He got absolutely obliterated by an archaeologist.

He got absolutely obliterated by an archaeologist. Even Joe Rogan is starting to call him out on his bullshit, how embarrassing:

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Atheists aren't capable of doing real science

  2. 1 month ago
    Cult of Passion

    Im concerned of Indy Jerry.

    He clearly means business.

    • 1 month ago
      Cult of Passion

      I stopped listening when I heard him review the table of content of Hanwiener's work.

      Nah, he is approaching this as a contrarian.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >I stopped listening
        How open minded of you. Have some faith.

        • 1 month ago
          Cult of Passion

          ...you have zero clue at the amount of data throughput I wield.

          I deduced a man's proffession from his perspective One Another Field (a Chemist, Dr.Tour) in seconds....this isnt new, Im not looking at his research, he flunked for the reasons states above.

          All of his answers are wrong, because like a good teacher, I have the answers, he started off with the wrong measuring rod and lined up things [as if to correct] he had no business doing, amd wording was crooked a bit implying bias wanting to express itself from the lack of conrete evidence.

          [slams gavel]
          Adjurned.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            you're the gayest poster on this board and that says a lot.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          just in the introductions, flint dibble refused to answer grahams FIRST question which showed he was not open minded at all

          graham had to ask about 10 times "how of much of sahara do you think archeologists explored?" and the guy still refused to give a straight forward answer after fricking 10 times of being asked the same question

          wtf is this lol

          -how much do you think is explored
          -uhhhh we've seen thousands of sites
          -but how much overall do you think is explored
          -what we have seen is... blab labla
          -the same question
          -dodging the answer

          i turned it off right there
          if youre fricking open minded then be straight forward and bite the bullet, say you didnt explore 95% of the sahara, but that what youve found does not support grahams story

          why refuse to answer?
          ill watch it some other time but the flint guy seems like a hack already

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            it's because you don't understand the point dribble made. if you randomly check like 5% of a set and A shows up like 10000 times and B shows up exactly 0 times, assuming B doesn't exist makes the most sense. you can't be sure tho, that's grahams point. god of the gaps style.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >if you randomly check
            Isn't the whole point of every thread about every happening in the past few years that science turns out to be rather selective?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            this reminds me of that time a group of marine biologists reported a mass die-off of atlantic lobsters and then, a few years later, reported that those lobsters had just moved a few miles north from where the researchers had been observing them.

            moronic hubris abounds.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >if youre fricking open minded then be straight forward and bite the bullet, say you didnt explore 95% of the sahara, but that what youve found does not support grahams story
            He DID say that. He should have communicated it more clearly for idiots who ignored the point he made, but his point was extremely clear, that we have a lot of knowledge about what was in the Sahara and we still have NO evidence of Graham's story.
            Graham was actually the one who looked way worse in that exchange because he was extremely rude and obnoxious in the way he interrupted him with this "No, no no. No. How much of the Sahara have you excavated?" which he should've got decked for if he weren't 73.
            In fact I used to be quite open to Graham's ideas but this exchange in particular, seeing him being the one to initiate such rudeness and hostility right off the bat was what made me figure out a lot of what he's saying is really just hype and bullshit.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >He DID say that.
            >He should have communicated it more clearly
            so did he say that or did he try to dodge it?
            >but his point was extremely clear
            point? why are you skirting around the issue and not answering? hurrrrr but the point is there!!!! i just refuse to answer but you gethe point hurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
            >Graham was actually the one who looked way worse in that exchange because he was extremely rude and obnoxious in the way he interrupted him
            he should interrupt him, as graham asked a very straight forward question and dibble acted like a weasel, thinking about the audience and how will his answer sound if he admitted to not exploring 99% of sahara, instead like a coward he skirts around the question and just says he explored a lot, thousands of sites
            THAT WASNT THE QUESTION YOU WEASEL

            HE DID NOT ASK YOU HOW MANY SITES YOU EXPLORED
            HE ASKED YOU HOW MUCH OF THE SAHARA YOU EXPLORED
            WAS IT 1%? 5%? 10%? THE ENTIRETY OF IT?

