Customer Reviews

Forbidden Archeology's Impact: How a Controversial New Book Shocked the Scientific Community and Became an Underground Classic

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

The problem with the scientific method is that it is driven far too much by theory, and not enough by fact. By which I mean that science moves forward by the development, and subsequent testing, of hypotheses, when at times formation of hypotheses should be strenuously avoided-- because they grow into filters which taint otherwise vital and compelling data.

Science is not comfortable with unknowns. (You thought nature abhorred a vaccuum? Nature's got nothing on science.) So rather than leave a question unanswered (e.g., "How old is mankind?"), science tends to fill in the vaccuum by providing an answer, based on the theory that can obtain the greatest consensus.

The problem arises when these theories and hypotheses become mental constructs-- it is a short hop in the collective consciousness from "the theory supported by the most scientists" to "scientific fact". New data that falls outside these constructs (that is, data which "flies in the face of accepted scientific wisdom!") are assumed to be anomolous, and are tossed aside; data that supports, fits the constructs is sought out and embraced.

Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes often described his detection method as scrupulously collecting facts, while AVOIDING the formation of theories. Keep collecting facts-- without the blind spots imposed by hypotheses-- until you have ruled out all possibilities but one. That remaining possibility, no matter how improbable, is the one true possibility.

I think Cremo has been a bit dramatic in characterizing science as conspiratorial, and it is understandable how the anthropologist (below) could take umbrage. It is not so much "cloak-and-dagger" conspiracy at play, but rather a very tangible limit on-- and flaw in-- the scientific method. That flaw is the need to develop consensus theories to explain the unexplained (rather than leaving a question unknown), and the subsequent phenomenon that these theories become constructs for filtering all new data.

Given that the world is flat, what do you do with evidence that the world is round? Well, you ignore it. Not because you are a conspirator. But because you accept as a given that the world is flat, and that colors your perception of any relevant-- or contrary-- data.

"Forbidden Archeology's Impact" might be said more appropriately to be a large dossier of letters, papers and documents written by the author and by a great number of people wishing to comment - among other things - on his and Richard Thompson's research into archeological papers containing evidence for extreme human antiquity. The author obviously had no intention of intertwining these textual elements into a cohesive woof, so readers should not expect the book to develop any central argument. Such an argument, however, is to be found in "Forbidden Archeology - The Hidden History of the Human Race" whose intellectual and social impact the present book is intended to register (thus, the dossier-format of this book - and not its contents - explains why I have given it no more than three stars).

Readers interested in the issues of human origins (for which archeologists have unearthed quite a bit of puzzling evidence) and the sociology of scientific knowledge (particularly as applied to Paleo-anthropology and Archeology) should hurry up and acquire the extremely well-written and painstakingly researched "Forbidden Archeology - The Hidden History of the Human Race" (914 pages). Readers will also benefit from a perusal of the customer reviews posted on the respective Amazon.com page. Many of them (excepting my own) are beautifully argumented.

However, the implications of a deep-rooted belief in Darwinism, the unavoidable practice of peer reviews for scientific journals, the few well-known cases of evidence suppressed or twisted by academic institutions, and the utterly subjective nature of all sciences which pretend to account for our true nature and raison d'ętre, have given rise to a very heated debate on the possible existence of worldwide conspiracies and powerful groups of mischievous academicians. Such debates, though they must happen, often lead our attention away from the intellectual revision required by discoveries such as those discussed in Cremo and Thompson's "Forbidden Archeology - The Hidden History of the Human Race". Of course, there's no denying that conspiracies and falsifications of History have occurred and may still occur (sometimes even providentially!), but I think readers should be careful not to get caught up too much in the unwholesome anxiety such speculations are prone to produce.

Conspiracy is not at all at the heart of the matter, so instead of loitering in a state of indignation and fingerpointing, non-zealots would do better in calmly concentrating on two essential facts: 1) There really is a large bulk of acceptable evidence, both archeological and anthropological, for anatomically modern humans living in very remote times, and 2) there is not one example in the fossil record nor a single logical or scientific basis for the claim that animal or plant species can or did create themselves or could ever transform themselves into completely new forms.

Cremo's work has helped expose the fragility and inconsistency of currently favored theories on human evolution, and so has taken an important step towards a new understanding of the discipline of Anthropology. So maybe it really is time we gave up our unintelligible, mechanistic evolutionary models and started taking the wisdom of our forefathers a bit more seriously.

I am a person who has seen both sides of who,what,and when in anthropology and archeology. I Practiced true skeptism and felt the backlash of the mainstream scientist to other credible evidence. I say this book is the reality check needed by anyone interested in both sides of the story. Highly recommended. Very truthful. I've been there!!

Remember Gary Larsen's "Far Side" cartoon of the scientists dropping everything and running outside when the Good Humor truck comes by? We tend to think of scientists as beyond reproach - but they're not. They're just as emotional and jumpy as the rest of us, especially when their pet doctrines get called into question.

