More thoughts on a Lost Civilization
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 04. 2024
- Thanks to all!
Chip me a tip with a super thanks or become a channel member today for some behind-the-scenes perks!
You can buy me a coffee at: www.ko-fi.com/flintdibble
or subscribe at: / flintdibble
In this video, I reflect on and add to the conversation I had with Graham Hancock on the Joe Rogan Experience
Also read my essay in Sapiens Magazine about my motivations for having the conversation: www.sapiens.org/archaeology/g...
Keywords: archaeology, history, Graham Hancock, Joe Rogan, Atlantis, Ice Age, Domestication, Neolithic
Remember you can chip me a tip with a Super Thanks or become a channel member today for some behind-the-scenes perks!
Or buy me a coffee at: www.ko-fi.com/flintdibble or subscribe at: www.patreon.com/flintdibble
This might be the least professional rebuttal from a scientist I have ever seen. It smells of vendetta/jealously.
Why bother with "debunking' Hancock's books and instead describe exactly what the Edfu texts say in their entirety.
Lot of personal animosity here. Being a soldier for your father's passion seems like a bias, no?? I hope in your work you recognize this fact.
As an archaeologist, I had the chance to meet Mr . Dibble on an excavation in Crete 2 years ago. He is one of the most passionate, knowledgeable and engaging people I’ve ever seen. He had the entire team completely drinking his words about a few samples of goat bones and teeth while also encouraging phds, confirmed archaeologists and students to exchange ideas , question and actively participate in the thinking process of his work. Knowing how quite a few of the so called experts can sometimes be people who just love to hear themselves speak, it was not only refreshing but also very inspiring. I couldn’t have thought of a better person to defend the “archaeologists point of view” on the debate with G. Hancock. Great guy!
I lost both of my parents to cancer also. I'm not an archaeologist, but have always had a lot of interest in it, and have followed you for a long time. I think you honor your father's memory and he would be extremely proud.
Wait, your brother is named Chip? Chip & Flint? hahahaha, thats great
Shame it wasn't steel. Flint and steel. Sorry.
@@DrumToTheBassWoop flint and chip is way better for archaeologists, though it seems to set up brothers for a weird relationship. One “chips” “flint” to make a tool
I sware its true lol
@@DrumToTheBassWoop We got a bright spark right here , im off for a knapp .
@@benjaminacurry4867one might in fact chip some flint to fashion a dibble.
Hardcore JRE listener. I come for the speculation and stay for open discourse on the evidence. Hats off to you and your research. Speaks for itself. Keep going!!
Nope! If you want to show him admiration, keep your hat on! no matter what!
Explain Tucker and his denial of Evolution then.
@Wayzor_ Money can buy an education and it can also shelter brainworms.
Tucker chose the latter and Joe just goes along and asks questions
yeah if you are hardcore jre listener you got issues bruh... dude just regurgitates the same stories over and over till he hits that 3hr mark.
@@Big_ten no, it's the endless rogan clips that get attention and reaction, regardless of how fucking erroneous or outright stupid the claims are.
i remember rogan early in his podcast(i even remember 'the joe show' prior to that), he used to complain about woo peddlers, now he's a podium for woo and bad takes.... for instance his supplements for memory and his own lack of recall as proof his supplements are woo.
I learned about you because of that episode. I honestly do find Graham entertaining and always liked him as a guest. That being said, you brought your A game and I became an instant fan which brought me to your channel and subscribed. I bet Joe invites you back on your own. I think if you were out there more and had more exposure just speaking facts and all the stuff you know about, people would want to watch it and learn. It is just as fascinating as lost civilization stuff, plus you actually have evidence supporting your knowledge.
What the hell are you talking about? He was petty and childish the whole time.
@@rijancaffegraham?
More fascinating because it’s not made up fantasy nonsense
@@rijancaffe Atleast he doesnt believe in a make believe fantasy land like you do buddy
Massive appluase to Flint for being the first guy to really go in there & debate Graham. I thought it was a very illuminating conversation. The concept of Greco-Roman nets being preserved from 2,000 year old sunken ships... mindblowing. I really appreciate the time you took to share some great recourses with me. We need to get you on The Great Courses/Wondrium!
@@novembertango1298 You realize it could be that Dunn is just a scammer? Just because something is difficult doesn't make it impossible. Incredulity is a logical fallacy.
you didn’t see the episode with Michael Shermer and Hancock and Rogan? Certainly not the first. Maybe amongst the first, but anyway, Hancock’s been selling books for 30 years. He’s had his fans and detractors for at least the same amount of time.
graham isn't to be taken seriously, he's a story teller and he's probably made decent bank peddling his stories on the woo circuit of 'i want to believe'
he's pure speculation, no substance.
Took these “real archeologists” long enough to actually stop bickering behind keyboards and actually debate like adults…except your boy Flint Dibble couldn’t even look another man in the eyes with his truth…
It was amazing and fullfilling
The only thing I can say in Graham's favor is that Gobekli Tepe was a shock to the archeological world. Nobody had predicted anything like that at such an age, and it came after over a hundred years of archeological work.
Actually they did predict it by saying humans needed lots of food and GT appears to have had plenty.
I think there's a big difference between finding a really old large or megalithic structure we weren't expecting and hypothesizing a culture that spanned the globe and was more advanced than we expect on zero evidence.
I think there's a chance there's an even bigger, older, & more surprising human city buried under the Amazon! Not magic, but a real city
@@pRODIGAL_sKEPTIC under the sand, beneath the jungle, before, before, before... sure, but that doesn't mean more advanced than today, or certainly one can't make the assumption without hard proof to be taken seriously.
@@pRODIGAL_sKEPTIC you're basically arguing Russell's teapot (there could be a teapot floating around in space). The point of Russell's teapot analogy is that you shouldn't believe something until you have sufficient evidence for it.
As someone from the other side. I enjoyed the debate. I think Hancock is more upset you said shitty things, and is letting that confuse your honest questioning of his theories. I hadn't thought of the fact or even knew that we already had all kind of stuff from the same time period, in the same areas. That was awesome to learn. I never heard of you till that day, but I like how you conducted yourself when he was taking shots at you, and trying to keep to the material. You did a great job. Thank you
Dibble was at times a bit snotty and snarky (he meant business) but it was debate and Hancock's lines and innuendos and speculations were easily pierced.
I did wish Dibble had elaborated and divulged his sources regarding the forgery of the Egyptian graffiti.
I wanna learn more about that graffiti.
The retort "I read man.." was good but he would have better countered Hancock's reference by naming his own source regarding the Egyptian graffiti mentioned.
Hancock seems like nice guy but with his imagination and story telling talent he should have just been a science fiction or mystery writer instead.
Dibble is good for the field of Archaeology due to his skeptical or objective approach and "prove me wrong" stance during debates of interviews/interrogatives.
🧐
One the one hand, I think Hancock is upset that Flint (and more so others) said “shitty things”. But - that is also sophistry. A tactic for persuasion based on emotion rather than the substance of the issues at hand. The only time when Hancock seemed to get the upper hand for a bit during that debate was when he was saying how upsetting it was to be accused of being a racist. And I am sure it was (I actually feel some sympathy for him on that point). But he also used that to his advantage as much as possible to get a kind of moral advantage and swing listeners to his side, where he couldn’t do it with facts. Hancock is a skilled orator, and good at pulling people to his side with word smithing and emotional appeals.
@@willmosse3684Graham deserves the white supremacist criticism, he have said alot of things that is both dog wistel and by white supremacist thinkers, he might not be a racist but what he say keep reinforcing stereotypes and false race narrative.
_"I think Hancock is more upset you said shitty things"_ Pointing out that what Hancock rights resonates with racists is something that Hancock should accepts as his own fault and stop trying to blame others. He could have said aliens helped all the non white natives build structures, but no, he had to say it was white "gods". And what forced him to not say that the British natives didn't need help?
@@NinjaMonkeyPrime Yeah it's so strange. All these real professionals need funding, and here comes this pseudo archaeologist coming in with his own Netflix show who'd rather be mad that real archaeologists are pointing out that he's married to a conclusion instead of a working process. He could be helping serious archaeologists get more funding so we actually *can* explore more than 5% of the covered ground. That should be his passion. He's a better mouthpiece than a scientist.
Graham had two main points: my civilian is non falsifiable, and you were mean to me.
Your discussion with Graham on JRE sent me to your channel and reignited my interest in continuing my education, I'm now exploring graduate degrees at my local university. Thank you for the reignition of inspiration to continue learning!
That's awesome! You'll do amazing.
Diddo that. Like ur hat
This is great to hear. Please update us here with questions or your decision. Congrats!
Here, for you journey. Although these are tailored for the UK, there is valuable info here for the wider field. Welcome to the club. :)
www.bajr.org/Employment/getajob.asp
www.bajr.org/BAJRGuides/33.%20Archaeological_Career_Advice/Archaeology_2013.pdf
Damn, that JRE Episode just came out
Thanks for doing the debates and because of that I found your channel and other archeologists channels. I really enjoyed your debate, it did change my mind a bunch. I cannot wait to go thru your channel this stuff is fascinating to me.
Hancock's arguments seemed to boil down to:
1) "Things look like other things, therefore they are the same things."
2) "The academic world is so unfair to me."
And then a whole lot of "Golden Bough" style confabulation.
His standard for "enough" excavations is literally impossible, which he'd know if he'd been on even a small digsite or spent any time in actual academia; and if he'd kept up-to-date with non-intrusive surveying methods, he'd maybe understand that digging up every square meter of Earth's surface isn't necessary to conclude that some parts of the planet were never settled.
It's frustrating that he has a following in this day and age.
Lot of “perhaps” with Graham. And then when he’s cornered it’s “Well I didn’t say that I was quoting blah blah blah” or “I’m a reporter I’m asking questions!” Like cmon bruh. U selling books stop it
no - its not us and them with Hancock. lots of old rich dudes in the 1700s 1800s and early 1900s went out and did inquiry...if we didn't have those dudes we wouldn't have fields of study. I don't get the hate. Hancock is a generalist... he is doing inquiry and it might lead to a new area of study and grants. I don't get the nails out for him ? Who cares he's not archeo trained...i don't. he's interesting. his Sacsayhuaman examples, his japan examples, were super interesting. inquiry is science. Its just the early stages of it... What I'm seeing mostly is a generational attack on him, its always young stem gen z millenns who go after him.
I think it would be fine if Graham had a following if he just said stuff was interesting and intriguing and didn't act like he has made some massive discovery of some "lost civilization". That's my problem with him. He just acts like you don't need scientific facts or archaeological artifacts for any of the things he claims existed.
@@sspacegghost hancock is making tons of money out of his fairy tales. I am not an archaeologist but have read enough to know he is talking rubbish. By the way he does have a university degree in sociology. So he is academically trained. He then worked as a journalist. But has found a money tree in disinformation. He knows he has no evidence while the mainstream is mainstream because it has tons of evidence.
@@sspacegghost the japan examples were absolutely nothing, it's quite evident to me that people are totally incapable of being objective about Graham.
I think Mr. Hancock bit off a little more than he could chew. I bet he will no longer want to debate anyone on JRE.
Flint dibble VS Graham Hancock celebrity boxing match? Please make this happen
@@TheLastHonestInfluencer 😂😂😂😂 Flint is 3 times as young and probably a little heavier. You couldn’t tell because of his jacket he had on but he probably has 10-20lbs on Graham and that’s a guess. Only thing that would give Graham a punchers chance, well besides a punch would be the fact he has so much hate built up against archeologists and their profession as a whole because of the hate he claims they throw his way. Really I don’t know but I would think that Archeologists and Graham himself would all be so busy doing their jobs and just living there wouldn’t be time for all this shade throwing a mind shit talking. But who knows we may see a boxing match between them one day. It would definitely be entertaining. Well it would be entertaining or really boring because one knocked the other out with one shot. 😂😂😂😂
It was a Viking who took the dump that was so big it survives to this very day, displayed in a museum. It had to hurt evacuating that thing. If only the warrior taking it knew then that the cause of his severe discomfort would become an educational tool for generations of children, and the most memorable artefact ever displayed in York's Viking centre. He would have been very proud.
how many courics would that be? 🤔
@@TEHmaniac437 shitty wok
i read your post as, "I was a viking who took the..."
i was about to congratulate you ))
@@TEHmaniac437 i dont think many wouldve picked up on your comment .Bono im not number twos and i need my bitty.
@@TEHmaniac437 Hey Sharon, come look at this
Hey man, just wanted to say it's really touching how you talk about your dad and him being your influence. He must have been a great dude, so sorry for your loss (however long ago it might be) and I think he would have absolutely loved your appearance on Rogan - you had to debate two man-made stones! Great to see people so passionate about what they do. Best of luck.
I actually thought JR was pretty nimble and quite open, although he couldn’t seem to accept that interpretations of photos (esp. by non-experts) can’t count as ‘evidence’. GH, on the other hand, the less said the better …
FD did incredibly well: he was fair with an interested layperson, and he managed to bat away the pseudoscientist’s nonsense
You could tell that you put the seed of doubt in Rogan's mind.
Graham's hands were sore from all that cherrypicking
Graham moved the goalposts from a lost, advanced, world spanning civilisation to a lost civilisation.
If you had to summarize the whole debate, Graham was just repeatedly saying that that there's not enough evidence to disprove it while Flint was saying there's not enough evidence to prove it, and we would expect to have that evidence by this point.
Yes, that's right. They remained at an impasse, however it was a good chance for Hancock to tell Dibble to back off and stop being so nasty.
Go to 17:21
did you watch the podcast, evidence points to no lost civilization but the sites in Graham's theory are no more or less than they present themselves.
@@simbamandi3545 Yeah for sure
@@wearethenightpartyLOL.
Hey, where can I read your honor's thesis? Sounds like an interesting read.
i'm working on a video about it
@@FlintDibble that'll be awesome to watch.
Huge kudos to Flint for stepping up and engaging with Graham in a meaningful debate. It was truly an enlightening discussion.
I'm very grateful for the valuable resources you shared with us and happy to see some archaeologists finally telling their stories in a more engaging way.
On a large platform as well
I loved both your JRE talk and that it's opened up the fascinating world of your work that I can educate myself with.
Even more so though...I love how much you love your Dad. He must have been such a great guy.
I only live in Chepstow, I'm going to keep an eye out in case you do any public lectures in Cardiff!
Thanks Flint, truly.
SHOUT OUT to POPPA DIBBLE! I am sorry for your loss Flint. Your father sounds like an awesome man. I watched the JRE debate and found you on CZcams. Consider me subbed, and I am donating to support archeology!
We know that Dibbles dad always pushed dibble to what he loged from what I have heard, truly he was a great man and father. The world is lesser place without him
Which episode of joe Rogan were you on?
2136
Hey Flint, you have a sub in me. I'm really flat that Graham spent the best part of 5 hours whining about how his ego was hurt by the mean custodians of archeology rather than spend more time delving into some of his actual claims so we could have had more of a back and forth between yourself and Graham, and hearing you lay out all the logical framework for why his claims don't hold up- I grew up enjoying Grahams work, it was fantastical and I was ignorant of science.. In a way I have Graham to thank for my love of science as a lay person, he introduced me to archeology and I've gone on to have an above average understanding of all science as a result. Please do more of this work, "We live in a world dependent on science and tech, where almost no'one knows anything about science and tech" This Sagan quote rings true.. There is a philosophical argument that the work you do in the field vs the work you could do teaching the lay person (as you did on JRE) is at this point in history, probably more beneficial for humankind... probably more financially lucrative too. Would love to see either yourself or David Miano have a sit down with Ben from Uncharted. Great work, Thanks again! Edit- Just as a side note, Graham never talks about Australia as a potential spot to find his lost civilisation, much like the Sahara and the Amazon, Australia would have been very pleasant 13000 years ago. Does he believe that his lost civilisation bypassed Aus? He used a god of the gaps argument all to conveniently and placed his Atlantis in every square foot yet to be excavated (Exaggeration, but yet it's kind of his go to argument)
Aw man I'm so sorry for the loss of your father. I'm very happy to hear he was such a wonderful man. RIP Pappa Dribble.
Stargate Atlantis, how do you explain that dibble?!?!
Fiction.
lmao. Graham Hancock is so full of shit.
@@MossyMozart that's what they want you to believe..
@@sg24336 the elite
Well done Flint, great work on JRE.
I'm certain you got Joe questioning Graham. I hope he has you back on your own to explain more about Archaeology, the processes and the method.
I have subscribed
I never thought I’d hear a conversation on JR about the defunding of the Humanities in UK universities. Thanks, Flint!
Hi Flint. Here from Joe Rogan podcast. Was a Hancock believer before. Am a lot less now. Thank you for bringing us all a reality check. bravo. And keep up the good work, the world needs more like you!
I learned so much from your appearance on the JRE podcast! Just subscribed-keep posting great stuff, my friend!
I’m here for flint. Flint I love hearing about your dad. The way you employ totality of evidence is so powerful for young people to learn from when shaping their beliefs. All the best, man.
you did and an amazing job representing archeological community and science as a whole. bravo sir.
At least you argued his hypothesis, and not him as a person
Well, Flint's Tweets where he was using the choice slander of the day to label Hancock as racist and white supremacist is not arguing his hypothesis.
@@kpetro1675 Explain why Hancock only targets the non white natives as needed help from white gods to stack rocks?
