Fingerprints of the Gods - Book Review

Post by **Minimalist** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 11:36 am

he has compiled the work of other psuedo authors who didn't do their research properly

Seeing as how I am not satisfied with the orthodixy club I have no problem reading and considering what everyone writes. BTW, who defines what a pseudo author is? You?? How does that make you different from the pope or any other self-appointed arbiter of dogma?

Post by **Minimalist** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 11:44 am

But then you delve a little deeper and discover that he's been very selective with his own research and the sources he quotes

Again, he is presenting evidence of a theory which is outside the mainstream. That's good because the marduk's and Hawasses and Lehners of the world want even the discussion of such ideas suppressed.

I'm not comfortable with the suppression of ideas....reminds me too much of the Republican party.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:00 pm

No point in talking to him Min. He's just another one of the vast number of humans that worship at the alter of orthodoxy. They are present in religion, science, and everywhere actually.

Not capable of free thinking and problem solving. And most of the language is composed of declarative statements.

Like your friend Arch.

Post by **Minimalist** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:02 pm

Actually, I was replying to essan.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:07 pm

Ok - after checking I see that you are. I made one of those assumptions.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:10 pm

min youre an idiot
if you had read what i wrote rather than fanatsizing about kissing Hancocks boots you would have seen just why he is a psuedo author
he doesn't do the research properly and he doesn't have any idea about what really happened in the ancient world
he is a journalist interested in making money not in enlightening cult members like you as to what actually happened
Zahi Hawass are at least qualified at what they represent
Hancock isn't
from your diatribe of utter crap neither are you

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:20 pm

It was probably hoping for too much to do this thing, Minimalist. I was never worried about the folks here at archaeologica, but indeed I was worried that these folks would show up and begin trashing the thread.

So, I'm willing to just read the book on my own and post my final thoughts when I'm done, and I can PM you about certain aspects of it 'till then.

Sad though, I know a number of our friends have been reading with interest. Let me know what you think.

stan · Post by **stan** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:25 pm

min youre an idiot
if you had read what i wrote rather than fanatsizing about kissing Hancocks boots you would have seen just why he is a psuedo author
he doesn't do the research properly and he doesn't have any idea about what really happened in the ancient world
he is a journalist interested in making money not in enlightening cult members like you as to what actually happened
Zahi Hawass are at least qualified at what they represent
Hancock isn't
from your diatribe of utter crap neither are you

Hey, Marduk! Lay off the personal attacks, please.
You have made some good points on this thread, and we have read them. It is unnecessary to "go ballistic."
We are here for the enjoyment of discussion, not to trash each other.
Thanks.
Stan

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:28 pm

min started it

is this forum completely unmoderated ?

Post by **Minimalist** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 2:13 pm

No, marduk, actually you started it.

Hancock and others at least raise questions. Zahi and his buddies think they have all the answers.

I don't trust people like that (they remind me of religious idiots) and I now assume you are one of them.

Let's never forget shall we that this guy still firmly ascribes the sphinx to Khafre based on.............what?

One syllable of Khafre's name allegedly on Thutmoses' restoration stele and the fact that it is near the pyramid? Lenin's tomb was in the Kremlin...doesn't mean that Lenin built the Kremlin.

And they call Schoch a whacko for daring to use geology to suggest that it may be older than believed.

Some people are too invested in the status quo.

Btw, marduk, I read what you wrote. I was not impressed.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 4:31 pm

what defines a psuedo author is whether or not their theories stands up under scrutiny
none of Hancocks do
but you being such an expert on the ancient world would know that right Min
you criticised my opinion and categorised me along with Hawass and Lehner
thats where you started it
I don't particularly like either of them

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 6:55 pm

Woooo-hoooo, it's all clear to me now. I looked ahead in the book, mainly viewing the pictures that Hancock has included.

He eventually ends up in Egypt. I didn't read much but it was enough. I see on one page that he invoked the name of Schoch.

I've wondered why some people seem to start foaming at the mouth at the sound of his very name. He has probably shot someones sacred cow. Well, we've already talked about Schoch so that will be easy to cover.

It's not nice to mess with peoples religion - ergo the jihad.

Starflower · Post by **Starflower** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 9:26 pm

For the last few days I have been what minimalist calls a lurker

But I have so thoroughly enjoyed reading this discussion I had to register and ask you to please not stop now. I read the book so long ago I do not have any coherent views on the matter but am willing to dig around for a copy and start reading it ASAP. Whether I can then come up with anything intelligent to say is another matter entirely. Hope to see you all still here tomorrow.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 10:18 pm

That's very nice of you Starflower. We'll be here tomorrow. I'm glad you joined us and welcome to the forum.

Post by **Minimalist** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:12 am

what defines a psuedo author is whether or not their theories stands up under scrutiny

Funny, marduk, according to Schoch and West the attribution of the Sphinx to Khafre doesn't "hold up" either.

You see, perception is everything and I repeat that a lot of people are terribly invested in the status quo.

Many years ago I read something that has stuck with me. The author said that faster-than-light travel may not be possible but that if it is possible, the secret will not be found by someone who thinks it can't be done.