Eric Uhlmann

This guy aims to confirm a pre-determined conclusion by cherry-picking evidence, rather than consider all the evidence before arriving at the most plausible theory. He ignores the actual controversies among archaeologists - which are far more interesting than anything in this show - and paints them as an arrogant group who all think the same things. Furthermore he misrepresents and oversimplifies the prevailing views among archaeologists that he does bother to mention. Of particular note: dating is often controversial (even among archaeologists), with different methods arriving at different dates for a given site. If something on a hill seems ‘out of place’ for its time, for example, often times the most plausible explanation is a mudslide (or 10, over the last however many thousand years) screwing up the chronological layers. I’m not saying this is what happened in episode 1, but there are lots of reasons one sample’s carbon date might not be accurate - and many of which are more plausible than this show’s thesis. Anyway, please don’t buy into this garbage. He’s essentially the anti-vaxxer/flat-earther of the archaeological world. Learn about archaeology from actual experts and you’ll see for yourself very quickly why this is bunk.