@@kpetro1675 Bro, Flint has said it like 5 times during the show that he didn't label Hancock as racist but the sources he cited were problematic and written/used by white supremacists. So independently of what Hancock thinks or believes, the uncritical use of those sources is problematic. And as Flint pointed out, he should do more to distance himself and his 'theory' from those approaches which have been used by other people who surely subscribe(d) to white supremacist ideas.
@@kpetro1675 if you constantly use the sources of people that absolutely were white supremacists and whose writings and theories were rooted in white supremacist beliefs about history and society, regardless of your own personal feelings on prejudice, you're keeping their prejudice alive.
@@kpetro1675 _"[Flint] was using the choice slander of the day to label Hancock as racist and white supremacist is"_
Literally didn't happen that way. Flint merely pointed out the sketchiness of some of Hancock's sources.
On the ice age "civilization" shipwrecks: If there are any, wouldn't they be under at least 500 ft of water, since that's roughly where the sea levels were back then?
But we do find shipwrecks. And thus far none support Hancock and his idea. Just like how we keep finding hunter gatherer camps and not entire cities.
Suggestion, try a Lavalier mic for better sound? Aiming for leveling around -6db for speach shuld also improve it, the peaks could go up to 0db. For example Milo Rossi got one from Rode, gifted by a viewer, and it really improved his sound.
Gift him one or I will
@@AnuddaGoy maybe you can send it to his university? Or better contact him first? Would be greatly appreciated!
Gosh I know the audio is terrible !!!
Probably not the mic, but the echo from hard walls. All people doing Tube seriously put up sound deadening on their walls.
@@chrimony well he seems to be using a non-lav mic. There is a place where he gets closer to it and the sound gets way better. But yes somethingnto control the echo would help a lot also
The fact that an Archeologist is named Flint is very perfect.
You’re a great teacher. You have an enthusiasm talking about archaeology that i wish you were my professor.
Also the admiration for you’re dad is nothing to be embarrassed for. You’re dad sounds like the man and he definitely raised a great som.
he is spreading fake-news and claims as facts.
Hi Mr Dibble , I am a flintknapper from scotland and i reproduce lithics from the european stone age . i used to believe that there was a slight possibility there might be something to hancocks theory but during some simple study of the continuity of lithics from the very early paleo to bronze age , i was able to leave behind the notion of atlantis or a lost universal civilisation .
some things still bug me though . the clear effort to deny earlier than clovis sites in the americas is a major one . Hueatlaco warrants further investigation and i would like to hear your thoughts on this . Also there seems to be a "sterile layer" without artefacts between clovis and pre clovis . would this sterile layer be evidence of depopulation in certain areas and could this be evidence of cataclysmic events in the region ? in scotland for example , on the east coast , there is a layer of sand and debris consistent with the tsunami that sank "doggerland" this layer contains little to no artefacts apart from organic matter . to me it looks comparable to the american "black mat sterile layer " . i may be wildly mistaken and i would love some clarity on the points i raise . one major thing that took me away from hancock was the assertion that clovis people simply "disappeared" . i know this is bollocks , the lithic technology evolved into cumberland/folsom and dalton technologies and beyond .
Hey Flint, I found a channel called Atun-Shei Films that took a different spin on the debate you might find interesting. He thought you came out on top but also had many pieces of advice on what could have been much better. His summary is unique too because he correctly points out that debates are just for entertainment and the most "charming" person is usually the one who wins. Facts, evidence, and truth have zero to do with a debate. His suggestion is to avoid debates and debunks and instead flood the internet with facts, evidence, and truthful information. It's an interesting strategy but with shows like Rogan being so popular I'm not sure the strategy can work anymore.
You did an amazing job at Joe Rogan! Thank you for sharing your work!
The most interesting thing from that episode was the point about lead smelting byproducts showing up ice cores before the classical era. You brought this up and Graham did not challenge it. Then, in another episode we heard that you had referred to a study of ice core sampling that ignores the ice age and that allegedly such byproducts show up examination of some ice core studies during the ice age. If that’s true debate is over, so it’s probably not true, but I would like to see such evidence either way.
Serious question, I'm just an amateur who's curious. Does Flint completely dismiss the possibility of the Younger Dryas impact theory? To clarify, I'm not referring to any advanced civilization prior to suppsed events 11-12K years ago. I'm more wondering if he agrees with massive flooding worldwide, and a very quick glacial melting period since the end of the most recent Ice Age.
I don't think anyone would completely dismiss a theory, I suspect he would say they is an academic debate on this and he is persuaded by the idea of more localised flood events rather than a dramatic deluge event. It is a disputed area and arguments will need to be settled over time and as new evidence is presented. The wheel of academia turns slowly but it does turn.
I wouldn’t say that. Though you’re gunna need proof for that, and the proof for the theory just isn’t there.
We are able to do studies on the impact that led to the end of the dinosaurs. We should be able to find ample proof of the impact theory.
Anthro major here! Love to see you sharing all of these resources with people and taking advantage of the platform you’ve been given! All of this is making my heart warm, and I’ll be definitely be digging deep into all of the channels/podcasts you listed!! Thank you!!
It's absoblutely mind blowing to me that you can see pyramid like structures all over the world and you would immediately assume that they individually sprouted up. My first thought is there has to a coeval origin point for the engineering of the structures. A couple times is a coincidence. we are beyond that.
Is your mind blown that children globally all stack blocks the same way?
@@NinjaMonkeyPrime that is a terrible analogy. the pyramid structures are just one of many idiosyncratic anomalies that defy explanation by modern archaeology.
Yet the only "commonality" between those disparate structures which coincidentally date to different periods in history is = their shape....... The Maya say built pyramids differently from the Sumerian Ziggurats or the later Egyptian "Step Pyramid" - while no one save for the Egyptians and later the Nubian knock-offs who learned it from the Egyptians achieved what might be termed as _"a true pyramid."_
Moral: all humans regardless of where they live and when are inherently endowed with the capacity for mimicry + _"pattern recognition."_
Thus in so much as those who would come to settle North and South America originated from Asia and beyond their forefathers having made the trip millennia ago - taking their cultural beliefs with them - then peoples who ascribe to deities they assume to be in the Sky might seek to copy that on the ground via = tall structures....... Ancient cultures often ascribe "greatness" to large things like mountains etc..
