Paranormalpeopleonline.com

This is the second volume of the Divine Comedy by Dante Alighieri; Purgatory, in this case translated by author and scholar Mark Musa (Penguin Classics).

Having thoroughly enjoyed volume one; Inferno, I had hoped that Purgatory would stand up to my rather high expectations.  In story I suppose it did, our pilgrim and his guide climb the mountain of purgatory, traversing the seven terraces of cardinal sin; wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy and gluttony.  I did find it a bit odd that these seven sins would be cleansed through purgatory, rather than punished in hell, but who am I to question the master poet of Italy?

This translation though, was somewhat disappointing.  Rather, it was Musa’s input that brought this version down.  The translation notes were thorough to the point of tedium, and being inserted after every canto they caused the story to become much too fragmented to be enjoyable.

If I were to take this path again I would choose a different translation, but all in all, I am richer for having endured.

A Universe From Nothing.  At first glance this book seems to be a treatise on the science of cosmology, but the happy surprise is that Lawrence Krauss presents a cogent and relevant argument against Creation.  Using science as a sword he carves out a picture of nothing and explains how something from nothing is not only possible, it’s inevitable.

I admit that I didn’t fully understand all of the science, though this is no fault of Krauss, his writing is eminently readable.  The subject matter therein is, however, highly complex.  From the cosmology of the Big Bang, to the curvature of the universe at hand (which happens to be as flat as can be measured), to the quantum weirdness of quarks and protons popping into existence from the nothingness of empty space.  These topics are mindbenders to all but a select few people.

To clarify my understanding, I may pick this book up again in the future. According to Richard Dawkins (who wrote the afterword for the book) this is a seminal piece in the battle between science and religion, so a second reading might be warranted.

Despite the fact that I didn’t grasp all of the subtle nuances of the science, I do recommend A Universe From Nothing to anyone wishing to find answers to the philosophical question of First Cause.  It is a journey worth taking.

The current state of UFOlogy notwithstanding, it’s an awe inspiring thing to look into the night sky and ponder the question that haunts so many…is there life elsewhere in the universe?

It has been a question that has weighed on my mind for many years, and one that has occupied the intellect of some of our civilizations most celebrated geniuses.  To say that I stand on the shoulders of giants would be a monumental understatement, but nonetheless I offer you commentary based on the intelligence of those who came before me.

The genius I refer to is the Drake Equation (also known as the Greenbank Equation or the Greenbank Formula).  The equation bears the name of its originator, Frank Drake, one time Emeritus Professor of Astronomy and Astrophysics at the University of California, Santa Cruz.  The anecdotally fulfilling story of how and when Drake came up with the formula is an aside to the real value that the formula offers to those who search for signs of such extraterrestrial life, though it is worth telling.

In 1960, Drake conducted the first search for radio signals from extraterrestrial civilizations at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in Green Bank, West Virginia. Soon thereafter, the National Academy of Sciences asked Drake to convene a meeting on detecting extraterrestrial intelligence. The meeting was held at the Green Bank facility in 1961. The equation arose out of his preparations for the meeting:

“As I planned the meeting, I realized a few days ahead of time we needed an agenda. And so I wrote down all the things you needed to know to predict how hard it’s going to be to detect extraterrestrial life. And looking at them it became pretty evident that if you multiplied all these together, you got a number, N, which is the number of detectable civilizations in our galaxy. This, of course, was aimed at the radio search, and not to search for primordial or primitive life forms.” –Frank Drake[1]

The equation allows one to work out how many intelligent civilizations are likely to evolve within the Milky Way galaxy.  It uses a number of values that are, shall we say best guesses at most, such as the number of stars that are created in a given period, or the number of habitable planets there are at any given time.

The Drake equation states that:

N= R* x Fp x Ne x Fl x Fi x Fc x L

where:

  N = the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible;

and

R* = the average rate of star formation per year in our galaxy

f_p = the fraction of those stars that have planets

n_e = the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets

fℓ = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some point

f_i = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life

f_c = the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space

L = the length of time for which such civilizations release detectable signals into space

Considerable disagreement on the values of most of these parameters exists, but the values used by Drake and his colleagues in 1961 were:

• R* = 10/year (10 stars formed per year, on the average over the life of the galaxy)
• f_p = 0.5 (half of all stars formed will have planets)
• n_e = 2 (stars with planets will have 2 planets capable of developing life)
• f_l = 1 (100% of these planets will develop life)
• f_i = 0.01 (1% of which will be intelligent life)
• f_c = 0.01 (1% of which will be able to communicate)
• L = 10,000 years (which will last 10,000 years)

Drake’s values give N = 10 × 0.5 × 2 × 1 × 0.01 × 0.01 × 10,000 = 10.

Little consensus can be found for the values above, while R* is based on a considerable amount of astronomical data and is the least argued value, others, such as n_e and f_l are hotly debated.  As shown above, Drake came to the conclusion that there should be 10 intelligent civilizations with the capability of communicating within the Milky Way galaxy (via radio waves etc).  The one factor that the Drake Equation does not address is when these civilizations might exist, which is the chief criticism of the formula.

Critics of the formula cite that many of the values are soaked in anthropic bias, or in common terms, they are based on information that is true about Earth, but may not be true of other planets.  Over the years various other people have worked the Drake Equation using different values, whether based on scientific data (i.e. geology, astronomy and anthropology) or even just intuition, ultimately causing great divergence among their individual values for N, providing for between 0.000065 to 20,000 communicative civilizations.

Ultimately the critics are correct, while the equation may provide an invigorating thought experiment; it does not provide any real answer to the question that preceded it.  Since most of its values are little more than guesses, the resulting expression is worthless.

Or as noted by science fiction author Michael Crichton:

“The problem, of course, is that none of the terms can be known, and most cannot even be estimated. The only way to work the equation is to fill in with guesses. As a result, the Drake equation can have any value from “billions and billions” to zero. An expression that can mean anything means nothing. Speaking precisely, the Drake equation is literally meaningless…”

As anyone whose read my blog in the past already knows, I am not a spiritual or religious man.  In fact, I am an atheist; in that I don’t believe in God (I’ll forgive a slight gasp of disbelief for those who are new to my writing).  I find the whole idea to be nonsense, but this is my choice, as it is the choice to believe for anyone else…but is it really a choice?  Are we born capable of intellectualising such matters?  Some would say yes, others would say no, and I have another argument to offer.

As much as anyone might be able to rationalize and compartmentalize such a choice, there is a growing amount of scientific evidence to suggest that a propensity for religious belief is a hardwired function of the human brain, meaning that our brains are programmed to believe in deities, though it doesn’t stop there.  There may be a correlation between religious piety and belief in extraterrestrials or even the paranormal.

Ancient Astronaut theorists have long proposed that the deities we so passionately worship today are nothing more than highly advanced extraterrestrial creatures who, quite literally, played God in our distant past.  In fact, many of the arguments used to deny the existence of God can easily be adapted and used to argue against the existence of these ancient aliens.  But that’s another discussion entirely.

What if I told you that your propensity for belief, whether in God or aliens or ghosts or what-have-you, is actually the product of your brain interpreting electromagnetic signals in the atmosphere?  Whatever you might say, I would tell you next of Canadian Neuroscientist Michael Persinger’s God Helmet.  Literally a device that is purported to bring about religious or spiritual experiences, the God helmet has been the focus of much scrutiny of late.  Originally conceived to aid Persinger and his research partner Stanley Koren in a study of creativity and the effects of subtle stimulation of the temporal lobe, the God helmet was found to provide a much more profound experience than just inspiration.

Now there is some argument over the replication of Persinger’s results, but Persinger does stand by his findings.  The God Helmet was not specifically designed to elicit visions of God, but to test several of Persinger’s hypotheses about brain function.  The first of these is the Vectorial Hemisphericity Hypothesis, which proposes that the human sense of self has two components, one on each side of the brain, that ordinarily work together but in which the left hemisphere is usually dominant.  Persinger argues that the two hemispheres make different contributions to a single sense of self, but under certain conditions can appear as two separate ‘selves’.  Persinger and Koren designed the God Helmet in an attempt to create conditions in which contributions to the sense of self from both cerebral hemispheres is disrupted.

