Speaker 1: We got to think about Earth Agents as a tool,
Speaker 1: a tool that you listen to to get the latest
Speaker 1: from around the world. And I'm really happy to say
Speaker 1: that I've been working diligently. Our team has been working
Speaker 1: diligently to pull from a variety of resources around the world.
Speaker 1: We have a really amazing land up coming in this summer.
Speaker 1: We have French, and we have British, we have Egyptian
Speaker 1: and South America. We have a variety of scholars from
Speaker 1: around the world, and we continue to pull from these
Speaker 1: people to hear the latest. And I'm really proud of
Speaker 1: the ability to offer not just home based material, but
Speaker 1: material that's from around the globe and news making data. Now,
Speaker 1: one of the aspects of that venture is this new
Speaker 1: satellite scanning. Now we've talked about SARCE, the synthetic aperture
Speaker 1: radar work that's been going on, but I recently discovered
Speaker 1: through Trevor Grassy. We remember Trevor and William Brown were
Speaker 1: on the program talking about scans that William had done
Speaker 1: twenty years ago, and they're kind of being a cover
Speaker 1: up or a non disclosure of the scans to the Orthodox.
Speaker 2: To.
Speaker 1: The Antiquities Department of Egypt and they just basically squelched it.
Speaker 1: They they didn't present anything. But if you haven't seen
Speaker 1: the satellite scans of the Caffrey and Cufu Pyramid, you
Speaker 1: gotta do. You got to take a look at him.
Speaker 1: You can see him on the Earth Ancient's Facebook page.
Speaker 1: But what makes this discovery, this use of this satellite
Speaker 1: imagery so compelling, is that it makes us want to
Speaker 1: verify it. And if we can't verify it with the
Speaker 1: known data, then we got to use new technology and
Speaker 1: apparatus to check and see if we can validate the scans. Hey,
Speaker 1: this is Cliff your host of Earth Ancients. Hope you're
Speaker 1: doing great today. We have a new scan that I
Speaker 1: just discovered and it's going to be part of a
Speaker 1: interview with Trevor Grassi, Wayam Brown and a new team member,
Speaker 1: I should say satellite team member who happened to scan
Speaker 1: the Hawara Pyramid. I think it's been ten years now now.
Speaker 1: If you're not familiar with the Hawara Pyramid, it is
Speaker 1: located in southern Egypt and it's noted for an underground
Speaker 1: labyrinth that Herodotus the Greek I guess you could call
Speaker 1: him an early filled researcher or archaeologist for his time
Speaker 1: a couple thousand years ago stated and talked about it,
Speaker 1: and he may have gone into a portion of it.
Speaker 1: Even though it was in severely ruinous state, he did
Speaker 1: make his way in through it, and he spoke to
Speaker 1: the Egyptian priesthood and others and came back with a real,
Speaker 1: real major discovery for his time that influenced people like Petrie,
Speaker 1: who was the father of Egyptology, who also commented on
Speaker 1: this labyrinth and was able to see aspects of it
Speaker 1: in the late eighteen hundreds. Now, what this new scan
Speaker 1: reveals is that there is a labyrinth and go to
Speaker 1: actually go to Cliff Dunning at Facebook and I have
Speaker 1: posted a color rendition of this scan that is being
Speaker 1: revealed towards the middle of June of this year, and
Speaker 1: we're gonna see some more of these scans that were taken.
Speaker 1: And there are an amazing group of scans that were
Speaker 1: done with a SAR satellite image. And not only are
Speaker 1: the rooms, there are partial pillars, there are voids that
Speaker 1: are significantly large, and it is just wonderful. Now, I
Speaker 1: don't think Zahi jas knows about it. I don't think
Speaker 1: any of the authorities know about it, and this is
Speaker 1: becoming a real problem for them simply because they they
Speaker 1: are not able to control the narrative. Ah. As many
Speaker 1: years as I've known about this labyrinth, I've also known
Speaker 1: that there has been no talk, no divulsion, no data
Speaker 1: coming from the Antiquities Department. And that makes you wonder,
Speaker 1: why are they not more open to revealing this information.
Speaker 1: Why must Zahi, who's supposed to be the spokesperson for
Speaker 1: the Antiquities Department in Egypt, why is he basically saying
Speaker 1: that the Tsar scans are invalid, that the Caffre and
Speaker 1: the Cufu scans Cufu was Pyramid was scan in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty two. Why are they invalid? Why? You know, there's
Speaker 1: a whole bunch that we know from those scans that
Speaker 1: we can validate. And then it makes us think, well,
Speaker 1: wait a minute, should we can we comfortably talk about it? Well?
Speaker 1: When pressed, and I think he was on Joe Rogan
Speaker 1: and he was asked about this, he said it was
Speaker 1: all pie in the sky. It was there's nothing valid
Speaker 1: about any of these scans, and uh, it's all false data.
Speaker 1: Why would he say that? And by the way, if
Speaker 1: you haven't seen that Joe Rogan interview with uh Sahi Awash.
Speaker 1: You need you need to hear it. This is the guy.
Speaker 1: I mean, he basically embarrassed the whole Egyptological community with
Speaker 1: his performance and what he had to say. And for
Speaker 1: this guy to be traveling in the United States right
Speaker 1: now speaking as the formal foremost expert on Egyptology, it
Speaker 1: doesn't say a lot for the industry. It says very
Speaker 1: little actually, because he's kind of unfortunately, he's a little
Speaker 1: behind the times on a lot. And I have to
Speaker 1: say this, it's not just him, it's Egypt as a
Speaker 1: whole is a couple of decades behind as and it's
Speaker 1: considered a developing country. The education situation is poor. I
Speaker 1: think a big one is their inability to use a
Speaker 1: light ar ground panetraan radar. I mean, they would rather
Speaker 1: just do the old turn of the century surveying for
Speaker 1: archaeological ruins. And this is just so backwards in the
Speaker 1: rest of the world using the latest technology. And I
Speaker 1: think I mentioned earlier in the year when I was
Speaker 1: there last year in Egypt that archaeologists are just sitting
Speaker 1: their way and not really interested in reaching beyond their
Speaker 1: traditional techniques of archaeological digs, and so when you're dealing
Speaker 1: with something like that, you can't do anything. But they
Speaker 1: are the masters of their domain. They are the ones
Speaker 1: who are running this amazing country. And now they have
Speaker 1: a one billion dollar museum that is now completely open,
Speaker 1: and I'm hearing every single day. In fact, I just
Speaker 1: heard from Mohammed Imbrhem that there are anomalousts artifacts, there's
Speaker 1: anomalous sculptures, and there's anomalous bowls and plates that obviously
Speaker 1: were spun on some machinery. So this is going to
Speaker 1: open up the entire country to additional inquiry and stifle innovation.
Speaker 1: To stifle research, it doesn't doesn't help the country, you know,
Speaker 1: it doesn't help the country, especially when they're in such
Speaker 1: a sad state of of of development. And so zai
Speaker 1: Owas really is the last person you want to be
Speaker 1: a spokesperson for your country. Because as these new developments
Speaker 1: come up, uh and you remember we had Robert Shock,
Speaker 1: we had Trevor Grassy, and we had a Manu Safety Day,
Speaker 1: Doctor Safety Day on the program. As this new satellite
Speaker 1: data continues and they're repeatedly scanning and fine tuning the images,
Speaker 1: we're going to see more and more and more data,
Speaker 1: and the pressure is going to just build on these
Speaker 1: guys that want to sit back and release data according
Speaker 1: to some itinerary that they have, Well, you can't do
Speaker 1: that anymore. You just can't do that anymore. And so
Speaker 1: he's going to have to. I don't think Zaii has
Speaker 1: that much of a decision in terms of releasing data,
Speaker 1: but he's a huge influence in the country. He's a
Speaker 1: huge influence, and he's just not a great spokesperson. It's
Speaker 1: a real, real, real problem, not only for me, but
Speaker 1: for a lot of people, for a lot of people
Speaker 1: who want to know more. And so we're in some
Speaker 1: ways we're still left to the ability of this Antiquities
Speaker 1: department in Egypt to release this data, to acknowledge it.
Speaker 1: If it's this information is there or not? Why do
Speaker 1: we have to wait another decade or two for a
Speaker 1: new group of Egyptian archaeologists and scientists to grant us
Speaker 1: permission to see these antiquities, to see and validate their age,
Speaker 1: to see how sophisticated they are. Now, if you haven't
Speaker 1: seen the images from the Caffree Pyramid Stars scan, you
Speaker 1: need to look at them. There's a whole bunch of
Speaker 1: different interpretations, and that's the big issue, is the interpretation.
Speaker 1: So that's one place to start. But what I am
Speaker 1: talking about, and we will go into great detail, is
Speaker 1: Hawara Elabyrinth, the one the massive underground structure Petrie describes
Speaker 1: and there's a couple of other people that bring it
Speaker 1: to that shine light on it. So if we see
Speaker 1: these details, and if they're being revealed, and by the way,
Speaker 1: the team, the scientific team that's gonna reveal it will
Speaker 1: have a couple of people on the show to talk
Speaker 1: about it. But this is another revelation. I heard about
Speaker 1: this technology a while ago and I wasn't sure about it.
Speaker 1: But this when you see these photographs again, you're going
Speaker 1: to go to Facebook and go to Cliff Dunning. I
Speaker 1: think I've spread them around on you can go to
Speaker 1: Instagram and go to Earth Ancients podcast. That's our page.
Speaker 1: I posted one photograph there, but check it out, see
Speaker 1: what you think. And this is you know, this is
Speaker 1: the future. These technologies are readily available and as more
Speaker 1: and more technicians are trained, the ability to grasp archaeological
Speaker 1: data is going to be more free to a wide
Speaker 1: variety of research institutes, individuals and universities. So and I
Speaker 1: don't know who's going to be the one who steps
Speaker 1: forward in it. I think it's going to be individuals,
Speaker 1: simply because universities are less likely to go against the
Speaker 1: antiquities departments because, remember the Antiquities Department, it's a developing nation,
Speaker 1: and so they are challenged in releasing the latest data.
Speaker 1: They want to keep the narrative that the pyramids were tombs,
Speaker 1: that the Pharaohs were the bright Ones, and that there's
Speaker 1: no hint of a previous high level civilization. So lots
Speaker 1: to think about. So Today's programs with Dan Richards and
Speaker 1: if you haven't heard from him, he's kind of the
Speaker 1: new media darling. He's got a real fun YouTube channel
Speaker 1: called Deduncting and it is filled with his comments on
Speaker 1: Graham Hancock, the orthodoxy, traditional academic view of people like
Speaker 1: Graham Hancock, and he in many ways supports the alternative
Speaker 1: narrative on a number of different topics, which makes it
Speaker 1: really fun. If you're not familiar with him, go to
Speaker 1: Joe Rogan and he has recently been on Joe Rogan
Speaker 1: and had a lot of really good things to say.
Speaker 1: So today's program is Archaeological Deduncting, and my guest is
Speaker 1: Dan Richard's Earth Ancients does a number of tours every year,
Speaker 1: and it's really important to have a really good camera.
Speaker 1: I just found the Insta three sixty x five recently,
Speaker 1: and I gotta tell you it is an outstanding camera.
Speaker 1: It is an artificial intelligence camera, which means that it
Speaker 1: automatically can adjust to the tones either day or evening.
Speaker 1: It has a huge battery, one of the best image
Speaker 1: quality I've ever seen, and you can edit on the fly.
Speaker 1: I mean you quick edit mode where you can actually
Speaker 1: edit while you're standing there. And for a limited they'll
Speaker 1: throw in a selfie stick if you're one of the
Speaker 1: first thirty people who purchased the standard package. Go to
Speaker 1: store dot Insta three sixty dot com and punch in
Speaker 1: Ancients and you'll qualify for that that selfie stick, which
Speaker 1: is worth twenty five bucks. Again, it's store dot Insta
Speaker 1: three sixty dot com. Use the word Ancients and you'll
Speaker 1: get that deal. This is an outstanding camera. Hold it
Speaker 1: in the palm of your hand. It's waterproof and it
Speaker 1: is a great camera. Check it out. The Insta three
Speaker 1: sixty x five. Ardangs is a sponsor of Cosmic Summit
Speaker 1: if you're not familiar with Cosmic Summit, it's going to
Speaker 1: be held in Greensboro, North Carolina, June twentieth through the
Speaker 1: twenty third. There are a ton of really good people
Speaker 1: there and we have One of their keynotes is Dan Richards,
Speaker 1: who's with us today. He will be presenting on one
Speaker 1: of those days. We don't know specifically what day it is,
Speaker 1: but if you're not familiar with Dan, he is a
Speaker 1: research investigator. His YouTube channel, Deduncting, is becoming extremely popular,
Speaker 1: and I gotta tell you, I had to have Dan
Speaker 1: on the program, not only because he's a fan of
Speaker 1: Graham Hancock, but he's kind of a voice for reason.
Speaker 1: And when I say reason, I'm talking about both sides,
Speaker 1: the academic side, which can get really funky, and the
Speaker 1: alternative history side, which some people believe is the pseudo
Speaker 1: archaeology side, which can be and is in a lot
Speaker 1: of cases, very funky. So Dan, Welcome to Earth the Ancient.
Speaker 1: Is great to have you on the program.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Thanks clip I appreciate it.
Speaker 1: I saw your first program on YouTube on deducting. It
Speaker 1: was great. It was Milo one and Milo two, which
Speaker 1: I thought was great. But I love the fact that
Speaker 1: you're very casual but point of fact for the most part.
Speaker 1: What inspired you to begin stepping up and wanting to
Speaker 1: speak out on these topics.
Speaker 2: Well, what really got me was when I watched Ancient Apocalypse,
Speaker 2: which I was a little late to the party, but
Speaker 2: I watched it, and I'd been a Graham Hancocks fan
Speaker 2: for a long time. I just didn't have a chance
Speaker 2: to watch Ancient Apocalypse. I watched it about a year later,
Speaker 2: and then I was like, well, in this modern day
Speaker 2: and age, of course you're going to have debunkers. So
Speaker 2: I went and looked at what they were saying. It
Speaker 2: was consistently, these guys they haven't read his stuff. They're
Speaker 2: responding to individual sentences, small ideas without having the underlying concepts.
Speaker 2: And I frequently compare it to debunking evolution by attacking
Speaker 2: the evolution of a platypus. It's like, well, that doesn't
Speaker 2: you know, if some jackass says things wrong, it doesn't
Speaker 2: mean that I can just go in there and prove
Speaker 2: evolutions wrong by attacking his ideas without attacking the body
Speaker 2: of work. And so that got me started doing that,
Speaker 2: and didn't take long before it became obvious that there
Speaker 2: was doing. Nobody else doing that. So find fertile ground
Speaker 2: you till it. So here we are.
Speaker 1: You read? Did you read Fingerprints of the Guys back
Speaker 1: in ninety six five?
Speaker 2: I had it pre ordered actually from Hastings. You could
Speaker 2: pre order books back then. You couldn't pre order movies
Speaker 2: back then for some reason, but you could pre order books.
Speaker 1: And it's funny. I'm here in San Francisco and when
Speaker 1: that book came out, he came out to Berkeley and
Speaker 1: he spoke at a bookstore. I had a chance to
Speaker 1: see him, and I mean, there's like one hundred people
Speaker 1: in the room. His work was so profound. To me,
Speaker 1: it was impressive. I was always kind of a questioning
Speaker 1: authority person anyhow, kind of a residual hippie, you could say.
Speaker 1: But I'm curious on your take for him. Do you
Speaker 1: think he goes out of his way to question the
Speaker 1: narrative of history or is he more of just I mean,
Speaker 1: he used to write for the Economist magazine, so he's
Speaker 1: not a smart person. But what would you say is
Speaker 1: the appeal of Graham Hancock?
Speaker 2: Well, I would say that he thinks outside of the box.
Speaker 2: I wouldn't say that he goes out of his way
Speaker 2: to look for an alternate theory. Quite often he will
Speaker 2: just accept that something is a mundane explanation. But he
Speaker 2: doesn't you know, that's not the work that he really
Speaker 2: gets into. That's not that if I write a book
Speaker 2: about you know, chilling playing farmland, it's not very interesting.
Speaker 2: If you write a book about it, you know, something
Speaker 2: that's mysterious, that's where you know, that's where you actually
Speaker 2: get some audience. So he makes sure to write about
Speaker 2: the things that are mysterious. But I don't I don't
Speaker 2: think he drums up mystery. If I was to accuse
Speaker 2: him of anything in those regards, I would say that
Speaker 2: he can be a little over zealous and accepting evidence
Speaker 2: that will align with his ideas, and sometimes that'll end
Speaker 2: up letting people that some people that I personally look at,
Speaker 2: I'm just like that guy is a grift Graham, and
Speaker 2: Graham will be like, hey, check this guy out. Okay,
Speaker 2: Well he said the same thing about me, and I'm
Speaker 2: sure some people think I'm a grifter. So what do
Speaker 2: you do?
Speaker 1: Why deduncty, what's that title all about?
Speaker 2: Well? I first saw what I was Milo ROSSI was
Speaker 2: one of the two Milo's and he did a short
Speaker 2: video where he was like showing how the number one
Speaker 2: YouTube video at the time if you looked up Ancient
Speaker 2: Apocalypse was his video debunking Part one and he goes
Speaker 2: get dunked on Graham Hancock and I was like, well,
Speaker 2: you've got a lot of stuff wrong in that, so
Speaker 2: let's undos as, let's dedunk that. And it sounded catchy enough,
Speaker 2: seems to be all right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's funny because you say to your you say
Speaker 1: to your audience, you say, I'm a skeptic and I'm
Speaker 1: an atheist, and it's like those are those are pretty
Speaker 1: big badges you're wearing there, Fella.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I know I get a lot of I get
Speaker 2: a lot of crap for it, but I really, you know,
Speaker 2: in this day and age, I honestly think that the
Speaker 2: whole label thing, It's almost one of the reasons that
Speaker 2: I like to shout it out is because the label
Speaker 2: thing's gotten stupid. You know. I'm the old hippie thing too.
Speaker 2: If you remember the The Beatles, one of their lines
Speaker 2: of the song was you don't get time to hang
Speaker 2: a sign on me. You're not gonna just get to
Speaker 2: slap your label on me and use that to judge
Speaker 2: a person. And I think because of the way that
Speaker 2: discourse has done nowadays, mostly on the Internet, and so
Speaker 2: we just see individual words, and people have gotten so
Speaker 2: big about putting those things in their bio, their pronouns,
Speaker 2: or their political affiliations or do I stand with little.
Speaker 2: I don't believe in a higher power. I don't believe
Speaker 2: in intelligent God. I don't believe in a I do
Speaker 2: consider myself a skeptic. I'm not a cynic. I'm not
Speaker 2: gonna be like it sounds like bullshit, must be bullshit.
Speaker 2: But if you come with something that sounds like it's
Speaker 2: a little bit on the wu side, yeah, I'm gonna
Speaker 2: expect you to pull up your sleeves and do some
Speaker 2: big boy talk here.
Speaker 1: I like that big boye dog. You were very outspoken
Speaker 1: regarding Flint Dibble and Graham Hancock's interview on Joe Rogan.
Speaker 1: What was it about Dibble that you felt was conniving
Speaker 1: and almost underhanded in the manner that he went about
Speaker 1: his interactions with Hancock?
Speaker 2: Well, I had. I had a lot of interactions with
Speaker 2: Flint before on Twitter, and we'd gotten along well. I
Speaker 2: got along well well enough with most archaeologists for a
Speaker 2: very long time. It was until about a year of
Speaker 2: me being on the internet, it was doing this. It
Speaker 2: was until I covered the whole racism angle and was
Speaker 2: pointing out that the you know, the legs that they
Speaker 2: were holding up that table with don't exactly hold up
Speaker 2: to scrutiny, and Flint have the he fly out and
Speaker 2: it just didn't matter. It's like, this doesn't really matter, blah.
Speaker 2: And that was immediately I'm like eh. And then I
Speaker 2: watched the debate and I see the way he handled
Speaker 2: Graham saying, hey, man, you know you conflate me with
Speaker 2: being a racist. You you know absolutely this is going
Speaker 2: to get me called a racist. And no, no, no, no, no,
Speaker 2: I never said that. Okay, I did say that, oh,
Speaker 2: and that was I knew that was bullshit. And I
Speaker 2: watched what I watched further, and I knew his position
Speaker 2: on plants reverting to wild ferialization where a plant returns
Speaker 2: to a wild state, like if you leave rice out
Speaker 2: in nature that's been domesticated, eventually it will become wild
Speaker 2: rice again. And Flints just need your dogs to take
Speaker 2: thousands of years. And I knew that wasn't the case.
Speaker 2: So I started looking for the tells which aren't really complicated.
