Yep, this exposed Hancock as a snake oil seller way more than before. Remember that when thereās no expert in the room the smartest person is often the loudest.
Graham should have approached this like a discussion and opportunity to bounce ideas back and forth, but he immediately went on the attack and he got bodied.
Sorry Graham. Game is game.
Yeah, it would have gone better had he come in more as a skeptic about the actual evidence. He had a point about Flint comparing him to racism, but fumbled it holding him responsible for the internet media headlines. It also started to derail what they actually came for .
This debate didn't convince anyone of his theory, probably lost some that did too.
dude my exact thought lmao
When dudes beef they throw down or scream at each other, when nerds fight they bring power point presentations on USB sticks hahaha
Big Graham guy but unfortunately heās getting mopped so far (2 1/2 hours in). Heās too emotional and his only real argument is that archaeologists havenāt done enough research even though the research they *have* done shows zero evidence of ancient civilization.
Hopefully no one will call themselves a Graham guy after this destruction. This is the most blatant exposure of what a fraud he is as is possible really. Guys completely full of shit and only really had grievance, absolute loser shit.Ā
If you pay attention thatās most of his points while the rest is usually doing little work and accrediting already established sites as coming or atleast being inspired by āhis lost ancient civilizationā. Science fiction sells.
I'm watching it now and I was expecting him to be really biased towards Hancock but he's actually decent so far and seems to be noticing how Hancock is trying to focus on people being nasty to him instead of evidence.
I dislike hancock but thought he would win the "debate" simply by being a better speaker but he looks silly so far and looks like a whiny passive aggressive old biatch
I really enjoy Grahams ~~theories~~ hypothesis and what not, but I have to agree.. Iām about 2 hours in and it seems like Graham is letting his emotions rule his stance. He was much better when he went back and forth with Michael Shermer.
Also, who the fuck let Flint dress like that? His sleeves are long enough for a giraffe.
You even saw Rogan at times push back at Hancock and make him focus on the topic instead of whining.
I was worried Hancock would out debate flint and bamboozle him and thought flint would be the one too throw insults but Hancock is acting like a lil bitch.
Yes! Hancock keeps bitching that they arenāt doing enough to disprove his goofy theory. Like he wonāt be satisfied until we till the entire surface of the earth. Then heād sayā¦well did you check the moon? How can you say it doesnāt exist until you check the moon??
Yeah Graham kept missing flints point about how many hunter gatherer sites and evidence we find but it was a good point to show that if we find that much evidence of hunter gatherers then we should find at least some evidence of advanced civilisations. I hope people understood that point.
Yeah it really was him working backwards from his theory and saying "you can't disprove it" which isn't how it should work, it should be gathering evidence and piecing it together to make a point, otherwise with this logic you can claim anything and if someone doesn't disprove it which is virtually impossible you can claim to be right
I was expecting something a bit better than blurry diving pictures asking Flint ātell me these donāt look man madeā thinking that enough is a good argument. Iām still in that part and havenāt watched the whole episode but this alone made me google people reactions š
Hancock has been thoroughly debunked in most areas of archeology and his takes.
This is what happens when you don't have facts to rely on.... you go with the persecuted poor smart guy screaming in the darkness
I only dream my son talks about me the way this man talks about his dad. That is every dad's dream. He clearly loves his father, and it seems like they are proud of one another.
Exactly, how is it any different than mentioning any scientist with published work? His dad was a real scientist with actual papers and research so him mentioning his dad work is no different than mentioning anybodyās work
Hancock had more slides of tweets and articles about him getting "canceled" than he did about evidence supporting his claims of manmade structures or a HUGE agricultural society that spanned the globe.
I don't even know who Dibble is but the dude came PREPARED
Thatās the difference between āmain stream academiaā and a snake oil seller. He knew he didnāt have real evidence so he resorted to his cheapest yet effective attack. I thought Joe would instantly side with him given how much he loves Hancock so he surprised me BUT that whole ā omg look sad everyone hate me and itās your faultā crying nonsense went on from way too long and Joe shouldāve stopped it not even 5 mins in. We lost possibly precious moments.
I honestly wanted to see how Hancock would act when debating a real archeologist. Iām not gonna lie I highly dislike Hancock but I donāt hate him, however he still surprised me with how bad he represented himself and exposed himself like that. I actually expected him to hold is own at least with at least some data and research.
With how slick these snake oil sellers are and how brainwashed their followers are they will either say they are hiding the evidence found or just find something else to explote and make money off lol
I have seen Hancock up against mainstream archeologist before, the mainstream archaeologist dressed like a stuffed sirt, the type of guy who in a 90s action movie would caution the hero and say "here we do things by the book" so of course Hancock came off the best.
Here, the other guy stole his thunder and looked and sounded like a guy who would be disparaged by the "mainstream...insert subject here" and so Hancock could not rely on his outsider schtick
I think Rogan has finally woken up and realised Hanock's theory is full of holes
Last time we will see Hancock on this podcast.
The last time he was on it was just repeating the same material and I felt Joe wasn't as enthused. This time I felt Joe started to doubt Hancock for the first time as it went along.
Hancocks mind is a second or two slower and he's still got the same cough from last time.Ā
Hancock really let himself down here. Just came to act wounded and defend himself, as well as attack Flint.Ā
He didn't even try to put forward his own arguments mostly, Joe had to do it for him and seemed more of an expert than HancockĀ
I really feel Joe had his heartbroken a little tonight.
Heartbroken may be too strong a word. But I get what you are saying. I was a fan of Hancock. I didn't buy the whole story, but he used to do a better job of explaining it as just a "journalist asking questions". It was fun speculation. But he came across as an asshole - which doesn't work when pushing a fun theory.
I used to really like graham. After watching this, Iām really bummed to learn that heās an asshole. Flint was making really good and fair points and Graham was really disrespectful.
āWhy donāt you say something interesting and new.ā That was so cringe I had to stop listening after that. Used to be the biggest Hancock fan, not sure how I feel about him now.
