Ten thoughts on weird revisionist history -- inspired by a
book that claims Antarctica was mapped by ancient civilizations before it was
covered by ice:
1. Why read the occasional book by a seeming crackpot, you
ask? Well, much as I value epistemological caution and having hard scientific
evidence before making claims, there is something to be said for limbering up
our dogmatic, narrative-preserving brains by hearing out a truly fringey view
once in a while -- and at least getting a feel for how internally coherent and
plausible-sounding it might be.
After all, I already think we live in a world in which
people mistakenly believe religion, government, and most health reporting are
helpful (the evidence that eating lots of vegetables is good for you isn’t even
all that strong, yet in nutrition science, that’s roughly the pinnacle of trusted, evidence-based
advice).
People recognize the past is filled with silly beliefs, but
so few really take to heart the idea that their own favorite present-day
beliefs might be wrong -- yes, even the ones you thought made you so goddam
intellectually superior to everyone else. Just how different might the real
world be if some of the fringe folk turn out to be right? Do you dare to
wonder?
2. This exploratory attitude need not cause us to dismiss
all we think we know about the past. Some things seem nearly certain and solid:
Seasons end on Game of Thrones, and
Magna Carta, arguably the first document to limit the power of government,
turns 800 today.
3. By contrast, it is only the twentieth anniversary of
British author Graham Hancock’s highly speculative book
Fingerprints
of the Gods, recommended to me by a fellow performer at one of
those Electoral Dysfunction onstage political panels (which I’ll appear in
again on
Saturday, July 18, 7pm at the
PIT in NYC).
You might not think there’d be much to learn from a book
making the bizarre argument that the
Earth’s surface periodically comes loose from its interior and slips around a
bit, like a loose orange peel, causing Antarctica, for instance, to
relocate from balmy to freezing climes as recently as a few tens of thousands
of years ago.
But just as one can learn a great deal about how truly weird
some lights in the sky are from UFO buffs -- even if it turns out those lights
are meteorological/plasmoid or military rather than Martian -- one can learn
things from Hancock’s thesis that leave unavoidably weird questions, even if
one doesn’t adopt his whole worldview.
It appears pretty convincingly to be the case, for instance,
that centuries-ago mapmakers inherited even older maps that depict the
mountains and valleys of Antarctica accurately -- even though modern European
culture only began exploring Antarctica 200 years ago, believe it or not, and
even though as long as our society has been aware of Antarctica, its mountains
and valleys have been hidden to all but the best-equipped scientists by thick
ice sheets.
Are the ancient maps just lucky guesses? Were there
mapmakers many tens of thousands of years ago, suggesting civilization rises
and falls more spectacularly and over longer spans of time than we normally
assume? Or was Antarctica somehow located in a warmer spot 10,000 years ago?
4. Before we assume trustworthy scientists and historians
have all that worked out already, keep in mind that ABC News was no doubt
relying on real, credentialed scientists eight years ago when it predicted New
York City would be underwater by June 2015 due to global warming (for out of
towners wondering: it is not). Humanity can be very wrong about some very
big-picture facts.
5. I say the science-oriented skeptic must keep an open mind
but am not for a moment saying this should cause us to abandon science for even
less-scientific pictures of the world, such as the Muslim/animist views that inspired
Malaysians to arrest tourists there recently for bearing their breasts on a
sacred mountain and thus being blamed by locals for an earthquake. We should
not punish breasts or blame them for earthquakes.
6. Nor do I think we should willy-nilly accept on an equal
footing with science every oddball theory such as the claim by great DC Comics
artist Neal Adams that the Earth -- not the universe but the Earth all by
itself -- is gradually expanding, and adding mass to boot, in a process covered
up by dogmatic mainstream geologists.
7. Indeed, as a DC Comics fan, I have to question whether we
should even accept the revisionist claim being made in current issues of Justice League that the Anti-Monitor was
once an “anti-god” known as Mobius. That’s not how I remember it! Does the goddess
Pandora know about any of this?
9. If you want some real history in your comics and have
wearied of all the endless revisions of the timestream in superhero and sci-fi
stories, you might want to check out Alan Moore’s current comics miniseries Providence, telling the (grim) life
story of horror writer H.P. Lovecraft. He would’ve appreciated bizarre,
pseudo-scientific claims about Antarctica.
10. But to get back to the Fingerprints of the Gods hypothesis: it strikes me that if Hancock has
been driven to strange speculations, it might be in part because he is
unwilling to abandon a powerful dogma of our own day. Maybe climate naturally
varies more drastically than we realize and Antarctica really did see some warm,
iceless days within written memory. I don’t know. And I’m certainly not saying
that in order to boost oil company profits or anything that fussily mainstream.
On the contrary, I’m saying it because the occasional anomaly like those
iceless maps won’t go away.
Of course, all the water frozen in Antarctica wouldn’t just
go away if melted either, so if Hancock were right we’d still have to ask why
the oceans weren’t all fifty or so feet deeper everywhere else on those maps.
So maybe their depiction of Antarctica was just luck. But I don’t know. I don’t
know.