I suppose what intrigues me the most is how people get "cancelled", like Hancock, because they are deemed "controversial".
But his is nothing new in the world of academia. For example, do you know who discovered the makeup of the average star?
No, no you don't, and there is a reason why.
Here name was Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin. She presented her thesis in college on the topic which suggested that the makeup of stars was mostly hydrogen. She had two strikes against her, which was she was going with a theory that contradicted the beliefs at the time regarding the makeup of stars within the scientific community and she was a woman. So, it is no wonder you don't know anything about her either. In a way, you might even say she was cancelled as well, despite later being proved correct.
The sad thing is that her college professor mocked her to the point of her recanting her correct theory about the makeup of stars in the universe.
But this sort of control within science is commonplace as almost all groundbreaking discoveries have been met with similar opposition.
For example, do you know who came up with the theory that tectonic plates moved on earth?
Alfred Wegener, a German meteorologist, introduced his hypothesis of Continental Drift in 1912, suggesting that continents had moved across the Earth’s surface over geologic time. Scientists scoffed at his finding because they maintained that the scientific consensus held that the Earth’s mantle was too rigid and solid to allow for horizontal movement of landmasses. The prevailing model viewed continents as permanent and fixed features of the planet’s surface. Although he did not have a correct answer for this discrepancy, which was later discovered, they decide to black ball him and ignore his findings that proved his theory.
Want another example, because there are many, many more. How about the most famous of scientists, Albert Einstein. You see, Albert came up with various scientific theories. This was a problem though, because they conflicted with the scientific consensus at that time which was that the universe was static and eternal. When tested by his theories, it showed that the consensus was wrong. However, Abert then fudged the theories so as not to upset the powers that be within the scientific establishment. He later called it his biggest blunder in life, but he did it to protect himself and his reputation, something Hancock cares nothing about because he has no reputation to protect.
In fact, the person that came up with the Big Bang theory was a priest of all people, who dabbled in science, a person Einstein also picked on as the group of bullies gathered round to mock him.
Do you even know who came up with the Big Bang theory? Of course, not, because academia and history have cancelled him as well. His name? It is Georges Lemaître. Why did they cancel him, because he was part scientist and part priest and because Einstein even joined in on mocking him at one point.
You people would mock him being a priest, because you have zero respect for the Bible, a book that told the world that we had a beginning, something that science rejected at the time but later found out was accurate once the Big Bang was verified in 1959. But in fact, the Bible is a rare and valuable insight into man's history as most of our knowledge of history has either been destroyed or not recorded at all. The same can be said of ancient origin myth stories all around the globe. Interestingly, despite being seemingly unconnected from each other due to different cultures and distances so far apart and cut off by massive oceans, they all seem to agree on various points, such as the existence of a cataclysmic event known as the great Deluges that flooded the world, or the agreement that beings came down from "above" that were considered to be gods due to their abilities in science and super human physical attributes, often referring to them as giants.
But like Hancock, I have no reputation to guard against and therefore no bank account I need to worry about padding by keeping the powers that be on my good side, so I ask questions, questions we really all should be asking because we should all at least acknowledge that we know very little about much at all.
