Joe Rogan Experience Review podcast - 537 JRE Review of Cassie Coppersmith

Episode Date: August 4, 2026

Cassie Coppersmith joins Joe Rogan for a fascinating dive into ancient civilizations, impossible stonework, mysterious artifacts, elongated skulls, and the growing evidence that human history may be far more advanced—and far stranger—than we've been taught. We break down the biggest claims, question where the evidence is strongest, and review one of the most intriguing archaeology episodes JRE has delivered in a long time. Thanks to this weeks sponsors: Rappin the Rivers: Go to Eventbrite.com or Sellout Events to get your tickets for Rappin the Rivers Festival 2026, August 7th and 8th in Cardwell, Montana, featuring DaBaby, That Mexican OT, Paul Wall, Kid Ink, Young Dirty Bastard, and more. For full festival details, go to RappinTheRiversMT.com. Camping is included. Shop now at Fabletics dot com slash jrer to get 70- 80% off everything when you sign up as a new VIP  Rocket Money: Go to RocketMoney.com/JRER to cancel unwanted subscriptions, monitor your spending, lower your bills, and grow your savings. Hims: Go to Hims.com/JRER for simple online access to personalized, affordable care for ED, hair loss, weight loss, and more. For fee-free banking go to Chime.com/JRER

Hey guys and welcome to another episode of the J.R.E. Review. Today we are reviewing Casey Coppersmith. It's a cool name. Cassie, I think it's said. That's what I meant. Cassie Coppersmith. She's really interesting. You know, the whole episode, she is not claiming to be an archaeologist, but she has a lot of theories about issues and kind of corruption and conspiracy. is going on in the archaeological world. And I found that more than anything interesting and worth discussing and revisiting. What about you? Yeah. So she describes herself as an independent researcher who just studies ancient civilizations

and archaeological mysteries has put a lot of time into doing that. And I, you know, I think in a lot of ways that's important. to kind of not potentially come from the traditional archaeological academic route just because of the way that they're training those people. That's kind of the whole issue, right? It's like these are the timelines, you have to follow this, you have to believe in this process. And I think for a lot of archaeologists,

especially all the ones that have been around a long time and they're teaching and they have books and they've really just kind of succumb to like, this is how it is thinking. They can't really think outside of the box like that. They can't ask those questions like, oh, maybe this was made by some machines we don't understand. They just have to go, oh, no, no, no, what did they have?

They had sand, they had string, they had little chisels. and it must have just taken them a shitload of time to cut this. Yeah, yeah. I mean, I think the way she sort of frames it and what makes you think bigger about, like, what we do know and what is proven as, like, a fact based on carbon dating and so on is like, okay, a lot of times archaeologists are commissioned or funded by some group

who's trying to prove some theory or trying to identify something really specific. And so their job isn't to go in and ask big questions. Their job is to go in and prove something. And there is money behind this. And someone who's funding this archaeological expedition or, you know, experience is like, I really want to prove and to that, you know, this artifact backs up a theory that I have or that it backs up a theory that's already in existence that we've been running with for a long time.

And I want to, like, expand that or verify that. And so the archaeologists aren't there to ask these big questions, but they're the ones they're literally digging up these historical artifacts, and they should be empowered to ask these big questions. Something's not right here. You know, this doesn't feel like, you know, given the tools that we've already proven have existed in a certain time frame, that this could be that, you know, given my professional experience, like I said, their commission to say, yes, this thing existed and there's evidence that it was, you know, a piece of property of this timeline. And so, you know, but in kind of to get more specific, there's a lot of in these ancient artifacts, they aren't necessarily looking at the material. They're looking at the inscriptions, right? So like, when is this inscription from?

And the way that Cassie frames it is, well, you know, like even with the pyramids, it's like you, these pharaohs or these kings or these empires, they stumbled upon these artifacts that maybe already existed and they didn't have inscriptions on them. and then they inscribed on them in a completely different timeline than when they were created. And so that's how we're dating them. And so therein lies the issue is we're only looking at like a small surface piece of this, you know, archaeological or, you know, artifact or this, you know, wonder of the world. We're saying, oh, the pyramids were created at this time because this is when the inscriptions say that they were a piece of property for this individual. Right. And what lines up with that is she was saying often these inscriptions are done more crudely than the piece itself, which kind of makes sense. I mean, if you just went up and spray painted, you know, a Sonic the Hedgehog on an old factory that was abandoned 50 years before, and then they went, well, Sonic the Hedgehog came out in the late 80s or early 90s, whatever it was. So that's how old the building must be.

Right. It's kind of like that, especially if the inscription is not done in the same way as the rest of the factory, not built that way. It's not the same paint. It doesn't seem to fit at all. Then it's like, why are they using that tool? But to your point, with archaeology, it's like they're not really trying to figure out how was this possible to be made. They just have some story for it based on what the technology was that they thought they knew. But ultimately, they're just trying to fit everything in this timeline.

Yeah. They're really protective of the timeline. Yeah. Because that's what archaeology is. Right. They've just made this timeline. They've spent a long time doing it, hundreds of years of university hours. And they're like, this is what it looks like.

None of you can work outside of this range. and you have to be able to put all the pieces in there. And if you try to put them anywhere else, we're going to discredit you heavily. Yeah. That seems massively problematic, but maybe on the other side of that, then it's like what archaeology was like when it first came around.

Nobody knew where anything went. Right. Yeah. Yeah, you know, it's really easy to take these pieces of a puzzle and kind of place them, right? But if there's no, if the pieces don't fit in this, puzzle. It's really hard for science and for historians, you know, scientists and historians to say, oh, well, I don't know. I don't know the answer to this. I don't know when this time frame was. They don't like to say they don't know. We don't have a vision. We don't have any idea about how

these people lived or what their brains look like. We're completely lost, but we found something we don't have an answer for. And I can't imagine anyone wants to go through years and years of a project and be like, well, we have nothing because there's too many questions. proposed here. You know, even as far as like, for example, with the pyramids, it's just one of a million examples of these, you know, historical sites around the world that we claim to be wonders of the world or that are just like these amazing ancient ruins that there's a lot of questions around.

But what we're really seeing is like, what do we have answers for? We have answers for how we can carbonate tombs and articles within a tomb and say, oh, okay, the bodies in this tomb date back to this era and the bowls and the wood and the clay and all these things that have living, you know, organic materials in them. We can date those. So we say, okay, well, the pyramids must have been owned by and built by someone, you know, between 500,000 years prior to win these bodies because that's like a realistic timeline, right? It took them 1,000 years to build, 500 years to build the pyramids and they had these tools and we have no idea. And it was just, you know, extreme craftsmanship of the time. But then people died and then they started to bury their dead in here with all of these other little artifacts, bowls and trophies and whatever. And so, but the reality is it's like we have no actual idea of who made the pyramids and the actual physical structures of these things.

And the stories date back, you know, they go back and back and back say, we didn't make them. We found them. We stumbled upon the sphinx and the pyramids of Giza. And these things are just like, we claimed them and built our society around them. And yet no one's asking when they were made. They were just assuming they were part of that empire. So it's like there's just missing pieces to the story. And so she really dives into that.

You know, that's what her work is. She doesn't claim to be an archaeologist. She's just like a curious individual who left the corporate world and had to like detox herself and heal from that. She even talked about. Oh, yeah. That was interesting. Very interesting talking about her four-day. No food, just some water, out in the woods.

Yeah, what did she call it? It was like a healing, like a Native American healing journey, essentially. Yeah, four days in the woods. A long fast. A long fast. And the final day she spent, you stay up all night and you build a circle of rocks. And she claimed to have a lot of benefit that she got out of that experience and how, you know, the indigenous. Americans people were doing it right because they really were connected.

I love how Joe goes. Oh, Jobs is so bad. You got to stop yourself for four days and stay out in the woods. But truly, I mean, think about the archaeologists that are questioning this. I've been doing this for 20 years and nothing's ever sat right. But this is my life and this is my work. So it's like I have my own idea of what's going on here. And they're probably questioning everything. Oh, there's a whole new generation after Graham Hancock and how popular his ancient civilization show on Netflix, both seasons.

Podcast is brought to you by Rapping the Rivers Festival, 26. Filth and Fowl, 406 Glass, Apogee Gardens, and Dirty Jones present Rapping the River Festival 2026. Montana's hottest music festival is back featuring live music from DeBased. baby, the Mexican OT, Paul Wall, Kid Inc., and many more with special presenter, Young Dirty Bastard. I'm telling you, this festival is going to be incredible. I'm going to be there, a bunch of my friends are. Get up to Montana, see everything it has to offer, all its beauty. It's such an incredible place.

