An Archaeologist Debated Graham Hancock. I Have Thoughts
Vložit
- čas přidán 25. 04. 2024
- Graham Hancock is a noted pseudohistorian whose theories about a lost Atlantis-like Ice Age civilization have become broadly popular among the general public. Archaeologist Flint Dibble recently went on Joe Rogan's podcast to debate him. Was it a good idea? How should scholars and communicators engage with pseudohistory in media and on the internet?
Support Atun-Shei Films on Patreon ► / atunsheifilms
Leave a Tip via Paypal ► www.paypal.me/atunsheifilms
Buy Merch ► teespring.com/stores/atun-she...
Official Website ► www.atunsheifilms.com/
You watch one Milo Rossi lecture and suddenly Graham Hancock and psuedoarcheology are far more prevalent on my feed.
Also Stefan Milo did the same
This is where the free market and neo liberalism has lead us
Ngl, I think when I saw Graham Hancock in the title, I clicked on his expecting it to be a Milo video 😅
@@WannabeMarsanachSo did I 😂
@@Kitties-of-Doom There are always plenty of older idiots out there and just enough bright young minds to counteract their insipid bullshit
100% agree I've basically stopped doing any debunking videos on my channel. I may do more in the future but it's much more useful just to make interesting videos about the past.
The problem with debunking is that you can easily come off as annoying and negative because it puts you in the position of saying "no" all the time. When in reality the people doing good archaeology/history are extremely enthusiastic about the past.
Stefan, you are my favorite youtuber 🙌
You couldn't be more wrong about not doing debunking content. The comments are full of people whose minds have been changed. Positive historical content does nothing to confront the actual problem, and most people who believe in laht conspiracies aren't going to care about legitimate historical content, because they find actual history BORING. As do most people. We history nerds often lose sight of the fact that the reason these conspiracies are so popular is because MOST people find regular history BORING, even if you try to church it up with a fun presentation. I mean sure, having fun historical content is important, but it is of the utmost importance that we have professionals debunking these hacks at every step, rather than allowing them to run free and call academics cowards.....
I can understand the frustration, just from seeing the crap I get pushed as ads on this platform. What takes you hours of research and editing is outpaced by the firehose of disinformation and misinformation. I haven't watched anything from you yet, but I've seen some recommendations for your channel, and I'll give you a look. Hopefully you'll have another subscriber soon.
Good luck, and keep up the good work, sir.
The man, the myth, the legend!. I was expecting to see your input here!
Your videos are beautiful. We need beautiful things. But we also need experts debunking scammers. Otherwise they win and people keep being deceived and the distrust of science keeps growing until we reach a dangerous zone.
I can't get over how an archaeologist is actually named Flint Dibble. That is too good.
The gods have a sense of humor.
His real name is Henry Dibble, Jr. They named the dog “Flint.”
@@PaulMcElligottAn archaeologist who wears a fedora, who uses the same name as his dog?
This man is literally Indiana Jones.
Wait till I tell you his brother's name is Chip.
His father was an archeologist too 😂
(Historical fiction author here): You know, Andy, what I think it comes down to is *story. These people really gravitate toward the Graham Hancocks and the crazy TikTokers because they're looking for story* - and these crazed conspiracy creators give it to them. The need for story is hardwired into our species; I mean, it got us out of the Pleistocene. Story fires our minds and builds community. That's what we need! The ivory tower approach won't work anymore because media has been democratized and people are gonna go where the story is - not necessarily where the facts are. So yes! You're absolutely right. We need more storyteller historians. ❤ Awesome talk, by the way.
And who has a better story........ than bran the broken
@@AtunSheiFilms A correct use of that reference 😅
@@AtunSheiFilms Oh you went and did it! 😅
It's not just that pseudo-science presents a neat story. Especially in the way Hancock presents it, it's just another conspiracy theory. Secret, forbidden knowledge that is being suppressed by the powers that be. The thrill of the validation that comes with possession of that knowledge; a sort of smug superiority that you know something more than the average Joe. Sorry, I'm a bit high and rambling. Lol
@@AtunSheiFilms Why have you done this D:
“Recently an archaeologist named Flint Dibble went on the Joe Rogan Podcast”
why does that sound like the setup to a really bad SNL sketch?
Flint Dibble sounds like a Flintstones character we never met in the show
Or Monty Python, but yeah. I pity anyone with the last name Dibble. OMG can you imagine?
Flint Dibble is the emergency 3rd string backup for the Bedrock Water Buffaloes bowling team
Is he related to Red Dwarf's Dwayne Dibbley? :p
Or a modern day Flintstone reboot
Graham is one of the many Joe Rogan guests that made a career out the "they are trying to silence me" grift.
Ironically no one is ever trying to silence any of them, that would require trying to take away his right to access platforms. All anyone is doing is calling him an idiot.
the opportunity to routinely have the ear of millions of people... yep, textbook cancelling.
The worst part about todays cancel culture is that the people who get silenced by it never shut the fuck up.
Sadly he did have the other guy actually take the bait and try cancel him buying trying to get his Netflix series changed. That’s the same as him being cancelled
@@jacklamb2904 so talking about how you're cancelled is just bait for people to try and fail to cancel you?
I mean, people already believe it, might as well do the crime for the time.
Or alternatively, show that it failed.
I am a doctoral student who works on state formation and state-craft in historical Tibet, focusing in particular on the way that Buddhism, magical warfare, and the monastic institution are used by (and cause issues for) Tibetan monarchies. I have presumed that there wouldn't be much general interest but have been mulling over the idea of starting to make videos. Your bit at the end has convinced me - maybe it will serve some use.
There's a LOT of conflicting information out there about the Dalai lama having slaves, what's your take on it?
@@rogerkeleshian2215 replying so that I can be notified.
@@rogerkeleshian2215 so now people worried about nazi conspiracy's are diving into Tankie communist conspiracies?
You had me at magical warfare. I'm willing to bet its equal parts fascinating and hilarious.
@@rogerkeleshian2215 yea Mao liberated Tibet from the Dalai Lama! hahahah
Atlantis of the Gaps. The evidence is always where you haven't looked yet.
Flint Dibble: Has a cool hat
Graham Hancock: No hat
I think it's clear who won the debate here.
The Indiana Jones test. Never fails
Thats just hat culture at work another way of canceling him 😂
he looks like the autistic kid i used to have lunch with. i had no friends and i sat with the fedora kid. its not a cool hat, its just his out fit because he's an archeologist. most have a beard and a fedora. not uncommon.
Ah, the old hat-trick
Its not just the hat dude.
The mans name is Flint Dibble. You cant beat that, thats the best name.
Hey friend. Im a phd candidate in the us studying slavery in the antebellum south and the anglo/spanish caribbean. I have learned so much from your videos about how to present history to students and to a more general public. Thanks and keep on rocking
❤
Bad ass area of study considering the US wants to scrub its history of any genocidal or murderous stuff.
