Fringe Archaeology
February 10, 2005 8:09 AM   Subscribe

Yes, I'm aware its just a big page of links. But its a snow day here and I found this to be a treasure trove of reading material for a snowy Thursday morning.
posted by anastasiav at 8:10 AM on February 10, 2005

It doesn't include Daniken. What kind of fringe archaeology page is it without Daniken?
posted by Captaintripps at 8:40 AM on February 10, 2005

This is interesting reading, anastasiav, thanks. I was disappointed, though, that the only discussion of the alleged ruins off the coast of Yonaguni was a Usenet tit for tat. I'd like to read a skeptical take on that site with a more scholarly feel.
posted by jeffmshaw at 8:55 AM on February 10, 2005 [1 favorite]

Apart from Daniken, my favourite crackpot is Menzies.
posted by Captaintripps at 9:16 AM on February 10, 2005

So, what is fringe archaeology as opposed to the mainstream? What are some of the major controversial theories that the fringe enspouses and the mainstream rejects? I know nothing of the subject and the link didn't have any insight.
posted by clockworkjoe at 10:41 AM on February 10, 2005

Fringe archaeology centers around one of two thinks. Pre-historic or unrecorded visitation of ancient cultures by extraterrestrials or the "discovery" of the New World by people other than those traditionally espoused (such as the Chinese).
posted by Captaintripps at 10:52 AM on February 10, 2005

Bah, thinks. Also, it purports to support the idea of Atlantis or extremely technologically advanced cultures in the past (though those usually roll into one of the two areas mentioned above).
posted by Captaintripps at 10:53 AM on February 10, 2005

clockworkjoe, the answers to your questions are addressed here and here, which are from a site Doug links to in the cult archaeology section (close to the bottom).

anastasiav, thanks for a neat post.
posted by carmen at 12:21 PM on February 10, 2005

Thanks, this will keep me busy for a while.
Mu was always my childhood favorite.
posted by Shrike at 3:46 PM on February 10, 2005

Talk about crackpots!

Some of these so-called "scientists" claim they've unearthed sites over 7,000 years old!

Hah! I think we all know that the Earth was only created 6,000 years ago, in 4004 BC.

Why can't they do something useful, like find fragments of the True Cross, or Noah's Ark or angel fossils or discarded manna-from-heaven wrappers?
posted by orthogonality at 7:27 AM on February 11, 2005

« Older Theater to DVD release = 4 DAYS   |   North Korea Has Nukes Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments