Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 1, 1997 - Art Bell

02:55:39

Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - Lloyd Pye - Everything You Know Is Wrong. Peter Davenport - UFO Reporting

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	From the high desert and the great American Southwest, I bid you all good evening or good morning, as the case may be across all these many prolific time zones.
	I indeed bid you welcome to whatever it is that's going to happen tonight, and I'm going to describe all that in a moment, actually, quite some bit.
	From Hawaii and Tahiti, where you conjure up visions of hammocks and drinks with big umbrellas and girls with pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom
	Good, you know, Green Bay, I think, is unstoppable.
	It's a good game tonight.
	Of course, you know, I'm kind of partial to Green Bay.
	You can probably tell when I held up the helmet one of my fans sent me.
	I'd like to welcome KRMS in Osage Beach, Missouri.
	11.50 on the dial there.
	Welcome to the network.
	Great to have you on board as the network continues to grow and grow and grow and grow and grow.
	We have named our doc.
	And the winner is... David Buller.
	D-U-L-L-E-R.
	David, thank you very, very much.
	We went through, spent the weekend going through hundreds of, actually thousands, of suggestions of names, and the winner is... Giza.
	Giza.
	That's her name.
	It was irresistible.
	David Buller, I'm not sure where David is from.
	His email came from an educational Um, institution of some sort.
	And there were a lot of close ones.
	We thought seriously about Nova, which was cute.
	But Giza, in view of our recent vacation and attachment that you well know to that area, and plus the fact that it's just kind of a cute name.
	Giza's doing well.
	Eating.
	And eating, and eating, and eating, and eating.
	Giza's been doing a lot of eating.
	So we know she can eat, and her belly is beginning to swell where there was sort of a dent there before.
	Giza, of course, is our new dog.
	If you want to see her, she's on the internet, thanks to Keith Rowland, who was here and took a couple of photographs of her.
	At any rate, I want to thank everybody.
	So many of them were so good suggestions, but Giza just, you know, popped right out at us, and we've sort of already taught her her new name.
	Now, In a moment, coming up, Peter Davenport and a report on what's been going on nationwide.
	A couple of very, very interesting reports.
	One concerning the possible landing of a UFO.
	That's Peter Davenport of the National UFO Reporting Center in Seattle.
	So he'll be coming up in a moment.
	And then later next hour, we're going to be talking with Lloyd Pye.
	was written a book called everything you know is wrong and what he means by that is human evolution our roots where we came from what we are how we got here what did we emerge from creation evolution of the Darwin theory oh that should be very very interesting indeed I'm going to make a special announcement We only do this once a year, and I'm not sure, but this might be the last year that I'm going to do this, just because it's too hard.
	I have two books that I've written.
	A lot of you will only know of one, called, of course, The Quickening, the latest one that made it to the bestseller list.
	In fact, it's still on there.
	About number five, I think, on the New York Times, a bestseller business list, hardcover.
	But I wrote an earlier book called The Art of Talk about me, about talk radio, about the way I feel about things.
	And so if you want to know about me, here is your opportunity to get an autographed copy, as autographed.
	This is what we do at Christmas.
	An autographed copy of The Art of Talk, or The Quickening, or both.
	Alright, here's a man who has been generating reports for us, from you, for a very long time.
	He takes probably thousands of calls on a regular basis and has to look into all of these reports of anomalous UFOs and various incidents and decide what seems real.
	What seems worth investigating?
	And, you know, the wheat from the chaff, that kind of thing.
	He is the National UFO Reporting Center.
	Peter Davenport.
	Hi, Peter.
	Good evening, Art.
	What in the world is going on?
	Boy, I wish I knew the answer to that question.
	If I knew the answer to it, I'd either be famous or dead.
	I'm not sure which.
	Maybe both, Peter.
	Perhaps both.
	That's right.
	I'm delighted to have an opportunity to share with our listeners tonight, Art, Some of the things that have been going on, because if they're true, they are very interesting.
	And we are seeking, frankly, we are seeking more information about a couple of these incidents that some of our listeners tonight may actually have been witness to, and didn't quite perhaps understand what they were looking at, or didn't think to report them, or didn't know about us, or one thing or another.
	Okay.
	But the most intriguing report we have comes from just about 30 miles south of Chicago.
	Last night, Sunday night, the 30th of November, We have what appears to us to be a very, very credible report from a qualified observer.
	The gentleman's a pilot.
	He's very bright, very aggressive.
	Last night, Sunday night, he and his girlfriend were driving west on Interstate 80.
	This is just about 30 miles south of Chicago, near the town of New Lenox, I believe it is, just east of Joliet on the south side of the Illinois River.
	And they were witness, sometime after 6.30 p.m.
	local time, they were witness to a most peculiar image or event in the night sky art.
	They saw a very large, red, perhaps flickering or burning orb come down through solid overcast and descend vertically.
	It was below the overcast long enough so that they think they saw it for somewhere between 10 and 30 seconds.
	That is a very, very long time for an object that was as bright as they report it was, and as prominent and large, and the color was very distinctive.
	It was blood red, apparently.
	The interesting thing about this case is that we have some confirmation that perhaps law enforcement or somebody in an official capacity was involved in the aftermath of this.
	In the sense that they were investigating this afternoon, Monday afternoon, they apparently had vehicles out searching for whatever it was that allegedly came down last night.
	When you say vehicles, you mean law enforcement?
	Official vehicles of some capacity, and we're trying to identify them.
	If we have any listeners who live south of Chicago, or who were about 30 miles south in New Lenox Township, who may have been witness to this, uh... collection of vehicles near parker road i think it was near francis and parker road uh... we would like to hear from those individuals and most of all if they were witnessed anything last night in that area we'd like to take a brief report from them either over our website or over our hotline out here in seattle alright uh... peter you said one of the things you mentioned is image what did you say that uh... did they see substance
	They saw substance to a craft.
	Yes.
	The recipient, the observer we've talked to, is a pilot.
	And he said his instant reaction was that it was an aircraft in trouble, on fire, leaving a very prominent trail of either smoke or some kind of turbulence behind it.
	From his vantage point, it was coming straight down, and he said, there's no way you could have missed it if you saw it.
	Cars on Interstate 80 reportedly were slowing down to 10 and 20 miles an hour to look at this thing.
	They had that amount of time to observe it, recognize that it was very unusual, and slow their vehicles down so they could get a better look at it at a safer speed.
	I've talked to some law enforcement people out in that area, and they confirmed for me that a search was initiated, but to the best of their knowledge, nothing was found.
	Well, that means they had to have reports, other than from your reporting party.
	I mean, they don't send a bunch of cars out.
	How much, they said, okay, we did go to search for something.
	How many reports did they have?
	Well, we didn't get into that, and I think, based on subsequent information we've gotten, Art, I'm not sure that we would have gotten the whole story, frankly.
	There's some evidence that the FAA was apprised, well, they were apprised of the incident.
	Earlier this morning, it is reported to us, they were reporting that they had taken up to 30 reports with regard to this alleged incident.
	Right.
	That's the FAA.
	That is the FAA.
	They traditionally are very good with these things.
	They are very open.
	In fact, they are our best source of information.
	We've not talked to them on this one yet.
	We may give them a call tomorrow.
	We thought we'd let the dust settle a little bit on this one so we could get more information and more observers and more witnesses.
	Okay.
	But this sounds like a good one, particularly in view of the fact that we have an almost identical report from Kansas City within a few minutes of what happened, allegedly, just south of Chicago.
	Really?
	If there are any witnesses in Kansas City, Missouri, or Gladstone, Who last night, about 7 o'clock or so, may have been witness to something coming down out of the sky.
	We'd like very much to hear from them after this program.
	Obviously, we can't answer the phones while we're discussing all of this, but after the program, we'd like to hear from them.
	To hear what it was they saw, what it did, and where they were viewing it from.
	So we can try to triangulate on where the object came down over Kansas City, Missouri last night, about 7 o'clock.
	It was apparently a pretty dramatic sighting, and I don't want to give out too many details on this one until we've gotten a few more reports on it, but it is intriguing.
	It may be coincidental.
	We're quick to admit that, but it is intriguing to note that the two incidents, one just south of Chicago and the other Kansas City, Missouri, were at about the same time and very similar in nature.
	Well, that's what I was going to ask.
	Descriptions, can you say that much?
	Yeah.
	Bright bodies coming down out of the sky, slightly different times, slightly different durations, colors were different, but both of them pretty unusual.
	Now, of course, an astronomer or a skeptic or an obstructionist would instantly say, I would predict, well, nothing more than just a meteor Alright, I would like to know something.
	This week we're having a very interesting thing occur.
	through every year about this time. It peaks about the 17th of November, but there are
	probably some stragglers that come in later on. But we're uncertain about that, and we'd
	like to get more information. Without the primary data, we really can't say anything
	for sure.
	All right. I would like to know something. This week, we're having a very interesting
	thing occur. Eight planets are lying up in a straight line.
	And so what that is going to mean is that a lot of people who normally are not
	looking at the sky are going to be out trying to observe the lineup of planets.
	And my guess would be you're going to get a whole bunch of reports, but just mark me down as guessing that.
	Yeah, that's a good point.
	You know, the best thing that ever happened to UFO observations was banning smoking in buildings.
	Hot tubs, skinny dipping, and comets.
	They're our best assistance.
	We should pay them a salary.
	A lot of people are outside.
	That's exactly correct.
	People, when they're outside, obviously they dramatically increase their chances of seeing something unusual, and that has been happening.
	I remember when Hale Bopp was here, we have a lot of really dramatic sightings, particularly Utah and Colorado.
	The night when Hale-Bopp was at its brightest and we had that lunar eclipse, I think it was a Sunday night about the 24th, we had some really dramatic events take place over just north of Denver, also near Layton, Utah.
	Sure, so you've got to ask yourself, is it going on all the time and the only difference is that people go out and see it?
	Yeah, I believe it is.
	But people are frequently asking us, well, are you getting more calls or fewer calls?
	Are there more UFOs here or fewer UFOs?
	That is a very, very difficult question for us to answer.
	It's like casting a lure in a lake and catching one fish.
	Does that mean there are a lot of fish there if you catch the first one on your first cast?
	Well, you never know.
	It is a terribly difficult question to answer honestly and accurately.
	But we are getting Very, very bizarre reports.
	Bizarre even by our measure.
	And that is really bizarre, of course.
	Are you referring now to these two earlier reports?
	Well, they're unusual.
	I would consider them to be unusual, but we are getting, I would say, multiple reports on a weekly basis of multiple craft informations.
	And the reason I say some of these are good reports is that the people who are calling us They appear to have just first-rate credentials, and moreover they're following up with what we traditionally ask for, a brief written report.
	A couple paragraphs, that's all we ask for.
	You find more people willing to go on the record now?
	Yes.
	Even pilots and people from the FAA are doing that.
	Maybe that's a result of a lot of good PR that we're getting from your program and in the National press now, local and regional press.
	But yeah, people are beginning to awaken to the fact that we're not all crazy ufologists.
	We don't understand it.
	I'm the first to admit that.
	We do not understand what we're dealing with fully.
	But it is, it seems from my vantage point to be distinctly real.
	And it is taking place on a regular basis.
	All right.
	Briefly, you said something rather intriguing about a report of a magnetic anomaly.
	Yeah.
	What have you got?
	I almost hesitate to even talk about it.
	Let me get my disclaimers in, first of all.
	Sure.
	First of all, I'm a pilot, former flight instructor.
	The one thing you teach a student pilot is, if all your instruments fail, you can always trust your magnetic compass.
	Also, I was born in Missouri, so these things I have to see with my own eyes.
	I'm hesitant to talk about magnetic anomalies, but we've had two now in two weeks up in the Northwest.
	We got a call this evening from the Spokane area.
	Just one source, a gentleman says he has a mounted compass out in the Spokane area, and it deviated just recently, he claims by about 25, I think he said 25 degrees.
	Oh boy.
	Under normal circumstances, and we've heard no other reports of this, I want to emphasize that.
	Under ordinary circumstances, I'd just make a mental note of it and not do anything with it.
	But we had a similar report on the 14th of November of truckers who were driving in southwestern Washington.
	This was that Friday night when all those lights went over the Northwest that I reported on your program that night.
	Oh, yes.
	Of course.
	And days afterwards, we got a very interesting report from a gentleman who also has a ship's compass mounted on a fixed mount in his yard.
	And he reports that it has gone, on at least one occasion, cattywampus.
	I do not know the details of that.
	But the other thing he added is that when those lights were going over the Northwest that Friday night, again the 14th of November, a bunch of truckers on the interstate got on their CBs to report to one another They said their magnetic compasses were going haywire.
	Oh, my.
	All right, Peter, hold on.
	We're at the bottom of the hour.
	When we come back, we'll get your contact information on the air, okay?
	Okay.
	All right, Peter Davenport, keeping us up on the latest.
	Chicago, Kansas City.
	And how's your compass tonight?
	Still pointing north?
	Morning, everybody.
	This is Coast to Coast AM.
	Now again, here's Art.
	Well, once again, here I am.
	And again, we just heard a story about a pilot who saw, at about 1832 hours central, near Chicago, Route 43, and apparently witnessed a large red fireball descend through solid overcast, continue to descend slowly to the ground, in about 20 to 30 seconds time.
	And that, and a similar report in Kansas City.
	If you know anything about those, or you can report a magnetic anomaly, then we would like you to talk to Peter Davenport.
	Peter, how do they best contact you?
	The best way to reach us is on the UFO hotline in Seattle.
	The telephone number is area code 206-722-3000.
	We'd be grateful if people treat it as they would a 9-1-1 number.
	We are members of the 9-1-1 organization.
	Don't be surprised if we're very busy when you call and all we're interested in is the information, not a lot of conversation.
	Sure.
	Or they can always send us messages over our website, that is www.ufocenter.com.
	We have a standardized report form there and our email address is simply director at UFOcenter.com. I think there's also a link from your
	website to ours.
	There is, yes.
	They can just go to yours and connect to ours.
	Yeah, I hear the phones going in the background.
	Looks like it's going to be a busy night.
	Yes.
	All right, Peter.
	Thank you for the update.
	And when you get details on all of this, please call me and we'll get it on.
	Very good.
	And we're going to be putting about 40 raw reports on the 14 November event on our website here in the near future.
	All right.
	If you had to sum up that event now, after all this time, you would say what?
	It was very dramatic.
	We still don't know what it was.
	I'm 50-50 both directions, but we've got some wild reports, and we're going to be putting a few of those on our website tonight.
	Good enough, Peter.
	Thank you.
	Thank you very much, Art.
	You take care.
	Peter Davenport at the National UFO Reporting Center in Seattle.
	Now, let us peruse a little bit of the news.
	In West Paducah, Kentucky, three students now are dead in the beginning it was one then uh... earlier today another died and then about an hour ago a third died five others injured when a fourteen-year-old boy opened fire in a high school lobby at the end of a prayer meeting a prayer meeting now he apparently had
	warned a bunch of the students that something big was going to happen, warned them away from this prayer meeting.
	So, he was already planning something at this point, and was beginning to warn people, and several, in fact, based on his warnings, didn't go.
	Well, he did, with a .22 caliber handgun, semi-auto, Three spare clips of ammo, two rifles, and two shotguns, which he had claimed he was going to use as props for a science project, so they let him in.
	If this is not quickening news, and I don't know what is, maybe the second story, tracking, in Tennessee, a father walked into the police and confessed That he killed his four children.
	Anybody have any idea what's going on out there?
	We appear to be eating our young alive.
	They appear to be eating each other alive.
	It's horrid.
	AIDS Day today, they say now 30 million infected.
	That would be 1 in 100, I guess.
	That's quite remarkable.
	1 in 100 worldwide.
	I don't know.
	It's out of control.
	This is roughly double the number that they thought were infected.
	And so you've got to wonder, how do they suddenly decide that twice the number of people are infected with AIDS than previously thought?
	How do they figure that out?
	Are they doing this in private studies with people who go in for surgery?
	I know they test there.
	I've been kind of puzzling about that.
	How they suddenly decide that double the number of people are infected than originally thought.
	Now, I have not yet read the U.S.
	News and World Report, November 24th edition, but apparently there's an article in there About some sort of a danger in our food supply.
	And I wonder if this article, I'm going to try and get hold of it, references the Ed Dames type Ebola AIDS virus that he talked about in cattle.
	So I wanted to touch on that.
	Then this, from a listener in Spokane.
	Art, top of the hour news.
	Scientists have discovered a new deadly virus in a remote section of Zaire.
	It seems to breed these things, doesn't it?
	The virus has been named the monkey pox virus.
	It is, in some way, related to smallpox.
	Scientists are not sure how fast the virus can be spread, and of course, the way that it can be spread.
	And JW, who sent this, said, is this the one?
	So there you have it.
	I'm going to take some calls between now and the top of the hour on any topic you want to talk about.
	And at the top of the hour, we're going to talk about who we are, where we came from.
	This is one of the most basic questions that I think most human beings would want to ask if they had some all-powerful being, the Creator.
	The person or persons capable of answering this question, we all want to know, where did we come from as human beings?
	Were we created by God?
	Did we evolve with the hand of God involved?
	Is nature really God?
	Did we come out of some sort of soup in Africa?
	Well, I've got a man who will address all of this for you at the top of the hour, Lloyd It should be more than just a little interesting.
	Easto the Rockies, you're on the air, good morning.
	Hi Art.
	Hello.
	Hi, this is Dorothy from Florida.
	Hello.
	Yeah, I just listened to your guest, and he was talking about that strange sighting in the sky.
	Yes.
	Well, I for sure don't know exactly what it is, but I'm just going to tell you that in the Bible, there's a passage that says that there will be strange signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars, and upon the earth, distress of nations.
	Well, he of course said, himself, that they're trying to determine and cannot really answer whether there are more sightings or fewer.
	So with reference to that passage, I don't know.
	More of this?
	Or not so much?
	The quality of the sightings up?
	A precursor to the final days?
	Who knows?
	On my international line, you are on the air.
	Hello.
	Hello, how are you?
	I'm okay.
	Where are you calling from?
	I'm calling from Surrey, D.C.
	Okay, D.C.
	Welcome to the program.
	Thank you very much.
	I just wanted to say thank you for all the work that you're doing and all the issues that you're bringing forward.
	And we up here in Canada have been following you closely in a group that's been doing a lot of work Over the years, on a number of issues to do with aliens, UFOs, and all that stuff up here.
	Well, good for you.
	You've just got to stay on top of it.
	Well, I know.
	I think it's really important that a lot of this stuff gets, you know, out in the public eye.
	And I think, you know, all the little groups that are carrying on in Canada, the United States, and across the world, that we need to persevere regardless of the Well, I'll call it persecution that we endure from time to time.
	Persecution is a fair word.
	It's a fair word.
	I'm happy that you have so many listeners and that you've brought your program forward.
	Thank you, and we'll be joining the crews on May the 10th.
	Oh, it's going to be an interesting one.
	Yes, I'm really looking forward to it.
	All right, I'll see you there.
	Thank you very much.
	Take care.
	All right.
	Yeah, that'll be interesting.
	All right.
	Can you imagine Dr. Zahi Was, who is like, he's a really nice guy, but he's kind of like a human time bomb with a very short fuse as well.
	Daniel Brinkley, Graham Hancock, Robert Boval, Dr. Ed Krupp, maybe others.
	And I will, I'm going to try to arbitrate all of this.
	That should be very interesting.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Good morning.
	Hello?
	Goodbye.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Good morning.
	Well, hello there.
	How are you?
	I'm just fine.
	Uh, well, I think Bartholomew loves me.
	I just, uh, we just bought 17 of your books today.
	You did what?
	We bought 17 of your books today.
	Why would you buy 17?
	Well, I'm in the military, and sometimes we go away for quite a bit on carriers, and I bought 17 books for some of the guys in the squadron.
	That's really nice of you.
	Well, thank you very much.
	I'm in Chapter 7, and what I tell you is incredible.
	And that kind of brings me to another point.
	There's a fellow in Utah, I'm calling you from San Diego, and we went to one of his seminars.
	His name is Jim Phillips.
	I don't know if you've ever heard of him.
	No.
	And I think that would be a tremendous guest.
	Well, what do you talk about?
	He talks about preparedness, but it's a different kind of preparedness.
	It's mostly attitude, and you can do anything.
	I went to the seminar with him in North Pole, in fact, about three years ago, and he taught Jim Lovell, personally, about building some clothing and some winter survival, and it's amazing.
	Well, the astronauts all went through dramatic survival training.
	This guy is tremendous, and I've seen him everywhere on the Internet, and I think if you can get a hold of him, I know he listens to your show.
	Well, then he can get a hold of me.
	I've got email, artbell at AOL.com, or you can send me a number or any manner of ways that we might be able to connect.
	Contact me, get me some contact information, and I will proceed from there.
	First time caller line, you're on the air, good morning.
	Hi, Art Bell.
	Hi.
	Uh, this is Deb Deb from Oakland.
	I'm listening to you on KFFO.
	Yes, ma'am.
	And, um, I wanted to make a comment.
	I have been pathetically depressed ever since I listened to Ed Dames the other night.
	Well... I need to get a life.
	Well... However... I... Look... I love him.
	Don't get me wrong.
	I love... Oh, and I wanted you to know that both my cousin Pamela and I both love you and we share you with Ramona.
	She's in the other room digesting that right now.
	Oh, you know, Ramona, you know.
	We've seen your picture.
	You have nothing to worry about.
	Anyway, listen.
	I just wanted to mention, the thing about it is it's my system of belief.
	So, I do believe that what he's saying could happen.
	It could happen.
	It could happen.
	You've got to live your life day to day.
	I'm praying that it won't and therefore I'm going to go out and do the best I can and all that stuff that we normally do and make sure we tune in every night at 10.
	We'll keep you updated.
	Loyalty and we just love you so and you're doing a very good job and we do take most things with a grain of salt just because you have to.
	It is the nature of this program that you should take what you hear with a grain of salt.
	Oh, and by the way, I wanted you to know, I found out about your program from a person that I believe is a man in black.
	Really?
	At the bookstore.
	I had read Communion, and I had not gotten around to reading Transformation.
	And it had been years.
	Transformation had been out for years, but you know the fear.
	I had read Communion back in the late 80s and had never read Transformation until this year.
	It was New Year's Eve.
	I was at the bookstore over on Piedmont Avenue here in Oakland, and this man walked up to me, tall and kind of pale looking, and he came up and said, I have the Transformation in my hand, standing in line, and he came up to me and he said, Have you ever heard of Art Bell?
	And then what was really funny was then I go to pay for the book, I turn around and the guy's gone.
	Okay.
	It was so strange.
	His name was John.
	Oh, he gave you his name?
	His name was John.
	Oh, of course.
	Oh, and the first time that my cousin and I ever listened to you on the Art Bell Show was on about a Sunday a week later.
	My cell phone happened to be on in my handbag in the dining room of our home, and the little phone rings.
	We're meditating.
	We're asking for guidance.
	You know, you do your own thing.
	Yes.
	And we're asking for guidance.
	My cell phone rings.
	We pick it up.
	It's this guy, John, calling me to let me know that Dreamland is on.
	I had never heard of Dreamland.
	So anyway, thank you for your time.
	We love you.
	Thank you for letting me vent.
	And by the way, it's so cool talking to you.
	Thank you and take care.
	Oh my goodness.
	I wouldn't like that one bit.
	Somebody walks up to you and makes a comment out of nowhere, leaves the name John, And then somebody who would have absolutely no way of knowing your cell phone number calls you up just offhandedly one day about Dreamlines?
	Very weird.
	Wildcard Line, you're on the air.
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	How you doing, Art?
	Okay.
	You know, I was listening to Peter Davenport a second ago.
	I didn't catch the top of the program, but did he mention, because I saw something out in a jacuzzi last night about 348 in the morning, It was about 14 gray circular disks moving at a... Alright, well you need to call Peter Devon.
	Yeah, I've been trying to get through to him, but I was wondering if he had any reports over the Vegas sky.
	This is Tony.
	No, this is the first I've heard of this, Tony, and usually I hear about things that occur in Vegas very quickly.
	This was very bizarre.
	There was about 14 gray circular objects that cruised over, I was sitting in the jacuzzi, And they were moving horizontally.
	It looked like they were about 1,700 feet up, and were cruising at about 800 miles an hour.
	And they moved apart, and then they closed back up together very quickly, about three times, and continued southwest.
	And if anybody has seen that, what I saw, I appreciate them if they call your program, and I appreciate your program.
	Alright, Johnny, thank you, and get the report to Peter.
	I worry that when you describe something you saw on the air, and you're very specific about it, it doesn't give Peter then a way to filter, because everybody has then heard the description, and it makes not as valuable the follow-up reports that he might get.
	So the next time you call, you should just say there was a sighting in Vegas last night, give the approximate time, and then give the details to Peter Davenport.
	Then it's like, you know, you don't get a whole bunch of witnesses together and question them, do you?
	And that is the effect that we have on the radio when we do something like that.
	I don't want to disqualify what otherwise might turn out to be a very valuable report.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Hi, this is John from Tennessee.
	Hi, John.
	Hi.
	I caught your Ed Game show the other night, at least the first half, when he gets the
	Yes.
	But then I missed the last hour or so, and I wanted to know if any of the colleagues asked him about how his current theory jives with his old theory.
	Was there any contradiction there?
	Not that I know of.
	I thought about the same thing, and I don't see any contradictions.
	All of them can still work together, as a matter of fact.
	Really, it verifies a lot of what he said back at the very beginning.
	He kept saying that it was about something being dropped off.
	You know, a pathogen, that's what it was.
	A plant pathogen.
	Yeah.
	Yes.
	Now, is that... He's still, he says yes, it is still occurring.
	Really?
	It's going to be a double whammy then?
	I guess.
	Because, you know, I kept waiting for that question and I never heard it.
	Or maybe what, you know, remote viewing is an interesting discipline, and it might be that the death of the greenery that he perceived to be a plant pathogen, Might, in fact, be something from the sun.
	Yeah.
	So, I don't know.
	We would have to ask him.
	Alright?
	Yeah, sure.
	Are you going to have him back so you can ask him that at some time?
	Well, he promises to do one more show.
	One more show, huh?
	One more show.
	And that'll be it?
	That's what he says.
	I heard he's already got his dad's ex back.
	That's what he says.
	All right.
	All right.
	I appreciate it.
	Take care.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	Hello.
	Turn your radio off, please.
	Number one.
	Hello, Art.
	Yes.
	Hey, how are you?
	Fine.
	Great.
	First time I tried calling you, I thought it would take me much longer than it did.
	Where are you?
	I'm Robert calling from San Diego.
	OK.
	OK.
	Turn your radio off, please, Robert.
	It's off.
	Thank you.
	OK.
	Yeah, I'm calling for two reasons.
	One, I was curious if you're ever going to have someone on the show regarding the Hollow Earth theory?
	I have that.
	You have that?
	Sure.
	I haven't been listening for probably more than a year.
	Ah.
	Well, I've been on for years.
	Yes, it is a subject we have covered.
	Fabulous.
	Can you tell me the date and can I get a copy of that show?
	Let's see.
	No, offhand.
	I can't tell you the date.
	We're dealing with years and years here.
	Okay.
	But I will try and come up with it and get it on the air.
	Okay, and one more thing.
	Have you ever had anyone on your show regarding the HIV-AIDS fraud?
	Well, I had Dr. Duesberg on.
	You did?
	Oh, yes.
	That's great.
	Have you ever heard of the book, The AIDS War, by John Lauritsen?
	Yes.
	Yes, I'm very familiar.
	What do you think about this doubling of the numbers?
	Are you surprised?
	You know, I'm not surprised because I think the AIDS industry is getting rather desperate.
	As more and more people find out what I consider to be the truth, they're getting worried.
	Well, what is the truth?
	Well, I believe that basically the test itself is very unspecific and HIV has never been proven scientifically to be the cause of any disease.
	Well, they have definitely, though, isolated the HIV virus.
	Now, I know exactly what you're saying.
	And I've heard a lot of testimony on all sides of this.
	But still, the doubling of the numbers.
	Can you imagine that?
	This is coast-to-coast AM.
	Stay right there.
	Tuesday is the deadline for Attorney General Reno to announce whether she'll appoint an independent counsel to
	investigate Clinton and Gore fundraising.
	Legal affairs correspondent Bonnie Obey in Washington says Reno is expected to decline.
	It would come as a major surprise if the Attorney General decides to seek appointment of an outside counsel
	because her in-house Justice Department advisors have recommended against doing so.
	The only prominent member of the department who isn't quite satisfied is apparently FBI Director Louis Freeh
	just want the longer investigation.
	An announcement anticipated from the FDA Tuesday.
	According to Food Administration sources, the FDA is about to approve irradiation of meat.
	This is Ghost to Ghost AM with Art Bell from the Kingdom of Night.
	Now again, here I am.
	Good morning, everybody.
	Where do you suppose we came from?
	It is one of the great questions that all mankind would like answered.
	Did we evolve?
	Were we created?
	Was there this slow evolution that occurred over thousands of years?
	Hundreds of thousands?
	Millions?
	These are questions that are argued and argued and argued and every side, of course, says the science is on my side.
	My guest in a moment will endeavor to answer all of this.
	His name is Lloyd Pye, and he has written a book called, Everything You Know Is Wrong.
	All about human evolution.
	He's an interesting guy, and I think you're going to enjoy this.
	So if I were you, I'd buckle in.
	Now, Lloyd Pye graduated from, I guess it's Amite High School in Amite, Louisiana.
	Am I getting that name wrong?
	Actually, you are.
	It's called a meet.
	A meet.
	All right.
	Went on to college at Tulane.
	You were a punter and a running back.
	Any comments on the game last night?
	Which one?
	Oh, Green Bay.
	No, that's OK.
	I don't want to cause trouble right away.
	I think it was a great game.
	Let it go at that.
	Really intriguing.
	All right.
	And then you got a B.S.
	in psychology.
	Right.
	And then somehow you went into the military and got involved in intelligence.
	Yes.
	There really is military intelligence.
	No, there is not.
	I experienced it.
	There is not.
	Of course, now I'm already in trouble.
	Well, that's all right.
	This is the very home of trouble, Lloyd.
	Don't let it bother you.
	Then somehow you got involved.
	How did you begin to study Zachariah Sitchin?
	Actually, I didn't find him until about 1990, unfortunately.
	I was, like everyone else, trying to make a living, and he's not well-known, and nearly as well-known as he should be, I think, for a number of reasons.
	But for whatever reason, I was looking in the wrong places and didn't find him until 1990.
	But I had done so much research to that point on hominoids that as soon as I I found him, I knew that I was going to be able to construct a new theory of evolution based on my own work, my own extensive work in hominoids and his work.
	And a hominoid is?
	Hominoids are the creatures, the upright, hair-covered primates that people see all around the world on a regular basis.
	Bigfoot, Sasquatch, we're all familiar with here.
	The abominable snowman, Yeti, in the Himalayas, and there are two other kinds that are dominant
	in other parts of the world that we're not as familiar with in the West, but which are
	equally prevalent in their areas.
	Different names, same creature?
	No, different creatures.
	There are four fundamentally different hominoid creatures out there.
	The Bigfoot Sasquatch is a giant, seven to ten feet tall, weighing 700 to 1,000 pounds.
	The abominable snowman is called man-sized, but they're basically six to seven feet tall.
	They weigh 300 to 600 pounds, but they're very primitive as these creatures go.
	They're by far the most primitive, and their range is restricted to the Himalayas, which is as big as the United States, so they have plenty of room to roam in.
	But the others, the other three, are able to move about a lot better, and they do.
	The third kind is called Almas, because they dominate in the mountains of southern Russia, the Pamirs and the Caucasus, and that's what they're called in that area, but they exist in other parts of the world as well.
	The Almas and the Bigfoot Sasquatch type, the giant kind, both live in very heavy montane forests, the deepest, densest forests that we have on the planet.
	That's where they tend to live.
	Do you consider there to be enough evidence of the existence of these creatures to be talking of them as you are, as though they are a proven fact?
	Well, the evidence is really overwhelming, actually, if you dig down into it.
	When they were first being discovered in the early 50s, Through into the middle 60s, let's say, they were taken pretty seriously.
	The study was done by some anthropologists, zoologists, Ivan Sanderson being probably the most prominent of that group.
	But during that time, stories would be written that were in mainstream media of that time, books, magazines that would be equal to, say, Playboy of today.
	They had stories in Time, Newsweek, Life.
	You know, they were taken seriously.
	And then when scientists began to be put on the hot seat, more or less, and being required to explain what these things were and how they could be out there and how they fit into the scheme of things, they began to be shuffled more and more off into the tabloids where they have languished ever since.
	Yes, the evidence is really overwhelming to anyone that looks at it with an even remotely open mind.
	And, I mean, we can go over some of it during the course of our talk, but there's really no doubt in my mind, and I think no doubt in the mind of anyone who reads, well, just Part 3 of my book will do it, but if you do any serious research into the subject, there's absolutely no question that they're out there, they have been there, that they are, in fact, a native, indigenous, upright-walking primate on planet Earth.
	Let us go back now to the beginning, and when I say that, I mean quite literally in our discussion.
	It serves me up a little list of questions that I should ask you here, and one is very, very good.
	What is wrong with creationism, Darwinism?
	In other words, you apparently have arguments against both of these.
	Well, I'm afraid to use theories.
	What would you call them?
	Well, they're theorists, of course, and I don't just... Now you're in trouble.
	...arguments against them.
	They have arguments against each other.
	As you know, they go and have been going nose-to-nose and toe-to-toe for a very long time now, and I think that the fact that they're both able to shoot such gaping holes in each other is a strong indication that they're both fundamentally flawed.
	I think if either one of them was absolutely correct, it would be like, you know, one of them would be more or less like Einstein's theory of relativity, where there's just absolutely no question, no challenge, no one argues the point.
	The fact that creationists, and if you've ever read creationist literature, you'd be surprised at how good some of it is.
	Now, not all of it, of course, but some of it, particularly attacking the Darwinian paradigm, It's very good, and it makes a lot of sense.
	I personally believe a lot of what they have to say, especially as it deals with macroevolution versus microevolution, which we can discuss in more detail.
	As far as what the Darwinists can do to the creationists in terms of the timeline of Earth, uh... they just more or less flat because the creationists
	uh... so many of them are stuck on that six days creation six thousand
	years ago and really all you have to do is look at the grand canyon or
	know that the peak of mount everest is marine limestone to know that uh...
	the earth was is vastly older six thousand years ago so the fact that
	they're able to shoot such holes in each other leaves i think an opening for a
	third alternative and that's what i've tried to forget provide and I believe that I am.
	Well, let's say it.
	What are the major problems?
	You've mentioned a couple with creationism.
	Well, with creationism, it's just the fact that... The hard science.
	Yes, the hard science answers that they have.
	to the idea of six... you know, that the whole entire universe would be formed whole and intact within six days.
	You know, no changes, no addendums. It's obvious that that's not exactly what happened.
	And as far as 6,000 years ago, that is not what it says in the Bible,
	but Bishop James Usher in the 17th century calculated the who beget whos in the Bible,
	and came up with a... you know, so-and-so beget so-and-so who lived for so many years.
	So if you add up all the begattens, you get to a certain number of years.
	Yeah, and ironically, the 6,000 year anniversary was this past October, so that has come to be taken almost literally as gospel, even though it was written by one guy, calculated by one guy in the 17th century.
	So, that, again, for the reasons that I just quoted, is pretty easy, I think, to knock a hole in, or knock down, even.
	Well, you'd get lots of argument about it, but for the sake of this one, let's say, okay, fine, let's move to Darwinism.
	Now, Darwinism is pretty much supported by hard science, the process of evolution.
	Well, you know, they tell us that, and it's very easy to just listen to the din and the drum of it and just come to shrug your shoulders and say, oh yeah, well, I guess they're right, because there's so many of them saying it.
	Well, where are the holes?
	The problem with it is this.
	There are two words you need to understand.
	Microevolution and macroevolution.
	OK, define them.
	All right.
	Microevolution is what Darwin actually found in the Galapagos.
	Now, it's this.
	He noticed that on the different islands that he visited, In several of the animals, but two in particular, in finches, which have come to be known as Darwin's finches, and in the giant tortoises that you see, he noticed that the finches that lived on the different islands had adapted themselves to eating different foods that were dominant on the islands.
	They would eat fruits, they would eat insects, they would eat seeds.
	And their beaks had been altered to accommodate that diet.
	Longer, thinner, shorter, fatter, really heavy for the seeds.
	Now, they're still finches.
	They're still fundamentally the same finch that flew out from South America however many million years ago, two or three million years ago, and founded the line of finches that became Darwin's finches.
	But the beak changes were so noticeable that it gave him the idea.
	And then he noticed with the tortoises that there were two fundamental kinds.
	Those that browsed on bushes that grew close to the ground They had shells that came down the way normal turtles do and met close to the bottom shell.
	The tortoises that browsed on bushes that grew up, you know, a couple feet, three or four feet in the air, they had these big notches in the front of their shells so that their neck could rise up.
	And he looked at that and he said, now wait a minute.
	We're looking at this much change in two to three million years, or however many million years these islands have been here.
	We know they're fairly recent.
	So in the grand span of cosmic time, which at that point they knew was moving into the hundreds of millions of years, it's established now at around 500 million years for complex life on Earth, in that span then entire whole bodies should be able to change.
	And that's fundamentally what Darwinism is about.
	Now that is called macroevolution.
	So understand, microevolution is change in a body part, a visible or external body part,
	size, generally some shape, whatever, but like the beaks or like the notches in the
	turtle's head.
	Something visible.
	But in a part, a small part, that the creature stays fundamentally the same, but some part
	of it adapts to the environment in some superior way.
	Now macroevolution on the other hand is the change of an entire body into another form.
	It's like sea worms turning into fishes, fishes turning into amphibians.
	Amphibians turning into reptiles.
	Reptiles turning into mammals.
	Mammals turning into us.
	So you see that sequence.
	So there you have to have wholesale changes internally.
	You have to have digestive systems changed.
	You have to have breathing systems changed.
	You have to have reproductive systems changed.
	You have to have some major structural realignment.
	Now that is what is missing from the fossil record.
	That is what is missing from the world around us.
	If you understand it, in the span of 500 million years that we're talking about, there have been upwards of a billion species that have existed.
	And as you know, probably there have been five major extinction events.
	So there's been a lot of wipeouts.
	There's between 5 and 10 million species alive now.
	So you would assume that at some point, and certainly in our own existence, It would be visible for us to see a gill turning into a lung, or a forelimb turning into a wing, or a scale turning into a thing.
	Something in the process of change that we could identify and say, ah, gradualism is in fact a real, workable thesis.
	And there is no evidence?
	None that anybody can point to and say this is unequivocally, unarguably Darwinism, gradualism in action.
	There's nothing out there that I'm aware of or I think anyone else is aware of.
	Now, what you will hear, you'll hear a lot of arguments, and I've been getting some of these arguments from Darwinists who come to hear me speak, and they'll say, well, you can see the change in bacteria and microbes.
	I was about to point that out.
	Yeah, well, you know, you can, but a lot of that is just speciation, which is a species modifying itself when you really boil it down It nearly always can be explained in terms of microevolution.
	It is still fundamentally the thing that it was.
	It still reproduces.
	It still breathes.
	It still digests.
	Whatever it does, even at the microscopic level, it's fundamentally the same.
	It's not turning into something else.
	There's just no record of it, Art.
	What about the virus level, Lloyd?
	If we're talking, for example, about, since it's in the news lately, we could clamp on to the AIDS virus, and we could talk about its ability to change, and to meet the drugs that are used against it, and modify itself.
	Well, within the world of a virus, and we're talking, they can go down as little as a half a dozen genes, so we're talking something minutely small, and not really Alive in the sense that it can't reproduce itself the way, you know, you could even argue that they're not living, and some people do, inasmuch as they need a living host in order to live.
	But put that argument aside.
	It changes to another form of itself, and it has a new beak.
	It has a new shell.
	It has some new modification in its body functioning, but it's still a virus.
	It lives as a virus.
	It's identifiable as a virus now.
	You find a virus that suddenly makes the leap from being a parasite needing to live off of something else.
	If you show a virus that can suddenly eat itself from its environment and reproduce itself, now you've got macroevolution.
	Do you know what I'm saying?
	Yes, I do.
	So there you go.
	Anytime you break down one of their arguments the way I just broke that one down, you will inevitably find that it is microevolution that they're hoisting off as macroevolution.
	So, you're saying creation has too many holes in it.
	You're saying Darwinism has too many holes in it.
	Right.
	You're saying there's a third explanation.
	I believe that there is a third fundamental explanation for all of it.
	Now, as far as what we're talking about now, the beginnings of life, that I don't have an answer for, frankly.
	I do not have that worked out.
	All I know is that what we're currently taught...
	When you say the beginnings of life, do you mean human life?
	All life.
	Human life we can talk about later.
	We were talking about all life.
	When you look at all life, here's the history of life on Earth.
	At around 4 billion years ago, quite unexpectedly, at a time when the Earth was still very plasmic and was fundamentally nothing but a ball of lava, it had just begun to coalesce out of the primordial cloud, again, which happened at around 4.5 billion years ago.
	So we're looking at a half a billion years.
	A long time.
	To just say that, but relatively speaking, fairly short, when the Earth was horribly, horribly inhospitable, the first form of life on Earth appears, and that is prokaryotic bacteria.
	All right, hold it right there.
	We're at the bottom of the hour, so we'll get back with Lloyd Pye and our four-and-one-half-billion-year trip to where it all began in a moment.
	This is Coast to Coast AM.
	This is Coast to Coast AM, from the Kingdom of Nye, with Art Bell.
	It is, and we will go back four and one half billion years ago, and try and discern from what life came, in Lloyd Pye's opinion, and of course we will take your calls eventually, but this is one fascinating topic.
	I guess it is actually one of mankind's oldest questions, once we came.
	Lloyd, Four and one-half billion years ago, what was the Earth like?
	Four and one-half billion years ago, the Earth was just coalescing out of the primordial cloud.
	It had taken its shape, the sun had ignited, but it was basically a seething mass of lava.
	And about 500 million years later, at around 4 billion years, it was essentially the same, but it was well into the cooling process.
	So we had some hardening crust, we had some steam, we had some water, you know, it was beginning to cool down.
	And that's 4 billion years ago is when life first came out.
	It might help if we go over what we're all taught.
	I was taught this 30, 40 years ago, and everyone's been taught this since.
	We're all taught that life began in the early primordial seas when we had oceans.
	I'm sure everyone out there listening will remember that.
	That somehow inorganic molecules floating around in that prebiotic soup or prebiotic sea found themselves somehow on a kind of chemical yellow brick road that allowed them to skip along linking electrons and forming themselves into ever more complex inorganic molecules until somehow they reached a magic threshold and were struck by, I was taught a lightning bolt example or taught other things That somehow triggered them into a living thing, swirled them into a living thing, lightning bolt hits them and whammo, you have this alive creature.
	Now, that has been in as much as the very largest single group of inorganic molecules compares to the very smallest conceivable, like we were talking about a virus, the very smallest conceivable actually living thing.
	That wasn't a virus that actually could reproduce and could feed itself out of its environment.
	The very largest inorganic molecule compares to the very smallest living thing.
	The way a small rural village would compare to New York City in terms of complexity.
	It's just there's no way that that happened.
	It has been analogized thusly by saying That the likelihood of that, it's called spontaneous animation, the real true likelihood of spontaneous animation is equivalent to a tornado sweeping through a junkyard and correctly assembling a Boeing 747 from the materials therein.
	So it didn't happen that way.
	The odds on it are just so astronomical.
	But over and above the fact that it couldn't happen the way we are taught, It didn't happen because everyone that knows anything about this knows that the first life form to actually appear on Earth was a bacteria, not a virus or a virus-level living thing.
	Right.
	A very advanced creature, relatively speaking, a single-cell bacteria nonetheless, but without a nucleus.
	So it's called a prokaryotic bacteria.
	Now, they exist today, Four billion years later, in fundamentally the same forms that they existed in when they first came.
	Basically unchanged.
	Basically unchanged.
	Blue-green algae, cyanobacteria, there are some other kinds as well.
	What's interesting about it is, not one kind came.
	Everyone would assume, well, when life started, surely it was one kind.
	They have recently found out, within the last decade, that two kinds came.
	Not one, two.
	The Archaea and the True Bacteria.
	So that was a big shock, needless to say, that what they had assumed for a very long time was one kind of creature.
	When they got able to break it down at its DNA level, they found that, whoa, we've got two things here, not one, two.
	And that's your first living life form.
	They had maybe several hundred strands of DNA.
	They were filled with ribosomes, which are in fact the size of viruses.
	There were hundreds of times bigger than viruses, so this is a well-advanced creature that comes to Earth.
	So that tells us right away that the first life to come to Earth certainly, certainly did not develop here.
	There was no time for it.
	Certainly it couldn't have gotten to that level of complexity in 500 million, in only 500 million years, in nothing basically but lava as an incubator.
	So it just didn't happen.
	There are those who would say, now you are arguing creation.
	Well, no.
	I'm just saying that life did not come here the way we are taught.
	That's all I'm really saying.
	I'm saying that it did come here, obviously, from someplace else.
	And wherever it came from, it existed millions, billions of years earlier than when we first appeared on Earth.
	That's all I'm saying.
	Where it came from, where that first spark of life came from to make that first thing, no one can say.
	I can't say and anyone else can't and I'm waiting for the day that someone can make a case that is convincing.
	Are you saying that all things then came from that first thing?
	Yes, that is the indication that we have because we all share the same genetic code.
	All plants, all animals, when you break it down to the gene level, You can take genes from a plant and put them in our bodies and they'll function.
	You can take genes from our bodies and put them in plants and they'll function.
	We all share the same basic genetic code.
	So yes, we all spring from a common life source.
	There is a mechanism.
	The bottom line for my case is this.
	There is a mechanism out there.
	There is.
	I don't know what it is.
	Nobody else does.
	What I'm saying is what we're being taught is inaccurate.
	We haven't looked far enough.
	We do not have the answer.
	Okay, but you seem to argue against yourself in some cases, because you suggest, okay, something came here from elsewhere, a fairly complex something, from which all things sprang.
	Right.
	Now, that would indicate some sort of evolutionary, definite evolutionary process.
	You're only arguing the difference in the beginning.
	Well, no, there's two parts to it.
	There's the beginning, and I'm saying that we don't know, I don't know, no one knows, and certainly the possibility of a divine creation is not out the window.
	Something happened, but in hearing how unlikely, in hearing how unlikely that spontaneous animation, whether on this planet or some other planet 10 billion years earlier, still, you've got the problem of the tornado through the junkyard.
	How do you explain going?
	Molecules are molecules the universe over, it should be.
	So how do you go from inorganic molecules to an organic life form containing millions of different inorganic molecules magically arranged so that they function as a living thing?
	I don't know.
	Nobody knows.
	And all I'm saying is what we're taught is not correct.
	It didn't happen as simplistically As we're taught.
	Now, we're taught that because it's simple.
	Because it's simple.
	And so, you know, everybody just takes it, oh, okay, that's what happened, and we move on.
	But you argue, though, that there can be no natural process of evolution that accounts for our presence.
	No, I don't even argue that either.
	What I'm saying is, no, no.
	There is a mechanism.
	Life does progress into higher forms.
	But what I'm saying is that on Earth, If you read the fossil record, if you just read the fossil record for what happens, here's what happens.
	When things are wiped out, we've had five major extinctions with collisions with asteroids or whatever, comics maybe, but something in five separate occasions in the history of Earth that we are very well aware of has wiped out between 80 and 90% of all life on the planet.
	And that's like wiping the slate clean in terms of the fossil record.
	And the fossil record gives us a very accurate account of what's happened.
	Well, I was certainly aware of the supposed KT event.
	Well, that's the last one.
	That's 65 million years ago, the Cretaceous extinction that wiped out the dinosaurs.
	But there have been four others prior to that.
	What are those?
	Well, one of them is called the Triassic.
	That was the first big one.
	The Permian at 225 wiped out most, like 90-95%.
	But the point is, at the end of each time, here's what you get in the fossil record.
	You have a few thousand years where nothing happens.
	There's just sort of nothing going on.
	Earth is allowed to sort of re-stabilize itself.
	And then suddenly, species begin to appear like popcorn, just like they did in the first time they came, which was the Cambrian Explosion.
	And Darwinists really have to dance around the Cambrian Explosion and all these other things, because what happens is this.
	Suddenly, in a very, very short time, the ecological niches are being refilled by fully formed, ready-to-go males, females, predators, prey, armor, fangs, whatever.
	At every level, they come whole cloth, ready to go, ready to reproduce.
	And what I call it in the book, what I say, and I know that this is going to make it a chuckle out of you, I say it's like cosmic dump trucks are out there.
	And they get the word that, hey, Earth needs a new batch of life.
	Now you're back to creationism.
	Well, not necessarily.
	It could be that we're being managed, that we're like an aquarium.
	By whom?
	And that moves into the latter parts of the book.
	But that's right.
	By whom?
	If the cosmic dump trucks are real, and if you read the fossil record fairly and objectively, that's about all you can conclude.
	Because what the scientists try to say is that there's something called punctuated equilibrium.
	This is how they try to attach an addendum to Darwinism.
	Darwinism, understand, is the gradual increase of everything From simplicity toward ever higher complexity.
	Correct.
	Well, it's obvious to anybody that reads the fossil record that that didn't happen, that that does not happen.
