>>3981439the link he posted is also strawmanning pretty hard
would post examples, but it doesnt let me copy paste stuff from that website even, but for example it claims hancock is wrong about atlantis because atlantis never existed
talks about how he is wrong about the age of the pyramid because carbondating says so, ignoring that carbondating only works on certain materials of which rocks arent one, and also only in a certain timeframe after which carbondating becomes a random number generator and so on. in the post before he refers to a debunking i refered to in the OP even debunking the debunking, but he seems to not even have bothered to read through it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4NnCAZcxHg remember the first guy (Zahi Hawass) was/is in charge of excavations in egypt, and pretty much blocks every attempt of any study and appearently never even heard about göbekli tepe. thats a guy that is seen as an authority on the subject. let that sink in
in one of hancocks documentaries, quest for the lost civilization he has a talk with zahi hawass where you see again that he pretty much denies any alternative theory without even considering it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5DNvYMtkyk 43:55
