Turbowolf Interview Graham Hancock: Episode 2

In the second of a series of four episodes, Turbowolf interview Graham Hancock at The Roman Baths in Bath.

Hancock is one of the foremost authorities on Ancient Mysteries, having written numerous bestselling non-fiction books on the subject such as Fingerprints Of The Gods, The Sign & The Seal, Heavens Mirror and Supernaturaland, most recently, the fantasy adventure novel Entangled.

Turbowolf released their eponymous debut album in November 2011, a blend of dirty rock ‘n roll, punked-up riffs and psychedelic noise. The band are about to embark on a European tour starting February 23, 2012 in London. Their shared fascination with the esoteric and the mysterious led to this meeting of minds.

In this episode Graham and the band discuss the mystery of the possible survival of death by human consciousness; the ancient Egyptian quest for the immortality of the soul; the encoding of advanced scientific information in ancient myths; some of the evidence from ancient Egypt and the Andes for the existence of a lost civilisation; and the danger, unless we change our ways, that our own civilization could become the next Atlantis.


Majestic is gadfly emeritus.

Latest posts by majestic (see all)

17 Comments on "Turbowolf Interview Graham Hancock: Episode 2"

  1. Death is a ‘Scientific Religion”?

    Actually, science has paid the greatest respect to the idea of “Life After Death” in forming a genuine understand that energy never dies and indeed only changes form. It would seem that its simply not the way many religions would like to think the universe operates. I’m not a religious person yet that understanding lends me the very same comfort most religions attempt (poorly I might add) to appeal to, within the various concepts of an afterlife or eternal life.

    • diplodocus | Feb 14, 2012 at 10:43 pm |

      I don’t think you can use the law of conservation of energy as proof that there is existence after death.  There needs to be a distinction made between the energy of thermodynamics and other sciences and the energy we feel in and around our bodies.  This second kind of energy is created in the imagination.  It’s based on data arriving from our senses and also on whatever else we are imagining.  It’s through imagination that we learn about and connect to our soul, to what’s eternal.  And this all takes simple faith cause the foundation of the soul is god, not the e that equals mc^2.  If a hard drive is burned the universe does not lose energy but the information is gone.

      • I didn’t say there is consciousness after death, which is what you’re implying I said. I mean to say that although you’re still a dead rotting corpse in the ground, the atomic particles you’re made of don’t cease to exist. Which isn’t comforting to religious folk who often want pearly gates .. or you can cherry pick and think I’m defending the idea of an afterlife because you’re taking what I said out of context.

        • diplodocus | Feb 15, 2012 at 10:37 am |

          Yeah I totally misinterpreted what you said.  Didn’t try to cherry pick, just did it instinctually I guess 🙂  I love the idea that our atoms were made in ancient stars and have been part of dinosaurs and stuff like that but I still don’t understand why the conservation of energy makes death lose its sting for you. 

  2. If it wasn´t insulting, this peoples experiments on heresy would be funny; but the truth is they are missleading millons of gulible youngsters into devil worship, whith their artistry manners and their spiritual sounding discourse. Why bother with these sincretic bullshit when God spoke clearly through the Holy Bible?

  3. Is this trio of douchebags blowing someone at disinfo? Why is this garbage featured? Psuedointellectual gibberish.

  4. Haven’t watched this yet, but I will say it’s interesting to note how many people have such ludicrous knee jerk reactions to ideas that bother them.  Only “know it alls” presume to do just that.  Graham has a phenomenal track record for providing inscrutable evidence for reconsidering orthodox edicts of his-story all together.  He also is willing to go where most “skeptics” dare tread, which is the realm of personal experience.  I tell you what, drink Ayahuasca 50 + times, do some Iboga and come and tell me if it doesn’t change your perspective of reality or the after life.  Also I can anticipate immediately the denial to experience any of the aforementioned methods for taking glimpses into metaphysical realms,  would that be a by product of fear, ignorance or both?  Who can know except through experience anything?  Such would be blind faith or sola fide.  Graham is featured because he has a message that is worthy of consideration.  Remember, “Condemnation without investigation, is the height of ignorance” – Albert Einstein.

