Speaker 1: You see, something's going to happen. What's going to happen?
Speaker 1: What we welcome to the Occult Rejects. Today we've got
Speaker 1: a returning guest. I think it's his third time back
Speaker 1: on and it was always it was always a pleasure
Speaker 1: in a blast the other two times, so I figured
Speaker 1: when I getting back on again. But before we introduced Alexander,
Speaker 1: we're going to introduce the other rejects. My man, we
Speaker 1: got the Headless Giant. Just got done doing a show.
Speaker 1: It was nice enough to jump back on here. These
Speaker 1: guys a gangster. Thank you very much. Hitdlus let him
Speaker 1: know what what you got going on there and all
Speaker 1: your endeavors. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you can find me at the Headless Giant podcast
Speaker 2: on YouTube and on Twitter x anything like that. So
Speaker 2: I've got a bunch of shows. I was just doing
Speaker 2: the Trialogus with my buddies Ethan and Ricardo and that
Speaker 2: was a good time. So check that out.
Speaker 1: Thank you awesome, Thank you very much, sir and Brandon
Speaker 1: Magas in the media, what is going on?
Speaker 3: Hello, Hello everyone, I'm excited for this wonderful talk with Alexander.
Speaker 3: Everyone out there, head over to Magason the Media YouTube channel.
Speaker 4: X TikTok Instagram. We're hitting all the things.
Speaker 3: YouTube channels are the big one where you hit all
Speaker 3: my video essays, live streams, my breakdowns of all kinds.
Speaker 3: All you nerds out there, all your magicians, philosophers, academics,
Speaker 3: we're all coming together and we're all taking on the
Speaker 3: archons together.
Speaker 1: I love it you definitely. I do have to say.
Speaker 1: You definitely cover a plethora of different topics over it stuff.
Speaker 1: That's why I love it. I really do. It's great stuff, man,
Speaker 1: And we got out, Like I said before, we got
Speaker 1: Alexander returning with us. Please, sir, let everybody know what
Speaker 1: your dealer is. Promote any of your books. I do
Speaker 1: have your link for the book in the bottom, but
Speaker 1: let people know what what's going on with you.
Speaker 5: Thanks for having me on again. As you mentioned third
Speaker 5: time on your show. I really enjoy it as always.
Speaker 5: My name is Alexandra Tishkevitch. You can find me, as
Speaker 5: with most of the people today on plenty of social
Speaker 5: media YouTube, Facebook, Instagram. Just copy paste Alexander Tishkevich and
Speaker 5: you will find me easily. My book is Daja Who
Speaker 5: has Everything Already Been? You can again find find it
Speaker 5: in amazons like in US, Canada, UK, Australia and many more.
Speaker 5: Deja who has everything already been? The best way, the
Speaker 5: easiest way is just copy and paste my name and surname.
Speaker 1: Very nice, that's very nice. So I know you approached
Speaker 1: me and you wanted to come back on again. I
Speaker 1: know you said there was like I guess, new things
Speaker 1: since being in school. So I guess wherever you want
Speaker 1: to take us, wherever you want to start with that,
Speaker 1: it's your floor, Yah sir.
Speaker 5: Yes, there have been plenty of new things going on,
Speaker 5: both with my life research but also when it comes
Speaker 5: to like media, new discoveries, archaeological, historical, and plenty of
Speaker 5: new things. And before we had two conversations, first introductory
Speaker 5: one about lost history and similar to this, you know
Speaker 5: title of our live stream science Our history is older.
Speaker 5: We're talking about that. Then in the second one we
Speaker 5: talked mostly about science, philosophy of science, the limitations, how
Speaker 5: it all works, and how science is never in the
Speaker 5: present form, in the current form able to go and
Speaker 5: achieve the truth, the final truth or something like that.
Speaker 5: And today I wanted to compile all of that knowledge
Speaker 5: and also give plenty of new things. And as you
Speaker 5: mentioned with my school. I started a bachelor degree with
Speaker 5: history in history here at my local University of Gdynsk,
Speaker 5: and I was actually positively surprised because I was given
Speaker 5: my book to some like professors doctors in history ancient
Speaker 5: one and they said that they do not agree as
Speaker 5: scholars with everything with lots of civilizations atlantis, but they
Speaker 5: were pretty happy that people are that much interested at
Speaker 5: my age when it comes to this all the history,
Speaker 5: which is, according to them, the least wanted one. Everyone
Speaker 5: when it comes to history wants to you know, learn
Speaker 5: world wars and stuff like that, but when it comes
Speaker 5: to this prehistory, when it comes to like younger generations,
Speaker 5: it isn't that very often that people are interested. So
Speaker 5: I was welcomed to some extent. I was given like
Speaker 5: private schedule to meet my interest to have specializations in
Speaker 5: you know, ancient times, ancient.
Speaker 4: Middle East history, religion.
Speaker 5: And stuff like that. And I will be also soon
Speaker 5: writing Purvid articles this time, and I wanted with all
Speaker 5: that experience, and you know, it's been a few months there,
Speaker 5: I wanted to you know, compare like academic knowledge with
Speaker 5: alternative history, how it's all connected and what are the differences,
Speaker 5: And also I wanted to include some new stuff both
Speaker 5: that I've learned, but not only when it comes to
Speaker 5: my studies there, but also when it comes to just
Speaker 5: you know, my research via books, internet, et cetera. And
Speaker 5: how as it's mentioned in the title, the science is
Speaker 5: finally catching up with, you know, all the conspiracy theories
Speaker 5: about our most deepest periods of our history, of our past,
Speaker 5: with especially prehistory dates like the dates of Atlantis before
Speaker 5: first civilizations and so on and so forth. So I
Speaker 5: think I will start with.
Speaker 4: All of that.
Speaker 5: Let's say, according to maybe let's start not with history
Speaker 5: like civilizations like ancient Sumer Egypt, but let's start with
Speaker 5: humanity at all. And you know, when I started studying,
Speaker 5: I wanted to know, to learn more academic history, you know,
Speaker 5: I got access to the library, et cetera. And for instance,
Speaker 5: when I was writing a few years ago, like five
Speaker 5: years ago, my book an automatically modern humans were Apperiod
Speaker 5: about two hundred thousand years ago according to genetic studies
Speaker 5: two hundred thousand, and again first settlements ten thousand BCS
Speaker 5: or twelve thousand years ago, ancient summer about five thousand
Speaker 5: years ago. So still there was a huge gap, right,
Speaker 5: now when it comes to like the current academic knowledge,
Speaker 5: it is stated that an automically modern humans appeared three
Speaker 5: hundred fifteen thousand years ago, so more than one hundred
Speaker 5: thousand years before, you know, just five or six years ago,
Speaker 5: not two hundred thousand, but three hundred fifteen thousand, with
Speaker 5: an additional note that probably they diverged from other home
Speaker 5: in it about half a million years ago, half a
Speaker 5: million years ago, and still civilization just about five thousand
Speaker 5: years ago, so still huge gap in our history that
Speaker 5: I'm explaining, I've explained in the first episode and of
Speaker 5: course in my book and other works. And what is
Speaker 5: interested interesting. What is interesting in that is we were
Speaker 5: given some like textbooks and academic books to learn about prehistory,
Speaker 5: and I got one very cool one from two thousand
Speaker 5: and four. And in two thousand and four it was stated,
Speaker 5: I remember, you know, the exact quote, that an automookly
Speaker 5: modern humans appeared fifty thousand years ago, maximum of one
Speaker 5: hundred thousand. So you see how in the last twenty
Speaker 5: years or twenty five or something, you know, we took
Speaker 5: the roots of anatomically modern humans similar to us right now,
Speaker 5: not like different home inies previous like ape men or
Speaker 5: something like that, but anatomically modern human genetically speaking from
Speaker 5: fifty thousand to one hundred thousand, then to two hundred thousand,
Speaker 5: and now to about three hundred fifteen thousand, two half
Speaker 5: a million years ago. So we are taking the roots
Speaker 5: of humanity back so much like in the last twenty
Speaker 5: five thirty years. So imagine how our knowledge will be
Speaker 5: in like the next twenty or fifty years and how
Speaker 5: you know, back or maybe not, we'll take the roots
Speaker 5: of humanity. So I've always asked when I first when
Speaker 5: I was writing my book, we're asking myself, you know
Speaker 5: how all this civilization like why only five thousand tiears ago?
Speaker 5: Approximately when two hundred thousand years of anatomicly modern humans.
Speaker 5: And I think that right now we are even more
Speaker 5: and more taking.
Speaker 4: The roots of civilization back.
Speaker 5: So this was the you know, genetics, anthropology, prehistory, so
Speaker 5: before written history, before civilizations. But right now when it
Speaker 5: comes to history, and these are like very recent recent news.
Speaker 5: Last December I think it was approximately the same, like
Speaker 5: fifteenth December, twelfth December something like that. So about a
Speaker 5: month ago, there was an an archaeologist as criologists, Irvin
Speaker 5: Finkel on the Lex Friedman podcast, and he mentioned that
Speaker 5: this is his own like controversial theory as an academic,
Speaker 5: but even thinkl isn't like just a researcher alternative history now,
Speaker 5: he is, you know, true academic person, very strigged, very conservative,
Speaker 5: and he said that we might be on a blink
Speaker 5: of a bit of revolution. That the writing system was
Speaker 5: not first found in ancient Summer or Proto Sumerian scrut
Speaker 5: but it may be as old as gobeicly tape, so
Speaker 5: it may be taken back from let's say thirty five
Speaker 5: hundred BC to about nine thousand BC and more. And
Speaker 5: he said it's his controversial opinion, but he's very let's
Speaker 5: say conservative, and he mentioned some evidence for that. And
Speaker 5: at gobekletape, you know this famous side about twelve years
Speaker 5: ago with all of these mega leaves that change a
Speaker 5: bit are understanding when it comes to human history. We
Speaker 5: found some stones with some kind of inscriptions similar to
Speaker 5: proto Proto Sumerian cunniform script that, according to this assyriologists,
Speaker 5: may be actually used as some kind of stamps, you know,
Speaker 5: stone engraved with some kind of script, you know, put
Speaker 5: on clay like a stamp. But of course these clay
Speaker 5: tablets didn't survive because it isn't that much again, because
Speaker 5: I'm telling you right now like very academic stuff. Because
Speaker 5: before we were talking about conspiracies and alternative history. But
Speaker 5: the more you know, I was attending the classes and
Speaker 5: the more I'm learning the academic stuff right now, the
Speaker 5: more I actually found I found what I was thinking before,
Speaker 5: the more like it's all, you know, the evidence comes
Speaker 5: together that what you know, Graham Hankok was talking about
Speaker 5: is or decades ago, what other alternative historians, what I've
Speaker 5: been speculating about for the last few years. The more
Speaker 5: I'm in this academic the more I'm learning academic stuff,
Speaker 5: the more connections I see that it's making the picture.
Speaker 5: So contrary to the belief of many skeptics that the
Speaker 5: more you learn academic stuff, the less you believe in
Speaker 5: loss of civilizations or in Atlantis or something. Maybe it's
Speaker 5: not that I'm more believing, because you know, I did
Speaker 5: my own research before. But I see connections and I
Speaker 5: see how you know, we will be changing very soon
Speaker 5: our history, that it's coming, you know, everything is being
Speaker 5: taken back more and more by thousands of years. We
Speaker 5: are talking about here, let's say sumerianscript about thirty five
Speaker 5: hundred BC. The starting point maybe before one thousand BC,
Speaker 5: you know, the earliest Proto script or something like that.
Speaker 5: But now we are taking nine thousand years so twice
Speaker 5: the time as that the times of approximately Atlantists, and
Speaker 5: we are saying that the script is taken back.
Speaker 4: So if there was a script, if there.
Speaker 5: Was megalithic strutt, if there were megalithic constructions like these
Speaker 5: found out goblicly tape, we see that there was some
Speaker 5: kind of civilization at the times of Atlantis or just
Speaker 5: a little bit after that. And you know, there are
Speaker 5: so many more discoveries right now or in the least
Speaker 5: ten fifteen years in the academic circles that I think
Speaker 5: the more and more theories like the theory of Atlantis
Speaker 5: or lost civilizations are plausible. And I you know, when
Speaker 5: I'm saying that right now, I'm thinking that in twenty years,
Speaker 5: thirty years, maybe fifty years, the theory that civilization or
Speaker 5: some kind of sophisticated culture started let's say ten or
Speaker 5: twenty or more thousand years ago will be plausible. So
Speaker 5: this is huge if you've got some questions. If not,
Speaker 5: I will go and take it further, I will dream Alexander.
Speaker 2: There. I think what a lot of the institution, the
Speaker 2: academic institution does is they try to limit the amount
Speaker 2: of understanding of state secrets. Right, So if we're going
Speaker 2: to take state secrets as an example and then just
Speaker 2: put that back into history, things start to make a
Speaker 2: little bit more sense when when you see the library
Speaker 2: of Alexandria being burned down and all of these different
Speaker 2: civilizations sort of keeping all of the knowledge of metallurgy
Speaker 2: to themselves, like this was a highly valuable state secret.
