JRE 2136 - Dibble vs. Hancock - WHO WON?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 апр 2024
- This short clip is from our podcast episode 0004, where we delve into the recent debate on the JRE between Flin Dibble and Graham Hancock. We share our thoughts on who emerged as the winner.
If you enjoyed this clip please do f*cking consider subscribing to our channel:
@LuisGeorgePod
You can connect with us now also on:
Instagram / luisgeorgepod
𝕏 / luisgeorgepod
Thanks for watching
Luis & George
#joerogan #jre #jreclips #grahamhancock #flintdibble #dibble 
Развлечения
If you like us or the pod subscribe to the channel🇺🇲🇪🇺
youtube.com/@LuisGeorgePod
Hell no
Hancock got exposed for trying to fit his theories to the evidence, as opposed to creating theories from his evidence.
Yep.
If you bothered to fact check flint you’d find out he lied and miss represented everything he spoke about. Guess you just lapped it up like a dog
I feel like Flint was the factual man whole Hancock brought more emotion and a fancy accent. Just like you mentioned.
Thank you!
I've been a fan of Hancock for 30 years but Dibble won that debate. I really liked the math he brought up when Graham mentioned the precessional numbers regarding the great pyramid. Dibble's counter point using the parthenon and then even 420 was very convincing. I love Grahams ideas but there just isn't enough substantial proof for me.
420 and blah blah is deliberately misunderstanding sacred geometry
@@kklh7918 Seems like you're deliberately understanding how math works.
@@buddafingahz9057 yeah I do know how math works
Do you think that the numbers 3,6 and 9 are important or is that woo woo
Dibble double downed so much he shrunk.
Great conversation, from an ex Hancock fan, now Archaeology student.
Thanks man! All the best with your studies! The conversation Is longer, this was just a clip. Full episodes on the channel
@@LuisGeorgePod Brilliant, will check that out tonight, thanks.
@@kavanagharchie enjoy! :)
1. I'll agree that Dibble had a very good power point presentation just like if we were in a college level class with the condescending singy songey questions included but he didn't actually provide a rebuttal at any point. Hancock could have done the same but chose not to.
2. Dibble laughing & giggling was uncalled for. I understand even if you don't have a rebuttal & only shoutouts, commercials for your colleagues & institutions but Joe should have laid out some expectation of rules & a line of respect in response to Dibble's childish behavior although I do appreciate the level of accountability that Joe placed on Dibble for his ridiculous claims of white supremacy to which Dibble couldn't make up his mind in response "I never said that, I meant something else, I can't remember, oh wait I remember again".
3. I understand Hancock doesn't present everything perfectly in a nice power point presentation like he's giving a speech or sometimes speak out of anecdotal or personal experience rather than through the scientific method but on the other hand Dibble only speaks out of institutional established textbook THEORIES & can't handle any information outside of that & the point here is we can't say either is wrong & lets have a mature conversation rather than laugh & gas light each other the way Dibble did. Responding to an argument that other person isn't making is a straw man & a red hearing argumentative fallacy.
4. The fact it's the Joe Rogan Experience Podcast doesn't delegitimize the conversation. The whole world listens to the Joe Rogan Experience including those in the scientific community. In fact, I think it's much better for it to be on this platform rather than an exclusive scientific community. What we need is a board of individuals like these men & then have them bring in guests that can back each other up for references & that way it's fair & diverse in theories & ideologies. Then we could have another expert who agrees to be impartial team up with Joe & help him referee the podcast. Let's let everyone speak, argue, & present their cases.
Very good point, thank you for taking the time to write.
We will release the entire podcast about the JRE, this is just a clip.
I think we said that the "white supremacy" was a bit of a stretch. Many of the myths though, might have been inventions of the conquistadores.
The debate started a bit with a toxic mood because of the beef between Hancock and Archeologists. Anyways the reality is:
-it would be cool if what Hancock claims is true.
-According to all the informations we have until now, it is not.
@@LuisGeorgePodI would be happy for it to be true. I think you guys pointed out how real science works. However a lot of people have never done it. If you do a longer video it might be a good idea to spend a little time explaining the scientific process in detail. No ill will towards people not understanding it. You almost have to actually do some at some point to realize how tedious and uninspiring it can be. Be sure point out the lack of evidence not being evidence part.
@@LuisGeorgePod Thank you for taking the time to reply.
Saying “it’s a bit of a stretch” is a euphemism for a harmful & in some cases, criminal ideology that victimizes & vilifies people based on their ethnicity aside from other immutable characteristics… Aside from other things like legalizing & promoting the removal of genitals from children. Let’s not trivialize the matter from what’s obvious.
Right, more importantly… Who started that beef is what’s important here as that person is the one avoiding accountability for creating it. I think you know who I’m talking about.
Yes, well… The exact same thing can said about Dribble’s claims which is why I say let’s have some of the guys like you & Dribble & let’s have some of the guys like Hancock square it off in a mature & referee conversation.
Thanks for the idea. We will do it. Talking also about the Roman Inquisition and Galileo Galilei. Stick around 😊
We might do a whole podcast about the toxic cultures spreading around the USA and in the west. Do you think it might be interesting?
Hancock's theories are plausible, but there's very little to now evidence. He's essentially edutainment. 60% fact with 40% speculation. I find Randal Carlson more interesting myself.
Yes indeed he is edutainment.
Dibble. Clearly. Hancock was an unprofessional mess, and I grew up on Hancock, so it’s not like I’m just hating.
A lot of people have hard time accepting this.
Dibble lost me when he started pulling the white supremacy card on graham
Yeah that was his weak part.
He didn't pull that, Hancock did.
Hancock’s logic.. oh you haven’t explored the whole of the Sahara desert so how can you say I’m wrong?
Right, neither can but the point of the matter is who threw the first stone.
It would be hard to find out.
Its easy to find out if you had ears for listening and a mind capable of reading comprehension. there was only one neckbeard in the room screaming racism
The point about lack of heritage being why Americans latch on to specific identity crowds is very interesting. I'm American myself and have never considered that.
Well man than this is the right podcast for you! Let us take you on a journey cause we did this podcast cause we LOVE AMERICA, and we want just to give you an outer look on your culture. AMERICA is still the number one country, and it has just become too divided over totally solvable problems.
his sources were "idk man i read it"
That’s how real science works. He might of wore a stupid hat but he does real science. Hancock is fascinating in many ways. However he needs data. Like the guy said in this video. “I saw it” doesn’t mean anything. Hancock is exploring not doing archeology. Yes I have a degree in anthropology. I have done archeological work. Hancock is certainly more like-able. Calling things racist is annoying, it wasn’t really called for. There certainly is jealousy. One of these guys pointed out how Hancock is successful and well off. While Dibble is a poor academic as many are. It’s pretty thankless. I certainly wouldn’t do it for a living. Hancock’s popularity isn’t proof of validity neither is being better traveled. Saying you can’t prove it’s not true is not evidence of anything and not how a scientific theory works. It’s cool story and I’d be happy if it were true. However right now there isn’t enough real evidence to support it.
@sethfg his sources were weak tho. The rebuttals were soft and lacking sources. I respect both. They're both obviously smart. But I felt more of the evidence fell on Hancock's side. Just saying I read it somewhere in a "debate" is really not a good look. But idk that's just how I interpreted the whole conversation.
@jbjoker18 many if not all of Dibbles claims were incorrect as well. Having a source doesn't mean much when your source is wrong, or you misrepresent the source
HAHAH i wanted a laugh emoticon for this comment but there is none
@@jbjoker18 Thats fine thanks for the civil response. I am jealous of all that diving Hancock gets to do. Dibble should go with him. Looks like he could use the exercise.
That he went there is so that he himself can find evidence collecting data? Isnt that better than just lookinh on Google Maps 😂
Yeah sure, but you don't collect that by "seeing things".
@@LuisGeorgePod you always start by seeing things. Everything is measured by sight and mathematics.
@EklundhAndreas yes but what you see is not a measure. We see rainbows, but they are an optical effect.
@@LuisGeorgePod yes you draw that concluaion by seeing
Hungcock got Dibbled 😳
Yes sir
It’s mad how many people just bent over and lapped what ever dribbled out of flint. You should probably fact check before you make a muppet out of yourself. Dribble lied about the ice core data failing to mention lead spikes going back tens of thousands of years. He lied about the glyph in the pyramid. He failed to mention that current flows and constant water changes would have made in next to impossible for any ships to preserve during the ice age. They say humans have used boats for 100,000 years but the oldest boat found is 9000 years old yet academics tell us they go back 100,000 years have a wee look into why. Ohh and don’t forget to look up the amount of crops that went extinct during the ice age and the evidence we have for plants being domesticated returned to the wild to then be redomesticated. Or you could just bent over for you next dribble
The difference is Hancock is coming from the position that there is enough evidence to keep investigating. Where Dibble says he has enough evidence to not investigate it any further. Which in Hancock's theory there is room for both worlds to exist. So in that way Dibble was not convincing.
