Rating: 
Summary: The scientific method is not dead yet.
Review: "Forbidden Archeology" is a superb, well-documented compendium of both the evidence favoring the conventional picture of human evoluton, and the anomalous evidence that casts this picture into doubt. Its larger significance, however, lies in its detailed documentation and analysis of one particular exampe of a disturbing phenomenon that has increasingly crippled mainstream science: the establishment of a new scientific orthodoxy, i.e. a quasi-religious belief by leading scientists in the absolute and unquestionable validity of the basic theories of their field. These theories are then elevated to "facts" of which any dissenter is accused of being ignorant, which makes for a convenient, easy dismissal of any anomalous evidence. Since any such evidence is thus automatically ineligible for publication in the proper journals, this lack of documentation is then in turn taken by researchers in the field as proof that the evidence must be of low scientific value. With "Forbidden Archeology", Cremo and Thompson have attempted to break through this self-perpetuating cycle of ignorance and denial. The many angry dismissals by "experts" one can read on this page shows that they have done their job well. A truly educational book that will open the eyes of many who are searching for the true origins of humankind. Those who don't have the time or patience to peruse this 900-page tome should consider reading the abridged version instead. Either way, they will come to appreciate one of the fundamental tenets of true science: theory never overrides evidence.
Rating:
Summary: An Alternative Scenario for Human Origins
Review: During a 1989 sabbatical leave from Niagara University, I investigated philosophical problems arising from the interface of evolution theory and religious revelation, especially respecting the historicity of human first parents as depicted in Genesis. The 1993 publication of "Forbidden Archeology" brought my attention to concerns about the manner in which the scientific community treats anomalous evidence of earlier than Late Pleistocene anatomically modern human beings. This, combined with a few apparently well-documented examples of anomalous finds, such as Reck's skeleton, the Castenedolo skeletons, and the Laetoli footprints -- plus a plethora of lesser known and sometimes less well-documented cases -- led me to the conclusion that there exists probable cause to have rational doubt about the current theory of human evolution. Chapter fourteen of my own "Origin of the Human Species," (Sapientia Press: 2003) discusses at length "Forbidden Archeology's" contention that anatomically modern humans predated hominids from which evolutionary theory claims we descended. My book demonstrates that sound natural science is entirely compatible with an authentic reading of Genesis, including Adam and Eve's reality -- and this, without recourse to young-Earth creationism. While my thesis need not rely upon "Forbidden Archeology's" claims, still, I considered its carefully documented analysis of the paleoanthropological record sufficiently credible to devote an entire chapter to analysis of its claims. I am grateful to Michael A. Cremo for his comments and suggestions during the writing of this chapter, which I include as a possible alternative scenario for human origins - one still consistent with belief in a single pair of historical first parents for the human race. We must recall that even a single instance of an anatomically modern human being prior to the Late Pleistocene period would be catastrophic to the current human evolution theory. The telling admission made in a review by the "Social Studies of Science" (26:1 (1996): 207) that "much of the historical material that they (Cremo and Thompson) resurrect has not been scrutinized in such detail before" should forewarn critics to beware of a priori dismissal of "Forbidden Archeology's" claims concerning the early presence of true humans in the fossil record. "Forbidden Archeology" explains how practical epistemological limitations place paleoanthropology in a category far removed from experimental science conceived as easily verifiable in a laboratory and universally replicable. These epistemological limitations, combined with Cremo and Thompson's extensive documentation of what appears to be anomalous evidence of true man living earlier than the Late Pleistocene period, renders credible the contention that, even in the early years of the 21st Century, educated persons can have rational doubts about the standard human evolution scenario. Indeed, the entire process of human origins might prove to be much more mysterious than atheistic Darwinians suppose. "Forbidden Archeology" deserves careful consideration in any serious discussion of evolution and human origins.
Rating:
Summary: An Important Book
Review: This book is a difficult read but the ideas discussed are important and relevant. If you have an interest in archeology, creationism, or the history of human development, you need to read this book.
Rating:
Summary: the truth everyone should know
Review: The book by Michael A. Cremo and Richard L.Thompson has appeared to be an eye-opener for me, as much as it probably is for many other people who give a thought to human origins problems and history of the society, civilization and the planet in general. Not everything is that plain and straightforward as the mainstream science including official archaeology, anthropology, paleonthology always wants us to see it. There is an official science theory, and there IS a lot of evidence of the alternate reality, since there are signs and physical evidence (always, at least for a couple of centuries, avoided by conservative scientists) of human presense in the very remoted past. Michael Cremo and Richard Thompson have brought the facts, the hard evidence and the ideas based on them into the light, and one can not overvalue that. The book has rather had a double impact - first, the authors showed to the public the hidden truth that is striking, much impressing, but based on the facts; second, they inevitably make us realize how unbelievable the position of the modern science is - "don't trust your eyes, trust my theory" is what may best be a slogan of those "real" scientists. The second part of the "impact" is rather most important - one more time a reader has a chance to see how a modern science can be an obstacle on the way of the general scientific progress, how a widely accepted theory can prevail over the logical and really scientific approach, how an established scientific society can hide or destroy the evidence that opposes the official views only in the name of pure officially supported theory. That is hardly a 20/21 century science, that is something different, and, unfortunately, the samples of this strange "something" is everywhere - in Egyptology, Anthropology, etc. In very short, the book is incredible reading that really makes us believe we are a little older than we are supposed to be according to 99% of other books. That is a rare case when you can stop and think a little of our past, our present, our science and our society. The real science could only wish the number of the books like this would grow.
