The Joe Rogan Experience - #852 - John Anthony West

Episode Date: September 27, 2016

John Anthony West is an author, lecturer, guide and a proponent of Sphinx water erosion hypothesis in geology. http://www.jawest.net/

Two, one, and we're live. Mr. West. Mr. Rogan. Pleasure to have you here in person. Doing it on Skype was fun and it was nice. You are, to this day, the only podcast I've ever done on Skype. Really? Yep. Oh, wow. But I just had to talk to you. If you couldn't get down here, there's got to be a way.

So it was nice to be able to do it that way, but much nicer to see you here in person. And much better to be here in person. And actually, what's responsible for me being here in person is that I wouldn't actually come all this huge distance even to be on your show. Unless you paid me lots of money, of course, which you're not prepared to do. But because I have this conference coming up at the end of the week called CPAC, which I'm surprised you didn't know about, Conference on Precession and Ancient Knowledge, which is the end of this week for those living in Southern California who might want to take a look at the website. Yeah, tell everybody where it's, where's that and what is it about?

It's Rancho Mirage, which is a great name. It means there is no ranch. But Rancho Mirage, which is somewhere near Palm Springs. And it is about exactly what it scenario about what causes precession, which is supposedly a kind of a wobble of the earth caused by nobody knows exactly what. And the counter theory is that it isn't that. It's that there is a dwarf star of some sort orbiting the sun, upsetting the balance of the celestial mechanical balance of it. And that makes a difference.

You say, well, what's the difference? One way or another, there's precession. It does make a difference actually in the big picture because it means that our solar system basically conforms with all of the other solar systems, which mostly are dual in nature. Sirius, for example, has the dwarf star that circles around it. Sirius B, that's responsible for all sorts of measurable phenomena. So it starts off from there, but then the ancient knowledge comes in because precession, and this is a big mystery, precession

seems to be a factor of virtually every ancient society, be it sophisticated, a la China and India, South America, Mesoamerica, or so-called primitive, a word I hate to use. It simply means unintellectualized or not expressed in coherent Western philosophy, for whatever that's worth. Western philosophy, for whatever that's worth. But procession is a known fact, discovered actually a long time ago. You'd think by now it would be common knowledge and everybody would teach it in school, which is sort of a joke.

It's kind of interesting that people don't teach it, right? It is a very bizarre thing that it's so prominent in ancient cultures and ancient society that they literally mapped this out, this 26,000 year cycle, this wobble of the earth, and that we rarely talk about it ever. No, because it upsets the notion that there's a knowledge of this going back to ancient times presupposes that there's a very advanced observational astronomy dating at a time when supposedly people were still living in trees. So, this is actually a big deal, hence the conference on precession and the ancient knowledge comes into it because understanding that there is a highly sophisticated scientific understanding that goes back not just to ancient Egypt itself but far thousands and thousands, millennia beyond, upsets what is effectively the reigning religion of today except it doesn't call itself a religion.

It calls itself science, which is based supposedly on reason. It's not. None of those things are true. It's not based on science and science is not based upon reason. Maybe we'll get time to do that. Well, some sciences, but archaeology in particular is very rigid in its ideas, and a lot of it is based on the professors that have written books and that teach these ideas, and they don't want to let them go. And when new knowledge is discovered that challenges those ideas, they fight it rigorously. Even if it's knowledge like the stuff that you exposed

with Dr. Ron Schock, Robert Schock, rather, which was the water erosion on the Sphinx, which we were talking about before the podcast, which is one of the best pieces of evidence, because the last time there was rainfall, heavy rainfall in the Nile Valley was, what was it, 9,000 BC? Is that what it was? They debate it, but anyway,

it's way before the beginning of dynastic Egypt. And then it's a question of how old or when those rains fell. Because an interesting bit of thing here that I'm now at liberty to relate publicly. Originally, when I first got shock over to Egypt, which is another two-hour podcast in itself, the history of getting shock interested in this stuff. And when he finally agreed, very hesitantly and very skeptically, to come along because he had to see the evidence for himself,

and I scraped together a bit of money to bring him over, and we got into the Sphinx enclosure. I don't think it got in legally. I think we bribed our way in very early in the morning. Well, in Egypt, everything is possible. And bribed our way in and he walked into the Sphinx enclosure. Actually, when we get that up on the screen, you'll see the level of the water,

the extent of the weathering, of the water weathering. And Schock looked at it, and everybody else walks into the Sphinx enclosure and has this, actually, this shock of recognition in the presence of this fabulous work of sacred sculpture, in fact, of sacred sculpture. And Schock looked, but Schock is a, no,, is a, no that's not, it was way back, Jamie, right to the beginning, first slides.

And Schock, everybody else sees the Sphinx as a work of art, Schock sees the rocks, as he's a geologist. And he, back like this, and he said, oh wow, these rocks look like they're hundreds of thousands of years old. And he said, wow, these rocks look like they're hundreds of thousands of years old. And he said, don't quote me on that. Because that's, of course, absolute heresy that the most spectacular sculpture on earth should be, I mean, tens of thousands of years. Actually,

even the 4,500 years that it's associated with do not conform with anybody's idea of how civilization developed. This goes back to your – of why the academic – I call it the quackademic establishment is so passionately – defends the old paradigm the way that it does because the reigning paradigm, the reigning religion today, which is not acknowledged as religion, is that this is the church of progress. And its credo, just like the virgin birth, is the credo of early Christianity

or present-day Christianity, not that they know what they're talking about. The credo of the Church of Progress is, A, we are the most sophisticated human beings that have ever lived on the face of the planet with our hydrogen bombs and our nerve gas and our striped toothpaste and our Disneyland. We're the best that ever was. And secondly, that progress, as it's called,

goes in a straight line from primitive cavemen up to ourselves. And when it becomes self-evident that in very, very ancient times, they had knowledge of precession, which is an incredible thing, too. it's almost unimaginable that it happens through careful observation because the sun, I don't know if all of the audience will know what this is so maybe it's worth talking about. The sun, if you look at the spring equinox now, the sun is rising against the last bits of Pisces. It may even be in the earliest stages of Aquarius. And gradually, the sun precesses, that's to say it goes backwards around the zodiac, in a cycle that takes 25,000, canonically, 25,920 years to make a complete circle.

What this means is that it actually takes 72 years, precisely, for the sun to precess one degree. So this is nothing. Who's going to be sitting there for 72 years watching the track of the sun in a cycle that takes 26,000 years to go around. And observe that there's a discrepancy enough to write it down and pass that information down. And then why should they care? It's somehow or another deeply connected with the civilization of that time and with our civilization.

I mean, you look at the numbers involved, this is another hours of conversation, actually. The 72 and the 73 are significant numbers in practically all of the developed numerologically based societies. So in Egypt, Set, who's the bad guy, derivative probably Satan is derived from Set, he's the bad guy but he's also a great god. That is to say the gods are not gods in any superstitious fashion. They represent the embodiments of cosmic principles. So, excuse me, Set is he who fixes spirit and matter. And the whole basis of any esoteric doctrine, including most of the religions

that are around even today in their depraved forms, the objective of any esoteric discipline is to free ourselves individually and collectively from our imprisonment in matter. This is the quest for immortality. And so in some sense or another, that processional cycle is very important and the numbers are important in the myth, which again, we don't have time for, but Osiris is the good king. Actually, this is all very carefully expounded, very brilliantly, in fact, in the Hamlet myth, which becomes Shakespeare's Hamlet, and then in the Lion King, in Disney's Lion King, in the movie especially, which is really pretty brilliant.

Anyway, Set is the good king who is beloved by his people. And Set is his wicked brother, his evil brother, who is determined to unseat him and steal his sister wife, Isis, while he's at it. Anyway, Set sets a trap for Osiris. And it's Set and there's 72 followers. So 72 is this number associated with time, and the 72 to 73 is a very significant ratio, actually, which pervades the philosophies of, as I said, of all of the esoteric civilizations. So all of this stuff, instead of being the kind of, ask a quackademic, the same guy you were talking about earlier who still thinks the 6th is weathered by sand.

Ask one of those what ancient myth is about. They say, oh, well, it's just a fabrication written by primitive people who are trying to explain the mysteries of the universe. It's the other way around. The primitive people are the ones with the PhDs. And back then, not only did they understand these scientific, these astronomical facts, but they orchestrated their whole civilization around those facts.

And the more, the deeper you get into this, the more miraculous the extent of ancient knowledge becomes. Now, what is the mainstream explanation when they talk about the prevalence of the number 72 and their understanding of the procession of the equinoxes? Do they address it at all? Like, how do they sort of explain how they knew about this 26,000-year cycle? There's a very quick answer to that, actually, for a change. No. They don't explain. They don't.

They just ignore it. Is it sort of like the Parthenon, the Acropolis? You know, which one? The Acropolis is the building, and the Parthenon is the structure, right? Is that what it is? No, both are temples. Both are buildings. But what's the base?

The base is the one that they don't explain, right? They just go, well, we don't really exactly. That's the gigantic, enormous base, the huge stones that the Acropolis is built on, right? No, I don't know. Which one is the Acropolis? I always screw those up. Acropolis is the one on top. Right.

Okay. See, the Parthenon is what they're built on. That's the base structure, or whatever it is, the bottom area. I don't know, actually. I've never really looked that deeply into it, other than that there's a friend of mine who's worked with

the proportions and the sophisticated proportions of the Parthenon, and it shows actually that it's as as minutely orchestrated as anything in Egypt, even though it's much later than Egypt. Much later than Egypt, but no one knows who built it and no one knows why they built it. It's one of those weird ones where it's not really described in the text and the

Acropolis is built upon it. At least that's what I'm explaining to me by Greek historians, by people who understand Greek history. They just really don't understand where it came from. Well, I believe that's true, except that I think it's pretty certain that it's not of Egyptian age, although if you're talking about gigantic paving stones at the bottom of it, as I said, I don't know. But whenever you see those gigantic stones, that's a pretty good indication of an earlier period of construction. As at Baalbek, they have these monolithic 1,200-ton blocks that they think the Romans put in there.

And that's in Lebanon, right? That's Lebanon, yeah. So there's a ton of this kind of indirect evidence and when you put it all together, you get, there's enough of a picture there so that it overthrows the basis. As I said, what's important about it is in one sense, who cares? In another sense, it overthrows the supposed scientific basis of the Church of Progress, that we're the most sophisticated people that ever were, and we can do whatever we please with this once glorious planet of ours without worrying about it because we're the best and everyone before us was primitive.

Well, there's a lot of new evidence now since you started your work, particularly all that nuclear glass that they're finding that corresponds with meteor impacts throughout Europe and Asia, and that's somewhere around the end of the ice age really in the same sort of Time period when they do core samples and they find this nuclear glass. It's all at around ten thousand plus years ago That kind of stuff really starts to indicate that we're looking at possibly an event that might have shaped human history or a reset of a large percentage of the people on this planet where civilization in many areas was all but wiped out. And then they had to rebuild again. Yeah, this is, I mean, actually this is coming to the fore now.

There's a lot of evidence for these, I think it's the tektites they're called. Shock thinks that they are the result of a gigantic CME, coronal mass ejection, giant solar flares. And there's a lot of evidence for this. Actually, we'll know if we get into talking about it here. I will at CPAC for sure. Shock will be at CPAC. But it's unlikely that it's actually a nuclear blast because it would be inconceivable, well, at least by our standards, a man-made nuclear blast. Although, when you go into the Hindu texts, and I think it's the Upanishads where they describe what sounds like, I mean, it's described as a battle of the gods. But for all the world, it does sound like a nuclear conflagration. I mean, a human-made nuclear conflagration. I'm not, I don't think

anybody knows enough to say what it is other than that that story is in there. In fact, one of the, because I'm a writer by trade, I'm very interested in the way that language is used. And so myth is one of the principal misleading words that, if you look in the dictionary, the first meaning that it gives for myth is a lie. You always talk about the myth, myth busters, myth is a lie. You always talk about the myth, Mythbusters, that myth is a lie. But the ancients didn't see myth as a lie. What myth actually is, when you get into it fairly deeply, is it is the interplay of cosmic principles described as drama rather than mathematics. So once you get a good look, this is an extraordinary but opaque book

called Hamlet's Mill by Giorgio de Santayana and Hertha von Deccan, who were historians of science at MIT, which is about as respectable as credentials can be. So as soon as myth is understood as having both a rigorous scientific as well as philosophical and spiritual base, the whole understanding of myth turns around. And you see, for example, in Hamlet, in Shakespeare's Hamlet, which is based upon a Danish folk tale, which

then becomes, quite brilliantly actually, the Lion King in the Disney film, you see how the myth, I mean, in other words, you could decode the Osiris-Isis horror myth as pure science and you might call it as spiritual or as sacred science. And at the same time, it's a ripping good story when you put it that way, a story, because then everybody can understand it, even if they don't understand it. Even if they can't articulate what they've understood, the power of the story soaks through. So myth is actually, the more you know about it, my case is not that much, but at least it's better than nothing. mythology becomes that they should have been able to put together these complex, hierarchical, esoteric concepts in a way that resonates as a story. Otherwise, insofar as, I mean, our own cosmology is next to impossible to understand unless

you're a cosmologist and schooled in the abstract mathematics that make the thing work. I mean, I can't, I mean, the mathematics is absolutely beyond me, but some of my astrophysicist friends can explain it to me in such a way that I understand, but it still doesn't have any emotional impact. So essentially what you're saying is that they didn't have the sort of scientific discipline that we have today. They didn't understand a lot of the things that we know today as far as the way academics or scientists relay information about space or about cosmology. So what they did is they combined theater and story with the actual facts that they knew. So that was the way they would relay this stuff,

and that's the way that stuff would be passed on, that information would be passed on through these stories. But in those stories was an actual history of the world itself, as far as they knew. Through that and through symbolism. And this is an infinitely superior way of communicating knowledge because you don't have to be an expert. It soaks into your bones in such a way that it directs personally and collectively people's behaviors.

And it's my firm conviction that this is why Egypt lasted as a coherent civilization, even in its dynastic form, for 3,500 years, and our lunatic society is coming apart at the seams in front of our eyes at 300 years. I wanted to talk to you about the written history of Egypt and the hieroglyphic history of the pharaohs, because I remember, I think it was from magical Egypt one we you were talking about the historical record like what they have written down in the hieroglyphs about the Pharaohs that it goes back far beyond what we think of as the birth of Egypt you know with the construction the the Great Pyramid I believe they put it modern academics put it at 2500 BC correct yes

and they you believe that it's possible that Egypt existed as far back as, I think you said, 34,000 years? Well, that's their own, that's the Egyptians' account, not mine. Right, of course. As expressed in a couple of, in a stone tablet called the Palermo Stone, because it's now in Palermo, Italy, and in a very fragmentary papyrus called the Turin Papyrus, which is now in Turin. And both of these documents, one is a stone stela and the other is a papyrus, tell or recount long periods when Egypt was ruled first by the Necheru, which means the gods themselves,

which I take to mean fully realized divine human beings. In other words, human beings that have attained, that have passed the test of the quest for immortality, who are in effect, they've outsmarted death, or they've outdeveloped death. Why do you believe this? Because their works speak for themselves, as it were. The level of the, now we're going back even to dynastic Egypt, because the temples themselves and the level of art involved, particularly in the sculpture, is such that standard,

I say genius is rare enough, but standard human genius doesn't seem to apply to these incredible constructions. And the quackademics simply dismiss it out of hand as really very talented exponents of a barbaric and primitive understanding of the cosmos. I'm leading my trips there, which I do, as you know, a few times a year. Next one coming up, by the way, anybody listening in? How can people go on one of those trips with you? Oh, it's very easy. You pay. Okay.

Where do they find you, though? On my website. JohnAnthonyWest.com? Yeah, on the website or on my email, JAWSphinx at AOL.com. Oh, you messed up. You gave out your email. That's a disaster.

Is it? My people, horrible people. I'm going to send you naked pictures for sure. Oh, not of themselves, I hope. Are you familiar with the term dick pic? I am now. Yeah, there you go. So your thoughts are that these people that lived 34,000 years ago were incredibly advanced.

Yes. Like much further advanced than we are today. Which doesn't take much. Right. When you understand what's involved. Yeah, I know what you're saying. But I mean, we're pretty damn advanced compared to people a few hundred years ago. In certain ways we are.

