He was defensive because the opposer, Michael shermer, didn't have a very good argument, yet he blasted Graham in one of his blogs. Meanwhile, Graham has dedicated many decades of his life to figuring out our past and he's being liberated more and more every day as we continue to find new evidence. It's understandable when you realize how much shit Graham has had to endure by going against most of the academics.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
This is the episode of JRE being referenced
- particularly this segment where Hancock defends himself from what in fairness comes across a hit piece against him. Criticism and scepticism is very important, it's something Hancock makes use of all the time in his mental toolkit in order to do his journalism, however the treatment he receives is far from fair much of the time.He had only won more respect from me, however from reading others responses it seems many others judged it differently.
Yes, of course. Dont get us the wrong way, 'fiery' means that his passion to his craft is absolute and when confronted by the 'establishment' we can see this conviction come forth.
There was an earlier post about how Zawi Hawas had blasted GH for his facts and research, indeed GH was calm during this bombardment, and Zawi left the conference room like an angry child. thanks for your your support of this great man.