The Misquote Heard Round the World: No Evidence for Atlantis  

Ahhhh, remember when scientists used to argue with religious people, then we agreed to disagree, now we can't even present a theory or speculate against the religion of unfinished scientific processes.

saying tribal myths and traditions mean nothing is 'white supremacy' more than saying they should be examined for truth imo.

The last person im going to take seriously about moving a heavy stone is someone that learned it from a book.

I have similar but slightly different reasoning for why we haven't and are not likely to find artifacts underwater. 1. When the sea level rose 400 feet, it wouldn't fill up like a swimming pool with a hose in it. It would be violent with strong and powerful tidal forces. If there were artifacts in those regions, they were swept away into deeper ocean with current and buried in all the sediment that would've also been kicked up and picked up at the time sea level was rising. 2. Anything light enough to be moved by water likely would be moved by water in 12k years time. 3. Anything metal would have oxidized in that time. If we ever do find non geological artifacts from 12k years ago underwater, it will have had to have extraordinary circumstances to not have dissolved into nothing in that time.

It seems like university education involves learning how to call your opponents racist at all cost.

I dropped my watch in a shallow creek once... took me fuggin ages to find it.... multiply that by a factor of a few million square kms and again by a depth of the oceans rise and you have a pretty good chance we dont know much about shit.

I am so glad this channel exists - Dibble exposed!

I think the Antikythera mechanism is the single most impressive technological examplary piece of lost technology that we have found up to date. The precision and the mere fact that we are looking at a mechanical computer was something absolutely infathomable only a few decades ago and would have probably put you firmly in the conspiracy corner of archeology. Yet we found it and saw that cultures have been able to make those complex calculations way before our arrogance sometimes let us assume they did. We sometimes forget that genetically we are identical. These people had the same potential we have now. And some of them found different solutions that were way ahead of their time.

Very cool! I’m sure there could have been advanced civilizations in the distant past! Not 15,000 years ago, but what about 70,000 years ago? 200,000 yrs ago? A million years ago…

This dude gave me serious classic sleazy used car salesmen vibe.......now I get it

Hancock comes from a place of truth. The entirety of his theories may not be correct but that does not mean he's entirely wrong. However, Hancock comes from a place of truth and honesty and he would not blatantly lie just to win an argument. But this is exactly what Dibble does in several instances. Even if he's correct on certain points, the mere fact that he's willing to lie or mislead to arrive at his goal is enough to dismiss him from the get go and then verify IF he's right in some instances.

Great summary and break down. You get better with every video. Keep up the great work.

The dishonesty of Dibble and Co. just makes me think that Hancock and Co. might, just might be on to something. 🤔

I love that you're making these videos, because you keep addressing literally all of my issues I had with the debate... except you've gone further and provided counter evidence and sources. It's brilliant. Flint literally represents everything I distrust about Archeology. He speaks in absolutes, presents personal interpretation of data as conclusive fact and rejects any other interpretation, relies heavily on logical fallacies, stoops to character assassination, repeatedly gets caught being dishonest, and misrepresents facts. What I want from Archeology is "here is the raw data of what we found."... That's it... If they want to attach narrative then it has to start with "the data suggests" or "we believe"... You know... Like a real scientist would.

8:45 I just woke up a 30 year coma, and my nieces and nephews are handing me Star Trek the next generation level magical rectangles so I have no idea how to find your other videos when they leave the room

For an electrician, your approach to content creation fascinates me. Many historical channels have a way of presenting their arguments as definitive and requiring no further investigation. On the other hand, with all the artifacts, structures and production of these which still have no explanation, it surprises me that there is so much dogma in these subjects. Those who continue to ask questions and propose different ideas come up against so many obstacles when they could be such interesting allies in moving knowledge forward. How sad to see all these efforts to confuse the issue. For me the strength of your channel @DeDunking is your ability to point out this lack of intellectual rigor, on both sides of the debate. Really looking forward to seeing more of your videos.

Irregardless of how many of Dibble's arguments against Hancock's theories are valid, he lost all credibility when he blatantly tried to associate Hancock with white supremacy to discredit him. Why? Because when you know he's willing to lie about something as disgusting as that, it makes you wonder what else he's willing to lie about to push his own agenda. There's no coming back from this, unless not only Dibble, but anyone involved spreading these lies about Hancock come out publicly and apologize for smearing his name. Thank you for providing a rational and balanced perspective on this whole situation, you won't find that many places on RU-vid.

Scientifically speaking, Graham is pointing out with this comment that archaeologists have a sampling problem. You cannot possibly falsify a model (e.g. Graham's) by claiming exhaustive probing when you haven't exhaustively probed. In addition, you cannot prove something did not happen or did not exist in any scientific argument because you are always limited by your level of detection. You can only prove a model wrong by demonstrating with positive proof that its predictions are false or with contradictory observations that cannot be explained by it. In terms of Graham's model, we can sum it up like this: Graham and many of his alternative historian colleagues have observed that some of the documented knowledge and know-how-precession, geodesic insights, engineering and architecture, and myths for example-found across the world's ancient cultures share common elements and are anachronistic or incompatible with the archaeological record amassed thus far of the cultural context of this know-how. This is what this comment means. Graham's model to explain these observations is divergence/diffusion from a common source whose other cultural footprints have been lost due to geological upheaval. The disagreement revolves around the meaning of these observations. Historians and archaeologists, on the other hand have constructed a part convergence, part regional diffusion model to explain commonalities and believe there are no anachronisms or paradoxes of know-how. They say that they can explain any and all common elements without the need for a ghost population, and any technological achievements can be reconstructed from more primitive precursors discovered in the material remains of prior stages. This is therefore a dispute about what the observations mean: different models to explain them. An important aspect of Graham's model is that his single-origin diffusion model does not involve quantitative dispersion of people, but a tiny group of influential knowledge carriers, shamanic as Graham describes them. This is distinct, for example, from the Yamnaya invasion of Europe and the quantitative displacement of the Neolithic farmer genetic signal. Graham's model is about knowledge diffusion, not genetic dispersion. In a dispassionate scientific debate, the logic of the opposing models and how to vet them observationally should be the first item on the menu. What the non-scientific community watching all this needs to know about science is that the only way to eliminate a model is by falsification. You cannot argue away a model with plausibility, probability, majority opinion, or similar soft science standards.

lame people are more concerned with winning or looking good to others, but genuine seekers of truth are concerned with the stones left unturned

The more and more I hear about and from Flint, the less and less I trust his opinions on the matter. His smug moral superiority about his university-level education giving him carte blanche to say "this is the irrefutable, empirical way it is", when Graham, fanciful or not has been to the sites he makes his claims about, and has studied them in person multiple times. Does it give him authority to speak about it? Maybe not. Does it give him actual hands-on experience that Flint sorely lacks? Absolutely. It's like car mechanics. Do you want your car fixed by the guy who learned how from a book, or the guy who learned how by actually fixing them?

An aspect of the Flint argument that I haven't seen addressed. His misrepresentation of the reliability of large data sets. Look at comparisons from other fields... ChatGPT relies entirely on predicting the best next word based on studying the language in literally TRILLIONS of data sources... This means it gets a lot of stuff scary accurate, and other times it completely misses the mark. Political polling consists of massive data sets and are often wildly wrong. As you covered in your video criticizing the scans of the Egypt vase, those scanners take thousands and thousands of data points and contain JUNK data that has to be sorted out manually. Newton's laws were considered "laws" until Einstein came and broke them with a "theory"... You could test Newton's laws infinitely on Earth at our relative scale and every-time be proven right... an infinitely large data set... and yet still Newton's laws breakdown at scale. It's ignorant to assume conclusions from large data sets, especially if that data set is only a fraction of what could and should be investigated.

Absolutely brilliant... but it's a pity the debunkers won't watch it and honestly respond to your points. As you say, It's all about winning.

Thanks for the upload. A slight tangent here, but in response to the ancient civilisation debate IN GENERAL, I suspect it's unlikely that our current civilisation will leave no trace whatsoever after a Younger Dryas scale event, unless said destruction is so thorough as to penetrate subways, underground bunkers, mine-shafts, and deep-sea wrecks. (Would chemical compounds, or radiation, be present for those who might know how to look?) However, I also seriously doubt that any of the advanced deities/alien civilisations represented in ancient depictions, would (assuming for a second that they play a part in one of our evolutionary lurches) be foolish enough to leave any of their own tech behind for a bunch of relatively primitive animals (humans). Wouldn't it be far more likely that they'd simply ASSIST us by using their tech, and only present us with the structures and sacred wisdom (probably in the medium of psychedelics), which seems to be in-keeping with what is shown on wall after wall, and pillar after pillar, of ancient stone? It might explain, both the baffling nature of some of our global architecture, AND why we don't see any of the relative tools we'd expect to find in constructions such as the Barabar caves, Kailasa Temple, or The Great Pyramid, to name just three. Food for thought, even if it is KFC.

Another round of witty dedunking coming up ladies n gents Giddiup

It's funny how he says it strips indigenous people of there heritage yet many of these indigenous people say we didn't build these they were here when we got here. Huh so it seems that they didn't build these thing's and if those things were there when they got there are they really indigenous? And why do these teachers ignore what these people say about there own history yet pretend to want to preserve it?...

Screw all the naysayers, your stuff is gold

How many archeoloists does it to change a lightbulb? Two, one to tell you lightbulbs don't exist, and one to tell you that lightbulbs don't exist

I think it is good that Dibble acts like an emotional fanatic. It makes it much easier to know who to take seriously. Thanks for a great video.

I just looked out my window. It is not raining which proves rain does not exist.

This level of quote mining would be expected from politicians and dogmatists, not skeptics. Come on, people, I thought _Skeptics TM_ already learned this from the religion debate back in the day.

I know you have a different perspective on this but I have to say that the returning of some people's remains from certain tribes is not the way to go. Sure if it is a recent ancestor I would understand someone claiming that one should respect that but I think most of these cases have way to many generations between them to be a justifiable reason. Since my mother is Brazilian I too have indigenous ancestors but also German ones from my dad's side of the family. We as Europeans also don't get to claim land or remains of people who had their roots here. So I don't really see a reason why we should grant such things to today living indigenous people. It sometimes goes so far that you can't conduct research because some interest group has a problem with it. Best example is Serpent mount. That shouldn't be a thing.

Back when I'm still a kid, I ran to my tv every saturday or rerun sunday to watch Kamen Rider Black. Fast forward tens of years later, I'm watching your video every week. Same feeling 😂. OOT, I know, sorry. I'm just glad that 1st Milo brought me to your channel last year. Any plans for covering Barabar Cave in the future?

Intellectual dishonesty is a skill perfected in intellectual institutions

The one thing that bothered me the most about Flint's argument was he kept saying they found no evidence of advanced people but did find evidence of hunter gatherers like that meant there could be no advanced people living at that time. When even today with our computers and cars and planes we have people living as hunter gatherers in places like Africa and South America.

Great vid Dan, as I've stated before. 👍👍 ......it is sad to see all the adhom type comments here. 😢 Dan is doing a great job of highlighting points that should be examined and pulled apart, but I also know Dan is a great guy and very balanced in his approach, and I know there will be vids upcoming that critique Graham's side of this convo over Flints. I also understand that fence sitting, and remaining unbiased whilst running a channel and wanting/needing clicks and interactions is a precarious balancing act and Dan is propagating subscribers, views and interactions and doing a GREAT job.....the nuances needed in this arena are definite. Try to keep the personal feels outta it and respond only to content like Dan does, the other thing to remember is that ol Gray Gray has been playing this alt game for 30 odd years, Flint, not so long. Be fair, non adhom and keep.it real. ☮️

Atlantis may or may not have existed, we don't know, no-body knows. "Atlantis" the study of the subject, including Atlantology does exist, & for me, some of its candidates for Atlantis, are interesting in their own right, for example, Sundaland, Sardinia et al, Socotra & may even turn out to be Atlantis.