	What actually happens is these bursts, these absolute explosions of life forms, fully formed life forms, on Earth when required.
	So what they try to say is that there is like an alternate theory or an addendum called punctuated equilibrium.
	It's like all the fish in the aquarium die and suddenly somebody goes out and buys a whole bunch and puts them back in the aquarium.
	Exactly.
	A whole new batch of fish, new kinds, everything.
	And it's like, oh wow, look at this.
	And the way they explain it, well, punctuated equilibrium has happened to this aquarium.
	Suddenly life knows, it just knows, that it's time to Hit the accelerator and start expanding exponentially, all over the place, all at once, everywhere, into every ecological niche.
	The survivors, whatever they are, somehow begin to absolutely disobey every rule of Darwinism, and they begin to turn themselves into multitudes of creatures, not just the next step up, but all at once, becoming 10, 15, 20 different things.
	The Survivors.
	It's the only way to explain what happens.
	Well you know, that doesn't make sense.
	That's not believable.
	But again, they have to say something.
	They have to come up with something.
	They have to fill that hole.
	So they have filled that hole in the logic with punctuated equilibrium.
	But the truth is, cosmic dump trucks make more sense, more intrinsic sense.
	What would be your best guess?
	And I'm not trying to really sell the cosmic dump truck idea.
	I'm just pointing out that what we're told is not accurate, doesn't make sense, and is
	really not believable when you look at it very closely.
	So, what would be your best guess?
	Do you have one?
	No.
	I really...
	It's the old thing about the more you know, the more you know you don't know.
	And the more I study it and the more I look at it, the more baffled and confused I am.
	It looks to me, if I just give a guess, if I just throw this out, it looks to me as if maybe we are being managed like a giant aquarium.
	Just given the facts as I see them and as I read them, that's how it looks.
	And I mean that goes all the way back, which really kind of sends a chill up your spine, given what we're going to talk about later vis-a-vis how we came to be.
	The Missing Link.
	The Missing Link.
	Okay.
	The Missing Link.
	Okay, here we go.
	If you forget all what we've just talked about, the beginnings of life and all that, and you move into humanity, how did we get here?
	Let's talk about that.
	What we're told by anthropologists is that we developed from a series of creatures that lived on Earth that are called pre-humans.
	That's what they call them.
	They're two fundamental kinds.
	They're the australopithecines, and then there are the early homos.
	Now, homo in scientific terms means man, so that explains why they're trying to signify that we're becoming more men.
	The australopithecines start at around 4 million years ago.
	Forget 4 billion when life came, now we're down to 4 million.
	Four million.
	And that starts with Australopithecus afarensis, which is the kind that Lucy, we all have heard about Lucy, Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds, also found by Donald Johanson in the Afar region of Ethiopia in 1974.
	So, that group, and then there's Australopithecus africanus, and then there's Robustus, and then there's Boise.
	there to fundamental divisions there africanist and afro russians
	fundamentally upright walking chimpanzees their heads are basically
	chimpanzees robustus and boys the are upright walking gorillas they
	have the wider faces the longer faces they have sagittal crests on the top
	of their heads at that bridge of bone the gorillas have been holding big
	chewing muscles so you have upright at four
	billion years ago you have to sets of creatures upright walking chimps
	the upright walking gorillas but we know they were upright walking
	because we have lucy's pelvis we have her hip bone we have her knee joint all
	of which are very human and at three point five million years ago we have the
	tracks left at the ashfall at leotoli in tanzania of the two
	hominids walking across this ashfall volcano that laid out a layer of ash
	They walked across it.
	It looks like a male and a female.
	A larger set and a smaller set.
	Walking side by side, and then more ashes came out of the volcano, covered those, and miraculously Mary Leakey and her team found them in 1978.
	So we know, we know that 3.5 million years ago, fully, fully upright.
	Lucy is at 3.2, fully, fully upright.
	So the creature that we supposedly evolved from becomes upright at some point in time between 8 million years and 5 million years.
	That's what we're taught.
	That there is a branching between a true ape-like creature that is our common ancestor, and part of the branch goes off and becomes gorillas and chimpanzees and orangutans and baboons, and the other branch is us.
	And the first twig on that branch is the Australopithecus afarensis Lucy group.
	But they don't look human.
	They're very distinctly not human.
	They have much more robust bones than we have.
	They have heads that, again, look like chimps.
	Their arms are much longer than ours and hang down around their knees.
	Do we know yet anything about their DNA?
	No, we do not.
	They've not sequenced that DNA.
	No recoverable?
	No recovery yet, no.
	Now, at around 2 million years ago, and these are very general terms, but at around, we go from 4 million years for 2 million years, let's say, the Australopithecines dominate, and then we begin to appear the homos.
	We have Homo Habilis, Homo Erectus, Homo Archaic, Homo Neanderthalensis, which is Neanderthal man, and then you have Cro-Magnon man, basically modern man, appearing at 120,000 years ago.
	So you have these four Homos, Habilis, Erectus, Archaic, and Neanderthal, and then suddenly, whammo, at 120,000 years ago, you have something, us, that looks absolutely nothing like them.
	You have a really nice sequence, in fact, from the australopithecines into the homos.
	You see their brains growing, but everything looks fundamentally the same on them, except their brains are growing bigger.
	Microevolution.
	Their heads are all fundamentally the same shape.
	Here's what it looks like.
	You've all seen the pictures, I'm sure, in National Geographic and elsewhere.
	They have no foreheads.
	Their foreheads slant back from their brow ridges.
	Their brow ridges are huge, thick, just like a gorilla or a chimp.
	Huge brow ridges.
	Large, round, night-vision eyes.
	You get those large, round, night-vision eyes because you need more rods in your retinas.
	So you're going to get those big, and those are, in fact, primate eyes.
	All right.
	Here's a good place to break it off, and we will resume after the top of the hour.
	So take a rest.
	Lloyd Pye is my guest, and he's telling us, I think, How we got here.
	Or he's going to try to.
	He's told us so far how we didn't get here.
	The Art Bell Show.
	This is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
	It is, and here I am.
	Lloyd Pye is my guest.
	And boy, it's going to be interesting when we get phone lines open.
	Lloyd says, look at creationism.
	And it just can't be.
	Not as described anyway in the Bible, and as many people of the Bible would believe it.
	Look at creation, and there's holes.
	Giant, gaping, impossible holes.
	But then look at Darwinism, look at the process of evolution, and there are equally large, impossible holes.
	And he has come up with a theory that we're about to hear about regarding how we all arrived here.
	How it all came to be.
	And his theory suggests that there were kind of, at various points on Earth, cosmic dump trucks, if you can imagine that, that literally plopped down upon the Earth at various times, all these various life forms, as we basically see them.
	That we see a little bit of change, but nothing that would describe the kind of change ...required to fit the theory of evolution.
	It simply doesn't work.
	He has a third theory, and we'll talk to him about it shortly.
	All right, back now to Lloyd Pye, who is in Louisiana, by the way, aren't you?
	Right, Louisiana.
	Okay.
	So, we've got two grand theories adhered to, preached about, and Well, you're going to be quite a target when we open the phones.
	hang their hats and their careers on and theologians hang theirs on.
	And you're saying both of them are essentially wrong.
	Everything they know is wrong.
	That's what I'm saying.
	Well you're going to be quite a target when we open the phones.
	I imagine so, but that's been the case up to now and I knew what I was getting into
	when I started it.
	Okay, hominoids.
	Well actually, if you don't mind, why don't we finish the pre-human fossil record because
	I was making the missing link connection and I'm near to doing that.
	If you look at the four australopithecines and the four homos that we are told lead into
	us that we evolve from and are sequentially leading toward us, you don't see a human bone
	in there at all.
	They all look, as I was saying, they have sloping foreheads, all of them.
	If you look, Art, seriously, at the pictures, if you cut those pictures up, if you take
	the four australopithecines, the four homos leading up to Cro-Magnons, to humans, and
	you take all nine pictures and you put them on a desk and you shuffle them and you bring
	in any third, fourth, fifth, sixth grade or whatever, and you say, pick out the one that
	doesn't fit.
	Every one of them will move the human one aside.
	It's that obvious to anybody.
	Their foreheads slope back, they have these huge brow ridges, these huge round night vision eyes, these very, very large nasal openings, these mouths that stick off their faces.
	In other words, it would have required macro evolution, which you say is absolutely impossible.
	It's not.
	It's a transition within that group, the australopithecines and the homos.
	You can argue that as a Transition, a micro-evolutionary transition.
	But what you need to go from Neanderthal to human, or from Homo erectus to human, or anything to human, what you need there is a transformation, a macro-evolutionary jump, which is not what happens.
	So, what I'm saying is, the missing link is any bone in that pre-human fossil record that looks actually human, and there's not one in it.
	There's never been one in it, and of course what they will tell you, what the scientific establishment says is this.
	Well, there was them, and now there is us.
	So obviously, somehow, someway, we transitioned from them.
	Well, we transformed from them.
	So they say, well, we're going to find it, even though we've not found it.
	We've been looking for it for 140 years.
	Right.
	We have not found the missing link yet, but by golly, we're going to find it because it has to be there because we do not allow the concept of outside intervention.
	So without that as a mechanism, it has to have been a natural process.
	And even though there is no evidence for it on the horizon, No evidence of a common sense just to look at it.
	Any child will tell you that we do not fit with that sequence.
	Nonetheless, we're going to find it.
	Well, they're not going to find it.
	It doesn't exist.
	It's never existed.
	It's not going to exist.
	There is no missing link, never was, never going to be.
	So the argument then becomes, well, if humans did not segue out of that group, those two groups, And we're out of the flow chart.
	What made those bones?
	What left those bones behind?
	How did they get here?
	And that's where the hominoids, which is part three of my book, comes in.
	The hominoids are the upright, walking, indigenous primates that I told you we talked about earlier.
	But you might refresh their memories.
	Around the world, there are four fundamental types of creatures.
	that are called hominoids.
	There are Bigfoot, Sasquatch, there's the abominable snowman, Yeti, there's another kind called Almas, and then there's a fourth kind which we didn't describe before, but they're called Agapes.
	They are pygmy-sized.
	They're about four feet tall, weigh about 200 pounds, and they live in the jungles of the world.
	All right, here's where I've got to pin you to the wall and say, where is there any archaeological evidence of the existence of hominoids?
	Well, the archaeological evidence is their bones that we are told are our ancestors, which are in fact their ancestors.
	When people describe them, understand, when people describe them down to a T, they describe the bones of the pre-human fossil record.
	Whenever they see them, and there are hundreds of these sightings, thousands of these sightings on record from around the world, literally around every continent, except Antarctica.
	They are out there, and people see them, and they describe them, and they describe them the same wherever they see them.
	Okay, but there's not one.
	Not one.
	That's been captured.
	Wrong.
	They have been captured, they have been killed, they have been enslaved.
	There's a lot of records of that, okay?
	For example, we have the famous Roger Patterson film of 1967.
	Roger Patterson took that film and here's... That film has probably been looked at maybe second only to the Kennedy assassination film of people trying to figure out how did he fake it or is it real?
	But it's only a film.
	Well, it's a film, but here are the things that you see in that film.
	You see a creature whose shoulder muscles and thigh muscles, the sun is shining in such a way that as she walks along and moves along, you can see her muscles rippling under her skin.
	Now a person in a suit, you can't glue the suit on a person's skin and get that effect.
	The only way you get that effect is if it is in fact skin attached to muscle in a living, natural way.
	What you also see is an arm, a very long, a naturally long arm, Swinging down around her knees with an elbow joint that articulates fully as she walks, but in a way that no possibility of a human in a suit articulating an elbow in this way.
	What you also see is breasts as she turns that sway perfectly naturally.
	If it was a person in a suit, it would look like those silicone jobs as she turns.
	It's an unnatural look.
	More importantly, she left a track that sunk An inch into very hard packed sand of a creek bed.
	The sand was very hard and she sank an inch.
	And they had people come right beside her that weighed 200 pounds and they sank about a quarter of an inch.
	So we know she weighed between 6 and 800 pounds.
	But Patterson himself knew what he had and he went right out of the woods and he called every zoo, every museum, every university.
	Begging in the area, begging them to send experts out with tracking dogs.
	Now, they don't go today, they didn't go then.
	They don't want to deal with it because they know it's a real phenomenon.
	Nobody would go.
	But if you're faking a hominoid sighting, the last thing you're going to ask for is dogs because dogs, these creatures have very powerful odors and dogs shy away from them and it upsets them, even tracking dogs.
	Whereas if it's a person in a suit, they'll get right on it.
	But also, experts can tell, you know, you just don't want experts are dogs.
	When it's a fake scene scenario, they'll always say they can't quite remember where they were, they won't tell anybody where it was.
	Patterson didn't do that.
	He did all the right things, but he just couldn't get anybody to go out there and take a look at it.
	So that, in every way, I think, measures up to the test of reality.
	There was the famous Minnesota Iceman.
	Sure.
	Which was carried around in an ice tomb for about a dozen years by the man who killed it named Frank Hansen.
	Now, I saw that when I was a young man with perfect eyes, and I believe it was real.
	Ivan Sanderson, a very famous zoologist of the 50s and 60s who wrote numerous books about cryptozoology, got three days to study it up very, very close and personal.
	And he wrote a long, detailed analysis of it in very technical terms, much of which I quote in the book.
	And anybody that can read that and think Sanderson didn't know what he was seeing and didn't know what he was talking about, it baffles me that people can read this and say, well, this guy, this was just a rubber and wax dummy.
	It wasn't a rubber and wax dummy.
	That was a dead, living thing laying there.
	It had the blood streaming out of its wounds, blood and plasma up to the top of the ice.
	No, I'm not saying that at all.
	Those left the bones in the pre-human fossil record that we are told are our ancestors.
	and you read the report and you know...
	Ted, you're saying these are our ancestors.
	No, I'm not saying that at all.
	Those left the bones in the pre-human fossil record that we are told are our ancestors.
	In other words, we're told by anthropologists these skeletons here are ours.
	And what I'm saying is those skeletons are the skeletons of dead hominoids
	because they match hominoids.
	They have the big robust bones, they have the arms that go down to their knees, all those pre-human, understand those pre-human skeletons, they all have arms that go down around their knees.
	And then suddenly, overnight, you get Cro-Magnons, much thinner bones, shortened arms, foreheads, flattened faces, small noses, chins, Long necks.
	Everything different.
	Everything different.
	Overnight.
	At around 120,000 years ago in the fossil record.
	So what I'm saying is that the hominoids provide a perfectly plausible explanation for where the so-called pre-humans come from.
	And if I'm right, and if they do, and if they are in fact living indigenous upright walking creatures of planet Earth, We humans are left off the flow chart of our own fossil record.
	And if we are, and we don't appear until 120,000 years ago, the question then becomes, where did we come from?
	And that's really the heart of the matter.
	To which you don't have an answer.
	No, to which I do have an answer, absolutely.
	I believe that the Sumerians Give us the answer of where we came from.
	Here I'm in alignment with a man named Zechariah Sitchin, and we can talk about who the Sumerians are and why I believe that what they had to say and what Zechariah Sitchin has to say about them is in fact accurate.
	I think the evidence is overwhelming that the Sumerians knew what they were talking about, that they were very accurate when they described the process by which we came to be here, and not only that, I believe that they were accurate in describing how the solar system came to take the shape that it has, and I believe that they were accurate when they described how life came to be on Earth.
	They talked about all these things, amazingly so, between 4,000 and 6,000 years ago, in great detail and with great accuracy.
	And in many cases, they have made statements that have proven to be true by our own people
	only within say the last decade or two. It's really remarkable. The Sumerian
	story is I think one of the great unknowns of this era and when more and
	more people come to know and they are I think through the work of Zechariah Sitchin
	and Alan Offord and now myself I think people are going to
	understand that what we are saying is in fact right and what they've all been taught is
	as my book says everything you know is wrong.
	I believe that we're going to see that that's the case.
	Who were the Sumerians?
	The Sumerians were the first ancient culture that we have on the planet.
	They walked out of the Stone Age, literally.
	You go from the Stone Age to the Sumerians at around 6,000 years ago.
	And they have over a hundred of the first that we consider necessary to a high technology.
	They are, in fact, the highest of the ancient high civilizations.
	Better than the Egyptians, better than the Greeks, better than the Romans.
	And they had the first of everything.
	And an extremely high level of sophistication.
	They were amazing.
	Absolutely amazing.
	And we know as much about them, if not more, How much do we know about the degree of civilization that they reached?
	We know a very great deal.
	They left behind hundreds of thousands of clay tablets describing in excruciating detail, in minutia you wouldn't believe, about how they lived, what they thought, what they did, how their business was conducted, we know an inordinate amount about them, but
	because they don't fit that Darwinian paradigm of simplicity leading to ever more
	complexity, how do you stand up in front of a class and say, well class, here
	we go. The very best ancient culture was the first ancient culture right out of
	the Stone Age. So they just gloss over it.
	You get very little about the Sumerians in school and you get an awful lot about the Egyptians and the Greeks and the Romans.
	But what we should be being taught about is the Sumerians, but we can't be taught about them because what they had to say is so far off and so off the wall and so unacceptable to the Darwinian paradigm, they have to be just put on the shelf and How technical were they?
	Very technical.
	Extremely technical.
	Give me an idea.
	Let's talk about their astronomy for a minute.
	Sorry, you know, nobody wants to deal with the Sumerians because they don't fit our view
	of the world and particularly our view of ourselves.
	How technical were they?
	Very technical, extremely technical.
	Give me an idea.
	Okay, well, they had a...
	Let's talk about their astronomy for a minute.
	They knew, for example, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto were out there.
	Not only did they know they were there, they knew what they looked like in the heavens.
	If you're out in the heavens looking at them, they knew what they looked like, and they wrote about it.
	Now, we only found Uranus in 1781, when our telescopes got good enough to see it.
	We found Neptune in 1846, when our telescopes got good enough to see it.
	We found Pluto in 1930.
	I mean, it's absolutely impossible that these people would know this, and yet they did.
	But they kept cosmic time based on the great year of precession, 25,000 years.
	That was their base time figure.
	25,000 years.
	They walk out of the Stone Age and they know about precession.
	And that's their unit of measure of astronomical time.
	Alright, look, we are now at the bottom of the hour, so I'd like to break and invite people to call in and pick you apart a little bit.
	How's that?
	Well, do we want to talk about where we came from before we do that?
	Alright, we'll do that and then open the lines.
	How's that?
	Sound good.
	Stay right there.
	This is Coast to Coast AM from the Kingdom of My with Art Bell.
	Alright, back now to Lloyd By.
	Lloyd, you were about to drop the big one on us.
	Alright, excuse me.
	Yes.
	Well, what the Sumerians say is that the The solar system as we know it was reshaped at four billion years ago by another planet that swept into the just forming solar system.
	That would be the twelfth planet.
	That would be the twelfth planet.
	Zechariah Sitchin's famous twelfth planet.
	You're right.
	Swept in on the ecliptic, was captured by the gravitational pull of the larger outer planets, was pulled toward the sun and captured by the sun As a comet would be, and so that it now orbits in a long elliptical orbit of 3600 years clockwise.
	Now, all the other planets go counterclockwise in circles, so you can just almost imagine that visual in your mind.
	I can.
	This other planet looping out past Mars, between Mars and the asteroid belt, 3600 year cycles.
	And what the Sumerians say is that on that planet, Either developed or somehow was put there or whatever, there was a superior culture, vastly superior to ours, a space-faring people, and that in their rise to a high technology, they damaged the atmosphere of their planet, which according to their depictions is the size of Uranus and Neptune.
	So it's two to three times the size of Earth.
	Very big planet, a lot of atmosphere to repair.
	And the only way really to repair an atmosphere We are faced with this same problem right now, and in the future, ultimately, we will have to repair our atmosphere in exactly the same way they had to repair their atmosphere, which is to take very, very, very fine particulates of gold, almost a powder, shoot it up into the stratosphere, where if the pieces are small enough, they will disperse and stay, and they will act, which is what gold does, it acts as a perfect insulator and a perfect reflector.
	That's how you patch, basically, your atmosphere.
	Well, the Sumerians are writing this 4,000 to 6,000 years ago, and we're just finding out that that's what we're going to have to do.
	Gold is a perfect conductor, Lloyd.
	And an insulator and reflector.
	I wasn't aware of its insulation properties.
	Yeah, it'd be a good insulator and a good reflector, yes.
	Gold is a wonder and an amazing thing.
	But anyway, you're right, and a conductor as well, but no conducting up there.
	Anyway, point is, they needed gold, and that's the reason that was given by the Sumerians.
	So, these people on this other planet didn't have enough.
	The planet is called Nibiru.
	The people are called the Anunnaki.
	Now, again, all of this comes from the work of Zacharias Sitchin, who's written seven books about this.
	Yes.
	And anyone can reference anything that I say.
	I have interviewed Zacharias several times.
	There you go.
	So, the gold they needed was not adequate on their planet, Nibiru, so the Anunnaki, the people, came to Earth around 430,000 years ago, according to Sitchin's calculations, and they set up shop in modern-day Iraq, in the Tigris-Euphrates Valley.
	And there, they placermined the gold, sweeping out of the Zagros Mountains.
	And they processed it there, because that was the place on Earth where you had naphtha, which is petroleum products, basically, what you could burn a fuel, just seeping up out of the ground very easily to get to.
	They would process it and ship it back to their planet as it cycled through in 3600-year cycles.
	After about 150,000 years, they tapped out, as you will, you'll tap out any source of gold, but by then, because there are flying people as well as a space-faring Well, they had found the mother load down in Southern Africa.
	So, they split themselves up into the upper world, those that stayed in the Tiger Shoe for 18th Valley, and those that moved to the lower world to begin digging the gold out.
	Well, those who had to dig the gold out, gold, even today, under the most modern of circumstances, is very difficult, hard, hot, dangerous work, and they, the Anunnaki, did not want to do it.
	At around 285,000 years ago there was a little revolt there and they decided we're going to make ourselves a slave.
	We're going to make a slave to do this.
	It's hard work.
	So they did that.
	They genetically engineered using, again, according to this marriage, using the creatures of Earth as a base, as a genetic base, and I say those were the Neanderthals.
	Now, wait a minute.
	I think I'm going to leap ahead and say my God, you're saying we're all a bunch of gold diggers.
	Good, good, good.
	Yes, that's what originally we were, and maybe that's why so many of us still have that trait.
	It could well be.
	But anyway.
	That thing where when we hold gold, when we look at gold, when we taste gold, when we see gold,
	it brings on a certain fever that drove people to murder and drove people absolutely crazy.
	Could be that it's in our genes.
	Maybe they programmed us that way so we really care about it and really want to dig it out.
	I don't know.
	I've never heard that before, frankly, that's original with you, but I think it's a good idea.
	Oh, no, it's absolutely true about gold.
	I mean, look at the gold rush days, even modern day.
	You take a hunk of gold, you take a gold nugget, you take a gold coin, you hold it in your hand and you know it's something Really special.
	Right.
	You're right.
	And it could well be that it's innate in us.
	I haven't heard that before, but certainly worth exploring.
	But anyhow, so they say they genetically engineered us, combining using the creature of Earth, as they called it, as the base, and putting their genes in with the creatures of Earth, literally genetically engineering us to be what they wanted us to be, which is strong enough to do the work, but not too strong.
	Smart enough to take instructions, but not as smart as them.
	But not too smart.
	But not too smart.
	Is that why we only use some portion of our brains?
	Yes, that's why we only use 10% of our brains, exactly.
	They had to give us fundamentally their bodies, because the creatures of Earth, all primates, most people aren't aware of this, but all primates have about 10 times our relative strength.
	If you were, for example, to take a male chimpanzee, not a gorilla, a male chimpanzee, and put it in a room with Mike Tyson, And it's a fight to the death.
	Two or three minutes later, the chimp is walking out.
	Now, he might be missing an ear, but the chimp is walking out.
	And so, most people are unaware of that.
	It would tear Tyson Limb from limb.
	It could.
	It has the strength.
	If anybody's had a pet monkey, they know what I'm talking about.
	Incredible strength.
	Oh, yes.
	It's true.
	So, they could not have their slave having that kind of strength, because if they get together, it would be a real problem.
	So they had to really dummy down the strength and give them essentially their
	strength, the slaves, so we got their body and but they had to also upgrade the brain
	considerably.
	And that's why when you look at those skull patterns that we were talking about a while
	ago, you see this huge leap, especially in the forehead area, when the Cro-Magnons come
	along.
	They had to give us their brains, but they seem to have, from all we can tell, idiotic
	memory, which is that they remember everything they see for as long as they live.
	They have powerful super brains and they live a very long time.
	So, they dummied us down to the extent of putting, apparently, a genetic partition in our brains to allow us only to access about 10% of what they access fully.
	Now, the way we know that is because of the feats of idiot savants I think we all saw the movie Rain Man when Dustin Hoffman played the idiot savant brother to Tom Cruise.
	What an idiot savant does is, in the damage to their normal sense, their normal intellectual capacities, they somehow get tears in that partition, that genetic partition that we seem to have in our brains.
	Which allows them to access certain parts of the genius that we all carry around in our heads, whether it be in math, as it was in Dustin Hoffman's case, or music, as the case of others that you've seen, or other intellectual abilities.
	And so what we know is that we all have this tremendous wealth of untapped intelligence in our heads that we can't get to.
	And the reason I think based on the Sumerian writings and what the Anunnaki said flatly, their goal was that they put a partition in our brains to keep us from being able to be as smart as them and ever rival them.
	So to ourselves, we're really smart, we're really cool, we think we're really sharp.
	We're stupider than dirt, we're slugs to them.
	Dumber than dirt.
	So they could always stay ahead of us and nothing we could do or scheme.
	Well, now wait just one moment.
	We are in the process of unraveling the human genome.
	Right, exactly.
	Now, when we get it unraveled, what's to stop us from breaking down the barrier?
	Absolutely nothing.
	And let me say this, too, about that.
	You know, in the wild, Art, and everybody knows this, when a creature, a plant or animal, is born and it's severely defective, what happens to it?
	It does.
	It does not pass the problem on into the gene pool.
	Now, you do get, still always, egg and sperm misconnects.
	You get two-headed cows, six-legged goats, you know, that's just a sperm-egg misconnect.
	But you do not have things that repeat generation after generation after generation in the gene pool, genetic defects.
	Guess how many we have?
	4,000 and counting.
	Now, how does that happen?
	How does that happen to one species out of all the others?
	It happens because it's an indication that we have been, in fact, genetically altered.
	Because in the cutting and slicing process that our own genetic engineers do now, they make mistakes.
	You're dealing with something very, very small, microscopic in size.
	Sure.
	And there are going to be accidents.
	And when there are, If we're doing something, well, we want to be careful that we don't create the monster that will kill us all.
	Right.
	But if they're making a slave and they're not worried, they have enough experience not to be worried about creating the thing that's going to kill everybody, are they going to worry about it?
	No, they're just going to keep right on going.
	They've got a deadline.
	So, oops, oops, we slipped.
	Oops, oops, we slipped.
	Well, they know the numbers as well as we do mathematically.
	Of those 4,000 genetic disorders and counting, We all, each of us, carry around 50.
	I may have 200.
	You may have 10.
	We average 50.
	So when we marry and produce offspring, our spouse is going to maybe have one or more of what we share.
	And if they do, then our offspring have a one in four chance of expressing the problem.
	So they knew the math for the slave.
	They were going to express themselves intermittently And at random.
	And they didn't care if it was 1 in 100 was defective.
	They didn't care if it was 1 in 10.
	They're making slaves.
	What do they care?
	Now, what we will be able to do over time is not only drop the partition, but we are, right now, right now, working to repair those 4,000 flaws.
	We have a whole body of science dedicated to doing that.
	Right.
	So these are some of the proofs that we are, indeed, genetically engineered.
	But probably the most convincing one is this.
	The Sumerians said that the Anunnaki told them that they created us around 250,000 years ago in Southern Africa to dig the gold.
	That's what they wrote 4,000 to 6,000 years ago.
	In the late 1970s, our geneticists discovered that there is something in our cells called mitochondrial DNA.
	It's DNA that's outside the nucleus.
	So it doesn't mix in each pairing, it passes down intact from generation to generation in females.
	So we can look at the mitochondrial DNA of any female and know when her oldest living ancestor was alive.
	Alright, here's one possible hole.
	When they created us in that manner, you're suggesting they knew precisely and exactly what they were doing.
	And yet, here we are, progressing to the point, as I mentioned, where we're going to unravel the human genome, potentially stop aging, stop disease, correct anything that might be wrong.
	In other words, in essence, becoming the very monsters, from their point of view, that they took every caution not to create.
	No, the monsters you're talking about are themselves.
	We are absolutely on the road to becoming them.
	You're right.
	That's right.
	And that means we are the monsters they didn't want.
	They wanted slaves, not the... They wanted slaves.
	They didn't want equals.
	I think monsters is too strong a word.
	From their point of view.
	They didn't want equals.
	From their point of view.
	In other words, if we were today to design a slave, When I speak, that's one of the questions that always comes up when I give my slide presentation.
	Just as they did with us.
	And from our point of view, if this brainless, nearly brainless slave were to get autonomy,
	consciousness and then equality, we would have created a monster.
	When I speak, that's one of the questions that always comes up when I give my slide
	presentation.
	It always comes up, well what's going to happen when we clean out all the mistakes, drop the
	partition and we're equal to them?
	What are they going to do?
	Well, Art, if there's a cosmic contract out there, I don't know what it says regarding us.
	I don't know if they will welcome us with open arms or if we will be squashed on the way to getting to that point.
	I really don't know and I don't think anybody does know.
	But it is certainly a topic worth discussing and worth considering in exactly the way that you're doing it.
	I don't have an answer to that.
	I don't know what the Cosmic Contract says, if in fact it exists in that way.
	But I do know that that is the ultimate result of where we're heading.
	We're going to perfect ourselves.
	We're going to do all the things that you said.
	And we will be them.
	Now, they had inordinate lifespans in the range of maybe 300,000 to 500,000 years.
	So they had already done this on themselves.
	And the way they interbred, if you've talked to Zechariah, you know that they would marry their sisters and their half-sisters consistently, trying to keep the gene pool pure.
	They did exactly the opposite of what we do.
	Because of all of our mistakes that are in our bodies, in our genes, we know, we've learned by bitter experience, not to marry our close relatives.
	Because the number, that 50 that we were talking about, goes way up the possibility of having a defect.
	I'm breeding in lots of defects.
	They obviously have clean genes because they would marry their intermarry with their close one.
	I've got you.
	And so for them, they have what we are on our way to achieving.
	So yes, we are going to stand toe to toe with them at some day.
	I think we have now told the story.
	is what happens when we get to that day and i don't have an answer for that i
	have certain answers that i can tell you i can tell you we didn't evolve here
	that they created us at the hominoids did but i can't tell where we began and
	i can't tell where we're headed i don't think anybody all right i think we have
	now told the story so we're near the top of the hour and what i want to do is
	open the lines and let them have at you Okay.
	Now, are you up to that?
	Absolutely.
	I'm ready for it.
	All right.
	Stand by, then, and we will do that shortly.
	When we come back, your calls and Lloyd Pye.
	I'm Art Bell, and this is Coast to Coast AF.
	Now, here again is Art Bell.
	Well, I don't know if it's the dawning of the age of Aquarius, but it is eight planets lining up.
	That's what's happening Right now.
	We should get to see some pretty good photographs of all that soon.
	That's happening as we speak, as is the interview with Lloyd Pye.
	Pye, if you're a new listener to the program, you may observe that we don't sit here and tear apart... I don't sit here and tear apart my guest's presentation.
	I don't believe in doing that.
	I believe, in fact, in helping my guest present his information, if I'm able.
	As best I can, rather than stopping and arguing with him at every juncture.
	I don't do that.
	And in this way, I try and let you be the judge.
	I assume that you're grown-ups out there, and you can decide for yourself if what you're hearing sounds reasonable or sounds like absolute BS.
	And the best way to do that is to allow my guest to present his material in an unfettered manner.
	And so that is exactly what I do on this program.
	As you may have noticed by now, we run a kind of a different sort of program.
	All right, back now to Lloyd Pye.
	Lloyd, are you ready?
	Well, if you could just take one minute, I'd sure like to finish that mitochondrial DNA piece, because it's very important.
	Okay, one minute then, and then we go to the phones.
	Mitochondrial DNA showed the biologists that they could chart the course of the evolution of any woman in the world.
	So what they wanted to do was Go back and see when we branched off from our common ancestor, was it closer to 5 million years or was it closer to 8 million years, as all the anthropologists thought at that point.
	They did the tests on women all over the world, every race, every creed, every color, and when the tests came back in the late 1980s, you might remember this, it wasn't 8 million years, it wasn't 5 million years, It was, in fact, between 200,000 and 250,000 years ago.
	And not only was it that time frame, they knew exactly where the oldest of us came from, which was Southern Africa, which is exactly what the Sumerians were writing and saying 4,000 to 6,000 years ago that the Anunnaki had told them.
