Take a look at these two statues, both from the ancient Olmec civilisation of Central America. One looks negroid, the other a bit Chinese. Plenty of other Olmec statues look as if they depict people from other parts of the world because these Native American craftsmen had lively imaginations. It really is as simple as that. Unless, of course, you are a cult archaeologist, in which case you will not be deterred by the inconvenient fact that, to quote Richard A Diehl, author of the major academic text on the Olmecs, “not a single bona fide artefact of Old World origin has ever appeared in an Olmec archaeological site, or for that matter anywhere else in Mesoamerica”.
David Hatcher Childress is just such a cult archaeologist and, like all amateurs who have “researched” Central America, is presented as “the original Indiana Jones”. Unlike Indy, however, he self-publishes his oeuvre. Fortunately, however, Graham Hancock has chosen him as author of the month. And so Childress now has a fresh opportunity to circulate his theory that… well, let me quote his exact words:
No one knows where the Olmecs came from, but the two predominant theories are:
- They were Native Americans, derived from the same Siberian stock as most other Native Americans, and just happened to accentuate the Negroid genetic material that was latent in their genes.
- They were outsiders who immigrated to the Olman area via boat, most likely as sailors or passengers on transoceanic voyages that went on for probably hundreds of years.
In fact, these theories are “predominant” only in the demi-monde of cult archaeology, though the latter has spilled into the mainstream via the work of various racist “Afrocentric historians”. For the most part, they are believed only by people who believe other very stupid things. Which is not to imply that Mr Childress is one of them … oh, hang on. What’s this on Hancock’s site?
If you enjoyed this post, why not subscribe to our RSS feed or follow us on Twitter? You might also consider making a donation to the Counterknowledge.com fighting fund.David has a wide scope of interests, and is a recognized expert not only on ancient civilizations and technology, but also on free energy, anti-gravity and UFOs. His books on these subjects include: The Anti-Gravity Handbook; Anti-Gravity & the World Grid; Anti-Gravity and the Unified Field; Extraterrestrial Archeology; Vimana Aircraft of Ancient India & Atlantis; The Free-Energy Device Handbook and Man-Made UFOs 1944-1994. His latest efforts are A Hitchhiker’s Guide to Armageddon and Atlantis and the Power System of the Gods.
Click here to sign up for free RSS updates.
Download the free 
Join 
45 responses
So they knew the secret of immortality as well?
“these Native American craftsmen had lively imaginations”
A bold statement. But condescending. So they were not artists? ‘Just’ imaginative craftsmen? Are you sure they were men? Is it really your opinion that ancient artists (or craftspeople) were depicting only the products of their imaginations, rather than cultural-historical objects and ideas of importance? Objects such as statuary are rarely products of whimsy, as you suggest.
It’s also an ahistorical statement made to imply a degree of unthinking racism in your subject. Were the Olmecs ‘Native American’? They might come to be considered so, hundreds of years later. But what did they call themselves?
If there’s the possibility that ancient transoceanic travel was going on at the time, there’s the possibility that these imaginative people were carving from life.
My other objection is that the statue head on the left looks to be mongoloid, rather than negroid. It seems you’ve been directed by your source. Have another look and see what you see.
I’m waiting for someone to come up with a role for the Tunguska Event in all of this. Hmm, must call my publisher.
Well, Aprilista. if the head on the left looks mongoloid, that makes sense, because that’s what the Olmecs were. I don’t think anyone has a clue what the Olmecs called themselves - they didn’t leave a written language, unlike the Maya.
Aprilista,
Thank you for such an incisive post. As a parody of self-righteous political correctness and epistemic relativism, it is both subtle and amusing. I especially enjoyed the part about needing to know whether or not these inclusive and ethnocentric Olmec sculptresses considered themselves Native American. (I’m guessing it was an understated reference on those who pander to Native American creation myths.)
“those who pander to Native American creation myths.”
Do you mean those who comprehend the cultures of others?
What creation myths do you prefer people to pander to?
Aprilista,
Do you mean those who comprehend the cultures of others?
No. I mean those who pander to Native American creation myths.
Apologies if I’ve missed the obvious, but I don’t get what you mean by ‘pander to’ in this context.
Re ‘Afrocentric historians’.
Geography doesn’t seem to be a strong point with these charlatans. When you consider that the maritime achievements of the West Africans were so limited that transport to the Cape Verde Islands (discovered by the Portuguese) was beyond them, it seems ridiculous to suppose that they could have traveled many times that distance and got all the way to Central America !
