Analysis: “Fingerprints of the Gods”

Having read Graham Hancock’s earlier work, I purchased Fingerprints of the Gods despite the fact that I was consumed with developing the Noetitek™ system during the mid-1990s. “Some things take time,” I said one day to my house-remodeler neighbor as he was working on a long-planned addition to his own home, and he responded, dryly, as if to complete my statement: “…and some things take even longer.” With that remark in mind, a fifteen-year delay in reading a 578-page book seems not so bad. 

When I added the book to my collection, which has always grown faster than I can read, the intention of Fingerprints of the Gods was clear from the cover: to reveal The Evidence of Earth’s Lost Civilization. This intrigued me, not only because the enigmatic Sphinx is depicted on the cover, but because in 1982 I had visited ancient ruins in Peru, including Machu Picchu before it became a huge tourist attraction. Despite the explanation of locals that those massive stone-works had been made by Incas, it was obvious that the Incas had merely rebuilt ruins that they had discovered. Equally obvious to me was the similarity of some of that architecture to other ancient stone-works around the world. The implication was clear: that a worldwide civilization existed in pre-history and the Old Ones enjoyed certain technological capabilities that remain undiscovered. 

In 1991, after several years of research that involved studying all of Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky’s books and many others, including the oldest known writings from around the world, and more recent additions to the list, ranging from the Dead Sea Scrolls to the Book of Mormon, I sent a proposal to a leading literary agent who had been nagging me for a submission. Unfortunately, my unique approach to making the case for an ancient world civilization committed the sin of mixing genres, and I did not want to dumb-it-down to satisfy a marketplace more concerned with the way bookstore shelves are labeled than with the value of new avenues to understanding. Yet I continued piling up books, magazines, and videos that might aid a future effort to revisit my abandoned “theory of everything” related to pre-history. 

Getting back to Hancock’s book, his research is extensive and it paints a picture that is surely compelling for many readers. For me, however, the “lost continent” premise is erroneous, the facts and assumptions lack newness, the insights are not revelatory, and over-reliance on ancient maps to make the case is unconvincing. A detailed critique of each map discussed is not possible or appropriate here. Instead, for now, I quote scientist-philosopher Alfred Korzybski, who said: “The map is not the territory”—models of reality are not the reality of the present or past. If a case for accepting those tantalizing maps as fingerprints of a lost civilization were to be presented in a court of law, and PluribusOne™ Consulting presented its counter-arguments, the maps would be insufficient even as “circumstantial evidence,” with respect to the age of their origin, methods of compilation, and otherwise. Sometimes a smoking gun is a cap-pistol. 

Do fingerprints of a lost civilization exist?—yes, all over the planet, and many are presented superficially in Graham Hancock’s door-stopper book. Published in 1995, it remains valuable as an introductory reference tool for armchair investigators.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 Responses to “Analysis: “Fingerprints of the Gods””

  1. Valiant Says:

    I keep reading that the geographical setting for the Book of Mormon cannot include areas of Peru such as Machu Picchu because the time period does not match. The Book of Mormon covers the period from about 600 BC to 400 AD. Machu Picchu, experts say, was not built until about 1450 AD. How do you respond to this?

  2. PluribusOne™ Says:

    There may be other reasons to exclude Machu Picchu and other areas of Peru from consideration as having been populated by tribes described in the Book of Mormon, but the time period argument absolutely does not hold.

    I have studied ancient stone-works from around the world and extensively examined the ruins at Machu Picchu and other sites in Peru in person. At Machu Picchu, there are two distinctly different layers of stone-work having dramatically different quality. The older stone-work is much more sophisticated in design, refined in the cutting, and enigmatic in the perfection of placement.

    It should be obvious to any archeologist worthy of a university grant that the truly ancient stone-work at Machu Picchu was “restored” by some later people, perhaps the Lamanites, perhaps the Incas. In any case, those more ancient stone-works were set in place many thousands of years ago. The question is: Why has this truth been suppressed?

    In 1982, I discovered smoking-gun evidence that the older stone-work at Machu Picchu predates even the Biblical Flood.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s