Teaching is the fastest way to become an "expert" of your material. I felt like during my first year of teaching Property Law, I was just a few pages in front of the students. By the third year it was easy. By the fourth year I had developed my own critiques of the material and was able to actually contribute something substantive to the academic community. It's the same with just about every academic.
My brother used to say he was an expert, X being an unknown quantity and spurt being a drip under pressure. Of course, it works much better verbally rather than in text.
Good answer to the first Q Academics aren’t obligated to respond to every idea out there. The majority of these ideas arent even heard by academics. I’m glad you make an effort to engage with people though because it is important work
I've always heard accusations that academics are suppressing alternative narratives but rarely did I see academics respond to it. It's refreshing and interesting to see your response. Keep up the great videos
Agreed. I have seen responses, but they don't tend to be much more detailed than "Oh, believe me, that is is nonsense, practically every scholar dreams of producing a work capable of completely overturning the existing consensus." That kind of mindset is a part of why I'm not really interested in continuing in academia, I'm not that interested in overturning the consensus, though I'm aware my angle on a lot of things isn't exactly mainstream, I just want to teach high schoolers to either enjoy history the way I do, or, failing that, teach them to respect Ave treat the people of the past as complex, real, people, not static words on a page.
Academics don't usually respond to non-academic claims for several reasons. One is, as it has been pointed out, that the theories are laughable to the trained eye, and academics are usually so immersed in their own niche research areas that they tend to extrapolate. "Others must see this is not sound, surely" is a comment I've heard some of my professors say when a nationalist "alternative history institute" claimed that several historical figures had been "stolen" by other nationalities. But the other reason is time and effort. Academics, especially those who are not established figures or comfy professors with deep roots in their cathedra, have to spend a lot of their free time and usually measly pay knee deep in books, trying to get their next big scoop or find their new angle. Some of my best friends are professional historians (I abandoned academia four years in, once I found out that I didn't have anything new to contribute, and indexing unedited 1450 documents was the most boring thing ever) and they simply don't have the time to now get a hands-on, full thorough rebuttal of the pages and pages of nonsense some of these alternate researchers create. They'd rather publish more papers that might get them the publications they need in order to get another scholarship or more visibility in a specific area.
I think that is one of the reasons why pseudoscientists get so much attention, and why academics need to profile themselves more like prof Miano is doing here.
I sort of got into the "alternate history" stuff when I was a teenager. I eventually realized that I just wanted a lot of these things to be true because it would be interesting, and that oftentimes the actual truth of what happened is more fantastic. Our ancestors were amazing.
Geologist here. The Richat structure has been extensively explored by Geologists for minerals and oil and gas. Although it's existence as a possible candidate for Atlantis keeps popping up by "alternative historians", there is NOTHING man-made about the structure. If there were, it would be known. It's a natural geological feature and not Atlantis or any other city.
Everyone in academia who has done the tedious grunt work working on a project and the time it takes to statistically run the models that verify the results and finally to publish it understand why many people present on you tube and push their books to the masses rather present their finding to professionals in the field for peer review. Fun vid and Great answers, David.
Graham Hancock - former sci fi author & tour guide. Brien Forester - author and tour guide. Uncharted X videographer and tour guide. “Jimmy”… ummm, former retail loss prevention guy with a RU-vid channel? I’ll take Dr David, Raven DeSilva & Stephan Milo and their real world expertise any day. Actually, I like the truth more. The Great Pyramid of Giza was built BY HAND - and that is much cooler to me than “ancient machines” that didn’t exist.
Check out “Giza - the fall of a dogma” as soon as it gets published in your language. These guys don’t give guided tours, nor have a specific theory to push about the giza plateau, which is definitely a plus. They reported what has been going on And what has been discovered in the great pyramid with a critical standpoint.
Just watched the greatest video I’ve seen on RU-vid since the first hit that got me hooked…. Top comment is probably first I’ve ever read and wished I had wrote…. Bravo gentlemen!
@@barbojohnsung7113 What do you mean Hancock doesn't have a specific theory? He's always saying that there was an "ancient and lost global civilization", isn't he?
I agree, but I love their channels regardless, especially Jimmy, lol. I am one to say I don't know what really happened in the past, not really, the landmarks are there regardless. I only like using my imagination to just... imagine.
Imposter syndrome is extremely common, and it's far more useful in the modern world to know how and where to look for information than it is to have it memorised. You don't have to have a perfect memory as long as your job doesn't require instant on the spot answers to obscure information, which is quite a rare requirement. It is perfectly OK to say "I don't know, but I can find out."
