Do you think Hanwiener did a good job expressing the points he of theory he raised in his television show?
Any chance he gets another television show on Netflix in the future?
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Do you think Hancock did a good job expressing the points he of theory he raised in his television show?
He is a total lunatic. He comes across well on his JRE appearances but at other times he was claiming it was weed smoking shamens who could build using sound waves that were his ancient civilisation. No one legitimate in archeology wanting to acknowledge him is because they think he is a mad man.
hanwiener got dabbed on hard. only midwits believe non scientists who step into the relm of hard academia.
I hate to break it to you but Academia is a fricking joke (outside of SOME branches of physics, chemistry, and biology)
>hard academia
absolute kek
Flint's arguments were admittedly better but archaeology cucks are definitely moronic in general.
They make declarations that can neither be confirmed or challenged because they have at best a loose basis in reality, usually.
Hanwiener is no better, the difference between them is one has a team of idiots that have repeated his opinions ad nauseum for 3 decades and the other is basically a lone idiot repeating his (also equally valid but stupid) opinions
archaeology is a moron "science"
To quote flint himself
>Here's a Palaeolithic stone tool *hem* uh that my dad made
>holds up shitty rock
remove biology and chemistry and math, etc. id say a good 61 percent of science is just guesswork
Math isn't science
ok 11 percent of science is guesswork
You're a moron. Actual Archeologists don't repeat sensationalists non falsifiable claims about lost civilizations, otherwise all of them would be getting their netflix shows. When you decide to study something for a living, it comes with some level of integrity and understanding of the scientific method. Who are the archeologists making claims half as moronic as hanwiener?
All of them.
All of their "evidence" is speculated on. There can be no hard evidence of ancient history, that is why Hanwiener is no better or worse than Dibble.
Who's to say there wasn't a real man in the sky that hurled bolts of lightning and watched over Mount Olympus. You don't know, and neither do they. Anyone claiming to know is full of shit.
Archaeologists are ALL full of shit.
>only midwits believe non scientists who step into the relm
stop
2 passive aggressive nerds throwing claws was funny for 30 minutes
Hanwiener's entire career, his life's work just got exposed as drug-induced pareidolia.
When confronted with the fact that he didn't even have a crumb of evidence he just resorts to "well we haven't looked under every rock on the planet so i must be right"
I'm fairly neutral on this issue, though I admit I slightly lean towards there being some kind of rather advanced (relative to other ancient peoples) society somewhere on Earth.
Graham's best evidence seems to be the recent discoveries in the Amazon and the fact that so little of it has been explored, and that's about it.
On the other hand, when Dibble started talking about how human beings domesticated crops it was a very strong point. He basically said and you can pinpoint when humans started using agriculture by looking at a specific A or B genetic characteristic found in fossilized seeds of grain. As humans domesticated crops, one characteristic (A) started becoming the dominant expression and the other (B) feel out of favor. The implication is that if there were an advanced civilization that predates anything yet discovered, then there should be some record somehwere of much older seeds discovered with the genetic marker (A) of domestication, yet no such evidence has been found.
Another strong Dibble point is that there should be submerged shipwrecks (since ocean water preserves shipwrecks remarkably) from older advanced civilizations, yet none have been discovered so far.
Overall Hanwiener got kind of BTFO on these points, you can point to the Amazon and ideas that there is lots of uncharted territory, but that feels kind of weak in the face of zero evidence.
Then again, the world is a big place and I wouldn't put anything past people who want to keep a certain narrative going. Also it's totally possible that some crew of construction guys have dug up artifacts they didn't tell anybody about so that their job site wouldn't get shut down for months or years or forever. Some joe sixpack construction guy isn't going to know if a pottery shard is 2,000 years old or 20,000 years old. God knows how much stuff construction people have destroyed or never reported
It really boils down to whether agriculture is really necessary at all for a civilization.
If animal sources of food was plentiful, in the forests or the oceans, then cultivation of crops should be unnecessary.
Did they find any ancient grains or anything near Gobekli Tepe?
It's not quite the gotcha they seem to imply. Let's talk about the pacific islanders that traversed vast tracts of ocean, did their boats withstand the test of time?
I just looked it up and there are no ancient extant polynesian canoe artifacts.
Well there you go. It's possible that an ancient seafaring civilization could have existed without their boats surviving OR agriculture. If you lived by the sea you literally just had to rely on fishing.
