Rating: 
Summary: Fatally flawed, but interesting
Review: The author of this book makes two main mistakes:1. He starts with a conclusion. In a violation of the scientific method, Mr. Hancock begins at the end; at the start of his work he has already decided that the Earth was home to a civilized people (from Atlantis?) millenia before current data suggests. He then distorts evidence to "prove" this thesis in much the same manner that Creationists distort data to prove their absurdities; by only allowing for one explanation for any apparent anomaly. 2. Ethnocentrism and out-dated Anthropology. Hancock's work is also tainted by his acceptance of a cultural fallacy: That civilized life is the easiest, most "advanced" form of human social existance, and that it is a goal that all humans work toward, adopted by food-foragers as soon as they are given the oppurtunity. However this concept of unilineal evolution has been disproven over and over again, starting with Marshall Sahlins' 1972 book "Stone Age Economics." This puts the lie to phrases used by Hancock such as "golden age of agricultural plenty" and reveals the real (but perhaps unconscious) purpose behind the book as an attempt to explain why, since civilization and intensive agriculture are so wonderful, fully modern humans existed without them for 100,000 years. Despite these very serious flaws the book does raise some very interesting points, such as the apparent evidence of water-erosion on the Sphynx, and (most interesting) the apparently ancient map detailing an ice-free Anartica. Unfortunately, the serious problems detailed before cast a shadow over the credibility of the entire work, which makes me much less able to readily accept these enigmas, which would be very intriguing in a different context. However they are enough, combined with Fingerprints of the Gods well-written and very readable presentation, to lead me to give this book 2 stars instead of one. Readers are advised to take everything Hancock says with a very big grain of salt.
Rating:
Summary: Aryan Civilizers
Review: Although the book is an interesting read for the number of tidbits that the author reveals, I would like to warn anyone interested in this book about the pernicious absurdities that underlying this book, that seem to have been completely ignored by its critics. Although Hancock does not state it explicitly, he is trying to imply that edifices of the ancient Egyptians and South Americans were constructed according to knowledge imparted by Aryan survivors of Atlantis. This is a current theory in occult circles, which has been circulating since the sixteenth century, and was most clearly elaborated by H.P. Blavatsky, god-mother of the New Age movement. Essentially, this theory posits that the Aryans are the most advanced of races, and that they have been created by a race of divine beings on the continent of Atlantis. When the continent was destroyed, the Aryans fled, later conquering several civilizations, imparting the advanced knowledge they had rescued. Hancock searches the mythology of the Egyptians and South Americans to find evidence of the colonization of white civilizers. These civilizations divided history among the rule of the Gods, the rule of heroes and the rule of men. The rule of the gods is thought to refer to the original Aryan colonizers. At one point, Hancock attempts to demonstrate that the South Americans had depicted a Caucasian in a blatantly ambiguous relief sculpture, whose only Aryan feature would be small beard. Hancock also goes on the present the worldwide recognition of a universal cataclysm, to refer to the period that these Caucasians or Aryans would have survived. Because astrology is one of the main aspects of what is thought be the Ancient Wisdom of the Aryans, finally, Hancock attempts to prove that the pyramids were configured according to astronomical data. As acknowledged by occultists, the Ancient Wisdom is the Kabbalah, from which they have borrowed their fansical theories. However, the Kabbalah is not an ancient wisdom, but a Jewish heresy of the sixth century BC. This astronomical knowledge identified with the Kabbalah can also be demonstrated to have emerged in the same century. It has often been attributed to the Babylonians, who supposedly taught it to the Egyptians, or to the Indians who taught it to the Babylonians, but always back to the original Aryan conquerors. However, as Franz Cumont has pointed out: "That Babylon was the mother of astronomy, star-worship, and astrology, that thence these sciences and these beliefs spread over the world, is a fact already told us by the ancients... But the mistake of the Pan-Babylonists, whose wide generalizations rest on the narrowest and flimsiest of bases, lies in the fact that they have transferred to the nebulous origins of history, conceptions which were not developed at the beginning but quite at the end of the Babylonian civilization. This vast theology, founded upon the observation of the stars, which is assumed to have been built up thousands of years before our era, nay, before the Trojan War, and to have imposed itself on all still barbarous peoples as the expression of a mysterious wisdom, cannot have been in existence at this remote period, for the simple reason that the data on which it would have been founded, were as yet unknown...
Rating: 
Summary: overwelming
Review: It is one of the most interesting books i've ever read. I think the fingerprints are a definative path to .......Well, More questions.But I do like Mr. Hancock's conclusions. I read this book when it first came out, I heard Mr. Hancock on a talk radio show plugging the book, and I was fastenated, i had just read "Hab Theory" and although it is a Sci fi, it comes close to the same theory. If you can stand textbook type reading, then try it! His thoughts make YOU think...
Rating: 
Summary: Loathe science? Then you'll love this book!
Review: Many readers find Mr Hancock's ideas exciting challenges to the established orthodoxy. Well I suppose they are, but for a new theory to overturn an old one, it is generally the case that the new theory encompasses established facts and includes new ones which are at odds with the old theory. The overturning of classical mechanics by quantum mechanics is the typical example here. My problem with Mr Hancock's work is not that he challenges scientific orthodoxy, indeed anyone with the slightest acquaintance with science will know that such challenges are the very lifeblood of the advance of scientific understanding, but that there are glaring examples of his theory not accounting for facts perfectly adequately explained by existing theories. An example is the aging of Antarctic ice cores, Mr Hancock does not address the issue of how they can be so much older than would be allowed by his theory. While Mr Hancock's research may be "brilliant", to quote other reviewers, it certainly is not exhaustive. At the end of the day, Mr Hancock has presented a new theory, the onus is on him to show why it should be taken seriously. Making basic errors is not the way to persuade the scientific community.
Rating:
Summary: Top of the line
Review: This is a masterpiece of antidiluvian history, with a plethora of empirical and tangible evidence (in addition to mythical and theoretical accounts) to back it up. This world-encompasing book pulls jumbled information into organized, easy to follow theories. An excellent book for beginners in the subject, with plenty of new material for the well-read. I welcome everyone who wishes to expand thier knowledge of our past to read this highly stimulating book. I had trouble putting it down, and was saddened when it ended.
Rating: 
Summary: A little theory of my own
Review: Maybe the reason why critical reviews have such a smaller "approval ratio" than adoring ones is that the people who look up a book on Amazon are more likely to be fans of it than bitter, twisted enemies, bent on revenge. Oh, almost forgot to mention Fingerprints of the Gods. Well there's not much I can say about it that hasn't already been said. Hancock present to us a hugely diverse range of fascinating oddities, from all around the world, and attempts to link them together with the grandiose notion of a highly advanced civilization, about which we know virtually nothing because (wait for it)... any remaining evidence will be buried beneath miles of Antarctic ice. Certainly there's lots to ponder over, but I'm afraid that Hancock's treatment of the evidence is sorely lacking in scientific rigour (for instance, many times we're told something along the lines of: Such and such a thing is an uncannily accurate and expertly crafted representation of X, but the people couldn't possibly have known about X unless blah blah blah, but the thing in question doesn't look very accurate or expertly drawn to me... maybe I'm just a philistine). I don't doubt that we have a huge amount of explaining to do before we can honestly claim to understand how, say, the Egyptian pyramids came to be constructed - and this book certainly does a fine job of drawing this to our attentions. However, the links Hancock draws between the disparate trails of evidence are far too tenuous to justify his conclusions. Still, it's great fun to read - just be sure to approach it with your skeptical hat on.
Rating:
Summary: Makes a lot of sense!
Review: If there is one book to read regarding the topic of ancient civilizations and unexplained ancient mysteries... this is the one. We are actually in the process of rediscovering the past and learning all these ancient knowledge about the cosmos and its workings. Probably the "ancients" had nothing else better to do than count the stars. In this day and age, we hardly even take the time out to look at the universe and its magnificent machinations. All we do is watch tv and have fun. Buy this book! Have an open-mind.
Rating:
Summary: Confluence of Faith and Science
Review: How much Faith do you have in Science? What Science is there in Faith? Hancock toes the line between the seen and unseen is this courageous episode of his remarkable series of books. Whether or not I agree or disagree with his outrageous conclusions, I can say honestly that I enjoy this book for a number of concrete reasons. First, I continue to return to it. I am one of those readers who freely allows my mind to spiral off into dreams at whim. Hancock's Fingerprints is a perfect book for the professional dreamer. Since I first read this book, more than a year ago, I have unshelved it countless times as my own dreams, unyeildingly, crossed paths with his. Second, Hancock is a true Humanist and his writings cross the borders of culture and language sans passport. It's refreshing to read something without experiencing that judgemental urge to scold the writer for his foolish, narrow views. Third, every great idea began as a unlikely thought. "New opinions are always suspected, and usually opposed, without any other reason but because they are not already common." -Locke So, is it possible that those who came before us were greater than our grandest dreams? You better believe it.
Rating: 
Summary: Fingerprints Of The Gods
Review: This volume is fascinating. Graham Hancock points out interesting details showing similarities between several ancient civilizations. Uncanny! ET eat your heart out. It looks like we may have done it all ourselves but with the wobble of our planet we get periodic opportunities to start over and to leave a bit of evidence of our existance to those coming after us. History buffs and those interested in anthropology should find this book well worth reading.
Rating:
Summary: The fingerprints
Review: We see that Graham Hancock dazzles his audience with claims of an Antarctic super civilization. If you look in the back of the book we see that most of Hancock's sources are of old age. For instance, he uses references of the Piri Ris map, which is very old in itself. It's a map that supposedly shows Antarctica without ice on it. There has been scientific evidence that shows the antartic continent not covered with ice was just parts of the stem of South America and such. Also, when investigating the Tiahuanaco complex, he ignores all the careful archaeological work over the years and puts its date to 10,000 b.c. He totally ignores all the facts against him. In my opinion, he is insulting the many respectable archaeologists that base their theories on fact, not conjecture. Just read Nick Thorpe's Ancient Mysteries published recently. I did and I saw how outrageous and bogus his theories are. I would read this one just to get a good laugh. Also in question are Robert Bauval's theories, but that's a whole different book entirely.
| 
