04-18-2024, 09:11 AM
-
#31
- eddiehaskell
- Join Date: Oct 2009
- Age: 42
- Posts: 16,178
- Rep Power: 33829
-
-
this was interesting and right or wrong...the older guy is very intelligent and well researched.
04-18-2024, 09:18 AM
-
#32
04-18-2024, 09:19 AM
-
#33
04-24-2024, 12:43 PM
-
#34
- jtaylor2010
- Join Date: Mar 2010
- Location: United States
- Posts: 33,186
- Rep Power: 441972
-
-
Finally got around to finishing this and just lol at thinking Dibble disproved Graham’s theories. He basically refused to accept any theories that haven’t been 100% confirmed regardless of how strong the evidence is or how much the number of people who accept the theory is growing. Instantly dismissed the Younger Dryas impact theory. Instantly dismissed water erosion on the sphinx. Instantly brushed all evidence by basically just rejecting it. Even when it came to the insane accomplishments of the Egyptians, when asked by Rogan if he could at least agree there was a HUGE gap between the Egyptians and the rest of the world, all he could muster was “they were doing different things”. Couldn’t even bring himself to say they were more advanced.
He did bring up some interesting things throughout the conversation though and it was good to hear from someone in that field. But as he said a few times “we work from the known go the unknown”. Nothing wrong with that approach per se if that’s how you want to go, but if you take that path just realize you’ll be the absolute last to accept a true statement as true. Also realize that the approach by its very nature forces extremely slow progress and changes in perspective. And I don’t even think Graham did a great job presenting his case, just decent. But just decent was good enough to prevent Dibble from making any great cases against it.
Also, just lol at Dibble throwing the ole “he’s racist, sexist, misogynistic, and anti-Semitic” attack at Hancock. That alone should tell you the counter is pretty terrible.
He did bring up some interesting things throughout the conversation though and it was good to hear from someone in that field. But as he said a few times “we work from the known go the unknown”. Nothing wrong with that approach per se if that’s how you want to go, but if you take that path just realize you’ll be the absolute last to accept a true statement as true. Also realize that the approach by its very nature forces extremely slow progress and changes in perspective. And I don’t even think Graham did a great job presenting his case, just decent. But just decent was good enough to prevent Dibble from making any great cases against it.
Also, just lol at Dibble throwing the ole “he’s racist, sexist, misogynistic, and anti-Semitic” attack at Hancock. That alone should tell you the counter is pretty terrible.
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-

- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts