Thank you for this video WoA. You really did a great job of overviewing the work done in the region over the last 3-4 decades. Very succinct and easy to understand! I did my PhD on ground/polished stone artefacts from the Late Epipaleolithic and early Neolithic of the Southern Levant. I actually worked on material from the site Shubayqa 1 in Eastern Jordan that you show a picture of at 08:43-09:00! Great to see our site referenced. It appears that people like Hancock and Co. have a really hard time understanding stone tool technology and prehistoric stone masonry and artistry. It is almost as if they forget that stone (in addition to wood, bone, shell, fibres etc.) was the main material(s) people had to work with. Humans and our ancestors have been shaping stone (with other stones) for more than 2 million years. People didn’t much else to do and got really good at it! Can’t blame them entirely, because unfortunately research of past stone technologies (especially within Paleolithic archaeology) has been heavily focused on flaked stone tools, like flint/chert knives, arrowheads etc. Until the 1990s very little attention was given to the study of prehistoric ground/abraded/polished stone tools. This has changed though! And we now know a lot more about how people shaped and used “ground” stone tools like mortars and querns of coarser igneous and sedimentary rock. Another reason we know less about the process of shaping these rock types is also that the process leaves a lot less traces than other methods of shaping (rock). In flaked/chipped stone technology, people flaked pieces of stone like flint/chert and this usually left lots of flint flakes behind on the ground (for us archaeologists to find) and allows specialists to reconstruct the process from the intermediate steps, i.e. the different flakes left behind. This doesn’t happen as much when shaping “coarser” stone types. Here you would also perhaps flake a basalt boulder into a more manageable size or a preform, but from there your main mode of shaping was abrasion, i.e. shaping by rubbing a stone against another (sometimes with water and sand), and pecking, i.e rapid/short percussion/impaction with another stone. These processes should and would rarely result in flakes but rather the byproduct is small/tiny stone fragments and stone dust released from the boulder you were shaping. This dust and these tiny fragments are almost impossible to find during an archaeological excavation, meaning that all the intermediate steps in the production process are lost. Only preforms or accidentally broken pieces are left behind, and again unlike flaked stone tools, mistakes are easier to correct/remove (by pecking/abrading) so fewer mistakes are also found. Anyways, I just wanted to say thank you for sharing this research and letting people know that people of the past were really good at using and shaping all kinds of stone (and other materials as well!).
@@craigmorris559 No, or rather I have visited the Sinai, but only on holiday. As an archaeologist/researcher I've mainly worked in Jordan and Iran, primarily on late Epipaleolithic, Natufian and early Neolithic (PPNA) sites.
Nobody is believing shit… ur taking out of context. It’s about asking questions having an open mind and actually looking everywhere not acting like we just know everything… this is just another TH-camr piggybacking what people want to hear on their side.
"You know, we gather here every year, we build some temporary thing, then we disperse and do it all again next year. Wouldn't it be better if we just put a bit more effort in and used rocks? After twenty years it pays for itself. We could decorate it up nice and. . " "Dude! For the last time - we are Hunter Gatherers. We look in hedges, dig up grubs and huck rocks at mammoths. That's that"
Or. You know how the last place had really good strong wood for carving and building? Yah? This place ain’t got shit in terms of that. But it’s got rocks, lots and lots of rocks. It’s a little harder to work with, but it’ll do.
@@however-yh2jy There’s actually one two miles to the north east built around the same time, it just fell apart because wood+time, but the evidence is still there.
"Huck" is a new one on me, so thanks for that alongside the chuckle. We have a presumably related "hoik" in northeastern England. which in other parts means to lift rather than throw. Fascinating stuff! This explains too why writing was subsequently invented, for "No mammoths" notices to warn the big hairy pachyderms away from the settlement after the abandonment of traditional rock-throwing ways.
hello I am a French sculpture teacher and passionate about archeology... SO BRAVO!!! finally, coherent and structured work on this founding subject of our cultures. YES we must clearly understand this extraordinary mutation and feel this pre-agricultural human journey.
I do find it interesting that Graham Hancock demands evidence of a gradual progression in human development to believe it. Which does actually exist as this vid explains. Yet he has no problem believing in a high tech civilisation of which we can find no trace. Don't expect a reply from him anytime soon David.
Clueless , you ever heard of the ice age ? Do you realise how much ice was all over the planet ? Do you realise how much that ice would weigh??? Any trace would of been ground to dust under the glaciers .. Look up the London hammer , then come with an opinion pfft
@@craigwatson4413 Might be worth your time to look at the extent of the Ice Age glaciers and, more importantly, how far those glaciers were from the areas being talked about. Almost all of northern continental Europe was completely free of ice, naturally everything south was well. Maybe your magical advanced society lived in Norway and managed to remove all trace of their existence from everywhere unaffected by the glaciers?
@@craigwatson4413 *_"Any trace would of been ground to dust under the glaciers "_* But that is not evidence that there was ever anything there. And it's "would _have_ been", not would "of" been. {:o:O:}
The problem with Graham’s theories is that he often uses phrases like “suddenly”, “just pops up” and “out of nowhere”. Which gives a false impression that these advancements are not a result of technological progression. It replaces all that you’ve explained in this video with a more simplistic but dramatic alternative which caters to people’s imagination rather than sense. I’ve followed Grahams work for several years and I really like the fact that he’s made ancient history and prehistory more popular. But it’s come at a cost. The hard work of people like you and other historians and archaeologists have been over shadowed by a more “fun” and “dramatic” alternative. Thank you for your videos, they are very important.
Well, to be fair do you have a point. Graham do make people interested in the past but he also spend a lot of time complaining about experts in the area not knowing what they are talking about and that is a bit dangerous. Presenting theories without any evidence as facts is becoming more and more popular in many different subjects and far too many people are too lazy to bother fact checking things today. Graham is charismatic and a competent writer, I just wish he started to write science fiction books instead, he clearly have a talent for it.
Díky, přisvojím si z Vaší reflexe nový terminus technicus přesně postihující povahu věci: "dramatická alternativa", nebo lépe "zábavná dramatická alternativa". Přidám z jiných povedených pojmenování "nevzdělaný křižák" a ze sebe "assasin vědy". Dík! Až Vám bude smutno, sledujte prosím kanály Daniken, Childress, Tsoukalos, Sitchin, Sueneé, Blochová...nakonec ´Úžasný svět záhad" Tom 49/44/29//13/22/57 Thanks, I will give you a new Terminus technicus from your reflection exactly affecting the nature of the thing: "dramatic alternative", or a better "entertaining dramatic alternative". I will add from other hilarious names "uneducated Crusader" and from myself "Assasin Science". Thanks! When you feel sad, please watch the channels Daniken, Childress, Tsoukalos, Sitchin, Suene, Bloch ..... Tom 49/44/29//13/22/57
The sad thing is that history really doesn't need the added hyperbole or intentional falsehoods used by Hancock and his ilk. There aren't a ton of great ancient history communicators where some scientific disciplines, like those relating to space, are blessed with a plethora of amazing public voices. That's one of the reasons I really appreciate Dr. Miano, he has not only the passion for the material, but the ability to speak clearly, effectively, captivatingly, and with a manner that just oozes with live and respect for the material. Dr. Miano is one of the few ancient history voices I feel comfortable calling anywhere approaching Sagan-esque. Like the great Carl Sagan, Dr. Miano also obviously has such passion for the material the has devoted his life to and is able to infect listeners with that same sense of excitement and reverence. Not to be forgotten, because it may be one of the most important aspects of Sagan's work, but Dr. Miano also never comes across as anything, but patient, kind, understanding, humble, and willing to have a conversation with anyone about the material and always approaches it in good faith. These days those are exceedingly rare qualities for anyone to possess one or even two of, but ancient history is lucky to have someone that happens to embody all those qualities. It is voices like his we so desperately need to push back against Hancock and his fellow grifters in the age of anti-intellectualism. I simply can't thank Dr. Miano enough for what he does because he manages to do all the above and also remain extremely fun to watch, perhaps the most important of all these accolades, because if no one wanted to watch his content the other qualities wouldn't matter.
The strange thing is that in GH's world his lost civilization apparently popped up out of nowhere and then disappeared without a trace because of some catastrophe. He doesn't provide any evidence of its development thru time. It is just there one day and gone the next. Its survivors then went on and introduced overnight technological developments elsewhere even though the evidence in those areas indicates gradual technological development. All without the survivors bothering to simply relocate and rebuild their own civilization which they obviously still had the technology to do if they were spreading it all over the place. GH is so full of logical inconsistencies and cherry picking of data that it is amazing that anyone takes him seriously.
They were more capable than today, given than they had to figure out and make everything by themselves, unlike the current era where most people are uncapable of doing so many things, just because they know how to use a computer or a smartphone they believe to be superior when everything they use is really made by a long chain of other people who produce materials parts and assembling.
you're right, he thinks wizards high on salvia and ayahuasca were so spiritually advanced they built ancient high technology and transmitted advanced esoteric knowledge with their minds, man...@@davidclark573
A long-time Graham Hancock fan here. What a brilliant presentation of facts, it completely changed my perspective on the GT site and its implications for contemporary archaeology. Thank you for putting this together. Would love to see you on Joe Rogan someday! Cheers
@MattGrandis Klaus Schmidt dated GT to 22 000 bc. He died in 2014. It has since been redated to 8,000 bc...odd isn't it? In the very jor rogan podcast episode, Hancock uses Schmidts dating hence his theory for a missing civilization. The new dating oddly makes Gobekle tepe younger than Jericho.
@@anthonyoer4778Hm, looks like my comment didn't go through, probably because I included links. I can't find any evidence that Schmidt dated the site older than 11,000 years. There's an interview with Smithsonian Magazine from 2008 where Schmidt talks about the site being 11,000 years old, and on the website of University Münster there are still links to his lectures (2013/2014, right before his death) where he, too, said the site is 11,000 years old. If he ever mentioned an earlier date, his research up until his death must have led him to the conclusion that the site was 11,000 years old.
Usually when someone- ESPECIALLY someone who’s expertise is not in the field they are speaking of- disagrees with an overwhelming consensus of the scientific community based on a “lack” of evidence, there isn’t actually any lack of evidence, just their OWN lack of KNOWLEDGE of the existing evidence.
the personal lack of facts and then confusion of hypothesis with conclusion simplifies the theory making of those who cannot be troubled with the pesky problem of learning when it interferes with their making money.
Well, keep in mind that, like the video said, those other sites weren't found yet. That episode was like a decade ago. His right to hypothesize was real at the time. Shermer's prediction has turned out accurate though.
Hancock has already made up his mind. it's very profitable to do his grift, and very popular. he's not the only one either. no amount of evidence will change people like them.
@@jzakora >His right to hypothesize was real at the time. Not really. Any reasonable person in good faith would have assumed that the missing developmental links just weren't found yet. His explanation was a stretch, even for someone unfamiliar with how painstaking archeological discovery actually is.
@@lee.morrisif they're capable of invention autonomously, why are the ancient people whose work they're being credited with incapable of it? It seems very weird that ancient non white civilizations needed someone else to make these things for them, but then it's assumed the hypothetical group who are being given credit did not need outside help to invent these things.
I had been skeptical of Hancock’s theories, but was entranced by the idea of a lost civilization. After viewing the debate between Dibble and Hancock and finding your videos, I am not convinced by Hancock’s (lack of) evidence. I enjoy your videos based on their fastidiousness and civility. Thank you.
My problem with ALL these "advanced lost civilization" theories is that if they were so advanced why everything they left is literally stone age stuff? If they could use Hi-Tech tools then how come the "proof" of them existing is always just a bunch of rocks put together? Look at modern society, we literally leave more plastics and metal stuff behind than anything out of rocks.
I also used to be one who subscribed to this ancient high civilization idea! Turns out I was just uneducated! The more I learn and the more I research into ancient history, it all makes perfect sense! I was truly a perfect example of Dunning Kreuger. Thanks for all you do to educate us on this phenomenal history! The more I learn the more I realize their is no one hiding the truth, their is no one lying to us! This is our history as humans and its amazing to learn about!
However I must add, if it wasn't for people like Graham I would have never became so captivated by our ancient ancestors! Soo thank you Graham and all other confused ancient history buffs!
It's very smart to correct one's mistakes as new evidence comes into light. The sad part is these fringe youtubers and writers have a cult following of drone like individuals that you cannot reason with, who will ignore literally all data, will go into heavy cognitive dissonance and nothing will change their minds.
When we are young it is easier to jump into trends that seem revolutionary from our own naive point of view (and oftenly very simplistic which require no learning or studying), good thing that you could go past that phase, many don't.
I find the more I study and search out answers the more questions appear. It has become obvious to me that neither Hancock or the structured archeologist is capable of satisfying. It is enjoyable looking into all the information available and attempting to sort the wheat from the chaff in my own mind. It is nothing more than a futile exercise for any one individual or group to form a collective agreement on the unknown. By all means do have fun guessing and sharing everyone
@@winstonsears6293 Although there are plenty uncertainties, there is a huge difference between fringe pseudo-scientists like Hancock and the scientific method. One should not ignore that. Guessing might be fun, but if it's not in accordance with the scientific data, what use is it?
Graham's line of argumentation strikes me as very similar to that of creationists, asking for evidence of transitional forms and then claiming his own ignorance of those transitional forms as evidence that a much wilder claim with even less evidence is somehow the more reasonable explanation
As both an archaeologist and a religious person who believes in a fully scientific explanation for the world, I find this sort of thing very frustrating, since the evidence is so abundant but is often communicated very poorly to the general public, so so much has to be established to help these people understand. Thankfully folks like Dr. Miano are doing great work in communicating this research to address specific misconceptions like this!
@@SaszaDerRoyt That's because Creationists don't worship a God, they worship a book, and if they can't cram the handprints of the universe INTO that book, they ignore it. It's infuriating.
thing is, like most creationist apologists, Hancock knows the evidence exists, he has been shown it multiple times before and then just claims it doesn't exist whenever there's no-one in the room who can present it on the spot. Hancock wouldn't ever agree to be on Rogan if MiniMinuteMan or Dr M were the guests, you know, actual historians, because they would have already looked up his arguments and have evidence ready to go. Instead, he always goes on opposite a physicist or biologist, someone who doesn't have expert knowledge in the field.
This is a false equivalence. Graham is distinctly from the school of secularistic deconstructionism of the postmodern ilk. He uses this methodology to enhance his own bias in a field that requires physical evidence, of which, he has none. Creationists, conversely, are just confused religious types who don’t understand that the scientific method is not applicable in matters of faith, God etc. These subjects are not falsifiable or provable. So its pointless to ask a creationist for evidence & it’s pointless for a creationist to attempt to find it. It’s not pointless to ask Graham for evidence. It’s a requirement given the subject matter.
GH: "we haven't found that intermediary technology". What we definitely didn't find is a super advanced global civilization and it seems that doesn't bother him at all. Incredible.
If you would have told people a century ago that we'd be going to the moon, having tele conferences, computers, self driving cars and stuff like that they would have called you crazy and that there was no evidence of such developments. Hancock is a nutcase who is selling a book, a fantasy book.
@MikTuo- Why don't you actually go and look up what's written about this, yourself? There's not a single unexplained phenomenon around at this point. Workable explanations have been theorized and in many cases experimentally proved. Nobody still believes that the pyramids of Egypt weren't built by Egyptians, to take one, the debate is only about exactly which of the several possible methods were used.
@tohaason the modern Egyptians are not the same as the classic Egyptians, and the classic Egyptians were not the same as the prehistoric Egyptians. The Egyptians, as you, in the 21st century see them, DID NOT BUILD THE PYRAMIDS. There are workers on the plateau who's ancestors have been excavating for well over a thousand years. They are more connected to the pyramids than anyone in modern Egypt and THEY came from somewhere else.
@@jamesbael6255 The Egyptians back then were the Egyptians of that time, how much or how little the population has changed over time - little or much - is of no importance. The point is and was only that the people of the time, with the (well known) tools at the time, built the pyramids, and there is zero need to involve andvanced-disappeared-without-a-trace civilizations of the Graham Hancock type to explan the pyramids. Or anything else in the ancient world.
It's funny how similar the rhetoric is to evolution denial. "Here's a gap, therefore it *must* be filled with [extraordinary and unsubstantiated thing]." I suppose that and creationism and ancient aliens are really just different flavors of the same thing.
🎯 In a nutshell here is the difference between academic inquiry and pseudoscience: 1 - academics seek to understand based upon all the evidence we see. As such what follows represents basing conclusions upon = *KNOWNS.* These are further subject to outside consensus so as to ascribe plausibility or not. 2 - pseudoscience on the other hand does not seek to provide the individuals answers. Their entire focus is essentially to deny academic conclusions and that is justified by pointing to incredulity-based argumentation premised upon _"what if......"_ What follows however is only subject to = personal belief rather than a consensus view. They create supposed "gaps" in academic understanding so as to justify filling those in with their whimsical assumptions. Hence pseudoscience represents attempting to generate supposedly plausible explanations based upon........ = *UNKNOWNS* - at which point Occam's Razor kicks in. Moral: pseudoscience narratives fundamentally reflect stereotypical _"argumentum ad ignorantiam"_ - or "arguing from ignorance". Conversely as you alluded to religions also therefore represent the same paradigm whereby the individual is assuming validity based upon a desire to "believe" with only themselves as the supposed arbiter of that claimed validity. It results in pure, subjective "validation" which is only real for the person contingent upon a desire to assume thusly. They are 2 fleas on the same dog of assumptive logic. Enjoy your day.
@@bobobobos2425 A supposed "scientist" who does not abide by principles of proper scientific inquiry when forming conclusions they desire to challenge accepted facts = is not a scientist then....... They represent "fringe opinions" who are misrepresenting science - usually for economic purposes as they stereotypically monetize their specious claims. Moral: there is no "club" = but there certainly are "grifters" in the LAHT industry - and it most definitely is an industry.
Except the aliens have had 100's of millions of years to get here and the religious thing may only be a few 100k years old. The idea that we aren't alone or that advanced civilizations can figure out how to travel through space is far from extraordinary. Like suggesting humans will never learn to build computers after it took us thousands of years to learn how to stack big stones. Must be since some 'experts' seem to think they know stuff.
These theories rely on 2 things: 1- criticizing any and all evidence to other people's theories 2- distracting you from their lack of evidence for their own theories Notice that they will just spend hours discrediting archeologists for every little tiny detail, but never put into question if a drawing of a bucket in 2 cultures is proof of alien contact
Occam's razor, when faced with a lack of evidence and multiple possibilities, the simplest explanation is more likely. Complex alien civilizations for which there is literally no evidence - is not a simple explanation - therefore more evidence is required.
@@docvaliant721 Solid rebuttal. I'll try to remember that one. In the meantime, I'd recommend actually watching the video in question before popping off with your inane platitudes.
I would like to point out how much quality work is showcased here. Not only all the historical research but adding additional context to the places and discussions while staying respectful and giving sources. Great work Dr. Miano
But Graham is just asking questions... And then completely ignoring the answers because they don't fit the narrative of his next pseudo-science fiction book.
I love conspiracy theories and alternative history debates for the entertainment value. But, also it then promotes videos like this, where by amazing public education videos are made for general betterment of our understanding of our history. Thank you WoA for this awesome video! ❤
"Even Chris Dunn won't be found at Gobekli Tepe putting a straight edge up to one of the T-pillars"... bravo sir! A masterful video, as every. thank you for your hard work and research 👍
Thank you so much for making this video, Dr. Miano: The TH-cam "DIY Archaeology," community was severely in need of a comprehensive effort to inform the community of work that has been done (in some or even many cases) many decades ago that paints exactly the picture that Graham Hancock (and others) have been claiming for years does not exist: That the move towards megalithic construction (sites) was a gradual one, and most certainly did not, "appear out of nowhere." I know you put a lot of hard work into this video and judging from a brief glance at the comments section, your efforts were well worth the while. I see dozens and dozens of comments reflecting a lot of, "wow, I never knew that," and, "I used to be a proponent of the lost civilization hypothesis, and your videos have slowly assisted me in emerging from ignorance." Great work, Dr. Miano. You really are a gifted educator and an invaluable member of the community.
Best comment here Alex! I would love Dr Miano to know how very important he and his work are, and how much it's appreciated by those of us who are very alarmed that so many people actually believe GH's garbage! Thank you for echoing my thoughts!
@@cattymajiv couldn't agree more. And that's exactly what GH's stuff is: Pure friggin garbage. And I feel so bad for all of the people who are pulled into his sensationalist idiocy.
Lmfao: “used to be a proponent of the lost civilization hypothesis, and your videos have slowly assisted me in emerging from *ignorance*." Not very subtle 😂 What’s wrong with a lost civilization hypothesis anyways? Did we not lose a civilization or two along the way? 🤔
@@CoercedJab if you're going to be completely objective with yourself you must admit that believing in Graham's lost civilization hypothesis requires ignorance of certain archeological facts. I mean, ignorance is basically the crux of Graham's theories. It's all "lost knowledge." What is loss of knowledge if not ignorance?
@@markwrede8878 because you compare it with our technological progression and can't conceive a society based on other valeus that didn't contemplate technology and life the same way we do. This isn't the only way evolution (or involution) works or should work, there might have been other forms of advancement.
@@syyylvo No. It is you who conceive alien involvement because there would be no efficient capital technique, so you cannot conceive of slow and demanding tech.
@@syyylvo it’s known in anthropology that the least technologically advanced civilizations are the ones with the most complex languages. I agree advancement is multifaceted. I’m not sure the current state of physics is advancement in evolutionary terms. It seems likely to kill a lot of people. The tech might advance but the society may devolve.
"They were smarter than that!" This is my father's typical response to people always arguing from personal incredulity about the dumbfounding advanced abilities of the ancients. People just assumed because they are ancient that they are therefore "primitive".. My father is an archaeologist and doctoral student at Tel Aviv University, by the way.
@@ALook_at_my_picture_ in the very least they demonstrate that the person who made the statement has some credibility since he has rigorous training from TAU. Anyone who knows anything about archaeology knows about this university
@@ALook_at_my_picture_You're saying that nothing can ever be proven? I'm pretty sure this video shows that the evidence Hancock claims he wanted does in fact exist. If you're trying to be trollish about it, you can say that you still need to research and verify the evidence presented is accurate, but that's easily done by a professional reporter such as Hancock.
Hancock's theories are called imaginative, but it seems to me like a severe LACK of imagination. Reality may be mundane, but it is far, far more complex and fascinating than a lost civilization.
Excellent! I'm so happy to see a respectful answer to a question that I think was honest. I am so used to hearing fringe ideas being shut down and silenced without regard or anything but condescension and hatefulness. I really like Graham Hancock because I believe he is genuine, and I really like you Dr. M., because you are fair. I've commented on many of your videos and you always read and respond. You never bashed me for thinking the alternate history hypothesis was plausible. After Ancient Apocalypse came out, I was enthralled with the idea. Graham gets so much hate from scholars, but he won my interest in the subject. It's you, Dr. Miano, that clarified on the facts. You took the time to make a reasonable argument. If scientists shut down fringe ideas without ever respecting the who and why behind them, we'll be hard-pressed to find out something new. Your thoughtfulness and dedication inspires me so much Dr. Thank you for clarifying a magnificent mystery for me. When I win the lotto, we're goin' to Egypt haha.
Funny how Graham says because archeologists have not excavated the entire earth their theories cant be proven but when Graham has a fantasy without digging up the earth it must be true.
What the heck. He mentioned that they used a granite pestle and mortar and built structures out of LIMESTONE then 300 yrs later we are to believe they had the ability to cut gigantic stones of GRANITE/BASALT weighting multiple tons cart them up a mountain miles away from where they were quarried?? Come on, your kidding right!!!
Let's explain this with the 3 little pigs. The first pig builds a house of straw, the second builds a house of wood, and the third builds a house of brick. Then we wait 10000 years. The straw has rotted, the wood has rotted, and the bricks are still around. You conclude that brick buildings came out of nowhere, spontaneously! They must've been taught how to build by an alien race! Stoneworking is a very old craft, and woodworking is probably even older. There's no evidence that any of these things appeared suddenly, they only seem sudden from an archaeological perspective because so much of the contemporary work has been lost to time.
Magnificent video. I'm myself a scientist in a different field (astrophysics) who enjoys learning of ancient history and coming across a video like this to respond in an educated and sound way to unsustained provocative theories from GH was certainly very inspirational. Certainly I liked it and decided to suscribe to this amazing channel.
oh boy all of a sudden , a guy with no degree a stranger on the internet , you whole hearted believe him, because he said he did research , oh gee the guy in the videos evidence is a dead baby monkey 24:17 lolololol you never graduated did you 26:48 a relief valve relief hole? yet the picture he shows on the right IS NOT A HOLE , where is the relief??!!!? hi huh mr. oh boy this guy did amazing research
I had a bias going into this video since I like Graham, but your video was well-made, and you helped me keep an open mind during the video. Thanks for the video!
Good example for such carvings (petroglyphs) are the ones found in the Konkan Coast of India. Some of them are even contemporary with Gobekli Tepe! Look for the sites of Kasheli, Pansaimal, Ukshi
The ritual burial and abandonment of sites is incredibly interesting. I wish an advanced civilization had taught them how to write so we could know what they were thinking!
I wonder how they know it was a "ritual burial" in stead of other asshole humans fucking other human's shit up. We see that stuff all the time trough out history and even in current times. Just come in, ruin other people's day, break their stuff.. Mind you, I'm just a random guy with a shower thought here
The problem is that we don't know what type of writing they used. For example the Inca used a knotted cord as a form of writing and communication. That knowledge was completely lost with the Spanish conquest.
Few video's warrant a recommendation for "all" to watch... this "is" one. Amazing amount of rich content for others to build upon... a game changing opportunity. Bravo to the author(s) of this video!
IMHO it's not a lack of education - it's intentional obfuscation to keep his source of revenue secure. It's the same reason he regularly defames archaeology so that his fans won't go looking for more detailed knowledge that would refute his flimsy claims.
He is educated and was a rather reputable journalist on social and economy (work for the economist etc) until suddenly he U turn into alternative archeology.....
@@redemissarium I don't need help interpreting facts. There is no 'alternative archeology'. Just the rantings of willfully ignorant religious types not interested in facts that disagree with their fantasies.
Think of the complexity of negotiating trade and communicating what you had to offer and what you required in return as part of that trade. Cultures mingling and being influenced by trade and availability of materials and connections to other areas geographically. Incredible video. Setting a marker for Hancock
The more of your videos I watch the more I am blown away with ancient humans. Such a fascinating subject. I can't be bothered researching this myself but I really appreciate the time and effort you take to make your videos. All presented in such a way that is interesting and engaging. The world has a shortage of great educators like yourself.
@@Radzta I mean I'm realistically not going to go and send a heap of time researching this stuff myself but I enjoy learning about it. Similar to watching a documentary on something of interest but wouldn't send heaps of time to research it myself.
@@rjbennett3418 Don't you know the game was rigged? It was all a big plot to have T Swift throw the election to Biden. Or so I've been told. And I can't disprove that hypothesis, so I must accept it as true despite the lack of evidence.
Thanks for doing this. Fascinating! The Natufians have been an interest of mine for a long while. My personal hypothesis is that the Natufians expanded north with their wild rye food processing and storage technology and met another culture in Anatolia that had massive einkorn wheat resources to which the same food processing technologies could be applied. The chocolate got applied to the peanut butter and this Anatolian culture bloomed. I read a paper a while back that proposed the shift from circular to rectangular architecture was merely a response to population density and the extra corner space provided more living space in an urban environment.
I've seen the same in a few places, and it makes complete sense. Without any population pressure there seem to me to be more advantages to the round buildings, but when space and building materials both become more limited, the square or rectangle can become more advantageous. But whether the issue at the time was space or materials was not addressed by what I read. I'm sure it varies by the site.
