What is the author's perspective in the book, The 12th Planet?

Sitchin approaches his narrative as a researcher convinced that there is truth behind Sumerian legends and looking for an overarching explanation of everything in the world, a teleology. He is eager to unite science and myth into one truth that explains it all. In doing this, Sitchin cherry-picks scientific information, choosing facts and theories that will seem to support his conclusions while ignoring others that won't, such as the possible effects of gravity of a 12th planet on the solar system's stable orbits or the unlikelihood of life evolving on a planet orbiting in deep space most of a 3,600 year period and then emerging into the hot radiation of the sun, causing intense climate change. Similarly, he reinterprets myths to suit his ideas.

Sitchin's scientific inconsistencies and use of mythology as evidence are not likely a planned misinterpretation, but instead a methodology that is driven by placing the hypothesis above the evidence. Sitchin sees an elegant way to explain the cosmology of the Earth and understand mysteries in science and myth. He wants it to be true, and he gathers evidence to prop up his ideas, instead of trying to come to the most straightforward conclusions based on all the evidence, critically weighed. Sitchin often relies on broad statements about what anonymous scientists or scholars believe, and just as often he picks a single, minor study or event to highlight. By doing this, he avoids both the true big picture and the myriad of conflicting details.