Speaker 2: That state secrecy institution has sort of been in place
Speaker 2: since the Bronze Age, since way back when, and I
Speaker 2: don't think academia is ready to, you know, fully come
Speaker 2: out and say, hey, yeah, there's kind of been a
Speaker 2: state secret thing with us and all this transatlantic travel
Speaker 2: going on in prehistory that we can't really talk about
Speaker 2: because it affects the political situation today. But all of
Speaker 2: these different ideas really come apart when you realize how
Speaker 2: much older civilization is. Then we're being given right now.
Speaker 2: So I don't know if that was a question, but.
Speaker 4: Now that's brilliant. I agree, Headless, it's interesting.
Speaker 3: The more I work with academia myself. There's so much
Speaker 3: bureaucracy and administration that and it's interesting, how, you know,
Speaker 3: we talk about the governmental slash, the deep state and
Speaker 3: black ops and all these different things, there's so many
Speaker 3: different ego like the conspiracies.
Speaker 4: It's like they're all trying to vie for power.
Speaker 3: So even on the microcosmic level of in academia, you
Speaker 3: can't get one professor who's like, I know, a man
Speaker 3: who's in the humanities department in like a really big
Speaker 3: school of like something as seamlessly as say like architecture,
Speaker 3: different things like that, And then you have your other
Speaker 3: more positivest professors in that same department, and they're at
Speaker 3: odds and they're like trying to stop this kind of
Speaker 3: thing that you're talking about, those words like they're trying
Speaker 3: to stop and even Alexander, they're trying to stop this
Speaker 3: the mythopoetic human like more quadrivium like nature of what
Speaker 3: the academia even was back in the day. So it's like,
Speaker 3: I wonder, how can even in the next twenty years,
Speaker 3: especially as the powers that be try to control the narratives,
Speaker 3: how you know, even though we're expanding things by thousands
Speaker 3: of years, Like how really, like really do we think
Speaker 3: that we can like all of a sudden.
Speaker 4: Realize our nature?
Speaker 3: As Graham Hancock talks about it as like a we
Speaker 3: are a civilization within amnesia.
Speaker 4: You know what I mean? Yes, I understand.
Speaker 5: I didn't want I didn't want to include conspiracy at
Speaker 5: first because I was actually very welcomed. And I think
Speaker 5: that there are, of course plenty of conspiracy, plenty of
Speaker 5: as you mentioned, bureaucratic things when it comes to academia.
Speaker 5: But from my own experience, maybe it's just a few months,
Speaker 5: and you know, not with like tens or dozens of
Speaker 5: profit source, but just if you I've experienced that people
Speaker 5: even you know, at this level, some people are very open,
Speaker 5: very curious, and not everywhere, but of course at the
Speaker 5: higher level, like publishing level, if you wanted to publish
Speaker 5: something very controversial or something, yes, of course, but the
Speaker 5: conspiracy isn't everywhere. And still, you know, when we try
Speaker 5: to make an appearance that there is no conspiracy, things
Speaker 5: are getting through this new discovery is this neey stuff?
Speaker 5: So I didn't want to know to start with such conspiracy.
Speaker 5: And I think that you know, not in entire academia.
Speaker 5: There is a conspiracy even you know I mentioned that,
Speaker 5: you know, I'm on such podcasts, et cetera. They were asking,
Speaker 5: you know, ancient aliens and stuff like that, lots of
Speaker 5: civilizations and what they said about you know, being academic,
Speaker 5: being an academic historian. And as I mentioned, there is
Speaker 5: a conspiracy, especially when it comes to let's say Polish history,
Speaker 5: because maybe you know, here in Poland ancient times, prehistoric,
Speaker 5: no one cursed because it's not.
Speaker 4: Politically very dangerous.
Speaker 5: Still maybe on the other side of the world, of
Speaker 5: course it is, but here still it isn't. But when
Speaker 5: it comes to the Polish for instance, megothic sides. I
Speaker 5: had a few people telling me about their experiences that,
Speaker 5: you know, they couldn't go in places that you know
Speaker 5: are very accessible to casual tourists. But you know, when
Speaker 5: they got some kind of a paratus like glider or something,
Speaker 5: you know, they were men in black, came men in
Speaker 5: black of course as a meta for some kind of agents,
Speaker 5: and they said, no, you cannot do that, better relief,
Speaker 5: it will be in dangerous. I know people you know
Speaker 5: firsthand who were telling me that, and had a few
Speaker 5: of such things.
Speaker 4: But what I mentioned I.
Speaker 5: Didn't want such a conspiracy because for the last few
Speaker 5: months I didn't experience it. And why they said, you
Speaker 5: know that historian is like a job. Like let's say
Speaker 5: you are a judge and you need to you know,
Speaker 5: do your judge things. No matter you know who the
Speaker 5: suspect is, is it your family member or do know
Speaker 5: the truth? You need to go you know, through all
Speaker 5: the methodologists. You need to know logically, rationally, you know,
Speaker 5: analyze everything. And the same is with the historian. Even
Speaker 5: though you have some ideas, even though you have some
Speaker 5: opinions in peer reviewed papers, in the official academic statements,
Speaker 5: you need to be you know, using historical methodologists, you
Speaker 5: need to be objective. No matter what do you believe
Speaker 5: in Atlantis or not, you need to follow the guide. So,
Speaker 5: as I mentioned before, we had this conversation about limitations
Speaker 5: of science. That's why I believe, you know, science will
Speaker 5: never at the current firm come to the you know,
Speaker 5: final truth like you know, spiritual even truth, metaphysical truths.
Speaker 4: And that's what I.
Speaker 5: Wanted to know today, to show from my experience that
Speaker 5: it's not that all academics and you know from my experience,
Speaker 5: I you know, as I'm in such a podcast, even
Speaker 5: bigger ones, I get plenty of critics. I get plenty
Speaker 5: you know, of people calling me some kind of crap
Speaker 5: et cetera, different words. But actually, when you know, I
Speaker 5: went studying, and you know, I know a few of
Speaker 5: academic members of high ranking here in Poland, at least
Speaker 5: I've experienced that these kinds of people that are, oh,
Speaker 5: we need to debank Graham ham Kok, Oh, Graham Kuangkok
Speaker 5: is racist, et cetera. These are you know, just as
Speaker 5: in politics, there are some very strong voices.
Speaker 4: You know, these they.
Speaker 5: Aren't like representing the official academic stuff. They are we know,
Speaker 5: in this like one kind of group that wants to
Speaker 5: debank everything and wants to have this kind of opinion.
Speaker 5: And even right now here we are learning about different
Speaker 5: kinds of approaches, maybe not as let's say, controversial as
Speaker 5: Graham Hamkok's ideas, but we are talking. Okay, some people
Speaker 5: believe in that, but some people are completely in opposition
Speaker 5: to that. Even when it comes to actually such things
Speaker 5: that academia should you know, everything is in the current
Speaker 5: part I know, for instance, the chronol and day things
Speaker 5: of ancient Egypt. There is still a debate and you know,
Speaker 5: there is one academic group that thinks there were some
Speaker 5: kind of one hundred years in the ancient Egyptian history,
Speaker 5: and there is the other group who is rejecting entire
Speaker 5: one hundred years of history, which in the result is
Speaker 5: completely changing the chronology.
Speaker 4: So I wanted to share, you know, without.
Speaker 5: The conspiracy, from my own experience, that you know, such
Speaker 5: kind of let's say, mild academia, not like very politically
Speaker 5: or conspiratorially interested people. You know, it's like a job
Speaker 5: that you need to follow the methodologists. You need to
Speaker 5: follow that this is our method. Like let's say I'm
Speaker 5: some kind of engineer or someone or car mechanic. I
Speaker 5: am one hundred percent experts, you know, in car mechanics,
Speaker 5: I'm like one of the best. But when it comes
Speaker 5: to for instance, some there will be there will come
Speaker 5: a current and I cannot do my own mechanic magic,
Speaker 5: mechanical magic because she would say no, it's not like
Speaker 5: that or something, and I will get sued by her.
Speaker 5: So like you know what I mean, So the same
Speaker 5: you need to follow the guidelines in the academic but
Speaker 5: you can have like your own opinions and you know,
Speaker 5: your own stuff. It will be sometimes ridiculed at such
Speaker 5: antil I wanted, you know, to omit for a moment,
Speaker 5: this conspiracy power, just to show you know how everything
Speaker 5: from my own experience, how I experienced and how it
Speaker 5: shocked me because I also before had this. You know,
Speaker 5: oh I will go, I will be called a pseudo
Speaker 5: scientist or something. It will be so only the borrowing
Speaker 5: stuff there wouldn't be anything. And the same the more
Speaker 5: I'm learning from these academic books, like I started, you know,
Speaker 5: more heavily before I also was reading academic books, but
Speaker 5: I am more heavily focused because of the classes on
Speaker 5: the academic stuff. The more I see how actually, finally
Speaker 5: on this level, the bs of the bankers that oh
Speaker 5: Atlantis never existed, and so one is stopping making any
Speaker 5: sense because you see, for instance that at such a
Speaker 5: high academic level, people are very open.
Speaker 4: We do not know much about our history.
Speaker 5: We find only a few examples of this, how minutes,
Speaker 5: and we still don't know if there were others, like
Speaker 5: between the ones that we found, we do not know that,
Speaker 5: you know, if history started here because we have a
Speaker 5: different example here. So this was like positively shocking to
Speaker 5: me that finally, at this level the stuff I'm talking about, Oh,
Speaker 5: we are speculating maybe history is older, maybe civilization is older,
Speaker 5: maybe there was Atlantis. These kind of things is are
Speaker 5: completely ridiculed. Like when we are talking in some kind
Speaker 5: of you know, academic de bunker, we'll say, oh, it's
Speaker 5: all bs.
Speaker 4: But when you.
Speaker 5: Start reading yourself high academic stuff, you will see there
Speaker 5: are even debates about, you know, if this was influenced
Speaker 5: by that or by that things that you know, we
Speaker 5: as alternative historians are doing like asking questions, can it
Speaker 5: be older?
Speaker 4: Can it be the case that we do.
Speaker 5: Not have plenty of things that were preserved from let's
Speaker 5: say ancient summer or any other kind of distant past.
Speaker 5: So this was what positively shocked me.
Speaker 3: That's amazing. I think I'm fascinating Alexander. I love your
Speaker 3: ability to continue that train of thought that was that
Speaker 3: was That was awesome. I think it's important to understand
Speaker 3: what the difference between conspiracy as in theory and conspiracy
Speaker 3: as in to conspire, don't you think? And and that's
Speaker 3: what a lot of people don't understand is we continually
Speaker 3: want to talk about what like maybe the more new
Speaker 3: age idea of what Atlantis is in comparison to tamaeis
Speaker 3: from Plato and his idea of Atlantis in how it
Speaker 3: stems very in between to how A Graham Hancock talks.
Speaker 3: But then can you can you speak to me on
Speaker 3: how you deal with the hermeneutics of the subjects in
Speaker 3: like your own historical lenses, because that is something that
Speaker 3: then when you add in the ability to fire and
Speaker 3: having all these different academic agents like the bureaucracy of administration,
Speaker 3: and the idea of trying to tenure yourself, is that
Speaker 3: you're going to want to maybe conform to a certain
Speaker 3: idea so it's easier for you to get a job
Speaker 3: and be able to pay your bills. So you're not
Speaker 3: a professor who's in his car and then teaching his students.
Speaker 3: Because that seems to be a massive thing that's going on,
Speaker 3: not only in the United States but across the world.
Speaker 5: Do you know what I'm saying that, yes, I will
Speaker 5: start with this conforming and I think yes, plenty of
Speaker 5: professors are probably conforming to you know, all the pressure
Speaker 5: from above on them and you know, changing their minds
Speaker 5: and you know privately thinking something different. Fortunately, you know,
Speaker 5: I went, I'm just I just started the first year
Speaker 5: of bachelor degree. I have like publishing house, but not
Speaker 5: with many books here in Poland. So you know, I
Speaker 5: with all of this because I started, before I started studying,
Speaker 5: I was into you know, conspiracy theories, alternative history. So
Speaker 5: I'm with a mindset that, you know, okay, I won't
Speaker 5: be like very high ranking professors something. I'm just going
Speaker 5: and doing it for myself. But when it comes to
Speaker 5: let's say, conforming, the only thing I'm conforming to is,
Speaker 5: for instance, it was university's initiative if I'm a writer
Speaker 5: to write some articles on subjects of ancient history pre history,
Speaker 5: because not many people in Poland are writing on that.
Speaker 5: And I'm okay, And they said even I can write
Speaker 5: sometimes about Atlantis or the Pyramids. But what I need
Speaker 5: to do I need to know to get into these guidelines.
