Erich von Däniken has died

Legacy and Cultural Impact

• Seen as a key popularizer of the “ancient astronauts” idea, though commenters note earlier authors had similar themes and even earlier fictional precursors.
• Widely remembered as a charismatic showman and effective orator who helped turn fringe ideas into mainstream TV and pop culture, inspiring series, movies, and tabletop RPG/settings.
• For many, his books were formative childhood reads that sparked interest in archaeology, astronomy, and science fiction, even when later rejected as nonsense.

Quality of Arguments and Internal Consistency

• Multiple commenters describe his work as riddled with contradictions, leading questions, and weak inference: “every mystery ⇒ aliens.”
• Compared unfavorably to other fringe writers who at least tried to build internally consistent systems.
• Some stress he never really followed or claimed the scientific method; others say decades of refutations left his core claims unchanged, framing him as a crank or grifter.

Racism, Human Achievement, and “God of the Gaps”

• Strong thread arguing that attributing non-European monuments to aliens is implicitly racist and diminishes ancient peoples’ ingenuity.
• Alternative view: some fans treat “ancient aliens” as a spiritual or emotional narrative for human progress, not explicitly racist but still anti-human in its assumptions.
• Several point out how “aliens” function as a God-of-the-gaps move, similar to many conspiracy theories.

Entertainment, Wonder, and Pedagogy

• Many distinguish between literal belief and using his ideas as imaginative fuel: fun walks, games, speculative conversations, and “what if” storytelling.
• Some argue pseudohistory like “Ancient Aliens” could be used in schools to teach critical thinking (spotting enthymemes, reported speech, and question-begging).
• Others counter that such “harmless fun” contributes to a broader ecosystem of disinformation and distrust of science.

Belief, Conspiracy Thinking, and the Information Ecosystem

• Long subthread explores why people cling to such beliefs: identity, emotion, gaps in historical knowledge, cognitive dissonance, and lack of trust in institutions.
• Commenters debate whether demanding evidence is itself a “belief system,” and how to engage believers empathetically versus dismissively.
• Several contrast the 1970s print/TV era—where refutations could keep pace—with today’s social media environment, where fringe ideas scale faster than corrections.