17 views
•
3 months ago
0
0
Share
Save
Audio
3 appearances
Ben van Kerkwyk is an independent researcher exploring ancient mysteries. www.youtube.com/@unchartedx www.unchartedx.com
Show all
Arthur Posnansky, Tihuanacu: The Cradle of American Man
Giorgio de Santillana & Hertha von Dechen, Hamlet’s Mill: An Essay Investigating the Origins of Human Knowledge And Its Transmission Through Myth
Graham Hancock & Santha Faiia, Heaven’s Mirror: Quest for the Lost Civilization
5 views
•
3 months ago
Joe Rogan podcast, check it out.
The Joe Rogan experience.
Train by day, Joe Rogan podcast by night, all day.
Ben.
So last time you were on, we barely scratched the surface of all the things
that we wanted to talk about.
So immediately we're like, we got to do another one quick.
Because you want to talk about the Sphinx.
The Sphinx, yes.
Yeah, we were on, we got into the, well, the labyrinth was kind of the big.
Labyrinth is nuts.
I still haven't been able to get over it.
The 40-meter metallic shape, tic-tac shape thing that's in the ground.
Like, what is that?
Well, I hope we'll find out.
I mean, I don't know.
The wheels do turn a little slowly, but the point of that was to try and drive
some awareness.
Maybe we'll get some sort of angel investor in there to go and look at it and
solve the problem, do something.
Someone needs to talk to Elon.
Yeah, maybe.
I'm not the guy.
I talk to him too much as it is.
He's too busy.
But someone who can annoy him.
He's solving other problems.
Yeah, or maybe Bezos would like to be the first guy to get in there.
Someone has to get in there.
You have to figure out what that thing is.
That's crazy.
This might be one of the biggest mysteries in the entire human civilization
record.
Yeah.
Who's the director that went to the bottom of the eye?
Oh, Cameron.
Cameron.
I mean, he likes going places that nobody's gone before.
They do a hole and get there.
Maybe someone should do it.
They just I don't think enough people know for it.
A lot of people know that we're listening to this podcast, but not enough
people that would
do something that can do something.
You know what I mean?
It's like we reach a lot of knuckleheads with some wide variety of people, but
the percentage
of people that have the resources to make something happen.
They have to work something out with the Egyptian government, right?
So they have to do something with those dams.
Yes.
Well, you don't have to.
No, I don't think it takes the dams.
You would have to remediate the water on the site, at least like somehow box it
out,
right?
You've got to drain.
You'd have to drain this massive area, or at least if you were targeted enough,
you
might be able to drain a smaller area to then excavate in that area.
We should probably explain to people that didn't listen to the last podcast,
just a real quick
synopsis of what this is.
So the labyrinth, we're talking about the great lost labyrinth of ancient Egypt,
which
was described by figures like Herodotus, Diodorus Siculus, Pliny the Elder.
Figures from antiquity, these authors, and they've described it as being
greater in magnificence
than the pyramids.
Like they had these just mind-bending descriptions of what this site was, like
multiple levels,
3,000 rooms.
You would get lost in it.
It had giant courtyards with pillars, all made from, I mean, one guy, I think
it was
Strabo, described the roof as being a single piece of stone, which I don't
think it was,
but it's describing those perfect joins that you see in the real megalithic
work from Egypt.
So it's this giant mystery.
We know it's there, and it was kind of lost to time until we found it again,
basically.
It was discovered, it was always known about because there were clues about its
location.
It was always theorized to have been at this place called Hawara, which is near
the
Fayoum in Egypt.
And, you know, Petrie went there and dug it up, a Flinders Petrie in the late
1800s, early
1900s.
And he found massive stone slabs, and he thought he was standing on its
foundation like it had
been quarried and taken away.
And rather than that, it turns out he was most likely standing on the roof of
like the top
layer.
It was like 10 meters below the ground.
That is so nuts.
He never got quite in.
But then in the Madahar expedition happened, I think in the mid like 2017 or
2015, there
was an expedition run by a guy named Louis de Cordia in partnership with the
Egyptian government.
They used ground penetrating radar, sonic techniques, like well-established
subsurface techniques.
And they found it.
They found these massive cyclopean walls that were meters thick.
It was a labyrinthian structure.
It's well verified.
It's below the water table level of what's on that site now.
So you have water table sort of five meters below the surface.
The labyrinth starts at nine, 10 meters.
And there was some controversy around that report because it was buried.
So he found it.
They never published the report.
It was squashed by Zahi Hawass.
This is according to Louis de Cordia.
He threatened him and his team with national security sanctions if they talked
about it.
It just was put away.
He waited a few years.
He finally released the report.
It's like, holy shit, we found the labyrinth.
And then this then spurred some other companies to use some of these new space-based
scanning techniques.
There's been at least two that have been done very different techniques, but
they found the same thing.
They found that there is, in fact, a massive underground structure at this
place called Hawara.
It goes much deeper than what you could reach with those ground-penetrating
radar and those established techniques.
60, 70 meters below the ground, there's multiple levels, three or four levels.
And they correlate.
So one scans a statistical model.
Another one that uses high-frequency photography along with, I think, seismic
data.
Very similar to the Doppler tomography work that's being done by the Italians
at places like the Giza Plateau now.
And they both correlate.
Yes, there's a big structure.
But one of the most interesting facts that came out of this scan was it seems
like in this massive central atrium that's this one big, giant, open room, 40,
50 meters long,
that connects to all of these levels there seems to be this unidentified
metallic object that's freestanding in this room.
It's about 40 meters long.
And it seems to be tic-tac-shaped is what this report said.
It's a fucking UFO.
It's a UFO in Egypt.
The aliens did it.
Yeah, I don't know.
I mean, could you imagine if they get in there and they really do find a
recovered spacecraft?
What do we do then?
Because if this is a public excavation, that's the question.
We would have to bring in the seals.
We need to lock that place down.
Maybe we need to occupy Egypt just to figure out how to fucking get this done.
Occupy Hawara.
Let's just – yeah, just Hawara.
You'd have to occupy the whole country.
You'd have to bribe them, something, give them money, whatever you've got to do.
Like if I was a president, that would be like my number one priority.
I mean, yeah, it has the – I think there's been a little bit more of this
from Egypt.
I guess the establishment there, they seem a little more willing to engage in
some of the mystery.
I genuinely do think that discoveries like these can only help and boost
tourists.
What they want is to bring people in.
It will bring way more.
Could you imagine if they actually figure out a way to drain all the water out
of the labyrinth?
They give you a tour and show you the spaceship.
How much are you paying to see this spaceship?
Bro, I'm paying a ton of money to go see that spaceship.
That's a special permission.
Like that's the way we do.
They're very good at that.
Like there's a lot of places you can now go in Egypt that are these special
permissions.
It's thousands of dollars.
But they would make so much money.
People would go.
They could charge like 10 grand.
They could charge like a lot of money just to go look at the spaceship.
Yeah.
It would be like Mecca.
Like Mecca for UFO dorks.
It would be insane.
It depends what – who knows what – well, the guy did say too.
It didn't seem like any metal that he'd seen before.
Like he couldn't identify what type of metal it was.
Because it's alien.
Right.
It's element 114.
For sure.
It's alien.
It's made out of the same stuff that comet's made out of.
The AI atlas.
Oh, yeah.
The 3-Eye atlas.
Yeah, whatever it is.
The thing that's off-gassing some nickel alloy or something.
It's a giant nickel the size of Manhattan.
Yes.
That's jetting towards the sun.
Although didn't NASA came in – I think they released their images, I think,
recently.
I can't remember.
There's some images that came out and said, oh, the comet's doing this and
doing that.
It's doing a lot of weird stuff.
Sure is.
But it definitely seems to be a comet.
Yeah.
Unless you ask Avi Loeb.
And he's like, anything can be a spaceship.
He's got a point.
He's got a point.
He does.
We don't know what one would look like.
We've not seen.
Yeah.
I mean, it's a small sample size as it is for interstellar objects, right?
Yeah.
We have three to compare.
But two of them have been really fucking weird.
I think the point we're getting at is, and this is the point of all these
conversations,
is that there's some stuff that is yet to be discovered that has previously
been discovered
that might be like, it might blow the dam down on all this stuff to the point
where like,
okay, whatever you think happened here, a lot more happened.
And it seems way crazier.
If the stuff underneath the Giza Plateau was correct, which is like, what?
And if the labyrinth, if they can show you that this, not only was Herodotus
depicting
an actual place, but we can show it to you and it's preserved and it's been
under the water
for 50 years.
Yeah.
It would be amazing.
And yes, I think some of these things would knock down...
It's a house of cards, right?
I think there are elements of that that are obvious, I mean, not obvious, but
people can
explore them and it starts to knock down the house of cards.
It's how people end up with this, just looking at the contradictions in ancient
Egypt.
But there are other examples of what I would say, like these things like the
Madahar expedition
that have been discovered, but then sort of covered up and kept secret.
And a lot of them have to do with, you have the same tie-in with these ancient
stories
and accounts from history, not just from the Roman and Greek historians, but
also the Arab
historians, like Al-Masudi, for example, the Herodotus of the Arabs, they
called him.
You know, he talked about tales of these tunnels and chambers beneath the Sphinx,
that there
were ruins beneath the Sphinx that then led out to like three different tunnels.
You have a number of other Arab historians from as far back as like 600 AD that
have stories
of getting into the pyramids and then getting lost in tunnels and chambers
beneath them.
Jeez.
Yeah, I mean, there's a lot of these...
You hear these stories of like the Hall of Records, right?
The people like Edgar Cayce, the American psychic in the 1940s, who, you know,
he would...
Have you heard of Edgar Cayce?
Yes.
So he would fall into these trance-like states and he'd have these visions, he's
called like
the sleeping prophet, they would call him, or he's like one of the Americans'
psychic.
And he wasn't just about things around Egypt, he did prophesize and talk about
locations for
three Halls of Records, which were these Atlantean caches of information, like
a pre-Diluvian
civilization.
He did call it Atlantis.
But he would also have these predictions about the stock market and a lot of
people made a lot
of money based on his predictions and that led to the...
He was really good at it?
Oh, yeah.
Yeah.
So apparently he went...
I mean, whether he was like, I don't know.
I mean, I have...
Because that's always the question when it comes to like psychics.
Psychics?
If you were a real psychic, why wouldn't you make all the money in the world
from the stock
market?
It did happen.
There was a lot of people made a lot of money and he did evidently too as well.
And so that led to the formation of something called the Edgar Cayce Foundation
or the ARE,
the Association for Research and Enlightenment is the name of them.
They're still going strong today.
And they've been looking to try and find his Halls of Records.
And they've been trying to verify the Cayce's predictions.
One in particular that they've been chasing down is the famous Hall of Records,
which he
said was beneath the paws of the Sphinx.
So there's not...
You know, the stories of this Hall of Records and these rooms beneath the Sphinx
go back
thousands of years.
I mean, not just the AREs, but also Herodotus and these other guys also talked
about that
whole area, the Sphinx and everything else being vastly more ancient, even than
the pyramids.
But there was some work done that happened in recent times, like in the 1990s.
Well, there's been a search going on since the early 70s that the ARE has been
involved
in.
And a lot of this is quite secretive.
A lot of this has never really come to light.
But there's some...
Until very recently, in fact, there's been some footage that came up that
showed that
there are, in fact, tunnels beneath the Sphinx that may well have been explored.
We're not quite sure.
But it's an interesting story.
So it does involve Mark Lehner and Zahi Hawass, who are the authoritative
figures involved
in Egypt.
Are they bottlenecking this as well?
Well...
Do I have to go give them a hug?
Maybe.
Say, come on, guys, join us.
Allegedly.
We'll blow you up.
We'll make you so much more popular.
We'll help.
It should be.
Get you more tourism.
And I think the current guys that have been running the Department of Antiquities
are embracing
a little bit of that idea.
But I do think there's been a little bit of gatekeeping that's happened in this
in particular.
Well, I think it's a generational thing.
I agree.
And I think when you are an academic or you are a person that's in a position
of power
like Zahi is, and you've been running things for so long, and this new thing
comes along,
it's very threatening.
And when there's a lot of movement and momentum behind it, it's very
threatening.
But that thing will just embrace you.
If you say, oh my goodness, look what we've learned.
We've learned more new, amazing things about, wait for it, Egyptians.
Like it's the same people.
It's just older.
It is.
It's just older versions.
Like this is why it's so dumb.
It's like you're just, you are only allowing part of the narrative to go
through about how
magnificent this culture is.
It's already the most magnificent culture in human civilization.
And in terms of history, when we look at it, nothing's anything like Egypt.
It's crazy.
And imagine it's bigger and crazier.
Richer.
It's just richer and a longer history in this place.
It's still like it is Egyptian.
It's the most magical place in the world.
Yeah.
It is unfortunate.
I was just talking about this just yesterday, in fact.
The nature of establishment being to resist change, right?
It's unfortunate.
And control.
Control and to resist change.
Maintain control, not lose control.
That was the fear.
The fear is if I am a self-professed expert with an institution behind me with
a nice name
and then all of a sudden some fucking asshole with an Australian accent comes
along with a
tech guy who becomes a YouTuber because he watched some asshole's podcast when
he was younger.
Yep, pretty much.
That's it.
This is true.
But it's you and Graham and Jimmy Corsetti and all these other amazing people.
And you guys are, you're showing the world that there's another side to a lot
of these
stories and it's a legitimate side.
It's not just a legitimate, it's an unfathomable side.
When you're looking at some of the stuff like Baalbek, you're looking at those
stones,
there's unfathomable things that no one is saying they're unfathomable.
No one's saying, we don't know.
Everyone is saying, don't worry about it.
We got it all figured out.
Like that's crazy.
I agree.
I think embracing them, and I think I've made this point before, but it's the
nature of the
discourse that's changed that has forced, I think, a stronger reaction from the
establishment.
Yes.
The general public views things differently now.
Well, the general public's involved in the discussion now.
If you go back more than 60, 70 years, I mean, general public didn't have
access to this
information.
They were, I mean, these discussions only happened in societies and in
universities.
But with the rise of, firstly, alternative authors and then the internet, now
everybody's got
a chance to have a platform and a set of ears to hear this information.
And it becomes more popular.
Guys like you have had a huge impact on the popularity of these topics.
And that's, I think, what is threatening.
Well, I think they've always been popular.
The problem is they haven't been legitimized.
Like these ideas have always been popular.
It's just nobody gets, it's like there's a food that you want that no one's
serving.
You know what I mean?
That's what it's like.
It's not like it wasn't popular.
Yeah.
Like I'm not unique in my interest in ancient Egypt or in ancient civilizations.
Everybody has, look at when they ask men, like, what do you think about ancient
room?
Guys think about ancient room all the time.
It's just a normal part of being a person that lives in a current civilization
wondering what
it was like in the past.
And then when you see something like Egypt, you're like, none of this makes
sense.
No.
There's massive contradictions.
And I think-
It seems so old.
Well, it does.
And I think what's made this, let's call it alternative perspective, much more
possible,
even plausible is all of the adjacent fields of science and work that is
basically providing
a plausible context for these ideas that there was an ancient lost civilization
that
is responsible for the roots of some of the things we see in these
civilizations, responsible
for some of the technological enigmas that we find on these sites.
And that, you know, that's, this is all stuff that's happened in recent years
in adjacent
fields of science, things like the extension of the human timeline, the
evidence for severe
erosion on these sites, our understanding of climate history and cataclysm.
The extension of the human timeline is huge.
That's huge.
Because, you know, we were just, Jesse Michaels and I were just having a
conversation about
this.
I was like, imagine if you would not lose any cognitive abilities, no decline
at all, and
modern science figured out a way to let you live a thousand years.
Imagine if you're a person who's working on material sciences and you're doing
like 3D printing,
you get to live a thousand years and you're a researcher.
And you're, you still show up at work every day for a thousand years or 10,000
years.
That sounds nuts, but it doesn't.
Because if you can extend life, you can extend life for a very prolonged,
especially with gene
editing and a lot of the other crazy, who knows if they already figured that
out back then.
Data brokers are invading your privacy.
They're recording everything you do online.
And if you live in the U.S., they're selling your information to anyone and
everyone who's
willing to buy it.
But thankfully, there's a way to stop all the tracking and spying.
And that's with ExpressVPN.
ExpressVPN is an app that hides your IP address and reroutes 100% of your
online activity through
secure, encrypted servers.
This keeps data brokers from tracking your information, protecting you from
invasive advertisers, scammers,
and even criminals.
And ExpressVPN is now offering three different plans, allowing you to customize
your VPN experience.
The basic plan starts as low as $3.49 a month.
That's less than $0.12 a day.
Or if you want all the bells and whistles, including identity protection,
credit monitoring, and
a dedicated IP, just choose one of their more premium plans.
It's up to you.
Plus, right now, you can get four extra months of service if you tap the banner
or go to
expressvpn.com slash rogan.
That's a price as low as $3.49 a month, plus four extra months of service.
Go to expressvpn.com slash rogan.
And if you're watching on YouTube, get your four extra months by scanning the
QR code on
screen or by clicking the link in the description.
I mean, there seems to be some evidence that they might have.
What about the Sumerian kings list?
Well, this is a big part of it.
Yeah, I mean, not just them, but almost every civilization that talks about,
even the Bible,
it talks about pre-Diluvian or pre-flood civilizations, often talks about
people living for hundreds
of years, if not longer than that, thousands of years.
You have an Egyptians kings list that does the same thing.
But even in the Bible, you know, Noah was 600, right?
So you have, yeah, I think something like that.
You have many examples of these, what they would describe as pre-cataclysm or
pre-flood
civilizations where people live for a long time.
But you just, I mean, not just, there's an extension of individual human
timeline, but
we also know that there's an extension of the human, like how long humans have
been here.
Right.
Right?
Because that's going back further and further all the time.
We have, we have skulls and fossil record evidence now where it's just slightly
more
than 300,000 years genetic and studies into teeth morphology make the
possibility open
to whatever, seven, 800,000 years there was a skull found.
Yeah, I mean, it's, I think that was more, I think that's more of a homo sapien
clade
skull.
So it's like a, it may not be homo sapien exactly us.
It might be a variety, but that's, that's a whole other aspect on this too is,
is that
where the last humans left, right?
There were other types of humans that we know lived for, in some cases, a
couple million
years that had similar, like even bigger brain sizes than we did.
We don't, we don't really know what their capabilities were.
We, we only can work with ourselves and then you combine that lengthening of
time of like,
okay, you have an intelligent social species that has the ability to build on
knowledge of
your, you know, your ancestors.
So, you know, one guy spends his life making the spear, the next guy spends his
life perfecting
how to throw it.
Then it's just, we have this unique ability to stand on this knowledge that's
passed down
from our direct ancestors and therefore build up our capability and inevitably
leads towards
civilization.
And if you stress that way back in time, and now you look at things like the
climate
history and the, the history of cataclysm on this planet, this possibility that,
that,
that this may, these civilizations may have arisen and then been completely
destroyed at some
point over the last several hundred thousand years, you can't, you can't just
dismiss that,
that there's a strong possibility that, that it, that it's, it's just, it's
possible.
And in fact, there seems to be a lot of other contextual evidence to support it
in origin
tales, in stories, in the echoes of sacred geometry and advanced mathematics
and knowledge
of, uh, the cosmos and also, you know, planetary dimensions and, and geodetic
data, all this
stuff that's encoded into these, into these monuments and into these stories
and tales that
we can't explain how these so-called primitive civilizations like the Egyptians,
uh, or the
Sumerians knew this information yet it's there and it's encoded in their
monuments and in
their, in their data.
But we can't explain, even the Greeks, you can't explain the precision of, of
some of
the, the aspects of things like the pyramids, but yeah, I mean, you just, and
again, with
the cataclysms that we know have happened, the Younger Dryas just being the
most recent,
but if you go back several hundred thousand years, you have these massive, you
know, interglacial
periods and glacial maximum periods, right?
That these cycles that we go through where you have this big glaciation buildup
and then you
have just, you know, these, what must've been catastrophic floods and then
interglacial
periods.
In fact, there was a, a period called the Aeolian period.
It was about 120,000 years ago.
That was very much like the Holocene that we're in today.
In fact, it lasted longer than the Holocene has currently lasted.
We've been in the Holocene, maybe 10,000 years, um, 10, 11,000 years.
I think the, the Aeolian period was, was more than 15 to 20,000 years where it
was stable
weather.
Sea levels were, were like three, four meters higher.
Uh, than where they are today.
But it wasn't like this, it wasn't like the, it wasn't like the, the height of,
you know,
a glacial maximum where it's a difficult place to live.
It was, it was a, it was a calm period.
I mean, the only reason our civilization is here today is because of the nice
weather of
the Holocene, right?
We have warm weather.
We, we, we haven't had like massive catastrophes that, that have been like, you
know, extinction
level events kind of thing, um, to get in our way and knock us back to the
stone age.
There was a similar period like that, that lasted longer than we've been in
this nice
period, about 120,000 years ago.
And if you consider after that, the cycles of glaciation and flooding, then
particularly
the younger dryness, there'd been just almost nothing left.
It's just this, the stone in places that survived what happened afterwards.
So I do like my, my range of possibilities for, okay, when did these artifacts,
uh, originate?
Like when did some of this architecture originally be built?
Uh, it it's, it's not to me just 15,000 years ago.
It could be a hundred, 200,000 years or even more.
And again, more contextual evidence to support that is things like the, the,
the erosion that
we can see on some of these sites.
One of the, my favorite topics in the last couple of years has been looking at
the erosion
on the Giza Plateau.
Yeah.
I wanted to bring that up.
And of some of the big monuments in particular, like the, the whole middle
pyramid complex on
the Giza Plateau.
Let's show some of the images that you used in some of your videos because it's
pretty,
it's pretty fascinating when you look at it.
It's kind of undeniable.
It is.
And what's, what's fun about this is too, is, is that we don't have to guess,
right?
We know how long it takes.
We, studies have been done about like limestone erosion.
Turns out there's almost an endless number of conveniently dated limestone slabs
all around
the world.
They're the tombstones in cemeteries, right?
So you can, they get dated, they get cut, they get inscribed with the date when
the, when
it was put up.
And then, so you can measure it and you can come back over whatever, decades
and measure
erosion.
And so how long does it take for this face of this limestone erosion to, to recede?
This is the nutty stuff.
Yeah.
And because we're assuming that unless something happened to the outside of
that, that this
was at one point in time, flat and smooth.
A hundred percent, because there are still blocks that are protected.
So a lot of this has been rebuilt.
This is tricky to see.
So see, you can actually see that the, the, the less eroded sections are
actually modern
restorations because this is so eroded that it's falling apart.
Right.
And this isn't even the exterior of the structure.
This is the interior core masonry.
All of this was also for God knows how many thousands of years encased in granite.
It also points to a trend, it points to a pattern that we, when human beings
find ancient
things, they do renovations, try to keep them.
Oh, yeah.
Which is one of the things that's been, you know, yeah, over and over and over
again.
We've talked about that.
Yeah.
There's so many structures that seem like there's multiple timelines working on
the same
exact ground.
It's, it is a hundred percent a human tendency to, to renovate and restore, uh,
all of these,
to, to reuse these sites.
Even in a gross way, like what they do with the Sphinx, like the pause, that's
gross.
It is.
It, but it's, it's, we're renovating it and restoring it to use it as a tourist
attraction.
Like the Romans renovated and restored it to use as a ceremonial center.
But it's a very shitty version of the original.
Yeah, I agree.
And there's a lot of assumptions.
You're assuming you knew the form of it.
You're making your own form.
Yeah.
Over the feet.
I have a problem.
Yes.
That was one of my problems with the, they were talking about restoring the
middle pyramid,
like the third pyramid, like the Menkara pyramid, the small one.
Yeah.
It's monstrous, but it has these granite casing stones, right?
And the last, the top four or five courses are still there, but it was at least
15, 16 courses
of granite.
And there's just all this granite and these massive granite blocks and rubble.
And, uh, Mustafa Waziri, who was at the time, the head of the department of
antiquities was
talking about, we're going to rebuild it.
We're going to put it back together.
And I know this.
And I'm like, please know, because what an asshole.
Well, he did something cool, which was he excavated in front of it.
He did show that the courses keep going down, but then he's like, we're going
to restore
it.
I'm like, dude, that would use concrete.
It never, it would be a facsimile of what it once was.
Is he still around?
No, he actually, because he said that, uh, there was a lot of international outcry
for
that very reason.
And then, in fact, they, the government formed a tribunal to figure out what to
do.
The tribunal was headed by Zahi Waz, and, uh, he lost his job.
So yeah, don't, he's not in that.
Yeah.
That's not happening.
It's not happening.
That's crazy.
Nobody wants to see the restored pyramid.
You want to see what's left.
Yes.
Well, we can use our imaginations to, they are.
We are restoring a lot of things.
I don't necessarily agree with this either.
Things that are actively falling apart, sure.
You need to buttress them.
Like a lot of this wall.
So this is part of the middle pyramid complex at Giza.
And there's a lot of blocks like this.
There are limestone blocks that are 11, 12 meters long, like four meters wide,
you know,
two, 300 tons that were stacked up on top of each other.
And they eroded so greatly on the inside that they've actually fallen over at
some point
in antiquity, they've fallen off.
And so they are trying to buttress and support things that are going to fall.
I'm all for that.
But I mean, there's a lot, just the amount of erosion that it takes for that to
happen
to blocks like this, of this pneumolytic limestone, which is a very hard form
of limestone, full
of fossils.
And it's, it's, you're talking like two, three feet in some places of erosion
of limestone.
And if you look at the studies that have been done into like limestone erosion
rates, and
there's been several, they've studied them in coastal wave action environments
where it's
like getting battered by waves, they put in rivers, you know, they put limestone
cubes on
the top of one of the governmental buildings in DC and left it there and
studied it over
decades.
And like, okay, it's tiny amounts, but in a normal weathering environment,
right?
This is assuming a lot more rainfall than what happens in Egypt, which gets
very little
rainfall, by the way, but a place like Washington DC or somewhere where you get
like 40, 40 inches
of rain a year, something like that.
It would take just normal weathering erosion to do two feet of erosion like
this more than
a hundred thousand years.
And so, and that's, I think you can extend that because if, if, well, the thing
is maybe
there was more rainfall here at some point.
We know there was after, since about 4,000 BC, the African humid period was,
was, was in
place.
That's, that's another big, I think, tell, uh, for, for what happened,
particularly on the
Giza Plateau and the sites in Egypt, uh, in that, you know, but one of the
things that
always mystified me about the, the Sphinx is like, it's spent so much time
buried in sand
up to its chest over the last several thousand years, more time than it hasn't
been.
We have to work pretty hard to keep the sand out of it now.
In fact, there were multiple attempts to dig it out of the sand in the 1800s
that failed.
And then they just literally two or three years later, it's, it's, it's sort of
buried
up to its chest again.
It seems like a design flaw.
Like, why would you build this thing in a low spot?
In a windy desert where it's going to fill with sand.
It's just, I don't think.
Who's it attributed to again?
Khafra.
That's right.
And then it wasn't there an inscription that were Khafra said that if he could
uncover the
Sphinx, he would be the Pharaoh?
Uh, this is right.
It's actually Thutmose the fourth.
That's called the, there's a stelae in front of the, in the chest in there in
the Sphinx.
So Thutmose is the fourth.
About a thousand years later.
So he was the one that was saying if he uncovered.
So we knew it was buried in sand during the dynastic Egyptian civilization.
That was what I was going to get to.
Yes.
So that's the, so that during that time, no erosion.
Well, this is a whole, yes.
So there's a whole other, um.
So it's protected.
Right.
So this is another big issue with, uh, the wind and sand erosion.
When you talk specifically about the Sphinx enclosure, I mean, this is, this is
one of
the big controversial, I mean, for academics.
Well, here's the big one.
The face is eroded.
Exactly.
And if it's wind and sand, that's the only thing that's exposed.
And that's not as eroded.
It's been one of my major points for a long time.
It is, to be fair, it is the yarding, the sedimentary layers of limestone.
It is a slightly harder form of limestone, but still you're talking thousands
and thousands
of years where that the only thing above the sand level was basically the face
and it's
then, and they explain all of this deep erosion on the body of the Sphinx and
the Sphinx
enclosure to wind and sand.
I know obviously Robert shock is a different interpretation, but yes, you would
see erosion
on that, but you just don't.
I think that the most plausible explanation for that Sphinx is that yes, the
face was recarved
in the dynastic period, probably, but it could have been by Khafra.
It actually may well have been before that as well, because there's other
evidence that
suggests that the Sphinx was already buried in sand at his time.
Wow.
The attribution to Khafra comes from two main sources.
One is its position.
So where the Sphinx is, you have the middle pyramid, you have the causeway that
runs down
and you have the middle pyramid, you have the pyramid temple, the complex where
we were
seeing that erosion.
You had this massive causeway that runs down to then the valley temple, which
is this very
famous massive megalithic structure.
And right next to the valley temple is the Sphinx.
And in front of that is the Sphinx temple.
So they sort of attribute it and make it, well, it's part of the middle pyramid
complex.
The other attribution comes from what's been written on that dream stele
between the, in
the legs of the Sphinx at its chest.
It does say Khafra on there, but there's a lot of, it's a controversial
statement to say
that that means Khafra built it.
There were several Egyptologists who had different, and this is back in the,
you know, early 1900s.
They had different interpretations for what that said.
What they believe it said was Khafra was trying to do what his ancestors had
done, well, had
done before, or that Thutmosis was trying to do what his ancestors had done
before.
And Khafra is mentioned there in terms of dig it out of the sand and become
king.
Like excavate it from the sand.
That's the move that everybody goes through.
Well, it's also, I think it's propaganda.
It could be a great explanation for that dream stele.
It could also just be like governmental propaganda, right?
So he could be, you could put that in there and say, see, I'm divinely ordained
to be king
because I dug this out of the sand.
It could be just a story.
Yeah.
Just in the interest of keeping this standalone, please explain to people the
whole deal with
Dr. Robert Schock from Boston University and the water erosion.
Yes.
I know.
And if you've heard this before, I'm sorry.
I just want it for people that are like, what?
The water erosion that appears to be thousands of years of rainfall.
Yeah.
It's actually good.
It's good background context because it does apply to not only the Sphinx.
It's the most famous example, I think, and well-known example of, again, an
adjacent field
of science coming in and challenging some of the doctrine that's been around
Egyptology.
But it was actually Swala de Lubitz who originally, I think, proposed it.
His work was followed up by John Anthony West, who then brought Dr. Robert Schock,
who's
a professor of geology at Boston University, to the Sphinx.
This was, I believe, late 80s, early 90s.
And he went and looked at the erosional path.
So the Sphinx sits inside an enclosure.
It's carved from bedrock.
So it was originally what you'd call a yardang, which is like a limestone outcropping.
And so they cut down in this big enclosure and they cut the floor.
And then they sort of shaped the Sphinx from this natural outcropping of bedrock.
So you had, and we know this because the structure next to the Sphinx or in
front of it called
the Sphinx temple is actually, you can line up the sedimentary layers of the
blocks that
are in there from the Sphinx enclosure.
So we know that there were blocks taken from here.
So this is all predictably sort of cut walls and the Sphinx would have been
nicely finished
when it was.
And he looked at these patterns.
If you go there today, I think I have pictures of the walls of the Sphinx
enclosure in there.
And it's just these deeply eroded vertical channels.
And the Sphinx body is harder to tell because it's been restored so many times.
The ancient Egyptians restored it.
The Romans restored it.
We restored it a couple of different times.
Assholes.
Yeah.
Yeah.
It's funny.
But the nice thing is the walls of the enclosure really haven't been touched.
So you can see the natural erosive patterns.
And he looked at that and went, that's rainfall erosion.
But not just some rainfall erosion, literally the result of thousands of years.
The only way you would get these patterns in the stone is thousands of years of
rainfall
erosion.
Obviously, geysers are really, really dry.
I mean, Egypt's a really dry place these days.
You have to go back to time periods pre-4000 BC when the Sahara was a savannah.
It was grasslands with lake basins and river systems.
And it had a lot more rain.
You didn't have this annual flood cycle that you have now.
It was like a lot more rainfall.
It was much more verdant and green.
The Giza Plateau would have been green.
Which makes sense that that's why they would settle there in the first place.
Exactly.
Yeah.
Why?
I mean, they didn't build it in a desert.
I mean, you wouldn't because it would fill up with sand.
It also makes sense why they would flourish because they had so much resources
because
it was like so green and fertile.
Right.
Probably had plenty of plants, plenty of animals.
Well, there's a really other good point associated with that that I wanted to
bring up.
But first, just to finish on the Sphinx erosion.
So when Shock came out and said this, he really thought he was moving the story
forward.
And he took it to an archaeological conference and they literally laughed him
out of the room.
And they said, this is ridiculous.
Like, where are the pot sherds was, I think, Mark Lehner's comment saying, like,
where's
the evidence that something's at least 12,000 years old?
Mocking.
Mocking them.
Yeah.
So he got a good taste of, I guess, the old boy network of the archaeologists
on that
day.
But he's, you know, he's being very conservative in that dating also of saying,
well, 12,000
years, it could well be tens of thousands of years.
And in fact, it seems more likely to me based on the erosional evidence that we
see not only
in the Sphinx enclosure, but elsewhere on the Giza Plateau.
There's many places where you see just a huge amount of erosion that you can't
really explain
within the timelines and the climate of dynastic Egypt as we know it from, you
know, roughly
3000 BC till even now, like, because you've still, it's still eroding, right?
But yeah, he, he, it could be vastly more ancient.
I actually, I actually think there's something else that came out, was it
earlier this year?
I think it was much earlier this year or maybe late, late last year.
But there was a study done that showed that during the African humid period, so
this period
of time before the desert, desertification of, of Egypt, the Sahara becoming a
desert when
it was green and there was more consistent rainfall.
There was a lot, obviously a lot more water in the Nile, as we call it, and it
had different
channels.
One of the things they discovered was that there was a branch of the river Nile
and it's
called the Aramat branch.
And it was in places up to a kilometer, most of a mile wide.
So it was quite an extensive branch.
But it turns out that all of these valley temples on all of these pyramid sites
from Dashur and
Saqqara, Abu Sir, Abu Ghraib, Giza, all of those valley temples were built on
the shores
of this extinct branch of the Nile.
So it's like pyramids, when you look at a pyramid, it's not just a pyramid,
there's a whole complex
associated with it.
There's a temple, there's a structure at the pyramid, there's a causeway, there's
what
they call valley temples down.
And it's like, these were all built on the shorelines of this branch of the Nile
that
went, basically disappeared 4,000, somewhere between 4,000 and 3,500 BC.
But it was in place for thousands and thousands of years before that.
And today, if you go there and they say, well, you know, the valley temple, yep,
they would
ship the stones from Aswan and it'd be like three months of the year, it would
flood enough
where you can get a boat in.
I mean, I've seen pictures.
There are pictures of when that flood happened before they built the dam and
stopped that
process.
And it's, in some years, it's a puddle.
Like it's, there's not, I mean, you're talking about boats that were carrying
hundreds of
tons of granite and only in a three month period of year can you get them in
there.
There's many, there would have been many years where there's not even remotely
enough water
to get it anywhere near the valley temple.
I don't think they even use boats.
Oh, no, I don't either.
I mean.
It sounds crazy to say, but I think they had a technology that we haven't even
begun to
mess with yet.
The logistical achievements of the ancient Egypt, of what is represented in
ancient Egypt
is like, like nothing you can see anywhere.
I mean, there's Baalbek and then there's, to me, the best example is the statue
at Tannis.
There's a statue.
I mean, there's several of these thousand plus ton statues, like half a dozen
of them.
You get remnants of them.
But there was one that was at Tannis, that was moved a thousand kilometers,
like a thousand
kilometers.
And it would have been, it was a single piece granite statue, easily a thousand
tons.
Show that image, Jamie, if you would, please.
I think it's giant objects in there or something.
There's, I mean, and this is Tannis in the Delta, Aswan down here at the, at
the quarry.
I mean, downstream on the Nile, there's, there's, there's another example of
the one at Karnak
that's the whole shoulder and arm of a, of a composite quartzite.
Again, gigantic size of the Statue of Liberty, basically, like single piece
granite solid
statue.
I mean, there's, there's all these pieces.
That's a small one.
Which is insane.
That's, yeah, that's.
Look at the people in the background and say, that's a small one.
No, it's only 200 tons.
I mean, it's 250 maybe.
It's not.
You have them 10 times almost that size.
The crazy thing is also how beautiful it is.
Oh.
Like how symmetrical it is.
The workmanship on these is, is astonishing.
And you can still feel like, this is one of the signs, I think, when you get to
the finishing
on some of these statues, that's a, yeah, that's a giant kneecap.
There's one with an arm and a shoulder sort of poking out.
That's a really good example.
And that's Balberk.
Yeah.
The point is, like when you, when you talk about how beautiful that, like how
that one
that's lying down, Jamie, oh, there's a, the one, the back one, a couple, that
one.
Yeah.
Look at the, the finishing on that.
Like how incredible you see his nipple.
You see all the, you know what I mean?
Thousands of years later, you see the detail on the headdress.
You see all, and then you have to realize like this was done with people that
didn't have
steel.
Yeah.
And you can, supposedly.
Right.
It definitely, I mean, they, yeah, later periods, like in the new kingdom, they,
they had some
more iron, not necessarily steel, but you know, you know, something else here,
like see that
cartouche.
See how poor that is relative to the finishing of the face and the chest.
So this is the other thing that happened.
This is why no one's sort of like, you don't get archeologists saying, well,
there's statues.
We don't know who made it.
We know who made it because they put their name on this.
That is literally Ramsey's II's cartouche right there.
I'll recognize it anyway.
But that's awesome that you recognize that.
If you come to Egypt, you'll recognize it too.
I would show it.
He, he was, Petrie called Ramsey's II, the great usurper because he put his
name on fucking
everything.
And he carved it in deep like this too.
He would have it, him and his father, uh, Seti the first and his son, Maren Petar,
they
were all, they were all in that business of rebadging the, some of this stuff.
So they would find old things and they would put their name on it.
They would claim it for themselves.