Speaker 5: I need to know to be critical of everything, and
Speaker 5: you know, but privately I'm still you know, into conspiracy theories,
Speaker 5: into theories, and I will come to the conspiracy theories
Speaker 5: and to conspire in a moment. But what I mean,
Speaker 5: and yes, when writing this purific article, I will be critical.
Speaker 5: I even said, I can be you know, do a
Speaker 5: critical analysis of something because it's a good exercise, you know,
Speaker 5: of logic of analysis. And I think, as I mentioned,
Speaker 5: the job of a historian is to be extremely critical
Speaker 5: of everything. We may live in Atlantis and everything. But
Speaker 5: it's like a job. If you are a police officer.
Speaker 5: You also cannot you know, oh, I will you know,
Speaker 5: bit this person because it's a bad person. No, you
Speaker 5: need to calm down and you know, get this person handcuffed.
Speaker 5: So I think it's the same with a job or
Speaker 5: just being a historian, because you know, in plenty of
Speaker 5: people's mind, historian is of course not a job. So
Speaker 5: I will conform with these articles, but you know my
Speaker 5: books are not conforming, or what I'm talking here is
Speaker 5: also not conforming. But okay, I agree that if I
Speaker 5: want to know an article for a journal, I need
Speaker 5: to you know, do a little bit of mind bending exercise.
Speaker 5: And okay, let's be critical for a mont. I think
Speaker 5: it's a good exercise, even for any kind of research.
Speaker 5: You know, to try to get into the issues of
Speaker 5: the most extreme skeptic. I sometimes do that, you know,
Speaker 5: check what the skeptics, the bunkers have to say about it.
Speaker 4: You need to know.
Speaker 5: Balance between the two sides and then you can go
Speaker 5: to the truth. So no, I won't be like conformed
Speaker 5: and you know, suppressed by all of that, hopefully, but yeah,
Speaker 5: it's a thing.
Speaker 4: You're right.
Speaker 5: And when it comes also to conspiracy theory, you mentioned
Speaker 5: conspiracy theories and you know true conspiracy, but also, you know,
Speaker 5: Graham Hancocks, let's say, for instance, ideas of loss civilizations atlantis,
Speaker 5: in my opinion, are not conspiracy theories, because conspiracy theory
Speaker 5: is a theory in which there is a conspiracy. Okay,
Speaker 5: maybe Graham is saying about some kind of you know,
Speaker 5: the clothes stuff or the Egypt that people are hiding something.
Speaker 5: Let's say academics are not open. Okay, there is a
Speaker 5: little bit of conspiracy there. But you know, the idea
Speaker 5: of loss civilization or our now speculations about is his
Speaker 5: older cannot be older? Can there be atlantis? It's not
Speaker 5: a conspiracy theory. It's you know, just.
Speaker 4: People in the media.
Speaker 5: Everything for them that it's outside of what should be
Speaker 5: true according to the mainstream is conspiracy theory to them.
Speaker 5: Even though most of these theories are not conspiracy theories
Speaker 5: because there is no conspiracy involved. I sometimes mentioned conspiracies too.
Speaker 5: I even mentioned whole conspiracy theories. But I would say,
Speaker 5: you know, my basic speculation about the history, prehistory, even
Speaker 5: the nature of the universe, spirituality are not conspiracy theories.
Speaker 5: So that's another thing for our viewers, you know, to
Speaker 5: think when someone is called conspiracy theoriess, is he really
Speaker 5: that are his theories about conspiracy or maybe he's just speculating,
Speaker 5: he's just questioning things, asking questions.
Speaker 1: Yeah, nice, Do you think maybe because well, I mean,
Speaker 1: I hate to go back to conspiracy theories again, but
Speaker 1: like maybe because of the way the world is, the
Speaker 1: way the world is a little bit open more to
Speaker 1: other ideas that maybe people in the academic field don't
Speaker 1: have to feel so criticized if they come out and
Speaker 1: say they actually question X, Y and z, or maybe
Speaker 1: they have this idea. Do you think it's maybe just
Speaker 1: starting to feel more comfortable because of the way society
Speaker 1: is going.
Speaker 5: I don't think it's a major thing when it comes
Speaker 5: to academic people. I think it's just, you know, there
Speaker 5: were times, you know, especially you know here in Poland
Speaker 5: we are under partitions by German and Russia and we
Speaker 5: are talking about something called Prusky drill, so like Prussian school,
Speaker 5: like hardcore you need to be critical one hundred person discipline,
Speaker 5: no emotions, et cetera. And I think and maybe yes,
Speaker 5: because you're saying about the openness. Because of the openness
Speaker 5: in our case here in Poland from the West, people
Speaker 5: you know are calmer and they don't care that much
Speaker 5: about being very strict. And if you can like mother
Speaker 5: and let's say his storians, academics with like previous ones
Speaker 5: previously like ninety nine percent tried to be extremely strictive
Speaker 5: and if it was, you know, not in their hearts
Speaker 5: that you know you need to be like that. It's like,
Speaker 5: you know this like modern kind of grind set that
Speaker 5: I need to grind. I cannot have emotion, you know,
Speaker 5: this polarization that you know, no feelings, no spirituality, just
Speaker 5: you know, I need to know be the best discipline,
Speaker 5: et cetera. So I think it was like that, but
Speaker 5: within academia that you needed to be you know, you
Speaker 5: need to double check everything one hundred times, you need
Speaker 5: to be so precise, so exact that then you have
Speaker 5: all of these German mostly German philosophers who when you're
Speaker 5: reading you don't understand what they are talking about because
Speaker 5: they are so precise. They are even creating their own
Speaker 5: words to describe some kind of phenomenon, because you know,
Speaker 5: you must be precise, you must be so kind. This
Speaker 5: extreme extreme, someone would say, is discipline extreme, you know,
Speaker 5: being critically extreme. So I think it's a little bit
Speaker 5: that she said that because publicly everything is more open minded,
Speaker 5: it's changing the academy. But I would say that, you know,
Speaker 5: there isn't much pressure from the public to do that.
Speaker 4: But I think that we should go into.
Speaker 5: More mysteries because you know, philosophy's conspiracies. But let's say,
Speaker 5: you know how science is at least to some extent,
Speaker 5: of course catching up. And as I mentioned this, the
Speaker 5: more I'm learning, the more I'm reading academic articles or
Speaker 5: papers anything like books, textbooks, the more I see what
Speaker 5: I've been talking about in my boo book, Deja has
Speaker 5: everything already been? Because I was asking question, now, how
Speaker 5: much of the previous time survived until nowadays? And I
Speaker 5: was speculating, and I had the opinion that, you know,
Speaker 5: when it comes to the rate of decay of casual things,
Speaker 5: things from ten thousand years ago, twenty thousand years ago,
Speaker 5: one hundred thousands or something like that, there is nothing
Speaker 5: much and you know with this idea, plenty of skeptics,
Speaker 5: even at lower actually educational levels of my journey, like
Speaker 5: in high school, or some people say, no, it's not
Speaker 5: the case. Lots of things are surviving. Look at how
Speaker 5: many let's say, flint stones we have, for instance, from prehistory,
Speaker 5: or at how many tablets we have from Mesopotamia. So
Speaker 5: this was like semi advanced level, like advanced level of confidence.
Speaker 4: But not of true knowledge.
Speaker 5: But then when I started again reading the academic stuff,
Speaker 5: it was the same that I've been talked about, and
Speaker 5: I've been criticized for that.
Speaker 4: From you can read it everywhere from.
Speaker 5: Prehistory, do not have plenty of things that survive because
Speaker 5: everything is fragile, different conditions and so forth. This is
Speaker 5: what I've been speculating years ago, or from ancient for
Speaker 5: instance Mesopotamia, so many thousands, even hundreds of thousands of
Speaker 5: clay tablets. But if you study like higher academic levels,
Speaker 5: you see that, for instance, clay tablets mostly survived from
Speaker 5: single cities. Let's say there were twenty great cities at
Speaker 5: this time, and from this time period, we have only
Speaker 5: tablets from two cities, and we know that there is
Speaker 5: not all of them because for instance, they are being
Speaker 5: numbered and we see that huge number is missing. Or
Speaker 5: for instance, only these tablets with cunniform scripts survived to
Speaker 5: our times because the city was burnt down. Armies attacked
Speaker 5: burnt down the city. Of course they were inscribed these
Speaker 5: inscriptions in clay. Clay with heat was you know, hardened,
Speaker 5: and because it hardened, it survived to our times. But
Speaker 5: still you see, at such high academic levels, people are
Speaker 5: telling you that now we do not have plenty and
Speaker 5: it's like five one to three percent of all the
Speaker 5: tablets that possibly existed during these chronological times except by
Speaker 5: the academia. So at this advanced level, you know, there
Speaker 5: is this notion that we do not know much about
Speaker 5: our past, that we have only like one three five
Speaker 5: percent of the evidence for that. Or just let's say
Speaker 5: herod TuS vision of the pyramid was one two thousand
Speaker 5: years after they were built, and b it was completely
Speaker 5: you know, just you know, random guys were telling the
Speaker 5: legends to him, and you know they wanted maybe you know,
Speaker 5: to show the strength of Egypt or something plenty. You know,
Speaker 5: it's much more complicated than that, but you know, just
Speaker 5: to see that, you know, when the critics are attacking Rahamhankok.
Speaker 5: When the critics are attacking any kind of idea of
Speaker 5: and all their civilization, they say, you know, they give
Speaker 5: these arguments which on semi professional level, even you know,
Speaker 5: let's say you've read a lot, or you are a
Speaker 5: high school teacher or something, are completely valid and theories
Speaker 5: are breaking down. Let's say, but when you start, you know,
Speaker 5: reading advanced academic textbooks about you know, a single city
Speaker 5: of summer or a s period of ancient consumer, you
Speaker 5: see that. Okay, we did not know much, and academics
Speaker 5: know that, and it is very well known in higher circles.
Speaker 5: The same with the previously mentioned how many species? You know,
Speaker 5: how many howminies there were? You know, right now are
Speaker 5: the only times we are alone as hominies on earth
Speaker 5: because before that, let's say, a few tens of thousands
Speaker 5: of years ago, hundreds of thousands of years ago, there
Speaker 5: were at least a few how many species, not only
Speaker 5: let's say us, but at one point the biggest number
Speaker 5: that we know about, but it may be even bigger,
Speaker 5: is we plus five hominy species. And right now you see,
Speaker 5: for instance, oh giants, what stupid conspiracy theory people's people
Speaker 5: believe in? Giants, you know, academic people or the bankers
Speaker 5: are telling that, But we coexisted with others. One home many,
Speaker 5: for instance, with whom we co existed was Homoflores Census.
Speaker 5: We know about him, this Hobbits one meter tall. So
Speaker 5: if we anatomically modern humans co existed from one meter
Speaker 5: toll beings home in its advanced maybe there were also
Speaker 5: giants that we haven't discovered yet. And of course the
Speaker 5: bankers will say, no, we will never we know everything
Speaker 5: about hominutes. It's not true. And if you start, the
Speaker 5: more you study, even the academic one, even let's say
Speaker 5: for a moment omit conspiracy theory, that's you know, the
Speaker 5: biggest clue of this episode. Let's form an omit conspiracy theory.
Speaker 5: But even if you learn more and more of let's say,
Speaker 5: academically accept technoledge, you see that those the bankers are
Speaker 5: not right and do not know much, and that it
Speaker 5: is commonly accepted that we do not know much about
Speaker 5: our preyer history, about ancient civilizations. And right now we're
Speaker 5: taking the roots of civilization back by many times. Maybe
Speaker 5: some questions here we're laughing.
Speaker 3: No, no laughing, I think that's great. I just again
Speaker 3: I love you fucking just it's just coming out. It's
Speaker 3: just and it's beautiful. I think what's interesting is as
Speaker 3: a historian, do you like, I think something that's being
Speaker 3: missed by historians is that from aneric understanding, and and
Speaker 3: somebody commented on here, it's how important narrative.
Speaker 4: And story is.
Speaker 3: And so do you think one of these things that
Speaker 3: we historians tend to not integrate into their thinking and
Speaker 3: helping us date these things and understand the human story
Speaker 3: is that what about the mythology of the times and
Speaker 3: the spaces that we're talking about.
Speaker 4: Can that add a little little help help.
Speaker 5: I think it's a great question. And again, people at
Speaker 5: lower level do tend oh, there are narratives, but and
Speaker 5: I also thought, let's say a few months ago, like that,
Speaker 5: oh they are in their own narrative. I'm let's say,
Speaker 5: in my own Atlantis narrative. But I learned that no,
Speaker 5: as historians, you know, at higher level, we even analyze
Speaker 5: some puy Refit articles, they are actually you know, analyzing
Speaker 5: different narratives, even the commonly accepted paradigm. It's not that
Speaker 5: people say, oh, paradigm staste and there is no paradigm
Speaker 5: shift Okay, there is not yet a paradigm shift, but
Speaker 5: the current paradigm is constantly under pressure. Maybe, of course
Speaker 5: we do not change. Let's say tomorrow there will be
Speaker 5: a consensus that Atlanta schools.
Speaker 1: We all know.
Speaker 5: But still, these narratives are compared, contrasted, you know, critically analyzed.
Speaker 4: And I was like, wow, it's so amazing.
Speaker 5: You mentioned about methodologies and stuff that historians do.
Speaker 4: This is what you know I love about.
Speaker 5: Before that was very heavily into philosophy of science, history
Speaker 5: of science, and the same. You know, plenty of people
Speaker 5: are saying, oh, well, we know everything about you know this,
Speaker 5: We know everything about these civilizations. But at this level again,
Speaker 5: I was telling people, you know, for many years now
Speaker 5: that less than two hundred.
Speaker 4: Years ago we knew almost.
Speaker 5: Nothing about any kind of civilization of Mesopotamia. We have
Speaker 5: plenty of mentions of Assyrians, Submerians, Babylonans and Chaldeans, Acadience
Speaker 5: and other ones, but less than two hundred years ago,
Speaker 5: because most of the excavation in the Middle East started
Speaker 5: in the eighteen forties. And I was saying that for
Speaker 5: many years, and this year, I, you know, found true
Speaker 5: sources that are telling us that yes, we didn't know
Speaker 5: almost anything about Mesopotama, so the same could be about
Speaker 5: any other kind of civilization, Atlantis, Lemuria, the other kind.
Speaker 5: But yes, as you mentioned these narratives, it is one
Speaker 5: of the coolest things I'm learning right now and also
Speaker 5: the biggest shocked to me that it's not the job
Speaker 5: of a historian is not about, you know, going into
Speaker 5: this narrative, but actually the true job of a historian
Speaker 5: would be criticizing a narrative, showing this is only a narrative,
Speaker 5: This isn't you know true, This isn't a consensus when
Speaker 5: it comes to knowledge. So yes, and you know I'm
Speaker 5: open to do that, so you know, it's as I mentioned,
Speaker 5: I wanted such a conversation and a little bit omission
Speaker 5: from conspiracy theories because I was positively shocked at what
Speaker 5: is going on here, at least in Poland, maybe though
Speaker 5: in some other countries it's a bit different, maybe in
Speaker 5: the West, but maybe at some university is similar because
Speaker 5: you know, everything is being criticized, even you know, everyone
Speaker 5: was talking, Oh you're you are not telling about history,
Speaker 5: you are your channel is not his, even you know,
Speaker 5: I had a channel fear in Poland, and I wasn't
Speaker 5: very heavy into conspiracy theories. I was into ellon atlant Is,
Speaker 5: megal expiramis and stuff like that. And they said, oh,
Speaker 5: conspiracy theory channel, it's not history. And I said, where
Speaker 5: is the conspiracy theory else, you know speaking maybe pyrabtal
Speaker 5: or older, maybe megal is our order, et cetera. And
Speaker 5: you know, it's it was very shocking to me to
Speaker 5: experience that. But right now we are analyzing at classes
Speaker 5: some very cool articles, one's so called of the best
Speaker 5: as examples, and they are doing the same.
Speaker 4: They are speculating that maybe right.
Speaker 5: Now we think about that, but there is another possibility,
Speaker 5: you know, just as we are speculating. Okay, maybe we
Speaker 5: now think consumer was the first civilization academically speaking, but
Speaker 5: maybe there was another one. This is what's being done
Speaker 5: by the best of the best when it comes to
Speaker 5: scientific articles. And I was shocked by that.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 5: So it's what I'm doing, and I'm called on the
Speaker 5: internet conspiracy theories or some kind of you know, bad words,
Speaker 5: et cetera. But they are doing that, and you know,
Speaker 5: this was what I wanted to show the differentiation between
Speaker 5: those who are truly at work as historians maybe philosophers
Speaker 5: of science and someone like that, and the media, you know,
Speaker 5: very loud speakers. So Graham hongkongy is racist, your conspiracy
Speaker 5: theories and stuff like that. But let's say, because I
Speaker 5: will forget about what I was talking about again within
Speaker 5: that summer was the sorry, but you know, I think
Speaker 5: I explained it very well and answer to your question.
Speaker 5: But again the academic casual thing is that you know,
Speaker 5: ancient Zumer was the first. But actually right now I
Speaker 5: got some cool news.
Speaker 4: It's not like news news.
Speaker 5: But from the last ten or fifteen years here in
Speaker 5: eastern Europe, not maybe in Poland, but in Romeia, modern Ukraine, Balkans,
Speaker 5: there were Proto civilizations, even a few Proto also before
Speaker 5: pre civilizations, and they for instance, had cities of thirty
Speaker 5: thousand people, so pretty decent cities. Right now I'm living,
Speaker 5: you know, it's a descent city in Poland, and it
Speaker 5: has between two hundred and four hundred thousand people, so
Speaker 5: thirty thousand people thousands of years before Submerians. It's still
Speaker 5: impressive if we are looking from you know, academic standpoint
Speaker 5: of how our history unfollowed this very deep pass and
Speaker 5: even you know, ancient Sumerian cities at you know, the
Speaker 5: highest had similar numbers of thirty ten thousand people, twenty
Speaker 5: thousand people and so forth.
Speaker 4: And you find plenty of things.
Speaker 5: For instance, you know, first chariots thousands of years before,
Speaker 5: Submarrians from these regions, and plenty of other things. For instance,
Speaker 5: these proto civilizations. And you know, if we accepted that
Speaker 5: these were civilizations because they were huge, they were having
Speaker 5: you know, some kind of hierarchy, they were living like
Speaker 5: civilized people. It was not like hundred gatherers or something.
Speaker 5: But the only thing that it's again this methodology of science,
Speaker 5: you know, the strictness maybe you know, bureaucracy and stuff
Speaker 5: like that, we cannot accept them as civilizations because they
Speaker 5: didn't have script. They had script, but we haven't deciphered
Speaker 5: them yet. And because we have we haven't deciphered this
Speaker 5: script yet, we cannot say it's a script. So it's
Speaker 5: you know, shockingly, someone would call stupid, you know, crazy
Speaker 5: to think like that because we haven't deciphered something that
Speaker 5: looks like script. And it really it's not like just
Speaker 5: some kind of carvings. No, it looks like script really,
Speaker 5: but just because we haven't deciphered it we cannot say
Speaker 5: that thousand years before Sumerians there was a civilization in
Speaker 5: the eastern Europe about it's even a bit more than
Speaker 5: thousand years.
Speaker 4: There were different ones.
Speaker 5: I think the famous name in the you know, English media,
Speaker 5: there are some YouTube even videos about that it was
Speaker 5: Vincha culture. But it wasn't the one Vincha culture. There
Speaker 5: were a few others. They predated by thousands of years
Speaker 5: Ancient Summer, and they were pretty advanced to say the least. So,
Speaker 5: as I mentioned, we are taking the roots of our
Speaker 5: civilization back because we agree that this was some kind
Speaker 5: of pre civilization proto civilization. And again some people were saying, oh,
Speaker 5: no Atlantis. But if we are again to goblicly tepees,
Speaker 5: we just took the roots of script back, maybe we
Speaker 5: do not. Again this mentioned I mentioned these cunny formed tablets,
Speaker 5: very famous ones and Nucky Gilgamesh, flood and so forth.
Speaker 5: But as I mentioned before, most of them survived because
Speaker 5: cities were burned, and not all cities were burned or
Speaker 5: you know, were being destroyed in different manners. So it's
Speaker 5: like one to five percent of all the let's say,
Speaker 5: clay tablets from the Ancient Summer and later civilizations of
Speaker 5: an in Mesopotamia. But you know, and again even even
Speaker 5: conservative archeologists and assyriologists I mentioned this, even Finkle guy
Speaker 5: are telling you, okay, they didn't survive, but we see
Speaker 5: that probably it was used as a stamp to you know,
Speaker 5: just engrave this kind of from script in a different
Speaker 5: manner and to the tablets didn't survive. But again the
Speaker 5: script could have been dated not to do three thousand,
Speaker 5: three thousand BC, but to more than nine thousand BC.
Speaker 5: So we are taking the roots of everything back the same.
Speaker 5: You know, before I was very into the early let's say,
Speaker 5: conspiracy theories Irish Fondanik and you know how they tried
Speaker 5: to debank all of that, Graham Hancock later, you know,
Speaker 5: Robert Shaw and his dating of these things. And actually
Speaker 5: in the seventies and eighties, the main argument against such
Speaker 5: things and against academics even going into you know, our
Speaker 5: the permits older, are the pyramits from ten thousand and
Speaker 5: five hundred BC? Or did Atlantis exist? Was that they
Speaker 5: didn't have anything to reference that people of ten thousand
Speaker 5: BC could build the Sphinx.
Speaker 4: Or the pyramids.
Speaker 5: They said that we have the argument, we do not
Speaker 5: have any evidence that people were capable of doing that,
Speaker 5: so we are sticking with our mainstream Egyptian chronology. But
Speaker 5: then the famous Gobecle tape in nineteen ninety four, so
Speaker 5: a bit recent. Let's say, when it comes to all
Speaker 5: the discoveries these megalthic pillars right now, plenty of other
Speaker 5: Krahn tape and plenty o Goblaketype cylinder seals. Yeah, this
Speaker 5: is a green stone. This is what they talked about.
Speaker 5: You can you know zoom and yes this or the
Speaker 5: other ones that it was again very conservative, higher ranking
Speaker 5: assyriologists even filmclas said that this stone was used to
Speaker 5: actually see even its comparison with some later examples of
Speaker 5: true you know cylinder seals as was mentioned, but kind
Speaker 5: of stones were used to engrave these in clay, so yes,
Speaker 5: thanks for showing it. And again the goba Ce type
Speaker 5: show that you know, hunter gatherers could build mega lifts.
Speaker 5: So maybe there were also civilizations much older than that.
Speaker 4: And right now, when it comes to.
Speaker 2: These symbolic studies on a lot of these cylinder seals
Speaker 2: without this is they really do have a connection to
Speaker 2: like trade goods and stuff like that, so they would
Speaker 2: they would use these cylinder seals to sort of mark
Speaker 2: or you know, label their stuff as they were sending
Speaker 2: it out into the world. And yes, it's linguistic to me.
Speaker 2: I mean, I don't know what they're defining it as,
Speaker 2: but that's a language they're they're sending it out with
Speaker 2: brand label on it.
Speaker 5: So yeah, I agree because you know, as I mentioned,
Speaker 5: why I'm having this conversation to do and speaking so
Speaker 5: much about academic stuff to show your comparison that you know,
Speaker 5: science is catching out. Things are getting older, as Graham
Speaker 5: Hankerk once said, and you know, previously alternative history or
Speaker 5: conspiracy theories are starting to you know, be true even
Speaker 5: when it comes to you know, academic stuff. And you
Speaker 5: mentioned it.
Speaker 4: Great. I've been recently learning again.
Speaker 5: From you know, very advanced the stuff sometimes so boring,
Speaker 5: but you know again very cool stuff that yes, you're right.
Speaker 5: Actually script it's you know, common theory, like mainstream theory.
Speaker 4: How the script appeared.
Speaker 5: It appeared to actually for products, for goods, for wheat,
Speaker 5: for barely do you know just you know.
Speaker 4: Okay, we need to know how much food.
Speaker 5: We have, so we are you know, in inscribing okay,
Speaker 5: this much, this much. So it all started with as
Speaker 5: you mentioned, labeling goods showing how much we have. And
Speaker 5: this is commonly accepted theory. So it's like very very
Speaker 5: speculative or some kind of like drageous conspiracy theory, it's
Speaker 5: actually considered it to be true. So that's how, according
Speaker 5: to it all started. And as I mentioned, proto civilization
Speaker 5: thousands of year at least eight thousand years before the Submerians.
Speaker 5: So who knows, you know, script nine thousand BCS, So
Speaker 5: who knows if maybe we'll find soon some kind of
Speaker 5: Atlantis or something. As I mentioned, most of the Middle
Speaker 5: Eastern discoveries, the famous you know zicuas everything was only
Speaker 5: found in eighteen forties, and only because in the Middle East,
Speaker 5: in the region of Mesopotamia it was there were very
Speaker 5: good conditions. Because it's another thing I'm saying, you know,
Speaker 5: in my Daijavving already been my first chapter is about
Speaker 5: how our modern civilization would decompose. Let's say, if there
Speaker 5: was a cataclysm or if everything was abandoned by humans.
Speaker 5: And I mentioned that it would be pretty fast, let's
Speaker 5: say a few thousand years, maybe ten twenty thousand years.
Speaker 5: They would be of course some specific materials that would
Speaker 5: last longer, but it wouldn't be that long.
Speaker 4: And skeptic say, no, in ten.
