Speaker 1: I want you to close your eyes for a second, seriously,
just humor me. Imagine you are a villager living five
thousand years ago.
Speaker 2: Okay, I'm with you.
Speaker 1: Maybe you're in the Indus Valley, or maybe you're tilling
the soil in ancient Scandinavia. Your world is incredibly small.
It is defined by the dirt under your fingernails, the
stone tools in your hand, and you know the terrifying
reality that when the sun goes down the world belongs
to the predators.
Speaker 2: It's a visceral image. You're living in a world where
speed is how fast a horse can gallop, and power
is how hard you can swing a club. Your physics
are very.
Speaker 3: Direct, exactly now.
Speaker 1: Imagine you are standing on a hillside wiping the sweat
off your forehead, and you look up. Suddenly the sty
splits open. You witness a modern drone strike.
Speaker 2: Oh wow.
Speaker 1: Or maybe you see a cruise missile sleek and metallic
streak across the horizon and obliterate a mountain peak with
like mathematical precision. You feel the shock wave in your
chest before you even hear the sound.
Speaker 2: It's a terrifying thought experiment. The cognitive dissonance would be paralyzing.
I mean, you'd have absolutely no framework for.
Speaker 1: That, right, So how do you describe that to your
family when you run back to the village. You don't
have the word propulsion. You don't know what aerodynamics means.
You certainly don't have a concept for GPS or high
explosive yield.
Speaker 2: No, absolutely not.
Speaker 1: You wouldn't say, hey, guys, I just saw a piece
of advanced aerospace engineering.
Speaker 2: No, you'd use the only vocabulary available to you. You
have to. You'd use the language of the supernatural.
Speaker 1: You would say that was magic. You'd say that was
a thunderbolt thrown by a god. You'd say a dragon
breathed fire on the mountain precisely.
Speaker 2: This is what we call the cargo cult phenomenon in anthropology.
You interpret the unknown to the lens of the known.
If then technology is sufficiently advanced, as Arthur C. Clark
famously said, it is indistinguishable from magic.
Speaker 3: But it's more than that, isn't it.
Speaker 2: It is you deify it, You assume intention and divinity,
because engineering isn't in your mental model. A machine doing
something precise feels like a will, a consciousness.
Speaker 1: And that brings us to the question that is going
to drive us today. It's a loose thread that I've
been pulling on for a week, and honestly, the more
I pull, the more the whole sweater of history starts
to unravel.
Speaker 2: I know the feeling.
Speaker 1: What if the magic described in our oldest mythologies Norse, Greek, Hindu, Japanese.
Speaker 3: What if that wasn't magic at all?
Speaker 1: What if it was actually misunderstood advanced technology that we
are only just now in the twenty first century beginning
to understand.
Speaker 2: It's the ultimate game of translation, isn't it. Yeah, trying
to strip away the poetry to see if there's a
blueprint underneath. And I have to say, when you actually
look at the texts, not the children's book versions, but
the original translations, the descriptions are uncomfortably technical.
Speaker 1: Welcome to thrilling threads. I'm your guide to the impossible,
the anomalists, and the things that make you go wait
a minute.
Speaker 2: And I'm here to make sure we keep one foot
in the scientific method while we explore the rabbit hole.
But I have to admit today stack of research is well,
it's heavy.
Speaker 3: It is heavy.
Speaker 1: We are not just looking at pottery shards today, We
are looking at weapons of mass destruction described thousands of
years before the.
Speaker 2: Manhattan Project, a sobering thought.
Speaker 1: We're going deep into a stack of research that includes
ancient runestones from Sweden, historical accounts of legendary Japanese sortsmiths
sacred to Hindu, texts like the Mahaparada.
Speaker 2: Archaeological anomalies in Scotland that science still struggles to explain,
and modern testimonies regarding classified space programs. It's an incredibly
broad scope.
Speaker 3: It really is.
Speaker 2: And the mission here isn't just to retell these myths
as bedtime stories. What's fascinating here. What we're really digging
into is the specificity of the descriptions. We aren't looking
for vague metaphors about power or raft, no, not at all.
We are looking for technical data hidden in poetic language.
We're looking for the functionality of the weapons, how do
they trigger? What was the payload, what were the biological effects.
We're looking for schematics and sagas.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's unpack this. We are starting in Scandinavia, the
land of vikings, sagas and some very very intense weaponry.
Speaker 2: And we're going to a very specific place blings to Sweden, just.
Speaker 1: About forty miles northwest of Stockholm. We're there to see
the box to.
Speaker 2: Runestone, right, the box to runestone.
Speaker 1: Describe this for us because usually when I think of
Runestone's I think of, you know, squiggly lines and memorials
to dead kings.
Speaker 3: What are we looking at here?
Speaker 2: Well, it is an ancient carved granite block dating back
to the Viking Age around the eleventh century. But it's
significant because it's one of the few remaining relics we
have that actually depicts the Norse god Odin.
Speaker 3: So we get a visual.
Speaker 2: We get a visual, and he's not just standing there posing.
He's on horseback, likely his eight legged horse, slight near,
and he is holding his signature weapon, the spear known
as Gunnar gun Year.
Speaker 1: Now, in the myths, this isn't just a sharp stick.
I mean every Viking had a spear. What makes this
one so special?
Speaker 2: Oh, it's far from it being a norm. According to
the skull Skipar Mall, which is part of the prose Eta,
Goodyear was created by the sons of Evaldi. Now we
need to pause on who these creators are.
Speaker 3: The Dwarfs.
Speaker 2: Yes, but let's look at the description of dwarves in
Norse lore. They aren't just short guys with axes. They
live underground in Spartalfi. They are pale, they avoid the sun,
and they are the sole source of high tech manufacturing
for the gods.
Speaker 3: They're the R and D Department.
Speaker 2: They are the engineers. They forge, they build, They craft
items with properties that defy the laws of nature. As
the Vikings understood them, They're the only ones who can
make this stuff.
Speaker 1: So in our modern context, these are the guys in
the clean suits, working in the underground bunker at like
Area fifty one or skunk works.
Speaker 2: That's a fair analogy, a very good one, actually, And
they imbued this spear goodyear with a very specific and
very strange property. Yes, absolute accuracy. The myth states, no
matter who threw it, no matter the skill of the
person throwing, it would always hate its mark, always always.
Once it was set to a target, it could not miss.
It would stopped at nothing, It would fly through any
obstacle to reach its destination.
Speaker 1: Okay, see here's where it gets really interesting. For me.
If I'm a Viking and I'm really good at throwing
a spear, I might say I never miss, but that's bragging,
that's ego.
Speaker 3: This is different.
Speaker 1: This is an object with an inherent quality of infallibility.
Speaker 2: Exactly. It's not about the user's skill. The skill is irrelevant.
Speaker 1: It sounds less like a wooden spear and more like, well,
like a laser guided cruise missile.
Speaker 2: Precisely, that is the technological interpretation. If a primative culture
sees a weapon that self corrects its trajectory mid flight,
how do they describe it? They say it's enchanted. We
would say it's programmed.
Speaker 3: It's just a difference in vocabulary.
Speaker 2: It is. Think about the sidewinder missile. It locks onto
a heat signature, You fire it, and the missile does
the work. It has its own guidance system. The pilot
just has to get it in the general vicinity and
pull the trigger.
Speaker 1: It's basically the old ltimate aimbot for a god. But
does the text implain that Odin has to aim it
carefully or just let it go.
Speaker 2: That's the kicker. It implies the opposite. It says the
spear finds the mark. The agency is in the object,
not the user. When Odin uses this in war, the
outcome is predetermined.
Speaker 3: It's not about his skill, as.
Speaker 2: A warrior, not at all. It's about the superiority of
his technology. The text says it travels to the target
regardless of the conditions, wind rain, whatever. That sounds like
a smart weapon. It sounds like satellite guide munitions or
active radar homing, something with an onboard computer making decisions.
Speaker 1: And the sources bring up this idea that the sons
of Avaldi, these dwarves, might not have been magical bearded
guys with hammers, but perhaps technical engineers or even extraterrestrial
entities providing this tech.
Speaker 2: That's the ancient astronaut angle. Yes, if you accept the
premise that these gods were actually advanced beings visiting Earth,
or perhaps a breakaway civilization that survived some cataclysm, then
Goodyear is simply a piece of their standard kit.
Speaker 3: It's their rifle.
Speaker 2: It's a precision guided weapon. It's not magic. It's just
Monday for them. And if that's true for Odin, we
absolutely have to talk about the heavy hitter, the weapon
that defines the genre.
Speaker 3: And the hammer. M'll near, Nu'll near the crush.
Speaker 1: Everyone knows the hammer, Marvel has made sure of that.
It's a pop culture icon, but the details in the
research were surprising to me.
Speaker 3: It wasn't just heavy.
Speaker 1: There are specifics about how it was built that just
don't sound like blacksmithing.
Speaker 2: No, not at all. Again, it was manufactured by the Dwarfs,
specifically two brothers, Bronco and Sindri. The myth says it
was made under duress. They were in a competition and
there was a mishap during the forging process. Loki disguised
as a fly bit one of the Dwarfs, causing him
to slench.
Speaker 3: So there was a mistake.
Speaker 2: Because of that, there was a flaw. The handle was
too short.
Speaker 1: A design flaw, or maybe, and this is just me spitballing,
an ergonomic choice for a specific type of user. I mean,
if you're building a weapon that balances perfectly for a
kinetic strike, maybe a short handle is a feature, not
a bug. Maybe it's for one handed use.
Speaker 2: That's a valid question. Maybe the flaw was just the
story they told to explain why it looks so weird.
But despite the short handle, its capabilities were I mean
they were off the charts. It had three main functions
described in the lore.
Speaker 3: Okay, let's break them down.
Speaker 2: One like gunnyear, it could hit any intended target, you
throw it, it hits guaranteed.
Speaker 3: So it has that same smart weapon capability.
