View Single Post
Old 1st June 2017, 01:56 AM   #169
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 16,041
Originally Posted by King of the Americas View Post
The interview is 3 hours long.

My summery would be a dis-service.

*Sorry, I don't do other people's work for them...
Okay, you're not interested in having a conversation.

You have a particular interpretation of the 3.5 hour podcast that is very different from my interpretation of the 1.5 hours that I watched, but you're not capable of explaining what specific things were said in the podcast that support your view.

Maybe you're right, but I'm not going to find out by talking to you and I didn't find Hancock to be very convincing during the 1.5 hours that I watched him explain his viewpoint either, so I don't see much use in continuing to waste time with him.

My view:

GT sounds like a very interesting site. I find it conceivable that agriculture did develop slightly easier than we thought and thus preceded the site. Thus it would have been built by some sort of agricultural civilisation. That's possible to me. On the other hand it may have been built by hunter gatherers of the sort you saw in the pacific northwest of north america who were very organised and formed large societies (for hunter-gatherers) due to the density of food sources in the area. There is, in fact, suggestion that the reason that agriculture was able to develop where it did was because hunter-gatherers were able to form those sorts of dense societies and it's only after settling down to some extent that they developed agriculture.

Even if agriculture arose earlier than we thought, it couldn't have been much earlier. One piece of evidence is the simple fact that agriculture led to the evolution of the grains being cultivated and we can we that process happen through time. There are plenty of other reasons to think it couldn't have been much earlier.

There's no good evidence that there was an advanced civilisation that preceded GT. And the degree to which that suggestion is counter-factual is greater the more advanced that civilisation is posited to be. I heard on another of Joe Rogan's podcasts Randall Carlson suggest that there was a nuclear war that wiped out that previous advanced civilisation. That, I'm sorry, is counter to the evidence that we have. Any civilisation that could build nuclear weapons would have been world-spanning, and left a truly massive archeological record.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top