The Joe Rogan Experience - #2374 - Ben van Kerkwyk

Episode Date: September 3, 2025

Ben van Kerkwyk is an independent researcher exploring ancient mysteries. www.youtube.com/@unchartedxwww.unchartedx.com Try ZipRecruiter FOR FREE at https://ziprecruiter.com/rogan Don’t miss out on all the action - Download the DraftKings app today! Sign-up at https://dkng.co/rogan or with my promo code ROGAN. GAMBLING PROBLEM? CALL 1-800-GAMBLER, [phone] or visit gamblinghelplinema.org (MA). Call 877-8-HOPENY/text HOPENY (467369) (NY). Please Gamble Responsibly. 888-789-7777/visit ccpg.org (CT), or visit www.mdgamblinghelp.org (MD). 21+ and present in most states. (18+ DC/KY/NH/WY). Void in ONT/OR/NH. Eligibility restrictions apply. On behalf of Boot Hill Casino & Resort (KS). 1 per new DraftKings customer. $5+ first-time bet req. Get 1 promo code to redeem discounted NFL Sunday Ticket subscription and max. $300 issued as non-withdrawable Bonus Bets that expire in 7 days (168 hours). Stake removed from payout. Terms: sportsbook.draftkings.com/promos. NFL Sunday Ticket: YouTube TV base plan (not included in this offer) required to watch NFL Sunday Ticket on YouTube TV. Subscription autorenews yearly at then-current price (currently $378 for YouTube TV subscribers, or $480 for YouTube subscribers) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Joe Rogan podcast checking out The Joe Rogan Experience Train by day Joe Rogan podcast by night All day Ben so excited to talk to you man I have been so looking forward to this Since I saw your video on the Labyrinthus in Egypt Spoiler alert

There appears to be a 40 meter long metallic tick-tac shaped object How deep into the ground? It's in that, so it's in the central atrium, which we'll get into what that is, but somewhere in the realm of 60, 70 meters. So, man, what's that in feet? Like 200 feet, 150 to 180 feet down, something like that. So for anybody who's interested, what is the name of that video that you put out? I think it's the ancient structure like it's said to be greater than the pyramids.

I try to tease it a little bit, but it's on that. It's on my channel. Well, it was a good tease. You got me. Thank you. I dove right in. And I remember, I was in the gym when I was watching it, and I literally stopped working out. I was like, okay, I've got to pause this because this is not something that I can consume why I'm working out.

I need to, like, really pay attention to this because it's so wild. Yeah, and I honestly, I'm grateful for how, like, that video took off. Like, for me, it took off way bigger than ones that I've done in the past. I talked about the labyrinth in the past, and it's a much longer video. And I was really glad to get the chance to dive into these details because I've been wanting to revisit the labyrinth. labyrinth for a long time. However, there's just been recently a bunch of new data that came up about things that happened a decade or two ago, or inside the last decade, that really changed that picture. And it was things like the Merlin Borough scans that correlated other scans and

also reported on, yeah, there seems to be a metallic object down there. And this isn't, you know, this isn't sort of crazy emerging science. This is a legitimate company that is using technology that's been well established in defense. And in the UK defense, it came out of the UK military as a technology that's been more or less proven. And the guy that Tim Acres, rest in peace, unfortunately, he's since passed. But he, you know, what he said about this object, like he's, he is a credible guy to say this. He doesn't draw conclusions about what it might be, but it's definitely, it's not wood, it's not stone. It's metal. It's not unlike other metal that he's seen, although he couldn't classify what exact type of metal it is, but he said,

yeah, there is a, in this central atrium, because the labyrinth has multiple levels, and it's almost like you're, imagine yourself standing in a shopping mall, and you have that central atrium where you can see all these levels, and it's like this big central chamber that connects to these multiple levels that's open. It's at least 40 meters long. It's really tall. And in the center of it is what's more than 40, because it contains this single sort of 40 piece, 40 meter long object that's sitting in there So how did you find out about the labyrinthus?

Like this is something that has been talked about for a long time. Thousands of years. Yeah. But no one it's not in any like traditional archaeology books. It's not some... Is it? Yeah, yeah. No, it is. So the labyrinth

is kind of that this is the other part that drew me to it is that it isn't something that's coming out of left field, right? It's not like this. No one ever heard of this before. It's literally a structure that was written about extensively over hundreds of years in antiquity by authors like Herodotus, Deodorus Siculus, Pliny the Elder, Strabo, Polonius Mello. Like there's all of these writers of antiquity, and you're talking about time frames from like 500 BC up to the first century AD,

had visited it, and they'd written about it and talked about it. And they gave it this legend. Guys like Herodotus said that it surpasses the pyramids in grandeur. And then you have, yeah, so this is from Herodotus's histories in the 5th century BC. And he says, for this, I saw myself, and I found it greater than words can say, for if one should put together and reckon up all the buildings and all of the great works produced by the Hellenians, the Greeks, the Greeks, they would prove to be inferior in labor and expense to this labyrinth. So he's saying that all of the temples of the Greeks of ancient Greece, you've been there,

you've seen the Eccropolis, and just if you added them all up, the labor to produce them would be inferior in, what it would take to just make this one thing in Egypt, the labyrinth. That is underground. That's underground, right. How do conventional archaeologists approach this? Do they discuss this at all? Yes, they do.

It's been, basically, what happened was, so you had, they always, we always kind of knew where it was. So, you know, you have the classical authors of antiquity, which coincides with what you might call the Ptolemaic period of ancient Egypt. It's a transition from, like, dynastic Egypt into becoming essentially a, Roman province, like an imperial province of Rome. And that runs you up to about four or five hundred AD. And then civilization, we have the dark ages, sort of have Roman Empire collapses. And it's not until again you get to the renaissance and you have artists and other authors are looking at these

historical accounts and they're talking about it. They're drawing it. Some of the depictions you see from the labyrinth are in that. And then again, not until the emergence of what I would call modern archaeology in the 18th century. So guys like Carl Lepseus, in the 1700 started to look at these accounts and go and survey the place where they said it was. So, you know, Herodotus and these authors, I selected the quotes here to just, there's a lot more that they say about it. But one of the things they talk about is they kind of give descriptions of where it is. They say it's near what was called Lake Moiris, and it's near a city that was the temple of the crocodiles, Crocodilopolis or ancient Arsenao is the other name for. And we know

where that is. And Lake Moiris sort of somewhat still exists. It's much smaller now, but it's in this region called the Fium of Egypt. So if you ever look at Egypt on a map, you can imagine it's desert and you have from north to south, you have this green line of the Nile, traces it down. But on the left side, you look at there's this leaf-shaped depression that's all green. It's called the Fium. It's a depression which used to flood with the Nile. Today they use it for agriculture. And it's right at that neck of the Fium, where it connects up to the Nile Valley. And he also described it, described the pyramid that's at the site because there is the pyramid to Ammanemap the third on that site. So they give us all these descriptors and everyone kind of agreed, yeah, so it's

at this place called Hawara. Where I've been to several times, there's still a pyramid there and there and there's just great fields of sand and like little open air libraries with chunks of stone. And what happened was so Carl Lepseus went there and he said, well, I've discovered the ruins of like a Roman town that's built on the surface. There's nothing crazy about it. Flinders Petrie was the guy who kind of got the closest. Now Petrie went there in the late 1800s and early 1900s, and he was excavating. He dug down seven or eight he got down and he found this massive stone slab of betton or plaster that was huge, like a thousand feet long. He sort of traced the edges of it. He's like, I'm standing on the foundation

of the labyrinth. So what he said is like, it's all gone. Like it's basically Petrie said it's been quarried. This place has been a source of stone for literally millennia. So it's gone. So pretty much everyone since then in archaeology, Egyptology is like, and if you look on Wikipedia, they'll tell you, oh, it's gone. It was destroyed, was quarried away. Petri says, you know, I'm standing on the foundation of it, the bottom layer, and that's it. There's nothing here. And so that's always been kind of the position of orthodox Egyptology, look in the textbooks. That's where it is.

But that's all changed because there's been a whole bunch of different now scientific expeditions there. This is where it gets into some intrigue because the matter. Haar Expedition, the Kara University expedition. I mean, these happened. Their results have come out since, but they were covered up at the time. They were suppressed. So the first guy to real... What year was this?

2008 was the Matterhire expedition. They were covered up. Yes. This episode is brought to you by ZipRecruiter. The hiring process can be absurdly time consuming. Like when you're looking for a new doctor, you spend hours searching, when you finally feel like you found the right one. It turns out they're not accepting new patients.

The same thing happens when you're hiring. You scan through hundreds of resumes, you find one you like, only discover they aren't actively looking for a job. Well, good news for all you hiring managers out there. Your search looks a little less frustrating now thanks to ZipRecruiter. And bonus, you can try it for free at ZipRecruiter.com slash Rogan. ZipRecruiter has added new tools and features to help speed up the hiring process and save you valuable time. They can easily connect you with qualified candidates in minutes. They also have a wide pool of talent to choose from, and it's continuously growing.

Over 320,000 resumes are added monthly, so you can reach more potential hires. Use ZipRecruiter and save time hiring. Four out of five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the first day. And if you go to ZipRecruiter.com slash Rogan right now, you can try it. for free. Again, that's zipRecruiter.com slash Rogan. ZipRecruiter, the smartest way to hire. Yeah. So what? Is this our boy, Zawi? Yeah, Zahi, it is. Zahi. Sorry. It was. And again, not my words. This is the words of Lewis DeCordier, who is he's a Belgian artist and entrepreneur who funded and drove the Madahar expedition. He did it in conjunction with the Supreme

Council of Antiquities, which at the time was helmed by Zahi Hawas. Also with the NRAG, which is the National Research Institute for like, like basically subsurface study. So that's those guys dragging that box around. So they used a whole bunch of different techniques to look at these areas around that pyramid at the side of Hauara, things like ground penetrating radar, geomagnetism, very low frequency, like seismic tomography, electrical resistivity tomography. There's a bunch of different techniques that are well established. Known sciences isn't like the cuff rescans stuff where it's like you can debate the

merits of the technology. this is established technology and they found the labyrinth so and what he found was is that yes so what lepsias said about the ruins of a roman or greek or persian town with mud bricks and stuff yep that's there in the first few meters you go down then you hit the water table so that there's the other issue on this side is the water table so the water is it like five meters below the surface and under that is the slab that petri found so like six seven meters is at that that huge slab that petri found that he thought was the foundation and then below that Petrie didn't dig deep enough. Below that we can find essentially a labyrinthian structure of granite and very very dense rocks and walls and like a maze like structure

that's that's that has walls that are meters thick there's another great slide in there that's that's the green and it's the actual VLF right that's it there so yeah so this is eight meters with VLF sounding so you can see like this labyrinthian structure of these walls and all of these lines and walls. These are like granite. And the scale of this, it's 100 meters vertically by 150 meters. 100 meters tall. Well, no, so it's vertically? No, no. So the y-axis, I guess, of this. So we're looking down in the ground here. But you've got to look at the scale. Like across the top, that's 150 meters, right? So, I mean, what, 450 feet? So these are big walls. So it's big chambers and big walls. For people at home, it's like a football field. Yeah, it's a football field.

Well, it's more. I mean, 100 meters. In Australia, so my 100 meters is. the football to think. I don't know how big. It's pretty close here. Yeah, well it's 100 yards. What is the difference 100 yards and 100 meters?

100 yards is a little less. A little less. So 150 meters and this is only a section of the labyrinth. They scan two sections. The labyrinth itself is said to be much, much larger than this.

So they found... Much larger than that. Oh, that's huge. Yeah, no. It extends... So what is the overall structure? Like, how... It's like a thousand feet at least.

Wow. Like three, four, five times that size. I mean, you have to go back to the, we have some better indication with the more modern space-based scans now, but when they did those, the geophysical, like the ground penetrating radar scan, so they scanned two areas. That was the bigger one, like in front of the pyramid, then they did another one on the other side of the canal that runs through the site today, and they found it on both sides. So that's the difference between, like, what we say about the lab, like what the textbooks will tell you about the labyrinth,

it not being there and it being destroyed to, no. We've actually, now there's been the Madahar expedition, confirmed it was there. And they, so what happened, this was interesting. And I have, I have, I think, reasoning for why this happened, but it was covered up. And these are the words like Lewis de Cordier, he eventually got sick of waiting because what happens in Egypt, anything you do, whether it's you're an academic institution or you're an individual or a group that's funding some sort of expedition. You work with the Council of Antiquities today.

It's the Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities. But they essentially, you know, it takes years to get access. And then once you do, though, they control release of information. So that's always part of the deal, right? It's that Egypt gets to do the announcing and if and when they choose. And they have dismissed things in the past that they then accepted later. Yeah, a great example is, honestly, the scan pyramid project. So when, so they got ahead of themselves a little bit.

This is the muon detection, the cosmic ray detection stuff. They've been running that experiment for years at Gieser in the Great Pyramid. And every time I go in there, there's always different sets of equipment at different places on it. But these muon detectors, they have them under the ground and in the grand gallery, and it just takes years to collect data. Occasionally these cosmic particles, they'll pick one up, and you're able to detect voids, or they can somehow tell the difference between it traveling through solid matter versus a void. It takes years to build up a resolute picture.

But once they did, they said, oh, okay, so we've discovered. that big void in the pyramid, but they'd also discovered the small void at the main entrance. If you look up at it today, there's those Chevron blocks, like above, you go in down here at the Alma Moon's tunnel, but at the top where the descending passage actually exits the pyramid, the original entrance, there's this big Chevron blocks, and behind that's that chamber. So you remember a few years ago, they made a big fuss. But as an example, like when the Scan Pyramids guys, on their own initiative announced that we've made these discoveries, I mean, Zahi basically came.

out and said, this is bullshit, this doesn't exist, there's nothing there, and if there is something there, we knew about it already. And you go on a couple of years, and now it's time to do the press releases and to roll out the footage, who's standing at the podium making the announcement and showing the, Zah, he's doing it. He has to. Yeah. Yeah. Fascinating situation over there with him. Yes. I did a video, I just released it a few days ago that got into some even more intrigue about stuff that's happened at Giza in the in the in the in the in the in the in the Giza plateau in the 1990s which we can we can get into that too but so yeah what happened with the

Madahar expedition and the labyrinth was that 2008 and 9 they finished their um their on site work they're ready to release the data they they put on a very small public lecture at Ghent university in Belgium no one really attended it and then they got told to start and again in the words of Louis de Cordier because he waited like two or three years and then he put this out there he said that he was told to cease any and all discussion or release of information from the Madaha project and him and his team members were threatened with national security sanctions from Egypt, which means that, you know, I think at the low, like if you come to Egypt, we'll arrest you and if not, when maybe we'll come

and get you, I don't know. It's this is national security sanctions. Isn't there a way to sort of massage that situation and to talk to Zai and say, listen, you can be the guy who found this? Oh, that would have been the K. I think that was a given if it had been released. I actually think in the case. So it's funny. I kind of don't really blame him so much. I think this was a political decision, not a, not so. And people say, oh, it's hiding the truth and whatever. Yeah, okay, that's happening. There's new data. There's an amazing, amazing find that could change the world. In my opinion, honestly, the labyrinth is the biggest archaeological discovery of the millennium. When we get into what that structure is and how big it is and the way it's

reported in antiquity, there's nothing bigger than they. Herodotus says it surpasses the pyramids. like finding more geese like a geese plateau somewhere like under the ground under the ground like you can't i just think it would be the biggest discovery of the millennium which is part of the problem because i think unfortunately in egypt and this is just my um intuition in my sort of read of the situation what's happened is that the the reality is is the groundwater level is rising right so it's it's kind of attacking that part of the site at least the higher levels of the labyrinth for sure are suffering in this salted groundwater right it is going to slowly a road because that groundwater's come way up. We know it's come way up because Flinders Petrie

back in the late 18th, early 19th century, actually got in to under the pyramid. And you can't, today, if you go to that pyramid, there is a passage you can go down, you go down a few steps and just throw a pebble, it's just water and debris and mud. So this water table has risen slowly over? No, since the 1960s, since they built the dam. So it's the high dam. So what happened, it's, this is the problem, right? So you've got all these factors. It's where it is, so it's Hawaii, the neck to the foam. Now, Egypt, I love Egypt. I go to Egypt a couple times a year every year.

And fantastic place, but they are one of, like, they're food poor in terms of, like, they're the net biggest importer of wheat. They need all the agriculture they can get. The fium is a huge agricultural area. There's a huge irrigation canal called the Barwabi Canal that's been cut in there in, like, the 1840. Same guy built the Suez Canal made it, cuts it in there. So you've got this situation of like, all right, we've got,

all this agriculture happening. We've got farmers water rights messing with this, and it happens to be running through this ancient site that could be the biggest discovery of our time. And it's happening because we built a dam on the Nile. And what happened with the high dam in the 60s, like there's a low dam the British built in like 1901, 1902, then they actually partnered with the Soviet Union to build this high dam. There's actually still a monument to Egyptian Soviet Union friendship at the dam. It's pretty cool. But when they built it, that high dam, it essentially stops that yearly cycle of inundation of the Nile. So everyone, you know, we always talk about the Nile flooding, right? Every year that rains in Africa in the

south, you get this huge flood that comes up the Nile and it floods out and you get this deposit of, you know, black mud and real fertile ground and they would use that to farm. And they built the dam, you get rid of that yearly cycle, right? And what happens, people, it seems counterintuitive because people like, well, it's less water in the, the Nile. No, what the dam did was eliminate the nine-month dry season. So you had the three-month wet season, but then you don't have that nine-month dry season now. So you have essentially more water for more time in the Nile, which is having this effect of rising the water table. So you combine that with the size of Hauara and the project, the scope of the project to try and

remediate and save or excavate start working at the labyrinth. I mean, you're talking like millions and millions. It's not an easy problem to solve on an area that size to try and get the water out, divert the farmer's water, deal with all of those problems. You know, and then, so what I think the options Zahue might have been left with here is like, well, it's either going to cost us an absolute bomb to try and do this for like, we don't know what sort of gain. It'll probably be a decade before that place is suitable for tourism. There's not much to see there even now. or we basically say we've discovered it, but we're not going to do anything about it because it's too expensive, and you're going to face a lot of international criticism for that.