@@CommieApeThat's definitely true. and even if slavery and indigenous removal are acknowledged, it's often in a way that forecloses any contemporary efforts to make right the wrongs of the past. As if the past we inherit doesn't impose ethical imperatives on us in the present
@@CommieApe Well, _parts_ of the U.S. want to. Looking at you, red states.
A big problem in my own opinion, is that academia is glacial paced when new evidence contrary to the established "fact" is...
Think 1492...
It leaves a gap waiting to be filled that these psuedo- historians jump in to fill
Thanks for the Toastmasters shout-out! I've experienced the benefits and have watched it help many others.
Fingerprints of the Gods highly insinuates that Graham believes this missing civilization could use mind powers from getting super high and levitate these huge blocks into place... This is why I think most of his critics don't read his books, because there's soooo much BS in them that there's a serious lack of him being critqued on the full blown crazy stuff that he only hints at in interviews.
I believe Fingerprints of the Gods was also fiction.
I read fingerprints of the Gods. I don't remember that part of the book lol
i would bet that about 75% of his current followers do not read his books but are familiar with him due to Rogan interviews, other YT podcasts and his Netflix special.
he occasionally mentions the "Egyptian traditions of priests chanting in order to levitate stone blocks" in interviews.
but, yeah he does dial down, in interviews, some of his more grandiose ideas including the extent of his Lost Global Advanced Seafaring Ice Age Shamanistic Psychic Civilization which he has described in books as being "the Size and Scope of the 18th-Century British Empire."
not to mention his books on The Ark of the Covenant and Martian Civilizations...
Graham later started suggesting such ideas as speculative solutions but 1. he's never come out explicitly and said that that's what he thinks; and 2. to the best of my knowledge - having read it twice - Fingerprints doesn't say that. What page number?
@@leep1667 yeah, Hancock was written 10 books of harmless, innocent speculation. he's... "Just asking questions." obviously, he would never want anyone to take his conjectures seriously. no, that wouldn't do at all. it's the furthest thing from his mind!
in FOTG, he "speculated" that Atlantis was in Antarctica and was destroyed by Earth Crustal Displacement. recently he's "mused" that Atlantis was actually in North America and was destroyed by a Comet Apocalypse.
what fun! straight from the Von Daniken School of "Could it be?!"
from a Jason Colavito review:
"According to chapter 30 of America Before, Hancock believes that the lost civilization possessed the following characteristics:
It had global maritime capabilities, including seafaring and longitude calculation.
It had technological and infrastructure development equal to that of Western Europe in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.
It had “transcended” the need for physical manipulation of building materials and instead “learned to manipulate matter and energy by deploying powers of consciousness” unknown to Western science today.
It employed telepathy, telekinesis, remote viewing, and psychic healing.
Its population was Native American.
It “adopted” the Clovis people and the inhabitants of the Amazon rainforest as most favored nations and bestowed specific technological and intellectual gifts on them.
Hancock identifies these claims as speculation, and after five hundred pages of innuendo states that “I will not attempt to prove here or support with evidence” these ideas."
so he's just beboppin' & scattin'. why do archaeologists get so butthurt?!
Don't think us keen-eyed viewers haven't missed that stuffed animal collection down the hallway. We demand a plush tour.
Lol, they are parade throws from Mardi Gras :)
@@AtunSheiFilms
You're a New Orleanian through and through
Ah, Mardi Gras. When you get metric tons of crap and then realize the next day that you’ll never use it in your life.
@@AtunSheiFilms Gonna be going to one with my girlfriend who lived near the area!
@@AtunSheiFilms Papist idolatry!!!
Very well said. The bit about the “culture war” bullshit I find especially pertinent. As important as it is to call out conspiracies with roots in racism, the moment you start using those words the people who stop listening are the ones who need to hear them the most. It’s a frustrating predicament to be in because it leaves educators with two options: either teach the topic fully and risk the “culture war” people ignoring every single other point, or leave that part out to keep them comfortable but lose the opportunity to teach about the racist roots of many conspiracies.
Like you said the greatest weapon we have is good information. Debunking gets clicks and views, but rarely does it change minds. The best tool at our disposal is to “out communicate” the bullshitters. Find ways to teach the truth, unadulterated by pseudo history. Only with a dedication to that will we be able to tip the scales.
It might have something to do with the word "racism" being thrown around too often by bad faith actors at everyone and everything they don't like.
Oh shit! We found him boys!
I think the biggest hurdle is that actual, factual information isn't as "sexy" to media production companies like Netflix as saying "Oh but what if aliens/ancient superhumans/ghosts/lizardpeople/God did it?!" So it's going to be that much harder to get large platforms to agree to publish the good over the bad.
Favorite CZcamsrs
I think Hancock has no chance if he debates you, Milo. It needs more than just knowledge, he needs to be really called out on his crybaby bs, and that can only be achieved with high debate skills. He is a professional scammer. Not an easy task to beat him. I hope we can see that one day.
As the decendant of a 13th century Edinburgh wool Merchant, I feel weirdly called out....
I think Milo Rossi would leave Hancock crying. He has the perfect combination of knowledge, looks, and debate skills. Knowledge isn't enough, the public need to be bought. And I think Milo can sell
If Hancock is being silenced by establishment archaeologists, how come I've heard of Graham Hancock and am familiar with his work, but have never heard of his establishment archaeologist opponent or his work?
I wonder why, right? 😂😂😂
Probably because, like Graham Hancock, the only people that take Flint Dibble seriously is Flint Dibble.
Because graham is a public figure displayed on massive media platforms, while most archeologists won’t have their names known outside of the research circle of academia
Because bullsh!t artists seek attention, & serious academics seek more study/research.
@@north3949Plus....they are actually busy....doing science or... archeological field work.
"A Vicious Plague of Good Information" should be the motto of this channel.
Spare no one from the wrath of help.
Party like it's 1666
The Plauge Lord Nurgle takes this channel under it's patronage
Ominous positivity.
*mainstream brainwashing
Fixed for you
I still prefer my personal "radical conspiracy theory" where the Egyptian, Mayans, and all the other ancient peoples... just did all the things they were credited with. I know it's a really radical concept but I think there's evidence for it. :P
:)
I dunno, do you have a source for that?
@@whatzittooya9012 of course not what kind of conspiracy theory has sources :D
wow. only a crackpot believes that all those uncivilized inferior primitives were capable of creating their Ancient Wonders without a transfer of knowledge from a Lost Advanced Race.
Why and how. Let's play the ball
Wild to me hearing somebody say cancel culture in a debate, but then again that's just what Graham does when his ideas are challenged.
During a debate while he is ON THE JOE ROGAN PODCAST. like, yeah, people who are on there are definitely cancelled.
