Forbidden Archeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race

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.


An Enormous Amassing of Anomalous Evidence.   February 17, 2007
New Age of Barbarism (EVROPA.)
38 out of 46 found this review helpful

_Forbidden Archeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race_, published by the Bhaktivedanta Institute, by historian and philosopher of science Michael A. Cremo and researcher Richard L. Thompson first appeared in 1993. This book called into question the most widely accepted account of the origin of mankind by bringing to light an enormous amount of anomalous evidence. Such evidence would seem to indicate that mankind (as Homo sapiens sapiens) existed on this planet long before the accepted date for man's origins (believed to be 100,000 years ago in Africa after evolving from an ape-like ancestor). However, were the evidence presented in this book to be accepted, then it would call into question the most widely held theory of man's origins, the Darwinian account of evolution by means of natural selection. The book relies on a certain understanding of the scientific enterprise itself, emphasizing the role that social forces play in the scientific endeavor. As such, the authors admit their debts to such philosophers of science as Thomas Kuhn, Steven Shapin, and Paul Feyerabend. The ideas of these philosophers are controversial (particularly among scientists) because they seem to show that sociological (and even political) factors play a greater role in the scientific endeavor than is usually admitted. (Long ago, others such as Charles Fort also amassed anomalous evidence that called into account many widely accepted theories of the time.) Throughout the book the authors will maintain that such anomalous evidence presents a challenge to the orthodox scientific account of mankind's origins. They also maintain that while much of the evidence appears in older journals and publications from the Nineteenth century that it was too casually dismissed by scientists of a later generation when the Darwinian account became the orthodox theory. The authors maintain that there is really no good reason to reject such older evidence, provided that one also accepts the modern evidence which lends support to the Darwinian account of mankind's more recent origins. Thus, one can choose to either accept both forms of evidence (for the older account of mankind's origins) or to reject both. Either way, the results do not look good for the standard Darwinian account. Since the beginning however, reactionary scientists have scoffed at such evidence, largely attributing it to fraud, improper data collection, memory distortions, etc. - basically any excuse to reject it. This can be seen in the reactions of many scientists to the ideas presented in this book. When this book did appear, with few exceptions, it was uniformly greeted with a negative reaction from the scientific community. Some maintained that the book amounted to a conspiracy theory, was thus unfalsifiable, and could not be taken seriously. However, this objection cannot be used against it, because science itself has been found to contain many unfalsifiable theories. However, even more importantly others have maintained that the motivations of the authors are religious in nature and that this discredits any evidence they may present. Thus, some have maintained that the authors have a confirmation bias and have leveled the charge of "creationism" against the authors. However, these scientists fail to take into account their own confirmation bias in their blind allegiance to the orthodox Darwinian viewpoint. The authors admit at the beginning of their account that they are members of the Bhaktivedanta Institute and were motivated by reading accounts of mankind on earth long before current history allows in the Vedas. Such accounts are certainly interesting and may reveal that there is more to the story of mankind's origins than is commonly allowed. The fundamental issue at stake here is how science deals with anomalous evidence. Some merely scoff at it, or attribute it to other causes a priori without even examining it. However, others may take a closer look at it and find that there is more to it. I am not quite sure that the authors have proven that man in fact inhabited this planet at such early dates as some of the evidence in this book may seem to indicate, but they have certainly provided me with much to think about. I can no longer look at the official accounts of human origins in the same light again. It seems as if many scientists have allowed personal, political, and ideological motivations to guide the scientific endeavor and thus have lost all sight of objectivity. Such things must be taken into account when formulating a theory of human origins.

