My opinion is that Graham Hancock does not fit into the same category as Erich Von Daniken, not by any stretch of the imagination. Von Daniken made elaborate claims based on nothing more than fantasy and the desire to make a buck, whereas Hancock's books are meticulously researched to the point where you almost want to scream. Believe me, I know - I've read most of them.

A writer is not a "huckster" just because his/her theories differ from the mainstream. If research has been done, is cited within the work and holds up to scrutiny, it becomes a viable "theory". Not fact, theory. Hancock's ideas are -- you guessed it -- theories.

As for Dan Brown, the Da Vinci Code is fiction. But I do find it incredibly interesting that the Catholic Church is so very bugged by the book...