You’re making a very glib conclusion. Please, if you have an interest, make an effort to learn more about this subject. It’s not just matching myths .. its recording a history of geologically recorded events, along song lines actually walked where those geological events occurred.

“Prophecies” is a very euro-centric way to dismiss the subject. Indeed, there is encoding for you to be discovered, which has been rigorously demonstrated.

Dig deeper.

▲

FloorEgg 3 days ago | parent [-]

The whole point of hacker news is to converse curiously. It's stated clearly in the guidelines. Here is a person encouraging curiosity and getting down voted.

Why is the dismissive non-curious comment not getting down voted?

Am I in denial about whether the curios community still exists here?

To recognize the topic on hand... When a native community shares an oral tradition that accurately describes something that's been under water for 12+ thousand years despite not having the technology to map the sea floor that's pretty strong evidence in the accuracy of their ability to persist accuracy through oral tradition.

Parent is entirely valid in encouraging curiosity in this subject to anyone who is dismissive of it.

▲

done_lurking a day ago | parent [-]

ggp isn't being dismissive or incurious. They say they are skeptical of the reasoning used in the science.org article, but are still open to the accepting the conclusion. Does being curious mean you aren't allowed to question anything? gp is probably being downvoted for dismissing ggp's concerns with a trite "please educate yourself" and not actually referencing anything to read. Telling someone else they are wrong and to go find evidence to support your own opposing view may technically be "encouraging curiosity" but it's certainly not curious itself.

	▲	FloorEgg 21 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I re-read the comment you refer to as ggp and I agree with you completely. I must have gotten my wires crossed about which comment was being referred to.