Was There an Advanced Civilization Before Our Own?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 окт 2024
- Embark on a mind-bending journey into the depths of the cosmos and Earth's history. Are we alone in the universe, or did forgotten civilizations precede us? Explore the fascinating possibilities now!
Simon's Social Media:
Twitter: / simonwhistler
Instagram: / simonwhistler
Love content? Check out Simon's other RUclips Channels:
SideProjects: / @sideprojects
Biographics: / @biographics
Geographics: / @geographicstravel
Casual Criminalist: / @thecasualcriminalist
Today I Found Out: / todayifoundout
TopTenz: / toptenznet
Highlight History: / @highlighthistory
XPLRD: / @xplrd
Business Blaze: / @brainblaze6526
Somewhere on the edge of our solar system is a sign post that says 'proceed with caution, humans ahead'.
You are referring to the Kuiper Belt. "Do Not Enter"😂
Proceed with caution. Under construction. Patent pending. Enter at own risk. Slippery when wet....
I hear they're mostly harmless!
Yeah, but the sign is written in "High Xtatloon" which nobody can read so, thanks for nothing.
@@Thekowaikaijufinally a reference to the Guide.. been scrolling looking for awhile now.. missed the first ten minutes of Simon talking but totally worth it 😜😜😜
“Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.”
Have you got your towel?
@@WholeWheatWhale You doubt I'm a frood?
Well it's a bypass, you have to build bypasses
@@JRockySchmidt Nahhhhhhhh..... Now a hyperspace bypass......
Don't panic.
A common point many people ignore or forget that a civilization can be advanced without being a carbon copy of our current civilization. Advanced does not mean high technology
Also, much of our current technology wouldn’t be traceable as it would rust away and disappear especially if we are talking about millions of years
@@TylerIRufener Without a doubt. I can't remember the name of the series, but the name's something like, "After People" or something, where they show how fast man's works can return to nature
@@yourseatatthetable Very close; it's called "Life After People."
Define technology
I'd like Simon to read something about just how sporadic the fossil record actually is. I mean every single time a dead animal is turned into a fossil is about the most miraculous thing that can and has happened. The amount of things that need to be just right for it to happen is crazy.
The nice thing is that on a period of hundreds of millions of years and countless creatures who lived on our planet, even if a minuscule fraction of them will be fossilized, there will still be plenty of them left for us to find.
@@resileaf9501 But at the rate of fossilization, there will not be enough of a single human to serve as holotype. So whatever they know about what was once on the planet, our role will have to be implied by artifacts that we leave rather than any of our fossilized remans of any of us.
That should help hammer in just how rare the formation of any single fossil is. What I said doesn't even being to start factoring in things like estimates at the rate existing fossils actually survive, are identified and examined scientifically.
edit: btw with no humans being fossilized enough to serve as holotype, it has nothing to do with time. There simply haven't been enough of us in the whole of human history combined (so far anyways).
Agreed it would be interesting. It's just a fragment of the total population. Few years ago there was a paper released about how many t-rex total roamed and it was possibly around 2.5 billion.
Agreed. There are very specific conditions to form them. Unfortunately a lot of the earlier life forms were really fragile.
That's true. We still find fossils of course, all over the place. Its like playing the lottery, the chance you will win is very small but the chances _someone_ will win are very good. With enough people playing (or events, happenings) even remote odds become overwhelming. And nothing is more impossible then proving something *didn't* happen.
Miniminuteman had a great 4-part series tearing Ancient Apocalypse to shreds.
Came here to say the same thing. Milo is awesome
Seen em too, though there's plenty of channels that have videos debunking his videos, so much chaos
@@robertcartwright2236 just a bunch of butthurt Graham Hancock fanboys that don't like to be called out for believing BS
@@robertcartwright2236 you mean they TRY to debunk Milo. They fail miserably.
I was gonna say the same thing, both Stephen Milo and Milo from mini minute man have deep insightful criticisms. They also point out how much of these theories link closely to Nazi ideology... Tbh I'm not that far into the episode and haven't got to the debunking yet. I just couldn't help but talk about the two Milo's.
Great topic!
My son and I once made a timeline of life on earth, and the to see the tiny portion that written history encompasses is shocking. Our timeline was about 30ft long and written human history on that timescale would have been basically invisible. Less than 1/1000 of an inch. We had to expand the scale to cover just since humans evolved to even get human history to show up as a pencil line. When you think about 30ft of time where our entire technological civilization would be so small as to be invisible, it really doesn't seem that farfetched that other creatures could have developed intelligence and technology and then faded away somewhere in the past.
Time is just one of millions of factors at play here though. Just having the time available has never gotten anything done. Hundreds of thousands of us have had a "project" car and plenty of time. But not the facilities, tools, and most importantly the money.
So yeah it does absolutely seem far fetched. There's ZERO evidence where there absolutely should be. Seriously, we should already have it. And there's more than enough evidence against.
We've collected stone tools 800,000 years to 3.3 million years old. Never a phaser or iPhone mixed in the middle. So yeah, again far fetched.
It appears that the Mayans looked like they knew what they were doing on the first attempt, but we don't have the history to show all their failed attempts. For one thing, when the Europeans got here (like The Spanish) they burned the Native American's books! The few books we have left are because a few monks rebelled and hid them. We burned their history and then say, "They have no history, that's insane!" And how many histories were burned by other humans throughout history. The Library of Alexandria comes to mind.
The idea that the Library of Alexandria burned all at once causing this massive loss of knowledge has largely been debunked. Kind of a stretch to compare it to what happened in the new world.
@@KS-PNW I hadn't heard it was debunked, but the books in the Library were copies of other books, so presumably the originals where still out there somewhere, and maybe other copies. But, all the information was no longer in one place if the library was burned as I learned. And I learned it was burned by invaders, but I'll look into it more since I haven't done so since my grade school days. And, I agree that it isn't a perfect analogy, the Europeans burning all the books they could find was indeed far worse, I learned the only reason some survived was because a monk secretly hid some so they wouldn't be burned.
@@aremoreequal yeah the copies thing is a big part of it. Also appears that it didn't so much as burn up all at once as it struggled with budget cuts over centuries.
ruclips.net/video/hYDYkQaxSFg/видео.htmlsi=F0rWOu-oV3o_d1xz
Yeah those damn conquistadors really did bury the Mayan culture and civilization didn't they?
@@aremoreequal yeah losing the library was definitely a loss, dont get me wrong not trying to say it wasn't. It's just that newer evidence suggests that universities in Baghdad and Timbuktu contained many of the same copies. Although they weren't as accessible to Europeans they were very popular sights for other scholars. There's also some evidence that scholars in China and India had also made many of the same discoveries in parallel. While those areas would be largely inaccessible to westerners for quite some time it's another way that, that knowledge endured and wasn't truly lost.
I've read about the Silurian Hypothesis. It's a thought experiment, not a theory. Meaning that its creators don't believe there were any earlier civilizations, they just ask the question "How would we look for one?" It ends up being more of an examination of our own civilization.
Yeah, any signs of a civilization that old (in the millions of years) would've been completely wiped away by geological forces.
There isn't an archaeological person around that wouldn't love to have their name attached to a discovery that changed things completely.....the reason they don't follow Hancocks assertions is he asks "questions" that have been answered already, and yes he absolutely asserts things as being wrong when they aren't. Bimini Road is a prime example
Hancock is a content creator, not a scholar. His methods are exceptionally slack and he is just the latest in a line of Charrouxs, Von Dannikens and even Blavataskys. He rejects orthodoxy not because it is wrong, but because he is pushing his own theory...and theory which relies entirely on a LACK of evidence rather than proof of his. He is the equivalent of a theist, relying on faith and feeling rather than evidence and veracity @@tystkanin9996
If there's no evidence and his theory may not be right, why would any serious scientist want to waste their time on it? It's not that they're "stuck in their ways" or "reluctant to accept new ideas". They're not going to go looking for magic unicorns just because someone with a cult following thinks he's right.
@@tystkanin9996 Except as soon as they prove him wrong he totally ignores it, or says 'we must re-evaluate the meaning of..' so he doesn't have to admit he's wrong. Because admitting he's wrong would hurt his future earnings though books and TV shows that peddle his much debunked nonsense.
Ironically he accuses of archaeologist of being dogmatic and stuck with the 'official narrative', you probably nod sagely at that, completely ignoring that archaeologists and historians are constantly changing their theories with new evidence, whilst Hancock sticks to his dogma regardless.
@@tystkanin9996 If the "people with the know-how and tech" stopped to look into every random poorly-conceived question that came their way, they'd quickly run out of the time, money, and resources they need to pursue more realistic questions that, unlike Hancock's ideas, at least have some foundation of evidence to support them. Sooner or later a line must be drawn, and that line is typically one based on both evidence and plausibility -- otherwise we'll be inundated with "junk science" endeavors to determine what flavor of cheese the Moon is made of or what is on the bottom of the flat disk of the Earth, instead of work that will produce actual usable knowledge of the real world.
Id like to point out a part of that theory of lost citys is entirely possible as my mind immediately went to Troy, a city existed under Troy, and thereafter 2 more cities where built one on the other, forgetting the previous. This has been documented for quite a few other places as well! Its super fascinating!
The first pancake lubricates the pan perfectly, that's why the rest doesn't stick. When making french crepes at restaurants, they don't even pretend to try and get the first one right
Are you insinuating that there is any kind of a connection between a pancake and a crepe? You boor.
It always works the other way for me, the first pancake turns out just fine and they go down hill from there.
french means add more butter between every crepe
I seen an analogy in this comment with humanity lol must be the coke
The first pancake cools the pan down if it’s too hot.
The First Pancake Problem: pancakes like to be cooked at a relatively low temp compared to other breakfast foots (like bacon or eggs). The pan you're using at home is at a high temperature before being used so when you put down the first pancake it cooks it too fast. All subsequent pancakes are fine because the pans heat was all dispersed from the first pancake, thus allowing all subsequent cakes to cook more slowly at a lower temp, this is how you get a good looking and tasting pancake.
Source: I was a server at a small diner and one of the cooks had been to culinary school. One part of his grill he always kept much lower heat so he would be able to cook the pancake orders and they'd come out perfectly. Took forever tho.
U.K. pancakes are closer to crepes than US breakfast pancakes. Thinner and wider. We don’t eat them for breakfast but traditionally on Shrove Tuesday aka Pancake Day
Pans and stovetop burners vary wildly to affect the temp. Recipes are very sensitive how thick or thin the batter combines flour/mix with milk/water, how old the leavening agent, if it's overly mixed or not enough. Electric stovetops especially require 3 to 5 minutes PRE-heating, so just putting burner on HIGH would help do anything other that create burned and raw spots.
Perfect pancake temperature is 375 degrees. I use a griddle so I can get the right temp. I still get too much oil on the griddle and that messes up the first set of pancakes.
@@EconAdviserlol it's not that complicated
LOL, so it must be true.