Right. We still can't. We couldn't and wouldn't build the Cathedral of Chartres. There's nobody alive, to the best of my knowledge, who could produce a building that is based upon sacred principles that even comes close to... You mean sacred geometry? And sacred, even that. I mean, a few people really know quite a bit about this, but they couldn't design Chantre. And that's, well, that's, you know, 12th century. What was it about Egypt in that time in particular that, in your opinion, I mean, obviously there's a lot of speculation going on here because there's so little evidence from 34,000 years ago.

But what is it about that area that you think developed people at such an incredibly high level? Because unless there's more evidence to be found, there doesn't seem to be any parallels anywhere else in the world like that one spot. Actually, there's a fairly simple explanation for that, for a change,

because most of this stuff is so complicated, but just to go back a bit to the rule by the Necheru, the gods themselves, and the names of those rulers are given and the length of time that they reigned. And then there's another group of semi- But the line of time is incredible, right? Well, this is where we're getting the 34,000, 36,000 BC from. Because you add the times up, the Turin papyrus has a similar thing of the reign rule of the Netzeru and the rule by what's called the Shem Suhor, the followers of the companions of Horus.

And again, the names are given and the regnal years. And when you add those all up together, you get around 34,000, 36,000 B.C. I'm sorry to interrupt you, but weren't some of the pharaohs, didn't they live hundreds of years? There's no evidence for that. But wasn't it written that they did? I'm not sure. I'm not sure what those dates are, actually. I've not actually deeply researched them. So, Cholère de Lubix, the great genius with the unpronounceable name, who put together the whole interpretation of symbolist Egypt from which my work is derived.

I mean, I regard myself as Cholère's Boswell, making his basically impenetrable work accessible to… Dummies like me? No, smart guys like you. Not dummies like politicians no smart guys smart guys like you not dummies like politicians and quackademics no so but when you're talking about 34 000 years i mean the average person today lives to be about 80 years you're talking about an incredible number of pharaohs then yeah you are but it is and so all that is depicted? Apparently. Apparently the names are given. I get that from Schwaller from the one long chapter he wrote called the chronology. Chorography, he called it.

Not the word for it. But the chronology of Egypt where he's looking to back up from a scholarly point of view, from the scholarly argument, that the Egyptians knew what they were talking about when they were assigning these long reigns, that these are not fictitious. This is not made-up history in order to, you know, fool the people who couldn't read the hieroglyphs anyway. Only the scribes could read the hieroglyphs. So Schwaller wrote this very long and thoughtful and scholarly lecture. Sorry, not lecture, but chapter.

And then at the very end of it, this throwaway line, and of course the Great Sphinx of Giza has been weathered, shows unmistakable signs of aquatic erosion. And that was my little epiphany because I picked up on that and said, wow, the rest of this isn't science, but that's geology. And if the geologists can be, you know, will agree that this cannot have taken place since 2500 years, 2500 BC when the Sphinx is supposedly built. This will upset the whole paradigm. All of civilization will have to be,

our view of civilization will have to be rethought. And that's began this long, long, now four decade long quest to find somebody to back it up. And we're now, my sense of it is, closing in on

beating down the opposition. And this will be another thing, actually, in fact, I'll probably be talking about at CPAC, but probably with, shall I say, a little bit more politely than I feel necessary to talk about here. It's because I'm here with you. And that is riffing on a line that probably everybody who tunes into this is familiar with, Victor Hugo, the French poet, novelist, dramatist of the 19th century. Actually, France's most popular poet of the 19th century was Victor Hugo. And it was Victor Hugo who wrote the famous line, there's one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that

is an idea whose time has come. You know that line, right? Everybody knows that line. But what Victor Hugo didn't think of, or if he did, he didn't express it, was that the second strongest thing in the world is an idea whose time has not yet gone. And since it is a matter of record that all of the armies in the world, be they military, economic, financial, cultural, agricultural even, wherever there's a paradigm, there's an army devoted to protecting that paradigm. And this is where we stand now, that the idea whose time has come only comes when the second strongest,

the armies of the second strongest thing in the world are beaten down, are beaten into the ground and somebody breaches the portcullis to the ivory tower where all of these guys live. And this is of particular interest to me because I am a scholar by default, but a satirist by nature. And really, my whole adult life has been devoted to proving a vision that I had at the age of 13 or so, that I was born into a lunatic asylum.

And at the age of about 19, it was a very uncomfortable place to live where everybody called it progress. And I thought it was crazy. And at age about 19 or so, I knew what I wanted to do, which was to be the little boy who said the emperor has no clothes and to prove to everybody's satisfaction that indeed the emperor has no clothes and it's a lunatic asylum. The end result took me a few couple of decades to realize that. It was that in real life what happens is that no, the people all don't say, well, look, the emperor has no clothes and everybody lives happily ever after. They say, oh, look, the emperor has no clothes, and everybody lives happily ever after. What happens is that the disgraced emperor goes back to his palace and regroups the empire. And at the end, all of the forces of empire conspire to prove to everyone that the emperor's clothes are real, but it's the child who's imaginary.

We were talking about this before the podcast, and this is a really fascinating aspect of this discussion. When I first became aware of your work was that Charlton Heston narrated a documentary about the aging of the Sphinx, The Mystery of the Sphinx, which I believe was on NBC. What I thought was shocking was when Dr. Shock was speaking to that Egyptologist who was saying, what evidence is there of a culture that existed 7,000 years before ancient Egypt? There's no evidence. He's like, there is no, and he was laughing. And the way he was doing, there was so much ego involved in what he was saying. I was like, wow, this is not how I would picture an Egyptologist laughing.

Well, that got me curious. I started getting into it. Why would anybody think like that? And then I realized, oh, these guys write books and they teach lectures and they teach classes based on this information that they're teaching. And now this information has been shown to be not true anymore. When Dr. Shock was showing this water erosion, he was saying that this was all before the discovery of Gobekli Tepe. And once they discovered Gobekli Tepe, now they know that there is a sophisticated structure capable of massive stone circles that was 12,000 years ago at least when it was intentionally buried. So it could have easily been several thousand years old then. We don't know.

But we know at least 12,000 years ago, someone was capable of incredible design and incredible stone structures with three-dimensional animals carved into these stone structures, which is very sophisticated. Now, has that guy been talked to since then? And has he amended his position on it? As far as I know, he hasn't. And I know Lehner reasonably well.

We're civil to each other. And it won't be long now. I mean, he's one of the generals in the army of the idea whose time has not yet gone. And his time is coming up pretty shortly, I think. Does he address Gobekli Tepe? Because his whole position was there was no civilization. What evidence is there? Well, now that you have this evidence, what does he say?

Well, maybe. I haven't actually spoken to him, and I don't know if anyone has. I see him in Egypt every once in a while. I don't know if anyone has. I see him in Egypt every once in a while. I don't know if anyone has. And I ran into him fairly recently. We just said hello. And I don't think I'd really, I'd necessarily want to bring it up with him

off the record. I'd rather have him with the cameras on us and just see what happens. Otherwise, he's a dead duck. But it's just so, he seems to be just clinging to this idea because he can. Like mainstream academia hasn't accepted this predating of the Sphinx or also the difference in the structures, like the difference in the construction methods that were used. One of the more fascinating things that you sort of highlighted

in your Ancient Egypt series, Magical Egypt, which is fantastic, and I highly recommend it to anybody who is even remotely curious of this, you will be sucked in in an incredible way. It got to the point where my wife was walking by the TV. She's like, Jesus Christ, you're watching Egypt again? And I'm like, it's like six discs. It goes on forever. Eight.

So there's a clear distinction between the older methods of construction and the newer methods. They use different methods. And it's really obvious to someone like me. I don't know anything about it. But you could see the difference. And also that these older structures were below the newer structures. Like you had to dig down to get them. That's right.

Yes. But the fact that they don't address that, the fact that this isn't, it's like they want to lump this all into the same people is kind of crazy. It is. But as long as they can get away with it, they will continue to get away with it. As I said, the second strongest thing in the world is the idea whose time is not yet gone. And anybody who doesn't, let's say, among myself and my colleagues who are all in this, let's say, the quest to prove, to demonstrate that advanced civilization existed in the very distant past, which is, in my case, in other cases not necessarily, but in mine, it's because that opens the door in and of itself.

It doesn't affect the price of eggs. But on a much more profound philosophical level, once it's understood that that understanding that civilization goes way much, much further leads to the understanding and the acceptance that our role, our destiny as human beings is to achieve immortality. This is as simple as that. Otherwise it's just a head trip. In other words, if it's not understood that we have a role to play in this grand cosmic scheme, there's no civilization possible. What do you mean by that?

Our goal is to achieve immortality. Do you mean as individuals or do you mean in what way? That we arrive at a level of consciousness that is not subject to the death of the physical body. All of religion is based upon that. All of the stories of the saints and the rishis and the masters and so on is based upon, all of it, is based upon their experiences that have led them to this understanding. If it's just a head trip, it's no good. It has to be part of your

very being. The purpose of sacred art and of sacred music, when it works, is to communicate, even if only momentarily and fragmentarily, this understanding that there's something else. And speaking from my own personal experiences, I've never gone through a full-blown mystical experience, but I've had lots of these moments, particularly in Egypt, in the long study, and these moments in Egypt where there's this sudden realization that the world as it manifests to our faculties, our normal faculties, is not the only world there is. There's something else beyond that

which was understood a lot better in those days than now. And actually, funnily enough, I forgot to mention this, but I don't know if you know this. I've spent the last couple of years sort of sidetracked from my regular work, working on a book written by a friend of mine, good friend, who was not a writer. So I helped him with the editing and contributed to it.

And this is maybe the definitive book on NDEs. You know what those are, right? Near-death experiences. Near-death experiences. He was a Christian pastor, a rare guy who actually lived what he preached, named David Solomon. And he had collected all of this material, a huge amount of material, that he was trying to systematize. Because this is now, it's certainly not a common experience, but there are 5,000 verifiable accounts of people who have been clinically dead and who have been revived, usually through modern methods,

because now, one of the reasons why it's now so common, and before it was reserved for the saints, the great saints and the mystics, that modern medicine has improved to such an extent that if you get to these people quickly enough, any number of people who are clinically dead for X number of minutes, you know, not two days, but minutes, sometimes more extended period than that,

come back with these tales of this realm beyond that of the senses, a realm of higher consciousness. Basically what it is, what they've experienced is grace. In Christian terms, it's grace. It's a moment and they come back transformed. They come back convinced that everything that they were doing before is either nonsense or unimportant. And they often come back with a mission, even though they don't have the schooling, let's say. They don't understand philosophically or spiritually what they've experienced. They know what they've experienced. And they laugh at the debunkers who are saying it's all hallucination of the brain, dying brain.

This is all garbage. What they've experienced, they've experienced. And David put these together in a systematic fashion. And then as he was just, he collected all this material. And I was telling him, he's a good friend. He financed our trip to Gobekli Tepe five, six years ago. And he started losing his balance. And he was a Tai Chi guy who knows a lot about balance.

Also a bonsai master and a Christian pastor. Unusual guy. And he started losing his balance and it wasn't going away. And the doctors finally figured out what was wrong with him. And he had a glioma, glioblastoma of something. I forget. Do you know what a glioma is? It's a form of brain cancer that is 100% fatal.

The only thing you have is that you can't determine the timeline. And they gave him something like 10 months to 12 months to live. He actually lived three years. And at that point, he had all of this material. And I told him when he was telling me about it, I said, I should write a book. This is really good stuff. The way you're doing it is not like anybody else has ever done. And he said, no, no, I'm not a book. This is really good stuff. The way you're doing it is not like anybody else has ever done. And he said, no, no, I'm not a writer. I'm just doing this. And then when he found out the diagnosis, then he had a mission, which was to get the book out. But he wasn't a writer.

So he drafted me in to put the words in right order. And he lasted just long enough to get the book finished and get it published. And it's really, if this went viral, it could make a difference. It's called, he was very good at titles, David. It's called The Dead Saints Chronicles, subtitle, A Zen Journey Through the Christian Afterlife. And it really is an absolutely extraordinary book. And it becomes quite clear when you go through this that what people have experienced is a state of grace that's not all the same. I mean, some people it's more profound and some people less so. But all of these people

are unprepared for what they've experienced and all of them come back transformed. And of course, the quackademics, this is one of the ways they protect themselves. Peer review is one way and the other is their insistence. Who the hell gave them the right to make the rules from science that apply to science? Are they scientists? Does that give them the right to make the rules? No, the rules are the rules. And one of their chief elements, one of the chief ways in which they protect themselves is to insist that anecdotal evidence, personal experience doesn't count. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't buy a cookbook by someone who's never fried an egg.

So these are guys who've never fried a spiritual egg. These are guys who've never fried a spiritual egg. And these 5,000 accounts are people who've actually been there to this superior realm and come back to talk about it. But you say you haven't had a mystical experience. You mean a psychedelic experience? No, that I've had, yes. You've had psychedelic experience. Which kind of psychedelic experiences have you had? Oh, I've done ayahuasca and I've done, you know, you name it. Right. So then you're,

so you've done DMT? Yes. And I've done, and I've done, not mescaline, but the other one, acid. Okay. All of those. No, the experiences come actually, for me, as I said, they're not a major, it's not the state of grace that these people are talking about. You didn't experience the state of grace when you did DMT? Not quite, no. Not compared to what the NDEs... Can I ask how many times you've done it? One. One time.

Okay, did you do a lot of it? I don't know. You've got to do a lot of it. Yeah, I imagine. Did you just dissolve? Did you go to this crazy geometric infinite universe where you're... No, I didn't. You didn't get in there then.

I didn't get in there then. I didn't get in there then. How long are you in town for? Pardon? How long are you in town for? Only until tomorrow. We're going to have to make something happen. You've got to go deeper. Yeah, maybe.

That experience that people are having, a near-death experience, is mirrored by the same experience. I'm sure you're aware of Dr. Rick Strassman. Oh, yeah, sure. Sure. I believe actually he's on that's right i never met him when chance was doing the brilliant guy and so important because what he has created by his book uh dmt the spirit molecule they did these clinical tests

giving people dmt in a clinical setting and uh at the university of new Mexico. And what they found was these people achieve this incredible state of understanding a more relaxed vision of the future. They're more confident. Like the, the, the idea, I mean, this is also mirrored by some of the John Hopkins tests that they've done

with people with psilocybin, where people have, uh, you know, they have just a much better outlook about the future. They don't think that this is it and that whatever happens to them when they're having these trips.

And the way Strassman did it is much more intense than most people do it because they did intravenous doses, which last longer. A typical DMT trip lasts only about 15 minutes unless you just jump right back in, which is what I usually do. But he gave these people intravenous doses,

which take them just very deep for more than a half an hour. And they all have very similar stories and similar stories to people that have had near-death experiences. I've had friends that have had near-death experiences. And when they talk about it, it's very similar to the way I've talked to other people that have had DMT trips, where they are in the presence of this divine greatness, this something. But that is also a chemical that's produced by the brain. Now, this is where neuroscientists step in and say, well, your experience is experiencing is some sort of a hallucination.

And they might be right, but it also might be some sort of a chemical gateway that your brain produces when we really don't know. And that might be the way the soul, quote unquote, air quotes, whatever, but for lack of a better word, transitions to this next stage of life. Now, when the anecdotal evidence that you're talking about is measured up, what's interesting about it is similar accounts over and over and over and over again. That's right. The people that can remember things, they remember this incredibly divine experience. But, you know, the question becomes, is that experience,

and this is something that I've been bouncing around in my head a lot lately, is that experience a hallucination or is that experience an actual real experience in a divine presence? And does it matter? Because is it the same thing no matter what? If you just think you're experiencing God and divine greatness And does it matter? Because is it the same thing no matter what?

If you just think you're experiencing God and divine greatness because you're creating it in your mind versus actually experiencing God and divine greatness, isn't the experience the exact same thing? And is our mind locked into the idea of a physical thing like this laptop? I can pick it up. I can drop it. I know it has weight. I can touch it. I can measure the width. We can't do that with psychedelic experiences. We can't do that with transcendent experiences.

We can't do that with mystical experiences. You can't measure them. You can't put them in a bag and take it home with you. But it might be the same thing. It's entirely possible that this is what many, many ancient cultures experienced as well. They found the use of psychedelics very early on. And this is also something that you documented in your work. And they documented it very clearly in a lot of the Egyptian work.

They had deep understanding and knowledge. Exactly, Joe. This is one of the important things about the drugs and the NDE experiences. In my view, the NDE experiences more so because there's nothing in the way. There's nothing obstructing it. They're dead, and this is where they go. With the drugs, you know you're you in these experiences. And the problem, interesting, the problem, it's not a problem, it's the wrong word, but with the NDE experiences, I mean, absolutely, Joe Sixpack, everybody, ordinary people, many of them, some of them even atheists, go through this and come back, literally transform their whole lives. It changed by it. With the drugs, it really is, for the most part, it's a trip. It doesn't have this, let's say, this lasting transformational value. It does on some people.

It does sometimes, yes. The John Hopkins study showed that a lot of people, decades later, had a vastly improved quality of life, different outlook on things. And especially when you're dealing with terminally ill patients. Oh, wow. And they've given it to terminally ill patients, significant lessening of anxiety and fear of death. Oh, sure. It would be.

But the hallucination, this is another scam by the so-called rationalists, who, in fact, they're not there, this idea that it's a hallucination. And what's a hallucination? And what's its evolutionary value? Why should there be a, where's a hallucination. And what's a hallucination? And what's its evolutionary value? Why should there be a hallucination? Where's the hallucination gene? This is all bullshit, actually. And what it actually is, is not based upon reason as they promote themselves.

What it is actually is the rationalization of their own inner emptiness. They can't handle the fact that there might be something else. And in fact, their whole intellectual lives are consecrated to proving that life is indeed as meaningless as their own. But is that what it is? Or is it they're just trying to look at some sort of, give it a critical, objective view and go over all the possibilities. We know that drugs do affect the mind in very strange ways. And we know some people take drugs and it completely

distorts their reality. Alcohol is a perfect example of that, right? It's a great drug for distorting reality. You can watch someone get drunk and have a very bizarre version of what they're looking at. There's many drugs that change the way people look at things, like physically, the way they see things. They will hallucinate. So we know that drugs have an effect on people. That's right. I mean, it seems rational, though, that a scientist would look at those things and try to find some sort of a scientific explanation for the chemical process that's going on in the mind, the way it's affecting the visual cortex, and the things that the person is, quote unquote, hallucinating. Underlying that contention, which is not science in and of itself.

That is just a hypothesis. That is speculation. And I said, what it's based upon is protecting their own vision of the world, which is that the universe is an accident, and anything that is mystical or so-called spiritual is hallucinatory and they have the answers. And these people, as far as I'm concerned, are more dangerous even than politicians. They are, put it this way, the Church of Progress is the religion of the emotionally defective, the spiritually dyslexic, and the philosophically depraved. If you want happiness in this crazy world, you do not talk about moonbeams to the blind or music to the deaf.

And you absolutely do not talk about sex to eunuchs. They just get angry. And this is what you're dealing with when you're dealing with these intellectually based scientists. These are spiritual, emotional, and philosophical eunuchs. And it's no surprise when they behave the way they do. Who's surprised when the eunuchs snigger behind the sultan's back and deride his passions? The problem is that with our Church of Progress, when the eunuchs take over the palace and call their terrible disability reason, then the empire's cooked. You sound like a person who's been deeply in the trenches against

academics for years. You sound like a bitter man, John Anthony West. No, I'm not bitter. I'm not bitter. I'm just realistic. And I know what's involved from being in the trenches. I know what's involved in fighting this particular battle, which I've been engaged in all of these decades. Particularly yours, because you've been dealing with archaeologists that are trying to refute evidence. They're all just as bad as each other. What I bring to the table that my colleague Graham Hancock was an excellent writer and some of the others who are very brilliant people. Rupert Sheldrake is also a very good friend and a very good scientist. What they are not is satirists by nature. And I am. Now, let's go back to this idea that human beings need to fulfill immortality or that there is our ultimate destiny to fulfill immortality. What do you mean by that exactly? Because if there is an afterlife, right, if we do die,

and then we go to this other place that people are seeing in these near-death experiences, why do we have to do anything? Why can't we just sit around and wait for our physical meat body to stop working and then transcend? Well, this is, again, this gets addressed in David's book, in the Dead Saints Chronicles, because it's our job to transcend. In other words, if we don't do anything, well, something happens to us. And again, here's where the near-death experiences get interesting, because almost none of them are negative. What happens to the real evil monster people

that are out there in this world? I mean, does Dick Cheney go to heaven? Gee, if he dies, I don't want to be there. That would be hilarious. Imagine if you get to heaven, you're like, Dick fucking Cheney's up here? You've got to be kidding me, man. I could have done so much more.

I mean, he's in the special waterboarding division. Well, maybe he just realizes it. No, but seriously, this is the purpose. You'd never know it from listening to these guys. This is the purpose of religion. It's a practice. It's not something you believe in. It's something that you do.

And if you don't do it, you don't, unless you go through an NDE, then you come back and you start doing it in one way or another. But it's my own personal conviction is that unless enough people are doing this and getting somewhere with it, it's not as though everyone's going to become enlightened. They probably aren't. Again, going deep into the whole theories of reincarnation and return and so on, which is part of Egypt and part of all of the Eastern cultures of reincarnation.

No, chances are you don't make it in one lifetime. But these things, let's say, there's a report card. There's a divine report card where these things are measured. I mean, Jesus says insofar as, I mean, the Bible is a scholarly morass, and I usually try to avoid using it as evidence for things because it's so open to interpretation and it's so convoluted to begin with, and who knows what's original to it and what isn't. But, you know, many are called, few are chosen. But those who are called, who do their work or who try to do their work,

reap the benefit of that on an internal level that the quackademics can't measure and don't want to measure and don't believe can be measured. But somebody with a presence is very different from somebody without any presence at all. You see that in the world around you as you go. Yeah, I want to bring you back around, though, because I'm still confused. What do you mean by it's our goal to achieve immortality? What do you mean by that? Do you mean like the physical body no longer dies? And do you believe that, like, whatever I read, I do not remember what I read,

That, like, whatever I read, I do not remember what I read, but what I read about the earliest depictions of the pharaohs that was that they lived an extraordinary length of time similar to, like, Noah. Like, Noah in the Bible was 600 years old when he built the ark, correct? Something like that. Something like that. And that this is a common thing. Now, is this because the way we think of time, they had a different interpretation of it? And what 600 years is to us is not 600 years to them? Is it like in the Quran when they talk about 72 virgins? You know, when the expression 72 virgins is not really 72.

What 72 virgins means, it's interesting because it's 72 again. What it means is a large, it's like a shitload. Like someone saying a shitload, you'll have 72 virgins in heaven. Like, oh, whoa, what am I going to do with all them? You know, it's just a large number. It's not the actual number 72. It's just sort of a euphemism for a large number. That's one of the theories of all of those different strange numbers in the Bible. And I don't know any better than anyone else. As far as I know, the pharaohs lived ordinary lifespans. And of course, there's no evidence, physical evidence of the pharaohs, the Necheru, when the divine rulers ruled and the Shemsuhar when they ruled. There's none of that. And we simply don't know. The Tibetans have

accounts, if you want to believe the Tibetans, and I tend to, I don't see why they should lie, of great lamas who live several hundred years and go when they choose to. I don't know, simple as that. And actually, you might say it's no more than kind of mental, it's an interesting hypothesis like Bigfoot, but who cares? The only thing that actually counts is the inner work. And if you're doing it, you're doing it. And if you're not doing it, and you don't measure yourself either, as soon as you're looking for results, that's already a way of not getting them.

It's a very delicate and yet profound subject. And if you go to a good Zen master, this stuff is still around. There are masters. My own focus, as you probably know, or maybe you don't, is the Gurdjieff work. Because when I came across Gurdjieff, an extraordinary character, It was the Gurdjieff work, because when I came across Gurdjieff, an extraordinary character, he was the first person I'd ever encountered posthumously. He died in 49, and I found out about his work in the 60s, who was as contemptuous of Western civilization as I was. The difference was that he knew how to live in it, and I didn't. And at a certain point, I figured out, particularly what you're talking about before, that My Life in the Tren trenches, good subtitle for something.

I still don't understand what you mean about achieving immortality. So if you're not talking about physical immortality, you're not talking about someone living a thousand years and plus. No, absolutely not. What are you talking about? You're talking about the ideas that they promote transcending and moving on? I'm talking about a level of consciousness that transcends death, that the body dies, and that understanding is where you are. I mean, the drugs do that. You have these moments that with the body, you come back because you get out of the trip.

Let's say it's an eternal trip, and the ancients talk about that. You have these moments that with the body, you come back because you get out of the trip. Let's say it's an eternal trip. And the ancients talk about that all the time, even in their mythology, which is always taken as fanciful. Let's say in the pyramid text, the script reads that when the pharaoh dies, and the pharaoh being, let's say, the embodiment of the realized and enlightened soul, when the pharaoh dies, his ba unites with his ka, his spirit unites with his essence, becomes a star, and travels with Ra across the sky in his boat of millions of years. This is, and in fact, I've often wondered if the Egyptians actually knew what he was being, what they were talking about, and the stars themselves are the realizations of enlightened souls.

It's as good as any other explanation that they're simply balls of gas. How did that get there? That automatically, at some point, accidentally colorless into galaxies and nebula and universes, and the whole thing goes on meaninglessly. Well, I don't think anybody thinks it's meaningless, but it is kind of fascinating that stars themselves are the only reason why people are alive. That's right. Like, we are made of stardust, which is just-

We are indeed. Incredible to think that the seeds of human life and all carbon life, in fact, come from a star exploding. Like, wow. Like everything that you see, like the sun, the sun is a seed for future life. That's bananas. Exactly. Yeah.

Well, you've answered your own question, as it were. That understanding, and I wouldn't even call it a philosophy, it's an understanding by people who understand more than we do, certainly more than I do. But if you say that's our goal to achieve immortality, it sounds like we're going to get it anyway, no matter what. Well, no, actually, with the NDEs, no, what happens, not really, no. They've had their experience. They've had their X number of minutes of grace

and come back transformed and realize that they have to live their lives differently. They don't even talk about the future or anything like that. I mean, this is obviously a very big thing that not many people evidently achieve. But the effort, like everything else, the effort is the effort. And it's on the scorecard. It's like, it's not so different from everybody who picks up a violin isn't going to end up in Carnegie Hall. And everyone who picks up a baseball bat isn't going to play up in Carnegie Hall and everyone who picks up a baseball bat isn't

going to play center field for the Mets or any other team. But it's the effort that counts and it's a certain kind of directed and intelligent effort that is painful in its own way but carries its own reward and it it manifests in a kind of presence and just in our daily lives even with people who are not consciously doing it but they're doing it they have a different level of presence and you notice it when you meet them now what is it that you think these ancient Egyptians, when you talk about the earliest Egyptians that you believe had achieved this incredible state of mind or consciousness, what is it that you think that they did to achieve that? Like why were they so advanced?

Why were they so beyond what we think of when we think of even the possibility of a human being living 34 plus thousand years ago how did how did they achieve that we don't know we don't know we don't know all we can see all we can see is the manifestation of of what they did when we actually when you really understand egypt was even to the extent that i do, you regard it as miraculous. You don't see how beings ostensibly like ourselves should even imagine such things, much less be able to do it. And this is what, I'll pitch my trip.

Okay. I often start a lecture off by saying that Egypt is like sex. That gets everybody's attention. Why is it like sex? saying that Egypt is like sex. That gets everybody's attention. Why is it like sex? Because you can read books about it,

and that's informational of sorts. You can look at pictures. That's a different kind or a different level of information. But until you've experienced it, you do not and cannot understand it. And Egypt is like that. That Magical Egypt series is as close as anyone has ever come to communicating the wonder and the magic that is Egypt as anyone has ever, it's way head and shoulders above what anybody else has done. And that's my genius partner Chance

is doing in its entirety. It's, you know, simplest ideas and I play a big role in it but it's really chance's baby. But at the visit to Egypt, at the end of a couple of weeks there, I can talk from that old dooms after day after day after day in the presence of sacred art of this quality. And there's nowhere else on the left. I mean, I'm sure that China and India and all of these places had not pyramids and not that kind of structure. The nature of Egypt, it's a kind of freak of nature, as it were, all desert except this little strip of Nile. And then the delta that until recently was impenetrable swamp. So it's practically unattackable. And the food denial floods and the food jumps out of the ground.

And under the, with a series of genuinely enlightened rulers, or at least pretty close to enlightened rulers, ruling them, it all lasts for 3,500 years. And how did they live? You see, everything that they did, in fact, until quite recently, there were no such things as jobs. There were trades and crafts and skills and arts.

And everybody, I mean, yes, in Europe, the combination of a repressive church and an oppressive nobility kept everybody immersed in serfdom in one way or another. But what people actually did with their lives was in some sense or another transformational. All of it. It takes a lot of smarts to be a good peasant. All of these things that people used to do as a matter of course. And in Egypt, you see it carved into the walls and everyone thinks these are the scenes of daily life. Well, they are scenes of daily life, but they're decodable as transformational activities.

So anything that you do, and boy, you're doing martial arts. This is a highly developed skill. You are somebody that you wouldn't be if you didn't have that skill. If you were doing a podcast and what you did for a living was flipping burgers at McDonald's, you wouldn't be Joe Rogan. You've been doing your homework

without maybe even thinking that it was homework. Because anything that you're involved in that you go at with a quest for perfection of whatever it is has this transformational value. And when you know it, let's say when you know it intellectually, when you can articulate it, it implements actually the activity itself. So it's possible even to do that. You could be an enlightened burger flipper, and the Sufis are very good at it.

The Sufi is in life but not of it. In other words, you can practice waking up, as it were, in the midst of the most mundane thing. You could be an enlightened garbage collector as long as you knew what you were doing. It's a totally different thing. I would imagine I'm not a garbage collector. It's a totally different thing to collect the garbage consciously than it is to just do it resentfully because that's the only job that you can get all of. Right.

So when we're talking, it's not as though this is anything actually new. It's the oldest idea that ever was, and it's something that people have been doing for thousands and thousands of years. That said, going into the whole thing of precession and the ages, particularly as expressed, Plato, they have the golden age and the silver age and the bronze age and the iron age.

The Hindus do it in a rather more sophisticated fashion. I forget exactly the names that are on the tip of my tongue of those ages. But if they are, let's say, analogous to our seasons, particularly if you live where I do and not in California where it's all one season. But the seasons... The yugas? Is that it? The yugas?

The yugas, that's right. If they're compared to the seasons, it's a very different thing to grow roses in June than it is in January. It's the same effort when you're talking about people, you know, waking up and all of the rest of it. This is a dark age. I mean, this is this is the Kali Y, as far as I'm concerned. To do anything of a spiritual nature now with all of these forces lined up against you, not consciously, of course, but unconsciously, it's an incredibly difficult thing to actually practice a genuine spiritual doctrine. First of all, you have to get interested in it, and that's only a small chunk of us, and then you have to try to do it.

Peter Robinson And you have to have the time, you have to have the focus. Peter Robinson Or make the time and the focus. Peter Robinson Don't be distracted. Peter Robinson That's right, the focus and the will and all the rest of the things. So growing roses in January takes a lot more effort than to get to the same rose than it takes in June when they're jumping out of the ground. So my guess is, and it's only a guess, it's speculation, that in these higher levels of these higher periods of, you know, gold and silver, bronze, and so on,

it's just much easier. it is much easier for people to recognize what's demanded of them and to do it than it is in the middle of a from a spiritual point of view spiritual but brightly lit brightly it unilluminated but brightly lit dark dark age well if you where we, if you look at the influence that Egypt had clearly on Greece and clearly on a lot of other civilizations where people literally came to Egypt to learn, if Egypt wasn't there, what would civilization be like? I mean, it's such a unique place in that there's really nowhere that you can compare that has the level of sophistication as far as the structures in the ancient world.

I mean, it's almost like what they created was undeniable. Like, I think Giza, the Great Period of Giza, has 2,300,000 stones that weigh between 2 and 80 tons. Like, what? Like, that's insane. It is. Like, there's the level of sophistication in creating something like that.

I mean, I've only seen it in photographs, but one of the greatest photographs I've ever seen is from someone with a GoPro standing on the top of it. So you get this kind of a, you get a sense of how immense it really truly is. And you just think about how incredible that must have been, especially when it's covered with smooth limestone before they cut it all off.

Right. I mean, what you're seeing is it's an undeniable mastery of physical things. It is. To the point where it makes your head spin. I mean, people say we can do that today. Well, okay, maybe. We kind of understand that it's been done and that we can do pretty immense things. We have some pretty incredible tractors and machines and everything like that.

But they didn't have those. As far as we know. They didn't have those. They might have had something else. What do you think they had? I don't know. Do you have some hypothesis, some theories in your head about the construction methods? Some, a bit.