In any event, the God helmet uses complex magnetic signals patterned after physiological processes, such as one derived from limbic burst firing, to elicit a response in the subject’s experience.  His subjects reported feelings of a presence in the room with them, visions of angels or of deceased persons known to the subject, and most poignant, a feeling of being in the presence of God.

It strikes me that these feelings are comparable to those reported by persons visiting various spiritual locations the world over such as Stonehenge in Wiltshire, England, or Machu Picchu in Peru, or even Cambodia’s Angkor Wat.  It’s also interesting that each of these places are reported to have or emit strange electromagnetic fields.  Furthermore, these locations, and many more, are points of inclusion in the world grid.

Also called Ley-lines, the world grid is a series of lines that criss-cross around the globe, connecting a large number of sacred or spiritual sites all over the world.  It’s thought that the world grid is the manifestation of complex EM fields, that when mapped out create invisible geometrical shapes.

Ancient Astronaught theorists like to assert that the world grid is an old world navigation system, used by extraterrestrials and possibly taught to ancient man.  In some circles it’s said that these ancient spiritual sites are in fact revered as sacred because of those teachings.

As mentioned above, it strikes me that these locations, the ones that are considered to be situated at convergent lay-lines, seem to emit or posses special electromagnetic energy and I wonder if the spiritual nature of these sites is related to the effect seen in Persinger’s God Helmet.  In short, I suggest that those EM fields at sites like Stonehenge etc. act in much the same was as the God Helmet, creating religious experiences through the subtle manipulation of the temporal lobes of those who visit such sites.

Science and the Akashic Field, a relatively small book, is definitely not a light read. Written by philosopher of science Ervin László PhD, this is a thorough tour of virtually every contemporary science on the way to an understanding of László’s Integral Theory of Everything.  Where the likes of Einstein, Newton and many others have created various theoretical works, none have been able to encompass every aspect of the reality we all experience.  It appears that László has succeeded in revealing such a TOE, an I-TOE.  He has spent decades examining the works of other theoreticians in search of evidence for what he calls the Akashic field, or the A-field, which is the foundation of his theory.

While I’m not knowledgeable enough to provide you with a complete explanation of his I-TOE or the A-field, I do come away from this book with a deeper understanding of coherence as it pertains to the quantum world and to the cosmos.  I did find László to be utterly convinced of the efficacy of his own theory, even though, to my understanding, he has non-conventional views of evolution and quantum mechanics.

I wouldn’t recommend this book to anyone who has limited knowledge of physics, cosmology, evolutionary biology and even psychology, but to those well versed in contemporary science, it would be a worthy effort.  All in all, I found Science and the Akashic Field to be a fulfilling read.

Artificial Intelligence or the scientific pursuit of AI is insulting to me as a biological entity.

The very idea of replacing human control over both the developmental pace and capacity of computers is to me an idea fraught with folly.  Not the least of my concerns is the eventual obsolescence of humanity on earth, but more to the point, I think there are better ways to apply the collective knowledge of genomics, nanotechnology, computational engineering, evolutionary biology and cyber-neurology

What is meant by the often abused title Artificial Intelligence?

“Intelligence exhibited by an artificial (non-natural, man-made) entity; the branch of computer science dealing with the reproduction or mimicking of human-level thought in computers; the essential quality of a machine which thinks in a manner similar to or on the same general level as a human being.” [en.wiktionary.org/wiki/artificial_intelligence]

A computer that thinks; this is opposed to the computers we have currently, computers that are exceptional in their computational abilities, but which cannot perform even the simplest task without instruction from a human being.

Even without invoking the ever popular notion that Skynet will take over the world –in a violent attempt to either defend itself against destruction (or deletion, or disconnection, or whatever other apocalyptic processes a computer might eventually deem it needs to defend against) or act to protect us from the perceived threat of, us– I can articulate a number of other possible negative outcomes of the race to AI.

Perhaps our robotic progeny will advance so fast in intellect and reasoning ability, somewhere in the range of an exponential increases in both computational power and cognitive scope, as many who work on such projects realistically predicts will be the case, that our interference will be deemed akin to the presence of termites in the walls of our homes, and of course be subject to extermination.  Or perhaps our little AI creations will simply leave us behind, ejecting themselves off and away from this planet doomed to biological destruction, forsaking all that which we most self-righteously demand they owe us from their creation.

