It's the the I'm safe in my bubble mindset. It's odd that so many have opinions that won't stand in face of differing viewpoints. edited to add: also how little tolerance we Americans have for discomfort ----- whether mental or physical.
@@Stephanie-we5epI always find that amusing too, the "I trust the science" types are the most closed minded to anything that pushes back against the status quo. Anyone who actually values science should understand that science isn't static, it's rarely "settled", new things are being discovered every day.
Apostatsy! Begone with that devil talk! I think there is a reason that an apple was involved in the fall of mankind and will be involved when we fall again!
@@malaka-j4t only for a month ? youtube is what i watch everytime i eat lol. i literally don't even open the tv when i eat, i just use my phone and put on my headphone as to not disturb others and i eat while watching people's content. Rinse and repeat for everytime I'm eating lol. I also watch content on the side too while i'm searching for a job. My field is in quite the predicament atm. IT still hasn't fully recovered from covid. I've been unem,ployed for about a year or so. I truly couldn't have made it without the support of my family, mainly my parents who still are providing for me, even as a 32 years old. A support system is quite helpful in those situation. Regardless, it is indeed a nice routine to take. Tho, one that i will have to shed off once i get a job that i'll have to physically go to lol.
im not sure if you will see this....there was just a huge argument about the crusades on piers morgan. i know this comment is off topic. but i would REALLY like to see a metatron reaction to it
52:34 uuh, is he saying that he has his conclusion made before any evidence. Isn’t this against science? Even after making entire series and writing book about it. He still says there is no evidence for an advanced civilization. Doesn’t that debunk everything? You don’t need to push theories without evidence that’s not how science or archeology works.
No, it doesn’t debunk his theory. Graham is working on finding evidence to prove his theory. You don’t need evidence to introduce a theory, you need evidence to prove or disprove a theory.
@@kennyfnpowers707You just stated the entire Problem. Graham is working on finding Evidence to Support his Theory rather than making a Theory that is supported by the Evidence.
@@kennyfnpowers707Grahams evidence for his ideas is from getting high on ayahuasca. He believes that psychic powers exist, and he looks for evidence of them in the past. Except he doesn’t find any, but pretends he does.
I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding the issue here, but it sounds like Hancock has made a claim, there isn't evidence to support it, and expects the rest of the archaeological community to disprove his claim or shut up about it. Dibble had a good point when he said that in the thousands of dig sites they've done, they've found many small, hunter-gatherer sites, but nothing to indicate a large civilization. Hancock honestly sounds like the guy who made a career out of the Cydonia picture he believed showed a person's face on Mars. He has a belief that he calls a theory, and until others disprove him, he feels wronged that they disagree with him.
That's all I heard when I first listened to the podcast as well. I have no research or expertise on this topic so all I can do is listen to how these two guys communicate their ideas and evidence; and Graham uses way too many salesman techniques for me to think he's the one with answers. Also that rant he goes on about "big archeology" attacking him online didn't help him and just sounds like he's begging for sympathy as a victim.
The thing is, I would argue that places like Gobekli Tepe (as well as the other Tepe sites), Sacsayhuaman, Puma Punku, etc. are evidence of a civilization which was much more advanced than we currently think that existed sometime during the last ice age. Dibble and others would disagree, despite their hypotheses being inadequate in my opinion. That is one of the main contentions. What even counts as evidence?
@spracketskooch They were evidence that groups of people could move and carve stone. The technology isn't anything special, but the ability to live and work together in large, at least semi settled groups was. This is partly because the area they lived had abundant wild grain that could be gathered and stored in large quantities with relatively little effort. It was the very advent of the,agricultural age, just before we,started deliberately growing them, likely because a change in climactic conditions gave them no choice. The population had grown too large to go back to hunter gathering.
@@Toxicpoolofreekingmascul-lj4yd And that is mostly speculation. Until Gobekli Tepe was discovered most archeologists said that no such thing existed because hunter gatherers were incapable of megalithic building, many even said such a site could not exist. Now the definition of hunter gatherer seems to have changed to include megalithic building, along with a host of other qualities that we previously only associated with agricultural civilizations. I might be willing to overlook the sudden and convenient change if the archeologists who pilloried people like Graham for suggesting that something like Gobekli Tepe was possible, were to admit that they were wrong to make definitive statements about things which can't be known for certain, admit they attacked people and not ideas, and apologize for their wrongdoings. As it currently stands though, most archeologists pretend that they weren't drastically, confidently, and arrogantly wrong for decades.
Hancock is just not a good debater. He should stay away from direct confrontations with his detractors, he gets far too defensive and personal very quickly. He doesn't help his cause when he does this.
CBS recently released a TH-cam video about the "discovery of ancient tools". It's hilarious. It's a team that found a piece of a rock that's sharp. They then show how easy they are made by two rocks hitting each other... Then walk down a gravel road claiming it's teeth and bones they are walking on.
Sounds more like Graham wants the funds to be put into different places. Unfortunaly the recourses are limited and needs to be put where we can actually get some value for the time and money spent. Hopefully the money and time is also well managed.
The risk vs reward is worth investing some resources into investigating Graham's hypothesis. The potential reward is large, but not guaranteed. The potential reward for only excavating known sites is small, but guaranteed. Also, Graham has worked with archeologists in the past, but whenever he does the site either gets shut down, or any archeologists associated with him in any way are banned from the site. Money isn't the big issue, permission is. That is one reason why Graham complains so much. No one is allowed to even do the research that could potentially provide evidence for his hypothesis. That is an issue of academic censorship, not an issue of resources.
@@spracketskooch "Money isn't the big issue, permission is. That is one reason why Graham complains so much" - He lied multiple times about those sites in his books and TV series, no wonder natives banned him from conducting his propaganda there. Also, Hancock has no hypotheses. Hypotheses must be based on reality, Hancock made things up.
Great video as always Metatron! Ignore the haters. I love the fact that you react to different videos and people. Great to see someone on youtube who actually knows what they're talking about, and openly admits when they're not sure about something. Also fantastic to see someone on here that isn't "afraid" to touch on any subject. Keep up the great work!
My main problem with Graham is that HE is making the extraordinary claim without hard evidence and he puts the responibility of proving the claim wrong on archeology. That's just basic backwards thinking when it comes to do science and archeology. In academia, one can only draw conclusions from the evidence that are at hand, not the evidence that is abscent. Leaving the door open in any study for new discoveries and more research is a also a staple and expected.
Not really, for the most part Graham is just asking questions like, "could this be?", or "is it possible?" In contrast, Flint said during this debate, "I'm going to show you why a civilization capable of metallurgy cannot have existed during the last ice age." Not, likely didn't exist, not even didn't exist, but cannot have existed. I've also heard David Miano claim that it was impossible for the Sphinx to be build during the last ice age because of season flooding of the Nile. Totally ignoring the concept of dams. Archeologists and historians constantly make absolute claims of knowledge, which cannot be proven by any known methods. Then those claims are treated as fact, and anyone who questions them is pilloried for questioning the "facts". Just look at the carbon dating for the mortar in the great pyramid. The dates range over a period of a thousand years, even in samples taken inches apart, and some of the dates are 200 years before Khufu's reign. I'll link a video going into more detail if you're curious. A lot of this alternative history originated from questioning the conclusions, the knowledge claims of archeologists. Questioning the construction methods and timeline of the great pyramid being the most famous. Archeology in general has historically not held up it's end of the bargain, being open to new discoveries and more research. Look at the Clovis first debacle. Archeologists were accusing other archeologists working in South America of being CIA plants. Which nearly led to one archeologist and his family being killed by the Pinochet government. All because that archeologist was putting forth solid evidence that the Clovis people were not the first people in the Americas.
@@spracketskoochyeah but Graham just ask questions. Then idiots start saying the sphinx was built by the dinosaurs. It’s fine to ask questions but it’s meaningless. I have theories about the structure of the universe but I know Little about psychics so no one should care. As no one should care about Grahams rambling
Then stop having a go at Hancock for thinking outside the box. And as Hancock is not a ‘proper trained endemic’ is, he doesn’t have to play by academia’s rules. And so he can go where he likes.
I love how people announce their unsubscription to their fleeing the country. I agree with what Motley Crue says in one of their songs... Don't go away mad, just go away.
He goes to actual sites, shares true stuff about them and then proposes theories on top of that.... Weather those theories are wrong or right, he presents them as theories....sounds like a documentary to me
@@verone272because clearly other people didn’t find it amazing at all it’s not that they’re lying to themselves or something no they just don’t feel as you do it’s not hard to understand
They need a geologist (like me) to actually analyze this stuff. Rocks can definitely have systematic joints that can form perpendicular to each other. Large scale stresses as well as metamorphosed rocks can definitely form joints that are extremely straight and flat and systematic like that. I've seen some rocks that cracked and jointed in nature that look remarkably like someone flattened them. But it's natural. Why don't they just send a geologist who can take samples of the rock and do some field mapping and determine if it could have jointed that way.
@metatron your decision to listen to all viewpoints is so refreshing and gives me so much more faith in experts than the idea that experts should not need to engage with less popular ideas. If anything, I would imagine that university graduates of the middle and late-middle ages would have gladly and happily engaged with charlatans (not saying Hancock is one) or others, not avoid them. We only progress forward by sharpening our ideas against others. And you never know when one of those ideas turns out to be true!
Listening to all viewpoints isnt critical thinking! Having the knowledge and understanding to know when someone is peddling bullshit is critical thinking. Not all viewpoints are valid or worthwhile exploration. Hancock is a joke and the sheer amount of crying he does regularly is comedy. Why doesn’t anyone take my unsubstantiated theories seriously? 😭 😂
"experts" do listen to other people are you dumb or something, maybe a little slowe? But when what you are saying is so far from reality it isnt even worth debating. Would a F1 driver debate the best car with a person talking about hotwheels?
@christiangrosjean2980 how do you determine which viewpoint is bullshit without listening to it first? How do you convince people in the middle ground without giving them the assurance that you understand the flawed perspective? I'm not defending Hancock, I'm attacking your misguided view of how ideas should be tested.
@@mbalfour7 "Middle ground" stances often boil down to apologia/normalisation of absurd ideas. The middle ground provides an illusion of objectivity. Person 1: "I believe 1+1 is 2." Person 2: "I believe 1+1 is 4." Middle gound: "The solution must be that 1+1 is 3."
The problem with looking for techniques is we don't know what techniques or tools a stone age civilization would have used. So hard to compare to unknowns.
I think to say that archaeologists rule out the possibility of a lost civilisation is an extremely disingenuous thing to say! I mean, of course, there are plenty of "lost" civilisations, I don't think any honest archaeologist worth their salt is going to say that we have discovered every and all civilisations that have ever existed in the entirety of human history, that's just insane!! The key word here is "advanced" ancient civilisations, and archaeologists have yet to find any evidence that points to any advanced ancient civilisations to have ever existed, so there's no point in looking for this specifically because there's no reason to assume that any such civilisations ever existed, so the only time they should be looking for those types of ancient civilisations is when they find solid evidence that points to that being an actual possibility! 🤷♂️
Flint literally said during this debate, "I'm going to show you why a civilization capable of metallurgy could not have existed during the last ice age". He didn't say, "likely didn't exist", or even, "didn't exist", but "could not have existed". He's ruling out he possibility completely, while also making an unscientific absolute claim of knowledge. He's basing all of this on ice core data which does show lead emissions in the volume you'd expect for a civilization engaging in large scale metallurgy. The authors of the study he's citing say that the lead emissions are most likely from a natural source, a volcano eruption. You can accurately say that at least Flint Dibble dismisses the possibility of a lost civilization that doesn't show characteristics we're familiar with. People have short memories, but Gobekli Tepe was once said to be impossible. Hunter gatherers couldn't possibly build such a thing, and nothing but hunter gatherers existed at the time. Yet here we are. Another thing, much of the evidence put forward by people like Hancock is dismissed out of hand, or inadequately explained. For example, how does one move a near thousand ton one piece granite statue over 1000 kilometers with the technology we think the dynastic Egyptians had? There's no evidence to point to how they were moved. We have art depicting the dynastic Egyptians moving smaller statues, but those methods are not scalable, the difficulty curve is not linear.
Well then you haven't watched any of Graham Hancock stuff past random clips on the internet. He provides loads of incredibly interested bits of information that definitely point in that direction. His personal conclusions aren't even the point, really it's that he's shedding a light on some phenomenally bizarre connections between cultures that were thousands of years and thousands of miles apart. The questions he's raised are genuinely incredible, and to date I haven't heard anyone dismiss them with satisfactory information. And you might be tempted to say this is because of bias I might have, and the struggle against bias is an ever-present one, but I ignored Hancock for decades, literally, because I lumped him in with the History channel/ancient aliens nonsense, and he really doesn't belong in that group (though admittedly, some of his conclusions are pretty ridiculous - like he's into numerology which annoys me to no end, or ayahuasca visions about the afterlife - but his points truly never rely in on that kind of nonsense)
I do not like Hancock. I am not saying he is 100% correct. However, some archeologists DO rule out the possibility, and some evidence DOES exist. If you want your comment to be accurate you could say something like, "not all archeologists" and "no conclusive evidence exists." But Hancock never said all archeologists felt that way or that conclusive evidence exists...at least not that I recall, so making those changes would align with his argument. This is why he has to repeat his argument. Intentionally or not, you just created a strawman. It's ok. People do it all the time. As long as you recognize your error or prove Hancock actually did argue in absolutes, it's fine : )
@Great_Wall_of_Text well I did say that any honest archaeologist worth their salt is not going to claim that we have discovered every civilisation to have ever existed in the entirety of human history, so any archaeologist who rules that out is dishonest and I don't think I created a strawman, I'm simply using his very argument with the same wording that he repeatedly states.
