• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Graham Hancock (General / Compendium Thread On His Work)

Amoradala said:
There is geological evidence that catastrophic floods DID happen overnight.
The sudden melting of ice caps due to sudden superheating from comet impact.
Click to expand...
What evidence is that? (Asks the geologist)
 
Hi Sharon,
Please take a look at the video above ( if you have time ;/) i’d Be interested to hear your thoughts on the geological evidence Randall presents.
The last hour in particular is filled with photographs of evidence of catastrophic flood erosion.
 
This thread is what is so frustrating to readers of Graham’s work.

Commenters are eager to post ad hominem attacks on his academic qualifications or personal habits, and even when they are not familiar with his work personally - trawl other sites to copy paste disparaging reviews (that also show ignorance of his writing ) and generally join the mob denigration.

But when evidence is presented that could (and perhaps should) be discussed. . .

Silence.
 
Regional sudden flooding isn't odd. Is there anything to indicate it has to do with a sudden melting of the ice caps?
 
Amoradala said:
Hi Sharon,
Please take a look at the video above ( if you have time ;/) i’d Be interested to hear your thoughts on the geological evidence Randall presents.
The last hour in particular is filled with photographs of evidence of catastrophic flood erosion.
Click to expand...

Do you have links to the geological studies which Randall used as references to draw upon when he was preparing his theories? Or even their titles?
 
Probably on Randall’s website and the appendices of his books and papers.
 
Catastrophic flood erosion is not the same as the idea of a sudden blast of great heat causing masses of ice to melt.
 
Amoradala said:
Probably on Randall’s website and the appendices of his books and papers.
Click to expand...

But do you know of any scientific books or articles which back up his beliefs? I'm sure you don't accept the theories just based on what is in the vid. A picture of a rock on it's own doesn't prove anything.
 
INT21 - Yes it is.

ramonmercado - You are missing the point of what Graham and Randall are presenting

These are new theories that are not part of traditional or current academia.

They are well aware of established and accepted theories, they are presenting their new theories that fit the evidence they present.

The evidence here (that is presented in the last hour of the above video) is solid and provable.
It's millions of tons of rock formation. These rock formations can be examined at any time by anyone.

They ask - if these formations weren't formed by flood erosion, then what DID cause them ?

A picture of a rock doesn't prove anything ?
Hmm, Sharon Hill might not agree.
 
Last edited:
The valley I live in was caused by millions of tons of water.

But it was in the form of ice.

A glacial valley carved out by the ice moving.

The original subject of the thread was that a sudden great heat event cause a huge mass of ice to melt at grear speed.

Ice just doesn't behave that way.
 
They theorise that a comet impact superheated the atmosphere causing rapid melting of vast areas of ice.
This rapid thaw caused flooding of unimaginable size and intensity.

These floods swept everything up with them- a rapid moving slurry of mud, sand, icebergs and rocks of tremendous size and weight (and whatever else it crossed)

This tremendously heavy and abrasive mix wore the landscape in readable and recognisable patterns.
 
Would not this have killed everything on the planet ?
 
Yes most lifeforms and humans - but for a few.
A few from Africa perhaps.
 
Why would Africa be exempt from the global flood ?
 
Our human ancestors originated from Africa (according to current anthropological theories)
 
The body of the Sphinx has evidence of severe water erosion estimated at 12 thousand years ago.
The originators of the Sphinx may have been a technological civilisation wiped out by this - (the Earth's most recent ) cataclysm.
 
The destruction of Doggerland and the creation of the English Channel were both catastophic floods. But they weren't caused by meteors or sudden ice-cap melting. These events were caused by ice dams bursting and/or cliff collapse in Norway.
 
eburacum said:
The destruction of Doggerland and the creation of the English Channel were both catastophic floods. But they weren't caused by meteors or sudden ice-cap melting.
Click to expand...
What caused them?
 
