At that age, I didn’t yet understand why some people are incapable of changing their point of view. To be honest, I still don’t fully understand how ideology can cloud the mind so thoroughly that only a single way of thinking remains possible.

He had a way of describing things with a vigor that is quite rare. It was a fascinating read as a kid, blending science fiction with history and archaeology. Of course, later learning about the scientific method, or even just Occam’s razor, made it clear that the theory of ancient aliens is very unlikely, but the what if, the “wouldn’t it be cool if this premise were true,” still lingers in my mind from time to time.

A quite unique and interesting person departed this planet yesterday.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ancient_astronauts

"However, the fifties and sixties were more dominated by European works. The Italian Peter Kolosimo wrote several books as early as 1957, but his Timeless Earth (1964) became an international best seller and was translated into several languages. French-language authors included Henri Lhote who proposed that prehistoric Saharan rock art depicted close encounters, Bergier and Pauwels' Morning of the Magicians (1960), Robert Charroux's One Hundred Thousand Years of Man's Unknown History (1963) and Misraki's Flying Saucers Through The Ages. A few British authors also published before Von Däniken, such as Brinsley Le Poer Trench, John Michell and W. Raymond Drake who wrote Gods or Spacemen? in 1964.

"Although Von Däniken claims he was formulating his ancient astronaut ideas throughout his school days, it is clear that many others had already published their books on the subject, long before he became notable with Chariots of the Gods? in 1968."

1. Can obviously be made

2. Can be made very fast

There is simply no reason why major advancements in metallurgy couldn't have been made between 4453 and 4382BC, completely unknown to us, and later forgotten.

If fact, it's a mystery why we can't see more of such ancient artifacts, if anything.

The article doesn't even go far enough by blaming the oiling on some accidental dumb ritual, while it used to be common knowledge that iron can be protected from rusting by oiling it, and it was done completely on purpose.

- If you claim that the assistance of alien visitors is needed to explain the milestone leaps or technological achievements of ancient human civilizations...are you walking into a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down logic trap? Because obviously "our" alien visitors would have need even greater leaps and achievements in their own past, to be able to travel to the earth. And their visitors similar, and so on.

- Based on the folk & religious beliefs of a great many cultures, it's easy to argue that human societies have a very strong bias toward believing in anthropomorphic supernatural beings - be they angels, demons, ghosts, spirits, or whatever. Are von Däniken's ancient aliens anything more than "random" meme, which turned out to be an excellent fit for the social environment it found itself in?

His book "Chariots of the Gods" was a best seller. I remember reading it probably in the early '70s, when I would have been somewhere in the 10-12 year old range. I'm pretty sure I believed he was probably right, as did a couple friends who also read it.

We also believed in some other bunk, like various psychic and paranormal stuff, much of which came from reading "Fate" magazine.

But without internet there was really no way to connect with a larger community of people who also believed those things. With just books, magazines, and maybe if we were really into it a couple newsletters it was hard to become obsessed with this stuff.

Furthermore we also read popular science magazines, and Asimov's monthly column in "The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction". They would publish rebuttals to the more significant crackpot claims going around (although I don't think Asimov ever specifically commented on EvD). The mainstream news magazines, like Time or Newsweek, would often include comments by prominent skeptics such as Carl Sagan when writing about these things.

Because mass communication was expensive (and often also slow) new questionable theories took some time to start getting widespread acceptance. That gave scientists (or other relevant experts for non-science based crackpot theories) time to write refutations. It is more work (often much more work) to refute crackpots than it is to generate crackpot theories.

Now we are awash with widespread belief in crackpot theories. A new one can spread very fast and very wide on social media and be established before refutations can be written. And when the refutations do come out the social media algorithms might not show them to the people that those same algorithms fed the theories to. They get more clicks and engagement if they instead show those people new crackpot theories instead of refutations of the crackpot theories they were showing a week or two earlier.

If I may share a memory: I still remember visiting Jungfrau Park with my parents on a vacation to Switzerland back in 2005; as a scifi-leaning kid even back then (4th/5th grade), I had a ton of fun in all the different exhibits. IIRC, different wings of the park were dedicated to different mysteries/monuments, so you'd have the Aztec and Egyptian pyramids, Peruvian (Nazca, and my favorite one) desert drawings, ancient Indian flying chariots, etc. A great time, and I'm honestly quite surprised (in retrospect) that my dad chose to go there, given our time-limited schedule. It was also my first time trying Weisswurst in the JP cafetaria (being a Hindu kid growing up in the UAE, I seized every opportunity to try beef and pork when I could lol) -- I'm sure it was fairly mid, but I thought it was fantastic!

If nothing else, it helped me establish some pop cultural 'throughlines' in that I was able to digest (so to speak) other "aliens were here first and they taught us a bunch of things" trope that cropped up later in my life (like Aliens vs. Predators, Prometheus). I can't say for sure, but it might have been my earliest encounter with the Big Question: "Why are we here? Is there a plan?" -- even though I discounted the alien theory pretty young, it was still an exciting way to get started on the subject (and is still fun to me to this day). I suppose a portion of credit for ongoing interest in science fiction is directly attributable to my time at Jungfrau Park :)

Weirdly enough, I was just in Switzerland a couple of months back and we happened to drive by Jungfrau on our way to Lauterbrunnen -- JP is still there, which stirred up the ^ memory, but I learned on the trip that it had been shut down sadly.

Thanks for being a part of such a surreal memory Mr. Daniken.

I have also take a page from his books by expostulating outlandish theories to explain facts with a straight face, always ending with a quick "of course there are other explanations".

It's a hobby. Mostly harmless.

I was surprised to see these ideas becoming so mainstream with Ancient Aliens, and then somehow finding overlap with the alt-right, antivax and Covid-doubters. This made me really turn off of taking this seriously.

When I got older and understood how media industry works, I liked his "product execution & market fit" even more :-)

Rest in ascension.

I think it is more surprising that we have not found any alien artifacts by now.

Godspeed Erich.

Notable for "Chariots of the Gods" (1968).

Not sure what is 'shocking' about someone in their 90s passing away. Surely at that point you start expecting it?

But sometimes you see current reality with a different eye, not necessarily in E.v.D. way and surely not in the establishment's way.

I cannot respect him as an author or thinker, only as a human.

This stupendous gaslighting mirrors what I took away early in this article. It used several Appeal to Authority and Epistemic Invalidation and is quite clearly pathetic. Hard to read the clearly biased claims.

However, I tried re-reading it when I was a bit older and it was just laughably bad. Seemed to be a whole bunch of leading questions and then throwing random assumptions into the mix.

When I was older, I started reading a bunch of Robert Anton Wilson books and was introduced to The Sirius Mystery by Robert K G Temple - now that's a much more serious investigation into Ancient Aliens visiting the Dogon people.

Of course, we should really be tracing back the Ancient Alien theory to Lovecraft's fiction.

Rest in peace, your ideas were good entertainment.

But I think the basic idea, by itself is harder to dismiss

Archeology by itself is always going to have limitations, and there are vast swatches of history we are almost completely ignorant about

EvD is certainly guilty of taking himself much more seriously than the evidence suggests. But there's always going to be that "what if"

The problem is summed up by Carl Sagan: “Every time he [von Däniken] sees some­thing he can’t understand, he attri­butes it to extraterrestrial intelli­gence, and since he understands almost nothing, he sees evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence all over the planet” (Playboy 1974:151).

Unfortunately its true of so many people, and the information revolution we were all promised seems to have made it worse, not better.

Later I also learned that he is a charismatic dude that can also laugh about his work, which is something I will always appreciate in people. I think he believed bits and pieces he wrote or at least found them interesting overall. A lot of it is just also viewing ancient cultures from different angles.

It's very different from people today that turn everything into a cult and is "us vs them".

Something I cannot stop to notice is how a lot of actual science (not pseudo-sience like what Däniken does) have very fringe ideas nowadays. There is that weird "advanced civilization" context that feels like humans will turn into weird "philosophy robots". The whole "they will make themselves robots" with the idea that somehow that brings eternal life when most even more simple machines don't last as long as humans. There is that weird idea that it will be fine to go on generational ships. There is the idea that people will be fine with simply freezing themselves completely abandoning any contact with any human they ever interacted with. Very weird concepts, but somehow they are essentially "aliens must be like that" when empirically... aliens have been drinking, partying and enriching themselves, waged wars, plundered and raped for thousands of years with essentially no sign for change. You have horrible times (middle ages, world wars) and you have good times (post napoleonic times/long peace, post WW2 and times during Pax Romana). People for thousands of years dream of some world, be it mythical creatures or aliens that somehow are just philosophers and scientists.

This seems almost as absurd. Yet there are people that call themselves scientists and believe those things almost considering them for granted. (the whole Kardoshev Scale is essentially fringe science as soon as you consider it anything but a completely arbitrary scale)

But that's not bad. In fact it's good. The whole dreaming up stuff to motivate to explore more is a strong driver for science. Doesn't matter if it's discovering a new continent, dreaming up machines that allow for global communication, or what could lie hidden in a pyramid. The channels on Mars might have been imaginations, but I am certain if that fascination wasn't there astronomy would be a lot poorer.

And while Däniken had a lot of imagination and didn't apply the scientific method I think that he made a lot of people interested in both the stars and ancient cultures.

I really wished that in today's society there would be more space between science, fantasy and what is essentially charlatans, cults, sects and so on.

Being curious can and should exist outside of academics. And disagreeing and questioning things should exist outside of conspiracy theories and anti-vaccers.

And maybe it should be more than some video game or Netflix series lore.

And I mean curiosity that isn't just endless YouTube video watching, but something a bit more active. There is nothing wrong with challenging truths. Like there is nothing wrong with finding good arguments for abstruse ideas (earth being flat or something) to learn something new. Nothing wrong to come up with "science" behind vampires and zombies.

It's just bad that suddenly you wake up in some weird cult and are shunned for thinking a bit out of the box and using imagination. And for not making clear lines and distinctions.

I hate how a lot of that makes people part of groups or something and how they somehow find their way into politics. It's bizarre and given that this seems to be a somewhat new development I think it's also completely unnecessary. Even with "futurists" and scientists the whole "fusion vs fission vs other ways of power generation" is sometimes a bit weird to watch.

I think a bit more imagination would be a good thing in today's world. Viewing things from different, even fantastical angles would be beneficial. Imagining where things could go doesn't have to be left to hypothetical alien civilizations. There was a time when people thought Esperanto would mean that people could all talk to each other on equal footing. There was a time when the US, Europe and Russia were building space stations together. There was a time when national borders seemed to become less important. From today's perspective a lot of these things seem like fever dreams, and it feels like we're heading into the dark ages yet again.

He's up there riding that chariot now.

DonHopkins on Nov 24, 2024 | parent | context | favorite | on: Hundreds More Nazca Lines Emerge in Peru's Desert

FYI, Erich von Däniken's book "Chariots of the Gods?" is racist pseudo-scientific claptrap. My Archaeoastronomy professor at the University of Maryland, John B. Carlson, despises it.

