Die Erforschung antiker Zivilisationen und Theorien

Because if you look at Europe during the Ice Age, and I'm talking about a lost civilization of the Ice Age, Northern Europe and North America were absolutely inhospitable wildernesses during the Ice Age. They were frozen, they were dry, and they were dangerous. And they were not the places that people would go. People naturally gravitated south towards the equator, towards the tropics. That's where I would expect to find traces of a lost civilization, and that's where I do find traces of a lost civilization. You don't really find it. Right? I've never reported anything about the UK, for example, in my books. We have Stonehenge, we have Avery, we have these stone circles, but they're not old enough. That was the time when the UK started to get warmer. And it's the same with the rest of Northern Europe. And it's the same with the northern part of North America. You have to go down to the southern part of North America. You have to go into Mexico. You have to go into South America to really find an environment during the Ice Age that would have nurtured a high civilization. And there's a lot of speculation as to why they weren't able to cross the Bering landmass too, right? Well, again, this is an area where there has been a narrative that archaeology has sought to impose upon us. And this was called the Clovis First idea. There was a people who archaeologists called the Clovis people. We don't know what they called themselves in North America. And traces of their characteristic tools, particular sort of fluted points, arrowhead spear points. turn up from about 13,400 years ago and end abruptly 12,800 years ago. And for a long time, with the beginning of the Younger Dryas, and for a long time, archaeology maintained that this Clovis culture, so-called Clovis culture, we don't know what they call themselves, were the first Americans, and that there were no human beings in the Americas before 13,400 years ago. And bit by bit, the new evidence has come in, which is... forced archaeologists screaming and tearing out their hair to back away from the Clovis first paradigm and admit that actually, yes, there were people here before that. But even then, they're reluctant to go very far back. We've recently had these footprints in White Sands in New Mexico, 23,000 years old or so. That's largely being accepted now. But there are much earlier dates. There's 130,000 years ago from the Cerruti mastodon site near San Diego. The Sphinx is supposed to have been built 4,500 years ago, but as you know, Robert Schock and I and many others are convinced the Sphinx is much, much older than that, that it goes back 12,000 plus years. And this is based on geological evidence of heavy rainfall, which is another interesting thing about the climate and the environment of that area, that we think of it as being desert, but at one point in time, it wasn't. Well, this is one of the reasons why I'm so frustrated. by archaeologists claiming that they could know there was no lost civilization when they've done so little work in the Sahara, when the Sahara was, in a number of occasions during the Ice Age, incredibly fertile. Very, very nurturing environment with huge river systems running through it and lakes. It's not disputed that that was the case. It was a kind of environment that would have nurtured human civilization. And we really can't write off the possibility of a lost civilization until we take a much closer much more detailed look at the Sahara Of course, that's expensive and then Egypt itself is in the Sahara. Didn't they find? Fossilized whale bones in the Sahara. Yeah, that would go back a lot further that would go back to to Millions of years to a time when the oceans were different perhaps even hundreds of millions So Sahara at one point was an ocean as many places were pretty much anywhere where you find you find limestone was once covered by ocean. The world has changed. The world is constantly changing. It's like one of those magic kids'toys where you pull a lever and it wipes out the diagram you just made. It just keeps on, the world keeps on recreating itself. And we human beings make our journey through this changing world. And we try to fix it and say, this is how things were, this is how things will be. And it never cooperates with us on that. It's just incredibly fascinating that the timeline when you go beyond the traditional timeline and you get back into where you and Robert Schock have speculated the age of the Sphinx. Now you're talking about a completely different environment of lush rainforest and many, many, many resources. Absolutely. We're talking about a completely different Sahara, which and Schock's evidence is of a thousand years of heavy rainfall. That's what the Sphinx bears witness to, that it was already there when the rains of the Younger Dryas and the Younger Dryas affected the Sahara with heavy rainfall. Just as further north it changed the climate and made it much colder in the Sahara, it became much wetter. And it's that period of rains that are the most likely culprit for weathering the Sphinx in the way it is. But it could have stood there for thousands of years before that. There's also very clear evidence that the face in the Sphinx is much younger, right? No doubt about that whatsoever. The first problem is the ancient Egyptians were masters of proportion. The ancient Egyptians were masters of proportion. Art is rightly world famous for its quality and they didn't get things out of proportion. They wouldn't make that elementary error when they create this giant statue, carving it out of solid bedrock. But the head of the Sphinx is way too small in relation to the body. It looks like the head of a pin. It doesn't fit with that 270 foot long, 70 foot high body. It looks very much as though... The Sphinx once had a much larger head. Can you show us a photo of it, Jamie? It's also much less weathered, right? And it's much less weathered. And this is, again, where Egyptology tries to attach the Sphinx to a particular period. Egyptology claims that's the face of Khafre, who was the successor to Khufu. It doesn't look like any statues, known statues of Khafre that I can see, but it is called the Nemes headdress. It's the classic headdress of an Egyptian pharaoh. Not, in my view, Khafre, but the headdress of an Egyptian pharaoh. But it's on a head that is way too small by comparison with the body. And both Shock and I and John Anthony West, Manu Seifzada, who's another excellent researcher in this field, we all feel that the Sphinx was almost certainly a complete lion at one point. It was a lion with a huge mane. And that that head sticking up above the plateau got very heavily eroded. And by the time... The ancient Egyptians inherited it. They decided to improve it a little bit, to cut down that heavily eroded head and put the head of a pharaoh on it. Does it have the same sort of sophisticated proportions where they're perfect left and right as some of the other statues do, which is another incredible mystery? That when they look at the measurements of these immense statues, somehow or another, they're completely symmetrical on both left and right sides. Completely symmetrical. I'm actually not sure whether that's the case with the Sphinx. I wouldn't be surprised because I have no doubt whatsoever that the head of the Great Sphinx was carved by the ancient Egyptians who made those statues. But the question is what was it carved from? What was it cut down from? So the geology, the precipitation-induced weathering is one of the pieces of evidence for a much older Sphinx. But the other thing is the astronomy, the fact that the Sphinx is an equinoctial marker. If you stand looking... Due east at Giza, or anywhere in the northern hemisphere, on the spring equinox, there's three key moments of the year, four actually. There's the winter and summer solstice, and there's the equinoxes, the spring and fall equinoxes. On the summer solstice, the sun rises far to the north of east. On the winter solstice, it rises far to the south of east. But on the equinoxes, it aligns perfectly due east. And that's