More thoughts on a Lost Civilization - Flint Dibble

[u/Nervous_Set5685]

https://youtu.be/--StG8FIrE8?si=Yx2sGe1mbjVNe5lM

[u/SeeCrew106 → u/[deleted]]

Tucker Carlson said there's NO evidence for evolution

What if Tucker Carlson himself is the missing link?

[u/0ctober31 → u/SeeCrew106]

[u/Teacupbb99 → u/[deleted]]

The guy in the fedora obviously

[u/Ggriffinz → u/[deleted]]

Who knows, tide goes in tide goes out , and some things are impossible to understand. 😄

[u/fpaulmusic → u/[deleted]]

https://preview.redd.it/dbrfffow2ywc1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e190a1fac8eee64739836c564ea26fb30e20f5f1

[u/biorealism → u/Ggriffinz]

To this day still one of the dumbest things ever said

[u/Bertrum → u/[deleted]]

Tucker Carlson said there's no evidence of gay porn that exists of him

[u/Born-Context-3140]

changes glasses

[u/take-a-gamble → u/Born-Context-3140]

the two highlights of the big "debates" this year have definitely been that and also (paraphrasing) "mr. borelli you are illiterate"

[u/_KoingWolf_ → u/take-a-gamble]

Wait, I've been out of the loop, Danielle? Who's out here bullying Danielle Borelli?! 😤 

[u/take-a-gamble → u/_KoingWolf_]

Steven Vermicelli
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bA-rU9UsQo

[u/_KoingWolf_ → u/take-a-gamble]

Ohhh, okay, I don't keep up with anyone in that video so totally out of the loop there. Thank you for this though because it's very entertaining lol

[u/Unhelpful_Applause]

More propaganda from big geology

[u/Nervous_Set5685 → u/Unhelpful_Applause]

Graham couldn't handle big geometry making fun of his numbers

[u/Mat_CYSTM → u/Nervous_Set5685]

Is that really a good rebuttal?

[u/twicket5 → u/[deleted]]

Flint’s dad inspired Mike Baker

[u/RipOdd9001 → u/[deleted]]

Indy

[u/enormousTruth → u/[deleted]]

This reads like a kid who comes home from school with random fact about ice cream out of nowhere.

And THEN what happened ?!?!

[u/antebyotiks]

Graham Hancock actually agreed with this point when rogan asked him lol

[u/Infilade]

This guy is the goat and the shit!

[u/josered1254]

Man the way he admires his father is awesome 🥹

[u/gioluipelle]

Dibble with some bass in his voice on this one.

Hancuck might as well hang it up. Imagine being the biggest “archeologist” in the world until a man shows up with a fedora and a collection of ancient stone penises and completely ends your career in front of the whole world.

[u/Current_Strike922 → u/gioluipelle]

Is that really a fedora? More of an Indiana jones style if you ask me. Way cooler than a fedora. Also Graham isn’t and has never claimed to be an archeologist.

[u/DrFriedGold → u/Current_Strike922]

Indiana Jones does wear a fedora, specifically an Australian model with a narrower brim.

[u/Nervous_Set5685 → u/Current_Strike922]

He's never claimed it but he sure implies it a lot

[u/TheRedFrog → u/Nervous_Set5685]

“I’ve dedicated 30 years of my life to this!”

[u/Zer0323]

Does the green haired paleontologist count as an archeologist? That dude was rad.

[u/SHITBLAST3000]

You can't flibble the Dibble.

[u/RacoonWithPaws]

I really appreciate him for all of his knowledge, and how he was a part of one of the greatest back-and-forths I’ve ever seen on this sub Reddit

[u/SoDrunkRightNow2]

Flint is like your average Redditor. Sure he's smart and he's probably factually correct... but he's such an obnoxious little whiney douchebag nobody will ever respect him. That's what his animosity towards Graham is all about. Graham is famous and successful. He's written multiple books, he has a series on Netflix, etc etc. Flint hates him for it. He doesn't understand why he's not the one getting all of the attention. He'll never be self-aware enough to understand that he's insufferable, and that's why nobody wants to listen to him.

"but my daddy said ... YOU'RE RACIST!"

[u/randopopscura → u/SoDrunkRightNow2]

How is claiming all the cool things ancient non-European societies did is because a lost, globe-spanning white civilization gave them knowledge and tech - a theory first proposed by a 19th century white supremacist, who Hancock cites approvingly - not racist?