"It's enough to know where you can find out." For a foreign language student, having a dictionary on the shelf, or in your iPhone, is not the same as knowing what the words mean already.
“But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.” --Carl Sagan
On the memory question: i would like to add that trying to associate the new info with something fun/memorable in your head or try to visualize what you are learning and categorize it in your head if you can. Visualize as much as you can. Also (might sound dumb but...) try to excite yourself about learning, picture yourself unraveling truths of the world history to yourself. You are tapping into human history, it's amazing. I wish you luck up & coming scholars
Go into a bookshop and you will find hundreds of books on alternative theories, and there is nothing wrong with that. In fact, some are quite interesting. But the academic kitchen is a hot one. Even if you present your theory using all the correct methods and get peer reviewed...guess what, the kitchen gets hotter. And rightly so, that is how it works and how the wheat is sorted from the chaff.
For the first question, I had to write an essay about alternative theories about the sphinx recently. I am not an historian and I was not very aware of all the alternative writers out there. I was very surprised by their theories (which are very weak to my opinion) but more than that by the storytelling they build in their books. It is way more about how academia disregard them than it is about their theories. To be honest, at first I was amused by this. I am not an historian but I came from the world of academia (in biomedicine), so i know the "codes" and stuffs. Saying in a book about your theories how mainstream researchers were mean with you, it is uncalled for and very unprofessional in my opinion, so it kind of discredit the whole message of the book for me. But after I read several of these books and started to go online to see how people responded to them, I was very sad and disappointed to see how people completely adhere to this storytelling of the oppressed alternative researchers looking for the truth despite the mean and bad mainstream researchers. As you said, presenting yourself and your book as the seekers of truth disregarded by academia IS a good way to sell and make cash the "easy way". Which is never grasped by their blind followers. Sad but true.
Did any of those books come up with the simple theory that the sphinx is a failed statue of Annubis? go to any of the Egyptian gift shops and there are scores of sphnix-posed statues of Annubis.
@@utubewatcher806 yes, it is a theory promoted by Temple if i recalled correctly. I read one of his books and I was not convinced at all because they are absolutely no argument to think the sphinx was recarved. But i didn't go further as I was mostly interested about the theories of the lion head, the tunnels under the sphinx and the erosion which are promoted by other pseudoscientists (who btw seemed to be in conflicts with Temple for what i read in their respective books). The anubis poses is different (look for the way the tails is and the paws)
@@froggystyle642 I drew one on a piece of 1x4 with coloured permanent markers, cut up some popsicle sticks for the 'dice' and used some of my D&D d4's for pieces. It's on the game shelf at my cabin. Makes for a fun project.
I love how the one guy probably thought he was being a troll asking about dice, only to have Dr. Miano give him an excellent, academically thorough, interesting and detailed answer! Great work!!
Hey, Dr M. ,Joe Rogan and Graham threw down the gauntlet and are accepting challenges. Although they’re looking to get a conversation with archaeologists, since these guys are all over the map, they need a solid historian in the mix. YOU ARE THE MAN.
At least for me, teaching helped me learn, not just because I was repeating info, but because I was terrified of being blind-sided by a student. My first few semesters, I was über prepared.
That's such a good explanation of the situation with the alternative-history people. If they were "accepted" into the mainstream, they would lose their platform. I usually get a lot of funny questions during the first week in the first-year history class I teach, but by the second week nearly everyone realizes that it's all ridiculous.
If only Spengler were alive today. He’d have a field day with those people and associate them with Western societal breakdown and our slide back into anti-intellectualism.
What’s your explanation for the underwater pyramid at Azores or the Japanese underwater pyramid. What about the structures found under water near Cuba where the geological data shows that the land was submerged 50,000 years ago. How do you explain that??
I have found that when I write things out by hand, it helps me remember information more reliably and for longer. In university, I would take notes for non-math classes on my laptop since I can write faster with a keyboard, then I would go home and copy my typed notes into regular notebooks. For people still taking classes, reading the material that would be covered in lecture the night before the lecture was also a huge help, both for retention and boosting the participation component of your grade.
To write a thing requires more effort and hence more = focus. So what is required to understand is that our brains are highly amenable to "repetition" - it serving as the basis of creating memory engrams. This is why children as an example are taught via "rote" whereby they will recite and/or write down things over and over again - such as reciting their multiplication tables as a class. So the method of your retention - though it worked for you - is less about how you accomplished as you compelled yourself to focus upon what information you wished to remember. The longer you focus upon it + the more exposure to it you acquire = the better it will probably be retained by you.
Exactly. I have pretty bad adhd but I get through college and medical school by taking notes in class and writing stuff I’m studying over and over. That way I feel like it actually routes thru my brain instead of bouncing off.
I'm always amused by the "supression" theory. I know some university archeologiests, and frankly, they'd cut their own mothers throat for a chance to re-write the history books with a new find. Just as the discovery of Troy, or Tutankamun tomb, or the Terracotta warriors changed so much of what we "knew". Academic "history" is actually always changing to reflect new thinking or discoveries.
Amusing to see callers "studying" these alternative theories asking you for comment on topics that you've already made in depth videos about. Apparently their definition of study doesn't extend to the 30 seconds it would take to hit the magnifying glass icon on your youtube page or read the video titles. Kudos for your gentle handling of such curious "minds"
@Adam James I’ve made myself extremely familiar with the obviously false narrative being spun for pre-history, and I’m very familiar with several alternative theories in our pre-history. What would you like to debate? I’m happy to indulge.
@Adam James The real reason you won’t debate is that you can’t. You were told what to think, and you follow that dogma without hesitation. The holes in our history are proven by geologists, astronomers and a slew of other scientists frequently these days, and any historian will tell you that history is written by the victorious, and should always be taken with a grain of salt. History is being rewritten on an almost daily basis now, thanks to the use of Lidar, more advanced and reliable dating methods, evolutionary biologists and a slew of other modern discoveries. It turns out we have a much more interesting past than the honestly boring fiction we’ve been convinced of most of our lives. But you have a choice. You can stay ignorant, and continue to study a clearly fake narrative of deep history, or you can join the modern era, and discover what we’ve been missing, and what we’ve been wrong about.
@Adam James What places you in a position to refute the tenured professor of geology, Robert Schoch? He’s very respected in that field, and his work has been published in some of the most prestigious scientific journals in the world. Most of what he has proven is accepted by mainstream geology, and only weird narrative pushers refute what he has clearly proven in terms of dating the sphinx enclosure. But what have you to prove he is wrong when mainstream science has accepted his findings?
@Adam James Old Kingdom isn’t pre-history, though. We have written record for most of that period. You would have to go back further. However, Egyptology does have a lot of bias and dogma to diffuse. I can try to debate the old kingdom, if you like.
@Adam James I’m not sure who was raised in a theosophist tradition, but discrediting that person based on such a thing is a logical fallacy. Another poor debate tactic is trying to discredit your opponent, then refusing to engage in debate. If we are looking at outside influencers affecting the integrity of research, why aren’t we talking about the money influence that permeates the crumbling mainstream narrative? You seem to support this narrative without having actually supported it here today. I didn’t bring that logical fallacy up originally because I was seeking honest debate. Instead, you provide a string of logical fallacy and no substance. Reach out when you have something specific to discuss, and when you’ve decided to leave the argumentative fallacy and insults behind.
I do appreciate an actual material, institutional critique of academia. I think largely your explanation of how unstable a top-down stranglehold on a given field usually is - there are simply too many hungry young researchers with little to lose - is correct. If a field relies on material evidence or clear and undeniable steps of reasoning, and if its conclusions are largely unconcerned with the large scale organization of the social order and how resources are distributed - it is thereby resistant to perversion from existing power structures. For example it would be all but impossible to ‘discipline’ a conference of mathematicians into denying the conclusion of a given proof that they had all witnessed through proper argument. It is a beauty of these fields that, basically all one has to do to push them forward is to search and find a bulletproof string of arguments that, once it’s articulated, cannot be denied (simple, not easy). It is disappointing to see people waste their energy and their defiant skepticism on things like crank physics, flat earth, Atlantis, etc. because these fields largely don’t have the vulnerabilities to being steered and wielded by power that other consequential fields do. If they instead aimed their scrutiny towards, say, economics, international relations, political science, recent political history, criminology, property law- are a few that spring to mind - they might actually start to get to the bottom of why they feel as if they are being lied to. Because there really *ARE* institutions and power structures who really do (whether whole or in part) seek to confuse and mystify the public about the workings of the world. “What archeologists DON’T want you to know,” is a rather silly idea. But, “what the fellows at a economics think tank funded by the mineral extraction sector DON’T want you to know,” seems like a much more sensible thing to consider and discuss to me.
It seems that what you prefer would be arguments with a political agenda - or at least what would be perceived as such - and I get the impression that David goes out of his way to avoid that. I think he does a greater service by exposing the weakness of popular ideas that are not supported by credible evidence. Political arguments would just allow people to dismiss his work as partisan, unfortunately.
