Jimmy Corsetti and Ben van Kerkwyk challenge mainstream archaeology by linking Mauritania’s Richat Structure—with its concentric rings, gold deposits matching Mansa Musa’s wealth, and 11,600-year-old underwater slide—to Atlantis, citing Plato’s records and evidence like Mount Kusi’s truncated lava flows. They argue Egypt’s precision-engineered stone vases (flat to three-thousandths of an inch) and 1,200-ton obelisks suggest lost advanced civilizations erased by Younger Dryas floods or pole shifts, while academia dismisses such claims due to ideological gatekeeping. Rogan highlights censorship risks, from the Georgia Guidestones’ suspicious destruction to TikTok’s data harvesting, as platforms like YouTube and Rumble become vital for alternative research. Their discussion implies humanity’s focus on trivial issues may blind us to deeper existential threats buried in history. [Automatically generated summary]
Spectacular about this is that it just so happens to match more than a dozen striking similarities to what Plato had described as the lost ancient capital city of Atlantis I almost feel like we're not going to do your video justice by just talking about it because the video is so good and you go into so many details by the end of it my jaw was dropped I was like holy shit like from what you had the last time you were on the podcast to what you put out now It's even more compelling.
It was said to have mountains to the north, and you just so happen to have mountains called the Atlas Mountain Chain, which Atlas was said to be the very first king of Atlantis.
And what's interesting is that the very first known king of Mauritania, which is where the Rishat structure is located, is also their very first known king was also named Atlas.
And though I'm not saying that that's the same individual, but what we do today is we pass down names, right?
Like people like, oh, my dad's name's John, and so is my son.
And so it's another striking similarity, but it goes further than that.
Like there's geological similarities, such as the fact that Atlantis was said to be made up of red, black, and white colored stone, which is another similarity you see at the Rishat structure.
It was said to have an abundance of gold and that the outer walls were lined with it.
And it turns out that Mauritania is loaded with gold.
And not only that, the richest person ever known to exist in all of mankind is Mansa Musa of the Mali Empire, which consisted partly of modern-day Mauritania.
And he was so rich from gold that he would be richer than Elon Musk and like Bezos combined almost.
Like many unfathomable amount of billions of dollars.
There was said to be an abundance of elephants, which is one reason why to suggest that Atlantis would have been in Africa is because, well, besides the fact that elephants are known to be throughout Africa, there used to be in Mauritania.
unfortunately pretty much extinct there today.
But another little detail that most people aren't aware of because they think of Atlantis like, oh, it must be at the bottom of the ocean.
Well, that's not exactly how Plato worded it.
He did describe that the aftermath of Atlantis followed a catastrophic event involving water is that what was left of Atlantis was reeds of grass and a shoal of mud that prevented ships from navigating to and from.
And what people don't realize is that Sahara Africa up until about 4,500 to 5,000 years ago was totally green.
It was tropical.
It had the largest network or one of the largest networks of rivers ever known to exist.
It had the largest freshwater lake ever known to exist, which is Mega Lake Chad, which just to put this into perspective, it is if you take all the North American Great Lakes combined, that's 94,000 square miles of surface area, whereas Mega Lake Chad was 139,000.
Additionally, Atlantis, the capital, was said to have a river that went just north of it or next to it, and the Tamanrasat River— Went right through the Rishat structure or just north of it, went all the way to the Atlas Mountains that I described, which is in modern-day Morocco.
And the evidence is that it existed at that same period of time when Atlantis was said to be around 11,600 years ago prior to its destruction.
Up until about 5,000 years ago.
So going back to my point, like a lot of people see the Sahara Desert and they don't realize that this place was unbelievably different than it is today.
And one of the things that's so important is that I know some people listening will, you know, they hear Atlantis, they think, oh, it didn't exist.
Whether it existed or not, the evidence that we're going to chat about today to show you that there is conclusive evidence, I would say, that catastrophic water erosion that the ocean had blasted through the Sahara Tens of millions of years more recently than previously known.
According to the science, 56 to 66 million years ago was the time of the Trans-Saharan Seaway, which was the last time the ocean blasted through it.
However, there are a few lines of evidence that say otherwise.
Besides the fact that anyone that looks at the Sahara Desert through the Google Earth app, you can see fluvial striations, which is signature traits of water erosion.
This is confirmed by other experts that look into these things.
I like to mention Randall Carlson.
He's someone that's analyzed the area and has said, yes, this is catastrophic water erosion.
So one of the signature lines of evidence that suggests that the ocean blasted through it far more recently was the largest volcano in Sahara Africa is in Chad.
It's Mount Kusi.
There's a lava flow that goes through it that is dated at 12,000 or so years ago.
The volcano itself is supposed to be somewhere between 1.2 and 2.3 million years ago.
But if you look at Mount Kusi to the south, you can see, and I don't know, Jamie, if you're able to bring up one of the photos of that mountain chain, but you can see that the water erosion cuts off that lava flow directly to the south.
Yeah, keep going over.
A little bit right there.
Okay.
So go over a couple.
That is the mountain.
And you can see those striations, which are signature traits of water erosion.
All those white blemishes are salt.
And I should point out real quick that it is a confirmed fact that much of the Sahara has surface level salt.
And you see those white blemishes on that mountain?
That is what I suggest because in the middle of that caldera, you have huge patches of salt.
And is it reasonable to suggest that that salt existed before the creation of that volcano?
Because it seems to me that all that molten, that salt would burn up.
And not only that, there is scientific studies that show that there are gastropods, which are sea life, that existed inside that caldera that used to be a thousand feet deep and dried up just a few thousand years ago.
So the fact that this is an 11,000-foot volcano that has salt on top of it, I would say, is corresponding evidence that the ocean had once went through it.
And if you go over a couple more images, Jamie, you will see far better images that show you that...
Okay, so notice how it cuts off.
You see to the black right here?
That is a lava flow that's dated around 12,000 or so years ago.
And regardless of whether the volcano or that water erosion happened 12,000 years ago or 2 million years ago, that in itself is evidence that the ocean blasted through the Sahara Desert literally 50 to 60 million years more recently than previously known— And the implications of this, as far as climate science, as far as the topic of geology and cataclysms, cannot be overstated.
I mean, does it not look like that lava flow was cut off by whatever type of erosion that is?
No, I was going to say something that you mentioned about the origin of, I guess, Plato's description.
You said it was mud and grasses was like the aftermath.
It's interesting.
the topic I've been exploring recently is that that does match some of the translations of origin stories from the ancient Egyptians.
So it's like that the temple of Horus at Edfu, it's this amazing structure, but it's literally covered head to toe in hieroglyphs and descriptions and all these types of things.
But one of the stories in the translations they do talk about is this, what they would call the original point or the primordial mound, the primordial island.
They describe it as being an island that was surrounded by water that was sinking and essentially these reeds that were growing on it that created a falcon's perch.
And then the god, it was either Horus or Hurun, one of the falcon gods, alights on this perch and then gains divinity.
But as part of that story, I mean, and then he goes and forms Kemet, essentially the motherland Egypt.
And it's this tale of them, I guess their civilization moving and migrating to this new land.
But they do talk about a whole stack of unknown gods and a whole culture that existed before that.
It's an interesting correlation.
It's something that Graham Hancock speculated about in his work with the Temple of Horus at Edfu.
They also have catastrophic flood myths and things like this, but it may be that whatever prior civilization, and that might have been where the dynastic Egyptians actually got their origins from, because it seems clear that they've inherited some things from the past.
Yeah, it was the priests of the delta that told Solon.
And they said that, yeah, so 6,000 years – or 9,000 years, sorry, prior to the time of Solon was when the sinking of this city happened.
And that works out to be 9,000 years.
600 BC, so 11,600 years ago, which is bang on exactly where now the geological evidence points to basically the end of the Younger Dryas cataclysms.
We know something happened at the start at like 12,800, 900 years, and then 11,600 years ago was that end of the Younger Dryas that brought us up out of the cold spell and into the Holocene.
And if you think about the people that lived 1,000 years ago and how they lived.
You know, all of this that I've learned from Graham Hancock and from Randall Carlson and from you guys, all of it is so astonishing and it all fits into place.
It all makes sense.
Like, why are we so fucked up?
Like, why is civilization so wacky?
Why do we have these weird structures that no one can really explain?
And when you think about the fact that There's so much evidence that we were hit by comets, that we were hit by large objects.
Like, I didn't know about that enormous crater that's in Antarctica.
It's something plopped down in the Indian Ocean, and it washed up these mega tsunamis on the coast of Madagascar and Western Australia that we can see in satellite images today.
It's got these like 500, 600 foot high chevrons from where the water went miles inland.
And they found organic material from the seabed in these chevrons, and then they date that with carbon-14 dating, and they put it right at 5,000 years ago, so 2,500 around that time BC, which is actually a really interesting date when you consider some of the publications that we rely on in our modern civilization today.
The Bible, the Old Testament, wasn't written long after that.
And if you think about where the Indian Ocean is, that could have been the source of the biblical flood.
That would have washed up north into the Persian Gulf, flooded the hell out of that whole region.
And say, going back to the younger driest period of time, there's evidence...
When you say get whacked...
More than 30% of all landmass at that time was charred, burned.
They claim that it's more fires than existed in the time of the dinosaurs.
Now, I don't know if—that's an article I read on Science Alert.
I don't know if they can truly prove that, but if nothing else, 30% of all landmass existing today was burned and scorched to death at that period of time.
That, like, helps people to wrap their heads around, like, the world was on fire.
They estimate as part of the burning, because there was floods and fire, and this correlates to a lot of origin myths from cultures all around the world.
But yeah, 10% of the biomass, I think, is the 9% to 10%, which is an inconceivable number.
That's how much of the world was burnt, and that's now embedded in this black...
I think there's some evidence to suggest that some of these, like Derinkuyu in Turkey, in the Cappadocia region, could host tens of thousands of people.
There's massive labyrinths all over Egypt beneath Saqqara.
There's miles and miles of tunnels and catacombs.
I've been down into a bunch of them.
And even when you look at sites like Gobekli Tepe, there's been some interpretations of the artwork on that site that seems to indicate a cosmic calendar.
They're almost marking that date.
We know that the ancients were watching the sky.
They were concerned about it.
And comet mythology is a fantastic topic for Randall.
I talked with him about this quite a bit.
It wasn't seen as a pretty thing in the sky.
It was the harbinger of doom.
Comets and...
All those types of things were just seen as really bad things that they were preparing for.
But I think we survived partly because of diversity and being spread out all around the world.
There were parts of the world that weren't as badly touched, like Australia, for example.
That whole continent wasn't as badly affected as, say, the Northern Hemisphere was from the Younger Dryas.
But also caves, 100% caves and sheltered caves, those big cities that could take tens of thousands of people underground.
Something wild that it's popped back up in my head, speaking of flooding and this 11,000-year timeframe, going back to the Rishat structure, there's a study that I came across that ties into the video that we were just mentioning, that off the west coast of Sahara Africa, right in front of the Rishat structure, there is an underwater seafloor slide dated at approximately 11,000 years ago, and keyword approximately, the very symbol is in there.
So they're not entirely sure the date, but in that timeframe.
And this sediment...
Looks like in the shape that was blasted from a flood of water coming out of the Sahara, just based on the nature of the shape of it, that's more than 200 miles wide and maybe 130, 140, 150 miles from north to south.
And it's layered sentiment that is 2,000 meters, excuse me, more than a mile deep, and it's layered.
This right here.
So, one, it's corresponding evidence that a massive force of water may have blown out of the Sahara.
And the one reason why this is so significant is besides the fact that it indicates a possible flood of 11,000 years ago.
But if there was any remnants of Atlantis, if the Rishat structure was the location, this is where you would want to go looking.
I mean, it's, again, layered sentiment more than a mile deep.
The shape of Atlantis, like the concentric circles, the amount of them, earth to water, the way the representation of it as described, the mountains to the north, like everything lines up.
If people play around with this on Google Earth, you can check the elevation by using your mouse.
All the areas with all the most significant amounts of salt...
Happened to be at the lowest elevations, which I think is corresponding evidence that seawater had settled and later evaporated there.
And as you see here, you can see it rips through the entire Sahara.
And if you look at their study that's showing the Trans-Saharan Seaway of 56 to 66 million years ago, it shows that the water blasted to the south, but it does not show it going west over the Rishat.
So I feel like there was some other event, something separate that happened.
Do you want something that's going to blow your mind?
So this area right here.
Scroll in, Jamie, and you'll see we discussed this last time as being water ripples.
So remember when Graham Hancock and Randall Carlson were on your show a few years ago, and they were showing you the area of the Missoula floodplains in Montana and Washington?
So it is the entire structure from one side to the other is nearly 30 miles, but the interior structure of the concentric circles is 16 miles.
And this is one argument that's made against it, is that the size dimensions that Plato had gave Are significantly smaller.
And so – but I would make two arguments on this.
One, this is a 12,000-year-old story, and I would argue that it is impossible for over 12,000 years to carry down precise translations because of – How off is it from the translations?
Oh, significantly.
The entire site would be a small circle inside the middle of the circle.
But here's the reason why I think those dimensions are wrong, is because Atlantis was said to be busy all day and all night.
And I would compare that to any modern city today, which you could argue would be a population within the millions.
It was as small as Plato described.
It wouldn't be feasible to suggest that millions of people would have lived there.
And I'll make one other little point, which is that because many people posit that it could be in the Atlantic Ocean, like at the Azores, and I think that's a phenomenal argument for that.
But if I was to defend the Rishat, or I would say that if this was a place that was spoken from languages of all over and was said to be a trading hub, I don't think that it would be as feasible to suggest that Atlantis would be in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean as opposed to West Africa, which was green at the time, this whole area was connected by a network of rivers, which I should have some slides in there.
Yeah, but people used to take Atlantis a lot more seriously.
Something happened.
In the 1960s, there was a lot of Legitimate scientific work being done in the Azores region looking at the possibility of subversion and can there be large parts of land that sink?
And then something happened where it's like the establishment just turned on it and it became this pseudo-term and anyone who mentioned it was kind of dismissed and shaken off in the same way that they're treating guys like Hancock with his ancient Apocalypse series are now.
I don't know specifically what happened but it used to be taken a lot more seriously and there's certainly a lot of Evidence coming from prior cultures that something did exist.
And I think now we've got a massive body of evidence that suggests our history as a species and as a civilization goes way back much further than what we've thought about as being our own history since, you know, I mean, right up until 2006, we pretty much thought, nope, the last 6,000 years, that's when we stopped being cavemen and became, you know, started building cities and organized societies and things like that.
The gatekeepers of academia, you know, just the stuff that you two gentlemen put on your YouTube pages should open up fields of inquiry.
People should be reaching out to you.
They should be having you speak at universities.
They should be watching your videos.
They should be like, oh, my God.
Like, look at all this actual evidence.
Not speculation, not, like, look, you're looking at physical geological evidence, physical erosion evidence, and then all the stuff with the structure that lines up exactly with the stories of Atlantis.
But I'm like, there's so many similarities that if nothing else, it shouldn't be ignored.
The off the West Coast should be drilled and run with some LIDAR to see what's going on underneath that sediment.
And not only that, let's just pretend, okay, Atlantis never existed.
The Rishat's not it.
Well, then let's focus in then on why is this catastrophic water erosion going through the Sahara?
Sixty million years more recently than it was supposed to.
There's another image in there, Jamie, that shows where the Trans-Saharan Seaway went, and it does not reflect it going west over the Western Sahara.
So I'm like, in the context of climate science, I'm like, this should be discussed.
Why is nobody talking about the Sahara was green potentially 4,500 years ago, which is, by the way, the same alleged date as the Great Pyramid's construction in Giza, 4,500 years ago.
So check this out.
As you can see, it does not annotate the water erosion going west over the Rishat.
But as we just showed, it clearly did.
And this was based on a 20-year study.
Wonderful people did this.
I don't know.
I have no explanation for why they don't annotate it going west.
But it clearly did.
And not only that, it went east of Niger along Chad, which I showed you the water erosion along the volcano.
So what I'm suggesting is that either something else separate happened or they just missed something because Again, the Sahara is a big place and they can only search so many places.
Coming as an outsider to this, I couldn't be more surprised to see their reactions to anything alternative because it's like, wait a second.
The success of the things that we present, the success of Graham Hancock's Ancient Apocalypse show, this, any true enthusiast of ancient history or geology, This is a win-win for everybody because it's gaining interest in these unanswered questions and everybody would stand to gain from it.
Like archaeologists, if it was up to me, they'd be out there digging right now because of this stuff.
The only reason why you would do this, it's one of two things.
I've listened to their arguments, and it's either one of two—I'm just going to say it.
I'll be bold.
They're either really stupid to associate that with racism, or they're doing exactly what I see going for anyone that says something counter to a narrative, which is we need to cancel this person, shut them up.
He's so nice, and he's just so inquisitive, and he's been so courageous his entire career.
And the more time goes on, the more he's validated.
It's true, really?
Yes.
I mean, you go back to Fingerprints of the Gods.
I read about that in the 90s.
I read that book in the 90s, and that's when I got really into his stuff.
And back then, if you brought it up, people would go, oh, he's a kook.
But as the internet came about, and as more and more information became available, and then the discovery of Gobekli Tepe, Just threw the whole thing on its head.
They're just so scared that he's going to make them look like fools because they wrote these books when they had limited access to information and they made these very, like, direct assertions.
It's archaeology not being a hard science that does hypothesis experiment result like you can do in things like chemistry, for example.
These guys, they rise to their positions of powers in academia, they become their whole personal, I think, sense of self is somehow tied up around this position as an expert in this story.
And that's all it is.
Ultimately, we're looking at, we're trying to interpret the very scant evidence that is history.
We're looking through the bones of many civilizations.
People have destroyed things, rebuilt them, destroyed them, rebuilt them.
You're trying to put that together and evaluate this evidence.
And yeah, they write the textbooks and they kind of have that position of power.
And when new evidence comes along that I think threatens that, that's why you get in some way such a strong reaction because you're almost threatening the person.
The whole story, as we're told it in dynastic Egypt, just doesn't make sense from a number of different perspectives.
It's as if they...
Arose out of nowhere, like perfect, and then degraded over time.
When you think about it, things like the pyramids, I mean, those are the first pyramids ever made.
Like these massive megalithic stone pyramids that have all of these different elements of sacred geometry and precision and all these different aspects of incredible engineering built into them.
Another video of yours that I watched today was a video that showed the similarities not just between pyramids, But between construction methods all over the world in Japan, I had no idea that they had made the sarcophagus covers in Japan that were exactly the same shape as the ones they made in Egypt.
Because it's like coming up with – You know, I don't know, I don't have a good, like, if someone like this lighter, if someone, I mean, this is an unusually shaped lighter, the way the top pops, if someone just coincidentally, without any internet, came up with this on the other side of the planet, be like, how the fuck?
It's so oddly shaped, like the buttons in the same place, the lids in the same place, there's no way!
That's what it looks like to me.
And the fact that it took an enormous amount of effort to make and move and put it into place, because you're talking about incredibly heavy stone.
And the fact that these similar construction methods existed in Peru, they existed in Egypt, they existed in Japan, and we don't know how old stone is.
That's what's really wacky.
When we talk about carbon dating, they're not carbon dating stone.
They really don't know.
So even when they go back to ancient Egypt and they say, oh, we date the pyramids construction to 2500 BC, it's a fucking guess.
And literally with the Great Pyramid, very little evidence.
There's like this big statue of him that they found down in the Valley Temple, nowhere near it.
And then there's a glyph on the inside.
There's a lot of controversy around that.
But there are some of these artifacts they do for that reason because they date a lot of stuff based on the site that they found it.
So if there's organic material at the site that they found it, what's been, I've found it's kind of like a smoking gun piece in all of this, is all the vases.
So are you familiar with the incredible stone vases that they make in Egypt?
