Submitted by Mind-Matters-Not t3_z109pu in todayilearned
Reply to comment by blackday44 in TIL the Great Pyramid of Giza is not the largest pyramid in the world, Great Pyramid of Cholula, also known as Tlachihualtepetl, is the largest archaeological site of a pyramid in the New World, as well as the largest pyramid by volume known to exist in the world today. by Mind-Matters-Not
I'm pretty sure he is building up to the Younger-Dryas impact theory. Something like a series of meteor impacts 12,000 years ago caused rapid changes in climate. It's not just about a "flood" its that during the last ice age the sea level was hundreds of feet lower. Since humans like to build on the coasts this would have drowned any existing ancient civilizaitons
Correct he’s building to the YDIH and then claims, with out evidence, that there was civilization that existed and spread their knowledge all over the world. He does this with zero evidence to support the idea of a lost civilization
He doesn’t do this without evidence. He uses myths from across different cultures, and temples and their relation to astronomy to suggest a lot of these different structures are older than believed. It’s fine to not believe that is sufficient evidence, but to pretend he just came up with it and didn’t try to back it up with evidence is just false.
Also, it doesn’t seem like he’s saying there is a single lost civilization, but several that were ended due to the climate disaster.
He definitely just came up with it any number of civilizations could independently build structures in relation to astronomical bodies, they can all see the sky, it’s a huge stretch to claim it’s because a lost civilization told them too. There is no physical evidence to back up his claims.
You're really framing this in a strawman way. He does at times suggest that leap, but he more often is pointing out valid evidence of structures that go against the modern timeline of progress and is saying the current timeline is incorrect. Gobekli Tepe and the megalithic templea at Malta are both worth studying much more and in my eyes are strong evidence to reconsider the timeline of human technological capability.
To be fair, all Graham Hancock ever does is strawman “mainstream” archaeology.
He definitely makes too many leaps, like constantly. The whole "Let's talk about Atlantis" moment made me cringe during the series. There is some valid evidence of interesting things from longer ago than the 6000 years currently accepted.
Yeah that’s not what is claimed at all though. It seems like you’re trying very hard to strawman the position. I’d suggest actually watching it or at least trying to understand what is being stated before jumping to “he just made it all up”.
He gives a few speculations on why they might have built these structures this way, but none of them were “some ancient civilization told them to.”
Objectively: he’s been claiming for a long time that civilization is much older than we think and there were advanced civilizations that were wiped out by some cataclysm and the ancient, sophisticated wonders were signs that some history and methods were passed down orally by survivors. The rise of the Younger Dryas Impact could be seen as something that corroborates (or simply coincides with) his theory as well as the ever-increasing “age” of civilization as seen in Gobekli Tepi and similar sites. Subjectively: There are a lot of naysayers, but it’s fair to say that over the past few years his theories have generally looked better and better. I think he’s a bit off the deep end with how “advanced” he proposes they were, but I think it’s very interesting (and plausible) there were civilizations lost to time. Even if we vanished, there’d be no signs left after ten thousand years and the Younger Dryas was like 12,000 years ago.
Is it plausible? Of course but there’s no physical evidence for it and then the claim that they sailed all over the world spreading knowledge to other civilizations, yeah his conjecture is bullshit. The time to believe in ancient lost civilizations is when there is evidence to back it up, not a crackpot journalist making claims to sell bullshit books
Again, 12000 years ago, not exactly a possibility for a ton of physical evidence. Things do, suspiciously, keep getting older…
I think the strong reactions, like yours, to the mere notion that it’s possible we don’t know everything about ancient history is even more fascinating than the theories, however outlandish.
Yes, as new evidence is discovered we change and adapt our theories to fit the evidence, that’s how science works. The time to believe something is when there’s evidence, pardon me for not wanting to take a journalist at his word.
The farther you go back, the more abstract things get. There is “evidence”, it’s a matter of if you believe it and how you interpret it. Someone sees an ancient road buried under the sea, others see a rock formation.
Which is why I default to scientific consensus, and the scientific consensus around the Bimini Road is that it’s a naturally occurring geological formation
Gobekli Tepi IS the evidence for it. What do you need, a VHS and guidebook?
The Bimini Road, a uniform and leveled structure dozens of feet below sea level, consistent with what sea levels would have been during the last ice age, is enough evidence for me that the age of civilization and the age of many of our great megoliths is worth further examination
Look into the water erosion questions about the Sphinx and Robert Schoch. Pretty interesting stuff and also branded “fringe”.
The other thing we are battling against is that we know historical Christianity and Islam (other regions i'm sure as well) were masters at building on top of historical sites, burying them and replacing the older cultures.
Destructions of libraries is another aspect; Viking raids, library of Alexandria, sack of Baghdad.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments