Robert M. Schoch on Joe Rogan podcast.

Cheerful Spring

Robert M Schoch is American associate professor of Natural Sciences at the College of General Studies, Boston University. He was the guy who dated the Sphinx much older than the accepted date of 2,500 BC. He estimates it using science the Sphinx is much older and its 10,000 years old. Fascinating interview and he even found evidence that Sphinx has a hidden chamber and so far Egyptologists have refused to dig in that area. Schoch found evidence in ancient manuscripts the Sphinx was an archive and there may be stuff still there in that hidden chamber

Schoch is an academic so his opinion is not easily dismissed.

Moved from Conspiracy Theories

Overheal

What is the conspiracy?

Ipso

A bit of a run down on the old Sphinx idea.
http://www.jasoncolavito.com/who-built-the-sphinx.html

Another idea from the academic.
http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/robert-schoch-werewolves-are-actually-humans-who-form-psychic-connections-to-animals-through-drugs

EagererBeaver

"using science"

Cheerful Spring

Overheal wrote: »

What is the conspiracy?

Unknown culture build the Sphinx and great pyramid of Giza. The ancient Egyptians did not exist 10,000 years ago.

Cheerful Spring

Ipso wrote: »

A bit of a run down on the old Sphinx idea.
http://www.jasoncolavito.com/who-built-the-sphinx.html

Another idea from the academic.
http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/robert-schoch-werewolves-are-actually-humans-who-form-psychic-connections-to-animals-through-drugs

Whos Jason Colavito? Has he visited Egypt and done work on it? Skeptics are known to write half-truths and spread lies and misquote people.

This happened recently when Graham Hancock and Micheal Shermer (skeptic) debated ancient civilizations on Joe Rogan podcast. Micheal even apologised to Graham for lying about what he said. I have heard since this podcast Graham and Micheal have become friendly with each other Graham invited Micheal to Peru for a trip.

Ipso

He’s well read in a lot of ancient texts, which seems to be a source for much of the fringe crowd.
Hancock’s stuff seems to be a re-hash of much of Ignatius Donnelly’s stuff.
I used to be into Hancock but like the UFO and fonspiracy theory industry, this area now seems to be over populated with cranks, liars and plagiarists.
From memory, one of the arguements from The Keeper of Genesis was rain marks on stone and there was no rain in Egypt when the Sphinx was built, but that doesn’t rule out the Sphinx being built with rain damaged stone

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Skeptics are known to write half-truths and spread lies and misquote people.

Skepticism is a type of thinking. It essentially means questioning everything within reason and doubt. It's a fundamental part of science, law, reason, logic, everything.

If for example 99 experts claim X and 1 expert claims Y. Logic and reason dictates that X is the claim most likely to be correct, because it's backed by a consensus of 99 other experts. Y is backed by just one (who could be a crackpot)

People who engage in conspiracy thinking don't work to this type of logic or reason. In their minds, that 1 expert knows some sort of "real truth" and the 99 other experts are "in on a conspiracy". It's belief over reason.

My reading into this situation is that in this case we have one expert who maintains the age of the Sphinx is X, whereas most other experts maintain it is aged Y

Overheal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Unknown culture build the Sphinx and great pyramid of Giza. The ancient Egyptians did not exist 10,000 years ago.

So, not a conspiracy at all, just a claim of new information/ideas.

Moved to History & Heritage.

riffmongous

I was wondering what I was reading for a minute

Edgarfrndly

Joe Rogan is married to the idea of the Sphinx being older than it is. Schoch's views just support Rogan's confirmation bias. When in doubt, I favour the scientific consensus. There would be no logistical reason for other scientists to reject the Sphinx being older. He should get someone on to counter Schoch's views. This one sided conversation favours nobody.

Overheal

riffmongous wrote: »

I was wondering what I was reading for a minute

I'll clean it up a little next time

Cheerful Spring

Edgarfrndly wrote: »

Joe Rogan is married to the idea of the Sphinx being older than it is. Schoch's views just support Rogan's confirmation bias. When in doubt, I favour the scientific consensus. There would be no logistical reason for other scientists to reject the Sphinx being older. He should get someone on to counter Schoch's views. This one sided conversation favours nobody.

Schoch teaches natural sciences at Boston University he not some loon with no qualifications. There is no scientific consensus. Schoch even discussed this and said most Egyptologists have Art and History degrees they have no scientific background at all.

Cheerful Spring

Ipso wrote: »

He’s well read in a lot of ancient texts, which seems to be a source for much of the fringe crowd.
Hancock’s stuff seems to be a re-hash of much of Ignatius Donnelly’s stuff.
I used to be into Hancock but like the UFO and fonspiracy theory industry, this area now seems to be over populated with cranks, liars and plagiarists.
From memory, one of the arguements from The Keeper of Genesis was rain marks on stone and there was no rain in Egypt when the Sphinx was built, but that doesn’t rule out the Sphinx being built with rain damaged stone

It less fringe now because of the discovery of Gobekli Tepe this has changed everything we know about how civilization started. Scientists have calculated it age as 12,000 years old this not disputed. 15 years ago Graham Hancock was ridiculed for his theories nowadays their more acceptance of his work on ancient civilizations.

The Micheal Shermer and Hancock debate on Joe Rogan was interesting. Shermer even brought on an expert to discuss the subject and everyone at the end ended up being friendly and accepting each other opinions on the subject. Micheal even apologised to Graham for misquoting his work in the past and writing false narratives about him.

riffmongous

Overheal wrote: »

I'll clean it up a little next time

Hehe oh it's fine, I might just add a note in the OP so it's clear from the get go

Cheerful Spring

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Skepticism is a type of thinking. It essentially means questioning everything within reason and doubt. It's a fundamental part of science, law, reason, logic, everything.

If for example 99 experts claim X and 1 expert claims Y. Logic and reason dictates that X is the claim most likely to be correct, because it's backed by a consensus of 99 other experts. Y is backed by just one (who could be a crackpot)

People who engage in conspiracy thinking don't work to this type of logic or reason. In their minds, that 1 expert knows some sort of "real truth" and the 99 other experts are "in on a conspiracy". It's belief over reason.

My reading into this situation is that in this case we have one expert who maintains the age of the Sphinx is X, whereas most other experts maintain it is aged Y

Most experts are Egyptologists who have no background in geology to know what they are looking at. Schoch was a real scientist, has the qualifications to know and went to Egypt to carry out the work on the ground that most skeptics have not done. Even said he went to Egypt believing he debunk Anthony West ( (a famous revisionist on ancient Egypt) many theories the sites at Giza are much older. What he found supported Anthony West theory. Schoch evens states it more than just the weathering on the rock that turned him into a believer. He did measurements and did seismic work on the structure and found that the human head was too small to match the body. He discusses the scientific stuff in the podcast and finding an ancient text and hieroglyph that names the Sphinx ( i forget now that) and was a lioness head and text describing the Sphinx as an archive. Schoch is trying to get the Egyptian government to allow an archaeological dig near the paw of the Sphinx. Schoch found a void in a room of sorts underneath when he did seismic tests.

Edgarfrndly

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Schoch teaches natural sciences at Boston University he not some loon with no qualifications. There is no scientific consensus. Schoch even discussed this and said most Egyptologists have Art and History degrees they have no scientific background at all.

I'd appreciate it if you saved your strawman arguments. I never stated he was a loon or that he had no qualifications. It is no different than one climatologist out of thousands saying that climate change isn't real or isn't influenced by human activity.

As for his claim that most scientists who study Egypt have no scientific background at all, I don't know if that's a claim he can verify or you can validate. You would have to look at all the peer-reviewed literature on Egypt and then look at who has produced it, and from what field of science it comes from.

If his claims had merit, more geologists would support it.

Cheerful Spring

Edgarfrndly wrote: »

I'd appreciate it if you saved your strawman arguments. I never stated he was a loon or that he had no qualifications. It is no different than one climatologist out of thousands saying that climate change isn't real or isn't influenced by human activity.

As for his claim that most scientists who study Egypt have no scientific background at all, I don't know if that's a claim he can verify or you can validate. You would have to look at all the peer-reviewed literature on Egypt and then look at who has produced it, and from what field of science it comes from.

If his claims had merit, more geologists would support it.

It, not a strawman argument he has gone to Egypt and carried out work on it. Your argument is a strawman argument more geologists would support if he was right. Did ever cross your mind they have not done so? Schoch theory seems to suffer more pushback from Egyptologists who have dogma to protect! Travelling to Egypt and investigation of this is not cheap. Shoch even laughed at the suggestion there is this big community against him about his ideas about Sphinx. Of course, you can validate you just to have to know who the big hitters are who have legitimately done their work on Ancient Egypt. Some who read a book about Egypt and never been is reading other peoples work on the subject. Schoch knows who the main people are in this field for last 30 years he knows what their background is.

Ipso

The people who disagree with him have also studied in Egypt, their ideas for weather erosion on the Sphinx are just as legitimate as his.
He claims rain, others claim existing rain or from sand erosion.
Personally I ignore anyone who does the "oppressed by the main stream" schtick, they seem to be contrarians as much as anything.

Cheerful Spring

Ipso wrote: »

The people who disagree with him have also studied in Egypt, their ideas for weather erosion on the Sphinx are just as legitimate as his.
He claims rain, others claim existing rain or from sand erosion.
Personally I ignore anyone who does the "oppressed by the main stream" schtick, they seem to be contrarians as much as anything.

They have studied Egypt but they have no scientific background to date ancient buildings made of limestone and granite. Their claims are not legitimate because Shoch is qualified in the proper field to know what he's talking about. If you can list people who have been to Egypt and are of similar calibre to Schoch and they disagree with him that's a different matter.

It, not just weather erosion that he basing his theory on but when you don't take the time to listen to other people theories you just assume his wrong. It always best to listen to both sides versions or take on things and then come away with an opinion whos correct.

He talks about why rain could only have caused this effect on the limestone, but like he said he would not only use this only finding for he believes the dating of the Sphinx was wrong.

Edgarfrndly

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

It, not a strawman argument he has gone to Egypt and carried out work on it. Your argument is a strawman argument more geologists would support if he was right. Did ever cross your mind they have not done so? Schoch theory seems to suffer more pushback from Egyptologists who have dogma to protect! Travelling to Egypt and investigation of this is not cheap. Shoch even laughed at the suggestion there is this big community against him about his ideas about Sphinx. Of course, you can validate you just to have to know who the big hitters are who have legitimately done their work on Ancient Egypt. Some who read a book about Egypt and never been is reading other peoples work on the subject. Schoch knows who the main people are in this field for last 30 years he knows what their background is.

Your argument was a strawman because you responded to a claim of me calling him a loon and lacking credentials, which I never said. A strawman argument is a response to a claim which has not been stated.

He is one person. If there is validity to his claim, it will get broader support.

Ipso

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

They have studied Egypt but they have no scientific background to date ancient buildings made of limestone and granite. Their claims are not legitimate because Shoch is qualified in the proper field to know what he's talking about. If you can list people who have been to Egypt and are of similar calibre to Schoch and they disagree with him that's a different matter.

It, not just weather erosion that he basing his theory on but when you don't take the time to listen to other people theories you just assume his wrong. It always best to listen to both sides versions or take on things and then come away with an opinion whos correct.

He talks about why rain could only have caused this effect on the limestone, but like he said he would not only use this only finding for he believes the dating of the Sphinx was wrong.

What is Schoch's background gives him more credibility in his dating claims?

Cheerful Spring

Edgarfrndly wrote: »

Your argument was a strawman because you responded to a claim of me calling him a loon and lacking credentials, which I never said. A strawman argument is a response to a claim which has not been stated.

He is one person. If there is validity to his claim, it will get broader support.

I think this nonsensical argument because the dogma is so entrenched now that ancient Egyptians build the Sphinx many are afraid to come out and support this theory in public. They look at in private and think it has merit and Shoch even says many people in the similar field have contacted him and supported him privately.

Shoch said the people who are trying to destroy his credibility are Egyptologists who are afraid of change and don't want this to be true. Scientists are not opposed to this at all and are open to new theories.

Cheerful Spring

Ipso wrote: »

What is Schoch's background gives him more credibility in his dating claims?

It obvious from this background his put the work in studying Geology. Yale University would be one of the top schools globally.

Dr. Robert M. Schoch, a full-time faculty member at the College of General Studies at Boston University since 1984, and a recipient of its Peyton Richter Award for interdisciplinary teaching, earned his Ph.D. in Geology and Geophysics at Yale University in 1983. He also holds an M.S. and M.Phil. in Geology and Geophysics from Yale, as well as degrees in Anthropology (B.A.) and Geology (B.S.) from George Washington University

Edgarfrndly

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

It obvious from this background his put the work in studying Geology. Yale University would be one of the top schools globally.

Dr. Robert M. Schoch, a full-time faculty member at the College of General Studies at Boston University since 1984, and a recipient of its Peyton Richter Award for interdisciplinary teaching, earned his Ph.D. in Geology and Geophysics at Yale University in 1983. He also holds an M.S. and M.Phil. in Geology and Geophysics from Yale, as well as degrees in Anthropology (B.A.) and Geology (B.S.) from George Washington University

So why do you believe that his views carry more credibility than every other scientist who has studied the pyramids and the sphinx? He's not the first scientist with a PhD in geology who has done so. Is it because it supports your confirmation bias?

Cheerful Spring

Edgarfrndly wrote: »

So why do you believe that his views carry more credibility than every other scientist who has studied the pyramids and the sphinx? He's not the first scientist with a PhD in geology who has done so. Is it because it supports your confirmation bias?

Shoch theory is mostly about the Sphinx. They're not scientists they are people with history and art and linguistics degrees. They are dating the pyramids and Sphinx on finding a culture already there. The Egyptologist's main problem is who else could have built the pyramids and was sophisticated enough to have done so some of them are just afraid of just being wrong about their beliefs. That's irrelevant though because of the geology and sphinx measurements don't support a 2,500 bc build. The Egyptians don't even claim to have to build it and they depicted their lifestyle and surroundings during this time in hieroglyphic texts.

Ipso

So you're saying Schoch is the only geologist or archaeologist to look into ancient Egypt?
The thing is, that on the face of it the claims are not that outlandish. But look deeper and you enter into a rabbit hole, despite his wonderful credentials Schoch also endorses some bat sh1t nonsense (he made claims about the Turkish hunter gatherer site being linked to Easter Island or somewhere like that), Robert Bauval tries to tie the Giza site into Mars and Hancock strays into some awful new age nonsense.

I file this stuff under things I'd like to be true and wouldn't be surprised if it was, but I'm not wasting my time with the usual suspects you alos find in industries like UFOs or crypt zoology.

endacl

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Schoch is an academic so his opinion is not easily dismissed.

On the contrary, opinion is the easiest dismissable to dismiss in academia.

He has never reinforced his 'fringier' opinions with anything resembling evidence.

Edgarfrndly

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Shoch theory is mostly about the Sphinx. They're not scientists they are people with history and art and linguistics degrees.

Are you saying that he is the only person with a background in geology who has studied the Sphinx?

Cheerful Spring

Ipso wrote: »

So you're saying Schoch is the only geologist or archaeologist to look into ancient Egypt?
The thing is, that on the face of it the claims are not that outlandish. But look deeper and you enter into a rabbit hole, despite his wonderful credentials Schoch also endorses some bat sh1t nonsense (he made claims about the Turkish hunter gatherer site being linked to Easter Island or somewhere like that), Robert Bauval tries to tie the Giza site into Mars and Hancock strays into some awful new age nonsense.

I file this stuff under things I'd like to be true and wouldn't be surprised if it was, but I'm not wasting my time with the usual suspects you alos find in industries like UFOs or crypt zoology.

Well of course archaeologists have been to Egypt, but it is a different study they go to places to recover stuff. Shoch theory is relatively new discovery and people missed this. Being a geologist what he saw puzzled him and he started his own investigation and came out with a new theory the dating of the Sphinx was wrong.

Skeptics often misquote and misinterpret graham Hancock. Micheal Shermer numerous times in that podcast apologised to Graham for writing stuff he did not say. The highly enlightening podcast that shows they often write things wrong to discredit someone with an alternative opinion. But good to see now since I heard Micheal and Graham have become friends, before this they were opposed to each others opinion. Micheal went away from that podcast liking Graham and wasn't a crackpot after all.

Mars? No, I think it was something to do with the Pyramids position to the Orion belt.

Cheerful Spring

Edgarfrndly wrote: »

Are you saying that he is the only person with a background in geology who has studied the Sphinx?

Been to Egypt and has done their own work I don't know anyone who has so? It unlikely all geologists agree with him but are they are armchair geologists sitting at home have they gone to Egypt to dispute his findings?