Danny Jones Podcast - #203 - New Evidence For Ancient COMPUTERS in Egypt | Ben Van Kerkwyk

Episode Date: October 2, 2023

Ben Van Kerkwyk travels & studies ancient sites around the world in attempt to uncover the true origins of our past. EPISODE LINKS: https://youtube.com/UnchartedX https://www.instagram.com/unchartedx7 https://twitter.com/unchartedx1https://unchartedx.com SPONSORS https://www.americanhartfordgold.com - Call 855-679-1326, or text “KONCRETE” to 6-5-5-3-2 https://mybookie.ag - Use Code DJP when depositing $50 or more FOLLOW DANNY JONES https://www.instagram.com/jonesdanny https://twitter.com/jonesdanny JOIN ON PATREON: https://bit.ly/koncretepatreon OUTLINE 0:00 - Gobelki Tepe & 80 other newly discovered ancient sites in Turkey 17:58 - New chamber discovered in the Great Pyramid 31:12 - Timeline of ancient Egypt 41:53 - Sacred geometry encoded into the Great Pyramid 45:38 - Evidence the Dynastic Egyptians inherited the pyramids & tried to replicate them 56:01 - Multi-ton granite boxes cut with precision, Egyptologists translate hieroglyphs to date objects & evidence of TWO industries 1:09:54 - What happened to the original casing stones on the pyramids? 1:16:14 - Evidence for ancient hyper-advanced cutting tools 1:26:29 - Petrie’s core # 7 1:37:50 - Application for the Serapeum boxes 1:42:33 - Relationship between precision & function 1:53:42 - Yousef & Hakim Awyan: the legendary wisdom keeper of Egypt & "sound hospitals" 1:58:42 - Edgar Cayce secret expeditions underneath the Sphinx 2:14:32 - Bizarre scoop marks in granite quarries 2:19:36 - The “other species of hominids” potentially responsible for the great pyramids, Lloyd Pye, & possibility humans were genetically engineered 2:31:07 - Giant quarries 2:35:49 - New structured light scans of pre-dynastic vases 2:52:21 - Encoded ‘sacred geometry’ of ancient vases 3:00:03 - The Golden Ratio 3:02:54 - Evidence COMPUTERS were used to create these ancient vases 3:07:25 - Ben’s theory these ancient artifacts are deliberate messages sent to us from the past Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Welcome back, Ben. This is your homecoming. Good to be back, Danny. Cheers, man. Thanks for the input. It was about a year ago I had you in here. And then since then, you've been on Joe Rogan, you've been on Flagrant. What other podcast have you been on? There had been a few. I think those were mostly the big in-studio ones. Yeah. Was Rogan and Andrew Schultz's flagrant, which was hilarious, actually. That was a lot of fun. And I was on Rogan with Jimmy. That was a great opportunity.

I enjoyed that, although it's a bit of a blur in my head at this point. But I've been on a few others, just on like Zoom and the remote style one. So, yeah. So you were the first guy to, first in studio podcast. Well, cool, man. I'm happy to inspire those guys to discover you. I mean, I'm sure they already, I know. I know Rogan already knew about you.

He'd already seen videos of your stuff. I think so, yeah. But you've been all over the place, too. You just got back from Turkey, I think, recently. England, well, Turkey earlier this year and then England, I came back from England a couple weeks back. first chance to visit sort of the megalithic structures there, the stone circles, the museums, things like that. I mean, you could spend months in the British Isles. There's so much to see there.

I definitely want to go back. But Turkey are in the year. So what were you doing in Turkey? Where'd you go? You went to Gobeckley-Tepa? We did. So we did a couple of weeks in southeastern Turkey. So in that Gobeckley-Tepe region, like it's all centered around the city of Shenlurfa, which is the biblical Edessa. It's the city of prophets. It's a city that goes back thousands of years. I mean, there's been occupation there since Neolithic times. It's a really interesting city. It's sort of Abrahamic traditions there, a lot of the legends from books of the faith that now are like, you know, Judaism, Islam and Christianity.

A lot of the events that happen in those religions are all centered in that area. It's, you know, it was part of like the Silk Road, the northern-ish end of what was Mesopotamia back in the day. So it's an ancient place. really interesting city a lot of fun I wasn't sure what to expect it was my first time in Turkey and different to Egypt

I'd say it was it was a really nice place and the timing was it's I don't know what happens with me and travel man trying to even get over here we had the hurricane but man it just

I have the worst luck with travel because they had obviously they had the earthquakes earlier in this year those big earthquakes that and it shook down a lot of people I mean

I think the government estimates, they said something like 50,000 people, the guys that I knew on the ground there who were out like my guy there, Ramazan, who we did the tour with, lost his home. Like his home fell down. He was living out of his car. But within the next day or two, he was out helping in the villages trying to help people to sort of recover from it. But he said it was probably more like 250,000 people that might have died in that just from, if you include Syria, because it's just, it's right next to the Syrian border. And there was a lot of Syria that was affected as well. But yes, so that happened and they're like, man, we, okay, so the city itself of Shenlurfa was, wasn't, the infrastructure was still up, the roads were okay, like a few buildings fell down. Some of the other cities were much, were impacted much more. And then they had these rains. They had these floods, which were almost unprecedented floods in that region. It just poured down. And, you know, there were people that died in Chenlurfer purely because they were, they didn't

have anywhere to live and they were in these tents. and they got sort of washed into these alcoves and carried away in these floods and a bunch of people died. So I was like, man, and all this happened within, you know, the couple weeks. And I guess around the month leading up to it. So we were like, geez, are we going to do it? And he was like, yeah, we can do it. And we sort of reassured the people that were coming with us.

We can make it happen. And we did. Unfortunately, obviously places like the museum, they had this wonderful museum in where a lot of the artifacts from Gobeckli-Tepe, Karahan Tepe, like all of the recent archaeological finds there, a house in this museum, but it was they, they had to evacuate it because of the floods. They basically boxed up, I don't know, like 100,000 artifacts or something and shipped them off so we couldn't get into the museum. But also as a consequence, it did make the place green. Like normally if you see pictures of those, of that region, it's brown, but we were there

as it was just breathtakingly beautiful. These limestone hills were just breaking out in wildflowers and grass and everywhere we went, it was just gorgeous. and of course the sites there are just incredible they go back forever there's go beckley tepe which was everyone i think who is interested in this field should know something about go beckley tepe it's it's the site that was i mean it was originally discovered in the 1950s i think it was there were some farmers or they saw some these the tops of what it turned out to be these big tea pillars sticking out of the ground on this side of a hill i think it translates to pot-bellied hill uh in in in that language and they

sort of dismissed it as being, they thought, well, no, this is a relatively modern cemetery or something. Like, it's not a, you know, it's not, the stonework was too good to be considered very ancient. And it wasn't until the mid-1990s when the German Archaeological Institute, and Klaus Schmidt, who sadly has passed away since then, began to excavate at Gobeckli-Tepa. And that's when they found, okay, yeah, so this is actually tremendously ancient. It does have some very unique stone work including megalithic work you've got you know tea pillars that are 18 feet tall and 20 plus tons and it's a very large site it's it's all of these stone circles these pillars that are encompassed by more of a loose or rough stone stone walls and it spreads out it's

quite large there's a number of them they're only excavated maybe 10% of that site and it shook the world up because they based on some of the material that they found in that dig they pretty much conclusively dated that thing to about 11,000 years old, which is much older than any previously recorded evidence of civilization or of this type of occupation. So going there was a really interesting experience. People have said for a long time that it was deliberately buried. The work and the research and the science on this is slowly changing. They're starting to move away from this idea that it was deliberately buried.

it may just have been layers of, layers of sediment that have built up over time. There might have been some periods of burying. In fact, if you tried to bury it deliberately, it would have taken years and years and years. It's a huge site. But what was interesting to me, you know, researching this site is that if you look at the picture of, this is a good picture of it. I have some photos too, but this works. You have two styles of architecture here.

You have the megalithic work, the T-pillars, and it's not just the pillars here. they would actually cut down to the bedrock. You see that area around the teapillars. When you go there, it looks like cement. It's not cement. It's actually the, I believe, limestone bedrock that they've lapped down to be flat. So they have these huge big flat areas, and they inset these stones into them,

or some of them are set up on pedestals like that central one. And these te pillars are a lot of them, they're not all complete. Some of them are broken. They have the most amazing high relief artwork on them. By that, it's, you know, it means you're carving away the negative space to make the figures and the symbols pop out at you. Right, right, right. Yeah. And see, and that's a good example of that image there of that one stone.

Yeah, if you look at that, so you see how the walls, the walls around it kind of encompass those stones? Like, they actually cover up some of the features. And they've, you can clearly tell the walls seem like they've been built to reinforce these stone circles, to sort of preserve them all. almost. And looking at the walls, and this is also true at another site, we'll talk about Karahan-Tepa. Inside the walls, there's actually pieces of broken pillars have been used as material in the building of the walls. And the material or the organic matter that they've used to date the site to give it that 11,000-year-old age came from inside these walls. So it's like, to me, I look at that. It's two different architectural styles. I think it is a potentially

indicative of two entirely different periods of occupation and building because these walls are quite primitive. It's local stone and they're actually using pieces of broken pillars, which means that those pillars could have been there for who knows how long, actually fallen over. Some of them might have broken and they've been encompassed and used in these walls that were then used to sort of resurrect or renew or renovate the site and protect these pillars. So do we know if it's 11,000 year old? I think that's kind of the earlier. date for it. It's the youngest date. It could be vastly older than that. We really don't know. And you said there's a bunch of this that's still under the ground? Heaps of it, yeah. So they've

kind of excavated on one side of a, of a, of a hill. And that's where the UNESCO, like the World Heritage site is now. They put a big cover over the top of it. It's actually great. Like, yeah, see the walkway there. There's this big, they want to keep the rain off it. I think if it, when it does rain, if they left it out in the weather, it just get really muddy and, you know, it'd just wash away a lot of the sediment. It's a great way to view the site. It'd be lovely to get down in there, but they get a lot of traffic. Like, this has become a major tourist attraction for that part of Turkey now. A lot of people want to see this. And they've built a big visitor center. And yeah, so it's a nice way to view the site. And if you have a camera with a zoom lens,

you can kind of see a lot of a detail. Oh, wow. That's incredible, that negative relief. Yeah, the higher relief. There's, you know, lots of interesting studies that have been done on Gobeckley-Tepe. Martin Sweatman, who I've talked about. he was presenting at the Cosmic Summit recently as well. I've talked with him on my, on my channel. He wrote a book called Prehistory Decoded, and he contends that Gobeckley-Tepe is something of a celestial calendar. He uses a method of statistical analysis that shows that it's extremely likely that's what it is. He's looking at the figures relating to, you know, procession and constellations in the sky, and that it, when looked at through his analysis, it seems

to mark, you know, interesting events that we know sort of happened, like periods like the Younger Dryas, because this site dates back to the Younger Dryas. And had there been, you know, this comet or these impacts or these fragments of things coming from the sky, that's probably something they would have noticed. He wrote a whole book on this. That's, it's a very interesting theory. He gets attacked pretty hard on the basis of it, I think, from a lot of people that don't really understand the nature of statistics and how that works. He actually wrote a, there's a peer-reviewed paper that you can read if you're interested in kind of diving into his research or his detail. There's other studies that have been done also that are interesting on the geometry of the site.

So there's not only do you have a number, you have these stone circles which the circles themselves, and this is true also at Karan-Tepa have alignment, interesting alignment. So they align to, you know, a lot of them may well have been used as solar observatories or potentially lunar observatories. So there's, you know, there's alignments on the site that point to significant periods like solstices, equinoxes, lunar events. But there's actually a geometric arrangement between the circles themselves at Gobeckley-Tepe. So they form like equilateral triangles, I think. There's, there's been some studies done that shows that it was a very deliberate layout plan of how these

stone circles were formed. So it's, it was fascinating. And not, you know, so Go-Bekly-Tepe was obviously a highlight, but what I didn't know on this trip, was the fact that, okay, I knew about Karahan-Tepa, so that's another site that's nearby. It's actually pretty close. There was a site that was very recently discovered. It's an active archaeological site now, I believe the University of Istanbul is excavating there. It's another stone circle site. It's similar architecture to Gobeckley-Tepa.

You have huge tea pillars, but it's something like 10 times larger than Gobeckley-Tepa. and they've only just sort of scratched the surface at Karahan. They're still digging and we had special permission to go in there and look around the site. And you can literally walk, look at these beautiful hills with flowers on them and just poking up everywhere are the tops of tea pillars. You just see this tiny little top of it and you can clearly see it's a teapillar

and there's something buried under here. And there might be as many as a thousand tea pillars on this site. It's at least five times or more, I think, larger than Gobeckli-Tepa. And it's at least 500 years older base. on the dating of material that they found so far, which it's kind of funny because when they built a visitor center at Gobeckley-Tepe, they called it like the zero point in history. This was the brand name that it gave you. You go in these big light shows and these, you know, big wall-to-wall sort of cinematic experiences

to look at the site. But it's like, well, I guess that makes Karahan-tepe zero point minus 500 or something like this. Wow. Right, it's even older. And I actually was out there like three, four times during the two weeks. a wonderful site. I could probably even pull up images if we want to see them, but it's, yeah, they're just starting to excavate. And you see a similar thing. In fact, at Karahan, there's evidence of domiciles. So this gets, one of the controversies about Gobeckley-Tepa

is, is this civilization, right? Because technically, if you go look at, and I guess this is more along the, I guess, the orthodox line of thinking, the date for civil. civilization hasn't really changed. We're still saying, well, six thousand years ago, you know, Samarians and Mesopotamia, that was the start. But when I look at a place like Gobeckley-Tepe or Karahun-Tepa, that screams civilization to me. The theory is, oh, it's purely ceremonial. You know, it was what happened. And this sort of came out with the Michael Shermer, Graham Hancock and Randall Carlson podcast on JRE. It's a well-known one. And I mean, they've essentially just changed the definition of hunter-gatherers to now not just be, well, no, this is not just, we're not just out hunter and gathering. But on the weekends, I guess, when the men want to get away from the women and the kids or something, they'd like to, you know, participate in a little bit of megalithic stone building and things like this. And, you know, building these 20-ton tea pillars. It's insane. But, you know, there's infrastructure on these sites.

They're massive. There's systems. There's quarries. There are other structures. At Karahan Tepe, there's actually evidence for domiciles and permanent housing, which is another indication of sort of settlement and civilization. And I just look at the scale and scope of what is on these sites. And it's like you, that's not something you do on the side. Like this is a, this requires specialization, right? So for people to be able to specialize in doing this type of

stonework, this type of, of a logistical endeavor, the artwork that's required. to carve these things, you need to have infrastructure around you that means there's other people collecting food, there's other people doing things. Like, it's that organization that essentially defines civilization. I think just the scale and scope of the work requires that. So I think it's kind of ridiculous that we don't consider this civilization. And the nail in the coffin for me, and this is something I learned on that trip, is that it's not only is there Karahan and Gobeckle-Tepi, but there's between 40 and 80 more sites that they've discovered just like that. around that area.

Around that area in southeastern Turkey, yeah. I mean, there's a lot of other well-known sites, Sogmatar and other places, but these tepeys and these tepillared stone circles, they're doing a lot of ground-prenestrinating radar and that type of thing. And they've discovered somewhere between 40 and 80, and I think they want to open up like 15 of them for tourism. And that's like, at that point, you know, it's a huge civilized. That's a, that's a, it requires a big population of people.

And it's civilization. I mean, it's like a lost chapter of human civilization that we really know nothing about. Like, we've got some artifacts and we've got some indication. But it's a, yeah, I mean, it's, to me, it's just a whole lost chapter of our history in this region. Who are the organizations involved in doing some of this ground penetrating radar and, like, discovering more of these sites? Well, a lot of it is happening locally with the universities in Turkey. Oh, okay. Istanbul. I mean, they're excavating, I believe it's the University of Istanbul.

is excavating at Karahan. Who was doing Gobeckley? Well, German Archaeological Institute was the one working at Gobeckley-Tepe. It's, you know, the way these projects get dealt out and the way that digs happen and sort of institutions get involved is no regular process. It's like a negotiation process, I assume. It's some academic institution somewhere in the world wants to go and dig somewhere and it's negotiation with the government to get the permissions.

And then they kind of get to, run the side and then it places like, like, Gebeckli-Tepe, when UNESCO gets involved, that's a whole other set of things. You see the same thing in Egypt. Like there's various, you have the British in one area, you have the French in another area,

you have the Germans in another area, you have the Egyptians themselves doing a lot of work in different areas. So it's a case-by-case basis almost about who actually does the work and then publishes. Certainly in Egypt, any publishing of findings has to be, done in close concert with the Department of Antiquities, formerly the Supreme Council of Antiquities. So you would, they essentially control the release of information. So people that have seen things

like the recent, you know, scan pyramids project and that sort of data when they found that new chamber in the, in the Great Pyramid and stuck a, you know, a like a little camera in there to take a look, that was all released by the Department of Antiquities in Egypt, in partnership with the that were actually doing the work. When did they find a new chamber in the Great Pyramid? Oh, you haven't? Well, it's been going on for a couple of years now. So there's been a, the scan pyramids project is what it's called.

They're essentially using muon cosmology. It's basically cosmic ray detection. So they put all these sensors and I've seen them a bunch of times because they, I've been into the pyramid over this period of time, several times. And down in the subterranean chamber, there's like a rack full of gear. And there's, you know, there's these boxes. up on the Grand Gallery and in the Queens Chamber, like the parts that you can't normally get to to the average tourists won't be able to get to.

You need to book a special permission to see. There's a lot of this infrastructure. And so what they're doing is there's these cosmic rays and muons in this case are passing through, you know, they pass through material. They pass through stone and everything like that. But there is sort of a very slight difference when they pass through material versus a void. So they put these detectors in there and they leave them for a couple of years and they've got them on the outside as well. So they're measuring it kind of from all these different angles.

And putting all that data together and crunching it has let them kind of put together a rough picture of where they think there are voids inside the pyramid. So these are like empty spaces. And one of them was a small empty space behind above the main entrance. So the main entrance is above where we go in today. So today when you visit the pyramid, you go up on that north side and and you enter in through what's known as El Mahmoon's Hole or Mamoon's Hole. It's supposedly been hammered by the Khalif Al Mahmoon, and he sort of hammered through the limestone superstructure of the pyramid, and he hit the junction between the ascending and descending passageway.

Okay. But up above that, and you can see that in those Chevron blocks. So the actual descending passageway actually goes all the way up to a doorway that's below those two triangle-shaped chevron blocks in that center-top picture. Yeah, that one. So there's a doorway there. That's considered the original main entrance to the pyramid. Now, this was all in antiquity still cased over.

So this wasn't visible. At some point, it was certainly opened in antiquity. Elma Moon wasn't the first one in there. But it's actually where the void is above that sort of behind those chevrons. There's a small chamber. And they either drilled a hole or they found a space where they could stick a little tube in and then put one of those, you know, little snake cameras in there and they had to look around. And sure enough, there's this space.

And it was a big, yeah, this scientist revealed hidden corridor. I mean, it's, this is this little chamber. And it's got these chevron blocks. It's like those chevron blocks keep going back into the superstructure of the pyramid. And it doesn't seem to go anywhere, but we don't know that because often these some of these passages would be blocked up. That was certainly the case with the, what, the ascending passageway that comes off, the descending passageway has these big granite plug plug plug. plug blocks in it.

But the really interesting part of this scan pyramids project is that they found a massive void in the pyramid. A really large void. Like this is a tiny little space that they've looked at. But if you've seen the layout of the pyramid in the area above the grand gallery, it's kind of above and I think a little bit to the right,

they've found indication for what is just a huge chamber. Now, it's something like 40 meters long. Which one is the grand gallery there? So it's that large angled, piece on the right. See, it's the one that's just to the right of the King's Chamber. It's the angled down like tall. Oh, I see it.

Okay, towards the top. Yeah, yeah. So it connects the ascending passageway is the passageway that goes down to, that kind of isn't to scale that picture. Right, okay. Not even, actually, I don't know, that's not the architecture for the pyramid. That's Pharaoh Osmosis. That's a completely sort of diff, yeah, that's not the actual pyramid.

Okay. That's like there's a lot of chambers that aren't there on that map. but it's it's it's it's a huge yeah that's probably a thick diagram yeah this is probably a little closer to reality um i probably have a picture too but there you go is it obvious to you when you go in the pyramids that these things were made for people to walk through no not at all it doesn't feel it all that way i actually think it i don't think they were made for humans put it that way and i don't think they were tombs either i don't they certainly i mean this is not a this would not have been an easy space to take some sort of formal procession of Pharaoh's body into these places. It's

ridiculously difficult to move around in them today and we've added steps and handrails. You know, it's a difficult exercise for anyone. Just the, you know, the passages are like three and a half feet high and feet square. So you do this pyramid crouch thing. They're on a, they're on a pretty steep angle going up and down. The longest passage is like 300 feet or something, the descending passageway that goes down to the subterranean chamber. And it's quite exercise getting out of there. And, you know, I can only imagine how difficult that might have been without the modern steps and handrails that we put in there to help people.