The other big glaring issue with :ancient people taught the egyptians and the mayans: The Egyptians were building pyramids in 3000BCE and the Mayan were building pyramids in ~~300~~ 1300 AD
neither of those numbers is correct lol. the writen records of those people themselves don't claim to build those structures.
You're facts are wrong check again.
@@Howl-Runner oh you are right, that should have been 1300AD not 300AD
@@Dr.Zoidberg087 The maya don't have written records at all.
@thrawn82 how does that argue with me at all? lol. those structures were absolutely ancient to those people we call ancient. your numbers are way off.
I love that Simon casually has a book simply titled 'SEX' in the lower left corner of the screen.
I noticed that barely a minute into the video, had to pause and see if anyone else noticed or mentioned. I had to scroll so far to find this comment.
Something you definitely want to master.
Glad I’m not the only one! David’s next book?!
What a perv
I am a Master Of My Domain.
6:08 The History Channel: Where the truth is history.
This whole production crew, from behind the scenes to the host, is simply incredible. I wish I could be a part of such a quality production
Except for the fact he speaks about 3X faster than any other RUclipsr out there, I might agree with you. The thing is, when he is communicating material that is new to you, there is frequently inadequate time to even process the information, because he is feeding you with a fire hydrant.
@@izzytoons there’s all different kinds of folks. All processing information from their subjective perceptions. I’m sorry to hear that was your experience.
Regardless of what Graham's theories and thoughts are, it's gotten people wanting to look into archaeology, ancient history etc. And that helps the field of work, plus having someone like this challenge the norm of archaeology is healthy for the industry.
What's healthy is giving money to actual hardworking scientists and making actual informative documentaries and not wasting it on conspiracy theories by idiots with a prosecution complex and contributing to the further decline on trust in science and institutions so Netflix can line the pockets of their shareholders.
@woobilicious. all scientists actually do is prove people like him right or wrong, most of the scientists and others alike were called crazy at some stage in their career for their theories, all science does is prove conspiracies right or wrong through trial and error and other forms of experimentation, so you are wrong, but you are right that we should give money to actual scientists to prove these theories out there right or wrong, you don't understand that these discussions are healthy and having someone who isn't apart of their groups challenge them in a way they have not been challenged about a topic before helps not only their careers but the industry as a whole, you can agree or disagree with graham all you like cause that is your opinion but one thing you cannot dispute is that he is bringing attention to an industry people have been neglecting and it is healthy for it, say for instance Neal degrasse tyson is not a legit scientists doing studies and tests all the time but he's made people interested in it.
You may as well say that anti-vaxers and the colloidal silver enthusiasts are healthy for the medical profession. People like Hancock lead to distrust in the actual experts, who have spent their life studying and understanding the civilisations that Hancock dismisses as feckless savages. It's hugely harmful.
Its less conspiracy theory & more like speculation. He has never denied that his work is speculation. He has admitted time and time again his thoughts are based upon what he see's and extrapolates at various sites worldwide, and from others research and evidence.
Many may hate him but ya'll need to go watch Joe Rogans podcast episodes w/ Randall, Graham, and the both of em. I'll even list 'em. Episodes 501, 606, 725, 872, 1172, 1897, and 2051. Gain some big time insight on humanities past, and how some of Graham's speculation could very well tie into the scientific past of our history.
@TehCanadian I do watch his content mate, I know what randal carlsons theories are, please don't assume 🤙
Okay, now I’m just imagining John DeLancey in Mexico and Egypt just snapping his fingers whilst wearing a TNG era uniform…thanks, Simon. 😂
I'm not there yet but so excited. I swear I saw Qs kid on a Netflix show the other day. It looked like Q if Q had ever been in the show when he was 20 and sounded exactly like him so often. It was a trip.
Yes. Blame Q. Meddling in human affairs since before written records. Damnit, Q!
With me, it just made me think of the Larry Cohen horror movie 'Q: The Winged Serpent' where a monster believed to be Quetzalcoatl flies about New York eating people.
Quetzalcoatl appears in the Star Trek: The Animated Series episode “How Sharper Than a Serpent's Tooth”, although it uses its Mayan name of Kukulkan.
Speaking of Star Trek, Voyager gave us an answer to this question: the episode “Distant Origin” (3x23) introduced the Voth, who evolved from Hadrosaurs. In the episode, Chakotay says, "Earth has been devastated by countless natural disasters over the course of its history: asteroids, volcanoes, earthquakes. All evidence of your race could be at the bottom of the ocean or under kilometers of rock."
I was thinking Desmond Llewelyn and Sean Connery:
"Don't touch that, Double-O Seven! You'll destroy all traces of our civilisation!"
"What? You mean like -- "
"Oh, for Heaven's sake, Double-O Sev --"
BOOM!
I'm only halfway through but there's definitely something to this, I'm from Romania and because of the USSR, archeologists only now have started looking into the black sea. At the bottom of the black sea, where the saltiness levels are so high, they found villages, clay jars, and other stuff used for farming and trade. So when it comes to the creation of the black sea, there was most definitely a big flood that took place, that most likely surprised the population living near the lake that is now the black sea.
Water levels been going up as the world warms,and apparent water levels can change with the earth's plates getting pushed up or down as they move and then rise or subside. Look at the area between England and Holland which was affected so (Dogger land). The land plates moving around has been as proven as anything can be, no fantasies of ancient aliens nor ancient gods needed to sensible mind.
I watched a very interesting documentary about it. The black sea definitely is very interesting and a good contestant for a flood myth, at least in the area. Supposedly it grew in size in a very short period of time and went from sweet water lake to salt water sea.
Or sea levels rise like they did all over the world.
Don’t forget the ancient city found off the coast of India in the gulf of khombat that, for the longest time, archaeology considered a myth, until it was discovered
Don't forget that most early and even modern major human settlements have been based right on rivers, lakes, seas and the ocean. All of these have a tendency to flood, sometimes catastrophically so. Over thousands of years of habitation, it's very likely that many, many places will experience a life-altering catastrophic flood that the survivors of tell stories to their children about, who tell their children, and so on. You also have to consider the rise in sea level since the end of the last glacial period; its likely that very many ancient coastal communities were erased from the world over time.
It's less of a "global flood" and more "floods all around the globe," but at different points in time.
I love Simons attitude about pre agricultural societies, that living in the woods was somehow carefree. Like it wasn't a ton of work to stay alive before farming. Farming took a lot of the risk out of finding and procuring food.
If you have twins please name them "Hunter" and "Gatherer."
Fun fact: Hunter-gatherers in the American Pacific Northwest lived relatively easily, with an abundance of berries, salmon, and small game available
I mean, there's a big overlap between a fully agricultural societies and purely "hunter gatherers".
It's not that farming took the risk out of things.
It's the opposite
When the iceage ended 12000 years ago, most of the megafauna in the northern hemisphere went extinct.
You can't have fields of crops with wooly mammoths and rhinos in europe, giant camels in north America
Flat faced bears, dire wolfs, and many more huge animals trampling your crop or literally eating you.
Agriculture could happen because the rapid end of the ice age wiped out all of the big animals
The suspects are
Multiple comets
Or solar flares from the sun.
@@gregbors8364 Fun fact: Today in the pacific northwest those same natives would get stabbed by a fentanyl zombie.
I think part of why the precursor civilization theory is so attractive is not that it's believable, but it's so much more believable than so many of the other crazy hokum that people come up with.
Same reason I believe in Santa but not God.
I think it's a reaching concept at best, since even if true, we would be completely unable to verify or even tell approximate age without some sort of organic material to test. I think the course humans are currently on is such an unlikely scenario it could only happen after 50k years of trial and error where humanity gets to 'farming and textiles and community' but then lacks the interconnected-ness to grow beyond that without lots of war, suffering, and conquest.
The reason why we have this level of technology might only be because we launched a nuclear program and then used a bomb, and the impact of it set humanity on this very specific course (when it could have been much different) and the resulting growth in research, technology, immigration of scientists from other leading countries after the war, AND the progress within subsequent wars taking place after the use of the bomb, to gain other sophisticated and very purpose driven technologies.
The country we nuked became one of our greatest allies. We established military bases there, rebuilt their country, and then gave them technology access and a bustling economy. Japan's growth after WW2 mirrored the US and only really began to split into it's own thing when technology being released in Japan became popular worldwide, giving them the ability to be a world leader, even without an active military.
Something that kinda hit me when I was browsing UFO rabbit holes... What if, and this is a huge, gigantic, WHAT IF: Japan is the country responsible for developing UFO technology. Japan was all about attacking the US up through WW2 when they surrendered. They were exposed to God Level Military Tech twice in two bigger cities. From there, they became our allies and as part of a pact with the US, agreed to devote their time to developing technologies, most of which have consumer applications, while the US has all these home grown military applications they use abroad, as allies of Japan.
FFW to today, we have sightings of UFOs and other UAP over military installations, nuclear facilities, and the places where we keep our nuclear arsenal. Japan has a huge vested interest in ensuring the US (and any other country) is never allowed to use a nuclear weapon again. Having witnessed the first hand horrors of the tragedies of Nagasaki/Hiroshima, Japan developed secret technology to disable any device another country has built, while also being able to travel vast distances without being impacted by the environment, particularly gravity.
It would be amazing if the one country in the world not allowed to have a military (it's part of their constitution as a country) turned out to be the country responsible for UAP/UFO technology. Ironic, I'd even be a fan.
Also, let's face it: it would just be really, really cool if there actually was one.
There is just this weird problem with megalithic structures. We had "hunter gatherer", "ice age", "???", "ice age", "civilization"
The simple assumption that the second ice age would have grinded away a lot of traces we had from the time between the 2 ice ages should be enough to argue why unknown ancient civilizations could have likely existed. It would have made perfect sense that the only structures from those civilizations that survived the following ice age were the megalithic structures, that got reinhabited after the ice receded.
Main issue is, that by definition of this story, the chances for any archeological evidence for their existence are low. Giant ice-shelves grinding over soil are a great eraser of historic evidence...
I buy into this theory man, I don’t think it’s completely accurate and Graham Hancocks work is a bit sketchy at best.
Do a bit of research into this topic if you haven’t already it’s fascinating and I think you might be surprised. This video doesn’t do it justice and science isn’t the way people think, almost every single study cant be replicated accurately and nobody really tries it because it’s so expensive.
When I hear the argument "We would find evidence of older settlements" I'm reminded of the recent Roman Mosaic that was found in London that was previously unknown.
That further proves the point.
We know the Roman's existed, not because of that mosaic but because they left tons of evidence everywhere they went.
A previous civilization, as described by these theories, would have left evidence.
I really like the idea of the flood myth originating with the Sumerians. They were an isolate language, with no connections to other semetic languages in the region such as Akkadian. The theory is that their original ancestors lived around the bottom of the Persian Gulf (which at the time would've been mostly above water), but as sea level rose, it likely drove these peoples further and further north. Tides would've washed away their lands and all their settlements and they would've passed down these stories from generation to generation. I recommend a video on the Sumerian by the 'Fall of Civilizations' he covers this theory alot better.
If true we would have evidence of their new settlements idiot...
have an upvote for Fall of civilizations, try History Time too.
That's a great channel.
@@M1gginssubbed to that one too.
Wasn't a myth
The issue with the Sphinx, outside any other theory or ancient structure is the simple fact that the Sphinx has insane amounts of erosion on it. Nothing in Egypt compares to it. Throw on the fact that it's been buried under sand for thousands of years makes it really hard to believe it's not older.
There are alternating layers of hard and soft limestone. Right now, people can see flakes the size of potato chips coming off it as night gives way to day. Perfectly natural forces at work.
The writer also left out the most important part about the sphinx. The erosion can only be from rain, and the last time it rained enough to cause erosion like that in the Nile valley was around 10,000 years ago. meaning the sphinx predates known Egyptian civilization by 5000-ish years.
I was very disappointed they did not bring up the head of the sphinx in this video at all, and it being recarved from a lion
@@daltonking6956- It always had a human head.
@@julietfischer5056 what about the blocks in temple in front of the Sphinx. The temple was made with the blocks removed from the construction of the Sphinx. Yet they show ZERO I repeat zero erosion. These are the same limestone, same layers. Only difference would be water cascading over enclosure. And not in the temple.
I do think we are missing whole chapters of our history. But leaving that as a separate argument, why can't the Sphinx be built by actual Egyptians just at an older time. It stands out as a sore thumb in the timeline. The erosion compared to literally everything else makes zero sense.
Here is the real trouble with Graham's idea: You don't start with "What if..." and then look for evidence to support it. A decent scientific hypothesis starts with observation of something that our current model does not support, then investigating why it might be that way. This started as "So, this could have happened..." which is a quick trip to observation bias town.
His cult will never accept a scientific explanation to anything. He did a good job making them believe that big archeology is out to get em. According to him, hes a martyr but the dude has a fucking Netflix special and its called a documentary.
Hancock knows he's full of shit, but admitting it means he doesn't make any more money and add to the millions it's already made him.
.... Um..... You do realize that your argument ends up proving the "what if" method right? How else is a model developed to prove or disprove something. Like plate tetonics: even after finding fossil evidence of fauna in South America and Africa, scientists"what if'd" super continents. Until there was more conclusive evidence to prove it. Ffs, it's why scientists create theories and use theoretical models. Theory is legit a fancy way of saying "What if".
As a new Zealander I at least knew that but it was pretty recent news afaik,
as a child we did not know NZ was massive once.
Kia kaha bro…
That accent was upsetting... and probably accurate
AND WILL BE AGAIN
@@tamlandipper29 only if we get hit by some major seismic shiz
Where are Zoolanders from 😂😂😂
In our house, the first pancake is designated the sacrifice to Oolatek. A nod to the movie Heavy Metal. If you do not eat the sacrifice to Oolatek, all the other pancakes are doomed to a malformed existence. The real reason is because the pan is not at the appropriate temperature and you’re using the first pancake to figure out if it’s too hot or too cold.
Knowing full well your penchant for mispronunciation, and for not really giving a crap, you did remarkably well with Quetzalcoatl. Aztec is hard enough for English speakers who have at least an idea how to pronounce the Aztec language, much less for you. Well done, sir!
The thing about massive floods existing in many different cultures, is there's no way to say it's the SAME flood. I think thats unlikely. When these people say "everything was flooded", they really mean "(almost) everything we know about was affected by the flood."
Exactly. They were cultures all formed around rivers, and they experience floods. Shocker, right? Crazy how that happens.
I get into this argument a lot with fundamentalists. They hear floods and think Noah. There were no less than 3 melt water pulse events that raised the sea level 100-200 meters
No gives a shite about you@@Hunting4knowledge
I love Simon's brief insights into dad life. Especially during a video about the vast complexities of the universe. Burnt pancakes are good hangover remedy 👌
1) The oldest wooden structure, using shaped wood was recently found in Zambia it's 476,000 years old (That is not a typo).
2) Gobekli Tepes (~11-12000+ years old, purposefully filled in ~10,000 years ago).
3) Karahan Tepes (12,000+ years old)
4) Boncuklu Tarla (12,000+ years old)
5) Over 10,000 structures...so far, have been found using LiDAR in the Amazon, nobody knows who they were, but we do know they invented Terra Preta and Ayahuasca, exhibiting some extremely complex understandings of chemistry...or just some really good luck (once is believable, but twice starts to stretch credulity).
I'm not drawing any conclusions, however, melt water pulse 1a and 1b and whatever caused them, would've wiped out and submerged most civilizations. We know it was a particularly awful period because of the mass extinction of mega fauna that occurred across North America, as well as the black mat (Younger Dryas boundary) in the soil record that can be found most prominently in North America, however it also stretches to Europe and Asia (there are impact signatures in this mat, that would suggest comet impact, as we only know 1 way for those substances to be created...comet impact). During this timeframe, the water levels rose 400 feet, and if past civilizations are anything like us currently, they would've been mainly concentrated around coastal areas.
Again, no conclusions, individuals like Hancock spin a pretty intriguing yarn, but it's a tad too premature to be making definitive's about a lost civilization. That having been said, there's some very intriguing facts about some of the structures out there that are pretty undeniable, that most certainly call into question our currently accepted origin of civilization. I find it difficult to believe, for example, that Hunter Gatherer's...who know that survival depends on hunting and gathering, would drop all that to construct Gobekli Tepes...just cause. Especially so when the location is so rugged and resource limited, compounded by the sheer size of the effort. And lastly, just something to consider. The gap between when Gobekli Tepes was _filled in_ and when the Pyramids were built, is a greater expanse of time than the gap between the Pyramids and us.
Excellent facts. Thank you for sharing. I often muse on how people on multiple continents seem to have advanced around the same millenia?
Also the oceans rose quite a bit and cultures often build on coasts. Any evidence is likely too deep for standard human diving. As the world warms, those potential locations will only be further away.
Thank you again.
You are being a bit condescending saying that ancient peoples couldn’t have done chemistry, or made cities and buildings without help. The dates you’ve described show a fairly linear (not entirely, of course), progress of the Homo genus. It definitely doesn’t support an ancient civilisation with advanced technology.
@@ethandoingstuff1433most people are simply second guessing the origin of civilization. I think that's completely reasonable.
@@ethandoingstuff1433 undeniable proof of high technology ancient civilization is Egyption vases that are carves with 1/1000th of an inch precision.
Where in zambia? I used to live there.
Fossils are an incredibly rare occurrence, and were a society to have existed say 11,000 years ago then the bones we do discover would look like any other human remains. You have to also remembering that any structures made of anything other than would long have collapsed and crumbled to nothing over that time frame, just as our most impressive skyscraper would decay into dust. Thats also not to mention that just as we do today, ancient people would have made cities near coastlines and rivers that may have long been submerged with rising sea levels.
When people entertain the idea that advanced civilizations existed in our ancient past they arent usually saying thay everyone was flying around in space ships powered by magic crystals, just that technological and societal progression isnt necessarily linear and that ancient people may have had knowledge of metaphysical matters or means of construction that we dont understand today.
I am curious if there was an early bronze (or whatever metal) age somewhere over 50.000 years ago (or a million, etc), that only lasted for a few hundred years before it suffered it's own bronze age collapse (plagues, floods, famines, empty mines...), would we be able to tell? Even if an archeologist got lucky and dug in exactly right spot what would remain of the buildings or forged metal? Considering we still find and lose whole damn cities and pyramids in the amazons, that aren't that old, I not sure we wouldn't miss a whole civilization that been buried over a 1000 times as long ago.
Stone tools don’t decay and they would have to be the first items any civilisation would create. Homo Habillis was the first species of ‘ape man’ to start using tools and every other species then refined their use. Records show there was no great leap in the way basic tools were used over the next couple of million years up to the Bronze Age. Humans came about by evolution not revolution and that took millions of years, as hunter gatherers there was no drive for change until environmental factors kicked in. Look at the horseshoe crab, it’s as old as the dinosaurs but so suited to its environment it has no incentive to evolve, it certainly wasn’t driving around in jet cars a million years ago.
@timsytanker Well I'd say it's a bit of a stretch to compare human evolution to horseshoe crabs since there's just a little bit of difference in our biology, consciousness and how we function.
There's a massive bias in modern archaeology that's just now beginning to fade with the Clovis first narrative, in that it was the dogmatic mainstream idea that the Clovis people were the oldest civilization in North America so that means there's no point on digging any deeper than 10,000 years ago because nothing could possibly be lower than that without humans already being in North America. Since that time we've found evidence to push back human habitation to at least 20,000 years ago and possibly further, doubling the span of time humans were in North America with a single discovery.
My point is that we still have so much to discover about our past, and if a single discovery can rewrite history by 10,000 years than its not at all out of the realm of possibility to discover an ancient, advanced civilization. Just because you see a progression in advancements in stone tools doesn't mean that somewhere else in the world another culture hadn't developed metal working, you have to remember that primitive stone age tribes still exist today as we fly over them with our jets, and were civilization to collapse today their stone tools would survive millenia while the jets are reduced to dust.
I love those 'artefacts in a coal seam' things that pop up.
Makes me ponder and wonder, what else are we missing?@@izuela7677
Very well put indeed 👍
Until 1997 the oldest megalithic structures were dated around 4000 BC. Then Gobekli Tepi changed everything. It is not unfathomable to think that there is more out there that we just don't know about yet. It is not proof, but it is certainly room for doubt.
I agree. A couple of hundred years ago the people didn't have any idea of the existence of virusses or bacteria. I ask myself what people in the future will know and what will be logical to them, maybe something we are not understanding today or have no clue about. We are always assuming we know a lot but I think we know little...the universe is so big and so complex
Gobekli Tepi is not advanced by any metrics.
Makeshift gravity walls, animals carving and no trace of permanent settlements.
I don't see much interest except pushing the beginning of civilization further in history.
Whoch is not an argument for an ancient, technical civilization.
lookup Natufian culture, it even predates Gobekli Tepi. The built structures and complex tools. Archeologists have known about them for 100 years. Graham cherry picks shit and science takes a long time. .... there will always be gaps, and we need evidence before it can be considered fact.
Gobekli Tepe did not change everything. It filled in some gaps, but there was nothing too groundbreaking. Basically, the main change to human history was the fact that some humans were building structures, and settlements without having discovered agriculture.
@@eabutler6861 Your last sentence makes no sense and the term gaps has a connotation you're making a religious argument or talking about some story
I watch these because I really enjoy Simons commentary on the various topics.
When Simon gave the line "and then we get all their diseases and they destroy us" the editor missed the chance to flash one frame of Lrrr from Omicron Persei 8.
WE WANT MCNEIL!!
Frankly, it would be weird if ancient civilisations that flourished next to large rivers / coastlines DIDN'T have a flood myth - tsunamis due to earthquakes and rivers flooding due to particularly rainy years have been a thing since forever...
Simon Doggerland is in the English Channel between the UK and France and has been explored and artifacts have been documented. It’s an interesting rabbit hole.
I dont thinik Golbekli Tepe was sufficiently explained. Would have also been nice to include Boncuklu Tarla since that site is far older and more extravagant, which makes it even less likely to be made for little reason IMO. I think its becoming more obvious that civilization predates our current understanding, but as of yet no evidence that it was advanced. for me, the evidence that civilization predates the younger dryas is stacking. Maybe we had a early bronze age before the flood, and took 2 steps back following. This for me seems more plausable than 'we built megastructures for hunter gathering for no known reason'
There was advanced civilizations. They just didn’t have mechanical engineering and flying cars and crap. You can do technology in a different way. Tesla thought the pyramid of Giza was a power plant. I am not saying it was but we should be more open minded about this stuff
They found an even older site near by called Boncuklu Tarla. Around 12,000 years old
Tesla was also considered a little crazy and had some very whacky ideas that went nowhere. There's nothing wrong with being open minded, but the pyramids very clearly weren't power plants of any sort and there's no evidence of any advanced technology that's 'different' without invoking some kind of 'magical' physics.@@waltersobchak6
@@waltersobchak6 all subjecture
I am under the camp that there was most likely are older permsment civilizations, but the melting glacial ice put their civilization under water.
Not saying it was massive like Egypt. More likely they were smaller affairs.
I would argue at the mouth where a river goes into the ocean would be a good place to look, but rivers can radically change courses over time. Especially if you have glacial melt causing flooding every year.
Any object swallowed by sea level rising would degrade rapidly due to tides coming in and out eroding it, with salt water destroying it, and organisms eating it.
Furthermore some scientists believe that humans were evolving as some water ape.
I will be honest I'm not sure if that theory holds much water myself, but thought I'd add it.
Anyway erosion is a b1tch. It is totally possible there were many smaller sized civilizations that are just lost with the winds of time. I don't believe that Stone monoliths are a requirement to be a cavitation.
“ sounds like a guest on Joe Rogans podcast”. Yep nailed it.
Joe Rogan, the king of the pseudo intellects.
Love JRE
Funny cause Simon himself was a guest on the Joe Rogan podcast...
@@Laocoon283oh ya? Which episode. Can't find it.
Joe Rogan, the largest and most respected news source on the planet with over 4 million average viewership. Has been for a few years now, more than quadrupling the views of CNN (126k), MSNBC (747k) and Fox (564k). But sure, you know better. 🤣
It's nice of these ancient civilisation people that they gave tech to the ancient mesopotamians and Egyptians, and Chinese and Indus Valley people, then built ocean going vessels and crossed either the Atlantic or Pacific to go to America, despite their pre-cataclysmic maps probably being horribly out of date what with the global flooding and all, and then they just kind of sat down in the jungles of mesoamerica and waited for a short few 12000 years for the Maya to come into existence so they could teach them a really inefficient calendar.
It's so fucking easy to see hes full of shit. Dude's theory crumble on itself the second you do a tiny bit of research.
My experience with pancakes is always the reverse. The first one is perfect, and it's all downhill from there.
I have no problem with any pancakes. I'm trying to remember if I ever did.
He said that and I'm like,...what? Blink blink.
Similar but what i figured out as a child and proves true today is that if you rinse the pan between batches then every one turns out great, but for some this is too much work
Depends on the pan. Thicker bottom pans preheat and tend to burn the first one if overheated compared to desired cooking temp.
Thinner ones start off preheated and cool because they don't have the necessary thermal mass to continue evenly cooking.
My guess is Simon uses something like I do, with a multilayer base. It took me literally like a year to get my habits changed. 5+ years later, and a few changes in how I cook, and I have no issues with pancakes.
I am guessing you're using some sort of aluminum or non stick pan for your pancakes? Just guessing from your comment.
Rinsing the pan not only removes deposits from previous pancakes but also starts you from a lower temp point, too. So that may have something to do with it. I use a similar method to make sure I don't overcook fried eggs. I preheat pan, with lid. Sprinkle a decent amount of water, let it steam with the lid. Dump it out and butter my pan (goat butter, give it a crack for cooking instead of regular cow butter or oil, ignore the initial smell, I promise you'll get used to it) and cook my eggs.
I'm no culinary expert, but my best friend is, we sit around and chat about this stuff often.
@@saydvoncrippswhat do you cook them on? Electric or gas range in a pan, on a griddle on the stove? Electric griddle? Curiosity on the discussion of pancakes has got me 😂
The issue with Graham Hancock’s theory is that he starts with a conclusion and then goes about finding evidence to support it, instead starting with a question (like “is it possible that there was an ancient civilization before recorded history?”) and then forming a conclusion based on research and evidence. These are not my own words, this is a paraphrasing of Milo Cirus from MiniMinuteMan but I agree with his assessment. And I apologize if I misspelled his surname horribly.
See the problem with this is, the whole point he's trying to make is that the evidence your asking for is missing and he's trying to work with what's in front of him.
This is why I don't like his involvement in the comet research group. The Comet impact is completely reasonable and there's alot of viable evidence, but Graham ruins it by placing wild claims on top of it.
@@paulnolan6866 Much of the evidence is not missing, though. He just chooses to ignore it. And for what is missing
g, instead of trying to understand why it's missing, he jumps straight to wild conclusions.
But the point is that the scientific method does not work in such a way that you start with your conclusion and work to prove it, only focusing on what you think supports it. It is to form a hypothesis and search for evidence with that hypothesisin mind, refining based on your finds, as well as to test against that hypothesis attempting to *disprove* it.
I find it curious that these “advanced” civilizations didn’t mine metals or use plastics? What is the thought process? So I have access to huge power (without machines?) and after much thought I decide “I’m going to pile rocks! That’s the ticket! Forget air conditioning or sewage management, I’m going to pile rocks!”?
I don't think it's possible a post industrial civilization could have been here before us and not leave traces, but an advanced civ capable of building the sphynx, sure. Makes sense to me
Yeah, exactly. It could have been an iron age one. But definately not the Woo-powered UFOs that Graham sometimes bursts out much to my immense dissapointment. Imagine something like Mayans or Romans.
how where the pyramids built
@@grabacactus5709 From the inside out.
@@balazsvarga1823 Precisely. People often say if humans vanished today, there would be no traces of us left in 10,000 years.
But that's not true. Excavations would remain. Canals. Radio isotopes in spent uranium, and probably many more hallmarks of humanity that I don't know about
@@grabacactus5709which pyramids are you talking about? The ones in Egypt? Central and South America? Southeast Asia? They're all quite different and all built differently.
As someone who is not a fan of camping, may I just say, I do not agree that hunting/gathering would be in any way superior to farm life. Farms have beds, even if they’re not fancy. Farms would also allow for whoever isn’t working, to travel for trade with other communities, for interesting things they can’t or don’t make, themselves. Also, farms made the first beer production possible. So yeah. Forests are awesome, but I’d still pick to live on a farm, over hunting/gathering, all day.
Modern-day farms completely suck! They destroy habitats and destroy soil to the point that the UK only has 60 harvests left, and its way worse in many other countries. They pump the land full of hazardous chemicals that make their way into our water systems. Polluted land and water ways means dead insects, dead birds, dead animals and eventually dead humans. Farms only feed humans and literally destroy everything else on Earth. Forests do all the opposites. None of this is opinion it's all fact!
I mean having a sturdy structure over tents or living in caves means we have better protection against predators. Seems more likely to work out better
The issue is that a lot of the “evidence” in ancient civ is stuff like “it’s all aligned to 2 degrees off of north pointing toward X far away. “
The issue is do we know they meant to do that? If things happen to line up it doesn’t mean anything unless we know they tried to do that. Like you can make a Bermuda Triangle in a bunch of places that have heavy travel activity it doesn’t mean they are all alien spots.
The reason so many ancient cultures built pyramids is because, lacking advanced materials and architectural techniques, the only large structure that is stable has a wide base and becomes narrower as it rises, aka a pyramid.
Yep, and many of the civilisations just went for building with the most available and easy to prepare resource - stone. Just imagine if some of the most prolific pyramid builders had rich seams of pure metals near them and lots of trees for fuel. I.e. resources so common that they weren't conserved just for tools, jewelery, weapons. I reckon we would have seen early attempts at strengthening structures with a lot of metal, and wood is a lighter material but still strong. Combine all of that with stone and suddenly straight sided tall buildings isn't that much of a stretch.
Have you been there?
Shout out to people that also watched Miniminuteman’s video on this dude!
He got debunked many times
Yep definitely worth a watch after this video.
Favorite quote from milo so far "well color me fucking shocked!" Lol
Which dude
@@kappega Graham Hancock. Miniminuteman has a whole video series on the ancient archeology series. It's great!
Always make sure your pan is heated properly before cooking your first pancake. Level achieved.
So I've got two thoughts on the video (which was great and I enjoyed it by the way). First, I feel like Simon has a very idealized view of scientists as a group of people. Scientific knowledge is a big ship, and it pivots very very slowly. Especially amongst outsiders. For example, the Big Bang has been on the outs for years. Its almost become a "Theseus' Ship" theory as they keep modifying it to incorporate new evidence, which still isn't quite adding up. But its still considered "fact" amongst scientific outsiders rather than a hotly contested theory.
Second, I find the idea that there's a great deal of lost history beneath the waves extremely plausible, because its happened near me. They recently discovered a massive Stonehenge style monument in the Great Lakes. In a place where myself and hundreds of thousands of people have been boating and swimming our whole lives. We even have a great deal of underwater divers due to the numerous shipwrecks. Yet 40 feet under us was this massive monument that actually predates Stonehenge by around 6000 years, and no one knew about it until very recently. While the stones aren't as large as Stonehenge, they're still massive (some are the size of a car) and decorated with carvings of animals native to the area.
Ya I think Simon doesn't relies just how much "lab politics" scientists are involved in. Everyone needs funding so you better not have an idea that makes you the mad man or you'll get no funding.
@@lackinganame7857nonsense. You have no actual clue how peer review science works, do you?
@@petermsiegel573 - in my experience, cliques and very un-scientific dogmatism. But what do I know? I'm just some shmuck on the internet like everyone else.
For one, I'd caution to compare theoretical science to applied science. One relies heavily on theory and can be considered more of a thought experiment, whereas the other needs physical evidence to posit a new theory.
Also, you are dismissing how far the scientists you are so easily criticizing have pushed science forward - especially in the last 100 years. There are definitely bad apples, no argument about it. But to posit that those represent the norm is just not true.
Scientists, researchers, and engineers have propelled humanity forwards in ways otherwise not possible. There is a reason for that. Because science, and scientific methods, work.
