Hancock’s theory is just that - a theory, just like Darwin’s theory. There is too much scientism (rigid skepticism), and this has to stop before scientism can become real science. I am an academic myself, and I know how academia works: insults everyone who dares to look at things differently and speak up about it that’s why academia is the last to know anything nowadays. I don’t think academics need to get their nose into this. Whilst the journalist’s own novels provide ample material to justify a second instalment. I think the show has stirred up enough controversy and won over enough fans to warrant a second season. As of now, there is not confirmation of a season 2 of Ancient Apocalypse. Hancock himself stated that the series took two years to film, so even if there is a second season in the works, it won’t be heading to Netflix any time soon. The renewal status of the docuseries Ancient Apocalypse is currently still pending over at Netflix HQ, with no word yet on a follow-up season. Will there be a season 2 of Ancient Apocalypse? Renewed or cancelled status There are, however a few snippets of intrigue throughout the first season, and he makes some unique points, but his animosity towards the field in general means that his theories are instantly dismissed without any further analysis. He believes that his findings challenge the traditional view of human history, although his evidence is mainly based on speculation and ancient mythology. In the series, Hancock proposes the existence of an advanced civilization that was roaming the earth during the last ice age alongside the hunter-gatherers we are most familiar with. He has written many books on the topics of ancient civilizations and apocalyptic events that may have wiped out these lost societies but constantly claims not to be an archaeologist or a scientist. An outsider in the world of history and science, Hancock has been completely rejected by his own industry. None of his books have been peer-reviewed, and none of his findings have been printed in any academic journals. The journalist has been criticized for cherry-picking his data and has therefore been entirely dismissed by the academic community to date. The series is controversial for a number of reasons, but in essence, it all comes down to the show’s presenter Graham Hancock and his specific viewpoint. Overall, most would agree that the show is entertaining and educational to a point. The general public seems to be more generous with their evaluations though, and the series currently has a score of 8.3 on IMDb. Other critics have summarized in a similar fashion, Ancient Apocalypse is slick and well-presented, although Hancock is biased, and his opinions are short on any genuine facts. Our very own Nicole Ackman gave the show a 1.5-star rating, claiming the journalist to be ‘more speculative than factual’, although praising the show’s ‘impressive cinematography’. Surprisingly few critics have reviewed the Netflix original series to date, and it doesn’t even have a rating on Rotten Tomatoes yet. What did critics say about Ancient Apocalypse?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |