I’m confused. All over this site we’re told that homeopathy is not medicine and not science because there’s a large element of it that’s purely belief and, in an case, there’s no active ingredients to speak of. However, you’re saying that homeopaths can and do prescribe active ingredients.

If there some active homeopathic ingredients are harmful, if misapplied, are those effective if used properly? Are there homeopathic active ingredients that work and those that don’t work?

Is this Zicam stuff a treatment prescribed and developed by homeopaths (registered or otherwise) or is it something that’s been developed by others to sell as a homeopathic remedy? Has it made its way on to a government list because it seems like a homeopathic remedy? Do homeopaths regard Zicam as homeopathic?

Unintelligent Designer,

Homeopathy is defined as a system of ‘medicine’ where substances that would bring about symptoms in a healthy person are used – heavily diluted – to treat an unwell person who already has those symptoms. The fact that there is no active ingredient in the solutions that homeopaths would typically use (Hahnemann recommended 30C and beyond) is only a prevalent consequence of their methodology, and not a prerequisite.

The manufacturers of Zicam state that their products are a 2X homeopathic solution, “packaged and distributed in full accordance with the HPUS”.

For criticism, see Dr. Iris R. Bell in the AP article. She says that most homeopathic remedies are much safer than conventional pharmaceuticals. You and me know why, of course.

Thanks for that, WH. I see what you mean. However, I was wondering whether homeopaths regard Zicam as homeopathy. This is an important point.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gQ2bZ11tGtoiKx6BO5K70Lx1ETmgD98SK27G0:
“Dr. Iris R. Bell, a psychiatrist and homeopathy researcher at the University of Arizona, Tucson, says the suspended Zicam products deliver the homeopathic ingredient right into the nose — not an accepted homeopathic method. She says the FDA should act against such products.”

She says the Zicam delivery method doesn’t accord with homeopathic practice.

The US National Center for Homeopathy says Zicam isn’t homeopathy:
http://nationalcenterforhomeopathy.org/articles/view,341

Skeptico says Zicam doesn’t sound like a homeopathic preparation:
http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/06/if_it_has_any_i.html

We’re talking here about unscrupulous producer of over-the-counter pharmaceuticals that makes a bad product within state-registered legal definitions.

We’re not talking about an over-the-counter preparation registered as homeopathic, not a homeopathic preparation made and prescribed by homeopaths. There’s a difference between those two things. 30C is a world away from 2x.

I think you do a disservice to the facts by suggesting that the harm caused by a state-registered pharmaceutical that’s claimed to be homeopathic provides evidence that homeopathy is potentially dangerous.

“The fact that there is no active ingredient in the solutions that homeopaths would typically use (Hahnemann recommended 30C and beyond) is only a prevalent consequence of their methodology, and not a prerequisite.”

Here, you’re offering a similar argument to the one the Zicam manufacturers use in protecting their product as homeopathic. They’re following the regulations to the letter.

I think we need to know whether Zicam is made by homeopaths and whether a wide community of homeopaths recognise it and recommend it as valid in their system of treatment. If they don’t, your linkage of Zicam, which is shown to cause harm to people, to their practice is at least unfair and at worst disingenuous.

The line of argument from debunkers and sceptics over the years is that homeopathy doesn’t (in fact, can’t) work. Either it can or it can’t. You seem to be saying that it can work. But you’re offering this opinion based on a 2x product. What about 30C preparations? Do you agree there’s a difference between 2x and 30C homeopathic products?

So how many other 2x products are there? Are these harmful? How many 30C preparations are harmful?

Science is needed here, soon.

Lastly, I think we need to know who owns Matrixx Intiatives, the company that produces Zicam? Is it a small-scale operation run by deluded homeopathic enthusiasts? Or is it a subsidiary of a larger pharmaceutical company? If it’s not a subsidiary, where did it get the capital to succesfully launch an over-the-counter medication in such a cut-throat market?

By the way, I’m not a homeopath and don’t use homeopathic remedies.

Unintelligent Designer,

What I point out is that a 2X solution may very well have an active ingredient present. This was so in Zicam’s case, because a lot of people were harmed. At no point am I saying that homeopathy works: a cold remedy that destroys one’s sense of smell is certainly not my idea of successful treatment.

My association of Zicam with homeopathy is certainly not unfair. What Royal Copeland sowed has sadly been reaped, and I have already stated that Matrixx Initiatives is “trading objectionably on an already objectionable concept”.

“The line of argument from debunkers and sceptics over the years is that homeopathy doesn’t (in fact, can’t) work. Either it can or it can’t. You seem to be saying that it can work. But you’re offering this opinion based on a 2x product. What about 30C preparations? Do you agree there’s a difference between 2x and 30C homeopathic products?”

UD I think you’re bringing up an unrelated issue. The above article isn’t about whether or not homeopathic remedies work, but the consequences of homeopathic remedies gaining automatic FDA approval. The FDA doesn’t just establish the efficacy of medical remedies, it also establishes their safety. Homeopathic remedies don’t have to go through the same long clinical trials to establish their safety before they hit the market. And in the case of this nasal spray, that means an unsafe product was let loose on the market.

??? ?????? ???????? ????? ??????????? ? ? ?????? ???????????
———————————————————
????????? [url=http://www.gaurastyle.kiev.ua]????????? ?????[/url], ???????????.
??????????? [url=http://www.starstudio.com.ua]????????? ?????[/url], ???????????.

“For criticism, see Dr. Iris R. Bell in the AP article. She says that most homeopathic remedies are much safer than conventional pharmaceuticals. You and me know why, of course.”

Most homeopathic remedies are water. They are “safe” only if you’re treating for dehydration. They treat nothing else.

Once you start getting into these lower succussions, the remedies contain an active ingredient and they should be controlled by the FDA.

O Really Tom!! Have u ever tried Homeopathic Medicines??? They are not diluted but POTENTISED, which means by the process of successions given, the kinetic energy of the molecules is raised to many folds. Here it differs from simple Dilution, in which only water is added but not potentized.

Homeopathic medicines do work and many clinical trials are on to feed the rationalistic minds. Under WHO only trials have been conducted and it had been recommended to use them. How can someone treat ailments ranging from coryza, cough, acne to asthma, pneumonia, kidney stones by Placebo Effect… This type of comments surely doesnot suit to intelligent people li you, Tom!!

And Homeopathy is surely a hit on fortunes of pharmaceutical Companies due to it’s cost-effectiveness that’s why giants are behind it…

Every year there is 20-25% economic growth and homeopathic Heathcare industry is going to be somewhere near 52,000 crore by 2017, just because of it’s Placebo Effect… FUNNY!!!

I recommend you a thing, please try this so called Placebo under a good reputed clinician and feel changes in you.

Good Luck!!

Priyanka, Good luck with that. You enjoy your homeopathic “cure” and I will enjoy modern Western medicine.

I will come to your cremation with flowers for your family. Rest in peace.

@Priyanka: “which means by the process of successions given, the kinetic energy of the molecules is raised to many folds.”

So the solution gets hotter? Well, I suppose it would really, if you go around banging it against things. I’m just not sure what possible health value that has, since it’s going to cool down pretty rapidly.

Hey, thanks for the remarkable content. Honestly, about five months back I started taking reading blogs and there may be just so much nonsense available. I appreciate which you put terrific subject material out that’s clear and well-written. Wonderful luck and thank you for the terrific document!!!

I’m confused. All over this site we’re told that homeopathy is not medicine and not science because there’s a large element of it that’s purely belief and, in an case, there’s no active ingredients to speak of. However, you’re saying that homeopaths can and do prescribe active ingredients.

If there some active homeopathic ingredients are harmful, if misapplied, are those effective if used properly? Are there homeopathic active ingredients that work and those that don’t work?

Is this Zicam stuff a treatment prescribed and developed by homeopaths (registered or otherwise) or is it something that’s been developed by others to sell as a homeopathic remedy? Has it made its way on to a government list because it seems like a homeopathic remedy? Do homeopaths regard Zicam as homeopathic?

Unintelligent Designer,

Homeopathy is defined as a system of ‘medicine’ where substances that would bring about symptoms in a healthy person are used – heavily diluted – to treat an unwell person who already has those symptoms. The fact that there is no active ingredient in the solutions that homeopaths would typically use (Hahnemann recommended 30C and beyond) is only a prevalent consequence of their methodology, and not a prerequisite.

The manufacturers of Zicam state that their products are a 2X homeopathic solution, “packaged and distributed in full accordance with the HPUS”.

For criticism, see Dr. Iris R. Bell in the AP article. She says that most homeopathic remedies are much safer than conventional pharmaceuticals. You and me know why, of course.

Thanks for that, WH. I see what you mean. However, I was wondering whether homeopaths regard Zicam as homeopathy. This is an important point.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gQ2bZ11tGtoiKx6BO5K70Lx1ETmgD98SK27G0:
“Dr. Iris R. Bell, a psychiatrist and homeopathy researcher at the University of Arizona, Tucson, says the suspended Zicam products deliver the homeopathic ingredient right into the nose — not an accepted homeopathic method. She says the FDA should act against such products.”

She says the Zicam delivery method doesn’t accord with homeopathic practice.

The US National Center for Homeopathy says Zicam isn’t homeopathy:
http://nationalcenterforhomeopathy.org/articles/view,341

Skeptico says Zicam doesn’t sound like a homeopathic preparation:
http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/06/if_it_has_any_i.html

We’re talking here about unscrupulous producer of over-the-counter pharmaceuticals that makes a bad product within state-registered legal definitions.

We’re not talking about an over-the-counter preparation registered as homeopathic, not a homeopathic preparation made and prescribed by homeopaths. There’s a difference between those two things. 30C is a world away from 2x.

I think you do a disservice to the facts by suggesting that the harm caused by a state-registered pharmaceutical that’s claimed to be homeopathic provides evidence that homeopathy is potentially dangerous.

“The fact that there is no active ingredient in the solutions that homeopaths would typically use (Hahnemann recommended 30C and beyond) is only a prevalent consequence of their methodology, and not a prerequisite.”

Here, you’re offering a similar argument to the one the Zicam manufacturers use in protecting their product as homeopathic. They’re following the regulations to the letter.

I think we need to know whether Zicam is made by homeopaths and whether a wide community of homeopaths recognise it and recommend it as valid in their system of treatment. If they don’t, your linkage of Zicam, which is shown to cause harm to people, to their practice is at least unfair and at worst disingenuous.

The line of argument from debunkers and sceptics over the years is that homeopathy doesn’t (in fact, can’t) work. Either it can or it can’t. You seem to be saying that it can work. But you’re offering this opinion based on a 2x product. What about 30C preparations? Do you agree there’s a difference between 2x and 30C homeopathic products?

So how many other 2x products are there? Are these harmful? How many 30C preparations are harmful?

Science is needed here, soon.

Lastly, I think we need to know who owns Matrixx Intiatives, the company that produces Zicam? Is it a small-scale operation run by deluded homeopathic enthusiasts? Or is it a subsidiary of a larger pharmaceutical company? If it’s not a subsidiary, where did it get the capital to succesfully launch an over-the-counter medication in such a cut-throat market?

By the way, I’m not a homeopath and don’t use homeopathic remedies.

Unintelligent Designer,

What I point out is that a 2X solution may very well have an active ingredient present. This was so in Zicam’s case, because a lot of people were harmed. At no point am I saying that homeopathy works: a cold remedy that destroys one’s sense of smell is certainly not my idea of successful treatment.

My association of Zicam with homeopathy is certainly not unfair. What Royal Copeland sowed has sadly been reaped, and I have already stated that Matrixx Initiatives is “trading objectionably on an already objectionable concept”.

“The line of argument from debunkers and sceptics over the years is that homeopathy doesn’t (in fact, can’t) work. Either it can or it can’t. You seem to be saying that it can work. But you’re offering this opinion based on a 2x product. What about 30C preparations? Do you agree there’s a difference between 2x and 30C homeopathic products?”

UD I think you’re bringing up an unrelated issue. The above article isn’t about whether or not homeopathic remedies work, but the consequences of homeopathic remedies gaining automatic FDA approval. The FDA doesn’t just establish the efficacy of medical remedies, it also establishes their safety. Homeopathic remedies don’t have to go through the same long clinical trials to establish their safety before they hit the market. And in the case of this nasal spray, that means an unsafe product was let loose on the market.

??? ?????? ???????? ????? ??????????? ? ? ?????? ???????????
———————————————————
????????? [url=http://www.gaurastyle.kiev.ua]????????? ?????[/url], ???????????.
??????????? [url=http://www.starstudio.com.ua]????????? ?????[/url], ???????????.

“For criticism, see Dr. Iris R. Bell in the AP article. She says that most homeopathic remedies are much safer than conventional pharmaceuticals. You and me know why, of course.”

Most homeopathic remedies are water. They are “safe” only if you’re treating for dehydration. They treat nothing else.

Once you start getting into these lower succussions, the remedies contain an active ingredient and they should be controlled by the FDA.

O Really Tom!! Have u ever tried Homeopathic Medicines??? They are not diluted but POTENTISED, which means by the process of successions given, the kinetic energy of the molecules is raised to many folds. Here it differs from simple Dilution, in which only water is added but not potentized.

Homeopathic medicines do work and many clinical trials are on to feed the rationalistic minds. Under WHO only trials have been conducted and it had been recommended to use them. How can someone treat ailments ranging from coryza, cough, acne to asthma, pneumonia, kidney stones by Placebo Effect… This type of comments surely doesnot suit to intelligent people li you, Tom!!

And Homeopathy is surely a hit on fortunes of pharmaceutical Companies due to it’s cost-effectiveness that’s why giants are behind it…

Every year there is 20-25% economic growth and homeopathic Heathcare industry is going to be somewhere near 52,000 crore by 2017, just because of it’s Placebo Effect… FUNNY!!!

I recommend you a thing, please try this so called Placebo under a good reputed clinician and feel changes in you.

Good Luck!!

Priyanka, Good luck with that. You enjoy your homeopathic “cure” and I will enjoy modern Western medicine.

I will come to your cremation with flowers for your family. Rest in peace.

@Priyanka: “which means by the process of successions given, the kinetic energy of the molecules is raised to many folds.”

So the solution gets hotter? Well, I suppose it would really, if you go around banging it against things. I’m just not sure what possible health value that has, since it’s going to cool down pretty rapidly.

Hey, thanks for the remarkable content. Honestly, about five months back I started taking reading blogs and there may be just so much nonsense available. I appreciate which you put terrific subject material out that’s clear and well-written. Wonderful luck and thank you for the terrific document!!!

The World Health Organisation has also warned against using homeopathy use:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8211925.stm

“People with conditions such as HIV, TB and malaria should not rely on homeopathic treatments, the World Health Organization has warned.

It was responding to calls from young researchers who fear the promotion of homeopathy in the developing world could put people’s lives at risk.

The group Voice of Young Science Network has written to health ministers to set out the WHO view.

WHO TB experts said homeopathy had “no place” in treatment of the disease.

In a letter to the WHO in June, the medics from the UK and Africa said: “We are calling on the WHO to condemn the promotion of homeopathy for treating TB, infant diarrhoea, influenza, malaria and HIV.

“Homeopathy does not protect people from, or treat, these diseases.

“Those of us working with the most rural and impoverished people of the world already struggle to deliver the medical help that is needed.

“When homeopathy stands in place of effective treatment, lives are lost.”

Dr Robert Hagan is a researcher in biomolecular science at the University of St Andrews and a member of Voice of Young Science Network, which is part of the charity Sense About Science campaigning for “evidence-based” care.

He said: “We need governments around the world to recognise the dangers of promoting homeopathy for life-threatening illnesses.

“We hope that by raising awareness of the WHO’s position on homeopathy we will be supporting those people who are taking a stand against these potentially disastrous practices.”

‘No evidence’

Dr Mario Raviglione, director of the Stop TB department at the WHO, said: “Our evidence-based WHO TB treatment/management guidelines, as well as the International Standards of Tuberculosis Care do not recommend use of homeopathy.”

The doctors had also complained that homeopathy was being promoted as a treatment for diarrhoea in children.

But a spokesman for the WHO department of child and adolescent health and development said: “We have found no evidence to date that homeopathy would bring any benefit.

“Homeopathy does not focus on the treatment and prevention of dehydration – in total contradiction with the scientific basis and our recommendations for the management of diarrhoea.”

Dr Nick Beeching, a specialist in infectious diseases at the Royal Liverpool University Hospital, said: “Infections such as malaria, HIV and tuberculosis all have a high mortality rate but can usually be controlled or cured by a variety of proven treatments, for which there is ample experience and scientific trial data.

“There is no objective evidence that homeopathy has any effect on these infections, and I think it is irresponsible for a healthcare worker to promote the use of homeopathy in place of proven treatment for any life-threatening illness.” “

The World Health Organisation has also warned against using homeopathy use:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8211925.stm

“People with conditions such as HIV, TB and malaria should not rely on homeopathic treatments, the World Health Organization has warned.

It was responding to calls from young researchers who fear the promotion of homeopathy in the developing world could put people’s lives at risk.

The group Voice of Young Science Network has written to health ministers to set out the WHO view.

WHO TB experts said homeopathy had “no place” in treatment of the disease.

In a letter to the WHO in June, the medics from the UK and Africa said: “We are calling on the WHO to condemn the promotion of homeopathy for treating TB, infant diarrhoea, influenza, malaria and HIV.

“Homeopathy does not protect people from, or treat, these diseases.

“Those of us working with the most rural and impoverished people of the world already struggle to deliver the medical help that is needed.

“When homeopathy stands in place of effective treatment, lives are lost.”

Dr Robert Hagan is a researcher in biomolecular science at the University of St Andrews and a member of Voice of Young Science Network, which is part of the charity Sense About Science campaigning for “evidence-based” care.

He said: “We need governments around the world to recognise the dangers of promoting homeopathy for life-threatening illnesses.

“We hope that by raising awareness of the WHO’s position on homeopathy we will be supporting those people who are taking a stand against these potentially disastrous practices.”

‘No evidence’

Dr Mario Raviglione, director of the Stop TB department at the WHO, said: “Our evidence-based WHO TB treatment/management guidelines, as well as the International Standards of Tuberculosis Care do not recommend use of homeopathy.”

The doctors had also complained that homeopathy was being promoted as a treatment for diarrhoea in children.

But a spokesman for the WHO department of child and adolescent health and development said: “We have found no evidence to date that homeopathy would bring any benefit.

“Homeopathy does not focus on the treatment and prevention of dehydration – in total contradiction with the scientific basis and our recommendations for the management of diarrhoea.”

Dr Nick Beeching, a specialist in infectious diseases at the Royal Liverpool University Hospital, said: “Infections such as malaria, HIV and tuberculosis all have a high mortality rate but can usually be controlled or cured by a variety of proven treatments, for which there is ample experience and scientific trial data.

“There is no objective evidence that homeopathy has any effect on these infections, and I think it is irresponsible for a healthcare worker to promote the use of homeopathy in place of proven treatment for any life-threatening illness.” “

I thought the guidance excluded chronic back pain? A minor detail, I know…

The BBC article mentions a choice of 3 complementary therapies. If it was down to excercise or acupuncture, I wonder what most people will go for?
Surely the implication that it is a placebo would make the NHS think twice? Unless they are happily promoting bogus treatments these days (ahem)

Re the Beacon. You are right, the guidance doesn’t mention ‘chronic’ back pain (so I’ve amended the above article), but it does talk about ‘persistent back pain’.

I wonder how many of the sceptics have actually tried acupuncture from a reputable practitioner.

Having tried acupuncture as a last resort for back pain, for which the NHS could only advise radical surgery, I found it to be both effective and lasting in its effects.

If that were down to a placebo effect, then I’d imagine that the anti-inflammatories and painkillers previously prescribed by my doctor – and which I fully expected to resolve the problem – would have worked just as well. They didn’t.

As for proven efficacy – if those of us who have tried acupuncture and found it to work are to be written off as deluded beneficiaries of a placebo effect, then trty the copious body of research available on the World Health Organisation website.

It works, and has been proven to work, when administered by well-trained professionals, as licensed by the British Acupuncture Council.

Did you know that 95% of percentages used in 95% of “studies, reports, [email protected] or whatever this Will Heaven has claimed to have conducted, are figures pulled out of the air.
What are you an expert on Mr Heaven? apart from radical spin journalism see following quote (reported by Counterknowledge.com and the BMJ”Whether needling at acupuncture points, or at any site, reduces pain independently of the psychological impact of the treatment ritual is unclear.” In other words, scientists do not know whether acupuncture works like a placebo, or if it has a real biological effect. I ask why are you spinning acupuncture in this way. Do you perhaps have any connections to the Drug industry which is squirming due to the fact that Drug free remedies are increasing in popularity? If this is your main job then well done. i’d love to sit at a pc all typing rubbish and making it sound official with the usual newspaper dribble, The Catchy headline, All the bullet points kept negative to hit home the message, the odd figure to make it sound official and a sceptical negative anecdotial conclusion. Its a rubbish article but whats more worrying is that people may read it as fact and tell others it as fact. i’ll be keeing my eye out for your articles.

As you all know acupuncture has been around of thousands of years, if there were nothing to it don’t you think it would have gone away by now? You cannot deny the undeniable benefits of natural forms of healthcare.

That acupuncture is effective in blocking out pain is beyond dispute. People have surgery with acupuncture alone. The real issue is not whether acupuncture is effective in blocking pain but whether the relief is persistent.

Acupuncture does work i should know i have ankylosing spondylitis and have ONLY become pain free because of Acupuncture, i now only need a few repeat treatments when the pain comes back and the pain that does come back is minimal compared to the pain i used to get.
I would have loved Acupuncture to be on the NHS instead of paying out a small fortune, Acupuncture does help allot of ailments as well as back pain.
You Mr Heaven have no idea i presume of what it is like to have your whole body in pain, so much so you can`t get out of bed by yourself because your spine muscles have weakened and be in constant pain everyday and then oneday i visited an acupuncturist after my mam got cured of sciatica through Acupuncture and after allot of treatment i am ALLOT better and more often than not either pain free or nearly pain free, all because of Acupuncture.

Paul, I think the last one locked the doors and shut off the lights a couple of months ago.
All thats left here is tumbleweed and and an exchange of invective over the holocaust and zionism.
I assume the site staff have all moved on.

Acupuncture works, and it has done so for hundred of years. It also saved me from spending the rest of my life in a wheelchair. Could have gone for a expensive and ridiculously dangerous operation I guess….

Acupuncture has been known in China for ages, my mom introduced me to acupunture and i am since been amazed how it can reduce my migraine.

What a joke. Acupuncture works, it has for thousands of years. It saved me when I had major back issues, when NHS simply send me home with painkillers usually given to heroin addicts. And that was it.
To dare stating that its beneficial effects are unclear or that this a placebo is state of the art smug ignorance.
LLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

I regard something truly interesting about your weblog so I bookmarked .