“What creation myths do you prefer people to pander to?”
Oh, the irony of this question appearing on a site dedicated to dubunking nonsensical myths of all shapes and sizes.
And also the PC gibberish in aprilista’s comments is very amusing too. Maybe it’s time for counterknowledge to mention the Alan Sokal hoax, just in case some who read this blog are unfamiliar with it.
“PC gibberish”
As I recall, I was gently implying that, without further evidence, it’s rash to make assumptions about who was involved in producing culture in an ancient civilisation.
… Historical and archaeological inquiry is best undertaken with an open mind. Preconceptions and excess cultural baggage may hamper one’s reading of the evidence on the ground.
And, of course, there’s a difference between close-minded people and those who bring experience to bear.
So, in summary, the author’s beliefs are just as speculative as Hancock’s.
“blah blah blah… lively imaginations” - now that’s science in action folks!!!
Isn’t a more likely explanation that the Olmecs had encountered some African people or, possibly, the Olmecs were African?
What’s a “cult archaeologist” anyhow????
Obviously Hatcher isn’t a professional archaeologist but an experienced traveller who has visited loads of sites. But hey, if having your own unorthodox ideas damns you as cultist, then we may as well go back to the dark ages.
Now I geddit - the delicious double meaning in counterknowledge does actually refer to your own mission to stop or “counter” rival forms of information or “knowledge”. Correct me if I;m wrong.
Aprilista,
As I recall, I was gently implying that, without further evidence, it’s rash to make assumptions about who was involved in producing culture in an ancient civilisation.
Well, no, that’s not all you were doing. For one thing, you accused the author of the original post of racism and sexism for referring to the creators of these artefacts as “craftsmen” and not “artists” – and you did so despite the fact that the word “craftsmen” can mean “artisan” or “artist”, and, its suffix notwithstanding, can be gender neutral. In other words, you were detecting these prejudices in “homeopathic concentrations” – i.e. where they don’t exist.
Judean Peoples Front,
So, in summary, the author’s beliefs are just as speculative as Hancock’s.
Well that might indeed be a summary. Quite what on Earth it’s a summary of, however, remains something of a mystery.
Ed. I chided the OP for condescension and rehearsing ahistorical thinking.
It’s important to remember that what you think and what others think may often differ.
It’s important to remember that what you think and what others think may often differ.
Exquisite.
It’s off topic, but I’m wondering how the 9/11 “truthers” are going to deal with this.
A better explanation for some Olmec statues looking Chinese is that Olmecs and other Native Americans were of Asian ancestry. Some Indians look very Chinese. As to the “Negroid” features of the Olmec heads (the football player heads) one explanation is that the rulers were highly inbred and this led to deformities.
Saw the word “negroid,” clicked expecting evidence of dread C’thuhu’s awakening.
Left disappointing, screaming in tongues.
Glad to see that white people still firmly believe in white supremacy. It will inevitably be their downfall. smh
Guys, Seriously, put your cocks away and the rulers down.
It stings when someone one-ups your opinions that you’ve worked so hard to mould but you’re never gonna know that you’re 100% correct in your idea of the truth so keep the floor open for alternative discussion points without the need to re-educate.
Childress puts forward a selection of truths and facts. Some may argue that the order in which he does this is created to bring the audience to a shared conclusion, whether factual or nay, but he asks us “How is this possible?”, rather than stating it to be undeniable. Creating a discussion point and thats what we’re doing is it not?……Or were you in fact roaming around a few millenia ago with the Meso-Americans to be so sure of yourselves.
Plus he has an extremely silly voice for a narrator that keeps me listening.
Sounds like someone from South park.
Two things, there is no evidence that there was any trans-Atlantic voyages 2500 years ago, the time period that the Olmecs live. Then, all the human remains that were associated with the Olmecs and the ones that built the heads, had similar DNA to the people who live there today. Also, they is greater variation between them and people from West Africa than from the people who Populate Eastern Siberia.
You might want to listen to these cult-archaeologists than philanthropist like Graham Hancock. Also, I do find it racist to say that an indiginous culture could not have built monuments when in fact, they could have. That is exactly what Graham Hancock is saying.
Sorry, I meant real Archaeology, not cult-archaeology.
Indians don’t come out of a cookie-cutter. Both heads look like people I know; members of the same tribe. Have any of you been to a reservation?
Why do some of you people hate your African ancestry so much? If you cannot disprove the evidence given, accept it. The hate many of you have for your own ancestry will not change the facts.
It is really pathetic that some people in this world despite access to the information technology thats avalible to them continue to express stupid racist denials about the acomplishments of ancient african peoples and what they created in this world. I just laff at their ongoing willingness to be ignorant. The olmecs were black africans and it’s nothing you or anybody else can do anything about it.
Olmecs were an American Indian people. Afrocentrics are in dire need to make up for their lack of progress and/or ignorance as to who their direct ancestors were. Also missing is a genuine connection with any African peoples.
To Multiplesourses and Ken Williams Sr. There is no evidence of a Tranatlantic crossing between Africa and Central America at any time in history before 1500 AD. There is no evidence of there being Africans in Central American at anytime before 1500 AD. The only evidence that you have that the heads were built by Africans is in the way they look, and that can also be explained without having to use an outside source. “Van Sertima’s (the man who came up with the hypothesis) asserts that they are clearly African in appearance, and indeed they do possess full lips and broad noses. Van Sertima, however, ignores the fact that many of the Olmec heads also have flat faces like American Indians, not prognathic profiles (jutting-out lower faces) like Africans. He also chooses not to see what appear to be epacatnthic folds on the eyelids of the statues-these are typical of Old World Asians and American Indians.” -Ken Feder; Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries.
Lastly, about being racist? Is it not racist to take away the accomplishments of one culture and give it to another? Saying that the Olmecs did not build those heads is like saying the Egyptians did not build the pyramids.
To RolandofGilead and other skeptics on this subject of the Olmecs: First, I completely agree that taking and ignoring the accomplishments of native peoples anywhere in this world is a crime against humanity . The entire western world and 99 percent of it’s academic institutions to this day still maintains a mindset of eurocentric superiority which reinforces it’s belief systems through every media source avaliable and the school institutions on every level. Second, there are and have been scores of historians thoughout generations who support the research on ancient africans crossing the world’s oceans and establishing settlements of different kinds in many lands.Third,
there are hundreds of ancient artifacts that are linked to Africa that have been discoverd in Mexico and are on display in their many museums. Fourth, now if you and others don’t want to do the proper research and read more , that’s your intellectual problem. Fifth, Dr. Ivan Van Sertima and all of his peers on this unique and fascinating subject will all be vindicated.
“First, I completely agree that taking and ignoring the accomplishments of native peoples anywhere in this world is a crime against humanity . The entire western world and 99 percent of it’s academic institutions to this day still maintains a mindset of eurocentric superiority which reinforces it’s belief systems through every media source avaliable and the school institutions on every level.”
Uhm, No. Despite the Eurocentric ideals that I may espouse, (WTF does that even mean???) that still doesn’t change the fact there is no evidence what-so-ever that African’s built the Heads, nor do the heads even look African. You see, there is a thing called fact, which does not care what country I’m from.
“Second, there are and have been scores of historians thoughout generations who support the research on ancient africans crossing the world’s oceans and establishing settlements of different kinds in many lands.”
Like who? Graham Hancock? Van Danikan? Robert Schlock? None of these men are historians or archaeologist. They have constantly ignored all evidence that calls their pet hypothesis into doubt, and continiously push irrelevant points that have been debunked. Not to mention that Graham Hancock believes the world is coming to an end on Dec, 12 2012. They are no different from the 9/11 truthers or creationists.
Also, I would like to add that just because somebody can build a raft and sail it across the Atlantic, does not mean it was being done 3000 years ago. I’ve got news for ya, the confederates during the civil war had the materials and technology to make liquid fueled rockets. However, there is no evidence that they did. That is how we know they didn’t. Where is your evidence of Africans or Asians crossing 3000 years ago?
“Third, there are hundreds of ancient artifacts that are linked to Africa that have been discoverd in Mexico and are on display in their many museums.”
Really? Can I see a link to these artifacts, maybe some context as to where and when these artifacts are found? Yes, it might be interesting to find a Roman coin in Maine, but it doesn’t mean that the Romans were there when the coin was found in the context of an 18th century farmstead. There are plenty of artifacts that come from around the world found in the Americas. The only problem, is that they are found well within the context of the Contact Period. There is a reason that Archaeologists note stratigraphy of a site. That is how they date the site.
“Fourth, now if you and others don’t want to do the proper research and read more , that’s your intellectual problem.”