What else do you claim when you need relevance
I'm being cancelled, says man currently being platformed by one of the most popular podcasts in the country, just on the heels of getting a netflix show
I see that kind of statement as an admission that Graham prioritizes his celebrity status over the accuracy of his studies.
If his theories rested on factual information and sound methods of study, he ought to welcome the scrutiny of accredited experts.
I mean... It's a topic that could legitimately be discussed in a debate... But in most cases it's just trying to hide shit and shift blame.
The fact that the three-hour long CZcams video Ancient Aliens Debunked has far more views, which last I checked was over 8 million, than the official Ancient Aliens content on CZcams combined, gives me some hope. This bit of good news from you, bolstered said hope.
You know the guy that did the Ancient Aliens Debunked is a young earth creationists that thinks Aliens are demons sent by Lucifer to usher the Antichrist by creating one world religion based on New Age. Sort of hilarious really.
@FilipCordas Sauce please
@@FilipCordas So? Even if what you say is true... it doesn't make his Ancient Aliens Debunked video wrong.
@@enorris768 Well the channel name is VerseByVerseBT that should give you a hint, but all you need to do is click on the author and view other video on that channel, there is plenty of sauce there.
@@LordVader1094 No the video is mostly good except when he tries to say that flood myth come from Judaism because they preserved it better then all the others that's just flat out wrong. You can see the YEC crazy in few other places as well but overall, everything is good. Even some of his conspiracy NWO videos are pretty good has good arguments and evidence for what he is talking about, I just find it hilarious that people don't realize it.
Pseudo history in archeology is weird.
In the early 1900s it was thought that Native Americans hand not arrived in the America's until 3000 years prior. The head of the Museum of Natural History held this view. To the point that when the first Clovis culture artifacts were discovered he refused to even begin to acknowledge the site.
Until just a few years ago if you pointed to evidence that there were large civilized and organized people in the Amazon some one would have made a video like thos about you.
The arrogance and hubris of scientists egos are rarely considered when speaking of science.
The world is incredibly complicated and it's history difficult to discern. Scientists are humans who considered themselves to often be the smartest people in the room. They invest a lifetime into thier theories and their ego often creates blind spots.
10:20 is this an insinuation that Nietzsche was racist/anti-Semitic? To my knowledge, this is incorrect. Discriminating against someone for their race/ethnicity would fall squarely under his idea of "slave morality" in that you're blaming someone else for the shortcomings you're experiencing rather than working to improve yourself. The unfortunate connection is that after his death, his sister and brother in law (literal Nazis) took and twisted a lot of his writings to a completely different meaning where they could be used to justify the insane rhetoric of their party. But Nietzsche himself as well as his writings weren't about that at all.
Shout out Milo at Miniminuteman for taking down Graham's series
Also Stefan Milo did the same
And Dr Miano
Oh hell yeah! Milo is demolishing that guy single handedly. His series is excellent.
@@antonnurwald5700 - did you see his April Fool's episode? He used ChatGPT to "prove" that the Bass Pro Shops pyramid was connected to the Illuminati, Bill Clinton, and pyramidology. Just hilarious.
Don't leave out Stefan Milo
What I found interesting is that Alan Alda was getting frustrated with academics losing the PR war over global warming to louder voices with money backing them. He started improv workshops for science academics to help them get more comfortable defending their positions in the public sphere. I think that that is a great idea to get academics across many fields better at communicating to wider audiences. I've also enjoyed watching Gutsick Gibbon's take-downs of young Earth creationists. I think your point on more academics starting uo CZcams channels to put their research out there more widely makes a lot of sense.
Except in the 70's the next global ice age was on the way...
@ssumrall70 The mechanism of carbon dioxide being opaque to particular wavelengths of infrared light has been well understood for quite some time. Sure, in the 70s, some climate scientists may have thought that an ice age may be triggered, but most didn't even back then. Carbon dioxide emissions and the rising temperatures worldwide have been measured pretty solidly for the last 80 years, and they trend together. Where we are in the Milankovitch Cycle (a combination of the lean of our axial tilt, the precession of our axial tilt, and the precession of our elliptical orbit around the Sun) should be heading us toward a mini ice age, but temperatures trend upward due to carbon dioxide and methane.
@@PJ818 We also have plenty of core samples that show Earth has constantly changed temperatures and had different amounts of co2 and methane through history. When we really high co2 life flourished. We also have historic accounts and other measures that in the Middle Ages England got so warm that they could grow grapes and started a wine industry. We have archeological sites for humans underwater and find them where glaciers have melted. The Earth has always changed temperatures and always will.
@ssumrall70 I know that the global temperatures have always changed, and always will. The Milankovitch Cycles are a large part of that. The problem is the speed of the rate of change, and the mismatch of current temperatures to where we are in the cycle. Solar irradiance, the amount of energy we get from the Sun here on Earth, has been accurately measured for about 120 years, and solar irradiance has gone down since the 1980s, while temperatures have gone up. The only reason that can be happening is that the infrared light that should be re-radiating and escaping out to space is not, being trapped inside our atmosphere by carbon dioxide and methane for the large part, and heating things up.
@@PJ818 That and we couldn't survive in high CO2 environments or literally any other epoch. They always overlook that one.
Great video. Love how you pointed out that academics should be careful engaging in debate with popular public figures without first receiving public speaking training.
Awesome video, subscribed, I feel 100% the same way, my life is so busy just trying to stay above water so I fully appreciate folks like you who can dedicate the time to this, thank dude!
Dude you are a word smith. Like genuinely you have such a compelling way with words and rhetoric. I’m very glad I found your content and also very glad you cover what you do. Pseudo history is such a gateway to other dangerous thinking. There was a time in my life where I almost fell down that rabbit hole
Thanks!
Agreed, historical revisionism is terrible for humanity, but all too common.
Just look at all the far left, tankies thriving online.
@@kingofcards9516Or azerbaijan in their recent conflicts with Armenia.
When someone solely focuses on attacking and targeting the far-left in a world dominated by right wing politics and mainstreamed far-right, it signals a strong possibility that they are advocating for right-wing revisionism. It's a glaring red flag for shady motives.
@@rogerkeleshian2215 exactly.
You claim to not be an ancient historian yet have a sick ancient Egyptian tie.
Curious!
Oh shit! We found him boys!
I follow Proffesor Dibble, and just watched a video of his on a preprint paper about hominid fossils, i had no idea he went on JRE against Hancock and was REALLY worried for a second there, supremely glad to here things went well, and that hopefully more people will get to know his other very cool work!!!
I was really into Hancocks ideas until I saw this debate. It dawned on me that Dibble didnt have an agenda, he simply wanted to see evidence, which Hancock had none at all. Just ideas. I think this will hurt Hancock's career
Guys like Hancock never have evidence. He's the archaeological equivalent of Alex Jones, always shouting, "I HAVE THE DOCUMENTS!" but never showing them to anyone else because Hilary Clinton will fire a space laser at him or something.
