More thoughts on a Lost Civilization
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 фев 2025
- Thanks to all!
Chip me a tip with a super thanks or become a channel member today for some behind-the-scenes perks!
You can buy me a coffee at: www.ko-fi.com/f...
or subscribe at: / flintdibble
In this video, I reflect on and add to the conversation I had with Graham Hancock on the Joe Rogan Experience
Also read my essay in Sapiens Magazine about my motivations for having the conversation: www.sapiens.or...
Keywords: archaeology, history, Graham Hancock, Joe Rogan, Atlantis, Ice Age, Domestication, Neolithic
Remember you can chip me a tip with a Super Thanks or become a channel member today for some behind-the-scenes perks!
Or buy me a coffee at: www.ko-fi.com/flintdibble or subscribe at: www.patreon.com/flintdibble
I just don't understand logically on a base rudimentary level how there can be no lost civilizations. All civilizations we've discovered were lost until discovered and mohenjodaro and the wide spread idea of multiple "cradles of civilization" has arisen only recently positing that civilization emerged at similar times in different regions. Inherently I don't understand how an archeologist can be so stubborn when their entire field is discovering knew civilizations some of which go back thousands of years prior to what was held as rigorous firm doctrine for decades. Wether that be Gobeklitepe or the Kazakhstan stone structure that are tens of thousands of years old. We are not all knowing. We only have a glimpse. Sad people are so indoctrinated they feel confined in a certain timeline when in fact discoveries even in the last decade or two are antithetical to their stubborn attitude.
The irony of what you're saying is:
The reason that you know about those previously unknown sites is because of....
Academic archeologists.
Those exact same people that you hold are too indoctrinated, or too convinced that they already know everything, to be open to new evidence that drastically alters their understanding of humanity's past, _are_ the people who excavate, document, study, and give a date for, the very things you believe are evidence in favor of the idea that academic archeologists desperately don't want to upset the current consensus.
This is very in line with the kind of rhetoric Hancock puts out. That is to say, it is accusing the other side of the doing the things that Hancock is guilty of.
For example, Hancock frequently asserts that academics disparagingly think of the hunter gatherers as really simple people, who weren't capable of achieving great things... They don't.
Hancock then spends _all_ of his time trying to build a case for denying numerous ancient cultures, and people, their rightful recognition of being the people who conceptualized, planned, and worked hard to build the cultures and civilizations that they did.
Their legacy is not allowed to be their own, Hancock insists these people couldn't possibly have created what they did, and so credit is given to a mysterious (and pasty skinned) people, advanced and sophisticated they gifted civilization and culture to the ignorant people of... wherever Hancock deems that the native population couldn't have achieved great things by themselves...
And he will intersperse his assertions with accusations that it is actual archeologists who think these ancient people were simpletons, it is actual archeologists who just have agendas that they follow, it is actual archeologists who ignore evidence that doesn't support their preferred ideas, it is them that denies obvious evidence..
It is projection, and it's an amazingly disrespectful bunch of BS to throw around about the entire academic field of people whose collective expertise, knowledge and experience, Hancock is convinced _he_ can not only match, but _he_ is better than.
JRE: I examine the facts and find that Graham offers plenty of opinions but lacks any evidence to support them. Everything he says is unfounded. However, we can't blame Graham entirely because he claims to be a reporter, not a scientist. But is he really just reporting? There's nothing for him to report since there's no evidence to report on. Instead, he fills his "Hamlet's Mill-style" books with every controversial idea, presenting them as facts. Mostly, he relies on his British accent to give an air of credibility.
Disney 365 Stories written by G.Hangcock
you are a failed academic , who needs to stay in his lane.
I love the idea that if an archeologist happened to find proof of Atlantis, or ancient aliens, that they’d not publish it. “I don’t want the fame and accolades such a find would bring me. I prefer being an underpaid educator/researcher. Why be able to set up my own grant foundation with the proceeds when I could remain anonymous and beg for grants?”
Science, history, academia is fun.
Reminds me of how some people claim drug companies are hiding a cure for cancer - sigh.
@@shenanitims4006 but when archaeologists have found proof that changes the accepted view they haven't been praised like you say. When Jacques Cinq-Mars found evidence of humans in the americas 24000 years ago he was vilified, shouted down, harassed, ridiculed, and had his career destroyed. Now they know he was correct.
We already know humans during the ice age had watercraft, how else did they get to Australia 50k years ago??? Why have no vessels from 50k years ago been found, when we know they existed, and we know the approximate location.
Do you think they swam?
The fact that humans got to Australia 50k years ago is proof that humans were traveling by sea 50k years ago. You don't need to find the boats.
@@paulholloway1599 Or doctors hiding cures.
Hardcore JRE listener. I come for the speculation and stay for open discourse on the evidence. Hats off to you and your research. Speaks for itself. Keep going!!
Nope! If you want to show him admiration, keep your hat on! no matter what!
Explain Tucker and his denial of Evolution then.
@Wayzor_ Money can buy an education and it can also shelter brainworms.
Tucker chose the latter and Joe just goes along and asks questions
yeah if you are hardcore jre listener you got issues bruh... dude just regurgitates the same stories over and over till he hits that 3hr mark.
@@Big_ten no, it's the endless rogan clips that get attention and reaction, regardless of how fucking erroneous or outright stupid the claims are.
i remember rogan early in his podcast(i even remember 'the joe show' prior to that), he used to complain about woo peddlers, now he's a podium for woo and bad takes.... for instance his supplements for memory and his own lack of recall as proof his supplements are woo.
