Alternative take on history

[brass neck]

Don't know if anyone is interested in the emerging age of enlightenment. Obviously it's happening politically as people are waking up and realising much of what they used to take as gospel is actually BS.

Well there is a fabulous field of History that's starting to appear. Some of it being daft but this guy really caught my attention with his no nonsense take on things.
For anyone who's into history and certainly always asked questions about some of the grey areas in the conventional telling of History this is fantastic. Not too long a watch either.

 

[Jazzcat]

Fatastic sounds about right, it's entertaining pseudo-science at best.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Graham_Hancock

 

[brass neck]

Fatastic sounds about right, it's entertaining pseudo-science at best.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Graham_Hancock

Fair enough. But all I'd say is watch it. He doesn't make any Erich von Däniken style cock eyed theories here. He makes a case for establishment historians and archaeology in particular refusing to acknowledge holes in long held theories. It's interesting and worth a watch. The end is a bit more out there but fascinating never the less!

 

[vonkeynotvenky]

We are a civilisation that leaves tons and tons of rubbish of all kinds everywhere we go, not just here but in space and on the Moon and planets. I can't in all honestly believe that another advanced civilisation that lived here earlier wouldn't have done the same and left evidence of their having being here.

 

[Jazzcat]

Fair enough. But all I'd say is watch it. He doesn't make any Erich von Däniken style cock eyed theories here. He makes a case for establishment historians and archaeology in particular refusing to acknowledge holes in long held theories. It's interesting and worth a watch. The end is a bit more out there but fascinating never the less!

I've actually watched a few of his videos and it's indeed a far cry from the crackpot lunacies put forth by von Däniken but he's still using the same tactics that classic conspiracy theorists use, however rational his argument may seem.
His claim that the cataclysmic event in the Dryas is largely unknown and hasn't yet been studied by 'mainstream' archeology (no such thing exists ) is simply not true.
It actually triggered a glacial increase, so the claim of a lost civilisation during a non-existent ice age( last glacial maximum (26,000 to 13,300 years ago) is a bit ludicrous, to say the least. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/did-a-comet-hit-earth-12900-years-ago/
Anyway, there are definitely holes in the current historical accounts, as one would expect, but to accuse archeologists of an agenda/lies, only to provide a different story, without any significant evidence, is a bit cheap imo and pretty unscientific.

 

[inchy14]

Read Fingerprint of the Gods many years ago, a lot seems like nonsense, almost looking for thing to fit his theories, interesting read at the time though.