Speaker 5: Thousand years we will have all the evidence for moderns
Speaker 5: realization and so on. But it all depends on so
Speaker 5: many factors. And I included it back then. I was
Speaker 5: thinking multi dimensionally that okay, in you know, some kind
Speaker 5: of conditions, like in the desert, things are preserved for
Speaker 5: much longer certain times, because maybe something that is very
Speaker 5: wet isn't that much preserved because it's you know, a
Speaker 5: very dry place. But you know, other things are very
Speaker 5: well preserved. That's why we have moonmies, for instance, movies
Speaker 5: of ten thousand even years in some kind of deserts,
Speaker 5: not the Egyptian one, but you know, in the New Himalayas,
Speaker 5: Tibetan stuff and so on.
Speaker 1: And you know, I was.
Speaker 5: Speculating about that, and the banker said, no, you know,
Speaker 5: stupid speculation.
Speaker 4: It's not true. But it is true.
Speaker 5: And when you're reading advance again academic textbooks, you see
Speaker 5: that they are taken into consideration that. For instance, again,
Speaker 5: another one cool thing that right now, I think last year,
Speaker 5: because it's the New Year, excavation at the Sumerian city
Speaker 5: of Ur were at twenty two meters below ground twenty
Speaker 5: two meters, and they approximately knew because there were some
Speaker 5: inscriptions that this place was I don't remember exactly let's
Speaker 5: say twenty three hundred BC. They knew, we found at
Speaker 5: the twenty two meters that it is from this period.
Speaker 5: So imagine how deep beneath the ground would be the
Speaker 5: Atlantean layer of you know, some kind of anything that
Speaker 5: was preserved for tens of ten thousand, ten thousand years,
Speaker 5: approximately twelve thousand actually.
Speaker 4: So you know what I mean.
Speaker 5: The more you learn, the more you see that previously
Speaker 5: conspiracy theories, Atlantis related stuff. Graham Hankok, it's all coming together,
Speaker 5: and we see that science is to some extent catching
Speaker 5: up again, not to like the biggest extent, but some
Speaker 5: extent catching up, and we are taking the roots of
Speaker 5: our civilization back many times, the same with civilization, pre civilizations,
Speaker 5: home minies. Again, I remember critics saying, oh, I do
Speaker 5: not know shit about prehistory, about homonies, or about our
Speaker 5: let's say two hundred thousand yas or millions of years.
Speaker 5: We have plenty of examples from all around the world.
Speaker 5: But actually, when you truly analyze that, again, we have
Speaker 5: plenty of examples, but sometimes they span millions of years
Speaker 5: between each other. Sometimes we found one place with one
Speaker 5: hundred thousands of human cut stones, let's say this flint
Speaker 5: like tools, one hundred thousand at.
Speaker 4: One place or something. So the more you.
Speaker 5: Learn, even academic stuff, the more you see casual the
Speaker 5: bankings which are going on all day long in the
Speaker 5: social media of Graham Hunkrik and others, they do not
Speaker 5: make sense and they are not what is actually true
Speaker 5: even within academic circles. And the more you see that
Speaker 5: there is even within academic not including conspiracies or any
Speaker 5: kind of bureaucracy or something like that, there is a huge,
Speaker 5: huge potential that there was something more in our past
Speaker 5: that you know, there was some kind of civilization like
Speaker 5: Atlantis on whatever level of advancements they were. So yeah,
Speaker 5: there is some example.
Speaker 1: I think.
Speaker 2: I think this one kind of went under the radar
Speaker 2: for a lot of people. Earliest fire making dated back
Speaker 2: to four hundred thousand years ago on Earth and Suffolk, England. Now,
Speaker 2: whether or not this was humans, anatomically current humans or not,
Speaker 2: it's still it says a lot. Right, This sort of
Speaker 2: blows the hole out of Africa theory, out of the water.
Speaker 5: Right, yes, yes, and remember it's only one fine, and
Speaker 5: we haven't digged the entire planet first and the second
Speaker 5: one it's one thing that survived for so long four
Speaker 5: hundred thousand years, so imagine how many other examples like
Speaker 5: that are there that either one haven't survived to our time.
Speaker 5: So we will mostly never know in like casual paradigm
Speaker 5: without some kind of extra sensory perception or some spiritual means,
Speaker 5: but b will not find versions because we are not
Speaker 5: digging everywhere. So you see, there is a huge potential.
Speaker 5: The same with out of Africa. There even right now
Speaker 5: they're saying, okay, out of Africa, but it's changed that
Speaker 5: there were a few waves even before humans that how
Speaker 5: minutes before us already left the Africa millions of years ago,
Speaker 5: so it's it's all being a little bit updated from
Speaker 5: the time zone. Even I was shocked that, you know,
Speaker 5: during such classes, we're we're having alternative views both. I
Speaker 5: remember to out of Africa theory one but it was
Speaker 5: very criticized and yes I've seen it was with some flaws,
Speaker 5: but it was mentioned still at the first day of history. Wow,
Speaker 5: and then we have another one when it comes to
Speaker 5: here the our Polish region these Slavs, because the consensus
Speaker 5: is that Slavs appeared about six b six century eighty,
Speaker 5: so very late, just before the Middle Ages, and plenty
Speaker 5: of people say no, these Slavs were here for many
Speaker 5: thousands of years, et cetera. And we were seeing and
Speaker 5: we were shown that, Okay, this is what we are
Speaker 5: learning that Slavs were very late appeared here in Poland
Speaker 5: or in Eastern Europe. But there is at least one professor,
Speaker 5: high ranking Polish professor, who's thinking the other way that
Speaker 5: it couldn't be the case. So we were shown a
Speaker 5: few alternatives.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think what we also are missing in this
Speaker 3: is that how fast and I know an e direct
Speaker 3: example from the area that I'm from, but how fast
Speaker 3: you discover new things by pulling up sites and you
Speaker 3: find new arrowheads or extinct races of bison or buffalo
Speaker 3: or animals, And then how fast the military comes in,
Speaker 3: scoops those things up, brings them off into a bunker
Speaker 3: somewhere and it's never heard of again, only by a
Speaker 3: select few of individuals who may be working on this site.
Speaker 3: And the only reason anybody ever knows about it because
Speaker 3: they leak it just because if they're mostly a mundane
Speaker 3: person who's just doing their job, and then they tell
Speaker 3: some people and then no one ever knows about it.
Speaker 3: And so I think when like the article you pulled
Speaker 3: up about the four hundred thousand year old fire making,
Speaker 3: it's like, how many times are these things happening but
Speaker 3: nobody hears about it just because of how fast and
Speaker 3: due to the techno oligorical AI system, how fast can
Speaker 3: they scan regions and send out their men in black
Speaker 3: to go pick up those things? As conspiracy theory, it's
Speaker 3: not conspiracy at all. I can think of three direct
Speaker 3: references of those things happening.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 2: What a lot of people don't understand about the military
Speaker 2: is it's a lot of top secret people working right
Speaker 2: next to janitors.
Speaker 4: Yeah, exactly, nailed its. Yeah yeah, no, you're so right.
Speaker 3: Janitors or people with pickaxes and shovels who are digging
Speaker 3: up those sites and they just stumble across these things,
Speaker 3: who are just trying to get feed their families and
Speaker 3: they're like, okay.
Speaker 4: Whatever, can I get back to work now?
Speaker 5: Or yeah, I agree, But I wanted, you know, to
Speaker 5: show this before in this conversation, this non conspirational part
Speaker 5: that there exists this part, but I agree, as I
Speaker 5: mentioned before, I know, first had a few people that's
Speaker 5: got this, you know, they were trying.
Speaker 4: It was like casual tourist site, but very mysterious.
Speaker 5: Like you know, like the Pyramits of Giza. We do
Speaker 5: not know, you know, how they built it. So similar
Speaker 5: here in Poland maybe of course not on that scale,
Speaker 5: but you know, strange place. But the tourists hundreds of
Speaker 5: tourists every day. But when they started to do something else,
Speaker 5: then just you know, take pictures and you know, read
Speaker 5: the labels.
Speaker 4: They will immediate, you know, and.
Speaker 5: They said, okay, you may be here, but you are
Speaker 5: you may be you know, threatend, you may be dangered.
Speaker 5: So I also agree with that the same you know,
Speaker 5: this is again the conspiration, the con spiratory part. There
Speaker 5: was no conspiratory part. But in the middle part in between,
Speaker 5: have conspiracy, have just you know, no conspiracy we know
Speaker 5: that you know about I don't know, depending on the museum,
Speaker 5: depending on the archive, seventy to eighty percent is still
Speaker 5: let's say clay tablets or something undeciphered being somewhere, you know, lockdown.
Speaker 5: And as I mentioned, the knowledge let's say from the
Speaker 5: academic textbooks. It's based on what is de siffered, what
Speaker 5: is being you know classified, and you know what is
Speaker 5: being described each kind of piece that we find underground.
Speaker 5: But if you know at some kind of sites museum,
Speaker 5: eighty percent is still.
Speaker 4: You know, unclassified.
Speaker 5: Again, you know not how different our history even you know,
Speaker 5: being in the middle between this hardcore conspiracy and non conspiracy,
Speaker 5: you know how much potential for a different.
Speaker 4: Turn off events there is.
Speaker 5: So yes, this is an amazing you know conversation, so
Speaker 5: much in a conspiracy. Academic stuff hardcore like learning, logical analyticle,
Speaker 5: but also philosophic stuff. But yes, I need to think
Speaker 5: of what I've also wanted to share. So if you
Speaker 5: have something there.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, while you're while you're thinking about that, Alexander,
Speaker 3: I mean it's really important to while you're in the
Speaker 3: academic world, because I've been in it myself, is and
Speaker 3: I'm still participating in it. Is that you're all like
Speaker 3: you as a student are only as good as the
Speaker 3: teachers that you have, and those teachers that you have
Speaker 3: are only as good as the works that they've read
Speaker 3: slash professors that they've had, so on and so forth.
Speaker 3: As it comes down, and so you can only read
Speaker 3: so much, You only have the ability to integrate so
Speaker 3: many articles into your own papers.
Speaker 4: And so it's like, how do you as a person as.
Speaker 3: Getting going and wanting to move forth like your book
Speaker 3: and your work, but also how do you not get
Speaker 3: caught up in the mechanism and the rationale of a
Speaker 3: static mind, which your mind isn't that? So how do
Speaker 3: you continue to make sure that you are writing concretely
Speaker 3: while still breaking the edges of the scientific historical paradigm.
Speaker 5: I would say that this, you know, my academic journey
Speaker 5: is like a side quest, a big one, okay, but
Speaker 5: you know it's not my main thing.
Speaker 4: I actually went there, you know, every.
Speaker 5: We were asked, you know, we were asked at first
Speaker 5: lessons why you went here? And people say, oh, I'm
Speaker 5: interested in that, oh and that, And I said that,
Speaker 5: and people said plenty of people because I'm part of
Speaker 5: time studying, so at the weekends only because I don't
Speaker 5: want to know all day it would be boring eight
Speaker 5: to ten places. You know, I've been always autodidact, learning
Speaker 5: myself everything. So as I mentioned, it's a side quest,
Speaker 5: you know, you know, gets check out and again and
Speaker 5: I mentioned, it's you know, for my own personal research
Speaker 5: business stuff, you know, books, et cetera, like videos, media
Speaker 5: content creation. So I said, it's you know, another fun
Speaker 5: because hearing polant history is like something boring, you know,
Speaker 5: not useful in personal life.
Speaker 4: And when it comes to jobs.
Speaker 5: Et cetera, and you know they were what that, you know,
Speaker 5: it's just it will help me. You know, I have
Speaker 5: more things to talk, I have more experience, I have
Speaker 5: more access because before that I as an independent teenage
Speaker 5: or twenty year old researcher, I had problems with accessing
Speaker 5: some text. Now I can access most of the libraries
Speaker 5: of the tire words. So I said, you know, so
Speaker 5: it's no problem for me. You know, it's just a
Speaker 5: side request making you know, even a bit. You know this,
Speaker 5: I got private studies schedule, you know, a bit more
Speaker 5: lessons but you know, under tutoring of a process or
Speaker 5: et cetera, and you know the article, so I you know,
Speaker 5: making okay, more side quest pydequest. But you know, I'm
Speaker 5: being independent when it comes to everything else. And as
Speaker 5: I mentioned before, it's not a risk for me that
Speaker 5: they won't like me. I was going there that they
Speaker 5: will not like my research. And I was positively shocked
Speaker 5: to some extent that they say, Okay, they do not
Speaker 5: agree with this, this and that, but you know, such speculation,
Speaker 5: such interest in these topics, ancient texts and such knowledge,
Speaker 5: it's valuable to them. And they say, even if it
Speaker 5: is considered pseudoscience or something by others, it is still
Speaker 5: they are happy that people are interested in history in
Speaker 5: our past because you know, even as academic historians, they
Speaker 5: want to you know, people be more interested. You know,
Speaker 5: it's like they're probably from above that they need to,
Speaker 5: you know, make people interested in history.
Speaker 4: But they say, okay. So I was positively shocked.
Speaker 5: I went, you know, with the most negative scenarios in mind.
