Subject: Fingerprints of the God. A Review
Date: 2 Mar 1996 07:11:01 GMT
From: heinrich 
Organization: Myself Only
Newsgroups: talk.origins,sci.skeptic

In message <0000204f+00003742@msn.com> on March 1, 1996
Paparazzi@msn.com (Leslie Smith) wrote;

>An interesting book called Fingerprints of the Gods by
>Graham Hancock covers some new area on this subject, and
>does it with convincing argument. Basically it claims a great

The arguments are convincing only as long as a person does
cross-check any the facts and science behind many of the claims
the _The Fingerprints of Gods_  (FOG) makes.  In terms of the
areas with which I am familiar, geology and Mesoamerican
archaeology, this book show an appauling lack of knowledge
and a definite lack of any serious review of the applicable
literature.

Judging just from the subjects with which I am familiar, geology and
mesoamerican archaeology, the _Fingerprint of the Gods_  (FOG) =
is very poorly researched.  In terms of the geology, I found that FOG
ignores any recent research (hundreds of papers) that contradict
the thesis of FOG, naively accepts any creationist and catastrophist
folklore as fact that supports the thesis of FOG , and misrepresents
geological facts for its own means.  Similar problems exist with
the parts of the book concerning mesoamerican archaeology and,
presumably, with the material with which I am not familiar.

An example of the sloppy scholarship in _The Fingerprints of the
Gods_ (FOG), which allows it to ignore contrary data, is on pages
148-149 of that book.  On page 148 of FOG which was copyrighted
in 1995, it is stated, "...we were just beginning to make headway
with the deciphering of their intricate hieroglyphics."  Also on
page 149, FOG states that "What was being said here?
No one knew for sure because the inscriptions, a mixture of word
pictures and phonetic symbols, had not yet been fulley decoded."

A quick look at either _Breaking the Maya Code_ by Micheal D.
Coe (1992) and _A Forest of Kings_ by Linda Schele and
David Freidel (1990) show that both statements are clearly
incorrect as much as three years before FOG was written.   As of
1992 and long before FOG was written, over 90 percent of the
Mayan glyphs have been successfully translated.  The inscriptions
on stela and pyramids can be read to point that not only do we
know when the Mayan pyramids were built, but even in many
cases who had them built them.  These incorrect statements by
FOG claims about Mayan glyphs being mostly undeciphered provide
a convenient wall of false ignorance behind which FOG can ignore
what is currently known about their age and who built them.

>civilisation existed some 15,000 years ago when a planetary
>catastrophe (in this case, a dramatic shift in the earth's crust)

As I cover in another post that was posted today, I note in
some detail the overwhelming geological evidence and
research that completely contradicts any possibility that
a crustal shift took place 15,000 B.P.  Two of the many
problems with the crustal shift theory are;

1. Paleomagnetic and an other geologic data shows that
Antartica has been at or the near the South Pole for the last 100
million years or so.  This is a fact that can be determined by looking
at a modern up to date undergraduate geology textbook.  (A
good example is _Historical Geology_ by Reed Wicander and
James S. Monroe which was published in 1989, a full five years
before FOG.)

2. There an abundance of evidence that demonstrates that  directly
show that the Antartica ice cap has been around for the last 2
million years or more,

Ice core and other data from the Antarctica clearly show that it
has been covered by an ice cap for the last 300,000 to 3 million or
more years.  For example ice cores recovered from the Antarctica
clearly show that it has ice-covered for at least the last 160,000 years
(Paterson and Hammer (1987); Lorius et al. (1985).  Ongoing drilling
operations by Russian geologists at their Vostok Station has
recovered over 300,000 years worth of continuos ice core
(anonymous 1995).

References;

Anonymous, 1995, In Brief. Geotimes. vol. 40, no. 12, p. 7.

Lorius, C., and 6 others, 1985, A 150,000-year climatic
record from Antarctic ice. Nature v. 316, p. 591-596.

Paterson, W. S. B., and Hammer, C. U.,  1987, Chapter 5; Ice
core and other glaciologic data. in Ruddiman, W. F., and others
(eds.) North America an Adjacent Oceans During the Last
Deglaciation. The Geology of North America, Vol. K-3,
Geological Society of America, Boulder, CO.

Also, a talk.origins FAQ titled  _ Ice-core Dating FAQ_
by Matt Brinkman can be obtained at:

http://rumba.ics.uci.edu:8080/faqs/icecores.html

In addition, abundant data demonstrate that permanent ice caps
have existed within Antarctica for at least the past 14 million
years.  Cores and multichannel seismic data from the Ross Shelf and
other Antarctic continental shelves show that Antarctica for this
period of time had a permanent ice cap existed.  Thus, unless
this lost civilization consisted of a bunch of cities built under the
Antarctic ice cap, it certainly was not on Antarctica.  The only time
during the last 14 million years when the ice cap may have been
smaller than present was between circa 3 to 5 million years ago
(Kennet and Hodell 1995, Mathews and Poore 1981).

References;
Kennet, J. P., and Hodell, D. A., 1995, Stability or Instability of
Antarctic Ice Sheets During Warm Climates of the Pliocene?
GSA Today. vol. 5, no. 1, p. 1, 10-13, and 22.

Matthews, R. K., and Poore, R. Z., 1981 Tertiary delta018 record
and glacio-eustatic sea level fluctuations. Geology. v. 8, p. 501-504.

There is an absolute lack of evidence showing that Antarctica was
experiencing either tropical or temperate climate either 12,000
years ago or even as far back as 2 million years ago.  The plant
fossils that show Antarctica had a temperate climate date as
far back as 250 million years ago and, thus, are irrelevant to
whether Antartica was ice-free 12,000 to 10,000 B.P.  That is
simple fact that FOG fails to understand.

>forced survivors to flee and re-establish remnants of their
>civilisation. They made contact with paleolithic tribes of
>central america and the upper nile, to name but two. A tangible
>link is then established as to why these two cultures, so far apart,

Idle speculation unbacked by any real data.
.......more archaeological fantasy omitted....

>The major world literary review papers have given this book
>a good rap, the literary review says, 'Surely the most impressive
>and scholarly piece of work on the subject ever produced... I
>suspect this book will come to be regarded as one of the
>intellectual landmarks of this decade...'

Why is no citation given for this quote?  It would be interesting
to know the qualifications of the persons who said the above
statement.  I would suspect that the person who said this was
neither a trained in geology nor archaeology, and thus was likely
knew very little about what he/she was talking about.

>It's a 530 page read, with an extensive bibliography, and some
>pictures, even!  But it will definitely challenge any contemporary
>views you hold on the subjects of Atlantis, the pyramids, the
>history of mankind and the subject of lost civilisations.

To challenge contemporary views of geology and archaeology, FOG
would have to present ideas that have crediable evdience behind
them.  The level of scholarship present by FOG would earn a
student a quick "F", in any undergraduate geology course.  If Mr.
Hancock wants to be taken seriously he needs to  spend the time
in a library that it takes to learn something about the material
about which he is writing.

Finally, for another review of _The Fingerprints of the Gods_,
see: Sprague de Camp, L., 1995 (July 6). Fantastic Archaeology.
Nature, v.376, p.29-30.  It is fun and fascinating reading and
clearly explains why the _The Fingerprints of the Gods_ is
not even good science fiction.

Sincerely,
Paul V. Heinrich
(as a private citizen)
heinrich@intersurf.com
Baton Rouge, LA

Earthquakes don't kill people.
Overpasses and buildings kill people.
-anonymous civil engineer

All comments are the personal opinion of the writer and
do not constitute policy and/or opinion of government
or corporate entities.  This includes my employer.

This page hosted by Get your own Free Home Page