The Paranormal, UFO's, and Mysteries of the Unknown

Void said:

I sort of see what you guys are saying, but it still doesn't really make a lot of sense. I don't see, for example, Egypt being so all-powerful (or at least influential) as to shut down any significant research that might show there were older advanced civs than those that made the pyramids. The pyramids are still amazing and worth visiting (I assume, never been there) no matter what discoveries are made. And like I said, I just don't see a lot of big money being at stake for the people that are researching Egypt that will suddenly dry up if something older comes around. Sure a few might get hosed, but I don't think we're talking big money like climate change. But I could be wrong.

It just doesn't make sense to me that there is some big inertia to keep the "accepted" theories going like there is with climate change. Fields like astronomy are constantly pushing for new discoveries and theories and invalidating old ones, so what makes ancient civs so different?

Click to expand...

It isn't like a singular illuminati conspiracy. It's merely the effect of the past 200 or so years of anthropological research and assumptions being challenged. Today's leaders in Academia, museums, etc have spent literally their entire careers and research basing off of certain foundational principles. Mankind came out of Africa and 6000 years ago developed agricultural technology allowing them to build Sumeria, the first civilization. Etc etc. Which created excess caloric intake to free people up for other work than just surviving leading to more and more technological advances.

This isn't even inaccurate per se. It's just that it is EXTREMELY LIKELY that there was a lot of human development going on before that that is just handwaved away. Machu Pichu being a supreme example of it. It doesn't take a retard to notice that there are two completely different architectural styles in that location. One that we know to be Incan, as there are many contemporary examples of Incan architecture all around that part of the world and one that academia just goes, "welp this must of been Incans too although I guess they just completely forgot how to use it at some point and instead built on top of it with architectural technology comparable to the rest of the continent at the time."

But when you have someone outside of the establishments go over to Peru and go, "see here this mortar and brick building? Clearly this is contemporary Incan... now look at these massive megalithic fitted stones with very fine stonework on them... How is this also the Incans?" These same guys recognize that there are similar megalithic structures all over the world and they're all just attributed to whoever we knew to be living there at some time. Anyone who says this or notices this and goes into depth about it is immediately attacked as a loon or for their lack of recognized authority on the subject. Like happens all the time. Or they are in the establishment and blacklisted (which there are also many examples of) going against the establishment.

This happens all the time and we look back on it thinking it happened overnight when it takes decades to slowly erode this kind of thing. Look up how slowly tectonic theory and glacial shaping (of the earth) was adopted. It took centuries.