So I think that the decision was likely made, in my opinion, complete speculation, that it's just easy to brush us under the table. This never happened. We never discovered this. This doesn't exist. Let's just go on selling tickets on the Giza Plateau and pumping water out to the fine in for agriculture. God. How short-sighted. Now, when you were saying millions, were you just going to say dollars, or were you going to say,

gallons of water? No, dollars. I mean, I think the project, the remediation project at Hawara would not be a, it's not a simple thing. In fact, they did do, it was another expedition after the Madahar expedition in like this was 2009, Cairo University, along with a Polish university went out there to try and figure out what is the deal with the groundwater. Where's it coming from? You know, like what direction? They were doing, they were doing geological test pits and all these boreholes to figure out the water situation. According to them, that information was also covered up because they also did ground penetrating radar surveys, also confirmed the labyrinth. The guy who was in charge of that in Cairo University was actually put in jail by, again, this is on their report when the information finally came out in 2017.

He lost his job, obviously, as part of it. So they covered that up too, but they had tried to. Put him in jail for what? I guess for working on the site. Like, I don't know. I don't know the reason it's on their report, though. That's what they say, is that he was jailed. because the he or Zahy allegedly halted the project and then put the guy in jail.

This is what they say on the report from that expeditional, that work, which came out like a decade after they'd done it. And I dig it up on the internet. I'm like, well, this is interesting because their results are interesting. But they, even after their work, their conclusion was, well, the water is a very complicated problem. It's coming from a couple different directions. Northeast is the shallow. It's like it's coming in from this way. but it's also coming from another direction.

They'd have to dig a lot more test holes in a wider area to really figure it out. And I think you'd have to start digging like remediation wells, put in pumps and just try and pump that down. If not canal and trench that whole thing out, like a massive site. And then you can start to worry about, all right, we're going to get some dirt out and start to excavate. Could it be done without interrupting the farmers? Probably. Yeah, I mean, I think we could do it.

I think that you can divert and move the bar-wabi canal out of the way. way if you had to. Someone needs to holler at Jeff Bezos. Oh, Oreo on. Someone, yeah, someone with some deep pockets.

Yeah. Don't you want to know? You want to know? I want to know. Yeah. Well, the crazy thing is, too, is that according to the, because the story doesn't end there, like when you get into the modern space-based scans, Melan Barrows and the G-Scan stuff, and I know that also, I've met the guys from the

Kaffray project, they are going to scan that site. We talked to them about it recently in the Cosmic Summit. And then, uh, I think, you know the lower what they're saying so far is that the lower levels like because this thing goes down like i said to nearly 100 meters there's there's reported like levels down to 300 feet under the ground and and it seems like they might be free of water so it's just it's just like shallow ground water and once you get into the bedrock and it's like it's like it's not a porous stone or whatever's underneath just the the top level sediment it seems like it you know

tim acres said it looks like it's free of water so the very bottom layers seem to be free of it. So the actual labyrinth, very bottom layers. The labyrinth is multiple levels, at least. But is it possible that they could somehow or another from the side, dig a tunnel below everything and below the water? Yeah, you'd have to dig a deep tunnel. You could, I mean, that's also an option, is to try.

If you actually believe, and you go with these scans, you know where that atrium is, we could probably try and get down there and just line a tunnel somehow and get down. That would be epic if we did that in our lifetime. I would love to see it. Like, it'd be incredible. It seems like a terrible travesty if they don't. I agree, which is the reason I made that video in the first place.

I wanted to draw attention to the labyrinth because it's just, I think it is like the biggest opportunity for us. In terms of massive discoveries in the ancient world, I can't think of anything that's bigger than the, I know the cuffray scan stuff is super interesting and the claims are wild and it's, but this is like known about, like this has been talked about and then it's been confirmed with multiple scans. You had Madahar Expedition, you had Cairo University, and I think it was like Rochlor, I'm butchering that, the Polish University. Then you had geoscan team, which was Klaus Dona, a friend of his who ran this German geoscan space-based satellite thing.

It's like a mathematical, statistical, they kind of use it to determine the elemental composition of stars is the best explanation I have. However, they have a track record of being able to find things like water and oil and gold under the ground. So they've been using that as a company for people to go basically survey and then go dig and they've done three or four of these and then. Okay, this is where you said it was. They scanned the labyrinth. They were the first space-based scan to come out and talk about it. Then you had Merlin Burroughs, which is this ex-UK military technology that's very similar in technique to the cuffray scan guys. So they use synthetic aperture radar or Doppler tomography.

These guys are using like high frequency orbital imaging with seismic data. So it's very similar in the way they're in that you're essentially the description I was told is it's like imagine dropping pebbles into a container of water. And if you could instantly freeze that container and lift it out and shine a light from underneath it. When you look at it on the top, you can you can see those ripples in three dimensions, but you're looking at it on a 2D scan kind of thing. And you can interpret them to show you the topography of whatever. is in that three-dimensional space. It's something similar to that. Isn't technology fucking awesome?

Dude, it is. It's so awesome. It's wild. It's so awesome that they just have the ability to do that and look at that. Beyond the CAFRA stuff, which, you know, I don't want to get disappointed. So I look at that like, hmm, like it's too great. It's too amazing. It's too spectacular.

It's a huge claim. And if it's true, oh boy, does that change everything about everything? I mean, I'm in the camp of want to believe, trust me. I mean, I'm sure you are. But I'm not, but I don't, I mean, I was skeptical initially when it came out. I've talked, I've since, I've since certainly come around on the tech, on the promise of the technology. I, my, my skepticism probably still exists in the layer between the scans as I've seen them and then the interpretations of the results. The 3D.

Exactly. Yeah. The, what their interpretations of it are a little weird. It's because, like, you don't really have a crystal clear view of what this thing is. is. It's like you're making it look like it's some sort of a Tesla coil or whatever it is. Giant cubes with these four tunnels. Yeah, look, we'll see.

And I want to get into the Osirist shaft because that's another thing that I just recently put a video out about these other scans that have happened in the 90s that have since kind of been confirmed by the Kaffirai scan team work. But yeah, at the labyrinth at least, the interesting thing to me that happened with these two wildly different techniques, right? So you have the geoscan, which is this statistical, mathematical approach, space-based still. But then you have, and the Merlin Burrows, which is a similar technique to the cuffray scan group. And it was used, I mean, just so this is what Tim Acres would tell you, it was used to detect submarines. They would look at, like, surface patterns on the water, and they were using it to basically track submarines under the water. So it's origins, at least in the military, as far as I know. It's like the non-classified part of it is what he said, at least report it to have said, I should say.

Are there ancient artistic depictions? Yeah. I mean, not ancient, but certainly Renaissance periods. And it's, I think, some of it's symbolic, but we do get a lot of descriptions from those authors. So, for example, Herodotus talks about it being, you know, 1,500 rooms on one level. Total of, he said there's two levels. He saw one level. He wasn't allowed to go to the lower level.

He said that there's 3,000 rooms in total. And not just rooms, but also courts, massive. open courts These are like Herodotus didn't have access Not to the bottom level According to him Interesting

But Diodora Siculus did Like these guys talk about Ciculus said that you needed a guide You would get lost down there for days If you didn't have a guide He knew his way around And then you have same Similar accounts from Pliny

The Elder and again these Once you, I think once you get Accounts coming from multiple people Over the span of centuries That are from different civilizations Both Roman and Greek And they're correlating It's like this is

pretty reliable data at this point. Certainly in history or in archaeology, that's your measure for like, all right, there's a grain of truth in this given that we've got the same thing coming from these different accounts that are essentially different civilizations that visited the same place. And what they say is astonishing. All of them talk about there being hundreds, if not thousands of rooms and twisting chambers and then also giant open courts that might have 40 columns to a side.

and all of it being done with just spectacular craftsmanship. Yeah, this is the Diodorus Siculus, first century BC, talking about that, you know, in respect of carving and other works of craftsmanship, they left no room for their successes to surpass them. He's saying that this is phenomenal work. And in the sacred enclosure, one found a temple surrounded by columns 40 to each side. And this roof had a, this building had a roof made of a single stone carved with panels and richly adorned with excellent paintings.

So, 40 to a side, that's 80. And how was this even lit? Well, that's always a good question. That's a core question when you get into any of these subterranean spaces, like the Serapumans, it's always, there's no soot. Right. We don't know how that way. The answer is it don't know.

It wasn't with flame. Like, I don't think it was with flame. And then you had, go back to Strabo's depictions. In addition to these things, there is the edifice of the labyrinth, which is a building quite equal to the pyramids. a great palace made of many palaces for such as the number of, has a word? Peristyle. Peristyle courts, which lie contiguous with one another.

Before the entrances, there lie what might be called hidden chambers, which are long and many a number, and have paths running through one another which twist in turn so that no one can enter or leave any court without a guide. Yeah. So he, you had Siculus's account of one of those courts, being 80 columns like, 40 to a side, and there was 12 of them, at least 12 of them in there. Wow. Yeah, so it's absolutely great.

So you have 3,000 rooms, 12 gigantic courts. Diodorus talks about the roof being made of a single stone. I very much doubt that, but what I think he's describing is the craftsmanship that you see in those real megalithic buildings in Egypt where you can't see the joints. And here, Pliny the Elder who lived between 23 and 79 CE, which is current time. So he's saying 3,600 years ago, this was constructed according to tradition. Isn't that interesting? Right, so that predates the pyramids?

Yeah, by a long way, yeah. Allegedly. Allegedly. Well, if you go with the Orthodox date of the pyramid, sure. He says that, you know, so essentially 3,600 BC, that it was built according to the tradition at the time, 3,600 years. So with the conventional dating of the pyramids, that's more than 1,000 years earlier. About 1,000 years, yeah, a little less maybe. And the conventional dating is like, eh, it's questionable.

I mean, even the carbon dating on the pyramids doesn't quite match the conventional dating. It's a little earlier than that. What is the carbon dating from pieces in the... So they got, yeah, some... Exactly, yeah, some mortar in the carbon dating. And what is that? The date. Yeah.

So it's, I believe it's like a wide range, but it's like several hundred years, like 200 years prior to what they would say is the time of Kufu, of Chiops, the ruler in the fourth dynasty, certainly on the Great Pyramid at least. And what is the room for error when they do carbon data? Well, it depends on the samples and there's a lot of specifics, but it could be plus minus 20, 30, 50, 100 years. It depends. I think the margin of error, they did multiple samples. I believe it's less than that.

So they're pretty firm that the date is earlier. So it gets, it's kind of a critic, I mean, I think there's a bunch of people that have talked about the fact that the archaeologist don't really reference that date because it kind of messes up their timeline a little bit. Of course. It's not thousands of years. It's hundreds of years. So the explanation tends to be, well, it was old wood.

It's like the ash that gets mixed into the mortar as the source for the carbon. And they're saying, well, maybe they just burnt really old trees. That's very convenient. Right. It becomes convenient, yeah. Well, all of it's convenient, which gets really weird because we know that they did some enhancements to the pyramid. Like, they refurbished some things. Exactly.

And so that's the problem. It's like, would you refurbished? what and how long was it there before you refurbished it? Indeed. I, look, I think I don't, I'm not, I don't discount the carbon dating. I think what you can say from the carbon dating firmly is that the, that it, it shows that these pyramids were being worked on. If you can't, I don't think you can make the jump to say, this is when they were built. You have to, you have to infer and say that I think this is when they were, they were certainly being worked on in that period. So I think it's possible that

dynastic Egyptians could have finished the pyramids. They may not have been entirely pyramids originally. I think there's a strong chance that there were multiple phases of construction over a long time for them to end up being what they are in our time. I think those are all possibilities here because it just this is the whole, when you take a step back and look at the whole picture of ancient Egypt, I mean, just you cannot attribute everything that we see in ancient Egypt to our current understanding of those dynastic Egyptians, their capabilities, their tools, their writings, and what we know about them. We know an awful lot. Like they do, we have tools from the ancient Egyptian toolbox. We found them. We have depictions shown on walls of how they did

things that were very good about documenting them. So we have the tools, we have the depictions. We also have lots and lots of artifacts that match those tools and depictions, right? We've got these what are clearly handmade artifacts. And this is a, across all the categories of artifacts from things like stonework columns, obelisks, oh sorry, yeah, obelis and vases, boxes, pyramids even. And then you have this other category of artifacts that doesn't match, it can't be explained by these tools and techniques. And there's just no, there's no depictions on walls of how they made the precision artifacts.

There's no... Do you give me an example of these precision artifacts? Of course, yeah, in any category. I have it in that tale of two industries, a directory, on there. It's, um, game on. Week one starts now and every touchdown brings you closer to a payout with Draft King Sportsbook, an official sports betting partner of the NFL. Every touchdown could hit big. Don't just watch the game when you can win with it. Draft King Sportsbook brings the unmatched intensity of the NFL straight to your fingertips. Whether you're backing the first

touchdown score, hitting any time TD props, or riding the thrills of live in-game betting every play is packed with possibility. New customers, this one's for you. Bet just $5 and get $300 in bonus bets instantly. Plus, grab over $200 off NFL Sunday ticket from your

YouTube and YouTube TV. Your season starts now. Download the Draft King Sportsbook app and use the code Rogan. That's code Rogan to get $300 in bonus bets instantly when you place your first bet of $5 or more. Plus, over two

$200 off NFL Sunday ticket from YouTube and YouTube TV. In partnership with Draft Kings, the crown is yours. Gambling problem, call 1-800 gambler. In New York, call 8778-Hope-N-Y or text Hope and Y 4667-369. In Connecticut, help is available for problem gambling. Call 888-78-9-7777 or visit ccpg.org. Please play responsibly. On behalf of Boothill Casino and Resort in Kansas, 21 and over, agent-eligibility varies by

jurisdiction, void in Ontario, new customers only. Bonus bets expire 168 hours after issuance. Four additional terms and responsible gaming resources, see dKNG.co slash audio. The vase is probably the best example. They're a smoking gun example of it. There's a 3D printed one. Yeah, so this is, these, to me, I mean, this is why the vase project was so, I mean, to me, quite validating when it came up.

Yeah, so he's a wheel thing. Yeah, the schist disc. So these are the smoking gun because they connect to everything else And we're learning so much about the precision of these things However, but we could start with statues or boxes or columns It doesn't really matter there there are two categories across all of these artifacts And the advanced category again So you can't really make them with the tools that the ancient Egyptians were just were

We know that we're using that we found They don't show the scene there's no scenes of building stone pyramids There's no scenes of them making giant statues, like 1,000-ton statues. This is the type of thing that you see on the wall, and this is in the Tomb of the Nobles up in the West Bank at Luxor. And here they're building mud bricks. So they're firing mud bricks over the fire. You can see them. They're pouring them.

They're shaping them. They're carrying them. It's all very relatively primitive. And we know they made mud brick pyramids. They made mud brick ramps. And some of the mud bricks were big and heavy. We know all about this. But you don't see is the stone pyramid building.

really massive megalite stuff. The next slide with the vases is a good example. This is what I've been calling the tale of two industries. It's a whole theory that I've been putting together for the last few years. Again, you have a primitive industry that is clearly observably handmade. It lacks precision and symmetry. We found the tools. The Egyptians drew the scenes. The artifacts matched the tools and techniques. And then you have this advanced industry, visibly sophisticated. Usually very hard stone is the other characteristic. The primitive stuff is usually softer stone, although not always. These artifacts,

as we're doing analysis on them, are showing this depth of precision and complexity that's phenomenal. The vases are just this is where they become a smoking gun to this whole argument, I think. For people that don't know about this stuff, can just give them some numbers on what? Sure. So, yeah, the vases go back to pre-dynastic

times. There's no debate that these are pre-dynastic. They predate what we would call the dynastic civilization. And over the last few years, we've, we We've been starting to analyze them. We, the vase scan team, various groups of people now, have been scanning these with modern technology, LiDAR scanning, like laser scanning, even CTX-ray scanning.

And basically they're coming back with precision in terms of circularity, flatness, like centering, numbers that are very much equate to some of the best industrial processes that we do today in things like aerospace industry. So where it's really important to be within two or three or four thousand. thousandth, thousandths of an inch of perfection for the parts we make for jet engines or rocket engines. Those are the numbers that we're seeing come back on a lot of these vessels. Not all of them again. I don't want to say this is true for all of them. It's not. It's true for a lot of them though. And this is, again, these are levels of precision that are not visible to the

naked eye. I mean, you're talking human hair, like a sheet of printer papers, like six or seven thousandth of an inch thick. A human hair is two to three or four thousandths thick. And you're seeing sometimes tolerances even lower than that. So it's not something you can feel or see or touch, but we see it again and again. And the only way we can achieve those sort of tolerances today is with very advanced machines. You know, 3D 5-axis mills, you know,

really high precision lathe, cat, like computer-controlled equipment. The problem with the lathe, though, is the handles on this. Right. So, yeah, if you get into it, so this is the issue with this. And one of the craziest things about, and this is the OG vase, the original granite vase. This is the one that started at all. It's one of the more precise ones.

And yeah, you can imagine without the handles, you could lave it if you're spinning it. But if you had the handles, if you wanted these handles, you would have to leave a bullnose that runs all the way around it. And then come back with a different process, a different tool to remove that space, that is basically the space between the handles off the body. And you don't see a lack of symmetry in those spaces. Well, precision. So this is the thing. So when we do that today, it's called you basically lose some position.

calibration on your tool. So we account for that in the way we do industrial design of these sorts of parts. So we know that we're going to lose a little bit of precision when we change tools and process, right? So we account for that, but you don't see that on this. When we did, I went back and we did, we did analysis of this area of the vase body in between the handles and there's no drop in precision relative to the rest of the vessel. So that means one of two things. one option is okay they could they could handle that positional that lack of that loss of positional calibration better than we can or it wasn't done on a lathe and it was done in what you would call a single pass with a single tool and the only way you can do that is on a is with a

tool with five axes of freedom so now you're talking about a five axis cnc mill like one of those computer controlled things that can just cut it out in basically one pass but without changing tools and process with incredibly hard stone and that That's the other challenge with this stuff, and there's some samples of the stone there in front of you from vessels. These are actual pieces from vessels. Yeah, I got a private collector. Just got to think, like, who made this and how old is this? How old is this? This piece? At least five, six thousand years. I think it potentially quite older, and we can get into how old, I think. But so that's the other challenge that is rarely talked about is the material. Like we, these things are made from granite diarite, rock crystal, that thing's rock crystal, basically quartz. It feels so hard.

It's insanely hard. Yeah, all these different, oh yeah, it's, it's, yeah, it's like I have a granite mortar and pestle at home, this big, heavy thing. It's like, I don't need to protect it from anything. I have to protect my counters from it, because if I just, it's going to destroy anything, it hits. And this is so thin. So that's, yes, so this is, that's the other, it's translucent, you hold a light up to it. Even the rock crystal one's translucent. Wow.