@@cattymajiv Thanks. I guess I didn't explain that remark well. On the topic of a record of cultural evolution, I think I have read that there are both circular and rectangular constructions at Golbeki Tepe. One paper on Israeli settlements proposed the earlier structures were imitations of tents, or just force of habit of building that way from before permanent structures.
As one of Graham's biggest supporters, I absolutely love this video! It's really refreshing to get a different perspective on the matter, delivered in this nature. Phenominal video! :)
Good for you. it is good to question everything. Which is one of the (few) things I like about Hancock. I like his persistence in questioning the establishment. But he goes into snowflake mode when he doesn't get enough recognition. And he isn't the first person to ask the very same questions he is asking. My conclusion is that he does what he does to sell books/make money. The truth is we all want to make money....and this is his niche. I respect him for his ability to make money from all this. Everyone making youtube channels are all here to do the same thing.
@@weisthor0815 "some bread to the table"..... Yeah, have a look at his book sales numbers and what a BBC-Docu-hosting pays? The man has grown massively rich for a writer who claims to do non-fiction. We are talking at least double-digit millions. Personally - I know smart and well-eductated professionals like our dear host here in WoA have been explaining to Mr Hanckock for decades why this or that or more of his points are most probably wrong or not supported by anything. Yet he goes on multiplying the stuff - the same stuff he has been schooled on for decades - over and over, while heaping up considerable riches through that storytelling. I´ve stopped considering him an honest actor long ago. Just like Däniken or similar characters, there comes a point where you either have to assume the person is mentally deficient to still repeat stuff they have been corrected on over and over - or accept they are smart liars and grifters, beguiling their audience with made-up stories they know are false. I dont assume Hancock - or Daniken for that - to be stupid.
I do agree. He does have a sincerity about all of it, for sure. And truthfully, I agree with his general premise: that humans had quite stunning levels of civilizations prior to Gobekli. But he trades on Hollywood tropes and short fiction pulp to garner attention.....I mean, hey, there's nothing wrong with doing it his way. I guess I am one of the "slow and steady wins the race" kind of person. So to each his own. I still dislike his constant whining about how archeology won't lavish him with recognition. @@weisthor0815
It is good to question that’s why miano had to admit on Reddit that he got most of the dating of those sites incorrect. Spoofed they were older than they really are
Dare I say Doc that it is time for a "World of Antiquity" Netflix special? It's time for your balanced and thorough viewpoint to be heard by everyone interested in the truth of our past.
This is fantastic. You know, society and technology rarely make huge leaps in short periods of time - it's a gradual process that builds on itself, and I think the same is true for the concept of permanent communities, settlements, and cities. So if you grant that, then you would absolutely expect to see examples along the continuum between pure hunter gatherers and, let's say, Ur or Babylon; Alpha and Beta versions of "civilization" so to speak. What you've shown here is a great example of region where humans truly were beta testing the concept of settled civilization and society. It's so fascinating to me. How did they divide the labor and choose who did what? How did they divide resources? What were their languages like? What stories brought them together? Did people get excited about making the trek to a hub like Gobekli Teppe? I can imagine families and tribes from around the region packing up and making the journey, and how truly amazing it must have been to see a place like that bustling with activity for the first time. Anyway, thanks for the very thorough walk through all of this. I'll never understand why people have to make up fantastical interpretations of human history when it's already so awe inspiring.
If you would have told people 100 years ago about rockets to the moon (and it not being of cheese), Mars, Out of the solar system, about computers, self driving cars, tele conferences, they would have locked you up. Only in my life alone, I'm now 67, have I seen unimaginable developments occur and I can assure you that I've always been on top of the game. Changes can happen very fast. Just look at the speed smartphones took off. Unthinkable before the year 2000, you'd have a phone the size of a suitcase and extremly unhandy and no internet. The fact that we can communicate just like this and if need be even in real time, just sitting at home....
@@telebubba5527 To be more specific, what I meant is that on the scale of all human existence, much of our progress has been along a slow, gradual curve for both technological and societal improvement/development. If you had traced average human development in these categories from 300,000 years ago to about 500 years ago, it would be a very shallow curve. There might be a few spots where you could point to faster or slower development, I just mean on average. You're right that in the last 200 years, specifically the last 100, that curve has certainly become very steep, but this makes up a very small portion of the timeline relatively speaking. In any case, my point is simply that you would expect to find all of these gradual stages of development between hunter-gatherers and city states, and that it's really cool to have more and more of the space between those two points filled out with growing archeological finds.
Actually, very rapid technological change is normal and well documented. In about 15 years we completely changed from using horses to using cars for transport as one example.
There is always going to be a "most advanced" city in the world. Look at a city like Shanghai, or Tokyo, and compare it to an older, more "classic" city like Detroit, or Boston. If civilization fell and in 5000 years humans found Tokyo, and Detroit and realized they came from the same time period, there'd probably be some disagreement as to why there was such a discrepancy in technology. Just a thought I had.
Thank you for a video and detailed analysis. I am not a fan of Graham Hancock, however as a fan of ancient history it needs to mention that all these places are still poorly studied. Methods of excavation and study are not carried out according to modern standards everywhere. I don't agree with Graham Hancock that this place appeared suddenly, but I also disagree with scientists that this place was created by hunter-gatherers. As for me, all the accessories of civilization are already present here, and I would not be surprised if, over time, writing is also found here.
There's zero evidence of agriculture and lots of evidence of hunting and gathering. I'm not sure why you would doubt the evidence of how they fed themselves. It's pretty straightforward.
Excellent survey of the literature. I think Hancock raised valid questions but this helps answer them very well. I've wondered how many precursor megalithic structures existed undiscovered in SE Anatolia. You helped answer this. Cheers!
30 years ago, his questions would have been valid, yes. Today, not so much. Already 30 years ago the Natufians were well known but we still missed a few links in the chain. I don't really buy that Graham never heard of the last 30 years of archaeology in the area though, he is constantly looking for anything he can use in his theory so probably just ignored everything that doesn't fit for him and raised his question to win a point with the listeners who doesn't know much about the subject.
Yup agreed. And that’s what it’s all about. Imagine if all the heavyweights were debating this and not just “fringe” people or TH-cam channel creators 😂
@@CoercedJab Archaeologists aren't generally that happy to discuss strange hypothesis with no actual evidence, it isn't really what they do. Historians might be a bit more interested but they are more experts on areas with written records then pre history. Dr Miano however is an actual Historian and there are some archaeologists like Milo from Miniminute man that also debunks things like this on TH-cam. But I honestly don't think most professionals really care enough to go on things like the Seth Rogan show, they are more interested in finding out about the past themselves then to educate the masses or debunk any weird theory they hear.
Göbekli Tepe was not a settlement. There is no evidence that anyone lived there. The builders visited the site occassionally. No one besides Grandcock is asserting otherwise.
@tcolley if you were familiar with many Hunter Gatherer sites even as far west as Star Carr you'd be aware that Hunter Gatherers, or more correctly Late Mesolithic, had already built regular seasonal sites which were stayed in for extended periods, they also started exporting grains.
I value your content, and I appreciate your ability to sustain a measure of academic politeness vis-à-vis the seemingly intentional research laziness of Graham Hancock.
It's not laziness it's intentional ignorance. Hancock ignores anything that doesn't fit his narrative. We need to remember he's a journalist and not in anyway a scientist.
I'm an historian by qualification but I can tell you a lot of people are drawn to figures like Hancock because history and archaeology as an academic discipline have a real problem with gatekeeping and snobbery. Keen amateurs who are genuinely interested and perhaps have new insights or new evidence that human civilisation may be older than currently believed are often given haughty and self-important short shrift by professionals in the field, many of them often resorting to insulting or belittling behaviour. Then when it's discovered that actually human civilisation is actually older than previously thought, the professionals forget all their previous hand-waving, and taunts, and degredation of those keen amateurs and again loftily retreat their ivory towers proclaiming that obviously human civilisation is older than previously thought, and only a buffoon would claim otherwise. People like Hancock and his followers see a continuous stream of professional historians and archaeologists berating them for not operating within the rules, only to later shift the goal posts and then loftily claim the rules have changed. This is not common to other academic disciplines. In astronomy, for example, or mathematics, or biology, or sociology, or linguistics, keen amateurs may present their theories, or some esoteric insight, or some anomalous piece of evidence and they're not met with immediate scoffing, scorn, and ridicule. Instead they're patiently corrected, or it's acknowledged that their notions and evidence may actually have merit that warrants invesitgation. They're not immediately kicked to the curb with a chaser of pompous laughter. If history and archaeology as a disicpline wants fewer Graham Hancocks, its professional practitioners have to stop behaving like some priestly class of gatekeepers who will only accept and not immediately scorn the contributions of those they deem worthy or sufficiently qualified. Einstein was a patent clerk. Ramanujan was a sari salesman. Darwin was a taxidermist. Sometimes great insights come from people outside of the fold, and Hancocks will spring up left, right, and centre if they're constantly derided and mocked by their idolised discipline, only for the professionals of said discipline to turn around in a decade or so declaring that they were correct, but never, ever acknowledging that fact merely to salve the disciplines' egos.
Even just one example of such an amateur wrongfully excluded would be atleast something. None of you guys give even that because the problem you guys assert doesn't exist.
Someone who actually has historical qualifications would know that history is based on evidence, and historians would never say there is a civilization until they found evidence for it. Yet you complain that they waited for the evidence first.
Yawn. Sorry but crazy ideas that aren't backed by evidence are ignored in every field of science. And rightfully so. Scientists are not parents that are obligated to entertain children and their fantasy ideas.
@@sampagano205 Tommy Flowers Alfred Russell Wallace Frank Calvert Gudea Atra-Hasis The history of civilisation itself is just one long list of embellishments on appropriated ideas the derivation of which is then obscured in an attempt to claim ownership.. 🏴☠️
Hancock always wants evidence of any reasonable hypothesis but is happy to assume his outlandish hypotheses are correct without evidence. He should be given an award for cherry picking.
Graham Hancock's lifelong use of Psychedelic Drugs has molded his brain to expect fantastic findings that'll prove fringe theories. Real archeology is fascinating enough for me.
So many cool facts from this video! Prehistoric people ground up so much grain that they had deformities in their palms and elbows to prove it. A prehistoric village of 250 people existed for 2000 years. The summary of all the gradual advancements at the end was great. I kind of wish there was also a visual timeline showing all the advancements between early paleolithic and gobekli tepe though
@@MrShuckedSean that only proves their poor fucking diet If you want to find more scientific facts about your body listen to podcasts of Dr Anthony Chaffee buen provecho
@I_dreamed_my_name_was_Brandon would you like to enlighten us with specific claims? Or just complain that more people don’t also pledge fealty to your guru
Absolutely fantastic! Even setting Hancock aside, it’s a really great piece of science-communication to lay viewers such as myself who are just interested in this paleo-archaeology/pre-history stuff. Great to see the developmental time line all laid out like that. I’ve never seen it set out clearly like that before. Much appreciated!
@@hpglake3231 Yeah. Sadly, as it’s not original research, I don’t think it would make a professional journal. Definitely worthy of publication in a mainstream popular format though! BBC or something!
Dr. Miano you are awesome. It's infuriating watching conspiracy theorists disingenuously spreading emotionally and intellectually coddling falsehoods. Thank you.
@@chaostheory6143 The proponents usually use the conspiracy theory tactics of unfalsifiable claims, moving definitions, straw-man arguments, and misunderstanding of other view points to reach emotional charged conclusions that they have a "true" or "secret" knowledge that the experts, as some sort of unified block, are trying to suppress.
Very well done. This is not the first time Graham Hancock has been clearly and correctly told why he is wrong with references... he has yet to correct himself in response to any evidence which precludes his claims. It seems he likes selling his books a lot more than he likes sharing true information.
He’s not going to respond because this isn’t evidence those buildings were dated after gobekli tepe. The guys showing buildings made after as a means to show how they upskilled themselves when those structures are dated after. It makes no sense for Hancock to respond to false information
I love this! The amount of detail and the analysis that you present is amazing and I could listen to it all day. I love this kind of in-the-weeds, thorough examinations. Thank you so much for this video.
One piece of evidence id like to put into the record against graham hancocks proposed ancient history is the history channels "Life After People" , both the tv movie and the series. Which in my opinion shows pretty clearly that we would have more evidence of this lost advanced civilization.
Ah, see, that's where you're wrong. They have a way out of that reality. Often I've heard the claim that, at least for "Atlantis" their culture was so advanced that they produced no waste and everything was made out of some kind of bio degradable material and the like. I'm not sure if that's Hancock's opinion or not, but that's the kind of weird logic that pops up often in the "ancient advanced civilization" crowd
@@caodesignworks2407 everything they built was biodegradable except for the very specific things they built that were then claimed by others is a fun unfalsifiable claim.
It also was "crystal technology" instead of petroleum technology (plastics etc). IDK what crystal technology is supposed to mean, exactly, so don't ask me. No, I've never seen any real artifacts that looked like anything I'd call crystal technology. Though, most artifacts are in private collections... I'd assume something like that would've gotten out by now. So... no evidence for any kind of ancient advanced technology, other than moving and carving large stones, and whatever biodegradable stuff they made. Probably no nuclear reactors or worldwide container ships.
Probably their carved stones were based on earlier carving of wood and hard animal products. So, designs "suddenly" appearing in stone doesn't mean that the designs were taught from outside. It could mean itinerant craftsmen, or it could mean the people transferred existing arts to stonework, at that point, based on older local artistic traditions and development in the region. Trade and long movements go back much further than we knew about 100 years ago... not like modern technology though. People had seaworthy vessels, but nothing like diesel container ships, or electric ray guns, or crystal wands that controlled the weather... I mean, there must be some convoluted way to get from that kind of society to the evidence we find today, but it would require incredible successful conspiracies, and not one piece of evidence making it thru to modern consciousness, and 100% of the evidence pointing g to the contrary... just the fact that we found oil close to the surface. Our type of society wouldn't have left that available for the future. But anyway.
I find it rather hypocritical for him to ask for so much evidence yet provide none himself of such extraordinary claims. Basically pushing his narrative based on the little information we have on pre history. He picked the easiest part of archeology and history to make millions off since he can speculate all he wants and whenever you disprove his false claims his followers say stuff like “ but what about the precision and perfectly made stuff by such and such civilization which cannot even be replicated to this day”. He pretty much found the best clientele for his product.
If you actually watch his documentary series you'll realise that he's not making claims. He's simply offering up an alternative explanation of human history. At no time does he ever claim to be right
@@pokie6087damn dude, that's an absolutely pathetic argument for the garbage that falls out of his mouth. Everything he speaks about is presented as fact. He slithers by the baseless conclusions by offering a weak "if I could see a something" and demading evidence that proves him wrong instead of presenting evidence that supports his wild ideas. It's bad fiction, at best, and he knows that.
@@InchFab Just a question out of interest. Why has Hancock generated such a vitriolic reaction from the scientific establishment, but yet people who claim that other worldly beings came down from outer space and used their technology to build these amazing structures, get a free pass. Heck they even have prime time TV documentaries like ancient aliens. Why aren't archaeologists taking issue with that.
@@pokie6087 If all he was doing was offering an alternative explanation then why every time he has a chance to attack “mainstream academia” he does. Hancock essentially is a snake oil seller. He sells you the idea that for example Gobekli tepe couldn’t have been made by “simple and primitive” hunter-gatherers. He tells you that before he even shows you anything just so that you can have that engraved on your mind that archeologist believe simple hunter-gatherers lived there and then he proceeds to attack “mainstream academia” so that you can think like “ well if he’s being attacked by mainstream academia it must mean he’s onto something” when in reality the academia is extremely strict with any research being done that makes extraordinary claims without extraordinary evidence. Then he makes up a story about the site ( could be anything from it was built to warn us about a apocalyptic event, to save themselves from the flood or for whatever reason) say it was built 12,000 years ago with no evidence and call it a day. Everything you can do in science and archeolgy wrong he’s doing it.
@@pokie6087 bruh no one takes ancient aliens seriously that is why, not even themselves. Hancock is the one making claims since a long time ago. Hancock also wrote crazy books about an ancient lost civilization in MARS, bruh in mars. Of course this didn’t work as he intended but then he found the working formula. Make an argument based on no evidence that can change the history of every single part of the world. His evidence is based on a negative which is “well you can’t disprove they didn’t exist therefor it’s possible” instead of doing “ said lost civilization existed and this is the evidence”
The simplest explanation to Hancock's phenomenon could be found using Occam's razor: 1) he's a reporter, so he makes living selling stories. 2) people love bold borderline outlandish ideas, mysteries and conspiracy theories. 3) law of supply and demand gives a perfect economic explanation to why he's clinging on to his conjectures, that's the only way to present himself as a "disruptor" and Prometheus sort of figure, which will spur more interest to the product he sells. Plus, we shouldn't rule out Narcissistic or histrionic traits, when a person seems to repeatedly do things that seem irrational or lacking adequate reasoning even though they're aware of the flaws and have been repeatedly shown why their behaviour or ideas are flawed. So his case might very well be driven by: 1) monetary gains 2) attention seeking 3) self aggrandisement or the combination of all 3.
I must have spend hundreds of hours going down rabbit holes, with the fascination about Biological Evolution, in defense of Creationists and people who insist on narrow, literary readings of Biblical texts - whether Jewish or Christian. I am now doing that with my other passion: archaeology.
@@MossyMozart quite the contrary. I never was. But I was always stumped by how much effort people put into denying science because of their literal reading of Genesis 1-2. I spent many hours studying Creationism to see if there's anything to it...and there clearly isn't
@@CoercedJab that's very cute. I like that. Within mainstream Orthodox Judaism, science is generally accepted and there's no reason not to accept the scientific observations about the universe.
Some people used to argue that computer technology, especially at the chip level, just sort of appeared so suddenly, that it must have been reverse engineered from recovered UFO crashes. Not so much these days.
I love how every response ive seen to Graham Hancock has been incredibly respectful and only attacked his arguments or his impact on the field, while every time ive seen Graham Hancock talk about archeologists he’s made at least one dig at them Its hilarious
Over the last 30 years I went from finding his stories fascinating to thinking he was just a bit ignorant to then believing he was an idiot to now being pretty sure that he is just a crook. It's called getting wiser with the years, I now realise.
for sure, when it gets to the point where you are a random dude who spends like 3 hours a year casually watching videos on the subject offhand on youtube and you seem to know more about these things than hancock does its pretty obvious he has also seen all this evidence, extensively, and has chosen to pretend it doesnt exist.
Well I believe in an even more ancient advanced civilisation that taught Graham's ancient civilisation all the skills that they know. My evidence is the lack of an intermediate stage.
This video is so well done. The visuals are perfect for the argument presented. I learned a lot more in this video, then watching several other videos of this nature. Amazingly researched and put together. ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Graham said the same thing about the Egyptians weren't able to build the pyramids on their own. It makes me laugh at the ignorance of people that have never pick up a hammer and saw before to have these type of conclusions, humans are very capable of doing amazing things without modern electronic distractions. Keep up the good work!
Distractions have always existed. The bread and circuses we watch on our electronic devices have always existed. The depravity in the red light district. The gaming in the gambling district. Etc It’s on warpspeed now but it has always existed and their have always been “village idixts” It’s like saying we should’ve landed on the moon long ago since we weren’t distracted by “electronic devices” for longer than we have been LOL
@@stew0072 they cut the stones with copper saws, water and abrasive sand, then dragged them to the site by hand and put the thing together. we know thats how they did it.
Wow. Apparently this went up 13 hrs ago, and already it has 29K views. Go you. As for me, I spent the entire video going "Wow!" and "Oh wow!" I think what you have shown is that we have discovered these lost advanced cultures of the past. They might not be aliens, and they might not be Atlantean, but they definitely are far more advanced than even Graham Hancock could imagine.
Historian EP Thompson wrote in the introduction to one of his books that his ambition was to defend ordinary people of the past from "the enormous condescension of posterity". Such a resonant phrase, and a standing rebuke to buffoons like Hancock with their rhetorical assumption that hunter gatherers are necessarily technologically incompetent.
An excellent presentation. So many times as shown over generations we feel that only those developing towards the modern era knew how to solve social and technical problems. This clearly shows that even the hunter-gatherers were mentally complex and goal directed as we are, just different environments dictating what those needs were.
@@MarcosElMalo2no I’m not, miano had to admit on Reddit his dating was wrong. Only one of the sites he shows pre-dates gobekli tepe making the video a pile of nonsense
@@Manbearpig4456 Man you really think that lying is a great argument don't you? Like you don't realize that we can just go check the dates ourselves and confirm that they're correct. I guess the idea of researching a topic is so alien to you that you never considered it.
Do you remember when the Pyramids or Ancient Egypt "appeared out of nowhere?" Ya, Hancock has to keep the schtick up. If he lets it go, the bank coffers will empty too fast. He won't be able to keep his Ayahuasca addiction going or, any other new addition.
A bit offensive to say that a prior advanced civilization (or extraterrestials?) had to have intervened, implying that paleolithic hunters and gatherers wouldn't have been intellectually capable of constructing Gobekli Tepe.
It's also been noted that Hancock used to also claim the people from Atlantis were white, which quickly makes it racist to suggest all the non white people needed the white man to teach them how to stack rocks.
@@NinjaMonkeyPrimeand that is exactly why your theories are inferior to someone like Hancock's. You can't imagine an alternative idea because suddenly its racist to suggest the random brown people who claim such advances might be mis- interpreting their history.
@@BGI-q3y Are you sure you even know what Hancock says? Because he's literally on record in saying that the people from Atlantis were white. Then he's tried to backtrack from the obvious racist implications. It's really hard to take Hancock fans seriously when they appear to have no clue what he's actually said.
@@BGI-q3y It is in fact racist to say exactly what you're saying. You whining won't change that and also proves the obvious, that this was never about genuine curiosity but a need to take away the achievements of all non-white people and assign them to white people. Herman Göring would congratulate you.
@@MossyMozart And even then.. they don't have the same experiences as me, but at the same time they were way more experienced than I am. I'm living in a modern world where I don't actually have to be very experienced at anything, though I'm good at writing using a computer keyboard. Not much, really. Very few of us can do much if we were thrown into a pre-industrial world.
It's pretty funny how Hancock accuses archeologists of thinking we're so advanced and ancient people were dumb while he denegrates every known society and hunter gatherers.
![วันเกิดเธอ (TO YOU) - PHUWIN [ OFFICIAL MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_ROx1Bj3T0Y/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you for this video WoA. You really did a great job of overviewing the work done in the region over the last 3-4 decades. Very succinct and easy to understand!
I did my PhD on ground/polished stone artefacts from the Late Epipaleolithic and early Neolithic of the Southern Levant. I actually worked on material from the site Shubayqa 1 in Eastern Jordan that you show a picture of at 08:43-09:00! Great to see our site referenced.
It appears that people like Hancock and Co. have a really hard time understanding stone tool technology and prehistoric stone masonry and artistry. It is almost as if they forget that stone (in addition to wood, bone, shell, fibres etc.) was the main material(s) people had to work with. Humans and our ancestors have been shaping stone (with other stones) for more than 2 million years. People didn’t much else to do and got really good at it!
Can’t blame them entirely, because unfortunately research of past stone technologies (especially within Paleolithic archaeology) has been heavily focused on flaked stone tools, like flint/chert knives, arrowheads etc. Until the 1990s very little attention was given to the study of prehistoric ground/abraded/polished stone tools. This has changed though! And we now know a lot more about how people shaped and used “ground” stone tools like mortars and querns of coarser igneous and sedimentary rock.
Another reason we know less about the process of shaping these rock types is also that the process leaves a lot less traces than other methods of shaping (rock). In flaked/chipped stone technology, people flaked pieces of stone like flint/chert and this usually left lots of flint flakes behind on the ground (for us archaeologists to find) and allows specialists to reconstruct the process from the intermediate steps, i.e. the different flakes left behind.
This doesn’t happen as much when shaping “coarser” stone types. Here you would also perhaps flake a basalt boulder into a more manageable size or a preform, but from there your main mode of shaping was abrasion, i.e. shaping by rubbing a stone against another (sometimes with water and sand), and pecking, i.e rapid/short percussion/impaction with another stone. These processes should and would rarely result in flakes but rather the byproduct is small/tiny stone fragments and stone dust released from the boulder you were shaping. This dust and these tiny fragments are almost impossible to find during an archaeological excavation, meaning that all the intermediate steps in the production process are lost. Only preforms or accidentally broken pieces are left behind, and again unlike flaked stone tools, mistakes are easier to correct/remove (by pecking/abrading) so fewer mistakes are also found.
Anyways, I just wanted to say thank you for sharing this research and letting people know that people of the past were really good at using and shaping all kinds of stone (and other materials as well!).
Have you been to Egypt?
@@craigmorris559 No, or rather I have visited the Sinai, but only on holiday. As an archaeologist/researcher I've mainly worked in Jordan and Iran, primarily on late Epipaleolithic, Natufian and early Neolithic (PPNA) sites.
@@PatRKHC1892 can u still tell us smt bout pyramids?
these guys should be invited to Joe Rogan exp
Shame on you for congratulating him for his lies and misrepresentation of the dating of those sites.
We didn't just replace hunting and gathering with agriculture, we added agriculture to our skill set and used them both for thousands of years.
"I don't believe (A) because there is not enough evidence, I must therefore believe (B) of which there is no evidence." Yeah, that makes sense.
It is infuriating that no one is calling him out on that.
Yeah but I can write books about B and even get a Netflix series.
Yeah that's Hancock in a sentence...
@@Putnamsmif Granite Hardrock* 😂
Nobody is believing shit… ur taking out of context. It’s about asking questions having an open mind and actually looking everywhere not acting like we just know everything… this is just another TH-camr piggybacking what people want to hear on their side.
"You know, we gather here every year, we build some temporary thing, then we disperse and do it all again next year. Wouldn't it be better if we just put a bit more effort in and used rocks? After twenty years it pays for itself. We could decorate it up nice and. . "
"Dude! For the last time - we are Hunter Gatherers. We look in hedges, dig up grubs and huck rocks at mammoths. That's that"
Or. You know how the last place had really good strong wood for carving and building?
Yah?
This place ain’t got shit in terms of that.
But it’s got rocks, lots and lots of rocks. It’s a little harder to work with, but it’ll do.
@@MeanderingSlacker yes but there are downsides to wood for building permanent structures. Hence no Woodhenge, just Stonehenge
@@however-yh2jy There’s actually one two miles to the north east built around the same time, it just fell apart because wood+time, but the evidence is still there.
@@MeanderingSlacker true, under the right circumstances wood can survive but stone is definitely a safer bet for permanence
"Huck" is a new one on me, so thanks for that alongside the chuckle. We have a presumably related "hoik" in northeastern England. which in other parts means to lift rather than throw. Fascinating stuff!
This explains too why writing was subsequently invented, for "No mammoths" notices to warn the big hairy pachyderms away from the settlement after the abandonment of traditional rock-throwing ways.
hello I am a French sculpture teacher and passionate about archeology... SO BRAVO!!! finally, coherent and structured work on this founding subject of our cultures. YES we must clearly understand this extraordinary mutation and feel this pre-agricultural human journey.
I do find it interesting that Graham Hancock demands evidence of a gradual progression in human development to believe it. Which does actually exist as this vid explains. Yet he has no problem believing in a high tech civilisation of which we can find no trace. Don't expect a reply from him anytime soon David.
Yeah, he’s in no way being scientific. He just feeds like a vampire off the ignorance of others.
No trace? The entire series was about traces of a previous civilization. Balbek, Nan Madol, Sacsayhuaman, Yonaguni, Malta, Bimini Road, Derinkuyu, etc
Clueless , you ever heard of the ice age ? Do you realise how much ice was all over the planet ? Do you realise how much that ice would weigh??? Any trace would of been ground to dust under the glaciers .. Look up the London hammer , then come with an opinion pfft
@@craigwatson4413 Might be worth your time to look at the extent of the Ice Age glaciers and, more importantly, how far those glaciers were from the areas being talked about. Almost all of northern continental Europe was completely free of ice, naturally everything south was well. Maybe your magical advanced society lived in Norway and managed to remove all trace of their existence from everywhere unaffected by the glaciers?
