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). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Dear Gay,

Might I begin by stating that I have absolutely no connection with either of the aforementioned 'Doctors' other than the fact that we are all critics of Graham's work. Beyond that point I feel that your tar brush has no further use.

As for my being here for some kind of prank or simply to make unconstructive comments - maybe that's why I have yet to receive any replies regarding my previous post.

'My original criticism of Graham's work centres on 'Fingerprints' and how I consider the author to have strategically eliminated vital information, glossed over the truth and not carried out as indepth level of research as should be required by the nature of this book.

From 'Fingerprints of the Gods':

page 4

'In attempting that explanation (the mystery of the Piri Reis map) it is worth reminding ourselves of the basic historical and geological facts...It (the Piri Reis map) focuses on the western coast of Africa, the eastern coast of South America and the northern coast of Antartica)'.

Since when has it been proven as FACT that the Piri Reis map depicts the north coast of Antartica? This is simply a theory - and there is plenty of contradictory evidence.

page 10

'No further scientific research has ever been undertaken into these anomolous early maps'.

I will assume from the above that Graham is referring to the period from 1953 (the publication of Hapgood's theory) to 1995 (the publication of Fingerprints).

In the past few days I have found a multitude of 'scientific research' publications that contradict the above statement. Not surprisingly, few of these publications support Hapgood's theory...however, that does not mean that they do not exist. Would it be fair to suggest therefore that either the author has not found these publications (scant research) or has this information been strategically eliminated?'.


Best wishes

Eyeswideshut


P.S. Considering that this a forum, I find it strange that I have yet to receive any comments about the above, especially as all other threads are particularly active.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
The Doctor(s) 472 Gav 21-Nov-00 14:29
RE: The Doctor(s) 177 Eyeswideshut 22-Nov-00 10:24
RE: The Doctor(s) 190 Graham Hancock 22-Nov-00 11:37
RE: The Doctor(s) 154 Eyeswideshut 23-Nov-00 09:09
RE: The Doctor(s) 160 jameske 22-Nov-00 12:20
RE: The Doctor(s) 214 Gav 22-Nov-00 13:53
RE: The Doctor(s) 169 Eyeswideshut 23-Nov-00 08:52
RE: The Doctor(s) 170 Eyeswideshut 23-Nov-00 09:15
RE: The Doctor(s) 217 Gav 23-Nov-00 12:17


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.