So that one gets down to about two millimeters thickness just under the lip. Oh, wow. Yeah, you put a phone light on it. You see it comes right through it. And, I mean, so with granite and with diarite, and particularly granite, I mean, it's essentially a conglomerate, right? So you have it's not a material that's homogeneous. So inside of granite you've got silica and hornblende and mica and all these different quartz. Hence the pattern.

Hence the pattern, but also almost. microscopically, it changes hardness, you know what I mean? So some of that stuff is less hard than other bits. And it's the way granite takes millions of years and heat and pressure to bond those things together atomically, and that's the stone we get when it pops up out on the bedrock and we mine it. But it's, it just means that when you're machining a material like granite, it, you know, your tool tip is going from stuff that's really hard to softer to hard, and it's like you have to account for that, yet we see this, you feel the surface of it. It's phenomenally well polished and finished. I mean, if you were doing this today with a lot of modern tool tips,

you'd be ripping chunks of quartz out rather than cutting them. So something that the actual tool tip that made these things we know is also very refined, because this is a very difficult substance to choose to work in. No stone sculptor chooses to work in granite unless that, what the project calls for. There's a reason they use marble is that it's both much softer and it's homogeneous. Like it's the same material. It doesn't vary and harden it's wildly. So making these sort of precision things and objects out of stuff like granite and getting it down to two millimeters thick like that other piece near the lip yeah this is crazy and it's there's even examples that get even thinner than that flinders petrie talked about um a diarite vessel that was

one 40th of an inch thick about he's he called it the thickness of stout playing card yeah this is it wow look at the light going through it that's that's about two millimeters thick that one's one of Matt Bell's vases, it's probably my favorite. It's typically called the thin walled vase, but it's a phenomenal piece. I'm amazed it's actually survived this long, because it is. That's one of the rare few delicate ones. You could break that because it's so thin. Because, again, with this type of stone, it gets really brittle.

It's like glass, like a cube of glass, bang that on anything. Thin glass shatters. Same as this stone, yet they did this again and again and again and again. How do we know that this is pre-dynastic? Well, from where they're found. I mean, they're literally found in pre-dynastic burials. This is the real, this is why the vases are so important to me. And why I think they're the smoking guns, one of the big reasons, is that they're uncontrovertibly or incontrovertibly pre-dynastic,

because they've been found in burials that are 100% pre-dynastic. Nacarta culture, Nakata 2, you can go to any museum that has a reasonable collection of these and find them in the pre-dynastic section all over there. There's no debate. Like, they're found in these burials and they carbon date the burials or they culture datum, the reference datum, to periods of thousands of years prior to the dynastic Egyptian civilization. There's good evidence that they may even stretch back as far as 12 to 14,000 BC that they're in burials that go back that far in like the southern Egypt, northern Sudan area. Yeah, it's crazy. And a lot of those burials, unfortunately, today are underwater because of the dam that created like NASA.

But either way, I don't. will debate how far back they go. It's just not controversial at all to say that they are pre-dynastic, 100%. And I think the reason is that they're this size, right? You can bury this with you. If you have it, then you can be buried with it. You can't do that with a thousand-ton statue. Right. It stays on the site. And then maybe someone down the road writes his name on it, like Ramsey's the second or somebody carves his name into it. And then we come along thousands of later and say, oh, Ramsey's the second's names on that, therefore he must have had it made. I mean, that's essentially one of the core principles of Egypt, they do use the writing

primarily as a source, not the only source, but they do. And the vase is what's the problem with even dating them to those pre-dynastic settlements is that there is nothing about those cultures that indicates they had this capability. Nakata culture and even the ones like Toshka, these older ones pretty similar in that you're talking like the burials are often like shallow fetal position graves you find these precision hard stone objects with fishbone combs sticks and stones very primitive hand thrown pottery not even thrown just hand formed pottery no other stone work you know i've seen antique steelers that that are selling these vases because there is a huge There's a lot of these in the private market and in private possession because of their size and their availability and there's how many there were because there's hunt like. Are they illegal to possess? No. No, no. So you could get a hold of one of those legally? Yeah. Yeah, there's, I know collectors with like 80, 90 of them, 100 of them. What? Yeah. Really? Yeah, they're on, they're on. They come up for sale. Is that many of them available? There's, I would say today there's, um, easily over 100,000. Hardstone vessels, for sure. I mean, they found 50,000 of them in one spot. Like, that's the fame.

It's discovery at the Steppe Pyramid. But, yeah, it's crazy. There's a lot. I think there were even more. Like, this was an industry. Like, that's the other key. And a lot of these are semi-exotic types of stone, too. We don't know where the stone came from.

It's not local? In a lot of cases, no. Like, there's lapis-lazuli artifacts that are pre-dynastic, and there's no known quarry for lapis in Egypt. The closest one's Afghanistan. What? Right. Yeah.

How far is Afghanistan from Egypt? No, I don't, I mean, must be. It's right over on the other side of the Middle East, I think, isn't it? It's over towards, yeah, it's up towards Russia and China. It's... Show that image again, Jimmy? Yeah. That you just pulled up?

Well, there's the Fium. There's Egypt. So Turkey, Afghanistan, over here, Uzbekistan. How? Over here, like on the other side of Saudi Arabia and Iran. So you've got to go all the way from Iran. Oh, my God. So that's the nearest lapis quarry.

I mean, look, this is not a problem restricted to the vases either. There's a box in the Osiris shaft. which is more the box itself just they say it's well it's fourth dynasty it's made from a stone called dacite and again there's no known quarry in egypt for dacite this happens a lot so it's go back to that image jamie please yeah there's one of the things that freaks me out about the map is when you go out it looks like it was washed over oh 100% yeah 100% I've talked a lot with randall about this like go go back out again look at that below it yeah the Sahara that's exactly what it looks like it looks washed out

It is. That's what it is. Yeah, but that's crazy. It is. Like, how much water wash that out? And how else would you get what looks exactly like a water wash out? How else would those features be on the surface? It's a... Yeah.

Yeah, I mean, some of those are mountains and mountain ranges, but I can tell you in the desert, not so much. I mean, there are mountains. That just looks like channels. It just looks like an insane amount of water, literally washed over the area and smoothed it out. Yeah, I mean, there's a massive amount of evidence for massive, for giant floods through the Nile Valley as well, not just across the Sahara, but, I mean, Petri was talking about, he was up on cliffs, you know, and finding water lines and flint points and stuff that were indicative of massive floods. This is Hawara. Yeah, this is the labyrinth. Wow. So there's the canal. You see, that's the canal. I've been talking the Barwabi Canal. It's so crazy that when you get to, like, sub-Saharan Africa, like how little of that has been explored and how much. of that was like insanely green and fertile. Not that long ago. Well, certainly not. Yeah.

Thousands of years ago. Well, it's interesting. I just, you know, I did a, I did this long video on the erosional features of the Giza Plateau because last year, 2024, they released a paper that they, I think some geologists, I can't remember the names, unfortunately, but they talked about the fact that there was all of the, all of the valley temples. So, these pyramid, you know, on all these pyramids that are on what you would call the, I mean, lower Egypt, so Giza, Aberrowash, Abusir, Sakara, My Doom, they all, the pyramids aren't just a pyramid, it's a pyramid complex. So it's like you have a pyramid, you've got a structure in front of it, you've got this causeway that runs down to what then they would call a valley

temple, a structure that's the end of the causeway. So that's the well-known valley temple that's next to the sphinx is the valley temple for the middle pyramid. Like it's connected by this Causeway. And they figured out that during the African humid period, which ended thousands of years before Dynastic Egypt ever started, there was a branch of the river Nile called the Arimat branch that ran exactly where all of these valley temples are. So it's like they were, it's almost, I mean, I just look at it and go, this was built, these were built for that water source because I think it's super, I'm very skeptical about the idea of these, all of these valley temples, particularly the one that Giza Plateau being used as harbors for like a couple months a year

to transport all these blocks from the quarry and Aswan. Again, 600 miles away, right, for all the granite. And there's tens of thousands of tons, hundreds of thousands of tons of granite on that plateau that had to be transported. I don't think there's the depth there. I've seen pictures and photographs in early times pre-dam when the Nile flooded. There's not that much water there. However, during the African humid period, which ended at the latest 6,000 BC, but stretches back,

thousands and thousands of years before that. That's when the Sahara was a savannah. You had river basins and lakes, like lakes and rivers. You had much more rainfall. And it wasn't like a, it wasn't this flood situation. It wasn't this annual inundation. There was just rainfall and there was enough water in that Nile Valley to support this aromat branch of the Nile, which is, was said to be like a mile or two miles wide in some place. So really not like an insignificant waterway. but it was high and it was running and they've traced the path of this aromat branch and it turns out all of these valley temples from these pyramid complexes are on its banks and it wouldn't it's like it's flooding it's like there all the time and and this end this period ends and the you get the desertification of the sahara starting around 6,500 6,000 BC and so you know it's not like until you know if you get 5,000 4,000 4,500 BC 3,000 BC that's when you sort of That's 3,100 BC's kind of when we say the Egyptian civilization started. So it doesn't make sense to me that if they built these valley temples and these,

and all these structures in like 2,800 BC, I mean, you would build it where the river is. Like the river was way down there at that point. Yeah. And so I... What is their response to this? Well, I just put it in my... Does anybody try to debunk it? No, it's a peer-reviewed scientific study.

This is what happens in these, with a lot of these... these papers, and you'll see this in, it happens in genetics and the DNA studies that have been done too, you don't, these other scientists will not really step on the toes of the archaeologists or the historians, right? They'll, they'll present the data, but stop from inferring what it could mean for the picture of history. Got it. So they just throw the data out there and go, you guys figure it out. Yeah, pretty much. And they just, whoops. And the archaeologists say, we're not going to touch it.

Yeah, they ignore it usually. They don't care. Yeah, it's left to like rogue scholars and idiots like me on YouTube, people that write books to really try and put the pieces together. Thank God there's a YouTube. Dude, right? I know. I mean, thank God there's a place where a video like yours can get millions of views where so many people all around the world can watch that and go, wait, what's going on down there? Like, who really knows?

And why do these people, why are they so sure? Like, why are they so arrogant in their ideas? Because it's very clear that it's, it's not, there's not a clear, you know, like we know civil war ended in 1865, right? Right. It's like it's all written down. Everybody knows people were alive. There's like photographs of the soldiers. We're pretty accurate with that.

Yeah. You get to fucking 6,000 BC, man. You're just guessing. All right. Yeah. It's a, it's, yes, the further back you go, the much hazy, you can't tell. You can't tell. There is way less evidence.

Yeah, and it's also, it scares them because something like that, if you really do find advanced structures that are at 6,000 BC. And before Gobeckley-Tepi, we didn't even know that that was even possible. Right. And that's that famous conversation that happened with Robert Schock and that really arrogant archaeologist. Mark Lina. Yes, which is, he's laughing. Like, why would you laugh about ancient history, first of all? Yeah.

What ancient civilizations are? Is that guy still alive? Laina, yeah, show me the pot shards. He must feel so stupid now. Well, yeah. After go Beckley-Tap, someone should show him that video and go, why are you laughing? Like, because this is just human ego. This is human ego on display for the world.

You want to be the gatekeepers of this information. You want to be the one person or the person that represents this group of human beings that are the scholars that have published work, that have taught at universities. and you're the only ones. You're the only ones that know the ancient history of Earth, despite the fact that there's people like yourself and Graham Hancock and who've spent a lot of time and they're very careful about what they say

and spent a lot of time investigating this. And they just want to dismiss those people because they don't have the proper credentials or what are you talking about? I think it's, yes, that's exactly what's happening. I think it is as a result of, the fact that the conversation is getting out of their hands, right? It's one of the things I admire so much about the people who started this,

what we would call archaeological or Egyptological space, guys like Flinders Petrie, they're very open about what they didn't know. Like one of my, like Petrie would tell me, he talks about the machining marks and you can read between the lines at the wonder at what he's finding. And he's like, I don't get it. Like, we can't do it. We don't know how they did it. And this is, I think, because the,

conversations happening in those halls of, you know, the academic halls or the geographical club or whatever, these peers. It doesn't get out to the whole world. It doesn't get out. And then, and so that slowly changes with the rise of initially like alternative authors, you know, which best represented by Graham Hancock, a good friend of mine as well. And he, you know, his books and they start to gain in popularity. And now these, I guess, the people in the, in the academic halls of residence that are typically considered the authority is seeing this conversation get out of hand. And now you get to YouTube where, you know, to some extent, I think it is possible to do an end run around what they're saying.

And I do watch people and there are guys like Flint that are trying to embrace the new media space and try and get on podcasts. And, you know, if you read the SAA journals and articles, the Society of American Archaeology, they're literally writing to themselves saying, how can we become more popular in this space and how do we start podcasts and get into it? The problem is they're still doing it the same way. They are. It's like when CNN journalists get fired for it. from CNN and start a podcast and everybody was like, no, you're doing CNN outside of CNN. That's what they're doing. They're doing academia, which is like gatekeeping of information.

And also like pejoratives, mocking, really shitty behavior towards anyone who's outside of it, including calling them racist, calling them white supremacists. It's so dumb. It's so dumb because one of the dumbest parts about it is no matter what, those are the people that lived in Africa. So no matter what No matter what happened Whoever built that Is people that lived in Africa They were African

Shut the fuck up Like the white supremacy thing makes no sense Yeah it's cry I mean It's Africans It's Africans 100 look That's the people that we're living there

If humans made it You know if you're not in the alien camp Which is a bizarre camp But if you're not in the I'm in the ancient civilization Incredibly advanced Cataclysmic disaster Wipes them out

Civilization takes a long time to rebuild finds the remnants of these ancient civilizations and then sort of claims them over generations after a thousand years nobody really knows who fucking built it you know and then this is this is where I think we find ourselves that's that's where I'm at but if you're in that camp you're talking about Africans yes so all these shitty things they do just show their hand just show what they're really all about what you're really all about is silencing anything that really throws a monkey wrench into everything you've been teaching for decades.

Like, you've claimed that you're the expert. You've claimed arrogantly that you have all the information when you clearly are wrong. Absolutely. That is what's happening. It's actually, it's a quote that I steal from my friend Christopher Dunn quite happily, which is, you know, you wouldn't trust an archaeologist to design the chair is sitting on. But if it's an ancient chair, he's going to claim he's the expert on it. And this is what happens.

I had Joseph Wilson on a podcast talk about, I had this great quote for him. He said, oh, you know, just because some engineers standing there, you know, shining a laser on a vase, don't let that, don't mistake that for him knowing more about the guy who can read horoglyphs because he can read what they wrote about it and he's the authority on it kind of thing. It's just like, you're just dismissing all of these other disciplines that are, that I think are required for a true and complete picture of trying to assemble this evidence, right? As you say, there's very little evidence that shows us definitively what happened in the dim, dark, distant past. But you've got to try and make the case for it as best you can. And I think we should try and encompass all of the evidence. And one of the disciplines that's missing from that approach is the engineering stuff. It's the precision stuff.

It just gets dismissed out of hand. And, yeah, just because we're not the authority figures on that topic, it just, yeah, they ignore it, which is what happens. I don't know how you can ignore the vases. you can ignore the statues, the symmetry and the construction of the faces. It's starting to become a problem. Like, they're trying. And even in the past, when I would guess, the mainstream approaches to try and solve, say, some of the machining examples, the tubular drills or the sawcuts, I mean, just when you dig down into them and the answers that you get and the explanations that are offered are just don't hold any water. They're kind of, they're frankly ridiculous.

Well, the issue with the drill bits is the revolutions per minute, right? I mean the cores, yeah, well, it's not the revolutions per minute, it's the penetration rate. We don't know how quickly it does. How, yes, so how quickly it penetrates into stone. I suspect that it's, that it was, it could have been turning quite slowly, but it's like a one in 60 penetration rate is the rate of the spiral groove on the cores that have been analyzed, particularly Petrie's core number seven. One in 60 meaning one and so for like if you unwind that circular motion to a straight line, 60 inches horizontal travel. inch vertical drop, which is 500 times greater than how we do it today with modern diamond tipped sores, whole sores, which do turn.

So our modern ones, bear in mind, they're 900 RPM. They'll cut through ground slowly, but it cuts, I mean, no doubt. It grinds more so than cutting. But yeah, unwinding that spiral and looking at that's what Petrie was, first of all, like, how is this possible? His numbers got refined a bit by Chris Dunn, but more or less a one in 60 penetration rate. So it's very difficult to explain there are multiple cores like this. And this is the other element that I think the vases are showing is that you have a technological link between the vases and these other precision artifacts,

the bigger ones that couldn't be buried in these civilizations that to me suggest that they were made with the same technology. You see the same machining marks, the same tubular drill marks. So on that quartz piece, if you look on the bottom, you can see the on the inside of it, there's no other side. You see the tool mark? This right here? Yeah. So this is like, that's the tubular drill. So this is, that's a core function of how these vases are made.

You would often find. So this is the bottom. The bottom. So they've cored that thing out and then they've snapped it off and polished it down, but they didn't eliminate the full toolmark. And you'll see that in a lot of vases. So we know that these tubular drills were used with the vases as well. But you've no idea of the power source, no idea what the material was that cut?

No. Well, yeah, so yeah, the vases have become interesting. One of the, let me talk about the provenance part first because that's been the one, like the pushback on the vases, this is where it's become a problem, is nobody's really been able to push back on the data, like the scientific and the measurement data that's come out, the precision fact, the geometry, there's a whole bunch in the geometry space that indicates that they are like designed. They're not just made. They were designed with mathematical and geometrical, geometric principles in mind. They show pie, they show fire, the golden ratio, Fibonacci sequence, all this sort of stuff is in them. No one's pushing back on that. The major pushback on the vessels and the early days of the vase scan project was that, oh, these are modern fakes or something.

Like, they're not the real deal because they're not coming from museums. They've been, they're modern forgeries. How can you say they're real? So what's happened in the years since, and when I first came on here and talked a little bit about that. That was very much the early days of this project about two and a half years ago now. Now, the vase scanner, particularly the artifact foundation, Adam Young, who started this whole thing, who owns, he actually, this is a copy of his vase. They've been in now four museums around the world. We've scanned close to a hundred vessels from inside of museums with impeccable

provenance. Those results are starting to come out. They're matching the results that we've found so far. So the provenance thing is, is kind of, that's going away. The people that I think chose to fight on the Hill of Providence have died on it now. It's, they're 100, they are legitimate. And to be fair, you can also find vessels in private collection with impeccable provenance, just as you can find a lot of vessels in museums that will have no idea where they came from. It's a much, it's not as clear as just while if it's in a museum, it's, we can trust it. And if it's not, we can't. It's not like that. But what else has happened is that there's So the project came out and it gained a lot of interest from really talented people around the world.

And there's been several of those. One of the guys that I've been working with a fair bit lately over the last couple of years ago named Dr. Max Zamilov, who's a physicist. I believe he taught for 10 years. He's a nuclear physicist taught for 10 years, I think at Penn State. He runs his own company now. And I first, he reached out to me and actually we took these fragments to his house and I rolled up to his house in Florida and sitting in his little.

living room are two like scanning electron microscopes, you know, as you do, who doesn't have two SEMs in their living room. So we started to do things like look at these pieces through a scanning electron microscope to try and find evidence for the materials that we used to cut them. So you should, if these were used with a tool so that the orthodox explanation being, well, it's a copper tube and it's sand or some sort of cutting medium and it's spun and ground out, you should find traces of copper or whatever that material was in there. We looked at We spent days looking at several pieces, zero, zero copper. Like, didn't find any copper, nothing at all.

The nice scanning electron microscope, not only do you get the magnification, but you can focus a beam of electrons onto a particular spot. And that backscatter of electrons, you can then map out the elemental composition of the material. Can I pause you for a second here? Yeah. Are the oldest tools that they found copper? Yeah, copper and stone. And what are the dates of the oldest tools that they found? Well, they go back all the way to the old kingdom, 26, 27, 2800 BC.

Like, yeah, it was early days they were smelting. I mean, obviously, the older tools are stone tools, like Flint. I mean, a lot of carving, you can carve stone with harder types of stone. So there was definitely flint and things being used. But there's no evidence, like, not up until, like, the very later periods of the Egyptian civilization, is there any significant evidence for iron and things like that? Like, it's pretty much copper and bronze alloys, tin, you know, copper and teenage bronze. So when they analyze the traces, there's no copper?

We didn't find any copper. We didn't find some other stuff, which was very interesting. Well, the most interesting thing we did find was titanium. What? Titanium and titanium alloys with iron. We found iron, zinc, tin, zircon. Titanium alloys. Yeah, titanium.

And it's not, we've, yes. So, yes, so when you find. The term alloy, doesn't that refer to something that has? It smelted, right, that's been. put together, exactly. In fact, titanium, as we know it as a metal, doesn't exist naturally. So in nature, it's titanium dioxide that is found in rocks. This was not titanium dioxide that we were looking at because you see a, again, that the SEM gives you this spectrum, right? So you would see oxygen and titanium together. We didn't see that. And in fact, I did a, I have a video on

this. And it's, we found a piece actually, like a small, maybe 20, 30 micron wide piece embedded in one of those grooves in a tooltip that looked like an embedded piece it shines up very brightly when you see metals in the SEM it's like a bright spot and you can aim it at it and it's just straight titanium

and it looked like a small piece of a tool that had been wedged in there and I mean look in the in our modern times I mean I think titanium was discovered even in the late 1800s it wasn't used outside of laboratories until the 1930s as a material

but there seems to be evidence that there's some titanium use back here. Has this been published? No, I wouldn't, I know Max is trying to work on that. I would, it was not a systematic. We spent days, like a couple of days, and it's, we didn't do like a systematic grid search. Like, even in one of those pieces, you could spend, it would take you a long time to just map it properly, like to scan the whole thing, but it's a play with devil's advocate.

Would that be evidence of a lack of a chain of custody that perhaps someone was? using titanium to see if they could cut it? Yes, it could be contamination. So we looked for signs of contamination. This didn't seem like contamination. In fact, at the end of, at the end of when we'd finished scanning, we actually took, he had some titanium darts. Like we put some on one of the pieces and put it in to see what that would look like.

Just like a tiny, just like literally a matchstick and just the tiniest end and just tapped it and then looked at that under the microscope to look at what contaminant. It just didn't seem to be contamination. You can't rule it out. There's, we found other types of metals as well. So it didn't seem to be contamination. What is the reason why it didn't seem to be that? Well, because it didn't, it was so we looked at what contamination would look like.

What is the difference? Well, so it's like smaller specs where you can actually see the material. The one piece that we found, it seemed to be embedded in the stone. Like it was as if something like this tiniest fragment of the tool, of some sort of, imagine it was a tool tip, wedged itself in the stone and then it stayed there. but it was only like 20 or 30 microns wide, which was pretty big under a scanning electron microscope. But that was the only piece of titanium?

No, we found other specs of it. And then occasionally it would be titanium and iron mixed together. And then we also found specs of like zinc, zircon and tin. And then various combinations. I honestly, I think it's grounds for more investigation. I think the most significant thing was the no copper thing, like that's like all right no copper like that that to me was the biggest takeaway the fact that we found some other elements in pieces of what let's say questionable provenance i know these

are legitimate pieces from these vessels ideally the best thing if we could this would i'd love to work with the egyptians to do something like this because i know there are fragments of vessels in the step pyramid there's there's hundreds thousands of them down there still in fact like the last time we've got down to the very bottom level which is you know there's a special permission required to get into the step pyramid and then even then they generally won't let you down to the bottom level there's another ladder and 30 feet down to the big bottom level it goes down further but it hits the water table again um but in one of these corners and this very bottom level you're like 150 200 feet under the step pyramid we found a wall and it was a collapsed

it must have been a collapsed magazine of these vessels and this is the place where they found 50,000 of them originally like like jean-filippe lois in the 1930s found this huge cash of these vessels there. And in this wall, it's an incredible little video. I've not published it. I mean, I do want to talk about it. But you could, you literally see that it's like a wall of dirt, of not rock, but dirt. And in the wall, there's like fragments of vessels because it had been a cache of them that there was something, a tunnel had collapsed and it did crush them. So you've got these like pieces of worked granite or whatever just in the wall. So I'd, that would be interesting if you could go down there and like get their permission to say, well, let's sample. Because you have then

And, you know, you've basically got it in its original environment from dynastic Egypt and put it in a Ziploc or whatever. Just keep it. Don't mess with it. Right. Clear chain of evidence. And then scan it. So I think it's an interesting observation. God, if they found titanium on that.

Holy shit. I think there's a Russian group that did something similar and they also found a metals lot. I think they found titanium as well. L.A.H., the laboratory of alternative history. How is titanium made? It's a smelting process from titanium dioxide. I don't know the specifics of it. But you have to take that titanium dioxide and, I assume, smelt it down or do something.

Like, again, it took us up until, you know, 1930s to use it just anywhere outside of labs. So it's super interesting. But I wouldn't even say that's the most interesting thing Max found. So he's a crazy, dude, an interesting guy. He's, you know, he's doing fusion experiments in his spare bedroom. He's got like this apparatus surrounded by boxes of borax and bored on to stop like cosmic. 10-foot Tesla coal. That house is going to blow.

So he took, so get, then this is, this sort of ties back to the toolmarks. It ties back to a question you asked me when I was here last, which is what's my wildest speculation. I actually have some now, which is based on some evidence in its early days. He has published on this on his website. But he took precision vases. He took base rock samples of the rock that these were made from from the place. I actually got him a piece of basalt. he took non-precision vases and he put them in a germanium detector basically to look at the radioactive

and the isotope sort of baseline radiation of these pieces and it turns out the precision vases are radioactive they're they're two to three times he's tested several relative to the base rock samples and the non-precision vases they have two to three times the thorium decay products in them all of them so far and in fact that piece right there has he said has the quartz piece or the crystal piece has a notable cesium-137 signature in it as well so that's an interesting nuclear titanium could be i don't know about that but so he's look it's again early days but he has published it on his website the findings and he is he's obtaining more equipment to do more testing some more in-depth testing that he will be a much more definitive about. He did take some recently to the Petrie Museum in London to test some of their

artefacts. But it's a very interesting result. This has to have been something that irradiated these vessels that give them that signature even after however many thousands of years with the half-life. Again, we're comparing it to the base rock samples and the non-precision bases, which they're just like, that's nothing. And they're not dangerous or anything. It's just above a baseline, but two to three times. So something happened to them. And one of his hypotheses, very interesting, is a concept called nuclear machining. So he actually, this is not a new idea. It's not something we've figured out how to do as a civilization yet.

We're on that path, but you can, if you take, his theory is something like palladium or another like radioactive material that is a strong alpha or beta particle admitter that you could put on a tool. It would ablate either in neutrons or it's blasting electrons or something. it would ablate the stone surface away in such a way that you could carve this stone with ease, kind of like a lightsaber, basically. And it would also leave a signature in the stone. And you...

Fuck, yeah. And you take it back to that penetration rate of that spiral tube drill. It's not... All we can say about things like that spiral tube drill and the other thing, the other striations and tool marks is, look, it's not... It doesn't seem to be the same thing we do to the stone, and it's certainly not primitive. It's not something you can do just by hand.

So is anybody the cores? Has anybody tested the radioactive levels of the cores? I think he, I don't know. He might have tested the cores when he was there recently. I'll talk to him. I was talking to him to this morning. I can ask him about the core. That's a great question.

Because that would, it's this, if it was the process, it should show something similar. If that's indeed the process. Look, the other possibility is, okay, they weren't machined with this method, but these were used in some method the other theory he has that these may have been part of a process for enriching material for some other nuclear use, although they were part of a system

that used nuclear material. They had advanced nuclear science somehow or another. That's just too much. It's, I mean, it's not too much, but it's too much, like it's too crazy. It's so crazy. But also, like, when you

do see some of the sculptures that look 3D printed, and You go, well, okay, now it kind of at least makes a little sense. See, if we knew for sure that there was a cataclysm and a lost civilization, that civilization had achieved some immense heights of technological sophistication in a completely different pathway than we've done in modern times. If we knew that for sure, then everything would be so easy. You'd go, okay, well, clearly they were doing something. what were they doing? But instead, we deny that possibility. So by closing off that door, now you're left with nonsense. You're left with sand and copper and it's dumb.

I agree. Yeah, I agree. I think it's... Because something fucking crazy happened. Yes. I... Yes. I think there is that this is... I try to follow the evidence where it leads. That's all we're doing here with... I mean, I'm quoting what Max has said about it with this nuclear machining hypothesis. And here's the thing about... The nuclear machining hypothesis, sorry to interrupt you,

but if you go a thousand years from now, for sure, we're going to have that. Yeah, that's, yes. I'd like to put that the same context in these arguments forward as well. It's like we just don't... To me, the answer is, you know,

we tend to look at the past and it always has to be this subset of what we know, right? But it's like, if you look at the history of knowledge and technology, give us 50,000, 50 years, a thousand years, 50,000 years. You know that there's more

out here to the sides that we're going to learn. Right. So that means there are realms of science and technology that we don't know anything about. I think if we were a bit more open-minded about investigating some of these mysteries of the past with some of these inexplicable characteristics, the precision or the machining, the engineering things, how the stone was cut, I think some of those answers could lay in those realms of the unknown. And by being open-minded about them and by investigating them with all of our capability,

we might even end up learning something about them, which is what we're doing. Like the Vase scan project, we are learning the depths of precision in some of the machining aspects of it. And Max is starting to learn like, okay, there's some weird, like radioactive characteristics of these things. Let's try and look at more and figure out some more. I mean, we can speculate a bit now, and I want to be clear, this is all very speculative at this point. Lots more testing and data is required to even shore up some of these theories about these possibilities. But the fact remains, there could be, they are possibilities. Right.

And it's also this assumption that there's been a linear path of progression, always. But that's not even the case today, right? You can go to ancient sites, whether it is in Mexico or even in Greece. And you see really shitty construction right next to the Parthenon. Yep. Right. I mean, the Acropolis and the Parthenon is right next to crappy apartment buildings. they're really close right yeah yeah that's a decay that's a you've obviously you can't do you

not why didn't you do that right that again like this yeah it's huge it's something there's something weird there's something weird going on and this is like 2,000 years ago where we knew who they were we know the people we know they did it like amazing precision amazing construction methods incredible art incredible engineering and architecture right yes and all understand But yet more advanced than the techniques utilized in 2025 in the exact same area, which is weird, right? So that's just, that's without a cataclysm. Right. Well, yeah, it's also, it's a nice criticism of modern architecture, to be, to be fair.

I mean, you don't even go back 2,000 years, just go back to like the Gothic era with the churches and the cathedrals. I mean, Jesus, why don't we build like that anymore? Right, right. Good point. So you see a decline, at least in craftsmanship that can be attributed to a changing of cultures. But this assumption that there's always this linear path of progression, and if you go back, they were dumb. You go back far enough, they were dumber. But that doesn't seem to be the case here.

And Egypt is the best example. It is. Like, explain that. Yeah, dude, exactly. And it's one of the biggest, if anyone, it's one of the biggest contradictions about Egypt is exactly, it's the technological progression. I mean, you're talking about a dynastic Egyptian civilization. at least 3,000 years, right? So 3,000 years. But if you look at it from a technological progression perspective, it's almost like they went backwards the whole time. I mean, you have

the emergence all of a sudden of this culture and language, like they're gods. One of the craziest things about ancient Egypt is this emergence of hieroglyphs just, boom, here it is. Here's this complex, extremely complicated language, cultural system, gods and everything pops out of nowhere. It's pretty consistent. It evolves over time. It does. doesn't really, it doesn't change that much. I mean, cuneiform in Samaria, there's a clear progressive path where we can see it being developed. We don't have that, that's not the case for ancient Egypt. And then it's all of the best stuff is the oldest. It's the biggest stonework, the valley temple, the 2,500 tons of granite in the King's Chamber structure that's, that's

in the Great Pyramid. The Great Pyramid itself, these things are amongst the very first pyramids ever said to have been built, yet progressively as you go forward in time, I mean, they just, they get to mudbrit pyramids. It's almost like you're going backwards. And there's just, you know, technologically speaking, it doesn't seem like they progress very far. So I think there's another interpretation for that data, one that fits the evidence a little better, which is that, yeah, I think they got a kickstart, they got a head start. They inherited an awful lot of objects. We know for sure these precision objects were around before the ancient Egyptian They don't match even the cultures that predated them.

We have no idea where they got them from. I don't think they made them. We don't know how old they really are. And I think there's a lot of other artifacts and architecture on these sites that they match these, like technologically speaking. There's a link, the same tools, the same precision. We're seeing that. Yet these are massive artifacts, sometimes like a thousand-ton statue, that you can't bury with you.

It stays on this site. It gets inherited. It gets renovated. It gets reused. Eventually you get kings with Hubert. and arrogance, guys like Ramsey's the second that says, you know, carve my name three inches deep onto that sucker. Right.

It's going to be me. I want to be part of the gods. These are the, you know, I want to time myself to the ancients. And the really crazy thing is that doesn't often get admitted is that this is literally what the ancient Egyptians themselves said. They called themselves a legacy culture. They trace their own history back 40,000 years. They have a list of kings.

They have a, they talk about these different eras of time. The Shemsu Ho, the followers of Horus, was this 12,000-year period where these mythical semi-divine beings walk the earth. You can talk about kings and rulers and that. And then before that, you have Zeptepe when the gods themselves walk the earth. And they trace their own history way back into those errors. That's the stuff that I brought up with Zahy. And he was like, what is this? He got very mad.

It's funny. I'm reading where I'm listening to the Book of Enoch right now. Okay. Yeah, that's some wall shit, too. Yeah. It's so wild. You're going, what are you saying? Like, gods, the watchers came down and mated with women of earth and created the Nephilim or whatever?

Yeah, the Nephilim. Like, what are you saying? Like, what, what were you trying to say? Thousands of years ago when they wrote this down. Yeah. And, you know, and the version I think that we're getting this from. is from the Dead Sea Scrolls, which is from Qumran. So how long did they write it down before that?

Like, how long did they discuss this? How long ago did this happen? And what are you saying? Like, what were they trying to record? Yeah. And why does it match up with what they're saying in Egypt? The gods walking amongst us? Right.

Yeah, it goes to some wild places. Squirrely. I know. It gets so squirrely. And that's where you get into the alien camp. Well, that 40-meter tick-tac-shaped metallic objects. Yeah, what is that thing? Well, and what kind of metal?

We don't know. Imagine if it's titanium? Yeah, it could be. He said it didn't match any signature that he'd seen before. That's crazy in the end of itself. It's one of the things I'll remember always about when you were sitting here talking to Bob Lazare and he said that some of those craft came from archaeological digs. I mean, it's part of his story.

There's long been rumors of that type of stuff in, you know, Under the ground in Egypt. I'm not saying that's what it is, but this is what, yeah, this is what Tim said about it. That would be amazing. It would be. If there's a UFO down there, all layers converge at a central corridor or avenue like the atrium of shopping mall where you can see all floors from one vantage point. My personal interpretation is that this entire hall was constructed to house a centrally positioned freestanding object about 40 meters long. The central object is hard to classify.

It appears metallic. Not stone or wood. I named it Dippy after the giant Diplotica skeleton in the Hintze Hall of London's. Is that I said that right? Yeah, Hints, I think. Hints Hall of London's Natural History Museum. It could be anything. It shape resembles those tick-tac hard mints.

It might also be an upright disc or even a colossal shen ring. And what is a shen ring? It's like the cartouche, you know, that thing around a cartouche. Oh, wow. Big object alone raises profound questions. How did it get there? why is it there? A more speculative theory is that it's some kind of portal, oh boy, now we're going. We're going full tinfoil. Either interdimensional or interstellar, a stargate. Its material signature is like, unlike anything I've seen in my entire career, but it's there, undeniably there. I'll let the future find out what Dibby is. Tim Acres. Well, that's, he went full art bell right there. He did. Interdimensional or interstellar. A stargate. Hey, look, the Egyptians talk about stargates.

Do they? Do you go to, where is it? Dendera. There's actually a couple places. The literal translation, you can read it on the walls. I always show people when we go there. It is, there are two or three depictions of stargates. That is the literal translation for it.

It's showing a constellation with a gate, and it's a specific constellation, a couple of different times. They're all on different constellations. Where can I see this? There's pictures of stargates from Dendera Temple. I think it's in the upper rooms. Yeah, it's up where the zodiac. So that's actually, the Dendera is incredible. Like it is a star-oriented temple.

There's massive depictions of the zodiac. And this is all redone from older versions of the same temple. But that is the translation of what's on the wall with the constellation and the gate. And it literally translates as Stargate. That is part of it. So, well, that's, I mean, the ceiling is the zodiac. Well, you even have depictions of, like, solar boats going up to the moon at Dendera. Randall loves that temple.

