Most people aren't aware of this but most of the fruits and vegetables are recent creations. They didn't exist 12 000 years ago. The fruits and vegetables back then were too small, too toxic and had too much cellulose to be edible and sustain a civilization.
In the debate that Graham Hancock fumbled his way through the whole time, one of the things Flint Dibble mentioned was that all the early fruits and vegetable were local and didn't come from other parts of the world like they do today. I know alternative historians want to just focus on stone all day, but you have to look at these other factors as well if you're trying to understand the earliest civilizations. You can't just ignore these other issues even if they aren't as exciting as stone.
Graham Hancock said that this lost advanced civilization introduced agriculture to the hunters and gatherers but presented zero evidence whatsoever.
The big question is if there was an advanced civilization that spanned the globe in the ice age, then where are the big fruits and vegetables that can sustain large civilizations? Did this advanced civilization choose to completely isolate itself from the hunters and gatherers all that time? That is just completely pointless.
Graham Hancock's theories have too many holes in it to stay afloat. So, either the skeptics and atheists are right, or there has to be some alternative to the alternative theories. The jury is mostly negative on the Younger Dryas Impact as well, so the obsession with catastrophism don't hold water either if you type it into the search. There is evidence I've been researching, as well as others like Fritjof Capra, that certain ancients somehow had very good knowledge of advanced knowledge of physics that they shouldn't have had back then. This subject gets ignored, in favor of stone and catastrophes, but I think it is a better area of research. It does, however, require a lot more reading of ancient texts.
by Own-Independent-9910