@@craigwatson4413
*_"Any trace would of been ground to dust under the glaciers "_*
But that is not evidence that there was ever anything there.
And it's "would _have_ been", not would "of" been.
{:o:O:}
The problem with Graham’s theories is that he often uses phrases like “suddenly”, “just pops up” and “out of nowhere”. Which gives a false impression that these advancements are not a result of technological progression. It replaces all that you’ve explained in this video with a more simplistic but dramatic alternative which caters to people’s imagination rather than sense. I’ve followed Grahams work for several years and I really like the fact that he’s made ancient history and prehistory more popular. But it’s come at a cost. The hard work of people like you and other historians and archaeologists have been over shadowed by a more “fun” and “dramatic” alternative. Thank you for your videos, they are very important.
Well, to be fair do you have a point. Graham do make people interested in the past but he also spend a lot of time complaining about experts in the area not knowing what they are talking about and that is a bit dangerous. Presenting theories without any evidence as facts is becoming more and more popular in many different subjects and far too many people are too lazy to bother fact checking things today.
Graham is charismatic and a competent writer, I just wish he started to write science fiction books instead, he clearly have a talent for it.
Díky, přisvojím si z Vaší reflexe nový terminus technicus přesně postihující povahu věci: "dramatická alternativa", nebo lépe "zábavná dramatická alternativa". Přidám z jiných povedených pojmenování "nevzdělaný křižák" a ze sebe "assasin vědy". Dík! Až Vám bude smutno, sledujte prosím kanály Daniken, Childress, Tsoukalos, Sitchin, Sueneé, Blochová...nakonec ´Úžasný svět záhad" Tom 49/44/29//13/22/57
Thanks, I will give you a new Terminus technicus from your reflection exactly affecting the nature of the thing: "dramatic alternative", or a better "entertaining dramatic alternative". I will add from other hilarious names "uneducated Crusader" and from myself "Assasin Science". Thanks! When you feel sad, please watch the channels Daniken, Childress, Tsoukalos, Sitchin, Suene, Bloch ..... Tom 49/44/29//13/22/57
The sad thing is that history really doesn't need the added hyperbole or intentional falsehoods used by Hancock and his ilk. There aren't a ton of great ancient history communicators where some scientific disciplines, like those relating to space, are blessed with a plethora of amazing public voices. That's one of the reasons I really appreciate Dr. Miano, he has not only the passion for the material, but the ability to speak clearly, effectively, captivatingly, and with a manner that just oozes with live and respect for the material. Dr. Miano is one of the few ancient history voices I feel comfortable calling anywhere approaching Sagan-esque. Like the great Carl Sagan, Dr. Miano also obviously has such passion for the material the has devoted his life to and is able to infect listeners with that same sense of excitement and reverence. Not to be forgotten, because it may be one of the most important aspects of Sagan's work, but Dr. Miano also never comes across as anything, but patient, kind, understanding, humble, and willing to have a conversation with anyone about the material and always approaches it in good faith. These days those are exceedingly rare qualities for anyone to possess one or even two of, but ancient history is lucky to have someone that happens to embody all those qualities. It is voices like his we so desperately need to push back against Hancock and his fellow grifters in the age of anti-intellectualism. I simply can't thank Dr. Miano enough for what he does because he manages to do all the above and also remain extremely fun to watch, perhaps the most important of all these accolades, because if no one wanted to watch his content the other qualities wouldn't matter.
The strange thing is that in GH's world his lost civilization apparently popped up out of nowhere and then disappeared without a trace because of some catastrophe. He doesn't provide any evidence of its development thru time. It is just there one day and gone the next. Its survivors then went on and introduced overnight technological developments elsewhere even though the evidence in those areas indicates gradual technological development. All without the survivors bothering to simply relocate and rebuild their own civilization which they obviously still had the technology to do if they were spreading it all over the place. GH is so full of logical inconsistencies and cherry picking of data that it is amazing that anyone takes him seriously.
@@loke6664 He's a nutcase and a fraud. Absolutely nothing charismatic about him. But then you probably think that Tump was a good president also...
It does get tiring how inept people assume the people of antiquity were. They were just as capable as we are today.
Probably more so in a lot of aspects.
They were more capable than today, given than they had to figure out and make everything by themselves, unlike the current era where most people are uncapable of doing so many things, just because they know how to use a computer or a smartphone they believe to be superior when everything they use is really made by a long chain of other people who produce materials parts and assembling.
Just look at the Republican Congress in the fall of 2023.
tHIS SHOW DOES NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT HANCOCKS POSITION IS.
you're right, he thinks wizards high on salvia and ayahuasca were so spiritually advanced they built ancient high technology and transmitted advanced esoteric knowledge with their minds, man...@@davidclark573
I love how they claim they had "high technology". Yet they only accomplished stacking rocks. Big rocks sure but they still only stacked rocks.
Highly advanced rock stacking.
Must've been aliens 👽 ...levitating rocks
A long-time Graham Hancock fan here. What a brilliant presentation of facts, it completely changed my perspective on the GT site and its implications for contemporary archaeology. Thank you for putting this together. Would love to see you on Joe Rogan someday! Cheers
He's saying natufian culture led to GT but GT is dated to 10,000 years older...
@@anthonyoer4778Who dated Gobekli Tepe to 25,000 years ago?
@@mattg-q3z Klaus Schmidt, who has since died in 2014...
@MattGrandis Klaus Schmidt dated GT to 22 000 bc. He died in 2014. It has since been redated to 8,000 bc...odd isn't it? In the very jor rogan podcast episode, Hancock uses Schmidts dating hence his theory for a missing civilization. The new dating oddly makes Gobekle tepe younger than Jericho.
@@anthonyoer4778Hm, looks like my comment didn't go through, probably because I included links. I can't find any evidence that Schmidt dated the site older than 11,000 years. There's an interview with Smithsonian Magazine from 2008 where Schmidt talks about the site being 11,000 years old, and on the website of University Münster there are still links to his lectures (2013/2014, right before his death) where he, too, said the site is 11,000 years old. If he ever mentioned an earlier date, his research up until his death must have led him to the conclusion that the site was 11,000 years old.
Usually when someone- ESPECIALLY someone who’s expertise is not in the field they are speaking of- disagrees with an overwhelming consensus of the scientific community based on a “lack” of evidence, there isn’t actually any lack of evidence, just their OWN lack of KNOWLEDGE of the existing evidence.
the personal lack of facts and then confusion of hypothesis with conclusion simplifies the theory making of those who cannot be troubled with the pesky problem of learning when it interferes with their making money.
Well, keep in mind that, like the video said, those other sites weren't found yet. That episode was like a decade ago. His right to hypothesize was real at the time. Shermer's prediction has turned out accurate though.
Hancock has already made up his mind. it's very profitable to do his grift, and very popular. he's not the only one either. no amount of evidence will change people like them.
@@jzakora >His right to hypothesize was real at the time.
Not really. Any reasonable person in good faith would have assumed that the missing developmental links just weren't found yet. His explanation was a stretch, even for someone unfamiliar with how painstaking archeological discovery actually is.
@JulieJaneSmith57, very well stated.
Graham never asks or answers the question “where did the advanced civilization learn their techniques”. Was it a different advanced civilization?
tis the basic slippery slope argument, kicking the problem up a level doesnt really solve anything because you basically just CHANGED THE SUBJECT
No he doesnt thats true. That doesnt mean the advanced civilisation learnt it from someone else though. They might have invented it no?
Yes he does!!! Basically the foundation of his work over the last 30 yra. 🤷♂️
It was "jewish alien lizard people" but everyone laughs in his face when he says that, so usually he keeps it quiet.
@@lee.morrisif they're capable of invention autonomously, why are the ancient people whose work they're being credited with incapable of it? It seems very weird that ancient non white civilizations needed someone else to make these things for them, but then it's assumed the hypothetical group who are being given credit did not need outside help to invent these things.
I had been skeptical of Hancock’s theories, but was entranced by the idea of a lost civilization. After viewing the debate between Dibble and Hancock and finding your videos, I am not convinced by Hancock’s (lack of) evidence. I enjoy your videos based on their fastidiousness and civility. Thank you.
Dibbles" " argument ", as if.
My problem with ALL these "advanced lost civilization" theories is that if they were so advanced why everything they left is literally stone age stuff? If they could use Hi-Tech tools then how come the "proof" of them existing is always just a bunch of rocks put together? Look at modern society, we literally leave more plastics and metal stuff behind than anything out of rocks.
I also used to be one who subscribed to this ancient high civilization idea! Turns out I was just uneducated! The more I learn and the more I research into ancient history, it all makes perfect sense! I was truly a perfect example of Dunning Kreuger. Thanks for all you do to educate us on this phenomenal history! The more I learn the more I realize their is no one hiding the truth, their is no one lying to us! This is our history as humans and its amazing to learn about!
However I must add, if it wasn't for people like Graham I would have never became so captivated by our ancient ancestors! Soo thank you Graham and all other confused ancient history buffs!
It's very smart to correct one's mistakes as new evidence comes into light. The sad part is these fringe youtubers and writers have a cult following of drone like individuals that you cannot reason with, who will ignore literally all data, will go into heavy cognitive dissonance and nothing will change their minds.
When we are young it is easier to jump into trends that seem revolutionary from our own naive point of view (and oftenly very simplistic which require no learning or studying), good thing that you could go past that phase, many don't.
I find the more I study and search out answers the more questions appear. It has become obvious to me that neither Hancock or the structured archeologist is capable of satisfying. It is enjoyable looking into all the information available and attempting to sort the wheat from the chaff in my own mind. It is nothing more than a futile exercise for any one individual or group to form a collective agreement on the unknown. By all means do have fun guessing and sharing everyone
@@winstonsears6293 Although there are plenty uncertainties, there is a huge difference between fringe pseudo-scientists like Hancock and the scientific method. One should not ignore that. Guessing might be fun, but if it's not in accordance with the scientific data, what use is it?
Graham's line of argumentation strikes me as very similar to that of creationists, asking for evidence of transitional forms and then claiming his own ignorance of those transitional forms as evidence that a much wilder claim with even less evidence is somehow the more reasonable explanation
As both an archaeologist and a religious person who believes in a fully scientific explanation for the world, I find this sort of thing very frustrating, since the evidence is so abundant but is often communicated very poorly to the general public, so so much has to be established to help these people understand. Thankfully folks like Dr. Miano are doing great work in communicating this research to address specific misconceptions like this!
@@SaszaDerRoyt That's because Creationists don't worship a God, they worship a book, and if they can't cram the handprints of the universe INTO that book, they ignore it. It's infuriating.
thing is, like most creationist apologists, Hancock knows the evidence exists, he has been shown it multiple times before and then just claims it doesn't exist whenever there's no-one in the room who can present it on the spot.
Hancock wouldn't ever agree to be on Rogan if MiniMinuteMan or Dr M were the guests, you know, actual historians, because they would have already looked up his arguments and have evidence ready to go. Instead, he always goes on opposite a physicist or biologist, someone who doesn't have expert knowledge in the field.
Drop the mic 🎤. Great work. Thanks for your efforts to counter all the BS being put out.
This is a false equivalence. Graham is distinctly from the school of secularistic deconstructionism of the postmodern ilk. He uses this methodology to enhance his own bias in a field that requires physical evidence, of which, he has none. Creationists, conversely, are just confused religious types who don’t understand that the scientific method is not applicable in matters of faith, God etc. These subjects are not falsifiable or provable. So its pointless to ask a creationist for evidence & it’s pointless for a creationist to attempt to find it. It’s not pointless to ask Graham for evidence. It’s a requirement given the subject matter.
GH: "we haven't found that intermediary technology".
What we definitely didn't find is a super advanced global civilization and it seems that doesn't bother him at all. Incredible.
If you would have told people a century ago that we'd be going to the moon, having tele conferences, computers, self driving cars and stuff like that they would have called you crazy and that there was no evidence of such developments. Hancock is a nutcase who is selling a book, a fantasy book.
@MikTuo- Why don't you actually go and look up what's written about this, yourself? There's not a single unexplained phenomenon around at this point. Workable explanations have been theorized and in many cases experimentally proved. Nobody still believes that the pyramids of Egypt weren't built by Egyptians, to take one, the debate is only about exactly which of the several possible methods were used.
@tohaason the modern Egyptians are not the same as the classic Egyptians, and the classic Egyptians were not the same as the prehistoric Egyptians.
The Egyptians, as you, in the 21st century see them, DID NOT BUILD THE PYRAMIDS.
There are workers on the plateau who's ancestors have been excavating for well over a thousand years. They are more connected to the pyramids than anyone in modern Egypt and THEY came from somewhere else.
@@jamesbael6255 The Egyptians back then were the Egyptians of that time, how much or how little the population has changed over time - little or much - is of no importance. The point is and was only that the people of the time, with the (well known) tools at the time, built the pyramids, and there is zero need to involve andvanced-disappeared-without-a-trace civilizations of the Graham Hancock type to explan the pyramids. Or anything else in the ancient world.
It’s simply a fact.
It's funny how similar the rhetoric is to evolution denial. "Here's a gap, therefore it *must* be filled with [extraordinary and unsubstantiated thing]." I suppose that and creationism and ancient aliens are really just different flavors of the same thing.
🎯 In a nutshell here is the difference between academic inquiry and pseudoscience:
1 - academics seek to understand based upon all the evidence we see. As such what follows represents basing conclusions upon = *KNOWNS.* These are further subject to outside consensus so as to ascribe plausibility or not.
2 - pseudoscience on the other hand does not seek to provide the individuals answers. Their entire focus is essentially to deny academic conclusions and that is justified by pointing to incredulity-based argumentation premised upon _"what if......"_ What follows however is only subject to = personal belief rather than a consensus view.
They create supposed "gaps" in academic understanding so as to justify filling those in with their whimsical assumptions. Hence pseudoscience represents attempting to generate supposedly plausible explanations based upon........ = *UNKNOWNS* - at which point Occam's Razor kicks in.