It's not an easy task at all. And then you get into spaces like the Grand Gallery. I mean, that thing looks, there's so many indications in there that that had some sort of function. It's outrageous. There's all these slots on the side of the walls. It's as if there was a mechanism moving up and down. I know there's architects and, and, and, and, and,

proposals that suggest this was a, like a, almost like a sliding lever room that they would use to haul blocks up and do things like this. I'm not convinced. Chris Dunn has his theories about that those slots might have been used to house like series of Heimholt's resonators that were part of this whole pyramid machine that he proposes. I'm interested in any functional take on it. I don't have one personally. I just, I get the indication from being in there that it feels like a machine, man. It feels like you're walking around in the guts of a of a machine. It's just what it feels like. It doesn't feel like it's meant for humans. You can see the stairs and the handrails on this, but this is the Grand Gallery. Oh, wow. It's like, how big is that? It's huge. It's probably about 40 meters long and, God, it must be four or five meters tall at the very, at the very top. It, it, you know, it steps up. It has that, it has that, that stepped, sort of it narrows as it goes taller. And along the edges of the walls, you have these, these slots. At the very bottom of it, you go straight, and that goes to the chamber known as the Queen's Chamber, and at the top you go straight through an antechamber, and then into the granite structure known as the King's Chamber.

So the void that they've found, however, is actually above this, and it's equivalent in size. So more or less equivalent. It's something like 40 metres long, four metres wide, and potentially four meters tall. they're not quite sure if it's angled or if it's straight but it's and they they kind of prove their they proved their their mechanism and their procedure with the first void like they they did their scans and they said there's probably a void right here and this one's right you know near them near the front entrance and sure enough they drill a hole in there they stick their little camera in there

and like there it is we've found this void so they've there's a very very high likelihood that there's a void there's an undiscovered chambers inside the great pyramid So who knows what that will reveal, and I very much hope that if it is explored or plumbed or they drill into it to take a look that it's data that's shared with everybody. Because it feels like this is, you know, everybody's history in this monument. Now, when you were at Go Becli-Tepi and Turkey and some of these other sites, Karahan Tepe, did you, are there any rocks or stones that show any of these machining marks that you found in Egypt? For all the time that we have been alive, the U.S. dollar has been the primary currency,

but that may not be the case for much longer. China is set to dethrone the dollar, and possibly much sooner than you think. And even the world's biggest economies are already ditching the dollar for the yen. Collapsing the U.S. currency, causing unprecedented inflation and crashing markets. And if that wasn't enough, this paves the way for the government to take total control over all of your money with a new digital dollar. Now is the time to take total control of your money and not let your life savings become a casualty of the currency wars, and you can do it using the only precious metal dealer that I trust, American Hartford Gold.

They will show you how to protect your savings and retirement accounts by diversifying your wealth portfolio into physical gold and silver. With the finest products, amazing customer service, and a buyback commitment. But you don't have to take my word for it. American Hartford Gold has a five-star rating from thousands of reviews and an A-plus from the Better Business Bureau. American Heart for Gold supports content like this that is committed to bringing you the truth. And if you tell them I sent you, they will give you $5,000 in free silver on your first order. So call them now. Click on the link in the description or call 855-679-1326.

That's 855-679-1326 or text Concrete, K-O-N-C-R-E-T-E to 655-3-2. Again, the phone number is 855-6-7-9-13-26, or text concrete to 655-3-2. Now back to the show. Not at those sites that I've seen, no. No, it's definitely, I mean, it's, it's, it's, it, you don't see, you don't see that the same sort of advanced, what I would term, the signs of advanced technology that you see in place like Egypt and Peru, for that matter, and in other areas, Balberg. But I didn't see that in, on these sites.

There's certainly some very significant achievements, but, but it is, it is, in my estimation, and all things that can be done with primitive methodologies. I mean, at Carahan-Tepa, there's still a stone that's in a quarry. It's a teapiller that's been cut out. It probably weighs around 30 tons. I mean, so that's doable. And there's flint everywhere. Like, that's the other thing.

You see little, when you're looking around on the ground, there's flint chips everywhere. I can probably pull up some pictures of it. Yeah, we would just, on the site, particularly at Carahan, you can find all of these chippings and like little like flint, either arrowheads or their pieces that have come off, you know, flint chisels or blades and it's all worked flint you can tell it's all been napped found dozens on them and just pick them up take a photo throw them down but yeah there's a big tepillar still in a quarry that's attached uh i mean it's it's a difficult thing to do but logistically sure you can move you know 30 ton loads um that said there are other sites in turkey that do i have not visited them

there i think there's one called i think it's a zanaki teppy it's kind of hard to say but it looks very much classical sort of megalithic matches the stuff in Egypt. I've seen photos of tube drills and other indications and it would take more investigation to see, well, is this specifically something that needs, you know, some sort of advanced tech to do? I'm pretty careful about specifically what I say is like, well, this can or can't be done, you know, with primitive methodologies. It's, you know, it's very specific signatures in stone, it's particular achievements, and it's, you know, things like precision that we've measured, not just eyeballed, stuff like that.

And, you know, I also classify like the massive logistical challenges over like, say, 250, 400, a thousand tons. I don't think we've answered the question or satisfied the statement that that can all be done with primitive methods. Like the, you know, I think you can do that. And people have demonstrated moving large loads up to 100, 150 tons, maybe even 200 tons. I don't know, but at some point there, to me, there's a line, I don't know if it's like 300 or 400. I mean, anything above, for sure, above 400 tons, I'm like, I'm really starting to question that this can be done with purely primitive methodologies, particularly those attributed to the dynastic Egyptians in this case.

Because, you know, the Romans could do all the things, but the Romans use pulleys and cap stands. And they had metal, they had steel, they had, they had a lot more capability than what we know, the dynasticians. Egyptians had. I mean, in the old kingdom. Exema is unpredictable. But you can flare less with ebbglys. A once-monthly treatment for moderate to severe eczema. After an initial four-month- or longer dosing phase, about four in ten people taking ebbglyse, achieved itch relief and clear or almost clear skin at 16 weeks. And most of those people maintain skin that's still more clear at one year with monthly dosing.

Ebglis, Librakezumab, LBKZ. A 250 milligram per 2-millimeter injection is a prescription medicine used to treat adults and children 12 years of age and older who weigh at least 88. pounds or 40 kilograms with moderate to severe eczema. Also called atopic dermatitis that is not well controlled with prescription therapies used on the skin or topicals or who cannot use topical therapies. Ebglis can be used with or without topical corticosteroids. Don't use if you're allergic to ebbglis. Allergic reactions can occur that can be severe.

Eye problems can occur. Tell your doctor if you have new or worsening eye problems. You should not receive a live vaccine when treated with Ebbglis. Before starting Ebbglis, tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection. Ask your doctor about Ebbglis. And visit ebbglis.com or call 1800 lily RX or 1. When you can't make it to your kids game, you don't have to miss it. With Game Changer, it feels like you're there watching your kids game live and crisp HD following every play in real time.

And replaying the moments you'll talk about later with automatic highlight reels. So even when you can't be at the game, your kids still knows you're on the sidelines cheering them on for every big moment. And Game Changer is always free to download. Live the game like Never BeFever. with Game Changer. And for a lot of that civilization, they had no use of the wheel. There's no evidence for pulle's use. They didn't use cap stands.

They didn't use force multipliers. They literally had like wooden levers, sleds, ropes, and human horsepower. There's no evidence they even used animals to haul stuff around. So that's very much a different challenge when you're talking about gigantic, you know, single piece objects that weigh a thousand tons or more, of which there is evidence for many. And in fact, I think there's evidence that stones of this size were even being removed from quarries prior to the pre-dynastic civilization. I think there's strong evidence for that at the Asmon Quarry. It's a new area of it that I.

When was the pre-dynastic? When was pre-dynastic? So the- Give us like the rough timeline. Well, here, I can actually show it to you. Okay, perfect. And Cleopatra was in the most recent. She was the last. She was the last, right?

And I think, I don't remember where I saw this, but Cleopatra is actually closer to us than to... Indeed. The building of the Great Pyramid. Yeah, so this here gives you an idea. So, you know, you're talking about a little earlier than 3,000 BC. So around 3,150 is more or less the date where you have Menez, the first pharaoh of the first dynasty. So like 5,000 years ago. Yeah.

Yeah, a little more, even. That was, so anything prior to that is what you would call pre-dynastic times. Okay. And there's a few cultures that we're so. with that, the NADC culture, several others. It's a very interesting time because we get a lot of very interesting artifacts that come from that time. Things like, you know, precision made stone vases, which we can talk about. Yeah.

But that's the early, it's what's known as the early period, the first couple of dynasties. You know, then, you know, sort of 2,700 BC or thereabouts. We get into what's known as the Old Kingdom. This is the famous period. I love studying this period, probably my favorite period. This is where the mega pyramids come in. This is the huge granite works of, you know, the valley temple, the sphinxes in here. All of this stuff happens in the old kingdom.

This is where mainstream archaeologists believe that this is when they believe the pyramids and the sinks were made. Yeah, they date this. So the pyramids are all dated to a reign of or a family. In fact, the people don't realize this. It's like the great, the stone pyramids, the massive stone pyramids, all of them. I mean, just in Giza alone, those three pyramids supposedly were built in a period less than 100 years together. Like with success, because you had, you had, this is the Orthodox time frame, you had Kufu, then you had his son, possibly his brother, I think.

Kaffray built the middle pyramid and then Menkara, who might have been his son. So you got these successive generations that apparently built these pyramids. And if you go back a little bit to include the other massive, massive stone pyramids that are attributed to one guy, Sneffero, who was the first pharaoh, I think, of the fourth dynasty. he has three pyramids he has the massive pyramid there's at my doom which is just a huge structure there's the bent pyramid which is i mean probably the best preserved at least the exterior structure is the bent pyramid the casing stones are all locked together and then most of them are still in place and then the red pyramid so the bent pyramid and the the red pyramid are at a place called dashor

and they're about the same size as the middle pyramid so very these are these are the same sort of achievement So if you take all of those stone pyramids, they were all supposedly built in just like a 150 year period according to the Orthodox timeline. It's kind of silly. And in Snefrew alone, I have a video on Snefrew. I mean, there's so many questions. Like they never found him. They didn't find any barriers. This is the same story, right?

No inscriptions, no burials, no remains in these pyramids. And why does a pharaoh need three pyramids? They kind of say, well, you know, he kind of stuffed up on the bent pyramid and he didn't get it right. It has this angle change to it, which was a mistake, which is complete nonsense. You don't make, you know, these things aren't made up as they go along. And then they go, well, it's, oh, then he did the red pyramid. He was probably buried in the red pyramid. It's like, what does he need three pyramids?

And if he did build all three pyramids, I did the math at one point. It's in the video. I think it was like over a 25 or even 40-year period. I think you had to have cut and installed more than 350 tons of stone every day for that entire period to build those three. That's finished. In 40 years. In 40 years, I think, something like that. You have the similar logistical challenges with the Great Pyramid, right? And in a period of 25 years, because you have to, this explanation for how these things were built is constrained by the fact that they have a rough idea of how long the kings they associate to them lived or ruled. And, of course, you want to build your pyramid while you're alive. You want to be buried in it. It's the next guy to come along,

may not finish that for you. He might take it off you. Who knows what, right? So they go for Kufu, for example, the Great Pyramid, roughly 25 years. The math works out with that thing with you know, two and a half million stones, uh, more or less making it up. And it's something like, you know, five to six million tons. Uh, it's one block quarried, cut, transported, dressed, finished, put in place, complete every five minutes, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. week, every day of the year. What's the average weight of those blocks? About two and a half tons.

With blocks ranging up to like 60, 70 plus tons, like the granite blocks in its core. A good example. I love this story. I use it in one of the videos that I have on looking at this sort of this absurd timeline of these pyramids. So in France, there's a well-in article. This was shown in the revelations of the pyramids

of a documentary made by a good friend of mine, Patrice Poyard. fantastic film. But there was a quarry in France. They dug a hole, basically. They quarried out of stone or something like this. It's a big pit, and it was roughly the same volume as the Great Pyramid of Geyser. And they used it, there's a big hole in the ground. And they're like, all right, well, we finished quarrying or we finished doing this.

So we just use this for a dump for, like, material, like rock or whatever from these building sites. So they would literally just dump truck, like dump trucks that just back up with this, you know, whatever, dirt digging material from other sites and just dump into it. 24 hours a day was just this one operation when all these construction projects they just drive trucks up and just dump into it. It took them 12 years to fill it by dumping it, dumping into it with modern dump trucks 24 hours a day all the time, 12 years just to fill that space. And you're trying to tell me that in 25 years you're building what is still one of the most precisely made structures on the planet in terms of alignment. The incredible precision that is exhibited in the stonework on the inside, the whole. the orientation of the entire structure you've got, and not included in that figure, by the way,

is not for nothing is the bedrock. I mean, you've probably got years of planning, right, just to survey it and plan and design this thing. Then they actually had to like level the bedrock and they had to get down to a point, they didn't level it entirely. There is a primordial mound sort of thing in the middle, which is another interesting fact that relates to a lot of other sites.

But it sits on tiles. There are foundation tiles around this. pyramid, some of them weighing 200 to 250 tons. A lot of people walk up and look at the pyramid, but make sure you look down at your feet. You're walking on something that was constructed before they ever laid the first stone down to build the pyramid. So all of that's probably taken years as well, and then you've got to go through this process of actually constructing the thing and finishing it because, you know, the inside,

they definitely use mortar and there's, you know, it's not a, you wouldn't call it like super precise most of the superstructure, but the exterior casing stones were incredibly well made, as was a lot of the structures on the inside, the whole massive granite structure that's in the centre that is the king's chamber is part of and is what is above it. There's like five or six chambers above it, all made out of granite. So yeah, all of this happens in the old kingdom. So you go from there, you have these intermediate periods. They're essentially periods when there's civil unrest or there's disconnection between upper and lower Egypt. It's something happens to disrupt to the kind of the unity of Egypt.

The Middle Kingdom runs from dynasties 11 to 14. Another intermediate period. The new kingdom, that's a relatively famous period. You have guys like Ramsey's the second. You know, Marin Patar, Sedi the First, notorious pharaohs. And this is actually an age of great power for the dynastic Egyptian civilization. They were very rich, very powerful during this period. Another third intermediate pyramid period.

You have a late period. then you have what's called the Ptolemaic period, which is essentially the Greek Roman period. And then the civilization, as we know, it comes to an end with Cleopatra, who famously commit suicide around 30 BCE. So, yeah, that statement that she's closer to us than to the building of the Great Pyramas is true. Like it's, you know, it's what, just under 2,000 years since Cleopatra killed herself, but you have to go back, you know, two and a half plus like 2,700 years almost to the building of the pyramids. to the official building and that's yeah the official date of the pyramid right which we people have speculated

you've speculated that it's been a lot it was a lot earlier than that right yeah I would question the dating of the pyramids I think I mean it's a difficult thing to to say purely because I'm

you're looking at the skeletal remains of something that's probably been worked on and and renovated and reused and just just I mean I'm sure the dynastic Egyptians were working on these things they did things to them they used them they became part of their culture I my my problem with the pyramid particularly the great pyramid because that's the one we've studied the most but actually most of them

obviously you have the logistical issues with the timeline that I that I talked about I think these were multi-generational projects they must have to be we've got tons of examples of that type of thing in our own time how long it takes us to build you know the Panama canal or these giant projects they're infrastructure projects. They take a long time. The problem I have with them is the precision and the knowledge that's encoded in them. I think any honest analysis of the pyramids

leaves you in a position where you have no choice but to reevaluate and rewrite history. You either end up if you go, okay, the dynastic Egyptians build them, right? Fine. In that case, they had far more capability and far more knowledge than we than we could then we've ever attributed to them, right? I think I've talked before about the fact that you have the dimensions of the earth encoded into the pyramid, right? It's essentially a scale model

of the northern hemisphere. There's, there seems to be specific information about the fact that the earth's an oblate spheroid, that it's, it's longer around the equatorial circumference than it is the pole circumference. Right. This, the grid of latitude and longitude, like that ratio of the fact that we're, you know, we're slightly, slightly longer east to west than we are north to south, that ratio. If you knock it out on like a grid of latitude and longitude, they're squares, they're not really squares, they're rectangular. Because the way the earth's shape, the latitude lines are shorter than the longitude line. So if you take a square unit basically out of the earth starting at the equator, it would be wider than it is tall. And if you scale it down, it is like

within inches the exact the exact size. Yeah, I have it here. Let me grab it here. Pyramid stuff. It's actually called. This is it here. So it's so it kind of

starts here. This is where that ratio is encoded. It's in something called the Soccal. Yes. Which is essentially a cubit high. It's like a little, think of it as like a little platform the pyramid sits on, which gives you two ways to measure its perimeter, right? measure the perimeter based on the perimeter of the socle or the perimeter of the actual

pyramid. And then, so this is your, this is exactly what you were talking about. So one quarter of one minute of latitude at the equator on the earth is 3,022.9 feet. A quarter of a minute of longitude is slightly longer at 30, 43.5 feet. And then so the perimeter length of the pyramid without the circle is 30 point, it's like, what, point two of a foot off. And this is point one of a foot off being exactly that same ratio. So you have latitude and longitude. You have the dimensionality of the planet, this, which is we, again,

Randall mentioned this the other day. We didn't really get a good, an accurate understanding of that until we had satellite surveys and we did space observations in the 1980s, and it turns out, because we had a much different idea of this before that time,

and the more accurate we became, the closer we got to the pyramid number. You know what I'm saying? Like we've started to learn actually the pyramid very accurately encodes this data. You know, you have some other things on the pyramid. Like it has that ratio of 4322. This is one of those cosmically significant numbers. It's in that pantheon of very interesting astronomical numbers.

And it's at a scale of 45,200, it essentially replicates the Earth. You multiply the height of the Great Pyramid by 43,200. You get the polar radius of the Earth. You multiply the base perimeter of it by 42,200. you get the equatoral circumference of the earth. This was coming up a lot yesterday with Randall and he was explaining this plasmoid generator type thing and how the dimensions of the tubes

and the sphere and the thunderbolt generator are, it starts at four inches, then it goes to three, then it goes to two. That is used throughout that whole mechanism, which is... Yeah, there's a lot of these numbers tend to repeat in lots of different ways, and Randall's a complete master at showing it all. But that's...

So that's why I say that I think, and you know other people have argued that the speed of lights encoded in it and there's obviously all this precision stonework in the pyramid so you know and it's a logistical achievement like no other that wasn't equaled until relatively modern times i mean so i think under either case so either the dynastic Egyptians built it or they didn't right so you have to it's either one or the other but if you if you go with they did then we need to reevaluate and rewrite history based on what it means and what information they have and their capabilities and we've got to we vastly underestimated the dynastic egyptians they were far more capable and they where do they get this data from and how

did they know it like that's a rewrite of history and if they didn't make it like they for sure worked on it but if there was something else here and this inspired them then that's something that's another picture like who did then like so that's that's where you get to this concept of inheritance and I and this is why I'm a supporter of the lost ancient civilization. hypothesis is that I think the vast majority of evidence favors that answer. I just think there is so much evidence of renovation and reuse and imitation. I think it's like I'd look at Dynastic Egypt and I think this idea of them being basically a giant cargo cult, the world's most advanced cargo cult, makes a lot of sense because you've got to imagine the other problem with the pyramids

is that these are the first pyramids that were ever made. They're like, that's at the very pointy end. The first ones were the best ones. The first ones were the best ones. Yeah, you can, the step pyramids another story. I think that is dynastic. But then immediately after the step pyramid, you have these mighty, gigantic stone pyramids that were supposedly constructed. But they kept making pyramids after that. I mean, take a look at this. Like so, you know, it's, to me, it's why I get this term, a tale of two industries. You have the earliest pyramids of these giant stone structures that are still standing today. They kept building pyramids right through the middle kingdom, but they were making them from mud brick, and they were much smaller,

and they were much less sophisticated. And they're today eroding away slowly because they were, this is how they were made. It's like this technology just disappeared if they had it, and then they were trying to imitate these other pieces of these other works with mud bricks. And in fact, this is also supported, this primitive methodology is supported by scenes on the wall. Like, there is a scene of pyramid building, like, but it's mud bricks. It's literally, it's in the Tomb of the Nobles on the West Bank of the Nine. How did they make the mud bricks? Well, they'd put together these mud.

They'd bake them in the sun or they might have baked them in ovens and they'd make these big mud bricks. And then they'd transport them to, you know, it's like straw or hay and mud and you, you know, you bake it and you stick it in a mold and you cook it. Geopolymer people, it's probably what it is. It's a form of geopuloma. And then they'd stack them up and they'd build it that way. And it's a process that continues to this day people doing stuff that way. But that's how they built them. And so what's interesting to me is.

is that this concept that, you know, there's an advanced version of a particular thing. Pyramids is one of them and a primitive version of a particular thing that matches the tools and techniques that we know about, right? We know that they were relatively primitive. They didn't use the wheel. They used manpower. They used primitive tools like flint chisels and pounding stones and, you know, wooden implements for this sort of stuff.

And there's scenes on the wall that support it, right? say we have they showed us how they did it that that exact set of circumstances exists not only for pyramids but it exists for for vases for columns for boxes for slabs there's an advanced and then there's a primitive version of that and i've been slowly trying to document that in detail over the last couple of years and look at each category of these and say okay so what matches what they the tools that we know they could use and the techniques that we know that they used and the stuff they drew on the walls that showed us how they did it versus the same stuff that isn't explainable via those mechanisms.

And so that's why I think there's, when you look at these advanced things and you look at what the dynastic Egyptians were doing and you look at their own history and what they say about their past, all of a sudden this idea of inheritance, you know, and a longer timeline, the fact that maybe they got a kickstart, you know, when they finally came out of that, that that neolithic or mesolithic stone age and they began civilized, they had enough people and they could organize and they started, they might have started with all of these artifacts and objects. And that's actually what they say too. Like they trace their own history back some 36,000 years. Like their origin stories with the time of Zeptepe, when the gods walk to the earth, they talk

about the time of the Shemsu Ho, these mythical, you know, demi-godlike people with magical powers, all of these rulers. They have a Kingslist that goes back nearly, like I said, over 36,000 years, I think. And then it gets to the dynastic civilization at the end. Who came up with the Kingslist? Well, there's a couple different sources. There was an Egyptian priest called Meneas that talked about it. Probably the primary source for that is something called the Turin Papyrus. There's also a Samarian Kingslist that's different. It goes like back 400,000 years or something. But there's a Turin papyrus, which is where this is written. And it's actually, I think it's even in Turin. But it's, yeah, they deciphered it on the back of a

on the back of a piece of parchment. So it's, it was, we're lucky we've got that much of it because it was, it's quite a long story about how that thing came to be.

It was falling apart and they managed to put most of it back together. But there's a couple different sources for that Kings list. You know, and not only that, they have cataclysm origin stories. Like they,

they're, the story of Atlantis comes to us from Egypt. That's entirely, the source for that is all in Egypt. Oh, really? Yeah. I mean, that,

well, that's where so, so, Plato in roughly two or three hundred BC or thereabouts. He talks about it in the Temaeus and Critias Dialogues. That's how we get the story. That's probably the best account we have of Atlantis that comes from his ancestor Solon, who lived around 600 BC.

And he tells the story of when he was in Egypt at a temple up in the Delta. This temple doesn't exist anymore, but it was a priest, an Egyptian priest, at one of these structures at this temple in the Delta that told him the story of Atlantis and said this happened 9,000 years ago, which, So Solon's 600 BC, 9,600 BC, 11,600 years ago. That's the end of the Younger Dryas. It locks right in with meltwater pulse 1B when we know the sea levels rose. So this is the correlation.

I think Graham Hancock made it. I don't know if he was the only one or he was the first. I'm not sure who, but this relates to Atlantis. And it comes from Egypt. And not only that, but it's also written on the walls of the Edfu Temple, the primeval DiGiba story. It doesn't specifically say Atlantis, but it tells a story with Toth, who it's one of the few sort of Toth passages. I've got photographs of it actually.

And they talk about the primeval land being an island that sank. And then they had to go to the homeland and build these primeval mounds that was where all the temples would be. And beneath these pyramids and a lot of these other structures, you have primeval mounds. So there's a lot of correlation to this concept of a lost civilization, call it at last. Landis call it whatever you want. But that's why I think all of this evidence makes sense. So, you know, the Egyptians are connected to it. We've got the evidence of the artifacts for it. And then I think you're also with the Egyptian iconography, you're looking at that as well. Because I do believe there is plenty of evidence that suggests a lot of these statues, not a lot, but certainly several of them.

And certainly the very large ones were required significant. technology and will beyond the capabilities of what we know about the dynastic Egyptians. So when I make the case for symmetry and precision in these statues, it's a question I sometimes get. It's like, well, how come, if you think these statues are so old, how come they look like Egyptians or dynastic Egyptians? And I think it's the other way around. I really do. I think the dynastic Egyptians modeled themselves and their culture after that, after the stuff

they inherited. It's that classic iconography of what we look at and we go, that's a pharaoh. You know, that's, if you had inherited that, there's the poem, Ossimandius, is it Percy Shelley, who wrote it, it talks about a story of a desert traveler who comes, who comes across these two vast and trunkless legs of stone standing in the desert. And nearby, he sees a giant visage that's half buried with a sneer of cold command. Like, you imagine coming along in a desert and seeing these legs and the head of this statue that was probably 1,200 tons and 90 feet tall, just broken down and it's looking at you.

And you're like, what the hell is this? I mean, if you had inherited this iconography, you would, and particularly if your culture was connected to it, like the Egyptians say they were, these are your gods, man. Like, these are your gods. And one thing that doesn't really change is, is in the actual tombs, so with all the beautiful artwork, and you see how the pharaohs depict themselves, that iconography of what they look like doesn't really change over the whole civilization. It's pretty similar. And they always depict themselves as being amongst the gods.

Pharaohs were considered god kings, right? So it's, and then generation after generation after generation, they get more powerful and more arrogant and the hubris of it. So they would, they would start to believe it, I guess, will start to claim these statues. Now, this is me, I'm going to write my name on this statue. I'm going to carve my name into it. And then, you know, this is kind of what happens. These artifacts and this, the iconography becomes part of that culture.

And it exists for 3,000 years. It becomes tightly integrated into it. These places probably became ceremonial places. So whether or not places like Giza or Sakara had a functional purpose, Abusia, for that matter, potentially had a functional purpose that had something. to do with an advanced civilization. I think that's a possibility. I think it's worth investigating. But they would have become ceremonial because the dynastic Egyptians might have had a cultural memory of it, but they had no ability to do anything with it. So it becomes ceremonial. And

again, you can make it a correlation of that. So imagine the younger drys happens tomorrow. You know, touch wood, it doesn't. But if it happens tomorrow within a couple generations, wipes out our civilization within a couple generations. I mean, we're going to be dancing around campfires like with black pieces of stone that look like a cell phone like trying to like oh yeah if we dance around the right way around this fire this black piece of stone is going to

tell me everything it's it's going to be able to talk to my ancestors I can do I can get all the data like the technology of yesterday becomes the myth and legend and magic and you try to capture it through ceremony I mean it's plasma TVs are a story you tell around a fire at some point right right so

long winded explanation for how I I think it's a, I think it's a, I think, I do think it's a viable lens with through which to try and view our past. Like, in particularly places like Egypt. I think there's a longer time frame involved here. And then going back to some of the inscriptions that are made on some of the stuff, like on, especially on the boxes that are inside the pyramids. Yeah. It's, it's very clear that the, um, the hieroglyphs that are carved into those things are much newer than the actual boxes themselves. And the boxes are perfect, precision, the lines are straight, the angles are perfect.

And then you have these sort of roughly cut, roughly chiseled hieroglyphics or, you know, it looks like they've been vandalized by a much later civilization. Yeah, that's exactly what I think's happened in a few cases. And, you know, here's an example. Like this is a great example. Yeah, use of an eye in the Serapium with these, which is a site with, you know, these 100 tonne thereabouts. giant granite boxes, 24 of them, they're about housed in these underground galleries. Wonderful, wonderful site. But, you know, these boxes, yeah, I mean, I've got, I've looked at them in great detail. A number of them are pretty perfect. Like, they've got 90 degree corners,

the flat surfaces, there's straight lines, all these things. You know, I love this image of it because, and another, another thing to point out is it's not the high relief. Yeah, it's carved in. It's carved in, yeah. Although the Egyptians did do high relief carving eventually. And they, and they did good carving as well, but this is a good demonstration of kind of the point that you're making and that I absolutely agree with is, you know, I love this image because on the corner, it's tough to see with the light there, but on that corner on the right-hand side, you can see it's actually reflecting the light from the hallway in the stone. Like it's... It's so smooth. It's what's smooth, and it's polished, and this isn't a natural property

of granite, right? You've got to work pretty hard to get a mirror finish on it. And then, you know, obviously the people who make it, they can make straight lines, they can make clean corners, but when you get to look at the writing, it's, you know, there's no straight lines. It's obviously the work of some dude with a chisel and a hammer. If you made this box, why would you put this on it? Yeah, if you were the maker of the box, you'd be pissed. Yes. You would be upset.

So to me, it's like, it's two different technologies, right? So the technology used to make the writing is primitive. It's totally achievable with hand tools. You can knock this out with a hammer and chisdell. drizzle on the granite. And in places it's even, the granite's too smooth where it's skipped over. There's no straight lines. And this is, this illustrates one of the issues with a lot of modern or contemporary sort of Egyptology, which is that the writing is the bedrock of Egyptology. Once we, once we translated hieroglyphs that, you know, the Rosetta Stone and we were able to sort

of start to translate. And that's been a huge science. It's wonderful, actually. it becomes the bedrock of how we date and relate objects and artifacts because it's it's whatever was written on them is it's not the only way but whatever's written on these things becomes the primary methodology for how we date them so if it is written on them so you have the name of a guy on an on an artifact it's just like well well the inference is therefore that he probably had this thing made for him and he and therefore he might have even made the whole site it's and you know it's not the only method that's used, but it is a primary one. It's probably the first one they'd go to for dating stuff. And what's interesting even on this box here is one of the other

issues with this idea is that you actually have an empty shenring on this box or a cartouche, which doesn't have a name in it. So it's all carved up, and there's an empty shenring in here, and all you have to do is imagine that there's the name of a pharaoh in this shenring. And then the history books would say that it was this guy that made this box and probably this whole site, And that's how the whole story, that's what ends up in a history textbook. Yeah. But it's empty. And we don't know who, whose name was going in here.

I suspect it was whoever was going to pay the priests that ran the place the most. Because this box was probably being sold for dedication. Right. This is the priest around this site. We know they were dedicated all over the Serapium. There's, you know, there's little indentations on the walls that have, you know, there were these little limestone or granite steleys that you would put in there and dedicate and have a dedication to yourself. and this was being,

a service is being sold by the priests that were running the place. Like, right, it's one of the issues with it. And, you know, it goes further. Once you start to see this dichotomy between,

of technology between the artifacts themselves and, you know, and the, and the writing, you start to see it in a lot of places. And this is a great example of, like, the show people.

Yeah, it's a hick-soph sphinx, but you can see that the ribs are kind of being shown up by the, just the light almost is being used to, the reflection to show that the rib line on this thing. But then you take, take a close look at the hieroglyphs and they're just crudely fizzled. Like it's, you know, you see the hammer marks. You see the fact that it's, it's done by hand. And here's another key indicator for

me, the hieroglyphs are never polished, right? So the rest of the stone is polished. And there's obviously, it's not all flat surfaces and easy polishing. There's lots of interesting and tight sort of parts of the stonework that were polished, but the hieroglyphs are never polished. So, you know, For example, if you look at some of these incredible statues that come from the old kingdom, you know, you have the top of the chest, the clavicle here is all beautifully done. You have the fingernails, the cuticles, the insides of the fingernails. All of that stoneworks polished, right? This isn't flat surfaces.

So they were capable of polishing stone. Whoever built this statue could polish stone in whatever form they wanted to. There's dust all over this statue, but it is polished. And, you know, you get these beautiful examples of knees. Like this is one of the best knees in strut. I mean, this is granodirite, not for nothing. But incredible musculature and bone structure. Granite?

Granite. Granite. How hard is that stone? Slightly harder than granite. Somewhere it's like a mixture between granite and diarite. And what is the hardest stone on earth? Diamond. And diarites, how far?

Dirate's like a seven and a half. So diamonds are ten on the most scale of hardness. You know, things like hard and steel might be a 6.5. And granite and granite can be a seven. 6.5 to a 7, some of diarite and Flint and some of the other harder stones, you know, either porphyry or dollarite can go up to like 7 and a half, 8. Okay. sculpture's done in marble these days.

So the Statue of David, is that marble? Yeah. Okay. Yeah, marble. It's much, much, much softer than this stuff. Like, incredibly, yeah, if you're a modern sculptor, you ain't working in granite just because, like, it's not a good choice. Like, you're going to burn your tools out.

It's going to be a nightmare. Right. Modern sculptors will know this. But, you know, the point is, is that, again, even with decent hieroglyphs like this, you know, it's not polished, right? Even in the good hieroglyphs that are on the side of this statue, like, there's the interior of the bird, not polished. The shen ring around that the king's cartouche there, not straight and not polished.

The lotus flower motif below it is polished. So it's like when this is a different, this was done with a different technology, potentially done it at an entirely different time. So it's difficult to say then that the writing is how we can date and relate this artifact into the story of history. It's entirely possible that this was inherited. We don't know how old it is and then somebody wrote their name on it later

and claimed it. And in fact, we have evidence of that very thing. In fact, here's one more good example of the polish. I like this shot because it shows you the polished stone and then you can see the chiselmarks. This is all these hieroglyphs. They're good, but they're all done by hand. And we know that the practice of writings

of somebody usurping an artifact, Ramsey's Flyndes, the Great Usurper, is one of the people, about him as one of the most powerful kings of ancient Egypt. But he was notorious for writing his name on stuff. This is an example here I can show you real quick. It's like

that's the cartouche of Ramsey's the second right here. This big guy here it's carved in very deeply into, and I actually love this photograph, he's carved it deeply into what is a reused section of an obelisk, but look closely at the end here. Oh yeah, the bird?

He's carving over the top of a pre-existing inscription. So you can see it here where he's blending in. They got quite good at writing over the top and blending in his stuff into a pre-existing inscription. Oh, wow. And, I mean, there's artifacts with two or three or four even different pharaoh's names on them.

And Ramsey's became notorious. He would carve his stuff really deeply because he didn't want other people doing to him that he would, what he was doing to others. But, you know, what I love about this particular picture is you're actually looking at two or three different reuses of a particular artifact, right? So this piece of stone was originally probably part of an obelisk, right?

It's a broken piece of an obelisk. They had a place called Tannis, which literally was forested with obelisks and columns. And if you've seen obelisks, the ones that have writing on them, the writing's vertical, right? It's not horizontal. It's vertical. Yes, when the obelisk is standing up. So this is an original writing. So not only did this obelisk break.

This thing was originally standing up vertically. Yeah, it's a piece of an obelisk, most likely. Yeah. And so it was re, and they were reused. There's even like these walls that they built in the, at Tannis, I mean, there's a foot from a thousand tonne statue that's been repurposed into a block in a wall. So they were reusing broken pieces of stones in walls. So not only did they, they reused it once as a block in a wall. Then someone wrote something on it the first time.

And then later on, who knows how long later, Ramsey's the second comes along and writes over it again. So this thing's been inherited, renovated and reused like. two or three different times. And it's written on horizontally. And all the vertical obelics are written on vertically. The ones that have writing on them, yes. So it's hard to say, how can you take this cartouche and say, well, Ramsey's had this block of stone quarried and shipped to the side and, you know,

we don't know that. You can't date the stoneworks. It's a great example of inheritance and reuse. What are the people saying that push back against this? Looking to see what's happening around your home? Ring's battery doorbell helps you track packages and see who's at your door in real time. The outdoor cam plus protects your yard at night with a wide field of view and clear a retinal 2K video. Or upgrade to 4K cameras and doorbells with retinal vision for ultra clear zoom in detail.

Your door, your yard, your home. With Ring, it's protected. Shop cameras, doorbells, and more at ring.com now. It's football season, baby, and you know what time it is. Time to gamble all that hard-earned money on some sports. As a better, you demand professional. And that's where MyBooky delivers. NFL, college football, and a brand new cash out system

give you the options to bet and win all season long. First two legs of your parley already hit. You can cash it out early and place another bet or sweat it out and let it ride for a chance at an even bigger payday. Join the MyBooky family for an entire season filled with daily odds boosts, same-day parles and super contests. And this season, MyBooky has a no strings attached cash bonus that lets you deposit and withdraw quick.

Use the promo code DJP on a deposit of 50. or more and you can receive up to $200 cash instantly into your MyBooky account. Bet your deposit amount once and you're ready to withdraw at any time. Again, that's promo code DJP to claim your cash deposit bonus. You can bet anything, anytime, anywhere, only with MyBooky. Like, how do they defend this when confronted with some of the stuff? Well, I mean, with the inheritance, I mean, the reuse of stuff, it's not really defended.

It's not, I mean, it's not like trumpeted as a, as a common thing, but it's, it's acknowledged that, yeah, Ramsey's would reuse stuff, but it's, it's kind of a weird, it's only in certain cases where they have very specific, oh, okay, we've got three names of rulers on this artifact, so therefore this is probably older, he might have, he might have renovated this, but they don't, yeah, they don't, they don't, they don't, they don't really acknowledge it as a possibility for a lot of the stuff. And I think it, it is, even the statues, like there's the big statues, like there's the big statues. that Luxor have the names of two or three different pharaohs on some of them. They just don't, I mean, one of the problems with, I mean, I hate to use the term, but just like mainstream or orthodox Egyptology is that they don't really consider the engineering aspects of the stonework. They don't care about precision or symmetry. They don't care about, you know, the vase scan work, for example, that we've been doing. It's not, it's not really factoring into the decision making, you know, they look. at who's written on it, they look at what scenes are on the wall, they look at the other data

they can do to support and say, well, that's where it is. I, you know, I genuinely don't, don't know how they think about this. I mean, for sure, they, they probably point to the fact, well, you know, you get the same sort of questions, like, where are the tools and, you know, where's, where's all the structures and all that stuff? I think, I think we're looking at some of the structures. I think we're looking at, but we're looking through the lens of, of thousands and thousands of years of renovation, reuse, remodeling, and then thousands and thousands of years of destruction and quarrying. And, you know, it's a really difficult picture to put together, particularly in Egypt, because it's, you know, people, even within their own civilization, they were reusing stuff.

But who knows when it started, but they kept reusing and rebuilding and changing the sites. And then for thousands and thousands of years after, they've been used as quarries for stone. People take the stone and they chop it up and they, it's all a great source for granted. you know even even during the egyptian civilization this was happening ramses the second was quarrying granite from the middle pyramid at geiza to go used in some of his other structures that like lished in a couple of other places and it's written on the wall at the pyramid is like i'm the quarry master for ramses the second and we were taking the stone from here because he's the boss you know what what was the original stone that was that was casing like the very outer shell of the pyramids it was like a

very well shiny stone yeah so it depends there's the great people pyramid and most of the middle pyramid was something called Tura limestone. Okay. Yeah. In fact, there's, you know, Mount Nemrut in Turkey is also made from Tura. It's a very hard form of limestone. And yeah, it's very white and pure. So that's a, it's not a local stone.

They had to get it from a quarry a distance away. And who stripped all that off? Well, a lot of it was probably done during the, started really with the Persian occupation. But everybody. Right. Anyone that could. It wasn't in, so the pyramid, the story goes, is that there was a, you know, the pyramid had its casing stones. And they're all, they're locked.

Like you couldn't get a bar in there to pry. And they're huge. You know, they're like three, four. Some of the casing stones are bigger than the other blocks. So that might, some of those might have been four or five tons. Funnily enough, the middle pyramid actually has giant blocks in its construction, too, even on the outside, like 50, 60 ton blocks. But the story goes that it was, I think there was an earthquake and I'm probably going to get the date wrong. The 400-ish

AD there was a big earthquake. It might have been even earlier than that. But it shook loose a couple of these casing stones. So it either tilted them or it busted one out and a big shake-up and some stuff fell off. And then that gave people purchase to like scaffold their way up there and scurry up there and then start prying these things out and then just like... Letting them fall. Letting them fall.

Jesus. And then it went from there. And, you know, it's a valuable stone. It's obviously useful. for all sorts of purposes, but one of its main purposes was you could grind it up and make like a plaster out of it. You grind it up, mix it with water, and you make a fine plaster that you can plaster over things and carve into. And I mean, literally the only reason we have a few casing stones still left on the pyramid is because of the piles of quarry rubble. Like there was 50, 60 feet of quarry rubble pushed up against the base of the pyramid from all of the quarrying activity that covered up the few.

remaining casing stones that were still at the bottom. Yeah, Flinders Petrie always decried this and he was always admonishing people for this because he'd said it's literally it was, and this is literally like 100 to 130, 40 years ago at all of these places. He said, does everyone who's anybody has a headstone made from the stuff, like the stone from the pyramid? And every day there's just camel trains and camel trains of people taking stone all the time and he dug he actually excavated through the rubble he found the casing stones he documented them and then he re-buried him he's like if i leave this open it's gonna be gone no no no question so he reburied it and it's like they'll have to work to get to that so yeah i mean it's just people don't

care most most people just interested in enriching themselves they're not that worried about taking the stone but it's it's human it's a human nature thing um but you get to you know the middle pyramid the bottom two courses, maybe the first, maybe also the second, for sure the first, was cased in granite. Like literally all of those casing stones

were granite. The bottom layers, like the bottom two layers. It's really cool. In fact, I have a, I probably have a picture of it. Yeah,

so this is the bottom pyramid here. So these casing stones are like the same shape as, as the ones on the other pyramid, but these are granite. And they're huge. And they're perfect.

