This is a docuseries.
If history is your thing, you already know that there are many megalithic architectural structures for which historians have no explanation.
If history is not your thing, you have at least heard of the pyramids in Egypt.
This docuseries does one thing brilliantly - it brings all those disparate, scattered pieces of evidence together and ties them up in a timeline that is credible.
The reason historians have been able to sidestep the questions raised by these megaliths is that the questions were asked one at a time - What about the Chichen Itza? What about the Nazca lines? What about the pyramids? But when you put ALL the data points on the table and ask ALL the questions together, they become very uncomfortable questions to avoid.
What it does not do so well is subtlety and sticking to the core of facts above analysis. Each data point is coated with some hypotheses and at some places, data points appear to be force-fitted to suit the hypothesis.
The other thing it does not do well is providing exhaustive information. The Denisovas, which, imho, form a very important piece of the puzzle, are entirely left out. The Nazca lines are untouched even though they are one of the best researched unexplained archeological features. I will not list the smaller data points that are omitted - we can chalk those down to time constraints. These are the two glaring misses in content.
If you are a history person, this docuseries will leave you with some additional, relevant information, and a slight discomfort with the pushiness of the host. The hypothesis is probable - at most. One might want to pursue it, but one is equally likely to file it as one of the many hypotheses already shared by those who care.
If you are not a history person, the series will truly open your eyes to a LOT of new information. What to do with that information, is entirely up to you.
Like all well-funded docuseries, it is well made, well-shot, well-edited. The technicals are all in place.
No comments:
Post a Comment