Graham Hancock

[Blackthorn]

Is anyone here a fan of, or a reader of Graham Hancock?

I have read "Fingerprints of the Gods" and am very interested in his theories.

I am not necessarily convinced of his theories, but nonetheless am very intrigued by what they suggest.

I have not heard of him, JCOM. Can you tell us of him a bit?

[n11pilot]

I've read some of MR Hancock's work and he is for lack of a better term a "Crypto-archaeologist". He has an interest in ancient mysteries which is something I share. Unfortunately, I can't say that I share many of this theories. His writing is very interesting but is also very short on proof or evidence.

[davidg]

I find that sort of writing fascinating however, I always end up reading it once, enjoying it, then re-reading it with more attention and find issues with the authors thesis. I find Hancock and others tend to make one step on evidence, another on speculation of the evidence, and the third step lands them on Venus somewhere.

[n11pilot]

I find that sort of writing fascinating however, I always end up reading it once, enjoying it, then re-reading it with more attention and find issues with the authors thesis. I find Hancock and others tend to make one step on evidence, another on speculation of the evidence, and the third step lands them on Venus somewhere.

I agree with that analysis, David. Speculation based on limited evidence is entertaining and a lot of fun to do with like minded friends over coffee but its not science.

[n11pilot]

JCOM, I think the three of us have a pretty fair assessment of MR Hancock's work. I don't think he's much of a scientist beyond a certain point but he sure is entertaining.

[The Oracle]

I have not read any of his work, but from what I have heard here I am interested. I just looked up "Fingerprints of the Gods" and noticed there is an updated version. JCOM have you read the update? If so is it worth making sure that one is read over the other?

[Steve]

I read his book "The Sign and the Seal" a few years back. Interesting, but he doesn't really have good sources to back up his theories, just conjecture. The academic community doesn't really take Hancock seriously.

[davidg]

I read his book "The Sign and the Seal" a few years back. Interesting, but he doesn't really have good sources to back up his theories, just conjecture. The academic community doesn't really take Hancock seriously.

I read "The Sign and the Seal" several years back and thought that it was very entertaining but then when I started to read other material in the same genre.. the difference between archaeology and what he does became clear. He is a good writer, and you DO need some degree of speculation in any new discovery however I think he goes overboard in his speculation..

Perhaps I'm just jealous.. Could I but write that way, I would have no need of a "normal" job!

[marcoshark]

The thing about Mr Hancock is that he use to be a writer for the Economist and his web site is very entertaining. I will also echo that while he does explore some very interesting ideas, his lack of smoking gun evidence, while not writing him off completely, does not necessarily make him a member of what I call "The Tin-Foil Hat Brigade".

[Blackthorn]

Interesting stuff! I'm glad you started this thread, JCOM. I'm intrigued now.