Speaker 1: I want you to close your eyes for a second. Seriously,
unless you're driving or operating heavy machinery, just show them.
I want to take you somewhere.
Speaker 2: It really helps to set the scene, doesn't it.
Speaker 1: It does. Okay, imagine you are walking into a tomb
in ancient Egypt. But I don't want you to picture
the big, airy spaces you see in the movies, or
the well lit corridors packed with tourists.
Speaker 2: No, this is something different.
Speaker 1: I'm talking about deep underground. You've walked down this long
sloping limestone corridor right into the Valley of the Kings.
You were in a tomb that was sealed shut three
thousand years ago.
Speaker 2: And the atmosphere down there is well, it's not like
a museum.
Speaker 1: It's heavy, it's oppressive. Yeah, the air is stale. I
mean it's been sitting there for millennia. It is incredibly hot.
That's stifling, dried desert heat that just seems to radiate
from the stone itself. The hallway is narrow, and the
ceiling feels like it's pressing down on you. It's really claustrophobic.
But then you shine a light on the walls and
the moment and you see it. Every single square inch
is covered in art, just intricate, colorful, unbelievably detailed carvings, hieroglyphics,
figures of gods, stars. It is an absolute masterpiece.
Speaker 2: And that is exactly where the logic problem begins.
Speaker 1: Right Okay, now open your eyes. Have a question for you.
How did the artists see what they were painting?
Speaker 2: It's I mean, that's the question that really stops you
in your tracks, isn't it. Because the immediate answer, that
sort of knee jerk response we all learned in history
class is torches.
Speaker 1: They use fire, right, fire torches, maybe some oil lamps
burning animal fat. That's the standard answer. But here's the problem,
and it's a massive one. It's what people call the
soot paradox exactly.
Speaker 2: Let's just you know, think about the physics of combustion
from it. If you are burning torches of these crude
oil lamps deep underground in a totally confined space for
hours and hours, yeah, days.
Speaker 1: And these tombs took years to finish.
Speaker 2: Years, so there is going to be a byproduct, massive
amount of it. Thick, black, oily smoke and soot rises.
It's sticky, it coats the ceiling, you can get into
the wet paint they're applying. It chokes the air.
Speaker 1: But when we actually look at these tombs, when the
archaeologists first crack those seals, there's nothing clean as a whistle.
Speaker 2: I mean, nowhere on those ceilings is there even the slightest,
faintest evidence of soot or smoke residue. The colors are
still vibrant, the white backgrounds are stark white.
Speaker 1: And it gets even more complicated than just you know,
dirty walls, because we have to think about the environment itself,
deep deep underground oxygen. Precisely, there isn't even enough oxygen
inside those deep tombs to support a torch flame for
the kind of time they would need to do this art.
Speaker 2: You light a torch, it just eats up all the available.
Speaker 1: Air, and if it eats the air, the artists can't breathe.
Speaker 2: It becomes a suffocation hazard almost immediately. I mean you're
literally replacing oxygen with carbon monoxide and smoke. So you
light a torch and either the flame dies or you die.
Speaker 1: We have this locked room mystery. There's no soot, there's
not enough air for fire, but the carvings are there
and they're perfect, which means they had light, and if
they didn't.
Speaker 2: Use fire, then you're left with what feels like the impossible.
The only remaining solution has to be some sort of
artificial light source.
Speaker 1: Welcome to thrilling threads. Today, we are just looking at history.
We are pulling on a loose thread that might just
unravel the entire timeline of human innovation. We're asking a
question that sounds a little crazy until you look at
the everance. Did our ancestors have electricity?
Speaker 2: It's a thread that takes us from these secret crips
beneath Egyptian temples, to dusty museum archives in a rock,
and then all the way up into the thin air
of the Peruvian Andes.
Speaker 1: Our mission today is simple, but it's kind of mind bending.
We're looking at evidence that challenges the whole idea that
technology is a straight line from stone tools to the iPhone.
We're talking about batteries in the desert, light bulbs carved
right into stone, and power tools before the invention of
the wheel.
Speaker 2: And we really have to approach this with an open mind.
We are going to look at the artifacts, the carvings,
the physics, because if this thread holds, it means we
are not the first ones to plug in.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's unpack this. We have to start where the
mystery is the most visual. We are going to Egypt,
specifically to the Temple of Hathora in Dindera, which.
Speaker 2: Is a fascinating location. Yeah, and we're not just you know,
walking into the main hall with everyone else. We are
going into a subterranean crypt.
Speaker 1: Ah. So this is important. Contact huge.
Speaker 2: This was not a public gallery. This was a secret place.
According to the records, only the high priests ever had
access to this crypt.
Speaker 1: So whatever is down there, it wasn't for the average
person to see. This was knowledge kept in the dark. Literally.
Speaker 2: And in this hot, narrow, low ceiling room we find
a relief carved into the wall that has caused more
arguments in archaeology than well, maybe anything else. It's known
as the dundera light bulb.
Speaker 1: And when you look at it, I mean you have
to look this up later, but I'll describe it. It
doesn't look like a symbol. It really doesn't look like
a metaphor. It looks like a blueprint.
Speaker 2: It's strikingly technical. It's almost jarring to see.
Speaker 1: It's huge, and it depicts what looks exactly like a
modern day large clear light bulb. You have this transparent,
oblong shape archaeologist, you know, they call it a lotus flower,
but it looks like a glass bulb and.
Speaker 2: Inside it, inside there's a snake. But the snake isn't
coiled up or anything. It's stretched out in this long,
wavy line, just floating right in the middle of the
bulb like a filament. It looks exactly like the filament
in an old discharge tube or a Crooks tube. But
here is where it gets really really interesting. It's not
just a flower and a snake. There is a cable
coming out of the bottom of the flower, or the
socket if you want to call it that.
Speaker 1: A physical cable. You can see it carved right there, a.
Speaker 2: Thick cable, and it runs underneath the bulb and connects
directly to a box.
Speaker 1: A box. So let me get this straight. You have
a bulb, a filament, a socket, a cable, and a
power source box. I mean, come on, if I drew
that on a neck and for you today'd say that's
a lamp.
Speaker 2: The visual resemblance is just undeniable. And the ancient astronaut
theorists people like Georgio Suculos. They argue that we need
to stop looking at this as religious symbolism and start
looking at it as a technical schematic.
Speaker 1: But the skeptics, the mainstream archaeologist, they have an explanation
for this, right they must. They say it's symbolic. The
lotus flower represents creation. The snake is some kind of god.
Speaker 2: Right. The standard interpretation is that the snake is a deity,
maybe harsomptis emerging from the primordial lotus flower. It's a
creation myth carved in stone. Okay, But that interpretation kind
of ignores all the technical details surrounding it, the cable,
the box, and more importantly, the text.
Speaker 1: The hieroglyphics, because they actually wrote down what this thing is.
Speaker 2: They did, and the translation offers a major clue. The
hieroglyphics found right near the carving describe the object, and
they say it is dangerous, dangerous, But and this is
the kicker. In the same breath, they call it the
bringer of light.
Speaker 1: Okay, hold on, dangerous and bringer of light.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 1: That sounds an awful lot like high voltage to me.
Speaker 2: That's the duality that the experts point out. If this
was just a flower. Why is it dangerous If it's
just a snake, God, why the warning. But if it's electricity,
I mean, electricity is the very definition of dangerous light.
It warns you to stay away because of the shock,
but it invites you because of the illumination.
Speaker 1: It's like a high voltage sign on a transformer box exactly.
Speaker 2: It's a warning label from three thousand years ago.
Speaker 1: So if we circle back to the soot paradox, the
fact that there's no smoke in the tombs, the mainstream
explanation is mirrors, right, that they use these polished bronze
mirrors to reflect sunlight from the entrance all the way
down into the crips.
Speaker 2: That is the standard theory. Yes, yeah, but I mean
have you ever tried to reflect light around say five
or six corners with a hand mirror.
Speaker 1: I can barely aim a flashlight correctly in a straight line.
Speaker 2: The physics creates a huge problem. Every time light bounces
off a metal mirror, and remember these were ancient copper
or bronze, not our modern glass mirrors, you lose a
significant percentage to the brightness. It's called light attenuation.
Speaker 1: So by the time you get to the end of
the tunnel.
Speaker 2: By the time you reflect sunlight down a long corridor,
around a few corners, and into a deep dark crypt,
you're left with a faint, useless glow, not the bright,
steady light you would need for microscopic detail work. The
complexity of the mirror system required.
Speaker 1: Is just immense, so the mirror theory is weak. The
torch theory is basically impossible because of the oxygen and soot,
which leads.
Speaker 2: The ancient astronaut theorists to a pretty stark conclusion. The
only remaining solution is artificial light. And then what do
you know, Right there on the wall, in the very
room that needs the light, they carved a picture of
a light bulb.
Speaker 1: It feels like they left the instruction manual on the wall,
like here, here's how we.
Speaker 2: Did it, or perhaps more chillingly, here is the gift
we were given.
Speaker 1: Ah Right, because the mentioned Hathor this is the temple
of Hathor, the goddess.
Speaker 2: Hathor, the sky goddess. She is addicted sailing in a
ship of eternity along the Milky Way. So the theory
suggests that this wasn't a human invention, but technology that
was gifted by extraterrestrials, the sky gods, and the Egyptians
carved it in stone to preserve the knowledge.
Speaker 1: So they see these beings land they use these glowing
sticks to light up the night, and they think that's magic,
so they carve it.
Speaker 2: It's classic cargo cult behavior. You see something you don't understand,
technology that's far beyond you, so you replicate the form
of the technology you witnessed, and you treat it with
religious reverence because you don't fully understand the science, but
you know it has incredible power.
Speaker 1: Okay, okay, I know there are people listening right now,
rolling their eyes. They're saying, fine, a drawing on a
wall is one thing. You can interpret art however you want.
It's a snake, it's a filment, who knows. But you
can't hold a drawing, show me the hardware.
Speaker 2: And that is a perfectly fair demand. I mean, extraordinary
claims require extraordinary evidence.
Speaker 1: And that is exactly why we are leaving Egypt. We're
hopping on a plane and we're heading to Iraq because
in nineteen thirty eight something was found that you can
actually hold in your hand.
Speaker 2: We are going to the National Museum of Iraq. It's
nineteen thirty eight, the director of the museum is digging
through the archives, basically the basement storage, and he finds
a box of artifacts that just don't make any sense.
Speaker 1: I love these stories of things found in basements. It's
never out in the field. It's always in some dusty
box that's been ignored for fifty years.
Speaker 2: He finds these terra cotta pots. They're small, you know,
maybe the size of your hand. But inside the pot,
it's not just empty space or filled with grain. What's
inside inside the clay pot is a copper cylinder, and
inside that copper cylinder is an iron rod, and holding
it all in place ceiling the very top is a
stopper made of asphalt.
Speaker 1: But two men so clay, copper, iron and asphalt.
Speaker 2: And these artifacts they date back to the Parthian period,
which is roughly two thousand years.
Speaker 1: Ago, which is, let me do the math. That's more
than a thousand years before the official invention of the
battery by Alison ro Volta in the eighteen hundreds.
Speaker 2: Correct, we're talking about a device that predates our modern
understanding of electricity by well over a millennium.
Speaker 1: Okay, so you have this pot. It looks like a
high school science experiment. How does it work? I mean,
is it actually a battery?
Speaker 2: Well, this is the best part. According to the source
material proponents like Jason Martel and Georgia Suklos, they didn't
just look at it. They built one. They created a
modern mockup using the exact same materials found in the
Iraqi desert.
Speaker 1: They went full mcgiver on it.
Speaker 2: Essentially. Yeah, they took a clay pot, the kind common
to southern Iraq. They put in the copper sleeve. They
inserted the iron rod, making sure the two different metals
didn't touch each other. That's crucial for the chemical reaction.
And then they used an asphalt stopper to insulate it
and seal it.
Speaker 1: But a battery needs juice. Literally, you need an electrolyte
an acid, and that's the.
Speaker 2: Beauty of it. You don't need industrial grade sulfuric acid.
Need a weak acid, something like vinegar wine, grape juice,
or in this case, orange juice, orange juice. In the demonstration,
they poured orange juice into the pot. What happened They
hooked up a vault meter to the copper and iron rods.
Speaker 1: Did the needle move?
Speaker 2: It jumped it generated a charge. The vultmeter showed about
four volts of electricity.
Speaker 1: Four volts. I mean a standard AA battery is what
one point five volts? A nine volt battery is nine volts.
So this ancient clay pot is pushing out more power
than two ALA batteries put together.
Speaker 2: Yes, enough to power a small light or to run
a small device. And the quote from the source on
this is pretty definitive. It is a battery. Everybody agrees
with that.
Speaker 1: Wait, even the mainstream scientists, the skeptic Yes, that.
Speaker 2: Is the fascinating part. The physics isn't in question here.
If you put two dissimilar metals like copper and iron
into an acidic solution, you get electron flow. That's just
basic chemistry. So the debate isn't if it works. The
debate is what were they doing with it?
Speaker 1: Okay, So if the mainstream admits it's a battery, what's
their safe explanation? They clearly don't think they were powering
ancient iphons with it.
Speaker 2: The accepted theory, the mainstream one, is that they were
used for electroplating. They believe these small, steady currents were
used to bond a thin layer of gold onto silver,
probably for making jewelry.
Speaker 1: So making cheap jewelry look expensive.
Speaker 2: Basically, yeah, a chemical process, not an electrical one in
the sense of powering a city or lighting a room.
It's seen as a kind of niche craft application.
Speaker 1: But here's where we have to pull the thread harder.
Because four volts is nice. It's a great proof of concept.
But you can't light up a pyramid.
Speaker 2: With four volts. Oh you can't. But this is where
the theory of scaling up comes in. Jason Martel poses
this really fascinating hypothesis in the source material. He asks,
if a small pot the size of a vase makes
four volts, what happens if you build one that is
six feet tall?
Speaker 1: Whoa?
Speaker 2: I mean? We find these massive clayats all over Egypt
in the Middle East. We usually assumed they were for
storing grain or olive oil or water. But what if
they weren't for storage? What if there were massive battery cells.
Speaker 1: So if you scale up the volume of the pot,
the metals, the acid, do you scale up the power?
Speaker 2: You increase the capacity and the potential current significantly. And
then what if you connect them in series, you know,
daisy chaining them together positive to negative, you could easily
generate twenty thirty maybe fifty holes.
Speaker 1: Now we are talking fifty volts is dangerous. Fifty volts
is real usable power.
Speaker 2: That is sufficient power for modern utility, that can absolutely
run a bright arc light, that can power a motor.
Speaker 1: So the bag Dad battery proves they have the fundamental technology.
The only question is how big they built it exactly.
Speaker 2: It's the difference between making a potato clock in science
class and building a modern power plant. The principle is
exactly the same. The scale is the only variable.
Speaker 1: Okay, so let's connect these dots. This is getting exciting.
We have the light bulb drawn on the wall and dindera.
We have the power source physically found in a rock,
the Bagdad battery. But there's a missing piece in the middle.
Speaker 2: The infrastructure, the components.
Speaker 1: Right, You can't just tape a battery to a bulb
and hope for the best. You need wires, you need insulators,
you need something to handle that power safely and efficiently.
Speaker 2: And this brings us to a part three of our journey,
the DJed pillar.
Speaker 1: The DJed pillar. Now I've seen this symbol. It's absolutely
everywhere in Egyptian art. It looks like a column, right,
kind of like a tree trunk with these four horizontal
bars across the top.
Speaker 2: Correct. It's very distinctive and it's often seen being held
by the god Osiris. Mainstream Egyptology will tell you it
represents stability. It's the symbolic backbone of the god Osiris.
So you know, kings would carry it to show they
were stable rulers protecting the land from chaos.
Speaker 1: Stability. That feels like a very abstract, kind of vague
concept for such a specific, technical looking shape it is.
Speaker 2: And when you look at that shape, not as an
art historian, but through the lens of a modern electrical engineer,
it stops looking like a backbone and starts looking a
lot like hardware.
Speaker 1: OK, so what does it look like to an engineer?
Speaker 2: It looks exactly like high voltage electrical insulator. You know,
the ceramic things you see on top of power line towers.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, the stack discs, I see it now.
Speaker 2: The stack discs are designed to increase the surface path
for electricity, preventing it from arntling to the ground. Or
even more provocatively, some say it looks.
Speaker 1: Like a Tesla coil a tesla coil, like the things
that shoot lightning bolts in old sci fi movies.
Speaker 2: The geometry is strikingly similar a central column with stack
discs or toroids at the top used to manage frequency
and voltage.
Speaker 1: Okay, that's a cool visual match. But is there any
actual connection back to the light bulb or are we
just you know, pointing at random Egyptian things and saying
that looks like tech.
Speaker 2: No, the connection is literal and it's undeniable. Go back
to the dindera light bulb carving. Look closely at the
bulb itself. It isn't just floating in the air. It's
resting on something. It's being held up by something.
Speaker 1: What's it resting on?
Speaker 2: It is plugged directly into a DJed pillar. No way, seriously, seriously,
The bulb is supported by the DJed. The little arms
of the DJET pillar reach up and cradle the base
of the bulb.
Speaker 1: So in the carving, the complete system is laid out.
You have the box which is the power source, you
have the cable, you have the DJET pillar acting as
some kind of conductor or insulator, and then you.
Speaker 2: Have the bulb. It completes the circuit. And remember the
translation from the hieroglyphics. The text says the DJed is
always associated with significant power power.
Speaker 1: And we interpret that as political power or magical power.
Speaker 2: But maybe they meant electrical power.
Speaker 1: This is starting to feel less and less like a coincidence.
Speaker 2: That's the whole thrilling thread theory in a nutshell. Maybe
the djeed wasn't just a magic wand symbolizing stability. Maybe
it was a functional necessary component, a capacitor or an
insulator or a step up transformer that was absolutely essential
to handle the charge from those acidic batteries to the
discharge bulbs.
Speaker 1: It completely changes how you see their entire civilization. We
think of them as chanting spells and performing rituals. What
if casting a spell was just the ritualized way of
turning on a switch.
Speaker 2: That is the core of the idea. What happens if
you lose the science but you keep the object. Technology
becomes magic. You mimic the movements the gods made. You
replicate the shape in stone because the original metal one
rusted away centuries ago. You pray to the Bringer of
Light because you forgot it was just a lamp.
Speaker 1: It's the planet of the ape scenario. You find a rifle,
you have no idea how it works, so you start
to worship it as a holy relic. Okay, so we
have light. We have a plausible power source. But electricity
isn't just for reading in the dark. If you have
that kind of juice, you can do heavy lifting.
Speaker 2: And that is a perfect segue. Because light is soft.
Stone is hard, and if we want to see the
real muscle of this theoretical ancient technology, we need to
leave the sandy desert of Egypt and go to the
high mountains of South America.
Speaker 1: We're going to Peru, specifically.
Speaker 2: To a place called Olante Tombo all Antai Tombo.
Speaker 1: Just saying the name sounds massive an ancient.
Speaker 2: It is. It's an incredible ancient mountain stronghold. And the
construction here is it's just baffling. We're not talking about
sandstone or limestone anymore, which are relatively soft and easy
to carve. We are talking about andesite.
Speaker 1: How hard is and asite for comparison, and it.
Speaker 2: Is incredibly hard. It's a type of volcanic rock on
the most scale of hardness. It's right up there with granite.
You need diamond tip tools to cut it effectively today.
Speaker 1: And what did the Incas or whoever built this place supposedly.
Speaker 2: Have According to the history books, they had stone tools,
copper chisels, maybe some bronze, if we're being generous, none
of which should be able to even make it dent
and andesite without being completely destroyed in the process.
Speaker 1: But they didn't just dent it.
Speaker 2: No, they machined it. We find these huge cube like
sections of stone, weighing many many tons, and the precision
of the work is the real anomaly here.
Speaker 1: Describe the precision. What are we talking about.
Speaker 2: The stones are cut so perfectly that you cannot fit
a single human hair between them.
Speaker 1: A human hair, not a piece of paper, a hare, not.
Speaker 2: A credit card, a hare. The joinery is airtight, and
the surface there are no tool marks. You don't see
any scratches from chisels or pounding. It is smooth, it's polished.
Speaker 1: And the corners, what about the corners.
Speaker 2: They're perfectly rounded. They're not sharp and jagged. If you
were just pounding this out with rock hammer, you'd have
all these jagged edges and fracture lines. These look like
they were molded or routed with a power tool.
Speaker 1: Okay, So Brian Forrester, one of the experts mentioned in
the source material, he has a pretty strong opinion on this.
Speaker 2: He does. He argues very forcefully that this isn't a
question of sweat and manpower. You can throw a million
people at a block of andesite with stone hammers for
one thousand years and you will never get a polished,
laser perfect surface like this. It's not about man hours.
It is a question of technology.
Speaker 1: He's saying, you need power tools, high speed drills, saws.
Speaker 2: Exactly, something that rotates at high speed, something with incredible hardness,
maybe even sonic technology that could vibrate the stone apart,
something far beyond hammers and chessels.
Speaker 1: But again I have to play the skeptic here. If
they had dwelt drills and diamond tipped saws, where are they.
We find the pottery, we find the mummies, we find
the arrowheads. Why don't we find a single power drill?
Speaker 2: That is the million dollar question, isn't it? And Georgio
Sucolos offers an answer that is actually quite sobering when
you think about it. It's the theory of the survivor,
which is stone withstands the test of time. Metal rusts
into nothing, Plastic decays and turns to dust. Wood rots away.
If you leave a modern car in the jungle for
five thousand years, what's left.
Speaker 1: Of it, Uh, maybe some glass, The rubber tires are gone,
the steel frame is just a pile of orange dust exactly.
Speaker 2: The machinery disintegrates, the only thing left is the stone
that the machinery cut. So the evidence of the tool
is the cut itself, not the tool that is.
Speaker 1: That's a haunting thought. So we're looking at the finished product,
scratching our heads and calling it a mystery because the
factory that built it turned to dust thousands of years ago.
Speaker 2: That is the argument. We are judging their technological level
by what materials happen to survive, not by what technology
actually existed.
Speaker 1: This really forces you to zoom out, I mean way
way out. We usually look at history in these neat,
little chunks, you know, the Romans, the Egyptians, the Mayans.
But we need to look at the whole timeline of
the planet.
Speaker 2: We have to adopt the big picture philosophy.
Speaker 1: The source material mentions the age.
Speaker 2: Of the Earth four and a half billion years.
Speaker 1: That's a number my human brain can't really comprehend. It's
just too big.
Speaker 2: It's immense, and recorded human history where we write down
and know about is a tiny, tiny fraction of that time,
a blink of an eye, really.
Speaker 1: And we just assume that this blink of an eye
has been a straight lineup, you know, cave men, then
they discover fire, then the wheel, then the steam engine,
then the internet, a constant linear progression.
Speaker 2: But the sources we're looking at today are suggesting a
completely different shape, not a line, but a wave, a cycle,
the cycle of rise and fall.
Speaker 1: We know from the fossil record that mass extinctions happen,
global cataclysms happen. What if civilizations rise to a very
high point, they achieve electricity, maybe even flight, and then
something happens. A comet hits, a super volcano, erupts, a
sudden ice age, a global flood, and.
Speaker 2: They get wiped out. The civilization collapses and the few
survivors are knocked right back to the Stone Age. They
lose the knowledge, they lose the machines, they lose the infrastructure,
and they have to spend the next five thousand years
trying to get back to where they once were.
Speaker 1: There's a phrase the source used. That just gave me chills.
We are a civilization with amnesia.
Speaker 2: It's such a powerful concept. We think we're discovering electricity
for the first time, but what if we're just remembering it.
Speaker 1: There's that great quote about Benjamin Franklin.
Speaker 2: Right, It's something like, you know, about two hundred years ago,
Franklin starts playing with kites and keys and lightning, and
we think that's the start of our electrical age. But
this evidence suggests that three thousand years ago, priests in
a Rock and Egypt were already experimenting with it.
Speaker 1: So we aren't the inventors, we're the reinventors.
Speaker 2: It really challenges our modern arrogance, doesn't it. We think
we're the absolute pinnacle of creation, but maybe we're just
the latest attempt to climb the ladder.
Speaker 1: And of course we have to touch on the other
possibility that's mentioned. If it wasn't a previous human cycle.
Speaker 2: Then it was an intervention the extraterrestrial angle.
Speaker 1: Halthors sailing her ship along the Milky Way.
Speaker 2: If you look at the Dendera reliefs again the sheer
strangeness of the imagery, the snakes in the bulbs, the
flying ships. Some people argue that this knowledge didn't evolve
naturally on Earth. It was gifted, it was dropped off
or maybe.
Speaker 1: Just left behind, And that leads right back to the
cargo cult idea. Did the Egyptians truly understand the flow
of the electron or were they just building stone models
of the incredible at tech they saw the sky gods use.
Speaker 2: Is the gjed pillar a functional device or is it
a stone copy of a device? That is the central question.
If it's a copy, it explains why doesn't work today.
It's like carving a smartphone out of a piece of wood.
It looks right, but it's never going to make a call.
Speaker 1: But the Bagdad battery, Yeah, that one wasn't a copy.
That was the real deal.
Speaker 2: It worked, That was functional, which suggests that at least
some of the fundamental knowledge was understood and applied by
someone at some point.
Speaker 1: Man, this really messes with your head. The more you
pull on this thread, the more the whole sweater of
history starts to unravel.
Speaker 2: It's supposed to. That's the whole point of pulling the thread.
Speaker 1: So let's wrap this up for today. We have journeyed
from the breathless pitch black tombs of Dindera, where we
saw what looks for all the world like a schematic
for a light bulb plugged into a generator.
Speaker 2: We held the Bagdad battery, or at least the idea
of it, a simple clay pot filled with acid and
copper that proves physically proves that they could generate voltage
two thousand years ago.
Speaker 1: And we stood in the shadow of the massive, impossible
walls of Peru, looking at stonecuts so precise they seem
to defy our entire understanding of chisel and hammers.
Speaker 2: It all points to one conclusion. Yeah, the official timeline
of technology is missing some huge chapters.
Speaker 1: We tend to be so arrogant, don't we. We look
back at ancient people and think, oh, look at them
stacking their little rocks with ropes and logs.
Speaker 2: We do. We underestimate them completely. But the Bagdad battery
isn't a theory. It's a physical object. It sits on
a museum shelf. It generates power. So the question isn't
if they had electricity, The question is how much did
they use it?
Speaker 1: And here is the final thought I really want to
leave you with. It's something to really chew on tonight.
The Bagdad battery survived all this time because it was
made of clay, asshole common cheap disposable materials.
Speaker 2: It was the throwaway tech of its time.
Speaker 1: Exactly. So, if the only piece of tech that survived
is the cheap clay pot, what incredible machines made of
refined metal, gold, glass, and delicate filaments? Have we completely
lost to the sands of time.
Speaker 2: If the battery is the trash that survived, just imagine
what the treasure must have looked like.
Speaker 1: That is a terrifying and a thrilling thought. So we
want to know where you stand. Is the DJ pillar
just a symbol of stability or is it a Tesla
coil in disguise? Are we a species with amnesia? Or
are we just being over imaginative.
Speaker 2: Look at the evidence for yourself and question the timeline.
Speaker 1: Leave a comment and let us know your theory. Thanks
for pulling on these thrilling threads with us.
Speaker 2: Keep exploring