It has always annoyed me, the scope to which humanity’s anthropocentric attitude blinds us to the unbiased reality of our environment.  Every assignment of the idea that we are at the top of the food chain, that we are the most intelligent beings on this planet, or that we somehow deserve evolution’s progressive respect (as such demanding that we should stay in our self-imposed position of superiority over nature), is an insinuation that our position is anything more than an egomaniacal fantasy.  Our big brains are an impressive example of evolution’s propensity for bio-complexity, but the result is nothing more than luck.  We are not the winners in a global lottery of species, now righteous in our celebration of the riches we’ve won.  We are freaks of nature, and a more succinct description could never be designed by either evolution, or monkeys on typewriters.  Our brains, and in turn our vast intellect are products of genetic mutations accumulated over millions of years of biological development; accidents of copy fidelity in our respective DNA and nothing more.

Perspective in mind, does the creation of an Artificial Intelligence preclude the notion that we have some right to sit where we do in terms of intellectual superiority?  No, it most certainly does not.  Hence, at the first opportunity, our position at the top of the ladder will quickly be supplanted by the first entity that is capable of doing so, whether created by us or Mother Nature.

If the worst case scenario is death and destruction, and the median might be abandonment, could the best case scenario be captivity?  I’m not necessarily saying that all AI research be stopped immediately, not at all.  AI research holds the potential to unlock the secrets of our vastly complex and secretive brains, it can, through its respective contributory sciences, serve to engineer humanity itself into that golden seat of actual superiority, immortality and infinite intelligence.

All that I’m suggesting here is that the pursuit of AI would be better aimed at integrating the longevity of computers that learn directly with human intelligence.  Whether that be a neural download (or would that be an upload?), a confluence of technological systems with biological systems…or even a full realisation of the Bionic Man’s opening Mantra: “…we have the technology, we can rebuild him.”

To me, the difference amounts to making devices that can outrun our intellectual possibilities, or increasing our own intellectual possibilities themselves.  It should be known that there are people working on both sides of this coin, there are those scientists who would have every home equipped with an AI butler, there are those that would have the internet converted into a learning machine (which presents me with a frightening mental picture), and there are those who would take AI research to the level of creating a whole new class of artificial entities, based on human technology and neurology.

This doesn’t belie the actual research being done on both fronts, AI and BioEngineering, wherein scientists are, with relative quickness, making discoveries that will doubtless enhance what it means to be human, not the least of which is the prospect of using nanotechnology and biomedical engineering to re-grow severed limbs and organs, or the decoding of human neurology in order to facilitate notions of radiotelepathy and neuronally transmitted communication.  We are moving ahead, as a species, this is a fact none can rationally deny; where we’re headed is another question, and is wholly up for debate.

In keeping with all of his other books, Sagan has once again weaved a spectacular tale.  Pale Blue Dot brings light to the solar system, illuminating each of our heavenly neighbours, teasing out the very nature of every body.  I am especially fond of Sagan’s description of Earth from the vantage point of space, would ET even notice that intelligent life exists on this small watery planet.

This book is eminently readable, though I did find myself feeling remorse for the fact that Sagan died before many of today’s space missions –i.e. Cassini, Curiosity and Huygens Titan probe- could get off the ground.  It makes me wonder how different this book might have been had he known what would be found in our solar system by contemporary missions.

I recommend this book to anyone interested in astronomy or cosmology, Sagan seems to have written this book for the layman but even so, he provides enough scientific detail to interest even the well versed.  I give it 5 out of 5.

Lumbering giants, terrifying predators, beasts that challenge the imagination; dinosaurs are and have been one of the great wonders of the world.  People have been finding dinosaur fossils for hundreds, if not thousands of years, and they, no doubt, have been the catalyst for many an ancient beast legend.

The first scientifically described dinosaur fossil was a Megalosaurus, found in 1824 by British fossil hunter William Buckland. Since that time, millions of such fossils have been found, and thus began the long standing guessing game of palaeontology.  Many nearly complete fossils have been found, which give us a decent idea of the general appearance of many dinosaurs, but our knowledge of the details of what they looked like is limited by the nature of fossils. But it seems that some in our ancient history had the jump on us when it comes to what dinosaurs looked like.

