I have several Graham Hitchcock books. They are all very well researched and articulated. Hitchcock is one of the most foremost researcher and historian in the world.
I especially laughed at the woke criticism stating-- "The discussion of race in Ancient Apocolypse' is conspuous by its absence. Hancock does not need to identify the individuals in the myths he describes as white because most of his audience already knows it. This is what permits him to conceal what archaeologists recognize as implicit racism in the theory."
On the Hierarchy of Argument scale, this is the lowest level of refutation and is called 'Name calling'. If "implicit racism in the theory" has actually been adopted in the field of archaeology, it is the weaponization of this field of science. No real intelligence or critical thinking is required from making reckless statements like this. It certainly is at the opposite end of the Hierarchy of Argument from "Refuting the Central Point'.
I have several Graham Hitchcock books. They are all very well researched and articulated. Hitchcock is one of the most foremost researcher and historian in the world.
I especially laughed at the woke criticism stating-- "The discussion of race in Ancient Apocolypse' is conspuous by its absence. Hancock does not need to identify the individuals in the myths he describes as white because most of his audience already knows it. This is what permits him to conceal what archaeologists recognize as implicit racism in the theory."
On the Hierarchy of Argument scale, this is the lowest level of refutation and is called 'Name calling'. If "implicit racism in the theory" has actually been adopted in the field of archaeology, it is the weaponization of this field of science. No real intelligence or critical thinking is required from making reckless statements like this. It certainly is at the opposite end of the Hierarchy of Argument from "Refuting the Central Point'.