When the entire field of archaeology experts calls someone out as a crank, you should really ask yourself if you have a good reason to know better than them.
Breaking new ground here with the sarcasm as well. If you have a substantive comment to make please do. I don't hate the guy but we have the amazing opportunity to have an actual conversation about facts through the internet, empty remarks aren't necessary here
I think you mean Graham Hancock. He has a couple of very interesting recent podcast appearances also, and was gonna do a debate with a mainstream archeologist (who unfortunately backed out for now due to health issues, but I hope it'll still take place at some point!)
Hancock is a charlatan of the worst sort. He knows the vast majority of what he says is a distortion of the truth at best, and completely fabricated nonsense at worst, yet continues to say it for the money and attention it has afforded him. There are so many strongly compelling pieces of contra-evidence that pretty thoroughly debunk literally all of his claims, yet absolutely nothing in way of any actual hard evidence that supports any of it.
His entire central thesis is essentially "Things are older than what scientific evidence suggest because I think this thing looks like that thing."
The ancient world is a fascinating place full of many rich cultures and interesting stories, and it doesn't need charlatans like Hancock making shit up to make it any more exciting.
