Unscientific...but claims to be
Earlier in these reviews you asked: "What's the harm in that?"
Read people's comments! There are a lot of people out there who tend to believe this crap without even doing their own research! Be aware of your resposibility, you claim this to be researched science, but it's not! And it wasn't in your other SS clips, too (for example water crystals by Emoto Masaru, yeah, interesting stuff, but he isn't a Dr. of science - he studied politics, and his experiments aren't empirically verifiable, means you wouldn't get that nice crystal structure for Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata" twice, never ever...).
The topics you chose for your series are quite interesting, because they are mysterious. Problem is, you present these as facts, not as questions. And you do it in a quite bad, unscientific style: First you go "the dogon blabla...they did this, they knew that.." and after that you ask a question "couldn't it be...blabla?
Yeah, sure it "could be" - if you did better research on the dogons and didn't already take that shit you told about them earlier for granted. That's unscientific!
Don't get me wrong, I myself are quite interested in stuff like that but I would never stop my research just because the information I already gathered is oh so exciting. You remind me of old Von Däniken with his "astronauts" on ancient temple reliefs (turn a picture of a king's coronation 90° and you clearly see his "ufo") oO. There are a lot of things in this world we don't (and possibly won't ever) understand, and you remember me of myself in my "mystery-astrology-Däniken-time". Get over it....soon.