Graham Hancock has some interesting and unconventional views of human history. He believes there was an advanced human civilization existed 13,000 year ago and was destroyed in a huge flood caused by the end of the ice age.
By "advanced" he is not claiming they had airplanes any flying saucers, but advanced, like the Egyptians were.
The hatred towards this man and his theories seem to be imbalanced for what he suggests. The MSM and establishment calls his theories "white supremacist" and "nazi" as they take credits away from cultures of "people of color". I'm pretty sure he never suggested any pigmentation or color of earlier civilizations.
The MSM and and archeology routinely claim that he says aliens brought technology to earth, etc, although I'm pretty sure he has not mentioned this.
So why so much animosity towards this? If it is true? So what? If it is false, so what? Is it archeologists who are threatened because they spent 50 years of their life teaching the world was one way, and now learning they may have been wrong?
Or is there some larger threat to the establishment here?
Edit: I'm only a little educated on this individual, so I apologize in advance if any of this is incorrect. Just that my experience is that when a person or idea receives many attacks by the establishment, it usually means they are over target.
The idea of it.
There is the Golden Plates story that Mormons believe in. Why would Golden.Greenish mystery metal sheets (i.e. lighter than gold) be inscribed with Egyptian hieroglyphs appear in a hill in Palmyra NY? I don't know what to make of it, TBH. Nor the seer stone transcription, which amazingly produced a non-repetitive transcript, which was translated and then recorded by a second person. Imagine dictating a lengthy manuscript, longer than most PhD theses, without repetition? The most hardened forgers would have trouble making up such a long transcript. Of course none of it can be verified, which gives detractors ammunition.
Even Mormons themselves have disagreements about how this happened. Was there paganist magic involved - i.e. the use of seer stones? The story could all be part of a giant conspiracy to subvert Christianity, and the fact that Mormons become CIA agents lend credence to this. But then it was one man, with a trusted friend who created the transcript. Maybe. However, in their defense, everyday Mormons seem perfectly sincere, while toting a bible in their witnessing activities, and arguably Latter-day Saints set about doing Christian good works in the community - so one cannot criticize their faith.
Full disclosure: I am a Christian brought up with the King James bible, however, that story intrigued me, for a long time. The idea that something like that could turn up in the Americas, seemed ridiculous to me thirty years ago.
However, then Hancock comes out with the Serpent mound in Ohio documentation, and one has to go Hmmm.
This is why I think people feel threatened. Hancock is coming out with theories about a religion that predates modern religions.
"And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost."