3 ms·

> This wording is very reminiscent of a lot of writing from conspiracy theorists I think this dismisses the article as a whole a bit too quickly. > The fact t

• prox 6y ago
  I think it doesn’t. A lot of conspiracy theorists use a technique where they start with something that is true, some facts A and B, and then C is controversial. You let your guard down with A and B, and are more susceptible with C. He is honest with the extraordinary proof he needs, but his article never much strays from pure speculation. It’s a nice flight of fancy. A lot is lost to history, no doubt, which skews our understanding greatly, especially prehistorical. But that is Dozens of steps away from finding a laptop from 10000bc or marsial burial chambers and having your advanced civilization theory stick. The article felt like shoehorning theories / finds to make them stick in his view.
  • koheripbal 6y ago
    ...but I think the author is being honest about it being speculation. If you read the article to the end, his conclusion is that outlandish speculative claims should be incentivized to be proven through a betting market that can reward proof proportionately. ie. Having the mainstream put their money where their mouth is. I don't see an issue with that. He isn't actually claiming that prior civilizations exist - simply that it's plausible that they did (depending upon what you interpret as "advanced").