Interview with Flint Dibble on Pseudo Archaeology, the Hancock Debate and Science Communication
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 05. 2024
- Join Matt and Chris as they sit down with Flint Dibble to reflect on his recent discussion with Graham Hancock on The Joe Rogan Experience. Flint shares his thoughts on the distinction between real archaeological research and pseudo-archaeology and discusses the importance of clear science communication. Tune in for a thoughtful conversation on the subtleties of engaging in public debate on potentially hostile platforms.
Support the Show:
If you like the show and want to support us, you can find us on Patreon, where we have a bunch of extra stuff.
► Patreon: / decodingthegurus
Find Us Elsewhere:
► Twitter: @GurusPod
► The Podcast: decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm/
► Patreon: / decodingthegurus
► Reddit: / decodingthegurus
Sources:
- Flint's CZcams Channel
/ flintdibble
- Flint on X
/ flintdibble
- Joe Rogan Experience #2136 - Graham Hancock & Flint Dibble
• Joe Rogan Experience #...
- Flint's Guardian Article: Lost civilisations make good TV, but archaeology’s real stories hold far more wonder
www.theguardian.com/commentis...
- Critical CZcams series on Hancock's Netflix Show Ancient Apocalypse
• I Watched Ancient Apoc...
- Flint's Conversation Article: With Netflix’s Ancient Apocalypse, Graham Hancock has declared war on archaeologists
theconversation.com/with-netf...
- Flint's Cardiff University Profile
profiles.cardiff.ac.uk/staff/...
- Atun Shei Review: An Archaeologist Debated Graham Hancock. I Have Thoughts
• An Archaeologist Debat...
- Medium Article by Chris that talks a bit about Graham Hancock's Book
• An Archaeologist Debat...
Usually I dabble in archaeology videos but I guess I'll Dibble this time around
Flint Dibble is an appropriate name for an archeologist
Beyond appropriate
School near my house with the name.
Flint's dad (Herald Dibble) was a paleontologist that studied lithic artifacts (ancient stone tools) and also made them. He named his other son Chip. The guy was a total nerd in the best way!
Edit - They mentioned this later in the conversation. I didn't realize they had when I commented.
fun fact: his father rpd him in his sleep
Are people who follow Dibble designated Dibblets? If so, I am a Dibblet.
You're a Dibbler
Maybe dibblers lol
This is gold!!😂🤣😂
Better than a Hancocker.
Does that mean the dibblers dibbled the hancokers?
Whatever Graham Hancock's MANY, MANY failings (!) his quackery caused me to become aware of Flint. And for that I have to take my hat off to him 😂 now for an incredible deep dive into Flint's works and online content!
I wouldn’t bother he constantly lied throughout the debate and any clown with a CZcams channel isn’t to be taken seriously
@@Bingobanana4789 Yeah but he didn't though... So there's that. He said a lot that's been completely verified by other archaeologists.
@@MerseyParadise within 3 days of the debate his apparent evidence was dismantled by real experts. The day after the ice core data was posted showing lead emission spikes going back 150,000 years. A leading expert in ship wreck preservation posted information on how why it would be basically impossible to find a ship wreck underwater from the ice age. Then there was the evidence that humans have been cultivating plants for over 40,000 years without the need to domesticate them. Poor auld flinty boy lied through his teeth and you lapped it up. Sad times for you believing a CZcams content creator over real expert opinions
@@MerseyParadise ohh dear seems you missed the post the day after the debate that shows lead spike emissions going back 150,000 years. Then there was the information on ship wreck preservation that was posted highlighting the utter nonsense dribble said on the subject. That one was pure lies from dribble. Then the correct information was given on how humans have been cultivating plants for over 40,000 years without the need to domesticate them never mind the amount of plants that went extinct at the end of the ice age that humans had been cultivating. Poor auld flint was exposed as liar, sad times for you.
@@MerseyParadise ohh dear seems you missed the post the day after the debate that shows lead spike emissions going back 150,000 years. Then there was the information on ship wreck preservation that was posted highlighting the utter nonsense dribble said on the subject. That one was pure lies from dribble. Then the correct information was given on how humans have been cultivating plants for over 40,000 years without the need to domesticate them never mind the amount of plants that went extinct at the end of the ice age that humans had been cultivating. Poor auld flint was exposed as liar, sad times for you my man
Dr. Dibble systematically disassembling Hancock's "argument" for a lost civilization & conspiracy against him was one of the most satisfying listening experiences I've had with a podcast. Hopefully he gets invited back on JRE to spit more facts about archaeology.
I watched that podcast and all I saw dibble do was attempt to maliciously assassinate hancock as a racist, white supremacist and antisemite for daring to propose the existence of atlantis. He's like the archaeology orthodoxy in the 70's and 80's that would destroy the careers of archeologists that would dare to suggest there were people in the Americas before clovis, since suggesting such a thing would be "racist" and take away the accomplishments of the native americans.
It really is scary how stupid you NPC's are getting. You couldn't pass a turing test but you all think you're geniuses
Joe prefers the long shot theories in every genre.
he didnt disassemble him, he actually opened up more questions and made grahams arguement stronger, that's why his side is getting way more views and action.
He didn't disassemble anything, all he said was we've searched 5 percent of the world found thousands of sites we don't need to know anything else. 😂
Pretty much confirmed what Hancock has been saying this whole time. 😂.
Lmfao
@@qwerto15 Nor really accurate, Dibble is we don't know what we don't know...Hancock is we might know what we don't know. And let's discuss that as if we know.
Long time Hancock fan here. Thanks Flint for opening my eyes, it took ballz to meet that dragon in his comfortable cave. I feel pretty dumb for listening to Hancock's appearances on various podcasts. When I've heard that he's British journalist I've assumed he's credible and that group of other scientists that appear with him sometimes put my skepticism to sleep. Doesn't help that Hancock is very charismatic and an excellent story-teller. He also hides all that telepathy bullshit pretty well and kept to reasonable stuff during London Real and JRE appearances. In my defense, I'll say I'm from Poland, so I don't have too much knowledge what sources are credible and what are absolute quackery in the UK.
Real science is too obscured by academic jargon for wider audience, we need to change that. Maybe I should start a YT channel too, because I've already seen enough bs propagated about my field (art) where people are absolutely lost on the concept of historical accuracy in art being a relatively new thing.
Hancock should really just pivot to 40K fan theories. I'd be all over that.
Takes courage to admit defeat and keep improving. We have all lost but to own up to it is responsibility and that seems to be a rare commodity going around. Glad to read your comment..
You’re not the only one. I’m British and not impressed by his accent in the slightest, and yet I was a Hancock fan for quite a while. I started giving him the side eye a few years ago after watching videos by ‘Scientists against myths’ CZcams channel. I hope you continue to find ancient history as fascinating even without the Hancock nonsense 👍
"Thanks for opening my eyes" it doesn't seem like your eyes are open, you're always looking for someone to tell you what to think. What you need is a mindset change. You switched beliefs but your lack of agency and intellectual autonomy still shows
@@jeanmichel5723 "your lack of agency and intellectual autonomy still shows" that's a load of assumptions hurled at someone who only shared one comment over something that has absolutely zero impact on my life, lol
Being dick much?
As a new viewer, this is the first time seeing Chris & Matt, & I was kinda surprised.
If you showed me a picture only of them, I would have guessed Chris’s voice came from Matt & vice versa, by voice alone.
Pleasant surprise, of course, but still unexpected.
Nah Matt totally looks like he’d be Australian, I wasn’t surprised. I didn’t know what to expect for Chris’s appearance though
Such a great and important discussion. Too bad it won’t get the same reach as these current guro-esque podcasts.
Flint totally refuted all of Hancocks claims , yet you wouldn’t know it from all the Rogan fanboy comments and videos analysing the debate.
What exactly do you mean by undermined?
@@SapphireKnightofWhiteLotusCity
Made his arguments useless.