For every criticism about too little information in the field of archaeology there are reasons for it. Most importantly funding, but also geopolitical problems that keep archaeologists from sites, time constraints due to seasonal changes, outside interest pushing for focus on certain areas more, etc. .
Yes, let's just fogo with the ideas of your average Joe with an IQ of 98, because common sense is superior to science! Me, I'd rather visit Joe than go to hospital.
In my opinion, Graham's hypotheses are mostly entertaining, however they do highlight a need to gain a better understanding of the underwater parts of the world. I do agree that we need to do more underwater archeology, though I hope we actually end up with a better understanding of ocean ecosystems and find fossils we otherwise would not have access to, which may help solve a lot of prehistoric questions. I do not think we will find many human remains or structures.
Well, he is certainly right about that part but the problem is that there is a lot of ocean. I do think there is structures to find, they found a 10 000 years old structure on the bottom of the Baltic sea a bit over a week ago (it seems to be 10 000 years old, pretty large and meant to hunt herd animals into). We also have something that seems to be an early stone circle outside Orkney, it is dated to about 500 years older then the oldest stone circle on Orkney, is probably human made, Josh Gates wass there in an episode of "Expedition unknown".
We also found Roman, Egyptian, Indian and Greel towns that sunk, usually due to earthquakes.
The most interesting sites of all though is Ohalo II just outside the beach in Israel. It is a village from around 23 000 BCE but what makes it super interesting is that it is the first site with confirmed primitive agriculture. Check it up, super interesting. :)
So yeah, there are certainly a lot of archaeology under water but I think Graham hopes for the lost city of Atlantis as seen in movies and that isn't going to happen.
Besides the fact that Plato clearly use it as a made up example, even if he actually based it on facts there are some problems.
First he claims they had a war with Athens, who we know started as a small town during the bronze age which totally screws up the time line. But that is not the worst thing, do you know what advanced technology Plato tells us they had?
Well, they had ships and could work iron, not a single thing he say they have are not something you couldn't find in Athens during his lifetime.
So yeah, while if Graham did find a 12 400 year sunken city the size of classical Athens that would be a sensation but it would not be what Graham want. Yeah, using classical technology back then would change our time line a bit but not enough for "The mainstream archaeologists" to cover it up as he think they do.
The whole thing about super advanced technology were made up by sci-fi writers in the 19th century, and of course by mediums using psychic powers and usually were proven phoonies later. There is not a single earlier mention of that between Plato and the 1850s and no new evidence showed up either so it is made up later.
But sure, underwater archaeology important, the hard things is to find where to dig since it is more expensive then regular archaeology that is also short on funding. That is why finds like that are usually found by accident, or in a few case by studying old scripts and very primitive maps.
Yeah
@@loke6664, Janah James or J J, had shown the Egyptians had Atlantis mentioned in hyroglyphs before Platos time
@@MayomiBravo That is not exactly what they said.
What they said was that the gods lived in a temple on a small island and the temple was swallowed by water.
So no city mentioned at all and the temple being swallowed by water is probably symbolizing the yearly flooding by the Nile who brought fertile soil which gave the Egyptians their life.
So there is a flooded temple involved but no sunken city. I guess you could claim that the Gods were actually Atlantians but it is a pretty weak hypothesis and it really doesn't have anything else in common with what Plato wrote.
That is from the New kingdom BTW.
For Plato's story to be verified with Egyptian sources we need a bit more, a sunken city to start with.
Have you heard about the prehistoric logs washing up from Doggerland? Also there is a recently found mythical city off the coast of India, I don't remember the name, and some striking underwater features off the coasts of Japan and Bermuda. There are definitely underwater ruins.
The dreaded first pancake... I could practically hear so many heads nodding all at once.
Minutemen Archiology has a series where he goes through Grhams theroies line by line. He does a lot od pseudo archology reviews
Miniminuteman is a genius RUclipsr, I recommend him to everyone.
I agree @miniminuteman channel is great specifically taking down Graham and others
Milo rocks. If I were his momma I'd be so proud of him.
The wife and I both love that dude, not only intelligent, but hilarious too!
Miniminuteman is a great rec for Simon's audience, who will certainly appreciate the snark-laden commentary.
To debunk the construction of pyramids as proof of this...the shape of a pyramid is simply a very easy and structurally sound method of building a tall structure. What's more, there is a very clear progression of pyramid innovations in Egypt, suggesting it was something they came to through experimentation rather than via some lost civilization's guidance.
The conspiracy theories about the pyramids is just another version of "god of the gaps" arguments.
Most people don't know about the step pyramid
Bro, I get so wound up by people like Hancock claiming that ancient peoples were too stupid to figure out "put small thing on top of bigger thing".
Because it's the shape of the mountains. The mathematical precision denotes their dedication to it.
Literal toddlers figure it out before they can talk. Apes do it too.
1. Floods aren’t exceedingly rare events. 2. Most major civilizations sprang up near sources of water (a significant portion of Hancock’s theory is based on this fact). 1+2=3. Statistically, most major civilizations will have stories of devastating floods. 4. It doesn’t mean all of those stories are about the SAME flood.
24:46 still watching of course but I can go ahead and answer you;
Pyramids are surprisingly stable structures, so naturally everyone did it because it’s what stood up longest.
Storms topple tree. Not a good choice for replication.
Mountains on the other hand. Let imitate those in our construction.
@@dobermanownerforlife3902no literally you’re right; the leap is not THAT hard 😭
I was convinced when simply pouring sand: it makes a pyramid and exactly what any animal learning shelter will replicate until it can stand up its own structure. Just like termites. That old man needs not be so damn proud.
Exactly. Also, their stability makes them last a long time. Ancient cultures built all kinds of structures, but the pyramids were most likely to last the ages because, as everyone knows, the triangle is the strongest shape.
It might just be one of the few structures that could stand the test of time. There may have been many others, but those didn’t survive time.
As a regular consumer of miniminuteman's (Aka Milo Rossi) content Graham Hancock is well trodden to me.
Well yeah, hateful people make hateful viewers. Its easy to win an argument against a video that can’t respond to criticism
You should get a cookie.
I just dearly hope the dinosaurs built the pyramids.
Everyone knows the dinosaurs built the pyramids. You been watching cnn and Fox News or something ?
Much more credible than Hancock's poppycock.
If there were an advanced civilization that preceded us, we would DEFINITELY have found the hallmarks of its industrial revolution. It's not very likely they're gonna skip right over hydrocarbons in the economic development cycle.
Don't forget that there would be genetic & agricultural evidence too! If there's two things humans like to do, it's reproduce and eat. 😂
The hydrocarbons would be blended and indistinguishable from background once subduction occurred.
Looking at humanity’s span scale compared to how old the Earth is it is pure insanity to think intelligent life started and exploded with humans.
Until humans leave Earth and actually explore the solar system our knowledge is theorized based on a constantly recycled system of rock and carbon from Earth’s crust.
Unless they were at a level equivalent to the Greek, Roman, Persian, Meso-American, South American, and ancient Asian civilizations. Which is more probable than atomic power or even internal-combustion engines.
Also why couldn't they? Just because our technology went down that path doesn't mean that others would have. That's what the entire steampunk genre is about. You being unable to imagine it doesn't mean that it's impossible.
You're even assuming that they had economic development, they could have started as an egalitarian society like Star Trek and continued that way until their end.
Boncuklu Tarla, and Karahan Tepe
Two sites also in Turkey which point to further large scale construction and seem to share a relationship with Gobekli Tepe
My personal bias, I want to believe Graham Hancock. But I also recognize that he makes some pretty wild leaps. Matt does a great job of pointing out both the more compelling points and the glaring holes. I do wish he would have addressed the two sites I bring up-perhaps largely because I was surprised to recently learn of them and I'm sure for one of these scripts he would have researched them more deeply than the cursory google searches I've done after hearing of them.
To be fair, their discovery is more recent than that of Gobekli Tepe.
Miniminuteman covers them
@@GelthWalker1 thanks for the tip... watching now
@IshtheStomach you're welcome enjoy his channel great for watching rabbit hole
World of Antiquity (Dr. David Miano) has an excellent video addressed to Hancock that goes over all of the current evidence that Hancock doesn't know about or refuses to acknowledge. Here: ruclips.net/video/T9aH1kQX6d4/видео.htmlsi=gGRVQy1dVVAV_b3m Dr. Miano's other videos are awesome too, but that one in particular should be required viewing for anyone interested in Gobekli Tepe and Karahan Tepe and possible relationships between sites in that region. I love Miniminuteman too, but if a hardcore Hancock believer is going to question their beliefs, Milo isn't the one to send them to. I love the smartassery and snark, but they probably don't appreciate it lol
@@astreaward6651 None of the conspiracy shills can acknowledge Miano, to do so would be to admit they are wrong, and that would end their income from it.
Everyone builds pyramids because it's the easiest way to build high buildings with a relatively low level of technology. that's the reason.
….did you just say that the pyramids are low level technology 😅😂
@@brianmetz6957 nope, i said BUILDING THEM requires relatively low levels of technology.
(as in tools and techniques that have been around for several millennia).
@@TheRacoonGhost how did they drag dozens of tons of stones from a quarry across the continent all the way to the pyramid site. How did they manage to not only do that, but place 300 stones a day for 20--30 yrs. Not only that, they had to feed the workforce required to drag a train of blocks across a continent. Not only do they carve it out the block, they have to drag it without it cracking or breaking. Dragging a block after long distance and by the time it arrived it still retained the dimensions.
@@TheRacoonGhost also, should take a look into baalbek, someone back then figured out how to lift stones weighing over 1500 tons.
I think the point is that if you’re going to make an impressively large, tall and stable building you’d make a square and then pile on smaller squares. So we have pyramids in different places around the world. How did they move the rocks? I’m not going to say it was aliens but… “it was aliens” (kidding)
Predynastic Egypt doesn’t have building tech more advanced than you would expect thousands of years (>4000 years ) after Gobekli Tepe. We have gotten a fair way in the roughly 5,000 years since the beginning of the dynastic period of Egypt.
If the people from the pre-existing civilisation were dedicated to restoring civilisation they really took their time
If most modern people were wiped out today and the survivors were forced to retreat to remote tribes, it would similarly take thousands, maybe even tens of thousands of years to recover
@@Poopgoy if we lost the ability to make solar panels and/ or wind and geothermal power plants we probably couldn’t get back to our current energy usage per capita ever due to having used all of the easy to access petroleum and coal.
That said if there were people with our current knowledge who wanted to rebuild they would know at least the basics of engineering, materials science, metallurgy chemistry and mathematics, there would be still be domesticated animals
I have built a miniature copper smelter from coal, clay and sand, made steel from iron ore and charcoal coal etc, I have used arches just building garden fences.
@@glenecollins you seem to forget that everyone isnt educated in everything. In a scenario like the one we're talking about most skilled workers wouldn't survive and only a limited amount of knowledge would be able to be passed down. There's also knowledge that would be useless. What's the use of a man that can make solar panels if there's no electricians, materials, etc in the tribe the solar panel guy joined?
