Community Comments - Revisiting Graham Hancock
Theories and More From Our Hottest Post Yet
Words can’t describe the shock of seeing how many people the article I wrote on Graham Hancock was able to reach. The comments and discussion that the post sparked are some of the best we’ve received on Thinking Man to date. I want to sincerely thank each and every one of the people who commented on the post; it meant a lot.
For anyone who may have missed it, here it is:
As a kid, my dream was to become an archaeologist. This was mostly spurred from my fierce obsession with Jurassic Park III (yes, it’s just as good as the other two), which ended up leading into rabbit hole after rabbit hole. I quickly became fascinated by anything this subject had to offer. Ancient Egypt, the Maya Civilization. Perhaps it was the mystery of it all that drew me in—after all, we can’t say for certain anything that these cultures did back then. Fortunately, the horribly boring Archaeology 101 class I took in college put an end to that dream.
It seems Hancock struck a chord, some positive and some negative, among all of you who joined the post’s discussion. Based on the responses, it appears I still have much left to learn. Some offered suggesting their favorite voices on the subject, others gave books and YouTube channels that require some serious sitting on the couch in my underwear in order to take in properly. I promise to try to get to all of them, but it’s definitely going to take some time.
Anyway. To the community comments!
Here’s the top comment on the post, a great one from
, that spurred to give response. (Don’t mind my smooth brained “LOL” wedged between two great comments!) Not only did both of you give terrific explanations as to why you would side with the theory that there was an ancient civilization, but after back-and-forth comments between and I, I was given the idea for this coming week’s The Deep End post (you’ll find out more about that when it comes out on Sunday).
I enjoyed my (short) “debate” with
as well. He brings up a great point and it led me to realize I had forgotten to mention something in the article. During the debate on Joe Rogan, Hancock didn’t defend himself well. There were several questions he could have asked Dibble—like the rather obvious one Ulysses brings up. Why would he not properly defend himself you ask? I attempt to explain in my last comment on the thread. (Also, yes, the moon landing is fake.)
More highlights from the comment section come from
, , , and (love that handle).
For everyone wanting a serious deep dive thank
for making your lives a whole lot easier with this list of videos. The titles alone already have me second guessing my surroundings!
I like changing my life. I do it at least twice a week on a good week. So I’m really excited to get into it. Unfortunately work forced me in for overtime for most of the week so I wasn’t able to crack it open just yet, but I’m getting to it this weekend!
Shout out to everyone else that joined the discussion:
Before this post I was usually afraid of touching what seemed like a controversial subject. After the reaction to this I’m as confident as ever that voices like ours should be heard. When I first created The Deep End, I wanted it to be about posts like this. I finally took the jump, and if it’s alright with all of you, I’d love to further expand on this subject and others like it and finally write about what I’m passionate about. Like I said, as a kid I always dreamt of being an archaeologist. Perhaps it isn’t too late. Maybe we can all help change the world by getting this information out. Thank you all so much for helping me realize that!
One thing we can say with certainty is that we have absolutely no freaking idea what to make of this crazy experience we call life. All I can tell you for sure is that there’s more out there than meets the eye. I’m happy to see the community we are lucky to be a part of shares that same belief.
Dang you crazy kids today. You'll believe anything some weirdo like Hancock spouts. Don't you know the science is long settled?
Now of course if Immanuel Velikovsky, or even Charles Fort noted such I'd give it some credit. ;-)
BTW: Back in my day geology was solidly settled; diastrophism, then defined, then noting that the same forces, wind/rain/erosion/vulcanism shaped the world, the continents and the concept of continental drift was just plain crazy!
The word, diastrophism, is still used in the field but, oddly enough, if's definition has changed.
here is something you might find intriguing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zz5So-KSJn0