Julian Dorey Podcast - #367 - "Groundbreaking!" - 1 Million Yr-old Skulls, Egyptian Labyrinth & Ancient DNA | Michael Button

Starting point is 00:00:00 At the end of the day, no one really knows what happened in the deep, deep past. If we're talking about the classic lost civilizations of the Amazon, Francesco, he was the one that reported seeing vast cities in the jungle. So then he came back to Europe and everyone laughed at him. But then when you think about what happened when people conquer new lands is that people get killed. And that's what happens. In recent years, they're starting to think that maybe this guy wasn't lying. They've been seeing these vast geometric earthworks. It's proof that civilization in South America is far older and far more complex.

Starting point is 00:00:27 You look at so much of the megalithic stonework, then you look at the you look at the culture that built it and it just doesn't line up at all, which is interesting. Fuck it, it must have been aliens. This all buys into the argument, which is the human history everywhere, is far older than we think. North American archaeologists basically tried to get this guy almost killed because he was making these statements. The idea was called the Clovis First Theory. So, Hey guys, if you're not following me on Spotify, please hit that follow button and leave a five-star review.

Starting point is 00:00:54 They're both a huge, huge help. Thank you. all the way from across the pond michael button got you in studio welcome hey julian how you do how you like in new jersey man it's good man i was walking around listening this is going to make you laugh or probably hate me i was listening to the soprano's theme tune because i was big soprano's fans you know i don't hate you at all for that you fit right in that's that's what you should do it gets you in the vibe all the opening scenes yeah we're filming as you know in Jersey yeah i was walking around i woke up this my own yeah yeah when you're

Starting point is 00:01:35 walking through like fucking jersey city at 6 am be careful but yeah you know it's it's actually funny because i grew up in south jersey and then i moved up here when i was 22 and i've been up here mostly except for the three years i went back to my parents house as an adult and when i was first up here the way i kind of learned all the landmarks was where soprano's filmed yeah which is like i forget who told me to do that and then you basically learn north jersey yeah through that cool stuff but you study the good stuff the ancient ancient ancient ancient that's a very shitty shitty english accent's pretty bad than my jersey one i don't have a good one but you know what i like about guys like you michael is that you come at it from both angles so you are traditionally

Starting point is 00:02:19 trained academically you went to college for this in birmingham and are obsessed and we'll get into your whole backstory with that but you also are fascinated by actual new discoveries and not putting the ivory tower around it and, you know, stopping discussion on things that we've decided to define as truth forever and never questioned, which, you know, do you ever find it like a little strange that we're living in this world now where you kind of have like hardcore academics and then hardcore all opposite everything history people and they're just fighting all the time? Yeah, I mean, that's one of the reasons I started to do what I do because I felt like there wasn't enough people kind of bridging that divide if you, if you know

Starting point is 00:02:59 I mean, like, people that are open to more alternative ideas about history, but also come from an evidence-based academic background like myself. And so that's why I started to do what I do. And I try to bring it from that perspective, because at the end of the day, this is kind of my view on history is that no one really knows what happened in the deep, deep past. Like once you get back before recorded history, before, you know, 5,000, 6,000 years ago, early civilizations like ancient Sumer, ancient Egypt, no one really knows what happened back then, before people started writing stuff down.

Starting point is 00:03:28 So it's all interpretation, and that's all the mainstream side of doing. They're just interpreting evidence. It's all the alternative side of doing, interpreting evidence in a different way. So I try to, as I say, bridge that divide. And, yeah, it's going pretty well so far. Yeah, and you also just got to go off of what new evidence is found. I mean, it should be that simple. I feel like, you know, our world wants to make that complex these days

Starting point is 00:03:49 and like some fucking revolutionary idea. But, you know, we had this concept that, you know, whether it was people said, oh, humanity is 6,000 years old or 10,000 years old. or something like that. We just had this, like, beat into us in society for hundreds of years. And now, you know, like you were pointing out, there's evidence that things are strong evidence, that things are much older than we thought, you know. And so you were telling me off camera, like you like looking at the Neanderthal stuff and going all the way back. Like, what's,

Starting point is 00:04:18 what's the farthest back you've gone and actually explored evidence? Well, this is the thing. Like, we have a mindset when we look at history as we base everything off ideas that I think we're formed like 50 to 100 years ago when we used to think the human species was extremely young. So not even that long ago, like maybe in the 1990s or the 1980s, we were under the impression that human beings homo sapiens were only like 30,000 years old or something. And then new evidence came to like that we were actually 50,000 years old. And then new evidence came to like we're 100,000 years old. And then 200,000 years old.

Starting point is 00:04:51 And then in 2018, we discovered these fossils in Morocco at the Jabello brood site, which showed that modern homo sapiens, anatomically modern, just like you and me, were 315,000 years old, potentially up to 360,000 years old. And that's a super, super long time ago. What was that called? It's called Jebel Eruid, I think. Obviously, it's like an Arabic name, and so I probably completely butchered that pronunciation. But yeah, that's the one. Yeah, Jebel Eruid, that looks right, doesn't it? So you said we discovered it's over 300,000 years old through that? Yeah, so the estimate is somewhere between about 300,000 to 360,000.

Starting point is 00:05:27 60,000 years old and they're classified as modern Homo sapien remains. So the brain case is pretty much identical to us. And that pushed back the age of our species by 100,000 years. So it was pretty like paradigm shifting discovery and that came out while I was at university and that was kind of the spark that led me to go down this path that I have gone down and not pursue a traditional career in academia instead to kind of think about these ideas from a slightly alternative perspective because I thought it was a really like paradigm shifting thing. because when you look at how old human civilization is, right, the dawn of civilization,

Starting point is 00:06:03 the very earliest time that civilization formed is 5,000 years ago. So then what about the other 310,000 years? You know, prehistory is literally 98, 99% of our story. And yet it's just a dark cloud. It's a shroud of mystery that we don't really know anything about. So that's kind of where my whole interest in this stuff kicked off. And I make a lot of videos about prehistory, about you know, that whole time. And then, as you say, Neanderthal's other human species, they were all existing in this time. And then there was also this really interesting discovery that literally came out about a month ago, which was this, I don't know if you've seen this, it's about the human skull found in China that was a million years old. Did you see that? So it's not, it's not Homo

Starting point is 00:06:45 sapien, just to be clear. It's, um... But you said human skull. It's human skull. So it's classified as Homo Longy, which is very similar to Denisovan. So it's a different human species. But But what they effectively are, yeah, there you go, it's effectively like a sister species of ours. So, I mean, that's not a very technical way of putting it, but it's like the most, that's quite like, that's a layman way of putting it. But effectively, they're large-brained humans, right? So they're very similar to us, basically a sister species or a cousin species, not an

Starting point is 00:07:12 ancestor, someone that's alongside us. Oh, not an ancestor. Not an ancestor, no. So like a sister species, yeah. And the same, pretty much the same brain size as us. Which does that suggest, maybe I'm reading too far. does that suggest therefore that in finding this and it's a million years old that at the same time there were homo sapiens that existed at that moment exactly so that's what the scientists who did

Starting point is 00:07:37 this study suggests so one of the scientists is professor chris stringer from the natural history museum in london and he actually is quoted i think maybe in this article saying this basically suggests that homo sapiens were around around a million years ago or at least the direct lineage of homo sapiens, a distinct lineage of the humans that became homo sapiens. Yeah, here we go. Defe just found it. The startling analysis has dramatically shifted the timeline of the evolution of large brain humans back at least a half a million years. According to Professor Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum, co-led on the research, co-lead on the research, he said there are likely to be a million-year-old fossils of homo sapiens

Starting point is 00:08:15 somewhere on our planet. We just haven't found them yet. And what was the... This is where it's way about my pay grade. But do you make that jump strictly by being able to say that the genetic evidence we found right here suggests that one would have been impossible without the other? Is that how they do it? So they made that leap. So the genetic evidence suggests that we're younger than this. The genetic evidence suggests we diverge. So this is basically how it works.

Starting point is 00:08:43 Because this homolongy skull or perhaps Denisovan skull was found and reconstructed. using CT scanning and classified as Homo Longy, which is a sister species to us, that suggests that our last common ancestor was before then. So if these humans were walking around a million years ago, that means that our species diverged before that point, which means that whatever became Homo sapiens, potentially Homo sapiens, was around at this point. That's what it suggests. Obviously, the dating may not be correct. It's a reconstruction of an extremely odd fossil, but it's a very interesting discovery. Yeah, and potentially extremely paradigm shifting.

Starting point is 00:09:19 And the reason I bring this up is because, you know, if we're 300,000 years old, that's crazy. But if we're a million years old, then in my view, you know, everything's on the table, right? Like, it's such a vast length of time. Like, it's incredible. There's a strange exponential curve with which we look at, with which we look at time as far as, like, in the modern day bias. I talked about this with Gnostic informant when he was here. but it's like when we look at the last you know we're both of this era so you look at the last 30 years it seems like pretty similar part of you know one thing came after another then you look

Starting point is 00:09:58 a hundred years out and you're like wow that was a while ago but now that you got to a hundred when you go 200 years back the distance between the hundred and 200 in your mind that you're looking at shrinks and 200 to 400 shrinks and 400 to a thousand shrinks and suddenly you start to make a leap such that you can look at some history of a Roman emperor in 50 AD and look at another one in 400 AD, 350 years apart, and assume it's like a very similar era. So now extrapolate that to, oh, you know, we thought we were like 6,000 years old. By the way, nope, we're actually 100,000.

Starting point is 00:10:32 Nope, we're 200, no, we're 300, oh, fuck that, we're a million. Yeah. The jumps here that you're making. Think about all the extinctions that could have happened, that definitely happened, in between all those times as well. It's like, you are unearthing, no pun intended, so many different segments of history in one fell swoop, but treating it like one discovery. It's so fascinating to me. Yeah, and I think we, it's almost the way, as you say, we look at the world, like we have a very warped perception of time.

Starting point is 00:11:05 And, you know, because we only think in like very short timescales, like our own life, you know, like 100 years at most. or potentially if you're looking at the whole history of civilizations, you can kind of sort of conceptualize it, like 5,000 years or whatever. But then once you get up to these massive, massive, massive timescales, 100,000 years, 300,000 years, potentially up to a million years. Our human brain can't really like think about that. It doesn't really compute up there. So I think that's potentially where many people go wrong and potentially why we have,

Starting point is 00:11:34 I believe, some kind of recency bias when we look at history. And we think that everything that's happened in the last few thousand years, the stuff we can see is all that's happened. You know, we think that because we can see that, that's the only sophisticated era of human history. We live at the pinnacle of human history. And we may do, but that doesn't mean that nothing else happened in, you know, the 99% of human history that came before that we can't see.

Starting point is 00:11:58 And think of all the human lives, all the stories, all the cultures, all the potential, you know, achievements that our species have made in that vast length of time that we have lost. And, yeah, we can't see anymore. And it's fascinating to me. So yeah, that's why I do what I do. Have you ever had that stomach-sinking moment when you check your bank statement and see that unexpected charge? Or maybe even worry about where your card details are stored every time you shop at a new

Starting point is 00:12:23 website. That's certainly something I think about a lot. Luckily, for both of us, the solution here is privacy. Not the word, the company. Privacy is a consumer protection focused brand that lets you generate unique virtual card numbers for every business or purchase. This is the ultimate online security. I use their merchant locked cards for subscriptions like Netflix or Amazon

Starting point is 00:12:44 because that card literally only works with that one business. That means that if that business ever has a data breach, again, this could be Amazon, Netflix, whoever, my actual bank information is going to be shielded. And on top of that, I get a notification if anyone tries to use the card elsewhere. I love being able to pause, set spending limits, or delete a card anytime. It keeps me in complete control. Now, it's also important to note that privacy doesn't ever sell customer data for any reason. Protecting your privacy isn't just a part of their business, it is quite literally in their name.

Starting point is 00:13:14 Like other card companies, their revenue comes from transaction fees called interchange from businesses. With privacy, it's easy to sign up and incredibly fast to use. They have a free plan with no transaction fees for domestic purchases. So start protecting your financial identity today. Go to privacy.com slash Julian. That link is in my description below. That's P-R-I-V-A-C-Y dot com slash Julian to get your $5.5.000. sign-up bonus today. That $5 can be used on your first purchase, so click the link in my

Starting point is 00:13:45 description and make privacy a part of your daily routine. Thank you to privacy for sponsoring today's video. Do you think that when we find a skull like this a million years ago, maybe not this specific example, but when you find one from way long ago, do you think sometimes we might find something that we don't even realize was walking around in a world that had obviously not the same thing because there's always different iterations in this? theory, but that maybe had things that were technologically equivalent to an iPhone and then an extinction event happened and suddenly something like New York City is just rubble? Well, I wouldn't say there's evidence of this, but I would say it's possible, you know,

Starting point is 00:14:25 because another thing when you get up to these huge timescales is the preservation problem, right? Like what realistically is going to survive that long? If something, not maybe not like New York City, but some kind of settlement existed 100,000 years ago. What realistically would we expect to survive now, 100,000 years in the future? Like, what's going to be left? It's really hard for materials to survive that long. And especially if you think about the kind of things that humans were likely building with, which is the things they find in their environment, you know, like wood or something or plants or reeds or anything that they would find around them to build with, it's just going to decay. Like the earth is an incredible recycling machine

Starting point is 00:15:03 of destruction effectively and we're we kind of underestimate in my view the sheer destructive nature of our planet when it comes to erasing our human past and i always think you know humans like us with a mind like us and that's a debatable point which i want to get into is the kind of history of intelligence and whether we did have a mind like us for this long but in my view we've had a mind like ours for at least 300 000 years potentially much longer than that what does that mean like what could we have been doing in that time and what would we realistically see left to prove it i want to get into that but even even before we go down that rabbit hole it's also like what about population sizes too because like if we have a brain that's of this capacity

Starting point is 00:15:49 it's one thing when you're working in a population of you know 10 000 of us who aren't even connected with the internet or something like that now you're working in a world of eight billion people for three to four billion of which are connected on the internet at any given time and can exchange ideas at the fastest rate in human history. It's like may have the same power, but we have significantly more resources and scale to be able to, you know, put something like this in our hands or something like that. It doesn't mean that they couldn't have come up with amazing shit at a smaller population with this little thing popping around up there. You know what I mean? Yeah. I mean, it's a good point, to be fair, like more people, you have more chance

Starting point is 00:16:26 of a lone genius coming up with something, all people just being able to connect together or work together, especially in our connected society. Like, yes, but something I always think about when I look at past populations of humans is we don't really know how high the population levels were because we have these things called genetic bottlenecks. So if you look throughout history, like, if you look at the genetics of our species, you have these moments in time where the population crashes and, like, almost all of humans are wipes out.

Starting point is 00:16:53 But what that means is only a very small amount of the kind of genetic information survives. So you can't really tell, like, you can tell at this point there are only like, you know, 10,000 individuals left. So you only get their genes passing through. So you don't know what you've lost, if that makes sense. Because if everyone's dead or everyone's been wiped out, you don't have their genetic information passed through. You've only got the 10,000 people that survive through this bottleneck. So there could be anything happening before then. It doesn't mean there was.

Starting point is 00:17:22 Genes die off. Exactly. So you can't prove that there wasn't, you know, millions of humans. 200,000 years ago. It doesn't mean there was, but you can't prove that there wasn't. Which I always find that really interesting because, you know, I think when you look at the climatic history of the earth, there are these periods, these warm periods where humanity could easily have flourished. And then you look at the crashes, these moments in the Earth's climactic history, which had the potential to completely wipe out massive amounts of humans. And we know

Starting point is 00:17:55 that that happened. So it's very interesting. And I always look. at those warm periods and think what could have happened in those warm periods and what could have happened when those warm periods ended and we crashed into ice ages and how must that have affected human populations and yeah something i dwell on a lot and yeah i find it very interesting yeah a lot of directions to go here but i do want to i i do want to touch the the point you made about you believing that it's around 300 000 years that we've had this type of you know cranial ability or brain ability why why did you land on that specific time range well That's the oldest modern human fossils, right?

Starting point is 00:18:31 300,000 years, the ones we were just speaking about. But then you have this skull here, which is not Homo sapien, but it's the same size brain case. It's a large brain hominin, and that's been around if these results are correct, for a million years. So it's potential that humans with, you know, the brain the size of ours has been around for that amount of time. Now, there's a big debate in kind of anthropology and history

Starting point is 00:18:54 of when intelligence emerged. So the traditional view was always that intelligence didn't emerge until relatively recently. And the view always was until the last few decades that prehistoric humans were effectively stupid. So have you ever read the book Sapiens? You've all know a Harari? That's the one, yeah. Yeah, I don't think I've read the whole thing, but I've definitely read some of that because I've owned that for years on my Kindle. It's a good book, and it does a really good job of speaking about the importance of symbolic intelligence to us as a species.

Starting point is 00:19:26 and why that's been such an evolutionary advantage. But what it does do is it promotes this idea that this intelligence didn't emerge until about 50,000 years ago. And what is he based that on? Basically, we have these cave paintings in Europe that were painted around that date. And that evidence, and it's not just him,

Starting point is 00:19:49 he's kind of collecting the kind of thoughts of academia and presenting it to a layman audience. So it's not his argument, but he's kind of presenting what used to be. I think this is changing now. But what used to be the mainstream argument for human intelligence, which is that it didn't emerge until around 50,000 years ago when Homo sapiens apparently migrated out of Africa, at least that's the current story. We migrated Africa at that point.

Starting point is 00:20:15 And we created all these beautiful cave paintings in Europe, which are undeniably incredible. But my argument is just because we see this evidence from 50,000 years ago, of these incredible cave paintings doesn't mean that's when humans got smart, right? I mean, we've had this size brain for at least 300,000 years based on fossil evidence, potentially up to a million years.

Starting point is 00:20:34 Just because we see cave paintings of incredible sophistication from 50,000 years ago doesn't mean that that's when humans got smart. So this is the cognitive revolution argument, right? That humans only got smart at this date. But I would argue that in recent decades, loads and loads of evidence has come out to suggest that humans have had these cognitive capabilities

Starting point is 00:20:52 for way longer. and not just Homo sapiens, but also our sister species like Neanderthals and Denisovans, because there's so much evidence that these humans were doing incredible things. Like, we have clear signs of symbolic behavior that are much older than this. There's a site in South Africa called Blombos Cave, which has these, like, ornaments that humans created 100,000 years ago. So that's almost twice as old as this so-called cognitive revolution happened. And there's even older examples.

Starting point is 00:21:21 There's these eagle claw talon jewelry, like necklaces made by Neanderthals from about 130,000 years ago that were found in Croatia. Neanderthals made these underground stone circles out of Stalachmites, which, why would you do that if you don't have symbolic intelligence, right? You wouldn't start building stone circles if, and like that's kind of, that's the sim. I feel like I need to probably explain what symbolic intelligence is and why that's an important thing. So, and Sapiens does a really good job of explaining this. this, I'll give Sapiens that because symbolic intelligence has allowed our species to thrive in many ways. So the idea is that because we can think in the abstract, right, so we can kind of create these concepts that aren't real, but we all collectively agree on them. So what's

Starting point is 00:22:11 an example? Maybe like, maybe like a country, right? So the United States, we're in the United States right now, right? And we both believe that. We both believe in the existence of the United States, but the United States isn't a real thing. It's a story. It's a story, exactly. You can't touch the United States. If I go outside the studio right now and touch the ground, I'm not touching the United States, I'm just touching some ground. But because we all agree that the United States is a thing, it allows us to cooperate in massive groups. So you have like the whole of, you know, the US army

Starting point is 00:22:42 or something. Yes. All believe in the United States. So they will cooperate in a huge group of humans. And that allows us to get things done. And so that's, that's the whole, the kind of power of symbolic intelligence we believe these shared myths and that allows us to cooperate in massive groups and no other animal can really do that you don't get like chimps that all believe in like the chimp nation and like collectively you know cooperate in groups of thousands of chimps like chimps can only really cooperate in bands of about 50 chimps and then they split they split into different groups because they can't kind of create a myth to to kind of base themselves around and work in a massive group that's interesting though just straight

Starting point is 00:23:21 strictly on like this the symbolism of the math though too i can't remember if it's 50 or 100 but the difference is going to be minimal here if you've ever read tribe by sebastian younger he talks about how you know there's a certain mathematical number to which you can actually exist where the tribe all works together and he was talking about humans in this case so meaning when it goes beyond that it starts to thread off into different ideologies and different people with different you know I guess priorities. And then you look at regular sociologists who we're going to talk to you about like the total number of real close relationships a human being is capable of having on an individual basis. It's also somewhere in that neighborhood like 100 or something like that. And so the fact that chimps can't cooperate beyond 50 is interesting because even if those numbers of like 50 to 100 for us humans to be able to either form relationships or stick in one tribe are similar. we are able to cooperate on a macro level, symbolically, to use your term, at a way bigger number just to, you know, be able to agree like, you know what? Yeah, there's a border here. Exactly.

Starting point is 00:24:33 That's our country. That's pretty crazy. It's just like, it's basically one revolution past where chimps are. That's it. But it makes all the difference in the world. Exactly. And I really, I support that argument made by books like Sapiens that that is such an evolutionary advantage for our species because it's everywhere. You mean, you look at like companies like Apple. Apple. Apple, has thousands, tens of thousands of people all over the globe all cooperating together because they all believe in the existence of the company Apple, which isn't a real thing. You can't fucking touch Apple. You can't, there is no real thing, Apple, because we all believe in it, we can cooperate

Starting point is 00:25:05 in these massive groups. So that's what symbolic intelligence is. That's why it's important. The theory always was that we didn't have this until about 50,000 to 60,000 years ago. And the evidence of why that emerged at that point was purely based on these cave paintings. Yeah, that's kind of wild. It's not really much evidence, is it? No.

Starting point is 00:25:24 And it's also like, that's evidence that just was put in a place where it didn't get destroyed. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, exactly. You know, think of all the things that have happened since then from a planetary level that could have destroyed basically all evidence and, you know, leave an outlier like that. Yeah. So I wouldn't measure it that way either. That's interesting, though, that, like, what's the evidence that those cave paintings meant

Starting point is 00:25:48 that those particular human beings, whether they were the oldest or not sounds like they weren't but what's the evidence there for that those paintings were made shortly after those people left africa like how do we know that well that's the date that we have for the like the mass migration out of africa is around 60 000 years ago so it's called the out of africa migration and it's when humans now do we do so this is the thing with out of africa is there are homo sapiens that we found that are older than this date outside africa but the idea is that that's when we kind of came out of africa and survives. Yeah, 60,000 years ago, yeah.

Starting point is 00:26:23 The out-of-Africa migration is the theory that all modern humans originated in Africa and later spread to the rest of the world in multiple waves with the most successful wave beginning around 60,000 years ago. Just like you said, this migration was likely driven by climate changes and followed routes through the Middle East, leading to the eventual settlement of Europe, Asia, and Australia. Early migrants were adaptable hunter-gatherers who used their skills to survive and spread across different.

Starting point is 00:26:50 environments, and then they have a video of it here. You know what, quick question, and this is like a very basic question for a guy like you, but I do think it helps reset the deck for idiots like me. When we're talking and thrown around like homo sapiens and Neanderthals, obviously these are different things, but they're discussed in a light in common parlance where it's like, oh, we're talking about like humankind in a way. If you had to outline the main differences between when they exist, obviously homo sapiens still exist, but, you know, and what the difference is were between Neanderthals and Homo sapiens, how would you explain that to like a fifth grader? Well, you say that's a simple question, but that's not a simple question as all.

Starting point is 00:27:29 That's like the question. There is like no one really knows and there's so much debate around that. Like what is the difference between Neanderthal and Homo sapiens? How different really are we? Because we can't have been that different because we bred with Neanderthals. We still have Neanderthal DNA in us, at least non-African people do. So me and you, like as white people, we have Neanderthal DNA within us. So we can't have been that different for them because you can't breed with something that's genetically too different from you.

Starting point is 00:27:56 So we are very similar to Neanderthals. And so the difference is what people classify it is is like skull and like brow ridge shape and stuff like that. But there's also variety amongst homo sapiens. That's what I'm saying. We have all different looking people around the world. I don't look anything like a guy in China

Starting point is 00:28:12 or both the same human race. Exactly. So I mean, so yeah, I mean, there is like, so you can identify, they do identify Neanderthal skull and they claim, you know, they say it's a different species, but the line of that is quite blurry. And yeah, it's all, it's kind of in flux. There's always in debate, really. And so it kind of depends where you kind of land in that, in that debate. But my argument is that we are extremely similar to Neanderthals. And I, and this is quite controversial, but I would say I'm not sure there, you know, any different from us in

Starting point is 00:28:47 terms of intelligence. And that's where I base, that's where I take these sites like them creating jewelry and say, look, they clearly had symbolic intelligence, right? They were, they were clever. And I think, to be honest, I think it's a really outdated idea that they were dumb. Because what's interesting is that we, we kind of put ourselves on this pedestal, right? And we, so when Neanderthals were discovered in, at the exact same time as Darwin's theory of evolution. So in the late 19th century, Darwin had this theory that, you know, we're no different from animals, basically. And that was a huge paradigm shift in the scientific world, because up into that point, humans had always been seen as, you know, the pinnacle of everything.

Starting point is 00:29:33 We're God's children, right? We're the smart, you know, people that came from the Garden of Eden. We're the clever ones. But then Darwin came along, and he was like, no, we're just another animal. And that was a huge shock to everyone because suddenly we lost our special. status. And at that exact same time, we discovered the first ever neanderthal skeleton. And so it was like, hold on, we're not even just another animal. We're not even the only type of human. So what basically happened was that we decided that, okay, we may not be any different from these animals. And we may not be the only human, but we're the smart ones, right? And then we named ourselves homo sapiens, which literally translate to wise man. So we were like, okay, we're the

Starting point is 00:30:13 smart ones. So we've given ourselves our special status again because we've lost this special status. So that's kind of where this idea came from that Neanderthals and other human species were dumb because it was us basically trying to regain our special status on top of the food chain. But I don't think that's really scientific at all. I think that's just us trying to, you know, big ourselves up. And I think since then, loads of evidence has come out to show that Neanderthals were just as smart as us and Denisovans were just as smart as us and yeah um i don't yeah i don't see any scientific basis on why that we think that they were stupider than us other than us trying to make ourselves look good when was the last time we saw denisovans on on earth is that what you

Starting point is 00:31:00 just said when was the last time we saw them on earth so we i mean we have hardly any evidence of denisovans we have like a tooth and a jawbone and they just found this well they just classified this skull called the Dragon Man skull as Denisovan or Denisovan. So they found Denisovins in Denisovina cave in Siberia relatively recently, like a decade ago. And they just, they classified it as a new species. What made it different for them to be able to classify it like the literal shape of the skull and brows similar to Neanderthals? Yeah. So, well, I mean, we hardly have anything. So as I say, we only have a teeth and a jawbone. And what's interesting is, they're quite big as well. Like the Denisovan molar is like way bigger than a sapien molar.

Starting point is 00:31:46 And that leads to people who have theories that maybe they were giants or something. But they're a distinct species because I mean, they're so much bigger. But we really don't know very much about them because of the sheer lack of fossil evidence. Oh, it sounds like there's a lot on the bone there, no pun intended. Yeah. That's going to be a rabbit hole for me. I'm very unfamiliar with that. The end of the year wears everyone down. Long days, short nights, too much caffeine, and somehow, of course, you're still exhausted. If you've been pushing through burnout, it might not just be stress.

Starting point is 00:32:17 It could be your sleep. Thankfully, there's Ghostbed. Ghostbed is a family-run company founded by a team with more than 20 years of mattress making expertise. They know how to build a bed that's comfortable, durable, and actually helps you recover after long days. Every ghost bed mattress is made with premium materials, proven cooling technology, and their exclusive ProCore layer, a targeted support system that reinforces the center of the mattress

Starting point is 00:32:39 where your body's the heaviest. It helps keep your spine align and your back supported so you wake up ready to take on whatever's next. And if you're a hot sleeper, Ghostbed's cooling materials help regulate your temperature automatically, keeping you comfortable all night long. Every Ghost Bed mattress comes with a 101 night's sleep trial

Starting point is 00:32:57 and a 20 to 25 year warranty. Furthermore, shipping is fast and free with most orders arriving in 2 to 5 days. Right now, during Ghostbed's holiday sale, you can get 25% off site-wide for a limited time. Just go to ghostbed.com slash Julian, that link is in my description below, and use promo code Julian at checkout. Once again, that's ghostbed.com slash Julian. Link in my description below, promo code Julian.

Starting point is 00:33:21 Upgrade your sleep with Ghostbed, the makers of the coolest bed in the world. Some exclusions apply, see site for details. Yeah, I mean, there's relatively new in terms of our understanding of them, human species. Now, when was the last time, like you said, there's Neanderthal DNA in, in, some Homo sapiens, but when was the last time we saw them exist that we know of at scale, so to speak? So they disappeared around this time of the out of Africa migration, right? The 50, 60,000.

Starting point is 00:33:53 Yeah, exactly. So that is, in my view, the biggest argument for the idea that we are smarter than them is that we effectively replace them because, you know, we won. So maybe we are smarter. But then that's often an argument given, like, you know, okay, maybe they did all this symbolic stuff. Maybe they had in symbolic intelligence. They had the same size brain as us, but we won. So we're the smart ones. But there's loads of other reasons why we could have wiped them out. I mean, firstly, did we wipe them out or did we just merge? Right. Did we just

Starting point is 00:34:21 breed with them and we kind of morphed into what we are now? And we're both sapien and the antithel. Or was it something like disease? Was these two populations clashing? A lot of possibilities. And they died because we gave them some horrible pathogen or something. Like it's not clear. And this is the thing with prehistory is presented as we know all the answers, right? We worked it all out in our modern age. We're all so smart in the space age. We know everything. But we don't, really. It's just guesses based on extremely limited evidence. Yeah, there's a lot of possibilities that, you know, could be way different to your point than we were just smarter than them. It's also like, you think about like warring populations and just playing this out in my head. You know, if I had Lane

Starting point is 00:35:05 Johnson and Miles Garrett in my almost Sabian race. You don't know who they are. Wayne Johnson is a left tackle on the Eagles. He's fucking huge. And then Miles Garrett is the defensive end on Cleveland Browns for American football. American football. And they're both enormous, right? If I put them up next to Belongelaal, who I just had in here, who's like a fucking genius,

Starting point is 00:35:29 neuroscientist, they're going to kill him. You know, no disrespect to Belon. He's not their size. and they're going to be able to wield any kind of blunt force weapon and kill him very quickly. So maybe, and I'm really going beyond where I should here, but maybe there's also a possibility that, like, Homo sapiens had developed based on what the world populations were at a time to be able to wipe out the Neanderthals because they had more and they were bigger or a combination of that as well, meaning it wouldn't have to do with, like, what they have up here to survive.

Starting point is 00:36:00 Is that possible or is that a little beyond? Well, I think Neanderthals are probably a little bit bigger than us in terms of, you know, physical anatomy. They're probably slightly bigger than us. They had slightly bigger heads. But that doesn't mean that, I mean, and that's an argument from we were more intelligent, right? But then there's evidence coming out recently that Neanderthals had the same kind of technology as us. Like we recently found some arrowheads that were, I mean, to have an arrowhead, you mean, you have a bow and arrow. That's pretty sophisticated technology.

Starting point is 00:36:30 We don't really think of bows and arrows as technology. but oh it is it is technology and again that was always thought to be a primarily safe and exclusively sapien technology but now we know that neanderthals yeah there you go yeah we got it all right 80,000 year old stones in Uzbekistan may be the world's oldest arrowheads and they might have been made by neanderthals all right let's read a little bit of this tiny stone artifacts discovered in Uzbekistan may be the oldest known arrowheads a new study suggests it remains unclear whether these stone tools were created by monitoring are humans, Neanderthals, or some other group.

Starting point is 00:37:05 Archaeologists found the tools at the site of Obie Rachman in northeastern Newzbekistan. Previous excavations uncovered a variety of stone tools at the site, such as thin and wide blades and smaller bladelets. But numerous small triangular points called microlists were overlooked in prior work because they were broken. Let me get a little more, Joe. Now in a study published August 11th in the journal Plus One, the researchers argue that these might Micro points are too narrow to have fit into anything other than arrow-like chefs. The stones also display the kind of damage that would be expected from used arrowheads study co-author Hughes Pleason, an associate scientist at the University of Bordeaux in France told live science.

Starting point is 00:37:50 These micropoints, which are about 80,000 years old, may therefore be the oldest arrowheads in the world, around 6,000 years older than 74,000 years old artifacts unearthed in Ethiopia. Wow. Yeah. So, I mean, not definitively Neanderthal, but likely Neanderthal, if you base the view of history around the out of Africa migration, then that's almost certainly Neanderthal because that's outside of Africa, right? And we know that homo sapiens did go outside of Africa, but that's probably why they're saying they're likely Neanderthal. But it's more evidence that, I mean, if they are Neanderthal, it's more evidence that, you know, they were as intelligent as us because they were developing technology such as arrowheads, sophisticated weapons technology, you know? So were they stupidly than us? I don't know. Is there, I don't want to ask this. Is there evidence, not even evidence, but is there a possibility that there are offshoot of human species that exist in our DNA right now that we don't know about? Similarly to how we do know about, there is some Neanderthal DNA in some of our DNA?

Starting point is 00:38:59 So what do you mean? You mean like traces of previous human species? Sure. Yeah, there's Denisovan DNA in what kind of, I think it's Southeast Asian populations or other oceanic populations. Yeah, I mean, we interbred with these species. And this is why I say we must have been so similar because you can't breed with something that's too different from you. So if we can breed with them, we're not going to be crazy different to them, you know? I wonder where that line is.

Starting point is 00:39:32 what the percentage line for differences to be able to still breed because like you can't you can't go what's another mammal you can't go breed with a horse or something like that right exactly you can't breed a bit of a chimp or anything yeah yeah you can't you can't breathe with a chimp which is like a lot closer than a horse to to human DNA but neanderthals and homo sapiens were so close whether it's 0.01 or 0.001 I don't know but meaning we literally separate them in like species but they're so close that the average person would almost be like that looks like the same thing that's like it's such a strange bar because then like i said we still live in a world where i'm the same species as someone in china when we genetically look so different and you can

Starting point is 00:40:21 say that about anywhere in the world you know i look different from a person in this country or that country and yet we accept ourselves as the same species sometimes like it's you know like it makes all the sense in the world to me, but then I see we separate something off like Neanderthal, and I'm like, would we separate that today? You know, like if we looked at it? So I think there are, I'm not a geneticist, but I think there are some, you know, genetic differences between the species. But then as you say, there are genetic, slight genetic differences between different races. But I mean, you get into tricky territory when you start talking about that kind of stuff. And then there's a really interesting geneticist called David Reich, who

Starting point is 00:40:59 who talks about this kind of stuff as well. But it's not my... David Reich? Yeah, yeah. It's not my, you know, expertise by any means, but it's really interesting. And basically the core point that I try to make is we are very similar and we don't really know what happened back then. We don't know why we won.

Starting point is 00:41:18 We don't know how much we merged and how much we won. We don't know where that line is. So, yeah, I find it fascinating. And I think, yeah, they had... at least as much intelligence as us they had the same side i mean neonathals had bigger brains than us so yeah you know maybe they were smart yeah which a lot of times can point to more capability but like the brain part makes sense to me because you're fine in the skull right so you'd be like oh the brain fit in there makes enough sense but when we're talking about all the different organs in our body and we find

Starting point is 00:41:51 just some skeletal remains of a neanderthal can is it possible to like definitively prove that like oh yeah definitely had a gallbladder right there i guess not but i mean it's basically the same skeleton as us so yeah so you would think yeah you think so yeah but like it's possible that maybe there were a couple organs that were different i guess so yeah i guess technically all right that's not crazy yeah how did you get into all this stuff then like before you went to school like were you always just fascinated by ancient civilizations growing up yeah i mean i've always loved history all types of history um i kind of feared towards the ancient stuff because I felt that's where the most mystery was, right? So, I mean, I'm interested in all history all the way through,

Starting point is 00:42:32 but when I got to the kind of age of, you know, 17, 18 thinking about going to university, I decided to do ancient history as my degree because I felt, you know, that's where the mystery is. That's where we don't know. And then as I continue to do my degree, I was like, holy shit, we really don't know. We know nothing. And there's a huge, huge story here, a huge empty, blank space in our understanding of our past that just no one really understands. And so that's how I got into it. And yeah, I mean, my degree was good, man. I like, I have a lot of respect for the people I went to university with and my professors

Starting point is 00:43:11 and everything like that. I don't want people to think I'm like anti-university or anti my course or anti the people that I met there. And like, I learned a lot of things and I found it really interesting. But I did find myself growing more and more at odds with the perspective of human history that was put forward, not like the specific things. we were taught, but more the high-level macro, you know, wider perspective of human history that we were taught, which was basically that, you know, we've got it, we've got it sorted. We may make a

Starting point is 00:43:37 new discovery here or there, but, you know, we know what happened. We've got the timeline. It was hunter-gatherers all the way until around the Neolithic Revolution about 10,000 years ago, and then that led to civilizations developing, sorted. And I was, I'm not sure about that, to be honest. It's such a vast length of time. Anything could have happened, right? So, Yeah, that's how I got into it. Were you raising that point, like in class when you were in college where you like, well, we have found this, this or that, what do you think and watching their brains like fucking explode?

Starting point is 00:44:08 Not so much because I was only starting the journey myself in my own head. I did, I remember I mentioned, so you know about Gobeckli-Tapi, right? Uh-huh. We should talk about that thing. We should. It's so interesting. But I remember I mentioned that I brought that because I was like, yeah, this is a site that clearly has severe implications for our understanding.

Starting point is 00:44:25 implications for our understanding of the development of human civilization. Should this suggests that human civilization is far older and more complex than with, we think? And I was basically told, that isn't your course, mate. You do ancient history. This is archaeology. Wait, they made a distinction between the two. Yeah, well, I mean, so technically there is a distinction, right? So archaeology is everything before recorded history, and ancient history is, you know, everything. know yeah exactly yeah so i and i was like really come on man i'm doing ancient history at university sure we can have this conversation but that's a crazy distinction i didn't i didn't

Starting point is 00:45:03 even know that i didn't know the either until i was kind of told that but yeah ancient history my course was only from the start of writing until you know the end of the roman empire or something nothing new to see here don't ask any questions that's what it is basically that's crazy So you found you started to learn about Gobeckley-Tepi while you were in school, did you say? Or you had learned about that before? So I discovered it in my own time while I was at university. I wasn't taught it. It wasn't mentioned on my syllabus.

Starting point is 00:45:33 And I was like, can we talk about this? And they were like, no, that's not on the course. You used to go do archaeology. And I was like, oh, come on. For people out there who need a refresher on Gobeckley-Tepie or somehow haven't heard a lot of guys talk about this because it is talked about all the time, can you just give a very broad explanation of where it was and what they're. found and what the potential implications are? Yeah.

Starting point is 00:45:52 So, Gebeckli-Tepe is a site in modern-day Turkey that is dated to around 11,600 years ago. And it's this incredible site with these massive megalithic pillars and these fast circular enclosures. And it's something like 50 times larger than Stonehenge or something ridiculous like that. It has all these incredible intricate carvings on the pillars. They've only excavated about 5% of it. But in my view, in the view of many others, it's a massively disruptive discovery for a understanding of human civilization because i mean you just have to look at pictures of it it looks

Starting point is 00:46:22 like a civilization you know how have you got the capability to construct such a site and it's not the only one right there's like 14 or 15 other sites that they're discovering in the region they're starting to call it the tash topella culture yeah very much emphasis on the word culture not civilization because it's not deemed a civilization for how do you make that distinction now like how can you say one without the other like do we talk about like shark culture you know what i mean Like, well, it's because, well, they've got a very, um, they've got this, this checklist effectively on what a civilization is. And it's basically based on Mesopotamia, on ancient Sumer, because that was the first civilization, ancient civilization that was discovered, or the earliest one that was discovered. So they were like, okay, ancient Summa, this is the first civilization. And so if we want another civilization to meet the criteria of civilization, has to hit this checklist of, you know, cities. agriculture, surplus, things like that. And Gebeckli Tepe, well, in my view, Tashdepella will be considered a civilisation. It's just going to take a while for people to get there. I think in

Starting point is 00:47:30 like a few decades, people are going to start calling it a civilization. It's just that it's so disruptive because, you know, it's twice as old as the oldest civilization, right? Yeah. So to call it a civilization is going to, it's a big monkey wrench in our idea of human history. So, yeah, I think people will get there over time, but these, I mean, these sites are all connected, right? They have like shared symbolism, which suggests a shared cultural identity, suggests trade. It suggests that this was, you know, a cohesive society that all built these massive megalithic sites. I mean, it really does sound like a civilization. They just found residential buildings at Gebeckli-tepe as well, and that was always an argument

Starting point is 00:48:10 why it wasn't a civilization. They always said this was built by hunter-gatherers, and they kind of, migrated to this site once a year or something to... They just happen to be fucking amazing artists. Yeah, well, yeah, that's another thing. Like, you need specialization to create a site like this and to become such a skilled crafts, craftsmen, you need time to be doing that as your job, right? So you need other people to look after the...

Starting point is 00:48:33 So while we don't have proof of agricultural surplus, the mere existence of Quebecli Tepe and Karahan Tepe and all these other sites implies surplus. It implies people whose specialist trade was, you know, you know, carving or megalithic construction or whatever you want to call it. Yeah. Because otherwise, how do they have time to develop these skills? It also lines up, like, with right around the, the timescale of, like, the younger, dryest period. And what would have happened?

Starting point is 00:49:03 So is this like, I mean, this is a way over generalization, but is this some sort of, like, bunker type idea? Or was it built shortly before that? And then some people were able to survive in this area or got wiped out. at once. Like, I guess it's all still possibility and they've been excavating it. But, like, you have so many obvious professionals doing this as well. And yet they still, there's obviously some sort of ivory tower effect, given that it's so public and so many people can see walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a fucking duck. But yet they refuse to actually say that. Yeah. It's kind of crazy. And like, another thing is, as you say, it's so old, but it's almost,

Starting point is 00:49:44 It's not the, it's not like they just woke up overnight and just knew how to do that, right? Yeah. It's not like they were just, they, that, there has to be a kind of development here. Then that's that, so that's the earliest it possibly is, I mean, the latest it possibly is, right? 11,600 years ago is the least long ago it possibly was that this civilization culture, whatever you want to call it, was flourishing. But there has to be a whole kind of civilizational buildup. And that's just the radiocarbon dates.

Starting point is 00:50:11 It could be much older than that, right? it like that's just that's just the latest date we have if you know what i mean with all the sites put together i'm kind of putting you on the spot so we can google this and see if they have it but with all the sites that they're finding put together that they're calling this what was it culture tashtapela tashtepella culture do they have any approximation at this time based on what they found of what the total population of these hunter gatherers would have been not that i've seen and not that I know, but I would suggest it implies a relatively large population because otherwise how are you doing this? And almost more importantly, why are you doing this? Because if you're just a

Starting point is 00:50:51 small band of hunter gatherers, like, why do you need to go to such effort to create not just one, but, you know, 14 sites that are all interconnected and have shared symbolism and creating these massive megalithic pillars and these incredibly intricate carvings? Like, so I mean, I don't I'm not sure what the population estimates are. I reckon they're probably higher than the estimates given, but yeah, I don't know. Well, let's see what CIA Opedia says right here. I got this pulled up while Joe's out of here for a sec. Because, by the way, I don't know if you've seen any of like Matt LaCroix stuff in the past,

Starting point is 00:51:25 but he's made some interest with another group of people as well. He's done some interesting excavations out on Lake Vaughn all in this region. And so, I mean, people can refer the episodes to listen to him explaining with the pictures of everything they found. Like some of the things they're finding in some cases way down below in the bottom of that lake are so clearly advanced that this wasn't made by, you know, a fucking rock and mortar kind of caveman or something like that. And it's just more evidence in the same region of the world. Yeah, I listened to him on here. Oh, awesome.

Starting point is 00:51:56 Yeah. And he was, yeah, I mean, I don't know too much about it other than what I heard him talk about. But yeah, same region of the world. Clearly a sophisticated construction, at least what they know about it. He's like doing something. expedition though, right? He's done a bunch. He keeps going back. Like, he's very, Matt, Matt's so passionate about all this stuff. There's some stuff when he looks at ancient history. I'm like, all right, slow down, slow down. Like, you were great till here and then you went a little too far. But the stuff that he's working on on the ground there, there's no doubt that they are they are on to something, well, historically, but onto something as far as discoveries go, new. Like, no question about it. Now, what the extent of that is going to be? I'm not sure how,

Starting point is 00:52:37 what percentage overlap it has with Gobeckley-Tepi and that civilization to me seems to be certainly along the same lines but that'll be determined as well but there's no doubt that there's something special there I really do believe in that I hope I'm not biased with it but the evidence

Starting point is 00:52:53 that he's had for that in particular that case is pretty good so that I just pulled it up the Tash-tepelle is that how we say? Tepella I mean I'm probably not the person to say I say Tash-depella but you know I'm not obviously not Turkish call us out in the comments i'm sure we got it wrong but the tash de pellar are a group this is what

Starting point is 00:53:11 they're writing on cia apedia are a group of neolithic archaeological sites in upper mesopotamian near the city of urfa and modern day turkey there are the remains of a number of settlements dating to the pre-pottery neolithic period 9500 to 7000 bc sounds like they even moved up that timeline or actually no that lines up 9500 bc would be around 11600 11 000 500 okay during transition from nomadic hunter-gatherer societies to settled agricultural communities in the region. That's interesting. So in the byline, they're literally put, they're calling it like the transition between. Exactly.

Starting point is 00:53:45 And so is that not just another way of saying the dawn of civilization? That's, yeah, that's what I would think. So let's see what they had here. Economy and Culture, the first segment's called not Economy and Civilization. The societies of Tashapelaar still had not yet developed the herding of animals or agriculture. Their subsistence depended on hunting and selective harvesting of wild cereal grasses. Before I go on, is there evidence contradicting that? I don't think so. Not yet. But I mean, it could well have been built by people that

Starting point is 00:54:17 lived in that manner. But this again comes back to this extremely narrow definition of civilization that we have. Like, we say it can't be a civilization because they didn't have mass agriculture as far as we know. But why does that mean they can't be a civilization? Yeah, they could have found another way to be able to eat exactly and then i mean we'll probably get onto this later but just quickly like if you look at you know what we're just they're discovering in the amazon like those people that clearly had a civilization they didn't use agriculture they used like these quite sophisticated form of kind of agroforestry like living off the land like that's not agriculture yet they had civilization so right why is agriculture you know one of the check marks for civilization

Starting point is 00:54:57 definitely put a pin in the amazon stuff i love that topic and i love that you're like so deep in it you and luke caverns are like the guys doing that i hope you guys continue to go all the way with it because it's one the most undercovered play it may probably the most undercover place in the world in my opinion considering the levels of ancient history that could go to so we're definitely going to talk about that i just want to finish this so we have the full context man's domestication of animals seems to have started within the broad region of the tashapelaar culture also would point to something very civilizationally but an early effort to animal mass Management, especially symbolic representations and entrapment methods, that's a fancy way of saying, I guess, hunting,

Starting point is 00:55:38 seem to broadly coincide with the development of Gobeckley-Tepe as shown in its animal art. The earliest dates for actual domestication of animals are 9,000 BC for goats and sheep, 8,500 BC for... Took them another 500 years to do pigs? Interesting. 8,000 BC for cattle, all in the area of northern Mesopotamia. Coyonu Tepe, for example, may be where some of the first animal domestication. occurred as the pig may have been first domesticated there in 8,500 BC. One more paragraph here. Sites such as Kayanu Tepe developed from the cultural tradition of Gobeckley Tepe

Starting point is 00:56:12 and started to implement agriculture from the 9th millennium BC, as well as other sites such as Nebuchari, Khafer Hoyak. I'm definitely saying all these wrong. Halan Chemi, Abu Hayara, and Jurf Al-Amar. That sounds like a lot of civilization talk to me, and I'm not going to read the next parts, but they have a section called religion. You know, there's a lot of very human civilization-y things going on here. But that's just me, Michael. Exactly. So, I mean, so then it's just, I mean, what do we even mean by civilization?

Starting point is 00:56:41 Why have we drawn this arbitrary line? It's the invention of writing, basically. Yeah. They say no civilization until after they invented writing in ancient Sumer around 3,000 BC. But in my view, this is all, I mean, and then is it even that important what you call it? Like, it's clearly incredibly sophisticated culture with megalithic building. shared symbolism, religion, like, you know, I think, as I say, over time, it's going to become more and more accepted that the story of human civilization is far deeper, far more complex,

Starting point is 00:57:13 and just far older than we've traditionally thought. I think it's going to be this generation of ancient civilization, educated people, both in school and not in school, I mean in general, but especially when you're looking at the ones who go inside the academic institution, the thing is they do bring their Wi-Fi. connection with them. You did bring that. So, you know, you can refer to some things that go outside the scope of what the dude teaching the class from the textbook in front of you can infer. And what's going to happen is the next generation is you guys are going to be teaching it. And so it'll, I do have faith in that part of it. It'll evolve with the times because we're only, you know,

Starting point is 00:57:53 18, 19 years into legit social media at this point. You know what I mean? Like we're just going to college with social media. Imagine when, you know, they're in the growth generation of running things when they're 40 to 60 years old and we've had that. Now we're in the AI age and all that. But I do think that'll change. Now, when we look at finding evidence like this, obviously it was a shocking discovery when they first found Quebec Tepe and as we laid out, they found a bunch of other sites in Turkey around there. Have we since been able to find any sort of evidence, be it text or some sort of storytelling of some sort and symbols in other parts of the world that may refer to something like Gobeckley-Tepe? Like, I don't know. In Egypt, were they talking about something

Starting point is 00:58:37 where it's like, oh, shit, that could be Gobeckley-Tepe? So I wouldn't say anything solid. I mean, I'm sure some people probably make that connection, and that doesn't mean that that connection doesn't exist. But as far as I would say, I'm not sure there's, like, solid evidence of people knowing about Gabi Tepe or referencing to Quebecli Tepe, you know, I mean, there's interesting things. You can say there's links between things, but again, you could also say that's just, you know, pattern bias or whatever that's called, you know, you see something that's similar. Like Easter Island, for example, like completely opposite culture, opposite side of the world, so distant in time. But there's weird similarities with Gebeckley-Tepa. You have these statues that, you know, look quite similar.

Starting point is 00:59:17 But that doesn't mean there was a connection, right? But it's interesting. There's this guy called an archaic lens on X, and he's basically been around the whole world. Shout out to him. Documenting this style of statue where they have their hands around their naval and there's like the same statue all over the world. And so there's some in Easter Island that look very similar to ones they found, not at Gebeckli Tepe, but Karahun Tepe. Yeah, there he is. Yeah, he's got his picture. There you go. Exactly. Oh, wow. The map points to all the places these similar statues are found. Look at that. Yeah. So, I mean, you could just argue it's a common human pose but or it could be the aliens yeah but he argues it's

Starting point is 00:59:56 it's like a sign of uh you know some kind of cultural connection between all these places um which is an interesting theory but yeah that's whenever it comes to the pyramids that's where i mean we can get into of course the logistics of building them the stone how difficult would be to to move certain type of stone from a part of Egypt to the thousand miles away where they built it and stuff like that. But when you look at all these different places around the world that clearly made structures thousands of years ago that are just so similar, you can't tell me it's like born in the human DNA that they're going to make a fucking, you know, perfect looking thing to the sky that's the same design without some sort of shared knowledge and

Starting point is 01:00:47 you wonder, oh, was there like an underground railroad of rafts going from one place to another for fucking 30 years with two people surviving just to get off and go, oh, here's how you build a pyramid and croaking and dying? I don't know, maybe, but that seems a little crazy to me. It seems like something else was going on there. Yeah, there are a lot of weird connections like that. And again, it doesn't mean, it doesn't prove anything. That's right. But it's interesting.

Starting point is 01:01:08 I mean, I love the connection or the similarities between the walls in South America in Kusko and the stonework on the Mencawre, pronunciation again, probably terribly wrong, but the Mencawere pyramid in Egypt. So they have these, I don't know if you've seen the walls in Kusko. Let's pull it up. These polygonal walls. Again, this could just be coincidence. It could be people dealing with the same problem. I'll be the judges. But it's remarkably similar. So if you, yeah, if you look at the Kusko wall and then the Menkauray pyramid stonework, it's very similar. It might be quite hard to find, but... We got it.

Starting point is 01:01:49 Okay, here we go. Yeah, so that's... Is this what you're looking for? Yeah, and then you need the M-K-K-R-A-P pyramid. I ain't going to try a spell. M-E-N-K-A-U-R-E, maybe. See, you're so worried about pronunciations and stuff, but that's the thing. British people, you guys make everything sound smart that you get forgiven for.

Starting point is 01:02:11 Exactly. Whereas I say, and they're like, what a fucking retard. So you need the wall that's at the entrance of the Menkari Pyramid. It might be quite hard to find, but... The wall of the entrance of the Mancari period. It might be quite hard to find a picture that actually displays it. But you had the pyramid up, but you just need the specific bit of the pyramid. Sorry, this is a very specific thing to bring up. I probably should have brought up something easier.

Starting point is 01:02:40 Yeah, I'm one of those guys. By the way, you're going to have to bear with me on the pyramids. I've done probably like five podcasts where we go deep on the Egyptian pyramids and I watch videos late at night about them and I still always get the goddamn name mix up which one's Kufu which one's Mankari yeah so if you look at that picture there and then you look at the this is the one you want though Michael yeah yeah this is correct looking at right there so again it could just be dealing with the same problem in and coming up with a very similar thing but it is

Starting point is 01:03:13 It's just a startling similarity between the two walls. So these cultures that are like separated by an absolute age in both distance and time. So a similar, so what I'm looking at here, it looks like what seems to be a certain type of stone that's formulating the foundation of a structure. And so you're saying because of the way that foundation is laid and how similar the stone looks in that foundation, it would suggest that it's like, I'm going to make a dumb relation here. but similarly to how in a neighborhood where it's all the same model house, they have the same kind of established looking base in modern day. Yeah, yeah, effectively. I mean, so I would argue that it's not evidence of connection.

Starting point is 01:03:56 I would argue that it's dealing with this a similar problem and coming to a remarkably similar conclusion because humans, yeah, there's only a certain way you can do something. People may become to the same result, right? But they're remarkably similar. And the stonework looks really similar. And so it's just one of those weird things. If you had to put aside your academic rigor for a minute and absolute pure evidence

Starting point is 01:04:22 and more focused on like an educated guess hypothesis, would you say that there's a strange connection that we haven't yet figured out between the civilizations that built pyramids? Let's just start simply there. I would say that could be. Could be. Yeah. I mean, why not? But I wouldn't say there's any solid evidence. And I try. That's a good answer, dude. You know, I try just, I, that's kind of my whole perspective on things. It's like, this could be possible, but I'm only going to really push it if I see serious evidence. And that's, that's the difference. We got to be careful because when you look at like the worst of like academia where they're like shut down anything that doesn't have a PhD, when you start running around with theories and posing it completely as evidence.

Starting point is 01:05:10 and saying I'm 100% confident about this with something that's clearly just disprovable on the base fact that it doesn't have any evidence at the moment, you kind of give those people exactly what you want, or what they want. You know what I mean? Yeah, and I think that's a big problem in many ways. Like, we decide something doesn't exist

Starting point is 01:05:28 so we don't look for it. But you can't, you know, that's just, like, that's a self-fulfilling prophecy in a way. Do you know what I mean? Like, if you're, if you've decided that something cannot exist, you therefore don't look for it. it and therefore because you don't find any evidence of it because you haven't looked for it that's

Starting point is 01:05:44 proof that it doesn't exist it's like a circle do you know what i mean that's probably not the best way of explaining that that's good and i think i think we have that problem a lot throughout history like even just in the wide idea of lost civilizations right we've decided civilization didn't begin until this date so we don't really look i mean we i guess we do kind of look but because we have this idea that civilization didn't emerge until even if you even if you you count go back cletap is a civilization if we're talking about way in the deep past no one would ever argue in an academic setting that civilization could have existed 200 000 years ago so that possibility isn't explored seriously and then because that possibility isn't explored seriously

Starting point is 01:06:25 there's absolutely nothing to showcase it so i just don't understand how then academic type people find a skull from a million years ago and that doesn't open up a conversation that's that's that's That's what has never, and I pose this question, this rhetorical question, or whatever it is, a million times on a lot of different podcasts. And it's just, it's like insulting to my intelligence that we would ever think that we've reached a limit of something. We've run into this problem in science, too, where people are like, oh, yeah, no, it's just scientific law. The whole point of science is to disprove the latest thing and get to a higher truth. You don't solve science until you know who God is. You don't solve religion until you know who God is.

Starting point is 01:07:05 But people, it's almost like they just, they're like, I don't want to know anymore. It's good. We got enough. It's fine. I just want to carry on my life and we'll figure it out later. Exactly. I would argue it's a completely unscientific way of viewing things, right? You've got to push the boundaries because otherwise you're never going to discover anything new.