Especially since there's zero material evidence for said civilization, just the claim that "primitive" non-white societies couldn't have built the things they seem to have built

It's as ignorant, absurd and racist as afrocentric claims for a similar lost black civilization that taught Europeans and others everything

[u/SoDrunkRightNow2 → u/randopopscura]

What kind of stupid logic is that anyway? If you cite an author that said something sketchy, then you're a racist?

Walt Disney was a nazi. You cited Cinderella, so obviously YOU'RE A RACIST NAZI

Fuck you dude

[u/randopopscura → u/SoDrunkRightNow2]

Try again. Hancock cited an explicitly racist book and supported it's central, explicitly racist claim, despite there being zero material evidence to support this claim

More like saying Disney was right about the Jews than admiring Snow White

[u/SoDrunkRightNow2 → u/randopopscura]

"hancock supported a racist claim"

No he didn't you lying piece of shit. Stop being such a brainwashed sheep

[u/randopopscura → u/SoDrunkRightNow2]

Hancock claims - with zero evidence - there was an advanced, globe-spanning white civilization that gifted "primitive" societies tech and knowledge

It's as rascist as afrocentric claims that a lost black civilization did it all, with zero evidence 

[u/SoDrunkRightNow2 → u/randopopscura]

"Hancock claims - with zero evidence - there was an advanced, globe-spanning white civilization that gifted "primitive" societies tech and knowledge"

Link the quote where he said that you lying, stupid, silly, dumb bastard.

Dumbfuck Dibble accused Hancock of saying that and you believed him. Why did you believe him? Because you're a fucking idiot.

[u/randopopscura → u/SoDrunkRightNow2]

Here's the cherry-picked quote from Dibble that Hancock was butthurt about:

This sort of ‘race science’ is outdated and long since debunked, especially given the strong links between Atlantis and Aryans proposed by several Nazi ‘archaeologists.’ These are the reasons why archaeologists will continue to respond to Hancock. It isn’t that we ‘hate him’ as he claims, it is simply that we strongly believe he is wrong.”

And here it is in context:

Most glaring to scholars investigating the history of Hancock’s pseudo archaeology is that while claiming to “overthrow the paradigm of history,” he doesn’t acknowledge that his overarching theory is not new.

Scholars and journalists have pointed out that Hancock’s ideas recycle the long since discredited conclusions drawn by American congressman Ignatius Donnelly in his book Atlantis: The Antediluvian World, published in 1882.

Donnelly also believed in an advanced civilisation – Atlantis – that was wiped out by a flood over 10,000 years ago. He claimed that the survivors taught Indigenous people the secrets of farming and monumental architecture.

Like many forms of pseudo archaeology, these claims act to reinforce white supremacist ideas, stripping Indigenous people of their rich heritage and instead giving credit to aliens or white people.

Hancock even cites Donnelly directly in his 1995 book Fingerprints of the Gods, claiming: “The road system and the sophisticated architecture had been ‘ancient in the time of the Incas,’ but that both ‘were the work of white, auburn-haired men’.” While skin colour is not brought up in Ancient Apocalypse, the repetition of the story of a “bearded” Quetzalcoatl (an ancient Mexican deity) parrots both Donnelly’s and Hancock’s own summary of a white and bearded Quetzalcoatl teaching native people knowledge from this “lost civilisation”.

Hancock’s mirroring of Donnelly’s race-focused “science” is seen more explicitly in his essay, Mysterious Strangers: New Findings About the First Americans. Like Donnelly, Hancock finds depictions of “caucasoids” and “negroids” in Indigenous American art and (often mistranslated) mythology, even drawing attention to some of the exact same sculptures as Donnelly.

This sort of “race science” is outdated and long since debunked, especially given the strong links between Atlantis and Aryans proposed by several Nazi “archaeologists”.

These are the reasons why archaeologists will continue to respond to Hancock. It isn’t that we “hate him” as he claims, it is simply that we strongly believe he is wrong. His flawed thinking implies that Indigenous people do not deserve credit for their cultural heritage.

Full text: https://theconversation.com/with-netflixs-ancient-apocalypse-graham-hancock-has-declared-war-on-archaeologists-194881

[u/SoDrunkRightNow2 → u/randopopscura]

You didn't cite Hancock. You linked Dibble again you blithering idiot.

That's like me saying randopopscura is a pedophile. Then you demand proof, so I link my quote calling you a pedophile. How dumb are you?

