Always sounds good enough here

I'm liking the new Anton method.

Try the Maono PD200X

I just use a Rode Lavalier II. I find that's really clear. I just use it flat with no EQ. But you can get that very close up 'booming' bottom end with a tiny bit of low end boost.

Highly underrated scholar of the universe !

If you're curious about this topic, there's a good video on the channel "World of Antiquity" describing the sites prior to Gobekli Tepe and the evolution of the architecture in the area. I definitely recommend it.

​@@federicogiana7430Thank you, I'll see if I can find it.

Something solid on the City underwater? Can be hard to tell facts from fiction these days

@@jennifernorman9655 I did find the video, but obviously, KZfaq is shadowing my comment. Let me try again... Channel: World of Antiquity Title: "Did Gobekli Tepe Appear Out of Nowhere? A Reply to Graham Hancock"

Thousands of years to become experts at architecture? Come on dude the architecture there is not rocket science and we went from mule carts to rockets in a few hundred years.

you wont have access to that data because its now in glowie hands 😭👽

I would just love to see them dig down to these cavities. Why everything happens so slowly or not at all amazes me, doesn't exactly instil confidence when experts claim they are just volcanic voids but no intention of proving it. I mean c'mon how easy is it to drill a hole and wack in a camera...could have been done years ago and mystery solved.

it's already been thoroughly debunked as being a natural feature, but of course some people refuse to acknowledge that because they have research grants resting on it being man made.

@@jwenting Thoroughly is drilling a hole and putting a camera in there..Why is that so hard? That would prove beyond a doubt if it is natural. You should be advocating for this yourself.

@@stopcensoringme6296 dude, stop talking with an air of authority about things you clearly aren't familiar with. a camera on a stick is wholly incapable of producing enough information to disprove natural origin.

Well, if you still think there were no great ancient human civilization aka Atlantis and even many more before, that you are on the wrong side of history mate.

hehe

I laughed 😂👍🏻

Ha

bars

I have a love *triangle* for these videos.

was talking to a friend who also watched the other day. I said he's very unbiased an often ends segments by saying something like "Is this definite? No, until we have more evidence it's just a nice idea"

Do a deep dive on the ancient civilization it’s pretty obvious once you do.

I thought this was going to be some bs but this guy has no tinfoil hat on thankfully.

@@myself171Yep, mainstream science narrative is so naive, arrogant & in extreme denial. So much so that they end up not following true scientific rationale & reasoning just so their fragile propped up narrative doesn’t fall over.

​@@jameshannagan4256tinfoil hat in understanding that hunter/gatherers couldnt stack two thoulsand ton rocks on top of eachother? The history is written down but the vatican thieves guild has stolen and locked away over a milion books for NOONE to see.

If he happens to be right, then he is right. Scientists (and I spent my career in STEM) HAVE to stop acting on "faith" - and calling it reason. If facts indicate that its true - then its true - stop with the bull.

Not in this case though. The paper has been heavily scrutinised for poor methodology. The dirt goes to 27000 years. But there are no artifacts at that depth. No indication of human activity. Earliest activity is 5000bce

Thats not really controversial for mainstream archeologists and etnographers.

Ya and one thing you learn quick is how tribal and shitty scientists are. You can't trust them.

@@alhesiad Yes it is.

@@Sgt.chickensInteresting this. I always am fascinated at how dating differentiates the 'structure' from the basic materials like soil used to build the structure. The former is newer when compared to the latter.

I'm not proposing some crazy conspiracy, but I think there's a real possibility humans might've had to re-discover civilization a few times due to natural disaster, disease, war, famine, whatever. A ton of things. I think people tend to underestimate how fragile civilization can be, especially way back in those days when not getting enough rain meant famine, which probably increases violent interactions, and so on. One thing going wrong very wrong back then could easily be the domino that knocks down an entire civilization.

You've been watching too much Ben from Uncharted-X. It's not even pre-dynastic, it's a modern fake gotten from a man who has sold fake stuff in the past. His provenance is non-existing. He claims it came from the ambassador of Czechoslovakia to Egypt at a time when Czechoslovakia didn't exist and there wouldn't have been any ambassador. You should do a little research on Ben and his claims of precision. He's a pseudoscience grifter that also believes the moon is a construction.

