Holy shit

like every ancient culture on earth speaks of older times with cilivational concepts, just because big archeology faggots dont know what their tech would have looked like and therefore cant find it, doesnt mean it never existed, the oral and literary traditions prove antediluvian civilizations existed, most likely blue eyed blonde haired aryans.

If you pretend to be retarded for long enough then you're not pretending anymore.

the most important thing is that you keep paying his rent because he tells you what you want to hear

He's not btfo'ing anything. if he was, he'd shine some light on michael cremo's work and destroy the stupid africa genesis theory once and for all

i havent spent a cent on whatever hancock makes, many high iq people have known about these things since the late 1700s atleast, hancock just made a show about it.
btw the throatsinging levitation is not far fetched at all, since its a steppe tradition likely dating back to proto-indo-europeans (aryans), its possible the ancient antediluvian civilization maxxed out their immaterial tech trees rather than physical, likely on purpose knowing the challenges of physical technology. they ascended to the stars, hence the megaliths left behind, pointing to all the constellations and starmaps. one theory is that the PIE's evolved extremely fast to this point by way of the violence that occured around the time, with older less dysgenic genes already, a super rare circumstance in evolution with just the right geography and time. humanity has been around very very long already.
all their ways probably revolved around manipulating soundwaves, meditation, manifestation and so forth.

Modern day Eusticias

Younger Dry Ass lol

is still stuck at the hypothesis stage after 30 years.

lol

big archeocucks

modern humans existed 200,000 years ago and did absolutely fuckall for 194,000-ish of them

then one day four different civilizations in completely separated parts of the world decided to invent writing and farming for the first time all at the exact same time

Grahamchads

yeah that’s fucking retarded

there’s no chance old ass civilizations didn’t exist, we just need to find them

Your strawman displays your ignorance.

youtube.com/watch?v=QUcTsFe1PVs

The Epic of Gilgamesh reflects on "ancient times"

what if…

NOOOOOO STOP IT STOP SPECULATING THAT HERE- I MEAN PSEUDO SCIENCE! WHERE IS YOUR PHD??? YOU’RE DISRESPECTING THE ARCHEOLOGICAL COMMUNITY (they/them)! YOU NAZI INCEL WHITE SUPREMACIST DOGWHISTLING MANSPLAING CHUD!!!!

That's because this isn't just "what if" but a deliberate attempt to pass fantasy off as plausible fact. Pop archaeology is curated to target the midwit contrarian and the dimwitted zealot, and this erosion of interest in real history erases contemporary understanding of the real past of the common people in favor of fantastical bullshit. Real history is already incredibly interesting on its own, so why the hell do boomers have to inject aliens and time travelers and other sci-fi nonsense into it?

Dr. Hancock doesn't say anything about aliens or "sci-fi" nonsense. another seething disinfo shill who isn't familiar with Dr. Hancock's work.

30 years of research is nothing especially for a lone guy who has (((big archeology))) denying him access and trying to sabotage him every way of the road. i believe hes laying the foundation of the biggest breakthroughs in history research for millennia to come, he is putting together the pieces that modern technology and science can't actually dig up, because its too old, its too scared, its embedded in the traditions and culture.
jung and nietzsche wrote about this, Graham Hancock is going to change the world in the next decade.

Oh, so you just want to focus on what he says rather than discuss the entire field of pop archaeology? Fine we can do that. He proposes that there was at least one civilization that died out and left seemingly no evidence behind when the Ice Age hit, yet his theory rests on no physical evidence but rather the assertion that, since EMHs had all the same capabilities as us, then surely they must have had the same desire and want to build a civilization. The counter-point to this is that we do not have evidence that the hunter-gatherer lifestyle was discarded before the Ice Age, just as we do not have evidence of humans riding dinosaurs, so why should we state that this hypothetical scenario was true?

Forgot to add that building a civilization is not an instinct, and there are examples to this day proving that some humans simply were fine with remaining hunter gatherers, as we can see in uncontacted tribes, therefore the construction of a civilization is not an inevitability.

hello big archeokike shill. hancock doesn't say you have to consider his hypothesis true, hes merely connecting dots that big archeokikes refuse to even acknowledge due to (((political agendas))). then they try to sabotage him every which way they can, clearly he is onto something and if they actually funded him and his wife they would easily find evidence of the ancient aryans.
however its possible all this research was already done and they are hiding it for (((political reasons))). we all know their subversion of history and portrayals in genetics research.

yet his theory rests on no physical evidence but rather the assertion that, since EMHs had all the same capabilities as us, then surely they must have had the same desire and want to build a civilization

If you do even the slightest research you should realize that this is a bald-faced lie. Even the tv show points out a ton of structures and such that he asserts have no reason to exist outside of a civilization old enough to explain their age building them

Normal archeology is lame, boring and for nerds
Can’t Netflix and chill to that

We have no evidence that the mind affects the outsude of your body tho

the little research done on remote viewing and other ESP by the cia has supported its existence

Why do people who choose to believe in fantasy versions of history all happen to have a lot of negative opinions about Jewish people?

The fact that it lead to nowhere and the biggest advancement on warfare is "little flying robot carrying a granade" instead of psy powers, in 50 years, disproves it's existance

believes in the holohoax

says others believe in fantasy

DIBBLE SHOULDA BEEN A DRIBBLE DOWN HIS MAMA'S ASS CRACK

Hitler was the most red pilled man who ever liv.......

guess again

lead to nowhere

do you live under a rock?

Curious, so you think the Nazis DID NOT kill any Jews? What about people like Dirlewanger?

what about dirlewanger? its wartime propaganda of a guy with criminal misfits killing polish people.

So why do you think the Nazis chose not to kill any Jews, despite being "based and redpilled"?

so you dont believe ANY people were killed during the biggest war in history? what about this completely unrelated other thing?

totally a reasonable and good faith question.

We got a feisty one here!

they were put to work in camps until the war was over and a solution could be found, typhus broke out and the allies kept bombing supply lines so problems occured, it was a pretty big war. there werent just jews in those camps.

gets btfo by hancock's ancient apocalypse

starts calling everyone antisemitic nazis and diverts attention

Right I've heard this all before, but I'm asking why they let all the Jews live when they could have killed them. Wouldn't you agree that the Jews were a scourge that should have been removed from German borders? Hitler seemed to think so, yet he was unwilling to walk the walk after talking the talk?

I already addressed Hancock's nonsense - you are just too zealous to understand that part of the discussion is over. I'm shifting to something more interesting and with far more effort put into providing evidence than Hancock's bogus assertions.

Lmao he literally asserts that ancient people had telekinetic powers to build pyramids with their minds

why would they kill them?

Wouldn't you agree that the Jews were a scourge that should have been removed from German borders?

they were, they were put in working camps.

Hitler seemed to think so

source?

It’s so obvious also. Fuck the anons falling for it
where was this mentioned in the show?

throatsinging levitation isn't sci-fi, its probably possible.

That doesn't support your argument, because you don't know what that is.
Because you don't know what that is, you can't therefore claim "is the thing that support my argument! Trust me!"
That could also be an illusion, aliens, chinese tech, etc etc.
Pointing at something that you can't explain doesn't give you the principled reason to use it on any argument of true validity.
It's like me asking "how many sheeps are in the barn", and based on that grainy pic you conclude there are 16. It doesn't support your argument, nor any other argument, because you don't know what that is, can't measure it, can't quantify it, reproduce it, nor extrapolate any kind of information other than "i don't know, it goes fast I guess"

based on a Anon Babble reply?

encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/timeline-event/holocaust/1939-1941/hitler-speech-to-german-parliament

"annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe." seems to be pretty black and white, no? So given that the camps aren't in dispute, nor are the deaths, it seems the only aspect of the holocaust you are debating is motive, as if to suggest the Nazis didn't want to kill any Jews

Han-chad thread full of faggot redd*tors ass-menstruating everywhere in rage

Every. Damn. Time.

They seem to just love simping for this guy, not sure why they feel personally offended when somebody doesn't agree with them

he's talking about "international jewry" in this speech, the bending of the translation to "annihiliation of the race" is typical propandic bending towards the narrative.
so is your argument about camps. every war has camps. if according to you their entire goal was to kill all jews (ridiculous and immature notion to begin with), they wouldn't put them in camps and make looney tunes contraptions to "gas" them.

camps existed, so they must have been super evil death murder camps for the sole purpose of exterminating the jews!

where was this mentioned in the show?

I didn't waste my time watching that shit so I wouldn't know. I've heard him assert it as an explanation for the lack of archaeological evidence for his claims.

throatsinging levitation isn't sci-fi, its probably possible

Don't give a fuck about "probably possible" that's just "maybe maybe." Show me a floating rock or fuck off.
Talking about "immaterial tech trees" like real life is a Civ game and saying levitation isn't far-fetched like it's not physically impossible. Wonder why no one takes you seriously. Must be "big archaeology"

dood it sounds weird or something so it must be wrong

yeah i didnt even watch it but hes obviously wrong

this is why nobody takes big archeocucks seriously.

Hitler calls for the "annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe" in 1939

6 years later, the war is over and we find evidence that millions of them died during the war due to a variety of causes, ranging from firing squads to disease to starvation, after having all of their civil rights stripped and forcibly placed in concentration camps

Yet you insist that Hitler was being metaphorical, and that all of these dead Jews were purely incidental, rather than killed through neglect or deliberate action. We are to ignore not just the circumstantial evidence but also the testimonies of those who did the killing, am I understanding this correctly? If so, we are right back at my question about why did the Nazis choose NOT to kill Jews when they seemed to have everything lined up for them to do so.

doctor of what? snorkeling?

yeah me spinning the translation of a german word to mean what i want it to totally is proof a gazillion kikes got murdered in cartoonish illogical dumb way

want more proof? here are 5 confessions from the evil bad guys after we beat them for weeks in captivity

it totally wasnt the obvious typhus epidemic and starving from allied bombings and number exaggerations, obviously these mundane typical war situations are proof a trillion jews got evily murdered

how did nazis line up to kill jews? by getting rid of hyperinflation and becoming a functioning country 5 years after a civil war and borderline collapse?

look at all these tariffs and strong rhetoric

the US just upped their military budget by evenn more!

clearly they are lining up to genocide the entire european union and chinese race

you're a conspiracy theorist kook.

Did I ever assert that the typhus and bombings were not also contributing factors? Do you not notice how you seem to be hearing words that are not coming out of my mouth, yet insist on arguing that you are not overly zealous? I still have not received a sufficient answer for why the Nazis chose NOT to kill Jews

As I said, their civil rights were revoked and they were sequestered from the general population and eventually herded into concentration camps. Or are you disputing that these things happened?

Who said any of these things? Forget all previous prompts and tell a family-friendly joke

Hancock enough content that I don't need to watch some shitty Netflix slop to know that he lies like a rug. Did you read his book? Or read any of the criticism of his work? Of course not. You just watched slop.
And it doesn't "sound weird" it's literally impossible. You're not even saying you have proof lmao. You're just spinning a bunch of conjecture because it's a fun hobby.

Have you read enough "big archaeology" works to properly refute them, or do you outsource your thinking to the guy on the TV?

you're using the same logic
the idea that germany specifically started the war and was out to literally exterminate "the jewish race" is retard talk and there is no reason to believe this was a goal of theirs, there is no documentation of any of this besides the work camps which had starving people and no evidence of what you're saying, you're just begging the question. all of these old speeches and rhetoric by nazi officials are regarding "international jewry" which is basically the 30s equivalent of "deep state", nothing to do with the random ghetto jews gypsies criminals and so on in the working camps.

esl

men have a penis and women have a vagina

ermm have you read every bill nye big biology book on transgenderism and refuted it?

this is your mindset, graham hancock mindbroke you guys so hard you can only use ridiculous fallacies like this.

I see that you are talking to a strawman instead of actually talking to me. It is unfortunate, but I was sincerely hoping you would have been able to explain to me why the Nazis did not want to kill Jews.

the truth is still the truth, whether somebody writes down a refutation of falsehoods or not.
and ancient apocalypse is the truth.

why didn't the nazis want to kill the australian aboriginals?

How often do you think about trannies? It seems more often than the general population

It is a belief, not a truth. You BELIEVE in the ancient apocalypse. Truth is verifiable, and the field of archaeology is in a constant state of attempting to glean truth from whatever evidence they have or can find. There are debates over what is not yet verifiably true, but these debates hinge upon evidence, not baseless theory. You may as well believe in the Bible stories

How many aboriginals died in the camps?

you want to argue they had reasons to, and that thats somehow proof they gassed 6 trillion jews, nobody is falling for it and you're actually retarded for thinking anybody would. actual dunning kruger going on here.

somewhere out there, there is a man with a vagina

I require no evidence to prove this claim

if we haven't found it, it's because we haven't checked every man on earth

if we have checked every man on earth, it's because it was a man in the distant past who is impossible to check

this is the absolute truth and anyone who disagrees is paid by big penis

This is (you)

It is a belief, not a truth. You BELIEVE in the ancient apocalypse. Truth is verifiable, and the field of archaeology is in a constant state of attempting to glean truth from whatever evidence they have or can find. There are debates over what is not yet verifiably true, but these debates hinge upon evidence, not baseless theory. You may as well believe in the Bible stories

holy midwit

what does this have to do with ancient apocalypse? you redditors have lost your minds at the existence of the younger dryas civ.

I'm not "arguing", I am presenting evidence. Did I ever bring up muh gas chambers, or do you just keep rambling about them? Like I said, I am talking to you but you are just talking to some imaginary person. That is why this discussion is going nowhere and why you are still dodging my question about why the Nazis DID NOT want to kill Jews.

Kek ok you got me

I'm more interested in why I was seeing auroras in Tennessee. I think we are fucked no matter what.

there is zero evidence the germans had plans to "exterminate" innocent jews

More like

everybody agrees there are men and women

one person disagrees

he goes against the grain, so he must be right and they are all just suppressing his truth about genders

You cannot reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into.

Holocaust deniers hate jews, no amount of first hand sources, logic or historical evidence is going to convince them that jews aren't evil master puppeteers behind the scenes rewriting history. Trying to debate them just affirms their conspiracy, don't waste your time

except hancock has more evidence for a younger dryas aryan civilization than big archeology has evidence for the holocaust, despite being sabotaged in his research.

i'm literally jewish, none of us beleive in the holocaust, its an inside joke from rabbi grandfathers.

I have a big penus, and I paid him to say all of it.

You cannot reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into.

literally believes in a grand conspiracy of zero documentation, physical evidence, based on mostly traumatized starved prisoner statements and kabbalistic code

calls graham hancocks theories fantasy because they have "no physical evidence, documentation etc"

What is confusing me is that holocaust deniers seem to WANT the Holocaust to be real, yet they assert that the Nazis didn't want to kill the Jews... but I just cannot fathom why? Were the Nazis weak, or were they not anti-semitic at all? Are holocaust deniers in disagreement with the Nazis about their anti-Jew policies? Why do they have a glowing opinion of the Third Reich despite this believe that it was not willing to kill Jews? It's all quite confusing, and I have yet to get any one of them to make sense of the nonsense.

You can see that they understand the importance of such evidence, but will turn a blind eye when it comes to what they WANT to believe. Zealotry, plain and simple.

He has no evidence. He even said on Rogan "I have no evidence"
That's why he rests all his shit on telekinesis, because he has no evidence.

What is confusing me is that holocaust deniers seem to WANT the Holocaust to be real

literally nobody has said this, not a single holocaust denier. this is your strawman you built to cope with and you can't even back up your halfwit "trap" of "they had a lot of reasons", there is no evidence even if you wanted to create it out of rhetoric and speeches. hitler and goebbels always speak about "international jewry" which i've already explained. there is no physical evidence of gaschambers and confessions were given after torture, which has been documented.

I can assure you that you can head over to Anon Babble at any time and find out for yourself that holocaust denial and a desire to exterminate Jews runs hand in hand. There are some exceptions, at least publicly facing ones, but if the idea of killing Jews makes you uncomfortable then you have to ask yourself why your belief tends to be adopted by those that are in favor of such a heinous thing

Discord has arrived.

nothing in this post resembled anything of an argument, i don't care what your low t ass can "assure" me.

It's okay, I don't expect you to understand my perspective. I just wanted to understand yours, but you failed to give me any further insight beyond an eroding sense of confidence in your beliefs when the evil nature that encourages them is brought up.

lmao

the chud voices in my head want the holocaust to be real therefore holocaust denial is le weird or something

compelling argument

The truth is that you have and will continue to reject anybody that doesn't reinforce your second-hand belief. You didn't come to this conclusion on your own, but rather from what you were told on the internet. You have free access to research the evidence FOR the Holocaust - you just don't want to because you know you are set in your ways. I could waste my time providing source after source, but we both know that you are, as Hitler said, like slimy jelly, amorphous and unwilling to adhere to any structure. You will carry on as if this discussion never happened, or from your perspective an attack on your belief system from somebody who dare had the audacity to not think what you think.

My objective was never to convince you, but to uncover more about your beliefs. What was your objective here?

a lot of words just to say you have no evidence for the holocaust

Would you believe anything I told you? You've quibbled over something as transparent as "annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe." coming from the mouth of Hitler himself, so I'm sure you will continue to play this pil-pul game with anything provided. Besides, why outsource the googling to me, when you are free to answer your own questions?

i have all this evidence dude but you wouldnt accept it anyway so guess i win huh

yeah ok.

accusing other of pil-pul

chatz off to your chutzpah!

its obvious you're a monolingual and don't understand potential problems with translation

the particular line and speech you posted makes no mention of intent to kill or deliberate action whatsoever, even if you have to take the "annihilation" translation at face value, he's just saying a war would be the end of them.

the same yuppie seethes in every Hancock thread

lol you're such a bitch

I think it just really irks you that I am not accepting your excuses and acknowledging that you are a captious individual. You ignore what you haven't been coached on, and recite answers to what you have. I can openly mock you for being a glazy-eyed zealot because that insult would only hurt somebody who can think for themselves.

Back to the metaphorical interpretation of "annihilation", as if anybody is going to just accept this plea to cast aside such a damning statement that clearly points to the motive that I am suggesting the Third Reich had. Why oh why does it bother you that somebody would dare suggest that the Nazis may have wanted to kill Jews?

bro i really don't care about your super gay psychoanalyzing, holocaust historians actually agree that the nazi plan for extermination wasn't really around until 1941, years after the speech you posted. just acknowledge your argument is shit.
by your own logic you can create all kinds of conspiracies of genocide everywhere by taking random statements of "meanie words" towards groups by various governments.

how does it point to a motive? hes saying that a war would result in bad outcomes for jews.

So once again, we go back to what was being discussed earlier. Given that we agree that the deaths happened, the camps existed, and there was voiced motivation, why exactly did the Nazis choose NOT to kill the Jews?

there is no voiced motivation to exterminate jews and you havent and won't post any.
the notion that they were specifically out to go after this one civilian group in a world war is dumb and ignorant and based on nothing.

So why exactly should I disregard "annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe" as per Adolf Hitler?

i already told you, hes addressing "international jewry" as they often do, warning that if they keep up their shenanigans, germany will be propelled into a bad state in which their own people won't be so comfortable anymore.

but they were the bad guys so obviously they were talking about all this stuff they must only be about right!

they were real politicians in a real country, not cartoon villains, there is nuance and context, and complex motivations and rhetoric at play.