No you just act like Dibble and ignore everything he says. You choose to believe one person over another simply because of “authority fallacy.” It’s a proven fact that people are more likely to listen to or believe someone that appears to have some level of authority vs someone that doesn’t appear to have authority. Dibble appears to “have authority” so your brain goes “oh he must be right” so you chose to believe him without doing any research of your own.
I’d like to ask Graham what the top 10 places he’d expect to see evidence for his Ice Age, globe-spanning civilization are. Then he should put together a team with archaeologists and geologists, and conduct actual research/excavation at at least one of these sites. Until he puts in an honest effort to conduct research, he will always be seen as a grifter.
The thing is, he's prevented from doing any research, and often anyone associated with him or his ideas in any way is also prevented. Also, multiple sites which were actively being excavated have been shut down after Graham publicized his interest in them. It's like if you were just thrown in prison tomorrow for no obvious reason, and I said, "until he walks out of the prison, he'll be seen as a criminal".
@ When has he been prevented from doing research? This is just Graham’s victim mentality being expressed. I’d love to see one proposal for an excavation he’s submitted and why it was denied. But unfortunately, he’s never submitted any proposals for excavation. There’s nothing preventing him from doing research outside of his own will to actually do it.
@@ZachFury Gunung Padang is one example. He was working with an archeologist there, doing what Graham is skilled at, reporting. The government changed, a bunch of international and some Indonesian archeologists poisoned the well against Graham, the archeologist was prevented from doing any further research, and now no excavations are happening at the site. Gobekli Tepe is another example. Excavation stopped shortly after Graham and others publicized the site. Graham is banned from Egypt, not allowed in the country at all. He doesn't submit proposals, because he's not an archeologist. He relies on archeologists to do the excavating. But even the archeologists he's associated with, or who show interest in his ideas, are prevented from excavating. Seems to me that you've already made up your mind though. Either that, or you're just not very familiar with Graham.
@ At Gunung Padang there was a geologist, not archaeologist, who found claimed to have found evidence of early human occupation through very unscientific means. (Carbon dates of organic material found with no context of human activity cannot be used to suggest humans lived there at that time). His work was stopped because he wasn’t conducting real scientific work. The archaeologists critiqued him because it was not good archaeology. That’s why Graham should work with actual archaeologists. Excavations at Gobekli Tepe have not been stopped. I don’t know where you’re getting that from, obviously not from the archaeologists working there. Graham’s banned from Egypt? Ok how does that stop him from working elsewhere, like in the places he says the ancient high tech civ actually were. This is more of Graham’s attempt to paint himself as a victim to distract from the fact that he has no evidence for his civilization. Graham should work with a team to submit proposals, not by himself. I doubt he knows how to set up a grid, use a total station, use a sieve, identify strata, identify artifacts and faunal remains. There’s probably very little archaeology he knows how to do, so he will need help from actual scientists.
@@ZachFury Mmm, maybe I'm wrong about the guy being an archeologist. The guy found some voids which could be lava tubes, or rooms. Which would be the kind of thing you bring in a geologist for. Also, if I remember right, they only dug down about 1m, which would make anything they found irrelevant to Graham's hypothesis. From what I remember the methodology seemed fine. If you can point to a specific instance of bad methodology then I'll change my tune. In any case, excavations were stopped once Graham got involved. You can look up articles which will show that excavations at Gobekli Tepe have been stopped in order to, "preserve archeology for future generations." Olive trees have also been planted directly on top of some unexcavated areas of the site, which are known to have constructions underneath thanks to ground penetrating radar. It won't take you more than a few minutes to verify what I'm saying is true. Yep Graham is banned from Egypt. Almost certainly because he got into an argument with Zahi Hawass, and Zahi used his influence to ensure Graham doesn't have access to Egypt. Egypt is probably the best place to look. The climate lends itself to preservation, so being banned from there is a big deal. We're currently discussing why he can't/doesn't go elsewhere. This is where we agree. Graham is a journalist. His role is to report what actual archeologists find. It's like the guy who runs the town gate demanding to know why the guy with no shoes won't just go into the village and buy some, but he refuses to open the gate.
These guys fighting over the aux cord and Hancock switching back and forth between pairs of glasses and never knowing which pair he is wearing or which pair he needs was hilarious.
I do not like Hancock, but I have listened to several hours of conversation with him. As far as I can, tell he acts like it pisses him off when people say his ideas are 100% impossible and claim that archeologists can be certain he is wrong. Any time somebody allows for the possibility, however unlikely, he chills. Did Dibble ever allow for even the possibility that Hancock could possibly, however unlikely, be correct? If so, I missed it.
I doubt they expect everyone else to spend time proving them wrong. Another thing he does is discredit the whole archeological community by claiming they are corrupt, which bolsters his claims to his audience and makes them suspicious of their evidence. Having said that, it would be cool if there was an advanced civilisation in the distant past.
Saying the site can be considered a candidate for Atlantis, because it drowned DURING life of Plato shows lack of basic understanding about the topic. Atlantis was ancient knowledge for Plato.
Here is a perfect example of Hancock changing his theory and claims at the drop of the hat. Suddenly at about 35:00 he starts saying a lost civilization instead of a Lost High Tech Civilization. The difference between the 2 is the crux of the argument.
I've said for years he should change his hypothesis to "......we could have done it sooner." Then he would have been 100% correct dozens of times. But he would not make money. His theory is not original to him either. The concept of a master civ teaching the rest begins with theosophy and Graham Hancock is well versed in it.
@dl1277 because his theories have never been simply about a lost civilization. His theories are specifically about a lost ADVANCED civilization that survived an apocalypse and traveled the globe spreading and teaching their knowledge.
@@publichearing8536 when has Hancock EVER claimed he was looking simply for a lost civilization? Academia would have no problem with him if that was all he was claiming.
Honestly, the biggest takeaway from this debate is a newfound sense of comfort because technically we can’t rule out the existence of unicorns either. I mean, have you personally excavated 100% of the Earth to confirm they’re not hiding somewhere? Didn’t think so.
From a scientific methodology, that would be exactly right. The biggest takeaway from this comment section is how many people have poor etymology and find this point to be surprising. You literally should be agnostic, lack of proof is not itself proof of the antithesis. Its just that it causes most people anxiety and they cannot handle it, which is why we have so many religions, ideologies and philosophies. People must subscribe to a complete story and world view to feel comfortable.
Exactly! And to change the topic entirely, have you heard about this lovely trinket for sale that is 100% guaranteed to keep you & your loved ones 100% safe from dinosaur attacks? For the low, low price of a very, very pretty penny!
Listening to theories and opinions of others is the beginning of learning. Imagine if we never entertain an observation or insight that is outside our own scope; we would never grow. Even if the ideas are outlandish, at least you’ll be entertained…
Dude, I couldn't finish it. The secondhand embarrassment was too much. And I don't have anything against Billy Carson. I enjoyed listening to his wild speculation based on incorrect information. My favorite fringe theory of all time is that what we now call trees are actually bushes, and real trees used to be hundreds, if not thousand of feet tall. All this based on Devil's Tower in Wyoming, and other similar formations.
@Metatron, I have a habit of making a light study of just about everything. If I've never heard of something, then I tend to want to study it to an extent that I can tell people, "Ya, I know what that is, and here's a little bit more." but I rarely study anything to the extent that I could be tested on it.
Hancock wants to spend archaeology's scarce resources chasing his theories when there is more than enough work in known areas. He wants the West to fund research in areas that are not in their control. Hancock needs to have these arguments with the countries that control those areas and get them to fund this research.
Same thing happens in other countries. Graham was working with an Indonesian archeologist with full support of the Indonesian government. The government changed, archeologists, both international and Indonesian, poisoned the well, and now all excavation at the site is blocked. Klaus Schmidt was excavating Gobekli Tepe with the full cooperation of the Turkish government. Then Graham gets interested in it, Klaus passes away, Turkish and international archeologists poison the well, and now they're planting olive trees over the site (tree roots destroy even megalithic constructions) and banning excavation indefinitely. It's not that archeologists won't look into sites that Graham proposes, but that sites Graham is interested in get shut down. Clearly it's a problem if active excavations are being halted because one guy uses them as part of his hypothesis. Also, I'm reasonably confident that Graham could obtain funding for excavations. The main issue there is that if he's involved in any way the excavations are not allowed. Turns out it's pretty hard to find evidence if you or anyone associated with you are prevented from gathering evidence. It's not like you can go out and just start digging, even if you have the money.
To be fair, funding from government subsidy comes from taxpayer dollars. There are literally tens of millions of taxpayers who would like to see funding going to these sites in question. Our elected representatives are not distributing the funds equally throughout the archaeology departments. I think that the future of archaeology is, in fact, currently under water. I look forward to the day more research is done regarding the more interesting areas between the sea level of the ice age coastlines compared with today's coastlines.
@@kurt2612 Cool I want to keep my fucking money. Government wasn't built to fund archology nor your food, nor your house. At least not in the US it wasn't. Clearly, it's not working funding all this useless shit.
@@spracketskooch And the paper of this indonesian archeologist was retracted. Funny you 'forgot' to mention that. Also, Read something about preservation of Gobekli Tepe, not cheap propaganda made up by pseudoarcheologists like Corsetti and Hancock. You are spreading dumb lies.
Indeed... I work in heritage architecture and often, I have to draw some observations from pictures and publications before meeting with clients. It's incredible how people who have been in a place for so long completely miss the obvious, even when they have interest in history.
kind of, i think the problem was he was able to see more than what the pictures produced and likely has a better understanding of the site. Which means whos observations are you to take into more credit the one that observed with what is given or the one that was able to observe with more. its the difference of using a telescope verses a probe on a planet.
@@hokage039 I would go with the one with more knowledge of the papers written on the site. Going somewhere and looking at a place tells you next to nothing.
I cant be more thankful for Billy Carson and Graham Hancock they introduced me to the Sumerians and histories i wouldnt have ever researched without their entertainment value.
Holy crap. It took me a second to figure out what was wrong with this video. Metatron! You're wearing a _modern_ shirt!? That's the most mind blowing part of this video! 🤣
Im not so sure that if Atlantis actually existed it would have been localized. They could have had something akin to embassies spread throughout the globe. Much the same way the United States does. Lets say hypothetically their HQ was on the Azores Plateau. The "Atlantian civilization" might have had outposts as far as the Amazon, all the way to the Richat Structure in Africa.
You don't have to believe Hancock's theories, they are pretty out there, but anyone should be able to admit that many of the smears against him have been off the rails, viscious, and purely motivated out of career survival, not principle. A lot of theories seemed more outrageous when they were first proposed, and ended up being true.
no he spouts utter lies and misinformation to ring wingers to attack the scientific establisment because theyre anti science, anti intellectual losers who cant keep up with actual scholars.
Nah, his theories are stupid. He has no evidence or proof at all. His global spanning civilization left no archeological trace in terms of agriculture, technology or anything for that matter. We can trace miniscule polynesian genetic impacts in parts of south American populations, but a civilization that gave agriculture and architecture to many regions of the world has left no genetic trace anywhere? Scientists are right to ridicule him. Him arguing that we should waste finite resources to look for something that is that unlikely and antagonising people to actual archeology is stupid. The way and what he communicates actively makes people dumber and more science illiterate.
@@HansWurst-po3bd yea buddy, everything is exactly as the establishment tells you it is, nobody has ever been wrong about history before, and nobody has ever lied.
I somewhat agree with Metatron when he compares Netflix Ancient Apocalypse to Netflix Cleopatra. One difference is, that we do know that Cleopatra existed.
Yep, but to know that she has some archeologic and historical work had to be done. And thill some years ago we had not even an idea that Dinosaurs had colors. And now we know and also first audio reconstructions on how they probably sound (some of them) was done. So someone has to do the work so we know more or we know that something did exist or didn't. Just to discard everything because you dislike someone is not the way to go, if you ask me.
That's not a fair comparison. Even if Graham is wrong about everything, he's wrong about things we're not sure about, or can't be sure about. Netflix Cleopatra was wrong about things which we are certain of.
@ You aren’t sure whether the civilisation that built the pyramids on Earth could have built pyramids on Mars? And that they could have used acoustic levitation by chanting at 800 ton stones, to move them into place? Perhaps there is incontrovertible evidence that Cleopatra was black, buried somewhere under the Sahara and the only reason we haven’t found it, is because mainstream archeology refuses to look.
Yeah and we know that unlike what some peoples grandma might claim, cleopatra wasn't black... incorrect information being propagated as a "documentary".
Dunning Kruger effect in action. Vacation spots are not known for their cold waters and strong ocean currents. Diving in an area like Yonaguni is impressive.
@@rd9337 And thousands of them dive as a holiday activity? If so, then I'm impressed by thousands of Brits. I don't really trust you to be honest though.