Speaker 2: I mean, a scientist says, like to take the metallurgy
Speaker 2: thing that it was One of the big points I
Speaker 2: hammered on Flint about is he claimed that you could
Speaker 2: prove for a fact that there was no metallurgy in
Speaker 2: the ice age and using the ice cores, and that's
Speaker 2: simply not the case. And you can tell that's not
Speaker 2: a scientific statement. You can tell he's not being a scientist.
Speaker 2: You can by the way he says it. Any scientist
Speaker 2: will say, all the data currently indicates that there was
Speaker 2: no metallurgy in the ice Age. What we would need
Speaker 2: to find is bur That's not what Flint said. We
Speaker 2: improved for a fact, you're standing behind a pulpit. You're
Speaker 2: not standing behind a desk educating people anymore. You're preaching.
Speaker 2: And you just just went through with the fine tooth
Speaker 2: calum and found enough examples of that to convince me
Speaker 2: that he went there with knowing that he was full
Speaker 2: of crap.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Do you think he's a good representative for the
Speaker 1: archaeological community.
Speaker 2: No, I think he's a good representative of the people
Speaker 2: that put themselves in a position of standing at the megaphone,
Speaker 2: like Zahi Hua, which recently proved what a mood. We'll
Speaker 2: talk about that a little bit, but no, these kinds
Speaker 2: of people are there. You know. We see this with
Speaker 2: every community on the world, in the on the internet
Speaker 2: right now, you take picture thing. Otherwise, the one I
Speaker 2: usually use as an example because it's so easy to
Speaker 2: see is a transgender community. Like here in Spokane. I've
Speaker 2: seen hundreds of trans people that they're just walking around
Speaker 2: like normal people. But if I get on the internet,
Speaker 2: the one that I'm going to see is screaming through
Speaker 2: GameStop knopping shit over going call me, ma'am, what's like? Okay, Well,
Speaker 2: that's not indicative of the dude that I saw at
Speaker 2: the Magic Card Store or the girl that I saw
Speaker 2: at the Magic Car Store. This is entirely different individual.
Speaker 2: But just like I was saying about Graham writing about
Speaker 2: boring farming isn't as cool as a mystery. Same shit.
Speaker 2: Transgender person lives normal life is a jank headline that
Speaker 2: does not get clicks. Transgender person screams destroys game stop.
Speaker 2: Same thing with archaeologists. Archaeologist says interesting data. Perhaps Graham
Speaker 2: Hancock right, probably not doesn't get clicks. Archaeologist says Graham
Speaker 2: Hancock is an idiot racist clicks.
Speaker 1: Yeah, totally. When Ancient Apocalypse one came out, the Archaeological
Speaker 1: Society wrote a letter to Netflix. I don't know if
Speaker 1: you heard about this, oh yeah, and basically said that
Speaker 1: you are discouraging future archaeologist. You are lying to the people.
Speaker 1: Graham Hancock is a false prophet they used. I mean,
Speaker 1: I think they even said that he was a racist.
Speaker 2: That was actually the the are that I used when
Speaker 2: I was debunking that was a Society for American Archaeology's
Speaker 2: letter to Netflix was when I made the video that's
Speaker 2: debunking their racist position. That was my I used that
Speaker 2: as their stereotypical argument.
Speaker 1: I mean, do you think that's kind of like they're
Speaker 1: fearful of his impact and or is it more that
Speaker 1: I mean, I think the first series garnered around forty
Speaker 1: to sixty million views. I'm outrageous.
Speaker 2: I think it's more about envy. When I said when
Speaker 2: I was on Sedona about a month ago with Graham
Speaker 2: on stage talking to a bunch of people, and one
Speaker 2: of the things that I said there was that you
Speaker 2: know you've got if you assume that nobody knows what
Speaker 2: happened ten twelve thousand years ago. So you have Graham
Speaker 2: writing his fiction, and then you have these archaeologists writing
Speaker 2: a fiction, and the archaeologists have the right letters to
Speaker 2: their name. Graham has the wrong letters, but his cell's better.
Speaker 2: That's gotta hurt man, you know. That's That's like I
Speaker 2: went to the school to be a professional musician all
Speaker 2: my life, and some dude comes in and shakes his
Speaker 2: hips and now he's the key of rock and roll
Speaker 2: and I'm just his studio bitch. That that that's going
Speaker 2: to poke some people in the ego. And as we've
Speaker 2: seen from some of these people very clearly, the two
Speaker 2: big names they're Flint Dibble and Zahie was. Both of
Speaker 2: those guys, their egos are just gigantic and they and
Speaker 2: they do not handle being challenged whatsoever, which is the
Speaker 2: antithesis of science. I mean, for fuxed Sakety science, the
Speaker 2: scientific method goes out of its way to eliminate individuality
Speaker 2: from the findings. So when somebody comes in there with
Speaker 2: like a huge egos, they're kind of a problem to
Speaker 2: the whole process. And that's from somebody from outside the
Speaker 2: whole situation. But I can say it as an electrician,
Speaker 2: we worked and applied to science. If we're like, hey, man,
Speaker 2: I'm trying to troubleshoot this and I'm getting this, and
Speaker 2: you went and tested it and you found that, But
Speaker 2: are you sure you tested it right? If the guy's
Speaker 2: not willing to accept that maybe he made a mistake,
Speaker 2: mean your model to be there all day. So it's
Speaker 2: just is ye me, it's just no brainer shit. But
Speaker 2: they kind of get to get to get away with
Speaker 2: that because at the end of the day, I had
Speaker 2: to make that light work and all they got to
Speaker 2: do is put ink on a paper. I can say anything.
Speaker 1: I have had a number of different Egyptologists on my program.
Speaker 1: A lot of them are much more flexible than Zaiety
Speaker 1: Hill was. Let's talk about him for a minute. He
Speaker 1: was just on Rogan's program and really really said some
Speaker 1: pretty outrageous things. Do you think he's a good representative
Speaker 1: for Egyptology.
Speaker 2: No, he's But sadly, he is absolutely the representative for
Speaker 2: the gatekeeping that that field is going through right now.
Speaker 2: He is instrumental in that field. So while he's not
Speaker 2: a good representative of it, it's like you could imagine
Speaker 2: if you've ever had a job where you had one
Speaker 2: really hard boss and then everybody else there was cool people,
Speaker 2: but the boss was just an asshole. And if the
Speaker 2: boss left, the place would still run just fine. That's
Speaker 2: kind of how I see Zahi Hu was the Egyptology
Speaker 2: would be going on just fine. What that would actually
Speaker 2: be going better without itse things like good and breaks,
Speaker 2: robot and stuff that that door. It wouldn't have took
Speaker 2: him nine years to go back. It probably took him
Speaker 2: nine months. But Zahi Hua is like, we got to
Speaker 2: make sure we do this, and then I just anyway.
Speaker 1: Yeah, go ahead.
Speaker 2: The robot was the the door in the Queen's chamber
Speaker 2: and the the and I think it was nine years
Speaker 2: from the time that if the first one went there
Speaker 2: till the second one went back.
Speaker 1: You talk about the shafts. He went up to the
Speaker 1: robot went up to the shafts to determine what the uh,
Speaker 1: what the what it was? I mean, that's a while ago.
Speaker 2: Had the nineties is when the first one went It
Speaker 2: was years before the second one.
Speaker 1: Hawaas is still telling people that the Kufu pyramid was
Speaker 1: a tomb? What is that?
Speaker 2: I mean?
Speaker 1: And right now most engineers understand and why. I'm talking
Speaker 1: about people like Christopher Dunn, and there's been a number
Speaker 1: of people since him believe that the Great Pyramids at
Speaker 1: Giza were some form of machinery. Why is it so
Speaker 1: hard for people like Zahi Jowas to consider that.
Speaker 2: Well, I think probably the biggest reason it's hard for
Speaker 2: him to consider that is that it goes against what
Speaker 2: the other funerary places are. I mean, it's like that
Speaker 2: he's taught that this is a funerary site, and so
Speaker 2: he goes and he sees a tomb that has chambers
Speaker 2: like this, and then he goes and sees on a
Speaker 2: wall of painting of chambers like that they're leading down
Speaker 2: to sarcophagus. And then he sees chambers like that in
Speaker 2: the pyramid, and he was told and it's you know,
Speaker 2: this is and this looks like a sarcophagus. It's to me,
Speaker 2: it's it is. It is kind of the default position
Speaker 2: for for the Pyramids is just to assume that their
Speaker 2: tombs until you start looking into them. And you know,
Speaker 2: both him and Mark Lenner, you know, they got a
Speaker 2: lot of money from the Edgar Casey Foundation. I don't
Speaker 2: know if you're aware of that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, then they get educated from that. That's what they
Speaker 1: paid for, paid for their college.
Speaker 2: Yep, yep, yep. And so yeah, it's it's very interesting
Speaker 2: how I mean, Zahi Hua was according to the Internet.
Speaker 2: Every now and again he'll still go yabber on their
Speaker 2: uh Edgard Casey foundations. Speaking of events, I think the
Speaker 2: last one was like twenty eighteen or something like that.
Speaker 2: But yeah, it's you know, there's there's a quote that
Speaker 2: I like to use of his a lot where he
Speaker 2: says he's talking about the loss of tourism after Arab Spring,
Speaker 2: and he says, no matter what is happening bad in Egypt,
Speaker 2: those new age people they will come. So I think
Speaker 2: I think that motivated a lot of what he's got
Speaker 2: going on, and I honestly think that that's part of
Speaker 2: I think that he plays that angle a little bit
Speaker 2: that he you know, knows it by putting up stiff
Speaker 2: opposition to new discoveries and things like that, that it
Speaker 2: promotes tourism. And at the end of the day, really
Speaker 2: it's a lot, you know, to us, it's a amazing
Speaker 2: mysterious thing. But if you live in Egypt and like
Speaker 2: you come of age one day and you notice that
Speaker 2: there's this mountain in the backyard that I can just
Speaker 2: mine for money by poking at tourists and stuff. I mean,
Speaker 2: it's a whole lot of a whole different thing. So
Speaker 2: I have a I get pretty I do get cynical
Speaker 2: when I think about the money getting involved in tourism
Speaker 2: and stuff. Wandering Wolf recently did a great video Mike Collins.
Speaker 2: He did a great video of showing how messed up
Speaker 2: the tour how these sites. You're about to go to Turkey,
Speaker 2: you said you'll see it there. How they don't. They don't.
Speaker 2: They're not Bill Beckley, tepe ain't set up for usk.
Speaker 2: If it's set up for you to buy a ticket,
Speaker 2: walk around the place and get the fuck out, buy
Speaker 2: a little gift card and go home. Yeah, that's that's sad.
Speaker 2: But again, if you live in Turkey, you come of
Speaker 2: age one day and check out all these cheap pillars.
Speaker 2: I've been driving past them since I was five. But
Speaker 2: but but, I.
Speaker 1: Mean I'm curious though, I mean I've We've had people
Speaker 1: on here who have scanned the Giza Plateau, discovered underground
Speaker 1: tunnel systems. There's even one guy, William Brown, who believes
Speaker 1: that there's a temple in the middle between the Sphinx
Speaker 1: and the pyramids. What would stop tourists coming? That would
Speaker 1: increase the tourism if they were to reveal.
Speaker 2: What if they didn't find it? That's I think, honestly,
Speaker 2: I think that that's what scares them at all the
Speaker 2: most is there. I think that they're paying attention to
Speaker 2: the old the old tale of the goose that laid
Speaker 2: the Golden egg. My best example for that would be
Speaker 2: the hidden chamber that they found with the Muon scans
Speaker 2: in the Great Pyramid, right right, What happens if that's
Speaker 2: I mean, if the tombs and tombs alone hypothesis is correct,
Speaker 2: and that's probably where the body would be, right, I mean,
Speaker 2: it wouldn't be in the king chamber any old Jack
Speaker 2: asked locate, It's gonna be in the one that you
Speaker 2: gotta freaking use lasers and shit to find, right, you
Speaker 2: get star dust to find. So it's gonna be expensive,
Speaker 2: potentially damaging this great site that we already make a
Speaker 2: lot of money off of. And if I open it
Speaker 2: up and I find that body, man, for the next
Speaker 2: six months to a year, we're gonna have a shipload
Speaker 2: of tourism and then all those new age people, they
Speaker 2: might stop coming. They might be like a fuck same
Speaker 2: thing with this potential hidden temple. Right, but if I
Speaker 2: just leave that mystery, but just let it go, just
Speaker 2: leave it there. Every now and again, I'll say, my
Speaker 2: bosses by going down to this little half ass tunnel
Speaker 2: under the string. So it's going this a little hole
Speaker 2: in the ground, yet nothing here. See. But in reality,
Speaker 2: I think that he is very much invested in promoting
Speaker 2: a mystery. And say, what's go Beckley Teppey. I mean
Speaker 2: decites like go Beckley tepe and in the pyramids and stuff,
Speaker 2: they are connected hand in hand to the mysteries that
Speaker 2: are around them that they're not. Stonehenge gets as many
Speaker 2: visitors as more visitors than a lot of the castles
Speaker 2: over there. I mean, clearly one is more impressive than
Speaker 2: the other, but one's more interesting to people than the
Speaker 2: other because of the mystery involved. We know who built that,
Speaker 2: who built this.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we're going to take a short commercial break to
Speaker 1: allow our sponsors to identify themselves, and we will return
Speaker 1: shortly with my guests. Today, Dan Richards discussing his work
Speaker 1: as a d dunker, will be right back. I guess
Speaker 1: today is Dan Richards. He is an observer. He has
Speaker 1: a YouTube channel called Deducting. It is filled with interviews
Speaker 1: as well as his perspective on a number of archaeological
Speaker 1: questions and mysteries. Zahi was very negative regarding the SAR scan,
Speaker 1: the synthetic aperture radar scan that these three attacked. Well,
Speaker 1: two Italians and one Irishman promoted and I thought that
Speaker 1: it would be a promotion for the Caffrey Pyramid, which
Speaker 1: is not typically thought of as much of a tourist site.
Speaker 1: But he summarily rejected any of the data. What do
Speaker 1: you say to that.
Speaker 2: To be expected? You know, Flint did the same thing
Speaker 2: where it was just a knee jerk reaction calling a bullshit.
Speaker 2: I mean him, him and I and Milo Rossi and
Speaker 2: Jimmy Corsetti were all on Pierce Morgan talking about it
Speaker 2: shortly after the announcement was made Flint. Flint ends that
Speaker 2: he both have the same It's a knee jerk position,
Speaker 2: not based on the science it's based on it's based
Speaker 2: on an old understanding of science. That's really what's funny
Speaker 2: about it. Like I did a video covering and it
Speaker 2: took me a better part of a week to research
Speaker 2: just the synthetic aperture radar. But it's not something I
Speaker 2: was real familiar with. But the big deal there is
Speaker 2: It's like when they first started using it, they used
Speaker 2: analog computers and they got you know, they got fuzzy images,
Speaker 2: but they had an idea. Then they started using better computers,
Speaker 2: real computers, and pretty soon they were getting some pretty
Speaker 2: high definition images. Then they started using that with some
Speaker 2: other technology like Doppler tomography, and they started getting down
Speaker 2: to where they could fly over the same place twice.
Speaker 2: And this is something you can find on NASA's website
Speaker 2: that you can use that SAAR data to fly over
Speaker 2: the same place twice and map changes in the landscape
Speaker 2: up to two centimeters I mean from space. That's pretty
Speaker 2: impressive compared to just in the seventies when I was born,
Speaker 2: they would take an image and the image would be
Speaker 2: like a little blob, and there was a chart they
Speaker 2: would use. This blob is probably a Soviet tank, This
Speaker 2: blob is probably a helico. I mean, it was bad.
Speaker 2: Now they can map it down to two centimeters and
Speaker 2: this next step, these guys are using a lot of
Speaker 2: the same stuff, flying over it twice, using Doppler. But
Speaker 2: they're saying that they are mapping the changes in that
Speaker 2: the topography, and they're using that to uh, they're using
Speaker 2: that with the changes that the hollows and the earth
Speaker 2: make as the Earth shifts over time and stuff, and
Speaker 2: they're using AI to put together what's going on under
Speaker 2: the earth now compared to where the technology was ten
Speaker 2: years ago. Yeah, that's a hell of a jump. But
Speaker 2: it's AI. Man, compared to where video editing was ten
Speaker 2: years ago, we're it a hell of a different place, man, music,
Speaker 2: imagine all that you've heard these song mashups or they
Speaker 2: have Johnny Carson, or they have Johnny Cash singing Barbie
Speaker 2: Girl and shit like that. You heard this stuff, some
Speaker 2: of it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's pretty amazing.
Speaker 2: Well that's my point. That's parodies are not where they
Speaker 2: were ten years ago thanks to AI. So they reject, Oh,
Speaker 2: this just can't be. This has fun all to do
Speaker 2: with the science, It has everything to do with the report.
Speaker 2: If this was them saying we'd found some big void
Speaker 2: underneath this site out in the middle of nowhere, and
Speaker 2: oh my god, maybe there's a cave system. This is
Speaker 2: some really interesting technology. I wonder if this SAAR stuff
Speaker 2: is really working well or not. But instead it's the Pyramids,
Speaker 2: it's Giza, and it's all attached to Atlantis and all that.
Speaker 2: They're gonna need jerk everything right out of there as
Speaker 2: soon as they can.
Speaker 1: I mean, it seems to me that there's a big
Speaker 1: problem for the Antiquities Department in Egypt because they're not
Speaker 1: able to control the narrative. And the other thing that
Speaker 1: I think is as funny is that they're angry that
Speaker 1: they didn't The Italians didn't ask permission. They just flew that.
Speaker 1: They just picked up the data from the satellite and
Speaker 1: said we're gonna we're gonna process this.
Speaker 2: That's one of the reasons if you want to get
Speaker 2: conspiratorial about this stuff, I think that would be one
Speaker 2: reason to pooh pooh this technology right out the gate.
Speaker 2: I mean, think about the sites in China, for example,
Speaker 2: where they're like, oh, there's a pyramid over in China,
Speaker 2: but the Chinese government ain't let nobody like that, fuck
Speaker 2: you China fly right over the top, ye or you
Speaker 2: would get all political about it. You got all these
Speaker 2: UN inspectors trying to go to Iraq like no, you can't, okay,
Speaker 2: fuck you Iraq. Okay, we've flown over, we took pictures,
Speaker 2: we know what you've got. So I think, you know,
Speaker 2: this technology is the kind of thing that if it will,
Speaker 2: if it's actually doing what they're saying it's gonna do, man,
Speaker 2: it's it's it's gonna be lucrative. Shit, it's gonna be
Speaker 2: very very lucrative, because I mean, think about how much
Speaker 2: money it costs to put a bunch of guys on
Speaker 2: the ground with the wide ar drones and stuff and
Speaker 2: then feed them and drive them out to or just
Speaker 2: buy the data from the satellite that flew over it
Speaker 2: a year ago. I mean, come on, this is kke right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, oh man, Okay, what do you think of the
Speaker 1: interpretation of the Caffree pyramid some of the people are saying,
Speaker 1: I mean, they kind of blew it. The Italians sent
Speaker 1: out a press release that said there's an underground city.
Speaker 1: Well that that's like ridiculous. But what do you say
Speaker 1: from what you've seen so far?
Speaker 2: Well, I think Christopher Dunn put it really well. With
Speaker 2: him and I talked about it a little bit, even
Speaker 2: though we disagree on a lot of things, especially ancient
Speaker 2: high technology. I mean, Chris get along well and have
Speaker 2: a pretty strong mutual respect for each other. And we
Speaker 2: were discussing this and he said that, honestly, the thing
Speaker 2: that's the most interesting to him isn't the idea of
Speaker 2: it being cities and tunnels underneath nearly as much as
Speaker 2: it is the natural honeycombed landscape that you have underneath this.
Speaker 2: The Nile Plateau, the Giza Plateau, all the bedrock, the
Speaker 2: limestone there is crisscrossed with caves, and he's interested to
Speaker 2: see how much of those have things in, isn't it
Speaker 2: how much of those were used by humans, recarved by humans.
Speaker 2: So like he basically what he said is that even
Speaker 2: from like a mainstream Egypto logical perspective, there is potentially
Speaker 2: something here now when it gets to those spiral staircases
Speaker 2: and straight columns and stuff. And this is where you know,
Speaker 2: we're talking about AI again. Remember the early days of
Speaker 2: AI images and the faces were a little distorted and
Speaker 2: the fingers were actually all right, here we go, give
Speaker 2: them some time, they'll get there.
Speaker 1: Graham Hancock's one of many people who have spoken on
Speaker 1: ancient the potential for advanced ancient civilizations. There's other individuals
Speaker 1: like John Anthony West Robert Shock, and I mean I
Speaker 1: could go on. Robert Bavall spoke in great detail about
Speaker 1: the alignment of the pyramids. Does it feel to you?
Speaker 1: And if you're a fan of Graham Hancocks, this should
Speaker 1: be a natural. But I'm just curious. Is there really
Speaker 1: a link to a lost advanced civilization on Earth?