I believe Chan Thomas’ theory proposed in his book “The True Adam & Eve Story. It fits & explains a lot of what we see, what we have found & importantly what we haven’t found.

"Precision manufactured"? Not sure where you're getting that from. This isn't some super advanced civilization except in the sense of what was original thought of for civilizations at that time. Context is important. And Anton summed it up well at the end of the video.

The precision argument is complete nonsense. The handles and holes aren't even symmetrical. Banging on about "precision" while ignoring basic facts is a false dilemma. Not to mention the fact that they made them in the old, middle and new kingdom.

Came here just for this. I wish people would use their damn brains and stop trusting mainstream media.

And justly so. AA has been thoroughly debunked for every episode.

​@peterinbrat your comment makes me wanna watch Ancient Apocalypse for a third time.

Science advances one death at a time, imagine how bad it is in the pseudo-science land that is archaeology where people tie their personal narratives into their partially scientific claims, and make into a dogma that can't be questioned. Too much of the old pseudo-scientists' time and too much money being earned in keeping their beliefs alive, they don't want to watch their lives' work going up in flames so they have to diminish and destroy people that oppose their religious views regardless of the evidence provided.

​@@peterinbratthoroughly debunked? That's funny!

To have an agricultural society, you should have something to cultivate. We have to assume those domesticated plants sank with the civilization, because none of the ones we knows is 20.000 years old.

​​@@neutronalchemist3241millets from Eastern Africa has a interesting genetic history, you should read some papers and see. TLDR: millet shows narrowing genetic divergence akin to what you see during domestication several times during the last 600k years. Thought provoking, huh? I don't know what the indigenous crops of the Java Region would be, perhaps Yams? I'd start by looking there.

​@@neutronalchemist3241well, genetic modified croops tend to be more fragile and not be able to survive without human intervention, or they just return to be wild croops without artificial selection, like bananas, they can't survive without us, or maize, it will also degenerate into a crop with poor yield after just a few generations as they are only able to be cultivated with human intervention.

@@derederekat9051 What happened with the neolithic agricultural revolution we know is that, once a crop had been domesticated, it didn't remain there as a close guarded secret. It did spread in many domesticated varieties. The places where emmer, einkorn and barley had been first domesticated are now desert, and the people that domesticated them disappeared before written history, but the domesticated crops didn't disappear with them, or their fertile land. Here instead we have to assume that this supposed crop had been created by this supposed civilization and died with it, without leaving anything behind.

I've have a lot of issues with the idea that humans didn't do agriculture until after the ice age but I don't completely discount it. My problem with the idea is that culturally modern humans evolved by 70,000 years ago, then spread through the length of Eurasia over the next 40,000 years, then about 20,000 years ago the east asian population spread into the Americas. But if none of these populations did agriculture, why? If they didn't have the genetic ability to do agriculture until 10,000 years ago, where did that mutation develop? There's a bunch of independent starts to agriculture in the 5-10 kya range all over eurasia and the Americas, but after 70,000+ years of no agriculture, it's implausible to me that there's a bunch of independent agriculture mutations at about the same time. And if the ability to do agriculture evolved 40kya in Africa, why no agriculture until after the ice age. It's not like agriculture requires a particular level of technology, just recognizing that when you spill seeds someplace the plant you spilled grows there next year and the desire to use that principle to create a more stable food supply. The one idea that seems plausible to me is this: tropical and subtropical areas have lots of easily available food so there's no need to do the hard work needed to domesticate it. But across the mammoth steppe, a new theory is that we ate the partially digested plant material in ruminant guts, so we still had no need for agriculture. But after the big ruminants went extinct, maybe humans all over had to start looking for better sources of food.