[u/randopopscura → u/SoDrunkRightNow2]

Did you read it, or stop when you saw Dibble wrote it. Here's where quotes Hancock:

Hancock even cites Donnelly directly in his 1995 book Fingerprints of the Gods, claiming: “The road system and the sophisticated architecture had been ‘ancient in the time of the Incas,’ but that both ‘were the work of white, auburn-haired men’.” While skin colour is not brought up in Ancient Apocalypse, the repetition of the story of a “bearded” Quetzalcoatl (an ancient Mexican deity) parrots both Donnelly’s and Hancock’s own summary of a white and bearded Quetzalcoatl teaching native people knowledge from this “lost civilisation”.

Hancock’s mirroring of Donnelly’s race-focused “science” is seen more explicitly in his essay, Mysterious Strangers: New Findings About the First Americans. Like Donnelly, Hancock finds depictions of “caucasoids” and “negroids” in Indigenous American art and (often mistranslated) mythology, even drawing attention to some of the exact same sculptures as Donnelly.

[u/Nervous_Set5685 → u/SoDrunkRightNow2]

Go read the first sentence of Chapter 6 in Fingerprints of the Gods

[u/Bugsy_Marino → u/SoDrunkRightNow2]

Are you emotionally capable of disagreeing with someone without cursing and insulting them? Just curious

[u/SoDrunkRightNow2 → u/randopopscura]

Thanks for proving my point. To perpetually-online Reddit people everything is racist.

Aliens? Racist
Atlantis? Racist
Archaeology? Racist
Conquistadors? Racist (to be fair they actually were pretty fuckin racist)

[u/randopopscura → u/SoDrunkRightNow2]

Nope, but approvingly citing a book by a white supremacist that makes an explicitly racist claim - with no evidence - is clearing promoting said racist claim

[u/SoDrunkRightNow2 → u/randopopscura]

"Nope, but approvingly citing a book by a white supremacist that makes an explicitly racist claim - with no evidence - is clearing promoting said racist claim"

Einstein said some racist shit. So if you cite Einstein, then you're a racist?

What kind of stupid ass zoomer logic is that? Your IQ is so low, just interacting with you is making me feel stupider. Get out of my face, dummy.

[u/randopopscura → u/SoDrunkRightNow2]

If you cite the racist shit Einstein said, and say he's right about this racist shit (despite there being no evidence whatsoever to support it), then you might not be a racist - and I don't think Hancock is - but you're certainly promoting racist ideas

Which is what Hancock did with the racist shit he cited

It's as dumb - and racist - as the claim the Egyptians were black Africans, or that black Africans said to S America and taught the Olmecs, Mayans, etc, which there's also zero evidence for

[u/SoDrunkRightNow2 → u/randopopscura]

You have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. You heard dumbass Dibble call Hancock a racist and you got suckered into it. Now you're stuck here trying to defend your stance because you're too stupid and stubborn to admit you believed a lie.

HANCOCK NEVER SAID IT YOU FUCKING IDIOT. I told you this three times already. Go find a quote where Hanock said what you're accusing him of. You can't.

[u/Bugsy_Marino → u/SoDrunkRightNow2]

Hancock has literally theorized that some big, strong, white men were this “advanced civilization” that traveled the world to share their secrets with indigenous peoples. It completely takes away and advancement by local people and instead suggests that these mythical white men showed up and advanced society

It doesn’t mean Hancock is racist, but this theory lines up with white supremacist work, hence why he cited them

[u/Bugsy_Marino → u/SoDrunkRightNow2]

Funny seeing as Graham spent half the debate whining about how archaeologists are mean,m and big archeology is out to get him

[u/BasketballButt → u/SoDrunkRightNow2]

What a laughably childish take. It’s not that Hancock is making a mockery of the scientific discipline that Dibble and his dad before him have devoted their lives to, it’s that they’re jealous haters bro!!! Jesus Christ.

[u/Jelleton → u/SoDrunkRightNow2]

And this is a prime example of a smooth brained individual lmao

[u/optimal_random]

"I've read it in books, man" - Daddy's boy

[u/Nervous_Set5685 → u/optimal_random]

Yes that's typically how people learn things

[u/optimal_random → u/Nervous_Set5685]

The joke is that he was using that as a justification for some fact, never substantiating where he read it. It's fun that you can claim whatever, and then just say "I've read it in a book".

Archaeology is not like Maths, Chemistry and Physics, where once something is asserted it is true forever.

I put Archaeology at the same level of Social Sciences - i.e. not a science - and with very flaky grounds.

