![]() ![]()
Whatever the outcome I’m glad to have played a part in forcing an intellectual elite – historians, Egyptologists, archaeologists – to defend their previously unquestioned theories and speculations about prehistory and to confront a well-worked-out alternative theory presented to a mass public in a series of bestselling books. If I’m wrong … fine! Let the Dobermans prove me wrong, or persuade the public that I am wrong. Meanwhile my own definite feeling, in such a hostile climate, is that it’s my job – and a real responsibility to be taken seriously - to undermine and cast doubt on the orthodox theory of history in every way that I can and to make the most eloquent and persuasive case that I am capable of making for the existence of a lost civilisation. Readers will have to make up their own minds about such attacks. The Dobermans also systematically ignore all forms of evidence that cast doubt on the established view (for example the implications of the astronomical alignments of the Pyramids of Giza) while at the same time accusing us “alternative historians” of being “pseudo-scientists” who dishonestly “select” only evidence that supports our case and who ignore or even misrepresent contradictory data. These scholars, and their many fans and chums in the quality media, do not hesitate to mount Doberman-like attacks on any who try to argue in favour of a lost civilisation. ![]() #Ebay books aviation forgotten fields of america full#There exists a vast array of academic “experts”, on comfortable and secure salaries, with the resources of full university departments behind them, whose life’s work is to churn out endless refinements and confirmations of the orthodox theory of prehistory. On the contrary, by providing a powerful, persuasive single-minded case for the existence of a lost civilisation, I believe that I am merely restoring a little balance and objectivity to a previously unbalanced situation. So the way I see it it’s not my job to be “balanced” or “objective”. Until I and a few of my colleagues like John Anthony West and Robert Bauval began to speak out there was really no counterbalancing view at all! And even now, although we’ve managed to get some people’s attention – and some television time – we’re still in every sense outnumbered and outgunned. I operate on the assumption that our education system, media and indeed our entire society today combine to give massive support and unquestioned acceptance to the orthodox side of the argument. ![]() If you want a slavishly “balanced” and objective account of “both sides of the argument” then I’m the wrong author for you! ![]() I’ve tried to show how seriously wrong this attitude could be and to gather together as much evidence as possible to support the view that a great “lost” civilisation could have flourished far back in remote antiquity and that it could have been so completely destroyed that its very existence was eventually forgotten.Īlthough I try to give thorough documentation, in the form of footnotes, to support every stage of my arguments, I would like to make it absolutely clear what my books are and what they are not. They insist that although they may have made some mistakes in the minor details they are undoubtedly correct in the overall picture that they paint for us of history and prehistory. For some reason that I have honestly never been able to understand properly, historians bitterly resent any such suggestion. Human society may indeed have evolved in a straight and essentially unbroken line from primitive to “smart” – just as the historians say – but it is also possible that there could have been major discontinuities in the record which have severely distorted and “edited” the data about the past that historians work with. I write my books to try to show that an alternative view can fruitfully be considered. The theory takes many different local forms with endless variations, but the backbone in all cases is the same: an entrenched belief system about the human condition and about our collective past in which modern advanced civilisation is seen as the product of thousands of years of linear social and technological evolution – “onwards and upwards,” as my friend John West likes to caricature the orthodox view, “from stupid old cave men to smart old us”. Steven Crossley Introduction by Graham HancockĪfter years of travelling, exploring archaeological sites and rummaging through puzzles in ancient myths and legends I have found many reasons to suspect that the orthodox theory of human prehistory – the one that is taught in all our schools and universities – is seriously in error. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |