This book is a collection of 15 original essays by 16 "unofficial" archaeologists (see list at end of this review). I've read works by several of these authors, previously. The basic premise behind their works is that official archaeologists (and those in related disciplines) have some explaining to do. Officialdom simply dismisses some evidence out of hand, causing a distortion in the official historical record.
Now to be fair to the archeologists, some of the "evidence" is poor and some of the conclusions reached by "alternative" researchers simply do not hold up. Both camps make good points. But there is a strong "Not invented here" streak in the orthodoxy, and I think that's because it's uncomfortable to change established views in light of new evidence or, for that matter, old evidence.
The main value of this book is the curious reader can read the views of 16 leading "alternative" researchers without having to read 16 books. That said, I find only a few of these authors to be tedious (the presented essays, however, are not tedious; I am referring to reading book length works). Others, such as Erich von Daniken, are always a good read.
This work covers a wide range of subjects, from the pyramids to archeological scandals. One author even covers the idea of ancient nuclear weapons and raises some very hard to answer questions from the evidence.
In this book, Philip Coppens provides his theories on Atlantis. I've read (and enjoyed) Coppens before, and respect his work and his attitude toward examining the unexplained. His take on Atlantis is the first one that ever made sense to me. Normally, I will not read anything on Atlantis because of how poorly that's been done by others. When I saw Coppens' name on this piece, I read it and was duly impressed.
You may not agree with the conclusions some of these authors reach. I know I don't. But agreement isn't a necessary element for enjoying a discussion now, is it? It's also probable that you've always suspected a particular conclusion in the orthodoxy does not pass the smell test, and one (or more) of these essays will strike a chord with you. I know that's the case with me.
If you're tired of the same old weather, sports, politics topics that dominate what pass for "conversations" today, consider buying a couple of copies of this book to circulate among your friends. Then get together for a lively discussion of the implications of, for example, what Scott Alan Roberts was talking about in his essay. That kind of intellectual stimulation has many benefits including, researchers tell us, a degree of protection from dementia.
The fifteen essays take up 233 pages. They are edited, but the author's personality and style come through. The book is indexed, which pleasantly surprised me. I've decided not to include, in this review, biographical information on the authors. The book has this information, (9 pages).
The contributing authors/essayists:
Thomas G. Brophy, PhD
Erich von Daniken
Marie D. Jones
Scott Alan Roberts
Paul von Ward.