Speaker 2: It does two. It would return to the user's hand,
almost like a boomerang. Or and this is a more
modern interpretation, perhaps a magnetic recall system.
Speaker 1: Magnetic recall makes so much sense. We have toys that
do that. Now, you press a button on a gauntlet
and a magnet pulls the device back. It's not even
sci fi anymore.
Speaker 2: And Thor did wear a specific gauntlet, urn gripper or
iron grippers to wield it. The lore says without the gauntlets,
he couldn't handle the weapon. It was too powerful.
Speaker 3: So the gauntlets aren't just gloves.
Speaker 2: They sound like a required interface, like a smart gun
that only fires for the user wearing them matching RFID
ring or maybe they channel the energy protected them from
some kind of feedback from the weapon itself.
Speaker 3: Oh, I love that the gauntlets aren't for grip strength.
They're the controller. They complete the circuit.
Speaker 1: But let's talk about the third capability because this is
the big one.
Speaker 2: Yes, this is the one that really stretches the definition
of a hammer. It was said to be able to
crush mountains.
Speaker 3: Crushing mountains.
Speaker 1: Now. Usually when we think of big bombs, we think
of fire, explosions, shrapnel, we think of expanding gas. But
crushing sounds different. It's a very specific word. That's a
downward force, a compression.
Speaker 2: It does, and the source material makes a very astute
scientific correlation here. Mulneir isn't described as an explosive device.
It doesn't seem to rely on chemical combustion. It's described
as a kinetic.
Speaker 3: Weapon, kinetic bombardment.
Speaker 2: Explain that right. It's the concept of destroying a target
through pure force and mass. If you accelerate a dense
object to high enough speeds, you don't need a warhead.
The impact alone delivers an incredible amount of energy. Think
at the concept of rods from God, a theoretical US
military project.
Speaker 3: I remember reading about that. They called it Project Thor ironically.
Speaker 2: I believe they did. The idea was to have satellites
holding tungsten rods basically the size of telefumpoles. To attack
a target, you just drop ones, drop it from orbit exactly,
no explosives, But that rod would be traveling at mock
ten maybe more. By the time it hit the ground.
It would hit with the force of a tactical nuke,
but without the radiation fallout would penetrate hundreds of feet
into the earth. It would crush whatever it hit.
Speaker 1: It would vaporize rock through sheer kinetic transfer.
Speaker 2: That's the physics of it. So is Thor walking around
with a blacksmith's tool, or is he carrying a handheld
kinetic energy weapon with a homing beacon and a magnetic
return system interface through his gloves.
Speaker 1: Put it that way, and he sounds like a space
marine for Warhammer forty K.
Speaker 2: That is exactly what the text is if you strip
away the magic. And again the sources suggests these weapons
weren't forged in a normal fire. They were given to
these figures by other worldly beings. It fits the pattern
of advanced tech being introduced to a civilization that can't
replicate it, only use it.
Speaker 1: Speaking of replicating technology, let's jump continents in centuries.
Speaker 3: Let's go from Scandinavia to Japan.
Speaker 2: A completely different culture, but a similar pattern.
Speaker 1: We're going to travel to seven hundred eight. This is
a fascinating story because it involves a sudden, massive jump
in technology that by all rights, shouldn't have happened. It
breaks the evolutionary curve of technology.
Speaker 2: This is the legend of Amakuni set.
Speaker 3: The scene for us.
Speaker 1: What was sword fighting like in Japan before Amakuni came along?
Speaker 2: It was not great. In seven hundred AD, Japanese warriors
were using swords based on Chinese designs. They were called chokuto.
They were double edged, straight, clunky and heavy. But the
biggest problem was the metallurgy they were so they broke
all the time. In the heat of battle against armor
or other blades, they would snap, which.
Speaker 1: Is the last thing you want to happen. When someone
is swinging an exit, you hang on time out.
Speaker 3: My sword broke. It's a catastrophic failure exactly.
Speaker 2: So the legend goes. The emperor returns from battle and
his army is decimated, not because of poor tactics, but
because their weapons failed. The swords are in pieces. Amakuni
is the Emperor's swordsmith. He sees the returning troops carrying broken.
Speaker 3: Hilts, and he takes it personally deeply.
Speaker 2: He takes this failure personally. He gathers the broken shards
and realizes he needs a complete rethink. This isn't about
making a slightly better sword. It's about starting from scratch.
Speaker 1: And this is where the thrilling thread gets spooky. He
doesn't just do some R and D. He doesn't just
try a new mixture of iron. He goes into isolation.
Speaker 2: He and his son Amakura seal themselves away in their
forge for seven days and seven nights. And this is key.
They aren't just hammering. They are praying. They are performing rituals,
praying to the Shinto gods, specifically the kami.
Speaker 1: The Kami these are the spirits or higher leings in
the Shinto faith, not quite gods in the Western sense,
more like forces of nature or ancestral spirits.
Speaker 2: Right, a very complex concept. And after this week of
isolation and prayer, they emerge with something that looks nothing
like the old swords. They come out with a single
edged curve blade, the katana.
Speaker 1: The most famous sword design in history, invented in a week.
Speaker 2: Effectively, yes, a complete paradigm shift in one week, and
the test results were immediate and absolute. The emperor goes
back to war with these new blades. When he returns,
Amakuni is waiting on his porch. He starts counting the
returning blades. Two, ten, twenty. He counts hundreds of swords,
not a single one is broken.
Speaker 1: That is a zero percent failure rate. That's six sigma
quality control in the eighth century.
Speaker 3: That's unheard of.
Speaker 2: It's perfection, and the emperor declares him the greatest swordsmith.
This design, the katana, dominates Japanese warfare for the next
thousand years. It becomes the soul of the samurai.
Speaker 3: So what does this all mean?
Speaker 1: How does a guy in seven hundred AD jump centuries
of metallurgical development in seven days? I mean, usually technology
creeps forward trial and error.
Speaker 2: That's the anomaly. Metallurgy is an incremental science. You try mixture,
it fails. You change the carbon content slightly, it gets better.
You figure out quenching, you learn about folding steel. It
takes generations of trial and air. Amakuni did it in
one sprint. To use modern software terms, he bypassed the
entire evolutionary process.
Speaker 3: He didn't climb the ladder. He took an elevator to
the top floor.
Speaker 2: That's a great way to put it. And the sources
mentioned the rituals involved the purification the white robes.
Speaker 3: Yes.
Speaker 2: Yes. In the Shinto tradition, making a sword is a
deeply religious act. It involves intense purification. You bathe, you
wear white, you set up a sacred space, You chant
specific mantras. The source material suggests looking at this through
a modern lens, so it sounds almost like a sterile
scientific protocol.
Speaker 3: Like a clean room to avoid contamination exactly.
Speaker 2: And the chanting. Think of it as a mnemonic device
for timing a complex chemical process. Chant this verse, then
pull the steel from the forge. It ensures consistency. You're
following a set of instructions.
Speaker 1: So the ritual isn't just superstition, it's the manufacturing process.
Speaker 2: It could be if you look at the structure of
a katana, it's a composite marvel. You have a soft,
flexible steel core called chigan, which is low carbon, wrapped
in a hard brittle steel shell called kawagani, which is
high carbon. This gives you a blade that can hold
a razor edge that absorbs shocks so it doesn't snap.
Speaker 3: And getting that to work is hard, incredibly hard.
Speaker 2: Achieving that bond without delamination requires precise temperature control and
timing that blacksmiths shouldn't have been able to manage back then.
But the speculation here is did Amakuni receive downloaded information.
Speaker 3: From the kami.
Speaker 2: If we view the kami not as spirits but as
extraterrestrial intelligences or some other form of advanced teachers. Was
Amakuni tutored? Did he receive a blueprint? The prayer, a communion,
a data transfer?
Speaker 1: There's a specific blade mentioned in the sources, the Kogarasumru,
the little crow. It's in the Imperial collection today.
Speaker 2: Yes, and this is the kicker. Modern science has analyzed
these types of ancient blades, the neanto. We can put
them under electron microscopes, and we struggle to reproduce the
specific properties of that steel. Even today, we can't do it,
not perfectly. It has this incredible combination of mortin sight
and prolite structures in the steel. Plus it has a
high resistance to oxidation. It basically has a built in rustproofing.
We have all of modern chemistry and physics at our disposal,
and we scratch our heads at how they achieve that
purity with just iron, sand and charcoal.
Speaker 3: So if modern science struggles.
Speaker 2: How did a man in seven hundred AD perfect it
in a week without help? It makes you wonder if
prayer was actually a form of communication or data transmission,
like he was dialing up tech support.
Speaker 1: Or like you said, just the only word they had
for instruction. I spoke to the Kami and they showed
me the way. It's the same pattern as odin spear.
A technology appears fully formed with no developmental history.
Speaker 2: And it changes the course of that culture's history forever.
Speaker 1: Okay, so we've got guided missiles in the north, super
steel in the east. Now let's talk about something that
feels very sci fi but has some weirdly physical evidence
attached to it, death rays directed energy weapons.
Speaker 2: This is where we move from enhanced projectile weapons to
pure energy, and we have to start with a bridge
between history and myth. Archimedes.
Speaker 1: Archimedes is a historical figure. We know he was real
math guy, bathtub guy, eureka, Yes, a.
Speaker 2: Genius, But during the Siege of Syracusan two fourteen BC,
he was a weapon designer. The Romans were attacking by
c Archimedes, according to the accounts, built a system of
giant mirrors parabolic disks made of polished bronze to focus
the sun's rays onto the wooden Roman.
Speaker 3: Ships, and he set them on fire from a distance.
Speaker 2: He incinerated them. Now, MythBusters tried to replicate this and struggled.
They called it busted, but other groups, like a team
from MIT, did manage to get it to work. The
historical accounts insist it happened, and this establishes a baseline fact.
Death rays or directed energy weapons are conceptually possible even
in antiquity, using the sun.
Speaker 1: But the myths go further than mirrors. The gods didn't
need a sunny.
Speaker 2: Day, much further. The source's points as to Zeus, the
king of the Greek gods. We know him for the thunderbolt,
but look at the description. It's not just random lightning
from a cloud. Zeus could push a button or unleash
a trigger and release a thunderbolt that caused fierce explosions.
Speaker 3: Push a button that implies a device, a mechanism. It's deliberate,
it does.
Speaker 2: It implies a handheld directed energy weapon. And this isn't
limited to Greece. This concept is global. The source highlights
a visual from India, the doorshay or Vajra.
Speaker 1: Describe the door shape. I've seen these in yoga studios.
I think little brass things.
Speaker 2: It's a ritual object today often seen In Tibetan Buddhism,
it looks like a short, double ended scepter, usually brass
or bronze, but in the ancient depictions, in the hands
of gods like Indra, it looks strikingly like a tool
designed to channel a beam. The ends have prongs that
curve inward to a central point.
Speaker 3: Like a focusing array.
Speaker 2: It really does, and the text says it was used
to vanquish the enemy, to destroy him, to incinerate him.
It's not a club. It's described as emitting something.
Speaker 1: It looks like a plasma rifle. I mean, honestly, if
you see the carvings, it's a handheld weapon. It reminds
me of the weapons the guards use in Stargate.
Speaker 2: It connects the dots between cultures. Zeus has the thunderbolt,
the Hindu gods have the doorge a Thor has the hammer.
They are all portable devices that emit energy to destroy
targets at a distance.
Speaker 1: But stories are stories, right. You can write about a
lightning gun because it sounds cool. It's imaginative, But the
sources gave us something physical, something that exists today that
I had never heard of before. The vitrified forts of Scotland.
Speaker 2: This is the physical evidence that is hardest to dismiss.
This is where the skeptics usually get quiet, because it's testable,
it's repeatable, and it's baffling.
Speaker 3: Take us to Scotland. What do we see.
Speaker 2: Throughout the Scottish countryside, places like Tapanoth or Dunderdale. There
are these ancient stone forts. They are ruins now dating
back to the Iron Age or earlier, maybe two thousand
years ago. But when you analyze the stones of the
fortress walls you find something that should not be there,
the glass. They have been vitrified. The stone has literally
melted and fused together into a black, obsidian like glass.
Speaker 1: And to do that, I mean, surely you just burn
the fort down. You have a big enough fire, you
can melt anything, right.
Speaker 2: No, And here is the physics problem. To turn granite
or basalt into glass actual ventrification, you need a sustained
temperature of roughly eleven hundred to thirteen hundred degrees celsius.
That's over two thousand degrees fahrenheit.
Speaker 3: Thirteen hundred degrees. That's hotter than lava.
Speaker 2: It is now. The conventional explanation is that these forts
were burned down during sieges. They were built with timber
beams interlaced with stone. But here is the thermodynamics issue.
An open wood fire, even a massive siege bonfire with
fat and an oil thrown on it, peaks at about
eight hundred or nine hundred degrees celsius. And that's momentary
in the hottest part of the flame.
Speaker 3: So it's not hot enough, not nearly.
Speaker 2: And to melt a fortress wall that is ten feet thick,
you need that thirteen hundred degree heat applied consistently for days.
In an open air environment where heat dissipates constantly, the
mass just doesn't add up. You can't do it with wood.
Speaker 3: Could it be lightning? Lightning is incredibly hot.
Speaker 2: Lightning is hot enough. Yes, But lightning is a strike.
It's a point of impact. It creates something called a folgarite,
a glassy tube where it hits sand or rock. But
these walls are fused for hundreds of meters in length.
A lightning strike doesn't melt an entire perimeter wall. It's
the wrong energy profile.
Speaker 1: And there's a detail about where the glass is right.
This is the part that really got me.
Speaker 2: Yes, this is crucial. The glazing is often found only
on the outside of the walls. Whoa think about that?
If you burn a building down from the inside an
accidental fire sabotage, the heat is internal, The inside should
be vitrified. If the outside is glazed, it implies the
heat source came from the outside.
Speaker 3: It implies an attack.
Speaker 2: It fits the profile of a high heated atomic or
directed energy weapon used against a fortification. Something hit those
walls with enough thermal energy to flash melt rock instantly,
locking the chemical structure into glass before it could cool.
We don't have a primitive explanation for that. We can't
replicate it with wood fires.
Speaker 3: That is chilling.
Speaker 1: It suggests a war was fought there with weapons that
wouldn't exist again for thousands of years. It's like finding
a bullet hole in a t rex skull. It's an
anachronism exactly.
Speaker 2: It's an out of place artifact, but on the scale
of a building. Oh and if we want to talk
about wars fought with weapons that shouldn't exist, we have
to open the Mahaparada.
Speaker 3: The Mahaparada, this is the ancient Sanskrit epic of India.
It's huge, it's unbelievably complex.
Speaker 2: It's the longest poe ever written, about one point eight
million words, and for many Hindus it's religious history. It's
foundational to the culture. But for our purposes today, it
contains what claimed to be eyewitness accounts of a mass
of war, the Kodukschetro War.
Speaker 1: The descriptions in here, I mean when I read the
source material, I had to double check that I wasn't
reading a manual for the US Air Force.
Speaker 3: It's startlingly modern.
Speaker 2: It's uncanny. It reads like a modern military document that's
been translated through a poetic filter. Let's look at the
catalog of weapons described.
Speaker 1: First up Vishnuz guided missiles than aaryan astraarion astra.
Speaker 2: Now, this is described as a flying weapon that fills
the sky with millions of projectiles. But listen to the
trigger mechanism. It detects motion. The text says, if you move,
it hits you. It targets activity. The only way to
escape it is to lie flat on the ground, drop
your weapons, and be perfectly still.
Speaker 1: That is a motion detecting munition or an automated turret
system from a video game. It's programmed to hit moving
targets precisely.
Speaker 2: How does an ancient writer dream up a weapon that
sees movement, unless they witness technology that did exactly that.
If you run, you die, If you surrender and freeze,
it ignores you. That's out algorithmic targeting. That's iff identify
friend or foe.
Speaker 3: But for movement, then there are the heat seekers.
Speaker 2: Yes, missiles described as following the fire or the spirit
of the target. If you've only ever seen an arrow
which goes where you pointed, how do you describe a
projectile that chases a heat source. You say it has
a mind of its own. You say it hunts, It
follows its prey.
Speaker 1: It's the only language you have for a self guiding system.
And then we have the god Shalva.
Speaker 2: Shalva is fascinating. He has a flying vehicle of Vimana.
We could do a hole throwing threads on Vimana's alone.
But shelviscraft called Saba is special. He can make it invisible.
Speaker 3: Stealth tech, active chemouflage.
Speaker 2: And he can put entire armies to sleep.
Speaker 1: Chemical warfare, some kind of nerve gas or sleeping agent.
Speaker 2: It's all there. Stealth, chemical agents, guide ammunitions. It's a
complete military industrial complex. But the Maha Barata describes one
weapon that stands above them all, the Brahmastra.
Speaker 3: The ultimate weapon, the weapon that.
Speaker 2: The text explicitly says never be used. It is the
weapon of last resort, the divine nuke.
Speaker 1: The description of this thing gives me goosebumps. Read us
the bit from the translation it's haunting.
Speaker 2: The text reads, a single projectile, charged with all the
power of the universe, an incandescent column of smoke and flame,
as bright as ten thousand sons, rose in all its.
Speaker 3: Splendor, as bright as ten thousand sons.
Speaker 1: That is the exact phrase Robert Oppenheimer, the father of
the atomic bomb, quoted from the bagavad Gita, when he
watched the first nuclear test at Trinity.
Speaker 2: It is the parallel is chilling and direct. But it
gets worse. The text describes the blast effects. It was
an unknown weapon, an iron thunderbolt, a gigantic messenger of death,
which reduced to ashes the entire race of the Vrishnis
and then Dakas. It says the corpses were so burned
they were unrecognizable.
Speaker 1: But it's the aftermath that really sells it for me,
because anyone can describe a big fire. But the text
talks about what happens to the survivors in the days
following the blast.
Speaker 2: This is the clinical detail that is impossible to fake.
This isn't poetry anymore. This sounds like a medical report.
It says the hair and nails fell out, pottery broke
without cause, and the birds turned white, and the food
and it says the food was poisoned. Any food exposed
to it became toxic.
Speaker 1: Hair falling out, nails falling out, food poisoned. That is
a textbook perfect description of acute radiation sickness and nuclear fallout.
Speaker 2: There is no other natural phenomenon that causes your hair
and nails to fall out after the event. Fire burned you.
Disease makes you sick, but radiation attacks your cellular structure,
your bone marrow. The birds turning white is also consistent
with thermal bleaching from a nuclear flash.
Speaker 3: It's just too specific to be a coincidence.
Speaker 2: The source material forces us to ask, did the Mahafarada
record an ancient nuclear detonation? Is this folk memory of
a war fought with weapons we've only just reinvented.
Speaker 1: And we are still echoing this today. The sources mentioned
that modern India names their rockets, Shokti goddess energy.
Speaker 2: We're reliving the mythology through modern tech. We are building
the things our ancestors said the gods used to destroy
the world. It's like we're retracing their steps, rebuilding their arsenal.
Speaker 1: So we have evidence of high tech war on the
ground in Sweden, Japan, Scotland, India. But the sources take
us even further. They take us off planet to the
cosmic battlefield.
Speaker 2: This changes the scope completely. We aren't just talking about
a skirmish on Earth. We are talking about a Solar
system wide conflict.
Speaker 1: It starts with a math problem from the seventeen hundreds.
That's just Bode anomaly. I had never heard of this.
Speaker 2: It's a fascinating bit of astronomical history. In the eighteenth century,
astronomers noticed a strange mathematical pattern in the spacing of
the planets. Think of the Solar System like a musical scale.
Each planet sits at a specific predicted distance from the Sun.
Speaker 3: There's a formula for it.
Speaker 2: There is and Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars that they all
fit the math perfectly.
Speaker 1: Okay, so it's like a rhythm, a predictable pattern exactly.
Speaker 2: But when you get to the game between Mars and Jupiter.
The math says there must be a planet there. It's
like playing a piano scale and missing a note. The
silence is deafening. The math demands a planet in that.
Speaker 3: Orbit, but there isn't a planet.
Speaker 2: No. Instead, we have the asteroid belt, a field of
millions of rocks and debris, all orbiting exactly where that
planet should be.
Speaker 1: And this leads to the theory of destruction.
Speaker 2: The idea that there was a planet there and something
destroyed it. And this isn't a new idea. The Sumerian
myths describe a cosmic battle in the heavens. They talk
about a planet sometimes called Tiamat, sometimes Phaeton, that was
destroyed in a war between the gods.
Speaker 3: So the mythology and the math.
Speaker 2: Line up they do. Zachariascitchen, the ancient astronaut theorist, propose
that the asteroid belt is the physical remains of this
destroyed planet, the rubble from a planetary war.
Speaker 1: So the debris field is a graveyard, a planetary corpse exactly.
Speaker 2: And if a planet was destroyed, blown apart into asteroids,
where did the survivors go? If anyone survived.
Speaker 1: That brings us to Series, the dwarf planet hanging out
in the asteroid belt.
Speaker 3: It's the biggest thing in.
Speaker 2: The belt, right it is. Series is a fascinating object.
It contains about a third of the mass of the
entire asteroid belt. And in twenty fifteen, NASA's don mission
arrived at Series and the images it sent back were
unexpected bright lights.
Speaker 3: I remember seeing these on the news. They were all
over the.
Speaker 2: Internet, extremely bright reflective spots inside the Ocat crater. NASA's
official explanation is that they are salt deposits cryoholcanism, but
they are incredibly reflective. And the probe also sent back
images that appear to show a three mile tall pyramid
shape structure. It's called Ahuonaman's a Hunaman's a three mile
tall mountain with incredibly steep smooth size that looks artificial.
Speaker 1: A three mile tall pyramid on a rock in the
middle of nowhere.
Speaker 2: The speculation here is compelling. If your planet was destroyed,
blown apart into asteroid, Series is the biggest chunk left,
it would be the natural place to set up a refuge,
a base, an outpost, a lifeboat.
Speaker 1: Is it possible those lights in that pyramid are remnants
of the civilization that fled the destruction, like a bunker
in the wasteland.
Speaker 2: It's a valid question that the data forces us to ask,
and it ties back to the idea that these gods
were not magical. They were refugees or soldiers. They were
fighting for survival. Maybe they came here afterwards.
Speaker 1: Which brings the war down to earth. The sources discussed
the war between the Greek Titans and the Olympians the Titanomichi.
We usually think of this as oh Zeus fought his dad, Cronus,
because he ate his kids.
Speaker 3: It's a family drama.
Speaker 2: But look at the geography. You have the Titans on
Mount Autrees, you have the Olympians on Mount Olympus. These
are two distinct physical locations.
Speaker 3: And Mount Olympus isn't just a mountain in the myths.
Speaker 2: No, it's described in the Iliad as a palace with
gleaming walls of gold and silver and blinking jewels. It
has gates that open on their.
Speaker 3: Own, blinking jewels.
Speaker 1: That sounds like a server room or a cockpit of
a spaceship or.
Speaker 2: A fortified military command post. If you reinterpret the War
of the Titans, not as a mystical struggle, but as
a tactical war between two extraterrestrial factions using the Earth
as a battlefield. The descriptions make a lot more sense.
Speaker 3: They're fighting a mountaintop to mountaintop war.
Speaker 2: They are firing at each other from fortified high ground positions.
Thunderbolts are flying, the Earth is shaking. It sounds like artillery.
Speaker 1: So the gods were extraterrestrial factions fighting a proxy war
or maybe a civil war right here on our planet.
Speaker 2: And we, the early humans, were just caught in the
crossfire or worse, used as foot soldiers. Our myths are
just the war stories.
Speaker 3: We told afterwards, which is a terrifying thought.
Speaker 1: It makes it small, but it leads us to the
final and maybe most controversial part of our stack today.
Because if this happened in the past, is it still happening.
Speaker 2: This is where we get into modern disclosure. This is
where we stop looking at old rocks and start looking
at new computer servers.
Speaker 3: We have to talk about Gary McKinnon.
Speaker 2: The hacker, the man who caused a massive diplomatic incident
between the UK and the US and the early two thousands.
Speaker 1: In two thousand and two, the Guy, a British systems administrator,
hacks into ninety seven US military and NASA computers. He's
looking for evidence of UFOs free energy, that sort of thing,
and he claims to have found something very specific.
Speaker 2: Not a blurry photo or a weird document.
Speaker 3: No, he says he found Excel spreadsheets.
Speaker 2: Excel spreadsheets the most mundane thing in the world. But
what was on them?
Speaker 1: Lists, specifically lists under the heading non terrestrial officer.
Speaker 2: Nonterrestrial officers. Now playing Devil's advocate, Could that mean officers
stationed in foreign countries? Space Command has personnel all over
the globe.
Speaker 1: It's possible, but he claims the context made it clear.
He says non terrestrial specifically implies not on Earth.
Speaker 3: But there was more.
Speaker 1: He found lists of fleet to fleet, cargo transfers, ship manifests,
but the ships had a prefix he'd never.
Speaker 2: Seen, USSS, not USA, not USS like the Navy USSS,
United States Space Ships.
Speaker 1: That implies a secret space fleet, a fleet that is
distinct from NASA, distinct from the public space program. McKinnon
believes he stumbled upon the roster for a clandestine military
space force, a program some whistleblowers call solar WORDOM This
aligns with the idea that we have mastered or reverse
engineered the technology you've been seeing. We're not just watching
the gods anymore. We've stolen their fire.
Speaker 2: And he's not the only one saying this from a
position of authority. We have Paul.
Speaker 3: Hellier, the former Canadian Defence minister.
Speaker 1: This is the guy who oversaw the integration of the
Canadian armed forces in the nineteen sixties. This isn't a
guy in a tinfoil hat in a basement. This is
a G seven defence minister, a very serious man.
Speaker 2: He is an extremely credible witness. He passed away in
twenty twenty one, but his testimony is blunt. He states unequivocally,
UFOs are as real as the airplanes flying over your head.
The US government is in contact with them, and.
Speaker 3: He goes into detail about the bent. He's not vague,
he is not.
Speaker 2: He says it's not just one species. He mentions the
short grays, the tall whites, the mantis beings, reptilians. He
cites figures of anywhere from two to twelve different species
visiting or operating on Earth.
Speaker 3: Confirmed, he says, by Apollo astronaut edgar Mitchell.
Speaker 2: Another highly credible source, the sixth Man to Walk on
the Moon. Mitchell was very vocal before his death about
the fact that we're being visited and that there is
a cover up.
Speaker 1: But Hellier has a warning, doesn't he. It's not all
peace and love and we come in peace.
Speaker 2: He does, and this connects everything back to the ancient
myths in a really chilling way. He warns that these
different species have competing agendas. Some are benign, some are neutral,
and some are not.
Speaker 1: He asks the big question, are they here for our
best interests or theirs?
Speaker 2: He suggests some might see Earth as their territory, a
strategic piece of real estate in the galaxy, just.
Speaker 3: Like the Olympians fighting the Titans for control of.
Speaker 2: The planet, just like the Norse gods fighting the frost giants.
It's the same story.
Speaker 1: So what does this all mean? If we connect all
these threads, what's the tapestry look like?
Speaker 2: The picture that emerges is that the dynamic hasn't changed
in ten thousand years. In the ancient texts, the gods
weren't benevolent creators. They were warring factions using high tech weaponry,
guided missiles, directed energy nukes to fight over territory, humans
were pawds or collateral damage, and hell, hell, you're is
suggesting that the situation today is exactly the same, only
the terminology has changed. We don't say demi gods anymore.
We say non terrestrial officers. We don't say magic spears,
we say directed energy weapons. The conflict is ongoing.
Speaker 1: It's a continuous thread from Odin's laser sphere to Japanese supersteel,
through the nuclear wasteland of the Maharada, passed the shattered
planet in the asteroid Belt, and finally landing in the
secret computer files of the Pentagon.
Speaker 2: Humanity has been witnessing, recording, and trying to survive advanced
technology for thousands of years. We just called it mythology
because we didn't have the user manual.
Speaker 1: That is a lot to process. It really reframes everything
about human history.
Speaker 2: It rewrites the timeline of human innovation completely. It suggests
we aren't the inventors, we're the inheritors, or maybe just
the mimics.
Speaker 3: Before we go, I want to leave you with a
provocative thought.
Speaker 1: If the gods were actually just advanced military factions fighting
over territory, does that mean our history of human warfare
is just us mimicking our parents?
Speaker 2: That's a heavy question. Are we just acting out a
learned behavior?
Speaker 3: Think about it.
Speaker 1: Are we destined to build the Brahmastra the nuke because
it's in our technological DNA left by them? Are we
just re enacting their wars with the toys they left behind?
Are we children playing with a loaded gun we found
in dad's closet.
Speaker 2: It suggests our destructive nature might not be evolved, but inherited.
We learned from the best, or rather the worst.
Speaker 1: So here's my question to you, the listener. If disclosure
happened tomorrow, if the President or the UN came out
and said yes, Mount Olympus was a crash spaceship and
Odin was a fleet commander, would that destroy your view
of human history? Or would it finally make everything mix.
Speaker 2: It's the difference between thinking we are alone and the
masters of our own destiny and realizing we've been living
in a crowded house with warring landlords the whole time.
Speaker 3: Exactly what is your stand?
Speaker 1: Are we alone or are we just the ground troops
in a very old war? Let us know in the comments,
We read them, and we really want to know what
you think.
Speaker 3: About this one.
Speaker 2: Keep pulling at the threads.
Speaker 3: Thanks for joining us on thrilling Threads.