            >"No, no no. No. How much of the Sahara have you excavated?" which he should've got decked for if he weren't 73.
            he should ask that for the remaining 3 hours of the debate until the homosexual clearly answers the question

            >seeing him being the one to initiate such rudeness and hostility right off the bat
            it wasnt "off the bat" he was calm the first time he asked his question, irritated the second time he had to ask it, annoyed the third time... rudeness and hostility came after he had to repeat his question ten times
            to me, he was way more calm and collected than he should be, dibble acted like an incredible weasel there

            this is how that exchange would go if dibble was a man
            - how much of the sahara have you explored?
            - we've explored about 1% of the sahara, mainly sites most probable to have any civilization
            - oh, okay, so do you think we could find it somewhere else if we looked where you havent yet?
            - yeah sure, but so far your theory holds little value

            boom, ive made dibble sound reasonable, how hard was that?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            He said that. You sound borderline incoherent, so I'm not surprised you had trouble. You should take your own advice and condense your own post down to the last paragraph.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            he did not
            dilate, troony

            >this is how that exchange would go if dibble was a man
            >- how much of the sahara have you explored?
            >- we've explored about 1% of the sahara, mainly sites most probable to have any civilization
            >- oh, okay, so do you think we could find it somewhere else if we looked where you havent yet?
            >- yeah sure, but so far your theory holds little value
            this is the lowest form of arguing. it's not as legitimate as it sounds, it's the lowest tier of b***h arguments
            >oh, so you didn't actually investigate the depths of Charon, so there might be a super advanced alien civilization living in a computer like simulation inside it isn't it?
            >but bro that's kind of moronic
            >BUT YOU DIDN'T LOOK YET DID YOU? SO THEY MIGHT BE THERE! I WIN!

            >this is the lowest form of arguing.
            why do you want to reduce the conversation to "arguing" from the start, you weasel?
            why would you assume that IF THE PERSON SITTING NEXT TO YOU IS REASONABLE IN YOUR MIND they'd instantly try to make some kind of anime-tier gotcha like ">oh, so you didn't actually investigate the depths of Charon, so there might be a super advanced alien civilization living in a computer like simulation inside it isn't it?"
            you clearly are not coming from a place of trust, honor, straightforwardness, logic and masculinity
            you already framed the conversation as arguing, now you're imaging some gotcha scenarios you have to fight off and thats why dibble was a weasel who couldnt answer it?
            lol, what a fricking shame

            >BUT YOU DIDN'T LOOK YET DID YOU? SO THEY MIGHT BE THERE! I WIN!
            if you think this is what graham would be like, why even come to talk to him?
            is dibble a moron?
            are you?

            wouldnt it go more like this?
            - how much of the sahara have you explored?
            - we've explored about 1% of the sahara, mainly sites most probable to have any civilization
            - oh, okay, so do you think we could find it somewhere else if we looked where you havent yet?
            - yeah sure, but so far your theory holds little value

            - well, if you're agreeing that theres still 99% (not some obscure depth of charon magical one place in the world, but 99% of the entire thing being discussed) of sahara unexplored than i'd agree with you that my theory has little evidence of being true and i should not make strong claims for its sure existance, but ill still explore alternative human origins (to my knowledge graham never strongly stated that THERES FOR SURE AN ADVANCED CIVILZATION, he's always just speculating and exploring, which dibble should be happy with)
            - okay, sure

            boom, straight forward, coherent and with respect for one another, then they could simply go to another part of the discussion
            instead of lingering on your deceptiveness

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            b***h argument. I'd be ashamed to resort to such argument type. I wouldn't dare lead with it in a fricking debate on Joe Rogan (large exposure).

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            straight forward/honest = b***h
            deceptiveness/weasel = chad

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            youre basically (AGAIN) telling me that dibble wasnt focused on having an honest discussion, but instead thought about the audience and how his word would be taken instead of talking with the guy next to him
            >I wouldn't dare lead with it in a fricking debate on Joe Rogan
            wtf?
            >(large exposure).
            oh my god! i might have to shave my balls, think about the audience, i must do everything for the audience!
            the audience!
            the audience!

            have a nice day

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            this is not about dibble vs graham, this is about the existence of a previous advanced human civilization. don't get that mixed up with the people discussing about it.
            >i must do everything for the audience!
            well you should make valid points and use proper arguments.
            the "you didn't dig every inch of it" argument is a quite particular one, and is reserved for grifters. they always go there and use it because it's safe. if they're looking to maximize the amount of arguments with no regard for their quality (because every inch counts and directly translates into more money) then he will have no issues with going as low as he can, just because of that extra bit of money. like corporations are optimized for maximizing income, so too grifters will have no fricking shame in using anything they can latch on, no matter how low tier of an argument it is.
            hanwiener had *that* discussion with himself long time ago, and he commited to it. he'll always reconsider on what becomes obvious (like the pyramids being WAY older than 4-5k years).
            that's all you're ever going to get from him, he'll agree to the undeniable, and no more, ever. that's what "but you didn't dig every inch of it" gives you, the ability to milk that b***h practically forever. and why self respecting people would never touch such bullshit argument.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            me
            >b***h argument
            more clearly because you're not risking anything
            >this is my argument and if it's proven false I concede
            they never do that, there's always strategically placed way outs of anything. always resorting to safe places just to keep the grift going.
            not arguing like a b***h is when you use arguments that are risky for you and your idea/hypothesis. that's legit battle of the minds, when you go out there risking to get hurt to KO'd. but if you're a brainlet you don't understand these kinds of things
            again, risk free b***h argument, nothing more.

          • 1 month ago
            Cult of Passion

            >you clearly are not coming from a place of trust, honor, straightforwardness, logic and masculinity

            [...]

            Here is Cairo, Easter Island and Angkor Wat in Geometric alignment of a Pentagon. These sites were built thousands of years apart, in secret?...riddle me.

            I'll have you know, mortal-human, I have cracked planets in half. Using nothing but pure alignment, to orient my body to mimic as emergent Physics projections or reactions

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >this is how that exchange would go if dibble was a man
            >- how much of the sahara have you explored?
            >- we've explored about 1% of the sahara, mainly sites most probable to have any civilization
            >- oh, okay, so do you think we could find it somewhere else if we looked where you havent yet?
            >- yeah sure, but so far your theory holds little value
            this is the lowest form of arguing. it's not as legitimate as it sounds, it's the lowest tier of b***h arguments
            >oh, so you didn't actually investigate the depths of Charon, so there might be a super advanced alien civilization living in a computer like simulation inside it isn't it?
            >but bro that's kind of moronic
            >BUT YOU DIDN'T LOOK YET DID YOU? SO THEY MIGHT BE THERE! I WIN!

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Could the entire field of archeology not find someone slightly less autistic to debate Graham?

    • 1 month ago
      Cult of Passion

      Thats because anybody with sense wouldnt.

      Your days are up, Zahi Hawass and the anti-MEGA extremist crowd, obviously working with Big Paleo to take on Randall "Rockin'" Carlson.

      ...destiny.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Proper archaeologists tend to consider it beneath their dignity to talk to people like Handwiener. They think it gives credence to his ideas.
      Problem is that Handwiener is much better at speaking to normal people than they are. They're trained in how to talk to other trained archaeologists, and are crap at public outreach. Most archaeologists would be useless in a debate against him, because debates are about style and rhetoric, not facts.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I think the problem is that it would reveal that their ideas are bullshit too.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Proper archaeologists tend to consider it beneath their dignity to talk to people like Handwiener
        That’s why we have this guy

        ?si=5F24rha7Z8pTHMrv

        • 1 month ago
          Cult of Passion

          >That’s why we have this guy
          Another contrarian, young-buck-with-something-prove-and-everything-to-gain.

          Seen, fact checked it, dont care.

          I listened to about 3 seconds.

          "Globe spanning civilization"

          >pic

          [...]

          Checkmate. Ice Age is irrelevent, its been done, its easy, Ive been all over the world.

          That kid hasnt.

          That dunce in OP hasnt.

          Hanwiener, meh, sure, its his job, but he has to focus on specifics, I dont, I can just up and go to the next country and continue my work.

          t.Amun Ra the VII of III

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            No one is talking to you, go away and stop shitting up this thread with your schizobabble.

          • 1 month ago
            Cult of Passion

            Exactly, go listen to a 23 year old college kid LARP a scientist, IT WAS MADE FOR YOU!

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous
          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Another contrarian, young-buck-with-something-prove-and-everything-to-gain
            That wasn’t the point moron

          • 1 month ago
            Cult of Passion

            A fool who pours corrupted koolaid for midwits to die defending.

            Oh, look, Euler's Identity is getting further cracked...its almost becoming weak at this point.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Mental dribble of the highest order

          • 1 month ago
            Cult of Passion

            >Mental dribble of the highest order
            Correct.

            Im just not very familiar with e or i.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Flint Dibble

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I like Indiana Joneswiener. He's obviously pretty smart. Maybe getting obliterated was part of his plan

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Based.

    Time for the pseud Randall Carlson to be BTFO as well

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    IQfy destroys IQfy

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I like Graham Hanwiener while also liking conventional/mainstream archeology. I don't believe in the Atlantis theory at the center of his worldview, but I also would be very surprised if we were not to find that agriculture and semipermanent settlements are a lot older than we currently have data to support.

    The large sea faring global civilization bit is a super entertaining idea and is cool to think about. It would take a lot of evidence that I don't think we would ever be able to produce (as a result of sea level rise and erosion) even if it were true.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You can trace the lineages of people based on DNA (that's how we know when Native Americans crossed the Bering Strait and Pacific Islanders sailed all the way to America). We have lake sediments and ice cores that dates thousands of years. All these record human peturbation (fires in Lake records roman lead in Greenland ice). Graham's theory was utterly moronic, his proof was dog ate his homework and did not put out testable hypothesis (I.e., where should we dig to proof/disprove his theory)

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You have very poor reading comprehension. I don't believe in Graham's ideas, I just find him to be a compelling story teller and entertaining figure.

        I do believe we'll find that agriculture (especially pastoralism) is older than we currently believe, but I believe that primarily from the ongoing excavation at Karahan-Tepe that has uncovered some semi-permanent settlements with evidence of food storage prior to the "start of agriculture."

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    He seriously needs to invest in bifocals

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Your link is broken

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Copy + paste it

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The difference in their size and posture is literally virgin vs. chad personified

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >did you dig every square meter in Sahara? no? oh I guess it might be exactly in the last place you could possibly check
    >good luck
    I so fricking hate this arguing style, instead of having legit arguments he's only about that "I'll take this hard to attack position because what are you going to do, dig all of Sahara to prove me wrong?" fricking hell that's triggering my bullshit meter like nothing else.
    >but did you dig ALL of the fricking desert? (protip: you didn't so I win)

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    4:26:59

    Are they serious?

    • 1 month ago
      Cult of Passion

      >I like knowing stuff but hate learning.
      Go to the gym or something while you attend lectures, I do...

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Watching morons jabber for hours is not learning. Read a fricking book.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Read a fricking book.
          Don't promote pornography on IQfy.

        • 1 month ago
          Cult of Passion

          >Watching morons jabber for hours is not learning.
          I see three patients, you dont have a doctorate, do you?...

          Secondly, as a teacher, Im grading their work.

          Third, I do shit with my life, like write a book while reading a book, while at the gym.

          >I was at a steak house this evening, had the Wagyu, Lemon Grab join between, grabbed a coffee and got back home to pack, got a flight in 48 hours. Listen...kid, Im sure your life is great, but youre not listening to a single word I said...you just "expressed yourself back". You should work on that, stop reacting back like a fricking Chameleon being harrassed by a kid. We're not peers...stop LARPing you are, its self deluding you into "Klown Soul" (The people of the Lie......(You).).

          • 1 month ago
            Saint. Barkon

            homosexual. I like you. You make good posts. But you need to stop Larping at random noise. gay. Shut the gay up.

          • 1 month ago
            Cult of Passion

            https://i.imgur.com/Ku4sjLV.jpeg

            A fool who pours corrupted koolaid for midwits to die defending.

            Oh, look, Euler's Identity is getting further cracked...its almost becoming weak at this point.

            https://i.imgur.com/O3A3A48.jpeg

            >Mental dribble of the highest order
            Correct.

            Im just not very familiar with e or i.

            Oh........and you *really* dont get me.

            Im reconnecting everything Im talking about, when I do I do shit like crack Euler's Identity...Im working out my brain, like I do my body. War is a resting state for me. This is me relaxing.

            Even when Im wrong...Im saying it wrong for a reason to make you think.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Being a self-replying schizo should be a bannable offense.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        There is a lot of other things that I could watch or listen to in those 4+ hours.

        • 1 month ago
          Cult of Passion

          Yeah, like write thesis on World History/Anthropology so you dont have to listen to a four hour long podcast made by amatures (YEAH, HANwiener TOO...)

          Related to Cognition, bloodlines and their resulting wars...he has barely been around the world.

          >Hi, Joe, I just spent 6 weeks in the Amazon...
          SIX?!? Put a fork in it, yer DONE.

          • 1 month ago
            Cult of Passion

            >HANwiener TOO
            He is Alex Jones, Im the smoking man from X-Files.

            (Cryptic insider knowledge, long disappearences, questionable loyalty...just trying to "help" (or is he leading to danger..?))

            Grey means I dont work for anyone.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I would like all the self-replying namegays to kindly frick off from this board.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I often wonder if it's one or two schizos who constantly talk to themselves, or an internet collective of schizos. Either one I could see being plausible.

      • 1 month ago
        Cult of Passion

        How many Archeological sites have you visited?

        How many artifacts analysed?

        How many paintings reviewed?

        How many Architecture schematics do you draft when looking at a Cathedral?...

        Oh, and got my education in Mathematics and Physics online, while at work, because double major is double timed, twice.

        Git gud.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        One or two schizos. The need to namegay and the imagined laurels they wish to have also indicate that they would never use the same assumed identity as someone else, because they are so in need of personal validation.

        • 1 month ago
          Cult of Passion

          Everything you typed was paranoid delusion cooked up by your deluded emotion, there was no "fact checking" in your "water bucket of a brain".

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            See how the israelite recoils, for he has been revealed

    • 1 month ago
      Cult of Passion

      You dont "do science", you dont post work, you post HOMEWORK.

      We are not the same, GTFO the lab and never return.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Even Joe Rogan is starting to call him out on his bullshit
    timestamp

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      ackchyually joe did a pretty good job at pressing both of them at some points. felt surprisingly fair.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        honestly Joe gets too much shit for being a moron, he's actually a very good host

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >the second vase the archaeologist shows is a Black person fricking a white woman from 1000 years ago
    i'm sick of this

    • 1 month ago
      Cult of Passion

      Theyre desperate to control the past because whoever does set the foundation for the rest of the world (to a degree, as we saw in the Tucker/Putin interview.)

      >He who controls the past, controls the present, and he who controls the present, controls the future.
      Human indicate their clocks on their heads, by use of their year.

      In Islam is around the year 1444, 2566 in Buddhistan, 2024 in Christendom.

      I come from the year 523,000,000 BC.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        are you the third coming of Christ?

      • 1 month ago
        Cult of Passion

        >523,000,000 BC
        I should not this is my "Genetic Lineage Birth Year", not my "calendar" which has been partially lost to time.

        Age of Aquarium of the Great Year (Month), in human years I can assume no more than two full Great Year cycles, but median that for averaging, yields about 35,000-40,000 BC.

        Well before the Ice Age, thats just the Information Wall of historical accounting.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Biggest cringe moron on this website
        Lose the adderall and stop this edgelord rp i cant stand the idea of sharing this planet with you lmao

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah he is a crackpot who could of guessed. It's almost like his theories and info aren't collaborated by anything. Like genetic evidence and any real archeologist who has spent anytime researching anything related to what he says knows it's bullshit.
    Just look at what he says about gobekli tepe. He is a complete moron or is pretending to be a moron either one.

    • 1 month ago
      Cult of Passion

      >aren't collaborated by anything
      Archeology?
      Anthropology?
      Biblical narrative?
      Evolutionary Biology?

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Some of the most brilliant people in history were also the most deluded and insane, you realize.

    Yes, I enjoy Graham, even when he proclaims the Egyptians had fricking telekinetic powers, kek.

    But, most importantly, this is what his (Graham’s) opponent wrote a day ago…

    — ‘Some Rogan fans will surely dismiss my remarks as symptoms of a “woke mind virus,” which apparently infects anyone who relies on evidence, experts, and the scientific method to form conclusions. Meanwhile, some colleagues will call me foolish. A pawn playing into the hands of pseudoscientists.’

    It’s a bit of a red flag.

    • 1 month ago
      Cult of Passion

      >It’s a bit of a red flag.
      You should see the shit this guy vs the archeological, theological, historical research of my own.

      Ciaro's Egyptian anthropology is trash. I would flat out tell him to his face he has no clue what the Pyramids are.

      Frauds are already in power, dunce, youre the super hero protecting Gotham, YOURE ON THE JOKER'S TEAM.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      > Some Rogan fans will surely dismiss my remarks as symptoms of a “woke mind virus,” which apparently infects anyone who relies on evidence, experts, and the scientific method to form conclusions

      So he believes that men can get pregnant, right? Because that’s what the science says?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >even when he proclaims the Egyptians had fricking telekinetic powers, kek.
      He's not too far from the truth. There's a growing idea that ancient people may have used coordinated sound/music in arcane ways to move large objects too heavy for human hands.

      • 1 month ago
        Cult of Passion

        I heard about a recyprical bow device, using harmonics and a rock as a type of hammer. Also, clear 'circular saw' marks, so there has obviously been lost accounts of technologies, not to mentions square cuts, mirrored halls, polygonal stones, let alone the sizes.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Some Rogan fans will surely dismiss my remarks as symptoms of a “woke mind virus,” which apparently infects anyone who relies on evidence, experts, and the scientific method to form conclusions.
      why do people come on Joe's show and then trash him and/or his fans like this right after the show? it's so disrespectful, and honestly Joe Rogan looked by far the most well-behaved and fair person in that discussion, he was actually an excellent host and very reasonable to both, especially considering he was friends with Hanwiener yet still pushed against some of his claims.

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >W-w-well I ASSUME geologists and archeologists have looked at that and didn't find anything! It sure is crazy, I'll give you that, but OBVIOUSLY it's not man-made or else someone else would have said it was!
    >Graham shows other structures known to be man-made which look just like the underwater one
    >Flint falls silent and hopes the conversation moves on, never addresses the similarities or differences between the man-made structure and the underwater one
    For someone who started with a speech about the open-mindedness of archeology he's extremely closed off to even analyzing evidence Graham presents.

  20. 1 month ago
    Cult of Passion

    >No! Protect the television face! Protect idea!

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why does the autistic hat guy seem to have no neck?

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    — “Many people buy it. Based on a recent survey by Chapman University scholars, nearly 50 percent of people in the U.S. believe in lost civilizations or ancient aliens.”

    Okay so Flint appears to be a form of absolute absolutist.

    The question of “Have aliens visited us?” is irrelevant in regards to humans, when the alternative is “No, they have never once decided to look at this planet over its hundreds of millions of years of life”, which is, quite frankly, more absurd than the reverse.

    The idea that aliens would just now look at this planet is hilariously erroneous.

