Archaeologica.org

I'm watching TV also. Don't worry about that.

When The Revolution comes on The History Channel I'll pay attention to that. A very well done series.

Remember that Hancock is not suggesting "contact." He is suggesting that all of these cultures developed independently from the wreckage of an earlier culture ( the Remote Common Ancestor.)

That idea is compelling but as you will see, Hancock gets off on a tangent with the Hapgood Earth Crust Displacement theory and he never gets back on track.

Interesting.....right around where the meteor landed that knocked out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago

you mean Chicxulub
i have no idea how its pronounced though

I call it "Yucatan."


(Much easier.)

he did make mention of the similarity of Giza and the layout of Teotihuacan. Two pyramids in a straight line - one offset to the left. That's a mighty big coincidence.

try laying out three pyramids in any formation and thats what you always get unless you go for the equilateral triangle option which apparently only appears in Bosnia

Well, yeah, if he relies on the Hapgood theory he has gone down the wrong road. I hope he's not going to go Atlantis on me either.

Let me know when we can move forward and I'll start reading.

At the beginning of this I warned folks that they may have a hard time following along if they didn't have a book. Hell, even with a book I don't think it's easy to follow.

One suspects that had the Egyptians (or whoever ) wanted to put the Giza pyramids in a straight line they could have managed it. Seems like child's play compared to building the goddamn things.

Yep, that's pretty silly IMO. I'm gonna take a break. Enjoy the Revolution.

Whenever you're ready. I don't know that there is an answer for any of this stuff. Von Daniken tried to attribute everything to spacemen and that didn't work, either.

Hancock's intention seems to be to throw anomalies against the wall and see what sticks. He is very good at that.

Hancock has a manner of writing that can be quite seductive (reader beware). I enjoy him. I know he has a lot of books out but this is the first that I've read.

When I've finished this I'll move on to Underworld. As you know, I already agree with the statements he has made on TV, etc. There is about 15,000 yrs. of mans history that is missing or punctuated by the fact that mankinds prime real estate was engulfed. I'm going to read that one on my own

So - I'll read on and see what "sticks".

BTW - I can post even later if that works out better.

I actually read The Sign and The Seal first. (In that, he tracks the Ark of the Covenant to Ethiopia, or so they claim.)

Of course, that was published before archaeology dismissed the possibility of an Israelite Exodus from Egypt and hence there was no basis for an Ark, either. Still....an entertaining yarn but of course, no payoff at the end.

Interesting. BTW- I don't dismiss the possibility of the Ark (and the the rituals associated with) once existing. But either way, it doesn't exist now.

That's another discussion though.

I can probably be in here a little later tomorrow again. Tuesday night I'll be at a Willy Nelson concert.

I don't dismiss the possibility of the Ark

Uh-oh. You getting like arch?

Minimalist wrote:

I don't dismiss the possibility of the Ark

Uh-oh. You getting like arch?

Au Contraire!!

I am saying though, just as we are examining religous customs and deities of the meso -americans and the Egyptians/Sumerians, the history in the written records of the Israelites is little different. From an anthropological viewpoint, there is a lot to consider. Not here, but sometime.

I'll bet you've read the Iliad of Homer. He refers to various deities intervening all through the book. But underlying the whole story is a basic historical truth.

It's the same thing.

Speaking of another post - you asked me not to compare someone to Arch. I'll take that up with you - in the Refuge sometime,but not here.

Touche!