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
So, essentially, you would like a spin-off argument about a sub-argument? Do you not find that this negative approach to everything all of the time eventually leads you nowhere?

I assume you are the same Warwick who regularly posts on the Hall of Ma’at? How very, very different you must find things here on GHMB, where the promoters of alternative ideas and explorers of new theories can not be simply bullied off the forum by a crowd of clucking, tutting, sneering cynics in residence. The Hall of Ma’at, that tomb of dead ideas and intellectual cowardice, where the closing of ranks replaces debate and where any argument which challenges the smug preconceptions of the regulars is stamped upon. Where posts are edited, censored, or removed at the merest whiff of any dissent or alternative argument that might hold water, and where the slightest inkling of a fresh and thought-provoking take on the ancient world is enough to bring the moderators in like fussing mother hens to close down the thread. Yes, how very different you must find GHMB, when you regularly hone your skills on a forum where anyone with an alternative view has to proceed with two hands tied behind their backs while a gang of co-dependent reactionaries lay into them with full editorial backing and who then have the gall to pretend that they are actually freely debating anything or “weighing the evidence”. Why, it was daily entertainment at one point to tune in to that site just to hear the regular thud-thud-thud of Scott Creighton’s threads being shut down by the panicking moderators as quickly as he could start them. At one point they split the entire Ancient History section in two to try to quarantine Scott’s contributions. Such was the fear of new ideas. Such was the loathing for an independent mind. Such was the intolerance of anyone who dared to try to waken those leaden, sleeping, pedestrian brains, some of whom had once dabbled in alternative theory themselves and had their fingers burnt and so took up their new closed mindsets with all the venom of the convert. Yet when Robert Bauval visits the forum they all roll over to have their bellies tickled by the great man – his fame and book sales overcoming their die hard allegiance to the orthodox view. A most unedifying sight, a most unhealthy environment, and indeed it would all be weirdly funny were there not so many decent and open minded people interested in the alternate history field who wander innocently in to the midst of this self-serving cabal only to get the intellectual equivalent of a mugging.

Yes, tha Hall of Maat. How very different you must find things here. It is not enough here to simply sneer or snipe from the trenches, or snigger about little green men when the argument starts to run away from you. This place is about exploring new ideas. Anyone can stand and defend the orthodox, the status quo, anyone can naysay. It is the easiest thing in the world to dismiss a new theory, to demand incontrovertible proof from the word go, to expect every new truth to be brought on a plate to you, all neatly packaged. But that’s not how the world works, that’s not how progress is made. Sometimes it takes intellectually bravery, sometimes you need to go out on a limb and risk being wrong. These qualities are rare. For every Bauval, Osborne, Hancock or Creighton, there’s a thousand like yourself, clinging like a dog with a bone to the notion facts are only facts when they've finally been accepted by the orthodox majority, as though truth was subject to some kind of democracy based on the twisted practicalities of research funding. And that is what I mean by your “ilk”.

My love of Nicolas Poussin's "Et In Arcadia Ego" connects me to Gary Osborne's work, who references Scott Creighton, who carries on the ideas of Hancock and Bauval. All fascinating stuff. Is it right or wrong, is it all nonsense? I don’t know. But I’m glad there are minds out there pushing the boundaries. You see, this will come as a surprise to you, but we don’t know all there is to know. It’s not all in books yet. It can’t all be subject to peer review because some people do not yet have peers. They just have to get out there and push forward, and follow the truth as they see it to see where it’ll take them. How very different from those who squat on the fetid mound of received wisdom we call orthodoxy, taking pot shots at those who dare to think differently.

I had the great pleasure in seeing Graham Hancock in person in 2007 when he gave a series of seminars which touched upon our deep subconscious inter-connectiveness and the possible origins of the human species. I think I’m an educated, sceptical and pretty worldly person. I could have scoffed. At one level, it would have been the easiest thing in the world to have dismissed what he was saying as fanciful nonsense. Yet, there in the room with the man, and listening to him, you are aware that you are in the presence of a deeply, deeply involved and extraordinary intellect. And it’s at that point, if you are honest with yourself, that you have to have the humility to accept that there are minds out there with the capacity to see possibilities where you cannot. No, they are not to be regarded as primary sources, indeed they may still have everything to prove – but I’m glad they are contributing, I’m glad they are doing what they are doing, even if it ultimately all boils down to simply asking the questions that we should be asking even if the answers continue to elude us. There’s a tremendous worth in that.

It says a lot about us when we make the choice whether to contribute or merely tear down, whether to try to figure the world out for ourselves or merely repeat what we've been told. So do forgive me if I toss my tuppence worth in to briefly commend those with the courage who leave the comfortable certainties behind.



