Michael Shermer vs. "alternative history" Hancock and Crandall

King of the Americas said:
Try getting a permit to do underwater excavation that requires drilling bore holes and removing large scapes of ocean floor, within another nation's territorial waters...

You might as well as me to procure moon rocks.
Click to expand...

"There's is evidence, but it's no use trying to find it, so just take my word for it"
Right...
 
King of the Americas said:
Try getting a permit to do underwater excavation that requires drilling bore holes and removing large scapes of ocean floor, within another nation's territorial waters...

You might as well as me to procure moon rocks.
Click to expand...

And thus mudbanks merely need to exist to prove the hypothesis, according to the train of logic unwound so far...
 
Porpoise of Life said:
"There's is evidence, but it's no use trying to find it, so just take my word for it"
Right...
Click to expand...

You asked where it was...

I can present tsunami evidence as proof, that if it exists, that's where you'd find it.

In the interview, Shermer accepts Hancock supposition that Cairo suffered a flood that covered the Nile basin in 120 feet of water...I think he said around 10,000 bc. Whatever evidence of who and when the sphinx was built is likely at the bottom of the Mediterranean.

'I' don't have access to it but that doesn't it isn't there...
 
King of the Americas said:
You asked where it was...

I can present tsunami evidence as proof, that if it exists, that's where you'd find it.

In the interview, Shermer accepts Hancock supposition that Cairo suffered a flood that covered the Nile basin in 120 feet of water...I think he said around 10,000 bc. Whatever evidence of who and when the sphinx was built is likely at the bottom of the Mediterranean.

'I' don't have access to it but that doesn't it isn't there...
Click to expand...

One of these is not like the other. Getting someone with no kind of training in the relevant disciplines to accept a supposition, is no proof of tsunamis occurring, much less of them sweeping away whole civilisations.
Also, your whole argument is contingent on your own supposition that "
"if it exists, that's where you'd find it"
Just like if Nessie exists, you'd find her in Scotland.
 
Porpoise of Life said:
One of these is not like the other. Getting someone with no kind of training in the relevant disciplines to accept a supposition, is no proof of tsunamis occurring, much less of them sweeping away whole civilisations.
Also, your whole argument is contingent on your own supposition that "
"if it exists, that's where you'd find it"
Just like if Nessie exists, you'd find her in Scotland.
Click to expand...

Yes, "if it exists"... We KNOW tsunamis wash entire cities out to sea. However, I DON'T know that floods are responsible for the removal of the civilization responsible for the removal of knowledge.

Could have been aliens...they came, enslaved us, forced us to build these massive structures, and then left because of a slave uprising?

That's not what I am supporting.

Instead, I think its likely an asteroid impact (proof provided in the interview) dramatically changed the climate and set mankind back technologically to the point of hunter gatherer reversion.
 
Last edited:
King of the Americas said:
Yes, "if it exists"... We KNOW tsunamis wash entire cities out to sea. However, I DON'T know that floods are responsible for the removal of the civilization responsible for the removal of knowledge.

Could have been aliens...they came, enslaved us, forced us to build these massive structures, and then left because of a slave uprising?

That's not what I am supporting.

Instead, I think its likely an asteroid impact (proof provided in the interview) dramatically changed the climate and set mankind back technologically to the point of hunter gatherer reversion.
Click to expand...

Like the interview, you are conflating claims:

1. there was a prehistoric advanced civilisation
2. An asteroid struck earth during the time claimed
3. all evidence of the previously advanced civilisation was removed by the effect of the asteriod impact

I'm glad you "think it likely" but the substantiation is somewhat absent.
 
Kid Eager said:
Like the interview, you are conflating claims:

1. there was a prehistoric advanced civilisation
2. An asteroid struck earth during the time claimed
3. all evidence of the previously advanced civilisation was removed by the effect of the asteriod impact

I'm glad you "think it likely" but the substantiation is somewhat absent.
Click to expand...

Yes.

And what's really sad is that a lot of the good archaeological work is showing that prehistoric civilizations were more advanced than the grunting cave-dwellers people imagined. They built tools and musical instruments and respected their fallen brethren. Almost from the beginning we organized ourselves and interacted with other groups and loved art and developed intricate languages....

What really turned me off the "aliens must have been here" people was the realization (in middle school) that believing early humans required some space intervention to build the pyramids or develop complicated religions is highly disrespectful bordering on racist, when it's applied to African and Central American cultures.

We had some really awesome ancestors. They were more advanced we previously thought. Doesn't mean space aliens were involved in Nazca.

And that was Hancock's angle for a long time. Then he tossed that aside and ran with ideas like Antarctica moving hundreds of miles in a big earthquake and all of these impossible cataclysms.
 
Last edited:
King of the Americas said:
Sounds like Fingerprints of the Gods evidence...

I'm not saying it is, but the technology, seemingly advanced, "pops up out of nowhere" and then is lost. Weird, to say the least.
Click to expand...

The part you put in scare quotes is significant. If we didn't have a written explanation, 3,000 years from now they might be saying that about steam, or nuclear power (depending on whether we abandon it or not) and the "out of nowhere" assumes technology that didn't exist before and suddenly appeared - is that the case? Moving large stones doesn't strike me as anything super special. I don't even think you could say it was "lost" - we quit doing it, sure, but that just means the reason for doing it fell out of favor - anyone building stone pyramids today?