	So I think that's very compelling proof that the Sumerians did, in fact, know what they were talking about because they were being told it from the horse's mouth.
	All right.
	Here we go.
	West of the Rockies, you are on the air with Lloyd Pye.
	Good morning.
	Where are you, please?
	Are you talking to me?
	I am.
	Oh, great.
	I'm Dean.
	I'm across the bay from San Francisco.
	Yes, Lester.
	All right.
	I had just tuned in a short time ago, so I don't have the name of the gentleman.
	Lloyd Pye.
	M-I?
	Lloyd Pye.
	P-Y-E.
	Pye.
	Oh, Pye.
	No, Pete, he isn't Paul.
	Pete, D-Y-E.
	Very good.
	Well, I'm going to ask him some questions about Pi now.
	Mr. Pi, are you familiar with the work that's been done in the last, oh, say, 400 years among the scientists?
	Who do you consider to be the greatest scientist of all time?
	Albert Einstein.
	Oh, my.
	Oh, I consider it to be Sir Isaac Newton.
	Certainly a good one.
	Good choice.
	Einstein did a little bit of work with mathematics, but as far as I'm very concerned because this evolutionary philosophy that's been going on for quite a while, not only since Darwin, but didn't get very far with Darwin until the end of World War II when Darwin's bulldog, Thomas Huxley's grandsons, Aldous and Julian Huxley,
	Uh, got in the U.N.
	and became the director of UNESCO.
	Do you remember that?
	Uh, no.
	That I knew about Darwin's Bulldog being Thomas Huxley.
	Yeah, well, Huxley's grandson was the director of UNESCO here for about 30, 35 years from 45 on.
	All right, so we've got to get to a question.
	Okay.
	Well, the question is, how in the world do you believe, if you really have studied some of our scientists and their work, That the Earth could be anywhere near 45 to 125 million years old.
	I don't believe that.
	I believe that the Earth is 4.6 billion years.
	It started to coalesce and I say that it's at least 4 billion years old in the shape that it's in.
	Okay, that's right.
	You did not say that.
	In fact, that is exactly what you said.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Lloyd Pye.
	Hi.
	Hi.
	How are you?
	I'm fine.
	Let me just make sure.
	My name is Cherry.
	I'm from Harlem.
	I'm living in Harlem right now.
	From where?
	Harlem, New York.
	Okay.
	I've been living in Staten Island for 23 years, but I was raised in Harlem.
	Welcome.
	You're welcome.
	I mean, my question is more of a spiritual nature.
	One question I'd like to ask Mr. Pye, is he familiar with a book called The Classification of Planets?
	No, not that particular book.
	I'm sorry.
	Okay, that's okay.
	Well, basically what he said is that there Okay, you're talking about Dr. Michio Kaku and his theory regarding Type 0, 1, 2 and 3 civilizations, correct?
	other planets, universes that can produce other universes, that kind of theory.
	And a friend of mine told me about it, so I said, where are we in the scheme of things?
	He said, well, we're zero.
	Okay, you're talking about Dr. Michio Kaku and his theory regarding type 0, 1, 2, and 3 civilizations, correct?
	Uh-huh.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	And we are a zero, yes.
	Okay, which made me feel kind of bad, being a human being.
	My question is this, more of a spiritual nature.
	Is there anything after this life, based on the little bit of the show that I did here, and I am a first-time caller, All right, well that's the ultimate question, all right.
	What do you conclude, Lloyd, or do you stay away from it entirely?
	No, no.
	Based on the writings of the Sumerians, which is all I really like to go on, I try to stay away from metaphysics as much as I can.
	The Anunnaki themselves, these individuals that live on this other planet, they had the
	concept of a monotheistic great god, like what we say is a god with a capital G. They
	felt that there was a big god behind them that created them, governing everything that
	they did, created the universe.
	Very similar, and in fact, a carbon copy of what we believe now because we took it from
	them.
	They handed it down to us.
	Initially, we, because we were living with them, considered them the Anunnaki gods with
	a small g.
	They were our gods.
	On a daily basis, we were serving and dealing with them.
	When they finally left us and left us in charge of the store, so to speak, the small god concept
	went away, the small g concept went away, and it passed down to us their large g concept,
	and that has become what we believe now.
	So, to sum up, you are suggesting that indeed you believe as they believe, that there is a God, big G, that there is a life and a spirit that Well, first of all, what did they say, and that's what they said.
	As far as my personal beliefs on it, I'm still working on that.
	I have some reservations, I have some leanings in that direction, but that part of my belief, my personal belief system, is still in process and I'm still working on that.
	Okay, that's fair.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air with Lloyd Pye.
	Hi, Lloyd.
	This is Dan in Virginia.
	It's a fascinating program.
	It raises a lot of questions.
	It answers a lot of things, too.
	My understanding is that, I guess what I want to ask you, at one time man apparently had all the facilities to do great things, and then he got genetically manipulated.
	So my question is, what happened before the Sumerians?
	Or were the Sumerians the ideal thing that man is fully capable of doing?
	In other words, were the Sumerians the first?
	No, not exactly.
	The first people, as the genes tell us, came to be between 200 and 250,000 years ago.
	The first humans, as we are now, the first Cro-Magnons or whatever you want to call us
	at that point.
	But we were human.
	We were fully human in the way that we are today.
	Now, most of those people that were alive up to the time of the flood, which is around
	13,000 years ago, around 11,000 B.C., the Great Flood did in fact occur, according to
	the Sumerians, and it did in fact wipe out most of us.
	So then we had to start over at that point, repopulating the planet.
	Again, the gene line is staying intact, but most of us are now gone and we have to repopulate the planet.
	There was never a time, Dan, frankly, when we were superior or capable of extraordinary things.
	From the very get-go, we were designed to be an inferior model of the Anunnaki, an inferior model of the gods with the small g. And we have always been that.
	We've always had the 10% partition in our brains.
	We have always had the 4,000 and counting genetic disorders.
	Initially, we might have been better.
	We might have had cleaner genes initially because we had more of the Anunnaki pure genes in us.
	But as time has gone by and as we've gone through the generations and mixed and swirled and combined those 4,000 disorders, We have gotten progressively less than we might have been at the beginning, but we were never really outstanding.
	We were never really anything approaching them.
	Fascinating.
	Lloyd, I do want to ask you about your book.
	Now, your book is called Everything You Know Is Wrong, Book One, Human Evolution.
	You need to add that because there are other things out there called Everything You Know Is Wrong.
	There's an album, there are other comedy books.
	Okay, Everything You Know Is Wrong, Book One, Human Evolution.
	How do people get your book?
	It will not be in bookstores probably until the middle of next year, so they have to order it by an 800 number or order it directly from the publisher.
	The 800 number is 1-800-444-2524.
	That's 1-800-444-2524.
	number is 1-800-444-2524. That's 1-800-444-2524. That is a company that specializes in doing
	this down in Sarasota, Florida. The mailing address for those who don't have a credit
	card is Adamu Press, A-D-A-M-U, Adamu Press, Box 8100, Madeira Beach, M-A-D-E-I-R-A-B-E-C-H.
	That's 1-800-444-2524. That is a company that specializes in doing this down in Sarasota,
	Madeira Beach, Florida, 33738. Madeira Beach, Florida, 33738.
	And their book is $20, $4 shipping and handling.
	Okay, give me the zip code again, please.
	3-3-7-3-8.
	Alright, now read the whole address one more time.
	I know how people are.
	Adamoo Press, A-D-A-M-U, Adamoo Press, Box 8100, Madeira Beach, M-A-D-E-I-R-A, Madeira Beach, Florida, 3-3-7-3-8.
	Okay, and the 1-800 number is 1-800-444-2524.
	How much is your book?
	$20, $4 shipping and handling.
	So, say $24.
	$24, exactly.
	All right.
	Uh, very good.
	First time caller on the line, you're on the air with Lloyd Pye.
	Good morning.
	Good morning, Mr. Bell.
	Uh, where are you, sir?
	I'm just right from Little Rock.
	All right.
	I've got a scenario to throw at.
	Mr., uh, Pye was talking about the Otanaki.
	Could that very well tie in with the alien abductions?
	Or what we know as alien abductions?
	Yes, very much so it could.
	I think they supposedly left, according to what we understand, the last of them left at around 200 BC, which is the last time that the planet Nibiru swept through the solar system.
	The colony that they had on Earth, the last remnants of that colony left at that time.
	I think, personally, this I believe, I don't talk about it in the book, this is just my personal opinion, I believe that they would have left some behind to sort of oversee the experiment and just keep their finger on the pulse of how things are going around here.
	And I do believe that the abductions probably, in all likelihood, are governed by the Anunnaki that they left behind to do that.
	Now, again, when I give speeches, this is one of the areas that we always get into, The way I think it might go is this, that they developed the ability to build androids, not necessarily slaves anymore, but androids.
	And I think personally that the greys that everybody talks about are androids.
	And I think this because occasionally, most people see just the androids, but occasionally they see the bosses one way or the other.
	And those are described exactly the way the Sumerians described the Anunnaki, as tall, very, very pale-skinned people.
	With long or semi-long blonde to reddish hair, good looking, just like perfect humans.
	And that's how they're described.
	I think those bosses that occasionally people see, humans see when they're on board these crafts, are very likely the Anunnaki.
	Again, personal opinion, can't prove it.
	I don't have it in the book, but you asked the question and that's my own personal belief.
	Alright, then let me cause you to extend it one speculation notch further.
	If that is the case, what do you imagine they are concluding with their monitoring?
	Well, again, we get into an area that nobody can say.
	I think they're trying to just keep track on what we're doing, keep track of how the gene pool is changing.
	And who knows what the plan is when it comes around again.
	But understand, it won't be here for another 1,400 years.
	So there's a long time.
	Now, to them, that's an eye blink.
	They are virtually immortal relative to us.
	Again, their lifespans are 300,000 to 500,000 or more years.
	Well, did you know that when we launch each space shuttle, because I didn't know it, naive me, when we launch every space shuttle, there is the ability from the ground to destroy it.
	Yes.
	You knew that?
	Yes, I did know that.
	So, if your theory is the way it is, then you would have to imagine that those they left behind to do the monitoring would have a destruct button.
	Yes.
	You're right.
	That's why I say I have no idea what the Cosmic Contract says, if in fact that is what it is.
	But it's all too real that we could reach a point where it's impowerable for them.
	I don't want to go around hanging crepe, which is what we call it down here.
	I don't want to go around hanging crepe all the time and say, yeah, we're living on borrowed time.
	That is a possibility.
	I think it's equally possible that they're looking and they're smiling and they're saying, look at these things we've built.
	Look at what they're doing.
	They are really coming up.
	They're going to be as good as us one day.
	Someday they're going to welcome us with open arms.
	Someday, Lloyd, I believe that.
	But if you read today's news, 14-year-olds shooting up other 14-year-olds at prayer meetings, then I see that long alien finger reaching for the buffet All right, Lloyd, hold on.
	We're at the bottom of the hour.
	We'll be right back.
	My guest is Lloyd Pye, and we are talking about our beginnings.
	I'm Art Bell.
	This is Coast to Coast AM.
	This is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
	Now again, here's Art.
	Once again, here I am.
	My guest is Lloyd Pye, possibly causing many of you to extend out to the 11th percentile point this morning.
	I'm going to ask him about the God Spot in Holmes, the one scientists are working on right now.
	Mr. Pye, welcome back.
	Thank you.
	And to the telephones, I guess we go if you're ready.
	I'm ready.
	I would like to go to say if Cherry in Harlem is still listening, Cherry, you be sure to call WBABC tomorrow morning.
	Thank you.
	Thank you, Lloyd.
	First time caller line, you're on the air with Lloyd Pye.
	Hello.
	Good morning, Art.
	This is Al in San Diego, first time caller.
	Yes, Al.
	There's just so many ways to go at this notion.
	I'm sorry, I can't call it a theory.
	But I'd like one comment about us and one comment about our alleged creators.
	All right.
	About us, first of all, ironically you should mention mitochondrial DNA because that pegs us at 120,000 to 150,000 years ago, not 250,000 years ago.
	to 150,000 years ago, not 250,000 years ago.
	It's rather precise in evolutionary terms.
	But the only people, I haven't heard this in decades, the only people who still say that we don't use
	but 10% of our brains are the people who don't know 90% of what our brains do.
	So that's a question for you to comment on.
	My second question about our creators.
	Did you realize that you're saying that people who could do genetic engineering 250,000 years ago wrote on clay tablets?
	Even early Christians had a sense to use copper.
	Alright, there's a good one.
	Lloyd?
	Well, as far as the clay tablets, clay was what they had at hand.
	If you go to Iraq today, or you, as it's called by Joseph Campbell, that little mud garden where civilization sprang from, mud is the tool that they used to do everything, clay meaning the clay.
	And actually, it's stone.
	It turns into stone.
	They would fire it into stone, and their tablets will still be around when all of ours are long gone, probably.
	So they were actually putting it on one of the most impermeable sources that you could have.
	Maybe not so dumb.
	It's a funny thing.
	We recently heard the Department of Defense destroyed a whole bunch of records.
	They simply shredded them.
	And I had several faxes noting that had we inscribed upon stone or something more permanent, that would not have occurred.
	Exactly.
	Here's one other for you that I want to ask.
	Scientists in London, I believe, are just now coming up with evidence that when we think about God, think about a Creator, or pray, depending on how you want to look at all this, there is actually a specific part of our brain that appears to become active.
	Are you aware of that?
	Yes, it's programmed to do that, right?
	That it was built into us to worship them.
	And it's not impossible.
	Again, with the genetic engineering that they did, and what the gentleman said about our brains, the 10% and the 90%, I refer him again to the feats of idiot savants.
	And I think that speaks for itself.
	And as far as the 150,000 years versus the 250,000 years, it depends on which sample and which test you've done.
	There have been a lot of tests done since.
	There are being tests done now on male Y chromosomes.
	And they're coming up a little shorter than the original test did.
	It doesn't matter.
	Somewhere in there, we were genetically created, and we're a very young species.
	Lloyd, and younger than, you know.
	And idiots of odds.
	How do we know that they're using all of their brains?
	Is it not equally possible that they're simply using those?
	I thought I made it clear, and let me reiterate.
	They're only using a narrow finger of ability.
	In other words, if you imagine the partition is Just a screen, there's a little tear, like a hole in it,
	where they can reach in and do these phenomenal things in math, in music, whatever, but
	they're not accessing the whole 90%.
	No, no.
	Just a narrow finger of light shining through the hole.
	They can go in there and see to that extent, but to us, it's blindingly phenomenal what
	Their abilities so much outstrip our normal geniuses.
	It's not even funny.
	It is a provocative challenge.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air with Lloyd Pye.
	Hi.
	Good morning, Art, and most to Lloyd Pye, I believe it is.
	Yes.
	Yeah, you know what?
	You've got a guest on here, Art, that I can agree with about 90% of it.
	I have two questions for your guest, Lloyd.
	The first one being is the Sumerians, they had communication with the Anarchy, I guess it was a race, and was it during their time or was it left in some other form?
	That's number one question.
	And number two would be, I've read a lot of metaphysics and so forth, but also a lot of Greek mythology.
	Now, is there any relationship between the Greek gods?
	Because there was many, many, many of them.
	Absolutely.
	Was there any relationship between them and the Anarchy, or is this just... No, this is a very good question.
	Not only the mythical characters of the Greeks, but of the Romans, and even of the Egyptians, they are all almost carbon copies of the living gods of the Sumerians.
	In other words, as the Sumerians wrote down, What the people they were actually physically dealing with, and their traits and their characteristics, and they had personalities just like we do, the different gods, again with the small g, Enki, Enlil, and Herzeg, all the names come down as a pantheon of twelve, where there were twelve leader gods among the gods of the Sumerians, and as they wrote about them, that pantheon of twelve came down to every one of those later cultures.
	The names were changed but a lot of the personality traits, and you have to read Sitchin for all the details of this.
	I don't go into that kind of detail.
	Sitchin's work, the Sumerian stuff, is only part four of my book.
	If you're interested in that though, Zechariah Sitchin does a wonderful job of it in his books.
	You're certainly welcome to explore that.
	Those mythologies of those later cultures come down directly from the Sumerians, and they were just simply telling it and viewing it the way, through their perspective of much later time, what the Sumerians had written and taught and talked about.
	All right, by facts.
	Art, I've got a couple of quick questions for Mr. Pye.
	One, does he feel the notion of the soul as a divine part of man comes from a memory or a metaphor of the inability of humans to use 90% of
	their brain, in fact, when we can access this portion of our minds, will our
	souls be reached, and we become, in quotes, divine beings as those who made
	us, and could utilize their entire brains?
	I don't think that will lead to divinity in the sense that the Anunnaki themselves
	did not believe themselves to be divine in the way that their creator was,
	their god with a big G.
	I don't think they viewed themselves as divine relative to us, of course,
	as we would if we had created a slave the way they did.
	But I don't think that perfect knowledge leads to divinity.
	I think that that spiritual aspect of it, if in fact it exists and is real, will remain always.
	All right.
	Part two.
	Does Lloyd feel that the ancients, this is really interesting, left out certain texts I think we could add to that the Bible Code.
	It's quite possible.
	It's quite possible.
	I think if you read the Bible Code, the book that everybody's been talking about for the last half of this year, if you read that and you understand the concept that the mathematician was trying to express, that it may well be A hologram of sorts containing all the knowledge that there is to know about the future and that all of our lives are written in the hologram, I mean, it's mind-boggling to me as just a normal, ordinary person.
	And yet, when you realize the kind of minds that we were up against and that we are dealing with when we're talking about the Anunnaki, then it's certainly not impossible and it makes sense that if, in fact, A God did hand the Pentateuch, those first five books of the Old Testament, to Moses the way the old legend that was discounted as a myth states, then it's quite possible that they designed that, and they are leaving messages in other texts as well, and in other ways and in other forms that we're maybe not yet quite intelligent enough to understand.
	But it could be that they're trying to help us along, but at our own pace, given how badly they crippled us in the beginning.
	Who knows?
	I don't know.
	All right.
	East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Lloyd Pye.
	Hello.
	Hello.
	Hi.
	Where are you?
	I'm in Shebuggan, Wisconsin.
	All right.
	My name is Steven.
	I'm a pastor at Research Universal Life Church.
	Uh-huh.
	I have two quick things I'd like to talk about.
	The first one's for you, Art.
	And it has to do with remote viewing that you discussed with Rebroadcast yesterday?
	Yes.
	With Major Ed Ames?
	Ames, D-A-M-E-S, Ames.
	Okay, Ames, I wasn't sure how to put it together.
	Have you ever seen the video or movie called Official Denial?
	No.
	Okay, I'll give you a quick rundown on that.
	Well, listen, it really doesn't... I'll make it really quick.
	It's got to relate to what we're talking about now.
	Okay, maybe I can call on it a different time for now.
	Please do, yes.
	Okay, no problem.
	Talking about gods, as far as Erich von Däniken, who wrote in one of his books, he had mentioned that the gods had been born in Turkey, a lot of them, at that time back then.
	And he also mentioned later in that same book that as the age progresses, for some reason on the planet Earth, there's less and less gods born each time for each age.
	Another thing is, too, talking about omniscience or perfect knowledge, like the last caller said, Since we're in the age of information, I came up with the idea a few months ago that perhaps we'll reach a point where, because we're so tuned in to the information around us, that we'll become omniscient.
	Like it says in Corinthians, that we see through a glass darkly, but then we'll see face to face, and we shall be like him, the firstborn among many brethren.
	So that's basically what I want to say.
	Well, not with the present genetic limitations, based on what you said, correct Lloyd?
	Right.
	I mean, I was waiting for the question.
	He just apparently just made a statement, and if you're asking me to agree or disagree with that statement, no, I don't think that that's going to happen without some kind of outside intervention, not certainly in the shape that we're in now.
	Now, if we design our own destiny and are able to redesign our own bodies, then yes, maybe we will stop looking through the glass quite as darkly as we are now, but I think we're a long way from that.
	But it's not impossible that we will reach that.
	We've gone over that, and it may be you're late to the show, but we've gone over that in various forms earlier in what we're talking about.
	We may rise to that point, but we're not there now, and we're not even particularly close.
	We're just on the way, and we have our toe in the water, and we're moving in the right direction, but we have a long way to go.
	Gotcha.
	All right.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Lloyd Pye.
	Good morning.
	Good morning, Mr. Bell.
	Hi.
	Where are you?
	I'm in Hawaii.
	Hawaii.
	And my name is James.
	Yes, James.
	Okay, I had a real quick question for you.
	Can I get your fax number real fast?
	Mine?
	Yeah.
	Sure.
	Three page maximum, otherwise it doesn't print out.
	Very important to know.
	It's area code 702-727-8499.
	And it's very important.
	My fax machine digests the number of pages, and if it's in excess of three, including the The cover, if you send one, what a waste cover pages are.
	It won't print it out, so hold it to three, max.
	And if you want to send me email, I'm meant to get this out, it's artbell at A-O-L dot com.
	A-R-T-B-E-L-L at A-O-L dot com.
	Okay.
	Okay?
	Okay.
	Thank you.
	Yeah, I was asking because I have four ideas for free energy devices.
	That's fine.
	Alright, do you have a question for my guest?
	Yeah.
	Mr. Pye, The information about the Sumerians, would I be able to look this up in a regular library?
	Yes, look for the work of Samuel Kramer as far as the translations.
	I wish I had the translations of the tablets.
	Or do you want to see the tablets themselves?
	Well, I guess he would like to see... I would imagine both.
	He's not here.
	Oh, okay.
	Well, if he wants to see the translations, Samuel Kramer did as good, I think, and a lot of Mr. Sitchin's work is based on his translations, although others worked in the field the same way.
	He's generally considered the man.
	As far as the tablets themselves, or the microfiche of them, they are in libraries all over the world, particularly, though, in England and Germany, because those were the guys that did the majority of the digging up of the cities of Sumer in the late 1800s.
	Okay.
	First time caller line, you're on the air with Lloyd Pye.
	Good morning.
	Hi, Mr. Bell.
	Yes.
	I'm a little disappointed in you.
	Well, that happens all the time.
	It's all right, though.
	Where are you?
	I'm in Brooklyn.
	And what is your disappointment?
	It's really nothing, but since the last time I spoke to you, the guys with the sunglasses have been following me.
	Well, hey.
	It's Mommy Boy Malloy.
	Help me Mr. Bell!
	Help me!
	Yeah, anything for my guest, sir.
	They're coming to get me, what do I do?
	Anything for my guest, sir.
	Uh, no.
	Okay, see you later.
	Uh, Wild Card Line, you're on the air with Lloyd Pye.
	Good morning.
	Uh, good morning.
	Los Angeles, this is the PABC.
	Yes, sir.
	Uh, I agree with Mr. Pye in some sense.
	There are life forms that are introduced in this world from outside sources such as diatoms and the Mesozoic.
	But the one question I have for him, if these Anakis, or whatever you want to call them,
	are that far ahead of us in technology, knowledge, and so on, if they were in search of gold,
	and this is a common thread I find, extraterrestrials coming to the Earth to find something, if
	If they're that far technologically ahead of us, why couldn't they transmute their own metals into gold without coming to another world?
	A very reasonable question.
	Actually, when I speak, that's one of the two fundamentals about the gold question.
	Why didn't they transmute and why did they have to dig it out?
	Well, you have to dig it out because it's in ore and there's nobody that we know has found a better way to do it.
	As far as transmuting That, to my knowledge, is still just a theory and has not been proved as a fact, and I am not going to sit in judgment of them.
	Maybe it is, in fact, impossible.
	Now, if it is possible, then that's a very good argument.
	Why didn't they?
	Maybe they didn't know how to do it, or maybe, in the end, it is, in fact, impossible.
	I don't know.
	All I can tell you is what the Sumerians said.
	The evidence is all around us that they were here.
	Not only the evidence in our bodies and our genes, but the evidence of the megaliths that stand around the world, which we haven't mentioned yet, which are clearly their fingerprints or their footprints or whatever you want to call it, that they were in fact here and they did create those edifices.
	So, we have to go with basically what we're told.
	We're told they were here, we're told they had to come for gold, and until somebody actually transmutes something into gold, I'm going to believe that they knew more about it than I do.
	Are you willing to allow for the fact that your basic theory regarding how we got here is correct, but that the details with regard to the Sumerians and the Twelfth Planet and Sitchin's work and all the rest of it could be wrong?
	In other words, there could be another answer which wraps into your basic theory.
	That's always possible.
	Now, as far as the sequencing, excuse me, sequencing and the details, As you may know if you've read both Sitchin and Alan Alford, there is some debate between those two about the timing sequences, let's say, and other things where they're not quite sure.
	And I believe that we're only in the beginning phase.
	As far as I know, Zechariah Sitchin is first, Alan Alford is second, and he's recent, he's just last year, and I'm third in this line, moving the paradigm in a whole new direction.
	So, I believe we're just getting started, and there are going to be, obviously, refinements as more and more people come into the field of ancient astronauts and begin to study this stuff the way that we have.
	We are going to find more and more scholars who get into it and say, ah, but this makes a little more sense, or this is a little more of a refinement.
	I think in general terms, though, I think in general terms that Zechariah Sitchin has it right, The Sumerians have it right.
	I don't think it's going to be very far off from that.
	All right.
	We're at the bottom of the hour, or top of the hour, rather.
	So we've got a break here.
	My guest is Lloyd Pye.
	I'm Art Bell, and this is Coast to Coast AM.
	Now again, here's Art.
	Now again, here I am.
	Good morning, everybody.
	Back to Lloyd Pye.
	Here he is once again.
	You're doing very well, having hung in there.
	Now this would be your fourth hour, Lloyd.
	Well, I'm glad to be here.
	I'm just grateful for the opportunity to talk about these things.
	I think that they should be more widely disseminated, and I really appreciate that you have a show that allows those of us who are into this to have an opportunity.
	I do.
	First time caller on the line, you're on the air with Lloyd Pye.
	Hello.
	Is this me, Lloyd?
	Well, only you know that for certain.
	But yeah, I'd say offhand, it's you.
	Okay.
	My name is Terry DeAngelo.
	I'm the Executive Director of the New England Skeptical Society.
	Uh, Mr. Bell, quick question for you first.
	Uh, there's a difference between attacking your guests and analyzing their notions critically.
	That's correct.
	Are you familiar with that?
	Yes, I do.
	Uh, do you ever do that?
	Uh, it depends.
	Well, you had said at the beginning of the last hour that you refrain from attacking your guests.
	I, I, yeah, I refrain, uh, uh, in other words, as a method of interview, I refrain from attacking my guests.
	Generally, that is absolutely correct, and I try and help them tell their story.
	And I leave it to you, and particularly you, to call up and to challenge in any way you wish, which you now have an opportunity to do.
	Okay, fine.
	I would like to ask your guest, how can you assert to a scientific community, or any reasonable person, that your notion of a cosmic dump truck, Is more believable than Stephen Jay Gould's work on punctuated equilibrium, which has been embraced by scholars worldwide, while your theory labors in their anonymity?
	Well, because those scholars that you're talking about, we have a saying down here, it's called, they have a dog in the fight.
	They have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo as it is.
	Okay, wait a minute.
	I have to stop you right there.
	So many people of your bent say that scientists have a vested interest in the status quo.
	That is on its face preposterous.
	You want to win the Nobel Prize and be a scientist?
	The way to do it is by knocking down theories that have been long-standing with new ones, by sublating old information.
	To maintain the status quo as a scientist will achieve you nothing.
	Not money, not notoriety, not anything.
	That statement is preposterous.
	Well, it's not preposterous at all.
	There are any number, any number of examples of individuals who came forward with a new theory or something really radically different and they were not part of the scientific membership or part of the scientific fold, not invented here, and they were absolutely ridiculed as long as possible until they were just overwhelmed, their objections were just overwhelmed by the new reality.
	There's examples, I have several examples of it in my book.
	Wegener's plate tectonic theory being just one of them, but it really goes on and on.
	And actually, sir, your statement is equally preposterous.
	There are, again, any number of examples of theories that have been put forth by somebody that wasn't scientifically credible, and then it just will not be accepted by you guys until you get rolled over by it.
	Perhaps you don't understand how science works.
	When you propose a theory, a hypothesis, it is the job, or the duty, of the scientific community, of other scientists, to critically analyze, critique, and literally tear apart your work looking for the holes in your theories, looking for the flaws.
	And it is only after that very rigorous process, if your theories are still standing, That they are then accepted as most probably true.
	You understand that?
	Yes, I do, but I also understand that... Okay, now, hold it, hold it, sir.
	Let him address that.
	I'm giving you your chance.
	Every, every... This is what I know, that every establishment, particularly the scientific establishment, but every establishment, I'm not picking on them in general, government, the local poker club, every establishment is in business to do fundamentally two things.
	Keep things the way they are, as much as possible, i.e.
	maintain the status quo, and avoid culpability for error, which is avoid having to say, we made a mistake.
	And nobody likes to admit that less, probably, than the scientific community.
	All right, Lloyd, hold on a second.
	Caller, let me point out to you the following, and that is that a great deal of science in this country is funded with federal dollars, with grants, private or federal.
	And it certainly is true that if you propose to study something that is not conventionally accepted as part of the current paradigm, your chances of getting that money are slim and none.
	Don't you realize, Mr. Bell, that in order to get those funds, to get those grants, you have to make your proposal, you have to present a scholarly paper to the people whose job it is to make these decisions.
	If your paper If we cannot substantiate the need for your research, then we have to make the decision realizing that we have limited resources and can only fund so much research.
	We have to fund those things that have a likelihood or have scholarship in their proposal.
	Oh no, I fully understand what you're saying, but paradigms indeed are propped up.
	Sure, I mean scientific theories that have withstood past rigor do stand up.
	The history of science is nothing but one long series of corrected mistakes.
	That's really all science is.
	One long series of corrected mistakes.
	And all I'm saying is it's time to correct.
	Another series of mistakes that I feel are out there.
	You obviously feel differently.
	You're entitled to your opinion.
	But I believe that I'm marshalling enough evidence to indicate that there are some serious flaws in the current paradigm, and I'm trying to call attention to that, and this is my way of doing it.
	Yes, Collar, if you have specifics that you would like to attack, why don't you do that?
	I'm not a scientist, and I don't have scholarship in this area.
	I've only read Mr. Gould's work.
	I've read their paper on punctuated equilibrium.
	There are others in my organization that do.
	I don't.
	But nonetheless, Mr. Bell, the attack on science in general, and having a skeptical philosophy, is in its nature a very helpful and very positive thing, because it gives you the filters With which to hear all of these notions, including your guests, and be able to put them in their proper perspective in your life.
	All right.
	Well, very good.
	I thank you for the call, and it's too bad we could not get down to specifics, but if you have any of your friends who can, have them call.
	That's what we're here for.
	Wildcard Line, you're on the air with Lloyd Pye.
	Hello.
	Yes, good morning.
	Good morning.
	This is Paul in Philadelphia.
	Hello, Mr. Pye.
	Hello, how are you?
	Paul, did you say?
	Yes, I appreciate the idea that the evolutionary theory and creation have their problems.
	I do see that.
	The problem I have with the Sumerian picture is that I have no reason to assume that if there were Anunnaki, which I don't know for myself, but if I assume that there were, I have no reason to know that they were telling the truth to the Sumerians.
	Well, you're right.
	They certainly didn't have lie detectors strapped to themselves, but we have to ask ourselves, why would they lie?
	They were so superior.
	What would the advantage be to them?
	Well, if you're an alien, and you come to this planet, and you want to create an oppressive or confusing atmosphere for the people, Or, you know, you'd say, look, I have a lot of power, you know, I'm an alien, and look, we created you, and we're here for the gold, and you do this for us, and that sort of thing.
	So I really, I tend to disagree with your theory on spiritual or metaphysical grounds.
	Let's go back and look at one of the factual matters that we discussed earlier, and maybe you didn't hear it.
	Yes.
	What the Anunnaki told the Sumerians is, we made you around 200,000 to 250,000 years ago, and we made you in Southern Africa to dig our gold.
	And our geneticists in the late 1980s discovered that, in fact, our genes, which are absolutely inviolable, say that we were, in fact, created around 200,000 to 250,000 years ago in Southern Africa.
	So I take that as evidence that they were telling The truth at least in that instance, and that's the one that counts.
	How we were made as slaves to dig the gold, and that's where I have the problem.
	The fundamentals of my theory are that we are a genetically engineered species.
	Why they did it is not as important as the fact that they did it, and I think the evidence is fairly overwhelming that they did do it.
	Leave the reasons out of it, if that's a problem for you.
	Well, I would rather believe that we're free spiritual beings, just as free as any planetary race or any alien.
	And, you know, that's sort of what I tend to hang my hat on.
	Well, basically we are now.
	I mean, they're not over here overseeing us the way they did before, so fundamentally you're correct, but we didn't start out that way.
	Those are theories that you have, and your theory gets the respect that it deserves, and I appreciate your questioning the paradigms that we generally accept, but I would rather go for the free soul theory.
	That's what I hang my hat on.