Moral: pseudoscience narratives fundamentally reflect stereotypical _"argumentum ad ignorantiam"_ - or "arguing from ignorance".
Conversely as you alluded to religions also therefore represent the same paradigm whereby the individual is assuming validity based upon a desire to "believe" with only themselves as the supposed arbiter of that claimed validity. It results in pure, subjective "validation" which is only real for the person contingent upon a desire to assume thusly. They are 2 fleas on the same dog of assumptive logic. Enjoy your day.
@@varyolla435 so how do you explain that tectonic plates used to be pseudoscience?
seems a pseudo scientist is just a scientist who is not in the club
@@bobobobos2425 A supposed "scientist" who does not abide by principles of proper scientific inquiry when forming conclusions they desire to challenge accepted facts = is not a scientist then.......
They represent "fringe opinions" who are misrepresenting science - usually for economic purposes as they stereotypically monetize their specious claims.
Moral: there is no "club" = but there certainly are "grifters" in the LAHT industry - and it most definitely is an industry.
Except the aliens have had 100's of millions of years to get here and the religious thing may only be a few 100k years old. The idea that we aren't alone or that advanced civilizations can figure out how to travel through space is far from extraordinary. Like suggesting humans will never learn to build computers after it took us thousands of years to learn how to stack big stones. Must be since some 'experts' seem to think they know stuff.
@@varyolla435 I believe we are on the same page - we have very very very few scientists 🤔
These theories rely on 2 things:
1- criticizing any and all evidence to other people's theories
2- distracting you from their lack of evidence for their own theories
Notice that they will just spend hours discrediting archeologists for every little tiny detail, but never put into question if a drawing of a bucket in 2 cultures is proof of alien contact
Occam's razor, when faced with a lack of evidence and multiple possibilities, the simplest explanation is more likely.
Complex alien civilizations for which there is literally no evidence - is not a simple explanation - therefore more evidence is required.
This works for both camps.
@@docvaliant721 Except it doesn't, as clearly illustrated in the video.
@@joshuapray drink your kool aid bud
@@docvaliant721 Solid rebuttal. I'll try to remember that one. In the meantime, I'd recommend actually watching the video in question before popping off with your inane platitudes.
I would like to point out how much quality work is showcased here. Not only all the historical research but adding additional context to the places and discussions while staying respectful and giving sources. Great work Dr. Miano
I concur. 👌
Wow historical research like in real science how could I miss it?
@@tolotolo2380 WTF are you trying to say?
@@cattymajiv dude I am saying that most historians are full of shit peace brother
@@tolotolo2380most "historians" are not actual historians, just grifters with a big ego and a very childlike imagination
But Graham is just asking questions...
And then completely ignoring the answers because they don't fit the narrative of his next pseudo-science fiction book.
Rubbish
I love conspiracy theories and alternative history debates for the entertainment value. But, also it then promotes videos like this, where by amazing public education videos are made for general betterment of our understanding of our history. Thank you WoA for this awesome video! ❤
Where do I get the information about 14K years ago and 500K years ago?
"Even Chris Dunn won't be found at Gobekli Tepe putting a straight edge up to one of the T-pillars"... bravo sir! A masterful video, as every. thank you for your hard work and research 👍
I had to smile as well hearing this remark.
Thank you so much for making this video, Dr. Miano: The TH-cam "DIY Archaeology," community was severely in need of a comprehensive effort to inform the community of work that has been done (in some or even many cases) many decades ago that paints exactly the picture that Graham Hancock (and others) have been claiming for years does not exist: That the move towards megalithic construction (sites) was a gradual one, and most certainly did not, "appear out of nowhere."
I know you put a lot of hard work into this video and judging from a brief glance at the comments section, your efforts were well worth the while. I see dozens and dozens of comments reflecting a lot of, "wow, I never knew that," and, "I used to be a proponent of the lost civilization hypothesis, and your videos have slowly assisted me in emerging from ignorance."
Great work, Dr. Miano. You really are a gifted educator and an invaluable member of the community.
Best comment here Alex! I would love Dr Miano to know how very important he and his work are, and how much it's appreciated by those of us who are very alarmed that so many people actually believe GH's garbage! Thank you for echoing my thoughts!
@@cattymajiv couldn't agree more. And that's exactly what GH's stuff is: Pure friggin garbage. And I feel so bad for all of the people who are pulled into his sensationalist idiocy.
Lmfao: “used to be a proponent of the lost civilization hypothesis, and your videos have slowly assisted me in emerging from *ignorance*."
Not very subtle 😂
What’s wrong with a lost civilization hypothesis anyways? Did we not lose a civilization or two along the way? 🤔
@@CoercedJab if you're going to be completely objective with yourself you must admit that believing in Graham's lost civilization hypothesis requires ignorance of certain archeological facts. I mean, ignorance is basically the crux of Graham's theories. It's all "lost knowledge." What is loss of knowledge if not ignorance?
@@CoercedJab You sound like we dropped civilizations out of a bag while catching the bus or something.
I'm surprised by this info and didn't know it existed. You gave me a better understanding. It was well presented, thank you.
Most of what he showed was built after gobekli tepe
@@Manbearpig4456 which ones?
@@ravon1982all bar one site which is contemporary. He basically lied through his teeth
I've always wondered why the advanced knowledge brought to ancient people is so primitive.
@@markwrede8878 because you compare it with our technological progression and can't conceive a society based on other valeus that didn't contemplate technology and life the same way we do. This isn't the only way evolution (or involution) works or should work, there might have been other forms of advancement.
@@syyylvo No. It is you who conceive alien involvement because there would be no efficient capital technique, so you cannot conceive of slow and demanding tech.
You sound so dumb it's painful.
@@syyylvo it’s known in anthropology that the least technologically advanced civilizations are the ones with the most complex languages. I agree advancement is multifaceted. I’m not sure the current state of physics is advancement in evolutionary terms. It seems likely to kill a lot of people. The tech might advance but the society may devolve.
@@atxmaps I agree, I see our society devolving if that's what you meant.
I love these videos cuz ppl like Mr Hancock make it hard as a layperson to learn about proper archeological discovery’s and understandings.
"They were smarter than that!" This is my father's typical response to people always arguing from personal incredulity about the dumbfounding advanced abilities of the ancients. People just assumed because they are ancient that they are therefore "primitive".. My father is an archaeologist and doctoral student at Tel Aviv University, by the way.
@@ALook_at_my_picture_ a recognized institution with international credibility on these matters
@@ALook_at_my_picture_ you want a fight. And I don't give a damn. Happy trolling
@@ALook_at_my_picture_ in the very least they demonstrate that the person who made the statement has some credibility since he has rigorous training from TAU. Anyone who knows anything about archaeology knows about this university
@@ALook_at_my_picture_ you're wasting me time. Have a nice day
@@ALook_at_my_picture_You're saying that nothing can ever be proven? I'm pretty sure this video shows that the evidence Hancock claims he wanted does in fact exist. If you're trying to be trollish about it, you can say that you still need to research and verify the evidence presented is accurate, but that's easily done by a professional reporter such as Hancock.
There is a difference between "arguing to convince" and "arguing to win". This has been the former. Thank you.
This is one of the most well-reasoned and evidence-filled videos I've seen about the region and the time period involving Gobekli Tepe.
Hancock's theories are called imaginative, but it seems to me like a severe LACK of imagination. Reality may be mundane, but it is far, far more complex and fascinating than a lost civilization.
Excellent! I'm so happy to see a respectful answer to a question that I think was honest. I am so used to hearing fringe ideas being shut down and silenced without regard or anything but condescension and hatefulness. I really like Graham Hancock because I believe he is genuine, and I really like you Dr. M., because you are fair. I've commented on many of your videos and you always read and respond. You never bashed me for thinking the alternate history hypothesis was plausible. After Ancient Apocalypse came out, I was enthralled with the idea. Graham gets so much hate from scholars, but he won my interest in the subject. It's you, Dr. Miano, that clarified on the facts. You took the time to make a reasonable argument. If scientists shut down fringe ideas without ever respecting the who and why behind them, we'll be hard-pressed to find out something new. Your thoughtfulness and dedication inspires me so much Dr. Thank you for clarifying a magnificent mystery for me. When I win the lotto, we're goin' to Egypt haha.
Exactly! Calling some one stupid does not make a good argument. Dr. Miano makes reasoned arguments and he makes sense.
Funny how Graham says because archeologists have not excavated the entire earth their theories cant be proven but when Graham has a fantasy without digging up the earth it must be true.
I don't even think that Hancock believes what he's saying. The guy makes a lot of money doing what he does, I think it's pure grift.
🎯 He does not need to believe it. He merely needs to believe = others will believe it - as that can be monetized as you noted.
Yes
Yeah I know that for a fact because he was caught manipulating evidence for his "Draco theory" of Angkor Wat.
This is a landmark video, David. Extremely well done. Thank you for taking the time to research and present it. Bravo!!
What the heck. He mentioned that they used a granite pestle and mortar and built structures out of LIMESTONE then 300 yrs later we are to believe they had the ability to cut gigantic stones of GRANITE/BASALT weighting multiple tons cart them up a mountain miles away from where they were quarried?? Come on, your kidding right!!!
He presented a load of lies about the dates on those sites. None of them were prior to gobekli tepe
@@Manbearpig4456 Liar.
@@jenny6253 Where?
Let's explain this with the 3 little pigs. The first pig builds a house of straw, the second builds a house of wood, and the third builds a house of brick. Then we wait 10000 years. The straw has rotted, the wood has rotted, and the bricks are still around. You conclude that brick buildings came out of nowhere, spontaneously! They must've been taught how to build by an alien race!
Stoneworking is a very old craft, and woodworking is probably even older. There's no evidence that any of these things appeared suddenly, they only seem sudden from an archaeological perspective because so much of the contemporary work has been lost to time.
Keep up the awesome job, Dr Miano 👏
Magnificent video. I'm myself a scientist in a different field (astrophysics) who enjoys learning of ancient history and coming across a video like this to respond in an educated and sound way to unsustained provocative theories from GH was certainly very inspirational. Certainly I liked it and decided to suscribe to this amazing channel.
I am Bill Gates
When someone's wallet is reliant on certain beliefs, those beliefs are unlikely to change.
Not to mention when someone life work and income is based on them.
Sort of like "global warming".
It’s cute that you treat GH as if he’s making an argument in good faith.
I hope people appreciate the level of contextual detail you have compiled in this 45 minute video. Excelsior!
th-cam.com/video/0OqLZzOvurE/w-d-xo.html
oh boy all of a sudden , a guy with no degree a stranger on the internet , you whole hearted believe him, because he said he did research , oh gee the guy in the videos evidence is a dead baby monkey 24:17 lolololol
you never graduated did you
26:48 a relief valve relief hole? yet the picture he shows on the right IS NOT A HOLE , where is the relief??!!!? hi huh mr. oh boy this guy did amazing research
@@ashzole It's sad that you edited your comment and it still remains incoherent.
Why would people appreciate someone lying about the dates on ancient sites?
@@Manbearpig4456 Any incorrect dates would be acknowledged by Dr M. Provided of course that you can prove your statement.
I had a bias going into this video since I like Graham, but your video was well-made, and you helped me keep an open mind during the video. Thanks for the video!
I'd recommend other videos on this channel!
Me too. Exactly what I was thinking!
Good example for such carvings (petroglyphs) are the ones found in the Konkan Coast of India. Some of them are even contemporary with Gobekli Tepe! Look for the sites of Kasheli, Pansaimal, Ukshi
The ritual burial and abandonment of sites is incredibly interesting. I wish an advanced civilization had taught them how to write so we could know what they were thinking!
You're assuming that writing is a sign of a superior civilization.
I wonder how they know it was a "ritual burial" in stead of other asshole humans fucking other human's shit up.
We see that stuff all the time trough out history and even in current times. Just come in, ruin other people's day, break their stuff..
Mind you, I'm just a random guy with a shower thought here
The problem is that we don't know what type of writing they used. For example the Inca used a knotted cord as a form of writing and communication. That knowledge was completely lost with the Spanish conquest.
Few video's warrant a recommendation for "all" to watch... this "is" one. Amazing amount of rich content for others to build upon... a game changing opportunity. Bravo to the author(s) of this video!
Thank you for taking the considerable time to debunk the uneducated foolishness of Graham Hancock!
IMHO it's not a lack of education - it's intentional obfuscation to keep his source of revenue secure.
It's the same reason he regularly defames archaeology so that his fans won't go looking for more detailed knowledge that would refute his flimsy claims.
That is not possible so a lie. On purpose or no knowledge about the issue?
He is educated and was a rather reputable journalist on social and economy (work for the economist etc) until suddenly he U turn into alternative archeology.....
@@redemissarium I don't need help interpreting facts. There is no 'alternative archeology'. Just the rantings of willfully ignorant religious types not interested in facts that disagree with their fantasies.
Think of the complexity of negotiating trade and communicating what you had to offer and what you required in return as part of that trade. Cultures mingling and being influenced by trade and availability of materials and connections to other areas geographically. Incredible video. Setting a marker for Hancock
What does setting a marker for Hancock mean?
The more of your videos I watch the more I am blown away with ancient humans. Such a fascinating subject. I can't be bothered researching this myself but I really appreciate the time and effort you take to make your videos. All presented in such a way that is interesting and engaging. The world has a shortage of great educators like yourself.
“I can’t be bothered” … a real truth seeker 😂😂😂
@@Radzta I mean I'm realistically not going to go and send a heap of time researching this stuff myself but I enjoy learning about it. Similar to watching a documentary on something of interest but wouldn't send heaps of time to research it myself.
You, Milo and Stefan all need to go on Joe Rogan
This is the definition of "I can't imagine them doing it, therefore they couldn't have done it"
Tried that in Vegas. I couldn't imagine Kansas City would beat San Francisco in the Superbowl. Still didn't get my money though.
It speaks to a paucity of imagination.
thats not what he says though.you lot are weird
It's the same principle used by people who don't believe that humans make crop circles. "People (i.e. me) can't do that so it must be aliens"
@@rjbennett3418 Don't you know the game was rigged? It was all a big plot to have T Swift throw the election to Biden. Or so I've been told. And I can't disprove that hypothesis, so I must accept it as true despite the lack of evidence.