And the recent edition is day ticket. So if you can't go up for the whole weekend, you can buy for either just Friday or just Saturday night. Get your tickets now at eventbright.com or sellout events. Camping is included. For all details, go to wrapping the rivers mt.com. Rapping the Rivers 26 music festival, August 7th and 8th in Cadwell, Montana. Don't miss it. Became that I bet that there are a bunch of archaeological professors right now

having to push back on these younger students are like, explain that. Like, what about this? How could you even do this? And they just will not have the answer. I mean, listen, they're not material scientists either. Yeah. They can only outsource to them.

Yeah. So if they find something, and they're not engineers. Right. As well. But I bet when they start talking to engineers and material scientists and people that really know how to build things, those people are going yeah you can't do that you can't lift that stone this way right it would just be impossible you can't carve this like let's take that uh what is it uh liangsu jade artifacts

right that that material supposedly super hard yeah super super hard and it's like lay board through with a hole the outside is square that it has other shapes and pieces on the outside. It's like, so you can't spin that one to make it. You have to be able to somehow chip it perfectly smooth. And, you know, basically she's just saying it doesn't fit with anything else that those people had. It's almost like they found it and kept it or given it. And it could have been even way older and just prized for this, like, you know,

incredible beauty and infinitely hard material. And there's stuff like that all over the world. Yeah. And the precision is just beyond, like, you need like an electron microscope almost to measure how perfect it is. It's like how would they have been able to do that? They can't look at it that closely. The human eye would barely even be able to tell the differences.

Yeah, her work is interesting, obviously, because she's asking a lot of questions, but she's also compiling, you know, experiments that they've done, modern experiments to say, This is what we've proven that they have based on carbon dating. And, you know, they had sand and they had abrasives and they had string and they had bamboo and they had all these things. So they try to recreate these artifacts with those materials in a crude way. And they're like, it's not the same.

We literally can't recreate it. Even with modern ability to like craft tools and things out of these materials that they had access to. We can't recreate this. So like it's hard to even fathom unless it's, you know, like a. modern-made custom piece of machinery that they could recreate it in the exact, delicate, intricate way that it was originally. So again, it just asks these questions that we don't have answers to. And people don't like that. You know, organizations and big companies don't like to be asked questions that they don't have answers to. And, you know,

back to what you were talking about with young individuals coming up through the system of, you know, archaeology and, you know, the education system there. Um, I just imagine those that just starting out and are like, okay, I put all this work and I have all this passion behind what I want to do, which is to discover these things, but I have to get a paycheck. I can't, I can't step out of line and actually ask the questions and say, this is what I'm seeing, which doesn't line up with anything that I've learned or anything that makes any sense. And yet I still have to get a paycheck. We see that in the corporate world all the time, right? Like, don't step out of line. Like, don't say anything. You know, don't be a whistleblower, like all this stuff. And it's a really unfortunate. element to modern society that like we're never going to have all the answers because there's so much money behind proving theories that you know or um ideas that you know a company has invested you know that we believe right it's really sad yeah you just don't get that many renegades you know the wild people like look at indiana jones now i know there's a movie but he's the coolest archaeologist ever and they're generally not seen as very cool people.

And what was it about him that made him that way, right? In the movie, it was all the movies. It was just that he believed in impossible things that no one else believed existed or real. He'd go find him. He was just willing to take risks and just be wild. Now, obviously, it's not possible for archaeologists to be like that. But for those that start coming up to be braver, you know, to really build their own name and then speak out and say, this doesn't fit. And it's okay, we don't have the answers.

But I'm going to put it here. I'm going to put it 13,000 years ago. Yeah. And we're just going to have to start building around that. Instead of lumping everything in with, well, it was the Egyptians that did this. Yeah. Right. This is where the pyramid goes.

Well, it's interesting. Because the old pot thing makes sense. Like all stick, you know, everything that you can carbonate. It most of the time, if you get like a small burial area, you dig it up and it shows there was some houses or huts or TPs or whatever. And the pieces lying around would make sense that they came from about that time, roughly, it will take some time. You know, maybe a couple of generations lived in that area, but you mostly have it. When you have giant things like the pyramids, right, that are just, you just. massive that can withstand the test of time up until now, who knows how long they did before that.

So really, the stuff laying around it, it's like, how can you really say? I guess it's better than no evidence, but it's just not that compelling compared to the complexity of everything else. Yeah, and it's not quite as satisfying to say. It's at least as old as these things, right? Which is more accurate. It is more accurate, but it's not saying like, just make. a claim that can't be proven, right? And I think that's with any of this evidence that's come

out probably in the last 200 years of archaeological evidence. We need to say things are at least as old as we can prove they are. But we don't know exactly how old they are. And we don't know everything, you know, that in this time, and we don't have it written down. It's just a guess. It's an educated guess. And we also have limitations on our education. We have limitations on how we train archaeologists. Cassie claiming that a lot of these ruins and these artifacts that are so impressive, they potentially came from, and she has no way to prove this, of course, and she is very clear about that.