Speaker 2: I think I think there is. I don't think I
Speaker 2: don't think it's nearly as advanced as most people in
Speaker 2: our community think it is. I think that they would
Speaker 2: be what we would consider very low technology today. I like,
Speaker 2: but I think that they were good at seafaring. I
Speaker 2: think they were good with math and good with astronomy,
Speaker 2: and that these good would being a team of people
Speaker 2: working on a boat. I think that, honestly, that those
Speaker 2: skills would translate pretty quickly into raising big rocks that
Speaker 2: were aligned to the stars. This is the kind of
Speaker 2: thing that they would be well situated to do. And
Speaker 2: historically we've seen that if you have the better astronomy,
Speaker 2: you can supplant somebody else's astronomy and thereby their religion
Speaker 2: pretty easily. I mean, there was a guy, a Jesuit
Speaker 2: priest that traveled to China. I forget his name, but
Speaker 2: he was the first person allowed in the forbidden city
Speaker 2: that was from outside. He was never allowed to meet
Speaker 2: the emperor because of the way things were, but he
Speaker 2: was the first foreigner buried in a Buddhist tomb and
Speaker 2: with a Buddhist shrine and everything. He was very well honored.
Speaker 2: And the reason was is because the Chinese emperors his
Speaker 2: validity on the throne was directly tied to his ability
Speaker 2: to predict the futures. So the Chinese emperors had thousands
Speaker 2: of astronomers up on top of the temple. There's still
Speaker 2: a bunch of astrolabes and shit up there from back
Speaker 2: in those days. And this guy came there and predicted
Speaker 2: the eclipses better than all of his astronomers did, so
Speaker 2: that right there, now, all of a sudden, his astronomy
Speaker 2: is the best. So my point is is, I don't
Speaker 2: think these people had to have like massive technology in
Speaker 2: order for them to come in and been considered a
Speaker 2: whole step above. All they had to do was be like, hey, man,
Speaker 2: you want to know when to plant, Just wait another
Speaker 2: two weeks when that the sun rises into that star,
Speaker 2: and all of a sudden, holy shit, this guy could
Speaker 2: speak to the gods. Right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you bring up another topic that is really a
Speaker 1: tough one for me and archaeologists just flat out refuse it,
Speaker 1: which is diffusion. And I am a big proponent of
Speaker 1: the Maya and the Omec and Mesoamerica culture ancient culture
Speaker 1: as being multi racial, multi cultural. I mean, it looks
Speaker 1: like African centric, Asian centric, Caucasian types all blended in
Speaker 1: in a very very early period thousands of years ago.
Speaker 1: Why do you think it's so hard for archaeologists to
Speaker 1: consider migrating people.
Speaker 2: I think it was a few reasons. I think one
Speaker 2: of them is they've got a framework already established, and
Speaker 2: that frameworks very nice and neat, and it starts getting
Speaker 2: pretty shitty if instead of one Clovis event and them
Speaker 2: crossing the very language, now you got a bunch of
Speaker 2: boats going across and all these different albo it's a
Speaker 2: whole lot more of a mess. Another one is, in
Speaker 2: all honesty, there has been a lot of traditionally, and
Speaker 2: I hate to say it because some will jump on
Speaker 2: and be like, oh, you're just like Flint divil, but
Speaker 2: there has been a lot of white supremacy stuff associated
Speaker 2: with that stuff in the past, and I don't mean
Speaker 2: Atlantis sony. I mean, like, this is the case of
Speaker 2: Dyton Rock that's over on the east coast of the
Speaker 2: United States, and it was first found in like the
Speaker 2: late seventeen or late sixteen hundreds, and the markings on
Speaker 2: it were assumed to you know, there's no way that
Speaker 2: an Indian could figure out how to carve one rock
Speaker 2: on another. Was honestly literally the interpretation at first, so
Speaker 2: they were looking for vikings and even today will almost
Speaker 2: every academic will consider it a product of the Native Americans.
Speaker 2: The Portuguese people that live in the area have the
Speaker 2: claim to their rock. And there's a lot of these kinds.
Speaker 2: There's a lot of these kinds of things where it
Speaker 2: has been attached to some kind of ugly ideas. And
Speaker 2: the more politically woke the world, especially the scientific community, gets,
Speaker 2: the less likely they are to entertain anything that's attached
Speaker 2: to that. Like we've seen them do the same thing
Speaker 2: with like biblical stuff, if it even smell at all
Speaker 2: like it might be related to the Bible. You just
Speaker 2: they're just going to push that out for I could
Speaker 2: make a whole presentation about that, we could go but
Speaker 2: as an atheist, but but uh, I honestly think on
Speaker 2: a big, a big part of it is just like
Speaker 2: I said earlier about that they wrote us a fiction
Speaker 2: and it's not the right one. Look at what four
Speaker 2: haired off if you know who he is, sure, oh yeah,
Speaker 2: he went through all the kinds correct Kantiki and he
Speaker 2: said that the Easter Island of the walls that the
Speaker 2: mooie were on the old wall looked very much like
Speaker 2: the one in Peru and sucks, say woman. And he's like,
Speaker 2: I wonder if these, you know, cultures were connected, and
Speaker 2: they're like, oh no, this can't be. Which first of all,
Speaker 2: I mean, how stupid is it if they found this
Speaker 2: tiny little dot in the ocean. How the fuck could
Speaker 2: they not find South America? You guys, come on, I mean,
Speaker 2: just doesn't even make any sense. But on top of that,
Speaker 2: then now we get genetics, and all of a sudden,
Speaker 2: it's like, well, okay, okay. Supposedly in the earliest habitable
Speaker 2: layer there was ginger and sweet potatoes, so they had
Speaker 2: Asian and South American foods as early as we know
Speaker 2: that humans showed up on Easter Island. In addition to that,
Speaker 2: there is a genetic signal that shows there was people
Speaker 2: from the Americas interbreeding with them and vice versas. So
Speaker 2: for hair, it all is vindicated, but he wasn't for
Speaker 2: a very long time. As you know, he fought it
Speaker 2: uphill battle because what he was saying it wasn't even outlandish.
Speaker 2: I mean, we know people made it there so well.
Speaker 2: They couldn't have made it here. They only made it
Speaker 2: here from one direction. It's the New World has to
Speaker 2: be isolated for some reason. And I don't the more
Speaker 2: that we see, like like you said, putting it out
Speaker 2: with South America, there are so many things that that appear.
Speaker 2: You know, I've heard some people argue the omech heads
Speaker 2: don't look so African. So if you don't want to
Speaker 2: go with that, fine, but there's no question that there
Speaker 2: is depiction of people with full beards, and there's no
Speaker 2: question there are depictions of people that are extremely Middle
Speaker 2: Eastern slash Southeast Asian in appearance. Extremely in some of
Speaker 2: these cases where it's like, dude, if this, if you
Speaker 2: didn't tell me this is from South America, I would
Speaker 2: have guessed this was some weird knockoff of a freaking
Speaker 2: Assyrian item or something. I mean, it's it's weird.
Speaker 1: I mean it's almost like they have to find the
Speaker 1: ruins of a sunken Phoenician ship off of Mexico. Are
Speaker 1: some weights or anchors of some kind?
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, And even then they might deny it. I mean,
Speaker 2: it's one of the funny things that they'll say a lot.
Speaker 2: It's one of the interesting things about science to me
Speaker 2: is that they like to use the term proxies. Well,
Speaker 2: you haven't found any proxies for that. That's just a
Speaker 2: fancy way of saying that this is a one off.
Speaker 2: We ain't seen nothing else like it, and it's kind
Speaker 2: of an extreme example. But the anti kisser mechanism is
Speaker 2: a fucking one off. We don't have any proxies for it.
Speaker 2: But nobody's claiming that it's fake. Nobody's claiming that aliens
Speaker 2: well you know in the scientific community, he's claiming aliens
Speaker 2: built it or anything. It's they just accept that. You know,
Speaker 2: this is one that we don't have any proxies for
Speaker 2: this yet here it is so it basically this is
Speaker 2: an argument that is used to uh humans like rules.
Speaker 2: And you see that rule that Carl Sagan put out there.
Speaker 2: You know, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and that's fair,
Speaker 2: But what what qualifies an extraordinary claim. In my opinion,
Speaker 2: it's like, what like Easter Island being reached by humans,
Speaker 2: that's not an extraordinary claim, but it was expected to jump
Speaker 2: through the extraordinary evidence to Clovis first being overturned. Not
Speaker 2: an extraordinary claim. But over and over again, that was
Speaker 2: the argument, Oh, we don't have any proxies for the
Speaker 2: bluefish caves. Oh we don't have any proxies for this
Speaker 2: sit Now we've got six sites that are all the
Speaker 2: same that we have no proxies for. It's ridiculous, but
Speaker 2: it's you know, science scientists are humans, and they're gonna
Speaker 2: do all the same stupid shit humans do.
Speaker 1: Is it just that they have to rewrite history to
Speaker 1: uh accept diffusion migrating cultures or is it the fact
Speaker 1: that it's too much for them to comprehend.
Speaker 2: I honest, I don't know if it's too much to
Speaker 2: get to comprehend. I think it would be easier for
Speaker 2: some of them to uh to just you know, accept
Speaker 2: that side of things. If it was especially the guys
Speaker 2: that aren't so attached to the framework, like you know,
Speaker 2: if Flint wasn't all into getting on the internet and
Speaker 2: arguing with people, he would be you know, in the
Speaker 2: seeds and bones and stuff, you wouldn't be hearing much
Speaker 2: about him in the realm of the grand scheme of things.
Speaker 2: He wouldn't really care if the world was connected or no,
Speaker 2: it's not going to change what he does with the
Speaker 2: seed or about Yeah, but I think what what I think, really,
Speaker 2: what it comes down to is egos. Like let's revisit
Speaker 2: the Society for American Archaeology letter. Now, if I was
Speaker 2: to tell you that the three things that they complained
Speaker 2: to Netflix about was the way that the evidence was
Speaker 2: quote unquote misrepresented, the way that what Graham had to
Speaker 2: say was racist, and the way that what Graham had
Speaker 2: to say was mean to archaeologists, you would think it
Speaker 2: would probably come in the order I just gave it
Speaker 2: to you, But it don't. It comes in Graham was
Speaker 2: mean to archaeologists, He got some shit wrong and always racist.
Speaker 2: It's like very clearly ego first, and the same with Flint.
Speaker 2: When he winds to anybody, you hear it very quickly.
