Someone told me he was going a little fash lately too. Don’t know if it’s true or not but it wouldn’t surprise me.
That’s not to say absolutely none of his claims could possibly have merit. It’s just that he mixes reasonable heterodox ideas with schlock. Loads of other people on the fringe have the same problem.
I'm reminded of someone describing Velikovsky, who wrote some pretty far-out books which conveyed radical views of archaeology and astronomy.
Paraphrased: "If you ask astronomers about the archaeology, they say it seems interesting enough, but the astronomy is bullshit. If you ask archaeologists, they'll tell you the astronomical theories are plausible but the archaeology is bunk."
I've never seen, read, or heard anything indicating that Graham is racist. Is there any substance to this, or it about as solid as his theories?
Certainly the accusation was valid applied to numerous others, notably von Daniken. It probably is reflexive in this case, lumping him with them.
It boils down to that that all the non white peoples could not have done any of these things and needed help from a superior white race, robbing these peoples from their own ingenuity and heritage.
Just because he isn't an outright racist doesn't mean that his theories imply that. I've not read his books but from what I've seen he likes to quote works built on the authors above that are just as racist.
He's clearly wrong, and it's easy to discredit him scientifically. Why not do that instead of playing the race card? Everything's a nail when you have a hammer I guess.
His works may be a nice story, but is fiction that is rooted in racism. Why not call it out for what it is?