True. Altough Hancock stretches is a bit. Yes they explored 5%. But if this civilization was so huge it would be easier to find.
@LuisGeorgePod ah, that is an assumption in its self. Is it not?
@@jeremydisbrow9814 I was about to say that. You beat me to it!
Well sofar there are no evidence man. The Dibble guy said it. They are looking for it, and gathering the big data. He also said that he agrees with Hancock that there is need of more research, but for that there is need of more money.
@@jeremydisbrow9814I have an anthropology degree have done a small amount of archeology. Dibble is not particularly like-able but more scientifically supported. The best case scenario is that Hancock draws in funding to do a whole bunch of work that is much needed and would be great. I do think humans came to North America earlier than previously thought. I’m willing to believe there were cities earlier than expected. The whole “advanced” tech part is very flimsy. I’d be happy if it were all true. I wonder if we surveyed 50% of the Sahara with some reliable fancy tech stuff and found nothing. Would Hancock concede or say we can’t be sure ‘till we checked it all.
He doesn’t wanna find Atlantis he called it racist
This is also a stretch. He said the myth of Atlantis was started by the nazis.
Every source Hancock cites, that Dibble guy just called racist. That is definitely scientific 😂
We said we disagree with that.
Hancok’s source: I dived down there with my wife … very scientific
@@luisrey7608 Dribble's source: Giggle* You're wrong because of theories accepted by major insinuations that pay me... Very scientific.
The one source that got called racist was a source from a sixteenth century conquistador
I have a question. Einstein used dark matter as an explanation. Has dark matter ever been proven? I know they use it for equations, but has it been proven?
Great question; Dark matter was a very fuzzy undefined concept in Einstein’s time especially because Einstein assumed a stable universe (he later called that his biggest blunder).
Nowadays scientists assume dark matter exist because we can detect it’s effect in the gravitational motions of galaxies. There’s extra gravity that doesn’t originate from these galaxies so dark matter is considered the origin of this extra gravity.
You can't believe Hancock because of his accent , really? If that's your opinion then maybe you shouldn't be voicing it in a critical manner
Omg man, that was a joke. We also try to be entertaining.
I think Dibble has his hat screwed on toooooo tight. No room for open possibilities!!!
🤣😂🤣😂
A couple of Hancock haterz..
U know they’re not replying to that😂 cause they’re haterzzz
@@Emoneeyy 🤣🤣
@@Emoneeyy there were a bunch of repliez.... ahaah dunno why you can not see them now.
@@LuisGeorgePod you are a hater just say that.
@@LuisGeorgePod yeah cause you a hater!
To say Hancock’s theories are ridiculous shows how closed minded you are. With everything that he’s seen over the past almost 40 years all he says is you can’t eliminate the possibility and that science hasn’t done enough work to eliminate the possibility. So in dibble’s world if nothing happened that can be proven right now just write it off that it’s not possible. Hancock’s only point is to not close the idea of a lost civilization and do more work. I don’t understand how that is a ridiculous idea
If it was this theory alone, it would be totally fine. The problem is that he subtly claims that archeologists are cutting this idea completely and actively off.
Dibble got owned
He owns Hancock.
@@LuisGeorgePod Your bias has been exposed.
@@shechshire what bias?
Not really. Hancock even says himself somewhere in the podcast (paraphrasing here): there is no evidence to support my claims for a lost ancient civilization around 10.000 BC.
Bro Hancock had no evidence. He was just attacking dibbles character
Incredibly bad and biased takes.
You are welcome in a live stream for a debate :)
@@LuisGeorgePod I would genuinely love that. I would also invite you to call in to my show anytime
@LuisGeorgePod my comments are getting caught in the filters, but that sounds good and I extend the same invite.
A debate on the debate sounds fun
@@LuisGeorgePod thegoobenator
At G male
Indiana Gnome got Fossilized
Please be respectful. Otherwise end up being a bit like him ahah
A couple of Hancock haterz..
🤣🤣🤣 just realistic
@@LuisGeorgePod eh kinda lol.. but I understand your arguments and respect them.
Thanks for watching man. We are just trying with our own podcast 😉
@@LuisGeorgePodJust close minded!
We just believe in the scientific method and not in fairy tales :). But hey you can beleive!