I don’t have a problem. I listen to people who have meticulously mapped, surveyed, and detailed the site, not someone who looks at a picture and then decides what it looks like.
“Fifth, Dr. Ivan Van Sertima and all of his peers on this unique and fascinating subject will all be vindicated.”
For some reason, I highly doubt that. I quoted an actual archaeologist. What do you have.
Dear Mr. RolandofGilead,
An Ancient African Proverb: Lies can run for years, but the truth can catch them in a day.
Keep living until you find out !!!!!
Dear Ken Williams Sr.
Archaeology deals with facts. If you want truth, I’m sure you can find a philosophy class somewhere.
I’m still waiting for you to produce the evidence for you to actually back up your claim. A quotation about truth is not evidence, and it proves to me that you really don’t know what you are talking about.
There is one cure for the absurd idea that the Olmecs were “Africans”. Just look at some pictures of contemporary Native Indian inhabitants of the region. Guess what. You find many that look like the”Negroid” heads and others that look like the “Mongoloid” and others that look like the “Semitic” heads. As been said before the evidence for such contact is minimal to zero. Further it apears that Olmec civilization emeerged from pre-existing village cultures. Oh and when Van Sertima originally suggested his idea Olmec civilization was thought to emerge c. 800 B.C.E., and the source an Nubian dominated Egypt, the date is now pushing 1500 B.C.E. and earlier which throws a wrench in that idea.
As for keeping you mind open for new ideas. Well if you ignore vast amounts of data the way Childress does your hardly having a open mind. Oh and please explain why anyone should take this idea the slightest bit seriously when the only “evidence” in support of it is sculptures of people who look like natives who live in the region today?
Finally, someone else who thinks to look at the actual people involved. Thank you, Pacal.
Two things, there is no evidence that there was any trans-Atlantic voyages 2500 years ago, the time period that the Olmecs live. Then, all the human remains that were associated with the Olmecs and the ones that built the heads, had similar DNA to the people who live there today. Also, they is greater variation between them and people from West Africa than from the people who Populate Eastern Siberia.
You might want to listen to these cult-archaeologists than philanthropist like Graham Hancock. Also, I do find it racist to say that an indiginous culture could not have built monuments when in fact, they could have. That is exactly what Graham Hancock is saying.
The best explanation for the so-called “negroid” traits in Olmec statue and in some Olmec crania is that there were two waves of humans migrating from Asia. The earliest wave of humans from Asia resembled modern Melaneseans and Africans the latter wave resembled so-called Mongoloids. Both types lived in Meso-America at least until the age of the Spanish conquest.
‘Plenty of other Olmec statues look as if they depict people from other parts of the world because these Native American craftsmen had lively imaginations. It really is as simple as that.’
Then i stopped reading…
Why are these phenomena easier to argue about than actually research? If I were to buy a car; I could stay at home, looking at photos online, reading anecdotes about the car, and so on…
or- I can actually LOOK at the car, drive it, and so on.
The persons involved in it’s design and production are irrelevant.
IMPORTANT: Mr. Damian Thompson has not ‘driven this car’, but has only collated an opinion borne of his research, which he put forward as fact (and with an inherent meanness that is very off-putting, might I add)…if Mr. Thomson has actually visited the Land of the Olmecs, done a visual survey of the current inhabitants of the area, and interiewed the area’s primary archaeological personnel- I formally apologize, and heartily so.
Mr. Hancock has test-driven the car.
He’s been to Cenral America numerous times, seen almost all of the heads and other important artefacts-touched them!- and spoken wth numerous local CREDENTIALed EXPERTS.
It is painfully obvious that Damien hasn’t read the material he condemns.
Mr. Thomson wastes everyone’s time arguing something that can be conclusively proven with a minimum of effort.
Of course, the local artisans had the imagination, talent, and technology to craft these heads.
I personally believe there was an African influence on the locals, but that this influence was via ET intervention. THIS IS MY OPINION, as I have yet to ‘drive’ that car. (and probably never will)
Damien-intelligent folks (such as yourself…i AM a fan!) should never state their opinion (or even other people’s opinions) as fact. To do so is immature, irresposible, and damaging to the collective forward momentum of the human race.