In the central US the people there formed a culture of "mound builders" creating great earthen mounds as sites of power and religious significance. In Central America they built stepped pyramids their having access to ample stone and the capacity to make simple tools to work that limestone and volcanic rock. In the Near East and North Africa their having developed metallurgy and mud brick technology in a mostly dry environment opted to create stone structures.
So they might all be "pyramids" = but they were created at different times using different tools based upon different techniques for different reasons. The only similarity is = they are pyramidal structures. Give a child with no understanding of geometry blocks to play with and in time with trial and error and pattern recognition they will create pyramidal shapes. Confirmation bias can be a bytch can't it........
@@xer314 So you're saying that children don't learn by playing that a pyramid works best when building?
One of the funniest things was when you showed how even IF an ice age civ existed, they couldnt have had agriculture, and Graham said something like: oh they didnt bring agriculture with them, just the idea.
Wat. They couldnt do it, but they knew of it? Or had just thought of it? Why couldnt the supposed native peoples have thought of it themselves? Absolutely silly
Subscribed! You’re awesome. You’ve done a lot of hard work and it’s incredible. New fan here!
PS your refutation of Hancock's taking of his quotations of the Edfu texts out of context is "chef kiss" brilliant.
Let's break down the list of people who think Atlantis is fictional: Flint Dibble, Me, Almost EVERYONE who has a career in science, Plato... Now let's break down the list of people who think Atlantis is real: AUTHORS WHO MAKE MONEY FROM BOOKS AND OTHER MEDIA INVOLVING ATLANTIS
Notice you labeled both groups as "who thinks" not Who knows.
You don't know it...that's the point. It's ok to wonder.
I’m a massive fan of archeology, I’m a farmer/ I also study plant science and have a BSc in agronomy, are you familiar with a town in England called Wallsend?
We have some of the best Roman archeology I don’t know the word for it but you should get yourself over here to Northumberland, our Roman fortresses and rich history will blow your mind it fascinates me every day! Was always on your side and even more so after than interview, you smashed him.
I absolutely love your passion for this, it's infectious! Thank you so much for having the courage to put yourself out there to reach audiences that may not have had the opportunity to hear about the exciting process of research and discovery.
Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.. but at some point it is evidence you shouldn't be wasting your time looking for something that *evidently isn't there.
Absence of evidence is evidence of absence if presence would be expected to produce evidence.
If I'd told you I was a millionare, and you looked at my bank account and my taxes and found no signs of large sums money ever having been in my possession, you would rightfully doubt my claim.
There is no evidence that I WASN'T a millionare, but the evidence yih would expect is missing.
I sat with my uncle who runs Living Tounges dictionary and he explained to me why Graham is an author and not a scientist. His quote was "he knows just enough to be dangerous". I thanked him and explained that I wouldn't have the same appreciation I have for history without Graham Hancock as he forced me to actually learn about these places. One quick shout out to Uncle Greg. Glad you could do the same for millions of people.
"It's not where you're going, it's wear your hat." --Mr. B, the Gentleman Rhymer, "Just Like a Chap"
great job Flint! While I've seen a lot of refutes to Handcock's claims, in my mind you truly let the facts shine. Not only did I appreciate your breakdowns of his "evidence", but I also really appreciated you highlighting so many great archeologist in the field.
No offense, but when exactly was Göbekli Tepe found, and how much do you know about it? And Tartessos, when was it found? And how much archeology knows about it?
Gobekli tepe was found in1963 and Tartessos in 1922
I had waited for this for a long time. Great Job! I'm an old guy like Graham (early 70s) and am very familiar with his tactics. Graham's only argument to counter the lack of evidence for lost blah, blah culture, is that the lazy archaeologists have just not looked in the right places, or haven't been thorough in their searches (argument from "you cain't prove it ain't"). I hoped that you would have humored the old duffer by continually driving home that you are not dismissing the idea of a lost blah blah culture, but that there has, as yet, been no material remains discovered. Graham doesn't have theories, he has claims and accusations.
Did you notice how he seemed to take credit for the development of LIDAR technology? "When I was there with the archaeologists, we sent up a drone...".
This guy (GH) is slick, affable, smooth talking, and has the ability to persuade the gullible of just about anything. He will site an archaeologist in a slim minute if he thinks it supports his ideas. He will then turn around and decry the way some have dismissed him as if by some dogmatic, knee-jerk, having been indoctrinated by the monolithic scientific establishment. I suspect that he really likes any criticism. Feeds his David and Goliath scam.
He loves to recount how certain researchers were dismissed for presenting findings that ran counter "archaeological orthodoxy" only to have their ideas accepted later after independent verification. He obviously fantasizes that, like them, he will ultimately be vindicated.
I enjoyed hearing that he accepts that the Egyptians of the old kingdom actually built the pyramids. It was weird, however, when he, in the same breath, in a very animated fashion, questioned that they were able to move and lift "60-70 ton blocks of granite". My response to him would have been: "Just because I can't figure out how they did it, doesn't mean they didn't do it!".
What mostly annoys me with Hancock is how he likes to date things with zero evidence to back him up. Someone excavated a cave into a few rooms, must be from the end of the ice age.
I watched this vid yesterday about this huge cave in China they claimed was impossible to date. It had well made pictures though and one of them they showed was a Buddha. Yeah, I am no expert in ancient Chinese art but they look Quin to me or possibly Han and there is no way a picture of Buddha is older then 2500 BCE.
Graham of course were there claiming it was far older but that isn't what the evidence really say and we know Qin Shi Huangdi had enough resources to build one of the most impressive grave complex ever made including the terracotta army so he at least certainly had the resources and skills to dig out a large cave for some reason.
And Graham does this all the time, if some kind of dating method proves him wrong he ignores it.
Archaeology should be the opposite, you look on your site by itself first before you try to pin it in with something else. When you have narrowed down the date and culture then you can start to draw conclusions how it fit in, not before you even know how old it can be. Cherry picking single things also doesn't help, there is probably other artifacts at the place that set that artifact into perspective.
good work....the way you presented the evidence was superb...also a totally new concept was introduced to me by you..that is aggregated archaeological data...made me rethink the way i look at history in general...thank you
Atlantis of the Gaps. The evidence is always where you haven't looked yet.
The world needs more channels like yours. I recommend improving your audio first which will result in the audience being more receptive of your message. Talk to Miano he recently improved his significantly
@ScrewdriverTUNING I completely agree...Hancock says exactly where to look...it's in your imagination
You should remember when Graham Hancock started he was just a writer working for a economic magazine he himself said he was just exploring things that mystified him I just believe he's been overcome by his Fame of talking on stage all the time
2 additional points I never hear alt archaeology people addressing .
1 an ancient globe spanning technologically advanced civilization that seeded indigenous civilizations with technical knowledge after a cataclysm would have left a genetic fingerprint, and would have spread agricultural innovation. There is no genetic fingerprint of this progenitor civilization in any of the places Hancock describes, nor do we see agricultural innovations/ domesticated plants spreading to these places from a single source. Evidence shows that Old/New world human genetics and plant domesticates were more or less entirely separate for 20,ish thousand years.
2 if there were any high tech civilizations in the past, the archaeology would show evidence not only of the tools they made, but also of all of the geological disturbing that would have had to have happened in order to get all of the resources they would have needed to make it.
For example, If the Egyptians etc had developed a light bulb, then we would have seen evidence, not only of that lightbulb, but we would have seen evidence of the glass manufacture, the metals manufacture, and evidence for the mining of the raw materials to make the glass and the metal and all of the geological and archaeological evidence which would be produced by ALL of the industrial processes required to make every single part of that lightbulb.
One cannot make a highly technological object of any sort, and not have multiple "fingerprints" left behind from each and every step , for each and every material needed to make that object.
Near as we can tell, around 13000 years ago, there was no evidence of any technology, nor any resource acquisition outside of a few places dipping their toes into the first stages of the Neolithic revolution. All of the evidence shows that the world's "high tech" at the time was the very earliest stages of pottery and farming in a very few locations
Thank you for the video again. I enjoyed it immensely and your enthusiasm is great to behold!
Looking forward to seeing a lot more of the stuff you promised. Will send you a couple of coffees
By the way, was that the fallacy fallacy you use against Plato? 😂
you did great!
Graham really tried his best to get the audience to dismiss you, that was his priority instead of proving his theory right.
even when Rogan asked him about evidence multiple times Graham would say there's no time to do that (with 2-3 hours left of the podcast)
That's how I fealt as well.
You gotta get yourself a better fitting suit, it looked like you were melting into the one you had on during the Rogan interview.
I learned of you from Gutsick Gibbon mentioning your debate and I just watched that. I’m really impressed you kept your cool so well. If someone insulted my profession the way he did, I wouldn’t have been to calm. I’m a biologist, and I can’t even talk to a creationist for more than five minutes before I start ranting and waving my arms like a madman!
I think a funny part was when you asked him why he doesn't think Stonehenge (or anywhere in Europe) was built by this lost civilization. He said something like "no advanced civilization worth their salt would build there." Basically due to climate. Yet doesn't he heavily imply they built their civilization here in the PNW? Clearly Joe had that impression, right? They didn't build in Europe... due to climate... but... the climate here was worse than many places in Europe... it was cold, dry and tundra. But hey, what do I know. Maybe they had bigfoot as livestock for their wool.
Funny since that time period (10k-40k years ago) in Europe produces some of the oldest examples of figurative art and even some arguments for proto-writing in 8000 BC, confirmed tracking of animal breeding patterns in cave paintings etc.
Good job man, really good listen on that podcast.
Im on the ancient advanced civilization side and I just wanted to swing by and say thank you for doing the debate with Graham.
U still on that side even after the debate?
Still? Can i ask why?
@@sirrichter5336 I am.
@@rippedtorn2310 Check out the quartz inclusion granite and dolerite vases produced in the tens or (probably) 100's of thousands.
@@rippedtorn2310 There is too much evidence of technology we cannot replicate. 1 small example, how did they get the granite boxes into the serapeum?
Lovely, lovely, entertaining, and informative video! Thank you for sharing your hard-won expertise!
I’m so sorry to hear about your brother-hopefully e his memory blesses you every day!
I can remember when Hancock was interviewed on The Joe Rogan Experience before the release of the video on netflix. I was kind of stoked because he was talking about all this evidence I have to show you will be in the documentary it proves everything. After I got done watching the series, I was speechless with anger due to the lack of any evidence. I'm not an archaeologist, but I very quickly picked out contradictions and cherry-picking information misleading you in a direction that felt good and like you were learning something for the first time. I was very fearful of the outcome of the series because of the misinformation tied to it acting like it is truthful factual information. Thank you for doing what you did. I know it must have been intimidating.
The debate made more sense when you realized that Flint was working from evidence & Graham was working from speculation. It was a good debate, I thought Joe did a decent job of trying to keep it between the guardrails, but it did dive off here & there. Graham definitely had some animosity towards you but I can understand, if someone called said I was supporting racism & white supremacy, I think there were some Nazi references too, I would like to defend myself as well. Whether it was meant that way or not, that is the way I came across to a lot of people. I listen to Rogan’s podcasts a lot, hearing Graham & Randall’s theories on the past is really interesting & makes you wonder. When you find out a lot of it is either bs or exaggerated speculation, it’s like when you’re a child finding out Santa isn’t real. But it is very interesting learning what evidence we do have vs what we don’t. Thanks for going on & explaining from an archeological standpoint, what is known.
