[.ca] Voices of the Rocks: A Scientist Looks at Catastrophes ... (ISBN 0609603698)

From Amazon.com:
Everything changes. The great 19th-century battle between catastrophists and uniformitarians seemed to end with the notion of global cataclysms being dismissed as a back door to the supernatural. But the catastrophist theory has gradually become more and more plausible, so that now, less than a hundred years later, it is widely believed that mass extinctions are linked to meteor strikes. Geologist Robert M. Schoch believes that if a large meteor or comet could extinguish most of our planet's complex life (just ask the trilobites), then a smaller one could destroy a civilization, and perhaps did. In Voices of the Rocks, he tells us how it may have happened. Asked to investigate the Sphinx at Giza, Schoch was troubled to find evidence of a much greater age than the 4,500 years suggested by Egyptologists. This led him to examine the possibility of a lost civilization dating back to at least 10,000 B.C. Looking at linguistic, geological, and archaeological evidence from around the world, he proposes an outline of prehistory that differs markedly from our received wisdom--after all, if the Lascaux cave paintings really are star maps, then we've got a lot of catching up to do. Schoch's willingness to dismiss implausible evidence and to use Occam's razor to cut away unnecessary complications is admirable and refreshing in a field in which credulity pays and skepticism is viewed with deep suspicion. Ending on a note of warning, Voices of the Rocks reminds us that by weakening the planet, we have made ourselves much more vulnerable to the next global cataclysm, which may come at any time. --Rob Lightner

Wishy Washy:
I was not impressed with this effort by Mr. Schoch. He seems to take a different stand depending on his mood. I would have expected more from a Yale Professor. Since I caught him on the Discovery Channel in a documentary concerning the underwater "Pyramid" off Yonaguni Island I will focus on this portion of his book. In the chapter concerning this debated monument Mr. Schoch states that it's origin is most likely natural in origin, and yet in his final paragraphs of this chapter he postulates a theory based on the idea that it is man-made. The natural side of his theory on this monument includes erosion that "bores" holes through rocks with the shape of the resulting hole having sharp right interior angles (a perfect rectangle!). He would also have us believe that the strong current of the region has carved out and carried off what would, on land, amount to small boulders! Yet, this powerful eroding current is also supposed to have taken the care to produce inumerable right angles(exterior and interior) to form what others believe to be an ancient monument. He has also ignored the film evidence of careful, though eroded, carvings on this monument which are plainly visible! When asked about the monument onshore of the Island that is strangely similar to the sunken one, Mr. Schoch replied that it was probably a copy of the underwater one. This is the same type of thinking that has had scholars claiming that the clay tablets of Sumer are merely fanciful fairy tales even though they pointed out the outer two planets of our solar system thousands of years before we found them in the middle of this century. Mr. Schoch is merely restating "approved" science irregardless of the evidence, and I have seen too much of that. In short, if you still believe that the Great Pyramid was the last one built, or that the pyramids were tombs, then this is your man, and your book! If, on the other hand, you feel the theory should fit the evidence and not the reverse then you would be happier looking in the direction of Sitchin or Alford

Very Disappointing.:
If you saw this guy on Discovery or The History Channel, you probably won't find much of interest in this book. The amount of space devoted to the Sphinx and Yonaguni Monument is almost an afterthought. And sadly, this is the only original work in the entire book. Most of this book deals with uniformitarianism (gradual change) and catastrophism (rapid change) in geology, evolution, and human history. The author's main credibility in presenting this evidence is that he is a dispassionate scientist that went to Yale and you are not. In creating a dispassionate work, Schoch has only managed to write a book that is very boring. Nearly half the book is simply looking at various theories to explain impacts with space rocks. So we're treated to rocks of varying densities and speed impacting at various angles sometimes on land and sometimes on water and sometimes both. These rocks are used to explain everything from the Ice Age to Polynesian emigration to Genghis Khan leaving Mongolia to conquer the world. In the end, there is still little science here and a lot of conjecture. Schoch clings ferociously to some "facts" and theories while tossing others aside because they weren't advanced by the right discipline. In the end, I realize that Carl Sagan did all this earlier and much better.

The Sphinx got wet once; does that make it older?:
Dr Schoch shows that the Sphinx shows water erosion marks. The last time it rained a lot in Egypt was tens of thousands of years before 4500 BC (the standard built-by date). So, Dr Schoch thinks the Sphinx was really built tens of thousands of years earlier. Hiroshima shows higher background radiation than most Japanese cities. That's not because Hiroshima was built earlier. Was the Sphinx built earlier? Did nasty canal-builders wash its builders and their works away?

A book with view (point) ... - Interdisciplinary treat!:
This was a book I read a few years ago, but re-read recently. Its a book by an archeologist. And it aims to show how one reads history through the glasses of an archeologist. One gets some pretty good insights into the study of archeology, the tools the subject uses and how inferences are drawn. The book takes some known facts and uses them to extrapolate in very good ways, drawing from other disciplines to construct new viewpoints of the past and our history. Its pretty elementary in its approach and simple, so in case you're one of the more serious heavy seekers of information, this is not for you. But if you're looking for alternate viewpoints from disciplines you have not much information about, then this is definitely a good place to begin.

Don't buy this waste of paper:
Well I got SUCKERED, what a grandly misleading title. Seeking hard science arguments from a reputed ph.D further explaining the anomities of the geological record, as the title suggests, I was greatly disappointed with the lack of story or revelations as claimed, and the petty partual inclusions of airy-fairy wish wash "Hype" themes. Lord behold, I was worried when I read the dubious praises on the rear cover by the renown cranks Hancock, West, and Bauval. Nothing at all new, the only compelling area covers little more than the intial pages where the dating of the Sphinx is detailed. The book then slips into crank theories where the author hovers around the sides like a timid scum-sucking iliterate fearful to be judged to be of any persuasion or belief. Everything from Atlantis in Antartica to Hapgood's maps are rehashed revealing zip. NOTHING new, BIG disappointment, much grandstanding with a hint of "just trying to fill a book". Any beneficial data could easily have been published in a single article, and has been. A author I would never purchase again.