Danny Jones Podcast - #336 - NEW Egyptian Vase Scans Prove the Human Timeline is Wrong | Karoly Poka & Adam Young

Episode Date: September 29, 2025

Watch every episode ad-free & uncensored on Patreon: https://patreon.com/dannyjones Adam Young & Karoly Poka reveal the latest research and scan measurements on predynastic stone vases & uncover the most precise artifact from ancient Egypt. SPONSORS https://capl.onelink.me/vFut/zralgyl0 - Download CashApp Today! https://www.amentara.com/go/dj - Use code DJ22 for 22% off your first order. https://mizzenandmain.com - Use code code DANNY20 for 20% off. https://whiterabbitenergy.com/?ref=DJP - Use code DJP for 20% off EPISODE LINKS Karoly Poka's YouTube channel:  @karolypoka https://www.artifactfoundation.org FOLLOW DANNY JONES https://www.instagram.com/dannyjones https://twitter.com/jonesdanny OUTLINE 00:00 - Analyzing ancient Egyptian artifacts 03:12 - The most precise granite vase is 5,000 year old 14:40 - The artifact scanning process 19:55 - Petrie's core analysis 31:52 - Could "perfect" vases be manufactured today? 42:52 - Are these vases older than we think? 51:50 - Failed recreation of "perfect" stone vases 59:00 - Explaining the scoop marks 01:02:18 - The most precise object in Egypt 01:11:41 - Why speculation is healthy 01:18:04 - Who controls the Egyptology narrative 01:23:27 - Best theory for how Egyptian vases were made 01:36:05 - Columns & hidden chambers under the pyramid 01:45:48 - Karoly & Adam's next project 01:47:07 - Unexplored zones of the Sahara Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

It's time to refresh your yard during spring backyard days at the Home Depot. Get low prices guaranteed on propane grills starting at $179, like the next grill three-burner gas grill. Or get $50 off a select Weber Spirit grill and bring big flavor to your backyard. Then set the scene with Hampton Bay string lights that bring it all together. Shop spring backyard days for seven days at the Home Depot. Now through May 6th. Exclusion supplies to homedipo.com slash price match for details. Kayak gets my flight, hotel, and rental car right, so I can tune out travel advice that's just plain wrong.

Bro, Skycoin, way better than points. Never fly during a Scorpio full moon. Just tell the manager you'll sue. Instant room upgrade. Stop taking bad travel advice. Start comparing hundreds of sites with kayak and get your trip right. Bad advice? You talking to me?

Kayak, got that right. First of all, once you guys just introduce yourselves, Go ahead. Thanks for being here or for the opportunity. My pleasure. My name is Karoipoka. I'm an electrical engineer basically coming from Hungary. I was actually watching and listening to Ben Bon Kirkuk's videos on Uncharted Ex when I met

these basis, this topic. And I was quite bored in my day job and I was very bored. I was also researching these and I figured out that probably no one had investigated real museum pieces before and that's when I that was the time when I had the idea to list all the Egyptian museums or the museums in Europe with a significant Egyptian collection and write them an email to ask for an opportunity to go there bring my own equipment and analyze these vases and and after I started this little side project I went on Ben's trip into Egypt I met Adam and actually we figured out that we have a shared goal and we teamed up and Adam was the one actually who started this entire investigation like 10 years ago I guess and yeah after the

trip we went to the Petri Museum we scanned a bunch of these actually these 3D prints from the most precise vases we found there And, yeah, basically that's how it started, for me at least. Adam, how'd you get into this? Yeah, Adam Young, my background's in math and statistical mathematics, and I work in finance up in New York, actually, and been interested in this sort of conundrum of our ancient past for a long time, but seeing these objects in person alongside bigger objects like pyramids and other temples,

but then the smaller ones are, I would say, as impressive in a different way. I thought that there could be something here that I could, that I could lend my hand and, if not expertise and at least my interest and enthusiasm into. And started analyzing these back in, I think, 2017, along with Chris Dunn's son Alex and a few others, we've investigated a number of them that were in private collections and then started making inroads to get into more institutional venues like the Chiron Museum at other. and yeah, when I met up with Carly and he joined the foundation, we've been working on improving a lot of the algorithms,

and he's put many months of his life into, I think what's really a groundbreaking field. So before the last few years, this had never been done, and it hadn't been an established, there had not been an established procedure for actually applying metrology analysis to ancient artifacts where we didn't know what the design was. where we didn't know what the original schematic or intention was. So it was a new field.

So what's this? Can you explain what this is? What's going on with this vase right here? When is this vase from? Where did you get it? And what's significant about this thing? So we call that affectionately the OG vase. That was one of the first that I analyzed. It wasn't the actual first, but it was the first that exhibited precision that was

inexplainable. It's traditionally dated to around 2,900 BC. It was found in a second. or third dynasty tomb, hence the dating attribution. It was in a private collection in London for a while, and then I purchased it just from an antiquities dealer, I think, like 12, 13 years ago, roughly speaking. So these were not that rare.

I mean, they were exported from Egypt by the thousands. Wow. And you can, you know, you can talk to any antiquities lawyer that would confirm that. Some of them, when we were in a museum, we were in the Turin Museum two months ago, or what was it, back in May. And they, one of their pieces, yeah, so one of their pieces was a Sakara vessel from the step pyramid that they obtained in 1896.

So that's 25 years before Loye, who is the, who's the most famous one that was credited with excavating most of them. So, you know, this has been a, this has been an ongoing fascination in Egypt is the antiquities trade. The ancient Greeks and Romans were coming here and bringing things back with them. Right. So this was from under the step pyramid, you said? This one, I don't know. Okay. We don't know the exact tomb.

But this is the, this is, what's going on here on this diagram? This is a scan that you guys did of it? So first it was scanned with a structured light, I think, in 20 or? 2017, yeah. And then he did a CT scan on this. So the CT scan will give you the most accurate representation. Computerized tomography scan. Yeah, exactly.

It's shooting X-10. rays through the object and it will give you very detailed micron, really micron level representation. And this is the analysis of that CT scan. Here you can see on the left side the sample points per slice. So basically the way we analyze this is to slice it up into very thin horizontal slices. One slice here is 20 micron high, basically. There's a slice thickness. and you can see the sample points per slice here on this chart and here the root mean square distance error of those points per slice. So basically we slice them up and we fit a perfect circle on every slice.

And we measure how much those points in the scan data deviate from the perfect circle. Okay. How many slices? we have a little bit more than 6,000 slices 6,000 slices and this thing is roughly would you say 6 inches tall 7 inches tall something like that yeah about that so we are measuring every little slice and the median root mean square distance

so every slice will get like a number sure was the root mean squared it's like an average deviation basically per slice. And we pick the median because if we would pick the average, every damage part will throw that away or will significantly modify.

And so the mean is not robust to outliers. That's what I'm trying to say. That's why we picked the median. It's a little bit better in this regard. And we found the median root mean square distance

of this waste 16 microns. It's like 6. or 7, 10,000th of an inch. The median. Yeah, the median. But as you can see here on the right side, on the right plot, it's quite consistent. It's not zoomed in really because on the top you can see there is damage.

So it was a little bit higher like 500 microns, probably because of that damage. And there is some of the bottom two. So these big spikes on the right are how far it deviates from perfect. a perfect circle. The maximum is 526 microns. And what is that in English? It's 200

of an inch. 200ths of an inch. No, 200s of an inch. Two one-hundredths of an inch. So 0.02 inches. That's the max. The minimum deviation is 0.004, like four 10,000s.

Okay. And the median is six. Okay. And what's, what, so basically what you're saying is that because these vases came from 2,500 BC, is that when it was? That was, that's when this one was from, roughly? Traditionally, it was dated to 29, but they range from early or old kingdom back to pre-dynastic and Akata time.

So, okay. It was about a 2,000-year-old. a 2,000 years span that these are usually ascribed to. Okay. So at least 4,000 years ago, at the very minimum, at the youngest, it could possibly be is 4,000 years old, right? So the idea here is like there's no way conventional, conventional explanations of how Egypt, Egyptians made these vases.

There are tools that we know that they had. They could not have come up with something so perfect. That's the idea, yes. Okay. So that's what we set out to test, to, to, to, to, to, see if that's actually true. Is there any way that any of this work could be done by hand or by manual methods and are there different grades or tiers of manufacturing quality in vessels that we see, right, across materials, across forms and across the different cultures that are attributed

to have been the ones that made them originally? So these are normally attributed to a time based on where they're found. So they're found in a third century tomb. Okay, that's the minimum mage. But it looks like something else. And we know this other group is making this thing in a different time period so we may actually redate it because it looks like something else. And there's a lot of problems. That's a Victorian era concept called form-based dating. And there's a number of issues with that. It's the best approach that was around 150 years ago, but I think it's led to a lot of inconsistencies. And we've seen that with the alabasters. We've seen that with granites where one form may be dated to Middle Kingdom. Another form might be dated to, like Nekata,

which was 3,000 years before, just because of the way they look. Without reference, without giving any credit to the type of material, how difficult it would have been, how, why does it make sense that two distinct groups of people are making the exact same thing for 3,000 years? That's kind of odd, right? But that's the fallacy with this form-based dating. Yeah, so I was listening to a quote-unquote debunking of these vases on YouTube this morning. And this guy, David Miano, was one of the arguments he was making is that if you find one of these that is perfectly symmetrical that you measure in your light scanners and your CT scans, you have, he was, and I could be, I could be misinterpreting this, but I believe the argument he was making is you can't just have one. You got to have two. and he's saying that if you only have one, it doesn't prove that your theory of this advanced civilization

or this advanced machining technology existed. But the way I was thinking, the reason that argument doesn't make sense to me is because if I go find a flying saucer in the desert, I don't need to find two flying saucers to figure out that there's some advanced civilization that made this thing, right? I only need one.

So I think there's thousands of them and many thousands and there there's thousands of these things that are that are this precise yes how many have been measured well we I mean we've gone through a few hundred we're not in the thousands but we also have a filtering bias right we're ignoring pieces that are heavily damaged that may have been precise originally but it makes it very difficult to scan analyze so we might we might discard a whole bunch of them and a lot of these were broken and put back together Right. So we could start to recognize these. They might look precise. We don't know until we actually measure. So it's really hard to say exactly. So we have been in four museums and there is a time limit in every appointment basically or at every appointment. And we have scanned like roughly 20 to 30 pieces per museum. Okay. So you bring your stuff there and you can scan them while you're in there? Yeah, of course. Oh, wow. That's amazing. And then of course, you know Matt Bell and others. They have been looking at pieces that. that are in private collections. I'm aware of people that own several hundred of these.

So these are not uncommon. They're not uncommon. And what are these people that own the hundreds of these say about the stuff that you guys are doing? It's novel to them, right? They've never really seen it or heard about it before. And usually people are open-minded about a lot of this, but there's a long period of traditional story

that you have to overcome before people are receptive to the fact that maybe they were made by a different group of people. So the other day I tried to split the dinner bill. And we're all familiar with the payment apps that take three days to send your money and you always forget your password. So you got to reset it. And then on top of that, they take a cut.

So now you have to send extra. Listen, if I take this bill and I give it to my friend, that's how fast I want my money to be transferred digitally. And that's where today's sponsor, Cash App says, Hold my beer. Moving money should be simple. We're not trying to apply for mortgages here. What a relief.

It took seconds to set up. and all I needed was my phone number. No digging around for bank info and no forms. Just boom, done. The first time I used it was when a guest didn't receive the taxi voucher I sent. I reimbursed him while we were still on the phone and he got it instantly. It didn't take two to three business days. It was instant. But what about safety? If you're about to send money to someone sketchy, cash app gives you an alert like, hey, you sure you want to send this? which definitely saved me once or twice when I mistyped the person's name with my slippery butterfingers. Also, you can personalize payments. So you can send your roommate rent money with a pizza emoji in a sparkly background. Every time my in-laws want something, they get the poo emoji.

Bottom line is, I use cash app because it's the fastest, the safest, and it just makes life far less stressful. And for a limited time only, cash app customers can use our exclusive code to earn some additional cash. For real, just download cash app and use my exclusive referral. code cash app 10 in your profile send $5 to a friend within 14 days and you'll get $10 dropped right into your account terms apply that's money that's cash app and now for the fine print cash app is a financial services platform not a bank banking services provided by cash apps bank partners prepaid debit cards issued by Sutton bank member fdic discounts provided by cash app a block ink brand visit cash dot app slash legal slash podcast for full disclosure

And thank you to Cash App for sponsoring this episode. How many again have been scanned by these? Roughly 100. Roughly 100. From museums, yeah. So you guys go to the museums, you guys pick the ones visually that you think look the most symmetrical. You put them in the scanner and then you basically filter it. Is this what the device is right here?

Yeah, that was in the Petrie Museum. So basically... Holy crap, that's crazy looking. We wanted to have like a portable device, which is relatively pretty, capturing the objects with a high accuracy. So this device is rated to 20 micron accuracy. And basically it's true. What did these museum people think when you guys show up with this crazy 3D scanner?

They like it. Usually they're curious. They're probably like, what the hell are you guys doing? Yeah. You know, we don't just ignore the less precise things. We want to control. We want a comparative. we want to be able to understand like how much more impressive is this so right we don't completely

ignore that as a control group but yeah i don't like my my point what i was making the point i was trying to make was that it doesn't matter if you do ignore the less precise stuff if there's shit that is that precise that goes far that back that far back that proves that there must have been something incredible that they that proves that they weren't doing this stuff with pounding stones and and bow saws or bow drills or whatever you know it it it's impossible to they would have got that lucky, basically is my point. Like they couldn't have just gotten that lucky a handful of times.

Right. So basically we are shooting laser beams to the object, and it's measuring the reflection angle of the laser beam, and then it's basically collecting the data points of the real object and reconstructing it with 20 micron accuracy. It means basically the 3D scan will be 20 micron close to the real object in dimensions, in size. eyes everything.

Yeah, so they were a little bit surprised. They told us that they never seen such high tech in a museum. But we needed this mobile handheld stuff because you cannot set up a huge device. Usually the museum space is very tiny. You don't have much room for big equipment or CT scanners. When they ask you guys why you're doing this, what do you tell them? I imagine you don't say you're looking for an advanced ancient civilization. Basically in the email when I reached out to museums

They'd be like get the hell out of here No actually they were quite not all of them But first the Petri Museum was very open to this And then the Museo Echizio I hope I pronounce it correctly it's a second Largest Egyptian museum after Cairo It's in Italy, Turin They were very open-minded

And I needed to craft a research plan And basically We were very open-minded We usually say it's a combination of preservation so that they have these things for posterity. We also say there's potentially more exploratory work that can be done. We don't know how these are made. I don't think anybody does, even though you may talk to an archaeologist that says there's consensus. There's really not.

And the consensus is around how the alabaster vessels were made, not necessarily the hard igneous rock like the granites and diarites. Right, right. Well, that's another straw man that the skeptics or the people that push back against this stuff, the conventional people like to say. They like to say, well, if you want to prove that, like he was specifically talking about Ben Van Kirkwick saying that he needs to come up with proof of ancient buzz saws or like ancient cord drills that would have been like perfect and would have had like insane amounts of power, like power tools.

But no, he doesn't have to do that because Ben is not saying that this stuff was made with any type of specific power tool. I think what Ben is actually saying is that the conventional explanation for how these things were made doesn't fit the bill. He's basically challenging their explanation. So the burden of proof isn't on them because Ben doesn't have some elaborate hypothesis of exactly how this was made.

Ben's just questioning the narrative, right? Yeah, that's right. So that one on screen, is this one right here? No, no, no. Oh, that's a different one. This is a museum piece. Yeah, exactly. And at the beginning, you can see

they collected all the pieces. So basically, they have an online collection, which we can browse and we can pick specifically at the Petrimism you can pick 10 pieces or 10 objects per visit. We had two appointments and we picked roughly 20 but they were

That's incredible that they're working with you guys like that They're letting you come in and do this Like I honestly can't believe that they did this It's insane how many objects are here These few, what is it like? 80,000 Just in a few rooms And this was like 5%.

Apparently this is like the bottom 5% of the material he brought back. Wow. Did you guys look at the core, the Petri Corps? Yes. Yeah, we looked at a few of those. Yeah. Core number seven, yeah. We also scan the core. I'm looking for the image. The Chris Dunn core number seven? Yeah. So for people who aren't aware of the Petrie core, I guess the Flinders Petrie found this cord out chunk of granite, I think it is, right? And it has it has these grooves that go around the outer edge of it and he went there and took a string and wrapped the string around the groove confirming that it's a it's a never-ending spiral from one end to the other right and because of how close the grooves are together and that it

is a perfect spiral um his engineering brain figured out that that had to have been a a drill that was moving at a very high speed that was drilling that core out of the rock at like a super high speed, right? 500 times? It was a slow speed. It was very productive. Each revolution was extremely productive.

We don't necessarily know the speed, but we know that every time it went around, it was removing an extraordinary amount of granite. More than anything we, I think Chris has said, between 100 and 500 times more productive than anything we have right now. But we asked them about this,

and they said, yeah, we have hundreds of these in boxes. Of these? Drill cores like this. Wow. They were discarded. They were all over the place and you could just pick them up off the ground. So we did see these, sorry, laser scan and photogrammetry on this.

So photogrammetry is basically a technique where you make like hundreds of photos from different angles around the object and then you stitch it together by tracking pixels and you can basically, there is a representative. here, or you can imagine the images all around. So these are the images taken of the object. Yeah, it's like how they photograph shit for video games. Yeah, exactly. And the problem with the laser

scanner, that those grooves are so tiny, that it's around the limit of the scanner, of the resolution of the scanner. So we probably have to go back and scan it with a more accurate laser scanner or a more accurate maybe structured light scanner.

because we could reconstruct the grooves but sometimes the grooves are not obvious where to where to follow the grooves because they have like cross sections and and uh yeah it's tough to see it here there's you can see the grooves when it gets towards the edge when the light's shining on it but like the the the pattern on that rock is like makes it really hard to see yes so we find we found a few spiral like turns basically on it but to make sure that it's 100% like a spiral

and not just a random wrongly connected groove we have to go back and analyze it more totally now I mean the stuff that Chris has done analyzing this core I mean he's done a lot of work made a lot of videos he's had aerospace people

look at them. I think he had an aerospace guy go with him to the museum. They've filmed wrapping the string around it. Like, where does that go after people like him do something like that? Like, is there somebody like that analyzes that and says like, okay, maybe we need to like rethink how they did this stuff or? There should be. The museum had no idea why this core is so famous. So this is the star object, the music. But when we were there, they had no idea why. It was surprising. So they don't pay attention to any of this stuff?

I don't think so. If they consider this alternative archaeology, then generally they ignore it. But there's other researchers that are there during the day, during the week, that they may also ignore just because there's too much on their plate. Right, right. The amount of people that are coming in and looking at this stuff, they probably just don't have the time to focus on it. Are you familiar with Chris King? No. his brand is the Chris King Precision Components

he's basically manufacturing high-end hapsets and headsets for mountain bikes and other bikes too he was with us so he's a manufacturing expert he's doing it for like 50 years like very tight tolerances aerospace tolerances

and he was explaining to the museum staff the archaeologist so when we were scanning they were watching us and Chris was explaining to them why we are doing it and what are the implications. And they were quite open-minded actually. So they didn't refuse to talk about these or.

Yeah, that's what Chris Dunn was explaining to me. He was explaining to me that some of like the younger up-and-coming archaeologists and Egyptologists in Egypt are way more open to this stuff. And there's there, a lot of them even have YouTube channels that explore this stuff and that pay attention to the stuff that like Ben is doing and, you know, all these like Jimmy Corsetti and all these other guys that are making. making a name for themselves, questioning the narrative. Like these young folks, these young people who are coming up, they're aware of it.

And they're actually taking it into consideration. And he's optimistic that that, you know, that dogma is going to change, which is. I think you can see it already. There's, like, Ahmed Adley is one of the members of the foundation with us and he's got a YouTube channel. It's specifically designed to bring this content to the Arab-speaking world because they haven't had it as much as English-speaking world. Probably French and German, but it's been absent from their lexicon. So you're right. I think people are open-minded.

And it does benefit them because it brings in tourist dollars eventually. I would think so. Yeah. Economically, it makes sense. So you guys, other than that thing you were just showing, that grid laser thing, didn't you guys also take this to like a defense contractor a place where they had some crazy like scanning machines that would analyze it even more thoroughly?

Well that's right. Before we had, now we have in-house equipment, but in the past that's the first few places I went. So I went to defense contractor that had access to old CMM machines and structured light equipment. And then we went to Zice itself in Michigan, which has like CZE.

Zice. Wow. Yeah, they're a massive, a massive brand that makes, yeah, exactly. Like lenses and scanning equipment, camera lenses. So they have CT scanning machines there that are the size of a small room. So obviously it doesn't lend itself well to on-site or on location expeditions or anything in a museum. But if you have the piece, so the private collection stuff can be analyzed at a place like that. And have you, who have, like, who have you shown these CT scans to that's involved with conventional Egyptology?

we've spoken to a few you know we have some relationships with with with with researchers and academics in Egypt at the Ministry of Antiquities and other places so we're I think we've taken the the softer approach where we we want you know we want access to the same the same sites and the same objects that other academics have access to and so we've you know the first few years I was relatively quiet and we didn't really release anything publicly because, you know, to them it's important. It could be an existential career question if they want to get involved in the academic and the alternative academic community.

So I don't understand what's alternative about bringing these artifacts into a defense contractor and measuring them. It seems pretty standard. That work is still above and beyond what's normally applied to this. But the implications could be, you know, could be interpreted. in a number of different ways. It could be as simple as well. Maybe this culture had something more advanced

than they're giving credit to all the way to it was someone completely different, or it was aliens, or it was high-tech computer, CNC machines, right? So there's a lot of different interpretations that have been applied to this subject. So they're afraid of the interpretations? Some, yeah, some are worried that it'll jeopardize their career.

They intensely criticize one another over their own papers that aren't even. and controversial. So if there is something that's controversial, that's outside of the mainstream, it could jeopardize their track. It could jeopardize their standing with their colleagues and everything else that comes alongside that, which is understandable. But I think things are starting to change a little bit. The acceptance level is higher than it used to be, especially if we're especially if we apply rigorous scientific standards. Did you know one in eight Americans are on anti-anxiety medications? The Omnative Muscaria mushroom is growing in popularity.

for uses with anxiety and addiction. And it was sent to me by today's sponsor, Minnesota Nice Ethnobotanicals. It's non-addictive and it activates the same gaba receptors as benzodiazepines and alcohol, making it a great way to help taper dependencies. Stress and anxiety make it easy to slip back into addiction. That's why thousands are turning to Omina-Muscaria

from Minnesota Nice. It's not a magic bullet though. Real recovery takes community and support, but this mushroom has been used for centuries, to promote relaxation, improve sleep, and even enhanced dreams. Their founder, Christian Rasmussen used Aminita to overcome his own withdrawal and built Minnesota Nice to make natural healing accessible and affordable. Their capsules kick in within an hour and last six to eight hours, and they cost a fraction

of pharmaceuticals. And it's not just Aminita. They've got blue lotus gummies. Yes, blue lotus in a gummy, Rishi for sleep and more. Plus they give back, like donating $12,000 to the Fungi Foundation and leading new research with brain mechanics. This is the kind of company I like to get behind. Try this incredible blend of ancient and modern technology.

Go to M-N-N-N-E-E-E-N-E-E-H-N-E-H-O-K-G-G-E-G-T-E-H-N-E-E-T-H-N-E-G-J-E. And use my code DJ-22 for 22% off your first order. 22% off your first order. Have you gotten any rational pushback on this stuff? That's not ideological and it's not like career driven. What is the most compelling pushback you've gotten about this stuff? Like, is there anything? It's criticism in general.

I know there's lots of criticism that you guys get from this. Not just from, I mean, I imagine it's not just from like YouTubers is or is it just from like YouTube type people that are making entertainment around this archaeology space. It seems to be more prevalent online than... Of course, right, because people make money doing that. People have identities. They have to be skeptics and they have push back on stuff. A lot of is legitimate. It's healthy.

We need skepticism. We need a healthy dialogue with all different types of people, alternative archaeologists and lifelong academics as well. I think most of the pushbacks was regarding the provenance. For example, the OGVAs. So they're saying by provenance, what do they mean by that? Where is it from? Is it a forgery?

Is it a modern fake? How long can you document the chain of custody? So, Previnience would be like where exactly what site it was dug up at. And that a lot of times is not known or it was and it was obfuscated. But how long has it been outside Egypt? When was it brought out? Is it before this various treaty? Okay, that's a legal concern.

But is there at any point in time could this have been manufactured more recently? And so that that was a frequent. Is that possible that somebody could manufacture like this granite base right here? Sure. Anything's possible. I don't think we've seen it done yet. You don't think? I haven't seen any spherical objects

manufactured to this level of precision. Complex spherical geometry. We have seen it in cylinders and other objects. Flat planes, yes, can exceed that dramatically, actually. And circularity, for instance, like an artillery barrel of a military cannon. Yeah. I think that

first reached, like we're talking about radial deviation basically, first reached about a thousandth of an inch in the late 1800s. So this has been possible for a while, but as applied to even metal and other complex objects, it's been 80, 90 years that we've been able to do that level of work in metal. But we haven't seen it applied to a hard igneous rock like this. What rock specifically is this? That's red, Oswani, and granite. Okay. I can feel with my thumb, it's a little bit, you can feel like the imperfections on the edge. Oh, and there are. And you can see tool markings. You can see what looks like evidence of hand tools that may have been applied lastly to smooth out some edges and fix a few imperfections.

They're not, they're not 100% perfect. And there's evidence of hand, of somebody's hand guiding some sort of a tool on a lot of these. So I, you know, I wouldn't, I wouldn't speculate and say they were made on an assembly line without, without human intervention at all. So there's no evidence that you've seen of anybody recreating something like this in modern times. He reached out. Talk about that way. He reached out actually to manufacture a great manufacturing company or some company in China who is making vases like multigenerational company. And they were not able to hello out the interior.

So basically they drilled a straight hole in it. and if you're talking about the external median circularity is like 110 microns it's like 4,000s. They're using computer control CNC machines. This is a CNC machine. Yeah, on a lathe. So the thing was spinning and then the CNC head was going around it. And that's the video of it on the right. There is another object they are working on.

That's obviously not granite. Yeah, it's marble, I think. And they were hand-polishing it. So the tolerances are not even close to this one. Do you have a photo of the inside of that base or just the diagram? I have just this diagram. Wow, man. The interior is more perfect.

Let's say it's 3,000ths and the exterior is 4,000s of an inch. Because cylinders are easier to work than complex spherical geometry. and when I put the order for these to print, I wanted to order a stainless steel CNC version of this one, because we have the STL files, we have the scans, so they could reproduce it. And a few days after I submitted the order, they reached out to me via email that, sorry, we cannot make it. We don't have, not out of granite, out of stainless steel. It was a manufacturing company in China who printed these. They had another service to CNC, to create CNC machine parts. And they said it's too complex for them.

They don't have the proper machinery to do it. And what about these little ones? Are these 3D print recreations of existing bases? Yeah, they make them this tiny. are from the Petrie Museum. And actually this is, this was the most perfect. This had the median circularity of 70 microns. That's how big it was? Yeah. And this was the opening just broke. Super symmetrical. It's like a shock glass. It's two thousandths of an inch median. It's hard to say, but there was some sort of a lip. Two thousandths. And it's diarite, not granite, die right.

dude that is mind bending and this is the actual size of it yes that's the extra size have you shown this to any sort of granite workers like shown them this thing how tiny it is and how perfect it is and like ask them like give me your first reaction to it

not me whenever that this is for people that this is for people that can't see this that people that are just listening this thing is like I don't know a third the size of a shock glass.

It's like an inch, inch and a half tall. Yeah. Sorry what we're saying. Granite carvers don't really, they don't usually attempt to make things like. These objects, they're very, they're complex, is I think the word. You have like parabolic shapes

in the exterior dimensionality. You have very small radiuses applied to all surfaces like the bull nose or the interior mouth you were looking at earlier. So it's not just, it's not something that's normally attempted. And so if somebody is, is going to speculate, you will hear a lot of people say, not possible. We can't do it today even with modern tech. People have said that and I

don't think it's true. I think the better question is how would we do it? Right? What would make what would make sense? Or why? Or why? Exactly. Why did someone make this in the past and how? Because it's looking more and more like it wasn't that difficult for whoever did it. Given the sheer number of them, given some sometimes they're haphazardly finished by hand in certain cases. And I also think it's interesting that, correct me if I'm wrong, but there aren't any two that are identical. Is that true? Which would, which would, I mean, some people would hypothesize that maybe they had molds for these things. They were melting this granite down into liquid and then putting it in these molds and like forming them like concrete.

No two pieces of stone are identical, right? Whereas concrete could be more homogenous. But we have seen some forms repeated over and over again, and even the nominal measurements. like the dimensionality, the same height could be applied. So here's an example of four of them side by side. One of them's right in front of you. But it's not exactly the same. They're very close.

And so, you know, these are funny enough. I think these are all attributed to very different Eupax. The one in the far left is 27 or 2,800 BC. And the other ones range all the way down to the Middle Kingdom, which is like 1,500 years later. Wow. And we have, I think, Granite Obsidian, either limestone or

what does that look like to you? The black one is what? Not obsidian, basalt, I'm sorry. De salt, yeah. Do you think that's like, is that limestone? They're all the same

general shape. They're all the same general idea, but you can see how, like, they're very, very different. Like this, it's not, it's like you gave somebody like the general layout

of what you wanted to build and they went for it. But it's clearly, that these weren't all like from a mold. And check it. Although they are super similar. Check out the interior. The shoulder.

Wow, dude. How in the hell. So the, so the fat part is completely, if you stick your finger down there, it opens up on the inside too. Yeah. And there's like a perfect,

right where this is, there's a perfect ledge on the inside. And this is what again? What is this made of? That's a type, I think that's a type of granite. Okay. So.

Is that a real one? Yep. Yeah. This is an original. I'm glad it's hard to distinguish. It means the prints are good. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. It looks like, I don't know, what the hell. I mean, it feels kind of like concrete, but it's definitely not concrete. You can see all the, like the pattern in it. We scanned a few alabaster and also pottery vessels, just to compare. if they did pottery, what's the circularity of those objects? And I always wonder if they can do pottery. Why would they go for the hassle and make this one?

Right. And make it so round. Why? What's the purpose of that? If they can do it out of pottery, which is less round, it's much easier. Was it some kind of religious function? Or they made it because it was holding a safe? sacred liquid, like clay pots or something like this?

Yeah, yeah. I can show. The sacred juice of life. So basically there was a Nagada base, this pottery ways, which we have scanned, and it's two hundreds of an inch, medium circularity. I had to remove the, it has four handles actually, as you can see here. 200ths. So it's still very symmetrical. Yes, but not even close to these granite vases. Which are, what is it again?

Not 200. 2000s. 2000s. Yeah, and less. So it's 10 times more. 10 times more perfect. Yeah. We have scandals and alabaster from the 18th dynasty.

Oh yeah, that thing looks super oblong. Well, the bottom is wacky, but if you set it straight, it's much better. The bottom will be not that straight, but the rest is good. Ah, I see. Maybe I can zoom in a little bit. So it was 500 microns, which is also roughly 2,000ths of an inch. Wow. Sorry, 200ths, 200s, 200s.

So it's similar. It's in the same range like the pottery. But we have seen actually very nice alabaster races, like tall ones in the MFA, Boston, and it was around 100 microns. So five times more accurate than this alabaster. So there are a few alabaster which are in the same category like these granite vases. How hard is alabaster? It's much softer.