The civilization Hanwiener proposes would have been much more advanced than Polynesians though. Yes they were proficient in navigating the the stars, but where were their grand mathematics, buildings, monuments? There are none. They aren't even middling compared to the hypothetical civilization Graham implies. They are relatively insignificant.
I find it very hard to believe that there could be an advanced civilization that didn't rely on agriculture. Maybe it's very remotely possible that an advanced civilization (Gramham compares then to 18th or 19th century Europe) could have existed without, and just relied on hunting, gathering and pastoralism, but that in itself is a huge stretch.
Another strong piece of evidence in favor of Dibble is the fact that no known drilled earth cores indicate that metallurgy was utilized before the dates we already have established. In other words, if there were an advanced civilization then there are no shipwrecks, no monuments, no buildings, no evidence of agriculture, and no evidence of metallurgy. When you add all of those factors up are place them in opposition to "well we just haven't explored enough" it starts to look like a rather flimsy argument.
Ultimately I lean slightly towards there was an advanced civilization but I have to be honest and say I think that because I want to believe it, not because there is any evidence to support it
It's impossible for it to be plentiful enough to feed mega cities. You need a large abundance of easy to access food to get societies large enough, and enough people free from the labors of hunting and gathering to develop more advanced trades that lead to discoveries.
Were the native american tribes considered civilizations? They pretty much fit the bill as how the ancient people were mostly like.
Buffalo/bison were plentiful enough.
Most of them were hunter gatherers. Exactly what flint said and graham contends
>God knows how much stuff construction people have destroyed or never reported
When I worked construction and we had to dig, I thought about this the entire time. We'd find a lot of old toys and marbles typically, or just really old glass.
What's under the cities that got buried under the cities that exist now? How many times has Paris existed?
Very cool anon, I'm glad you didn't take my comment the wrong way. You guys make the world go around. But still you can't help but think about how much priceless unique things has been buried or paved over, deliberately or accidentally
I always love hearing they found the body of a king or queen in England whenever they make a parking lot, personally.
God that would've been nice.
>https://old.reddit.com/r/fossils/comments/1c4hldl/found_a_mandible_in_the_travertin_floor_at_my/
This redditor recently found a homosexual sapiens mandible on his parents' limestone floor.
Perhaps our very concept of civilization is just wrong.
We define civilization as necessarily having agriculture and grand monuments specifically made of stone etc because those are the hallmarks of the oldest civilizations we can find. But what if the civilizations of the past relied solely on hunting game, preserving the meat as jerky, made monuments solely out of trees (easier to manipulate and less time consuming), and wrote specifically on tablets made of wood?
In fact, it's almost a given that people in the past would 'write' on wood before carving stone, because it's more pliable, lighter, easier to gather, etc. The only reason the oldest forms of writing we find are in clay or bones is simply because of survivorship bias. So it's almost a given that there have been large wooden monuments, predating stone monuments, of the past now lost to time.
Then this wouldn‘t be a particularly advanced society, would it? It just maybe had writing though nothing survives even though we have found papyrus scrolls from ancient egypt.
So there is this super advanced society that doesn‘t do agriculture or architecture or seafaring but according to hanwiener it eventually ends up teaching all of those things to hunter gatherers? Where is the logic in that?
>even though we have found papyrus scrolls from ancient egypt.
Egypt is much younger than the potential civilizations we're talking about.
>Where is the logic in that?
Ancient aliens. Or Stargate (the movie). Must be.
I mean agriculture's importance is probably inflated. Seafaring as we've said maybe small vessels or nothing survived/they were so good at it they never lost a ship to places it would have been preserved.
Gobekli Tepe is a mystery though, something HAD to have predated it.
>so little of it has been explored,
Hanwiener kept badgering him about how little of some place has been explored by archeology as if lack of exploration proves his prior civilization must be correct. Then he engaged in ad-homenim attacks about him calling him racist which is also irrelevant to proving hanwieners theories. Then there was joe expressing an opinion on weather cracked rocks look artificial , but there are many natural rock formations that form regular blocks.
>The implication is that if there were an advanced civilization that predates anything yet discovered, then there should be some record somehwere of much older seeds discovered with the genetic marker (A) of domestication, yet no such evidence has been found.
