Alivia Brown took on Graham Hancock

Alivia Brown took on Graham Hancock · Kayleigh took on Graham Hancock · Kayleigh Took on Episode 2 · Kayleigh Took On Malta - Sirius (Episode 3) · Kayleigh on Atlantis (Episode 4) · Göbekli Tepe

Alivia Brown took on Graham Hancock · Kayleigh took on Graham Hancock

Anthropology Graduate REACTS To Ancient Apocalypse | Responding To Graham Hancock's New Netflix Show
Alivia Brown, 11 Dec. 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kOiNJlkEug

8:35 "the same solution evolved twice"

As in evolution "trying to find solutions" to "problems" or "issues"?

How about the same Creator used the same solution twice - a personal or more precisely tripersonal Creator being obviously better equipped than a process to identify an issue and make a solution to it?

8:49 "that's what survived through natural selection"

Supposing fins weren't there from scratch, it had to get added before it could survive that culling process. Evolution biology has no clear scenario for how new things are added to living beings.

To take the example of a retina, the genetically damaged and useless one of cichlids in a cave in Mexico ...

To make the retina in a useful way so it can see, ten genes need to work together in turns over the "gestation" if you can say that of fish, or "fetal development" if you prefer.

Two of them are damaged, one or two mutations each - and that's why the retinas don't work. You see how this could be a severe problem for adding a feature?

Mutations are great ways of slightly modifying a feature (feomelanine is due to a mutation in genes that would otherwise produce eumelanine), or for losing one, which is sometimes rewarded (cichlids in that cave, or beetles losing wings on flat, windy islands). But not for adding features.

9:29 There is one thing with accepting some single feature could culturally converge.

Thor Heyerdahl, well before Hancock, had made lists of items that were just a bit too many between, for instance, South American high cultures and Polynesia, for "convergent evolution" to be a very great explanation.

Add to this the indigenous stories in Polynesia or some ancestor arriving from a direction corresponding to South America. Then Thor Heyerdahl provided proof that the voyage could be made in pre-modern vessels of types which could be realistically theorised in the area.

9:51 As a Young Earth Creationist, I wholeheartedly support GH on the non-convergent nature of Flood stories.

10:47 For structures that they build, the principle behind pyramids is, two stones support one stone, seen twodimensionally from the side - or four stones support one stone, seen threedimensionally from above. That's fairly intuitive.

But as for "stories they create" - how do you argue in the first place that Flood stories are "created" rather than modified?

And before you argue lots of cultures know wide floodings, there is a Flood story in the Altai region.

11:36 To fear a Flood or a Conflagration is to want one's survival, indeed, but how come so many cultures have put the Flood in the far past, and the Conflagration in the far or near future (depending on degree of Apocalyptic expectance) ...?

Where are the cultures that put both in the past, or both in the future, or reverse the order, Conflagration in the past and Flood for the future?

11:59 If we were talking only of pyramids, you might have a point. For S Am to Polynesia, I think pyramids are not even on the list, I don't think there are pyramids in Polynesia. But Thor Heyerdahl got a list of 20 or 25 features that closely corresponded.