	Yes, you're welcome to do that.
	Absolutely welcome to do that.
	This is simply food for thought.
	East to the Rockies.
	You're on the air with Lloyd Pye.
	Hello.
	Gentlemen, good evening.
	Good evening.
	I have three very strong points.
	All right, where are you?
	I am in Dallas, Texas.
	Three strong points from Dallas.
	All right, fire away.
	Okay.
	Number one, we'll start a couple years ago.
	Try it, four and a half, nine years.
	There's no way we could have originated from molten lava.
	That's fine.
	Is that correct?
	Well, yes.
	I would say that it's almost virtually impossible that we would have originated from molten lava, yes.
	I think that's a safe statement to say.
	Okay.
	I tend to agree with you there.
	But my theory lies in that Mars has recently been found to have had living organisms.
	Is that right or wrong?
	They are suspected to be.
	There is a picture that looks very much like a typical prokaryotic chain of life on Earth.
	It's possible there are those who look at it and see a prokaryotic chain.
	There are those who look at it and see just a conglomeration of little specks like around it that make it look that way, so the jury's still out.
	Well, to me, that tells me that if there's no...
	But those, and it's all been theorized, or I don't know if it's been proven, but those living organisms have come from a meteor or a comet of some type, impacting Mars, leaving the bacterial debris.
	Right.
	I believe, and maybe, and I think this goes against what you believe, that if that's the case with Mars, then the same could have happened with the Earth.
	Actually, it's a good point that you make, and it's the other way around.
	The story, we didn't talk about this earlier, but the story the Sumerians say is that when that planet came into the solar system, there was another planet that was called Tiamat.
	And on it, it was a very large planet outside the orbit of Mars.
	And on its second pass through, when both were still fairly plasmid bodies, but the Nibiru planet was older and therefore more stable, There was a head-on collision, literally a head-on collision, with Tiamat going counterclockwise and Nibiru going clockwise.
	And Nibiru blasted Tiamat in half, tore it apart, creating in the process the comets, the asteroid belt, all this is related in the Sumerian epic of creation called Enuma Elish.
	But they solve, in that process, five of the great current mysteries of astronomy are solved by the Enuma Elish.
	Comets and the asteroid belt being two of them.
	But in that process, a third one was, they say that in the collision, in the mingling of their waters, Nibiru passed life to Tiamat.
	So Nibiru was the container of life that inexplicably passed it to what was going to become Earth,
	which was the remnant of Tiamat at four billion years ago, just when we did in fact get our
	first life form, the two prokaryotes that we talked about earlier in the program that
	you might not have heard.
	So in fact what happened was in the collision that water containing the life sprayed out
	all over the place and it could very easily have sprayed to Mars.
	And so if in fact those are prokaryotic chains in the meteorite, which is literally how they
	look to my eye, that's how they look.
	They look like a prokaryotic chain.
	Then those prokaryotes would have come in the same collision that put life on what we
	Okay, Lloyd, I'm going to stop you for a second and tell my audience that there is, if you will go to my website, a link to Lloyd's.
	It is kind of a website in transition at the moment.
	Now, there are going to be a lot of people who are going to want to comment to you, Lloyd, no question about it, on what you had to say tonight.
	Do you have an email address?
	Yes, I have an email address.
	For that, it's lloydpie at lloydpie.com.
	And I have, of course, a personal email as well for friends.
	But for those who want to comment about this, I think the lloydpie at lloydpie.com would be best.
	All right.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Lloyd Pye on Coast to Coast AM.
	Yes.
	Hello, Mr. Bell, and hello, Mr. Pye.
	I have a quick, actually two questions.
	Regarding Tiamat, if you are familiar with the size of the dinosaurs which used to live on this planet, they were roughly around 130 tons for the largest one.
	Presently, the largest elephant can be about 8 to 10 tons.
	Is there any possibility that the dinosaurs perhaps lived on this planet Tiamat and therefore explaining why their size was so great compared to anything which can live on the planet today?
	Well, that's an original question.
	I've never heard it asked before and I've really never given it much thought.
	My first thought is I don't think so.
	It's certainly not impossible.
	There's nothing in the Sumerian tablets that I'm aware of that would indicate any transplanting like that of that nature.
	So, while it's a possibility, I can't say for sure, and I have no factual basis to give you an answer.
	Right.
	Just a quick physics.
	The larger the planet, the more it can condense the atomic structure, therefore allowing the animals to be larger.
	Impossible.
	Like I say, I just don't have any facts to give you there.
	Great.
	And the second one is regarding our moon, which the Sumerians called Kingu, saying that they basically placed it into its orbit.
	And if you'll notice, the angular size of the moon The moon is clearly outsized for the planet Earth, there's no question.
	And that occurs nowhere else in our solar system, and as far as we know, nowhere else
	in any other known solar system.
	Right.
	The moon is clearly outsized for the planet Earth, there's no question.
	But if you go back to the original size of Tiamat, which was double, perhaps triple the
	size of the remnant, which is Earth, then you see that the moon in that case would have
	been more in line with the relationships that other moons have to their planetary bodies.
	All right, Lloyd.
	Hold it right there.
	We're at the bottom of the hour.
	Stretch run is coming up.
	My guest is Lloyd Pye.
	Have we got you thinking?
	Well, that's good.
	I'm Art Bell, and this, of course, is Coast to Coast AM.
	Keep it planted.
	This is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell from the Kingdom of Nine.
	Now again, here's Art.
	Once again, here I am.
	Good morning, everybody.
	It is a wonderful world, isn't it?
	Once again, here's Lloyd Pye.
	Lloyd?
	Yes?
	All right, here we go.
	First time caller line, you are on the air now with Lloyd Pye.
	Good morning.
	Oh, it's a pleasure.
	Hi, where are you, sir?
	I'm Gene Nevato.
	This is Larry.
	Okay.
	I'm Arvind Gafoor.
	The only problem I have with your esteemed guest, Mr. Pine, is theory.
	I get three questions.
	If there's a space-faring race that he was talking about that was so advanced, why would they need to mine gold in such a primitive way?
	And if the E.T.
	group needed gold, why would they have to mine Earth when they could mine lighter G-planets and asteroids?
	And my comment-slash-question is, all Earth creatures, in my belief, are a synthesized strain.
	Well, I think that's just about what he said, actually.
	More or less, yeah, that's right.
	And as far as the mining of gold, they wouldn't do it on an asteroid or any lighter planet
	or anything like that because they needed to stay, they needed to live, so they needed
	an atmosphere.
	So that would certainly make Earth a leading candidate.
	As far as mining it primitive, I mean getting it in that primitive fashion of mining, we
	talked about that earlier, nobody's come up with any better way.
	Gold is very, very spread out in a very thin way within rocks, gold-bearing ore.
	Very seldom does it wash down in lumps.
	It flecks at most even when you placer mine it, so it's hard to get to.
	But the mining of ore, you just have to go out, dig out a big bunch of rocks, you have
	to ship them somewhere, you have to smelt them, you have to process them to get the
	gold out.
	And as far as we know, there's no better way and maybe as far as they knew, there was no
	That's what it appears to be.
	I asked you a little while ago if your main premise about our origins could be correct, These specifics that you think are true might not be.
	And I guess I ask that because your main premise to me seems wholly logical, but the details seem to be as much of a reach as anybody else's theory.
	Well, all I can say to that, Art, is that you go by, you dance with the one that brung you.
	You go with what the Sumerians say.
	The Sumerians say this now.
	Were they wrong?
	Were they misinformed?
	I don't know.
	I don't think so.
	We certainly do have ancient mines dug in South Africa and Southern Africa, that area that go back as much as 100,000 years as far as the testing that they could do on them.
	Now, that's hard to imagine who would be digging deep holes in the ground 100,000 years ago, but nonetheless, that's what some of those ancient mines seem to indicate.
	so we just have to go with some straight ahead facts and some looking at them in an elliptical
	way but adding them all up to say well this does seem to be the picture that they were
	presenting to us and there is some evidence, circumstantial or whatever, that indicates
	that this is the story and I'm not in a position to second guess them and I just go with what
	the Sumerians wrote and I'm prepared to believe that they had no reason to lie about it and
	I'm also prepared to believe that the Anunnaki had no reason to lie to them and that they
	told it to us as best they understood it. Now if it's some big cosmic prank on me, well
	okay then I fell for it but I think they were telling us the best they could what they understood
	to be the truth in the Sumerian.
	in their time and their circumstances as i think we try to do in our historical records
	and whether we are going to be distorted as a bunch of myth-telling trunkard fools drug takers or whatever by
	future generations i don't know because that's what uh... samarians are taken to be now just people who didn't
	have any idea what the truth was in they were just living in some kind of cloud
	land i don't i don't think that's true i think they were just
	telling the truth as best they do it yes but look how revisionist we've been
	well you know the old churchill thing history is a fable agreed upon
	and uh... that may well be true but as far as the details go until somebody comes forth
	with better details that make more sense this is all we have
	And again, let me just say, Zechariah Sitchin's work is really the first shot out of the box here as far as this new paradigm that I think we're moving toward, and I think that In due time, this new paradigm, for as strange and bizarre and unusual as it sounds right now, because it's brand new, relatively speaking, is going to, in very short order, I think, take over as people begin to look at the facts.
	They begin to examine Zechariah Sitchin's work, the work of Alan Alford, my own work, the work of others who are going to come behind us.
	It stacks up.
	I guarantee you, when you see my slide presentation, or when you read my book or any of those other You come away saying, you know, this makes a lot more sense.
	And it really does.
	All right.
	And over time, I think the logic of it is just going to overwhelm the resistance and the strangeness of the idea.
	All right.
	Wild Card Line, you're on the air with Lloyd Pye.
	Good morning.
	Good morning, gentlemen.
	Hi.
	Where are you?
	This is Jason in Encinitas.
	Yes.
	Good question for you, Lloyd.
	I'm not sure if I heard you mention this earlier.
	I heard you mention Nibiru.
	Have you followed Tom Van Flanderen's model of the exploded planet theory?
	Yes.
	And Planet X. I find this real interesting how Cydonia would relate to this model where maybe it was just a moon because there's not like mass cities all over Mars.
	There's just one that we know of, a key city, meaning it could have been a moon from a previous planet.
	So my question is, Do you have any knowledge of this planet actually existing and maybe Earth heading down its same course where we're going to blow and boom, we'll have a moon left of remnants of Earth?
	No, I don't think that.
	And what I base it on is this.
	The drawings that we have in some of the cylinder seals of the Anunnaki indicate that the solar system was more or less as we see it now, including Mars.
	So I don't think Mars is a remnant of anything.
	I think Mars was there to begin with.
	Those cylinder seals are over 4,000 years old, so I think that's pretty much the way it was.
	This is my own opinion.
	And as far as the Cydonia being a single thing on Mars, it could have easily been, I think, an outpost, maybe.
	It could have been an area where they mined there and tapped it out, and that was the only one there.
	There are any number of theories we can throw out to speculate what it's doing there and why things are the way they are.
	I don't talk about that in my book.
	I try as best I can.
	to stick with the facts as I understand them and facts that I know and can back up.
	I can't really back that up, although I'm very fascinated with Richard Hoagland's work about Mars, and I certainly will be a listener when he's on on Friday, but I wish I could be more specific and more factual and more knowledgeable about this, but I'm just not.
	Okay.
	All right.
	East of the Rockies, you're on air with Lloyd Pye.
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	Yes, sir.
	Where are you?
	I am 80 miles east of DFW.
	That's correct, sir.
	Mr. Pye, I wanted to congratulate you and say that I really have enjoyed your program and it's the first time I've heard what you're saying since 1955.
	Really?
	My world history teacher, Louise, who's passed away about 10 years, told me the same thing that you're telling me tonight in 1955.
	Well, I'm impressed.
	And I want to know where she got the news.
	She was one of the most astute history teachers I have ever met in my life.
	She brought my grade averages up from D's and E's to A's and B's.
	She probably just studied the Sumerians, frankly.
	She was very astute on the Sumerians.
	The material's always been there.
	It's just ignored, as I said earlier, because it's so foreign to the Darwinian paradigm of simplicity leading to ever more complexity that it's
	very hard for teachers to stand up before students and say, well the reality of it is that
	the best culture walked right out of the stone age and we went on a gradual downhill
	slide into the dark ages and now we're coming back up again and we're trying to approach
	their level of awareness.
	Well I got into one heck of a fight with my biology teacher that I told him I didn't spring
	from no damn monkey.
	Well you're right in that regard.
	And Miss Mullenkamp called me crying out of the hall and said what's the matter with you?
	I said well I'll tell you what so and so said down in the hall and this is what she told
	me and then we sprang into about a week and a half study of the Sumerians and how their
	culture came into greek mythology and where the gods came from and how they
	were named and the whole thing. In other words, that teacher went down exactly
	the same road that my guest has gone down. And I think that's a verification
	at least of the validity of the theory that two would track down the same road.
	Well I think we need to give credit where it's due which is to Zechariah
	Sitchin in that regard and I think what happened is your teacher went a little
	way down the road and he went all the way to the end of the line.
	That's basically the difference.
	West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Lloyd Pye, top of the morning.
	Yeah, hi, this is Jeff in Los Angeles.
	Hi, Jeff.
	Hi.
	I felt quite frustrated, Lloyd, that you weren't able to complete a lot of your initial thoughts due to Arts Lit and Eve interruptions, but I think you're now doing a great job of answering questions for the callers.
	My questions are, number one, how is your work different from that of Arthur Horn?
	And number two, how did the humanoids living on Liburu survive with so little sunlight due to their planet orbit being so far from the sun?
	That's a question that always comes up.
	As far as Dr. Horn, My work differs from him in that I don't believe in the lizard people.
	He doesn't necessarily believe in the Anunnaki as described by the Sumerians.
	I don't really believe in the lizard people that he talks about.
	I think that's just beyond what I'm able to accept.
	The second part of your question again was?
	Well, that's one of the questions people ask regularly.
	They're not adapted, obviously, to our degree of light.
	And heat, too.
	No, well, heat you can't say, because heat is an internally directed source, and they could have plenty of heat.
	All of the outer planets have internal heat.
	They're reflecting much more heat And they're absorbing in terms of sunlight.
	So they have the same kind of internal mechanics that we have.
	That's not a problem.
	And the atmosphere is not a problem, because if you have internalized heat like that that's creating steam and all, you could have an atmosphere.
	Not a problem.
	Light is the differential.
	Now, we believe, because we have so much of it, that it's absolutely necessary.
	But in fact, there are numerous, numerous creatures living on Earth, both plant and animal, that never see a speck of sunlight.
	Those at the bottoms of the ocean, underground, in caves.
	So it's really not as necessary as we think, but an answer, a plausible answer, is that perhaps, although there's no evidence for this in the text, but perhaps while they were here, they simply did everything that they would normally do at night and they avoided the sun.
	And if that's the case, then they would have had no problem.
	They would have had approximately the same amount of light.
	They would be dealing with where they are and what they would be physiologically adapted to.
	Interesting theory.
	Thank you.
	All right.
	Thank you.
	First time caller on the line, you're on the air with Lloyd Pye.
	Good morning.
	Yes, hello.
	This is Emil out of Minneapolis, ASTP.
	Yes, sir.
	And I can see you guys got a great program.
	I listened to it quite a bit.
	But I was wondering if you guys read the book, it's the Catholic Church and Ancient Myths.
	And there's a chapter in that.
	It's by Dr. Bill Donlan.
	And there's a chapter in that where somewhere in the Vatican, They found three vials of ectoplasm in there that's supposed to be like 5,000 years old, and I was wondering if that could tie into remnants or something that was left from the Cimmerians?
	I have no idea.
	I haven't read that book.
	I don't know anything about it, and it would be absolutely foolish for me to make even a speculation about that.
	No idea at all.
	I'm sorry.
	Okay, but when you go back, Lloyd, and you look at our most ancient Religions.
	Surely there would be hints to support what you're suggesting.
	Even at the mythological level.
	What religions are you referring to?
	Well, Catholicism.
	He mentioned Catholicism.
	Yes.
	What would you find in Catholicism that would support what you've been suggesting?
	I think I would find very little in Catholicism that would support what I've been suggesting at this point, because that came much later in the game.
	I don't think Catholicism really began to take hold as a religion until, what, 200 B.C.?
	Excuse me, 200 A.D.?
	Right.
	So, Don and Aki were gone, and they weren't really a part of our lives past 2000 B.C., and they were gone for good.
	Around 200 B.C., so there's not a real connection there.
	By the time the Catholic Church began to be formed, all religion began to be formed, as I said earlier, we had been without our small g-gods for some time, and we were looking for something to fill the gap.
	They had always been there.

▲