![]() ![]() Hancock is expressing his opinion when others have expressed theirs but without the credibility attached to it. And who in the end will know who is actually correct after all since there is no proof from the 'established scientific community' (who are all fearful of not getting their tenures), so why is Mr Bulger so critical that Mr. Fingerprints of the Gods, whether Hancocks theories are correct or not, presents more credible evidence than traditional views. I am not a scientist by any means but have always found conventional scientific theories more than lacking in any credible explanations. Michael Bulger is on the government payroll what with his skepticism of the Hancock book. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |