5 Controversial Theories about Ancient Civilizations
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 08. 2023
- Unveiling Ancient Mysteries: Debunking 5 Wild Theories about Lost Civilizations! Delve into controversial claims, from global floods to pyramid tech. Science separates fact from fiction. Watch now!
Biographics: / @biographics
Geographics: / @geographicstravel
Warographics: / @warographics643
MegaProjects: / @megaprojects9649
Into The Shadows: / intotheshadows
TopTenz: / toptenznet
Today I Found Out: / todayifoundout
Highlight History: / @highlighthistory
Business Blaze: / @brainblaze6526
Casual Criminalist: / thecasualcriminalist
Decoding the Unknown: / @decodingtheunknown2373
I find the distinction between 'advanced' and 'primitive' an interesting subject. To me, 'advanced' doesn't require aliens, computers, post industrial machines, time travelers, gods, or whatever. To me, it's a level of understanding and mastery. I do see evidence that ancient humans had a level of observation, understanding, and mastery, along with the determination and tenacity to take on projects that exceeded their lifetimes. This seems pretty advanced compared to our modern world, in my view.
A civilization requires a writing system. A society without a writing system is a culture. Without a writing system, you have no means of recording yourself or anything else. This is why writing systems are considered prerequisites to meet the criteria of a "civilization" - because otherwise you've left no records, only indefinitive clues.
I think it's safe to say that, in a strictly historical context, the delineation between advanced societies and primitive societies is a writing system. In terms of a practical, realistic distinction between the two, the standard will always be floating and derived relative to contemporary technologies.
Totally agree. It's seems that unless the previous civilizations made skyscrapers out of iron and glass or developed computers, they fail to meet our definition as advanced. The stone work alone found in some of the most ancient pottery, exceeds our current capabilities. The machine marks found on statues. machined holes whose diameter are accurate to .XXXX" is reason enough, to consider the fact that maybe its not that we haven't found advanced civilizations, but maybe its the measuring stick our archeologists use, is not advanced enough to see it.
@@yayhandles It's a good point. Writing is definitely a huge milestone for any developing civilization. I am comfortable accepting alternatives to the written word as long as they can reliably pass on their knowledge to each subsequent generation. But writing is surely superior at any large scale.
@@Adam13Chalmers Except that's exactly the thing: you *CAN'T* reliably pass your knowledge of past events by oral tradition. This is why The Illiad is not considered even remotely historically accurate, even though we know today that The Trojan War really happened - it was written hundreds of years after the fact. Imagine playing a multi-hundred year game of telephone with many thousands of people - the more time that passes, the less valid it becomes as a method of recording events.
But then what are they "advanced" in comparison to? Aside from the usage for modern and recent technology, the definition of advanced as an adverb is "far on or ahead in development or progress." To say these ancient cultures were advanced would be to say that they were further developed than others. There needs to be a standard for comparison, a group for them to be ahead of. But realistically, unless you want to compare them to even more ancient people, they were really only more advanced than what people believe their capabilities were. If they were using the same tools, the same technology as the other cultures of the era, then they weren't more developed, they weren't more advanced. They were the standard. It's just modern misconceptions setting the bar lower that we can compare them to and say they were more advanced. If you're expecting the ancient Egyptians to be pushing massive stones through the sand with nothing but their bare hands, lifting them up to the top of the pyramids, then yeah, the fact that they used logs to slide the stones over the sand more easily and pulled them up slopes instead of lifting them straight up means they were more advanced. But if you know they knew basic physics and simple machines like wheels and pulleys and ramps, then... Well, what they did was just standard for their knowledge.
But you are right that we typically think of advanced and primitive in comparison to modern technology. And that's part of what skews people's viewpoints to say that the ancient Egyptians must have been highly advanced to build the pyramids. Their development was standard for the era, most people just don't realize what the standard actually was.
I feel the disdain towards Graham Hancock and Robert Schoch in this video. I get Simon not wanting to say their names, but I will.
They have instilled curiosity in new generations. So it a W either way. People will find competent sources if their interest is strong.
Cause they're idiots
Yea it’s disappointing pointing to say the least.
Also don’t forget Randal Carlson
Who?
@@BVonBuescher That bogus geologist.
As someone that has a degree in geology, I've read the peer reviewed articles claiming the erosion on the sphinx does not match the archeologically accepted age. I actually agree with their findings, but they didn't suggest the sphinx was 15K years old. Göbekli Tepe is 10K or 11K years old, maybe even a bit older. The technology was around at the time to carve into limestone, why couldn't the people living in Egypt at the time have carved something in the limestone? Not aliens or Atlantis just normal neolithic people.
This
Well said Mate
The most realistic theory I read, says like most believe the rock of the Sphinx was been exposed for many thousands of years before it was carved by the ancient Egyptians. Hence the discrepancies over its age due to weathering. That due to natural weathering looked like some type of animal or God to local herders of Nile River valley, before classic Egyptian civilization was founded. That after a while these local pre-classical tribes did the first simple carvings of the rock that would become the Sphinx. Meaning humans have been modify the rock the Sphinx was made of for possibly thousands of years for before the pyramids. This suggests that ancient Egyptians have working stone in some fashion for thousands before pyramids and their other great works. Now that means work on stone of the Sphinx has been happening for at most 6,000 years and not 10 or 15 as some suggest. But again that just means the rock has been worked, the Sphinx we know today is still 3 to 4 thousand years old. So that makes their later creations like the pyramids inevitable, as no other human group had such continuous history of stone working as the ancient Egyptians and their ancestors. So such creations were not the mammoth and unheard of task they would be later groups. No Aliens or Atlanteans required, it sorta makes the ancient Egyptians kinda boring as they are famous for doing what they have always been doing.
@@TK199999 I agree with what you said for the most part, but the Egyptians did not build the pyramids, they themselves denied it and said it predated their people. Not saying it was aliens but the Egyptians were a lot more creative with their art work, the pyramids are far too bland to match their culture!!
@@ConfusedBoatLake-on5xq, Apparently when the Spaniards invaded South America, they made the same claim. They were already there when they migrated down.
I've heard that the Sphynx was originally a lion, but a pharoah wanted it to bear his face. That theory also explains the odd size of the head.
Ive read it originally had a jackal head but was recarved for the same reason.
And his explanation sucksf or the disproportion between the head and the body, nothing would have prevented them from carving more rocks for the body, especially when egyptian statues were know for their incredible proportions, perfect symetry and precisions. that might be the worst explanation i've heard so far.
@nicolasgamant7389
We don't actually know the story of how it was made is the issue.
If they had the head already and the body was a buried rock formation in the sand, maybe there was just not that much of a budget to carve up the whole thing to make it proportional, so they just shaped it with brick and clay on the *relative* quick to do something with that big head on a rock they had from a previous dynasty.
The reasoning is likely both more complicated and more pragmatic than we imagine because the thing was dug up several times over the millennia and likely changed on the occasion. So we do not actually know how much was done in how many steps or why. Maybe the head was re-carved, maybe the rock was just that shape and size.
@@MrHodoAstartes Sure, the guys who built the pyramids didn't have enough budget to carve the rest of the body 🤣of course
@@nicolasgamant7389the guys who build the pyramids famously had multiple architectural failures lol, bros never heard of the bent pyramid or the giant obelisk
People tend to forget that ancient humans were just as intelligent as modern humans, but with a different level of technology and resources at their disposal.
And let's not forget that since it took way longer until new tools and production methods became available (compared to modern times), people had generations to perfect the tools they had and figure out how to use them as effectively as possible.
"but with a different level of technology and resources at their disposal.". Go have a look at the UnchartedX Vase story, and then look at the box at Saqqara. Then ask yourself. What technology was needed to produce those things.
@@nathanielacton3768 Just looked at it, it's not impossible for the time and if you think we can't do it then you are a clown.
@@nathanielacton3768 The BOXES at Saqqara - there are 24 of them, made out of Aswan granite which is 7 Mohs, a steel nail is 6.5 Mohs. Could we make them today? Of course yes - could we make it only using hand tools made out of bronze...
@@richardwickens2923 Exactly Richard and thanks for the correct to 24 boxes. The key point I'd like people to follow up on however is the in places mirror flat surfaces. Actually, they are better than mirror flat. A mirror will be between 30-200 microns of deviations. Many of the flat surface from the megalithic period comes in between 1-2 microns.
We got in to space with less technological capability than this. Again, we could get in to space *without* needing this level of capability, yet here these builders were just splashing 1 micron surfaces here and there on half finished boxes.
The situation is even less believable than this. We have found these super flat surfaces in Saqqara and Cusco.
To me, this stands as a thorn in the side of archeology. Any narrative you wish to weave of copper tools needs on include how you get precision manufacturing that beats the 1960's in outcomes.
To me, these flat surfaces are THE most important historical artifacts on the entire planet as they point to a past that's nothing like what we thought it was.
Boncuklu Tarla is over 1000 years older and then Göbekli Tepe (a near by site) and much, much bigger. Like only 10% uncovered, if you want your mind blown look at Tarla as well as other adjacent sites. I wouldnt be shocked if by say 30 years from now - those interlocking sites/communities are referred to as our first known civilization.
I'm sure Simon will make a video then about how stupid people are for ever thinking it was more recent. 🙄
I wouldn't be surprised if we find more settlements of that general age range, but settlements aren't civilizations. There's some debate over what the definition should be, but Sumer (generally referred to as the first civilization) is far more recent than a fair handful of settlements, including unarguable towns like Catalhoyuk. The main difference being political organization as I understand it.
@@danelynch7171and undoubtedly he will present the episode with the absolute maximum most amount of sarcasm in his voice and presentation that is conceivabley possible, and do you know what really knocks my noggin,, I'll probably watch it when he does 😁😁👍
I think it's probable that a good portion of the ancient advanced civilisations are submerged beneath the Pacific Ocean and possibly the Atlantic as well, and the enormous unexplainable megaliths in South America and around the world are the final lonely remaining pieces of a time before history in which Mankind travelled the world and created mind blowing structures of incredible size and with construction methods and results that still couldn't be replicated to this day!