Thanks for doing this. Fascinating!
The Natufians have been an interest of mine for a long while. My personal hypothesis is that the Natufians expanded north with their wild rye food processing and storage technology and met another culture in Anatolia that had massive einkorn wheat resources to which the same food processing technologies could be applied. The chocolate got applied to the peanut butter and this Anatolian culture bloomed.
I read a paper a while back that proposed the shift from circular to rectangular architecture was merely a response to population density and the extra corner space provided more living space in an urban environment.
I've seen the same in a few places, and it makes complete sense. Without any population pressure there seem to me to be more advantages to the round buildings, but when space and building materials both become more limited, the square or rectangle can become more advantageous. But whether the issue at the time was space or materials was not addressed by what I read. I'm sure it varies by the site.
@@cattymajiv Thanks. I guess I didn't explain that remark well. On the topic of a record of cultural evolution, I think I have read that there are both circular and rectangular constructions at Golbeki Tepe. One paper on Israeli settlements proposed the earlier structures were imitations of tents, or just force of habit of building that way from before permanent structures.
For your ongoing efforts to enducate and inform
Thank you so much!
Please never stop making videos. We need your voice of reason to combat all the perceived knowledge.
He confirming all preceived knowledge
As one of Graham's biggest supporters, I absolutely love this video!
It's really refreshing to get a different perspective on the matter, delivered in this nature.
Phenominal video! :)
Good for you. it is good to question everything. Which is one of the (few) things I like about Hancock.
I like his persistence in questioning the establishment. But he goes into snowflake mode when he doesn't get enough recognition. And he isn't the first person to ask the very same questions he is asking.
My conclusion is that he does what he does to sell books/make money. The truth is we all want to make money....and this is his niche. I respect him for his ability to make money from all this. Everyone making youtube channels are all here to do the same thing.
@@warrenny of course he wants to bring some bread on his table, but i also think he is doing this not just for the money, but out of sincere passion.
@@weisthor0815 "some bread to the table".....
Yeah, have a look at his book sales numbers and what a BBC-Docu-hosting pays? The man has grown massively rich for a writer who claims to do non-fiction. We are talking at least double-digit millions.
Personally - I know smart and well-eductated professionals like our dear host here in WoA have been explaining to Mr Hanckock for decades why this or that or more of his points are most probably wrong or not supported by anything.
Yet he goes on multiplying the stuff - the same stuff he has been schooled on for decades - over and over, while heaping up considerable riches through that storytelling.
I´ve stopped considering him an honest actor long ago.
Just like Däniken or similar characters, there comes a point where you either have to assume the person is mentally deficient to still repeat stuff they have been corrected on over and over - or accept they are smart liars and grifters, beguiling their audience with made-up stories they know are false.
I dont assume Hancock - or Daniken for that - to be stupid.
I do agree. He does have a sincerity about all of it, for sure. And truthfully, I agree with his general premise: that humans had quite stunning levels of civilizations prior to Gobekli.
But he trades on Hollywood tropes and short fiction pulp to garner attention.....I mean, hey, there's nothing wrong with doing it his way. I guess I am one of the "slow and steady wins the race" kind of person. So to each his own. I still dislike his constant whining about how archeology won't lavish him with recognition. @@weisthor0815
It is good to question that’s why miano had to admit on Reddit that he got most of the dating of those sites incorrect. Spoofed they were older than they really are
Dare I say Doc that it is time for a "World of Antiquity" Netflix special? It's time for your balanced and thorough viewpoint to be heard by everyone interested in the truth of our past.
Unfortunately, David hasn't got any children being "senior manager of unscripted originals" at Netflix, as far as I know.
@@Spielkalb-von-Sparta Nepotism is still alive and well. Nice insight
Another fabulous job. Many thanks!
This is fantastic. You know, society and technology rarely make huge leaps in short periods of time - it's a gradual process that builds on itself, and I think the same is true for the concept of permanent communities, settlements, and cities. So if you grant that, then you would absolutely expect to see examples along the continuum between pure hunter gatherers and, let's say, Ur or Babylon; Alpha and Beta versions of "civilization" so to speak. What you've shown here is a great example of region where humans truly were beta testing the concept of settled civilization and society.
It's so fascinating to me. How did they divide the labor and choose who did what? How did they divide resources? What were their languages like? What stories brought them together? Did people get excited about making the trek to a hub like Gobekli Teppe? I can imagine families and tribes from around the region packing up and making the journey, and how truly amazing it must have been to see a place like that bustling with activity for the first time.
Anyway, thanks for the very thorough walk through all of this. I'll never understand why people have to make up fantastical interpretations of human history when it's already so awe inspiring.
If you would have told people 100 years ago about rockets to the moon (and it not being of cheese), Mars, Out of the solar system, about computers, self driving cars, tele conferences, they would have locked you up. Only in my life alone, I'm now 67, have I seen unimaginable developments occur and I can assure you that I've always been on top of the game. Changes can happen very fast. Just look at the speed smartphones took off. Unthinkable before the year 2000, you'd have a phone the size of a suitcase and extremly unhandy and no internet. The fact that we can communicate just like this and if need be even in real time, just sitting at home....
@@telebubba5527 To be more specific, what I meant is that on the scale of all human existence, much of our progress has been along a slow, gradual curve for both technological and societal improvement/development. If you had traced average human development in these categories from 300,000 years ago to about 500 years ago, it would be a very shallow curve. There might be a few spots where you could point to faster or slower development, I just mean on average. You're right that in the last 200 years, specifically the last 100, that curve has certainly become very steep, but this makes up a very small portion of the timeline relatively speaking.
In any case, my point is simply that you would expect to find all of these gradual stages of development between hunter-gatherers and city states, and that it's really cool to have more and more of the space between those two points filled out with growing archeological finds.
Actually, very rapid technological change is normal and well documented. In about 15 years we completely changed from using horses to using cars for transport as one example.
There is always going to be a "most advanced" city in the world. Look at a city like Shanghai, or Tokyo, and compare it to an older, more "classic" city like Detroit, or Boston. If civilization fell and in 5000 years humans found Tokyo, and Detroit and realized they came from the same time period, there'd probably be some disagreement as to why there was such a discrepancy in technology. Just a thought I had.
Graham Hancock and his ilk really give me "fan of an IP that takes their headcanon theory crafting way to seriously" vibes
SECRET GOOD FOURTH SHERLOCK EPISODE
Thank you for a video and detailed analysis. I am not a fan of Graham Hancock, however as a fan of ancient history it needs to mention that all these places are still poorly studied. Methods of excavation and study are not carried out according to modern standards everywhere. I don't agree with Graham Hancock that this place appeared suddenly, but I also disagree with scientists that this place was created by hunter-gatherers. As for me, all the accessories of civilization are already present here, and I would not be surprised if, over time, writing is also found here.
There's zero evidence of agriculture and lots of evidence of hunting and gathering. I'm not sure why you would doubt the evidence of how they fed themselves. It's pretty straightforward.
Excellent survey of the literature. I think Hancock raised valid questions but this helps answer them very well. I've wondered how many precursor megalithic structures existed undiscovered in SE Anatolia. You helped answer this. Cheers!
30 years ago, his questions would have been valid, yes. Today, not so much. Already 30 years ago the Natufians were well known but we still missed a few links in the chain.
I don't really buy that Graham never heard of the last 30 years of archaeology in the area though, he is constantly looking for anything he can use in his theory so probably just ignored everything that doesn't fit for him and raised his question to win a point with the listeners who doesn't know much about the subject.
I will like to know what about rest of the world.
Yup agreed. And that’s what it’s all about. Imagine if all the heavyweights were debating this and not just “fringe” people or TH-cam channel creators 😂
@@CoercedJab Archaeologists aren't generally that happy to discuss strange hypothesis with no actual evidence, it isn't really what they do.
Historians might be a bit more interested but they are more experts on areas with written records then pre history.
Dr Miano however is an actual Historian and there are some archaeologists like Milo from Miniminute man that also debunks things like this on TH-cam.
But I honestly don't think most professionals really care enough to go on things like the Seth Rogan show, they are more interested in finding out about the past themselves then to educate the masses or debunk any weird theory they hear.
A fabulous debunking. Thank you for taking the time and trouble. What's great is you are so educational, a great teacher!
‘Debunking’ is generous. Especially unchallenged
‘hunter gatherer’ by definition was nomadic. Funny how flexible we are with definitions when there’s a common enemy.
@@tcolley You consider hunter gatherer's your enemy???
Göbekli Tepe was not a settlement. There is no evidence that anyone lived there. The builders visited the site occassionally. No one besides Grandcock is asserting otherwise.
@tcolley if you were familiar with many Hunter Gatherer sites even as far west as Star Carr you'd be aware that Hunter Gatherers, or more correctly Late Mesolithic, had already built regular seasonal sites which were stayed in for extended periods, they also started exporting grains.
I value your content, and I appreciate your ability to sustain a measure of academic politeness vis-à-vis the seemingly intentional research laziness of Graham Hancock.
It's not laziness it's intentional ignorance. Hancock ignores anything that doesn't fit his narrative. We need to remember he's a journalist and not in anyway a scientist.
@@jamesmccreery250 When you make money from your ignorance, we have to ask ourselves if it's indeed ignorance, or a genuine grift....
His Draco Theory shows he goes out of the way to manipulate information.
He refrences natufian...10,000 years after gobekle tepe...
@@anthonyoer4778 Natufian - 15.000 to 11.500 BCE, Göbekli (sic!) Tepe 9.500 to 8.000 BCE. What are you talking about?
Thank you, Dr. Miano. As usual, your presentation was thorough and well documented.
I'm an historian by qualification but I can tell you a lot of people are drawn to figures like Hancock because history and archaeology as an academic discipline have a real problem with gatekeeping and snobbery.
Keen amateurs who are genuinely interested and perhaps have new insights or new evidence that human civilisation may be older than currently believed are often given haughty and self-important short shrift by professionals in the field, many of them often resorting to insulting or belittling behaviour.
Then when it's discovered that actually human civilisation is actually older than previously thought, the professionals forget all their previous hand-waving, and taunts, and degredation of those keen amateurs and again loftily retreat their ivory towers proclaiming that obviously human civilisation is older than previously thought, and only a buffoon would claim otherwise.
People like Hancock and his followers see a continuous stream of professional historians and archaeologists berating them for not operating within the rules, only to later shift the goal posts and then loftily claim the rules have changed.
This is not common to other academic disciplines. In astronomy, for example, or mathematics, or biology, or sociology, or linguistics, keen amateurs may present their theories, or some esoteric insight, or some anomalous piece of evidence and they're not met with immediate scoffing, scorn, and ridicule. Instead they're patiently corrected, or it's acknowledged that their notions and evidence may actually have merit that warrants invesitgation. They're not immediately kicked to the curb with a chaser of pompous laughter.
If history and archaeology as a disicpline wants fewer Graham Hancocks, its professional practitioners have to stop behaving like some priestly class of gatekeepers who will only accept and not immediately scorn the contributions of those they deem worthy or sufficiently qualified.
Einstein was a patent clerk. Ramanujan was a sari salesman. Darwin was a taxidermist. Sometimes great insights come from people outside of the fold, and Hancocks will spring up left, right, and centre if they're constantly derided and mocked by their idolised discipline, only for the professionals of said discipline to turn around in a decade or so declaring that they were correct, but never, ever acknowledging that fact merely to salve the disciplines' egos.
Please provide examples of this happening.
Even just one example of such an amateur wrongfully excluded would be atleast something. None of you guys give even that because the problem you guys assert doesn't exist.
Someone who actually has historical qualifications would know that history is based on evidence, and historians would never say there is a civilization until they found evidence for it. Yet you complain that they waited for the evidence first.
Yawn. Sorry but crazy ideas that aren't backed by evidence are ignored in every field of science. And rightfully so. Scientists are not parents that are obligated to entertain children and their fantasy ideas.
@@sampagano205
Tommy Flowers
Alfred Russell Wallace
Frank Calvert
Gudea
Atra-Hasis
The history of civilisation itself is just one long list of embellishments on appropriated ideas the derivation of which is then obscured in an attempt to claim ownership..
🏴☠️
Hancock always wants evidence of any reasonable hypothesis but is happy to assume his outlandish hypotheses are correct without evidence. He should be given an award for cherry picking.
_"Hugo Award"_ = for *SCIENCE FICTION.......*
Graham Hancock's lifelong use of Psychedelic Drugs has molded his brain to expect fantastic findings that'll prove fringe theories. Real archeology is fascinating enough for me.
No that’s just cooked tiger.
So many cool facts from this video! Prehistoric people ground up so much grain that they had deformities in their palms and elbows to prove it. A prehistoric village of 250 people existed for 2000 years. The summary of all the gradual advancements at the end was great. I kind of wish there was also a visual timeline showing all the advancements between early paleolithic and gobekli tepe though
Many English medieval peasants' left forearm is deformed from using the English long bow their whole life
tHE WORLD OF ANTIQUITY DOES NOT UNDERSTANBD WHAT hANCOCK IS SAYING,.
😅😅😅
@@MrShuckedSean that only proves their poor fucking diet
If you want to find more scientific facts about your body listen to podcasts of Dr Anthony Chaffee buen provecho
@I_dreamed_my_name_was_Brandon would you like to enlighten us with specific claims? Or just complain that more people don’t also pledge fealty to your guru
Absolutely fantastic! Even setting Hancock aside, it’s a really great piece of science-communication to lay viewers such as myself who are just interested in this paleo-archaeology/pre-history stuff. Great to see the developmental time line all laid out like that. I’ve never seen it set out clearly like that before. Much appreciated!
You can throw him in the dustbin. He's a fraud.
@@telebubba5527 He presented very strong evidence for his case there. What was fraudulent about it?
@@telebubba5527 Hancock or Dr Miano? Be clear in your writing please.
So true. This video is a slam dunk. It's a dissertation. This should be published in a professional journal.
@@hpglake3231 Yeah. Sadly, as it’s not original research, I don’t think it would make a professional journal. Definitely worthy of publication in a mainstream popular format though! BBC or something!