They came from a previous species that was so technologically advanced beyond what we believe to be capable of people. that lived a thousand years ago or, you know, 10,000 years ago. Yeah. And she does a great job of just posing the questions and it really makes you think, but it also is like makes you crave the answers. Like you're like, I want to know now. Like you want to like someone make a movie of all the theories and what that looks like so

I can visualize it. Because, you know, you, we have documentaries that sort of recreate 10,000 years ago. Mm-hmm. What about 100,000 years? ago. Yeah, let's get some wild ones out there and throw it out there. You know what's so crazy is a couple episodes ago we discussed. I can't remember what it was, but it was like time travel and how like maybe someone 100 years from now did time travel back. It had a knowledge and a piece of technology to create certain things and then had to live the rest of their life there. And so they were able to do

these things. And that was sort of them like proving I did it, you know. And in 100 years, it's all going to come to light and be like, this is what we were waiting for. Someone went and they made an impossible structure of, you know, stone or gold or whatever, lead or whatever it is, these materials that these ancient artifacts are made of. And they sprinkled them all over the globe throughout their lifetime. Maybe they, because we've figured out human ability to live longer, you know, human biology, we've hacked it. And they're living 500 years or 1,000 years naturally in this ancient time. And they've made all these artifacts. And they basically created all of the civilizations in hindsight of what they know 100 years from now.

How crazy. Please someone write a script and make a movie because I want to see that depicted. Yeah. Like how cool. What gets me is it seems like there's no message being left with most of these things either. It's like they had a function. Like Stonehenge did something. Right.

Right. and they ran all these AI tools around Stonehenge and all this like resonance sound stuff was happening that was just too precise for it to be a coincidence. And then, you know, take the pyramids, for example. Now obviously there's writing in there, but there's a good argument that that came later again, almost like graffiti on it.

Like, look what we found. Let's mark this thing up. And have no inscriptions to talk about how it's built because we don't know. You know, but it was like if people were making these things knowing that they would last the test of, like they would last a really long time. And we're adding time to it. She is. She's saying this could be much older.

Then I wonder why some message wasn't left. Like something that's potential, you know, you would have you would assume that languages were more simple in the past, basic. So that we should be able to decode messages. But it's like inscripted pictures of stuff. Yeah, I don't have... Or just a vase. I don't have a great answer, but I have a theory. Go on.

They didn't want to tell us anything. Well, you know, in time travel movies, they talk about, like, you can't, like, give too much information, right? Like, it's like leaving a breadcomb trail, a trail of breadcums to help us understand that and start asking the questions so that we get to the place that we develop the technology to go back in time and to basically do it all over. So it's like, it's already been planned out. And they're just sort of fulfilling the timeline of what happened. But if they wrote in modern day English, then that would completely alter. A language started before it actually did. So if they wrote on something and said like, X marks the spot and this was created at this time, don't get it wrong, then it's like the history of human evolution and mind and knowledge and education and archaeology.

You know, archaeology and all the things would be altered. But are they doing that by leaving the thing behind? in the first place? See, I don't know. Maybe they were like, well, this is, we sort of built something that doesn't alter it enough. Like, it doesn't improve the human condition enough to alter, but it's sort of like stamps. Like, oh, this did happen and it makes us start to question things and it makes us start to like think bigger in our timeline right now in the 21st century. Well, then they're making it just more confusing. Maybe that's interesting. I wish they had left it. Maybe they just wanted to fuck up behind. Just a bunch of jokers. I know. Just. Just. Just fucking with us. I don't know, but that's my theory is it's like they did just enough to like entertain themselves 100 years from now to say like, oh, we were there and like we made you think really hard about this in 2026 and come 20, you know, 30 26 or whatever it is that you now have or what is it?

2326 or 21 26. Geez. Yeah, come on that. But like, you know, that we were thinking enough to. to say, okay, let's get to the point where we start to develop this technology. Because they can't go back to every timeline. So they can only go to one. And they've only said, okay, I have to just do enough to where it's going to develop. And they know how we're going to have this crude and rudimentary way of dating things.

And then eventually we're going to say, like, but this piece doesn't match and this piece doesn't match. And then we're going to think bigger and bigger. And we're going to develop AI. And it's going to help us find the answers and develop technology to basically start the cycle over again. Well, but some of it has, like, massive. functional elements as well, like that anchor-wap place in Cambodia that's ginormous. Yeah.

