For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural
’ Message Board).
I really have no interest in stealing either Robert Bauval or Graham Hancocks ideas. All I am saying is that if their ideas are proveable there is nothing to stop them from getting their theories published in a peer reviewed journal. Non-academics and unqualified scientists manage to do this when they have sufficient evidence so I don't know why Robert and Graham have been so unsuccesful in their attempts. All I can surmise from this is that possibly they don't have sufficient evidence - is that such an absurd conclusion?
Before Charles Darwin published conclusive proof of his theory of evolution in 'The origin of species' the idea that species evolved had been around for some time. Darwins father apparently had ideas regarding evolution theory. However it was his son that managed to obtain the vital evidence to support the theory during his voyages on HMS Beagle.
Just having the idea is not enough to claim credit you need to prove that a theory exists before you can lay claim to it.
Dr D. Edlin