Thank you Flint. Thank you Milo, Kaleigh, Raven,
And the countless others ;
The historians , like David Miano, the geologist s , the scientists.
For bringing forth honest evidence, with proof, in the scientific manor.
And I see a trend with more info on topic, with less google debunking
Although I do enjoy the debunking, I like learning true stories, we are all curious, and I’m sick of the seudo science crap.
So thank you for taking the time to teach me how to think critically and tell me what we know now given the evidence.
It’s refreshing. Thank you all that helps band together , to deliver this scientific knowledge.
I appreciate it. ❤
Bro you are a savage and the world needs it. Keep up the good work.
Sup Flint, regardless of all the hate you got for doing Joe's podcast, you did a great job.
Thanks! Your JRE appearance was great :)
Thanks Daniel!
I lost both of my parents to cancer also. I'm not an archaeologist, but have always had a lot of interest in it, and have followed you for a long time. I think you honor your father's memory and he would be extremely proud.
As an archaeologist, I had the chance to meet Mr . Dibble on an excavation in Crete 2 years ago. He is one of the most passionate, knowledgeable and engaging people I’ve ever seen. He had the entire team completely drinking his words about a few samples of goat bones and teeth while also encouraging phds, confirmed archaeologists and students to exchange ideas , question and actively participate in the thinking process of his work. Knowing how quite a few of the so called experts can sometimes be people who just love to hear themselves speak, it was not only refreshing but also very inspiring. I couldn’t have thought of a better person to defend the “archaeologists point of view” on the debate with G. Hancock. Great guy!
Calling Hancock a racist was despicable. While he attempts to soften what he says, the implication was clear, and the goal, very much intentional.
@PaulAssmannyou know there's alot of phenomenon that involve seeing connections where there isn't. Especially when you've been told its there. If you think there's indisputable evidence of this civilization, you've been mislead. I can't say you'll see the magic evidence disproving this notion in your mind (many people that hold these ideas tend to be quite stubborn, hopefully you're an exception). However, the evidences of what we have is all out there a most of it's free, people have spent many centuries making a large effort to understand the past. I won't say with absolute certainty there wasn't a globe spanning civilization, most scientists would as well, the earth is big and we haven't checked everywhere at present. Yet, we have an advanced globe spanning civilization in the modern day and the evidence is; at no point in time has any place exhibited any of the hallmarks of a global civilation. Where is the genetic interchange between distant peoples? Why did all of their food crops emerge from local flora? Where's there garbage? Did they just go to extreme lengths to make it look like they were never there? (If so, give me a single verifiable reason as to why)
@@RobertoMarsalisrepeating things don't make them true sadly.
@PaulAssmann it’s not what you’re “totally shure” about. It’s what you can prove and you can’t prove it.
Great job! Rock on.
Thanks so much!
Wait, your brother is named Chip? Chip & Flint? hahahaha, thats great
Shame it wasn't steel. Flint and steel. Sorry.
@@DrumToTheBassWoop flint and chip is way better for archaeologists, though it seems to set up brothers for a weird relationship. One “chips” “flint” to make a tool
I sware its true lol
@@DrumToTheBassWoop We got a bright spark right here , im off for a knapp .
@@benjaminacurry4867one might in fact chip some flint to fashion a dibble.
Thanks!
Thanks so much!
I learned about you because of that episode. I honestly do find Graham entertaining and always liked him as a guest. That being said, you brought your A game and I became an instant fan which brought me to your channel and subscribed. I bet Joe invites you back on your own. I think if you were out there more and had more exposure just speaking facts and all the stuff you know about, people would want to watch it and learn. It is just as fascinating as lost civilization stuff, plus you actually have evidence supporting your knowledge.
What the hell are you talking about? He was petty and childish the whole time.
@@rijancaffegraham?
More fascinating because it’s not made up fantasy nonsense
@@rijancaffe Atleast he doesnt believe in a make believe fantasy land like you do buddy
@@MrWeanie and you give us a link to a know liar?
Wow
Thanks FD! held it down on JRE.. buy a coffee kind sir
Thanks Justin!
Hi Flint. Here from Joe Rogan podcast. Was a Hancock believer before. Am a lot less now. Thank you for bringing us all a reality check. bravo. And keep up the good work, the world needs more like you!
hahahahahahahahahahahh
You were amazing at Rogan, your knowledge to detail was truly stunning. I am a fan!!!
Thank you! Cheers!
Up until now Stefan Milo was the only archeologist I followed on RUclips but you've earned yourself a new subscriber!! Looking forward to seeing more of your videos!! Thanks!
It was a Viking who took the dump that was so big it survives to this very day, displayed in a museum. It had to hurt evacuating that thing. If only the warrior taking it knew then that the cause of his severe discomfort would become an educational tool for generations of children, and the most memorable artefact ever displayed in York's Viking centre. He would have been very proud.
how many courics would that be? 🤔
@@TEHmaniac437 shitty wok
i read your post as, "I was a viking who took the..."
i was about to congratulate you ))
@@TEHmaniac437 i dont think many wouldve picked up on your comment .Bono im not number twos and i need my bitty.
@@TEHmaniac437 Hey Sharon, come look at this
"Specimens courtesy of [my father]."
That's so cool that you two get to study the same things :)
11:00 onwards, my mom had a great example of how mixing quotes out of context sounds: "Judas vetraued Jesus..." " Now you go and do likewise". Both are correct Bible quotes, but they're a few pages apart, so combining these together isnt better than movie kidnappers using newspaper headlines to make a ransom note and then blaming Times for advocating the crime because their words were used out of context.
*betrayed, of course, not whatever my phone typed.
Found you by way of Milo. Love your enthusiasm for your work! Catching up on some of your content and looking forward to more. Keep up with the countering of anti-science!
Stargate Atlantis, how do you explain that dibble?!?!
Fiction.
lmao. Graham Hancock is so full of shit.
@@MossyMozart that's what they want you to believe..
@@sg24336 the elite
@@MossyMozart Alternative history, don't you know anything bro?
Thank you from the bottom of my heart. We need more people like you. Best way to fight pseudoscience is with facts. It’s a tedious process to root the weeds out, but as long as people like you keep contributing we at least stand a chance. ❤
Huge kudos to Flint for stepping up and engaging with Graham in a meaningful debate. It was truly an enlightening discussion.
I'm very grateful for the valuable resources you shared with us and happy to see some archaeologists finally telling their stories in a more engaging way.
On a large platform as well
The confirmation bias of Graham in the conversation about Quetzalcoatl was a pretty good highlighting of his overall overarching head canon. That conversation about Quetzalcoatl alone was a massive blow to his methodology. He refuses to accept evidence that isn't part of his grand mythos.
@@iraniansuperhacker4382 There isn't much and within 5 hours Graham couldn't highlight any of this evidence.
@@iraniansuperhacker4382 Graham highlighted gut feelings and ancient myths for his ENTIRE basis of evidence lol.
@@iraniansuperhacker4382 Evidence of early jewelry making techniques that still use primitive tech like easel speed drilling and carving stone isn't very compelling in constructing an advanced civilization narrative. Even if easel speed drilling and other methods of jewelry making were found 10-30k years earlier than previously seen, that doesn't change the fact that these methods are still primitive and its not out of the realm of possibility these things could have been created by primitive hands. This is the thing, you people constantly look to reinforce your own confirmation bias. You have a narrative head canon built up already and look for things to reinforce that solely.
@@iraniansuperhacker4382 And the fact is your "advanced drill" theory is supported by articles from the Daily Mail and not academic research lol. You're using sensationalized media articles not archeological discovery and research.
What mostly annoys me with Hancock is how he likes to date things with zero evidence to back him up. Someone excavated a cave into a few rooms, must be from the end of the ice age.
I watched this vid yesterday about this huge cave in China they claimed was impossible to date. It had well made pictures though and one of them they showed was a Buddha. Yeah, I am no expert in ancient Chinese art but they look Quin to me or possibly Han and there is no way a picture of Buddha is older then 2500 BCE.
Graham of course were there claiming it was far older but that isn't what the evidence really say and we know Qin Shi Huangdi had enough resources to build one of the most impressive grave complex ever made including the terracotta army so he at least certainly had the resources and skills to dig out a large cave for some reason.
And Graham does this all the time, if some kind of dating method proves him wrong he ignores it.
Archaeology should be the opposite, you look on your site by itself first before you try to pin it in with something else. When you have narrowed down the date and culture then you can start to draw conclusions how it fit in, not before you even know how old it can be. Cherry picking single things also doesn't help, there is probably other artifacts at the place that set that artifact into perspective.
He doesn’t just suggest a date based on an uneducated guess, and the same goes for archaeologists. One of the theories that made me pay attention to more credible alternatives than what is taught in schools was the inclusion of evidence beyond mere assumptions, incorporating other branches of science, like geology. For example, examining the water erosion on the Sphinx and understanding historical weather patterns suggests a different timeline for its construction. The assumption that the face depicts a human is questionable when you consider the dramatic difference in proportion between the head and the body, implying that the monument might not have been built by the same people who later re-carved the head. Ancient builders were known for their precision in proportions, so it makes no sense why they would carve such a disproportionately small head. Time and again, historians and anthropologists have been proven wrong by ignoring other sciences. So why won’t they dig deeper to uncover the truth?
All of this became a seed for me to start looking deeper into history, beyond what was simply taught by scholars. Other branches of science, like astronomy, offer a different approach. When astronomers discover something new or realize they misunderstood something, they are willing to modify their views and accept that they didn’t know everything. In contrast, historians and archaeologists are often resistant to changing their perspectives when new evidence comes to light. Instead, they seem to do whatever they can to dismiss or ridicule those who challenge their established views.
@@juangoyeneche7304 Ah, the Sphinx, that is an interesting topic.
That story started when Robert Shoch (I probably spelled his name wrong though), geologists, looked on the erosion of the Sphinx in the early 90s.
His report on it was indeed that the Sphinx had seen heavy rain and was older then assumed, he suggested at least that it was 5500 years old instead of 4500 years as previously assumed. Not that nowhere did he claim it was around in the Younger dryas as Hancock claimed.
Now, if he was right that the sphinx had seen heavy rain during the end of the African wet period or not (ended 5000 years ago) or if the statue who is built so it is still connected to the plateau sucked up ground water which increased the erosion is not something I would speculate in since geology isn't one of my skills but either at least sounds plausible.
So why don't we look on the other evidence and consider if Shoch's report would point towards the Sphinx being from an unknown very ancient civilization or not.
First, let's discuss the proportions. The Sphinx is built in 3 different types of sandstone and still connected to the plateau. The head is the hardest and geologist think it stuck up and was kinda head like naturally. The statue was limited to the natural rock it was carved out of so the size of the head does not really prove it used to be larger but neither does it prove it was not.
Let's talk climate. The wet African period ended 5000 years ago. The pyramids are considered built around 4550 years ago. However, the "Date the pyramid" project used 5000 carbon dating samples from mortar and other organic materials and it suggests the pyramids were actually built around 4750 years ago (give or take a century). Do you know where the 4550 years old comes from? That is actually Herodotus who claimed it based on Egyptian sources he heard about.
