<HTML>Claire wrote:
> I didn't really twigg that GH had
> updated his claim that the pyramids had possibly been built
> in 10500BC until recently ~lol~ I'm just a bit behind!
You wouldn't twig this from the `revised' edition of FOG, so don't blame yourself.
Following Hancock's `position statement' on this question, I suggested to John Anthony West (in a brief exchange of mail) that Hancock's books should properly be withdrawn and revised. He considered this excessive - but what do we see now, several years (and several reprints) later? The supposedly rescinded forgery claim stands unchanged, ready to mislead new readers. This is how distant GH and RB and their publishers are from a serious commitment to factual accuracy.</HTML>
