Rating: 
Summary: What do we really know?
Review: Although I may not beleive everything I read, this book provides some very interesting and thought provking information. Very well researched and presented. The conclusions left me wanting more information. This book, and others of a similar topic, makes one question the validity of what we are taught throughout the course of our education.
Rating:
Summary: Stimulating - But how about some integrity from reviewers
Review: Hey...I enjoyed the book. It gave me points to ponder. What frustrates me is when someone will offer a negative review by citing erroneous facts and fail to list their email address for legitimate response. It's like a literary hit & run.
Rating: 
Summary: A cranial jumpstart
Review: I picked up this book on a whim thinking it would at least be amusing. It was amusing in a whole different way. It is, IMO, a direct slap in the face to the our egotism in reference to our ancestors. Every page goes against orthodox thinking.For years we have been taught they were nothing more than idiots who are quite inferior to us. This book kicks that theory in it's rear and I love it for it. This is a book that requires you to think independantly. If you do not wish to do so, don't bother buying this book. You will hate it as apparent in the derogative reviews below. Speaking of them, I'd like to address one of the comments. "Archaeologists interpret what they find, they don't make up stories". And the difference would be what? TMK, there isn't one person on this planet who was alive during those times and anything we have to say about those times is nothing more than a story. We have no knowledge about them, we only have our beliefs.
Rating:
Summary: More than a mystery
Review: I have read all of this authors books. And with experience it has become a seal of excellence. This book is imperitive for anyone looking for historical reading. This book does not provide truth to our history. And anyone that studies history knows that it is biased by the author. I commend the author for his struggle to provide a open view through available facts. I have read many reviews to debunk this book. I ask those people, "without a stepping stone how can we climb the terrace of evolution." Perhaps everthing in this book will not correlate for each self-considered expert out there. But it is the holy grail for independent researchers. For ones sake read this book, with and open mind and the intent to ask questions. I thank Graham Hancock for his dedication to us, and his research that has changed or at least given another side to historical man.
Rating:
Summary: If Hancock can read Chinese history
Review: If Hancock can read Chinese history, he will find more evidence, there is a story about stars changed their positions because the poles supporting the earth was broken by a god.
Rating: 
Summary: Read This First
Review: I wish I had read "The Wild Side of Geoarchaeology Page", a web site maintained by Paul V. Heinrich, before buying this book. Like many reviewers, I was impressed by the "evidence" quoted in the book and the detailed references. But sadly Hancock's research seems to break down when those references are critically investigated. Finally, I am puzzled by the comments about the quality of the writing. I found it plodding, burdened by whimsical speculation and pointless introspection. Many times I wondered what the manuscript looked like before the editors went to work.
Rating:
Summary: 'Still more questions than answers'
Review: As a teenager, I was taken with Eric Von Daniken, but always felt there were opportunities that could be better explored. Sadly they were not, which always left a feeling of something of importance missed. Graham Hancock has achieved the same feeling, but this time I am left wondering is this deliberate. Has Graham purposely set out with errors to mislead? There are two references I would suggest require further investigation. In the early part of the book, it is suggested that Mayan calender cycles were of a large but significant number, relating to cycles of our solar system. This number could be calculated by the recall of elements of a 'folk story' handed down over generations, but missed the number by a miniscule amount. However, when the elements of the story are added back into the equation, hey presto, there is a comparable sum as accurate as the mathematically projected calculation for planetary line up. The second error I suggest, lies with the 'folk tales' in regard to the rotation of the zodiac, not so much a change in the heavens as part of the natural dawning of zodiac influences, rather a literal statement, i.e. a significant rotation of our planet around an axis which itself would create the illusion of the heavens moving, which of course they cannot. Graham's later work, especially the series as shown in the UK on channel 4, listed certain ancient sites, e.g. Stonehenge, Giza, Easter Island etc. The local 'history' holds them as the 'navel of the world', a play on words & it might be, that these are indeed the centre of the world, points of rotation. Interestingly enough the computer projected image of these points, as land sites, suggest a correlation to the points of the zodiac yet again. They also more curiously, share the same plane. It follows that calculation should show the distribution of those points on the same plane relate to the zodiac whether on land or not. It saddens me that this point was not pursued or discussed, which in the main is the purpose of this review, to raise the debate should anyone care to contact myself. Furthermore, If anyone has a contact for Graham, please forward this on my behalf, as I genuinely believe we stand at the edge of the most important discovery of our lifetimes. Regards to anyone choosing to read this. Keith F-S. AKA 'stacker298@aol.com'
Rating:
Summary: Written as a bibliographic revision of a PhD thesis
Review: This is an excellent book and well written. The most important thing is that the information given to the reader is based on published papers/books/reports, just as required by a bibliographic revision of a PhD or Master thesis. In addition, it is important to focus how the author was able to build the links between all those facts.
Rating:
Summary: Read for a laugh, and from it learn to think critically!
Review: Garbage! I'm embarrassed I didn't more carefully investigate this book before wasting my money. Oh please, give me a break- a 2,000 mile shift of Antartica in a 11,000 year time period, isn't that like a geologic femtosecond? It must have caused some catastrophically enormous earth quakes. Why it is a miracle the earth didn't just blow up! Well, I'm no geologist (and neither was Albert Einstein, and by the way- what an appauling appeal to authority), but I do know there is a vast body of research literature (serious and peer-reviewed) about plate tectonics and paleoclimatology that could have, and should have been cited if this absurd hypothesis is to be taken seriously.
Rating:
Summary: Inspired story-telling
Review: It is not my intention to be rude or deprecating ... however, there are a few words I would like to say. This book makes a good read, in the sense that it presents the reader with some new and interesting ideas. However, one should read this book carefully. If you are interested in archaeology, then this book is not for you. Mr. Hancock does not provide the reader with a solid basis of evidence. There is no difference whatsoever between data and the author's own interpretations. Although some may find this book attractive, please note that this is NOT archaeology. Archaeology is very different. I am not discouraging people from buying this book...far from it. However, it would be a good idea to check what archaeology has to say about the topics he discusses. Although archaeological evidence may seem less inviting and inspiring, please be aware that archaeologists can only try to interpret the data they find. Conjecture and story telling do not feature in archaeology. Thank you for taking time to read this.
| 
