Has anyone ever written a book to counter argue Hancock or Von Daniken?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Barford" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 6:56 AM
Subject: Odp: Graham Hancock
> Jason Lucas writes:
> > I can't really believe that Graham Hancock is still being taken
> > seriously - I'm sure most of his theories were dismissed some ten years
> > ago.
> Last year just for the hell of it I went along to a "lecture" given by
> von D. Of course there was no provision for a question session after the
> talk, he was thanked profusely and whisked away smartly. And that is a
> because he came out with the same stuff as always, completely unmodified
> take into account criticisms such as the 'thing that looks like an
> parking bay' on the Nazca drawings is only a couple of metres across (its
> the knee of a bird geoglyph). On the contrary this was one of his first
> slides. The guy must have come across these and all the other
> in his reading (even if just of the Internet which we know he spends a lot
> of time searching). Presumably then his use regardless of this
> pseudo-evidence is just cynical but furthermore shows that he himself does
> not take his own ideas seriously enough to reject that which is plainly
> wrong. And yet his primary argument was that it was the archaeologists who
> had the closed minds.
> The question is - argue with these crackpot ideas or ignore them?
> Paul Barford