Starting point is 01:07:23 If you're not open to those possibilities, you're always going to stay inside your box. Yeah. And that's not how science should work because you should be pushing every single button and then maybe one of those buttons will light up and you're like holy shit this is completely like no one was no one was looking for this but if you don't look you're never going to find so that's kind of where I come from in all this and that's why I that's why I'm not a you know on an academic career that's why I'm not doing the the career that was laid out for me you know do a PhD that's why I went independent because that's my viewpoint on the world you were for at least for a few years though

Starting point is 01:07:59 you were doing completely other things before going independent into this so you had decided then By the end of college, I'm not going that route. And then you ended up going this route. Why didn't you do it like right away to like go make content? Honestly, I was kind of just a bit sick of it, to be honest. I was sick of just the mindset that I was. And I didn't really think it was possible, to be honest. I was just like, I'm not really vibing with this like worldview, to be honest.

Starting point is 01:08:29 So I'm just not going to go down this path. But it never left me, you know. It was always in my head in the back of my head. I was like, you know, I've kind of been quite interested in this kind of stuff, you know. So then I decided to make my YouTube channel about a year ago. And yeah, been a been a crazy journey since then because, yeah, I just have always had that in my head, like, so interested in these ideas and felt I had a relatively unique perspective on them with my traditional education and felt like I could give my opinions in quite a good

Starting point is 01:08:56 way, both because of the education. And also what the education did give me, which is, you know, the ability to construct arguments and put forward evidence and, you know, construct a compelling narrative, I guess, which is what, that's all history is. And I almost feel like that. People don't really realize that, that the mainstream historians are doing the same thing. They're taking the evidence and they're creating a narrative. And that's fine.

Starting point is 01:09:18 But I don't get it when they attack people for doing the same thing, but with a slightly different viewpoint. Yeah. The last five letters of that word are quite interesting and very subjective. Yeah. You know what I mean? but the other thing is like your channel is fucking awesome you do a scope of ancient history around the world like in and i mean this is a compliment you're like a generalist with a lot of

Starting point is 01:09:40 different things which i love so we'll have that link down below so that people can can go check it out i would highly recommend it but also i think you know a guy like you as you grow here it's gonna it's gonna go up an entirely new level when you're traveling to all these places to and seeing it and making your own conclusions. Also, I'm sure, doing content these different places so you can bring your audience with you. Like it's amazing the scope of knowledge you have, we were talking off camera about all the places you haven't been to yet, like the scope you have without having gone and seen it or get

Starting point is 01:10:15 to sit with it, you know, kind of feel the ghosts around it and whatever. So I do think it'll be even better. Yeah, it's definitely something I want to do that. That's kind of the dream in a way of this channel that I guess I'm on the verge of realizing, which is to actually go to these places in person and be able to create content around that because, yeah, as you say, most of the places I talk about

Starting point is 01:10:35 I haven't really been to just because of, you know, financial reasons. So go join Michael's members only. Actually, I heard Joe Rogan has some money. Maybe he can throw it like 100 bands get you started here. Yeah, possibly. Yeah, he's probably got that line around Nashville or something. Yeah, he's already got it on the way, I'm sure. That was pretty cool, though.

Starting point is 01:10:54 That was like your first podcast doing Rogan or one of your first? yeah it was yeah my first well i mean i did i did a couple of like zoom ones um but yeah that was my first like actual podcast which was just nuts that's insane so insane like how did he find you he found me so early on mate like so no one watched my channel for like six seven months and then around march this year i had a couple of videos that started doing proper numbers like 100k and then he like saw a second one that did well and then he shouted me out on on his show oh wow and that fucking blew mind i was like how it like i have like two videos that have any views at all and this guy's talking about me on this show uh and yeah that was that was mental so i don't know how he found me i guess

Starting point is 01:11:37 he's just interested in this stuff um he's definitely interested in it yeah so yeah he shout me out and then a few months later he got he got me on and i was very grateful for that of course it was an incredible opportunity but i was you know kind of shitting myself to go on that show yeah he did great it's it's it's it's it's really cool to see that as well because like you know he can king make pretty much anyone but if he's looking at a channel might be smaller coming along and he's like wow that guy's great and it can kind of just be like plucking you out of the crowd and being like here you go and now you're now you're running with it which is awesome to see but it's like we also have to have the next generation now coming up like he's a guy who also got

Starting point is 01:12:18 a lot more attention on a guy who already had attention like graham hancock or like a randle Carlson, who have helped move forward the conversation. And you were telling me off camera, like Graham Hancock was a big influence for you. Was that growing up? You liked him? Not so much. So I didn't really get into any of this stuff until about midway through my degree. Right. So I didn't, I wasn't aware of the alternative view of history until, you know, at some point during my degree when I was starting to look around for other explanations, really. So, I mean, what kind of happened was I did this module on my university course called Catastrophe, which was all about how natural disaster had massively impacted human societies

Starting point is 01:13:03 during recorded history. And I found that really interesting. They did this study on the late Bronze Age collapse, which was when all these powerful civilizations around 1,000 BC all came crashing down simultaneously within like a few decades of each other. So this was the Hittite Empire, the palaces of Miscanian Greece, the Egyptian New Kingdom, a few others. And these were like the most powerful civilizations in the world, the most prosperous places in the entire world at that point. And they all came crashing down at the exact same time as each other. And no one really knew why. And that's what we were being

Starting point is 01:13:40 taught about. And the theory, the best known theory and probably the correct theory, I mean, I agree with this theory is that it was climate change. It was a small changing climate, which then had this cascading effect. So the climate changed by a few degrees. That led to drought. Drought led to huge civil unrest in these societies. That led to kind of rebellions. These societies were all interconnected through trade, trade collapsed, and so they all came crashing down one after another. And I found that so interesting. I was like, that's ridiculous how such a small, you know, changing climate, something that's really fluctuates all the time, can just bring all these societies down.

Starting point is 01:14:18 And so then I started looking into that more and I started looking at the climatic history of the earth and I was like, holy shit, like the earth has gone through some crazy stuff while humans have been around. And this was the same time this Jebel Arrude remains came out that showed we are 300,000 years old. And I was looking at the climactic history

Starting point is 01:14:36 through this whole time. And I was like, yeah, we've been through some crazy stuff, way worse than what happened in the Bronze Age collapse. And what could that potentially have meant for humans at that time? And that's what sent me on. the journey and then i started looking into alternative points of view because that wasn't spoken about on my course it was on it was only recorded history and i was like what about what could have happened back in you know way before them so then i started looking at people like graham hancock and

Starting point is 01:14:58 randall carton and i was uh you know enthralled by that and uh that's what sent me on the journey um but yeah he's a he's a really interesting guy i spoke to him recently and uh it was a quite surreal moment to speak to him yeah um but yeah he's cool guy yeah there's there's he's definitely when I think of the people that have really given a voice to that side of things, I don't think there's anyone who's been more consequential than him, especially over the past like 20 years. But, you know, it's open up the conversation. And we actually, this is a good spot to talk about some South America things because you had said, we were actually looking at it right before in your Peru video.

Starting point is 01:15:40 I liked how you put it with looking at what the LIDAR scans in South America could tell us about older civilizations potentially live in there. You were talking about it there, but one of the things Graham has said in the past that then turns into like these headlines that kind of, to his discredit, by the way, like it's not his fault, but the headlines then make it a whole new thing is he talks about how there are some, there's evidence for some manmade things in, you know, the ancient Amazon jungle. And what happens to the headlines is they'll start to come out saying like, Ancient historian, Amazon is man-made, which is not fair to Graham because that's not what he's saying, but it creates this narrative that the Amazon, which is under constant threat and destruction

Starting point is 01:16:27 and potentially poses an enormous risk climate-wise and Earth and oxygen-wise to the earth if it were destroyed to a certain level, it makes the idea get planted in people's heads that like, oh, people made the Amazon so we could make it again, no problem. And I bring this up because a good friend of mine is Paul Rosalie. He's a guy who's largely responsible for me sitting here right now. He really helped blow up my podcast when he came on. And, you know, he's been down there for 20 years. And it drives him nuts when people will send him a headline saying, hey, look, the Amazon's manmade.

Starting point is 01:17:02 We can kind of fix it because the evidence for manmade stuff is like a one-off thing here or a one-off thing there, some of which Paul will dispute other things. He's like, it doesn't matter. and so when you're talking about this subject matter i think it's really important that you like separate the two and say like look here's this amazing creation of the earth like this full fucking north america types or a united states of america almost sized area of the earth that's just dense jungle that provides all this oxygen and then by the way there's a few cool things that happen in there because ancient civilizations existed and because they existed maybe farther back than we initially thought So, let's start with your actual video you made here, where you unearthed, we're going through

Starting point is 01:17:46 the evidence unearthing that there were some older civilizations that had a different name than the ones we talked about found specifically in Peru. Who were they and when did they exist? So as in you mean like a Carol Super and stuff like that. Yes. Yes. Yeah. So, I mean, it's always been, well, the traditional view of South America was always that civilization emerged they're quite late in terms of the rest of the world, right, with the people like the Inca's being the kind of first true civilization that emerged in that region. But in recent years, quite a few discoveries have come out to show the civilization there is just as old as the old world, perhaps even older, right? So the Inca of something like 1,100 AD or something, but then

Starting point is 01:18:30 they've been discovering these places like the Carl's super civilization, which is from about 3,000 BC. So that's, you know, 4,000 years earlier than the Inca and shows the civilization in South America is far, far, far older than the traditional view was. And then they recently discovered another city called Panico in this region that they think is a kind of continuation of that culture. And, you know, these cultures are real sophisticated things. They built pyramids. They have these vast urban layouts. They had symbolism. Like, they're really sophisticated civilizations. And then you link that to the discoveries that have been made in the Amazon recently. So that's always been like the classic lost civilization theory, you know, the lost civilizations of the Amazon, right?

Starting point is 01:19:15 That's always been the thing that people would laugh at like for hundreds of years. Like ever since the Spanish first got there, they had, oh, I can't remember his name. Francisco de Oriana. Is that his name? I can't remember. He, I think he was the one that reported seeing VAR cities in the jungle, right? Allegedly, like an El Dorado kind of thing. Yeah.

Starting point is 01:19:35 So then he came back to Europe and he was like, yo, I've seen all these vast civilizations deep in gold. Yeah. And everyone laughed at him. They were like, what are you talking about? That doesn't exist. And then people came back 100 years later and they couldn't find anything. And so that's always been thought, you know, that guy made it up.

Starting point is 01:19:53 But in recent years, they've been doing all this LIDAR scanning of the Amazon jungle and they've been seeing these vast, like, geometric earthworks come up from these LIDAR scans. and they're starting to think that, you know, maybe this guy wasn't lying. And maybe these civilizations did exist. And then they collapsed in the 100 years between these two visits, which sounds crazy. But then when you think about what happened when Europeans reached South America, you know, it was a big collapse of the indigenous population for various reasons, perhaps primarily disease, but also, you know, what happens when people conquer new lands is that, you know, people get killed. And that's what happened. So people always laughed at Oriana, or I don't know how to pronounce that name, but people

Starting point is 01:20:37 always laugh at him and said, you know, he's made that up. And it's always been seen as a conspiracy theory that there were lost civilizations of the Amazon rainforest. But it's starting to come out with these new scans and stuff that there are vast like mysteries there that we don't really know about. And I think that's possibly the one of the biggest frontiers in ancient history is learning about the populations of the Amazon, learning about how sophisticated their civilizations were. And I think it plays into this, the discovery such as Carl Super, because it's proof that civilization in South America is far older and far more complex than was traditionally

Starting point is 01:21:16 thought. So once you appreciate that, it doesn't become such a, you know, crazy idea that there were civilizations flourishing in the Amazon. And now we have pretty solid evidence that there was so now it's a matter of kind of going in and excavating that which is probably harder than it oh yeah you know easier said than done obviously and you don't want to like destroy the whole amazon rainforest and stuff but i think there could be some really really interesting stuff there and i'd love to see it there's still significant parts of the amazon jungle that have never been seen period by anyone and like i was telling you i went down there last year for a couple weeks with Paul and when you get underneath that canopy you not even you don't have to go underneath the

Starting point is 01:22:00 canopy you can be right out on on the river and you just look around and you're like holy shit I am a speck out here like just imagine literally imagine mainland America except the entire thing is covered by 100 150 foot trees and filled with you know equator level ancient species and plant life and god who knows fucking spirits and voos i don't even know but like you even have out there to this day an accepted fact that there's like uncontacted tribes like now living there they know they're what their name implies they're uncontacted if you see them you're probably dead you know and it's like the idea that there wouldn't be ancient civilizations emanating from this place who would have figured out and on a very unique plot of land if you're

Starting point is 01:22:51 that's what you want to call it as well. I mean, you're talking about a place that has a completely different type of agriculture if you're going to do it. It has, you know, it's not, most of it's obviously not on an ocean. It's, it's on a river that runs through it and a bunch of tributaries. Like, the room for innovation that is way different than what we would see in other ancient civilizations around the world is vast. Yeah, and that's what I was alluding to earlier. Like, the Amazon and what we're discovering there is just shows that civilization, doesn't have to follow this path that we've decided it has to follow. It doesn't have to follow the Mesopotamian model.

Starting point is 01:23:27 It can be done in so many different ways. It doesn't have to be mass agriculture. It's completely dependent on the environment that these people were living in. And these what look to be civilizations in South America probably did it in a vastly different way to the civilizations of the old world. And that just shows that human ingenuity is like a really, you know, variable thing. We're such an adaptable species. We can just do different things depending on our environment, depending on the challenges and the pressures that we face.

Starting point is 01:23:57 We can adapt and flourish in so many different ways. And the Amazon is testament to that. And that kind of points to a further point about, you know, the whole world. Like we're looking for these civilizations that are based on this model, but they don't have to look like that. They can be so many different models of civilization. And we shouldn't just cancel something out because it doesn't fit this checklist. There's so many different ways that it can happen.

Starting point is 01:24:25 Yeah, and if you just break it down to the base case of what we talk about civilization-wise, like what's accepted parlance, right? Inca's, I'm just talking South America in general right now. Incas, Aztecs, Mayans, Olmex. I know there's some others, but those are the main ones that people talk about. And these are all civilizations that,

Starting point is 01:24:47 exist far outside, let's say, the center of the Amazon jungle. You know, you got the Incas on the West Coast. You got the Mayans in between Mexico and Guatemala and like that area, roughly, correct me in the comments. You got the Aztecs up in Mexico. I don't remember where, where were the old Mexican? I think I'm not an expert, I think around Mexico kind of region. Yeah, that's, I might be wrong as well. Let's just get that right. You need to get Luke in here for that one. Yeah, Southern Mexico, right. So, like, then you have this whole vast area of land where it's like, oh, we never really wrote down a story of who was in there as if there wouldn't be people in there. And by the way, you bring up Oriana and that journey that he then dictated.

Starting point is 01:25:29 I believe if I remember correctly, and we could pull this up deep to check me, but the diary, so to speak, was taken by the priest that was with him or the monk that was with him, who also is a known name. I don't know if we can find that. but he was the one that was writing down what they saw. They basically started on the West Coast and then traveled all the way across to the Atlantic Ocean down the river. And they passed these quote unquote, this city of gold with, you know, like gold pyramids and people and lights and action. And I just, I don't understand why historians wouldn't be open to the fact that something like that would exist. Yep, there it is. The most famous example is Bartolome de Lacasas, a priest who documented the actions of conquistadors,

Starting point is 01:26:18 though he was not a conquistador himself and his work was critical of their brutality. Is that the same one? Or can we type in Francisco de Oriana priest? Let's do that. That might be the same one. It's De Oriana. Like, yeah. Who was the guy?

Starting point is 01:26:41 I... Yeah, Gasper. That's it. Carbajal. He was the one who documented it. So, you know, you're getting it from multiple sources in that way. He had men on this journey with him. I think who corroborated that. And now we have these stories as well.

Starting point is 01:27:08 To this day, people talk about El Dorado and where it could be. I mean, there's a famous, Percy Fawcett died trying to go find it. You know, greatest explorer probably in modern history right there. Have you looked at that case very much? Not really, not. Percy Fawcett thing? No. That's so fast.

Starting point is 01:27:24 He just, like, that dude was about the action, went down there with his son and his son's friend, and then they never came back the last journey they took. But, like, the other thing people, I don't think, appreciate is that there's not, like, hiking trails or walking trails in the fucking Amazon you want to go into the Amazon you bring a machete and you break you have to break trees in front of you you know to go a mile is like walking

Starting point is 01:27:50 20 miles somewhere else maybe even more you know so the the ability to explore this and all the things you can run into that's why governments who technically have parts of these lands whether it be Brazil or Brazil or Peru or whatever they're not coming out there to police

Starting point is 01:28:06 you know when shit happens to Paul like yeah he's on his own call the military. There's no one to call. It's just like, oh, sorry. You got to sort it. Guess they got you, bro. Yeah. And I think part of the problem with South America is because of, you know, what happened when the Europeans came is that we don't really have a recorded history like we do in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia and stuff like that. We don't have that continuous history, that tradition, that kind of, because it basically got wiped out. And that means that it's just

Starting point is 01:28:38 vast, vast mystery there that isn't quite the same in the old world. And there's so much fascinating stuff in South America that doesn't quite make sense. Like you look at so much of the megalithic stonework. And then you look at the culture that mainstream archaeology says built it. And it just doesn't line up at all. Like if you look at... Who do they say built it? Well, it depends what we're talking about. But if we're talking about, so I was kind of referencing like some of the sites in Peru. So places like, oh, yeah, I Taitambo and Sashi Human and stuff, like, these incredible sites with these massive megalithic constructions, and then you look at what they say about the Inca, and it's like,

Starting point is 01:29:19 this doesn't line up. Like, how are they doing this? Like, I don't know so much about this site, but there's a, the site, Oya Taitambo, again, pronunciation is probably horrifically wrong, but it's up a mountain, right? And they've transported these incredibly massive stones and positioned them on top of this mountain. But the quarry is on the side of another mountain. So they've quarried these stones. They've transported them all the way down, this mountain, through a valley, across a river, then up another mountain. And it's like, how have they done that?

Starting point is 01:29:48 Because when we look at the ink and technology, it's just like chisels and ropes and stuff. How much are we talking weight again on these things? I don't know off the top of my head, but they're very big. It's like tons. Yeah, yeah, very, very big. And we're talking about potential hundreds of miles. They're taking them. Not necessarily hundreds of miles, but I mean, maybe in some cases,

Starting point is 01:30:08 but, you know, it's the terrain. Up a mountain, down a mountain, across rivers. Like, how are you doing that? Why are you doing that? It doesn't, it just doesn't line up with what we know about the Incan civilization. Yeah, and then there's sites like Tewanaku in Bolivia, which has these incredible, like, precision cut blocks and stuff. And it's like, how are they doing that? There's no explanation for that. And they just, because we know the Inca existed, we're like, it was the Inca. The Inca was existed in this region, so they built this. How do they do it? Well, they just did it. They just did it. Don't ask questions. Yeah.

Starting point is 01:30:43 I mean... There's one right there. Whoa. I'm not sure if that's attributed to the Inca, but... How big that goddamn thing is, though? It doesn't line up with the known capabilities of the civilizations of the region, is the point I'm making. Which is interesting. I'm going to go outside academics with this question.

Starting point is 01:31:04 Okay. But do you ever just sit there and like you're staring at the screen? and then you sit back and you go fuck it it must have been aliens I don't know I don't usually go to aliens I usually go to humans because I think humans are really incredible sorry yeah sorry I don't usually go to aliens

Starting point is 01:31:24 because yeah I just think humans are really incredible and it probably was humans that did it I just think the humans were far more sophisticated and there's so much that we've lost and we just assume that what we have is all that there was like we know that the inker existed We think it was the Inca. So, but I think there could be vastly more civilizations, especially in South America,

Starting point is 01:31:44 that we just don't know about. We have no history of many of these South American cultures that we do know of. They recorded all their history orally. And then obviously when they all died, that was all lost, right? And so we just don't know. Do we know why they didn't like write it down? I don't know. But that's another thing about these cultures.

Starting point is 01:32:04 They didn't even have a written script. And apparently that's one of the. hallmarks of civilization but the Inca didn't have a written script they had this they used ropes I can't remember what it's called like Queeper that's probably wrong

Starting point is 01:32:17 but they used ropes to like kind of record keep effectively and really sophisticated don't get me wrong but they didn't have a written script and yet they're considered civilization so why Quebecly's happy they always say oh they didn't have a written script not a civilization subjective yeah it's completely

Starting point is 01:32:33 yeah you got it close enough Can we go back Gotcha. That's what it looks like. So, Kipu are record keeping devices fashioned from knotted cords. They were historically used by various cultures in the Central Andes of South America and prominently by the Inca Empire. Kipu usually consist of cotton or camelid fiber corbs and contains categorize information based on dimensions like color, order, and number. The Inca in particular, used knots tied in a decimal positional system to store numbers and

Starting point is 01:33:07 other values in Kippoo chords depending on its use and the amount of information it's stored given Kipu may have anywhere from a few to several thousand chords. So it's extremely sophisticated. It's not just like tying one rope and saying, look, we did something. I mean, it's extremely sophisticated. It's just a totally different form of writing. It's not writing, but you know what I mean? Oh yeah. No, it's really sophisticated. I don't want to take anything away from the Inca. They were an incredible civilization and they, you know, they were very sophisticated in many ways. But my argument is, they're just the ones we know about, right? What about everything that came before them? We don't really know about that. So we just

Starting point is 01:33:44 assume there was nothing. And then this all plays into the idea that we've had around the history of the Americas, right? So we've only, we always thought that human history in the Americas was extremely recent. And that's kind of built into this argument that, you know, these are the first civilizations in the Americas because humans weren't in the Americas for very long. So the traditional argument was Clovis First, right? You know about, you know about Clovis First? Remind me. So Clovis First was the argument for a long time about the first humans to reach any type of humans to reach Americas. And this was that humans didn't reach the Americas until about 13,000 years ago, which is incredibly recent, if you think about how old our species is, right? Any type of human.

Starting point is 01:34:27 But this, and this was the paradigm. This was fiercely defended paradigm for a long, long time. Like, people lost their careers over trying to dispute this. For the whole of the 20th century, this was the accepted idea that humans didn't reach the Americas until 13,000 years ago. What's this called Clovis what again? So the culture is called the Clovis culture. The idea was called the Clovis first theory, so that the Clovis people were the first in the Americas.

Starting point is 01:34:51 Yeah, I want to pull that up. We have a different guy named Clovis right now up. Oh, yeah, that's some, like... Yeah, it keeps bringing up some Lorenjevin... Some Frank King. Yeah, Revengeian Dynasty King. Yeah, not him. You want to type in the Clovis culture.

Starting point is 01:35:08 I don't think we've talked about this on the pod before. I've heard that term, but I don't think we talked about this. The Clovis first theory was the long-held belief that the Clovis people were the first humans in the Americas arriving around 13. There you go. 13,500 years ago by crossing a land bridge from Siberia and spreading south through an ice-free corridor. The theory is now largely rejected because the discovery of pre-Clovis, archaeological sites such as the Monte Verde in Chile and Paisley Caves in Oregon, which show evidence of human presence in the Americas at least a thousand years earlier.

Starting point is 01:35:41 Yeah, and so this is like a great example of the dogma of archaeology. This is why people usually bring this up because archaeology basically suppressed or North American archaeology basically suppressed this find. A lot of these finds, so like sites like Monte Verde and Chile, that was dated to around 15,000 years ago, potentially up to 20,000 years ago. So that's obviously before Clovis. Lots of people were not happy about that when that was discovered in the 1970s by a guy called Tom Dillaughey, I think. And like honestly, he basically almost had his career destroyed because he had these dates of this site.

Starting point is 01:36:19 And he even had, I know that Dan Richards, Dundkin, I don't know if you've heard about that guy, yeah, but he always talks about how North American archaeologists, basically. I basically tried to get this guy almost killed because he was making these statements. So they wrote a letter to, so he lived in, so this is in Chile and Chile was run by a dictator at that point. What's his name? I can't remember his name. Pico, something like that. Anyway, people can search up. What years are we talking? So this was in the 80s and the site he dated to around 14,000 years ago.

Starting point is 01:36:57 I know, didn't it? Yeah, I can't remember. What I gave was wrong there. gave was wrong there. A dictator. Something like Piniecoe or something. Pinochet, yeah, yeah, that's the one. I knew you were on it.

Starting point is 01:37:10 I had the P. So yeah, so these, so this archaeologist even wrote a letter to them saying that Tom Dillahey was a CIA plant, which is like a, it's a really dangerous thing to do, man. Like he could have been killed for that because they were so against this find because, you know, it made them look really stupid, right? Because they were all behind this paradigm, Clovis first. 13,000 years ago and this guy's here saying, you know, I've got evidence that it's way older

Starting point is 01:37:34 than that. Anyway, long story short, he was eventually proven, right? There was another site in Canada called Bluefish Caves, which was even older. Bluefish Caves? Bluefish Caves, yeah. So this was an archaeologist called, what's his name? I forgot in his name. Jack, Jacques Saint Mars, that's his name. Yeah, there is. The site was first excavated by archaeologist Jacques Shank Mars. Can we scroll down deep? It's right there. Between 1977 and 1987 and the initial radio carbon dating suggested an age of 24,000 before present. This was considered controversial in contrast with the Clovis First Theory. Yada, yada, yada. Can you go up deep? I just want to grab this. So Bluefish Caves is a site in

Starting point is 01:38:20 Yukon, Canada, located 54 kilometers southwest of the Ventut-Gwitchin community of Old Crow. I have no idea where that is, but hopefully people do. It has been suggested the human occupation. Yeah, we already read that hard. Okay. So, yeah, I mean, but he, this guy was vilified for this. Like, he was finding something. Yeah, and his career was destroyed.

Starting point is 01:38:41 And he didn't have a career because he found this. Isn't that crazy? It's so crazy. And he was eventually vindicated, like, recently, like, in the last 15, 20 years. Oh, that's nice. Is he dead now? I think so, yeah. I think he is dead.

Starting point is 01:38:58 you love when we do that someone like lives their whole life going i'm telling the truth no you're not and then they die and you're like oh sorry yeah dead see died in 2020 so he probably lived just long enough to see himself vindicated but his career was ruined that's unbelievable for doing what he was supposed to do and making an incredible discovery and proving archaeology wrong but his career was destroyed basically and there's a few examples like that um but the point i'm making is that we don't know anymore how old human history in the Americas is. We have no idea because Clovis First is overruled. And there's an even older site called a White Sands footprints in New Mexico, where they discovered these footprints that are dated to around 23,000 years old, very solid

Starting point is 01:39:44 dating. So that shows that humans have been here for at least 23,000 years, which is 10,000 years older than Clovis. Yeah, there you go. Undisputed. Oh, yeah. Those are human feet. Yeah. So that's the oldest accepted evidence, but there's loads of other sites that are way older that are a bit more controversial. But my argument is that we really do not know how long human beings have been in the Americas. And that's also like when you when, especially when you're looking at South America, forget North America for a second, which is certainly has a lot of great arguments as well. But like, you're talking about climates that are goddamn near or on the equator. so if you're if you're most concerned about you know ice periods where you know people can't survive because there's no agriculture and shit's frozen well that's the least likely place for

Starting point is 01:40:34 that to be the case like that's why when we look at ancient civilizations other places a lot of times they're not always but like the ones we talk about like Egypt not too far from the equator right like you're you're looking at places to have warmer climates and therefore have more potential i guess to survive that's a broad way of putting it but it's like why you would, why you would assume that, forget even the Clovis first period, why you would assume that the oldest species, human species we know about in South America might be a few thousand years old or something. And not older than that doesn't even, it doesn't even make sense. It would be an amazing, it has its dangerous like anywhere else, but it would be an amazing climate

Starting point is 01:41:15 to live in. Yeah, the best, especially South America, as you say. But then there's other sites. There's a site called the Cerruti Mastodon site. Have you heard of that? Seruzy Mastodon. Saruti Mastodon. Sirruti, I think Lucas talked about this, but let's bring it up. I'm sure he has, yeah. I mean, this is very controversial, but there was a paper published in nature, which is, you know,

Starting point is 01:41:36 the most prestigious mainstream journal there is. And this is, yeah, so they found these broken mastodon bones that look like they've been broken by humans, some kind of humans. And this site's dated to 130,000 years ago. 130,000? Oh, shit. Sir Rudy Mastodon site is a paleontological and possible archaeological site in San Diego County, California, and 2017 broken mastodon bones at the site were dated at around 130,700 years ago. The bones were found with cobblestones displaying useware and impact marks among the otherwise fine-grained sands. Researchers have proposed that these marks were caused by the intentional breakage of the broken bones.

Starting point is 01:42:20 by hominins using the cobblestones. If true, that would be older by far than the scientific consensus for the habit. Yeah, you already nailed all this. I don't know why to fucking read. Because you know what I mean? That would, if that's true, that would push back human history in America

Starting point is 01:42:36 by another hundred thousand years. Like work? You know, exactly. That's like four or five times longer than we think. And so what does that suggest? Like this all buys into the argument of my channel, basically, which is that human history everywhere

Starting point is 01:42:49 It's far older than we think. Of course it is. And there's other sites as well, but I mean, there's just, there's a lot. Yeah, it sounds like you could go on for days. I mean, it's like, it's great. What is, though, of the ones that we talk about, which could include, by the way, some older ones that now have evidence to be found, what's the most intriguing civilization in South America that you've studied?

Starting point is 01:43:14 Depends what you mean by civilization, because, well, I mean, But, I mean, I find the civilizations that we accept in South America really interesting. You know, like the Inca and the Aztecs. Like, it's really interesting stuff. But, I mean, I don't really focus on that because I focus on the oldest stuff. I focus on the controversy. But that's not to say these things aren't interesting. And people often get that confused with me, I think.

Starting point is 01:43:36 People, like, criticize me a lot because they're like, you know, you're downplaying the sophistication of these civilizations. It's like, I'm not doing that. Like, I think they're really interesting. It's just that I have no beef, you know, with how they're presented. My beef is with this idea that, you know, it's all being cut off at this point and nothing happened before then. So that's what I'm like really going hard at. So, I mean, I don't know what I find them all interesting.

Starting point is 01:43:58 I have no favorites, you know, I don't choose. But yeah, I mean, it's a super fascinating place. I think South America is so interesting because we know so little. And I, it's not like my area of expertise. Like, as you say, I'm a bit of a generalist. I kind of just hop all over the place wherever I find something interesting. But I think there's a lot of mystery there. Yeah, you seem to store all of it, though.

Starting point is 01:44:21 You got a hell of memory with it. What was the site you were telling me about right before the new one in Mexico? I think you were, you had just made a video on this or were making a video on it. I think you mean way, I can't pronounce it. It's all right. Huerta laco or Weillatlako or something like that. Do you know the first letter of how it's spelled? Yeah, it's spelled H-U-E-Y-A-T-L-A-O.

Starting point is 01:44:49 Okay, I purposely didn't ask you about this when you mentioned it because I wanted to be surprised on here. But what was going on here? So, this site's super interesting because basically in the 1960s, a Mexican archaeologist found some artifacts here. This is in Mexico, I believe. Yeah, near Paul Bella. And he found these artifacts, and then a whole team of American archaeologists came in, and they discovered more artifacts. And then they got these team of geologists in to date the kind of the rocks and the sediments around it. And there was this layer of volcanic ash that was above the artifacts.

Starting point is 01:45:28 And they sent this ash off, this ash off for testing. And they were expecting it to be, you know, like 15,000, because this was in the time of the Clovis First theory. So they were expecting it to kind of align with that theory. And then this ash came back with dating of around 250,000 years old. And the artefacts were below this layer. And the artefacts were in an undisturbed context, right? So they hadn't been corrupted or anything. They hadn't been, they hadn't slipped down there or anything.

Starting point is 01:45:57 They'd been there since before this ash was deposited. And this ash was deposited according to their testing, and they did multiple tests on this in like various techniques to at least 250,000 years ago. Some of their tests were like 300,000, 400,000 years ago. So if that's correct, that means that there was some kind of human making tools in Mexico, so in the Americas,

Starting point is 01:46:19 you know, 250,000 years ago at least, which is just like ridiculous, because, yeah, and this was in the time of Clovis first. And then this is another example of archaeological dogma because people weren't happy with that. Like, this guy got his whole artifact collection, seized the site. Seized by the government.

Starting point is 01:46:37 By the Mexican government, yeah. Yeah, they're real not corrupt. They weren't happy with it. And according to the archaeologist's own testimony, or the geologists' own testimony, I should say, the site was cornered off by effectively the Mexican army or armed guards. And they came there. They seized the artifact collection and they said, you can't do this. The work that they produced wasn't published. They couldn't get it published in archaeological journals.

Starting point is 01:47:09 And then when people came back to the site, about 10 years later, to be like, we're going to sort this out once and for all, it'd all been like raised flat and there was nothing there anymore. So the artifacts are gone and the site is gone. So we just have these stories and this dating that suggests that these tools were in the Americas 250,000 years ago. So you can't prove it because it's all gone now. But these geologists were very certain about their dates. And there's been some more recent testing on the ash, I think, which aligns with these dates. I can't remember who did it or what the testing method was. There's a really cool video by this guy called Will Brown.

Starting point is 01:47:51 His channel is called Incredible History. He did a great job of... Shout out Will Brown. Shout out, he's awesome. He did a great job of kind of outlaying. I did a video too on it, but I point people to his video because he goes more in depth on it. Can we pull that up? Give him some props, man. He's good.

Starting point is 01:48:07 Yeah, Will Brent. What's the channel called? The channel's called Incredible History. Incredible. And his video on... I feel like I've seen that. Yeah, he's great. His video on Weaatlako, or however you say it, is... Wayat Laco.

Starting point is 01:48:19 That's how it looks to me. All the comments on my video are like, this guy can't pronounce this fucking thing. Which is fair enough. It's for engagement. Yeah, this is the video. Yes, I have seen this guy before. Yeah, he's good. He does a really good job.

Starting point is 01:48:34 of kind of outlining the dating, the cold controversy about the cover-up and what it could potentially suggest about a vastly older human presence in the Americas. So then when you start to look at all these things adding up, it's like, you know, how long have we been in the Americas, man? Like, how long have human beings been there? And thus, why are we against the idea of civilization there being, you know, far, far older than the Inca, obviously, but even Carl Super and Panico and these civilizations we're finding recently, how far back does it go? Yeah. And you're pointing out a lot of things that were found years ago in many cases and just didn't get attention. And it makes, it does, you know, you don't want to just make your head go conspiracy on everything like that. But you would wonder why fucking Walter Cronkite wouldn't have wanted to cover this on CBS, like finding something like this. I think that's very interesting 6 o'clock news, you know, from going back in time. It's not even like conspiracy. Like it's not. I'm saying the conspiracy of people not covering it.

Starting point is 01:49:33 But that's, I don't even think that's a conspiracy. I think they literally covered it up because they were not happy. Like, you have it with Monteverdi, you have it with Bluefish Caves. They, you know, they wanted to suppress this because, you know, North American archaeologists in the 20th century had built their whole careers around Clovis First. They'd written the textbooks. They'd taught the lessons. They'd kind of constructed their whole identity around being the source of information on North America. And then you have these people coming out like, this is,

Starting point is 01:50:03 not just wrong but this is almost ridiculously wrong like this you could be hundreds of thousands of years out here so they weren't happy about that but do you ever wonder if let me explain this i can ask the question properly but like if the intelligence agencies had the technology and there's very good evidence that they do to kind of simulate the effect of things on society like if you told society that a truth that they had accepted for a long time wasn't a truth. How would they react on a mass scale and things like that? Do you ever wonder if like intelligence agencies could have some involvement when it comes to ancient history because perhaps there have been things found that would so shake the structure of maybe every world religion

Starting point is 01:50:49 that's ever existed or people's basic, you know, quote unquote meaning of life that they're like, oh shit, that would crash society and people can't know about it. Do you ever wonder that? I do wonder that. I think it would have to be something like really crazy, like, you know, aliens or something or just like a really, really advanced civilization back in the past. I don't personally believe that a lot of people like in this space push the idea that, you know, this all been hidden from us and there's this like elite that know our true past. I don't buy into that. So I think it's more, when things are covered up, I think it's more like a human idea of, oh, I'm wrong about my job, my whole identity. So I'm not going to push this. I don't think we have.

Starting point is 01:51:29 evidence of like an advanced civilization from way back in history that people know about in hiding i don't think you know the intelligence agencies would see if it was something like aliens then maybe but i don't think if it was a human civilization i don't think that would like put people out too much you know but yeah you know maybe it would i don't know but yeah the aliens thing i think is a whole different level and i i could as much as like i want to know like i could see why you know something like that might not be disclosed and that's also when guys from the government including you know some people come on my show before it's i haven't had on in a while you know it makes me wonder like all right why are you here talking about this and this is probably

Starting point is 01:52:13 not the true thing it's probably something else like i feel like you wouldn't be telling us this but you know it's interesting because if we don't even know what happened on our planet and every day it doesn't get blown up by like 6,000 years like Quebecly-Tepie gets blown up by fucking a million years sometimes like the one in China. Well, what else don't we know about the, forget the solar, the galaxy around us and, you know, how we could have gotten here. I mean, it's strange to even think about why we're alive or what caused it or, you know, we're all like a one in four trillion chance of just being born in the first place. Like, let's start with that. You know, your mind can go to crazy places thinking about this stuff. But I do, I like,

Starting point is 01:52:56 right now you know you go in phases doing this thing but i i like talking with guys like you that are focused on you know the the history that we can find on our earth and kind of starting there because if we don't even understand the basics of you know what we have here what the fuck are we going to understand what we got going on up there other than looking at the planets you know i mean that's almost the point i make all the time is we don't know as much as we think we know about anything about human history about our existence about the universe like we think that we we've got it all figured out right yeah but we don't we don't even know who we are we don't know what was going on in our heads like so yeah i think there's so much still to be discovered and

Starting point is 01:53:42 i just hope we can do it before you know everything falls apart yeah i i like to have an optimistic view i think we're in some weird times right now but things will come together like i said we're still young with social media even you know i think i do have hope we'll figure out how to use these tools and this access we have to each other a little more constructively before we all kill each other right exactly that's that's the downside here but you were also telling me before you're interested in a lot of different things in history like and i always i love this when when guys like you are known publicly for having one expertise but then you're like yeah i also don't go this stuff too and you were saying you would maybe eventually if not on this channel on a

Starting point is 01:54:21 separate channel, cover things, like I think you said, like World War I or stuff like this. Like, what are your other favorite parts that, you know, that aren't ancient, so to speak? I love it all, mate. I love all of history. That's why I did it. University. That's why I do what I do. But yeah, I mean, like things like World War I have such a huge fascination with World War I.