PS-Aprilista, my opinion is that you have such a sexy brain!
peace to all-
RA Boesenberg
Graham Hancock is great, I really like him. He is not some lunatic with weird ideas based on nothing. I dont like the comparison with Danniken, who has ideas based on nearly nothing, or Zitchin, but not hancock. And his ideas and theories should be looked into because they have solid bones to it, they could also help us to understand certain aspect of the amazing mysteries of Human Civilisation. And a lot of academics are starting to realize that now. And millions of people around the world too.
This is how our understandings evolved, we always reviewed our own ideas in the past, even if it is painfull, to find new truth and make new discoveries. Humans make mistake, and the fact that we might have misunderstood and misinterpreted some of the legacy of the Ancient World is not something that should be ruled out, but considered. Too much evidences to be ignored. Look back in History and it really wouldn’t be the first time that we got it wrong, really wrong, until someone said “hang on a minute, what about……” Examples are way too many to be worth named here. Come on, we were convinced that the planet was flat! It would be arrogant to think that we haven’t made such mistake again, or that we won’t.
I think archeologists and egyptologists don’t like that fact that non-professionals could have seen something they missed for years, and there is a pride issue here. If they all worked together we would make huge progress in these fields.
Hancock might be wrong, and he doesn’t claim to provide the absolute thruth, but instead he suggests a new approach, a different point of view. Instead of stupid attacks and pitiful attempts to ridicule him, there should be a real debate.
And seriously, if you have a minimum of common sense, an open mind and a certain obvious logic, you will see that he has a point. A Big one, too big to be dismissed as fantasy.
Anyway, blind people can stay blind, they dont read and then they talk……silly. Sad.
Hancock is onto something, and wether you like it or not, that something is out there.
Among many things, I really wonder about that Yonagumi structure, what about that? Fantasy? LOL
RA Boesenberg and Sanji’s posts are hilarious. Such cultivated and worked up ignorance. Yes Hancock talked to the experts and proceeded to ignore practically all that they said to him. His books are filled with fantasy and deep ignorance. The section on Tiwanku is esspecially funny.
Hancock goes on for pages about Tiwanku being over 10 thousand years old while taking barely any notice of th fact that practically everyone who as worked on the site dates it to c. 300-1000 C.E. (A.D.).
Olmec sites have benn excavated and NO remains indicating an African presence ot ET have been found. There are of course plenty of remains of pre Olmec village cultures indicating and showing the development of Olmec civilization with no indication of Old World influence.
Critical literature on Hancock is abundant and indicates that he is a distorter and fantastist.
Hancock as simply driven his car over a cliff, probably because he as self-blinded himself. He as also openly admited that he is a one sided researcher out to defend his “client”.
Well i have talked to Mesoamerican Archaeologists and specialists and with no exceptions they regard Hancock as a crank.
So Boesenberg you think the Olmec were influenced by ET? That of course only shows me that you are deeply ignorant about Olmec archaeology.
As for Sanji, well what you said about Yonagumi is amusing. Haen’t done much research on it, it seems. Except of course possibly true believer material.
Thanks for the laughs guys.
Oh and please explain to me why the statues look like modern Indians who live in the area if they are suppossed to be of Africans?
Well reading my comment again, I do sound a bit like a simple - minded hippy. Right, let me precise a few things, I am not a full-on Hancock fan. I do not know a huge amount about him, but I saw “Quest for the Lost Civilisation”, and I read “Supernatural”, an absolutely amazing book, unrelated to his usual topics it seems. I really didn’t see what in there makes him a worthless ignorant. History, as we know it, is probably quite distorted and incomplete already.
After this I decided to look further into his work and theories. I have been a bit surprised by the range of his ideas and even found that sometimes he goes quite far actually. He made me think about a trigger-happy cowboy shooting in all directions in the hope of hiting a target.
Also, the next thing I did, immediately, was to researched his critics. This is how I came on this page.
Quite frankly, from what I ve read so far, most critics do indeed show flaws in his ideas, and he is probably wrong on some of them, no doubt about that. But what I also see is people picking on details - but flaws -, in a speech fuelled with bad faith, arrogance and bitterness. Then they dismiss the entire caracter, the theory talked about, as well as his other ideas and then brand him an amateur, lunatic, pseudo archeologosist and so on. And this is where I think it’s wrong, even with flaws, his ideas are still quite interesting, still valid enough to be worth further serious studies, and especially the general frame of mind behind it, something that his opponents and established theories do not take in count, at all. His ideas about Egypt and the Orion Correlation Theory is so obvious that I don’t understand why they are not taken in count by people that still haven’t manage to solve the mystery themselve.