what the Sphinx is. It's aligned perfectly to due east. And it's gazing at the horizon. And then we come to this contentious issue of who discovered the zodiacal constellations. Because the Sphinx, 12,500 years ago, was gazing at dawn on the spring equinox at the constellation of Leo. In other words, this lion monument on the ground was looking at its own celestial counterpart in the sky. Egyptologists dismiss that. They say that nobody had any idea of the constellations until the Greeks. I just think they're wrong. So astronomy and geology together combine. to invite us to consider the possibility that the Sphinx may be much older than 4,500 years old. Right. I mean, I know you know that theory. That is a crazy theory that sounds so, it sounds completely wackadoo. But then when you have it laid out to you, Christopher, what's his last name? Dunn. Christopher Dunn. I just had him on my podcast a few weeks ago. I just had him a couple weeks ago too. I just had a brain fart. His depiction of... The mechanisms that would be involved in turning this giant structure into some sort of a power plant, you hear about it and you go, wait a minute, whoa. Yeah, it makes a lot of sense. And him and I have very similar theories on how the power generation occurred. And I believe that the Nile, you know, when it used to run up close to the pyramids and the water would run underneath the pyramid and that would create something called physiostatic electricity as it ran underneath that magnetized crystal granite. Those ions would pour up into the chamber, move up the grand gallery where there used to be resonating rods. You can see the slots where the rods used to be. They're removed now, but the slots are still there. Then it would be pushed into the King's chamber where it would be amplified and some type of fusion would take place. Then forced up through the apex. And then the crystal granite obelisks around the region would capture that ambient wireless electricity. And then if you had something called a jet, which looks like a Tesla coil, You can capture that energy and you can transfer it into a device for gold electroplating, for any other electrical tools you need, like some of the tools they had to have used to create some of these incredible works of art. We can see the tool marks, so we know they had the tools. But they had wireless electricity way back then. The interesting thing about the Amazon Joe is it's been grievous. misunderstood over the years and fortunately archaeology is beginning to come to terms with it. There was agriculture in the Amazon going back a very long way going back at least 10,000 years maybe maybe further and we may have discussed this before but there's this there's this curious soil that exists in the Amazon that they call terra preta or Amazonian dark earth. Recent investigations have shown without doubt that it's man-made and deliberately man-made, not an accidental result of refuse tips, but a deliberate attempt to make the Amazon fertile. And how do they know that it's deliberate? Because they find in it the same ingredients. And amongst those ingredients are always broken bits of ceramics. That's one of the odd things. They seem to be part of what makes it work. Really? Ceramics? Ceramics. Mixed in there with dung, with human refuse. All deliberately put in there, not an accidental dunk heap, but a place that human beings said, we're going to make this ground fertile. Because rainforest soils are not particularly fertile. The fertility of the Amazon comes entirely from the fall of leaves onto the soil. It re-fertilizes itself. But to grow crops on the Amazon is a very different prospect. And this is where Terra Preta really comes into its own. And I've been standing in a pit with an archaeologist there, a Terra Preta pit. And you can see this beautiful, rich soil. And it is a mystery. It constantly replenishes itself. It never gets used up. Settlers seek it out, seek out areas of terra preta. And it fits with this notion that no longer a notion, it's a fact, that there was a population of millions in the Amazon 10,000 years ago. And they were living a highly productive, sophisticated life. They were using agriculture. They also gardened the Amazon. The hyperdominant trees in the Amazon are all food-bearing trees. The Brazil nut tree, for example. which is a huge tall tree, is a food-bearing tree and they exist in far greater numbers than they should do if they develop naturally. Humans manipulated the Amazon and made it serve human needs thousands and thousands of years ago. And then we have these enormous structures that are appearing in the Amazon which are being referred to as geoglyphs. They call them geoglyphs after the Nazca Lines actually. The Nazca Lines in Peru are huge. Ground images, sometimes geometrical in form, sometimes showing animals or birds or spiders, other creatures, often actually showing Amazonian animals. But in the Brazilian Amazon, in the state of Acre, as a result of clearances of the Amazon that have been done for farming purposes, there's this rush to just cut the Amazon down and replace it with cattle ranches and soybean farms. Those clearances have revealed something. that, again, according to the old view of the Amazon, shouldn't be there, which is gigantic earthworks, huge ones, a bit like the Henges in Europe, enormous embankments, ditches, and in geometrical forms. So you get enormous squares, enormous circles. You get a circle within a square. They keep repeating these geometrical images, and they're thousands of years old. When we were down there just recently, we had a local LIDAR guy. working with us. These days, you don't have to even use an airplane to find things with LiDAR. You can fly LiDAR off a drone. And flying his drone within a mile of known structures that are outside the rainforest now, he found two more huge geoglyphs under the rainforest canopy, which will be investigated. And this is bizarre and puzzling. They reckon, the team working on this, that's Marty Parson and... of the University of Helsinki and Alsea Ranzi, who's a Brazilian archaeologist and geologist, they reckon that there's thousands of these things still under the rainforest canopy, and there's a huge untold story. So one of the places I would look for a lost civilization is the Amazon rainforest. So the Atlantis one. Yeah, the Rishat structure. I was wondering if you saw those videos, Joe. Yeah, no, that was a big one that I saw because I've been fascinated by the concept of Atlantis. Ever since I had these conversations with Randall Carlson and Graham Hancock about the Younger Dryas Impact Theory and this concept that somewhere roughly around 11,000, 12,000 years ago, we were hit by a series of comets. And it's pretty evident that that's a fact. If you do the core samples of the Earth, they find this nuclear glass all over the Earth that exists in that time period. And it seems like something happened that reset civilization. And there's... Very little, uh... evidence of advanced civilizations before that up until recently, up until the last couple of decades, they started uncovering things like Gobekli Tepe and all these other structures that are clearly from more than 12,000 years ago. And they're really complex and really large with enormous stones. And it's sort of caused people to rethink the history of the earth and the history of human civilizations. And Atlantis has always been the big one. That has been the one that everybody talked about was this incredibly advanced civilization and no one can figure out where it is. Right. Or if it was real. I think that Atlantis, because surely that wouldn't have been necessarily the name just through like the change of language, you know, over let's say 12, 13,000 years ago, which would be the time frame. So like surely there would be several different changes of language. But I think it represented a civilization that was doing great things. They were more global than what many people think would be possible. Atlantis was said to be a kingdom made up of or an empire, excuse me, made up of ten kingdoms. And then there was the lost city of Atlantis, which was the