Most helpful critical review
The only reverse engineering here is the evidence to fit the hypothesis
on 21 June 2015
What the author would have us believe is not the standard evolutionary model of man and consequently world history but that something (intelligent) interfered with us, accelerating the development of civilization: from caveman to spaceman.
Now, he does admit to being “speculative” in his assertions and following the central thread does require a degree of suspended disbelief. But how much is he being polemic, sniping at established academia who turn their noses up at more esoteric theories that were once more widely accepted and acceptable? He is not the only alternative historian frustrated by the expert dismissal of what might otherwise be perfectly reasonable evidence. Evidence that deserves to be put through the lens of the scientific principle to determine its credibility. But by taking such an assumptive journey and relying on data that is “evidence” only in the most diplomatic sense of the word he trips over his own argument. The reason more convincing evidence doesn't get considered by academia is often it comes padded with the frankly absurd. It’s a long way from interpreting ancient texts in a non-conventional manner to proving there was a cosmic war millions of years ago…
In this book, Farrell is guilty of making the evidence fit the hypothesis without really considering the burden of proof.
The sirrush of the Babylon Gate for example. A fantastical creature that must be real because its depiction is consistent where other fantastical creatures change over time. It must therefore be an engineered creature, or a memory of a dinosaur, or even evidence of a living dinosaur. None of which really add up to anything stronger than speculation, but it would seem speculation is enough to amount to evidence. I would argue to the contrary, precisely because it’s a chimaera of existing animal parts it suggests the opposite: that it is made up. Show me something that we don’t recognise, then I’ll start to pay more attention.
From there the story picks up the predictable strands of post modern popular counter culture; Waco, Roswell, the CIA, Iapetus (you know, the one that was the inspiration for Star Wars’ Death Star!) It’s a join the dots approach, casting the net as wide as possible hoping to snag on something.
That’s not to say the book doesn't have some interesting things to say; clearly our ancestors knew a lot about advanced mathematical astronomy and there is something suggesting “co-ordination” between megalithic sites spread out over hundreds (and thousands) of miles. It’s an area standard history doesn't provide a satisfactory answer on yet. But why does it have to suggest “agency” of the third kind…can’t we take credit for being a little more advanced that we thought a few thousand years ago?
And then there’s the agenda …
Not content with speculating about a remnant of an alien civilization having a hand in the genesis of mankind, but they’re still here and up to no good. And they’re bankers.
I firmly believe this is really about a lack of control, the world isn’t run altruistically and we like to think this is not our fault (despite it being absolutely our fault). Whether it’s war, greed or just business we have a poor track record of doing the right thing. This doesn't mean that someone else is pulling the strings though.
A classic case of self-importance syndrome. Everything has a resonance here and now, as if everything is pointing towards this moment in time and giving us meaning. All the evidence seems to link to something that makes sense to us here is the 21st century. Whether its mind control, telecommunications, star wars or global banking. It’s clearly more a case of us interpreting what we see through our own eyes and those alone. We have to be the centre of attention don’t we, here and now?
I keep going back to one thought: show me something we don’t know and can’t interpret in light of our own prejudices and fears. Show me something that doesn't make sense, that’s aimed at us +1 million years. Tell us something new, then you have my attention. It’s this central theme that runs through the book that breaks its spine, it says far more about us than about any ancient alien civilization.
It’s a stone skimming across the surface, touching lightly on each subject, not long enough to pick up any detail or explain anything before it’s onto the next. But eventually it just runs out of energy.
There are undoubtedly questions to ask about the knowledge of the ancients, megaliths, astronomy etc and maybe academia just doesn't like accepting the evidence this suggests. But that doesn't mean we are the genetically engineered product of an alien race. It just means we might be more interesting than that.