The big issue with Graham is "you can't prove it isn't there", which on it's own not a good basis to presenting hypothesis, let alone calling it a theory (which MUST be falsifiable as one of it's criteria) but he also leaves so much room for himself, that even if you excavated 99% of every undervater shelf, he'd claim his "global advanced civilization" is in remaining 1%. It's not serious way to conduct your research. If anything, you should be one providing VERY strong evidence for your claim. Not "impossible geometry" (which youtube has plenth of videos with naturally occuring "impossible geometry", look it up), which is very speculative and opinion based at best, but actual, good evidence. But he doesn't, and when he gets even a slightest pushback, he cries that everyone is persecuting him. Flint raised a very good point (though he does a very bad job at constraining himself emotionally, he should've asked more level headed archaeologiat, who is also a good speaker, to talk to Graham instead), that if there is a GLOBAL culture with very advanced, megalithic architecture, we would find their artifacts and architecture way more often, that hunter-gatherer camps, that didn't also form a unified global community. "You can't tule it out" is pretty wild take to have as a scientist. You can't rule out being tiny undetectable worm inside of flesh and bones, forming a human personality. You can even use for proof pretty wild cases, like that one dude with hydrocephaly having brain as thin as a sheet of paper and still being a functioning person (though barely) with a wife and 2 kids. Would it mean that said hypothesis is good? Ofc not. And just because i can't rule it out, doesn't mean it's a hilariosly bad hypothesis. Graham does opposite of the Occam's razor, and goes for the wildest hypothesis possible. While simplest explanation isn't always true, it generally is more often true, than not. And it also hones limited resources into more strategic paths. Graham wants to get trillions of dollars to excavate the whole Sahara and all of Japan's beaches. How much money, does he think, archaeologists really get? Let me tell you, not that much.
The irony of you criticizing his argument by producing a ridiculous argument of your own. "He's not happy with a 5% excavation so he won't be happy with a 99% excavation" Utterly brain dead and disingenuous on your part
@richter6699 well, first of all, being braindead shows up in some using ad hominem over a youtube comment, yet here we are. Second, i didn't say that. I just used reductio ad absurdum on the principle he's using. If he's not satisfied with a wide range slice of 5% (which is global, as he claims his civ would be, and less visible, unlike he claims his civ to be), he wouldn't be with 99%. Analogy would be if we were on a beach with the white sand. And digging out 5% of it all we could find was small green rocks. But Geaham came in and said, that there are massive pink boulders all over the beach, and we can't see it, unless we excavate everything. And for proof he used man-made pink umbrellas on that beach (which are analogous to, as geologists claim, rare, but natural occurances of perfect geometry) It would be an absurd claim to make. And only braindead people wouldn't see it thay way (see, how easy it is to make ad hominems, so please, if you want to talk, let's talk without them, and if you can't contain your rage, go take a cold shower or couple valerian drops or something).
And also, i pointed that "he leaves so much room for himself", which is an absolutely true and factual claim on my part. Unless he makes a statement, of how much is enough, he's leaving a way out for himself. If he said, he'd be satisfied with 10, 20 or 50%, i would attack that claim (because it is ridiculous on it's own too), but wouldn't make 99% claim.
@@Kvint-kh12345you're not familiar with apophasis, are you? Maybe getting to know one of the most basic, fundamentally influential methods of generation of knowledge would help you out in your frantic search for a good argument, because there are plenty and you managed to not even scrape one.
How long does it take to get a degree in archeology? How many papers do you have to read? Graham has done 100 fold. When is it enough? When an institution certifies you with a C average?
@@seemjengsiang He has spread a lot of misinformation about archeology. If that is what you mean by "done 100 fold" then yes. If I spend 5 years reading about anatomy, that doesn't make me a doctor. He has skipped many crucial steps to becoming an actual archeology in his endeavor to cash in on gullible ignorant people who are quick to jump to conclusions
@ it’s ironic because flint has set archeology so far back after being called out for blatantly spreading misinformation on the podcast. Shouldn’t his credentials be revoked? Joe Rogan literally had a follow-up podcast with Graham soon after addressing flint’s actions
@@seemjengsiang even if i concede this point, how does that relate even slightly to the critique levied against hancock? you are using dishonest debate tactics.
@ Also, I spent a few minutes trying to find this misinformation you were talking about and all I could find were articles how Flint was trying to fight misinformation spread by hancock. If you have any source for all the alleged misinformation Flint spread in regards to archeology I would like to see it. But I dont think you are arguing in good faith based on that deflection you tried to preform earlier
Pay close attention to the way Graham shifts the goal post from an advanced civilization that taught agriculture, building, astronomy, metalworking, writing, etc...... to a lost civilization in general. No one refutes the possibility that any aspect of our past could have older origins than we are aware of today.
@vineflower Graham's original contention is that there once existed an advanced civilization in the past which spread its knowledge worldwide after its collapse. Exactly the same belief that was started by theosophy, and Blavatsky, to be precise. Over time, he has added the younger dryas and ice age into his theory. His theory began not with a rational examination of current facts but an irrational belief in a better past.
@@williamsaling9648 Not true that Blavatsky was the origin of that belief. Hundreds of cultures worldwide have similar myths. Sometimes it's a pale skinned man with a beard, sometimes it's a fish-man, sometimes it's a woman accompanied by a white buffalo calf, sometimes it's beings from the sky, sometimes it's nondescript people. The common thread is that some sort of cataclysmic event happened, and someone from somewhere else showed up in the aftermath to share specific types of knowledge which are useful to create what we call civilization. Blavatsky was basing her ideas off of those stories, mixed with occult ideas which were popular at the time.
I enjoy your videos and appreciate your continued efforts to be transparent and truthful - been watching for a few months and decided to subscribe just now xoxox keep making content brother
Well, if you lose a sock somewhere in your house, and you look under your bed but don't find it, does that mean your sock was never there? Maybe he is wrong and what he is looking for doesn't exist. But until we look through everything he won't be satisfied. In the meantime I do think there are many things to be discovered.
yes because the Clovis first theory (13000yrs) was the accepted oldest and archaeology thought no further digging is required (and even shamed an Archaeologist and ruinning his reputation) but Monte Verde in southern Chile(14200), White Sands National Park in New Mexico(23000yrs) and stuff keeps getting Older. so we need to dig more.
@@just4768 Clovis-first was the accepted hypothesis before new, strong evidence had shown it was incorrect. If Graham wants to push a new hypothesis to get accepted, he will need to show *evidence* Evidence is what science cares about, if you don’t have it, you’re just selling a fairytale. Remember when Graham said there was a civilization on Mars that colonized Earth? He had no evidence for that, and still he has no evidence for his new theories.
@@just4768 The theory was accepted at some point but obviously "archaeology thought no further digging is required" is not true since it's precisely further digging and study by archaeologists that overturned it.. It was not Hancock and his ilk..it was other archaeologists and historians that pushed knowledge further.. And what is this "archaeology thought" as if this is some unified entity that issues sentences..There is no archaeology..there are archaeologists and historians..many different institutions within the same country..with different opinions and theories even within the same institution.. Reputation damage? Sometimes its warranted.. Why? I'll give you an example.. Let's say I claim Metatron is related to Caesar..I make that claim on a hunch..for personal gain either financial or reputational.. You will call me a hack and a con because I make a strong statement based on nothing.. Now if in 20 years me or others find solid proof that Metatron is actually related to Caesar, that does not vindicate me and my theory because I made it falsely..it's just so happened that it ended up true..
I have a book on my shelf from Hancock called "The Mars Mystery" where he links pyramids on Mars with the pyramids in Egypt. How could you classify his work as anything other the science fiction.
And most of his theories are lifted from Ignatius Donnelly (late 19th century stuff) with mid-century authors. He constantly recycle old stuff that you find in Robert Charroux, Velikovsky and that Italian journalist I can't remember the name. The only useful thing about Hancock is that he has attracted attention to older archeological sites... the rest is just nice fiction. The Mysterious Cities of Gold was more grounded in reality than his books. And no, I'm not trying to shut the man down... but he lives in his victimhood bubble.
@@gabrielpettersson2069Where has Hancock ever said he no longer believes anything he wrote in ‘The Mars Mystery’? He is still making money from the book.
@@sailormatlac9114can’t really disagree with anything you’ve said there. It’s unfortunate that he is letting the attacks against him become the focus of his public discourse. Not that his anger about it isn’t warranted, but I imagine it weighs on him. I like his work, and I place and egg or two into his basket of theories. They are fun to read and imagine, and there are interesting questions he raises about cultural similarities between peoples that had no contact.
@@SaltyCorpsman That only proves a Jungian and Darwinian theory. Native Americans are somewhat similar to Chinese, for example, because they share the same genetic origins. Humans are the same because they share genetics. Doesn't matter if they had zero contact. Now, in more recent times, the cultural similarities are often there due to either contact or movement. For example, is a guy moves from China to an island, and that island has similarities, it's because he was actually in the first place, too. On the other hand, if there are similarities between the Middle East and North Africa in recent years, it's likely due to contact/trade (dating back at least 6,000 years, to my knowledge). Not only do we have some solid evidence for this in all areas, but it also makes much more sense than aliens or some magical old humans or whatever. Why is this a problem? Is he scared of genetics, or has a deeper motivation? Or just doesn't know anything? You might as well ask why many Jews have things in common despite having never met. It's because they share a culture across space and time, and share a common genetic root; thus, many of their genetic markers, gut growth, IQ levels, personality traits, and values are the same. It's a bit like how women on opposite sides of the world are very similar, because they're both women. Doesn't matter if they never met or came from different cultures -- their fundamental femaleness is the central, universal factor. This is also why some experts believe the West has individualism and the nuclear family, and the East doesn't. We developed differently, both genetically and culturally. On the other hand, Jordan Peterson had the remarkable insight/idea that the West only has the illusion of individualism due to how rigid and stable it is. Now, some claim that the Western humans are genetically superior for such reasons, but this is not innately true. Maybe how Africans and Arabs and Asians live is the natural, healthy way? There is certainly evidence for that. Maybe it's just different. Or maybe the West was good a long time ago, but isn't today. Or was bad then but good now. There are many options. Why did Bruce Lee not like cheese? Because he's Chinese and most Chinese people struggle to eat milk and cheese products, since they are not made for it, unlike some of the Western and Arab peoples. This is also why they have a problem with beer, just as the Native Americans have a problem with drinking due to the fact they share such genetic markers with the Chinese, where they came from (I read that the Native Americans started as a small tribe in China around 15,000 years ago, and walk across to the Americas via Russia and what was then the land bridge). Finally, there are only so many ways for humans to live and build and create; thus, it's natural that there would be some similarities between cultures. Why do American modern buildings look a bit like Japanese modern buildings? Because there's only so many ways to actually build a skyscraper. Because almost every culture shares the same resources and methods. It's why English bridges look a bit like Roman bridges, and why Hindu and otherwise old Indian culture looks a bit like pre-human culture: there's only so many ways to sit in a circle and perform rituals, only so many ways to bathe in the river, and only so many ways to eat with your hands. It just makes them HUMAN. Nothing magical here. We see it a lot. This is what Carl Jung heavily focused on for his idea of the collective unconscious, which is the more reasonable and psychological and Darwinian version of Hancock's theories. P.S. If we link steps/structures on Mars to Earth, we are literally proving that both are nature-made. He's just disproving his own theory instantly.
On your point about graham finding his own expeditions; he has told stories about how he and any team he is associated with gets banned from many sights. Like the snake mound in the US, he’s banned from there.
Kind of understandable why tho.not everyone want an important part of their history and culture ridiculed to satisfy a few peoples ancient civilisation fantasy
@25:15 Dibble said "they went and surveyed 21 hundred DIFFERENT PLACES" that is false, if I understand the graphic correctly, it says Sites (N=194) and Samples (N=2121) so they didn't go to 2121 different places, they went to 194 sites and took 2121 samples which is a big difference. So he either doesn't understand his own slide or he is knowingly misleading the audience, because he knows Hancock has a good point, which is even supported by his own evidence. Interesting...
He is dishonest about Ship wrecks and the time frame(metatron caught that one), He was off on Agricultural seeds and tracking whats domesticated and what isn’t. Dedunking has a good video explaining why and how, but I think it’s more about being desperate to prove Graham wrong than him being a bad guy. He clearly gets a bit offended and angry here and there(not that Graham doesn’t either). I really wish he would have been more consistent and not kinda exaggerated points to prove his point. Disappointed in both these guys and I need to say I am a bit biased because I want Graham to be right
Or he's using one of those technicalities like "no two objects can occupy the same place" therefore the umber of objects must equal the number of places (visited). Actually this in one of the things I hate (and fear it might affect me) among people who fight stupid conspiracies (or even trying to stop humans from destroying the planet, or take drugs or anything of huge consequences) they too often see how well those tricks work and start to use them "for the greater good".
@Wintermute909 I'm really not into arguing about what someone might have meant. I rather just listen to what someone actually says. I also don't judge wether he is deceitful on purpose or if he misspoke by accident or if he just didn't understand what he was talking about. I was just pointing out what he said and that his own slide disproves his words. If you take a close look on the map, you will also notice that the majority of the sites where actually around Abydos. There really only is a few actual sites in what is marked as remote desert on the map. So Hancocks point still stands that there really wasn't so much work done in the Sahara Desert. That all of course being the case if I'm reading this map right. If I'm mistaken, please do correct me.
An advanced civilization in the past would be labeled advanced because they learned to wipe their asses with their left hand instead of their right hand.