And the interesting thing about these vases, there's 50,000 plus of them were discovered beneath the Step Pyramid of Josa.
He collected them all up.
And even in the museum that's at Saqqara, they talk about, yeah, this is so, I've been down underneath the Step Pyramid.
This is a fragment of one of these vases that I found you can handle down there.
And even in the museum there, they talk about, well, he didn't have them made.
These were inherited objects from earlier times.
Like, they get the concept right.
And so these things stretch back way back into time.
There's pre-dynastic artifacts from pre-dynastic burials.
But there's always these sort of arguments, well, can you do this by hand?
Can you not...
And so recently, there's been some work done.
I've been working with a couple of guys.
The son of Christopher Dunn, who wrote some real seminal textbooks on ancient Egyptian technology, his son Alex and Nick Sierra, they're professional metrologists.
They work for Rolls-Royce in Indianapolis.
They make aerospace parts, turbine blades, things like that.
They've got their hands on a pre-gynastic Egyptian vase.
and for the first time they've actually been able to scan this thing using a structured light scanner and define the specific elements of precision on it and it's just astounding like this is this this puts the whole concept of can these even remotely been made by hand to bed like these things had to have been made on a machine and made with extreme precision because this vase that is is pre-dynastic
this is a picture of the vase here that they found in in a private collection because i should say generally archaeologists egyptologists they're not engineers they're They're not particularly interested in sort of how things were manufactured.
So what they've done is they've taken this and put this in a machine, and it's a structured light scanner, so it creates like a point cloud of different lights, and then you match a geometric shape to it, be that like a flat plane, a cylinder, a sphere, a cone, and then you can perform sort of geometric calculations on it and define things like precision.
So if you go back to that surface A, the vase lip, right?
So this is You can see down on the bottom that they've created a point cloud of the top of this lip, so the flatness, and they've called this Surface A. It's comprised of 3,813 points, and it's within three thousandths of an inch of being basically perfectly flat.
Now, what's interesting, once you start doing this, and if you go to the next one, Jamie...
Now we're looking at the lip.
So you take a cylinder and you basically take 10,000 points plus and you match the inside, the mouth of the vase to a cylinder.
And you can now measure that against the other surface.
So if you think of the top of it as being like the x-axis, this is now your y-axis.
So that first symbol here, the perpendicular symbol, what it's showing is that how perpendicular is this cylinder on its axis relative to the top of the vase, the surface A that's on the top, within one thousandth of an inch.
So it's perfectly perpendicular to within one thousandth of an inch of the top of the vase.
And then the second reading here shows you how perfectly, what's the circular error, like what's the circularity of it within thirteen thousandths of an inch of being perfectly circular.
But I'm just saying, if you think about a pottery wheel spinning, and you think about the precision involved in that, and you look at it, it's beautiful, it seems symmetrical, but nothing compared to this kind of symmetry.
So to give you an example, so a thousandth of an inch, if you take a sheet of printer paper like this, that's about seven and a half thousandths thick.
So here's an example of another perfect—I'd love to scan this one.
It's one of my favorites.
You can see the symmetry inherent in the vase just in the fact that it's sitting on almost like an eggshell.
It's so perfect.
But what that study is showing and what that precision that's now been measured is showing that, okay, these were turned on a machine— Yeah.
But when you think about the shape of the vase, it has these lug handles, right, on each side.
They've got little holes through them.
Those can't be turned.
If you think of it spinning and this is being carved by a machine, those lug handles can't be turned.
You would have to cut out a round thing around it and then take another tool and shape the lug handles without turning it.
Now, in precision manufacturing, when you introduce another tool, that introduces error, even in our best processes today, and we just don't see that on this vase.
Those lug handles are within one thousandth of an inch of being perfectly aligned with those other surfaces of the vase.
It's that relativity of one section of the vase to another that means...
A, unquestionably not possible by hand, but B, this has been designed.
Like somebody made a model of this and they had a very sophisticated bit of machinery that must have carved it out.
So this is a whole other discussion when you get into the depths of this work.
So when you look at ancient Egypt and the way it gets treated, they found tools.
And I should say it's very rare to find metal in the ancient world, right?
As soon as the Bronze Age starts, any metal, super precious, gets smelted down, turned into tools, weapons, things like that.
So it's very rare to find metal in general.
But across ancient Egypt, they found a bunch of tools.
So they found some copper chisels, bronze chisels, very primitive stuff, some wooden squares and plumb bobs, pounding stones, flint chisels.
So those are the tools that are found.
And in general, it's like the orthodoxy here and the academia will do everything they can to just hammer everything you find into this box and say, these are the tools we've found, so therefore everything's made by these tools.
Outside of that, there's a whole realm of what I would call machining marks that exist all over these sites in Egypt.
There's a place called Abusia that's been closed to the public for more than 100 years.
You have to get special permission to go there.
It's one of my favorite sites.
It's an Old Kingdom site, like Fifth Dynasty.
And all over this site, you find...
Amazing evidence for massive circular saws.
You see machining marks.
There are these tube drills.
I've got like an hour-long documentary just on the tube drills because there's been an argument going on for 150 years about the tube drills.
There is evidence for very sophisticated and powerful tools that is etched into these artifacts from the very earliest points in Egypt all over the place.
And a lot of these things, they disappear in later periods of time.
I didn't send you any of the machining marks, but I can show them to you at some point.
Yeah, so you find the tube drills are really interesting because it's a very thin tool and what they would do, they range in size from like a half inch up to nine inches.
So it's like a hollow tool that gets cut down and then you snap off the core.
Yeah.
And now Flinders Petrie, are you familiar with Petrie?
He was around like late 1800s, early 1900s.
I use his work a lot in the stuff that I do because he was the first guy...
To apply engineering principles to what we saw, which is kind of this meta point that messes with my head a bit in that it took our civilization up to the industrial age to even be able to put some of this stuff into context.
Like anyone else that looked at this stuff before we understood what machining was, what working in this stone was, what it looks like to cut stone with a circular saw.
You don't have the context to explain it.
So we had to get to the industrial age and develop sort of mass manufacture and engineering for us to even recognize what we're seeing here.
So he found there's a famous core.
It's called Petrie's Core No.
7. And it's a drill core from one of these holes.
It's in granite.
And it's located in the Petrie Museum.
And this museum is one that actually allows research appointments and you can analyze it.
And it's been analyzed several times.
There's been an argument that's been going on for literally 150 years about this call because what Petrie found and what Chris Dunn later verified, yeah, that's Petrie's call number seven, exactly, right there.
That, in fact, might even be Chris Dunn's photo.
That groove that goes around it, very obvious striations, right?
So it's been incontrovertibly shown that that's a spiral.
It's a spiral.
So it's not like just horizontal striations.
So if you can imagine the way we do it today, we have tube drills and core drills.
It spins really fast, makes lots of little marks.
There's been studies done looking at those sort of marks.
That's not what we're seeing here.
What we see here is a continuous spiral groove of at least two points, so it's a twin spiral, that runs down the length of the core.
Now, from that and analysing that, you can determine a few things statistically.
Things like how fast was this drill or how quickly was this drill penetrating the granite?
And Petrie and Dunn both analysed it and looked at it.
Well, it's about a 1 in 60 rate.
So for each, say, 60 inches of horizontal travel, it's going 1 inch into the stone.
So imagine that.
So if you take a spiral and straighten it out, and you just imagine, 60 inches this way, you're getting one inch of vertical travel.
That figure is 500 times greater than we can achieve today in terms of how fast it penetrates the granite.
Yeah, so you can go there, and I intend to do this.
I might be in the UK this year, and I intend to do that.
It's called the cotton wrap test.
You can actually, under a little microscope, run a piece of cotton through that groove.
Now, they actually took it a step further, and they made a latex molding of it, right?
And they sent it to Chris Dunn.
The Petrie Museum did this.
And then he cut reference holes in it, cut it out, and then geometrically proved, basically, that this is a spiral groove.
It starts above the line and ends below the line.
He showed that that's it.
And what I would love to see happen is we could get this core and then scan it with that structured light scanner because it will put that stuff to bed no problem.
As far as I'm concerned, this is a spiral groove.
The case has been closed, but people still argue the point.
But it's 100% an indicator of some form of technology that's far away from Beyond the primitive stuff that we attribute to the dynastic Egyptians.
So to me, it's an indicator that...
And I don't think the dynastic Egyptians, they don't describe having this type of capability.
We've never found any tools from them that can do this type of thing.
So I think what we're looking at here with dynastic Egypt is a story.
It's a longer timeline.
It's a story of inheritance.
I think they inherited a lot of artifacts, potentially some architecture, potentially parts of the pyramids or that type of thing.
And then that's where their culture grew from that.
I mean, they themselves...
Describe their history as going back nearly 40,000 years.
They themselves look at them like a legacy culture.
This is in the Palermo stone.
It's in the Turin papyrus.
The priest Minato talks about it.
There's a lot of different...
Yeah, so that actual yellow image in the center, that's the latex core.
No, up to the right.
Yeah, that one.
That's the latex core, the latex molding of core number seven.
But the crazy thing is, too, this is the only core that's really been analysed.
Like, these things, they're all over the place.
Like, lots of museums have them.
I'd love to see a body of work be built up with true analysis of it, because...
And so you can see the holes on a lot of the sites that seem to have a very clear striation on them.
Some of the tubes, the actual drill cores, if you like, seem to have it that way.
There were other techniques used.
So the argument that...
How the mainstream archaeologists describe them solving this problem is they had a copper tube and they got sand and they put a rock on top of the tube and a bow drill and they just went back and forth with this.
And they did some experiments and look, grinding works ultimately because sand has little chunks of quartz and corundum in it, but It takes days and days and days to cut this much, and the markings and the machining doesn't look anything like what you see in the ancient examples.
And what's more, and what's kind of interesting here, is that the drill cores that they found, they're tapered.
So actually, they taper in like this.
The holes are straight, the cores are tapered.
So it means that the tool itself must have had almost like a cone shape.
Because some people say, well, those lines could have been created when the tool was removed.
And I'm like, no.
If you think about a tapered tool like this, the second you take any pressure off it, the whole tool removes itself from the surface of the stone.
So those marks can't be made by withdrawal of the tool.
It's 100% something going on.
And Petrie, back in the late 1800s, was scratching his head looking at this stuff, and he goes...
There must have been a weight of two or three tons on...
He sort of said it was a jeweled tube of bronze that did this.
But he was looking at it.
He knew a mystery when he saw it, and he couldn't explain it.
There's obviously saws and tube drills that are powered by something.
Now, I think it may not just be pure friction.
There might be ultrasonics involved.
One of the whole interesting things I like about this space is it's like...
And this has to do with even the energy stuff that Randall was talking about that he's coming to talk about as well.
There are realms of science that sit outside of our understanding.
We'll know more tomorrow in 10 years, in 1,000 years about science.
So I think when we look at some of these...
These things in the past, we should be open-minded enough to consider the possibility that some of the answers may sit outside of our current perspective.
Because, you know, our tendency is to look at it all and try and...
Well, you either just get a denial and they won't address it, and you get dismissed as just being ridiculous, pseudo-archaeology, fantasy theory type thing, or in the case of the tube drills, for example, they...
This is a funny story, because they will argue that, no, no, it's not spiral.
The grooves on that thing aren't spiral.
And in fact, in the textbook, this is what Chris Dunn found out, in the textbook where they do try to address the engineering with that tube drill, they took the photo of the tube drill and they just tilted it.
Just a little bit.
So when you look at it on the page, the lines look horizontal.
They altered the photo because if you admit that that tube has a spiral It has a spiral groove on it.
Now you're admitting that they're cutting into that granite at a ridiculous rate and you can't do any of that stuff with any of the primitive tools.
It has this flow-on effect that just knocks over this house of cards that says all this stuff was built with primitive technology and the whole concept of the ancient Egyptians is off.
I think the dynastic Egyptians, they used primitive tools.
I think they just inherited a lot of stuff that's potentially a lot older.
And the proofs in the puddings with these vases, for example, those things disappear from dynastic Egypt after the 3rd, 4th dynasty.
Yeah, so there's a whole category of aspects to the discussion around ancient technology, right?
And I have to be kind of careful about what you say, oh, it is or it isn't, because in reality we really haven't analysed that many artefacts.
This vase work that we've done, first one we've actually taken a look at, that core, that's the first one and the only one that's really been analysed.
So I characterize something that's beyond the capabilities of these primitive ancient civilizations as being, okay, machining marks, tool marks, like these giant circulosaurs, tube drills.
Precision, and there's elements to precision, and one of those is symmetry.
And there's been some interesting studies done on the faces of giant statues.
One in particular is the face of Ramses.
There's a statue at Luxor.
They've since put their head back up.
It's up now 30 feet in the air on top of the statue, but it used to be on the ground.
And again, Chris Dunn was real seminal in this.
He went and took a photo, like bang on, like very front on, and then what he did was you take a copy of that photo, you make it 50% transparent, make the original 50% transparent, you take one and you flip it like on that horizontal axis, then you overlay them, right?
So you would see any, like the left to right, it's like overlaying the left side on the right side.
And it's perfect.
It's this face here, but I wonder if you can find the picture of Chris Dunn.
But it shows other aspects of, well, the same radius of tool being used to cut.
But what's interesting about the symmetry, it's perfectly symmetrical, left to right.
Now, this isn't a feature in humans.
No human is perfectly similar.
Different nostrils, different eyeballs.
It's also not something that is done in artwork.
So, you know, people often say, well, Michelangelo, you know, he carved David.
It's a beautiful statue.
I've seen it.
It's incredible.
But it's human.
It's not symmetrical.
Symmetrical is you can't, again, you can't achieve that degree of symmetry just by eyeballing it and doing it by hand.
And it's also something that's not really human.
I think some of these statues almost look a bit inhuman because of that symmetry when they're up there and they're staring at you because it's mind-blowing to actually go and look at them.
But yeah, the other aspect is that the most efficient way to create that would be to say, well, if you were going to design it in a computer, it's like, well, I'm going to create half this face in a program and map it out, and then I'm just going to reverse it and say, well, that's the other half.
It's literally the most efficient way to do it.
And that's kind of what we're seeing in some of these statues.
There's no evidence for it when we're talking about 2500 BC. Now, if there was some sort of very sophisticated civilization that was tens of thousands of years before that, and they were wiped out...
And then you're leaving behind these artifacts, and then people are claiming them as their own, and then trying to copy them.
Imitation was a huge part of it, and we even see that.
You go to the Egyptian Museum, and there's these beautiful igneous stone vases made of granite.
and right next to them in the same display because they're found in the same place there's a rough pottery vase that's not even turned just put together by hand and they've painted it with dots to make it look like granite and it's shaped the same way as the granite vase it's like that's pure imitation like this here I love this this is one of my favourite examples and this is like either first dynasty or pre-dynastic but yeah you have a hard igneous stone vessel made with perfection and right next to what's clearly an imitation of it made from pottery and they've even dotted it up to make it look like granite
All the most sophisticated artifacts, pyramids, everything, are all the oldest.
It gets worse as it goes on.
And that's not supposed to make sense.
And the last time I was on with you, Joe, I was trying to articulate a point which was that there was a middle kingdom, there was the first kingdom, and there was these periods of revolt and revolution and missing history within Egypt, and there was three different kingdoms.
years of lost history.
Another was over 200 years.
And the one point to mention about that is that that means that whoever took over and reestablished themselves, there's now no one alive at that period of time that was around prior to whatever it is that reset them, that government or whatever they were.
So if there's 126 years of lost history, no one is now alive to say what was what before that year one of 126 years, if that makes sense.
They say Gobekli Tepe was created by – they changed it, and it literally happened.
I saw this argument being made when Michael Schramm was here with Graham and Randall.
They say it's made by hunter-gatherers.
They literally changed the definition of what it means to be a hunter-gatherer rather than move that precious state of civilization starting from 6,000 years ago to 10,000 years ago with Gobekli Tepe.
I think it's ridiculous.
Gobekli Tepe, you cannot produce that type of installation without civilization.
So many things.
The specialization of allowing someone to be able to carve...
18 foot pillars that weigh several tons with high relief.
Not just that, but the fact that these animals on those pillars are 3D. You carve out the stone to remove stone so that you have these giant pillars with a lizard crawling up the side of it, but the lizard extends out from the stone.
And you need a population base to support the development of specialisation like that.
To me, it's as if they just think, well, no, these hunter-gatherers, these dudes just want to get around on the weekends, get away from the women, go and do some little carving project on the weekend.
We'll move some stones over here.
And it's not just stone circles.
There's buildings and cisterns and quarries.
There's infrastructure at these sites as well.
And they're finding more and more of them in Turkey.
And the fact that it all goes back to that day is just like, look, We should be shifting the data of civilization back.
We've shifted back our data as a species.
I mean, fossil record.
We were 190,000 years old forever.
They found a human jawbone in Morocco.
Now we're 300,000 years old.
The latest DNA evidence looking at our divergence from a common ancestor with the Neanderthals and studies on teeth morphology put us at around 800,000 to 900,000 years old.
Potentially.
That's the range of us as being sitting around here as modern humans on the planet.
You know, it's funny, Jimmy, you mentioned about an interesting point about the sediment, because I know, and Graham Hancock likes to talk about this too, underwater archaeology, the fact that sea levels have risen 300 to 400 feet.
One of the challenges with that is exactly that, is that this catastrophic flooding that happened as a result of this violent process that got us to our climate of today and our sea level, Is that, yeah, there's sediment everywhere.
So even if there were cities, there were remains.
The Younger Dryas and the Cataclysm was so violent and such a savage event that it would have just smashed stuff.
And even if there was stuff that's now underwater, it's buried in sediment.
It's not like you're going to just take pictures of the ocean floor around these continents and find lost cities.
In a lot of places, this is all going to be buried in sediment and smashed into bits.
But, I mean, just knowing the geological data, knowing that the Younger Dryas impact theory appears to be correct, knowing that there's people like Randall Carlson who have looked at the surface area of North America and shown these incredible pieces of evidence that there's massive water flooding...
That went through.
Impossible to understand.
Like, you can't comprehend the amount of water and the amount of power that would come from that water and just from being impacted by a mile-wide chunk of iron that slams into an ice cap.
The channeled scab lands is absolutely spectacular.
I've done those trips with Randall a bunch of times.
It's such an incredible landscape when you put it in that context.
And you're looking at this outflow from these floods like we've never...
Yeah, it's these massive big coolies that are 800 foot high and you're standing on top of about 300 foot of sediment at the bottom.
And it's just ripped all this basalt out and then downed.
We've dumped it out into this massive big boulder spree that's also several hundred foot deep and you've got granite from Canada that's been carried by these floods down here and deposited in these giant icebergs.
But yeah, I really think he's onto something with the major flood.
There's so many problems with the Missoula flood, the main theory of lots of little floods that this ice dam reformed and it's a good topic for Randall.
But yeah, I think it definitely happened in a real short time because...
That whole Lake Missoula area where they say was the reformation of an ice dam.
That's what they say.
It's like, well, this reformed like 95 times and these floods happened.
We have no evidence for that.
And there's nothing that ever supports that theory, least of all hydrodynamics, of trying to form an ice dam that's like 2,000 feet deep and six miles wide.
And this is like one of those things that nobody knows about, but it's a feature that's everywhere.
And so up and down, if you search for Carolina Bays, Jamie, all up and down the East Coast, it's not just the Carolina.
There are literally millions of these geological features.
They're literally bays.
They're elliptical bays.
The whole landscape's littered with them.
We started to notice them with the advent of aerial photography, and then when we started doing LIDAR flyovers, we started to see them under everything.
Millions of them.
That's on the East Coast.
Then over in Missoula, we have what's called Missoula Rainwater Basins.
So there's been some debate, and one of the mainstream opinions is that they're wind and sand, aeolian, lacustrian solution created.
None of the experiments along the lines of wind can back this up.
The interesting thing about these is that they're all oriented in a specific direction.
And what turns out is that there was a study done because a guy went and mapped out thousands of them and lined them up.
And it wasn't until he took into account the Coriolis effect, so the spin of the earth, that all of a sudden all these lines, the orientation of these bays all lined up at around Saginaw Bay, which would have been buried in ice.
So here's the theory that comes out about the Carolina Bays, is that there was a massive impact into the ice.
And it basically threw up splash damage of ice boulders the size of baseball stadiums on suborbital trajectories that then created this saturation bombardment and liquefaction of the entire East Coast and over there in Missoula of the entire land.
He's also written a paper on it and a couple of books.
But he shows that there's always been a big debate about them.
But by far the best, I think, explanation for them is the ice boulder hypothesis.
It's crazy to think about it.
Like, you know, impact happens over here.
Eight, nine, ten minutes later, you just have this rain of just destruction coming from the sky that obliterates the entire coast of the United States.
We are so vulnerable, and we like to think this is all permanent.
I mean, you think about how ridiculous human beings are.
We spend most of our lives accumulating stuff, trying to get status, trying to fuck as many people as we can and get the biggest house.
And meanwhile, there's rocks headed our way that are going 45,000 miles an hour that could exterminate 90% of the population instantaneously and completely erase every little bit of information we've ever accumulated.
All the knowledge, all of our history, all of our understanding of physics, mathematics, the astronomy, everything, Gauntz.
See ya!
Goodbye!
Welcome to being a fuckin' ape man again.
Welcome to, like, eating whatever the fuck you can get in your mouth and dying when you're twelve.
And they had had these written essentially laws for if like in the event of a cataclysm in human history was to be reset and this would be a guidance for how we should proceed.
And some people consider it to be very benign.
I don't – I wasn't a big fan of them because it basically preaches, I would say, communism.
It talks about having population control as far as not allowing – that there should be societal – Pressure as well as legal pressure on controlling how many kids people have moving forward and to keep a balance at 500 million.
They don't say reduce the population to 500 million.
That's where some of the conspiracies come in is that this is a depopulation agenda.
But the conspiracy, to answer your question, some people suspect that what if – because there's a lot of talk today about people wanting to reduce population and we're destroying the earth – that what if the powers that be that did create them purposely – If they're under – that way, if they're under their plan, they'd want to destroy them, remove that evidence, and pretend those Guidestones didn't even exist in the first place and remove that time capsule.
This is complete conspiracy.
I don't know what I'm talking about, but what I do find interesting – What is this?
Yeah, books and clicking around the internet, Googling Wikipedia, YouTube, whatever.
Twitter can be interesting.
I think there was probably something significant that happened in the last Ice Age, because we don't see any evidence of writing.
I'm using Ice Age in the colloquial term of when it was very snowy and where the glaciers came down far and where summer was short and winter was very long.
And that was about 10,000 years ago.
So...
Something happened around, I think, around that ice age that, because we see no writing, no writing before that ice age.
And we start to see writing pop up in multiple places on Earth after the most recent colloquially termed ice age.
So, yeah.
But like I said, there have been times when Earth has been extremely tropical and where it's been a snowball. um But these tend to occur over very long periods of time.
The global warming thing we're talking about here...
For such an unbelievably smart individual and as rich and powerful as he is, I look at these topics that we're into, cataclysms, Younger Dryas, lost ancient technology.
They say that the last one was like 778,000 years ago and we're more – we're like something like 200,000 years overdue.
But the Adam and Eve story, the theory of that is that these – it happens in cycles of 6,500 years and that it's a 90-degree flip.
But six days later or on the seventh day, it corrects itself.
It's a planet flip 90 degree and that because of it, the Earth essentially does a standstill.
The sun will be direct – will basically stay in the same spot causing heating like we've never experienced and that the wind and the waters continue with their momentum because essentially the wind travels at approximately 1,000 miles an hour at the equator.
So the theory is that when that event happens, it's going to be cataclysmic.
And here's the wild thing is that in that document it says a continental-sized tsunami being two miles high.
Well, I showed you the Emikusi volcano in Africa in the Sahara, which is at 11,300 feet that has salt as well as evidence of gastropods.
If you look at the Bible involving revelations and it's saying six days on the seventh day God rested, in that document it says six days things start simmering down a bit and by day seven things are starting over new.
So, real quick, the part that sets me off about this is that any article you ever read on this, it makes it crystal clear that this will not be apocalyptic.
Maybe we'll have some...
No, we'll potentially have some satellite communication issues that could affect our power grid and telecommunication systems, and that's going to be unfortunate.
But don't worry, it's not a doomsday.
I'm like, okay, first of all, if the grid goes down, that is doomsday.
But number two, they don't know what they're talking about because they claim that the geomagnetic pole shift is because of the interior, whether it's the iron core or whatever it is, the molten core, does a shift, and because of it, that's why the compass will flip.
But I'm like, if you look at the nature of earthquakes, some originate in the crust, others originate in the mantle, in the parts that aren't solid.
So I'm like, if you're saying that the interior that is molten does a shift, why on earth would you suggest that it wouldn't cause earthquakes or volcanic activity on the surface?
So I feel like every article I ever read on geomagnetic pole shifts, they go out of their way to say, don't worry, it's fine.
And I'm like, but yet the evidence shows that it's accelerating.
Back in just the 1990s, it was traveling the pole.
The North Pole was transitioning at 10 miles a year.
Now it's at 40 or almost 40 miles.
It's accelerating.
And in Adam and Eve's story, it talks about – actually, no, not the Adam and Eve story.
There was a documentary on NOVA years ago that the evidence shows that when they've studied all their other volcanic rock – For prior known pole shifts, because keep in mind, there's hundreds that are known.
This has happened throughout millions and millions of years.
This is mainstream science.
The poles do flip.
But it's not that the Earth flips over.
It's that the inside core does, and so your magnetic compass will flip.
So we know two things right now, is that the pole is moving...
So I think even the South Pole might be off of Antarctica at this point, the magnetic south.
And then the magnetic field consequently to this movement is weakening.
So we know our magnetic field, and that's where a lot of that danger is going to come from, is if the magnetic field keeps weakening, now everything cosmically that happens is going to hit the Earth, and particularly us with our electronics, it's all going to get...
More easily smashed because the magnetic field is what protects us from solar flares and cosmic radiation and all this stuff.
So as the field and the acceleration of that weakening of the field, sorry, is accelerating.
So it's getting weaker faster.
So we seem to be heading towards an unknown or undetermined time where the poles may shift.
Like the polarity of the Earth will shift, yeah, and the compass is...
And according to every article I ever read, like, oh, don't worry, it's probably another thousand years.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
It's accelerating.
And if you look, there's a – you don't have to Google this, Jamie.
I don't know what the – there's a mountain chain in eastern Oregon where it's the evidence of a pole shift, that there was a volcano that was active during the shift.
And if you take a compass along the volcanic rock, the compass will slowly start to change.
And so wherever like pottery or volcanic rock solidifies, that wherever the North Pole is at that time, it's an imprint.
And the compass will continue to show that.
It's really fun.
Take a compass around volcanic rock and it will move the compass to wherever the North Pole was then.
But here's the interesting part is that what it shows is that the pole shift starts slow and then they accelerate to the point where the day that it happens, you could potentially see the compass slowly moving.
And then when you go back to this Adam and Eve story talking about the pole shift, they say that the event happens in approximately a quarter of a day, so six hours.
So it's like it starts – it comes out of nowhere.
And I'm like, what if – I'm into the cosmic impact.
There's unbelievable evidence that definitely happened.
But there's other things that happen on Earth, whether it's supervolcanoes.
What if that's related to pole shifts as well?
And the reason why the evidence wouldn't be necessarily that we couldn't find it is because if the Adam and Eve story, if the details discussed in it are accurate, the reason why we're not seeing the evidence of it is because it flips right back and thus masks the evidence that it ever happened.
And what Randall Carlson said that really freaked me out, he goes, global warming's not scary.
He goes, global cooling.
That's what's really scary.
But we're so concerned with our own guilt and impact because of industrialized society and what sort of...
You know impact we're having on the climate and the earth and our air and and then there's this narrative that just gets repeated over and over and over again this fear-mongering and everyone gets freaked out it's not to say that we aren't polluting we certainly are not to say that we shouldn't improve we certainly should but if the fucking magnetic poles might shift and we might get hit by a giant rock from space we might have bigger problems And we're going to be concentrating on nonsense,
which is really par for the course with human beings.
We're going to be concentrating on these things that we're really not going to fix over the short term when something might happen that makes all of it a moot point.
Because the climate change that we're going to get from, yeah, catastrophic impact or any of these other events that inject kind of energy in from the exterior system – I mean, just all of this current discussion pales into nothingness.
We're lucky that the last essentially 10,000 years, with a couple little blips, things like Burkle Crater, we've had really calm, pleasant weather for most of it.
I mean, that's why our civilization has risen.
Because if you look at the temperature record and the swings from...
Cold to even colder and back again.
I mean, it's up and down.
There was all sorts of nasty things happening more than 10,000 years ago.
And ever since then, it's this pretty straight line.
It's the reason that we're a civilization now.
And because we think in such short-term timeframes, human lifetimes, or even just a couple hundred years, we just ignore that stuff.
But yeah, if you extend the timeline out far enough, these things are going to happen again.
And we should probably be a bit more conscious of them.
If there's enough smart people, they should be investigating this.
I'm like, what does Elon know?
What do other people know?
Some people speculate that the reason for such brazen, poor behavior involving spending with the government and the economy and the U.S. dollar and all these things, some speculate, there's a total conspiracy, that the powers that be know something's coming, and so they're just going to keep things going until then.
Because the way things are being run, it makes no sense.
I mean, that's also the Cheyenne Mountain, and that's where all the nuclear command is and stuff.
And they've been...
From sources unknown, I can also tell you that at some point I've eyeballed this like an RFP, Request for Proposal, for people to develop basically drone systems.
You remember the movie Prometheus where they threw the drones up in the internet channels?
There was an RFP for people to develop tech like that because the government was interesting.
The premise was that they wanted to be able to fight in underground cities.
We want to be able to map terrain and have these drones that can navigate in underground space without GPS and map the environment because it's the combat situation was fighting in underground cities.
And then how long before we start figuring out phones again after that?
How many thousands of years?
That's what's really crazy to think of.
If things get knocked into the Stone Age, like if you go back to the sophistication of ancient Egypt and you think about what the civilization could have been like, I mean you're just speculating, you're just trying to just imagine how they could have moved these 500-ton stone blocks, 500 miles.
You're putting all these things into your mind.
And then say, how long does it take to get from that If you knock back into barbarians, how long does it take to get from that to where we are now?
If you think about how absolutely fucking ruthless people were 2,000 years ago, doesn't it kind of make sense that those are the ones that made it through and then it took a long time before they calmed the fuck down?
So if you go back to, you know, whatever it was, the sophistication level that people were at when they built ancient Egypt, let's just speculate that it was 20,000 years ago.
And you think about how much they had to endure to get to that point and how much they had to...
I mean, there's real evidence, and if you especially pay attention to the work of people like Steven Pinker, that over time there's been less violence, less...
Less crime, less everything.
Civilization has gotten better.
We are calming down from now versus the way we were 2,000 years ago, 1,000 years ago, 500 years ago.
Things are moving in the correct direction.
But how long does it take before you have this level of sophistication that allows you to get to the pyramids?
And then we're nowhere near that now.
So even on the most conservative speculation that the Great Pyramid is only 4,500 years ago, we're not even anywhere near that now.
We're nowhere near the level of sophistication that it took them to build.
And we're just guessing as to what kind of technology they had available to them.
And as you pointed out, with these vases and with just the alignment to the constellations, the sophistication that's involved in the construction to get stones that are tons of stone that you can't even get a razor blade in between.
But then you have at least three or four unfinished, like, finished statues that were 1,000 tons, single-piece granite.
And one of them's in a place called Tannis, which is way up in the north in the delta.
That's more than 1,000 miles from where that stone came from.
And then moving that thing, I mean, it's 1,000...
It was around 1,000 tons finished, single-piece granite.
So moving it, you may be at 1,500 tons or more, like, moving that.
There's...
There's a quarry in Egypt, I think it's called the Minya Quarry, which has these blocks.
They're still attached, where they've cut these big blocks out, and there's an image of what looks like a giant pharaoh that's been carved on top of it.
They're made from limestone.
Now, maybe they were never intended to be blocks, or maybe they were never intended to be finished, but if you assume they're blocks, these two blocks weigh, I think it's 3,500 and 5,000 tons apiece, based on the density of limestone in that region.
They're not disconnected, but that's...
That's the scale.
We know there's objects up to like 1,200 tons, but the fact that they moved them a thousand miles, and we have examples.
So like in the 1700s, they took a big lump of, I think it's granite or something like that, from Finland, and they shipped it to St. Petersburg, and they carved it into a statue.
It's still there today.
It's the Thunderstone.
It's an edifice.
It weighed...
That's it now.
Yeah, that's the finished one.
This image here is the right one, yeah.
So this is how they did it in the 1700s, the Thunderstone.
And they moved it around 100, 150 metres a day.
It took them forever.
And the only way they did this was by basically sinking giant logs into the ground to give them a leverage point for these cap stands.
And they'd move a system of rails, big steel rails with steel ball bearings, I think we're good to go.
I think we're good to go.
They had to construct a giant barge, like a huge barge, and on each side of the barge they would tie up three warships just to try and keep it stable.
It's about the same size, same mass as the obelisk that's sitting in this mountainous quarry in Egypt, in Aswan.
It's still in the ground.
It's like 1,200 tons of granite.
And you're expected to believe that they somehow were going to lift this thing up out of a quarry, over these basically big hills and mountains of granite, And put it on a little ship that's narrowed in this, they call it the harbor there, and it's this tiny little space.
I'm like, you're absolutely delusional if you think this was a simple task that could be achieved with primitive methods, and then ship that thing a thousand miles somewhere.
I think there's connections possibly to gravity manipulation.
I think anti-gravity had to have it play a part in moving some of this stuff.
I actually think there's some connections to some of the work that's being done with this plasmoid implosion technology, the stuff that Randall's been looking into that's coming back to talk a little bit about.
The relationship and the sacred geometry aspects of that are similar to the things that we see In some of these cultures in the past, so that may potentially have something to do with the methods that were used in the past, but I'm convinced it was a form of advanced technology.
Now, whether it's our form of technology, because let's face it, we can do things like that today, but it takes hydraulics and diesel powers and cranes and all that stuff.
They may have had an entirely different avenue of tech, and that you open up in the realm of resonance and acoustics and anti-gravity, I think...
Resonance in particular might have played a strong role because that's certainly a feature that you see in some of these older structures, whether it's an accident or not, but some of them are incredibly resonant.
The Great Pyramid generates a tone just on its own that comes from the earth in their...
If you're quiet enough, you can, but it's certainly been picked up in a whole number of different experiments where they're measuring the tone.
The whole structure does generate a low tone.
It's an interesting thing.
A lot of these places typically have a connection to underground water as well.
We know there's water beneath the Giza Plateau.
Places like the Coricancha in Peru, which is also a giant megalithic building.
There's an underwater river near there.
We always see some form of flowing water associated with it.
Whether or not that has something to do with it, I don't know.
But it's just in that realm of...
I think it's the answers lay in realms of science that are outside of our current understanding that we should be approaching with an open mind because we might ultimately learn something from it if we do.
Instead of just dismissing it, putting it in a box and saying...
You know what?
We're superior to every civilization that's lived before.
And by the way, a quick little bizarre similarity when you're mentioning anti-gravity, that Dr. Chan Thomas, who wrote the Adam Neve story, he was researching anti-gravity for McDonnell Douglas back in the 60s.
A recent study published on Ancient Origins website claims that the ancient Egyptians benefited from the sound in the construction of the Great Pyramid of Giza and relied on the discovery of a dead end in the rock inside the pyramid room as a tube of acoustic resonance that generates ultrasonic waves at a base frequency within 5 hertz.
This raises the questions of the importance of ultrasound for the ancients and can we find the use of sound waves between ancient cultures elsewhere in the world?
The Serapium is an incredible site that houses like 25 of the biggest stone boxes you'll ever see.
It's just one spot and they're the biggest ones.
Some of them are up to like 70 tons with their lids 30 tons.
And I've been there with some people that have been measuring like the frequency resonance range inside there.
So what range are you generating standing waves?
And they all seem to have a very similar resonance tone to them.
So it's an interesting experiment.
Like you can stand inside a water tank or a concrete room and find a resonance.
But it's interesting to go and actually analyze those aspects of these ancient structures and to speculate maybe has this got anything to do with what they were made for?
because these are giant precision-made boxes made from cyanide and granite that are perfectly flat and square, and they're just massively solid.
They went to tremendous effort to remove imperfections from the stone, no cracks, almost like they didn't want the damn things to shake apart or vibrate.
Like the actual archaeologists that want to lock this down and try to come up with some sort of a conventional reason and, you know, some sort of an explanation that we can all get behind.
Oh, they used pulleys and pushed them on logs.
Like, shut the fuck up!
Just shut the fuck up.
What you're saying doesn't even make any goddamn sense.
It's way more likely that there was incredibly sophisticated technology that existed and it's way more likely, in face of the evidence of the Younger Dryas Impact Theory, that that shit was wiped out.
And that we're talking about a really advanced civilization that lived a long time ago, that's more advanced than we are today, but moved in a different direction.
Like, we moved in the direction of combustion engines and electronics, and they moved in some other direction, but achieved...
Maybe many thousands of years more sophistication in that direction than we have with our internal combustion engines and electricity and all the shit that we use.
And it's important for people to understand that these primitive methods that are suggested and pushed very hard by the, quote, mainstream, they don't test any of these.
Like, show me them moving, you know, a thousand ton stone on logs.
Let's see that.
They don't show, they've never cut one single box, like you said, in half, or even completed one single average-sized box, or any box.
When I say box, I'm talking about a stone block with the primitive methods.
There's also no evidence for it in dynastic Egypt.
That's the other thing.
The earliest parts of...
Look, the crazy thing about it is in the Old Kingdom, the mainstream archaeologists...
There's some disagreement on this, but in general, they don't grant them the ability to even quarry granite.
They say that in the old kingdom, they couldn't quarry granite.
They made all of their granite artifacts from surface granite.
It's the craziest thing.
No use of the wheel.
Never in the Egyptian civilization did they grant them the use of the pulley.
It was literally human horsepower, ropes, levers, and wooden sleds.
That's it.
The Romans came along, and the Greeks, and they started using pulleys and force multipliers and stuff like that, but there's no evidence for that in the dynastic Egyptian civilization.
Well, that's a whole other mystery, particularly in the quarry.
We can see different technologies and tool marks.
We know, and this is funny, because in the New Kingdom, the 19th dynasty, there's Ramses the Great, the greatest pharaoh of all time, right?
He was quarrying granite from the middle pyramid for his own projects.
He was taking the granite casing blocks...
And the way they did it, and the way that they still do it to some extent, is they would hammer out with a flint chisel or even with steel.
You'd hammer away, you make a little groove in the granite, you smash wood into it, you make all these grooves, you wet the wood, and you split the stone, right?
Eventually you hammer out it with chisels, you wet the wood, all this pressure gets on it.
Your object is to split a piece of stone, crack it off, and then I take that piece of stone.
And you see this mark all over the place.
You see it in the quarry.
You can even see later examples of these chisel marks where they've gotten big chisels.
And this might have even been like hundreds of years ago.
Not Egyptian civilization, but like the Persian civilization that lived there.
And then at the quarry, you have these scoop marks.
Like you have this whole other technology that exists where it's like they've scooped away at the granite with an ice cream scoop.
