Yaakov ben Avraham

Erich von Daniken
« on: December 15, 2013, 11:35:11 PM »
Just a curious question. I am reading a few of Erich von Daniken's books. For those who don't know, von Daniken is a Swiss, originally a hotelier by profession, whose claim to fame is his amateur archaeological work, & the subsequent 30-40 books he has written. In these, the 1st being 'Chariots of the Gods' in '68, he proposes to have evidence that 'earth has been visited repeatedly by advanced aliens from other worlds.' (from the blurb of 'CotG'). Athough his theories are rejected by mainstream scientists, he has become a gadfly to archaeologists & a very wealthy man by virtue of his books. I was curious to see if any of you had read his stuff, & if so, what you thought. Do let me know.

Saddam Hussein

Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #1 on: December 16, 2013, 04:55:47 AM »
I haven't read any of his works myself, but I recall with some amusement John Davis talking about them and how you had to read between the lines or something to get the full experience.

Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #2 on: December 16, 2013, 05:00:56 AM »
Just watch Ancient Aliens on the History Channel and you will get a good idea of what he believes.

Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #3 on: December 16, 2013, 05:18:45 AM »
Yeah, Ancient Aliens is really out there.  Half of it is plausible to me, but the other half is just reading way too much into things to me.
I don't even care to find out what you're doing wrong, but I'm sure you're doing something wrong.

*

Offline jroa

  • *
  • Posts: 3094
  • Kentucky Gentleman
    • View Profile
Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #4 on: December 16, 2013, 08:21:08 AM »
Ancient Aliens is the worst show ever.  Half of it is pure lies.  The other half is mistaken information.  They make their money by idiots not knowing which information are lies and which is them just being dumb. 

Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #5 on: December 18, 2013, 08:57:54 AM »
W. Raymond Drake, one of the very best authors on ancient technology:

http://www.amazon.com/W.-Raymond-Drake/e/B001H6J32M

His first masterpiece on the subject was published four years earlier than Erich Von Däniken's bestseller Chariots of the Gods.


Then we have Robert Charroux...

Charroux was a pioneer of the theory of ancient astronauts, publishing at least six non-fiction works in this genre in the last decade of his life, including One Hundred Thousand Years of Man's Unknown History (1963, 1970), Forgotten Worlds (1973), Masters of the World (1974), The Gods Unknown (1974) and Legacy of the Gods (1974).

The influence that Charroux's first work (in its 1963 version) had on Erich Von Däniken's first books (ca. 1966), as well as the influence that Von Däniken's early books had on Charroux, is widely appreciated, but Von Däniken seems to have been equally familiar with an earlier French work, The Morning of the Magicians by Louis Pauwels and Jacques Bergier (1960), which is likely to have been a direct inspiration for both Charroux and Von Däniken.Charroux's publisher contacted Von Däniken's in March 1968 concerning evidence of plagiarism, with the result that later printings of Chariots of the Gods and Return to the Stars at least mentioned Charroux in the bibliography.

http://www.amazon.com/Robert-Charroux/e/B001K7NMWU

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #6 on: December 18, 2013, 03:17:04 PM »
I've heard of Charroux, & the issue of von Daniken's possible plagiarism. I've often wondered whether von Daniken was acknowledging plagiarism, or just giving in to make the matter go away. W/o having read Charroux, I don't know, of course. I have also heard of 'Morning of the Magicians'. Sandokhan, what do you think of von Daniken's (et al) theories?

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3865
    • View Profile
Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #7 on: December 19, 2013, 03:57:00 PM »
Ancient Aliens is the worst show ever.  Half of it is pure lies.  The other half is mistaken information.  They make their money by idiots not knowing which information are lies and which is them just being dumb. 
Yes.

I took an archaeological class that was specifically made to debunk all the bad information, conspiracy theories, and paranormal fanatics out there.

A lot of people just don't want to believe that human beings are fully capable of making amazing structures with nothing more than simple tools and hard work. I mean, there is a recorded image of how the Egyptians made the Great Pyramid and still so many think it's a complete mystery. Daniken thinks it came out of nowhere when there are well known failures prior to the success. It's really upsetting.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2013, 03:58:51 PM by rooster »

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #8 on: December 19, 2013, 06:07:30 PM »
Rooster, now you've got me curious. I've never seen the video. How did the Great Pyramid get built? & no, I'm not being a wise-ass, I'm genuinely curious. Human prehistory is not a strong point of mine. My degrees were in history, which implies codification in some way. Archaeology, on the other hand, deals w/ stuff that hasn't been explored & codified. So, do tell, please.

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 6663
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #9 on: December 19, 2013, 06:20:49 PM »
I've seen several theories successfully tested on small scale pyramids (3-4 layers), but that doesn't necessarily mean that they scale to several hundred layers.  That and the logistics of quarrying, shaping and moving a million or more blocks in a relatively short time span does seem rather daunting even by modern standards, let alone ancient.
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

#firePete

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3865
    • View Profile
Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #10 on: December 19, 2013, 06:22:30 PM »
Rooster, now you've got me curious. I've never seen the video. How did the Great Pyramid get built? & no, I'm not being a wise-ass, I'm genuinely curious. Human prehistory is not a strong point of mine. My degrees were in history, which implies codification in some way. Archaeology, on the other hand, deals w/ stuff that hasn't been explored & codified. So, do tell, please.
It's not prehistory. If it was written down it is recorded history. My degree is also in history, I'm surprised you don't know Ancient Egypt qualifies as "ancient history" and not prehistory.

I didn't say anything about a video. When I say "recorded" I mean there is a drawn image from Ancient Egypt that was made for their records. But there are images of them using rollers to move large structures up ramps.

There are some good documentaries with people recreating the pyramid using both the roller method and the sled method if you're interested.

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3865
    • View Profile
Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #11 on: December 19, 2013, 06:24:06 PM »
I've seen several theories successfully tested on small scale pyramids (3-4 layers), but that doesn't necessarily mean that they scale to several hundred layers.  That and the logistics of quarrying, shaping and moving a million or more blocks in a relatively short time span does seem rather daunting even by modern standards, let alone ancient.
Maybe so, but it's how they paid "taxes". Every citizen was required to build massive structures in yearly shifts for the pharaoh. There is also a quarry of the limestone right across the Nile from where the pyramids were built and where they have found ancient quarrying equipment. And you are not motivated by fanatical religious beliefs to build monuments.

The only people who believe Erich von Daniken are people who have not properly researched the material.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2013, 06:26:33 PM by rooster »

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #12 on: December 19, 2013, 06:36:10 PM »
He's right. The records of Ancient Egypt, though sparser than we should like, are present. I amend my previous statement & stand corrected. Needless to say, my work was done in British history. That having been said, if I understand von Daniken correctly, he is suggesting that the sheer scale of things would have been beyond human endeavour. Is there an answer to that? & yes, I would be interested in those documentaries. Can you link to them?

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3865
    • View Profile
Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #13 on: December 19, 2013, 06:52:16 PM »
He's right. The records of Ancient Egypt, though sparser than we should like, are present. I amend my previous statement & stand corrected. Needless to say, my work was done in British history. That having been said, if I understand von Daniken correctly, he is suggesting that the sheer scale of things would have been beyond human endeavour. Is there an answer to that? & yes, I would be interested in those documentaries. Can you link to them?
Why would a large community of people taking turns to constantly build through-out the year be beyond human endeavor?

It's not the video itself, but an article written of it.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/who-built-the-pyramids.html

Quote
"In a NOVA experiment we found that 12 men could pull a one-and-a-half-ton block over a slick surface with great ease."

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #14 on: December 20, 2013, 12:39:24 AM »
Greetings, Rooster:

Having read the article at PBS.org, I must admit, it gives one a great deal to think about. I wish there was more, though, than the one article. I'm still having a hard time grasping the idea that 36,000 men could manage to put up that stupendous of an edifice in 20 years. Mind you, I am not saying that von Daniken's theories are necessarily any more accurate. What I am saying is that I don't know. Do you have any more information on the subject? Seriously, I am not trying to be a troll. I would like very much to get more information on the subject, as it has always been one of interest to me.

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3865
    • View Profile
Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #15 on: December 20, 2013, 12:43:02 AM »
Greetings, Rooster:

Having read the article at PBS.org, I must admit, it gives one a great deal to think about. I wish there was more, though, than the one article. I'm still having a hard time grasping the idea that 36,000 men could manage to put up that stupendous of an edifice in 20 years. Mind you, I am not saying that von Daniken's theories are necessarily any more accurate. What I am saying is that I don't know. Do you have any more information on the subject? Seriously, I am not trying to be a troll. I would like very much to get more information on the subject, as it has always been one of interest to me.
You could Google it or buy some academic books on the subject.

There's solid evidence in that article so I'm not really sure what you're having trouble with. Maybe I could help you out if you had more specific questions than general disbelief.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2013, 12:46:41 AM by rooster »

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #16 on: December 20, 2013, 02:43:34 AM »
Greetings, Rooster: I shall be rereading the article, & tomorrow, when I have access to wifi on my computer, I shall Google the matter. One question that comes to mind though, is, how would you provision such a large group of people? Assuming 36, 000 for a peak work season of 4 months, & 3,000 the rest of the year for 25 yrs, would the land be able to support them all?

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3865
    • View Profile
Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #17 on: December 20, 2013, 04:21:06 AM »
Greetings, Rooster: I shall be rereading the article, & tomorrow, when I have access to wifi on my computer, I shall Google the matter. One question that comes to mind though, is, how would you provision such a large group of people? Assuming 36, 000 for a peak work season of 4 months, & 3,000 the rest of the year for 25 yrs, would the land be able to support them all?
Fair question, but I bet it's similar to the way they fed all large groups of workers for their many ambitious projects.

I know that at least for later projects there were entire villages set up just for the workers with new farms for their food.

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #18 on: December 20, 2013, 06:08:49 AM »
It certainly is an interesting topic, & one that von Daniken mentions in 'The Eyes of the Sphinx', where he discusses the difficulty w/ provisioning the workmen w/ just 1 vegetable, namely, the onion. Why he chose that crop in particular I don't recall. But he used the sheer number of onions you would need to provide the workmen with, & the difficulty/impossibility of doing it, to extrapolate to how hard it would be to get enough food essential to the Egyptian diet, to more or less confirm that doing such would be impossible, or nearly so. Onions are 1, not essential. One could eliminate them from the diet & suffer no ill effects. 2, one needs only a very small number to meet one's wish for them. If von Daniken was right, & obtaining sufficient amounts for our onion munching friends is difficult or impossible, how much moreso foods the intake of which is essential, & in much larger amounts. Well, there you are. My work is cut out for me.

Re: Erich von Daniken
« Reply #19 on: December 20, 2013, 10:31:31 AM »
http://www.scribd.com/doc/36694833/Zecharia-Sitchin-The-Wars-of-Gods-and-Men-3rd-Book-of-Earth-Chronicles

figure 42 a and b, pg 141

It shows exactly who built the Gizeh Pyramid.