You can pretty much discount anyone claiming they are being silenced by the establishment who simultaneously is more famous than anyone from the establishment.
I don't. The majority of Hancock's fans are mostly there for the entertainment, like me. It's fun to speculate about all the ancient stuff but we don't really care. I think that real, scientific archeologists make themselves look silly trying to debunk him. We know it's just fun and games. Plus, archeologists have done a shit ton of bad work. The development of "monkey to man" still hasn't been proven by any stretch of the imagination, and I was taught that narrative in school as " real science". Speculations and fantasies about all the history stuff are valuable as a tool to stretch our imaginations and help us to find the "real" narrative.
I knew he was trouble when Emmerich cited him as inspiration for 10,000 BC.
I absolutely love that movie, ngl.
@@AtunSheiFilmsdon’t forget 2012 with the whole earth crust displacement theory which was adapted from the same book as 10,000 bc
@@AtunSheiFilms
It’s a weirdly fun movie
@@warlordofbritanniaI saw it on my class trip to dc we were in a bus and and a friend played that movie and I fell asleep during it. Not sure if the movie put me to sleep or it was the early time we had to be on the bus (bus lag maybe) idk.
@@warlordofbritanniaand what do you think about the second film Roland Emmerich adopted from the same source aka 2012 fun or not?
Is Flint Dibble his real name? If so, archaeologist is one of two possible professions this dude ever could have had. The other being professional nerd on old episodes of the Simpsons. What a perfect name.
Harold Lewis Dibble (1951 - 10 June 2018) was an American Paleolithic archaeologist [and funny guy].
The brother's name is Chip.
He apparently teaches at Dartmouth
Could've been a Spider-Man villain themed around sand... wait a minute.
Pornstar maybe.
Adult film star is another option.
"I dont think you are racist, but I think the sources you're using are" - is something more people need to hear
I think they already hear some variety of that plenty as is.
It’s talk like that which is actually stifling healthy debate on topics.
@@UnityAgainstJewishEvilyou can’t have healthy debate if you can’t point out biases in sources. Being able to identify and critique racial biases is absolutely required if you want to have a productive conversation about significant portions of history.
@@theEndermanMGS
In theory, that sounds nice, and I wouldn’t disagree. In practice though, what people decide constitutes as having a “racial bias” is typically just information which makes them uncomfortable.
would it still be racist if the "white saviour" wasn't white?
@@theEndermanMGS ok now which biases does your side of the argument have?
Flint Dibble is an absolutely fantastic name. Already like the guy.
Time to chat up Milo Rossi. Who is an actual archaeologist.
They did a livestream together a while back.
Also Stefan Milo did the same
I don’t want to be mean cuz I really love Milo Rossi and his channel, but I don’t think he’s even done an undergrad archaeology field school so he’s a archeology communicator rather than an archaeologist. But that also is kind of elitist so I guess he’s like, somewhere on the spectrum of archaeology professionals.
@@seanbeadles7421He has a university degree in enviromental archeology
@@seanbeadles7421He has a degree in archaeology and did do some field work though of course not as much as a veteran in the field because he is, for one, super young and quickly pivoted into science communication and edutainment which is his passion. I wouldn't say he is an authority in the field but he definitely has a solid basic understanding of the subject, meaning a heck of a lot more understanding than the average Joe. I believe he went over his credentials in one of his vids on his second channel.
Seconding that call to arms! one of my favorite youtube is power-point presentations on defense economics, and I've used a youtube channel on medieval siege warfare as the basis of an academic paper before, there is absolutely an audience out there, it might not be massive, but it exists, and it will be dedicated.
I think we have similar tastes. Perun and SandRhoman?
@@hrogarfyrninga3238 that's them! :)
I like the idea of looking for signs of older cultures than what the current official timeline suggests but the whole psychic powers thing... Nah, let's keep them among X-men.
This is the point of Archeology anyway. I assume ever Archeologist and or Historian would love to be associated with a newly found more ancient civilization. But this needs hard work, some luck series scientific method not wishful thinking.
"The ideas you're espousing have an uncomfortable history with racism and you haven't addressed it appropriately" somehow becomes "You're a racist." And that's adequately addressing criticism?
Intellectual dishonesty + victim complex/grift
Because pseudo history like Atlantis has been used to push racist propaganda
Why would anyone "address racism" in a debate about history? Lmao. Leftists really want everyone to submit to their bizarre rituals and religion
As Xiran Jay Zhao said, "You should be less worried about being called racist than about promoting racism."
It's because bad faith actors call everyone/thing racist, mainly from the left.
I'm honestly skeptical about this whole crusade (even though that term is historically loaded) of combating pseudohistory and misinformation through an academically-based historical narrative. The logic is sound in theory but it sounds practically difficult: real researchers have full-time jobs and can't dedicate 90% of their time to this; this is where "transmitters" like you come in: people with PR skills AND academic rigor, who can cite their sources and also produce engaging historical content.
Also, the problem with people believing pseudohistory and the advanced state of the ecosystems whch peddle this are symptoms of more wide-ranging issues, like deplorable access to academic history and the obsoleteness or lack of funding of institutions like museums which are supposed to do this outreach and transmission of historical knowledge. You could also talk about how deeply embedded anti-intellectualism is, especially in the United States, and the distrust this causes for "institutional" historical knowledge, which can itself be partly attributed to a certain elitism and corporatism of the academic historical community.
Some great points here
@@AtunSheiFilms Thanks. But I honestly want to thank you for all the work you do, because it does matter to and influence people. Granted, I was already interested in and studying history when I discovered your channel, but you and other historical content creators have really made me lean toward this field of transmission of historical knowledge once I finish my master's degree (I also happen not to be from the US so I don't have huge student loans pushing me into another field, which is another problem facing the historical profession).
The privatization of higher ed has a big role in all of this, both in thwarting scholars and in not combating this in the public sphere. Scholars are targets now of the far-right and we are witnessing a new McCarthyism.
@@mediacrusher I’m in France (lived in the US for a while) and though it’s not as bad as the States yet, there’s a shift toward this, and also prioritizing « useful » departments like communications or business over humanities even in public high ed. And we had a far-right TV pundit run for president in 2022 on quasi-revisionist stuff on Vichy France’s role in the Holocaust, on a very history-focused narrative on decline and reactionary ideals, practically calling for ethnic cleansing of Muslims etc and of course attacking real historians as « ideologues » which is just deliciously ironic.
@@mediacrusher well are the scholars all Communists who have a vested interest in making sure any narrative that could possibly down play climate change or colonialism be stamped out?
Hi ATF, thanks for the measured and inspired discussion. I am a person with a relatively large amount of knowledge about an extremely niche subject as you described in your video and the passion to physically orate that knowledge.
I however am "hung up" on the notion that my labor could be plagiarized, freebooted, and drawn into the training datasets for AIs without my consent. I feel daunted by the notion of having to engage in protection of my work.
Is the better option to just find a museum or larger organization to associate all my work with, rather than trying to do it independently?
Thanks for all you do.
Been a fan of the channel for a few years and have to say great video. I am a huge fan especially of the work you do in brining analyses of this type to your fan base. I have a bachelor’s degree in archaeology and am a thesis defense away from a master’s degree so I have a bit of a vested interest in the debate Flint and Graham had. It’s great to see mainstream archaeology get some attention on social media/popular media and I thought Flint did very well in representing the discipline.
This is a heroic video. Artists need to coordinate with scholars more!
It was heroic of Flint to try to cancel Graham. He is quite the snake.
That '80% communication is non-verbal' is a long debunked myth. Surprised to hear it on a video like this
No, it isn't...
Thanks for your summary thoughts on that very long podcast!
👏🙂
Yay for Archaeologist Flint Dibble and giving pseudoarchaeology a black eye.
He didn't at all lol. In fact dibbler is dead wrong about his domestication of crops theory in the ice age that he blithers on and on about. Olaho 2 in the ice age shows clear domestication of crops. Check out ancient architects recent video.
😂😂😂 you keep on believing.@@Kitties-of-Doom
@@Kitties-of-DoomThe part about shipwrecks and their preservation towards the beginning also made me raise an eyebrow (hard). Most wooden shipwrecks are not well preserved outside of extreme environments, like the Black Sea or the Baltic. It’s very rare to find ones as intact as Dibble is talking about from centuries ago, let alone thousands of years ago. You might find a few scant pieces of wood in the Mediterranean for example, but any wood not buried in sediment in that kind of environment isn’t going to last that long. What usually ends up denoting there’s a wreck in those cases is “oh look a bunch of pottery clustered together in the outline of a ship’s hull”- maybe some metal items here and there too. Sometimes a small section of the hull will survive, but not anything that makes it immediately apparent that “this was part of a ship” when examined out of context.
Shackleton’s wreck of the Endurance is so well preserved because it’s only a century old (109 years as of 2024), it’s nearly 10,000 feet down in one of the coldest environments on Earth that also keeps wood-eating critters at bay. Contrast that with the Titanic, which sank 112 years ago this April: there’s no original deck wood remaining and has not been for years, most wood structures are gone, what remained was inside the wreck in varying states of decay (some bed frames for example were in pristine shape owing to the chemicals they were treated with and types of wood used)- and that’s over 12,000 feet down in the Atlantic.
So when this guy says that wood is well preserved in water… ehhhhhh… not really. Cases where it is are exceptional, particularly when the wrecks are truly PRESERVED (not just ruined husks of themselves).
@@alenahubbard1391 its fact. ancient architects break it down. YOure in denial lol. plain and simple.
@@Smethells2023 its also operating under a dead closed loop assumption that an advanced ancient civilization used wooden ships lol
SPREAD TRUTH LIKE A VICIOUS PLAGUE! Is a great rallying cry
a vicious plague out to destroy something very human: ignorance :3
Calling someone you disagree with a racist is a great way to have your views instantly disregarded by default and in Flint's introduction to the world he ensured that at least half of it will never listen to him again. Even if he is completely correct about his archeological opinions.
On the point of providing compelling narratives, it boggles my mind that the Atlantis crowd isn't more into Pompeii. It feels like it should fit thematically so well.
Grand cataclysmic destruction? Check.
Ill fated rescue attempt? Check (pliney the elder I believe)
Strong emotional content? Check (nothing like a mother trying to shield her children from the ash cloud to tickle the heartstrings)
Loss of valuable knowledge? I mean probably. There had to have been one baker with a signature recipe, at least.
Pompeii is what got me away from wondering about Atlantis as a kid. To me it was basically the same thing, but most importantly, REAL
Pompeii and Herculium just have too much solid evidence too attract that crowd. Yes they want a story but they want a story that they tell. It's like the difference between Lord.of the Rings and Twilight. One is a super well established world and the other is loosely written specifically so people can fill in the blanks themselves.
I'm actually getting a Marketing Major and a Minor in Anthropology. It is my goal to go onto make history more appealing to the world. And I think a childrens program that covers the cool little parts of history to get kids more into it would battle this on the easiest front. Having people grow up with a knowledge and interest in history
Hey you have a great channel. Looking forward to seeing more of your work.
Never forget, Hancock was an PR apologist for the murderous Mengitsu regime in Ethiopia...
What posesed him to defend that...?
@@rogerkeleshian2215 he was a reporter covering east africa for a time and got sucked in - in 1984, right in the middle of his rule - he co-wrote "under ethiopian skies" a pretty picture book and in 1985 he wrote the challenge of hunger which was rather kind to the regime
making a connection between politics and archaeology
Love your conclusion : more positive statements instead of rebuttals, more engaging in subjects instead of dismissing them, this gets the audience more involved and accepting of the intelectual landscape
The part where you mention the importance of physical looks is all too unfortunately true. I saw one of the clips from the debate and every single comment was about Flint's appearance or his name.
That's the only tie I've ever seen that's made me want to buy a tie
This is the first video of yours that I have seen that was not focused on Civil War mythology. I really enjoyed it.
When I first saw graham and Randall on JRE I was instantly in love with the socratic-circle style of discussing possible alternatives to historical record, and in particular the information presented by Randall about the cataclysm that led to the Younger Dryas event.
"People are just curious and want to get to the bottom of prehistory and our ancient past."
True of people these days, many fall for the ideas because they sound so much more interesting. It's simple wishful thinking, wanting something more exciting, or pure naive ignorance.
However, that's not how many of those idea originally formed. The initial roots of the current idea of Atlantis, ancient aliens, etc are firmly in the belief of "I don't believe another culture is capable of doing this themselves". It's rooted in ethnocentrism and racial superiority refusing to accept the possibility that 'inferior' cultures are capable of doing great things, so there must be some other explanation like some great prehistoric civilisation.
No it is not.. something like moving 400ton+ stones is still not explained by anything we have found yet. There is more to our history then we want to be believe.
@@azoniarnl3362 "We do not know" does not in any way ever lead to "some advance prehistory culture did it".
The one and only thing it leads to is "we do not know".
Anyone who wants to say "we do not know therefore ..." has to provide adequate evidence to explain their hypothesis, if they can't then they are lying.
@@Valkanna.Nublet Thats my point, we dont know.. but mainstream folks are certain that stone age people did it, without actually providing evidence for that. Then when other people come around to give possibilities theyre called Psuedo-historians or worse.. sheep never look outside their pen.
@@azoniarnl3362I don't think you know how good we are at improvising and adapting to a situation. People long long ago would use simple geometry and tools to their advantage to build something. For example: the pyramid in Egypt, they used ramps and pulled the stone blocks with a lot of rope, on top of that, had manpower to do that. Not alien shit. 😂
@@azoniarnl3362 it's called leverage and slave labor.
and we have multiple ideas of how it was done, which just don't know which specifically.
I really hope more channels starts doin historically accurate videos and topics, even obscure ones. What ignited my interest in history in ny late teens was watching a video The Great War channel with Indy Neidell had done on my country. From. There i got into the detailed and tragic history of WW1 and then i started spreading out onto all sorts of topics. Genuinely interesting content that is well presented can go a long way to combat the gargantuant amount of misinformation thats being spread online.
The Great War is literally a communist channel. lol
I struggle to understand the need to take a good fiction and try to make that the case that it is real. The idea of a lost advanced civilization is a cool idea, but that doesn't make it real. The idea of a flat earth with a big ice wall, and distant lands beyond the ice wall would make for a fascinating alternate history fantasy novel, but these people who believe it are just perplexing to me.
a lot of it would be even cool if it was real. Oftentimes, they just throw shit on there to make it more conspiratorial. Not that it was true before the alters, but it usually is cooler. A giant ice wall, unexplored, and forgotten sounds cool as hell. The government guarding it sounds cheesy.
Personally I take offence at the headline "Graham Hancock debated fellow archeologist...." as if Hancock is an archeologist.
Part of successfully debating on Rogan's show is knowing how to manipulate Joe into not being an idiot. Its like tilting in pinball.
To your first point about Flint's body language and demeanor in contrast to Hancock and Rogan, et al who haunt the podcasting/social media worlds, realize how much of a rare gem and wonder that someone like Flint is ---
There is a wonderful book from around 2005 called Mediated by Thomas de Zengotita, who muses on this "performative" culture we've adopted through various medias, including the Internet. He wrote this before the advent of video based podcasting and modern social media, but the author correctly points out that somewhere along way from late 1960s into the 21st century, the general population adopted a performative attitude in their perception of reality; thinking we are all potential material for media and re-presentation in the public sphere. So consciously or unconsciously, we put on new attitudes, speaking habits, gestures, and general body language to advance the myth that we all live in our own movies for others. We cast ourselves in roles and assume some part of the audience can identify with our assumed mediated identity.
A great example he gave is if you look at old news footage interviewing everyday citizens, back from say the early 1960s. Young adults especially, when interviewed, were extremely awkward, stiff, stilted, non engaging with the camera compared to the pro, and just trying to focus on answering questions or giving information while also feeling a bit of an intrusive presence with the camera or microphone.
Fast forward some years or decades later, and since then practically everyone, when in front of a camera or mic saying even the most mundane, pithy comments, jokes, observations, stories, or opinions, are all little actors playing directly to the camera.
Flint seems to be among the few who still come from that non-mediated realm. Cherish it. An important cultural anthropological find! The irony is that commentors about this debate, when critiquing Flint on that surface level, can only seem to evaluate him in terms of performative culture. Like you brought up, his performance in itself could be considered a failure.
Excellent point to make.
Scientists tend to be introverted and sceptical of cultural ephemeral, which doesn’t make for good ‘performers’.
Something I learned about in my philosophy degree is the difference between a motivating reason for belief and a post-hoc legitimation. I see support for alternative historical narratives fitting into the latter category. People are drawn to alternate narrative explanations for phenomena when they either have no connection with more reasonable explanations or, already have a distrustful relationship with the people and institutions connected with more mainstream narratives.
In both cases, the problem can only ever be incompletely addressed by debunking or debating specific issues. The key is proper education in critical thinking and easy access to reliable resources.
ask yourself which one is more exciting. 1. we're not exactly sure how something happened in the past or 2. ALIENS DID IT!
one of those answers is obviously more exciting and would make a better Hollywood movie. try to think about it the way that a 5 or 6 year old would think about it and then you'll really understand what's going through a lot of these people's heads.
So well said and well reviewed, thank you.
Glad you’ve finally talked about Graham Hancock
Check his Atlantis video, as he talks a bit about why he hasn’t done a Hancock-focused takedown there
@@Kedai610 lol you folks are hilarious
@@ettan5812 Huh? Lol
A new vid from you equals a good day.
Interesting on how all this works, I’ll watch this debate tonight with dinner
Aren't professors supposed to have experience giving lectures and teaching classes? That means they DO have public speaking skills and are not as inherently bad at debating as stated in this video.
You don't need to teach to be a professor.
Archeology especially offers a bunch of career paths that don't require teaching a class.
But more than that you're overlooking the fact that academia doesn't require you to be good at teaching at all.
@@louiscypher4186 I know being GOOD at teaching is NOT required in academia, so I am not overlooking that at all, but I thought teaching was part of the DEFINITION of being a professor. You are the first person who has EVER said otherwise to me, so why should I believe you?
@@MatthewTheWanderer Don't believe me. Just go ask your local university or museum.
There's research professors, associate Professors, Professor. In some countries there's even senior professors.
Depending on what department you work in, at what institution your role will change. Hell a lot of high end universities professors run facilities instead of teaching.
@@louiscypher4186 I spent a decade of my life going to universities. You are wrong.
Kinda surprised to hear he didn't watch the HBomberguy video. At a guess, it's the CZcams drama aspect of it? But it could be the length, good grief, I forgot that monster was 4 hours long.
But, I do think the video itself is something of a masterwork, despite its topic. He draws people in by mocking widely-known accounts in order to laser focus on the hateful misinformation being spread by a person using their identity as a shield against criticism of the very hate they spewed.
was that the one about internet historian? what actually happened with that i didn't watch it I just vaguely heard about it
@@lorcanokane5128 the part about internet historian was pretty short, one of a few smaller points that worked as an introduction to the main part of the video. It was mostly about the youtuber James Somerton, who made videos about queer culture that turned out to be almost entirely stolen from documentaries, books, and articles other people had written.
I don't get why people aren't comfortable with our own history to the point where they have to create their own or outright lie to justify the parts of history hey don't like.
I'm a student in college right now, hopefully to become a professor in history one day and it's shocking how much training you have to go through and then realize that most of the public history is outright wrong or blatantly omitting historical context. Like the Bronze Age was essentially our Atlantis. The Palace of Knossos had toilets that could flush, the Indus River Valley civilization had running water/sewage systems, and the Egyptians/Hittites formed the first peace treaty and later the first international aid programs during the droughts that plagued the middle east. But apparently that's not good enough for these "archaeologists" and isn't proof of human civilizations remaining divided even from our earliest known civilizations.
Thank you for going into this. You might also find it interesting to delve into the topic of popular history vs academic history because it's something I'm having to learn currently. It's hard to get past but once you look into how academic historians present, research, and cite to prove their sources vs popular historians you begin to really understand how men like this are becoming more and more common, as information is no longer being fact-checked even by the authors who are supposed to cite for that information presented.
People crave knowledge of history, but a good portion of the population is too lazy, uninquisitive, or outright stupid to obtain it through legitimate channels. For those people, men like Graham Hancock provide them with an interpretation of history that does not dive any deeper than what they learned as a child, and constructs a narrative that is equally as simple as it is fantastic. Coupled with the narrative that the truth is being obscured by the establishment, it provides a feeling of arcane knowledge and control to a demographic of people who walk through life otherwise feeling lesser than those around them.
Popular history versus academic history is also super interesting. I think in the US specifically our K-12 history education is so incredibly limited that it allows far too much leeway for inaccurate history to fill in the gaps. The sum total of history education I remember receiving in public school was Mesopotamia existed, Egpyt existed, Greece existed and then Rome existed, and then none of human history mattered until Europeans set foot on North America.
The history of Asia and the majority of the Middle East is not taught. Nor even any history about Native Americans prior to colonization. The middle ages (itself a term that is needlessly broad) is skimmed over at best. You might learn enough about the Renaissance to name DaVinci and a few other artists.
But the only history taught in any detail is the scant 200-300 years that Europeans have lived on this continent, and even that is mythologized to the point of parody.
@@CheezMonsterCrazy Do you have undergrad or grad work in history? I don't understand how you could be a product of the same education system and have such better outcomes, more reliable records and therefore a more informed body of knowledge. It just sounds like you recognized at some point that some school is shit but some other school is not shit. Don't know how you could have the former experience and so confidently trust the latter.
How do you reconcile Zinn with Schweikart & Allen? How do you reconcile the public record now being elucidated in the Foreign Relations of the United States releases? Or from James Bamford, revealing the extent to which public records are fabricated by bureaucracy and security agencies? What about the Wall Street Pusch? Or Secretary Forrestal?
I don't think we should exaggerate our ability to replace bad ideas or false claims with good and true ones. Just because we realize there are problems with our education doesn't mean that there is a superior education out there or that more established academics are privy to it.
"public history is outright wrong or blatantly omitting historical context." 65% of adults in the USA DO NOT HAVE A COLLEGE EDUCATION. Of the remaining 35%, only 7% have a BA in History. Of that 7%, 50% are below average in the subject. Now you know why.
There are very clearly two different arguments being presented in this episode.
Flint demanded definite proof of claims, which Graham cannot produce- because his claims are based on the overwhelming limited discoveries that have been made.
Fanciful speculation, yes- though we don’t call previous theories about archaeology “pseudoscientific”- they had their time and were proven wrong/correct.
Asking “what if” and keeping an open mind should not be demonized.
I would LOVE a collab with you and Milo "Miniminuteman" Rossi on Pseudohistory ,pseudoarcheology and the dangers thereof.
Hard disagree on the idea that academics are inherently unschooled in public speaking. Obviously the world of entertainment media and lay communication is different from the academic sphere, and that should be taught and kept in mind, but public speaking is core to any graduate education. Teaching is public speaking, lecturing is public speaking. Paper presentations and conference talks and lab meetings and thesis defenses are all public speaking. Unless you strike absolute gold with your research topic and/or you’re a generational talent in the field that can get by on the written word alone, your ability to succeed as a scholar is 100% tied to your public speaking chops
That's a good point. maybe I should have differentiated between "public speaking" and " media performance" which I regard as two different skills.
My counterpoint is that while I've had some professors who were good lecturers, I've also had some professors who were godawful lecturers to the point where I literally could not understand the words they were saying. There's not that much incentive for a professor to be a good public speaker in the grand scheme of things.
harder disagree. most teachers & professors are inherently boring ass unengaging mofos lacking in communication skills.
The worst part of all this is not the guy spouting more atlantis crap. The worst part is knowing joe rogan iq he probably ate it all up.
What is Joe Rogan’s IQ?
@@MrNickguy1 His iq point number is on the likes.
Got him
I, for one, hate these debates even existing. If you are an actual scientist in a field and you debate people like this (also see Bill Nye's "debate") you aren't changing enough minds to matter. All you're doing is given credence to insane ideas with no basis in reality. No one who denies reality is going to change their mind if reality waves in their face.
If Joe Rogan wanted to have a "real" "scientific debate" he should start a journal and accept peer reviews articles with opposing theories.
That would work in the age of pre-social media. Ignoring them doesn't work anymore.
Da sssecienencceeee.
Tell your de grasse tyson friend to go debate globe earth with eric dubay. Let's see how well your actor performs
I was a full on pseudo-archaeology pro for years.
I legitimately thought that there must be something deeper and it was just that I didn’t know anything about it.
I can credit 1 CZcamsr Dr.Miano of Age of Antiquity. Real history is way cooler anyway.
Edit: Also Ben G. Thomas is a great source for real archeology news.
As someone who once believed in Atlantis, and still knows a bunch of people who do, I disagree that most people who believe this garbage do so on the basis of what they thought was good evidence. People are just told this stuff as if it is fact. It's the same certainty they have about things like, "the first chakra is red." When you get to the point of asking, "What is the verifiable evidence for that claim," you are halfway out of these beliefs. Sadly, a lot of people never get that far.
I think it would be a mistake to refrain from calling racist ideology racist ideology. The assumption that indigenous people couldn't possibly have created the works they created is racist. Graham makes that assumption over and over again, whether or not he thinks of himself as a racist. Most racism isn't fully conscious, but that doesn't make it not racist.
That is a killer tie
I was waiting till the moment Grahams demeanor was brought up and it made me smile. I haven't seen the debate at all, but have seen him get really really really mad on his other jre episodes.
I love the posters in the background. Is that a Spanish CNT poster?
I'm a biologist and used to engage with a lot of creationists. This is all extremely familiar. Hell, I even see the same shit tactics used by populist and nationalist politicians all the time.
I honestly think most of it actually boils down to methods which are particularly effective on folks with a strong authoritarian follower personality traits/tendencies. Everyone has those tendencies, but not to the same degree. And an audience which is extremely loyal and trusts their "leader" over all other evidence... Well that is an extremely profitable audience to have (for either $ or power)
ok are you leftist or communist?
@@Luke-id8ql I'm not particularly left of right... I am pretty liberal on the liberal vs authoritarian axis though. Why do you ask?
@@travcollier to me it seems that graham hancoks theory's don't reinforce authoritarianism but mostly the side who is desperate to debunk his theory at all costs. Somehow they think having people entertain him is dangerous. it's all laughable. just remember to look in the mirror and ask the same questions about yourself.
@@Luke-id8ql It isn't about (intentionally at least) reinforcing authoritarianism. He is exploiting the same personality traits and tendencies. So do lots of preachers/religious figures.
I think I should tell you that my cousin is a history teacher, and he said that his students were having difficulty with the Civil War and Reconstruction in the classroom. I recommended your Checkmate Linconites playlist, in the hope that it'd help with communicating the points in a way that would be interesting. I also pointed out that you cite your sources, which might have added to your credibility.
Shout out to Toastmasters! I'd also recommend taking Improv classes to improve confidence in public speaking and live performance.
I can’t wait for the movie version: Flint Dibble and the Conman from Atlantis.
there's a major issue with the whole "Ice Age Advanced Civilization" concept. nobody ever actually defines just *what* qualifies as "Advanced". when most people think of "Advanced", they will tend to think about relatively high technology levels - industrial level thru to space age/information age (look at how they talk about it... "Atlantis"... it borders on the fantastical). for this particular topic, I don't think this definition works at all - if there was an "Advanced" civilization, it more than likely was no more advanced than Iron Age levels (more likely Bronze Age), and thus would be utterly incapable of surviving without major upheaval and knowledge loss in the face of the sea level rise during the melting of most of the glaciers 10k years ago... they wouldn't have seen it coming, much less have any idea of how to adapt to it in any way except by moving to higher ground.
and it's damn hard to find or investigate anything of archaeological interest when any potential evidence is buried under hundreds of feet of ocean water and sediment. human artifacts do not survive saltwater baths of even one thousand years well... it's difficult to imagine much of anything being recognizable at 10 thousand years or longer at depth.
This debate is giving me flashbacks to Bill Nye debating Ken Ham.
Also, as someone who was raised learning Young Earth Creationism as “Science” and an Anthropologist myself, I *hate* the term “Alternative Archaeology”. Just call it what it is: Pseudo Archaeology…especially since Graham Hancock’s background is in Sociology.
Its also extremely egregious to look to Graham’s when his whole outlook, career, claims, and fame are drawing exclusively from 19th Century sources (or older) with him giving little or no pushback on the context in which such theories were written. My Anthropology Theory undergrad class took a much more analytical and critical look at how theory was formed over time and I think Graham needs to familiarize himself with Franz Boas is all I’m saying…
pseudo archeology is also dishonest and wrong. Mainly because it's not consistently used. Read the book A New Human as one example. Destroying and stealing evidence because it doesn't fit their ideas by a major university should be labeled as pseudo archeology but it sure as shit isn't.
Flint Dibble is such a great name for an archaeologist that i can't believe he was born with it.
OK, so where's that hour-long CZcams documentary on wool merchants in 13th-century Edinburgh? That's exactly my fuckin jam someone please make it
I was under the impression that Atlantis was a story made up by Plato or a story he adapted to make a political point about the moral problems in his contemporary Athens.
Plato is a dog whistle for racism, apparently
I mean Plato does espouse a lot of ideas that would later be used to justify racism 🤷.
Anything any european has ever thought, said or did, ever, and forever into the future, is racist. Science proves it and if you disagree you're dumb. = this entire channel and comment section
Yes but it kinda merged with the Nazi propaganda that pre collapse Aryans gave all the lesser races their tech. Plato's Atlantis and Hancock's Atlantis are not the same place.
You and Milo Rossi need to share a drink and chat about this stuff.
We did. czcams.com/video/Pd03UQBBnrc/video.html
@@AtunSheiFilmsthought so.
@AtunSheiFilms sometimes me being not online enough is actually to my detriment.
From the thumbnail I thought this was a miniminuteman video, but this is even better. Would you ever collab with Milo?
I like Milo Rossi's shorts because he uses those to debunk arguments of pseudo historians, but he doesn't necessarily show their online name - he focuses mostly on the claim itself. Sometimes he does shit on the post's creator, but that's a temptation most humans cannot resist, whether or not it makes for an algorithm boost.
I have spent a career as a journalist and I am proud of my work. Please do not refer to Graham Hancock as a journalist. He is more properly called a fabulist.
I find it so ridiculous that calling out racism or white supremacy is considered so incredibly politically incorrect and offensive. It is like being completely outraged that somebody notifies you of the fact that you stepped in dog poo.
If we are being very cynical about it, it shows how much of a grip white supremacy still has on our culture, or else the response wouldn't be so aggressive. Somehow a lot of people from all walks of life, still feel some kind of association with that hierarchy, and see an attack on white supremacy as an attack on their place in the hierarchy. Why else would they feel such resistance against the idea that certain old ideas could be racist of nature? Why else be so dismissive of any concept about residual elements of old bad ideas in our institutions and ideologies?
Not saying everybody has to automatically agree, but if you disagree you should at least disagree based on the facts, not just close your eyes as hard as you can, stick your fingers in your ears, and scream that you are being attacked. Yet, the common response I have seen when it is about the white supremacy stuff, is saying that it was 'lazy' of Flint to go there, that it is a low blow, that it is irrelevant, etc. I have yet to see someone offer a point of contention based on the facts of the matter.
The facts are, plenty of old science, and old literature, is racist af. There is no denying that, there is no way to deny that the people who thought slavery, colonialism, and institutional racism was fine, who justified it, who implemented it, who say black on white that they do it for racist reasons, were not racists. It would be like claiming the nazis weren't antisemitic. The only way the nazis were able to be so openly hateful was precisely because there was such a long preceding history of widespread, institutionalized, racism and white supremacy. So using ideas and texts from that period, without reflecting on them as being inherent immoral, is unethical. Hancock uses texts from that period without mentioning the inherent immorality of their ideas, so that is unethical. Seems like a pretty solid line of reasoning if you ask me.
CEO of yapping
The problem constantly "calling out" racism and white supremacy is that most people do it just to shut down the argument, and it works. It's literally the go to for everyone on the left.
Believe in the right to own a gun? Racist.
Don't believe in abortion? Racist.
Don't think minimum wage should be so high that businesses have to shut down? Racist.
Hold ANY view whatsoever that could be considered right wing? Racist.
Go ahead and call it hyperbole, but I've seen it a thousand times.
Great video! As a young professional archeologist I have to say agree with pretty much everything your saying. I also have to say that Flint’s appearance on JRE has got to be the largest exposure I’ve seen for real archeology and modern archeological methods and I’m really hoping this spikes an interest in people looking for good information and supporting archeology as a field of study!
Hey Atun-Shei
Just wanted to comment here, I brought up before talking to you sometime about the current state of education and academic issues with Reconstruction, the Lost Cause, and memory of the Civil War in public universities, especially student awareness and how such topics are being taught (or not being taught) at the post-secondary school level. Drop me a line sometime on here or such- I have a PhD in History and specialize in memory and mythic memory history- aka, the ways we remember or misremember the past for our own current societal needs.
Thoughtful video. Would love to see you interact with Milo Rossi on this kind of thing.
To be fair Randal Carlson has really showed some incredible stuff... Graham is a super interesting guy.
Thanks for your work!