Lonely Angel


""It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 752 Scott Creighton 27-Feb-09 13:35
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 339 Laird Scranton 27-Feb-09 14:00
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 278 Vanya 27-Feb-09 14:44
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 342 Archae Solenhofen 27-Feb-09 16:26
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 343 KABOOM 27-Feb-09 16:42
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 324 David Campbell 27-Feb-09 17:08
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 358 Scott Creighton 27-Feb-09 17:13
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 293 Archae Solenhofen 27-Feb-09 17:55
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 349 Scott Creighton 27-Feb-09 17:04
Silly you 323 David L 27-Feb-09 17:15
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 310 Archae Solenhofen 27-Feb-09 17:44
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 308 Scott Creighton 27-Feb-09 18:05
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 276 Archae Solenhofen 27-Feb-09 18:56
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 284 Scott Creighton 27-Feb-09 20:23
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 371 Archae Solenhofen 27-Feb-09 23:04
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 334 legionromanes 27-Feb-09 23:11
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 370 Scott Creighton 28-Feb-09 10:31
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 344 Scott Creighton 28-Feb-09 11:35
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 348 Archae Solenhofen 28-Feb-09 18:16
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 304 Scott Creighton 01-Mar-09 01:02
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 346 Archae Solenhofen 01-Mar-09 19:39
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 439 Scott Creighton 02-Mar-09 12:48
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 275 Pete Vanderzwet 02-Mar-09 13:32
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 315 Scott Creighton 02-Mar-09 13:45
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 341 Pete Vanderzwet 02-Mar-09 15:15
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 318 Scott Creighton 02-Mar-09 16:01
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 292 Warwick 02-Mar-09 16:31
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 310 Titus Livius 02-Mar-09 18:56
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 342 Warwick 02-Mar-09 19:03
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 369 Archae Solenhofen 02-Mar-09 17:21
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 325 Scott Creighton 02-Mar-09 20:42
Creighton still kicking ass I see 431 LonelyAngel 04-Mar-09 16:32
was the shinx enclosure originaly filled with water. 336 David Kubisa 04-Mar-09 17:24
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 364 Archae Solenhofen 04-Mar-09 19:10
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 308 NetWorkAngel 04-Mar-09 19:13
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 314 Warwick 07-Mar-09 19:33
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 341 Warwick 08-Mar-09 19:18
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 338 Scott Creighton 04-Mar-09 21:38
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 346 Archae Solenhofen 04-Mar-09 23:19
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 316 Scott Creighton 05-Mar-09 11:07
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 342 LonelyAngel 05-Mar-09 09:12
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 242 Archae Solenhofen 05-Mar-09 17:15
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 262 Scott Creighton 04-Mar-09 21:57
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 346 deeside 05-Mar-09 08:17
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 329 Pete Vanderzwet 05-Mar-09 10:32
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 330 Scott Creighton 05-Mar-09 12:18
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 303 Pete Vanderzwet 08-Mar-09 07:32
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 338 Scott Creighton 08-Mar-09 17:39
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 318 LonelyAngel 05-Mar-09 09:11
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 299 Scott Creighton 05-Mar-09 10:07
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 277 Archae Solenhofen 05-Mar-09 17:11
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 326 Scott Creighton 05-Mar-09 17:49
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 313 Archae Solenhofen 05-Mar-09 18:16
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 329 Scott Creighton 05-Mar-09 18:50
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 243 Archae Solenhofen 05-Mar-09 19:00