capital, which was said to be made up of concentric circles, two of water, three of land. And essentially that they were obliterated by a cataclysm as passed down by Plato, although it's worth mentioning that Plato got the story of Atlantis from Solon, who was his uncle separated by six generations. But what most people don't realize is that Solon had traveled to Egypt. And so it's the ancient Egyptians is where that tale comes from, which makes it even more bizarre because I would argue that the most spectacular ancient civilization is the Egyptians. I mean, no disrespect to the Romans. Hard to deny. Right? I mean, let me just say, because I want to, on this podcast, encourage people to travel. to Egypt. Joe, you got to go. I really want to. A friend of mine just went and she got back and she was telling me incredible things about it. Jamie, will you pull up the photos of these concentric circles? Tell him. Yeah, the wrist shot. R-I-C-H-A-T. It's worth mentioning that in the first couple, I just want to say it's wrist shot. I used to call it rick hot. I was mispronouncing it. But let me ask you this, Joe, real quick. When you saw my video, was that the very first time you had ever seen this thing before? Yeah, that's the thing. So many. When I first saw this, I was like, what the fuck is that? By the way, you see that white, all those white blemishes? That's salt. This was under the ocean. And people, let me just say, you mentioned Randall Carlson and Graham Hancock. I love them. And I know for sure that they don't particularly think this is the site for a few different reasons. So let me say there's absolute doubt. Even I am not 100% certain. I'm not even 100% certain that lenses existed. What I am certain is that humans were doing spectacular things and a civil, you know, a cataclysmic event happened. called the Younger Dryas and reset something for somebody. Is there a natural explanation for this formation? Yes. So let me say that it is considered to be mysterious. They're not 100% certain of it. However, the consensus is that it was a volcanic dome that had risen and collapsed multiple times like 100 million years ago, allegedly. I say allegedly, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with that. I'm just saying I would like to know where sometimes they get these figures from. Like explain to me. Why it was 100 million years ago and not 99 or 98, because here we are talking about how crazy things changed in just the last 12, 13,000 years. So when they throw around these numbers, you know, 1 million years in itself is an incredibly long period of time. But getting back to your question, some had originally thought that maybe it was an impact site from an asteroid or perhaps, but there's no evidence for it. Like there's none of the nanodump. The problem is there's these concentric circles. Yeah. I've never seen anything, I mean, obviously I'm not an archaeologist, but I've never seen anything like this in, I mean, if you study structures that are like man-made structures, I've never seen anything like this that humans have made. But I've definitely never seen like, go to that one where your cursor's on, Jamie. Please. So is this? You want to see some? All right. What is this? Okay. Okay, one step at a time because we also have to take into consideration that people are just listening. So kind of describe what we're looking at here. Okay, so what you're looking at. is approximately 250 miles inland in the total barren desert of Mauritania, Africa. So the Western Sahara. But this image looks like, why is it blue? That's just showing you the-What it used to look like? No, this is what it looks like right now through, I forgot what you call this type of animation, but it's essentially, it's a satellite imagery that they enhanced in order for you to see the difference in elevation and the actual structure to itself. Okay. So if there was water in this area- you would see it this way, that it would be these concentric circles that are raised above the water, and then the water would be inside of it like that. Well, just to clarify, this particular image, no, this is not trying to represent water. So that blue is actually picking up on salt. Salt. All that was salt. But, I mean, it used to be underwater, right? It's salt because it was underwater. That's what I believe, and that's what makes the most sense to me. Others will disagree, and let me tell you why. It is currently 1,200, 1,300 feet above sea level. It's 250 miles inland. And so some people say this was never under the ocean, at least not for the last. tens of millions of years is what the scientists claim. I argue that since the salt is still there, and not only that, Jamie, if you go to the other images that show you more of the white, the one that you were previously on, the one to the middle to the left right there. So those areas with the most white blemishes happen to be the areas that are the lowest in elevation, which to me tells me that saltwater had settled there. But not only that, Joe, Atlantis was said to be. like we said, you know, multiple rings of, you know, water and land. However, it was said to open to the sea to the south. And what you're looking at here, the south, so this is oriented north, south, east, and west. What do you see to the south? And especially if we could get another... This is a very flat area that looks like it's the lowest elevation, like around it looks like it's higher. I mean, it's hard to tell from this image. Jamie, will you Google map it? Just type in, even if you went to Mortania, so you could see this from space. Astronauts use it as a locator. And they weren't really familiar or aware of it until the Gemini missions in the early 1960s. So if you go to, like, if you just go to Google Earth, you could, you'll be able to find this quite quickly. It stands out. And it's why they call it the Eye of Africa or the Eye of the Sahara. All right, so just pan out a little bit. And it'll provide us with a much, keep going. All that, all that white is salt. Archaeologists should not seek to. isolate the story of Atlantis from other flood myths and traditions all around the world. And that's a problem too. I mean, we have hundreds of myths and traditions from countries all around the globe, which speak of a great global cataclysm, a huge flood, often wildfires, destruction of human beings and of animals, a few survivors who seek to restart civilization. It's a global story, not a single story told by Plato. And I mean if you hear the same story from so many different cultures at what point in time do you go? Maybe there's something to this. I mean, it's just very strange to try to deny that again We have this with the physical evidence. Yeah, especially with the physical evidence and it's interesting with the physical evidence like Like go back Lee Tepe, which is eleven thousand six hundred years old. I Mean it used to be argued Robert Schock and John Anthony West work on the Great Sphinx, suggesting that the Sphinx could be 12,000 plus years old. It used to be argued that was impossible because there was no other site anywhere in the world, no other megalithic site of the same age. And then we discover Gobekli Tepe and it's 11,600 years old. Now, if you can make Gobekli Tepe with its 20-ton megaliths, beautifully carved representations of human and animal figures in those pillars, if you can do that, you can cut the Great Sphinx out of bedrock as well. There's no reason. to dismiss the geological evidence of the Great Sphinx anymore. But instead, what archaeology is doing is trying to finesse Gobekli Tepe. They're trying to say, oh, there was this gradual build-up to Gobekli Tepe. And they now talk about people who they call the Natufians. Again, we don't know what they call themselves, who were predecessors of Gobekli Tepe around 14,000 years ago. And they show things that look like a tiny little stone wall. that they built the sort of thing that you can find a dry stone wall you can find anywhere in wales to this day you know uh and this is supposed to be a prequel to gobekli tepe you i'm sorry you just don't start off making dry stone walls and then