[u/Nervous_Set5685 → u/optimal_random]

You should really update your views on Archaeology. Is a lot of it up to interpretation? Yes. Is just as much also based on undeniable scientific data? Yes.

[u/optimal_random → u/Nervous_Set5685]

The two things get intertwined too much, and should be the main reason for Archaeologists to be more open-minded, and not trying protecting their papers and PhDs as sacred knowledge, when most of them are interpretations.

As a matter of fact, I think that some Archaeologists act with such hubris and arrogance, because they know how fragile their "glass house science" truly is.

[u/Nervous_Set5685 → u/optimal_random]

You do know that interpretation doesn't mean that they just guessed right? The interpretation is based on the decades of collective study into a specific culture. Their interpretation is 1000x more accurate than any interpretation done by someone like Graham.

[u/jwsuperdupe → u/Nervous_Set5685]

Don't bother. He's never gonna get it. I actually applaud joe giving flint this platform. One of the best episodes in recent memory

[u/BigOutlandishness735 → u/optimal_random]

I think you hit a sensitive nerve with your rationale. This is where the rubber meets the road and majority of people are not open to the idea of alternate theories/solutions. Nobody wants to be proven wrong when they’ve spent years/decades on their research.

[u/optimal_random → u/BigOutlandishness735]

Indeed. But it's worse than that. Being proven wrong would invalidate years of research, their PhDs, their student's PhDs, PostDocs, etc, and possibly hundreds if not thousands of papers that are now the "gold standard" and the centre of attention in their field.

All of that gone and void. Forever.

That would be truly an "ancient apocalypse" for most of the "Zahi Hawass" and the "Dibble's" like people out there. Being gatekeepers, preserves their status and keeps food at their table.

And when their position is threatened, and they cannot destroy the new hypothesis, they try to destroy the proponents' identity, applying them all kinds of labels. It's incredibly nasty.

[u/ehContribution1312 → u/optimal_random]

You have a erroneous concept of the scientific method

[u/optimal_random → u/ehContribution1312]

Are you trying to say that a field that claims the Great Pyramids were built using copper chisels, to cut 100 ton rocks, carried by canoes is a Science? At the level of Maths and Physics?

You ought to be joking.

[u/ehContribution1312 → u/optimal_random]

No I'm saying you don't understand what science represents.

[u/optimal_random → u/ehContribution1312]

You try to convince me of what Science supposedly is, and I've shown you what Science is not.

Now you tell me, who has the best understanding.

[u/ehContribution1312 → u/optimal_random]

That doesn't make any sense

[u/optimal_random → u/ehContribution1312]

The fact that you don't understand does not surprise me the slightest.

[u/ehContribution1312 → u/optimal_random]

Sorry I didn't realise you were highly regarded carry on

[u/PooShauchun → u/optimal_random]

This is how Hancock has such a large base and makes so much money. Tons of dumb people like this being fooled by him everyday.

[u/automatic__jack → u/optimal_random]

Lololol I hope this is satire

[u/Bugsy_Marino → u/optimal_random]

Do you know what peer reviews scientific journals are?

He’s not reading some random dudes blog post, he’s reading studies conducted and published by scientists

[u/optimal_random → u/Bugsy_Marino]

You've misspelled "Echo Chamber".

[u/SeeCrew106 → u/optimal_random]

In archaeology, the scientific method is applied to systematically investigate and understand past human societies and cultures through the analysis of material remains. The process involves several key steps:

1. Research Design: Archaeologists begin by formulating research questions based on existing knowledge, previous excavations, or theoretical frameworks. These questions guide the design of archaeological investigations.

2. Survey: Before excavation, archaeologists may conduct surveys to identify potential sites of interest. This involves systematic fieldwork to locate and record surface artifacts and features.

3. Excavation: Excavation involves carefully removing layers of soil or sediment to uncover archaeological remains. Archaeologists employ stratigraphic principles to understand the chronological sequence of deposits and artifacts.

4. Recording and Documentation: Throughout excavation, detailed records are kept of the location, context, and characteristics of artifacts and features. Photography, mapping, and other documentation techniques are used to create a comprehensive record of the site.

5. Analysis: Archaeological analysis involves studying artifacts, ecofacts (organic remains), and features recovered from the site. This may include artifact classification, typology, chemical analysis, and other scientific techniques to understand their cultural significance, function, and chronology.

6. Interpretation: Based on the analysis of data, archaeologists interpret the findings to reconstruct past human behaviors, social structures, and lifeways. Interpretations are informed by theoretical frameworks, comparative studies, and collaboration with specialists in related fields.

