Can't possibly reply to every comment so I'll just address the most common themes here. 1 - I know I have a stupid smug smile, unfortunately I was born with it. I look like that in all my videos, I look like that all day everyday. 2 - "Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence". Totally agree. However, Schoch's theory doesn't just lack evidence, in my opinion it is ignoring it. It is ignoring the abundance of Egyptian archaeology, from towns, to writing, to burials around the Giza plateau. It is also ignoring the evidence we already have of human activity in the time periods he thinks it may have been built in, from the paleolithic fishermen on the Nile, down to Egypt's first farmers and predynastic Egypt. 3 - "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Again I agree with you, but I do not think mainstream archaeology's claims are extraordinary. To throw out our entire understanding of the history of mankind based solely on the erosion of 3 walls would be extraordinary. Especially considering many geologists and climatologists disagree with Schoch. To prove his theory further he needs to produce more research on the process of erosion and the ancient Egyptian climate AND subject it to peer review. As a professor at a university he is well placed to do that and it is a shame he has not. 4 - Gobekli Tepe is a fascinating site and one which hopefully I will cover one day. It is at the moment the earliest monumental architecture anywhere on the planet. However, it is much smaller in scale than the pyramids. I do believe it was possible that a farming community, however recently they started farming, could produce such a site. There have also been discoveries of more sites nearby with that distinctive T-shaped sculpture. So it is not an archaeological site that has appeared out of nowhere, there is a community around it. The same dating techniques applied to Gobekli Tepe (radio carbon dating) have been applied to artifacts found in association with the pyramid and the sphinx. The results put it in the range of the Old Kingdom, not earlier. Thanks for watching.
@fullswing Dr. Robert Schoch is a tenured and respected geologist at Boston Uni. Don't worry, his peers are paying close attention to his 35 years or so research. We can't rewrite history...but we can discover new history.
I would add to your points about lack of evidence of prior civilisations: Regardless of whether the people lived on a coastline, now submerged, building the Pyramids and Sphinx required 1000s of people. Were they bussed in and out every day? If so, where is the evidence of the highway? It would have been impossible to construct such large edifices and leave no trace. Damn, I forgot, they might have been beamed down from the mother ship.
You're as cute as a blibbety blobbety button! Look closely at the Narmer palette - it shows the Sphinx, with a different style of head and headdress/buttered hair/wig, partially buried even then, but no pyramids - it shows mastaba-like buildings that may have been extended into pyramids later. I think the causeways were originally small, raised canals with lock gates, that could effortlessly raise the stones to the base of the pyramids, the water required to operate the causeway, and the counterbalanced hoists for raising stones, was provided by the subterranean ram pump system, that is evident in the foundations of the stone pyramids.
@fullswing Any grade-school child could look at the eroded walls of the Sphinx enclosure and recognize immediately the tell-tale signs of extensive water erosion. One can be a moron and deny the evidence of their own eyes, but that doesn't change the fact that water erosion is water erosion and no amount of PHDs are needed to recognize the very obvious. So who ya gonna believe? The "experts" or yer own lyin' eyes??? Once you wake up from your establishment-induced hallucination you need to get around to figuring out just when it was that such a volume of water was present on the Giza plateau. Let us know what you come up with.
thanks for debunking some of the ridiculous stuff..as an Egyptian, listening to others turning our history into B side sci fi drama can be a bit irritating Edit: to the Afro-centrists who have hijacked this, yes you are the original settlers of America, you built the pyramids, etc. well done. I would also like to dedicate to you Black by Pearl Jam. Eddie Vedder stole it from the original black person who discovered pearls, and jam!
If your "egpytian" then most likely youre arab..... which has nothing to do with the people who lived and made those momuments.. and if you cared so much about your culture youd know that. ... so dont try that
@@oltch. although you’re rude I’ll humour you. here’s a question for you..where are the descendants of ancient Egyptians? Wiped out? Immigrated? What’s your theory?
@@koozdorah look it up. Its been done thru , at least taking mummies and getting their genetics. Look up king tuts genome. But even the slaves were semetic peoples. Arabs came to eygpt later. Much later , and took it over and populated it. This is common knowledge just look it up .
@@oltch. good words in a nice order which do not answer my question. You’re making a claim and asking me to google for you. Fine, since you mentioned Semitic slaves, it’s incorrect (www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.haaretz.com/amp/jewish/were-jews-ever-really-slaves-in-egypt-1.5208519). As to the claim that Egypt is mostly arab, that’s incorrect (egyptindependent.com/dna-analysis-proves-egyptians-are-not-arabs/). And if you want something more anecdotal (www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/dd6xp0/are_modern_egyptians_related_to_the_ancient/) I have no interest in continuing this conversation and will not be responding. You sir, are a bigot. Do not go around educating people about their identity which you know nothing about.
Not for the idiot who started this by telling me “don’t try that”, but for other people who might be interested...btw Egyptian Christians and Muslims both carry Egyptian blood, both mixed with Arabs and other ethnicities, but Muslims have mixed more with Arabs. Essentially in most cases we can’t tell a Christian Egyptian from a Muslim Egyptian by looks, they look identical. That’s because Arabs did not replace the Egyptian population, yes there were huge Arab migrations, but still the islamisation of Egypt happened mostly through conversion of Christians (unfortunately probably forced) mainly in the 9th and 14th centuries. Egyptians today are a mix of many things but those things do include (surprise surprise) Egyptian.
I really enjoy the alternate theories because they are fascinating, but on some level I know they are BS, but don't have the background to refute the claims. Thanks for producing this, it's very interesting and undoes the straw man arguments.
I’m confused what the definition of megalithic culture is. If a culture that builds things out of large (mega) stones (liths) isn’t megalithic it’s a meaningless term. C14 dating of soot at GT puts the date very accurately. It’s discovery absolutely reshapes our understanding of human progress.
There are two meanings of "megalithic" or "megalithism": one the most generic one meaning "anything built with large stones" or "anything large built with stones" (cathedrals for example, I guess) and the more technical one which refers specifically to a macro-culture first documented in Western Europe (SW Iberia, Brittany, etc.) and which is most clearly characterized by the dolmen tomb (with or without corridor), that's why I often use "dolmenic megalithism" or "dolmenism" for this macro-culture, which would later expand to the Mediterranean and even into Asia (all the way to Korea and India in the Iron Age, after it had already faded in Western Europe).
hmmm - just checked the maths in one of the comments that you mention at beginning of video: 2,300,000 / 30 / 365 / 24 = 8.75 NOT 88 - so he was out by a factor of 10... - With good logistics, 9 blocks an hour, placed by many teams working in parallel at different points on the structure does not seem unattainable, just good planning.
@@StefanMilo Well, OBVIOUSLY Stargate Command had buried all of Dr Jackson's work... that's the only reason it hasn't been peer reviewed. Otherwise Daniel would certainly have been able to present all the naquadah based artifacts excavated from around the pyramids and Sphinx. Duh!
Because it didn’t. Pseudoarchaeologists claim that, but in reality it would have lined up most closely with Virgo. Besides, those zodiac signs are from a completely different culture, not Egypt.
No evidence of a civilization IN WHAT IS NOW EGYPT that predates the one we're all familiar with. I'd also debate whether Göbekli Tepe really constituted a civilization, as opposed to the very earliest predecessor to one. The scale is much, much smaller than that of Old Kingdom Egypt, the technology required to build it much less advanced, and there's no evidence that the site was even permanently inhabited.