Rating: 
Summary: Mostly nonsense premise
Review: A lot has been learned of genetics in the last 5 to 10 years.We know for a scientific fact the human race is way under 10 millon years old. Though it's multiple times older than the ridiculous YEC proposal of just 10,000 years tops. This book is under the foolish impresion, I thought, that humankind is around 55 million years old. Or something like that. Nonsense!
Rating: 
Summary: Darwin
Review: The only thing evolving in reference to the theory of evolution is the theory itself
Rating:
Summary: Scary Pseudoscience
Review: I stumbled upon this title being someone of interest in alternative versions of the origin of humans (and life in general) but this book is a sheep in a wolf's clothing. It looks impressive and like it will say something, but turns out to be another sham. Although many reviewers are impressed by the multitude of "facts" in this book that uncover the deceptive secrets of scientists, in reality their argument extracts selective references from very (!) outdated evolutionary ideas or data from scholarly papers and places them out of context. The "facts" are then, with a generous amount of spin, placed into a new hypothesis that has no actual data. This book tries to show modern biology as an entrenched discipline fighting off critics of Darwin, when nothing could be further from the truth. Many of the harshest critics of Darwin's theories are biologists themselves so to pitch this book as an objective view that will "threaten the establishment of science" is ridiculous. If you are spending your time reading this book in search of a version of truth, I think you should also read a scholarly archeology textbook or talk to a practicing scientist. I can guarantee that either approach will show the paucity of the authors' data and the emptiness of their arguments.
Rating: 
Summary: A Book in the Realm of Pseudoscience
Review: Wade Tarzia published an extensive review of this book in _Creation/Evolution_ 34:13-25, 1994 (National Center for Science Education), also available on-line at "Doug's Archaeology Pages" website. Here are some key extracts from that review:
---------------------------------------------------------------
...Despite all this hard work, I think the book falls short of a scientific work primarily (but not entirely) because (1) its arguments abandon the testing of simpler hypothesis before the more complex and sensationalistic ones, and (2) the use of so many outdated sources is inadequate for a book that seeks to overturn the well-established paradigm of human evolution -- scholars must not work in isolation, especially today, when multi-disciplinary approaches are needed to remain on the cutting edge of knowledge. However, for researchers studying the growth, folklore, and rhetoric of pseudo-science, the book is useful as 'field' data. ... Forbidden Archaeology [is also] ... a well-written example of pseudoscience -- its looks like the real thing, a phenomena discussed in Williams (1991, 15) [ _Fantastic Archaeology_; see also K. Feder's _Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries_ ] ... Mass of Details -- The mass of details with attached analyses would require book-length responses from specialized reviewers to confirm or critique. This style is a common diversionary tactic in pseudoscience. Since the authors have not aired their arguments previously through professional journals, as many scholars do before writing such a huge synthesis of material, the task of validation becomes a career itself. Such a style burdens an analysis with long leaps between broad assumptions (i.e., scientific cover-up) to the detailed evidence (i.e., minutiae of strata and dating from obscure sites) -- all on the same page. ... Use of Old Sources -- Quotations of the 19th-/early 20th- century material are copious -- comprising, I would guess, at least 25 percent of the book. ... I do not indict the sincerity and ground-breaking of 19th century scholars. However, because knowledge seems to accumulate and research techniques seem to improve, assuming a blanket equivalency of research level between 19th and 20th century science is just going too far. Rusting Occam's Razor -- A major flaw of Forbidden Archaeology is its quick leaps toward sensational hypotheses (see in general Williams 1991, 11-27). Sensational ideas are not intrinsically bad -- plate tectonics was pretty astonishing at one point (Williams 1991, 132), but also true. However, the cautious investigator hopes that less sensational, or simpler, hypotheses are first proposed and well tested before more complex or less likely explanations are considered. ... Missed Evidence -- While presenting a voluminous amount of detail, sometimes Forbidden Archaeology has missed important points. For example, the book discusses the Timlin site in New York, where researchers reported finds of ancient eolithic tools dated to 70,000 YBP (p. 354). Yet Forbidden Archaeology does not mention the responses to these claims by several professionals, which casts the nature of these finds in doubt (Cole and Godfrey 1977; Cole, Funk, Godfrey, and Starna 1978; Funk 1977, Starna 1977; a reply to the criticisms is in Raemsch 1978). I found it interesting that a student created similar "eoliths" by rattling the same source material in a garbage can (Funk 1977, 543); the simple experiment has much to say about eoliths! ... Acceptance of Poor Evidence -- ... Similarly, when the book documents a claim for a modern-type human skeleton (reported in a geology journal of 1862) in a coal deposit 90 feet deep, we learn the authors wrote the Geological Survey to date the coal to about 286 million years (p. 454). But we are not treated to a contextual discussion of the bones -- how they were found, who found them, what was the site like, and how these allegedly 286 million year old bones came out of the earth with only a loose black coating that was easily scraped