I have sent him a lot of footage from that temple. No, it's, it's actually, I know, there's a, you'd have to look up the, yeah, just Stargate glyph, maybe, at Dendera. Yeah, glyph, I'll tell you if you see it. No. I don't see the exact one, but it's not, I mean, it's literally a cluster of stars that represents a constellation and a fightway behind it. This is killing me. We got to find it. I know I probably have it on my hard drive.

Do you have it with you? It's on my laptop, if you want to see it after, yes. Yeah, yeah. All right, go grab it. We'll pause. You sure? Yeah, yeah, yeah. All right.

Not on what you gave me? Huh? Not on what you gave me. It's not on that one. I didn't think we'd get into the Stargate glass, but I'm going to try and find it. I'll try and find it. Okay. All right.

We'll be right back, folks. Okay, so we found it from a video from Trevor Grossey on YouTube. The video is titled Hieroglyphic Proof of Stargate Technology with Muhammad, Ibrahim, Mike Rick... Rick Secker, Rick Secker, and Trevor Grossey. So this is what we're looking at. See, it's like there's a glyph, as you can see the star and there's a gate. Actually, try and find one of the other pictures, maybe. The star is the circle.

That's what the star is supposed to be. Yeah, the star on the right, no, no. Oh, the far right. Yeah, there's the hieroglyph. So again, yeah, star gate. It's the, you see the gate and then the star, and then I assume that crooked hook or whatever is part of this as well. Oh, I see.

So it's how, the way you translate the hieroglyph? Yes. Yes. Mohamed I know quite well as well. He's very good at translating these glyphs. When I travel in Egypt, we usually go with Professor Muhammad Jabba. who's one of, I would say, top four or five in the world for reading hieroglyphs.

He can just read whatever's on the wall and tell you about it. He travels with us on these tours. It's phenomenal. He just shows us this. There's probably some better pictures of ones with the actual constellations up at Dendera if they get into. Yeah, but that one where they were standing next to each other,

go back a little. Where is it? Back a little. There, there, there. Yeah, so see, this is the one I'm talking about. You see the stars above the gates. So there's literally different. These, and with the words, they relate to specific constellations.

This is in the top, the, what's the zodiac room at Dendera, where they have a replica of the circular zodiac on the ceiling. The French have the original. But this is original hieroglyph, and it is, the translation of this is literally Stargate for these constellations. That is bananas. And what are these constellations supposed to be? I don't know, off the top of my head. we do tell people when we when we get into it there is yeah i could find out but i don't know off the top of my head i'm sorry click that with that one that you just had there jamie no no no no

no well you just had all yeah right there so yeah more gates they same similar again the gate with the crooked hook and the star yeah that's bananas yeah yeah so when they're referring to a star gate are they saying in any way would it would that means? No. No, it's, it's, I mean, they would, I mean, most of the, the, the, the interpretations these days would tell you that it's always symbolic. I mean, they do look at like the, the, the, the, Osiris and the, you know, the, the, the, the constellations in the sky as being connected to the duat or, uh, to, to, to, to, like this, this, this, the, the duat being the, this space and nut the goddess who is the sky. And, you know, it's all part of that passage from the,

of the, of the soul going into the realms of the immortal, of the immortal that happens after death. So this is the, you know, this symbolic interpretation that we, that we give it all. We say, oh, this is none of this. It sort of falls into this category a little bit of like everything is symbolic, everything is ceremonial, nothing is functional. I, you know, I'm fascinated by these temples because it goes back to something you were saying earlier. And I use this analogy to kind of set the stage for it. Imagine, again, imagine if Younger Dries happen to us tomorrow, whatever, I hope touch wood doesn't. But, say it wipes out civilization but we survive as humans within what two three generations we're

sitting around campfires telling stories about fucking these these things that were like a black rock and it's just and you you know it's like or plasma TVs but you say look if you get this shiny black rock you know you can get answers from the ancestors you will know everything you can talk to anything you can see anything you can ask a question you can ask it questions And maybe you go and you start getting black rocks and making them like this and you start dancing around the fire. You start ritualizing this memory of technology. Now, if you take that concept, like say there's a cataclysm and now there's people that remember and they tell these stories, the stories get passed down. Now imagine there's a civilization that comes up and it goes through thousands of years of structuring those legends and stories of technology.

They go through just distortions and representations and symbolism, but it's just twisting all of these stories into this iconography and this complex symbolism that we then, I think we go to a temple in Egypt that was made in the Ptolemaic era or whatever, and you see things on the wall. I think there's a great way to interpret some of those symbols and some of the paintings to say that, well, is this actually an echo of something that was functional,

or is an echo of technology? Like, every staff that you see has a tuning fork on the bottom of it. Every single one on these walls, it's always got a tuning fork on it. What's that all about? A tuning fork. Tuning fork, like a little, like a tuning fork. Yeah, all of the staffs with the was head that means power. Like, literally the interpretation of this symbol is power on top of the staff.

And every single one of them has a tuning fork on the bottom. Can we see an image of that? Yeah, and you can look up any of the temples in Egypt and like the depictions of gods with staffs and they're touching or they're giving like the Jed Pillar or the, you know, the, the Unk, which is Jed Pillar is stability. The Unk is life. The was is power. So in a lot of cases, these gods are granting kings, you know, life stability and power, or sometimes just life and power. But what are those depictions of these enormous cylindrical things that they're holding that look almost like one of those in being clubs?

Yeah. Like that one? There, that's like the jet pillar here. Yeah, what the hell is that? That's a great image. That literally is the symbol for stability. That thing down is what I was talking about. Oh, the quote-unquote light bulbs, yes, at Dendera Temple.

And see, there's a jet pillar there too with the hands. So the jet pillar is stabilizing it with its hands. Right. And you're on a boat. You're actually part of this is on a boat. It looks like some kind of technology. So you know what's crazy about this? So again, we get down into this.

This is in a crypt at Dendera. You have to, like, crawl through a hole. It's like an inside wall. It's amazing because the Christians and the, they didn't get into the crypt, so they couldn't deface the glyphs. Like, a lot of the glyphs are defaced. Look at that guy. He looks like an air traffic controller.

Well, he's like a reptilian, too. He's a frog dude with knives. Yeah, what is that dude? With a tail. Does he have a fucking tail? Yeah, he does. He does look like a, he was like a giant frog man. Yeah.

Wow. So what's crazy about, there is a whole story about this. And he's written on the walls. And again, this is thanks to my friend Yusuf A1, who I guide with and then, you know, Professor Jabra, who can interpret this. And we, actually, I'm going to do a video about this soon because what he is saying about this crypt is that there was, it tells you on the wall that there was a physical version of that thing in that crypt. That was, he said it was made from mostly gold and it was the span of, like, a dude with his arms out, like the span of a human wingspan, basically. I thought I was stumbled across something there called it Electrum. There was these two

The metal They stole these 3.3 ton Obelisk That were made out of a metal Called Electrum Golden Silver Yeah, Electrum's golden

So they definitely used Golden Silver A lot of the obelisks Had Electrum Tips they think Great for conductivity Oh, it's fantastic Yeah

I mean doesn't get any Which is really the only good reason to have it Other than looking good Right, yeah Other than balin Yeah other than balin Which they were balin

Which is going to be a Little bit of a side track But when you're talking about the nuclear stuff, I found these stories of the Aklomine and Gabon, which is a nuclear natural nuclear reactor. Reactor? Whoa.

That is very old. Four billion years old and 100,000 oldest nuclear reactor in history. Oh, okay. It's enriching uranium. It's probably... Natural enriched uranium. Yeah, imagine if it's in Africa, so I don't know if that was the only place they've ever found.

That makes sense, right? Is there something like that? in Afghanistan where this stone came from? Oh, the lapis lazuli and everything else? I don't know. I mean, I assume that I wouldn't be surprised if that sort of thing is happening somewhere in the mass of uranium in Australia either because that's like one of the world's biggest uranium deposits.

I imagine if it's enough mass of you, I think it's uranium 238 and they're trying to, no, 235 to get to 238 or the other way around. But if there's enough mass and neutrons hitting each other, it might be enriching it somehow. I think that's probably what's happening there. I'm no nuclear scientist, so I don't want to say the wrong thing. Let's go back to those hieroglyphs, Jammy.

The lizard guy, the frog guy, or whatever that reptilian thing is, that freaks me out. Oh, yeah, it's the stuff of nightmares at times. It's kind of weird. Because that's, you know, one of the things that the weirdest, when the weirdest stories

when they start talking about aliens is the different types that visit. Right. And that one of them is a repriments. reptilian species that are the most creepy to deal with, which makes sense. I heard the same thing. It would be. Yeah, I mean, that reptilian brown are on Earth.

Like chickens are assholes, you know. Right, they are. And so are comodo dragons. And the idea that somehow or another, they could eventually reach incredible levels of technological sophistication and intelligence. We kind of rule that out. But look, there's clearly primates that are way dumber than us, right? Oh, for sure.

So why do we assume that it's only primates that reach an incredible high level of sophistication when we know that crows, which are really fucking close to dinosaurs, crows, super smart, like, like smarter than most kids. Yeah, problem solving smart. Yeah. Yeah, it's, you can't, yeah, I don't think you can, you can't put a, a restrictor on what evolution might produce. Not at all.

In any of these. Especially when intelligence is being exhibited by things that are really close evolutionarily to reptiles. Yes. Yeah, and that would just be, yeah, you get to that, like, just. lack of empathy, just that reptilian brain, it's just aggression and like everything that's not us as the enemy kind of deal. That's the mind fucking smart dinosaurs. Oh yeah. I mean, that was in Jurassic Park, right? The Raptors, they were super smart. Yeah, they were smart. Which, you know, makes sense.

Yeah, it's that whole pack, yeah, the instinct. But the idea that there's, that we were visited by intelligent reptiles is fucking bananas. I put, look, with the aliens, I don't often address it. But I put it firmly in the realm of like possible. Like it's just, I don't, I think when you look at the vastness of space and the length of time, the fact that we've, you know, we're just this crazy, you could, there could have massive civilizations galactically could have risen and fallen a million years ago. And we just weren't part of it. And that's literally a blink of the eye in these, in those sort of timeframes. We just, it's not surprising this, the Fermi paradox, right?

Like how come we haven't got like firm proof. or anything, even though people will say we have, but it's like, yes, there's, it's, it's the length of time. Like, we can rise and fall that span of a million years. It's just nothing on those time scales. And, you know, you can civil, whole species can rise to massive prominence and then just be nothing but dust at the end of that period of time. And you've got to try and do that across, what, 14 billion years? And even that's in question now, because the James Webb telescope seeing stuff that's supposedly way older than that now. Right. I mean, we'll see. We're going to find out, like this three-eye Atlas thing.

Yeah, what is that thing? Super weird, right? Well, Javi Loeb is convinced that it's a UFO. But that's what he does, right? He did with that other one, Omunuma. Amu Amu Amua. Amu Amua. So that one was a little odd. That was weird.

So it wasn't the weirdest thing about Amuamua seems to be its path after it turned around the sun and accelerated. Like that was the standard model of physics said it shouldn't have done that. And it seems to have exhibited sort of motion that was not what we predicted. would do that's as much as we can acceleration it accelerated it was outside noticeable yeah it's accelerated but like to the factor of what well not that one i think it was only a few percent but it was not what should have happened according to the calculations that astronomers and the i guess the orbital dynamics people had done that's what i understand was the most obviously its shape and size it was tumbling about its reflective properties as well right well it's yeah i mean just because it was so long

and narrow and it was tumbling that's what caused it to we would catch like the long side of it which the brightness would increase. So we had this oscillating brightness on it. And then it just passed through the system. And it's, you know, it's going, whatever, 87 kilometers per second or whatever it was, huge velocity, enough to escape the, you know, the gravity of the sun. But it accelerated where, that's what I understand it, did it accelerated where it shouldn't have. Then there was another interstellar artifact that came in that was pretty much a comet,

behaved like a comet. It had a tail. It was off-gassing water. It was just an interstellar ball of rock and ice, is what they say. it didn't get a lot of attention. Now this Three-Eye Atlas thing is much larger. It's traveling much faster, apparently, than the previous two, but it's also not behaving like a comet. It has this aura of light that it's emitting around it for some reason. I saw a report that said it, they're almost seeing a metallic, like, smelting signatures off it. I don't know how much

credence I can give it, but we'll find out. Like, it has a, it has a, it's going too fast to stop in our system unless it dramatically alters its velocity, but it's, I mean, it'll pop out, we'll lose it on the other side of the sun, but then we should see it again on the way out. So we'll know one way or the other if it actually is going to, if it, if it changes behavior, I mean, what's he put it, Avi, even, Avi Lowe put it like 40-60 or something artificial to natural, but

really? Dude, do you, it's so funny, I'm into Warhammer 40K in a big way and it's just like, I'm like, okay, we're going to be joining the Imperium here soon, boys to say, all howly omnisire. That thing might be a mechanicus vessel. I don't know. If that's how they travel, I'd be very disappointed. They just shoot through the sky. It takes months. Well, if it slows down. I know, but I'm looking for portals. I'm looking for, I mean, an advanced civilization that visits us, I don't want the advanced Vikings. Right. Right. I want the advanced scientists from the 21st century.

You just open up the portal. Yeah. I just, I, you know what I'm saying? I do. The ones who come fast on a burning spaceship, they're the dangerous ones. Because they're probably Yeah, they're probably the warlike conquerors, the ones who are going to rob us of our minerals and force us into slavery. You know what I mean? Yeah, yeah.

That seems like if that's how you're rocking it, you're still doing it the way we do it, where you have something thrusting you insanely fast through the cosmos? Yeah, I get it, yeah. Do you know the whole dark forest thing, like the dark forest theory? No, what's that?

So this came out of, it was the three-body problem. A great series of books by Chinese author Got Tuning on TV show Great show The books are phenomenal too And it's just But it's this idea that Look, we shouldn't be making noise

It's like imagine you're a hunter in a dark forest So it's just You're out there, you know there might be other things out there And it's this It's this like a philosophical engagement Of like what do you what should you do Should you start light of fire And make a whole bunch of noise in the dark forest

That's full of predators You don't know where they are They don't know where you are What's your behavior? should you do, should you see another predator? What should you be friendly? What's the risk to you to do it? And these could be like, you could be there with a baron arrow.

This guy could have a tank. This other guy could have like a massive, some other energy weapon, whatever. You don't, there's massive differences in capability and scale. And pretty much every scenario works out to like the, what you should do is just be quiet. And if you see something, you should eliminate the threat. That's kind of the way it goes in the dark, dark forest. It's like it's too risky to reveal yourself. You should basically eliminate that threat if you can do so safely.

And you apply that to kind of the galaxy and where, I mean, to some extent, I feel like we're the equivalent of like a baby in a cot that's screaming around a roaring fire because we put, and there's, you know, leopards out there. Right. And, you know, because we're just like sending these signals out into space for 100-something years now. And we just hope, hey, we're friendly, please. Well, you have to hope that something is so evolved that it's gotten past war, and it's gotten past the way we behave. So we're hoping and assuming that Space Daddy, Space Daddy, Space Brothers will be benevolent and wise beyond our imagination, and that they will come here and want to take care of us and give us information and hook us up.

I have this discussion. I've had this discussion a few times, and my response to a lot of that is, well, we can take nature. what happens when we take Nate let's look at the apex predator whether it's in the sea, in the air or on the land apex predators don't tolerate competition

they don't suffer any attacks they don't I mean we don't we just we just dominate like you just if it's in your way it's inconvenient you kill it if it has something you want we take it if those bees have honey we take it

like it's just there's no we're not like helping them we're not like trying to teach the dolphins how to talk there's still parts of the world where we're just eating them. You know, like there's, I don't know, it's, it's, it's, it nature suggests that that apex predator, but maybe, maybe we're just, I think this is the other element that you're saying is maybe you, evolution leads you past those primal nature at some point.

The territorial primate instincts that we exhibit, like hopefully one day. Because clearly we're on a pathway to that, right? We're clearly much kinder now. Yeah. At least locally, you know, if you don't live in Gaza. You know what I'm saying? Like if you're in the middle of a war zone, you're like, what are you talking about? This is as bad as it's ever been all throughout human history.

It's the same behavior exhibited over and over and over again. What we want is aliens that are a million years more advanced. We don't want aliens that are a thousand years more advanced. Got it. Because they might be just like us, but way better. That's what we don't, right? Because as soon as we start going into the cosmos, if we venture into the cosmos in 20 years, we're going to be the same animal, right? We're not going to be significantly different unless we integrate with technology.

and remove the ego and all the other. Yeah, mushrooms. Well, no, emotions and stuff, but maybe mushrooms, ourselves, let's get there for sure. Emotions. All the things, the human reward systems that exist that we currently struggle with, we would be the same way. Just think of what we justify on earth in terms of destruction of habitat, of native species, animals that we kill, all the different things that we do on earth. factory farming now imagine why would we care about these lizard people that live you know in caves on some fucking stupid planet you know we would probably kidnap them we'd kill them

we'd pickle them we'd bring them back home we'd freeze them got golden them caves yeah right look at what columbus did when they you know arrived yeah and took the natives and had them get gold and if they didn't they cut their arms off yeah horrific terrifying things so imagine And there's no evidence that aliens are currently doing that, which is the promising thing. Right. Right. Even the abductions, although I'm sure they're terrifying if they're true, they seem rather benign. Like, in fact, in the Travis Walton case, do you know that, that one?

It's one of the most famous ones. Not off the top of my head. Real simple, 1970s, he's a logger, he's working with a group of guys. They see a ship. He runs toward it. He gets hit with a beam of energy, gets knocked back. unconscious, his friends flee. They come back. They're yelling at each other. We've got to go back. We've got to get him. They go back. He's gone. All four of them get investigated for murder. They tell the story. No one believes them. They all passed polygraph tests. Five days later, he shows up. He finds a pay phone, makes a phone call and has this fucking insane story. But the story was that they took him aboard the craft and healed him and communicated with him and that there was a bunch of different types of these beings. And he has been telling the exact same story ever since the 1970s.

So but relatively benign compared to what we would do. For sure. You know, like we fucking, you know, we shoot elephants. It turns into avatar. Yeah. Think about the horrible things that we do right now on Earth. No, I agree. Yeah.

And it's something that I always say, it's a great quote from Christopher Hitchens, which is, you know, we're just not the end of that evolutionary chain. You know, we're just our current, our current, the current version of humanity, the Our frontal lobes are too big. Our adrenaline... Sorry, our frontal lobes are too small. Our adrenaline glands are too big. Our thumb, forefinger opposition isn't all it's cracked up to be.

And we love violence. We love violence. We love violence. Our national sport is dudes who are enormous running at each other. Full speed. And the other one is guys punching and kicking each other. Yeah. I mean, it's kind of...

Yeah, I mean, it's kind of crazy. We're so hard. And then we're also involved in multiple wars simultaneously, at least proxy. Yeah, proxy wars. And at least human beings are involved in a significant amount of war always. Yeah, this is literally the status quo throughout history. I mean, it's just, we've always been at war with each other. I mean, I still do, I personally maintain the idea that it is still the best time to be alive.

100%. Technologically speaking. But also, I mean, obviously, we're much more aware of conflict around the world. But on a percentage scale of what it's been like in the past, it's actually far less than it has been, like even though it's terrible when it happens, but we're in an era where there's actually less of that going on and hopefully that can continue.

I actually genuinely think that it's one of the reasons why this whole investigation into the past is important to me. Like I don't, it's not, I haven't really talked about it in videos or put it down. It's going to be, it's part of the book I'm writing for sure. It's a big part because it's not just some benign investigation in the past. I genuinely think it could have a significant impact on our future

because that concept you talked about it of like this linear progression, right? I mean, in general, we get taught in school that, okay, we were Stone Age dudes, we were in caves, civilization happened, how many thousands of years later, here we are. This is the only, it's like this is the only way that an advanced civilization can happen is on this path, don't worry about it, it's almost like it's preordained, just worry about next election cycle, next quality result, whatever, right? And we just don't think about it. I do, this is this concept, I call it, I think it's a fundamental pillar of what it means to be a human being today.

It's in everybody's mind to some degree, like, all right, Stone Age to us, we're advanced, this is the only way it happens. I do think that if you can change that at that fundamental level to this cyclical version that is an oscillation between civilization and cataclysm and this idea that, okay, we've actually risen in the past, we've become relatively high technology, we've become civilized. and it happened, it would have been different to us, but we fell, we fell again, and we're somewhere on this oscillation and this circular motion between civilization and cataclysm, and on a long enough time scale, we know it's going to happen again. Yes. Right. And if you can change that, if you could change that fundamental concept in people, like,

that's what we teach people in schools. Okay, so we're rising again, we're at this crazy point in time where our technology is super advanced, we can solve some of these problems, but we know on this time scale, If we don't do something about it, we might end up like our ancestors did. I genuinely think that stands a chance of, like, changing some of our behavior and some of our, like, a little less money on tanks and guns, a little bit more money on space exploration, make solving the longer term problems a bit more of a priority. And it's altruistic and it's like a crazy goal. It's, I know it's altruistic is all hell, but it's just, I think there's precedent for it, too, though. I mean, whether you agree with it or not, politically, I mean, it doesn't matter, but the fact is that the term climate change has changed our behavior over the last 25 years, right?

It's changed. If you think about what's happened with that concept and that movement, it changes investment decisions. It changes our interactions with each other with the planet. You know, it's changed our behavior in the way we think about stuff. It's like this is crept into our zeitgeist as a species and it's changed our behavior. So I look at some of this stuff in the past as it's not just being some harmless investigation into things. I think it actually getting to the root cause of what's happened in the past actually could help us in our future. I think it's an important.

It's what drives, I think, my interest in it in a lot of ways too. It's another piece of an example, another example rather of how primitive we are that we still, the actual climate is political. That's bananas. Oh, yeah. Pollution is political. Yes. Well, I mean, if you disagree, I mean, I always find it crazy that if you even question any of some of the like official narrative about this stuff, the first thing you've got to do is make sure you decry and say, no, no, no, pollution bad. Pollution bad. Just because I think that some of the science might be off. I'm not saying, like, let's pollute the oceans. Like, no, no, let's be stewards. Yeah. But it's also the amount of time that we've polluted the oceans in is spectacular. What we've done just in terms of the depopulation of the ocean. oh yeah that's nuts like 90 plus percent of all big fish are gone yeah in a short amount of time like a couple hundred years of like hardcore fishing and we we fished out the ocean man just about

that's nuts not only that we polluted the fuck out of it to the point where you're not even supposed to eat it every day right which is that's crazy that's crazy if you eat sushi every day people don't recommend it on a beer bottle on the marion bottom of the mariana trench what yeah that's crazy man yeah that's how gross we are somebody was over there and they chucked one overboard yeah it looks like it was that honking it looks pretty recent right he's got the fucking label on it yeah right the label hasn't even eroded the challenge a deep if it's that recent like why isn't it covered in sediment you know I mean yeah yeah the the surface covers things up and moves

over time. It probably won't be there forever. It probably won't be sitting on the surface like that. I think it's still floating around. I don't think it's... Oh, wow. Yeah, maybe. Oh, right, right, right. It's... Oh, it's... Wow. It should sink, I'd been imagined. Unless there's some sort of a downward or upward current.

Yeah. Scientists find beer bottle the deepest point of the ocean. That's so... 6.7 miles, 35,000 feet below the surface. That is... How does it not implode, but that sub does? Boy, in no air. Yeah. Oh, okay. There you go. Right. Yeah, it wouldn't last long if there's a cap on it, that's for sure. But, yeah, I don't want to go down there.

Fuck all that. Yeah. Yeah, I'd rather watch a video. Not only that, they were watching a video. That's what's even crazier. Yeah. You go all the way down and you're watching a screen. Yeah.

It's not like there's a window. You can't have a fucking window. No, exactly. Yeah. Like one little, or just if there's one giant thick thing at the front. Imagine the freak out of being at the bottom. James Cameron knows. I mean, he went down that.

Yeah. Not for me. He went there by himself. I know he did. It's crazy. In that, yeah, in that, he did it right. I guess if you're going to do it. Why is he doing that?

James, we need you. I want four feet of titanium around me, like in a sphere. Yeah, we need you to make movies. Maybe not a carbon fiber tube. Yeah. Well, especially not one that the engineer said wasn't really designed for those depths. Yeah, that cracked. Did you ever watch that documentary?

It's, dude, they're putting that thing out. They do the scale model, and they're testing it under pressure, and they all standing around in the room and just goes, bang! Like, it's just, it's, and every test they did, it went bang, and blue. And they're like, oh, that's fine. They did, like, 20 successful trips with that day. Oh, they did a bunch. Yeah, and it was, and it, well, even the scariest part is, like, when you're in the footage with it, and you can hear it popping.

Like, it's literally the carbon fiber strands snapping. Oh, it's terrible. It's terrifying. Imagine me one of those people that successfully made that journey and then the nightmares that you have. every day. Oh. Like the one right before. You barely missed it.

You barely, yeah, the one right before. Barely missed getting instantaneously destroyed. Yeah. I'm sure you've seen the animation, the computer recreation of what it would look like. Yeah, implosion. Yeah, you turned to blood cells. Yeah. Just splatter.

Yeah, you wouldn't even, it said that it happens faster than the time it would take for you to even register that it happened, like for your senses to register in your brain that it happened. It's over. The fucking pressure. the pressure. Yeah. Just the fact that we're that weird that we choose to do that, that we have technology,

like, let's see, let's go. Yeah. This is so funny the way they skirted the, I mean, he signed everyone up as like basically expedition team members. They were,

that's how they got around. I'm not selling seats for this. Like they're coming on. They all had a technical role, supposedly, and it was like, I'm not, he was getting around the regulations

and the safety regulations. But yeah. No interest in that sort of pressure. I mean, I dive, but not like that. Diving is swimming. Pretty much. It's just like hardcore swimming. The simulation of the implosion is crazy.

Yeah. I haven't seen this. It said that it would have happened in 20 milliseconds, and it takes like 150 milliseconds for your brain to feel pain. That's, yeah, that's... Yeah, no, thank you. God. Oh, my God.

Why does this freak me out so much? Because a guy went on with his son. Yeah, it's a terrible story. I mean, it's just... Why? I wish I was friends with that guy. I'd be like, dude, no. It's not the place I'd want to explore.

Like, there is some stuff off Cuba. They say that's, they reckon pyramids, it's kilometers deep in the ocean. I've seen that. I've seen, well, I've seen internet videos. Yeah, like imaging. Yeah. But I did die. We were in Alexandria.

I dived on the lighthouse. So there's, and actually there was a news article just the other day about the, the Egyptians were pulling, like, more stuff out of the water there at Heraclion and at the lighthouse of Alexandria. Quite an interesting story. And we were in Alexandria, dive in the Mediterranean on the Egyptian side. And, I mean, it's amazing. There's massive columns and massive megalithic blocks in the water from when that, the lighthouse, it fell down or it collapsed. There was, there was an earthquake. And so you're actually, you're in the water, but you're diving over, like, megalithic blocks.

like these and huge columns and it and it's it has a history that stretches back too right it's the megalithic stuff is what's associated with the very earliest periods of building um all the stuff that happened later is typically not that big but yeah this is actually what's nuts that's what's nuts is that the older you go the bigger the stones are well and it's what's funny is when we looked into the erosion at places like the geiza plateau you it's it you have two or three feet. It's not on a sphinx. Everybody knows about the Sphinx enclosure erosion, but you look at place like the pyramid temple of the middle pyramid. There's some of the blocks on the Great Pyramid, the casing stones that are there that we can see now that they've

taken the boat museum away. And up and down the causeway, there is limestone blocks with up to two feet of erosion. Like it's these waves. I think I have a have a directory on that, on that drive with the erosion on it. And it's, you have to, you have to, you have to, you have to juxtapose that against all the other stuff they say is fourth dynasty right so right next to the valley temple there is another structure that's built from small limestone blocks doesn't have any erosion not like the valley temple does uh the western cemetery that's behind the great pyramid is beautifully made it's smaller limestone blocks it's apparently older so yeah here's a good example this is the mortuary or the pyramid temple so these you can see where the face of that block

originally was but it's been eroded in like up to two feet in places. There's huge amounts of erosion that you can find in a lot of places at the Giza Plateau. Yet at the same time, you have what is said to be contemporary structures said to have been built roughly in the same time. Sometimes they say they're even older that have just no erosion at all, made from the same stone, made by this, allegedly by the same people. And what force do they attribute that erosion to? Well, it's got it's wind and sand, right? That's what they will say. Look, this is just regular weathering. And here's the crazy thing about these structures are like this was also cased in granite these are the inside

blocks so this this structure was fully cased in like four feet thick granite blocks and that was excuse me that was stolen and that were taken but it would have protected this stone from erosion for however many thousands of years you find there there's another picture in here of like the um that's that's so there like see this is this is said to like that picture i just showed with the heavy erosion that's where the arrow is at the pyramid temple no no back to that back to that one yep So that deep erosion is at that pyramid temple, this one wall to the right. They say this is older than that. And this has never been cased in granite.

That other stuff was cased in granite. It's megalithic. There's a block in that complex. It's 450 tons. And it was cased in granite. Now, there's been studies, right? So we know how long it takes to weather limestone. There's been a bunch of studies.

The U.S., the government departments have studied it. They put limestone blocks on the top of the, a building in Washington, D.C. in a government department and studied it over 11 years. There's endless cemeteries with conveniently carved and dated limestone pieces in the form of headstones that you can measure. You can go, okay, this was carved and whatever year this guy died, and as you can measure it and over time get a sense for like what's it take with rain, with wind. We've done studies of like, all right, we put these blocks in a river and we let it wash over,

like a very highly erosive environment where we've got running water, over the stone and how long it takes to erode for some of the erosion that you can if you reference those studies for this type of hard limestone to get two feet of erosive wear on those blocks just with regular wind weathering and this is this is in places that have a lot more rainfall than geyser you're talking dates from like 60 to 1202,000 years to get that much erosion on it I mean and that's and I think that's in a more erosive environment than what the the desert is what so yeah that's that's it side by side so you have literally they'll tell you that thing on the right is older this was built by kufu this is supposedly kufra his son but it's it's completely

different so this is that tailored to industries thing as well but they attribute all this to the same people but you can baseline this because it's the same stone it's at the same elevation level it's supposedly the same age the differences are in the construction like it's megalithic And a lot of this stuff was encased in granite. This is the Sphinx Temple down at the other end of the causeway. Same thing. So all the megalithic stuff that was cased in granite has severe erosion. Yet there's buildings all around it.

And up and down the plateau, they say are built at the same time. Yet it's smaller blocks. It's not as nice work. And it's not eroded like that. And what's the conventional explanation from that discrepancy? They just don't address it. Like I've not seen anyone. Well, I mean, because the argument's always been the sphinx temple,

like the Sphinx enclosure, right? Robert Schock, John Anthony West, he talked about the fact that you needed thousands of years of rainfall erosion to get those patterns on the walls. That's where the discussion's been focused. It's not, there was no comparison made. It was always like, well, this is, this, you know, the geologists and the experts say it's wind and sand, it's water erosion, but then you have the archaeologist and the Mark Landis saying, no, it's wind and sand, wind and sand. But I think there's a better argument to be made when you start to do comparative work like this. You go, all right, hang on, let's take the western cemetery behind the great pyramid supposedly built by kufu fourth dynasty it's at the

same elevation level it's the same stone type as the mortuary or the pyramid temple of the middle pyramid complex so after kufu so if he built that then his son kufra built this one how come this one which was also cased in granite and this wasn't how come this is so much more eroded than this there's no it's at the same elevation level it's the same stone it's so you would assume that it's been subjected to the same weathering. Why is this so weathered and that is not? You can't explain it any other way. Yeah, I've not seen anyone respond to that, to that argument with anything that makes

any remote sense. Remote sense would dictate one's older. Yeah, I mean, we show, literally, I'd like to show people, like which one, which one looks older? Same stone. Same stone. Same elevation level, same everything. It has to be.

Yeah, I mean, it's, and again, we know. That's crazy. That's crazy. And it's not like this, this is very hard numelitic limestone. Like, it's full of fossils. It's not a soft limestone. The idea that there was a civilization that built monolithic construction. Yeah.

A hundred thousand years ago is crazy. It is. That's so crazy. But have you seen any of Michael Button's work? Yeah, yeah. I saw the episode, yeah. That is a very interesting episode. When he's talking about how human beings in this exact same form,

have been around at least 300,000 years. At least. At least. So that's the fossil record. Right. That's all we found. There might be human beings that were 500,000 years ago. There's six.

Good evidence for it, actually. Really? Yeah. So, yeah, so the Morocco find, I've talked about this for years as well. It's that, the fossil record, so we used to be, what, 190, we were 50,000, and it's 195,000 with the Ethiopian bones, and it's 315 or 19 with the Morocco find. That's the latest in the fossil record, anatomically modern humans. However, there are studies, I think this is in the other vectors director, I've got those studies.

There's two studies that I reference usually. One is a DNA study that suggests, like, from a genetic perspective, Neanderthals are our cousin. Like, we didn't evolve from them. We both evolved from a common ancestor. And they then based on just looking at the genome and trying to trace it back, the paper suggests that we split with a common ancestor somewhere in the realm of 800,000 years ago. us in the endothal split from a common ancestor like that's when we carved off 100,000 years ago yeah and there's another study on teeth morphology which is which was it actually got set up to try and prove that we're only you know two 300 thousand years old and they were looking at all right so my nearest common ancestor how quickly does our dental our teeth have to evolve uh and morph like this teeth morph like teeth morphology how quickly does that have to happen for us to basically have the teeth that we have today relative to our ancestors. And they thought, well, it's going to have to be this

rate to make these numbers work. And then they did this big statistical study on a lot of different people from all around the world. And they figured out the rate of dental evolution is much slower. So then they basically worked backwards from there and said, okay, so if that's how quickly our teeth evolved, then we may have been around as many as eight or 900,000 years. So you have two different studies. I mean, again, fossil record 300,000, but other studies do suggest the possibility could be up towards a million years old for human beings. It gets real interesting, even within the 300,000 years,

but certainly if you stretch it back further, I mean, you can find graphs of the temperature and the global temperature in ice core data from Antarctica. It goes back 400,000 years. So you have these peaks and valleys. Like we're in that peak right now in the Holocene, the nice warm period where civilization flourishes. But we've been through a bunch of those peaks before. And some of those valleys are, we know, as a result of cataclysm, like massive changes to the surface of the earth where nothing would be left. So I, look, I honestly put the realm of possibility for advanced civilization, not just the last ice age, but within, you know, up to a million years potentially.

That's fucking crazy. Could be. Well, it's not. It'd be dust for a lot of it, but... It would be dust what we would find now. But it's not... But that's what Michael Button's argument, when you're dealing with anatomically similar human beings

or amatomically exactly the same creature. Give us warm weather and, you know, enough food to eat, and we start fucking solving problems. Which is one of the reasons why Egypt itself was so spectacular was that it was very fertile. It was in the African human period. This is one of my arguments is I think if you, so if we just assume for...

a moment, that there was a civilization that flourished during the African humid period and before it, when the Sahara was a savannah. And that's why I think the Sahara is such an appealing target. It's because what happened, right? So if that civilization ends, we're knocked back to a relative Stone Age, the people that were populating, and people have been in the North, we know, for like hundreds of thousands of years, like people. And if they're going to start that civilization, they're going to do it in the only part of that country that was habitable it's the Nile Valley and that's where all the sites of ancient Egypt are that we know about but they've all been let's assume they kick started with stuff and they've built been

inherited and renovated and reused and the dynastic Egyptians made them their own if assuming there's something there before so what's fascinating to me is the possibility that out there in the Sahara maybe near an ancient water source or an ancient aqueduct or something or an ancient aquifer we might be another Assyrian out there like this subterranean things there might be another there might be another labyrinth buried beneath the sand somewhere that's not been touched and it hasn't been inherited and reused well that's where the rush art structure gets weird right and that's that's on a timeline that could be very ancient because it's very eroded it's then it's hard to see anything like this it's interpretive almost at this point to to figure out

that there's if there was a structure there or anything yeah right yeah it's interesting but it's also that's another one when you go above and you look at the satellite imagery you go oh boy That place got washed. Yeah, it did. It got washed. I mean, that place is one of the clearest examples of a place that looks like it got washed because there's literal salt deposits everywhere. Right. Yeah, I mean, it's...

Which is nuts. It is nuts. The whole thing is nuts. Yeah, I don't know what happened. Jimmy Cordes said he has some amazing videos on that. Well, yeah. If everybody's interested. Jimmy does.

You do as well. Jimmy's awesome. Yeah, he's... Yeah, that seems like it could be one of the places to look. I mean, actually, so Michael Donnellins, there's an interesting talk about Melon Burrows and that same satellite scan company. There's a guy named Michael Donnellan who's been working. He was working with them still is.

He's putting out a documentary pretty soon called Atlantica, and he thinks he's found, at least if not Atlantis, a part of Atlantis off the coast of Spain. And they've 100% found some shit in the waters and been diving on it for a couple of years now, I'm building a documentary. But it's pretty convincing. He's found, again, another like underwater, if nothing else, megalithic city. he thinks it could be Atlantis as well off the coast of Spain. Wow, I saw that that documentary was coming out.

I didn't know exactly what they had discovered. Is there images that we could see right now? It's no, he's, we saw like an advanced preview of it, close to his chest, until it comes out. But it's, it's, they discovered it with that Millen Burroughs scanning tech, the same satellite based tech, and then they went and dived on it. And I, we saw like a cut down version of three episodes at this conference I went to and met him. I've since talked to him a bit.

Fascinating. 100% found something. Like, it is man-made. Like, whatever it is. Yeah, so this is like the preview, a little teaser thing. When does this come out? I'm not sure when the streaming. I feel like it's got to be this year, I hope. He's mostly done with it. Says 2025.

Okay, so then. Or at least the trailer is 2025. That was Tim Acres for a second, the old guy with the beard when he was still alive. When did he die? I think it was just last year or the year before. Damn. Yeah, it sucks. I'm very happy I got John Anthony West on a couple of times before he passed I spawned my big regrets is never actually having the chance to meet the man he was

great he's phenomenal you know there's a clip I use in my videos of him back in the 90s show any images jammy no no no really back in the nighes John Anthony West I use it in some of my videos and he's standing at this cabinet the same cabinet I stand in front of take people there to the Cairo Museum and he's looking at this beautiful diro vase with a super thin neck and it's just it's like this beautiful but tiny little thin neck on it and fled and he's just saying you know how much these vases are an anomaly they're pre-dynastic we don't know how they made them you know how do you machine out the inside of this vase through this tiny little neck someone did and he said i can only hope that at some point in

the future will people will start to like apply modern technology and and study these things and try to learn some more about it so it's fantastic that that vase scan project is basically doing what he thinks we should be doing that is we're learning a ton about it his uh DVD series magical egypt is what got me hooked. Yeah, I know, yeah, as you've said. That series is insane. It's so good. He was great.

A symbolologist, and I think that symbolologist's view of ancient Egypt is fantastic. Occasionally he would touch on the engineering side of things that I'm caught a deep on. Sometimes he'd ignore it too. It's pretty funny. I have a copy of his guidebook, which is hard to get these days, his guidebook to ancient Egypt. And it literally has about this much on the Serapium, because there's just no real writing down in the Theropeum, that's the place with the 25 giant, like, 100-ton stone boxes. It's one of the most remarkable logistical feats that come from ancient Egypt, but he just wasn't, there wasn't

a lot to, like, for a symbolologist to interpret in that place. So it's like, yeah, it's pretty cool, go check it out some boxes. And we spend, like, four hours down there. It's interesting, if you think of him, like, being, concentrating on the symbolism and how much work he did. Oh. And just, you need one of those, too, right? For sure. You need a bunch of different people looking at all the different aspects of it. Yeah. And he was another one that had, his interpretation was this is a lot older. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.

It seems, no one seems to, like, do a deep dive on it and go, oh, no, no, no, they figured this out. No, right. Zahi's example was so crazy. His explanation was, this was the National Project. Dude, I've, it's so, I tried to watch that podcast. Imagine if we're all going to fly without wings. This is the national project. Exactly.

You're just going to use your mind and fly without wings. We're all just going to work on that. I have heard him say that for 10 years, 11 years. That's a national project? Yes. I asked him that question 2015. I was in the room with Graham Hancock and him having this debate. It wasn't a debate and we're yelling at like Zahi flipped out earlier in the day.

But, you know, we asked him that question. I've heard him and given that answer so many times. You're asking him about anything, precision or logistics, you know, all these difficult to explain topics. that's the response it is it's basically they tried really hard therefore they did and it's it's it drives me nutty he's not the only one who gives that response by the way that's that's that's a pretty stock standard answer to anything we say well how did they move a thousand tons statue a thousand miles which is what they did at one point um or how did they build the pyramid so precisely or whatever or how did they do it in the time frame no national project they just really wanted to and it's

the the response are good examples like the appell like let's assume I mean The Apollo 11, the Apollo program, right? Going to the moon. That was a national project at the time. There was a huge amount of resources put towards it from a relative to what NASA is today. But we didn't just fucking all come together with a big, you know, piece of fabric and fling some people at the moon.

There's technology involved, right? You can't do it without the technology. That's the aspect of that answer that annoys me. It's like, no, I don't care how hard you try. Try does not get you like precise down to within a thousand of an inch or in the case of one of these vases, four-tenths of a micron, six-tenths of a micron. That's the most extreme precision I've seen on one of them.

Well, it's interesting, too, that these vases, these small things that you can hold in your hand are evidence of this incredible technology when these enormous statues also exist. But you don't think of the vases as being the thing that's the smoking gun, but it kind It is. They are. It's because they predate the dynastic Egyptians, because they were buried with those people. We know they existed in those times.

You can't do that with the big statues, but I have a whole long two-hour talk about how these things connect to those things, like the tube drills and the precision and the machining. It's the same technique. It's the stone types. I mean, God, there are a bunch of tubular drills on the Great Pyramid, a whole bunch of them. People don't know about them or where they are,

but I've got pictures and I can. show people the statues show the same machining marks the statues reflect the same precision the boxes the the the obelisks a lot of the stonework reflect the same thing as well the same tools were used the same precision shows up and in pretty much all of those cases the oldest and the best examples of all of those things are typically also the oldest like it's like the the the best examples of the oldest yeah the single piece columns are absolutely incredible like those The Romans didn't make columns like that Like the fact that these columns of granite in Egypt

I mean they start off wide And they get narrow and narrow and narrow And then they flare out at the top And it's all a single piece And that means that the entire piece That was quarried had to be as wide As the widest part at the top And then machine down

These columns have freaking vertical They have lathe centering points on them Like there's like a hundred like Imagine it's like 150 tons Turning on a vertical lathe or something That they did to create some of these things So there's points that show that it was on Oh, it was definitely centering points.

Yeah, on these columns, there's a forest of them laying out at Tannis, and you can see it on the endpoints. Can we show that? That's nuts. And what's the weight of these things? Oh, it's up to, I mean, I imagine the bigger ones are maybe 100, 150 tons, 200 tons. And you have these existing on Old Kingdom sites. Sakara, Giza, Abu-Sia, the single-piece columns.

They are also on sites later on that are attributed to the New Kingdom, places like the Luxalt Temple or Karnak, however, I think that those places had a granite core and an infrastructure there already, and then those kings of the New Kingdom, Setti I, the first, Merrin Patar, Ramsey's the second, built around them. And you can see the difference in technology of what's in the granite core with the giant obelisks and the columns and the granite buildings that look like the Valley Temple and the old structures. Then outside of that, it's all sandstone and it's blocks. And they made giant columns too, but they're made from blocks of sandstone. They would stack them up and shave them down.

It's a much softer stone, and making blocks out of rounds and just, you know, making columns out of rounds is way easier than trying to build a single, flared, you know, granite column. And even the Romans, I mean, it has to have been something like that. It can't have been that all the way, because you have, actually, Jamie, in that precision large directory, there's a picture of a column end, like as I'm standing next to this amazing end piece, but some of them are faceted, so it can't have all. been laith work. They have little, they have little buttresses and features, but certainly the column of the lathe, the circular part could have been done, or the column, the center of the column could have been done on a lathe, I'm sorry. Yeah, it's fascinating. How big is this lathe? Huge. I mean, Chris Dunn thinks, yeah, I mean, that's one of the columns I'm standing next to. That's at Tannis. And if you flip through, there's like a column endpoint that's, yeah,

There's an end there. So see there's a hole in the in the tip. So you have, you have a lot, this is a place called Temple of Bastet and there were forests of these things. Like look at that thing. That thing is one of the most, look at that. That's one of my favorite artifacts in all of Egypt. It is immaculate. That, that, the facetting, look at that, that bull nose that runs up the center of that frond of the palm, because these are like palm shaped pillars. I mean, it tapers. It's thick on one end and it thins right down to the end and it's exactly. the same on either side. On each of these fronds, I would love to get there and scan this thing. One of my favorite pieces, and you just had, like, I mean, probably hundreds of these things on these sites. I mean, even, and it goes back in time. Again, this is from, this is, these are columns from Sakara and Abu Sear, which are all Old Kingdom sites. So again, these are existing in the early times. They didn't build columns like this later in the civilization. They build them with sandstone pieces. Go back to those images again, please.

Look how crazy that looks. Yeah. One solid piece of granite. Yeah, and flared. Even the Romans, who by all accounts, had far superior technology to the Egyptians. They had force multiplies. They had iron. They had all sorts of mathematical skill they got from the Greeks.

They've built single piece granite pillars, but they were tape it. the whole way. And they weren't anything as precise. They're quite rough. If you go, you've been to the Pantheon. This one's one of my favorites. This is called Pompey's Pill. You can see the dude standing at the bottom. Like this is, like I've actually got a picture of me there as well, but it's... Yeah, you see that dude at the bottom. Yeah. Zoom out so we can see the whole thing with him. It's not working. There it is. Look at that. So I think that's been a re, that's a reworked column that the Romans reworked and they either they carved that head top

or it's a separate stone I'm not actually sure but this is this is in Alexandria in Egypt but huge and where did that come from and so this is how they do it that's I don't I mean it's Aswanian granite it's but it's like a thousand kilometers away

so then when you get to New Kingdom so that's what this is what they yes so this is the stacked rounds of sandstone and this is I always like to show people this corner of Carnac because it's an unfinished column on the end there. You can see how they did it. They'd stack up those blocks and they basically shave it down and they would end up

and this is imitation too, right? This is the other key thing you see even with the vases they would I mean people knew what was sophisticated. Like anyone who works with stone whether you're primitive or not you see an artifact like that or one of those statues or a column out of stone you're like holy shit how did they do that? So

it's from the gods right. I'm going to imitate it and I'm going to try and replicate it and so they were doing their best to replicate and imitate. But With sandstone. With sandstone and in a technological method that they were capable of, which is to put blocks of sandstone up, shave it down and make it look like one of these columns. And they did great work, right? Don't get me wrong.

Carnac is, this is the great sort of hyperstall hall at Carnac. It's phenomenal. And it is the work of the New Kingdom. But it still pales in technological significance to like the older stuff, the single piece stuff. But it's fabulous. Like, this is, I love, the Karnak's one of my favorite places because you have all those examples right in front of you of like high tech and then low tech. And so by New Kingdom, what year? So like 14,500 BC, ish, wow.

So even then, they're still doing spectacular stuff. It's just not as sophisticated. It was by all it can't see. Old Kingdom, in the New Kingdom, that was Egypt's height, like the height of the dynastic Egyptian civilization. like Ramsey's the second in particular, like always call him the, you know, the greatest of the Egyptian kings. Egypt had the most power, the most wealth, the most ability to do that sort of work. So they built these great temples. And it just, it's very, very clear.

Yeah, this is that Pompeii's pillar that they call it. It's very clear that they built them around and on top of existing infrastructure. In fact, at Karnak, which is attributed to Ramsey's the second. I mean, again, the devil's and the devil's in. You have the names of kings that go back all the way to the old kingdom on various structures. You also, at one point at that, in that hall where they pulled up a massive floor tile, underneath the ground at the bottom there is a column base. It's another, like an older and white calcite column base that is the same sort of column base

that you see on the very oldest of sites, which tells you there was a columned hall here before and either got destroyed or knocked down, but the whole place was rebuilt. you see this evidence for these layers of infrastructure on these sites that tells you, okay, this is, it's like looking at these ancient sites, you always have to keep that in the back of your head, like, all right, there's been thousands of years of not only inheritance, but renovation and reuse and claiming. Like, it's, you know, people have asked me if I think the statues are so old, how come they look like dynastic Egyptians? I think the answer is it's the other way around. I think the dynastic Egyptians look like the statues. So if you imagine, there's evidence for like five or six of these giant thousand-ton statues, which are the typical stuff you see at Luxor with the, you know, the headjet

and the Nemes crown or the big, the bowling pin thing on the head. And they're always in that iconic symbolic style of ancient Egypt. Can you go to some of those? Yeah, I have the precision large has probably got the same. statues um and imagine that you are a tribal culture that's emerging from the from this the stone age but you have this history and these legends of these stories and you come across yeah so this iconic this iconic look and again this stretches back this is an old kingdom status is attributed to this is made of diarite by the way this is called cuffray enthroned one of my favorite

statues with the columns from from cigar in the background this is made out of that same and possibly hard stone yes it's like a 6.5 to a 7 on the most scale and it's it's it's phenomenal this is an incredible statue and this has exhibits that facial symmetry as well it looks like it i've not seen the actual scans from this but this thing actually has tubular drill marks and and sawcuts in it too so it's it's got between his heels is a you see the remnants of a tube drill keep that there please i've probably got a picture of that in my machining directory of the actual the tube drill between the heels and then in the legs on the inside you can actually see overcuts like saw cuts from where they cut too deeply into this insanely hard stone

and it's overrun which is if you were doing this by hand that's a mistake you'd have to be making for about four hours you know to actually get the depth of the cut but if you had some sort of power tool that was moving removing material quickly it's you can overcut in there and there's like little mistakes go to the full of this please yeah so your thoughts are that the Egyptians were imitating these ancient looks. Yes. I think they, I think they inherited their iconography from the things, the artifacts that they, that they gain in, like, statues like this, and also the thousand-ton versions of statues like this. And, I mean, if you look at their art style, this is one of the things that blows my mind, it's, it's, it's like, across that 3,000-year civilization, that iconography didn't change very much. Like, it's the same look. And you, and how do the kings draw themselves on the walls? They're always trying to position themselves as being one of the gods, right? They always talk about eventually they got this aura of divinity.

You became a god like the pharaohs became divine. That wasn't always the case. But they grew into that over time as that civilization progressed. And they always matched themselves and they try to make themselves look like the gods. And again, eventually once you get hubris and ego involved in some of these really big, really rich kings, you're like, damn it, I am one of the gods. Put my name on this statue. That's how I want to be remembered.

it. And that's, there were multiple guys, Sedi the first did it. His son, Ramsey's the second, his son, Marin Patar, particularly in the new kingdom. I mean, Petri called Ramsey's the great usurper. That was his name for him because he was putting his name on everything, trying to label himself as one of the kings. And I think if you look at that, from the old kingdom through to the Ptolemaic era, it's the same. Like they're depicting themselves as one of these gods who are always depicted in the same way. And that's, that's like, that's part of it from day one. like it feels like. And I think, where do you get that picture from? It's like that, what's the, what's the poem from Percy Shelley? Ossimandius, look on my works, you mighty in despair. Like, it's literally a poem by Percy Shelley that talks about it. He actually gets it from, I think, Diodorus, an account of Diodorus Siculus coming across one of these statues in the desert that's a thousand tons.

It's like a weary traveler in a desert in an unknown land. comes along to vast and trunkless legs of stone over like nearby a shattered visage lies still like sort of sneer full of sneer and arrogance and it's basically written upon this stone of the words my name is ozimandias king of kings look on my work ye mighty in despair and there the endless sand stretch far away it's i mean i'm paraphrasing people are dicks yeah especially when they become kings there it is Look on my works, ye mighty and despair. Nothing beside remains, round and round, okay, that colossal wreck, boundless and bear, the lone and level sandstress.

So it's like, if you imagine you come across in the sand in the desert and you find the remnants of a thousand tons, have you, if you probably, I'm sure you've seen pictures of the Rameseum and the thousand ton statues. Like there's four or five of them, at least, that happened. But they're incredible. Single piece stone statues that were moved in some cases up to a thousand, like, six, seven hundred miles away. I have them in a colossal directory. And did they fall

from earthquakes? Is that the speculation? I suspect either that or the hands of men. I think it was like, I think with enough dudes with enough leverage, you can probably yeat that thing over and it'll crack when it falls. And I think they would definitely, there was a long period of them destroying all the gods and all the

and all the, you know, the false idols of the past. Of course. At a place called Tannis, there's a foot. There's a giant foot that I can't, I mean, my whole asterisk hand wouldn't fit in the toenail. And it's a repurposed block of granite and Petri found it. And there's other pieces of this statue. So we know it was a statue that had it been standing, it's about the same size as the Statue of Liberty without the pedestal. The foot's about the same size. Just give it a frame of reference. And that thing's made from Aswanian granite. Now, Tannis is in the north. And it's

North of Cairo, like it's up in the Delta towards the Mediterranean, and Cairo is down here. It's like a thousand kilometers. So someone at some point took at least 1,000 ton, probably more like 1,500 tonne block of stone because they didn't finish them, they didn't ship them finished. We know they finished stuff on site, like a thousand kilometers north. Is it even better example, Jamie, I think in the... Is that the foot? The foot at Tennis?

No, that's it there, the first one. in my um in the massive uh yeah there's actually my my video thumbnail down the ancient tennis largest stone statue ever made uh which one uh giant huge objects huge objects yeah there you go up on that's the foot there so you see that's the it's actually it's funny because this box block's been repurposed It's been cut off on both sides and used as a block in a wall. They cut the front off it and the back off it and stuck it in and rebuilt it. This thing, there's a picture of the whole arm when it was put together in that directory. So that's a giant thumb holding a scroll.

And they put the whole arm together. I've got one picture of it. One time I was there, they put the whole arm together. And that is probably the most impressive example. It's in there, I'm sure. see it's that them down down down yep up up one there you go yeah so this this is uh it's made from composite quartzite so this is at karnak this is one of several of statues of this size at karnak and what's impressive about this they actually they put this together for one year then they took it

apart because and i got told that it was because they didn't people were freaking out about how big this must have been they didn't kind of it gives a sense of scale and then people like what the fuck how are they doing this so they took it apart again but you can still see the thumb there today so its turn on its side. Now, what's cool about this is that it's a straight arm. So a lot of those statues, like the one at the Ramaseum, they're seated. So they always have their elbows bent at their knees. This thing was standing. So it was a standing statue, thousand tons made from composite quartzite, which is in a lot of ways more difficult to work than granite. It's a very hard, compressed form of sandstone. It's like 6.5 to 7, but it's full of flint. It's a stone carver's

nightmare. It's like you can see the chunks of flint and the stone, but they somehow work that surface just with no problem going over Flint, which is seven, seven and a half on the most scale. The trick with this statue is where that stone came from. That's, it's a Karnak in the south, Aswan for granite, a bit further south. Composite quartzite doesn't come from Aswan. It comes from the red mountains north of Cairo. And the tricky part here is that the Nile River flows north. right so it's like people it's because it's north that people like it's flowing up but it flows to the north so they had to take the block for that thing

I'd say 1,500 tons easy they had to bring that up river up river 600 miles or something 500 miles wow I don't know how you explain that and there's certainly no depictions of them doing that that's that is a logistical

feat it's I don't know how you can rival it was a national project don't you get it don't you get it just a national project they really wanted to do well it's one of those really amazing mysteries because the actual facts of it are so spectacular that it defies any conventional explanation to the point where it it opens up people to the possibility that maybe we don't know it almost every anyone listening to this it's even remotely reasonable that sees that, goes, okay. I think this picture is a lot bigger than we thought it was.