I know this is actually boring and you are skipping to the next comment, but I simply wanted to throw a big thanks! We really came across this on yahoo, and im happy I did. I’ll definitely be coming back…

Reading some of the comments about this blog, Id need to say I agree with the majority. Only a and an very interesting post to read on this nice website. Almost never write some feedback only now i couldnt i possibly could not resist

I thought the guidance excluded chronic back pain? A minor detail, I know…

The BBC article mentions a choice of 3 complementary therapies. If it was down to excercise or acupuncture, I wonder what most people will go for?
Surely the implication that it is a placebo would make the NHS think twice? Unless they are happily promoting bogus treatments these days (ahem)

Re the Beacon. You are right, the guidance doesn’t mention ‘chronic’ back pain (so I’ve amended the above article), but it does talk about ‘persistent back pain’.

I wonder how many of the sceptics have actually tried acupuncture from a reputable practitioner.

Having tried acupuncture as a last resort for back pain, for which the NHS could only advise radical surgery, I found it to be both effective and lasting in its effects.

If that were down to a placebo effect, then I’d imagine that the anti-inflammatories and painkillers previously prescribed by my doctor – and which I fully expected to resolve the problem – would have worked just as well. They didn’t.

As for proven efficacy – if those of us who have tried acupuncture and found it to work are to be written off as deluded beneficiaries of a placebo effect, then trty the copious body of research available on the World Health Organisation website.

It works, and has been proven to work, when administered by well-trained professionals, as licensed by the British Acupuncture Council.

Did you know that 95% of percentages used in 95% of “studies, reports, [email protected] or whatever this Will Heaven has claimed to have conducted, are figures pulled out of the air.
What are you an expert on Mr Heaven? apart from radical spin journalism see following quote (reported by Counterknowledge.com and the BMJ”Whether needling at acupuncture points, or at any site, reduces pain independently of the psychological impact of the treatment ritual is unclear.” In other words, scientists do not know whether acupuncture works like a placebo, or if it has a real biological effect. I ask why are you spinning acupuncture in this way. Do you perhaps have any connections to the Drug industry which is squirming due to the fact that Drug free remedies are increasing in popularity? If this is your main job then well done. i’d love to sit at a pc all typing rubbish and making it sound official with the usual newspaper dribble, The Catchy headline, All the bullet points kept negative to hit home the message, the odd figure to make it sound official and a sceptical negative anecdotial conclusion. Its a rubbish article but whats more worrying is that people may read it as fact and tell others it as fact. i’ll be keeing my eye out for your articles.

As you all know acupuncture has been around of thousands of years, if there were nothing to it don’t you think it would have gone away by now? You cannot deny the undeniable benefits of natural forms of healthcare.

That acupuncture is effective in blocking out pain is beyond dispute. People have surgery with acupuncture alone. The real issue is not whether acupuncture is effective in blocking pain but whether the relief is persistent.

Acupuncture does work i should know i have ankylosing spondylitis and have ONLY become pain free because of Acupuncture, i now only need a few repeat treatments when the pain comes back and the pain that does come back is minimal compared to the pain i used to get.
I would have loved Acupuncture to be on the NHS instead of paying out a small fortune, Acupuncture does help allot of ailments as well as back pain.
You Mr Heaven have no idea i presume of what it is like to have your whole body in pain, so much so you can`t get out of bed by yourself because your spine muscles have weakened and be in constant pain everyday and then oneday i visited an acupuncturist after my mam got cured of sciatica through Acupuncture and after allot of treatment i am ALLOT better and more often than not either pain free or nearly pain free, all because of Acupuncture.

Paul, I think the last one locked the doors and shut off the lights a couple of months ago.
All thats left here is tumbleweed and and an exchange of invective over the holocaust and zionism.
I assume the site staff have all moved on.

Acupuncture works, and it has done so for hundred of years. It also saved me from spending the rest of my life in a wheelchair. Could have gone for a expensive and ridiculously dangerous operation I guess….

Acupuncture has been known in China for ages, my mom introduced me to acupunture and i am since been amazed how it can reduce my migraine.

What a joke. Acupuncture works, it has for thousands of years. It saved me when I had major back issues, when NHS simply send me home with painkillers usually given to heroin addicts. And that was it.
To dare stating that its beneficial effects are unclear or that this a placebo is state of the art smug ignorance.
LLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

I regard something truly interesting about your weblog so I bookmarked .

I know this is actually boring and you are skipping to the next comment, but I simply wanted to throw a big thanks! We really came across this on yahoo, and im happy I did. I’ll definitely be coming back…

Reading some of the comments about this blog, Id need to say I agree with the majority. Only a and an very interesting post to read on this nice website. Almost never write some feedback only now i couldnt i possibly could not resist

Switzerland?!?!

Not the home of 25 Nobel prizes, one of which was won by a young up-and-comer known as Albert Einstein?!?

…or the place with the world’s largest laboratory and world-reknowned medical research facilities?!?

PLEASE, not from the guys who invented the army knife…with a bottle opener, scissors AND a toothpick!?!

Tell me they haven’t been conned by the homeopathetic “magic water” fairies

*sigh*

I’ve often suspected that most people go for CAM because it just seems all nice and holistic and alternative, rather than because they know anything about the specific treatments in question.

Why else would people so easily mix and match CAMs? I mean if you believe in homeopathy, then herbal medicines, traditional Chinese medicines, whatever, are just as bad as pharmaceutical drugs. They’re all “allopathic” and not diluted.

Interesting site, but much advertisments on him. Shall read as subscription, rss.

I have to wonder if people in the survey perhaps mixed up homeopathy with herbal remedies. I’d love to read the actual article but it appears you need to be a registered member or somesuch.

Thanks for discussing my paper. I’m afraid you need a subscription to read the full article, but I can assure you that the responders knew it was homeopathy that we were asking about, here are some of the questions..

There is good scientific evidence that homeopathy works
Agree strongly Agree slightly No firm opinion Disagree slightly Disagree strongly

I know what homeopathy is
Agree strongly Agree slightly No firm opinion Disagree slightly Disagree strongly

How concentrated are homeopathic products?
Very concentrated Moderately concentrated Moderately dilute Very dilute Nothing there

Cheers

Shaun

Thanks for replying Shaun. But may I ask, how can you assure me that respondents knew homeopathy wasn’t the same thing as herbal remedies?

Oh I see…I don’t think that I can prove that, although the name of the survey and questions all referred to homeopathy, I guess that some may have confused them; I don’t think so, but can’t prove this. I’ll send you a pdf if you give me your email address. Cheers

“But may I ask, how can you assure me that respondents knew homeopathy wasn’t the same thing as herbal remedies?”

Well, surely that is the point: if they think homoeopathy is the same thing as herbal remedies, then they don’t know what homoeopathy is.

Quite, Mojo.

of course even the Cochrane Collaboration have been known to confuse the two!

There’s still an important difference between people not realising that homeopathic remedies contain no active ingredient, and people not realising that homeopathy isn’t the same thing as herbalism. For example if people were confusing the two, and you explained that they were different, they may then admit “in that case I’ve never used homeopathy” … in which case the claim that people who *use* homeopathy don’t know what it is, is invalidated.

Don’t get me wrong, they’re very interesting results, but if you do a similar study in the future you may want to check this distinction.

Surely this is further proof that homeopathy works by the placebo effect? It’s ‘natural’, it’s ‘traditional’, its got the royal seal of approval etc.

I don’t think there is anything wrong with the “Placebo Effect”. If only everything worked properly because of expectations.

Dr Shaun does not know any thing about this science. He doesnt understand the depth and do not have any knowledge of this wonderful science. If is driving a car blindfolded. Sir please study this science first and then comment.

Switzerland?!?!

Not the home of 25 Nobel prizes, one of which was won by a young up-and-comer known as Albert Einstein?!?

…or the place with the world’s largest laboratory and world-reknowned medical research facilities?!?

PLEASE, not from the guys who invented the army knife…with a bottle opener, scissors AND a toothpick!?!

Tell me they haven’t been conned by the homeopathetic “magic water” fairies

*sigh*

I’ve often suspected that most people go for CAM because it just seems all nice and holistic and alternative, rather than because they know anything about the specific treatments in question.

Why else would people so easily mix and match CAMs? I mean if you believe in homeopathy, then herbal medicines, traditional Chinese medicines, whatever, are just as bad as pharmaceutical drugs. They’re all “allopathic” and not diluted.

Interesting site, but much advertisments on him. Shall read as subscription, rss.

I have to wonder if people in the survey perhaps mixed up homeopathy with herbal remedies. I’d love to read the actual article but it appears you need to be a registered member or somesuch.

Thanks for discussing my paper. I’m afraid you need a subscription to read the full article, but I can assure you that the responders knew it was homeopathy that we were asking about, here are some of the questions..

There is good scientific evidence that homeopathy works
Agree strongly Agree slightly No firm opinion Disagree slightly Disagree strongly

I know what homeopathy is
Agree strongly Agree slightly No firm opinion Disagree slightly Disagree strongly

How concentrated are homeopathic products?
Very concentrated Moderately concentrated Moderately dilute Very dilute Nothing there

Cheers

Shaun

Thanks for replying Shaun. But may I ask, how can you assure me that respondents knew homeopathy wasn’t the same thing as herbal remedies?

Oh I see…I don’t think that I can prove that, although the name of the survey and questions all referred to homeopathy, I guess that some may have confused them; I don’t think so, but can’t prove this. I’ll send you a pdf if you give me your email address. Cheers

“But may I ask, how can you assure me that respondents knew homeopathy wasn’t the same thing as herbal remedies?”

Well, surely that is the point: if they think homoeopathy is the same thing as herbal remedies, then they don’t know what homoeopathy is.

Quite, Mojo.

of course even the Cochrane Collaboration have been known to confuse the two!

There’s still an important difference between people not realising that homeopathic remedies contain no active ingredient, and people not realising that homeopathy isn’t the same thing as herbalism. For example if people were confusing the two, and you explained that they were different, they may then admit “in that case I’ve never used homeopathy” … in which case the claim that people who *use* homeopathy don’t know what it is, is invalidated.

Don’t get me wrong, they’re very interesting results, but if you do a similar study in the future you may want to check this distinction.

Surely this is further proof that homeopathy works by the placebo effect? It’s ‘natural’, it’s ‘traditional’, its got the royal seal of approval etc.

I don’t think there is anything wrong with the “Placebo Effect”. If only everything worked properly because of expectations.

Dr Shaun does not know any thing about this science. He doesnt understand the depth and do not have any knowledge of this wonderful science. If is driving a car blindfolded. Sir please study this science first and then comment.

I’d just shoot them.

So go ahead and shoot them. As for me, I dislike this involvement with other peoples’ business. A damn good case could be made for pretty much everyone fucking up their kids in a million and one ways – I say that these are their kids whom they presumably care about and it’s no stranger’s business. Oh, but you’re a do-gooder are ya? You just want to save the life of a suffering and dieing kid? Sure you are. That’s probably why you’re murdering children by the dozens right now as you wear unnecessary clothes, eat unnecessary foods and own an unnecessary computer, etc. – all on money that could save the lives of suffering and dieing children.

Stop playing cowboy on the web Davey. Spend a few days thinking, come up with a philosophy that makes some sense to you and then be willing to die and kill for it, until then stop farting your half-assed homicidal tendencies around the cybersphere. Thank you.

This story demonstrates to us that many people are wholly incompetent and (in some probably useless manner) cautions us against being similarly ignorant regarding matters of high importance to us. Only morons and fascists though see anything individually prescriptive about it.

“Only morons and fascists though see anything individually prescriptive about it.”

I must be a moron then because I see something quite prescriptive about this story. Parents who refuse real medical treatment in favour of quack medicine, and get their children killed as a result, will be prosecuted and hopefully spend a long time in jail.

In the meantime in the USA a mother has been charged guilty of second-degree murder for letting her daughter die of diabetes because she believed prayer would heal her. All the girl needed was insulin and fluids. But the mother didn’t call 911 until after her child was dead. For this she will face up to 25 years in prison.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2009/05/wis-mother-guilty-of-diabetic-daughters-death.html

Homeopathy is about as effective as faith healing.

Wow! “mnuez” is not only a ignorant blowhard, but a coward too!
Why do you hide behind a pseudonym?
(That’s a ‘false name’, for the educationally sub-normal).

I’ll wager that I do not get a coherent response…

Stop playing cowboy on the web coward. Spend a few days thinking.

“I say that these are their kids whom they presumably care about and it’s no stranger’s business.”

Nice sentiment “mnuez”…just stick you head in the sand and leave people to damage their kids…its not your problem is it? What a wonderful attitude. Did you live next door to Josef Fritzl?

the next baby p.

That’s way long enough to have waited for a reply from the motley bullshit-factory calling themselves “mnuez”.
I’m guessing that this terminal wally is in fact a practicing homeopath.
He displays both the requisite absence of morality and degraded intellect to be their prime specimen.

That’s way long enough to have waited for a reply from the motley bullshit-factory calling themselves “mnuez”.
I’m guessing that this terminal wally is in fact a practicing homeopath.
He displays both the requisite absence of morality and degraded intellect to be their prime specimen.

Tragic story – but how is it different to the countless examples one could cite of individuals praying to a God(s) for a miraculous cure, instead of treating their children/themselves with conventional medicine? Homeopathy would seem to be a ‘faith’ cure that simply doesn’t stand up to science, much in the same way all faith based belief systems don’t.

Mr K

I just happened to land in this blog. People generally do not have understanding about any system. Do we eat tablets instead of food?
What is food any way? It has some Botanical Name ? We eat milder herbs a lot to fill our stomach to get the satiated feeling. What is a spinach ? What are the herbs we use to process our food for taste or nutrition ? Homeopathy medicines mostly are taken from plants and according to their strength they are used in small doses and they sure heal the body with proper nutrition to the affected part. Most of the damages are due to malnutrition. The nature has its own laboratory to make different chemicals and keep the goodness of them. The laboratory inside human body wonderfully absorbs such healthy chemicals without inhibition or resistance, only when the dose is proper. But the conventional medicines are strong chemicals which always leave a damage in some sort in some part which is technically called side effects or contra effects. Liver and kidney struggles to deal with such waste disposal. Mostly these medicines counter the symptoms more than dealing with the actual root of the problem. The curing formula of conventional medicine is Disease _ Medicine, but with alternative medicines Disease _ Body _ Medicine. Only if the Human Body allows the cure will take place and also the manifestation of disease also play a role. If the disease : Body management ratio is 40:60 any disease can be cured if it is inverted then curing seems impossible. Surgeries also help only to certain extent. Cancer drugs are more lethal than the disease itself. Dont try to categorise anything which you do not know in full. Go read some real good Anatomy books or Physiology books. At the same time read some good Materia Medica or Botanical Guide books to know the chemical construction of the plant. You will be astonished to know the composition is always C H O but in strange arrangement. Most of the modern medicines are also derived from many plants but researchers see only the active components in the plants considering the disease but nature also has passive components which help to balance the same when absorbed in the body. Herbal treatment is complete wholesome and really scientific. I know most of the Modern Medicines play havoc in major diseases but there is no time tested method to conduct autopsy to fix the medicine or the physician. Believe and Be cured,

Believe and be cured??? The Body has to allow medicine to work??? OK, mate, chuck down a whole bottle of pills and tell yourself not to die! I’ll save you the trouble; it won’t work.

And they wonder why we make fun.

No Zeke, they *don’t* wonder. Wonderment about one’s own failings requires a specific level of consciousness that breaks through the Dunning-Kruger effect.
If any of these fatuous dickheads had managed to break through that mental barrier, they (by definition) would not support the infantile magic nostrums that they do.

Eczema is really so itchy and i cant help but scratch it. Corticosteroid is a heaven sent because it can relieve the itchiness and redness. *

Wow, just found this story and comments. I’d like to add that society has made parenting such a complex arena that not a lot of people are really prepared for the event. Parents have to made important decisions everyday. Some good and some not so, yet those bad decisions do not necessarily make them evil people. I think in this case a very bad decision (probably based on poor advice) created a very terrible and sad outcome. Perhaps if society gave parents the tools for parenting and the confidence to use common sense rather than ramming lots options down their thoats parents may then become a lot more confident and will “sense” when there is something terribly wrong. A while ago, as an older parent I believe I was able to “sense” that something was wrong with my daughter just two hours after seeing the doctor and took her to the hospital. She was admitted for a week. The doctor’s advice was to send me home with medicine and have my daughter take fuilds. She may have died if I didn’t take her to the hospital. I that happened I could have then been seen as a evil mother for not doing the right thing.

I’d just shoot them.

So go ahead and shoot them. As for me, I dislike this involvement with other peoples’ business. A damn good case could be made for pretty much everyone fucking up their kids in a million and one ways – I say that these are their kids whom they presumably care about and it’s no stranger’s business. Oh, but you’re a do-gooder are ya? You just want to save the life of a suffering and dieing kid? Sure you are. That’s probably why you’re murdering children by the dozens right now as you wear unnecessary clothes, eat unnecessary foods and own an unnecessary computer, etc. – all on money that could save the lives of suffering and dieing children.

Stop playing cowboy on the web Davey. Spend a few days thinking, come up with a philosophy that makes some sense to you and then be willing to die and kill for it, until then stop farting your half-assed homicidal tendencies around the cybersphere. Thank you.

This story demonstrates to us that many people are wholly incompetent and (in some probably useless manner) cautions us against being similarly ignorant regarding matters of high importance to us. Only morons and fascists though see anything individually prescriptive about it.

“Only morons and fascists though see anything individually prescriptive about it.”

I must be a moron then because I see something quite prescriptive about this story. Parents who refuse real medical treatment in favour of quack medicine, and get their children killed as a result, will be prosecuted and hopefully spend a long time in jail.

In the meantime in the USA a mother has been charged guilty of second-degree murder for letting her daughter die of diabetes because she believed prayer would heal her. All the girl needed was insulin and fluids. But the mother didn’t call 911 until after her child was dead. For this she will face up to 25 years in prison.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2009/05/wis-mother-guilty-of-diabetic-daughters-death.html

Homeopathy is about as effective as faith healing.

Wow! “mnuez” is not only a ignorant blowhard, but a coward too!
Why do you hide behind a pseudonym?
(That’s a ‘false name’, for the educationally sub-normal).

I’ll wager that I do not get a coherent response…

Stop playing cowboy on the web coward. Spend a few days thinking.

“I say that these are their kids whom they presumably care about and it’s no stranger’s business.”

Nice sentiment “mnuez”…just stick you head in the sand and leave people to damage their kids…its not your problem is it? What a wonderful attitude. Did you live next door to Josef Fritzl?

the next baby p.

That’s way long enough to have waited for a reply from the motley bullshit-factory calling themselves “mnuez”.
I’m guessing that this terminal wally is in fact a practicing homeopath.
He displays both the requisite absence of morality and degraded intellect to be their prime specimen.

That’s way long enough to have waited for a reply from the motley bullshit-factory calling themselves “mnuez”.
I’m guessing that this terminal wally is in fact a practicing homeopath.
He displays both the requisite absence of morality and degraded intellect to be their prime specimen.

Tragic story – but how is it different to the countless examples one could cite of individuals praying to a God(s) for a miraculous cure, instead of treating their children/themselves with conventional medicine? Homeopathy would seem to be a ‘faith’ cure that simply doesn’t stand up to science, much in the same way all faith based belief systems don’t.

Mr K

I just happened to land in this blog. People generally do not have understanding about any system. Do we eat tablets instead of food?
What is food any way? It has some Botanical Name ? We eat milder herbs a lot to fill our stomach to get the satiated feeling. What is a spinach ? What are the herbs we use to process our food for taste or nutrition ? Homeopathy medicines mostly are taken from plants and according to their strength they are used in small doses and they sure heal the body with proper nutrition to the affected part. Most of the damages are due to malnutrition. The nature has its own laboratory to make different chemicals and keep the goodness of them. The laboratory inside human body wonderfully absorbs such healthy chemicals without inhibition or resistance, only when the dose is proper. But the conventional medicines are strong chemicals which always leave a damage in some sort in some part which is technically called side effects or contra effects. Liver and kidney struggles to deal with such waste disposal. Mostly these medicines counter the symptoms more than dealing with the actual root of the problem. The curing formula of conventional medicine is Disease _ Medicine, but with alternative medicines Disease _ Body _ Medicine. Only if the Human Body allows the cure will take place and also the manifestation of disease also play a role. If the disease : Body management ratio is 40:60 any disease can be cured if it is inverted then curing seems impossible. Surgeries also help only to certain extent. Cancer drugs are more lethal than the disease itself. Dont try to categorise anything which you do not know in full. Go read some real good Anatomy books or Physiology books. At the same time read some good Materia Medica or Botanical Guide books to know the chemical construction of the plant. You will be astonished to know the composition is always C H O but in strange arrangement. Most of the modern medicines are also derived from many plants but researchers see only the active components in the plants considering the disease but nature also has passive components which help to balance the same when absorbed in the body. Herbal treatment is complete wholesome and really scientific. I know most of the Modern Medicines play havoc in major diseases but there is no time tested method to conduct autopsy to fix the medicine or the physician. Believe and Be cured,

Believe and be cured??? The Body has to allow medicine to work??? OK, mate, chuck down a whole bottle of pills and tell yourself not to die! I’ll save you the trouble; it won’t work.

And they wonder why we make fun.

No Zeke, they *don’t* wonder. Wonderment about one’s own failings requires a specific level of consciousness that breaks through the Dunning-Kruger effect.
If any of these fatuous dickheads had managed to break through that mental barrier, they (by definition) would not support the infantile magic nostrums that they do.

Eczema is really so itchy and i cant help but scratch it. Corticosteroid is a heaven sent because it can relieve the itchiness and redness. *

Wow, just found this story and comments. I’d like to add that society has made parenting such a complex arena that not a lot of people are really prepared for the event. Parents have to made important decisions everyday. Some good and some not so, yet those bad decisions do not necessarily make them evil people. I think in this case a very bad decision (probably based on poor advice) created a very terrible and sad outcome. Perhaps if society gave parents the tools for parenting and the confidence to use common sense rather than ramming lots options down their thoats parents may then become a lot more confident and will “sense” when there is something terribly wrong. A while ago, as an older parent I believe I was able to “sense” that something was wrong with my daughter just two hours after seeing the doctor and took her to the hospital. She was admitted for a week. The doctor’s advice was to send me home with medicine and have my daughter take fuilds. She may have died if I didn’t take her to the hospital. I that happened I could have then been seen as a evil mother for not doing the right thing.

and that is the end of that.

No, there are no limits to some people hatreds

Hmmm….. You are a voice of sanity in the roar of the madding crowd!

‘Is there really any limit to how low antisemitic agents of counterknowledge will go in order to further their agenda?’

No limits whatsoever. As a general rule racists and bigots tend to be very unpleasant people, but there is something truly demented about anti-Semitism that attracts some really sick minds.

Thanks Ivor, assuming that your comment was aimed at me.

Thank goodness that lie has been nailed. I don’t see what difference it makes when people point out the (ex-) religious backgrounds of evildoers, whether they be historical mass murderers like Stalin or Hitler, or serial killers like Frederick West and Harold Shipman. In traditional religious doctrine we are all born with the stain of Adam and are thus equally capable of perpetrating profound evil or attaining to highest sanctity. With a modicum of grace most of us seem to muddle along somewhere between these two states.