away to reveal nice white bone, etc. The impression left is that, if a tabloid reported Jimmy Hoffa's corpse was found in Triassic deposits, then the authors would no doubt perform rigorous research to date those deposits and then include the data in their next book. ... Faulty View of Science Process -- One of the most striking themes of Forbidden Archaeology is the notion that scientists are slaves to tradition, which slows down or stops the adoption of new ideas. Yet, scientists have often overturned paradigms in the face of a social tradition that penalized them for it. Galileo pushed his 'wild' views of a heliocentric solar system until threatened by state-officiated torture. Modern cosmology is another example, a branch of knowledge under such motion and revision that I suspect astronomers are giants among coffee drinkers. Similarly, paleoarchaeology is revised often in the face of new evidence (see Tuttle 1988 for a feel for the controversy). The "knowledge filter" would have to be impossibly acrobatic to span all this change. ... Conclusion -- ...This book, and other creationist texts that use similar techniques, is most useful as ethnographic data in studies of comparative religion, cult movements, popular movements, anti-science, fantastic archaeology, rhetoric, folklore -- the book can be studied in any of these fields. With its emphasis on "secrets" and "hidden history" and "cover-up," the book participates in the popular genre of the conspiracy, akin to popular beliefs about the Kennedy assassination and crashed alien spaceships kept in guarded Air Force hangars ... I see Forbidden Archaeology fantasizing about a past open-mindedness to legitimize a vast restructuring of our present understanding -- without good evidence.
Rating:
Summary: Makes a Great Reference Book
Review: Read this book from cover to cover and it did take some effort.
For those interested in the evidence of man's past this book is well worth it and a must read. It will open your eyes. The ammount of evidence presented in this book is astounding yet many in the field are most likely unaware of it, what a shame. My question for the author is this: Many sites are documented in this book,will you support further explorations at these sites with proceeds from your lectures and publications.This is what needs to happen and should be the result from this book. I hope professionals in the field who read it will be spured on to continue the work of the these past seekers of truth. The science of man's development is still in it's infancy and this book merely points to the fact that there is still much to learn. My thanks to the author and this work.
Rating:
Summary: A Call for the Return of Science
Review: (This is an edit of my previous review which has mysteriously reverted to "a reader.") A level-headed, painstakingly researched tome documenting the systematic suppression of paleontological evidence militating against currently popular theories of human evolution. A chilling, non-sensationalistic look at the "sloppiness" and general lack of integrity of members of the scientific establishment who, in their devotion to defending the current models of human origins, reject or ignore unwelcome data - much of it seemingly impeccably researched - that would throw much of their field into (even more) utter confusion. It is hilarious and tragic to see this book being ridiculed by "reviewers" who have obviously never read it, but another symptom of the close-mindedness of the keepers of evolutionist dogma, as lamented by Richard Milton ("Shattering the Myths of Darwinism"). Now that their religion has been debunked by Behe's "Darwin's Black Box," it remains to be seen their level of true scientific curiosity as regards Cremo & Thompson's findings. There are the howls about Cremo's religion. Do they reject Newtonian physics because of Newton's creationist beliefs? Do they likewise pooh-pooh the contributions of Lister, Pasteur, Boyle, Maxwell, Peirce? Cremo admits his beliefs up front, and never do they impinge on his detailed, sober analyses in this book. They would do better to reject Darwinism ("[T]he literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion" - M. Ruse, atheist), a religion whose adherents see fit to fit false feet to fossils ("Lucy" was modeled with human feet and hands for public consumption although she was known to have had apelike ones). Any objective reading will show that Cremo is ironically more scientific than his detractors, and has a thorough grasp of the subject matter. The sheer volume and detailed discussion of "anomalous" data compiled in this book is staggering: traces of the hand of man (tools, etc.) found in strata millions of years before his supposed appearance on the evolutionary scene; off-the-cuff dismissals of such evidence by influential scientists for sometimes contradictory reasons (and sometimes almost none at all!); the findings of distinguished, top-notch scientists ridiculed and being branded as heresy for going against the prevailing dogma. It is instructive that most scientists today are totally unaware of the controversial evidence presented here, even in their fields of specialty. If we are able to do as the authors ask and evaluate the evidence as it stands without prejudice against their (eastern) religious beliefs, we might well find that the underpinnings for their belief in the great antiquity of the human race is at least as solid as that of the ruling paradigm - and probably even more so. Even if we do not agree with their conclusions (I don't), an open-minded inquiry into these findings will certainly show current theories to be, at best, seriously negligent in blissful ignorance - Mr. Magoo in a lab coat - or, at worst, anti-science. Remember, Piltdown was "scientifically" worshipped as our ancestor for near 40 years. Whereas science may be self-correcting, evolutionists are obviously somewhat deficient in this regard.
|