Amoradala said:
INT21 - Yes it is.

ramonmercado - You are missing the point of what Graham and Randall are presenting

These are new theories that are not part of traditional or current academia.

They are well aware of established and accepted theories, they are presenting their new theories that fit the evidence they present.

The evidence here (that is presented in the last hour of the above video) is solid and provable.
It's millions of tons of rock formation. These rock formations can be examined at any time by anyone.

They ask - if these formations weren't formed by flood erosion, then what DID cause them ?

A picture of a rock doesn't prove anything ?
Hmm, Sharon Hill might not agree
.
Click to expand...

I said a picture of a rock doesn't prove anything. What geological reports back up the claims? If the evidence is there then present it. They make the claims (as do you).
 
ramonmercado, thanks so much for taking the time and interest to post in this thread.

A photo of a rock (or in this case rock formation) tells us a lot - and even more to a Geologist. How else do you suggest he shows us physical evidence of his theories ? (Other than charter a plane to take us to the location, so to stand next to him whilst he points at it ? This would be prohibitively expensive.)
The option to visit these locations is of course open to all at their own leisure and discretion.

For convienience and efficiancy here, photographs are presented.

The theories (his claims) for what caused these rock formations are not represented in traditional or current academic papers or studies. They are new theories of his own, and he is presenting them in the hope of discussion and critisism by established geologists and academics.
If they can suggest an alternative theory that explains the creation of these rock formations that is evidentially provable - I'm sure he will happily concede his claims

Please take the time to watch the last hour of the video above to understand more of what he suggests caused the rock formations in the photographs that he uses to illustrate his theories.

But remember it is done in the spirit of discussion not confrontation. He doesn't want to disrupt careers or embarrass academics but set out an explanation that forwards new understanding of our history.
 
And just to be clear.
The rock formations in the photographs show evidence of erosion caused not by gradual increase in water levels.

But extreme erosion caused by almost unimaginably ferocious and turbulent catastrophic force of water and debris.

A body of water strong enough to carry massive house sized boulders that continuously crashed against the standing rocks - rounding their edges, ploughing deep troughs and grooves and boring deep pot holes into solid Basalt rock.
 
From wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm

Scientific Paradigm: (Excerpt)
An example of a currently accepted paradigm would be the standard model of physics. The scientific method allows for orthodox scientific investigations into phenomena that might contradict or disprove the standard model; however grant funding would be proportionately more difficult to obtain for such experiments, depending on the degree of deviation from the accepted standard model theory the experiment would test for. To illustrate the point, an experiment to test for the mass of neutrinos or the decay of protons (small departures from the model) is more likely to receive money than experiments that look for the violation of the conservation of momentum, or ways to engineer reverse time travel.

Paradigm Paralysis:

Perhaps the greatest barrier to a paradigm shift, in some cases, is the reality of paradigm paralysis: the inability or refusal to see beyond the current models of thinking.[19] This is similar to what psychologists term confirmation bias. Examples include rejection of Aristarchus of Samos', Copernicus', and Galileo's theory of a heliocentric solar system, the discovery of electrostatic photography, xerography and the quartz clock.
 
Amoradala said:
The rock formations in the photographs show evidence of erosion caused not by gradual increase in water levels.
But extreme erosion caused by almost unimaginably ferocious and turbulent catastrophic force of water and debris.
A body of water strong enough to carry massive house sized boulders that continuously crashed against the standing rocks - rounding their edges, ploughing deep troughs and grooves and boring deep pot holes into solid Basalt rock.
Click to expand...
Read my link about glacial lake outburst floods. These sort of violent events are relatively commonplace, not only on Earth, but on Mars too. Meteors have nothing to do with it.
 
eburacum said:
Read my link about glacial lake outburst floods. These sort of violent events are relatively commonplace, not only on Earth, but on Mars too. Meteors have nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...

But unlikely to happen en masse simultaneously around the globe. I also doubt if there were any glacial lakes in the vicinity of the Sphinx.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top