4 ms·

I was also just about to post about how there's still a ton of stigma around alternative theories of history. In particular, the ones about how the pyramids we

I was also just about to post about how there's still a ton of stigma around alternative theories of history. In particular, the ones about how the pyramids were built by ancient civilizations. The end result is that it's tough to find the real work being done because most credible people are driven underground. We're left with the conspiracy theorists.

andi999 6y ago
Here is my bone with these 'alternative' theories, a lot contain a lot of snake oil (of course I didnt look at much) and are disingenious. Let me give you an example. (I think it was a video by Däniken). He takes a ancient egyptian metal-vessel (probaly copper amphore) and then says:'the amazing thing is, if you just add a little acid and a wire to this amazing device it will act like a battery. So did the egyptians have electricity?' Or something like that. Of course that will happen, and it will happen to any metal cup, it does not show anything about having the knowledge about electricity of a society, but people who do not know much physics will then lead astray to 'so how do you explain this'. If they would have found the wire (of a different metal) inside the jar, in some device... ok... but this is like finding a rock of uranium and saying:'they could have made nuclear power plants from this'. When I saw they had to go this low, I was pretty sure they have nothing.
- Radim 6y ago
  Your post is seriously meta: To demonstrate how snake-oil people leap to conclusions and paint with a broad brush based on flimsy evidence… …you leap to conclusions and paint with a broad brush based on anecdata. > When I saw they had to go this low, I was pretty sure they have nothing.
  - andi999 6y ago
    Well, I remember it was one of the 'big-guys' of this alternative theories. So I believe if 'they' had something he would have used it. But please go ahead, point me to the best piece of evidence (no goal-post shifting later, please)
    - txmachinery 6y ago
      Possibly relevant (Baghdad Battery): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baghdad_Battery https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baghdad_Battery
      - rimiform 6y ago
        >"In March 2012, Professor Elizabeth Stone of Stony Brook University, an expert on Iraqi archaeology, returning from the first archaeological expedition in Iraq after 20 years, stated that she does not know a single archaeologist who believed that these were batteries." Sounds great!
    - Radim 6y ago
      OK. What are you goal posts though? :) Here's my (hopefully charitable) reading of your argument: 1. Alternative theories of history are disingenious (sic) snake oil, because they're based on weak circumstantial evidence. They use flawed reasoning to support strawman interpretations of the data. 2. To support this theory, you mention a video you saw (well, maybe saw…) of one guy X (Däniken) claiming something about Y (vessel batteries?). Don't you find the irony delicious? All theories were "alternative" at some point. Some stood the test of time and evidence; some didn't (Gobekli Tepe embarrassed quite a few "mainstream" scientists in its time); some are in the academic weighing right now (the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis).
      - andi999 6y ago
        No. I do not see the irony. I am not posting a researched theory here. Also since this is a forum, anybody can point out the smoking gun/honest interpretation whatever. A little burden of proof is on the alternative theories (and I do not go that far to say 'extraordinary claims need extraodinary evidence', I am fine with normal evidence).
  - dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
    Well, that is my experience, too. I'm very open so I examined several so-called proofs of alternative history. Unfortunately, in all cases they can be explained in more traditional ways, or were a fabrication like the crystal skulls. This doesn't mean that we haven't been visited by alien civilizations, but as far as I can tell we don't really have any definitive proof. Unless we equate aliens with gods - but even then the only artifacts we have are just scriptures.
jan_Inkepa 6y ago
[ I guess you mean "high technology" ancient civilisations? ] The problem is that wrong/inadequate/inferior theories will tend to be neglected, professionals will be stay clear of them, and "if only we had better theorists" could be a rallying call in those cases as well. "If only there wasn't such a bias against phlogistonism we'd have higher-quality phlogiston research." Weirdly enough I don't think I've heard this argument much in the crackpot science world, where I have more experience, but it is not uncommon for people to imprint on obsolete theories that modern working scientists can't really discuss because they don't know them in detail or maybe even in broad strokes (epicycles or the like). I'm happy to leave it to the professionals. History is a quite high-evidence high-rigour domain, with many converging sources that confirm earlier theories (genetics/linguistics/carbon dating/etc.).