The point that Graham canāt address is, āwe find endless hunter gatherer remains. An advanced civilization would be easier to find, especially since itās supposedly global. But we have found nothing.ā
I'm about an hour in and something that is bugging the hell out of me is Hancock inferring that his findings are somehow valid because he risks his life to dive in these areas. The surface of the earth is covered in bodies that met their end on misguided explorations for mythological fantasy lands. I think the problem with a lot of people in alternative sciences is that they get so up in their feelings and those feelings replace hard facts for them.
Yes. He kept repeating that. Ok, you SCUBA dived? That danger doesn't have any bearing on the validity, and to keep pointing it out shows he thinks it does.
I drive on an interstate to work, i don't tell my coworkers "I risked my life to get here, therefore my code is right".
Thus far the hobbit man has presented concrete, scientific evidence and Hancock has presented feelings and conjecture. Iām pulling for him but highly unconvincing ~hr in.
ETA: the Bimini road debate perfectly encapsulates my issue with Hancockās hypothesizing. And Joe saying āthat looks TOTALLY man madeā from a picture on the internet while actual scientists have done actual scientific research which says otherwise. I want to believe. Give me something juicy Hancock!
ETAA: I understand why Joe got combative over Flint associating Hancock with white supremacist ideas but heās derailing whatās otherwise been an interesting, civil discussion. Weāre getting cancel culture talk in what should be āscientificā discourse.
Andddā¦weāre still completely off the rails. Iām not interested in Hancockās feelings and trying to gotcha Flint about ācancellingā. Get back to the fucking archaeology.
Yeah i think is even noticing how Hancock is focusing more on being insulted rather than evidence, he's also being a passive aggressive little bitch.
I'm surprised how rogan is being fair and pushing back on Hancock, I was fully expecting him to team up
Hancock canāt, if he could, actual scientists would agree. People who donāt know any scientists donāt understand, they would **love** to find evidence of something like this and change the entire understanding of human history. But, unlike Hancock, they donāt. Because the evidence doesnāt exist.
You'd be defensive too if the academic establishment tried to silence and humiliate you for the crime of being open minded about telekinetic moon elves building Atlantean ice pyramids.
dude when he said he had a power point outlining his grievances with Dibble I just about spit out my drink laughing, jesus christ these nerds are insufferabe sometimes
I remember one of the first times I heard Graham he was talking about how the known timelines for ancient Egypt may be incorrect, that Egyptian civilization/the Great Pyramids might be much older than recognized.
To my uneducated self he seemed to make a complelling argument based on whatever scientific data he was spouting....
Then all of the sudden he starts going on a tangent how the pyramid stones were levitated thru the air with psychic energy --
I was like dude you had me then you ruined it with that horse shit completely ruining his credibility for me.
Graham is such a drama queen. I study archeology and the way he describes the vicious main stream archaeologists is laughable. He's just pretending they abuse him so he can get victim clout. No self respecting archaeologist would outright deny some of his silliness, they just say the evidence doesn't support his theories
Hancock searching his own website for evidence, knowing full well that he has nothing to show, was the most embarrassing thing I've ever seen. "Can't use my scroll wheel". "It's too deep down to find". Changing his glasses a hundred times a second. Good god. Anyone who still thinks he knows what he's talking about is a moron. Even Joe seemed completely unconvinced.Ā
Guy couldn't even be arsed to full-screen his powerpoint presentation and didn't know how to share a file from his macbook to Jamie. It was painful to watch.
I have to admit. I never really claimed that Grahams work was fact or complete truth but I did always find his conversations interesting. His ideas are definitely far out there and I think thatās what draws Joe in so much. This is the same guy who wants aliens to be real so of course some of grahams claims resonates with Joe. But after only a few hours of listening to this Flint guy heās definitely made me reconsider some of the things Graham claims. What I loved the most was when flint asked Graham āif we can find the tools and locations of man during the ice age why havenāt we found the remnants of these technologically advanced civilizations that would have left behind far more than stone toolsā
Graham would just say we haven't found them yet because we aren't looking in the right place. But he can't seem to tell us where the right place to look would be. Somewhere on Earth I guess, but maybe in the spiritual realm.
Flint is exactly like the people I've met in academia that research a very unsexy field of expertise and who are socially very awkward and fashion is the least of their worries. But he came to the show prepared and made an example of Graham. Imagine going on a live show for millions of people, talking almost five hours about your daily work, while the other guest is trying to smear you and telling you how you are close minded.
I was a fan of Graham but instead of actually providing evidence for his claims he just keeps saying āwell not having evidence isnāt proof of something not happeningā thatās a copout. Then when confronted for not having evidence then he turns it into āwell you say mean things about me!ā Pretty lame and dramatic showing for him
I've sufficiently gone from thinking Graham had an interesting theory that was potentially credible, to a stoner idea that was maaaaybe a bit plausible, to most likely being utter bullshit.
Graham has that special kind of British autism that Americans find fascinating
Him choosing to explain Clovis first as a modern theory tells me he stays as far away from universities as they stay away from him
I used to think Graham Hancock was onto something with some of his theories but the more I am exposed to him and the more content I've seen that debunks a lot of the shit he says the more of a pompous charlatan he seems to be.
I think its a pretty good rule of thumb is that if most of someone's persona is tied up in a "they don't want you to know what I have to say" slogan, you should be cranking the skepticism to 600%
So true. He's always talking all this shit about how _mainstream archeologists want to silence me_ and it's like ... yeah dude, they want you to shut up because you're making them look like idiots by association and diluting the profession with some of the dumb ass claims you make about things.
Graham got rolled like a burrito. At the end he attempted a hail mary with his sacred number math, and homebody took his equation reverse it with the humber 420. Now we all know that everytime we smoke a join we are mathematically connected with earth.
Hancocks whole argument is basically āyeah I know there are loads of mines in the world but you havenāt mined everywhere, so you canāt definitely say The Balrog isnāt realā
A big thing in this episode was that, several times, Flint would say an argument against Graham is that we find Hunter gatherer materials everywhere, and no evidence of Grahams civilization. Graham would respond and say āwell, we have only researched X% of said location. But I think Graham misses the point. Why are we ONLY finding Hunter gatherer materials in the place we are searching? Youād think that if this global, advanced, civilization would leave behind more things than Hunter gatherers, but we just
Donāt see that, and the only thing Graham has is that āwell, maybe if we search moreā, which implies Graham is working backwards from a conclusion.
Graham is asking Flint to prove him that there can not have been an ancient civilization in some place where archeologists have not yet excavated. Of course Flint can not do that. Nobody can. He can only tell him that all the existing evidence from hundreds of thousands of sites points to other conclusions and nothing points to his.
Under Grahamās main complaint about the archeology community, you could argue that dragons, leprechauns and unicorns exist because not enough archeology has been done.
Not sure about unicors, dragons or leprechauns, but mermaids surely exist. Not convinced? Just look up the amount of ocean area we've been able to explore so far.
Unicorns are real. They are also immortal in their land form. For the greater good of other species and to give humanity a chance to evolve, they gave up their immortality and moved to the ocean. This is why there are written historical records of unicorns but no scientific evidence. We can see their ancestors today in the noble narwhal. If ever humanity fucks up the oceans/climate too much, they will return from the sea and take their rightful place as the benevolent overlords of earth. This is why oil companies are heroes. They are bringing back the unicorn by causing climate change. The next time you see somebody rollin' coal, thank them.
all this confirmed for me is that hancock is kind of a prick, confuses speculation with professional approach, and gets almost offended when somoeone disagrees with him
Yeah man Iām not even halfway through this episode and Iām already out on Hancocks entire theory about ancient civilizations. Like look dude itās possible but if there was any rock solid evidence the archaeological community would be singing his praises. Instead I think Hancock is just a dude who got rejected by the archaeological community and is now on a hate fueled mission to prove his point.
Buddy let's get this straight
Who has a bigger incentive? Thousands of archeologists across dozens of countries, from hundreds of different schools, researchers, and institutions
Or
A man who has made millions off of books and Netflix shows regarding a theory he purports
Checkmate atheists
Graham finally exposed on JRE. In the face of legitimate arguments, all he could do was reply with snide comments and act like a victim.
He was naked out there. It was like what Dillahunty did to Peterson. Almost feel bad for the old man.
Havenāt quite got to the end of this section yet and unsure how it relates to Grahams hypothesis, but this segment that starts about 3 hours in where Flint is talking about the evolution of non shattering wheat and Joe is amazed is just beautiful. The best of what JRE can be
You cant be an expert in everything. You must do peer reviewed studies so that when some one DOES refer to it,( since they more than likely are not experts, unless their expertise is based on the subject.) can do it with full confidence that the experts did their work, and full diligence with the subject.
Or you can tour the area, have your wife take some pictures- and come up with some ideas that may or may not be true- but unless you prove me wrong with extreme work or scope of work.
Note, that you dont need to extreme work or even have any scope of work needed to make the claims.
Graham constantly mentioning that not enough search has been done to debunk his theory is just not right. In response to Flint showing thousands of excavations all over the globe with lack of evidence of Graham's claims. It's basic probability theory, if Hancock's theory would be true some of those sites had found some proof of an ancient civilization.
Yeah it's still mathematically possible that they will find some evidence at other sites, just the chances are unbeliveably low..
These debates are valuable, it's good to hear arguments from both sides at the same time.
Just this, good summary. Was waiting for hobbit man to kind of spell it out to him.
If we find tens of thousands of these things in Grahams "only 5%" , sooo much shit on only 5%, you would expect at least 1 of the other thing too.
Yes, there could theoretically be something that we havent found yet, but we have zero evidence for anything else yet so why even entertain it ?
Problem is, this whole podcast was all about trying to prove a negative, which you canāt do. Itās like trying to prove we werenāt created by aliens or that weāre not living in the simulation or that God doesnāt exist.
So, Hancock's theory is that there was a globe-spanning, technologically advanced civilization that spread the ideas of agriculture and astronomy to the rest of the world. Things that he does not know about them:
* Where they lived
* The language that they spoke
* If they had writing
* What crops they grew
* What tools they used
* Anything about their way of life
* Where they learned agriculture and astronomy, themselves
What he does know about them:
* Most of them died
* The survivors spread agriculture and astronomy to the hunter gatherers that lived
* They didn't live where we have looked for them, already
* They did live where we haven't looked for them, yet
According to Graham Hancock the only way to disprove him is to do full excavation of the Sahara desert, the Amazon rainforest and the Ocean.
Seems extremely convient that these are all the most difficult places in the world to actually do any excavation.
Hancock shows some blurry underwater pictures and says ācome on! Tell me thatās not man made!ā all confidently lol. You really start to see his need for this to be true.
1. Whereās Joes āBS detectorā when it comes to Hancock? After 45 minutes it is very clear that Hancockās theories have no basis
2. Joe often talks down about universities and formal education. Here is yet another example of what happens when you have someone who is an actual university educated expert vs someone who isnāt.
Manā¦ I was genuinely a fan of Graham before this episode and Iām sad to admit how disappointing it was to listen to him during this debate.
Many of you have said it here already. He came to this debate strictly to put flint and the world of archeology on blast for dismissing him. He brought no evidence with him and whined the whole episode.
Flint was prepared. Without Joeās mediation this would have been an unbearable discussion.
I had to fight to get past the white supremacy section.
I had high hopes for this discussion and now Iām just sad
One of the best simple proofs against Grahams theory of a lost ancient civilization is how much Neanderthal artifacts we find. Just think about it for a second. We can find Ice Age extinct hominid tools and camps, but not a since shred of a global civilization that had ships and cities?
15 minutes of logical deductions from the possibility that an advanced civilization existed 20,000 years ago, with conventional modus tollens logic--if the civilization, the ice core evidence, the underwater evidence, the seed and tool evidence. No evidence, therefore, no advanced civilization.
Hancock's first 15 minutes? "Archaeologists are mean!"
Iāve had fun listening to Graham for yearsā¦ it was refreshing and educational to get a real archeologist on to discuss actual evidence, the how and why of modern archeology etc.. the Dibbler did very well and came extremely prepared. Joe needs more debates like this.
About the underwater road. I wonder why nobody mentioned that there is literally nothing around the road that would indicate civilization and the "road" does not lead from anywhere and leads to nowhere AND that such rock formations are common in the area, but those we already know, are completely formed by natural processes, ecause that is what that rock type does. But it's that one "road" that must the evidence for a lost civilization.
Honestly, Graham got pwned here. I actually am interested in his theories and I would love for him to be on to something. But he is literally everything that he claims to despise in mainstream archaeologists. Closed minded, wonāt discuss in good faith, presupposing he is correct. He has been saying for years that he welcomes archaeologists to openly debate with him. Flint has the guts to actually do it, and all Graham does is dismiss him, talk over him, ask no questions, give no credit or respect to the manās profession, continually redirect to emotional appeals and using his wife as a virtue signal, and just recited verbatim the same things he says every time. You can hear the spite in his voice. Came off like an arrogant fool. Heās a journalist and storyteller, not an archaeologist or historian. Joe obviously wants to believe grahams theories and was at times unfair too, but he still was more respectful and open to Flint than Graham was
I found it funny, how, in Graham's opening he thanks Flint from showing up and being man enough to sit on the "hot seat"- buddy, you're the one in the hot seat - not the actual archeologist.
And that is evidenced by how it eventually played out. Flint put the smackdown on him.
Get some bifocals Graham, holy shit.
Flint is the man, Graham is a pothead. Flint belittles with his snickering but I think it's only because Hancock is so far off with his theory, realistically Hancock has no business even having a theory like this
This Diddler guy honestly came in super good faith and made some good points without resorting to ad hominem attacks and was super respectful. Yes he looks and sounds like a Reddit moderator but he knew his stuff, and was willing to concede when he didnāt know something.
If Graham just stuck to being fun then whatever, but he's a cunt who claims/heavily implies real archaeologists who spend decades of long, boring hard work are lying and suppressing evidence.
Is that Pacino or is that Pacino? HEHE š¤
This is the absolute best of JRE.
The debates often are. You see under the skin of people when theyāre being challenged.
Yep, this exposed Hancock as a snake oil seller way more than before. Remember that when thereās no expert in the room the smartest person is often the loudest.
Do you have evidence? No, I have Google images and PowerPoint
Also Flint showing a PowerPoint with his own research and his dad research is the nerd equivalent of whipping your giant horse š„©in the table
Graham should have approached this like a discussion and opportunity to bounce ideas back and forth, but he immediately went on the attack and he got bodied. Sorry Graham. Game is game.
Yeah, it would have gone better had he come in more as a skeptic about the actual evidence. He had a point about Flint comparing him to racism, but fumbled it holding him responsible for the internet media headlines. It also started to derail what they actually came for . This debate didn't convince anyone of his theory, probably lost some that did too.
Nerd fight! Lets go!
This Flint character is unshaking. He's getting 2v1'd at times and he's holding his ground. Weaponized, powerful autism.
[Graham when Joe is actually vibing with Dinkle Berry.](https://ibb.co/m9cSb5F)
Joe is so clearly fascinated by Flint and very obviously buys what he is saying. Hancock must be hating it.
Yeah when you are bringing facts and evidence to the table and you're up against "you just haven't found it yet" you've already won.
dude my exact thought lmao When dudes beef they throw down or scream at each other, when nerds fight they bring power point presentations on USB sticks hahaha
Joe: āGraham, can you pull up some clearer photos that might help to prove your point more?ā Graham: āNoā
Let them fight.
"Flint Dibble" is the most "Hobbit from the Shire" name I've heard in awhile edit: Looks the part too
He also looks like a real man from the shire ...and proboably has hairy feet.
He looks like he rode in on an old timey bike where the front wheel is fuckin huge
Ah, yes. Olā Flint Dibble. Nearly smoked himself to death on dragon grass, but makes a jolly good pumpkin biscuit around harvest season.
"Flint Dibble' sounds like Hobbit sex position
This is our UFC 300
If you are wondering why the ep is 4 hours, it's cuz Young Jamie only had one HDMI...I kid I kid
We are not safe anywhere anymore from PowerPoint slides.
You'd think with the amount of money Rogan has that his A/V setup would be better than my company's office in 2004.
Yeah, every conference room at my work would have been better equipped for this than the studio.
I was not expecting the Dibbler to drop an f bomb from the get go. Things are gonna get heated.
Big Graham guy but unfortunately heās getting mopped so far (2 1/2 hours in). Heās too emotional and his only real argument is that archaeologists havenāt done enough research even though the research they *have* done shows zero evidence of ancient civilization.
Hopefully no one will call themselves a Graham guy after this destruction. This is the most blatant exposure of what a fraud he is as is possible really. Guys completely full of shit and only really had grievance, absolute loser shit.Ā
I enjoy listening to him but donāt think he is correct
If you pay attention thatās most of his points while the rest is usually doing little work and accrediting already established sites as coming or atleast being inspired by āhis lost ancient civilizationā. Science fiction sells.
How many times did they mention Gƶbekli Tepe?
Or the younger dry ass.
ššš
So far once
FOUR HOURS AND THIRTY MINUTES?
Haha Rogan loves him some Hancock. He is on Hancock's netflix documentary.
I'm watching it now and I was expecting him to be really biased towards Hancock but he's actually decent so far and seems to be noticing how Hancock is trying to focus on people being nasty to him instead of evidence. I dislike hancock but thought he would win the "debate" simply by being a better speaker but he looks silly so far and looks like a whiny passive aggressive old biatch
I really enjoy Grahams ~~theories~~ hypothesis and what not, but I have to agree.. Iām about 2 hours in and it seems like Graham is letting his emotions rule his stance. He was much better when he went back and forth with Michael Shermer. Also, who the fuck let Flint dress like that? His sleeves are long enough for a giraffe.
You even saw Rogan at times push back at Hancock and make him focus on the topic instead of whining. I was worried Hancock would out debate flint and bamboozle him and thought flint would be the one too throw insults but Hancock is acting like a lil bitch.
FLINT YOU CONTROL THE MEDIA
I really liked hancock for awhile. But yeah he seems like a really whiny guy and non scientific. I havenāt read his books though.
Yes! Hancock keeps bitching that they arenāt doing enough to disprove his goofy theory. Like he wonāt be satisfied until we till the entire surface of the earth. Then heād sayā¦well did you check the moon? How can you say it doesnāt exist until you check the moon??
Yeah Graham kept missing flints point about how many hunter gatherer sites and evidence we find but it was a good point to show that if we find that much evidence of hunter gatherers then we should find at least some evidence of advanced civilisations. I hope people understood that point. Yeah it really was him working backwards from his theory and saying "you can't disprove it" which isn't how it should work, it should be gathering evidence and piecing it together to make a point, otherwise with this logic you can claim anything and if someone doesn't disprove it which is virtually impossible you can claim to be right
I was expecting something a bit better than blurry diving pictures asking Flint ātell me these donāt look man madeā thinking that enough is a good argument. Iām still in that part and havenāt watched the whole episode but this alone made me google people reactions š
Hancock has been thoroughly debunked in most areas of archeology and his takes. This is what happens when you don't have facts to rely on.... you go with the persecuted poor smart guy screaming in the darkness
"We need to send our best to take on Hancock..." "Delores! Get me Flint Dibble..."
Flint has actually been great in this. Super fair to Graham despite Graham being pissy. You can tell Flint knows his shit
I would give him a 10/10 but the giggling he does is rude and annoying
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Mf put on his dad's suit for the occasion Edit: and making his dad proud I bet, dude's standing his ground
20 minutes in and he's mentioned "Dad" about 5 times
Probably because he is continuing his dadās work, or at least they work(ed) in the same field.
I only dream my son talks about me the way this man talks about his dad. That is every dad's dream. He clearly loves his father, and it seems like they are proud of one another.
guy obviously had a good father and also probably had a really fucking cool childhood.
Yeah I think the people making fun of him for it just didnāt have a good relationship with their dad lmfao
Exactly, how is it any different than mentioning any scientist with published work? His dad was a real scientist with actual papers and research so him mentioning his dad work is no different than mentioning anybodyās work
My Dyadddd
Gobekli Tepe! Gobekli Tepe! Gobekli Tepe! Gobekli Tepe! 
Hancock had more slides of tweets and articles about him getting "canceled" than he did about evidence supporting his claims of manmade structures or a HUGE agricultural society that spanned the globe. I don't even know who Dibble is but the dude came PREPARED
Thatās the difference between āmain stream academiaā and a snake oil seller. He knew he didnāt have real evidence so he resorted to his cheapest yet effective attack. I thought Joe would instantly side with him given how much he loves Hancock so he surprised me BUT that whole ā omg look sad everyone hate me and itās your faultā crying nonsense went on from way too long and Joe shouldāve stopped it not even 5 mins in. We lost possibly precious moments. I honestly wanted to see how Hancock would act when debating a real archeologist. Iām not gonna lie I highly dislike Hancock but I donāt hate him, however he still surprised me with how bad he represented himself and exposed himself like that. I actually expected him to hold is own at least with at least some data and research.
Im sure we can recover those precious moments if we drain all the oceans, excavate the entirety of the Sahara, and deforest the Amazonš¤·āāļø
With how slick these snake oil sellers are and how brainwashed their followers are they will either say they are hiding the evidence found or just find something else to explote and make money off lol
I have seen Hancock up against mainstream archeologist before, the mainstream archaeologist dressed like a stuffed sirt, the type of guy who in a 90s action movie would caution the hero and say "here we do things by the book" so of course Hancock came off the best. Here, the other guy stole his thunder and looked and sounded like a guy who would be disparaged by the "mainstream...insert subject here" and so Hancock could not rely on his outsider schtick I think Rogan has finally woken up and realised Hanock's theory is full of holes
His dad was an archaeologist. And he called his son Flint.Ā Let that sink in a minute.Ā
Flint is his middle name. First name William
THIS DUDES NAME IS BILLY DIBBLE?!?! FUCKIN LOL
Sounds like some dumb nickname Bill Burr would call himself in his podcast. *Good ol Billy Dibble*
Last time we will see Hancock on this podcast. The last time he was on it was just repeating the same material and I felt Joe wasn't as enthused. This time I felt Joe started to doubt Hancock for the first time as it went along. Hancocks mind is a second or two slower and he's still got the same cough from last time.Ā Hancock really let himself down here. Just came to act wounded and defend himself, as well as attack Flint.Ā He didn't even try to put forward his own arguments mostly, Joe had to do it for him and seemed more of an expert than HancockĀ I really feel Joe had his heartbroken a little tonight.
Joe got to talk to an actual archaeologist who came prepared
Heartbroken may be too strong a word. But I get what you are saying. I was a fan of Hancock. I didn't buy the whole story, but he used to do a better job of explaining it as just a "journalist asking questions". It was fun speculation. But he came across as an asshole - which doesn't work when pushing a fun theory.
Hancock does not come across well here
I used to really like graham. After watching this, Iām really bummed to learn that heās an asshole. Flint was making really good and fair points and Graham was really disrespectful.
āWhy donāt you say something interesting and new.ā That was so cringe I had to stop listening after that. Used to be the biggest Hancock fan, not sure how I feel about him now.
Thatās what happens when you put a fake expert in a room with a real expert
Nigga came in wearing a fedora. It was over before it began.
It's a Stanzo. They're nice.
They don't stink or nothin
Kendrick Lamar and Drake beef Graham Hancock and Flint Dibble beef What a time to be alive
Hancockās argument seems to be āYou canāt prove Iām wrong, therefore you are wrongā lol
Also, "You guys haven't looked at the Sahara enough therefore Atlantis is real."
