Support this channel with a Super Thanks or become a channel member today for some behind-the-scenes perks! Or buy me a coffee at: www.ko-fi.com/flintdibble or subscribe at: www.patreon.com/flintdibble
why do you need money , are you to dumb to live of taxes? , dont forget , the ones who made racetheory and killed the jews apparently in the 20tiest century where scientists too ?
Part around 3:50 where Grahamn argues about how he is being taken out of context and wasnt talking about 1900s industrial revolution for his lost ancient civilisation.. uh didnt he write the Mars Mysteries hinting his "visitors and spreaders of cultures" were from Mars? Havent read the book, just summaries - anyone correct me if its wrong
Great video Flint. Your performance on the debate was outstanding and I was happy to see it remain civil (mostly) and cover a lot of great topics and info that you were well prepared and versed on. Even Joe did a pretty damn good job moderating in my opinion considering Graham is a long time friend. Needless to say I was disappointed to see what was a long overdue, largely respectful and incredibly thorough debate between these spaces devolve into such a shitshow afterwards. It was shocking and reprehensible to see some of the accusations (not to mention literal lies) that were slung at you afterwards. Good on you for making this video, clearing up the accusations and fighting to keep this thing on the rails. I tip my Indiana Jones hat to you.
@@FlintDibble Hi, great video. Will you also make a video on Bright insight? Because he has also lied about you and archeologists. His lies about Gobekli Tepe are also really bad.
My conspiracy theory is that they thought you’d be an easy win for Hancock. They saw the hat, said “this guy seems goofy, should be easy”, and then you showed up and just absolutely dogwalked Hancock. Essentially, old school anti-nerd discrimination was their downfall.
often the advantage conspiracists have over academics is that they can be more experienced as public speakers and know how to cater to the biases of untrained audiences ...my guess is that hancock thought his usual buzzwords and joe rogan's anti-establishment biases gave him an easy dunk...and it all gloriously backfired
@@AsusSusu-o3x you need only go back and listen to how Joe treated the primatologist Alison Elgart when she called into the Opie & Anthony show (to try to correct his misinformation) to see how he truly feels about academics challenging his narrative. He was vicious, cruel and completely dismissive of her expertise and experience.
That's not how it works at all; you can't make anyone retract anything, nor sue if they thought it was true at the time. Otherwise Flint would have retracted the plethora of racism accusations he's casually thrown around-- the same ones he clearly doesn't believe in enough to defend on Joe Rogan, downplaying his legacy of slander instead of owning up to it because he knows it's shameful. Besides, Dan has said that he was wrong about some aspects of what he said which literally is a sufficient retraction by all media standards.
@@BlockDefender you realize you're just perpetuating it and making it worse, right? When Dan admitted ON VIDEO that he was leaving up videos with claims he knew to be wrong, for the express purpose of showing Flint "what it feels like" to have bad info about you out there, it's an admission of slander and proves actual malice.
@@BlockDefender admitting you're wrong isn't a retraction, you have to also make a reasonable effort to remove the information you know is false so it doesn't cause further damages. You may be confusing it with a newspaper that obviously can't recall previous issues that were already distributed, so the best they can do is to print a retraction that clarifies what they got wrong. When websites and content creators are found guilty of libel however, they need to remove the offending media / article / post if it's within their power to do so, as there's no guarantee any future visitor of that page will see the 'correction' that was published later. To find someone guilty of slanderous libel, you need to prove they knew what they were saying was false, and that it was said with actual malice, and that it caused damages in some way. Dan literally admitted to all of these in the clips taken from his on channel: he admitted he knew the info was false and that he was leaving it up with the intent of harming Flint's reputation by 'showing him' how it feels to have false information spread about him. If I were Dan's lawyer I'd be smashing my head on the table right now.
Exactly 😂 "They took me out of context because I didn't properly clarify what I meant by not adding in the *needed context* in my own scripted show" 🙄🙄🙄 They didn't take him out of context, he didn't provide it! 😮💨
@@FlintDibbleI recently discovered your channel and work. First I would like to thank you for sharing your knowledge. Second, I believe you bested your opponent on the JRE podcast with vigor and skill. You are clearly the more learned man, and you believe in letting evidence and facts determine your perspectives. Well done, indeed.
I appreciate that MiniMinuteman pointed me in this direction. I thoroughly enjoyed this and look forward to delving through your other videos. Thanks to you both!
While there is currently no evidence of Dan being a good faith actor, I’m sure if we just looked harder along the coast line or in the Sahara we’d find some eventually
Well, the whole thing is that we didn't find anything to prove his point. He's just living in his own fantasy story. It's like saying aliens surely exist because we didn't check the whole universe, well, they might not exist as well, we might be alone. Ever think of that. Similarly, we might find nothing, or find evidence for something completely different. And so on.
Why don't they pony up the money for their own field expeditions if they really think the evidence is there. My god Joe Rogan has the money. Maybe they could get it off him. They can go to Antarctica.
Came from Milo's post on YT community. Thank you for all you've been doing in the interest of good science and education! Subbed and began watching your videos!
Man that whole "you guys had ancestral bones at university" is so dishonest. That is his way of getting 'back' at you for daring to call some of Hancock's sources racist.
Yeah that whole argument. It was slimy how jre didn't allow dibble to explain his point. Stonehenge isn't debated, Rome isn't debated. But heaven forbid anyone in Africa or mesopotamia did anything without intervention.
Egyptians were (probably) black so they had help from aliens. Mesoamericans are kind of tan, so they had help (from aliens) Mesopotamians are getting there. Did a lot of it themselves, but still lacking "the skills", and "brainpower" Now... Stonehenge..? Well, the inhabitants of British isles were white, so they definitely had the know-how. 0% chance of aliens. "Why is everyone saying my theories are racially charged??" - the schmuck who believes all that
Look, I'm trying to hear both sides of all this. I really don't like how Dan carries himself in these arguments and the BS he says sometimes. But "daring to call Graham's sources racist"? Ok. What do you think of smoking and chewing tobacco? Bad for your health? You know, the nazis started that whole movement. It was part of their supremacist agenda. Oh I'm not calling you a nazi if you believe that. I'm just pointing out it was promulgated by nazi ideology. If you support it, you're supporting what was a nazi movement. But I'm not calling you a nazi. Don't take me out of context. That's absolutely ridiculous. There's no reason to bring up the nazis. The fact that the anti-smoking movement started with them is irrelevant to the facts of the arguments against smoking. Separating facts from individuals is crucial to having honest, good faith debate. Flint trying to weasel out of it with "well, I never (directly) called him a white supremacist" is as much BS as the stuff Dan has said. Good on Joe for not letting him off easy.
Why are people (you) still talking about this ? You missed the boat... the Hancock Hating is old... been done... it's over... that is unless you got nothing else to talk about
At the end of the day, nobody with a sane mind chooses to be surgically operated on by a surgeon without proper academic education in medicine, instead of a reputable surgeon with it. In matters of history, I would rather listen to a PhD in the field than a crackpot without any formal education at all. No, it is not enough to have an open mind if you are not formally trained on that field.
I’m of the opinion that genuine archeologists have spent too much time engaging with these people. I don’t know that it’s necessary. I say that the best way to dispute their claims is to keep putting out genuine archaeological findings and information. I believe that alone would disprove, discredit and discourage these people. Archaeologists can simply make videos showing the facts that go against their claims.
@@HeatherWPunfortunately, these bad actors have a substantial audience and do major damage. You have someone like Rogan with his massive platform, spreading misinformation to millions of listeners. You have Hancock peddling books that become bestsellers. You have Netflix offering this nonsense to millions of subscribers. We’ve sadly seen the consequences of science illiteracy in recent years, so the temptation to respond is understandable.
Mr. Hancock can say "I was talking about advanced map-making, such as computing longitude, not technology." But of course, our civilization first accurately computed longitude with a series of extremely sophisticated timepieces, constructed with quite accomplished levels of technology (metallurgy, chemistry, etc.).
The sentence isn't even correct anyway. Map making IS a technology. He tries to hand wave stuff we take for granted as not being technology so that he can sell tech that doesn't exist as the indicators of this magical non existent civilisation.
Your discussion about the old grains on JRE was probably the most productive part of your participation in that discussion. Graham couldn't play on that field and Joe was genuinely fascinated by was you brought to the table. In recent months, I've seen several YTubers who call themselves "independant" researchers citing you and your studies in a positive light and giving them a wider platform. These middle of the road people generally reach to a crowd that overlap with Graham's audience... which means that fascinating recent information do interest common people. From my experience, that crowd is interested in "complicated" aspect of ancient history. The generic, superficial and overbaked official documentaries doesn't cut it for them, but when it goes deeper, they are much more involved. As UA-cam proved many times, there is a space for razor sharp documentaries focussing on supposedly "niche" subjects. So continue to spread your works and knowledge in a positive way!
Except for when Flint literally lied and said it takes thousands of years for plants to revert. Thank god people like Dan fact check claims like this so that people like you aren't easily impressed by a confident tone.
@@BlockDefenderhave you made that effort to “fact check” the claims you keep repeating in comments? It may be quite a helpful learning exercise for you 🧐
Hancock wanted this debate so bad and at the end of it he was regretting it. He just shut down argumentation, cross his arms and childishly insist we have to dig deeper for some evidence.
He was really bad during this debate, he didn't bring up any good points and didn't really have any good rebuttals. It seemed to me that the whole racist thing gurt him a lot and that brought up all the years of hate that had grown because of all the other accusations and name calling, it was like he didnt go for a discussion, he went to confront dibble and it clouded his thinking.
@@glenwarrengeologyI actually think that this debate was incredible. It convinced thousands of Rogan’s followers that they were wrong, which is an incredibly difficult thing to do. Sure, Hancock himself was a petty little baby at the end of it all, but the debate itself was very positive for real archeology.
I took classes from your dad and knew him a little when I was in college. I am very excited to have the opportunity to continue learning from you. Thank you for what you are doing on this platform.
Funny, most alt historians stick to writing "what-if" novels instead of attacking archaeologists for disagreeing with their clever theory on the Confederate States of America using dinosaurs as their means of locomotion
@compwiz101 it's a pretty common tactic, after all. Someone could probably do a super-cut of Ben Shapiro saying "let's say..." followed by a truckload of bullshit at a rapid enough way to trick people into forgetting all of it is nonsense he made up.
Being a pseudo archaeologist or pseudo academic of any kind doesn't point to lack of intelligence per se. Actual academics can become pseudo academics. It's all about the methodology or lack thereof.
@@garymaidman625 From what I have seen since becoming aware of it more often than not becoming as pseudoscientist is more about grift than methodology. The success of Hancock shows that it's a much easier way to make money than breaking your back breathing in dust bending over an excavation trench for hours a day. IMHO that's exactly why Hancock himself got into it after learning about Eric von Danicken's own success decades earlier. Chariots of the Gods was even mentioned in John Carpenter's sci fi horror film The Thing in the 80s.
I'm really disappointed with Joe after your episode. He doubled down on professing his belief in the Hancock theory in later episodes. I wish he'd have you on by yourself to talk real science and real archaeology. He's had other scientists on, but when it comes to archaeology, despite all the facts & fantastic work you did passionately advocating for real archaeology, Joe just "wants to believe," like Mulder in the X-Files, in the mysterious. It scratches that itch. 😂
Joe seems like a good guy but he is easily swayed by whichever "academic" he is interviewing at any particular moment. Graham Hancock is on his show all the time so that is who he believes.
Follow the money. Handcock makes a living from selling books that fund his tourist adventures. The more controversial and fantastical claims he has, the potential for higher book sales. He would have vanished into obscurity if it weren't for his 10 appearances on JRE. Keep your chin up Flint and ignore the hate. You did awesome work on the podcast.
@@bucklberryreturnsconspiracies drive history. Kind of a mistake to equate all conspiracies with automatic falsehoods. I don’t even think conspiracy theorist is the right name for these people, I’ve seen them called alt history sellers, and I think that fits better.
@@Eye_of_Horus I wasn't equating Hancock and his like with conspiracy theorists exactly, simply highlighting that the phrase "follow the money" is key to many whacko ideas pushing global domination by shady organisations, peddled by conspiracy theorists. The idea in those circles that "So many times we've been proved right!" is akin to a stopped clock. It's much, much more often you're correct calling it bollocks than not. As such, I mostly default wild claims to falsehood, and accept willingly when I am incorrect. As for correct naming schemes, I'll stick to conspiracy theorists when it fits (which it can when saying "academics are hiding....etc"). Alt history sellers I also dislike for this particular field, as there isn't an alternative history. There's fact and fiction. Historical fantasy would be much more fitting.
@@Eye_of_Horus Replied. Disappeared. Ugh. I was speaking specifically about that term, not the broader context. It is a common phrase used by such folk, much like "do your own research". I wouldn't call them alternative either tbh, there's correct and incorrect. Alternative facts is new age spin. Maybe historical fantasy would be better? Merlin, Atlantis etc. Fantasy until any evidence is provided besides stories. As for "conspiracies drive history", what does that even mean? I never mentioned anything about automatic falsehoods.
@@bucklberryreturns yeah sorry I just assume when people use those terms these days as sort of an insult it implies that conspiracies never happen. We know from history that conspiracies are a constant. On the micro and the macro scale. That’s what I meant from the drive history. Usually it’s not so clear when your in the time period, but years later historians piece things together. I agree they are not alternative, there’s literally no truth to their ideas. Though people know what you mean when you say it. Be great if there was a better description. I forget his name but the guy from world of antiquity has started calling them alt history sellers or peddlers. I thought that’s kind of clever, because they are selling you the lie. It’s their job.
Awesome job, Flint. It’s terrible dealing with coordinated attacks from online hordes. You always come with all the receipts, citations, and spend a ton of time embedding it right into your videos!! Keep this up brother - you are making a serious impact.
I have to say that you are being far more polite than I could ever be in your shoes. My responses would be chock full with every swear word in existence.
I find Dan's approach so frustrating. Because he really does throw out petty insults and rage bate. It reminds me of when I was a child and my brother would tease and pick on me until I snapped. At which point I would be told off for retaliating. In the same way as a brother, he knows what will make you snap, what will frustrate you and uses that to their advantage. I subscribed to Dan's channel early on, and watched many of his videos, at a time when he was less opinionated, however as of late I have been unable to watch his content due to the pure toxicity that emanates from them. He pretends to be balanced, and based in pure logic. But he is immensely biased.
@@righthomosphere7962 yeah it sucks, he has now been climbing the ivory tower of the pseudoscience world, and he managed to reach the top. It's just crazy to me that these people don't see how horribly toxic he is. The disgust and spite he gives off is insane. Like most things like this, it's usually not responding that is the best approach, because you risk empowering them like you say. But man, sometimes they just suck, and someone needs to say something, regardless of the consequences.
I watched the debate on the podcast and I couldn’t get through all of it honestly lmao. It made me so frustrated listening to you constantly cite sources and refute points and Graham basically saying “nuh-uh.” Glad to hear that you really made an impact on even Graham himself. Really an incredible achievement. It was definitely a very high risk move you did and I’m glad that it’s paid off! Also sorry to hear that you’re getting so much backlash. That said, I’m sure that’s something you were fully aware of being inevitable. Regardless, I think it just further shows how effectively you communicated the facts. They have no rebuttals other than personal attacks.
It's insane what you've had to deal with simply for sharing your expertise with people who say they want the truth. As an ex Hancock fan, I just want to say thank you for keeping on putting real archaeology out there for us in an understanable way!
Don't waste too much energy interacting with this dude. Your work is far more important than him. I hope Graham Hancock is going to do the right thing.
I’m here from Miniminuteman’s community post. Glad to see others pushing against pseudo archaeology and misinformation like milo does. Misinformation is quite literally a top 10 biggest issue in today’s society
I don’t think so… If you still have a functional brain… Both side have holes on their side of the story… I would be more happy if 2 real scientists sitting together to discuss this…
@@zalaiparasztDibble literally has a PHD in archeological sciences. It's just that every other qualified scientist doesn't hold the same views as Hancock. You will never have 2 different "Scientists" debate this. Just a scientist and a conspiracy theorist or if you prefer Hancock's term "Pseudo archeologist"
@@zalaiparasztconspiracy brain rot is strong with this one. Claims both sides have holes, but couldn’t tell you what any of the holes are in modern archaeology. This poster repeats things they hear random conspiracy theorists say in UA-cam videos and memes and believes them without questioning.
He has been very rude to Native people on social media and at a speech he gave at he Museum of the American Indian which is available on UA-cam. I and several other Native people were policed by him where if we disagreed, he immediately blocked us. It's ridiculous to study Indigenous people in North, Central and South America and then pull the Eurocentric superior brain b.s.
“I was conned into thinking realistically by actual evidence! It’s not fair!” Man I hate it when that happens. In all seriousness amazing job. It’s one thing to argue with someone and another entirely to actually change their position, even if it’s just a little. Huge respect to you for doing that with someone as influential as Graham Hancock and spreading some real science.
Normally academics aren’t great at handling ‘debates’ with crackpots. You did well, sir! Didn’t get riled, stuck to the facts, didn’t get baited into personal attacks (which would play to his ‘I’m oppressed’ complex). Well done sir
@FlintDibble No, thank you seriously. I was fully down the rabbit hole, and you convinced me without being arrogant or rude or dismissive like Graham. I hope for nothing but great things in the future for you. Thank you!
@@Sambraz316 Welcome to "the light" Sam...I've been confronting these "numb-nuts" for decades now. it has been gratifying to witness figures such as Dr. Dibble now engaging with numerous ultracrepidarians in a timely manner. The internet has facilitated this interaction, although it has also regrettably allowed their deceptive practices to proliferate rapidly, making it difficult for many to address the issue effectively.