For example, when Hancock says that his ancient civilization taught agriculture but didn’t give ancient peoples their own pre domesticated plants. This is contradicted because we have no finds indicating any domesticated crops beyond what our ancestors had access to at that time. So asking ‘what did the ancient civilization eat?’ Points out that it’s one more area where we have a ton of data, which Hancock has no answer to. If there was a globe spanning civilization, we should find a bunch of domesticated plants that we can’t tie to our hunter gatherer ancestors. And it’s not there.
@@ratgirl34 Yeah I agree but undermined is the wrong word to use especially if the comment is made in support of Flint... Plus you wouldn't know what they mean unless they clarify... Undermined is negative towards Flint, isn't it similar to ignore?
@@SapphireKnightofWhiteLotusCity yeah fair point, thx for the clarification, I’ll change it now, didnt realise I’d been misusing the word this whole time lol , perhaps “ refute” is more appropriate- what say you?
One big issue with him . Hancock brought up a point only a small percent of the world has had archeology done on it . He never made an argument that the small percent we have done would prove there was no older civilizations. He never tried to make an argument that with the small percent when have dug up proves there was none. Finding gobekli tepe in 94 really turned ideas we had up side down.
As someone not in your subfield (or your "uberfield"), I have enjoyed this conversation very much. Thank you.
I really like Graham as a fictional writer, but his attitude with Flint during the debate and his overall unwillingness to admit he could possibly be wrong... Definitely left that podcast a Dibble fan
I'm surprised a genre hasn't sprung out of Graham's ideas. Like a Conan-the-Barbarian-esque Ice Age setting, but instead of Swords & Sorcery, it's like... Arrows and Ayahuasca. A bunch of psychics flinging rocks at each other with telekinesis while on mushrooms.
Did you bother to check out flints data and evidence? That would be a no because you can’t figure out how many lies flint told throughout. Sad times for you
btw. I did an Erasmus exchange in Belfast (St. Mary's College) and once we visited the Giant's Causeway, I really wish Flint showed that to Graham on JRE and asked him who built that. xD
Absolutely. I always think of the Giant's Causeway when I hear someone saying that this or that megastructure MUST have been built by mysterious human hands. It's hard not to have that feeling about the Giant's Causeway even though we KNOW it is natural.
Lol show them hexagonal basalt columns or maybe some hoodoos and ask "did atlanteans make this too"
AWESOME EPISODE ❤🤘🏻
I avoid all things Joe Rogan, but now I need to dive into the 4 hour Dibble episode! Thanks for the best two episodes in a row.
Let me be the first to welcome Flint Dibble to the resistance
The orthodoxy is the resistance?
@@ZM-dm3jg Yes we're resisting the rising tied of anti-expertise sentiment.
You know any peanut can go study for so long and receive a certificate saying they are certified in a specific field right. Lmao
@@qwerto15 So in this case Hancock is less than a peanut? For all his historical/archaeological claims he hasn't taken the time to study and get certified. I think you'd agree a sociology degree wouldn't add up to being certified in archaeology and history.
@@delayedpilot exactly my point, no matter how much of a peanut you are you can go get a degree and seem superior.
So your telling me if he went and got his degree you would all believe him? . Lmao
19:21 I wonder if asking him "how much digging do you think is needed to prove/disprove your theory? 10%? 20? 50?" would be a good strategy... because it's obvious that it's impossible to cover 100% of the terrain and he could move the goalpost forever. 5/10/20/40/50/70% - doesn't matter. He could always say "it's still not enough".
I guess the reply is it's a representative sample size at an appropriate confidence level. Tbf the Dibbler making that point on JRE might be hard given the frenetic debate shenanigans of Hancock.
It's interesting to see how Hancock fans spin things even after the objective lost. I saw one channel, Podcast Cringe, where people were basically going "Well, Dibble called Hancock racist, and you can't call anyone racist these days. So let's just focus on Dibble being weird and talking about his dad a lot and not really talk about what they were arguing over."
The way Dibble connected Graham to racism was gross, though. Of course they would bring that up on a podcast.
@@donperegrine922Sigh, Dibble's point was that Hancock unquestioningly uses racist sources to back up his claims. Dibble's point is valid.
@@Lee-bv6iv lol Hancock believes and promotes something NON racist, put forwards by a racist....so Hancocks ideas are racist.
This is very "Hitler liked dogs, soooo......"
Don’t forget the constant lies dribble told about the data. The best one was the day after the debate the ice core data was posted showing lead emission spikes going back 150,000 years. Poor auld flint just lied over and over again
Always thought Graham was just full of himself, saw the debate, Flint is awesome thanks for this show.
Graham Hancocks son is Sean Hancock who is director of nonfiction at Netflix.
The perfect debrief to watch after the JRE episode. It's like a cleansing.
Flint Dibble is now a legend. He obliterates Hancockian bullshit with cool hard fact. And crushed Hancock's passive aggressive snooty English rhetoric with calm dignity.
Great guest!
Thank you, Flint is an excellent communicator, like that he keeps it bright and breezy in tone and adds humour.
He also lied constantly about the data don’t forget the lies. Nice tone or not it’s still lies
@@Bingobanana4789 the problem is no one has time to fact check these people. Graham didn’t object to Flints data, instead he showed media articles and blurry photos from Google. Why didn’t he at least have high res photos prepared?
I have to admit I read one of Hancock’s books and kinda bought a good bit of the theories… watched him on JRE. You really just made me think of the “debate” between creationists and scientists when it comes to more fundamental fields such as biology or cosmology.
I did feel like you approached it as a lecture which I appreciated, including not using deep cut / confusing terminologies... Graham uses terminology in very disingenuous ways...
Thank you flint, it must have seemed challenging to have rogan, a hancock fan, host a debate with you and hancock, but I think rogan was pretty fair and okay about it, and I think you did pretty good. If anything it could have gone on longer, I would have liked to hear you explain platos Atlantis story and why it's not literal history, or go more into the ice age evidence we have, or go more into why the younger dryas was not a "global cataclysm" like hancock makes it sound
Oh dear it seems you lapped up flints lies without looking into it for yourself. Sad times for you perhaps you should take a bit of time and look into the amount of lies flint told before asking for more lies from him
It's precisely because I looked into things myself that I concluded hancock is full of it and is a dishonest grifter, I heard him on rogan several years ago and it seemed like bs to me then, and I've never seen any reason to treat his Atlantis fantasy as anything other than bs in the years since
Graham Hancock believes that information received from drug trips is valid and should be able to be used as evidence in archeology.
Does he really, or are you making that up? I'd love to see you back up that.
@@donperegrine922 Dibble touches on it in this video but let me see if I can find the footage of Graham and Joe talking about it on the show
@@JakobVirgil hey, that's very cool of you! I would be shocked if he said that, but I'd be happy that you tried to find it, anyway.
I’m no Hancock fan but there has been interesting work done on prehistoric cave art and its relation to taking hallucinogens. So drug trips have been used as evidence in a way in archaeology, just not the crazy stuff Hancock is getting at
@@donperegrine922 This is roughly it or at least where I got that impression what is your take? czcams.com/video/IeIj_rNYhCU/video.htmlsi=o_k40zRK9it4hSv1
"Prior to the podcast era, intellectual celebrity was mainly derived from objective accomplishments. The media was interested in interviewing someone precisely because they'd accomplished something intellectually formidable. But in the podcast era, that has shifted to a set of people whose intellectual skill is often limited merely to sounding intellectually convincing through attractive wordsmithing, absent any proof of their conjecture. In my generation, we called that 'being a lawyer'." - Jon Stewart
Flint Dibble has entered the chat.
Really appreciate the balls it took to go on Rogan and you did it with such class and style you made the ‘Gods’ chuckle.
No he did it so he could say to mum "look mum I made it". 😂😂. He got ripped apart half the time, specially at 2 hour mark. He nearly needed his dummy, all he brought was tools his dad made. 😂😂😂
@@qwerto15 I’m sure you’re also still holding out that Narnia is still real, seeing as we haven’t checked ALL the cupboards yet.
And there isn’t one serious detective actively searching ALL the cupboards. That’s the only reason we haven’t found Narnia.
