Joe Rogan Experience #961 - Graham Hancock, Randall Carlson & Michael Shermer

Graham Hancock is an English author and journalist, well known for books such as "Fingerprints Of The Gods" & his latest book "Magicians of the Gods". Randall Carlson is a master builder and architectural designer, teacher, geometrician, geomythologist, geological explorer and renegade scholar. Michael Shermer is a science writer, historian of science, founder of The Skeptics Society, and Editor in Chief of its magazine Skeptic.

I accept that this data will be stored on the website after I clicked submit
I have read the privacy policy and accept it.

so hunter gatherers could build great temples and do more than we previously thought, but they weren't advanced? being able to achieve more than expected is advanced, shermer is making Grahams point, depends what you consider advanced to mean i guess

Found it... "The crater"... That mark guy is a dick! Condescending bastard fucker of a Dick. Just to be clear I don't like him.and looks like Joe's going to have to put sterner in an arm bar to get em to admit he's wrong! What a want admit defeat with the evidence right there. Litteraly right there! But at the same time, I like Graham but he was pretty butt hurt about the M.Cremo insult lol

Shermer is arrogant, smug and has weak arguments. Horrible debater.

😂😂😂😂 this is a huge joke

Joe is so desperate to be right. Calls out Schermer for “taking the opinion of a friend” then two seconds later Joe pulls out info that he got from a friend and claims it as fact. It’s not a conspiracy theory.

You see the real Graham Hancock when his pushed on his Horse manure by Shermer. When you scratch the surface you begin to see a petulant little premadonna. Not one of Rogan's best podcasts as his obvious bias blinded him to even allow Shermer to talk briefly without being interrupted by Hancock.

"dont teach a man how to suck eggs"

You know I

Jared Diamond is a hack.

Mark and Mike?.... you got served.

Who is Michael Shermer??? I see him...... and you could argue thats evidence he might have existed, but based on his profitable logic, f*** that sh*t, Im going to waffle on and diffuse with some good old american skepticism!
I like 1:19:45....what do you mean by massive fucking flood? global or local? Seriously, he should be in government his obfuscation of any useful language gets him there.
Im a sceptic! of his bloody hair stylist..... fucking greasy weasel.

Am i the only one who thinks graham hancock comes across as such an arse hole in this?

If the yellow stone volcano was under the ice sheet and erupted... wouldn't it have a similar effect? 🤔

You know a Joe Rohan podcast is old by the pictures of Jimi Hendrix behind him

What was all causally interrelated could have their root cause as described in the Thunderbolts of the Gods. Check out that fascinating YouTube .

micheal act like a flat earth believer!!... et cant even argu with graham and randall the only this that he was doing was going on a other argument and other theorie and saying that the other theories was bad so his is bad ....

Michael Shermer is ignorant.

Comets break up upon earths atmosphere due to the FIRMament.....He's got the whole world in HIS HANDS.

I like graham as a human being but I hate when he argues, he is a little bitter and quick to take the offensive on everything.. maybe it’s cause his work gets bashed on a lot but it’s annoying

doesn’t understand what is being mentioned

Joe: “so explain to the listeners who are just tuning in..”

Randall slides so much he could be an olympian ice skater!

I know you don’t read these comments Joe as it’s usually a bunch of idiots and trolls but please have this exact same podcast happen again. I’d love to see how it plays out, especially for Mr. Remotepodcastsmartypants, now that the impact crater that Graham hypothesized has been found. Please! Thanks for what you do Joe!

I think the position of Michael Schermer is the correct one, we have to critique everything, also the current ideas of our history. But in a couple of years, all three of them could be right in some points

You got me fucked up

My take on this is that the skeptic team got the better of the arguments of which there was broadly 2. First the ridiculous advanced civilisations hypothesis that simply isn’t realistic even if those who argue for the commit/impact theory had what it took to undermine the established science (and they don’t) that would offer no support to the evidence free assertion that an advanced society from somewhere unknown that under the logic of Graham must have been destroyed by events that failed to wipe out a dramatically less developed people actually existed. The second argument and the only thing worth talking about with any serious attention is the impact model of causality with regards the formation of rivers because that has at least some claim to evidence yet even here the sceptics prevailed by pointing out the simple fact of the glaciers deeply established scientific credibility as the cause of the geographical formations discussed in this debate that has stood the test of scientific scrutiny over many decades in contrast too the lack of evidence for a commit strike in the necessary time frame.

