All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 13, 2023 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
01:12:02
Fascinating interview with Randall Carlson about lost civilizations...
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome, everyone.
This is Mike Adams here, and I'm the founder of Brighttown.com, as you probably know, the platform for free speech.
And today we have, I think, just an incredible gem of a human being who's all about not just freedom of speech, but freedom to think, the freedom to be.
And his name is Randall Carlson.
And his website is RandallCarlson.com.
Just an extraordinary individual who has dedicated many years of his life to uncovering the mysteries of human civilization, human history, and even meaning.
What does it mean to be human?
And where are we going?
And how do we survive all of the tribulations that we may face?
Mr.
Carlson, it's an honor, sir, to have you on.
I'm a great fan of your work.
I think our listeners are as well.
Welcome to this interview.
Well, thanks for having me, Mike.
And I just want to reciprocate and say I'm a great fan of yours as well.
Well, I'm humbled to hear that because I feel like your work is important and I'm just goofing around most of the time.
But you're doing real big things for humanity.
Let's talk about that.
If people go to your website right now, RandallCarlson.com, they see the Cosmic Summit.
CosmicSummit2023.com, you're a speaker there.
What is all this about?
For those who are new to you and your world, What are you talking about in a Cosmic Summit and comet impacts and things like that?
What's the big picture here?
Okay, Cosmic Summit is a conference being organized by my good friend George Howard, and he's a fellow researcher into these areas of ancient history.
So this is his first attempt to organize a conference, and he's had some good help, so I think it's going to come together really well this June.
And it's going to focus on Mostly the catastrophic history of the Earth with a kind of a special focus on the, as it's called, the Younger Dryas, which was a period that lasted from roughly 12,900 years ago to about 11,600 years ago and was a time of incredible transition, planetary transition.
And amongst the things that happened was prior to the Younger Dryas, planet Earth was in the grip, the deep grip of a Massive ice age.
If you picture North America, try to imagine an ice sheet over all of Canada, reaching from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific, from the northern United States up to the Arctic Circle, at least as big, probably bigger than the ice sheet that now covers the South Pole of Antarctica.
Mile and a half thick over central Canada, extended down into the northern United States.
At the same time, because of this extraordinary mass of ice, oh, and I should also mention that it buried northwestern Europe as well.
So, countries like all of Scandinavia buried under thousands of feet of ice.
Because of all this buildup of ice on the land, ocean levels decreased by 400 feet.
As ocean levels decrease, the coastlines migrate oceanward, right?
Right.
And expose Several million square miles of continental shelf that is now completely drowned.
Also, there were enormous numbers of megafaunal species that lived on the Earth at the time.
You know, you had the mammoths.
Very few people realize, you know, you say elephants and people think Africa or perhaps India.
There were actually four species of elephant in North America up until the Younger Dryas, which is pretty amazing when you think about it.
That is.
You know, there was the mastodons, which were separate.
The term for these elephants is proboscidians, meaning they have a long nose, right?
The trunk, right?
So you had four species of proboscidians.
They're all gone, of course.
You had You had ground sloths that were the size of elephants.
You had 600-pound beavers.
What about saber-toothed tigers?
Yes.
You had the saber-toothed cats.
You had the American Pleistocene lion that was the size of a horse.
You had the paint bear.
You had Arctodus simus, which was the giant short-faced bear, who stood six feet tall at the shoulders.
A massive bear.
Standing on his hind legs, he was up to 12 feet tall.
So this bestiary goes on and on.
So amongst other things that happened during the Younger Dryas was that there were extreme climate changes.
The climate of the Earth went spasm for about 1300 years.
It went extreme warmth, extreme cold, back and forth several times.
During this time, the ice sheets catastrophically melted away.
Ocean levels rose very quickly.
Over 100 megafaunal species disappeared in the process, were killed off, were exterminated so effectively that they completely failed to perpetuate the species.
And to put that into perspective, right now today, now megafauna is defined as any is any creature that's over about 44 kilograms in body weight, which is about 100 pounds, right?
So if you think today, if you made a list of all the animals on Earth today, let's say mammals, that are over 100 pounds in body weight on every continent, and depending exactly on how you divide up the species, there's going to be between 100 and 120 species of megafaunal animals today on Earth.
That's about the same as the number that went extinct during the Younger Dryas.
So, in other words, the mortality event was equivalent to essentially wiping out every single animal on Earth over 100 pounds in body weight, which is hard to wrap your head around.
But that's how many species did not survive these transitions.
There was also the disappearance of the so-called Clovis culture, That was quite prolific in unglaciated North America down until the Younger Dryas began at about roughly 12,900 years ago.
And then they rapidly disappeared right along with the megafauna.
So you had the disappearance of the megafauna.
You had this rapid catastrophic melting of the ice sheet, these large pulses of meltwater discharging off the ice sheets, corresponding rapid pulses of sea level rise.
You also had climate shifts up to 10 to 12 degrees centigrade, which is up to like 15 to 18 degrees Fahrenheit.
And to put it into perspective, since the Industrial Revolution began, The climate of the Earth, if we go back to the end of the Little Ice Age, 1850, 1860, climate of the Earth is warmed about a degree.
Right, because you're talking about average temperatures warming by 18 Fahrenheit.
Yes, and sometimes maybe in less than two to three years.
That's extraordinary.
So, you know, a lot of your work and the work of other scientists and colleagues of yours, and I know you've led dozens of expeditions to various regions, and I think on your website you talk about how you even give tours.
People can go with you to some of these sites, which, that would be a fascinating experience, but...
A lot of your work, as I understand it, has been trying to find the common cause or the explanation that makes sense for this.
And is that what led you to the Younger Dryas impact theory?
Or is that one of many theories or just the primary one?
Well, I would call that the primary one.
You know, I've been immersed in reading.
I love science.
I love history.
I love mythology and have, actually since I was a kid, I grew up in rural Minnesota, right at the edge of one of the great glacial lobes that ebbed and flowed right there where I lived.
And so it was a very fascinating landscape.
Did not understand it, but I certainly was fascinated by You know, Minnesota is known as the land of 10,000 lakes.
It's actually closer to 15.
That's where I grew up in Minnesota.
And closer to 15,000.
We lived on, we had property on one of those little lakes, which was just, most of those lakes are remnant meltwater puddles from the Great Glaciers melting back.
But I can still remember my dad telling me that, well, once there was, you know, all of this ice right here, and I remember him showing me a picture and a book.
I have no idea what book that was.
This was a long time ago.
And it showed the huge glaciers and everything, and it just became very...
I became fascinated with that at an early age.
And I didn't really begin to dive into it as a study until later, like was actually in my mid to late 20s.
But I kind of circled back to it because I was very fascinated with mythology and the stories of ancient cultures, legends, folklore, all of that kind of stuff.
And I began to discover that, you know, so much, and I'm sure you're aware of this, Mike, that so much of the mythology and folklore of the ages and from around the world is strikingly parallel in a lot of things.
And one of the things that really intrigued me was the stories of great catastrophes, whether it was floods, fires.
You know, the Norse tradition deals with, you know, Ragnarok, the age of fire and gravel.
Battles of the gods in the sky, you know, the Greek tales of Phaeton, you know, who fell from the heavens and set the earth on fire, Deucalion in the great floods, you know, there was Utnapishtim in the Sumerian, there was Zisathrist, of course, there was Noah.
And as I'm reading all this, I'm going, you know, how come?
And then finding out that Native Americans' tribes almost across the entire continent had legends of these great world-destroying floods in their past history.
You know, the Mayans did.
You know, I saw the correlation between the Greeks and their four ages of the world, and the Mayans had four ages of the world.
And I began to think, well, how is this, you explain this?
And that's when I discovered Some of the early catastrophist researchers like Emanuel Velikovsky and others.
There was quite a few others.
Hugh Auchincloss Brown was another one.
Charles Hapgood was another one.
This would have been in about the mid-70s.
And so I just got very interested in it.
And there was a couple of years that I spent a lot of time hiking and traveling.
Summer of 70, I'm a year out of high school, and I spent most of that summer hiking around the western states, Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, Washington.
Got very fascinated by these, the landscapes that I saw.
And I can still remember having kind of an epiphany traveling up the Columbia Gorge, which forms the, along the Columbia River, forms the border between Washington and Oregon.
And seeing these just massive landforms, like these sort of almost Delta-like formations, splayed out from the mouths of the tributary rivers.
I just remember having this impression that there was just something extraordinary that must have happened to create these landforms, because I just remember, how do you explain this, you know?
And so it was these kinds of things that just sort of marinated in my mind.
And finally, about the late 70s, I really said, I'm going to get down and try to learn about this.
So I started reading everything I could on Geology and history of, you know, ancient history.
And one of the things is when you go back to the 70s, and all the way back to the late 1800s, there was a doctrine in geology called uniformitarianism, and it rejected any ideas of catastrophe.
I want to interject a question here on that, and I'm really glad you brought that up, because what is taught to the mainstream today?
This is implied but never really proven, but it's implied, and it sounds absurd when I'm going to say it here, but it's implied that Until the invention of the combustion engine, Earth was calm, peaceful, an eternal spring.
There were no hurricanes.
There were no storms.
There were no floods, catastrophes, nothing.
Everything was cool until we started burning fossil fuels.
And then it all went to hell, basically.
We're kind of told that story.
And it's absurd, because I used to live in Wyoming.
I remember sailing along Yellowstone Lake, I believe, looking at the Grand Tetons, and I'm thinking, this couldn't have happened gradually.
You know, I mean, look at these sharp peaks.
Something thrusts them.
Upwards.
I mean, that was just an intuitive thought.
What do you think?
Well, you know, when you go back to the origins of geology in the first, really right up until post-Civil War by several decades, almost all the founding fathers of geology were catastrophists.
And they were looking at the landscape without any ideological lens.
They were just looking, just like you, looking at those mountains, looking at mountains and thinking, yeah, because...
You look at some of the mountains there, like, you know, I've spent a lot of time in the Canadian Rockies, I've spent time exploring in the Pyrenees, and you see very sharp peaks.
Well, when you study erosion, you discover that erosion is an extremely effective method of wearing down mountains.
Yet, what we're looking at is mountains, when you see, like in Canadian Rockies, one of the things that are most impressive is the overthrust mountains, where you've got A slab of mountain that might be thousands of feet thick, and it's obviously ridden up over on top of another one.
Exactly.
And if you figure this, if you go, okay, well, it's all based strictly on the rates governed by seafloor spreading, continental drift, which is what?
A centimeter, a couple of centimeters per year.
That would imply that the uplift is very slow, that the uplift is going to be the consequence of plates spreading, At a spreading center, at a converging center, they're going to collide.
One is, they're going to buckle up.
One's going to override the other one.
But see, at that rate, they should be eroding away almost as fast as they're being uplifted.
That's a really good point, yes.
Yes, so it suggests that the rate of uplift is considerably faster than the rate of erosion.
But what happened is once geology became an academic discipline in the late 1800s and early 20th century, At that point, the uniformitarian view became dogma.
It became entrenched.
Everybody from that point on, all the students coming in to learn about Earth history, We're inculcated into this idea of incrementalism, very slow, accumulated changes over long periods of time.
And that totally correlated with Darwinism, which postulated that the evolution of species was also a very slow, incremental process.
And that became so dominant and it eventually became an entrenched dogma And then so when you had people like J. Harlan Bretz, who came along in the 1920s and had studied these giant floods in eastern Washington that carved out this remarkable landscape called the Channel Scabland,
he was rejected, roundly rejected by the geological community, ridiculed and Ostracized because he was considered to be a fringe nutcase.
But wasn't a lot of that criticism based on the fact that at the time he did not have an explanation that could account for so much water?
See, that's exactly right, Mike.
That was the problem.
So he said, okay, the totality of this suite of landforms, these features that we see, Now, you might be able to explain an isolated instance, like you might be able to explain a certain kind of a gravel bar or a valley train or a pothole or a boulder deposit or a cataract, whatever it might be, isolated as the result of a gradualistic process.
But when you take the whole suite of features, it completely rules out any gradualistic process.
Yes.
So what he did was he just doggedly kept researching and documenting over a period of about 20 to 25 years.
And eventually what happened was you had younger geologists coming up who started looking at it and going, well, maybe he's got something here.
But you're right.
The criticism, the main criticism that was leveled at him was that, well, You say that there was these tremendous meltwater flows coming off the ice sheet, which was his original model.
And in some cases, these flows, in his estimation, reached 200 to 300 million cubic feet per second.
Now, it turns out that later on, when you actually had sophisticated paleohydraulic studies being done in the 70s, Peak magnitude of these floods doubled up to 700 to 800 million cubic feet per second.
How do you visualize that?
If I could interject something here, it seems to me that at the time, not only himself, but the other scientists were all looking for a source of energy within the Earth that could account for this, and they couldn't find it.
There wasn't a big enough volcano.
There wasn't a big enough thing.
But as you have pointed out, and others in your space, and the Cosmic Summit speakers, Guess where there's a ton of energy?
I mean, I don't mean a ton, but a lot.
Well, how about a hypervelocity extraterrestrial object?
Where the velocity is turned into heat energy, boom, in an instant.
So they forgot to look outside of Earth, it seems.
That's right.
That's exactly right.
And up until the 1980s, that was not really a domain of interest to most scientists.
You know what happened in 1980 was that you had three teams independently presenting papers that the Dinosaur extinction at the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary 65 or 66 million years ago was the result of a giant asteroid impact.
And that ignited a firestorm of controversy.
Firestorm, right?
Ignited this controversy that raged through the 80s.
And the critics would say, well, you know, until you lack the smoke and gun, you don't have a crater.
Until you have a crater, We're not buying into it.
So you had one team that was pretty much coming down on the volcanic side.
You had another group that was like the more protracted.
It took millions of years for the extinction to occur.
And then finally you had the group that was really believing that it was impact because they were finding the impact proxies all over the earth.
Exactly.
When you have that impact, it deposits.
The main thing they were finding was Iridium.
But then they began to find other proxies as well because All of the platinum group metals are oftentimes deposited during a cosmic impact.
And then you also have the firestorms.
And so that was one of the studies that showed that many of these boundary layers were extraordinarily enriched in soot and from fires, right?
So there had been large-scale biomass burning.
And so eventually, it was in 1991, they discovered the Cheek-Shaloub Crater, Under the Yucatan Peninsula, it's half under the Yucatan Peninsula and half under the Gulf of Mexico.
And probably, I would think one of the reasons they didn't find it was because it was so large, like they were zoomed in too much looking for things.
This thing was so huge, you couldn't see it until you looked at the whole planet and under the water, of course.
Yeah, and under like half a kilometer of limestone rock.
Interestingly, you know, when you now look at the satellite imagery, there's a ring of cenotes.
Now, cenotes are sinkholes.
And the ring of cenotes exactly defines the inner rim of the southern part of the crater.
And it's almost like a perfect half circle.
Interestingly, I think that the Mayans had some kind of insight onto that.
There is a...
I don't know if you've ever been to Chichen Itza, but there is a very interesting Mayan complex there.
But one of the things is there's a cenote called the Well of Sacrifice.
And the Mayans would hold these rituals at the Well of Sacrifice.
They would hold rituals to commemorate the end of the world.
And amongst the rituals that they do, they would make these long pipes that were hollow.
And they would carve them into the likeness of a serpent.
Now, the serpent was a very typical way of representing things in the sky.
Comet, asteroids, fireballs.
Like tails, like comet tails.
You got it, Mike.
That's exactly it.
So they had these hollow, elongated...
The mouth would be open, and what they would do is they would insert a ball of copal resin in that mouth.
They would ignite it on fire, and because it was hollow, the smoke would go through and come out the tail.
And during their rituals, they would throw these serpent-like figures into the well of sacrifice.
Wow.
They're just playing out what they saw in the sky.
Yeah, exactly.
Now, here's another thing that has always struck me as interesting.
The name of the crater itself is Cheek Shalhoub.
Now, when you look at a section of a large impact crater, say about more than 10 to 12 miles in diameter, a simple crater, a smaller one, will simply be a bowl.
I don't know if you've ever seen pictures or been to that Winslow Crater in Arizona.
There's a famous crater there, right?
It's a simple, it's 600 feet deep.
It's about a kilometer wide.
But as you get bigger, you start getting a multi-range structure.
And then if you get even bigger, you get this central uplift.
Because when the impact occurs, it compresses the ground.
And then at the same time it explodes which releases the overburden and it allows the center of the crater to spring up and it forms a central uplift peak.
And you can see that very prominently displayed in a lot of the large craters on the Moon, on Mars, even on Earth, right?
I think you can see that also in a freeze frame of a water drop.
You got it.
You got that's exactly right.
I can still remember being shown like science films in school where you would see something drop into a bowl of water or milk or whatever.
And yeah, you would get that drop that would come up Yeah.
Yeah, that reverberation.
That's exactly it.
So now get this.
The name of the crater is named after the town that's sitting right dead on the center of the crater.
Wow.
About 2,000 feet of limestone under that crater is the sharp peak of the Central Uplift, right?
Now get this, Mike.
The translation of Chicxulub is this.
Horn of the Devil.
Oh, you're kidding me.
No, I am not kidding.
I don't know how to explain that, you know, coincidence or...
I don't know how to explain that, but it's pretty bizarre when you think about it.
But one of the primary themes, as I understand it, of your work and many of your colleagues is that there were civilizations that are far more advanced than what modern science gives them credit for, more advanced in terms of astronomy.
Architecture, for example, culture, law, writing, whatever.
Obviously, construction.
I mean, look at what they left behind.
But then a lot of that knowledge was lost.
So, see, when you say that, these ancient mythological...
What would you call it?
Ceremonies or stories that they seem to have these nuggets of knowledge.
You know, to you and I, we're not surprised, but to mainstream science, they just dismiss it.
Oh, that's just coincidence.
That's just fairy tales.
But I think there's a lot more to it than that.
Oh, and I 100% agree.
And what has happened, I think, is since that early 80s, which to me was sort of the catastrophist revival that...
Now it became acceptable within mainstream science to think about catastrophes.
And at that time, it was acceptable to now think in terms of catastrophes in Earth history.
What is still controversial, though, is the role of catastrophes in human history.
Once we begin to look at it, we begin to understand that if something like the Cretaceous Tertiary event were to happen again, we would become an extinct species.
We would just go the way of the dinosaur.