The evidence for an advanced civilization is right there in their faces, okay not under the sea as far as we know so far but it's everywhere else including Gobekli tepe and Boncuklu Tarla but nope, civilization started around 6 thousand years ago around the fertile crescent and don't you dare suggest otherwise.
Where is that?😊
When I studies archaelogoy at OSU 2014-15. We were taught that the majority of achaelogists were coming around to the idea that the sphinx was possibly carved as a lion approximately 10,000 years ago, and the head was recarved to it's current likeness of khafre in approximately 2500 BCE.
They call it Egyptology, because it's not really history or archeology, it's speculation that doesn't really qualify as science. There is nonsensical dogma that goes all the way back to ancient Greek historians. It's so hard to change the mind of an Egyptologist, they literally still believe things from when we didn't have the steam engine. Some of the most amazing works of sculpture in human history, and they think they banged two rocks together to make them. I can't take them seriously.
We k ow that it was. There's documentation that - when they found it, buried in sand with its head sticking out and ruined. He ordered it cleared and then the head was redone.
His last line proves advancement happens quickly, and our own experience shows that it can devolve just as quickly.
Calling Göbekli Tepe "the oldest structure in history" is just wrong. It depends on your definition of structure of course but Göbekli Tepe is not even the oldest place in the area. Boncuklu Tarla for instance have been dated to about 1000 years older and there are several places with the last-name "Tepe" that is also older. That is still not the oldest though. You have for instance Kostenki 11 that is a 25 000 years old mega structure built out of mammoth bones.
But the really oldest known man made structure is way older and not even made by Homo Sapiens, it is a weird Neanderthal structure inside a cave that is 173 000 years old. It is built out of pieces of stalagmites and stalactites and we have no clue of it's purpose but it is pretty deep inside the cave so it must have been a bother to build it.
We have no clue about when people started building wooden structures, I would assume those are older then stone structures since it is an easier material to work with and it is impossible to say when that practice started but I am very sure it is older then Göbekli Tepe at least. Yeah, there is no proof for that however so we can't say for certain wooden structures are older but it is something we should consider.
Do you know what the Neanderthal structure is called? I’ve never heard of that.
@@FoosNotesI found this article in The Guardian where they talk about the discovery.
*"Neanderthals built mysterious cave structures 175,000 years ago"*
I hope this helps 🙂❤️
@@sandyjamison5929 thanks 👍
I don't know if you can really consider a ring of rocks a "structure", more like a small shrine, or a few of them got bored and made a circle. And the mammoth bone thing was basically a tent. You are absolutely correct about Gobekli Tepe though. Just remember, he doesn't write or research this stuff, he just reads it. He's just a mouthpiece haha
I'm more impressed with Neanderthal art than the stalagmite circle. I mean they were even making jewelry! Just wanting to clothe and decorate yourself is a huge step away from the "dumb caveman" story the bulk of us grew up with. I think what Simon is referring too in this video is more about the "theories" of ancient advanced civilizations that compare to modern day and beyond. So yes "advanced" means a vastly different thing depending on how you look at it, but there's no evidence to suggest any civilization before our own used electricity, internal combustion engines, flying saucers, etc. Though many people (with a platform!) out there are telling people exactly that. I'm not saying it's impossible that some of that may have happened at some point, but right now there is no evidence to support it, certainly nothing to empower anyone to scream about it like it's a fact. That crap is so annoying.
@@timsawyer9231 A tent is a structure.
"People of the past were clever, and they were capable and they didn't need ancient Atlantians or aliens to help with their progress anymore than us modern humans did when men landed on the moon who's parents went to work on horseback." - Simon Whistler
All these conspiracy theorists are really jumping through hoops out here. They either assume that ancient people were less intelligent then we are now which is obviously not true at all, or they assume that all of academia is lying to them lol. It amazes me how they can be so terrible at critical thinking
"You're a day-walker Blade" - Also Simon Whistler
@tturi2 "you're a wizard, harry" ... pretty sure that too was Simon Says
How smart? Smart enough to be considered an advanced ancient civilisation?
Anyone who has worked with stone knows these people didn't make these works of art with hammers and chisels 😒
That peer-review thing only works when you get someone who disagrees and tries to tear up your opinion. Religion is literally peer review that may not have worked out so well.
If discoveries like Gobekli Tepi are pushing back the timeline for human civilization, then that pushes back the end of that forgotten civilization. Younger Dryas just finished the job completely. Who says that the high civilization lasted until an event of nature took them out? They could have epically knocked themselves off before then, and YD just wiped away those last prints in the sand. And possibly literally, as there are hundreds of human cities that are underwater all over the globe.
Actually Gopekli Tepe is dated to be at least 11 000 years old.
did you notice the "scoop" marks on the tops of the pillars in G.T.?
I'm just playing a video about that LOL
That is what the video says at 2:32..
Karhan Tepe (i could be spelling that wrong) is even older - its also in Turkey. Not much about it is out there, but miniminuteman here on CZcams just did a video from when he visited it
@@earlgrey4976No one cares about your bootlicking. the lad is right, and there may be an older site in turkey.
There are massive mounds built by humans in North America. The civilisation is literally called the Mound Builders or Missippian or something similar. The location though is the Southeastern US (mostly). However the use of soil instead of rock makes it more difficult to recognize. Meanwhile pyramids in Mexico were confused as natural hills, and there's even a Spanish church built on top of a Pyramid.
Thing is we know they were man made and not natural because there’s evidence for them being man made.
The church was built on top before it became a "mound". It was the disgusting religious practice of destroying the remnants of the rich culture. We've lost so much because of that group of trash people.
Most of the mounds are found here in the northern US following the Mississippi tributaries but mounds are/were found all up & down the eastern US. They were incredibly numerous. They say at least 90% (likely more) are gone now, having been dug out & flattened mainly by the curious or by farmers who needed the land for their crops.
If you are interested in prehistoric North American megalithic structures I highly recommend looking into the cairns, effigies, stone walls, etc... but most importantly the ancient stone chambers here in the north east. They rarely receive attention & are being destroyed due to construction. Academics had falsely attributed them to early settlers' root cellars many decades ago despite all evidence to the contrary. These include no design match in the settlers' countries of origins, use of multi ton megalithic stones as lintels, chamber alignments with associated lightbox effects on sunrise/sunset on either solstice or equinox depending on the chamber & more. It's a major aspect of our collective history being intentionally ignored IMO.
The one pictured in the video is Monks Mound in Cahokia (just across the river from St Louis)
There's a snake mound in Georgia. A pyramid near New Orleans and towers and structure in South Florida. Dude is stupid.
The problem with a rising sea level (which ended up to be over 100 meters in some areas), is that your skilled artisans, who have generations of built-up infrastructure at their current locations, have to pick up, move and rebuild. On top of that, the older artisans with much of the knowledge still being in the process of being handed down (a lifetime process), are more likely to die along the way, either by disease or by attacks of rival cities/tribes. So with each move, infrastructure and knowledge was lost. Often by the several generations needed to rebuild the infrastructure (remember - you have to earn a living and gather resources for the reconstruction) were completed, you had to move again, either from rising sea levels or from attacks by other groups wanting your new, less defended (decent city walls can take generations to build) location. Human civilization tends to congregate along waterways, and often in the fertile lush coastlands where transport by boat is much more efficient and less costly than by land.
So over time, many of these once "advanced" groups lost their technology base and knowledge, and had to relearn how to do things, while maintaining in their oral and written traditions the memory of the past... Often, as they were forced out of the best living areas, their technology dropped back to "hunter/gatherer", if they did not have people with farming or shepherding skills in their group. A similar case in the Dark Ages about 536 AD, when due to the darkening of the sun for a decade caused the collapse of many cities, towns and farming became impossible in the northern climes. For over a decade, people in northern Europe were forced to become hunter/gatherers. And much knowledge, skills and techniques were lost and had to be relearned after the crops could grow once more.
Simon, advanced means in this case building techniques not super computers, if there was a catastrophic event, see the geology in America and the salt deposits around the Richat structure, the survivors may not have had the stone mason knowledge to build complex structures as before. see the walls in Peru that are so well put together that you cant get paper into, however the more 'advanced' later humans built shitty stone walls on top as a repair method.
All good points mentioned here; however, let us not forget the sage advice of world renowned Carl Sagan: Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence. So many now accepted theories were once scoffed at, like the theory of sunspots once argued as being birds or blowing leaves in front of Therese’s one at the time of a photograph of the sun
Sun spotd are an observable fact. Let us not assume, let us present evidence and show facts otherwise an knvisible pink dragon lives in your garage
I always say that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence unless you’re drafting a Motion for Summary Judgment and have depositions and such evidence.
Boncuklu Tarla, also in Turkey, discovered in 2019, is about 1000 years older than Gobekli Tepe.
Two word's , oop artifact's, some million's of year's old thousand's found and ignored because they don't fit " THE SCIENCE "
@@robot336interesting, do you have any good link where I can read about this?
@@sfbnairb I'll give you one , then you can do the work like everyone else has to to get around the science gate keeper's - btw archaeology is not strictly science , YT this "2-Million-Year-Old Doll" Dismissed By Academia?
and consider that out of the thousand's of oop art's discovered only one has to be real to bring down the accepted " SCIENCE "
@@robot336 thanks, and btw I'm not doubting you I just find it interesting.
@@sfbnairb COAST TO COAST AM Homo Naledi: Unveiling Ancient Hominin Discoveries Beyond Conventional Timelines
Simon's producers have discovered that winding up conspiracy theorists is a youtube goldmine.
I get a kick out of these comments. As soon as you start spitting truth and logical ideas people start getting upset. This channel is not based on wishy washy thinking but concrete evidence.
Check out this comment: Is this logical? "...there's no evidence that the evidence they existed was lost in a giant flood." 2:45 Perhaps the evidence of the evidence they existed was actually lost in a giant flood. The absence of any evidence is a ridiculous assumption based on bias. You cannot debunk something by saying there is no evidence unless you are prepared to look for the evidence and thoroughly prove it is not there, and that is a the point Graham Hancock keeps repeating. I don't care either way. However, if you refuse to look through the telescope as the cardinals did with Galileo you will never see reality. The Egyptologists who hate Hancock challenged him to show any other comparable artifact to the Sphinx built around the time Hancock claimed - just after the . Take a break for a decade or two and up pops Göbekli Tepe. Mainstream archeologists wasted no time in trying to dismiss any claims other than their own theories. Academics are so amusing.
The reason that the Grand Canyon "resembles" that electrical discharge pattern is because the physics of finding a path across resistance (think hard/soft rocks) works the same.
Exactly. Water and electricity both follow paths of least resistance
In your view, that would mean that soft rock was deposited in a Lichtenberg figure/pattern by electrical discharge, surrounded by hard rock, and the soft rock was later eroded away by water.
@@silvergreylion no, that's the exact opposite of what they mean. When high voltage electricity passes through a bit of wood and leaves a Lichtenberg pattern, it isn't because there was already a Lichtenberg pattern in the wood of the tree for the electricity to follow. The electricity just found its way through the wood in the most efficient way available to it. Just like when water flows over a flat landscape it also finds the most efficient way available to it too. The outcome looks very similar, because the mathematics is the same
@@WhichDoctor1 Sorry, but that's not how things work. The most efficient way would be a completely straight channel, and that's never the case.
Also, electric discharges happen very fast, and water takes thousands of years, or more, to carve out channels in rock.
They are extremely different processes.
In soft landscapes, rivers always eventually become a snaky S-pattern (nature's way of taking a longer route, keeping water in the landscape for as long as possible), very different from a Lichtenberg pattern, but electric discharges still create them in soft landscapes.
In a very flat landscape of rock of all the same hardness, water first cuts a mostly straight, slightly wavy channel, then over time it becomes a bit more wavy.
Lichtenberg patterns are _purely_ a hallmark of electric discharges.
@@silvergreylionA straight line would be logical if the ground was a homogenous material, which it isn't. And, the pattern is not a Lichtenberg pattern, it just resembles one.
I'm having a hard time reconciling what you said about a flood destroying a civilization with your other video on doggerland. I'm not saying there was an agent civilization, but it does seem that there is evidence that there has been huge catastrophic and quick flooding
Doggerland were normal villages and farmland as the surrounding areas. Not an advanced civilization.
@@duudsuufd I'm not saying that, I'm saying it was an entire region that was washed away. So, the argument that an advanced civilization didn't occupy an area next flooding want a thing is bullshit.
I do agree the was no civilization, just based on that fact there would absolutely be evidence. What I'm saying is, using the tested of flooding is a flawed way to convince people.
@@duudsuufd Rungholt was a rich city. Dunwich was the capital of the Kingdom of the East Angles, but the harbour and most of the town have since disappeared due to coastal erosion. Vineta on the Baltic Sea is a lost city. This did not happen once, but time and again in many places, and not just to villages but to huge cities and entire civilizations.
Localized flooding does and has happened. It has even sunken islands or low-lying regions, like Doggerland.
However, that doesn't support a global flood, as some propose. Nor does a flood destroy all evidence of a civilization. Even if the civilization lived entirely in a place that was flooded, there are still remains to be found under water. To assume that there was an advanced civilization that could travel the globe, but it was wiped out by a localized phenomenon so utterly that there is no evidence of it left is a bit fantastical.
I have read several papers that discuss the theory that the global flood myths came about as a result of the glacial dams breaking at the end of the ice age, coupled with the rising ocean levels. These dam breaks were taking place around the world in pretty much every location where glaciers intruded, then melted in such a way that the caused large localized flooding in several regions where early humans were living. These floods, along with the rising oceans, caused many early humans to relocate and spread their stories, which is why you see them in cultures around the world that can trace their lineage to a location that would have been impacted by either a glacial dam break or a rising ocean. I have no doubt there are still a number of settlements or even lost civilizations that may have been washed away or buried under the rising ocean levels, but these are NOT some crazy advanced societies that the conspiracy nutters believe in. They were just regular groups of people that were forced to relocate because of environmental changes.
Or, you know.
Most human settlements, especially the kinds that turn into major influential civilizations, get built beside water because humans need water to not die, and most large sources of water will flood on occasion.
Throw in some good old human exaggerating for clout, and voila, global flood.
Especially since "the entire world" to an ancient civilization covered an area comparable to a modern small country or large province/territory/state.
@@FNLNFNLNRandal Carlson has detailed geological evidence of massive flooding in North America likely caused by melt water coming off the huge glacier that existed there around the end of the last ice age. We definitely do not have enough evidence to dismiss the theory of a great flood.
Humans have an amazing capacity to be wrong about things. We should not be annoyed, or feel threatened by new hypotheses, we should be open to them and factor them into our investigations. It's more fun that way too. 😉
Why do people take the most outlandish theory posited about ancient civilizations and then lump EVERYTHING into that theory. Only a FEW people (nutters) believe they were "super advanced" what most people believe is that they were simply more advanced than we give them credit for. Just looking at some of the structures shows a level of skill we would have trouble matching today. The Saqqara boxes could not have been created with a bronze chisel and a lot of sweat. I find when someone just reaches for the most outlandish theory and then lumps everything into the same box with that theory they are simply manufacturing a reason to not look at ANY of the theories and stick their head in the sand.
The whole "advanced civilization" label is used as a strawman to dismiss the idea of any civilization existing at the time. Advanced doesn't need to mean flying around and using electricity or steel. A Bronze Age level culture at that time would've been amazing and could have seeded later civilizations, influencing their legends. The humans that existed 10, 50, 100 thousand years ago were just as smart as us. Their brains and bodies were just like ours. The idea that various groups may have risen and fallen over that time is not that weird. The idea that nothing happened anywhere for over a hundred thousand years and then BAM! Egypt, Sumer, Indus, China, all at once, seems like the weird one.
@@Pushing_PixelsExactly, even Romans would be called advanced by this definition since they had a type of cement which wasn't deconstructed until last year. It is possible for a civilization to be agriculturally and architecturally advanced than us. It's the hubris of people like Simon to think that can't exist.
Point 3
As per experts, Gunung Padang is the world's oldest pyramidal structure and was built atop an extinct volcano before civilisations existed and humans delved into agriculture. As per new data found by scientists in Indonesia, its interior hides large open chambers which contain many unknown elements.
People need to start understanding just how powerful and capable a collective group of humans actually is. We're super intelligent. If we all shared a common goal and worked for it, you'd be stunned how much would become possible.
And yet Bozo Johnson and Lizard Truss were both elected PM. So not THAT intelligent.
Especially because the world is a dangerous place. Before modern medicine you had to be in a group to survive. It's why we're programmed to feel lonely and want to be around a group of people. Saftey in numbers.
@@HieronymousCheese We've become less intelligent as a species in some regards, thanks to media and propaganda.
@@HieronymousCheese Yep, the Yanks voted in Biden & Trump, Scotland voted in a Crook and the labour party voted in a massive racist. Doesn't exactly fill you with optimism about the future does it.
No. An inteligent leader with enough people behind him or her is a powerfull thing. People as a whole are dumb. We are animals that need to be sheperd. Like a herd. Unfortunatly.
I like the bit where they show ancient spacecraft around the pyramids in their present, ruined state. Like, it's easier for them to picture alien spacecraft than to imagine the pyramids with their original, smooth, shiny and white surface!
Probably created by AI
It's funny that they hadn't been in that state even for the founding of Rome, let alone Egypt falling under Roman influence.
Even funnier that what historically was always described as a static past that spanned into mythology because oral histories make fact into song into legend into myth. This seemingly endless past with little change can in many ways be reconstructed through modern methods into a long, unimaginably complex line of historical events and processes that push the nostalgic notions of "simpler times" and "ancient tradition" out of the timeline, replacing them with eternally fast-paced changes in the lives of people who could not hold on to the volume of events by writing and compiling data.
But every year, every day things changed. Always. A new chief in the tribe, a bad harvest, a new rival group, a flood, a strange animal, a plague, internal tensions etc.
There was never a quiet life. Just different priorities and children not understanding what's going on, so adults with responsibilities always remember that they didn't have to worry about the roof leaking or going to war when they were five, giving the suggestions that life's issues somehow intensified from "before". But no. As the complaints of crotchety old farts through millennia and cultures show: The youth always arrogantly talked back, the wives always had too many demands, the bosses always had the temerity to want you to work and the servants/slaves/workers were always lazy.
I like to think that the pyramids had been on the Egyptian landscape since time immemorial. They were as much a mystery to the ancient Egyptians as they are to us today.
Consider the amount of work and effort that went into building these shapes. Shapes that dominate their horizon unlike any other object in their reality and yet the pyramid shape itself seems to have no meaning or cultural significance to the Egyptians of our textbooks. Where is the pyramid in their carvings and hieroglyphs? Where does the pyramid shape fit into their rich culture and religious beliefs? What is the significance of this shape to the ancient Egyptians?
It doesn't have one because it doesn't belong to them.
@@Lethgar_Smith "Where does the pyramid shape fit into their rich culture and religious beliefs?"
The Egyptians had a symmetrical step sided hill as one of their hieroglyphics. It depicts Benben, or the primordial mound, said in Egyptian religion to be the first bit of earth to rise above the primordial waters of chaos at the dawn of time at the instigation of Atum a ancient creator god. There was also a small pyramidal stone called the Benben stone in the temple of Ra at Heliopolis which was said to be the tip of that very primordial mound. Which they believed was the starting point of creation and symbolised the imposition of order, or Maat, on the unformed universe. The pursued of Maat (which symbolised truth, balance, order, harmony, law, morality, and justice) over chaos underpinned pretty much every aspect of their religion and culture. So this symmetrical pyramidal shape was kind of a little bit funder mental to their entire understanding of their world.
It isn't as if the original appearance of the pyramids hasn't been known for a long time. I've known about the polished white limestone covering and gold caps since I was 8 or 9, over 60 years ago.
“Advanced” is in reference to hunter gatherers not spaceships. Ancient humans were fitter, stronger and smarter than the average person today, so I can easily imagine them being capable of building, farming, animal husbandry, etc
That is an assumption. They might have been fitter on average than the couch potatoes we have today because they actually had to go find food, beat it over the head and then cook it. But stronger? Smarter? They were definitely shorter, their diet was less varied so they didn't get all the nutrients we get today, that could not have been good for brain development. Romans used lead cooking pots and water piping, I doubt the average Roman child/adult was very bright as a result. As Simon often says, the past was the worst.