Starting point is 01:54:41 I think World War I maybe it's partly because I'm British, but I think World War I was such a pivotal moment. It kind of almost was the beginning of the modern world. It was the end of the kind of old society, which was run by like kings and empires and stuff. And then it all, it was like this age of like such illustrious, almost hedonism that all came to a head. Like these people had so much money and these empires were so flourishing that they just didn't know what to do. So they just ended up just creating the worst inferno ever and everyone died basically. It's almost like the beginning of the end of Britain, I think. I think, because Britain was obviously the most powerful country in the world at the turn of the 20th century and had so much money and so much influence and so much power that it didn't even, it almost didn't really realize where it was. And then you have this new upstart country in Germany coming along and trying to like take the crown. And yeah, the fact that all these societies just basically mass industry created, you know, they basically poured the entire society's resources into,

Starting point is 01:55:50 death and everyone got slaughtered and i just find that whole period so interesting and then what came out of that which was you know transfer transfer of power across the atlantic to you guys in america and then obviously all the implications in europe which led to the rise of nazism in germany and led to the second world war which led to the cold war which led to you know the modern world yeah exactly i just think that world war one and him bullet exactly exactly so like one one bullet led to everything in a way it's also actually very sad to me how ignored world war one is specifically because then you had world war two which is no more recent compared to speaking happen you know just over 20 years later and break out but you had some of the most like brutal

Starting point is 01:56:42 warfare ever in world war one with the trench warfare just you know pure savagery of behind-the-scenes suits paying for everyone else to kill each other i think i think probably the wildest story that paints that picture is obviously i'm sure you're familiar with this but the when there were too many wolves in the one battle and they had to call like a ceasefire for a few days the germans and i think it was the germans and the brits and the french like we're playing pick-up soccer together yeah and then they had to yeah exactly and then they had to go back into their trenches two days later same guys and shoot each other like that's nuts Yeah, so nuts. That whole conflict is because the whole point of the war, there was no point for that war. That's what makes it so, like, ridiculous, in my opinion. Because at least when you look at World War II, like, you can see there was a reason behind that. Like, you know, Hitler was taken over the whole of Europe. He had these crazy genocidal ambitions. He wanted to take over the world and exterminate everyone who wasn't like him, you know, and clearly a bad guy. Let's fight that guy. It's a just war. World War I, there was no reason to do it. It was just these stupid alliances.

Starting point is 01:57:49 that all kind of led to a domino effect, which led to the entirety of Europe declaring war on each other. And it was the first industrial war. I think that's what makes it so interesting and so tragic because you had all these societies that thought about war in the traditional sense. They thought it was this romantic thing. Because Europe had been at peace for 100 years, basically,

Starting point is 01:58:09 up until the 20th century. So war was this far-off distant thing that they thought about Napoleonic times, basically, like these men in fancy coats riding horses and going to glory. And there was these little skirmishes and then you trade a little province here with me and then the war's over.

Starting point is 01:58:26 So that was with the idea of wars. They were like, okay, we'll have a little war. But it wasn't. The world had changed. There was these mass industrial societies. They had the ability to cool up millions and millions and millions of men. They had weapons like the machine gun and like massive artillery. And it just led to this horrific stalemate

Starting point is 01:58:43 where the whole of Europe was just trench warfare with just pouring millions of men into this. zone of death and slaughtering them all for what because for what you're allied with me and I'm allied with you and he's allied with him and he shot him in Sarajevo so that means that he has to attack him so you have to attack me so it's just it's ridiculous and yeah how many people deep can we google this how many people died in world war one is it's a obviously horrific number millions and millions and millions of millions of people always talk about world war two but world war one over 37 million casualties so that's 15 to 22 million deaths and 23 million wounded military personnel

Starting point is 01:59:27 and civilians combined over like a four-year period yeah that is absolutely absurd 8.5 million military and deaths 13 million civilians and then total twin wow yeah see i i remember i listened That's probably like six years ago, maybe, seven years ago. Listen to Dan Carlin's. Yeah, blue pit for Armageddon. Oh, my God. That's my favorite history podcast episode ever. Fucking incredible.

Starting point is 02:00:01 And you're like, how are we ignoring this? And then to your point, the way that it closed up is what set the stage. You had everything from the Treaty of Versailles, which then basically like completely hamstrung Germany and allowed for a vacuum to suck up with their economy for someone like Hitler to then seize power, all the way to, I hope I get the name right, like the Sykes-Picot Agreement, which just carved up the Middle East and set up just like willy-nilly, you know, a bunch of dudes in an office in Europe, like, oh, this will work. Yeah, you can trace back the whole current Middle East conflict to that basically.

Starting point is 02:00:39 Exactly. Balfour Declaration was back then too, like it's, it's absurd. And then World War II, I'd love your perspective on this. like history is written by the victors there's no history ever that's 100% right it's just a fact of life i always cite the american revolution is an amazing example like i study the hell out of that war it's amazing there are literally things that are actually written in the history books that you'll read whether it be hw brands or some other brilliant historian from that era that like when it's when the wars talked about where the documentaries made they don't really mention that so even the

Starting point is 02:01:13 stuff like some stuff that's written down they won't mention and that stuff i'm referring to will be things that are like negative towards the revolutionaries in the United States, meaning like, yeah, we did some stuff wrong in that war too. But I, you know, I'm not one of these like, it's everything or nothing or like 5%'s wrong. So we're going to throw out the 100% baby out with the bathwater. But I can like look at it and say, okay, I'm very glad all due respect to your people that, you know, we did this revolution and we're able to form this great country. And these guys were amazing and the shit they came up with.

Starting point is 02:01:44 But yeah, they did a few things during the war as well. well, that probably wasn't totally fair to the British, for sure, and that certainly happened a lot in the other direction. And then, yeah, like in the Constitution, they fucked that up and, you know, didn't abolish slavery. Like, meaning you can point to things and call it nuance without excoriating the entire thing. And what's really concerning me about society now with history in general, but I think we've seen a major aspect of it formulate around World War II, is that we're looking at narratives that have been told to us. us before and people are plucking on, you know, that one percent that might be a little different

Starting point is 02:02:22 than it was written. And then they're pulling out that bottom card from the house of cards and saying, look, the whole thing comes down. It's actually all fake. And they'll say, you will literally hear people say things sometimes. Like, you know, Hitler wasn't great, but it was actually Churchill that was the bad guy. And, you know, you should be able to discuss anything. You should be able to hash things out. I don't want to like shut down conversation. But when people are running, running away with narratives like that and suddenly now using the internet and algorithms to push them and suddenly report them as truth. Do you ever get concerned about how we're discussing like even modern history?

Starting point is 02:02:57 Yeah. I mean, historical revisionism, it's worth exploring for sure, as you say, but you do have to be careful because as you say, when you start taking these narratives, you can say this means this and then the whole thing falls down. Exactly like, was Churchill with a bad guy of World War II? No. Like, he was, wasn't a perfect guy, but he was a man of his era, right? He was a, he grew up in the, at the end of the 19th century when Britain had the British Empire and was, you know, oppressing everyone around the world. Like, British Empire had positives, but also there was definitely a mindset amongst the, especially the elite of Britain that, you know, they were better than

Starting point is 02:03:34 everyone else. And Churchill was a product of that. And you could point to many things that he did that were, you know, not great. And the guy clearly thought that white British men were the best thing in the world. But at the same time, more than almost anyone else, I think, in the world, he was instrumental in stopping Hitler, right? Because if Britain had surrendered, and Britain was extremely close to surrendering to Germany in 1940. And Churchill was basically the guy that stopped that happening. Like, the British government wanted to, or factions of the British government wanted to surrender when France fell. Yeah. For good reason. Like, you're looking at this, because people always forget the context of World War I, like Britain and France and Germany

Starting point is 02:04:17 had been through the most horrific, traumatic experience only, you know, less than 20 years or just over 20 years prior. So all these people are still alive. All these people can still remember an entire generation of men being slaughtered, their kids or their brothers or their friends, wiped out, dead. And you're thinking, fucking out, lads, the last thing we want to do is do this all over again. And yet it's happening. Let's just call it quit. It's like, this Hitler guy, like, yeah, he's a bit of a nutter, but is it worth wiping out another three million men from our population? But Churchill was like the one guy that was like, no, we're not having this.

Starting point is 02:04:53 We're going to fight this guy. We're going to beat this guy. So when people say, like, Churchill was the villain of World War II because he, you know, didn't continue with the policy of appeasement or whatever, I'm not quite down on the arguments why people say that, but he clearly wasn't, and he clearly more than anyone else was the guy that kept Britain in the war and thus enabled. the allied cause to keep going, thus enabled America to eventually join the war, and thus enabled the allies to win the war, and thus enabled Nazism and fascism to lose and for, you know, Western

Starting point is 02:05:25 democracy, America to become the prominent power, at least with the Soviet Union, then eventually defeat the Soviet Union, which is a preferable outcome to fascism. And you're underlying an amazing point here, which is that a lot of people who will look at this I find with revisionism, one who assume the world is a perfectly balanced place where the logical outcome is always going to win. And then when they see an outcome that involves using logic where something has to lose, they cannot accept that that's the case. And what I mean is, in this context, Churchill made a decision that the fastest growing GDP in the world, which was fascist Nazi Germany that was starting a war on multiple fronts and taking over countries by the day,

Starting point is 02:06:10 he made a decision that that was the worst immediate problem that doesn't mean that he didn't think the communists were were a problem of course in fact he protested like the whole time like oh we got to work with this fucking stalling guy like he knew that was a huge issue he's the guy who invented the iron curtain and all that but he made the best of two bad decisions at the time that unfortunately yes world war two is the bloodiest conflict ever tens of millions of people died that's terrible i hate that that happened the alternative of like the United States never getting into the war and me speaking fucking German right now. Well, definitely me anyway, yeah.

Starting point is 02:06:46 Like, like that's worse. I'm sorry, it is. And maybe eventually that would have fallen, but there would have been even more destruction on the way. And, you know, there's even misunderstandings of like how Churchill eventually viewed like Chamberlain. Like he disagreed with what Chamberlain did. But Chamberlain gets more shit in history than he should. He tried for peace. He did it the wrong way.

Starting point is 02:07:11 It didn't work out. Hitler was not a guy you should listen to. But like, he made the effort. And then what did he say? He's like, if you break this, I'm going to be forced to declare war on you. And he fucking did. You know, like, that's what it is. And also people ignore the Churchill gave the eulogy at Chamberlain's funeral in like 1940 or 1941.

Starting point is 02:07:30 And he talked about, you know, this guy's going to be misunderstood in history. We had some disagreements, but like he tried. Yeah. And now this is what it is. It's like people, you have to live in reality, and reality sucks sometimes. But when you're looking at history, you also have the advantage of having some hindsight 2020. Don't use that the wrong way and assume you could have magically solved the problem back then,

Starting point is 02:07:52 you know? And you can completely understand Chamberlain's position, as I said, because of the First World War, because of the trauma. You think let's do anything to stop this happening again. But at a certain point, Hitler's just, he's going for it, mate. He's ignoring all the deals you make with him. he's attacking all these countries you've got to fight him eventually

Starting point is 02:08:11 and Chamberlain did come round to that but at the end he was the wrong guy Churchill came in, Churchill was instrumental in keeping Britain in the war because if Britain had sued for peace which they tried to do well they didn't try to do but factions of the government really wanted to do then Churchill wouldn't have remained

Starting point is 02:08:26 in power it probably would have been have you ever heard of Oswald Mosley I don't think so he was the fascist leader of well the leader of the British fascist party at the time. So it probably would have been someone like... Oswald Mosley? Yeah. Okay. He's actually in Piki Blinders, which I know, yeah. Yeah. Um, so

Starting point is 02:08:45 yeah, he would, it probably would have been someone like him who would have been put in place in Britain because Britain would have then presumably had like, you know, good ties with Nazi Germany, so then you might have had a fascist Britain, whole fascist Europe. He makes a bit like Hitler. Yeah, I get that. I think he's probably modeling himself on Hitler because Hitler, I guess, was his ideological hero. Wow. But you know, Britain like, it, what we weren't, it wasn't like, People think of fascism now is like, oh, it's evil, but it hadn't happened yet. So people just seen that as an alternative. And it's like, well, Mussolini's doing pretty well in Italy.

Starting point is 02:09:16 Hitler's fucking smashing it in Europe. Why don't we try this Mosley guy? So someone like Churchill was the guy that kind of stopped that and led to democracy winning. Also, shout out to the Brits too, dude. I didn't, because I didn't, that was one part of World War II. I hadn't done like a huge deep dive on. I've looked at it in my whole life. It's so fascinating to me.

Starting point is 02:09:39 But like the Battle of Britain and that year, which is all prior to Pearl Harbor, by the way, and not just Churchill, but like the whole context of the bombing raids back and forth between Britain and Germany on each other, insane, man. There were a lot of times where Britain could have folded there. And like you said, because of Churchill and obviously a lot of other brave people, they didn't. And that when you really look at like between that and the evacuation it doesn't, Dunkirk and everything, being able to like keep a standing army together and you look at the pivot of being able to be like, all right, let's have a foot to stand on to win this war.

Starting point is 02:10:13 That's really, they deserve a fuck ton of credit for that. Yeah. So interesting how history can pivot on like so tiny like things and tiny amount of individuals like because Britain's always been throughout history, Britain was always a naval power, right? So that kept Britain secure and we could rule the seas through having the best Navy. And that's what led to the British Empire being what it was and everything like that. But by the time you get to the 1940s, that's kind of redundant because of air power. So Britain had this amazing Navy, but the Luftwaffe could just dive on it and destroy it. So Britain was like, how do we defend ourselves now? So they invented radar effectively. And because they

Starting point is 02:10:52 invented radar and radar was literally being invented at the time that the World War II broke out. And the first test of British defence radar system was the Battle of Britain. And if they didn't have this invention, they wouldn't know when the bombers were coming. They wouldn't know where to send the very few fighters that Britain had to intercept these bombers. And the bombers were targeting all the airfields. And if the Luftwaffe bombers had wiped out the RAF, then the Luftwaffe could then wipe out the Royal Navy. And then Germany has free reign on Britain. So without the invention of radar at the exact time by like, I can't remember the guy's name.

Starting point is 02:11:23 There was like one or two people. Invention of radar. We'll get it. So the radar, I think radar was a little bit older, but the development of the technology into a, you know, sophisticated defense system literally happened because of necessity at that exact time. And if that hadn't happened, then the RAF would have been wiped out. And obviously the bravery of the RAF file. Yeah, they had a lot of inventions around World War II in the nick of time. Are you talking about Robert Watson what?

Starting point is 02:11:47 I'm not sure. I'm not sure the name. The British invention of radar, so that was the initial invention you're talking about when they figured out how to use it. Yeah, my brother. Okay, so the British invention of radar led by Sir Robert Watson Watt played a pivotal role in winning the Battle of Britain. The chain home system was the world's first early warning radar network providing the Royal Air Force with crucial advanced notice of German air raids, allowing them to scramble their fighters and effectively direct them to intercept the incoming bombers. Without radar, it is highly unlikely the RAF could have defeated the Luftwaffe. and then the system could detect approaching aircraft from up to 80 miles away. That's amazing back then.

Starting point is 02:12:29 Yeah. And if like that hadn't, if that technology hadn't been just at that exact point where it was possible to do that, the whole history of the world would look different. And if that these people hadn't managed to do it. And that's the thing. You make an amazing point about how this was only like 20 years after World War I. So people in Britain, they had fathers, sons, brothers, friends who died in that war. people knew the cost of the most brutal cost of war. So, and in the United States even getting

Starting point is 02:12:59 in the last year, they knew it very well too. So totally understandable, there were some isolationist feelings. And then the war breaks out in Britain is getting attacked, so they're forced to not be isolationist. But one of the things that I really didn't understand just how deep it was how isolationist we were in America. I read this book when I was telling you, I was looking into this a couple years ago called The Splendid in the Vial by Eric Larson, which is about the one year of basically the bombing of Britain. And he talks about like the relationship with, it's basically from Churchill's perspective. And he talks about the relationship between Churchill and FDR. And FDR knew this was all a problem. But beginning with the May 1940 bombings,

Starting point is 02:13:43 when Churchill was like, please help, FDR had an election on November 5th, 1940. And he was telling Churchill, he's like, bro, I agree with you. But like my opponent is running complete isolationism, stay out of this. So I have to like try to run in his direction just to win an election. I don't think you understand. Like the whole country doesn't support getting involved, so I can't really help. He couldn't even give Churchill a couple totally broken boats that Congress was about to vote on to destroy. Like they were floating in the Caribbean useless. And Churchill's like, fuck it, I'll take them. FDR had to come up with some backhanded like secret deal to try to even get them there. It was that isolationist. And so Churchill was like begging for a year.

Starting point is 02:14:25 And then it took Pearl Harbor to get the United States involved. Do you think Pearl Harbor was a false flag? Unfortunately, absolutely. I've had West Point fucking commandos sitting there openly saying that as if it's common parlance. I have had a dude who wrote a book on the entire thing and the dude who was in the building that this picture on the wall is taken from, which is Rockefeller Center from MI6, to build up to World War II whose sole job was to try to get the United States involved. There are cables that show that FDR knew it was coming

Starting point is 02:14:58 and that, you know, that's what it was and the ultimate poison pill there is that, you know, hindsight 2020, because I've never looked at a false flag before I've been like, well, that was a good idea. It was fucking horrible. You wonder, though, if that hadn't happened if the world would look a lot different

Starting point is 02:15:16 because they knew it would force Hitler's hand because he was such fucking big dog guy to like declare a war because the war was only declared on japan but they knew that would get hitler involved and give him an excuse to be like okay well fuck you we're coming in too that's that's a tough one man yeah i mean it's very plausible i think not that it was a false flag but that they allowed it to happen yeah yeah there's also like there's financial things related to that with what they did with like the oil i forget it off the top of my head but like the oil exports I think involving Asia that would have forced Japan's hand to do. Fix me in the comments

Starting point is 02:15:57 on that. It's hazy. But there were a lot of things going on there. And it gets weird. But you know, you should talk about all these things for sure. You know, like I said, no war is, is ever 100% on the up and up and all that. Yeah. Yeah. Interesting. Interesting time. But I mean, I think one thing that's probably underestimated in the West is the World War II was basically one and lost on the Eastern Front, I think. I completely agree with you, yes. Because that's where it turned. Yep.

