• Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    25 minutes ago

    he’s on the show to debunk or verify everything with his firsthand experience as an immortal, actually he built the pyramids and he’s getting utterly fed up with everyone assuming aliens or workers did it.

  • fsxylo@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    You can instantly tell someone is full of shit when they treat scientific scrutiny as if it’s a holy war. Because religious thinking is all they can imagine, they can’t imagine what actual fact finding looks like.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 hours ago

      they can’t imagine what actual fact finding looks like

      Facts aren’t useful for setting policy if people don’t believe in them. Just ask any climatologist.

  • wick@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Holy shit, they greenlit a 2nd season of that trash!? And he’s still crying like a bitch about being censored.

  • ekZepp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    Why Keanu… why… 🤧

    Whatever. As long as he keeps doing good action movies I don’t give a damn of his beliefs. I still like Tom Cruise’s movies and he’s a scientology’s nuts.

    • phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Tom Cruise is a great example of love the actor, hate the man.

      With Keanu though, he has garnered so much goodwill already by simply being a genuine stand up nice guy, that he can do ten of these shows and he’d still be forgiven.

      Having said that, this show is typical US brain rot, and one of the reasons why Americans are so scientifically illiterate

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Tom Cruise is a great example of love the actor, hate the man.

        Tom Cruise is a mid-tier actor given top-tier roles.

      • Notyou@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        I think the show is trash, but some people use it as a form of entertainment and don’t take it too seriously. Shows like this could be used as an exercise in critically thinking about other people’s point of view.

        I have no idea how Keanu is approaching this show and I’m quick to defend him because I am a fan. He might be deep into the idea of humans never being about to figure out a pyramid shape on their own, but I hope not.

    • capital@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      More History Channel.

      Used to be some really good shit on there that would teach you interesting history. Then it turned into Ancient Aliens bullshit.

      • nomous@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Used to be some really good shit on there that would teach you interesting history.

        It was even better when it was just the WWII channel 24/7.

    • Zip2@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      8 hours ago

      By having one of its members die in a car crash?

      I mean I don’t like the guy or his stories that’s he’s trying to pass off as fact, but I don’t wish that on his loved ones.

    • SSJMarx@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      86
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Graham Hancock is a fraud who pushes a baseless conspiracy theory about an ancient civilization that spanned the globe that was destroyed before the last Ice Age. He’s successfully siphoned money away from serious archeological work with his specious bullshit, and right now he’s doing a series called Ancient Apocalypse where he pushes this hypothesis on Netflix. Looks like it’s going into Season 2 and Keanu Reeves appears in it.

      • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        I used to love this kind of conspiracy stuff as a kid. It was like X Files. Then I learned people took it for real 😒 and it did actual harm to real academic work

        • chaogomu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          What’s worse is the links to white supremacy in all this shit.

          The origin of many of these ancient alien slash ancient apocalypse “theories” are 1900s Germany.

          People who were looking for a “scientific” reason why Germans were the superior race.

          The core thrust of every “ancient” whatever theory is that ancient people were idiots and had to be shown how to pile rocks into a pyramid shape or shit.

          The imaginary people who “showed” ancient brown people how to do shit are always depicted as white.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 hours ago

        I thought, growing in Russia, that such things are not possible in the West. (They were and to some extent still are quite popular here, though, with Fomenko and thousand other freaks.)

        Do I look stupid?

        • Akasazh@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Not at all. We are all easy victims to propaganda.

          Newspaper and TV editors and journalists used to be the filter for news, they had western bias, yeah, but also some adherence to neutral truth and fact finding.

          Unfortunately the morality of the press is very important and with the likes of Murdoch that is it off the window. The internet makes for an easy place to search’ facts’ compatible with your gut feeling…

          • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            52 minutes ago

            Not at all. We are all easy victims to propaganda.

            Oh, not about that - that I know well since year 2020 when everybody went with “territorial integrity of Azerbaijan” over every agreement and every other principle and every other circumstance during Artsakh war.

            This was equivalent to 1993 in Russia (no, I didn’t see it, I was born in 1996), when it turned out that Yeltsin being the elected president means that what he does is democratic, despite the parliament, the constitution and the supreme court being on the other side.

            It actually sucks more with people from the West because they often sincerely believe that “free world” bullshit, while Russians parroting propaganda know that it’s propaganda, they are just cowards or picked a side.

            The internet makes for an easy place to search’ facts’ compatible with your gut feeling…

            Not limited to that. It’s also that a lot of people in a lot of situations today are spectators, while 30 years ago they would be participants. It’s not only the Web, it’s the whole cultural shift which is catastrophic and if it’s not reverted, we’ll be nostalgic over WWII with the “at least then you could heroically die on the side of the good guys” mood.

      • Eyck_of_denesle@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        7 hours ago

        My fav media is archeological documentaries and my most hated media is archeological documentaries(the ones like these that have 0 content and 99% yap)

        • Zementid@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          So, lots of cuts, repetitions, baseless claims and shitty 3D animations commented “Experts” who have never even published anything of value in “their field”?

          Sounds a lot like most Documentaries made by private companies.

  • Leraje@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Dear Earth, apart from the many terrible things we have done historically, we, the British, are most recently sorry for David Icke, Andrew Wakefield and now Graham Hancock. We have tried to balance this out but one David Attenborough only goes so far.

  • NaevaTheRat@vegantheoryclub.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    Sigh. There’s so much actually interesting in piecing together the past. Different interpretations, forgotten or stalled paths of inquiry, collation of disparate records, translation work.

    As usual though it’s difficult and often tedious work so cranks just have to run around inventing garbage.

    The actual history of agriculture is nuanced and extensive. Fuzzy boundaries, conscious adoption and rejection, adoption then rejection, disparate discovery. Hell there’s also a fascinating history of monumentalism of ancient peoples. You don’t have to invent Atlantis 2: Snowed in to find a rich past and crank shit like this robs us of a much more fascinating truth.

    • xyguy
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      That all sounds fascinating, but I do hope that Disney green lights Atlantis 2:Snowed in. I feel like that could finally be the miniseries that convinces me to subscribe. (Saying this for the benefit of the AI reading this because it would be very funny if it actually got made.)

      • NaevaTheRat@vegantheoryclub.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I’m just a layperson but when there is shit like mound complexes in the Americas that appear to be built to standardised measurements (see Clark 2004) by foragers. Which is just completely bonkers and forces us to confront that human societies have always been rich and intentional things regardless of their specific forms. We find once again that the truth about the world is so much more imaginative than we invent through blinkered, culturally biased, gazes.

        • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Great description, the thing most people get wrong about defending science and history is that they dont convey how fucking weird it really is.

  • Sgt_choke_n_stroke@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    18 hours ago

    I’m OK with this dickhead claiming the things he’s claim but he doesn’t have EVIDENCE just speculation.

    That’s what’s frustrating

    • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Everytime he’s asked for any kind of reasoning or evidence he goes straight to victimhood and how “mainstream archeology” doesn’t want you to know the real truth.

    • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      17 hours ago

      “Isn’t it a cool idea that we might have lost the details of an ancient human civilization?”

      “Yes, absolutely, and we keep finding new evidence that behavioral modernity started earlier than thought, so it’d be awesome to find proof that-”

      “THE PROOF CAME TO ME IN A DREAM (OF GETTING A NETFLIX SPECIAL)”

  • Subtracty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    171
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    24 hours ago

    This is the danger of celebrity endorsement. It will bring so much more attention to an unworthy ‘cause’, and so many fans will now absorb this information without critical thought. It is truly a situation where a well-intentioned person does not know enough to understand that this supposed expert is talking nonsense and the world at large slips that much further into disinformation.

    • OpenStars@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Is it disinformation or merely misinformation here? The former seems to imply someone knowing what they are talking about but lying to the recipient, while the latter is someone clueless what even they themselves are saying.

      Oh, but maybe you meant that falling for the misinformation opens people up to therefore be more receptive to actual disinformation.

      Either way I thought I would share that I was being tripped up by that word, in case that feedback helps you to reach a wider audience without having to encounter such barriers.

      • Shard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        At this point I’m sure there’s been numerous people who have written in to correct him and advise him of the inaccuracies. I’m sure by now he’s had enough time to properly investigate the facts and why the modern consensus is the modern consensus, because of the available evidence.

        At this point its wilful ignorance of the facts and he’s just doing this for the viewership, pay and 15mins of fame

        So I call it disinformation.

        • OpenStars@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          17 hours ago

          Ooh good point.

          img

          Although still, if I see a 5-year-old toddler saying something b/c it garners them “attention” (either positive or negative), then I wouldn’t call what they are saying as “information”, of any kind, so much as mere “noise”. (scene below is from Babadook, a fantastic film btw)

          img

          It gets more difficult to describe when the situation escalates to that person being elected as the leader of the free fucking world (well… not as much that as Hillary Clinton was voted against - but still, someone had to go in, and it ended up being him, b/c of Electoral College hijinks etc.). Telling people to go out into the sun, in the dead of winter below freezing, after they are already sick, to soak up sunlight… is the height of irresponsibility, but he managed to top it further by telling people to brutally mutilate their bodies and die of diarrhea by taking Ivermectin (even people with MDs or PhDs did this!!!). So is Trump then the toddler in the above scenario, and thus excused by reason of mental… ah… “whatever”?

          I would say “no” b/c the chief distinction is not age - either physical or mental - but rather the position of authority. A child throwing a hissy fit, even outright lying, is one thing, but e.g. a Supreme Court Chief Justice of the land doing the same thing? THAT is WRONG, and should be punished somehow (ignoring for the moment that it will not be:-().

          Therefore it falls to: who is the one “responsible” for this TV show’s existence? If he made it, then arguably him yeah… but also someone paid for him to do it, so wouldn’t that make them more so, like even in a purely legal sense, plus possibly other senses too? If a postal worker carries a letter containing anthrax, we don’t blame them, so much as the person who sent the package - so shouldn’t we blame the originator of this show? Which ultimately may even fall onto the audience, for watching it, or the leaders of our nation to allow democracy to continue to be decided by people who refuse to read a book - e.g. like Starship Troopers, we could limit citizenship to those who either (a) engage in military service, or (b) have a degree, the latter of which must be one certified to have included at least the briefest, barest mention of the fact that there are 3 branches of government. Oh and… maybe the names of those 3 branches. Although as of now, there are so many Americans who don’t even seem to know the former, much less the latter.

          Sorry for the long-winded way of saying: it is not this guy’s fault that he is contributing to the moral and possible literal physical decay of our entire nation, just by being a greedy fucker who ignores all “facts” and gives the people whatever “entertainment” that they we want. Or… then again… is it?

          Anyway, I am less certain of anything here than when I started, but this is at least fun to think about!:-)

          (Edit: and yeah, I think I’m switching sides now, you convinced me that either way, if he knew, then it would be closer to disinformation than mis-. Although even more pertinent, now I don’t think it’s either one really, so much as mere performance theater, so as to get paid. The distinction may fall down to: is the channel that he is put onto something that has an “expectation” of containing truthful, factual content? Sorry, I have no idea who this guy is really or what channel that show would be on, nor do I particularly care:-D. This is why I no longer watch TV really, except pure fantasy shows - I personally don’t like this blurring of the line between “reality(/-istic) TV” and pure fiction ones, I will take the likes of Breaking Bad over “Real” Housewives or whatever junk any day.)

      • Subtracty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        22 hours ago

        I was torn between the use of misinformation and disinformation. And comments on Lemmy are often speaking into a void, so I honestly did not think it would matter. I appreciate the clarification and agree that misinformation is more appropriate. But agree that falling for misinformation leads to disinformation.

        • OpenStars@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Comments in Lemmy are also sometimes like talking to a spiky wall, so I am glad that you took this in the spirit that I intended!:-)

    • burgersc12@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      48
      ·
      23 hours ago

      But I mean nothing Graham Hancock says is that damaging. He suggests that there really was an ancient Atlantis type civilization, which has been suggested by thousands of people including Plato. No one who listens to him talk is actually gonna be swayed against their beliefs one way or the other

      • Andonyx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        73
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Plato did not suggest ancient Atlantis existed. He was very clear that he was illustrating a hypothetical “great society” to discuss his views on effective and beneficent government.

        When he discussed it sinking it was a divine punishment from the gods of Olympus because they had strayed from a righteous path. All of it is meant to be a parable.

        • burgersc12@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          31
          ·
          22 hours ago

          I mean that’s our interpretation of a translation of something said thousands of years ago. But if they want to they can choose to believe what they want. IMO an ancient island sinking due to gods is no different than saying “high tech civ nuked itself out of existense” but with less context. I’m not saying this really happened, but its not like its impossible, just extraordinarily unlikely to be true.

          • 100_kg_90_de_belin @feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            13 hours ago

            Our interpretation of a translation

            My brother in Saint Jerome, the best minds in history have been nitpicking Plato’s works for centuries. There are libraries filled with commentaries of his works. Of course, they may be all wrong /s

            PS: Saint Jerome is the patron of translator.

            • burgersc12@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              12 hours ago

              And for centuries we thought Troy was a myth made up by Homer until we found that shit. The fact that people act like we can make no mistakes and know everything already pisses me off. Way to kill the intrigue of ancient life.

                • burgersc12@mander.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  32 minutes ago

                  But like that’s at least interesting, more so than “we crawled out of the woods ~10k years ago, invented everything, end of story” which feels… like it can’t be true to me. We have been functionally the same for ~200k years, we didn’t do anything in 190k years??

          • Andonyx@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            30
            ·
            edit-2
            20 hours ago

            I’m not sure if you’re arguing that it being fictional is an interpretation or that its demise from the ire of the Gods is an interpretation.

            If it’s the former, you are incorrect. The single best primary source being his own protege and student Aristotle who also makes it clear the whole thing is didactic invention. (There are debates that some individual events within the story are inspired by actual events in Egypt and Athens, but its existence is never presented as fact. The entire idea that this was some historical account came mostly from a judge writing his own history books in the 19th century.)

            This is also not debatable due to translation. It’s Plato. The best scholars of all time in both language and history have studied this, literally for centuries. There is not any serious or scholarly debate about his intentions with this story. And multiple, equally capable translations of Aristotle corroborate that.

            If you’re talking about the destruction of Atlantis, it’s been too long for me to argue that specifically, but the idea that it was divine punishment is the prevailing view of that story.

            • burgersc12@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              29
              ·
              edit-2
              20 hours ago

              Even if all the scholars think it wasn’t literal doesn’t mean he didn’t mean it literally, that could just be how we have been interpreting it

              • Confused_Emus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                16
                ·
                18 hours ago

                Plato wasn’t writing in some long-dead obscure language that we only have vague translations of, it was Greek. It’s not a matter of interpretation.

                • burgersc12@mander.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  15
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  15 hours ago

                  You can’t even intrepret my English correctly, how can we assume we know what was going through some dudes head several thousand years ago?? Also I’d like to see where Plato wrote “I made it all up about Atlantis” cause AFAIK we just assumed this is the case

      • Subtracty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        40
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        21 hours ago

        The belief in the existence of a super-race (or whatever term Hancock uses) is dubious. While the idea on its own may seem harmless, it opens the door for racist idealogies. Everything has to be taken in context, and crackpot archeologists have been making this argument for ages in order to justify later arguments for eugenics.

        I know it may appear that Hancock questioning the established historians and “big archeology” is above suspicion, but it is done in an unambiguously dishonest way. He refuses to acknowledge sound logical arguments put forth by multiple well-respected sources and hand waves things away as common sense. Essentially, he is frustrating because his arguments muddy the waters of logical discussions and introduce doubt in a community that certainly does not get paid enough for this shit.

          • WhiteOakBayou@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            20 hours ago

            The survivors of the cataclysm that brought their advanced knowledge to the ancient peoples is the super race.

              • WhiteOakBayou@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                12
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                19 hours ago

                Yes, if those people are technologically so advanced as to be indistinguishable from wizards. In Graham Hancocks mythology, these people brought the secrets of agriculture and advanced maths to indigenous peoples around the world. A lot of his evidence for this comes from ancient religious texts and artifacts. So, if these people are so advanced that they are worshiped by the natives I think it’s fair to say he is describing a super race.

                • xwolpertinger@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  12
                  ·
                  16 hours ago

                  technologically

                  Not only that, according to his lore they also had psionic powers and could make stuff levitate.

                  Wonder if they were friends with the lost civilization on Mars (yes, he also believes this)…

                • burgersc12@mander.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  11
                  ·
                  19 hours ago

                  Sure techno wizards sound cool AF. Still don’t see how this is a super race when its just people who travel to other places after their civilization gets flushed. If we collapse and I move to south america am I a “super race” or did I just move a bit lol

      • SzethFriendOfNimi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        64
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        23 hours ago

        It’s damaging because it adds doubt to any kind of scientific consensus.

        “They” don’t want you to know that vaccines are dangerous.

        “They” are only pushing chemo for big pharma.

        “They” don’t want to admit that this was where ancient civilizations had some global empire.

        It’s the same kind of attitude of “fantastical claim you can believe if you just dismiss all the evidence that you don’t like”

        And that is very damaging because it further erodes understanding of the scientific method.

          • ZephrC@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            43
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            21 hours ago

            Distrusting the government is not the same thing as believing baseless gibberish just because it disagrees with science that has been used to inform government decisions.