I think it's, it's the, the nature of, of, I mean, during that period in the
new kingdom
in the 19th dynasty, you know.
It's all, I did this, all me.
Yeah.
It was the height of dynastic Egyptians, uh, Egypt's power and wealth.
So they had all of this, uh, I think hubris and, and arrogance to, to, to make
themselves
one of the gods.
And it's one of the, I think there's these statues, there's a lot to unpack in,
in these
because I, I also happen to think that when you look at these massive statues,
you can't
really explain with the capabilities of the dynastic Egyptians.
I think it also explains their iconography because if they inherited these
giant statues,
like it's, those are the gods.
Like you're looking at this, imagine the statue, the size of the Statue of
Liberty standing
out in the desert and it's just sitting there looking at you with this, this,
this face
and that, and the craftsmanship on these are amazing.
Kind of see it here.
You see how the eyeballs are like tilted down almost.
And it looks like a smile on the face from here.
But when you, it's perspective, when, when you stand beneath them and you look
up at them,
they're looking at you and the, and it's not so much, it's not a smile.
It's just like a straight line.
It looks straight.
They've built, they've, they've shaped these faces for perspective.
As if you're viewing them from the ground.
It's, they're absolutely incredible.
And there's also been studies done on some of these that show the faces are
pretty much
perfectly symmetrical.
Again, not something that you can achieve or not something that's done in
modern artwork.
The perfect symmetry.
That's not a, it's not even a characteristic of a human face.
Like we aren't like that.
Our nostrils are different sizes and whatever, but.
Because we're hybrids.
We could be.
We just, we're imperfect.
We're imperfect beings, Joe.
I think they made us.
I mean.
I think they made us.
I think something came here from somewhere else or something was already here.
Intervention theory.
I think they did something with lower hominids.
Have you read Lloyd Pye's work?
No, I've heard of it, but I haven't read any of this.
Everything you think you know is wrong.
Fun lecture.
Rest in peace, Lloyd.
He was, and there's some interesting genetic evidence that's this, I think,
suggests that
as a possibility.
Our chromosomal difference between us and other mammals of our type, almost
like we've had
these, the tellurides have been attached.
We've been genetically engineered.
Great Braden talks about that.
Yeah.
We have some real strange characteristics for being on this planet.
Like we dive exposure at 80 degrees in the shade.
We can't look at the sun.
You ever see dogs?
You get a dog stare at the sun like this and you're like, what are you doing?
You're like, I'm fine.
Why can't you do that?
I can't even see at night.
We have no benefit of the night vision.
Yeah.
It's interesting also when they look at all these other versions of humans that
they
find, almost all of them were more durable.
Oh, broomsticks to axe handles.
Yeah.
Like it's multiple gaps of.
But isn't that kind of in the Bible?
Doesn't the Bible say the meek shall inherit the earth?
Well, we're the meek when it comes to like.
I think we're the meek.
Yeah.
We're just the meanest maybe.
We're the meanest.
We're the meanest and the trickiest because we had to be, which is like all
animals.
When you have to, you're small, like hyenas are fucking ruthless.
Oh, yeah.
The reason why they're ruthless is because lions are bigger.
They had to figure it out.
Yeah.
You know, they had to just be fucking mean and nasty.
And I think, I think we probably wiped out or interbred with everything that
wasn't us.
Yep.
And that's a wrap.
Sorry.
Sorry your big bones don't work on arrows.
You dummies didn't figure out catapults yet.
Guerrilla tactics.
Yeah.
Guerrilla tactics, technology.
I mean, I think that's also probably one of the reasons why we're so obsessed
with making
better stuff, including weapons.
Yeah, yeah.
You know?
Yeah, I think so.
I mean, there is, I don't rule out the, I mean, personally, my opinion, I think
there's a,
either via panspermia or intervention theory like that where we've been, there
is a huge
mystery as to, as to both our species and then how life itself kind of kicked
off.
Like that's, even panspermia is like kicking the can down the road problem.
Like how do you, how does DNA happen?
Because it's one of the most interesting things to me is like DNA as a
technology has never
changed.
Right.
So from single cell organisms right down through to us, the way life is
expressed as a technology
DNA, like the, how it expresses life has changed, but DNA, I don't think has
changed.
Like it's, it's like this one way that life expresses itself and how it forms
is like the
actual origins of life.
It's DOS.
It's DOS.
It is the HOS, human operating system.
Yeah.
Life loss, life operating system, something like that.
What is your take on those tridactyl mummy?
I have, I, I don't know.
I, I think there's, I wouldn't.
Did you see Jesse Michaels episode on it?
I literally, yeah, not all of it.
I've seen some of it.
Yes.
Or the scans, you see the scans?
I've seen the scans.
Yeah, I saw some of the, I've seen a lot of these.
I don't want to get, I don't want to get tricked.
So I'm like, but Jesse said that seeing them in person, I just talked to him
about it.
He said it was otherworldly.
He said it was incredibly strange, like very, very surreal seeing them in
person because it
really does feel like it's a different species.
Like you're looking at some different species.
My take on that stuff is honestly, it's, it's like, sure, right?
It's, I, to me, the whole, the whole alien, um, other life in the universe was
settled.
I mean, it's a mathematical certainty.
Like I just, the Kepler mission showed it.
Like it's a mathematical certainty that life has to exist other, in other
places on the planet.
In some form.
In some form.
But, and then you multiply that out across the, the, the, the span of space and
time.
Is it possible that we're being visited?
Is there something to these phenomena?
Yes.
I, I think so.
It doesn't, I, I'm, I'm skeptical that we'll ever really, I hope maybe my
lifetime will,
will know, but I'm, I, would it change what I'm doing if we had that
realization?
Not particularly, I don't think.
It's just like, we could be part of the Galactic Federation.
I'd be like, oh, that's cool.
I think it'll give additional perspective.
Like, let's just, let's go way out there and put that fucking tinfoil hat on
tight.
Um, if they open up the, the labyrinth, if they figure out a way to drain the
water and
they do find out that that 40 meter long metallic thing is something from
another place.
Interdimensional.
Something from another place.
Whatever, right, yeah.
Or maybe break up civilization.
You know, there's a lot of people that think that there were, like, like there's
us and
then there's Neanderthals, right?
And then there's, okay, they all coexisted at one point in time.
What if this thing coexisted with us as well?
And this is a different version of what we will eventually be.
Just like if, let's imagine human beings, we maintain a presence on this earth
for the
next 30 million years.
Let's just imagine that.
Could be crazy, but it's happened before with crocodiles.
If, right, if we did, what would chimpanzees be like 30 million years from now?
Evolution wouldn't stop, right?
Right, it's not going to stop.
They're already using tools, right?
There's speculation.
I mean, there's various scientists that believe that you can make an argument
that many primates
are in the Stone Age.
Yeah.
That they've entered into the Stone Age.
So let's assume that this keeps moving in that general direction without our
intervention,
which I'm assuming some foreign countries probably would engage in that.
And one of them might be America.
Yeah, yeah.
You know, secretly?
Like, if we're, if we're, look, if we're doing this gain of function research
on viruses
that wind up killing a million people, you don't think that we're going to, if
there's some
sort of a, like, there was talk during the, I believe it was World War II,
where Russia
was, there was talk of some sort of a hybrid between a human being and a chimpanzee.
Trying to devise that for soldiers.
Yeah.
Yes.
Yeah.
Real, right?
That's real.
Yeah, yeah.
There's some very strange and interesting experiments that happened in that
period of time.
So what if those little fuckers...
Kept going.
What if those little fuckers are, like, the OGs?
Like, they're us, like, a million years from now, and what we are, you know,
the chimps
are a million years later.
Right.
That's what we are right now, currently.
They are what we're going to be.
Yeah.
And then they went, fuck it, we're going to the ocean.
Right.
Well, fuck, right.
Yes.
That's a possibility.
In fact, the breakaway civilization concept's not a new one either.
Like, a lot of ancient cultures looked at places like even the moon as a refuge.
They would call it a refuge.
Like, that's a whole other theory.
Like, what's going on with the moon?
Is there something happening up there?
Was there something that happened with it in the past?
Right.
Yeah.
I mean, this is – it's – to me, the whole – it's – all of these things
are
completely plausible.
Like, I just – I don't – I tried actles or the – yeah, I mean, the UFO
phenomena.
I mean, this could have been going on for a long, long time.
I wouldn't – I mean, I certainly would include some sort of otherworldly
craft as potentially
one of the explanations for what that thing is beneath the ground at the labyrinth.
Well, even if it's not anotherworldly craft, whatever the fuck was going on
where someone
could make a 40-meter-long metallic thing thousands and thousands and thousands
of years ago,
40 meters is a half of a damn football field.
Yeah, it's big.
That's big.
And stick it underground for some reason.
In a corridor or in a huge atrium?
Okay.
Yeah.
Like, what – all bets are off.
If what those Italian scientists are saying is underneath the Giza plateau, all
bets are off.
You're looking at something that is, like, as kooky as the pyramids are, that's
the tip of the iceberg.
True.
Yeah, and that's why I wanted to – the labyrinth was so interesting because,
you know, that – their
announcements around what they – these, you know, 800-meter shafts and
massive cubes kilometers deep
under the plateau is – kind of came out of nowhere.
But there is – there are these accounts for these other places like the labyrinth
where
there's some, like, historical legitimacy to them, like there's been accounts
of them.
Although, you know, over time, what they're talking about beneath the Giza
plateau, maybe
not to the full extent of what they're saying, I'm still having trouble with
that.
But there's certainly a lot more – we know there's a lot more down there,
right, that we,
at least the public has never discovered.
We know that there are – so beneath the bottom of the Osara shaft, for
example, we know that
there are further tunnels that go off from there that go underneath it.
The Osara shaft, for people who don't know, is one of the – it's like a –
there's three
passages, like three rooms, and it goes down a little over 100 feet or so
beneath the ground,
beneath the causeway on the middle pyramid complex.
You go down this big ladder, you go into one room, you go down another ladder,
there's
a bigger room with boxes in it, and you go down a further ladder to the bottom
room, which
also has boxes in it.
Today, it's the water tables way up high.
But we know in the past, this is one of the things that has recently come to
light, is
that that down there in the bottom in the 1990s, that was scanned with ground
penetrating
radar at the bottom level.
And they found, yep, there are actually like four-meter-long, eight-feet-high
tunnels
with domed ceilings below that, even further, that nobody, as far as we know,
have ever explored.
There are also tunnels leading off from that bottom level that head off towards
the Sphinx,
and they head off towards the pyramid.
And in fact, they fork, because there was a little-known exploration done by a
team of
Japanese scientists in the early 2000s that got like a camera on a long pole,
and they
shoved it down through the mud, and they stuffed it about 20 meters into one of
these tunnels.
And they found these man-made structures, like tunnels, and it forks.
And it actually forks off, and one seems to head towards the Great Pyramid, and
one keeps
going up towards Khafra.
So there's tons of stuff below there.
And in fact, if you ever go to the Giza Plateau, that causeway, if you're
heading up towards
the middle pyramid, you've got the Asara shaft on the left.
But on the right, you have, I mean, 10 of these massive shafts that we don't
really know how
deep they are, or whether or not they've ever been fully excavated.
But they just go way down into the ground.
So this could be like, you know, it's like the very top layer of things that
are being
claimed by the Italian scientists and their scans.
But there was, we know that these tunnels extend down to beneath the Sphinx,
for example.
Like, there's long been rumored that there's a tunnel, an entrance at the end,
at the back
of the Sphinx.
In fact, if you go there, there's a little box and a little hole.
It doesn't go anywhere.
I've stuck a camera in there and had a look.
But this is what happened in the 1990s.
So, you know, John Anthony West, I'm sure you've seen it, Mysteries of the Sphinx,
right?
Yeah, he's been on a couple of times.
Yeah, I know he has, but you've seen his work.
Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Wonderful documentary, Charlton Heston.
Charlton Heston, yeah.
Well, that's when that archaeologist is mocking Graham Hancock and John Anthony
West.
That's right.
Do you know about the three T's of Thanksgiving?
Turkey for eating, table for gathering, and touchdowns for winning.
With DraftKings Sportsbook, an official sports betting partner of the NFL,
every touchdown could
bring you closer to cashing in before dessert.
With DraftKings Sportsbook, all the actions in your hands.
First touchdown, anytime TD, live bets.
Every play, every snap, every game counts.
Big plays, bold calls, and bragging rights.
When the games get good, the bets get better.
And here's the best part.
New customers can bet just five bucks, and if your bet wins, you'll get $200 in
bonus bets
instantly.
When the touchdowns happen, we feast.
Download the DraftKings Sportsbook app and use the code ROGAN.
That's code ROGAN, bet $5, and get $200 in bonus bets if your bet wins.
In partnership with DraftKings, the crown is yours.
Gambling problem?
Call 1-800-GAMBLER.
In New York, call 877-8-HOPE-N-Y or text HOPE-N-Y-467-369.
In Connecticut, help is available for problem gambling.
Call 888-789-7777.
Or visit ccpg.org.
Please play responsibly on behalf of Boothill Casino and Resort in Kansas.
Pass-through if per-wager tax may apply in Illinois.
21 and over.
Age and eligibility varies by jurisdiction.
Void in Ontario.
Restrictions apply.
Bet must win to receive bonus bets which expire in seven days.
Minimum odds required.
For additional terms and responsible gaming resources, see dkng.co slash audio.
Limited time offer.
Yeah, so he did that research, I think, in 1991.
1990, 1991, it came out, and he actually won an Emmy for Best Documentary, I
think, for it.
Totally warranted.
But so he, as part of that work, had a guy named Tom DeBecky, who was a ground-penetrating
radar expert.
And he did work around the Sphinx, and he found the existence of, like, large
regular chambers beneath the Sphinx.
And then when that documentary came out, I mean, allegedly, Zahi was incensed
by it because it talked about Atlantis,
and it made the suggestion that this might be, you know, a hall of records that
talked about Edgar Cayce.
And he then denied, after that, John Anthony West and Robert Schrock any
permits to do any further work.
But what's weird is that Zahi and Mark Lehner have this longstanding connection
with the Edgar Cayce Foundation,
which is like a – it's this weird dichotomy.
It's like on the public facing, they decry anything Atlantis-based, but then on
the private side, they seem to be enabling explorations by the ARE.
And in fact, they've been enabling the ARE to do drilling experiments and other
things at the Sphinx since the late 1970s.
And there was an expedition, notorious one, that no one ever knew what happened.
It was called the Shore Expedition.
Dr. Joseph Shore, Joseph Jehodo, and then a guy named Boris Saeed were running
the Shore Expedition.
And Boris Saeed was a friend of John Anthony West.
He was the executive producer for Mysteries of the Sphinx.
And this happened in like 95 through about 97, 1997, and they partnered up with
Zahi, gave them a five-year unlimited permit to do whatever they wanted up at
the – on the Giza Plateau.
And one of the stories that came out of that was a story – so Boris Saeed,
who unfortunately has also passed away since, but he talked about filming Zahi.
He said, well, we got to the back of the Sphinx, and he said, you know, we want
to make another documentary like the Mysteries of the Sphinx.
And he said, well, what if we open up a tunnel that no one's ever opened up
before?
And he's like, that'd be great.
What sort of tunnel?
He said, well, a tunnel under the Sphinx.
And Boris Saeed said, that'd be fantastic.
So I actually filmed him going into the rump of the Sphinx, standing down in
there and saying, you know, the quote is something like, even Indiana Jones
wouldn't believe that he was here.
We're standing inside the body of the Sphinx.
Nobody knows where this tunnel goes, but we're going to open it for the first
time.
And he's down in this space with basically a blocked up tunnel beneath the Sphinx.
And he filmed all of this, but then this footage all disappeared.
So during the expedition, it was kind of shut down.
And then they got into a legal dispute, like Boris Saeed and Joseph Shaw got
into this battle.
The footage was never seen.
But he went on Art Bell in the late 90s and talked about it.
And we're like, God damn.
So this, you know, they also talked about this stuff at the Osiris shaft.
They did that ground penetrating radar work.
They did sonic experiments in the Great Pyramid.
There's a lot that happened at the Shaw expedition run by the, it was, they're
all ARE members.
Like, and the stated goal of Joseph Shaw was always to find the Hall of Records,
right?
I mean, this all continued into the 2000s too with that organization.
But there was all this tantalizing mystery of this footage.
Like, where the fuck is this footage?
Apparently the Department of Justice had a copy of it because there was this
lawsuit that was going on.
And nobody knew.
So this is, it's kind of out there.
And then, and then it was only like earlier this year, it turns out that, so
what happened?
So Boris Saeed was, was sick with liver cancer, but he was trying to raise
funds to make this documentary.
So he put together this tape with some of this footage from this expedition.
And he was selling VHS copies of it as a way to invest in this documentary.
And then a couple, like a year later, he just, he, that's when he passed away.
So there was, there's been a handful of these VHS tapes out there in random
homes from the mid to late nineties, just sitting there with this tape.
And then eventually someone this year actually digitized it, put it up on
YouTube as an unlisted video.
I found out about it.
And so all of a sudden now we actually have this footage.
We have Dahi going into the Sphinx at the back saying these words.
Yeah.
That's if you, Jamie, if you pull up my, I think it's the latest or the couple
latest videos about the rare footage found from the Sphinx.
It opens with that, with that footage.
Dude, thank God you're out there.
I'm so excited you do this.
It means so much to me that you do this.
It's, I love doing it.
I know you do.
It's fascinating when you find, like I've known about this footage for years
and years.
And I'm like, oh my God, somebody found it.
Yeah, this is it here.
So there's Zahi.
Yeah.
So he's going into this tunnel.
Yeah.
So you can still, this still exists, but then this is, yeah, this, where he is
now doesn't.
What happened?
Well, the story gets more and more intriguing.
So yeah, this is the, him saying the line saying, we've never opened this
tunnel before.
We're in the body of the Sphinx and we're going to figure out where it goes.
So, yeah, so after that, so Boris, they filmed that.
This is the early days.
So yeah, I'm walking around the back here.
I think I poked my camera in there, but I talk about it later on.
It's, it's, so Boris Saeed, who had filmed this with Zahi, goes, he talks to
them about,
let's make a contract.
Let's, let's have Zahi open the tunnel.
Like we'll make the documentary about him opening this tunnel and we're going
to show it to the world,
you know?
And they talked about it.
He went back to New York and he never heard from them again.
They never mentioned this contract, nothing.
He never had any further contact with Zahi about it.
And then funny thing happens in Egypt about, I don't know, eight, nine months
later.
And this is as reported by Robert Boval and Graham Hancock in their book,
Heaven's Mirror.
And also I found it in the Arabic publications, but about eight, I think it was
six to eight
months later, Zahi makes an announcement in El Aram and these Egyptian
publications in Arabic
that says, I've made this incredible discovery.
I've discovered tunnels and chambers beneath the Giza Plateau.
That's going to change everything we know about the ancient Egyptians and the
pyramids.
And he talked about finding three tunnels, one that was like on the north, one
on the
south, and then one that was yet to be determined where it went.
And he made this announcement and then never said another word about it ever
again.
And this is just in the Arabic papers.
And here's the funny thing.
But it could be because there's nothing there?