I find it strange however that with us the more technologically advanced we got, the crappier our construction became...well over the last 50-60 years which means nothing to this argument. The stone work and the tools available would make it such an expensive daunting task to be near impossible.

There is a certain amount of of higher technology referenced in Irish, Hindi and Greek mythology. The Irish ones were all referring to weapons, and being described by folks who knew what they did but did not know how they did it. The really striking one to me was the description of the Formorian God Balor, the one eyed God sat on the deck of the ship and when he opened his eye everything he looked at was burned, the God must have been very tired by all this smiting, the Irish commentator remarked, because his priest had attached pulleys to his eyelid and held it open for him. One of the Greek cities managed to burn the invaders ships and long as they attacked by daylight, managed to defend their cities quite well, unfortunately they did not do so well at night. I only saw one video on the Greek stuff, so I can't give you the reference, Hindi mythology is jam packed with amazing weapons and even if you choose to write that off as fantasy, I follow Preveen Mohan's videos of the temples in India, even if I don't always agree with his interpretation of what he shows, he gives a detailed picture of the temples, links what he shows to the religious beliefs, states his idea of what is going on and invites his viewers to weigh in on what they think, the temple with the pillars that actually turn, and are set up in gear ratios was mind blowing to say the least. The temples he shows are between one thousand and two thousand years old, according to the archaeology but to me they seem to either be older, or a copy of an older one. Definitely they indicate a technology much more advanced than anything you would have found in Europe over a thousand years ago, Alexander the Great made it to India, and maybe there was a good reason why he stopped there.

Waterworld !? I know what im watching tonight. 🤘😎🤘

If I were to find some kind of ancient artifact, I most likely would not bring it to the attention of the authorities. I’m pretty sure the rumors about the Smithsonian have some basis somewhere, but my experience with the university system leads me to believe that they are just interested in justifying their own positions as brokers of knowledge and thus power. They like to present their policies as purveyors of posterity, but they are only part of a historical faction with a narrative to pedal.

Why do academics call theories they don't support fantasy? They act as if something that might or might not have happened thousands of years ago would make the theorists life better. Fantasy? More like thoughts that they disagree with

Interesting sidenote. My ancestor founded dartmouth. Eleazor Wheelock as an indian school. Indians were allowed in the classrooms and carried the books and tended to the students needs including feeding and taking care of horses. I have native blood from both my mothers and fathers side but im not indian. I know history cannot and should not be changed but its embarrassing to me that Dartmouth has become so woke and so many of the professors and staff are so bigoted towards white people in general.

The idea that you could never cite or build off of someone else from the past because they may have been racist is ludicrous. If that’s the argument, then almost all the earliest presidents of the US should be wiped. And don’t even think about applauding them for anything good they contributed. Thank you for speaking some sense. We can acknowledge the sins of the past, what was appropriate 2, 3 or 4 hundred years ago certainly isn’t today. We have recognized our error and are trying to correct ourselves. At the same time, that doesn’t mean a racist from the past hasn’t made a discovery or contribution that we can still build off of today.

4:06 I know how they did it. I know how to build the great pyramid. 😊 I'm writing a book on how to build the great pyramid

For Heaven's sake, Plato clearly described Atlantis as a Bronze Age civilization, probably Early Bronze Age. Where did this insane idea of a super-technically advanced Atlantis come from? Oh, yes; it Madame Blavatsky and Edgar Cayce. Enough said.

This video is seriously hilarious🤣Great job mate

Why did the archeologist cross the road? His hat was on the other side

There is nothing wrong with believing in an ancient civilization. But that's what it is...believe, and nothing more. The "we haven't searched everywhere" argument leads nowhere. Otherwise you'd have to believe in almost everything you can possibly think of. As we haven't searched the entire universe for it, so you can't proof it doesn't exist.

This is one of your best videos Dan, some very valid arguments here.