@@richardwickens2923 So chimpanzees in captivity have more developed brains than those in the wild because we give them a modern Western diet?
I think thousands of years in the future people will look back at these videos like we look back at the ancient scrolls of our ancestors. They will see Simon in so many different videos and say he must have been an alien to do so many great videos on so many channels.
I think it's highly likely that we haven't discovered the true oldest civilization out there yet, and it's highly possible that they were more advanced than would be expected, but what I wish people understood is that this doesn't mean they had electricity or spaceships or whatever. The only reason people believe these fringe theories is because they want them to be true, however ludicrous that might be.
Well scientists have found that in mummies from egypt there are chemicals from plants that didnt exist in africa or europe and only existed in south american. There is a ton of things we dont know about history yet. To claim we know everything is stupid. We have also recently found out there are more tunnels and hidden rooms inside the great pyramid no one had a clue that were there before. They are closed off with no access.
Not everyone thinks they had spaceships or could walk through walls, that's just the odd nutter, the same type of people who have left over alien probes - it's used as an excuse to dismiss EVERYTHING that doesn't fit the official narrative. Most people simply think that there is something wrong with the official narrative. That there is evidence that previous civilizations were more advanced than bronze tool workers with a lot of patience. What I don't understand is why people find it so hard to believe that there might have been a societal collapse and we lost technology. We lost the art of making Roman concrete (although apparently we finally figured it out) there are other things we have lost the art of making, which we freely admit, but somehow if you say this probably happened before a couple thousand years ago ... "OMG ALIENS!"
The Egyptians used electroplated pottery to pay roman taxes, which required the use of electricity produced using acid from grape juice and brass and copper. By the time the Romans realised what was happening, the imperium had made back its losses by selling on the "gold" pots to the public so the practice continued. Whether the Egyptians used electricity for any other purposes is yet to be determined, but they did know how to use it to force a chemical process to occur when needed. As to the efforts made to create massive structures, the number of skills lost to humankind as a result of the adoption of new technologies, disasters, plagues and need is unguessable. What workers could do a century ago with less sophisticated equipment than we have today is only known about because some of their products are considered to be of value. We can make knock-off copies using all kinds of tech, but there are very few people out there who can replicate the original process. In a few decades, those skills will be lost completely, but the evidence of their abilities will remain.
Setting aside all the plausible but undeniably unproven theories about some level of technology we would recognize as advanced in ancient civilizations, the main agreement and most reasonable evidence proposed by people like Graham Hancock, John Anthony West, Robert Shoch, Robert Deval, Randall Carlson, and many others like the esteemed professors that authored Hamlet's Mill decades ago; the evidence most undeniable is that of ancient megalithic architecture, 10,000+ years of weathering and erosion on said megaliths, implications of advanced astronomy, and a deep understanding of mathematics. I can't cover every point mentioned, but trust me there have been many books written on this subject, feigning ignorance and incredulity doesn't work if you can't even learn about the topic at hand, instead of straw man dismissive arguments. Just like saying, "alien life in the universe is a silly idea, because some people think they were abducted and implanted with tracking devices". Serious people aren't arguing that, just like serious people don't think lizard people had some technological civilization before humans, or ancient people were helped along by aliens, that's not what the discussion is about.
Indeed there could very well be some level of civilization yet discovered that predates the oldest currently known. The odds of them being past copper age technology seems very low though.
The water erosion of the sphinx has been independently published and verified as being caused by long periods of heavy rainfall by several geologists. I note you dont show the enclosure where this is obvious. There are deeply cut gullies surrounding the entire enclosure. You think water vapor did that?
Why isn't there the same erosion on all of the enclosure walls or the Sphinx temple that is supposed to be the same age as the Sphinx? There are at least 3 other theories that are very technical geological explanations. This is not a settled fact just yet
The erosion is not uniform because rain does not fall down in perfect vertical downfalls. It's blown in by wind. The ground is not completely level and water will rush in unevenly at different point. My point is that this is a real working credible theory that is very troubling to some people because it disrupts alot of foundational time lines. The counter theories like morning dew, water vapor IMO are very hard to take seriously. @@jellyrollthunder3625
@@jellyrollthunder3625 No one is saying it is, what they are saying is we need to take a closer look... with an open mind. But when people throw the baby out with the bathwater because of a few outlandish claims by the more "vibrant" scholars it does not help.
@@richardwickens2923 I'm only addressing one outlandish claim and that is the central premise to the entire alternative historical body of claims, particularly that there was an advanced civilization in the ice age, more advanced than the Egyptians, that was supposedly completely removed from the archaeological, agricultural, and genetic record by some unspecified "cataclysm" during the younger-dryas period. I don't think anyone is arguing that humanity wasn't more advanced than we once thought them to be, particularly regarding the Tas Tepeller sites of Anatolia dating from around the younger dryas. But this entire discussion is related to this lost, global civilization from the last ice age. THAT is the outrageous claim here. Please tell me what you're referring to if that isn't it.
@@richardwickens2923 oh my mistake, I got this comment mixed up with the lost ice age civilization discussion. I think we're campaigning for the same thing. Almost all you hear about are the Shochian claims about the Sphinx's age while we have numerous other explanations which better explain the specific erosion patterns than Mesolithic precipitation. The fact that the erosion pattern isn't ubiquitous is a pretty damning piece of counter-evidence to Shoch's claims. I'm on guard when it comes to these claims that always seem to want to retroactively redate everything back to the same exact, fairly sensational younger-dryas timeline. When you notice a pattern of a group that always works backwards from their same conclusion, it's difficult not to begin dismissing their pseudo-scientific practices out of hand.
Modern construction is a relatively small group of people spending 8 hours a day on a project split up amongst many trades and the whole project being governed by cost. With that outlook it seems impossible to create these structures. Ancient cultures had ridiculous amounts of man power, worked long days and often times had no wages to speak of. If we took a major city's entire population and set them all to task on a singular project without time or financial constraints we could create amazing things beyond most people's imagination.
Yep go to burning man see what creators can do in less than a year to prep.!I built a seven story light house peice by peice in a month and a half.with a helper .
I would love an episode about the concept of evolutionary paradigms, aka telescopic evolution. TLDR: Life doesn't just adapt to survival, it also adapts to the process of adaption by creating independently evolving systems that help drive biological selection.
It also adapts to the adaption of the process of adaption.
Stop! Are you saying that people make up s#$'t to Just sell books?
WHY??
Because...MONEY! :D
0:45 - Chapter 1 - Ancient apocalyspe by massive flood
4:10 - Chapter 2 - Melted buildings theory
7:30 - Chapter 3 - Age of the sphinx
11:10 - Chapter 4 - Creationist foot prints
13:55 - Chapter 5 - Lost advanced technology
The question i have always had about the Sphinx is if it was buried for most of its time how did it weather so much.
It was made 13k years ago. The water weathering could only have been done by substantial rainfall, and that would have had to been when Egypt was a rainforest 13k years ago. A geologist from Boston University already wrote several papers on this. His name is Robert Schoch.
Remember: the discoverer of Troy was a conspiracy theorist. Then he found it, and the experts ate their hats. "Experts" are just people who want you to do what they say
Theorists:
Based on countless shared folk stories and religions about a global cataclysm that roughly coincides with a impact event around the same time, we suggest that an ancient civilization(no more advanced than Rome) that possibly had global trade and contact, was wiped out and had to restart civilization after a period of hunting and gathering for survival.
Everyone else:
LULz theY tHink AliEns deStroYedd a sci-fi futUrisTic plAnet!!!
Puma Punku is a place I'd love to get your take on. No, seriously, you may be surprised.
Towards the end there, Simon mentioned, we know the method for ancient stone working down to very tight tolerances. Does anyone know where there is a study or video on this? Ben from uncharted X I take as a very well-meaning, rational and truthful person and would of thought he would know about this is it was available.
it's the jars that would be a good place to start. if there's the evidence of how they did it , please explain to the rest of us. then the giant granite boxes in small corridors. how'd you get the ammout of people in there to move them ?
Simon lost it here. Such shame.
I lost a lot of respect for Simon over this. For someone claiming to research things, he has dropped the ball badly here... Watch UnchartedX episodes on ANY of this and then explain how you can still parrot the BS you scripted for this video... GET YOUR SHIT TOGETHER SIMON. I truly like your work. Don't damage your credibility.
This whole video reeks of status quo, ignorant out of hand dismissal, and closed mindedness.
I’m a huge fan of all of Simon’s channels but this one is at best ill informed and at worst intentionally dismissive of new discoveries.
It’s a real shame. Invoking the phrase “conspiracy theorists” and “pseudoscientists” as dirty words to disparage those who are questioning the established narrative, I had hoped this sort of thing was beneath Simon.
Turns out he’s just a mouthpiece, a talking head, cashing in on controversial topics.
We know it because we've done it ourselves. There's thousands of tight fitting stones in every place around the world. The difference is ancient people didn't have the advanced tools we have, BUT, they had patience. Patience we've lost today. The very notion of "generational projects" is an obscure thing for us, in the fast paced society we live in. Back then, spending 100 years to build up a structure wouldn't be any different than the notion that the Sun is always up in the morning today. Other than that, we're probably very much alike ... if you ignore masses of stupidity clumped around the internet...
This hardly-noticeable, easily-adaptable 2cm a year sea level rise sounds suspiciously similar to the sea level rise we're constantly being told will indeed cause civilisation-destroying global catastrophe
My favorite ridiculous conspiracy theories are the mud floods and the idea that the moon is just a holographic projection.
The only way to settle this is an MMA match between Simon Whistler and Graham Hancock in the middle of the Richat structure.
hell yeah!!!
My money's on Simon; he's younger and has that wiry energy about him.
Hancock would turn up, start going on about the Younger Dryas and get a punch in the mouth for his troubles.
And Erick von Danekin could be the referee.
@@Maria-co9eg I wouldn't trust Erich not start throwing punches himself.
@@Maria-co9eg Giorgio Tsoukalos could be the ring announcer.