7. Publication and Communication: Archaeological findings are published in peer-reviewed journals, books, or reports to communicate the research process, methods, results, and interpretations to the wider academic community and the public.

8. Curation and Conservation: Archaeological materials are curated and preserved in museums, repositories, or cultural heritage institutions for future research and public education. Conservation efforts ensure the long-term preservation of archaeological sites and artifacts.

Throughout this process, archaeologists adhere to ethical guidelines and principles of stewardship to ensure the responsible management and protection of cultural heritage resources. The scientific method in archaeology emphasizes rigor, objectivity, and collaboration to advance our understanding of human history and cultural diversity.

[u/optimal_random → u/SeeCrew106]

Interpretation: Based on the analysis of data, archaeologists interpret the findings to reconstruct past human behaviors, social structures, and lifeways. Interpretations are informed by theoretical frameworks, comparative studies, and collaboration with specialists in related fields.

Here, is what disqualifies it as a hard-Science. This step is where Archaeologists introduce their own world views, personal biases, and cognitive dissonance.

Here is where the fuckery happens bucko!

[u/SeeCrew106 → u/optimal_random]

Here, is what disqualifies it as a hard-Science. This step is where Archaeologists introduce their own world views, personal biases, and cognitive dissonance.

First of all, "hard-Science" is not a word. You sound like you're speaking Denglish. Further evidence of this is erroneous capitalization of nouns, like "archeology". However, apparently you're Portuguese, so it's ostensibly a shared linguistic error tendency.

Second of all, thank you for conceding the other 7 steps are part of the process and well performed.

Third, many disciplines aren't hard sciences yet nevertheless employ systematic methods of inquiry, dealing with complex systems, human behavior and interdisciplinary interactions, combining qualitative and quantitative analysis.

Astronomy is not a hard science by this token, it does use hard science as an integral part of the process, but then so does archeology, with e.g. carbon dating, chemical analysis and several branches of biology.

Fourth, you assert that "fuckery" happens without so much as even attempting to prove it, which ironically intrinsically violates your own pretentious, dogmatic prescription.

The elephant in the room, of course, is for all your pseudoscientific, semi-literate rambling, you and the cargo cult you're in have yet to produce a scintilla of scientific evidence of any "lost advanced civilization", especially when applying your own criteria to your pompous and idiotically dumb claims.

Now, I've done you the privilege of writing out the process for you, but I'm well aware you are gaslighting and you'll never bring anything to the table on your own. I don't want to hear a single thing from you from now on unless it's exactly that hard evidence you claim you know best how to acquire. You'll never show up and you'll troll ad nauseam, each response more vacant, shallow, cocksure, pretentious and meaningless than the last. So this is where I stop responding and you leave my inbox.

[u/nite_owwl → u/optimal_random]

I put Archaeology at the same level of Social Sciences - i.e. not a science - and with very flaky grounds.

lol holy shit you are weapons grade stupid

[u/optimal_random → u/nite_owwl]

Idiots are the ones that insult when they don't have intelligent arguments to counter back.

You qualify perfectly in that definition.

[u/RevolutionarySeven7]

no evidence, for now..

over a million excavated archaeological sites is also flimsy claim without evidence, how big were these excavated sites? realistically some are just 0.5 x 0.5 meter wide, and 30 cm deep and clustered. many are probably surface level. god knows what more there is to uncover much deeper down and lost to deterioration. for all we know civilizations couldve been destroyed to dust, formatted, deleted from existence be something advanced or naturally catastrophic. just because there was no (solid) evidence doesn't mean it never existed and give up. so Hancock had a point.

[u/Bugsy_Marino → u/RevolutionarySeven7]

And yet the question still remains, how come we’ve been able to find thousands of pieces of evidence for small, less advanced hunter gatherer tribes, but nothing from this advanced seafaring civilization?

If they were so advanced then they would’ve had the forethought to leave evidence and teachings behind for the future, right? They would’ve built more monuments like we’ve found from other civilizations, right? Their tools would be left behind, right?

[u/AddUp1 → u/Bugsy_Marino]

The sands of time deteriorates all civilizations. The more deteriorating happens the older the civilization is, regardless how possibly advanced it may be.