I’m with you dude, I don’t need evidence I have wishful thinking on my side
29:00 yeah that is what I dislike so much about some of these alternative people. They are so nasty, actual adult bullies. And it is especially nasty because they hide behind a facade of ‘open mindedness’ and ‘alternative ideas’.
I heard that Hancock did describe the atlanteans as white people in his first edition of one of his "of the gods" books, then changed it. However I've not bothered researching this.
Flint’s Indiana Jones thumbnail is kind of hilarious when you realize that Graham has actually climbed the great pyramid 5 times, dove Yonaguni 200 times and served as a journalist in war torn countries. Flint looks like a little kid with a fake beard wearing his dad’s suit.
Plenty of people have tourism as a hobby.
Dr. Flint was amazing on JRE. I've never seen someone so surgically dismantle someone's arguments on live like that.
What did he surgically dismantle? Why isn’t he focused on discovery and education? PR Hitmen.
@@RackemDawghe dismantled Graham’s pseudoscientific theories. He is concentrated on discovery and education. He educated a massive audience on the Joe Rogan podcast and he’s spent 30 years in discovery and education as an archeologist.
You can still like Graham, but what Flint did was as important for the field of archaeology.
@@mentalglitch9603 Dribble shit the bed when he didn’t have ready-made BS. His intro was laughable. Pornographic pottery? Fake tools? Yeah, he hasn’t moved the needle. He’s an agent, not a man.
@@mentalglitch9603 I’d still like you to point to A SINGLE point in which he “surgically dismantled” GH. He demanded to go first, talked about stupid shit like food and seeds, and then revealed his agenda and agency when confronted about ad hom attacks against GH. They keep alluding to GH being a white supremacist, forgetting he’s married to a black woman that is 100% involved in GH’s research. Nobody likes a shill. He can go sit in a corner with NDT.
I saw people Surgically dismantle Clovis first. Where the hell were you.
Look into conflict archaeology if you are interested in human warfare. There is a document called Dead Birds that was released in 1965 that's pretty interesting.
These people obviously never lived a past life
Is it him? Is it really him?
*I GOT DIBS!*
44:14 in the history field there are 3 types of history, academic, public, and pop. Public history is a not dumbed down, but meant for general audiences, type of history. Pop history is when you dumb down the subject, and academic history is meant for scholarly audiences. I think often in archaeology we struggle with performing good public archaeology and the niche is then filled by pseudo-archaeologists. Like, I’m struggling to think of an actually well known public archaeologist on the level of Graham. Lee Berger? He’s not even an archaeologist…
They have now a place on CZcams .
In some years this pseudo science will be over .
@@GardenofEdens I hope
Flint " the body bag " Dibble
Where's that hat, Dibble?
"Graham Campbell," love child of Graham Hancock and Dr John Campbell perhaps?
Yeah, I did watch the debate, Mr Google. That doesn't mean I'm interested in every video where this character appears. I did not only watched the debate, I was searching what both said. I knew Hancock wasn't the most reliable guy, now I know you aren't either.
I trust flint ,he looks like a mole...he supposed to dig in ground
31:16 I've gotta disagree with this way of thinking. Archaeologists need to start engaging with all of the fringe ideas and EXPLAINING to people why they're illogical. The internet changed the game. You can't just ignore these things and hope they'll go away on their own. They only grow on the internet and gain an audience.
Meanwhile there are channels like Gutsick Gibbon, who's working to get her PhD in primatology, that will actively make videos explaining why things like creationism don't make sense. And every time she makes a video rational people get a deeper understanding of how to refute pseudoscience, and many MANY people within those digital echo chambers come to realize how little their pseudoscientific beliefs make sense.
Start engaging with people and stop expecting modern folks to just respect your authority as scientists. That doesn't work in the modern world of scientific mistrust. You don't have a reputation as a trustable source for a lot of Americans. You can only change that by engaging.
Here’s a thought…how about people start taking some personal responsibility for what they believe?
An outdated concept, I know.