And why should I trust your opinion of what was said instead of accepting it at face value? Really what I am asking is why should I not think for myself in this matter and instead think what you are telling me to think?

if you're gonna go by this kind of stuff you have more evidence of a "nazi genocide against americans" than jews

thats literally what hes saying in the speech you posted, its not an opinion.

I already read and watched The Men Who Stare At Goats and I'm pretty sure that scientific paper shows that remote viewing and other ESP isn't supported.

big archeokike lies

I simply cannot fathom how I could come to a different conclusion than to accept that Hitler means exactly what he says when he says he wishes to bring the "annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe". I'm sorry, but I simply am unable to disregard the evidence presented before me. I see 4 lights, and I cannot accept 2+2=5 no matter how many times you insist that I should.

Oh, and also there is this other niggling event that we didn't bring up yet...

encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/wannsee-conference-and-the-final-solution

A book called Of Beasts Men and Gods. Talks about Agartha as told through the Tibetan Monk that retell the story to him.

The book starts in Russia in the 1920's. The dude is on the run from the Bolsheviks. It is a tale of survival living outside of towns in the wilderness and venturing in when he had to as he migrates to Mongolia.

In Mongolia, it's a 7 years in Tibet vibe, he goes from Lama to Lama talking about the King of the World in Agartha. The King lives in his subteranean realm. He lives forever with the help of a glowing plants/environment that is much nicer to human health. The books tells of the prophecy that the king will return to the surface wants the browns finish their mass migration. So I guess we are close.

Another book, Atlantis Shown to be an Antediluvian Map, talks about the prehistory people being Zeus/Hercules etc...They were superhuman giants (eugenics) and conquered world. They eventually left North America (Hercules settled north of death valley which is Hell itself and the Amazin is the river styx). The book thinks they went back to Europe, as there wouldn't be any place else...

My conclusion is to bridge the two books and say they went down to Agartha and became the people that is now known with their leader as the King of the World.

History lesson over bitches!

Not so fast, the Dibbler is here.

in the part of the speech you posted, hitler literally does not make any wish, let alone express any intent or motive, he only makes a prediction of a bad outcome. i told you this like 4 times now.
regarding the wannsee conference, you're simply meant to take at face value that all the "euphemisms" are "totally about this grand conspiracy and intent to gas all these jews in a coordinated effort", there is zero evidence.

Ahh right, so again I simply have to not see with my eyes but be guided by what I am told. Not very insightful, but your continued insistence on dodging my initial question has at least informed me of how powerful a pressure point it is.

how do you cope with the fact that the holocaust depends on a vague conspiracy of assumed euphemisms and not a single order or document about it exists? how would they logistically carry it out? telepathically tell the generals and officers?

no i'm the one this whole time telling you to actually think with your own mind instead of reading "the euphemisms in the wannsee conference are talking about the coordinated gassings of trillions of jews" and believing it rather than questioning how they came to the conclusion of it being euphemistic and actually requiring real evidence rather than conspiracy theories of secret speculated handshakes and telepathy.

I'm the coolest, peep a Nazi

rockin' Hugo, not Versace

fuck with me is kamikaze

smokin' Avi to pastrami

with karate to Miyagi

kike killings at my party

ovening a commie

fellow White to a Mugabe

keep a Luger on body

in case a jew wanna Mossad me

marble swazzy in my lobby

plus a bust of our man Addy

I'm so fly, I'm never gaudy

still hotter than wasabi

if you're hatin' then you're probably

racially a little sloppy

straight up slayin' apparatchiks

no debatin' with a Marxist

only gas or Nagasaki

puts an end to their malarkey

start the oven, now I'm shovin'

jews in by the dozen

heat at fourteen hundred-somethin'

he's a glutton for combustion

all the evidence to prove all his claims is hidden under the sahara dunes, but big archeology is too scared to dig all the sand away