Graham Hancock - Discoveries of Ancient Civilizations

[uzn]

In this, more sentimental, version of Hancock's presentation, he invites us to not only re-consider the past but re-evaluate our present. Originally titled, 'My Discoveries Are Lethal To Academia', Hancock's presentation includes megalithic stone constructions from around the world and calls into question the conventional dating surrounding many of them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKlbyqlsxlA

The Post was meant also to be a Bump Post for John Anthony West who has one wonderful speech and an amazing conversation with Graham Hancock in this Thread:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?94713-ANCIENT-ALIEN-EGYPT----A-Day-with-John-Anthony-West-5-HOURS-2016

[A Voice from the Mountains]

I've always appreciated Hancock's work but I think he is a bit too trusting of some dating techniques. Last time I heard him speak he still believed that the pyramids were really built back during the Egyptian dynasty they are conventionally attributed to, despite the lack of evidence for any of that, and the evidence of them being built closer to the time of the Sphinx which he believes dates back something like 12,000 years. So he believes that Sphinx was built around 10,000 BC but that the pyramids weren't built until something like 8,000 years later, which I don't buy. Of course he could just be saying this to avoid additional controversy and stick closer to mainstream academic literature.

Carbon dating also has many problems, and the carbon dating of organic material underneath excavated stones is typically the only way stone megaliths are dated. So people throw a lot of dates around but I don't believe any of them are accurate unless by dumb luck. The method itself is very flawed and easily manipulated in the lab.

[uzn]

Yeah, Carbon Dating doesn´t help with Stones at all. He might be a bit cautious with his datings. But listen to him, he dares to question mainstream dating a lot in this talk. I like him a lot.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Carbon dating doesn't help with anything at all except maybe in very narrow relative dating. Anatoli Fomenko gives a good summary of the problems with carbon dating in volume 1 of his History: Science or Fiction? series. Any number of things can affect carbon-14 levels, from cosmic radiation (and there are already studies showing that carbon dating in the Great Lakes region is considerably off because of a great burst of radiation in the past, from what is believed to have a been a cosmic event like a supernova) to local environment conditions (nearby deposits of radioactive ore) and the biology of the organism which takes in the carbon.

This is all before getting to the lab and the entire cluster intercourse it entails, starting with individuals submitting samples to declare what dating they expect from the artifact to the lab technicians who they are paying to find it. Significant deviations result in samples just being called "contaminated" or in the worst cases "anomalous." Results that they are able to fudge into the time period they were looking for a priori are declared successes or major breakthroughs.

For artifacts carbon dated from Egypt and neighboring regions they even have to mathematically manipulate the lab results (when they are within an acceptable range to begin with) because otherwise they won't match the same carbon-14 scale used to date items from other regions.

[Ernie Nemeth]

I really liked Hancock's books. They are well written, informative without being authoritative, and his personal impressions are eloquent.

I don't recall him claiming that the pyramid is of a different age than the Sphinx, must have missed that or his other data cancelled his error in my mind.

I would purchase another book of his if he writes one. He is a good researcher, with an eye for anomalies, and otherwise innocuous detail.

[ghostrider]

One thing about him i like, he seems very sincere ... the history of Earth is very tightly controlled ...

[Justplain]

I saw Hancock at his lecture at the university of toronto last fall where he gave his well know views on ancient civilization as well as consciousness raising. He has a loyal following. He is a pioneer who has brought much insight to a large and growing audience, for which he deserves much credit.

Hancock also seems to discredit an alien presence here, explicitly drawing parallels between abductee experience and those who get high on hyuasca.

Another topic Hancock loves is getting high on drugs, like hyuasca, marijiana and mushrooms, to explore one's consciousness. No mention was made in his lecture to other methods of consciousness raising, such as meditation, yoga or fasting. I find this a bit irresponsible since mind altering drugs can be extremely dangerous.

Anyhow, Hancock has his approach and a dedicated audience. Its just best to realize he comes with limitations that are good to be aware of.

[Ernie Nemeth]

I don't judge people for having different tastes to mine.

And, I would love to get high with the dude. I bet he's a hoot

[Fellow Aspirant]

I've always appreciated Hancock's work but I think he is a bit too trusting of some dating techniques. Last time I heard him speak he still believed that the pyramids were really built back during the Egyptian dynasty they are conventionally attributed to, despite the lack of evidence for any of that, and the evidence of them being built closer to the time of the Sphinx which he believes dates back something like 12,000 years. So he believes that Sphinx was built around 10,000 BC but that the pyramids weren't built until something like 8,000 years later, which I don't buy. Of course he could just be saying this to avoid additional controversy and stick closer to mainstream academic literature.

Carbon dating also has many problems, and the carbon dating of organic material underneath excavated stones is typically the only way stone megaliths are dated. So people throw a lot of dates around but I don't believe any of them are accurate unless by dumb luck. The method itself is very flawed and easily manipulated in the lab.



If you read his books you will be reassured that he is consistent with his claims that the pyramids and the Sphinx pre-date the Egyptian dynasties by thousands of years. He is meticulous in his use of dating techniques.

B.

[Spellbound]

And, I would love to get high with the dude. I bet he's a hoot

I laugh when he gets high with Joe Rogan on occasion (some really REALLY good podcasts there along with Randall Carlson). I'd love to try iowaska with Graham.

Dave - Toronto

[A Voice from the Mountains]

If you read his books you will be reassured that he is consistent with his claims that the pyramids and the Sphinx pre-date the Egyptian dynasties by thousands of years. He is meticulous in his use of dating techniques.

B.

I have read Fingerprints of the Gods and I've watched him in several lengthy interviews. He thinks the Sphinx shows signs of water erosion that put it back about 12,000 years but he doesn't argue the same for the pyramids. He thinks that the pyramids are much more recent.

I could only find this source off-hand but if anybody digs through his work more deeply I'm confident that they'll find what I'm saying to be true:


Among the most attention-grabbing claims in the book were: a suggestion that the Pyramids of Giza were designed to store books of knowledge written by an ancient civilisation; that the Great Sphinx preceded the Ancient Egyptians by many thousands of years; and that Plato, who wrote about Atlantis in his books Timaeus and Critias, knew exactly where the fabled lost city was hidden.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/authors/graham-hancock-interview/

Note in the Telegraph excerpt above that the Sphinx belonged to "an ancient civilisation" but the pyramids themselves were merely "designed to store books of knowledge" from that same former civilization. So there is clearly a distinction there.

Again this is the only source I could find off-hand. Somebody else could probably find it straight out of the horse's mouth if they had the time to dig, because I know I've heard him talk about this before and it's one of the things I most disagree with him about. I suspect he may just want to be cautious with what he says so as not to alienate the mainstream audience too much by getting into the pyramid "conspiracy" stuff. At any rate the sphinx does show much more erosion than the pyramids themselves do.

[CurEus]

I missed his talk in Toronto :(

Hancock strikes me as sincere, sane and a thoroughly good researcher. His use of ceremonial and consciousness expanding "medicines" like Ayuaska is conducted in a traditional manner and not "recreationally" so I wouldn't label him as a "drug user" per se although he admits at a time marijuana had become a problem...which after few ceremonies with Ayuaska he promptly addressed.

[meat suit]

great guy Graham Hancock...
its worth following him on twitter .. he often post and always interesting stuff
https://twitter.com/Graham__Hancock

[Cardillac]

Graham Hancock is one of my intellectual heros; have read "Figerprints of the Gods"/"Magicians of the Gods"; both tremendous books, sources of knowledge-

Larry