Please do not get your information on said info from this channel. Anton is FAR from a history buff let alone his biases are worn on his shirt. I absolutely disagree with ignoring factual scientific evidence because you dont "FEEL" it is right... What a truck load of garbage Anton is feeding his audience now. Sorry Anton, the date is established, Graham Hancock is correct about this place and you just go sit in the corner and cry about it to your fans who seem to listen to every word you say without doing an ounce of research.. This may not be you, you mention the younger dras, you know about the extinction event, don't let this skerptard suppress your knowledge! Keep researching !

it also makes the project faster as you only have to cover the mountain up with rocks , not build it from the ground up with a lot of rocks

If every building is a one story room, or several rooms attached, then what context is there for "building higher" than "let's build a mountain it'll take a few generations, but we live in the tropics, so ¼ of us carry on fishing, ¼ of us keep picking fruit, the rest of us are building a mountain now"

@@archmage_of_the_aetherno

@@Dave-spacenot that impressive can be done with 100 men and rope

Pseudoarchaeologists will tell you archaeologists look down on ancient humans - that they think there was no way an ancient advanced civilizations existed that taught everyone to make pyramids. Actual archaeologists will say they believe ancient humans were smart enough to figure pyramids out on their own and that they're not making claims on ancient advanced civilizations until there's actual archaeological evidence.

Fuckin form a committee and start lobbying, m8! You have our support.

Nah, humanity moved from pyramids to spheres

That would be kinda awesome. Build something similar to the great pyramid but bigger. We’ve wasted far more money on other dumb crap. Really wouldn’t be that colossal of an undertaking for us.

It's more that pyramids are, by virtue of their shape, very easy to build and build big

How about a huge ziggurat?

Ancient architects just released a video with updates on gobekli tepe, they found what they think are houses and other structures.

@@EvilFandango interesting, thanks

It's not that deep bro

Agree, after 20,000 years there would be nothing left of our civilization except masonry, so we can assume this is the case here too. Biologist tell us that homo-sapiens in our current form arrived 100,000 years ago as the modern human. Logically if that civilization carved stones that means tool usage. That yields: modern humans had tools thousands of years before than previously shown, thus anything that we believe early civilizations could do with tools also applies to these people.

@@Ramiromasters One thing I do kinda find funny about this is that, if this is some kind of monument or the like, its age at least lines up with the oldest cave paintings.

​@@Ramiromastersmodern humans have, to the best of my knowledge, been around for at least 3 to 4 hundred thousand years based on remains found. The earliest evidence for tool use is dated to over two and a half million years ago by a different hominid species. If tools were around before homo sapiens then it wouldn't surprise me in the least if we had been using tools for our entire existence. Three to four hundred thousand years is a long time that we know almost nothing about. Nothing as of yet indicates anything unusual, but anything could be hiding in that time frame.

​@@kevinhank17the largest finds of homoerectus tools was in India dated about 1 mya. There was a land bridge connecting India, Ethiopia and Madagascar where homoerectus settled and moved back and forth from India and Ethiopia. The first homosapiens might have developed out of this constant migration and would explain why Indian legends talk about India one million years ago. The oldest Homosapien remains were found in Morocco dated over 300,000 years ago. I myself wouldn't be surprised if Homosapiens appeared closer to 400,000 ya.

​@Ramiromasters I disagree as humans have created landfills the size of very large hills where literal tons of debris would still exist.

Yep. People like to argue and say people didn't live in Gobekli. Of course not. You don't live in the temple. You live neaby. I just hate how slowly they're uncovering things. I want translated pictogram stories that make the epic of Gilgamesh look like Hello Moon. Sadly it will take decades.

I've heard of sites which are perhaps 1000 years older - but 3 to 4000 years? What exactly do you mean?

What a question. There's a few sites in the Tazpeller region that are older than Gobekli Tepe and one of them is 3-4 thousand years older. Don't take my word for it. Do some searching. There's info and videos out there that discuss these sites. @@bjornfeuerbacher5514