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 372 Scott Creighton 05-Mar-09 19:09
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 299 Archae Solenhofen 05-Mar-09 19:35
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 324 deeside 05-Mar-09 20:16
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 323 Scott Creighton 06-Mar-09 00:58
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 363 Archae Solenhofen 06-Mar-09 02:15
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 305 Scott Creighton 06-Mar-09 10:13
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 303 Archae Solenhofen 06-Mar-09 17:31
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 386 Scott Creighton 06-Mar-09 18:31
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 363 LonelyAngel 06-Mar-09 11:28
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 342 Archae Solenhofen 06-Mar-09 16:47
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 364 Warwick 07-Mar-09 19:39
The Subject was Homework 338 Warwick 08-Mar-09 19:16
Re: The Subject was Homework 377 LonelyAngel 09-Mar-09 12:17
Re: The Subject was Homework 307 Warwick 10-Mar-09 16:01
Re: The Subject was Homework 339 The Kwuda 11-Mar-09 07:15
Re: The Subject was Homework 301 Warwick 11-Mar-09 15:45
Re: The Subject was Homework 336 LonelyAngel 11-Mar-09 16:33
Re: The Subject was Homework 323 Warwick 11-Mar-09 18:43
Re: The Subject was Homework 455 LonelyAngel 12-Mar-09 12:00
Re: The Subject was Homework 346 Scott Creighton 12-Mar-09 12:26
Re: The Subject was Homework 364 KABOOM 12-Mar-09 12:34
Re: The Subject was Homework 352 Titus Livius 12-Mar-09 18:33
Re: The Subject was Homework 315 deeside 12-Mar-09 18:47
Re: The Subject was Homework 309 Diomede 13-Mar-09 10:27
Re: The Subject was Homework 394 Warwick 14-Mar-09 17:19
Re: The Subject was Homework 341 Diomede 15-Mar-09 00:45
Re: The Subject was Homework 315 Warwick 16-Mar-09 15:32
Re: The Subject was Homework 284 LonelyAngel 17-Mar-09 11:37
I think we get your gist 339 Warwick 17-Mar-09 15:29
Re: I think we get your gist 341 Scott Creighton 17-Mar-09 16:16
Re: I think we get your gist 353 Warwick 17-Mar-09 17:12
while we're at it 309 Warwick 17-Mar-09 17:16
Re: I think we get your gist 274 Scott Creighton 17-Mar-09 17:52
Re: I think we get your gist 304 Warwick 17-Mar-09 18:03
Re: I think we get your gist 308 Scott Creighton 17-Mar-09 18:19
Re: I think we get your gist 304 Warwick 17-Mar-09 18:32
Re: I think we get your gist 321 Scott Creighton 17-Mar-09 18:58
Re: I think we get your gist 314 Warwick 17-Mar-09 19:08
Re: I think we get your gist 278 Warwick 17-Mar-09 19:08
Re: I think we get your gist 394 Scott Creighton 17-Mar-09 19:19
Re: I think we get your gist 315 Pete Vanderzwet 17-Mar-09 22:14
Re: I think we get your gist 268 Scott Creighton 18-Mar-09 09:43
Re: I think we get your gist 296 Warwick 18-Mar-09 15:51
Re: I think we get your gist 275 Scott Creighton 18-Mar-09 18:28
Re: I think we get your gist 260 Warwick 18-Mar-09 18:55
Re: I think we get your gist 297 Scott Creighton 18-Mar-09 21:28
Re: I think we get your gist 286 Warwick 18-Mar-09 21:42
Re: I think we get your gist 311 Scott Creighton 18-Mar-09 22:30
now that you ask 314 Warwick 19-Mar-09 18:35
Re: now that you ask 357 Scott Creighton 19-Mar-09 18:54
Re: now that you ask 234 Warwick 19-Mar-09 18:59
Re: now that you ask 309 Scott Creighton 19-Mar-09 19:27
Re: now that you ask 287 Warwick 19-Mar-09 21:23
Re: I think we get your gist 287 Archae Solenhofen 18-Mar-09 18:03
Re: I think we get your gist 268 Scott Creighton 18-Mar-09 22:15
Re: I think we get your gist 302 Archae Solenhofen 19-Mar-09 03:26
Re: I think we get your gist 368 Scott Creighton 19-Mar-09 17:35
Re: I think we get your gist 303 LonelyAngel 18-Mar-09 10:47
Re: I think we get your gist 300 Warwick 18-Mar-09 15:36
There you go again... 251 LonelyAngel 18-Mar-09 17:08
Re: There you go again... 280 Warwick 18-Mar-09 17:44
Re: There you go again... again 291 LonelyAngel 19-Mar-09 10:01
Re: There you go again... again 286 Warwick 19-Mar-09 15:59
Re: Creighton still kicking ass I see 312 bigbytes 04-Mar-09 22:12
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 291 Archae Solenhofen 03-Mar-09 05:27
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 303 Scott Creighton 03-Mar-09 10:49
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 319 deeside 27-Feb-09 19:07
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 275 Warwick 28-Feb-09 18:03
A Question of Qualifications 550 Xebec 11-Mar-09 02:50
Re: A Question of Qualifications 338 deeside 11-Mar-09 09:03
Re: A Question of Qualifications 284 Scott Creighton 11-Mar-09 10:43
Bankrupt Dating Methodology 270 Xebec 28-Feb-09 07:24
Re: Bankrupt Dating Methodology 299 Scott Creighton 28-Feb-09 09:53
Don't raise the bar too high 280 KABOOM 28-Feb-09 13:16