They had the huge, perfectly rectangle lake that was, what does she say, like 50 pyramids big that they made? And then when they did the LIDAR, all around, there was just this hidden urban layouts and roads and embankments and reservoirs and all this stuff that could have sustained a giant civilization back then. One we don't know about at all. And they can see when they say, oh, yeah, this came from these people in this time. Well, those people weren't aware of the LIDAR and they'd like dug through the remains of what was there before.

Almost like, again, they found that place. Yeah. And we're like, we don't even know what was here before on these mounds or wherever. And we're just going to use it because it has function. But yeah, like how much of this stuff could have been found. Yeah. Such a big question. It really makes you think and, you know, I think you can either go two ways with this. You can either like sort of spiral into all these conspiracies like we've sort of done or you can just sort of say. It's a fun for it. It can be fun. It also can be overwhelming. So if you're feeling overwhelmed by this, you're not alone. I think it took me a long time to really come around to being able to hypothesize about this because it is really scary to think. about what we don't know. Well, it's scary to think that we potentially have been wiped out almost to extinction

a bunch of times and then got really advanced and then kind of went back to knowing nothing. Yeah. Because that suggests that shit could happen now. Right. It's safer in our minds to think, oh, we just keep getting better and everything gets better and technology and it improves and that's great. Mm-hmm. But if they got more advanced than us in some.

areas in the past, which some of these objects suggest, and then they went back to cave people, that is quite terrifying. That's terrifying. And yeah, is it like, was it the same species? Like, did they evolve in the same way that we did? Did they find this planet and grow and develop and evolve somewhere else? And then find Earth. And then that's when they did it.

So that's why there's only, like, some evidence. Like, there's not, like, it's like they were planted here for a short piece. period of time and then like left left or became extinct you know and that's the theory of like extraterrestrials on you know and we're not alone in this universe so like there's that whole theory or there's the theory of like we are the rudimentary like we are the barbaric people that have come after this like super evolved civilization that looked super similar to us but maybe they didn't speak the same way as us or they didn't they communicate via written language they communicated via like telepathy. So like that's why there's no language on these because everything was communicated.

Like you just, they walked up to things and they were, they were, they heard it in their head. Sure. Right. Or they communicated all through smell or touch or a different sense that we developed and we developed and evolved differently. And so like physically we have certain things that are the same like because of our earth's gravity, you know, like a lot of our physical attributes are the same and the way that we, you know, digested foods or whatever are the same. but like our brains and our skulls look so different because that's like less affected by those things and is more like the, you know, our brain is like what is so advanced about humans compared to apes. Right. Right. So like bigger brain.

Bigger brains. And so was their brains and they're, I mean, and they talked a lot about schools. Oh, yeah. Those crazy. Some of the skull stuff is wild. Super wide. Some of those look really bizarre. And you know what I found the most interesting is that there's only so many that we found or.

that we have evidence of. And you would think there would be more, but maybe some of them are removed and that's just what's left. Or maybe we're not looking. Or maybe we find them and we're like, this is too scary to think about. This is too different. So, but like there's like enough to say like this isn't necessarily like a singular like

genetic mutation that just like made this person have like a really long big skull and brain. But like that this was like a thing. There was enough people that they developed like. health care. What was it that they called drilling into their brain? Oh yeah. What was that? There's enough, like, instances of people that looked like this. Trepanation. Trepanation. What a good word. And enough evidence of trepination. It's like that this was like a chronic problem. People in some way,

there was enough people that were different enough that they felt they needed to either investigate, alleviate or, you know, mitigate what was happening with these individuals. And it's like, what was it? Was that they were too smart? Were they in pain? Was this a mutation that made them, like, have, like, you know, like a physical disability at that time? Or was it a physical ability beyond what we had? And people were like, we got to take that away from them.

Like super humans. Yeah. Like so hard. And so hard to know because there's nothing written about it that we have yet that we've proven. But it is crazy. They can do like DNA testing on any skulls though, right?

I mean, that's organic material. Yeah. And I think that's the thing is like they've probably done. They've done enough to say like, oh, these are like a homo sapien. They're not like not a homo sapiens. Like they're not, you know, like there's differences. But like. But maybe there was something that

could happen to just a regular human. Yeah. That would make them way smarter. Yeah. What is that, though? I mean, think about it. Like, you get these characters that come along, like an Elon or Tesla or Einstein. And just in one lifetime, they do incredible things.

