Youtube comments of Cloud Dragon Arts (@JulianaAndersson).

  1. 67
  2. 32
  3. 30
  4. 30
  5. 27
  6. 22
  7. 10
  8. 10
  9. 7
  10. 7
  11. 7
  12. 7
  13. 6
  14. 6
  15. 5
  16. 4
  17. 4
  18. 4
  19. 3
  20. 3
  21. 3
  22. 3
  23. 3
  24. 3
  25. 3
  26. 3
  27. 3
  28. 3
  29. 3
  30. 3
  31. 2
  32. 2
  33. Hancock operates from a lot of cognitive biases… that is normal. But he needs to challenge his cultural cognitive biases… like each one of us need to do… it is very human… it’s basically a brain shortcut in thinking… he also has never taken a logic class. Obviously … He doesn’t have a method to formulate solid arguments or know how to reliably test those hypotheses…just like most of his audience… that’s why he speaks to and for his audience so well… people are not taught how to determine truth from falsehoods… and couldn’t critically think their way out of a brown paper bag… it’s why he feels “attacked” when people challenge his views… Hancock also consistently uses double standards… what he holds others (Dibble) up to he doesn’t use that same standard towards himself… the biggest DS is when he asked Dibble if he had ever been to a particular site and then went on to state that he couldn’t speak on it because he hadn’t actually been there. Yet that is what Hancock is asking us to do… trust him from his pictures and experiences, when we haven’t actually been there. He inconsistently applies qualifiers when they suit him. The other thing you speak to is experts in one field are not automatic experts in another.. Hancock is an expert in media and journalism. Not geology/archeology/physics/astrophysics/ nor astronomy… yet he forms his theories based on research of others in the field. Scientist get in to the most trouble when they speak outside their scope… Sagan, Gregg Braden, Hancock…. L. Ron Hubbard…. chiropractors… 😂😂😂 I think that’s important to understand… and I can see why Netflix was asked to recategorize to science fiction… Hancock’s scope of expertise is as a writer of stories… investigative journalism… there are important distinctions here and nobody needs to get shamed… or attacked.. this is normal human brain thinking… one must learn and cultivate critical thinking skills
    2
  34. 2
  35. 2
  36. 2
  37. 2
  38. 2
  39. 2
  40. 2
  41. 2
  42. 2
  43. 2
  44. 2
  45. 2
  46. 2
  47. 2
  48. 2
  49. 2
  50. 2
  51. 2
  52. 2
  53. 2
  54. 2
  55. 2
  56. 2
  57. 2
  58. 2
  59. 2
  60. 2
  61. 2
  62. 2
  63. 2
  64. 2
  65. 2
  66. 2
  67. 2
  68. 2
  69. 1
  70. 1
  71. 1
  72. 1
  73.  @AustinKoleCarlisle  there’s a huge difference between an educated, experienced and expert in the field mind — and a closed mind. Dibble= archeology educated, degreed with 10 years in actual field research… Hancock= journalist with an interest in archeology and cool places There can be arguments made that Hancock is actually the closed minded one. This is not about an “open” or “closed” mind, tho…. This is a multidisciplinary, uneducated layperson/citizen journalist with an interest and a professional archeologist with expertise in how archeology is done today. This is a meaningful difference. GH has no evidence for his theories so he has to deflect and argue that the professionals are colluding against him. Which is also a fallacious argument. It’s sleight of hand to misdirect his readers from the truth.. he doesn’t have any actual evidence… just… as he says, “questions”. If he is so interested in actually exploring the unexplored for this lost civilization theory why doesn’t he fund a dig somewhere? When the rubber hits the road, he actually is the slippery one. He could pick anywhere and crowd fund probably a huge amount of $ to do this and yet he still prefers to revisit already known sites that he only has tourist access to. Gotta ask yourself why. In the past archeology was a hobby of the rich. They would fund their own dig explorations. Why isn’t Hancock doing that? Why is he instead just putting forth hippie garbage to not trust professionals and recognized authority and consensus at these sites? He does this on purpose because he has nothing else. After decades of developing this “theory”, he only focuses on the double standard of how his theories aren’t accepted because mean archeologists are just stodgy and rigid, closed minded… that’s not what is happening here… the scariest thing is he uses a lot of the same paranoid tactics cult leaders use. Instead of just reformulating his arguments or finding a dig somewhere…
    1
  74. 1
  75. 1
  76. 1
  77. 1
  78. 1
  79. 1
  80. 1
  81. 1
  82. 1
  83. 1
  84. 1
  85. 1
  86. 1
  87. 1
  88. 1
  89. 1
  90. 1
  91. 1
  92. 1
  93. 1
  94. 1
  95. 1
  96. 1
  97. 1