wake up one morning and create 20 ton megaliths in huge stone circles perfectly astronomically aligned as we have at gobekli tepe not only that but how like what did what did they do Where are you getting those 20-ton megaliths from? How far do they have to transport? In the case of Gobekli Tepe, not far. How far? Oh, hundreds of meters. I've stood on top of one megalith that they partially cut out of the bedrock with the T-shape, but then they found a fault in it and they left it there. It would have been a 30-ton megalith. They clearly intended to release it from the bedrock, but it had a fault, so they left it alone. The issue of the quarries for the rock at Gobekli Tepe is not... too big a problem. But the transportation of those? Even the transportation, you get enough people working together and they can move large stones. That's not in dispute. But that's where the question comes. How do you get enough people together? How do you have the organizational skills? Where do you have the mindset that plans something like this at the beginning? And that is the problem that is not answered in the case of Gobekli Tepe, that happening suddenly. And what were they using for tools? They're supposed to have just been using stone. There's not supposed to have been any metals at that period. Not even brass. Not even brass, not even copper. I have a complicated view on Gobekli Tepe. Let's say it's my hypothesis. It's not a fact. I don't claim this is a fact. I think that what we're looking at at Gobekli Tepe, there's no doubt that the population around Gobekli Tepe were all hunter-gatherers. Gobekli Tepe started to be made. And that's the weirdest thing of all, because previously, archaeology always used to say hunter-gatherer cultures did not have the manpower, did not have the organizational skills, could not generate the surpluses that would allow people to specialize in architecture and engineering and astronomy and so on. So it used to be said that hunter-gatherers couldn't do that. Now archaeologists have backpedaled on that and they're saying, well, yeah, clearly hunter-gatherers did it. The funny thing is that during the thousand years that Gobekli Tepe... functions, and it runs from roughly 11,600 years ago to, say, 9,600 years ago, 10,600 years ago. During those thousand years, the population of Gobekli Tepe transitions from being hunter-gatherers to being agriculturalists. So we see two new ideas suddenly appearing at Gobekli Tepe, enormous megalithic architecture and a shift from hunter-gathering to agriculture. And what Gobekli Tepe looks like to me is a transfer of technology. that people who already knew how to work megalithic architecture and align it precisely to the risings of particular stars, for example Sirius, came to Gobekli Tepe at a time of chaos and cataclysm in the world and they sought to introduce a new way of thinking. I think Gobekli Tepe was created as a project to mobilize the local community, to give them something to work on, to bring them together. And it's not an accident that during that thousand years they transitioned from hunter-gathering to... to agriculture. I don't see massive technical complications in creating Gobekli Tepe except those very precise alignments. But what I do see is a sudden appearance of something that shouldn't have been there. And that requires explanation. Well, if you look at the tablets, again, they talk about this war, right? And this war that occurred, there's a lot of wars, obviously, but this one particular war, it seems like the same one that damaged the area or the region of the Giza Plateau. Also Mohenjandaro in the Indus Valley up there by Pakistan. And the reason why it's interesting is if you look at the war in the Texan and go to those areas, it looks now almost you can begin to see, oh, wait a minute, it looks like war. Mohenjandaro, Indus Valley, the buildings turned to glass. The sand turned to glass and the bodies are still laying in the street right now today holding hands, never been scavenged by animals. Wait a minute, where is this? Mohenjandaro. Are there photos that we can look at? Oh, yeah, look it up. Mohen Jandaro, Indus Valley, dead body, still laying in the street thousands of years later. And guess what? They just lay there? No one's covered them up? Nobody's covered them up. Yeah. When you put a Geiger counter over them, higher than background level radiation. Really? Yeah. But aren't stones higher than background level radiation? Some stones are. Some stones are, especially like diorite and crystal granite. But these bodies, these are just bones. How come they're higher than background level radiation? I can't wait to see this. Why haven't I ever heard of this? Mohen. Jindaro, M-O-H-E-N, there you go. Whoa! Yeah, this is evidence of a nuclear war, or a nuclear type of war. Go back to the other, that one there, that one's insane. Yeah, there's bodies that are sitting on the edge of steps next to their own buildings that they lived in. The building is turned to glass. That's 3,000 plus degree temperature weapons fire. So there's a bunch of people that seem to die all at once, just scattered around? Yeah. Now what's the conventional explanation for how these people died? They have no idea. They have zero idea. The only thing that you can... That was just a couple, Jamie. Go to the other, just the Mohenjandara, mythical mass massacre. Yeah. So did they think it's a massacre? Is there any... Look at their bodies. Yeah, look at the guy just laying there. Just laying there. And that building, those stones are vitrified, which means 3,000 plus degree temperature. Oh, shit. What kind of, you know, what could have caused that level of temperature, energetic release? Well, it could have been a low atmosphere asteroid. It could have been. I mean, just like... That's possible. Tunguska. Yeah, it could have been a low... But then their bones would have been splattered apart and broken into pieces. Good call. Yeah, that's a good call. Yeah, because they don't seem to be broken apart. No, they're not broken apart. That impact would have shattered the bones and spread them out over a great distance. Right, but without impact, even if you just look at the one that burst in the atmosphere in Tunguska, it just flattened trees. Flattened everything. I think it's some insane, like a million acres or something crazy. Yeah, it's incredible. How big was the Tunguska explosion? That one's, yeah, so those bodies would be toast because the trees were ripped apart. The buildings would have been flattened. The legs would have flown off. There's no way they would just be laying there like that. Exactly. That's interesting. And they don't seem to be like chopped up. No. Did they have any evidence of stab wounds or anything on them? They don't have any evidence of any injury of any kind of attack or any cutting or like swords or anything. They just all got cooked. Right. And then in the tablets, it says that the evil wind moved over the land after they released these weapons. And they and then Enki goes to his father. I mean, Enki goes to his father Anu and says, hey, can you stop the evil wind? Because he had fallen in love with some people, you know, and down there. And he's like, there's nothing I can do. He said, get in your skyship and for a boat. That means get the hell out of here. And he said the people's hair was falling out. Their eyes were bleeding. Their nose were bleeding. Their fingernails were curling off. That sounds like radiation sickness. So you think it's radiation sickness that did this to all these people? Or was it an impact that did this to all these people? Nobody. Nobody knows. But they're not blown apart. Right. They're not blown apart. It seems like. Whatever struck or whatever energetic weapon it was, it might not have been a weapon. Whatever it was, it seems like that shockwave reached them at some point. And whatever was in that wave. Just killed everybody. That's what it did. Yeah. And they just don't know what it is. How does a conventional archaeologist describe it? Do they just say it's a massacre? They just call it a mythical massacre and they stay away from it.