Yeah. And they're just a little bit smarter than most people. Right. Right. It's not like they're twice as smart. They don't have IQs of 300. Yeah. They just are, you know, percentages, smarts.

and that's enough to just completely outdo everyone else and basically change the world. Yeah. So who knows what could be possible if they found a way to selectively make a few people super intelligent with some ancient process that we've forgotten about. Well, they sort of talked about, you know, there's this concept of this awareness that humans, not Americans,

Americans probably use less, but humans use... Don't be rude. 70% of their brain power, 30% of their brain power. And if you could just tap into using 10, 20, 30% more brain power, I don't know what the exact number is. I think that's like an old story. Maybe. It's like you just use certain parts at a time, certain areas, fire at a time.

You use the whole thing. If you could activate more of your brain at one time or like, you know, meditate into using it differently, like maybe you, your brain does start to grow. differently. Like maybe we, our brains sort of evolved to not grove that big as a means to protect us against something else. Maybe it evolved to like, yeah, it is really painful to have a big brain or it's like you hate life because you're so much smarter than everyone else. So you sort of you got to drill into your own skull. Yeah. So then you sort of evolved enough. So it's like, oh, now everyone's sort of on the same playing field, same level of like knowledge and awareness.

So that we can multiply. Right. It's like these people were like, you're too dumb for me to even procreate with. Like, I can't fathom that. So I'm not going to. And then that was sort of like evolved out of us through procreation, right? But again, it's part of the fun of kind of explaining like, all right. So maybe if the archaeologists were right, we didn't have in the past advanced machines that could make these things. But maybe we had some sort of way of making a super intelligent group of beings that could

figure out how to make these super complex things with whatever tools they had then. Yeah. Because whatever happened was remarkable. It obviously took unbelievable engineering, whether it was advanced machines or if it was just basic things and then a lot of precision and planning. That takes some super intelligent people. Yeah. It does.

I think it takes intelligence. I also think it can take. time time which that's kind of one thing that they've liked to throw out there the archaeologists like well they just had a lot of time yeah it's like how much time yeah i mean again like talking thousands of years to build this thing maybe they had less things occupying their time like they they still have to get food they weren't do regular stuff raise kids other things for taking more time right like hunting and gathering like that took a long time. But maybe they'd evolve to need less new nutrients than we did. So they only ate once a week. So like it genuinely, they did have more time. It's like a lot of modern society revolves around three meals a day and getting your macros and doing this and this and this and like following the grind and eight hours of work a day. And you know, you got to do this X, Y and Z where it's like and like children don't have a lot of work or like, you know, productive responsibilities until they turn 18. They go to school and we sort of train them to, like then follow our agenda versus like, oh, if your family specializes and making these things,

and every individual by the time they're five, six years old is like learning this trade and they're masters at cutting jade with straying and abrasives. I don't know. And so genuinely it's like... They definitely would have had to have specialization. Yes. And then they would have also had to be able to outsource.

things like gathering food and a bunch of other stuff so you could have these specialists just work on these projects. And that's another thing that's part of the timeline is we don't think that that was happening all that long in the past. Yeah. So therefore we just say it can't be that old because, you know, everyone was just running around like hunter gatherers at this time. Yeah. Until they found Gobeckley-Tepi, which they know. know is like 12,000 years old and was buried. That's why it survived.

Yeah. So I guess there was some things around there that they were able to carbon date. And that one is forced the timeline to change, though it doesn't seem to have done enough for them to be like, yeah, let's start throwing some other things in and around that timeline. Yeah. Just people want to do it. So it kind of stands on its own. It's just this weird outlier that's like, hey, that should be enough. to say this wasn't the only place in the world where they were doing building massive things like this.

Right. Intricant monument, stonework, all the rest of it. It's like, yeah, could have been there way, way longer. I found it very interesting. They were talking about LIDAR towards the end and how, like, you know, it's they, what is his name? The Italian and he's found what he thinks is a second sphinx. Right. And they're trying to brush it off as like, oh, no, you haven't found what you're seeing.

is the excavation, you know, the remnants of the excavation of like, whatever, the pyramids or something else. It's like, well, no, because, like, this, like, no, like, we know that that's there, but what we're seeing is below that. And they're like, nah. They're just, like, trying to discredit him. And it's like, but that's enough evidence. Like, if you could just dig enough to, like, find a head, like, the original, like, the sphinx that we've, that we know of today. That was all that was, before it started being excavated, all that was exposed was the head. So start the project, but like no one's going to fund that because it would basically like upturn. It's like the sphinx is like this like special amazing wonder of the world. And

there's been two of them all along and like this is a whole different thing. And they say that there's these stories from the Egyptians are like, we found it was two sphinx and two pyramids and like that's where we started. And like those are existed. We didn't. But that's a whole different. But They would sort of discredit, like, oh, our timeline, but, like, credit that story to being real. Isn't the whole point of that area, like, a massive archaeological process, though? Yeah. It's like a site. It's like, hey, we've scanned the ground.

There's another thing here. Dig it up. Let's start digging. Because if you dig and there's nothing down there, that's surely not a massive deal. It's filling in again. It's like probably a lot of digging happens in archaeology. They find nothing. It's like people don't get mad at archaeologists for digging in the ground.

The only thing I can think is that it just comes down to like tourism. I mean, you would think it would bring more tourism if they found another one. But in the short term, what does that look like? Do they have to stop it because it's like risky to people? Does it make extra dust in the air? Is it? How expensive is it? You know, like they're thinking in the short term.

They're not thinking like, we need answers. They're thinking like, we've already found one. It's fine. Like maybe there's another one. We've already found these really cool things. It brings in X amount of dollars every year that we need. We can't pause that. Well, and the AI analysis of that probability of the second sphinx is like 80%.

Yeah. Dig it up. That's pretty. Let's see it. Yeah. I just can't understand why anybody wouldn't just be like, well, clearly we're going to fund this. This would be amazing. Yeah.

Like, are they running out of money? Can we start go fund me? Second sphinx go fund me campaign. I'm into it. I'm into it. We're going to start with that. Yeah. And then also they talk a little bit and, you know, for dragons to come up on a Rogan podcast, not unusual. I mean, he is a dragon believer. And then they talk about like serpents and all the rest of it, like across time. And, you know, that is a good point that is strangely coincidental. The dragons do appear in ancient scripts and stories and mythology kind of all over the world. Yeah.

Is that just a coincidence, like how there's pyramid-shaped buildings all over the world? Well, you know what I found more interesting. Maybe it's just because not like it. Not into dragons. Not that into dragons, but is giants. Is it in almost all like historical text, there's some claim of giants. Yeah. And is, and I mean, there's a lot of explanations to this.

Oh, the people were small and they just never seen. seen anyone that was seven feet tall. And that's like very not normal, but possible today. Sure. It's just like what they call tall people. Tall people. And they're just like, oh, we've just never seen anyone because there was like so little food and so little, you know, everything was so much work and people didn't live very long. So like there wasn't that many people there were that tall. So like one in like one in the whole world was that big, right? Or two. And so like, those are the giants. Like, and then the story gets blown in a proportion. Oh, they were seven feet tall. Oh, they were 17 feet tall. They were 70 feet tall, right? And then, or, you know, was there genuinely people that, or was there in some way people were led to believe in a really realistic way that there was individuals that were that big? Oh, they found their residence. And they're like, why is there a chair that's this big? You'd think there would be some ancient burial sites that would have, um, kind of secured some giant bones.

that we could have rolled up on. Well, we found small bones, right? We found like small... Short people. Short humanoids. Mm-hmm. But we've never found, I don't believe, any real evidence of, like, giant bones. Beyond like, okay, there was someone who's like six-six.

Yeah. Right? They don't have anything in a museum that's like a FEMA. But they're like that. For someone that would be ginormous. And, you know, you got to think with the bigger things, it's harder to hide that. And Neanderthals were haunted. Right? So like maybe it's just someone evolved to stand up straight. And so they just like appeared bigger. I don't know. But like there is so much. The giant stories are cool. The giant stories are crazy because it's like that is like a physical like I can kind of see with dragons where it's like you know like you see with snakes like they have venom. So it's like snakes are this like oh they bite you. But like if you don't have modern science to like determine oh it's because of venom it's like oh they magically when they're around you and they put their mouth on you then they kill you. So maybe it was.

dragons that spit something. So they weren't really spitting fire, but spitting out a substance or a venom that burned. And like, that's how they killed you. Whereas like it burned through you, but it wasn't like fire like we know fire. It was like a different kind of fire that burned and felt like fire. But it wasn't that or, you know, their tongues looked like fire and it had things on it. They burned. I don't know. But maybe it's just like an obviously really scary creature. Yeah. It's like, well, let's give it everything. It looks like a T-Rex. It can fly. that's scary. Mm-hmm.

And then what's the greatest, scariest technology we know? Well, add fire. Yeah. It can make that. And then there's like things like, you know. And it eats people. Biological, you know, like, what's the word? Like when you have like an issue.