He is obviously very clever and down to earth, his appraoch and the way he thinks is what I like; It deserves attention and debate.
And usually, lets face it, the established ideas he is fightning against most definitely leave room for plenty of inconsistencies, mysteries and MANY legitimate questions to be raised, don’t you think?
Even if he might be wrong, he has a certain angle on these subjects that science ignores, and his view would certainly help. I think we need people like him to shake things up a bit, and progress. Because this is how we alwasy did.
Regarding that Yonagumi structure, I don’t know what you mean by “True believer material”. What I believe is that we have here an underwater structure that has the same base lenght of the Great Pyramid (not completely sure about that), that is aligned North / South, and seems man-made. And last time it was above water was 8 to 12000 years ago, a time where no one on earth could have had the technology or knowledge to do it. I find this fact, on its own, taken apart from any context or theory, is quite amazing, isn’t it?. It is not garanteed that it is man made, but in my opinion this is just a matter of time. Japan’s top marine geologist and many other seems to think that this possibilty is high enough to bet their own career on it. I have seen many pics of it, do you really think that nature did that?? Not impossible, but mathematically, scientifically and logicaly, it seems quite unlikely. The odds speak volume.
Anyway, about this page’s subject, I had no specific opinion about it so far, apart that this is just another weird subject to study. So Hancock promotes garbage about it? Ah cool, why then? Your answer is “because these Native American craftsmen had lively imaginations. It really is as simple as that”.
Heh??? Jesus, what if they didn’t have “a lively imagination”?? It is possible but that is not a study, this is just an assumption. Great work, thanks Einstein.
I had a look on this site, and I found a whole topic about 9/11, and how people that think that US government might have been involved are idiots.
If this is an American website, man THAT is hilarious.
@RA Boesenberg
Have you read “Fingerprints of the Gods?” I have. Not once did Hancock consult any archaeologist, DNA specialist, or historian who would know anything on the matter. Sorry, Hancock did not test drive car either.
Sanji you say:
I smile a big smile and laugh out loud. Just the barest amount of research will indicate that the orion correlation like the 10500 BCE correlation is dubious. (It is from Edgar Cayce for example) Of course the pyramids around Giza do NOT form the constellation orion unless you do a major distortion. Further there were two pharoahs who lived between the builders of the three great pyramids who did NOT build at Giza. Of course did not not remember that Hancock propsed that the pyramids were built to commemorate a date c. 10500 B.C.E. A completly absurd idea. THe number of Egyptologists who give any credence to this idea can be numbered at close to 0. Oh and as for the three pyramids of Giza looking like Oions belt. Well only if Orion’s belt was backwards.
As for
Yep you have swallowed truebeliever material by the cartload. I felt like rolling around the floor laughing when I read the above. The overwhelming majority of Geologists who have examined Yonagumi rate it as natural. The fact that you haven’t come across this only indicates your lack of research. So sorry the “site” is natural geology. Yep I’ve seen the pics and it looks natural to me. The fact that you have said the above only tells me you have done research in true believer places.
As for this comment
Aww we call a crank a crank and a distorter a distorter. We’re so bad. Sorry but Hancock is a distorter his treatment of both the Maya and Tiwanaku are replente with examples of incredible distortion. His discusion of the Mayan calander is a monument to bad scholarship. The rest of his works are incredible examples of fraud and fakery. The theory is nonsense that does not in the least deserve to be taken seriously. Hancock”s “evidence” non existant. We are talking about a man who took the face on Mars seriously here. Of course no account as per usual is taken of Hancocks view of professional archaeologists as conspirators covering up the truth or his calculated contempt for them.
Thank you again for giving an excellent example of how a true believer forms and of course showing once again deep ignorance.
Look man, I didn’t post here to start a debate about every aspects of Hancock’s work and theory, like I can see everywhere else, or to be branded an ignorant by a smug head who dont know anything about me, what I know or what I do for a living. I came here to see critics about him and once again these critics are rubbish or not enough to make me think hancock is worthless. You can find answers about what you just said on the Giza pyramids OCT and Yonagumi yourself so I wont bother trying to defend these point cos others are doing that already.
“These poeple had a lively imagination, it really is as simple as that”
Bless you.
You people play your role perfectly. Pigeons don’t even know they are pigeons, so I will just let you keep enjoying the smell of your own farts on this little online circus, and keep walking pass the blind and fools.