@@YellowKing1986 that's the kind of nonsense that has people believing men can get pregnant 😂 Words have *meaning* - not least in an intellectual debate Dictionaries/Thresaurus exist
Thank you for saying Graham should fund archaeologists to search where he thinks we should be looking. Put his money where his mouth is, as the saying goes. But he wont. - said as an archaeologist
To be fair to Graham, we today right now with our global society have places with completely uncontacted tribes out there and still have people all over the world that still live like hunter gatherers. If all humans vanished today, I bet in 1,000 years the vast majority of what we've built will have turned to dust or reclaimed entirely by nature. Hell a car can rust away if exposed to elements in a decade or two.
There was once a pseudo-documentary series on Discovery, where they theorized how much time would it take for signs of civilization to cease if humans disappeared. In 1000 years there would still be quite a lot of ruins, but put in another 0 to make it 10000 years and literally only gigantic engineering feats like Hoover Dam would even have a chance of still existing.
Think of it like this. The map doesn't get the shape of the coastlines or islands exactly right, but it does show a large southern landmass which appears to be Antarctica.
@@spracketskooch It shows only South America. Every person who read what is written on this map knows this. Antarctica being depicted on this map was debunked decades ago, however, scammers like Hancock don't care what is written on this map, so he uses it to sell his bs.
Even if you excavate every square inch of coast line this guy will claim that his advanced civilization would live entirely on boats. It's like disproving Russel's Teapot existence. But he should digging, he might stumble upon something interesting, I just doubt it will be an ancient empire.
I kind of take Hancocks suggestions with a grain of salt. Maybe I’m alone, but I think it’s kind of fun to imagine what could’ve been before any of us were around. I’m not gonna stand at the top of the building though and shout that it’s true… But I’m willing to listen to the guy and maybe suspend disbelief.
Suspend disbelief maybe. It can be fun to think of fantasy. But the real history is so much cooler. Look at genetics and you can see the history of migrations and movements of people. How connected we all are, so called “races” mixing constantly. Many of the questions Graham pretend haven’t been answered, have been answered and they’re so cool. I encourage you to learn more about it.
I agree. I mean he has some points of which I would say it is worth to help him tom find out more. But he also gets on that "I believe/I wish"-side where nithing is proofed. However I hate this black and white talk where people act like or you fully have to dislike him or you fully have to believe what he says. Sadly it seems a lot of people in this comments are that way. Just read the jokes they made.
@@TheBrendon67 this is a great mindset, but when you actually spend considerable time listening to him as i did you start to realize theres pretty sizable cracks in his claims
The thing is as long as there is no sound evidence, is theory can survive in vacuum. It works because it's basically impossible to find evidence to debunk is theory because he's protected by the "You didn't search well enough... or here".
@@sailormatlac9114 It's not a theory at least in the scientific sense it's at best a hypothesis. Having a "theory" about who shot JFK is not the same as the theory of gravity.
@@richter6699 no he's not he's grifting. he's making claims which lack any evidence so he can grift from the gullible then whining and denigrating others when they point out there is 0 evidence to support hancock's claims. he could put his money where his mouth is and put up his own money, which would be tax deductible so cost him nothing or get netflix to pony up cash or crowd fund to sponsor a dig. That hancock has never even lifted a finger to do that is a tell that he even he knows he's a grifter.
@@richter6699So why not do it himself? He knows where to look and has the money. Why isn't Graham digging to prove his ideas? He had 20 years to do it and the only thing he produced are books with 1960's fantasies and "documentaries".
The problem starts when he is constantly whining how much cancelled he is, despite being super famous and having popular show. Oh, and ofc i "love" the "don't trust the science" rabbit hole
Except you need to prove that crypto monsters exist at all. We know that the Egyptians and Khmer empire existed but we can't explain how they know extremely advanced astrological patterns that take place over 26000 years that even we only recently discovered ourselves, and then how they built monuments whose construction is often Completely impossible to explain that match the stars locations on dates 10,000+ years before their time. A knowledge of these things and construction techniques we don't even have an understanding of TODAY means that something is going on, period
@@scleless1342 Likewise, you need to prove Hancock's global advanced civilization existed at all. You also need to prove that these civilizations knew extremely advanced astrological patterns that take place over 26.000 years, as you claimed. The same goes for your last claim about star location dates 10.000 years before their time. If you have any sources for the claims you just made, feel free to cite them.
They are happy to let us dig anywhere and perform analysis. We want to know more, always. But when we find the thing again we have to stop, rebury and limit access. Its nothing to freak out about. It happens all the time.
They have been showing this Bahamas site since 2000's on tv and disproved it even then. I too would like to think that there is an opportunity for a larger civilization but the probability is low and will remain low because of the sheer size under water.
@@thegreengouf56 Hancock lied in this debate, not Flint. All "lies" of Flint were already explained by Flint himself. Hancock, on the other hand, still believe in his made up stories. You guys are either ignorants, or belong to a cult.
I’ve never seen any documentary that doesnt have bits of opinions. If they remove hancocks work from documentary, half of netflix’s docs also get removed. Totally agree metatron.
That's actually the best way to investigate things. Why tf are you gonna rule something out that you can't prove? This is why Flint Dibble has been constantly getting debunked the passed few months and have validated Graham's claims
@ I spent 10 years professionally investigating crime and I can tell you the best way to investigate is to gather evidence. Graham admitted he has none.
@reoki5451 so did you investigate crime from thousands of years ago? Flint Dibble's X acct is literally him having a meltdown. Dan Richard debunked him along with other people. Ego has no place in investigating truth. Lazy investigators will close cases. Lmao
Just think about how different the reaction video would be if instead of stone age history would be roman history, how different would metatron react to someone like graham
Exactly, he definitely put on the kid gloves for this one. I wish he kept the same energy here that he had for that tik tok lady claiming Rome wasn't real.
@@dylansmith3184 For once he was open minded... 80% of written history is bullshit.. if you think otherwise I suggest reading and researching.. ffs you ARE on internet... learn how to use it..
Flint Dibble does such a great job in this of showing that, while an ancient advanced civilization would surely be cool, the stuff actual archeologists are doing these days is just as cool! Why do we feel the need to invent an unverified history when the actual history we have is so interesting!!!
I don't know if someone has commented this before but I do recommed to watch Miniminuteman breakdown of the Hancock Netflix series, as he does a good job of pointing the flawed logic of Hancock. I'm not against lisening to people with theories that go against our current understanding (I belive it can be useful when it comes to think different and advance a field), but I do thing is important to remmember that if it is something you are not an expert in is much easier to be trick by faulty logic.
Mr. Dibble is an excellect if not a great orator. He displayed a marvelous evidences and proofs that who we are once. And it sadly shows that for thousands of years we as human species lived in this world, settling down and making a civilization really is hard like how hard to get a house.
24:09 and at this point we know the real reason Flint hates Hancock. He cant have anything fracture Flint's dear old dibble daddies findings. This is more about protecting family legacy more then finding the truth of our story. Not just dibbles and his cohorts but all of us.
☝️here you can see someone who definitely didn't ignore most of an hour long video to pick a point that tenuously supports his pre-established conclusions.
@DaddyWarlocks and here ☝️you can see someone who definitely doesn't know I watched this whole hour long video, the full podcast on Joe Rogan, multiple videos on others channels about dibble and Hancock's battles. Dedunking has videos on the harassment dibble has subjected Hancock too. Also about this podcast where dibble gave false and misleading information to prove his arguments. There are also 2 other podcasts on joe Rogan post this podcast where they actually talk about dibbles misinformation. Now to have this much hate and animosity against a guy simply asking questions from another point of view is crazy unless you have alterior motives behind your attacks and I would say protecting daddies legacy in his field is definitely on the top of someone's list I would expect another daddy like yourself would expect that from your seed as well
Ancient civilization of the gaps exists as long as there is even the slightest gap. You can't really try to find something in a targeted way, if "it could be anywhere you haven't looked".
Anyone who unsubcribes because you watch a journalist with some theories of his own is absolutely wild.
Freedom!
It's the the I'm safe in my bubble mindset. It's odd that so many have opinions that won't stand in face of differing viewpoints.
edited to add: also how little tolerance we Americans have for discomfort ----- whether mental or physical.
@@Stephanie-we5epI always find that amusing too, the "I trust the science" types are the most closed minded to anything that pushes back against the status quo. Anyone who actually values science should understand that science isn't static, it's rarely "settled", new things are being discovered every day.
Those are dumbasses 😂
I love Metatron reviewing these Graham Hancock videos
@@markzuckergecko621Even more amusingly the scientific method pretty well spells that out! I trust the science, just not the scientific method... lol
"Im low tech"
"Well, its just windows"
Perhaps you did not hear when first I spoke.
Apostatsy! Begone with that devil talk! I think there is a reason that an apple was involved in the fall of mankind and will be involved when we fall again!
Joes old he doesn’t realize that’s phased out
Metatron video after dinner is fast becoming my new evening routine. It’s something to look forward to.
Glad to hear!
Mine is watching him with breakfast, it’s nearly 7am here (in 🇦🇺) and got the news on in the background. Great start to the weekend.
@@Timbo6669mine is for a late mid-afternoon lunch 😅
This absolutely! Been on this buzz for a month now myself, its a nice routine!
@@malaka-j4t only for a month ? youtube is what i watch everytime i eat lol. i literally don't even open the tv when i eat, i just use my phone and put on my headphone as to not disturb others and i eat while watching people's content. Rinse and repeat for everytime I'm eating lol. I also watch content on the side too while i'm searching for a job. My field is in quite the predicament atm. IT still hasn't fully recovered from covid. I've been unem,ployed for about a year or so. I truly couldn't have made it without the support of my family, mainly my parents who still are providing for me, even as a 32 years old.
A support system is quite helpful in those situation. Regardless, it is indeed a nice routine to take. Tho, one that i will have to shed off once i get a job that i'll have to physically go to lol.
im not sure if you will see this....there was just a huge argument about the crusades on piers morgan.
i know this comment is off topic. but i would REALLY like to see a metatron reaction to it
Yesssss
Hmmm cant find that video
I would love to see Metatron examine the very beginnings of the Templars and their relationship to the Cathars and southern France
the crusades was a barbarian invasion
You mean those wars where Christianity defended itself from invading muslims.
Flint has so much respect for his father he wore his suit. Jk, but he is very well spoken.
Those cuffs give me a stroke every time i see them
I was going to leave this EXACT comment. I could only hope to one day have a son who admires me that much.
52:34 uuh, is he saying that he has his conclusion made before any evidence. Isn’t this against science? Even after making entire series and writing book about it. He still says there is no evidence for an advanced civilization. Doesn’t that debunk everything? You don’t need to push theories without evidence that’s not how science or archeology works.
56:03 “Let’s look at this old map which is full of inaccuracies” ah, yes the best source
No, it doesn’t debunk his theory. Graham is working on finding evidence to prove his theory. You don’t need evidence to introduce a theory, you need evidence to prove or disprove a theory.
@@kennyfnpowers707You just stated the entire Problem. Graham is working on finding Evidence to Support his Theory rather than making a Theory that is supported by the Evidence.
@@kennyfnpowers707No. You don't need evidence to introduce a hypothesis. You need evidence to introduce a theory. Which Hancock has none
@@kennyfnpowers707Grahams evidence for his ideas is from getting high on ayahuasca.
He believes that psychic powers exist, and he looks for evidence of them in the past. Except he doesn’t find any, but pretends he does.
I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding the issue here, but it sounds like Hancock has made a claim, there isn't evidence to support it, and expects the rest of the archaeological community to disprove his claim or shut up about it. Dibble had a good point when he said that in the thousands of dig sites they've done, they've found many small, hunter-gatherer sites, but nothing to indicate a large civilization. Hancock honestly sounds like the guy who made a career out of the Cydonia picture he believed showed a person's face on Mars. He has a belief that he calls a theory, and until others disprove him, he feels wronged that they disagree with him.
That's all I heard when I first listened to the podcast as well. I have no research or expertise on this topic so all I can do is listen to how these two guys communicate their ideas and evidence; and Graham uses way too many salesman techniques for me to think he's the one with answers. Also that rant he goes on about "big archeology" attacking him online didn't help him and just sounds like he's begging for sympathy as a victim.
The pyramids were built by giant scorpions who ruled humanity for millenia.
Prove me wrong.
The thing is, I would argue that places like Gobekli Tepe (as well as the other Tepe sites), Sacsayhuaman, Puma Punku, etc. are evidence of a civilization which was much more advanced than we currently think that existed sometime during the last ice age. Dibble and others would disagree, despite their hypotheses being inadequate in my opinion. That is one of the main contentions. What even counts as evidence?
@spracketskooch They were evidence that groups of people could move and carve stone.
The technology isn't anything special, but the ability to live and work together in large, at least semi settled groups was. This is partly because the area they lived had abundant wild grain that could be gathered and stored in large quantities with relatively little effort.
It was the very advent of the,agricultural age, just before we,started deliberately growing them, likely because a change in climactic conditions gave them no choice. The population had grown too large to go back to hunter gathering.
@@Toxicpoolofreekingmascul-lj4yd And that is mostly speculation. Until Gobekli Tepe was discovered most archeologists said that no such thing existed because hunter gatherers were incapable of megalithic building, many even said such a site could not exist.
Now the definition of hunter gatherer seems to have changed to include megalithic building, along with a host of other qualities that we previously only associated with agricultural civilizations. I might be willing to overlook the sudden and convenient change if the archeologists who pilloried people like Graham for suggesting that something like Gobekli Tepe was possible, were to admit that they were wrong to make definitive statements about things which can't be known for certain, admit they attacked people and not ideas, and apologize for their wrongdoings. As it currently stands though, most archeologists pretend that they weren't drastically, confidently, and arrogantly wrong for decades.
