Joe Rogan podcast. Check it out.

>> The Joe Rogan Experience.

>> TRAIN BY DAY. JOE ROGAN PODCAST BY

NIGHT. All day.

>> How are you?

>> Great. How are you doing, John?

>> Very nice to meet you. [music]

>> Nice to meet you.

>> I've enjoyed your content online.

>> Thank you. [laughter]

>> I the first I got first introduced to

you by a video you did with uh his

channel's Megalithic Marvels. Yes.

>> Yeah. And it was about ancient Chinese

artifacts that don't make any sense.

>> Yes.

>> And uh it was so fascinating. The moment

I saw it, I reached out to my guy. I was

like, I got to talk to her because this

is crazy.

>> So, please explain to people what these

artifacts are and what's so bizarre

about them.

>> I I first saw these artifacts in uh the

British Museum. So, they have an entire

whole wall full of them, and they're

they're made of nefright jade, which is

an extremely hard stone. Um, and they

just look they look machined. They look

way too precise for the the tools that

they say built them. So, I started doing

some research. I haven't been to the

site in China. It's it was built by the

Langju culture, so archaeologists say.

Um, but it the it's a two different

kinds of artifacts that are really

famous. One is called a sung tube, which

is a tall tube that's circular in the

middle and square on the outside and

extremely precise geometry. The other

one are these big round B discs that

almost look like a giant flat doughut

that are perfectly flat on top. You

know, there's the precision versions of

these just like you see all over the

world and there are versions that are uh

much crudder. So, it almost seems like

the civilization had this my my theory

is that these were not unlike the

hardstone vases in Egypt. Um, so it was

something that this culture either was

gifted or found and it turned into a

very cherished object like a grave good

for them. So you find these tombs in

Langghu, China that have literally

thousands of these jade artifacts in

them. Um, and it's not unlike the hard

stone vases that you see in Egypt where

you find those in the grapes as well.

>> So what what's the timeline where these

pieces are attributed to?

>> So these are really old. I mean the the

earthworks and the um

the the community around the lean

culture is securely dated by

archaeologists to like 3,400 BC and then

you know just so it's about the same

actually as the graves that were in

Egypt um with the hardstone bases. So

it's very it's very very old.

>> And the the at the time of this culture,

what were their tools? Like do we know?

>> Well, the the archaeologists say that it

were that it was made with um strings.

So they would take strings with sand or

some sort of an abrasive and they would

cut the jade that way and then they

would uh they would use copper tools,

stone hammers, those kinds of things to

shape it.

So the the explanation with

>> a giant smile on your face.

>> The explanation doesn't make a lot of

sense. And even you know the hole down

the middle of the bisc is a perfect I

mean you can see the drill marks on the

inside of the bis.

>> Can we do we have some images of these

things? Let's take a look at them.

>> Jamie I have um a china

>> folder

>> cuz the images on uh and uh by the way

that channel megalithic marvels Derek's

channel. Excellent. Really fun.

>> So great.

>> Great stuff.

>> Yeah. Derek is the one that got me into

all this.

>> Shout out to Derek. Shout out to Derek.

>> So, this is How do you say it? How do

you pronounce that? B disc. B disc. B I

disc.

>> And um how big is this?

>> So, that thing's about 9 in across.

>> Perfectly perfectly circular, perfectly

flat surface on the top,

>> like measured to to what tolerance,

>> you know? I I don't know the answer to

that. And I don't know that there have

been a lot of deep scientific studies on

the precision of these. Right. Right.

The archaeologists assume that that this

culture made them with bamboo, you know,

bamboo and strings.

>> Okay. [snorts]

>> So, yeah, there there that picture,

Jamie, you can see the inside of the

actual artifact in the bottom right.

That's drilled.

>> Yeah.

>> Right. And the one on the left is an

experiment these archaeologists ran with

a bamboo core down the middle of the

jade. And you can just you can see the

difference between the two. How far did

they get down with the bamboo

experiment? Oh,

>> all all the way through.

>> They got all the way through. How long

did that take?

>> I don't know the answer to that. There

was a an archaeologist that did an

experiment in the 1930s and they used

these strings with the abrasives to cut

off a piece of jade that was the size of

a basketball and it took them a week to

to cut the bamb or cut the string all

the way through that piece of jade.

>> So, it was a long time.

>> The difference in the people that are

listening. So, there's the bamboo

experiment where they drilled into

something with a bamboo and and cord and

some What else was did they use? They

like sand or something.

>> Yes. Abrasives of some sort.

>> Yeah.

>> And so, the difference is if you look at

the lines uh as it's drilling down,

they're thick and they don't look the

same. If you look at the ones in the

actual artifact, they're extremely

tight. They're they're way smaller and

they're they're tighter to each other

and it doesn't make sense. Like you look

at that, you're like that looks like a

machine.

>> It it does. And in this specific

instance, it looks to me like the drill

came from both directions. Like they

flipped it over and drilled from the top

and then flipped it over again and

drilled from the bottom and that's where

it met in the middle.

>> Wow. Um,

so when what is like what's out of all

these uh different artifacts, what's the

most puzzling one to you?

>> The sung tube,

>> which is the one on the left hand side

there.

>> Yep. So that you know that is a it's

larger on top, smaller on the bottom,

perfectly 90° corners. Um, it's got a

round tube in the middle, but the

artifact in general is square. So it's

just a very complex shape to create with

that level of precision. And Nefright

jade is a very a very hard stone. So it

would have taken you know this is a

people in my space talk about the mo

scale of hardness just as a way of

saying diamonds are a 10. You know

different different stone levels the the

um

the hard stone discs like diorite that

would be a six or seven. This is the

same. It's it's that hard. Wow. And

so

is the idea um well I'm just assuming

the idea is that there was a more

sophisticated culture that probably

existed predating that and these are

leftover artifacts.

>> It is only my opinion that that's the

case. I haven't seen a lot of people

talk about these artifacts at all. Um

Jamie, if you go back to the picture you

had just flashed on the screen, [snorts]

the reason I've developed this theory,

so this is an image on the side of the

largest uh sung tube. It's called the

king of jade sung. It's a 15 uh pound

artifact that was found and you can see

the raised stone. So it's the high

relief carvings that were later etched

over. [snorts] That etching is has

become very famous. If you look at

photos of the museum in Liangghu, this

image is everywhere. And I think that

this was an image that was used by uh

the Leangju tribe as like the the image

of the king basically. And so I but I do

believe that it was scratched over the

top of an original very uh interesting

high relief carving that you see in a

lot of other artifacts. Um so I think

that he basically found this. it looks

um it's something that they maybe could

not recreate and then they kind of

stamped their their kingly symbol over

the top of it.

>> So this is um it's common in Egypt as

well that and particularly this theory

among alternative historians because you

look at the complexity of some of the

sarcophaguses and some of the different

things that and then you see the writing

on the outside which looks like crudder.

The the the writing is not as precise.

The cutting is not as precise. There's a

lot of like chips to it. It doesn't look

>> like they use the same materials or the

same uh utensils you or tools.

>> Yeah. And you know the question is if

you had the ability there's the king of

jade sung. So if you had the ability to

make an artifact in that kind of a

shape, why would you not have also

created the scratching over the top in

that high that high quality version? So

why would you create the artifact like

that and then just scratch over the top

of it, right? It doesn't make sense.

>> It's there's always that's always been

the case that

history shows that people who are

controlling a region will take credit

for everything. They'll take credit for

all the ancient stuff, too. They'll put

their name on it. They own everything.