You have interpreted this period quite well. I think you've proved your point. Well put together.
Dr. Miano you are awesome. It's infuriating watching conspiracy theorists disingenuously spreading emotionally and intellectually coddling falsehoods. Thank you.
"Conspiracy theorists?" What conspiracies are being theorized about surrounding this video?
What "conspiracy" are you refering to, the one you've just invented in your mind? Grow up and stop the childish name calling.
@@chaostheory6143 ancient lost super civilization Atlantis stuff or ancient aliens.
@@CostaCola how are those conspiracies?
@@chaostheory6143 The proponents usually use the conspiracy theory tactics of unfalsifiable claims, moving definitions, straw-man arguments, and misunderstanding of other view points to reach emotional charged conclusions that they have a "true" or "secret" knowledge that the experts, as some sort of unified block, are trying to suppress.
Excellent work and I myself am ever so appreciative to have come across this highly informative channel.
I want Joe Rogan to bring Hancock on and have them watch this together and live react 😂
I don’t think that would help. Once the brain dies, it’s dead. You can’t grow a new one.
somewhere out there Graham Hancock has his fingers in his ears singing: "lalala I can't hear you"
I’d prefer they both just go away lol. It’s unbelievable to me that people look to them for knowledge.
@@Sfhakrnlol the fucking arrogance. Get over yourself
@@Sfhakrnwhy
Very well done. This is not the first time Graham Hancock has been clearly and correctly told why he is wrong with references... he has yet to correct himself in response to any evidence which precludes his claims. It seems he likes selling his books a lot more than he likes sharing true information.
He’s not going to respond because this isn’t evidence those buildings were dated after gobekli tepe. The guys showing buildings made after as a means to show how they upskilled themselves when those structures are dated after. It makes no sense for Hancock to respond to false information
@@Manbearpig4456 liar.
Graham Hancock is the Alex Jones of archaeology.
I love this! The amount of detail and the analysis that you present is amazing and I could listen to it all day. I love this kind of in-the-weeds, thorough examinations. Thank you so much for this video.
I got to say, this was pretty convincing.
One piece of evidence id like to put into the record against graham hancocks proposed ancient history is the history channels "Life After People" , both the tv movie and the series. Which in my opinion shows pretty clearly that we would have more evidence of this lost advanced civilization.
Ah, see, that's where you're wrong. They have a way out of that reality. Often I've heard the claim that, at least for "Atlantis" their culture was so advanced that they produced no waste and everything was made out of some kind of bio degradable material and the like.
I'm not sure if that's Hancock's opinion or not, but that's the kind of weird logic that pops up often in the "ancient advanced civilization" crowd
@@caodesignworks2407 everything they built was biodegradable except for the very specific things they built that were then claimed by others is a fun unfalsifiable claim.
@@sampagano205 Exactly!
It also was "crystal technology" instead of petroleum technology (plastics etc). IDK what crystal technology is supposed to mean, exactly, so don't ask me. No, I've never seen any real artifacts that looked like anything I'd call crystal technology. Though, most artifacts are in private collections... I'd assume something like that would've gotten out by now. So... no evidence for any kind of ancient advanced technology, other than moving and carving large stones, and whatever biodegradable stuff they made. Probably no nuclear reactors or worldwide container ships.
Probably their carved stones were based on earlier carving of wood and hard animal products. So, designs "suddenly" appearing in stone doesn't mean that the designs were taught from outside. It could mean itinerant craftsmen, or it could mean the people transferred existing arts to stonework, at that point, based on older local artistic traditions and development in the region. Trade and long movements go back much further than we knew about 100 years ago... not like modern technology though. People had seaworthy vessels, but nothing like diesel container ships, or electric ray guns, or crystal wands that controlled the weather... I mean, there must be some convoluted way to get from that kind of society to the evidence we find today, but it would require incredible successful conspiracies, and not one piece of evidence making it thru to modern consciousness, and 100% of the evidence pointing g to the contrary... just the fact that we found oil close to the surface. Our type of society wouldn't have left that available for the future. But anyway.
I find it rather hypocritical for him to ask for so much evidence yet provide none himself of such extraordinary claims. Basically pushing his narrative based on the little information we have on pre history. He picked the easiest part of archeology and history to make millions off since he can speculate all he wants and whenever you disprove his false claims his followers say stuff like “ but what about the precision and perfectly made stuff by such and such civilization which cannot even be replicated to this day”. He pretty much found the best clientele for his product.
If you actually watch his documentary series you'll realise that he's not making claims. He's simply offering up an alternative explanation of human history. At no time does he ever claim to be right
@@pokie6087damn dude, that's an absolutely pathetic argument for the garbage that falls out of his mouth. Everything he speaks about is presented as fact. He slithers by the baseless conclusions by offering a weak "if I could see a something" and demading evidence that proves him wrong instead of presenting evidence that supports his wild ideas. It's bad fiction, at best, and he knows that.
@@InchFab
Just a question out of interest. Why has Hancock generated such a vitriolic reaction from the scientific establishment, but yet people who claim that other worldly beings came down from outer space and used their technology to build these amazing structures, get a free pass. Heck they even have prime time TV documentaries like ancient aliens. Why aren't archaeologists taking issue with that.
@@pokie6087 If all he was doing was offering an alternative explanation then why every time he has a chance to attack “mainstream academia” he does. Hancock essentially is a snake oil seller. He sells you the idea that for example Gobekli tepe couldn’t have been made by “simple and primitive” hunter-gatherers. He tells you that before he even shows you anything just so that you can have that engraved on your mind that archeologist believe simple hunter-gatherers lived there and then he proceeds to attack “mainstream academia” so that you can think like “ well if he’s being attacked by mainstream academia it must mean he’s onto something” when in reality the academia is extremely strict with any research being done that makes extraordinary claims without extraordinary evidence. Then he makes up a story about the site ( could be anything from it was built to warn us about a apocalyptic event, to save themselves from the flood or for whatever reason) say it was built 12,000 years ago with no evidence and call it a day. Everything you can do in science and archeolgy wrong he’s doing it.
@@pokie6087 bruh no one takes ancient aliens seriously that is why, not even themselves. Hancock is the one making claims since a long time ago. Hancock also wrote crazy books about an ancient lost civilization in MARS, bruh in mars. Of course this didn’t work as he intended but then he found the working formula. Make an argument based on no evidence that can change the history of every single part of the world. His evidence is based on a negative which is “well you can’t disprove they didn’t exist therefor it’s possible” instead of doing “ said lost civilization existed and this is the evidence”
The simplest explanation to Hancock's phenomenon could be found using Occam's razor: 1) he's a reporter, so he makes living selling stories. 2) people love bold borderline outlandish ideas, mysteries and conspiracy theories. 3) law of supply and demand gives a perfect economic explanation to why he's clinging on to his conjectures, that's the only way to present himself as a "disruptor" and Prometheus sort of figure, which will spur more interest to the product he sells. Plus, we shouldn't rule out Narcissistic or histrionic traits, when a person seems to repeatedly do things that seem irrational or lacking adequate reasoning even though they're aware of the flaws and have been repeatedly shown why their behaviour or ideas are flawed. So his case might very well be driven by: 1) monetary gains 2) attention seeking 3) self aggrandisement or the combination of all 3.
I love the over abundance of evidence of evolution well done!
I must have spend hundreds of hours going down rabbit holes, with the fascination about Biological Evolution, in defense of Creationists and people who insist on narrow, literary readings of Biblical texts - whether Jewish or Christian. I am now doing that with my other passion: archaeology.
@@TheMuseumGuyIsrael - So, you are STILL a creationist in spite of all your research?
@@MossyMozart quite the contrary. I never was. But I was always stumped by how much effort people put into denying science because of their literal reading of Genesis 1-2. I spent many hours studying Creationism to see if there's anything to it...and there clearly isn't
@@TheMuseumGuyIsrael so you believe in a big bang theory and not the big dad theory?
@@CoercedJab that's very cute. I like that.
Within mainstream Orthodox Judaism, science is generally accepted and there's no reason not to accept the scientific observations about the universe.
Some people used to argue that computer technology, especially at the chip level, just sort of appeared so suddenly, that it must have been reverse engineered from recovered UFO crashes. Not so much these days.
I love how every response ive seen to Graham Hancock has been incredibly respectful and only attacked his arguments or his impact on the field, while every time ive seen Graham Hancock talk about archeologists he’s made at least one dig at them
Its hilarious
Thank you Prof. Miano for the time and effort you put into debunking this kind of 'alternative history' nonsense. Much appreciated.
Over the last 30 years I went from finding his stories fascinating to thinking he was just a bit ignorant to then believing he was an idiot to now being pretty sure that he is just a crook. It's called getting wiser with the years, I now realise.
for sure, when it gets to the point where you are a random dude who spends like 3 hours a year casually watching videos on the subject offhand on youtube and you seem to know more about these things than hancock does its pretty obvious he has also seen all this evidence, extensively, and has chosen to pretend it doesnt exist.
Looks like i should dump all my Hancock books.
Well I believe in an even more ancient advanced civilisation that taught Graham's ancient civilisation all the skills that they know. My evidence is the lack of an intermediate stage.
Or a starting stage, or any stage really
This video is so well done. The visuals are perfect for the argument presented. I learned a lot more in this video, then watching several other videos of this nature. Amazingly researched and put together. ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Outstanding and precise reply. Thank you for your work, friend!
Graham said the same thing about the Egyptians weren't able to build the pyramids on their own. It makes me laugh at the ignorance of people that have never pick up a hammer and saw before to have these type of conclusions, humans are very capable of doing amazing things without modern electronic distractions. Keep up the good work!
yeah but c' mon Egypt stonework is a bit over the top .
So how were they built? You seem like u know
Can you link to the paper explaining how they were definitively built please?
Distractions have always existed. The bread and circuses we watch on our electronic devices have always existed. The depravity in the red light district. The gaming in the gambling district. Etc
It’s on warpspeed now but it has always existed and their have always been “village idixts”
It’s like saying we should’ve landed on the moon long ago since we weren’t distracted by “electronic devices” for longer than we have been LOL
@@stew0072 they cut the stones with copper saws, water and abrasive sand, then dragged them to the site by hand and put the thing together. we know thats how they did it.
Wow. Apparently this went up 13 hrs ago, and already it has 29K views. Go you. As for me, I spent the entire video going "Wow!" and "Oh wow!" I think what you have shown is that we have discovered these lost advanced cultures of the past. They might not be aliens, and they might not be Atlantean, but they definitely are far more advanced than even Graham Hancock could imagine.
1 day after release it has 61,695 views now.
Do you know how stupid things get millions of views
That doesn't tell shit of merit whatsoever
2 days after release it has 74000 views
Tbf graham working from the ancients playbook.
Historian EP Thompson wrote in the introduction to one of his books that his ambition was to defend ordinary people of the past from "the enormous condescension of posterity".
Such a resonant phrase, and a standing rebuke to buffoons like Hancock with their rhetorical assumption that hunter gatherers are necessarily technologically incompetent.
An excellent presentation. So many times as shown over generations we feel that only those developing towards the modern era knew how to solve social and technical problems. This clearly shows that even the hunter-gatherers were mentally complex and goal directed as we are, just different environments dictating what those needs were.
The videos full of blatant lies, none of those sites pre date gobekli tepe
@@Manbearpig4456 Dude, you’re going by when the sites were discovered, not when they were built.
@@MarcosElMalo2no I’m not, miano had to admit on Reddit his dating was wrong. Only one of the sites he shows pre-dates gobekli tepe making the video a pile of nonsense
@@Manbearpig4456 Man you really think that lying is a great argument don't you? Like you don't realize that we can just go check the dates ourselves and confirm that they're correct. I guess the idea of researching a topic is so alien to you that you never considered it.
@@hedgehog3180 look them up for yourself then billy big balls see once you realise I’m correct remove your comment you muppet
Love this explanation & elaboration of the gradual growth & development things ! Thank you for the lecture Mr. Miano 👽🙏
Do you remember when the Pyramids or Ancient Egypt "appeared out of nowhere?" Ya, Hancock has to keep the schtick up. If he lets it go, the bank coffers will empty too fast. He won't be able to keep his Ayahuasca addiction going or, any other new addition.
There are 36 underground cities within 200 miles of Gobekli Tepe. Who built these? Why were they built?
A bit offensive to say that a prior advanced civilization (or extraterrestials?) had to have intervened, implying that paleolithic hunters and gatherers wouldn't have been intellectually capable of constructing Gobekli Tepe.
It's also been noted that Hancock used to also claim the people from Atlantis were white, which quickly makes it racist to suggest all the non white people needed the white man to teach them how to stack rocks.
@@NinjaMonkeyPrimeand that is exactly why your theories are inferior to someone like Hancock's. You can't imagine an alternative idea because suddenly its racist to suggest the random brown people who claim such advances might be mis- interpreting their history.
@@BGI-q3y Are you sure you even know what Hancock says? Because he's literally on record in saying that the people from Atlantis were white. Then he's tried to backtrack from the obvious racist implications. It's really hard to take Hancock fans seriously when they appear to have no clue what he's actually said.
I think they white too, it makes sense.
@@BGI-q3y It is in fact racist to say exactly what you're saying. You whining won't change that and also proves the obvious, that this was never about genuine curiosity but a need to take away the achievements of all non-white people and assign them to white people. Herman Göring would congratulate you.
Wonderful work. Incredible what they were able to do.
@nebulan - Yes! Earlier people were not stupid at all, just less experienced. We owe them so very much.
@@MossyMozart And even then.. they don't have the same experiences as me, but at the same time they were way more experienced than I am. I'm living in a modern world where I don't actually have to be very experienced at anything, though I'm good at writing using a computer keyboard. Not much, really. Very few of us can do much if we were thrown into a pre-industrial world.
Simply amazing video, I wasn’t aware of such impressive archeological sites.
It's pretty funny how Hancock accuses archeologists of thinking we're so advanced and ancient people were dumb while he denegrates every known society and hunter gatherers.
Graham Hancock = TLDR: Aliens of the Gaps.