Speaker 2: He did the thing defending Zahi Huas on Joe Rogan
Speaker 2: and at the beginning of the section where he says, oh,
Speaker 2: now it's time for me to criticize Zahi Hua, Zahi,
Speaker 2: you might want to turn away from this. Well, he
Speaker 2: really threw his other colleagues under the bus quite a bit,
Speaker 2: you know, he disagreed with this, like has fuck all
Speaker 2: to do with you've getting evidence and facts wrong. It
Speaker 2: has everything to do with him saying other archaeologists didn't
Speaker 2: discover it. I discovered it, that was flint. It's ego
Speaker 2: egos what drive these people to do the stupid shit
Speaker 2: that's unscientific that makes me make videos about him.
Speaker 1: That brings up an interesting topic. It seems that when
Speaker 1: there are dates that exceed what I consider that, what
Speaker 1: they consider the norm, what archaeological community thinks of the norm,
Speaker 1: then they have a crack. They have a cow. I'm
Speaker 1: thinking of Goon Penang, where Danny Hillman got in there
Speaker 1: and he did everything by the book. He used carbon dating,
Speaker 1: he used all kinds of scientific evidence, and he dates
Speaker 1: the earliest part of Go Noon Penang, this pyramid to
Speaker 1: twenty four thousand years ago. And they're finding the archaeologist
Speaker 1: are finding every avenue they can to disprove this data,
Speaker 1: and I don't think they can go very far. But
Speaker 1: what do you feel about go Noon Penang.
Speaker 2: Well, I think the the problem with the way that
Speaker 2: gen Kanong was excavated or getting penang or how it's pronounced.
Speaker 2: They they're they're easily they're rejecting the handful of artifacts,
Speaker 2: the Kajong Kajong stone, and there's a couple of stones
Speaker 2: that looked like they might have been like weights for
Speaker 2: a bola or fishing weights or something like that. They're
Speaker 2: rejecting those as artifacts, saying these aren't work stones. So
Speaker 2: they're rejecting the older dates because they took core samples,
Speaker 2: because doctor Nati Wajaha was a geologist, so he took
Speaker 2: core samples and had his archaeologist's friend, doctor Ali Akbar
Speaker 2: to look at the stuff with them. But you know,
Speaker 2: it's kind of a stereotypical picture of an archaeologist on
Speaker 2: a site is you got those people over there shaking screens, right,
Speaker 2: and they're they're looking for teny little pieces like they
Speaker 2: call them micro chips, when if you're like flaking off
Speaker 2: a piece of stone to make a weapon or a tool,
Speaker 2: you'd knock off flakes in a very specific manner. These
Speaker 2: could be very small, but they'll call them. They're still
Speaker 2: technically artifacts. They're proof that humans were working in stone,
Speaker 2: so they look for these things in the debris, and
Speaker 2: there was nobody doing that there, so it left them
Speaker 2: a big fat hole. They were able to easily say,
Speaker 2: we'll reject these three or four artifacts out of hand,
Speaker 2: and now we can say that nothing that was found
Speaker 2: there was right. So basically what it comes down to
Speaker 2: is the you see the same thing written about Jacques
Speaker 2: sink Mars, who was the first scientist, the first archaeologist
Speaker 2: to challenge Clovis. First, they basically challenge every bit of
Speaker 2: evidence to bring up. Instead of instead of coming at
Speaker 2: it like appearing like I'm just attacking the whole concept
Speaker 2: of this, they just challenge every single bit of evidence
Speaker 2: and then say, what are you even talking about. You
Speaker 2: don't have any proof of what you're saying. This just
Speaker 2: seems like a bunch of bullshit to me. Instead of saying,
Speaker 2: twenty five thousand year old pyramid, that's stupid, they say,
Speaker 2: you don't have this isn't an artifact. This isn't an artifact,
Speaker 2: this isn't a artiffact, and you don't have anything else.
Speaker 2: That's what you got your carbon dating. It's just grass
Speaker 2: and the dirt. That's it. You got twenty five thousand
Speaker 2: year old grass. Good job, that's that's their position. Oh yeah,
Speaker 2: it's gross. They I could go off for hours on
Speaker 2: how they did that. They did this to the younger
Speaker 2: drivest impact hypothesis, very very sneaky effective way to getting
Speaker 2: skeptical people to reject it out of hand. They've they've
Speaker 2: done a lot of that kind of stuff.
Speaker 1: We're going to take a short commercial break to allow
Speaker 1: our sponsors to identify themselves, and we will return shortly
Speaker 1: with my guest today, Dan Richards, coming to us from
Speaker 1: Washington State. Will be right back. Dan Richards is one
Speaker 1: of many of the keynote speakers at the Cosmic Summit
Speaker 1: coming June twentieth to the twenty third in Greensboro, North Carolina.
Speaker 1: If you can't get to that part of the country,
Speaker 1: consider watching it as a streaming media presentation. To get
Speaker 1: more information, go to cosmicsummit dot com and look for
Speaker 1: the streaming media pass Use Earth Ancients in the discount
Speaker 1: box and get fifteen percent off the price for the
Speaker 1: streaming passport. The younger dryers hypothesis has been backed by
Speaker 1: conventional science for quite a few years, and you're part
Speaker 1: of that. You're part of that, I don't know. Are
Speaker 1: you talking on the younger driss at the Cosmic Summit.
Speaker 2: I'm going to mention it, but I'm not going to
Speaker 2: be like one of the big Younger Drives people there.
Speaker 2: I'm not part of the common research group or anything.
Speaker 1: Right, right, right? What do you say to that the
Speaker 1: the scientific community who says that it's not valid there
Speaker 1: was no asteroid impact and it didn't turn I mean,
Speaker 1: one of the big evidentiary facts is that there seems
Speaker 1: to be a terminating event during this younger drives where
Speaker 1: the MegaFon and the big land animals die off by
Speaker 1: the tens of millions. We don't really know what humanity
Speaker 1: is there, but if there's any humans that are around,
Speaker 1: then they're wiped out for the most part. But what's
Speaker 1: your feeling on that.
Speaker 2: Well, it's pretty interesting. I'm still I'm hoping the scientific
Speaker 2: community eventually comes to more of a consensus on the
Speaker 2: younger directs impact hypothesis, although right now I'm certain that
Speaker 2: it's it's going to be a while because they are
Speaker 2: two distinct camps a raided against each other, and when
Speaker 2: that happens, you know, stuff can get ugly and last
Speaker 2: for a very long time. The Clovis first debacle took
Speaker 2: like thirty years for them to figure it out from
Speaker 2: the time, but we got our first bit of evidence.
Speaker 2: So now, as far as the over hunting hypothesis, the
Speaker 2: idea that humans wiped out all of the that's the
Speaker 2: alternative theory. Generally speaking, archaeologists will say that it was
Speaker 2: usually over hunting hypothesis. And now, to play Devil's advocate,
Speaker 2: there there is one thing that I don't ever hear
Speaker 2: discussed with this is he always people talking about how
Speaker 2: you know, they came up with the clothes points and
Speaker 2: they killed everything. But we would make humans, especially things
Speaker 2: like bison and mammoth. We would make these rock basically runs.
Speaker 2: We would corral the animals to run towards cliffs and
Speaker 2: so that we could herd the animals and get them
Speaker 2: to run this direction, and they're all going to run
Speaker 2: off a cliff and we were done. We got what
Speaker 2: we needed. We didn't take the walls apart. We just
Speaker 2: fucking left them there and came back next year. And
Speaker 2: so if a hundred elephants walked off that thing in
Speaker 2: the meantime, one hundred elephants walked off that thing in
Speaker 2: the meantime and fuck it, so there is going to
Speaker 2: be more death. We were pretty good at pretty efficient
Speaker 2: wiping things out, so there is some legitimacy to the
Speaker 2: idea that we could have have really fucked things up.
Speaker 2: But then you got the carnivores. I don't see the
Speaker 2: disaber tooth cats and the dire wolves and all that
Speaker 2: shit following these things off the cliff. These are a
Speaker 2: little bit more smarter animals. They would be finding another
Speaker 2: way down to get to that meat. And you know,
Speaker 2: all the animals aren't going to be that that's easily led.
Speaker 2: So it's to me it seems like there was certainly
Speaker 2: something also up, especially the way that the Clovis culture
Speaker 2: or the Clovis Point, however you want to look at,
Speaker 2: the Clovis toolkit disappears from the record at that time,
Speaker 2: and we end up, at least in the most of
Speaker 2: the Americas, we end up with the Fulsome culture at
Speaker 2: that time, which is kind of a there's a full
Speaker 2: The Fulsome point is like a Clovis point, but it's
Speaker 2: it's made for a smaller game. I mean, there's the
Speaker 2: big ship's all gone now.
Speaker 1: So it's funny that you say that because I mean,
Speaker 1: that's one excuse, But then you look at these bone
Speaker 1: yards where there's millions of bones in Alaska that are
Speaker 1: being dug up. There's Siberian uh animals that are flash
Speaker 1: flash frozen. It's something really geologically strange happened. I'm in
Speaker 1: this younger, dryer event, and they don't seem to be
Speaker 1: looked that. No.
Speaker 2: They there's again the things get attached to old ideas.
Speaker 2: That's one of the things I'll be talking about quite
Speaker 2: a bit at the Cosmic Summit. And I'll give you
Speaker 2: a quick example. Now, like when in they like eighteen hundred's,
Speaker 2: you know, science was expected to prove the Bible right,
Speaker 2: and so you get Charles Darwin coming along, and I
Speaker 2: forget the geologists name, but he was basically right around
Speaker 2: the same time, and they were very similar ideas, very slow,
Speaker 2: steady changes as opposed to these dramatic God did it things.
Speaker 2: It doesn't, it's not. This geologist came along and he
Speaker 2: was like talking about weathering and erosion as opposed to
Speaker 2: flash floods to create these grand canyons and things like this,
Speaker 2: and pretty much overnight it changed the way that science
Speaker 2: was supposed to view these kinds of events. A technical
Speaker 2: term for it was catastrophism. This is catastrophic, and then
Speaker 2: they changed it to gradualism. And these were mutually exclusive
Speaker 2: and the minds of science all the way up until
Speaker 2: nineteen eighty with the KT disaster, when they finally were like, okay, yeah,
Speaker 2: the KT media are killed. With Alvarez proved that the
Speaker 2: media killed the dinosaurs. When science accepted that, they were like,
Speaker 2: we need to come up with a new idea. We'll
Speaker 2: call it punctuated equilibrium. Usually things go like this, but
Speaker 2: every now and again it's punctuated by some catastrophe. And
Speaker 2: it's like a fucking five year old could go stand
Speaker 2: at the beach for a day and be like, well,
Speaker 2: usually the water just kind of does this, but every
Speaker 2: now and again a big wave comes. I mean, calm
Speaker 2: the fuck on. It took them over one hundred years
Speaker 2: because of one hundred and forty years because of this
Speaker 2: idea in their head. The collective heads this knee jerk
Speaker 2: reaction to we cannot prove the Bible right, So it's
Speaker 2: not just the Bible that this happens with. It's any
Speaker 2: time that they find themselves. We saw it recently in
Speaker 2: the medical community. They find themselves in a position. They
Speaker 2: array themselves in two different camps. And even today, if
Speaker 2: you go look up the top ten retracted papers that
Speaker 2: are still being cited in public papers today, they're all
Speaker 2: medical because there's two teams in there. Fucking are you
Speaker 2: and we don't even hear about it anymore. There are
Speaker 2: going back and forth over fucking twenty twenty still, So yeah,
Speaker 2: that's what science does. They they I don't get me wrong.
Speaker 2: I'm not saying science sucks. I'm saying that you get
Speaker 2: these protracted, egotistical arguments that had come up, and it
Speaker 2: slows everything down for decades. It happens over and over
Speaker 2: and over again. Because people are people. We just use
Speaker 2: the same shit over and over again. You know, the
Speaker 2: old the old saying those who know history, those who
Speaker 2: don't know history are doomed to repeat it, and those
Speaker 2: who do know history are doomed to stand by and
Speaker 2: watch others repeat it. And that's pretty much where we are.
Speaker 1: Amazing. We don't got a lot of time here. We're
Speaker 1: doing a sixty sixty minute I want to talk a
Speaker 1: little bit about Megalithic Montana. I had a chance to
Speaker 1: go there a couple of years ago, and I didn't
Speaker 1: go with the owner, but I went with Julie Ryder
Speaker 1: and saw this sage wall and I saw a number
Speaker 1: of what i'll just say, our natural formations, and there's
Speaker 1: just no way. I mean, I saw the it's called
Speaker 1: the TiSER Dolman, and that is no way in hell
Speaker 1: that was laid by a moving glacier. You know, there's
Speaker 1: no way. Yeah, it's amazing.
Speaker 2: The TiSER Dolman's pretty crazy.
Speaker 1: I know you were just there and you don't want
Speaker 1: to talk a lot about it because you're doing your
Speaker 1: own thing, but talk about at least the TiSER, because
Speaker 1: I found that that thing was just outrageous.
Speaker 2: No, we're gonna. I'm gonna. I'm waiting about four weeks
Speaker 2: to six weeks to cover the stage wall at the
Speaker 2: request of the property owner. But the TiSER Dolman, I'm
Speaker 2: gonna be covering that one pretty quickly.
Speaker 1: Here.
Speaker 2: It was really interesting. It was the way that it's
Speaker 2: situated and stuff the rock on top. If you be skeptical,
Speaker 2: you walk around in almost everywhere there you can look
Speaker 2: and see, Okay, well just ran into that and knocked
Speaker 2: down this and this piece s left off of that.
Speaker 2: Could you could see where a lot of things just
Speaker 2: kind of fell into place. If you can, you can
Speaker 2: put the pieces together. But the rock on top of
Speaker 2: this Dolmen is like on the side of a damn
Speaker 2: hill and there's trees around it, and then then there's
Speaker 2: blue sky, and it's like, where the fuck did that
Speaker 2: rock come from? You know, somebody pick it up and
Speaker 2: put it there. But that rock's you know, weigh as
Speaker 2: much as a Volkswagen or something. I'm a couple thousand
Speaker 2: pounds and a metric tongue whatever the system we're using nowadays,
Speaker 2: but at least three drafts and it went up on
Speaker 2: top of that. That Dolman's probably thirty feet higher. So
Speaker 2: I mean, you were there. It's it's it's impressive. But
Speaker 2: if you look at the Dolmen, you can see in
Speaker 2: the front of it there's a rock that's laying down
Speaker 2: and you could see there's a rock up against the
Speaker 2: back where you can kind of see how it got
Speaker 2: split where it was like a rock fell up and
Speaker 2: smacked into that thing, knocked a piece off the front
Speaker 2: and busted it open. So it's a really interesting area.
Speaker 2: There's there's a lot to talk about as far as
Speaker 2: geology and potential archaeology goes as far as up on
Speaker 2: that part of the country. The problem is is that
Speaker 2: I know from living in the Pacific Northwest, the locals
Speaker 2: get to these sites long before the scientists do, and
Speaker 2: by the scientists get by the time the scientists get there,
Speaker 2: there's nothing left. They fire pits that they're investigating were
Speaker 2: left there two weeks ago by partying kids. They're not
Speaker 2: you know, they got nothing to do with ancient history,
Speaker 2: so it makes it difficult.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you were there with Jimmy Corsetti, and I mean,
Speaker 1: I don't think that they've done a light our scan
Speaker 1: or any ground penetrating radar. I think they have the
Speaker 1: ground penetrating radar, but it's old enough that most of
Speaker 1: it that would define it is probably under the surface.
Speaker 1: What do you think.
Speaker 2: Yeah, as far as the wall or the Dolman, the wall,
Speaker 2: the wall in that whole area, well, yeah, it's yeah,
Speaker 2: it's it's tough to say. The geologists say that all
Speaker 2: that stuff was covered with dirt and then it slowly
Speaker 2: eroded down. That's how they explained things like that Dolman
Speaker 2: for example, this the all you just formed like that
Speaker 2: and then the dirty rote it off of which I don't.
Speaker 2: I ain't buying that on that one there either, just
Speaker 2: because of how precariously it's balanced. But yeah, the thing.
Speaker 2: The thing with the wall is there's one side of
Speaker 2: it is like a retaining wall like you saw. I'm
Speaker 2: sure that one side of it is like holding dirt back,
Speaker 2: and then the other side is like down where it
Speaker 2: doesn't seem like uh, it doesn't seem like erosions what
Speaker 2: did it or you would think it would have eroded
Speaker 2: both sides pretty equally.
Speaker 1: Yeah, But I mean I think that there's been somebody
Speaker 1: with some kind of ground penetrating radar.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that there I'm waiting. That's one of the things
Speaker 2: that hopefully we'll get some information on within the next uh,
Speaker 2: within the next month. There was some light ar done
Speaker 2: Chris the land of the property owner. He showed me,
Speaker 2: showed all of us one light our image and that
Speaker 2: there's more. They're having them interpreted a process or whatever.
Speaker 2: You know. He's a little bit leary, and I understand
Speaker 2: because he sends stuff like this to to signists. I
Speaker 2: advise him to send it without telling them where it was.
Speaker 2: If he could send it to PhD students, because you
Speaker 2: tell them, Hey man, here's this stage wall place and
Speaker 2: they go google it. They're like, oh, fuck, no, this
Speaker 2: is totally natural. Here you go, so it'll be it'll
Speaker 2: be interesting to see. I'm waiting for the data to
Speaker 2: come out those kinds of things. I'm always I always
Speaker 2: look for the more mundane explanations first. But the wall
Speaker 2: is definitely interesting even if it is even if it
Speaker 2: is totally natural, it's very unique in the fact that
Speaker 2: it's just such a straight run and if you look
Speaker 2: next to it, it seems like there was another one that
Speaker 2: kind of formed a trough at one point. It's it
Speaker 2: took an I think I took enough pictures that I
Speaker 2: can put that together pretty well. But like where the
Speaker 2: wall is, if you look across, there's like a little
Speaker 2: that little valley where it is, and then on the
Speaker 2: other side where it starts to go up, you can
Speaker 2: see where there's a bunch of rocks that look like
Speaker 2: it may have been they were definitely standing up and
Speaker 2: it may have been another wall. It's hard to tell now,
Speaker 2: but it may have been another wall there. And so
Speaker 2: a lot of the people when we were there were
Speaker 2: talking about u that possibly be in a channel or
Speaker 2: a canal or something that had been formed through there.
Speaker 2: I don't know. It's awfully big. And you do see
Speaker 2: a lot of rocks that do that same thing in
Speaker 2: the region where every rock, all that granite breaks in
Speaker 2: very straight, very uniform ways, because it's so much quartz
Speaker 2: in it. So but the wall itself is just so.
Speaker 2: What it got me more and over and over was
Speaker 2: its size and its straightness. It wasn't like other things
Speaker 2: like that that I'd looked up coming there was.
Speaker 1: How can that be natural? It's so long, it's so
Speaker 1: perfectly I'm fitted with stones. It's almost you know, obviously
Speaker 1: there's some of these stones that are like fitted so
Speaker 1: they support other the bas stone, you know what I mean,
Speaker 1: there's logic behind it. It's not like a natural phenomenon.
Speaker 1: How could it be natural? It's like it's like, come on, man, really.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, you know. I took some pictures of
Speaker 2: some areas next that were nearby where we were going
Speaker 2: and looking for the dolmen, because I was being me,
Speaker 2: I'm looking at both sides of it, and I saw
Speaker 2: one place where I forget. It's got the two pink
Speaker 2: the two pink granite stones that are are pink. Okay,
Speaker 2: you know, that spot that I'm talking about, and there's
Speaker 2: like those are all like uniform looking blocks likely okay,
Speaker 2: but that that but those that's you know, they're you
Speaker 2: could see where it's falling apart and stuff there, and
Speaker 2: that's that's it's caused. It seems like it's caused by
Speaker 2: water eros uh like to thee like water gets in
Speaker 2: between these blocks and then it fills it full of
Speaker 2: pine needles and all kinds of shit, and then it
Speaker 2: soaks during the winter, and then it freezes and then
Speaker 2: its repeats over and over and then which slowly splits
Speaker 2: these apart. The uniform how uniform some of these sites are,
Speaker 2: that's where it gets interesting. And that's where even if
Speaker 2: it is a natural phenomena, it needs to be investigated.
Speaker 2: I mean, I you know, like some things can look
Speaker 2: uncannily you know, man made and not be Probably the
Speaker 2: best examples get when like the easiest to show or
Speaker 2: when you get down to the microscopic world. If I
Speaker 2: show you a picture of a plankton, a thing looks
Speaker 2: like a fucking D twelve for playing dungeons with dragons with, right,
Speaker 2: I mean, it's like perfectly the decadeater on shit, right,
Speaker 2: So it nature's a weird duck man. I don't. I
Speaker 2: don't know what to say for sure, but uh, there's
Speaker 2: it's in situation. I'm not one hundred percent either way.
Speaker 2: On the stage wall, I do lean towards it being uh,
Speaker 2: I definitely see signs of it being natural that that,
Speaker 2: but the it's uncanny. It's like the Bimini road in
Speaker 2: those It's just it's uncanny and warrants more investigation but
Speaker 2: won't get the investigation that it deserves because it's going
Speaker 2: to be forever associated with WU And so that's there
Speaker 2: it is. Yeah, it's one of the saddest things about
Speaker 2: it because you know, they closed down archaeological departments all
Speaker 2: over the world right now, Flint's out of a job
Speaker 2: or whatever. I don't know exactly, but they closed the
Speaker 2: department that he was working in. You know, if you
Speaker 2: cater to people that you actually bought that kind of stuff,
Speaker 2: you actually made interesting content for the masses, you might
Speaker 2: find that your department generates the fucking profit and then
Speaker 2: you have a job. I know it's capitalist and evil,
Speaker 2: but it beats starving and holding up a sign and
Speaker 2: doing real archaeology on Twitter, doesn't it. I mean fux.
Speaker 2: That's a lot. To me, it's like a no brainer.
Speaker 2: But Carl Sagan understood this all too well. He wrote
Speaker 2: books about fucking aliens because he knew that it would sell.
Speaker 2: And you're like, ah, you know, I'm not really into science,
Speaker 2: but I like aliens. And he's like, you're not into science.
Speaker 2: Spoonful of sugar, bitch, medicine science, eat it, eat more,
Speaker 2: eat more. You will learn science. You like Star Wars,
Speaker 2: You're learning science. He understood how to do that, and
Speaker 2: these are archaeologists to a man, they got no fucking
Speaker 2: clue how to do that.
Speaker 1: Hey, Dan, it's been fun speaking with you. I know
Speaker 1: we talked before we started. You're not sure what day
Speaker 1: you're speaking, but the Cosmic Summit's June twentieth to the
Speaker 1: twenty third. You can go to cosmicssemmit dot com get
Speaker 1: your tickets. Most of you guys can't be there, but
Speaker 1: if you go to the streaming section, they got a
Speaker 1: streaming pass for seventy five bucks. That seems like a
Speaker 1: lot of money, but if you're thinking about covering all
Speaker 1: of the talks over three days, it's pretty cheap and
Speaker 1: you can see it live from anywhere you're sitting as
Speaker 1: long as you have an Internet connection, and I really
Speaker 1: urge you to do it. Dan will be there. I
Speaker 1: think two of the three days you're gonna be there.
Speaker 2: I'm doing the presentation and I'm doing a live debate
Speaker 2: with Randal Carlson and David stick Hanson and doctor Danny
Speaker 2: Hillman Natty with Jahwah and I don't know some other
Speaker 2: people too. Sorry for those of you all forgot far.
Speaker 1: That's good. No, So check out Cosmic Summit dot com
Speaker 1: and you'll see Dan and a really pretty good lineup.
Speaker 1: And I've told you guys before, it's really cosmic Summits
Speaker 1: really the only quality conference in the whole country for
Speaker 1: this year twenty twenty five. So definitely check it out. Hey, Dan,
Speaker 1: I want to see a book coming out of you
Speaker 1: one of these days. I think you got one in you.
Speaker 2: Well, thank you, Cliff. I will I will get to
Speaker 2: work on that. I've been thinking about it for a bit.
Speaker 1: So yeah, Like hell man, it's like you're gonna sit
Speaker 1: down and go I'm gonna dedicate three hours of day
Speaker 1: to writing. It's a believe me, I tell you it's
Speaker 1: a challenge.
Speaker 2: I'll get one of those back in mind. You had
Speaker 2: to buy one of those dragons software. Now you just
Speaker 2: yell at your computer, Hey, Siri, start fucking typing.
Speaker 1: Or you can have one of those AI books written
Speaker 1: where you give it a chapter and then it puts
Speaker 1: together a book for you. Hey, we got a trip
Speaker 1: coming up in Guatemala at the end of the year.
Speaker 1: It's our Guatemala's Sacred Temples, and we have We're about
Speaker 1: half full. This is a hands on tour. We don't
Speaker 1: do any of these anymore because most of the archaeological
Speaker 1: parks are cording off. You can't climb anything, you can't interact.
Speaker 1: No ceremonies, no prayers, no meditations allowed in Mexico. In Guatemala,
Speaker 1: it's open season. You can climb pretty much any pyramid.
Speaker 1: We'll be going to call to visit the Lost World Pyramid.
Speaker 1: This is the specific pyramid that was tested by John
Speaker 1: Burke and has emissions still active in the pyramid that
Speaker 1: will be able to climate, sit, meditate, process and actually
Speaker 1: get a sense of the energy. We'll be hanging with shaman,
Speaker 1: We'll be doing ceremony. We're going to go to some
Speaker 1: areas that the locals refer to as former Atlantean temples,
Speaker 1: we're gonna be actually also helicoptering over to Elmodor. Likely
Speaker 1: Richard Hansen will be there. We're not sure, but we're
Speaker 1: gonna climb Ldonta pyramids and get a sense of what
Speaker 1: they're all about. This is not to be missed. If
Speaker 1: you want to interact with pyramids, coming and join me.
Speaker 1: For all the details, go to Earth Ancients dot com
Speaker 1: Forward Slash Tours, look for the banner, click on it
Speaker 1: you'll see the entire itinerary. It is a remarkable tour,
Speaker 1: the first of I hope a regular tour that we do.
Speaker 1: And if you have any questions at all, send me
Speaker 1: an email sent to Earth Ancients the number four of
Speaker 1: the letter you at gmail dot com, Earth Agents for
Speaker 1: you dot com if you have any questions whatsoever, and
Speaker 1: I'll get back to you. Don't miss it. It's the
Speaker 1: first ever Guatemalan Sacred Pyramidture December first to the twelve. Hey,
Speaker 1: that was fun with Dan Richards. I got a sense
Speaker 1: of where his mind is and I can see why
Speaker 1: people really like him. His channel Dedunking on YouTube is
Speaker 1: quickly growing just because his point of view is very
Speaker 1: refreshing and I think we need more of that kind
Speaker 1: of preview of the academic world. And I mean, if
Speaker 1: you haven't seen the Zahieu Loss interview with Joe Rogan,
Speaker 1: it's I mean, there's only one way to describe it,
Speaker 1: which is embarrassing. He repeatedly embarrasses himself. He doesn't know
Speaker 1: what zep Tepi is. He doesn't know what go Beckley
Speaker 1: Teppi is. I mean, it's nothing to do with Teppi,
Speaker 1: nothing to do with Turkey. And this is the foremost
Speaker 1: expert in the world on Egypt. So think, I think
Speaker 1: it's sad, and I think it's time. As I mentioned earlier,
Speaker 1: though Egypt's in a crisis, they are, their growth has
Speaker 1: has atrophied in the last few years. Luckily, they have
Speaker 1: finally opened this billion dollar Grand Egyptian Museum and it
Speaker 1: is looking like a fantastic place to visit. So a
Speaker 1: lot to love about Egypt, but a lot of challenges
Speaker 1: if you're a citizen. So I like what Dan has
Speaker 1: to say, And if you want to see him live,
Speaker 1: you can go to see him at the Cosmic Summit
Speaker 1: the twentieth through the twenty third in Greensboro, North Carolina,
Speaker 1: and go to Cosmicsummit dot com. Use Earth agents in
Speaker 1: the subject line for the coup on, I think it's
Speaker 1: fifteen percent off. If you want to see it as
Speaker 1: a door. If you want to do the live streaming,
Speaker 1: you can go to Cosmic Summit dot com under coupon
Speaker 1: punching Earth Ancients. And I think I think it's fifteen
Speaker 1: for the streaming passport. I think it's called a passport.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure. Anyhow, if you go there, you can
Speaker 1: get a nice discount off of seventy five bucks. But
Speaker 1: I have to tell you for seventy five bucks and
Speaker 1: a three day tour, a three day conference, that is
Speaker 1: rock bottom. That's a very very complementary charge because you're
Speaker 1: seeing a lot of talent and you're getting the latest
Speaker 1: from everybody, Randall, Carlson, Scott Walter, who else? Oh, Previne Mohan, which,
Speaker 1: by the way, we're gonna have Previne on the show
Speaker 1: in a couple of weeks, talk about the tipples in India.
Speaker 1: We haven't had him on in a while. He is
Speaker 1: also doing a tour in August that we'll talk about
Speaker 1: next week. And he's got a few openings. And I'll
Speaker 1: tell you if I had a chance to go with him,
Speaker 1: I would and I'm hoping to design a tour with
Speaker 1: Provene for twenty twenty six, perhaps maybe early twenty seven,
Speaker 1: because I really want to see these temples before you know,
Speaker 1: I get too old and I can't fly anymore. I
Speaker 1: don't fly very well. I don't think I told people.
Speaker 1: I just have. I mean, I used to fly for business.
Speaker 1: I was a marketing manager in charge of the exhibits
Speaker 1: for a software company in Santase, California, and I mean
Speaker 1: I had to fly all over the country in Europe,
Speaker 1: and I just I just didn't fly well. I just
Speaker 1: didn't react to the pressurized cabin. Twenty plus years ago,
Speaker 1: the playing filterrations were not as good either, So it
Speaker 1: was a challenge for me, and I just to this day,
Speaker 1: I've gotten better, but I just God, I don't know,
Speaker 1: I don't know how much longer I can deal with it.
Speaker 1: So yeah, so there you go. So okay, there you go.
Speaker 1: So if you can get out with Pravine, think about it.
Speaker 1: Look for the interview next week for the Temples of India,
Speaker 1: and we're going to try to do a talk with
Speaker 1: him next week. It's probably going to be a special
Speaker 1: event simply because I haven't spoken to him in three
Speaker 1: years and his YouTube channel has turned into a monster.
Speaker 1: I think he's got two million people likes on his program,
Speaker 1: and he's the only game in town, and he's covering
Speaker 1: an entire country, you know. And his Cambodia material and
Speaker 1: Thailand material is also very very good, so something to
Speaker 1: check out. All right, there you go. All right, Hey,
Speaker 1: I want to thank my guest today, Dan Richards, coming
Speaker 1: to us from the state of Washington. Thanks for coming
Speaker 1: on the program. As always, the team of Gael Tour,
Speaker 1: Mark Foster, and everyone who makes this thing happen. You
Speaker 1: guys rock, all right, take care of you well, and
Speaker 1: we will talk to you next time. St. St. St.
Speaker 1: Stan