  98. How come the para Olympics are not a part of this conversation. Para or Special Olympian can not compete against normal able bodied humans… they have their own Olympics Event… and they don’t complain about that… they are legit Olympics… but the unfair advantages are recognized. Why can’t there be a Trans Olympics? Maybe because the numbers are so small as to be almost non existent…. And it could not support itself as an Olympics… Trans women are not female sex. If they were, they would understand. Notice how it’s never trans men that are vocal about this… cause the men’s categories are actually not a thing. They are the OPEN category where literally anyone can compete. Men, women, para, etc… just not everyone can win by entering those competitions…. And that’s the key here… women, trans women, para competitors want at least a realistic chance at winning something… trans women want to WIN… and the only way they can do that is to enter the female only competitive realms… One thing needs to be said here and that’s men are men from birth. Puberty only enhances and matured what is already there… every parent in any part of the world will tell you that, even with large variation, boys are different from girls. In how they think, how they play, energy levels and how they interact with others. There is a difference from birth, not just puberty. Trans should have its own category… and I can almost predict the outcomes between trans males and trans females competing… will they need two separate categories for competition? As they so boldly state: GENDER IS A (false) CONSTRUCT OF SOCIETY… they mean it to be in their favor, to identify how they want, but it can also mean that it is something that is “made up” by an individual about themselves to suit their whimsical “needs”…
    1
  99. 1
  100. 1
  101. 1
  102. 1
  103. 1
  104. 1
  105. 1
  106. 1
  107. 1
  108. 1
  109. 1
  110. 1
  111. 1
  112. 1
  113. 1
  114. 1
  115. 1
  116. 1
  117. 1
  118. 1
  119. 1
  120. 1
  121. 1
  122. 1
  123. 1
  124. 1
  125. 1
  126. 1
  127. 1
  128. 1
  129. 1
  130. 1
  131. 1
  132. 1
  133. 1
  134. 1
  135. 1
  136. 1
  137. 1
  138. 1
  139. 1
  140. 1
  141. 1
  142. 1
  143. 1
  144. 1
  145. 1
  146. 1
  147. 1
  148. 1
  149. 1
  150. 1
  151. 1
  152. 1
  153. 1
  154. 1
  155. 1
  156. 1
  157. 1
  158. 1
  159. 1
  160. 1
  161. 1
  162. 1
  163. 1
  164. 1
  165. 1
  166. 1
  167. 1
  168. 1
  169. 1
  170. 1
  171. 1
  172. 1
  173. 1
  174. 1
  175. 1
  176. 1
  177. 1
  178. 1
  179. 1
  180. 1
  181. 1
  182. 1
  183. 1
  184. 1
  185. 1
  186. 1
  187. 1
  188. 1
  189. 1
  190. 1
  191. 1
  192. 1
  193. 1
  194. 1
  195. 1
  196. 1
  197. 1
  198. 1
  199. 1
  200. 1
  201. 1
  202. 1
  203. 1
  204. 1
  205. 1
  206. 1
  207. 1
  208. 1
  209. 1
  210. 1
  211. 1
  212. 1
  213. 1
  214. 1
  215. 1
  216. 1
  217. 1
  218. 1
  219. 1
  220. 1
  221. 1
  222. 1
  223. 1
  224. 1
  225. 1
  226. 1
  227. 1
  228. 1
  229. 1
  230. 1
  231. 1
  232. Why stay within the last 500 years? When you say “Black Civilization” do you mean in Africa? Also, what are the criteria for “successful”? Cause there are hundreds of societies and tribes that have survived for thousands of years to present day. That is one thing I would consider “successful” in criteria, to last for multiple millennia. Take Ethiopia. Also, the last 500 years has seen the colonization of Africa which has disrupted and destroyed the previous African cultures and civilizations, diverting them from practicing their lifestyle fully. Since we are probably talking Africa, should we even mention North Africa? I mean, can anyone really top the Egyptians when it comes to building highly advanced, artistic and massive stone structures? Who are we comparing this successful civilization to? And in what time period? Cause that really makes a difference. If you are defining the term civilization as something like we have in America in modern times, just know that archeologists don’t really use that word anymore because it is highly ambiguous, prejudicial to non conforming societies and just plain outdated (in a racist sorta way). Historically, it was used against many societies and peoples as a justification for colonization, slavery, racism, and assimilation into Christian European cultural standards. I think you should stop using informal fallacies (mistakes in reasoning) and cognitive biases to construct your arguments. Also, learning some anthropology or archeology would be useful to shine a light on your cognitive distortions. But this is probably way more than you wanted to argue. You just wanted to say black people are incompetent without actually saying black people are incompetent. To address this, there is a direct correlation between the incompetence of black euro-style civilizations to the European colonizers who changed the pre-existing societal structure, many times relocated, then converted, dominated, enslaved, killed, undermined, and finally abandoned (like with Haiti) them. I think any European people who had the same global societal pressures would also look disorganized to the person who comes from the colonizers society. IMHO
    1
  233. 1
  234. 1
  235. 1
  236. 1
  237. 1
  238. 1
  239. 1
  240. 1
  241. 1
  242. 1
  243. 1
  244. 1
  245. 1
  246. 1
  247. 1
  248. 1
  249. 1
  250. 1