This episode is a tad different than the rest
Yea, I like him less after this tbh
The problem I have when we dismiss what could and couldn’t have been in the past is this. If we were to suffer a catastrophic event today, world altering end of modern civilization as we know it. How much technology would be lost? We have a small % of people who know how to make the things we use today. The rest of us just consume and use technology’s accommodations. Get hit by a asteroid, mile high tidal waves across the globe… who is there to rebuild? We can take a guess at how things were done, but they are lost. We tell stories to your children and after a couple of generations, it becomes myth, fairytales, an improbability that isn’t possible and none of the newer generations have any idea of what was lost. If any of it is found, the superstition of man gets the better then them. I find it incredibly hard to believe that this is our first real world civilization. A reset took us back thousands of years.
Yes this id called the middle ages as a lot got lost as the Roman empire in the west fell apart. So the problem is the lacn of knowledge of history and so one falls prey to charlatanes and is an easy mark.
In the documentary Ancient Aliens Debunked it's actually mentioned that the supposed lack of soot was BS as well, in that the archeologists missed several artworks on the ceilings because they were covered in such a thick layer of soot.
The coolest thing about the Sphinx is that even before you start dating it, you know there's going to be a little head involved...
"...because apparently, we're not evolving to get smarter..." Have you seen U.S. news? Idiocracy isn't funny; it's a documentary on where we're headed.
Age of the Sphinx? Dunno. Is it 15,000 years old? Dunno.
But I do know that weathering pattern on the surrounding walls is water damage. That's not sand or wind, it's flowing water, lots of flowing water.
Dat 220walt plug image in hylogryph 🤣🤣🤣🤣 had me laugh out loud😅👌🏼 great work sir
First one isn't a conspiracy theory, it's just a theory which has historians and archaeologists divided so much that peer review has turned into an argument instead of debate.
It all started when they proved, not theorised that the sphinx was way older than the ancient Egyptian culture that was originally attributed to building it.
They never proved shit.
Yea i stopped watching when he said "alternative archaeologists' theories"
You mean a Phd geologists analysis of the erosion patterns of the sphynx pissing off Egyptologists that have no business dating the erosion on rocks right? He's probably just bashing on graham hancock though, that's the usual out of people who dont want to face Robert Buval/Shocke or their PILE of evidence.
I also noticed how the comment on the size of the head of the sphynx was laid out, and knew exactly what was coming next. No surprise. Yea, sure, master craftsman are going to start crving on a rock before they even know what they're working with 🙄
Normally i nod in agreement on his debunking videos, but with this one, I just lost a bit of respect for the side projects team.
+1
@@thefloop2813 me too and unsubscribed, I used to love Simon's videos. This one exposes him as either really dumb or (worse) a shill.
I never expect much better from this guy. His whole routine is to heap scorn on any notion that contradicts the current (or recent) orthodoxy. He's the archetype of the "smug sceptic" who pretends he keeps up with science, but doesn't actually bother to, then confidently declares false anything he thinks sounds suspicious, and believes it makes him look smart.
From the way some people talk online, ancient humans didn't know how to even chew their own food without some sort of alien or ancient super-civilization stepping in to help them out 🤣
Have you seen those fckn stones? Have you seen those fckn buildings? It took them ~200 years to build fckn Notre dame and it's fckn TINY dude, that church is fckn shak compared to pyramid of Giza. Are you even serious!?
A fellow fan of the historical alien butt tube hypothesis 😊
@@roscojenkins7451 I don't know about aliens, but build me a pyramid right now in Austin, Texas if it's that easy. I don't think so, nobody building pyramids anymore for some reason.
@@nekozaemon3803 making something that lasts isn't coherent to capitalism. Planned obsolescence means I couldn't even build you a phone that last more than a few years
@@roscojenkins7451 this sht is like democracy. It's bad, but it's only one that actually working.
most "how did they do that"? questions, can be understood by very basic 1st yr high school physics, technology has moved so fast, it seems to have erased what we knew 50 years ago, let alone thousands of years ago. Love your presentation style BTW
Man... the amount of people committed to the JRE Archaeologists without question is wild.
Its funny how the opposition to early advanced civilisation always claim that 'advanced' somehow means 'flying saucer and anti gravity' advanced, not just advanced beyond hunter-gatherer. Its totaly plausible that there were civilisations few thousand years before archeologist claim there were.
"things just keep getting older"
Still zero evidence to support it, so it resides in the realm of conspiracy theory until it does. Sure the evidence could have been eroded by time, but the whole idea is based on no evidence to begin with. That's why we dismiss it, we prefer to work with facts and evidence.
It's funny how the most vocal proponents for advanced ancient civilizations often just talk about totally absurd forms of how advanced they think those civilizations were.
Like, if we are only talking about how the transition from hunter-gatherer society to agrarian civilization happens, then you're not really representing archeologists very well right now since the majority of them would agree with you.
@@danelynch7171 That's true in any direction you want to spin that statement.
Yes, yes the experts are stupid and just trying to keep the arcane ancient knowledge of the true universal holy order of alien super beings from you.
It would be weird to think we have all the answers. I’m not saying it’s aliens or anything, but I do think the resistance of established archaeology to any new ideas is ridiculous.
exactly, not only that, they refute any theory of others who have actual knowledge on specific subjects which they do not have.
An archaeologist is not an engineer, or geologist. Yet for some reason we hust accept their explanation?
It IS the same problem with 'aliens'. The brainwashed scientists start searching for ridiculous, almost not proven, natural explanations for things that happen unexpectedly. Something like Ouamoua (too lazy now to search for the exact name). Some real scientists have looked at it with 'it could be aliens', not sure about it but as a base to start their research, but they were soon silenced.
What annoys me is that only a FEW people are saying Aliens - but the entire idea is lumped in with the nutters, all in a concerted effort to discredit it. Only a FEW people are saying "Super Advanced Ancient Civilization" - what MOST people are saying is "it doesn't add up, we are missing something" and calling for a more thorough examination with an open mind.
Ancient civilization theory usually involves civilizations as advanced as Rome, but somehow gets warped into being described as some kind of alien sci-fi futurism.
I'm sure every scientific discipline has it's amateurs and cranks, but it's always archaeologists you see getting so butthurt about heterodox theories. I've never seen a physicist make a video gleefully dunking on perpetual motion machines. I've never seen a biologist make a smarmy video destroying cryptozoology (though I've seen a few doing it to creationists and intelligent design proponents). I've never seen a neurologist make a screed against psychic abilities. They just don't seem to see the need to "debunk" ideas that they find to be ridiculous. But man, the archaeologists seem to relish ripping apart the Younger Dryas crowd. They even went so far as to call Graham Hancock racist for his Netflix show, I believe. There's nothing I'd like more than to see some new discoveries cause mainstream archaeology to eat crow.
Melted buildings......melted brains
i'm a bit skeptic about the Sphinx head... not in a ancient aliens or lost civilization aspect, but of a human hubris aspect. I can envision that a lion like sculpture was created with pretty accurate dimension by someone. As time went on, the head was recarved to match the current ruler. And as rulers were changed, it was recarved again. This would account for the smaller scale of the head compared to the body.
Do I have any proof? Heck no. Just one of those "What ifs" I get myself into late at night.
I think it’s time for a video on Simons watch collection
All the best to everyone
3:10 Ancient apocalypse by massive flood: it's also important to mention, that most ancient flood myths refer to different flood events and almost never to single event on global scale, due to placing their corresponding flood story at vastly different ages. Sometimes it is more than thousands of years between such events. Cross referencing all existing flood myths and putting them on a timeline does not show any of them to match up with one another.
Many meteor events have lead to months of endless rain, globally. We have evidence of this.
There were global floods, but not to the exaggerated extent the stories describe.
we had a flood in New Zealand a few months ago that was devastating. not at the same time as hurricane catrina. fascinating.
The real explanation for the prevalence of flood myths is simply that humans need water to live and thus usually lived near rivers. Rivers periodically flood, occasionally catastrophically. Similarly, coastal communities would have experienced things like tsunamis, major storms, and post-glacial sea level rise. Ergo, most civilizations are going to end up with a story about that one time a really bad flood wiped out all the nearby villages within walking distance anyone had ever heard of (e.g. the whole world) or about how 'when i was a young whippersnapper like you there used to be a bunch of coastal lowlands over here but now it's all underwater'.
@@DogFish-NZlots of Christians pretend that because different societies have a flood in their mythos/history that's evidence of ONE FLOOD ....that lasted for 40 days with 1 dude and his family in a boat. .... hi cousin 👋
Ancient flood myths specify "single" "global" flooding, not different flood events. SOME modern interpretations suggest that those myths may have been inspired by local flood events. SOME modern interpretations suggest that there was a global event that caused floods around the world, to which many myths allude.
There was no catastrophic flood in the Fertile Crescent during the time of the Sumarians or Jews, just frequent flash floods. The Gilgamesh and the Biblical Great Flood myths are believed to be taken from older sources predating those two civilizations, possibly a shared ancient source. We have no "dates" to match up. How do you begin dating the origins of South American flood myths? They were ancient word-of-mouth mythologies that were at some point recorded in temples or on carvings. The dates of those temples do not date the myths.
The alternative archaeologist is a professor at Boston University called Dr. Robert M. Schoch
Bachelor of Science (BS) degree in Geology and Geophysics from Yale University.
Master of Science (MS) degree in Geology and Geophysics from Yale University.
Ph.D. in Geology and Geophysics from Yale University.
Dr. Schoch's doctoral research at Yale focused on understanding geological processes and landforms. He is a trained geologist with expertise in various aspects of Earth science.
So he knows his stuff 😂😂
Simon not turning this into a Decoding the Uknown episode was really really hard for him.
Simon forgot to mention the same credible archaeologist are the ones that damaged the pyramid and are trying to cover up the internal ramp theory. There's a great video on how they used the walls around the sphinx to properly date it.
Simon is a paid actor and says whatever BS script is fed to him. Nearly every criticism he had against these theories is an ad-hominem argument.
@@localenterprisebroadcastin5971 Either that or just plain wrong. Archeologists didn't date the sphinx to the earlier period as stated, geologists did. Additionally, the date geologists gave, puts the excavation timeframe of the enclosure overlapping with what was later established as the period G.T. was in use.
Yeah .That's what we Archaeologist do. Cover up top secret 'internal ramp theories ' and hiding the Sphinx real age. .Imagine the panic once that gets out !
@@localenterprisebroadcastin5971
And what is your conclusive evidence that they are all real?
@@spiritualanarchist8162 I'm not an Archaeologist I design large IT banking systems normally as upgrades to 20 year old systems. A little bit similar in that we're trying to work out how things works and what they are used for without documentation.
I'm genuinely interested to hear you take on 3 things, no trick question or sark:
1) Construction technique for the box at Saqqara. In particular how internal corners are produced to micron level flatness. You would need a CNC tip about half a mm wide.
2) UnchartedX Metrologist report of a small simple vase. The symmetry and precision is something that should require quality metal lathes and probably diamond tipped CNC machines for the protrusions. Look at youtube here : /watch?v=PrhFnai2TGs
3) The tunnel wall in Cusco that's 8m long and has a standard deviation of 1.5 microns. Cut directly in to the natural stone, not manufactured and dragged in to position.
If you only want to consider one, look at (2). The metrologist report is published and can be downloaded along with the point cloud in STL file format.
I have found no plausible technique for the construction of these kinds of items other than technological capability far in excess to the tooling and capabilities that are attributed to this time period. Nobody except these kind of YT channels is approaching these problem is any kind of open way that I can find. They are outliers that stand in defiance of the models. From a scientific POV, they are the falsification of the models. To me, that says opportunity, not problem.
I don't quite get why the sphinx being older than 4000 yrs is odd. We understand erosion fairly well, and let's not forget that the largest ancient monuments are in close proximity. The thought of ancient men/slaves building these huge structures in the middle of a desert is more far fetched than them being that old. I mean 10k years older would put the Nile right around where the pyramids sit now, making their construction and their placement a lot less odd...
Around 30yrs ago some anthropologists and archaeologists had suggested that the Sphinx was carved in the soft limestone by neolithic peoples not as a lion with a man's head but with a lion's head. Over time due to the weight of the face it caused it to break off thousands of years later the Egyptians carved a human face on the remains of the lion's head.
Uh, first of all, the sphinx is older then 4000 years, we know that since it is built into Khafre's funeral complex which is 4500 years old or so no one think it is 4000 years old.
Secondly, during the Green Sahara period when the Nile was wider the sphinx would not be next to the Nile, it would be under. There was a huge survey tracking where the Nile was during the Green Sahara period a few years back and the area the sphinx is standing an area that would have been flooded up until around 3500 BCe.
Then add the artifacts found at Giza (including in the generally ignored Kroner pit): About 50 Maadi artifacts (around 5000-3000 BCe), around 3000 early dynastic (1-3 Dynasty) artifacts and hundreds of thousands later.
All that say that the earliest people who could have built it was the Maadi, not a single older artifacts have been found and you have a hard time persuading anyone that people building the worlds largest stone statue wouldn't have left a single thing behind.
All this data suggest that the sphinx must have been built between 3500-2500 BCe but far more likely between 3000-2500 BCe (50 pottery shards seems a bit little for that much actively but I can't completely ruled it out) which would make the earliest likely builder Narmer (maybe as many dictators do and put up a huge frigging statue to show who is in charge in his new territory) to Khafre. Khafre is still the likeliest builder but that is not a given.
As for the pyramids placement, they are near a huge limestone quarry which seems rather logical to me, on a large enough relatively flat area. The since then dried out part of the Nile that made shipping fancier rocks like granite there, it seems like a good area for any engineer.
the evidence doesnt fit the paradigm. nothing takes so long to fall as a dead mistaken theory. scientists are the proudest fools in the verse. takes a long time for them to admit they were wrong and their fathers before them were wrong about history.
Two word's , oop artifact's, some million's of year's old thousand's found and ignored because they don't fit " THE SCIENCE "
@loke6664 they found vases made out of the strongest stones as thin as hairs. Those vases are impossible to reproduce. The pyramids are made from stones carried hundreds of miles away. With today technology just to move and quarry the stones alone with 20 000 men working 24/7 it would took us around 150 years without building the pyramids. Lots is missing to explain how and when the pyramids were made. The lower part of the Sphinx doesn't have erosion so the soil had to be compressed to have erosion only in the middle of the Sphinx what would have took thousands of years naturally. Lots of Egyptologists are spreading lies because if we go against their main story it makes them useless. I believe in science. Until we can find more proofs we need to keep trying to understand. Lots of the studies and conclusions about Ancient Egypt were made over 100 years ago without our existing knowledge. Lots of artifacts were buried by the government of Egypt in museums kinda like what's happening with the Vatican. History understanding changes with time
This video had me in creases more than once haha thank you very much! needed that ahaha
How about massive passage of time to explain lack of material evidence?
So you're telling me that the part of the Sphinx that's underground had more erosion than the head that was above ground and that's normal? Since when do you start a project on the top and end on the bottom with the top looking the newest in the bottom looking the oldest? I don't think you've quite thought this through
Sedimentary rocks like limestone aren't uniform. Different layers can form under different environmental conditions. This can make one layer slightly weaker than another which can lead to differential rates of erosion. This is the same effect that produces features like natural stone arches.
Well, aside from what the other reply says:
The Great Sphinx of Giza has been excavated several times throughout history. Research suggests it was made about 2500 BCE, the surroundings used as a quarry to build the pyramids as well as a temple in front of the Sphinx. Around 400-500 years later, around 2181-2055 BCE, the Giza necropolis was abandoned. Being higher up, the head would have been far better protected from blowing sand than the body as it slowly became buried up to the shoulders. Then around 1400 BCE, Thutmose IV ordered an excavation and eventually managed to uncover the front paws. Once again, the head would have been higher above the sands and thus more protected from blowing sand as it became buried again. It's believed there was another excavation around 150 years later, but that's unconfirmed. If it did happen, that's more time that the lower body would have been exposed, and being higher up, the head would have been more protected from the blowing sand.
Another excavation was done in the first century AD, which is when they built steps down to it and a podium to view it from (which apparently was torn down in the 1930s). This would once again leave the bottom portion exposed to blowing sands, with the head far above the ground and thus more protected. It would remain uncovered until at least 200 AD, and with the fall of the Roman Empire, it would be left to once again become buried in the sand.
The Sphinx would remain buried up to the head until yet another excavation began in 1817, which lasted at least until 1887. It has remained uncovered ever since, once again exposing the lower body to blowing sands while the head remains more protected up high.
So... There you go. Even without the fact that the lower body is made of a softer stone than the head, there's the fact that the lower body has been excavated several times, providing plenty of time for it to erode before becoming buried again. The same sand that buried the body would have eroded it in the process while the head was more safe, further above the sands. Even if it had all been the same hardness of stone, the body would have had more chance to erode than the head.
it's a softer limestone than the head. You should look into the different layers of limestone that make up the sphinx .
Next youll be saying the pyramids were tombs 😂
Please tell my you think they were electric generators, lol. PLEEEASE????
@@jellyrollthunder3625 To assume, makes an ass of u and me.
If you think they were tombs, please give me a single piece of evidence. Just 1. PLEEEASE
@@motionsheepz OK, I'll give you SEVERAL. The Egyptians DO refer to them as tombs In the Harper Song of Intef (sp?) from 2nd millennium B.C.E. says "The Gods who existed before, who rest in their pyramids, and the blessed nobles, likewise buried in their pyramids", also the Abbot papyrus of the 20th dynasty (1100 BCE) documents robberies of many of the kings and queens tombs, some of which they clearly state are pyramids. Then there are the Pyramid Texts for the 5th and 6th dynasties which instruct the kings and queens on their journey into the AFTERLIFE. It makes sense that texts about the afterlife would be placed in TOMBS. Also the pyramids are located inside of necropolises. The pyramids were the central structures in a vast necropolis of burial structures such as satellite pyramids, mastabas and mortuary temples, offering shrines, etc. This suggests that Giza was a place for the dead to be interred. They are all in context. The fact that mortuary temples were built right next to the pyramids directly implies they were intended as TOMBS. There is overwhelming evidence that pyramids were an evolution of mastaba tombs. They have many of the same features and we know mastabas were tombs. The earliest pyramid, the pyramid of Djoser is clearly built upon a mastaba tomb. It was a direct evolution of the mastaba burial practices. Sneferu of the 4th dynasty further experimented with pyramid technology and suggests that pyramids can trace their ancestry back to mastaba tombs. Also burial equipment has been found in pyramids such as sarcophagi and coffins. Under one of Menkaure's queens tombs a pink sarcophagus was found and part of a wooden coffin was found in the main pyramid of Menkaure. the presence of this equipment suggests a mortuary purpose. ALSO the remains of mummified bodies have been found in pyramids: a mummy was found in the pyramid of king Merenre Nemtyemsaf fourth king of the Sixth Dynasty. It was laying right next to his sarcophagus. Also many fragments of mummies have been found in other pyramids: a mummified foot was found in Djoser's pyramid, a right arm, some pieces of skull, and other bones were found in the pyramid of Unas. An arm and a shoulder in Teti's pyramid, a skull, legs and part of a torso were found in the recently discovered pyramid of one of Teti's wives, fragments of a mummy in the pyramid of Pepe the first, some mummy wrappings in the pyramid of Pepe the second, mummy fragments in the wooden coffin of Menkaure's pyramid, and burnt bone in the Amenemhat III's pyramid. The remains of Sesheshet, wife of Teti has been genetically verified, proving that the pyramids were being used as tombs as early as the 6th dynasty. The later kings who were interred in the tombs after the original burials clearly state that they are an effort to RESTORE the previous king's tomb, suggesting that a tomb was also the original purpose. And finally, the private burials from the new kingdom had chapels place above them upon which they placed small pyramids which nevertheless shows the association between pyramids and burial. I suggest you check out the World Of Antiquity channel on YT, particularly the video entitled "The True Purpose Of The Pyramids". The alternative history community has failed you. Will I ever hear from you again???
@jellyrollthunder3625 still waiting
@@motionsheepz still waiting on what? I sent you several examples 2 days ago? Do you not see it? I can repost if you like
Most arciologists start out with an almost closed minds. Only a small % of ancient history is still available. Why say what it can't be?
What the ancient people didn't have, electronics meaning no video games, no television, no lights for your house, so no hour of make up and vanity, no public libraries, no motor vehicle, no jobs as we know them.
What they did have, wood, rocks, brains, and a lot of free time. Maybe if we weren't so distracted we could move mountains too.
One theory I hate is that Devil's Tower is a giant ancient tree.
That one is pretty pervasive too. There is a whole theory about how anything with those basalt columns are actually giant trees... because reasons
WOW Lloyd Waldo the closing line was amazing it really puts our modern thinking into perspective. Summarizing "our astronauts parents rode horses to work." Brilliant, fantastic piece of writing. Thank you again Lloyd for this episode.
He actualy wipes out his own entire argument with that last statement, whilst it was impossible for a advanced civilization to exist next to hunter gatherers, the astronauts parents on horseback make the same point, the contrast is developement over a short period of time can be huge, not to mention the location, there are still people today who ride their horse to work.
@@zorrodahousecat9104 There are hunter-gatherer tribes on five of the seven continents today!! To say an advanced culture cannot live with a stone age one is ludicrous!
@@bundymccain2642 While you are correct, we have absolutely no evidence of an advanced civilization before written history.
@@kaldo_kaldo In 12-15,000 years they wouldn't be able to find NYC.
@@bundymccain2642Bullshit.
You should co-op with Miniminuteman for another of those kinds of videos!
Credible archaeologists also said there was nothing below the sphinx, yet tunnels have been found ( empty however ) but their existence was hidden and lied about, 2022 a guy went in and got footage
And the pyramid shape is probably the most common shape in nature for a peaked structure. It's a simple shape. That's why ancient builders used it. If nature creates paths to the gods, maybe they'd notice humans building them, gain their notice and favour
Yeah. Once a pile of sand was explained to me, I got it.
It's the simple stuff ... and sometimes why "learned man" is so stumped.
The pyramids a 'simple shape' from nature? Have you ever really looked at the shape of the pyramids? There's nothing simple about it and it's absolutely nothing nature could create. Unless you believe mathematics to be natural. The pyramids are not 4 sided, but 8 sided in exactly the same size and orientation. Tell me what natural phenomenon is an example of that?
As @arturama8581 said. There's nothing simple about the Pyramids. The engineering is mind boggling. The precise placements, base, inner tunnels, perfectly cut carvings etc.
@@Seriksycertainly not simple, but in comparison to the Hoover Dam, or the International Space Station, definitely indicative of the technology and engineering of the day.
The pyramids are 8 sided my dude. Not simple at all
My thought of the old time stonemasons making these clever stone items: they were just so good at what they were working on.
I strongly disagree. Have a look at the recent UnchartedX videos where they do highly detailed technical analysis with real world Metrologists (measurement specialists) and investigated things like symmetry, flatness, etc. There are pile and pile of items stacked like trash that have accuracy down to the micron. This was not 'skilled masons'. US Aerospace engineers are then called in to propose techniques on how certain 'hard' things can be made and they concluded that the technology to reproduce or even MEASURE some of these pieces did not exist until the 1980's. Meaning, we got to the moon with less precision than these pieces have.
Lets you mind settle on the how then. Saying that a 'skilled craftman' did it is like saying that if the skilled craftsmen tried 'really hard' they could have made a moonbase and all the tech to get there too. This is the reason the controversy exists.
My take is, how long does metals and other materials take to fully oxidise on earth. Has it all 'rusted away'. Do we really think that the precursor's who did this managed it with pounding stone and flint shipping. Again, were talking about perfect services with micron level perfection. How?
@@nathanielacton3768 🙄
Correction needed at 15:11. The ancient Egyptians are known to have used 120VAC, Single Phase, 60Hz. NOT 220 VAC, 50 Hz... 😆
I feel like there needs to be a clarification that the term Advanced Civilization in this context means Advanced for that time and not Advanced compared to our time.
I came across a few videos that I think were trying to claim that buildings here in America weren't built by us, but rather an ancient civilization. I'm talking like 1800s and maybe earlier. I barely could pay attention though because my eyes rolled into the back of my head so hard I got a headache.
Oh the mud flood dummies, spectacularly stupid.
yeah i was there. u get into it cus ur high then u realize its rotting your brain
@@mikeychimbira1453 lmao.
You mean the fictional creepy pasta stories about monuments and statues? Are you sure you weren't watching something clearly labeled as fiction and you took it seriously?
@@danelynch7171 Tartarian mud flood.
I do find it fascinating when people talk about these really old structures where we just have no comparison with regards to the sheer amount of manpower required to create some of these old structures and yet how exactly they did it is lost to time.
Like the pyramids for example I'd love to have some idea of what the construction was like, must of been tens of thousands of people working at any one time and the surrounding settlements to serve the workers needs would of been immense too.
The Egyptians were excellent record keepers. There are contemporary writings on all of your questions.
it's the jars that would be a good place to start. then the giant granite boxes in small corridors. how'd you get the ammout of people in there to move them ?
My question would also be where did the rest of the buildings and structures go, the pyramids are not in their original state either, they had a casing stone and something on top of each thats missing
@@richardjohnson8009 I get what you mean, I suppose many of the structures were torn down and their materials repurposed, as most would of only been there for a single purpose anyway.
Apparently the original look of the pyramids was covered in limestone or marble, something like that, trouble is there was nobody around to stop the next ruler from stealing it all to build something new, rather than go through the effort or sourcing new materials. However I have no knowledge of where these pieces went after their removal.
@@johngatewood4638 they didn't keep a record of the building of the great pyramid, especially how they lifted 70t granite blocks so high off the ground that went in the king's chamber
archeologist have found that the egyptians had access to corundum which they used to carve basalt statues, while copper tools are not strong enough to do the carving, copper tools embedded with corundum are
11:32 yes, Simon that is how science works, but you forgot the part where new evidence is discovered that may raise questions and change the concensus, as has happened many times throughout history.
Graham Hancock, while peddling some theories that require serious mental gymnastics to even consider, did bring some good points in the Netflix series. Especially regarding the 'flood' which seems odd to be recurring story around globe and would coincide with some events of Younger Dryas (meteor strike causing the release of waters trapped in melting ice age glaciers for example). Also, his 'theory' isn't that of seriously advanced civilization, but one that would rival some earlier known civilizations that organized and built basic towns, monuments, and knew some basic astronomy, maybe even cartography or writing. And that isn't that far fetched theory.
And if we think about how little history is preserved from much younger civilizations it's not a wild stretch of imagination to think that there was some civilization 10-12 thousand years ago that was existing in some relatively localized geologically unstable area, and was skilled in seafaring (sharing their stories and basic knowledge around world). Such civilization if struck by something like massive flood torrents, tectonic movements, volcanic eruption or something equally devastating could very well be lost forever under ground or sea, or straight up washed away and their tools and artifacts lost. What would be left from a group of people that travel across ocean to new lands, brought few tools and had wooden ship? Nothing. Knowing how little some more recent civilizations left us even though they weren't hit by something as devastating, this isn't that crazy theory.
Not to mention that even today we have gigantic differenced in civilization progress between 'us' and lots of uncontacted tribes around world. Even many people that know of existence of new technology still live like their ancestors lived thousands of years ago. Having a civilization make a breakthrough several thousand years earlier than the current science tells us, seem like nothing compared to difference we can witness even today.
There is no reason to be hostile to some very plausible ideas and theories that people like Hancock are telling. And after watching his series I was left with impression that science is full of dogmatic people that aren't open to new ideas, which is very detrimental to science itself and goes against its core idea - to question everything.
Its unfortunate that most will not read the full comment. I agree with 95% of what you said, but people will remain oblivious to facts that counter their personal narratives, now more than ever im afraid.
Sadly Simon's mentality is the kind that would tell everyone they are crazy for following modern medicine because wise men for generations have known about the four humors.... no room for anything that hasn't already been decided.
@@tehlurfry679 True, changing own opinion on something where your mind was already set and accept an idea that seemed ridiculous at first - that is really hard. However, proper science should be above this, especially when such ideas aren't subject to any monetary gain, there's no oil lobby or some political agenda that would prevent the science to stay open to the possibilities of something more than the current consensus.
Could it be just the loud egos that try to cancel any mention of different ideas? We have seen how low some 'scientists' stooped very recently, and how much they eroded public's trust in science, so nothing would really surprise me any more.
It is strange to believe that absolutely all evidence of such a past civilization was washed away, sunk or buried when we have found evidence of other more recent civilizations in the sea or in the ground. That is the real crux of the issue. Unlike what tehlurfry679 or adirtymuppet seem to indicate that the current accept theories are due to "personal opinion" or "already been decided" show a lack of understanding about how the current theories have been developed. Scientific advancement has always been about questioning the core idea with a new hypothesis and changing the theory when evidence and empirical data indicate it. Hand waving and explaining away the fact we couldn't find the evidence is not a substitute for data.
@@adirtymuppet Not really, given Simon's mentality in which "show some actual good evidence, and if I'm indeed wrong I can change my thinking to incorporate the new evidence". Showing weak, amateurish theories as "evidence" does not obligate anyone to buy the mental equiv. of snake oil.
The Atlantis myth is weird.
It starts with one source: Plato
He explains pretty directly that he made it up to serve an allegorical purpose.
Yet it persists.
It's not though. There are many references to an ancient world wide maritime civilization by almost every culture from BC times. The issue is when you start calling it atlantis. That's not what's its inhabitants called it so you will never find an ancient reference to that name before Plato. You need to look at what the people that lived in the America's say about "atlantis". They will tell you all about it if you want to listen.
@@Spectre-wd9dl Nearly all of what is codified as Atlantean myth begins with Plato's description, or later re-interpretations and retro-fittings of it.
Other mythical maritrime stoties are not the same as Atlantean myth. You can't just conflate disparate stories for your convenience simply because they in some way or another involve the sea and it suits you to do so. Chinese, Indian and African myths tell of great ancient wars. No one credibly does, or should, contest that they refer to the same war.
How do we know what the mythical Atlanteans called their realm, and that Plato was thus wrong to call it that?
Spare me the thinly veiled insinuations of your final statements; implying that because I find contrary to youirself, my mind is somehow closed to truth.
