[rooster]

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.

Does he have a source for this onion theory? Cause Daniken completely makes things up all the time.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

To be honest, Rooster, I'm not sure. I'd have to re-read the book, which I fully intend to do. I'll keep everyone informed as to where I'm @ w/ my reading in both conventional & more exotic stuff.

[rooster]

I'm a little surprised that you just kinda take him at his word without checking on his sources. As a historian you should know that you need to get as first-hand as possible and check your facts.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

I agree. That is why I started this thread, to see if other people had info on him that I didn't. I am only now reading his stuff closely. The first time I read Chariots & Sphinx, I read both very quickly. So, no, don't think I'm just taking his word for things.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Well, as per your point, Rooster, I checked a few of the 6 books of von Daniken that I have (mind you, I've only read 2, & those quickly). They all have bibliographies, & some of the later ones do have chapter notes. I'm rereading Chariots right now, his 1st book, which has no notes, just a bibliography. Apparently, he eventually learned how to do more honest research. I'll keep everyone advised. I shall continue to read von Daniken, but I shall also read more orthodox answers to questions as well. Its very sloppy to write a book presenting a controversial thesis w/o notes!

[rooster]

Well, as per your point, Rooster, I checked a few of the 6 books of von Daniken that I have (mind you, I've only read 2, & those quickly). They all have bibliographies, & some of the later ones do have chapter notes. I'm rereading Chariots right now, his 1st book, which has no notes, just a bibliography. Apparently, he eventually learned how to do more honest research. I'll keep everyone advised. I shall continue to read von Daniken, but I shall also read more orthodox answers to questions as well. Its very sloppy to write a book presenting a controversial thesis w/o notes!

Still depends on his sources and what in context he is using the information. Anyone can take one sentence out of a book and turn it to their advantage.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Very true. I would hope that he's more honest than that, as one expects when one reviews footnotes, but you are correct that shoddy work happens alot. You are evidently less naive than I am. *GRINS WRYLY* I recall the highly exacting standards that I was expected to meet when I wrote my MA thesis. Shoddy scholarship would not have been tolerated, as I am sure was the case for you as well. It is still hard for me to believe that someone would willfully deceive others. Be ignorant, yes, & open their yap when they would do best to stay silent, sure. We've probably all made asses of ourselves once or twice in life. It happens. But to knowingly deceive others is beyond me. I can't imagine misusing data knowingly to further a goal that was fundamentally indefensible. Its one thing to be wrong. That happens. Its ok to be wrong. Hell, its ok to look like an ass, if you're honest about it. It is NOT ok to lie or cheat your way toward a goal, even if the goal is laudable. I know he's got a checkered past. I just am not

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

certain how checkered. I have to review more of his stuff to be able to evaluate him overall.

[rooster]

Look at Daniken's past. He has been arrested for fraud before.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Yes, I believe it had to do w/ taking out credit in the name of the hotel he managed & then using it to fund his research. He was fined & sentenced to 3 yrs, of which he did 1, & was then released on remand to keep the peace for the remaining 2, which he did.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Greetings. I've been able to get hold of an old copy of von Daniken's 2nd book, 'Gods from Outer Space' (published in the UK as as 'Return to the Stars'). I shall read that now I'm done w/ 'Chariots'. Also, I'm getting a gift card to Barnes & Noble for a late Hanukkah gift, & should be able to get a few of his books then as well. He makes an interesting case, though I'm not sure how valid his argument is. 1 point though. Where did the Egyptians get the wood for the rollers used to build the pyramids? Each cylinder would only have lasted a short time under that weight, & Egypt is not & was not a land plentiful in trees.

[rooster]

That's true, but Egyptians still had wood in a lot of their buildings it's just believed to come from somewhere else.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

They would have had to import ALOT of wood to make the endless number of rollers & ramp supports & so-forth. & once it arrives @ the coast, it has to be transported up the Nile. Egyptians did not have the horse & cart. The river would have been a mess of barges transporting foodstuffs, wood, & God knows what else! Not a very practical environment in which to build the largest structure in the known world. Understand, I'm not trying to be snide. I genuinely want answers to this. It has my curiosity going now.

[rooster]

But the river is how they transported everything. What makes you think it would be a mess? And why is it a countless amount of wood? How do you know how long the rollers lasted?

Daniken makes the mistake of underestimating ancient culture. He asks questions as if these things were impossible and pulls crap out of nowhere like the builders just eating onions.

Everything he brings up has already been asked and answered and he acts like it's all a secret.

[markjo]

Look at Daniken's past. He has been arrested for fraud before.

But was he ever convicted of fraud?  People get arrested (and later released) for things that they didn't do all the time.

[rooster]

Look at Daniken's past. He has been arrested for fraud before.

But was he ever convicted of fraud?  People get arrested (and later released) for things that they didn't do all the time.

Yes.

In November 1968 von Däniken was arrested for fraud, after falsifying hotel records and credit references in order to take out loans[8] for $130,000 over a period of twelve years. He used the money for foreign travel to research his book.[6] Two years later,[8] von Däniken was convicted for "repeated and sustained" embezzlement, fraud and forgery, with the court ruling that the writer had been living a "playboy" lifestyle.[4] Von Däniken entered a plea for nullity on the grounds that his intentions were not malicious and the credit institutions were at fault for failing to adequately research his references.[4][6][8] Von Däniken was sentenced on 13 February 1970 to three and a half years imprisonment and fined 3,000 francs.[8][10] He served one year of this sentence before being released.[6][11]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_von_D%C3%A4niken

He wrote his second book while in prison. I doubt he could do any real thorough research that way.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Whatever one may think of von Daniken's work, I expect most of the research for the 2nd book was done by the time the wheels of the Swiss justice system were able to churn out his arrest & coviction.

[rooster]

Whatever one may think of von Daniken's work, I expect most of the research for the 2nd book was done by the time the wheels of the Swiss justice system were able to churn out his arrest & coviction.

Stop. I can't do this. You think way too highly of this terrible fraud who has completely poisoned so many minds about ancient history. He is an utter disgrace.

You claim to be a historian but I can't believe any historian would read that garbage and take any of it seriously.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Actually, the more I am reading of his work, the more I am inclined to agree with you. He is a VERY sloppy individual. I think Carl Sagan may have been right about him. Although paleo-contact is a possibility, and Sagan acknowledges that it is, he still believes that von Daniken is sloppy at best, and downright dishonest at worst. I am beginning to agree.

[rooster]

Actually, the more I am reading of his work, the more I am inclined to agree with you. He is a VERY sloppy individual. I think Carl Sagan may have been right about him. Although paleo-contact is a possibility, and Sagan acknowledges that it is, he still believes that von Daniken is sloppy at best, and downright dishonest at worst. I am beginning to agree.

Praise god.