Does this skeptic have anything else to his argument besides appeal to majority? That's all he's got... "well a lot more people disagree with you than agree... so..."

Shermer's geologist was wrong about the cycle of precession. It's approx 25,772 years Graham was closer.

I may be alone when I state this but..... I think Randall and Graham just dropped the mic on these individuals.

3:07 The pendulum in the background is the only thing I can focus on for some reason. Well, I'm high as fuck so that might be the reason but aside from my current stat of bliss, does anyone else feel drawn in by the swing of the pendulum?

Love you show Joe Rogan keep on making the homemade duck tape

Shermer had to be happy when his buddy came on and took the heat off him for a bit 😆 man he was taking an ass whooping!

Its fun to speculate but a debate is no place for speculation. A debate is also no place for smugness, considering one's ego and confidence hinges on speculation. Hancock's theories lie very much in the realm of "the god of the gaps", in that his ideas rely on outliers and inconsistencies in data.

Graham and Randall destroyed those fuckers ....dudes act like it’s hard to use common sense and just listen to facts being presented

dude agriculture is invented in south India, how could u give that credit to some other civilization, and i am talking about agriculture practices dating back to almost 10,000 years ago

Theres a greater leap in cognative ability between not being able to create art(cave paintings) and being able to, than between paintings and carving stone.

EVERGREEN: "2:12:25 "Alright, Mr, Rogan, um, I..I don't want to come across as a, as a pompous scientist."

why does defant think comets are made of frozen water and volatiles? I believe our close observations of comets have only weakened this model. They look like charred rock.

"Well let me put on my reading glasses." Someone call the cops cause Michael Shermer is about to get murdered.

Is it possible that Ancient Beings decided that it was in the best interest of humanity to hide their existence and leave clues until we are ready? And, the possibility that they never left and are living amongst us as humans? That everything that is being discovered is a well thought out elaborate plan to slowly introduce us to the TRUTH? Is it possible that these great advances in technology in the past 50 years has been influenced by them? Maybe they decided it was better to live among us rather than separately to be worshiped by us. That our dependence on them as “gods” handicapped us rather than help us grow? Anything is possible in this Cosmic Universe.

Einstein's theory of evolution is wrong and has been proved by scientist who have seen our D N A as been spiced and that is what as changed us from being from Monkeys.

2:35:15 "I think we're getting kinda technical for this audience." Wow, the hubris!
No jackass, it's you and Michael who can't keep up. If you're from "higher education" then I'm happy to be "uneducated" lmao
Thank you for demonstrating to us how closed-minded and egotistical you are. Thanks for demonstrating your unwillingness to learn and humble yourself by admitting you're wrong. Thanks for showing your behavior in lying to your students about current data and behaving like an immature and jealous prepubescent boy. I'm embarrassed for you and as a tutor I'm ashamed of you.

I also find the hunter gatherer argument lame and lazy.

We have on the Earth, right now, hunter gatherer civilizations that have never even seen outsiders and have never heard of electricity.

Yet I'm watching you fools argue about this subject on a magic Box with moving pictures that I hold in my hand powered by an invisible force.

It's not a question of one or the other. we have both a highly technical society and hunter gatherer societies on the Earth right now, today.

Lame skeptical argument.

Another thing that baffles me about skeptics...

In a little more than 100 years we have gone from horse-and-buggy to sending robots into outer space to send photographs back of planets that are millions of miles away from the Earth.

But they don't believe that could have ever happened any time in history except for now.

Out of all the tens of thousands even millions of years, it's impossible there in 100 of those years another society got technological and then got wiped out.

Again, it seems like lazy thinking to me. I don't understand why there's such an unwillingness to uncover the truth. Why are they so afraid that we may not be the best thing ever?

These skeptics always crack me up.
He says, "where are all the metal tools that built Gobeklei tepe?
They are nowhere to be found."

I say where are the tools that built the Empire state building?
They are nowhere to be found.

That's because once you're done building something you don't just leave the tools laying around. The people who own them usually take them so that they can build other things.

Where are all the tools that built your house? why aren't they on your property somewhere close by?

To me that's a lazy argument. It's definitely unscientific. How are we supposed to believe someone that can't even figure out that people don't leave their tools behind once they're done building something?

53:00 okay Graham, you win

Near the beginning the sceptic guy asks “with all the other archeological studies and hypothetical theories, why should this one take presidency?”

It’s simple and I can’t believe he doesn’t see it so blatantly...



(By women I mean men fighting each other over “ownership” of them)

Almost holding giving graham grief in case joe cleans him out with a spinning back kick

We're getting a little too technical for this audience.....

While insulting, it was kinda true lmfao.... I have no ideawhat drumlin or an eskir is << see I dunno how to even spell it ;D

"Michael you wanna be right so bad. WELL HOLD ON A SECOND!!!!!" Damn Joe and Graham are very unfair to Michael this episode for sure.

this old guy angry

Mark just called Polynesian people unsophisticated

I’ve watched this 3 times over the years

Definitely one of the best broadcasts!!! Thanks to all!!!!

Heated as f! :D

best podcast ever

Michael Shermer is uninformed, closed minded & does not deserve to be in the same room as Randall & Hancock, almost as bad as Hawass


I watched this live really fucking stoned and there's so much information to digest its impossible to do so in one sitting I think. This dude, Mark, I think its a perfect example of a paid shill.

Randall Carson MVP

George Carlin would love this shit

Getting to witness beefy Academic UFC during quarantine is a reward on it's own, both of them are brilliant.

I would rather listen ro Randal talking about stone and sediments for 7 hours straight, than listening to Michael suck himself of like this. That dude is an idiot.

This is one of the best podcasts ever, actually anything with Graham or Randall is excellent. I think this is my 5th or 6th time watching this one.

"Where is Atlantis" - Eye of Sahara ... It matches description perfectly, and it even matches maps with Atlantis indicated on maps of ~500BC, and more importantly - founder Atlantis - Atlas, mysteriously had same name of founder and mythical king of people living in that area - Atlas ... What a coincidence

I Love this crap. Joe is awesome for having these guys on. And Go Joe for using ur platform to help educate people!!

I want to side with Michael because I think Graham is reading way too far into what little knowledge we have, but every time the man opens his mouth I cringe!

"Why they don't find iron tools or trash" - when the last time you found an iron tool or trash just laying around in a church or in a monument structure or mausoleum ...
He misses the subtext of why they find either trash or tools - most of archaeological findings are in sites that were abandoned in a hurry, or was a place of no return, but never a possible religious or non religious but monument of importance: dwellings were having human trash, the castles and such had tools because - some military action happened, some were abandoned due to cataclysm - earthquake or heavy rainfall or something.
This particular monument was buried by humans

When they buried it - if it holds a significance would you not clean from trash?.. If it was buried for preservation - would they not clean it before, or they buried it for religious beliefs and what not, back then (up to very very recently) people were very superstitious, if one cursed another they would really believe that they were cursed, muslims were afraid of Christian cursing them and vice versa. They could have been afraid of a "curse" no matter they believed in righteousness of it or not

And burying iron tools - why would they ... Without modern technology ironwork is crazy expensive. You'd buy a cow in 18th century for a price of a rusty screwdriver...

The modern scientists are so ignorant of whole period of human development: people often destroyed old constructions to use building material out of it, or used ruins to deconstruct and build a new.
Which is easier going to a quarry tens of miles away making perfect stones for your construction and bringing them, or finding old construction near your site with materials all ready - no need for further preparation ...

This has been seen again and again in middle ages and up to 20th century when main construction material changed from bricks and stones to concrete and metal
You can see as late as early 20th century buildings having incorporated into its construction gravestones brought to a nearby cemetery ...
Think about it

I just can't keep quiet! The man you have on Skype is a complete idiot! I can't stand him!

Bring Hancock back ..dudes a Genuis😍

The person arguing with Graham is a baffon!

Why the massive headsets... Looks hugely uncomfortable, what/who are they possibly listening to and why not much smaller earpieces if at all...???

why dont bring real archeologists to debate Graham Hancock and Randall Carlson?

and here we are after finding that massive impact crater in greenland they were both right

Randall has a fuckin big dick energy my dude

Give me an example of someone going against Egyptology and advancing...

Actually I can. Quite recently in fact. It was once thought pretty concretely that the builders of the pyramids were slaves who were treated badly.... but not long ago at all.... I think within the last decade actually, it was discovered that they were not treated poorly, and might not have been slaves at all in the traditional sense.

This was a HUGE discovery, they found remnants of housing areas where they had beds and other such conveniences for the workers.