@@brucetucker4847 Well you have some good points there Bruce. Speaking of the technology required, I still find the technology used to build the great pyriamid a big ?
@@brucetucker4847 I believe we are looking for cultural continuity, not geographical? Gobekli isn't far from Egypt, as the nomad wanders. Technology, people, and ideas would easily spread over centuries, if not months. . Gobekli is clearly a civilization by the measure that matters to the question of Egyptian antecedants -- they made a huge public work. Thus, it pushes back the age of "big projects" and shows there was more experience with them than previously believed. . But does Gobekli support an old vs a young Sphinx? I don't see how it matters, either way.
Videos like this make me slap my forehead because I realise I've unknowingly absorbed a lot of historical misinformation over the years. I'm sure I watched some documentary on the water-erosion hypothesis on the History channel as a kid, and the idea the Sphinx was ~10 000 years old just got permanently lodged in my mind (until now). Eeep!
Yes... and he appears to misunderstand Schoch’s claims here... Schoch says multiple times that it’s precisely because the head was buried for so long that we DON’T see the lesser erosion which we would expect to see from the lesser rains which Stefan points to have caused the erosion around the Sphinx enclosure walls - we don’t see evidence of lesser rains but we do see evidence of stronger rains which must have been older than 5,000 years - between 7 and 12 thousand years, I believe he states. Are there any tools or pottery etc found at Gobekli Tepe? We need to ask ourselves if we would expect to find much evidence of a pre cataclysm culture or whether the vast majority would be destroyed - the few pieces we do find are deemed not enough to corroborate and thus labelled anomalous? There has to be a different approach - archeology such as fragments and shards can only go so far back in time, surely? Also if people have lived around the site for thousands of years afterwards as well - they repurposed pyramid blocks and reclaimed other buildings - like the Romans etc etc... they built on top and repaired - just like the Inca did. We’re talking a prior civilisation here - we’re talking a pre cataclysm civilisation and then a few thousand years after a post cataclysm civilisation - it’s not linear! I’m convinced of this now! Cheers
So what does Gobekli Tepe have to do with the Sphinx??? Oh............that's right = absolutely nothing - but to answer your question yes there was flint tools found at Gobekli Tepe. As to erosion. I guess the fact that the Sphinx is formed out of the limestone bedrock which forms in layers with each layer varying in density and thus hardness then plays no role here either??? lol! Neither then I guess the reality that limestone is also porous while there is groundwater below the Sphinx which is constantly upwelling through the porous bedrock to cause denuding of the surface via efflorescence............I guess Schoch "neglected" to account for these variables. _C'est La Vie_ Moral of the story: what you have "convinced" yourself of is of course utterly irrelevant here. All that will ever really matter is = what does the totality of credible evidence actually support...........and it does not support your nonsensical conclusions. On a side note and purely for my own pleasure. The most destructive natural force on the planet is vulcanism which can literally reshape the surface of the Earth. The Thera eruption destroyed the Minoan civilization = yet we see still evidence of it which we can study. Thus what magical force supposedly caused this "pre-cataclysm advanced civilization" to disappear so entirely..........yet magically leave the Sphinx and other structures behind then??????? LMAO!!! I will leave you with the famous question which Egyptologist Mark Lehner posed to Schoch so long ago which of course he has never answered: _"where are the shards????"_
Its so telling that every one of these "free thinkers" starts their argument out with a statement of belief. Its no wonder they can't wrap their heads around the scientific method
Actually it makes perfect sense. The Sphinx = was carved from the bedrock. Limestone is naturally porous and there is groundwater below the Giza plateau. So that moisture can transit the porous bedrock of the Sphinx to evaporate on the surface = causing the bedrock to flake away via a process known as efflorescence. Meanwhile the temples and pyramids are built from = blocks - which are not attached to the bedrock. As such they are no subject to the same evaporation process as the water below the plateau can not reach them let alone transit through them. This means the Sphinx is swiss cheese with groundwater transiting it from below.
@@varyolla435 you never seen the efflorescence of the rock, did you? The efflorescence of the rock leaves crystal sediments on the top rock, where the water passes out..there isn't any on the Sphinx wall rock. How the rock had levigate itself?! From inside out? If the water is coming from the bottom to the top, the rock wall would be cracked also elswhere, not just on the
The biggest thing to me is that the sphinx has been buried in sand almost the entire time humans have lived in the area. The Egyptians only once to our knowledge dug it out of the sand and Marcus Aurelius was the most recent to do so before European egyptologists did so. Oh, and Napoleon’s time (I think the French) exposed the back, but no more than that. Which means wind erosion is basically impossible for it and yet it is far more eroded than anything that’s been in the open as long as it supposedly has existed. More so than Mesopotamian structures and statues, which are around twelve thousand years old. I just think it was built before the Younger Dryas or before the Clovis Comet. There are simple megalithic structures from before those times and the sphinx’s form is indeed extremely simple minus the pharaoh head added much later.
Thank you for my daily laugh. As a consolation prize I offer you a "mental exercise": _"What happens when you rub sandpaper across soft wood over and over again???"_ Let me know what you come up with.
True true but some believers of these types of theories are big racists , like some if you check out their profiles or whatnot in facebook/twitter/reddit ,they would give to credit aliens and gods in building those ancient cities/structures than giving credit to people of that region "the people/civilization of this are is not that intelligent at that time to do this kind of feat" - every conspiracy tv show hosts ever
@@snoot6629 ah yes, all people who like having creative thoughts about the world around them and how everything humanity has made came to be are rampant racists. Thank you for that insight. Grow up.
@@ToffeeJim19 i did not said that , i said " some believers " often times want to credit aliens and other supernatural stuffs instead of actually acknowledging the people who built those impressive feats of architecture , hence "the people/civilization of this area is not that intelligent at that time to do this kind of feat"
@@ToffeeJim19 Creative thoughts= " Must have been done by a civilization we've never heard of ", or " they couldn't have moved those huge stones ", or " This level of precision is unattainable even with today's technology ". Are those the kind of creative thoughts you're speaking of? How is it that the alt history crowd always seem to have the same " creative thoughts "? And they have been having these same creative thoughts for better than 70 years. This ain't nothing new. Check out " Worlds in Collision " 1950, Emmanuel Velikovsky. The racist part is refusing to accept that Indians built Tikal or Machu Pichu. Or that indigenous hunter gatherers entered the Nile valley around 17,000 YBP, progressed through the neolithic to pastoral, herding lifestyle, to then agriculture and settled farming communities that eventually lead to one of the greatest civilizations mankind has produced, past or present.
@@russellmillar7132 ‘they couldn’t have moved those huge stones’ is just a testament to someone’s fascination with how the pyramids could possibly be constructed by a civilisation without sophisticated metal tools and machinery... how is that anything to do with racism? It’s really difficult to explain how an ancient culture could build such a massive monument without the right equipment especially considering the bricks used to create the pyramids were actually not particularly local to where they were built
Thank you for making this video! These days there seems to be an abundance of opinions all over the internet of lost ancient civilizations ranging from "aliens did it" to relatively reasonable sounding to a layperson, and i have to admit i have kinda fallen down this particular rabbit hole. Lets be honest here, the Joe Rogan podcasts with Graham Hancock are really convincing and Michael Shermer didnt do a particularly good job of defending the skeptical position. Long story short, i love it that someone is making accessible videos that counterbalance the lots of wishful thinking.
@fullswing, come now, that's a bit harsh. The only reason a scam artist exists is because they're really good at introducing curious people into nonsense.