    The idea that dinosaurs wouldn’t intrigue aliens is hilariously bad.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      If lost civilizations existed, we might not have any truly fair and reasonably reliable way of discovering them, is another thing. I don’t care how advanced they were. It’s just a no fricking brainer that past cultures eventually become invisible.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        > It’s just a no fricking brainer that past cultures eventually become invisible.
        Nope. If we don’t see them. They don’t exist. Chud.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        why do we find a lot of way more primitive settlements and bones and shit but NOTHING from "advanced but not as advanced as us" civilizations?
        ever wondered why they say not as advanced as us? because they would have had satellites and a bunch of other shit, and we found none.
        the whole idea doesn't make any fricking sense, it's appealing to primitive senses and it's basically a fricking grift. he's selling shit, gets to dive in nice places and all that

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The idea that the ancients may have had lost techniques, relatively primitive techniques in comparison to present day science, isn’t unfounded. I don’t care if it’s just for etching and drilling holes. That’s nowhere near our present day triumphs, but it’s still worth admiring, for the time.

          Chalking it all up to ancient aliens does however threaten to dilute ancient man’s own ingenuities.

          • 1 month ago
            Cult of Passion

            >relatively primitive techniques in comparison to present day
            Egyptians calculated the dimensions of the planet at least 5,000 years ago and the accuracy wasnt matched until GPS.

            Try again.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            If I had mentioned anything remotely close to present day capabilities, I would be attacked, sorry. You’re not allowed to place past accomplishments on the level of the modern day period, apparently.

            I’m saying it’s okay to admire and appreciate past accomplishments regardless of sophistication, and entertain the idea of such things existing.

          • 1 month ago
            Cult of Passion

            >I’m saying it’s okay to admire and appreciate past accomplishments regardless of sophistication, and entertain the idea of such things existing.
            Cool, and I just said your perspective is counter reality, like...you get BTFO and your repsonse was, LITERALLY, "Um, man, thats like your opinion.".

            Youre not acting like man, what are you?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Your reading comprehension skills are horrific.

          • 1 month ago
            Cult of Passion

            SILENCE, LYING SHITBAG

            YOURE FULL OF SHIT, GET THE FRICK OUT OF MY THREAD.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            We know exactly how Eratosthenes measured the circumference of the earth, and the technique is quite primitive.

          • 1 month ago
            Cult of Passion

            >That’s nowhere near our present day triumphs,
            Youre deluded by the advertising of humanity, you dont see either the past or the present, you see a presentation.

            ...I, have no energy to reducate you on existence, try again...

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Jesus Christ, I already made it apparent I don’t fricking care how advanced or not advanced they were.

            There’s this notion that if we (modern science) don’t know of it, it couldn’t have possibly been scientifically employed in the past, since le heckin modern science knows everything.

            Modern science will insist that it -knows- how X or Y ancient object was built.

          • 1 month ago
            Cult of Passion

            >I don’t fricking care how advanced
            Youre ignoring the LOGICAL conclusion one could make about intelligence, and know so little telling you how it is is irrelevent because you dont even have a grasp on whats taught, just your "solipsistic ego center perspective of "me, not them".

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I would never argue from this shit position, it's so fricking weak and weaselish
            >you didn't check so you don't know so it can be real
            like that's supposed to give any credence to the grift.
            grifts are always constructed as far as the unknown permits, but not more. this way they are always easy to defend with the
            >but you didn't check every spot in Sahara, so you technically don't know, so I may be right
            that's a homosexual argument dude.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            See, you’re precisely a part of the problem.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Au contraire mon ami, I'm clearing out bullshit. There is no problem to begin with. If there is anything it will eventually be found by archaeologists with their improving tools, in professional ways. Not grifting amateurs. So no need to worry, if they are there they will eventually be found.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          > ever wondered why they say not as advanced as us? because they would have had satellites and a bunch of other shit, and we found none.

          Because of this, I find that any hypothetical past Atlantean society “more advanced than us” would be advanced in likely arbitrary ways - like if aliens had decided to give lesser lifeforms keys to nature. Which is rather unbelievable. That, or there was a global cleanup or reset, which is still similarly unbelievable.

          The modern day is already practically Atlantean though. How is it not?

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The most ingenious physician and chemist like half a millennium ago, who brought forth medicinal minerals to man’s attention, thought that ejaculating into a chicken egg - or a horse’s vegana - would produce a miniature Frankenstein’s monster like creation.

    It’s okay to trust madness. You guys act like lunatics don’t have points to prove.

    Hawking visited Epstein island.

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Flexible glass………
    Greek fire………

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Even cavemen knew wheels roll. So does modern man.

    “No! Modern man knows how wheels roll even rollier!”