Sure you could teach a tribe to smelt, but could anyone teach them to smelt AND to mine resources for said metalworking? Most people wouldn't and the odds someone that can survives is low. This logic applies to most modern technology that would be attempted to be passed down
Now to give you the benefit of the doubt, using your smelting example again: a tribe could also learn of smelting and metal working and begin experimenting on its own with gathering metals, which would in turn lead them to 1) discover metal working way earlier than they would have and 2) if the guy that taught them the concept of smelting is still alive when they figure out gathering metals a fragment of our culture will be passed down to them when he teaches them western craftsmanship
Something not really covered in the episode, and that could perhaps warrant its own episode, is the possibility of a *_pre-human_* civilisation in the millions of years the Earth has existed even since the dinosaurs. During such a timescale, many conventional evidence (e.g. buildings, plastic, etc) would have eroded away and been broken down to the point of being nearly indistinguishable from the natural environment. It is a also useful avenue of inquiry to help figure out what we should be looking for when searching for life in space (that may have likewise gone extinct). All evidence indicating a lack of a pre-human civilisation are for a *_post-industrial_* civilisation. Something on the level of Neanderthals would not be expected to leave behind such traces.
If you think about it, a prehuman civilization along the lines of the neanderthals whose artifacts would have eroded away until they were indistinguishable from the natural environment would be, for all practical purposes, meaningless. If we never even know of their existence they may as well never have existed.
Something would have fossilized. Especially if they were as impactful as we are today
@@1197540k What if they weren't as impactful as we are today. Also, scientists estimate that only approximately 5-10% of species of animals that have existed have left fossil evidence. Meaning, we have no fossil evidence of 90 to 95% of animals that previously existed.
@@1197540kFossilization is an extremely rare process that requires specific environmental and mineral prerequisites at just the right timescale.
@@1197540kPlus any fossils that did exist would be destroyed approximately every 500 million years due to the Earth’s crust recycling down.
I find the linear way civilisation has progressed to be much more pecuilar. It seems that there should have been ancient civilisations that were able to do things better than we can. The fact that things just existed like they had for millions of years and then humanity just got to a point of being able to interact and mould the world around them out of nowhere at some arbitrary point in time feels even more bizarre but yet normal because this is how for all intents and purposes it actually happened.
The one thing that always makes me at least tilt my head with interest with theories like this is because I have been told by teachers when i was in college that even in the scientific community if you try and go against anything that is established even if you are right you get ostracized til it becomes so overwhelming someone has to listen. it reminds me of how we know in history scientists try to give us theories and were being silenced by the church. Its hard to say if ones like this one are fully fluff or onto something because any research to look for the new means going against what the current science community wants
That's why they're teachers, it's only natural that they might feel a little miffed about not rising through the ranks, besides, anyone who thinks an archaeologist wouldn't give their right nut to introduce evidence to the world or aid someone else in presenting evidence to the world of a world-wide, seafaring ice-age culture that carried knowledge to the four corners of the planet is crazy: Archaeologists have egos too, y'know.
But then you have people like Ignaz Semmelweis, whose life was basically destroyed (and then ended) for trying to get other doctors to wash their hands between patients. They're not always lunatics.
@@Macallion It seems to me that the further along we get with technology the crazier doctors and scientists are getting, I mean, who in their right mind would build a bomb powerful enough to destroy a city or an artificial brain that almost certainly will kill us someday or who the f**k would manipulate viruses hoping to make them more virulent and more contagious?
(I had seen a documentary about Dr. Semmelweis and his frustrating experience trying to introduce germ-theory to his peers but I did NOT know (or forgot) that his life had been destroyed or that it had ended his life...I thought he had won-out in the end...)
Legitimate questions about new theories are not ostracism. Other scientists in the relevant fields examine the new theory and the work behind it, looking for problems with both, and go back to the current theories and ideas to put them under new scrutiny. Individual scientists can be total assholes, but the methods of science get the proper results.
@@Macallion- He had to deal with prideful asshats, and I read that he wasn't the most diplomatic of people. No matter how much infection rates dropped and how many survived childbirth, those doctors were quite convinced that he was wrong. It took a while for the germ theory of disease to be accepted.
I always had the opposite problem with pancakes, my first one is perfect but while cooking it the pan gets too hot so the ones after that perfect first one the rest end up getting burnt. I learned the best way to cook them by slowly heating the skillet so it is able to maintain that perfect temperature for much longer so all of my pancakes end up identical. Hardest part is not cranking up the burner to heat up faster, the key is patience.
What, you make the pan slightly hotter to start, then you bring the temperature down 😅
Regarding pancakes: I used to have that issue until I realized you gotta let the pan finish pre-heating before you start cooking. Some pans can't handle an empty pre-heat, so that's another reason cast iron is great for pancakes.
I grew up watching the history Channel with my dad. Regardless of what they turned into, I still credit them with fueling my curiosity about history. Even if alot of their current shows are blatant cash grabs that don't accomplish anything besides muddying the waters
Same. Back in the day, History Channel was basically only about our least favorite mustache man. Now it's all aliens and pawn shops.
For the curious with a lot of time on their hands, multiple trained archaeologists and historians on RUclips have shown exactly how dubious every single claim Graham Hancock has ever made has been. Archaeosoup, Archaeology Tube, miniminuteman, scholagladiatoria (yes, sword guy is a trained archaeologist), Stefan Milo, and probably many others I don't know about have all released videos, often multi-hour videos, calmly (mostly, miniminuteman gets heated at times) and thoroughly debunking everything Hancock says. Miniminuteman especially goes into excruciating detail exposing every individual point of Hancock's recent show "Ancient Apocalypse" as baseless hypothesis or outright lying, episode by episode. He's also entertaining and my personal recommendation to start with.
Modern archaeology is methodical, with any claim requiring solid evidence before even being considered by the larger community, and the more disruptive the claim is to the established (by mounds of verified evidence) archaeological record, the better the evidence required. Hancock's bs rests on utter claptrap.
Yes, yes, yes. Dubinking Milo has been quite thoroughly many, many times. Why people still say "but, but, but..." is still beyond me. They'll believe anything from anyone if they want to. That's all it takes. They want to.
Gotta love simon saying Quetzalcoatl like he has never seen the word even though he has made multiple videos on him 😂
The ruins at Gobekli Tepi have been dated to around 9500BC, therefore pre-dating the first supposed civilisations by around 5500 years, which seems to prove that the currently accepted history of the human race is seriously lacking.
The mat (mentioned) is found around the world and contains a large amount of iridium, which is indicative of an asteroid strike , possibly on the ice caps thereby causing massive floods (as mentioned in most religious texts) ... have a look at the work done by Randall Carlson.
Megalithic structures show that ancient people were able to work with some truly massive blocks of stone, something which we'd find hard to do even these days with all our machinery ... have a look at the Baalbek Stones, truly monumental quarried stone blocks.
I feel like not including this information is a glaring problem, either with writer bias or with a failure to adequately research the subject
Not really, we see the beginning of that technology in another civilization: The Natufians (12 500- 9 400 BCE) and they didn't live that far away from Göbekli tepe either. They have been known about for 100 years but Graham seems to forget about them.
They did not built T pillars but well those round walls around them, used the same water cistern we see at Göbekli tepe and a lot of other similar technology.
They were around during the hypothesized asteroid strike and we don't see any decline in them, they also packed up and left just about the same time we see the tepes emerge a bit up north.
As for the Baalbak stone, it was built by Roman engineers and they actually had machines. In that case I can't of course prove they carved that out but there is zero archaeological finds or artifacts at the site from the hypothesized timeline, not a single thing. If someone was doing massive work with massive machines I would expect them to leave some things behind, just look at any building work site today.
The toolmarks on the stone do look exactly like Roman toolmarks though, not like like they came from powertools which is very suspicious. I am pretty sure the Romans were great engineers, we do know they moved a massive stone column (one that Graham thinks the Egyptians couldn't move) all the way to Rome, it was still a lot lighter then the Baalbek stone but that one they probably planned to move a short distance but since they never did, maybe they couldn't?
It is still in place so I don't think it proves anyone actually could move it even from a lost high civilization, because no one ever did even if someone certainly planned to move it.
In short: We have evidence the Romans were there and nothing from your alleged super civilization. You somehow dates it to the younger Dryas because? All evidence we have points towards the Romans, but if you actually could find a real evidence I would be all ears, that would be amazing. But "I think" is not evidence, just wishful thinking.
@@loke6664 he didn't mention the baalbak stone. He talked about gobekli tepi, which the Romans did not make and which you didn't really give a response to as the natufians didn't build any megalithic anything. You just brush it aside because it doesn't fit into the narrative you're trying to push
@@NestoftheSun What are you talking about? There is a large Natufian megalith on the temple mound in Jerusalem even.
Yes, they were smaller then Göbekli tepe which is what you expect from an earlier civilization,
It is not about fitting into anything, it is about actual evidence instead of making things up.
Yeah, we do not see any T-shaped pillars older then Karahan Tepe (or have not found any yet at least).
In cases where we actually see a group of people moving in from far away we see a lot of new things, look on the Columbian exchange for instance. New animals, new plants, completely new technology from somewhere else.
We don't see anything you could call writing at Göbekli tepe, the plants that got domesticated are all local. The tools we found are very similar to Natufian tools. Are you telling me that people from this high technological place couldn't even bring pottery?
There is zero evidence from someone coming in to Göbekli tepe with new technology and if you want a bridge between the Natufians and Göbekli tepe you have Boncurlu tara who had a stone temple and similar building style 1000 years before Göbekli tepe.
But show me the evidence and I will change my mind, evidence trumps theories any day.
@@loke6664 how are you going to try to say with a straight face that the natufians, whose stonework is severely inferior to the work at gobekli tepi, moved to gobekli tepi and completely stopped farming, the thing the natufians are known for? No pollen has ever been found at gobekli tepi and if the people gathering there farmed at all pollen would have been found.
If there was advanced civilization on Earth in the past for some reason they never dug up and moved around large amounts of minerals or fossil fuels, they never developed plastics, and they never put anything in orbit... that these things are all where they should be from planet formation and geological events until we started messing with them recently makes me highly suspect that anyone was around before hand.
I think you're thinking of "advanced" as far more advanced than the term intends. Advanced civilization doesn't mean cars and space flight. It means they knew about farming, had written language, studied the stars, had advanced mathematics, and good building techniques. Compare a civilization like that to cavemen. One is far more advanced than the other. As for minerals, if there were 100,000 people in that advanced civilization, they wouldn't have dug up enough minerals for us to notice over 10,000 years later. It wouldn't be like today where we've got 8 billion people and our mining areas would remain obvious for a very long time in the future because of how much we've dug and altered things.
