"OF COURSE keanu reeves knew the time line was off since he was a little kid. that's because he was there. at the start of it all. and when the last star dies off, keanu reeves will go back to sleep and dream a new universe again." - greg, who hangs out outside 7/11 drinking wine from a carton.
I would say almost more so than Hancock. I like Hancock because he's sort of a big picture guy, but Randall comes with the data and geological knowledge to show potential evidence of ancient cataclysms.
@@LWRNCH6550 Yes yes those who are paying attention already know Keanu is actually the future Emperor of Man praised be his name. Tell us something we don't know
@@tstones5187 well why wouldn’t he though? It’s not as if he’s been trained in archaeology or the scientific method. It’s understandable. From my perspective, it’d be like a quantum physicist throwing up formulas, and telling me what they mean. The physicist could be making the whole thing up, & I wouldn’t know, especially if it sounded believable. I get why so many people want to believe him.
Getting Keanu is genius because a lot of casuals will watch for him, and they might get curious about what you have to say and start doing their own personal research. Season 1 was awesome, and this is going to be great! Thanks so much for all your hard work!!
I did my own personal research and found out half the things he said in season 1 was straight rubbish. He is a laughing stock among experts for a good reason.
Been following Graham since his first appearance on the JRE. He opened my mind to many fascinating topics and he certainly has a gift for articulating his ideas and expressing them verbally. A true storyteller. With a little bit of shaman mixed in.
His stories are nice and he is a good storyteller but he has never provided any evidence. It is just assumptions, an attempt from him to imagine how the world was. Pseudohistory.
@@politicallyincorrect2564 You haven’t read his books, clearly. I don’t believe it’s fair to dismiss someone as having “no evidence” when you haven’t even honestly studied their work. You can disagree with his conclusions but to say that he doesn’t present ANY evidence is just purely dishonest and disingenuous. Strawman argument.
Silly. But I'm glad he helped in any little way promote these theories. The more people are aware there's something shady about the official history of mankind the better.
@heretic124 There is nothing "shady" about history. There is evidence and provable fact. Hancock has yet to provide any shred of evidence to support his claims. Every historian or archaeologist would give their right arm to find physical evidence of a previously unknown civilisation.
Synopsis: After years of research into lost civilisations Graham finds himself in a dangerous situation. His former arch nemesis Flint Dibble tracks Graham to the ends of the earth till they finally stand face to face in New Zealand before the fires of mount doom.
It's funny seeing people be triggered by Flint Dibble. He's the boogey man that you guys can't prove wrong. All you got is jokes on how he looks and his name. Pathetic, but that's the usual hancock fan club clown show for you.
I have been worried there wasn't going to be another season of this show. I am so happy there will be and I'm looking forward to it! Thank you to Graham Hancock, Netflix, and to all of the people who worked on this show and made it happen!
Dont worry, with his son working for netflix in juust the right position, hancock can probably crank his conspiracies out to the gullible for another 10 years.
@@Subjekt3 lol "conspiracies" how many times lies are you gonna spread today. you are literally a conspiracy theoriest thinking graham spreads conspiracies lol.
@@C3l3bi1 dude was literally involved with the 2012 end of the world crowd... maybe watch some of his older interviews... or maybe dont, if you allready fall for his modern bs.
I'm so glad Graham is receiving the attention he deserves, he's been talking about this for so long and these so called "experts" just keep dismissing him because they want to follow the narrative that they have been studying their whole life, as if we know all and everything in the world, when in reality we don't know much, in fact we have been wrong about almost everything!
Bro Graham Hitchcock is literally a conspiracy theorist journalist pretending he understands science. He's just for laughing at, don't take him so seriously.
@@r.j.6811 It's about archeologists not scientists and it's not that they* say we know everything, it's more that some are too sure that everything they already know is completely accurate. The further you go back in history, starting in the early Bronze Age and everything before that, a lot of what we assume to be history is more based on guessing and speculating what's the most likely interpretation for the few things we found. For example there is actually no 100% evidence of how old the great pyramid is or what it was used for, there's just a lot of indirect evidence that makes it very likely that our current theories are true, but it's not 100% evidence. Or the Sphinx, there's no way to date the stone and there is no text that tells us who built it. But some, not all, archeologists treat it like those are certain facts. I'm not saying Graham is right with everything, but it's good that he at least keeps a more open mind to the possibility that some things maybe were different than we think. *obviously the majority of all archeologist are good people and are doing a great job and some are even open for the possibility of some of Grahams ideas to be true, it's most likely just a loud minority of arrogant or close minded archeologists (after all they're just humans too and some humans just are like that) that are the problem that think they couldn't be wrong and that everything they learned is true.
@@r.j.6811 they aren't saying they know everything but they are pretty confident about things in the last 10k years. However, If a cataclysm hit tomorrow, it would only take 3k years for most of our structures and evidence of technology to cease to exist except in the most remote and isolated places like bunkers. Otherwise natural deterioration of materials, from plastics to electronics to metals would just become deposits that line the ground. This is proven, with another 5k years after the first 3 we have been eliminated to just what pottery and and bones that lay in the ground, grave yards, etc. Do we do soil testing around ancient grave sites for metal composition to find deteriorated/ oxidized metals etc? No, archeologists focus on fundamentals; pottery, bones and plant matter. I am not saying there was a civilization existed with technology as advanced as us but just saying, it took 1000 years for us to move from feudal to rennassiance, (astrology to astronomy and greater understanding of physics and mechanics) then another 500 to go from that to beginning of industrial revolution then another 100 to go to nuclear. Would be pretty stupid to think that humans have existed for 100k+ years on this planet and we've only had 1 shot at evolution. Even though non western european cultures show greater populations who could navigate the warmer seas when the sea level was much lower. We assume they didnt have sailing only because the narrative showed sailing was invented in such and such though for the length of voyages and time between stops (exploration of Easter islands and gylapagos by polynesia is a fact). You should start looking at the globe more and watch the narrative. Then read the studies with out a narrative.
@@dubselectorr345 I am wondering how many episodes there will be and the length. Even season 1 didn't have a huge run time, I want to say half an hour ish each but can't remember exactly. The scope of the Americas is ridiculous though.
Ahhhhh Graham, you animal! I’m so happy for you, getting another season of AA on Netflix. And with Keanu! What a massive accomplishment. Well done you! Long time fan here, wishing you all the best and I cannot wait for this to come out 💕
You know you're dealing with a serious scientific investigation into the past when Keanu Reeves is highlighted in the trailer of your very serious history show
@@ha-kh7ef Milo is a hack, a fraud, and a very condescending snob that only the most feeble and insecure minds find interesting. I feel bad for squares like you.
@@Josh385moni I don't like his tone either, in fact I very much hate it. But if you can ignore the tone you can hear the truth in what he is saying. I think he sounds derisive and disrespectful to me because of my age (I'm over 40) and his content is clearly aimed at the 25 and under aged crowd - they find it funny and empowering, so... I still find him interesting and insightful, just in small doses please and thank you :)
@@Josh385moni If you want to make any big suggestion in any scientific field you need to provide evidence specially when he doesn't really make suggestion he's literally talking like everything he says are fact Also this has nothing to do with textbook, he just debunk the "evidence" provided by GH
@@ni9274 "f you want to make any big suggestion in any scientific field you need to provide evidence specially when he doesn't really make suggestion he's literally talking like everything he says are fact" What? he literally does not, he literally throws it out there saying these are the facts and these are the hypothesees.
I do stuff with Aztec etc history, and when S1 came out, I did a big breakdown Ep2, so I'll repost that here: Hancock preys on people's ignorance of Mesoamerica to take mundane findings and blows them out of proportion to act as if they upend the archaeological or historical consensus when they really don't: The most blatant example of this is with Cholula, where he presents the fact that the Pyramid has layers as some sort of unexpected find, the implication being that it calls into question the pyramid's age. But pyramids being built sequentially in layers like a Russian doll is EXTREMELY common in Mesoamerica:, with expansions built as new kings took power or during important cosmological milestones. And the specific layers of the Great Pyramid of Cholula is well studied in particular, due to fact that the structure wasn't destroyed by the Spanish (see below). Hancock even explicitly says he doesn't even dispute that dating (which makes that whole segment feel pointless and dishonest, since he's clearly still trying to make people skeptical). I also found his framing of it being located over water as something special and then asking "What made these people build it here?" to be sort of absurd: He answers his own question! Pools of water, mirrors, caves, etc were all tied to underworld entrances in Mesoamerican cosmology, with Pyramids at Teotihuacan or Chichen Itza's Temple of Kukulkan also being over pools/caves. He even draws attention to this, bringing up that the Giza Pyramid etc were built over water sources too, so he's simultaneously acting ignorant but also trying to draw a global pattern (but doesn't establish it being a wider pattern in Egypt, SEA, etc). His "all pyramids have connections to death and rebirth" point also falls flat, as Mesoamerican pyramids were primarily temples, not tombs like in Egypt. Now, it SHOULD be noted that there are sometimes buried remains and ceremonial goods in Mesoamerican pyramids, but these were usually ritual caches to consecrate the construction of new phases/layers of the pyramid, not burials the monument itself was dedicated to, though sometimes that was the case as well. Actually, sometimes Pyramids (or Pyramid like outgrowths of some larger acropoli complexes) were even used as administrative buildings or residences! But that just goes to show you it's not always or even usually tied to death/rebirth. The show also clearly misrepresents Dr. Mcafferty's statements (something he's since said since in other interviews): At one point, Hancock asks "Is that enough to be confident enough about the full story", and he basically says "No, there's a lot of work to be done to teach us more about Mesoamerica". This is not him saying "Everything we think we know is wrong" (which is what Hancock implies it to be) it's just saying that there's still more excavations to do, as there's always more we can learn. And when Dr. Mcafferty says "Knowing more about Cholula would let us rethink Mesoamerican as a whole": The researcher's point was likely that a better understanding of Cholula would give us a better picture of how social, political and religious trends changed in Mesoamerica over time (since Cholula existed as small village in 1000BC all the way to being a large city with 40k+ denizens as of Spanish contact) and since the city had widespread religious and political influence even in other parts of Mesoamerica (with other kings appealing to Cholula officials for legitimacy or visiting it for coronation), more info on Cholula would likewise yield insights on Mesoamerica as a whole The 3D Cholula render the episode used is also pretty wrong: It just had buildings evenly spaced around the Pyramid. No roads, city planning, etc: Mesoamerican cities usually had a central urban core with temples, palaces, other elite housing/civic buildings, ball courts, etc, all richly painted and decorated, organized around open plazas for communal activities and ritualistic alignment. And then around that you had suburbs of commoner housing interspersed with agricultural land, etc, with the suburbs gradually decreasing in density the further out you go (in some cases, covering hundreds of square kilometers). Both the core and in some cases the suburbs had roads, aqueducts, etc. The Pyramid in the render was also grey and mossy, in ruins. If this is meant to be at the Pyramid's apex, then it should be painted and adorned with sculptures, reliefs, etc. If it's depicting it as of Spanish contact (which is what the graphics suggest), then it would've been buried in soil: The entire reason it's intact today is the Spanish mistook it as a hill, as after the city got conquered by new populations over time, eventually around 900-1200AD the Great Pyramid was abandoned in favor of a newly constructed Pyramid dedicated to Quetzalcoatl (which doesn't survive today). The show also mislabels some Teotihuacan frescos as being from Cholula; gets some of the dating wrong; and claims the whole pyramid