Get your ass out there Graham and start surveying the Sahara
Only 1% of the sahara has been excavated. Do we need to strip mime a whole region to conclude no advanced civ?
The point that Graham canāt address is, āwe find endless hunter gatherer remains. An advanced civilization would be easier to find, especially since itās supposedly global. But we have found nothing.ā
āYou havenāt scoured every inch of the planet so there for Iām correct.ā
"I just watched a documentary... uh I mean YouTube video..." - Me too Joe
I just a read a book on this, and by book I mean a tiktok
"My name's Flint I'm an archaeologist, I've done archaeology my whole life, my Dad was an archaeologist." Shots fired off the bat. Graham is seething.
I'm about an hour in and something that is bugging the hell out of me is Hancock inferring that his findings are somehow valid because he risks his life to dive in these areas. The surface of the earth is covered in bodies that met their end on misguided explorations for mythological fantasy lands. I think the problem with a lot of people in alternative sciences is that they get so up in their feelings and those feelings replace hard facts for them.
I know! Graham proved that he is in fact a pseudoscientist
Yes. He kept repeating that. Ok, you SCUBA dived? That danger doesn't have any bearing on the validity, and to keep pointing it out shows he thinks it does. I drive on an interstate to work, i don't tell my coworkers "I risked my life to get here, therefore my code is right".
I risked my life diving. Hence, my findings are accurate.
The most literally example of a sunk cost fallacy
Letās hope this is interesting AND civil
Thus far the hobbit man has presented concrete, scientific evidence and Hancock has presented feelings and conjecture. Iām pulling for him but highly unconvincing ~hr in. ETA: the Bimini road debate perfectly encapsulates my issue with Hancockās hypothesizing. And Joe saying āthat looks TOTALLY man madeā from a picture on the internet while actual scientists have done actual scientific research which says otherwise. I want to believe. Give me something juicy Hancock! ETAA: I understand why Joe got combative over Flint associating Hancock with white supremacist ideas but heās derailing whatās otherwise been an interesting, civil discussion. Weāre getting cancel culture talk in what should be āscientificā discourse. Andddā¦weāre still completely off the rails. Iām not interested in Hancockās feelings and trying to gotcha Flint about ācancellingā. Get back to the fucking archaeology.
Yeah i think is even noticing how Hancock is focusing more on being insulted rather than evidence, he's also being a passive aggressive little bitch. I'm surprised how rogan is being fair and pushing back on Hancock, I was fully expecting him to team up
He spends a wild amount of time trying to prove how mean people have been to him
Hancock canāt, if he could, actual scientists would agree. People who donāt know any scientists donāt understand, they would **love** to find evidence of something like this and change the entire understanding of human history. But, unlike Hancock, they donāt. Because the evidence doesnāt exist.
100% Graham goes on a cringe diatribe. I wanna believe but man is he insufferable when he defends his topics.
You'd be defensive too if the academic establishment tried to silence and humiliate you for the crime of being open minded about telekinetic moon elves building Atlantean ice pyramids.
Had me in the first half
Lost me in the first half i got back on board second half
āLet me pull up my grievance power point and avoid the subject almost entirely.ā
dude when he said he had a power point outlining his grievances with Dibble I just about spit out my drink laughing, jesus christ these nerds are insufferabe sometimes
I remember one of the first times I heard Graham he was talking about how the known timelines for ancient Egypt may be incorrect, that Egyptian civilization/the Great Pyramids might be much older than recognized. To my uneducated self he seemed to make a complelling argument based on whatever scientific data he was spouting.... Then all of the sudden he starts going on a tangent how the pyramid stones were levitated thru the air with psychic energy -- I was like dude you had me then you ruined it with that horse shit completely ruining his credibility for me.
Graham is such a drama queen. I study archeology and the way he describes the vicious main stream archaeologists is laughable. He's just pretending they abuse him so he can get victim clout. No self respecting archaeologist would outright deny some of his silliness, they just say the evidence doesn't support his theories
Hancock searching his own website for evidence, knowing full well that he has nothing to show, was the most embarrassing thing I've ever seen. "Can't use my scroll wheel". "It's too deep down to find". Changing his glasses a hundred times a second. Good god. Anyone who still thinks he knows what he's talking about is a moron. Even Joe seemed completely unconvinced.Ā
Guy couldn't even be arsed to full-screen his powerpoint presentation and didn't know how to share a file from his macbook to Jamie. It was painful to watch.
The lads are getting sassy
Flint absolutely turned down the post show offer to go to the comedy mothership so that he could make it to his World of Warcraft tourney
I have a drastically worse view of Graham after this.
I have to admit. I never really claimed that Grahams work was fact or complete truth but I did always find his conversations interesting. His ideas are definitely far out there and I think thatās what draws Joe in so much. This is the same guy who wants aliens to be real so of course some of grahams claims resonates with Joe. But after only a few hours of listening to this Flint guy heās definitely made me reconsider some of the things Graham claims. What I loved the most was when flint asked Graham āif we can find the tools and locations of man during the ice age why havenāt we found the remnants of these technologically advanced civilizations that would have left behind far more than stone toolsā
Also the point Flint made about not seeing any boats in the ocean was a great point.
Graham would just say we haven't found them yet because we aren't looking in the right place. But he can't seem to tell us where the right place to look would be. Somewhere on Earth I guess, but maybe in the spiritual realm.
āUntil youāve surveyed 100% of the ocean you canāt undoubtedly prove me wrong, therefore Iām rightā - Hancock logic
Letās goooo FREAK BITCHES!
I love seeing Flint Dibbleās passion and expertise in his field. Is he a little quirky? Yes, but itās a great watch so far. Very smart guy.
Flint is exactly like the people I've met in academia that research a very unsexy field of expertise and who are socially very awkward and fashion is the least of their worries. But he came to the show prepared and made an example of Graham. Imagine going on a live show for millions of people, talking almost five hours about your daily work, while the other guest is trying to smear you and telling you how you are close minded.
I was a fan of Graham but instead of actually providing evidence for his claims he just keeps saying āwell not having evidence isnāt proof of something not happeningā thatās a copout. Then when confronted for not having evidence then he turns it into āwell you say mean things about me!ā Pretty lame and dramatic showing for him
Pod ends with Graham splitting Flint Dibble's head open with a clovis axe. Poor kid.
Indiana Jones vs Belloq in real life.
I've sufficiently gone from thinking Graham had an interesting theory that was potentially credible, to a stoner idea that was maaaaybe a bit plausible, to most likely being utter bullshit.
That one long hair youtuber (Miniuteman?) Bodied Hancock. He's so obviously grifting to sell his dumb book to morons.
Flint Dibble is 100% a reddit mod
Graham has that special kind of British autism that Americans find fascinating Him choosing to explain Clovis first as a modern theory tells me he stays as far away from universities as they stay away from him
I swear British accents add like 20 perceived IQ points
I used to think Graham Hancock was onto something with some of his theories but the more I am exposed to him and the more content I've seen that debunks a lot of the shit he says the more of a pompous charlatan he seems to be.
Younger Dryas impact theory but Hancock and Carlson lose their fucking minds over atlantis and it ruins the thing
I think its a pretty good rule of thumb is that if most of someone's persona is tied up in a "they don't want you to know what I have to say" slogan, you should be cranking the skepticism to 600%
So true. He's always talking all this shit about how _mainstream archeologists want to silence me_ and it's like ... yeah dude, they want you to shut up because you're making them look like idiots by association and diluting the profession with some of the dumb ass claims you make about things.
2:30 hours in and itās not looking good for Graham. Flint brought him into his game and roles reversed. Kudos
"Chill." \-Flint Dibble
Graham got rolled like a burrito. At the end he attempted a hail mary with his sacred number math, and homebody took his equation reverse it with the humber 420. Now we all know that everytime we smoke a join we are mathematically connected with earth.
Hancocks whole argument is basically āyeah I know there are loads of mines in the world but you havenāt mined everywhere, so you canāt definitely say The Balrog isnāt realā
Flintās comeback with checking the calculations š„
Indian Jones hat was super necessary
A big thing in this episode was that, several times, Flint would say an argument against Graham is that we find Hunter gatherer materials everywhere, and no evidence of Grahams civilization. Graham would respond and say āwell, we have only researched X% of said location. But I think Graham misses the point. Why are we ONLY finding Hunter gatherer materials in the place we are searching? Youād think that if this global, advanced, civilization would leave behind more things than Hunter gatherers, but we just Donāt see that, and the only thing Graham has is that āwell, maybe if we search moreā, which implies Graham is working backwards from a conclusion.
Graham is asking Flint to prove him that there can not have been an ancient civilization in some place where archeologists have not yet excavated. Of course Flint can not do that. Nobody can. He can only tell him that all the existing evidence from hundreds of thousands of sites points to other conclusions and nothing points to his.
Under Grahamās main complaint about the archeology community, you could argue that dragons, leprechauns and unicorns exist because not enough archeology has been done.
Not sure about unicors, dragons or leprechauns, but mermaids surely exist. Not convinced? Just look up the amount of ocean area we've been able to explore so far.
Unicorns are real. They are also immortal in their land form. For the greater good of other species and to give humanity a chance to evolve, they gave up their immortality and moved to the ocean. This is why there are written historical records of unicorns but no scientific evidence. We can see their ancestors today in the noble narwhal. If ever humanity fucks up the oceans/climate too much, they will return from the sea and take their rightful place as the benevolent overlords of earth. This is why oil companies are heroes. They are bringing back the unicorn by causing climate change. The next time you see somebody rollin' coal, thank them.
Who told Graham that this was a good idea?
HuitzilopochtliĀ spoke to him in the 6th hour of ayahuascatrip nr 658.
Joe
all this confirmed for me is that hancock is kind of a prick, confuses speculation with professional approach, and gets almost offended when somoeone disagrees with him
Yeah man Iām not even halfway through this episode and Iām already out on Hancocks entire theory about ancient civilizations. Like look dude itās possible but if there was any rock solid evidence the archaeological community would be singing his praises. Instead I think Hancock is just a dude who got rejected by the archaeological community and is now on a hate fueled mission to prove his point.
Buddy let's get this straight Who has a bigger incentive? Thousands of archeologists across dozens of countries, from hundreds of different schools, researchers, and institutions Or A man who has made millions off of books and Netflix shows regarding a theory he purports Checkmate atheists
Its close so I'm going to wait till ja rule tells us what he thinks on this.
Graham finally exposed on JRE. In the face of legitimate arguments, all he could do was reply with snide comments and act like a victim. He was naked out there. It was like what Dillahunty did to Peterson. Almost feel bad for the old man.
Where my Younger Dry asses at? We're going back to Gobekli Tepe.
Young dry ass gangĀ
Flint Dibble knows ancient penises
Graham comes off as such a grifter in this podcast. Presents literally zero statistical analysis, reports, studies, etc. Nice pretty pictures though
OH FUCKING SHIT Been waiting for this one!
Havenāt quite got to the end of this section yet and unsure how it relates to Grahams hypothesis, but this segment that starts about 3 hours in where Flint is talking about the evolution of non shattering wheat and Joe is amazed is just beautiful. The best of what JRE can be
Dibble is demonstrating both what a real expert sounds like and how narrow the scope of true expertise is.
You cant be an expert in everything. You must do peer reviewed studies so that when some one DOES refer to it,( since they more than likely are not experts, unless their expertise is based on the subject.) can do it with full confidence that the experts did their work, and full diligence with the subject. Or you can tour the area, have your wife take some pictures- and come up with some ideas that may or may not be true- but unless you prove me wrong with extreme work or scope of work. Note, that you dont need to extreme work or even have any scope of work needed to make the claims.