The first section of this book deals with anomalous evidence. The authors begin by presenting some history of how Darwin's account as detailed in _The Origin of Species_ and for humans in _The Descent of Man_ came to be the most widely accepted account. The authors then note some epistemological issues that will occur regarding the facts of testimony and the possibility of fraud. They then propose their model of suppression for how the scientific community has systematically ignored certain types of evidence. Following this, the authors present anomalous evidence for human toolmakers in the following forms: incised and broken bones, eoliths (anomalously old stone tools), crude paleolithic stone tools, advanced paleoliths and neoliths, and anomalous human skeletal remains. Much of this evidence is extraordinarily old and it may cause one to doubt until one considers the fact that the case for such evidence is every bit as good as the case for any other piece of evidence used to establish the standard orthodox account. The authors next present the accepted evidence. First, they call into question certain aspects of the Java Man (Pithecanthropus Erectus) finds. Then, they devote a chapter to the Piltdown man fiasco and forgery. The important thing about the Piltdown man case is that it shows how wrong orthodox opinion can often be. Many have attributed the Piltdown man forgery to the scheming of a single scientist (usually conveniently blaming the "amateur" Dawson or the religious Jesuit Teilhard de Chardin, rather than a "real" scientist). However, one possibility is that the forgery resulted from an overzealous form of British nationalism. The authors have an interesting take on this. They consider the possibility that a group of scientists themselves created the forgery, only later to "expose" the very forgery that they had created. If such a thing occurred (and it is just as probable as blaming it on any given single scientist), it would certainly cast doubts on a large part of the scientific endeavor. Following the Piltdown case, the authors examine evidence for Peking man and other finds in China. Following this, the authors turn their attention to the possibility of living ape-men, who may live among us. This is a controversial topic; however, they note that evidence for such ape-men (be they called sasquatch, yeti, or what have you) is just as acceptable as any other form of evidence. Further, many new animals are discovered every year. Many mainstream anthropologists have remained silent on this issue and some have spoken out against modern ape-men; however, a brave few have spoken up in favor of modern ape-men, and their studies of the phenomena are presented here. The authors then discuss some of the findings from Africa. Darwin maintained that Africa was the birthplace of man and much of modern paleoanthropology seems to indicate he may have been right. However, there is reason to be suspicious again because of recurrent issues of nationalism. The authors call much of this evidence into question. (They also question the alleged time frame for man's first arrival in the New World.) The book concludes with three appendices: one on chemical and radiocarbon dating of anomalous human skeletal remains (calling into question many accepted methods), one on evidence for advanced culture in distant ages (this remains more questionable of course, but would indicate that many ancient writings are correct were it proven to be valid), and a summary of the evidence.

After reading this book, I remain largely baffled as to how to respond. Certainly most of the evidence here deserves a careful looking at. And, the fact that many mainstream scientists remain so skeptical and outright reactionary is not a good sign. It would appear that much of the scientific endeavor has become corrupted with politics as a result. (For example, the authors note the role of the Rockefeller Foundation in influencing the modern scientific endeavor and the decline in traditional religion.) Scientists have been fooled before by the Piltdown man hoax, and it remains a distinct possibility that a great many of them are fooled even today. However, until such time as more open-minded and cautious people are capable of looking objectively at the evidence, the scientific community is unlikely to alter its course in dogmatically affirming the Darwinian account. Such is the sad story of the modern scientific enterprise.



Great book.   July 23, 2008
Flapjack (japan)
12 out of 13 found this review helpful

If you're only interested in the politically correct version of human history, don't read this book. If, on the other hand, you are willing to explore evidence that contradicts the current history books, read on. The research done in this book is extremely comprehensive and hard to refute. The one-star reviews for this book don't get the big picture, and try to point out embellishments within the material that make it sound fishy, when it's really not. It's just their attempt to try and refute the real evidence which contradicts established canon. The current scientific viewpoint concerning the origins of human history has turned into a dogma, resembling that of the Inquisition, where any attempt to bring up an alternative viewpoint to history is met with a venomous assault. Scientists generally find what they are looking for, which only reinforces their current theories, and they tend to ignore evidence that doesn't fit into their belief systems. This is essentially what this book is all about.


Prompted me to reassess my archaeological education.   June 4, 1999
24 out of 29 found this review helpful

Years after drifting away from my background in archaeology, I started playing catch-up with some current works. This book made me take a hard look at what I was taught in college. In retrospect I see how archaeology can be highly unscientific. For example, I was told in one lecture that a certain site in Wisconsin (Aztalan State Park) used to be a great site, but it had been paved over years before. Well, I've been to Aztalan three times with friends, and it's an honest-to-goodnes ancient city with earth pyramids. Did that professor purposely lie to the class? Did he think no one would ever actually visit the place? What other complete fabrications have I been taught? Cremo and Thompson are very brave for taking on the establishment, but they have a lot of allies like me out here. Let's bring on SCIENCE and some TRUTH to our origins.