This can't be true

That was the story of Atlantis, Noah, Utnapishtim etc. They didn't pull it out of their asses like Academia wants you to believe.

I mean, it's purely semantics right? Obviously humans been around for something like 200,000 years. Since we didn't even have writing systems (that we know of) until 5,000 years ago, it's impossible to guess how much knowledge was amassed by mankind pre-written language. So it's kind of meaningless to even include it into human history since we have zero idea as to wtf even happened back then. We can assume it's a lot of the same stuff as today tho, probably more slavery and tribalism tho.

Attached: 1544835207322.jpg (986x553, 96.27K)

>It has been proven by archaeology and genetic that if you took a human from 200000 years ago they would be the exact same as the ones today.
this is not true at all

Alternative historians have been successful at pointing out numerous flaws in the reconstruction of ancient history. There are many explanations as to why both the Pyramids and the Sphinx couldn't have been built by primitive people. Geologists found enough evidence to conclude that it wasn't built during the desert periods.

History is stuff that's written down and we have records for. That doesn't mean that humans didn't fight and have tribal conflicts, explore, expand, and invent new things (such as bread), it just means it wasn't written down and we have no record of it, making it pre-history.

No that's just the last common ancester of humanity, so humans back then would be as different to us today as niggers are to us.

Attached: Humanity.png (792x698, 160.66K)

So for 195000 years a single person did not think of making a symbol that means something that others can learn?

During the time of "pre history" humans communicated telepathically so there was no need to write things down. (((they))) bred out the gene so we can no longer do it.

True but I don't see any writing, architecture, or culture that's older than 5000 years. Why is our history so short when our genetic line is long?

Obviously people did but it didn't stick for some reason. Possibly because of diseases or disasters killing people or wars etc.

They weren't primitive people though, they were the beginnings of civilisation with cities, farming, and a division of labour.

>muh copper tools
>muh slave labor

THIS
Since there were no written records, we have to rely on physical archeology and genetic. What is surprising is that there were empire-like domains in time period normies call "cave-men" era. Not only in Europe. One can pinpoint movement, battles, and even borders where on one side one kind of pottery was done than on other regions.

Attached: 6684976321690340614.gif (272x480, 3.21M)

I said. "that we know of". It's entirely possible that some writing systems were invented prior, but none of them have survived, unless they're buried in some ancient crypt no one has discovered yet.
Would you have? I know it seems like common sense but that's because you were told to do that when you were 2. Written language was most likely invented for the same reason as everything else that gets invented, necessity. As soon as people needed to keep track of monetary and farming records they invented a system to do so, then some other dude saw it and were like "hey this is pretty cool yo I can finally write down the bedtime story I've been telling my kids" and now we have the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Humans were painting long before writing systems, and if paintings were used to tell stories some could argue that it's some kind of writing system, but I think I'd draw the line before we got there. Like I said m8, it's purely semantics.

Attached: 1541888311022.jpg (190x162, 6.33K)

Because we didn't have any good ways of recording events until we invented a way to do so. We still had language. We just hadn't figured out how to depict said language physically and permanently. We have signs of civilizations older than 5k but hadn't quite gotten a written thing down yet.

Because humans have only been farming for some 12000 years at this point. Civilisation can only flourish when a people stays in one place to improve the land. What we call "history" takes up about half of that time span, so that is pretty reasonable.
Also there was culture prior to farming, notice the cave paintings we often find, and infact that may explain why it took us so long to cultivate crops. If your ancestors had been doing something for as far back as the oral tradition goes (and even farther back than that) there is often not much incentive to drop your lifestyle to try growing some small amounts of einkorn.

Research the Book of Enoch.
It covers some of that period.

See

I didn't mention either of those, especially not slave labour. The pyramids were done by paid workers and it was considered an honour to do it for the pharoah. The fact of the matter is these were organised societies that could command tens of thousands of people, some rocks in the desert aren't unfathomable for them to achieve.

There is alot of evidence that shows that theee where civilizatioms before that but its basically dogmatic law in the history community that civilizations started with sumer and egypt

Implying writing was for normies and plebs back then. Do you even know history?

Attached: 13173096_1569964506629437_7535376843462904329_o.jpg (1470x2048, 160.58K)

worth looking into Graham Hancock if you are researching

Attached: han cock.jpg (200x150, 3.7K)

>he doesnt know

Attached: Finno-Korean_Hyperwar_Info.png (317x1442, 282.01K)

The Ice Age ended only 10000 years ago. Also human keep killing each other. Civilisation started in isolated places like Egypt and Babylon

This, you also have to remember a pyramid wasn't constructed as quickly as buildings today. Some of these pyramids took over 30 years to build.

The history books are wrong, Look up Göbekli Tepe ,it’s 12000 years old.