08:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Harte
Also, when Zahi Hawass led him into the relieving chambers above the King's Chamber in the GP and Hancock saw the evidence, he later wrote that there can be no doubt at all that the GP was constructed by the Ancient Egyptians - directly contradicting his previous claims.
Harte


There too much speculation and holes to shoot into this subject.. The only thing I would like to add is that I can understand Hancock' remark with Hawass present.

I do not know the man personally but I came to the conclusion that Hawass is a snake. Saying stuff in the presence of Hawass which could remotely suggest aliens or an other civillization than the Egyptians could cause you to be banned for visiting the relieving chambers for the rest of your life.



posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 09:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: zatara
I do not know the man personally but I came to the conclusion that Hawass is a snake. Saying stuff in the presence of Hawass which could remotely suggest aliens or an other civillization than the Egyptians could cause you to be banned for visiting the relieving chambers for the rest of your life.

Hawass has committed the unforgivable sin of representing Egyptian antiquities for Egyptians. I did an unscientific poll on an archaeology forum, and nobody had any particular problem with him. So what if he has no sense of humour with regard to ancient aliens? He's close enough to Ground Zero to take offense at the 'brown people can't build #' theorem. And I don't blame him.



posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Harte

I'm shocked Harte are you saying HG is mercenary and plays to the crowd?

lol

The biggest problem fringe writers have is trying to come up with something new -to do so they have to get weirder, stranger or more outlandish.



posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: zatara

originally posted by: Harte
Also, when Zahi Hawass led him into the relieving chambers above the King's Chamber in the GP and Hancock saw the evidence, he later wrote that there can be no doubt at all that the GP was constructed by the Ancient Egyptians - directly contradicting his previous claims.
Harte


There too much speculation and holes to shoot into this subject.. The only thing I would like to add is that I can understand Hancock' remark with Hawass present.

Dude, Hawass wasn't present for the remarks, which were made in print and still appear on Hancock's website.

Harte



posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hanslune
a reply to: Harte



I'm shocked Harte are you saying HG is mercenary and plays to the crowd?



It is rather shocking, isn't it?




Harte



posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 01:58 PM
link   
Graham Hancock is the man, nuff said:




posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 02:15 PM
link   
haven't read him in a long time but he kept the subject of ancient civilizations interesting. but after many years, of continuing study, I'd say in and of himself...he didn't even scratch the surface concerning the knowledge of the Egyptians. but that should be said about everyone involved in producing the body of knowledge into ancient civilization.

when you SEE a Sphinx in real life you'll understand what I'm saying.

keep on reading.



posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 03:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: michaelbrux
haven't read him in a long time but he kept the subject of ancient civilizations interesting. but after many years, of continuing study, I'd say in and of himself...he didn't even scratch the surface concerning the knowledge of the Egyptians. but that should be said about everyone involved in producing the body of knowledge into ancient civilization.

when you SEE a Sphinx in real life you'll understand what I'm saying.

keep on reading.


Going to Egypt and actually seeing their ruins, going thru the museums, the endless tombs and monuments. It gives you a fuller understanding just what they accomplished. I've been fortunately to have visited there a half dozen times and each time I enjoyed it even more.

Its a bit unstable now but in the future try and find the time and money to go, it is well worth it.

Oh and go in the winter!



posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 09:36 PM
link   
He is one of the reasons why i am in the jungle of peru next week (ayahuasca)



posted on Aug, 16 2014 @ 10:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: kauskau
He is one of the reasons why i am in the jungle of peru next week (ayahuasca)


Doing what?



posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 12:07 AM
link   
I love Graham Hancock. His book Fingerprints of the Gods was a welcome edition to my library at a time when I knew most of our history books were hogwash. My wife and I had the great pleasure of meeting Graham and his wife Santha on a few occasions and even had dinner with them twice. They are both amazing people with an immense passion for knowledge. They are very down-to-Earth people. We even received an invitation to their home in the U.K. (where we lived at the time Fingerprints came out) to go exploring with them. Fingerprints of the Gods was revolutionary and a slap in the face of academia. When I was quite young I was certain I wanted to be an archaeologist or anthropologist. I was always fascinated by the work of Dr. Louis Leakey. After he died and as I finished my basic schooling I rapidly became disenchanted with both fields as it was quite clear to me that much evidence was being overlooked, ignored, or simply misrepresented. I recall once telling my high school history teacher she was "feeding us crap". After a tour through the military and establishing myself firmly in a computer technology career I began spending much of my free time researching "alternate" views of our past. When Fingerprints of the Gods came out I felt in many ways vindicated and showed the book to all my family in a sort of "told you so" fashion.

Graham is a pioneer for sure. It took guts to buck the establishment at that time. I am ever so grateful for what he has done.



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join