Try to be more sceptical and keep learning from multiple, reputable sources, official science journals or Wikipedia for that matter. The more you know, the less vulnerable you are to BS.
More worship of the recent. The Nile has been there for Millenia. So have humans. So why not have repeated civilization cycles. Interrupted by solar outbursts floods and ciimate catastr
@@wernerretief4569 Because in order to have civilizations, humans had to evolve their technology from stone tools and being hunter/gatherers to discovering metal tools and learning agriculture/domestication of animals. Also while they were doing that they had to leave behind evidence of their existence and how they lived. The earliest evidence of the arrival of civilizations forming was 5000-6000 years ago in Mesopotamia. We have archaeological evidence of humans from over 100,000 years ago and we know about when humans made these technological leaps. It's fine if you want to assert that civilizations sprang up sooner, but you have to support it with hard evidence.
@jimralston4789 Civilization=/= Oldest known permanent cities constructed. Not to argue with your point to the comment above you, more to say it's potentially a quagmire of BS to get into when using civilization to be synonymous with oldest known stone town ruins. People like Hancock will happily play into this misconception and conflate 'civilization' and 'intellectually capable' and try putting it against his idea of more nomadic hunter gatherer people prior to the "sudden" appearance of these massive constructions evidencing their "sudden" switch to civilization and "sudden" ability and intellect to technologically engineer "more advanced" structures. Like, boom, outta nowhere!
History / his story.. Like how all those fishtailed gods share common phonemes for mother and water, starting in West Africa to Egypt India Asia Europe and the Americas. YaMAya, NomMOs, MAtsya, MAnannán, Melusine. There's a lot more of them. Even Jesus is a fish, right? Weird how all those fishtailed gods coincide with symbols of fascism. Double headed axes and spears.. What about fake language like pig-latin? Yeshua = joshua Iesous = heil Zeus (like Spanish jesús) Jesus = Greek ge + Latin sus = EarthPig /jesus. Church comes from circe. Circe was a witch that turned Odysseus's men into pigs (way before the invention of Abraham or them turning Akhenaten and Sargon into Moses..). Jesus turned the legion into pigs at Gerasene. Legion + Gerasene = a garrison / a military (that's indoctrinated to support the fasces). Pig-latin is funny because everyone worships piggy-banks and we're all born in barns like Jesus and pigs. A manger is a trough. (pennies » fishtails, plebes consume the least valuable portions. Paradise / eden = a penned in place to domesticate cattle. Pastor comes from pastoralism = the domestication of cattle. ..For sure, abrahamic religions are poorly plagiarized from a dozen older religions and there's no archeological evidence of a place called Israel or a people called Hebrews until Rome invented them in the common era. #historyisfake
@@moodist1er There is mention of the isrealites in egypt in a chronicle of their conquerer, but everything else is bullshit. I hate abrahamic religions and that faltities they have been writing in the stake their last stand.
I was part of a documentary film crew in the late 90s that went to the Giza plateau to look for “ mysteries of the sphinx. The “ Pyramidiots” we’re all surprised that not only did it rain but it also hailed while we were there.
@@hebisty4163 Yeah, that's why koptic christians are black, or wait no they aren't. There also are no evidence for large displacements of egyptians during islamic expansion or mass settlement of arabs in egypt.
Maybe you are the idiot for not being open to new evidence that contradicts the current thinking. In whatever field of endeavor that might be. The weathering inside the Sphinx enclosure attributed to rain by Schoch hasn't appeared over the whole Giza Plateau. The pyramids and the sphinx's head should show the same level of ware. [And I think you meant were]. "We're" sounds like you are including yourself as a "pyramidiot". I won't argue.
And they brought alien space rations with then so they didnt need earth food! They also built the pyramids, the sphinx, and the dendera temple in like a couple hours because they had space lasers and and tractor beams to life the stones.
@@Anuisgod Bright Insight is one of the least credible people I've yet come across on RU-vid. He substantiates precisely none of what he claims, makes wild leaps of reasoning and starts with conclusions and then tries to work backwards from there. He seems like an intelligent enough guy to know much of what he's spewing is utter nonsense, which makes him even worse in my opinion. He's a charlatan and nothing more. I suggest you stay away from that particular brand of over-hyped pseudo-archaeology and actually start doing some reading for yourself. Once you do you'll quickly start realizing the whole "lost ancient civilizations" thing is a house built on a foundation of sand.
A question that pops into my mind about the hypothesis that these pyramids were made by a previous advanced civilization is - why? If Egypt couldn't have done it because there had to be some other bunch making it, then why not also assume this earlier civilization couldn't do it either? The whole hypothesis is just moving the beginning backwards for no reason.
The idea is that there was a civilization that was almost as advanced as modern humans but some sort of catastrophic event occurred that caused large parts of humanity to die off and we regressed technology-wise to the just before the bronze age and that most of the bronze age myths were us trying to remember the world before
It was never discovered. The coptics and Arabs in Cairo always knew it was there. And it was not completely covered. The head was above the sand. Why do people spread so much misinformation online?
That's what I was thinking... so morning dew, in my opinion, can't be the main cause of the erosion. Maybe a bit in the years since the excavation but what declares the signs of water erosion when the sphinx was excavated wich is to be seen on the photos taken during it.
Yes - it however is nothing new. The advent of "pseudoscience" as a business has been a problem for academia for decades. Such as the late Carl Sagan as an example wrote about it as far back as the 1970's. Since the advent of the internet and entertainment television via "niche cable channels" however what was once limited to fringe print media and the occasional television program - which appropriate disclaimers - has largely spread to the internet where anyone can claim anything absent any real pushback. Moral of the story: channels like this have become a necessity. Just as a virus can continuously spread if measures are not taking to mitigate that spread = so ignorance begets ignorance ad infinitum unless the cycle is broken by more credible information and facilitating understanding. Sunlight continues to be the best disinfectant. The problem of pseudoscience/history stems from the entertainment genre via movies and televisions. It is maintained however in large part owing to = a failed educational system which does not teach people how to recognize such trash so as to realize it is more Hollywood than actual history. So Schoch et al = are "bottom feeders" who are exploiting the ignorance and gullibility of their minions to monetize the response. 🤔 _"A sucker is born every minute"_
The biggest complaint I have about "outsiders" opinions about ancient cultures is that that 99% of the time they're not interested in finding truth and uncovering mysteries. Their goal is almost always to validate their own misconceptions and prejudices.
Why do inscriptions date items? Shouldn't it only set a min age and not a max? We know that the graffiti on Stonehenge doesn't indicate its age. So why do we interpret the inscription as being from the items origin?
Indeed, a mistake often made by even so called experts within the field. But I only need to drive on the road in my country to see that most people have great problems with the meaning of min and the meaning of max. We have a max speed we are allowed to drive, and most car drivers here treat it as a min speed instead. I don't see how when they enter their office they all of a sudden understand these concepts proporly and then forget all about them the moment they step into a car again.
@@BlacksmithTWD driving is completely different. Most people want to go faster than the maximum limit. Do you live in the United States? Do you not exceed the speed limit almost all the time? I drive a little slower now that I'm in my 40s, but I still exceed the speed limit generally speaking. If only by 5 or 10 mph.
@@jamisojo No I happen to live in the Netherlands and no I happen to obey the speed limit almost all the time, never had a ticked for speeding my entire life at least (also in my 40s now). I happen to have a friend who doesn't like me driving as I'm driving 'too slow' according to him, as he is used to exceeding the speed limit by about 10 km/h and in practice treats the max speed as a min speed (so I don't like traveling with him driving either), where I tend to drive 5 km/h below max speed up to max speed (especially when driving with a small trailer as he seems to forget that when driving with a trailer the speed limit is 90 km/h instead of 130 km/h). Though I get an idea of what you are trying to get at, and to some extend I don't disagree, however, seeing the number of people who ignore the speed limit and then when I drive the speed limit they pretend I'm the one who's breaking the traffic laws, I think you are mistaken at least about that group. Contrary to them you are willing to admit it when you choose to break the traffic rules, and as such at least you still seem to know the difference, unlike my friend or the guy who was asked what his main traffic frustration was and answered : "people who drive below the minimum speed", while where I live there is no minimum speed, here there only are maximum speeds in the traffic rules (though we do have a rule against unneccesary obstruction of ongoing traffic, never got a ticket for that either). Though probably driving in the Netherlands is more complicated as driving in the US as we happen to be more densly populated and as such have more different speed limits per driven kilometer/mile. Also depending on the time in the day the speed limit differs. Obeying traffic rules has gotten worse over the years as our government decided on increasing penalties while lowering traffic rule enforcement (about the same number of police officers for traffic rules as 30 years ago while the number of drivers more than doubled), though traffic safety has been increasing (except the last 5 years, after raising the maximum speed from 120km/h to 130 km/h, while for trucks it remained 80 km/h), but this is mostly caused by improved infrastructure.
I feel like I'm missing something about the South wall orientation issue. If the Sphinx is older than the rest of the site, and the South wall originally had its current orientation, then the question becomes why does it align with the later built causeway? Couldn't the answer be as simple as they decided to build the causeway aligned with the South wall of the Sphinx? Why is this a mystery? What am I missing?
@@dj_koen1265 you need to grow a brain. We know troy existed because there is huge archeological evidence for it. Atlantis has none and is said to exist 10000 years earlier
Going through this back catalogue of Stefan Milo vids after watching your recent ones - man the production quality is amazing on your new stuff. And it's hilarious to see you welcoming 500 subs haha.
While I don’t necessarily believe in Doctor Schochs theory, I do believe it is an interesting idea to think about. There’s relatively very few things within our understanding that we can say we understand completely, as we are ALWAYS discovering more and more about our universe and our world. Dr.Schoch is not a nut job by any means, and I don’t know why people get so angry when an alternative idea is presented we should embrace different theories. That doesn’t mean we have to accept them, but if we limit ourselves to what we think we know we will never progress. A perfect example of this is Copernicus or Galileo, they had theories about space that challenged what was accepted as undisputed truth, and they were attacked and “discredited” but in the end they were proven to be correct. Again, I don’t believe in the theory of water erosion on the Sphinx, but it saddens me so many people in this comment section are so ignorant that they can’t even think about his ideas, that kind of mindset is unintelligent, and unscientific.
I’m guessing they were introduced to the majesty of space microwave technology and were like, “Yo we outta here” *points to pyramids as they enter radiation cube* “Those are yours now, we out.”
@@StefanMilo the can tell rain erosion from the Death of Gullies running down the side as well as the Seciment. And. Were is the Salts And how do you even know it Kafre who made had that Dranage cannal . Why was was there even a Drainage cannal. And how can they Built such huge Trases without leaving a Trase. Can you hear how contradictory that is. And look life after humans. Can such a civilian that built the Hover Damb or Rushmore . Leave no trase of Houses. Or anything
@@osmosisjones4912 yo, are you okay? He'd have to build the drainage canal because rain, explaining erosion. I may have myinclination about watchers, but to just assert this nonsense will get is nowhere closer to the truth
The best theory i heard to explain away the inconsistent water erosion was that for quite some time the sphinx was a structure inside of a decorative pool of water which i like to imagine looked really nice. I think the Egyptians could move water. It's not that hard compared to building a freaken 50 foot statue
Follow the white rabbit: 1 - limestone is naturally porous. 2 - the Sphinx was carved from the limestone bedrock = ergo it is still attached to it. 3 - below the Giza necropolis sits the Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System = ergo there is groundwater a mere 4-5 meters below the Sphinx. You can coincidentally see videos here on YT of Egyptologists and geohydrologists drilling below the Sphinx to hit groundwater. 4 - so groundwater naturally upwells through the porous limestone bedrock to the surface. There is reacts with the calcium in the limestone to form salt precipitates which denudes to surface of the limestone causing it to flake away to touch. This process is called = "efflorescence". 5 - finally limestone as a "sedimentary rock" forms in layers of varying densities. As such the Sphinx which was carved from the bedrock is "softer" in some areas and harder in others. It was formed from the Mokkatum Formation which has 3 main density layers. Thus the upper face/head is medium hard - the neck and upper back is the softest part - while the bottom of the body is the hardest stone. This means that the structure erodes at different rates in different areas based upon its relative density there. Moral of the story: the Sphinx was buried for centuries up to its head in sand. Thus how could rainfall erode was what buried under meters of accumulated sand??? Meanwhile the exposed head and upper back as the softest parts of the structure were also the most badly eroded as a result of efflorescence from groundwater evaporation from below. They were exposed and accordingly blowing sand basically etched away the already crumbling surface of the limestone it was carved from. Consequently French engineers in the 1920's reinforced the Sphinx using concrete and steel rebar to buildup the neck and headdress area as well as fill in a large crack in the back and a hole in the top of the head. On a side note. A few years ago the Egyptian Dept. of Antiquities via a USAID grant hired a US water systems company to install underground water pumps around the plateau to lower the water table and divert it away from the necropolis to slow the erosion which is destroying the Sphinx even now. It requires constant maintenance to try to preserve it. So forget about rainfall. Something new to think about.
@@varyolla435the theory is obviously that it wasn't buried in sand last time there was rain fall 😂 I can't believe you wrote that whole essay and couldn't comprehend that.
@@pierer91 Sorry if reading is difficult for you - let alone understanding what you read. Fortunately you can take classes to address this apparent problem.........
Over 280 geologist agreed with Dr Robert Schoch and even they couldn't convince 1 Egyptologist in 1992. So I am unsurprised that you disagree. That said we need sceptic's to keep the debate going so while I disagree with your findings I thank you for sharing and look forward to future views you may have on a "Lost Civilization".
Ya know I think Stephan makes some important points and has caused me to reexamine the Sphinx's history, although there is quite a bit of counter-evidence that I feel he glanced over. It was quite popular for a new Pharaoh to imprint his identity on existing monuments such and rededicate them to himself. We also have considerable evidence that the Sphinxes head was found and recarved in Khafre's likeness, a trend that can be noted with many statues around Egypt. Furthermore, for much of the sphinx's existence, we are aware that it was covered with sand up to its head which serves as an excellent preservation method. The Sphinx has had to be dugout multiple times throughout its history, most famously by Thutmose IV. How come the head shows minimal erosion compared to the rest of the body? If it has been exposed the longest shouldn't it be in the worst condition? There is much more data supporting the rainwater hypothesis to particular for this silly comment. I think every hypothesis should be put under extreme scrutiny, I just think this video has left out most arguments that contradict his point.
Like all his debunking videos. Follows the same totally unscientific approach and is totally biased towards his own political, egotistical or religious beliefs. Science should follow proper scientific method not fit the line of whatever you believe in and ignore facts.
The head is a different type of stone which is much harder and tougher so it resists erosion better. Just google "sphinx rock layers" and look at the image results and you should get a whole load of results which shows the different layers.
@@dukenails7745 I didn't hear one political or religious argument. He listed proper scientific evidence: climatological evidence that the Sahara was wetter 5000 years ago, no trace of archaeological evidence of a civilization capable of building the Sphinx 15000 years ago, no bronze tools as it hadn't been discovered yet, there are many other sources of erosion including groundwater, dew, hail. He listed proper scientific explanations, it's people who have formed an intractable opinion that won't consider them.
I have heard a different version of this theory. That is only the Sphinx that is older and was originally a lion statue. It was during Khufu's reign that it was turned into a sphinx. This explains why the head is in so much better condition than the body.
@@Horse2021 and if the Sphinx was built some 10-12 thousand years ago, at least before the time Egypt was wet, it would have faced Leo in the sky. The physical evidence, motive, all point to an earlier build date.
one argument from the anti-traditional theorists is this: how did the egyptian culture rise and the very first construction of them is the most incredible, biggest and complex structure ever? its like they came into history with the greatest bang and from then on their architectual skill reduced? i am not saying i believe the conspiracy theorists but what about a rise to perfection? you know the saying rome wasnt built in a day. its like the old romans built the colloseum the year rome was founded instead of late into the empires history. why is the first thing the egyptions came up with the greatest thing ever without them having a decent history in architectual design beforehand? the only other building before the great pyramid was a stepped pyramid of djoser according to my reasearch, a mere 30 years before the great pyramid. i would like to hear your take on this argument against the great pyramid origins.
There are many earlier examples of egyptian architecture, the great pyramid was not built in a day. There are a lot of more ancient tombs that lead to it, from mastabas to the pyramid of Djoser, to the three pyramids of Snofru and finally to Khufu's great pyramid. Also, they obviously had architectural plans, most probably drawn on papyri which do not survive very easily and were possibly also considered sacred or something and maybe destroyed? I don't understand why this looks so incredible to all conspiracy theorists, it is a big building that would have required a lot of raw material and workforce but it does not need that many technological skills or equipment, just a lot of money, sweat and time. Also why is everyone focused on Egypt and not the near easter ziqqurats lol. i think you are the mainstream conspiracists here ahhaha If you really want to solve your doubts, get a degree in archaeology and go excavate it yourself
@Sf Ski alright, so then it is aliens. Of course we will never know for sure how they did it, they are dead! But they didn't create anything otherworldly, they were very good architects and had a lot of resources that's it. I don't get why if we can't say for sure HOW Egyptians built their ramps, then it means they didn't built it. Jesus we don't know how Romans made their bread, does that mean that the bread we find in Pompei it's not Roman? If a pyramid is slathered in egyptian writing, frescoes and allover culture, if there are earlier examples of an evolution of the pyramid shaped tombs and if the pyramids are surrounded by Egyptian contex and fit well whitin it (mythology and all), then why is it so unbelievable that they could create impressive structures??? But no it must be aliens or some kind of older civilization that had superior technical skills but of which there is absolutely NO PROOF of existence. I really really don't understand why it is so difficult to believe.
@Sf Ski alright then i give up. Go on with your research and good luck solving the pyramid mystery. Just one last note: you can't find three articles that prove YOUR theory and call it a day, you should read also all the ones that contradict it and only then make up your mind. Also maybe ask yourself why the people who built the pyramids didn't leave any other trace beside them, and why it is ok for them to appear out of the blue and have a perfectly evoleved technology, but not for the egyptians. Bye bye
6:18 Dude that's massive! You just glossed over that lol but that's huge. So you're saying that Egypt used to be wet and green. So those erosion makes could have totally come from rain but not only that, it totally changes how we should depict Ancient Egypt. That's pretty awesome
The Sahara goes through cycles of being intense desert and grassy forested land. The last time the Sahara was a lush location was around 5000 years ago, allowing for a vast opportunity for habitation and advancement of technology through northern Africa. The entirety of the Sahara covers part of a continent therefore the potential for hundreds of microclimates existed during these lush years.
What he doesn’t mention is Giza gets around half an inch a year in rainfall currently. So that’s around 1.5 inches of rainfall a year, and the largest estimate I could find is 5 inches for desert areas such as Giza. Absolutely outstanding.
Old kingdom, when pyramids and sphinx were built, ended when circa 2200 bc, a climate change toward drought took place and ended several civilisations in the Middle East and Asia. So it definitely rained more during Old Kingdom than in the following times.
My cheeks hurt from smiling, I smiled through the hole video. I really did have my mind made up before seeing your video on what Robert said and truly believed it all. A lesson was learned to dig a little deeper before forming a conclusion, I thank you for that Well I'm about to go down the rabbit hole of RU-vid on this one. 😉
I know this was meant as a debunking video but you don’t show any archeological evidence that the Sphinx was built during the 4th dynasty. Do we have writing, explanations from that time period, or is that date confirmed by association to the great pyramids?
The way I always saw it, is that If you can't see the water damage... You must not know what water damage looks like. c: Also, you have to factor in the sand, and the current, and the salt within that water; and not just water. You may not know this, but there is also something called minerals in the water. and rain, it rains in the desert all at once sometimes.
It should be mandatory for anyone who wants to attend archeology university to cut 20 tonnes granite block in a half with copper saw before he/she can be accepted.
Thanks for your video. I love watching weird, science-fiction sounding theories on RU-vid and then watching a debunking video presenting the scientific consensus. I don't know why I like to do that. It's just fun :D. Generally, the wild theories are made compelling by purposeful deception. Anyone sincerely looking at all the evidence for the truth would never conclude anything about ancient aliens, hyper advanced ancient civilizations, flat earth, etc. However, they don't let that get in the way of a good story! What I understand less is the the psychology of the people who will believe the story despite being exposed to overwhelming edidence that it is false. That's just maladaptive, guys. Maybe it makes you feel good to believe this story, but being a gullible sucker in general is not going to serve you well in life. PS--I like the stupid smile, too. You look genuinely amused/happy to me.
Good on you, sir! I personally enjoy watching conspiracy videos from time to time, but I always find the debunking more clever anyhow. Have a good time with your conspiracy videos!
Let me start by saying I don't believe what you call conspiracy theories. I do believe in this video he overlooked some evidence though. Why was the Sphinx carved in the shape of a lioness, with its face later remodeled to look like Khufu? How is all this erosion possible when we know for a fact the Sphinx was buried completely understand for a lot of recent history? Crystals forming does not explain why the erosion looks to be runs of water, it wouldn't just randomly form like that from condensation from dew. As far as some of the objects inside the pyramids, perfectly square corners in granite? Sarcophagi that aren't even disconnected from the lid, but just carved completely out inside with a few inches gap? Polished hieroglyphs that to this day have not lost their luster? Strange chambers that aren't really explained, with copper rods at the end of them? And underground chamber similar to the warden Cliff towers Tesla designed meant to create free wireless electricity? It seems too simple to discard all of these facts along the guys of conspiracy. I hope one day we will have enough knowledge to reasonably explain everything without simply ignoring one side or the other
Few points to respond. Disclaimer I'm not a geologist. 1. You say there is there is no geological consensus that water erosion occured as Dr. Robert Schoch proclaims. While that's technically true theres a lot of debate on the matter, your use of words is misleading, insinuating that only Dr. Robert Schoch has made this claim. Yet there are many geologist who have observed his findings and have come to the same conclusion. 2. In regards to the "expansion", Dr. Schoch has gone on many times to say there are multiple types of erosion. Wind, Sand, Water, AND precipitation. The other signs of water erosion do not necessarily mean precipitation erosion, as the Nile may have flooded the enclosure, as many geologist, to include Dr. Schoch has said. 3. In the claim that studying Ancient Egypt, the climate was 3x wetter (doesn't seem like a scientifically based definition or terminology), that may be true, but that type of climate does not produce HEAVY rain fall as Dr. Schoch proclaims. Having lived in both a desert and a wetland, I will tell you, you cannot even compare the two or any zone in-between. A desert rain is like a water gun you get from the dollar store and a wetland rain is like every fire department in the state came together and blasted you with all of their fire hose. 4. This is more of a complaint to the entire archaeological community, but I really hate the argument that, "there no tools or trash so that means there's no evidence". Whole there is no terrestrial evidence of any of these things I don't think it's wise to say, "we haven't found it so there's no evidence." IF, and this is a big IF, because it may very well turn out that your position is right and Dr. Schoch and his constituents are wrong, there was a civilization capable of doing this 12,000 years ago, what leads us to assume those primitive tools would have even survived that long? In modern example, if our civilization was forgotten and technology advanced and that civilization found the white house, there wouldn't be any of the tools used to build it on the site, because the tools used to build that site aren't there today. Lastly, the archaeological findings are my biggest issue with this. I love archaeology and I read up on it as much as I can. But archaeology around ancient Egypt is extremely political and not heavily based in science. There's an extremely grueling process that archaeologist have to go through to even study the area as it's maintained by Egyptologist, who are Art Majors, not Archaeologist. Not to mention the scandalous Egyptologist who have been caught selling artifact findings for personal profit. This is a great stain on ancient studies as our best evidence, for possibly either side of this topic, may have been sold, soiled, and destroyed, ruining a great chance at studying our past. I don't post this to hate, I actually thoroughly enjoy your channel and the content you produce. I even agree with you on some points in this video, mainly pertaining to Dr. Schoch using a newer tablet to claim the Pharaoh didn't build the pyramids. I just think we are too easily dismissive of possible human history.
I , too , as born with one of those faces. I have had random strangers decide they don't like me , because of my face. This could lead to trouble in my youth. I am dead serious. Now, at 63 , I could'nt care less whether someone like's me or not. Great videos, by the way. Keep them coming .
at two minutes in to the video, I am thinking ok I live in California in 2020 so I am going to drive down to San Francisco and spray paint my name all over the Golden Gate bridge and I am going to leave my picture there as well as my ID, therefor who ever asks they will know that I am the one who built it because it will say so on the bridge, the hieroglyphs on the pyramids the boxes inside them or around them on statues or what ever are insulting and do not match the precision yes precision of the master craftsmanship of the buildings and statues, you're telling us that the architect who designs and builds the Empire State Building is going to sign it with a crayon using his left hand while blind folded
Lol, no, that's oversimplfying it and pretending like poeple don't have critical thinking skills, but at least it will be another joke for historians to laugh about if they hear about it. You seem to misunderstand how history is done, so lucky for you, I'm a history student. So what's wrong with your analogy? First off, you assume that your graffiti can last for thousands of years. Yeah, no. City would get rid of it probably. Also: it just wouldn't last. Should our world not collapse into a dystopia, then continuity would mean that there would be no reason to need to figure out who built the bridge since historians would have access to that information already thousands of years in the future. The timing in your analogy just does not work. If you had said you were in Egypt and did that, we would assume its graffiti because the literacy rate (hieroglyphics were more for elites since it's very formal writing and shows a scribe's skill in what they chose for to inscribe) wouldn't show would be low and so any inscription would not probably anything honorific enough to show that it was you. Your name would not have ties to other kinds, or match succession dates, or battles, or anything to 'triangulate' (as one of my professor's likes to say) your relevance to geopolitics of the time. You have to keep the context in mind for how historians figure out the relationship of artifacts to one another. Primary sources are hold more weight than secondary sources, and the source's background and bias matters. Secondly you assume that the graffiti in this context is a claim to ownership. In regards to the Bridge, I assume there would be plenty of evidence against you (inscriptions, photographs and digital evidence). There is the evidence for the Golden Gate Bridge and then there is the evidence for your life. Joseph A. Blum took photos of the construction. The blueprints exist, and at this point have a number of copies floating on the internet. Given the significance, the priority for information relating to the bridge would be high on the city archivists' list. In regards to you, if your ID and such somehow survived, then it would lead historians to look for you. This means that they will dig into your life (so they will know when you are born- and if it's possible you could have built the bridge at that time, your qualifications, and so on...). Thirdly, you assume that we would assume that historians would think that it shows ownerships, and not suicide. Given the context, and the possibility of all or few items surviving thousands of years, historians might look at a dropped ID and think it either lost (or a missing person's poster), or (given the bridge) suicide. Historians would not think that you made the bridge. Even if people forget how well known the bridge is as a chosen place to commit suicide, the bodies in the water (through underwater archeology) would show that that was the case. So, the most likely scenario, through the evidence would seem to them that you probably committed suicide. Sorry to be a downer. Egyptians "boxes" at times have been over written (you are probably familiar with it as the "helicopter hieroglyph") which has one layer of hieroglyphs but then was has others inscribed over them (@ egyptologylessons on Instagram discussed it, check him out also if you're interested in historical reconstructions). Historians and archeologists don't just believe everything they read. Victory stele, for example, are obviously propaganda texts so not like historians can take everything at face value (like a common phrase something is how a king 'destroyed' a city but, in the example of Israel, we know that that's not true because ancient Israel's history didn't end there (see Merneptah Stele). For example, there are monument where the king made it be written that he won a battle though in actuality (when comparing to other inscriptions and archeological evidence) that's not the case. P.S. Graffiti also is a thing that requires context. For example, in Rome, in Pompeii, there is graffiti that advertise gladiatorial games. Then there's other graffiti that's like on walls that's the typical young adult stuff and jokes. Or for example, the one of the crucified donkey, which is assumed to be the first depiction of Jesus (though the guy seemed to be mocking his friend's religion). So, if somehow your graffiti survived, it's not like they will assume your graffiti (and every other teenagers') shows ownership of buildings even those where there are overlap on walls. Historians know that context matters it's like right there in the job, it's why there are books that give concrete dates for the time period they are talking about because things change. Have a nice day, and keep on learning.
Qualified people such as Senior Civil Engineers, Senior Architects, and particularly Modern Stone cutting Engineers, have NEVER been allowed to make any type of official detailed examinations of any of the relevant engineering involved in Egyptology. Further NO branch of science is willing to forward any type of funding towards any such Professional Engineering appraisals. Why? Because Egyptologists know perfectly well, their little money spinning World would collapse around them, if such Industry professionals were allowed in. Until qualified Engineers are allowed to make full and thorough examinations of what we find in Egypt nobody but nobody is ever going to get anywhere near the real truth of exactly, who, when, and how they were built. But more importantly WHY they were built ! I will however as an engineer myself say this. If you honestly think any of the hundreds of Pyramids all over this planet, have anything to do with burial chambers you have been sadly mislead.
You say noone is willing to fund examinations by modern engineers. I ask you why should they. What valuable, new information do we get from people with no knowledge of ancient stone cutting technique? That we could achieve similar results with modern machinery? How interesting - and utterly useless. Unless you can show that we can expect usefull information from your little examination, there is no reason for anyone to fund your vacation to egypt. I am sorry, if you don't like that, but that is how it works.
When I was in Cairo I noticed that the erosion patterns on the Sphinx and the Cairo Citadel (the foundations) are practically the same. Any explanation for that?
Very good. It's so nice to see a good and logical examination of the evidence to dispute or support popular theories about ancient Egypt. I too was beguiled by the water theory and I am glad to see that their is no consensus for the cause of the weathering of the rock face. The temple that is associated with the Sphinx is very interesting though, you should do a follow up on that temple. The design and huge beams of rock with faceless smooth surfaces is thought to be unique, and the level of the ground floor, so much lower than the level of the present day are questions I like you to answer, please.
The entire Giza plateau used to be covered in water, historical records report it being very calm shallow water that would create a reflection, effectively doubling the pyramids, visually.
Interesting video. Egypt has a desert morphology so you don't need to postulate a wetter climatic period to cause water damage to a structure. All you need is one major downpour every couple of centuries to cause sufficient water damage. Case in point is KV5 in the Valley of Kings. Chock full of debris from a flood when it was discovered. The tomb was built by Ramses II. The Sadd El Kafara is another example. This ancient dam was built in the 3rd millennium BC and is just south of Cairo. Under construction for about 10 years, the dam was destroyed by a heavy rainfall and never repaired. Limestone and shales are porous rocks that hold water, so they easily flake and peel.
@@travisaitch9963 I understand your premise. In general there are dissolved minerals and salts that come from various water sources, it could be that the apparent water erosion has come at different time frames with different mineral salt strengths, I know that will confuse many, but it might explain differences in erosion levels. Atmospheric levels of water may also have other dissolved salts as well. Salt has a very corrosive effect on many materials. Whether buried or not it still happens.
By hunter gatherers who are on the cusp of developing agriculture maybe even already are early agricultural communities. The scale of the two monuments, their style, and the technology required is hardly comparable.
You are brushing the controversy under the rug. It doesn't fit the current understanding of anthropology. www.google.com/search?q=gobekli+tepe&rlz=1C1GGGE___US623US623&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj_yp2NhO7gAhUC_4MKHfY4AS4Q_AUIDigB&biw=1536&bih=760#imgrc=pGQejBaSsfEciM: This predates the pyramids by 4500 years
@@StefanMilo Well, I came in to point out how biased and unscientific your contentions are, and then I found this equally clueless comment, if not more. If you had any experience in archeology, as I do, you'd realize what a bonehead comment it is to contend that the Sphinx and Gobleki Tepi are not on par regarding scale and scope. Gobleki Tepi is only 10% excavated. The stoneworking skill necessary to not only quarry, shape, and place the stones but to carve the reliefs does not happen while wandering the savanna hunting antelope. Those skills must evolve over generations, if not centuries or millennia. Likely you were attempting to pass off GT as the work of a nascent settlement. No, this was the work of a highly organized society, which already existed 12,000 years ago.
@Nick Nack What's your evidence? Mine is experience, and a degree anthropology, studying what it takes to for civilizations to evolve from hunter-gatherers to an organized civilization.
@Nick Nack I already know what the literature says. And, having been in Academia, I have witnessed firsthand how skewed the results get on an archaeological project. Yes, feet are held to the fire to not skew the results, but the results get skewed for purposes of perpetuating one's career by fitting facts into previous conclusions. For example, what is the oldest date of human habitation in North America? The Clovis level, right? You and I both know that is b******* and that there is an emerging preponderance of evidence that blows right through the Clovis level. You also know that less than 10% of Goblecki Tepe has been excavated. It is much too soon to draw conclusions about any lack of pottery or other signs a settlement. In addition, there are indications that there are sites adjacent to Gobleki Tepe. Let's take a look at the recent discovery of a void in the Great Pyramid. Zahi hawass says it isn't there. Why? Because he doesn't believe in radar. The ministry of Antiquities goes to Great Lengths to ignore anything that doesn't fit in with their notion of Egyptian antiquity. For example, the Great Pyramid is the tomb of Khufu. More b*******. None of the pyramids were tombs unless the Builder is just got a wild hair and decided not to do anything that they had done previously and afterwards to create a tomb. Khufu simply rework was already existing. Same with the Sphinx. Go ahead, try and tell me that isn't water erosion. This is exactly what I'm talking about. Exactly. So, pardon me for being crass, but put your head back up your ass and go write another paper. Make sure you don't say anything that someone else hasn't already said.
Hey just wondering if you can expand on this and maybe talk about Graham Hancock's theories about Ice Age civilizations and Randall Carlson's theories that line up really, really well with his about the idea that a giant global flood really happened as proven by several geographic features found in North America and Siberia as well as the massive amounts of megafauna from 11,600 years ago found dead with their legs broken and all in one area as if they had been hit by a mega tsunami and floated to one area together. Would love to hear more on it as it is one of the few "conspiracy" theories I genuinely 100% believe. Thanks for doing great work man. As a video essayist creator I appreciate big levels of research going into videos
Well, the floodings in north america and sibria, where not 1 event, but the evidence clearly shows that they flooded a couple of times, wich doesnt work with this hypotheses. And could you give me a source to the claim of mega Fauna with broken legs ?
I'd take Hancock more seriously if he didn't attack 'science' so often for not embracing the theories he likes. I enjoy his books as entertainment and his TV programmes posed some interesting questions at times. He's undoubtedly a clever man with considerable knowledge but he chooses to use that knowledge to sell books rather than engage in original research that could then be verified by the scientific community and absorbed into the body of knowledge. His theory that an advanced global civilisation existed prior to the end of the last glaciation and were all but wiped out by rapid sea level rise is an interesting one but his evidence comes up short. In the end his argument seems to be that there are a few pieces of potentially anomalous evidence, that a coastal civilisation *could* have existed in areas now hundreds of feet under water and that the scientific community is too conservative to take such a concept seriously. As Carl Sagan is quoted as saying "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Graham Hancock is very good at the first part of that but rather poor at the second.
@fullswing Do you mean pseudoscience from Hawass too, he was exactly about that reproach accused, and two more points. He shows the public a false picture of the dynasty Egypt's, Hollywood like. And itself he is close at The Edgar Cayce Foundation and is still looking as member of his circle or lodge for the hall of records. read up at Smithsonian. To make it clear i don't agree with all this conclusions from all Autors Hancock Collins .... include the Tomb Theory. but all that researchers did a excellent investigation work.
@fullswing Hawass isn't the devil at all. if you talk to him you just learn he is utterly smart. But it is time to fix that Egypt picture in the world. nobody can serve two lords for ever. We all knows about his hobby "looking for the hall of records" why he do it not in the public ? I don't like Hancock personalty. he is into drugs. You are wrong about his education he graduated from Durham University in 1973, receiving a First Class Honours degree in sociology. worked as Journalist. worked for many British papers. But about his work. he is reading in public such famous texts "The Lament of Hermes" or "The book of the Gates / Dead, and of the Rebirth". "The Pyramid Texts". Andrew Collins is a engineer working into stonemason technics. he is research the whole technical subject. Tool marks. processing stonemason technology. And there a lot others Civil engineers. Stonemasons which are into that subject. You can't put all them experience turn down, call into question. Who are you?
I love how you can dismiss Dr Schoch and only because you have been indoctrinated by Egyptologists. What is your basis for saying the Yale educated geologist is wrong? "Where is their stuff???" Well, you've got the pyramids , Sphinx, serapeum boxes (the absolute smoking gun, no copper chisels and hemp rope brigade built those) and lots of other megalithic sites all over the world. You expect their less durable "things" would survive over 10k years? It's sad that people have their blinders on , but I guess that shows how powerful indoctrination is. The Egyptologists say Egyptians Cut, carved and moved 100 ton granite stones with copper chisels and hemp rope and you believe that 🤦🤦🤦🤦🤦
Also, after producing all of the perfect constructions, statues, artifacts, they then stopped producing? Surely if the ancient eygiptians were capable of producing all of that, then production would have continued.