In over hundred years of searching for Atlantis nothing has been found. Now if Graham wants to take some of his millions and fund a search for real then put your money where your mouth is. Graham does the same as all the others before him. Speculation and innuendo.

The funny thing is when archaeological fantasy like the Minoan Palace Interpretation is thoroughly debunked by a an architect and geologist like H.G. Wunderlich they stick to their interpretation as if the future of the world depended on it.

Wasn’t Troy a myth until it wasn’t?

Athanasus kircher is now a white man supreme lol He wrote about atlants even copied drawings of their machines into some of his work, from other sources now lost. Since monastaries tended to copy stuff and lose or toss out the original that means he was not the first northern european to believe in atlantis and that it was very well known and discussed at the time, probably more the further back in time you go. Not to mention the 'myth' comes from thousands of years ago. What an absolute tool.

good stuff i liked this one

I am enjoying your content immensely, a refreshing and common sense approach.

This dude thinks hes alot smarter than he is.

Just like in the Race and IQ debate a thing can be both. It can be racist and still actually be true. In the end it only matter how it is used. Is there maybe a difference in IQ? If yes that is a fact one has to be able to state. What matters if you treat people any less because of it. Because no matter your intelligence that should not lead to you being treated as a lesser human being. Otherwise you would have to treat everyone no matter which race as subhuman if he doesn't reach a certain IQ score. I'm a person of color myself since my mom is brazilian and in the end I don't really care. An averagre score tells you nothing about the individual in front of you.

Absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence!

Smug nerds are the worst

@DeDunking Recently Patrick Bet David's Valuetainment had a chart showing the percentage of college professor political affiliation. It was very eye opening showing college professors are overwhelmingly Democrats. So its no surprise they jump to racism as their key point in arguments.

Half of the donation is for a big Thankyou. The other half is so you look at my last comment about the water requirements of wetting sand to move blocks.. Cheeky, but hopefully effective ...

I think you got a dunk there. Love your content

They`re constantly finding surprises like this headline today: Newly discovered 3,300-year-old shipwreck ‘changes the understanding’ of sailing in ancient world

Aiight... I've done the numbers. 1. 8% of the great pyramid is made of granite. 2. 8% of 2.3million = 184 000 blocks 3. 184 000 blocks with a safe estimate of 5 tons each = 920,000,000 kg 4. Distance travelled is approx 800kms 5. Water required to moisten sand = 5-8% 6. Volume of sand = 2m (width) x 0.5m (depth) x 800 000m = 800 000 m3 7. Average density of 1600kg/m3 8. 5% of 1600kg x 800 000 = 64 000 000 kg water 9. Sand drains water on average 5cm per hour. 10. 0.5m depth of moistened sand will drain in approximately 10 hours. 11. 64 million litres of water required every 10 hours in order to keep the sand moist (assuming the blocks were moved in a consistent chain) 12. 64 000 000 x 2.4 = 153 600 000 litres of water per day to wet the sand. 13. 153 600 000 x 365 = 56,064,000,000 litres of water per year. 14. Estimated current water flow of the Nile river per year = 84 000 000 000 15. If the pyramids were built today we would need 54.6% of the Nile's yearly water flow. 15. 56,064,000,000 times 30 years = 1,681,920,000,000 litres of water to wet the sand over 30 years. 16. Yep, that's 1 trillion, 681 billion, 920 million litres of water needed to wet the sand to move 8% of the pyramids blocks. 17. This is where it gets fun. 18. In order to move 1,681,920,000,000 litres of water, you will need some kind of vessel. 19. That vessel will need to be dragged, like the granite blocks. 20. You will need water to wet the soil to drag the vessels containing water to wet the sand to move the granite blocks. 21. Approx 100 kms from Nile to chain of blocks between mines and pyramids. 22. One water access per 100km of granite path = 800kms of paths requiring water to moisten the sand. 23. Let the fractal begin. 24. Much love from a broke ass farmer in Australia with a bit of geotechnical history.