I agree. I may be biased, but as an archaeologist, archaeological research is a lot cooler than fantasy. The fantasy stuff though is what gets clicks and sells books because the fantasy stuff is what comes to mind when you hear the word ‘archaeology’.
The line about discovering Santa Claus isn’t real hits close to home. As a young college student over a decade ago, I was brought into the discipline by the mythological stories of the Aztecs (my Nahuatl ancestors) vs Cortez. If only the Aztec magic spells could’ve helped against the invaders. But nope, there is no evidence of the spells working, in fact, the opposite happened. And here we are.
Cheers to you🍻
Hey dude, I love that Rogan brought you on. The podcast was great and I’ve enjoyed diving into your work after. I’m a new fan. I hope he brings you back for a 1 on 1!
Just saw your debate with Hancock and I subscribed! Keep up the good work!
I am blown away by your stamina, sounds like you've been incredibly busy!! Thank you for your important work! :)
"I am Flint Dibble, and I destroyed Atlantis."
"i am become the dibbler"
Good thing his name doesn't have more d's
I had a great time watching you and Graham. You're both very passionate and I truly enjoyed listening to both sides of the argument.
I'm about halfway through, and it looks like Atlantis got sunk for a second time. 😂
What do you think about the newest video by Achient Architects about Ohalo II from 23k years ago?
Flint, I have a question for you. I enjoyed what you presented on JRE and I am curious if the slides/PowerPoint you prepared is available to view somewhere?
I loved the title of Stefan Milo’s response to the JRE debate, Atlantis is dead. It’s the first time someone who is truly an expert in the field debated Hancock in a public forum. You wiped the floor with him. He had nothing to say other than, you haven’t looked everywhere, which is the same as saying we can’t say there’s no God because we haven’t searched everywhere.
@@bschmidt1 hey flint here’s another guy you need to censor. I’d do it for you but you’re not paying me.
@@bschmidt1 have you?
Loved your Rogan episode, new subscriber here!
loved how articulate you were on JRE, you were very impressive and gained a fan! Hope to see more from ya man!
I think Grant having an antagonist more of a business decision then it is anything else. Him the hero and archaeologist the villains sell more books.
As a longtime Rogan listener I feel genuinely foolish for thinking Hancock was anything more than a grifter. The end of the episode really summarizes the differences between you two; you asked for donations for real research and children's education while Hancock shilled his nonsense book.... again. "We can say there is no evidence for an advanced civilization" - Graham Hancock
Now just watch a lot of your perception of his guests begin to erode.. after you realize Joe is just as gullible as anybody & ends up boosting a lot of grifters
Hancock is a masonic plant.
Don’t feel like a fool. I think there is value in crazy conspiracies and pseudo science science simply because, if a little critical, they will eventually lead you to actual scientific knowledge.
When has that happened?
The idea of a lost civilization as advanced or more advanced intrigues me. So I enjoyed listening when Graham would go on the show. I don't think I was ever convinced, but the hypothesis was engaging for me. When watching his Netflix show I could barely make it through Ep1. His tirade about Dibble cemented for me that he had no compelling proof outside of how do you know for sure, otherwise, he would have used that time to show his proof.
It must a frustrating thing to argue/ debate with a wordsmith like Hancock, he is a brilliant orator and has had many many years of experience prototyping and defending his story. I find it so bizarre that they use simple things like core drilling, masonry, sedimentary rock and moving of tiny 900 ton blocks to confuse their audience. Hancock definitely maintained a strong position in the: "but you haven't looked everywhere" Hill. Hiding in the unknown is easy. Thanks for a most entertaining Debate.
And not just that - he also has a very good motivation to defend his fiction to his death. That's because of the lots of money that he is making. Same goes for all of his collegues. This is no scientifical debate, because this has already been won by real science multiple times over. Unfortunately, many treat is as such and want do deal with these guys in a fair debate. It's a waste of time and maybe a bit of fan-service, for the ones who already know the outcome. It's solely pseudo-fiction, pure fantasy plus an serious attempt to make it into an religion, which creates lots of money for the people behind it.
Yeah, I think that's very true. Real science simply disproves it whether the masses believe in it or not. Graham can only lose if he admits that he has doubts about his claims. If he did this people would loose faith in him. he just stays aloof and hard to pin down. I wish he had written a fiction with these themes involved, because its an epic story which he has created.@@dnocturn84
" and moving of tiny 900 ton blocks"
Tiny?
Mental origami much?
He must have sold a ton of books on his 'no proof' premise. It's almost as if the public prefers the no evidence approach.
I’m glad you’re getting online and recording. I didn’t even know you had a channel.
Archeologists told us for a very long time that ancient Sumer was the oldest civilization known. Then along came Gobekli Tepi, Boncuklu Tarla, Karahan Tepli. No doubt plenty more artifacts of civilization older than Sumer will be discovered in the future.
The oldest known structure is like the tallest building. When you find something older or taller it is the newest one.
To be fair they told us that because it WAS the oldest KNOWN civilization at the time, it isn't like they were hiding anything or being disingenuous.
@@SurfTheSkyline Never said they were hiding anything or being disingenuous. Merely pointing out that theories constantly need updating when new evidence arises.
The biggest mistake any scientist in any field can make is to assume the science is settled.
“I am not a skeptic, I am an expert” is the line I loved the most. I really appreciated how much evidence you brought to your debate with Graham and I really felt that you held your own and provided evidentiary support against an ultimately frail argument from Graham. I can see how his storytelling seems compelling, especially when paired with beautiful imagery, but it made me so crazy to see over and over again that a single picture from one angle was enough to lend credence to the idea of monumental structures underwater. Nature is awesome and wild! It just is! That in and of itself is not evidence to support the idea that those structures were human-made! I also really wished that JR and his fans understood more of your points about white supremacy, because that clearly got lost in the conversation. Thank you for including indigenous experts, thank you for including the role of mythology in informing archaeology, and thank you for standing up for archaeologists everywhere!
Finally, the idea that Graham - with his own Netflix show - is somehow the victim here against an archaeologist at a public university was a bit galling. His friend’s work that was retracted doesn’t speak to anything other than that the paper lacked enough scientific evidence to be supported by the journal. Even the letter to Netflix didn’t ask for it to be canceled! Simply relabeled to a more appropriate category! All of his complaints about attacks were the result of friendly theories falling flat in the face of scientific study and him being upset that reputable sources were being responsible about not publishing them as actual fact.
Yeah Flint, thanks for bringing up white supremacy, anti-semitism, and sexism in an archeological conversation where not a single person involved was prejudice towards any race, gender or ethnicity. SUPER INFORMATIVE!
he bought no evidence, thats the problem, all scientific evidence poinst to Hancock being right
An ex-spurt is just a drip under pressure.
Hi Flint I am repeating a comment i posted on World of Antiquity. I felt like you weren't able to adequately convey this on JRE! And it could have cleared up a lot of minds!
That's the thing that swayed me and opened my eyes to the atlantis cult. Hope this gives you a video idea.
The one thing I realized about archeology: SAMPLE SIZE. I realized that the main rebuttal from the pseudo archeologist was that "we only explored 1% of the Sahara" "we only excavated X area of Y". The one illustration I kept thinking of was this:
- imagine you have a bucket that's filled with 1000 blue and yellow marbles that you don't know the proportion of
- you keep taking handfuls without looking into the bucket but you look at your open hand and count: 8 yellow marbles
- another handful -- 7 yellow marbles
- another handful -- 8 yellow and 1 blue
- you take a few handfuls and your total is 50 yellow and 3 blue
- what can you say about the bucket? does it look like it's actually filled with 50/50? or 1% yellow 99% blue? or 99% yellow 1% blue?
Clearly the last one. And in my metaphor the bucket is pre-ice age history and taking samples is exploring with archaeology, documents, writings, records etc. Yellow = hunter-gathers, blue = atlantis.
I wish you did a video on this and showed clearly the area of coverage that archeology has to date and how the concept of sample size works.
Thank you and keep it up!
Big fan of the debate. Great job with the preparation and the performance. I learned a lot of new things. Wish there was more debates like that for the public to consume!
I feel like all you need is a history of the Peloponnesian War and a Greek philosophy course to be able to put 2 and 2 together and see that Plato is promoting his Republic from Plato's Republic, and criticizing Empire (particular Athens's empire in the Delian League). If you don't get this in high school, you'll get it in university if you have an interest in those courses. Or just read it on your own, Plato's Republic is an interesting book and the Peloponnesian War is one of history's most interesting wars, so it's not a hardship.
I have been a reader of Hancock's theories for a number of years. I've watched every appearance of his on the Joe Rogan show, and I am intrigued by ancient history and the idea of a lost civilization. I have to say you did an awesome job in the debate and you have won a new convert. Nice job, Mr. Dibble!
Sweet!
Convert is a wild way to put it, but glad to hear you aren’t just buying into Grahams fiction books.
@@misanthropicservitorofmars2116 How about "new subscriber"? Because that's what I am.
Why did you suggest Magdalenian period as a place to search for a lost civilization?
My current Greek reading is Plato's Timaios. Anyone reading the account of Creation there should immediately know that it is not some alternate, possibly true physics deserving serious attention, it's just a story. Ditto the brief "history" (at the beginning of the dialogue) about a super ancient civilization. Plato puts the story in the mouth of a fictionalized Athenian who says he heard it from his grandfather who got it from Solon who learned it from a priest in Egypt, where it was written down ages before. That's six hands, counting Plato himself and whatever scribe supposedly recorded the story. Plato is all but saying, "Here comes bullshit, but I'm only telling you what I heard."
I'm not sure that real archaeologists or historians should deign interact with the likes of Hancock, who are in it for the money. In my long lifetime I've seen the bestseller multivolume series The Lost Civilization of Mu, the blockbuster bestseller The Chariot of the Gods, and now Hancock cash in on the credulity of the masses and their desire for a better story than what scholarship gives. Let them live in their world, we will live in ours.
New subscriber here! Fantastic job on the Joe Rogan podcast, Flint! You went into the dragon's den and stood up for Archaeology and the scientific method. Looking forward to more archaeology content in the future!
As if Hancock, Schoch, etc., method's aren't "scientific"?
@@sammykays5858Shoch and Hancock aren’t really comparable. Shoch actually writes scientific papers lol. He actually has a research degree.
@@sammykays5858 hancock doesn't have any evidence, at all. that's the problem.
@@kieranb7747 Yes, but he met the Snake Goddess in person while under the influence of ayahuasca. Top that!
I can’t stand Rogan but was happy to see somebody with some real experience and education In archeology and history on there debunking the nonsensical bullsh!t spewed by Hancock and his ilk.
Man, I'm no where near your field, I can't even say I know a lot about Archaeology, my passion is in art and illustration, but I do enjoy reading or watching things that I find interesting and on many occasion that leads me to Archaeology. I loved that show of Rogans and I thought you did a pretty damn good job. I have nothing personal against Hancock but I finally appreciate there being some sort of one on one debate with his ideas and the ideas he puts out there. I could easily see how one would be wooed into his hypothesis on an ancient civilization but I have personally found if you spend just a little bit of time on channels like yours or some of the many others I've come across who discuss his ides they tend to fall apart. Maybe it's being the son of a middle school science teacher, but I tend to side with those that feel like more credible scientists. Doesn't mean they're always right, but my hope is that their pursuit of what is right and what is wrong through scientific methods will lead you down the right road more often than not. Cheers to you my man, well done. SMASHES THAT SUBSCRIBE BUTTON!
I just followed you from the "History With Kayleigh" channel. Great interview!