In 1966, Peruvian physician Javier Cabrera Darquea was presented with a stone that had a carved picture of what Cabrera believed to be an extinct fish by a friend for his 42nd birthday.  Cabrera’s father had begun a collection of similar stones in the 1930s, and based on his interest in Peruvian prehistory, Cabrera began collecting more.  The more he collected, however, the stranger the story got.  These are, in fact, the Ica Stones, so named because they are found in Ica, Peru. The stones are made of andesite and vary in size from pebbles to boulders.  They have carved in them various scenes which include dinosaurs and other animals, advanced medical works and maps.

Cabrera believes the stones date to somewhere between 500BC and 1000ad, but since stone cannot be carbon dated their actual age is up in the air.  However, if the stones are as old as Cabrera says, there’s a problem, and a glaring problem at that.  How exactly could the people of Ica Peru have carved such accurate images of dinosaurs more than 2000 years ago?

Dinosaurs lived through three different ages according to palaeontologists, the Cambrian (542–488.3 million years ago), the Triassic (250 to 200 million years ago) and the Jurassic (200 million to 145 million years ago) periods.  This means, according to mainstream science, that dinosaurs have been extinct for at least 145 million years.  So how exactly did ancient Peruvians know what they looked like?

The Ancient Alien Theory suggests that knowledge of dinosaurs and even the medical processes that have been carved on these stones was given to the Ica people by their sky gods, or more accurately, ancient aliens.  Other conspiracy theorists insist that dinosaurs lived a lot longer than mainstream science wants to admit.  They suggest that the Ica people carved what they saw first hand, meaning that dinosaurs lived during the reign of the Ica people just more than 2000 years ago.  Some even go so far as to claim that some dinosaurs still exist to this day, pointing to the Loch Ness Monster and Ogopogo in Western Canada as evidence for their claim.

Mainstream science, however, has a different theory, as one would expect.  Geologists contend that the andesite stones have been carved much more recently than others would have you believe.  Some say that the carvings are less than fifty years old, and that they are simply an artistic expression of the modern people of Ica Peru.

Of course, there are those who would seek to use the existence of these stones as evidence that man and dinosaur coexisted at some point in our past.  Creationists have latched onto this legend (if you will) and are pointing and shouting that these stones are the proof they’ve been looking for to say that the Earth is less than 6000 years old.

The stones, which number in the hundreds of thousands, could, in all likelihood, be a modern hoax, intentionally pushed into the fore by a people whose culture is going the way of the dodo.  But there is a chance, however small, that they are a genuine mystery out of the ancient past.  Whichever way you lean, there’s something to be said for the artistic value of the carvings themselves.

Streaks of white criss-cross the sky, puffy, billowy lines use the backdrop of clouds as cover for their true purpose.  If you’ve ever looked up on a clear day you’ve likely seen them, white veins of moisture trailing behind an aircraft high above.  You likely can’t even see the plane, the contrails being the only evidence of it’s passing overhead, hanging in the air at an incredible altitude.

As mentioned, these lines are commonly known as contrails, a contraction between the words condensation and trails, and they’re really quite innocuous. They’re caused by the water vapour in the hot exhaust of aircraft engines, but can also be triggered by the changes in air pressure in wingtip vortices or in the air over the entire wing surface.  Like all clouds, they consist of water vapour or ice particles in the form of a suspension.  They really are just another form of cloud…or are they?

Conspiracy theorists have another name for contrails, one you may already be familiar with; they call them chemtrails.  As with the above, chemtrail is a contraction of two words: chemical and trail.  And conspiracy theorists believe that they are something a great deal more pernicious than simple moisture.  This tends to be a highly charged topic of discussion, for the believers are adamant that the government is undertaking to pull the wool over our eyes.

As the theory goes, chemtrails are deliberately discharged clouds of chemicals released from military aircraft for a host of [potential] reasons.  From weather control through cloud seeding (which actually does take place, but not in this manner), to population control and even mind control through psychoactive drugs.  Respiratory diseases and other health concerns are blamed on the widespread use of chemtrails over the domestic US, as well as Canada, Mexico and even the UK.

