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
Garrett out, "Dr Conspiracy" in, Dr Edlin out, "CSICOP" in. But at least Garrett and Dr Edlin are real people rather than doppelgangers. Dr Edlin even wrote a not completely unfriendly review of one of my books on Amazon.co.uk.

I'm trying to write the best book of my life, right here, right now. An entirely new book which doesn't go over any old ground and with enough "hard" evidence (weigh it, measure it, count it)to satisfy the most hard-nosed empiricists.

At the same time it's important that I defend my position when attacked on this website, particularly with such an obvious smear campaign underway connected to the CSICOP/BBC Horizon agena.

But it would not be wise to allow the time I give to my critics to stop me writing books altogether.

That's why, as a reasonable time-saving alternative to repeating live on this message board the very lengthy debate that Garrett Fagan and I had by email last December/January, I have proposed that we simply publish the entire debate, as it stands, on this site. After that has gone up and visitors have had a chance to review it and form their own opinions, then and only then would it be appropriate to enter into further debate on points not covered or not properly clarified in the original debate.

The debate with Fagan began on 10 November 1999 when he sent me an email, via this site, with an accusation that I am a fraud who should be in jail. By the time we had finished on 14 January 2000) the debate had run to 77 pages of closely printed A4 paper. It is a very comprehensive debate, very thorough, quite readable as you can imagine(I really respect Garrett's abilities as a communicator and a scholar) and covers all the ground that Garrett now seems to want to get into yet another debate with me about -- including, of course, carbon-dating.

Now I know these academic types do have a lot of spare time on their hands, but I don't. As far as I'm concerned I already gave Garrett Fagan a full month of my time for a serious professional debate last December/January and it is that debate that we should now publish.

So I find it difficult to see why my reasonable position over not duplicating effort and wasting time should be regarded by you as a knock-out blow for Garrett Fagan.

Judge that after you've read our debate -- if Garrett Fagan can be persuaded to allow me to publish it here.

All the best, Graham Hancock

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Hancock's Challenge: A Response 448 Garrett Fagan 27-Nov-00 22:34
C-14 an academic joke!! 167 William John Meegan 27-Nov-00 23:52
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 161 Garrett Fagan 28-Nov-00 00:05
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 161 Garrett Fagan 28-Nov-00 00:11
Be more inventive than that: PLEASE 156 William John Meegan 28-Nov-00 00:55
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 165 William John Meegan 28-Nov-00 00:50
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 156 jameske 28-Nov-00 00:23
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 160 oziris 28-Nov-00 02:10
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 145 Bryan 28-Nov-00 02:18
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 157 Brian A 28-Nov-00 14:50
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 153 Bryan 28-Nov-00 14:58
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 169 Brian A 28-Nov-00 14:48
To Brian 152 William John Meegan 28-Nov-00 15:35
RE: WJ Meegans sanity 157 CSICOPdivision2 28-Nov-00 16:53
CSICOP is a very rude child: a cry baby 122 William John Meegan 28-Nov-00 17:26
RE: CSICOP is a very rude child: a cry baby 153 Bryan 29-Nov-00 02:19
RE: To Brian 200 Brian A 29-Nov-00 17:41
To Brian: THE KABBALISTIC QUEST 186 William John Meegan 01-Dec-00 01:57
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 197 Graham Hancock 28-Nov-00 02:24
RE: Hancock The Underdog 120 Mark 28-Nov-00 11:42
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 164 Garrett Fagan 28-Nov-00 16:10
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 192 Graham Hancock 28-Nov-00 19:10
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 119 laura 28-Nov-00 21:27
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 127 CSICOP 29-Nov-00 09:29
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 191 Graham Hancock 29-Nov-00 10:37
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 149 Garrett Fagan 29-Nov-00 15:02
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 170 Graham Hancock 29-Nov-00 15:51
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 150 Pilgrim333 28-Nov-00 05:22
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 166 Sky 29-Nov-00 17:24
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 157 Robert G. Bauval 28-Nov-00 07:40
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 149 Christophe Leijnen 28-Nov-00 11:08
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 153 R. Avry Wilson 28-Nov-00 11:55
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 139 Mark 28-Nov-00 12:41
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 159 R. Avry Wilson 28-Nov-00 13:43
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 160 Mark 28-Nov-00 13:49
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 171 Pilgrim333 29-Nov-00 01:12
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 152 Garrett Fagan 29-Nov-00 15:49
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 184 R. Avry Wilson 29-Nov-00 11:18


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.