In Science the drill is to glom onto the accepted belief system and hang on for dear life. God forbid some punky upstart like Fritjof Capra should come along and write a smart-alecky book about how Vedic texts described the same tenets as Quantum Physics a coupla thousand years ago. Or Rupert Sheldrake would have the nerve to point out that the DNA emperor has not clothes. Howls of derision. Calls for book burning in the journal "Science". Yellink und screamink.

Now I don't think it takes 900+ pages to make a point. Probably 150 would have been adequate to get everybody's bowels in an uproar. The 2-cassette audio abridgement seems to do a pretty good job. As far as the actual validity of the overall argument - who knows? The evidence proposed is probably just as valid as the official party line.

It is important to remember that all scientific revolutions go through pretty much the same drill: Scorn and derision towards those presenting novel or contrary opinions, followed by fear, panic and banishment of those individuals when it begins to appear that empirical data is supporting the new theories, then total abandonment of previously cherished notions, accompanied by jumping on the bandwagon with abandon while announcing that they'd been supporting the new idea all along.

So it's really the process that's important here. Hey, sit back and enjoy the show!

Disclaimer: I have not yet read this book; I am ordering it now. But I have a rule that works for me: Whenever I see a book that gets spotty and polarized reviews, and the ones panning it resort to emotional arguments, can't spell ("pure dribble"?) and have heroes like Stephen Jay Gould, I figure it has to be a sure winner.

Ok, OK. I admit it right off the bat. I have not read this book, nor do I intend to. It is not a work of science. I only got this book from interlibrary loan because a 1996 letter of mine to NBC, and the reply, is reprinted in it (without my knowledge or permission---I found out about it a few days ago). This kind of stuff is a cottage industry for pseudoscientists and chasers of the paranormal. Credence is given to Hindu views that man has existed for billions of years. Etc, Etc. Whether this is even a mainstream Hindu view is probably not disclosed. This work consists of a collection of essays and letters gathered from various places, such as Usenet, and bound into a volume. As such, it may have some use. But as science? No.

I am happy to finally find a fresh and definitive research on the origins of the Human Race on this Planet. An eye opener for the masses!! Another great read is on ancient Sumer(Z.Sitchin). Can you handle the real truth of our origins? The powers that be are quickly losing their grasp and control of us due to Scientific Studies such as Forbidden Archaeology's Impact. Special thanks to Michael Cremo and staff for their great service to the World and the Earth Humans.

"A reader, August 23, 1998" writes in his review exactly what you might expect from people who are (to say the least) not open for new insights and ideas. "while the real scientists are busy..." ==> busy doing what?! Busy hiding from revolutionary ideas that's a threat to what they were taught? REAL scientists would jump on the challenge thrown at them to look into the fascinating world they had closed their eyes for. It's (seemingly) far-fetched ideas that can mean breakthroughs and revolutions in what we know about the world's history.

So don't let yourself be put off by such narrowminded disregarding and open up. Maybe there's a whole lot more than what we have been taught to believe...

outstanding, just what I wanted and the price was better than anywhere I checked.

I am not writing this review to insult the intelligence or creativity of Cremo or the numbers of individuals who are drawn by the romance of the "underdog" or the "conspiracy." As an anthropologist myself, I understand the value of comprehending the variety of worldviews that exist and bringing this diversity to the attention of the public. I enjoy scientific discourse, and would welcome the addition of legitimate arguements on the subject of human origins. I take issue, however, with the assertion by Cremo that there is some sort of grand conspiracy to conceal and pervert information about human origins. As an archaeologist currently conducting research, I am somewhat insulted at the accusation that I am fabricating or concealing data. I have always endeavored (I believe successfully) to conduct my research in a responsible, straightforward, and honest fashion; I know that Cremo could not prove differently. The final note in this short tirade is this: if the President of the United States could not keep his zipper problem a secret, HOW on earth could a motley, ununified and argumentative group like we archaeologists conspire to conceal such grand discoveries, which, according to Cremo are frequent occurences. Please. I will be frankly honest, we are not capable of such a smooth, seamless execution of conspiracy, If you get more than a few archaeologists in a room together, you are bound to have a heated debate, more than that and there may be blood spilled. We are people just like anyone else. We do not want to hide things from the public. Truly, my interest, and those of many of my colleagues, is to achieve a greater understanding of humanity, both past and present. The benefits and reasons why this is important will take up my next lecture, so this is not the place for them, but suffice it to say that we try to do the best job that we can and share our often humble results as much as possible, finding venues to get the information out there is the biggest problem, not some nefarious concealment of information. I hope that I have made it clear that while Cremo and his supporters are right when they make the assertion that new ideas are good, they are woefully overestimating the abilities of archaeologists when they demonize us with dark powers of concealment and conspiracy. We are just regular folk like everyone else, maybe more excentric and excited about going to work, but with feet of clay just like you.