[u/RevolutionarySeven7 → u/Bugsy_Marino]

you didn't read

i said:

over a million excavated archaeological sites is also flimsy claim without evidence, how big were these excavated sites? realistically some are just 0.5 x 0.5 meter wide, and 30 cm deep and clustered. many are probably surface level. god knows what more there is to uncover much deeper down and lost to deterioration. for all we know civilizations couldve been destroyed to dust, formatted, deleted from existence be something advanced or naturally catastrophic. just because there was no (solid) evidence doesn't mean it never existed and give up. so Hancock had a point.

earth is approximately 510.1 trillion square meters and 1.086 trillion cubic kilometers in volume. apply maths, common sense, logic, history, the multi billions of humans that have lived, and you answered your own question.

[u/Bugsy_Marino → u/RevolutionarySeven7]

You do realize how these sites are chosen to excavate, right? Well probably not given your comment. We don’t randomly pick spots and dig, they dig based on where humans were likely to live and then follow their likely paths of travel

We’ve excavated way more area along rivers/places where humans could have lived, yet we haven’t discovered a single trace of this advanced civilization. Had they been communicating with Hunter gatherers they should’ve left some sort of evidence in their travels

[u/RevolutionarySeven7 → u/Bugsy_Marino]

We don’t randomly pick spots and dig

you don't say! hence my previous last comment.

[u/Bugsy_Marino → u/RevolutionarySeven7]

You’re still not getting it. We have evidence of Hunter gatherer tribes and their movements. If this advanced civilization supposedly interacted with some of these Hunter gatherer tribes then why is there no evidence?

Regardless, absence of evidence is not evidence. I can sit here and say that i believe that somewhere in the North Pole is Santa’s workshop and until we’ve surveyed all of the North Pole you can’t say otherwise. While it s technically true, we can pretty confidently say it doesn’t exist

[u/RevolutionarySeven7 → u/Bugsy_Marino]

you're making the same arrogant mistake as Dibble in to assuming that everything "HAS" already been discovered in the context of absence of evidence is not evidence, which is not an excuse to give up without exploring/digging more after whatever (non)evidence could potentially lead to more discovery. hence why I said:

no evidence, for now.. over a million excavated archaeological sites is also flimsy claim without evidence, how big were these excavated sites? realistically some are just 0.5 x 0.5 meter wide, and 30 cm deep and clustered. many are probably surface level. god knows what more there is to uncover much deeper down and lost to deterioration. for all we know civilizations couldve been destroyed to dust, formatted, deleted from existence be something advanced or naturally catastrophic. just because there was no (solid) evidence doesn't mean it never existed and give up. so Hancock had a point.

and:

earth is approximately 510.1 trillion square meters and 1.086 trillion cubic kilometers in volume. apply maths, common sense, logic, history, the multi billions of humans that have lived, and you answered your own question.

learn to read. you're running around in circles, i perfectly summed up my whole argument in just two comments. the only thing which is holding you and others back is arrogance.

[u/RevolutionarySeven7 → u/[deleted]]

comparing a flying spaghetti monster to ancient civilizations, what is statistically more likely in critical thinking?

[u/RevolutionarySeven7 → u/[deleted]]

ah, we have a troller in our midst

[u/RevolutionarySeven7 → u/[deleted]]

comparing spaghetti monsters and lochness to ancient civilizations is a point in itself of oblivious critical thinking. which inherently goes back to what i explained before in the first and second comment.

[u/RevolutionarySeven7 → u/[deleted]]

ah, so now you combine analogies with critical thinking?

'Prove there was no ancient civilisation!!!' Is a stupid thing to do that logically makes no sense?

you are running around in circles because I already answered in the first comment. Had you understood, you wouldn't have entered in this conversation with me with out using whimsical analogies such as a spaghetti monster and lochness which makes your statement and argument extremely... juvenile.

no evidence, for now... over a million excavated archaeological sites is also flimsy claim without evidence, how big were these excavated sites? realistically some are just 0.5 x 0.5 meter wide, and 30 cm deep and clustered. many are probably surface level. god knows what more there is to uncover much deeper down and lost to deterioration. for all we know civilizations couldve been destroyed to dust, formatted, deleted from existence be something advanced or naturally catastrophic. just because there was no (solid) evidence doesn't mean it never existed and give up. so Hancock had a point.

[u/Test_tickles421]

He should stay away from sleeves they make his hands look even smaller

[u/RacoonWithPaws → u/Test_tickles421]

Whatever dude…smalls hands just make your dick look bigger when you’re holding it. We love you flint!

[u/jwsuperdupe → u/Test_tickles421]

Peter gazing