People naturally gravitated south towards the equator, towards the tropics. That's where I would expect to find traces of a lost civilization, and that's where I do find traces of a lost civilization. You don't really find it.

Right? I've never reported anything about the UK, for example, in my books. We have Stonehenge, we have Avery, we have these stone circles, but they're not old enough. That was the time when the UK started to get warmer.

And it's the same with the rest of Northern Europe. And it's the same with the northern part of North America. You have to go down to the southern part of North America.

You have to go into Mexico. You have to go into South America to really find an environment during the Ice Age that would have nurtured a high civilization. And there's a lot of speculation as to why they weren't able to cross the Bering landmass too, right? Well, again, this is an area where there has been a narrative that archaeology has sought to impose upon us. And this was called the Clovis First idea.

There was a people who archaeologists called the Clovis people. We don't know what they called themselves in North America. And traces of their characteristic tools, particular sort of fluted points, arrowhead spear points.

turn up from about 13,400 years ago and end abruptly 12,800 years ago. And for a long time, with the beginning of the Younger Dryas, and for a long time, archaeology maintained that this Clovis culture, so-called Clovis culture, we don't know what they call themselves, were the first Americans, and that there were no human beings in the Americas before 13,400 years ago. And bit by bit, the new evidence has come in, which is...

forced archaeologists screaming and tearing out their hair to back away from the Clovis first paradigm and admit that actually, yes, there were people here before that. But even then, they're reluctant to go very far back. We've recently had these footprints in White Sands in New Mexico, 23,000 years old or so. That's largely being accepted now. But there are much earlier dates.

There's 130,000 years ago from the Cerruti mastodon site near San Diego. The Sphinx is supposed to have been built 4,500 years ago, but as you know, Robert Schock and I and many others are convinced the Sphinx is much, much older than that, that it goes back 12,000 plus years. And this is based on geological evidence of heavy rainfall, which is another interesting thing about the climate and the environment of that area, that we think of it as being desert, but at one point in time, it wasn't. Well, this is one of the reasons why I'm so frustrated. by archaeologists claiming that they could know there was no lost civilization when they've done so little work in the Sahara, when the Sahara was, in a number of occasions during the Ice Age, incredibly fertile.

Very, very nurturing environment with huge river systems running through it and lakes. It's not disputed that that was the case. It was a kind of environment that would have nurtured human civilization.

And we really can't write off the possibility of a lost civilization until we take a much closer much more detailed look at the Sahara Of course, that's expensive and then Egypt itself is in the Sahara. Didn't they find? Fossilized whale bones in the Sahara.

Yeah, that would go back a lot further that would go back to to Millions of years to a time when the oceans were different perhaps even hundreds of millions So Sahara at one point was an ocean as many places were pretty much anywhere where you find you find limestone was once covered by ocean. The world has changed. The world is constantly changing. It's like one of those magic kids'toys where you pull a lever and it wipes out the diagram you just made. It just keeps on, the world keeps on recreating itself.

And we human beings make our journey through this changing world. And we try to fix it and say, this is how things were, this is how things will be. And it never cooperates with us on that. It's just incredibly fascinating that the timeline when you go beyond the traditional timeline and you get back into where you and Robert Schock have speculated the age of the Sphinx. Now you're talking about a completely different environment of lush rainforest and many, many, many resources.

Absolutely. We're talking about a completely different Sahara, which and Schock's evidence is of a thousand years of heavy rainfall. That's what the Sphinx bears witness to, that it was already there when the rains of the Younger Dryas and the Younger Dryas affected the Sahara with heavy rainfall.

Just as further north it changed the climate and made it much colder in the Sahara, it became much wetter. And it's that period of rains that are the most likely culprit for weathering the Sphinx in the way it is. But it could have stood there for thousands of years before that.

There's also very clear evidence that the face in the Sphinx is much younger, right? No doubt about that whatsoever. The first problem is the ancient Egyptians were masters of proportion.

The ancient Egyptians were masters of proportion. Art is rightly world famous for its quality and they didn't get things out of proportion. They wouldn't make that elementary error when they create this giant statue, carving it out of solid bedrock. But the head of the Sphinx is way too small in relation to the body. It looks like the head of a pin.

It doesn't fit with that 270 foot long, 70 foot high body. It looks very much as though... The Sphinx once had a much larger head.

Can you show us a photo of it, Jamie? It's also much less weathered, right? And it's much less weathered.

And this is, again, where Egyptology tries to attach the Sphinx to a particular period. Egyptology claims that's the face of Khafre, who was the successor to Khufu. It doesn't look like any statues, known statues of Khafre that I can see, but it is called the Nemes headdress.

It's the classic headdress of an Egyptian pharaoh. Not, in my view, Khafre, but the headdress of an Egyptian pharaoh. But it's on a head that is way too small by comparison with the body.

And both Shock and I and John Anthony West, Manu Seifzada, who's another excellent researcher in this field, we all feel that the Sphinx was almost certainly a complete lion at one point. It was a lion with a huge mane. And that that head sticking up above the plateau got very heavily eroded.

And by the time... The ancient Egyptians inherited it. They decided to improve it a little bit, to cut down that heavily eroded head and put the head of a pharaoh on it. Does it have the same sort of sophisticated proportions where they're perfect left and right as some of the other statues do, which is another incredible mystery? That when they look at the measurements of these immense statues, somehow or another, they're completely symmetrical on both left and right sides.

Completely symmetrical. I'm actually not sure whether that's the case with the Sphinx. I wouldn't be surprised because I have no doubt whatsoever that the head of the Great Sphinx was carved by the ancient Egyptians who made those statues.

But the question is what was it carved from? What was it cut down from? So the geology, the precipitation-induced weathering is one of the pieces of evidence for a much older Sphinx. But the other thing is the astronomy, the fact that the Sphinx is an equinoctial marker.

If you stand looking... Due east at Giza, or anywhere in the northern hemisphere, on the spring equinox, there's three key moments of the year, four actually. There's the winter and summer solstice, and there's the equinoxes, the spring and fall equinoxes.

On the summer solstice, the sun rises far to the north of east. On the winter solstice, it rises far to the south of east. But on the equinoxes, it aligns perfectly due east. And that's what the Sphinx is.

It's aligned perfectly to due east. And it's gazing at the horizon. And then we come to this contentious issue of who discovered the zodiacal constellations.

Because the Sphinx, 12,500 years ago, was gazing at dawn on the spring equinox at the constellation of Leo. In other words, this lion monument on the ground was looking at its own celestial counterpart in the sky. Egyptologists dismiss that. They say that nobody had any idea of the constellations until the Greeks. I just think they're wrong.

So astronomy and geology together combine. to invite us to consider the possibility that the Sphinx may be much older than 4,500 years old. Right.

I mean, I know you know that theory. That is a crazy theory that sounds so, it sounds completely wackadoo. But then when you have it laid out to you, Christopher, what's his last name? Dunn. Christopher Dunn.

I just had him on my podcast a few weeks ago. I just had him a couple weeks ago too. I just had a brain fart.

His depiction of... The mechanisms that would be involved in turning this giant structure into some sort of a power plant, you hear about it and you go, wait a minute, whoa. Yeah, it makes a lot of sense. And him and I have very similar theories on how the power generation occurred.

And I believe that the Nile, you know, when it used to run up close to the pyramids and the water would run underneath the pyramid and that would create something called physiostatic electricity as it ran underneath that magnetized crystal granite. Those ions would pour up into the chamber, move up the grand gallery where there used to be resonating rods. You can see the slots where the rods used to be. They're removed now, but the slots are still there. Then it would be pushed into the King's chamber where it would be amplified and some type of fusion would take place.

Then forced up through the apex. And then the crystal granite obelisks around the region would capture that ambient wireless electricity. And then if you had something called a jet, which looks like a Tesla coil, You can capture that energy and you can transfer it into a device for gold electroplating, for any other electrical tools you need, like some of the tools they had to have used to create some of these incredible works of art.

We can see the tool marks, so we know they had the tools. But they had wireless electricity way back then. The interesting thing about the Amazon Joe is it's been grievous. misunderstood over the years and fortunately archaeology is beginning to come to terms with it.

There was agriculture in the Amazon going back a very long way going back at least 10,000 years maybe maybe further and we may have discussed this before but there's this there's this curious soil that exists in the Amazon that they call terra preta or Amazonian dark earth. Recent investigations have shown without doubt that it's man-made and deliberately man-made, not an accidental result of refuse tips, but a deliberate attempt to make the Amazon fertile. And how do they know that it's deliberate? Because they find in it the same ingredients. And amongst those ingredients are always broken bits of ceramics.

That's one of the odd things. They seem to be part of what makes it work. Really?

Ceramics? Ceramics. Mixed in there with dung, with human refuse. All deliberately put in there, not an accidental dunk heap, but a place that human beings said, we're going to make this ground fertile.

Because rainforest soils are not particularly fertile. The fertility of the Amazon comes entirely from the fall of leaves onto the soil. It re-fertilizes itself.

But to grow crops on the Amazon is a very different prospect. And this is where Terra Preta really comes into its own. And I've been standing in a pit with an archaeologist there, a Terra Preta pit. And you can see this beautiful, rich soil.

And it is a mystery. It constantly replenishes itself. It never gets used up.

Settlers seek it out, seek out areas of terra preta. And it fits with this notion that no longer a notion, it's a fact, that there was a population of millions in the Amazon 10,000 years ago. And they were living a highly productive, sophisticated life.

They were using agriculture. They also gardened the Amazon. The hyperdominant trees in the Amazon are all food-bearing trees. The Brazil nut tree, for example. which is a huge tall tree, is a food-bearing tree and they exist in far greater numbers than they should do if they develop naturally.

Humans manipulated the Amazon and made it serve human needs thousands and thousands of years ago. And then we have these enormous structures that are appearing in the Amazon which are being referred to as geoglyphs. They call them geoglyphs after the Nazca Lines actually.

The Nazca Lines in Peru are huge. Ground images, sometimes geometrical in form, sometimes showing animals or birds or spiders, other creatures, often actually showing Amazonian animals. But in the Brazilian Amazon, in the state of Acre, as a result of clearances of the Amazon that have been done for farming purposes, there's this rush to just cut the Amazon down and replace it with cattle ranches and soybean farms. Those clearances have revealed something.

that, again, according to the old view of the Amazon, shouldn't be there, which is gigantic earthworks, huge ones, a bit like the Henges in Europe, enormous embankments, ditches, and in geometrical forms. So you get enormous squares, enormous circles. You get a circle within a square.

They keep repeating these geometrical images, and they're thousands of years old. When we were down there just recently, we had a local LIDAR guy. working with us. These days, you don't have to even use an airplane to find things with LiDAR.

You can fly LiDAR off a drone. And flying his drone within a mile of known structures that are outside the rainforest now, he found two more huge geoglyphs under the rainforest canopy, which will be investigated. And this is bizarre and puzzling. They reckon, the team working on this, that's Marty Parson and...

of the University of Helsinki and Alsea Ranzi, who's a Brazilian archaeologist and geologist, they reckon that there's thousands of these things still under the rainforest canopy, and there's a huge untold story. So one of the places I would look for a lost civilization is the Amazon rainforest. So the Atlantis one.

Yeah, the Rishat structure. I was wondering if you saw those videos, Joe. Yeah, no, that was a big one that I saw because I've been fascinated by the concept of Atlantis.

Ever since I had these conversations with Randall Carlson and Graham Hancock about the Younger Dryas Impact Theory and this concept that somewhere roughly around 11,000, 12,000 years ago, we were hit by a series of comets. And it's pretty evident that that's a fact. If you do the core samples of the Earth, they find this nuclear glass all over the Earth that exists in that time period. And it seems like something happened that reset civilization. And there's...

Very little, uh... evidence of advanced civilizations before that up until recently, up until the last couple of decades, they started uncovering things like Gobekli Tepe and all these other structures that are clearly from more than 12,000 years ago. And they're really complex and really large with enormous stones.

And it's sort of caused people to rethink the history of the earth and the history of human civilizations. And Atlantis has always been the big one. That has been the one that everybody talked about was this incredibly advanced civilization and no one can figure out where it is.

Right. Or if it was real. I think that Atlantis, because surely that wouldn't have been necessarily the name just through like the change of language, you know, over let's say 12, 13,000 years ago, which would be the time frame. So like surely there would be several different changes of language.

But I think it represented a civilization that was doing great things. They were more global than what many people think would be possible. Atlantis was said to be a kingdom made up of or an empire, excuse me, made up of ten kingdoms. And then there was the lost city of Atlantis, which was the capital, which was said to be made up of concentric circles, two of water, three of land. And essentially that they were obliterated by a cataclysm as passed down by Plato, although it's worth mentioning that Plato got the story of Atlantis from Solon, who was his uncle separated by six generations.

But what most people don't realize is that Solon had traveled to Egypt. And so it's the ancient Egyptians is where that tale comes from, which makes it even more bizarre because I would argue that the most spectacular ancient civilization is the Egyptians. I mean, no disrespect to the Romans. Hard to deny. Right?

I mean, let me just say, because I want to, on this podcast, encourage people to travel. to Egypt. Joe, you got to go. I really want to.

A friend of mine just went and she got back and she was telling me incredible things about it. Jamie, will you pull up the photos of these concentric circles? Tell him.

Yeah, the wrist shot. R-I-C-H-A-T. It's worth mentioning that in the first couple, I just want to say it's wrist shot. I used to call it rick hot. I was mispronouncing it.

But let me ask you this, Joe, real quick. When you saw my video, was that the very first time you had ever seen this thing before? Yeah, that's the thing. So many. When I first saw this, I was like, what the fuck is that?

By the way, you see that white, all those white blemishes? That's salt. This was under the ocean. And people, let me just say, you mentioned Randall Carlson and Graham Hancock.

I love them. And I know for sure that they don't particularly think this is the site for a few different reasons. So let me say there's absolute doubt.

Even I am not 100% certain. I'm not even 100% certain that lenses existed. What I am certain is that humans were doing spectacular things and a civil, you know, a cataclysmic event happened.

called the Younger Dryas and reset something for somebody. Is there a natural explanation for this formation? Yes.

So let me say that it is considered to be mysterious. They're not 100% certain of it. However, the consensus is that it was a volcanic dome that had risen and collapsed multiple times like 100 million years ago, allegedly. I say allegedly, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with that.

I'm just saying I would like to know where sometimes they get these figures from. Like explain to me. Why it was 100 million years ago and not 99 or 98, because here we are talking about how crazy things changed in just the last 12, 13,000 years. So when they throw around these numbers, you know, 1 million years in itself is an incredibly long period of time. But getting back to your question, some had originally thought that maybe it was an impact site from an asteroid or perhaps, but there's no evidence for it.

Like there's none of the nanodump. The problem is there's these concentric circles. Yeah. I've never seen anything, I mean, obviously I'm not an archaeologist, but I've never seen anything like this in, I mean, if you study structures that are like man-made structures, I've never seen anything like this that humans have made. But I've definitely never seen like, go to that one where your cursor's on, Jamie.

Please. So is this? You want to see some? All right. What is this?

Okay. Okay, one step at a time because we also have to take into consideration that people are just listening. So kind of describe what we're looking at here.

Okay, so what you're looking at. is approximately 250 miles inland in the total barren desert of Mauritania, Africa. So the Western Sahara. But this image looks like, why is it blue?

That's just showing you the-What it used to look like? No, this is what it looks like right now through, I forgot what you call this type of animation, but it's essentially, it's a satellite imagery that they enhanced in order for you to see the difference in elevation and the actual structure to itself. Okay. So if there was water in this area- you would see it this way, that it would be these concentric circles that are raised above the water, and then the water would be inside of it like that. Well, just to clarify, this particular image, no, this is not trying to represent water.

So that blue is actually picking up on salt. Salt. All that was salt. But, I mean, it used to be underwater, right?

It's salt because it was underwater. That's what I believe, and that's what makes the most sense to me. Others will disagree, and let me tell you why.

It is currently 1,200, 1,300 feet above sea level. It's 250 miles inland. And so some people say this was never under the ocean, at least not for the last. tens of millions of years is what the scientists claim. I argue that since the salt is still there, and not only that, Jamie, if you go to the other images that show you more of the white, the one that you were previously on, the one to the middle to the left right there.

So those areas with the most white blemishes happen to be the areas that are the lowest in elevation, which to me tells me that saltwater had settled there. But not only that, Joe, Atlantis was said to be. like we said, you know, multiple rings of, you know, water and land. However, it was said to open to the sea to the south.

And what you're looking at here, the south, so this is oriented north, south, east, and west. What do you see to the south? And especially if we could get another... This is a very flat area that looks like it's the lowest elevation, like around it looks like it's higher. I mean, it's hard to tell from this image.

Jamie, will you Google map it? Just type in, even if you went to Mortania, so you could see this from space. Astronauts use it as a locator.

And they weren't really familiar or aware of it until the Gemini missions in the early 1960s. So if you go to, like, if you just go to Google Earth, you could, you'll be able to find this quite quickly. It stands out. And it's why they call it the Eye of Africa or the Eye of the Sahara.

All right, so just pan out a little bit. And it'll provide us with a much, keep going. All that, all that white is salt.

Archaeologists should not seek to. isolate the story of Atlantis from other flood myths and traditions all around the world. And that's a problem too.

I mean, we have hundreds of myths and traditions from countries all around the globe, which speak of a great global cataclysm, a huge flood, often wildfires, destruction of human beings and of animals, a few survivors who seek to restart civilization. It's a global story, not a single story told by Plato. And I mean if you hear the same story from so many different cultures at what point in time do you go?

Maybe there's something to this. I mean, it's just very strange to try to deny that again We have this with the physical evidence. Yeah, especially with the physical evidence and it's interesting with the physical evidence like Like go back Lee Tepe, which is eleven thousand six hundred years old.

I Mean it used to be argued Robert Schock and John Anthony West work on the Great Sphinx, suggesting that the Sphinx could be 12,000 plus years old. It used to be argued that was impossible because there was no other site anywhere in the world, no other megalithic site of the same age. And then we discover Gobekli Tepe and it's 11,600 years old. Now, if you can make Gobekli Tepe with its 20-ton megaliths, beautifully carved representations of human and animal figures in those pillars, if you can do that, you can cut the Great Sphinx out of bedrock as well.

There's no reason. to dismiss the geological evidence of the Great Sphinx anymore. But instead, what archaeology is doing is trying to finesse Gobekli Tepe. They're trying to say, oh, there was this gradual build-up to Gobekli Tepe.

And they now talk about people who they call the Natufians. Again, we don't know what they call themselves, who were predecessors of Gobekli Tepe around 14,000 years ago. And they show things that look like a tiny little stone wall.

that they built the sort of thing that you can find a dry stone wall you can find anywhere in wales to this day you know uh and this is supposed to be a prequel to gobekli tepe you i'm sorry you just don't start off making dry stone walls and then wake up one morning and create 20 ton megaliths in huge stone circles perfectly astronomically aligned as we have at gobekli tepe not only that but how like what did what did they do Where are you getting those 20-ton megaliths from? How far do they have to transport? In the case of Gobekli Tepe, not far. How far?

Oh, hundreds of meters. I've stood on top of one megalith that they partially cut out of the bedrock with the T-shape, but then they found a fault in it and they left it there. It would have been a 30-ton megalith.

They clearly intended to release it from the bedrock, but it had a fault, so they left it alone. The issue of the quarries for the rock at Gobekli Tepe is not... too big a problem. But the transportation of those?

Even the transportation, you get enough people working together and they can move large stones. That's not in dispute. But that's where the question comes. How do you get enough people together? How do you have the organizational skills?

Where do you have the mindset that plans something like this at the beginning? And that is the problem that is not answered in the case of Gobekli Tepe, that happening suddenly. And what were they using for tools?

They're supposed to have just been using stone. There's not supposed to have been any metals at that period. Not even brass. Not even brass, not even copper.

I have a complicated view on Gobekli Tepe. Let's say it's my hypothesis. It's not a fact.

I don't claim this is a fact. I think that what we're looking at at Gobekli Tepe, there's no doubt that the population around Gobekli Tepe were all hunter-gatherers. Gobekli Tepe started to be made.

And that's the weirdest thing of all, because previously, archaeology always used to say hunter-gatherer cultures did not have the manpower, did not have the organizational skills, could not generate the surpluses that would allow people to specialize in architecture and engineering and astronomy and so on. So it used to be said that hunter-gatherers couldn't do that. Now archaeologists have backpedaled on that and they're saying, well, yeah, clearly hunter-gatherers did it.

The funny thing is that during the thousand years that Gobekli Tepe... functions, and it runs from roughly 11,600 years ago to, say, 9,600 years ago, 10,600 years ago. During those thousand years, the population of Gobekli Tepe transitions from being hunter-gatherers to being agriculturalists.

So we see two new ideas suddenly appearing at Gobekli Tepe, enormous megalithic architecture and a shift from hunter-gathering to agriculture. And what Gobekli Tepe looks like to me is a transfer of technology. that people who already knew how to work megalithic architecture and align it precisely to the risings of particular stars, for example Sirius, came to Gobekli Tepe at a time of chaos and cataclysm in the world and they sought to introduce a new way of thinking.

I think Gobekli Tepe was created as a project to mobilize the local community, to give them something to work on, to bring them together. And it's not an accident that during that thousand years they transitioned from hunter-gathering to... to agriculture. I don't see massive technical complications in creating Gobekli Tepe except those very precise alignments.

But what I do see is a sudden appearance of something that shouldn't have been there. And that requires explanation. Well, if you look at the tablets, again, they talk about this war, right?

And this war that occurred, there's a lot of wars, obviously, but this one particular war, it seems like the same one that damaged the area or the region of the Giza Plateau. Also Mohenjandaro in the Indus Valley up there by Pakistan. And the reason why it's interesting is if you look at the war in the Texan and go to those areas, it looks now almost you can begin to see, oh, wait a minute, it looks like war.

Mohenjandaro, Indus Valley, the buildings turned to glass. The sand turned to glass and the bodies are still laying in the street right now today holding hands, never been scavenged by animals. Wait a minute, where is this?

Mohenjandaro. Are there photos that we can look at? Oh, yeah, look it up. Mohen Jandaro, Indus Valley, dead body, still laying in the street thousands of years later. And guess what?

They just lay there? No one's covered them up? Nobody's covered them up. Yeah.

When you put a Geiger counter over them, higher than background level radiation. Really? Yeah.

But aren't stones higher than background level radiation? Some stones are. Some stones are, especially like diorite and crystal granite.

But these bodies, these are just bones. How come they're higher than background level radiation? I can't wait to see this. Why haven't I ever heard of this? Mohen.

Jindaro, M-O-H-E-N, there you go. Whoa! Yeah, this is evidence of a nuclear war, or a nuclear type of war. Go back to the other, that one there, that one's insane.

Yeah, there's bodies that are sitting on the edge of steps next to their own buildings that they lived in. The building is turned to glass. That's 3,000 plus degree temperature weapons fire.

So there's a bunch of people that seem to die all at once, just scattered around? Yeah. Now what's the conventional explanation for how these people died? They have no idea. They have zero idea.

The only thing that you can... That was just a couple, Jamie. Go to the other, just the Mohenjandara, mythical mass massacre.

Yeah. So did they think it's a massacre? Is there any...

Look at their bodies. Yeah, look at the guy just laying there. Just laying there.

And that building, those stones are vitrified, which means 3,000 plus degree temperature. Oh, shit. What kind of, you know, what could have caused that level of temperature, energetic release? Well, it could have been a low atmosphere asteroid.

It could have been. I mean, just like... That's possible.

Tunguska. Yeah, it could have been a low... But then their bones would have been splattered apart and broken into pieces. Good call.

Yeah, that's a good call. Yeah, because they don't seem to be broken apart. No, they're not broken apart.

That impact would have shattered the bones and spread them out over a great distance. Right, but without impact, even if you just look at the one that burst in the atmosphere in Tunguska, it just flattened trees. Flattened everything.

I think it's some insane, like a million acres or something crazy. Yeah, it's incredible. How big was the Tunguska explosion? That one's, yeah, so those bodies would be toast because the trees were ripped apart. The buildings would have been flattened.

The legs would have flown off. There's no way they would just be laying there like that. Exactly. That's interesting.

And they don't seem to be like chopped up. No. Did they have any evidence of stab wounds or anything on them?

They don't have any evidence of any injury of any kind of attack or any cutting or like swords or anything. They just all got cooked. Right.

And then in the tablets, it says that the evil wind moved over the land after they released these weapons. And they and then Enki goes to his father. I mean, Enki goes to his father Anu and says, hey, can you stop the evil wind?

Because he had fallen in love with some people, you know, and down there. And he's like, there's nothing I can do. He said, get in your skyship and for a boat. That means get the hell out of here. And he said the people's hair was falling out.

Their eyes were bleeding. Their nose were bleeding. Their fingernails were curling off. That sounds like radiation sickness. So you think it's radiation sickness that did this to all these people?

Or was it an impact that did this to all these people? Nobody. Nobody knows.

But they're not blown apart. Right. They're not blown apart. It seems like.

Whatever struck or whatever energetic weapon it was, it might not have been a weapon. Whatever it was, it seems like that shockwave reached them at some point. And whatever was in that wave. Just killed everybody.

That's what it did. Yeah. And they just don't know what it is.

How does a conventional archaeologist describe it? Do they just say it's a massacre? They just call it a mythical massacre and they stay away from it.

Transcript for:Die Erforschung antiker Zivilisationen und Theorien

Transcript for:
Die Erforschung antiker Zivilisationen und Theorien