Orcutt's Crackpot Index

A simple method for rating potentially revolutionary contributions to the field of Egyptology.

1. 5 points starting credit.

2. 1 point for every statement that is in conflict with generally accepted theories.

3. 2 points for every statement that is clearly vacuous.

4. 3 points for each internal inconsistency.

5. 5 points for every supposition that is maintained despite prodigious archaeological evidence to the contrary.

6. 5 points for each instance of specious data expressed as fact.

7. 5 points for each authoritative reference to Edgar Cayce, Immanuel Velikovsky, Erich von Daniken, Thor Heyerdahl, Zecharia Sitchin, John Anthony West, Graham Hancock, or Robert Bauval.

8. 7 points for each authoritative reference to Martin Bernal, Cheikh Anta Diop, Molefi Kete Asante, Chancellor Williams, or Yosef A.A. ben-jochannan.

9. 10 points for each authoritative reference to R.A. Schwaller de Lubicz.

10. 10 points for each baseless claim that widely accepted theories are fundamentally erroneous.

11. 10 points for boasting of academic degrees unrelated to the topic at hand.

12. 15 points for boasting of a lack of academic degrees, insisting that formal education is not only unnecessary but also an impediment to creative thought.

13. 20 points for lamentations of being misunderstood.

14. 20 points for every use of a myth or legend as axiom.

15. 20 points for defensive citations of real or imagined ridicule inflicted by the academia.

16. 25 points for each evidential mention of Atlantis, Mu, Lemuria, or the 1995 film Stargate.

17. 30 points for insisting that if critics cannot disprove a theory, then it must of necessity be true.

18. 30 points for claiming to be the victim of a conspiracy by the scientific establishment.

19. 40 points for professing to be privy to information that is secret or to which no one else has access.

20. 50 points for claims of psychic revelation or firsthand past-life experience.

Apologies to John Baez