To the history student who is a visual learner: Perhaps when "pure" history is to overwhelming, there might be a way to change to more "visual" fields of science like material history, art history or even archaeology. I studied archaeology years ago and I always need the material objects to imagine the past. I see them as kind of "stepping stones" or crystilasation points around which the web of history or prehistory enfolds. Currently I learn more about medieval european history and I use the material culture and everyday life in a certain timeframe as a vantage point to get into the bigger scope of politics. Bottom to top, if that makes sense. I feel, it is easier for me to imagine the past when I have a inner picture of the physical world of that period. I hope that helps a bit. Sorry for bad grammar, english is my second language.
Yeah, that was sort of an existential dilemma. If your brain struggles with reading, fields that don't involve a bunch of reading are probably more for you than is academia, given the nature of academic work. If you insist on persisting with reading, it IS incredibly likely that your brain will become more adept with the act, over time.
Something that helped me immensely was having a text-to-speech feature read the research papers to me. I have really bad ADHD and my mind starts to wander when I try to read dense material, but listening is much easier.
An alternative historian saying in a best-selling book that they're being being silenced is essentially the same as a politician saying "I'm being silenced!" on national news. It's playing the victim for clicks and attention and falls apart with the slightest of scrutiny. Like how many seasons has ancient aliens gone on? And, like dr. Miano said, how many articles has Graham Hancock submitted for review? My guess would be none.
@Adam James exactly. Being banned from a platform is not silencing if you still have the opportunity to make the mainstream news spread your message endlessly. I particularly love how he kept playing the victim while he was president and was in the news every single day. It's downright delusional.
The history of dice bit was fascinating. I've always wondered about the Assyrian bird people. I always assumed they were air spirits of some kind, maybe connected to the old Akkadian disease demons, but they're presented in a more benign context. I'll check out the apkallu video
For anyone in college struggling with too much reading or retaining textual info you can often get accommodations! I highly encourage you to talk to your university's office of accommodations to see if you can get digital and/or audio copies of your textbooks. If you have something like ADHD or dyslexia, they may be legally required to accommodate this. Apart from that, if the text comes in digital form you may be able to DIY a solution by having a computer voice read it. There are programs out there for this, just depends on the format. Oh, also ask profs if you can record their lectures to listen again later! They usually don't mind, and this is a great way to review
On the popularity of Egypt, I think an important aspect is the discovery of Tut's tomb relatively recently. It was a massive discovery that got a lot of public attention. This reinforced the existing prominence of Egypt in the popular imagination.
Excellent point. No Eurasian tombs were found as such. Furthermore, I think it's also that Egypt was more colonized than the Middle East, as it was Turkish until World War 1, while the British didn't look too far into Indian history since it wasn't well preserved.
@@Tareltonlives The Hebrew Bible has a lot to say about Egypt, but it's possible that it was mostly metaphor about Babylon, since most of it was written during the Babylonian captivity and it would have been safer to do that. What reignited European interest in Egypt was Napoleon's conquest of Egypt at the beginning of the 19th century.
@@faithlesshound5621 Never thought of that- that makes a lot of sense-the Exodus was at least influenced if not entirely inspired by the Babylonian captivity. After all, they also used Babylon as a metaphor for the Seleucids And definitely it was the French and British conquests- both empires were extremely literate in classical studies and knew of Greek and Roman writings of Egypt, but Egypt itself proved to have many surprises and mysteries. The idea of Egypt as this magical, supernatural place dates back to Herodotus and it still remains a big part of Euro-American culture.
When studying...some had trouble retaining what they read...so we all took turns recording ourselves reading out loud from the books. We all had copies and could playback while driving...housework...etc. It seemed to help.
Great videos! About audio-video history from the scholars. It's great to see that more and more museums create youtube channels were their scholars talk about historical subjects related to their own work and artifacts or exhibitions in their meuseum. The British Museum has a great RU-vid channel with alot of content about ancient history. Bovington Tank museum aswell. Just to mention a few. So I think your idea on schoolarly videos has already started a great trend that might result in what you described.
Thanks for the video. I also love genealogy, it's a great way to learn about history. I find it takes you in new directions and makes you learn about things you might otherwise have overlooked.
About 16 minutes in. You talk about teaching what you've learned to other people. This is an excellent way that I have learned to retain information. I'm like the individual who asked the question. I have a very hard time retaining dates and specifics. I would also like to add, something that I've been trying lately is to write it out. I tell my kids and it helps with remembering. But I've noticed when I write it out in my own words and my thoughts on the subject it helps with remembering the little details. Your are a fucking very intelligent individual and I must admit I wish I had found your channel earlier in my learning about history. I'm loving all of it! So thank you!
It's not always practical for every student to teach what they have learned to someone else, and repeatedly. That's why teachers invented the essay: it's not purely a method of assessment, it also forces you to select from what you have learned and put it into your own words as a coherent whole. This works best if you do it at leisure rather than at the last minute. If someone checks ("marks") your essay, you may find it easier to learn than the textbook itself. A quiz or MCQ doesn't have the same benefit but may (if long enough) identify gaps in your learning more efficiently. Mathematics students do this all the time by solving problems: essays are the same thing for the humanities.
Hancock thinks the Atlanteans had literal psychic powers and had an astral vision of the catastrophe that would wipe them out. He doesn't bring this up too much for obvious reasons but it's central to his entire theory
Yes. "Innuendo" is a central component of "alternative" narratives. It is required to facilitate the "confirmation bias" behind the acceptance of the beliefs which are subsequently rationalized by the "alternative" minions. It therefore becomes relevant as to bias based upon what exactly. If one objectively considers those "alternative" narratives one sees whereby there is considerable overlap with narratives perpetuated by Hollywood via the science fiction genre for decades now in movies and television. The only plausible explanation becomes Hancock et al are trying to take advantage of all that "free publicity" to monetize people's overactive imaginations - helped along by the entertainment-based culture as noted. It is a disingenuous manner of turning a buck.
I am very happy Mr Miano is on board for giving us his opinion on things other people say. You can't fact check someone in an emotional state; they are locked in their belief and nothing one can say will make them think otherwise. This is why I like to hear both sides of the story of history.
Long time fan here from South Africa! Please keep up the great work! Your 1 million view video is coming soon! I know that's not what motivates you but you really deserve it! Much love!
Wish more history RU-vidrs engaged with subscribers in this fashion, great engagement- would live streams be something you'd consider? Also, as much as I enjoy them, I totally suck at your "what came first" shorts.
If acedemics start doing peer review via video, I personally think they should always make two videos for each subject; one specifically for the acedemics themselves to discuss and debate ideas, and another simplified version for the general public. I feel like this is something the general public needs to mitigate the spread of misinformation online.
I've always favored Lattimore, but I've been waiting for a translation to successfully do, philosophically, what it sounds like was done hear. I'll be getting this for sure, hopefully its as great as it sounds. Exciting!
You're a braver man than I sticking your hand into the blender like this. Qudos. To steal a line from I forget where... "Do you know what they call alternative medicine that is proven to work? Medicine." Same rule applies here.
Video suggestion: history of the use of the name “Asia”. Was it first used by Greeks to describe the eastern shore of the Aegean Sea, then extend to Peloponnesus, then to Mesopotamia, etc? Maybe this would be mostly a video about the Greeks’ knowledge of the extent of the land to their east and northeast
Your advice that the best way to solidify one's learning is to teach is absolutely right. It's not just repetition of the material, but by being forced to answer questions in detail, one is more certain that they have actually learned something. If you are not challenged, it is easy to convince yourself that you know. This applies to every field of of human knowledge.
Being from a tech background, we merit peer reviewed academic research, no doubt. But its common even in a field like computer engineering where researchers refuse to change due to the sheer inertia and mountain of work they built around or on an idea. Some have very clear "BELIEFS", and others refuse to go beyond their silos. It has its flaws too, and the ability to theorize, conjecture and prove something is often hard, and not available to these alternative theory buffs. Its also often hard to look at the totality of evidence, let alone reconcile dissonant facts. And personal beliefs/conflicts of interests used in peer reviewed cabals, where each one can get more reviews in a race to be a "more visible researcher". Honestly, their devices and means are not always honest. Now this is Science, imagine the humanities and liberal arts. Even all flaws considered, there is certainly an inertia, even in a standardized consensus reality.
16:50 This is so true. I think this is changing for things like podcasts, given the pervasiveness of long-form, slow paced, well-researched podcasts. I hope this trend continues and we can get some more mediums normalized.
Between the near daily quizzes and the videos you are pumping out I'm feeling spoiled and I'm here for it. Thanks Doc. Edit: is there a way for us to submit voice mails?
To my knowledge the oldest known dice is actually from around 2600 BCE in Shahr-e-Sukteh in modern day Iran,. This agate dice is not only cubic and six sided, it has basically the SAME design as a modern day one with the dots in the same patterns. So the modern dice design is actually bronze age, which is really cool. It was also found along with the oldest backgammon board. These games are really timeless. Shahr-e-Sukteh is a magical place for finds, as archaeologists also have found the reminds of a woman with a golden artificial eye, the first example of brain surgery on a person, the oldest known caraway seeds and the first animation (an animal jumping on the side of a cup). This one of a kind site is associated with the Helmand culture..
The game found at Shahr-e-Suktekh is similar to the Game of Ur and from around the same time. But the dice are not cubes. Still, it would have been worth mentioning.
The problem with conspiracy history is twofold: 1. They usually present steep method problems that don't seem relevant to the wider public, but that invalidate them as serious theories. Therefore, 2. The victim card, the "Im being silenced" crowd, kinda seem true to the broad public, since most are really not published in serious scientific journals. The public here is the key. The public is no expert in historical methodology, the public is where the money is. Serious historians can't do pop history easily because they will lose face, and very few are capable of doing it, because new findings and new theoried are usually not based on exciting stuff like aliens and ufos, but on odd sorts of pottery or a couple of half erased epigraphs. There are some, like Mary Beard or Paul Preston, but theyre few and far between.
Regarding the first message : I absolutely agree with what you say. However, as someone who has also been through academia (albeit not in History), I feel like we should not ignore the fact that, well, academia is made up of humans, and humans have biases. From discussions I've had with other researchers in other fields, it seems that each domain has its own biases that make it so certain topics, or certain approaches are never really published, because they fall outside of what researchers in those fields are looking for. One example I can think of is multi-disciplinary papers which tend to get rejected by journals in both fields on the ground that they fall outside of their respective scopes. Another example would be topics that are disregarded by their communities as they are seen as not very interesting, or perceived to be just a fad. In general, from my experience, the subject of research seems to hold a lot of weight in the research community. Not just the quality of the research itself.
You're absolutely right that people are biased, and people are not likely to give up theories they have invested in for many years. (This is why we need new generations of scholars.) I have had articles rejected many times by academic journals, but there are so many of them, that I just keep trying. Usually there will always be at least one that will publish.
The multidisciplinary approach does have a place in archaeology; that’s part of the whole gist behind “post-processualism”, that experts from many field should collaborate. A lot of chatalhoyuk was excavated with that sort of attitude.
I love your videos and I am extremely critical of fringe theories. I had a conversation with my cousins children recently. They both graduated from college during the pandemic. I was shocked to find out that they believed some conspiracy theories. I naively thought that college would prevent that sort of thing. They told me that you are encouraged to question everything on campus and you are excused from class if a topic offends you on a personal level. IMO that is a recipe for disaster. I'm worried that college campuses are becoming a conspiracy theory factory.
@@WorldofAntiquity The funny thing is that my cousins kids did not attend the same college. One went to a university in California and the other in Idaho. The policies were the same for both schools.
@@perceivedvelocity9914 I don't think the policy of being able to leave class when offended is all that remarkable. A student is allowed to leave class for any reason whatsoever. It's always been that way.
@@kklh7918 I just Googled "conspiracy theory" and obtained approx. 114,000,000 hits. You should be able to do that too. In a second or two, you will be able to find an example.
No, of course they are not. Any archaeologist would love to publish evidence of a previously unknown civilisation that had advanced technology but left no pottery. They would make their career, and there may even be a Nobel Prize in there somewhere. If ONLY there was some actual evidence! {:-:-:}
Unfortunately some have invested their whole career on some findings. So going against that would be career ending. That is why some scientists never agree with new ideas because they cannot go back and say I was wrong for 20 years.
I don’t know how anyone can say this given the fact that the human mind continuously proves itself wrong with lost civilisations and stories. If you think the mainstream haven’t tried to discredit Sumerian impact on modern human civilisation then you’re quite literally an idiot. It’s one thing to look at it from a purely historic view, but we need to look at it from reality. The fact that the most known story of Moses is taken from the Sumerian tablets, the Christian/Catholic powers definitely had a hand in suppressing information. History is written by the victors, therefore some history is promoting more than usual. Over time that history becomes ‘fact’ and fact becomes reality. Yes they clearly are.
@@kklh7918 well sir you just proved my point with your pretentious I'm right and your wrong mentality. This is what mainstream has done and will always do. Just listen to the constant bashing Randall Carlson and Graham Hancock receives. Just because a college professor is Democrat does not make him God.
@@markmission9728 "Unfortunately some have invested their whole career on some findings. So going against that would be career ending." No, if proven it would be career MAKING. "That is why some scientists never agree with new ideas because they cannot go back and say I was wrong for 20 years." Not how science works at all - if you cannot revise a science due to a fixed view of it then it is no longer science, it is just dogma with maths attached. That being said scientists have some times become over reliant on past publications by other scientists on a subject to the point that they simply consider rule x to be inviolate without actually testing it for themselves with modern equipment and testing standards. This may be unscientific, but it is not suppressing discovery - it's just lazy science.
@@kklh7918 "The fact that the most known story of Moses is taken from the Sumerian tablets" *from Mesopotamian tablets written in cuneiform - I think Sumerian would be a stretch though given what I've heard on the subject. Possibly Akkadian would be more accurate given the age of the clay tablet I saw Irving Finkel talk about.
Visualization techniques was a memory tool for me in academics. A behavioral model covered in one of my communication courses that was a prerequisite to the area of science I was pursuing. When presenting I can guarantee that all 5 senses are tied into the moment, I remember when I woke up, what I ate, the smell and coldness of the air and my own thoughts of failures and accomplishments in preparation, during and following presentations. I used those physical experiences as meta placeholders for the next presentation or submittal. Having used this tool I went from 'man I'm glad that's over', to 'I can't wait to do it again'. Additionally Dave your forum is in itself a solidifier in knowledge and memory.
That first question is exactly why these alternative history channels and "researchers" are ridiculous by saying actual experts are too stuck in the status quo. Any scientist/historian would love to be the one to break the news that the Egyptians had lazers or whatever. It's so silly
Hey, totally missed this video when you first posted it, and of course you responded to my question in it, haha Thank you for your answer, I was curious where the stuff about Babylon came from, and the way you laid it out made it seem rather obvious now that I think about it, so great stuff.
I understand where this guy is coming from. What I like about history is piecing the timelines together, like the Carthaginians and Romans and Etruscans, that kind of thing but there was so much going on you can only remember a few anacdotes like Dido inless you specialise. Ivy league type education give students a firm understanding of the classics, so you can quote a few Greek philosiphers and pull it off in polite society.
For whoever it was who was curious about audio visual angles. You might look into specializing in oral history. As technology has changed, our access to recorded oral accounts has grown, and oral history is a somewhat underutilized window into the recent past, something that can capture the opinions and experience of the people on the ground generally better than statistics (at least alone) can, or other sources used, like government documents or autobiographies, because those tend to have a bias towards the successful and exceptional. Oral historians will still have to do a fair amount of reading, much as they're emphasized you can't often get very far in academia relying solely on primary sources, and as Miano pointed out, the field of history (or academia on general) isn't really in a state that strongly supports the production of primarily auditory scholarly work. Just as a side note, at least when it comes to books, you might also be able to find them narrated or in audiobook form, though that's less likely with scholarly works than popular history.
We are increasingly a post-literate society. School children no longer learn handwriting, and so they can't read script either, only print. That's enough to follow comic books, which were the lo-tech precursor of the videotape, and the pictures satisfy the visual learners. American parents prefer their schools to teach "our glorious history," so the textbooks for college courses may in future be pictorial, to download to a tablet, with an audio track, so audio-visual learners will rule at home as they did in the White House.
I was surprised to receive a reply from David Rohl when I questioned his approach after watching a vid of his on SAMA, which is mostly academically rigorous but also featured 'alternative' theorists from time to time. As an enthusiastic amateur historian his approach to evidence seemed the best explanation as to why he isn't taken seriously by most historians.
On the Christian misrepresentation of Babylon: they did this for pretty much everyone they didn't like. For example, the word "pharisee" now has the primary meaning of "hypocrite" in the dictionary, which is very unfair to actual pharisees. The same sort of thing for "philistine". Propaganda works.
Or even later in Rome: Hun, Vandal, Goth. The word Barbarian ultimately just means foreigner, but it became unanimous with tribal nomads with a warrior culture.
In some cases, the Christians only had the context of the Bible. It's easy to write off the opposition to the heroes when your only source is the heroes.
Actually what is worse is = they simply do not care....... The "alternative" schtick as far as the gullible minions are like that T-shirt with a picture of a turtle with their arms crossed and the caption reads: _"do not bother me with the facts - my mind is already made up."_ As far as those who create the specious narratives they naturally do so because = they are monetizing those gullible minions.
Any academic out there would love to be able to totally overturn the status quo. Any academic would love the chance to be the Newton, Darwin, Einstein, Mendel, Fermii, Chomsky, or Mendeleev of their field.