Hancock is just not a good debater. He should stay away from direct confrontations with his detractors, he gets far too defensive and personal very quickly. He doesn't help his cause when he does this.
Because he can’t support his argument with scientific evidence
Being accused of racism will do that to a person. Especially when the guy who accused you won't own up to it.
It's his only path forward because his hypotheses have little or no good evidence to support them.
@@IanAnthony-IAm cut him some slack this was his first ever debate! He’ll get better with practice
@@spracketskooch And the guy being accused has a black wife, mixed race children and grandchildren
CBS recently released a TH-cam video about the "discovery of ancient tools". It's hilarious. It's a team that found a piece of a rock that's sharp. They then show how easy they are made by two rocks hitting each other... Then walk down a gravel road claiming it's teeth and bones they are walking on.
Metatron + strong coffee = perfect morning routine.
Yep. Same here. Drinking my Marghiloman, watching an archaeologist and a pseudoarchaeologist argue. Probably would have watched this otherwise
Its a 2 scoop day 💪☕️
Hancock reminds me of space balls: "have you finished combing the desert? what did you find?" "WE AINT FOUND SHIT"
hahahaahahah
You can tell these guys really like each other.
Me and my big brother when we drink 😂
Sounds more like Graham wants the funds to be put into different places.
Unfortunaly the recourses are limited and needs to be put where we can actually get some value for the time and money spent.
Hopefully the money and time is also well managed.
The risk vs reward is worth investing some resources into investigating Graham's hypothesis. The potential reward is large, but not guaranteed. The potential reward for only excavating known sites is small, but guaranteed. Also, Graham has worked with archeologists in the past, but whenever he does the site either gets shut down, or any archeologists associated with him in any way are banned from the site. Money isn't the big issue, permission is. That is one reason why Graham complains so much. No one is allowed to even do the research that could potentially provide evidence for his hypothesis. That is an issue of academic censorship, not an issue of resources.
@@spracketskooch
"Money isn't the big issue, permission is. That is one reason why Graham complains so much" - He lied multiple times about those sites in his books and TV series, no wonder natives banned him from conducting his propaganda there.
Also, Hancock has no hypotheses. Hypotheses must be based on reality, Hancock made things up.
Great video as always Metatron! Ignore the haters. I love the fact that you react to different videos and people. Great to see someone on youtube who actually knows what they're talking about, and openly admits when they're not sure about something. Also fantastic to see someone on here that isn't "afraid" to touch on any subject. Keep up the great work!
Graham didn't change his glasses enough times for me this time 'round. I was hoping for more.
Love this guy 💪🏻 Keep up the good work!
My main problem with Graham is that HE is making the extraordinary claim without hard evidence and he puts the responibility of proving the claim wrong on archeology. That's just basic backwards thinking when it comes to do science and archeology. In academia, one can only draw conclusions from the evidence that are at hand, not the evidence that is abscent. Leaving the door open in any study for new discoveries and more research is a also a staple and expected.
He's got no problem citing someone else's research and then demands that they legitimize his claims.
Not really, for the most part Graham is just asking questions like, "could this be?", or "is it possible?" In contrast, Flint said during this debate, "I'm going to show you why a civilization capable of metallurgy cannot have existed during the last ice age." Not, likely didn't exist, not even didn't exist, but cannot have existed. I've also heard David Miano claim that it was impossible for the Sphinx to be build during the last ice age because of season flooding of the Nile. Totally ignoring the concept of dams. Archeologists and historians constantly make absolute claims of knowledge, which cannot be proven by any known methods. Then those claims are treated as fact, and anyone who questions them is pilloried for questioning the "facts". Just look at the carbon dating for the mortar in the great pyramid. The dates range over a period of a thousand years, even in samples taken inches apart, and some of the dates are 200 years before Khufu's reign. I'll link a video going into more detail if you're curious.
A lot of this alternative history originated from questioning the conclusions, the knowledge claims of archeologists. Questioning the construction methods and timeline of the great pyramid being the most famous. Archeology in general has historically not held up it's end of the bargain, being open to new discoveries and more research. Look at the Clovis first debacle. Archeologists were accusing other archeologists working in South America of being CIA plants. Which nearly led to one archeologist and his family being killed by the Pinochet government. All because that archeologist was putting forth solid evidence that the Clovis people were not the first people in the Americas.
@@spracketskoochyeah but Graham just ask questions. Then idiots start saying the sphinx was built by the dinosaurs.
It’s fine to ask questions but it’s meaningless. I have theories about the structure of the universe but I know
Little about psychics so no one should care. As no one should care about Grahams rambling
@@ransakreject5221 exactly
Then stop having a go at Hancock for thinking outside the box. And as Hancock is not a ‘proper trained endemic’ is, he doesn’t have to play by academia’s rules. And so he can go where he likes.
I love how people announce their unsubscription to their fleeing the country. I agree with what Motley Crue says in one of their songs...
Don't go away mad, just go away.
Let's not pretend like the word documentary has any correlation to factual accuracy.
He goes to actual sites, shares true stuff about them and then proposes theories on top of that.... Weather those theories are wrong or right, he presents them as theories....sounds like a documentary to me
It’s an amazing documentary… I really don’t get people in this comment section wtf
@@ifancybeerHe didn’t say it wasn’t a documentary you dork he said a documentary doesn’t mean somethings legitimate
@@verone272because clearly other people didn’t find it amazing at all it’s not that they’re lying to themselves or something no they just don’t feel as you do it’s not hard to understand
They need a geologist (like me) to actually analyze this stuff. Rocks can definitely have systematic joints that can form perpendicular to each other.
Large scale stresses as well as metamorphosed rocks can definitely form joints that are extremely straight and flat and systematic like that. I've seen some rocks that cracked and jointed in nature that look remarkably like someone flattened them. But it's natural.
Why don't they just send a geologist who can take samples of the rock and do some field mapping and determine if it could have jointed that way.
@metatron your decision to listen to all viewpoints is so refreshing and gives me so much more faith in experts than the idea that experts should not need to engage with less popular ideas. If anything, I would imagine that university graduates of the middle and late-middle ages would have gladly and happily engaged with charlatans (not saying Hancock is one) or others, not avoid them.
We only progress forward by sharpening our ideas against others. And you never know when one of those ideas turns out to be true!
Listening to all viewpoints isnt critical thinking! Having the knowledge and understanding to know when someone is peddling bullshit is critical thinking. Not all viewpoints are valid or worthwhile exploration. Hancock is a joke and the sheer amount of crying he does regularly is comedy. Why doesn’t anyone take my unsubstantiated theories seriously? 😭 😂
@@christiangrosjean2980 exactly right. People are so dumb
"experts" do listen to other people are you dumb or something, maybe a little slowe? But when what you are saying is so far from reality it isnt even worth debating. Would a F1 driver debate the best car with a person talking about hotwheels?
@christiangrosjean2980 how do you determine which viewpoint is bullshit without listening to it first? How do you convince people in the middle ground without giving them the assurance that you understand the flawed perspective?
I'm not defending Hancock, I'm attacking your misguided view of how ideas should be tested.
@@mbalfour7 "Middle ground" stances often boil down to apologia/normalisation of absurd ideas. The middle ground provides an illusion of objectivity.
Person 1: "I believe 1+1 is 2."
Person 2: "I believe 1+1 is 4."
Middle gound: "The solution must be that 1+1 is 3."
The problem with looking for techniques is we don't know what techniques or tools a stone age civilization would have used. So hard to compare to unknowns.
I think to say that archaeologists rule out the possibility of a lost civilisation is an extremely disingenuous thing to say! I mean, of course, there are plenty of "lost" civilisations, I don't think any honest archaeologist worth their salt is going to say that we have discovered every and all civilisations that have ever existed in the entirety of human history, that's just insane!! The key word here is "advanced" ancient civilisations, and archaeologists have yet to find any evidence that points to any advanced ancient civilisations to have ever existed, so there's no point in looking for this specifically because there's no reason to assume that any such civilisations ever existed, so the only time they should be looking for those types of ancient civilisations is when they find solid evidence that points to that being an actual possibility! 🤷♂️
archeology is done for many reasons ,he just says we should include these on our list
Flint literally said during this debate, "I'm going to show you why a civilization capable of metallurgy could not have existed during the last ice age". He didn't say, "likely didn't exist", or even, "didn't exist", but "could not have existed". He's ruling out he possibility completely, while also making an unscientific absolute claim of knowledge. He's basing all of this on ice core data which does show lead emissions in the volume you'd expect for a civilization engaging in large scale metallurgy. The authors of the study he's citing say that the lead emissions are most likely from a natural source, a volcano eruption.
You can accurately say that at least Flint Dibble dismisses the possibility of a lost civilization that doesn't show characteristics we're familiar with. People have short memories, but Gobekli Tepe was once said to be impossible. Hunter gatherers couldn't possibly build such a thing, and nothing but hunter gatherers existed at the time. Yet here we are.
Another thing, much of the evidence put forward by people like Hancock is dismissed out of hand, or inadequately explained. For example, how does one move a near thousand ton one piece granite statue over 1000 kilometers with the technology we think the dynastic Egyptians had? There's no evidence to point to how they were moved. We have art depicting the dynastic Egyptians moving smaller statues, but those methods are not scalable, the difficulty curve is not linear.
Well then you haven't watched any of Graham Hancock stuff past random clips on the internet. He provides loads of incredibly interested bits of information that definitely point in that direction. His personal conclusions aren't even the point, really it's that he's shedding a light on some phenomenally bizarre connections between cultures that were thousands of years and thousands of miles apart. The questions he's raised are genuinely incredible, and to date I haven't heard anyone dismiss them with satisfactory information. And you might be tempted to say this is because of bias I might have, and the struggle against bias is an ever-present one, but I ignored Hancock for decades, literally, because I lumped him in with the History channel/ancient aliens nonsense, and he really doesn't belong in that group (though admittedly, some of his conclusions are pretty ridiculous - like he's into numerology which annoys me to no end, or ayahuasca visions about the afterlife - but his points truly never rely in on that kind of nonsense)
I do not like Hancock. I am not saying he is 100% correct. However, some archeologists DO rule out the possibility, and some evidence DOES exist.
If you want your comment to be accurate you could say something like, "not all archeologists" and "no conclusive evidence exists."
But Hancock never said all archeologists felt that way or that conclusive evidence exists...at least not that I recall, so making those changes would align with his argument.
This is why he has to repeat his argument. Intentionally or not, you just created a strawman. It's ok. People do it all the time. As long as you recognize your error or prove Hancock actually did argue in absolutes, it's fine : )
@Great_Wall_of_Text well I did say that any honest archaeologist worth their salt is not going to claim that we have discovered every civilisation to have ever existed in the entirety of human history, so any archaeologist who rules that out is dishonest and I don't think I created a strawman, I'm simply using his very argument with the same wording that he repeatedly states.
When I was a child I thought Hancock had a point
When I grew old I realized Hancock just smoked joints
Damn you grew up very quickly for a 12 year old
😂@@IamRa-18
Ha, maybe you should take an Ayahuasca trip and see what you think afterward.
Yeah and you vape probably...
No you just act like Dibble and ignore everything he says. You choose to believe one person over another simply because of “authority fallacy.” It’s a proven fact that people are more likely to listen to or believe someone that appears to have some level of authority vs someone that doesn’t appear to have authority. Dibble appears to “have authority” so your brain goes “oh he must be right” so you chose to believe him without doing any research of your own.
I’d like to ask Graham what the top 10 places he’d expect to see evidence for his Ice Age, globe-spanning civilization are. Then he should put together a team with archaeologists and geologists, and conduct actual research/excavation at at least one of these sites. Until he puts in an honest effort to conduct research, he will always be seen as a grifter.
The thing is, he's prevented from doing any research, and often anyone associated with him or his ideas in any way is also prevented. Also, multiple sites which were actively being excavated have been shut down after Graham publicized his interest in them. It's like if you were just thrown in prison tomorrow for no obvious reason, and I said, "until he walks out of the prison, he'll be seen as a criminal".
@ When has he been prevented from doing research? This is just Graham’s victim mentality being expressed. I’d love to see one proposal for an excavation he’s submitted and why it was denied. But unfortunately, he’s never submitted any proposals for excavation. There’s nothing preventing him from doing research outside of his own will to actually do it.
@@ZachFury Gunung Padang is one example. He was working with an archeologist there, doing what Graham is skilled at, reporting. The government changed, a bunch of international and some Indonesian archeologists poisoned the well against Graham, the archeologist was prevented from doing any further research, and now no excavations are happening at the site.
Gobekli Tepe is another example. Excavation stopped shortly after Graham and others publicized the site.
Graham is banned from Egypt, not allowed in the country at all.
He doesn't submit proposals, because he's not an archeologist. He relies on archeologists to do the excavating. But even the archeologists he's associated with, or who show interest in his ideas, are prevented from excavating.
Seems to me that you've already made up your mind though. Either that, or you're just not very familiar with Graham.
@ At Gunung Padang there was a geologist, not archaeologist, who found claimed to have found evidence of early human occupation through very unscientific means. (Carbon dates of organic material found with no context of human activity cannot be used to suggest humans lived there at that time). His work was stopped because he wasn’t conducting real scientific work. The archaeologists critiqued him because it was not good archaeology. That’s why Graham should work with actual archaeologists.
