I have been tracking Hancock's progress for a while and he keeps making links that make sense - I know he gets criticised for building off other people's work - but I find he's pretty good at giving his sources and giving credit to those sources - so I think that is just more establishment 'credentialism' to avoid the fact that he keeps on asking really, really good questions. How come the Great Pyramid - is a scale model of Earth? How come the Sphinx has water erosion marks if it is only 4500 years old and Egypt wasn't wet 4500 years ago and to get those marks it would have to be over twice that old. How come the Sphinx points to where Leo would have been on midsummer's day 13000 years ago. If civilisation is only 4500 years old - WTF Goblecki Tepe in Turkey which is also 13000 years old. And on and on and on with the good questions - and archeaology just dismisses everything he says. We know on this forum here that when credential establishment figures dismiss something - they're basically covering something up.
The problem is that academia stays within its artificial sectored boundaries. which is not how knowledge was approached, even a few hundred years ago. Archeologists do not really talk to Geologists, for example. Which is weird if you think about it - they are both digging into soil and dating stuff. What Hancock is doing is joining their dots, which is outrageous to the establishment. The same thing happens between Psychologists and Strategic Management types. Again - weird - why would management strategy not include a measure of how mass psychology works?
The premise of Science is to take a theory and disprove it. These days, people are trying to make science concrete and irrefutable, (famously illustrated by Pelosi's "Science, Science, science" comment) but that is not what is supposed to happen. Those people who disprove hypotheses, like Hancock and Carlson, are now seen as heretics. REEEeeeEEE.
You're just supposed to shut up and believe the Great Pyramid was built at the beginning of the Egyptian civilization and their building skills rapidly declined thereafter.
I have been tracking Hancock's progress for a while and he keeps making links that make sense - I know he gets criticised for building off other people's work - but I find he's pretty good at giving his sources and giving credit to those sources - so I think that is just more establishment 'credentialism' to avoid the fact that he keeps on asking really, really good questions. How come the Great Pyramid - is a scale model of Earth? How come the Sphinx has water erosion marks if it is only 4500 years old and Egypt wasn't wet 4500 years ago and to get those marks it would have to be over twice that old. How come the Sphinx points to where Leo would have been on midsummer's day 13000 years ago. If civilisation is only 4500 years old - WTF Goblecki Tepe in Turkey which is also 13000 years old. And on and on and on with the good questions - and archeaology just dismisses everything he says. We know on this forum here that when credential establishment figures dismiss something - they're basically covering something up.
Wierd criticism since that's supposedly literally what academia is
That too. They're desperate.
The problem is that academia stays within its artificial sectored boundaries. which is not how knowledge was approached, even a few hundred years ago. Archeologists do not really talk to Geologists, for example. Which is weird if you think about it - they are both digging into soil and dating stuff. What Hancock is doing is joining their dots, which is outrageous to the establishment. The same thing happens between Psychologists and Strategic Management types. Again - weird - why would management strategy not include a measure of how mass psychology works?
The premise of Science is to take a theory and disprove it. These days, people are trying to make science concrete and irrefutable, (famously illustrated by Pelosi's "Science, Science, science" comment) but that is not what is supposed to happen. Those people who disprove hypotheses, like Hancock and Carlson, are now seen as heretics. REEEeeeEEE.
You're just supposed to shut up and believe the Great Pyramid was built at the beginning of the Egyptian civilization and their building skills rapidly declined thereafter.