Haha... same thought as soon as I saw it. Fortunately not red. They tend to not last the full duration.

Ensign Tiberius Pike

LOL. My first impression also.

also the content, specially for og star trek haha

He better hope he doesn't beam down with Kirk, spock and bones...cause if he does, he ain't coming back

You're so right I can see old BBC docs on UKposts and they are extrordinarie ! Here in LA I stopped watching the boob tube a decade ago it's a waste land of political brainwashing ! Cheers

LoL I gaved mine away. No TV ever again. No radio. Skipping all adds Really choosing what I listen to.

Absolutely, me too.

100% spot on

With one exception.....I do like some sports. Otherwise TV is nearly unwatchable.

You'll find the "uncouth braying" we collectively give out (at least, the worst of us) is a 'design' or the result of malicious designs that disassembled what should have been graceful conversation, but has been reduced to political pop-media madness. This 'design' or set of designs are inclined to all things horrible like greed lust egoism selfishness etc... we don't worship the loved one or even the self, we worship the pleasure and the dollar.

On this topic but implicating indigenous australians, 'Australian Aboriginal and Islander mathematics' (John Harris, 1987) is a great read and is interesting both from a linguistic and anthropological perspective !! should be freely available

Richard Buckminster Fuller, 7/12/1895 - 7/1/1983, an American architect, systems theorist, writer, designer, inventor, philosopher and futurist, developed numerous inventions, mainly architectural designs, and popularized the widely known geodesic dome.

Aaaa hahaha aaaahaaa

Quite frankly this was just plain boring...

The great awakening of the people is close and the world will be very different once that occurs. The deceived will rise against their deceivers.

@@m1tanker391 🥱

FALSE "all the ways of a fool are right in his own eyes"

Yeah, they blew each others' minds....so no mind left.....damn..........such a pity............

@@shandytorok259 If you want a more useful criticism, you can borrow this one: "Graeber and Wengrow, with Dawn of Everything, have consummated in an epic gish gallop of both naivete and arrogance in pretending to be anthropologists, misrepresenting and mischaracterizing the actual body of work and scholars in the field to such an extent as to completely destroy their own credibility forevermore. While pretending to take a liberal stance on "options for governance" they jettison the condition-based analysis of primitive societies in favor of post-modernist perspectives on freedom of choice in governance, an oxymoron of colossal proportions. Whether the intention was to author a new Bible for fascists or merely line their pockets I have little doubt that they have left their souls impoverished as a consequence. (RIP Mr. Graeber, I pray your intents exceeded your efforts, regardless of moral direction.) Unfortunately, those unfamiliar with the field will be courted endlessly by their rigorous contempt for authentic scholarship, painting experts as unilaterally patriachal (except for, Thank Marx, them), and such readers will undoubtedly swoon in their ignorance and hypnotic effect under such sophistry... as I was... before getting a friendly bump towards more experienced research and analysis." ~me and definitely not ChatGPT

Buy another one at the local bookshop and return that one to the multinational.

@@lvr5266 Where I live, one can also borrow books from libraries and save trees.

@@lettersquash close them all down nowadays

@@ct-gt2dt I'm pretty sure you don't understand supply and demand. You don't think printers estimate how many books people are going to buy before they do a run? Your argument is like saying when you buy a computer at the shop it's already been built in runs in a factory, so we can ignore the plastics and metals used and the carbon dioxide that's been released to the atmosphere. It's an idiotic argument.

I knew a guy named piss balloon.

_" how we want to live as a society "_ how to be that: *...and those vadals killed the economy and every human only for warfare money...*

religious differences, class differences, financial differences. No way thngs will ever change for the better

​@@PazLeBon Yes. All that is pushed top down. We have no clue or way to roll out a better way. But we do know a lot of the individuals pushing it down and do nothing to eliminate them.

*hypotheses*

Iraqi dinar

You tell which ones are true by looking at the evidence. That has been done.

Yes, we should react to them with skepticism and an open mind. Before you we accept radical ideas that align with our politics we should try as hard as we can to prove them wrong. David Graeber posited a lot of unconventional ideas about human history. I am not convinced because he didn't give much evidence or discussion his methodology so I can judge how rigorous it was.

The conventional wisdom is oftentimes wrong. You still believe a certain God passed down the words in the Bible through inspirations?

If two scientists disagree on dark matter , does it make one of them a conspiracy theorist?

​@@DrewBodsq

@@MartinMcAvoy my first thought...

Don't go too deep though, there is no way back when you go too deep............

@@MartinMcAvoy What is a jibbyjabby? Is that cockney slang?

Tell us about their individual rights.

You have the right to sacrifice a child, if you cannot afford a child one will be provided for you.

​@@cannaroe1213Nailed!

@@cannaroe1213😂 that sounds like the Phoenicians too

​@@cristianpopescu78Nailed what?

It is a product of deduction based on evidence. Nothing is written in stone .. either metaphorically or literally. As long as you realise that there is a certain amount of political bias in the interpretation. The facts remain material. But it is at best, "disingenuous" to imply it is merely "manufactured" and risks wild and far fetched flights of fancy the like of which we see in those uncertain and darkest flung corners of the Internet today. And only goes to fuel the ever increasing propagation of the post truth society.

I mean it can't not be manufactured. People can only see so far as their axioms allow them. If your axiom of truth starts eith the idea that you are gods chosen people or some such funky idea its going to be very hard to see beyond that. If you grow up believing money has inherent value its going to be difficult to see somone not asking for money for their work to be mad ..and everyone is always coming from some perspective nobody is robotically aware of all the facts even in one small domain to logically appriase those facts without a perspective being overlaid.

Well yes, it’s difficult to see how it could be done any other way. (Journalism too, in the best of faith.) One can assemble a priori evidence but as soon as you then use that to produce an interpretation, you are inventing a narrative. It might even be “true” in the traditional sense of the word but it’s still a manufacturing process.

@stpancraschapel2136 literally everything is manufactured. Mathematics english literature history our vision when we look out of our eyeballs ...everything in your head is manufactured from a limited apprehension of reality into a story of what it is you're looking at.

Ikr, for everything we experience, we manufacture personal beliefs based on our limited knowledge, which we then often forget to review and test for accuracy.

For hundered of years we in the West have killed, tortured and enslaved other humans. We have totally destroyed other human cultures, their language, their Gods and even their food and clothes. The Bible, McDonalds and jeans was told to be the superior. We were told we constantly mooved forward to something better. Meanwhile aboriginal australiens say they were healthy, satisfied and lived good lives before their continent was invaded by "the superior" culture. How many people in the West are satisfied (=dont want more, more more goods/money/sex etc)

Just ordered the book. Fascinating conversation. More of this please, Novara.

I am reading it right now, and I am not impressed. The whole narrative comes off as very arrogant, i.e. 'Everything We Think We Know About Early Human History is Wrong'. The first few chapters are devoted to attacking anyone who has written on this topic in the last 400 years. There are definitely interesting tidbits here and there, but they often contradict themselves, and make conclusions based on shacky assumptions and anecdotal evidence. They admonish others for making assumptions about ancient hunter gathers based on modern hunter gatherers, then they do the same thing. They assume Life among the Amazon Tribes must be better than modern society based on a sample size of one girl who was kidnapped by the Yanomami, then escaped 20 years later, could not adapt to modern life, so went back to the Yanomami. They then back this up with more anecdotal evidence from Benjamin Franklin. They do have good points to make, but their approach has been a turn off for me.

Indeed. We have to be kind of isolated to believe "we are the greatest" yet that is what most of us are. We adapt to the situation we're in, and find advanced ways to solve the problems that gives us, but ignore the rest.

lol i dont think anyone thought they were less intelligent. You seemingly just suprised your self

@@PazLeBon What a silly response! Did you even watch the video? You know nothing about me or my work yet still seem to feel entitled to cast judgement, well cast it against yourself and ask why you need to go around being a troll.

They were just the poor, like us.

​@@haraldthiPaleolithic people couldn't survive in our environment and very very few humans would make it a month I'm the Paleolithic

Lol...I never thought of it as insulting, just felt some envy.

let's say that there were several iterations of technological human waves throughout history. and let's say that there are plausible reasons why there isn't compelling evidence of these waves. why are we the first wave to exploit crude oil, not to mention electricity exploitation. like we have presently?

Open your mind .

​@@gppizza8979necessity. In pre anthropocene eras there was more than enough game and resources to not need agriculture or a combustion engine

if they had any foresight they would have

Critical thinking and universities have been mutually exclusive for almost a decade.

Because the professor can’t give you answers unless they’re written down in a book written by someone else. Most just want you to follow the same thought processes they did.

have you heard of the 5 monkys experiment ? @@Whoishere2333

Scholarship is built on "disrupting" established thinking. But you do need to convince others of the strength of your ideas through meticulous published research. Sorry you didn't stay long enough to learn that. But it's okay. Academia is insanely competitive and underpaid. You would never make it by simply being disagreeable. That's not enough. You can get away with being disagreeable after you've persuaded some of your opponents through the strength of your research. But most scholars prefer the easier route: be agreeable while quietly working at alternate theories until you get there.

There's ways of going about things. Don't forget the Kruger-Dunning effect.

You praise the man, but say nothing about the subject. Do you accept this as true?

If you want to go further you are humble.

@@timhallas4275 there is also much more about this. It is very deep, I was decept about the questions.

@@tamo3041 "decept" ? what do you mean sir?

@@izmirtolga2625 rispondo in italiano: sono rimasta delusa dalle domande molto superficiali, ma credo debba essere così. Questo tizio? Si avrei gran piacere a parlarci e condividere pensieri.

Not that I'm aware of. What crops were these "garden farmers" growing? We've got evidence of the transition and the beginnings of domestication and selection of crops in the thousands of years before farming really gets started, which might be what you're thinking of. Basically still gathering, but starting to change the crops with some tending or incidental selective dispersal of preferred seeds.

I think the point is that "plow agriculture" isn't somehow the pinnacle of food cultivation. (Actually it depletes the soil.) People experimented with cultivating crops in many places and using many methods that don't fit the kind of agriculture, often considered a more advanced "stage" of civilization, seen in Europe ~12000 BCY. The stageist view is: first agriculture, then cities. The archaeological record shows a far more complex picture, with many sites that have very large populations before the so-called agricultural revolution.

@@spencerharmon4669 I'm still curious what agricultural crops are being talked about pre-12,000 BCY.

@Spencer Harmon what archaeological sites are you referring to and what sizes were they in terms of populations?

@@paintsilj for example the sites of the Cucuteni-Trypillia. An old-european (pre-PIE) culture that had no signs of organised farming. in fact they had no signs of social stratification at all. and they had communities the size of the Mesopotamian city-states, thousands of years before.

most of us wont personally kill an animal and a growing number wont allow others to kill for them

@@IntergalacticDustBunny Well our intelligence and knowledge has continued to develop so it makes sense that eventually we will value all life as equally precious

​@@PazLeBonBETA!

i just wanted to be footballer, I thought that was what every boy wanted :)

When I was a little boy I wanted to be a girl as they always got preferencial treatment and seamed to get away with all sorts of wild behavior. So glad I didn't grow up in today's society as I would have been destroyed in lieu of outgrowing that absurd faze I went through.

Well it's not. I like Indiana Jones films but he's a terrible archaeologist. He's a tomb raider. The scenes in which he causes destruction of rare, beautiful and unique statues and archictecture are the total opposite of archaeology. I have a B.A. in Archaeology and have worked on 14 archaeology and paleontology digs, including one in Egypt. I'm a paleontologist now but still love ancient history.

@@granthurlburt4062 I think you have taken my comment a little to literately😁

lmao, then half the population died of mushroom fever having only ever tried the magic ones previously

With the exception being that they where probably well informed about what they where doing, rather than led by a bunch of anarcho-capitalist billionaires to cut their own noses off!

In the Paleolithic Levant, 23,000 years ago, cereals cultivation of emmer, barley and oats has been researched near the sea of Galilee by the Ohalu II.

Just another con....nothing fascinating about it.....

What was thoughtprovoking in this discussion? There was nothing new at all? No new ideas, not even a hint to the controversy in Egyptology going on these days.

@@perjanuschas8050 Well, it provoked my thoughts. And perhaps Wengrow finds that he doesn't need to refer to Egyptology to make his arguments. Have you actually read his book?

