Rating: 
Summary: Good photos but....
Review: I found Graham Hancock in error on the first page of his introduction. He writes that "a widely held assumption of science, though it is by no means unanimous, tends to be that there is not soul, and that 'dead means dead.'" But science makes no such assumption. Being empirical, science cannot draw a conclusion about soul, and taking an agnostic position is different from making an assumption. Later I was annoyed by Hancock labeling every question about the past as a Great Mystery, which seems to me as if it might be a ploy. Also, Hancock apparently sees himself as the Einstein of archeology: he describes "mainstream scholars" as either blind or trying to protect their territory, which is nonsense.
Rating: 
Summary: Great
Review: I found this book to be extremely interesting and thought provoking. He raises very good points about the sky ground enigma. It is unfortunate that some people take what may be one of the lesser of Hancock's points, and blows it completely out of porportion. If you can't see the truth behind many of the things he is saying then I ask that you don't write a 'smear campaign' review. How can one say that Graham Hancock built this book on "the most flimsy of evidence," when the reviewer already has his/her mind set to what he/she thinks about this book before reading it? If you read this book with an open mind you will love it. If you choose, like some have, to ignore the very concrete evidence in this book, and if you already have fomulated your opinion on this issue through hearing the opinions of so called 'experts,' which by the way, if they were wrong on this subject, their jobs and reputations would be at stake, then you probably will hate hearing the facts, which will lead you to hate this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Good-not great-but good, actually-great, no just good
Review: I found this book to be fairly stimulating, although some parts seemed dry and repetitive. I sometimes found myself daydreaming in the middle of a sentance, but other times I couldn't put it down. I definately recommend this book to anyone who likes....whatever category this book falls into.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Continuation of Fingerprints of the Gods.
Review: I have followed Hancock's works for eight years now and he has not dissappointed me yet. This book is a great continuation of his previous work. I always look forward to his new books and buy them as soon as they hit the stands.
Rating:
Summary: Absolutely brilliant
Review: I have seen the documentary on British TV and that was wonderful. The book goes into so much detail. The photography is excellent and the way Graham talks about the subject is enthralling. The content makes you marvel at the lost civilization and on comparison makes you realise how pathetic, unimaginable and totally gadget reliable we have become. So much for our super human race!
Rating:
Summary: Heaven's Mirror Quest for the lost civilzation
Review: I think this is a wonderful book. It brings to light other ideas about the ancient world not just plain out dated stuff. None of the pyramids were tombs stuff. I read this book and choose to read all his other books ( most just as good).
Rating:
Summary: Think about what you're reading
Review: I think too many people read this book and either go with "wow this is really great, its a deviant on the standard belief of life" or "BAH get this trash away from me, he's making it all up". I think the best way to read this, and all the other books he's written is from an objective point of view. While reading, don't take what he's saying so seriously. I'm not saying what I think on the subject, I'm just saying that all his books will become a lot more interesting if everyone doesn't try to prove him wrong or take to heart every single thing he says.
Rating:
Summary: Outstanding hypothesis
Review: It appears that some people love Hancock's books and some people hate them. I can't necessarily buy into everything he proposes in this or his other books. However, when viewed as a whole, his work presents interesting questions and hypotheses which have not been addressed by mainstream scientists. Mr. Hancock might be mistaken on any single point of his analysis, but as a whole, he has presented evidence which is compelling and cannot be overlooked. It is important to remember that the first people who proposed that the Earth was round instead of flat were considered lunatics, and view Mr. Hancock's contributions with an open mind to the possibility that our assumptions regarding our distant past may still need further revision.
Rating:
Summary: Nice!...Really nice!
Review: It's a tour de force, it's a mish-mash of a hundred different theories, but IT MAY BE CLOSE TO THE MARK...It's certainly the most authoritative (and beautifully photographed) study of ancient monuments, and when you find out that they're almost exactly evenly spaced out, well you have to wonder.....
Rating:
Summary: Thought Provoking Theory
Review: Last September I went to England with my British husband to visit his family on the Isle of Wight, after which we rented a car and proceeded on a 1600 mile journey through the ruins of castles, abbeys, and ancient stone circles and henges. What sparked my interest the most was the great antiquity and severe lack of knowledge that surrounded all of the stone circles and other ancient henged sites that we were lucky enough to come across on my "search for the past". When we came back to America I started to do some research on the many prehistoric sites in England that I was privy to see, via the web, books, television, anything I could get my hands on, something to let me know how or why these great megalithic stone circles and henged structures came into being. It was at that time the Discovery Channel just happened to air the three episodes of Graham Hancock's "Quest for the Lost Civilization". I sat intrigued for three nights straight contemplating the possibility of an ancient civilization that was wiped out via flood or some similar catastrophy. Immediately I felt that Hancock's theory could be correct, and that what I was taught in text-book history class, which I found most boring and often skipped, could be wrong. I then bought the book "Heaven's Mirror: Quest for the Lost Civilization". I was thirsty for knowledge and read this book vehemetly, most often concurring to Hancock's opinions that an ancient civiliation could have once existed, and due to some tragedy, most likely a flood, was suddenly wiped out of existance. According to Hancock, the most likely catalyst to the demise of this ancient "mother culture" was a great catistrophic flood that affected the whole of the Earth in the year 10,500 BC, of which there were but a few survivors. This notion is brought together by the fact that several ancient cultures including the Egyptians, Olmecs and hence the Myans, Easter Islanders, Cambodians, etc. all had similar belief systems, similar mythologies, similar architecture, similar astronomical calculations and alignments, which is theorized to come from an even more ancient common source. Being that humanity has been around for hundreds of thousands of years with the same brain capacity as ours today, is it so hard to believe that we never used that brain capacity until just 4000 years ago? Keep an open mind when reading this book, for it just might open it further.
|
