Fingerprints Of The Gods by Graham Hancock

Read this book some years ago.Found Hancock's theories and evidence quite believable."There is possibly Pyramids or other such remains buried miles under the ice of the North Pole ( a theory that was hijacked for the film Alien vs Predator) .Originally was further south but got shifted like an orange peel around it's core many thousands of years ago."

"The Egyptians didn't build the Pyramids in Egypt.They just came along many years after and stole the glory and graffitied all over the walls."

he goes into the 'Myths' of legend like the story of Qeutzelcoatl- the Giant who taught the ancients .But maybe it wasn't a myth.These Giants may actually have existed

Been quite a few docs on TV about the mathematical possibility and probability that the Pyramids were in fact built in 10,500 Bc and certainly not by the glory stealing Egyptians.

Ah ..well ,i'm waffling and it's maybe a load of early 21st century hokem.But it's a convincing book

that looks pretty interesting and I'm always in need of new things to read. :)

This sounds alot like the stuff that Erich Van Daniken peddled more than 20 years ago. He wrote a book called Chariots of the Gods. There's also a doco with the same name. Its all interesting stuff but hard to believe. It almost smacks of racism when we deny the achievemnts of a particular culture. This happened in Zimbabwe when white explorers would not believe that what they saw as a primitive people could have been responible for the ruins of Greater Zimbabwe.

Ronald Kirsch wrote: This sounds alot like the stuff that Erich Van Daniken peddled more than 20 years ago. He wrote a book called Chariots of the Gods. There's also a doco with the same name. Its all interesting stuff but hard to believe. It almost smacks of racism when we deny the achievemnts of a particular culture. This happened in Zimbabwe when white explorers would not believe that what they saw as a primitive people could have been responible for the ruins of Greater Zimbabwe.

Yeah , i heard of the Van Daniken book but not read it.Don't know what the difference between the two authors views are.

I' m sure Hancock didn't set out to be racist or dismiss the Egyptians achievements but there is lot that doesn't add up or connect.

"Originally was further south but got shifted like an orange peel around it's core many thousands of years ago."

What? What does that mean? I'm a total believer in the idea of one or many previous civilizations....but is thig gonna be one of those books with likes like....

"This requries you to think outside science" (or logic, reason or common sense) or "What the great scientific conspiracy dont want you to know is"

if we're free of that sort of needless pish...that may as well be a naked chick chick with a bass drum shouting snake oil, penis pills, get yer bullshit here.

i may read it.

Steve Campbell wrote: "Originally was further south but got shifted like an orange peel around it's core many thousands of years ago."

What? What does that mean?

What he reckons is .. well imagine the British Isles where they are now but then a catastrophic event shifts the surface of the planet whilst the inner core stays in the same position.So everything is shifted and the UK for example ends up at the North pole (and the original land mass at the north pole ends up a few thousand miles south.and melts).The new land mass at the north pole then of course ices over because of it's position on the globe.Everything becomes covered in two miles of ice and snow.Hancock thinks there may be the remains of an ancient civilisation buried under the north pole right now.Of course if there had been a shifting of the Earth's core thousands of years ago whatever civilisation that occupied the planet at that time is most probably to have been wiped out.Hancock believes there was such an advanced ,intelligent society that met such a fate.They would have been possibly more intelligent than Mankind today and building stuff like the pyramids would have been fairly straightforward for them.There are Pyramids that have been dated to a couple of centuries after the main Pyramids in Giza .But these later Pyramids are a terrible piece of workmanship and seem to lack technological know how.They mostly crumbled within a few centuries.So how come the technological know how was lost quickly?.Or maybe they didn't have the technlogical know how in the first place because they didn't actually build the Pyramids at Giza.

There are many other rermains that point to the possibility of an anient ,highly intelligent civilisation.There is a Sarchophagus which has grooves that could only have benn carved woth a highly sophisticated laser.yet the Sarchopagus is supposed to be thousand of years old.

And then there's the Pyramids in Peru.they, like the Egyptian Pyramids have jaw droppingly incredible mathematical alignments to various constellations.

How was this intelligence lost????????

I get the idea of ancient intelligence for sure, I think you mentioned something like the rock glass found in several places, of a type that can really only be caused by an atomic blast. But I dunno...is there really the geological evidence to support this?

Dunno .it's years since i read the book .i believe ,personally that there was a highly advanced civilisation at one time and we are merely the second (or maybe even third or fourth) bunch of cunts to inhabit this planet.

I'd buy that for a dollar....i just think that any bugger who reckons he's found the proof is out of his teeny mind is all :D

Steve Campbell wrote: I'd buy that for a dollar....i just think that any bugger who reckons he's found the proof is out of his teeny mind is all :D

i don't think there's proof but i enjoyed reading about the myths of Quetzelcoatl and the Mayans ( ).Blimey ,she gets everywhere doesn't she

Johnny wrote:

Steve Campbell wrote: I'd buy that for a dollar....i just think that any bugger who reckons he's found the proof is out of his teeny mind is all :D

i don't think there's proof but i enjoyed reading about the myths of Quetzelcoatl and the Mayans ( ).Blimey ,she gets everywhere doesn't she

'cept your bed johnny boy :D

Steve Campbell wrote:

Johnny wrote:

Steve Campbell wrote: I'd buy that for a dollar....i just think that any bugger who reckons he's found the proof is out of his teeny mind is all :D

i don't think there's proof but i enjoyed reading about the myths of Quetzelcoatl and the Mayans ( ).Blimey ,she gets everywhere doesn't she

'cept your bed johnny boy :D

Alright ,no need to rub it in .i thought i was in with a chance sometime back but she is a finicky thing.Ah .. well, maybe one day

Sit down mate, bit of man to man advice....

She....is a chick!

Finicky is only ticking over, a mere background thing. Wait til one goes nuts on you!