Politics · Society

Netflix’s Ancient Apocalypse and Dogmatism in Science

The other day I binged on Ancient Apocalypse, a recently released eight-part documentary series on the work of the fringe archeologist Graham Hancock. His main hypothesis is that an advanced human civilization existed well before 5,000 years ago, which flies in the face of mainstream “science” and its stance that the birth of human civilization happened at around 3,000 years BC, in Mesopotamia. Some of the evidence he presents is probably known even to the casual reader. His claim that there may have been survivors of a superior ancient civilization, the Atlanteans, that brought knowledge to other civilizations, helping them to advance tremendously may seem far-fetched. It is a possible explanation, however, and it may have a kernel of truth to it because there is strong evidence that enormous floods happened not just in the Bible but in reality as well.

If you have four hours to spare, I can only encourage you to watch the aforementioned documentary. Even if you want to dismiss Hancock’s claims outright, you will probably find it interesting that mainstream archaeology is about as open-minded as radical leftist politicians. They want to have none of their dogmas challenged, and evidently man-made structures that corroborate Hancock’s claims are simply dismissed as having been the result of random natural events, even if this is completely implausible. Some of those claims arenothing but laughable.

This leads to the question why the mainstream acts the way it does. I think the issue is that society has become completely politicized. People no longer care about truth but only about power, believing that as long as they have power, they can determine what is true and what is false, which obviously implies that they are lying because otherwise they would not need to resort to abuses of power. Thus, anyone challenging the mainstream needs to be fought. In the case of Hancock, one aspect is probably that his hypotheses could be used to question the climate change dogma. There are other scientists who do that too, but they also get fought just as well.

There is probably no easy way out at this point. Universities will simply become less and less relevant as time goes on. Genuine human progress is only possible if we are able to discuss ideas openly, instead of dismissing them because our rulers dislike them. This is most obvious when patently false ideas are being promoted. Right now, for instance, the Northern hemisphere is going through one of the harshest winters in recent history. Does this lead to any concession of the mainstream that their climate change bullshit is perhaps not entirely true? Of course not. To them, admitting that they have been lying is an admission of defeat and this is the least desirable outcome for them.

6 thoughts on “Netflix’s Ancient Apocalypse and Dogmatism in Science

    1. It is on Netflix, of course. Allegedly, there are sites from where you can stream this series free of charge, which are blocked in Google but can be easily found via Yandex. I know absolutely nothing about that, though.

    2. Oh yeah, it’s uh… It’s right there in the title of your post. Sorry, shouldn’t have gotten up so early this morning, I guess. 😀

  1. I’ve seen episodes so far. I’m not very impressed. Sure, he examines a lot of finds that are not getting enough attention; but he slants everything to support his theories and relies on an old dubious school of thought that independent invention is impossible.

    He even states that ancient monumental stone buildings and structures, in different parts of the world, that align to the rising and setting of the sun and moon must be caused by Atlantean mentors because why would different peoples do that? I don’t know; maybe because it’s an obvious thing to do perhaps?

    1. I am not sure I buy everything Hancock says, but I surely do not agree with mainstream views on science and human progress either. The standard view is that there is a clear line of technological progress which is obviously false. The height Roman engineering was at a level we cannot reproduce and I also do not think that we, as a society, would be able to build a cathedral that rivals our civilization’s work in the supposedly dark ages. There are also highly impressive artifacts such as the Antikythera Mechanism, i.e. the world’s first analogue computer. Clearly, just a cursory look at history shows that human progress is at best chaotic. As a society, we move backwards in fact.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.