Mysteries :
The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
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).
cladking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ultimately any hypothesis must be compared to the
> totality of the evidence. From THIS perspective
> Scott Creighton's hypothesis seems to better
> explain the evidence than the current paradigm.
> In other words I believe there is a higher
> probability of him being generally right than the
> paradigm. . . .
As I said, the final nail in the coffin of your bid for credibility. If you can’t see through Creighton’s con-job, then you simply aren’t up to the job.
M.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ultimately any hypothesis must be compared to the
> totality of the evidence. From THIS perspective
> Scott Creighton's hypothesis seems to better
> explain the evidence than the current paradigm.
> In other words I believe there is a higher
> probability of him being generally right than the
> paradigm. . . .
As I said, the final nail in the coffin of your bid for credibility. If you can’t see through Creighton’s con-job, then you simply aren’t up to the job.
M.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.