thedategenie

Have been digging up everything on this case from old YouTube videos for the last 1 week when this series was originally supposed to be released. Have been having trouble sleeping when those eyes of Indrani appear in my mind. After she was released on bail, she went on a media blitz and did many other interviews promoting her book which gives her version of the events and supposedly are the truth. In any of those interviews, she doesn't touch on some basic questions like who are her (indrani's) biological parents. She appears to suggest sometimes that she was adopted and some other times that her father was her stepfather. Secondly, who is the biological father of Sheena. I thought Das was saying the truth when he said both Sheena and Mikael were his. Funnily, even Indrani's lawyer in this series refers to Das as Sheena's father when Indrani interjects him. And lastly, the cell data on the night of the murder. Yeah! She was looking for farmlands, alright.

As for the series, I thought Netflix did an immaculate job of creating a mini series keeping all sides to the best of their ability and adding bits from beside the main camera that put things in perspective like how Indrani was interacting with her lawyers.

She is a psychopathic, narcissistic, evil genius but she is not fooling anyone.

His (Hancock'a) hypothesis which he aptly acknowledges as a hypothesis is a hypothesis, a possibility. What he successfully exposes though is the very many holes, to the extent that it can only be seen as fantasy, in the official version of human history which has been shoved down our throats for decades and the arrogance and the very unscientific mindset of the mainstream "scientists" who are behind stifling down any alternative ideas.

Those who are blaming Hancock for not giving screen time to the proponents of the official version, just watch the leaked video which can be found on YouTube of Hancock trying to engage Zahi Hawass, former head of antiquities of Egypt in a debate on the very obvious, unanswered questions on the Pyramids and the Sphinx. That will give you an idea on the nature of mainstream archaeology. Or watch the Joe Rogan episode where he debates Michael Shermer from Skeptic magazine (such an irony of a name). The very fact that the mainstream archeologists not engaging in a debate on the merits of the issues he is raising and rather resorting to personal attacks on Hancock says something about those who control the narrative around mainstream archeology. If they engage in genuine debate, they will be exposed for what they are.

Kudos to Netflix for featuring this series and allowing Hancock's ideas to reach many. Ignorance of the masses is what protects the dogma in archaeology. It's time to ask questions.