I am a Hindu and according to ancient Hindu scriptures, humans are BILLIONS of years old and are NOT NATIVE to Earth. Here is merely SOME evidence suggesting not only a human presence on Earth BILLIONS of years ago, but also suggesting complex human civilisations on Earth BILLIONS of years ago: * A human skull fragment from Hungary dated between 250,000 and 450,000 years ago * A human footprint with accompanying paleoliths (stones deliberately chipped into a recognisable tool type), bone tools, hearths and shelters, discovered in France and dated 300,000 to 400,000 years * Paleoliths in Spain, a partial human skeleton and paleoliths in France; two English skeletons, one with associated paleoliths, ALL at least 300,000 years old * Skull fragments and paleoliths in Kenya and advanced paleoliths, of modern human manufacture, in the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania, dated between 400,000 and 700,000 years * Neoliths (the most advanced stone tools and utensils) in China of a type that indicate full human capacity, dated to 600,000 years * Hearths, charcoal, human femurs and broken animal bones, all denoting modern humanity, in Java, dated to 830,000 years * An anatomically modern human skull discovered in Argentina and dated between 1 million and 1.5 million years (eoliths, which are chipped pebbles thought to be the earliest known tools, at Monte Hermoso, also in Argentina, are believed to be between 1 and 2.5 million years old). * A human tooth from Java yielding a date between 1 and 1.9 million years * Incised bones, dated between 1.2 and 2.5 million years, have been found in Italy * Discoveries of paleoliths, cut and charred bones at Xihoudu in China and eoliths from Diring Yurlakh in Siberia dated to 1.8 million years * Eoliths in India, paleoliths in England, Belgium, Italy and Argentina, flint blades in Italy, hearths in Argentina, a carved shell, pierced teeth and even two human jaws all bearing a minimum date of 2 million years Curiously enough, several of the very earliest artifact discoveries display a truly extraordinary level of sophistication. In Idaho, for example, a 2-million-year-old clay figurine was unearthed in 1912. But even this discovery does not mark an outer limit. Bones, vertebrae and even complete skeletons have been found in Italy, Argentina and Kenya. Their minimum datings range from 3 million to 4 million years. A human skull, a partial human skeleton and a collection of neoliths discovered in California have been dated in excess of 5 million years. A human skeleton discovered at Midi in France, paleoliths found in Portugal, Burma and Argentina, a carved bone and flint flakes from Turkey all have a minimum age of 5 million years. How far back can human history be pushed with discoveries like these? The answer seems to be a great deal further than orthodox science currently allows. As if the foregoing discoveries were not enough, we need to take account of: * Paleoliths from France dated between 7 and 9 million years * An eolith from India with a minimum dating of 9 million years * Incised bones from France, Argentina and Kenya no less than 12 million years old * More paleolith discoveries from France, dated at least 20 million years ago * Neoliths from California in excess of 23 million years * Three different kinds of paleoliths from Belgium with a minimum dating of 26 million years * An anatomically modern human skeleton, neoliths and carved stones found at the Table Mountain, California and dated at least 33 million years ago But even 33 million years is not the upper limit. A human skeleton found in Switzerland is estimated to be between 38 and 45 million years old. France has yielded up eoliths, paleoliths, cut wood and a chalk ball, the minimum ages of which range from 45 to 50 million years. There's still more. In 1960, H. L. Armstrong announced in Nature magazine the discovery of fossil human footprints near the Paluxy River, in Texas. Dinosaur footprints were found in the same strata. In 1983, the Moscow News reported the discovery of a fossilised human footprint next to the fossil footprint of a three-toed dinosaur in the Turkamen Republic. Dinosaurs have been extinct for approximately 65 million years. In 1983, Professor W. G. Burroughs of Kentucky reported the discovery of three pairs of fossil tracks dated to 300 million years ago. They showed left and right footprints. Each print had five toes and a distinct arch. The toes were spread apart like those of a human used to walking barefoot. The foot curved back like a human foot to what appeared to be a human heel. There was a pair of prints in the series that showed a left and right foot. The distance between them is just what you'd expect in modern human footprints. In December 1862, The Geologist carried news of a human skeleton found 27.5 m (90 ft) below the surface in a coal seam in Illinois. The seam was dated between 286 and 320 million years. It's true that a few eoliths, skull fragments and fossil footprints, however old, provide no real backing for the idea of advanced prehistoric human civilisations. But some other discoveries do. In 1968, an American fossil collector named William J. Meister found a fossilised human shoe print near Antelope Spring, Utah. There were trilobite fossils in the same stone, which means it was at least 245 million years old. Close examination showed that the sole of this shoe differed little, if at all, from those of shoes manufactured today. In 1897, a carved stone showing multiple faces of an old man was found at a depth of 40 m (130 ft) in a coal mine in Iowa. The coal there was of similar age. A piece of coal yielded up an encased iron cup in 1912. Frank J. Kenwood, who made the discovery, was so intrigued he traced the origin of the coal and discovered it came from the Wilburton Mine in Oklahoma. The coal there is about 312 million years old. In 1844, Scottish physicist Sir David Brewster reported the discovery of a metal nail embedded in a sandstone block from a quarry in the north of England. The head was completely encased, ruling out the possibility that it had been driven in at some recent date. The block from which it came is approximately 360 million years old. On 22 June 1844, The Times reported that a length of gold thread had been found by workmen embedded in stone close to the River Tweed. This stone too was around 360 million years old. Astonishing though these dates may appear to anyone familiar with the orthodox theory of human origins, they pale in comparison with the dates of two further discoveries. According to Scientific American, dated 5 June 1852, blasting activities at Meeting House Hill, in Dorchester, Massachusetts, unearthed a metallic, bell-shaped vessel extensively decorated with silver inlays of flowers and vines. The workmanship was described as 'exquisite'. The vessel was blown out of a bed of Roxbury conglomerate dated somewhat earlier than 600 million years. In 1993, Michael A. Cremo and Richard L. Thompson reported the discovery 'over the past several decades' of hundreds of metallic spheres in a pyrophyllite mine in South Africa. The spheres are grooved and give the appearance of having been manufactured. If so, the strata in which they were found suggest they were manufactured 2.8 BILLION years ago. What are we to make of these perplexing discoveries? They cannot simply be dismissed. If even ONE of these discoveries is TRUE (and I believe that MANY if not ALL of these discoveries are TRUE), then it changes EVERYTHING that modern mainstream anthropologists THOUGHT they knew about the human species.