I do agree though you need a lot of evidence to back up a radical new idea, but it SHOULD be this way. Sure there is ego and there're flaws in the scientific community.... But if you're in college for instance, and you're writing a thesis on something and you cite your fathers ideas that he wrote in a book, then yes lol, you're gonna get marked down because you're not following the assignment. A thesis requires scientifically cited sources. When you graduate and have gone through the ringer of education and understand how one presents a theory and what is needed, THEN you can write a paper and have it peer reviewed etc. But you need good evidence.

The problem with this Shermer guy is that he just understands the process and what would be needed to get these ideas to be taken seriously... he has no specific knowledge on these particular subjects, so this by itself makes him look bad, but nothing he is saying is wrong, and is the default position anyone should have. There is also nothing wrong with Hancocks observations and ideas..... but the issue is that they're just ideas and to get ideas established into science you need evidence, not just observations.

Let's have an example... let's say I were to drop a metal ball and it stopped and floated in mid air..... Graham would say "well maybe it's because gravity doesn't exists, or that we're thinking about it in the wrong way.. this is strong evidence that what we know about gravity is completely wrong.

Shermer would say.... you're taking one anomaly and trying to disprove gravity even though we have tons of evidence for gravity in MANY other ways....... You can't look at one thing that goes against the hundreds of other things and say that the one thing is the correct one....... the ball doesn't drop therefore gravity isn't how we suspect it to be, even though we know gravity works the way it does at every other place in reality,... in the math down street, between objects, we can test it and our predictions about it are correct every time except this one time the ball doesn't drop........

So then you look to see why the ball doesn't drop in this particular area and one could say "see you're looking for explanations why this ball won't drop to support your theory of gravity instead of throwing away the theory of gravity and starting from scratch based on the fact that the ball doesn't drop in this one particular spot"

Well yes..,, and 99.9999% of the time you look into it a little further and find a magnet suspending the ball.

Graham Hancock makes me a bit embarrassed to be British...even if he's right

This guy Michael sure loves to take a beating. It's like he's not even trying. Or stupid, maybe.

I'm afraid Michael falls foul of the 'ad populum' fallacy. For a skeptic, he's quick to point to the incredulity fallacy, but then invokes the "but how many other specialists / mainstream agree".

Michael Shermer is an idiotlog....

1:03:03 being a skeptic is what? Being only skeptical of things that aren't if we know exactly how history went

This whole show was ruined by the douche skeptic! I’m all for healthy debate and not getting stuck in an echo chamber... but this dude was a dick.

I only put it up for my students. So miss leading his Students is okay.

Man, that skeptic got his ass kicked.

i wanted to change the channel but couldnt its really powerful and interesting experience. been 12 hours and i want to keep watching it

man this sceptic....the same narrow mindedness that led the last dodo off the cliff.

Rogan is a dumbass on this one

Hancock: "well I'm just citing Clause Schmidt". If you listen to Clause Schmidt's Ted talk he never mentions anything remotely resembling Hancock's numerous claims characterizing an advanced civilization. Yes, there were elements of surprise, but nothing remotely characterized by Hancock. 23:50 , 25:50 , 28:10 and others. He can't win an argument on his own so he brings in someone who has passed away but carries a lot of weight.

There is Strategically placed buildings on a massive scale and only 1/50th has been unearthed, so whos to say all the town’s possessions werent placed in a singular building ir area that hasnt yet been discovered?? How bout we dig faster!? buy me a plane ticket and a shovel...

Graham Hancock comes off as a total douche. He doesn't seem to know how to let others present their argument without interrupting them.

he can carbon date ripples of sand, but cant get a handle in that mic... 🎤

There doesn't seem to be any archaeological evidence that that an interstellar civilization came here and carved these rocks, are we all in agreement here? These rocks were carved by humans, right? It wasn't a species with faster than light speed travel technology? Humans did this?

Lucky Shermer is here to be the counter argument to Hancock and Carlson because if he wasn't you'd think he was an uneducated fool. if i had this discussion with Shermer at the pub i would of walked away you can't argue with that kind of ignorant.. i'm surprised he has considered changing his opinion

around the two hour mark, talking about Atlantis possible whereabouts... what about the perfectly cut stone steps under water in japan?

Joe: If you could bottle your enthusiasm it would be an awesome pill”. I would pre-order a few bottles of that.

Michael Shermer is out of his depth and it is painfully obvious. He has no idea what he is talking about and is an embarrassment to his publication and anywhere he publishes his articles.

Quarantine watching Joe, Graham and Randal. Very entertaining while educative. 🤔