Climatologists have investigated the Nile's size during the African wet period by taking a lot of sedimentary samples though. Their conclusion is that the place the Sphinx stands was under the Nile until 5500 years ago and their evidence is more conclusive then any of the earlier discussed tests.
The Sphinx would have been under water during the Younger Dryas as well from at least 15 000 years ago and it would not have survived 10 000 years under a way more active river then we see today.
So now, let's move to artifacts and I am including artifacts from the Kroger expedition that most Egyptology experts tend to avoid.
The oldest artifacts we found are Maadi pottery shards and a few tools, maybe 30 artifacts in all.Those disappeared when Narmer took control over the area and founded the first dynasty which is traditionally seen around 5000 years ago even if some evidence point towards it being earlier, maybe even 5500 years ago.
So 30 Maadi artifacts showing activity at the site before 5000 years ago, maybe even up to 6000 years. Then we have the first to third dynasty artifacts, a couple of thousands found at the Kroger pits in the 70s.
Then we have the fourth dynasty artifacts where we can see a huge increase in numbers of artifacts that goes on until Roman times when the number of artifacts shrinks down again.
So nothing before Maadi, not a single artifacts or sign of earlier activity at all. Could there have been an earlier civilization who didn't leave a single thing behind? I think not.
So what does the evidence actually say if we take Shoch's investigation at face value?
Well, if he is right, as well as the size report of the Nile, the Sphinx must have been built around the end of the African wet period. It couldn't have been built until the Nile shrunk enough to build it but that the traditional dating based on Herodotus isn't old enough.
That would leave us with 3 potential builders: The Maadi, the 1st-3rd dynasty including Narmer and the 4th dynasty if we stretch the "Date the period project as far as we can and also Shoch's report.
Those are the people we can prove was in the area and fits with all the evidence we collected. None of them are from a mysterious civilization.
We don't have any signs of the Maadi building huge statues, they did love making underground buildings but the person who brought advanced engineering was Narmer. He also took over the area and had a pretty good motive to build an impressive statue with his head on in his new area.
But the 4th dynasty is possible, even if they are at the end of the period when it could have been built. The African wet period didn't suddenly end in a single day so there were probably some periods of heavy rainfall that became rarer and rarer as time went by.
I think the artifacts is the smoking gun though, Hancock have failed to explain why even he can't point out a single artifact in the area from the period he suggest, not even a flint or metal tool. People leave things after them.
So unless we somehow finds a huge cash of artifacts from Hancock's hypothesized civilization in the area, there is zero things pointing towards him being right. The worlds largest statue does not magically appear, at every other site in the world, we find artifacts from the people who built them, and usually in large numbers which speaks against the Maadi too even if they seems to have had a village in Giza but those we can't totally dismiss, we know they were at least there.
I think it is good to investigate these things but we also need to look on the actual evidence.
We don't with 100% certainty know who built the Sphinx and even traditional archaeologists suggest people like Khufu or Jeddafre (don't check the spelling on that but he was one of Khufu's sons).
I think Narmer is a pretty good candidate too, he had the motive and means to build it and his people was in the area.
So unless you can figure out why there is zero artifacts from the ancient super civilization, that one is out. Even if the Nile's size somehow isn't correct, the 2 softer layers would have been totally devastated by at least 7000 years of heavy rain as well.
But I do enjoy discussing these things and look on the actual evidence. That a single 4th dynasty Pharaoh must have built it is not conclusive, I agree with that part. That however does not mean we can ignore the plenitude of evidence we have,
@@juangoyeneche7304 "ancient builders were known for precision in their proportions" NO? Literally not, older the construction is the more crooked it happens because they didn't know as much. Look at all pyramids that are bent or collapsed, or remade, hell, the Great Pyramid itself looks like it has incisions in the middle of walls due to construction errors. They spend literal tons of mortar to fill the gaps between absolutely uneven stones and it's one of the most impressive monuments! You can still fit a hand between the stones inside. Others are generally worse.
But you're missing the entire point, it's IMPOSSIBLE to have a picture of Buddha made before Buddhism came to China let alone before Buddha LIVED! that's like seeing a Soviet poster depicting Brezhnev and claiming it's from Kyivan Rus' times... It just can't be.
You really ought to collaborate we with Dr. Justin Sledge from the channel Esoterica! I wanna see yall do some ancient dark magic
Because I like listening to Graham I thought to myself you were evil or some shit at first but immediatly I loved listening to you sharing your passion and knowledge
Flint, your dad would be so proud of you. What an awesome family! Well done on the debate , love your passion for archaeology!
I'm so disappointed that all Graham seemed to want to do was smear you. I was on the fence about a lot of this stuff but the fact that you wanted to debate the actual evidence and science and he wanted to cry and avoid the evidence spoke volumes to me. Thank you so much.
I’m glad someone is trying to break through
“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” Issac Asimov
Hey, professor. New subscriber here from Destiny's podcast. I would really love if you consider putting all this amazing information in a 180º VR format because it would be incomparably more immersive and intersting. Science teaching is the one type of video that would benefit immensily from the popularization of VR headsets because it makes the content much clearer and easy to grasp. I'd probably watch several hours of your lectures in this format. Thanks.
It's a good idea and something that could.be fun to work towards for sure
I watched the whole 4hour somrthing from 01:30 in the night to the early morning and finishing off with this. Thank you.
Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.. but at some point it is evidence you shouldn't be wasting your time looking for something that *evidently isn't there.
Absence of evidence is evidence of absence if presence would be expected to produce evidence.
If I'd told you I was a millionare, and you looked at my bank account and my taxes and found no signs of large sums money ever having been in my possession, you would rightfully doubt my claim.
There is no evidence that I WASN'T a millionare, but the evidence yih would expect is missing.
Subscribed! Superb preparation and presentation in the debate. I loved how you played the ball not the man, and just calmly presented endless fascinating archaeology. My tip is keep doing that. You must have a ton of amazing material from your preparation, I hope Joe invites you back so we can see the rest, I suspect he will!
I love Graham Hancock it was a great debate
18:30 I specifically picked York to visit because of the Lloyd’s Bank Coprolite. I was pleasantly surprised to find out that York is a super cool city. I would highly recommend visiting the city. And the Jorvik Center ride is a wild trip.
Serious question, I'm just an amateur who's curious. Does Flint completely dismiss the possibility of the Younger Dryas impact theory? To clarify, I'm not referring to any advanced civilization prior to suppsed events 11-12K years ago. I'm more wondering if he agrees with massive flooding worldwide, and a very quick glacial melting period since the end of the most recent Ice Age.
I don't think anyone would completely dismiss a theory, I suspect he would say they is an academic debate on this and he is persuaded by the idea of more localised flood events rather than a dramatic deluge event. It is a disputed area and arguments will need to be settled over time and as new evidence is presented. The wheel of academia turns slowly but it does turn.
I wouldn’t say that. Though you’re gunna need proof for that, and the proof for the theory just isn’t there.
We are able to do studies on the impact that led to the end of the dinosaurs. We should be able to find ample proof of the impact theory.
It was great man. I was already teetering but you helped push me back to the right side
As a longtime Rogan listener I feel genuinely foolish for thinking Hancock was anything more than a grifter. The end of the episode really summarizes the differences between you two; you asked for donations for real research and children's education while Hancock shilled his nonsense book.... again. "We can say there is no evidence for an advanced civilization" - Graham Hancock
Now just watch a lot of your perception of his guests begin to erode.. after you realize Joe is just as gullible as anybody & ends up boosting a lot of grifters
Hancock is a masonic plant.
Don’t feel like a fool. I think there is value in crazy conspiracies and pseudo science science simply because, if a little critical, they will eventually lead you to actual scientific knowledge.
When has that happened?
The idea of a lost civilization as advanced or more advanced intrigues me. So I enjoyed listening when Graham would go on the show. I don't think I was ever convinced, but the hypothesis was engaging for me. When watching his Netflix show I could barely make it through Ep1. His tirade about Dibble cemented for me that he had no compelling proof outside of how do you know for sure, otherwise, he would have used that time to show his proof.
Seen the Hancock vs Dibble on the JRE. Loved it, new sub here❤
You could tell that you put the seed of doubt in Rogan's mind.
Graham's hands were sore from all that cherrypicking
Use your Brain why there would be direct evidence when they hide the evidence, when they hide the evidence there would be gaps , use deduction and logic.@@PixelPenguin77
What an awesome podcast and this video was the icing! Great work Flint!!
Hey dude, I love that Rogan brought you on. The podcast was great and I’ve enjoyed diving into your work after. I’m a new fan. I hope he brings you back for a 1 on 1!
Loved your Rogan episode, new subscriber here!
Thank you. My imagination still has a lot of engineering questions but the social scientist in me is really glad your yelling out.
Thanks for doing the debates and because of that I found your channel and other archeologists channels. I really enjoyed your debate, it did change my mind a bunch. I cannot wait to go thru your channel this stuff is fascinating to me.
I hope you have the opportunity to come to Bulgaria for work or even just for a visit! Keep up the good work, it is appreciated!
Graham moved the goalposts from a lost, advanced, world spanning civilisation to a lost civilisation.
"Lost advanced civilization" itself is goalpost moved from ancient aliens... and I mean, lost civilizations exist, problem is he's trying to misattribute everything to them. One example of a monument likely built by a lost civ is Stonehenge. We don't know who made it. It predates druids and Celts, let alone Britons or Anglo-Saxons. Hilariously, it's one monument Hancock DOESN'T attribute to lost civilization.)))
I’m glad you’re getting online and recording. I didn’t even know you had a channel.
I just finished your JRE with Hancock and wow. I am so completely amazed at both the amount of knowledge you possess and your ability to share it in an understandable and engaging way. The difference between Graham and a real scientist was eye opening.
So glad finding out about you from the joe rogan podcast. You are great at what you do and would love to see more
There was a moment when he asked you 'how much of the sahara has been excavated?' then shortly after 'how much of the sahara has been investigated'
It shows a lack of understanding of archeological process. The answer to how much has been *investigated* is 'actually quite a lot!' investigation is more than just digging. You only need to dig where you have a reason to, and investigation into where to dig to ground truth something is almost more important than the actual dig.
I would have loved you to have come back to some of his points with 'yoi know graham, youre right. Not enough has been investigated. If youre willing to put up the funds we'll dig wherever you want to look for something'
this Lost Civilization is very lost... maybe we can start an add "missing Civilization, reward 250 USD "
Thanks for doing this. I had been waiting for years for a real archeologist to confront him on his BS. Thank you!
It was flawless.
Go for round 2.
You were amazing to listen to man! Definitely got me into learning more about the real evidence that exists
Thanks!
Hey man, just wanted to say it's really touching how you talk about your dad and him being your influence. He must have been a great dude, so sorry for your loss (however long ago it might be) and I think he would have absolutely loved your appearance on Rogan - you had to debate two man-made stones! Great to see people so passionate about what they do. Best of luck.
I actually thought JR was pretty nimble and quite open, although he couldn’t seem to accept that interpretations of photos (esp. by non-experts) can’t count as ‘evidence’. GH, on the other hand, the less said the better …
FD did incredibly well: he was fair with an interested layperson, and he managed to bat away the pseudoscientist’s nonsense
Joe Rogan sent me! PS you made me change my mind once all the science and evidence was presented. Unfortunately Grahams case now looks extremely thin. 👏🏼
Enjoyed the podcast with Danny Jones - can you do a podcast on megalithic structures - how were the big stones moved? We can hardly do it today with our own technology. I love Graham Hancock - and I loved what you had to say - great research you have done, true field work.
The vases lmao
I hate to break to you that you've been mislead. Videos of people failing to understand the capacity of the tools they're using isn't evidence that we can't do it. Here's some fun facts; The US can deploy abrams tanks to most places if necessary. An Abrams tank weighs around 70 short tons (about 10 tons heavier than the biggest stone in the great pyramid). We accomplish this by lifting them on and off ships and transporting them on railways. The USA has the ability to make a pyramid out of functioning abrams tanks. Now ask yourself if the Egyptians could do that.
I can’t stand Rogan but was happy to see somebody with some real experience and education In archeology and history on there debunking the nonsensical bullsh!t spewed by Hancock and his ilk.
Good job Flint, you are a true Scientist, I like Graham and he is a dreamer, but you two need to team up, basically Graham needs really good archeologists to work with him to actually prove older stuff. Team work!
Let's break down the list of people who think Atlantis is fictional: Flint Dibble, Me, Almost EVERYONE who has a career in science, Plato... Now let's break down the list of people who think Atlantis is real: AUTHORS WHO MAKE MONEY FROM BOOKS AND OTHER MEDIA INVOLVING ATLANTIS
Great video!
Good job man, really good listen on that podcast.
I was very entertained and enlightened. A very good job in presenting yourself, your research and your arguments against Graham Hancock's theories. You have a new subsciber and i would love for you to give us updates on the Natufian sites and older ones like Ohalo II whether you are directly involved or have insights that were shared with you by your fellow archeologists. Thank you.
Im on the ancient advanced civilization side and I just wanted to swing by and say thank you for doing the debate with Graham.
U still on that side even after the debate?
Still? Can i ask why?
@@sirrichter5336 I am.
@@rippedtorn2310 Check out the quartz inclusion granite and dolerite vases produced in the tens or (probably) 100's of thousands.
@@rippedtorn2310 There is too much evidence of technology we cannot replicate. 1 small example, how did they get the granite boxes into the serapeum?
I really liked your presentation at 3:00:00 in the Rogan podcast, very interesting stuff.
New subscriber here! Fantastic job on the Joe Rogan podcast, Flint! You went into the dragon's den and stood up for Archaeology and the scientific method. Looking forward to more archaeology content in the future!
As if Hancock, Schoch, etc., method's aren't "scientific"?
@@sammykays5858Shoch and Hancock aren’t really comparable. Shoch actually writes scientific papers lol. He actually has a research degree.
@@sammykays5858 hancock doesn't have any evidence, at all. that's the problem.
@@kieranb7747 Yes, but he met the Snake Goddess in person while under the influence of ayahuasca. Top that!
Your dad sounds like a great dude and I’m sure he was and is proud as hell of you Flint! Epic work, passion and presentation style too 👍
Hi Mr Dibble , I am a flintknapper from scotland and i reproduce lithics from the european stone age . i used to believe that there was a slight possibility there might be something to hancocks theory but during some simple study of the continuity of lithics from the very early paleo to bronze age , i was able to leave behind the notion of atlantis or a lost universal civilisation .
some things still bug me though . the clear effort to deny earlier than clovis sites in the americas is a major one . Hueatlaco warrants further investigation and i would like to hear your thoughts on this . Also there seems to be a "sterile layer" without artefacts between clovis and pre clovis . would this sterile layer be evidence of depopulation in certain areas and could this be evidence of cataclysmic events in the region ? in scotland for example , on the east coast , there is a layer of sand and debris consistent with the tsunami that sank "doggerland" this layer contains little to no artefacts apart from organic matter . to me it looks comparable to the american "black mat sterile layer " . i may be wildly mistaken and i would love some clarity on the points i raise . one major thing that took me away from hancock was the assertion that clovis people simply "disappeared" . i know this is bollocks , the lithic technology evolved into cumberland/folsom and dalton technologies and beyond .
I think a funny part was when you asked him why he doesn't think Stonehenge (or anywhere in Europe) was built by this lost civilization. He said something like "no advanced civilization worth their salt would build there." Basically due to climate. Yet doesn't he heavily imply they built their civilization here in the PNW? Clearly Joe had that impression, right? They didn't build in Europe... due to climate... but... the climate here was worse than many places in Europe... it was cold, dry and tundra. But hey, what do I know. Maybe they had bigfoot as livestock for their wool.
Funny since that time period (10k-40k years ago) in Europe produces some of the oldest examples of figurative art and even some arguments for proto-writing in 8000 BC, confirmed tracking of animal breeding patterns in cave paintings etc.
I think you're missing the point of this conspiracy: the only reason it exists is to claim brown people couldn't build anything and it had to be aliens. There's never a question of Europeans building something.
Well done !!!
Is it true that metallurgy has never been looked for in ice cores from the ice age period?
why would we?
@@gecko7005 because Flint said we did..
@@codyrod He didn't say that. He said we have looked at ice cores from those times and found no lead in the samples before around 6000BC. Not that people specifically took the samples to look for metallurgy
Hey Flint I have couple of questions …Greece related …I go there every year as musician and spend whole summer and sometimes during the year : 1 how old is Greek Pyramid of Hellinikon , there no available inscription at the site …( strange ha ) 2. How old is Dragons house at Top of Evia, and $ 3 . How old is Pnix wall ? Thanks for a great insight ! For all sights no inscription , basically
Shit man... I was a huge Hancock fan but you destroyed my illusion. Now I'm interested more then ever in archeology. Your channel is a real Goldmine for me now.
A tip for future research from someone studying history, find sources that corroborate.
Graham Hancock was one guy trying to fight academia, but reliable information is usually used by the majority. A story that is believed by the majority of historians or archeologists is probably more accurate than one going out on a limb.
Hope that helps you in your quests into archeology, this field is fascinating
Great post! Loved the debate, thanks for the list of other history truthers on youtube! I subscribed to all of them. I'll hit you up If I ever need a goat picture for one of my books. 🐐😆🐐🐐
11:25 the seemingly unintentional editing cut in what he's saying adds flair to the point being made
Well done Flint, great work on JRE.
I'm certain you got Joe questioning Graham. I hope he has you back on your own to explain more about Archaeology, the processes and the method.
I have subscribed
good stuff!! keep up the good work.
PS your refutation of Hancock's taking of his quotations of the Edfu texts out of context is "chef kiss" brilliant.
Just found your channel and hearing about your dad was great. Im so sorry about your loss ❤ i lost my father to cancer in 2022 and all we can ever do is continue to live on in ways they would be proud. Love your video and keep speaking real truth to these baffoons
What changed everything for me was watching the original 1979 Life on Earth by David Attenborough ... its a slow, almost painful explanation of all the evidence. And it blew my mind all the evidence that existed, in a long form series. After that, i viewed all the flashy doc series as entertainment, not education.
Attenborough is and remains the best in his field… what a fantastic communicator!
I gotta say you really dominated Hancock. Total Dibble victory.
I think Mr. Hancock bit off a little more than he could chew. I bet he will no longer want to debate anyone on JRE.
Flint dibble VS Graham Hancock celebrity boxing match? Please make this happen
@@TheLastHonestInfluencer 😂😂😂😂 Flint is 3 times as young and probably a little heavier. You couldn’t tell because of his jacket he had on but he probably has 10-20lbs on Graham and that’s a guess. Only thing that would give Graham a punchers chance, well besides a punch would be the fact he has so much hate built up against archeologists and their profession as a whole because of the hate he claims they throw his way. Really I don’t know but I would think that Archeologists and Graham himself would all be so busy doing their jobs and just living there wouldn’t be time for all this shade throwing a mind shit talking. But who knows we may see a boxing match between them one day. It would definitely be entertaining. Well it would be entertaining or really boring because one knocked the other out with one shot. 😂😂😂😂
@@Brando-UK
From what I can tell archaeology is a physically demanding profession in the field.
The most physically demanding thing Hancock has to do is get to the sites and point at stuff.
He's not even carrying or using the camera equipment.
He'd snap in half in less than 30 seconds against any field experienced archaeologist.
"the fact he has so much hate built up against archeologists and their profession as a whole because of the hate he claims they throw his way"
IMHO it's all an act.
A well honed, decade long practiced underdog act to get sympathy from the masses to increase his sales.
He's a grifter, pure and simple.
You did really well on Rogan, very informative, thankyou was refreshing!
Graham was actually extremely famous in the 90's already after Fingerprints of the God's. Otherwise BBC Horizon wouldn't have done that awful hatchet job documentary on him so early trying to discredit his theory. The younger generation today just assumes Joe Rogan sent him to infamous stardom. People today unfortunately don't read books never mind scientific papers. I enjoyed the debate and thought Flint had a very good coherent argument that at times I could see Graham trying to thwart by going off topic. It did annoy me, particularly when Flint was addressing some good examples of architecture in ancient Greece and Graham immediately tried to debate Sacsahuaman. I didn't see where this was relevant? I've have enjoyed all of Graham's work over the last 30 years have met him many times and his Wife Santha. He's a lovely guy, and he has signed all my books. Including my treasured original 1995 copy of Fingerprints of the God's. What Graham did for me as a young man in the 90s was more to do with opening my eyes to the world. I went travelling to nearly all the sites in the book. Met many interesting amazing people and cultures. Crazy to think I was 19 in 1995 and I'd never heard of the Great Pyramid or even the Mayans. I even learnt to Scuba dive in 1999. Since then I've read many more books from various authors. Prior to that I was very lazy and read nothing at all. I'm now going to look more into what Flint is saying because it's extremely interesting and of huge relevance to this subject. Thank you all
Derrek Lambert from myth vision sent me here, so glad to learn you will be appearing with Neal the gnostic informant, that will be a wild ride 😂 have a good weekend while the heat wave last dude 👍
i always wonder why it’s wrong to speculate or theorize or hypothesize condsidering it’s a step in the process of the scientific method. Hancock says a lot of things confidently. Though I am pretty sure he still admits all of his stuff is still just an unproven theory. Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t think he explicitly stated that his theories are already proven fact beyond a shadow of a doubt. And I always take issue with real archaeologists and real scientists disparaging new ideas and new theories when it’s literally supposed to happen that way? theorize, test, prove/disprove. Anyways, I didn’t watch that Joe Rogan episode yet. But this video popped into my feed and I recognized him from a short clip I watched. How can someone be disproven once and for all time with currently available evidence if all the things they say, they also say are still theory? But maybe they are kind of an eccentric character so they are fun to listen to? And sometimes people take too seriously such eccentric characters who are able to theorize persuasively? Yet still acknowledge what they are saying is theory?
Because academia has been overtaken by the Leftist woke zealotry (think of it as a secular religion) and questioning religion has ALWAYS been a heretical sin.
Archaeology and anthropology have a RIGID dogma and questioning ANYTHING will get your career ruined and your life destroyed, because that's how religious zealots roll.
Just look at what happened to Virginia Steen Mcintyre. Look at how Graham Hancock and Randall Carlson are treated as 3rd class citizens.
Because academia has been overtaken by the Leftist woke zealotry (think of it as a secular religion) and questioning religion has ALWAYS been a heretical sin.
Archaeology and anthropology have a RIGID dogma and questioning ANYTHING will get your career ruined and your life destroyed, because that's how religious zealots roll.
Just look at what happened to Virginia Steen Mcintyre and how Graham Hancock and Randall Carlson are treated as 3rd class citizens.
I have replied to your post several times but FascistTube keeps deleting them.
Obviously they have something to suppress, as nothing I've said was offensive.
Just found about you and I have to say you are doing a great work!
Atlantis of the Gaps. The evidence is always where you haven't looked yet.
The world needs more channels like yours. I recommend improving your audio first which will result in the audience being more receptive of your message. Talk to Miano he recently improved his significantly
@ScrewdriverTUNING I completely agree...Hancock says exactly where to look...it's in your imagination
The man. The myth. The legend.
ITS FLINT FUCKING DIBBLE!!!
The fact that an Archeologist is named Flint is very perfect.
I listened to the JRE with you and Graham and i have to say that you both made some good points. Especially you made some points i didn´t even consider until then, so thanks for taking part in this discussion with Graham!
But i wold really like to know how your personal view on the temple of baalbek is, especially the trilithon of baalbek or the stone of the pregnant woman, which all have more than 1000 tons.
I wonder how you think they shaped, transported and built with them. These are the heaviest and biggest building blocks on the planet and i am truly curious what your take on them is.
I can not believe that the romans made them, they have to be older.
They never transported the stone of the sleeping woman, and the Trillithon blocks were not 1000 tons.
@@wompbozer3939 They did, because underneath it they found an even bigger stone. And the trillithon is estimated between 800 and 1000 tons for each stone, and they used it du built in a height of 12 meters, and with a precision that you can´t fit a razorblade between them.
That is something Dibble can´t explain.
@@weisthor0815 You are wrong. They’re estimated to be between 750-800 tons. We have records of people moving 1500 tons with simple ropes, rollers and compound leverage.
The stones are impressive, but remember that the largest of these stones never left the quarry. You should be somewhat interested in this part of the story. Perhaps they ran into economic problems, or they simply reached the limits of what they were technologically capable of.
It’s also quite likely that they were never intended to be hauled away as 1200 ton blocks, and this was simply a quarrying method used to make it easier to crosscut blocks.
@@wompbozer3939 other estimations go near or over 1000 tons, but it doesn´t really matter if it is 800 or 1000 tons, does it?
no one moved that with ropes, rollers and leverage, at least not into the precise position they are in today. no way.
and the biggest stones are still in the quarry, right, but the fact that three others are incorporated into the plattform disproves your point.
@@weisthor0815 My point is that larger weights have been moved in the modern era using rollers, levers, ropes pulleys and leverage. Look up the thunderstone- it was 1500 tons when they started moving it, 1250 when they finished. Well documented with photos and news articles.
I loved both your JRE talk and that it's opened up the fascinating world of your work that I can educate myself with.
Even more so though...I love how much you love your Dad. He must have been such a great guy.
I only live in Chepstow, I'm going to keep an eye out in case you do any public lectures in Cardiff!
Thanks Flint, truly.
great stuff, after seeing you on jre i found your channel and watched tons of your videos, theyre all fascinating. but i would say that i wished this video was more of a full breakdown of your debate with hancock because i'd like to see you be able to articulate your points more thoroughly. its hard to get everything out in a debate and itd be cool to see you discuss the topic in a more relaxed situation
If you had to summarize the whole debate, Graham was just repeatedly saying that that there's not enough evidence to disprove it while Flint was saying there's not enough evidence to prove it, and we would expect to have that evidence by this point.
Yes, that's right. They remained at an impasse, however it was a good chance for Hancock to tell Dibble to back off and stop being so nasty.
Go to 17:21
did you watch the podcast, evidence points to no lost civilization but the sites in Graham's theory are no more or less than they present themselves.
@@simbamandi3545 Yeah for sure
@@wearethenightpartyLOL.
You were awesome on joe rogan. Hope lots of good things come frpm it for you.
On the ice age "civilization" shipwrecks: If there are any, wouldn't they be under at least 500 ft of water, since that's roughly where the sea levels were back then?
But we do find shipwrecks. And thus far none support Hancock and his idea. Just like how we keep finding hunter gatherer camps and not entire cities.
@@seantobin6988 You want science to count shipwrecks that haven't been found?
Unfortunately for years archaeologists and historians have been pretty bad at educating openly to the world what we know. The power of the internet has enabled people with little to no knowledge of what they are talking about to "educate" people. I find it hard to know where I stand on GH, is he being deliberately deceptive or does he just have confirmation bias.
You did an excellent job Flint, you conveyed your points clearly and precisely that anybody could understand without needing a phd. Looking forward to more content coming from you! keep up the great work!