If you walk around the middle pyramid, It's littered with these amazing casing stones. And you see this dashed line that's in this? That's an attempt to quarry it. In fact, they were looking to split this whole face off it and get to this square block behind it. So this is, you see this everywhere on these sites. And people like, what are those dashed lines? It's quarrying.

It's called a wedge and chisel. So you'd hammer it. You'd use like steel chisels. You'd just hammer away at it. You'd create these witts. And then you'd get wood or something. or you can sometimes use stone too, like flint. But wood was good because you'd pound wood into it,

and then you'd wet it, and when wood gets wet, it swells. So it would provide pressure on the stone, and then you would get a lot of these flint chisels or steel chisleons and just hammer into these gaps. And what you're trying to do is crack the stone along that line and take a piece. And, yeah, I mean, these things were perfect. You know, these these casing stones were perfect with their angle,

and they're all polished on these. outside and there's tons of it just from quarry rubble talking about the boxes i was it's funny i was reading um i was reading chris's book this morning this is his first one the geese death star or the geese power plant and uh he was saying how he interviewed one of the or he talked to um like the guy who ran the biggest granite manufacturing company in the u.s and he asked them what it would take what the resources would be to reproduce one of those massive granite blocks that were basically hollowed out on the inside. And the guy, the guy said it would take at least $2,000 just to quarry it. Not more than. It was 200,000.

That's what I meant, $200,000. Yeah, $200,000 just to quarry it. Another like $50,000 to transport it. Easy. And then he was like, it would make no sense for us to hollow it out, hollow out a single piece. We would just take four or five pieces and we would bolt them all together. That's right. He's like, we would never just hollow it out. They couldn't. Well, you'd need to develop the tool. Like modern granite processing, we can, we cut slabs, you know. Right, right. Quarry amount of the quarry in like big blocks and then we cut them into slabs for kitchen counters or what other use. You know, when you talk about doing granite sculpture, which happens, people do do like complex shapes in granite. It takes very specific tools. And man, yeah, hollowing out a single piece of granite like that would cost a bomb in the tooling to make that happen.

you burn out half your tools trying to do. That's a big volume of space. But yeah, that's... And remember these prices are like... I mean, Wendy write that book, the 90s. I mean... Right. You know?

So that's... Prices probably double that easy since then to do this. And then the saw cuts, too. Like the saw cuts, then the errors in the saw cuts. Like, if you take a skill saw and you're trying to cut something and you go into it and you realize, oh, you got the angle wrong. You pull it out real quick, and then you go back in and make another cut. There's evidence for.

for this. Yeah. But if you're doing it slowly with whatever methods they have, they claim they had to cut those stones, you wouldn't be going the wrong way, then pull back out and then start going the right way. You would obviously be going so slow that you would be able to make adjustments along the way. That's right. And there's plenty of evidence for overcuts and exactly that type of thing is one of the reasons why I think, look, we're seeing evidence for call them power tools, call them just powerful tools that were cutting incredibly hard stuff. and that's that's that's that's one of the best i have uh we can look at some of those images if you like of tooling i mean you know not just just cuts you see these cuts all over the

place when i don't know if this is this is all broken up stone now but you know there's these these these types of things you see all over it at um at uh this is on the basalt pavement but one of the one of my favorite ones is actually i really like the edge of this thing it's a slab um at um at uh at um abucia it's this beautiful beautiful slab. And if you look along the edge, it's been like just finally touched with some sort of powerful tool that's sort of been backed out. It's got, you know, this thing's got markings all over. You have these giant circular sore depressions here and here. God Lord. You know, you can look at how many times this thing's been touched on.

What is this made of? You know, this is, I think it's schist. I think it's schist. Or it's blue quartzite maybe. It's a very unique piece. I'm amazed it's still there because a couple people could probably move it. And it's just a remarkable piece of stone. Let's see where else you got. So, Jusus pointing out the big circular surreintation. All the colors come out of it when you wet it.

We usually wet this one and show people. And it was actually, so it was cut right through here at the end and then snapped off. You can see that on the end here. Cut straight through. You know, here's some other looks at the circular saw marks on this thing. Absolutely amazing tooling marks in this. Perfectly straight. Yeah, and you have, let me look.

I think it's in statues. I want to show you the overcuts. Yeah, I mean, you have stuff like this, right? So this is at Karnak Temple. I just did a video on this. This is in an obelisk, and you literally have circular saw overcuts. And you see them on statues too, but you can literally see on this one here where it was exactly what you were talking about. Oh, yeah, you see right there, yeah.

It was reset, like the angle of the cut was reset. Yep. And it was some sort of giant circular saw because they start narrow. You know, they start here and they penetrate and they get deeper. And then they peter out at the bottom. The profile fits a big circular saw And in fact, there's some more of these at Karnak And I do this in the video

But I've plumbed them with like a keycard Where you can show the depth increase You show the profile of a circular sawcut Oh really? Yeah, I mean it's So the depth, the depth varies From the middle being the deepest And it gets shallower towards the ends

Yeah, I mean this is a classic Example of a circular sawcut You see this here, right? I mean, it's just it's hard to they had straight soles too I should say that it's not all circular saw

there was absolutely straight source too this piece is very interesting this is at a place called Abbey Rwash if Chris Dunn does talk about this in his book a lot of people

have talked about this I think even maybe Petrie talked about it but you see how it's you clearly can see the orientation of the saw right? Here's the crazy thing

to think about this piece it's concave it's see this line in the center here you can actually see it here see this kerf Yes. So it's shaped like this.

It's concave. So it's cut this way and it seems to have been cut this way. So it's not straight. So what I think you're looking at is a two-stage machining process here where they cut. And this is where that concavity ends here. Like you can see it gets deeper and then shallows out. So they cut it sideways through this. And then it's almost as if they ran a circular saw this way and they just pushed the block through like this.

So it was digging out that. profile as it went through. But there's this, it's hard to see in the photos, but it's entirely there. And again, you see the striations in the stone from the cutting mechanism. Right, right, the little grooves. This is a very sophisticated machining in stone. Like, I don't know what the purpose was for this, whether this was, it could have been part of a box that didn't cut all the way through the stone.

I don't know. Here's another good, that's just good stuff like this. Yeah, like, you know, I mean... God, Lord. We're blowing Stevens mind right now. I mean, this, I've got endless examples of this. And it, I mean, I like this one too. But it's, you can see, it's just been, and you actually look close to,

you can actually see the durations, like the individual cut lines. So it gets really interesting with this because, you know, these, a lot of these saw marks, the basalt ones, and again, basalt being kind of as hard, if not a little harder than granite, are in these, are in this basalt pavement that's to the east of the Great Pyramid. And it's on the sides because they would finish the top and it was perfectly flat. In fact, it's a wondrous application of stonework. But over the years, millennia, it's been falling apart.

In fact, they even built back in the day, they built a road. They had a road over it. Like they literally put down a road over the top of this basalt pavement. They've taken the road away now. But at the sides of this thing where it's falling apart, you can see where they were rough shaping the blocks. there was different types of tools it seems to me

the quarry there was like the scoop marks in the quarry they were looking to remove stone quickly and they didn't care it wasn't precise they're like scooping stuff out to get out as much material

as possible so they can get the block out then they had the rough shaping of stone where they were cutting out the kind of the general dimensions of the block and we might be looking at that with this where they're just cutting on the side and okay we want to get this down to this point and then there was a capability to

to just perfectly finish the stone, like fine polishing, fine machining, doing those fine little touches to get those precision surfaces and then a polish to make it kind of like that mirror finish. So there's different levels and these were done in different places. And what's interesting with the stone cutting is that we don't have a good explanation for this. It's that there's tube drilling kind of falls under this tube. But the stone cutting is like the explanation is that it was grinding with, like a copper dragsaw, you'd call it. Like it's like a V-shaped copper bar.

You put sand and water and you grind and grind and grind. So you just sit there and grind and grind and grind. And the problem with that is that it doesn't leave... There's videos of this, right? Yeah, yeah. Mark Lainer and it's a good experiment. There's nothing wrong with the experiment. So Mark Lainer and a guy named Dennis Stocks,

Mark Laine's a famous Egyptologist. Dennis Stox is an experimental Egyptologist who does actually do these sort of experiments. And it's great because we get some data from his work. But there's a few problems with it. One is it doesn't leave the same signature. Secondly, you don't get overcuts. You don't get these narrow cuts like these.

You're not going to get this sort of stuff with that. Because it's V-shaped, right? And based on that data, though, from Dennis and other people, we have data on how long it takes to do this. And it's something like to, look, let's round it off and say this thing. is a little tiny bit over, but about two millimeters per hour. Right? With that grinding technique?

Yeah, and that varies based on the length of the cut. Obviously, the longer the cut, the slower you go. So two millimeters, roughly two and a half or whatever millimeters per hour. It's very, very slow is the takeaway. And at the same time, you lose copper. Like the grinding, because it's the quartz sand that's doing the cutting, the copper's kind of, you could use horn or potentially even wood, but even using copper, you lose copper at a tremendous rate. So you lose almost as much, if not more copper,

than you're actually getting from cutting the stone. And it's a very slow rate. So A, with that slow rate, you'd have to grind away for hours to get these sort of overcuts that we see for starters. So it's, and again, as you said, you're probably not going to, you're probably not going to make that mistake and sit there and keep doing that mistake for hours and hours

to get an overcut. Like, all right, Johnson, you're in trouble. Like, and secondly, I have yet to do the math, but I really, I plan on. I'd love to do this. I've said it a few times now, but I want to scale this up to see what is the, at an industrial scale,

can the stuff, because we know you can kind of calculate how many blocks, how much granite was cut. You can probably get to a rough figure of how much tonnage of granite, say just at Giza, or maybe just on the middle pyramid complex. I don't know. But, you know, Chris Dunn kind of calculated it,

just to give you an example, there's a box inside the middle pyramid, right? it's as a box in the room, kind of like the box in the Kingschamp. It's a little bigger, a little longer, like maybe eight feet long and, you know, three or four feet wide. And based on Dennis Stocks's experiments, purely to make the primary cuts on that block of granite. So soon you quarry the granite takes, God knows how long, but just to make like the north, south, east, west, top and bottom cuts, right, to shape the box. Using the data that we've got from guys like Dennis Stocks would take something like 267 days.

of continuous grinding, 24 hours a day, just to, just to shape that one box. And that doesn't include hollowing it out, because again, it's a single piece box, right? It's been hollowed out, it's been finished perfectly. You've got tube drills in it. It's all shaped and decorated, and there's who knows how much work in doing that as well. So it's just like, do you really think you could scale up and do like hundreds of thousands of tons worth of granite work using this? And where's all the copper dust?

Where is it? Like there's tons and tons and tons and tons of copper must have been to do this. And yeah. Didn't they analyze that famous core, the Petri's core? And I think in Chris's book, I think I read this also, where they took a modern day tube drill. And they basically estimated based on the rings going around the outer edge of the tube, the core that came out. They estimated that the drill would have been 500 times more powerful than any modern drills. So based on, yeah, so in fact, this is Petrie.

Petrie's core, where I've got another image of it here. Let's see, where's the other one? No, that's not it. This one will do. That's fine. Same thing. Let's go, computer. Okay, so, yeah, that's Petrie's core number seven there.

So it's, yeah, and it's called Petrie's Core number seven, because Flinders Petrie discovered it when it's exhibit number seven on his, and this is the one that's been studied. So he calculated, he looked at it, and he determined that this spiral groove that's on the stone has a what you'd call a one in 60 penetration rate, right? So if you take that, if you unwind that spiral travel, you make, stick it out in a straight line for every 60 inches of horizontal travel, you're getting an inch of vertical travel one in 60. Right. Okay. Chris Dunn has since, I think, refined that a bit. It's not quite as deep. It's not quite,

it's a little less than one in 60. It's, it's in the ballpark. And yeah, so based, and then when you compare that to our modern tools, that's a, it essentially rounds out to being about 500 times greater penetration rate into stone than we can achieve. That's not to say that it may have moved very slowly doing this. Our stuff spins really fast, you know, so it's not penetrating it as fast per, you know, you don't get a 1 in 60 penetration rate, but our stuff can still maybe cut the stone pretty quickly, but the actual penetration rate based on the motion of the drill isn't anything like what we're seeing in the stone here, which is crazy.

And, you know, there are a number of these calls. Cause. I've talked a lot about this core as is Chris. And I'm sure when you get Chris in, he'll talk about it too. But I can see the case is closed, bro. They did a latex mold of it. He has proven without any doubt that it's a spiral groove. The problem has always been the claim that it's a spiral groove. That's the one thing that no one in, I guess, mainstream Egyptology will admit. And they go to great lengths to try. and obfuscate this idea that it's a spiral groove, but it has been definitively proved by the Petrie Museum, no less, and Chris Dunn, who were both responsible for the latex core experiment, which is this one. So they made a, in fact, they made a latex core of it, right? So this is this latex mold. Chris stamped the latex mold with these notches, cut it open with these notches. And then here's it's showing you the notch detail in these blowups next to these little arrows, right? So you can draw a straight line between these notches, which would make, which is the horizontal line, okay?

The straight lines are the horizontal line between the notches, same spot. So it goes to the bottom of the notch, it goes to the bottom of the notch. Same down here, bottom of the notch. And then what you're seeing is these dotted lines are tracing the individual spiral or individual grooves. And in every case that we look at here, it starts above the line and it ends up below the line. So it's there is, it is spiral, right? So it's higher here, it's lower here. It's higher here, it's lower here, et cetera, et cetera.

It's geometrically prove, proves this is a spiral groove. That said. And the length between each groove is exactly the same, right? The width? Oh, that's what I meant. Yeah, the width. Not really. It seems, well, it's Petrie described as a drunken screw.

There are some crossover. It seems to have been more than one cutting point. So there was multiple cutting points. So there might have been some crossover. And, you know, I, people speculate all day about this. It is, and the other thing to note about this is that it's actually tapered. So it's, it's tough to see, you can kind of see it. See how it's tapered?

Right. Yep. Right. So it narrows down and this thing's upside down. So this is probably where it's fatter at the bottom. This is, it's upside down. It snaps off here. And so you've got to imagine the holes that they come out of a straight, right?

And it's tapered. So it tells us that the tool itself was probably tapered. Right. Which means that it's shaped like this. So as it goes, it's cutting down, it's cutting down, it's cutting down, it's cutting down, it's cutting on all surfaces. And then, so a lot of, this is where people say, well, you know, this groove could have been made when they retracted the tool, like it unscrewed itself.

I'm like, that isn't how it would work if it was tapered. So if it's tapered, it's going to conform to the granite's conforming to the shape of the tool, and then the second you move it up at all, it loses contact with the stone because it's, the angle changes, right? It's narrower at the top and it's wider at the bottom. So once you get down and you're finished, you lift it up a bit. And then all of a sudden, the tool's going to be wider right at that point when you lift it up. So it's not actually touching the stone.

It doesn't unscrew. It just lifts out. I don't think unscrewing it or removing the tool will give you the spiral groove. Plus, look, it takes quite a lot of force to cut into granite like this. It's not just a simple. You're not scratching granite and leaving a deep groove like we. see in these two it's not just in the you know it's not just in the in the in the in the in the in the in the in the holes too you see it in these holes too you have these deep grooves in the holes um and you

see this all over the place with with uh as many now is that an example of like them doing a cord drill used to split a piece of stone well I don't think it's used to to split a piece of stone so much as they were sought out to then to then split stone you know what I'm saying like they they they will I think the people that were quarrying the blocks were looking for these. And then they would try and split them along the angle of the tube drill, along the axis of the tube drill. You see it all,

there's lots of complete holes that haven't been split. And in fact, you see on the back of the stones, you see that dash line, which is a, I mean, that's a technique that started. I mean,

the earliest, we know they were using it like the new kingdom, but these tube drill holes go back way further. And the oldest types, we don't see that quarrying method way back in the day. It's like the oldest quarrying method seems to be the scoop method at the quarry Which is kind of weird

Like an ice cream scoop Yeah And but I think they were looking for them Like for example Here's a giant tube drill right This is a nine inch one at Karnak And this stone's been split Along its axis

Right So later later civilizations found these things And used that to try to stop Yeah because it's a natural weakness in the stone And you can split them So you see a lot of tube drills that are in fact split But you see plenty that are whole as well And when we know that a hole

originally because we have the drill cores. Can we look at some pictures of these scoop marks? Yeah. Actually, this is a good point. I don't know if I have... Let's just go straight to that. And also, I forgot to ask you, what do you speculate

these sawblades could have been made of? I... It's less maybe what they were made of than what technology they were using. I mean, you know, Petrie speculated that it could have been... He's like, diamond would fit the bill, you know, like, because he was looking, it's a bronze embedded with gemstones or something. But he's like, there's no evidence for diamond.

And he's right. There's no evidence for diamond use in Egypt. We see no diamonds. It's not written about. Would there be leftover fragments of diamonds? Maybe you find something. There's literally been zero. And as far as gemstones go, as far as gemstones go, the genetic Egyptians sort of prized colored stones.

So diamonds wouldn't have been precious from that perspective. I mean, who knows? Maybe they did use them. We just don't have any evidence for it. But I don't, look, I don't know what it was using. It could, any curundum or hardened substance, but it could have, like, I look at the stuff. I don't think there was pure mechanical force involved. I think there's something else going on.

Like how, though? Well, that's the speculation. Could they soften the stones? Who knows? Were they changing the molecular properties of the stone? Were they using ultrasonics? Were they, I mean, you have to go back to the legends. Plasmoids?

Have you ever heard of. Plasmoids? Well, it could have been plasmoids. I don't know. I mean, this is where we speculate. And that's why I think it's interesting to be open-minded about what we see on these sites and research it as best. Let's use our best tools. Let's microscopically analyze the rock.

Let's look at it and being open-minded to any possibility because we might learn something. You know, I think you go back in time that the legend of the Shamir is very interesting. You ever heard this story? No. The Solomon's Temple or Shamir and all this. So it's, well, the Shamir, I'm not that well-versed in this. You should really have, you know, Russ and Kyle, the snake bros. Oh, the snake bros.

Yeah, they would be great guest. I'd be reaching to reach out to those guys. Fantastic. And Russ really knows this stuff inside out. So there are stories in, I think it's associated with King Solomon about the stories of something called a Shamir, which essentially, think of it as like a lightsaber that just cuts through stone. Less people cut through very hard stone is off sometimes described as a worm. But there's this consistent story of this artifact called a Shamir that is like,

like allegedly would let you, yeah. I like to think of it as like this lightsaber that just cuts through stone and you could, people become really hard stone with it. It comes out of history. So it's like, was this left over from these times? I don't know. I don't know. And it's, it's, I try not. Thinking about it in terms of diamond blades though

is like, it's like thinking about it looking in the mirror. Like, like we can't assume that they did shit the way that we do shit, right? This is what we've been talking about with Randall for the past few days. Yeah, it is. And I think that's the right approach. It's a tempting and natural thing to look at a problem. We look at these challenges and we go, this is how we would do it, fit it into our box. And again, I just think that there's avenues of

technology that we are yet to learn about, that we will know more about in time. And I think it's hard to do, but it's like, here's our perspective and here's everything we know, but some of the answers might be out here. Like it's just, and that's what being open-minded about it. And, and not just dismissing stuff and scoffing at it, and then researching it with some of those possibilities in mind. We might even learn something eventually from it. That's what I want to do. I'm going to, people always like,

what is it and what's a speculation of how it does? You can speculate all over the plate. Chris Dunn's new book, if you've got to it, the Serapium chapter. Yeah, I'm like a quarter of the way through it. I've got to finish it. He does some amazing speculation. I'm not going to sport. Really?

Oh, God. I'd love it. He sent me the Serapium chapter because I'd, helped him with some stuff for it before he wrote it. And now I'm writing like a recommendation for it. So I've got the book too. It comes out early next new year. Right.

January or something. January 24. Yeah. For people. Oh, get them salts, baby. And then, and then he does, I just, I love where he goes with it. But it's, with speculation, you know, the world, it's an imagination at that point.

You know. Does he talk about these lightsabers? I don't, I haven't seen him mention specifically this. He's talking about more about a potential technological application for the boxes. Oh, a technological application. Yeah, like what, like. Oh, that's something I've always thought about too, yeah. So here's another way to think of it.