They don't report finding treasure because it will all be taken from them. They will get nothing. And what would hubting for treasure ship wrecks have to do with ancient artifacts?

Flint Dibble's approach appears to be pseudo-scientific, we are therefore justified in calling him a pseudo-archaeologist.

I'd love to see you have a discussion with Mr. Rogan.

Degradation of metals, ores and alloys or time is rarely if ever discussed at these sites. Middle and dark age specialists act like they win the lottery when they find bronze, steel or iron artifacts. Why? Steel and iron instruments completely disappear in about 800-1200 years under most conditions. Bronze-about 2000 years. Yes we have Iron Age artifacts and bronze age artifacts but those are preserved in dry ideal conditions like the Mediterranean not northern and Western Europe or central or Eastern Asia. So finding tools specifically tools that can shape stone and make other tools and machines to build won’t survive more the 5000-8000 years. Technology ages 8000-12000 years ago don’t need to space age, they can be identical to pre-industrial age tech but they couldn’t survive time.

Ricky Gervais should seriously start thinking about using Flint Dibble for a new comedy... like Dave Brent in The Office. What about Flint Dibble in The Dig?

The point is that people care more about Atlantis than run-of-the-mill archeology and that bugs them. The mundane archeologists will NEVER win because of this. They’re spitting in the wind. And that’s OK.

Wow! What a scummy, slimy move. Why is it that guys like Flint make you loop scenes of punches to the face in your head.

Honey???!! Where’s my Indiana Jones hat and my maize samples???? I’m gonna be late to the debate!!

"Welcome to the end of this episode" 🤣

Just found ur channel from Jimmy Corsetti on twitter. What a find. I’ll be ur top viewer within a week 😂

I know this is sub sophomoric …but flint looks like he doesn’t have a lot of friends long term

My new favorite channel ❤

How can you take a guy wearing a rumpled Indiana Jones hat seriously? Where's the whip?

He can call it evidence, but that does not mean that it is evidence. You can literally imagine anything - that's not evidence.

Why are they arguing so much about a hypothesis? There are many speculations on how the pyramids were built and as long as we don't know the real answer everyone is free to speculate. Hancock himself says we have no evidence. That should be the end of it. Does it disprove it? No but it's silly arguing about how to prove a negative.

Atlantis is a massive underwater formation of a dragon looking down on a primate. It gives the impression that the dragon is hypnotizing the primate with its gaze

There are words you can't use these days to describe people like Flint Dibble

i belive giza plato was built like 15,20, maybe 30.000 years ago, maybe even more

Flint Dribble wears shoulder pads under his lab coat.

You say that you are unbiased - but every one of these videos I have watched has you criticizing dibble, I think your bias is obvious

And thank you for turning on the action. It definitely gets my engine going 😉

Nice one Dan

I believe the best place to find proof of atlantis is in mountains. Any advance civilization would go upward away from sea shores. Hunter gathers would move towards the sea shore .

Flint Dibble looks like his mom still packs his lunches.

He thinks he Indiana Jones. Lmao

Flint Dibble=lithic debitage of dubious utility.

great channel - thank you !!! , and i love how your 'back-ground' sometimes changes whit some new items !!! ( presidential thought's )

I've never heard of this Dibble person.

“Jamie, pull up Flint’s sleeves.”

I only just started watching. Great stuff so far. 👍🏽 love your sense of humour.

Should had the begining joke have dunking as a contuining joke

There is no evidence, just suggestion

In the context, Dibble Dribble!

Has anyone quantified the amount of water required to wet the sand in order to move the large blocks... My numbers are showing an almost infinite feedback loop.. eg the amount of water required to wet the sand needs to be transported in something... that something would also need water to wet the soil to move the something with the water in it... feedback loopy

Love your work, Thankyou. Can you just imagine the difference in this debate if all the ‘myth’ believing top scientists and university lecturers worldwide, who are in all fields, were free to teach their interpretation of the evidence.…sadly they loose their jobs therefore it’s left up to the Graham Hancocks of the world.

Vey well said