@@WorldWokeApeCult First off, no need to be an ass bro, we’re on the same side. I’m a science loving ape just like you.
But I live in the states. Half the country decided they’d rather get COVID than the vaccine. That’s the level of distrust they have in the scientific community. They won’t give life saving vaccines to their loved ones because they don’t trust science as an idea.
Scientists don’t get to just demand that these folk trust their authority. They have to get their asses out to the public and DEMONSTRATE why science is a reliable and trustworthy system. If they keep this elitist “we’re the authority” stance they’re only gonna drive half the country further into magical thinking and away from evidence based thinking.
1:00:00 Flint dibble pretty much just disassembled the Hegellian dialectic that supports Marxist-communist beliefs around the world. Nice.
Please tell Flint that Atlantis is located in Lake Merritt, Oakland, California. 😄
Pre-bunk yeah i can see the value in that approach for sure, i fear it may assume the audience understands the value in the first instance of evidence. Or possess the skills to be able to Parse out good and bad arguments. These lost civilization types know the power of an emotional argument in the post rational world.
31:00
I think you should be working together
Jimmy from Not-so-bright-insight is the yappy chihuahua of alt-history you tube content producers. He obviously appeals to an entire generation of younger folks. Scary!
They need a real Indiana Jones on Joe Rogan to get them to listen... You need to be confident and assertive. They bring people like Flint Dibble on because they know they can get away with picking on him.
I just associate confidence now with grifters and liars. I don’t want my archaeologist to behave like used car salesmen I want them to look like they’ve been dragged away from their library
@@Celestina0 there's a difference between being assertive and being charming when your confident okay ... Don't give me that BS, you can be genuine and still be assertive...
I watched that show-Dr.Dibble was outstanding in exposing Hangcock (whom I consider to be nothing more than a charlatan) and showing how real archeology is done.Big fan!!
While Flint made many good points, labeling Hancock as a white supremist was very disingenuous and acting like he doesn't know how people would interpret it made him lose all credibility. It's either he's too stupid to know how people would read it or he's just lying.
He didn't call him a white-supremacists - as was explained at length (ffs). What he said was Hancock's theories are not new. They've been around since the turn of the century and were quite well liked by, for instance, Nazi archeologists who loved the idea that native peoples couldn't possibly have created anything - especially complex things... must have been some mystical time-traveling white folks. Stupid and false, and deserves the ridicule it gets.
One big issue with him . Hancock brought up a point only a small percent of the world has had archeology done on it . He never made an argument that the small percent we have done would prove there was no older civilizations. He never tried to make an argument that with the small percent when have dug up proves there was none. Finding gobekli tepe in 94 really turned ideas we had up side down.
Flint tattoo coming up next
I’m a total Dibbler now. I really enjoyed this interview
Came for the Flint, stayed for the Dibble.
Little did we know, Graham Hancock's lost civilization is Lillipution and hides in the ever-shrinking region of "where you haven't looked yet".
The Lost Civilization of the Gaps
Hancock would be a great Mormon apologist.
Mormons are based. Hancock not so much.
Wow. Two weeks after Rogan and he’s a CZcams guru. This is getting ridiculous…
Graham has a full-on fan boy rival in Dribble, on the surface. He’s OBSESSED with GH. Maybe he should make a name for himself before exposing himself as an agent.
lol what the hell are you on about? He isn’t obsessed with graham Hancock at all, what a strange conclusion to draw
@@Vgallo the diminutive debunker is just here to shit on Graham Hancock.
He's right. Dibble couldn't be more disingenuous. He goes out of his way to attack Hancock and his attempt to ride Graham's coattails to fame couldn't be more obvious. Dibble is the very same asshole archaeologist he was railing against. Dibble is a fraud and has nothing new to contribute.
What is Dibble wrong about?
@@coreyander286 all of the things
Matt looks like he is growing out of the ground in the thumbnail.
hypothesis
[ hahy-poth-uh-sis, hi- ]
a proposition, or set of propositions, set forth as an explanation for the occurrence of some specified group of phenomena, either asserted merely as a provisional conjecture to guide investigation working hypothesis or accepted as highly probable in the light of established facts.