The theory originated in 1996 when the United States Air Force was accused of “spraying the US population with mysterious substances”[1] via aircraft.  Much of this is due to an Air Force Air University strategy paper titled Weather as a Force Multiplier, Owning the Weather in 2025[2]. Conspiracy theorists at the time feared that the government was developing some kind of weather control technology and were troubled by the possible health and environmental consequences of such technology.  Since then the theories have spiralled almost out of control.

In Canada, the issue has been brought before parliament by way of a petition, signed by thousands of Canadians demanding an explanation for the so-called spraying of chemicals over the population of the country, citing fears of health issues.

“…presenting a petition on behalf of Mr. Brian Holmes of Ontario regarding aerial spraying. Mr. Holmes has collected signatures from across the country from concerned Canadians who believe that chemicals used in aerial sprayings are adversely affecting the health of Canadians.”[3]

Many of the dozens of theories out there suggest that chemtrails consist of barium, aluminum salts, polymer fibres, thorium or silicon carbide; exposure to some of these compounds is known to cause health problems.  And if true this poses a direct threat to the health of any population being “sprayed”.

Mainstream science, however is quite clear on the matter, stating outright that there is no such thing as a chemtrail.   The US Air Force states that the “‘Chemtrail’ hoax has been investigated and refuted by many established and accredited universities, scientific organizations, and major media publications.”[4]  But the masses aren’t convinced.

Of course, a discussion of chemtrails is not complete without dropping the acronym HAARP into the mix.  Officially known as the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Project, based out of Gakona, Alaska, HAARP has been the focus of countless conspiracy theories, including weather control, earthquake machines, and ionospheric research that could result in a flip of the earth’s magnetic poles.  By far the most prevalent conspiracy theory involving HAARP is the chemtrail theory.

Theorists insist that HAARP, which is funded jointly by the US Air Force, the US Navy, the University of Alaska and DARPA, is up to no good.  They claim that all manner of nefarious devices are designed and tested there, populating myths about their true purpose and blaming them for everything from floods, droughts, hurricanes, thunderstorms, earthquakes in Pakistan, Haiti and the Philippines, major power outages, the downing of TWA Flight 800, Gulf War syndrome, and chronic fatigue syndrome.

Others still whisper the words Illuminati and New World Order, citing some clandestine agencies operating under the malevolent control of Majestic (whatever that really means).  They see chemtrails as a first step in the cleansing of earth’s population, making way for that one world government.

Many people around the world see the chemtrail problem as an American issue alone, which may be due to the amount of interstate air traffic seen in US skies compared to Canada or Britain.  But these billowy nightmares are everyone’s problem it seems, and while a certain percentage of chemtrails are no doubt simple, natural contrails masquerading as something more dangerous, it seems unlikely that we’ll ever know the truth of the matter.

Since everyone’s seen a contrail/chemtrail at least once in their life (unless you’ve been living under a rock), all are invited to leave their opinion on the cause and purpose of this phenomenon in the comment section below.

Over the years I’ve written on a wide spectrum of topics, some more popular than others.  Among those varied subjects I have endeavoured to keep my personal opinion out the mix, with some pointed exceptions.  Some subjects beg for impartial treatment, while others lend themselves to a more personal critique.  In those cases where I’ve presented the information in a more even-handed manner, often it’s because my own thoughts on the subject at hand are somewhat disorganized, but today’s topic suffers no such fate.

I give you…Ancient Alien Theory.

Tracing the origin of the Ancient Alien Theory –also known as Ancient Astronaut Theory and the Paleocontact Hypothesis- one is led inexorably to a list of several infamous authors, such as the late Zecharia Sitchin and Erich von Däniken, both considered to be the fathers of the theory, followed by their disciples David Childress, Georgio Tsoukalis and the late Philip Coppens, among several others.

A line of reasoning which gained much of it’s popularity in the 1960’s and 1970’s, theories put forward by Sitchin and von Däniken suggest, in the broadest sense that extraterrestrials visited and influenced the early development of man, meddling with our cultural and even genetic progress.

Both men have their own pet theories, Sitchin claims that the Anunnaki, a supposed race of aliens who call the fictitious planet Nibiru home, are charged with interfering with human development in the era of pre-history, to make a hybrid race of beings called the Nephilim, for, shall we say, commercial means.