Speaker 5: Maybe they will even kick me out in some time.
Speaker 5: But as I mentioned some only a site thing, I'm
Speaker 5: doing my own stuff, and if I ever don't agree
Speaker 5: with something, that's not a problem for me. If they say,
Speaker 5: oh I kind of maybe continue something now, that's completely
Speaker 5: not a problem for me. And I had an idea,
Speaker 5: you can you can also add something. But I had
Speaker 5: an idea of also what to mention. Okay, you have
Speaker 5: something else want to ask.
Speaker 4: Well, yeah, just the integration.
Speaker 3: I want you to integrate what you're you're thinking about,
Speaker 3: but also integrate it into what is your thesis, Like
Speaker 3: what are you? What is your idea about history and
Speaker 3: why you care about it? And then integrate it into
Speaker 3: your idea about that.
Speaker 5: Yes, I would say, and it would send may be illogical,
Speaker 5: but I am a little bit into irrational stuff and speculation.
Speaker 5: I would say that I do not have like a thesis.
Speaker 5: I try also to be critical. You know, I'm telling, oh,
Speaker 5: history is older, et cetera. So I'm, let's say, acting
Speaker 5: on this thesis and showing some evidence. But I do
Speaker 5: not have like thesis. Oh, I want to prove Atlantis
Speaker 5: was real. All I want to do that. I and
Speaker 5: I just want to explore the biggest secrets of our past,
Speaker 5: biggest secrets of the universe. That's all spirituality, metaphysics, how
Speaker 5: it all came about. I won't say that I'm going
Speaker 5: with a thesis that was problematic forout the ears that
Speaker 5: you know, I need to do thesis, et cetera. But
Speaker 5: you know, I don't have like strict thesis that history
Speaker 5: is older and I'm going to prove that and research that.
Speaker 5: And no, I'm just you know, it's I'm very fluid
Speaker 5: when it comes to research. You know, I'm very open minded.
Speaker 5: I just want, you know, to show this openness that
Speaker 5: there's oh maybe one thesis on some level would be
Speaker 5: show the possibilities both when it comes to the history
Speaker 5: the best, but also when it comes to science existence,
Speaker 5: everything that exists, like physics, metaphysics, spirituality. I want to
Speaker 5: show that there is. I want to show the possibilities
Speaker 5: because throughout the years of my education, of my life,
Speaker 5: I've always seen that people are very close to possibilities.
Speaker 5: I cannot do that. It's impossible said, it's true, it's
Speaker 5: not told we know everything. No, I want to show that,
Speaker 5: show the possibilities. I sometimes, you know, see the possibilities
Speaker 5: maybe spiritually or something like that. I want just to
Speaker 5: show possibilities, not that there is much more according to
Speaker 5: when it comes to in comparison to some people's thinking.
Speaker 5: But I want to, you know, explore all the possibilities,
Speaker 5: like when it comes to spirituality, existence, philosophical metaphysical ones. Yes,
Speaker 5: I want it. I don't know Nick how long we
Speaker 5: can go.
Speaker 1: But you can.
Speaker 2: Have a question about Poland. Are the wing Hussars the
Speaker 2: people who helped in the in the war against the
Speaker 2: Muslims in Austria. Are they considered sort of a Christian
Speaker 2: cultural figure, like a pre Christian sort of cultural figure.
Speaker 4: At Christian times. No, it was already at Christian times.
Speaker 5: It was like fifteen hundred, sixteen hundreds, et cetera, maybe
Speaker 5: late fourteen hundred and fifteen sixty. It was already in
Speaker 5: a Christian We were a Christian country back then.
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's interesting one.
Speaker 5: You know the swing two stars from a historical perspective,
Speaker 5: they were having these wings, these were out of metal
Speaker 5: and probably you know the sound of the metal wings
Speaker 5: when they were charging was you know, making enemies or
Speaker 5: enemy horses, you know, shocked?
Speaker 4: What is it? You know?
Speaker 5: Danger? So it was like att active and very cool.
Speaker 5: You know, as I mentioned in lots of podcast, people
Speaker 5: are asking me, you know, we have very rich maybe
Speaker 5: not old history. Again, we have some old history, but
Speaker 5: maybe not like ours, but we have very rich history
Speaker 5: as false. We were under partitions for one hundred twenty
Speaker 5: three years, one hundred twenty three years without Polish nation.
Speaker 5: We survived, our culture survived. Plenty of things of course
Speaker 5: didn't survive. But I think because of that people are
Speaker 5: very here skeptical. I would say that we have much
Speaker 5: higher percentage of conspiracy theory people here because people were
Speaker 5: not only before under partitions and they wanted plenty of
Speaker 5: times to change our history. They wanted to eliminate Polish culture,
Speaker 5: germanize us, rucifies us, so make us Russian and German,
Speaker 5: you know, no Polish language. And then later you know,
Speaker 5: the war's First World War, okay, in the first inter
Speaker 5: between the wars, then the Second World War, and then
Speaker 5: after the war we were.
Speaker 4: Under the communist regime.
Speaker 5: We weren't like independent independent, and people knew that there.
Speaker 5: You know, it was very common in the seventies, sixties
Speaker 5: and eighties to know that what is officially what they
Speaker 5: talk officially tell you, it's a lie, it's not true,
Speaker 5: it's just propaganda. It was commonly known commonly, and we
Speaker 5: have so many examples of you know, our history textbooks
Speaker 5: being changed, even recently.
Speaker 4: You know, I'm twenty to twenty three right now.
Speaker 5: During my educational journey, I've experienced twice changing a little
Speaker 5: bit because you know, in modern times it cannot change
Speaker 5: a lot because people know there is internet and so forth.
Speaker 4: But I've experienced twice.
Speaker 5: During my educational journey changes in history depending on the
Speaker 5: political people in power, and it wasn't, as I mentioned,
Speaker 5: very huge because people have access to the internet, you know,
Speaker 5: English language.
Speaker 4: Et cetera.
Speaker 5: But for instance, one very major even from our history
Speaker 5: was completely omitted, even from let's say advanced high school stuff,
Speaker 5: and it was there before. Or another one was you
Speaker 5: know a little bit in propaganda manners. You know, they
Speaker 5: added false narrative onto it, you know, to prove some
Speaker 5: political point. Nowadays, so I've experienced that people as I
Speaker 5: mentioned before nineteen ninety knew very well that it's all paganda.
Speaker 5: We are under communistic regime, etc. So hew, people older ones,
Speaker 5: because modern ones there's you know, still rise in you know,
Speaker 5: everything we know is true. Your conspiracy series. Yes, there
Speaker 5: are people of course like that right now. But I
Speaker 5: would say that in most older people forty plus forty
Speaker 5: plus and even you know what I would say, mostly
Speaker 5: forty plus people are very skeptical. They say you need
Speaker 5: to do that, it's something wrong. If they say it's
Speaker 5: better you stay at home something, you know, so it
Speaker 5: So we're talking about conspiracies. We have we at least
Speaker 5: used to have different mindset when it comes to such things.
Speaker 5: But if we have some time the first thing, because
Speaker 5: we had like presentations. Everyone was ordered here at the
Speaker 5: university first yeah, first semester to make some presentation about
Speaker 5: something that interests them in the ancient past. Of course,
Speaker 5: not everything, but I said, and they knew I had.
Speaker 5: I have a book research about great flood and right
Speaker 5: now I will be soon. I like, I'm in the middle,
Speaker 5: maybe the bigger middle, sixty percent in the research about
Speaker 5: flood similarities between ancient Mesopotamian sources before the Bible, the Bible,
Speaker 5: but also for instance, ancient India texts. And actually, when
Speaker 5: I showed these presentations in front of the class and
Speaker 5: in front of course of one of the professors, he
Speaker 5: was shocked because no one here in Poland talked or
Speaker 5: published about that. So they ordered me that I should
Speaker 5: write an article. We reviewed this first one in my
Speaker 5: career about you know, similarities of the flood and how
Speaker 5: the transfer of knowledge. And I've started this research and
Speaker 5: I was shocked again when it comes to you know,
Speaker 5: game changers, conspiracy conspiracies about how we understand our past
Speaker 5: because we think, okay, right now, I think it's mostly
Speaker 5: within our circles common knowledge that you know, Sumerian or
Speaker 5: Acadian versions of the flood story or similar to the Bible.
Speaker 5: But what if I told you that, in my opinion
Speaker 5: it is the Biblical version could be even considered a
Speaker 5: plaguiarism of this previous version. And I was, you know,
Speaker 5: very very shocked. And again plenty of people are comparing
Speaker 5: the Biblical, for instance, version with the epic of a
Speaker 5: tra Hazies, epic of Gilgamesh and other sources and saying, oh,
Speaker 5: this proves Biblical Lot was real. But they are not
Speaker 5: considering that the Biblical version actually was written down somewhere
Speaker 5: between five hundred to three hundred BC, so not that
Speaker 5: long ago. And the oldest Mesopotamian versions are for instance,
Speaker 5: from the eighteen hundreds, so a thousand, five hundred ye
Speaker 5: is before that, but the oldest one Sumerians are from
Speaker 5: about twenty six hundred twenty three hundred, depending on the version,
Speaker 5: et cetera. About it is, of course everything it's relative.
Speaker 5: We do not know exact dates when it comes to
Speaker 5: these very very distant pass but it's you that before.
Speaker 4: But I was showed that plenty of people still.
Speaker 5: Think that, you know, these are powerul version and the
Speaker 5: Mesopotamian stories of the flood are just confirming the Bible.
Speaker 5: No the Bible plagiarized them. And before that, already in
Speaker 5: my book a few years ago, I showed that, for instance,
Speaker 5: number of people taken onto the ark of Noah was
Speaker 5: seventh plus the main hero, because Noah took his wife,
Speaker 5: three sons of his wife, and three wives of the songs,
Speaker 5: so seven people plus Noah. And the way for instance,
Speaker 5: seven abclus seven sages taken onto the arc in the
Speaker 5: Mesopotamian versions. Depending on the version, there are different things.
Speaker 5: And again seven rishis. I think we even talked about
Speaker 5: it in the first episode here on the Awkward Project,
Speaker 5: that the same number of people is taken in India,
Speaker 5: Mesopotamia and the Bible. But I was shocked that, for instance,
Speaker 5: even the name Noah was probably stupidly taken from Mesopotamian sources,
Speaker 5: because even I found a few Asseologists, I don't remember
Speaker 5: their name exactly, but a few academic people saying that
Speaker 5: Noah is not like name, like the biblical name of
Speaker 5: the Noah was actually an epithet of atra Hesis from
Speaker 5: previous story. So it seems like the Biblical writers where
Speaker 5: you know, writing down copying these Sumerians Sumerian or Acadian
Speaker 5: or later Babylonian flat stories, and they were so maybe stupid,
Speaker 5: maybe they you know, were not very well worsed in
Speaker 5: these languages like Acadian Sumerian, that they even took it
Speaker 5: was epithet, so it means that, for instance, the great Utrahyasis,
Speaker 5: so the great is the epithet or the strong Atrohsis,
Speaker 5: and Noah seems to be one of the epithets of Atrahyasis.
Speaker 5: So they even plagiarized the name unknowingly. Probably they were
Speaker 5: just you know, writing things down. They didn't understand the
Speaker 5: full stories, so they copied everything. So again I was
Speaker 5: actually shocked about that. I'm still in the process of
Speaker 5: research because there's much more to that, and I would
Speaker 5: say I am even I am intending in the near
Speaker 5: future even to go into the entire Genesis and you know,
Speaker 5: books of the Old Testament to show that maybe they
Speaker 5: are also plagiarized from the earlier Mesopotamian sources. So yeah,
Speaker 5: that's crazy. Not plenty of people know that. But one
Speaker 5: last thing about the flood, I was also conspiracy theory
Speaker 5: this time that you know, how the flood story, either
Speaker 5: in Mesopotamia or in the Bible, that the arc was
Speaker 5: somewhere after the flood in the high mountains, whether it
Speaker 5: was the famous Mount arad Zagros or another one, depending
Speaker 5: on the story. And from these mountains, people from the
Speaker 5: arc started against civilization, and you know how no lessic
Speaker 5: revolution started, so the first sedentary lifestyle, you know, the
Speaker 5: times of the Gobaktepe and so forth. It started in
Speaker 5: the mountains, mountains and highlands, not in the lowlands that
Speaker 5: were later in which later Sumerian cities appeared. It all
Speaker 5: started us in these stories of the flood in high mountains,
Speaker 5: in the highlands, and from then from these kind of highlands,
Speaker 5: first domesticated plants went down. So again conspiracy maybe some
Speaker 5: kind of flood was real, and civilization at the Northic
Speaker 5: revolution kicks started again from you know, some kind of
Speaker 5: let's say arc was on this mountain. People went down
Speaker 5: from the mountains through highlands and then back gave the
Speaker 5: civilization to the lowlands and then later first civilization of
Speaker 5: at least this region the ancient summer appeared. So plenty
Speaker 5: of interesting stuff, right yeah, nice, Yeah, that was.
Speaker 2: I got on the on the screen the atom and
Speaker 2: Eve cylinder seal which was found, yeah yeah, which really
Speaker 2: kind of shows exactly what we're talking about with the
Speaker 2: kind of the same idea here. So this cylinder scale
Speaker 2: was used as a way of marketing products and things
Speaker 2: like that, and it's post Akkadian origin. So again you've
Speaker 2: got all of the elements of the Atom and Eve
Speaker 2: stories put all into the seal and they were you know,
Speaker 2: distributed widely, so it was sort of understood that this
Speaker 2: could be one of these earlier stories that.
Speaker 4: Were great example.
Speaker 5: I want to academically actually analyze everything because I don't
Speaker 5: see that besides conspiracy theory, alternative history. People are talking
Speaker 5: about that, even you, my professor said that it's a
Speaker 5: great thing to do academically, of course critically, but I
Speaker 5: want to, you know, focus on that. And again you
Speaker 5: can ask a question, Brandon, you have some no, yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, nice, I do. You can tell me scorming over here.
Speaker 3: So academically, I think it's really important. But at the
Speaker 3: same time as the you know, I think we tend
Speaker 3: to fall too far into conspiratorial thinking.
Speaker 4: I hear you.
Speaker 3: But Joseph Campbell is a brilliant contemporary mythologist and religious expert,
Speaker 3: and he has and I was looking for it really fast.
Speaker 4: That's what you caught me Scuorman on.
Speaker 3: I have the book, and he actually breaks down this image,
Speaker 3: showing it symbolically and how each image of this and
Speaker 3: how these same stories through time keep getting told and
Speaker 3: then why and through breaking down through that more symbolic
Speaker 3: narrative of the mythological structure of our unconscious mind. I
Speaker 3: think that's really important because we shouldn't deem that to
Speaker 3: be conspiratorial. That can be broken down academically and symbolically,
Speaker 3: so to not just leave the historical framework of what
Speaker 3: literary the literary, you know, like people want to deem
Speaker 3: this is like, oh, the flood had to happen in
Speaker 3: real life. It's like those things happen within the unconscious
Speaker 3: and subconscious and conscious mind of the human person. So
Speaker 3: it's then through the symbols of those things that was
Speaker 3: on screen where we can truly understand the psyche, thus
Speaker 3: the collective psyche of our of humanity as a whole,
Speaker 3: especially in the time frames that we're in right now,
Speaker 3: where we are always stemming to be in everyday apocalypse,
Speaker 3: especially in the United States. I can't speak for Poland,
Speaker 3: but it's such an interesting.
Speaker 4: It's an interesting thing to come to.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I agree, with that, and I actually mentioned during
Speaker 5: this presentation during my classes about you know, the mythological, philosophical,
Speaker 5: to some extent esoteric meaning.
Speaker 4: Of the flood.
Speaker 5: I agree with that, but as I mentioned, academically historically,
Speaker 5: because as for instance, with this case of biblical version
Speaker 5: of the flood being plagiarized from previous mesopotainment sources, you
Speaker 5: may interpret again that is, you know, universal, but also
Speaker 5: if you, for instance, have this epithet Noah taken from
Speaker 5: this older one right now, aizing historically and you see
Speaker 5: that it's not in this case universal, but that they
Speaker 5: took historically it throughout the period. So it's a different thing.
Speaker 5: But I agree. And also into these topics, you know,
Speaker 5: the heroes journey and stuff like that. That's for another conversation,
Speaker 5: because the flat is also about cosmology. You know, there's
Speaker 5: plenty of stuff about that that you know, it's too
Speaker 5: much for today, sorry, but again I'm also into these topics.
Speaker 5: These are great topics, but I want to historically go that, Okay,
Speaker 5: this may be they took the universal themes from before,
Speaker 5: but we have historically, we can historically prove that they
Speaker 5: took them and it wasn't that. Okay, they also created
Speaker 5: them because we see how the transmission of knowledge went
Speaker 5: and you know how, for instance, the number of people
Speaker 5: taken onto the arc of K seven.
Speaker 4: It also has some meaning.
Speaker 5: But for instance, this Noah's epithet is directly taken from
Speaker 5: previous sources. Or for instance that we know from the
Speaker 5: Bible that Noah is sending one bird. This bird is returning,
Speaker 5: so this bird couldn't find safe place, so it means
Speaker 5: to know that everywhere else is water, he cannot you know,
Speaker 5: find a place to stay.
Speaker 4: And again, after.
Speaker 5: Some days he's sending another bird and this bird is
Speaker 5: not returning, meaning he found some safe place. The same
Speaker 5: is in the epic of Googa Mesh. He's sending one
Speaker 5: bird returning, the other not returning, so it's safe. So
Speaker 5: one way, I'm always interdisciplinary, and again I show that
Speaker 5: in my at my university, and you know it's another
Speaker 5: advantage of mine that I also want to analyze it
Speaker 5: from this perspective. But you know, we can also see,
Speaker 5: you know, we need to you know, analytically different kind
Speaker 5: of layers. Okay, this is the metaphorical layer, mythological, psychological,
Speaker 5: but this is a layer.
Speaker 4: Textual, philological. To be exact, that.
Speaker 5: Okay, we see that this text was copied from that,
Speaker 5: this was from that, et cetera.
Speaker 4: But that's good point.
Speaker 5: And the flood, as I mentioned, is meaning, for instance,
Speaker 5: in cosmologies of ancient ones.
Speaker 1: I wanted to bring this up real quick. Hell, Lis,
Speaker 1: can you go back and show the other one where
Speaker 1: the regular cylinder is on the sure?
Speaker 2: Yeah, because all of these cylinders were used for pressing
Speaker 2: lots and lots of clay tablets.
Speaker 1: Did find something interesting, just like in the if you
Speaker 1: see this image right there, and then if you were
Speaker 1: to go back to the clay one. Now I'm not
Speaker 1: discrediting that this isn't Adam, Adam and Eve. But now
Speaker 1: if you go look at that other one, just by
Speaker 1: removing that snake behind him that's attached to that square,
Speaker 1: you're gonna automatically think even more it's Adam and Eve
Speaker 1: because now the snake isn't near him and it's just
Speaker 1: near her. So I mean that's kind of like playing
Speaker 1: with the image in my opinion, cutting that out on
Speaker 1: the other side. Oh right, he see what I'm getting at.
Speaker 1: You're removing on the other side. Now you don't see
Speaker 1: a snake and it's all that's definitely got to be
Speaker 1: Adam and Eve. Well maybe maybe that's the Caduceus pulled
Speaker 1: apart now, I mean I don't know.
Speaker 3: Right, No, I love that and the great marriage, the
Speaker 3: sacred marriage of the Cadusius is the masculine feminine coming
Speaker 3: together to reach that level of enlightenment through one individual.
Speaker 5: Through two type of idea.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's super propagandic to remove that fucking image right there.
Speaker 1: Yeah. When I caught that, I was like, well, that's
Speaker 1: insinuating it. Now if you remove one of the snakes
Speaker 1: and you're only associated with her, I mean, of course,
Speaker 1: now you're going to think Adam and Eve.
Speaker 2: Here's here's something to consider. So, like we were talking about,
Speaker 2: these cylinders were like an agent form of branding. So
Speaker 2: the story about him and Eve is basically an advertisement
Speaker 2: that they pup off the ground. And they're they really
Speaker 2: creating a story out of like we'll look at the
Speaker 2: back of you know, cereal boxes to get our history from.
Speaker 4: Right No.
Speaker 3: I yeah, that's interesting, And especially because they only tell
Speaker 3: you that Adam and Eve's story. They never tell you
Speaker 3: that Genesis has two stories in it right.
Speaker 4: Away that you know that, like, yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1: Maybe it's like a movie advertisement.
Speaker 3: It's like ancient Marcus theater is trying to tell you
Speaker 3: exactly what you're supposed to think.
Speaker 4: Buy my popcorn. Believe you know, like believe in my Judom.
Speaker 1: It's one of the original Adam and Eve stories. Movie.
Speaker 2: It's very controversial to say that this is Adam and
Speaker 2: Eve because it uses the motif of the banquet, right,
Speaker 2: So you would want to show off the Akkadian wealth.
Speaker 2: So they had these agents tablets to show off their wealth,
Speaker 2: and so to call it the Adam and Eve thing,
Speaker 2: they get kind of touchy. But I think, you know,
Speaker 2: this is a lot of what was going on in
Speaker 2: the area, was showing off your wealth through these tablets
Speaker 2: and the and the goods that were attached to them.
Speaker 4: Yes, yes, it's great fun.
Speaker 5: I think that it's one hundred percent sure it was
Speaker 5: an inspiration for Adem and If, But again it's only
Speaker 5: one that survived, so imagine how many more. Maybe there
Speaker 5: were the entire stories of aidm and If in Acadian,
Speaker 5: in Sumerian, or you know, in other later civilizations that
Speaker 5: just didn't survive.
Speaker 4: That word the inspiration for the biblical one.
Speaker 5: But again, to show people on the other side of
Speaker 5: the spectrum who see, oh, Mesopotamian sources are confirming the Bible.
Speaker 4: No, it's that's ridiculous, that's ridiculous.
Speaker 3: Well, it's more for me, it seems like it confirms
Speaker 3: the the great work. It confirms the story that is
Speaker 3: coming and stemming from the unconscious mind that is continually
Speaker 3: being told throughout all cultures. And it's not a perennial story,
Speaker 3: meaning it's not one that happens literally, but stems throughout
Speaker 3: the entire planet, Which is then why I I've always
Speaker 3: thought that out of Africa theory it was a complete
Speaker 3: notther nonsense that it's like, okay, we're going to try
Speaker 3: to tell everybody that everything stem from this one place,
Speaker 3: even though the planet is this.
Speaker 4: Total global sphere.
Speaker 3: You know, no hatred to you flat earthers out there,
Speaker 3: but that's not quite nonsense, especially if you believe in
Speaker 3: astrology and you know the harmony of the spheres through
Speaker 3: a Pythagorean sense is that you get to see these
Speaker 3: same mythopoetic currents stemming up through all of history, and
Speaker 3: that we can prove it because even though history continues
Speaker 3: to be covered over, we have the ability to pull
Speaker 3: up these small little evidential, concrete examples of these same
Speaker 3: symbolic stories throughout the entire planet.
Speaker 5: Yeah, that's for another conversation, because it.
Speaker 1: Wasn't too much.
Speaker 5: I have like much in my book about you know,
Speaker 5: these symbols, you know, astrology. You know, maybe if someone
Speaker 5: is interested, we can the least in my book it's
Speaker 5: deja vicathing already been. And this daja v is about
Speaker 5: the cyclicality of nature, of time, of history and the
Speaker 5: end I talk about, you know, cycles of our ancient
Speaker 5: answer stores and if you are talking about you know,
Speaker 5: astro theology astrology. I found, not myself, but after other researchers,
Speaker 5: that history seems to repeat, at least to some extent
Speaker 5: through zodical ages, like through the procession of the equinoxies
Speaker 5: of the twenty five thousand, nine hundred and twenty years
Speaker 5: of the Platonic grade year. And if we divide it
Speaker 5: into twelves of the x science not thirteen thirteen actually
Speaker 5: doesn't make sense with this at least discreplining history, but
Speaker 5: twelve it makes And I found after, for instance, David
Speaker 5: will Cook a few examples of repeated history in the
Speaker 5: next cycle. So two one hundred and sixty years after
Speaker 5: that similar Like again we are talking about universal stuff,
Speaker 5: so we could say similar energy, similar archetypes, but completely different.
Speaker 5: There was ancient Rome and not modern modern but let's
Speaker 5: say nineteen and twentieth century history of the USA. We
Speaker 5: still the same motives, the same dark characters, you know,
Speaker 5: similar errors being made. So again it's a very interesting one.
Speaker 5: And you've mentioned about the harmony of this fist. So
Speaker 5: I'm also mentioning about the geometry of the Solar system.
Speaker 5: And actually I think I need to add that to
Speaker 5: my website because already in high school we needed to
Speaker 5: write essays on I was having history.
Speaker 4: Word, religions.
Speaker 5: This was that I've chosen, and mathematics, And on the
Speaker 5: mathematics essay, I made an essay on the geometry of
Speaker 5: the Solar system. There is a bit in my book,
Speaker 5: but I was calculating and everywhere in the ratious from
Speaker 5: planets to Sun, for instance, everywhere there was one hundred
Speaker 5: eight four three two golden ratio. So it was crazy.
Speaker 5: Even the planets may be distributed from the Sun and
Speaker 5: the golden ratio, so it was epic. We may have,
Speaker 5: like I had polished presentation about it, but it's crazy
Speaker 5: everywhere you know, not maybe exactly to you know ten
Speaker 5: the simal place, but approximately it's very very harmonic, very geometric,
Speaker 5: as I mentioned for free to one hundred and eight
Speaker 5: golden ratio everywhere in the solar system. So already back there.
Speaker 5: And when it comes to this word religion, essay I
Speaker 5: did about consciousness as the source of the universe, analyzing
Speaker 5: you know, different philosophical and religious thoughts. So already in
Speaker 5: high school they threatened me that, oh, you know, someone
Speaker 5: at a higher level won't accept them, and I won't pass.
Speaker 4: But I passed.
Speaker 5: You know, they were like sixty seventy percent because they
Speaker 5: didn't like the topics, but still they were accepted. And
Speaker 5: from history I did about prehistoric measures of the Earth,
Speaker 5: another you know, cool topic, and another one you know
Speaker 5: this we mentioned today cosmologist universal stuff, So that would
Speaker 5: be for another conversation.
Speaker 3: Yeah, nice, Yeah, Alexander, Alexander. Sorry, do you have any
Speaker 3: embodied practice? Do you do? Do you have like an
Speaker 3: esochair practice, meditation, kung fu magic or anything like that
Speaker 3: or are we just strictly in the intellectual spheres here?
Speaker 5: No, No, and just you know a bit, I would
Speaker 5: say that parallel to my research and I sat very
Speaker 5: early when I was teenager, and I always mentioned that
Speaker 5: it was the masculine part, like hardcore history research, because
Speaker 5: you know, my book is full of you know, also
Speaker 5: academic stuff like full of footnotes, bibliography, et cetera. So
Speaker 5: parallel to that, at the same time, I was.
Speaker 4: Having like spiritual journey. And I say always that it was.
Speaker 5: Like masculine this research research and feminine this, you know, intuition, dreams,
Speaker 5: spiritual experience, synchronicities at such a and I would say
Speaker 5: my history was interesting because before that I was on
Speaker 5: the etheistic maybe agnostic site. And then I say, wait
Speaker 5: a second, it's too much. It cannot be logically explained.
Speaker 5: There is much more. So, yes, I am into spirituality.
Speaker 5: I don't have like practice all the time, but I use,
Speaker 5: for instance, to reach people's auras in high school or later. So,
Speaker 5: but I do not have like strict that every day
Speaker 5: or every something I'm practicing. I'm more like suddenly something
Speaker 5: cool happens. But I say, for many years, when it
Speaker 5: comes to systematically, I was having dream journals, like I
Speaker 5: have twelve or something this like like a few books
Speaker 5: of dream journals. I did that for many years. But
Speaker 5: I found out that if I'm not that strict with it,
Speaker 5: it's getting better when it comes to dreams.
Speaker 4: It's nice.
Speaker 3: I'd be interested to see how you could integrate a
Speaker 3: practice and embodied like daily practice into your work and
Speaker 3: see how your work blossoms and blooms and doesn't only grow,
Speaker 3: becomes even more concret creed, and how you're thinking starts
Speaker 3: to really like just kind of stretch itself out. Because
Speaker 3: it seems that an embodied practice is something that most
Speaker 3: academics don't have, not even academics, but even though more
Speaker 3: spiritually new age woo woo, they think they have a practice.
Speaker 3: But what's important about practice is that it's a dedication,
Speaker 3: and that it's a dedication.
Speaker 4: That yoga whatever it is.
Speaker 3: And I don't mean yoga as and you're fucking like
Speaker 3: going to your yoga class, but I mean actually having
Speaker 3: that body mind synthesis that happens when you're dedicated to
Speaker 3: something larger than yourself, you know, So something interesting I
Speaker 3: think about I.
Speaker 5: Would say that I have something like that, and I'm
Speaker 5: using like not only today was very logical talk because
Speaker 5: of the topic and you know of my recent experiences.
Speaker 5: And also I would say that right now, I've been,
Speaker 5: but I'm again getting a little bit in balance with
Speaker 5: this you know, verse trigged irrational thinking and irrationality spirituality
Speaker 5: because in the past, like past few years ago, I
Speaker 5: was too much, because I went again from this atheistic
Speaker 5: agnostic like in the material world and then suddenly so
Speaker 5: crazy spiritual things that I would say I went out
Speaker 5: of balance into spirituality, not being grounded enough with you know, logic, rationalism,
Speaker 5: et cetera.
Speaker 4: So right now I'm but moance.
Speaker 5: That's why you know, I'm not that heavily and systematically
Speaker 5: doing because I was the other way. I was systematically
Speaker 5: again re learning rationalism, logic, you know, research that one.
Speaker 5: You know, I even started playing some like chess on
Speaker 5: the side or something because I was too into this
Speaker 5: creativity spirituality too much, so I did the other way around.
Speaker 4: Have you ever studied phenomenology? I have the book by Hegel,
Speaker 4: but not like very no no.
Speaker 3: No no no, no no no no. I'm gonna stop
Speaker 3: you right there. Hegel is only good for base like.
Speaker 3: Hegel's fine, but that's not phenomenology. What I'm talking about
Speaker 3: is husserl, Heidiger, Merleu, Ponti.
Speaker 4: And lev Nas.
Speaker 3: These are the characters that I think you should deeply,
Speaker 3: you know, get into, because what ends up happening is
Speaker 3: we start to understand that what happened is the Cartesianism
Speaker 3: came into being with Descartes all the way up.
Speaker 4: Until finally Heidegger.
Speaker 3: And it's still in our modern zeitgeist of the academic
Speaker 3: spheres where you separated subject and object, and the idea
Speaker 3: is that that is a convoluted illusion. Subject and object
Speaker 3: is not how we experience the world. We experience it
Speaker 3: through our first person experience with things and feelings, and
Speaker 3: it's got a very concrete way of how we see
Speaker 3: the world. And so I think it would be very
Speaker 3: I think it'd be fascinating to see where your work
Speaker 3: goes once you integrate the phenomenalgical reduction.
Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, I would try to get and I have
Speaker 5: a few projects because you know, I may be a
Speaker 5: bit like tired or something at least a bit bad.
Speaker 5: You know, recently I had plenty of stuff going on.
Speaker 5: But you know, in a few months I will finish,
Speaker 5: you know, the old ones, and you know, finally be
Speaker 5: more free as I used to when I started the research.
Speaker 4: And I of course would have to say that.
Speaker 5: I've regressed a bit when it comes to my research,
Speaker 5: but I'm still trying to deliver in my best. But
Speaker 5: I was better when it comes to everything like that,
Speaker 5: as probably because you know of this kind of spirituality
Speaker 5: and you know, maybe being you know, being more free
Speaker 5: of course, and you know, focusing more time on that.
Speaker 5: But I think there are cycles, there are seasons to everything,
Speaker 5: and oh, that's that's too much for I think to explain.
Speaker 4: Thank you again.
Speaker 5: I see that, you know, people at least some comments
Speaker 5: that people really like.
Speaker 4: Today.
Speaker 5: As I mentioned, today was a bit logical because of
Speaker 5: the recent a few months, just because that's how I wanted,
Speaker 5: you know, to show something, but again show something that
Speaker 5: science is starting to at least a bit catching up,
Speaker 5: so there may be some hope at least at least
Speaker 5: to some extent. Of course, as we mentioned and discussed,
Speaker 5: so thank you Nick. Once again, I think we also, oh,
Speaker 5: so many topics right now. We also before that on
Speaker 5: the second one, it was also logically about limitations and
Speaker 5: philosophy of science. We mentioned that we need to talk
Speaker 5: about Atlantis.
Speaker 4: This would be.
Speaker 5: Another one, but you know, so many topics today appeared
Speaker 5: that whatever you like the next time, if you want
Speaker 5: so we can discuss and thanks Brandon, you need to
Speaker 5: maybe we need to you know, message each other too,
Speaker 5: so you can give me this.
Speaker 3: Oh, I would love to, Alexander. I would love to
Speaker 3: give you those sources. Yeah, that sounds good. I'll message
Speaker 3: you on the definitely Instagram.
Speaker 1: All all of stuff as usual, Alexander. So thank you
Speaker 1: very much for coming on, Audie. Really you had my
Speaker 1: attention double time, so definitely help me. Thank you. You
Speaker 1: want to remind everybody where they can find your book
Speaker 1: and stuff. I did let for the people listening. His
Speaker 1: links are in there, already was in there before I start.
Speaker 5: Yes, but you want to let every links My book
Speaker 5: is again Desia visas everything already been. It's mostly about
Speaker 5: you know, history, lots of civilizations, Atlantis and stuff like that,
Speaker 5: but also, as the title suggests, about cyclical time, and
Speaker 5: there is a bit at the end of metaphysics, spirituality
Speaker 5: and so on. So mostly history, but I would say
Speaker 5: also twenty percent of how it connects on a bigger level.
Speaker 4: And I think that the.
Speaker 5: Best way is just copy paste my name and surname,
Speaker 5: because plenty of people are have hard time, you know,
Speaker 5: typing it or something. Just copy and paste and you
Speaker 5: will find me. My book can be found on Amazon's
Speaker 5: like US, UK, Australia, Canada and a few more. Just
Speaker 5: you know, surge day ja if has everything already been
Speaker 5: our copy and paste my name and surname. I'm a
Speaker 5: bit on YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, but maybe just by typing,
Speaker 5: you know, copying my name in Sturnam, you will find
Speaker 5: me probably faster on some other interviews, like bigger ones,
Speaker 5: because my English social media isn't big right now, but
Speaker 5: you know, I had this work, so I will try
Speaker 5: to make it better because my Polish one is significantly bigger.
Speaker 5: But I want right now to focus small on the
Speaker 5: Polish one, on the English one, and soon and right now,
Speaker 5: because I'm on a little bit podcast journey, you can
Speaker 5: find me on a few bigger channels, but not all
Speaker 5: are published yet, so you will find me probably on
Speaker 5: some channels that you follow soon.
Speaker 1: Nice, really great, it's tough man and uh Brandon, please
Speaker 1: let everybody know well first, thank you for coming on.
Speaker 1: Really appreciate it. And please let everybody know what the
Speaker 1: deal is with you when they can find all yourself.
Speaker 3: Yeah, nice, everyone out there, thank you for joining us.
Speaker 3: Thank you Alexander it's fascinating. I love your mind, I
Speaker 3: love the way everything sounds, and I look forward to
Speaker 3: getting deeper into your work. My channel is magas in
Speaker 3: the media, where we break down anime, comic books, literature, film,
Speaker 3: and media of all kinds through the mythological, philosophical, esoteric, occult,
Speaker 3: anything that's stemming from my mind. We're breaking it down
Speaker 3: and where I'm trying to get it out there to
Speaker 3: all of you. We live in a strange time where
Speaker 3: meaning is lacking and no one really knows where they're going,
Speaker 3: and so we're trying to not only myself but Nick
Speaker 3: on a daily basis, so make sure everyone is continually
Speaker 3: watching all of the fascinating and brilliant content content that
Speaker 3: Nick is coming out with all times of certain people. Yeah, Nick,
Speaker 3: you're Kroushner right now. The amount of content you punt
Speaker 3: out is is fucking wild, and so.
Speaker 4: It's amazing. And the same with myself.
Speaker 3: I you know, this strange time, it's all about getting
Speaker 3: back into the soul and getting back into the body,
Speaker 3: and I think we're missing that in an overrationalized, over
Speaker 3: post like modern logical positivist framework.
Speaker 4: And it's the.
Speaker 3: Stories and it's our media that is showing us how
Speaker 3: to lead a better life. We just have to be
Speaker 3: able to see it either through the lens of they're
Speaker 3: showing us how not to live, or the symbols are
Speaker 3: coming from them and we are showing us how to live.
Speaker 4: Anyway, I'm on all the.
Speaker 3: Social media platforms, so just type in magas in the media, subscribe, like,
Speaker 3: and share, and let's enlighten the world together.
Speaker 4: That's my long winded thank you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, thank you very much, great message. Definitely go
Speaker 1: check out how social media it does put out. It
Speaker 1: puts out a real quite often, so yeah, definitely definitely
Speaker 1: doing it yourself too, my man. I am again thank
Speaker 1: you so much, Alexander, thank you everybody in the chat.
Speaker 1: That was a great chat. I was stuck on that
Speaker 1: for a little bit too. Read in the comments and
Speaker 1: just great stuff, and I'm glad everybody enjoyed it. I
Speaker 1: thought it was great and definitely look forward to having
Speaker 1: you back on again, sir.
Speaker 5: So sure, sure, so so many topics even today, we
Speaker 5: came up with so many.
Speaker 1: Definitely definitely keep on having it one, sir.
Speaker 5: Thank you for having me on. I really enjoyed it
Speaker 5: as always, truly fascinating, nice that you are having different
Speaker 5: minds also here in our conversation, because you know, we
Speaker 5: are giving more and more and everyone is thinking a
Speaker 5: bit differently even though we mostly agreed, but still new
Speaker 5: thoughts and we may you know, discover.
Speaker 1: New things exactly. That's what I connect. The dots make
Speaker 1: so magic. So yeah, yeah, and then until the next one,
Speaker 1: everybody be well later