Listened to the latest Joe Rogan podcast today and this show was talked about. Very interesting to consider that maybe there was an advanced human civilization that was destroyed during the ice age.

It is an interesting watch so far and 3 episodes in I'm enjoying it.

It may be interesting but Graham Hancock is a nut job. I like Rogan quite a bit but he will get behind a crazy conspiracy. He also likes Hancock as he has been on there a few times.

I haven't watched the Netflix show but would have a hard time with it if the goal is to present Hancocks BS as a possibility to have ever occur.

Last ice age is way too recent for all traces of a technological society to disappear.

I've often thought about what a way more distant advanced society would have left behind. If there was a technological society in the age of the dinosaurs, would we expect to find any trace of it 65 million years later? Probably not.

Considering that humans went from just like every other animal species to advanced technology in 100,000 years it is kind crazy to think about all the 100,000 year periods since life was on earth.

I don't think Graham is a nut job. He just asks questions that main stream scholars do not want to look into as it could hurt their credibility if the are wrong

amercer said:

---

Last ice age is way too recent for all traces of a technological society to disappear.

I've often thought about what a way more distant advanced society would have left behind. If there was a technological society in the age of the dinosaurs, would we expect to find any trace of it 65 million years later? Probably not.

Considering that humans went from just like every other animal species to advanced technology in 100,000 years it is kind crazy to think about all the 100,000 year periods since life was on earth.

---

Wrong. We found all of their animated home movies back in the 80's.

plowboy1065 said:

---

I don't think Graham is a nut job. He just asks questions that main stream scholars do not want to look into as it could hurt their credibility if the are wrong

---

I don't think he really is either, but he comes off as one here because . . .

Quote:

---

He just asks questions that main stream scholars do not want to look into as it could hurt their credibility if the are wrong

---

Yeah, as he insists on telling us every 5 minutes. In a way that's kind of nutty. While he crisscrosses the globe telling us why these sites are older than "academia" says, but not actually connecting any dots or presenting a coherent alternative. Maybe that's coming in the last episode.

He talks about the dissmissive and arrogant culture of academia, and I have NO DOUBT he's right. But he's over the top about it in a way that I just don't see. He acts as though Gobekli Tepe doesn't exist. In my lifetime alone the accepted view of human history has changed A LOT. Some of what he's presented I just flat out don't believe academia has refused to even look into it.

The show is taking us some interesting places and raising some interesting questions. He just has a tendency to ask them in a very Oliver Stone kind of way.

plowboy1065 said:

---

Do you know which episode it is or who he's talking to?

---

I believe it's the one with Hancock and Michael Shermer.

This happens every 150,000 years. Not every 100,000.

Just ask Mitochondrial Eve the next time you are in Tanzania.

Good show. I enjoyed it. At best its very speculative and at worst is fantasy archeology, but it makes for entertaining food for thought. I do find his battle with "academia" hilarious. Thumbs down to the serpent mound folks for being gatekeepers on what someone is allowed to show about their site, they played into his kook "science is hiding something" hands and came off like petty jerks holding back riff raff they dont agree with from a site or whatever.

Humorous Username said:

---

amercer said:

---

Last ice age is way too recent for all traces of a technological society to disappear.

I've often thought about what a way more distant advanced society would have left behind. If there was a technological society in the age of the dinosaurs, would we expect to find any trace of it 65 million years later? Probably not.

Considering that humans went from just like every other animal species to advanced technology in 100,000 years it is kind crazy to think about all the 100,000 year periods since life was on earth.

---

Wrong. We found all of their animated home movies back in the 80's.

---

Dino Riders was the *****

JJxvi said:

---

Good show. I enjoyed it. At best its very speculative and at worst is fantasy archeology, but it makes for entertaining food for thought. I do find his battle with "academia" hilarious. Thumbs down to the serpent mound folks for being gatekeepers on what someone is allowed to show about their site, they played into his kook "science is hiding something" hands and came off like petty jerks holding back riff raff they dont agree with from a site or whatever.

---

100% this. They should have negotiated to welcome his visit with the caveat that they get to present their own research that supports their view of the site's history on the show, too. Sunshine is the best disinfectant!

All of this history has been discovered, learned, documented in what, the last 100? to 150? years. I find it difficult to believe we haven't made any errors in our understanding of things that occurred 1,000s of years ago.

Quote:

---

I've often thought about what a way more distant advanced society would have left behind. If there was a technological society in the age of the dinosaurs, would we expect to find any trace of it 65 million years later? Probably not.

---

If we can find 65 million year old footprints in mud, and fossilized bones of dinos, I think we could find remnants of an advanced society.

'03ag said:

---

...He (graham) acts as though Gobekli Tepe doesn't exist...

---

what do you mean?
hes a huge fan of Gobekli Tepe

OasisMan said:

---

'03ag said:

---

...He (graham) acts as though Gobekli Tepe doesn't exist...

---

what do you mean?
hes a huge fan of Gobekli Tepe

---

I was earlier in the show. He got to it in the next episode.

The problem for him is it doesn't fit with his general take on Academia. They seem perfectly willing to redo their timelines in the face of new evidence and Gobekli Tepe is as good an example of that as any. Maybe not as quickly or as radically as he'd like.

I finally finished and he never presented a coherent thesis. The most annoying point was his conversation with Rogan when he's asked for Academia's counter argument and he just says "because we say so." It's really hard to take anything he says seriously with that attitude. I have no doubt Academia is arrogant and probably wrong on a lot of things. But I can guarantee you they're going to have a lot more than "We say so" on their side.

Graham found his niche as the "I'm just asking questions" guy. He is kind of like a partisan radio host. Creates false straw men, presents one side of arguments, claims the establishment is hiding something, and never seems to have any of his theories ever proven to be correct (or even plausible).
It's an easy way to make a good living without ever having to stand up to academic scrutiny.

Hancock is not a nut even if he is outside the mainstream. I don't see how you could honestly call him that unless you're just a closed-minded jackass. I don't think he is right about everything obviously, and I agree some of what he claims seems far-fetched, but nobody else is asking questions about how some of these structures far older than the most ancient cultures we know of were built, and what the broader implications are. The ultimate idea he is communicating (that there was some ancient more advanced culture) is basically factual. There's no other realistic way to explain some of the artifacts and structures from pre-antiquity that we couldn't even replicate today. I think the only question is how advanced were they? If they were advanced in the same sense we are, they would have left artifacts in space and on the moon, which they didn't. But they were certainly more advanced than the hunter gatherers of 10,000 -12,000 years ago. Somehow humanity reverted back that hunter-gatherer phase AFTER already developing agriculture once and building complex structures and cities earlier in history. We don't know how or why that happened. Asking those questions might not be mainstream, but if nobody broke from the mainstream, science and history would never make progress.