Graham Hancock

Found by an amateur. Turns out to be a real place. I think the myths are the memory banks of our species. And I don't think archaeology takes them seriously enough. There's a tendency to just dismiss them as fantasies, as things that were made up by the ancients for some bizarre reason of their own.

But they're the memories we have from the time before writing, from the time before documents were kept. And they're a precious resource in understanding our past. So it's things like that. And then at the end of the day, to say, to twist what I said, that in what archaeologists have studied, there's no evidence from my lost civilization.

But they're the memories we have from the time before writing, from the time before documents were kept. And they're a precious resource in understanding our past. So it's things like that. And then at the end of the day, to say, to twist what I said, that in what archaeologists have studied, there's no evidence from my lost civilization.

But they're the memories we have from the time before writing, from the time before documents were kept. And they're a precious resource in understanding our past. So it's things like that. And then at the end of the day, to say, to twist what I said, that in what archaeologists have studied, there's no evidence from my lost civilization.

is completely wrong because I've written thousands of pages of books. This is one of the issues. Like in that debate, I was supposed to prove everything about a lost civilization. I didn't even come here to prove it. I came here to explain why I'm interested in it and why I want to share my interest. and my curiosity about the past with others.

is completely wrong because I've written thousands of pages of books. This is one of the issues. Like in that debate, I was supposed to prove everything about a lost civilization. I didn't even come here to prove it. I came here to explain why I'm interested in it and why I want to share my interest. and my curiosity about the past with others.

is completely wrong because I've written thousands of pages of books. This is one of the issues. Like in that debate, I was supposed to prove everything about a lost civilization. I didn't even come here to prove it. I came here to explain why I'm interested in it and why I want to share my interest. and my curiosity about the past with others.

But if I'm asked to prove it, I would say don't refer to what I managed to say during a three-hour debate. I'd say refer to the eight or so major books that I've written with thousands of pages and thousands of documented footnotes. That's where my argument is in place. And you'll find that that argument is not based on what archaeologists have studied.

But if I'm asked to prove it, I would say don't refer to what I managed to say during a three-hour debate. I'd say refer to the eight or so major books that I've written with thousands of pages and thousands of documented footnotes. That's where my argument is in place. And you'll find that that argument is not based on what archaeologists have studied.

But if I'm asked to prove it, I would say don't refer to what I managed to say during a three-hour debate. I'd say refer to the eight or so major books that I've written with thousands of pages and thousands of documented footnotes. That's where my argument is in place. And you'll find that that argument is not based on what archaeologists have studied.

It's based precisely on what they've not studied about the past.

It's based precisely on what they've not studied about the past.

It's based precisely on what they've not studied about the past.

Again, I will withhold judgment until I have my boots on the ground there and have a look at it. And even then, that might not be enough. I do know that the property owners there are doing a lot of ground-penetrating radar, and there may be results from that. But at the moment, I would not say that's definitely a man-made structure, nor would I say that's definitely a natural structure.

Again, I will withhold judgment until I have my boots on the ground there and have a look at it. And even then, that might not be enough. I do know that the property owners there are doing a lot of ground-penetrating radar, and there may be results from that. But at the moment, I would not say that's definitely a man-made structure, nor would I say that's definitely a natural structure.

Again, I will withhold judgment until I have my boots on the ground there and have a look at it. And even then, that might not be enough. I do know that the property owners there are doing a lot of ground-penetrating radar, and there may be results from that. But at the moment, I would not say that's definitely a man-made structure, nor would I say that's definitely a natural structure.

I would say that's an intriguing structure. But it is in the geological context where other things like that are found. If I were asked to put money on it. There it is. Yeah. Boy, that looks. I mean, it really is hard.

I would say that's an intriguing structure. But it is in the geological context where other things like that are found. If I were asked to put money on it. There it is. Yeah. Boy, that looks. I mean, it really is hard.

I would say that's an intriguing structure. But it is in the geological context where other things like that are found. If I were asked to put money on it. There it is. Yeah. Boy, that looks. I mean, it really is hard.

Oh, it does. It goes deeper. That's what the ground penetrating radar. How far? Is about 30 feet. 30 feet. In fact, I was yesterday. That looks so man-made. Yeah, it really does. When I look at that photograph, to me, that is a man-made structure.