America Unearthed

Entertaining and thought provoking. If you are new to alternative archeology you will enjoy this show a lot. Unfortunately there are episodes I've snored through due to lack of new information. On the other hand some episodes are intriguing. Don't let the negative reviews scare you off, make up your own mind. I'm not a Wolter fanatic; and I too am annoyed by the occasional self-promotion and sponsor advertising, but I can say from life experience if someone attacks you with intense animus and tried to shut your ideas or theories down, then your are probably on the right track or they feel threatened. I for one am glad that history has an open mind.

I give this show a 3 just for some entertainment value, but maybe I should give it something lower for being so misleading. History and archaeology are full of mysteries and conflicting theories, as they should be and all of these should be examined openly. I have the most OPEN of open minds and am willing to belief that civilization is FAR older - by thousands, if not tens of thousands of years, than is currently believed.

That said, I watched the show last night about an alleged "Englishman" being buried in the desert with a runic gravestone and all the furor Wolter created around this. Pure codswallop. I know something about runes, not enough to read the inscription itself, but enough to know that these were probably not Anglo Saxon runes, but Nordic runes, and even if they were Anglo Saxon - Englishmen had stopped using runes in favor of the Latin alphabet by the 12th century (after the Norman conquest. No one would have used these. If someone had gone to all the effort of carving out that inscription (his buddy was carrying a chisel around with him?), it would have been in Latin alphabet (as we use now) in Old English or in Latin (Latin most likely as it was the universal tongue).

And then to go to England to allegedly hunt down this Hurech was ridiculous - there was no evidence tying Peter de Hurech to some alleged body in the American desert. While some Englishmen did use surnames at that time (my own family has an ancient surname in Yorkshire), most people did not and just went - as someone said, by Christian names or nicknames.

The episode presented no proof of any of the allegations and was as realistic as Tolkien's hobbits. It is a shame that the HISTORY channel is presenting this bunk under its auspices and giving the merest conjecture and speculation, the lustre of legitimate archaeology. This is especially bad as so many young people watch these shows and don't know any better. We need to re-learn the value of PROOF.

I watched the episode about the Medieval man in the Arizona desert. I would love if some reputable program would do stories on things like "Kennewick Man" and other archaeological finds that upset the establishment. There should be NO place in science for political-correctness. Having said that, this corn-ball scripted reality completely detracts from any scientific validity a find they may exhibit. The host pretending to get a phone call from a rune analyst telling him things (in the same day!) about his analysis of images is just silly. Also, the presumptuous nature of the "questions" posed by the host to the people with him is like watching a lawyer ask and answer his own questions. One funny scene was when the one fellow said to dig in an area you need a qualified archaeologist to be attached to the project, implying that the host, a self-titled "forensic archaeologist" isn't what he seems. I have no idea if he is qualified. Lastly, the manipulative music is overbearing and aimed at simpletons to get them interested.

I do understand that H2 has to sell this as " entertainment " and this will undoubtedly anger the " science " community, too bad.... You ( the science community , can poke holes at the ideas presented, but you have admit to the prevailing answer he receives with nearly every site he goes to. NO NO NO !!!!! You can not go ( fill in the blank ) or you can NOT do any digging or further investigation. If there is nothing there, then it wouldn't hurt for him, under proper guidance, to look a bit deeper. However, if there is something there, that's when the " brothers and sisters of science " band together and belittle or tear down ANY hypothesis other than what is collectively accepted as " fact "... Before science, religion has the same view ( I mean EVERYONE knew the earth was flat ), it wasn't until explorers and global expeditions proved them wrong and even then they denied their findings.. It is human nature to mock what we don't know and science is no different. If an individual without a degree finds something he is a footnote in history, but the scientist he told usually will get all the credit, I think that's called ego. After all, with all that publicity the funding will surely follow and then the university will love you...

The show is based in discovery and exploration, but it is also a form of entertainment. Take it for what it is, sit back enjoy a wonderful show and if you are from the science community.... Turn the channel!!!

I've watched every episode of America unearthed. After reading some of the reviews posted I feel Scott may be correct when he says if certain discoveries do not fit the current paradigm of main stream beliefs that discovery or theory is dismissed as garbage. What I categorize as fringe science has always interested me. I know for a fact our history is flawed to the point I feel history should be taught as theoretical not fact. Let the student research and form their own opinions. My research leads me to believe Christopher Columbus did not discover America and he does not deserve a holiday. That being said, I believe we do not know everything about this world or this country by any means. So how can anyone dismiss one mans theories on his quest to find the truth? Sure he is pushy and on the arrogant side and he does have an agenda - that aside he does raise some very interesting questions and offers what I feel are some very logical theories of the history of this country. My main concern with this show is he does not ask enough questions. As a retired police detective with 32 years experience I tend to look at most situations with a different eye. As an example, when Scott was in Oklahoma I believe looking at cave drawings of what he believed to be a bull as seen in Egyptian petroglyph's - I was curious as to the history and geography of the cave purported to be from the 2nd or 3rd century. That's nearly two thousand years ago. How is it possible the astoarchology (sp) explained in this cave still be present after all this time? Did the cave weather over the years? I would think the answer would be yes but that question was never addressed. My questions regarding Oak Island in Nova Scotia would be how did ancient people dig the hole that deep with simple digging tools? The water table on that island must be very high and I feel the hole would fill with water after about 6-10 feet. So how was it possible for that hole and the purported booby trap holes dug allowing ocean water to fill the cave at approximately the 200' level( I believe) constructed. Those questions need to be addressed in my opinion. It makes sense to me the knights Templar could have passed on their quest to the masons. Why not, is there proof this did not happen? I don't think so - therefore I do not discard hypothesis from anyone without proof it is wrong. Open your minds to the possible until it becomes probable then open your minds it may be true.