It attributes the achievements of ancient non-European civilizations to extraterrestrial visitors, undermining their intelligence and capabilities, promotes speculative theories without empirical evidence, misinterprets artifacts, ignores scientific consensus, perpetuates harmful cultural stereotypes, and plagiarizes French author Robert Charroux's "The Morning of the Magicians".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariots_of_the_Gods%3F

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeoastronomy

>Archaeoastronomy (also spelled archeoastronomy) is the interdisciplinary[1] or multidisciplinary[2] study of how people in the past "have understood the phenomena in the sky, how they used these phenomena and what role the sky played in their cultures".[3] Clive Ruggles argues it is misleading to consider archaeoastronomy to be the study of ancient astronomy, as modern astronomy is a scientific discipline, while archaeoastronomy considers symbolically rich cultural interpretations of phenomena in the sky by other cultures.[4][5] It is often twinned with ethnoastronomy, the anthropological study of skywatching in contemporary societies. Archaeoastronomy is also closely associated with historical astronomy, the use of historical records of heavenly events to answer astronomical problems and the history of astronomy, which uses written records to evaluate past astronomical practice.[6]

A Brief History of the Center for Archaeoastronomy

https://terpconnect.umd.edu/~tlaloc/archastro/cfaintro.html

DonHopkins on Nov 24, 2024 | parent | next [–]

Archaeoastronomy was one of the most interesting courses I took at uni, and professor Carlson was extremely enthusiastic about it. It really opened my mind to how smart and motivated ancient people were, not at all like our stereotypes from "The Flintstones" and "Chariots of the Gods?".

For example, The Anasazi Indians made significant astronomical observations that they integrated into their architecture and cultural practices. They tracked solar and lunar cycles, aligning their buildings and ceremonial sites with celestial events like solstices and equinoxes. A fascinating example is the "Sun Dagger" at Fajada Butte in Chaco Canyon, where they used sunlight and shadow patterns on petroglyphs to mark important times of the year.

They deserve an enormous about of credit for what they achieved without all our received technology, and left behind for us to reverse engineer.

https://spaceshipearth1.wordpress.com/tag/anasazi-indians-as...

https://www2.hao.ucar.edu/education/prehistoric-southwest/su...

It's disappointing when people reflexively attribute ancient achievements like that to religion (or aliens), when it's actually hard objective observation based science that deserves credit!

>[then vixen99 took issue at my use of "FYI" and tried to argue that we should respect irrational and racist opinions by framing proven objective facts as opinions, just to be fair to loonies: "How about IMO rather than FYI ? We can make up our own minds."]

DonHopkins on Nov 24, 2024 | parent | next [–]

Sometimes (and often) pseudoscientific bullshit is just objectively wrong, and you'd have to be completely out of your mind, or just trolling, to "make up your own mind" to believe it.

No sane flat earthers in this day and age actually believe the earth is flat, or deserve to have their presumed beliefs respected or even humored, because they're just being contrarian and trolling for attention, so it's perfectly valid to say to them "FYI, the Earth is not flat."

I refuse to couch my firm disbelief that the Earth is flat as an opinion that might possibly be wrong, by saying "IMO, the Earth is not flat." Flat Earthers (also Young Earthers) certainly aren't couching their crazy beliefs as opinions, so don't deserve it in return.

"Chariots of the Gods?" is also that objectively wrong: there is no possible universe in which its claims are true. It's all based on historically ignorant Argument from Incredulity and inherently racist assumptions. In the 50th anniversary edition, von Däniken refused to address, admit, or correct any of the many widely proven errors in the book that made him so much money and fame, so he doesn't deserve to be taken seriously.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity

Believing in pseudoscientific claptrap like Homeopathy, or the objectively false stories of Adam and Eve or Noah's Ark is just as ridiculous. They're physically and mathematically and logically and practically impossible. So it's also fine to say "FYI it's biblical fiction, and the Earth is definitely not 6000 years old, and you absolutely can not fit and feed and clean that many animals in a wooden ark." It's not my opinion, it's objective information.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4OhXQTMOEc

To pretend otherwise feels like humoring a small child who still believes in Santa Claus.

I stumbled upon his work when I was very young and could barely read, but damn, it was the first book that opened my eyes to our crazy world and taught me that our textbooks are just convenient truths.