>Daily Mail
There's a reason why you're not allowed to cite that newspaper on Wikipedia articles, and it's because a big part of what it publishes is misleading clickbait.

>>18367523
You're not in Wikipedia, grandpa.

kys

Ancient BBC ruled them lands since the times of proto pharaoh wewuz II. Till them natufians invaded motha africa and raped the og black Egyptians

>>18367135
christianity was a type of proto-marxist cultural revolution that delinked many civilizations from their past/culture, turning inconvenient history into mythology. as the shackles of jewish propaganda are thrown off, the truth shall be rediscovered/revealed.

Antonio Ambrosio claims this the problem is that he's a physicist not a historian or archeologist.
If you ever want a 100% quick fool proof way to check if someones just an insane hobbyist check if the shit they talk about has to do with their job and degree.

>>18368455
Big Bulgarian Cities?

It's a paper from an """"independent researcher"""" that people have already poked a ton of holes in

They really want to avoid talking about being zionist puppets

>>18367135
>evidence: none

>>18367523
>There's a reason why you're not allowed to cite that newspaper on Wikipedia articles
Yes, and that reason is that Wikipedia is an obscurantist propaganda outlet.

>>18368844
>evidence: none
You mean like the claim that the great pyramid was made by egyptians?

>>18367523
Because you're only allowed to cite progressive newspapers that go along with Wikimedia's politics, like The Guardian

We need to defeminize /x/ so it actually starts making sense and looking at things correctly before merging.
And you'll need /sci/ for that too.

>>18367135
I dont even understand what that title is trying to say

>>18367135
I'm sure it was aliens too, right, Erik Von Danniken and...oh wait you died.

>>18370775
we are the aliens from mars, dun dun duuuuuun

>>18367135
Science falsely so called. The earth isn't 12,000 years old. Grow up.