Comments by "mpetersen6" (@mpetersen6) on "You're a bunch of legends. Legendary Qu0026A!" video.

Probably any of the fringe element long on speculation a d short on evidence.
3
There is a difference between areas on the continent talking shelf that is above or below sea level and islands that are formed and disappear through geological processes. Volcanic islands do undergo collapse over time but any thing recent would still show up on ocean bottom mapping. Personally I think most if not all early immigration into the Americas (1) took place along the coasts. 1) Aside from Alaska
2
@AlexSalikan The stone circles that Ballard found off of Galipoli in Anzac Cove (1) when foing a survey of the wrecks of Allied warships from WWI certainly show that things were being built. The area was last above sea level 8000 BCE or 8000 years ago. Then there are the structures found in the Bay of Mumbai. I'm not saying that there was some highly advanced technological civilization at that time. Simply there was more going on than we think. 1) entirely by accident.
2
@RandomPlaceHolderName Rather than labeling the earlier stuff far right I think a better term might be Eurocentric or Ethnocentric.
2
@RandomPlaceHolderName No I'm not. I'm referring to the work and outlook that existed pre 1900. As to the use of left or right I think it's a far too simplistic way of looking at politics or social views. A far better method in my opinion is the dual axis method or even better a three axis method. Now just how you define the axis's is another matter.
2
It's my understand that even today the occasional fishing boat from West Africa drifts ashore along the Brazilian coast.
2
@AlexSalikan One needs to keep in mind that the areas of Eurasia that were in glacial conditions and the environments surrounding them only contained a small portion of hominids. The overwhelming majority of hominids would have lived in regions with far better climate. Also since Neanderthal fossils have been found in the Middle East just where did Neanderthal arise. I don't doubt that Neanderthal had adaptations to the cold in those areas. Part of the problem IMO is for far to long the study of early hominids was too Eurocentric while today is has become too Afrocentric. The whole story of our history is far more complicated than just the ones region.
1
There is also the possibility that the styles evolved independently. Also were the styles in use at the same time.
1
Well horses and camels did exist in North America pre the mega fauna extinction (1) event at some point. I cant recall the current accepted date for their disappearance right now though. Don't get me started on the whole Atlantis thing. OK, maybe I will. Plato imo used the tale as a morality play to display the effects of societal hubris. The whole supposed date coincidence with the YD is nothing more than accidental. That does not mean I do not think that civilization (2) does not go back that far in some form. 1) As to what caused the mega fauna extinction at the YD I think it's a combination of things. A sudden shift in climate, the truely massive floods that happened when melt water was released, and human predation on the serving prey species. As to whether or not an impact event happened I think I will let the experts hammer that out. 2) First we have to define just what "civilization" is. If nothing else Golbeki Tepe and other sites show something was going on. The stone circles that Bob Ballard found in Anzac Cove off of Galipoli clearly show that there sites now underwater that have the potential to have a major effect on our view of pre-history.
1
@TieYourLaurenDown I dont think they were either. I think Plato was creating a fictional society for his morality play. Does that mean Plato didn't have some knowledge of the disaster that swamped the Minoans? He may well of had some knowledge that a society had existed. After all the oral tales that were turned into The Illiad and The Odessy were certainly around. There were probably others that we don't know about simply because the oral tradition died out and any surviving written copies were lost. I'm highly skeptical of the fringe. Even the ones like Dunn who do raise reasonable questions about how certain artifacts were made tend to go off the deep end. When it comes to artifacts my response is, OK, if the Egyptians* had nothing but copper or copper alloy chisels, saws, sand and dolorite pounders use those tools and reproduce the artifacts in question to the same standard. That in my opinion is not fringe. That falls into the range of experimental archeology. *just the common standard go to for the fringe
1
Could sedentary agriculture develop multiple times. Definitely. Seeing as it likely did in the Middle East, Asia, New Guinea, Meso and South America. Now define agricuture.
1
@Great_Olaf5 I never said they were domesticated. The horse evidently went extinct in North America 10k years ago plus or minus. Camels went extinct about 13k years ago.
1
I for one object to the "far right archeology" definition. I'm not saying fringe groups can't or won't latch on too certain ideas. That does not mean the original idea proposed is far right. And as to the wack nut job proponents. They already have a big enough platform. But one of the best things (1) that has come out of the fringe element is the challenge to conventional archeology is that if you say that this is how something was done or this is how they performed the work needed to create certain artifacts that the archeologists should prove it by using those methods to recreate the works. And to the finish and level of precision seen in those artifacts. If that's considered far right then the definition of right and left have changed radically. (1) Maybe the only good thing. In a way it's funny. Questioning authority is often seen as a good thing. Except in the field of archeology. And especially Egyptology.
1
I'm not sure about fossils but there is circumstantial evidence circa 30k ago. I personally think a lot of evidence is underwater.
1