@@cl1ntonbodycount652 Hancock is either paranoid or dishonest. I guess he's a good self publisher and tells good fantasy stories and tells them interestingly. His belief in beyond the fringe long discredited ideas like Atlantis is amusing enough and one could argue that while there is no reasonable argument to support the idea of of an Atlantis that ever existed - even the original source, Plato, is self contradictory and may not have believed himself what he wrote - and everything about the accounts are anachronistic and geographically inaccurate one might argue Atlantis represents some vague idea of something we haven't found yet, and fair enough, neither is there any decent evidence to support the fancy. His dishonesty, though, is in representing archaeology as some edifice invested in discrediting true inquiry and closing ranks to shut him up. This is complete rubbish. One might think such things of the multibillion dollar oil or pharmaceutical industries, but most archaeology is done by passionate people on a shoestring budget and, like David Wengrow here, are mostly careful methodical thinkers genuinely interested in what we can learn about the past, At best, Hancock is a ringleader in his own private circus.

Seemed like a basic conversation for the time we live in

Wasn't impressed

Was saying the video was basic! Your comment was more interesting 😊

Oh no! Listening to this podcast gave you a stroke? Heal up quick!

Quality content? So you think this guy is right?

@@timhallas4275 I’m curious, what’s the purpose of a comment like this? Attempting to open an honest dialog? Defending an orthodoxy? Troll? Who benefits from presenting false choices?

Ponderously slow

@@stvbrsn My comment was directed to the op... troll.

I reckon They ate loads of hazelnuts meat , fish and mushrooms over winter.... the cereals came later for bread and beer and forage and bedding for the animals geese etc... if it was a good year for cereals it was a bonus. Storing grain would have been a lot more difficult so came a lot later, initially cereals must have been a bonus nothing more, unless you lived in more predictable weather. Rust on cereals can be controlled with milk products though

I can't quite tell when this is supposed to have happened either. There was a migration of Indo-Europeans into Britain somewhere in that period that may have affected the shift as well. And evidence of a shift more to pastoralism than back to hunting and gathering. Which might fit with descendants of steppe nomads moving in.

it could have been a result of climate cooling after the Holocene climate optimum peak (the warmest period during the current interglacial, warmer then today) which forced the inhabitants to switch to pastoralism, coupled with the yamnaya-derived invasion of the first (pre-Celtic) Indo-Europeans, who appear to have largely replaced the previous population (of mostly Neolitic farmers with some WE hunter-gatherers) based on genetic evidence

@@pavelandel1538 That's why a time would be useful. That climate optimum seems to have been ending about the right time. There was also a big population decline across Europe, generally attributed to plagues, over roughly the same timespan. And then migrations off the steppes. Somewhere in there, this supposed switch away from cereal agriculture. Without knowing which bits came first, it's really hard to talk about why. If agriculture continued right up until the pastoralists arrived, that's one answer. If it's associated with a big climate change or with population drops due to disease, those are others. But if you ignore all the other things going on, it's easy to reinforce the idea that "sometimes they just decide to stop doing agriculture". (And even then to imply it was back to HG, rather than to herding.)

Grain suffered the same in medieval Europe which had periods of colder, wetter weather followed by outbreaks of ergot poisoning with horrific consequences.

Yes facinating and some truth but what u say about historical analysis gelling with current ideology ,so true. I am very interested in end of Roman Britain and advent of the Saxon's etc. Yes the Victorian invasion and slaughter no longer seen as valid but now it's the other extreme where there was no violence at all ,being pushed. And clearly improbable.

To me it's a natural development, as we take hold of those pieces of information that seems interesting to us in the problem solving that we are currently at. The rest of the available information is too much to have a grasp on, so we let it be.

Great comment. Most facts of history are totally accurate but the overall narrative is largely false. We live in a short term medium age, not as dark as some times, but we are not the most advanced human civilization to have walked the earth

You can read Billy Meier's writings for free.

he didn't say anything this was BS!!!

@@dumbvedeoz David Wengrow is a professor at one of the world's top universities and you are ....? If you want to disect his arguments then articulate your views and formulate a compelling argument. A one line "BS" dismissal is not enough.

