Started off good, lost me at time travelling modern humans as a rationale.

Some interesting ideas and facts in here but a lot of this was covered in one of their other books, so it felt like I was reading it all again.

Abject nonsense, riddled with either misunderstandings and/or misrepresentation of simple data, endless circular reasoning, coincidence, and numerology and magical thinking standing in for mathematics (if you pick and choose your sums so as to only produce significant numbers, then you will consistently produce significant numbers, particularly when you're prepared to fudge the numbers, round up and round down where convenient and accept "close enough" as evidence for a numerical system you're arguing is impossibly precise at every level).

The final conclusion they reach would make for a half-decent sci-fi story, but makes for exceptionally poor science married to an even poorer grasp of archaeology and history. It openly ignores its own flaws of logic with the wafer-thin defence that "other theories have big flaws too", and relies on archaeological and mathematical "coincidences" that are, simply put, bullshit. The central premise relies on assumptions about the likelihood or otherwise of life evolving on Earth (plus, again, a load of nonsensical numerology masquerading as maths), and decides that the unlikeliness of it renders it impossible. Despite wasting a chapter deriding creationism, the book's conclusion is creationism by any other name.

Cited as "Thought Provoking" by the Daily Mail and certainly it is, but not in the way I expected.

Located in the Popular Science section of the bookstore ... and I'm not sure it sits well there after reading it. Sure, there are a lot of scientific facts and mathematical data to explain Knight's theories, yet all those figures fried my brain. It's not something I would research to check for accuracy, or even something I would understand if I tried. Maths was my most hated subject at school! (Now if I had a teacher like Christopher Boone from The Curious Incident Of The Dog In The Night-Time I might, just might, have learned more on that subject).

I'm still unsure what my feelings are about this book. Part intrigued, part mystified, and still none the wiser. If time traveling humans are one of the conclusions then surely that is not possible, or more to point ... Why hasn't there been evidence of time travel through the ages already. Surely time travel should encompass 'all' of time?

Heck, I'm still scratching my head over that alone.

Karen's review sums this book up better than I ever could! Such fun to read I was truly tickled pink.