I suspect something else.
I suspect that even if there was nothing there, he would have stuck a camera in
there and looked
at it.
I suspect, I think it's more likely that, yeah, they found something that might
have upset the
apple cart and it doesn't get out.
Could you imagine if they are sitting on information?
Oh, I think.
You think they are.
Yes.
Yeah, I do.
I think there's been plenty of excavations and discoveries that I think were
inconvenient
for one reason or the other that have probably never seen the light of day.
That's a crime against humanity.
A little bit.
I think so.
I mean, it's, you know, the funny thing that he's, what he said too, when he's,
when
I read that comment he makes about three tunnels, that's, that's, that's what
Al-Adresi and
Al-Masadi said as well.
Like these, these Herodotus of the Arabs, like six to 800 AD, when they went,
they described
the same dam, the three tunnels, like chambers and rooms.
It's, it's, it's like lining up with these, same as the labyrinth.
Like it's lining up with these historical accounts.
And then it's just, you don't hear another word about it.
And when you go to the Sphinx today and you, you finally, you pop that little
box off
its butt, it, the whole thing's been backfilled.
Like the whole, it's where, where you see that camera, where Zahi was standing,
that still
beam's still there, but where his head level is, where he's standing, hey, this
tunnel
goes, it's like the dirt level's here now.
Like it's, it's all been backfilled.
That's so crazy.
Yeah.
That's so, why would you do that if there wasn't something in there?
You would only do it if there's something in there, unless it caved in.
Yeah.
To be honest, it's, it's my concern also with the great pyramid and the chamber
there is
that I, first of all, I have my suspicions that they may well have already
taken a peek
with an endoscopic camera into that, that hidden void.
So this is, you know, the scan pyramid project.
Suspicion is based on anything in particular?
No, no.
I just, no, just, just, just my experience with.
How they do things.
Yes.
So, so it's, there's always, I mean, I just, there's very little transparency
when it comes
to a lot of these digs and stuff.
And this isn't just the Egypt, this is, I think, I mean, it's not a criticism.
It's maybe more characteristic of archeological digs everywhere.
Sometimes the way this works is, is you might have to wait 20 or 30 years for,
for, or a decade
for information to come out because then it has to get perfect.
If someone has to publish a paper, you know, they sit on that information until
that point,
or maybe it never sees the light of day.
I mean, um, because it's inconvenient.
Well, I, I do, I do think that, I mean, anything that's going to like seriously
upset the apple
cart, like if you came out and found something that was, oh, damn, we found the
hall of records.
You know, we found this, this, this evidence that is, is incontrovertible that
suggests that
there was a predecessor culture and a predecessor civilization to the ancient
Egyptians.
I, I think there would be some long and hard thinking about whether or not we
actually release
that because it's going to make everybody look bad.
You know what I mean?
Like it's, it upsets.
Isn't it crazy though?
It is.
That make everybody look bad would be the motivation to keep one of the most
important discoveries
ever from, from the human race.
I, I, I agree.
Yes.
I, I.
Fucking nuts.
It is.
That we're even thinking about this.
And I love your approach.
I think you're absolutely right too.
Is it, is it, even if these figures, all they'd have to do is embrace it.
Like all they'd have to say is look at what we learned.
Yeah.
And everyone would be like, that's amazing.
And if you.
It's still Egyptians.
What is.
It's just, it's Egyptians that go back 30,000 years or whatever it is.
Yeah.
Or more.
That's so crazy.
But also wouldn't that excite more people to be more interested?
Wouldn't that increase the economy?
Wouldn't that increase the tourism?
Yeah.
Yeah.
It would increase everything.
Yes, it would.
It would make everybody more excited about archeology.
I, I think you've got to embrace the mystery.
There was a, there was a trend towards squishing it for a while.
There's no way you could know everything.
It's not possible.
Especially when you're finding these new things.
It's clear you don't know everything.
Yeah.
If they're finding new things, you don't know everything.
If there's a 40 meter long metallic object in a labyrinth that's in a giant atrium
that's
under the fucking ground.
Yeah.
You don't know everything.
Yeah.
I think it's worth taking a look.
Like, like.
Jeez, you think?
Yeah.
I mean, let's at least take a look.
Let's drill like a hole.
Like figure out, we know where from the scan, kind of where it is.
Like stick a borehole down and.
We were talking before, you were saying that there might be a possibility of
digging a
tunnel under the water through into the bottom because the actual area where it
is, is not
in the water.
That's so, the scan seemed to indicate it is likely free of water is the
terminology I heard
from the scan interpretations.
It's true to say that the, the issue with the water on at Hawara in the labyrinth
is, is
the groundwater.
So it's this seepage that's coming in from the north and it's, so presumably at
some point
you do get to a form of bedrock that may well be impermeable.
And if it's sealed and you're cut into that structure, then yeah, you may well
be free of
water or it might be, you know, it's, it seems like the groundwater.
Well, hopefully they don't fuck up and let the water through the hole and try
to dig a
tunnel and flood that too.
For sure.
Some of it's in the water, like the upper levels of the labyrinth.
So from the ground penetrating radar scans at the Matterhar expedition, I mean,
you have
these granite blocks that are like three, four meters wide and this huge labyrinthine
structure that's sitting in, I mean, I'm sure it's full of sediment too.
Like it's not like there may be some cavities and open everyone's like, can we
dive on them?
Like it's full of, it's literally mud and sediment, a lot of it.
And that's sitting in this sort of salty brackish groundwater that I suspect is
not going to do
great things to that granite if it's left for another 50, 100 years or more.
So it's, there is a pressure to, to remediate this problem.
And I think to, to save what's down there, uh, the deeper layers, however, seem
like there's
a possibility that they're free of water.
I mean, is there been, has there been any proposal to do that?
Is there any proposal to figure out a way to reroute the water?
Dave, so this is what I, I talked about it in the video.
There were some studies that started to happen to try and do that.
And then the guy who was running the study got thrown in jail for, for, for
talking about
it.
And then nothing since that, nothing since, as far as I know, tell Zahi he can
come on
again if he does it.
I'll have him back on.
I'll mention it.
I would love to, I would, I would, I mean, I think it's a solvable problem
though.
That's the thing.
We're going to get Zahi to do mushrooms.
That's what we have to do.
We have to get him to just drop it all, cut the bullshit, become the sun god.
Yeah, no, I don't know.
Yeah.
Just let everybody love you for doing that.
Cause they would, if we just changed, turned, turned a new page.
Yeah.
Just said, all right, let's just, let's go crazy.
I think, yes.
Yeah.
He's, yeah.
He wants to be loved.
He wants to be respected.
He does.
Everybody does.
True.
Open it up, baby.
Let's go.
Give me a hug.
Open it up.
Start digging.
Yeah.
Let's go.
Let's sink some boreholes and get some pumps in there and like, get this water
out of
here.
I mean.
These are those moments where I wish I was Elon Musk.
Cause you, you want an engineer to get involved as well.
You need all of that.
Yeah.
You need like army corps of engineers, someone who's going to be able to figure
out
how to move water.
Take a real big French drain, you know, just figure it out.
It can be done.
It might take decades, but it can be done.
I think it can be done.
The result would be insane.
I think you could do it too.
And like a targeted search.
I think you could do start in a small area where you know, you do some more, I
mean, more
surveys too, like more, more GPR, more surveys, more scans and, and, and really
narrow in
on like a section.
And then like, let's see if it's, if we're, if what we're seeing on these scans
is, is
there, then maybe do the site.
I have a feeling it's one of many.
I really do.
Oh no.
Yeah.
I have a feeling that whole area, that whole complex, you're going to go as, if
they can
really prove that there have been civilizations that have been there for 10, 20,
30,000 years,
I think it's going to reveal itself one layer of the onion at a time.
Right.
And I, and it's today, it's like, it is a symptom of the climate that we only
really look
in the Nile Valley, right?
Because the dynastic Egyptians settled in the Nile Valley because when they
started, it
was a desert.
That was the habitable part.
But if you, if you open up the possibility that there's a precursor
civilization that was
existing in the millennia prior to that, now you, now you've got the Sahara,
you've
got the, figure out where the lakes, the river, river systems, the lake basins
were.
And, and there's very little of the Sahara that's fully, you know, we're not
looking under
the sand there.
We've, we're developing new scanning techniques.
Let's start looking there.
Cause I, I think there's a, you know, the Assyrians is crazy place in, at, at
the back
of temple of, of Seti the first in, in Abydos and it's sitting on top of this
aquifer.
It's like this big subterranean granite structure.
And I'm like, I bet this is, this was, this was, I think clearly some sort of
functional
thing and I bet there's a bunch more of these, but we just don't know where
they are.
Cause they're under the ground.
We just found this one.
Well, Seti found it when he built his temple and he's like, holy shit, we found
this giant
granite subterranean structure.
Let's turn the temple this way.
But yeah, I think there's, I think there's a strong possibility as well.
There's a lot more of that stuff.
And even to be, to the credit, like archaeologists suggest the same thing, like
the scope and
scale of what is under the sand in Egypt.
I mean, I think even most mainstream archaeologists will tell you like 70% of
it's still as yet
undiscovered at least.
That is so crazy.
That's such a crazy thing to say when you look at what has been discovered.
Well, it's nothing quite like it.
I mean, Luxor, what do they say?
The stats around Luxor is like one third of the world's antiquities in this one
area,
just at Luxor, and it's not even the Giza Plateau, that's just, that's upper
Egypt down
at Luxor with the West Bank and the Valley of the Kings and Karnak Temple.
And it's astonishing.
And they're still digging stuff up.
There's a, the Temple of Amenhotep, the second or third is near, no, Colossae
of Memnon,
these giant six, 700 ton statues are like the front door to it.
And they're slowly excavating this monstrous temple behind it.
And they keep finding these remnants of these colossal statues.
I've heard rumors, just rumors.
I'm going to Egypt like next week.
Hopefully we can, I want to get a look at this.
And I've heard rumors that they found like a hand from a statue that's even
bigger than
the biggest ones we've found so far.
So they might've found a segment of a statue that was one of the, the largest
ever, which
would be astonishing because who knows?
I mean, there's some evidence that they made stuff like that.
I mean, we talk about a thousand tons and that's mind boggling enough, but
there's actually
a quarry in Egypt called Minya.
It's like the unfinished obelisk, right?
It's like the unfinished obelisk still attached.
They never pulled it out and it's 1200 tons.
But that Minya, there's these, it's like limestone and these, they've cut these
blocks out.
They're still attached.
They've made these blocks.
And there's even an inscription, like a rough inscription of a seated, uh, fair,
like a seated figure
on a throne sort of drawn on this as if that's what they were going for.
But the, the, the, if you take the density of the limestone in the Minya region
and you
calculate its volume, it's in the realm of 5,000 tons.
Oh my God.
Yeah.
It's, it's, who knows what they, what was there originally?
I mean, I just, I think it's, it's baffling enough that we have this, um, you
know, these
logistical achievements in that, in that anything above really three, 400 tons
is Christ above
a hundred tons over any distance is, is, is a massive challenge for, for any,
anyone.
I mean, us to move that sort of a load over the roads and things we have now, I
mean,
shit, even in Peru, you, you find similar, uh, logistical achievements.
Like I was just, I spent, just came back from five weeks in Peru.
I want to talk about that.
I don't have to pee so bad.
Okay.
So let's pause real quick and we'll be right back.
Sorry.
Sorry about that folks.
And we're back.
Um, have you speculated like why they wanted things so big?
Like, or was it just that they had the ability all of a sudden at one point in
time in
their development?
I, I mean, it's, I would, you can't make to me any argument that these giant
statues
are functional.
They're clearly symbolic and it's, it's the, it's, it's almost like a challenge
to history.
It's, it's a month, it's a monument through history.
I mean, there's some indication that things like the pyramid, the great pyramid
are markers
and, um, you know, they're, they're demonstrations of their knowledge and
capability.
And we can talk about that in a minute, but there's, uh, with the statues, it's
no, it's,
to me, it's just like, look at us, look how mighty we're like, it's, it's, it's
a, like
the same reason we, I mean, why do we make Mount Rushmore or we make some big
money?
It's like to, to leave a monument or it's some sort of marker behind.
I mean, the Sphinx, for example, could be a marker, uh, in time when you look
at it in
terms of the great cycle and the fact that it was likely a lion and you know,
it's facing
due east so that it could well be a marker for a particular moment during the
processional
cycle, which could be either like 10,500 BC or 35,000 BC or plus 25,920 years.
So it's, it's, it's cycle of that.
So this is the thing.
I mean, the Sphinx, I mean, it was, it's been talked about even like, again,
you go back
to Deodorus Siculus and Strabo and Herodotus, they talked about the Sphinx
being vastly older.
They're hearing things about it being older.
Gaston Maspero and, and a lot of the archeologists, the, the early, um, explorers
for that region
also mentioned it being 12 plus thousand years old, it being this ancient
monument.
And there's strong evidence to support that in that, I mean, you have statues
of Sphinxes
that predate Khafra, for example.
Like, so when he apparently built it, like there's already, we see statues and
imitations of Sphinxes,
there's also lions, um, uh, before that time, you have the, what's called the
inventory stelae
or the stelae of Khufu's daughter, which was a statue that, that Khufu being Khafra's
father.
So Khufu, great pyramid, Khafra, middle, middle pyramid.
Uh, this, this, this is rarely acknowledged, but it tells the story of that,
that, that Khufu
was trying to repair the Sphinx and dig it out of the sand.
He's Khafra's father.
So this, this could be older, but also the name, like the, the, the, the oldest
name for
the Sphinx is, is Ruti.
And it's, it's, it's the, it's the two lions.
It's, um, uh, Sekhmet and what's the name of the other lion?
I can't, I have it here.
Um, what is it?
Uh, I can't remember the name of the other lion, God, but it's, it, it
literally means
to two lions and gate.
So it's like this lion's gate.
It's, it's guarding a gate.
But this is one of the oldest, uh, names for it.
So if it, if it was indeed a lion and it's facing due east, and we know that,
that things
like, uh, procession of the processional cycles, processional numerology, uh,
is deeply embedded
in many, many cultures all around the world.
This is one of the other key bits of context that seems to point to a
consolidated origin
point for knowledge and data of the cosmos and of geodetic data.
Um, but knowledge of the procession of the equinoxes is one of those, which is
the, you know,
basically you mark this by what constellation is behind the rising sun on the
vernal equinox
facing east.
So as, as we look east today, it's, it's somewhere between the constellation of
Pisces and Aquarius.
And, and, and it's, it's, it's a, it's a cycle that denotes or is, is due to
the earth's wobble.
All right.
So we have, we have at least three motions of, of the planet.
We have the, you know, like the rotation of the earth.
So 24 hour cycle, we have the orbit of the earth around the sun, 365 and a
quarter days.
And then you have the processional wobble.
There's a couple more actually.
And that is, and that is basically the earth as it spins, does this, it
describes this little,
like it's, it's, it's axis.
It describes a circle in space, which changes the constellation.
And it's, it's, it's a cycle that takes around 26,000 years, 25,920 is the
typical, um,
description for it.
And what that means is the backdrop of stars, you know, as we're looking, uh,
at any, at
any time is, is slowly changing.
It changes only one degree, uh, every 72 years.
So if you're looking at the horizon, like the width of your thumb over 72 years,
the, the,
the, the, basically the relative to the sun, the, the, the constellations
behind the sun
shift.
So today it's Pisces and we're moving into the age of Aquarius and before Pisces
was the
age of Aries and before Aries was the age of Taurus.
And you go back front and get to Leo, the lion, which is another, I mean, this,
the, the
symbology and certainly the dynastic Egyptians as well as many others had, had
very similar
constellations and names for all of these constellations that we do.
So I think there's a good indication that Sphinx could be a, a, a, essentially
a processional
marker talking about a specific time, which in our current cycle would have
been, I think,
yeah, around, around 10,000 something BC, but you could potentially add a whole
cycle onto
that to go back another nearly 26,000 years, which is, which is an interesting
possibility.
It's interesting, but it's also nuts.
It's very nuts.
It's nuts.
It's nuts comparative to our conventional timeline.
What is the conventional timeline for the acceptance of astrological signs?
That, I mean, constellations, Aries.
This is, I mean, there's no doubt about the, I mean, the processional cycle is
an observable
thing.
Right.
It's, it's, it's, it's.
But when, but naming them like Cancer, Leo.
I don't, I don't actually know.
It goes back.
It's, it's, it's, it's very common across multiple cultures.
It's one of the craziest things.
It's actually depicted on the, the, the ceiling of the temple of Dendera in
ancient Egypt,
the same constellations that we have.
Pisces, the fish, Aries, the ram, you know, Leo, the lion.
What do you think is the oldest accepted, like if we put it into perplexity,
what do you
think is the oldest accepted?
I would suspect it's either the, it's either the Egyptians or the Sumerians,
because that's
about as far back as, as written knowledge goes.
I mean, it was the Sumerians followed by the Egyptians.
I don't know what they're, if the Sumerians had a zodiacal acknowledgement, but
certainly
the dynastic Egyptians did.
And that seems to have progressed from there down every, everyone.
And, and the interesting thing.
This is, we have a sponsor, perplexity, AI sponsor.
So clay tablets from Mesopotamia, Sumerian, later Babylonian, and the late
second millennial
BC give the oldest secure written constellation names, including the figures
like the lion,
the bull, and the scorpion.
These early star lists, such as Babylonian, three stars each catalogs, and
later the M-U-L-dot-A-P-I-N
tablets, what is that?
You know what that is?
No.
Systematically record stars and constellations and were compiled roughly
between 1200 and 1000
BCE, drawing on an even old, on even older tradition.
So it's at least 1000 BCE.
Yeah.
It says here that the iconography of star animals similar to these constellations
appear on prehistoric
seals, vases, and gaming boards from Mesopotamia may go back as far as 4000 BC.
I think if you go to Gobekli Tepe and Martin Swetman's theories that a lot of
the animal depictions
on there may be showing constellations, I don't believe they're the typical zodiacal
constellations.
But it's, I mean, what's interesting is...
Let's see, are they found in Gobekli Tepe?
Let's see what perplexity thinks.
No clear universally accepted constellation names have been identified at Gobekli
Tepe,
but some carvings appear to depict animals in positions that may correspond to
parts of
later constellations, such as Scorpius, Sagittarius, or Cygnus.
Cygnus?
Cygnus?
Cygnus.
Cygnus.
According to a minority of researchers, most archaeologists remain cautious...
Yeah, minority being Martin Swetman, probably.
...seeing these are powerful, symbolic animal figures like a scorpion, vulture,
and other birds of prey,
and arguing that firm links to a true zodiac or named constellations are
speculative.
But interesting.
Yeah.
Yeah, it's remarkable.
I mean, and more so even just in those markers is one of the...
I mean, for me, it's sacred geometry and the processional numerology that's encoded.
I mean, this is Hamlet's Mill, what's in the book, Hamlet's Mill, that
essentially shows
you that a lot of the sacred geometry, which is like a numeral system or these
sacred numbers
that are repeated through geometry, time, distance, even cosmic cycles as we
measure them,
and then they appear again and again through ancient cultures and in their
origin stories
and even in their architecture.