@danb239 I think the Sahara desert debate from Graham started my doubt. Putting the burden of proof onto the Archeologists for some reason. Then, Graham flat out, admitting there was no physical evidence. Then, when Flint pointed out the amount of sunken ships that had been found and how well they stay preserved and not a single ship provided a speck of evidence to Grahams theory of his "advance civilization" who traversed globally. That planted a lot of little seeds of doubt, and that's when I started looking into it further.
Here because of Miniminuteman. I'm very proud of you for standing up for actual archeology and prouder that you are standing up for yourself in such a professional manner. You just got another subscriber to add to your base :)
Thank you for your work, your patience and your resilience. I think we need more and more good archaeologists talking about real archaeology on the internet. So keep up the good work!🥳🤩💪🏻
So Graham assumes every hunter gatherer was just so stupid they couldn't do anything with out someone from some advanced lost society to help them? I don't understand the bases for why Graham is making this hypothesis.
A lot of racism. Thats the basis. Or at minimum a deep, deep ignorance for his sources and where they come from, falling into believing the same stereotypes our ancestors were taught to put people different than us down so we would seem more noble for our heinous actions in the past.
Anti-intellectualism sells lots of books. Don't forget that before every single point Hancock has to first tell you why scientists are incompetent and corrupt. That's because his audience loves hearing that. And Rogan helps sell it.
I watched the podcast and a few videos and must say, you’ve represented yourself and your colleagues very well! Your knowledge was palpable in the conversations and your evidence was present. I hope you and Graham can come together again for a *cooler* conversation!
If I had the opportunity to go to college it would have been for the study of archeology. It is the most fascinating and vital profession in the pursuit of who we are, by knowing what and where we've been. Since, I first heard you speak re the story of Atlantis, I cheered "Finally!" As it was what my instinct had always known, I became a fan. While ideas, are fascinating, if they are beyond reality, though they take us away from worry at best, you have only the makings of a Hollywood movie. Only science and truth, when confirmed, become the most inspiring and miraculous of all ~ because it's REAL! Thank you!
@@NinjaMonkeyPrimeexactly, any valid critique of Dedumbking’s nonsense is met with thin-skinned ad hominem attacks and further doubling down on nonsense.
Hi Flint. I'm brand-new to your channel and heard about you from Miniminuteman. I'm leaving a like, a comment, and will listen to this probably a handful of times as i inevitably fall asleep to this. Thank you for debunking pseudoscience. Youre a beacon in this misinformation swamp
came here after miniminuteman's bridges ep, saw the beginning of this vid, went back and found the debate and watched the whole thing (you did great! the only fumble i clocked was handling his accusing you of calling him racist/white supremacist but that's just my opinion). gonna go watch your bridges ep next and go thru your vids after. glad to find your content!
I live in Wichita. About an hour from me there is a huge excavation dig that's been happening. They have found the 2nd largest native American "city". Keep up the good work, Flint! I had a hectic childhood, combined with bad choices in my 20s I never pursued my dreams. I am 33 now. I'm thinking about going back to school to pursue archeology even though I'm getting older. I wanna be a part of the dig I mentioned
I come from Milo Rossi. I heard about the debate and am yet to watch it, but do plan to. I lost most of my good faith when it came to Graham when he endorsed a poorly written article on Milo by Holly Skinner with manipulative language that insinuated Milo was a pseudoarcheologist and a liar simply because Milo decided to debunk all 8 of his episodes in 4 parts, using his mistakes in the Baghdad battery video as “evidence” when he made mistakes almost everyone would have when it came to their discovery. I believe this is the exact same thing, except the difference is that you met face to face. Graham is a public figure who has charm and is used to many eyes on him, and I think he expected for you to crack under the pressure since your presence on the internet is smaller. Instead, you brought good evidence, facts, statistics, and dwarfed him while on his home turf. He got upset, and like any pseudoscientist, he refused to back down and resorted to personal attacks and twisting words. This is why people who are interested in archeology aren’t really listened to. It’s because people like DeDunking and Graham Hancock are actively making it harder for people who don’t have a degree in archeology to actually get interested or look into the archeological community. They spit vitriolic venom at those who disagree and then claim no one listens to them. Congrats on the win in the debate, by the way! Changing people’s views when it comes to pseudoscience is really difficult, and you did it, so there’s at least one win here.
_"This is why people who are interested in archeology aren’t really listened to. It’s because people like DeDunking and Graham Hancock are actively making it harder for people who don’t have a degree in archeology to actually get interested or look into the archeological community"_ I think it's more about people wanting to hear anti-intellectual stories. The topic isn't really important, just be sure to sell a narrative that "science/experts are dumb and you are smart" and people will watch or buy books. And Rogan promotes it.
It was a Mortal Kombat fatality and brutality level drubbing. It was like the Hindenburg collapse commentator, “oh the humanity….”. You owned him. lol. Thank you for that sir.
I want Flint Dibble back on Rogan. Thanks Dibble for producing content immediately after and sticking with it, please continue to provide content your camera and mic quality etc. has improved ten fold already and you are great at this. Look forward to more youtube uploads.
What i find especially frustrating about people like Graham is that the scale of their claims always seems to match the level that his audience will accept. When he's talking to someone who knows archaeology, his claims are scaled way back until they've almost become meaningless. When discussing stuff with Flint for instance, Graham claims almost nothing except "look at these weird perpendicular rocks" and "did you personally dig up the entire planetary crust of the earth? no? then how can you know for sure". When he's talking to just Rogan -- a man whose previous career was professionally getting punched in the head -- he has the ancient Egyptians using sonic levitation and shit. It's wild.
I don't think you truly grasp where Dan is coming from. He's a cultist of sorts, who has a narcissistic/psychopathic type of personality he displays to those who can see him. He's an attention seeker plain and simple and uses social media to get the attention he want to satisfy his need to be in the spotlight. I think what he does is an act and he is playing on the feelings of a particular demographic that doesn't trust academia and its official narrative. He probably doesn't believe half the stuff he says but he says it anyway for attention and money. He's also acting like a cult leader more so than someone who questions a particular narrative. I would just look at him and his followers as the local neighborhood riff raff, drunk on Kool Aid and feel a sense of pity for them.
At the end of the day, Dan is a contrarian with an extremely strong antiestablishment bias. I think he genuinely thinks that any idea that contradicts “the mainstream” is valid and worth exploring. And if he thinks he has a case against “the mainstream”, he’ll relentlessly pursue it.
I'm no genius, but it seems to me like no one in the whole world would be more motivated to find an ancient lost civilisation than actual archeologists. The idea that you're all just arrogantly and stubbornly dismissing supposedly compelling evidence is silly.
What makes people like Dan and Hancock even more delusional is how they use actual discoveries as evidence for dogmatic thinking. Dan loves to reference the Clovis First information as proof that archaeologists don't want to find something new because he feels as if it took too long to get everyone to accept the evidence. He flat out refuses to admit that initial evidence was terrible and advancement in technology helped eventually make a case with solid evidence. Instead of just admitting that it took a long time to find solid evidence, he thinks it's just a grand conspiracy from corrupt archaeologists.
Flint Dibble saved me from believing in ancient archaeology, and that will pay dividends down the road when other seductive conspiracy theories cross my path. Thank you for finally being the person that could rebut Graham’s only real argument: “but have you been there and seen the monuments for yourself?” “No Graham, but my colleagues have and all disagree with you.” The guy makes it seem like science can only be conducted with the naked eye.
I have been following this social media debate for a while. I am coming to the conclusion that archaeology debates between archaeologists afraid of losint their jobs wild men on social media are a waste of time.
I dont think Graham Hancock is racist. However he does use a lot of concpercy theories and thought processes that have a deep history within racism and white supremacy and would hope that he would feel deeply distraught if he saw just how much his statements play into this.
Many moons ago I “oohed and ahed” at Hancock’s whimsical theories. I’ve always been a history enthusiast so I was immediately struck by his claims. I’m SO glad I found people like you, Milo, Stefan Milo, Antiquity, prof Dave ❤❤
@@inforuimteschip5970 I would say that I have watched a few of dedunking's videos and he really doesn't. Flint is an actual field archaeologist who has authored many peer-reviewed articles. He is in the academic literature. Dedunking is someone with no expertise in the field of archaeology who calls academics like Flint disingenuous.
Hey, I'm one of those people who believes in conspiracy theories. Not all of course, because I always enter with skepticism, but I really believe that there are a lot of conspiracies, especially political ones. Having said that, you destroyed Graham and it was really nice to listen to an educated man who knows what and how unlike our politicians.
Y’know people dunk on climate related sciences and evolutionary biology for reasons like pro-fossil fuel politics and intelligent design religions. But never did I think archeology and ancient history would be hotly debated on the internet and it’s all because one person with a huge ego wants there to be an ice age civilization that went down like Atlantis. Thank you for this!
I watched your entire discussion with Hancock, and I think you completely embarrassed him. He was insecure, hostile, and very childish. And of course, he failed to present any concrete proof for his ideas. You, on the other hand, did a really great job at explaining the facts in a professional, yet interesting way. Pretty much every fact you chose to present was a major blow to Hancock's hypothesis. Great stuff!
This is more accurate Conspiracy theorist/terminally online public: why don't experts ever engage with us? Experts: RUIN HIM! Terminally online Public: why are you guys doing this you guys look silly and now look bad faith Expert: engages with conversation Conspiracy theorists: Ruin him! terminally online Public: slightly pushback on ideas Expert: They want to cancel me😢this is why we don't engage with fake/pseudo science!!!! Me: but this is how we move forward in life...
@@GordonCaledonia the vile abuse is from assholes.. the Internet has existed for a while now. Everyone knows there is a subsect of humanity that sucks. Get over that he didn't lose his job and in fact all this is giving him a lot more backing and support..
@@Frankd24875 It's more than a subsect on the Joe Rogan comments section, man, it's pretty scary that a humble archaeological scientist is getting bullied as if he is up there with Anthony Fauci. Joe Rogan needs to address that shit before it gets worse, don't you agree?
@@GordonCaledonia I get that the subsect is huge but the Internet is huge. I don't think Rogan needs to do anything other than keep giving him the option to respond. Joe Rogan saying anything regarding the trolls and assholes won't do a single thing to stop them because they are vile creatures. The world is filled with them I'm sorry. I concede that if Joe had knowledge of people trying to fire him then he should state that is wrong but that's it. The alternative is saying nothing even though his words are not bullying. If they can't have a conversation online then they should do it privately but both parties chose to go online.
Mr Dibble, I know you don't like responding to these fools. But how you did it was really entertaining. You should consider doing a series of debunking videos.
I wasn’t a fan of GH anymore when the debate happened. But you sir made me really open my eyes to his (and the fans) gross tactics. Plus!!! You started me on a journey - to get back into ancient history that was a passion of mine as a kid / teen. So thank you, enjoy your beer and f.them haters! ❤
"I don't want to debate minor figures." So he just wants to talk to people who will boost his profile? The actual qualifications of his opponents aren't of interest, just their celebrity status. This is the sign of a grifter. He knows he's lying, he doesn't care.
I don't mean to generalize, but Joe Rogan's audience is more accustomed to seeing cranks pass themselves off as legitimate. So when they see an actual legitimate professional, they have to confront having been fooled by charlatans, which is not always easy. Only a minority of people can critically examine themselves that way; the majority dig in their heels further.
Looks like Dan landed his dream job of being on the Hancock payroll. He's not got an interview with Hancock titled "Something is Rotten in the State of Archaeology". Remember when Dan claimed to only care about the truth and science and claimed he didn't agree with Hancock?
Mr Flint its with great pleasure that i announce i didn't know your work before the joe rogan debate that was suggested on the side bar of this platform. Both Graham and this person Dan was suggested to me addressing you, so rejoice because their larping is giving you a way for people who really seek truthful work to find your channel and work. Congratulations for the professional stance you had in facing these "intelectuals". May i ask you if you could point me some names in the archeology field in the topic of propagation of Greek agriculture in the Western Mediterranean sea? God Bless you my friend, keep up the amazing work, the world needs more people like you. Thank you so much.
I find it hilarious that a guy is trying to discredit you because of 2 clear jokes when he wrote a whole book about how martians built pyramids on the moon
Your civility is unmatched. I personally think that Hancock and Dan could use a punch in the face, but then they'd claim that they're being silenced by mainstream archeology. Some people like them just don't have a moral compass.
I'm glad you're confronting these folks directly. I do have to say, there is a point at which engagement with bad faith actors becomes both pointless and counterproductive. I understand that who care about science strain to not to go into ad hominem attacks, but when there are so many times someone acts like a jerk in these arguments *the problem is clearly that they are a jerk* and not their "arguments" that are moving targets by design.
Support this channel with a Super Thanks or become a channel member today for some behind-the-scenes perks!
Or buy me a coffee at: www.ko-fi.com/flintdibble or subscribe at: www.patreon.com/flintdibble
Graham's Doors to Perception need rehanging.
why do you need money , are you to dumb to live of taxes? , dont forget , the ones who made racetheory and killed the jews apparently in the 20tiest century where scientists too ?
@@Maputi_na_Kalabaw What shady stuff have you seen from Flint?
This is getting old.(ah!)go and dig a hole ,scratch a rock ...
Part around 3:50 where Grahamn argues about how he is being taken out of context and wasnt talking about 1900s industrial revolution for his lost ancient civilisation.. uh didnt he write the Mars Mysteries hinting his "visitors and spreaders of cultures" were from Mars?
Havent read the book, just summaries - anyone correct me if its wrong
Great video Flint. Your performance on the debate was outstanding and I was happy to see it remain civil (mostly) and cover a lot of great topics and info that you were well prepared and versed on. Even Joe did a pretty damn good job moderating in my opinion considering Graham is a long time friend.
Needless to say I was disappointed to see what was a long overdue, largely respectful and incredibly thorough debate between these spaces devolve into such a shitshow afterwards. It was shocking and reprehensible to see some of the accusations (not to mention literal lies) that were slung at you afterwards.
Good on you for making this video, clearing up the accusations and fighting to keep this thing on the rails. I tip my Indiana Jones hat to you.
My hat is tipped right back at ya!
@@miniminuteman773 a wild Milo appears! Can't wait for more Dark Routes 😍
@miniminuteman773 omg! I found your videos rights after the debate. Between Flint and the Milos, I can say that my brain has fully opened.
@@FlintDibble Hi, great video. Will you also make a video on Bright insight? Because he has also lied about you and archeologists. His lies about Gobekli Tepe are also really bad.
I know I'm among "mainstream archaeology" when milo and flint are here. Shame SHAME lol
My conspiracy theory is that they thought you’d be an easy win for Hancock.
They saw the hat, said “this guy seems goofy, should be easy”, and then you showed up and just absolutely dogwalked Hancock.
Essentially, old school anti-nerd discrimination was their downfall.
@@Big_ten hahaha wouldn't be surprised either
Yeah, it's super annoying to see how Rogan kinda shows what a dick he is, especially when it comes to actual science stuff.
often the advantage conspiracists have over academics is that they can be more experienced as public speakers and know how to cater to the biases of untrained audiences
...my guess is that hancock thought his usual buzzwords and joe rogan's anti-establishment biases gave him an easy dunk...and it all gloriously backfired
The only profession you can still look cool with a hat in is archeology ngl
@@AsusSusu-o3x you need only go back and listen to how Joe treated the primatologist Alison Elgart when she called into the Opie & Anthony show (to try to correct his misinformation) to see how he truly feels about academics challenging his narrative. He was vicious, cruel and completely dismissive of her expertise and experience.
Dan Richards knowingly leaving up false information with the intent of slandering you is leaving him open for a lawsuit.
When the dude is accusing him of stuff that could actually get him fired also, that's a legitimate basis for a slander lawsuit
@LoreTunderin - Can Dr Dibble at least get a cease and desist order to get Richards from ever talking about him again?
That's not how it works at all; you can't make anyone retract anything, nor sue if they thought it was true at the time. Otherwise Flint would have retracted the plethora of racism accusations he's casually thrown around-- the same ones he clearly doesn't believe in enough to defend on Joe Rogan, downplaying his legacy of slander instead of owning up to it because he knows it's shameful. Besides, Dan has said that he was wrong about some aspects of what he said which literally is a sufficient retraction by all media standards.
@@BlockDefender you realize you're just perpetuating it and making it worse, right? When Dan admitted ON VIDEO that he was leaving up videos with claims he knew to be wrong, for the express purpose of showing Flint "what it feels like" to have bad info about you out there, it's an admission of slander and proves actual malice.
@@BlockDefender admitting you're wrong isn't a retraction, you have to also make a reasonable effort to remove the information you know is false so it doesn't cause further damages. You may be confusing it with a newspaper that obviously can't recall previous issues that were already distributed, so the best they can do is to print a retraction that clarifies what they got wrong. When websites and content creators are found guilty of libel however, they need to remove the offending media / article / post if it's within their power to do so, as there's no guarantee any future visitor of that page will see the 'correction' that was published later.
To find someone guilty of slanderous libel, you need to prove they knew what they were saying was false, and that it was said with actual malice, and that it caused damages in some way. Dan literally admitted to all of these in the clips taken from his on channel: he admitted he knew the info was false and that he was leaving it up with the intent of harming Flint's reputation by 'showing him' how it feels to have false information spread about him. If I were Dan's lawyer I'd be smashing my head on the table right now.