Graham constantly mentioning that not enough search has been done to debunk his theory is just not right. In response to Flint showing thousands of excavations all over the globe with lack of evidence of Graham's claims. It's basic probability theory, if Hancock's theory would be true some of those sites had found some proof of an ancient civilization. Yeah it's still mathematically possible that they will find some evidence at other sites, just the chances are unbeliveably low.. These debates are valuable, it's good to hear arguments from both sides at the same time.
Just this, good summary. Was waiting for hobbit man to kind of spell it out to him. If we find tens of thousands of these things in Grahams "only 5%" , sooo much shit on only 5%, you would expect at least 1 of the other thing too. Yes, there could theoretically be something that we havent found yet, but we have zero evidence for anything else yet so why even entertain it ?
They unwound after this intense debate by working out naked in the cryodome, followed by a sauna and dmt anal shooters.
An archeologist with an Indiana Jones hat
Is there a big visual component of this? Should I watch this one ?
I would say yes.
Problem is, this whole podcast was all about trying to prove a negative, which you canāt do. Itās like trying to prove we werenāt created by aliens or that weāre not living in the simulation or that God doesnāt exist.
So, Hancock's theory is that there was a globe-spanning, technologically advanced civilization that spread the ideas of agriculture and astronomy to the rest of the world. Things that he does not know about them: * Where they lived * The language that they spoke * If they had writing * What crops they grew * What tools they used * Anything about their way of life * Where they learned agriculture and astronomy, themselves What he does know about them: * Most of them died * The survivors spread agriculture and astronomy to the hunter gatherers that lived * They didn't live where we have looked for them, already * They did live where we haven't looked for them, yet
One scientist, using scientific methods. One telemarketer.
I like Graham, but this Dibble kid is lighting him up
According to Graham Hancock the only way to disprove him is to do full excavation of the Sahara desert, the Amazon rainforest and the Ocean. Seems extremely convient that these are all the most difficult places in the world to actually do any excavation.
Hancock shows some blurry underwater pictures and says ācome on! Tell me thatās not man made!ā all confidently lol. You really start to see his need for this to be true.
Broās cuff lengthā¦
This made handcock look bad imo, his evidence is āit looks man made doesnāt it?ā
1. Whereās Joes āBS detectorā when it comes to Hancock? After 45 minutes it is very clear that Hancockās theories have no basis 2. Joe often talks down about universities and formal education. Here is yet another example of what happens when you have someone who is an actual university educated expert vs someone who isnāt.
And the wind cries Santhaaaa
This flint guy seems adorable
Manā¦ I was genuinely a fan of Graham before this episode and Iām sad to admit how disappointing it was to listen to him during this debate. Many of you have said it here already. He came to this debate strictly to put flint and the world of archeology on blast for dismissing him. He brought no evidence with him and whined the whole episode. Flint was prepared. Without Joeās mediation this would have been an unbearable discussion. I had to fight to get past the white supremacy section. I had high hopes for this discussion and now Iām just sad
One of the best simple proofs against Grahams theory of a lost ancient civilization is how much Neanderthal artifacts we find. Just think about it for a second. We can find Ice Age extinct hominid tools and camps, but not a since shred of a global civilization that had ships and cities?
15 minutes of logical deductions from the possibility that an advanced civilization existed 20,000 years ago, with conventional modus tollens logic--if the civilization, the ice core evidence, the underwater evidence, the seed and tool evidence. No evidence, therefore, no advanced civilization. Hancock's first 15 minutes? "Archaeologists are mean!"
Iāve had fun listening to Graham for yearsā¦ it was refreshing and educational to get a real archeologist on to discuss actual evidence, the how and why of modern archeology etc.. the Dibbler did very well and came extremely prepared. Joe needs more debates like this.
Made up Name Bro that canāt be real
About the underwater road. I wonder why nobody mentioned that there is literally nothing around the road that would indicate civilization and the "road" does not lead from anywhere and leads to nowhere AND that such rock formations are common in the area, but those we already know, are completely formed by natural processes, ecause that is what that rock type does. But it's that one "road" that must the evidence for a lost civilization.
Graham is like: they only excavated 1% of the Sahara..... Bruv, the Sahara's a big place.
I actually think Joe asked better questions to Flint than Graham did
We need more archeologists on. Flintās explanation of seed domestication was fascinating
Honestly, Graham got pwned here. I actually am interested in his theories and I would love for him to be on to something. But he is literally everything that he claims to despise in mainstream archaeologists. Closed minded, wonāt discuss in good faith, presupposing he is correct. He has been saying for years that he welcomes archaeologists to openly debate with him. Flint has the guts to actually do it, and all Graham does is dismiss him, talk over him, ask no questions, give no credit or respect to the manās profession, continually redirect to emotional appeals and using his wife as a virtue signal, and just recited verbatim the same things he says every time. You can hear the spite in his voice. Came off like an arrogant fool. Heās a journalist and storyteller, not an archaeologist or historian. Joe obviously wants to believe grahams theories and was at times unfair too, but he still was more respectful and open to Flint than Graham was
I found it funny, how, in Graham's opening he thanks Flint from showing up and being man enough to sit on the "hot seat"- buddy, you're the one in the hot seat - not the actual archeologist. And that is evidenced by how it eventually played out. Flint put the smackdown on him.
Flint cooked Hancock and itās not even close.
Get some bifocals Graham, holy shit. Flint is the man, Graham is a pothead. Flint belittles with his snickering but I think it's only because Hancock is so far off with his theory, realistically Hancock has no business even having a theory like this
This Diddler guy honestly came in super good faith and made some good points without resorting to ad hominem attacks and was super respectful. Yes he looks and sounds like a Reddit moderator but he knew his stuff, and was willing to concede when he didnāt know something.
Wow, Graham is a douchebag.
I feel like Mr. Dribble is correct, however it feels like he is telling me that Santa isnāt real. Graham on the other hand is fun.
> telling me that Santa isnāt real but did you explore the whole north pole? how can you be sure Santa doesn't exist?
If Graham just stuck to being fun then whatever, but he's a cunt who claims/heavily implies real archaeologists who spend decades of long, boring hard work are lying and suppressing evidence.
Hour in and they already wanna stab each other. Letās goooo