@@Rishi123456789 "A human skull fragment from Hungary dated between 250,000 and 450,000 years ago" What does that have to do with "complex human civilisations on Earth BILLIONS of years ago"?!? And so on, and so on, etc. Your oldest example in the whole first paragraph 2 million years old. That's still 500 times shorter than even _one_ billion years! Can't you calculate? :D "In Idaho, for example, a 2-million-year-old clay figurine was unearthed in 1912." Where and when exactly was this published? How was the age determined? (And again, 2 million years is _still_ 500 times shorter than even _one_ billion years! "Bones, vertebrae and even complete skeletons have been found in Italy, Argentina and Kenya. Their minimum datings range from 3 million to 4 million years. A human skull, a partial human skeleton and a collection of neoliths discovered in California have been dated in excess of 5 million years. A human skeleton discovered at Midi in France, paleoliths found in Portugal, Burma and Argentina, a carved bone and flint flakes from Turkey all have a minimum age of 5 million years." Humans? Do you mean Homo sapiens? Or distant relatives, other hominids? (And 4 million years is _still_ 250 times shorter than even _one_ billion years!) And where are your sources for all these claims? (If you plan to say something like "google for yourself!", that will be taken as an admission that you simply made these claims up.) "An anatomically modern human skeleton, neoliths and carved stones found at the Table Mountain, California and dated at least 33 million years ago. . A human skeleton found in Switzerland is estimated to be between 38 and 45 million years old. France has yielded up eoliths, paleoliths, cut wood and a chalk ball, the minimum ages of which range from 45 to 50 million years." Again: Sources for these claims...? And again: All of this is _still_ shorter than even _one_ billion years. Shorter _by far_. "In 1960, H. L. Armstrong announced in Nature magazine the discovery of fossil human footprints near the Paluxy River, in Texas" Seriously?!? :D :D :D There are _still_ people around who believe in the Paluxy footprints?!? Even most creationists in the USA admit now that these aren't genuine!!! :D :D :D Get an education! And by the way: this was _never_ published in Nature.magazine, and especially not in 1960!!! Where did you get that from?!? Whoever told you this simply lied to you. Or did you make that up yourself? "In 1993, Michael A. Cremo and Richard L. Thompson reported the discovery 'over the past several decades' of hundreds of metallic spheres in a pyrophyllite mine in South Africa. The spheres are grooved and give the appearance of having been manufactured." And again: Source for that claim...? (And all of the others!) "What are we to make of these perplexing discoveries? They cannot simply be dismissed." Yes, they can, because obviously most of these are simply made up, i. e., these are lies. "If even ONE of these discoveries is TRUE (and I believe that MANY if not ALL of these discoveries are TRUE), then it changes EVERYTHING that modern mainstream anthropologists THOUGHT they knew about the human species." Wrong. Many of the discoveries you listed right at the beginning are totally unsurprising and would change essentially nothing.