Dozens of videos released to CZcams all at once, to refute an idea that has continued to gain evidence for decades. An idea that is only a suggestion, to explain new evidence as it is collected. Why so hostile to someone else's idea?
Why not share the advances Dibble has made to the field of archeology? Because he has made none. He is good at repeating what others have said. He is unwilling to consider a novel idea, regardless the evidence. He is stuck in the 20th century.
He's trying to get some use out of his expensive degree, since he's not doing research or actual archeology.
Decoding the academics would be far more interesting and damning lmao
Graham Hancock never says he's right he just says "This is my theory or I don't claim to be right but it seems to me...etc" stop putting words in Graham's mouth.
orange background still killing me tbh
I like it
it's iconic
I enjoy Hancock as a fictional writer. I like Dibble as an academic. I don’t like Flint calling listerners to JRE uneducated. Saying this as an University alumni
But they are, they’re totally enthralled by fakes and gurus whilst possessing 0 critical thinking skills, for example they actually think Hancock is right and he won that debate.
I like Flint calling JRE listeners uneducated.
@@coreyander286 I’m happy for you
Its good that your educated but the majority is just......
Just take a look under the commentsections.@@enoscheeren6105
@@coreyander286 what’s your thoughts on the constant lies flint told on the debate? Did you see the ice core data that got posted the day after the debate showing lead emission spikes going back 150,000 years. It seems that all the flint fans just opened wide and accepted what ever dribble came out of flint
And that is his real name…
Not saying it’s Atlantis, not saying it’s aliens; but I’m not convinced archaeologists have the megalithic stones figured out. For instance, how some were made, why there are peculiar similarities found across the globe, how they were transported. Neither the GH side, nor the mainstream archaeology side has it figured out, from what I’ve seen so far. That’s just my amateur opinion from watching interviews with both sides.
That’s fair
Why are you so convinced that there is any mystery about it? I’m not trying to be rude, just trying to pin down ‘why’ you think that is a mystery.
@@LesterBrunt for the reasons I mentioned above. I haven’t seen many convincing explanations as to how they were constructed or moved. Also, there are similarities found in some of the megalithic stones in different regions of the world. They often are explained by mainstream archaeology as having spontaneously emerged independent of one another. But I don’t find that explanation very compelling.
@@CJ-cd5cd It sounds like you are unsure about the current views, but without an alternative theory what else is there to believe? That something doesn't feel intuitive doesn't mean it is wrong or incorrect. If those megaliths didn't emerge independently, how did it happen then?
@@LesterBrunt Doesn't mean it's correct either. I don't know how it happened. I'm ok with sitting with the ambiguity and not filling in the blanks to satisfy a need for cognitive closure. Just saying the available theories at the moment aren't compelling enough for me, personally. I also haven't read or watched everything available on the topic, so it's possible there is still something out there that could sway me in one direction or another.
This guy isn't a geologist he deals with plants so him talking about geology doesn't hold any evidence that grahams wrong
Where do you think ancient plant remains are found
Graham is neither a geologist nor a plant guy, he’s a journalist who claims to know more than archaeologists
Flint taught at a school that used illegally obtained native remains. They have since been returned. With his anti supremacy angle, I'm let down by his lack of decolonial humility. In this he acknowledged gaps with 0 imagination as to what's possible.
Dibble is exactly what Hancock was describing archaeology to be. That little patronising laugh says it all.
If that's all you've got then you deserve that same kind of "little patronising laugh" that Hancock got.
I'ld like to propose that we stop using that antagonistic term "pseudo-archeologist." The phyical remains used in archeology are open to interpretation unlike some more deterministic sciences. For a clear example, one only has to look the diametrically-opposing interpretations of the minimalist and maximist archeologists in Israel. And many times genealogists and linguists have disproven the conclusions of archelogists. So archeologists do not own the one true interpretation of history. And everyone who has different facts than what archeologists believe are not pseudo-archeologists.
