Ancient Apocalypse

For any curious mind that wants to know more about our past, this documentary reveals wonderful monuments, much older than well known monuments such as the pyramid of Giza. And not only presents these monuments, but analyzes them in ways that reveal the complexity of those minds that have realized them. It makes the viewer realize how many more hidden treasures are on this Earth, and how little we've explored them.. and how much more we could do to understand them. It truly excites and opens your mind to new possibilities.

As for the arguments behind his ideas about the ancient civilization, they are all empirical. He collects data from various sites, and in various ways, puts the information together and builds a story out of them. There is nothing extravagant in his methods, quite the contrary, they are quite sensible and rational. For those that criticize him merely because he did not earn a degree in this domain, remember centuries ago, people like Leonardo da Vinci were revolutionizing the world and there was no one to call them a fraud because they had no University diploma. In fact, I am most glad that there are individuals like Graham, who dare to use their whole creativity and imagination to explore and learn about the world, without the invisible chains imposed by our society.

Yeah you read that right.

Made it to episode 4 where he discredits himself.

A dolphin is not a fish. Did he want to say that he isn't a scientist.

He says earlier that he believes that there is proof of an ancient civilization despite what everyone else says.

So I get that. But with the claims he makes during the first three episodes he isn't helping himself.

The narrative is drawn out... and than doesn't really say anything surprising.

Well he is obsessed with googling himself. And doesn't have issue that the specialists say that you should take in what he says with care.. The series isn't helped with him posing for drone shots. While a narrative is building up to another empty statement/unanswered question

Finally and I try to watch episode 4... and adjust my rating if there is an improvement... So far it has talked about structures not much more. And while they certainly are baffling... there is almost nothing else shown or talked about.

Where are all the items from these times??

How old are they dated?

Again utterly disappointed in a series about this matter.

The term 'pseudo-science' has been used to create an interesting aura with the guy who correlated information for this series. There is a sense to discredit the perspective attained not only by him but also numerous other recognised and educated individuals who attained qualifications / recognition for their data and factual interpretation.

There comes a point where 'scientists' can eliminate so much information they end up discrediting what they have access to. The guy in this programme presents himself as a journalist...he has spent his life simply gathering information from both indigenous people and physical locations that display physical data / information and other people with recognition in their field. Instead of actively eliminating data he correlates and forms informative patterns. It is important to accept we don't need to be limited to the perspective of some individuals who claim to be better than others but instead just be able to acknowledge the wealth of information available.

Truth is as ability to correlate data improves, we gain a more clear picture of what was always able to be viewed - think back to when those who claimed the Earth was flat and there was an edge to fall off, then to when we first gained an image of Earth from space. The archeological people who are failing to simply acknowledge views of others are themselves removing a sense of scientific analysis. LiDAR, computer correlation of constellation placement through thousands of years, physical objects and carvings as well as stories through the history of mankind surely can be acknowledged as a whole rather than eliminated. I am left wondering why this guy has been labelled 'pseudoscience' when he actively has people from numerous perspectives share their sense of what they know from visible and known data sources.

We gain better awareness through experiencing numerous perspectives. Why would you actively want to limit an opportunity to allow people to experience what others have dedicated their life to correlating? No-one needs to cover up - let people form their own view of this programme which is well worth watching. For many years information has been controlled, held by those deemed worthy when we are all worthy of forming a view ourselves.

Recommend you watch with open eyes and ears. You don't need to accept everything that is shared. What is hidden will always be revealed...

I find it interesting those willing to discredit Graham so quickly , he isn't here to give you the answers but he's done an amazing job of presenting you with real information to help you open your eyes to the fact that we don't know everything about our history , why are mainstream archeologists so quick to discredit him when a lot of his claims made in this DOCUSERIES have solid ground to stand on, why can't they engage and instead of accuse him actually prove him wrong? If you are not willing to open ur eyes to another possibility other than your own you will never see the truth. Please watch this series for yourself and then decide if it's possible. Not if it's true, if it's possible who are we to say it's wrong. We don't know our history.

Look, honestly it seems that the major pushback to this is just a bunch of whining, while the show honestly stays very grounded. It shows factual developments, great renders, really great writing.

The animations are a great and inspiring feat. He is not suggesting anything ridiculous, and it is a truly fun ride. Just check it out, then go on to explore on your own. Books like Sapiens or Dawn of Everything are great examples of the general shift in human history perception.

Let us not get blocked by many old archeologists who cannot let go of their way of seeing the world.

This is proposing points we must explore further, and then decide, whether they are valid or not. That is all the presenter asks for, after all.