    Don’t fear the medicine.

    •  if you hadn’t chimed in here there’d really be no way to reply amidst all the poison spitters. interesting indeed to watch “intelligence” snap quick to the defense of “normal” and “logical” as if nothing good ever came out of challenge new ideas.

      if I post “I got my cat a new toy!” on facebook I get an instant 10-30 likes. I posted an hour long talk of Graham Hancock’s about a week ago, and it still on has 1 like.

      Apparently most of the world prefers to regurgitate the system rather than consider something new. (and yes that is what we’re doing here, considering, discussing, and wondering.)

      • I agree completely.  What I’m realizing more and more is it just ego defense for coping with death in a lot of ways.  We all will pass that mysterious threshold in time one day or another, how we make peace or rail against the terms of incarnation goes far to explain our attitudes towards many things.  There are a lot of smart cookies here but sadly I think the allure of confirmation in one’s beliefs often supersedes the more humble and intelligent response of “I don’t know.”    I’m thankful for the influence and example of anyone who has opened up the cosmic floor for new ideas.  It’s much more invigorating and enlightening to consider the source with an open mind.  Best wishes.

        • Calypso_1 | Feb 16, 2012 at 2:29 am |

          I am curious as to what you refer, regarding your realization of this “ego defense for coping with death”  you are observing in others. [ and please if you will grant reprieve from past encounters we have had, as those have never been my initial intention despite the outcomes that have been generated.  I have no doubt that I can find distaste in your ways and means at a future time if such opportunities present, but I do not consider those expressions to be the whole of your essential self and would prefer to find other channels of communication.more amicable for the both of us. ]

          • Death not only of the physical body but of one’s cherished ideology being ripped away by a better paradigm.  Even scientists cringe from this reasonable reaper all too often.  It’s denial.  People will deny that which reminds them of their very temporal nature for it reminds them of their relative insignificance and power in this whole arrangement in time.  

            Too often people wish to prevent losing face, though assuredly we all lose face upon death, heck maybe even during the process but I digress.  If Humans could cut the shit, stop trying to one up hump everything to death and seek knowledge and understanding primarily most of our primal tribal monkey instincts could be transmuted.  Perhaps we will manage to venture into the great unknown with a humble heart and open mind if we can just remember to re member.  

            I just hope mankind can respond reasonably well enough to adapt to the challenges we are faced with.  At this point that prospect is bleak unless we honor truth.  No matter how grisly & skeletal it’s face.  No matter how sharp it’s scythe.  Eleusis.

    • Hancock is an Ass, selling New Age, Pseudo-Scientific and Pseudo-Spirituality books to people who lack the necessary mental faculties to differentiate between assertions and arguments.


      • Which of any of the ideas offered by Hancock cause you such consternation?  You yourself have constructed a rather ambiguous, stereotypical ad hominem/composition fallacy in chastising those you see as lacking the “necessary mental faculties to differentiate between assertions and arguments”.  Tell me do you understand that the irony of such a contradictory invective is not lost on those who refute your condemnation?  In other words, I read Graham, I understand the difference between the “assertions” you have made and that they lack the evidence required to make an effective “argument.”  You have failed to outstrip your own standard for the monolithic organism you erected from straw.  If you want to refute a scholar, start with one point and present evidence, no need for ad hominem attacks.  Just present your case and provide evidence.  That is if you understand the difference between assertions and arguments.

        • ok wasn’t the pharoah the only person to go to the afterlife. His belief seems to say we all can go to a afterlife, but they themslves didn’t not follow that belief.

          • Jin The Ninja | Feb 16, 2012 at 9:26 pm |

             the pharoah was a god-head, the pyramids were designed to project his celestial essence into the cosmos. conceptions of heaven and hell don’t really work in this context.

  5. 7-2=5 didn’t the pharoahs have the only right to after life, i could be wrong.

Comments are closed.