Are you suggesting that the term shouldn't be used at all? It seems to me that when an independent researcher makes claims about the ancient past, uses the jargon of science to support these claims, and concludes that their "theory" is the only explanation that makes sense, they just might be a pseudo archaeologist. Sure, you can look at the excavated portions of Gobekli Tepe, for instance, and draw any number of conclusions about it. But when an independent researcher comes up with an idea that the characters carved into the pillars are part of a system of astrology, based solely on what it "looks like" that's pseudo archaeology.
People who think the ancients had access to secret lost magical abilities through psychedelic drugs and colonized Mars and Antarctica (such as Hancock) should be termed in a way that makes their hysteria clear.
@@russellmillar7132 The well is already poisoned. Correct, if someone is falsely claiming to be an archeologist and publishing claims that are not based upon good scientific practices, then and only then, the term "pseudo-archeoogist" may apply. But the term has already become a catch-all term.
Please consider this: Genealogists proved that the outdated archeological myth of the "Celtic Invasion" of England was not based on fact. The change in material goods that archeologists found at that horizon (1200bce?) was not based on a migration of "Celtic" people, but instead on a migration of ideas and trade goods. The DNA of the residents did not change signiicantly before/after that archeological horizon. So, someone might call genealogists as "pseudo-archeologists." However, the genealogists were correct and the archeologists were wrong.
Thanks for the considerate reply.
@@russellmillar7132 Thanks. I replied but my reply was deleted. Thou shalt not cast doubt on the archeological hegemony. I give up
@russellmillar7132 "When an independent researcher makes claims about the ancient past, uses the jargon of science to support these claims and concludes their theory is the only one that makes sense..."
That is literally every single researcher though? What scientist doesn't use jargon? What scientist doesn't come to conclusions about what makes sense? What researcher doesn't make claims about the past?
Dipshyt dibbledo
Flint didn't get the memo on Science
Thanks Obama!
these guys cary a big bucket os BS. They're the twisters of information
Show one demonstration of granite stonework to completion done using ancient egypt copper and bronze and stone tools and ill instantly switch from Graham's side to Dibble 🤪 i'll be waiting lol
That's a completely unfair challenge, though. It's a huge task, and it won't get done because it's so huge.
Instead, the proof would be something like "using ancient techniques, demonstrate and refine a pots precision to that of these artefacts".
What I mean is, if they started out with a nearly-completed pot (created by machine, but just roughly the right shape) and they demonstrated grinding and smoothing down to these micrometre tolerances.
@@donperegrine922 Prove that goblins don't exist! Take that scientists! FFS... welcome to the Joe Rogan crowd.
@@PJM273 I am also the Joe Rogan crowd lol. Sorry, we are quite diverse
@@donperegrine922 Not really. You all want to believe you've uncovered some amazing alternate theory or understanding of the world because you watched a podcast of 2 idiots talking about something. You bore the shit out of your friends and family claiming to have revealed/superior knowledge on topics without ever putting the work in (to study the topic). That's what Rogan offers - buy it all you want - don't expect to be taken seriously. Just sayin...
@@PJM273 why so militant bro? Nobody here has hurt you.
I spent 22 years in college studying pretty much all science and mathematics available. Dibble is like many students I encountered along the way. Dibble is insecure and arrogant at the same time. Dibble is "NOT" a critical thinker. Dibble is interested in being recognized more than seeking truth. Dibble has a lot to learn, but I don't think he will.
Should a spent a few more years, doesn't seem like you quite got it. Nevermind!
@@decodingthegurus The name Dibble has become an adjective.
Instead of the ad homs give a concrete example
Lol breakdown of his 4hr podcast for anyone that doesnt have time .
Conclusion; archeologists have studyied thousands of sites, roughly 5-10% of the earth, and if nothing can compare to anything they have found before its not worth investigating.
If dibble was around when they found the first stone tool.. "but it doesnt look like a kitchen knife".
😂😂😂😂
Geez. I didn't make it past the 15 minute mark of this woke crap.
Cya
you're the guy Dibble was talking about - have to dumb it down and condense for the Rogan audience. There's only so much dumb and condense you can offer on a topic. Stick to UFOs maybe?