Author of the Month :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
Join us at this forum every month for a discussion with famous popular authors from around the world. 
Welcome! Log InRegister
The book on which my AOM article is based rests on two pillars: one archaeological, the other astronomical. Although its main topic is purely archaeo-astronomical, the dates for Malta's temples, 9,150 - 4,250 BC, that followed from its outcome deviated so much from those given by archaeological convention that a scrutiny of Malta's archaeology was the most logical step to take. This led to the shocking discovery of flaws in the past, of evidence that the dates for Malta's temples were deliberately asserted to be not older than Bronze Age Crete (see Ch. 4 of Part One of Sirius, the Star of the Maltese Temples). When we add to this the scarcity of radio-carbon dates for the temples ("as scarce as ice-cubes in hell" - Graham Hancock in Underworld), the first and obvious consequence in my opinion is that the conventional dates for the temples may be and must be questioned. This is the bottom line, which leads to further thoughts...



Edited 15 time(s). Last edit at 28-Mar-19 14:36 by Lenie Reedijk.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
The Orientation of Malta's Temples to Sirius - Further Thoughts and Ramifications (1) 603 Lenie Reedijk 05-Mar-19 07:26
Re: The orientation of Malta's temples to Sirius - some consequences (1) 74 Poster Boy 05-Mar-19 15:26
Re: The orientation of Malta's temples to Sirius - some consequences (1) 74 Lenie Reedijk 05-Mar-19 16:11
Re: The orientation of Malta's temples to Sirius - some consequences (1) 71 Poster Boy 05-Mar-19 19:51
Re: The orientation of Malta's temples to Sirius - some consequences (1) 94 Lenie Reedijk 05-Mar-19 20:07


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.