I don't know the most, but it's... About three. You can cut that without an abrasive, with like a bronze tool and no abrasive. So it's much softer, but yeah. So this, you think this was just super easy for them to do? I don't know if I'd say super easy. have been challenging, but they did it, and they did it at scale. And there was so many that they were spread around. Do you think it's possible that this stuff wasn't even from what we think

it was from? Do you think it's possible it was much older than this? Maybe even older than 12,000 years old? It's hard to know, you know, there's a break in the archaeological record between around 5,000 BC and 10,000 BC where we don't really see these. And so if it was from a culture right before where these are normally attributed to, we think we would see that. if it was from a period of time much, much earlier, then maybe what you're saying is right. I don't know,

but I don't, how do you, how do they do that? How do you, how do you determine that there was a gap from when we see them? Like,

like, how do you, how do you date these? They're found in burials. So, so the Egyptian, the dynastic Egyptians would bury them, would bury their loved ones with these,

right? And sometimes kings and pharils would find these in. All of them are found in burials. Yes, but the funny thing is, of them were buried themselves. So there was a feral named Joser in Emotep.

They put at least 40,000 of these down below the step pyramid. I actually think it was much, much more like 100 or more by themselves. So not with bodies. They were packaged up in thousands of containers to protect them. So with nothing to carbon date? No, but some of the names sketched into them were from kings even earlier, hundreds of years before. sketching to the vases themselves. Etched in or scratched in, if you would.

Wow. Okay, so that would be good evidence. That would be a good way of dating it. Well, yeah, you have a minimum. You have a minimum age. You know it's someone before you, but that guy was, that was Meenies or Norma,

who allegedly was the first person that united Egypt. And so if his name isn't a lot of these, maybe he was collecting them too. And it turns out a pre-dynastic culture called Nakata was found with these. Well, just because you find them, buried with pharaohs or have pharaohs names etchedendum doesn't mean they made them they could have

just found them yeah exactly if you go to the cairo museum the new museum and i think it's also in other museums as well but if you look at those vases sometimes they have the museum label the serial number of those and specifically in the in the new egyptian museum i've seen one big ways with three different labels the first one or one was from the current museum and and another one from the previous one. And what if they did the same? Like they found these, they labeled them, and then you see multiple inscriptions

on these vessels and containers. And it's not the real owner or manufacturer of the basis, not the original guy who made it. Right. Yeah, I don't, I just don't, I don't understand the controversy here because it's an insult to anyone's intelligence to show them these scans that you guys did

and say that they were done with pounding stones and copper tools. Like it's just not logical in any sense of the word. We were talking to Miano recently, and he acknowledged that potentially they did have a lathe or revolving equipment. But right now, that's not what's attributed to any of these cultures.

They didn't have the wheel. The wheel came from Mesopotamia after Nakata. Yeah, what year did they have... Do you know what year that they actually got the lathe? Like, when was the lathe first introduced? It was around 3,000 BC, roughly speaking. We don't know exactly, but it was found in Mesopotamia.

first and then apparently share with Egypt. But these were turned. You can see evidence of turning marks on them. These would predate the wheel being in this region by several thousand years. And if these were made on something rotating, which it seems like they certainly were in a lot of cases, it was

part of the process. Something revolving, either a wheel or a layer or something like that. But that's interesting because that culture that's allegedly made these Nakata, they didn't apply that that process to anything else. Their pottery was not made on a wheel.

It was made by hand. They would pinch it and draw it and coil. And so that seems very odd that they would have this tech that's only used for stone. That's so wonderfully efficient. And they would never use it for anything else. These people also didn't put stone in their house and their homes. They didn't make headstones. They didn't have monuments, statues.

They didn't have toilets, sinks, basins. And if you could cut and carve stone this easily or this proficiently, you would apply it to your primary residence and other. churches, whatever, you know, important buildings. Yeah, no, that makes sense. And one of the arguments I think Flint Dibble made to me, not about the vases, but about the pyramids, was that like certain things need this,

they would be incentivized to make certain things better and more precise if they're monumental. And he used the analogy of like Washington, D.C. He's like, you see the Washington monument? Now are all the houses in the neighborhoods around that monument, are they as precise as the Washington monument or as enormous and, like, well-crafted as that? because they weren't, that was like a monumental ceremonial thing, right?

You don't need the houses. They could be mud huts, you know, living around there. And I don't know. I don't know if that argument applies to the bases, though. Well, the Hoover Dam is the biggest, one of the biggest things in America. It's one of the biggest, you know, constructions that men have ever made. But we use the same technology in other things. We know how to use cement and other things.

Why, how come this technology was never applied to anything else? Ever, ever. and you easily could, you could say, oh, look how they're spinning that stone around. I should do that with my clay. Right? And so that's, it leads me to think these are inherited. Even to this culture, they were heirlooms. This is not a very rudimentary culture.

I would say that they're impressive. It was a society. They traded. They were all over the world. Which culture are you talking about? Nakata. Nakata. So they traded with the Levant with that area all the way up until Syria, southern Africa.

They did have copper. they were using it to hunt. They made beer. They had breweries. But they lived in mud huts. They had very limited uses of wood. And they weren't known for applying anything like this

to any other facet of their life. So these were found in the cada burials. That's the earliest record of these being fine. Possibly. Sometimes they don't even, or they cannot even date it. Because if you look at the museum provenance, sometimes it says that possibly

Nagada or it was found in this grave and that grave which is dated to Nagada but sometimes they are not sure they just write early dynasty or dynasty or Nagada or pre-dynastic so it's it's not straightforward when were they made right the thing I had on previously that was the small one yeah I just kick it over how insane this is man

It really is great. This is how it looks like. So that's the real one. Yeah. And this is in Petri Museum? Yes. Yeah. And so it's like...

And how thin? I mean, it's pretty thin the walls of this thing. The interior is reconstructed because the laser scanner cannot capture the inside of this. So how thin was the real one? We couldn't measure it because we had a precision caliper. calibrated to a few microns but it wouldn't fit the opening is so tiny

when Matt was here he had some of his vases and we turned all the lights off and we shined a flashlight in there and you could see the whole thing lit up because it was paper thin like the edge the size of this granite base were literally paper thin it was completely insane

and like this one was very thin you can feel the thickness of this this is a very weird shoulder the char. This is from the 86th dynasty sorry. So this is not

pre-dynastic on paper. But the interesting thing about this piece is the actual measurements. So if I open it up, the exterior is basically

140 microns which is 5,000 or 6,000s of an inch. Okay. That's the exterior. And the interior is 1,000s.

So the interior is more precise than the exterior. Like the Serapium boxes is the same thing, right? The interior is super precise, but the exterior is like really rough and rugged. Yeah. And it's like a cone shaped.

You can see the you can think about a tool that may have been used. You know, we could be talking about one drill tip versus something that was going around, which could result in more. More precision on the inside. And it was beautiful. Now, another thing that people like to point to is the, apparently there was a group of people

who tried to make a recreation, a modern recreation of this, right? They have a YouTube channel. I think they're Russian. I forget the name of them. Scientist against myth. There you go. Okay. Yes.

And when Debel was on here, he was trying to say that they made it perfect. he was saying that they is this it is this what they did so on the left side you can see the scientists so they we don't know

how they scanned their ways but they published it so you can you can download it basically they made all okay so which one did they make they made the one the far left

okay the middle one is this small piece from the Petrie Museum and the right one is this one and you can see the heat map the green is very close to perfect

so Basically, these are compared to the perfect slices. I see. So we slice them up, fit perfect circle on every slice, and we created a CAD model based on these slices, the perfect circles. And the meshes then compare to the CAD model. And that's what you can see here. It's the surface deviation between the CAD and 3D scale.

Wow, the OG vase is insanely accurate and precise. It's all yellow and green pretty much with a little bit of blue and red. towards the edges. Yeah. And the one that the scientist versus myth, that looks like a, like radar. When it's dark. When it's dark red, it means it's out of the 100 micron tolerance. When it's dark blue.

So when it's red, it's like a bump. It's a positive deviation. And dark blue is a negative deviation. It's like a dent. And how long did it take them to make that? two years. Two years to make one of them. Based on their video.

And the hole is also straight. So it's not like ellipsoid or... Oh, the whole is a straight core. It's not... It's not contouring. It's just straight, like a core drill. But, you know, they designed and made... I think they were using their knowledge of like modern machining

to create tools that make their lives faster. They were using wood to create basically machines that would drill and do the work for them. and then when they were measuring to remove the high parts, he was measuring the red parts, they used a rotating table on ball bearings. And so that's effectively a fixed spindle. It's a fixed axis.

So that's going to impart roundness on something. They have cheated, basically. Oh. Well, yeah, they might not have. What stone did they use? Do we know? Dyrite or granite. Okay. There's a diarite, yeah.

I mean, it's pretty impressive that they were able to pull that off in two years. but you know when the rubber meets the road it's nowhere near as precise as these ancient ones and my problems or my problem with their claims that they also went to a museum in Russia the problem is Flint Dibble said it was more precise and clearly it was not even close it's much less precise for sure right because they said it in their video they went into a museum oh measured something with a physical caliber not a laser scanner at least that was the video. But this caliper was like, like, it has some tape on its edges and no way you can measure micron levels with that thing. They had to put it on the ways and then measure it against a scale or

something. It's not a precise measurement. And their table, they represented in the video was also not, this was not really understandable. It was a little bit sketchy, not so scientific in my opinion. And, yeah, that we can see. It's not more precise. And, okay, another question is, who did that scan? Did you actually get your hands on that vase that they had? No, they uploaded their 3D scan. Oh, so they made it freely available.

Okay. It's openly available. And when they upload the 3D scan, I assume they give you all the measurements and everything. or like something to do with the 3D file you can basically plug that into any program and it recreates it, is that how it works? It's an STL file is what it's called. An STL file.

You can go that into like Blender or Metrology software. I see, I see, I see, okay. And then we ran our software on these. The same analysis on all of these three. That's so crazy. I mean, it's got to be, I don't know. I feel like just the way my brain works, I want to say that this stuff had to have been

way before that. And it has to be the same people that were responsible for doing some of this megalithic stone work. And just like, you know, there's just so many questions that including this that are not, there's no reasonable explanation for like the scoop marks under that giant obelisk in Egypt, you know, how they, how do they scoop those, the rocks like that? And even there's scoop marks in the serapium boxes where it's like, I don't know, I don't know how like, I've never heard it can, The best explanation I've heard is that they, which is Jeffrey Drum's explanation, is that they had some sort of a chemical that they were able to put on there to soften it to maybe scoop out cracks or something like that. But other than that, I mean, there's just so many unanswered questions when it comes to Egypt. Let's be honest.

Most dress clothes are uncomfortable, high maintenance, and just don't feel good when you wear them. You have to spend too much time ironing, dry cleaning, and tugging stiff fabrics. And that's why I love Mizzen and Maine. Today's sponsor, Mizan and Maine makes classic menswear with performance fabrics, so it's effortless to look sharp and feel fantastic. Over 10 years ago, Mizan and Maine invented the performance fabric dress shirt. Since then, they've perfected it with modern fabrics that look refined but feel incredible. Their shirts and pants are stretchy, lightweight, moisture wicking, wrinkle-resistant, and completely machine washable. So no more ironing or dry cleaning.

The moment you put them on, you feel the difference. professional style that feels comfortable whether you're in the office, traveling, or even out on the golf course. And it's timeless style that lasts. Thousands of guys swear by Mizan and Maine because it's clothing you can invest in once and wear for years. I personally love their performance golf shirts like this one because it's so smooth, stretchy, buttery, breathable. I don't sweat my ass off when I'm out on the Florida heat on the golf course. And I look like a million bucks.

Right now, Mizzen and Maine is offering our listeners 20% off your first purchase. at mizzen and main.com with the promo code Danny 20. That's Mizen spelled M-I-Z-Z-E-N and Maine, M-A-I-N dot com with the promo code D-A-N-N-N-Y-20 for 20% off. Mizzen and Mane.com promo code Danny 20. And if you'd rather shop in person, you can find Mizzin and Maine stores and select states. It's linked down below. Now back to the show. You can see different widths and different, almost like, radius apply to the different scoop marks at different places in Egypt, almost like they had a different tool for a different job. Or they were made on site for a specific purpose, right? You see thousands of

those scoop marks at Oswan. You see far fewer, but you do see something similar at Avidos in the temple there. But it looks a lot different. It looks much wider, like there's a bigger radius. So, you know, they had different tools for different jobs. And how does that, how do the conventional Egyptologists explain the scoop marks away. I've never heard of... Diarride pounders. Diarrite pounders. And fire setting. So basically

they stress the granite with fire. They put a huge fire on and then they cooled it with water. It stressed the rock and then they use the pounders. Like rounded punders and remove those

scoops manually. Dolar it's like basalt, so it's hard. It's probably not harder than the granite, but it would do the job eventually. Well, I mean, that sounds, I would love to see somebody try to do that. I would love to see them experiment with it and see how it works. They didn't experiment, actually, with the fire setting. But the numbers, I haven't seen the numbers.

Right. I really want to see how much who do you need for this? How much fire? I mean, you're literally, you're cutting out a 1,000 ton obelisk using this method. like yeah and then smoothing the interiors of those buildings I mean without in ventilation you'd choke

yourself out what is this photo this is the Lahoun pyramid basically in the Fayum oasis and there is a huge granite box underneath this

basically it's a mud brick pyramid or at least the exterior and we had an expedition last year, December and yeah, it's a huge I wouldn't say

how deep on the ground does this go? I think it's less than 100 feet. So this is interesting because it's not attached to the pyramid itself. It's below grade. Remember the story about how the pyramids are protecting the king's body? This is the pyramid. So you can enter this

very simple set of tunnels from from outside the base. So see where we are. We're not close to, even where the base used to be when it had casing stones, we're still about 100 feet back from that.

And so we go straight down and then somewhat under. So we are somewhat under the pyramid. Oh, wow. We're not connected to it. Which asks, I think, there's a number of questions. So these hallways don't connect

to the pyramid at all? They're not, no. They're below grade. So whatever the pyramid was built for doesn't appear to be directly related to us. Whoa. And it's almost collapsing.

A lot of this is modern. A huge piece of rock just fell down when we are there. Okay, yeah, you can see how that was, yeah, that looks like bricks. We see some retaining wells here, but this is just the entrance. And the main thing is at the end of this room. Holy shit. This is a granite room. So this room is doing just fine.

It doesn't need any retaining walls. How did I never seen this before? Flinders Speedway said probably this is the most precise artifact ever came out of Egypt And this is Is that Ben right there? Yeah, yeah What is the explanation?

What do they say this was a coffin or something? Everything's for death It's all coffin It's all for death It's a perfectly polished rectangular Granite box With looks like it was cut with a laser dude

And the bottom has an angle a constant angle. The bottom has an angle. You mean the inside bottom? If we back up, freeze it so we can see that. Holy cow. The top surface was published, Petrie measured and published it, and he found it to be 4,000th of an inch deviation

across about one and a quarter meters. Like flatness? Which is, I think, 20 times flatter than a normal household countertop. And this entire room is also made out of granite. These are granite tiles. It's crazy. And we actually could measure it.

So why, though? Like, the whole thing is like, why? Like, it's, it's, so number one question is like, obviously how, right? I mean, that's the glaring one. But then once you figure out, like, why the hell did they have to do? Because one of the thing Chris Dunn says is that coming from an engineering background, you have to you start with function

then you go to design and then you do like the measurement so like you start with your function and then you kind of like engineer it from there like what is the purpose of this then you figure out how precise you have to get to achieve your purpose right or they had the tools

which made it easy if they had already those tools that could provide these tolerances they don't have to think about okay how should we do this Right. You can't see that this is more flat than far less flatness. And it is possible to do this. In modern lapping methods, this is lapping what would result in something like this, are generally hybrid approaches. There's a machine that's like randomly moving flat, maybe circular surfaces over another surface. And then a lot of times somebody by hand applies some finishing lapping. So it is possible to do this by hand. But you can't see it. You can't see how flat it is. So if this was their target, And look how homogeneous that is. If this was their target because of the function, like you mentioned, Dan, how would they know when they got there?

How would they know when they achieved their target? They can't see it. So basically... Unless they would have had to have something to measure it, right? Like they would have had... You can make a flat surface with the lapping technique, but... It seems like it's something that's almost incomprehensible. It's like, it's... I can't think...

of any way they would have been able to do this. So we fit it a plane on this can. Right. And you can see the green area is around 4,000s of an inch. Oh my God. And that's exactly what Petri measured.

We don't know how he measured it exactly, what tools he used in the Victorian era. But... How much is this thing way, do you think? If I had to guess, I'd say, like, Two to three tons. Two to three times? I think much more.

Well, it's hollowed out, so it. So it wasn't moved there. It's been there. The other problematic issue, as Petrie put it, is that the maximum width coming into this room is smaller than the minimum width of the side of this sarcophagus or bathtub. So how did it get in here? Maybe the room was built around it, though, right? So that's your explanation. Oh, my God.

But to what end? and look at the... How deep underground on me again? 100 feet? I think a little less, yeah. 75 feet. Wow. That's Kyle.

Wouldn't you love just to get a time machine and just keep going back and see how the fuck this shit was done? Bath tub time machine. Yeah, this is the other... The backside of that room. It's almost collapsing. Yeah.

Good Lord. Hopefully this box will be still visible in a few years. They won't close the entire pyramid. I hope so. What is that that they've carved into? Is that solid rock or is it some... Is it like just compacted mud?

I'm not sure. There is both because some of the mud brick is... Well, I'm sure that's a lot of that's modern and reinforced with different things, maybe even concrete or something like that just to make it... I mean, that's clearly modern, right? No, this is original.

Oh, that's original? This is original, right, yeah. This is the red granite. described these walls. Oh, it's the same material as the box. Yes. Correct. Ground.

They were ground to extreme levels of flatness, but not polished. But on the edges, it looks like there's some mortar around it. That's modern. That's modern, right. It looks like it doesn't, probably doesn't need to be here. Yeah. Yeah, dude, it's just so insane. Like what?

Like, why? Why cut a box into something so precise where there's nothing else around it that's as precise? Right? It seems to be only this box. Most of these boxes in Egypt had lids. So conceivably, a lid fed on top of here, hermetically seal what was inside,

which is why you needed the extreme flatness. We don't know if there was ever a top found. We don't know. The dynastics at some point did, I think, bury somewhat in here. What is your, like, wildest hypothesis of, like,

what this could possibly be? Like, I know it's not going to be scientific, right? But, like, what's your, like, what's your imagination, like, you just push your imagination to its limits. What do you think it could be? I think this stuff was repurposed.

I think it used to look a lot different. And it was, it's going to be really hard to, to hypothesize what was originally used for, what it looked like, but things are moved around. Chris Dunn thinks they were used to grow crystals, these boxes. Have you ever talked to him about that? Yeah.

It seems as likely as anything, sure. It seemed plausible. The way he was explaining to me, I don't remember it exactly how he explained it, but the way he was explaining it seemed very, it seemed like it made sense to me at the time he explained it. These rooms, these boxes, they're, they're resonant, right? They're harmonically tuned.

These people are obsessed with resonance everywhere, frequency and residence. So that could, that could fit with that theory, sure. And what was, do you remember what he was saying about how the crystals were grown? In Lahoun, in this one? No, in the serapium. Not exactly. Okay. Because it has something to do with the boxes being more precise on the inside than the outside. Like the outside didn't matter. It was the inside that mattered.

The volume metric considerations are more important. Something about the resonance and something else. I would love to hear somebody that could like explain that theory to me. Yeah, that's crazy. He's holding a square tool to the edge of it and it's literally perfect. There's no there's no gaps with that square tool up against the granite. And we measure the same, not the same spot. but this same angle. And actually, if you fit planes on both the top and this side,

the angle deviation is like 0.25 degrees. So it's 90.25. That's crazy, dude. And it's polished. You can see his reflection in the stone. Yeah. I think the chemical. I think, like, I think what Jeffrey Drum talks about with the chemicals,

using to scoop stuff out and to soften stuff. I think that makes a lot. I'm not a chemist, but I mean, to my layman brain, I think it makes a lot of sense. And as well as like polishing this stuff. But again, I think these people were just on another technological trajectory than we are on today. And that's why some of this stuff doesn't make sense to our brains. Because just like the way we're going technologically,

just like with combustion engines and with electricity. And like that's our foundation for technology. And we like build up from there. We're not really innovating anything different. We're kind of on like a very linear trajectory with our technology. And it seems like they were on a completely different trajectory than we are now. And that's, I think, why we can't understand it. Yeah.

I agree. I agree. I don't really like speculations because I'm trying to look at these from a scientific point of view. And I'm afraid if I speculate too much, it will just drift me off. the right path. I think people try to dismiss you if you speculate too much. Oh, so. Yeah.

Right. That's an unfortunate. That's an unfortunate thing that people try to do that. But, I mean, you have to, you have to speculate. I mean, you're measuring it. You're figuring out what this is, how accurate it is, and you're doing all the work. You're putting in the work to figure out, like, look, these things are, like, insanely precise. We can't find anyone to re-engineer it, to recreate it.

So, I mean, we don't have a time machine. We should at least throw shit against the wall and try to use our imaginations and get creative and think, like, what could they have been doing? And I think, I mean, even like, you know, sometimes the wildest sci-fi shit ends up being true, you know? You learned about it 20 years later, but it does happen. Yeah. And it makes it interesting, but you need theories to just prove.

We can't just criticize. you know silly explanations and you need to step in the arena with with the people that are pushing back against this stuff and have an open dialogue with the people that want to that want to claim this stuff isn't real or it's not what you think it is or um that want to push back on your claims like that's that's the only way to figure out like what's going on is to have to these you know get in the room with these people and just have a you know battle out your ideas and see which one makes the most sense to people let the audience decide it's great thing about the internet gets rid of all the gatekeepers what's the This is actually the full set we analyzed in the Petrie Museum. Okay, so those are all the ones that you analyze. Ascending order. Okay. Yeah, so the grade outs are not really precise. That's the median circularity of those objects.

Mm. But there were a few, actually very different materials. This one was diaride, this is limestone, this is granite, all grain grain, also limestone. So they even achieved similar accuracy in limestone. I don't know why. Yeah. We tend to ignore that or we used to because the limestone industry was present throughout dynastic Egypt. So from Old Kingdom all the way to New Kingdom, they did have limestone and Alabaster.

And they used it extensively. They made jars. You can generally see them. You can see the difference. They're not as symmetrical. They're not as, I guess, precise. And I think the explanations of how stone carving for vessels was done, relates to these alabaster vessels.

That's the, that's the, the, uh, the picture of the forked drill and the methods that are described in on the walls of tombs of the nobles. I think those, like that big bow and they push back and forth. Some of that's, some of that is, as with respect to woodworking, honestly. And then other stuff is alabaster and pottery. Um, it, it doesn't seem like they were ever dabbling in this. They, they probably try it or attempted to it, but, um, I suspect this industry is from before them. And we know some of it is at least.

But look at the range. from all the way to 31,000. We were talking about the clay earlier, the Nacado vessel, and some of the other stuff was, it's orders of magnitude more. Wow. Yeah, and I imagine how many people,

like how many people, like you were talking about, own hundreds of these things that no one's ever seen. They've never seen the light of day, you know? Like, there's probably so many more. You know one. Yeah. Who owns only 200s, sir? Yeah, I know some people.

I mean, Matt owns like, what, like a cuff, dozen at least as well he has more I think he has probably a hundred now and there's museums I mean I think that the first time I was at the Kair Museum and saw these 12 13 14 years ago there was less than a dozen on display now you go there and you can see probably hundreds and it's rumored that they have many thousands in their store rooms and offside that aren't publicly for display right but actually it was also crazy when we went down to step pyramid where they found several thousands of these tens of thousands of

these we found vase shards embedded in the walls in the lower catacombs vase shards embedded in the walls yes it was in the foundation of the pyramid there's three at least three collapsed chambers when the french expedition was there in the 1920s loyer he found two chambers and described three collapsed ones and so when we were there we go. So if you look at the war, you can see the fragments. There you go. These are the lowest levels of the pyramid.

And how do you know these are shards of vases? You can see the workmanship up close if you look carefully. Okay. Oh, so there were some explosions or something? They were blowing up this stuff to get through here and then maybe it blew up some vases. Or it was already collected, broken, and they built the pyramid on top of these. That's possible. Yeah.

These chambers were described as already collapsed when the French team was there. Okay. So it could have just been, these were crushed by the collapsing ceiling. This whole area looks like Swiss cheese. There's hundreds of miles of tunnels here. Wow. I'm sorry, not hundreds of miles. There's miles of tunnels.

And so you can easily destabilize. This is Kyle. Wow, man. It's crazy. I mean, what more would need to be done? Like, what more could you possibly do? As far as like taking these things to a military defense contractor and scanning them in like the most advanced measuring devices known to man, I don't know what else you could do. We have to do like, we have to collect data and we are on this journey at the moment.

We have to scan in multiple museums, scan hundreds of vases and then draw conclusions based on the big data. because just picking one or a few. How many do you need do they say? Is there like a rule of how many you need to qualify for the scientific community to accept this stuff? I mean, other papers have been done with far less. But the bigger, the better, the more comprehensive study, the more comparative analysis, the bigger control sample size. And then, you know, the Alabaster industry existed for at least 2,000 years in Egypt in dynastic Egypt.

So having a good library and data set of that would be helpful as well. But again, the most precise ones come from, at least are traditionally attributed to Nakata, which is thousands of years before dynastic Egypt. So that's a huge starting point. That's not disputed. Right. Right. And we're talking about things that it appears that we needed, in order to make these,

we need an explanation that exceeds what's currently attribution. to that culture. We don't believe that culture had the technology to make those. So that's a really interesting starting point. Well, it seems like the burden of evidence is on the people who say that this was attributed to those people. Yeah, it's an extraordinary claim, which requires extraordinary evidence. Yes, exactly, exactly.

Yeah. And that's, we'll get into that later, but we'd like to see more attempts. Who's in charge? Who has to do that? Like who is the ultimate person or group of people who make that evidence or make that claim into fact? Well, in the past it was Europe, European archaeologists and museums. Now I think it's largely Egyptians that can take this, that can take this back. It's their culture.

It's their, it's their inheritance. right there's to grab and to move forward so i i think we'll see some of that we're we're already starting to see it now they're much more receptive to these types of things not all of them but some of them are whereas 20 30 years ago it was nobody so it's like people like zahi who was like people like people like him and and these people because he like there's a lot of these people like correct me if i'm wrong because i don't know everything about people like like him specifically but a lot of these folks are are tied up in the government and like policy and stuff like that.

So there could be some sort of hidden incentives for them to like maintain a narrative. There's more and more people on those committees on the, the antiquities committees that are not from Egyptology that come from other scientific disciplines. So you're talking about like physics, aerospace, industrial design, structural design. People like that are now more and more apart. of the ministry. So I think that that'll help, right? They're not, they don't have this indoctrination, this entire subset of a belief system that they have to bring in with them. They can approach these things from an open mind, like assuming I didn't know anything about

Egyptology, how would I think this was made? How could this logic chain make sense? And you see some, I think you see people starting to really question some of this stuff. Not all of it. The dynastic Egyptians were a very impressive group of people, right? They had unbelievable believable achievements in medicine, astronomy, physics, engineering, mathematics. I mean, it was, they were the most impressive group of people that we know of up until that point, and then for the next two or three thousand years, I think. So we're not taking anything away from them whatsoever. But it's possible that some of the things that they're giving credit for were actually inheritance.

And what is this image here? So when we were in London for the Petrie Museum scan, I found this marble toothbrush holder in the Airbnb. And we ran some practice runs with a scanner before the appointment. And also it was very good to have a modern reference. So I'm sure it's a mass product. It was made on a lathe or something with a modern machine. And it's marble.

And it's marble. It's not as hard as granite. And the median circularity was 50 microns, which is 2,000s. so these ways the OG ways is more precise and it's great because it's too sorry it was a six or seven ten thousandths so marble softer it's a simple design you can do this it's effectively a cylinder which means you can use

well-known grinding techniques sure which are not which don't impart a lot of friction on the on the object so this modern this modern marble toothbrush holder was on the level of this one. This is 70 microns and the toothbrush holder is 50. Okay. Wow.

That's bizarre. It is. Now, have you guys tried to come up with, I don't know we kind of talked about this already, but have you been trying to come up

with any sort of theories on how they could have done it? Yeah, like he mentioned Chris King. We speak to machinists and stone carvers, and so we welcome their ideas, and maybe that helps formulate what we think might have happened, and then hopefully we can rule some things out over time.

But, you know, when you're talking about today, when we're making a baseball bat and we're spinning something around at a high RPM on a lathe using a fixed cutting piece, that doesn't seem to be a good explanation because it would strike these hard crystals in the ground mass,

like the quartz in the felds bar. It would get sucked into the body. And so you're really, I think, talking about something that's removing material in a very unbiased way, like evenly. And that's grinding. And we have grinding techniques that can achieve this level of accuracy that don't need to be computer controlled or anything like that. However, this is complex spherical geometry. So we're not going to be able to explain all these little thin radii everywhere. and the contouring with that explanation alone or the interior.

Chris King thinks that basically if you have a very sophisticated lathe made out of primitive materials like dark, African, I think blackwood and very hard materials, you can make something round to like 100 microns, 2,000 or something like that. he thinks it's possible the problem that we haven't seen those sophisticated tools from this culture they haven't found and if we go down to the level of this one

I think that's a different level what does he say as far as like what type of tools they would need to be you could do this work with wood and stone you wouldn't necessarily need metal but it has to be calibrated and fixed in a very rigid spindle. Your access of rotation has to be extremely rigid and fixed.

That's how you impart roundness and transfer roundness from something that is round or moving in a round fashion to something that you want it to be. And so I think it's possible that you could build a machine out of wood and stone.

But you have to know what you're doing. And that would be, you know, that's never been described or documented by any of these cultures, the Egyptians or the Akata cultures. But the Egyptian Egyptians documented everything, right, in their lives. I think that's well known. And they documented extensively processes for making pottery, making furniture, and things like that.

So they never mentioned these at all. They never really mentioned any of the megalithic projects that we see out there. And if they had the capability of doing them, especially something that appears to be mundane, yet they never mentioned it at all. We don't see other records of revolving or rotating tools. We just don't. So if it was used with stone, would they also have been able to use stone to grind down the boxes and make the boxes so perfect? Or even use them, use stone to make the cuts in those big rocks that you see like around the pyramid that Ben talks about that looks like big circular blades, cut them?

I don't think that explains everything. No. They certainly could have had metal, but if you're asking where are the tools, they used copper for thousands of years. and we found 10, maybe 20 copper saws total, ever. So if millions of people were using something for thousands of years and we found 10 or 20, that could give you an example of how tools might not survive. But what if they had iron tools? That's a very nice idea, I think, that would elevate

or put this entire question or race topic on a different level. And recently I have interviewed a German, gentleman on my show and he was the guy who sampled the Kufu graffiti in the Great Pyramid. Who did what? He sampled the Kufu graffiti. Oh, okay. And there was a huge interpol case.

Zahia was tried to put them in jail etc. Whoa. Yeah, it was very big. And why are you trying to put them in jail? Because so they had permissions to sample special permissions to take samples

from the King's Chamber ceiling because they found interesting black thongs like some kind of tool marks, like some residue on the ceiling blocks. And they sampled that, they had some time left, and they went up to these relieving chambers, and they also sampled the Kufu graffiti. That's the main inscription in the Great Pyramid, which is attaching, which is attaching the pyramid to Kufu.

and they had permissions for this from the guards who were with them but after they tried to release the results they tried to announce something about it

there was a huge case of that but they found magnetite in the king's chamber what's that it's like a residue when you have a very rudimental iron smelting process they found

this iron residue with some magnetite in the king's chamber on the ceiling blocks and they made an experiment they put they created a 16 tons of concrete block and they have made some kind of you-shaped holder put it underneath this this block and there was a space where you can put some metal wedges inside or basically underneath this block and they hammered in these wedges and they could elevate this 16 ton block in like

one hour 10 centimeters with two people and their idea is that they that's how they elevated and move these huge and massive granite blocks and with iron with iron and they also find

some iron tools in the Great Pyramid there was also iron found I think in pre-dynastic era so probably they could have iron before I think iron tools were first mentioned like iron smelting

is beginning with the Hittites if I'm not mistaken well there's a guy there's a guy on YouTube who does this stuff who moves these big blocks using just like gravity and pulleys and stuff like this he did the stonehenge in his garden

by himself well there was There was two guys. There's one who does like YouTube videos. There's another guy who had this place, Coral Castle, which is in South Florida, who elevated these. Leeds going. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. And he did that, not that long ago.