Yeah.

>> You know, and that's famous with

Pharaohs. They they did it with

everything. And this is documented. We

know that they wrote their name on

things that they didn't create.

>> Yeah. Ramsy's I was king Selfie. You

know, he [laughter] he put his cart on

everything.

>> Yeah. Which is I mean, it sounds like

what a dictator does. It sounds like

what a pharaoh would do.

>> Yeah.

>> You know, it doesn't mean that they made

it. And for us to just assume that they

did, knowing that people in great power

behave that way is kind of kind of

crazy. That's our map of history. So,

how did you get down this road where you

started looking at these objects and

looking at the the conventional

historical timeline and saying

something's wrong here

>> specific to the Chinese artifacts?

>> Yeah. Or or were you already on that

path when you found the Chinese

artifacts?

>> I've been on this path for a while and

you know my the name of my channel is

Secrets and Stone and the reason I named

it that is because I believe that the

stones speak to you. they will show you

exactly what the story is, right? Um, so

with these artifacts, just like the hard

stone de or hard stone bases, uh, it

just is out of place, you know, it

doesn't make any sense. And especially

in the British Museum, when you look at

these with your own eyes, um, and then

you read the story of how they believe

that they were made, you know, it's it

just doesn't it doesn't add up. And so

all you have to do, you know, in any of

these places is dig one or two levels

down and you start to start to see a lot

of inconsistencies.

>> One or two levels. So meaning that the

older stuff is the more complex.

>> Yeah. Or um with the way that the

archaeologists have interpreted a lot of

these sites, there's a whole lot of uh

assumptions that are made. You know,

there's there's carbon dating that only

goes partway down. uh you know they

they'll dig partway down, they'll date

it, it matches their story, and they

write the report. They'll take

inscriptions, you know, especially in

Cambodia, places like that, where a king

has written an inscription, and they'll

say, "Yep, well, that king wrote on

this, so this must have been made at

this time." And there's really no no

further investigation. Um, so it's it's

become a theme with my work um where

I'll go somewhere specifically with the

megalithic uh architecture. You can you

can see exactly where the old

architecture was built. Oftentimes it's

the lowest level and then you can see

where other cultures have come later and

built on top of it. And it just looks it

looks like a

just a copy of what's underneath. It's

like they were really trying to make

what they saw, but they just couldn't.

And so once you've kind of trained your

eye for that, you go anywhere in the

world and you see it.

>> How did you start looking at this stuff?

>> Um, I went to Well, I went to Egypt four

years ago and watched Ben Van Kirkwick's

videos. You know, Ben.

>> Sure.

>> Um, he's awesome.

>> So, I watched a couple of his videos on

the way to Egypt. That was my first kind

of introduction to this and then it just

became a bit of a obsession for me. Um I

like to go to the sites around the world

that other people don't really go to. So

um you know I think Egypt and Peru and

Turkey that's it's all in good hands,

right? Ben's Ben's watching over Egypt.

We've got Brian Forester down in Peru

doing amazing work. Um the sites I go to

are the sites that nobody else really

visits. Um, so I just got back from

India a couple weeks ago. I spent a lot

of time in Cambodia. I went to Thailand.

And these are the sites that I think if

you're trying to make a case or at least

a strong enough case that people will

consider, right, that there may be a

different history than what we're being

told. Um, I think you have to have more

than three examples. So if you can start

to to do a lot of research on these

sites all around the world, um you can

have thousands of examples of nubs for

example or megalithic architecture that

looks very similar. These walls that

look very similar all over the world

>> and it just make in my mind it makes a

much stronger case for it than just

continuing to look at the same sites

over and over again. It seems to me so

much more likely that the the timeline

is incorrect than the historians are

right and everyone else is just a

conspiracy theorist weirdo. The the more

you look at it, the more the more

questions I have like that Kyasa temple

in India. Yeah,

>> we've gone over that a few times, but

Jamie pointed out something that they

brought in about was it like an army to

try to destroy it.

>> Mhm.

>> And they barely put a dent in the damn

thing.

>> Yeah.

>> And they they stayed for a long time.

They tried to smash it up and they

couldn't do [ __ ] to it.

>> Yeah.

>> And then you go, "Okay, well, how did

they make this? What did they? And I saw

a a really wild uh YouTube video the

other day where this guy was proposing

that they used lasers and that it was

all laser carved and that they had some

sort of like super sophisticated laser

setup back then. That's why you're not

finding all the stone

>> that was

>> well you know it

>> like what? Wait a minute.

>> Look, I think that's absolutely

possible. It sounds but also so insane

that we're so wrong about the linear

timeline of human history that they had

[ __ ] lasers in India like how many

thousands of years ago

>> that they were using to carve an entire

massive perfect temple out of rock

>> you know I was just down at the Hoala

temples which are in southern India and

they have these lathes lathe turned

pillars the pillars are feet across

they're huge

and you walk up to them and you look at

them closely and you can see the lathe

marks on them and archaeologists concede

that they're lathe turned but they don't

concede that it's machined. So they

basically say well maybe they were

turned on a lathe. We'll give you that

but that was probably humanpowered or

animal powered. Yeah. So these are

>> god

>> these are the statue or the uh lathe

turn pillars in southern India. I was

just looking at these with my own eyes a

couple weeks ago. It's completely

unexplainable. And to think of the size

of the machine that would be required.

You say you turn that pillar sideways,

you [snorts] connect it to a machine on

each side and you start lathing. Um

Jamie, I have a folder in my India

[clears throat] uh pictures that

>> God that's so pretty

>> that has lots of ev So what you can see

at sites like Hampy in India is you can

see the evidence of lathing. So, it

almost looks like the setup that they

would have used to carve these kinds of

pillars. And it's just sitting in kind

of far-flung corners of these sites.

Nobody addresses what they are. Um, and

and so the evidence is everywhere of

this. It's just not, you know, it's

written off. It's like, well, that must

have been an animal powered lathe,

[laughter] you know. So, I I do think we

have strong evidence for machining in

ancient history. And in my mind, it

doesn't have to be machines. You know,

there there could have been other ways

that they were doing this that we don't

even recognize.

>> So, what is this that we're looking at?

>> So, this is in um this is at the museum

in Hampy in southern India. And that to

me looks like the L. So, it looks like

where a pillar might have been placed

and the machine was spinning um you

know, some sort of a lathe machine. So I

I think it's like the you know the other

side of these pillars basically

>> like the the end plates.

>> Yeah. Exactly.

>> Right. Okay. And so these pillars, how

large are they? Can you Jamie, could you

go to that image in the lower right hand

corner, please? That one right there.

That God, I can't get over how pretty

that is.

>> They're so incredible in real life, too.

>> How tall are they?

>> Way tall. I mean, I my head would

probably go halfway up that pillar.

They're twice as tall as me.

>> So immensely heavy. And what kind of

stone is it carved out of?

>> This is a chloritic shist. So it's a

it's called soap stone.

>> So pretty.

>> But there are lathed turn pillars that

are also granite.

>> In in southern India, it's a soap stone.

So when it's uh quarried, it's a little

bit softer and then it hardens once it's

out of the quarry.

>> Has anyone done an analysis of the

geometry in these things? Like how

precise it is and how like I'm I'm

looking at it. If you go to that the one

uh next to it, please. That one. The

Yeah, that one. When I'm looking at the

precision of that and how many different

pieces there are, I I would love to know

how uniform those are because it looks

insane. That looks so beautiful.

>> It's

>> We're looking at uh how do you say that

word? Copeswar.

>> Copwar. Madev. Is that how you say it?

Mahadev.

>> God, that's [clears throat] pretty.

>> It's incredible. And you know, these

sites have crazy energy, too. You walk

into them and you can tell that they

were they were made with a lot of love.

Um, these these pillars, you know, you

can't help but touch them. [laughter]

>> You're allowed to touch them.

>> Yeah, absolutely.

>> Look at that. Like, I would love to know

what the precision of that is.

>> Yeah.

>> Because really, imagine if it's insanely

precise and then you have to explain

that, too. Not just stone chisels and

tools and stuff, but

>> when you can see in the pillars, you can

see where the lathe started at the

bottom and you can see where it stopped

at the top. It's just it's just running.

And you know, a lot of people are like,

"Well, turn it sideways. Is that some

sort of a a soundwave, right? Is it

mimicking? Is it telling us something?"

>> This episode is brought to you by Armra.

Every week there's some new wellness

hack that people swear by and after a

while you start thinking why do we think

we can just outsmart our bodies. That's

why arra colostrum caught my attention.

It's something the body already

recognizes and has hundreds of these

specialized nutrients for gut stuff,

immunity, metabolism, etc. I first

noticed it working around training,

especially workout recovery. Most stuff

falls off, but I am still taking this.

If you want to try, Armra is offering my

listeners 30% off plus two free gifts.

Go to armra.com/rogan.

I'm glad you point that out. I've seen

that, too. Does that make sense?

>> I think so.

>> Can I say that again, Jamie?

>> Yeah, I was just trying to find out your

question

>> of how precise they are.

>> Oh, here [clears throat] it goes. The

pillars in how do you say it? Suara

Mandap of Copwar Temple are lathe turned

with extremely uniform circular and poly

polygonal profiles

showing high geometric precision and

tight alignment despite being carved

from stone without mortared joints.

>> It says it resembles machine turned

work.

>> Resembles.

>> Yeah,

>> that's cute.

>> Mhm.

>> Isn't it more likely [laughter] that it

was machine turned if it's exactly?

Pillars are laid out with consistent

spacing in the circular hall so that the

open oculus in the ceiling remains

perfectly centered, suggesting careful

radial planning and load distribution.

The temple uses interlocking stone and

gravity rather than mortar. So the

precise fit of the pillars into bases

and beams is critical to stability and

is cited as an example of advanced

medieval Indian stone engineering.

One thing that's interesting when you go

to these temples is you can see where

they have moved these pillars into the

temples. So the core of most of these

temples in my opinion is the original

megalithic part of these temples, the

oldest stuff. But you can see where

these pillars have been moved into new

temples. And so you'll see these crazy

precise dark stones.

>> Says this is a rotating pillar.

>> What?

>> I think it used to rotate. It does not

anymore. I actually saw that pillar.

>> When did it stop? [laughter]

>> I don't know. And maybe that's just a

myth. I have no idea. But you can see

where they they moved these pillars from

original temples or maybe who knows?

Maybe they found a workshop somewhere

with these and they put them in the in

the center of the newer temples. So it's

it's not precise at all. Very crude

stonework above and below them. And then

they have this perfect lathe pillar

right in the middle. What? So what is

the timeline that they attribute to the

construction of these?

>> Oh, you know, 1,200 to,500 AD.

>> And why do they say that?

>> Because the kings that ruled during that

time period wrote inscriptions

>> on the pillars in a lot of instances on

the sides of the temples, things like

that.

>> Yeah.

>> It's it's all inscriptional evidence.

>> I would need more evidence, you know.

>> Right. Well, what's really interesting

I've done a lot

>> That's great. It's graffiti.

>> Yeah. I've [snorts] done a lot of

research in Cambodia and they they date

all of their uh all of their temples

based on inscriptions and when you

actually run these inscriptions through

AI and you translate them, they've all

been translated from Sanskrit to French.

I then translated it from French to

English and when you read what the kings

actually wrote, very seldom do they say,

I king so and so built this. What they

say is I installed a lingum. I brought

a, you know, I brought a a statue to

this temple. And so the archaeologists

make a fairly big jump between what the

kings actually wrote and saying, well,

this king must have built this. So in a

lot of instances, they're actually

putting words into into their mouths.

>> Wow. [snorts] Um, so what is your belief

in terms of the timeline of the

construction of these things?

I mean it in the oldest instances it I I

personally believe that it's pre flood

so you know more than 12,000 years ago.

I think there are some that are probably

older very you know

Peru is I just got back from Peru a

couple of months ago that's fully

unexplainable. You've talked about Peru

on your show many times. Egypt is

incredibly ancient. I actually believe

that India is one of the most ancient

places on earth. Um, and were they were

they different civilizations building

there? What they built suggests that it

probably was. Were they in contact with

each other? I believe they were. You

know, there's enough similarities around

the world that it feels like there was a

communication network between them. But

when you look at the actual building

styles between, take those three

examples, India, Egypt, and Peru,

they're completely different, right? E

Egypt is very just uh just blocks, very

few decorations, especially in places

like the Oyerion. It doesn't it's just

um it almost looks it's like clinical,

you know, but then you're in Peru and

it's playful there. There are these big

pillowy blocks and then you go to India

and there's carvings all over

everything, right? And so I do believe

that there are certain places in this

world that are substantially older and I

believe that for thousands of years

civilizations have been they're

attracted to these places and they build

on top of them and they settle there and

so you just see generation after

generation after generation of building

on top of them.

>> Well, it makes sense when you think

about Kyasa because look how perfect it

is now. And this is thousands of years

after they attribute it to being built

or at least a thousand years.

>> Yeah.

>> And it looks like there's been zero

erosion.

>> Yeah.

>> Now add a few thousand years to that,

it's going to look exactly the same.

>> Yeah.

>> And if you're just generation after

generation like not knowing who built it

and you get a version of uh you know

this king said he did it or this guy

said he did like how add a few thousand

years and it's [ __ ] guesswork.

>> 100%. And to have archaeologists shift

through dirt and find an inscription

somewhere and go, "Oh, we nailed it."

Like,

>> god, that's such a disservice to what

the complexity of the mystery of what

we're looking at is. Yeah.

>> Like just the Kyasa one is. I am

obsessed with that place. I've I've

watched like four or five documentaries

on it and see and we went over it on the

podcast the other day with the CEO of

Perplexity. It's like it's [ __ ]

bananas.

>> Yeah. It's so crazy how precise and one

mistake and you're [ __ ] Y

>> but yet it's all geometrically aligned.

There's they have no idea what they did

with all the stone.

>> Yeah, [laughter]

>> that's the big question, right?

>> That seems so crazy.

>> They removed an entire cliffside

mountain and you know it was it was they

carved it from the top down.

>> Yeah. And put it where would you do it

at all?

>> Good question.

>> That's so much rock. That's not a little

bit of rock. You would think there'd be

some laying around.

>> Yeah. Even after thousands of years,

you'd have like a pile somewhere. Like,

[ __ ] it. Anybody want some free stone?

It's over there. No one's going to take

all the stone. You have [ __ ] millions

and millions of tons of stone. Like,

that's crazy. What' you do with it?