Excavations at Gobekli Tepe have not been stopped. I don’t know where you’re getting that from, obviously not from the archaeologists working there.
Graham’s banned from Egypt? Ok how does that stop him from working elsewhere, like in the places he says the ancient high tech civ actually were. This is more of Graham’s attempt to paint himself as a victim to distract from the fact that he has no evidence for his civilization.
Graham should work with a team to submit proposals, not by himself. I doubt he knows how to set up a grid, use a total station, use a sieve, identify strata, identify artifacts and faunal remains. There’s probably very little archaeology he knows how to do, so he will need help from actual scientists.
@@ZachFury Mmm, maybe I'm wrong about the guy being an archeologist. The guy found some voids which could be lava tubes, or rooms. Which would be the kind of thing you bring in a geologist for. Also, if I remember right, they only dug down about 1m, which would make anything they found irrelevant to Graham's hypothesis. From what I remember the methodology seemed fine. If you can point to a specific instance of bad methodology then I'll change my tune. In any case, excavations were stopped once Graham got involved.
You can look up articles which will show that excavations at Gobekli Tepe have been stopped in order to, "preserve archeology for future generations." Olive trees have also been planted directly on top of some unexcavated areas of the site, which are known to have constructions underneath thanks to ground penetrating radar. It won't take you more than a few minutes to verify what I'm saying is true.
Yep Graham is banned from Egypt. Almost certainly because he got into an argument with Zahi Hawass, and Zahi used his influence to ensure Graham doesn't have access to Egypt. Egypt is probably the best place to look. The climate lends itself to preservation, so being banned from there is a big deal. We're currently discussing why he can't/doesn't go elsewhere.
This is where we agree. Graham is a journalist. His role is to report what actual archeologists find. It's like the guy who runs the town gate demanding to know why the guy with no shoes won't just go into the village and buy some, but he refuses to open the gate.
These guys fighting over the aux cord and Hancock switching back and forth between pairs of glasses and never knowing which pair he is wearing or which pair he needs was hilarious.
Graham Hancock acts like it is the archeologists job to go around the world disproving his theorys/ideas.
Archeologists make knowledge claims that they can not back up all the time.
@@muddywitch9016and you know this how?
I do not like Hancock, but I have listened to several hours of conversation with him. As far as I can, tell he acts like it pisses him off when people say his ideas are 100% impossible and claim that archeologists can be certain he is wrong.
Any time somebody allows for the possibility, however unlikely, he chills.
Did Dibble ever allow for even the possibility that Hancock could possibly, however unlikely, be correct?
If so, I missed it.
I doubt they expect everyone else to spend time proving them wrong.
Another thing he does is discredit the whole archeological community by claiming they are corrupt, which bolsters his claims to his audience and makes them suspicious of their evidence. Having said that, it would be cool if there was an advanced civilisation in the distant past.
@@muddywitch9016 And archeologists think it's the Taxpayers Job to fund them forever.
Saying the site can be considered a candidate for Atlantis, because it drowned DURING life of Plato shows lack of basic understanding about the topic. Atlantis was ancient knowledge for Plato.
Here is a perfect example of Hancock changing his theory and claims at the drop of the hat. Suddenly at about 35:00 he starts saying a lost civilization instead of a Lost High Tech Civilization. The difference between the 2 is the crux of the argument.
It really isn't though.
I've said for years he should change his hypothesis to "......we could have done it sooner." Then he would have been 100% correct dozens of times. But he would not make money. His theory is not original to him either. The concept of a master civ teaching the rest begins with theosophy and Graham Hancock is well versed in it.
I'm confused are theories laws or are theories working concepts of and idea? Cause you seem to think that a theory is set stone.
@dl1277 because his theories have never been simply about a lost civilization. His theories are specifically about a lost ADVANCED civilization that survived an apocalypse and traveled the globe spreading and teaching their knowledge.
@@publichearing8536 when has Hancock EVER claimed he was looking simply for a lost civilization? Academia would have no problem with him if that was all he was claiming.
This is a video I didn’t know I wanted.
Honestly, the biggest takeaway from this debate is a newfound sense of comfort because technically we can’t rule out the existence of unicorns either. I mean, have you personally excavated 100% of the Earth to confirm they’re not hiding somewhere? Didn’t think so.
@@LaRatta-b8o exactly the burden of proof is on you to prove they don’t exist! 😆
hornless unicorns is a thing though, neighbour got one.
From a scientific methodology, that would be exactly right. The biggest takeaway from this comment section is how many people have poor etymology and find this point to be surprising.
You literally should be agnostic, lack of proof is not itself proof of the antithesis. Its just that it causes most people anxiety and they cannot handle it, which is why we have so many religions, ideologies and philosophies. People must subscribe to a complete story and world view to feel comfortable.
@@totobeni a zebra?! 🦓 😝
Exactly! And to change the topic entirely, have you heard about this lovely trinket for sale that is 100% guaranteed to keep you & your loved ones 100% safe from dinosaur attacks? For the low, low price of a very, very pretty penny!
Listening to theories and opinions of others is the beginning of learning. Imagine if we never entertain an observation or insight that is outside our own scope; we would never grow.
Even if the ideas are outlandish, at least you’ll be entertained…
it takes millions of years to create stone
Was hoping to see more of the reaction to this, gonna listen to it while preparing food for tonight.
Do the Billy Carson VS. Wes Huff debate next!
Dude, I couldn't finish it. The secondhand embarrassment was too much. And I don't have anything against Billy Carson. I enjoyed listening to his wild speculation based on incorrect information. My favorite fringe theory of all time is that what we now call trees are actually bushes, and real trees used to be hundreds, if not thousand of feet tall. All this based on Devil's Tower in Wyoming, and other similar formations.
@@spracketskoochI mean, I’m not against the idea that once we did have a few big trees it’s not too hard to believe.
@@DankyKang96 Maybe, but Devil's Tower looks nothing like petrified wood. Also, I'm not even sure a tree that big could hold up its own weight.
@ maybe the oxygen was better back then who knows, interesting hypothesis tho
@Metatron, I have a habit of making a light study of just about everything. If I've never heard of something, then I tend to want to study it to an extent that I can tell people, "Ya, I know what that is, and here's a little bit more." but I rarely study anything to the extent that I could be tested on it.
Hancock wants to spend archaeology's scarce resources chasing his theories when there is more than enough work in known areas. He wants the West to fund research in areas that are not in their control. Hancock needs to have these arguments with the countries that control those areas and get them to fund this research.
Same thing happens in other countries. Graham was working with an Indonesian archeologist with full support of the Indonesian government. The government changed, archeologists, both international and Indonesian, poisoned the well, and now all excavation at the site is blocked. Klaus Schmidt was excavating Gobekli Tepe with the full cooperation of the Turkish government. Then Graham gets interested in it, Klaus passes away, Turkish and international archeologists poison the well, and now they're planting olive trees over the site (tree roots destroy even megalithic constructions) and banning excavation indefinitely. It's not that archeologists won't look into sites that Graham proposes, but that sites Graham is interested in get shut down. Clearly it's a problem if active excavations are being halted because one guy uses them as part of his hypothesis.
Also, I'm reasonably confident that Graham could obtain funding for excavations. The main issue there is that if he's involved in any way the excavations are not allowed. Turns out it's pretty hard to find evidence if you or anyone associated with you are prevented from gathering evidence. It's not like you can go out and just start digging, even if you have the money.
@@spracketskooch Sources? At least gobekli teppe continues to be studied and is a major turist atttraction for Turkey.
To be fair, funding from government subsidy comes from taxpayer dollars. There are literally tens of millions of taxpayers who would like to see funding going to these sites in question. Our elected representatives are not distributing the funds equally throughout the archaeology departments. I think that the future of archaeology is, in fact, currently under water. I look forward to the day more research is done regarding the more interesting areas between the sea level of the ice age coastlines compared with today's coastlines.
@@kurt2612 Cool I want to keep my fucking money. Government wasn't built to fund archology nor your food, nor your house. At least not in the US it wasn't.
Clearly, it's not working funding all this useless shit.
@@spracketskooch And the paper of this indonesian archeologist was retracted. Funny you 'forgot' to mention that.
Also, Read something about preservation of Gobekli Tepe, not cheap propaganda made up by pseudoarcheologists like Corsetti and Hancock. You are spreading dumb lies.
Handcock vs Dribble.
I accidentally called him Haham Grancock the other day.
I'm sorry, but stating that you can't have an opinion because you "haven't been there" is such a poor, low-rent argument
Indeed... I work in heritage architecture and often, I have to draw some observations from pictures and publications before meeting with clients. It's incredible how people who have been in a place for so long completely miss the obvious, even when they have interest in history.
kind of, i think the problem was he was able to see more than what the pictures produced and likely has a better understanding of the site. Which means whos observations are you to take into more credit the one that observed with what is given or the one that was able to observe with more. its the difference of using a telescope verses a probe on a planet.
@@hokage039 I would go with the one with more knowledge of the papers written on the site. Going somewhere and looking at a place tells you next to nothing.
Flint is an expert on dick-bones and seeds. Why is he talking about stonework and architecture?
@@haydenquakenbush8626and how were those papers written? By someone going and looking at them...
I cant be more thankful for Billy Carson and Graham Hancock they introduced me to the Sumerians and histories i wouldnt have ever researched without their entertainment value.
Holy crap. It took me a second to figure out what was wrong with this video. Metatron! You're wearing a _modern_ shirt!?
That's the most mind blowing part of this video! 🤣
I love it!
I did a couple of takes at his window and thought similarly.
Rocks do weird things these shapes could be natural. Does he once show an actual artifact?
i’m envious of the hair…
I'm envious of the beard.
@@PeterParker-fx9dli’m envious of the Quadrilingual ability.
Y'all gahay
I'm envious of the brain...
LOL
Lets go! I've been waiting for part 2 lmao
Say "Guillermo"
Say it
Say
It
Im not so sure that if Atlantis actually existed it would have been localized. They could have had something akin to embassies spread throughout the globe. Much the same way the United States does.
Lets say hypothetically their HQ was on the Azores Plateau. The "Atlantian civilization" might have had outposts as far as the Amazon, all the way to the Richat Structure in Africa.
You don't have to believe Hancock's theories, they are pretty out there, but anyone should be able to admit that many of the smears against him have been off the rails, viscious, and purely motivated out of career survival, not principle. A lot of theories seemed more outrageous when they were first proposed, and ended up being true.
no he spouts utter lies and misinformation to ring wingers to attack the scientific establisment because theyre anti science, anti intellectual losers who cant keep up with actual scholars.
Out of... Career survival? Where?
What an interesting hypothesis, but does it have any merit?
@FirstLast-wk3kc observation of reality? Are you refusing to acknowledge that people don't want their work to be discredited?
Nah, his theories are stupid. He has no evidence or proof at all. His global spanning civilization left no archeological trace in terms of agriculture, technology or anything for that matter. We can trace miniscule polynesian genetic impacts in parts of south American populations, but a civilization that gave agriculture and architecture to many regions of the world has left no genetic trace anywhere? Scientists are right to ridicule him. Him arguing that we should waste finite resources to look for something that is that unlikely and antagonising people to actual archeology is stupid. The way and what he communicates actively makes people dumber and more science illiterate.
@@HansWurst-po3bd yea buddy, everything is exactly as the establishment tells you it is, nobody has ever been wrong about history before, and nobody has ever lied.
@1:45 I see this man's youtube algorithm is not unlike mine. :)
I somewhat agree with Metatron when he compares Netflix Ancient Apocalypse to Netflix Cleopatra.
One difference is, that we do know that Cleopatra existed.
Yep, but to know that she has some archeologic and historical work had to be done.
And thill some years ago we had not even an idea that Dinosaurs had colors. And now we know and also first audio reconstructions on how they probably sound (some of them) was done.
So someone has to do the work so we know more or we know that something did exist or didn't.
Just to discard everything because you dislike someone is not the way to go, if you ask me.
That's not a fair comparison. Even if Graham is wrong about everything, he's wrong about things we're not sure about, or can't be sure about. Netflix Cleopatra was wrong about things which we are certain of.
@ You aren’t sure whether the civilisation that built the pyramids on Earth could have built pyramids on Mars?
And that they could have used acoustic levitation by chanting at 800 ton stones, to move them into place?
Perhaps there is incontrovertible evidence that Cleopatra was black, buried somewhere under the Sahara and the only reason we haven’t found it, is because mainstream archeology refuses to look.
Yeah and we know that unlike what some peoples grandma might claim, cleopatra wasn't black... incorrect information being propagated as a "documentary".
You appreciate Hancock because he went scooba diving...?
That's not exactly a difficult task is it? I mean, that's usually a vacation activity.
Dunning Kruger effect in action. Vacation spots are not known for their cold waters and strong ocean currents. Diving in an area like Yonaguni is impressive.
Thousands of brits holiday at the seaside, last time I checked the North Sea is pretty cold with rather strong currents.
Try again.
@@rd9337 And thousands of them dive as a holiday activity? If so, then I'm impressed by thousands of Brits. I don't really trust you to be honest though.
@@rd9337people obviously don’t holiday in those places when it’s cold 😂
It's always cold, it's half a kick in the arse off the arctic😅
The big issue with Graham is "you can't prove it isn't there", which on it's own not a good basis to presenting hypothesis, let alone calling it a theory (which MUST be falsifiable as one of it's criteria) but he also leaves so much room for himself, that even if you excavated 99% of every undervater shelf, he'd claim his "global advanced civilization" is in remaining 1%. It's not serious way to conduct your research. If anything, you should be one providing VERY strong evidence for your claim. Not "impossible geometry" (which youtube has plenth of videos with naturally occuring "impossible geometry", look it up), which is very speculative and opinion based at best, but actual, good evidence.
But he doesn't, and when he gets even a slightest pushback, he cries that everyone is persecuting him.
Flint raised a very good point (though he does a very bad job at constraining himself emotionally, he should've asked more level headed archaeologiat, who is also a good speaker, to talk to Graham instead), that if there is a GLOBAL culture with very advanced, megalithic architecture, we would find their artifacts and architecture way more often, that hunter-gatherer camps, that didn't also form a unified global community.
"You can't tule it out" is pretty wild take to have as a scientist. You can't rule out being tiny undetectable worm inside of flesh and bones, forming a human personality. You can even use for proof pretty wild cases, like that one dude with hydrocephaly having brain as thin as a sheet of paper and still being a functioning person (though barely) with a wife and 2 kids. Would it mean that said hypothesis is good? Ofc not. And just because i can't rule it out, doesn't mean it's a hilariosly bad hypothesis.
Graham does opposite of the Occam's razor, and goes for the wildest hypothesis possible. While simplest explanation isn't always true, it generally is more often true, than not. And it also hones limited resources into more strategic paths. Graham wants to get trillions of dollars to excavate the whole Sahara and all of Japan's beaches. How much money, does he think, archaeologists really get? Let me tell you, not that much.
The irony of you criticizing his argument by producing a ridiculous argument of your own.
"He's not happy with a 5% excavation so he won't be happy with a 99% excavation"
Utterly brain dead and disingenuous on your part
@richter6699 well, first of all, being braindead shows up in some using ad hominem over a youtube comment, yet here we are.
Second, i didn't say that. I just used reductio ad absurdum on the principle he's using. If he's not satisfied with a wide range slice of 5% (which is global, as he claims his civ would be, and less visible, unlike he claims his civ to be), he wouldn't be with 99%.
Analogy would be if we were on a beach with the white sand. And digging out 5% of it all we could find was small green rocks. But Geaham came in and said, that there are massive pink boulders all over the beach, and we can't see it, unless we excavate everything. And for proof he used man-made pink umbrellas on that beach (which are analogous to, as geologists claim, rare, but natural occurances of perfect geometry) It would be an absurd claim to make.
And only braindead people wouldn't see it thay way (see, how easy it is to make ad hominems, so please, if you want to talk, let's talk without them, and if you can't contain your rage, go take a cold shower or couple valerian drops or something).
And also, i pointed that "he leaves so much room for himself", which is an absolutely true and factual claim on my part. Unless he makes a statement, of how much is enough, he's leaving a way out for himself. If he said, he'd be satisfied with 10, 20 or 50%, i would attack that claim (because it is ridiculous on it's own too), but wouldn't make 99% claim.
@@Kvint-kh12345you're not familiar with apophasis, are you?
Maybe getting to know one of the most basic, fundamentally influential methods of generation of knowledge would help you out in your frantic search for a good argument, because there are plenty and you managed to not even scrape one.
@publichearing8536 lol
Hancock is not an archeologist, he is a journalist.
How long does it take to get a degree in archeology? How many papers do you have to read?
Graham has done 100 fold. When is it enough? When an institution certifies you with a C average?
@@seemjengsiang He has spread a lot of misinformation about archeology. If that is what you mean by "done 100 fold" then yes. If I spend 5 years reading about anatomy, that doesn't make me a doctor. He has skipped many crucial steps to becoming an actual archeology in his endeavor to cash in on gullible ignorant people who are quick to jump to conclusions
@ it’s ironic because flint has set archeology so far back after being called out for blatantly spreading misinformation on the podcast. Shouldn’t his credentials be revoked?
Joe Rogan literally had a follow-up podcast with Graham soon after addressing flint’s actions
@@seemjengsiang even if i concede this point, how does that relate even slightly to the critique levied against hancock? you are using dishonest debate tactics.
@ Also, I spent a few minutes trying to find this misinformation you were talking about and all I could find were articles how Flint was trying to fight misinformation spread by hancock. If you have any source for all the alleged misinformation Flint spread in regards to archeology I would like to see it. But I dont think you are arguing in good faith based on that deflection you tried to preform earlier
Pay close attention to the way Graham shifts the goal post from an advanced civilization that taught agriculture, building, astronomy, metalworking, writing, etc...... to a lost civilization in general.
No one refutes the possibility that any aspect of our past could have older origins than we are aware of today.
I can't see no shift. Maybe it is in your head?
Actually his point is a cross-continental civilization. Just a civilization by default requires a level of technology that archeology hasnt found yet.
@vineflower Graham's original contention is that there once existed an advanced civilization in the past which spread its knowledge worldwide after its collapse. Exactly the same belief that was started by theosophy, and Blavatsky, to be precise. Over time, he has added the younger dryas and ice age into his theory. His theory began not with a rational examination of current facts but an irrational belief in a better past.
Yeah well its because people like you seem to believe it means Sci Fi as if they had spaceships etc
@@williamsaling9648 Not true that Blavatsky was the origin of that belief. Hundreds of cultures worldwide have similar myths. Sometimes it's a pale skinned man with a beard, sometimes it's a fish-man, sometimes it's a woman accompanied by a white buffalo calf, sometimes it's beings from the sky, sometimes it's nondescript people. The common thread is that some sort of cataclysmic event happened, and someone from somewhere else showed up in the aftermath to share specific types of knowledge which are useful to create what we call civilization. Blavatsky was basing her ideas off of those stories, mixed with occult ideas which were popular at the time.
I enjoy your videos and appreciate your continued efforts to be transparent and truthful - been watching for a few months and decided to subscribe just now xoxox keep making content brother
Graham Hamcock logic:
Unless you dig every inch of the earth to bedrock and scour the oceans, you cannot disprove my theory.
Buy my books
Well, if you lose a sock somewhere in your house, and you look under your bed but don't find it, does that mean your sock was never there?
Maybe he is wrong and what he is looking for doesn't exist. But until we look through everything he won't be satisfied. In the meantime I do think there are many things to be discovered.
yes because the Clovis first theory (13000yrs) was the accepted oldest and archaeology thought no further digging is required (and even shamed an Archaeologist and ruinning his reputation) but Monte Verde in southern Chile(14200), White Sands National Park in New Mexico(23000yrs) and stuff keeps getting Older. so we need to dig more.
Alantis of the gaps
@@just4768 Clovis-first was the accepted hypothesis before new, strong evidence had shown it was incorrect. If Graham wants to push a new hypothesis to get accepted, he will need to show *evidence*
Evidence is what science cares about, if you don’t have it, you’re just selling a fairytale. Remember when Graham said there was a civilization on Mars that colonized Earth? He had no evidence for that, and still he has no evidence for his new theories.
@@just4768 The theory was accepted at some point but obviously "archaeology thought no further digging is required" is not true since it's precisely further digging and study by archaeologists that overturned it.. It was not Hancock and his ilk..it was other archaeologists and historians that pushed knowledge further.. And what is this "archaeology thought" as if this is some unified entity that issues sentences..There is no archaeology..there are archaeologists and historians..many different institutions within the same country..with different opinions and theories even within the same institution.. Reputation damage? Sometimes its warranted.. Why? I'll give you an example.. Let's say I claim Metatron is related to Caesar..I make that claim on a hunch..for personal gain either financial or reputational.. You will call me a hack and a con because I make a strong statement based on nothing.. Now if in 20 years me or others find solid proof that Metatron is actually related to Caesar, that does not vindicate me and my theory because I made it falsely..it's just so happened that it ended up true..
Great episode Metatron! Thanks for the video!
Joe Rogan sucked at stopping the bickering especially Graham being disruptive
Very stimulating discussion. Thank you!
I have a book on my shelf from Hancock called "The Mars Mystery" where he links pyramids on Mars with the pyramids in Egypt. How could you classify his work as anything other the science fiction.
And most of his theories are lifted from Ignatius Donnelly (late 19th century stuff) with mid-century authors. He constantly recycle old stuff that you find in Robert Charroux, Velikovsky and that Italian journalist I can't remember the name. The only useful thing about Hancock is that he has attracted attention to older archeological sites... the rest is just nice fiction. The Mysterious Cities of Gold was more grounded in reality than his books. And no, I'm not trying to shut the man down... but he lives in his victimhood bubble.
He does not really stand by the early work any more.
@@gabrielpettersson2069Where has Hancock ever said he no longer believes anything he wrote in ‘The Mars Mystery’?
He is still making money from the book.
@@sailormatlac9114can’t really disagree with anything you’ve said there. It’s unfortunate that he is letting the attacks against him become the focus of his public discourse. Not that his anger about it isn’t warranted, but I imagine it weighs on him. I like his work, and I place and egg or two into his basket of theories. They are fun to read and imagine, and there are interesting questions he raises about cultural similarities between peoples that had no contact.
@@SaltyCorpsman That only proves a Jungian and Darwinian theory.
Native Americans are somewhat similar to Chinese, for example, because they share the same genetic origins.
Humans are the same because they share genetics. Doesn't matter if they had zero contact.
Now, in more recent times, the cultural similarities are often there due to either contact or movement. For example, is a guy moves from China to an island, and that island has similarities, it's because he was actually in the first place, too. On the other hand, if there are similarities between the Middle East and North Africa in recent years, it's likely due to contact/trade (dating back at least 6,000 years, to my knowledge).
Not only do we have some solid evidence for this in all areas, but it also makes much more sense than aliens or some magical old humans or whatever. Why is this a problem? Is he scared of genetics, or has a deeper motivation? Or just doesn't know anything?
You might as well ask why many Jews have things in common despite having never met. It's because they share a culture across space and time, and share a common genetic root; thus, many of their genetic markers, gut growth, IQ levels, personality traits, and values are the same. It's a bit like how women on opposite sides of the world are very similar, because they're both women. Doesn't matter if they never met or came from different cultures -- their fundamental femaleness is the central, universal factor.
This is also why some experts believe the West has individualism and the nuclear family, and the East doesn't. We developed differently, both genetically and culturally. On the other hand, Jordan Peterson had the remarkable insight/idea that the West only has the illusion of individualism due to how rigid and stable it is. Now, some claim that the Western humans are genetically superior for such reasons, but this is not innately true. Maybe how Africans and Arabs and Asians live is the natural, healthy way? There is certainly evidence for that. Maybe it's just different. Or maybe the West was good a long time ago, but isn't today. Or was bad then but good now. There are many options.
Why did Bruce Lee not like cheese? Because he's Chinese and most Chinese people struggle to eat milk and cheese products, since they are not made for it, unlike some of the Western and Arab peoples. This is also why they have a problem with beer, just as the Native Americans have a problem with drinking due to the fact they share such genetic markers with the Chinese, where they came from (I read that the Native Americans started as a small tribe in China around 15,000 years ago, and walk across to the Americas via Russia and what was then the land bridge).
Finally, there are only so many ways for humans to live and build and create; thus, it's natural that there would be some similarities between cultures. Why do American modern buildings look a bit like Japanese modern buildings? Because there's only so many ways to actually build a skyscraper. Because almost every culture shares the same resources and methods. It's why English bridges look a bit like Roman bridges, and why Hindu and otherwise old Indian culture looks a bit like pre-human culture: there's only so many ways to sit in a circle and perform rituals, only so many ways to bathe in the river, and only so many ways to eat with your hands. It just makes them HUMAN. Nothing magical here. We see it a lot. This is what Carl Jung heavily focused on for his idea of the collective unconscious, which is the more reasonable and psychological and Darwinian version of Hancock's theories.
P.S. If we link steps/structures on Mars to Earth, we are literally proving that both are nature-made. He's just disproving his own theory instantly.
I was waiting for this
On your point about graham finding his own expeditions; he has told stories about how he and any team he is associated with gets banned from many sights. Like the snake mound in the US, he’s banned from there.
Kind of understandable why tho.not everyone want an important part of their history and culture ridiculed to satisfy a few peoples ancient civilisation fantasy
@ If only that was the case. It just so happened to be archaeologists who banned him, not anyone actually associated with native Americans.
@@johnspence5689 he's not banned. They denied him full day of filming alone.
It's a tourist place. They have the rights for that
@@FirstLast-wk3kc excatly.
Yeah becuse hes a bullshiter who lies about cultural sites
Joe didn't look particularly happy when they started to speak over each other 😁
@25:15 Dibble said "they went and surveyed 21 hundred DIFFERENT PLACES" that is false, if I understand the graphic correctly, it says Sites (N=194) and Samples (N=2121) so they didn't go to 2121 different places, they went to 194 sites and took 2121 samples which is a big difference. So he either doesn't understand his own slide or he is knowingly misleading the audience, because he knows Hancock has a good point, which is even supported by his own evidence. Interesting...
He is dishonest about Ship wrecks and the time frame(metatron caught that one), He was off on Agricultural seeds and tracking whats domesticated and what isn’t. Dedunking has a good video explaining why and how, but I think it’s more about being desperate to prove Graham wrong than him being a bad guy. He clearly gets a bit offended and angry here and there(not that Graham doesn’t either). I really wish he would have been more consistent and not kinda exaggerated points to prove his point. Disappointed in both these guys and I need to say I am a bit biased because I want Graham to be right
Or he's using one of those technicalities like "no two objects can occupy the same place" therefore the umber of objects must equal the number of places (visited).