was straw and adobe brick, when the exterior facade of most stages, as well as some of the fill in later phases, were stone. Moving onto Texcotzinco: Firstly, this is an INCREDIBLE site more people should know about: This was a royal estate/retreat for rulers of Texcoco, the second most powerful Aztec city. It sourced water from 5+ miles of aqueducts (some elevated 150 feet off the ground) which brought the water to a series of pools and channels to control the flow rate on an adjacent hill, then across the gorge between there and Texcotzinco, where it flowed into a circuit around Texcotzinco's summit, into the site's painted shrines, pools, fountains, etc, and then formed artificial waterfalls which watered the botanical gardens at the hill's base, which had different sections to mimic different Mexican biomes. We outright have written sources discussing the site being designed in the 1460s AD by Nezahualcoyotl, Texcoco's most famous king who also designed levee and aqueduct systems at other Aztec cities. But, in the interest of intellectual honesty, those written accounts which credit Nezahualcoyotl as the site's engineer are written by Fernando Ixtlilxóchitl, a descendent of Texcoca royalty, for the specific purpose of glorifying Texcoco to the Spanish and we do know he twisted details (EX: claiming Nezahualcoyotl worshiped a monotheistic god and rejected sacrifice). There's a whole book on this, "The Allure of Nezahualcoyotl'' and I know another researcher, Dr. Susan Toby Evans has a lot of papers on Texcotzinco, but a lot of her faculty page's links are down. In the papers I do still have access to, it is mentioned that the site probably had some shrines built under earlier Texcoca rulers before Nezahualcoyotl, and they may have been buried there, There IS a paper by her which mentions there is hard dating for Texcotzinco's construction based on archaeological material rather then just those 16th/17th century text sources, which should definitely nail down the construction dates (barring issues with the dating technique or methodology), but sadly the paper doesn't clarify on what that evidence is, exactly. However, Hancock's points are still unconvincing: The person he brings on to talk about the site (who is not a researcher, just a guy who runs an Atlantis blog) give basically zero scientific analysis or actual criticism of any sort of dating method, just vague commentary about there being a lot of weathering on a random rock, so there's no real evidence to review. Hancock's other point is that there's Tlaloc-style iconography at the site, and uses a pre-Aztec Tlaloc-style sculpture from another site to imply Texcotzinco could be pre Aztec as well... BUT WE ALL ALREADY KNOW THERE ARE PRE-AZTEC TLALOC STYLE RAIN GODS! That Tlaloc and other Mesoamerican, "fanged" or "goggled" rain gods like Chaac or Cocijo originated from Olmec ""were jaguar" (there's some debate of if they're actually meant to be were-jaguars) sculptures is VERY well documented in the literature, there's even giant charts by researchers showing the specific stages of development the iconography of these Rain gods went through at different times in different parts of Mesoamerica! So the presence of Tlaloc-style iconography doesn't inherently suggest any time period, and if anything the Tlaloc depictions at the site are consistent with Aztec period examples. Especially since the royal gardens many Aztec rulers had like Texcotzinco were meant to evoke Tlaloc's heavenly realm Tlalocan, a lush tropical paradise with flowers, fruit trees, waterfalls, streams, springs, etc. Texcotzinco in particular fits this framework even more, since there are ties between Tlalocan and hills/mountains, and one of the hilltops the Texcotzinco aqueducts sourced water from was LITTERALLY named "Mount Tlaloc", thought to be an earthly manifestation of Tlalocan ala Olympus in Greece. CONTINUED IN A FOLLOW UP REPLY BELOW
CONTINUED FROM THE ABOVE: Moving onto Xochicalco, the same guy without credentials talking about rocks at Texcotzinco identifies a glyph as representing a burning temple (when it doesn't resemble any other depictions of burning temples in Mesoamerican art, and it and similar iconography on that monument is rather consistent with day signs and even have the telltale numerals indicating dates), tying into Hancock's telling of the myth with Quetzalcoatl which similarly, mixes details from different accounts or just gets stuff wrong: The flood he references is from myths detailing the cyclical creation and destruction of the world (and was done by Chalchiuhtlicue, not Tlaloc as the episode claims), wheras Quetzalcoatl sailing on a raft of snakes comes from Aztec accounts about the 10th century Toltec lord Ce Acatl Topiltzin, who is tied to Quetzalcoatl: These are largely separate narrative eons apart. There's many versions of these, and only SOME of the latter involve the raft, and in them, he is LEAVING rather then arriving into Mesoamerica. Even