Ep 8: A Rational Approach To Ancient Aliens: Epistemology & Archeology

Over the last seven episodes, we’ve established that the Pentagon has admitted that UFOs are real, that they are operating with impunity in our airspace, and that we don’t know what they are. We’ve talked through some of the most common explanations for what the UFO phenomenon might be, considering everything from secret human technology to future humans and from extraterrestrials to ultraterrestrials.
We’ve also met some — though certainly not all of the main players in the current disclosure movement. Although we’ve covered a lot of ground, when it comes to understanding the full scope of the UFO phenomenon and its implications for humankind, we’ve barely scratched the surface.
In this episode, we’ll begin to tackle some of the most fundamental questions raised by the UFO phenomenon — starting with the question of whether the UFO phenomenon may have had an influence on our ancestors in the distant past. For many, this line of questioning brings to mind Ancient Aliens, and the ancient astronaut theory, but there are other equally startling and profound possibilities that are suggested by the evidence as well — including the idea that the story of human civilization is far longer and far more dazzling that we ever imagined.
But before we can begin to truly tackle these questions, we need to spend some time talking about the epistemology of archeology — what do we know, what can we know, and how sure are we that the established narrative of human history is correct?
We’ll do a quick intro to epistemology, discuss some of the verification challenges that exist within archeology, explore the limits of our current dating techniques and the unique challenges that we encounter in attempting to date megalithic structures.
We’ll also look at the academia and the peer review system to identify the ways that the most innovative and potentially impactful ideas can be systematically rejected and marginalized.
And finally, we’ll talk about the difference between science and pseudoscience, and establish a simple framework that we can use to tell the difference between the two.
Carroll, A. E. (2018, November 5). Peer Review: The worst way to judge research, except for all the others. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/05/upshot/peer-review-the-worst-way-to-judge-research-except-for-all-the-others.html
Geologic activity. (n.d.). Mount Rushmore National Memorial (U.S. National Park Service). Retrieved September 14, 2022, from https://www.nps.gov/moru/learn/nature/geologicactivity.htm
Tarlach, G. (2016, June 1). Everything worth knowing about … scientific dating methods. Discover Magazine. https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/everything-worth-knowing-about-scientific-dating-methods
Whitcomb, I. (2021, January 10). How do scientists figure out how old things are? Live Science. https://www.livescience.com/scientists-dating-methods.html
The full transcripts for each podcast are available to the public when each episode goes live. However, at the conclusion of each set of 10 episodes, those transcripts are compiled into a book, and at that point you have two options for getting a copy:
I do my best to make sure that all the resources I reference in the episodes are available here. However, right now, I’m still a one-woman operation, and sometimes I miss things. If you are looking for any resources that you expected to find here, please don’t hesitate to reach out to me directly at kelly@uforabbithole.com. I will make every effort to get you the resources you’re looking for and will update this page so that others have access, as well.