"That multiple-hour documentary I produced with Netflix took me out of context." 😂
*spits milk*
Exactly 😂
"They took me out of context because I didn't properly clarify what I meant by not adding in the *needed context* in my own scripted show" 🙄🙄🙄
They didn't take him out of context, he didn't provide it! 😮💨
Graham Hancock: "Me took me out of context!"
WHICH MY SON COMISSIONED
@@FlintDibbleI recently discovered your channel and work. First I would like to thank you for sharing your knowledge. Second, I believe you bested your opponent on the JRE podcast with vigor and skill. You are clearly the more learned man, and you believe in letting evidence and facts determine your perspectives. Well done, indeed.
I appreciate that MiniMinuteman pointed me in this direction. I thoroughly enjoyed this and look forward to delving through your other videos. Thanks to you both!
Same here. Stopped watching Rogan years ago, but this was well worth dropping back in for.
Big up, Milo, for the heads up.
While there is currently no evidence of Dan being a good faith actor, I’m sure if we just looked harder along the coast line or in the Sahara we’d find some eventually
Hah!!!!
Well, the whole thing is that we didn't find anything to prove his point. He's just living in his own fantasy story.
It's like saying aliens surely exist because we didn't check the whole universe, well, they might not exist as well, we might be alone. Ever think of that.
Similarly, we might find nothing, or find evidence for something completely different. And so on.
Absolute masterful response!
Why don't they pony up the money for their own field expeditions if they really think the evidence is there. My god Joe Rogan has the money. Maybe they could get it off him. They can go to Antarctica.
@@AgentM3tallionwhich one?
" if only archeologists looked for evidence of chanting"
-Graham Hancock
@@celsus7979 ommmmm
@@FlintDibble i think graham would like Euripides' Bacchae!
Hahaha, what a funny joke, but surely Mr Hancock doesn't think ancient peoples made stone monuments with chanting--oh. Oh.
@@toweypat I mean, you can't prove they DIDN'T chant those blocks into place. Or, you know, make the stone melt and then just form it like clay.
If they could do that, what destroyed their civilization? And is their bane still out there?
👻👽
@@matthewsmolinsky5605
Been waiting for your response to these two🎉
oh yeah. been too long coming
@@NORTH02 love your vids!
Here via Miniminuteman.
Good grief, it’s so plain to see who is sincere and who is not. Keep it up, Flint.
same!!
he supports the destruction of gobekli tepe i wouldn’t call that sincere. he’s a WEF puppet
Ditto!
Hola!
Present!!
Came from Milo's post on YT community. Thank you for all you've been doing in the interest of good science and education! Subbed and began watching your videos!
💯 rock on
Same ❤❤❤❤
Man that whole "you guys had ancestral bones at university" is so dishonest. That is his way of getting 'back' at you for daring to call some of Hancock's sources racist.
yup... ridiculously transparent lie
Yeah that whole argument. It was slimy how jre didn't allow dibble to explain his point.
Stonehenge isn't debated, Rome isn't debated.
But heaven forbid anyone in Africa or mesopotamia did anything without intervention.
Egyptians were (probably) black so they had help from aliens.
Mesoamericans are kind of tan, so they had help (from aliens)
Mesopotamians are getting there. Did a lot of it themselves, but still lacking "the skills", and "brainpower"
Now... Stonehenge..?
Well, the inhabitants of British isles were white, so they definitely had the know-how. 0% chance of aliens.
"Why is everyone saying my theories are racially charged??"
- the schmuck who believes all that
Look, I'm trying to hear both sides of all this. I really don't like how Dan carries himself in these arguments and the BS he says sometimes.
But "daring to call Graham's sources racist"? Ok. What do you think of smoking and chewing tobacco? Bad for your health? You know, the nazis started that whole movement. It was part of their supremacist agenda. Oh I'm not calling you a nazi if you believe that. I'm just pointing out it was promulgated by nazi ideology. If you support it, you're supporting what was a nazi movement. But I'm not calling you a nazi. Don't take me out of context.
That's absolutely ridiculous. There's no reason to bring up the nazis. The fact that the anti-smoking movement started with them is irrelevant to the facts of the arguments against smoking. Separating facts from individuals is crucial to having honest, good faith debate. Flint trying to weasel out of it with "well, I never (directly) called him a white supremacist" is as much BS as the stuff Dan has said. Good on Joe for not letting him off easy.
Why are people (you) still talking about this ? You missed the boat... the Hancock Hating is old... been done... it's over... that is unless you got nothing else to talk about
First time I'm this early!
Thanks for your hard work Flint. The respectful debunking tone you had on Joe Rogan was refreshing
thanks Louis!
"You would fail my classes if you took them"
That may be the harshest thing you said this whole video 😂
Honest tho
At the end of the day, nobody with a sane mind chooses to be surgically operated on by a surgeon without proper academic education in medicine, instead of a reputable surgeon with it. In matters of history, I would rather listen to a PhD in the field than a crackpot without any formal education at all. No, it is not enough to have an open mind if you are not formally trained on that field.
Conspiracy Theorists: Why don't 'experts' ever engage with us? Are the cowards?
Expert: Engages in conversation
Conspiracy Theorists: *RUIN HIM!*
💯
I’m of the opinion that genuine archeologists have spent too much time engaging with these people. I don’t know that it’s necessary. I say that the best way to dispute their claims is to keep putting out genuine archaeological findings and information. I believe that alone would disprove, discredit and discourage these people. Archaeologists can simply make videos showing the facts that go against their claims.
YUP
@@HeatherWPunfortunately, these bad actors have a substantial audience and do major damage. You have someone like Rogan with his massive platform, spreading misinformation to millions of listeners. You have Hancock peddling books that become bestsellers. You have Netflix offering this nonsense to millions of subscribers. We’ve sadly seen the consequences of science illiteracy in recent years, so the temptation to respond is understandable.
@@HeatherWPagree completely.
Mr. Hancock can say "I was talking about advanced map-making, such as computing longitude, not technology." But of course, our civilization first accurately computed longitude with a series of extremely sophisticated timepieces, constructed with quite accomplished levels of technology (metallurgy, chemistry, etc.).
Clearly he meant an advanced 19th century level of chanting to make maps appear
The sentence isn't even correct anyway.
Map making IS a technology.
He tries to hand wave stuff we take for granted as not being technology so that he can sell tech that doesn't exist as the indicators of this magical non existent civilisation.
I hadnt heard about you before Stefan Milo mentioned your debate, but you have some great content that I now enjoy watching.
@@benjamin2629 thanks!
Your discussion about the old grains on JRE was probably the most productive part of your participation in that discussion. Graham couldn't play on that field and Joe was genuinely fascinated by was you brought to the table. In recent months, I've seen several YTubers who call themselves "independant" researchers citing you and your studies in a positive light and giving them a wider platform. These middle of the road people generally reach to a crowd that overlap with Graham's audience... which means that fascinating recent information do interest common people. From my experience, that crowd is interested in "complicated" aspect of ancient history. The generic, superficial and overbaked official documentaries doesn't cut it for them, but when it goes deeper, they are much more involved. As UA-cam proved many times, there is a space for razor sharp documentaries focussing on supposedly "niche" subjects. So continue to spread your works and knowledge in a positive way!
Except for when Flint literally lied and said it takes thousands of years for plants to revert. Thank god people like Dan fact check claims like this so that people like you aren't easily impressed by a confident tone.
@@BlockDefenderhe obviously never owned a variegated pot plant in his life.
@@BlockDefenderhave you made that effort to “fact check” the claims you keep repeating in comments? It may be quite a helpful learning exercise for you 🧐
Hancock wanted this debate so bad and at the end of it he was regretting it. He just shut down argumentation, cross his arms and childishly insist we have to dig deeper for some evidence.
@ediik96 yup, that matches some of my thoughts
@@ediik96 Thats why you don't debate with stupid people, they always win, then shit on the table.
He was really bad during this debate, he didn't bring up any good points and didn't really have any good rebuttals. It seemed to me that the whole racist thing gurt him a lot and that brought up all the years of hate that had grown because of all the other accusations and name calling, it was like he didnt go for a discussion, he went to confront dibble and it clouded his thinking.
@@glenwarrengeologyunderrated subcomment 😅
@@glenwarrengeologyI actually think that this debate was incredible. It convinced thousands of Rogan’s followers that they were wrong, which is an incredibly difficult thing to do. Sure, Hancock himself was a petty little baby at the end of it all, but the debate itself was very positive for real archeology.
I took classes from your dad and knew him a little when I was in college. I am very excited to have the opportunity to continue learning from you. Thank you for what you are doing on this platform.
Thanks so much Piper! He is very much missed, but everything I do channels him
"I am an alternate historian. I happily call myself a psuedo archeologist."
Welp, at least Dan owns his lack of intelligence.
Exactly
Funny, most alt historians stick to writing "what-if" novels instead of attacking archaeologists for disagreeing with their clever theory on the Confederate States of America using dinosaurs as their means of locomotion
@compwiz101 it's a pretty common tactic, after all. Someone could probably do a super-cut of Ben Shapiro saying "let's say..." followed by a truckload of bullshit at a rapid enough way to trick people into forgetting all of it is nonsense he made up.