these versions recorded in the early colonial period we know have catholic influences from Friars re-writing them to aid in conversion and to make their rule seem pre-ordained. Stuff like Cortes being mistaken for Quetzalcoatl (a myth invented for similar reasons, Cortes never claims this, and in fact explicitly mentions an incident where Moctezuma II shows his bare chest to convince Cortes he, LIKE CORTES HIMSELF is human rather than a god or sorcerer as Cortes had heard rumors of) comes from these, too. Hancock's telling is, if anything, closer to even later and more nonsense versions that make Quetzalcoatl white, blond, etc. Some of the earlier versions do have Ce Acatl Topiltzin as bearded, but this isn’t strange, as the Mesoamericans had facial hair! We know it was customary in Aztec society for everyone other than rulers (Moctezuma II had facial hair, as seen in both manuscripts and in conquistador accounts!) or the elderly to shave, and Topiltzin was both. There are NO examples of Prehispanic or even 16th century art depicting or describing Quetzalcoatl as white skinned. (There is a symbolic tie of Quetzalcoatl to the color white in the "4 Tezcatlipocas'' paradigm, but A: that's a symbolic, not a literal connection to the color, and B: the entire concepts of the "4 Tezcatlipocas" is likely a misreading of the Codex Ramirez and isn't a real thing, see Clickypenned's posts on this) Instead of listening to Hancock for "stuff archaeologists don't want you to know about" people should look up the REAL civilizations most books, classes, etc ignore because Prehispanic history is underappreciated: - Teotihuacan was a gigantic metropolis in Central Mexico during the time of the Romans that had 100,000+ denizens all living in fancy palace compounds across a gigantic planned urban grid, may have even conquered Maya city-states a thousand kilometers away. (and hey, i'll plug Ancient America's excellent video on Teotihuacan here, which I helped quite a bit with) - The Moche was a civilization in Northern Peru during the same period that build big, gorgeously decorated adobe ziggurat complexes called Huacas and have insanely lifelike ceramic busts which depict the same figures, likely rulers, across different stages of life, as well as ceramics depicting kinky sex acts and some amazing gold artwork. - The Mixtec and Zapotec in Oaxaca have a long history stretching back as much of the Maya, with Monte Alban being a major captial for around 1000 years;and then 8 Deer Jaguar Claw having an insane life story, being born a noble in Tilantongo, working as a general for other city-states, founding his own city, taking the throne back in Tilantongo, using his blessings from officials in Cholula to sidestep the Oracles that sectioned political marriages and wars in Mixtec society to then conquer nearly 100 cities in 18 years before ironically dying when the one boy he left alive in his arch-rival's family grew up to assassinate him. - The Chimu were another civilization in Northern Peru with a massive capital city called Chan Chan, who the Inca had major wars with. - The Purepecha Empire, the third largest state in the Americas after the Inca and Aztec, who totally crushed attempted Aztec invasions, formed a fortified border in response, and had Mesoamerica's most centralized imperial political system and the largest center of Bronze production in the region. There's so much more than these too, and I would implore people to look them and all the other things up that are actually REAL but nonetheless still don't get attention from mainstream sources. The channel "Ancient Americas" here on RU-vid does some great videos, as is MrLaserHistory's video on Aztec sacrifices, DJpeachCobbler's Aztec/Cortes trilogy, Stefan Milo's video on Tlaxcallan, the ARTSQ channel, Aztlanhistorian's channel, etc. InvictaHistory and Kings and General's older Aztec and Maya stuff is solid too.
I loved the first season. Hancock clearly delineates between what is known and what his own hypothesis are. That he's angering complacent historians in the process is a bonus.
@@BiscuitGeoff Repeating old dogmas despite evidence to the contrary and collecting fat paychecks for it. Look up Clovis culture and see how the establishment was debunked by actual archeologists like Hancock.
If his hypothesis aren't backed up by any evidence and presented to millions of people through massive media like Netflix then it's not just "his own hypothesis" and archaeologist have the right to explain why the hypothesis is completely false
So glad season 2 is almost here. Your insight is so strongly rejected because you have discovered something so profound. The flak is always heaviest over the target. Thank you again Graham Hancock for your work in this world.
His insight is rejected because there is no tangible evidence for his civilization, and all the actual scientific evidence actually points against it. He has fooled millions into thinking he is onto something.
@@ni9274 have you? please link your in depth insights and discoveries into ancient megalithic sites. Perhaps then, I can understand your point of view.
This guy is an absolute legend. He has researched for thirty years and presented a mind bending viewpoint which, if true, could reshape the timeline of history. As a history student at uni I am inspired. I understand the flaws in the arguments, I understand the points presented by critics. But calling it "racist" to question the age of objects is absurd. Contradicting other peoples historical is not racist. Here's the thing through: I also see the validity in many things which he has observed - after all, he is not claiming his theory is fact but rather he is asking the tough questions using evidence he has found in the field. Finally, I don't even have a viewpoint on this issue yet, but my word. Seeing how the media and some sections of society have treated this man is reprehensible. Humanity has a long way to go in recognising theories and ideas that are not of the cultural norm! If your reading this Graham, I love your work, as do many. Ancient Apocalypse is one of my favorite history documentaries, I love the thesis. Please, never give up your passion for history, it is amazing to see and listen to.
Imagine spending 30 years of your life on a conspiracy and getting proven wrong at every turn. But instead of accepting defeat gracefully you just assume everyone is out to get you and dig yourself deeper into the conspiracy theorist rabbit hole.
People dont call it rasist, they call it rubbish, cause thats what it is. His claims been disproven many times and he still spreads them, sometimes even pure lies
@@martinondrus6344 Um mate they actually do call it racist. Dibble does it on the Joe Rogan debate plus mutliple newspaper articles did. Do some research mate
@@loglog7 Nah mate it's a theory, not a conspiracy. Stop framing it in such a disparaging way. And people like Dibble have been shown to have lied through their teeth on multiple issues bro. Nothing against Dibble personally I'm just making the point that he is easily a proven liar - unlike Graham who ACKNOWLEGDES he is pushing a theory, which he is using facts to try and prove.
@@flawlessvictorychannel1 It's a theory when you have some evidence, it's a conspiracy when you have none. And these crackpots have no evidence of anything.
Will there be any evidence for the lost civilisation in this one? Or did all the budget go to cool drone shots instead of funding archaeological research?
People look at stonework and ask, where is it? With eyes you will see your answers. Look and you will find. Only make your answer once you look AND touch it... it's there. All over the world. You should check the long form content over the TV shows though.
it dont realy care of Graham is right or wrong cause its still alot of unsolved history! its just fascinating and interesting to se diffrent theories. take it for what it is, Entertainment. the Dibblers can hate as much as they want wont change the fact alot of people just love this kind of stuff to imagine what can or cannot be.
@@sadhu7191 Any scientific hypothesis needs to consider all evidence. Graham does not. He bends the data to make it look like the real deal to gullible people but it is not a thesis backed by evidense. His constant whining that scientists dont want to talk to him further builds the picture that science is elitist and does not want to hear revolutionary ideas. Quite the opposite is true but you cannot discuss something that is based on makebelief instead of facts. Graham earns a lot of money from his willfully missrepresentation of facts and archaeology. While archaeology is whofully underfunded... But hey they hide everything in the smithsonian right? :)
I like it that Keanu is happy to endorse the work of Graham Hancock. Anyone with a brain knows that there is something wrong with the way that history has been shown to us. I'm not disputing recent history, say the last 2000 to 2500 years or so, but the structures that are much older, and the structures that have been taken by the Sea, there is no explanation for them. And these structures are incredible, exceptionally well built, spanning vast areas. Main stream archaeology has given no answers for this, so why attack anyone that comes up with a hypothetical answer? Someone had to have built them.
Well but there is a lot to dispute, about the more recent history that is. Particularily where you notice there are actual laws protecting certain elements of it and people actually go to jail for questioning those elements. Why does history need to be protected by law?
Graham is off the hinges with this one. Even got Keanu on board, gid damn. It will generate so much hate in the mainstream, cant wait. Much respect for this man!
"It will generate so much hate in the mainstream" He's working with netflix, he's literally the mainstream People criticizing him are the one being attacked by the mainstream, they're the one who do not work with massive corporations and millions dollars budget.