andi999 6y ago

Here is my bone with these 'alternative' theories, a lot contain a lot of snake oil (of course I didnt look at much) and are disingenious. Let me give you an example. (I think it was a video by Däniken). He takes a ancient egyptian metal-vessel (probaly copper amphore) and then says:'the amazing thing is, if you just add a little acid and a wire to this amazing device it will act like a battery. So did the egyptians have electricity?' Or something like that. Of course that will happen, and it will happen to any metal cup, it does not show anything about having the knowledge about electricity of a society, but people who do not know much physics will then lead astray to 'so how do you explain this'. If they would have found the wire (of a different metal) inside the jar, in some device... ok... but this is like finding a rock of uranium and saying:'they could have made nuclear power plants from this'. When I saw they had to go this low, I was pretty sure they have nothing.

Radim 6y ago
Your post is seriously meta: To demonstrate how snake-oil people leap to conclusions and paint with a broad brush based on flimsy evidence… …you leap to conclusions and paint with a broad brush based on anecdata. > When I saw they had to go this low, I was pretty sure they have nothing.
- andi999 6y ago
  Well, I remember it was one of the 'big-guys' of this alternative theories. So I believe if 'they' had something he would have used it. But please go ahead, point me to the best piece of evidence (no goal-post shifting later, please)
  - txmachinery 6y ago
    Possibly relevant (Baghdad Battery): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baghdad_Battery https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baghdad_Battery
    - rimiform 6y ago
      >"In March 2012, Professor Elizabeth Stone of Stony Brook University, an expert on Iraqi archaeology, returning from the first archaeological expedition in Iraq after 20 years, stated that she does not know a single archaeologist who believed that these were batteries." Sounds great!
  - Radim 6y ago
    OK. What are you goal posts though? :) Here's my (hopefully charitable) reading of your argument: 1. Alternative theories of history are disingenious (sic) snake oil, because they're based on weak circumstantial evidence. They use flawed reasoning to support strawman interpretations of the data. 2. To support this theory, you mention a video you saw (well, maybe saw…) of one guy X (Däniken) claiming something about Y (vessel batteries?). Don't you find the irony delicious? All theories were "alternative" at some point. Some stood the test of time and evidence; some didn't (Gobekli Tepe embarrassed quite a few "mainstream" scientists in its time); some are in the academic weighing right now (the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis).
    - andi999 6y ago
      No. I do not see the irony. I am not posting a researched theory here. Also since this is a forum, anybody can point out the smoking gun/honest interpretation whatever. A little burden of proof is on the alternative theories (and I do not go that far to say 'extraordinary claims need extraodinary evidence', I am fine with normal evidence).
- dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
  Well, that is my experience, too. I'm very open so I examined several so-called proofs of alternative history. Unfortunately, in all cases they can be explained in more traditional ways, or were a fabrication like the crystal skulls. This doesn't mean that we haven't been visited by alien civilizations, but as far as I can tell we don't really have any definitive proof. Unless we equate aliens with gods - but even then the only artifacts we have are just scriptures.

jan_Inkepa 6y ago

[ I guess you mean "high technology" ancient civilisations? ] The problem is that wrong/inadequate/inferior theories will tend to be neglected, professionals will be stay clear of them, and "if only we had better theorists" could be a rallying call in those cases as well. "If only there wasn't such a bias against phlogistonism we'd have higher-quality phlogiston research." Weirdly enough I don't think I've heard this argument much in the crackpot science world, where I have more experience, but it is not uncommon for people to imprint on obsolete theories that modern working scientists can't really discuss because they don't know them in detail or maybe even in broad strokes (epicycles or the like). I'm happy to leave it to the professionals. History is a quite high-evidence high-rigour domain, with many converging sources that confirm earlier theories (genetics/linguistics/carbon dating/etc.).