Hanwiener responded to this by saying oh they did'nt bring seeds they just brought the idea of agriculture but that makes no sense if they were traveling around the whole world why wouldn't they bring seeds of useful crops with them ?
>Hanwiener kept badgering him about how little of some place has been explored by archeology as if lack of exploration proves his prior civilization must be correct.
He wasn't saying that proves he is correct, he said it means there is a possibility and it hasn't been found yet. I thought both handsome good points, Flint was good on seeds. But Flint fell into some of the same type of rhetoric he was accusing Hanwiener of, especially towards the end. Also Flint is annoying.
A while back, an old timer blacksmith with 50+ years of experience decided to recreate the mastermyr find (bunch of Viking era tools that were preserved). He was doing it on YouTube, and he disagreed with some of the assertions about what some of the tools were or were for, giving examples about wear patterns and shape, etc. His comments were filled with so many extremely nasty comments from Flint Dribble types crying >noooooo where is your EVIDENCE that's how it was used? That's not what my college professor said!
While Graham is not as experienced as that blacksmith and says a lot of kooky stuff, Flint strikes me as exactly the same type of commenter from the blacksmith videos
people would repurpose stone and bricks and metals from ancient ruins all the time
yes I'm sure the romans and vikings dove down into the deep sea trenches in their submarines and salvaged the high tech ships of the 25000 year old gudung padang / whoever hanwiener thinks ackshually built the sphinx civilizations and melted their computers down into bronze swords.
why would you expect seeds to survive a cataclysm if metals didn't?
Dibble made a very compelling point that we haven't physically searched many areas no but we already know what's there through scanning technologies, so it's unnecessary. We only actually dig in places we find interesting after scanning so naturally that will result in 1% actual surface excavation or whatever. I don't buy Graham Hanwieners shit at all anymore. I also suspect Joe specially chose Dibble because he sounds like such an unlikable homosexual. He gave Graham every advantage he could.
They don't scan that many areas. They use big data analysis to extrapolate. And scans can't see shit.
You could see in the interview the exact moment Graham started to lose Joe. It was when Dibble started talking about the lack of agricultural seed evidence, that was very damning and honestly Grahams "we haven't looked enough" argument felt very weak in that moment
Literally who
I saw a clip of this where they were discussing a bunch of news articles that claimed his him and his theories of encouraging white supremacy, so I doubt you will see him on Netflix anytime soon.
The little Hobbit looking guy was saying he was a racist for citing Spanish colonial sources and talking about Atlantean myths that Nazis used to push.
Yes Ivan we know you're raiding. No Ivan this isn't normalizing white supremacy either.
>muh Russians
absolutely mindbroken
you can't convince me that this isn't a bot post
Oh and he would like lots of funding to search the oceans, deserts and amazon to make sure. Since these are his theories at least some of that money should be put at his disposal hmmm?
Entertaining stuff though and Netflix is the perfect place for him. No one thinks Netflix is high quality.
>NOOOOOO YOU CANT SHOW THAT YOU'RE A HECKIN WHITE SUPREMACIST NOOOOOOOOO
>u-uh achshully i-i n-never said that! the e-editor m-might've said that
wtf is flint's problem?
>wtf is flint's problem?
autism
Same reason he thinks its okay to wear that hat... indoors... with headphones
>spends 4 1/2 hours holding up the headphones to his ears instead of just taking the fedora off
he did it out of respect so as to to hair mog bald joe and 70 something year old Graham... a true gentleman
he's got his own hair issues
He's trying to look like Indiana Jones please understand
Maybe after an evil poo ripped his heart out
he's a fricking CIA construct desperate to look the part like that fricking construct Peter Hotez always displaying his scientist paraphanelia.
>https://www.sci.news/archaeology/science-polynesian-ocean-sailing-canoe-new-zealand-02182.html
Ok they found one. And it was fairly recent too 1400 CE so only 600 years old. And that's all they found. Still supports my theory. We shouldn't assume boats are going to be well preserved especially when we're talking tens of thousands of year timescales.
A global, advanced civilisation would presumably have larger boats than a canoe, with more advanced materials like steel and composites that preserve better.
I couldn't make it through the 39 year old man with an 11 year old's voice opening points. The autism delivery style made the high pitch and whine even worse.
Who was the winner?
Bert Kreicher came in at the end and destroyed both of them with some closing remarks
shirtless?