Unfortunetely such things can happen everywhere, no matter of religion. However it is rather the other way round – this whole story was clearly used by Jews against Austria/Germany due to growing antisemitism in Europe especially in Austria and Germany. (Fritz(l) – rather negative description of a German person, the country – Austria birthplace of Adolf Hitler) was biased, but it will have no effect on people. But it’s good they busted this guy and punished him.

Bad people can be found anywhere, among atheists as well as among believers, however devout. Religious people are not necessarily better or worse than atheists. Whether Fritzl is or isn’t a Jew is totally irrelevant.

Hein, I agree that Fritzl’s religious background is, per se, not worth any particular comment.

However, when people hijak it to further their agenda, now that is worth commenting on.

he is jewish

‘he is jewish’

He isn’t. But you are a cunt.

This site is supported by ADL worms. Why 6 David Stars on the wall? Catholics worship stars? No jews do that!
Fritz is a ashkenazi jews. That`s it. This site was created to confuse people. The think is when a jew commits a crime he/she is protected by laws saying that accusing him/her is an act of “anti-semitism” or covering the actual ID. He`s jew! Retard watch you`re a CUNT!

Yeah like jews never hide their jewishness appearing to be christians, never happened, nope…..im not saying he is jewish I dont know that, but saying that because he doesnt go to the sinagogue means he is not a jew is ludicrous.

There are “stars of david” or more correctly 6 pointed stars on many many Christian/Catholic and Muslim archetectural features all around the world. The Muslims call it the “Seal of Solomon” and Christmas trees in Russia are topped with the 6 pointed star regularly. So STFU you lousy internet troll. This means nothing except that people look for Jewishness as a way to prop up their stupid irrational beliefs. Man i wish ya’ll’d just have been aborted, you redneck/nazi/conspiracy-theorist/skinhead/ghetto/stupid punks!

So seeing as you Jews are so outraged by this, will you stop doing this on a much larger and sinister scale to a certain “other” billion or so folk?

Pretzel Fritzl is a fake jew, just like the rest of the centuries old talmud turkey crime club that think they can keep up the pretence for much longer.
Many of these ‘truth’ blogs are beginning to stink like ashkenaz roadkill…

The same David stars picture is on the dailymail.co.uk site, I believe it’s authentic. So who knows, maybe he was ? If he was, you should be happy he is in jail.

He’s a Jew and he did that to his daughter because in the talmud it’s teaches u that it’s ok to sleep with children and god won’t punish u for it this why god through them out of the holy land because they tampered with the original Torah and wen the babalonians defeated them and took them back to babalonia as slaves they wrote the Talmud and went totally against gods laws they took fornicating is a sin out of the Torah and made the Talmud the most wicked and disgusting acts of mankind if u dnt believe me do your research .

This is nothing new to Jews commiting the worst crimes type “Jewish gangsters snuff films” in google the most shocking sex crime in the history of mankind but u won’t see it on TV why because there Jews!!!

and that is the end of that.

No, there are no limits to some people hatreds

Hmmm….. You are a voice of sanity in the roar of the madding crowd!

‘Is there really any limit to how low antisemitic agents of counterknowledge will go in order to further their agenda?’

No limits whatsoever. As a general rule racists and bigots tend to be very unpleasant people, but there is something truly demented about anti-Semitism that attracts some really sick minds.

Thanks Ivor, assuming that your comment was aimed at me.

Thank goodness that lie has been nailed. I don’t see what difference it makes when people point out the (ex-) religious backgrounds of evildoers, whether they be historical mass murderers like Stalin or Hitler, or serial killers like Frederick West and Harold Shipman. In traditional religious doctrine we are all born with the stain of Adam and are thus equally capable of perpetrating profound evil or attaining to highest sanctity. With a modicum of grace most of us seem to muddle along somewhere between these two states.

Unfortunetely such things can happen everywhere, no matter of religion. However it is rather the other way round – this whole story was clearly used by Jews against Austria/Germany due to growing antisemitism in Europe especially in Austria and Germany. (Fritz(l) – rather negative description of a German person, the country – Austria birthplace of Adolf Hitler) was biased, but it will have no effect on people. But it’s good they busted this guy and punished him.

Bad people can be found anywhere, among atheists as well as among believers, however devout. Religious people are not necessarily better or worse than atheists. Whether Fritzl is or isn’t a Jew is totally irrelevant.

Hein, I agree that Fritzl’s religious background is, per se, not worth any particular comment.

However, when people hijak it to further their agenda, now that is worth commenting on.

he is jewish

‘he is jewish’

He isn’t. But you are a cunt.

This site is supported by ADL worms. Why 6 David Stars on the wall? Catholics worship stars? No jews do that!
Fritz is a ashkenazi jews. That`s it. This site was created to confuse people. The think is when a jew commits a crime he/she is protected by laws saying that accusing him/her is an act of “anti-semitism” or covering the actual ID. He`s jew! Retard watch you`re a CUNT!

Yeah like jews never hide their jewishness appearing to be christians, never happened, nope…..im not saying he is jewish I dont know that, but saying that because he doesnt go to the sinagogue means he is not a jew is ludicrous.

There are “stars of david” or more correctly 6 pointed stars on many many Christian/Catholic and Muslim archetectural features all around the world. The Muslims call it the “Seal of Solomon” and Christmas trees in Russia are topped with the 6 pointed star regularly. So STFU you lousy internet troll. This means nothing except that people look for Jewishness as a way to prop up their stupid irrational beliefs. Man i wish ya’ll’d just have been aborted, you redneck/nazi/conspiracy-theorist/skinhead/ghetto/stupid punks!

So seeing as you Jews are so outraged by this, will you stop doing this on a much larger and sinister scale to a certain “other” billion or so folk?

Pretzel Fritzl is a fake jew, just like the rest of the centuries old talmud turkey crime club that think they can keep up the pretence for much longer.
Many of these ‘truth’ blogs are beginning to stink like ashkenaz roadkill…

The same David stars picture is on the dailymail.co.uk site, I believe it’s authentic. So who knows, maybe he was ? If he was, you should be happy he is in jail.

He’s a Jew and he did that to his daughter because in the talmud it’s teaches u that it’s ok to sleep with children and god won’t punish u for it this why god through them out of the holy land because they tampered with the original Torah and wen the babalonians defeated them and took them back to babalonia as slaves they wrote the Talmud and went totally against gods laws they took fornicating is a sin out of the Torah and made the Talmud the most wicked and disgusting acts of mankind if u dnt believe me do your research .

This is nothing new to Jews commiting the worst crimes type “Jewish gangsters snuff films” in google the most shocking sex crime in the history of mankind but u won’t see it on TV why because there Jews!!!

that’s what you call gibberish

I can’t even begin to understand…

If you were ever unfortunate enough to become involved in a discussion with this guy, where exactly would you start?

Sounds like some weapons grade “Wishful thinking= results” BS

From nutjob’s website, linked in my name.
“The Resonance Project Foundation is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization dedicated to the unification of all sciences and philosophies emerging from a complete and applied view of the physics underlying the wheelworks of nature.”

Hoooo boy, we hit gold.

“Director of Research Nassim Haramein and scientists at the Resonance Project Foundation have found a new solution to Einstein’s field equations which incorporates torque and Coriolis effects. Furthermore, calculations were rendered to describe the collective and coherent behavior of the plasma dynamics of ergospheres orbiting the event horizons of black holes demanding a highly structured polarized vacuum, resulting in an alternative view of black holes where the exterior white hole portion surrounds the interior black hole singularity.”

Nothing in a Brief History of Time made my head hurt as much as that.

Anyone who thinks reality is subjective has never walked into a patio door they were certain was open.

“If you were ever unfortunate enough to become involved in a discussion with this guy, where exactly would you start?”

Where would you start? If you were unfortunate enough to become involved in a discussion with this guy, the only thing that would be going through your mind is “where did this start and how the feck do I finish it??”

And I thought vacuums were just for cleaning the house! I never knew they ruled the universe.

Physics update on the universe;

Vacuum (nothingness) actually means Universe (everythingness).

Hurrah for self contradiction. This is logic’s retarded twin brother. We only let him out on sundays.

Is this person high?

Daryl, his synchronicity has just gone through the roof.

He just sounds like some guy at a Dead Show who is trying to explain why he’s licking the light bulbs in, what he perceives to be, a rational way.

The real rational answer would be that he’s on acid. But he thinks that’s only “opening up his mind, man”….

Daryl, lol… I asked myself that very same question. But at least now we know that it ALL started inside a large Dyson and then, ‘hey man’….the whole thing went through the roof.

It makes sense in it’s own way.

Sounds like BS to me.

If an honest individual sends TRUE information into the vacuum to benetit everyone, but a dishonest corporation spreads conflicting FALSE information via mainstream media to profit itself, the result is likely to be confusion, with false information having the upper hand. An apt analogy might be; A baby submerged in dirty bathwater. Kind of like this website.

Some other posterior gems from Haramein:
“Wow, the universe is just a bunch of dots!”
“Reality is an illusion” (appropriated from Buddha, of course)

“Yeah again, in the context of my theory synchronicity starts to make sense…”

So in other words, in the context of his theory, his theory makes sense… to him… for me on the other hand it is still a bit of a mystery.

So well done to Mr Haramein, he’s created an entirely unnecessary counterpart to the theory of the interplay of cause and effect, except that this one is for Solipsists.

McM. Good post. I like it. One wonders what the real agenda is. Or to put it in my own language who is ringing the bell? Might I also ask if Mr Haramein is on acid at all?

Why is there no substance to the comments? You all accuse Haramein of lack of substance, but your attacks are vapor.

One question – and only one – should dominate:

“Nassim, have your relativity-equation solutions been reviewed by the physics community?”

Surely peer-review is the only relevant question to ask?

Wow. 16 responses and only one voice of reason. I thought this was meant to be a truth forum?

I agree Paul, if he is what he claims to be, ie: a physicist, then his equations should be able to stand up to peer review. From what little I have read of Nassim and the Resonance Project it seems to be a legitimate effort to look at zero point and field equations from a different angle.

Assuming that this guy is a quack due to the subject matter of his talk is beside the point.

WOW…whilst this guy may or may not be a ‘nutjob’ posts bar two seem to be a lot worse…talk about lunatics taking over the page, no one got anything intelligent to add?
very dissapointed with this site

If Einstein had come out and said, along with his theories, “I also like to hook up two escorts and fondle their boobs with my head. It makes me feel like I’m on the seventh planet of the divine”… would we have been reluctant to accept his theories? Eh, maybe.

Ok, this guy’s not Einstein but if you look up his stuff, some of it’s actually science, believe it or not. The problem here is that it’s often mixed up and intertwined with spiritual references that are, well, hard to incorporate in science.

Crazy? Yes. (Geniuses are usually crazy, anyway) Quack? Maybe, but not entirely. There’s a lot of good sense in his gravity field theories which caught my interest and could unlock a lot of things we can barely come close to explain… spin, for example.

You can listen to the guy’s ramblings but the science is hard to filter out sometimes when he goes too deep unto difficult to accept spiritual concepts.

This is just a circular argument wrapped up in 2 and a half minutes of babble

Where can i get one of those vacuums?

@quickredfox just go with a Dyson man! might be more expensive than the dvd set but at least you’ll get something out of it

He has a four CD set of explanation of his theory called “Crossing The Event Horizon.” His explanation of the nature of All makes as much sense and the other physicists explanations using terms like strong force, week force, gluons, dark matter etc. JEEZZ ! Much more sense in fact. He actually seems to make physics and quantum physics seem compatible.

A definite rush to judgment going on in this forum.

A very worthwhile thing to consider I perceive. Maybe it can be found at libraries.

What about all those times people need lifeboats or mine rescuers or firemen to turn up, and they don’t? I suppose these people can’t refute Mr Haramein, because they’re dead…

http://theresonanceproject.org/research.html

he wrote a paper called “The Schwarzschild Proton”. It won Best paper award at the “9th International Conference CASYS’09 (Computing Anticipatory Systems)” and above is a link which gives further information.

You can cross check the references, you can cross check all 13 panelists, you can cross check everything he says regarding this paper.

or you could read the paper, follow the math, and take some time to try and understand what he’s saying. its not that complicated (its does require patience and a decent understanding of math)

Until you have made the effort to follow up on the TECHNICAL and SCIENTIFIC papers he has written, a number of them with E.A. Rauscher (theres a name to look up) your opinions of him are as meaningless.

One must know what they’re talking about before they talk about it.

I’m not saying what Nassim is saying is wholesale right, but i have made the effort to look into it, and he offers alot more information on why HE is right and why all of you who insult him on this “truth” forum are some combination of ignorant and lazy.

Many of the present assumptions in the field of theoretical physics have been proven wrong time and time again by actual observed cosmological events i.e shoemaker levy, comet impactors,black hole radio jets etc. The theoretical physicists however seem to refuse to believe the evidence presented before their very eyes and continue to attempt to bash that square peg into the proverbial round hole with patently contradictory explanations that i’m sure don’t make sense even to them. They seem to have forgotten that scientific knowledge is always a work in progress and are becoming entrenched in their views. The gravitational universe theory is taking knocks from all angles but many of the theorists continue to expound their dogmas. For anyone interested check out the long suppressed “Electrical universe” theories out there. Does a much better job of explaining and more importantly accurately predicting cosmological phenomena
Peace

How does one check out EA Rauscher? I could find no reference to her on the net or as a person connected to Berkeley.

I find NH’s take on physics fascinating. His grasp of history is less convincing as he confuses things and makes sensationalist claims.

What makes me a bit sceptical is that his organisation might be non-profit making but it is keen on raising money. It would be more credible if it were profit-making and actually capable of applying his leading-edge physics in a commercial kind of way. The market place is even more effective in testing the truth than peer review.

We all want to know how the Egyptians et al moved the giant blocks and why can’t their manipulation of energy be replicated now? Now, as we face the challenges of climate change/ fossil fuel issues/ polluiton etc, we need physicists to work out what the ancients knew – and stop wasting time on Big Bang and string theory.

There is certainly no evidence of a four thousand year old Large Hadron Collider anywhere on the Nile – so how did they do it? And why can’t NH tell us?

This site should be called Counterproductive, no matter how ludricrous this man’s claims – the person who posted this possibly out of context has provided no useful COUNTERKNOWLEDE with this clip. So are we assuming the site agrees with this persons theories? Most of the small minded responses here show evolved the people are who use this site. If it were the middleages you would be burning him at the stake…. apologies to the few that have actually made an effort to check this guy out, I’m of to do the same, not that I believe him but I will attempt to make an educated decision using critical thinking, not something that is popular on this site…

There is no doubt that winning an award at the 9th International Conference on Computing Anticipatory Systems CASYS’09 (organised by the sweetly named Belgian university of Liege mathematics institute CHAOS : Centre for Hyperincursion and Anticipation in Ordered Systems) gives Mr Haramein a lot of credibility.

I sat through all 45 youtube videos of his presentation from 2008 and the physics made a lot of sense to me. It pays to be more open-minded. After all, Einstein, the universally recognised genius of the C20th, did not like quantum physics.
Even Richard Dawkins, the ulitmate in rational, finds quantum physics “mysterious”. What is rational about the principle of ‘non-locality’?

I still have a concern that NH’s comments on non-physics subjects which lack the accuracy that he applies to physics would lead gullible people down the wrong path. More pseudo history than pseudo science… but still pseudo

Ignorance is only skin deep, but stupidity goes to the bone. I am very famliar with Mr. Haramein’s good work. Anyone who would cast stones at this man and other brilliant, dedicated minds like his is probably just too lazy or stupid to matter anyway..so I say..eat this bitches!

S. Fuelling, R. Bruch, G. Liu, M. Bailey, E. A. Rauscher, E. Tr?bert and P. H. Heckmann, ?Absolute State Selective Cross Sections for Ionization-Excitation of Helium in e-+He, H++He, H2++He and H3++He Collisions,? Z. Phys. D 21, (1991) 309.

this is a paper i found reference to on this personal information page for Dr. Stephen Fueling at the University of Nevada,
http://www.physics.unr.edu/FacFuelling.html

E.A rausher is mentioned. true, she is hard to find on the internet. dont forget tho, that the internet doesnt have everybody on it. you cant find this publication on google, but if you have access to a college univistity database, with programs like pubmed and what not, you may be able to find it there.

happy hunting

Elizabeth Rauscher: ZoomInfo Business People Information
Lots of info on this link.
Liz Roberts

It is easy to be critical and a skeptic. It takes time to listen and understand. Take the time to listen to his lectures on the geometric structure of the vacuum and just maybe it’s not so crazy. I’m thinking this man may very well have found some real answers.

His theory could very well bridge hard science into noetic science. What I would question is how or what presented itself to him to postulate that vacuum has structure, let alone a crystaline one. Is the shape more of a fractal nature or more rigid like the physical ones we can tangibly hold?

I just reviewed his Schwarzschild Proton paper and couldn’t find anything wrong in there. Everything he states is correct. All his calculations are correct. Units are correct. The best part in this whole paper is that it’s basically so simple that he only needs to reference one text book in his references. The main reason I believe his theories is that I have my own theory of the universe and it basically comes to the same conclusions as Nassim, that black holes exist at different scales including the quantum scale and beyond. Also, space-time has fractal nature (crystalline fractal nature). He calls it the fractoholographic universe which is the perfect name for this phenomenonl. FractalWoman

Regarding comments about H’s lack of credibility in history: In the video he points out that “no one who says the ‘Egyptians didn’t build the pyramids’ will ever get a Ph.D. in history… and yet we have absolutely no proof that they did…. no hieroglyphs talking about it, no corroboration, and no way for us to do it with current technology.” That is a good argument, and I wonder, which “history” lacks credibility?

People pay to see 13 hour talks with this joker. He sells himself as having all kinds of new insights into physics, but he’s a liar and a fraud. It’s sickening, and sad to see the gullibility of people who are taken in by it. The truth is so much richer than the garbage people like this make up.

(FractalWoman: Look again at his “Schwarzchild Proton” paper – it’s completely circular, as well as nonsensical. He uses the gravitation equation to suggest that a proton weighs a billion tons because that’s what it would have to weigh for it to be a strongly gravitationally bound object, and then uses the same equations to conclude that nuclei are held together by gravity, because really they weigh a billion tons each. And that’s his derivation of the strong nuclear force.)
(If that’s not what you read in his paper, I’d be interested to know what you think he was saying.)

for anyone to fully watch n.h.’s speach, and try to think of a cute little saying that all of the other inbred rednecks can relate with is the exact ignorance that led the world away from nature, and natures way of being…. fuck ignorance, kill politically

I just love a good incoherent run on sentence that complains about someone else’s ignorance. Nothing elucidates a person’s intelligence level like an inept attempt to brag about how smart they are.

A comprehensive debunking of this guy (and fractalwoman) can be found here: http://www.sciencefile.org/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1251881447/0

The award that is touted about him was some ‘best of conference’ award given in a conference requiring no peer review and in no way affiliated with the university (other than hire of the room).

Unfortunately he’s a hippy crank.

Well…I lasted through 20 minutes of his 4 hr youtube while surfing for additional info on this guy. No real peer reviews, and Wiki punted his entry. Hmmm.

I have problems with infinities and singularities. Nassim doesn’t.

I recently inhaled a couple of well written books. If you want get a solid understanding of what the real brains are focusing on today then try:
In Search of the Multiverse, John Gribbin. ISBN 978-1-846-14113-3
Quantum Enigma, Bruce Rosenblum & Fred Kuttner. ISBN 978-0-19-534250-5
The last book is a bit controversial as it is linking consciousness with quantum physics. Read it anyways as they do an excellent job of describing the world around us using real science. WIth both books you will also find answers that mostly eliminate the need for singularities and infinities.

BTW Thanks for the debunk link zeroone

One small comment regarding dimensions, that I have always found to be a though provoking analogy.

Clearly we exist in 4D as 3D objects, but lets step back a bit and look at dimensions; but not as Nassim describes in his school lesson (this was his first mistake though useful for the manipulation of his audience) Anyways… The shadow of a 3D object is clearly 2D. No depth but not imaginary or non-existent. So the shadow of this 2D object would be 1D or a line (no matter how close you get it never gets thicker. A 1D object’s shadow would be a point, or singularity, or 0D. OK so that is the framework. So then 3D is the shadow of an object moving through spacetime (4D). You see where this is going?

Anyhoo, that’s my 2 qubits. (or 4 bits if you prefer

You gotta kidding me. You want rational criticism of this person?

He’s talking about a SENTIENT VACCUUM. Prima facie nonsense that means duck squat. It’s just a bunch of catch phrases arranged in a manner meant to sound “deep.”

This person absolutely deserves to be flamed, because everything he says doesn’t make any sense, it’s just a bunch of buzz words put together into a patois.

who are all those phd’s he has listed working for him on his site, are they fake too. he can barely pronounce english words sometimes. that long youtube video where he stated that his footage from NASA showed a ginormous comet swinging past earth and for some unknown reason we were spared, and then admits the video is an animation – but people pay for this stuff. i’m confused as to why so many people like him are goating the public like ministers to give up their money. there are obviously changes taking place in our world but these guys … i honestly believe he and other alternative media are govt disinfo agents sent to blind and slide people into bottomless rabbit holes and confuse people. click my name for a real site.

Scott Mercer (above) hits the nail on the head! Nassim is usually talking to those who know nothing about physics, which will be most of his audience, and like Richard Hoagland goes on about issues that are not completely understood in his own way as if he has found the understanding of it. The illusion of knowledge is a powerful thing.

Okay, he may sound a little stoned and the terminology is skewed a bit but the larger idea behind what he says does actually make sense. It is not totally unlike giving our attention to something we want to learn, the more attention we give to it, the more we learn, perhaps first through memorization, but then we begin to see patterns and links that create a greater understanding. We can now interact more through this knowledge/skills with the greater body – which Nassim refers to as the vacuum – but more down to earth, it may be a group of physicists working in quantum mechanics. Naturally, armed with knowledge of the language of physics one can give and receive more readily due to the hyper-awareness and understanding of that environment. Anywhere we place our awareness I think we will tend to see such occurrences partially due to our increased awareness, and perhaps co-create occurrences relative to interactive participation at some level..We cannot become aware of anything without creating change – that may be minimal or set off a chain reaction of related events (whether or not we identify them as related) that would have otherwise not occurred and that, in essence, establishes a communication network between two or more entities that respond to each other in some unique manner. I say ‘unique’ to
identify that the subsequent series of events is identified with the parent event and would have otherwise not occurred.

Wow, this guy is a real nutjob and has no clue. Not sure why this was posted? I would expect something like this from a guy I give spare change to.

that’s what you call gibberish

I can’t even begin to understand…

If you were ever unfortunate enough to become involved in a discussion with this guy, where exactly would you start?

Sounds like some weapons grade “Wishful thinking= results” BS

From nutjob’s website, linked in my name.
“The Resonance Project Foundation is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization dedicated to the unification of all sciences and philosophies emerging from a complete and applied view of the physics underlying the wheelworks of nature.”

Hoooo boy, we hit gold.

“Director of Research Nassim Haramein and scientists at the Resonance Project Foundation have found a new solution to Einstein’s field equations which incorporates torque and Coriolis effects. Furthermore, calculations were rendered to describe the collective and coherent behavior of the plasma dynamics of ergospheres orbiting the event horizons of black holes demanding a highly structured polarized vacuum, resulting in an alternative view of black holes where the exterior white hole portion surrounds the interior black hole singularity.”

