Thread by @FlintDibble

OK, I've now seen this video. I will reply in this thread to the defamatory accusation here, made both by @Graham__Hancock and @dedunkingpast, that I somehow "conned" Graham Hancock and @JoeRogan
/1

https://twitter.com/Graham__Hancock/status/1802719563219398755

First off, Graham Hancock has written several books, hosted a Netflix series, and given 100s of talks on the topic of a global civilization from the Ice Age with advanced technology

If I conned him using published evidence, then he's admitting he doesn't know much about it
/2

Which is true. He admitted directly to Joe Rogan that there is "no evidence" for his proposed civilization

clip right here:


I'm not sure why there's a need to continue, but I will anyway
/3youtube.com/clip/UgkxCbw0c…

My main points I spent nearly an hour discussing during the conversation on Joe Rogan were:

1) we have tens of thousands of hunter-gatherer sites from the Ice Age. Even underwater and from Ice Age coasts. It's ludicrous to think there's a major, global civilization missing
/4

For underwater Stone Age archaeology you can see a recent video I posted. An interview with @jwcookhale

We discuss the evidence we do have for underwater archaeology from the late Pleistocene and Younger Dryas period and how she finds these sites


/5

She discusses how underwater contexts preserve wood for 1000s of years. She says rapid sea level rise is good for preservation

@dedunkingpast is wrong about ships disappearing due to "time. That's not how it works. Large ships capable of crossing the ocean would preserve underwater
/6

We have tens of thousands of stone age sites, and hundreds from Ice Age coastlines in Europe, North America, and Asia

We have explored underwater

There's no major Ice Age civilization that built enormous monuments. It ain't there. Hancock even admits there's no evidence
/7

2) I spent a significant amount of time discussing the timing and process of domestication. How the human choice to plant crops impacted their evolution. How we can date that evolution via radiocarbon on the seeds themselves. How we can see the spread of crops and date that too
/8

Again, none of this has been contested. Instead @dedunkingpast has focused on the fact that some early papers claimed rice went feral after domestication (not going feral but crossbreeding with wild rice). But this was all after the Ice Age!
/9

So it doesn't matter. The evidence all dates 1000s of years after Hancock's supposed Ice Age Civilization

Sure, I didn't know about it because I don't study rice, and I said to Joe I don't know how long crops take to go feral. But it's irrelevant because it's not Ice Age!
/10

Next, let's address the ice core data that I presented. I want to be clear, I spent a total of one minute on it. Why? Because it's not archaeological evidence. I focus on what I know: archaeology

Did I lie or misrepresent evidence?

No!
/11

I started this one minute, minor point by bringing up that Hancock has repeatedly stated his civilization has hte equivalent of 18th/19th century technology

We can see emissions from fossil fuels and pollutants from mining and smelting in ice cores. People have published it
/12

This graph is an example of how we can detect an 'advanced civilization' in environmental proxies like ice cores. Nowhere did I state this graph goes back to the Ice Age. However, I was correct when I stated there is no published evidence for Ice Age metallurgy from ice cores
/13

That's a problem. For a globe-spanning civilization with 18th/19th century technology, it should show up in environmental proxies, whether ice cores or pollen samples or geological cores. But it doesn't

Please tell me if you think I 'lied' about ice core evidence @icy_pete
/14

But @dedunkingpast is willfully lying and misrepresenting evidence in his video. He claims I ignored evidence from ice cores of lead in Ice Age layers

But the title of the articles he cites, show these pollutants were introduced naturally, not by humans
/15

Nor do these metals concentrate around the end of the Ice Age, the period Hancock says his civilization dates too

Instead the authors show how they follow natural climatic rhythms and directly correlate with aridity during the Ice Age, wind kicking up elements from dry soil
/16

OK, I think I've delt with most of the "cons" except for the elephant in the room: my supposed claims of white supremacy and Graham Hancock

I have never called Graham Hancock a racist or a white supremacist. Show me where I have said that. I have not
/17

I have repeatedly said that the sources he uses are flawed because they are racist. The myths he cites for white-skinned deities like Quetzalcoatl as Indigenous in nature only date to after the Spanish conquest

I describe this in detail on Joe Rogan
/18

Precolonial depictions of Quetzalcoatl and other deities do not depict a white-skinned deity. See for yourself

Hancock's facts are wrong. Joe Rogan even agreed with my point that the Spanish could impact myths
/19

And there are many examples of people using this evidence today (not Hancock) to promote racist ideas that Indigenous people could not be responsible for their monuments and cultural heritage. That is racism. It's not Hancock, but I would hope he would denounce it
/20

That's it. I'll make a longer video soon to summarize my evidence in depth. I can tell there's an interest in it. Stay tuned

Thanks for reading. I'm traveling today, so don't expect replies once I board the plane

@dedunkingpast is a liar and Hancock is grasping at straws to save face

One last small point. The major points I present here and on Joe Rogan are basic facts that have been known by scholars for decades and taught to students in intro level prehistory or environmental archaeology courses at universities

There's no gotcha here. We have known ice age sites are near ice age coasts for decades. We have known the basic timeline of and process of domestication for decades. We have had an understanding of underwater preservation for decades

These facts have been repeatedly tested and observed and refined and still are with ongoing research

To claim ive lied about this stuff is so disingenuous that all it takes is reading an archaeology 101 textbook to see that I've truthfully presented archaeological evidence