On the time scale we are talking about, electricity and all of its boons have appeared "out of nowhere."

---

ETA: Impact also lends itself to agricultural collapse and descending time spent on 'the arts'...as more and more crops failed they had to spend more time hunting and gathering?
Click to expand...

Local disaster appeals to me more than global. War, famine, disease - civilizations, even great civilizations, do fail. Dark ages happen. Sometimes all you need is barbarians swooping down from the hills or a pile of "don't care" from the locals.
 
Last edited:
marplots said:
Local disaster appeals to me more than global. War, famine, disease - civilizations, even great civilizations, do fail. Dark ages happen. Sometimes all you need is barbarians swooping down from the hills or a pile of "don't care" from the locals.
Click to expand...
That might cause the collapse of a civilisation, as it did in the case of the Roman Empire. But did it obliterate all evidence for the Empire that had existed previous to the Dark Age? Go and look at Herculaneum, or get hold of a coin or some other product from the Roman Republic or Empire. They are still to be found in huge numbers.
 
Craig B said:
That might cause the collapse of a civilisation, as it did in the case of the Roman Empire. But did it obliterate all evidence for the Empire that had existed previous to the Dark Age? Go and look at Herculaneum, or get hold of a coin or some other product from the Roman Republic or Empire. They are still to be found in huge numbers.
Click to expand...
Until Napoleon, basically the Roman road system still functioned throughout the former empire.
 
Craig B said:
That might cause the collapse of a civilisation, as it did in the case of the Roman Empire. But did it obliterate all evidence for the Empire that had existed previous to the Dark Age? Go and look at Herculaneum, or get hold of a coin or some other product from the Roman Republic or Empire. They are still to be found in huge numbers.
Click to expand...

That's the point though. We'd expect to find such evidence but don't. Whatever happened there it hasn't been revealed in the 5% excavated so far. Really, it could be as simple as "they moved to where the fishing was better" coupled with "Why are we wasting so much time building stuff to honor Gods which have let us down?"

12,000 years was a long time ago.

In my opinion, monoliths alone do not an advanced civilization make.
 
Last edited:
Kid Eager said:
Like the interview, you are conflating claims:

1. there was a prehistoric advanced civilisation
2. An asteroid struck earth during the time claimed
3. all evidence of the previously advanced civilisation was removed by the effect of the asteriod impact

I'm glad you "think it likely" but the substantiation is somewhat absent.
Click to expand...

1. Ahh, so 12,000 years ago there actually was an agriculturally supported city that constructed THE most impressive monolith structure on the planet to date. *You are wrong.

2. Watch the interview, evidence for asteroid impacts are evidence in sedimentary layers dating to the time period in question... "microspherials" I think. *Wrong there too.

3. Sorta... The asteroid impact caused flooding. This is what wiped away the previous civilization. *Wrong again, sorry.
 
Last edited:
King of the Americas said:
Lift a 40 ton block of stone onto another without the wheel... Or do we get to suppose 12,000 years ago they must have had both the wheel and axil to perform such tasks?
Click to expand...
A wheel? An axle? For lifting a block of stone?
What about a block and tackle?
Or what about a lever? As Archimedes said: "Give me a place to stand, and I shall move the Earth with it".

In fact, Wally Wallington built a Stonehenge replica on his own without any of that:



ETA: damn, ninja'ed by marplots.
 
Last edited:
ddt said:
A wheel? An axle? For lifting a block of stone?
What about a block and tackle?
Or what about a lever? As Archimedes said: "Give me a place to stand, and I shall move the Earth with it".

In fact, Wally Wallington built a Stonehenge replica on his own without any of that:



ETA: damn, ninja'ed by marplots.
Click to expand...

I wanna play my Coral Castle card, but I don't know how.
 
King of the Americas said:
1. Ahh, so 12,000 years ago there actually was an agriculturally supported city that constructed THE most impressive monolith structure on the planet to date. *You are wrong.

2. Watch the interview, evidence for asteroid impacts are evidence in sedimentary layers dating to the time period in question... "microspherials" I think. *Wrong there too.

3. Sorta... The asteroid impact caused flooding. This is what wiped away the previous civilization. *Wrong again, sorry.
Click to expand...

You so funny. You know full well that all 3 criteria need to be met for your claim to have a chance of being credible

Saying "wrong" doesn't make it wrong, and your assertion in statements numbers 1 and 3 remain unsubstantiated. And don't think I haven't noted your weasel-wording rephrasing of your claim on point 1 either...
 
Kid Eager said:
You so funny. You know full well that all 3 criteria need to be met for your claim to have a chance of being credible

Saying "wrong" doesn't make it wrong, and your assertion in statements numbers 1 and 3 remain unsubstantiated. And don't think I haven't noted your weasel-wording rephrasing of your claim on point 1 either...
Click to expand...

I know I make the jokes. :)

You didn't listen to the interview, right?

Weasel-wording? I am a prospective law student, I yam what I yam.

*Personally I thought that Coral Castle card post deserves nomination...FTR :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom