i've only begun to read part 1, but will research the points as i go along. Here's one view i've came across...
The Piri Reis map shows the western coast of Africa, the eastern coast of South America, and the northern coast of Antarctica. The northern
coastline of Antarctica is perfectly detailed. The most puzzling however is not so much how Piri Reis managed to draw such an accurate map of the
Antarctic region 300 years before it was discovered, but that the map shows the coastline under the ice. Geological evidence confirms that the latest
date Queen Maud Land could have been charted in an ice-free state is 4000 BC. - - - - - - - On 6th July 1960 the U. S. Air Force responded to Prof.
Charles H. Hapgood of Keene College, specifically to his request for an evaluation of the ancient Piri Reis Map: 6, July, 1960 Subject: Admiral Piri
Reis Map TO: Prof. Charles H. Hapgood Keene College Keene, New Hampshire Dear Professor Hapgood, Your request of evaluation of certain unusual
features of the Piri Reis map of 1513 by this organization has been reviewed. The claim that the lower part of the map portrays the Princess Martha
Coast of Queen Maud Land, Antarctic, and the Palmer Peninsular, is reasonable. We find that this is the most logical and in all probability the
correct interpretation of the map. The geographical detail shown in the lower part of the map agrees very remarkably with the results of the seismic
profile made across the top of the ice-cap by the Swedish-British Antarctic Expedition of 1949. This indicates the coastline had been mapped before it
was covered by the ice-cap. The ice-cap in this region is now about a mile thick. We have no idea how the data on this map can be reconciled with the
supposed state of geographical knowledge in 1513. Harold Z. Ohlmeyer Lt. Colonel, USAF Commander - - - - - - - The official science has been
saying all along that the ice-cap which covers the Antarctic is million years old. The Piri Reis map shows that the northern part of that continent
has been mapped before the ice did cover it. That should make think it has been mapped million years ago, but that's impossible since mankind did not
exist at that time.
It's worth noting, that if some things that this guy Max allude to are true, there is a heck of a lot of dis-information being served to us by
governments. Reminds me of Zeitgeist i guess. I took an anti-Zeitgeist stance on here very recently, basing it on what i could research as historical
stuff on Horus. If we are being fed history that is BS, we are discrediting, potentially, the truth.
We gotta remember, from a very early age we are being told what way the world has been, and is. From school, we are constantly being taught be the
establishment what way the world is. It has been going on so long, so big a part of us still beleives it all.
The effect of this is although some of us are attempting to be 'free-thinkers' (as i was with Zeitgeist), we are too easy to dismiss all alternative
thinkers. This is not to say all are true, but we must also look at whatever evidence we use to debunk such people.
There is a chance, through our lifetime conditioning, we are still doing what the governments want, albeit sub-consciously.
If history is to be believed, throughout time, many free-thinkers have been labelled as idiots. By the people in power, and then the general
I've noticed a pattern emerging though. With the Zeitgeist film, and now this guy Max. If the banana thing that MAx wrote about is so obviously
wrong, it is curious he included it. Also, Part 1 in Zeitgeist is largely inaccurate, if we believe history, as in Egyptian mythology. Why are these
guys including stuff that actually makes folks doubt the whole veracity of the work. I think i'll ask them.