Von Däniken, however, is much less specific in his hypotheses. He claims that ancient art and iconography throughout the world illustrates air and space vehicles, non-human but intelligent creatures, ancient astronauts, and artefacts of an anachronistically advanced technology. Von Däniken also claims that geographically separated historical cultures share artistic themes, which he argues imply a common origin.  Certain artefacts and monumental constructions are claimed by von Däniken to have required a more sophisticated technological ability in their construction than that which was available to the ancient cultures who constructed them. Von Däniken maintains that these artefacts were constructed either directly by extraterrestrial visitors or by humans who learned the necessary knowledge from said visitors. These include Stonehenge, Pumapunku, the Moai of Easter Island, the Great Pyramid of Giza, and the ancient Baghdad electric batteries.

Von Däniken and Sitchin are both prolific writers, and both are most famously known for their original works titled Chariots of the Gods (1968) and The 12^th Planet (1976) respectively.  Through those books, both men have amassed a huge following of die hard fans, most of whom are utterly convinced that the two are almost infallible, which unfortunately is not true.

I have written about Sitchin’s shortcomings in the past (hereand here) and I’m not about to duplicate that work, other than to say that Sitchin, who taught himself to decipher ancient Sumerian cuneiform, is widely regarded as having mistranslated certain ancient Sumerian texts, which ultimately formed the basis of his theory.  He is also widely criticised for his erroneous astronomical and scientific interpretations and literalism of myths.  Having died in 2010 at the age of 90 with more than 14 books under his belt, Sitchin’s legacy is bound to live on for many years, in spite of the fact that the scientific community views his theory as far more fiction than fact.

Von Däniken has suffered similar scientific criticism and is actually more prolific with an amazing 32 books published in multiple languages, though critics are quick to point out that much of his written work is unfounded pseudoscience.  Von Däniken has travelled the globe on so-called archaeological expeditions, supposedly giving him unique insight into the cultures and artefacts of many parts of the world.  In 1973, von Däniken claimed to have stumbled upon a vast underground cave network under the small South American country of Ecuador.  He claimed that the tunnels covered an area spanning the length of the country and that within the caves was an ancient alien library complete with books made of metal.  This proof of an extraterrestrial presence in the distant past garnered von Däniken a good deal of celebrity, but in 1974 he admitted, under fire, that he had fabricated that evidence, calling it poetic license.

In addition to his scientific credibility woes, von Däniken has come under fire for plagiarising a good portion of his work in Chariots of the Gods (as well as other work), eventually succumbing to a lawsuit wherein he agreed to a legal settlement to give credit to Jacques Bergier, Louis Pauwels, Robert Charroux, and other authors who accused him of stealing their work without credit.

The ancient alien world is no stranger to these kinds of shenanigans, what with people like Georgio Tsoukalis proclaiming that he’s the publisher of a magazine called Legendary Times, when that “magazine” is actually just the news letter for the Archaeology, Astronautics and SETI Research Association, now called the Ancient Alien Society.  Of which he is the current director and claims to be the founder (which is also in dispute as von Däniken is thought to be the actual founder).

These people are self-congratulating, self-appointed experts, whose knowledge of ancient history and science is at best flawed, if not completely fabricated.  Of those mentioned, only Sitchin has any real post-secondary education, even though his degree from the University of London was in economics and not archaeology or ancient languages.  They do tend to be well travelled, but visiting a place no more makes you an expert on its history and nature than looking up makes you an astronomer.

As I’ve mentioned before, I find it insulting that most of their theories reduce the real history and science of many archaeological sites to a steaming pile of wild speculation and conjecture.  They diminish the achievements of our ancestors and demean our long lived legacy.  I don’t deny that the idea of extraterrestrials visiting our ancestors is an attractive one, hell, I’m prone to believe that aliens are visiting us now, but if we’re accepting the flawed and often times fraudulent opinions of people who’s own past is peppered with plagiarism and “poetic license”, we’re accepting a lowered standard of evidence that can only lead to embarrassment.

In the future, I plan to do a series of pieces on the various ancient alien theories that have been proffered by these people, paying close attention to the facts of the matter, rather than the conjecture that we’re typically asked to believe.

What do you think of the ancient alien theory?  Voice your opinion in the comment section below.