    Okay. Cavemen also knew men could not get pregnant.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Cavemen didn't understand complex sociological and psychological problems
      And?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        They knew not to overcomplicate basic simplicities like pretentious unhappy morons, because unga bunga

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Yes, they were stupid and didn't understand anything. That's what I said.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Anon. Unga no bumga. It’s that simple.

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >I SAID FIVE THOUSAND YEARS MINIMUM.
    No, Eratosthenes was alive from 276 BC – c.195/194 BC.

    • 1 month ago
      Cult of Passion

      >I SAID

      MY RESEARCH. ME, I DO RESEARCH, YOU READ WIKIPEDIA.

      MY SOURCES.

      WHO THE FRICK ARE YOU?

      STOP LARPING YOURE THE TEACHER OF SHIT YOU DONT KNOW.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Aren’t you the one larping as an idiot? It takes a larper to know a larper.

        • 1 month ago
          Cult of Passion

          My source is the geomtry of pyrmid at the equtorial midplane in proportio of the Earth.

          HANwiener AND ERATOSTHENES DID NOT.

        • 1 month ago
          Cult of Passion

          no ***u*** sit through four hours of "word-word-word".

    • 1 month ago
      Cult of Passion

      >Eratosthenes
      A fricking moron, like YOU.

      Thats why you hold him up, he is an idiots verison of a smart man, a MORON.

  27. 1 month ago
    Cult of Passion

    Egypt thread?
    No, *MY* thread.

    t.Amun Ra the VII of III (2.333...)

  28. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Dibble starts out calm and quiet
    >Hanwiener has 1 chance to speak
    >Dibble's speech turns into indignant shouting for the rest of the time as he perpetually seethes and malds for the rest of the runtime
    >Hanwiener remains calm and collected no matter how much Dibble malds and spergs out
    This guy is clearly not cut out for debate, it's obvious he's spent little to no time actually defending his views against people who genuinely disagree with him. He comes completely unhinged the moment someone pushes back on his worldview even slightly.

  29. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Sweet a schizo thread

    • 1 month ago
      Cult of Passion

      Im going on a vacay because my vacay in Thailand smoking weed has exhausted, so Im gunna bump up the kicker and see where life takes me.

      Pshh...you were never at the cool table (mine). I wouldnt know, I was there.

  30. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Listened to it during work today
    I think Dibble's main argument was that we've found so many hunter-gatherer evidence during and before the ice age that, statistically, we would expect to find some evidence of a global civilization if one existed
    Dibble didn't do a good job at clarifying he is making a probability argument.
    Hanwiener claims that they haven't searched enough
    A good argument against him would be to ask
    >How much would we have to search before you change your mind?
    Also Dibble should've just apologized for the white supremacist claims, he came off as disingenuous there
    And to anyone outside of these niche academic circles the claim that Atlantis=White supremacy seems totally absurd

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      > Also Dibble should've just apologized for the white supremacist claims, he came off as disingenuous there
      > And to anyone outside of these niche academic circles the claim that Atlantis=White supremacy seems totally absurd
      What the frick. He sounds like an unhinged buzzword tossing leftist asshat.

      Oh wait. He totally is:
      > “Some Rogan fans will surely dismiss my remarks as symptoms of a “woke mind virus,” which apparently infects anyone who relies on evidence, experts, and the scientific method to form conclusions. Meanwhile, some colleagues will call me foolish. A pawn playing into the hands of pseudoscientists.“

      Why are these people always so cringe?

      • 1 month ago
        Cult of Passion

        See, I aint wasting my life listening to that shit. Just like that Destiny and three other guys talking about Israel.

        Frick that, midwits "figuring it out with lies and deceptions".

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >I think Dibble's main argument was that we've found so many hunter-gatherer evidence during and before the ice age that, statistically, we would expect to find some evidence of a global civilization if one existed
      >Dibble didn't do a good job at clarifying he is making a probability argument.
      Yeah I wanted to smack him over the head for how moronic his communication was. He should have just slowed down with his sperging out and not tried to bombard the audience with information they were never going to digest anyway, and more strongly emphasised this point.
      >Also Dibble should've just apologized for the white supremacist claims, he came off as disingenuous there
      Hard agree with this as well. It's a real issue when you're too used to writing in a scientific article style that you get used to being able to tell people that they should read exactly what you say and normally you can get people to very precisely interpret your words in a journal so this problem doesn't come up, since we read words with a very precise meaning, but he has to be moronic to not know that journalists have no such culture. The fact he would write something like that and pretend it isn't a part of how journalists find an argument to smear Hanwiener as a Nazi makes him socially moronic at best and dishonest at worst.
      Honestly towards the end, both behaved quite childishly.

  31. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You’re not convincing me this incident wasn’t aliens.

    > ‘In the morning of April 14, 1561, at daybreak, between 4 and 5 a.m., a dreadful apparition occurred on the sun, and then this was seen in Nuremberg in the city, before the gates and in the country – by many men and women. At first there appeared in the middle of the sun two blood-red semi-circular arcs, just like the moon in its last quarter. And in the sun, above and below and on both sides, the color was blood, there stood a round ball of partly dull, partly black ferrous color. Likewise there stood on both sides and as a torus about the sun such blood-red ones and other balls in large number, about three in a line and four in a square, also some alone. In between these globes there were visible a few blood-red crosses, between which there were blood-red strips, becoming thicker to the rear and in the front malleable like the rods of reed-grass, which were intermingled, among them two big rods, one on the right, the other to the left, and within the small and big rods there were three, also four and more globes. These all started to fight among themselves, so that the globes, which were first in the sun, flew out to the ones standing on both sides, thereafter, the globes standing outside the sun, in the small and large rods, flew into the sun. Besides the globes flew back and forth among themselves and fought vehemently with each other for over an hour. And when the conflict in and again out of the sun was most intense, they became fatigued to such an extent that they all, as said above, fell from the sun down upon the earth 'as if they all burned' and they then wasted away on the earth with immense smoke. After all this there was something like a black spear, very long and thick, sighted; the shaft pointed to the east, the point pointed west.’

    How can you honestly say this sounds like they are describing a meteor shower or ball lightning or a sun dog?

    • 1 month ago
      Cult of Passion

      Sounds like some kind of Revelation.

      Im too preoocupied to decypher it, got a flight in 24 hours.

  32. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    A debate is a contest of minds, not a contest of ideas. Dibble's argument is more convincing simply because he's smarter than Hanwiener. A fringe theory by definition is going to have a much smaller pool of proponents to draw from, so there will likely be fewer intelligent people able to defend it.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      fringe ideas are a resource. humans are genetically primed for bullshit. not doing it would be kicking away money. people want a good story, and you can use what isn't yet settled, and sell it.
      which leads into inevitable issues, like with science. so then the incentive is to fight against science. the more you do it, the more money you can potentially get, on your grift. which explains *current state* of things.
      humans are moronic that way. Rogan freely admits it
      >I want to believe, I want to be convinced they're real
      it's right there for the taking

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I found Dibble incredibly unconvincing because he behaved like a spergy child who thinks shouting equals authority and looked goofy as frick in that oversized off the rack suit.

  33. 1 month ago
    Cult of Passion

    Im my world there are Kingdoms of Men that still stand.

    Rome still stands.
    Cairo still stands.
    Atlantis still stands...these are not "arbitrary nonsense", theyre referencing specific things in history.

  34. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    this board is literally indistinguishable from /x/

    • 1 month ago
      Cult of Passion

      >/sxi/

    • 1 month ago
      Cult of Passion

      Wanna know what else is cool.

      All the cool kid social scientists and biologists are hip on it too, "Golaith", the "Dragon", "Possessed by a spirit."

      BioMagnetics, your PHYSICS dictacts reality.

      • 1 month ago
        Cult of Passion

        Holy shit, lol...
        [hand cross thing]

  35. 1 month ago
    Cult of Passion

    >We know medical science.
    Negatory.
    >We know history.
    Negatory.

    Know thy station, human-unit.

    t.Amun Ra the VII of III

  36. 1 month ago
    Cult of Passion

    >He split the moon.
    The Moon of Catholicism and Moon of Islam in twix, but in their division theyre still One.

    Why is a Giza in París?

    • 1 month ago
      Cult of Passion

      Womp womp.

      Stoned, impatient, and careless, bad combo. Bed time.

      • 1 month ago
        Cult of Passion

        Wow, I just heard the Koran's interpretation of the Trinity, it added a whole fricking paradigm I wasnt expecting, this rewrites some shit....like, in both Books, oh frick....this is wild.

        I think I might keep this one to myself....

  37. 1 month ago
    bodhi

    he is right about more things than he is wrong about, this is a fact. Anyone who denies it is just ignorant of the facts

  38. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Graham Hanwiener's ideas are all racist, white supremacist, and misogynistic.
    >Why are you calling me racist, white supremacist, and misogynistic?
    >Hahaha, what are you talking about? I never called you those things, I only said that all of your ideas explicitly promote those things.
    This Dribble guy is an insufferable homosexual. What's his early life look like?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >no I never said that
      This miffed me too.
      No different from people like Trudeau.
      “I never forced you to take the vax, what are you talking about?”

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Even worse was when he doubled down.
        >So you're saying this publication misquoted your article?
        >Yes, I don't control what the media says.
        >Did you contact them and ask them to correct it?
        >No, I didn't keep track of every article that quoted me.
        >Will you ask for a correction now that you know about them misquoting you?
        >No, because it's true.
        >That I'm a racist white supremacist?
        >No, I didn't say that!

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *