Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • Chapter 27 - Romancing the Past

  • from Part V - Transcendent Thinkers: Reflections on Controversial Intellectuals
  • Michael Shermer, Chapman University, California
  • Book:
    Giving the Devil his Due
    Published online:
    28 February 2020
    Print publication:
    09 April 2020, pp 311-327

  • Summary

    This essay grew out of several threads of commentary on Graham Hancock, the author of numerous bestselling books about ancient human pre-history, whose work I had encountered many times over the years. Many millions of people seem to accept Hancock’s radically challenging ideas uncritically, so I thought someone needed to defend mainstream science and put Hancock’s alternative archaeological theories into perspective. What follows is an original essay stitched together from my notes for the show, my postmortem blog about it afterward, my Scientific American column about Hancock’s work, and a few thoughts about the book he published after our studio collision. I like Graham very much as a person, despite our differences over scientific issues, and through correspondence we became friends. He is a warm, thoughtful, caring, generous, and intelligent man whose life’s work I find compelling even while rejecting its central premise, with which this essay shall engage.