>> You know what I wonder? I wonder I do

feel for archaeologists, right? I mean,

they they go to a site and they're like,

gosh, maybe this feels a little older,

but the only evidence I have are

potshurds that I can date. I can dig

down and I can find cultural layers of

cultures that in my opinion lived there

afterwards. They're dating that and they

see inscriptions and that's the evidence

that they have to make their case. But I

do wonder how many of them are looking

at these sites and saying, "Yeah, this

actually doesn't make a whole lot of

sense."

>> A lot of the young ones,

>> I've talked to them. I've talked to

them. Um I think this the hierarchal the

hierarchal what's the word? hierarchy

the structure of academics and in terms

of these guys that are teaching

university courses and giving out PhDs

and writing books and they have a vast

body of work that's all about the

timeline and all about you know what

they know and they are the gatekeepers

of information

>> and there's a lot of ego involved with

academics I'm sure you know that

>> and they get really shitty with each

other and they're vicious they're

vicious when they attack each other even

if they're wrong like the the whole

Clovis first thing was the best example

of that.

>> The gentleman who proposed this theory

that there were people here older than

the Clovis people was destroyed

>> by by his own peers.

>> And it took years before it was proven

that he was correct. And not only was he

correct, but he was correct by like over

10,000 years. Yeah.

>> Like now they're pushing it past 22,000

years ago because of the footprints they

found in White Sands, New Mexico.

>> Right. The peopleing of the Americas.

>> Yes. Humans have been here a long long

long time. And this is just indicative

of this pattern that happens whenever

anybody comes up with any sort of an

alternative theory that doesn't come

from the gated halls of academia.

They're just dismissed. But but

academics have only been around for a

few hundred years. Like we have to stop

and think about how crazy it is that

we've put the power in these people that

we know are not always accurate nor are

they compromised and they have ego

problems and they have this structure of

the people at the top that are giving

out grants and giving out funding and

giving PhDs and reading people's

dissertations. It's like it's very

social and it's very complex and to

deviate from the narrative is

devastating for your career. Like if if

they can destroy the guy who proposed

that Clovis first was incorrect. That

guy was a an academic. He was

established. Yeah.

>> Imagine if you're a [ __ ] PhD student

and you're like, I think you guys are

wrong. Well, you're [ __ ] forever. You

know, I used to work in corporate

America and there were a lot of things

that I thought that I absolutely never

said. Right? So, if you think about

these young archaeologists, even if they

see something and they think, gosh, I

wish that I could dive into that and

really explore how old this is, they're

going to get shut down immediately and

their self-preservation mechanisms are

going to kick in because they've got a

paycheck. You know, you have to

sympathize with the situation that

they're in.

>> Oh, I do. I completely do. Look, we've

all worked for shitty bosses. It's a

terrible position to be in

>> and especially if your shitty boss is in

charge of the distribution of

>> information about the history of the

human race. That is crazy. That is crazy

to get ego involved in that.

>> I know

>> because when you see like the attacks on

guys like Graham Hancock and all these

people that propose that this data that

we should look at that just like there's

there's a bunch of data that confounds

the timeline like it it [ __ ] it

completely up. Yeah. when Gob Beckley

came along and then everybody was like,

"Okay, we're in a we have a problem. We

have an 11,000 plus year old structure

for sure. It was purposely buried 11,000

plus years ago." So, how old is it? It's

at least 11,000 years old. That doesn't

make any sense cuz timeline of

civilization, it's supposed to be 6,000

years ago. So, now we have immense stone

structures with 3D carvings that are in

concentric circles. That's 5,000 years

older than that. Okay, these are hunter

gatherers. They were just [ __ ] that

in their spare time from killing

antelopes, they decided they were going

to build immense structures on the top

of a hill.

>> Well, and don't you find it interesting

that the dating of Gobeclet has not

opened the door to redating other sites

around the world. So, when you talk

about the stuff in Egypt, nobody's

really open to saying maybe this is

10,000 years old. Should we look again?

>> Right?

>> You know, that that story has been

written. There's been a period on it and

it's been put to bed. Not only that,

there's actual geological evidence. And

this is where Robert Shock came into

play. You know, I have had him on the

podcast before, and I remember watching

that documentary on the mysteries of the

Sphinx, and he proposed that there's

water erosion on the outside of the

Temple of the Sphinx. And he he's taken

photos of that erosion and brought it to

other geologists and said, "What do you

think this is?" And they said, "Well,

that's water erosion." And then he shows

them where it came from. They I don't

want to have nothing to do with this.

>> Yeah.

Just kidding. It's the wind.

>> Crazy. Which is crazy. Imagine the

timeline of human history is so

controversial that you're worried that

it would ruin your career if you spoke

accurately about your field of

expertise, which is erosion and geology

due to rainfall. Thousands of years of

rainfall. Well, thousands of years of

rainfall means at the very least the

Sphinx is 9,000 years old.

>> Yeah.

>> At the very least. But that's probably

way older than that because you have to

have thousands of years of rainfall from

the time that it was constructed

constructed to make these kind of deep

fissures into this stone

>> and it was buried for much of its recent

history which means there was not

erosion taking place the entire time it

was buried.

>> Yeah. It the whole thing's nuts and the

the wind and sand erosion that's an

argument against that right because it

was covered in sand.

>> Yeah. And it, you know, if there was

rain erosion like they're proposing, it

had to have been when there was

rainfall, significant rainfall in the

Nile Valley. And that's way back 9,000

years ago.

>> A long time ago. Yep. And, you know, I

guess it just it breaks my heart a

little bit that this conversation gets

shut down because if you think about

think about 23 and me, right? the the

number of people that have subscriptions

to websites like that because they are

extremely interested in where they came

from and it opens up their world when

they can see four generations back. It

gives them you know people that that

belong to these subscription services

will say I finally have a sense of

belonging. I kind of feel like I know

where I came from. We as a humanity

imagine if we actually knew where we

came from. I think we would feel a lot

less lost. I don't think it's sad. I

think it's funny. I think it's just

another example of just how funny people

are, how we're so weird. We're so full

of [ __ ] and we're we're we're just so

filled with this desire to be correct

and to enforce our narrative that we do

it even with facts that are like

significantly important for the entire

world. And I think it's funny because it

doesn't work because it's only opened

the door to people like you and people

like Derek and people like Graham

Hancock and Ben Van Kirkwick and Jimmy

Corsetti and all these people that Luke

Caverns they just spend enormous amounts

of time making this incredible content.

>> Yeah.

>> Like all the stuff that Luke has done in

the Americas in South America like good

lord there's so many mysteries. Like

explain away Sakai Huan. Explain away

those stones. Help me out. Help me out.

Pe how people with no steel and no heavy

machinery move these things into

position. Move these 20 foot tall

immense stones that are cut like jigsaw

puzzles. It looks like they were melted

into place.

>> Yeah. It looks like a melted marshmallow

stacked on top of a melted marshmallow.

>> It's literally bananas. It makes no

sense. And then you have the weirdness

of these elongated heads that they find

down there. These skulls that are

absolutely real skulls. These are not

hoaxes. They have a 30 20 to 30% larger

brain capacity.

>> Yep.

>> In the skull.

>> I have personally seen elongated skulls

in four different countries.

>> And it's not the same as skulls that

were manipulated to be flattened. That's

what's different. So, what people think

about this, there's a a very well-known

practice where they would take boards

and put them on children's heads to

elongate their heads. The question is

why were they doing that?

And were they trying to emulate

something

>> That's right.

>> that existed, another type of person

that was here. Well, it seems like it.

And it seems like these skulls that they

find, particularly in Peru, the bones

are larger. It's a larger face and they

have a larger brain capacity. And they

don't have that sagittal ridge.

>> Yep. The sagittal suture.

>> Sagittal suture that's down the middle.

>> So, they're literally a different kind

of skull. It's clearly human or some

form of human,

>> but it has more brain volume and it's

built different than us. And everybody's

like,

>> I don't see anything.

>> Nope. They're not like, "Hey, maybe

there was a completely different species

of human that existed along with just

like Dennisovvens, just like Neanderls,

just like all these new ones that they

keep finding fairly recently." Like the

one they found in China, the big-headed

man. What was it? What was that one

called again? Julian's. Homo Julian's.

>> This is like really recent. Like a few

years ago, they found this. Like,

>> okay, we we don't have the picture,

guys. We just don't we don't have the

full We don't have all the data. And

when you have these [ __ ] big skulls

and you're not even bringing that up, it

makes me think like, are you afraid to

look at this? Because then you have to

admit that you really didn't know this

and you were walking around saying

you're an expert in the human timeline.

>> Imagine some of the capabilities of of

these people with that much more brain

volume. Could they speak telepathically?

Could they move stones with their minds,

with sound? Right? We don't know what

they were able to do. If you just unlock

an additional 10% of your brain

capacity, Joe Rogan's brain capacity.

Think of what? Think of all of the

connections you would make. Think about

all of the things you could do that you

can't do now. And now expand your brain

volume by 30%. Exactly like

>> the Bradley Cooper movie. Remember?

>> Yes.

>> Yeah. And he kept the same size head

>> or the movie Lucy with Scarlett

Johansson

just unlocking her full brain. And

suddenly she was moving things

>> with her mind. Right. So, were these

people able to do things that regular

humans couldn't? And that's why they

were emulated throughout history with

cradle headboarding. They were the

elite. They were maybe building some of

these structures. Who knows? And if you

are if you are just an average Joe in

that community, you want to look like

them, right? You all of us do it, right?

>> Especially the elites of the time.

>> Yeah.

>> Especially the humans that you know were

the kings and the pharaohs and all these

different people. They wanted to have

those heads.

>> Mhm. Yep. There were some really

interesting

>> It sounds like we're crazy people,

right? If I just tuned into this, it'd

be like, "Oh, great. Another one of

those [ __ ] Joe Rogan shows where

he's talking to crazy people." But then

you see, Jamie, pull up some of the

images of those skulls. I know we've

shown them a million times.

>> I have a folder with skulls. I can show

you some really interesting ones from

England.

>> Oh.

>> That are on small bodies. So, it they

almost look like fairies. And they have

these giant skulls on these very small

bodies. And it does make you think that

probably had something to do with the

mythology of fairies in in England. This

was at Aberry, which is one of the big

stone circles. When you walk into the

museum there, there are these amazing

anomalous elongated skulls on these very

tiny little bodies.

>> Wow.

>> The other interesting thing about

elongated skulls,

>> are they children?

>> Um, I don't think so. No. There's a

woman named Maria Whitley who writes all

about these skulls that she found that

have been found all over England. Um,

that's Egypt. Yeah, there it is.

>> Yeah. So, this is England.

This is one of the skulls, but this

skull is very small, but if you look at

the shape of it, you know, their their

ears are in a different spot. They have

huge eye sockets. Um, I have another

photo where it's there's one still

attached to a small body. Oh,

look at the size of that head.

>> Isn't [clears throat] that interesting?

>> That's crazy.

>> Now, this one may have been a child. I

don't remember specifically which of

these skulls.

>> Even as a kid, that kid's going to be a

football player. [laughter]

>> He already has a helmet.

>> Kid has a giant head,

>> but it doesn't look right. It doesn't

look right. Even like I have babies,

>> they don't they don't have heads that

big. That's crazy. Even when a baby's

got a big head when they're little and

they're they can barely hold their head

up, it doesn't look like little

bobbleheads.

>> That's crazy. Another really interesting

>> Look how far we I'm sorry, but look how

far it goes behind the spine.

>> And look how flat it is at the bottom in

the back. Yes.

>> I mean, imagine holding that head up.

>> Well, that's the other weird thing about

these um elongated skulls. The the part

of the skull where it connects to the

spine is in a different place.

>> Yes. Which makes sense. Otherwise, you

know, you or I guess you'd probably your

head would fall backwards.

>> Like look at these. Look at these that

don't have that sagittal suture. That

one that's closest to us. That is crazy.

>> Yeah. So, that one's in Peru. I saw that

one a couple months ago. It looks

completely different than the skull

right behind it.

>> Right. It's like a different kind of

person.

>> Yes. Interestingly, in a lot of

>> they have one on the side and they don't

have the one down the middle.

>> Yeah. There's another one that's labeled

Malta and you can see the view of it

from the top and you can see how it

looks completely different than any of

the other. So here's an interesting

thing that I'm not sure you've talked

much about Joe.

>> Brain surgery.

>> The holes in the back of these skulls,

it's trepation. So it was a surgery that

they

>> that they see evidence of in lots and

lots of ancient skulls. And the question

becomes, so if you don't have a sagittal

suture and your brain, you know, we have

the our brain will fuse, right, as we

grow.

>> Sorry, but look at that. What it looks

like, it looks like they used drills.

>> Yeah.

>> Doesn't it?

>> Like they just drilled a circle around

that dude's head.

>> In a lot of instances, these people

survived these surgeries.

[sighs and gasps] The question becomes,

why were they doing it?

>> Whoa, look at that top one. Scoop out

some brain, bro. That's crazy. Maybe

they were trying to relieve pressure.

>> Well, if your brain doesn't have all of

the sutures that ours does and and your

brain is fusing, there are some theories

that suggest that these people were

losing their uh connection with

consciousness. So, they because their

brains were so big, um they, you know, a

lot of telepathy and things like that.

So, if you if you cut a hole in a fused

skull, you still have access, right? It

it allows your allows you I guess more

space in your skull to access what you

use to access.

>> So it's like relieving pressure in some

way. This is the idea why they're doing

this trepation.

>> May I you know I think it's

>> we had a woman on who did trepidation to

herself.

>> Oh my gosh. I've read about her.

>> Yeah. [laughter] Is she still alive?

They were doing labbotoies until pretty

recently. I know like what this is.

[laughter]

>> Yeah. Right. When

>> we knew better.

>> Is she still alive Jamie? I think she

might have passed recently.

>> And and her motivation for that, was it

not for consciousness?

>> Yes.

>> Yeah,

>> she was out there.

>> But isn't it interesting?

>> Lovely lady. Lovely lady, but she was

out there.

>> Yeah.

>> That lady had been on some trips. She

She had been to other dimensions many,

many, many, many times.

>> She passed away about a year ago.

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah. So, a sweet lady, too. She was so

kind.

>> It begs the question, what was the

motivation for doing that in these

ancient She described it in very glowing

terms.

>> The experience of trepation when she did

she did it to herself. So there's a

photo of her. Isn't there like a is

there a video of her doing it?

>> I know there's photos of the actual

procedure of her drilling a hole in her

head. Like yo,

>> it must be quite a sense of relief,

though.

>> I don't know.

>> Your brain's no longer locked in your

skull.

>> I mean, is that really what it is? I

don't want to find out. But I mean, I

know people that have had to have brain

surgery because they had brain bleeding.

Yeah, there it is.

>> Oh my gosh.

>> They just drilled a hole. Looks like

they use a stick. What the hell?

>> Okay. I think she did it.

>> What is she using?

>> Is she doing it to herself?

>> Yes.

>> No,

>> it's the only way. If you really want to

achieve one with chakras or some [ __ ]

[laughter]

>> you're probably not going to get a

doctor to sign up for that.

>> Jamie, can you find uh there's some

images of those elongated skulls.

There's a few really spectacular ones

that we pulled up the other day and one

of them is like the the sagittal suture

is completely missing and it's it's so

big and you're looking at it like,

"Okay, this is a real skull in a

museum." Like, help me out. Help me out,

anatomy experts. Why does it why does it

not have the features of a normal human

skull? And why is it so big? Like,

>> this seems completely insane.

>> The AI told me why, but I don't know if

that's

>> Yeah, shut it AI.

That's a That's a a bunch of [ __ ]

Archaeologists got an AI and wrote

>> I just thought bad articles

>> when I saw that one with the the little

kid or the small thing with the big back

of the dome.

>> Aren't there or could that be explained

by just like a a random

>> anomaly? Yeah, for sure.

>> Yeah, it depends on how many there are.

But go to the images of those uh those

skulls so we could see that crazy one.

>> I don't know why Google just changed and

there's no longer

>> they don't like you anymore.

>> No, like the whole website has changed.

They hate you.

>> I noticed it yesterday. You can't.

>> Oh, yeah. That is weird. You're being

sabotaged.

>> Oh, because they're trying to get you to

use AI.

>> Yeah, it's all gone.

>> Oh, that's so gross. Just write images.

>> Yeah. See, now now they'll show you.

Okay. So, it's the one on the far left

upper corner. It's right below it.

Sorry. There you go. That's it. That's

the one.

>> Look at the eyes.

>> Yeah. The whole thing is nuts. That the

fact that that is a real skull. It

should freak everyone out. That no one

is that this isn't in the front page of

the New York Times. that this isn't

something that everyone's investigating.

Like, this is not a physical anomaly.

This is a completely different skull.

That's not a regular human skull at all.

The capacity is so much larger. You

cannot explain that by headboarding. You

cannot explain the size of the [ __ ]

eye sockets is crazy. You imagine

looking into something. Who's that one

lady that has crazy big eyes? She's an

actress. Do you know what I'm talking

about, Jamie? She's really pretty. No,

but I've seen this big giant eyes pop

out of their head.

>> I I've seen that, too. But but that's

But they're not that big. The point is

like those eyes would be [ __ ]

enormous. Like if that person was in

front of you and they had skin on with

with those eye sockets and that head,

you'd be like, "Yo, [laughter]

>> you know, I want you to meet my friend

Mike." They'd be like, "What the [ __ ]

That is not what it looks like. That

that drawing that drawing is way too

normal.

>> That head's way bigger than that, too,

by the way.

>> And the eyes are nothing

>> nothing like it. They're not even in the

same place. Like those eyes are in a

different place. Like those eyes those

eyes are in a nutty place.

>> I mean that that image on the right, the

the woman that could be what they looked

like if they were cradle head borders.

>> Yes. And her face looks flattened, too.

Like the whole thing looks which is such

a gross thing that they did to try to

emulate these people.

>> Imagine tying a baby up on a board and

telling it to stay.

>> Look at that. Skull was

>> Look at that one. Uh to the left, Jamie.

Left. Right below that. Yeah, that one.

Look at that one. What the hell is that?

with the trepation.

>> Yeah, but help me out. Tell me that's a

person. Help me out. That is not just an

elongated skull. That's crazy. That's

not

>> I wonder if that's a real photo.

>> I know. Well, almost a potential plaster

even

make this stuff.

>> That is true. That is true. People

>> that came out in Sasquatch organization.

>> Well, that's a reputable source.

>> I don't.

>> They are the best Sasquatch

organization.

>> I try not to judge all of those. I'm

just clicking the photo, but

>> they [snorts] have all the real

information. There's a lot of

misinformation in the Sasquatch

community.

>> Oh, yes.

>> Um, but that is the only place that

shows up. [laughter]

>> Um, there's got to be other ones. Well,

that that one in the middle in the top

on the left. Yeah, right there. Click on

that. Look at those three. Like, come

on.

>> That almost Yeah,

>> it's still the same one. Those all the

same one or these

>> from different angles.

>> Well, the one in the middle looks

different than the one on the left.

>> Definitely.

>> Look at the recreation below, though. At

least his eyes are big. He looked

>> like Okay, that's a good one. That's a

good that's a good representation what

those people those people tell me that

dude can't read your mind

>> dude on the left he comes up to you with

those beads on like

>> I'll do whatever you say

>> you're like okay I guess we're

communicating with the mother ship

[laughter]

>> like look at the size of his head please

go back to that image again

>> hair

>> yeah that's is that real

>> yeah and most of the hair on these

elongated skulls is red

>> oh that's so wild that's so crazy um go

back to that last image please where she

you see the dude like that guy. Imagine

running into that guy at a at a Mayan

temple. You'd be like, "Oh, Christ,

they're real."

>> 100%.

>> Like that's a different kind of person.

>> Like that seems the eyes are [ __ ]

massive. That seems like a totally

different kind of person.

>> Yes.

>> You know,

>> who has very different abilities than

the average human.

>> Yes. I mean, if the brain is what

differentiates us from all the other

intelligent animals on this planet, and

a a human, it looks just like a human

but different, has a brain that much

bigger than ours. What is that?

>> That's a real thing, folks. This is

these We're not making this up. These

[ __ ] skulls are real. That's crazy.

>> Yep.

>> That is crazy that there was a person

like that. The only museum I've been to

in the world that has any sign that

indicates it may have been alien is

Malta. When you walk into the museum in

Malta, it actually has a poster that

talks about the the lack of the sagittal

suture. It has a picture of an alien on

it.

>> Really?

>> Wow.

>> And they leave their skulls out. A lot

of these museums, especially the ones in

southern Peru, they've sort of tucked

them away. They've put them in dark

cases so it's harder to take pictures of

them. You can't. They're not out there

in the open where it's easy to pop

around it.

>> They're probably worried about them

getting stolen, too.

>> That this There's an issue that I've

been informed about with uh ancient

artifacts that there's a whole

underground market where really wealthy

people like want to buy like Egyptian

artifacts. And there's a lot of scandals

involved with a lot of these people that

are in charge of these artifacts where

artifacts go missing and people get rich

and you know they sell books that nobody

buys and all a sudden they have a

mansion, you know. [laughter]

>> Yep. Yep.

>> Yeah. And if you're if you're on a

government salary and you can slip one

of these voses away

>> and sell it, you're going to make a lot

more money than you're going to make in

the working for the government.

>> Not just voses, but even skeletons.

There's evidence of skeletons going

missing. Yep. skeletons they found in a

sarcophagus and then all of a sudden

they said, "Nope, there's no skeleton."

And then there's clearly documentation

that they found a skeleton that leads

back decades ago and then today they're

saying, "No, no skeletons." Like,

>> where's the skeleton?

>> Nothing to see here.

>> Yeah. And some of that that's the weird

thing is like some of these these skulls

that they find, if you could find the

entire skeleton, you would imagine that

is a very big person. These are not

normalsized people. Like whatever the

structure that's, unless they have an

enormous head and a little tiny body, if

they have a proportionate head to their

body, you're looking at a seven, eight

foot tall person. This is a huge head.

>> Yeah. And there's giant lore all over

the world in every ancient civilization.

>> And in [clears throat] the [ __ ]

Bible,

>> I don't believe that that's imaginary.

And I don't believe it's myths. I think

that it's remembering.

>> Yeah, I think it is, too. I I think

there's probably a different version of

people that existed.

And uh I think the real problem is we'll

we're dealing with the fossil record.

And the reality of biological life is

neither you nor I is very likely to

leave behind a fossil. Yep.

>> So a thousand years from now, no one's

going to know who you were and no one's

going to know who I was. And they're

they're not going to be able to tell

from our bones. You're not going to find

them. Yeah.

>> They're going to be absorbed by the

ground and that's a wrap. And in order

to get a fossil, a very specific set of

circumstances has to take place.

>> Yeah.

>> And so, you know, we're lucky that we

have some skulls. We're lucky and

there's, you know, a thousand years old,

2,000 years old, however old they are.

But you get back to 10, 11, 12,000 years

ago, 15,000 years ago, 50,000 years ago.

Good luck.

>> There's nothing left.

>> Good luck. Unless you're finding it in

the perafrost, like in Alaska, like my

friend John Reeves, he has that place,

the Boneyard in Alaska. He's the best.

That's so cool.

>> Love that. That place is crazy.

>> Have you been?

>> No. He keeps trying to get me to go out

there, and I I will eventually. I

promise. But, um, the spot is absolutely

bananas. He's finding all kinds of

insane things out there, including

animals that aren't even supposed to

have existed in that area. So, they're

rewriting the idea of like what was

alive, like what what animals were

alive, different cats and different

bears.

>> Yeah. [sighs]

[gasps]

>> Like, we don't know that much. We're

we're basing like think about all we

know about the dinosaurs. It's amazing

how much work they've done. It's amazing

how many dinosaurs they've documented.

>> But if you look at the amount of

dinosaurs that actually lived over the

>> hundreds of millions of years, hundreds

of millions of years that dinosaurs roam

the earth, there's a tiny tiny tiny

fraction, a tiny fraction of these

dinosaurs that we find that are

fossilized. Yep.

>> Most of them are gone forever, including

who knows how many species that we're

completely unaware of. we have no

evidence of whatsoever. Now, think about

an intelligent species that probably

buried their dead like we do or maybe

even burned them. You know, we don't

know what they did. Or, you know, maybe

they were even more enlightened. They

did the Tibetan sky funeral where they

let themselves get eaten by vultures.

>> You're not going to find anything,

>> right? No, you're you're absolutely

right. I It feels like people should be

just maybe a little bit more open to our

past.

>> I think people are. I think the problem

is some of these, and I say some, it's

only some of these academics.

>> Yeah.

>> There's a lot of people that are

deviating from that now. And again, it's

a lot of young people,

>> you know, like guys like Michael Button,

do you know who he is? He's great. He

went to school, got a degree, and was

like, I think there's more to this, and

I think I could do a better job doing a

YouTube channel where I just research

these things thoroughly and provide you

with a very balanced perspective on how

crazy all this stuff is and how none of

this really makes sense if you use the

conventional timeline.

>> Yep. And people are hungry for that

information.

>> Yeah, I am. It's I'm obsessed. Thank

goodness that the internet has

democratized it so people people like me

can get on there and put a video on and

just see what people think.

>> And you really learn a lot when you see

people like you get attacked, you know,

and people like you Jimmy Corsetti and

all these people like they go after

people so hard

>> and they always take the same lot. They

always take

>> It's always racism.

>> It's racism. Exactly. That's what I was

going to say. Which is so crazy because

no one's attributing the Indian temples

to anything other than Indians,

>> right?

>> Like it's not racist. It's just saying

I'm saying Indians from like a long ass

time ago. It's the same people. They

>> It's something to be even more proud of.

>> Yes. Yeah. It's It's crazy. Like no one

is saying that the people in Peru,

humans in Peru, didn't make that stuff.

No one No one's saying that, right?

>> That's exactly what we're saying. Yep.

>> We're But what we're saying is probably

the people in Peru were incredibly

sophisticated before the flood.

>> Yeah.

>> That's probably what it was.

>> Egypt, it doesn't make any sense that

they're shutting that down. it to extend

your timeline if you're able to to

20,000 years ago. That's twice as much

to be proud of. [laughter]

>> Right.

>> Right. But it's it's just the academics

who have like firmly stamped 2500 BC.

Bam. This is this is what we know and

we're going to stick with it. Yeah.

>> Despite all the hard evidence, like the

geological evidence disputing that is

really weird

>> because like look guys, rain does a very

specific thing to stone over thousands

of years. This is hard evidence

>> right there.

>> Yeah,

>> that's right there. And you don't really

know when it was built. You're just

guessing. But this isn't really much of

a guess. This is actual evidence.

>> Yeah.

>> And for them to not even consider that

and to just dismiss them and just lucky

that guys like Robert Chuck had tenure.

>> And lucky that also that he wasn't an

archaeologist. He's a geologist. And

what are they going to fault him for his

methods, the way he did it, what he

said? No, you can't really because it's

pretty rock solid. We should be leaning

on these geologists and saying, "What do

you see?" and then informing our

theories based on what they're saying.

>> Yeah.

>> Not the other way around.

>> Ben Van Kirkwick has done amazing work

on some of the erosion that's around uh

some of the the the pyramids and some of

the bases of some of the structures

around the pyramid and that it seems

like there's many levels of construction

and that the oldest oldest stuff has a

preposterous amount of erosion. Like

insane amount of erosion.

>> Absolutely.

>> Yeah.

>> Yep. I mean even in so I've spent a lot

of time researching Cambodia.

If you look at the so there are eight

different pyramids in the immediate

[clears throat] anchor watt area and

these pyramids are massive and when you

when you walk up to them you can see how

incredibly ancient they are and the the

dating on these pyramids are you know

900 AD to 1300 AD. So, not very old the

official dating, but when you stare at

the stones, you can see the same thing

you see in Egypt. You see just ancient

weathering patterns down the sides of

them. You can see how the whole site has

been rebuilt and they don't talk about

it, right? So, the entire history of

Cambodia, nobody nobody is open at all

to exploring that it might be older than

800 AD.

>> Let's look at some photos of Ankor Watt

because it's another incredibly bizarre

place. And um when people use the

conventional timeline to date it, it's

not it's amazing and it's beautiful, but

it's not as crazy when you really if if

if you take into consideration that no

one really knows when it was built and

the possibility that it's actually

11,000 years old, 12,000 years old,

maybe even older,

>> it almost kind of makes sense.

Have you done

>> because it would look just like that?

>> Yeah. And the the temples or the towers

inside the core of Ankorwatt, in my

personal opinion, the core of Anchorwad,

it's got three different layers. The

core, I think, is extremely old. It's

got these five central towers. They look

almost melted. So, you can see the five

in the middle. As you move out by each

layer, all of the iconography in

Anchorwatt changes. So in the center

it's all um deities, it's religious

symbolism. As you move out it becomes

war scenes and elephants and battles,

right? So you can see where each

successive culture has built on to the

outside of Anchorwatt.

But the core of it, it it looks

enormously old.

>> And let's get some photos of the core of

it.

>> Have you ever have you ever discussed

the LAR findings around anchor watt?

>> I have not. [clears throat]

Jamie, I have some photos in my Cambodia

folder.

>> Trying to dance the line of looking at

these before I switch over to your

stuff.

>> God, look how beautiful that is.

>> Look how the the trees roots are growed

all around it.

>> Cambodia is one of the most special

places on this earth.

>> Imagine what that was like during its

prime.

>> Oh,

>> that's the Bon Temple.

>> The temple with 218 faces.

Wow.

>> Enormous faces.

>> So, uh, are those is that like those are

clearly different stones brought in.

>> Yeah, they're individual stones

>> to compare to the other stuff we've seen

where it's not that correct.

>> Yeah. Very different. Very different

kind of construction. Yeah.

>> I'll show you the light.

>> Spectacular, but maybe makes more sense

than like Kyasa.

>> In 2012, that's a great photo, Jamie.

>> In 2012, [clears throat]

they did a LAR survey in Cambodia. And

what they discovered in Cambodia

completely shocked the world. So you can

see Ankorwatt in this photo is right in

the middle of that giant moat. There

were huge moundfields all around

Ankorwatt inside this moat and outside

of Anchorwatt. And then if you go south

of it, you can see these giant spiral

embankments. If you just zoom out a tiny

bit, Jamie, do you see those spirals in

the bottom left side of the screen?

>> Mhm. Those are from one side to the

other. They're a mile long.

>> Yeah. So, these are the geometric

features at Anchor Watt.

>> And these are hidden from the nicot.

>> Yes. They're under the jungle canopy.

Nobody knew that these were there until

2012 when the LAR results came out.

>> Holy [ __ ]

>> There are mound fields that are a mile.

This particular moundfield is a mile

long. It's got it's a 10x10 moundfield.

And these mounds are enormous. They're

like 30 feet across. And there's no

explanation at all for what these are.

>> And they didn't even know they existed.

>> They didn't even know they existed. So

this is Anchorwatt from the air. Very,

very interesting. That western beret

where you see, that's a man-made, it's

the largest hand cut reservoir on Earth.

It's 8 kilometers long and 2 km wide. So

you can see the old CMRE International

Airport just south of it. That's the

size of this thing. It is enormous. The

official archaeological story of these

berets is that they were uh hand dug and

that they were used to water rice.

[laughter]

There's one on the left side. That's a

western beret. There's an equally large

one on the east side. So there are two

of them that are 8 kilometers long on

each side. two kilometers wide. Just an

enormous volume of dirt would have had

to have been removed to create these.

And there's no discussion at all about

what they were for, how they were made.

They're just attributed to different

kings based on inscriptions found in the

corners of these sites.

So, if you want to talk about mysteries,

in my humble opinion, Cambodia is one of

the most mysterious places on Earth.

What did they how old do they think this

reservoir is?

>> Uh like 900 AD. So not old at all. And

there's no explanation for how it was

done. Just to excavate the western beret

is the equivalent of 53 Giza sized

pyramids of dirt moved out of it. So

this is it today. You can see there's a

temple in the middle of it.

>> That's so big. That's so crazy that they

they supposedly dug that out by hand.

>> You can see this from space. NASA's

taking photos of it before.

>> There's no explanation for for what they

were doing there.

>> What is the images of the pyramids up in

the corner?

>> That's the 50. Yeah, that's the

equivalent. So 138 million cubic meters

of dirt to dig that out.

>> How deep is it?

>> It's, you know, five or 10 meters deep.

Um, and I I believe that they, you know,

they dug out the inside and then they

built these large walls, you know,

retaining walls on the outside. So, I

don't think that there's huge piles of

dirt somewhere. I think that's, you

know, it was just deepened and then they

built the walls around them to retain

them. But there's a lot of really uh

interesting complex things going on with

these berets.

>> Uh, this reminds me of I'd had

Perplexity dig up something on the Kiosa

Temple.

>> Yeah.

>> Uh, let me find it here. it

>> I was it was just going into like um is

the ability of what do you know how many

people they thought made it I guess I'll

ask you that first do you know how they

the conventional method they said 250

people made it over five and a half

years

[laughter]

>> the problem with that is uh it started

to

>> I like to hire those dudes [laughter]

>> it started to tell me like that's kind

of like okay but then it started to get

I was like actually the hardest part

with this is going to be removing all of

that rock.

>> Yeah.

>> Like where not they couldn't didn't say

like where is it but it just was going

into the math. This is all the the

perplexity did. It's all this math on

um

>> this is Kyasa.

>> Yeah.

>> The amount of stone that can be removed

every day.

>> And it just it [clears throat] would

have taken it is even just the 250

people is a fourth of the potential uh

the number they tried to destroy it with

for three years. [laughter]

And it has the same tools. I guess they

just said it had some sort of metal.

This says five and a half years.

>> They tried to destroy it for three

years. Just quit.

>> Really frustrating. Three years.

>> A thousand guys tried to destroy it for

3 years. You imagine that. [laughter]

>> That is crazy.

>> It was 100 and it's just exaggerated,

you know? They couldn't do anything.

>> That's really crazy.

>> Some you know how mad that king was.

He's like, just destroy it. [laughter]

>> Imagine what a dick he must have been.

>> Oh, yeah. to want to destroy that.

[clears throat] That's the problem with

kings.

>> It's the problem with kings.

>> Good lord, that's wild.

>> So, yeah, [clears throat] the c Cambodia

is incredibly mysterious and nobody

talks about Cambodia.

>> Would you like some coffee?

>> Um, sure. Thank you. You're

>> welcome. So, how did you get involved in

Cambodia? How did you uh What was the

first thing that you looked at?

>> I went there for the first time three

years ago. Um, it was a quick stopover.

We were getting ready to uh hike the

Sandong Cave in Vietnam, you know, the

largest cave in the world.

>> I saw that on 60 Minutes.

>> Yeah. So, we we had that trip planned

and I said, "Well, Cambodia is right

next door. Maybe we should just pop over

there for a week." So, we did. And, you

know, walking on these sites, it's the

same thing I was talking about earlier.

You I like to hire local guides just to

hear what's the story that that they're

telling you, what is the official

history? And the story that they told me

just it doesn't match what you see with

your own eyes. Right? So they say that

the earliest civilizations there built

in brick and then they built with stone.

Over time they developed the ability to

build with stone. But all of the brick

is on top of the stone. It's on top of

these massive pyramids, right? So it

doesn't it doesn't make sense that the

oldest stuff is at the top. So I started

sort of questioning the history of

Cambodia. I got into these LAR results

which are really fascinating. I mean

they discovered entire unknown cities in

Cambodia with LAR. So on top of the

Cooland Mountains which is the plateau

where they uh quarry all of the stone

for anchor wad all the sandstone there

was an entire massive city on top of

that plateau that they had no idea was

there. There were pyramids there were uh

2,000 acre reservoirs. There were mound

fields, there were, you know, massive

causeways, and it was all just hidden

under the uh the trees, the jungle. So,

it's, you know, in 2012, sort of the cat

was out of the bag in Cambodia. And

what's interesting is it should have

made international headlines. You know,

these spiral embankments that are a mile

long on the south side of Ankorwatt,

nobody knows what they are. Nobody has a

good explanation for what they are.

archaeologists say, you know, maybe it

was a garden feature, maybe it was

fishing. And in my mind, you don't build

milelong earthn embankments in a shape

of a perfect spiral unless you have a

very specific reason for doing that.

>> What do you think that reason was?

>> I don't know. I, you know, I'm starting

to put together a theory about I I think

it all had to do with water. They were

channeling water down from the Cooland

Mountains, which is about 50 miles away

from Ankor Watt. They were channeling

water down, building 16 kilometer

diversion channels, taking the water way

out of the way, running them through