Yeah, that's honestly my response to it, too, is I don't know how they did this. You can't do it in primitive fashion. We literally tried. Like, we've had the Thunderstone is the other, is the event. How would they even do it today? Hydraulics and diesel power, like huge bar. I mean, I didn't even know. You try to move, I mean, it's like makes newspaper headlines when they shift a load of like 150 tons on a truck somewhere.

A thousand tons these days I don't even 1,500 tons I mean we have cranes We have the capability But it's usually by water And giant I don't know if we could

How we'd transport a load like that Over anything other than water Imagine the wooden boat And how hard those dudes are rowing Up River too Not only that How deep is the water And when you're dealing with

150 tons How far does it sink You know what I'm saying? Displacement Yeah How much of a boat do you need? And can you fit a boat that wide? In parts of it, oh, you can, but I'll tell you this, and I've looked at this, that you sure as shit can't do it at the quarry, because this is what they say.

You go to the quarry, and this is an example I like to give people all the time. The unfinished obelisk, you know, at the Aswan quarry. It's like 1,200 tons, more or less, like 10 tons off of them. They will tell you that, oh, yeah, so there's this low area in the quarry, that's the harbor, where they park the boat to take the stone. I mean, you just, there is no chance that you could put that thing on a boat that even would, it's like, this is not in the realms of possibility for a boat to displace enough water to take a load like that obelisk. It would literally just be this giant clunk. It was just, it just can't happen. And what's more, that quarry or that, that harbor in the quarry, that isn't a harbor.

That's an extraction. They pulled a fucking block out of there. same size as the obelisk and it's gone you can see it i show it's an off-limits area to the quarry but we kind of get in there every time so someone somehow pulled that off it's already been done 100%. We know it has because we've got the statues of blocks of that size and tonnage have been have been successfully transported and shaped however in that place they call the quarry in the harbor it is it's all scoop marks it's the same technology and here's where it gets wild is that that there's you can see the extraction that's come out it's massive like basically like the obelisk the unfinished obelis

so something like an order of 12 to 1300 tons in a piece got pulled out of there and on in the corner right up at the end where you see the boxy end of whatever this was was taken out on the wall there's red ochre painting it's paintings of like emus or flamingos and some other dolphins and other stuff and it it's an identical match for the art style and paintings that you find on pre-Dynastic pottery that comes from Nicar culture and before it's exactly the same

it's not it's not dynastic Egyptian it's pre-dynastic artwork that's been put on the wall I hope I have pictures of that I know I do on here it's actually I have a video called

it's on what I have a video where I look at all this on my channel but it's the exact same artwork that you see on the vessel so it's to me it's an indication of there was a primitive of these people that were living there in the thousands of years before the

dynastic Egyptian civilization rose were obviously in that choir and they found this convenient wall to put some artwork on and they painted on it which tells you that well this extraction had to happen before that right had to have been taken out before that and how far before we don't know can't date the stone so

but somebody took a piece like that out of there 100% with the same technology the scoop marks and stuff have you found anything on that Jamie? Once you get that, let's look at the unknown obelisk, too, so to give people the unfinished obelisk. Yeah, the unfinished obelisk is, how many feet? I have that up of them now. That is definitely in that other directory. That's, yeah, that's the, that's the video about the obelisk. The unfinished obelisk is how long?

Oh, God, it's got to be, I don't know, 100 feet long. or something like that. It's a 90, 80, 90 feet long, I'm thinking. You'll see it in the picture. It's, I mean, it's a giant, giant block. I mean, so it's not extracted either. That's what I should say. It is still attached to the bedrock. So they were cutting it out and then for whatever reason they stopped. But if you assume that the obelisk would have a square section, which means, you know, same width as, you know, like this, a square section, it would have, it's mass with the granite there at like 2.7 tons per cubic meter is roughly one. thousand two hundred tons and had they stopped because it was cracked or does what they say that's what

they say i don't think so i don't think that it doesn't to me that's hard to say whether it was cracked or not it was people tried to quarry it after there wasn't much attempt made to quarry i don't know why you would even if it cracked why not use it if it's actually part if it was done during domestic egypt i mean you've done all that work you've cut out the trenches on all of it around you could cut pieces out of that it'd take way less work you want to get a smaller piece of stone for something else, just cut it. Like you should use it, but it's not, that's not what happened. Unless their technology was so sophisticated that what they wanted was very specific and they could just do it again. Yeah, and maybe it didn't crack. I think that's an example like you do see on a lot of these

sites, like the Serapium, like the Assyrian at the quarry, that something happened that meant tools down. Yeah, so here's the painting. This is, this is the pictographs. Those are the paintings. And if you compare that to what's on like the pre-dynastic vases, you'll see exactly the same thing. Now, so these depictions of flamingos, was it possible to date the paint that they used? I think you probably could. I don't know if anybody ever has. I'd love to see that done. Yeah, I would love for that to happen. That's a very good point because it just, there's a few things in Egypt where I'm like, why don't we date that? Sorry, Jamie, we scroll down a little bit? That scoopy thing. No, below that.

Yeah, they're right there. What's that? So that's another piece in the quarry. And this puts the light of the stupid pounding stone theory of how they explain this in the mainstream. Because these scoop marks, they tell you, are pounding stones. This is another big piece. This is probably, we guess this piece, it was probably going to be like a smaller, seated statue, but still something's maybe 150 tons.

And they were cutting this out. So you can see this is the process of carving out underneath it. and so you can get in these trenches and the scoop marks are crazy though because they extend basically from the top of the wall like 15 feet straight down these ridges they go all along the ground under

and then up on the roof side so if you're pounding you would have been doing this pounding up to pound that out and also it's a very sharp turn on the inside there's some it's the result of some tool also someone's got to be underneath it when it finally cracks loose yep that would not yep

don't want to draw that short straw thank you very much Yeah, we take people down into that area around this block every time. It's great. Very bizarre looking. And you can grab that stone and whack at it and just see how little effect you'll have with the meat, you know. But those stones were, is that an example of what they are trying to claim was used? Yes. How long would that take?

So is that the unfinished obelisk? That is the unfinished obelisk. And so where is that sucker cracked? So there's a couple cracks, right? So this is the thing that there's attempts at quarrying that have been made. It's, I think it's that crack up the towards the top is what they say, how it cracked, but we don't know how it cracked. We don't know if it cracked after the fact either.

It's possible that, I mean, like a lot of these places, that it was a tools-down situation, just something happened to stop, whether it was civil unrest, cataclysm. Right. And this thing was buried, too. Like, that's the thing. There was a lot of quarrying that happened after this at higher levels. Like, so this is, you've got to imagine when you go to this quarry, it's like they've cut the top of a granite mountain. I've taken so much granite.

out of there. Huge granite mountains to get down to, you know, this sort of high quality granite, which is not surface level granite. You have to go 10, 12, 15 meters into granite to get blocks that are even possible to be this size or this, you know, one single piece. And in fact, even now, you can see that, like all of this has changed. There's no staircase. All of that gravel up to the north of that has all been moved. We're still clearing the side out or they are. But when this was first discovered, it was buried in like seven, eight meters of quarry rubble from all of the quarrying that had happened above it and around it, like for thousands of years. The Egyptians, the Romans. Yeah, this was buried. How'd they know it was there?

Well, so there was like an edge, one little edge piece poking out. Like, what the hell is this? And then it was Howard, it was, it was Flinders Petrie's assistant who actually excavated that site. And he had to like split a bunch of big blocks to even get it out of the way. took them forever but they eventually uncovered it all yeah wow but it was the back end of it's like seven eight meters of rubble that they had to clear out I mean yeah that's nuts yeah it is it's and to me it's like it's quite plausible it's a possibility that that was there it was done also quite plausible there's more of that stuff out there oh for sure I mean there's many more quarries this is just because that's in the quarry that's the quarry that's sort of been

cleared and made available for tourists but just tons of quarries like there's There's, yeah, these are great pictures. That's the dual image. This is when it first popped out. Yeah, so they had this section of it. They're like, wow, this is something else. And so what happened with the pounding stones are really interesting because there were thousands of them on the site, these round stones.

However, the vast majority of them were broken. That was split. And, God, I'm blanking on the name of the guy who excavated the site. however he was like huh how come these are all broken and he tried to break him so he stood up on like a you know 15 feet up and he's hurling these stones down onto the granite and like bang bang it to do it like 10 times and eventually he cracks a chip off on them because they're the dollar right they're hard they are hard a stone and look you will eventually create enough dust eventually I mean it's it's like there there actually have been studies done uh Dennis Stocks did a study and

And it's the volume, it's basically you remove about, I think it was two-thirds of the volume of a golf ball in an hour of pounding. Yo. So not a lot. Not a lot. Yeah. And if you can imagine, I like to tell people it's like you can only fit like, you know, these trenches around this col.

It's not like you can put a thousand dudes in there. They've got to sit in there. There's like one person in one spot than dudes. And so all you have to do is imagine all of that space being filled up with golf balls add another third for the you know because it's two thirds of golf ball and then maybe add another half again to that to account for the negative space between the balls that's how many hours it would take which is i mean decades of effort like it's not it's not remotely possible to do it in any reasonable time frame people can't and pounding stones it's like come on how do you break it

free well that's the issue who's underneath it when they're pounding like how does that's what i think these balls were so i think they're very difficult to break they've taken away all the broken ones. The only ones on site now are these little nice, rounded ones. And even then, you can't do it from all in a couple. You have to kind of let it go and catch it. And your arms are burnt out in no time. But I think the reason so many were broken, I actually, I think, and you can actually see this in the, in the harbour area, there are these channels that I think they cut under them. You can see the remnants of them where they took the big extraction out. And I suspect what they did was they would shove these balls of dollaride in there. And it would provide them enough

movement or just enough support where they could cut the rest of the whatever scoop out or remove the other attachment points. And then you're also, once you get out of that trench, you can now shift this thing ever so slightly to get whatever you would need to get under it to lift it up out of there. Because that's the other problem with the obelisk is like it's on an angle. And I mean, the trench is going to be when it's completed, they had only dug down two thirds as deep as they need to go. So that trench at its thickest point would have been like 12, 15 feet deep down there and you've got to get under it.

So it's on an angle. You have to lift that thing up 15, 20 feet up in the air to get it out of the trench and then somehow move it to get. And it's this rocky, crazy environment to move it to get it somewhere to take it wherever else you're taking it. But you'd have to be able to maneuver. So I honestly think those dollarite balls could have been used as primitive ball bearings that would just, that's all they were used for.

to support it while you cut it free. And then a lot of them would have snapped in half under the mass of something like that, which explains why so many of them were broken. Because you ain't broken those things by pounding on them. Like it's just not going to break. That actually makes sense that they were used as some sort of a ball bearing.

Yeah. But even so, even if that's the case, like how, what? Well, how you're lifting it? What are you doing to lift that obelisk? How many people are involved if it's just manual labor? cannot fit enough people around that obelisk to even come close. Like not, you're probably not even to get 10% of the amount of people. Like, it's so, it's such a rocky weird.

You can't fit that many people around it today. I have no idea how they, I mean, I don't think they were doing this without the expectation that they could get it done, you know what I mean? But what kind of conventional explanation is this? There's nothing. There's nothing. There's nothing. They just gloss over it.

We don't know. They say we don't know. They don't address the realities of the thousand, tons. I've not seen anyone address those realities. Well, okay, so they do. And there's, and it's like, with logistics, they will show you pictures where the Egyptians are moving something that is 100 tons or 150 tons and say, see? Now, that's not how logistics works. So, for example, with the statues, we know they scale right up to, you know, 1,000 tons or more. There is a picture on a tomb of a guy named Dejuti Hotep. And I've got this in the statues directory. I think it's a painting

on a wall. And it's, it's a, it's a sled with this statue. And there is like, you know, rows of guys, they've got the, you know, the imprint of dudes behind dudes and they're all pulling on a rope. No pullies. Again, they didn't have force multipliers. They were just straight pulling. Wooden levers, a wooden sled. They're dragging this statue. In the case of the statue, we know about this statue. There's pieces of it left. It was made from alabaster. Calcite's not as heavy as granite. But it probably weighed the estimate of how much it weighed was 57 tons, which is quite a load. It's respectable, right? And you can imagine, but with enough labor and on a sled, this is it. This is a 57 ton statue. There's a guy pouring something on the sand or in front of them.

So you can count all these dudes in the shadows of the dudes behind them on these ropes. And so there's a figure about it, and there's been papers written about this. There's literally, I think, a Japanese team wrote a paper about what would it take to do this. and okay this is possible for 57 tons with enough people enough horsepower you can do it now it's not like that scales up on like a linear increase in difficulty to something that's a thousand tons it's more of a logarithmic exponential curve you cannot you cannot take this explanation and apply it to something that's a thousand tons it's 20 times as heavy the coiff the friction coefficient goes through the roof that those sleds would literally just drive into the

ground. You can't, you get to, you're in, you're in realms of mass where it's like material failure becomes a problem. Wood is no longer sufficient to support that. You cannot, you certainly can't move it up any slopes. You have to do all this ground preparation work to even attempt it. And they move these things like a thousand kilometers. If there's a place that you could go back in time and see, that is it. That is it. Yeah, quarry would be a good one. God, if you can go back in time just to see construction just I guess quarry but I mean I mean how you lifting things what are you doing what what is your machinery look like you must have some some kind of technology that is just dust in the wind now it has to be because we've tried this like there's an exact do you know

about the thunderstorm you heard of this thing no okay so no no I did hear about this yeah so in like the 1700s I think it was pre-industrial age well at the early days but no diesel power no hydraulics And this is the thunderstone. So we did, like in Russia, they moved this thing from Finland to Russia. It's at St. Petersburg. They carved it as they went. It's the base now for, I think, a bronze stature of Peter the Great. But this is how they did it.

And so basically you can see the cap stands, the twist things these dudes are working on. They're rotating. They would dig these giant holes to anchor these big logs in the ground to then use pulleys and force multipliers with dudes on giant rails. and then they would have these huge big iron rails that they would put on the ground and carry back and forth and the whole thing was moving on these bronze spheres these big giant bowling ball size spheres of bronze

and on a good day they'd move this thing 150 meters what's that 450 feet still pretty impressive yeah but it took them years and years and then and it's this thing weighed around 1,500 tons it's interesting that using bronze spheres you know what brass spheres I'm sorry whatever metal spheres which is very similar

to what you're describing with the obelisk right but there's again when you compare the level of technology here to ancient Egypt ain't there's nothing they have they show you what they did

with that DeJudey Hotepe image it's a wooden sled no force multipliers no cap stands no pulleys no none of that just dudes yanking on a rope there's no evidence they use pulleys

pouring water on the sand maybe slippery milk or whatever right oil who knows it's it's just stupid you can't take you cannot explain it when it took us everything they had for years and years to move that. And by the way, they took that across the Gulf of Finland, and it wasn't on some

little river barge either. They built a giant platform, took them a year to build it, and then they had to put warships on either side of it to keep it balanced. It's massive to even plop this thing in the center and hope that they got this thing and go over to Russia to then move it the rest of the way. So it ain't no barge carrying a thousand tons down the aisle. No. It's nuts.

Something happened. So, it's all so fascinating. And something happened is actually the only answer we have. Yep. Yeah. I would agree. Yeah. Ben, you're awesome, man.

I really, really appreciate you coming on here. Your channel, Uncharted X, fantastic channel. So much good content. How long have you been doing it now? I've been doing it. I mean, I quit my job 10, 10 years ago, but not, I mean, Uncharted X. Thank God. You had the courage to do that.

It was a big old step. The wife was like, what are you doing? I know, but look, you were right. It worked out. I am super grateful that's worked out. In fact, I want to, I mean, obviously, thank you for the hospitality and the invite. And I genuinely also think, dude, I've come full circle with this a little bit. Like, what got me into it in the first place, genuinely, I mean, I was always interested,

but it wasn't until Graham's first, who I've gotten to know very well over the years, I love that man, it wasn't until his first appearance on your podcast back in the old days. Like, was it 2011, 2012, something like that? He was one of the first real guests. Yeah. that was just me and Duncan that one you and Duncan right at your house at my house that was when I was doing it at my house

that one was what really I mean after that I followed him really closely I went to Peru and Bolivia with him in 2013 and then 2015 I went with him to Egypt so it's like the fact that I'm here talking to you now you started me on this and it's it's come full circles so thank you for that and the fact that you are interested in this topic I think is such a boon

to everyone else out there that you know you get to spread the word and it's just such a benefit to the whole space. Well, I'm so happy that guys, like, you took that fucking baton and ran with it. It's been a wild ride. I love it. My answer to all this is, who's not? I don't understand you if you're not interested in this. How is this not unbelievably fascinating?

Yeah, 100% I agree. That's what happened to me. I fell down this pyramid-shaped hole, and I was doing, I mean, I had a, had quite a career before this in the tech world, but I mean, I'd go to conferences and tech events, and the second that we're out in the break room, I'm talking about the younger dryers and pyramids and massive statues and all this shit, Graham Hancock, and they're like, this is really interesting. I'm like, I know. It's literally the most interesting thing about civilization. That time period and the mysteries that are involved in trying to just

decipher what happened. Yeah. It is the most fascinating time in history, I think. Yeah. I'd I agree. I agree. Yeah. Phenomenal. Again, thank you so much. Thank you, Joe. We'll definitely do this again. I would love to.

Especially if some more information comes out about the labyrinth, and hopefully more people, you know, we're also picking up the baton and people get involved. I see that happening. I'm very glad that it is. I'm absolutely, I'm thrilled to see other people getting into the field. I don't see any of this. It's not competition. It's like all, it's a rising time.

Zahi, you can say you found it. Zahi, come on, jump on board. You could definitely say you found it. Everybody will agree. that you found it. We didn't talk about the sphinx and the stuff in the star shop, but save that for next time maybe.

Definitely do it again then. Definitely do it again. Yeah, I would love to. Thank you so much. This was awesome. All right. Thanks, everybody. Bye-bye.