I mean, you know, the Great Pyramid's probably the best example of it being the...
I mean, I'm sure you've heard that it's like a scale model of the Northern Hemisphere
at a ratio of 43,200 to 1.
It's absolutely insane.
And it encodes so much more knowledge when you consider it from that
perspective,
knowledge that we can't explain through the dynastic Egyptians or by any
capabilities that they had.
It encodes geodetic data in terms of the very specific shape of the Earth, it
being an oblate spheroid,
like it encodes that information in it.
How so?
Well, so 43,200 is an interesting number to start with just because the number
of seconds in a day is 86,400.
So in 12 hours of the day, the amount of sun, like basically the amount of time
on a hemisphere or in half of a day in exactly 12 hours is 43,200.
It's 432 is one of those numbers that shows up again and again and again and
again.
So the Great Pyramid at a ratio of 43,200 to 1 is essentially a scale model of
the Northern Hemisphere.
If you take the height of the Great Pyramid, and this includes the socle that
it sits on,
but you take that height, you multiply it by 43,200, you get the polar radius
of the Earth.
So from the center of the Earth to the North Pole, almost exactly within a
couple hundred feet.
And even more impressive is when you take the perimeter length of the Great Pyramid
and you multiply that by 43,200,
you get the equatorial circumference of the Earth within about 300 feet, which
is super interesting because it's flexible.
It changes.
So as we've always known, there's been multiple surveys since the 1800s of the
Great Pyramid,
and once its base was cleared off and we got its perimeter length.
And then we've also had surveys looking at, you know, how big is the Earth?
Aristoteles in like 500, 600 AD in Greece, he was the first one to give it a go
by measuring sort of the angle of, you know,
the shadow in two different places over a few years, and he got the circumference
of the Earth to within about 500 miles.
That was as close as we got until, you know, the 1800s, and then the advent of
modern satellite surveys in the 1970s and 1980s.
And the funny thing is, is that the more advanced we got, as we step closer and
closer and right up to the modern satellite surveys,
the closer the number came to what the Great Pyramid represents at this ratio
of 43,200.
Right up to the point where it's like the most modern, I think, the surveys
done in the 80s are still the ones we use today,
looking at the, you know, the actual circumference of the Earth is within about
300 feet of the measure of the Great Pyramid,
which makes, I mean, that's within the margin of error.
It's within the variability of the margin of the Earth, of the circumference of
the Earth.
Because you have like the moon and the sun on one side, it literally, you
measure it every day,
it's going to change about 200 or 300 feet, just because gravitational forces
are pushing on the Earth.
So that also means that it's what interesting is, is if in two seconds of time,
if you were standing on the equator,
then the Earth rotates precisely the length of the perimeter of the Great Pyramid.
So in two seconds, it goes, basically, the Earth turns the same length as the
perimeter length of the Great Pyramid.
What's even crazier, and so you have this measure expressed in distance and in
time,
given that it's this significant number that measures the amount of seconds in
12 hours.
It also encodes geodetic data.
So the Earth isn't a perfect sphere, right?
We deviate from being a perfect sphere because, and this is, thank Christ,
because it's like that rotation that,
the oblate spheroid nature of the Earth, the, what's it called, the spin, the,
shit, I won't die,
the spin motion of the Earth, essentially, like a dryer, for some reason I can't
think of the word.
It's flattening our tops a little bit, and we bulge a little bit at the center
around the equator, right?
So it's like that spin force is making us bulge a bit.
So what it means is that if you measure the Earth this way, like north to south
around, and then east to west,
it's going to be slightly longer east to west.
How slight?
I think it's something like 70 or 80, no, 40 miles, I think is the difference,
something like that.
Maybe that's the radius difference, but it's, I think, yeah, radius or diameter
might be 30 or 40 miles difference.
It's just this, it is this slight equatorial bulge.
And what it means is that, you know, when you draw latitude and longitude lines
on the planet,
and that latitude being north-south, longitude being east-west, if you get down
to the equator,
now obviously they, you know, the shapes of them change as you go up towards
the poles,
but the latitude lines are straight.
I saw this recently, I don't know how accurate it is.
It says it's accurate.
That's Earth without water?
Without water.
That's nuts.
Yeah.
Rocky little ball, isn't it?
Bro.
That's crazy.
Yeah, some of those oceans are deep.
I don't know where that...
Yeah, you think?
Yeah.
Jeez.
That's cool.
That's bananas.
That almost looks exaggerated to me, that a little bit.
Wow.
The most accurate model of Earth's shape accounting not only for its rotation,
but also for the distribution of the masses inside the planet,
making the surface slightly uneven and deviating from a perfect sphere.
Unlike a school globe, which depicts Earth as an ideal ball,
the geoid resembles a slightly flattened at the poles and bulging at the
equator potato
with a height variations up to 100 meters due to the gravitational anomalies.
This shape arises from the...
Centrifugal, that's the word I was looking for.
There it is.
Force of the Earth's rotation, which inflates the equator by an additional 21
kilometers
compared to the polar diameter.
Interestingly, the geoid is used in GPS navigation and geodesy?
Geodesy?
Geodesy, yeah.
Geodesy, to precisely measure elevations above sea levels as oceans follow this
uneven surface.
Imagine if you shrank the Earth to the size of a basketball,
the geoid's irregularities would be smaller than the roughness of the orange
skin.
Wow.
Of an orange skin, yet still impact our daily lives.
Wow.
Yeah, so it must be a little exaggerated because I think that's clearly thicker
than the roughness
of an orange skin.
But yes, yeah, that's an exact...
It gives us an example.
But so, yeah, so we're a little bulgy around the middle, a little flatter on
top.
So when you get down to latitude and longitude at the equator, right?
So at the equator, if you draw that cube one degree of latitude, one degree of
longitude,
it's not a perfect cube.
Okay, so it's a little bit further east to west than it is north to south.
So if you cut that down into like 60 seconds of latitude and longitude, it's a
smaller little
square, but same proportions.
You have the same ratio.
And if you actually take the Great Pyramid, so the thing to understand about
the Great Pyramid
is that it sits on a socle.
I don't know if I've talked about this before.
But so we know because we have casing stones, we have that 51 degrees, 51
minutes angle of
these casing stones.
So we were able to really act, and we have a few of those still around the base
from where
they fell off.
So from that, we can determine the height, and we also have this perimeter
length using
the casing stones, pretty very accurately, this survey.
And now those casing stones, it doesn't sit direct on the bedrock.
The pyramid actually sits on top of a 55-centimeter socle.
So it's this little platform that sticks out about this much, and it's 55
centimeters high,
and it like sticks out.
So you have the casing stones, and you have this little socle that it sits on.
So you have these two methods of measuring the pyramid.
You can measure the perimeter length around the casing stones, or you can
measure the perimeter
length around the socle.
Socle's slightly larger.
And the funny thing is, is if you get down to one quarter of one second of
latitude and
longitude at the equator, the longitude is exactly within an inch or two, the
perimeter
length of the socle, and the latitude, the north-south, is the perimeter length
of the pyramid.
So it's encoding the geodetic shape of the earth.
The ratio of latitude to longitude is encoded incredibly accurately in these
perimeter lengths
on the pyramid.
And that's just kind of mind-boggling.
Well, so this would be the skeptic reductionist's answer to this stuff is that
you say, well,
you're just playing with numbers.
It's like, well, the numbers are there.
None of those things.
Anyone can check that data for themselves.
It's like the 43,200 to one ratio of the pyramid, the fact that that's the
number of seconds
in 12 hours of the day.
There's so many.
I mean, this, by the way, 432 turns up all over the place.
The Kali Yuga is said to be 43,200 years old.
The radius of the sun is 432,000 miles.
The king's list from the Sumerians is a total of 43,200, oh no, 432,000 years
with one king
reigning for 43,200 years.
So this 432 is one of those sacred geometry numbers that keeps turning up again
and again.
But what's always been fascinating to me in the geodetic information encoded in
the Great
Pyramid is like you have to understand the shape and size of the earth to get
that ratio
so accurately embedded in that monument.
And we weren't able to do that basically until really recently with satellite
servers, but
we certainly weren't able to measure longitude even until like the turn of the
18th century,
like James Cook's second voyage of discovery.
We couldn't measure.
We couldn't accurately figure out where we were on those east to west traverses.
Like accurately reflecting longitude in the pyramid, it's astonishing.
It's one of those things that also relates to ancient maps, having accurate
coastlines with
longitude on them.
But what seems clear is that somebody at some point in the past had very
accurate knowledge,
not only of cosmic cycles, but also of the shape and size of the earth itself.
Like in terms of they surveyed it, they understood its shape.
They understood the ratio of latitude to longitude on the planet.
And it's all encoded in this monument.
And it's just kind of scratching the surface on what's encoded in their great
pyramid.
But I mean, the numbers are all there.
You can add these up.
Have you ever had a debate with anybody that thinks that this is all
coincidence and that
you could take these numbers and just kind of monkey around with them and make
any kind
of equation you want if you just draw arbitrary distances between certain
things?
No, not...
Because some people do believe that, right?
Yeah.
I mean, so I think there's a difference between when you talk about numbers
versus ratios.
Like once you get to ratios, then it doesn't matter how you measure them.
Like it's like the ratio.
It doesn't matter.
You measure them in mosquito dicks or inches or whatever, right?
It's all centimeters.
So ratios are one thing.
Numbers, there is a lot.
I mean, the whole system of measurement, how we measure time, the imperial
system of measurement,
where the mile comes from, all of that stuff does have these deep roots in
sacred geometry
and basically cosmic.
And that's, again, I think all pointing towards a common system or a common set
of knowledge
that came from.
But I've not debated somebody about this.
I don't know that you...
I mean, you can't really question the numbers, but there's some incredible just,
I guess,
coincidences that are in this whole system that do point towards like...
I mean, they get really crazy.
So here's another one, which I just...
This one just pickles my noodle.
So, you know, we know that I've said this before.
I think that the sun is, you know, the moon's 400 times smaller than the sun
and it's the
sun's 400 times further away.
So you get this.
That's how we get total solar eclipses.
That's really nice.
But there's also another sacred number encoded in their ratios relative to
their diameters
in the distance from Earth.
That's the same between the moon and the sun.
And that's 108.
So if you take the diameter of the moon at whatever it is, 2160 miles, by the
way, 2160 is also
the length of a great month in the processional cycle.
That's one twelfth of 25,920.
But 2160 miles times 108, that gives you the more or less the distance between
of the moon
to the Earth.
So moon's, yeah, so it's a moon's diameter times 108 gives you the distance to
the Earth.
The sun's diameter, which is 86,400 miles, which is the number of seconds in a
24-hour period,
times that by 108, and you get, that's the distance of the sun from the Earth.
So it's like that relationship between their diameter and their distance from
the Earth
is exactly the same between the sun and the moon.
And it's 108.
That ratio, so it's the lunar, lunar diameter over lunar distance equals solar
diameter over
solar distance.
And I mean...
What a coincidence.
What a coincidence.
Yeah, and it's 108.
And by the way, there are temples in places like Cambodia that have 108 pillars,
like 108s,
another one of these sacred numbers that have been encoded into the way we
measure stuff,
the way we count for time.
So there's this huge, there's a huge sort of rabbit hole of sacred geometry and
processional
numerology that seems to point to some point in the past, someone having all of
this understanding
to create these systems and to measure things and to do so accurately to the
point where
the more accurate we get in our measurements, the closer we get to these, the
ratios and data
reflected in these ancient structures.
It's just, and you can't attribute that to these, the cultures that were on
those, like
the ancient Egyptians or the Greeks.
It's like, where did this information come from and how come it's represented
in cultures
from, you know, the Norse mythology through, you know, South American Native
Indian myths
to, you know, these numbers show up again and again, as was shown by Hamlet's
Mill, this
book that basically, this tome that put that information together and say, well,
this, all
of it seems to point to this, you know, this origin point of someone with this
information.
And it's just, it's one more of these contextual points when you combine it
with the human timeline
and climate and cataclysm and the endless other, other contradictions in the megalithic
architecture on these sites and stuff like that, that, that makes this concept
that we've
been advanced, significantly advanced, us or someone has, and they've, we've,
they've
left all these signs and signals and breadcrumbs for us to try and follow to
figure out.
Whoa.
Yeah.
Whoa.
Yeah.
The pyramid is cool.
It is just, whoa, it is my favorite subject of all time.
Yeah.
The, the lost civilization subject, I think is my favorite subject because it
ties all of
them together, you know, it, it, it, and the mystery of the human origins, it,
all of it.
Yeah.
It's just, I think it's, I think it's plausible.
I, I, I think it's probable even that, that we've risen and have been wiped out.
I mean, I think I was just saying, I just spent five weeks in Peru again.
I just came back like 10 days ago.
And I mean, that place more than anywhere else is, is both more mysterious and
more obvious
that there was something else going on long time ago.
More obvious.
Yeah.
More of in, in, in the, the delta between these technological levels.
Like, so in Egypt, you know, it didn't, I don't, you never want to
underestimate what
the dynastic Egyptians were capable of.
And they had this long civilization of 300 or sorry, 3000 years.
And they did some incredible work.
So, you know, they're, they're really good stonework.
It gets, the lines can get a little blurred.
I mean, you still see the difference, but in Peru, it's, it's different,
particularly in
the sacred Valley.
Um, places like Tiwanaku in Bolivia, but there, there you have these very
distinct lines, like
in terms of technology and the stonework that the, and the layering of the
stonework in that
place.
Um, to, I mean, typically it's mostly all attributed to the Inca, but the Inca
were really only around
for like maybe 300 years maximum at their, the Inca empire was barely a hundred
years before
the Spanish wiped them out in 1533.
And so it's relatively young, right?
It's a 1200 AD roughly to 1533.
And they attribute most everything to the Inca.
And it's just not, you just look at it and go, this is not remotely possible.
It's, it's, there's a huge difference.
You see these, these three different layers of architecture.
Um, there's a, a guy in Peru that, um, has been researching this stuff for 50
plus years,
him and his father, uh, Jesus, um, Gamara, who's has his classification system
for the, the
architecture in Peru.
Uh, so you have, he calls them Hananpacha, Urenpacha, Ikunpacha, the three,
three levels.
This has, these words have many meanings in Quechua, but it starts with like
the oldest stuff
seems to be this monolithic carved, really bizarrely carved mountains, like
rock, bedrock.
It's not, they're not blocks.
It seems vastly ancient.
Uh, there's all these channels and massive structures and shapes carved into
the, the living
rock of the mountain.
And it's just like the lowest level usually shows the most erosion.
Then you have the megalithic stuff like Sakse-waman.
You've seen pictures of that, you know, Sakse-waman and the core of Machu Picchu.
Yeah.
Oyente, Tamba, these giant, no, the streets of Cusco, these huge megalithic
blocks that
are all got these perfect joins between them.
You can't fit a razor blade in between them.
They're flowing.
They're, they're mortalist walls.
They're, they're, they're incredible.
It's one of the best, the most amazing parts of the Sacred Valley is the proliferation
of
this sort of megalithic work.
But then on top of that, you have the Inca work, the Ikunpacha.
It's literally cobblestones that are put together with mud mortar.
It's like a local rock and they've stuck it together.
And so you have this, you have this very distinct layers.
Um, I have pictures of this stuff, Jamie, in the South America, um, um,
directory on there,
but it's, it's super clear.
Like there's no blending.
Like it's, it's like, boom, okay, here's, here's the oldest layer.
Here's the next layer.
Here's the Inca layer.
And it's always in that order.
Like it's always like Hanapach on the bottom, then the megalithic stuff on top,
and then
the Inca work on top of that, cause they were repairing stuff.
So even the Inca never talked about them making sites like Sacsayhuaman.
They have all these other stories for it.
Like the, you know, the giants built it is one of the explanations you work.
Yeah, this is a great example.
So it's, this is the Intipunku, the Sungate.
So you see the difference, you see that clear distinction in the architecture.
You have the megalithic stuff and then you have the repair work on top, um, the
cobblestone
work.
And there's just, this is all I, once you see this, you can't really unsee it,
uh, as
you go all over the sacred valley.
And some of these, some of these, this is small compared to the type of stuff
you see in
Sacsayhuaman, where some of the blocks get up towards 200 tons, 150 plus tons,
um, and
all of the same type of stone.
Yeah, this is Tiwanaku.
And so, you know, there's this long history of, of unknown.
And so in Egypt, you have this connection, a cultural connection that, you know,
they have
their King's List.
They have, they talk about Zeptepe.
They clearly have this connection to whatever builder culture was there.
They talk about it.
And I mean, it's part of their origin stories.
But in South America, you have something else happen.
Like there's a big gap.
Like you, you don't have the Inca, don't have that, that precursor culture.
They came from the South.
They talk of their origin story comes from Lake Titicaca up into the sacred
valley.
And then they took over.
There are a couple of precursor cultures to the Inca, but there's this huge
unknown.
It's like, we just don't know what happened.
Um, you know, there are, there are other sites in Peru and Graham Hancock's
been out there
recently.
You know, I was out there just recently too.
There, there are pyramid sites in Peru that are 5,000 years old.
Um, places like Corral, there are, they're not sophisticated.
It's incredible work in terms of the amount of stone that's been used, but it's
not, you
know, it's not megalithic or, or, um, or precise, but there are pyramid
cultures that
stretch back at least 5,000 years.
But in terms of the real megalithic precision work in South America, we have no
clue who
did that.
Um, in fact, there's probably the strangest site.
One of the, my favorites is, is Tiwanaku, Pumapunku, Tiwanaku.
You heard of this place in Bolivia?
Sure.
Tough to get to.
It's amazing.
It's up at, up in the, up on the high Alta Plano, like 12 and a half thousand
feet, um,
above sea level.
It's like nothing else on the planet.
The stonework there is massive.
It's precise.
It's playful.
There are just endless 90 degree turns, perfectly polished surfaces, like saw
marks, cut marks.
It's, it's.
Do you have some images of this?
Yeah.
I have a Tiwanaku directory there, Jamie.
And then, uh, and it's, it's, it's quite well preserved because it was buried
in mud.
It's been, it's slowly been excavated and it's, there's, there is a lot of
evidence that
suggests this place is at least 10 to 12,000 years old.
Again, using, um, yeah, endless like this sort of andesite work.
See, there's a left turn arrow for some reason, but, but it's this playful
nature.
If you like the H blocks are famous at this place, but they just have these
endless little
insets and don't like stuff like this.
It's like, this is one of my favorite blocks to show people.
That is a, you're looking down on top.
So the ground's down.
So I'm looking down this, this thin channel that's been cut into this block and
it has
all of these little drill holes in it.
Little, and these are like tiny little drill holes.
And this channel's about this wide and it's cut into this block.
You have several blocks with features like this.
Like it's clearly something's been attached to this.
Like it's how, how, how do you cut this in stone?
And this is, you know, thousands of years old, but it's, it's a remarkable site
full of these
sort of examples.
And it's attributed in general to, uh, a culture that lived there around 1100
ADs.
He's still, they're still digging stuff out of the, out of the ground.
It was, it was destroyed in a cataclysm or, or just some sort of massive mud
flood, I think
was the end of this civilization.
However, that's me and Graham.
Um, and this is at 12,000 feet or 12 and a half.