However, you can have a catastrophe that's orders of magnitude less than that, that would not necessarily cause the extinction of the human species, but would certainly eliminate civilization as we know it.
Right now, if you think about the way our Civilizations are set up.
There's a lot of interconnected global networks tying everything together.
Oh yeah, highly vulnerable, few redundancies, long supply chains, all of that.
You got it.
That's right.
Yes, exactly.
So we're kind of in a position now where we're beginning to realize that we humans, with our modern brain capacity, have been around for at least a couple of hundred thousand years.
We don't really know how far back the origin of when was the first modern human set foot on the earth.
However, modern humans, homo sapiens sapiens, keeps getting pushed back further and further and further.
Now, when you get back to 150, 180,000 years ago, of course, the evidence becomes very sparse.
But all it takes is, you know, a couple of Bones, a couple of skulls, remnants of skulls.
You can reconfigure the cranial capacity and realize that, well, yeah, we don't have millions of people, the fossilized remains of millions of people from 150,000 or 200,000 years ago.
But if you've got a handful, it shows that we were there.
Yes.
The premise here, I think, of this new thinking and the new paradigm thinking is that we have to reconsider that there may have been a lot more going on in prehistory than we've previously recognized.
And when you look at the Younger Dryas, circling back to that, if you look at using as your barometer, your yardstick, for the severity of the catastrophe, if your yardstick is loss of species, Which is a direct indication of loss of habitat.
Absolutely.
You have to go back at least, at least three to three and a half million years to find something of equivalent magnitude in Earth's history.
So what that means is, is that this Younger Dryas event was probably the most severe thing that happened to this planet in at least three and a half, maybe over five million years.
Now, what that means is whatever happened during that Younger Dryas that completely changed the nature of the planet, it stands as a veil between modern history and whatever happened before.
That's the point that a lot of archaeologists and a lot of scientists are still not really cognizant of that.
And I don't necessarily blame them because I've spent almost 40 years studying catastrophism.
So I've spent thousands of hours in these landscapes.
I've read thousands of papers, right?
They haven't done that.
And because they haven't done that, they don't know how extreme these changes have been and what that would imply for whatever came before.
But even those scientists who are willing to accept, as it has gone mainstream, for example, the 65 million years ago impact, they're willing to accept that now, but then perhaps not a more recent impact or even the idea that these impacts occur with some kind of Enhance frequency, right?
They might say, well, no, we're only struck every quarter of a billion years or something.
And that's not the case at all.
And I'd like you to talk too, Randall, about the fact that if the Younger Dryas Impact Comet were hitting mostly these ice sheets, then that would explain why there are no massive land craters.
Correct?
Yes, however...
I mean, impact craters.
Impact craters, right.
In the classical sense that we think of as an impact into the ground.
Now, we have to talk a little bit about the different species of cosmic entities that could potentially collide with the Earth.
On one end of the spectrum, you've got very low-density objects like comets, which are basically about the same density as water.
They're largely frozen material.
On the other end of the spectrum, you have the iron asteroids, which, if you can imagine, in one hand, you're holding a nicely compacted snowball, and in your other hand, you're holding a piece of cast iron.
Right.
Well, and then you've got a whole gradation between those two of different species of cosmic entity, right?
So you have to take that into account when you're talking about encounters between Earth and these denizens of the deep, I like to call them, right?
You've got an iron asteroid.
It can be pretty small, and it can penetrate the full Atmospheric column, strike the ground and gouge out a deep hole like you've got there at Winslow, Arizona, right?
On the other hand, a comet is going to tend to fragment its lower density.
It's going to have a different impact regime than the iron asteroid.
So it's not only the composition and density of the impactor, it's such things as the velocity at which it's coming in, the angle of approach, whether it's perpendicular or at a steep angle.
So all of these are factors of the nature of the target rock itself.
You could have an impact over land, over the ocean, or over an ice sheet, right?
Right.
Now, if you go smaller, what happens is, you've heard of the Tunguska event of 1908 over Siberia.
That's right, the airburst.
Yes, that was an airburst.
Unlike the impact in Arizona, which was a ground-penetrating burst, the Siberian 1908 event was an airburst.
I've been very curious about these air bursts of what determines that.
I guess you're going to tell us some of that, but I've always been very curious about what determines whether something bursts in the air because it's not like it's just eroding from air friction in a gradual fashion.
It actually sort of...
Combust?
How would you explain it?
It's because it's two things.
It's the velocity.
If it's coming in straight above, it's got to go through about 12 miles of atmosphere.
If it's coming in at an angle, that could be double the amount of actual air that it's passing through.
Now, as soon as it starts entering the atmosphere, friction, you start getting friction.
And if it's moving, think about this, if it's moving at 15 to 20 miles per second, Yes.
The air doesn't really even have time to get out of the way.
It just piles up in front of it.
I liken it to doing a belly flop.
You know, if you just dive off the diving board and land with outstretched arms right on your stomach, you can feel that force when the water can't move out of the way.
It's kind of like that.
The other thing is the density.
So if it's a real dense object, it's going to be much more effective at penetrating the atmosphere, hitting the ground.
A lower density object is going to be subject to breaking up in the atmosphere.
And that's primarily what it is.
It's going to be a function of the velocity and the density of the object, right?
Here's the thing though.
You know, in trying to determine frequencies of impacts, One of the things I think that has misled the astronomers that are doing crater counting is that for every one impact into the Earth, you've probably got somewhere around 10 airbursts.
So airbursts are undoubtedly, and we know that because of taking the census of the type of objects that are flying by the Earth that we've seen out there.
We also know now that a large comet nucleus, Can fragment as it's going around, you know, usually it goes in an orbit like a ping pong between the Sun and Jupiter, and it's going to break up.
And one cometary nucleus can produce millions of smaller objects.
Now, so there are some astronomers who have been looking at this that says, well, really, the real danger is not the big single impactor.
You know, which you could say is like the T-Rex.
It's a swarm of smaller things, more like a swarm of velociraptors that come in that together can ignite a global firestorm.
And I think what we had, and I think that the evidence is pointing strongly that the Younger Dryas was triggered by Earth's encounter with The fragments of a comet undergoing breakup.
And can I ask you, for how long was that series of impacts perhaps taking place?
Are we talking over a period of weeks, months, or even longer?
Days.
Days.
Just days.
Here's a picture of this.
You've got this thing going around the Earth and the Sun.
It begins to fragment.
Well, each trip around the Sun, this clump of fragments that's the result of this breaking up, is spreading out along the path, along the orbital pathway.
Early after the breakup, it's going to be clustered.
Now, if the orbit of that Encounters or transects the orbit of the Earth.
What that means is the Earth is intersecting it.
And again, the analogy I use is that imagine the Earth is, you know, a big racetrack and there's another road that intersects it.
You're going around this racetrack and let's say that the other road is, you know, not very densely Populated by cars.
So now, however, you know that from driving yourself that there are times of day when there's more cars, other times there's less cars.
If you were going to go out and blindly go down a road and blindly go through intersections, you would probably have greater chances of survival if you were doing it at 3 a.m.
than at 5 p.m.
in the afternoon, right?
Well, think of it sort of that way.
If the Earth is crossing an orbital pathway of a disintegrating comet, it depends on the distribution of the stuff and also whether it's clustered.
And if Earth is intersecting the comet pathway, when there's a dense cluster there, the odds of some kind of an impact are going to go up, probably by orders of magnitude.
And there's evidence now that The remnant of a great comet that entered the inner solar system probably around 25,000 years ago.
And then started undergoing a succession of fragmentation events.
Now, this comet may have been 60 to 100 miles in diameter, the nucleus, which is huge for a comet.
Comet Halley, for example, is about 10 miles in diameter.
But this comet begins to break up.
Now, it goes through a series of breaks.
So you have, like, the original comet comes in.
It breaks up.
If you remember Shoemaker-Levy 9 from 1994.
I do.
I've revisited that recently.
It was torn apart by gravity, and there was a series of successive impacts that made a line of impacts on the planet.
Yes.
Now, imagine that was like the first stage disintegration of the comet nucleus.
If it had, let's say, made another close pass by Jupiter, it could have gone through a secondary or even a tertiary stage of breakup.
And each one of those 21 objects that had originally been part of a single nucleus could have each broken up into dozens or hundreds of other pieces.
And then what you would get is you would get a stream.
However, within that stream, you would not have a uniform distribution of the material.
It would be clustered in the early stages.
Eventually, yes, it's going to spread out and become more or less uniformly distributed.
But I think that this is a very close, and I almost think, Mike, it's almost like the universe was giving us an example in 1994, showing this is what happened to you guys.
Yeah, right.
And it strikes me, if you're standing on a mountain looking in the distance and you start seeing craters impacting and there's a line pointing at you...
Oh, guess what's going to happen next?
I mean, because the planet, you know, is rotating, these impacts are going to be mostly in a line, but isn't that also what is believed to have happened with the Younger Dryas impacts, that there was kind of a distribution that was, what, from Canada to the southeast, hitting Africa or the Middle East?
What is that?
Well, the proxies are being found all over, even as far south as Tierra del Fuego in Antarctica.
But that doesn't mean there was an impact there.
What that means is that the proxies are going to be microspherals and micrograins and things like that.
The radium dust is going to be lofted into the atmosphere and it's going to circulate around the planet.
What you would be looking for though, and I think this is where they've kind of missed the boat, is that if you're doing, you're looking for a typical crater form, but you're actually talking about impacts into ice sheets, well, is an impact into an ice sheet that's a half a mile thick going to have the same effect?
And I think the answer is no.
And I think having now, you know, I've traveled extensively up in Canada looking at areas that I believe were actually impact zones.
And the way I've done this is you can trace meltwater patterns to their origins.
Now, in the normal model of glacier recession, the melting of the glaciers occurs at the snout of the glacier.
It melts at the snout and then the glacier recedes backwards, right?
But when we look at the melting of the great, there were two great ice sheets over North America.
The Laurentide and the Cordierin.
The Laurentide was mostly eastern Canada, centered over what is now Hudson Bay.
Cordierin reached from northern Idaho, northern Washington, all the way up the Canadian Rockies into Alaska, right?
So it was about the size of the ice sheet that now covers Greenland.
The Laurentide was about the size of the ice sheet in Antarctica.
Okay, so you've got these two huge ice sheets, okay?
When we look at the pattern of melting, see this is one of the things that I really began to realize even in the 80s when I'm looking and doing these studies of the glacier melting, is that Oftentimes, the melting didn't come from the snout, or the terminus, as it's called, of the glacier.
It actually emanated sometimes from hundreds or even like a thousand or more miles up within the glacier mass itself.
Oh, really?
Yes.
That tells you something right there.
That tells you something right there, yes.
Wow.
So, how do you explain that?
Well, right, right.
So, there had to be melting...
Far from the boundary of it.
Yes, there had to be some source of energy to trigger that melting.
Now, could it be volcanism?
Well, we know that volcanoes under the ice sheets in Iceland can cause melting, creates a reservoir of water that can find its way typically between 20 and 30 miles through the glacier within a week or two, discharge at the At the snout of the glacier, the Icelanders call it a jokalops or an outburst flood, and it can be quite catastrophic.
But minuscule when compared to the peak discharges of the terminal ice age floods.
I was about to say earlier that, you know, when you look at 350 million cubic feet per second, that's about 10 times the combined flow of every single river on Earth.
All flowing together at once.
That's extraordinary.
There are places, and maybe at some time, Mike, you might join us.
Actually, next summer, we're going to be doing two tours, one in eastern Washington and one in northern Idaho, Montana, to try to cover this mega-flood geography.
But there's a place along the Clark Fork River, right around the Montana-Idaho border, And at that point, the water, you can actually follow, so you can see the traces of the high water mark on the mountainsides.
It was 2,100 feet deep.
It's like twice as deep as Some of the deepest, like Lake Pend Oreille in Montana is about 1,150 feet deep, I think.
And it's deep enough that the U.S. Navy tests three-quarter scale Trident submarines in that lake.
Yeah, I mean, that's crazy deep right there.
1,000 feet deep is crazy deep.
It's crazy deep.
It's crazy deep.
Yes, it is.
Tallest, you know, I live next door to Atlanta, Georgia, and the tallest building in Atlanta is about 1,100 feet deep.
So, I sometimes will take people out.
There's a vista.
You can see the skyline of Atlanta.
And I say, look, you see that Bank of America building there?
It's 1,050 feet deep, right?
Tall.
Well, that's only half as deep as this water was in the Clark Fork Valley, right?
And the current theory is that it was held in by an ice dam.
No sense at all.
No, because ice doesn't have that hydraulic pressure resistance.
Exactly.
I mean, ice is not like rebar reinforced concrete.
No, that's right.
And I know civil engineers that are experienced in Dam design and construction that go, wait a minute, that makes no sense.
Absolutely.
Well, let me ask you a related question, but I also want to be respectful of your time, although this is so fascinating.
But Randall, if we had to take a hit on our planet, would you prefer, if you could choose, a hit in the ocean?
Because then we've got coastline destruction everywhere.
A hit on solid land?
And then maybe you've got volcanoes and earthquakes, I don't know, or a hit on an ice shelf, and then you've got all this melt and ocean level rise.
But in any case, there's a bunch of something getting ejected into the atmosphere, so you've got that.
But where would you want to take the hit on a planetary scale, if you could choose?
This is the first time I've been asked that question.
Each one has a whole suite of really bad things that would happen.
On land, of course, you're going to have fires, very large-scale fires.
You're also going to have the injection of very large amounts of soot into the atmosphere and dust.
So that combination of dust and soot It goes into the atmosphere, it increases the opacity of the atmosphere, reduces sunlight, and brings on what's been termed a cosmic winter, right?
So now you have, until that all clears out, which might take two or three years, you've got agricultural, widespread agricultural failures.
That's going to lead to famine.
People not getting nourished, you know, the malnourishment is going to lead to weakened immune systems.
Well, you've got a collapse of the whole ecosystem.
I mean, how do the pollinators function, right?
I mean, how do flowers bloom?
How does phytoplankton function?
Exactly.
An impact into the ocean.
Like you said, it's going to create enormous tsunamis.
I mean, you might have tsunamis that, you know, making landfall or 100 to 500 feet high.
So this is going to completely wipe out anything on the coastlines.
The other thing is it's going to inject enormous amounts of water vapor into the atmosphere that's going to take many days, if not weeks, to thoroughly rain out.
And so one of the things that we can see with respect to the deglaciation process in North America is that there were these gigantic, I almost call them like meltwater tsunamis, Gushing off of the ice sheet itself.
But then far removed from the ice sheet, like in areas like, you know, the southeast in the Appalachians, in the southwest, in Arizona, in Utah, in New Mexico, there is evidence of gigantic floods, but there weren't really glaciers there to provide the copious meltwater.
So, you know, you probably, you know, Great Salt Lake in Utah is the remnant of Lake Bonneville, which was a massive body of water that filled up fast almost a thousand feet deep, right where Salt Lake City is now.
Now that was not being fed by glacial meltwater.
It had to have been rainfall.
When you see, like, I've gone through a lot of river valleys in areas that are, and creek valleys, where it's just a small river or a small creek going there now.
But in mantling those valleys, you will see boulders stacked up to their size of SUVs and even bigger.
And the modern creek or river did not emplace those boulders.
That was something altogether different.
And so, there is evidence that there were these tremendous rainstorms happening to the extent that we have dating, and the dating is still limited and needs a lot more of it, but to the extent that we do, it looks like there was this window, and at the same time you've got the melting of the glaciers, you've got these tremendous pluvial events, to use the term, which means rainfall events.
We can, there's now evidence coming, I saw a recent, somebody just sent me photographs of around the Caspian Sea just recently, they've been over there, and there are shorelines, actually the term is strandlines, but you can see them 200 feet above the modern highest water level.
There was also gigantic mega floods in Siberia around the region of the Altay Mountains.
That we're on the same scale as the Channel Scablands floods in eastern Washington that we're looking at.
Now, to give you an idea, in that Clark Fork Valley, where the peak discharge was about 350 million cubic feet per second, that works out to be about 9.6 cubic miles of water per hour passing through this particular valley.
Wow.
It makes you have to paddle hard upstream, huh?
Yeah, that works.
That's an understatement, Mike.
Yes.
Right.
It's called being up Bleep Creek without a paddle right there.
Talk about it.
Yeah, there you go.
So what I do on these tours is we have several briefing meetings where I assign, I give people reading assignments.
I show slides and we talk about, I introduce the terminology.
So that once we get out in the field, you're kind of already, you've kind of gotten through kindergarten, first grade.
You've got a little bit of sense of paleohydrology, of glaciology, sedimentology, stratigraphy.
I explained some of that and how to recognize the proxies and how you use this to reconstruct these events.
Then we get out in the field and we'll spend anywhere like up to a week.
Typically, like we've got coming up in May, we're going to do the channel scab lands and we're going to be staying We've pretty much leased this entire resort for the group, south end of Soap Lake, Washington.
It's a group of cabins there.
It's very strategically located, and we use that as a base.
And then we go out, we take day trips out, we explore all of this stuff.
We come back.
You know, we may do presentations, have a slideshow, you know, great food and camaraderie.
We have discussions.
And we might even have a party with some jamming going on, things like that.
And this is something that people can attend.
Oh, yeah.
Correct?
I mean, they can go to your website and find out about it.
Oh, yeah.
I'll tell you, RandallCarlson.com.
I'm also now, I've been elevated to the president of HowTube.com.
Which is a new, very free speech oriented, very free speech oriented web.
What am I trying to say?
I got slightly distracted.
Video platform?
Yeah, platform.
That was the word I was looking for.
Thank you.
And when I started working with the CEO a couple of, two and a half, three years ago, he was just launching the platform.
We've now got Oh, gosh, I don't know what it's up to, 120 content creators right now.
But the whole idea is that it's very free speech oriented.
It's going to be curated only to the extent that just to keep the trolls and the trash talk at a minimum, to try to keep the level of discourse high.
But it's going to be very open to debate and different perspectives and different points of view.
I love that.
Yeah, so...
Yeah, so that would be something for folks to check out as well, howtube.com.
The other thing we should mention, Mike, and we could perhaps do another follow-up interview about this, is that when we start talking about ancient cultures, and we didn't get into that much today, but that's a question that looms large when you get into this kind of subject matter.