Actually, from Tibet, there's actually a funny little book. I've done some lectures out at, what is it called? In Joshua Tree. You know about that? It's a contact in the desert. They're mostly interested in the UFO phenomenon and stuff like that. But the place itself,

Joshua Retreat Center, is founded by a very interesting guy who was sort of the Tibetan Krishnamurti. In other words, it's an interesting little book he wrote, terribly written, but his studies in Tibet. And at the end of his little book, it's an interesting little book he wrote, terribly written, but his studies in Tibet. And at the end of this little book he's talking about, he's studying with the lamas.

He describes certain of the things he has seen them do. And I see no particular reason to dismiss what he says. He's talking from experience and it has the ring of veracity to it. He talks about going into an underground chamber that has no lights or electricity or anything like that. That's all lit up. And if you go to Egypt, you have these deep, deep shaft tombs that go down and around and all like this. And people say, well, how did they light the thing up? Can't have had torches. It would have used up all of the oxygen and it would have smoked up the ceilings

and all the rest of it. And people say, well, mirrors. No, mirrors will do, and you need silvered mirrors for it to go around corners. There are the gypsy caves in Seville that are four or five rooms and that are lit with mirrors from on top.

But no, somehow, and I used to joke and say, well, you know, they had an inner light. I was joking. But maybe that's what it was that they produced. And he talks about other lamas he's witnessed doing incredible feats that you couldn't do, you know, that you just couldn't do in your ordinary state. Probably you as a martial artist have had moments or witnessed people who can do things that are for anybody else impossible. Yeah, but they don't light up tunnels.

No, they don't light up tunnels, but they can do physical things that are … Yeah, sure. They're extraordinary. They're almost miraculous. Nobody else could do them. Yeah, but it's a really important point what you're saying about the construction methods that they used where they did have these long tunnels and these passages and these places. But somehow or another, they managed to navigate these things without leaving any marks or soot from torches, which are everywhere else where people used candles or anywhere else, like in the Sistine Chapel. The entire ceiling is covered with soot. They had to clean it to prepare it so people could see it again. But that's really fascinating to think that they had some other method of illumination that we

just haven't discovered yet. We don't know what they did or how they did it. That's one thing. But you look at a jillion other things, particularly this is, again, one of the reasons why the sphinx theory is so contentious to these, so dangerous to these guys, because the sphinx, carving the sphinx is one thing. But, okay, limestones are relatively resilient stones, relatively soft stone. And enough guys with chisels, even if they're copper chisels, could do that given enough time and enough genius. But the temples either side of it are built of stones half the size of this room, slotted into place like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. This is unbelievable.

And again, what you just said is really important. Copper. Copper tools. That's what they think. Copper tempered with arsenic. I mean, those same copper tools are supposedly used for carving the granite. If you go to Egypt, actually,

you should get a huge audience. Get a Joe Rogan trip together and come on to Egypt. I'm not going with the people listening to this podcast. Well, have a test. Too many freaks. 90% of them would be great. The 10%. Well, keep out the 10%.

Just prepare a... I have to have a filter. Have a conversation with them. Prepare a filter. Get them in a room. Prepare a filter. How many people would you take at a time? I have a max of 24.

Interesting. Because more than that is unmanageable. Right. And when you see it, I mean, one thing after the other. And it's totally safe to go to Egypt right now? Well, it's as safe as Los Angeles. I mean, or anywhere else here in dumb Pakistan. You know, this is for Americans, for Americans to, of all people, to be afraid of going somewhere.

We're worried about Islamic terrorism more than anything. It's here. Yes. It's already here. And Islamic terrorism is itself a tiny little bit of the terrorism that goes on on a daily basis. You pick up, you open the Internet, and there's some nutcase kid somewhere or another shooting down a mall. I mean, the terrorists, the known terrorists have accounted for it.

It's not even a statistic. It's an X number of people that they've gone after. But, you know, here in this crazy, violent country, you're never safe anywhere. Schools aren't safe. Malls aren't safe. What's safe? Right. Cairo has some nice hotels, too, right?

Oh, great hotels. Yeah, we stay at a place actually right across a stone's throw from the pyramids itself. So you can look at the pyramid out your window. Yeah, you can. Wow. That's right. the pyramids itself. So you can look at the pyramid out your window? Yeah, you can. Wow. That's right. You can do that. When I look at the Great Pyramid or I look at the structures I've seen online or in your

videos or things along those lines, what's shocking to me is how, and this is going to be a weird thing to say, how Egyptian it looks and how Egypt stands alone in this very distinctive way. And that the construction methods, just the intricacy of the building and these pyramids. I mean, people talk about the Mayan pyramids and I've been to Chichen Itza and it's an amazing place and it's really beautiful and crazy to look at. But it pales in comparison to the structures of Egypt. Yeah, everything pales in comparison. So what happened? How did that happen?

Well, as I said, because it was in a kind of a blessed one. It had a philosophy, you know, it had a spiritual philosophy underpinning it that had the, that had the, that had, you might say, that had the, that united the people in their entirety. It doesn't mean that there weren't, you know, criminals and murderers and stuff like that, but basically the people were united in their faith, united in their belief. Herodotus, when Egypt was 6th century BC, Herodotus and Egypt is already in steep decline. It says the Egyptians are the happiest, healthiest, and most religious of people. It wasn't the Egyptian Chamber of Commerce that was telling him to say that. He was a patriotic Greek.

But it was like that. And it was a combination of the philosophy wedded to in a society that was protected on all four sides and almost impregnable. It was conquered a couple of times over the course of 3,000 years for a relatively brief period of time. And the food jumped out of the ground. The Nile flooded and took practically no work. And that made a quite substantial population. It gave them months of free time every year.

So how did it all go wrong? Now we're talking about the Kali Yugas. Whatever period Egypt is assigned to is on a downhill slope. It just plain was on a downhill slope. And you can watch it transform in front of your eyes. It disintegrates as a coherent religion, rises in another form that we call Christianity, actually. And you can see it happening in front of your nose

with Coptic Christianity arising. All the rest of the stuff gets completely decadent under the Romans. I mean, Rome, what's his name? Gibbon, Edward Gibbon, in Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, talks about the grandeur, the glory of Greece, which is absolute nonsense, or totally, near total nonsense, and the grandeur of Rome. Yeah, they were building coliseums in order to torture,

in order to let gladiators kill each other. And they built good roads. But Rome was a three-ring bureaucracy, actually. And that's the beginning of the end. In Europe, anyway, it's very traceable. The Asian countries, less so. But they, too, have high civilizations that decline. And in Europe, you see kind of a turnaround in the Renaissance. Very impossible to actually so, but they too have high civilizations that decline. In Europe, you see kind of a turnaround in the Renaissance, very impossible to actually date. Then you have it leading in a sort of very one-sided development in which technology advances by leaps and bounds and everything else is arguably a lot worse than it was a couple of hundred years ago.

From every spiritual, psychological point of view, we're a lot worse off than, let's say, the colonial Americans. You really think so? Oh, yeah. But the depictions of the colonial Americans by the ancient people, when you, who was it that described the atrocities that Columbus and his crew had done? What preacher, what priest? Oh, yeah. No, loads of them.

Sure. They had done horrific, horrific things. Oh, those are the conquerors. Yeah. I'm not talking about the settlers who murdered all the Indians. Right. Oh, and the Aztecs. And all that stuff.

Montezuma was a piece of shit. Slaughter of 80,000 slaves after they built Teotihuacan. How do you say that? Teotihuacan. Teotihuacan. This I don't know about, and I don't know, again.

But they seemed like bad people, too. Oh, loads of bad people around. They just didn't have the internet. No, but I'm talking about they certainly didn't have the internet and lots of other goodies they didn't have. No, but there was a certain, let's say, about the populace in general in America, a certain gravitas about them.

There's a certain presence that is of our great-great-grandfathers. Well, not mine because they were in Hungary at that time, my great-great-grandfather. But there's a certain sort of like Emerson self-reliance. I mean, this is a piece of it. Meanwhile, of course, they weapon all the slaves in the South and they're murdering all the Indians and the billionaires, as is their fashion, are beating up on their Irish immigrant workers because why have slaves when they can mistreat their workers and build all of their railroads across the country.

But nevertheless, there's a sense of... Let's say gravitas is almost the only word I can think of because it's not as though it's intellectually advanced or anything like that. But there's a certain seeming solidity to 19th century America than there is now in this crazy chaos that we're living in. Don't you think that there's always this tendency in human beings that long for nostalgia?

They look back to the past, to a moment when things made sense. It seems to me that there's always that. And even when people are full of shit about it, like they look back on high school days, man, those are the good old days. Like, what are you talking about? You had pimples, you were out of your fucking mind, insecure, you're terrified of the future. That wasn't the good old days. This is true. Yeah, Trump, make America great again. Yeah, bring back slavery. Find some more.

We run out of Indians. Murder the Muslims. Yeah, let's go to the Arab nations. Or let's go to the Amazon. Yeah, let's import them and murder them. And let's bring back all of that stuff. No, it was never great. But, as I said, there's just, there is a kind of... Maybe I'm more optimistic. I think there's an awakening going on right now with human beings that's unprecedented.

And I think it's because of the Internet. I think because of the fact that we're combining our thoughts in some sort of a strange way and sharing ideas and information in a way that no one's ever been able to do before. I don't think people have ever been this aware of how crazy things are. But at the same time, it's the lunacy of last night's presidential debate. You realize, like, I guess we really haven't, I mean, we might be aware of things,

but actual progress is not really being made. We have the ability to be aware of things. Yes. But we are not, we are not at least in sufficient numbers doing anything about it. We numbers, doing anything about it. We are not doing anything about it. And that's the crux of the matter.

It's one thing, this is why intellectual spiritual, you know, intellectual mysticism is a total waste of time. Only the, it's like intellectual violin playing. No, you've got to play the violin. Yeah. Or it's not music. Right. So thinking about Egypt is not good enough. You've got to go the violin. Or it's not music. Right. So thinking about Egypt

is not good enough. You've got to go. The ability, well that, yes. The ability to get information is now absolutely unparalleled. As far as we know, there's never been anything remotely like this.

At the same time, there's never been that much static. So as we were talking about earlier, you know, the crystal sniffers and the unicorns and the ancient aliens, this is all a vast amount of static, so you have to be able to find your way through the static to the music.

How much does ancient aliens frustrate you? Not much, because I watched a couple of programs. But if you did, are you throwing things at the TV and screaming? No, I have low expectations. So it's TV. It's entertainment and the people who are putting it together don't know what they're doing except they see that it works and they want to make money. Is it possible that the aliens made the pyramids?

When they have all these experts, everything it is. Is it possible that extraterrestrials? I guess it's possible. That's right. Well, it is possible. And Giorgio, of course, pushed into a corner and says, yeah, all of this and that and so on. Still, it's aliens. Giorgio Tsoukalos?

Yeah. He's beautiful. I love that guy. He's a funny guy. He's a funny guy he's a funny guy um but when you think of ancient egypt and you you think of the the public's understanding and awareness of it what do you think the average person is missing all of it all of it basically yeah the so you think it's like right before our fate, in front of our eyes, and most people just have no idea the majesty and how intensely unique it is.

No, look, Our Mystery of the Sphinx, which at that time, one of the most watched TV documentaries of all time. And it really had a massive audience and people who saw it remember it. I mean, even to this day. Not me. You saw it? Yeah. Oh, you did? I have a VHS cassette tape of it, it. I mean, even to this day. You saw it? Oh, you did? I have a VHS cassette tape of it, sir. Really?

Wait, I brought it. Wait, did I bring it? I forget if I brought you. I think you can get it online now. I think it might be on YouTube. It's on DVD. I was going to bring you a DVD of it, actually. But I maybe forgot.

I've almost memorized it. Well, that's good. Yeah, I've seen it quite a few times. But anyway, that had a certain impact. For sure. Even if 30 million people saw it, 300 million didn't. Right. And then going there is really what's up.

And, well, that's the big crunch. I felt that. And only X number of people can go there. I went to the Vatican last summer, this past summer, my first time ever in Italy. And I had seen it on television before, obviously. I'd seen videos and stuff. I've seen photos. Boy, when you're there and you're like in, what is it, St. Peter's Basilica?

Yeah. St. Paul's? Paul's? No. Paul's? St. Paul's? Wait. One of those guys.

One of those old dudes. Now you've mistook it. St. Peter's. Is it? St. Peter's. Is it? Okay. With the dome where the boat always comes out. And you look at it and you go, when you're inside of it and you realize the insane magnitude of the construction, the fact that it took hundreds of years to complete and they did it all without saws, without power tools rather.

They did it all without any modern equipment. And it's unbelievably beautiful. Yeah. Incredible work of art. And it pales in comparison to what they did in Egypt. Yes, it does. Which is like, I think I got to go. Because it's one of those, well, they also have an obelisk.

That's a 4,000-year-old obelisk. Yeah, they stole it from Egypt. Yeah, they stole it from Egypt. Yeah. And you just look at that, and when you're there physically, and you look at it in person, you just go, how the fuck did they make this? Wait a minute now.

Wait. This is— Yeah. Cathedral is—Basilica is very interesting and all that. But— How did they move? How did they get this? This actually is an interesting book by my now-deceased friend Peter Tompkins on the magic of the obelisks, where he's talking about ripping them out of context and bringing them to Rome and New York and England.

And it was interesting because they were brought over in the 19th century, and it's already, you know, technology is pretty advanced. I mean, you have huge cranes and all the rest of it, and it strained the Victorian technology to the utmost to get these things over. And then you realize that the Egyptians did it with none of those tools. Yeah. At all. They somehow got them ripped out of the bedrock, brought down the river, taken offloaded from

the raft or boat or whatever, which is a big job, transported across the ground. That's doable. Erected in place precisely to the millimeter on the base. That's a big mystery. Did they have levels? What? Did they have levels, like bubble levels? Not bubble levels, but they had other kinds.

They did it with water somehow or another. That's, I think, reasonably well established, but I forget exactly how it was on how they leveled, I think, reasonably well established, but I forget exactly how it was, on how they leveled, for example, the base of the pyramid to a millimeter or something like that. I mean, everything that you look at in Egypt, when you go there,

the deeper you look, the more mysterious it becomes, and you marvel at how the devil did this. Well, the king's chamber is one of the most bizarre ones, right? Yeah. Well, no more bizarre than other things. But just the enormity of the stones, the way they're set up, that it's such a complex system. The way they've set them in place is so incredible. You're talking about the ones, the so-called relieving chambers, which are really resonating chambers.

Resonating chambers? Yeah, that's another thing. Yeah, they don't relieve anything. Architecturally, completely unnecessary to relieve the stresses from above. Directly below the king chamber is the so-called queen's chamber, which doesn't have that at all.

It has a simple gabled roof, and that protects it from anything that it needs. The other chambers, when you're in the King's Chamber, it's like being an echo chamber. You can't—it's really a miraculous place. And, of course, everything is precision cut and all of that, but it doesn't look that fantastic. It's the levels above that are the most amazing things. These are the 70-ton blocks of stone. I think that's what you're talking about. How they got those into place, no one knows.

But they're responsible for the resonance of that particular chamber. And it's my belief that resonance plays, even not necessarily resonance for the human voice, but when you're in there, the, I forget the acoustic term, feedback or whatever, that you can't, for example, if we're in the King's Chamber and we go, we rent the pyramid for a couple of hours and for a meditation session on my trips, and when you're in there, you can't have a

conversation the way we're having it now. and when you're in there, you can't have a conversation the way we're having it now. You have to talk like this. Otherwise, the reverberation is such that it scrambles your voice. This can only be deliberate, and you can hear from the king's chamber. If you do a set-up and you do a chant in the king's chamber,

if you go all the way down the ground gallery, and then there's a place below where you have to make a turn, and then there's a descending passage that goes as deep below the ground as the pyramid, as the king's chamber is above the ground. It's about a 12-story shaft that you go down. Below the ground, 12 stories. 12 stories down below and then 12 stories built up above. Wow, look at that. Oh, right. Very good.

And if you set up a chant in the King's Chamber, you can hear it down in the pit below. 12 stories below. Yeah, but you shouldn't be able to hear it at all because the sound has to go down and then turn around and then go down the other shaft. By the way, I should say, because people are always asking me now, it's a function of age, how long are you going to keep doing these trips? Yeah. And I say, well, you know, unless and until I can't get up and down the King's Chamber, to the king's chamber I'll be doing trips unless some media

thing takes over but they say in Texas if you can do it it ain't bragging good line I was in Egypt recently on my on a research recce trip that may lead to something and it may not recce trip?

reconnaissance film lingo for okay reconnaissance i thought it was like like a like a meditation no not regular not reiki and and actually so normally you ever go with the group up to the king's chamber but i don't bother to go we open it gets opened up and you go down into. So I said, ah, it's my 84th birthday. I happen to be in Egypt. So I said, okay, I'll test it. So I went up to the king of chamber and down the shaft. So that's 12 stories up and 12 stories down.

I went down to the pit. It was 12 stories down and 12 stories up. And I figured that was pretty good for 84. That's pretty good. So I'll be doing the trips for a while. Nice. Well, that's good. I mean, I don't think anybody's capable of doing the same kind of experience that you would provide.

Like your knowledge of Egypt is pretty rare in this day and age. Well, I was hoping when I had this idea to do my own trips, I thought, oh, finally I'll make a living out of this stuff. But what happened was that no sooner had my guidebook come out, you probably don't have a copy of that, and it's out of print now, but I have copies, that back in 85, the first of the terrorist things happened, and these guys hijacked the cruise ship off Alexandria and pushed this poor old guy in a wheelchair over the side of the cruise ship and he drowned. And that, my book had just come out and instantly the tourist trade was killed. Talking about people being afraid for a whole year it took for it to develop. And it did develop again, but the book had disappeared from the shelves by that time. Anyway, still available of course

but wait, I lost my thread. With the trips what did you say? With Egypt Someone doing them Oh, someone doing it. My plan was I wanted to train a number of people up

who were familiar you know, steeped in symbolist Egypt, to spread the word, as it were. And while I was at it, get a commission from the trips to provide some useful wool propellant. So you can have some nice passive income. Right. But it never happened because one thing led to another and it was hard enough getting my own trips filled up. But yeah, unfortunately, as it now stands, I'm the only one, only a handful of people, no symbol of Egypt well enough to communicate it.

As it just so happens, I'm the only one who does trips. That's so crazy. I really am the only wheel in town in that regard. Well, you brought us a bunch of slides. So why don't you tell me what do you want to show us and what did you bring here? Well, that's my whole long lecture. You want to go to the geology of the Sphinx, the water weathering. And then other slides related to that, the gigantic blocks, paving blocks, around, particularly around the second pyramid and, yeah, mostly around the second pyramid.

And then, I mean, all of that stuff relates to the scientific, the geological evidence. Then I wanted to get into, I didn't want to touch the symbolist, the quest for immortality, because that's a whole big subsequent thing. I did want to get into, and we didn't even talk about it, yeah, the map of dumb Pakistan and what I call the, and I've got a great graphic for it, actually, everybody you know, certainly, and everybody, probably most of your audience will know about the four horsemen of the apocalypse, right?

From Revelation, who are actually an interesting study in its own right. The four horsemen are war, famine, pestilence, and death. And what's interesting about the four horsemen is that only war is really under human control, at least in theory. Famine, pestilence, plague, as it were, and death comes to us all. It's a peculiar choice, actually, for the four horsemen.

But I invented the five cowboys of Apocalypse 2.0. And they are capitalism, patriotism, democracy, technology, and entertainment. All the stuff I love. Well. That's the end? Well, no. It's just another way of looking at things, actually. It's really human folly, all of it, right?

Well, yeah. Call it democracy. Call it capitalism. Call it technology. It's none of those things. It's human folly, all of it, right? Well, yeah. Call it democracy, call it capitalism, call it technology. It's none of those things. It's human folly. It's the human, the error in human use. Well, yeah. Well, okay.

Capitalism is really based upon the philosophy, everything for me, nothing for you. You see, everybody's fighting for market share. Why can't you let a guy stay alive? It's competition. But if it wasn't for that competition, we wouldn't be here. We wouldn't have planes that shoot across the sky. We wouldn't have laptops that work so well. We wouldn't have internet that's so fast. I don't know. We might, but we might not. It's very possible that we wouldn't. And there's a downside to all of those things. But there's an upside, too. I'm a glass half full kind of guy john anthony west that's the technology side of it i haven't got to that yet okay capitalism is based upon everything for me nothing for you patriotism

is based upon everything for us nothing for them the bumper sticker says god bless america the hidden sticky side says, and fuck everyone else. That's patriotism. Democracy is that the idea is that the dishwashers elect the chef and tell him what to do. I don't know about you. I don't eat in the restaurant where the dishwashers elect the chef and tell him what to do. It's flawed. It's hopelessly flawed to begin with, which Plato recognized perfectly. Churchill said democracy looks like the worst of all possible political systems until you

look at all the others. At the same time, this is fun and it's not necessarily untrue. The same time, he also said, contradicting himself, the best argument against democracy is 10 minutes of conversation with an average voter. I don't know about you, I don't want my leaders elected numerically by the average voter. Actually, if they had a test, which is next to impossible to even conceive, if voting were a privilege, I mean, when the country started off, it was a privilege, but you had to be a white male who owned property, which is not as

elitist as it actually looks now. Because in those days, they were the only ones who were substantial enough and probably had some sort of an education. It doesn't mean necessarily that they understand the principles. And they were, you might say, the solid citizens who at least could read. I mean, nobody else could read except people with an education of some sort. So that was the rule. And it wasn't a terribly good rule, but it might have been in its own way. Anyway, that's as a principle that it shouldn't be a privilege to vote just as like anybody could produce. Why shouldn't anybody be able to do brain surgery, you know, or design engineer, design a bridge? I'm as good as the next guy.

I've never designed a bridge. I don't have any training, but it's a democracy. Why can't I do that or play center field for the Mets? And that's what the president is, really, essentially. Anybody, you just have to say, I want to do it. Step up. This is my plan and get people to vote for you. Well, it's a contest. Anyway, put it this way. In its current form, and in fact, as far back as you could go in America, it's been a disaster democracy. Technology is certainly a mixed bag. The problem, two big problems with technology. The main one, and we touched upon this earlier, is that technology deprives the average, the normal human being of making a living out of his own productive out of his own

creativity it deprives them technology does how so it the only people who are creative in technology are the people who are creating the technology everybody else serves the technology they work in the offices that serve the technology they they they're basically slaves to the technology. But what about the people that use the technology to separate themselves from slave jobs? Like there's a lot of people that have started their own businesses online because they could use technology now.

So crafts, people who create things. That's the upside, but it's a relatively small part compared to the number of people. They talk about all these good jobs going out to China. Those are shitty jobs. Nobody in their right mind would want to work in a factory. Have you ever worked in a factory? No. Or been in a factory? Yes, I've been in factories. Because I went to schools as seldom as I possibly could in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, which is where the

Bethlehem Steel Center was. And we used to go there on field drives. Holy mackerel, this was like working in Dante's Inferno. These blackened figures jumping up and down in the blinding heat of the Bessemer converters. And the other kinds of jobs of robots stuffing things into boxes or flipping burgers. robots stuffing things into boxes or flipping burgers. The vast majority of people, yeah, they have their television sets and their internet and stuff like that, but the vast majority of people do not and cannot make their living

out of their own creativity. And before, however terrible things may have been in medieval times, people did creative transformational things. So that's the downside of technology. And the other bad side of technology, you talked about the good side. The bad side is that it's not immoral necessarily, but it's amoral. So as long as they can do it, they do it. What do you mean by that?

Well, hydrogen bomb, why not? We don't invent it, somebody else will do it. Nerve gas, well, that's a very good way of getting around stuff. Striped toothpaste, well, it's a waste of time and effort and stuff like that, but maybe we can sell more striped toothpaste than unstriped toothpaste.

And the rest of it is, in other words, a percentage of it, yeah, the medicine is very good until it gets into the hands of big pharma. And then make sure that people are ripped off to get at the medicine that they need and the medicine that they have available is not usually a cure. It's a way of keeping people alive and buying more medicine. Anything that's actually a cure that comes from alternative sources is fought to the death by the big pharmaceutical companies. So technology is certainly a mixed bag. And entertainment, depending on how you define it, is what you do to kill time before it kills you.

For the most part, it's an absolute waste of time. It takes your mind off the boringness of your own life. Art is different. Art is not entertainment. There's a broad line in between that, at least in theory, could or should be filled by comedy, which is not exactly entertainment, but it's not exactly sacred science either, but it plays, at least theoretically,

it can play a kind of a transformational role. You can... Real high-level comedy is enlightening. It points out, and comedy is based upon, you can't laugh. Comedy is based upon what's wrong. You can't laugh at what's right. You can't make fun of good sex or good food. You can make fun of attitudes toward good sex or good food.

But you can't laugh at what's right. Not easily, but you can laugh. good sex or good food. You can make fun of attitudes toward good sex or good food. But you can't laugh at what's right, not easily, but you can laugh, but you can and do laugh at what's wrong. And so, let's say at some inner level, by laughing at what's wrong, Inadvertently, it's a recognition we have within us, let's say, a moral compass or something of the sort that recognizes by recognizing what's wrong, we're giving assent to what's right. It is to cultural, of course, what's funny to an Eskimo is not necessarily funny to an African. What's funny to an African is not necessarily funny to a

Chinese. But comedy has this potential to play, at least in my view, a transformational role. But anyway, mostly it doesn't. And entertainment at the American level, turn on your television set.

Is that entertainment? It's certainly not art. It's a deadening. It's an anodyne. It's sort of most of it is a kind of, what's it that you take to go to sleep? Sedative. It's basically a kind of sedative or the opposite. It's like a Benny.

Stimulant? It's a stimulant, actually, with the Terminator and all the horrible, vicious things that they do. Let's get to the slides because we're already two hours in here. Oh, yeah. Let's take a look at some of the slides. What do you want to start? Let's start with the geology. Okay.

Start right at the beginning. And I'll just whip you past. Okay. Now, why are they, this is a really confusing thing to me, why do they continue to rebuild that thing? Because when they're rebuilding it, they're rebuilding the feet and the paws of the Sphinx. And I understand there's considerable erosion that they have to mitigate, but it's not the Sphinx. And I understand there's considerable erosion that they have to mitigate, but it's not the Sphinx anymore.

Well, it's bringing the Sphinx back to supposedly what it was originally. The problem is, really is an engineering problem. They don't know themselves, and at least a few of them acknowledge it. Chuck thinks this. He's not in charge of doing the repairs that it may be doing more damage because it's still weathering on the inside and by covering it over with these usually very badly yeah badly done stuff but they're actually doing more damage than that well the department of antiquities is this zowie so he's no longer he's no longer in the pokey did they lock him up no no

no no he's in trouble never been able he well and was in trouble, but they couldn't pin it on him. Oh, the slippery bastard. And they would have if they could. No, listen. Zahi, on a personal level, that's another long story. We've already gone on for two hours. But on a personal level, I can get on with Zahi. And he's now back in, not formally in a position of power.

He's not head of the department. And he's got his problems. Did you see the debate that he had with Graham Hancock? Oh, God. He walked out right away? Yeah, he was a disaster. And all of his friends even, I mean, the guy who runs my trip, Muhammad Nazmi, who I called a surgeon because he really knows how to operate.

He's a wonderful guy. And he's a good personal friend of Zahi's. And he said, you know, Zahi, this is a disaster. But, you know, he lived through it. And he's back on the scene, as it were. Anyway. So we're looking at the Sphinx enclosure here. And this massive, massive structure with all this erosion around it.

Right, all this erosion to it right all this erosion to it and then people see this on youtube um yeah when when you'll see as we go through a few sides you get a few slides you'll see the sense of that erosion this is just a wonderful picture of it taken by a good friend of mine keep going this is what they thought about this is why this is why the sphinx could not have been weathered by sand what we're looking right now, for the people that are just listening, is it buried in sand, which it has been many, many times when Napoleon found that it was buried in sand, correct? Right. Completely buried in sand and probably for a few thousand years. This is taken, photograph taken about 2000, when it had already been excavated and filled up with sand again, which

happens pretty quickly. So basically you can say, give or take a few hundred years, that since its supposed construction around 2500 BC, it's been buried in sand about 3,000 of those 4,500 years. That's insane. So that's the proof. Yeah, there's the evidence. And still the geologists go on ranting about sand. When you're talking about this friend of yours who's going through the tree, you say, okay, how did it weather by sand?

Wind and sand, right? How did it get exposed? The wind can't affect it that way. Wasn't that the original text of whoever? Who do they attribute to the construction of the pyramid? Thutmose? No, no, no, no. Pharaoh Khafra.

Khafra. The successor of Khufu, who supposedly built the Great Pyramid, which is not true in its entirety. The pyramids, this is another complex argument, which as you see, everything's complex. They're almost certainly built in stages, and the earliest stages probably date from whenever the Sphinx was originally built. And the argument for Khafre building, it wasn't a text that said that he had a dream that if he uncovered the Sphinx that he would become Pharaoh. No, that's Thutmoses IV a thousand years later. They attribute it to Khafre because the causeway that leads from the Sphinx, if you go the behind it you see the beginning, not really, you see it's just back in the Sphinx. If you go to behind it, you see the beginning? Not really. You see it's just the back of the Sphinx. The causeway leads up right to the middle of the Khafra pyramid, which he almost certainly did build or anyway superimposed upon something that was there before

because you can prove that. Okay, keep going. Did they used to think it was Tutmosis? No, no, no. They always thought it was Khafram because, well, again. What is this right here? That's not the Rosetta Stone, is it? No, no, no.

That's the stela of Thutmose that talks about how in a dream it's covered with sand. Oh, that's it right there. That's in 1450 B.C. So that means in 1450 B.C. it was covered in sand. It was covered in sand, exactly. And with a certain number of other evidences of that sort, you can put together the timeline that tells you. I swear I've read online someone attributing Tut Moses to the creation of it, but there's a lot of erroneous. There's a lot of junk on it.

Now, the face of the Sphinx, this is a really controversial thing, right? Because the face of the Sphinx is clearly newer than the body. It's less eroded. And it's also a very African-looking face. Do they think that, which obviously it's the continent Africa, but do they think there's the Nubians had conquered Egypt at one point in time, right? Wasn't the speculation that one of the Nubian pharaohs had created this? Well, some said that. 19th century travelers, lots of them noted

that this was really an African face, but what they meant is that it's a sub-Sahara African face. It's a real African African face. The Nubians are very black, but have more or less finer features. They don't have the jaw like that. I mean, that looks more like an NBA basketball player than an Egyptian. Anyway, the headdress is all redone. The picture before was covered with sand. You see how weathered the headdress was. They redid the bottom of it.

They redid the headdress in its entirety. The face itself is a much harder outcrop of limestone. So it hasn't weathered to the same extent that the body of the Sphinx has weathered. So you think it's of the same era? We don't know. Actually, you see, the African face is a real problem, actually. Of course, the Egyptians are as prejudiced as everyone else, and they don't want to actually believe that the Sphinx itself could be a sub-Saharan African, maybe from an earlier period when the Africans were pharaohs. We don't know.

Wasn't there some speculation that initially it was an actual lion's face and that the lion's face was cut down to create this pharaoh's face? That's us speculating that way because the head is way too small for the body. And it certainly – and we had the NYPD, we did this big study. I think that's the next slide coming up. Yeah, there it is. There you see Frank Domingo, who was the NYPD. Sketch artist? Well, he was a forensic, a senior forensic artist for the NYPD.

The guy who knows about, you know, physiognomy. So he did a study of the comparative faces of the Sphinx and the, of the Sphinx, that's the one on the right, and Ferro-Kafra, and his conclusion was that no artist, no competent artist or sculptor could possibly have used the same model for the face of the Sphinx as for the Khafre face. Right. And there's a few Khafre faces floating around. So my criminal partner, when Frank gave us that study, his comparative study, Boris Said, said, Ha, for the academic establishment, this is bad news and worse news.

The bad news is that there wasn't Atlantis. And the worst news is they were black. My black friends like that phrase. But anyway, so in the 90s, I did an op-ed piece for the New York Times. And I carefully left that part out. I just compared you as the Frank Domingo's drawing versus the Sphinx. But a couple of weeks later, a letter was published from an orthodontist who also knows about faces saying, hey, hey, that Sphinx is actually a sub-Saharan African face. face i didn't say it he said it so i'm not in trouble for that right but anyway until until something better is discovered it's a sub-saharan african face and we don't know when it and it was recarved and we

don't know when so it's entirely possible that it used to be a lion and then some entirely came along and said i don't like that lion making my face. No, it may have been that the head was so weathered over time that they said, well, we can't repair the face the way that we can repair the body, and so they re-carved the head. And, of course, the face was most likely still above ground while the rest of the body was covered. So it was subject to more erosion? Well, it's also a harder limestone.

So probably, again, this is speculation, but we reckon that an outcrop of stone was sticking above the sand level to begin with, and somebody at some point, a jillion years ago, at some point, a jillion years ago, decided to carve the Sphinx by cutting around it, cutting the bedrock away from around it, leaving the outcrop above and carving that into whatever it may have been originally. It could have been an African queen. How much information did they lose when the Library of Alexandria was burned? Well, since it was burned, we don't know.

It's amazing, though, really? We don't know. A million scrolls. It was dragged that they had a million scrolls. Who knows what was on them? One of my dreams, not dreams, but sort of vision, whatever, but the hope is that one of these days

somebody turns over a spade in Damascus or somewhere up there and discovers a cache of hidden scrolls from the Library of Alexandria. It's quite probable that the so-called maps of the Sea Kings, the Piri Reis map and some of those other things, are copies of maps that were originally part of the library.

And I have a whole film script, actually. What's the latest on this supposed chamber that they found in the paws of the Sphinx? There's been some radio. No, us. That's us. It's the seismograph that says there's a chamber there. And the seismograph doesn't channel. And the geophysicist who did it said, yeah, there's a void down there. Does that mean that it could be a natural void that's certain kinds of limestone that riddled with those kinds of voids?

But this isn't that kind of limestone. So more more stuff when when the opposition finally caves in and says they never say they're wrong, but and says, well, this deserves further study. They never say they're wrong, but and says, well, this deserves further study. Then maybe we get permission to go and really look back into that, stick a probe down to something like that and see if there is indeed something in there. We don't know. God, that seems like an important thing. Could be. I mean, just to find that there's something there. Just to find there's something there is important.

Yes. Now, has there ever been any discussion whatsoever about, I mean, I know they've done all this repair work on the Sphinx. Has there ever been any discussion of taking the limestone that was pulled from the Great Pyramid and somehow or another putting new limestone back up there to recreate its original look? No, nobody has ever talked about that as far as I know. But it would be a nightmarish job because all of those core blocks are all crumbly and uneven and damaged and stuff like that. And besides, they have other fish to fry. You know, they've got technology to worry about.

I know, but I mean, just if people could see what it used to look like. Whoever did that when they raided it to build Cairo, like what? That's what they say. I'm not even a hundred... I've never seen a study that actually has documented where those stones are. And they're big, massive stones, and they slope like this. You can't build a bridge

out of those stones. You'd have to cut the edge off, which is almost as much work as quarrying the stuff out of the raw quarry rock, which is closer to Cairo. What do you think happened? I don't know. I don't know. But I'm not 100% happy with that explanation. I don't have a better one, but that one is subject to,'s say is subject to question.

Now has it been firmly established that it was covered in smooth limestone? Pretty much, yeah. Pretty much? Yes, actually the Roman, Greco-Roman writers who were there at the time studying talked about it being absolutely perfect and unpenetrable.

In fact, one of them said there's a rumor that there was a hinged block at the entrance that if you pushed it or did something with it, it opened. And I've often thought that I wonder if that's the origin of open sesame in the 1001 Nights because there are a lot of certain of those 1001 Nights tales that have their origins in ancient Egypt. Wow.

That would be a good study. Go ahead. Keep going. What else we got here? That's the head of Khafra with the falcon. Wow, very different face. A totally different face. I mean, you can't miss that.

And there's more long story, but we're already going over here and I won't go into okay here's this water weathering that when shot took one look at it said wow this look like they're hundreds of thousands of years old just keep going hundreds of thousands years that was his you know when the geologist he wasn't thinking what he was saying it just he was just saying it but it was massive water erosion it was... Massive water erosion. It was massive water erosion by a guy whose expertise is in that field. Right. So if he thought about it, you know, he can't document that until we get a bunch of guys there really looking seriously into it.

How old do you think it is, if you had to guess? I don't know um because of the way it's oriented one of the reasons they come out with the date hancock and boval originally came out with this 11 500 because as a processional marker because that would be the time as a lion that would be the time when it last saw its own image in the sky le Leo the Lion, the constellation of Leo. That would have been the last time, I think, not that there's too much that's going on. It's in too chaotic a stage to have been done then. And I think it may be the age before that, which would be about 36,000 B.C., which would correspond with the Egyptian texts themselves.

However, that said, it wouldn't surprise me if we were older still. Wow. Until we get a bunch of geologists and experts in their various fields to see if they can put a fix on it, and they might not be able to. But that's one of the things we look forward to doing if we get permission to go back in there, get the funding, and the permissions to go there in there, get the funding, very important, and the permissions to go there and actually get this done.

This is where actually we were just in Egypt when I climbed up and down the pyramid myself at 84. We got, complicated story, but we did get to meet the new minister of antiquities, and who was very cordial and listed the things that we had to do in order to get formal position. But in any way, we established a personal contact with him, which is very useful. And then we also met up with the director of this new gigantic museum that they're building and that is going to open in a year or two ago. And he was very open to anything even controversial that they could apply science to. So if some of the other pieces of this trip didn't go as planned, we couldn't get to see some of the things we wanted to see for complicated reasons. But anyway, we established

the potential foothold for getting the next stage of work accomplished. That's very, very promising. That's promising. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but they think that people in this form, the form of you and I, have only been around for somewhere around 300,000 to 500,000 years. Is that right? Well, that's the current thinking. The current thinking. Yeah, well, and it changes all the time. Yeah, it changes.

So let's bring it back. Let's go crazy and say it's a million years old. When you're looking at something like this and you're talking about 36,000 years, boy, that's, it's just crazy to think that there's this period where people are just throwing shit at each other and throwing pointed sticks at animals and kind of barely getting by. And then something like this just sort of erupts out of the imagination and the ingenuity of people that lived tens of thousands of years ago. Yeah, but it shouldn't be that difficult because as you keep going through the slides, you'll get to the Paleolithic caves.

Now, that's more evidence of water erosion, correct? No. What you're looking at right there? No, no, I'm talking about the Panky Cove. No, but I'm saying, but right there with this image, well, right there, same image. No, well, that's the same water weathering. It's just another view of it.

That's the back end of the Sphinx. Okay. And that's interesting. Anyway, part of Mark. That's the back end of the Sphinx. Okay. And that's interesting. Anyway, part of Mark Lehner's theory is that it flaked away over time, and that's what's responsible for the curved profile. But this is a tomb that's been cut in. It's not Old Kingdom. It's what's called Late Kingdom, but it dates from about 600 or 700 B.C.,

and those are the Mason's marks still as original, you know, 2,600, over 2,500 years later, still perfectly visible. So, no, theory exploded. Well, that definitely puts a damper on the wind and sand erosion theory. Well, that too, absolutely. Especially considering that they still think the Sphinx is 2,500 B.C. Yeah, yeah, well, listen. This is, remember, as I said, the second strongest thing in the world.

Yes. And this is not, you don't trifle with them. If you think that just because the evidence is good enough, they're going to accept it. No, they're only going to accept it when you beat them into the ground sufficiently so that they can't get up. Well, as long as their reputation is staked on their original assumptions being correct, there's going to be a problem. Oh, and so there is. Yeah. So what are we looking at here?

This is the corner of Khafre Pyramid, and you see the two very different styles of architecture. The huge blocks below, very finely dressed, and the much cruder core masonry up above. This is evidence of two separate stages of construction. It's like if you bought a Victorian house with an Ikea kitchen in it, you wouldn't say, oh, well, they just decided to build this Victorian house and put this cool new kitchen in. No. Right. You know in two seconds that it's two different stages of construction.

Anyway, we've got a lot of stuff to cover here. Here. Stop. You see where these people are walking? Do you see that this one block? You see those people? Yes. There, and then all the way down where the third guy down there is walking, there's another.

It goes down to there, and then it goes. It's like a 20-foot-plus block. It's about a 20-by-30-foot block. Wow. And then next slide. That's what it is edge-on. Those are the blocks. People walking on top, that's what we were just looking at.

So those blocks are about between six and eight feet thick. Go back to the bottom one. So not only are they six and eight feet thick, but they're stacked on top of each other. That's right. To build it up to that level. Wow. Yeah. Six and eight feet thick and then stacked on top of another one that's of a similar height.

And if you go poking back into it, you see the joints between them are pretty rough. But in fact, if you poke back in there, you see that they fit together that you can't barely get a credit card between them. That's just, that's, you know, lots and lots of weather over lots and lots of years. Then those are the blocks of the Great Pyramid,

which are much smaller and almost presuppose a later state of construction. Yeah, those are the same. Okay, that's the Red Pyramid. You know, we're going to take up too much time here. Keep going.

Okay, that's the interior of the Red Pyramid, and you see that's a megalithic construction. It's always called a plundered tomb chamber. A, it's not a tomb chamber because nobody was ever found in it. It doesn't look like any Egyptian tomb chamber. And B, it's not plund chamber because nobody was ever found in it. It doesn't look like any Egyptian tomb chamber. And B, it's not plundered. It's simply ruinous. This is an earlier construction that, for whatever reason, the builder of the Red Pyramid decided to incorporate that into his pyramid.

It's not like an IKEA kitchen incorporated into the Victorian house. It's something that was there before and that they built the pyramid on top of. So there's some older construction and then a better, more... Stay up there, Jamie. Stop moving. So what you're seeing, the lower, cruder level, is an older method of construction,

and then above it you see, like, really smooth. Yeah, yeah, much, oh,. Then above it, you see really smooth. Yeah, yeah. Much, much. Oh, well, and also you see really smooth because it's in perfect shape. There's nothing. It's the inside of the pyramid. Nothing could do. It's like it was done yesterday.

Whereas the bottom has been out in the weather for a long time. That's the secret. It's weathered by it's weathered. Not like the exterior of the Sphinx, but its style is typically megalithic. It looks like certain of the constructions in Ireland and Scotland and Wales, the megalithic constructions there. So you mean like a cruder cutting? Much cruder, but dating from an earlier period, 6,000, 7,000 B.C., something like that. So much like when they go and do excavations in Mexico City, they're building buildings down there,

and they have to stop construction because they find some ancient pyramid or something along those lines. Exactly. So what this is is they had an old structure, and they built the new stuff on top of it. The new stuff is what we think of as the original structure, but there's evidence to point that there was some ancient stuff below that. Exactly. Okay. Interesting. Okay. And what do we got here? More. That's more just shots of shocking myself in there. Okay. This is another piece of the puzzle. This is part of Abidos behind the temple itself. Temple is off to the right. And this is, again, a good friend of mine has just done an elaborate book on this.

And even though he's not an Egyptologist, it's being academically published, but it's going into all sorts of things having to do with this strange structure, which is one of the most resonating, powerful places in all of Egypt. most resonating, powerful places in all of Egypt, we are convinced, shock and myself, that those central pillars date from a much earlier period, and then the rest of the temple is Seti I, which is about 1300 BC. But this is too elaborate to get into here, and I'm running out of words. Why do you think that it's older? The construction method? Style of construction, mostly style of construction, and the way that it's sited, sort of buried into the ground, which is almost unheard of for an Egyptian temple to be constructed into as a subterranean structure.

It would have had a roof over it and so on at some point or another. But anyway, it's a complicated issue. There it is. It fills up with water sometimes. And now they won't let you in. Wow. But anyway. And this is...

Scuba divers. This is us, actually, at Yonaguni. Oh, in Japan. Jacques and myself and Hancock. And Graham still, now he's getting a bit more cautious about it. But we went there, financed by this mega-millionaire Japanese industrialist. Really, I mean, he wanted to prove the existence of Lemuria. And as you see, I mean, all of those geometric looks there.

And Jacques and I came to the conclusion after a week of diving there that seductive as it looks, it really is a natural, entirely a natural way. And we could even see, we don't have the pictures of it because it was the last day we were there. You could even see the way that it was formed by the nature of the rock and the action of the waves and the terrific tides that prevailed there.

So this is what this, that's me, you can tell. So you actually did the diving down there. How old were you when you did that? Oh, when was that? 10, 12 years ago? That's pretty gangster. In my 70 12 years ago? That's pretty gangster. In my 70s, what? That's pretty gangster.

Yeah, well. Get down to the bottom of the ocean when you're 70, checking out rocks. Well, and I don't like being underwater either, but for archaeology, I'll do it. Okay, keep going. Oh, well, this is the famous cartouche that some people think is here. Now, these are the Paleolithic caves. This is the best of them, called Chauvet. This is dated.

This is in France, right? This is in France. And this they date. They date, not us. They date to 31,000 B.C. or older. This is genius stuff. Great artists did this. Great artists are not primitive. They might be shooting arrows at rhinoceroses to eat and why not? It's a lot better than going to the supermarket. Organic, you never heard of a GMO rhinoceros. But this is fabulous work.

And who knows what was going on the rest of the time when they're doing this in the dark, hidden away in these caves. And this is 31,000 BC. So the date for us of 36,000 or thereabouts for the Sphinx and all of that

is not as out of the question as you think because they date this, the 31,000, and this presupposes, A, an extremely sophisticated artistry and supremely sophisticated artistry is not done by morons or by primitives. It just isn't. Keep going. Look at this great stuff. Yeah, they definitely had a very good sense of how to capture what these animals that they worshipped and went after looked like.

But it was crazy here. You see, that looks like a rhino down there and horses it is it is and the horses wild horses Wow well maybe no this is go back we tap that's the artist artists study of go back we tap now is correct me if I'm wrong but I think they've only uncovered less than 10% of go back we tap yeah let much less I think yeah five percent something like that and they work well now it's near the Syrian border, so God knows what they're doing. But they're covering it over because once they started excavating it, it had been protected by the fill for all of these thousands of years, and it started deteriorating.

So now they've, unfortunately, you can no longer see it the way that Jacques and I saw it six, seven years ago. So what are they covering it with? Oh, they've got sheds and roofs over it. And it's completely destroyed. It's magic, but I can't blame them. The weather is getting at it. Well, when did they discover this? It was actually discovered in the 90s, 94 or so.

And they've been working on it ever since. And it only came into public view around 2004 or thereabouts. And here's some of the detail. And this is why Shock is fascinated by this, because that kind of thing of the anthropomorphic, of the hands grasping around the corner, doing that was something almost identical to that in Easter Island. We think Easter Island plays a role in this whole lost civilization hypothesis.

Wow. That's more. Again, this is raised relief. You have to chop the stone, cut or abrade the stone away from the figures. This is tough to do. It's 3D stuff. And also, aren't there animals depicted

on these things that aren't even local? They're not even available on that continent, nor do they think there's a history of these things that aren't even local they're not even available on that continent nor do they think there's a history of these animals i am not sure this is but this one is the that one there is a kind of a feline of some sort um hard to tell exactly what it is because it's stylized right but it's a pretty brilliant piece of sculpture and you have to you know carve away the whole stone surface in order to get at that. Yeah. I'm not sure if they know or surmise what that is. Yeah, it definitely looks like some sort of a cat.

It's a puma, some sort of a puma. This is interesting. That's a bead that they found there from Gobekli Tepe, and this is a big mystery in a small bead, because how did they drill that hole it's a very very very hard stone very hard stone a very small stone too because this is sitting in your hand that's about the size of your your the last digit of your thumb yeah it's tiny it's tiny and it's thin and so there's a tiny little hole in that and again we're talking about a time where

there was no steel that's right so how did they do that exactly well aren't there there's a tiny little hole in that. And again, we're talking about a time where there was no steel. That's right. So how did they do that? Exactly. Well, aren't there, there's a bunch of pottery in Egypt in terms of a carved stone pottery where they have zero idea how they constructed it with a very thin lip and then it goes inside contoured. Yeah, yeah. I think we have one of those there.

This is a bracelet found recently in Turkey. It's made of obsidian, which is an almost impossible stone to work with. And the ridges on it, they, again, not us, have found by doing a careful study of it geometrically that it's very sophisticated geometry at work. I forget exactly what it is that's at issue here, but it's not just a couple of cavemen saying, well, you know, my wife is pissed off at me, so I better give her something nice for our anniversary. So I said, well, here's a nice chunk of obsidian. I think I'll do a little bracelet for her. Do they know how old this is?

Yeah. It's dated by the strata that it's found in around 8,000 B.C. Wow. Wow. Wow. Okay, this is more stuff. This is Sardinia, which is a treasure of megalithic, misunderstood. Look at these extreme, fantastic structures. We think, shock and myself, that this may be, a lot of this may be, in answer to this massive coronal mass ejection that happened maybe thousands of years earlier even, and people are still building things to keep them safe from another one of these.

Now, what would be the effect of a coronal mass ejection? Right now? Yeah. A catastrophe. Right. Now it would. It would kill the satellites and there would be a lot of issues. It would freeze the grid.

It would fry the satellites and there would be a lot of issues. It would freeze the grid. It would fry the grid. Right. I mean, instantly, the only people who would hang, the only people who would survive are the survivalists, you know, who are off the grid to begin with. And those are all assholes. Those kinds of survivalists. The real problem. Yeah, those kinds of survivalists. Preppers.

But other people are off the grid, you know, doing. But other people are off the grid doing – my pal Clay, who's here, is buying 10 extra acres that I have that I'm not doing anything with and is planning to, in fact, do exactly that, to go off the grid and build a permaculture, 10-acre, self-sustaining little farm. That's a great way to do it, to have like a farm and if you could afford the land and have solar power and all that jazz and well water. Few people are doing that. It's a great way to do it if it's possible. There are some people,

but when the world is overpopulated to the extent that it is, it's not going to get to an awful lot of people very quickly. It's difficult to do. Yeah, these are the interior of those extraordinary, Noraggi they're called. Sardinia is an incredible place, actually.

And that's in Italy, right? Island off the coast of Italy. Wow. And what do they date these to? Well, they date it to 2600 or so, 2600 BC. And Chuck and I question that, but we don't have any data that tells us otherwise. This is the

stone circle in Egypt, the Nob de Playa, as it's called. It looks completely fragmented and rough, but in fact even this, the academics, the archaeoastronomers acknowledge is astronomically oriented and there's a physicist, an archaeoastronomer named Tom Brophy, who studied it much more carefully and has found much more sophisticated alignments than just solstices and equinoxes.

Now that's a common thread in ancient architecture, which is really fascinating, is the alignment with celestial bodies. Always. The Mayans were big on that. Always. And festivals and all sorts of things like that are attuned, take place at these critical, let's call them energy points. And what they're doing, and it's quite clear that they're doing it, is that they're orchestrating their entire civilization. They're tuning their entire civilization to the movements of the heavens. This is quite clear. And this you can kind of demonstrate what they're achieving by that.

We don't know. But it's very important to them. What do we got here? More of the same. That's the devil's dick. Well, close. Looks like it. Yeah, that's Nob the Playa. And that's just a drawing of Nob the Playa.

And this gets into complications of the cosmology of it. This is the Dogon. This is the work of my good friend Laird Scranton, who you may know of, I think. Yes. Yes. And the Dogon tribe, that's the tribe that thinks that they come from the constellation Sirius? Well, who think they got their knowledge, yes. It comes to them directly from Sirius.

I don't think they think they come from Sirius. They might. I'm not sure. But anyway, Laird's work started out just as a sort of amateur thing, looking into the cosmology of the Dogon and at a certain point he decides to see how that matched current technology. He's a techie guy, he's an expert in computer languages and things like that. So he's very good at this kind of work and he finds that in the first book of his called Science of the Dogon, that this Dogon cosmology of this, you know, rather simple tribe in Western Africa, Mali, I think it is,

has their cosmology, which they know about, they can transmit it, is in fact consistent with the latest wrinkles and string theory and torsion theory and high energy physics and all that sort of stuff. And then that led him to the study of other civilizations and he's now six or seven books into it and really what he's doing, it's unrecognized except by a handful of people. They're not bestsellers.

And they're written very well. It's very simple and easy to follow. He's showing that this complex cosmology is understood and expressed by every society, virtually every society that he's looked into, including the Chinese. That was a relatively recent book. And he's ending up with a master picture puzzle of all of these ancient civilizations. And there's no dating them exactly, but it's become quite clear through this body of work that the ancients had this same, effectively the same cosmology and the same understanding of

it and we think that this is a hand-me-down from the ancient civilization that we're busy trying to to validate and the so meaning the survivors of this coronal mass. The survivors of the coronal mass. The people that existed before the coronal mass that achieved some sort of a high level of sophistication. And then these people with whatever knowledge was left over, whatever they had managed to save. Something of that sort, or they were the same people who were everywhere and had it to begin with. What you're seeing up here, figure 12.4, the quantum frenzy can cause a string-anti-string pair to erupt and annihilate, yielding a more complicated interaction. What is that?

Well, that's from, again, that's from the physics lab, actually, who they're talking about. I'm not sure if it's... So this is like some sort of a geometry thing and... It's a physics thing. And they're looking at... This is Dogen Art? Is that what this is no but

dogan art has has that figure in it keep going no down down i think let's say there's somewhere the dogan have that well there's where is it jamie okay No. No. Hmm. I think it's the one right after it. Well, very close. Let's see. Anyway. Anyway. You have to read Laird's book. Yeah.

Science of the Dogon. It's really all there. And then it's the same in all of the civilizations all over the place. And I don't – I dislike using the Old Testament, the Bible, for scholarship because it's a minefield. You just don't know. You can select from it. I mean, the inquisitors found a way to justify the Inquisition from the Bible. And you can justify just about anything. Well, there's so much craziness in there.

There's so much craziness going on in there. Well, there's so much craziness in there. There's so much craziness going on in there. But one thing that did strike me in the correspondence is one of the intriguing bits of the – I forget where it is, Tower of Babel. If it's Exodus or – no, it can't be Exodus. Genesis maybe. Anyway, one of the early books of the Bible where they talk about the Tower of Babel. And one of the lines that is suggestive is before the tower was built,

all of humanity spoke in one tongue. The Eskimos spoke the same as the Polynesians. What is this? And the Polynesians spoke Chinese? No, it doesn't seem logical. I mean, the linguists don't find that sort of thing. But if the common language that they spoke was the cosmology and Laird finds the same cosmology wherever he looks, that's interesting.

That's not anything that you can base, you know, you can't be sure of it, but suddenly that strange line does have some corroboration. I think it's very hard for us to put into perspective what it would be like if there was some sort of a high level of sophistication involved in the society back then and then they experienced whatever it was. Whether it was meteor showers super volcanoes what asteroid asteroids yeah and whatever it is and then trying to retain a certain amount of it and pass it on to your children how things get so convoluted and distorted and there would be very little left yes yeah i mean like that it's and but the people would be of the same sophistication in terms of the same kind of minds, the same sized brains, the same capability. They would just have to relearn everything all over again. Well, this is a good, I think there's a good case that can be made for that because stuff gets, after this catastrophe, things really do go into a tailspin.

And then around 3000 BC, 4000 BC, all of a sudden, all over the place, very sophisticated civilizations arise. But based upon this ancient knowledge, the mythology is all there to begin with. But suddenly there's Sumeria, and around the same time there's Egypt, there's China, for sure, there's India, and all of these seem to arrive at a very high level of understanding around that 4,000 or so date.

Especially Sumer, when they go over some of the ancient, those clay tablets, when they see the depictions of the ancient those uh clay tablets when they see the depictions of the solar system that's where it gets really confusing it's like how the hell did they know this how did they know that there was a sun in the center and then all these planets were in the correct size i mean they had jupiter in the correct size in the correct position mars in the correct position it was very very strange very strange stuff. I didn't know that, actually. You ever seen those? No, no.

Beautiful. Have you ever followed Zacharias Hitchin's stuff? Oh, yeah. He's got some really wacky shit. Well, it is wacky shit. Yeah, fun to read if you're high. Yeah, but it's... But the Anunnaki and those from heaven to earth came and created people out of monkeys

and alien DNA. He's a galactic Darwinian. Well, he was. Now he's worm food. And I call his father with sychenines. Sychenines? Well, I've read The Twelfth Planet. I think that was called The Twelfth Planet.

Horrible stuff. But when you don't know anything, it's awesome. Terrible stuff, yes. But when you don't know anything, it's awesome. But pull up an image, Jamie, just to show it to John, of the solar system depiction in the clay tablets, because it's really fascinating stuff. I mean, it clearly shows a sun with what we, you know, our standard sort of image of a sun where it's a circle

and the radiating sort of lines outside of it. And then it has all these planets circling around it. Yeah, there it is right there. Look at that. Oh. The sun is a star. No, that's just, it's not a drawing. It's just outlined. That's the actual original clay tablet, but they

drew on it as an outline. Isn't that amazing? I mean, you can find the actual tablet, Jamie, too, and you can zoom in on it so you can see it better. But really, really incredible stuff when you consider the fact that they made this somewhere around, what was this, 5000 BC? 4000 BC?

I think it was that one right there. I don't know if it's that early, but it's somewhere in that neighborhood. See if you can find a better full version of it there young jamie but incredible stuff and weird stuff i mean they're depictions of people with tails sitting on the laps of giants and that that tends to decode symbolically actually those hybrid creatures and stuff like that. Most of those things, I think, should not be taken literally. Right.

Like you were talking about myths. Yeah, myths, because things change shape and one thing becomes another. And when those are shown pictorially, it doesn't mean that it's to be taken literally. There's the original. So you can see it there in the background. Pretty interesting stuff, huh? But where are they in the background? Where?

See right there? Oh, there. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. But the stars, that's the original. So you have the sun in the middle of the stars. Actually, that's a motif that you see in Egypt often. Really? Where you have a star with a solar disk in the middle of it.

And often they're just stars. They're five-pointed stars. And then it's with a solar disk in it. often they're just stars. They're five-pointed stars. And then it's with a solar disk in it. And what they're talking about, I think the Egyptologists talk about a stellar cult and a solar cult. And that as soon as you call anything a cult, it becomes

you can talk about it because it's somebody else's religion and therefore superstition. But what it's talking about, and probably this too, is two levels. In other words, it's the solar sky, our solar system, and the star around it is the zodiacal sky, is the constellational sky. So it's two levels of the hierarchy simultaneously.

But just amazing that you're talking about such a long, long time ago, and they had all the little planets there. But they don't have Uranus. We'll see what they have there. Pull it back up again, Jamie. I'm finding a couple of different versions, too. Oh, yeah? Yeah.

So there's more than one version of it? Yeah, one only had seven planets. They have another one has nine. Oh, that's interesting If they have not only has seven right But that was a different one where that shows a star and then it has a bunch of plants off to the side who knows What that means go full view on that one Jamie. Yeah, look at that one It's just so cool to look at something that someone made It's just so cool to look at something that someone made, you know, whatever, 5,000, 6,000 years ago and see their attempt. Go back to that, please.

Their attempt at trying to show and convey what they knew about the world or what their thoughts were about the world. Like, what are we seeing here? Looks like war. or what their thoughts were about the world like what are we seeing here we'll see that looks like a war that one is not well that's a common theme and in that's a common theme in Egypt to the Pharaoh the Pharaoh smiting smiting in the heads of the of his enemies it's the conquest of the forces of light over the forces of darkness and this one the seven might not be, there it is. You have that, you have that, as I said, often in Egypt,

or very similar, but the other one, the star and the seven planets, could be planets, but, see, it's a different looking star, too. It's many. One, two, three. Yeah, it's a different one. The other one was six. It might be, it might be it might be it might be a number symbolism thing with the thing and the and the numbers the egyptians

do seven not as circles like that but as as as dots it's you know it has it has a numerical validity rather necessarily than an astronomical one that That one. The other one. Go back to the other one, Jeremy? Yeah, now that one's really interesting. Yeah. All this stuff is interesting to me. Yeah, the relative sizes, the relative sizes, that's

pretty mind-boggling. Yeah, and again. And the two on the outer edge is really those two. Yeah, that's interesting. Yeah, very. That's interesting indeed. I'd like to see that explained any other way than...

They knew something. They sure as hell knew something. Or it's an amazing lucky guess. No, this is not guesswork. No, it's just unraveling ancient civilization it's like putting together a puzzle when you only have five six pieces yeah well we're this is the thing that when we started out there were few pieces and then now a lot of pieces have been added to the puzzle. Right, like the nuclear glass, the coronal mass ejection

stuff. Gobekli Tepe is a big chunk of Gunung Padang in Indonesia is another one. I don't have any photos of that, but Chak has been to that and is absolutely convinced that it's very, very old. A, that it's human

made, and that it's very, very old. So things are showing up all over the place. So go back to the slides. And it's just such an emerging thing as far as people talking about it, too. The slides. This is something that's being discussed over and over again now. It's much more mainstream. And now that Graham Hancock has got a lot of uh traction on his work and his new book magicians of the gods and

randall carlson who's an expert on asteroidal impacts has sort of impacted his work as well and really sort of um made it more interesting because he's provided a context with some historical, like actual scientific evidence of impacts. Oh, yeah. Go along with it. So what are we looking at here? That's Gobekli Tepe again. I'm not, yeah, sorry, not Gobekli Tepe. That's Nabta Playa.

But that's one of shock slides, I think. And I'm not sure what he's driving at there. Some sort of constellation in the background. That's Brophy's, I think, and I'm not sure what he's driving at there. Some sort of constellation in the background. That's Brophy's, I think. That's Brophy's slides where he's looking for much more sophisticated information in Nob de Playa. out speculations are just speculation. I think they could be. Just the basic premise is already of great significance. That this is, because

this is dated to 5,000, 6,000 BC. So that makes it the oldest datable stone circle. Now, one of the things I was going to bring up with you, I forgot when you were talking earlier about this idea of the precession of equinoxes, the wobble of the Earth being caused perhaps by a dwarf star that we don't know exactly where it is.

That was one of the theories about whatever it is outside of the Kuiper Belt, that there's this object out there now that they're 90% plus sure exists, and they're calling it Planet X or whatever it is. They think that it's at least four times larger than the Earth, and it's somewhere outside of the Kuiper Belt, which is now what they believe Pluto is a part of, right? Oh, okay. When Pluto is no longer a planet, it got listed as an asteroidal- Oh, poor old Pluto.

Yeah, poor Pluto. It got downgraded. Got the shaft. Right. But they think there's something out there, And one of the theories that I had read was that it could be some sort of a dwarf star that exists so far out there that we can't see it. A brown dwarf. Well, this is, I mean, Walter Cruttenden, who started CPAC, would be, I don't know, I wonder if he knows about that. I'll be seeing him in a few days. And some interesting stuff going on started CPAC, would be, I don't know, I wonder if he knows about that. I'll be seeing him in a few days.

And some interesting stuff going on at CPAC. It's strange he didn't know about it. Well, you know about the planet that they're pretty sure of, right? Do you know about that? I think. Well, let's see if you can find that. They think that somewhere outside of Pluto that there is a large body. They don't know what it is.

They don't know exactly how big it is, but they think it's far larger than the Earth, at least four times larger than the Earth, and that it exists, and its gravitational effect is having a response. Here it is. New dwarf planet discovered far beyond Pluto's orbit. No, Jamie, that's not it, I don't think. That's a different, that's a dwarf planet. This is something that's much larger.

This is like, they think it's larger than Earth. Just look up planet four times larger than Earth, believed to be outside of the solar system. They think it's a part of the solar system, but it's on this gigantic orbit, like way, way, way out there. So most of them are binary star systems, right? Most of them?

I think so, yeah. Yeah. Chuck would know that. He knows his astronomy a lot better than I do. But it's interesting if there is some sort of a star or a dead star out there, like way out there. Yeah. And it's affecting us. It's causing our Earth to wobble.

Maybe, yeah. I mean. Maybe, yeah. I mean... Here it is. Astronomers say a nept... No. No, no, no. Not Neptune. Neptune.

Is that it? Is that it? Well, Neptune's big. It could be... Yeah, it might be. It's January 20th. Yeah, okay. That's right.

I didn't see that one. The claim is the strongest yet in the centuries-long search for Planet X beyond Neptune. The quest has been plagued by far-fetched claims and even outright quackery. But the new evidence comes from a pair of respected planetary scientists. I don't want to say that guy's name. Yeah, look at the language. Look at the language. It's quackery if they don't agree and if it's not one of their own.

And if it's one of their own, it's respected until somebody comes along and shows that they're wrong. Right, but their language is tempered by guys like Zacharias Hitchin, isn't it? Well, yeah, he brings it on himself. That's right. But some of their stuff is equal. That's why I call them the quackademics. Because every week there's something coming along, disproving stuff that they've been insisting has been right for the last 10 or 15 or 20 years. Look at this thing.

But they're never quacks. They think it orbits the sun every 15,000 years. Right. Wow. That's awesome. I mean, it's just, it's so interesting. We know so much, but so little at the same time. We know so much, but so little at the same time.