We all learn in our own way ... With me, it's helped by taking notes. When I write it, put it in order, then afterward, I seem to not need even to look at the notes. I frequently have it in my head once it's done. Strangely, does not work when I can't find my shopping list!
Another reason I think ancient Egypt is popular, is their style. Not that the other cultures don't look great, but them Egypters got some next level swagger
I maintain that all the alternative history folks bank on advertising what they're peddling as "unauthorized", "forbidden", "secret", and playing the persecution card is an integral and important part of their sideshows.
We don’t silence santa clause or the easter bunny either. I prefer calling it fake history or fantasy. Alternative gives a veneer of respectability that is undeserved.
"How many times have alternative history folks actually tried to get published in peer reviewed journals?" There is an interesting example of this happening: Dr Richard Carrier's book On The Historicity of Jesus is peer reviewed and published by an academic press, and argues for an alternative conclusion than the current consensus.
Babylon, in Revelation, is used as a code word for Rome, since the Babylonians were no longer able to be intrusive into the lives of people who disrespected their empire.
My question would be. Paradigm shifts are always verbaged by those with new theories and my question is do you believe that some of the original thinking has jaded us in our ability to make sense of our observations? I say that with the mind of the evolution of our previous universal understandings and the changes. Flat earth ect. Really enjoy watching. Informative and interesting. Always leave with something. Thanx
The answer is no. Suppression is the wrong word. When ideas don’t hold up to scrutiny, fall apart when conflicting data arises, and Occam’s Razor is out the window… it’s not suppression. Its logic.
No, debunked lunacy isn't being silenced. Audible, RU-vid, and the History Channel are constantly trying to get me to spend time on the work of Graham Hancock and the like. Not including such people in professional journals clearly isn't keeping them from being heard.
For the audio visual learner: reconstruct the material from the medium you are less attuned to (books) to a medium you are attuned to (I recommend detailed diagrams, you can even source them.)
Today, all the world is focused on wm. Shatner and his flight into space. I'm all in favor of Graham and his theories. I truly hope it generates piles of money for research. You should have a such a budget! To boldly go.....yatta, yatta, yatta.......Inner space, outer space, there's just so much to explore.
If the establishment are not trying to silence "out of the ordinary" finds, please explain the kokain mummies. Here you have a finding that swiftly was dismissed, because the egyptians didn't have seagoing boats, and therefore never was in south-america. But they did have seagoing boats, so who knows how far they could have gone.
I know this may be an apocryphal tale that I fell for but it was my understanding that the traces of Coc**ne were due to young students or interns smoking Cr**k at night when the pros were getting their beauty sleep...seriously.
I loved your answer to the student with difficulties. My first thought was "give me a break"... But you came up with such a sensitive and thoughtful answers. Great teacher you are!
@@Soapy-chan_old Because of the apparent impossibility of being a student when you can't read. However, there are blind academics, and they don't "read" in the usual way either.
To students of ancient history. Sometimes, it is the manner of presentation that can cause a memory difficulty. There are some professors that present their lectures in a manner that does not engage you into securing the material into your memory. You can get dates, people and places mixed up. Shpchorarly papers can also have this effect so you reject the medium. If you have any type of reading matter that engages you p, Sci Fi/ fantasy comes to mind, try to place yourself into that same mode when reading such information. The old game if make believe can help your memory, as mist have been audio/ visually engaged for some time. And despite the inaccuracies in some mediums (film,videos) you place yourself into the story this even works for “ historical presentations of which there are hundreds. I am certain that everyone has had a boring teacher at some point. History is not boring when you think of it as His-Story.
Chef’s kiss! Bravo! 👏! I’ll be posting a link to this video a lot! There is so many people who need to hear your answer to the first question. There unfortunately have been a few cases of the scientific community being held back by titans in their field refusing to acknowledge being wrong. There’s been fraud… However we know about those cases as regular folk, because they make interesting stories. Most science is not that interesting to anyone but the few people in that field. So we just don’t hear about it. Yet despite these rare occurrences of the scientific community being led astray, peer review and renewal of the species eventually exposes and eliminates these false narratives. Science evolves, ancient aliens haven’t taken a step foreword in centuries.
Should a student of "Classical Studies" at undergraduate level have to study a classical language? On the one hand, "Bible Study" is possible without knowing Greek or Hebrew. On the other, what would we think of a graduate in American Studies who could not speak or even read English, and had only read books about the US written in Russian or Chinese?