I don't know why this year-old video is popping up in our feeds again, but my BS-detector is maxxed out by this guy. The fact that cities pre-dated agriculture is well known, yet he presents it as his own amazing new idea. Then he misinterprets it. After a little Googling, I think he's just a political activist with an academic hustle. "Capitalism is bad, and I can prove it with psuedoscience". Meh.

Exactly the way technologies build on each other, combining discoveries by neighbors & experimenters.

Not sure if you're referencing the book, but this is discussed in the early chapters of the book. That we assume hunter gatherers in history lived in rubbish places, because thats where they live now.

Another example could be Papua New Guinea where a plane flying over the island's highlands in the 1930's discovered the existence of stone age people no one had any idea were there. And not just a couple of sparse bands, but the population was estimated to be as high as a million! With those numbers, impossible everyone was purely nomadic, and indeed there was some agriculture and interaction among groups.

Yes. The “set” of cave symbols that are more numerous in caves than animal images - only a couple of dozen symbols but spread over at least two or three continents - definitely shows a shared stream of culture. There are other places where a fairly sedentary hunter-gatherer life was possible. More recently the people living on the banks of the Danube, catching enormous sturgeon at certain times of year, weaning their children in fish roe, and hunting in forested hinterland.

You can only poop in one place for so long without sewer systems before you have to move somewhere else.

@@bearthalamas9241 Wrong.

Except for the total lack of evidence of any such waves of civilization. And the pretty decent evidence of long, slow development even of the basic early stone tool kits.

Why is that ludicrous? We know that humans in Australia went a good 50,000 years without ever doing it. Maybe a few people started down that path and everyone else told them to knock it off because it was a bad idea? You're replacing the past false assumption of "people 100,000 years ago were too stupid to invent technology" with what I see as an equally false one: that if humans have the innate intelligence to invent and adopt a certain technology they will necessarily do it.

'Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." -Carl Sagan

Not all theories are equal. Scientists are likely to accept a new or modified theory if it explains everything the old theory did and more. The process of theory change will take time and involve controversy, but eventually the scientific explanation that is deemed more accurate will be accepted.

lionel messi

He mumbles

Yet, we have never found anything "advanced" hundred of thousand years old.

Nothing like our current civilization. You will be able to see our mark on the planet forever. A billion years from now some future evolved species will dig down through the geological reccord and find the compressed boundry layer of our civilization marking the start of the 6th mass extinction.

YOU havent found anything. Grow up​@@PATRICKJLM

Not really that hard to exclude that possibility when we have no evidence for it ...be very hard to have such Ana danced civilization that you disassembled your entire city and any evidence of it or of the systems nessisary to support it during a cataclysm!

I concur

really? they keep you colonized...

money addicts are *NOT* "humanity" ...quite the opposite, actually.

boooooo

Yes. It goes back to how the West was developed. It unanimously abandoned the cultures and traditions of ancestors for religious ones, then it abandoned those for material ones, and it is destroying them as the world begins to change against the circumstances that allowed that development. You can see it every time they encounter a people that has those cultures and traditions, because they know those peoples, and they are all over the world, will survive this change, and they will never be in this dominating position again once the collapse is completed.

"Obsession with novelty and a dogma of constant progress and economic growth has blinded us". Don't you see the eloquence of Bush Economic Plan of post 9/11; Shop til one drops! Don't you shop?

The world is empirically better in almost every way than it was 50 years ago. Habitat destruction is about the only thing that’s gotten considerably worse.

Exponential growth cannot be sustained on a finite planet with a declining population. The "appearance of exponential growth" can be extended by using propaganda and disinformation to fool an ignorant, uninterested and "asleep" population. Allowing the Top 1% to extract more of the valuable resources and capital until the whole civilization collapses. Probably very rapidly accompanied by the collapse of the rule of law. And a revolution and bloody fighting until new governments are formed.

But he's having people think Aborigines had knowledge of the rest of the world. They really don't.

for real

@bina nochtI reckon they cut the trees for heat and to provide expanse for protection and protection of their rabbits and dogs. The understory of hazel was used for food, animal feed and tools and fencing/huts copiced for tender shoots to eat or left for nuts, and the mounds as lookouts and allow the animals to be protected at night. That's roughly an idea I have anyway. The place was chosen in the first place because of the abundance of flint which made fire and weapons/blades, which were easy to trade in a short amount of time. Every part of history for me is about economy of effort. Unfortunately now we are a slave to our desires.....

​@bina nocht I like your idea that farming was something that they were forced to do because of the destruction of forests. I read Yuval Noah Hari's book but I don't remember him suggesting this, although he did say that farming was extremely hard compared to hunter gathering but that people stuck to it because of the 'this time next year, Rodney" mentality.

​@@hughdennison3013 I read that the English cut down the Irish Oaks to build ships for warmongering.

I recommend James C Scott “against the grain”

@@richardswaby6339 the English still lived in Europe not the British isles in the time that is being discussed

No, Graham Hancock has taken other peoples work and woven a wild science-fiction narrative from it to sell books. He's an extremely talented bullshit artist.

Come a long way?! The civilisation of Simone de Boulevard......😵

Previous 100M years.

Made me wonder why he seemed to disparage pseudo archeology. After all, the evidence comes via photographs from space rather than a dig, or from stone experts who say archaeologists explanations for how someone made of fine vase out of granite don't stack up...

​@@simonruszczak5563 Homo homo sapiens are 200,000 years old.

@@jamesragsdale8202 Humans have evolved and gone extinct many times over tens of millions of years, our civilisation and species is not special.

Exactly. And where is this evidence? Crickets…

Yeah but u can’t prove they weren’t geniuses that were completely free of ego and reading this each other’s mines and more advanced than even we are now. Logically then, shouldn’t we assume it’s true?

That’s not how science works. If we have no evidence we need to say “we don’t know “

@@oobrocks you just don’t wanna accept aliens obviously built the pyramids or at least their knowledge did

Pleaseeeeee

Pol Pot, having studied Rousseau in France, murdered a third of Cambodians,including eyeglass-wearers because they may have read books.

@@TeaParty1776 Pot was nuts: but the kind of nuts that American foreign policy likes, reducing the populace to the level of workers without any say in policy. It's the same old same old; Europeans have this Immense Egotistical Need to disguise their infantile need for control under some 'ism' label while imposing their childish desires upon everyone possible. Sometimes through willing agents. Hey, how _DID_ a guy in a nation that didn't produce guns, bullets _OR_ tanks or bombs manage to shoot & bomb his way into power & maintain it anyway? Oh, right, that second thing I said.

@@choosecarefully408 > Pot was nuts: but the kind of nuts that American foreign policy likes, reducing the populace to the level of workers without any say in policy. Evasion causes stupidity needed to rationalize the evasion. The claim that the communist, Pot, was consistent w/the anti-communist US foreign policy is beyond bizarre. Ideas are the basic cause of politics. Evading ideas encourages conspiracy theories.

@@TeaParty1776 I'm not sure what you're saying here because I'm not referring to anyone's isms. I never do because experience has shown me that people choose what they want, then try to rationalize that through isms, not the other way 'round. You're right about the last part. Most people feel a desperate need to 'know' everything & when they feel that they're being lied to, they start seeing everything said by those they feel are lying as lies. This is perfectly childish. It's what we all go through in our teens with our parents. (I'm constantly stunned that I've never read of any cultural practice that brings us out of this). But this doesn't apply to me. I'm not saying that I have _NO_ preconceived notions, simply that I am usually aware of them & have the ability to set them aside. I'm a terrible researcher, though Noam Chomsky has referred to pro-Pol Pot statements made in the press by various U.S. foreign policy figures & at least one president. Then there is the "who armed him" question that I raised indirectly. It's the same thing as in Africa: out of nowhere a rebel army armed well enough to take out the reigning government appears even though that reigning government does not leave such things lying around or to be purchased at your local K-Mart or Crazy Eddy's Discount Arms Emporium. A little logic helps one realize that someone is supplying arms to the person or people using them. Isms need not apply.