Starting point is 02:16:32 Because if Hitler had taken Moscow, if Hitler had knocked out the Soviet Union, he's in such a strong position, even with America. But because, you know, Stalingrad happened, because it turned on the Eastern Front, that allowed you know, that allowed the Allies to win effectively. And I think the Soviet Union probably don't get enough credit in the West, probably because they're so ideologically opposed to us. And they're also the enemy, they became the enemy. But without that contribution, Hitler probably would have won or at least wouldn't have lost

Starting point is 02:17:02 and there would have been some weird stalemate. Maybe they would have sued for peace, although probably that goes against Nazi ideology. But yeah, I think that's underestimated in the West. Because we have, you know, we have this narrative like Britain and America together. We won the war. we defeated Hitler but I mean the real war was the eastern front right so it was all three and there's no doubt that the Russians because the war literally ended up coming onto their land civilians and military alike through the most bodies of the problem I mean that's by a lot and that absolutely

Starting point is 02:17:31 is true and again it comes back to that you kind of had to pick the lesser two evils to work with and at the time you know cold war wasn't great and all that but didn't drop 45 five million bodies in that way, you know, on battlefields and with the civilians in the middle in a four-year period or anything like that. Obviously, a lot of people died and there was destruction within the Cold War. I don't want to underestimate that. But, you know, these are the decisions that have to get made at the time. And you can sit there and analyze them to death afterwards. And I still think the right overall decision was made by the Allies. And it was what it was. Yeah, it had to be done, right? It was the only logical decision at the time. Yeah. Yeah.

Starting point is 02:18:12 It's just crazy how reason all this was as well. I think people forget that. This is only like, you know, 60, 70 years ago. Shaped our entire modern world. Like our grandparents' generation live through this. Had two guys sitting in that chair who fought in it. Really? Yeah.

Starting point is 02:18:26 That's cool. Yeah. That's the kind of shit I'll tell my grandkids about and pull up the video and be like, look at that. Yeah. You know, but that shows you. It's not too, too long ago. Real quick, Michael, this is going great. I just got to go the bathroom.

Starting point is 02:18:38 And then we'll come right back. We've got to talk some Egypt and stuff. Yeah, we do. I need to go off from Tuesday. That's good. Cool. We're right by. You know what's one thing I also, I was just thinking about this on the bathroom break,

Starting point is 02:18:48 but one thing I've never really looked at. There was this video I saw when I was going through like a hardcore ancient Rome phase, maybe like a year ago where it showed a CGI recreation of like Britain since the ancient Rome times and it takes you through like each era. But I've never really looked at the history of your country. before ancient Rome and like who was there. Have you done a lot of work on that? Not so much, but I mean, the Romans came to our country and basically made it good for a long time

Starting point is 02:19:21 and then they left and we went straight back to, I guess, the Dark Ages. But I mean, Britain before Rome was basically just Celtic tribes, I guess, in just different locations. There was no unification, really. I mean, have you ever had a Queen Budica or Buddhism? I don't think so. So she's pretty famous in Britain because she's... Yeah. She's famous in Britain because she's kind of seen as like a heroine of British identity, which is kind of a bit silly because we're not really the same. Yeah, there you go. And she was like

Starting point is 02:19:52 this warlord. And obviously, she's a woman. So that like made it like ridiculous because they were ahead of the times. Very head of the times. Yeah. And she like led some British tribe and she almost unified all the British tribes against the Roman forces in Britain. And she almost won. That's the crazy thing. She almost took out the Roman occupation of Britain. Was she around when, I didn't look at the years there, was she around when Caesar was actually leading the armies there? Was this slightly after? I think she was just after, I think, what's the date here? AD 60, yeah. Oh, yeah, that would have been after he's dead. He's like 53 or something. He's BC. He's like, when did he die? He died like 40 BC or something like that. So this is just in the start of the

Starting point is 02:20:32 Roman Empire. So that's, maybe this is just after Augustus. Yeah, 44, BC, March 15th, 44. What did I say? I was pretty close that, wasn't I? Yeah, you're right. I think you said 43. Yeah. Right there.

Starting point is 02:20:44 Pretty impressive. It's fucking up there, bro. You got an encyclopedia. It's great. So this lady was trying to unify all the tribes against the constantly incoming Roman army. But the Romans at this point would have already been occupying. Right? Yeah, yeah.

Starting point is 02:21:02 Yeah, yeah. But I mean, so, yeah, I guess less is known about Britain before the Romans, Romans, because you know that wasn't we weren't really with it we were just some random island on the edge of the known world like Britain was not a relevant place until quite recently in terms of the historical yeah like the last thousand years yeah well even less than that like britain was always just this outcrop on the edge of the known world like this crazy island where these tribal people lived and no one went like the romans hated britain because it was such a hard place to run because it was so far away from their central power and it was this

Starting point is 02:21:35 place that you had to cross the sea to get there and full of crazy Celts and stuff like that so yeah a bunch of Connor McGregors coming at you basically terrible accent but whatever we'll go with it are you are you someone that's also like fascinated with ancient rome do you study that a lot or yeah so basically that was my degree was a lot about ancient rome um i really i'm really interested by rome because you know it's a fascinating civilization right like the whole roman empire is so interesting and yeah so i know a lot about it i find the period from the transition from republic to empire uh very fascinating you know how so because it was just a crazy time in world history right where caesar see so do you know the story of it of caesar getting

Starting point is 02:22:25 yeah and like then the whole beef that happened after that and then what led to the formation yeah it was like now it's been a while but that was like when they had the the tripartite thing yeah you know your stuff yeah yeah exactly um so yeah i mean i find that whole period of history so fascinating because you have this roman republic and they were very you know they they were really proud about their identity of not having kings you can almost make the comparison to the to the modern day with the no kings protest against trump but um not quite the same thing not to be clear not quite the same thing. But they were terrified of dictators because they used to have kings way back in the very early days of Rome and then they became this republic and they were like,

Starting point is 02:23:07 we're never going to have a king again. And then eventually they had these more and more powerful individuals and Caesar was one of them and Caesar effectively wanted to take control of all of Rome and he was becoming so powerful and he had this, he basically conquered all of Gaul and you could say he almost conducted a holocaust in Gaul, but that's a maybe that's a different topic of conversation, but he was amassing all this power, and they were terrified of him in the Senate because they didn't want a king. And he was acting like a king. So they were like, you can't come back here with an army. You can't, you've got to stay out there. And then he crossed the, fuck, what's it called? This is like a

Starting point is 02:23:45 RubeCon. Yeah, that's it. It's like a famous phrase, and I forgot the name of the river. But he crossed the Rubicon with his army, and that was basically him declaring war on Rome. And then there was this big civil war, which he eventually won. And then he wasn't an emperor, but he was almost the first emperor in spirit because he kind of took control of Rome. But then obviously people weren't happy about that. And so then he was assassinated by, you know, all the senators. And that's that famous story. And he's like etu-brutei, which I don't think he ever said, but that's a Shakespeare line.

Starting point is 02:24:14 Hey, it's a good line. It's a good line, exactly. So you might as well just take it as a historical fact. Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story. Exactly. So he was assassinated. And then you had this power vacuum and you had his adopted son, who was Octavian

Starting point is 02:24:26 you had Mark Anthony who was Caesar's right-hand man and you also He was banging Cleopatra right They were both banging Cleopatra Yeah different times But they were both banging Cleopatra Fair play

Starting point is 02:24:38 And then you had Oh what's the other guy called That's pretty bad Octavian Mark Anthony And then I think he was Leopardus I think that's right

Starting point is 02:24:48 Something like that That sounds familiar Mark Anthony Octavian and third guy That should bring it up. Google AI should be smart enough. Grock will definitely be smart enough. Was it Leopardus?

Starting point is 02:25:01 Yeah. Yeah. I should have more confidence in myself. That's fine. Yeah, so they basically had this massive civil war, which Octavian eventually won at the Battle of Actium. And then that led to Mark Anthony and Cleopatra committing suicide. Leopardus got knocked out earlier on.

Starting point is 02:25:20 He was a bit of an irrelevance. And then Octavian became August. And he was like, I am the first emperor. And he ruled for ages, he ruled for like, you know, like 60 years. Peace time. Yeah, and it was like a very peaceful and prosperous period. And he became the first emperor. And yeah, it's just a fascinating time because it's the transition of how they structured their society from Republic to empire.

Starting point is 02:25:45 And then they had, that was the Roman Empire from then on. And it lasted for quite a while in a good way. But then it did kind of go south later on. But fascinating period. period. I'm not sure too many people understand the distinction there, but it was a very different society, I think, once it became an empire, because, you know, the power was all concentrated in this one guy, this emperor who ruled basically the entire known world, which is an incredible thing to do and so much power. And he had some pretty bad emperors as well that really

Starting point is 02:26:18 abused that power and led to Rome, I guess, eventually collapsed him. But you also had some good on us as well like you have a meditations up in up in your little room next door exactly he was a good one but the brilliance i mean i i i would actually legit read those like once a day and like you're like oh my god bar bar bar like every single thing it's it's it makes you look at yourself and be like fuck he's right fuck he's right like that guy was amazing yes you had some real wise ones like him but then you had some crazy people like colligula the guy that made his horse a senator i I think basically is a massive fuck you to the Senate. And then also Nero, who was a bit of a crazy dude.

Starting point is 02:27:00 And, yeah, a fascinating period of history, ma'am. It's one of those things, like, there was a trend. Maybe this was worldwide. It was in America. So it was probably in the UK, too. There's a trend online a couple years ago where it's like, how often do you think about the Holy Roman hour or whatever? And I remember when it came up, I was like, all the fucking time, actually.

Starting point is 02:27:17 Like, I don't know if that's like a weird thing to say, but I think about it all the time. And there's a defy I always ask for this. and I never have it ready to go, but the map of Europe that shows blood veins from the ancient Roman Empire, it's one of my favorite visuals ever because it basically shows how the cradle of, you know, modern civilization in the developed world all leads to Rome. That's not it, but that's close. It literally, it looks like a human body, but it starts in Rome and then leads out like a bunch of

Starting point is 02:27:52 of veins goes all the way to England and all the way to the east and stretches far and wide. Sorry, I should add it ready. It's like a Twitter. You found it? No, it's a human body. That was close enough. Yeah, I mean, it gets the visual across. If people have seen it on Twitter, like Google all roads lead to Rome veins.

Starting point is 02:28:19 Let's see if that does it. I don't know. crack but like i just i'm a real visual person yep there it is boom all right pull that bad boy over you see what i mean oh yeah it's like it's like a damn it is there it is that's fine that's fine it's it's it's like a a symbol of humanity itself that that was built right there and obviously there's been empire since then it fell and that's a whole story in and of itself. But what we know of like, you know, quote, you have to be careful, I say these days, but like, you know, world order, if you will, kind of emanates from some of the examples that they set.

Starting point is 02:29:02 And also, to be very fair, like there's a lot from ancient Greece to, there's a lot from a lot of different civilizations. It's just this one kind of like amalgamated it, if you know what I mean, altogether. And it's truly incredible to me. Yeah, they kind of were the first to almost unify Europe, I guess. I think that's probably a fair thing to say, which is an incredible achievement at such a time. But obviously it was a really hard thing to maintain because just for obvious reasons. And that's, I guess, eventually why it fell. But they did, they had a good run, mate. They had a good run.

Starting point is 02:29:37 So very interesting civilization. But yeah, they were heavily inspired by the Greeks, I think, heavily inspired. Like they really saw themselves as the inheritors of the Greek legacy and Greek culture. And the Greeks then saw themselves as the inheritors of Egyptian. civilization in many ways and obviously both greece and rome ruled egypt for many many centuries and yes and quite an interesting continuity there they were both pretty obsessed with egypt like it's documented obviously like it became a part of the roman empire at one point and everything too but you know it's they looked at i don't know you could almost extrapolate it by years in history too like they

Starting point is 02:30:15 looked at egypt the way that we look at them yeah in a lot of ways it's kind of like you know the 30,000 foot view of the 30,000 foot view, which is always pretty cool to me. But actually, on that note, we said we're going to do this before the break, so let's get to it. In Egypt, Ben Van Kirkwick, I know has been making waves recently on a bunch of podcasts. I think he went on Joe Rogan and some others as well with like some new information on the pyramids. I have seen absolutely none of it yet. I haven't gotten around to it. So what exactly you were talking about this?

Starting point is 02:30:50 Like, what exactly apparently has been found here and what does it tell us? Yeah, so it's not the Giza Pyramids. It's a different pyramid called Hawara, which is further south in the country. So what Ben has been talking about, and he's done a great job, talk about it. And I would recommend everyone watch his video on his channel and he spoke about on Rogan. So a lot of people would have heard of it. So there's always been this almost tale of the labyrinth of ancient Egypt, the lost labyrinth of ancient Egypt and ancient writers from Greece and Rome wrote about.

Starting point is 02:31:20 it and visited it. So the most, the first example is Herodotus. Have you heard of Herodotus? Greek historian wrote the very famous histories, almost seen as the father of history, the first historian in many ways. He's claimed to have visited the lost labyrinth of ancient Egypt at Hawara, and he said some pretty outlandish things about it. He said it was greater than anything that his people, the Greeks had ever achieved, both in grandeur and an expense, which is quite a mad thing. He also said it surpassed the pyramids of Giza in terms of its achievement. So, you know, the great pyramids of Giza are perhaps the most impressive construction in all of antiquity, right? And they still confuse us to this day. Like, how are they built? Why are they so big? Why are

Starting point is 02:32:06 they so precise? What were they for? They're just massive and they're ridiculously impressive. And he said that this labyrinth surpassed that in grandeur. So it's a more impressive achievement than the Egyptian pyramids, which is a big thing to say. So he went there and he said, you know, all this and said he went in it and like had a detailed description of all of it. But he wasn't the only one. There was also the Greek geographer Strabo, who said he went there, said it was incredibly impressive. There were a few Roman writers like Diodorus Siculus who went there and Pliny the elder who went there. And Pliny the elder made the interesting claim that the labyrinth was constructed over 3,600 years before his time. So I believe he was writing in the

Starting point is 02:32:48 the era of Augustus, as we were just talking about the start of the Roman Empire. So 3,600 years before his time, would put it before the first dynasties of ancient Egypt. So before the Egyptian civilization, dynastic Egypt arose. So that's quite a confusing thing. How are they constructing something that surpasses the pyramids in grandeur before the beginning of Egyptian civilization? That's a pretty crazy thing. So we have all these classical authors that say they visited the labyrinth, say that it was like this incredible construction, but that was it. And then it kind of faded away into obscurity and everyone thought it was just, you know, this legend and these ancient writers were talking about it. So then you fast forward to the modern

Starting point is 02:33:30 day and you get the European explorers visiting Hawara. First notable one, I guess, is Napoleon Bonaparte, you know, the famous French general. He was obsessive ancient Egypt. He loved ancient Egypt. He once spent a night in the King's Chamber of the Great Pyramid and said, we never spoke about it, but apparently he was quite shocked by his experience in there, which is a weird thing, but he spent a night in the King's Chamber, which is pretty crazy. So, yeah, and he brought teams of scientists and scholars to Egypt, and some of them went to Hawara, and they said that they could see some, like, foundations and some ruins at the base of the pyramid there, and that was kind of the first modern identification of the labyrinth's potential

Starting point is 02:34:12 location, but that's kind of all it was. And then you fast forward to some British explorers, like most notably Flindus Petrie, who's the famous British Egyptologist. He was the first one to kind of conduct any serious excavation there. And so he drilled into the pyramid and under the base there. And he came across this kind of base that he assumed was the foundation of the labyrinth that was all that was left of it. And he had this like, he found this, like, he found this massive base and he was like, okay, the labyrinth was here and I found all this left of it, this massive base. So the labyrinth was real. These ancient writers weren't making it up, but it's gone now. You know, there's nothing left of it other than this base. And that kind of

Starting point is 02:34:57 was the theory that for forever, basically, about this labyrinth was that it was real. These writers weren't making it up. Petrie found the base of it. That's the end of the story, right? And that was was the case forever. In recent years, in the 21st century, a couple of independent researchers have thought maybe that's not the true, that's not the full extent of the story, right? So there's this interesting expedition in 2008, I believe, called the Matterhart expedition, which was led by a Belgian researcher called Louis de Cordier, and he went to Hawara with the permission of the Council of Antiquities in Egypt, the Egyptian authorities led by Dr. Zahi Hawas, who I'm sure you've heard of.

Starting point is 02:35:40 A few times. Yeah. So they went there and they had the permission of Hawassan, the Egyptian authorities, and basically they tried to conduct some scans using, I think, ground penetrating radar. But what they discovered was not that the labyrinth was gone, but the labyrinth was still there. And they came back with these results that showed these vast subterranean grids beneath the sand of Hawara, completely untouched and still existing. And they wanted to release this, right?

Starting point is 02:36:11 Because obviously that's an incredible find. You found the lost labyrinth of ancient Egypt, this elusive discovery that's been known about since antiquity, but no one's ever found. But apparently, according to Louis de Cordia and his team, Hawass and others weren't, they didn't want to release it. They were like, you can't put this out there. They said it was a national security issue to release this data.

Starting point is 02:36:36 And they basically kept finding themselves getting blocked. And eventually, after years and years of this, they were like, you know, fuck this, I'm putting it out independently. So they released the scan data to the world on a website that he made. At the same time as this, a different team from a company called Merlin Burroughs and a man called Tim Akers also conducted, I think, satellite scans of the area. So Tim Akers was a, he's dead now, but he was an ex-British military satellite scanning specialists. So a legit guy, worked with the British military, knows this stuff. They conducted scans of the same area, and it came back with similar results. There you go, exactly, right on cue.

Starting point is 02:37:18 So they found a similar thing, which is these scans of, you know, vast geometric grids in the right area. Those were identified by Petrie and people with Napoleon. And it appears to look like a vast, you know, labyrinth, still intact, hidden beneath the sand. and combine that with the results from the Matter High Expedition and you start to think, you know, there could be something incredible down here. This could be like the most, you know, shocking and, you know, important discovery in archaeology of our generation, right? If it's true, they also made the interesting claim

Starting point is 02:37:57 that they found an object in there that was shaped like a Tick-Tac and gave off a metallic signature. It's a pretty extraordinary thing to say. That feels a little, shall we say, not earthly, but... Yeah, exactly, especially when you combine it with all the kind of UAP stuff and right. So, I mean, obviously, this is what they're saying. I'm just kind of reporting what they're saying, but this is, you know, this is a serious people saying this.

Starting point is 02:38:23 And they can't really explain, they didn't know what it was. They're just like, yeah, there's this object that's shaped like a tip-tac down there in this labyrinth that's possibly metallic because it gives off a weird signature and to the radar-trained eye, it looks like not stone. It looks, you know, possibly metallic, which is an interesting thing to say. And that's kind of where we are with it, because there's no excavation is allowed there. The Egyptian authorities don't want to do it. There's also the problem of water.