If people who could read, write, farm, build, create/use advanced tools, tell time, use math, and the stars came to a group of cavemen and started teaching them, those cavemen may consider them gods. Those cavemen would go from wandering, crudely painting on cave walls, hunting, and gathering to building settlements, farming, building structures, etc... That's a very sudden jump from one way of life to another and they'd want to tell their story to future generations. That story being these "gods" showing up and teaching us everything we now know.
@@ChaseSchleich Yeah. Hancock maybe right in an advanced civilisation that was iron age, compared to cavemen. But still pre industrial, or we would have found mining traces, coal burn traces in ice cores, etc.
Noah's flood (and other religions that speak of a world altering flood) are perfect examples. They all depict an apocalyptic flood, which if one were to compare various texts & evidence, that in reality occurred worldwide.
All cultures have various tales, whether religious or not, that speak of various events in the past. We of modern society just can't seem to accept that.
Also, as ChaseSchleic said, advanced doesn't specifically mean technology wise. It could be respect towards the planet and nature. Evidently they were, especially compared to now, more advanced when it came to memory given that before the written word was created information had to be passed via memory and word of mouth. Among other examples that are far more impressive than what many focus on.
Simple fact is for a culture to be advanced it doesn't mean they have to be in regards to technology. Look at the various peoples who live secluded from the modern world, I guarantee they have much more respect for nature than we do & better odds of surviving after potential catastophic events than those in modern civilization. They simply have more advanced knowledge when it comes to survival, hunting and gathering, and anything else such peoples would need to know. While modern culture is severely lacking in those aspects.
How do you know they never tapped into minerals? How do you know they never had plastic, steel or anything else. Say it was 20,000 years ago, all that stuff would have vanished, satellites would have fallen out of orbit.
@@TehCanadian They speak of great floods here and there and there is evidence of great floods here and there. No surprise at all. Such things happen. There is no evidence of a flood that covered the entire earth all at once. Where would the water come from? Where would it go? Outer space? And the rest of the Ark story is complete, unadulturated b.s. At best it is a fable. A parable. Otherwise, just nonsense. They couldn't even fit the habitats and food for all the insects, and keep them all fed and alive, let alone all the other smaller and larger animals and all the freaking plants. They would have needed several more Arks at least for food alone. And getting all those animals together from all around the entire earth? And then feeding everything and keeping everything alive, feeding them and clearing all the waste every single day, taking care of their illnesses and injuries, all including the Noah family, keeping them healthy and alive during and then after the when all life had been obliterated by the flood. I know some answers have been imagined (they always are) but they are as ridiculous as the story itself. Get real.
The reason ancient people all over the world built pyramids is that it's a very easy way to make something really big. Kids in a sandbox will build pyramids. Pyramids also last forever. If you built a tower as tall as the great pyramid it would require a great deal of advanced fortification, and even then it's topple eventually. Either from natural events or from people tearing it down deliberately.
I'm still trying to find a source of this quote I read once "Let's face it, even a roughed up and tumbled down pyramid is still basically pyramid shaped." It'd take quite a catastrophic natural disaster to destroy a pyramid. And to deconstruct one manually is almost as much work as building it in the first place.
So in short: Pyramids are easy to build and difficult to destroy.
im only about 5 minutes into the video, but tbf even now we're switching more to digital documentation over physically writing things down and stuff...maybe something like that existed before and it was lost because there's no way for us to currently access pre historic tiktok?
eta: also we haven't discovered a lot of the ocean so who knows what fossils and stuff are down there?
Because digital recordings have physical remains. Long after the internet collapses there will still be computers.
@@thomaswillard6267digital recording do not survive catastrophic events. Stone is your best way to try and ensure knowledge is passed on.
We have been measuring the disgusting amount of microplastics and chemical waste from our own tech for almost as long as we have had the tech. We would see these signature eons back in ice core samples, ocean sediment cores etc. tf you on about a digital age we don’t know about 🤣
@@generationxpvp why would you assume they discover electronics and polymers. Advanced civilization means agriculture, so they can have a civilization. You fall into the same narcissism that academia does.
@@dobermanownerforlife3902 Too bad you, this video and 98% of people have fallen into the trap of confusing and ultimately conflating a civilization with a society or culture. Neither of which actually need civilizations, but are required by civilizations.
Basic civilization contains agriculture at the level of the bronze age. Large scale agriculture that is efficient enough to allow for a significant portion of the population to do things other than farm, is one of the cornerstones of a civilization.
"Advanced" civilization has one assumption. One you have failed to make and are therefore just as bad as those you criticize. That assumption is the evolution of the mechanisms that make up a civilization and make it function, or the formation of new complex emergent systems. I.e. advancements of some sort.
One of the other required elements of any civilization is writing. Therefore _ADVANCEMENTS_ on that front are... (do I even need to finish this? Yes, yes people are that bad.) Possible and indeed one of the more probable ones. This includes identifying various possible means of doing the actual recording and storing.
Milo Rossi (Miniminuteman) has an excellent series on this.
Also, can we stop paying attention to Graham Hancock?
Miniminuteman is a genius RUclipsr, I recommend him to everyone.
I wish we could but check the comments here lol it’s all insane babble about how he’s right and AcAdEmIa BaD
Excellent lol whining for hours is sll he does
It's like anit-vaxxer talking points. They will never go away, and we will never have another broad, nationwide public health response to as virus again. Moreover, vaccines like MMR and rabies for dogs are being used less and less and those problems are already growing. It's an effing civilizational travesty. So there is no surprise that people continue to babble on about advanced ancient civilizations.
This sounds like the transcript from the Netflix show...
There are plenty of ruins built on top of each others around the world as Graham mentioned. One not mentioned is Machu Picchu in Peru, with its megalithic stones as a base but with more crude stones at the top. Göbekli Tepe was also deliberately buried, which is also very fascinating.
While there are some holes in Graham's claims, it's not impossible at all. So wouldn't hurt for Archaeologies to have a more open mind and look into it.
There are after all holes in modern Archaeologies claims as well.
The problem is that the size of the holes and the willingness to patch them up without sufficient evidence is not the same
Just want to point out that 'written history' is not the same as 'unknown history'. We have permanent structures discovered at place like Göbekli Tepe, dated to 9700 BCE; and those are just what has been unearthed. There are other still-buried sub-sites to examine. And another near-by site is even older. We might lack details, but we still have at least a rough idea of that history.
Why did it take so long? Because the world ain't friendly and human life is short when you have limited tools to survive and no time to spend working to understand the world around you enough to make new tools in order to manipulate both the environment and thus their chances of survival. Being nomads does not lend itself to scientific observation and study. There were probably hundreds, possibly thousands, of humans that could have advanced human civilization. They just died before that happened, or the changes they did make didn't propagate for any number of reasons including the nomadic lifestyle.
And Graham Handcock is a 'journalist' with not formal training in archaeology and whose pet theories have been soundly debunked by actual archaeologists.
The comet impact theory is stupid on its face. _Impacts don't cause warming, they cause _*_cooling_*_ due to the ejecta of the impact blocking sunlight._ Just because some scientists believe it's possible does not make it so. Especially when those scientists get such fundamentals wrong.
The theory goes that the comet hit the north American ice sheet, imparting most of its thermal and kinetic energy into it. Thus the heating
We’ve definitely got more than 5000 years of our history documented right?
That recorded history began 5000 years ago is fucking NUTS
Depends on what you mean by documented. We have cave paintings much older than that.
There may have been written records dating farther back than that but at this time we don’t know of any. If they did exist they likely were destroyed by natural processes or we simply haven’t discovered them yet.
Writing as we know it is that old, but evidence of culture is thousands of years older than that.
I believe the kish tablet is the oldest document we have and it’s from like 3500 bc-ish
We have things that can inform what we call history, when there is no actual history to find in and of itself. These are things like archeological interpretation and documentation of sites, more varied dating methods (for even more separate lines of inquiry) of various stuff (archaeomagnetic dating is my favorite, dating the last time a fire was lit by looking at what it recorded the magnetic signature of the earth to be, more or less when stuff gets really hot, it forgets whatever the magnetic field was are it gets reset to that time. Basically works like dendrochronology, but with magnetic fields and kilns and things like that which get really really hot). Reinterpretation of past finds and sites in light of newer methods or ways of thinking. Even anthropological approaches that try to equate modern "primitive" societies with those of the distant past.
Commonly people will call all of this stuff "history". They are fact not part of the discipline of history. They inform the interpretation of history and history informs them. The key is that you need proper documentation of events for something to qualify as being part of the discipline of history itself. A cave painting is not such documentation any more than an Edward Hopper painting is "documentation" of movie theaters or US Route 6 in Cape Cod.
The one thing that always gets me with this sort of theory is like the search for life. Its all based on our technology and our needs. What if there was another civilization on earth but they had used bio tech before and grew all their houses
I have been a Hancock debunker since the early 2000s.
He is now winning because in order to argue with him successfully, you need to be very well versed in history and archaeological methods of obtaining data. Layman's like his fantasy history.
I even find his shows and books entertaining, just mainly untrue.
Stop being so jealous.
@@justinsmith4562Stop believing in fantasy.
There are several early pyramids in Egypt that collapsed while being built at Meidum. There is a pyramid - called the bent pyramid - that was started at the wrong angle and changed halfway through construction once the builders realized they had messed up. It's easy to follow the process of developing the skills needed to build the great pyramids in Egypt through a process of trial and error over a period of centuries. It is SO CLEAR that the Egyptians were very smart and taught themselves how to build pyramids with no outside help that I find other theories pretty silly.
Its important to realise how long the ancient Egyprian civilization lasted from pre pharonic times to the death of Cleopatra VII. They slowly developed over time and became very knowledgable about many things, agriculture, the seasons, the stars, mathmatics, trade and writing. Once writing developed idea storage and sharing would have boosted all other areas of knowledge as shared ideas were built upon by other ideas. The development of pyramids can be seen clearly from the early mastaba to stacked mastaba to crude step pyramids and then the more advanced and long lived 'great pyramids of Kufu, et al.
Our ancesors weren't stupid and lived in societies where knowledge was valued and not just for financial gain. Their social structures and education systems (mainly for the elite or young people recognised as particularly intelligent) were good and there were a lot less distractions from productive thought than we have today.
This is not an argument against preceding lost civilisations, more an argument against the chasing around of a small number of wise lost civilisation folk making everyone develop the same things at the same time. Pyramids were nice big impressive buildings which began from smaller square or oblong buildings built on top of each other for height, its hardly suprising that other civilisations discovered the same thing, never mind those influenced by descriptions from traders who saw them. Lets face it how many civilisations had axe like or knife like tools - was that straightforward development or wisdom from some external civilisation?
Both of my Nanas and my Mother always said, the first Pancake is nothing more than a Frisbee!
GH has many fascinating hypotheses and has written some very entertaining and intriguing books. It was a pleasant surprise to find him so prominently acknowledged in this video. Fact or fiction, historian or hack, he's a best-selling author for a reason.
Graham Hancock is a grifter.
But why would a man with a belief and interest in stringent academic research say that?
Perhaps we'll never know.
We'll leave you to decide...
(closing credits music here)
I don't think it's strange to think there might have been areas of slightly more technological early agricultural people 12,000 years ago, Glacial Period ice sheets extending down to about 45° Latitude in Europe and N. America. Ocean sea levels rose 400 ft, and would have displaced many.
Sure. That's not really what Graham's claiming though. He's repeatedly claimed this previous civilization had teleportation tech and could control gravity increasing or decreasing it in specific areas to make construction easier. THAT'S what most people find hard to believe..
The Sphinx has an oddly small head compared to the Egyptian sculptures that are amazingly symmetrical.
The sphinx was probably a rocky outcrop that was vaguely sphinx shaped. Either the bit that the head was carved out of was a bit on the small side or it has been whittled away and altered over time I'd guess.
PS. At one point in history Dinosaurs being eliminated by a large asteroid impact was not a widely accepted theory. That changed with the discovery of the Chicxulub impact site in the Gulf of Mexico. Just saying. Love the videos.
Yes but that theory was put forward by palaeontologists not journalists and they worked to assemble actual evidence to back up their theory, not just a slickly produced Netflix series.
Apples and oranges. Graham ignores any and all evidence that doesn't suit his narrative. The intermediary pyramids aren't just going to disappear so Graham can get his way. People aren't just going to start ignoring all the counter evidence just because Graham wants them to.
The blue hole in a reef off of Belize was just explored for the first time.
They found caves with stalactites over 20 meters down. Stalactites can not form underwater. Therefore, at one point, those caves were above water.
Ja? Und? It's a long-known fact that oceans rose tens of meters when the glaciers melted at the end of the Ice Age.
If any precursor human civilisation existed then they did not advance to a very high level of technology. If they had any metal technology at all then they would have been either quarrying rock or mining ore and thus leaving evidence behind of their activities that would survive through to the modern era even if their habitation sites had been completely destroyed by later events.
Also there would be a noticeable genetic shift in any animals and plants that they had domesticated and this would leave markers that could still be discovered in a post civilisation hunter-gatherer culture within the same geographical location.
I think that a very highly technological would have ample time to flourish and disappear completely if it existed say ten million years ago. There would be no trace left of anything, even the products of high technology after such an interval. I think that the answer is on the moon, where there should be definitve proof as to whether or not any previous technological civilization originating on earth could match up to our civilization.
Made it really early this time! Best part of my day! Thanks Simon!
If there was depending on the timeframe we would never know. Eventually the crust of the continents fold in on themselves destroying any evidence.
You are aware of ice cores, are you not?
@@mistyhaney5565Ice cores are younger than the crust of the earth. Ice forms on the crust.
Watching Simon trying to pronounce words like Quetzalcoatl never gets old 🤣
There was a 'great flood' in the North Sea that drowned Doggerland and created the English channel however this was caused by a huge mudslide under the sea off the coast of Norway. In my humble opinion there were lots of 'great floods' through world history. Also why do historians focus so much on the Great Pyramids when Stonehenge up to 1000 years older, the sheer size of this monument proves that people were able to come together without having huge city's.
When Stonehenge was being built, there was a monument in Scotland so old that they wouldn't have known why it was built. When it was being built, gobekli tepe had already been built, used, buried, and forgotten. In terms of ancient structures, Stonehenge is middle of the pack
@@RealSkoolmasterand The Boyne Valley Mounds at Newgrange Ireland
I wonder if racism plays a part there. It's accepted that ancient White people could make a cool thing. But ancient Brown people raises questions.
@@valolafson6035 congratulations! You have won the "most asinine comment of the week" award!
I think you could argue that there was a civilization that had iron tools but the tech was lost and fell back to the bronze age. If you look carefully at all of the stonework in Egypt the quality of work seems to be much better the older the work is. We are told by prominent archeologists that ancient Egyptians only had bronze and few one off iron tools made from meteorite fragments found in the desert.
Egypt was indeed more advanced during the bronze age, the thing is that even though it survived the bronze age collapse it was never really the same afterward. The great civilizations that existed back then were all dependent on trade with each other to maintain their high level of technology and way of life. As its trade partners for vital resources vanished Egypt had to make do with whatever they could obtain on their own. Thus the decline. Honestly the entire bronze age is basically the 'precursor civilization' that Graham was looking for, they had access to a high standard of living, public libraries, public officials and many more things you might associate with modern day.
Heck, the same thing happened around the time of the romans and the subsequent decline after the empire collapsed
No it doesn't. If you new anything about thr early Egyptian empire including the step and bent pyramids you'd never say such a thing.
Even bother to look at the crowns.
It's a modern myth that the older ruins are more advanced than the newer ones: You can start in the Pre-Dynastic era of rectangular, above-ground, mud-brick family tombs (Mastabas), to two and three story mud-brick tombs with underground burial chambers to more complex stone family tombs with a network of individual chambers to the first mud-brick pyramids of several evolving styles (bent pyramid, red pyramid, etc.) and finally the fully formed stone-block pyramids of the Giza plateau culminating in the Great Pyramid of Cheops or Khufu. People like Graham Hancock are disingenuous liars and hucksters who profit everytime you buy into their bullshit.
I am infertile from eating scented candles
Good.
This is the weirdest thing I read today
Quit waxing poetic already.
😂👏👏👏
bro what💀💀
6:25 - Chapter 1 - Setting the stage
11:25 - Chapter 2 - Graham hancock
16:05 - Chapter 3 - Is it possible ?
22:15 - Chapter 4 - Gods among men
28:25 - Chapter 5 - Explaining the gap
43:00 - Chapter 6 - The silurians
Just in the last 2 or so years we have discovered “civilizations” that existed before us. There were humanoid species creating tools and building wooden structures before humans existed. We certainly copied/ learned from them.
Unless you're referring to such relatives as the Neandertals, no we haven't. We keep discovering that our ancestors and 'cousins' were every bit as capable of planning, designing, and constructing entire temple complexes, villages, and cities.
@@julietfischer5056 wtf are you saying?
@@julietfischer5056 Point us to these "cousins", and to the temple complexes, villages and cities they built. I think you are compltely confused.
@@yeoldegunporn - That Neandertals and Denisovans, and other species were every bit as smart and capable as we are. No need to invoke K'n-Yan or space aliens.
@@jelink22 - We're finding things that Neandertals and other human species have built. They may not be on the level of Karnak or Machu Picchu, but they exist.
Unless you really, really, want there to have been a primordial super-culture that somehow left no undeniable traces, or for K'n-Yan to be real.
Something that completely breaks apart Graham's premise that mainstream archeology refuses to alter their timeline of human cultural evolution is Gobekli Tepe, in Turkiye. The discoveries at the Gobekli Tepe site pushed back when humans were building complex, permanent structures by thousands of years, and while the purpose of the site is still up for debate, the fact that it exists and was built around twelve thousand years ago is widely agreed upon.
I remind people who insist that there has not been advance civilizations before say, Egypt [INDIA, people. INDIA] that the Earth herself has changed massively, in so many ways, and part of those changes is Tectonic Plate Subduction. You know, the cause of the inevitable Cascadia Event in the North American North West?
Earthquakes, volcanoes, storms and floods caused by Volcanic Winters, these things very well can have removed decent areas of the Planet's face where a pretty spiffy Civilization once lived and thrived.
We've all seen the interesting maps of how the current Continents of the World have likely been shaped and placed. Well, that same movement that spread our current land masses is still happening, and some of the previous migrations were very destructive to coastlines [Such as the sea bed now near the top of the Himalayas after the Indian Sub-Continent moved up like a family member who IS going to stay with you, just try and kick them out,] but also land masses have been recycled into the Mantle via subduction too. We've rediscovered Pompeii which implies there could be many more towns and cities, entire Cultures laying deep in the Earth, close enough to the surface to be found if we stop assuming about the Land we live on.
Now, I know Matt[Hullo Matt! 👋] is intending "Advanced" to be synonymous with "Modern" as in Industrial Revolution or better. Still. We can't even agree about how the Egyptian Pyramids were built, much less imagine that Humans could have developed very impressive technology to make life easier and safer, that a Culture can possibly have contained more than 500,000 people in a city [complete with suburbs] and so on.
Did ancient people have combustion engines? I doubt it. But in India and in Celtic Britain and Europe, the medical practitioners performed complex surgeries successfully, even reconstructive surgery and removing cancer and curing it after to boot. So, "Advanced Tech" needs to be defined and standardized before we start poo-pooing those who came before us, don'tcha think?
Hullo and thank you to Simon and team, I love this channel! always engaging, fun and funny, I learn a lot watching Decoding the Unknown!
The problem with people like Graham Hancock is their idea of what constitutes "advanced." Hancock specifically has something more metaphysical in mind when he uses that term.
That said, while the earth does change dramatically over time, it's a very slow process, with some fits and starts interspersed, such as volcanoes, earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, etc.
Comparatively speaking, humans haven't been around for long at all. Though we spread around the world relatively quickly, we still generally congregated in somewhat predictable regions, such as river valleys, floodplains, deltas and coastal regions. These are the environments in which civilizations arose and grew, and this stayed pretty consistent around the world.
For all the known early civilizations, we have pretty solid bodies of evidence: structures and ruins, irrigation channels, trace compounds in soil, tools, pottery, jewelry and other artifacts(some even showing evidence of trade), as well as human and animal(and livestock) remains.
The point is that even on a small scale, civilization leaves behind a plethora of evidence in both variety and quantity, and generally over a broader area than what could be considered a civilization's borders. While many regions and cities have been altered or lost entirely due to natural events, such as Doggerland or Ilion(what we know of as the city of Troy), that wouldn't be enough to thoroughly destroy the evidence of an entire civilization.
There's obviously still much we don't know about our past, and lots left to be discovered, but the chances of an entire civilization dating even earlier than those in the Levant, Mesopotamia, Indus River Valley, East Asia, South/Central America, etc are extraordinarily low. There would be traces left behind that nothing short of a cataclysm of biblical scale could destroy, and such an event would also leave obvious evidence behind.
Everyone keeps talking about a time when humans were literally apes. You've seen the big brow guys, right? Before them. THAT'S the time you're talking about.
The line of study about how nomadic lifestyle was then replaced by agrarianism is a very Eurocentric view on human history. Many Indigenous Nations and communities would have multiple living locations based on seasonal patterns and land regeneration. Many Peoples on Turtle Island (what we know as Canada) were living this lifestyle since time and memorial and were forced into sedentary settlements by colonial Europe. There’s also traditional ecological knowledge that proves how many Indigenous Nations practiced strategic harvesting, akin to farming, and not simply ‘foraging’. The more you know! 🧡
This has to be one of my favorite videos ever…. Bravo
Not sure why you didnt mention the findings of Göbeklitepe which is dated around 10,000BC or the other many tepe's found nearby in Turkey.
Or any other works that make some of Graham's speculations much less speculatory. Such as Randall Carlson's.