And I forget the guy's name who does the stuff, but he basically takes these giant blocks and he like uses big wood levers to like rotate them and like to put them, move them into place. And it's, it's wild to see. So like if they were, if they were able to understand physics well, enough, you know, it seems reasonable that they could have, you know, moved some of these blocks into place and like stacked them in a certain way, but still like, it doesn't explain the cutting, though. It doesn't explain the cutting and like the perfection of like, of the, the edges of the great pyramid, which are like, if you measure the outside of the great pyramid, it's like

10 times more square than any of the skyscrapers in Manhattan, you know, like when you have to build a skyscraper, they have to be, according to code, you know, within a certain deviation of like perfection before you can start building it. And the pyramid is like 10 times more perfect than even like the biggest skyscrapers that we have. So like it doesn't, it doesn't really explain that. And that gets into the time it would take, right? There's no way you're going to fit that, that, that, I'm not that degree of work into a 20 or 25 year timeline. Yeah. And the conventional explanation is that how long did it take to build the Great Pyramid?

Well, they think it's still, it's still supposedly 20, 25 years, something like that. Funny enough, though, in South America, they don't think that. You can ask someone about Teotelicon, they may say, yeah, it probably took 100 years or more. Oh, really? How could you have done in any, you know, in any other timeline? That would be a minimum.

So it depends if you ask. Yeah. So my point was that I think if they would have iron tools, it would be a completely different conversation. And my problem with Flynn-Dibald's explanation, if you have a compass, you can make a round feature, yeah, you can do that. If you have what? If you have a compass, which you... Oh, a compass, yeah, yeah.

But you still have to hold onto the piece. Right. Which, have you seen these large vases in the British Museum in London? It's huge. What kind of tool would you put it in? Like, it's like a big boulder. Really? You have a picture of it?

Maybe Steve, if you, I'm not sure. I'm sure you're going to find it. I don't have it here. Right. So it's so big that they wouldn't be able to use like a lathe. Oh, I have it. If you're, you have, the piece has to be affixed somewhere, right? So if you only have one point, you generally would want two for stability.

But whatever is carving out the interior. Yeah. Assume it's like an L-shaped in order to get it in there to hollow that out. Yeah. The longer you are away, the further you are away, the more friction. Sorry, look at the people and look at the sizes of these two on the right. Just a minute. Second.

These ones. Oh, wow. Holy cow. And this is the end product. If you look at the, if you would look at the raw material, it's much larger. Right. And this is the explanation like this. So that's what we were talking about earlier

from tunes of the nobles. This is Verks. So the same people who carved this depiction are supposedly the same people who made the pottery. Well, funny enough, no, this was made almost 2,000 years later than the traditional dating.

Oh, really? Interesting. And some of these were actually painted on like stucco walls. Yeah, it's Sixth Dynasty. If I zoom in, I cannot... Yeah, the painting itself, is Sixth Dynasty and usually these these big

vases are much older but this painting or this depiction works for the alabaster bases right but they want to apply that explanation to these and then how do you explain the handles

that are built into it do we have to like whose job is that I mean how do you do that on a lathe right like how it would like you would remove it would be a torroid shape and you'd remove what's inside of it. And if you actually,

you want to go back to the heat map of the OG, you can almost see a line where it looks like it was a toroid. There you go. See that blue, very faint blue line on the top. Of which one? Parallel with the top handles on the right.

On the OG. You can see there seems to be a strip. Oh, yeah. Right. So that would have been removed. Your original pass would have left that and then you would remove it. But look how perfect is

aligned to the rest of the body. Oh, wow. That's interesting. You would no longer be able to spin it. It's so crazy. So you still have to hold into these with a rigid

massive mechanism or some kind of I would say machine. It can be a wooden machine. It doesn't have to be a five-axis CNC. But still, you can draw a perfect circle, but how would you make it in a very rigid material like this? I don't know, man. This stuff is, this stuff

is beyond my comprehension. I don't know. I can't. It just doesn't compute. I don't know how they could have possibly done this stuff. I don't think we do either. What do you make of that recent thing

that came out with the, they went under the pier, they found these big things under the pyramids, these big like vertical columns under the pyramids. Walmart business is in the business of helping your business. Regardless of whether you're building bridge, Building spreadsheets or building lesson plans.

Ooh, that looks fun. Walmart business can help save you time, money, and hassle so you can focus on what you're building instead of what your supply closet is missing. In short, we take care of business, so you can do more with yours. We're the Walmart you love. Now for your business.

Learn more at business.womenart.com. Your favorite local grocery stores like Kroger, Ralph, Fred Meyer, and more are now delivering on Uber, Eat's. Get 40% off your order of fresh quality ingredients. Whether you just got home to an empty fridge or suddenly got a craving to whip up

something new, you can get everything you need delivered in as little as 25 minutes. Get 40% off your order with code Kroger 2026. Plus members get zero dollar delivery fees. Order now on Uber Eats. Orders of $30 or more save up to $25 and $4.3026 yet for details.

What do you make of that? Have you looked into that at all? I have interviewed those two Italian guys. Oh, really? Yeah. Actually, I think they are really smart, actually, the guy who made this algorithm and this entire, so the engineering part of it, he's also an electrical engineer, telecommunication engineer, holds several masters and the PhD. So he's a brilliant guy. And I think something went sideways with the explanation, so they probably couldn't transfer the full knowledge,

and everyone thinks that it's a bullshit. So in my understanding, they are using these satellites to shoot radio waves to the ground, basically. And they are measuring the frequency shift in these radio signals caused by the earth's crust movements. So if you are familiar with the Doppler effect, when the ambulance car is moving, using the siren the movement of the car is causing a pitch shift in the sound so basically when the earth moves

I hope I can give it back properly but when the earth crust moves very low level seismic activities they can sense this as a frequency shift right okay and then they can estimate what's on the ground And this is new technology that they used to find this? Or is this something around?

The SAR technology. SAR scans, yes. That's existing. Okay. Military is using it. So my understanding was that from whoever explained this to me was that whatever stuff they used to detect this stuff under the pyramids was new or something, some sort of novel technology.

Yeah, they refined it to. be able to go deeper and to be able to analyze this deeper basically. But it depends on the model you have out of this that's crazy.

This bedrock so you need to have a good approximation of the bedrock. If it's limestone, what's the geophysical properties of that block or that stone? You are

looking at. And a lot of people are confused probably what are those rendered images, like is it made by AI or something. So in my understanding, they try to make it more understandable. They can interpret these heat maps and images, but we cannot. So this image we're looking at right now, Steve, this is that one on the right and the left. Those are like the actual, that's the actual data scans that we got from this. S-A-R stuff. And then people came in and did like artistic renditions of it to make it more palatable for people. They did it.

Yeah. Oh, they did it. Okay. Yeah. And these people have a YouTube channel where they cover this stuff, right? They have a, these Italian dudes. I don't think they have. I'm not. Oh, no? I'm not sure. Oh, I thought they did. I thought, um, didn't we have somebody who like showed us their YouTube channel, Steve? I think that was a, Jeffrey,

Drum. No, it wasn't Jeffrey Drum. It was more recent. So what you're talking about the more artsy stuff, right? Yeah, that's the more artsy stuff. And they also scan known structures. Okay. The Osir's shaft also. And it was accurate?

I mean, my question is the interpretation. Is it biased because the structure is known? Or is it full automated interpretation done by the model they use? So I don't know. I think Kyle, from the snake bros said was that they should scan something unknown and then excavate it and compare to be 100% sure well yeah if you can scan something where you know what's you know like scan a shaft or a pyramid's interior where you know you already explored it and the data that comes back

correlates with what you already know is real then that's a good way of testing whether this technology works or not and then if you do something unknown and it shows you something like this then you should I mean, that's a pretty good proxy for if it's accurate, right? Yeah. So they, I mean, and then now, I don't know what, if anyone's proposed to try to, like, dig and explore this or not. But, um, it would be really hard in my opinion to dig under the pyramid. It's mostly bedrock, so. And also the permits and who would allow this, probably a different group has to verify this to get the permit for any digging.

but they also scanned two years ago the Great Pyramid. This is under the Middle Pyramid. They also scanned the Great Pyramid. Oh, this was under the middle pyramid? Yeah. Okay. And they found hidden chambers. Yeah, right. They found one the size of a jumbo jet, like above the Grand Gallery, right?

Or like a 747. That was the size of that cavity that they haven't explored yet. Yeah. Which is crazy. like they did that years ago and that was the scan pyramid project I believe and they still haven't drilled into it or right there

the hidden chamber the Italian guys scanned the great pyramid and found those guys found that chamber that hidden chamber that's the scan pyramid that's the Italian guys Steve if you look for or search for

Gnum Kufu synthetic aperture radar it should should show the yeah I mean, how long ago? How long has it been since Chris Dunn found those two electric probes, those two metal prongs at the end of Gate and Brinks door? Right. Like, there's no, there's still, they did on a national TV for like a huge documentary.

And there's still no explanation for that. What is this? Is this it? I think that's an AI image on the left. The second image was a little bit better in the result. Yeah, that one. They have also. Oh, yeah, I've seen this.

and those chambers are mostly unknown. So the green one, number 19, is the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, they have not explored yet. And there are these ramps all around that's also unknown. And there's also, which Christon explains is there's these big, I didn't know about that until I talked to him was there's these big, um, like holes in the ground on the outside of the great pyramid that he says they connect into the shaft. that go up to like the king's chamber and the queen's chamber. Yeah, that's the rumor. He hypothesized that they could have poured chemicals in there and it would have fed up those shafts

and like gone through like into the chambers or something like this. Probably, I have no idea. But I'm sure that a lot of those tunnels under the Giza Plateau probably are connected or very connected to the one of those or all of the pyramids. If you go down to those iris shaft, it's like 100 meters deep probably

with three levels. The lower level is filled with ground water, basically. But there are one or two shafts relatively closed. I think Zaijavas found this in the late 90s or something. They tried to excavate. They couldn't, they faced with mud. They couldn't go forward. They couldn't proceed.

Once they found a small kid in that tunnel and the kid also, I mean, he, found a blocked entrance or a blocked tunnel, they don't know what's, what is it connected to. But if you look at the subterranean chamber of the great pyramids, I think that's a good, good option. So maybe the subterranean chamber is connected to the Osiris shaft or one of these shafts. Well, the subterranean chamber, I mean, it's like almost impossible to get a human down there. Like a big person can't even barely get down there. Into that tunnel. Yeah.

Yeah. That very bottom shaft where Chris Dunn thinks that there was like a hydraulic device that like hammered the ground and like and like maybe mini earthquakes. Right. And that's just how a whole hypothesis of how it's like a solid state electron harvester that like build electrons through all the igneous rock through the pyramid

and like somehow created free electricity or something like this. it's a wild it's a wild hypothesis but i mean he i mean he's the guy to do it i mean he literally came up with the whole reverse engineering diagram of how it would work and how those chemicals would interact and how it could theoretically create some sort of a free energy but again i mean that's applying our knowledge of uh technology to something that was you know thousands and thousands of years ago so i don't know So what are you guys going to do next?

What's your plan moving forward? We have a few things on the schedule. We're looking at some pre-pottery Neolithic lithics, basically like stone arrowheads, and we're sort of tracing them from Egypt to the Middle East. We want to go back to that we have some stuff to do with the quarry. We still, hopefully we'll get into the Chyri Museum one day. That's the plan.

And so there's, I think, scanning small things and looking at big things and looking at larger, I think, stories is all part of the exploration. These things all feed into one each other. I don't think we could understand the vases without understanding the culture, understanding other aspects of their technological set. So, you know, that's very related. It's related. If you know how they approach to astronomy and math and physics, it's related to fabrication, it's related to stone carving. So I think we're kind of like comprehensively looking at these cultures, but I do agree with what you said. You saw similarity between this level of work and the megalithic projects, right? Like the pyramids, I tend to agree with that.

I think it might have been a related culture. Yeah, there's a lot of things, right? I mean, there's not just the pyramids and these vases, but like the Serapium boxes and the box that you showed. It seems like the same culture or the same type of technology was involved in creating all of those things. So like other than those things, like the pyramid and the vases and the boxes and the scoop marks and like all the crazy symmetry. Like what else can you use to help put this picture together of what and when the civilization existed? Like what do you look for? Where do you look?

huge part of the Sahara is not excavated and discovered yet so who knows what else is under the sand which part of the Sahara huge part everything to the west of the Nile oh really yeah I mean there's there has been some

surveying but it's not you know we're not looking at every square meter square mile it's like mad max out there it's uh yeah it's lawless out there that's where that big um that big circular, what's it called? The big circular thing, the eye of the Sahara. Yeah, yeah. Where that is. Reshot structure. The reshot structure, right, which I think Randall Carlson thinks it's like the top of a dead

volcano or something like that. But no one's been out there to explore it. I mean, there's all kinds of people who talk about that and, like, speculate on what it could be. And I have never heard anyone who's actually, like, been there and, like, dug into it or, like, really done, like, a detailed now. Like, people fly over it, right? But, like, who's been on the ground studying that? It was only about 7,000 BC when the Sahara was lush. I mean, it used to rain 100 times more than it does now.

Right. And so that's not, that's only a few thousand years before these other cultures we've just been talking about. So we don't even have to go back pre-ice age or that far. There's a lot there for mainstream archaeologists right now. Do you know of anybody who's trying to dig in this place and trying to, like, excavated or anything here yeah the reshot structure no i i i know of people like jimmy crocetti that talk about this and call for it but i don't know if anybody's actively yeah and there's

and it's not just this so much of this planet has not been touched right like you like the egypt cairo is like a it's like a tourist destination but how many spots of this earth have not been excavated and not been like combed over or or researched or explored like a ton of it and we don't know what it is because we probably don't know about a lot of it right also underwater sites and underwater right huge yeah the ocean is like 70% of this planet and I hope I can say that that in the future in the long term the artifact foundation is planning on excavations and also underwater discoveries. So hopefully if we get the right...

You can say that. Hopefully if we get on the right path and if we can publish and if we can establish like a solid background in this kind of research, we will be able to acquire permits for this kind of stuff. Yeah. I mean, even

like the Antikythera device that was found underwater. That thing's insane. Yeah, that's... And I don't think there's ever been another one found like that. I think that's the only one. That's one of one. And if they had something like that to like navigate the stars or navigate using like planetary alignment, you know, who knows what else they could have been doing? It was actually simulating the elliptical path of the planets, even before Kepler knew that. So the antiquatory mechanism was kind of an advanced calendar, like a computer to calculate where.

those stars will be at a certain amount or certain point in time. Probably they use it for Olympic Games, but the movement of the planets were simulating the elliptical movement, which was not known until Kepler. Quote-unquote known. Yeah, there's a lot of inheritance going on here, right? And this entire device was sitting in a storage of a museum for 50 years or something. Right. Well, they found it in a shipwreck, right, underwater?

Yeah, that's right. And they kind of like, they kind of like refurbished it and, and, um, and brought it back and figured out what it could have been. But, you know, yeah, there's a lot of the oceans that, that haven't, have not been explored. And, you know, there's lots of really unique structures that have been found, um, that we can't really excavate that look. That look, they, that just straight up don't look natural. So it shows you how much we have to do because how could that be the only one of those devices ever made. Right. Yeah, it's not, that they had to have made more.

What is this, a recreation of it, Steve? Yeah, it's a recreation. So, yeah, we were able to scan it and basically recreate it. It's insane, man. Yeah. And do we know what, when they would have made this? Is there, like, a date attached to this thing? If I'm not mistaken, the established date is, like, 100 BC or something like that.

100 BC? Wow. based on the shipwreck they found it in right so so it's it's yeah the other problems the other problem is with the with the um this metal or iron tools if they would have by thousands of years it would basically disappear completely right metal wouldn't survive turn into rust well if we were wiped out right now in a thousand years all that would be left are like giant like the Hoover Dam would still be here the Washington Monument would probably still be here but we wouldn't see any buildings the buildings would be basically disintegrated all metal would be gone

right we'd see stone toothbrush holders and you see this stuff exactly right crazy shit man and then you guys have a foundation or something like this you guys are yeah artifact foundation dot org we do our best to communicate the work that we've been doing especially when we can sometimes we have to wait because of agreements, but we, our, our job is to communicate this, this stuff. And, you know, we're not, we're not solely in Egypt. We also do work in other places, Asia, North, and South America. And we're launching a competition right now. So there's been a lot of, there's been a lot of criticism. There's, there's a lot of opinions about what's possible. What can we, what can humans have been able to do by hand with guided or unguided tools? And so we're launching,

The Artifact Foundation is sponsoring an experimental archaeology challenge. So there's a $25,000 prize to the stone carver, the experienced craftsman, that's able to actually replicate one of these vessels close to what we've measured. So we're not expecting, you know, we're not expecting sub 10,000th of an incircularity, but the tools need to be true. Here are the basic rules. The tools need to be true to the time period by which the, are attributed to. So we're talking about Nakata, early dynastic Egypt. Stone tools, wood,

copper would be fine. But these people were not known to have had the wheel. So using the wheel or the laya would be a violation of what they're attributed to or known to have had. This must be documented. So we want a regular cadence. So a video, a short video clip once a week or a picture every day of the work and the progress. No cheating. No cheating. complex geometry, so not a simple cylinder, right? So we're looking for the vessel where the interior is hollowed out to the same contour as the exterior. Right. And then in terms of circularity, the goal and the prize winner is going to achieve a thousandth of an inch median circularity in the outside and three thousandths of an inch median

circularity in the inside. And so what those guys did, the scientists versus myth or whatever, that wouldn't count. It wouldn't count for a few reasons. They didn't achieve the precision that we've measured time and time again now in ancient vessels and they used modern equipment they used modern equipment to measure the deviation and then to remove those high spots when they when they used a when they used that wheel apparatus with with the ball bearings in it they were taking something that was that was capable of so they were just like scanning it figuring out what was wrong where the deviations were where it was not perfect and they were retooling it after that.

No, not scanning. Just imagine a pottery wheel, like an easy, like potter's wheel with a metal bearing. They put the weights on. They turn it around and they hold or held

like a pencil or something by hand to check the high spots. And then they remove those. The wheel is perfectly round. And so it's going to tell you when there's something off. But they use the modern metal

bearing. Right. which is probably the dynastics or pre-dynastics didn't have that. Right. What if somebody was able to create something with some different methods, right? Like without, because I mean, I don't think that, I think reason would suggest that this was not done with pounding stones and copper tools that the Egyptologists claim it was made by. But what if, like, somebody was able to figure out some sort of like chemical or, I don't know,

some unconventional method that you would have never. thought of. We have a simple application process on our website so submit that that proposal and what's the website called artifact foundation.org artifactfoundation.org. And if anyone is interested in in-depth documentary style videos of our research and the results actually then they can find these on my channel on YouTube. They can just search for my name, Karoli, K-A-R-O-L-Y, POCA or look for ancient technology podcast. And are you guys, are you guys, um, partnered with any, um, like conventional Egyptologist folks or, or, um, we talk to them.

Yeah. We, we talk to a lot of them. Um, we, we, we do. I would, I would say we're not, we're not officially associated with any universities. Mm-hmm. Um, but we do have advisors that are at various universities in Europe and in America. That are, that are working with you on the foundation. and all that stuff.

Okay. Yeah, they vet the work that we do. They help with algorithm. One very important part that probably multiple people or several people are analyzing these scans. But I think it's very important to, that the methods we are using for the analysis is wetted by different independent persons.

Like we have actually three people analyzed the software I have designed with all with PhD, math, 3D reconstruction and computer vision backgrounds. And I think it's very important to not use a software which hasn't been wetted by. So

when I look at different analysis of these ancient vessels, my question is how did they align the object? So it's a crucial part of the analysis. If you don't align it perfectly, it will screw the entire screw up your entire slicing method

and calculations. If you don't calculate the root mean square distances or the data point deviations correctly, it will also give you a different result. So I think it's very important to be on the safe side. Cool. Well, I'm looking forward to see how this stuff pans out and how this whole project progresses with you guys. I'll be keeping an eye on it.

And we'll link the foundation, your YouTube channel, all that stuff below. Is there anything else that we should tell people? No, it's about it. Thanks. All right. Cool. Thanks your time, guys. And PQ1, if you like. Oh, hell yes, I will. Awesome.

All right, good night. You can't reason with the sun. Trust us. We've tried. This summer, it's time to put that angry ball of fire on mute. Columbia's Omni-Shade technology is engineered to protect you from the sun's harsh rays that can burn and damage your skin. The sun is relentless. But so is our gear. Level up your summer at Columbia.com to spend more time outside and less time slathering on alolotion.

You're welcome. Columbia, engineered for whatever.