Which is why it was surprising to see that on September 29, Coppens had himself accused academics of being liars and telling naughty, naughty lies! The conspiracy, he asserted, began during the reign of China’s first emperor:
In fact, after the rule of this Emperor, a more ingenious plan was devised by an unknown evil genius – a methodology that continues to be practiced to this very day. It is far more effective to introduce lies into the historical records – lies which will forever be quoted as proof, for they are, after all, part of the historical records, not? [sic]
Of course. We can’t expect the standards of September 29 to apply on October 3.
This is why I was shocked (shocked!) to see that on October 5, Coppens went a step further, suggesting a continuing academic conspiracy against the “truth,” which he also described in morally unambiguous terms. This time he was discussing the supposed conspiracy to prevent study of the Bosnian pyramids, natural formations some alternative scholars think are pre-Holocene artificial pyramids. He claimed “Western archaeologists and Egyptologists have found themselves sidelined” and therefore frustrated in their attempts to “to control our understanding of history.” Therefore, he accused archaeologists of lashing out in “a vociferous and vile campaign” to suppress research on the Bosnian formations to maintain control over history.
Now, let’s recall that when I said Coppens lied because he said something that was (a) untrue and (b) contrary to the plain reading of the texts he based his claim upon, Coppens replied “Jason Colavito is taking great interest in everything I say. … Why am I so special? … I wish you well with wasting your and everyone else’s time in writing and doing so. I, however, don’t. I am sure that leaves me open for more name calling on your part! Somehow, I feel I stir something in you that you so hate, that I feel that whatever I do, I cannot change that.”
As we now see, Coppens is hardly special. In fact, he considers me, all Egyptologists, and all Western archaeologists to be fair subject for “name calling” and “hate.” In fact, the only person exempted from this is Coppens himself!
So, if I erred in presuming his untruths are lies, this is no more and no less than what Coppens himself wrote four days before and two days after his complaint! I would call this hypocrisy, but that might presume too much about his motives. Instead, let us simply agree to call it “the vociferous and vile campaign ... by an evil genius … to introduce lies into the historical record … to control our understanding of history.”
Surely, he can’t possibly object to that turn of phrase.