Yeah.
So what would be the reason for establishing a civilization at 12,000 feet?
It gets strange because there's, so the, the modern, first the modern dating
for it comes
from a handful of carbon dates, right?
They found some carbon dates and they go, okay, 1100 AD, but they've, they've
also found carbon
dates that go back to 1500 BC and they just dismissed them as being unreliable.
I literally think the only, these carbon dates could literally be the last
person, someone
lit a campfire there or was buried there.
There's a guy named Arthur Posnanski.
He was a Polish professor that lived, he spent 50 years on this site, died in
La Paz,
published his works, 1945.
I have a copy of his books, um, the cradle of American man.
It's called, he spent 50 years, uh, investigating this site.
He, he dated it at 15,000 BC, uh, based on a whole range of others, like geological
data,
um, astro archeological dating, which is, it has these alignment properties we
can talk
about, it, you know, um, he found the skull of a Toxodon there with Toxodon is
an extinct
Pleistocene era mammal that went out with the young, in the younger dryers, 13,000
BC.
There seems to be depictions of saber tooth tigers and Smilodons, uh, in some
of the artwork
there.
So you have some, they also, they say they're all pumas, but some of them have
small canines.
Some of them have really big canines.
I mean, why is there a difference here?
Um, he dates it culturally in terms of it being the origin point for not only
other cultures
in South America, but also Central and North America through, uh, the symbology,
the Chicanas,
the Incan cross, there's all these other features.
So he used a whole raft of scientific techniques to date that site and to, to
support his conclusion
that it was vastly ancient.
Uh, and then that's kind of all been thrown aside because they found a few
carbon remains
that were at the, you know, 1100 AD mark.
Why would you build a civilization there at that altitude?
You wouldn't.
You just wouldn't.
It's too hard.
It's above the tree line.
There's no natural trees.
And this is, it gets wacky because today, Tiwanaga was a port.
Like they admit like this, even the archeologists, they talk about Puma Punku.
It's like a port.
There was something industrial happening there.
The stone, if you look at Posnanski's original images with the, there's all
sorts of interlocking
bits of stone and sluice gates and hydrodynamic features on this place.
There's a giant step pyramid that had this reservoir in the sand.
It's crazy.
But they tell you it's a port and it was a port on, on Lake Titicaca, which
today is
about 10 miles away.
The shoreline is about 10 miles away.
H.S. Bellamy in the 1800s discovered a strand line that runs basically through
where Tiwanaku
was.
So strand line is like, you know, basically the shoreline of an ancient water,
body of
water.
And it can be formed through just gentle wave action over a long period of time.
It can be formed from like a high intensity period of, of waves, you know,
something hammering
a shoreline.
But he, he measured this, he found this shoreline that runs about 400 miles.
So it's, it's like across the Alta Plana from Sulastani in the north, way down
south towards
La Paz.
But he's, he documented this strand line.
What's really weird.
And, and, and at that strand line, Tiwanaku would have been at the shores of
Lake Titicaca.
It would have been a small island or a peninsula.
The lake level would have been right there when it was, and it would, that fits
it being a port.
However, the strand line is today, it's tilted.
The strand line's tilted.
So obviously water, when it makes, you know, a body of water, when it makes a
strand line,
it's flat.
Like it's, it's, finds its level.
But only geological processes, and I assume over a fair amount of time, can
give it this
tilt of a couple degrees, which is what they've measured.
There's no doubt there is a strand line, but it's tilted.
So I question whether in the period that they say Tiwanaku was built, 1100 AD,
less than
a thousand years between then and now, that there's been enough geological upheaval
in
the Andes to tilt this strand line a couple of degrees.
I don't think it can happen anything like that fast.
I think, I think, I think this strand line and the evidence that it was a port
shows us
that this city was in fact vastly more ancient than that, and that it was
destroyed by, by
cataclysm, by flooding from the melting of the glaciers in the Andes.
There's been, there's strong evidence there that it's seen several, we may have
seen multiple
cycles of, of, of glaciers.
And the climate would have been different during this period, like the climate
changed to make
it this arid sort of inhospitable place that it is today, like where it's just
tough to
exist at 12 and a half thousand feet above the tree line, where hardly anything
except
like fruit varieties of potato grow, they must've had better climate or I don't
know, lower
altitude, but, but a better climate at least.
Lower altitude is possible?
I don't think so.
I mean, it's.
How much does that change the time?
You're talking millions of years for that.
Like, because Lake Titicaca, I mean, that was sea, like it is seawater.
Like it's not today.
It has like unique species in it.
Like a, there's a native seahorse.
It's the only, but it's brackish water.
So it was originally part of the ocean that was uplifted and it's been uplifted
12 and
a half thousand feet, but this is millions and millions of years and it's today
fed by
these glaciers.
So it's slightly, it's, it's brackish.
It's like, it's, it's a combination of salt and, um, and, uh, and freshwater,
but it has
these species that can only have come from the ocean, but this is like long geological
processes.
So I think it's more likely that there was just a different, like, like subclimate
or
like a mini, a climate zone in that area that must've supported that life.
Cause that place is massive.
It's, it's, it's the site where you go is, is only the barest fraction of what
is actually
there under the ground.
They've done scans.
They've found entire buried step pyramids at this site.
The farmers in all the fields around it, they ran into, you know, these big
blocks occasionally
and like, God damn it, it ruined the tractor again.
And it's a big andesite block from T1U.
Whoa.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So it's, and it's, it's a super mystery and it's.
And it's also the place where those tridactyl pyramids, those tridactyl mummies
are.
Right.
So Nazca, right.
A lot of, a lot of that comes from South America.
That's right.
And there's, um.
That gets real weird.
It does.
When you take all those things into consideration.
Yeah.
Things get real weird.
Well, you know, there's also this evidence for technology and alignments there.
I mean, this is one of the things Posnanski based his dating on was this, was
this structure
there called the Calus Asaya.
There's a, there's a big step pyramid there called the Al Capana.
Then there's this Calus Asaya, which is big rectangular mass.
They called it the Stonehenge of the Americas originally because it was just
these giant stones
that form this big rectangular structure.
Today it's been reaped.
They've left the big stones there, but they've kind of filled in the gaps and
they've built
the walls and stuff again.
And what Posnanski found was that it is a extremely accurate solar observatory,
kind
of like a, I mean, similar to Stonehenge in some ways.
But if you stood in the center of the, um, the West wall and you looked East,
so there's
big rectangle.
Do we have an image of this so I can look at it?
Yeah.
If you've got a Tiwanaku, it's kind of like an overlook.
Um, if you bring them all up, I can show you.
Or you can type in Tiwanaku, you'll probably find pictures of it.
Um, Calus Asaya, K-A-L-A-S-A-Y-S-A, something like that.
Um, but it's, it's, it is like, it's, imagine a big rectangular, huge
rectangular, uh, that's
in, yeah, there, so that's it there.
So actually it's like, there's an inner structure there, but this is, so see
all those standing
stones?
Those are the original stones.
So it actually goes all the way around and all that far side.
So it has an internal structure as well.
Interesting.
So the, the larger stones?
The original.
Okay.
And then they built the smaller wall later.
That's all modern.
Modern?
Modern as far as?
The last 50 years.
Oh.
Yeah.
They reconstructed it.
If you go back to Posnansky's original excavations from the early 1900s, all,
all you see is
the big standing stones.
It's been quarried.
Like this is another, one of those places where literally like the core of La Paz
is made
from stones from Tiwanaku.
Like it's the whole town that's here.
There's a massive church that's been built.
There's, they made, they made mines and sewer systems.
They, it was just like the most convenient source of stone.
And in Tiwanaku in particular, like they're very square.
Like it's really linear, beautiful blocks of Anderson.
Perfect building material.
Why wouldn't you just take it and build cities?
So they, they were right up until the thirties.
They were just wagon loads and wagon loads and wagon loads of stone every day,
every day.
So that place has been used as a quarry for, you have to, similar to a lot of
places in
Egypt for hundreds, if not thousands of years.
And, but it's so, so what you're looking at is you got to use your imagination
to look
at the older pictures to even, and even then it's barely a fraction.
Um, I think of what's actually there under the ground, but what's interesting
is Posnansky
figured out that if you stand in the middle of that, of the West wall, like, so
looking
this way.
And if you looked at the corner pillars on the East wall, it showed you, um,
the sun on
the, on the solstices would rise exactly on the outside corners of these
pillars.
Now this, this is, if you, it looks like that to the eye, but if you measure it
with, um,
precision instruments, you find it's about 18 minutes off now.
And so when it was aligned, so it's, it's similar to that, the Sphinx and like,
when
was it lined up with Leo?
So when, when was the structure lined up exactly on the solstices?
And so the, the motion of the earth that would affect that is called the change
in the obliquity
of the ecliptic.
It's another one of the Milankovitch cycles.
So you have, we talked about procession of the equinoxes, which is the wobble.
So then you, you also have this tilt, like this change in the tilt of the earth.
So the actual tilt goes back and forth, I think between 22 and 25 degrees,
something like
that, but it's a 41,000 year cycle.
And it's basically the change in the axis of the earth relative to the equator
of the
sun or the ecliptic plane.
So there's, you know, if you project out the, the equator of, of the sun where
all the planets
are orbiting, um, it's, it's the change in the earth's tilt relative to that
plane, change
the obliquity of the ecliptic.
And so on that cycle, it's a 41,000 year cycle, turns out that he dated it
using the star charts
of the time at around 15,000 BC.
Now his work was, was validated in the early two thousands by the Bolivian,
this is a funny
story, Bolivian head of archeology, um, in Bolivia and these astronomers that
went there
and said, let's check Posnansky's work using the astronomical almanac, more up
to date,
uh, information.
And they said, yes, indeed he's, he was correct.
Like if, if you assume this was a, an aligned, like an alignment, um, thing,
this would have
lined up right on basically 12,000 years ago, 13,000 years ago, 10,000 BC or
plus 41,000
years, I guess for the cycle.
So, and the guy, Gustavo, I've forgotten his name, damn it.
But the guy who was in charge of the Bolivian department of archeology at the
time, once he
made that announcement, lost his job.
And I don't think it's ever been talked of since like he's, yes, the official
dates for
Tiwanaku haven't changed.
However, these guys also figured out that if you spun it around and you looked
from, it's
also aligned to the sunsets on those solstices.
So if you go on the west wall and, oh, sorry, you go on the east wall and look
west, it also
perfectly aligns with the sunsets.
You also get the solstices in the center.
So, you know, solstices being, sorry, equinoxes in the center.
Solstices being the shortest and longest day of the year where the sun's furthest
north and
furthest south.
And then equinoxes in the middle.
So it's perfectly aligned with that, but just off kilter a little bit because
of that motion
of the earth, the change in the obliquity of the ecliptic.
So it's not an accident, put it that way.
It's not just a coincidence that it's aligned this way.
It was set up that way to be a solar observatory.
And if you look at it with an open mind, it's an insane date.
Yeah, it is.
I mean, it's even, even within this cycle of 10,000 BC, I mean, that's the
Younger Drys
period.
Like this is, you know, this is, and it's a significant marker for South
America because
I can tell you the Younger Drys had a tremendous impact on South America.
Something like 75% of the megafauna species in South America went extinct.
Although you are up in the Andes, they may have been more protected from the
full extent.
Who knows though, fires and smoke, they would have had the, you know, the blackening
of
the skies and all the rest of it that would have happened during that Younger
Drys extinction
event.
But yeah, something happened.
I mean, they, again, there's been, I think there's been a cycle of glaciation
and deglaciation
in the Andes that's affected the lake and a lot of the stuff up there in
particular.
Just because we know that there are structures, get this, there are structures
beneath the water
of Lake Titicaca today made from red sandstone that match kind of the oldest
layers at Tiwanaku.
So they might've been made beneath the water.
Beneath the water.
So the lake level must've been lower.
And then the lake, and then something happened where a lot of water got added
and then.
Temple found on Lake Titicaca.
And this is in 2000.
Stone anchor.
What is that word?
Adenaminal?
It's 660 foot long.
And animal.
And animal?
It's missing a space.
It's missing a space.
And animal bones.
Oh, stone anchor and animal bones were found amongst our artifact scientists.
Wednesday, oh, there's Wednesday said it's connected to.
Wednesday said they had found beneath South America's Lake Titicaca in what?
There's something wrong with this translation.
Look at all these words are jammed together.
Even when it says Titicaca, then scientists, there's no space.
My five-year-old website.
Yeah, but that seems weird.
Like, it's like recoded or something, right?
After 18 days of diving below the clear waters of Titicaca, scientists said
Tuesday they have
discovered a 660 foot long, 160 foot wide temple, a terrace for crops, pre-Incan
road, and
a 2,600 foot containing wall.
Holy shit.
Yeah.
I strongly support the hypothesis that was found by the—what is that word?
Atahalupa?
Something like that.
It's clearly a Peruvian word.
Atahalupa 2000 expedition are the ruins of a submerged pre-Columbian temple,
said Eduardo
Perea, a Bolivian scientist who was among those who explored the site around 90
miles northeast
of the Bolivian capital of La Paz.
Yeah.
So there's stuff underneath the water.
It says it's filmed.
Yeah.
They have film of that?
Can we see what that looks like?
Try to find it?
Yeah, I was—I just thought this was easier because I couldn't find a good
video.
Oh, it's got to be.
Yeah.
I'm sure it exists somewhere, but I have to try to find it.
Oh, my God.
So it said it's made over 200 dives in the water, 65 to 100 feet deep.
I'd love to know exactly how deep—does it say how deep it was?
Because, I mean, that's a significant change in the level of the lake.
So, yeah, Lake Tutti Kaka is 12,464 feet above sea level.
That is bananas.
We went and stayed out on an island on the lake with no electricity.
The sky at night was absolutely phenomenal.
If you were a gambler, how old do you think that is?
Yeah, I would put it at least—I'd say at least in that 12,000 to 15,000 years,
if not significantly older.
I think—I don't know that there were periods of time in that lake where that
level was that low.
What's crazy is that there's been a variance.
Like, there's structures beneath the current lake level, so the water was lower.
And then we know from the strand line that the water was—God, what is it?
I think 40 meters almost higher than what it is now when it would have been at
the shores of Tiwanaku.
Which is indicating a long time period of change.
Yes, and the tilted strand line.
So, if you were talking about Tiwanaku, if I was a gambler, I would put it at
tens of thousands of years.
I don't think—I don't even—and this is speculation.
I don't think it fits even within the 10,000 to 12,000-year cycle.
I think it's got to be tens, like multiple tens of thousands of years for that
to be where it is.
And, in fact, when I was there, literally like two weeks ago, we made some
observations that I hadn't made there.
But I'd spent a bunch of time at Tiwanaku over the years.
But we figured out that those big pillars of that Kalasasai, we thought they
were andeside.
They're granite.
The ones on one side, they're actually granite.
And they're very heavily eroded.
Like, again, you have that big scoop out of—you can see the bottom where they
were buried.
But there's this huge amount of erosion.
And I just—and granite erodes way more slowly than things like limestone.
So, it's just—I think the erosional data there needs to be studied.
Because I don't know how long it would take, even in that environment, which
gets more rainfall than places.
Like, it is—it can rain quite a bit.
You get these storms.
But I think it takes a long time to erode granite that far.
And the stuff that's been exposed and above, you know, the mud and when there
was—
it was clearly some sort of big mud flood that came in that knocked this stuff
down.
The stuff that was been facedown or buried in the mud has been quite well
preserved and protected.
But—
Oh, is this the film?
There's, like, one minute of underwater footage.
That's Inca.
Whatever that is, it looks Inca.
Oh, yeah, but they found—
Lake Titicaca, underwater archaeology.
Yeah, gold Incan figurine.
Well, the Inca were definitely there at the lake.
There's the island of the sun, island of the moon.
That's Inca.
With his big old dick.
Well, you should see—
It reminds me of, like, the—you should have seen some of the pottery they
make, right?
Like, they was—we were making—I was making photoshops with my friends with
it.
There's—it's literally, like, dick and balls and, like, all this pottery.
They have this whole erotic section of the Larko Museum, and it's always good
for a little giggle.
So, is it safe to say that less exploration has been done at this site?
Yes, for sure.
It's still being slowly excavated, but, yeah, this isn't—I mean, it's—the
wheels are grinding slowly.
They're slowly trying to renovate.
They're trying to encourage tourism, but there's not—there's so much of that
site that needs to be dug up.
It's not—it hasn't had anything like the attention Egypt has.
Is there the same sort of pushback against dating?
For sure.
Other than that one guy?
But it's the same everywhere.
Yeah, yeah.
So, it's, like, a human characteristic of people that are in control of a
narrative.
They don't—well, it's tough to explain.
There's just—they don't want to deal with this possibility of a culture down
there that's that old, I think.
It upsets too many other apricots.
So, I feel like it's been—it's been—it's kind of been—well, we found
these carbon dates.
This fits kind of the timeline of what the Inca said to—because the Inca talk
about emerging from Lake Titicaca and going north, being pushed out by the Amara
people.
And if you think that, okay, the Inca arrived in the Sacred Valley from the
south around 1200, between 1100 and 1200 AD.
So, therefore, they might have been at Tiwanaku at 1100 AD.
So, that's—it kind of fits that timeline, but it doesn't mean anything.
Like, the Inca could have been down—the Tiwanaku could have been there
forever.
Right.
I think the Inca, sure, that's the timeline for that civilization, but—
And as we've established, everywhere you see people put a civilization on top
of an old world.
Oh, that's—yeah, 100%.
And the Inca were, like, very respectful.
This is the other thing about the architecture in that part of the world.
The layers are very—other than the Spanish, they smashed it a lot.
But the Inca were very respectful, and trying—they tried to rebuild, even.
Like, where they could rebuild megalithic structures, they would.
Here's a great example.
And I also think a great example of why it's not possible that the Inca did all
of this, because it's—in such a short period of time.
Again, their civilization lasted barely a couple hundred years, and there's so
much of it, of this stonework.
And it's just a complete night-and-day difference.
But—so in Cusco, there were, like, 13 high Incas, these kings of the Inca
empire, like, the high Inca, the big, big dude.
And he had his court with his advisors.
They called him a panaka.
And they—and it was a hereditary thing, so the son would inherit, and he'd
make his own panaka, his own people.
He'd also have his own palace.
You couldn't live—like, the son couldn't live in the house of the father.
So they would build another spot in Cusco in this city.
Cusco's a crazy city.
It's, like, megalithic, Inca, colonial Spanish, modern, all piled up on each
other.
It's an amazing city.
But if you actually look at where these courts were, like, starting with Manco
Capac, the first sort of high Inca around 1200 AD, you have the first seven or
eight of these high Inca, when they would build their structures and their
palace, they would rebuild, like, a megalithic courtyard.
They'd be these big, massive stones.
Or they'd inhabit and they'd repair it.
They'd have these huge, big megalithic courtyards.
But as soon as they switch from, I think, the eighth to the ninth or the
seventh to the eighth, it's all small cobblestones.
It's just all of their courtyards, like their palaces, were made from, you know,
small local stones stuck together with mud mortar.
It's, like, well, hang on, you're saying that if you say that the Inca built
all of this stone, then all of a sudden you're saying, well, between one
generation and the next, you lost all of this capability to do the fancy stuff,
the big stuff, which doesn't make any sense.