@@DeathlyTired they were writing about it in Central America before Plato was born so I don't see how that's possible. You should go look into before you just repeat what you're told.
@@DeathlyTired you should look up the term disparate. The stories are nearly identical in the description of the culture and land area they occupy. You can call them disparate if you want but it doesn't change the fact that they describe the same place during the same time period.
I always assumed that the Atlantis story described the Minoan civilization and its destruction by the volcanic eruption on the island of Santorini
As one of those "fringe amateur archaeologists" I have to say that while I don't believe that some lost ancient civilization had flying cars and levitation through sonic chimes and crystals or whatever, I do think that it is not unrealistic to think that some lost civilization existed before the Sumerians, Harrapans or Egyptians. People originated in Africa and the Sahara and most of north Africa was a lush lake filled savanna up until 13-8 thousand years ago. Our ancestors were also not any dumber than any of us so why wouldn't they be able to build a society in what would have been an eden in terms of resources?
I mean up until recently most archaeologists would have laughed at you if you told them people would have built a large scale metropolitan worship and trade area 13 thousand years ago but low and behold we have Gobeleki Tepe which is still being excavated and expanded. So why dismiss any ideas that contradict the established thought?
It also strikes me as interesting that the debate on the Sphinx has advanced from "Pfftt!! You are crazy if you think the erosion was caused by water! The Sahara is a desert and that is obviously wind erosion!" to " Well yeah that obviously isn't wind erosion dummy but it can't be caused by water because that would push back all our entire dates for Egyptian civilization to a time when the desert/savanna would have received enough rainfall. Which means at least 6 thousand years before we can say Egyptian civilization was a thing. So we will invent a new time of erosion that takes places with a buried structured in moist sediment that looks like water(rain) erosion but is actually just shifting moist sediment" See how absurd that sounds?
Look call me crazy but I thinks it is wild that a fictional civilization was lost 10500 years ago from the time of the greeks which would make it 12500 years ago from our perspective which just happens to coincide with a time when the climate was undergoing catastrophic shifts, whether that took place over the course of months or decades, that also happens to line up with not just a few global myths but damn near every global mythology about some cataclysm that people survived and had to rebuild from. Which often involved some massive flood or calamity from the sky. Like I get it be skeptical always and ask for proof, but if things start to fit together then follow the evidence even if it means you have to move the origins of civilization further south or acknowledge some truth to things like the christian bible as a mythology based in some truth.
Dont forget Sam, with lower ocean levels means that the ocean had more salt in it which means a lesser of a boat would float as compared to an ocean with less salt in it.
I'm disturbed by Simon's certainty in a script he didn't write and can barely read 😅
That's all of his videos lol
what else does a mouthpiece do? lol
The writers seem to be more and more condescending lately. On another note I watched a vid yesterday stating a large chunk of earth's history is missing based on rock layers at the grand canyon and other places around the world. What to say that this wasn't the time period this advanced civilization existed. There is a hell of a lot we don't know so simon needs to stop denigrating those that ask questions.
lol.....@@cgrisaffiudtl
@@cgrisaffiudtl considering these "lost" times. They most of the times range for over millions of years, way before homini ever existed. And they never range over the whole world, they are only isolated. So there are enough regions around the world where this timeline is not lost.
So it's very very unlikely and nearly Impossible that all of these supposed civillisations would be lost like this with no trace left.
" we are not evolving to get smarter" understatement of the century 😂
except the archaeological record show a clear, gradual progression of technology.
Matt Powell has a giant inflatable banana in his backyard which he calls Mr. Peele.
I've thought about the great flood theories and have come to the realization that the whole world to people back then was visible from a hill or tower since they only had feet for transport. The river basins in those areas (Indus, Tigris and Euphrates ett. al) were that world and hence "the worldwide flood" showing up in lore several times.
Same thing crossed my mind somewhat recently. It makes a lot of sense that a "worldwide flood" is alleged in so many ancient texts when, for thousands and thousands of years, "the world", as understood by people at the time, was a pretty small place. Couple this with the fact that most early peoples congregated around major rivers or coastlines, and it all kinda fits that so many ancient records insist that a "worldwide flood" occured at some point in their pre-history.
You can look at earth from a satellite and see where the beach was around the time of gobekli tepe. Florida would have been almost 3 times larger back then than it is today.
Absolutely. It wasn't the whole world that flooded. It was just the known world, which at the time was actually quite a small area.
People of biblical times traveled much further than you give them credit for.
Are you under the impression that everyone 10,000 or so years ago lived in the same place?
I think people forget the scale of time it took to build these structures. The Temple of Jupiter in Lebanon took three hundred years to construct. That means if construction began when America gained independence, it would still be under construction for another seventy three years.
No mention of Gobekli Tepei...
Also the ancients had all the time in the world to carry out these feats of engineering and construction. They had nothing else to do but eat, drink, work and survive - and often do what they were told... No TV, internet, or football to distract them. If a project took a 100 years, then it took 100 years - they were in no rush....
Don't forget about all that free labor. Slaves were very common back then, in most all societies.
@@tempest411 well it's already been proven that the pyramids in Egypt were not built by slaves.
@@BenS3. I doubt that. Considering the morality of the era, the need for free Egyptians to tend to the basics of food and other industries, using slaves for the bulk of the grunt work is the only way such structures would even be feasible.
@@tempest411 doubt it all you want, it doesn't change anything. 🤷🏽♂️. That's why I said it's been "proven".... 👍🏽
@@tempest411 Farming when it is the season needs a great deal of people, during sowing and harvesting in particular. The rest of the time these people are free to do other things. Like providing the hard labor required for large construction work. Slavery would be one source of a large workforce but it most certainly is not the only one.
A lot of these ideas seem to stem from the notion that ancient peoples were stupid. I think it is all just a gross misunderstanding of how intelligent they were, especially in relation to us. If anything, I think they were probably smarter than we are, it's just that we have more information at our fingertips!
Ancient humans were just as smart as modern humans, if not smarter in some ways - it’s just that we modern humans have historical knowledge and technology to fall back on. What writers like Graham Hancock postulate is that there was an advanced human civilization 12,000 years ago, which was destroyed, probably by a natural disaster. And now, the claim goes, knowledge of that civilization is being suppressed by the powers-that-be.
I agree! We’ve built upon knowledge generation after generation but that doesn’t mean they were stupid.
No, it stems from the fact that these people (tinfoilers) are stupid, therefore they (ancients) had to be at the same level. Talk with any conspirologist and you'll find their IQ point is so low, it's a wonder they can breathe unassisted.
That sucks that’s what you took from this video… I think they were incredibly smart and far beyond their time… humanity and most evolution of anything is about being better / more equipped for the current day. For anyone to think they were “stupid” would be a pretty stupid person
They were not ‘smarter’, just far more practically minded than us - because they had to be.
Creation 6000years? I was under the impression that older version of old restement didn’t refer to days of 1000 years but periods of time with no reference to actual time.
During the last ice age the level rose 400 feet to imagine how many caves how many sites of ancient ruins have been lost under the water
its funny because graham makes it perfectly clear multiple times on his documentary what he means by “advanced civilizations”. also the fact that a lot of these ancient structures around the world line up with constellations that were only in that position over 10,000 years ago is cant be a coincidence. his documentary os really about being open to new ideas.
His documentary is full of lies, Im sorry but it's the truth. He vilifies scientific research and cherry-picks his sites, ignoring everything found around these sites to make it fit his narrative. It's really bad. Graham isn't even an archaeologist. He has no professional knowledge at all. I'm not trying to be mean. Please give this here a watch -> czcams.com/play/PLjcnGL5EjI2Hp1-_4VXco2DjAuxE83lt2.html - it's a whole series that goes through Graham's documentary episode by episode, and it's done by someone who actually studied and graduated in archaeology.
No what's funny is you choosing to support one of the worst grifters around that single handedly does more harm to the topic of ancient history than almost anybody. Go study the bronze age collapse both before and after and maybe check out the armana letters or the library of Ashurbanipal and they will open your eyes to how awful Graham really is.
Exactly. I hate that people that set out to discredit him or poopoo his theories always say "What do you mean by advanced? Like they had computers and plastic? If they were so advanced, where is all their trash?" But they are completely missing the point of what Graham means when he says 'advanced civilization'. He simply means civilizations advanced enough to have a deeper and more profound knowledge of architecture, astronomy, lifestyle and social structure than simple hunter gatherers. Yet skeptics still thinks he means that these people were as technologically advanced as us.
Simon and his writers are married to the establishment. Any deviation from the approved script is accidental. He’s heard of peer reviews but obviously doesn’t realize how easily the peer review process can be gamed. I’ve also noticed a major deference to authority. An almost unskeptical mind toward the BBC or CNN, doctors or “scientists”. But only if the scientists are approved of. Dunning-Kruger comes to mind.
Graham has been so thoroughly exposed as a grifter at this point that it's laughable to even mention his name in any serious discussion. @@kinnexion
Debate Randall Carlson. Wear diapers
It’s funny that this is so controversial, we literally had the fall of Rome, and it took us 2000 years to regain their technological advancements. We just figured out why their concrete is better than ours recently. They didn’t have flying cars but they were more advanced than the dark ages that followed.
Blame religion and especially Christinity for that,. They put a cap to any progress and censured what was allready known. That is how you go back in time....
Now it’s them and governments
You missed out the liquified rock/seismic softening conspiracy theory Simon. I really want to know where that one leads.
The men who landed on the moon had parents who rode around in horse pulled buggies is a very profound statement and truly shows what humans are capable of accomplishing in a very small period of time!
To be fair, I was born in the late 80's and I rode a horse to work until I finished my undergrad.
It was interesting until the statement that bronze age saws held tolerances of .005. Even if they could hold the tolerance (which I am very skeptical of), it was a very slow process. If they only used a saw to cut outside faces, it would not be possible to cut that many with that technique in 20-30 years. That is as unlikely as the idea that the stones were floated to the top on water. Find a different solution and get back to us.
yeah idk, pretty much just skipped the stones, too hard for bronze, electricity on the other hand could make power tools or edm, and who knows what maybe they just had diamond already like why not
look up the 1500-ton "thunderstone" moved by Russia in the 1700s using nothing but capstands and rollers. No advanced technology needed.