And less than 5% of Gobekli Tepe has been excavated.

The symbolism of the handbag across all these ancient sites is not a coincidence. All these cultures were in contact with one another or something or somebody taught them all something to do with that handbag haha

@@MichaelPK03 Why does every language throughout all of time have the same meaning for the Sirius star.

Personally, that’s not a fun fact. To me, it’s an annoying fact and I’m trying not think about it lest I become enraged. Come back when you have a fact that is actually fun, like Karajan Tepe was made of peanut brittle

No shit genius

*you're

Mwahaha

After this video.... not so much

Pretentious much?

A defensive mound what makes you say that?

Heresy. There is no funding that would support such a study to establish such a claim. Ergo, you are a fake news spreading heretic. Just stick with what the commercial scientists tell you is true. Stop with all of that presumption that humans have always had the ability to modify their environment to survive.

Defensive mound lol this is megalithic structure not comparable to anything of that age.

The world is full of mounds built by ancient people for spiritual reasons. Even simple burial mounds which are all over Europe. And all the known big pyramids like those in Egypt, Mesoamerica, Nubia etc were made for spiritual and cultural reasons too. You don't see too many "defensive mounds" around. For defense civilisations usually find natural hills and build forts and villages on top. Smaller defensive mounds as are needed to protect from horizontal gunfire in modern warfare are irrelevant for the ancient world.

​@@dfpguitar- Spears, arrows and bullets follow different trajectories, but the basic idea is the same. Among smaller groups it was closer to guerilla warfare though -- hit-and-run skirmishes, predawn raids, capturing members of a rival group, etc. Defensive emplacements only make sense if you're going to stay put for a while, and hunter-gatherers need to move around a lot; they go where the food is, instead of fencing the food in.

Why be skeptical? Anatomically modern humans have been around for hundreds of thousands of years, and most of the choice area for settlements is now under water!

What do you even mean by “look for confirmation bias” - it’s part and parcel of the scientific method to check for bias in the work of yourself and others, and when you find it and deal with it - thats a good thing, not a problem. What scientists specifically are you talking about and in what case did they specifically engage in whatever it is you think you are talking about?

scientists? everything has been corrupted by money and power. We just went through years of the ultimate example.

I remember seeing another video a couple years back saying Atlantis is actually here. Some where south of the gap between Java and Sumatra.

Did you miss Anton's point that this probably is _not_ a pyramid that was built, but simply a geological feature?

@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 Not me, Anton is confused. The pyramid's built over a natural geologic formation and hexagonal basalt rock which comprises the pyramid is naturally formed but moved from where they're formed to the pyramid site and used as construction material. Even establishment archeologists, who say the site is recent (yes the top layer is) admit that the natural basalt columns are used as construction material. The Great Pyramid of Egypt is ALSO built over a natural geologic formation.

@@danielch6662 - There's no such place as Atlantis - it was a metaphor created by Plato.

@@FrostekFerenczy- Actually not true - Plato had a relative who preceded him by quite a few years - his relative was named Solon - he was a literate and curious Greek person who traveled to Egypt where in conversation with some scholarly men of Egypt (priests) he was told about temple inscriptions there which recorded Egyptian history going back many many generations - at that time Egypt was called Khem - the history recorded in those temple inscriptions told of a great catastrophic event that took place about 9,000 years earlier… Plato was recording Solon’s information for posterity (us) - if you are interested you can look it up I’ve given you several very good clues. Good luck,

Are we going to literally dig up every extinct volcano because someone detects an empty magma chamber, dates some dirt, and declares the whole thing an absurdly old pyramid without even a shard of pottery to back up their claim?

What do you think? I'd guess probably not.

Thank you, I did not know until you taught me. :)

THANK YOU I WILL LOOK THIS UP I AM INTERESTED IN THIS STUFF GUESS MAYBE? BECAUSE A FAMILY MEMBER WORKED ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES ASIDE FROM HIS REG JOB SOME OF US AREN'T INTERESTED I AM I THINK WE CAN LEARN FROM THE PAST

This is false. Here is what wikipedia has to say (check yourself for better sources) "It has been suggested that these fish traps may be the oldest human construction in the world. The age of the fish traps is currently unknown. ... An indication of when the Brewarrina fish traps were constructed may possibly be gauged by considering changes in the flow of the Barwon River. Construction of the fish traps would only have worked if low water levels were relatively frequent and regular in the river. Evidence from the lower Darling River indicates that during the past 50,000 years prolonged periods of low flow occurred between 15,000 and 9,000 years ago, and then from about 3,000 years ago up until the present time. Whether or not these dates also apply to low flow periods in the Barwon River is currently unknown."