It's much more likely what they did was they found an abandoned, ruined megalithic
city.
They rebuilt it and they ran out of megalithic courtyards to renovate for their
next king.
That's what happened.
Like, so the first bunch of these high anchors have these megalithic courtyards
and then the next, right up to the end, they're just, they're made from small
local cobblestones.
It's like, were they just not special enough for the big special stonework or,
it's just, you can't imagine within such a small couple centuries that they
lose all that capability.
It's just not, none of it makes sense.
The only thing that makes sense when you look at that architecture down there
is, yeah, they were rebuilding older stonework.
They were repairing it.
They were putting their stuff back on top of it.
I mean, I had, there's so many amazing, Iante Tambo is one of my favorite sites
down there.
Just because it's so obvious, there's these giant 80, 90 ton granite blocks
that make up this structure and it's fallen apart.
And then in, like they've tried to move these things and in between them, they've
just stacked all these little local crappy little stones in between.
Do you have any images of that?
I have the Iante Tambo directory, tons of pictures.
And in fact, that's a, that's a whole other interesting story because that
place is another example of what you see a lot of in Egypt, which is this
phenomenon of just something happened.
And they went tools down.
We're not finished.
We're like, we're in the process of doing stuff and just drop work, leave,
whatever happens, cataclysm, social club, something happened.
Because we know a lot about Iante Tambo.
It's at the top of a mountain in the Sacred Valley.
Yeah.
So this is a great example of the rocks on top of this stuff.
Yeah.
But up a, there's a great little drone video actually.
One of those videos, one of the videos in there is a drone shot from the top of
this.
It's at the top of this steep mountain.
They built this structure.
No, go back one.
That's at the quarry.
So I'm standing on one of the stones.
So yeah, that's, that's it there.
And at the top of this are these giant 80 ton granite blocks that make up this
central, they call it a sun temple.
And we know where those come from.
It's like, if you imagine this giant mountain, there's a big old valley to the
left of it.
And then another giant mountain.
And at the top of that other giant mountain is the quarry for this granite.
It's about four, five, six miles as the crow flies, but it's probably like 10
or 12 to walk it.
And I've walked it.
We've climbed up to that quarry.
And all the way along this path, they have what are called these tired stones,
which are giant blocks of granite that they just, they just, they dropped.
They just left them there.
Tired stones.
They're called the tired stones.
Yeah.
And in fact, there's a road, if you see in the very bottom left here, there's a
road that they built.
And if you look at some of these other images, I'm standing on some of these
rocks.
Actually, this one, this is one of the examples.
They had to build the road around it, the modern road around it.
And this block, when you pace it out and measure it, it's probably not less
than 90 tons of granite.
And I mean, we couldn't, I mean, shit, the equipment to try and move this on
this would destroy this road to try and lift this.
But these, there's, there's dozens, there's like a dozen or more of these
things all the way up to the quarry at Ollante Tambo.
But it's just, again, it's very obvious that the Inca rebuilt this.
But something happened here where they went to, yeah, these are the big 80 ton
blocks in the center of it.
And yeah, this is one of the examples I love to show people.
It's like, okay, you're telling me the same people did all of this stonework,
the stuff in the middle, and like this little filler work in here?
Yeah.
If we were going to attach to a timeline, it would be way more likely that what
you're saying is correct, especially when you're looking at it like this.
Yeah.
Look at the massive stones and the way they're cut and then what's above them.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Wild stuff, man.
It really is.
Because what happened?
And the evidence of the mud, that's the other thing.
For sure, yeah.
At Tiwanaki, yes, there was a huge, and something happened here, like a cataclysm
happened here.
Look at these blocks.
These big blocks are scattered around.
Something knocked this structure over.
And these are huge blocks of stone.
What had happened to cause that?
That's a good example of the Hunanpacha, the carved bedrock.
You see a lot of this crazy stuff.
In fact, there's also tool marks here.
Like in one of the big Hunanpacha, if you look, there's like a grid of cuts in
one of these pictures here, Jamie.
That one's nuts because, go back, look at that.
That one's nuts because it was removed.
Right.
So people often say, well, this Hunanpacha is a quarry.
I'm like, really?
That's not a quarry.
I usually, I like this.
There's many examples like this where this isn't a quarry.
How do you make the back?
If you're trying to take a block of stone out.
Right.
How are you doing that?
How are you making the back cut?
You can't.
You have to.
It's like a box.
You have to cut it out.
Right.
Deliberately shaped.
And that block is not.
We don't know where.
No.
I think it was.
I think we think we were talking a lot about this.
Most likely, it was meant to house something.
Either other stone or something else was going on here.
This is stuff that's since been removed.
And in fact, in one of these pictures, there's like a semicircle with all these
cut grid lines in them.
These are more lazy, tired stones out in the fields.
You go marching around in these cornfields and you find them all over the place
down here.
It's great.
That's so strange.
It's a very.
This is the thing.
Here we go.
So if you zoom in on that.
So this is up the hill.
Ooh.
And these are cut marks.
It's like a grid pattern that's been cut into the stone.
I don't know how with what, but you actually, you can't see this from the
ground.
And we were super lucky in that there was a huge festival going on in the town
and all the guards were at the festival.
So they'd never let you get up here.
Otherwise, we climbed up this halfway up this mountain to get a picture of
those cut lines, which is, again, not attributable to the very basic tools that
the Inca had, right?
Barely in the Bronze Age.
This is nuts.
Yeah.
So this is that drone footage.
Also, because the guards weren't there, they would have gone nuts if they'd
caught us droning.
Oh, really?
They don't like you droning?
No.
No, it can't do this.
Why so many restrictions?
I mean, wouldn't this, all this, especially from someone like you, wouldn't all
this encourage tourism?
I think you'd think so, but it's not the case.
In fact, they're getting worse, unfortunately, in parts of Peru, just in terms
of the ropes and the restricted areas you can't go to.
Machu Picchu, unfortunately, you can't get to the famous hitching post of the
sun or the central megalithic area.
Just looking at this drone footage, there's such a clear difference between the
original stone that's below and then the stuff that the more modern people
built above it.
There's such a difference in the way the stone is constructed.
Wild stuff, man.
It's night and day.
So this is what I like about South America.
Once you see it in South America, it's very clear because you just, you know,
again, in Egypt, you just had a longer ancient civilization that were able to
develop higher capabilities than, say, the Inca did.
In fact, the quarry for this stone is way on that other mountain across the
valley at the top.
You can't quite see it, but it's, you know, they hold these big blocks over
very difficult terrain at high, this is still 10,000 feet.
And what is the largest of these stones?
It'd be 100 tons at least.
I mean, it's Saksaywama, and you're closer to 200 tons.
I think at Tiwanaku, the biggest sandstone block, I might be rising to
something like almost 300, 400 tons, something like that, 300 maybe, is a big
red sandstone block.
Are those cross marks, the etchings to the stone, is that the only evidence of
tool marks?
No, we've seen others, particularly in Tiwanaku.
I mean, this is actually up at the quarry.
So this is, yeah, this is up at the, up that other mountain we hiked up, and it,
trust me, I can't imagine trying to carry a ton of rocks up here.
This was hard enough.
But, yeah, so in Tiwanaku, you certainly see a lot more evidence for tool marks.
In South America, you have tubular drills, you have all sorts of kind of crazy,
what look like tool marks and functional aspects of stone, in particularly
places like the quarry cancha, which is the big central structure in Cusco.
It was this, today it's a Catholic church, but it's megalithic, and the inside
walls have all, I mean, some of the blocks have been put out and are on display,
and there's a lot of the inside structures that are still there.
Yeah, there are similar sort of tube drills that have been cut.
There is a lot of similarities to some of the tools that you see in megalithic
Egypt.
So there's, I think it's an offshoot, I mean, if I was to bet, I would say it's
either the same or an offshoot of the same civilization that did the megalithic
stuff in the other parts of the world, for sure.
Like, it's just the megalithic work itself.
It's just like there's skyscrapers in Tokyo.
Boom, that's it.
Yeah.
Yeah.
It's like, you know, the reductionist and the skeptics will say, well, it's,
they're solving this, you know, it's like a guy that you want to kill an animal,
you make a flint arrowhead or whatever, right?
And I can understand that process where you are solving a problem and getting
at it the same way.
However, when it comes to walls, like stone walls, I'm very skeptical that two
completely separate cultures found the most difficult, the most complex, the
hardest way to make a stone wall and chose that.
Because that's what megalithic walls are, like these giant blocks that are
perfectly shaped together.
That's the thing, man.
When you're in Cusco and in these streets, when you look at, some of them have
been shaken apart from earthquakes.
So you can see, they're complex, like they're curved.
Not only is the, not only does the, the line, it's not straight, so the lines
curve where they join, the face angles change.
So it's, it's changes this way, but also the face angle changes and they
perfectly match.
Just, it's, it's mind boggling to understand how they might have actually put
those stones together.
This is why it does lead people to the geopolymer ideas of stone softening.
My buddy Kyle, Brothers of the Serpent podcast, who travels with this, he has a
great idea that it was, it might've been a resonance thing where you're
actually resonating and, and, and grinding stones together slowly.
Where, so they, once, you know, you, you basically, they'll match eventually if
you were just like grinding.
There are jeweler's tools, like, that do similar things.
You can cut through, you know, they do it on real small stones, but you can cut
through granite with a star shape or whatever.
With, with, with these jeweler's tools that get to the right resonant frequency
and they just sort of grind through like an ultrasonic drill or something that
cuts and just vibrates its way through.
If you turn it off while it's in there, it's like Excalibur, right?
It's, it's stuck in the stone real tight.
You have to have this, but, you know, obviously you talk in some advanced
technological capability to be able to vibrate a 50 ton stone to make it grind
into its neighbor.
But it's about the most plausible thing I've heard because I can't imagine that
this was done by, all right, we lift it up, we measure it, we mark the high
spots, we rub it down, we take, you know, we put it back up.
And it's, you're saying this for stones that are 150 tons, it's just not, it's
not happening like that.
Yeah, let's pull up some images of what you're talking about, these very
bizarre shapes that they're perfectly matched to fit into each other like a jigsaw
puzzle.
I think in the South America, directly there, Jamie, there'll be some walls,
some of the walls in the streets.
The speculation is that they did it in these shapes to protect against
earthquakes?
One of them, that's the Coricancha, keep going, there's the wavy lines, yeah,
this stuff, right?
Yeah, this stuff.
This is like the Inca Roca wall.
And there's probably some pictures of the broken sections where you can see
these inside joins.
That's Sacsayhuaman, so it's the same thing, just a much bigger scale.
Weird.
Yeah, some weird, bizarre stuff, yeah.
Weird stuff. Go back to the curvy, what's that, the curvy ones back the way?
Yeah, that one.
Yeah, that's the green one.
That one, yeah.
That's nuts, man. What are the nubs?
I don't know.
No one knows, right?
We talked about the nubs endlessly.
Yeah, people, all sorts of speculation, like people have geopolymer explorations
for them.
People have, you know, a lot of people try to say they're lifting bosses and
that's not how, they would flip over, they're not in the right place.
One thing's for certain, I think, with the nubs that is an observation a friend
of ours, Chuck, a geologist made, which is that if you look at how stone is
quarried, right?
So one of the common methods still used to some extent today, but certainly is
attributed to cultures like this and the Egyptians, is what they call a wedge
and feather quarrying, right?
You cut these little wedges out and then you hammer in either, you know, wood
and wet it and tries to, you're trying to split stone, basically.
You're trying, and they still do it today.
One thing you'll never be left with in a splitting or a wedge and feather
approach is a nub.
Like you can imagine, you can't imagine these stone faces splitting and leaving
these bloody nubs that are on all of these walls.
Right.
So they're formed.
They're formed, either deliberately formed or they're a result of some other
process, we don't know.
But they're not the result of this sort of primitive quarrying method.
They, I don't know where they are, but they're on everything.
And that's another-
It's weird that they leave them there as well, right?
Well, they're in Egypt too.
Like they're on the Menkara.
Like if you compare that wall to like the third pyramid, the Menkara pyramid,
it's exactly the same.
I mean, it looks exactly the same.
The pillowy appearance on the out, not like unfinished.
Let's find an image of that.
Menkara pyramid.
Yeah.
The granite.
It's just, it's so weird because they're not in a uniform position either.
No.
And, you know, there's, you find examples, there's been surface wear on a lot
of this stone.
There was, there's plenty of examples where it was very finely like reflective
and polished originally.
So there's been spalling on the surface.
It's, it feels rough today, but there are sections.
Yeah.
So this is, this is Menkara pyramid.
Looks the same.
It's-
Same kind of thing.
Yeah.
Nubs.
But a little larger.
In some places, those are big ones, but there's other ones that are smaller,
very much like
that, yeah, that, that Facebook picture there, I guess is, is a good nub
picture, but there
are, even in, in Menkara, there's some evidence that they were flattening some
surfaces of the
pyramid, whether or not they intended to flatten the whole thing, we don't know.
Funnily enough, they have actually found that there's probably another hidden
entrance to
this behind that blank flattened wall there on the, the Turkey today, airfield
anomalies
under Menkara pyramid.
Yeah.
So there's a, this is on the, um, well, that'd be Eastern side, I guess, of the
pyramid.
The, uh, yeah, the Eastern side where the pyramid temple is, the entrance is in
the North, but
there's a flattened part of this wall on the Eastern side.
And they've been hitting that with like a, a ground, like a radar thing.
And they found that there are some anomalies behind there.
So there might well be, uh, an entrance behind this wall.
Yeah.
That looks a little odd.
Like that wall looks a little different than the surrounding stone.
Well, for sure.
And then there's some evidence that they had a patch like that.
We, one of the, uh, hypotheses, again, I got a credit, um, Carl and Russ from
brothers
construction guys.
So they look at this stuff and they have a great theory about this.
Cause on all, there's a lot of the, the casing stones are missing on the back,
but we found
blocks that were smooth like that with the angle for the other side.
So what I think there were probably four patches like that.
Now what you could be one possible explanation for this is like, well, you, you
very carefully
grind and finish a section on each side because that sets your angle.
Once you set your angle, you can use that patch as a reference point to then
basically try to
finish the whole rest of the pyramid at that exact angle.
So you've got to start somewhere you, you met, you very carefully set your
angle correctly
on that patch.
And then you can, you can use that as a reference to then smooth out the rest
of the surface,
which you say smooth out in places is this much granite.
You've got to remove like a foot of granite.
It's got to come off these stones to get down to that level.
Like they're so pillowy, pillowy, it's granite.
Um, I mean, I just, it boggles the mind.
It's like there was scoop.
It's like this, they were using that scooping tool or whatever to do it.
Are there competing theories as to what the nubs are for other than like using
it to lift
the stones somehow?
Yeah.
Um, you know, some people suggest some of them may have been like little, I
mean, they're
really, there are different types of nubs.
The subtle ones, not all work as lifting nubs.
Some people say in the geopolymer world where they say, well, stones were, were
formed or
cast, they'll say, well, these are like heat expansion points.
Uh, I've heard good theories from certain people that suggest it had something
to do with the
mass of the stone, like a resonant free, like as you change the mass of a stone,
it's whatever
resonant frequency it has might alter.
Cause you also have scoops, you have nubs and you have scoops.
So you seem to have this reduction of mass and then there's more mass in
another place.
So maybe it had something to do with, these are different theories I've heard.
I don't have a good explanation for them.
It's so weird how it never comes up again in human history.
Yeah.
We don't, we don't make stuff with nubs.
It's weird.
It is weird.
It's really weird.
Well, it's a commonality too.
It's one of those other indicators.
It's like, Hey, this is the same, but how come this is the same?
Isn't it in Japan as well?
Uh huh.
Yeah.
Yeah.
There's places in Japan.
I mean, there's, it's a place I want to, I've been there.
I've just not explored all those sites.
Um, yes, there's some really megalithic stonework in, in Japan that actually
matches a lot of
the stuff in Peru.
See if you can find some of that, Jeremy, please.
Yeah.
What's that, bro?
I'm looking at different ones.
Oh, wow.
Where's that?
That looks like Turkey.
Turkey.
Yeah.
Turkey's another one.
Those are more consistent nubs, uh, I would say.
They're like a bit more, a little more, a bit more deliberate.
There's also a lip on that.
Yeah.
Still weird.
It is.
It's like, what are you doing?
Are you copying?
That could be, that's a possibility for sure.
Cause we're very good at that too.
You do see a lot of imitation.
Right.
Uh, who taught you how to do it?
Yeah.
There's, there's, there's, there's a few, there's a few people really obsessed
with the,
the stone nubs and I can see why.
Like it is a real mystery.
See those, those ones, that's an Oriente Tambo.
That's, those are bedrock nubs too.
Those aren't even in blocks.
That's in bedrock.
And those are a bit more deliberate.
I would say like, they're more like maybe they're shadow and, and, you know,
markers for
like, um, uh, some sort of calendar.
These, this is part of the Coricantia.
Uh, they're big square ones.
I don't know what that's for that.
They're different again.
Um, what is your take on that, um, sage wall in Montana?
I haven't been there and seen it.
I've been wanting to.
Those are weird.
Um, I've heard differing opinions on that.
Like it's, it's possibly, I'd like to see it for myself to be honest.
Uh, I've seen some footage of it.
Jamie, China, China, that looks like Yangshan.
Yeah.
That's Yangshan quarry.
And they're giant.
That's giant too, by the way, the Yangshan quarry is thousands of tons.
Like if, if they'd ever cut that block off, it's something like, I don't know,
some astronomical.
Oh yeah.
I watched a piece on this.
So yeah, you see it there.
It's monstrous.
What is the timeline of this stuff?
Uh, I believe, I don't know off the top of my head.
Maybe Jamie, you can find out.
Ask your AI.
Ming dynasty.
Right.
Yeah.
They, they say the story on that is like, like some ruler said, like, carve me
a dragon.
They're like, sure boss.
And they started trying to get this block out.
And then eventually some foreman went, yeah, maybe we can't deal with this
stone anymore.
And they left it.
Doesn't seem real plausible to me.
Um, that's the size of the Yangshan quarry.
Oh my God.
Yeah.
Thousands of tons of that.
And what they were doing there, I do not know.
And I do not know when they did it.
But that's the weird thing is there's so many.
Yeah.
Sights.
Those nubs would be huge.
They're huge.
Huge nubs.
Yeah.
They're different.
But it's like, what do they represent?
Well, so one, another option, I mean, something else I've heard is that in some
places they
could have been mounting points for something that was grabbing them or hanging
onto them,
some tool to finish the wall.
That was another theory that came up.
Or a structure around them.
Yeah.
A structure from them.
Like a base.
And now, uh, the Japan ones, Jamie, did you find anything?
No, I was just looking around.
That's different.
Do you go Japan megaliths maybe?
But, I mean, India, the Barabar Caves is another one of these mysteries that
fits this box.
Do you ever heard of the Barabar Caves in India?
No.
Oh, my Lord.
That's a whole other.
These are in Japan.
This is Japan, yeah.
This one in particular, the-
Whoa.
Click on that one that you just had your cursor on.
That's nuts.
