thoughts?

>>18961170
Was debunked hundreds of times. Has lots of very basic mistakes and lies.

I'm reading it on and off. So far its pretty good. It is a little hard for me to read more than 30-60 min in one sitting. I would recommend it to anyone interested in x stuff. It is a good addition to the personal library.

>>18961189
lies?

>>18961189
Really?
Now I might drop it lol.

I'll only read it if the forward is written by Joe Rogan while he was in an isolation tank.

>>18961189
fuck off, academia shill

>>18961212
kek

Wasn't that book written in 1995? We've learned a lot of things since then, it probably has a lot of outdated information.

Belongs on /pol/ with the rest of the racist retardation.

File: magicians-uk-500px.jpg (44KB, 325x500px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 325x500px

>>18961243
thoughts?

ayo we wuz GODz n shieet nom sayin bruh

Very problematic scholarship, it essentially exposes all social sciences as an elaborate hoax agreed upon by committee.

(The real answer is both the officially accepted story and the Hancock narrative is bullshit, interpretation, and conjecture. Hancock reaches his conclusions because he is LARPing as a neo-satanist pagan-luciferian new age guru. The professional archaeologists reach their conclusion due to external funding pressure from the empire they are defending.)

When we look at the Chinese official science policy, which rejects Out of Africa as the root cause of human evolution, we call it propaganda. When we look at Ancient Egypt and call it the first civilisation, because it led to Greece, Rome and Europe, we call that history. No, no, don't dig in Syria or Iraq. Don't explore South America too closely. Nothing happened in India 5000-6000 years ago. And so on.


Problems, lots of problems in the world. You either just go deep into physics so people can't bullshit you with quantum mumbo jumbo, spend the 5-6 years to learn about lasers and optics and particles and mathematics. OR you have to depend on some third party for all verification when it comes to new information. Wikipedia, Google, some University professor, some guy selling books, someone you know. Trust. In this world of zero privacy, it's difficult to trust anyone. When information is free it is essentially worthless, since now you have to purchase trust, and the more you spend the more accurate your information will be. yeap, lots of problems.

The way I think of it is like this. A lot of things are possible. Only certain things happen. The chances that things you did not personally witness happened the way someone is telling you is certainly possible, but highly improbable. They are fish stories. Hancock wants one world technocratic neo-feudalist world government, so he wants to paint some form of unified human culture in the deep forgotten past, and he looks as hard as he can for that.

>>18961189
Such as?

The most important part of the book, and which I think Hancock was successful in demonstrating, is that many of the great works of Egypt were built much earlier than we suspect and by a more advanced intellect than mainstream academia acknowledges.

Insecure racists got so bent out of shape from the quotes referencing white men that the entire point of the book went over their heads.

>>18961305
Look how the world responds to you. Bro, people are immune to harsh reality even in the anon-form. But I'm glad you too realize that kernel of truth exists in between. Rather than eating a single source, we ought to do what our ancestors did - cherry picking and rice thrashing. Then we will be able to gather what we need at the moment.