Only wearing a shirt, nothing else, it was meant to be a subversion of expectations but it scared Graham Hanwiener and made him leave early (Rogan admitted to this afterwards)
I won by not watching
>flint dibble
He did a good job of looking like a fricking moron and getting owned by a redditor lol
Thats what happens when you smoke and trip yourself stupid and have to interact with someone who isnt joe rogan throwing you softballs all day long.
>no evidence? well that's your fricking problem. do you even know that we have only excaveted 10% of the entire earth? how can you say my evidence isnt hidden in the rest of the 90%
>tell me with a straight face that this is not man made. you cant. its so clear it is undeniable; this is an ancient ruin.
there are lots of rocks that look artificial like these in ireland.
why had Big Archeology not dug up antarctica with their THOUSANDS of dollars of grant money? instead they conveniently search where their incestious models predicted findings. come on, it's only like a mile of ice but they are too lazy and close-minded.
Ok enough about the younger Dry Ass period, tell me about the older Wet Ass period.
Its all about the Younger Deadass cataclysm.
Why don’t you ask your mother
Toasting before the troony janny sees this and deletes the thread.
Does anyone know why we aren't allowed to discuss the JRE podcast on Cinemaphile?
nah he's a normie conspiracy b***h who thinks the earth is round
I know on Cinemaphile the consensus is that Graham [/spoiler]/qa/ lost. But off of Cinemaphile, what is the consensus? On YouTube, they seem to think Graham won by default because Flint looks, talks, and acts like a redditor.
Damn, I reversed the spoiler. Frick
Most people go by vibes and by vibes alone Graham won. Nerds don't realize that the medium is the message and if you're ugly and present yourself like an annoying worm then no one wants to hear what you have to say.
based vibe checker. FRICK archeo-cultists. they lost the argument the second they brought up muh white supreemism. i AM an ancient aryan, and you WILL kneel, libtard.
In a battle of logos vs pathos, pathos always wins.
I stopped believing flint when he was being a slimy snake about the white supremacist tweet, he has an obvious agenda.
I thought he was winning up until that point
he lost the second he decided to read from a script he prepared in a fricking debate
Flint was good on seeds and bodied Graham on that one.
I felt that they both lost on the ethnicity argument in different ways.
You can easily see proof of people shaping the way important figures look to their own just by looking at depictions of Jesus.
You have the typical white Jesus that's widely spread, but I doubt he actually looked like that. And if you've ever been to a Korean church you'll see that their own artwork looks more Korean than white or semitic.
And this isn't even something that's necessarily done consciously, artists often use models and reference material. I'm sure whoever carved these stones used their own people to carve the faces "nativizing" them.
But Flint is being a real reddit cuck by talking nonsense about how "he doesn't see ethnicity" like that. Lots of South Americans have little body/facial hair, people have eyes.
On the slander thing, I think Flint is technically right, but him and the rest of the experts are being gays about it all.
It's obvious he's being a weasely frick and really just want to call Graham a moron grifter.
Experts always get these things wrong because they have to be autistic to even get into these fields in the first place. You don't need to go out of your way to prove people like Graham wrong.
If your research is legit, it'll be the one that gets put in the relevant texts. Who cares about some show on Netflix?
I also don't think Graham is good on the metallurgy argument. China had massive ancient furnaces that were hot enough to be capable of forging iron.
Just to get to that point where the people had enough time to devote to projects like this, you'd need to be way past subsistence farming/gathering.
And we'd surely find some sort of proof.
>why wouldn't they bring seeds of useful crops with them ?
No I can actually agree with this one.
Not all plants can grow in every environment or face different diseases/predators and it might be more useful to look for things locally.
how do you find ancient seeds in the sahara? how did those people get to those caves in brazil that predate clovis?
I mean they're talking about the ice age. The Sahara was different back then. And I think they all agreed that the Amazon and places close to the equator at the time could support vegetation.
I could understand Graham's ideas that a group of people could bring the concept of agriculture to a foreign land, using local vegetation as opposed to hauling crops from back home.
IIRC Tobacco being a hardy crop was one of the reasons Europeans grew so much of it in the Americas. Maybe they had b***h ass crops that had poor yields so they switched to local stuff?
I don't understand your clovis point. Isn't Graham's whole shtick the fact that small groups of a lost advanced civilization imparted knowledge to some natives in a different area?
