> Graham Bruce Hancock… promotes pseudoscientific theories… An example of pseudohistory and pseudoarchaeology, his work has neither been peer reviewed nor published in academic journals.
> Mark Lehner, an American archaeologist and egyptologist, has disputed Schoch's analysis, stating, "You don't overthrow Egyptian history based on one phenomenon like a weathering profile... that is how pseudoscience is done, not real science."
> Historian Ronald H. Fritze has described Schoch as a "pseudohistorical and pseudoscientific writer".
Randall Carlson doesn’t have a wiki page.
I hope anyone who is interested in these people is listening to them out of morbid curiosity and not because they think they are deserving of any credence whatsoever. The scientific method is not optional. If you don’t use it, you’re not a scientist.
Rogan, however, appears to genuinely want to believe (and promote) these theories, whether they have any factual basis or not.
Notice how I never mentioned "science" or "scientist" in my post, because I knew exactly the type of retort I would get - "Look at what Wikipedia says about these guys!". Do I believe everything Graham Hancock peddles? Absolutely not. Some of his ideas are just plain ridiculous. But do I believe that civilization first started with Mesopotamia? Again, absolutely not. There are tons of actual solid evidence out there that we go way back.
And my God, everything isn't about science or the scientific method. Some of this stuff is just plain entertaining to me. Is it really so wrong to listen to these things and just have a great time thinking about crazy and out there stuff?
> Graham Bruce Hancock… promotes pseudoscientific theories… An example of pseudohistory and pseudoarchaeology, his work has neither been peer reviewed nor published in academic journals.
> Mark Lehner, an American archaeologist and egyptologist, has disputed Schoch's analysis, stating, "You don't overthrow Egyptian history based on one phenomenon like a weathering profile... that is how pseudoscience is done, not real science."
> Historian Ronald H. Fritze has described Schoch as a "pseudohistorical and pseudoscientific writer".
Randall Carlson doesn’t have a wiki page.
I hope anyone who is interested in these people is listening to them out of morbid curiosity and not because they think they are deserving of any credence whatsoever. The scientific method is not optional. If you don’t use it, you’re not a scientist.
Rogan, however, appears to genuinely want to believe (and promote) these theories, whether they have any factual basis or not.