Sphynx was covered up to its head in sand,preserving all nooks and crannies until 1820,only recently has it been actually acknowledged the water erosion
Thanks for making this video, Stefan. Your dedication and passion is inspiring, and it is good to have a voice like yours making this content. Conspiracy theories are a tough subject and, as a history teacher, I am surprised how pervasive some of them are. I am glad there are those out there like you answering such questions on RU-vid. Keep up the great work!
And for decades the US government claimed UFOs were a farce and invented the phrase conspiracy theorist. Ha a few months ago we couldn't get "scientists" to agree on masks being a good idea.
Every time someone makes an argument that the Egyptians didn’t build the pyramids. Replace pyramids with Catholic cathedrals. And replace Egyptians with medieval people and see how ridiculous it sounds.
You do not even need to do that. Simply asked them = "then who did???" Invariably they can not answer - at least not intelligently. It will always be allusions to some supposed "lost civilization" for which coincidentally nary a pottery shard exists to show it was actually real. Such unsubstantiated speculation coincidentally is known as "argumentum ad ignorantiam". Ironic in that the pyramids or Sphinx survived whereas nothing else about them did. lol!
Well said. I am shocked to see everywhere fringe theories that require logic flips or worldwide conspiracies to legitimize. It upsets me and there are tons of people wasting time to argue the least likely hypotheses with zero evidence or often contradict the existing evidence and don't even pass simple scrutiny.
Here’s my problem with you. Robert Schoch is a peer reviewed published and long career geologist, who has physically touched these walls. You read a couple articles and books many of which are written by people who have never been to the Sphinx. You are not a geologist in any form. Explain to me how you could have an educated opinion on this. And before you say it, I do not have a opinion on the age of the Sphinx. I can’t because I am not a scientist and have never been there. my problem is that you are so sure of yourself without ever doing any real work yourself.
Brother..... You are joking or being serious . The dew made me laugh. Only one person thinks the pyramids are older. Truly this shows that Robert Shock was one to prove you wrong. Is he A True Blooded American.?. But he's right
Schoch refuses to publish in peer reviewed journals. Not only can the dew weaken surface tension. It has been tested. So the "gee I can't see how they did it, so it must be... (Insert your favorite brain fart)" is pathetic.
"His majesty sent me to dig five canals in Upper Egypt, and to build three barges and four tow boats of acacia wood purchased from Wawat. The foreign chiefs of Irtjet, Wawat, Yam, and Medja (Nubian tribes) cut them into timber for us. All was completed at my behest within the year. Once we had them floating, they were loaded with very large blocks for the pyramid "Merenere the Splendid". I saved a lot of money for the palace with these five canals." -Weni the Elder, 6th Dynasty judge, general, engineer, and governor during the reigns of pharaohs Pepi I Meryre and Nemtyemsaf I. But then I'm sure they are right. That whole summer, probably the hardest of his life was spent in commune with aliens. And when he said acacia wood barges what he really meant was anti-gravity devices.
An opening statement confused me. It seems some poor logic was applied. Even if we take it as an axiom that the Sphinx wad built at least 7000 years ago (which we should not do) I don't see why it should follow that the pyramids by association must be as old. Also the claims about the pyramids not being a tomb sounds like the lecture from the opening scene of the film Stargate. Fun movie, but a scifi NOT a valid scientific source.
I believe, because in all tombs of the dynasties believed to have built them, the tombs were all decorated with hieroglyphs. In any of the pyramids inner chambers, were bare of any adornments, or sarcophagi. While tomb raiders might have stolen all golden objects, and while they might excise the hieroglyphs, the walls were smooth (indicating there were no hieroglyphs), and there were no large, heavy, stone cases that surround the golden coffins of the dead. It's a little contradictory to understanding, which allows for speculation and conjecture (which is partly the basis for fun scifi movies). I agree about the sphinx/pyramid dating.
Here's how I see it, The fact that we have found ANY of the megalithic sites dating over 10k years ago is your proof.. .no hunter gatherers are erecting 50 ton stones at gobekli Tepe . All this "where is all their stuff??" is a bad argument because you are not realizing that a cataclysm destroyed most of it.... Over the millennia, other people would've found it and taken it apart to be used for other things. "Why didn't we find their tools next to the pyramid?" Really? You think workers drop their tools and run after they finish a project?? According to the dynastic Egyptians themselves, they were a legacy civilization.. their history went back thousands of years. Somehow Egyptologists think they know more than the Egyptians themselves. 🤦
It's a non-debunkable, debunk-proof, because there's always a possibility that artifacts of extreme antiquity just haven't been dug up. I mean, basically the thesis demands that more archaeology needs to be done. There's no way to make a case that less archaeology should be done! Or I suppose you could attack the individual proponents of "forbidden archaeology", which would simply justify their paranoia. Maybe accept that these those people aren't really enemies of archaeology. You can say they're wrong and criticize their PR techniques, but the minute you make them an enemy, they've basically won the argument. The only response is to do more, better science.
@@squirlmy So they can propose any ludicrous theory they imagine and we can't criticise because technically it's not 100% impossible that in future we find some evidence for it? By, that logic you cannot criticise anyone's theories no matter how ridiculous they sound.
A Nice reply on the alternative Sphinx theorie Stefan! Well done.. Some examples of the sources you mantioned deffinly are a strong argument against the water/rain erosion on the Sphinx. The only thing I am not so sure about is if Zahi Hawass is a reliable source of information haha 😁 but the rest is pretty solid and definitely gave me enough reason to be critical about the water/rain erosion theorie.. Regardless it's a pretty cool kitty cat (kochek) that they built ✌️
Late to the party. Honestly, Robert Schoch lost all credibility with that pith helmet. If he was wearing a fedora like Indy, then his theory would have been credible. LOL
If I had to re write Shakespeare's stuff today: ... And when Romeo touched Juliet's spaghetti, Juliet said "You're already dead".. To which Romeo replied relax I've got some sunshine in ma bag... Good grief
fullswing I have it on good authority, from people with quite fetching tin foil hats, that Mainstream Archaeology is involved in a massive coverup of The Truth. Why that should be so, I have no idea. But it’s hard to argue with a fetching tin foil hat. And they must not be involved in the conspiracy, because they have never studied archaeology, so they must know what they’re talking about. Lol
I plan on covering the Neolithic Revolution after the Neanderthals videos I'm making. For now though i'll simply say that that site is not in Egypt, it bears no resemblance to the architectural style or construction methods used in Egypt, there are no Anatolian artifacts around the pyramid and we understand very well the Neolithic context in which it arose. There is still no evidence of any early civilization around the pyramids other than ancient Egypt.
A lot of these theories about how the Egyptians didn't create this work starts with the assumption that they are not capable of doing it. They didn't have the tools they didn't have the organization. They didn't have the intelligence. Anthropologist would tell you that the ancient people the homosapiens were just as intelligent as we are today. They started basically from scratch and built the foundation of where we are. None of this stuff arrived by accident or by aliens or by glaciers or rainwater. It was made by intelligent people to meet their felt needs. Certain people are attracted to the stuff and it sells. It's pop archeology.