Is it impossible for humans to have arrived before and simply not succeeded in the same way later humans did?
I mean I don't think Graham's mystery civilization was absolutely necessary for humans to have been around South America, but I don't see the problem with having one group of humans arriving, dying out, and then another group of humans to come in later
did they die out? I dunno. besides the polynesian travelled far and wide without having any idea of metalurgy or such and I don't think they were big into farming either, could be wrong about that. I'd say the whole assumption that hunter gathers couldn't form civilizations might be bs.
also remember that scandinavian guy proving you could travel the atlantic on a raft
Listened for the first 20 minutes of Dibble introducing himself and why he was on the show. I immediately could tell this guy was legit and that GH was basically going to get exposed for being a moron. I always thought of GH just trying to sell another book about the ancient world but it turns out the Netflix show went to his head and now he really believes the shit he proposes.
the autistic reddit guy won
typical reddit man, wears a fedora and is very dogmatic despite trying hard to look like an intellectual. i bet he swore by the vaxx because the science community said to get it. an in-person equivalent to obnoxious "SOURCE??" posts.
Also hates White people and thinks all pre-Renaissance brown cultures are heckin' valid.
No Ivan he doesn't hate white people. Yes Ivan non whites have their own culture.
>Le Russian troll
You need to get on meds. You've been doing this for years. It's not healthy. And no, the problem is that Marxists in academia think a culture that sacrifices babies to a demon God with a 9 foot dick is just a valid as a culture that created linear algebra. It's not. Cope & Seethe
Notice how hard he was trying to avoid saying that the pyramids were amazing compared to what other cultures were doing at the time? Come on, bud
except all those brown cultures across the Americas that have ancient tales of white men with beards, usually red, he throws that out the window
Hanwiener is a wack job but that other guy needs to be murdered for being reddit incarnate.
These guys sound like KoTH characters
If only people like Hanwiener existed we would have millions of moronic theories that never really get proven
If only people like Dibble existed we wouldn't have any theories at all
Hanwiener got his ass handed to him, but that Dibble guy is annoying as frick.
at one point Joe asks "is there any evidence to suggest there's an ancient civilization?" and Graham says "no". Basically destroying his entire career.
The exact moment where Dibble literally goes on a lecture about archeological grains was the moment Hanwiener was eternally done. Him not knowing how an archeologist tells the difference between a domesticated grain and a wild one was where Joe Rogan immediately saw he was a kook
all I know is that at one point archeologists thought dinosaurs had feathers, then they all laughed at old stuff showing feathered dinosaurs (probably because of jurassic park), and now dinosaurs have feathers again until they don't. but clovis first is also a great argument. maybe this dude actually was told about it being wrong while at university, but doesn't make it untrue that for the longest time it was considered to be unrefutable.
>yeah Hanwiener lost but the other guy was such an ugly redditor!!!
pathetic lmao
>Dibble
Handwiener is a grifter and needs to leave ancient history to the experts
>we haven’t searched even 10 percent of it but we know it doesn’t exist
I think graham is full of shit but God damn scientists can’t be bothered to say they don’t have an answer to every question
According to graham this society spanned from brazil over the sahara to japan and australia, yet in none of those places there is any evidence of them. But there is evidence at thousands of sites of hunter gatherers. What are the odds that we keep finding the few remains of hunter gatherers but not of the much larger more advanced society with architecture and large scale agriculture?
Not to mention that is 0 evidence for this society that can‘t be found, yet graham is sure it exists based on vibes.
Why he got a name like a point-and-click protagonist though?
doesnt this guy think there are pyramids on the moon
>he's never seen the moon pyramids
ngmi
do you have proof that there isn't?
I think Flint Dibble was the archetypal annoying reddit nerd but holy frick Graham Hanwiener is a total kook, imagine arguing for a lost civilization and all you have is like 3 photos of some underwater rocks that we don't even know if they were made by natural processes.
old man here. from experience: sometimes people who act super confident can still end up being wrong despite them sounding credible. meanwhile people who can't articulate their point also can end up being right. we just don't know what we don't know.
everyone is gonna forget about this debate
lol
i predict the zyn segment will be at least 25 minutes long
>btfo by a quintessential redditor
hyperboreabros......
lol at the name flint dribble. it was over before it even started
big graham hardwiener debates silly mcjackass over whether or not aliens built civilization for everyone in the world instead of just old white men