What is the best response to "experts and academics might be lying or stopping dissenting voices from getting degrees, so all of history and science are fake?"
>>18447693The scientific method is enough to defend against accusations that science is fake but even the most bluepilled of historians will tell you that, at least in part, history is a lie agreed upon and we'll never know exactly for sure how certain events went down outside of the lens of the propaganda surrounding them after the fact.
>>18447693That mainstream academia has at times suppressed investigation on certain niche topics doesn't change the fact that much of the conventional account of our history is objectively documented via archaeological evidence. Is it possible that there were earlier civilizations that existed between the beginning of modern man's presence in the fossil record and the generally accepted start of civilization in the Fertile Crescent? Sure. After all, archeology in the late 19th and early 20th century pushed the start date of civilization back several thousand years earlier than had previously been believed, so it's entirely possible that there are further undiscovered sites that could repeat a similar lengthening of the historical record in the future. But that doesn't mean that Hancock's schizo theory that there was a technologically advanced world-spanning civilization during the Ice Age is at all plausible. At most, we'd be looking at small "stone and mud brick cities" type of civilizations if there are any to discover. There are certain unmistakable signatures of a technological civilization that would be impossible for a few narrow-minded Zahi Hawass types to cover up, like miners stumbling upon previously mined-out coal seams or climatologists finding unexpected layers of soot in Antarctic ice cores.
>>18447795lollmaoRead Fomenko. Everything is a lie. It is proven with math.
>>18447693I don't really know. There's a flaw in American culture right now where so many millions are more than willing to throw away the word of experts and conventional wisdom due to immense skepticism, but at the same time are retardedly gullible and believe anything any old jackass says.It makes you miss the days of The Big Bang Theory where popular culture was humanizing academia and showing that it's just a bunch of eccentric people, not some illuminati bullshit.
>>18447693>history is a lie agreed upon and we'll never know exactly for sure how certain events went down outside of the lens of the propaganda surrounding them after the fact.I mean there is always a degree on uncertainty, but most of the important parts of history is documented well enough to where we can say it happened with just as much certainty as a criminal court convicting someone. That without a reasonable doubt, things happened as we believed they have.
>>18447693it's not that they might be lying, they are lying or are parroting liesthat's the problem
>>18447693dude, woah, aliens
>>18447693People who think aliens created Agartha n shiet always existed. The only difference is that today people seem to be following them in greater numbers than the past. I think that’s far more of an indictment of academia than Atlantis believers, that their credibility has become so eroded that people would rather believe them over professors.
Appeal to logic and make the obvious statement that it is logistically impossible to control every single academic author on Earth, through a thousand years, accross millions of nation states -who even when they are the deadliest of enemies, still agreed to basic premises of material reality and basic record keeping-. The only way a person can reject this is to reject logic itself and to expose he believes in some sort globe spanning conspiracy, where all regimes were actually on the same side and just pretend-fighting, and all for the cause of hiding the arctic wall at the edge of the world from you. At that point the person has proven himself to be a retard and he cannot come out on top of any argument.
>>18448021>globeno, it's flat
>>18447943>makes you miss the days of The Big Bang TheoryGet the fuck outta here with the normie nerd culture. I hate how internet became mainstream to allowed shits like you posting here.
>>18447941I prefer Gunnar theory
>>18447693>What is the best response to "experts and academics might be lying or stopping dissenting voices from getting degrees, so all of history and science are fake?"It is how it is
>>18447693American civs were built by non-whites.
>>18447693>Hey Graham, what about archeogenetics and molecular clocks?
>>18447693Regular reminder that Hancock believes that the Face of Mars was built by ancient Martians to warn the Earth about climate change.
He sounds really convincing on Rogan when you don't know much, but as soon as you "fact-check" most of his claims, it's clear he's just dragging it out. He's been at this for 30+ years and has no evidence, just speculation. In the first episode of his show, he claims that a hill in Indonesia is a 20,000-year-old pyramid. But it turns out the dude who did that study just carbon-dated some random dirt to that age and had written a book a few years earlier claiming Indonesia was Atlantis. It's all so stupid
>history is a lie forced upon you by the winner and we'll never know exactly for sure how certain events went down outside of the lens of the propaganda surrounding them after the fact.all of history is a lie.
>>18447693"That is a non-sequitur." Even if academic institutions were dominated by misguided people, it would not follow that all history and science is fake. And claiming that they are all evil and in cahoots does not hold up to any kind of scrutiny. It may be that the academic establishment makes it hard to challenge the orthodoxy, but the distributed setup and generational change lead to paradigm shifts over time.
>>18447980No, actually, Hancock is "dude whoah Atlanteans". >>18449539This desu. The trick with these people is to actually force them to slow down and fact check them, then force them to connect their ideas logically. Hancock will tell you that the survivors of his ancient lost civilisation were so advanced that they all just happened to be expert engineers and astronomers who could shape societies of grugs, but then turn around and tell you that their society didn't leave any evidence of itself because they chose not to, and if someone presses him on it he'll just free-associate until they stop asking. He'll dump whatever he can on top of an argument to give it the appearance of being well evidenced, but his evidence never holds up or fits with the things he actually argues.
>>18449927>force them to slow down and fact check themBut here is where most "defenders of the current scientific consensus" (or whatever you want to call them) fail in those debates: they cannot concede that the consensus view also has gaps in the data and judgement calls and things that are yet to be fully explained. And just to be perfectly clear, I don't believe that there was a civilization that was far more advanced than any of its contemporaries that got lost.
>>18449949The thing is that an education in actual academic method doesn't really equip you to take on people like Hancock, because they essentially use an updated version of the Gish-gallop designed specifically to overwhelm the academic. Hancock will bury you in collected anecdotes to obscure the fact that his core contentions almost always rely on some kind of strawman. If you say to Graham "This is the earliest known site relating to this culture" what he will choose to claim you have said is "This site reflects the possible point in this culture". It's a fucking ludicrous thing to do, but he does it. He tried to needle Klaus Schmidt with this shit. This bullshit has been going in since Von Danniken, fake history peddling hacks will point to an ancient site and insist that academics honestly believe that site was the first of it's kind. Find me an academic that actually believes Hancock's claim that ancient writing systems simply appeared fully developed. Hancock insists that the fact that göbekli tepe is the earliest discovered site of it's kind that academics believe it must therefore be the earliest site of it's type to have ever existed. He'll provide his readers with dozens of loosely connected ideas to support his attack on academics for claiming shit that academics definitely do not claim. His data doesn't need to line up because he is fighting an argument he made up himself half the time. His argument that the reasonable explanation is atlanteans hinges on misrepresentation and false premises. There could be an even older site under the hill down the road, but because it hasn't been found, Hancock misrepresents the field as believing that no older site could exist. Imagine a million years from now some aliens land om earth and are digging around and the earliest city they find is Manhattan. Grey-am Hancock would argue that humans must have just walked out of caves one day and were somehow given the knowledge to build skyscrapers.
>>18449971>an education in actual academic methodsure, but it has been a problem for decades and it is not getting away that with modern media you people to bridge the gap between the "ivory tower" and the "unwashed masses". You cannot get rid of the Hancocks of the world and you will not convince the masses to ignore his weird books and tv shows because the Faculty of Harvard took a vote and has decreed thus.And that is why you need science communicators to lay out the state of research to a broader audience. Unfortunately many of them seem to have a thin skin or maybe by the time they get on stage they are fed up with all the bullshit that happened before. You don't have to convince Hancock or the people who need to believe in aliens. But you need to engage enough to reach those who have a non-professional interest in the matter.
>>18447693>stopping dissenting voices from getting degreesgetting a degree requires studying what ois currently accepted knowledge. if even before getting a degree you chimp out then it's your fault for being impatient, arrogant, and over all retarded
>>18449494They're contingent on commonly agreed upon chronology. That commonly agreed.upi chronology can change.
>>18447693>>18447701>history is a lie agreed uponWhat does that mean exactly? Henry VIII didn't exist? The Roman Empire was actually in Estonia? I suppose this answer's OP's question.The problem is typical Joe Rogan fanboys won't understand the point I am making. You could spell out the "no true scotsman" fallacy for them, but they will just see it as "words words words" and say "you talk like a fag and your shit's all retarded bro".I think at a certain point you have to accept certain people are locked into their beliefs. You can only really plant seeds and hope one day they realize it was bullshit and grow out of it. You do this by being some kind of charismatic gigaChad who comes up with the most concise explanations with relatable examples tailored to the target audience yet also memorable so it sticks in their mind in a split second.
>>18447943>so many millions are more than willing to throw away the word of experts and conventional wisdom due to immense skepticismShouldn't have gatekept knowledge behind universities and fuck-expensive books.