And it's a place where you can get in under a piece of stone.
Look, they'll tell you that it's, this skull was a, it's a pounding stone of dolarite about that big and they reckon they were doing this with it.
Which is, it doesn't make sense at about 15 different levels that I do go through in autistic detail in one of these videos.
But, you know, these scoop marks extend to like the underside of rocks where you're pounding up and it's just, it doesn't make sense.
None of this fits the evidence that gets presented.
And it, There's something else at work here.
There's some other technology that's been used to remove this granite at a rapid rate.
The scoop mark in the obelisk is a whole other mystery, but we see it also on other bits of unfinished stone.
You see scoop marks on some of the blocks on the third pyramid that are unfinished.
You see them at the Assyrian, which is a massive underground granite structure that's at the Temple of Seti I with granite blocks that weigh like 90 tons.
When we were in Egypt together and we're at Aswan, they actually have a granite block with these dolerite hammers that are, you know, round dolerite black stones that are like eight, ten pounds a pop.
And you're allowed to bang away at it.
I have video of one of my videos on YouTube.
It's me doing it.
If you ever take an 8 to 10 pound weight and start banging across, first of all, it feels like you're going to get arthritis within a few minutes.
And you see that you're only chipping away particles of dust.
It is the least feasible explanation ever.
And anyone that simply picks up one of these dolerite hammers and bangs away on a piece of granite themselves will see that it's nonsense.
And not only that, those scoop marks that you mentioned, I don't know, Jamie, if you're able to type in Aswan unfinished obelisk and you see these scoops, They're symmetrical.
It doesn't make sense that that would be done by handwork.
You have these holes around the side of it where they call them test pits because what you want to do, and this gets back to my comment about the ability to quarry granite, is the quality of granite that it takes to take an object like that or like, this is actually from a guy that went on my tour, the quality of granite that it takes to make large objects like that and a lot of the quality of granite that we see on the Giza Plateau, you're talking 30 feet.
Well, yeah, you actually get, there's a consistent line, so on the wall behind where we're standing, it's like 20 feet high, and you'll see a horizontal ridge that runs all the way down that line, underneath, and then up underneath the other piece of rock.
There's been some tests that have been done, and I get into it.
And I think it's something like, I've got to say, about 70 cubic centimeters or something like that, that you can remove with that method over a solid hour.
And I think it's either 50 or 70, but it's, put it this way, it's three quarters the volume of a golf ball.
Or two-fifths the volume of a chicken egg.
That's how much material you can remove in an hour by just non-stop pounding of granite dust.
That's the best estimate we have.
So what you've got to imagine is that entire trench around this obelisk.
Bear in mind the trench is only two-thirds as deep as it needs to be to remove a square section.
But if you filled that whole thing up with golf balls...
And added another 25%.
That's the number of hours it might take to do with that method.
Supposedly what they tell you is it developed a crack across the center and they left it there.
I think the crack could be the result of later quarrying attempts.
When they found this, it was utterly buried.
There was one small section of it poking out, but the rest of it at the bottom here was under nine meters of rubble, and there were other big quarried blocks.
I actually think this could have been here long...
I think the Egyptians were using the quarry, but I think this object could have been...
Like can soften the stone, can change the molecular bonds beneath the stone because it's made up of all these granites like a composite material made up of a bunch of different types of horn blend and crystal quartz and a bunch of stuff like that and then just being able to somehow scoop it out.
I don't know.
It's as if it looks that way when you look at it.
You've got to think it's either some sonic There's something going on that is enabling them to scoop that material out of there in an effortless fashion.
These scoops, in places, it's almost as if they articulate.
We see in places, in a recent observation we made, they're not just straight down, but they bend.
So imagine a backhoe arm.
It's digging here, and it does this.
And you see that in some of these scoops.
There's an articulation to these lines.
So maybe there was a tool that was anchored, and it almost looks like it had a very flexible tip, but it was some rotating tool that just chewed out this stone.
And that's where Chris Dunn goes with it, is there may be some sort of rotating tool.
The interesting thing about the quarry also is that there is, in an area, there is drawings on the wall of the quarry where there's all these scoop marks of these ostriches, and it matches pre-dynastic drawings.
So it's almost as if there were people in that quarry making paintings on earlier Dunn scoop marks before the dynastic civilization even started.
So...
I think that Scoop Mark stuff is absolutely a part of this ancient lost civilization.
And it's one of their working areas.
There's a tremendous value in seeing unfinished work because we get to have a little bit of insight into how did this tool potentially function?
How did it work?
You have to have an open mind to kind of look at it that way.
We see the same thing on a couple of objects that are unfinished.
There's some incontrovertible evidence for machining and things like that in other objects.
Speaking of technology, Jamie, you should Google the Khufu ship because the largest vessel that's ever been found from ancient Egypt...
A canoe.
Basically.
And there's no other depictions.
I'm not suggesting that – no one's suggesting that this boat was used to tug and move around large stones.
But it's worth mentioning that of all the descriptions that you see – or inscriptions, excuse me – this 140-foot-long boat is the largest boat ever found.
The point that's significant in this is that that is the largest boat that they've ever found.
And my point is that if they're going to claim that they were moving 100-ton stone blocks on barges, I just want to iterate that they've never found one and there was no inscription that shows anything large enough that would have done it.
There's a tomb of the nobles that's over near on the west bank of the Nile at Luxor, but it shows them literally making mud bricks and building a mud brick pyramid.
What is the speculation as to why they're different sizes?
Why did they do that?
Like one of the cool things that you showed in one of your videos which shows the similarities between the construction methods of ancient Japan and Peru and Egypt is that so many of these stones, they're like these odd shapes like jigsaw puzzles and they fit in perfectly.
But if you look at comparisons of the Indonesia pyramids and the ones in Central America and Mexico, they have similarities of the strip steps that go up the middle of it.
I use the analogy of skyscrapers, that we have skyscrapers in any major city around the world, and they're all the same based on that, yeah, you have steel and concrete and glass, but they're all different.
You have a different architect here, and they look a little different, but it's still the same thing.
But is it really feasible to say or is it a coincidence that they just happened to start building pyramids on multiple continents around the world or these polygonal walls that are – whether it's from Peru, Egypt, places in Italy, Greece.
They're not supposed to be 4,500 years old or something like that.
And the reason why this is significant is because if the Great Pyramid is 4,500 years old, my argument is that there are connections across the oceans that are not supposed to exist.
Because according to everything, they're adamant.
It wasn't until Christopher Columbus, 1492, sailed the ocean blue.
But yet there's evidence that goes back more than 1,000 years prior that suggests...
Well, it just makes sense that if they developed weapons and they developed clothing and they developed shelters and then they figured out mechanisms, if they had the sophistication to be able to construct these buildings, why wouldn't they have the sophistication to be able to construct a watch?
Look, the Vajra, which comes from the trident, or the trident comes from that.
He had that in the lower left corner of the picture.
If you were to Google Ilama's bedside photo, lower left corner, that is the symbol that comes from ancient Hindu that is supposed to be the most powerful thing in the entire universe.
Hmm.
This is a staged photo.
I don't know if Elon Musk is trolling or if he's literally...
Because he's been talking about that he thinks that his life could be in jeopardy.
He's going against the grain and all this freedom of speech stuff.
And I don't...
See, bottom left corner.
Yeah, click on that.
The Buddhism ritual object.
If you Google the Vajra, the A-J-R-A, that would...
So the fact that he has that vajra in the lower left corner...
I wonder – this is conspiracy, which I'm all into – is he essentially sending a shot off the bow to the people who he thinks are going after him, which is that I have knowledge of something involving – because here we are.
We have Randall Carlson.
You bring him back on.
There's all this speculation that there has been a limitless energy device that has come from the ancients that has been essentially redeveloped.
And then in a short period of time, you have Elon Musk posting this picture while he's also talking about that he believes that his life could be at jeopardy.
He's taking certain security precautions.
This is a staged photo.
It makes no sense.
November 28, 2022, my bedside table.
This is at 3.48 a.m.
What is this?
Either he's trolling, and maybe, or is he trying...
Why would he put that Vajra right in the lower left corner?
The symbol that means that other people can correlate with a limitless free energy technology that may have once existed, and that's where the trident comes from.
Yeah, I mean, he obviously felt very compelled to buy Twitter.
I mean, it's not like...
It's not—44 billion dollars is a lot of goddamn money, and he overpaid for it, but he felt like there's a need to have some sort of an uncensored distribution of information, or at least un-government censored.
Well also when you start attributing when you put words on that like racism and you start putting those kind of accusations towards so if you watch that that special that the series and you you say oh This is racist.
You're a fucking idiot.
I mean, it's really that simple or you're a dangerous asshole who wants to change with the reality of what this guy is actually talking about and Right?
Throughout history, anyone, whether it's the Nazis, the Stalinists, the Maoists, and everyone else, anyone that's ever censored people, the people who censor other people, they're always the bad guys historically.
Same people, same argument that they made three years ago against him.
The Journal of American Archaeology, or the Society of American Archaeology, dedicated 27 pages in a journal three years ago to attacking Hancock for his book America Before.
Same accusations, same language, same people, and then I think what happened was when his show comes out and it's got You're There, I think Jordan Peterson was in one of the clips, and I think it triggered some of the more maybe left-leaning publications to go and look for what are the arguments being made against this, and then all those talking points get amplified and boosted and it becomes this much bigger thing.
Well, they're just terrified that they're losing control of the narrative.
I mean, that's the big part of it.
And that's the same problem they have with this podcast, the same problem they have with a lot of things that can become very popular that they can't control.
They just hate the fact that people are just able to discuss things openly and freely without them being in control of it and getting all their greasy fucking fingers all over stuff.
But the reality is that I look at this topic, you know, there's a niche community there into the ancients.
And whether it's archaeologists that disagree with everything we just said, or other people that agree with everything Graham Hancock says, This is a win-win for everybody.
I think this is an opportunity for people to unite under a common interest and then start exploring these topics.
For example, if I had won the lottery, I would have hired a bunch of archaeologists that are the biggest naysayers of anything that's alternative and be like, hey, here's a salary.
Let's get some blocks and let's start cutting this stuff and moving it and just experiment.
Because I think they all kind of know, and I don't think they're necessary anymore.
Thanks to people like you guys, Who have really just examined all of the actual evidence without any biases or any sort of ulterior motive and any narrative that you're trying to promote.
You're just looking at it going, what is it?
This is wild stuff.
And because of the fact that you guys exist on these platforms like YouTube, where you can get millions and millions of views, I mean, there are no mainstream archaeologists that are getting millions of views on their stuff.
So a lot of people criticize us or Graham Hancock, like, you're not archaeologists, you're not historians, you can't be trusted.
But I'm like, having outside eyes come in is so important.
Let me give you a quick little example I shared with Ben the other day.
So I came from Target, I was investigating fraud with them, busting employees that stole from the company.
And there was a story that one of the executives spoke in front of us when I was an intern.
And at that time, this is like 2013, Walmart was amping up their online presence to compete with Amazon.
And as the story goes, they hired some executive from Pepsi.
Pepsi is far more than a soda company.
It is a distributor, if it's anything.
They move product from point A to point B.
And as the story goes, this executive came in and on day one saw something, some opportunity for improvement that made significant changes with Walmart's ability to compete with Amazon and their online presence.
And it's because when you have other people coming in from outside the box, whether it's Ben coming from the tech industry and having patents with HP, should I drop a name?
Like some pretty cool stuff.
You know, here I was a number of years ago watching Graham Hancock and Randall Carlson on the Joe Rogan podcast.
And I remember like going down the rabbit hole, seeing like, OK, let me let me see if there's some truth to these these alternative theories involving bronze chisels.
chisels?
Is this feasible?
Is this feasible?
Is it not?
Is it not?
And so I'm convinced that any reasonably intelligent person that simply looks at all points on any side of it can see like, okay, you know, there is something here.
There is a mystery here.
And going back to Graham Hancock and ancient apocalypse, with all the criticism he's getting, I don't hear anybody advocating for exploring the meanie road.
I don't hear anyone asking to excavate the 25,000 year old chamber in Indonesia.
I don't hear anyone talking about anything in the show.
Look, human beings have accumulated knowledge and information over time, and the idea that there's gatekeepers to knowledge and information, that they have to come from these accredited universities, Yeah.
Yeah.
Social ideas and all the crazy shit that people it's not necessary.
There's just information and the you the what's what's happening right now with the internet is that you're it's over use The the actual amount of information is so overwhelming The idea that one group controls the access to information or what is legitimate about that information, it's not true anymore because there's so many random people that are experts and that have accumulated very Vast amounts of data,
and like you, you can just pull it off the top of your head.
You don't even have any fucking notes you're drawing from, and you're talking about all this different stuff.
I mean, how many archaeologists can do that?
And how many archaeologists can do it about these very specific aspects of this stuff, which is so confusing.
I've been contacted by students, people that I think what's happening is that because this stuff is out there and it's becoming more mainstream, they're being forced to deal with the arguments that are being raised by guys like Graham.
You have to go and account for the evidence.
You can't just dismiss it.
Which is kind of the prior generation of the old guys and the old guard now.
That's a lot of the approach they've taken.
But I'm hopeful also that, yeah, because some of these students have said who will be the establishment academics of the future and potentially also in charge of the textbooks and whatever the official story even means.
It's amazing that there's access to people like you now, that you guys have these platforms like YouTube where you can just put these videos out, and your videos have fucking millions of views, and so do yours.
Because I can channel Adam Curry for a minute and talk about when you talk about the internet and access to information outside of establishments.
One of the dangers I do see in it is the fact that we now – the internet kind of gets distilled down to these portals.
Everyone looks at it through a portal, whether that's a Google search or a Facebook or a big social media engine.
You could set up your own website outside of that, but the trick is how are people going to see it and go and look at it.
So I do see there are some efforts, and I came from that background.
You hinted at it.
I've worked in data center and cloud and – All of that for a long time.
And it's just like, that control of that information is eventually going to come down to the stuff we're seeing with the Twitterphiles now, where it's like, hey, we need to de-amplify these things.
It's at the point now people have to start, you know, this is what you do.
And like, I remember during, I hate to bring it up, but the COVID stuff.
And I remember watching every, when it was first kicking off and they were doing the White House press conferences every single day.
And I was listening to every single one of them.
Yeah.
And I started to see extremely quickly that all these – Trump would say something and then all these headlines would show up minutes later and contradict what he was saying.
And I'm like, oh, this is awesome.
Everyone's going to see very quickly that like the mainstream with their little headlines are so inaccurate.
That's not what happened.
That's not what happened at all.
In fact, what it showed me is that most people are getting all their information from mainstream headlines.
Well, it's because there's a difference between true and false, right and wrong, good versus evil.
I genuinely believe this.
And truth always comes out.
People can be had.
It's easy to lie and fool people.
But if you continue to lie, that one lie creates five more and those five lies create 25. And then before you know it, it's out of control and you can't keep up with it.
The same thing was going down to Instagram, and then apparently Zuckerberg, he shut that down.
Which, by the way, why...
I don't care about social media, but I don't have a blue checkmark on Instagram, and I don't know what it's going to take to get one, because this would allow me to DM people.
And in this world that we live in, when they're controlling information, the one thing that freaks me out about talking about history is that they usually, they, as in people who are tyrants that suppress and censor people throughout history, they go after the teachers.
They're on there.
It's more than just artists.
They'll go after the comedians.
They'll go after the teachers.
Because it's going to be complete control at a certain point where it's like, you do not get to teach.
We were talking about this last night at dinner about how, what's her face down there in New Zealand?
And then COVID came along and this opportunity to control people and a reason to do so.
We're all in danger and they exaggerate that danger greatly and use it to clamp down on you and force you into these pharmaceutical drugs that you have to take and do this and do that.
We've got to lock it home and stay here and we're going to redistribute wealth and this and that.
It's like, whoa!
You guys are fucking demons.
I didn't know you were demons.
I thought you were just governors and mayors and shit.
And shut down all the restaurants, even if it doesn't make any sense.
What I witnessed walking my dog in different neighborhoods was a lot of Carrie Lake signs.
And I didn't see one single one of Hobbs.
And Katie Hobbs, like her social media on Instagram had like 6,000 followers, like literally on the election night, compared to Carrie Lake's at like 300,000.
And I'm like, that means something.
It doesn't necessarily prove anything.
But my point is that people I was talking to, she had a huge, huge, huge following.
I think one of the problems with elections always is that you can never say there's zero fraud because no one thinks there's zero fraud.
When you say, how much election fraud is there?
It's not zero.
So what is the number?
And how much of it is Republican election fraud?
And how much of it is Democrat election fraud?
I don't know.
I remember they had that documentary on HBO back when Bush was president.
It was called Hacking Democracy.
And it was all about the Diebold voting systems and that these voting systems have been manipulated to help the Republicans win.
So there's always been this sort of There's always been this narrative that your elections are not fair, and a lot of that is being reinforced by these troll sites, these troll farms like in Macedonia, they have a bunch of them, and then Russia, and they've been doing that to try to undermine our faith in democracy forever.
A lot of people, they get their information from these websites and Facebook pages that aren't even based in America, and they're purely designed to get us upset at the election process and undermine our faith in the system.
And they found out that 20 out of the top 20 Facebook pages, that 19 of the top 20 were all Russian troll farms.
Which is all the Christian sites.
19 of the top 20 Christian sites on Facebook were trolls.
And it's like they're doing this to try to get people upset about things.
It undermines our faith in democracy, creates more chaos, makes us more easily manipulated.
It's really bad, and I really wish that we understood.
If so many people thought that Joe Biden would be a great president, well, now you know.
Now you know he's not.
And now you know he really was in mental decline.
And, well, maybe you can make a better choice in 2024 and let's sort this out.
Well, it's just like when the guy's on Twitter and he says funny shit, people can attack him and they can go after him.
That's what it's supposed to be.
It's supposed to be like he says something and then let someone from the left, let Elizabeth Warren go after him or let this person go after him.
Let him duke it out.
Don't fucking silence people.
Especially like this idea that it's dangerous to let him speak and communicate.
What about you, motherfucker?
Someone's going to say it's dangerous to have you speak.
Yes, it's going to come down to it.
They're going to keep pushing it further and further and further until you're going to have a very narrow window of communication, a very narrow lane of your ability to express yourself, and it's not going to accurately represent people, and they're going to whisper things in pubs and whisper things in coffee shops, and that's going to be the real truth.
And this is like I was saying a few moments ago, which is that for decades throughout your life, people – we didn't have the censorship.
People were allowed to say things.
In worst case scenario, they got ridiculed and laughed at and life went on and everything was fine.
The merry-go-round of life worked out just fine with everyone being able to say whatever they want to say.
And now all of a sudden it's a problem.
So they're conditioning the younger demographic to be like, you're right.
This is – This is dangerous misinformation.
The younger demographic, these Gen Zs, they don't remember what I remember before, like the days before 9-11, being a senior in high school when that went down and just how everything has slowly started changing since.
They don't understand that freedom of speech was always a thing.
Devin Nunes, the former California congressman who left office to run Donald Trump's app TrueSocial, has remained quiet as the platform continues to be plagued with issues.
I mean, think about Gab, and think about a lot of these other ones that they created, Getter.
There's a lot of them they created, they just went away.
I mean, if you got a fucking figurehead as big as Donald Trump, and he's banned from Twitter, and you say, this is the only way to get the voice of the king, and you put it on true social, people can invest in that.
And if they're gonna invest in that, they're gonna be very hesitant.
Well, how do I know he's not gonna go back to Twitter?
Well, he was not allowed to.
I mean, that's just me guessing.
I have no idea.
I'm totally talking out of my ass.
But I would imagine that he has some sort of a deal.
Also, I would imagine that if that is his company, he would be wise enough to go, you know what, this is worth nothing if I go onto Twitter.
So if I'm going to sell this one day and make a big Profit.