Unfortunately, the exact age of the Brewarrina fish traps remains unknown. This lack of certainty stems from the difficulty in dating such ancient structures built from natural materials. However, various estimations and suggestions offer insights into their potential age: Estimated age: 40,000 years: This estimate is found in some tourist information resources and museums like the Brewarrina Aboriginal Cultural Museum. However, it lacks concrete archaeological evidence. 1,000 to 3,000 years: This estimate comes from archaeological research conducted by Dr. Richard Wright. He compared the Brewarrina fish traps to other similar structures in New South Wales and suggests a younger age range.

@@HippopotamusPencil You believe wikipedia...Now that's funny!

My love for Ü has almost killed me.

Though, I aspeCept Ur Semi Tally a Hoe a Po!! O Gee. Butt i❤Ü.

yes, that was quite a statement

@@longrange957 It stunning how many people on a science oriented channel are "skeptical" (willfully ignorant) of physical ancient architecture well known to museums and most native tribes and which anyone can visit. Half of USAs major cities are built over these ancient mound sites (St. Lewis for example) and the natives say their people didn't build them but a different people who came before.

Oh course! Just look at how they refuse to dig up Gobekli Tepe while at the same time telling everyone how Gobekli Tepe proved everything was wrong!

i am sure they use a multidisciplinary team also archeologist are not dumb

And vise versa 🔄

That's because the current locals in Nusa Penida came from Java, whereas the original inhabitants retreated back into Lombok (where they originally came from).

@@andrewsuryali8540 I don't know if that's completely accurate. Lombok is majority Muslim, and nusa penida has temples that are a mix of Hindu and Buddhist. the locals claim the temples predate the people. although I was told that bali used the Island as a penal colony for the dark wizard

@@danielroberts2012 Lombok people weren't always Muslim. Originally they were a mix of shamanistic peoples with a sprinkling of Hindu-Buddhist influence. The conversion of the Lombok people into Islam came about as a result of two invasions (also by Javanese people - but Muslims) in the 16th century. The ruins of Nusa Penida came from before this invasion.

@@andrewsuryali8540 that makes sense, I always love talking to the locals about their history when I go to the island. I feel like this is a region that will eventually be forgotten to time

what do you mean about that statement?

​@@TheRepainI think their comment is obvious. What lasts longer, wood or stone? 🤔 Ancient people almost certainly had wooden constructions as well, that have long withered away. Stone lasts way longer though...

​@@southernflatlandAnd buried wood?

The Negrito are still around. No relation to the hobbit

@@christopherellis2663 I think this is what you're saying, but to clarify, the "hobbit people" were a different species from us, Homo floresiensis, who were probably directly descended from Homo erectus in Asia. Negritos are anatomically modern Homo sapiens just like us.

Homo floresiensis ~190,000-50,000 years ago.

Maybe, 1000 years ago my Javanese ancestor were recorded in history they were granted tax free land & monopoly of the twin & dwarf people that as a must have sacrificial in king coronation ritual, i don't know if the dwarf was related to the Hobbit.

Homo floresiensis were nicknamed the Hobbits by some @@christopherellis2663

It’s more that there were less people to innovate large scale things for 200,000 years.

9:15 It seems that innovation wasn't really part of our makeup, I think (besides far fewer people to innovate and there are probably tipping points where reaching a certain state makes innovation more likely) that there might also have been some mutations in our DNA that made us more innovative.

It doesnt take many people with free time to think up lots of things. Its getting that free time that is hardish to do, so goes the idea of hunter gather vs agrarian. I find that poor reasoning. People had to figure out how, to figure out how to build the pyramids. Like we take for granted some very basic information. Levers, Pullyes with their 2:1 ratio per loop. 45* slope is the steepest, most stable an angle you can get in our gravity. And thats just to figure out the concept of moving a block and the end shape you want to end up with. Then you are fighting welp the one guy in 1000 who knew how to do one part of this died and he didnt have anyone to teach it to. Once writing came along that helped. Then once numbers came along it went even faster. This will blow your mind, some cultures even with math, did not have a concept of fractions. They understood 'half that thing' but did not have maths for it. Makes it hard to build things.

There's a lot of evidence humans were anatomically the same but not psychologically. There is zero evidence of art beyond about 100,000 years ago at most for example and there were several unexplained sudden changes in human group sizes and artifact types during that time period. One interesting theory is that humans lacked an instinct towards territoriality, which is an instinct that only emerges where food is plentiful but concentrated. That theory suggests this instinct evolved in south-east africa 80,000-95,000 years ago around shellfish deposits (think massive fields of oysters and clams covering every rock for a mile) since this is the area and time period we first see art and some major increases in group size. Regardless, we have a shitton of artifacts and none are of an ancient advanced civilization. It would only take one metal tool to change that. Gold for instance would easily last unaffected by the elements to this day. Yet we find nothing.

I became convinced that there IS a recurring natural disaster resetting the human advance roughly every 12 thousand years. Mythology, legends, religious traditions ALL teach around the world that ours is the 5th advanced human civilization on Earth and the previous ones were destroyed by fire from the sky and gigantic floods. Therefore this discovery is not a mystery but a new piece to the huge puzzle.

There is a misconception in your thesis, which is that people will avoid building on and around an active volcano. All the major Javanese volcanos actually preserve multiple layers of habitation around them. There are layers of buried temple complexes at the foot of Merapi volcano (one of the most active in the world), some being dated to within half a century of the preceding layer. People simply continued coming back to the same place in-between eruptions to build and rebuild temple complexes at the same place, sometimes within living memory of the destruction of the previous ones. Even today people still do this. There was a mystic living on Merapi who was believed by locals to have been the "keyholder" of the mountain. His family had been doing this "job" for many years and he came to national prominence in 2006 when he and a few families of his followers refused to leave the volcano after the government issued an evacuation order. That time his house got wrecked and he caught burns across half of his body. Well, by 2008 the house had been rebuilt and MORE people had moved in around it, drawn by his supposed mystical powers because in 2006 only he got injured. All his followers survived with minor scratches and burns. In 2010 Merapi erupted again and this time wiped out the community, including the mystic. Well, guess what? In 2013 Merapi erupted again and people found out that the community had rebuilt itself and was once again refusing to evacuate. Merapi erupted again this year, so I looked around in the webz to find out whether these people were still around. Yep. Still there.

@@andrewsuryali8540 That is very interesting. I did mean global trends but did not know that it was done in the same region. That could be a very old cultural phenomenon that connects them with this pyramid but also people do build near volcanoes when they lose the memory of how dangerous they are due to the great farmland (e.g. Naples). That and home is home wherever it is would explain people rebuilding on very active volcanic systems. Perhaps I'm wrong and there's a different reason why this pyramid or "pyramid" was built on. We'll find out in time. Alternating layers of pyramid and tephra would be an interesting semi-natural parallel to Mesoamerican pyramid building. To be clear I don't think that the core structure was built by people. A culture that could build a pyramid 27,000 years ago would surely show up all over the archaeological record of the region and it would be a hell of a dark age before the next one would be built. Thanks for the information about Marapi and its mystics. That'll be good to read about.

@@andrewsuryali8540 the key word is "around them" and NOT "on top of them"

@@SAOS451316 The "pyramid" is bogus. Or at least the dating is. What the structure is is a cinder cone that people have unintentionally shaped over a very long period of time into something that sort of looks like a pyramid if you squint enough. Then the latest bunch of people realized that, hey, this sort-of-regularly-shaped giant structure looks like the perfect place to build something on, and built a bunch of surface structures that gave the whole place it's pyramidy final looks.

@@elenabob4953 No, literally ON them. Didn't you read that whole part about the mystic and his followers? They were living right next to the peak. What's crazier is that there's a regular market around 100 meters from the compound and the local merchants have no connection to the mystic. They just set up shop there because there are people around to trade with - villagers and tourists.

Digging more would have been nice. Now I'm waiting for the drilling into the hollows shown on the scans