Like, gosh, why am I forgetting the term? Like when you can't like a defect, like a biological defect. Like a mutation. Like genitathy? Everyone knows Gemithae, the raccoon, right? He looks like a mythical creature. But he's just a raccoon with a birth defect. So like maybe...

Like a defective, like a mutated crocodile. Yeah, like a mutated something that does exist and it just has a mutation where it like lived for a short period of time and maybe it did procreate or in that genetic defect, you know, was passed on. So there was like some additional evidence of it. But like the Bigfoot's. maybe it's just like a albino bear with some other defect that helps it stand up straight. You know what I mean?

So it's like it's not actually a big foot. It's just like it isn't like a different species. It's just like a bear with the birth effect. I don't know. But there's obviously a million and one ways you could try to explain something. And I think that's sort of what goes back to these archaeological sites, these historical artifacts. Like there's a lot of ways we can. can hypothesize, oh, this is what could have happened.

But like, we need some people to step up, figure out what happened. You got to keep an open line. Where did they come from? Look, the timeline's important. It's useful for a lot of reasons. And I think we should be brave enough to be like, this really doesn't fit. And this is why. Yeah.

Like, change the process of how we're dating things. Question everything. Why not? Yeah. I mean, why not throw it out there? Because the, because people are just not buying this. those answers. And what it's doing is I think it's taking a lot of credibility away from archaeologists, which is why they're so pissed off with people like her and Graham Hancock and

those others that are out there saying this doesn't fit, this is wrong. Yeah. Because they want credibility. My hope is that there's enough young people out there that are coming into the professional world and they're interested in listening to these people that are asking questions, but maybe have constraints of what is already in play and what already sort of pass control over the answers and that they're willing to push forth and often change it and use AI and use the new technologies that we do have and, you know, really start to clarify even if it's like maybe just like change the industry to where like archaeology isn't about answers. It's about what questions do we not have answers to? Well, I think once once they have better scanning technology,

like the LIDAR, the stuff they use to scan under the pyramids and that satellite. that they used, and then, you know, even smaller detailed measuring equipment that can look at these small artifacts and then they start throwing it all into AI. And then it just will just start coming back with percentages of like how possible is it they could have made it with these types of tools. Yeah. And then the AI is like 4%. Yeah.

It's 4% possible. And also you can't argue with that stuff. Some of these smaller artifacts, like Cassie acknowledged, like, yeah, there hasn't been a ton of, like, specific, like, really detailed measurements of, like, how exact and precise are these things they look and feel really precise. But, like, are they? And I think that would kind of rule out whether or not a human, it could have been created by a human or not. Like a highly skilled human, like an artist can make something that visually feels and looks super balanced to the human eye. Sure. But to a CAD system to a computer to an AI. Getting down to the molecular level. Is it identical on right side and left side? Is it completely straight and even?

Like, where are the imperfections? And is this something machine made or is this something a human made? Yeah. And that's where I think AI is really going to come into play with all of this. And it's hard because there's so much. We just got to get out of the museums. Yeah, get it out of museums. So we can check it.

People got to let go of some ownership over these things. and they can't be owned by organizations. They really need to be studied by people who are interested in the answers, not in proving a theory that already exists. Yeah, without the gatekeeping, right? Again, an open mind, a new examination. And I think more and more of that will happen in time. And look, thank goodness to this lady and the type of work that they're doing

and the interest that is droned up on Rogan's podcast, because it makes more questions. and it has people going at things from a completely different angle. So I liked it. Hopefully, Joe said he's going to have her back on. I hope so. Yeah. It'd be cool when she's checked out some more things.

And maybe she gets some of those cool measurements. And then we have a new story to tell next time. Yeah, this somewhat felt like an old school Joe Rogan podcast. Oh, for sure. Like it wasn't about a sponsor. Yeah. I'm not saying, I'm just saying like it wasn't, you know, it was like genuinely, he's so interested in the topic.

I don't think he brought up perplexity one time. He didn't. He might have said AI once. But like he was very... It was very curious, Joe. It was very excited. It was very, like, kid in a candy store of, like, I am so excited to be learning about this and that you're sitting in front of me.

And it had nothing to do with how much money someone's made or how popular they are is a genuine, like, interest. And that was so refreshing. Yeah, it's the best type of Rogan episodes. Yeah. I loved it. I thought it was great. She was cool. Check it out, everybody.

Thank you so much. And that's the end of this review. I would talk to you next time. Cheers, y'all. Bye. Thank you.