Since the show was two hours and I really didn't want to watch all of it, could you tell us if this episode had anything to do with discoveries in Antartica? Thanks.
Sure, no problem. Absolutely nothing new in terms of information that Hancock (and others) have hypothesized and speculated upon.
The only major difference I noticed in his presentation is that he (as well as others e.g. Randall Carlson) are now connecting their previous Younger Dryas hypothesis to a greater "Atlantean" (for lack of better words) civilization.
So basically NO, there is not new information or proof (besides some brief mentions of the subterranean Egyptian stuff that has gone mainstream in recent years) of anything relating to Antarctica
... just rearranging of Hancock's own hypothesis to cover a broader definition of the antidiluvian world.
Thank you for your reply. The title of the video is somewhat misleading, but that's why I asked for a quick synopsis. I appreciate your effort at appeasing my curiosity.
Since the show was two hours and I really didn't want to watch all of it, could you tell us if this episode had anything to do with discoveries in Antartica? Thanks.
Sure, no problem. Absolutely nothing new in terms of information that Hancock (and others) have hypothesized and speculated upon.
The only major difference I noticed in his presentation is that he (as well as others e.g. Randall Carlson) are now connecting their previous Younger Dryas hypothesis to a greater "Atlantean" (for lack of better words) civilization.
So basically NO, there is not new information or proof (besides some brief mentions of the subterranean Egyptian stuff that has gone mainstream in recent years) of anything relating to Antarctica ... just rearranging of Hancock's own hypothesis to cover a broader definition of the antidiluvian world.
Thank you for your reply. The title of the video is somewhat misleading, but that's why I asked for a quick synopsis. I appreciate your effort at appeasing my curiosity.