Has the Book "Chariots of the Gods" been Debunked?

reply to post by grantbeed


It is a great read - whether it is true or not I do not know.

But it is well worth reading.

Originally posted by grantbeed
Hi all,

I am wondering whether to read this book, "Chariots of the Gods" by Eric Von Daniken. I've actually read the first few pages and it's very interesing stuff, but I would like some opinions on this as to whether it's still considered a legit theory?

The book was written in 1977 I think, quite some time ago. i did a search on here but could not find much. I'm sure there are some people on here that can shed more light on this.

Should I really be giving my time to this book or not?

Cheers, G.

Fiction doesn't have to be debunked. Read it as entertainment and to possibly make you think about some earth mysteries. But at no time should you believe or accept anything that is claimed within its pages as being factual. It is only speculation from a man who still doesn't want to deal with the truth when fantasy is not only more entertaining but sells a hell of a lot of books!

I agree with The Shrike. It gives you food for thought but at no time do I think that this book should be taken seriously. However, please do not let my view influence you. Give it a read and make your opinions.

Originally posted by grantbeed
I am wondering whether to read this book, "Chariots of the Gods" by Eric Von Daniken. I've actually read the first few pages and it's very interesing stuff, but I would like some opinions on this as to whether it's still considered a legit theory?

Legit theory? It depends on what you mean by legit theory.

Even the author says it's speculative, he's not presenting the information as factual. I try to read even viewpoints I don't necessarily agree with just so I can understand how other people think. I bought the book and read it and I'd do it again. It's almost an icon you hear people talk about so it's nice to know what's in it.

But I think it's not only speculative as the author says, it's highly speculative, and there other alternative explanations for the cases he cites that make more sense to me.

Now that we are in the space age we see manifestations as aliens. But before the space age, people saw manifestations as angels, demons and gods. Similar manifestations but just a different cultural context. So when Von Daniken sees the Nazca lines as communications to aliens, I see them as communications to gods. Both are/were believed to be from the skies or heavens.

reply to post by grantbeed


Daniken comes up with a lot of good stuff, but I don't agree with his bottom line that we were seeded from aliens. He makes this jump without proof and has ton of emotionalism in his book to get the reader on his side.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


I am leaning more to that aliens theory - after all, we don't know where we come from.

Aliens are not aliens when they are on their home planet.

reply to post by grantbeed

Go ahead and read. Has it been debunked? Yes and no. I had, or have a book claiming (too lazy to check right now) that Van Daniken was a bit of a fraud, but he was not the first to use the alien seeding of civilization argument. He kinda steals arguments and makes an easy, populist format of them.
Some things are false embellishments (I vaguely recall the starman-cave in South America being fraudulent, somewhere in his books).
However, there are ancient religious texts and lingering questions on ancient monuments, which are now indeed assumed to be much older than civilized history is supposed to be. Then there are the remarkable sunken city remains all over. I think he's a good introduction to a genre, and his books are available virtually for nothing second-hand!

reply to post by Arbitrageur


You said: "Now that we are in the space age we see manifestations as aliens. But before the space age, people saw manifestations as angels, demons and gods. Similar manifestations but just a different cultural context. So when Von Daniken sees the Nazca lines as communications to aliens, I see them as communications to gods. Both are/were believed to be from the skies or heavens."

The Nazca lines have been shown in well-done TV documentary to have connections to water sources at the end of the lines. The straight lines, that is. The silliest explanation, though, has to be from those who say they're runways for alien craft!

cheers for the replies. i think i will give it a read. Its a fascinating subject for sure.

Its sounds crazy, but only if a few of his claims were true, it would be amazing.

i agree with it is a great read and allows you to make up your own mind about things.
i read it wheni was 9 or 10 and alot makes sense when you think about it
but it is still pure speculation
want a good read while laying on the couch this winter in front of the fire - read that book! will make you ponder things

Originally posted by The Shrike
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

You said: "Now that we are in the space age we see manifestations as aliens. But before the space age, people saw manifestations as angels, demons and gods. Similar manifestations but just a different cultural context. So when Von Daniken sees the Nazca lines as communications to aliens, I see them as communications to gods. Both are/were believed to be from the skies or heavens."

The Nazca lines have been shown in well-done TV documentary to have connections to water sources at the end of the lines. The straight lines, that is. The silliest explanation, though, has to be from those who say they're runways for alien craft!

Yes I was referring to the giant pictographs like the spider etc that he says can only be recognized from the air.

And I agree the straight lines aren't runways, I don't expect aliens need a runway to land on, their ship is probably so advanced they could land anywhere.

You might want to check out Cult of the Alien Gods. It's about how horror-scifi writer HP Lovecraft influenced and may have been the genesis of ancient astronaut theories.

reply to post by DoomsdayRex


ah, i'll have a look at this. cheers.

reply to post by grantbeed


If you're interested in what people had to say about Von Danikens book check out The Space Gods Revealed by Ronald Story, Crash Go The Chariots by Clifford Wilson or Flim-Flam! by James Randi.

reply to post by DoomsdayRex


Ugh - that Lovecraft writer is deeply scary and also without humour.

At least Stephen King has a sense of humour.

Originally posted by grantbeed
I am wondering whether to read this book, "Chariots of the Gods" by Eric Von Daniken... Should I really be giving my time to this book or not?

Yes, I think it'll restore your sense of the miraculous to read Daniken's Chariots.

This book and its follow-up books have never been "debunked," for one simple reason: Erich Von Daniken did not make any hard-and-fast claims about the books being proven fact.

Rather than defending his scientific accuracy, Von Daniken has consistently pointed out over the decades that his books only present QUESTIONS, not answers.

Look at the title of his first book: Von Daniken deliberately entitled it "Chariots of the Gods?"...with a big question mark. Inside, you'll find hundreds of questions, although Von Daniken does not pretend to know the answers.

His intent was to cause his readers to ask questions and seek answers for themselves.

So, I don't see how there can be any harm in reading his collected works, opening your mind to fresh questions about extraterrestrial influence on Earth throughout history and prehistory. To close your mind to questions is to limit your own intellectual growth.

Incidentally, Erich Von Daniken is still very much alive and kicking, still giving lectures and still writing to this day. Here's a link to his website:

Erich Von Daniken's website

— Doc Velocity

reply to post by Doc Velocity


cheers for the link Doc. will have a peek at his website. Think i will give this book a read over the xmas holidays. Im not much of a reader , but this sunject is fascinating for sure!

This is a very interesting read. I think you will enjoy it, and nowhere does Erich Von Daniken state that he is presenting hard facts or proof. That’s where a lot of debunkers get it wrong. There are a lot of QUESTION MARKS, he’s poses the questions, what if. I read the book sometime ago and found the ideas in it very interesting. I hope you do as well. Enjoy.