And I like this idea too, is that, and because this relates to, he does talk about this, and this isn't giving the game away here, but it's like, if you consider the idea, you heard of the concept of an assembler. An assembler? Assembler. Like this is, imagine we get nanotech down to the point. And this is entirely plausible if you just project technology forward, where you create these microscopic machines that can essentially assemble themselves.

Or they can, they're almost like a von Neumann probe or something like that. But at the tiniest level where you can use molecular. A von Neumann probe. Yeah, it's like a self-replicating probe. Imagine you say, and some interesting books been written on that topic. Yeah, it's like you send a probe out into space, but it has the capability to replicate. itself and just by using the material that it finds and then, you know, project forward a thousand years and see what happens.

But imagine you get to the point where we have these microscopic machines that can, they're assemblers that can take molecular material even at the atomic level and assemble things and even replicate themselves. So you could build anything, but it's being done with technology that's so small and you can't see it. Right. that's this concept. It's been proposed by a number of sci-fi authors and people that have thought about technology.

Yeah. And it's like that's one scale of things. And the other scale of things to think about is, well, if you go out and you think about, you know, Dyson spheres and things like that that are almost galactic in scope or the size of a solar system in terms of a machine that does a particular thing. It's just an interesting way of thinking and looking at technology. We look at it and we go, here's a box. And how would we cut this box and make this box? but it's possible, whether it's plausible or not, I don't know, but it's possible that the answers to some of these questions

could be so small we can't see them or so large we can't comprehend them. Like that's just the nature of technology. Like we just don't, you know, you can throw simulation theory into that too, the idea that we're all just part of some simulation running on the computers of the future. But that's, it's all, it's just projections of technology.

And I'm just, this is all pure speculation. So it's, that's one of the challenges with speculation. is that it becomes this, this, this just endless, endless imagination of possibilities. But I do try to focus on sort of following the evidence and looking at what, you know, some of the answers might be based on the evidence that we have in front of us. And it's fun to speculate. And I'm going to, I'm in the process of writing a book too. And I will speculate, give my speculation in there as well about what it might be.

But I always try to be real clear about when I'm speculating. because as soon as you speculate people are like, look, he's crazy. You think the moon's a spaceship or something. Oh yeah, we did our last podcast. We were talking about the moon and somebody took a video and made some crazy reaction video. Oh, yeah.

Got to love that React model. I got to pee real quick. All right. They've really figured out their construction guys. Is it two guys? Russ and Kyle brothers, yeah. They've really figured out some really cool shit on how some of this architecture might have been made

because, you know, these blocks that go around the corners. You know how in like geese are the blocks kind of go around the corner, like where they're cut and then they go around. They're not like cut and just bricks in the corner. They curve around. But they've sort of worked out how that was probably done. And they have a really good method for showing people. They've made some really astute observations on like how the pyramids were built

and how these big granite structures were built. Do those guys go out there a lot? Go with me. Yeah, they come with me next year and I've taken them out twice. Yeah. They're two times I've been to Egypt They went with me

Yeah So I like to tour with them Because we also jam Oh do you really Yeah yeah We play Those guys are fantastic Well particularly Kyle

Amazing musician I use some of If you watch that Karnak video The song at the end Did you get to the end of it Like the The most recent one

Carnac Right at the end There's like a music There's like a song at the end The last like 10 minutes of it Is like a song Yes I remember that yeah That's Kyle

music. Oh no shit, really? Okay. Yeah, so, but we jam and they're good. I'm not, they're more like, they help me to manage the group and then also, I mean, they're just more social and personable than me most of the time. Yeah. A bit more serious, I'm happy to have conversations, but those guys are funny. Yeah, yeah, so it's great. We work together really well.

Yeah, but one of the things, like, getting back to those boxes, I wonder, like, was the technology just so hyper-advanced that, like, making something that precise didn't wasn't a big deal like if if some culture came along a million years from now be like how do they make this bottle so perfect and smooth like not because there was a purpose just because it was easy so like those boxes was it just really fucking easy to do that or and the pyramid too or was it for a specific function like how can you make that box functional well it it mean there is a relation and i make i have a long video on precision and there is and i said this the other

day I think to you as well that there's there's there's a relationship between precision and function right you don't develop precision developing precision costs money like it costs resources you have to you only do that for a functional return and when you look at the development of of precision in the modern world it kind of stems out of the need for like old naval cannons to to shoot straight the old days you would you would cast a cannon and then fire it while it's hot and go well I guess that's the barrel and hopefully that thing shoot straights now. And then they were like, well, we can make more accurate weapons if we actually, you know, maybe cast it and then carve out and machine it like slowly use a water wheel and turn out, you know, a cannon barrel to make it

shoot straight. And they decided to draw that relationship. Then we needed to make chronographers accurate timepieces that help with navigation. Like longitude, we talked about longitude earlier, but it's very difficult to measure. Latitudes, okay, you can use the sun for that. but longitude you need accurate time pieces to be able to know where you are on that east-west time frame. And in fact, the way we used to do it, it was, you know, you'd go to where you wanted

and we'd basically move in right angles. Like if people would sail to get somewhere based on, you know, navigational maps, it was called like running down a westing or running down an easting. You would get to where you wanted on a latitude and then go that way until you hit what you needed to because you knew you could head east or west, but you weren't sure how far you would go on.

And it wasn't until the end of the 17th century, essentially, that we developed accurate enough timepieces to be able to navigate using longitude effectively. You know, then, you know, precision progresses into the industrial age and steam engines and the, you know, the need to create containment vessels for pressure. And, you know, and that's now in the modern world, we've got, you know, seven, seven Newton meter. processes that we're developing silicon on and you've got you're packing millions and millions of transistors in complex logical circuitry into a tiny little footprint but that costs billions of dollars

to do and we do it because there's a functional return on it so a long way around of saying that you develop precision when you're chasing a particular functional return and I think that's what it's one of the indications to me when you look at some of these precision objects particularly the more like

the regular ones the boxes are a good example I think that were functional and potentially some of the structures and even the sites were functional. And I think in order to get that functional return, they needed to make these things with precision. Now, in terms of the bottle that we looked at and industrial design, once you have a manufacturing system that supports precision, precision is what you get. Like today you get a by a toaster, it's going to be industrial design on a computer and

it's going to be made in a manufacturing system that is just by its nature very precise. It's all, you know, there's no panel gaps on it. I mean, cars, look at the panel gaps between different panels on cars today versus in the 1960s. It's much better. Like, it's, you don't need it, but it's a result of the manufacturing system. So that's also an explanation that I like to use when it comes to the more abstract artifacts, like statues that show tremendous precision that look like they've been designed. And then they've been executed in a manufacturing system that gives you. that precision. It gives you that perfect symmetry. You know, it gives you these features that are

like kind of hard to explain in isolation. But, you know, I do, I do believe that they develop that capability to get some sort of function. What that function is? I don't know. Like, that's where the speculation comes. Yeah. What was the function that the boxes did? Those, this crazy correlation of the, you know, these boxes in these pyramids or these boxes in these underground structures, your Serapium is an example. The pyramids are an example. You know, even across the Giza Plateau, the Osirass shaft, you see these boxes underground and in these big structures. I don't know. But I get the sense they're functional.

There's infrastructure on these sites. At Sakara, at Abu-Sia, at Dachur, at Giza, we have evidence for very complex systems of what I can only call channeled blocks, these U-shaped blocks that are below the floor level. So you have these floor tiles that might be a couple feet thick. In some cases, they're even cased on top of that. But right down beneath that stuff, you have this infrastructure of essentially piping. It runs all under these sites. It's all over the place at Abu see. We see evidence for it, Giza Sakara, like all these old kingdom sites.

It's not something you ever see on the later sites. These are the oldest of sites have these very strange and complex, essentially, either it could have been housing piping. It could have been housing cables. We don't know. But it's, and sometimes it's not all gravity-fed, like sometimes they'll run all the way down beneath causeways to where there would have been water, and then it runs all over the site in complex patterns at Abu-Syria. It's probably the best example that there's Y-Joons and all these other things running beneath the floor. And sometimes using fairly exotic stone types like granite or white calcite or alabaster. And a lot of those stones show evidence for machining. There's a great example at Sakara of machined alabaster, U-shaped, channeled blocks that are beneath the floor tiles. And it's a lot of those stones. And it's a lot of those stones show evidence for machining. And it's a lot of machineing. And it's, It's a real mystery. We don't know why. I mean, it's like if you ask the explanation for how this white calcite or alabaster was used,

it was prized for its white color. It's an expensive stone to try and use. It's difficult to obtain. Alabaster and calcite comes from, you know, extinct and calcified natural springs. Like, you have to, you know, these are millions of years ago were natural springs. They've calcified over time. And to get white calcite, you actually have to dig all the way to, like, the source. of the natural spring. So it's wherever that was, it's not, it's not like an easy stone to get to.

You know, further out from the source, you get sort of yellow calcite and brown calcite, but they were using white calcite. And, you know, Egyptologists say that that they prize that stuff for its color, for its clean color or sometimes it can be transparent. In that case, what is this stuff doing buried beneath the floor level where it's never going to be seen? Like, it's literally a stone type that gets used in this underground infrastructure that's never seen. So they must have been using it for some other purpose. Like I think some of these stone types that you see, particularly in the really megalithic stone sites,

might have had a functional purpose, like choosing particular types of stone like basalt, granite, limestone, white calcite, even quartzite in some places, and in particular orders. And there's plenty of other indications that there was something else going on at these sites. I mean, in my last video I did on Karnak Temple, there's some really interesting, there's an area of Karnak that it's normally off limits.

Again, we know the right people to get in and see it. And I love showing people this stuff every year. There's a part of Karnak that where the granite's literally crumbling apart. It's granite die right. It's something's happened to the stone here where it's like the inside of the stone has swelled. It's like undergone a transformation and it's expanded. And it's almost around the edge of the stone. There's like this a couple of inches of where the stone is.

is in good condition. But because the inside's like transformed and expanded, it's put this pressure on the outside, and it's cracked all of the outside. And in some places, it's like falling apart. Like, it's cracked,

it whole blocks apart. And then the inside of the blocks just crumbling. Crumbling from the inside out. Yeah, inside out. So wild. And then we see that also at Abyssyr and other places where you have, you have like crumbling basalt.

And this happens in nature, right? Right. But it takes literally millions of years of exposure. Basalt and these other igneous stones that are formed in the heat of like lava and formed over millions of years of compression and heat in the earth. I mean, you can expose them to millions of years of sunlight. And okay, they're going to erode and degrade over time. But we're talking about cut surfaces of stone that are doing that.

And they were originally finished. And so at Abysseer, for example, you have basalt that's been cut. it was cased in limestone. So it's like, you know, it was surrounded by limestone, but those mating surfaces are now crumbling and falling apart. Now, who know, is it, is it, is it, is it, is it, it's pure speculation, but was it, was it, was there, was there something going through it? I mean, I've, I do have a video where we were playing with like a, a very high voltage, electromagnetic sort of field generator device and we were testing different types of stone and they have different electromagnetic properties.

Like granite doesn't do anything. You can get arcs coming off limestone and then some sort of an art coming off basalt. So they do have different properties under different conditions. And is it possible that those were some of these properties of the stone were things that were being chased by the builders for a functional purpose?

I love these ideas. And I know Chris Dunn is exploring some of those in some of his theories and his work. He certainly knows a lot more about it than I do. again, I'm just, I'm trying to illustrate that there may be other, there may be reasons for that type of stone and some of those properties might have something to do with a possible purpose. So it's like, why would we not research that further? Why would we not apply ourselves and try and see, you know, is there anything here that could possibly provide an answer or provide a clue for why this was done this way? Let's look at those scoop marks. Okay. All right. So I, you know what, let me just give me. me a second hole. Now when it comes to these scoop marks, is there any sort of idea or explanation on how

they were made either by the Egyptologists that are there or by you guys? I mean, yeah, the explanation for them is, you know, is that they were, that's pounding stones. This is the pounding stone explanation. Here's the quarry. I love the part of one of your videos where you guys are. filming that lady with the pounding stone and she's trying to pound the ground. Yeah, watch out, you'll break it.

Yeah, let me pull up this and then we'll go to, yeah. I also want to talk about Yusuf. Oh, yeah. Yeah, we'll get into, we'll get into that. That guy seems super interesting. In fact, they let him, like, run around there and do guys, do guide people in tour and explain all this stuff that goes counter to the narrative. Yeah, Yusuf's great.

I mean, I love Yusuf, in just the fact that he has, he has yeah he's just he's such a knowledgeable guy and I dude he's he's the greatest he's my brother he uh

I sort of hit the jackpot when I when I met him and and um and he's a superstar for for teaching people it's what he does it is absolutely what he does and I will swear to God I will find these pictures here in a second

you said Yusuf has lived right there his entire life since he was a kid he has yeah Yusuf so his dad um Yusuf's dad was Hakeem L. Aowan. It's a really famous indigenous wisdom keeper and guide. He's unfortunately Wested since then or he's passed. He was the guide that was used by guys like Graham Hancock, Robert Boval, John Anthony West. Hakeem's well known. There's lectures you can find from him

online. He's got, I mean, at Yusuf's shop, he's sort of got pictures of Hakeem from all over the world. He met all sorts of interesting figures. He's kind of been really well known, you know, as a guide. And really interesting guy. So Yusuf kind of followed in his father's footsteps. He doesn't believe everything that Hakeem does. And there's a, if you're interested in Hakeem's theories, there's an author named Stephen Mailer who wrote a book,

Land of Osiris, I think it is. And he was Hakeem student. And he, I mean, Hakeem was the founder of this modern, I guess you'd call it chematology, this theory. Kemet being the ancient word for Egypt. And he was, he has a lot of interesting theories. But again, I wouldn't, I wouldn't say that Yusuf subscribes to all of them.

He has his own theories. He's done his own work. You know, he's a practicing stonemason. So he works with this material. He's a very talented musician as well. Works with this material with his hands. He's very well versed in traditional Egyptology. Like he knows all of the rules.

He can read hieroglyphs. And yeah, he grew up literally across the street from the Sphinx. In fact, it's still where his family store is. It's in Nazlet El Samam, which is. the little village that's right near the entrance, or the Sphinx entrance to the Giza Plateau. And yeah, he's the, you know, the Awen family store is right there and his balcony up the top,

you're looking straight at the sphinx and the middle pyramid complex. It's really cool. What are some of the theories of that guy that guy came up with? Hakeem. Yeah. Hakeem has, here we go. Hakeem has, I mean, one of the things I can talk about, he thinks there was acoustical properties to a lot of these sites,

that there were, some of these were sound hospital. In fact, he even ran one for quite a while. And they had, I mean, look, anecdotally at least, very good results. They would take people to these ancient places into some specific areas that have, you know, resident properties. And they would, I don't know exactly what they were doing in there, but they had people that recovered from illnesses. And I mean, at least anecdotally from what I've heard, it worked. And then as the story goes, as it's been told to me, Zagaiyahuas actually shut them down. He stopped them from doing it.

Who was Zahiawas again? Well, Zahiawas was the long-term, like, head of the Supreme Council of Antiquities, or the Department of Antiquities and Tourism, I think it's called now. Okay. He's, you know, notorious kind of figure that's, that's, yeah, he had the debate with Graham Hancock where he kind of lost the cool. He's probably the world's most famous Egyptologists, certainly Egyptian Egyptologists, this world famous guy, written a bunch of books.

You know, I talked about him a few times. I've met him a few times. In fact, with the last trip to Egypt, we ran into him like four times. Really? Yeah, yeah, he was just there. He was at the, he was at... Is he nice guy? He's a charming, he can be a charming girl.

I suspect he probably, look, I don't know him personally. I know some, he's treated a lot of people very fairly. He's probably been less fair to others. You know, I had no problem with him. I mean, I was just on a tour and he was, this was the Graham Hancock tour where he was supposedly debating him, and we spent a day with him. And I think he's certainly had a history of being quite in the past. It's strange, you know.

He really attacks a few of the alternative authors, Graham. I mean, in particular, Robert Beauvajal he doesn't like. He's pretty fond of saying that, you know, people are just charlatans trying to make money and they're all Pyramidates and stuff like this. But back in the day, though, he was quite friendly. And in fact, I've seen a picture of like Zahi and John Anthony West. Robert Boval and Graham Hancock kind of arm in arm at the Sphinx enclosure. And he certainly has enabled some interesting research to happen privately a few times.

I had a video about the Sphinx Temple that started to get into some of that with, you know, there's an interesting correlation and at least these allegations of connection between him and the Edgar Casey Foundation. Do you know who Edgar Casey is? the American profit. Okay, so there's a, this is an interesting story. So Casey was a, was a, was a profit. And a lot of people made a lot of money based on his predictions for the stock market back in the day. And, and he ended up, he, he, he had these visions and wrote a couple books. And one of his visions entailed the, you've probably heard of,

you've probably heard of the Hall of Records, right? Yes. Okay, so that comes, a lot of that comes from Casey. He talks about the fact that there's a hall of records in one of the locations, there's three of them, I think, and one of them's, the location is one of them is under the pore of the sphinx. And then there's another one that's supposedly under, I think it was, I mentioned it earlier, it's Mount Nemrut, like the Nemerut tumulus pile, which is insane site that I also saw for the first time this year. But, you know, so he's, that foundation, it's the ARE, I think it's the Association for Research and Enlightenment, is essentially the Casey Foundation. Okay.

And they've kind of been involved in private expeditions to Gieser. They've been looking, right? They're trying to, they're trying to satisfy Casey's prediction about the Hall of Records. And they have been essentially digging and looking around at Giza and these other places since like the 1970s. Now, Zahi is very much against anything Atlantis related. He's like, there's no ancient civilization. So in publicly facing, right? He decries any of that type of thing. But he did also grant like the Casey Foundation, like a five-year permit to do unlimited,

essentially digging in excavation on the Giza Plateau, including in the Great Pyramid. And so it's on one hand, you sort of decrying all of this, this, um, you know anything lost civilization at the other hand you're enabling essentially an organization whose stated goal is to is to prove out atlantis and that there was a hall of records and everything like that not only that but edgar casey's son hughlin casey who wrote it he wrote a book and in that book he claims and i will say that zahuiwas has denied this he claims that the edgar casey foundation funded his education like they paid for his education at pennsylvania University.

They found, like he literally says in the book, and this isn't me saying it, he said that they found Zahue, who was a site inspector at the time, like not, you know, like lower rank kind of guy. But he was pliable and agreeable. And they thought he was someone they could work with. So they funded his education along with Mark Lainer, who's been a long-term partner of Zahy who was. And that went through the Pennsylvania University.

They got him his doctorate. And for sure, it's verified like Zahy has had in engagements with the ARE, plenty of times. He's gone and spoken at their events. He's been part of it. He goes back there in lectures quite often. So, you know, it's just strange to me that he's associated with an organization like the ARE, which has done these secretive digs. And there's strong evidence as documented by Robert Boval, which might be one of the reasons that Zahy doesn't like him so much. He's documented the fact that Zahar he's been enabling kind of secret expeditions digging and drilling around the Sphinx since the 1970s.

Like there's kind of one acknowledged drilling effort that they made to look under the Sphinx. I think it happened in the mid-90s thereabouts. And they were drilling under the body of the Sphinx. And the stated goal was, oh, we're checking the integrity of the limestone bedrock given the water tables rising, blah, blah, blah. But there's plenty of evidence for a bunch of other drilling that's happened. Like as far back as the late 1970s. And there's pictures of, you know, Hugh Lynn Casey and Mark Lainer and Zaheyuas from those times, like a young Zahari. They're all together. And then in the mid to late 90s, he enabled something called the Shore Expedition, which was Dr. Joseph Shore, a couple other people. Boris Said was one of them. But they're all ARE members. They're all part of the Casey Foundation. And none of them are Egyptologists or archaeologists. But he gave them a five-year permit, open permit to do whatever they wanted up at the Giza Plateau. And they did a bunch of stuff. They did a bunch of excavations around the Sphinx. And Zahi was involved in it. And they, he was involved in it. And they

even made a documentary that's never been seen. So Boris Soid, who was a filmmaker, he's also since died. And I dug into like these old Art Bell radio episodes from the 90s where he was talking about it. They had it, he had a falling out with, I think Joseph Shaw, the guy that was funding the experiment or the expedition. And just based on this fallout, the documentary kind of went into limbo and it's never been seen. But apparently it's part of it. And they, they had gone in under the Sphinx and looked at chambers. And Zahey at the time, and Boris said they found chambers beneath the sphinx. Like they 100% found chambers beneath the sphinx.

By the way, also acclaimed made by John Anthony West and Dr. Robert Schock, when they analyzed the area with ground penetrating radar, they found chambers beneath the sphinx. And at the time, when they were doing this experiment, Zahey said, oh, we've got this incredible announcement and discovery. It's going to shake up the world's history. It's going to, we're going to change what we know about the sort of the structure of the Giza Plateau and what's down below the ground, he was teasing it. And then this documentary kind of went away, and he's never said anything about it since. And in fact, to this day, denies that

there's any chambers or any structures or things beneath the sphinx. He now if asked, he'll say, well, yeah, they found natural fishes in the rock and there's nothing else, which is nonsense. I mean, Boris Said's on record, I've seen him. He's been down there and seen him and been in them. been in them? Well, it's kind of what he says, yeah. But it's very secret. It's all privately organized and permitted by, by US. And so there's an interesting history.

I think, look, I think if there are chambers down there and if there's anything in them or there was, it's long gone. I just, I think it's been pilfered or it's been taken. It's been, it's not public. I mean, there's also a chance that if there was ever anything in there, and the Egyptians or the Dynastic Egyptians might have taken it. There's a couple people with theories along those lines, like Manu Sefazada wrote a book, I think, called Beneath the Sphinx that talks about the idea that the Hall of Records may well have been there, but it was discovered by the Old Kingdom Egyptians who took it, and then there's some evidence that they were replicating some of

that information and knowledge through a particular cult that persisted through dynastic Egypt. And it's an interesting story that he puts together. It is new data, but it seems likely that they're indicating some really interesting information like the spacing of planets, the relative distance of planets in the solar system. Look all this cosmic information that it seems like they didn't really know what to do with, but it was information that they'd gotten from, you know, this trove of data from a lost ancient civilization. And it's just they, then were replicating it and kind of recording it down in their own way. And there's all these interpretations of this stuff that seems to match all of what we know about the solar system

and the structure. So it's, it kind of goes, There's all these different directions that stuff goes in. And I'd love, I've been meaning to do a more dedicated sort of deep dive into that shore expedition and the history of secret digs around the sphinx because, you know, the sphinx and the sphinx temple, it is, like it's described as a gateway. Like there is a lot of legitimate reasons to think that there's something below that structure in that part of the Giza Plateau. Like even the way it's historically depicted and talked about from ancient,

Egypt. They often, when they draw out the sphinx, I mean, they show it on a pedestal. Like the sphinx is always depicted in these steles, most of the time, on top of a pedestal. And in many of those pedestals, there's a doorway. And then the sphinx is often described as a doorway or as a guardian, guarding a doorway and into the underworld or something like this. And when you look at the sphinx, there's, it doesn't, it's obviously sitting on the bedrock, right? But you have to imagine there's a structure in front of it that's next to the Valley Temple's on like the left looking at the Sphinx. Then there's the Sphinx Temple in front of the Sphinx and the Sphinx is behind it. Now the Sphinx Temple has been shut for public access for I don't know how long. Yusuf, I mean, he's in his 40s.

He's never been in there until we got to go in there on one trip. We were probably one of the first groups to ever. And thanks again to the people I know in Egypt who arranged this through the Ministry of Antiquities to finally open up access to the Sphinx. temple as a special permission and we went in there. Very interesting structure. Amazing. There's amazing granite cornice blocks and all this stuff. But if you'd imagine it back in the day with its cornice blocks, which are these curved blocks that would have been around the edge of it, and you'd looked at it from down in the valley towards the sphinx, it would have looked as if the sphinx was sitting on top of the temple, which makes the sphinx temple potentially the location for

the pedestal of the sphinx, which has the doorway to the underworld. Now, in the sphinx temple, when you go there, there is indeed evidence for shafts that go down. There's these, again, these giant, there's like an 80-ton channeled granite block in the ground beneath the floor tiles that have since been removed that terminates at a shaft that goes down to we don't know where that hasn't been cleared. Make Mother's Day even more special at Whole Foods Market. Kick off brunch or dinner with quality cheese and charcutory with no synthetic nitrates. Then go seafood. There's an abundance on sale at Whole Foods Market, where it's all sustainable while caught are responsibly farmed. At the bakery, grab seasonal treats like their strawberry pretzel cream pie, and you can't

go wrong with a ready-to-heatheesh Lorraine, deviled eggs, and fresh-cut fruits to go. Celebrate Mom with Whole Foods Market. But it obviously goes underground. And not only that, but at the front of the Sphinx Temple, if you walk back, if you're standing there at Giza and you're looking at it, It's where the seats are for the sound and light show. Sort of off in the corner, about 30 or 40 feet in front of the Sphinx Temple, there's a little concrete pad, and there's a metal tube sticking out of it like this, just off the ground, just sort of unobtrusively in the corner.

That's where Zahi Huas himself did a drilling experiment. So they drilled down like 150 feet. This is a limestone plateau. And at like 150 feet or 130, something like it, they hit granite. This drill hit granite and return these. shards and flakes of red granite from 130 feet below the ground. And there's not natural granite there. So what the hell is down there that deep and it's made of granite, right?

Whoa. I mean, half, yeah, it goes on and on. Like, you go halfway up the platt, up the, the causeway, like connects the Sphinx and the valley temple to the middle pyramid complex, right? It's this big causeway. It goes up to the pyramid. Halfway up it is what's known as the Osiris shaft. This is three different levels that you can go into

Again, as a special permission, there's water at the bottom, but there's three chambers that go down to about 150 feet and there's big granite boxes in them unless you go down there. And there's tunnels that literally lead off down the causeway that have never been explored at the bottom level. They're caved in and stuff, but they've never been explored. There's footage of when they did pump the water out back in the day

when they're exploring it, and it was like a fox, I think it was on the Fox channel, and Zahi was down there with a reporter and saying, oh, this was the tomb of Osiris or whatever. And she's like, well, what about these tunnels? Zahy's like, no, we've never explored them. We sent a boy in and he couldn't get very far, but we've never looked as to where they go.

So there's definitely underground chambers and infrastructure down there. And we honestly don't know if they've been explored and if, you know, there's anything in there or if, you know, what's happened, which is... And what do you think his motivation would be to change his story on that and keep all this secret excavation secret and all this secret exploration and not to change the narrative. Like what sort of motivations would he have? I don't know.

I mean, I mean, I think it's the typical. If there's any motivation, it's pure speculation, I'm not claiming this all that I know it. And I will probably reiterate that Zahy's denied that he has any connection to the airy. For sure, he was involved in these expeditions. I mean, there's plenty of people who talked about him being involved in these expeditions. And again, all of this happened like, you know, 30 years ago now. But, yeah, I mean, what motivates people, right? It's money and it's power and it's all these sort of things.

I don't know. I don't know. And it's, I don't like any real conspiratorial angle on these things in terms of, you know, they find stuff and is it hidden from us because it doesn't conform to the story? I don't know. I'd like to think not. I'd like to think that if they found stuff, they'd talk about it regardless of if it had a significant impact on the story of history. But doesn't he make money quite literally

from people visiting Egypt and explore another stuff? He's he's made plenty of money. I mean, I don't know how directly he's, he's a very powerful figure in Egypt. I'd say this. He's also done a lot for Egyptology. I mean, he champions the returning of objects to Egypt, which I think is a great cause, particularly if they're in private hands and people can't see them, the stuff that It's, I mean, Egypt's been pilfered by everybody for so long. Yeah, you were saying much of the stuff's been found in Israel, right? Oh, it's all over the place. Yeah, all over the place.

There's, there's, yeah, I mean, there's, there is stuff that, I mean, you don't have to go back to just Israel, but you go back to the Americans, the French, the English. I mean, during all the periods of occupation, the last several hundred years, everyone who's been involved in the governance of Egypt. I mean, you know, I think Matt Simpson just did a video or some, no, Luke Cavins actually did a video. talking about how the British Museum is essentially full of artifacts that was stolen from Egypt. I mean, one of the sticking points is that the original Rosetta Stone is in the British Museum. It's been there for like 200 years. But it's, you know, I look, I'm like, if it's in a museum somewhere and people can see it, they have people to understand the scope of artifacts that have been found here too. There are warehouses absolutely full of this stuff in Egypt.

Like some of the tombs in the Valley of the Kings, like they fill them up with all the artifacts they find in other places and lock there. doors because it's essentially climate controlled. And I hope, and I've yet to see it, but they're building a giant new museum, or it should be just about done by now, the Grand Egyptian Museum, biggest museum in the world, from what I understand, it's going to be. And I really hope that they have enough space in real estate to show us all of the artifacts that have, they just haven't had the space to show. I mean, there's so much stuff in Egypt and that's been taken from Egypt. And even then, even despite all of this, even the Egyptologists and Dahhee will say this as well is that, is that it's like 70% of it is still underneath the sands. Like he thinks that

we've only, we've only maybe uncovered 20 to 30% of what's out there. So there was, you know, there's a lot going on. And, but yeah, look, I don't, I don't know. It's an interesting sort of story to dive into with the history of some of these excavations. And, and, and, you know, And like I said, it kind of goes back to my point about the pyramid earlier where I hope that whatever they do, and I'm sure somebody's planning it, that they're going to go and try and look for this chamber, I'd love, I would very much hope that it gets shared with the world. That's all I'm, that's all I want. It's like share that information, let everybody see it. I mean, it's part of everybody's history. You know, I don't care who makes money on it or doesn't, but it's just like, I think a lot of people would be interested.

What is this right here? So this is the obelisk. Okay. This is the unfinished obelisk. And you talk about scoop marks. There's a few of them on top of it. Oh, wow. And in fact, you see some of the characteristic pounding stones there as well.

And in fact, yeah, there's probably a better look. And there's some of these scoop marks are, you see on the right here, on the left of the thing as well. And then all the way down the, what do you call it, the, what do you call it? The, what is this man? Why, my brain not working? Here. Seriously, you need some sauce. The trench.

There you go. I just needed to look at the smelling. Yeah, right? Yeah, so this one is still, this one was never actually pulled out of the quarry, right? This was started and never completed. That's right. Yeah, it's not actually, in fact, it's not, the trench isn't quite deep enough. Actually, you look at some scoop marks.

See them on the right here as well, on the wall. So what's interesting about the scoop marks, and I don't know if I have other examples in this particular... Is there any explanation of how this could happen naturally those scoop marks? Like from degradation? It's not natural. It's definitely not natural. It's not degrading.

So the explanation for this is that this was the quarrying technique. You see this on the quarries. You see it around the artifacts where they've been quarrying things. And it's not a natural. phenomena 100%. They say it's been made by these dollarite pounding stones, which honestly is, it's one of the silliest theories that's out there. So they found, at the site, though, they found a lot of these dollar, dollarites are harder stone than granite. You know, you will eventually grind away and remove some granite if you pound away hard enough. And again,

studies have been done on, on kind of the, the removal rate of stone using dollarite pounders. But, and I cover it in my video, one of my videos about the quarry. There's a lot that doesn't make sense when it comes to this particular quarry. And in fact, if I take a look at, where's the Isis Quarry Stombs? I have videos here. I'm sure I've got some. Okay, so you can see a number of different quarrying techniques in play at the Aswan quarry, the oldest being. How far is that obelisk from the Giza Plateau?

About 500 miles. Okay. So that's generally the... So this is like the general characteristic layout of it and you see these scoop marks all over the place, right? They're all on the floor where they've been used to move stuff.

You see those other forms of quarrying too in higher layers. You'll see chiseling and you'll see wedge and chisel, but you also have these test pits. Now I probably have, this is probably not the best example, but so these test pits that go down,

some of them 30, 40 feet, they're like cut straight down into the stone. They're like a, I don't know if I have a better example here. Most of my stuff on this is video. But, oh, here's one. So here you go. So see, this is like a,

we have to put a grate over the top of this. And this is done using those scoop marks as well, which sort of starts to belie the challenge. Like, how do you get in there and pound, crouched down? And it's barely wide enough or broad enough for a person to, to stand in there, let alone get down on their, you know,

crouch down and pound it on the floor and then remove the material out. These go straight down. And what they're probably, four is that probably for testing the quality of the granite. Right? When you're looking for a giant single piece of granite, you're not going to find that at the surface of any granite outcrop because the granite's inferior up there.

It's going to have cracks. It's going to have defects. When you cut down into the core of these quarries, this is where the highest quality stone is. It's got the large quartz crystal inclusions. And that's where you can find stone of a quality good enough to to cut like a single piece block that isn't going to break on you.

So these test pits would have been dug looking for like how deep do we have to go to get these blocks out. Which is, opens up a whole bunch of other problems because a lot of Egyptologists don't credit the old kingdom Egyptians with the ability to quarry granite. It's sort of ridiculous.

Yeah. And you see tons of, let me, this is more of the test pit here. These are really cool. But you can see how it was done. Good God. dude. Yeah.

The quarry is really, really interesting. Here's some good scoop marks, actually. This is, uh, you start to see stuff.

So in some areas, there's really interesting, uh, particular block. I probably have it here. Do I? Okay. This is,

this is probably the best, um, indication of it. So it's tough to see. I don't know if you can see that. Yeah. So there's an unfinished piece that's not the, not the big one,

but there's one on the side. And so what, and it's, it's sort of cut out. And it goes in under. It goes in underneath the... What's your wildest guess on when this was all done? Oh, so I think some of the stuff has done.

Wildest guess is... I mean, you know, I would open up the range from 50,000. I mean, I don't think it's necessarily just before the Younger Dryce Catecholism, put it that way. Like, that's a possibility that the civilization that might have done some of this might have been ended by the Younger Dries. But I actually think, given the extension of the human timeline, given the possibility that it may not have been just us, it might have been other species of hominids potentially involved. I don't know.

I open up that window to potentially hundreds of thousands of years. What do you mean other species of hominids? Well, Denisovans, Neanderthals, we have a complex genetic history. So us ourselves, our species is now out potentially 800,900,000 years old. That's based on teeth morphology. Studies into teeth morphology. studies into like when we split from a common ancestor with the Neanderthals like our DNA train from a fossil record where the oldest human remains are like 300,000 years old,

but a couple of recent studies looking at the rates of dental evolution and our DNA put the window much further, like towards a million years, but you know, 8,900,000 years. We're also finding that our history is more complex. We have, you know, the discovery of the Denisovans or the Denisovans, or the Densens Sovens is a fairly recent thing. Like it's a whole other species of hominid. And there's some evidence of tool use and even sophisticated tool use. There's a jade bracelet that is a Denisovan artifact that has drill holes in it. And the one other thing that I've learned recently that I always thought that like Neanderthals couldn't talk. Like that was, I just thought,

ah, you know, our studies and what we found of Neanderthals, the larynx and the structure of their throat meant that they couldn't talk. I think that's recently been reversed. I think think now there's evidence that they could in fact talk. And we don't know anything about the Denisovans. We literally have a couple bones that we're working from like a pinky bone and a couple other pieces, I think. So we don't know if they could talk. And you kind of need speech to organize for civilization. At least we do it verbally. I mean, Graham Hancock might argue that maybe some of their methods of communications might have been some other mechanism. So just again, in speculation, I don't rule out when you consider the concept of a lost ancient civilization

I'm not saying aliens, but I think it could certainly have involved other types of humans. We've got all the elongated skulls as well in South America that's a real interesting phenomena. Graham would, I've heard him talk about the fact that some of those people that they may have had other faculties that created or achieved some of the stonework. I prefer to say about that. Well, he, I mean, he gets attacked for this endlessly, but he, you know, he says, that it's possible that they achieve some of the things they did through other mental faculties, not just telepathy, but telekinesis and stuff like that. I mean, there's stories that just seem to go along those lines. I prefer to take the technological angle just given that

we have the evidence for some of the tools and powerful tools being used and achievements being made like these thousand plus ton statues. I mean, God, I think I was telling you at dinner last night that, you know, there's a quarry in Egypt that had they disconnected that one limestone block, it would have been 5,000 tons. Right. You know, there's stuff up to that scale that seems like they were working on it. And it's crazy at the Minya Quarry. But so I don't rule out the possibility for a lost ancient civilization that it could have involved

other species of hominids. Like, we're one. We're the last humans left, right? There were other humans. We killed off the rest of them. We're the last humans left. Are you aware of the evidence? I'm really fuzzy on this, but there's some sort of evidence that was found that basically says that our DNA or the telomere on our DNA, the telomeres have been like capped or something happened where there's evidence that like a pre-civilization could have possibly had a lifespan that was like 10 times our lifespan or something?

Yeah, there's some really interesting It was like a very stark Difference between our DNA And the DNA that was found in What was it compared to? The DNA and what I don't forget what it was Probably in chimps and other Yeah, our closest relatives

So there's I'm not I'm not 100% familiar with the telling me anything I've heard that But I've always been fascinated by the work of guys like Lloyd Pye. Lloyd Pye, that's the guy, that's how I heard about this. Yeah, so Lloyd Pye is interesting. He, he, it's a great lecture online called Everything You Think You Know is

wrong. He was, he was probably more, more well known for being the keeper of the Star Child Skull, which is this interesting artifact, but he was genuinely interested also. Star Child's School. Oh, that's a whole other rabbit hole. Okay, all right, let's keep you on. Let's not get you off track. Interested, it's interesting.

But he was interested in human origins and human evolution as well. He wrote a book called Everything You Think You Think You Know. was wrong. And I will say that he does, he does do the whole, um, anarchy thing. Like, he does go down the route of, uh, what's his name? Um, who wrote 10th planet, Sitchin, Zacharize Sitchin. So this is, he, he sort of follows that, but I mean, I, I'm not, I'm not, I don't think Sitchin is correct and I'm not really a believer in the Ananaki stuff, but. Oh, really? No, I think there's, I think Sitchin was kind of pretty comprehensively kind of debunked with how he translated his deliberate mistranslations and it's a long story with sitchin but

not to say that you can rule like that possibility isn't ruled out i i where the work that lord pye did made it interesting from a perspective of a potential intervention theory which is means that he was sort of pointing at the fact that we might have been genetically engineered as a species and there's some evidence that at least from a genie he was in he was looking at the evidence to support that. I think we have, I'm going to get this wrong. We have, we have a different number of chromosomes. Right. Than other species. Then our closest relatives. Right. And when you look at the, at the DNA structures, it almost looks like we've been engineered, like they've been tied together and kind of

engineered that way. There's a few genetic oddities about our species that Lloyd Pye was suggesting might be indications that we've been engineered. So it gets. into that in detail. I'm not an ex. It's been a long time since I've read the book. And this flies in the face of evolution. It does in a lot of ways. But there are sort of other examples. I don't know if it's horses or something like that that have a similar like chromosonal difference. Yeah, it's not the only thing he points at like where it's we're a weird kind of species with some of the diseases that we have. I mean he he talks about the fact that

we're like one of the only species that dies of exposure. Like you can't, we're not, it's like we're not well engineered for the planet. Right, right. You've ever seen a dog just looks at the sun? Like it's eyeballs, they're just looking at the sun. Like, don't look at the nuclear explosion. You'll go blind. No, they're fine.

We go blind if we look at the sun. We don't have very good night vision. We die from exposure if we're left out, you know, without clothing and shelter and all those sort of things. Yeah. We have a bunch of really weird genetic diseases that other species don't seem to suffer from. I mean, there's even some deficiencies in our genome that. We're so far away. from every other wild animal. It's insane. It is. Well, and that's, that's always been true. I mean,

the whole missing, the missing gap idea is you'd actually need like a dozen missing links or the missing link, you know, the idea that, oh, there's a missing, there's a missing link in the chain of evolution to get to humans. And you need more than one. Like, it's, to go from our nearest ancestors and Neanderthals to us is a huge jump. I mean, and it's actually, he points out that in a lot of cases, it gets, that gets obfuscated by the way they lay out skeletons, like, Like by making skeletons of Neanderthals look more humanoid in terms of like, you know, they space out the neck and they don't show it like it was where they had no neck and their shoulders were kind of much closer to their head. There's this huge genetic and evolution gaps between us and our nearest relatives, not, you know, in a number of different areas. So he gets into that and it's an interesting idea.

Like I don't, but I don't know. I'm not, I don't, I don't know how to explain. plan it one way or the other. I do rate the whole intervention theory as a possibility. So either the OG intervention theory, which is life itself, panspermia, like DNA itself coming to this world by intervention or by just panspermia as an accident. Like comets could well be the progenitors of life in the universe. Like the fact, we're learning more and more about the fact that there's, you know, the amino acids and the building blocks of life could be contained in commentary material in those icy cores or even with the if they're radioactive they could be liquid

cores liquid water could be carried by these things which could contain the building blocks of life and it's really interesting to think that you know this is the mystery that's at the origin of life altogether and you know we're definitely creatures of this planet too i'd say that like we trace our DNA we're part of the tree of life of this planet but it's the one as far as evolution's gone from single cell organisms through the to the dinosaurs to us, the one part of that that's never kind of changed, that's never evolved is DNA itself. So the way that life gets expressed as a technology, the DNA, that's never really changed. Like DNA as a technology has not changed. It's just, it's changed

just expression. Like it's the forms and the life that it creates has changed. And there's a real mystery at the, at the point of origin of life. Like how DNA came to be. You know, this is a, this is an ongoing field of research. There are people trying to figure this out. Can you, you know, I mean, I personally think it's quite unlikely that it was a bunch of, you know, proteins and amino acids and some warm water that got hit

by lightning and boom, there's DNA. It's a very complex structure. Yes. And even by saying that, oh, okay, so life might have been seated on this planet, either like Prometheus style, where the aliens came and said, sprinkled some DNA in the river and away we go, or it just arrived on a planet from somewhere else all you're really doing is kicking the can down the road. Like, it still had to start somewhere. But it's a possibility. I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if Panspermia was the

origin of life on this planet. Could have been another civilization. I don't know. And I think there's some interesting lines of evidence and interesting thinking from people about the idea that it could have been a more direct intervention into evolution later on in time. I'm not saying I believe that. I just think it's interesting. And it's, it's tough to rule out some of those possibilities based on the evidence. Especially when you look at some of the stuff that we're looking at here and the stuff that you've discovered. I mean, I mean, I think with beyond a shadow of a doubt that we have proved that you and people like you have proved that we're not, we're not coming from off of a linear timeline of, I would agree, at least technologically. Yeah, I would agree. So

let's see if I can show this to you. It's hard to see. I wish I had these photos. Maybe I can pull up a video or something. But which one? So is this, are you looking at that new five million or five thousand tonne obelisk? No, no. If you want to see that, I do have a picture of that. I would just say that with, I would finish off the quarry discussion by saying that with the scoop marks. So one other thing I'd just like to point out to people is, is that, you know, these are regular lines.

You actually see it here. I think it's not a bad example. They start. Like these scoop marks start and they're consistent and linear and they go, all the, the way down and they actually go up and underneath this stone. So the stone's being quarried out, the one in like in the foreground here. And they go all the way up and under. So it's like this one continuous toolmark. I have a long video on the scoop marks that gets into the details of why this isn't the pounding stone hypothesis isn't a plausible example. And I think it's telling

also that if you look at the quarrying methods that they will show you in the quarry, okay, there's pounding stones, which is literally, uh, with a pound with a stone or rubbing on it with a stone and then you go up in sophistication to the wedge and chisel approach that I talked about where you hammering wood into like you make these grooves and you hammer wood in and then the other example is well you actually have straight chiseling where it's later in time and you've got hardened steel you've got long steel chisels and you're banging it in and you're just like carving the rock and then splitting it yeah so you can think of that as a sophistication goes up but but what they're extracting and the stones that they're taking out is is the absolute

opposite. They're using those other methods to take smaller pieces and little pieces off the sides of things. But that pounding stone method, the most primitive one, is also the one supposedly responsible for the biggest goddamn pieces you can find. Like it doesn't make any sense that their most primitive technology is the one supposedly responsible for the thousand-ton artifacts. And there's a good example of just how old that is. If I go back up to my podcast images we go back to the quarry is in this area here right so this this is what's known as the harbour in the quarry you can't normally get in here I don't know one time we wandered down here we're in here and supposedly this is where they would park the boats and they call this the

harbour and it's it's not a harbor to me what you're looking at is the remnants of a trench for a giant object right so look at this thing so this is a piece of stone that was probably extracted from here. You see the scoop marks along the side. I think it's as big, if not bigger, than the, than the unfinished obelisk. And it's, it's in this lower area. I'm standing there. And it's, it's called the harbour now. But I think you're looking at what is left after they've taken something out using this, this scooping technique. What's interesting about it is that it's got painting on it. It's got all these these paintings, these

depictions of ostriches or some people say they're flamingos and there's all this painting on it. And what gets even more interesting about that stuff is when you compare, you look at this style of this artwork that's in this, on this area. See it keeps going down here and all of these walls

are gone. The closer wall to us has been quarried out entirely but this was a big trench and this huge piece of stone was removed. That type of artwork and I've got many more examples than just this, it matches this stuff. Now this stuff is a style of painting and artwork that is very much associated with pre-dynastic times, right? So before the dynastic civilization ever started, the artwork that's on the wall in that quarry matches the pottery and diagrams and drawings

that we see on pottery vessels that come from pre-dynastic times that have been found in pre-dynastic burials. So what this infers to me is that that artwork done in that quarry was probably done in pre-Dynastic times. It was done using the same art style. They used a much different art style. There's other carvings in the quarry where the Egyptians did their thing, you know, the more dynastic, typical kind of hieroglyphic and artwork. This red ochre paint with the with the style of carving, these birds on this thing match the birds in that. There's a bunch of other examples of it. It means that it was done in pre, I think it was done in pre-dynastic times, which also tells you that it was done on the wall that was left after they'd pulled that block out.

So you had to have pulled that block out first to even expose that wall. Right. And then it gets painted on. So how long ago did they pull that block out of there? And yeah, it's crazy. Good God. So I wanted to finish. I just wanted to make that point about the quarry.

Yeah. And I do have a video that dives into that, that giant block that's been extracted there and the connection to that artwork. Let's talk about the vases. There's a lot of new shit going on with the vases that you've been looking at. There is. We talked a lot about the vases on the first podcast we did and the incredible symmetry involved in making those vases and the fact that they're extremely thin. You can shine a light in them and you can see through them they're so goddamn thin.

And they're made out of some of the hardest rocks on earth. And they still say that these vases were made during those times with chisels and pounding stones and all that stuff. Even after you've come out with some of your videos and some of this stuff, no one's acknowledged it. especially. Right. Yeah. I mean, nobody's looked at, at, nobody's really said that, you know, there's, I mean, the hypothesis for how they were made at least in the mainstream has remained the same, which is, you know, it was people rubbing on them with rocks and banging on them with Flint, stuff like that. So made by hand. And again, to speed run the vases, it's like they exist in, they go back to well and truly pre-dynastic times. In some cases, there's evidence of them going

back to burials as far as 14,500 years ago, right through pre-denastic times, and then they've been found in times, you know, basically during the old kingdom, up to about the fourth and fifth dynasty, most of them. The majority of them were found beneath the step pyramid, like 40, 50,000 of them,

which is a third dynasty structure. Then they kind of peter out after that. Like, there's a few examples of vases that come from later periods, but we identify them as coming from those periods because they have very poorly scratched hieroglyphs on them. So, I mean, we talk about that earlier. But these are incredible class and, you know, category of artifacts, like

made from all sorts of exotic types of stone. Like you said, we talked about them before. Perfect symmetry. Extremely thin. Petrie found one that went down to one 40th of an inch, which is, I think, the quote that I've got here from him. One of the other things I always like to point out is that they're often found. We talked about imitation earlier. Painting them. This is where you would find them and they're ascribed to the same person because they're found in the same burial, but you have a hard stone vase here next to a hand-formed pottery vase that is painted to look like granite. And not even, this is not a turned vase.

This is hand-formed. Right. So, you know, a lot of people, even when you get into the details of arguing about this, the people like, okay, they made them on a lathe, but it was just a simple lathe. Because, you know, the idea that you're turning the stone to get these results. Right. I'm like, okay, so if they had lathes, why didn't they have the pottery wheel? The pottery wheel was a much simpler application of the wheel than a laties.

But it's just a facetious sort of argument to suggest that these came from the same people. I think they're inherited and they're older. But what's happened, and there's lots of evidence, they go way back in a time, lots of them discovered, they were inscribed. They were definitely reused and inherited. You know, there's a depiction of how they were made that was found at Sakara. This is what they used to basically say. This is how they were made. It's basically like bent sticks with weights on the side and flint tips.

This guy's got his hand in the middle of it. Yeah, he's rubbing at it with a hand. But what they're showing you here is the vays making industry that happened after the Third Dynasty. It's the alabaster vases. It's just white calcite. It's a three on the most scale. It's much softer. And we have lots and lots of examples of beautiful alabaster vase work.

But it's very simple. It's not simple. It's awful. It's not precise. You don't see the same symmetry. They're off balance. They don't have the same properties as the very hard stone vases that seem to come from earlier times. So what's happened, though, since I talked to you last, was that we've finally been able to take this analysis to a new level.

Like, we've finally been able to get our hands on what is a privately owned pre-dynastic rose granite vase and subject it to structured light scanning. This was the first step we've taken. This happened at the start of this year of 23. and we've come a long way since then. And structured light scanning is a process where you're basically 3D scanning it with lasers and you can basically create a model of the artifact down to the accuracy of about a thousandth of an inch.

So take an inch divided up into a thousand pieces. A human hairs between two and three thousandths of an inch thick. A sheet of printer paper, maybe five or six, something like that, thousandths thick. So where accuracy is down to less than half the width of a human hair. So it creates an extremely accurate model of the vase. Now, once you've got that model, you can start to do some interesting analysis on it. You can start to look at, okay, how precisely was this thing made? And that's exactly what we did.

So this is the vase. It's actually only about, yay, tall. It's like six inches tall, maybe, a little tiny thing. And that's it being scanned. And once we did that, there were a couple of professional metrologists, and these guys work in the aerospace industry. They make parts for, for, for, jet engines and turbines and, you know, the space rocket ship stuff, you know. These are professional engineers that they're professional metrologists and metrology being the study of all the science of measurement. So in those fields, you know, you have to, you use these techniques a lot in those fields. And it's very important, right?

We want to make things precisely. And this is a good example of precision enabling function. It's like turbine blade manufacture and stuff like that, like efficiency of jet engines, all that sort of stuff. guys work for one of those companies and this is what they do on a day-to-day basis. So they analyzed the scan and they ran it through a coordinate measurement system and what they found was just astonishing. Like the results and looking at just how precisely this thing was made, absolutely astonishing. And in particular, it's not just the precise nature of the surfaces themselves,

but it's the interrelation of one surface to another. So, you know, making the different parts of the vase be perpendicular or parallel or perfectly aligned with other parts of it. So the way this works, it's fairly complex, but we can sort of step through it. The first thing to know is the vase itself is an ellipsoid. You can't match it to a regular geometric shape, right? It's not a circle, it's not a sphere, it's not a cone, it's an ellipsoid. And what you want to be able to do is match geometric shapes or regular shapes to parts of the vase so that then you, you're you can do geometry on them. You can calculate center lines and center points.

And how perpendicular or parallel are they to other parts of the vase? So things like this. So we essentially start by creating an XYZ three three dimensional grid, which helps us derive things like, you know, center lines, axes. And then we can start to compare the other parts of the vase. So the way you do this in a CMM system is you match geometric shapes to parts of the vase. Now, you could do that with five, you could say like, all right, we're going to match a flat plane to the top of the vase, the lid, and we're going to use five points to do it. It's not going to be very accurate.

It's not going to represent that surface very well. But if you do it with thousands and thousands of points, the more points you use of reference, the more accurately it's representing that surface. So you'll see in these slides the fact that we're using thousands and thousands of points. So in this example, there's nearly 4,000 points of reference has been used to match a flat plane to the top. of the to the vase lip to the top surface and then the measurement we're doing is like how how close to perfectly flat is this it's within three thousandths of an inch so it's very flat like that flat the flatness of that surface is within three thousandths of an inch of being perfectly flat basically so very close very very very accurate around the width of a piece of hair yeah yeah

that's just the top so then you can you can go further from that now we can look at all right let's look at the the the vase mouth so this is that round part on the inside of the neck of the vase, if you like. And so what we're doing here is we're measuring it with a cylinder. You can see that on the left of the vase mouth there. There's a little cylinder icon. And we're using like 10.5,000 points to match it, which is a lot. I mean, this actually has got some damage on the inside of the neck to this vase.

And we can match it looking at the cylindricity. So how perfectly cylindrical is that? It's within 13,000th of an inch of being cylindrical. But now that we've, this is, I'll speed up a bit on this because now that we've got that top surface, you can think of that as like an X axis. And if you think of a cylinder sitting in the neck of this vase, we can now, because we've matched the cylinder to the surface, we can, we can say, okay, how perpendicular is that cylinder to the top surface that we just managed? And we call that, like, the top surface is control surface A, right? So you can see like the perpendicular measurement, how perpendicular is it to control surface?

surface A and it's within one, it's one thousandths of an inch. One thousandths. Yes. So it's basically perfectly perpendicular to the top surface. Now, top surface is A and now we've got this vase neck, this cylinder in the vase neck and the center line of that vase neck. We can call that the axis of the vase and we can call that control surface B. So now we can measure every other part of the vase relative to the top and the neck.

And that's what we do. So we go on to measure like, all right, you can match a sphere to the lower part of the vase body. And we did that using like nearly 80,000 points of reference, so it's really accurate. And then what you can do is you can, with that sphere, this is worth talking about for a minute. This is the highest number we saw in the whole report. It's 17,000ths of an inch. So the center point of that sphere is basically within 17,000ths of an inch from the center line of the vase. So it's like a couple sheets of printer paper, basically away from it. Now, it seems like a big number relative to the other numbers. But what this is telling you a lot more than just, like, how close

is that center line of the sphere? What spheres are interesting, like, if you took a sphere and you, and you deformed it at all, like small on the bottom or you push it or whatever, it's going to shift that center point dramatically, right? So what, what this is telling you is not only is this 17,000s is no joke. Like, that, that's extremely close. The exact center point of that sphere is really close to that center line of the vase. But it's also telling you just how regular that shape. is because if it wasn't regular and that part of the vase that matches a sphere, if that was that all deformed, it would shift that center point all over the place. So it's telling you that it's not only is this very close to the center line extremely close, it's almost perfectly

spherical in this section. So it's a section of a sphere, that blue line, right? That's the matching of a sphere. It's very, very regular. It's regular to the point where you couldn't possibly achieve it with hand tools by hand or by eye like as you you know imagine you're carving on that and again they don't credit the old kingdom or certainly not pre-denastic times with the use of the lathe but even if they had a lathe and even if you're using like a tool rest and you're trying to do this by hand you're going to be a million miles away from this result this is genuinely not achievable by hand right this incredibly regular shape um it's it's a phenomenal achievement And even though that's the biggest number you see in this report,

this represents something that would require some of the very best machinery we have today to replicate, even in other materials like acrylic or stainless steel or aluminium. And this is in rose granite, which isn't a regular material, right? The hardness changes microscopically as it goes through the material. We get other results with same things. We're matching a cone at this point to the vase bottom. And this is the other end of the vase from the, the top and the center line, and we're within 5,000th of an inch of being perfectly perpendicular

with the top, but within 9,000th of an inch of being perfectly parallel with the center line using 60,000 points of reference. Like this is, it's infinitesimal, it's so ridiculously well made. It's not, is what we're seeing with this, right? Jesus, man. So this is, it gets interesting here even with the lug handles. And this gets into some of the some of the details around how this might have been made because you can imagine like turning this on a lathe, you can't really do the lug handles, right?

Right, exactly. You know, if this thing had lugs on it and you were spinning it this way, you can't, you know, and you're cutting it as it's spinning, you can't really create the lug handles. Yeah, yeah, yeah. They add those after in modern times. Yeah, you'd have to, well, these aren't added. They're part of one piece.

They're part of one piece. Exactly. Yeah, so you would have, you'd probably have to leave a bull nose and come back with a different procedure to make them. Okay. But we can do things like compare the, like the match a cylinder to the lug handles, compare them to A and B, which we're doing here, and we're within a thousandths of an inch, like one and three thousandths of an inch.

So incredibly accurate relative to the, to those, to these axes of measurement that we're taking. And then we can compare them to each other. We can create like, all right, we can make one of these called reference surface F, and we can measure the other lug handle relative to it. And again, we're within, you know, five or six or six. and get 7,000th of an inch of being perfectly aligned, what is that, parallel with the other, the other lug handle. Not only that, but it's like the tops of them.

Like, there's actually a video of us spinning this thing on a, on a surface and having like one of these precision tolerance gauges that measures in the thousands of an inch and you sort of zero it out on one lug handle and you spin it around and it just zeros out on top of the other lug handle. Like they're perfectly the same height on the thing. And that also speaks to the flatness of the bottom because it's turning relative to the flatness of the bottom of the base, which we didn't measure,

but that's the fact that you're zeroing out this gauge. It's in some of the videos. It's hard to explain. It's hard to explain machinists and people that understand these sort of measurements will understand it better, but they'll get it. But it's interesting to think, all right, so assuming you have to, you've left a bullnose, right, to create these lug handles. You have to come back with a different tool

and you've got to carve away that area of the vase body between the lug handles. So what about that part of the vase? Because they can't be made on a lay that has to be made with a different process, right? And so we looked at that. We looked at the actual area of the vase between the two handles.

And we found the same level of precision. And this is truly remarkable. He's 20,000 points of reference. We looked at, we matched a cone to look at how close is the center line to the center line of B, like that center line of the neck of the vase, it's within 5,000th of an inch. This is really remarkable because in today's manufacturing processes,

when you change tools or you change the process, it introduces errors. Like this is accounted for in our modern manufacturing processes, things like making turbine blades and stuff like that. We understand that tools and process changes introduces errors and we don't see that sort of error here. We're not seeing it. So it leads you to one of two conclusions.

One, they, whoever made this was able to handle tool and process changes better than we can, right? So they could deal with changing the process and the tool and just not have the same degree of error that we'd see. Or it wasn't made on a lathe. It was made in a single pass. which means that you're talking about five axes of freedom.

It's a mill. It's a, think about those C&C mills as computerized mills that can carve a sink like a complex object with one tooltip. You either,

it's one of those two things. It has to either be... Like 3D printing? Not print, no, as far as we know, this is reductive. Reductive, right? As in we're like taking it

and carving it away. Right, okay, yes, obviously, yeah. Yeah, geopolitics, the idea... I don't mean, yeah, right, that doesn't make sense. But think about like a CNC mill. Like a complex five axes of freedom with an arm. Yes. That's computer guided.

Like that's one of those two things that comes out of this analysis. And it's the fact that there's no perceivable lack of precision between the vase handles is amazing. So and this is just the start of the rabbit hole kind of thing. Like it got crazy from here. This is a lot of fun because we made this. We made the STL file like the model available online and sort of open sourced it. And there was a cryptographer from Denmark named Mark Kavis who runs this website called unsigned.io. Really interesting guy spoken to him.

And he undertook essentially a deep sort of mathematical and geometric analysis of the vase. And he found some just utterly remarkable aspects of it that I think have some extremely startling conclusions. And he kind of started by looking for like, all right, what are the, Are there geometric patterns that we can see in his vase? So what can we see in it? And so, you know, he kind of started and he found that it actually does encompass some of the sacred geometry that we were talking about with Randall the other day, the things like the circle of life.

There's actually two circle of life grids that are in here and you can see them this way. So if you look at the blue circles that measure at point D, that's a grid based on the maximum internal diameter of the vase. And you can also see that grid matches the very. top of the vase with the point A. So it's a circle of life grid that matches the internal diameter, it matches the top of the vase, and then you have another circle of life grid that matches the, it's based on the external maximum diameter of the vase that also matches other points of it. And this is kind of where he started. And he found that it created, not only were

these these geometric patterns in it, but there's a bunch of these mathematically, significant ratios and even algorithms and interrelationships between the shapes in the vase to the point where you could define it with a single algorithm. And the overall point here is he's proving that this vase was designed. Like these degrees of interrelationship between these features in the vase aren't accidental. It had to have been designed and then somehow executed in granite with just astonishing precision. So, one of the base principles that he found, he's sort of reverse, he's taking the object and he's reverse engineering it. Like, we're looking at it and he's trying to find out what was used,

what is the, what is the philosophy mechanism mathematics behind this vase? And the more you dig, the more you find. So one of the fundamental principles he found in the vase is the use of the radian or particularly the one radian angle. So this is a little diagram showing you what a radian is. It's a simple way to express an, at any angle, right? You go, you take the radius of a you apply it to the circumference of a circle. The angle that it forms when you draw lines to it on the inside is one radian. So if you, you know, there's a two, you can measure,

you could call something a two radian angle. You could half a circle is pi radians or 3.14, et cetera, radians. Right. And there are two pi radians inside of a circle. So it's like a, it's just an elegant way to describe any angle. And you can see the use of the one radian angle expressed here. So one radian angle kind of defines the curvature and the angle of the top of the vase. It based on that circle of life grid center point, you can see the one radian angles kind of defining the placement of the handles.

There's a number of different uses of the one radian angle. And from that, he discovered something else. He discovered that not only are there radians in this thing, but the radian is the basis for an algorithm that can be used to describe. all of the curvatures used in the vase. Now, this is, this gets a little, you don't have to understand the mass to understand the significance of this. The most widely used shape in the vase is the circle. Like sections of circles are used to describe the curves on the vase,

the little tiny curves on the insides of corners and stuff like that. Now, the radius of these circles, so the size of these circles is very tightly interrelated with each other. And it's only these radiuses. Like if there's none of these, the size of these circles are accidental. They're all tightly related to each other and they can be expressed with a single elegant equation that Mark was calling the radial traversal pattern. And that's the equation right there.

But what this is telling you is that if there were circles or curves of a different radius, of a radius, there's none of it. There's nothing here that doesn't fit this pattern. So it's only the circles of this size that fit this pattern. It's based on, like it's, it's uses radians, but it's, it's, it's, it fits this radial traversal pattern. Right? So you can see there's up to like,

there's like 14 different, uh, or 12 or 14 different circle radiuses that is radii, radi, radiative that are used. They're all related to each other. They're connected to each other through this algorithm. There's that 4.3.2.

4.3 is here as well. Um, yeah. And, and so this is, this is, the, the point to take home is that this isn't accidental. You might be able to find one or two degrees of, of mathematical interrelationship in an, by accident, but to find to find 12, like 12 tightly coupled degrees of mathematical interrelationship in an object like this is not accidental. Mark actually said in the article said it'd be more

likely for you to wake up one morning and have an entire new universe, like quantum universe sprouting out of your left nostril than it would be for this to be an accident. It's not accidental. It was designed. And in order to prove this, he went ahead and said, you know what, let's make a model. We're going to go into CAD. We're going to build this vase using just this algorithm, using these circles with this algorithm, make it perfect. And then I'm going to compare the vase model to the CAD model that's built using just the math.

And he did that. And the median radial deviation, so the difference from the actual model of the scanned vase to the model he built using the mass was nine micrometers, which is 0.3 of a thousandth of an inch. Like that's the average deviation. 0.3 of a thousandth. So like a 10, it's three 10,000ths of an inch. Which is at that point we're talking about degrees where we don't know if it's an imperfection in the scan. Right. Or even in the vase.

We don't, you can't tell you're at the limit of resolution at this point. Of what we can measure. Yeah. So you got to also remember here that some of these circles we're talking about, they range from about 42 millimeters in size down to one. 1.1 millimeter at the small end. So you have circles, arcs of circles that fit this pattern that are 1.1 millimeters in radius, which is kind of crazy, right? Very small. What was Randall saying when you pulled this up the other day? He was like kind of freaking out. He was. I don't think he's watched all of the videos. I'd love him to see. I want to talk. I haven't had the chance to take him through it yet. And I'll probably do that in Montana here. But he was kind of losing his mind when he saw this because he saw something very similar with the radiuses of these circles compared to some of this plasmoid. technology that he was talking about. Yeah. Yeah. And I think he would, this other stuff, it was interesting too, the fact that other than the radial traversal pattern, we also see pie, the golden ratio, we see other sacred geometry put in here. So the image on the left shows

you pie to within 0.1 of a degree. The image on the right shows us the golden ratio squared to within less than 0.1 percent. I'm sorry, not degree percent. Less than 0.01 percent accuracy with the golden ratio. There's actually the golden ratio shows up in a number of places. I've just used a couple of examples here. It also has encodes pi to within, you know, 0.1%. Can you explain what the golden ratio is, people that might not know? So people don't know. Golden ratio is the, man, the aspect or the ratio of the universe.

The golden ratio is a fundamental principle of the world. Like it seems to be an encoded ratio that is encoded from, DNA up to the up to the formation of galaxies. It's 1.6, etc., etc. I can't actually remember exactly what it is. But it's a ratio expressed by living things.

It also can be found by basic geometry. We went through it with the Randall Carlson podcast about how to define the ratio. But it can be expressed in a human body in terms of how it grows from, you know, the length of your hand down to the, the gap in the gap in your wrist here and that's that that's one part of the ratio the other parts of it is is down to here it's it's the ratio is as a line that is dissected where the ratio of the small to the large is exactly the same as the large to the whole right so it's hard to think about but it's like take a line the point where you dissect it where the ratio

of size is of of the small piece where you've dissected it where you've dissected it. it, the ratio of that to the larger piece is exactly the same as the ratio of the larger piece to the, right, to the, oh. So it's like, A and B, B to A, A is to A plus B. That's the, that's the equation for it. And it's expressed in life, right? Everything that grows organic material, the human body, cons shells is the famous one. It's the Fibonacci sequences attached to this. It's, you know, you take a cross-section of a DNA molecule, you find the goal. ratio. It's in the spiral helix of the DNA molecule. It's in the structure of galaxies. It's it seems to be a fundamental constant of the universe. And that's why I think the fact that it gets

expressed in these artifacts and it's in fact this sort of geometry, even radians themselves, it's they're showing us, the builders of this are showing us that there's a language behind this. They're showing us their capabilities. This vase is to me represents something of almost like a time capsule. It's like a, it's like, it's like, it's like, it's like something that's sent through time to us that, that is expressing the degree of knowledge and understanding that it's created as had of the universe and of their system, even their system of mathematics. It's, I actually get, I have a slide on this later, but there was a really, I had a, once, I, I'll get, I want to, want to finish talking about the vase because there's, there's,

there's some interesting implications about the maths that we've been going through. I'm not doing it just for the, the sake of mass, but come back to that time capsule. idea in a minute. So when you think about the design of the vase and how it's been made very precisely in Rose Granite and there's a mathematical design that's behind it, right? We get to a point where we're like, all right, so the precision, the complexity, the depth of interrelation between the features really rules out random chance. This artifact was 100% designed. And it's like, okay, so how could you design this? Can you design it on paper? Remember that there are circles that have a radius of one millimeter basically.

If you were trying to draw that at scout, try and draw anyone, I'd challenge anyone, try and draw a circle with a compass that's got a radius of a millimeter and see how you go. And then be able to execute that down to the thousands of an inch. Remember, it's made extremely precisely. You might be able to draw it out on a piece of paper that's as big as the room, but then you still have to scale it down somehow. It's got to find its way to an output somehow.

You've got to be able to carve this thing in granite somehow. I think the best way, and Mark proved it the best way to design this is mathematically. It's designed with the mass. We can express it with an equation. Once you've got that equation, you've got that mathematical design. You have to then do the same thing. You've got to get it to output somehow. So how do you take it from a design to an output and into an output of a system that is extremely accurate?

Like this, just be able to make something like this in Rose Granite would require some of our very best precision lathes or precision mills and you're talking about extremely sturdy and firm bearings and rods and turn screws and it is a whole lot of capability in this right it's been made with astonishing precision and the fact that it's we know that because of the area between the vase handles right it's it's extremely precise like they didn't they didn't lose positional calibration when they changed tools to make the vase handle or it was made on a five access mill in a single pass. And this is kind of where that evidence and logical leads.

And I like to use this. I like to quote directly from Mark's article where he wrote about this. And this is what he said, quoting Mark, as far as we know, no human beings, trained animals or naturally occurring phenomena, modern or ancient, take mathematical formulae and equations as input and produce lathe operating motions as outputs. For all the knowledge and insights we've accumulated over the ages, we know of exactly one and only one category of things capable.

of such behavior. The kind of thing that we refer to as a touring machine, a device capable of taking input, holding state, performing operations on held states, according to predetermined principles and producing output. Now, you can make touring machines mechanically, pneumatically, electronically, hydraulically, but we call this class of device a computer and no plausible way representing operating on or manufacturing the design of this artifact exists without having access to one such. He's saying that you cannot have made this without the use of a touring machine, a.k.a. a computer. Be able to take that design and produce the output to get the result that we see in this. As a very interesting statement. That's a mind fuck. That's what we like to call a mind fuck.

Yeah. Yeah, and it did fuck with the mind of one of these engineers that did the original analysis. I remember we talked about the metrology at the start, one of these aerospace engineer guys? Yes. So Mark does this. And this guy's name's Nick, and he called me up. He's like, Mark puts out his article. And it took me, you know, you've got to read this article a few times and figure out the math and trying to really digest it and see what it means.

And for me, you know, this is validation. I'm like, this is magic. This is, this is confirming some of the. the things that I've long suspected and I've held this particular worldview for a while that, all right, there was technology in the past. Nick, you know, he was amazed by the metrology. He was like, this thing's incredibly precise scratching his head didn't know. But it wasn't until he really sort of chewed on Mark's article where he's like, he calls me up one day and he's like, dude, I have to talk to you about this. This thing is, it's keeping me up at night. It's like,

I wake up in a fucking sweat thinking about this vase because it, you could tell it. It'd kind shattered his worldview. It had like changed. He's like, I can't explain this or rationalize it without this type of technology. What the hell was going on in the past? And he said something to me that I was like, I put into a slide here, which I thought was really interesting. Some of the things that I've said that I think this artifact is much more than just a simple vase, right? It's encoding sacred geometry, which is the very fabric of a universe. And I think it's telling us a tale of the creator's capabilities, their elegance, their knowledge systems, right? Even their mathematical systems, like they might have a base radian system rather than a base 10 like we use,

which is an elegant mathematical system. But what Nick said to me is like, you know what this reminds me of? He said, it reminds me of the golden records that are on the voyage of space probes. So when these space probes went out in the 1970s, they had these golden records on them. And it wasn't like we wrote this information on there. We used mathematical principles, geometric principles. we even use the radioactive decay of, I think, uranium atoms to provide a launch clock. We gave them all these clues based on different principles and maths on these vases to try and convey information about our species, about who we were, about what we knew. And we sent the goddamn things out into space.

I think this vase, it seems to be something like that, but instead of going through space, it's been sent through time. It's like one of these golden records has been sent through. through time to us. And if we have the eyes to see it and the ability to decode it, there's all this information that we can glean from it and we can learn something about the past from it. And that's what Nick was telling me. I was like, that's a fantastic analogy for. And that's truly what it is. The deeper we look, the deeper this rabbit hole goes on this thing. And yeah, the crazy thing is too, this is now, this was the start of the year we did this

and we've been working through it. But it's not the only one. You guys did more vases? We're doing more vases. We have literally 20 or 30 more that we're working on now. Early results, we're seeing similar results for a lot of them, even better in terms of the pure metrology and precision. Like some of them are zeroing it out on like the thousandth scale. What?

We're also measuring stuff in CT machines now, which can go down to the micron. So even like 25 times more accuracy than the structured light scanning. Yeah, I think. My gosh. Very interesting. It's, yeah. So this dude you were hanging out with the other day, he has like a ton of these bases.

Can you show that picture? Yeah. Of you with all these vases? Yeah, sure. Is that the first time you put your hands on one of them? It's the first time that I've, here's me holding one here. This one actually is translucent. You can see through the light right through it.

But this is the collection that we're, some of his that we're working on. I've been extremely fortunate and I do want to I'm not going to name names but I'm I'm very grateful to people that have been inspired by this vase work and they've and they have the means and the ability to go out and collect these things like this because these are artifacts that can be bought on the on the antiquities

market and they cost a bomb obviously I can't do it but I mean I'm extremely grateful well some of I mean you up to a like 70, 80 thousand dollars, a hundred thousand dollars. The more provenance, the better usually. Some of them as low as like a few thousand dollars, but mostly the good ones. You know, you're talking five figures, if not six. And yeah, I'm very grateful too that they're willing to have them looked at and analysed. Of course, the goal is, the goal is to get into the museums and to look at some of those artifacts that are in there. We're working on, you know, creating a standardized process

that we can then propose to museums. And we have some very good interactions happening and we're very hopeful that in the very near future we'll be able to get into some museums that do allow this type of research. They're willing to work with us. Petrie Museum being one of them. They've got a number of artifacts

that would totally fit within this. And I think this technology and this technique is not, we don't just have to use it on vases. I'd love to see it done. We want to scan those drill cores that we looked at earlier and really define that spiral groove. we want to be able to, I'd love to see this used on boxes and statues and be able to really do complex geometric modeling and analysis for those things.

So I think we're just on the tip of the iceberg when it comes to learning more about the statues of the luxor, for example, those things were analyzed similar, not obviously under those techniques, but Chris Dunn pointed out that those statues of the luxor were perfectly symmetrical. Yeah, perfectly symmetrical. Yeah, and the way we've done that is with photographic and photogrammatric, photogrammed. But even the smallest, the sort of relatively small statues, you know, six-foot statues, I think we could scan down to this level of precision and we can, you know, we can define just how precise they are, how regular the curves. I think there's tremendous things we can learn with this technology. And I think that's exactly what I'd love, I think we should be doing. Because who knows what it'll turn. I just think we should be following the evidence wherever it leads, no matter how much it kind of upsets the apple cart in terms of the established story of history. So yeah, this is, it's really interesting stuff and it's, it's, this has been a huge project this year. And for people that are waiting for more vase file STLs, they're coming. The analysis takes time. Like this stuff doesn't happen overnight.

So, you know, the process is ongoing. I know there's, there's some interest in writing a paper. We were looking for, yeah, I mean, scientific paper's probably coming. But to me, it's this, I, it's the first time. I think we've genuinely. got some very hard evidence now that that is very hard to argue with about significant technology being deployed to make these things because the challenge is out there I would love anyone to make one of these like go make one if you think you can do it by hand go for it if you think you can

even machine it with a tool made out of acrylic go for it if you think you can get down to these numbers and trust me machinists and people that work in these tolerances understand just how well this thing is made I want to see it I would love to see people attempt to make it and even come close because I just think that we're a lot years away from this idea that these things were done by hand at this point. Right. And again, remember, these go back to pre-Dynastic time. Do you think there will be any sort of like attempts to suppress the kind of stuff that you guys are looking at or like dismiss it? Yeah, there's already people dismissing it.

What are they saying? What do they say about it? Well, mostly it's been like, oh, the vase is fake. It's a fake vase. Yeah. Which, you know, Alex Dunn in the, so one of the engineers is Chris Dunn's son, he, that he's in my videos about this. But he, I mean, that's the only thing they can come up with that I've heard is, oh, the vase is fake. It's like, you think it was, the vase on this, the provenance on this particular vase goes back to the 1980s.

Some of these vases provenance goes back to where they, in terms of they have a known history, go back to the 1800s. But even in the 1980s, I think you'd be challenged to make something that precise out of Rose Granite. And if you think you can make it today that precise with that much of all of that maths that's behind it and everything else, try and make it. And try and see how much that costs you to make it. And then try and justify that by the cost that's going to whatever you think you can sell it for on the antiquities market. It's actually damaged. It's the thing, it matches almost perfectly. In fact, to the eye exactly, lots of pre-donastic vases that you find.

in the Cairo Museum. In my video, I show a bunch of them. Like, it is the same shape and size as many pre-dynastic vases. Obviously, there's a variety of shapes and sizes when it comes to these artifacts. But, I mean, just calling it fake is about the best argument

anybody's been able to come up with because they can't handle... Fake how? Well, somebody manufactured it, and, I mean, things do happen. Like, people may try and sell fake artifacts. But it's like, this is, it's ridiculous to think that you could do that cheaply

or it's not, look, this is not something that's made in some like backyard workshop in China or India and then, you know, mass produced and salt on the market. It's ridiculous. If you think it's fake, try and make one, see how long, and see if you can get anywhere near it and how much it costs you. I just think it's a facetious argument with nothing behind it more than the desire to dismiss this because it doesn't, it doesn't match their worldview. No one's arguing with the metrology. Like, nobody can challenge the metrology. The scans out. there and available. It's public information. You want to do it and you want to figure it out for yourself. The scans right there. You can make the same calculations Mark made. You can measure it for yourself. You can stick it in a CMM and work out the data for yourself. So it's all repeatable. But the best people can come up with it's, oh, it's fake or sacred geometry is woo. The other thing I've heard, which we talked about in detail with Randall, like sacred geometry is not woo. Sacred Geometry is the universe. It is the fabric of the universe and it's, you know, knowledge of that is what essentially comprised the mystery schools and, you know, this is, it's, this is like

the way you see the world. Like this, the idea that sacred geometry is woo. That's the only other thing I've heard is like, oh, as soon as you see the flower of life, forget about it. It's crystal peepy nonsense. Like, it's just people that don't like what it means. Right. And they just are seeking any way to try and discredit it, I throw shade at me because, oh,

the crazy ideas that guy has or whatever. It's like, I don't care. And, and I'm going to, I think, all the. these other vases are going to put proof to all of that nonsense too. Like there's vases here that are being scanned that had provenance going back to the 1800s. In fact, funnily enough, one of these vases that happens to be on this table and is owned by this collector and is being scanned and analyzed happens to have been brought up in one of the videos that were made, like debunking this work as an example of a real vase. So we'll see what this real vase actually looks like

because he picked the dude picked a silly example because turns out this guy owns that vase. its provenance goes back to the 1800s and we are going to scan it because it looks to me like it's going to show some similar Which one is it? It's the back on the back one on the right here, I believe. That big one? Yeah, the big one here. Yeah, this guy. So the guy made the debunking video about that particular case.

He used that as an example as a fake face. No, as a real vase. As a real vase. So assuming the first phase we scanned was fake. Oh, this is what a real vase is. I'm like, okay, bro. Let's see. I don't know what results is going to show.

I will say that not every vase shows these properties. There are handmade vases. They did work on it, but there's often a visible difference between the ones that have, that show these sort of precision properties versus the ones that don't. You know, most of the handmade stuff is alabaster, but there is, there were still, you know, handmade hardstone vases as well, and you can usually pretty clearly tell the difference. Yes. Yeah, it's a fascinating space.

I mean, I'm just. And are they all found in Egypt? these are there is some actual artifacts from around the world that I'd love to see subjected to some of these this process as well um but in general yeah I mean a lot of this stuff I mean they got and and I would like to scan other artifacts like Roman things and and I mean typically there's not a lot of of hard stone artifacts like this that seem to display those levels of precision that come from other um cultures and obviously the technologies that they were using was getting better we're getting better too but I'd love to scan them and compare them because I even primitive lave made stuff I don't think is going to come anywhere near the precision of these. The best, yeah, I don't know of any particular examples outside of these things in Egypt. This is a, it seems to be a pretty common. Magna Fuente Bowl, there's maybe a few others that I'd love to see scanned. But yeah, I think this technology is applicable for lots of different artifacts.

Yeah, they're like time capsules from a previous civilization of aliens. trying to teach us something but what are they trying to teach us Ben they're telling us that they knew man they just I think a lot of it is an expression of I mean we're not trying to teach whoever the hell reaches finds the voyage of probes

anything we're just trying to let them know that we were here we were here yeah yeah we had it figured out yeah well bro you got to catch a flight I do at some point yes so in about five minutes you gotta get out of here so thanks for coming dude we fucking killed it We did a whole Flurry of podcast this weekend. We did.

Very enjoyable, man. Thanks for bringing me out again. Always great to see you. Hell yeah. Where can people find out more about what you're doing? Keep up. Obviously, I'm sure a lot of people listening. I already know, but for people that don't tell them where they can research you online,

read, you know, your book's not out yet, right? No, yeah, I'm working on. Another, it's probably going to be a little while for the book. But, yeah, Ben Van Kirkwick's the name if you want to look me up. But otherwise, unchartedex.com or YouTube.com slash c slash unchartededx. I'm also on Spotify, on Rumble. You can find all my videos on Spotify, like I said. Rumble, wow.

Yeah, no, I'm throwing stuff on Rumble too for now. But you can, I'm on social media. I'm not super active on there, but yeah, Twitter, Instagram. That's all that's linked on the website and pretty much in all of the videos. But, yeah, YouTube's the main place. Yeah. You engage in some of the Twitter drama going on right now? I don't play that.

I wouldn't be on social media if it wasn't for this stuff. Yeah. There was some, I did engage. get some enjoyment out of some of the things I saw happen on Twitter yesterday. It's so funny that people. There's people on Twitter just for that stuff. And there's people like you who are just on there just to show the stuff you're doing in the real world. Yeah. And it's so funny when you see those two worlds collide. I ain't got no time for social media nonsense. Honestly, I don't care. I'm not spending time on social media looking at what people

said about what. And yeah, you know, I think, yeah, Twitter's meant for arguments. It's literally engaged for conflict. It's so stupid. That's its nature. It's fine. Yeah. I'll link everything below and thanks again we've got to get you back what are you working on anything new right now that's coming out soon or what do you got going on in the pipeline? I am actually I'm taking another look at the Serapium here shortly. I've I've just got back from England. We didn't even talk about the Stone Circle stuff but I'm I am that's a lot of research involved in that for me as well but yeah new look at the Serapum is coming up plus I haven't really done a video talking about the Osiris shaft I have like there's some other structures up there. in Giza that are interesting. South America, yeah, I'm always working on things. There's another vase video coming about the recent scans and some more data coming about those.

Were you filming when you were down there in Sarasota? Yeah, a lot of pick, yeah. Not mean, yes, this was a chance for me to see these things in person, handle them in person. It was the first time, as we said, that I'd ever got to handle them, like full units. You can get, you can find pieces of them in Egypt and like beneath the step pyramid. But, yeah, the first time actually can handle them. Yeah, it was a thrill, man.

I'm really thankful to that guy for letting me play with his toys. Tell him to at least put a seatbelt around him when he's driving around on a Porsche. Yeah, that was. Yeah, one might have fallen off the front seat of his car. I wasn't there. He said it's fine. It's made of granite. It's not going to.

I mean, the fat ones are probably okay, but there's one in here that's like translucently thin. You're kind of like that thing. You don't want to break it. Jesus. That was an expensive one, too. Wild shit, bro. Well, we'll get you back in the next year. So, cool.

Thanks again. Goodbye, everybody.