Starting point is 02:38:51 So the whole area is flooded. So in Victorian times, they dug an irrigation canal through the area, basically for agricultural reasons, for local farmers and stuff. and there's like big flooding around the area. And there was always the worry that the labyrinth had been flooded. And if there was anything left, it's, you know, destroyed by water damage and stuff. But these scans seem to suggest that while there's water damage at a certain level, the labyrinth is beneath that level. So the water damage is kind of below, I mean, above the foundation or the roof that Petrie thought

Starting point is 02:39:27 was a foundation actually may be a roof and the water's above that. but the labyrinth below and whatever this tic-tac object which they nicknamed dippy after the skeleton and the natural history museum in london they uh they think that that's still intact and the whatever is in this labyrinth is possibly still preserved since antiquity and that raises you know a whole load of possibilities right like at very least it could be an incredibly important discovery for our understanding of egyptian civilization and egyptian construction and, you know, could be an extremely important discovery just within the mainstream narrative of Egyptology.

Starting point is 02:40:05 And very most, it could be a completely, you know, paradigm-shifting discovery. Like, how is this thing built so long ago? How is it built before the Egyptian dynasties? If plenty of the elder is correct with his date, what the fuck is dippy, this potentially metallic object that's a tick-tac shape? So it's very exciting. That's kind of where the story is at the moment. But they're not allowed to go try to excavate because the government's stopping them.

Starting point is 02:40:28 So you can't even. Yeah. Well, the government, the Egyptian authorities don't really want to. I think probably because of cost rather than any kind of conspiracy that's cover it up kind of thing. I think it would be very expensive to get all the water out. You'd have to, it would have serious implications for local farmers and stuff like that. You'd have to redirect that canal. So it would be a tough thing to do.

Starting point is 02:40:54 But, you know, the archaeological potential of the site is, extremely interesting have they talked at all or is do we even have enough to be able to go off to ask questions about the ability to build it where they did and what i mean by that is when you look like the pyramid of kiza and some of the other pyramids there's there's a lot of evidence to state that like the stone that's used would have had to come from x number of miles away it weighed this much how the fuck could they have even gotten it there would it taken this much time if they even could of physically at the time, is there anything about this that also runs into those problems? Well, yeah, the fact that it's underground. I mean, how do you construct something so sophisticated underground? Because when you start looking at the ancient testimonies with this data and you say, okay, this is real and their descriptions of it are incredible. They're like, I can't remember off the top of my head, but what they say about it is, you know, that it's like this vast maze of these with these huge columns and pillars and like it's a really,

Starting point is 02:41:56 incredible thing. And so I can't remember their quotes off the top of my head, but if people should watch Ben's video or I did a video on it as well and things they say about it, just make it sound like an incredible construction. The fact that it was all done under the earth implies some seriously sophisticated construction techniques, right? Because how do you do that underground if you're, you know, pre-Dynastic Egypt? They're not supposed to have had anywhere close to this kind of level of technology if it really is that old. So certainly a very interesting site. Defe just found what Herodotus wrote about this. I'll read this. for people and this would have been you know between 44 and 425 bc when he was alive the egyptians made

Starting point is 02:42:33 a labyrinth which surpasses even the pyramids it has 12 roofed courts with doors facing each other six face north and six south and two continuous lines all within one outer wall there are also double sets of chambers 3,000 altogether 1500 above and the same number underground we learned through conversation about the labyrinth underground chambers through conversation the Egypt caretakers would by no means show them as they were. They said the burial vaults of the kings who first built this labyrinth and of the sacred crocodiles, the upper we saw for ourselves, and they are creations greater than human. That's a crazy quote.

Starting point is 02:43:12 Yeah, that's like a, I want to put like a Jay-Z after that. The exits of the chambers and the mazy passages hither and thither. Is that say thither? Yeah, hither and thither. Through the courts were an unending marvel to us. Overall, this is a roof made of stone like the walls, and the walls are covered with cut figures, and every court is set around with pillars of white stone

Starting point is 02:43:37 very precisely fitted together. Near the corner with the labyrinth ends stands a pyramid 240 feet high on which great figures are cut. A passage to this has been made underground. So with, I was thinking this when you were saying the underground labyrinth and how, you know, it's underground. That's really hard. Am I thinking about this totally wrong in that they could have, they could have dug like a giant hole and then built from there and then kind of covered it up? Or is that?

Starting point is 02:44:08 Yeah, maybe. But that would have been a pretty sophisticated construction project for a society that was apparently, you know, just coming out. They didn't have any, they didn't have any like, you know, caterpillar fucking cranes and shit. Interesting. Did he say, can we go back to that quote real fast? He said he learned it through conversation, right? We learned through conversation about the labyrinth's underground chambers. Yeah, so he wasn't allowed into the actual underground part of the laboratory.

Starting point is 02:44:35 Right, okay, he says the upper we saw for ourselves. Okay, that makes sense. So he saw the upper and thought that was ridiculous, you know, not even human. And he wasn't even allowed into the potentially more impressive bit, which was the subterranean part. So it's interesting. And then you have, so you have these classical accounts and then they align perfectly with the modern data that shows that there potentially is still elaborate down there. And you think, yo, this is a potentially crazy archaeological discovery that we could make if the, you know, the will is there

Starting point is 02:45:03 to do such a thing if the funding is there. And that's why what Ben does is such important work, because he's bringing this to light. He's bringing this to the masses and, you know. Absolutely. Yeah. It's exciting. Yeah. And Ben does it in like a very calm collected evidence driven kind of like sober way which i really like because i think that it's going to be really important when you try to bridge these divides between you know the academics and people actually trying to uncover some things here you know you're you're the way you say it and the way you present the evidence i think is very important and he's like to me like i remember when he first went on danny jones podcast like he's

Starting point is 02:45:45 he's just he's a cool customer and and i think i think that's great and it's another guy by the way who was like inspired by other people that came before him to like get into this he was he was a normal dude and really started studying it and you know has made some amazing certainly some amazing claims and i would say some some pretty impressive discoveries about what we don't know down there that's now you know it's cool to see like jo rogan bring that to the mainstream so that people can hear about it. But, you know, I had Luke in here, November 2024. We didn't put out the episodes until the end of January and then beginning of February. We did it, we did a couple episodes that, you know, one recording where it basically turned into the 27,000 year history of Egypt. And when

Starting point is 02:46:30 you start to really, when you start to really, I think I'd literally call it like 20,000 year history of Egypt, part one and then part two is really amazing stuff. But when you start to like actually go through the full length of what we know and then they inject in the pyramids like kind of out of nowhere and i'm going to fuck up the years so i'm not going to try to be exact with the years but then talk about like how quickly they could have made some of these structures we already mentioned how difficult it would be to get some of the stone from the river all the way to where the pyramid is and everything it's like you don't need to run right away to like oh the aliens did it or something like that. But what other, outside of that, like, what other explanations are

Starting point is 02:47:12 there for something like the Pyramid of Giza being able to build in the time period and, you know, the length of time it took to actually build it to what it was built into? I mean, I would argue that the conventional explanation for the construction of the entire Giza plateau doesn't really make sense. Like, according to the conventional argument, the Giza pyramid was constructed in at most 20 years. I think, which is ridiculous. And then if you do the maths of like how many stones there are, it's something like they had to, I can't remember the exact maths,

Starting point is 02:47:42 but it's crazy like they had to place a stone like every three minutes for 24 hours a day for that entire 20 year period and like, to quarry the stone, transport the stone, lift the stone, precisely place the stone, like every four minutes for 24 hours a day. I'm not sure that's the correct maths, but it's something like that. There was an AI video last year that showed a bunch of giants lifting the stone. I thought that made a lot of sense. Something like that, I'm sure.

Starting point is 02:48:09 But, I mean, yes, it doesn't make sense. And then if you extrapolate out to the entire Giza Plateau, like according to the conventional explanation, it was all constructed within the reins of a couple of pharaohs over like a 60, 70 year period. And it's like, really? Because they had to level the whole thing flat, right? Which is a ridiculous thing on itself.

Starting point is 02:48:28 And then build the three pyramids and the sphinx. And yeah, it's very odd. And then there's the whole question about the data. of the sphinx and the water erosion hypothesis which is really interesting and yeah you want to dig into that a little bit i've talked about that with matt lecroy and and luke in the past a bunch but yeah some of the pictures there yeah i mean it looks like water erosion right but the paradox there is that there was no rainfall in egypt since the time of the green sahara which was you know a lot earlier or at least the level of rainfall would have been a lot earlier which suggests that the

Starting point is 02:49:04 Sphinx is a lot older because of what's how would that weathering occur in the conventional explanation isn't that? It's just wind and sand, but I don't know. It doesn't really look like wind and sand. Obviously, I'm not geologists, but there are geologists who have looked at it like Dr. Robert Schock and they say that is water erosion. That's clear signs of water erosion. And then there's also the fact that the Sphinx was buried by sand for like the vast majority of like when Napoleon discovered it and other people discovered it, it was buried in sand. Even the Egyptians excavated the sphinx when it was covered in sand. So if it was covered in sand, then how did the wind and sand erode it when it was covered in sand? I've never really

Starting point is 02:49:42 seen a explanation for that either. Isn't that the one where there's like a secret entrance that's blocked off to, or a couple of them? What's underneath the sphinx? I think there's one like up top too. That's what we say. I hope I'm remembering that, right? There was a picture we looked at. I want to say that was episode 115. with Matt LaCroix do 153 and 154 with him. I feel like there was a picture towards the end of that first podcast that we looked at

Starting point is 02:50:08 maybe actually maybe I'm mixing some things together but maybe it's like a picture where Zahi Huas is standing outside of it or something. But there's like a picture I'm seeing it in my head towards the top of the sphinx where there's like a manhole and you can't go there.

Starting point is 02:50:26 Oh yeah. Can you Google aerial shot Sphinx entrance let's try that I might be misremembering this

Starting point is 02:50:38 go refer to episode 153 I remember Matt talked about this and had some images might be that first one I want to say that's it but I also don't want to say for sure

Starting point is 02:50:58 I don't know Refer to episode 153 but there's something weird there where they won't let people in certain areas and again like you know it could be like an explanation

Starting point is 02:51:11 like the other thing we're talking about where they're like oh it'd be too much money or shit's got to get moved or there's too much water whatever it might be but it's also not a good look because it makes you look like

Starting point is 02:51:24 you're hiding something or it makes you look like something's going to be different and I don't know. Maybe I'm looking at this way too simply, but I've always thought, like, if there's more insane history at a place, that's a lot more tourist dollars that are going to come into your economy. If you can prove something like that, so why wouldn't you? I mean, maybe I'm thinking too much dollars and cents, but you think so, wouldn't you? You think the more mystery,

Starting point is 02:51:48 well, maybe it's the opposite. Maybe the more mystery, the better, right? Maybe they don't want to rule it out. So people keep coming back. I don't know. I don't know. But yeah, there's so much mystery in Egypt, so much mystery at Giza. And hopefully, as, you know, the generations go past, there's that quote from Max Planck, the physicist, like science advances one funeral at a time. Yeah, no, that's good. I've heard that one before. Once the old generation die off, you know, maybe these things will change, but we'll see. We shall see. Do you believe Atlantis existed? I believe Atlantis is a very interesting story. story in relation to the wider flood myth. So I don't necessarily, I mean, I wouldn't rule

Starting point is 02:52:34 it out, but I don't necessarily say it existed. But I think in conjunction with the flood myth, which is, you know, a consistent story across cultures all across the world, Atlantis is yet another one of them, yet another famous story of a flood wiping everything out, which, you know, so many cultures across the world have that story. And it's interesting because Plato puts the date of Atlantis, you know, as many people have said, right, during the Young Dryas, right? He says it's, God, forgotten, he says, he says it's 9,000 years before his time, I think. Either way, he says it's, again, if you do the calculations, it's during the Younger Dryas, which is interesting. I wouldn't rule out Atlantis existing,

Starting point is 02:53:15 but that would then be the lost civilization, right? So, yeah. You can't say there's evidence of it, but it's an interesting story for sure. What do you think of Jimmy Corsetti's richart struck i always pronounce that wrong rechart reshot yeah reshot structure theory it's a good it's i really like how he does it i really like the videos i've watched the videos on it um it's really interesting because you know it matches up in so many ways to play it's description right um but i don't again is there any evidence or is it just a good way of putting the story together you know yeah but it's fun i i really enjoy his videos i really enjoy the way he does it and i wouldn't rule it out but i don't sure you can say that that definitely is atlantis right but yeah i'd like to think something like that

Starting point is 02:54:01 existed and obviously like there's a lot of writings in ancient greece among some of the philosophers where they refer to it i wonder sometimes though if it's really like some of the you know clearly not true stories from the bible think of like a dude being swallowed by a whale and then you know living there and being spit out stuff like that was that job yeah yeah yeah yeah but like i wonder if it's something like that that's more supposed to be a mirror for ourselves as civilization to look in and aspire to be rather than something that's real. Whereas it seems like there's significant evidence for something like an El Dorado that exists based on written history and what would make sense over there. But Atlantis, it's like they don't even know. It could be here. It could

Starting point is 02:54:44 be there. It could be there. It could be this. It could be that. You know, it's all over the place. So I don't know, but that's one I always, like, that's one of my favorite ones to kind of riff on because it's like it could be a lot of things. Yeah, well, I mean, the conventional idea is that Plato was just, you know, creating an allegory to talk about his own civilization, right? But that doesn't mean there's no truth behind it. And Plato isn't the one who came up with the idea. He got it from Solon, who was, he was passed down through his family from Solon to Plato. And Solon got it from Egypt, right? and Egypt's this mysterious place.

Starting point is 02:55:17 And apparently these Egyptian priests were telling him about this civilization that existed and was wiped out in a single day and night. You know, it's an interesting story. It certainly is. Are you working on any cool videos right now on some places around the world? Yeah, I mean, I've got a few in the pipeline. Where are you looking? I've just done a video that's not come out yet,

Starting point is 02:55:39 which is about this genetic bottleneck we see. It'll be out by the time this episode comes out, but this genetic bottleneck we see in the late Neolithic, so around 5,000 to 7,000 years ago, where basically 95% of men were whites out, but no women, which is really interesting, because we see this massive bottleneck in the Y chromosome, which is the line that was passed down from father to son. Lucky is 5% of all time. Yeah, but that's who we're all descended from, right? Because they're the survivors of what the conventional explanation is was a massive, like, cultural revival. violence in the late Neolithic of basically mass prehistoric war where all the men were going around killing everyone else and taking the women, right? So there's no bottleneck in the mitochondrial DNA, which is the mother.

Starting point is 02:56:27 But 95% of the men were wiped out in this period. Where's the evidence that they found this? It's in genetics. It's in our genes. Oh, that's it. So they're just looking at our genes saying, oh, that had to be at that period right there. Yeah. And you can see the bottleneck.

Starting point is 02:56:42 And it happened. And then we literally drop right down to 5%, 95% of men were wiped out in this period. But the females were unconnected. And then you aligned it with archaeological finds, and there's all these, like, massive pits of bodies with weapon wounds and horrible injuries and people being slaughtered. And it's quite an interesting period. Yeah.

Starting point is 02:57:03 I haven't heard that. Can we Google this? Genetic bottleneck, 95% of men exterminated. What, 5,000 and 7,000 years ago, you said? I think so, yeah, yeah. That's also like a wide range, too, so it happened over time. Yeah, but it's across all of Asia, Africa and Europe. So like the whole of the world except for the Americas.

Starting point is 02:57:27 How large was the population of Homo sapiens at the time approximately? Not sure off the top of my head, but it was getting big because this was after the agricultural revolution, right? And that's the theory of what it is, is that we apparently settled down and, yeah, there you go. There we go. We settled down and we had something to fight for. We had like property rights for the first, potentially for the first time in history. Yeah. Okay.

Starting point is 02:57:53 So the forgotten prehistoric war that killed 95% of all men, how a brutal conflict 7,000 years ago left only one in 20 men alive. Within every single one of us lies a biological time capsule, 3.16 billion base pairs of DNA. These strands don't just dictate eye color or height. They hide dark twisted secrets from humanity's past. of the most chilling. A forgotten prehistoric war so catastrophic and nearly wiped out men entirely, leaving women outnumbering them 17 to 1. This wasn't a minor skirmish or a regional feud. It was a global slaughter spanning continents, reshaping our genetic code and burying

Starting point is 02:58:27 evidence of its horrors and mass graves until now. The story begins with the genetic mystery. Researchers analyzing modern human genomes stumbled upon a shocking anomaly, a drastic bottleneck and male genetic diversity dating back roughly 7,000 years. During the Neolithic period, the effective male population across Africa, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East collapsed by up to 95%. Imagine a world where 3.9 billion men vanished overnight, leaving only 200 million survivors. This wasn't a plague, famine, or natural disaster. The culprit was far more sinister, unbridled systematic violence. While mitochondrial DNA passed down through mothers showed stable diversity, why chromosomes passed from father or son revealed a near-apocalyptic drop.

Starting point is 02:59:08 nature doesn't discriminate by gender when wiping out populations volcanoes don't target men storms don't spare women this oh wow okay so that makes a ton of sense this was a human-made catastrophe a coordinated eradication of males so extreme it left scars in our genes but where are the bodies turns out they're everywhere over 250 late neolithic massacre sites have been uncovered in europe alone skeletons tell gruesome tail tails skulls shattered by axes arrow heads and embedded in ribs bones stripped of flesh at the all right yeah click to read the full story but that actually that last part answered a question i was going to ask are there i was going to say like even in other parts of history are there biological diseases and things that could discriminate by gender do we

Starting point is 02:59:56 know of any examples of that i think so no not that i know of anyway i mean that evidence of like they found the sites of massacres with skulls bashed in and stuff obviously points paints the picture that's crazy 95% overnight. Yeah, that's crazy. Not overnight, but yeah. You know what I mean. Over time right there.

Starting point is 03:00:17 Yeah, yeah, yeah. They're just dwindling down over and over again. Yeah, we almost wiped ourselves out there. And we're all descended from the winners, the most terrifically violent of them. That's who we all come from. Survive all the fittest. And this was quite recent. This was, you know, 7,000 years ago, which is recent when you look at the story of us.

Starting point is 03:00:38 after a go blackie go beckley teppy mm-hmm yeah we're just savagely killing each other what else you're working on right now i can't remember i haven't i haven't like obviously i've been in america for a little while so i haven't actually done too much but that's one that's coming out um to know man i've got a whole list but i can't remember off the top of my head but all right all good all the historical mysteries you know i'm coming from the wall that's what i'm saying everyone's got to check out your channel because you cover, I mean, you cover in every part of the globe and it's only going to get bigger and bigger. So it's awesome to see what you're doing, bro. It's great to have you here in America, too, to hop on.

Starting point is 03:01:15 You're going to have to do this again. You got to start coming to America a little more, too. Mate, I'd love to. And I'm really grateful for you to invite me on. It's been an awesome, an awesome chat and an awesome experience to come out to your beautiful country. So, yeah, very grateful. Excellent. All right, brother, we'll do it again sometime.

Starting point is 03:01:29 Thanks, Julian. All right. Everybody else, you know what it is. Give it a thought. Get back to me. Peace. Thank you guys for watching the episode. If you haven't already, please hit that subscribe button and smash that like button on the video.

Starting point is 03:01:40 They're both a huge, huge help. And if you would like to follow me on Instagram and X, those links are in my description below.

Julian Dorey Podcast - #367 - "Groundbreaking!" - 1 Million Yr-old Skulls, Egyptian Labyrinth & Ancient DNA | Michael Button

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.