Kayleigh on Atlantis (Episode 4)

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

Ancient Apocalypse, Ep 4. The Road to Atlantis?
History with Kayleigh, 29 Jan. 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cug0XJnasYg

2:02 "No more a pseudo-scientist than a dolphin is a pseudo-fish." - I like that quote.

As I already said under another video, "archaeology of ideas" and "archaeology" are two different disciplines.

You are on the archaeology side, Hancock on the "archaeology of ideas" side, and Thor Heyerdahl was a genuine overlap.

2:31 Third possibility : the "scientific community" has required that he make it clear that he's not speaking on their behalf?

And he complies?

9:28 I may follow your explanation, but a little question:

Have any examples of beach rock forming been observed by scientists in the present? Or is it reconstruction.

When YEC claim that many wharves at Grand Canyon and other places are not yearly layers, but result from a process of instant sorting, that sorting process has been demonstrated by Guy Berthault.

The process given by men like ... it seems to be answered actually:

There are beach rocks around some Pacific islands that contain human skeletons and shell casings from World War II. At Bimini and along other Bahamian islands, many swimming beaches are lined with beachrock that is forming today. They contain imbedded Coke and beer bottles.

That's by EUGENE A. SHINN - Sceptical Enquirer (publication says sth about his outlook), Jan/Feb 2004.*

12:12 Answering your objection - any river that is now further inland is reaching to what is now the shore.

Any river existing back then would have reached the shore back then.

In my model for the carbon 14 rise, during the ice age, carbon 14 formed c. 10 times faster than now. This implies that the atmosphere was bombared by more particles back then. Now, the part of the background radiation that is cosmic, is constant in relation to latitude and longitude, but varies in relation to altitude. The higher up, the more radiation you get. Obviously, living in caves was also an asset, as caves block out radiation (the surrounding rock does).

The milliSievert per year for a normal altitude, medium altitude of today inhabited locations, is 0.34 milliSievert per year.

As I already mentioned, Ilya Usoskin has (for economic reasons) declined to computer model what milliSievert per year on that altitude would result from this or that or sundry conditions allowing a ten times faster formation of C14. But arguably higher. So, lowering it by going to lower altitudes, back in the ice age accessible, would make sense.

And your answer doesn't seem to even acknowledge that back then the rivers that were would have been running to the beaches that were. There is next to none river on earth that doesn't run into some sea. Even the Jordan runs into the Dead Sea. There is no way if Hell froze over that the rivers back then would have been going only to today's coastlines.

19:27 Here** is Willie Drye, National Geographic, making a resumé of Plato's Atlantis:

The founders of Atlantis, he said, were half god and half human. They created a utopian civilization and became a great naval power. Their home was made up of concentric islands separated by wide moats and linked by a canal that penetrated to the center. The lush islands contained gold, silver, and other precious metals and supported an abundance of rare, exotic wildlife. There was a great capital city on the central island.

It would seem to me that at least advanced technology (great naval power, concentric islands with moats) and monumental architecture (a great capital city on the central island) are in Plato's description.

The Academics who say Graham Hancock hasn't found that in Plato and consider him as a fool, are probably Archaeologists, who are not the most excellent Grecists that I know of. Back when I studied Latin and Greek, the Classics Archaeology had an approach of largely ignoring texts and conclude ideas only after analyses of material remains. For instance, they were claiming that Roman claims about Carthaginian child sacrifice would probably have been Imperialistic Propaganda. Tophets with burnt remains of small children were arguably (they said) after miscarriages and abortions. Only recently did I see a video about some archaeologists asking - are all the burnt child skeleta furnished with Y chromosomes? Because the child sacrifice was specifically about sacrificing boys, but miscarriages and abortions would give more or less equal gender dsitribution. The video (which I didn't watch to the end) is from 2019 or sth. But back then - up to and including 1993 - archaeologists were dismissing Livy's accounts of sacrificed children, boy-children.

So much for the credibility of an archaeologist claiming Graham Hancock hasn't read Plato!

* A Geologist's Adventures with Bimini Beachrock and Atlantis True Believers
EUGENE A. SHINN, January/February 2004 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER
https://cdn.centerforinquiry.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/2004/01/22164702/p38.pdf

** Atlantis
BY WILLIE DRYE, [date not identified]
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/atlantis

On Guy Berthault :

Refonder la sédimentologie avec Guy Berthault
Catholiques de France 9 octobre 2020
https://catholiquedefrance.fr/refonder-la-sedimentologie-avec-guy-berthault/