Re: Don't raise the bar too high 265 Scott Creighton 28-Feb-09 14:04
Re: Don't raise the bar too high 228 KABOOM 28-Feb-09 16:39
Re: Don't raise the bar too high 319 Scott Creighton 28-Feb-09 16:45
Re: Don't raise the bar too high 266 Xebec 01-Mar-09 05:20
Re: Don't raise the bar too high 251 Titus Livius 01-Mar-09 09:50
Re: Don't raise the bar too high 298 Scott Creighton 01-Mar-09 11:37
Re: Bankrupt Dating Methodology 316 Riaan 28-Feb-09 10:36
Re: Bankrupt Dating Methodology 307 Pete Vanderzwet 28-Feb-09 16:10
Re: Bankrupt Dating Methodology 348 Riaan 28-Feb-09 20:22
Re: Bankrupt Dating Methodology 302 Pete Vanderzwet 01-Mar-09 00:54
Re: Bankrupt Dating Methodology 382 Riaan 01-Mar-09 07:00
Salt and Pyramids 277 Xebec 01-Mar-09 07:09
Re: Salt and Pyramids 399 Riaan 01-Mar-09 10:42
Re: Salt and Pyramids 287 Pete Vanderzwet 02-Mar-09 09:16
Re: Salt and Pyramids 313 Riaan 02-Mar-09 18:16
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 239 Pete Vanderzwet 28-Feb-09 16:01
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 300 Scott Creighton 28-Feb-09 16:34
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 290 Titus Livius 28-Feb-09 17:40
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 309 Scott Creighton 01-Mar-09 17:04
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 297 Pete Vanderzwet 01-Mar-09 00:50
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 280 Scott Creighton 01-Mar-09 01:05
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 324 Pete Vanderzwet 01-Mar-09 05:46
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 400 Scott Creighton 01-Mar-09 12:27
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 347 Archae Solenhofen 01-Mar-09 18:49
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 246 Scott Creighton 01-Mar-09 19:00
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 321 David Campbell 01-Mar-09 19:26
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 296 Warwick 01-Mar-09 19:38
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 237 David Campbell 01-Mar-09 20:17
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 306 Warwick 01-Mar-09 20:49
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 288 David Campbell 01-Mar-09 23:23
prespective, proportion, and perilous carving 285 Warwick 01-Mar-09 19:32
Re: prespective, proportion, and perilous carving 280 Scott Creighton 01-Mar-09 23:50
Re: prespective, proportion, and perilous carving 303 KABOOM 02-Mar-09 15:21
Re: prespective, proportion, and perilous carving 308 Scott Creighton 03-Mar-09 16:04
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 291 Archae Solenhofen 01-Mar-09 20:07
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 345 Scott Creighton 02-Mar-09 10:58
What a cop out... 306 Pete Vanderzwet 02-Mar-09 05:36
Re: What a cop out... 329 Susan Doris 02-Mar-09 07:29
Re: What a cop out... 324 legionromanes 02-Mar-09 17:24
Re: What a cop out... 287 The Kwuda 11-Mar-09 07:20
Re: What a cop out... 355 Scott Creighton 02-Mar-09 10:20
Re: What a cop out... 282 Warwick 02-Mar-09 15:52
Re: What a cop out... 363 Pete Vanderzwet 02-Mar-09 16:53
Re: What a cop out... 309 Warwick 02-Mar-09 17:02
Re: What a cop out... 295 Archae Solenhofen 02-Mar-09 17:35
Re: What a cop out... 255 Scott Creighton 02-Mar-09 17:45
Re: What a cop out... 317 Archae Solenhofen 02-Mar-09 18:12
Re: What a cop out... 284 Scott Creighton 02-Mar-09 20:50
Re: What a cop out... 291 Pete Vanderzwet 02-Mar-09 17:53
Re: What a cop out... 313 Scott Creighton 02-Mar-09 20:54
The 2 pictures don't compute 254 KABOOM 01-Mar-09 19:38
Re: The 2 pictures don't compute 311 Warwick 01-Mar-09 19:51
Re: The 2 pictures don't compute 276 K_Asp 02-Mar-09 12:00
Re: The 2 pictures don't compute 292 deeside 02-Mar-09 14:35
FYI 303 Warwick 02-Mar-09 15:43
Re: The 2 pictures don't compute 249 KABOOM 02-Mar-09 15:08
Re: The 2 pictures don't compute 300 Archae Solenhofen 02-Mar-09 17:56
Lets look again, by the numbers 320 AndyBlackard 02-Mar-09 21:49
Re: Lets look again, by the numbers 279 Scott Creighton 02-Mar-09 22:15
Re: Lets look again, by the numbers 251 legionromanes 02-Mar-09 23:05
Re: Lets look again, by the numbers 373 Scott Creighton 03-Mar-09 09:21
Questions Posted to Authors of this Paper 221 Scott Creighton 04-Mar-09 09:40
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 287 Enigcom 05-Mar-09 21:28
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 330 davet 12-Mar-09 19:53
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 298 KABOOM 12-Mar-09 21:15
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 311 Scott Creighton 13-Mar-09 09:31
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 287 enkira 14-Mar-09 12:51
Re: Could the Sphinx be Almost 1 Million Years Old? 304 davet 18-Mar-09 22:08


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.