You know, when we first started this, or maybe it was even before we started recording, you mentioned several of the things, you know, the architecture, the rituals and ceremonies and symbolism and traditions that have come down to us, which really does imply that there was something much more going on in prehistory that has been lost.
And you even used, you know, Velikovsky's term, mankind in amnesia, that Graham Hancock has kind of made his His slogan with full attribution to Velikovsky.
But yeah, it is like we've forgotten.
And so, but then when you, you know, when you get into this discussion of advanced civilizations, the first thing I say is, okay, let's define what we mean by advanced.
Good point.
I did last year, I did like an eight or nine hour presentation just on the question of Atlantis.
From a geological perspective.
And I went in and I did a line-by-line analysis of Plato's two dialogues, Timaeus and Critias.
And then I examined that.
I went to, what was it, four or five different translations, including going back to the original Greek to determine what he was really saying in there.
And then looking at that through his lens, Of Plato's dialogues, and then looking at it from the standpoint of geography, marine geology, astronomy, and so on.
And what you come up with is really totally different than the standard model of talking about Atlantis.
But Atlantis is just one example of this idea that there was something else going on.
Now, one of the interesting coincidences, Mike, about this, about particularly the Atlantis story, that I think now is probably not just coincidence, is that in the dialogues, Plato is quoting Critias, who is telling the story of his great-grandfather Who heard it from Solon, who went to Egypt, spent 10 years in Egypt, hearing the stories of their ancient history.
And once he gained their trust, they recounted from their ancient registers, they call it, their ancient record.
And so they told this story of Atlantis, and they gave these details.
And there was this great war between the Atlanteans that lived on a group of islands in the Atlantic Ocean.
And we can actually show that the Azores, We're much more extensive during the Ice Age than they are now.
And that's kind of what I get into, all of that.
There was this war between the Atlanteans and the cultures that lived inside the Pillars of Heracles, which meant inside the Mediterranean.
At the conclusion of this war, there was a great catastrophe that happened.
It affected the Greek peninsula, because Plato recounts how All of the topsoil of large regions of the peninsula was lost during these incredibly intense rainstorms.
And at the same time, there was a great earthquake and the islands of Atlantis sank beneath the ocean.
The date that he gave for that was 9,000 years before Solon's sojourn in Egypt, which occurred in 600 B.C., So 9,000 plus 2,600 is 11,600.
Now you can look it up right now.
Look at the end of the Younger Dryas, the beginning of the modern epoch.
Meltwater Pulse 1b defines that, which was the second great rapid sea level rise.
That date is precisely 11,600.
It would appear as if islands are sinking, but actually the oceans are just rising and you're losing land bridges, you're losing peninsulas and so on.
But in this case, Mike, you actually did have land sinking along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge.
I get into that in great detail.
The process is called isostasy.
Which, you know, plate tectonics and continental drift is lateral horizontal movement.
Isostasy is vertical movement.
The shifting of these trillions of tons of weight, which is the shifting of mass from the continents back into the ocean basins, causes pretty considerable vertical movements of the Earth's crust.
I would love to do an interview with you solely about Atlantis.
Let's do that.
Yeah, absolutely would love to do that.
And also, the final thing I want to mention here, too, my overall reaction is that, isn't it wonderful that all of this is etched into the Earth?
The clues are there.
It takes individuals like you to go out and actually just observe and be honest about what you're seeing instead of, oh, let's go to the academic papers and let them tell us what that was, but you're going to the places.
And looking with your eyes and thinking through reason and cause and effect, what happened here?
And the history is there.
It's written in the earth.
You're right.
See, you're just totally nailing it, Mike, because as I've said, There's this grand epic story, and it's on such a scale that we haven't been able to see it up until now.
It is literally engraved into the surface of the planet.
You have to learn to speak like Earth talk, which is geology and catastrophism.
But the Earth is speaking to you.
It's almost like the Earth is screaming out.
Like when you see the side of a mountain and you see the layers, it's like it's screaming out.
My history is here.
Come look at me.
I frequently recite from the scripture of Psalms where it says, Speak to the earth, and it shall teach thee.
Exactly.
Yeah.
Exactly.
And that's what I'm trying to do.
When I take people on these tours and do these programs, I'm trying to teach them Earth literacy.
I'm trying to teach them to be able to read this story that's been waiting 12,000 years to be told.
Yeah, you're decoding the mysteries of our planet, the mysteries of where we came from and what happened to our ancestors.
This is the greatest mystery of all time that we know of.
It's extraordinary.
I'm super excited, as you can tell, but I want to say too, Randall, before I let you go, I am seriously committed to helping in this, and I interviewed Dr.
Malcolm Lecomte earlier, and we're working with him.
He's going to provide samples to my lab.
We're going to do microscopy because we have this really high-end video microscope.
Oh, wow.
We also have two ICP-MS instruments, and right now we're looking at a laser ablation interface so that we can do isotopic ratio analysis on the elements using laser ablation for the introduction into the mass spec system.
You know, we've been doing food science all these years, and now it turns out we have the instruments that geology researchers need to look at this.
And they needed the lab time, and we have the lab.
So we're just donating time, lab instrument time, to help these people get more data.
And I'm super thrilled.
So spread the word if there's anybody else that we can help.
And I hope this is just the first of a whole series of conversations we can have.
Oh, absolutely.
Because now that I know that you're, you know, you're segueing into a lot of this, I would like to just be at your disposal to help in any way that I could.
And I really believe that going forward here, these collaborative efforts are going to be, you know, critical to changing the paradigm that, you know, I think both you and I are...
We're really disturbed by some of the directions things are going with the wokeness and the controls and all of that kind of stuff that's going on.
And I think if we start pooling our resources, we can be a very powerful antidote to that.
We need decentralization of the dogma, right?
Because you have these high priests of modern science who, they're the gatekeepers.
They provide the funding.
And I've talked to university labs.
They won't touch anything controversial because of the NIH funding, the university funding, the federal funding.
So you've got to have independent labs, independent thinkers like you.
This is the way that revolutions actually happen.
And people like Graham Hancock, for example, and so many others.
This is how it happens.
This is how it has happened.
Look at Hapgood throughout history, right?
Yeah.
We're on the right track.
We won't be able to get into it on this discussion, but we should follow up on this soon, which is that I've been working with a scientist that he's really one of the top scientists in the world.
On matters of energy.
And he's also an inventor.
He's a geophysicist by trade.
And he has gotten really into the idea of what kind of a industrial...
If you had an advanced civilization, how would that have been powered?
And so he has come up with a whole series of inventions that are undergoing testing right now using plasma energy.
And this is opening a door to a whole new realm of possibilities for our future.
And I would like to really clue you in on some of that.
That's right down my alley.
I would love to hear about that.
I used to read the books about John Worrell Keeley and wonder, like, what is going on here?
But, yeah, you can't have an advanced civilization without an energy source, period.
Yeah.
You've got to be able to move things, like giant 20-ton boulders.
Exactly.
And I think that this is going to literally, it has the potential to change the world in the next 10 years.
And one of the things that it's going to do is it's going to completely render all of the Green New Deal stuff completely irrelevant.
Right?
It's going to go completely irrelevant.
It's going to leap over all that to a new paradigm of energy because the cosmos is seething with energy.
It's just waiting to be tapped into.
Yeah, and what this man has done is he's come up with ways of utilizing that energy and creating...
It's very, I mean, I'm going through a very concentrated period right now of educating about how it works.
And I'm going to be going back on Joe Rogan on the 23rd of this month.
Oh, okay.
Does that mean you're coming to Texas?
I'm going to be coming to Austin, yeah.
Is that where you're at?
I'm near Austin.
We've got to meet.
Yeah, yeah, I'm right near Austin.
Well, okay, so I'm going to check in with you before we come out.
I'm actually riding out with George Howard, the Cosmic Tusk.
He's riding in an RV. We're going to roll out in style.
We're going to come in on Sunday night.
We're going to do the interview on Monday, and then we've got a couple of days to kill.
One of the things that we might be doing is visiting a bone bed that's on private property that he's Hopefully going to obtain special permission to gain access to.
He's been there before as part of his remediation of one of the creeks that runs through the property.
And he's gotten to know the property owners, but almost no one knows about it.
It's a bone bed.
Well, this is fascinating, but just on a practical note, when you finish being on with Joe Rogan, You just head east and you'd be at our studio.
We'll talk off camera, but we've got to interview both of you.
If you have an opportunity while you're in town, it would be extraordinary.
Well, I think we should try to do that.
Oh, man.
I'd be totally up for that.
That would be amazing.
And I'm so glad that Joe is giving you the opportunity to share this so many times.
I think you've been on his show several times.
But to Joe's credit, he is an open-minded guy.
Oh, yeah.
He's curious about the universe and wants to know how things work.
Yeah.
And he's not shutting you guys down like a university might.
No, not at all.
He's letting you speak.
So amen to that.
Yeah, I have a great deal of respect for Joe.
And I've gotten to know him quite well.
You know, having been on the show now seven times, I've gotten to know him quite well.
And I think he's very sincere.
He's, like you said, he's open-minded.
He's curious.
He's willing to listen to different points of view.
So I would just suggest to people howtube.com is the website, I mean, the platform I'm collaborating with, and they're hosting my website.
Also, take a look at the website strikefoundation.earth, which has just been, it's only been up a couple of weeks, and it's part of this open sourcing project where we are going to, we're going to disclose to the world this potential new energy system.
And it's going to have videos, it's going to have papers, it's good.
And it's still a little bit disorganized because it was put up in a very much of a hurry.
Yeah, you probably could look it up right now and you'll see there's...
No, I'm looking at it.
I see it's loading up and I see very interesting things here to dig into.
So yeah, thank you for that.
I would love to learn more about that and help share that information with the world, of course.
And also want to mention your website, RandallCarlson.com and also the Cosmic Summit.
Isn't that CosmicSummit2023.com?
Yes.
Okay, great.
And that's in Asheville?
Okay.
And that's in June, did you say?
That's in June.
June.
Okay, coming up in June.
And people can go there in person or they can buy streaming access.
Is that correct?
Yes.
And you can buy streaming access and it's all going to be recorded.
HowTube is hosting the live stream and it's going to be recorded.
And all of the speakers and all of the events will be then downloadable from that point on.
Okay, excellent.
And I'd also love to meet the other founders of HowTube because there might be collaboration across our platforms and streaming because we're all on team humanity here.
We're just trying to spread knowledge and truth and keep this species alive and sane so that we might reproduce and have a shot at the future.
Yes, let's do what we can to increase those probabilities of a successful future.
Absolutely.
Because it's not looking so good right now for certain sectors of the species.
That's all I'll say.
Yeah.
We're in some trouble.
Yeah.
Well, hey, this has been great.
And we'll talk some more before I, as I figure out my schedule.
Yeah, and I certainly will give you a shout when I get out there your way.
And we'll just see what we can make happen.
Okay, outstanding.
This has been really fascinating and just extraordinary.
I'm really humbled that you would spend so much time with us here, especially so late in the evening.
But thank you, Randall.
This has been just the highlight of my week, I've got to tell you.
Oh, well, it's been a pleasure for me too, Mike.
Well, it's the beginning of much more.
Well, thank you so much for offering that.
We're going to do a lot more together.
We're going to help you and your team and play a small role in assisting what you're doing and spreading the word.
So thank you so much.
Again, folks, the website is randallcarlson.com.
I already mentioned the Summit website and also Randall's giving tours that you can take part in, which would be fascinating.
In addition, howtube.com.
That's what you said, right?
Right.
HowTube.
Like, instead of YouTube, it's HowTube.
Got it.
Okay, perfect.
So that's the interview, folks.
Of course, I'm Mike Adams, the founder of Brighteon.com.
But you watching this, feel free to repost this on other channels and other platforms.
Just give credit to Randall Carlson and his website, RandallCarlson.com.
So thank you so much for joining me.
Much more to come.
Hope to get Randall back on soon.
We'll talk about Atlantis and other interesting things.
Sure.
I'd love to.
All right.
I look forward to it.
Thank you so much, Randall.
All right, Mike.
A global reset is coming.
And that's why I've recorded a new nine-hour audiobook.
It's called The Global Reset Survival Guide.
You can download it for free by subscribing to the naturalnews.com email newsletter, which is also free.
I'll describe how the monetary system fails.
I also cover emergency medicine and first aid and what to buy to help you avoid infections.
So download this guide.
It's free.
▲
Export Selection