I think that's AI.
Is it?
Son of a bitch.
That thing looks AI.
AI-powered U2 transcription.
Son of a bitch.
The one on the left, just next to it, the medium one, that's definitely, and
below it actually
is a better picture, the Asuka megaliths.
Yeah, so this matches a lot of the stuff in Peru to me, and even the Imperial
Palace, the
cornerstones and corner blocks of the Imperial Palace there, the wall, is very
megalithic.
Whoa.
And in fact, it's funny, they've actually been digging up the foundations.
My wife was there recently, and they've gone underground, and they've found
original foundations
and big walls, and they've just opened some of that up to the public.
Yeah.
Some of this is very, I mean, this is totally Peru, Hananpacho, if this is
legit.
Wow.
It matches, right?
It's the same.
Yeah.
The same kind of stuff.
Yeah.
And that's what's weird.
It's like, is this a traveling civilization?
Is civilization uniform all around the world at a certain point in time?
I think it was global, yeah.
Global.
I think it was global.
We're looking at the remnants of it.
Look at that.
Oh, my God.
Offshoots of it, too.
Looks like that thing in L.A.
Potentially.
What's that, Jamie?
Looks like that giant boulder in L.A. at the museum.
You know, it's like sitting over the tunnel, you know what I'm talking about?
At LACMA.
I don't know.
No?
I don't remember it.
I've tried to block LACMA out.
Look.
Oh, wow.
Kind of.
What is this?
Like a sculpture?
L.A. Museum of Modern Art.
It's blech.
You go there, it's like, this is a plexiglass box.
It's amazing.
Yeah, with a banana peel in it.
That kind of shit, yeah.
Yeah, I'm not a fan of Modern Art.
No.
It's for dorks.
It looks similar.
Yeah.
Kind of.
You're right.
But not as cool.
That one's cooler and obviously way fucking older.
It's just so weird how these megalithic structures are so consistent.
Whoa, look at that one.
That's nuts.
Where is that?
There's something like, looks like Cambodia, potentially Thailand.
Well, that was the other thing that we pulled up the other day, the temple in
India.
The one that's cut entirely out of the mountain.
It starts with a K.
Yeah.
Yeah.
That's one.
Yeah.
There's a lot in India too.
It's another place.
But that's made from granite.
It is cut out of granite.
If you look up Barabar caves, that's also in India.
These are, my friend Patrice Poyard, who runs a filmmaking company in France,
has done an amazing documentary on Barabar and they've scanned them.
And these are caves cut into big granite outcroppings that are just massive,
perfect on the inside.
Like it's mirror finished granite within like a thousandth of an inch flatness
on the insides.
And they have these crazy shapes.
So some of them have these circles, but then have a whole other room in the
back that's circular.
And that's an unfinished one.
That's like a-
Click on that doorway, please, Jamie.
Like upper left.
Yeah, right there.
Like that's nuts, man.
That's a lot of that.
The decoration there is added.
That's probably later.
Again, it's the writing came later.
The original doorway is probably that one.
So the elephants over the top, that's later.
Yeah, for sure.
There's an attribution of these that was supposedly owned by a particular king
who gave them to like a religious cult to get out of the rain.
But it doesn't say anything about him making them.
They just-
Oh, wow.
If you go to the insides is what's impressive in here.
It's the finishing of the granite.
They're mirror finished.
And it turns out with the scans, what they found is that they're also like
almost perfectly symmetrical.
Like they're not straight.
They tilt in it like a degree and a half exactly on both sides.
It's some of the most precise like work in granite in single piece.
Again, it's one of those things where you can't make a single mistake.
I mean, this is an imitation.
Like this is a later attempt to replicate it.
Yeah, look at that cow patty hammer, whatever the one, the two in the middle of
the air.
So this is, and you literally, it reflects, I mean, the acoustics in there are
incredible.
But this is granite and it's been polished to this mirror finish.
And then it's also been measured for flatness and geometry.
And it's insanely accurate.
There's been a whole series of documentaries done.
And you can see the mirror finish in it.
Wow.
And nobody knows.
There's nothing else quite like this anywhere.
It's like giant stone boxes.
Look at the size of that one.
Carved into a mountain.
Carved into a granite outcrop in a mountain.
Exactly.
Yeah.
There's seven or eight of them.
They're all in the same area.
Really hard to get to.
It's like you've got to rough it and camp and stuff to get out there.
But it's on my list.
Like what's the conventional explanation of how they did this?
I mean, there are literally other examples of people hammering on them with
like trying to make replicas.
With the tools of the time.
And then it just jumps to this.
And it's just there's no explanation for it other than they did it in order to
let this religious sect out of the rain.
Because it's literally some of the really poorly inscribed.
It's like the Egyptian stuff.
It's like somebody hammered this text.
Right.
Sandscreen or whatever it is.
And it says, oh, you know, this king gave this to these guys to get out of the
monsoon.
It's the ancient version of Kilroy was here.
Yeah.
Exactly.
Kilroy was here.
Oh, Kilroy built this.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Wild, man.
Little Timmy on the skyscraper.
I've never seen that before.
That's...
It's completely insane.
Patrice, I actually have his full documentary on my channel if people want to...
I'm just going to go with the giant statue outside.
It's the Oya Quarry in Japan.
In Japan.
Whoa.
It's an abandoned quarry.
Whoa.
Oh, this is like...
We were in a quarry like this in Turkey.
It was absolutely incredible.
Whoa.
Look at the...
In relationship to the size of the people that we're walking around.
Is this a salt quarry or is it limestone?
I can't tell.
I can look it up.
A lot of them are salt cabins, but we were inside.
So you have big cabins.
You have big quarries like this, underground quarries in China.
We were in Turkey in this...
I have this amazing footage from this massive underground quarry.
Caves that were carved in Turkey when we were there in March.
Look at this title.
Scientists discover this structure in Japan they claim humans could never have
built.
How's that?
How could humans have never built a quarry?
Yeah.
Get clicks.
Yeah.
You're just getting clicks, you sons of bitches.
That's the game.
Someone did it.
No one's saying it's not humans.
She's saying something was going on back then where they were way more advanced
than we want
to give them credit for.
Yeah.
And when you take into account the Younger Dryas Impact Theory and the natural
catastrophes
that undoubtedly have befallen many a civilization in the past.
Yeah.
It all kind of makes sense.
It's just weird how many people resist it.
That's the weird part.
It's like they want to cling so tightly to their preconceived notions of the
history of
the human race.
It's a weird thing, isn't it?
Yeah.
Like the history of civilization is one of those things that hasn't changed a
whole lot in
about 100 years, like the idea that civilization started with the Sumerians and
the Mesopotamians
6,000 years ago and now we're here.
That idea has been around for a long time.
And it's just everything else around it has shifted such that, I mean, I hope,
I really
do hope that it's just that the context, the next generation of academics can
take some
of this context into account.
I think they will.
I think they will.
I think a lot of them are growing up listening to stuff like your show.
I think that's going to help because there's a lot of people that are getting
into archaeology
now, a lot of young people that are a little bit more open-minded.
And then they also encounter some of these very arrogant professors and people
that have
these ridiculous ideas and think that they should be the absolute gatekeeper of
information,
which is so crazy because universities are a fairly new concept.
The idea that these people that are running these universities, they should be
in charge
of something.
This is a new thing.
They should be in charge.
They're the only ones that could figure it out.
They have the paper.
It's written.
Their name is written.
It's framed on the wall.
You shut the fuck up.
You got the letters.
That is literally insane.
Because you're dealing with something that it is not possible for everyone to
know, and
you're not as into it as they are.
The thing is about they are not as into these ideas as you are.
You know what I'm saying?
You are chasing this shit down.
There's not a lot.
You are.
And so is Jimmy Corsetti, and so is Graham Hancock, and so are many, many other
people
and Randall Carlson and John Anthony West, rest in peace when he was alive.
He was awesome.
Those people chasing down these ideas are way more into it than the people that
are gatekeeping
the information, and they don't want to accept anything other than what they've
been teaching
and what they've been writing about.
Yeah.
You're right.
There's a lot of it.
I mean, it's amazing that the medium has shifted to give people a voice, I
guess, that are into
it.
And my friend George Howard has a great way of explaining this in terms of a
potential
talent pool, if you consider like, okay, so current academics, at least the
ones that
are the old guard now, have kind of been selected from the people that chose to
go to universities,
that got into universities, and you have this pool.
But now with kind of the internet, and it's like you're exposing these ideas to
such a wider
variety of people that you can then, there's going to be people out there that
think about
these things a certain way.
Obsessed polymaths.
Obsessed polymaths that are going to be able to come forward and give those
ideas.
And I think the vast majority of significant breakthroughs in pretty much any
scientific
field have usually come from somewhere that's not within the box thinking.
It's usually anti-establishment or it's outside the box thinking.
Not always, but a lot of those ideas came from like, this has come complete
from left field,
like germ theory, all that sort of stuff.
It's like, what are you?
You're crazy.
You've got this dumb idea and then it turns out, ah, you know, 30, 40 years
later, it's
like, that was the right idea.
And we go from there.
I mean, I'm hopeful as well that, yeah, the next generation of academics will
be able to
embrace a lot of these, the context for some of these, and then try to explore
them.
Because I think ultimately that's what's needed is, is some, take some of these
ideas seriously
and, and bend some of our resources to try and explore them on the ground and
in full.
Because there's only, you know, ultimately it's the people that have the
control and are
able to do the real on the ground research are the ones that will be able to
confirm or,
you know, chase it.
But it takes real science in a lot of cases.
And also we're currently obsessed with our impact on the environment, which is
not a bad
thing.
It's a good thing to be conscious and aware of our pollution and our emissions
and all
that good stuff.
But if we were absolutely certain that civilization has been utterly destroyed
by something that
is outside of our capacity to control, probably a good idea to know that that's
happened.
Yes, a hundred percent.
And to deny the possibility of even exploring that concept because people are
going to get
their feelings hurt because, you know, they were, because they're so bitchy to
each other.
That's the craziest thing you find out about these academics.
They are so bitchy to each other.
When anybody has any sort of an idea that's heterodox, any sort of an idea that's
outside of
the narrative that they've been teaching forever, they attack each other's
reputation.
They're a little sociopaths.
It is vicious.
It's, well, that's their version of the fight.
I guess it's their, the mean letters and the, yeah, it's, you know what I mean?
It's weird.
It is kind of weird.
It's.
But they're also in today's day and age of these shows where like your show and
all these
other ones that we mentioned, it's, there's, there's a much more attractive
approach to
these ideas, you know, where people are not like bitchy authoritarians, but
they're rather
people that are absolutely fascinated by something that is undeniable.
The size of these stones, the similarity to them all over the world, all these
different
mysteries, the fact that many of them are covered in mud, the fact that the
enormous stones look
they've been knocked off by some immense force.
Yeah.
Stuff that was left, just left there in the middle of construction.
Nobody ever picked it up.
Nobody ever finished it.
Like what happened?
Yeah.
And it's, it's really only not that long since we've had the ability to apply
some of these
disciplines to these problems like engineering, you know, it's, it's since the
industrial revolution
that we've, we've even had the enough background knowledge to kind of
understand these problems
because we have to solve them ourselves.
Or like think about how Christopher Dunn approaches the idea of the Great Pyramid
itself.
Like no one would have ever been able to do that 200 years ago.
That's what I'm saying.
Yeah, like a hundred percent that's, that's, it's, it's these other disciplines
that have
a whole different take on it that, and it's again, not a criticism of archaeologists
to
say they're not engineers.
They're not engineers.
It's just, yeah, it's fact.
They don't, you don't, it's like, I'm not a dentist.
I don't know much about, you know what I mean?
I can't solve those problems.
Exactly.
No one can solve all problems.
Yeah.
But hey, dentists might have some input on some of these, you know what I mean?
Like you could, you can, I think a lot of these problems are multidisciplinary
is what
I'm saying.
Like there's, there's a lot of different approaches and angles to them that
lead to some pretty
interesting places.
It's funny you say that because my dentist is obsessed with UFOs.
Oh really?
Super smart guy, obsessed with UFOs.
Trying to talk to you.
Every time he's like doing my, what do you think?
What do you think that is?
I'm like, blah, blah, blah, blah.
It's fun.
It's fun to talk to him.
I'll bet.
Yeah.
Yeah.
What else are you going to think about while you're feeling on something?
But it is a subject that is so important for us.
I mean, I'm watching the Ken Burns documentary right now on the Revolutionary
War and it's
really great.
Awesome.
Amazing.
Fascinating to look back at this very recent history, relatively speaking, to
terms of the
timeline of the earth.
And then just realize like that ain't shit.
Yes.
And that's one of the reasons that drives me to is why it's, I think that's a
big factor
in why this is important is that it's altruistic, but I do believe that having,
if we could
change that pillar of humanity from like, well, we were stone age and now we're
space age to
this cyclical nature of we've been here, we've not been knocked down, be aware
of the dangers,
like solve the longer term problem.
I do genuinely think that a whole generation that's exposed to that, that has
that inbuilt
as they're like, Hey, background knowledge of what it means to be human, then
maybe we would
solve those problems.
Yeah.
Maybe that's a constant test every 12,000 plus years.
It seems like it.
Yeah, it does seem like it.
And it seems like no one's really solved it yet, you know, and we probably get
a little
smarter every time we do it, but it takes forever and it probably sucks for a
long time.
Well, it seems like it's not every 12,000 years or so is like, there's
definitely been
events that, that are orders of magnitude greater than anything we've
experienced in our, the
last several millennia.
Yeah.
Um, you know, like a, you know, a thousand Katrinas or whatever at a time kind
of thing.
And there's evidence of like things like the Tunguska event where like
something a little
bit more, a little more than we've experienced before happens, but nothing
compared to what
has experienced, we've experienced or the earth has experienced in the past.
No, for sure.
We've not, we've, yeah, we've had, we've had nothing, but it does, if you go
back the
last couple hundred thousand years, it is, has this periodicity, it seems like
that does
for some reason align with some of those, those 12,000 years and 26,000 years
kind of cycles.
It's weird how that happens.
It's like this.
Including the depictions of Atlantis and the fall of Atlantis.
Well, yeah.
I mean, it's all that lines on with the timeline, lines up with the timelines.
It does.
Dude, your show is fucking awesome.
I love it.
I look forward to it.
Every time you put a new episode out, I really love it.
And I love every time you come in here and let's make this a regular thing, man.
Dude, I'd love that.
It's my favorite show.
I love this.
I fucking love this subject so much.
It's so engaging.
It's so exciting.
You know, for whatever reason, there's just part of the human fascination with
the past
that gets ignited in me.
And it's so, I think the audience feels the same way.
It's like, it's so intriguing.
And I think you're right.
And I think Jimmy Corsetti's right.
And Graham Hancock's right.
I think all these people are right.
I think there's more to this story than we're being spoon fed.
Thank you very much, sir.
My pleasure, brother.
Uncharted X.
It's on YouTube.
Subscribe, like, and subscribe.
It's fucking amazing.
And then you, what is your Instagram?
It's Uncharted X1 on Twitter and Uncharted X7 on Instagram.
I should probably fix that, but it is what it is.
Okay.
As long as it's not 6-7.
That's the new thing with the kids these days.
Oh, no.
Yeah, I haven't done that.
You know about all that?
Yeah, I've heard about it.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Appreciate you very much.
Cheers, Joe.
Bye, everybody.
Thank you, bro.
Yeah.
I don't want to force it, but I wanted to ask about that.
Oh, Shamir?
Yeah, we could have talked Shamir.
We can throw it back in.
Yeah, I could.
Can we talk about it real quick?
Yeah, yeah.
You want to talk about the Shamir?
I can unend it.
Sorry, folks.
We unended it.
We unended it because Jamie had sent me this earlier today, Solomon Shamir.
Yeah, the Shamir.
So you are familiar with it?
I am.
Okay.
So this is an ancient idea that there was a worm or a substance that had the
power to
cut through and disintegrate stone, iron, and diamond.
And Solomon is said to have used it in the building of the first temple in
Jerusalem in
place of cutting tools.
For the construction of Solomon's temple, which promoted peace, it was
inappropriate to
use tools that could also cause war and bloodshed.
Yep.
There's also, I found since we've been, since I sent that to you, there is a
actual thing
called a Lothordio or something.
What?
That they found in the Philippines that does some sort of stuff.
It's a rock eating worm.
Yeah.
Yeah.
The Shamir is like Solomon's lightsaber, I like to call it.
Yeah.
It's, it's, it is described, the Shamir is, is, is described as a stone cutting.
Whoa.
Implement.
That thing ate through that?
So the guy who found it said he had never heard of the Shamir.
Huh.
And some scientists don't know if they're even the same thing, but they do,
they're described
very similarly.
What a creepy looking motherfucker.
That thing is a rock eating little worm.
Like grinding stone.
That's crazy.
It's, there are a number of different depictions and descriptions for the Shamir.
And, and one of the, it, one of the problems with it being like this, this
thing that slowly
grinds through, uh, yeah, see, this is the weird part.
Shamir was meant to have always been wrapped in wool and stored in a container
made of lead.
Oh, at the end of the container would burst and disintegrate.
So it's like.
What?
Under the Shamir's gaze.
Yeah.
All I had to do is look at it.
So, I don't think it had eyes.
So are we describing, are we describing radiation or something?
Like I said, what are we describing?
Well, it gets into the, it gets into the realm of the Ark of the Covenant and
everything
else too, right?
Right.
Roll and stored in lead?
That's nuts.
And then it lost its potency.
Yes.
Right after, which I don't, the dripping of the honeycomb.
I don't know what that is.
By the time of the destruction of the first temple during the siege of
Jerusalem in five
years.
BC.
Yes.
Wow.
That's crazy.
But again, it still exists.
They found it today.
Like 2019, I think as well.
Well, they found a worm that does something similar.
A very similar worm that could be evolutionary.
Maybe they had a giant one that they just like fucking.
Maybe they could have trained them.
Like some people can train pigeons to do stuff.
Eat the wall.
He had to do it fast.
You can train ants.
One of the things too, he was, they had to build that Temple of Solomon quickly
so that
he was like, we need this, we can't use the regular methods, but we also need
to be able
to cut stone quickly.
So one of the things that Shamir was described as doing is being able to cut
these sort of
hard stones.
Like I think it described like diamond even.
Yes.
He's cutting it quickly.
The blood of the Shamir was used for diamonds, but this also said that he was
not, he didn't
find it.
It was given to him.
A bird found it.
A bird.
Someone noticed a bird was using it to make nests and rock.
And they're like, let's take, let's, let's get the hold of that.
So yeah, there's some people also speculate that there's, there is a bird that
vomits this
thing or poops this thing that on rock, which can melt rock or something.
The angel of the sea had then given the Shamir to a bird.
Yes.
Identified by the Talmud as a hoopoe.
Yeah, but it's the, it's the oldest bird.
Isn't this, I believe this is like the, where he had to go to several birds,
which were
also these like spirits he talked to.
Oh boy.
And I think he had to get to the very late, the very last one.
It's a lightsaber.
They got from aliens.
It's a worm from a bird.
It's a lightsaber from aliens.
It's a radioactive alien lightsaber.
All right.
And the end.
Bye everybody.