Hancock: What are we Debating?

@maxinatorborderls 8 hours ago

In my opinion the Graham Hancock debate should have started with Flint asking Graham to very clearly define exactly which claims he makes about his lost civilization. The way Graham plays he is extremely vague in what his hypothesis entails, and once you demonstrate elements to be false he will crawl back into his motte and say that he never claimed that. When you allow him to be so vague, indeed it is impossible to disprove him. I think when you actually pin him down on some claim, then you can definitely disprove it.

For example, I think a claim of a globe-spanning culture can be clearly disproven, while a claim of wide-spread plant cultivation sometime before the younger dryas can be much harder to disprove. We need to know which elements are and are not part of Graham's hypothesis.<

p>