You know, I think it was Dennis. Yeah, Dennis McKenna had this great saying that when the bonfire of understanding grows, it illuminates the surface area of ignorance. Well, good line. Yeah, that you realize, like, the brighter the light, like, wow, there's so much you don't know. And then also, you have to distinguish between knowledge and understanding. Yeah. For example, with the quackademic Egyptologists, they have a lot of facts at their disposal that they do not understand at all. And that's why, I mean, my own work, Schwaller's own work, couldn't have been done without all of that careful factual work by the Egyptologists.

And what I do or what we do, I mean, those of us who are looking into this, we take that factual material and Schwallerize it. And that gives us a certain degree of understanding. Those jerks don't have it all. Those jerks. Let's go back to the slides. What else you got here that you want to show us? I don't know. There's a lot, but some stuff I want to skip.

Okay. Keep going. I want to skip stuff now because I'm running out of words, which is hard to do. That's one of those very hard stone vase with this thin lip, and the walls of the vase are about as thick as the rim of the lip. And this is all made out of one piece of a very hard stone called green schist. And we think, actually, shocking myself, and it was an idea by another friend of mine, a very good writer named Paul William Roberts,

was his suggestion that, hey, maybe these stone things, quite a few of them, date from the earlier period and were kept as sacred objects all of those years. And of course if they were kept and guarded and not broken, and a hammer breaks it, but were kept in one piece,

you know, X number of thousand years they wouldn't be weathered or anything. They'd be fine as long as they were protected. Now, is there any speculation whatsoever as to the method that they used to create something like this? Well, there's some stupid ones. Let's hear the stupid ones. Well, they're shown with bow drills that, you know, that go like you light a fire with sticks like this. the way like you light a fire with sticks like this.

Well, it's a kind of a drill that they put in there with balls of some kind of hard stone. And once you get the drill thing down, you can kind of work your way around and gradually, gradually, gradually hollow out the inside. This seems insane to me, and that it would take... I mean, one of those guys should devote his life to taking a block of green shift and trying that method and see how far he gets in 10 or 15 years. It's very hard to imagine that they could do that with a method like that. But otherwise, no one knows.

But isn't that like sort of, doesn't it balance out with the insanity of building a pyramid in the first place? I mean, building a pyramid is just an incredible undertaking. Didn't they say that if you cut in place 10 stones a day, it would take you 664 years? Yeah, it is mind-boggling. But, in fact, it's quite clear that they did it. It's not at all clear that they did it in the allotted 25 years or something of the sort. Why they did it, I mean, again, to an academic, the only possible explanation is that they were tombs,

even though there's no evidence whatsoever that they were tombs. But if they say they were tombs, they don't need evidence. What do you think they were? I don't know, except what I'm pretty sure is that they weren't tombs and they weren't tombs only. My general sense of it is that since everything in Egypt has as its focus the quest for immortality in some way, shape or form, they enhance that quest. They make it possible to do things that you wouldn't otherwise do. I can tell you, you get enough people together and come on a trip or come on your own. When we do our two-hour meditation in the pyramid, you come out of there knowing that you've not been just in a quiet bathroom. This place surges with power. You get a group of people in there, all of whom are, especially

if they're some who have practiced some meditation. It's really, it's something. I mean, you come out of there knowing that you've experienced something that you've not experienced before. So how they were used and to what end, I don't know. I mean, this is a quite common theory that there were sites of high initiation. Well, there are sites of high initiation and when you understand what initiation involves, that's not a dumb theory. It is a dumb theory if you don't think there's such a thing as initiation and if you think that illumination is dependent upon electricity, well, you're not be able to think Egyptian. But if you've been to the places and have

experienced for yourself the power of these places, then explanations of that sort, even though they don't count as, I mean, they're speculative for sure, but when you don't have any evidence for them being tombs, that's pretty speculative too. Right. And building them is incredible beyond belief. Lighting them up is only slightly less incredible. Yeah, yeah. The whole thing is mind-boggling. Now, do you have any theories at all as to how they could build some sort of a stone thing like this? No, no. I don't. Pretty incredible stuff.

Let's go, because we've got a lot of stuff and I don't. Pretty incredible stuff. Let's go, because we've got a lot of stuff, and I don't want to take it. Okay, that's us and my criminal partner, Boris, swinging the digital sledgehammer, looking for underground caverns. So you hit that thing, and it makes a sound. Yes, the seismograph. The sound goes into the earth. Interesting. The next slide is what we found. And there it is.

See, A, that is a cavern or a chamber or of some sort. It's a void underneath the bedrock. And that's the so-called Hall of Records. People think that's Edgar Cayce he's talking about. We're iffy about it. Other than that, the seismograph does not know how to channel. So it just says what's there. So it knows there's a void So it knows there's a void.

It knows there's a void. And at the very back, it's a little bit, you know, see, it's the edge of the sea. See, at the very end by the rump, that is also a chamber. And that's absolutely, it's known that it's there. And this gives you the same profile seismologically. But there's no known way to get into these things? Yeah, the back one, there's a way. It's a very rough cut chamber.

And there's a, just behind there, one of those stones, the back one, there's a way. It's a very rough cut chamber. And there's just behind it one of those stones. If you pull it away, and you can get in. And it's a room, rough, it's very rough, but about the size of the room that we're in here, the studio. And that's a room. So if that's a room, then it stands to reason, that seismographical reason anyway, that A is also a cavern or a grotto or a construction or something so what

we're looking at with a when you see all those circles around it and the the rough shape of it that's the shape that they believe the room is so it would be similar to the one that's at the rump where it would be like kind of a sort of well well the the seismographic those are the i forget top o lines is something that give you the depth that the thing is at. But it's not like a square, 90-degree angle cut? Well, it's roughly rectangular, says Tom Dobecky, who is our geophysicist who was doing that work. So what's the holdup as far as examining that? Well, two.

One, they don't want to be wrong. Two, that it's very difficult to do. It's under about 15 feet of bedrock, that cavern. The Sphinx is, A, probably the most, let know, excitement and all the rest of it as the Sphinx. Secondly, the water level has risen so that that whole chamber is probably filled with water now. So anything that isn't stone would have been obliterated long ago. Imagine if you got down there and you found wet scrolls. Well, maybe. Or stone something or another. But in theory, you could put a little fiber optic something down there and study it.

But they don't want to be wrong about this. And anything invasive, the Sphinx is really in disastrous condition. So any little vibration or something like that could conceiv know, could conceivably damage it. I don't worry about these things. The geology is much more important as far as I'm concerned. And my guess is that when we finally break open the Port Cullis and capture all of the, you know, all of the, capture all of the quackademics that it protects at the moment, the quackademics that it protects at the moment,

which, I don't know, maybe we'll waterboard them. But anyway, we capture all of the quackademics and get them the hell out of there. At that point, when it is accepted, and these things do happen, this is this idea whose time has come, when it has come, things change. And at that point, maybe then the funding shows up and the determination comes up to actually look

into that void or chamber and see if it is indeed a void or chamber and if there's something in there. Is it possible that there's some other things in Egypt that haven't been discovered yet? Oh, loads. I don't even know where they are, a lot of them. Really? Yeah, but what do you call it? Landsat, infrared something, you know, when you can photograph underground. They have, yeah, there are hundreds of sites that they know where they are, graves and tombs and stuff like that.

But most of them, I don't think that kind of photography goes deep enough for us to establish the lost civilization. It will be under the sand level. It will be at the bottom of the sand level. And so far, at any rate, it doesn't get down that deeply. But they have lots of places to excavate if they had the money. Let's keep going here. Keep going. Okay, well this is now, this is Shock's book

and he'll be at CPAC. Is this a recent book? That's his last book, yeah, that's a recent book. The Role of Solar Outbursts in Our Past and Future, Forgotten Civilizations, the title. Yeah, very interesting thesis and backed up by a lot of solid scholarship.

And Shock will be at the CPAC, this particular CPAC. So he thinks it was a solar outburst more than they think it was an asteroidal impact. He thinks, although they're not necessarily antithetical. The dates, in other words, it could have been either or. I mean, Schock thinks that it's an impact in the earlier catastrophe

that brings on the younger dryas, the intensification of the ice age, and he thinks that it's the solar outburst that puts an end to the entire civilization and melts all the ice. Whoa. Wow.

Northern Lights, what else we got? Well, keep going. Let's go whisk by here because this is Anthony Peratt, who's a physicist. It's his thing. And here, these are these figures that show up in the electron, through the electron microscope, and that are mirrored by those strange, dancing, multi-headed, multi-armed figures at the petroglyphs at the top, usually at the upper registers of the petroglyph facade, which also mirrors, that's the Rongo Rongo script. Shock is fascinated by the so far untranslatable Rongo Rongo script. Where's that from?

Easter Island, which shows as letters, presumably, those kinds of weird humanoid figures. One of the great mysteries of linguists. Oh, yeah. weird humanoid figures. Hmm. One of the great mysteries of linguists. Oh, yeah. Huh. Okay. Keep going. That's the end of it.

Is it? Yeah, it's the bottom. Of the whole thing? Mm-hmm. Of my whole show? Yep. Really? Yeah.

There was a whole bunch of other stuff that I wanted on. Well, some stuff I wanted to whisk through. But what was up there, maybe I'll send it to you, is the map of Dumbfuckistan, of greater and lesser Dumbfuckistan, which is very useful. And my Five Cowboys, and the graphic

of the Five Cowboys, it's a really graphic. My stepson found it somewhere online. But it really shows the Cow of cowboys in action which is as i said you pick up the pick up the daily newspaper or turn on the internet and you'll see the cowboys at work you've been at this for a long time now you've been at this for many years yeah late 60s i think it came across when i was born yeah. I was born in 67. Well, it's around the time I came across Shvala Diluvich, yes. Around then.

Do you feel like people are slowly but surely starting to come around at the concepts of these ancient civilizations being not the primitive people that we've been told, but maybe perhaps really complex. Oh, yeah. Well, a lot of people. The trouble is that the picture is muddied. I mean, the academics are as staunch as ever in their delusion. in their delusion. But the trouble is that the whole scenario is muddied and it's almost unavoidable by ancient aliens and Zechariah Sitchin and a whole bunch of nutcases that think that aliens built the pyramids and all of that sort of stuff. So yes, more people are interested, but how many, the percentage of those that are actually capable of sifting the evidence and intellectually honest enough to accept what stands up to scrutiny and not. Numerically, there are lots more of them than there were, but statistically, they're a very, very small percentage of the populace that

actually care or understand it. But it only takes a certain small percentage. Have you ever tried to get your Magical Egypt series on Netflix? No, not on Netflix, but they probably wouldn't take it because they'd have to make, A, you'd have to cut a really lousy deal with them, and B, the numbers probably wouldn't justify it. I don't know about that. Well, they love documentaries, and why would you think that they would want to cut a lousy deal? They do. I mean, they really don't give you much. I mean, the mystery of the Sphinx

is on there, but it's the guy who does the reproduction of it that negotiated with him. And Chance, the downside of Chance is that he's a bit paranoid about letting stuff out of his control. So I've told him, you know, it's a thing on Netflix. I mean, people have stolen it and it's on YouTube. The reproduction, you really don't see it unless you actually own the DVD. But it's Chance's baby as far as pitching it. And he doesn't. And it's not.

So he hasn't even brought it up to Netflix? I don't know if he has or not. It seems like it would be right up their alley. You would think. But I've given up sort of arguing the case. If he doesn't. It's his baby. Yeah, but it's not.

I mean, it is and it's not. But it's a big part of your work. I mean, I just think that that would be a great venue for it. I think it would be, too, but you write him and tell him that. Well, I have a Netflix comedy special coming out. He's been trying to get on your show for a while. Has he been? Well, he's been emailing you a couple of times.

Oh, he probably emailed the wrong address. Well, nobody responded, so he gives up. Anyway. I never got any emails from the dude. We'll talk about that after the show. We'll try to figure that out. But I got a comedy special coming out on Netflix in October. I'd be happy to talk to them and say, hey, this is something you guys should look at.

I don't have any idea what kind of deals they cut in terms of documentaries, but what I do know is that what you did is amazing. And I think that it would be great for everybody to have that, have more access. I agree. Just the sheer depth of the information when you go over the temple and man and all the different incredible structures that exist in Egypt that most people don't even discuss. They don't know about it and they don't want to discuss it. But chances, I mean, that's, you know, the way to really watch, people have told me this, me too,

I mean, I'm not much into, even dope, I casually smoke it once in a while, but I'm not much, vodka is my vice, such as it is. I don't even consider it vicious but um watching that a couple of tokes to watch with a couple of tokes because it slows things down the editing on that is breathtaking yeah and there's a hypnotic quality to it it's really i mean it's an extraordinary achievement and shock did it on sorry shock mean, Chance did it on a zero budget, you know, and doing all of the photography. I mean, everything single-handed on nothing.

It's really the heroic production. And, you know, and we made nothing out of it. Let's try to get it on Netflix. I really want, I'm going to try to make an attempt. You'll attempt? Yeah, I'm going to try to make an attempt. I you attend yeah, I will I'm gonna try to make an attempt I'm gonna bring it to them and have a conversation with them. Yeah. Yeah, they think Give them a copy. They might not even know, you know, I mean I guarantee they don't

It's I really think it's one of the great works. I do It's a mate and it's so in-depth. It's so in-depth. I know only way you could do it was to self-produce it Yeah. Oh, yeah, you couldn't get was to self-produce it. Yeah. Oh, yeah. You couldn't get anyone to do that. Nobody would go, you're going to do eight DVDs? I know. What are you, out of your mind?

Nobody's going to watch all that. I watched it. I watched it like three or four times. Lots of people do. I mean, people. And you have a Magical Egypt 2, right? Well, we're working on it, except we don't have the funding. And actually, this is chances, baby. Now, because I'm, anytime he wants me, I'm there for him.

But I'm not in any position to really help with it because I'm so swamped with my own stuff. Right. And what would be covered in Magically Egypt 2? I don't know. I don't know. We've got the first one semi-done, but I don't know what he's got in mind. And he's in Australia, so I don't get to see him at all. And even Skype is not good for in-depth, evening-long conversations.

No, no, it's not. So I don't know, but I'll bet if you showed it to Netflix and they expressed an interest, he'd be interested. Well, I'm going to do that. I'm going to do that. I'm going to bring them a copy, and we're going to see what we can do. Okay. I think it's one of those things that I really believe that people should see. Well, that would be great.

And I think that if you could get it on Netflix, and I could tweet it and let the world know and try to get people to spread the word i think once people see it they just start like that making of a murderer thing you know that that caught all that traction entirely because it was on netflix and word of mouth mostly i really think that that that magical egypt is one of those things yeah yeah well when what i would like to do actually and i hope my pal Clay and some other people are going to help me with this, I'd like to get some of my other, when I'm wearing my other hat, my writer's, my bohemian beret instead of my Egyptological pith helmet. Because I've got, I mean, a whole lifetime's worth of work, much of which has been produced, but none of it really commercially successful.

And it's just sitting there waiting to get done, and Netflix would be the perfect venue for it if I had something to show them, you know, because they do production. I mean, they're producers now, too, Netflix. Yeah, it's an interesting time. I mean, that's one of the best things about the Internet is that something like that can kind of spring up and become a bigger network than any of the networks on television. Yeah, that's the upside. Well, the networks are about to die in good riddance. Well, it's a silly idea.

It was good back when there was no other ideas. And you had to sit through those commercials and wait for the next segment. And then you watched 10 minutes and the commercials popped on again. You rolled your eyes and waited for the commercials again. then you watch 10 minutes and the commercials popped on again. You rolled your eyes and waited for the commercials again. All that stuff's nonsense now. You watch a commercial now, you're like, what is this silly thing? Well, the internet's full of

commercials, too. It is. But at least they're usually at the beginning of a video. No, they come in the middle sometimes. They're there. Anyway. Magic Leagip is awesome. They're there. But anyway. Anyway. Magical Egypt is awesome. You're awesome.

Appreciate you coming on here. Glad we got a chance to meet in person. Me too. It's a big difference. Even though Skype is the next best thing to three-dimensional meeting, it isn't three-dimensional meeting. It is not. It's fun to be here, and thanks for inviting me. Well, thank you, and thank you for all of your work, because I think you've done a great service to the world to sort of shine light on this amazing civilization.

Thank you. Much appreciated. All right, ladies and gentlemen, is it. Thank you very much, John Anthony West. Go seek out his work, and definitely go buy Magical Egypt. Don't pirate it, you fucks. Go buy it. It's awesome. Exactly. And, and, and And if you have the money and the wherewithal and the will, get on an Egypt trip.

Get on an Egypt trip with this man. Soon. Because I'm good enough to get up and down the pyramid, but who knows for how long. Exactly. So, uh... Strike while the iron's hot.