Actually this in one of the things I hate (and fear it might affect me) among people who fight stupid conspiracies (or even trying to stop humans from destroying the planet, or take drugs or anything of huge consequences) they too often see how well those tricks work and start to use them "for the greater good".
@Wintermute909 I'm really not into arguing about what someone might have meant. I rather just listen to what someone actually says. I also don't judge wether he is deceitful on purpose or if he misspoke by accident or if he just didn't understand what he was talking about. I was just pointing out what he said and that his own slide disproves his words. If you take a close look on the map, you will also notice that the majority of the sites where actually around Abydos. There really only is a few actual sites in what is marked as remote desert on the map. So Hancocks point still stands that there really wasn't so much work done in the Sahara Desert. That all of course being the case if I'm reading this map right. If I'm mistaken, please do correct me.
Good catch. We need a more people to verify it, but good catch.
An advanced civilization in the past would be labeled advanced because they learned to wipe their asses with their left hand instead of their right hand.
Hancock's always a good listen. I love his kooky hypotheses.
Finally. Someone knows the difference between a hypothesis and a theory
@@soulknife20Seeing your comment made me think the same thing! Hahaha
@@soulknife20 A rose called by any other name would still smell the same.
@@YellowKing1986 that's the kind of nonsense that has people believing men can get pregnant 😂
Words have *meaning* - not least in an intellectual debate
Dictionaries/Thresaurus exist
oh i've been waiting for this 😂
Thank you for saying Graham should fund archaeologists to search where he thinks we should be looking. Put his money where his mouth is, as the saying goes. But he wont. - said as an archaeologist
The worst is that Flint recovered from chemo shortly before.
To be fair to Graham, we today right now with our global society have places with completely uncontacted tribes out there and still have people all over the world that still live like hunter gatherers. If all humans vanished today, I bet in 1,000 years the vast majority of what we've built will have turned to dust or reclaimed entirely by nature. Hell a car can rust away if exposed to elements in a decade or two.
Which of these ‘uncontacted tribes’ would you say qualify as a ‘global, seafaring civilization’?
@rosifervincent9481 you missed the point but its ok
@@sward0483 I’ll put you down as a ‘don’t know’.
@@rosifervincent9481 put it down however you want, you're still missing the point.
There was once a pseudo-documentary series on Discovery, where they theorized how much time would it take for signs of civilization to cease if humans disappeared. In 1000 years there would still be quite a lot of ruins, but put in another 0 to make it 10000 years and literally only gigantic engineering feats like Hoover Dam would even have a chance of still existing.
Here is the usual full support for channel growth.
So, GH admits that the Piri Reis map is full of inaccuracies but still wants to use it as indisputable evidence?
Think of it like this. The map doesn't get the shape of the coastlines or islands exactly right, but it does show a large southern landmass which appears to be Antarctica.
@@spracketskooch It shows only South America. Every person who read what is written on this map knows this.
Antarctica being depicted on this map was debunked decades ago, however, scammers like Hancock don't care what is written on this map, so he uses it to sell his bs.
Joe's expressions are just the best lol
Even if you excavate every square inch of coast line this guy will claim that his advanced civilization would live entirely on boats. It's like disproving Russel's Teapot existence. But he should digging, he might stumble upon something interesting, I just doubt it will be an ancient empire.
Lmfao Metatron please finish reacting to that video. This has been great and hilarious.
I kind of take Hancocks suggestions with a grain of salt.
Maybe I’m alone, but I think it’s kind of fun to imagine what could’ve been before any of us were around.
I’m not gonna stand at the top of the building though and shout that it’s true… But I’m willing to listen to the guy and maybe suspend disbelief.
Suspend disbelief maybe. It can be fun to think of fantasy.
But the real history is so much cooler. Look at genetics and you can see the history of migrations and movements of people. How connected we all are, so called “races” mixing constantly.
Many of the questions Graham pretend haven’t been answered, have been answered and they’re so cool. I encourage you to learn more about it.
I agree. I mean he has some points of which I would say it is worth to help him tom find out more. But he also gets on that "I believe/I wish"-side where nithing is proofed.
However I hate this black and white talk where people act like or you fully have to dislike him or you fully have to believe what he says.
Sadly it seems a lot of people in this comments are that way. Just read the jokes they made.
@@TheBrendon67 this is a great mindset, but when you actually spend considerable time listening to him as i did you start to realize theres pretty sizable cracks in his claims
I appreciate your balance and generally fair view on covering this
I think space-rabbits built these structures using big carrot-hammers from another dimension. Prove me wrong please.
Naa
Absoloutley!! Then spiders from Mercury came and eat up all the space- rabbits, this is why its a lost civilization.
I think you are missing the parsnip - pickaxes
Mr. Dibble sounds like a space bunny name. Coincidence?
And I heard that you painted abs on your forehead so people would think you are smart.
For north americans, it looks like a heated debate, for sicilians, it looks like a very polite family gathering...
🤣 I was married to a Sicilian for 20 years, you're spot on. Holidays were LOUD.
Hancock is making the claim, it his burden to provide evidence to support it; saying that his unsupported claims have to be disproved is ridiculous.
The thing is as long as there is no sound evidence, is theory can survive in vacuum. It works because it's basically impossible to find evidence to debunk is theory because he's protected by the "You didn't search well enough... or here".
@@sailormatlac9114 It's not a theory at least in the scientific sense it's at best a hypothesis. Having a "theory" about who shot JFK is not the same as the theory of gravity.
Welcome to 20 years ago. The entire thing he's advocating for is further investigation. You fool. Try listening next time
@@richter6699 no he's not he's grifting. he's making claims which lack any evidence so he can grift from the gullible then whining and denigrating others when they point out there is 0 evidence to support hancock's claims. he could put his money where his mouth is and put up his own money, which would be tax deductible so cost him nothing or get netflix to pony up cash or crowd fund to sponsor a dig. That hancock has never even lifted a finger to do that is a tell that he even he knows he's a grifter.
@@richter6699So why not do it himself? He knows where to look and has the money. Why isn't Graham digging to prove his ideas?
He had 20 years to do it and the only thing he produced are books with 1960's fantasies and "documentaries".
fun fact "ice" actually goes with "dry". like the antarctica is the biggest desert of the world, because it's all ice, no water and therefore dry.
I view Hancock as very entertaining and i think "Thats an interesting view and stories" Then i continue with my life. People should relax more 🤷♂️
The problem starts when he is constantly whining how much cancelled he is, despite being super famous and having popular show.
Oh, and ofc i "love" the "don't trust the science" rabbit hole
Love the long form content. It feels like I'm hanging out with my Sicilian Uncle rambling about history. Very fun, very cool.
Most of Hancock's arguments can be used for a variety of mythical/fantasy creatures...
Yep exactly......except for pixies because they are actually, totally, 100% real!
Except you need to prove that crypto monsters exist at all. We know that the Egyptians and Khmer empire existed but we can't explain how they know extremely advanced astrological patterns that take place over 26000 years that even we only recently discovered ourselves, and then how they built monuments whose construction is often Completely impossible to explain that match the stars locations on dates 10,000+ years before their time.
A knowledge of these things and construction techniques we don't even have an understanding of TODAY means that something is going on, period
@@scleless1342 Likewise, you need to prove Hancock's global advanced civilization existed at all. You also need to prove that these civilizations knew extremely advanced astrological patterns that take place over 26.000 years, as you claimed. The same goes for your last claim about star location dates 10.000 years before their time.
If you have any sources for the claims you just made, feel free to cite them.
@@scleless1342 "Except you need to prove that crypto monsters exist at all. "
Rhinos and gorillas used to be considered cryptids.
@@scleless1342Just because you can't figure it out, doesn't mean they couldn't. Sounds like a skill issue on your part.
They are happy to let us dig anywhere and perform analysis. We want to know more, always. But when we find the thing again we have to stop, rebury and limit access. Its nothing to freak out about. It happens all the time.
Reacting to Graham Hancock is all well and good, how about reacting to Tony Hancock?
What about Tony Danza? There are zero docs on his work.
I think reacting to Herbie Hancock is a must!
@@DoctorPhobos Come on, he's all fingers and thumbs!
They have been showing this Bahamas site since 2000's on tv and disproved it even then. I too would like to think that there is an opportunity for a larger civilization but the probability is low and will remain low because of the sheer size under water.
You can say a lot about Graham, but he is absolutely honest. You can't say the same about Flint.
Exactly. People seem to have forgotten who lied in this debate.
@@thegreengouf56 Hancock lied in this debate, not Flint. All "lies" of Flint were already explained by Flint himself. Hancock, on the other hand, still believe in his made up stories.
You guys are either ignorants, or belong to a cult.
I’ve never seen any documentary that doesnt have bits of opinions. If they remove hancocks work from documentary, half of netflix’s docs also get removed. Totally agree metatron.
Graham's whole career has been founded on the argument of "YEH BUT YOU CAN'T RULE IT OUT!!!" Loll
That's actually the best way to investigate things. Why tf are you gonna rule something out that you can't prove? This is why Flint Dibble has been constantly getting debunked the passed few months and have validated Graham's claims
@ghstletter5978 shh, dont you know if the overlords haven't said so, then it's not true for sure
@ I spent 10 years professionally investigating crime and I can tell you the best way to investigate is to gather evidence. Graham admitted he has none.
@reoki5451 so did you investigate crime from thousands of years ago? Flint Dibble's X acct is literally him having a meltdown. Dan Richard debunked him along with other people. Ego has no place in investigating truth. Lazy investigators will close cases. Lmao
@reoki5451 so, would you say that because you haven't found evidence yet, then it's pointless to investigate any further
Just think about how different the reaction video would be if instead of stone age history would be roman history, how different would metatron react to someone like graham
The Roman’s had spacecraft and visited every planet in our galaxy and also I just smoked a whole bunch of crack! -Graham Hancock probably
Exactly, he definitely put on the kid gloves for this one. I wish he kept the same energy here that he had for that tik tok lady claiming Rome wasn't real.
@@dylansmith3184 For once he was open minded... 80% of written history is bullshit.. if you think otherwise I suggest reading and researching.. ffs you ARE on internet... learn how to use it..
@@SuperSeytan666
Let me go read some of that.
Wait, but 80% is bullshit though.
So how does that work?
Where does one go?
If Graham was talking about civilizations we all know existed, there would be no controversy whatsoever. Obviously
An obsidian edge can get to 4 molecules wide if my memory is right
Flint Dibble does such a great job in this of showing that, while an ancient advanced civilization would surely be cool, the stuff actual archeologists are doing these days is just as cool! Why do we feel the need to invent an unverified history when the actual history we have is so interesting!!!
Like what?
@@blackhawk8920 like gobekli tepe.
I find him a real weasel actually
@@michelbraun4858 not as cool but still interesting.
@@michelbraun4858 ?....
Holy Schmoley! These two look like Larry David vs Doctor Demento! 🤣🤣🤣
I totally see it!
I don't know if someone has commented this before but I do recommed to watch Miniminuteman breakdown of the Hancock Netflix series, as he does a good job of pointing the flawed logic of Hancock.
I'm not against lisening to people with theories that go against our current understanding (I belive it can be useful when it comes to think different and advance a field), but I do thing is important to remmember that if it is something you are not an expert in is much easier to be trick by faulty logic.
Mr. Dibble is an excellect if not a great orator. He displayed a marvelous evidences and proofs that who we are once. And it sadly shows that for thousands of years we as human species lived in this world, settling down and making a civilization really is hard like how hard to get a house.
An hour long vid metatron? Get it mayne! I’m here for it, especially when it comes with my favorite, pseudo archeological madman , Hancock
Flint Dibble looks exactly like what someone named Flint Dibble should look like.
So you just 'steal' some over used comment from others? Say something that is actually interesting about the topic
If you have nothing to bring to the conversation then your a wasting everyone’s time
Thank God then Hancock is not named Handcock
NPC
"Jamie can you roll up Flint Dibbles sleeves?"
If you wear an Indiana Jones costume you automatically fail
24:09 and at this point we know the real reason Flint hates Hancock. He cant have anything fracture Flint's dear old dibble daddies findings. This is more about protecting family legacy more then finding the truth of our story. Not just dibbles and his cohorts but all of us.
☝️here you can see someone who definitely didn't ignore most of an hour long video to pick a point that tenuously supports his pre-established conclusions.
@DaddyWarlocks and here ☝️you can see someone who definitely doesn't know I watched this whole hour long video, the full podcast on Joe Rogan, multiple videos on others channels about dibble and Hancock's battles. Dedunking has videos on the harassment dibble has subjected Hancock too. Also about this podcast where dibble gave false and misleading information to prove his arguments. There are also 2 other podcasts on joe Rogan post this podcast where they actually talk about dibbles misinformation. Now to have this much hate and animosity against a guy simply asking questions from another point of view is crazy unless you have alterior motives behind your attacks and I would say protecting daddies legacy in his field is definitely on the top of someone's list I would expect another daddy like yourself would expect that from your seed as well
Ancient civilization of the gaps exists as long as there is even the slightest gap.
You can't really try to find something in a targeted way, if "it could be anywhere you haven't looked".