Where A Book Can Lead

Voices Of The Rocks SchochI have just finished reading a couple of books, one was actually a reread, well really it was a re-re-re-reread, but you get the point and it provoked some random thoughts. What books? Voices of the Rocks and Fingerprints of the Gods, respectively.

The first edition of Fingerprints of the Gods, was the first book that showed me that there were in fact real and serious people asking some of the same questions that I had always wondered and researching some of the same things that interested me. Reading that work opened up a whole new world to me, in terms of research and learning and growing. And I was hooked.

Fingerprints of the Gods 2002ed HancockI started looking for other such books, but only those that I believed were properly researched and truly passionate intellectual works. Ones that were not looking for proof of their desired whims and wishes, but those that noticed the textbook versions didn’t answer all the questions and even seemed to make no sense with the questions they did answer.

Seriously, given all the true examples of royal burials in Egypt, how to you claim that the great pyramids of Giza are tombs at all, much less only tombs with a straight face and any sense of truthfulness. The 3 great pyramids stand out like a sore thumb. It is like lining up all the breeds of cats in the world and at some random spot inserting 3 dogs and claiming cause they have 4 legs and fur and eat meat they are cats too!

And lots of academics, especially, anthropologists and archaeologists, are consistent in rejecting all differences as single exceptions or anomalies without considering the reality that all the single exceptions and anomalies actually create a larger body of evidence than the accepted pool of their textbook fact supporting evidence.

The other absurdity is that if you do not have hard evidence then it doesn’t exist. The fallacy in that is that an absence of proof does not prove absence. More importantly ignoring evidence does not mean the evidence is lacking. Denying evidence does not mean that the evidence is lacking.

Now you might wonder what any of this means regarding the aforementioned books. Both books discuss very well documented and accepted means of destruction of parts of the earth’s land areas. Some of those destructive means include massive flooding, earthquakes, volcanoes and land-slides; however, there are other means of destruction as well, natural and man-made from impact events and tsunamis to intentional destruction from razing and rebuilding conquered lands to scorched earth campaigns.

Logically, it is very possible to accept the likely probability that there are whole societies and complete civilizations that have quite literally been erased from history and existence. It is also, completely logical and probable to presume that evidence has been misinterpreted and misunderstood and thus mislabeled and misidentified and used to create or support an erroneous narrative.

The hypocrisy is in the scholars and experts that will say one thing in their textbooks and classrooms, such as how important water is to human existence and advancement and then deny that humans mastered water travel tens or hundreds of thousands of years ago. Logic would dictate that if something is so important to a group that the group would learn and master all uses that would benefit the group.For example, hunting, we did not just hunt for food, we learned how to utilize the whole animal for everything from food to adornment to clothing and tools and shelter; yet, we would not have used water for all its benefits?

Hancock V Hawass

SCORE Hancock

Hancock Hawass YouTube StillSo on 22 April 2015, there was supposed to have been a debate between, Graham Hancock and Dr. Zahi Hawass, in Egypt. The topic was about their differing views of the history of Egypt and human kind.

This could have been an amazing discourse. It is always a very good thing when ideas are shared, exchanged, and questioned. The best thing about this debate would have been that while Mr. Hancock is still searching for answers and the WHOLE truth, Dr. Hawass thinks that we know EVERYTHING, that there is nothing else to know, and that HE knows all there is to know concerning Egypt and the beginnings of history.

Dr. Hawass was the primary reason that I did not pursue study in Egyptology. He is a tyrant in the field. He was “God” in that he had the power to deny access to any research into any site any where in Egypt and also could refuse a researcher access to any artifact in Egyptian possession. Thus, making it almost impossible for someone to have any differing idea and be able to pursue it.  You either agree with the status quo or you kiss your career good-bye. Prime example for how you better change your mind if you want to keep your career is found in Mark Lehner, who went from having a very open mind about what was possibly still left to learn and find in Giza, to parroting Hawass’ lines about everything already being known….in a Nova documentary, Mr. Lehner stated that the reason for the carving of the Sphinx…..was that it was a show of artistic creativity.

Back to the point: Dr. Hawass, has an inability to allow differing ideas and opinions in the dialogue of history with regards to Egypt and Egyptology. If he was totally so sure of his own opinions and conclusions and his statement that we have nothing more to learn on the topic, then why not grant access so that fools make fools out of themselves. By denying access to sites and artifacts he is limiting research. Then by stopping access and projects in the middle of their activity, he is also creating the ‘contamination’ of the experiment and even feeding these “foolish notions” instead of letting them finish. Or worse he jumps in and claims the evidence/discovery as his own. Whether or not Dr. Hawass ever had any true love or passion for Egyptology or not is mute at this point as he clearly no longer does.

Please, check out this link for the whole story as well as links to the video, so that you can judge for yourself, what happened and what the reasons might be and how this might impact future learning in the area…..

Zahi Hawass vs Graham Hancock — the April 2015 “debate” debacle