@@choosecarefully408 > I'm not sure what you're saying here because I'm not referring to anyone's isms I'm not sure what you're saying here > people choose what they want, then try to rationalize that through isms, not the other way 'round. Yes, people choose first. But ideology is political and social philosophy split from the fundamental branches of philosophy. Ideology is a need of the minds function in guiding survival action. Contra Pragmatism, man needs an intellectual framework, if only primitive myth, for the use of his mind. A disintegrated mind cannot guide survival action. Of course, many ideologies are false. > Most people feel a desperate need to 'know' everything & when they feel that they're being lied to, they start seeing everything said by those they feel are lying as lies. When people are ignorant of any ideas that guide history and politics, they use conspiracy. Conspiracies exist, of course, but,relative to ideas, their influence is tiny. But a false explanation is better than intellectual chaos, thus, religion, traditionalism, communism, etc. Conservatism , despite its weaknesses, is sustainable. Subjectivism is not. Thus, eg, Roman Stoicism was replaced by Christianity. DIM Hypothesis-Leonard Peikoff; Western history as basically the effect of various philosophical methods of using the mind. >I'm not saying that I have NO preconceived notions So you know reality prior to knowing reality?! As Mr. Spock would say, "Fascinating!" >[I] have the ability to set them aside. Youre psychotic or a brute, instinctual animal?! Fascinating! >Noam Chomsky has referred to pro-Pol Pot statements made in the press by various U.S. foreign policy figures & at least one president. I have never heard of this. However, post-WW2, US foreign policy (and maybe earlier), has been a short-range, anti-ideological, contradictory, Pragmatist chaos. So who knows?! Biden supports Ukraine w/no principled defense. Trump told North Korea's, Kim, that he "loved" him. As 60s rocker, Marianne Faithfull, so tartly warbled, "We''ve been trying to get high without having to pay." Europe's anti-energy policies required Russian energy, thus funding the foreseeable, Ukraine invasion. The US didnt predict the forseeable Russian attack on Ukraine utilities. Im assuming it was not a perverse policy. US WW2 bombing of German utilities seriously hurt German defenses and morale. Dont forget Shermans march thru Georgia. Your comment about Africa is obscure. On the other hand, why is the US fighting in Africa?! Do they have long-range, nuke spears?! Inquiring minds want to know. Its a damned good thing that the US military is globally dominant. Our foreign policy is...wait, we dont have a policy. Even the Pragmatist, Kissinger, said that all we had was a "response to cables," ie, to unpredicted emergencies. Wikipedia lists many post-Soviet wars to regain lost territories. Ukraine was predictable. Hell, Pearl Harbor was predictable from 1930s newspaper headlines screaming war. The lack of US intell coordination was trivial. May you live in interesting times...

How old is this video?

I believe him studying theater has helped him tremendously with communication.

@@professorrhyyt3689 - Another favorite scholar of mine is the psychologist Julian Jaynes. He left academia for a while to work as a playwright. It was maybe his non-academic experience that led him to a larger perspective. He quickly lost interest in behaviorism research and ended up writing a book that looked far beyond conventional psychology, including studying the evidence about the early humanity.

​@@ario4795 What do you mean "ambiguos"? Egypt is located in Africa.

@@ario4795 But ironically you use the term European. Were the Greeks “European” or Middle Eastern? Asian isn’t a race either. I imagine you don’t consider Nubia, Kush or modern Sudan, Eritrea/Ethiopia to be “African” either. Strange aroma coming from your comment.

@@NoLefTurnUnStoned. , they not Africa is continent not gene. Cushitic people and native middle eastern share dna and linguistic.

For what it’s worth, Cahokia is still near the river.

@@jeavjuaf - I've forgotten how old the Cahokia Mounds are estimated to be. Do you know?

@@foxtrotjulietbravo5536 1000 years old or so.

No. Just the one overarching climate problem that inhbited long term stability and growth. Put down the bible and step slowly away from it. Real life cataclysms don't work that way. Way back before we had large nations bound by an overarching control (monarchy or empire) the largest singular entities were city states like Uruk or Shuruppak. Within that kind of structure a single bad river flood could destroy the whole thing and disperse its population along the river basin - which is almost certainly the origin of the original Mesopotamian flood myth from which the Noah and Gilgamesh flood myths are derived. Less well known is that all of Canaan was in fact a neighbor of Mesopotamia, and further back during the times of the Akkadian empire it was actually part of its territory - so the spread of that ancient river flood myth to Canaan and its associated cultures like Israel and Judea is very likely. Contrary to how the bible/Torah presents it the kingdom of Israel was in fact a Canaanite nation from the outset, just as its language that persists to this day is in fact Canaanite in origin.