Nothing in a Brief History of Time made my head hurt as much as that.

Anyone who thinks reality is subjective has never walked into a patio door they were certain was open.

“If you were ever unfortunate enough to become involved in a discussion with this guy, where exactly would you start?”

Where would you start? If you were unfortunate enough to become involved in a discussion with this guy, the only thing that would be going through your mind is “where did this start and how the feck do I finish it??”

And I thought vacuums were just for cleaning the house! I never knew they ruled the universe.

Physics update on the universe;

Vacuum (nothingness) actually means Universe (everythingness).

Hurrah for self contradiction. This is logic’s retarded twin brother. We only let him out on sundays.

Is this person high?

Daryl, his synchronicity has just gone through the roof.

He just sounds like some guy at a Dead Show who is trying to explain why he’s licking the light bulbs in, what he perceives to be, a rational way.

The real rational answer would be that he’s on acid. But he thinks that’s only “opening up his mind, man”….

Daryl, lol… I asked myself that very same question. But at least now we know that it ALL started inside a large Dyson and then, ‘hey man’….the whole thing went through the roof.

It makes sense in it’s own way.

Sounds like BS to me.

If an honest individual sends TRUE information into the vacuum to benetit everyone, but a dishonest corporation spreads conflicting FALSE information via mainstream media to profit itself, the result is likely to be confusion, with false information having the upper hand. An apt analogy might be; A baby submerged in dirty bathwater. Kind of like this website.

Some other posterior gems from Haramein:
“Wow, the universe is just a bunch of dots!”
“Reality is an illusion” (appropriated from Buddha, of course)

“Yeah again, in the context of my theory synchronicity starts to make sense…”

So in other words, in the context of his theory, his theory makes sense… to him… for me on the other hand it is still a bit of a mystery.

So well done to Mr Haramein, he’s created an entirely unnecessary counterpart to the theory of the interplay of cause and effect, except that this one is for Solipsists.

McM. Good post. I like it. One wonders what the real agenda is. Or to put it in my own language who is ringing the bell? Might I also ask if Mr Haramein is on acid at all?

Why is there no substance to the comments? You all accuse Haramein of lack of substance, but your attacks are vapor.

One question – and only one – should dominate:

“Nassim, have your relativity-equation solutions been reviewed by the physics community?”

Surely peer-review is the only relevant question to ask?

Wow. 16 responses and only one voice of reason. I thought this was meant to be a truth forum?

I agree Paul, if he is what he claims to be, ie: a physicist, then his equations should be able to stand up to peer review. From what little I have read of Nassim and the Resonance Project it seems to be a legitimate effort to look at zero point and field equations from a different angle.

Assuming that this guy is a quack due to the subject matter of his talk is beside the point.

WOW…whilst this guy may or may not be a ‘nutjob’ posts bar two seem to be a lot worse…talk about lunatics taking over the page, no one got anything intelligent to add?
very dissapointed with this site

If Einstein had come out and said, along with his theories, “I also like to hook up two escorts and fondle their boobs with my head. It makes me feel like I’m on the seventh planet of the divine”… would we have been reluctant to accept his theories? Eh, maybe.

Ok, this guy’s not Einstein but if you look up his stuff, some of it’s actually science, believe it or not. The problem here is that it’s often mixed up and intertwined with spiritual references that are, well, hard to incorporate in science.

Crazy? Yes. (Geniuses are usually crazy, anyway) Quack? Maybe, but not entirely. There’s a lot of good sense in his gravity field theories which caught my interest and could unlock a lot of things we can barely come close to explain… spin, for example.

You can listen to the guy’s ramblings but the science is hard to filter out sometimes when he goes too deep unto difficult to accept spiritual concepts.

This is just a circular argument wrapped up in 2 and a half minutes of babble

Where can i get one of those vacuums?

@quickredfox just go with a Dyson man! might be more expensive than the dvd set but at least you’ll get something out of it

He has a four CD set of explanation of his theory called “Crossing The Event Horizon.” His explanation of the nature of All makes as much sense and the other physicists explanations using terms like strong force, week force, gluons, dark matter etc. JEEZZ ! Much more sense in fact. He actually seems to make physics and quantum physics seem compatible.

A definite rush to judgment going on in this forum.

A very worthwhile thing to consider I perceive. Maybe it can be found at libraries.

What about all those times people need lifeboats or mine rescuers or firemen to turn up, and they don’t? I suppose these people can’t refute Mr Haramein, because they’re dead…

http://theresonanceproject.org/research.html

he wrote a paper called “The Schwarzschild Proton”. It won Best paper award at the “9th International Conference CASYS’09 (Computing Anticipatory Systems)” and above is a link which gives further information.

You can cross check the references, you can cross check all 13 panelists, you can cross check everything he says regarding this paper.

or you could read the paper, follow the math, and take some time to try and understand what he’s saying. its not that complicated (its does require patience and a decent understanding of math)

Until you have made the effort to follow up on the TECHNICAL and SCIENTIFIC papers he has written, a number of them with E.A. Rauscher (theres a name to look up) your opinions of him are as meaningless.

One must know what they’re talking about before they talk about it.

I’m not saying what Nassim is saying is wholesale right, but i have made the effort to look into it, and he offers alot more information on why HE is right and why all of you who insult him on this “truth” forum are some combination of ignorant and lazy.

Many of the present assumptions in the field of theoretical physics have been proven wrong time and time again by actual observed cosmological events i.e shoemaker levy, comet impactors,black hole radio jets etc. The theoretical physicists however seem to refuse to believe the evidence presented before their very eyes and continue to attempt to bash that square peg into the proverbial round hole with patently contradictory explanations that i’m sure don’t make sense even to them. They seem to have forgotten that scientific knowledge is always a work in progress and are becoming entrenched in their views. The gravitational universe theory is taking knocks from all angles but many of the theorists continue to expound their dogmas. For anyone interested check out the long suppressed “Electrical universe” theories out there. Does a much better job of explaining and more importantly accurately predicting cosmological phenomena
Peace

How does one check out EA Rauscher? I could find no reference to her on the net or as a person connected to Berkeley.

I find NH’s take on physics fascinating. His grasp of history is less convincing as he confuses things and makes sensationalist claims.

What makes me a bit sceptical is that his organisation might be non-profit making but it is keen on raising money. It would be more credible if it were profit-making and actually capable of applying his leading-edge physics in a commercial kind of way. The market place is even more effective in testing the truth than peer review.

We all want to know how the Egyptians et al moved the giant blocks and why can’t their manipulation of energy be replicated now? Now, as we face the challenges of climate change/ fossil fuel issues/ polluiton etc, we need physicists to work out what the ancients knew – and stop wasting time on Big Bang and string theory.

There is certainly no evidence of a four thousand year old Large Hadron Collider anywhere on the Nile – so how did they do it? And why can’t NH tell us?

This site should be called Counterproductive, no matter how ludricrous this man’s claims – the person who posted this possibly out of context has provided no useful COUNTERKNOWLEDE with this clip. So are we assuming the site agrees with this persons theories? Most of the small minded responses here show evolved the people are who use this site. If it were the middleages you would be burning him at the stake…. apologies to the few that have actually made an effort to check this guy out, I’m of to do the same, not that I believe him but I will attempt to make an educated decision using critical thinking, not something that is popular on this site…

There is no doubt that winning an award at the 9th International Conference on Computing Anticipatory Systems CASYS’09 (organised by the sweetly named Belgian university of Liege mathematics institute CHAOS : Centre for Hyperincursion and Anticipation in Ordered Systems) gives Mr Haramein a lot of credibility.

I sat through all 45 youtube videos of his presentation from 2008 and the physics made a lot of sense to me. It pays to be more open-minded. After all, Einstein, the universally recognised genius of the C20th, did not like quantum physics.
Even Richard Dawkins, the ulitmate in rational, finds quantum physics “mysterious”. What is rational about the principle of ‘non-locality’?

I still have a concern that NH’s comments on non-physics subjects which lack the accuracy that he applies to physics would lead gullible people down the wrong path. More pseudo history than pseudo science… but still pseudo

Ignorance is only skin deep, but stupidity goes to the bone. I am very famliar with Mr. Haramein’s good work. Anyone who would cast stones at this man and other brilliant, dedicated minds like his is probably just too lazy or stupid to matter anyway..so I say..eat this bitches!

S. Fuelling, R. Bruch, G. Liu, M. Bailey, E. A. Rauscher, E. Tr?bert and P. H. Heckmann, ?Absolute State Selective Cross Sections for Ionization-Excitation of Helium in e-+He, H++He, H2++He and H3++He Collisions,? Z. Phys. D 21, (1991) 309.

this is a paper i found reference to on this personal information page for Dr. Stephen Fueling at the University of Nevada,
http://www.physics.unr.edu/FacFuelling.html

E.A rausher is mentioned. true, she is hard to find on the internet. dont forget tho, that the internet doesnt have everybody on it. you cant find this publication on google, but if you have access to a college univistity database, with programs like pubmed and what not, you may be able to find it there.

happy hunting

Elizabeth Rauscher: ZoomInfo Business People Information
Lots of info on this link.
Liz Roberts

It is easy to be critical and a skeptic. It takes time to listen and understand. Take the time to listen to his lectures on the geometric structure of the vacuum and just maybe it’s not so crazy. I’m thinking this man may very well have found some real answers.

His theory could very well bridge hard science into noetic science. What I would question is how or what presented itself to him to postulate that vacuum has structure, let alone a crystaline one. Is the shape more of a fractal nature or more rigid like the physical ones we can tangibly hold?

I just reviewed his Schwarzschild Proton paper and couldn’t find anything wrong in there. Everything he states is correct. All his calculations are correct. Units are correct. The best part in this whole paper is that it’s basically so simple that he only needs to reference one text book in his references. The main reason I believe his theories is that I have my own theory of the universe and it basically comes to the same conclusions as Nassim, that black holes exist at different scales including the quantum scale and beyond. Also, space-time has fractal nature (crystalline fractal nature). He calls it the fractoholographic universe which is the perfect name for this phenomenonl. FractalWoman

Regarding comments about H’s lack of credibility in history: In the video he points out that “no one who says the ‘Egyptians didn’t build the pyramids’ will ever get a Ph.D. in history… and yet we have absolutely no proof that they did…. no hieroglyphs talking about it, no corroboration, and no way for us to do it with current technology.” That is a good argument, and I wonder, which “history” lacks credibility?

People pay to see 13 hour talks with this joker. He sells himself as having all kinds of new insights into physics, but he’s a liar and a fraud. It’s sickening, and sad to see the gullibility of people who are taken in by it. The truth is so much richer than the garbage people like this make up.

(FractalWoman: Look again at his “Schwarzchild Proton” paper – it’s completely circular, as well as nonsensical. He uses the gravitation equation to suggest that a proton weighs a billion tons because that’s what it would have to weigh for it to be a strongly gravitationally bound object, and then uses the same equations to conclude that nuclei are held together by gravity, because really they weigh a billion tons each. And that’s his derivation of the strong nuclear force.)
(If that’s not what you read in his paper, I’d be interested to know what you think he was saying.)

for anyone to fully watch n.h.’s speach, and try to think of a cute little saying that all of the other inbred rednecks can relate with is the exact ignorance that led the world away from nature, and natures way of being…. fuck ignorance, kill politically

I just love a good incoherent run on sentence that complains about someone else’s ignorance. Nothing elucidates a person’s intelligence level like an inept attempt to brag about how smart they are.

A comprehensive debunking of this guy (and fractalwoman) can be found here: http://www.sciencefile.org/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1251881447/0

The award that is touted about him was some ‘best of conference’ award given in a conference requiring no peer review and in no way affiliated with the university (other than hire of the room).

Unfortunately he’s a hippy crank.

Well…I lasted through 20 minutes of his 4 hr youtube while surfing for additional info on this guy. No real peer reviews, and Wiki punted his entry. Hmmm.

I have problems with infinities and singularities. Nassim doesn’t.

I recently inhaled a couple of well written books. If you want get a solid understanding of what the real brains are focusing on today then try:
In Search of the Multiverse, John Gribbin. ISBN 978-1-846-14113-3
Quantum Enigma, Bruce Rosenblum & Fred Kuttner. ISBN 978-0-19-534250-5
The last book is a bit controversial as it is linking consciousness with quantum physics. Read it anyways as they do an excellent job of describing the world around us using real science. WIth both books you will also find answers that mostly eliminate the need for singularities and infinities.

BTW Thanks for the debunk link zeroone

One small comment regarding dimensions, that I have always found to be a though provoking analogy.

Clearly we exist in 4D as 3D objects, but lets step back a bit and look at dimensions; but not as Nassim describes in his school lesson (this was his first mistake though useful for the manipulation of his audience) Anyways… The shadow of a 3D object is clearly 2D. No depth but not imaginary or non-existent. So the shadow of this 2D object would be 1D or a line (no matter how close you get it never gets thicker. A 1D object’s shadow would be a point, or singularity, or 0D. OK so that is the framework. So then 3D is the shadow of an object moving through spacetime (4D). You see where this is going?

Anyhoo, that’s my 2 qubits. (or 4 bits if you prefer

You gotta kidding me. You want rational criticism of this person?

He’s talking about a SENTIENT VACCUUM. Prima facie nonsense that means duck squat. It’s just a bunch of catch phrases arranged in a manner meant to sound “deep.”

This person absolutely deserves to be flamed, because everything he says doesn’t make any sense, it’s just a bunch of buzz words put together into a patois.

who are all those phd’s he has listed working for him on his site, are they fake too. he can barely pronounce english words sometimes. that long youtube video where he stated that his footage from NASA showed a ginormous comet swinging past earth and for some unknown reason we were spared, and then admits the video is an animation – but people pay for this stuff. i’m confused as to why so many people like him are goating the public like ministers to give up their money. there are obviously changes taking place in our world but these guys … i honestly believe he and other alternative media are govt disinfo agents sent to blind and slide people into bottomless rabbit holes and confuse people. click my name for a real site.

Scott Mercer (above) hits the nail on the head! Nassim is usually talking to those who know nothing about physics, which will be most of his audience, and like Richard Hoagland goes on about issues that are not completely understood in his own way as if he has found the understanding of it. The illusion of knowledge is a powerful thing.

Okay, he may sound a little stoned and the terminology is skewed a bit but the larger idea behind what he says does actually make sense. It is not totally unlike giving our attention to something we want to learn, the more attention we give to it, the more we learn, perhaps first through memorization, but then we begin to see patterns and links that create a greater understanding. We can now interact more through this knowledge/skills with the greater body – which Nassim refers to as the vacuum – but more down to earth, it may be a group of physicists working in quantum mechanics. Naturally, armed with knowledge of the language of physics one can give and receive more readily due to the hyper-awareness and understanding of that environment. Anywhere we place our awareness I think we will tend to see such occurrences partially due to our increased awareness, and perhaps co-create occurrences relative to interactive participation at some level..We cannot become aware of anything without creating change – that may be minimal or set off a chain reaction of related events (whether or not we identify them as related) that would have otherwise not occurred and that, in essence, establishes a communication network between two or more entities that respond to each other in some unique manner. I say ‘unique’ to
identify that the subsequent series of events is identified with the parent event and would have otherwise not occurred.

Wow, this guy is a real nutjob and has no clue. Not sure why this was posted? I would expect something like this from a guy I give spare change to.

what I like to say milo welcome back .let’s have more fun.

Welcome back guys.

hANOVER fIST’s state of mind can be gauged by a look at the pages he links to – such as ‘A Complete History of Zionist Crimes’, ‘Auschwitz for Dummies’, and ‘Dual Citizenship – Loyal to Whom?’. I suggest that no one looks at any of these pages on a work computer.

Incidentally, Mr fIST tells readers of his page (not that there seem to be all that many) that if he is ’suicided’, then the ‘Bush-Clinton Crime Empire’ will be held responsible. So if his website does suddenly disappear, we should do our duty and ensure that the ‘truth movement’ is notified of the untimely demise of one of its brightest stars.

This is an IMPORTANT comment everyone should read.

I am not going to warn you it is serious stuff.

Here is an actual quote: Hello

Looks like some Ouija boarding to me.

Wow…forgot his name and the quote. Wanna loosen that hockey helmet strap, Snicklefritz?

Just as a matter of interest, hANOVER, I assume that the fact that you haven’t been ’suicided’ – despite your frantic efforts to uncover the ‘true’ conspirators involved in 9/11 – should be evident to you. Namely, the point is that you’re so shit at acting as an investigator, and you’re ‘theories’ are so way off the mark, that they’re not even close to panicking us sinister NWO types. You need to try a lot harder before we even consider sending the Sayeret in.

Happy Hanukah

Welchy…I know YOU’RE not one of them…so don’t flatter yourself. The “NWO types” use idiots like you as toilet paper when they do a number two.

‘Welchy…I know YOU’RE not one of them’

Amongst the many mental faculties you lack is something we humans call ‘a sense of humour’. But then the only time you’ll ever see a joke is when you look in a mirror.

Happy New Year, troll. Maybe someone will actually visit your website this year, so you won’t feel compelled to post comments here.

Aww…is poor widdle Welchy to much of a cunt to deal with my postings?

Eat it, load-gulper. Just in case you can’t count, that little counter indicates that many people are reading the posts at my page – but I won’t have little teabaggers like you attempting hit-and-run attacks, so anyone who wishes to comment must leave some contact info. Just like Adam Austin says, why give you idiots yet another platform to lie to everyone?

Now, to finish…just like I told you daisy-chain partners, Fung and moRon…don’t attempt to psychoanalyze me…you’re just another blithering nitwit in a sea of fools.

“to (sic) much of a cunt”

“Eat it, load-gulper”

“little teabaggers like you”

“you idiots”

“you daisy-chain partners”

“blithering nitwit in a sea of fools”

And hANDjOB wonders why no one leaves comments on her paranoid anti-Jew website…

It simply must be her charming personality, or maybe her impeccable manners.

That’s because he’s a drooling simpleton.

Oh… well that makes sense, then. I briefly looked at the laugh-a-minute blog, but got so bored with the tired ravings I had to move on to some shopping at Amazon. Much more interesting stuff there, by the way.

‘I briefly looked at the laugh-a-minute blog, but got so bored with the tired ravings I had to move on to some shopping at Amazon. Much more interesting stuff there, by the way.’

That seems to be a common experience for anyone who strays across his page.

Yeah, I found this really sweet Buddha statue/candle holder for my officemate (her birthday is next week). Hand-crafted wood, very nice.

Oh… was there something else we were discussing? Hmmm…

Right, got it – that blog. Didja see the crap about… oh never mind, you know what I mean.

‘Yeah, I found this really sweet Buddha statue/candle holder for my officemate (her birthday is next week). Hand-crafted wood, very nice.’

Great stuff. If that was an unintended consequence of your visit to hANOVER’s site then it’s good to know that – indirectly at least – that KKK motherfucker has done something positive for someone other than himself.

Actually, I literally got bored and decided to take advantage of the freedoms I have in the good ol’ US of A. You know, to spend my money where I want, for whomever I please, and at a time and place of my choosing.

Oh wait…. did the Big Bad Gubmint “tell” me to BUY BUY BUY? I’m soooo confused… Maybe I’m just a “sheeple” that’s just “doing what I’m told to do”.

Oh hANDjOB, please save me from myself!!!

Dear Captain Sternn and Joseph Welch;

You both seem to be forgetting two things here:
1. Don’t feed the Trolls (it means they win)
2. Arguing on the Internet is like running in the Special Olympics: even if you win you’re still retarded.

counterknowledge.com is a SUPPRESSIVE group that smothers truth and perpetuates the LIES that have been imposed on our populations. Counterknowledge.com is a TOOL of the Global Elite who are seeking world dominance at the expense of the FREEDOM of our people. Counterknowledge.com should be BANNED and its people JAILED for conspiracy and perpetuating the ALTERIA MOTIVES of it’s puppet masters.

How does one know this to be true? Answer EVERY SINGLE TOPIC PRESENTED is a topic whose ellimination is fueled entired by a HIDDEN AGENDA NOT IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF MANKIND.

what I like to say milo welcome back .let’s have more fun.

Welcome back guys.

hANOVER fIST’s state of mind can be gauged by a look at the pages he links to – such as ‘A Complete History of Zionist Crimes’, ‘Auschwitz for Dummies’, and ‘Dual Citizenship – Loyal to Whom?’. I suggest that no one looks at any of these pages on a work computer.

Incidentally, Mr fIST tells readers of his page (not that there seem to be all that many) that if he is ’suicided’, then the ‘Bush-Clinton Crime Empire’ will be held responsible. So if his website does suddenly disappear, we should do our duty and ensure that the ‘truth movement’ is notified of the untimely demise of one of its brightest stars.

This is an IMPORTANT comment everyone should read.

I am not going to warn you it is serious stuff.

Here is an actual quote: Hello

Looks like some Ouija boarding to me.

Wow…forgot his name and the quote. Wanna loosen that hockey helmet strap, Snicklefritz?

Just as a matter of interest, hANOVER, I assume that the fact that you haven’t been ’suicided’ – despite your frantic efforts to uncover the ‘true’ conspirators involved in 9/11 – should be evident to you. Namely, the point is that you’re so shit at acting as an investigator, and you’re ‘theories’ are so way off the mark, that they’re not even close to panicking us sinister NWO types. You need to try a lot harder before we even consider sending the Sayeret in.

Happy Hanukah

Welchy…I know YOU’RE not one of them…so don’t flatter yourself. The “NWO types” use idiots like you as toilet paper when they do a number two.

‘Welchy…I know YOU’RE not one of them’

Amongst the many mental faculties you lack is something we humans call ‘a sense of humour’. But then the only time you’ll ever see a joke is when you look in a mirror.

Happy New Year, troll. Maybe someone will actually visit your website this year, so you won’t feel compelled to post comments here.

Aww…is poor widdle Welchy to much of a cunt to deal with my postings?

Eat it, load-gulper. Just in case you can’t count, that little counter indicates that many people are reading the posts at my page – but I won’t have little teabaggers like you attempting hit-and-run attacks, so anyone who wishes to comment must leave some contact info. Just like Adam Austin says, why give you idiots yet another platform to lie to everyone?

Now, to finish…just like I told you daisy-chain partners, Fung and moRon…don’t attempt to psychoanalyze me…you’re just another blithering nitwit in a sea of fools.

“to (sic) much of a cunt”

“Eat it, load-gulper”

“little teabaggers like you”

“you idiots”

“you daisy-chain partners”

“blithering nitwit in a sea of fools”

And hANDjOB wonders why no one leaves comments on her paranoid anti-Jew website…

It simply must be her charming personality, or maybe her impeccable manners.

That’s because he’s a drooling simpleton.

Oh… well that makes sense, then. I briefly looked at the laugh-a-minute blog, but got so bored with the tired ravings I had to move on to some shopping at Amazon. Much more interesting stuff there, by the way.

‘I briefly looked at the laugh-a-minute blog, but got so bored with the tired ravings I had to move on to some shopping at Amazon. Much more interesting stuff there, by the way.’

That seems to be a common experience for anyone who strays across his page.

Yeah, I found this really sweet Buddha statue/candle holder for my officemate (her birthday is next week). Hand-crafted wood, very nice.

Oh… was there something else we were discussing? Hmmm…

Right, got it – that blog. Didja see the crap about… oh never mind, you know what I mean.

‘Yeah, I found this really sweet Buddha statue/candle holder for my officemate (her birthday is next week). Hand-crafted wood, very nice.’

Great stuff. If that was an unintended consequence of your visit to hANOVER’s site then it’s good to know that – indirectly at least – that KKK motherfucker has done something positive for someone other than himself.

Actually, I literally got bored and decided to take advantage of the freedoms I have in the good ol’ US of A. You know, to spend my money where I want, for whomever I please, and at a time and place of my choosing.

Oh wait…. did the Big Bad Gubmint “tell” me to BUY BUY BUY? I’m soooo confused… Maybe I’m just a “sheeple” that’s just “doing what I’m told to do”.

Oh hANDjOB, please save me from myself!!!

Dear Captain Sternn and Joseph Welch;

You both seem to be forgetting two things here:
1. Don’t feed the Trolls (it means they win)
2. Arguing on the Internet is like running in the Special Olympics: even if you win you’re still retarded.

counterknowledge.com is a SUPPRESSIVE group that smothers truth and perpetuates the LIES that have been imposed on our populations. Counterknowledge.com is a TOOL of the Global Elite who are seeking world dominance at the expense of the FREEDOM of our people. Counterknowledge.com should be BANNED and its people JAILED for conspiracy and perpetuating the ALTERIA MOTIVES of it’s puppet masters.

How does one know this to be true? Answer EVERY SINGLE TOPIC PRESENTED is a topic whose ellimination is fueled entired by a HIDDEN AGENDA NOT IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF MANKIND.

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.

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:

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

Sanji, you said:

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.

Oh well You should really not say anything as once again you reveal your deep ignorance and utter unwillingless to learn. Read some basic texts on Egyptology and Archaeology first, which you have so plainly failed to do.

As for being a smug head thats a little rich coming from someone who says:

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.

I’m not going to take seriously being called a pigeon, which
is your way of saying I’ve been sucked into believing stuff that is not true, from someone who quite clearly does not have much knowledge of Archaeology. I suggest that if anyone is the pigeon it is you who has been sucked into swallowing Hancock’s and others dubious crap. If you want to swallow the lies and distortions of people like Hancock please do so. please continue to ignore the vast mountain of evidence that refutes their fantasies.

As for this comment:

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.

Yep true believers and other fatasists are continuing to distort and lie about those things. THe fact is that the overwhelming majority of geologists reject the idea that Yonagumi is artificial. The vast majority of Egyptologists reject the OCT and the Great Pyramids. The speculations, fantasies and hand waving of the true believers are of little interest to the real experts. I can only suggest that you look at this extensive and massive literature demolishing this crap.

P{lease continue to fantasize yourself has possessed by true knowledge that us, poor deluded “pigeons” who rely on real evidence are excluded from. The evidence is quite overwhelming that Hancock deliberately distorts and is a shoddy scholar. As mentioned before his stuff about the dates of Tiwanaku and the Mayan Calander are quite enough to consign him to the garbage heap.

Of course the critics of Hancock are “rubbish” even though they have found error after error, nonsense after nonsense in Hancock all of which is easily found on the web. AS for being labeled as ignorant by a smug head? Well there is no reason for anyone to label you as ignorant your own comments do that quite well enough. As for not knowing you. Well based on your comments you are indeed phenomenally ignorant of archeaology and much else.

THank you for once again indicating that so many people attracted to alternative nonsense feel that they have special knowledge that the rest of us “pigeons” don’t have. As for farts please continue to enjoy Hancock’s abundant number 2s.

Hey, Sanji, here are two authors to start with if you want to know about real archaeology: Brian Fagan and Ken Feder.

I think the only garbage we can talk about is this stupid article. Whoever wrote it, he only makes statements and talks shit about Graham Hancock because he does not agree with him. He should realise Mr Hancock theories are being serioulsy taken into account by those who dare see things, not in the way we are said at universities by the statuos quo, but what the evidence itsel suggests. He says the olmecs were “imaginative”.
That ’s pathetic. I invite you to debate with ideas and not speak stupidities just because you are envious of Mr. Hancock contributions to unveil the humankind’s past.

Pacal and Sanji are nothing else but stupid apprentices who spit on Hancock’s work just because they are said to do so. A couple of arrogant misers whose only purpose is to convince people that the orthodox ancient history is the owner of complete trutth. How much are you paid? Perhaps you both defend is a crappy job at a faculty full of old biased arecheologists, so bitter that they can not accept the inconsistencies of their “discipline” (I do not call it science, since arqueology is not a science, physics is science, not this shit, chiefly when you see they are afraid of a multidisciplinaty aproach when studying the misteries of the past). You both guys, should be aware that we do not need your fucking point of view to get to grips with questions and conclusions about the ancient past of mankind. Why do not you come back to the shithole you came from?

Think about this, Hancock is more famous tham you could ever dream, because he dared say what you ingnore. History will say who was right, either hancock or a couple of anonym archeology aficionados of this shitty website.

Incognitus if you have any ability to read you should realize that Sanji thinks Hancock is great. I suppose you mean Roland of Gilead. Like Sanji though you display deep transcedent ignorance. Let us look at your bowel movements.

He should realise Mr Hancock theories are being serioulsy taken into account by those who dare see things, not in the way we are said at universities by the statuos quo, but what the evidence itsel suggests.

The fact that Hancock as a few deluded followers who know next to nothing about Archaeology impresses me not at all. As for what the evidence suggests. Mr. Hancock of course as is typical for him ignores the evidence and what it says. The evidence overwhelmingly says that Twanaku is less than 2000 years old, but Hancock ignores it. The evidence does not support Hancock’s prehistoric supercivilization, but in fact refrutes and of course he ignores it.

Pacal and Sanji are nothing else but stupid apprentices who spit on Hancock’s work just because they are said to do so. A couple of arrogant misers whose only purpose is to convince people that the orthodox ancient history is the owner of complete trutth. How much are you paid? Perhaps you both defend is a crappy job at a faculty full of old biased arecheologists, so bitter that they can not accept the inconsistencies of their “discipline” (I do not call it science, since arqueology is not a science, physics is science, not this shit, chiefly when you see they are afraid of a multidisciplinaty aproach when studying the misteries of the past). You both guys, should be aware that we do not need your fucking point of view to get to grips with questions and conclusions about the ancient past of mankind. Why do not you come back to the shithole you came from?

Lets see a complete novice like Hancock, with little real knowledge tries to overthrow the work of thousands of scholars with nothing more than a fantasy of wish fulfillmen t and the defenders of so-called Orthodoxy are arrogant!? Irony of ironies.

Like all good true believers you fantasize that any opponents of your revealed truth are motivated by bias and of course are paid. Well I’m not being paid at all for this, sadly! Also the usual conspiracy psychosis / delusion.

So Archaeology is not a science. Thank you for showing a most deep ignorance. Please read an introductory text to Archaeology. Of course you then label it “shit”. Please explain to me in detail how to do do a dig in the desert versus underwater. How to perform a carbon 14 test. Please explain Paleoethnobiology. How to do a shell midden Analysis? All of which are involved modern Archaeology.

As for being afraid of a multidisplinary approach. Well that is exactly what modern Archaeology involves routinely. Your statement about fear only provides abundant evidence that you are indeed phenomnally ignorant of Archaeology.

Like all true believers when your cherished delusions are attacked you react by screams of hysteria. Sorry but I didn’t come out of a shithole and so won’t ever be going there.

As for thinking about Hancock’s fame. Why should I? I’m glad he as made himself rich off the deludded and guilible, because that is the only way the guilible and credulous will learn. As for daring to say what I ignore. Hancock is merely saying pseudoscientific crap that others have said before, it is nothing new but the same old snake oil. The verdict is already in and was in long before Hancock and it says he is full of it.

OK; Pacal, you want to play hard? Lest do it.
You, Mr. Almighty encarnation of archeology, explain to me a few things and make me wise:

1) Baalbek in Lebanon: How did the ancients cut and moved blocks of 1500 tones? What is the technical method to to this? Why are our modern cranes not able to move them and the ancientswere?

2) How do you date stone using C14?

3) Why the similarities between cultures like the mayans and egiptians, why did both cultures were avid stargazers and built pyramids? Are all of these similarities “just coincidence”?

4) Why does the sphinx have evidence of erosion caused by massive water flow on it? When does the climate record say Egipt had a rainy weather? Robert Schoch put his reputation at stake saying this is the case with the sphinx…was he wrong?

4) Finally, how are we suppose to trust a horde of biased individuals when they can not even offer an open explanation to these dilemas?

5) Give the link to the archeological papers that show your points. If not, I will suposse you are a windbag and nothing more!!!!

Finally, Richard Feymann was very critic of scientific methods in social sciences (which includes archeology, as far as I understand), see and grow intellectually:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaO69CF5mbY

From the point of view of a phycisist, archeology is just a bunch of innacurate methods whose uncertainty grows the more we go back in time. It is not a natural science. When we are talking about pre-history events, I think archeology is more flawed than ever.

SAnji, sorry for what I said about you, I think I put you side by side with that discusting Pacal, which is already a painful mistake!!!
Really sorry!!!

Incognitus you can read my reply to your nonsense at.
http://makinapacalatxilbalba.blogspot.com/2010/07/hancock-woo-graham-hancock-following-is.html

Hey Pacal,:I have read all your astonishing compilation of books and ad-hominems. It is funny to believe you are very wise because you have wasted your life loving books instead of women, but that is your problem, not mine. You should not reveal your secrets in your website. However, in my view you are a biased ignorant.

1) You supported my point that C!4 method can not date stone. From that point of view, it means dating of organic material is highly dependent on the interpretation of the archeologist.

You quoted:
“The stones were transported over a path only 600 meters length and about 15 meters *downhill*. The quarry is 1160 meters high, and the temple 145 meters. So it was easy to keep the stones on an even level to their final resting place and it was unnecessary to lift them about 7 meters as some authors claim. As you might know, Rome is the city with the most obelisks outside of Egypt. They stole the things by the dozen and took them home. The heaviest known obelisk weighs 510 tons, and it was transported some 1000’s of *kilometers*. This transport was documented by the roman author Marcellinus Comes. The Romans even left detailed paintings and reliefs about the ways to move such things : as on the bottom of the Theodosius-obelisk in Istanbul. They used “Roman-patented” winches, in German called “Göpelwinden” which work with long lever ways. To move a 900 ton stone, they needed only 700 men. The transport was slow, about 30 meters a day, because they had to dismantle and rebuild the winches every few meters, to pull the obelisk with maximum torque. But in Baalbek, where they moved several blocks, maybe they built an alley of winches, where they passed the block from winch to winch.”

My answer to that is SHOW IT. Has this experiment been done with such weights there? Of course not. I see many 2000 tones blocks moved and that fit perfectly in a complex distribution. I know for sure the most powerful cranes can not lift weight heavier than 300 tones. If you were an Engineer, you would understand it is just not a matter of leting them go down the hill, as your very purposely selected quotation says. I will not believe your quotation because it contradicts common sense, my common sense tells me it is not possible to move such kind of blocks

2) You have answered as expected. C14 can not date stones. Why do archeologists dare say with complete certainty the date in wich any monument was built? It is left to the analist criterium, and that is not valid in such matters. There is a degree of uncertainty that is ihnerent to this method and that can not be helped, as simple as that. In the most ancient monuments, the interpretation deduced by archeologists may be flawed or biased to let the evidence fit in the stream of knowledge they accept. What guarantees that the monument and the age of the carbon dated sample are the same? As far as I see it, a monument could be far older than the carbon dated samples and this fact may not be detected by the archeological survey. I find a problem with this, sorry.

You seem to assume you should trust the archeologists and that we should believe they are never biased or whatsoever. If you were a natural scientist you would understand that is not the case. Doesn’t matter. The IPCC is a clear example of how preconceptions can even make you doubt about a “serious research”. If climate scientists are prone to this thing, I believe archeologists as well. So your claim of complete trust to the methods of these people doesn’t work for me.

3) You seem completely unaware of the many similarities between these ancient cultures. Tell me something…have you read Hancock’s work? I bet you have not. He points out the parallels among these cultures with good clarity. He may not be right in everything he claims, but the evidence of something wrong with the accepted archeology explanation is vast, in my view we have a case here. In Physics, if you have an anomaly in a theory that does not fit it makes your theory crumble. Why is not this the case in archeology? You say they are “scientists”.
You tell me “that human civilizations have similarities because they are human civilizations”, a poor explanation for someone who boast his intelligence for reading dusty second-hand books in a library. If you were archeologist unless… what it shows is that you are not aware of such similarities, therefore you should undertake your own investigation in the matter.

4) Do you contradict Robert Schoch? His evidence comes from geology, a natural science, certainly more robust and accurate that this “science” called archeology. So I have to believe you instead of DR. Schoch, which is a leading scholar in his field? You must be kidding!!! Of course his arguments are disputed by ignorants in geological aspects, which find it easy to give support to their preconceived ideas on the Sphinx.

5) I am not paying you, that is true. I would pay quality job, not your second-hand research. If you say you are right, you have to show it. If you do not want to be asked, you do not get into this forum.
I will not recommend you so many books, as I would not like to end up like you. Please take a look a the archeological inconsistencies that DR. Cremo points out in the following book:
http://www.amazon.com/Forbidden-Archeology-Hidden-History-Human/dp/0892132949

He has a PhD and he does not find what I have told you coming from “an ignorant”. I do not care what you may think, what you think is your problem. But you should be aware that people have the right to question even the academia when searching for answers. People like you can only see and believe what they have been said by a system who wants you to believe what is useful to them. You should make an effort for not sticking your head in the sand and try to open your mind at these inconsistencies, and start to question. But it may be late for you, as far as I see.

You are right, I may not take time to read your books. I live in paradise, not in that shitty land called Canada, full of snow and with freezing temperatures most of the year. Specimens like you are rare here, since we are not obliged to spend our lifes secluded at home or in libraries for not having something interesting to do.

Pakal, I would like to make public how you try to misinform us. You quote about the Theodosius Obelisk, which weighs 400 tones.
See the following link:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brswanson/2809124885/

THis obeliks was cut into three or two pieces to make possible its transportation. It was originaly 30m tall when in Egipt, but for some technical problem it is now 19m tall. Very interesting. You dare put this obeliks of 400 tones which had to be cut to be moved as comparable to the baalbek blocks. Do you really think people are stupid?

This is another example of people whose knowledge is based how spending their lives reading academic books (real aficionados) but not based on commoon sense.

Sorry, the more you read your arguments, the more I am convinced you do not know what you are talking about.

Icognitus Just as I expected a flood of ad-hominoms that are meaningless and even more powerful indications that you are a true believer and deeply ignorant. Thank you for your concern about my personal life and why are you dragging that in all?

Regarding Carbon 14 dating. Not the slightest bit interested in learning how it works it seems. Again the question of does carbon 14 date rocks is a red herring and is meaningless. No one expects it to date rocks at all. Then again if it did the dates would be in millions of years n’est pas?

But then your further comments indicate that you have absolutely no willingness to find out how carbon 14 is done. As for errors of course they happen and that is why Carbon 14 has all sorts of protocals etc., to minimizes errors. Of course error happen but why should that be a surprise which is why more than one date should be done.

As for your “common sense” regarding Baalbek. If the Romans could move 3 blocks weighing over 100 tons each from Egypt to Constaninople (Istambul) than they could move 1000 tons 1000 yards or less. I note you don’t deal with the evidence found in digs at Baalbek that date the monument to Roman times. As for a crane well I would think we could move a thousand ton block if we wanted to do so. And in fact concrete oil drilling platforms weighing more are moved all the time. As for the crane. So what. The Romans and Egyptians had ropes, pulleys and enourmous work forces. Oh and by the way ancient methods of moving rocks are tested all the time and they work. The only difference between moving a big block and a small block is the labour, time involved the techniques were the same. “Common sense” dictates that this methods were the same only larger. Oh and if Archimedes could design a gaget to lift a ship out of the water the Romans could devise a technique to move 1000 tons 100 yards or less. If the Romans could build 100 miles of Road and 100 miles of aquduct, both more difficult than Baalbek, than they could build Baalbek. Oh and please show that the Romans could not have moved a thousand ton block less than 1000 yards.

As for similarities you just don’t get it. Similarities don’t prove contact they just are similarities. For smoeone who is convinced that Archaeology isn’t like Physics, you seem to want it to be so.

Do you honestly feel that the fact we are human would not lead to cultural similarities without contact? Also you forget the similarities are in many cases vague. After all Mayan and Egyptian pyramids are not very similar. Oh and did you know that pyramids in Peru pre-date Egyptian? The fact is their as been virtually no evidence of old world artifacts in pre-columbian america. Which would be the case if there was contact. Oh and i’ve read Hancock’s Fingerprints of the Gods and several others.

As for Robert Schoch. Obviously you haven’t read or read very badly the stuff I linked too. Do you forget that Geologists have disputed him. Well if it upsets your preconcieved views continue to ignore that fact.

You complain about my second hand research. Well it is obvious you have done no research yourself and thank you for indicating that you have little to no willingness to do reseach yourself.

As for Cremo. Read his book. It was a incredibly funny read. The guy is guilible. Yep he has a Phd and is a creationist and a Vedic scholar. He is another true believer like Hancock. Who now goes around saying the world may end in 2012.

It is you who has stuck his head in the sand and thank you for telling me that you probably won’t read the books I suggested. I guess you don’t want your “truth” questioned. As for thinking people are stupid, well you don’t think the Romans could move those blocks etc. I don’t think your stupid, but you are as this posting shows deeply ignorant and utterly unwilling to remedy that.

As for the personal comments and the insulting reference to my country all it proves is that you are acting 5 years old.

“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.”
LooooooooooL
Man I haven’t laughed so much this week. Thank you, your arrogant ignorance has just made my day.
Keep writing.

I told myself I wouldn’t bother looking again at this crappy page where two individuals think they know about things just because they ve read books that everyone agreed to keep as non questionable truths and facts. Well I just had a look to see how things are going on this lost web page.
Sorry guys, Hancock and others outsmarted you, “experts” and everyone else, it is really as simple as that. They made fools of everyone else. Though they just observed things with a open mind free from academic protocols and took notes.
Experts are so old, bitter and up they re own arse that they will never reconsider or debate. Well its always been like this anyway. Nothing new really. Rinse. Repeat. Here you go, you just got 2000 years of History.
You people play the role of the bunch of cultivated guys who just will never get it. And its fine, this your role, this is what you are. You will always sit on it, blinded and fooled by your own knowledge, and the arrogance that comes out of it.
Yonagumi….off course most experts all agree to say it s natural. They all know (and this applies to other disciplines and about other subjects) what’s gonna happen to their career if they dont jump on the train. I m not interested in experts who think its natural..well exceptionnally impressive and rare to be more accurate. I m interested in experts who think it s man made. And so should you.
And this applies to Giza, south american sites and more.
Anyway, this situation where everyone tries to convince others that they are in the wrong is pointless.
Someone is right, and someone is wrong. And whether you like it or not, I think hancock is the closest to being right, that’s it. End of the story.
Dunno if you guys will watch it, I hope you will, but I found this quite interesting, two lectures from Hancock and Bauval

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDDlHSjkz0g
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA9JysD5ASk&feature=channel

The second one from Bauval is particulary interesting. If you do watch it, please let me know what you think. It is not too long and I would like to know what you both think of it. Yes they are a few little inconsistencies in what they say, even me noticed it, but it is still awesome. Though I expect you to say something about it being hilarious and showing deep ignorance and bla bla.

If you have something you would like to show me that supports your ideas, I will definitely watch it, so please dont hesitate to share.
Easy boyzz, speak soon.

Hey, Incognitus…

To answer your first question, I make $11.95 an hour working forty hours a week at Smithfield Luter pulling hogs. I wonder where my check from these so called cabal of archaeologist is at. I’m also 28, which I did not think made me old.

Now, here comes the beatdown. Hancock, (I have read Fingerprints of the Gods and actually am ashamed of the fact that I believed it at one point) provides no evidence that those heads are african in origin except that they look african. Well shiver me timbers, they must have been football players too because they’re wearing football helmets. Not really, but just to point out how stupid it is to make an assumption based on looks. This is what Hancock does, and he is wrong.

Your next question about some stones in Lebennon, the space shuttle weighs 2010 tons. Yet, somehow NASA has the ability to not only move this thing over to a launch pad over a mile from its dock, but also put it in orbit. And here’s the kicker, they do it without a crane. Hmmm, but your common sense would tell me this it not possible. You want to know how the stones were moved, probably by using cutting tools (these people had bronze and iron), and they probably moved them by putting them on wooden rollers. It’s that simple. …Or do you think they used some alien technology but did not leave any behind. Pacal answered this question for you, my suggestion is to stop insulting him.

Now on to C14 Radiometric Carbon Dating. Yes, C14 cannot date rock, but that is a strawman anyway. Archaeologist do not date rock and they do not use C14 all that much because they have to establish provenience. Dating the rock that a building is made out of only dates the rock and when it was created, it does not tell when the rock was first cut out of the ground and used as building material. The actual date of the rock is useless information to an archaeologist.

Also, there are ways to date rock, here are a few:
Uranium-Lead Dating
Uranium-Thorium Dating
Rubidium-Strontium Dating
[/pedantic]

Now, for the Maya/Egyptian connection. There was none. The pyramids in Egypt are true pyramids were as the pyramids in Mexico are not true pyramids. They are modified mounds with temples on top to symbolized a temple on a hill or horizon. The writing, artwork, and technology of the Mayans are very different from the Egyptians. Not to mention the time frame does not match up either. The Egyptian Kingdom went from Approx. 3500 BC to 750 BC when they became part of some other empire in history. The Maya City States went from 200BC to 1200 AD. There is a 550 year difference between the two. The only real similarity is the stargazing, but every human culture in history did that. It’s easy to find out things about the heavens when you don’t have TVs, Radios, and Videogames.

As for the Sphinx, Pacal answered this question perfectly. I will like to add that limestone and sandstone both are brittle rock. You can break it off in you hands and rub it into powder. It is very grainy and is easily broken. This has been demonstrated by archaeologists in both the Southwest and Egypt. I’ve actually held sandstone and I know from personal experiance how brittle it is. Brittle rock weathers easily.

BTW, Robert Shloch also said the movie Zeitgeist was acurate and true when it is neither. He has no credibility as a scientist as far as I’m concerned.

Now, I’m not going to do your research for you. You are making the claims, you back them up. Everything I have posted can be backed up just by looking on Wikipedia and Pacal has list of sources as well. I have neither the time nor the patiance and if you want me to prove you wrong, I’m not going to do it. You can look at the facts for what they are. If you don’t want to accept them for what they are, that’s your problem, not mine. Just be prepared when you wind up on the wrong side of history.

Hey Sanji. I do not care what you believe, and I am not here to convince you about Hancock? work. In fact, he may have made mistakes as well, as much as the archeologists are spreading lies about human’s past. It is up to do your own research. What I said Pakal is MY opinion, this is a debate forum, so read, say your opinion and support your arguments, that is all you have to do, no sensible person would claim complete credibility, as long as this person is humble enough to accept his own ignorance (except Pakal of course). I do not care whether you belive it or not, so do not worry and be happy!!!! I also believe all the crap you have just written.

I am beginning to suspect Rolando Gilead and Pakal are the same guy. In any case, Rolando, keep your bloody research for yourself, I am capable enough of doing mine. I have presented my arguments. Look at what you said:

“Your next question about some stones in Lebennon, the space shuttle weighs 2010 tons. Yet, somehow NASA has the ability to not only move this thing over to a launch pad over a mile from its dock, but also put it in orbit. And here’s the kicker, they do it without a crane. Hmmm, but your common sense would tell me this it not possible. You want to know how the stones were moved, probably by using cutting tools (these people had bronze and iron), and they probably moved them by putting them on wooden rollers. It’s that simple. …Or do you think they used some alien technology but did not leave any behind. Pacal answered this question for you, my suggestion is to stop insulting him.”

You are quite a real fool if you think this argument explains the Baalbek anomaly. Are you suggesting the ancients count on similar technology to lift those masive blocks? If that is the case, you are giving the kiss of death to your own argument.

If this is not what you meant, then you are giving the ancients credit for leifting a weight that can only be lifted by the modern NASA spaceship infrastructure, which undermines your arguments against the fact that the ancients used a diffierent technology. I challenge you to describe here how you move a 2000 tone block using ropes and timber logs, how you achive the uncanny precision in order to make these blocks fit perfectly.
I would like to read the nonsese you will come up with.

With your argument, you are just saying that such blocks can only be lifting with modern technology, so thans for supporting what I said.

Reality is so simple, but so difficult to understand for some people, that they tend to give poorly supported explanations for things that are completely obvious if you apply common sense.

Sanji, sorry mate, I have misinterpreted your words again, sorry for my rude tone. I amply agree with you.

I am beginning to suspect Rolando Gilead and Pakal are the same guy. In any case, Rolando, keep your bloody research for yourself, I am capable enough of doing mine. I have presented my arguments. Look at what you said:

Wow, you have no reading comprehension skills. You can’t even get my nick right. BTW, when are you going to complain about my argument, why don’t you provide some evidence to back up yours. Pakal provided sourced material, so why don’t you stop insulting our intellegence here.

You are quite a real fool if you think this argument explains the Baalbek anomaly. Are you suggesting the ancients count on similar technology to lift those masive blocks? If that is the case, you are giving the kiss of death to your own argument.

It’s time for you to either put up of shut up. If the ancients could not have built these megaliths using their own technology, then what technology did they use? If they didn’t build them, then who did? Aliens? Atlanteans? Some white Anglo-Saxon God?

The concept of lifting heavy objects is something so simple, that a child could understand it. If you truly knew what the hell you are talking about, you would understand that the concepts of pulleys and levers are farely simple concepts to understand and they would have been availible to the ancients. When you add enough elbow grease, you can move anything. Also, there is carpentry and masonry techniques that were developed then that are still in use today, because they are so simple and they work. You have provided absolutely no evidence to counter this except that no modern crane can lift those heavy blocks, which does not impress me any. Hell, my example of not having to have a crane to lift heavy objects went right over your head. So, that proves to me you don’t know what you are talking about.

Sorry, Incognitus, you fail.

As an actual Archaeologist i can atest to many an artifact being swept under the carpet by the academic establishment when it deos not fit the reigning paradigm. Examples abound. You do not need to be credentialed to have a fully rounded perspective on any subject, just an interest and an ability to think critically. The willingness to blindly accept information from so-called experts displayed on this forum is a measure of the sucess of the indoctrination system that is erroneously tremed education

ooops, mispelling ot termed in last sentence. before all you pedants jump down my throat.

So, Ragnarok, how may tertiary flakes did you see swept under the cover?

Hi guys, I m still waiting to see what you think of the two links I posted above, both leading to a conference that Hancock and Beauval had a while back. The subjects of them isn’t really about the Olmec mystery, though it is mentionned too.
I ask this because this page isn’t about the olmec. This page is about Hancock being a worthless ignorant who’s name should disappear in History before his evil lies and distortions get more attention, or a smart guy who had the balls to bring something new on the table, when the greatest minds of History have failed to explain an abondant amount of mysteries and inconsistencies about our past, our history and legacy. If you cant even agree about these amazing abnormalities and the questions they implicates then there s no point talking at all.

So here you go, I m not a full on fan of hancock, I m ready to think he is wrong and a liar ect ect if anyone can show it without acting like a little arrogant child not ready yet to reconsider the validity of his knowledge without leaving his pride aside.
And as far as I know, there s no reason to assume that the olmecs depicted accurately people from across the sea “just because they had a lively imagination”. Really? The lack of real foundations based on research and reason behing such statement is baffling, so you better show off some thinking and study of your subject if you attack a person like hancock, boy. I ve been looking out for critcics about him for a while now and this is as far as it gets; low level statements from frustrated little kids full of themselves.
So, please watch those videos if you wanna talk, and go over every point which you think is absurdity. Then show me something solid that proves it. Simple. Oh and please, avoid stuff like “The OCT theory cannot work because you have to put the map upside down”, you gotta be really stupid or blind to brush aside such amazing possibilty and the many other reasons to think so, just because it doesnt fit the current way of thinking about maps in the 21th century, because if you wanna recreate the sky the way you see it from the ground you dont need to invert anything. I couldnt find any real, solid critics about Hancock, so you guys can hopefully show me some good stuff?

Watch these videos, then come back and show some good critics, we ll see what happens.

Shibeee

sanji i to came to this site for exactly the same reasons has u and come to the same conclusion .watched both videos thanks for that .my first introduction to bauval who i think is both intelligent and honest man listening to him now on information machine try watching black genesis by bauval and dont waste your time arguing with pacal think him rude and offensive and blind to exploration of facts

Yeh it s probably pointless to discuss with those guys, because in the end I m just gonna repeat what hancock and others have already said, and I m gonna read here the same critics Ive seen, which sometimes are legitimate, but never good, solid, proven, unbreakable reasons to completely dismiss hancock and every single aspect of his work. In the end, what he says has been going on for a quite a while through history, it s not brand new, so that debate has already been going on for ages.
Maybe because people like me haven’t yet spend a massive amount of time reading work to boost their knowledge, intelligence and ego, that what might be actually misleading or wrong, it s easier to get on with the “outside the box” way of thinking.
I wont go into details because they all say it better than me, but his position about C14 dating process for ancient monuments, his position about the Ice Age and its many mysteries, about maps found around the globe showing what might be locations unknown at the time, about ancient monuments that seem to have atronomical aspects to it, about underwater structures looking suspicious, about drawings, texts, interpretation of some ancient texts. and so on and so on….
There is just so much that you cant just ignore all of this, even when “it’s not a prefect match”, “most specialists disagree “, “he isnt a professional” and blah blah blah blah.
There are obviously a lot yet to discover about ourselves and our past, and that dude and his mates definitely bring something worth looking into. If a lot of experts of our time are against even debating or considering all this with a new eye, then so be it. It happened countless times before. Doesnt mean we should blindly believe people like him, but if you sit on your books and ignore such caracter, then you really have shit in your eyes and your ears, and your slowing down the learning process of mankind. Anyway, I m wasting my time typing all this, lets agree to disagree.
Guys I m still waiting to hear your opinion about those two videos

Kevin you say:

sanji i to came to this site for exactly the same reasons has u and come to the same conclusion .watched both videos thanks for that .my first introduction to bauval who i think is both intelligent and honest man listening to him now on information machine try watching black genesis by bauval and dont waste your time arguing with pacal think him rude and offensive and blind to exploration of facts.

Bauval is not worth taking the slightest bit seriously along with Hancock. The whole Orion correlation thing as been exploded long ago. You are not aware that the consilation of Orion when imposed on Pyramids at Giza and the Neighbouting area don’t match up. But then Bauval’s a joke. Have you bothered to read up on why the majority of Geologists do not accept a early date for the Sphinx as suggested by Schoch? Or how about how Bauval and Hancock were gunning for a 10500 B.C.E., date for ther Sphinx and basically ignoring that even Schoch gave a date after 8000 B,C.E. Of course do you accept the idea that the great pyramid was planned in 10500 B.C.E., although built thousands of years later to reflect the date of 10500 B.C.E. Which by the way Hancock got from Edgar Cayce, (the sleeping prophet). Both of them have been in the past quite ready to accuse Egyptologists of lying, of fraud, fabrication and forgery. In Fingerprints of the Gods Hancock accused an 19th century Egyptologist of fabricating Khufu’s name on stone blocks found in the chambers above the Kings chamber. Hancock has since retracted this baseless accusation but he continues to blither on about wicked Archeologists supressing the truth.

As for your last comment given the quite vicious names I’v e been called here I find you thinking me rude / offensive hilarious. I’ve merely said you guys were ignorant and clueless. Which you most evidently are. As for blind to exploration of the facts. Depends. If you mean the made up nonsense of Hancock and Bauval; that is speculation and fantasy not fact. But then you guys seem to have absolutely no interest in doing any sort of real research at all, but just mouth whatever Bauval and Hancock pull out of their asses.

Sanji you say:

Yeh it s probably pointless to discuss with those guys, because in the end I m just gonna repeat what hancock and others have already said, and I m gonna read here the same critics Ive seen, which sometimes are legitimate, but never good, solid, proven, unbreakable reasons to completely dismiss hancock and every single aspect of his work. In the end, what he says has been going on for a quite a while through history, it s not brand new, so that debate has already been going on for ages.

Yep the debate between the cranks and wackjobs as been going on for ages. Almost all of it in the minds of the cranks. Thank you for indicating that you have no desire to do any real research.

As for your request for unbreakable reason to dismiss Hancock. What about the simple fact that his lost super civilization seems to have vanished without a trace. How about the fact that each and everyone of the anomolies he points to is almost always asa a “prosaic” explaination. How about Hancocks conspiracy mongering. I should not forget to note Hancock’s 2012 boosterism.

From Baalbak, (built in Roman times), to the Piri Re’is map Hancock recycles mysteries that are not mysteries.

Maybe because people like me haven’t yet spend a massive amount of time reading work to boost their knowledge, intelligence and ego, that what might be actually misleading or wrong, it s easier to get on with the “outside the box” way of thinking.

Yep musn’t have ones head clogged with knowledge it might inhibit’s one ability to swallow woo. I guess ignorance is a blessed state and knowing nothing is cool. Oh and Hancock doesn’t think outside the box his thought is firmly in the area of twentieth century crank Archaeology, he is right up their with Von Daniken, and esspecially Robert Charroux, (One Hundred Thousand Years of Man’s Unknown History).

I wont go into details because they all say it better than me, but his position about C14 dating process for ancient monuments, his position about the Ice Age and its many mysteries, about maps found around the globe showing what might be locations unknown at the time, about ancient monuments that seem to have atronomical aspects to it, about underwater structures looking suspicious, about drawings, texts, interpretation of some ancient texts. and so on and so on….
There is just so much that you cant just ignore all of this, even when “it’s not a prefect match”, “most specialists disagree “, “he isnt a professional” and blah blah blah blah.

Hancock’s position about Carbon 14 and how it is used to date monuments is deeply ignorant. Hancock never seems to get the fact that the materials that are associated with the momuments are dated. But then how Archaeologists do that would require him to read some of the many texts about Carbon 14 dating and how to use it. For dating methods see Archaeology, Second Edition, Renfrew, Colin, THames and Hudson, London, 1996.

He could also use with reading a book about climate history. Say Climate Change in Prehistory, Burroughs, William J., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005.

And of course has mentioned above Hancock’s “mysteries” are almost always not mysteries at all.

It is quite easy to ignore most of it, because it is generally not a mystery, and what little is “mysterious” does not require a unknown super civilization or aliens. I should mention here that foe a time Hancock supported the idea of alien monuments on Mars, he as backed away from that I hope.

I lost any respect for Hancock from reading the sections of <Fingerprints of the Gods (A deliberate play on Von Daniken’s Chariots of the Gods, in my opinion.), from his shoddy chapters on the Maya and Tiwanaku. In th Tiwanaku chapter he almost entirely, (except for a throw away line) ignores the conventional date of the site and instead advances a far out date based on astronomical alighments deduced from recently reconstructed buildings. These dates contradict dozens of Carbon 14 results along with ceramic, and stratigraphy studies to say nothing of ethno-historical data all of which date the site 200-1000 C.E (A.D.). Please see Ancient Tiwanku, Janusek, John Wayne, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008, The Tiwanaku, Kolata, Alan L., Blackwell, Oxford, 1993.

As for the Maya please see The Ancient Maya, Sixth Edition, Sharer, Robert J, & Traxler, Loa P, Stanford University Press, Stanford CA, 2006, pp. 102-120, for the Mayan calander. It also shows why Hancock’s discussion of it is a crock. Hancock’s discussion of the Sarcophagus lid in the tomb of Pacal at Palenque is also totally bogus.

There are obviously a lot yet to discover about ourselves and our past, and that dude and his mates definitely bring something worth looking into. If a lot of experts of our time are against even debating or considering all this with a new eye, then so be it. It happened countless times before. Doesnt mean we should blindly believe people like him, but if you sit on your books and ignore such caracter, then you really have shit in your eyes and your ears, and your slowing down the learning process of mankind. Anyway, I m wasting my time typing all this, lets agree to disagree.
Guys I m still waiting to hear your opinion about those two videos

Thank you for the Galileo gambit, the typical cliche of cranks everywhere. However for every Galileo who was right there were 10,000 cranks who were way wrong.

As for seeing it with a new eye? Nope! Its the same old same old processed woo. In the 19th century Ignatius Donnelly was touting woo in his Atlantis: The Antediluvian World, in the early twethieth century we had Edgar Cayce and in the late 60’s and into the 70’s we had Von Daniken, along with countless others. It is the same old crap served for another generation.

As for shit in eyes and ears. Since people like Hancock listen to other woo miesters and ignire reams and reams of data while continuing their diet of woo. It is clear who has shit in their eyes and ears and it is Hancock and those who believe like him.

Although it is nice to know that you think the hard won knowledge of the past won over the past century or so is shit.

Some more reading:

Invented Knowledge, Fritze, Ronald, H, Reaktion Books, London, 2009.

Ancient Astraunauts, Cosmic Collisions and other Popular THeories about Man’s Past, Stiebing, William H, Prometheus Books, Buffalo NY, 1984.

Giza: The Truth, Lawton, Ian & Ogilvie-Herald, Chris, Invisible Cities Press, Montpelier Vermont, 2001.

P.S. The two links are to films that are merely the same dull old nostrums that have been coming from those two for quite sometime.

Sanji as an example of Hancock’s problem “common sense” is a comment he makes that Khufu’s hieroglyph being found on stone blocks inside the great pyramid is meaningless, and further that they were possibly forged. The quality of Hancock’s scholarship is clear from that comment.

First Hancock fudges were the marks were found and ignores that they were quarry marks not just marks. In otherwords blocks marked for transportation to a building site. Also the blocks with the quarry mark were found in a chamber above the Kings Chamber in the great pyramid that had been sealed from the building of the Great Pyramid until the 19th century. Hancock manages to nicely fudge that it must mean, most likely, that the pyramid was built for a King named Khufu.

Hancock’s dismissal of the “marks” a a possible forgery by the Egyptologist / explorer Vyse. This is nonsense. Oh and it now appears that the quarry “marks” contine round the corners into the crevacies between blocks. So much for forgery.

Of course Hancock gets the idea that the marks may be forgeries from author Zecharia Sitchin in his book Stairway to Heaven.

An excellent source for info on this is pp. 95-113, of Giza The Truth, by Ian Lawton and Chris Ogilvie-Hera;d, Invisible Cities Press, Montpelier VT, 2001. The above book is of especial interest in that the authors are very sympathetic to “alternative” history and archaeology. The same book is excellent on the date of the Great Pyramid, accepting the traditional date of Khufu’s reign c. 2600 B.C.E. I could of course mention carbon 14 dating results. Hancock also ignores the very clear line of development of pyramid construction from Djoser’s Step Pyramid to the Great Pyramid. Hancock leaves out the Red Pyramid, the Bent Pyramid, the Pyramid of Medium and a couple of pyramids which were started and not completed. Which shows a definite development of technique. For more Read The Pyramids of egypt, by I.E.S. Edwards, Penguin Books, London, 1970, and multiple further editions.

The same dissesction can be performed on comment after comment Hancock makes.

I m making a cool post, will take a bit of time because I m not english and I want it to be comprehensible. So please keep an eye on this page.
Ive just read all the comments on this page, and somehow if you step back from it, arguments for and against hancock (and those type of ideas) all make sense at some point. I want to debate a bit more with you guys, because it will help me to get a better opinion. But clearly, there are A LOT of really,really, really odd things about the ancient world. This fact on its own should make all of us accept that there is definitely something strange about our past history, because otherwise pages and discussions like the ones presented here wouldn’t exist, or need to. Quite brilliant, I find this very exciting.
Will be back asap.

Damn my computer doesn’t work anymore! Humm I m going back home for Christmas so I ll do it from there, I ll post within the next 2/3 weeks.
Btw I posted the above after a heavy night, what I meant to say is that I wanna present a few odd things to you guys and see what you think.
Speak soon.

I thought I should read the infamous FOG before I post anything else, so I m doing that. I m halfway through it now, will be done in, lets say, one month or so.
Easy guys, speak soon

Any novice can look at those stone heads and see that they are Amerindian. I was once fooled into believing the supposed “Negroid” features until I saw pictures of Natives from the region that resembled those stone heads. People who say the giant heads look Negroid have flawed racialist views. This is simply 15th – 19th Century perceptions of race. This poses a problem for Hancock and the Afrocentrics, because all of these claims stem from the “opinion” of an alleged African phenotype.

It’s great that there are experts in the field but we can argue this without them. Not saying we don’t need them, just saying that if Afrocentrics and the Hancocks of the world can invent junk history then we can debunk them easily because they only have opinion.

The Olmecs were Amerindian. There is no mystery to who they were and there is no proof of any African influence.

Fallacious argument is fallacious. Ever heard of the mitochondrial Eve? Keep calling leading researchers “cult-archaeologists” and “afro-centric racists” if that’s all you can muster as proof that they are wrong. Please don’t use facts or do research for yourself, just keep labeling people you don’t agree with.

bohemianexile you say:

Fallacious argument is fallacious. Ever heard of the mitochondrial Eve? Keep calling leading researchers “cult-archaeologists” and “afro-centric racists” if that’s all you can muster as proof that they are wrong. Please don’t use facts or do research for yourself, just keep labeling people you don’t agree with.

What does Mitochondrial Eve have to do with the fact that Olmec statutes look like modern day Amerindian natives of the area? There is NO need to postulate that the statutes are depictions of Africans. There is also no evidence Archaeologically of an African presence in Olmec culture / society. Calling Hancock and other pseudo-scientists researchers is of course hilarious. Just look at the bibliographies of their books, full of references to all the familiar tropes and crap of yes “cult” and “pseudo-scientist” cant. As for proof they are wrong it exists in abundance. Everytthing from genetic studies to archaeology shows they are wrong.

It is a fallacious arguement to assume, and it is an assumption, that because the statutes “look like” African they are Africans esspecially since there are people in the area today, Amerindians, who look like the statutes. Calling people like Hancock “researchers” is in my opinion deeply insulting to those real researchers who work in the field. Perhaps you should read some of their work. May I recomend the following.

Olmec Archaeology and Early Mesoamerica, Christopher A. Pool, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007.
The Olmecs, Richard A. Diehl, Thames and Hudson, London, 2004.
The Ancient Kingdoms of Mexico, Nigel Davies, Penguin Books, London, 1982.
Mesoamerica Goes Public: Early Ceremonial Centers, Leaders and Communities, in Mesoamerican Archaeology, Ed. Julia A. Hendon & Rosemary A. Joyce, Blackwell Pub. Oxford, 2004, pp. 43-72.
Mexico: From the Olmecs to the Aztecs, 6th Edition, Michael D. Coe & Rex Koontz, Thames and Hudson, London, 2008, pp. 39-100.
First Peoples in a New World, David J. Meltzer, University of California Press, Berkeley CA, 2009, pp. 184-207.
Art, Ritual, and Rulership in the Olmec World, F. Kent Reilly, in The Ancient Civilizations of Mesoamerica, Ed. Michael E. Smith & Marilyn A. Masson, Blackwell Pub., Oxford, 2000.
CA Forum on Anthropology: Robbing Native American Cultures: Van Sertima’s Afrocentricity and the Olmecs, Gabriel Haslip-Viera & Bernard Ortiz de Montellano, & Warren Barbour, in Current Anthropology, v. 38, No. 3, Jun. 1997, pp. 419-441.
The Spanish Entrada: A Model for Assessing Claims of Pre-Columbian between the Old and New World, Kenneth L. Feder, in North American Archaeologist, v. 15, No. 2, Ed. Roger W. Moeller, Baywood Pub. Co. Inc., Amityville NY, 1994, pp. 147-166.

Opps! Kent Reilly’s article is on pp. 369-399 of The Ancient Civilizations of Mesoamerica.

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.

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:

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

Sanji, you said:

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.

Oh well You should really not say anything as once again you reveal your deep ignorance and utter unwillingless to learn. Read some basic texts on Egyptology and Archaeology first, which you have so plainly failed to do.

As for being a smug head thats a little rich coming from someone who says:

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.

I’m not going to take seriously being called a pigeon, which
is your way of saying I’ve been sucked into believing stuff that is not true, from someone who quite clearly does not have much knowledge of Archaeology. I suggest that if anyone is the pigeon it is you who has been sucked into swallowing Hancock’s and others dubious crap. If you want to swallow the lies and distortions of people like Hancock please do so. please continue to ignore the vast mountain of evidence that refutes their fantasies.

As for this comment:

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.

Yep true believers and other fatasists are continuing to distort and lie about those things. THe fact is that the overwhelming majority of geologists reject the idea that Yonagumi is artificial. The vast majority of Egyptologists reject the OCT and the Great Pyramids. The speculations, fantasies and hand waving of the true believers are of little interest to the real experts. I can only suggest that you look at this extensive and massive literature demolishing this crap.

P{lease continue to fantasize yourself has possessed by true knowledge that us, poor deluded “pigeons” who rely on real evidence are excluded from. The evidence is quite overwhelming that Hancock deliberately distorts and is a shoddy scholar. As mentioned before his stuff about the dates of Tiwanaku and the Mayan Calander are quite enough to consign him to the garbage heap.

Of course the critics of Hancock are “rubbish” even though they have found error after error, nonsense after nonsense in Hancock all of which is easily found on the web. AS for being labeled as ignorant by a smug head? Well there is no reason for anyone to label you as ignorant your own comments do that quite well enough. As for not knowing you. Well based on your comments you are indeed phenomenally ignorant of archeaology and much else.

THank you for once again indicating that so many people attracted to alternative nonsense feel that they have special knowledge that the rest of us “pigeons” don’t have. As for farts please continue to enjoy Hancock’s abundant number 2s.

Hey, Sanji, here are two authors to start with if you want to know about real archaeology: Brian Fagan and Ken Feder.

I think the only garbage we can talk about is this stupid article. Whoever wrote it, he only makes statements and talks shit about Graham Hancock because he does not agree with him. He should realise Mr Hancock theories are being serioulsy taken into account by those who dare see things, not in the way we are said at universities by the statuos quo, but what the evidence itsel suggests. He says the olmecs were “imaginative”.
That ’s pathetic. I invite you to debate with ideas and not speak stupidities just because you are envious of Mr. Hancock contributions to unveil the humankind’s past.

Pacal and Sanji are nothing else but stupid apprentices who spit on Hancock’s work just because they are said to do so. A couple of arrogant misers whose only purpose is to convince people that the orthodox ancient history is the owner of complete trutth. How much are you paid? Perhaps you both defend is a crappy job at a faculty full of old biased arecheologists, so bitter that they can not accept the inconsistencies of their “discipline” (I do not call it science, since arqueology is not a science, physics is science, not this shit, chiefly when you see they are afraid of a multidisciplinaty aproach when studying the misteries of the past). You both guys, should be aware that we do not need your fucking point of view to get to grips with questions and conclusions about the ancient past of mankind. Why do not you come back to the shithole you came from?

Think about this, Hancock is more famous tham you could ever dream, because he dared say what you ingnore. History will say who was right, either hancock or a couple of anonym archeology aficionados of this shitty website.

Incognitus if you have any ability to read you should realize that Sanji thinks Hancock is great. I suppose you mean Roland of Gilead. Like Sanji though you display deep transcedent ignorance. Let us look at your bowel movements.

He should realise Mr Hancock theories are being serioulsy taken into account by those who dare see things, not in the way we are said at universities by the statuos quo, but what the evidence itsel suggests.

The fact that Hancock as a few deluded followers who know next to nothing about Archaeology impresses me not at all. As for what the evidence suggests. Mr. Hancock of course as is typical for him ignores the evidence and what it says. The evidence overwhelmingly says that Twanaku is less than 2000 years old, but Hancock ignores it. The evidence does not support Hancock’s prehistoric supercivilization, but in fact refrutes and of course he ignores it.

Pacal and Sanji are nothing else but stupid apprentices who spit on Hancock’s work just because they are said to do so. A couple of arrogant misers whose only purpose is to convince people that the orthodox ancient history is the owner of complete trutth. How much are you paid? Perhaps you both defend is a crappy job at a faculty full of old biased arecheologists, so bitter that they can not accept the inconsistencies of their “discipline” (I do not call it science, since arqueology is not a science, physics is science, not this shit, chiefly when you see they are afraid of a multidisciplinaty aproach when studying the misteries of the past). You both guys, should be aware that we do not need your fucking point of view to get to grips with questions and conclusions about the ancient past of mankind. Why do not you come back to the shithole you came from?

Lets see a complete novice like Hancock, with little real knowledge tries to overthrow the work of thousands of scholars with nothing more than a fantasy of wish fulfillmen t and the defenders of so-called Orthodoxy are arrogant!? Irony of ironies.

Like all good true believers you fantasize that any opponents of your revealed truth are motivated by bias and of course are paid. Well I’m not being paid at all for this, sadly! Also the usual conspiracy psychosis / delusion.

So Archaeology is not a science. Thank you for showing a most deep ignorance. Please read an introductory text to Archaeology. Of course you then label it “shit”. Please explain to me in detail how to do do a dig in the desert versus underwater. How to perform a carbon 14 test. Please explain Paleoethnobiology. How to do a shell midden Analysis? All of which are involved modern Archaeology.

As for being afraid of a multidisplinary approach. Well that is exactly what modern Archaeology involves routinely. Your statement about fear only provides abundant evidence that you are indeed phenomnally ignorant of Archaeology.

Like all true believers when your cherished delusions are attacked you react by screams of hysteria. Sorry but I didn’t come out of a shithole and so won’t ever be going there.

As for thinking about Hancock’s fame. Why should I? I’m glad he as made himself rich off the deludded and guilible, because that is the only way the guilible and credulous will learn. As for daring to say what I ignore. Hancock is merely saying pseudoscientific crap that others have said before, it is nothing new but the same old snake oil. The verdict is already in and was in long before Hancock and it says he is full of it.

OK; Pacal, you want to play hard? Lest do it.
You, Mr. Almighty encarnation of archeology, explain to me a few things and make me wise:

1) Baalbek in Lebanon: How did the ancients cut and moved blocks of 1500 tones? What is the technical method to to this? Why are our modern cranes not able to move them and the ancientswere?

2) How do you date stone using C14?

3) Why the similarities between cultures like the mayans and egiptians, why did both cultures were avid stargazers and built pyramids? Are all of these similarities “just coincidence”?

4) Why does the sphinx have evidence of erosion caused by massive water flow on it? When does the climate record say Egipt had a rainy weather? Robert Schoch put his reputation at stake saying this is the case with the sphinx…was he wrong?

4) Finally, how are we suppose to trust a horde of biased individuals when they can not even offer an open explanation to these dilemas?

5) Give the link to the archeological papers that show your points. If not, I will suposse you are a windbag and nothing more!!!!

Finally, Richard Feymann was very critic of scientific methods in social sciences (which includes archeology, as far as I understand), see and grow intellectually:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaO69CF5mbY

From the point of view of a phycisist, archeology is just a bunch of innacurate methods whose uncertainty grows the more we go back in time. It is not a natural science. When we are talking about pre-history events, I think archeology is more flawed than ever.

SAnji, sorry for what I said about you, I think I put you side by side with that discusting Pacal, which is already a painful mistake!!!
Really sorry!!!

Incognitus you can read my reply to your nonsense at.
http://makinapacalatxilbalba.blogspot.com/2010/07/hancock-woo-graham-hancock-following-is.html

Hey Pacal,:I have read all your astonishing compilation of books and ad-hominems. It is funny to believe you are very wise because you have wasted your life loving books instead of women, but that is your problem, not mine. You should not reveal your secrets in your website. However, in my view you are a biased ignorant.

1) You supported my point that C!4 method can not date stone. From that point of view, it means dating of organic material is highly dependent on the interpretation of the archeologist.

You quoted:
“The stones were transported over a path only 600 meters length and about 15 meters *downhill*. The quarry is 1160 meters high, and the temple 145 meters. So it was easy to keep the stones on an even level to their final resting place and it was unnecessary to lift them about 7 meters as some authors claim. As you might know, Rome is the city with the most obelisks outside of Egypt. They stole the things by the dozen and took them home. The heaviest known obelisk weighs 510 tons, and it was transported some 1000’s of *kilometers*. This transport was documented by the roman author Marcellinus Comes. The Romans even left detailed paintings and reliefs about the ways to move such things : as on the bottom of the Theodosius-obelisk in Istanbul. They used “Roman-patented” winches, in German called “Göpelwinden” which work with long lever ways. To move a 900 ton stone, they needed only 700 men. The transport was slow, about 30 meters a day, because they had to dismantle and rebuild the winches every few meters, to pull the obelisk with maximum torque. But in Baalbek, where they moved several blocks, maybe they built an alley of winches, where they passed the block from winch to winch.”

My answer to that is SHOW IT. Has this experiment been done with such weights there? Of course not. I see many 2000 tones blocks moved and that fit perfectly in a complex distribution. I know for sure the most powerful cranes can not lift weight heavier than 300 tones. If you were an Engineer, you would understand it is just not a matter of leting them go down the hill, as your very purposely selected quotation says. I will not believe your quotation because it contradicts common sense, my common sense tells me it is not possible to move such kind of blocks

2) You have answered as expected. C14 can not date stones. Why do archeologists dare say with complete certainty the date in wich any monument was built? It is left to the analist criterium, and that is not valid in such matters. There is a degree of uncertainty that is ihnerent to this method and that can not be helped, as simple as that. In the most ancient monuments, the interpretation deduced by archeologists may be flawed or biased to let the evidence fit in the stream of knowledge they accept. What guarantees that the monument and the age of the carbon dated sample are the same? As far as I see it, a monument could be far older than the carbon dated samples and this fact may not be detected by the archeological survey. I find a problem with this, sorry.

You seem to assume you should trust the archeologists and that we should believe they are never biased or whatsoever. If you were a natural scientist you would understand that is not the case. Doesn’t matter. The IPCC is a clear example of how preconceptions can even make you doubt about a “serious research”. If climate scientists are prone to this thing, I believe archeologists as well. So your claim of complete trust to the methods of these people doesn’t work for me.

3) You seem completely unaware of the many similarities between these ancient cultures. Tell me something…have you read Hancock’s work? I bet you have not. He points out the parallels among these cultures with good clarity. He may not be right in everything he claims, but the evidence of something wrong with the accepted archeology explanation is vast, in my view we have a case here. In Physics, if you have an anomaly in a theory that does not fit it makes your theory crumble. Why is not this the case in archeology? You say they are “scientists”.
You tell me “that human civilizations have similarities because they are human civilizations”, a poor explanation for someone who boast his intelligence for reading dusty second-hand books in a library. If you were archeologist unless… what it shows is that you are not aware of such similarities, therefore you should undertake your own investigation in the matter.

4) Do you contradict Robert Schoch? His evidence comes from geology, a natural science, certainly more robust and accurate that this “science” called archeology. So I have to believe you instead of DR. Schoch, which is a leading scholar in his field? You must be kidding!!! Of course his arguments are disputed by ignorants in geological aspects, which find it easy to give support to their preconceived ideas on the Sphinx.

5) I am not paying you, that is true. I would pay quality job, not your second-hand research. If you say you are right, you have to show it. If you do not want to be asked, you do not get into this forum.
I will not recommend you so many books, as I would not like to end up like you. Please take a look a the archeological inconsistencies that DR. Cremo points out in the following book:
http://www.amazon.com/Forbidden-Archeology-Hidden-History-Human/dp/0892132949

He has a PhD and he does not find what I have told you coming from “an ignorant”. I do not care what you may think, what you think is your problem. But you should be aware that people have the right to question even the academia when searching for answers. People like you can only see and believe what they have been said by a system who wants you to believe what is useful to them. You should make an effort for not sticking your head in the sand and try to open your mind at these inconsistencies, and start to question. But it may be late for you, as far as I see.

You are right, I may not take time to read your books. I live in paradise, not in that shitty land called Canada, full of snow and with freezing temperatures most of the year. Specimens like you are rare here, since we are not obliged to spend our lifes secluded at home or in libraries for not having something interesting to do.

Pakal, I would like to make public how you try to misinform us. You quote about the Theodosius Obelisk, which weighs 400 tones.
See the following link:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brswanson/2809124885/

THis obeliks was cut into three or two pieces to make possible its transportation. It was originaly 30m tall when in Egipt, but for some technical problem it is now 19m tall. Very interesting. You dare put this obeliks of 400 tones which had to be cut to be moved as comparable to the baalbek blocks. Do you really think people are stupid?

This is another example of people whose knowledge is based how spending their lives reading academic books (real aficionados) but not based on commoon sense.

Sorry, the more you read your arguments, the more I am convinced you do not know what you are talking about.

Icognitus Just as I expected a flood of ad-hominoms that are meaningless and even more powerful indications that you are a true believer and deeply ignorant. Thank you for your concern about my personal life and why are you dragging that in all?

Regarding Carbon 14 dating. Not the slightest bit interested in learning how it works it seems. Again the question of does carbon 14 date rocks is a red herring and is meaningless. No one expects it to date rocks at all. Then again if it did the dates would be in millions of years n’est pas?

But then your further comments indicate that you have absolutely no willingness to find out how carbon 14 is done. As for errors of course they happen and that is why Carbon 14 has all sorts of protocals etc., to minimizes errors. Of course error happen but why should that be a surprise which is why more than one date should be done.

As for your “common sense” regarding Baalbek. If the Romans could move 3 blocks weighing over 100 tons each from Egypt to Constaninople (Istambul) than they could move 1000 tons 1000 yards or less. I note you don’t deal with the evidence found in digs at Baalbek that date the monument to Roman times. As for a crane well I would think we could move a thousand ton block if we wanted to do so. And in fact concrete oil drilling platforms weighing more are moved all the time. As for the crane. So what. The Romans and Egyptians had ropes, pulleys and enourmous work forces. Oh and by the way ancient methods of moving rocks are tested all the time and they work. The only difference between moving a big block and a small block is the labour, time involved the techniques were the same. “Common sense” dictates that this methods were the same only larger. Oh and if Archimedes could design a gaget to lift a ship out of the water the Romans could devise a technique to move 1000 tons 100 yards or less. If the Romans could build 100 miles of Road and 100 miles of aquduct, both more difficult than Baalbek, than they could build Baalbek. Oh and please show that the Romans could not have moved a thousand ton block less than 1000 yards.

As for similarities you just don’t get it. Similarities don’t prove contact they just are similarities. For smoeone who is convinced that Archaeology isn’t like Physics, you seem to want it to be so.

Do you honestly feel that the fact we are human would not lead to cultural similarities without contact? Also you forget the similarities are in many cases vague. After all Mayan and Egyptian pyramids are not very similar. Oh and did you know that pyramids in Peru pre-date Egyptian? The fact is their as been virtually no evidence of old world artifacts in pre-columbian america. Which would be the case if there was contact. Oh and i’ve read Hancock’s Fingerprints of the Gods and several others.

As for Robert Schoch. Obviously you haven’t read or read very badly the stuff I linked too. Do you forget that Geologists have disputed him. Well if it upsets your preconcieved views continue to ignore that fact.

You complain about my second hand research. Well it is obvious you have done no research yourself and thank you for indicating that you have little to no willingness to do reseach yourself.

As for Cremo. Read his book. It was a incredibly funny read. The guy is guilible. Yep he has a Phd and is a creationist and a Vedic scholar. He is another true believer like Hancock. Who now goes around saying the world may end in 2012.

It is you who has stuck his head in the sand and thank you for telling me that you probably won’t read the books I suggested. I guess you don’t want your “truth” questioned. As for thinking people are stupid, well you don’t think the Romans could move those blocks etc. I don’t think your stupid, but you are as this posting shows deeply ignorant and utterly unwilling to remedy that.

As for the personal comments and the insulting reference to my country all it proves is that you are acting 5 years old.

“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.”
LooooooooooL
Man I haven’t laughed so much this week. Thank you, your arrogant ignorance has just made my day.
Keep writing.

I told myself I wouldn’t bother looking again at this crappy page where two individuals think they know about things just because they ve read books that everyone agreed to keep as non questionable truths and facts. Well I just had a look to see how things are going on this lost web page.
Sorry guys, Hancock and others outsmarted you, “experts” and everyone else, it is really as simple as that. They made fools of everyone else. Though they just observed things with a open mind free from academic protocols and took notes.
Experts are so old, bitter and up they re own arse that they will never reconsider or debate. Well its always been like this anyway. Nothing new really. Rinse. Repeat. Here you go, you just got 2000 years of History.
You people play the role of the bunch of cultivated guys who just will never get it. And its fine, this your role, this is what you are. You will always sit on it, blinded and fooled by your own knowledge, and the arrogance that comes out of it.
Yonagumi….off course most experts all agree to say it s natural. They all know (and this applies to other disciplines and about other subjects) what’s gonna happen to their career if they dont jump on the train. I m not interested in experts who think its natural..well exceptionnally impressive and rare to be more accurate. I m interested in experts who think it s man made. And so should you.
And this applies to Giza, south american sites and more.
Anyway, this situation where everyone tries to convince others that they are in the wrong is pointless.
Someone is right, and someone is wrong. And whether you like it or not, I think hancock is the closest to being right, that’s it. End of the story.
Dunno if you guys will watch it, I hope you will, but I found this quite interesting, two lectures from Hancock and Bauval

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDDlHSjkz0g
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA9JysD5ASk&feature=channel

The second one from Bauval is particulary interesting. If you do watch it, please let me know what you think. It is not too long and I would like to know what you both think of it. Yes they are a few little inconsistencies in what they say, even me noticed it, but it is still awesome. Though I expect you to say something about it being hilarious and showing deep ignorance and bla bla.

If you have something you would like to show me that supports your ideas, I will definitely watch it, so please dont hesitate to share.
Easy boyzz, speak soon.

Hey, Incognitus…

To answer your first question, I make $11.95 an hour working forty hours a week at Smithfield Luter pulling hogs. I wonder where my check from these so called cabal of archaeologist is at. I’m also 28, which I did not think made me old.

Now, here comes the beatdown. Hancock, (I have read Fingerprints of the Gods and actually am ashamed of the fact that I believed it at one point) provides no evidence that those heads are african in origin except that they look african. Well shiver me timbers, they must have been football players too because they’re wearing football helmets. Not really, but just to point out how stupid it is to make an assumption based on looks. This is what Hancock does, and he is wrong.

Your next question about some stones in Lebennon, the space shuttle weighs 2010 tons. Yet, somehow NASA has the ability to not only move this thing over to a launch pad over a mile from its dock, but also put it in orbit. And here’s the kicker, they do it without a crane. Hmmm, but your common sense would tell me this it not possible. You want to know how the stones were moved, probably by using cutting tools (these people had bronze and iron), and they probably moved them by putting them on wooden rollers. It’s that simple. …Or do you think they used some alien technology but did not leave any behind. Pacal answered this question for you, my suggestion is to stop insulting him.

Now on to C14 Radiometric Carbon Dating. Yes, C14 cannot date rock, but that is a strawman anyway. Archaeologist do not date rock and they do not use C14 all that much because they have to establish provenience. Dating the rock that a building is made out of only dates the rock and when it was created, it does not tell when the rock was first cut out of the ground and used as building material. The actual date of the rock is useless information to an archaeologist.

Also, there are ways to date rock, here are a few:
Uranium-Lead Dating
Uranium-Thorium Dating
Rubidium-Strontium Dating
[/pedantic]

Now, for the Maya/Egyptian connection. There was none. The pyramids in Egypt are true pyramids were as the pyramids in Mexico are not true pyramids. They are modified mounds with temples on top to symbolized a temple on a hill or horizon. The writing, artwork, and technology of the Mayans are very different from the Egyptians. Not to mention the time frame does not match up either. The Egyptian Kingdom went from Approx. 3500 BC to 750 BC when they became part of some other empire in history. The Maya City States went from 200BC to 1200 AD. There is a 550 year difference between the two. The only real similarity is the stargazing, but every human culture in history did that. It’s easy to find out things about the heavens when you don’t have TVs, Radios, and Videogames.

As for the Sphinx, Pacal answered this question perfectly. I will like to add that limestone and sandstone both are brittle rock. You can break it off in you hands and rub it into powder. It is very grainy and is easily broken. This has been demonstrated by archaeologists in both the Southwest and Egypt. I’ve actually held sandstone and I know from personal experiance how brittle it is. Brittle rock weathers easily.

BTW, Robert Shloch also said the movie Zeitgeist was acurate and true when it is neither. He has no credibility as a scientist as far as I’m concerned.

Now, I’m not going to do your research for you. You are making the claims, you back them up. Everything I have posted can be backed up just by looking on Wikipedia and Pacal has list of sources as well. I have neither the time nor the patiance and if you want me to prove you wrong, I’m not going to do it. You can look at the facts for what they are. If you don’t want to accept them for what they are, that’s your problem, not mine. Just be prepared when you wind up on the wrong side of history.

Hey Sanji. I do not care what you believe, and I am not here to convince you about Hancock? work. In fact, he may have made mistakes as well, as much as the archeologists are spreading lies about human’s past. It is up to do your own research. What I said Pakal is MY opinion, this is a debate forum, so read, say your opinion and support your arguments, that is all you have to do, no sensible person would claim complete credibility, as long as this person is humble enough to accept his own ignorance (except Pakal of course). I do not care whether you belive it or not, so do not worry and be happy!!!! I also believe all the crap you have just written.

I am beginning to suspect Rolando Gilead and Pakal are the same guy. In any case, Rolando, keep your bloody research for yourself, I am capable enough of doing mine. I have presented my arguments. Look at what you said:

“Your next question about some stones in Lebennon, the space shuttle weighs 2010 tons. Yet, somehow NASA has the ability to not only move this thing over to a launch pad over a mile from its dock, but also put it in orbit. And here’s the kicker, they do it without a crane. Hmmm, but your common sense would tell me this it not possible. You want to know how the stones were moved, probably by using cutting tools (these people had bronze and iron), and they probably moved them by putting them on wooden rollers. It’s that simple. …Or do you think they used some alien technology but did not leave any behind. Pacal answered this question for you, my suggestion is to stop insulting him.”

You are quite a real fool if you think this argument explains the Baalbek anomaly. Are you suggesting the ancients count on similar technology to lift those masive blocks? If that is the case, you are giving the kiss of death to your own argument.

If this is not what you meant, then you are giving the ancients credit for leifting a weight that can only be lifted by the modern NASA spaceship infrastructure, which undermines your arguments against the fact that the ancients used a diffierent technology. I challenge you to describe here how you move a 2000 tone block using ropes and timber logs, how you achive the uncanny precision in order to make these blocks fit perfectly.
I would like to read the nonsese you will come up with.

With your argument, you are just saying that such blocks can only be lifting with modern technology, so thans for supporting what I said.

Reality is so simple, but so difficult to understand for some people, that they tend to give poorly supported explanations for things that are completely obvious if you apply common sense.

Sanji, sorry mate, I have misinterpreted your words again, sorry for my rude tone. I amply agree with you.

I am beginning to suspect Rolando Gilead and Pakal are the same guy. In any case, Rolando, keep your bloody research for yourself, I am capable enough of doing mine. I have presented my arguments. Look at what you said:

Wow, you have no reading comprehension skills. You can’t even get my nick right. BTW, when are you going to complain about my argument, why don’t you provide some evidence to back up yours. Pakal provided sourced material, so why don’t you stop insulting our intellegence here.

You are quite a real fool if you think this argument explains the Baalbek anomaly. Are you suggesting the ancients count on similar technology to lift those masive blocks? If that is the case, you are giving the kiss of death to your own argument.

It’s time for you to either put up of shut up. If the ancients could not have built these megaliths using their own technology, then what technology did they use? If they didn’t build them, then who did? Aliens? Atlanteans? Some white Anglo-Saxon God?

The concept of lifting heavy objects is something so simple, that a child could understand it. If you truly knew what the hell you are talking about, you would understand that the concepts of pulleys and levers are farely simple concepts to understand and they would have been availible to the ancients. When you add enough elbow grease, you can move anything. Also, there is carpentry and masonry techniques that were developed then that are still in use today, because they are so simple and they work. You have provided absolutely no evidence to counter this except that no modern crane can lift those heavy blocks, which does not impress me any. Hell, my example of not having to have a crane to lift heavy objects went right over your head. So, that proves to me you don’t know what you are talking about.

Sorry, Incognitus, you fail.

As an actual Archaeologist i can atest to many an artifact being swept under the carpet by the academic establishment when it deos not fit the reigning paradigm. Examples abound. You do not need to be credentialed to have a fully rounded perspective on any subject, just an interest and an ability to think critically. The willingness to blindly accept information from so-called experts displayed on this forum is a measure of the sucess of the indoctrination system that is erroneously tremed education

ooops, mispelling ot termed in last sentence. before all you pedants jump down my throat.

So, Ragnarok, how may tertiary flakes did you see swept under the cover?

Hi guys, I m still waiting to see what you think of the two links I posted above, both leading to a conference that Hancock and Beauval had a while back. The subjects of them isn’t really about the Olmec mystery, though it is mentionned too.
I ask this because this page isn’t about the olmec. This page is about Hancock being a worthless ignorant who’s name should disappear in History before his evil lies and distortions get more attention, or a smart guy who had the balls to bring something new on the table, when the greatest minds of History have failed to explain an abondant amount of mysteries and inconsistencies about our past, our history and legacy. If you cant even agree about these amazing abnormalities and the questions they implicates then there s no point talking at all.

So here you go, I m not a full on fan of hancock, I m ready to think he is wrong and a liar ect ect if anyone can show it without acting like a little arrogant child not ready yet to reconsider the validity of his knowledge without leaving his pride aside.
And as far as I know, there s no reason to assume that the olmecs depicted accurately people from across the sea “just because they had a lively imagination”. Really? The lack of real foundations based on research and reason behing such statement is baffling, so you better show off some thinking and study of your subject if you attack a person like hancock, boy. I ve been looking out for critcics about him for a while now and this is as far as it gets; low level statements from frustrated little kids full of themselves.
So, please watch those videos if you wanna talk, and go over every point which you think is absurdity. Then show me something solid that proves it. Simple. Oh and please, avoid stuff like “The OCT theory cannot work because you have to put the map upside down”, you gotta be really stupid or blind to brush aside such amazing possibilty and the many other reasons to think so, just because it doesnt fit the current way of thinking about maps in the 21th century, because if you wanna recreate the sky the way you see it from the ground you dont need to invert anything. I couldnt find any real, solid critics about Hancock, so you guys can hopefully show me some good stuff?

Watch these videos, then come back and show some good critics, we ll see what happens.

Shibeee

sanji i to came to this site for exactly the same reasons has u and come to the same conclusion .watched both videos thanks for that .my first introduction to bauval who i think is both intelligent and honest man listening to him now on information machine try watching black genesis by bauval and dont waste your time arguing with pacal think him rude and offensive and blind to exploration of facts

Yeh it s probably pointless to discuss with those guys, because in the end I m just gonna repeat what hancock and others have already said, and I m gonna read here the same critics Ive seen, which sometimes are legitimate, but never good, solid, proven, unbreakable reasons to completely dismiss hancock and every single aspect of his work. In the end, what he says has been going on for a quite a while through history, it s not brand new, so that debate has already been going on for ages.
Maybe because people like me haven’t yet spend a massive amount of time reading work to boost their knowledge, intelligence and ego, that what might be actually misleading or wrong, it s easier to get on with the “outside the box” way of thinking.
I wont go into details because they all say it better than me, but his position about C14 dating process for ancient monuments, his position about the Ice Age and its many mysteries, about maps found around the globe showing what might be locations unknown at the time, about ancient monuments that seem to have atronomical aspects to it, about underwater structures looking suspicious, about drawings, texts, interpretation of some ancient texts. and so on and so on….
There is just so much that you cant just ignore all of this, even when “it’s not a prefect match”, “most specialists disagree “, “he isnt a professional” and blah blah blah blah.
There are obviously a lot yet to discover about ourselves and our past, and that dude and his mates definitely bring something worth looking into. If a lot of experts of our time are against even debating or considering all this with a new eye, then so be it. It happened countless times before. Doesnt mean we should blindly believe people like him, but if you sit on your books and ignore such caracter, then you really have shit in your eyes and your ears, and your slowing down the learning process of mankind. Anyway, I m wasting my time typing all this, lets agree to disagree.
Guys I m still waiting to hear your opinion about those two videos

Kevin you say:

sanji i to came to this site for exactly the same reasons has u and come to the same conclusion .watched both videos thanks for that .my first introduction to bauval who i think is both intelligent and honest man listening to him now on information machine try watching black genesis by bauval and dont waste your time arguing with pacal think him rude and offensive and blind to exploration of facts.

Bauval is not worth taking the slightest bit seriously along with Hancock. The whole Orion correlation thing as been exploded long ago. You are not aware that the consilation of Orion when imposed on Pyramids at Giza and the Neighbouting area don’t match up. But then Bauval’s a joke. Have you bothered to read up on why the majority of Geologists do not accept a early date for the Sphinx as suggested by Schoch? Or how about how Bauval and Hancock were gunning for a 10500 B.C.E., date for ther Sphinx and basically ignoring that even Schoch gave a date after 8000 B,C.E. Of course do you accept the idea that the great pyramid was planned in 10500 B.C.E., although built thousands of years later to reflect the date of 10500 B.C.E. Which by the way Hancock got from Edgar Cayce, (the sleeping prophet). Both of them have been in the past quite ready to accuse Egyptologists of lying, of fraud, fabrication and forgery. In Fingerprints of the Gods Hancock accused an 19th century Egyptologist of fabricating Khufu’s name on stone blocks found in the chambers above the Kings chamber. Hancock has since retracted this baseless accusation but he continues to blither on about wicked Archeologists supressing the truth.

As for your last comment given the quite vicious names I’v e been called here I find you thinking me rude / offensive hilarious. I’ve merely said you guys were ignorant and clueless. Which you most evidently are. As for blind to exploration of the facts. Depends. If you mean the made up nonsense of Hancock and Bauval; that is speculation and fantasy not fact. But then you guys seem to have absolutely no interest in doing any sort of real research at all, but just mouth whatever Bauval and Hancock pull out of their asses.

Sanji you say:

Yeh it s probably pointless to discuss with those guys, because in the end I m just gonna repeat what hancock and others have already said, and I m gonna read here the same critics Ive seen, which sometimes are legitimate, but never good, solid, proven, unbreakable reasons to completely dismiss hancock and every single aspect of his work. In the end, what he says has been going on for a quite a while through history, it s not brand new, so that debate has already been going on for ages.

Yep the debate between the cranks and wackjobs as been going on for ages. Almost all of it in the minds of the cranks. Thank you for indicating that you have no desire to do any real research.

As for your request for unbreakable reason to dismiss Hancock. What about the simple fact that his lost super civilization seems to have vanished without a trace. How about the fact that each and everyone of the anomolies he points to is almost always asa a “prosaic” explaination. How about Hancocks conspiracy mongering. I should not forget to note Hancock’s 2012 boosterism.

From Baalbak, (built in Roman times), to the Piri Re’is map Hancock recycles mysteries that are not mysteries.

Maybe because people like me haven’t yet spend a massive amount of time reading work to boost their knowledge, intelligence and ego, that what might be actually misleading or wrong, it s easier to get on with the “outside the box” way of thinking.

Yep musn’t have ones head clogged with knowledge it might inhibit’s one ability to swallow woo. I guess ignorance is a blessed state and knowing nothing is cool. Oh and Hancock doesn’t think outside the box his thought is firmly in the area of twentieth century crank Archaeology, he is right up their with Von Daniken, and esspecially Robert Charroux, (One Hundred Thousand Years of Man’s Unknown History).

I wont go into details because they all say it better than me, but his position about C14 dating process for ancient monuments, his position about the Ice Age and its many mysteries, about maps found around the globe showing what might be locations unknown at the time, about ancient monuments that seem to have atronomical aspects to it, about underwater structures looking suspicious, about drawings, texts, interpretation of some ancient texts. and so on and so on….
There is just so much that you cant just ignore all of this, even when “it’s not a prefect match”, “most specialists disagree “, “he isnt a professional” and blah blah blah blah.

Hancock’s position about Carbon 14 and how it is used to date monuments is deeply ignorant. Hancock never seems to get the fact that the materials that are associated with the momuments are dated. But then how Archaeologists do that would require him to read some of the many texts about Carbon 14 dating and how to use it. For dating methods see Archaeology, Second Edition, Renfrew, Colin, THames and Hudson, London, 1996.

He could also use with reading a book about climate history. Say Climate Change in Prehistory, Burroughs, William J., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005.

And of course has mentioned above Hancock’s “mysteries” are almost always not mysteries at all.

It is quite easy to ignore most of it, because it is generally not a mystery, and what little is “mysterious” does not require a unknown super civilization or aliens. I should mention here that foe a time Hancock supported the idea of alien monuments on Mars, he as backed away from that I hope.

I lost any respect for Hancock from reading the sections of <Fingerprints of the Gods (A deliberate play on Von Daniken’s Chariots of the Gods, in my opinion.), from his shoddy chapters on the Maya and Tiwanaku. In th Tiwanaku chapter he almost entirely, (except for a throw away line) ignores the conventional date of the site and instead advances a far out date based on astronomical alighments deduced from recently reconstructed buildings. These dates contradict dozens of Carbon 14 results along with ceramic, and stratigraphy studies to say nothing of ethno-historical data all of which date the site 200-1000 C.E (A.D.). Please see Ancient Tiwanku, Janusek, John Wayne, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008, The Tiwanaku, Kolata, Alan L., Blackwell, Oxford, 1993.

As for the Maya please see The Ancient Maya, Sixth Edition, Sharer, Robert J, & Traxler, Loa P, Stanford University Press, Stanford CA, 2006, pp. 102-120, for the Mayan calander. It also shows why Hancock’s discussion of it is a crock. Hancock’s discussion of the Sarcophagus lid in the tomb of Pacal at Palenque is also totally bogus.

There are obviously a lot yet to discover about ourselves and our past, and that dude and his mates definitely bring something worth looking into. If a lot of experts of our time are against even debating or considering all this with a new eye, then so be it. It happened countless times before. Doesnt mean we should blindly believe people like him, but if you sit on your books and ignore such caracter, then you really have shit in your eyes and your ears, and your slowing down the learning process of mankind. Anyway, I m wasting my time typing all this, lets agree to disagree.
Guys I m still waiting to hear your opinion about those two videos

Thank you for the Galileo gambit, the typical cliche of cranks everywhere. However for every Galileo who was right there were 10,000 cranks who were way wrong.

As for seeing it with a new eye? Nope! Its the same old same old processed woo. In the 19th century Ignatius Donnelly was touting woo in his Atlantis: The Antediluvian World, in the early twethieth century we had Edgar Cayce and in the late 60’s and into the 70’s we had Von Daniken, along with countless others. It is the same old crap served for another generation.

As for shit in eyes and ears. Since people like Hancock listen to other woo miesters and ignire reams and reams of data while continuing their diet of woo. It is clear who has shit in their eyes and ears and it is Hancock and those who believe like him.

Although it is nice to know that you think the hard won knowledge of the past won over the past century or so is shit.

Some more reading:

Invented Knowledge, Fritze, Ronald, H, Reaktion Books, London, 2009.

Ancient Astraunauts, Cosmic Collisions and other Popular THeories about Man’s Past, Stiebing, William H, Prometheus Books, Buffalo NY, 1984.

Giza: The Truth, Lawton, Ian & Ogilvie-Herald, Chris, Invisible Cities Press, Montpelier Vermont, 2001.

P.S. The two links are to films that are merely the same dull old nostrums that have been coming from those two for quite sometime.

Sanji as an example of Hancock’s problem “common sense” is a comment he makes that Khufu’s hieroglyph being found on stone blocks inside the great pyramid is meaningless, and further that they were possibly forged. The quality of Hancock’s scholarship is clear from that comment.

First Hancock fudges were the marks were found and ignores that they were quarry marks not just marks. In otherwords blocks marked for transportation to a building site. Also the blocks with the quarry mark were found in a chamber above the Kings Chamber in the great pyramid that had been sealed from the building of the Great Pyramid until the 19th century. Hancock manages to nicely fudge that it must mean, most likely, that the pyramid was built for a King named Khufu.

Hancock’s dismissal of the “marks” a a possible forgery by the Egyptologist / explorer Vyse. This is nonsense. Oh and it now appears that the quarry “marks” contine round the corners into the crevacies between blocks. So much for forgery.

Of course Hancock gets the idea that the marks may be forgeries from author Zecharia Sitchin in his book Stairway to Heaven.

An excellent source for info on this is pp. 95-113, of Giza The Truth, by Ian Lawton and Chris Ogilvie-Hera;d, Invisible Cities Press, Montpelier VT, 2001. The above book is of especial interest in that the authors are very sympathetic to “alternative” history and archaeology. The same book is excellent on the date of the Great Pyramid, accepting the traditional date of Khufu’s reign c. 2600 B.C.E. I could of course mention carbon 14 dating results. Hancock also ignores the very clear line of development of pyramid construction from Djoser’s Step Pyramid to the Great Pyramid. Hancock leaves out the Red Pyramid, the Bent Pyramid, the Pyramid of Medium and a couple of pyramids which were started and not completed. Which shows a definite development of technique. For more Read The Pyramids of egypt, by I.E.S. Edwards, Penguin Books, London, 1970, and multiple further editions.

The same dissesction can be performed on comment after comment Hancock makes.

I m making a cool post, will take a bit of time because I m not english and I want it to be comprehensible. So please keep an eye on this page.
Ive just read all the comments on this page, and somehow if you step back from it, arguments for and against hancock (and those type of ideas) all make sense at some point. I want to debate a bit more with you guys, because it will help me to get a better opinion. But clearly, there are A LOT of really,really, really odd things about the ancient world. This fact on its own should make all of us accept that there is definitely something strange about our past history, because otherwise pages and discussions like the ones presented here wouldn’t exist, or need to. Quite brilliant, I find this very exciting.
Will be back asap.

Damn my computer doesn’t work anymore! Humm I m going back home for Christmas so I ll do it from there, I ll post within the next 2/3 weeks.
Btw I posted the above after a heavy night, what I meant to say is that I wanna present a few odd things to you guys and see what you think.
Speak soon.

I thought I should read the infamous FOG before I post anything else, so I m doing that. I m halfway through it now, will be done in, lets say, one month or so.
Easy guys, speak soon

Any novice can look at those stone heads and see that they are Amerindian. I was once fooled into believing the supposed “Negroid” features until I saw pictures of Natives from the region that resembled those stone heads. People who say the giant heads look Negroid have flawed racialist views. This is simply 15th – 19th Century perceptions of race. This poses a problem for Hancock and the Afrocentrics, because all of these claims stem from the “opinion” of an alleged African phenotype.

It’s great that there are experts in the field but we can argue this without them. Not saying we don’t need them, just saying that if Afrocentrics and the Hancocks of the world can invent junk history then we can debunk them easily because they only have opinion.

The Olmecs were Amerindian. There is no mystery to who they were and there is no proof of any African influence.

Fallacious argument is fallacious. Ever heard of the mitochondrial Eve? Keep calling leading researchers “cult-archaeologists” and “afro-centric racists” if that’s all you can muster as proof that they are wrong. Please don’t use facts or do research for yourself, just keep labeling people you don’t agree with.

bohemianexile you say:

Fallacious argument is fallacious. Ever heard of the mitochondrial Eve? Keep calling leading researchers “cult-archaeologists” and “afro-centric racists” if that’s all you can muster as proof that they are wrong. Please don’t use facts or do research for yourself, just keep labeling people you don’t agree with.

What does Mitochondrial Eve have to do with the fact that Olmec statutes look like modern day Amerindian natives of the area? There is NO need to postulate that the statutes are depictions of Africans. There is also no evidence Archaeologically of an African presence in Olmec culture / society. Calling Hancock and other pseudo-scientists researchers is of course hilarious. Just look at the bibliographies of their books, full of references to all the familiar tropes and crap of yes “cult” and “pseudo-scientist” cant. As for proof they are wrong it exists in abundance. Everytthing from genetic studies to archaeology shows they are wrong.

It is a fallacious arguement to assume, and it is an assumption, that because the statutes “look like” African they are Africans esspecially since there are people in the area today, Amerindians, who look like the statutes. Calling people like Hancock “researchers” is in my opinion deeply insulting to those real researchers who work in the field. Perhaps you should read some of their work. May I recomend the following.

Olmec Archaeology and Early Mesoamerica, Christopher A. Pool, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007.
The Olmecs, Richard A. Diehl, Thames and Hudson, London, 2004.
The Ancient Kingdoms of Mexico, Nigel Davies, Penguin Books, London, 1982.
Mesoamerica Goes Public: Early Ceremonial Centers, Leaders and Communities, in Mesoamerican Archaeology, Ed. Julia A. Hendon & Rosemary A. Joyce, Blackwell Pub. Oxford, 2004, pp. 43-72.
Mexico: From the Olmecs to the Aztecs, 6th Edition, Michael D. Coe & Rex Koontz, Thames and Hudson, London, 2008, pp. 39-100.
First Peoples in a New World, David J. Meltzer, University of California Press, Berkeley CA, 2009, pp. 184-207.
Art, Ritual, and Rulership in the Olmec World, F. Kent Reilly, in The Ancient Civilizations of Mesoamerica, Ed. Michael E. Smith & Marilyn A. Masson, Blackwell Pub., Oxford, 2000.
CA Forum on Anthropology: Robbing Native American Cultures: Van Sertima’s Afrocentricity and the Olmecs, Gabriel Haslip-Viera & Bernard Ortiz de Montellano, & Warren Barbour, in Current Anthropology, v. 38, No. 3, Jun. 1997, pp. 419-441.
The Spanish Entrada: A Model for Assessing Claims of Pre-Columbian between the Old and New World, Kenneth L. Feder, in North American Archaeologist, v. 15, No. 2, Ed. Roger W. Moeller, Baywood Pub. Co. Inc., Amityville NY, 1994, pp. 147-166.

Opps! Kent Reilly’s article is on pp. 369-399 of The Ancient Civilizations of Mesoamerica.

You what happened to make the website disappear for a few days?

OT, but I simply have to share the good news of another world leader’s endorsement of traditional medicine:

Tehran, 4 March: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for investment on reviving traditional medicine to reduce dependence on imported medicine and equipment.

In a meeting of health ministers of member states of Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) here on Tuesday evening, Ahmadinejad said, “I believe if we spend some of our investments for reviving traditional medicine, we will certainly reduce our dependence on imported medicine, equipment and ways of treatment.”

Referring to the materialism and liberalism as the main ideas of the west, he said that human happiness has been a pretext for big business in the west adding in today world diseases are spread so that medicines for their treatment can be sold.

Ahmadinejad noted that pharmaceutics in the world is in the Zionist monopoly and the nations’ wealth is being spent on treatment expenses.

By referring to the bright history of traditional medicine in Iran and Islamic world, President Ahmadinejad said that if Islamic countries exchange their experiences and possibilities, they would not need others.

Concerning Iran’s achievement in the field of medicine, President Ahmadinejad said, “We are ready to exchange our experiences with all Islamic countries.”

Appreciating participants in the second meeting of health ministers of OIC member states in Tehran, the president expressed hope that health shortcomings can be uprooted in the society.

The second meeting of health ministers of the OIC member states inaugurated on Tuesday with a speech by First Vice-President Parviz Davoudi.

Health ministers from 30 countries as well as 20 foreign delegations are attending the meeting.

Iranian official IRNA news agency website 3rd March 2009

Speaking of a major confronation, this week’s Private Eye has a good column by “Ratbiter” about the Jeremy Sherr homeopathy case which really sticks the boot in.

Ratbiter is a bit right-wing for me, but it’s good to see Private Eye running such a column after their rather shoddy performance during the MMR scare.

Just on the subject of vaccines, i find it laughable that in producing vaccines in the interest of public health and herd immunity, that Baxters managed to contaminate a batch of their product with live Avian Flu virus.
Not to mention the recent batch of contaminated men c vaccines that were recalled.
Still I routinely roll up to the surgery to watch the needles sink in to my children, playing their part in the herd immunity mass vaccination program.
CK is very biased on food and drugs issues.

I take it this ‘fisking’ by holford watch is a result of Burne’s affilliation with Holford rather than the content of the article.
His main point appears to reflect the reason why the NHS have not already got onboard the chickenpox vaccination scheme.

http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/1032.aspx?CategoryID=62&SubCategoryID=63

Chicken pox is one hell of a nasty disease, it ruined my flawless skin a couple of years ago.’–

Chicken pox is one hell of a nasty disease, it ruined my flawless skin a couple of years ago.,:’

Holfordwatch is a Astroturf website. I wouldn’t believe a word of it but question who’s funding it. Probably something similar to Ben Goldacre who has received many awards from GlaxoSmithKline-Good boy Ben, now sit -woof woof

You what happened to make the website disappear for a few days?

OT, but I simply have to share the good news of another world leader’s endorsement of traditional medicine:

Tehran, 4 March: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for investment on reviving traditional medicine to reduce dependence on imported medicine and equipment.

In a meeting of health ministers of member states of Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) here on Tuesday evening, Ahmadinejad said, “I believe if we spend some of our investments for reviving traditional medicine, we will certainly reduce our dependence on imported medicine, equipment and ways of treatment.”

Referring to the materialism and liberalism as the main ideas of the west, he said that human happiness has been a pretext for big business in the west adding in today world diseases are spread so that medicines for their treatment can be sold.

Ahmadinejad noted that pharmaceutics in the world is in the Zionist monopoly and the nations’ wealth is being spent on treatment expenses.

By referring to the bright history of traditional medicine in Iran and Islamic world, President Ahmadinejad said that if Islamic countries exchange their experiences and possibilities, they would not need others.

Concerning Iran’s achievement in the field of medicine, President Ahmadinejad said, “We are ready to exchange our experiences with all Islamic countries.”

Appreciating participants in the second meeting of health ministers of OIC member states in Tehran, the president expressed hope that health shortcomings can be uprooted in the society.

The second meeting of health ministers of the OIC member states inaugurated on Tuesday with a speech by First Vice-President Parviz Davoudi.

Health ministers from 30 countries as well as 20 foreign delegations are attending the meeting.

Iranian official IRNA news agency website 3rd March 2009

Speaking of a major confronation, this week’s Private Eye has a good column by “Ratbiter” about the Jeremy Sherr homeopathy case which really sticks the boot in.

Ratbiter is a bit right-wing for me, but it’s good to see Private Eye running such a column after their rather shoddy performance during the MMR scare.

Just on the subject of vaccines, i find it laughable that in producing vaccines in the interest of public health and herd immunity, that Baxters managed to contaminate a batch of their product with live Avian Flu virus.
Not to mention the recent batch of contaminated men c vaccines that were recalled.
Still I routinely roll up to the surgery to watch the needles sink in to my children, playing their part in the herd immunity mass vaccination program.
CK is very biased on food and drugs issues.

I take it this ‘fisking’ by holford watch is a result of Burne’s affilliation with Holford rather than the content of the article.
His main point appears to reflect the reason why the NHS have not already got onboard the chickenpox vaccination scheme.

http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/1032.aspx?CategoryID=62&SubCategoryID=63

Chicken pox is one hell of a nasty disease, it ruined my flawless skin a couple of years ago.’–

Chicken pox is one hell of a nasty disease, it ruined my flawless skin a couple of years ago.,:’

Holfordwatch is a Astroturf website. I wouldn’t believe a word of it but question who’s funding it. Probably something similar to Ben Goldacre who has received many awards from GlaxoSmithKline-Good boy Ben, now sit -woof woof