posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 01:09 PM
Originally posted by Jazzerman
I was just wonder what some people here thought about this. There is a book by Michael Cremo, although some 1,000 pages long that I read awhile back
in my local library, here is a link for it:
While there ARE some true mysteries (the "Baghdad Batteries" are genuine and a real mystery), and there are some apparently out of place artifacts,
the ones I've seen him discuss are pretty bogus (the hammer is simply a real hammer locked in a concretion in the same way the spark plugs were
(discussed on the Angelfire page.)
He and others have found artifacts and evidence such as Chalices, necklaces, leather soles of shoes, etc. fossilized in rocks that often date
to Pre-Cambrian times, and back when the Earth was only covered with water. Here is a link with some pics of just a few of the artifacts:
It's been shown by a lot of people that he consistantly misidentifies things. The "finger," for instance is not a finger but a snail shell. This
has been confirmed by x-ray and other techniques... but he espouses a Young Earth Creation and won't entertain the possibility that he's wrong.
Personally, this stuff is very compelling, and the evidence in the book is overwhelming. Being an Historian myself he and others present very
well documented and collected evidence that either we have had Extraterrestrial visitors for a long time, or there used to be other civilizations
living on Earth before us.
I don't find the evidence very compelling from an anthropological and archaeological standpoint (and I'm speaking as someone who's been on an
He also misstates things to bolster his viewpoint. For instance:
[i}Michael Cremo is no stranger to resistance. In 1993 when Forbidden Archeology was released
there was a vast array of response. From anthropologist Richard Leakey calling it "...pure humbug" to Fingerprints of the Gods author Graham Hancock
referring to it as "One of the landmark intellectual achievements of the late 20th century," it has received both positive and negative
international attention. In addition, in 1996 when NBC aired its special The Mysterious Origins of Man, hosted by Charlton Heston, and featured the
book, establishment scientists felt so threatened by this program that they lobbied the Federal Communications Commission to censure and fine NBC for
airing it (read the complete story in Forbidden Archeology's Impact
Yes, a number of scientists denounced it, but not because they felt threatened by it. They denounced it because it was bad science.
He focuses on old evidence -- evidence that has since been re-evaluated in light of newer material (and if you're a scientist and you're only basing
your research and counterproposals off material published in the 1800's and early 1900's, you can expect to be laughed at for Not Doing Your
Here's a review (ironically by a Christian who also has a PhD and is writing for a Christian Creation/Evolution magazine):
Tarzia says much the same that I just did, and goes into specifics about Cremo's bad science and fact-twisting:
Similarly, when the book documents a claim for a modern-type human skeleton (reported in a geology journal of 1862) in a coal deposit 90
feet deep, we learn the authors wrote the Geological Survey to date the coal to about 286 million years (p. 454). But we are not treated to a
contextual discussion of the bones -- how they were found, who found them, what was the site like, and how these allegedly 286 million year old bones
came out of the earth with only a loose black coating that was easily scraped away to reveal nice white bone, etc. The impression left is that, if a
tabloid reported Jimmy Hoffa’s corpse was found in Triassic deposits, then the authors would no doubt perform rigorous research to date those deposits
and then include the data in their next book. At any rate, such credulity as does exist in the book strains reader confidence.
So, even the people you'd expect would support him find his material lacking and of poor quality.