Being a pseudo archaeologist or pseudo academic of any kind doesn't point to lack of intelligence per se. Actual academics can become pseudo academics. It's all about the methodology or lack thereof.
@@garymaidman625
From what I have seen since becoming aware of it more often than not becoming as pseudoscientist is more about grift than methodology.
The success of Hancock shows that it's a much easier way to make money than breaking your back breathing in dust bending over an excavation trench for hours a day.
IMHO that's exactly why Hancock himself got into it after learning about Eric von Danicken's own success decades earlier.
Chariots of the Gods was even mentioned in John Carpenter's sci fi horror film The Thing in the 80s.
I'm really disappointed with Joe after your episode. He doubled down on professing his belief in the Hancock theory in later episodes. I wish he'd have you on by yourself to talk real science and real archaeology. He's had other scientists on, but when it comes to archaeology, despite all the facts & fantastic work you did passionately advocating for real archaeology, Joe just "wants to believe," like Mulder in the X-Files, in the mysterious. It scratches that itch. 😂
Joe seems like a good guy but he is easily swayed by whichever "academic" he is interviewing at any particular moment. Graham Hancock is on his show all the time so that is who he believes.
@@howard385 Joe seems like a good guy who is easily swayed by 100's of millions of dollars... he's a grifter.
Rogan is tool, in short all he cares about is money that he makes from his channell.
Joe talk real science. Lol!
@@howard385 joe is like a 13th century Mongolian war lord who brings in "wise men" from affar to explain the universe.
Follow the money. Handcock makes a living from selling books that fund his tourist adventures. The more controversial and fantastical claims he has, the potential for higher book sales. He would have vanished into obscurity if it weren't for his 10 appearances on JRE. Keep your chin up Flint and ignore the hate. You did awesome work on the podcast.
"Follow the money". Careful now, that's sounds like conspiracy theory talk!
@@bucklberryreturnsconspiracies drive history. Kind of a mistake to equate all conspiracies with automatic falsehoods. I don’t even think conspiracy theorist is the right name for these people, I’ve seen them called alt history sellers, and I think that fits better.
@@Eye_of_Horus I wasn't equating Hancock and his like with conspiracy theorists exactly, simply highlighting that the phrase "follow the money" is key to many whacko ideas pushing global domination by shady organisations, peddled by conspiracy theorists.
The idea in those circles that "So many times we've been proved right!" is akin to a stopped clock. It's much, much more often you're correct calling it bollocks than not. As such, I mostly default wild claims to falsehood, and accept willingly when I am incorrect.
As for correct naming schemes, I'll stick to conspiracy theorists when it fits (which it can when saying "academics are hiding....etc"). Alt history sellers I also dislike for this particular field, as there isn't an alternative history. There's fact and fiction. Historical fantasy would be much more fitting.
@@Eye_of_Horus Replied. Disappeared. Ugh.
I was speaking specifically about that term, not the broader context. It is a common phrase used by such folk, much like "do your own research".
I wouldn't call them alternative either tbh, there's correct and incorrect. Alternative facts is new age spin. Maybe historical fantasy would be better? Merlin, Atlantis etc. Fantasy until any evidence is provided besides stories.
As for "conspiracies drive history", what does that even mean? I never mentioned anything about automatic falsehoods.
@@bucklberryreturns yeah sorry I just assume when people use those terms these days as sort of an insult it implies that conspiracies never happen. We know from history that conspiracies are a constant. On the micro and the macro scale. That’s what I meant from the drive history. Usually it’s not so clear when your in the time period, but years later historians piece things together.
I agree they are not alternative, there’s literally no truth to their ideas. Though people know what you mean when you say it. Be great if there was a better description. I forget his name but the guy from world of antiquity has started calling them alt history sellers or peddlers. I thought that’s kind of clever, because they are selling you the lie. It’s their job.
Awesome job, Flint. It’s terrible dealing with coordinated attacks from online hordes. You always come with all the receipts, citations, and spend a ton of time embedding it right into your videos!! Keep this up brother - you are making a serious impact.
@@ElevatedThoughtsPod thanks!
Here from Milo Rossi's community post about you and the debate. 👋🏼
Welcome!
@@FlintDibbleparakalo, glad to be here
"Ice-core specialist told me something else on zoom" is the new "I have a girlfriend but she goes to another school"
I have to say that you are being far more polite than I could ever be in your shoes. My responses would be chock full with every swear word in existence.
@@Stelios1fan hell yea
@@Stelios1fan mine probably would have ended in me saying I'd see Dan in court.
Cursing is more flexible than swear words..." may your dog bone turn to lime green jello !"
Even if you were a celebrity this thing about finding ways to insult you for sharing knowledge would still be unreasonable harassment.
@@elizabethstuart8401 100%
I find Dan's approach so frustrating. Because he really does throw out petty insults and rage bate. It reminds me of when I was a child and my brother would tease and pick on me until I snapped. At which point I would be told off for retaliating. In the same way as a brother, he knows what will make you snap, what will frustrate you and uses that to their advantage.
I subscribed to Dan's channel early on, and watched many of his videos, at a time when he was less opinionated, however as of late I have been unable to watch his content due to the pure toxicity that emanates from them. He pretends to be balanced, and based in pure logic. But he is immensely biased.
Dan is delusional and unhinged. He knows he's a closet Hancock apologist but he's desperately trying to play the role of honest supporter of science.
@@samuelalvarez_art what's funny is that Dan would never be relevant if Milo didn't acknowledge him
@@righthomosphere7962 yeah it sucks, he has now been climbing the ivory tower of the pseudoscience world, and he managed to reach the top. It's just crazy to me that these people don't see how horribly toxic he is. The disgust and spite he gives off is insane.
Like most things like this, it's usually not responding that is the best approach, because you risk empowering them like you say. But man, sometimes they just suck, and someone needs to say something, regardless of the consequences.
Here from Miniminuteman. Keep up the good work. You’ve got a new follow
I watched the debate on the podcast and I couldn’t get through all of it honestly lmao. It made me so frustrated listening to you constantly cite sources and refute points and Graham basically saying “nuh-uh.” Glad to hear that you really made an impact on even Graham himself. Really an incredible achievement.
It was definitely a very high risk move you did and I’m glad that it’s paid off!
Also sorry to hear that you’re getting so much backlash. That said, I’m sure that’s something you were fully aware of being inevitable. Regardless, I think it just further shows how effectively you communicated the facts. They have no rebuttals other than personal attacks.
Dibble has absolutely shat on Hancock and that other weirdo 😂
@@zr1f903 hell yea
If you watch Graham's recent response to the debate you'll find that the opposite is the case :)
@@Vigula and his recent response is?
@@Mikri90 repeating things other grifters came up with for him
@@Mikri90 available on you tube.
It's insane what you've had to deal with simply for sharing your expertise with people who say they want the truth. As an ex Hancock fan, I just want to say thank you for keeping on putting real archaeology out there for us in an understanable way!
@@UnassimilatedRG thanks RG!
Don't waste too much energy interacting with this dude. Your work is far more important than him.
I hope Graham Hancock is going to do the right thing.
This DeDunking Dan Richards guy drives me googledybunkers
Hihi .. ( is' googlydybonkers ' good or bad ? )
@@Thom4ES I’m not so sure myself, nor is most of Milo Rossi’s viewers, or even Filip Zeiba himself
I’m here from Miniminuteman’s community post. Glad to see others pushing against pseudo archaeology and misinformation like milo does. Misinformation is quite literally a top 10 biggest issue in today’s society
It’s a shame that it comes to this but, I guess that’s the world we live in. Excellent response!
Thanks!
You smoked Hancock so hard that you put the anti-academy industry in retreat
100%
like a sausage
I don’t think so…
If you still have a functional brain…
Both side have holes on their side of the story…
I would be more happy if 2 real scientists sitting together to discuss this…
@@zalaiparasztDibble literally has a PHD in archeological sciences. It's just that every other qualified scientist doesn't hold the same views as Hancock. You will never have 2 different "Scientists" debate this. Just a scientist and a conspiracy theorist or if you prefer Hancock's term "Pseudo archeologist"
@@zalaiparasztconspiracy brain rot is strong with this one. Claims both sides have holes, but couldn’t tell you what any of the holes are in modern archaeology. This poster repeats things they hear random conspiracy theorists say in UA-cam videos and memes and believes them without questioning.
John Hoopes is an absolute sweetheart. He was super helpful when I was doing an assignment on psuedo-archeology and myths.
No wonder that guy hates him so much 😂
Good for John!!
He has been very rude to Native people on social media and at a speech he gave at he Museum of the American Indian which is available on UA-cam. I and several other Native people were policed by him where if we disagreed, he immediately blocked us. It's ridiculous to study Indigenous people in North, Central and South America and then pull the Eurocentric superior brain b.s.
He's great on Facebook too, had a few back and forth comments with him on that FB group he runs.
“I was conned into thinking realistically by actual evidence! It’s not fair!”
Man I hate it when that happens.
In all seriousness amazing job. It’s one thing to argue with someone and another entirely to actually change their position, even if it’s just a little. Huge respect to you for doing that with someone as influential as Graham Hancock and spreading some real science.
Me too. I try very hard to ignore so called 'evidence' that contradicts what I believe.
Normally academics aren’t great at handling ‘debates’ with crackpots. You did well, sir! Didn’t get riled, stuck to the facts, didn’t get baited into personal attacks (which would play to his ‘I’m oppressed’ complex). Well done sir
I am so sorry to hear about the harassment you have endured. Thank you for your honesty and transparency about your post-Joe Rogan experience.
@@smitinathan thanks Smiti!
I wonder if Graham will ever see this. He probably has a young assistant like Holly Lasko Skinner handling his social media accounts.
I LOVE FLINT DIBBLE. I WOULD STILL BELIEVE GRAHAMS BULLCRAP IF IT WASN'T FOR YOU!
hah thanks Sam!
@FlintDibble No, thank you seriously. I was fully down the rabbit hole, and you convinced me without being arrogant or rude or dismissive like Graham. I hope for nothing but great things in the future for you. Thank you!
@@Sambraz316 Welcome to "the light" Sam...I've been confronting these "numb-nuts" for decades now. it has been gratifying to witness figures such as Dr. Dibble now engaging with numerous ultracrepidarians in a timely manner. The internet has facilitated this interaction, although it has also regrettably allowed their deceptive practices to proliferate rapidly, making it difficult for many to address the issue effectively.
@danb239 I think the Sahara desert debate from Graham started my doubt. Putting the burden of proof onto the Archeologists for some reason. Then, Graham flat out, admitting there was no physical evidence. Then, when Flint pointed out the amount of sunken ships that had been found and how well they stay preserved and not a single ship provided a speck of evidence to Grahams theory of his "advance civilization" who traversed globally. That planted a lot of little seeds of doubt, and that's when I started looking into it further.
I’m so glad you found your way out, and thanks for sharing your story, I hope it gives others the courage to change their views.
I laughed so hard out loud when you revealed what the dog bone was. That HAS to be a deliberate choice on his part lmao
Here because of Miniminuteman. I'm very proud of you for standing up for actual archeology and prouder that you are standing up for yourself in such a professional manner. You just got another subscriber to add to your base :)
Thank you for your work, your patience and your resilience. I think we need more and more good archaeologists talking about real archaeology on the internet. So keep up the good work!🥳🤩💪🏻
@Archeomilla thanks you rock too!
keep up the good fight against pseudoscience and disinformation!
I plan to!
@@FlintDibble Oh, and if, hypothetically, you were let go from your job b/c of it, that's "actual harm" in many jurisdictions! 👍
Thanks Dr. Dibble, keep fighting the good fight!
@@Pompeius_Strabo I will!
im here from miniminuteman's shoutout - love the work and education im seeing here 💙
So Graham assumes every hunter gatherer was just so stupid they couldn't do anything with out someone from some advanced lost society to help them? I don't understand the bases for why Graham is making this hypothesis.
A lot of racism. Thats the basis.
Or at minimum a deep, deep ignorance for his sources and where they come from, falling into believing the same stereotypes our ancestors were taught to put people different than us down so we would seem more noble for our heinous actions in the past.
Anti-intellectualism sells lots of books. Don't forget that before every single point Hancock has to first tell you why scientists are incompetent and corrupt. That's because his audience loves hearing that. And Rogan helps sell it.
@@cccc8141 it isn’t racism, Graham in his personal life is as far from a racist as you probably can get. It’s just money.
@@Eye_of_Horusracism can be baked into our biases, even as we try to be as anti-racist as possible.
@@nerveagent1905 yeah I don’t subscribe to all that new age nonsense on race. But I suppose if you do then absolutely everyone is a racist.
I watched the podcast and a few videos and must say, you’ve represented yourself and your colleagues very well! Your knowledge was palpable in the conversations and your evidence was present. I hope you and Graham can come together again for a *cooler* conversation!
If I had the opportunity to go to college it would have been for the study of archeology. It is the most fascinating and vital profession in the pursuit of who we are, by knowing what and where we've been. Since, I first heard you speak re the story of Atlantis, I cheered "Finally!" As it was what my instinct had always known, I became a fan. While ideas, are fascinating, if they are beyond reality, though they take us away from worry at best, you have only the makings of a Hollywood movie. Only science and truth, when confirmed, become the most inspiring and miraculous of all ~ because it's REAL! Thank you!
@@WickedFelina thanks felina!
Flint, I told you I would watch footage of Dan because you are a friend who I care about. But I want you to know I am sacrificing. I am in pain.
@@ArchaeologyTube I'm sorry for your loss
Dan's interactions in the comments with @potholer54 were painful and revealing. I think Peter knows that replying to Dan is a waste of time.
@@NinjaMonkeyPrimeexactly, any valid critique of Dedumbking’s nonsense is met with thin-skinned ad hominem attacks and further doubling down on nonsense.
Hi Flint. I'm brand-new to your channel and heard about you from Miniminuteman. I'm leaving a like, a comment, and will listen to this probably a handful of times as i inevitably fall asleep to this. Thank you for debunking pseudoscience. Youre a beacon in this misinformation swamp
came here after miniminuteman's bridges ep, saw the beginning of this vid, went back and found the debate and watched the whole thing (you did great! the only fumble i clocked was handling his accusing you of calling him racist/white supremacist but that's just my opinion).
gonna go watch your bridges ep next and go thru your vids after. glad to find your content!
I live in Wichita. About an hour from me there is a huge excavation dig that's been happening. They have found the 2nd largest native American "city". Keep up the good work, Flint! I had a hectic childhood, combined with bad choices in my 20s I never pursued my dreams. I am 33 now. I'm thinking about going back to school to pursue archeology even though I'm getting older. I wanna be a part of the dig I mentioned
I come from Milo Rossi. I heard about the debate and am yet to watch it, but do plan to. I lost most of my good faith when it came to Graham when he endorsed a poorly written article on Milo by Holly Skinner with manipulative language that insinuated Milo was a pseudoarcheologist and a liar simply because Milo decided to debunk all 8 of his episodes in 4 parts, using his mistakes in the Baghdad battery video as “evidence” when he made mistakes almost everyone would have when it came to their discovery.
I believe this is the exact same thing, except the difference is that you met face to face. Graham is a public figure who has charm and is used to many eyes on him, and I think he expected for you to crack under the pressure since your presence on the internet is smaller. Instead, you brought good evidence, facts, statistics, and dwarfed him while on his home turf. He got upset, and like any pseudoscientist, he refused to back down and resorted to personal attacks and twisting words.
This is why people who are interested in archeology aren’t really listened to. It’s because people like DeDunking and Graham Hancock are actively making it harder for people who don’t have a degree in archeology to actually get interested or look into the archeological community. They spit vitriolic venom at those who disagree and then claim no one listens to them.
Congrats on the win in the debate, by the way! Changing people’s views when it comes to pseudoscience is really difficult, and you did it, so there’s at least one win here.
_"This is why people who are interested in archeology aren’t really listened to. It’s because people like DeDunking and Graham Hancock are actively making it harder for people who don’t have a degree in archeology to actually get interested or look into the archeological community"_ I think it's more about people wanting to hear anti-intellectual stories. The topic isn't really important, just be sure to sell a narrative that "science/experts are dumb and you are smart" and people will watch or buy books. And Rogan promotes it.
It was a Mortal Kombat fatality and brutality level drubbing. It was like the Hindenburg collapse commentator, “oh the humanity….”. You owned him.
lol.
Thank you for that sir.
@@karsu hell yea!
I want Flint Dibble back on Rogan. Thanks Dibble for producing content immediately after and sticking with it, please continue to provide content your camera and mic quality etc. has improved ten fold already and you are great at this. Look forward to more youtube uploads.
What i find especially frustrating about people like Graham is that the scale of their claims always seems to match the level that his audience will accept. When he's talking to someone who knows archaeology, his claims are scaled way back until they've almost become meaningless. When discussing stuff with Flint for instance, Graham claims almost nothing except "look at these weird perpendicular rocks" and "did you personally dig up the entire planetary crust of the earth? no? then how can you know for sure". When he's talking to just Rogan -- a man whose previous career was professionally getting punched in the head -- he has the ancient Egyptians using sonic levitation and shit. It's wild.
Time to “DIG IN” for this one!
I don't think you truly grasp where Dan is coming from. He's a cultist of sorts,
who has a narcissistic/psychopathic type of personality he displays to those
who can see him. He's an attention seeker plain and simple and uses social
media to get the attention he want to satisfy his need to be in the spotlight.
I think what he does is an act and he is playing on the feelings of a particular
demographic that doesn't trust academia and its official narrative.
He probably doesn't believe half the stuff he says but he says it anyway for
attention and money. He's also acting like a cult leader more so than someone
who questions a particular narrative. I would just look at him and his followers
as the local neighborhood riff raff, drunk on Kool Aid and feel a sense of pity for
them.
At the end of the day, Dan is a contrarian with an extremely strong antiestablishment bias. I think he genuinely thinks that any idea that contradicts “the mainstream” is valid and worth exploring. And if he thinks he has a case against “the mainstream”, he’ll relentlessly pursue it.
I'm no genius, but it seems to me like no one in the whole world would be more motivated to find an ancient lost civilisation than actual archeologists.
The idea that you're all just arrogantly and stubbornly dismissing supposedly compelling evidence is silly.
What makes people like Dan and Hancock even more delusional is how they use actual discoveries as evidence for dogmatic thinking. Dan loves to reference the Clovis First information as proof that archaeologists don't want to find something new because he feels as if it took too long to get everyone to accept the evidence. He flat out refuses to admit that initial evidence was terrible and advancement in technology helped eventually make a case with solid evidence. Instead of just admitting that it took a long time to find solid evidence, he thinks it's just a grand conspiracy from corrupt archaeologists.
Flint Dibble saved me from believing in ancient archaeology, and that will pay dividends down the road when other seductive conspiracy theories cross my path.
Thank you for finally being the person that could rebut Graham’s only real argument: “but have you been there and seen the monuments for yourself?”
“No Graham, but my colleagues have and all disagree with you.”
The guy makes it seem like science can only be conducted with the naked eye.
I cannot comprehend the idea that people don't like people spitting facts on their face. You go Flint, we stand against stupidity and falasy.
It would be interesting to hear your response on Graham’s recent response.
I have been following this social media debate for a while. I am coming to the conclusion that archaeology debates between archaeologists afraid of losint their jobs wild men on social media are a waste of time.
I dont think Graham Hancock is racist. However he does use a lot of concpercy theories and thought processes that have a deep history within racism and white supremacy and would hope that he would feel deeply distraught if he saw just how much his statements play into this.
You did a fine job, talking to Hancock and Rogan.😀 Anyways... This Dan guy seems to be very toxic and fundamentally dishonest.
Hot damn!
Well done Flint!
We have your back. You’re doing great.
@@EtruskenRaider raid at dawn!
Many moons ago I “oohed and ahed” at Hancock’s whimsical theories. I’ve always been a history enthusiast so I was immediately struck by his claims. I’m SO glad I found people like you, Milo, Stefan Milo, Antiquity, prof Dave ❤❤
💯
These guys are fighting the good fight.
@@inforuimteschip5970 I would say that I have watched a few of dedunking's videos and he really doesn't. Flint is an actual field archaeologist who has authored many peer-reviewed articles. He is in the academic literature. Dedunking is someone with no expertise in the field of archaeology who calls academics like Flint disingenuous.
Hey, I'm one of those people who believes in conspiracy theories. Not all of course, because I always enter with skepticism, but I really believe that there are a lot of conspiracies, especially political ones. Having said that, you destroyed Graham and it was really nice to listen to an educated man who knows what and how unlike our politicians.
Y’know people dunk on climate related sciences and evolutionary biology for reasons like pro-fossil fuel politics and intelligent design religions. But never did I think archeology and ancient history would be hotly debated on the internet and it’s all because one person with a huge ego wants there to be an ice age civilization that went down like Atlantis.
Thank you for this!
I watched your entire discussion with Hancock, and I think you completely embarrassed him. He was insecure, hostile, and very childish. And of course, he failed to present any concrete proof for his ideas. You, on the other hand, did a really great job at explaining the facts in a professional, yet interesting way. Pretty much every fact you chose to present was a major blow to Hancock's hypothesis. Great stuff!
Simply thank you Dr. Dibble...Keep it up!!!!
@@JayCWhiteCloud thanks Jay
This is more accurate
Conspiracy theorist/terminally online public: why don't experts ever engage with us?
Experts: RUIN HIM!
Terminally online Public: why are you guys doing this you guys look silly and now look bad faith
Expert: engages with conversation
Conspiracy theorists: Ruin him!
terminally online Public: slightly pushback on ideas
Expert: They want to cancel me😢this is why we don't engage with fake/pseudo science!!!!
Me: but this is how we move forward in life...
But it's not pushback, it's vile abuse on these people's Twitter, Facebook, etc. Some of these people come off as genuine psychos.
@@GordonCaledonia the vile abuse is from assholes.. the Internet has existed for a while now. Everyone knows there is a subsect of humanity that sucks. Get over that he didn't lose his job and in fact all this is giving him a lot more backing and support..
@@Frankd24875 It's more than a subsect on the Joe Rogan comments section, man, it's pretty scary that a humble archaeological scientist is getting bullied as if he is up there with Anthony Fauci. Joe Rogan needs to address that shit before it gets worse, don't you agree?
@@GordonCaledonia I get that the subsect is huge but the Internet is huge. I don't think Rogan needs to do anything other than keep giving him the option to respond. Joe Rogan saying anything regarding the trolls and assholes won't do a single thing to stop them because they are vile creatures. The world is filled with them I'm sorry. I concede that if Joe had knowledge of people trying to fire him then he should state that is wrong but that's it. The alternative is saying nothing even though his words are not bullying. If they can't have a conversation online then they should do it privately but both parties chose to go online.
Mr Dibble, I know you don't like responding to these fools. But how you did it was really entertaining. You should consider doing a series of debunking videos.
Hah thanks! My focus is on sharing real archaeology. That said, I will mix in similar debunking videos for sure
I wasn’t a fan of GH anymore when the debate happened. But you sir made me really open my eyes to his (and the fans) gross tactics. Plus!!! You started me on a journey - to get back into ancient history that was a passion of mine as a kid / teen. So thank you, enjoy your beer and f.them haters! ❤
Came here from Milo Rossi! Sorry about everything that happened.
One thing is clear, our ancestors were way less childish than we are.
"I don't want to debate minor figures." So he just wants to talk to people who will boost his profile? The actual qualifications of his opponents aren't of interest, just their celebrity status. This is the sign of a grifter. He knows he's lying, he doesn't care.
Props to you, Flint. You are a class act.
@@jessemiller7540 class is in session
I’m a convert. Can’t believe you didn’t more subs after that debate. Graham can be interesting to listen to…as fantasy.
Thanks
Thanks 👍
I don't mean to generalize, but Joe Rogan's audience is more accustomed to seeing cranks pass themselves off as legitimate. So when they see an actual legitimate professional, they have to confront having been fooled by charlatans, which is not always easy. Only a minority of people can critically examine themselves that way; the majority dig in their heels further.
"You would fail my classes if you took them" BAM 👊
I'm going to share the best fortune cookie saying I've ever received:
"Do not listen to vain words from empty tongues." QED.
Looks like Dan landed his dream job of being on the Hancock payroll. He's not got an interview with Hancock titled "Something is Rotten in the State of Archaeology". Remember when Dan claimed to only care about the truth and science and claimed he didn't agree with Hancock?
Mr Flint its with great pleasure that i announce i didn't know your work before the joe rogan debate that was suggested on the side bar of this platform.
Both Graham and this person Dan was suggested to me addressing you, so rejoice because their larping is giving you a way for people who really seek truthful work to find your channel and work.
Congratulations for the professional stance you had in facing these "intelectuals".
May i ask you if you could point me some names in the archeology field in the topic of propagation of Greek agriculture in the Western Mediterranean sea?
God Bless you my friend, keep up the amazing work, the world needs more people like you.
Thank you so much.
I find it hilarious that a guy is trying to discredit you because of 2 clear jokes when he wrote a whole book about how martians built pyramids on the moon
Thank you Flint for being such a good Science Communicator your work matters a lot
Thanks Carera!
Your civility is unmatched. I personally think that Hancock and Dan could use a punch in the face, but then they'd claim that they're being silenced by mainstream archeology. Some people like them just don't have a moral compass.
MiniMinuteMan sent me, gotta say from the few brief clips I’ve seen you an absolutely killed it in that debate! Keep up the good work, Mr. Dibble!
I'm glad you're confronting these folks directly. I do have to say, there is a point at which engagement with bad faith actors becomes both pointless and counterproductive. I understand that who care about science strain to not to go into ad hominem attacks, but when there are so many times someone acts like a jerk in these arguments *the problem is clearly that they are a jerk* and not their "arguments" that are moving targets by design.
This is the new peer review for social media, well done
the world needs more minor figures like you
@@RPodoba 💯
i think when people get ‘owned’ on Rogans podcast it should be ‘ you got Flint Dibbled’
…you’re a champion Flint cant wait for the Netflix special
Found you from your conversation on Bridges podcast. Thanks for your work and skill in debunking Graham!
To me "alternate historian" sounds like a euphemism for "Holocaust denier."