← Danny Jones Podcast
Danny Jones Podcast
#365 - Space Weather Expert: Pole Shifts, NASA Cover-ups & Super Flares | Stefan Burns
03:11:27
Loading summary
Transcript598 lines
- [00:00]
Stefan Burns
Foreign.
- [00:07]
Danny
Stefan. Thank you for coming, dude. I'm excited to talk to you.
- [00:10]
Stefan Burns
Great.
- [00:11]
Danny
I see my X feed is littered with these types of posts that there's the, There's a sunspot, there's a solar flare, there's a double solar flare. There's all these things happening, these coronal mass ejections that are gonna like, you know, cause a cataclysm or something like this and nothing ever happens.
- [00:28]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, there's this interesting because I, I cover this in my videos and I talk about it and it's just an interest in mine because originally I was focused on the geology and then the geophysics of the Earth and naturally I had to start studying the space environment to understand what was happening here to a better degree. And so as a result, I learned about this and I make a video saying, hey guys, we have a solar storm coming in. This is the forecast. Let's say we do see it launch. Like, it's like, guarantee we're going to get hit. We have a G3 storm. A lot of people will be like, oh, here he is calling for the end of the world again. It's like, well, guys, I never said that. It's just like this. We have a solar storm coming in. But there's something about the mix of it being epic in scale because it is a massive explosion on the sun, which is many times the size of the Earth. So it's just fundamentally epic in scale, paired with also a lack of education as to these things and, and even adding a third of some people taking these events and then twisting them into a doomsday narrative, and having done that for a long time, that creates this convergence of people thinking that the moment there's a solar flare, we're all doomed. But that is like, we could have what we call a super flare. And we don't know how that affect the Earth, but in terms of is that going to happen tomorrow? Or we would need a gigantic sunspot, like unbelievably large, and we would have clear optics on that. And we're not seeing that right now, but it could happen.
- [01:58]
Danny
What is the biggest solar event that has impacted the Earth the most, like, in recorded history that you're aware of?
- [02:07]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, there was a really big. Well, this is kind of a complex question, but in 1859, there was a Carrington event that was a really big solar flare and, and coronal mass ejection impact and a really strong geomagnetic storm. We've had other Carrington level solar storm impacts since then. 1872 1921. We kind of got lucky in 1972. It didn't have the right magnetic field configuration, but it was strong enough to set off these landmines at Vietnam.
- [02:41]
Danny
Whoa.
- [02:42]
Stefan Burns
Yes. That's an interesting one because they just deployed these landmines off the coast of Vietnam. Then we had this super fast solar storm impact. But again, the magnetic field wasn't conducive for a really strong like magnetic storm where the magnetic fields going nuts. But it's still enough of a shock impact just because of the velocity and the density that these sea mines like went off. That was 1971. We had a close miss in 2012. Some people know about that. But those are, let's say, a Carrington level event. There's solar storm impacts are less than that. Like what happened in May 2024. That was a big solar storm impact, actually multiple in a row that triggered what's known as the Mother's Day storm or the Ganon storm. This is May 10th to the 12th of 2024 during the solar maximum. That was big, but that's quite a bit weaker than like a Carrington level impact. But if you go back, we have these isotope records where we see these radioisotopes jump up to dramatically, like carbon and beryllium. And we don't exactly know what causes it go up. It could be a solar storm impact, that's the most likely candidate. But it could be cosmic in origin. They're called Miyake events. And so if it is solar in origin, then that's classified as a super flare. And that is about 10 times bigger in scale and stronger in scale in general. If not even like up to two orders of magnitude stronger, a hundred times stronger. So those would be the largest. But in terms of us having like really hard data on that, we don't. So 774, 775 A.D. we had a really powerful Miyake event. You can go back through the record. We had some really powerful ones. Um, they kind of come in clusters, it seems. But going further back, there's also a really powerful Miyaki event that we're starting to get good data on right around the border of the Younger Dryas event. So that's kind of interesting because it like lines up pretty closely with when that cataclysm went down. And there's some people that talk about there being a solar trigger for the Younger Dries. And then other people talk about, you know, comet trigger, or maybe it's just orbital cycles and Milankovitch cycles and such. I think it was A convergence of factors. But yeah, the point is, is that we. We can see a small. A small solar storm come in and let's say, trigger a G3 geomagnetic storm that's a moderate to strong one. We can see a Carrington impact. How that would affect technology and like satellites and power grids and more nowadays, we don't really know. Then we could have a super flare and that. That certainly wouldn't be good.
- [05:25]
Danny
What would happen during a super flare?
- [05:29]
Stefan Burns
That. Well, we don't really know because these power systems and tech and everything has been hardened quite a bit. But I do have a feeling that if we had a super flare, like we had a really big super flare, we'd probably lose a lot of satellites.
- [05:43]
Danny
So it'd be like a giant emp.
- [05:45]
Stefan Burns
That's if that's exactly what it is. It comes in so fast. Not only is there a massive electromagnetic pulse which can cause a lot of satellites to undergo what's known as deep diversity dielectric charging, they can short circuit. You also get the upper atmosphere of the Earth to actually energize and raise up. And so the density of the atmosphere increases in some aspects. And so these satellites in low Earth orbit all of a sudden encounter more drag. And as a result of that, they will often lose their altitude and burn up.
- [06:18]
Danny
Whoa.
- [06:19]
Stefan Burns
And so we see, we. We have quite a bit of data there in terms of starlink in term, in terms of there being just regular solar storm impacts. And then starlinks are falling out at rates greater than maybe Elon would hope for, but they're always launching more and more up, so they're kind of replenishing. But if you had a super flare, like a real legit super flare directly aimed at Earth impacted, I think probably the majority of satellites would go down. We don't know. But I. That's probably what would happen because it'd be so far beyond what we've experienced. And we really see what we're. We already see the effects of what's been happening. And it can be pretty severe with some of these smaller solar storms and then power grids. I think there certainly be blackouts globally, but maybe not one massive global blackout, but isolated, maybe larger. I don't. It's hard to say, but it would. It would be a huge black swan event.
- [07:20]
Danny
What happened. Can you, like, lay out what happened during the Carrington event? Like, how bad were we affected by that?
- [07:29]
Stefan Burns
We weren't that affected technologically because we only had telegraph lines.
- [07:34]
Danny
This was in the 1700s, 1800s.
- [07:36]
Stefan Burns
1859.
- [07:37]
Danny
1859, yeah.
- [07:38]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. And that was the first solar flare that was observed on record. Carrington, this British chap, was looking at the sun and he saw it start to flare and then he ran to go grab like an aid or something to tell them. And he actually missed seeing the peak of the event like that one minute where it's really going nuts. Then he came back. This is what they've kind of been able to reconstruct historically, but that he saw effectively the flare. They estimate it was up to like a x65 flare. There's different categorizations. It's logarithmic. So you go from, let's say C to M to X. Those are the three highest. That's a 10x jump each time. And if you have an x65, then that's 65 times more than x1. So huge jump. That's some of the estimates are in that zone. It could have been less. We don't know. We don't have the modern tools of characterizing these events back then as we do now.
- [08:35]
Danny
Sure.
- [08:36]
Stefan Burns
But in less than 24 hours, I think it's about 16 hours or so, maybe less than that. It wasn't more than 12. We had this impact come in. And all of a sudden telegraph stations were catching fire and lines were like melting. And there were some reports where they disconnected the power and they were still able to operate their machines because as that solar storm hits, you have a whole bunch of high energy particles. This is really the. If we really zoom out and look at the Earth as a whole, we have to be very thankful that we have a magnetic field because that protects us from high energy particles from space, cosmic or solar. And if we didn't have that, things would not be good. If you want to colonize the solar system, you got to figure that out. Because most planets don't have a magnetic field. Or moons, for example.
- [09:24]
Danny
Right.
- [09:25]
Stefan Burns
I mean, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, they have magnetic fields, but they also generate their own super high energy particles. So the radiation.
- [09:32]
Danny
Mars has a magnetic field, doesn't it?
- [09:33]
Stefan Burns
Just crustal anomalies? No, no. Global, globally generated magnetic field.
- [09:40]
Danny
Oh, whoa.
- [09:41]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. There's ideas that you could put a big magnet in front of Mars and keep it in line with the sun and basically create an artificial magnet like magnetosphere. But I'm. I'm not.
- [09:52]
Danny
So is that one of the biggest issues with colonizing Mars?
- [09:57]
Stefan Burns
It'd be a big one. Yeah, yeah, it'd be a big one because Mars is still close to the sun. There's also, like, the fact that I don't think a lot of us realize just how close the Earth is to the sun at one astronomical unit. We think Mars or Venus and Mercury are closer, and they are, but Jupiter's at 5. That's actually still very close. Saturn's at 10, Uranus is at 20. Neptune's at 30 astronomical units. It drops off quite a bit when you go that far out. But when you're at 1 au, you're getting really walloped. So we have a strong magnetic field on Earth. It's actually very strong. If you look at kind of the solar system scale, Mercury's Fields, 1/100 the strength, it's very, very, very minor. Venus doesn't have a magnetic field. Mars doesn't have one.
- [10:41]
Danny
Why do we have such a strong magnetic field?
- [10:44]
Stefan Burns
Because we have a lot of internal processes within the planet. Our planet is very active and alive, whereas Mars seems to be dead geologically for the most part. They did register like a magnitude 4.6 earthquake on Mars in 2022, I believe. So that's pretty big. But, you know, we get like magnitude 9 fives and probably larger, but we have a lot of active processes. And there's a lot of the research in geophysics across time has been trying to figure out how Earth has been able to maintain its energy and heat for billions of years. And so there's. It's kind of like Earth in many ways is a macrocosm of life that we don't really know how it keeps going and replicating, but it does. Mm. And that generates a magnetic field, these geodynamo processes. And I think there's probably some other factors involved as well.
- [11:37]
Danny
Interesting. So for people who aren't familiar, can you basically lay out what geophysics is, what the idea of this is, and how you got into all this stuff?
- [11:48]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, geophysics is just examining the. The physics of the Earth. And you could broadly apply this to the other plants as well. Maybe the quantifier geo goes away at that point. I'm not sure. But there's a lot of energetic processes unfolding on the planet. A classic example is that there's an earthquake and there's some just event that occurs underground. A fault slips, you have a movement in the crust, and that releases a tremendous amount of energy as seismic waves. This is sound energy that radiates out. There's broadly three different types. You have P waves, S waves and surface waves. So it's a compressional wave, a shear wave, and then these rolling surface waves. Where most energy is. And you know, some people actually feel that. So that's like a well known geophysical energy. But then you also have the magnetic field and you have these telluric currents, these electric currents that pulse through the Earth. Those are really interesting because we really don't know too much about them. There's lunar rhythms to that, there's solar rhythms to that. Those are greatly enhanced during a solar storm impact. In a geomagnetic storm you have these tell. Our currents don't just go through the crust of the Earth, they also go through the oceans. The oceans are very conductive. I think most people in this field aren't thinking about the oceans enough in that regard. And these electric currents are also pulsing through the upper atmosphere, the ionosphere.
- [13:17]
Danny
Right.
- [13:18]
Stefan Burns
Which is how they get induced into the Earth's surface in many ways. So all these combine create this geophysical system that's multi layered and also interconnected. And what happens in the space environment affects what happens in the atmosphere and in the surface and even down into the core. Just to what degree? What's the significance? How so? These are all in some aspect open questions, not completely open, but because we're not clueless. But we're also probably more clueless than we are educated and you know, and super deep understanding as to what's happening. I think in general, my, I mean my kind of thought in general for this is that we really are pretty new to understanding just exactly how the energetic system on Earth works. And I think it's much more alive and you could say even conscious than most people attribute their that to, to the Earth at all. Because a lot of people just see the Earth as kind of like a dead thing. But again, like how is it still sustaining itself after billions of years whereas Venus has just become a hot house and Mars is dead and. Right. There's a lot of unique properties to the Earth. And it seems, it seems well across time people thought of as intelligent.
- [14:43]
Danny
But for some reason, most dress shirts always make you choose between looking good or feeling comfortable. Mizzen and Main is the first brand I've ever worn that gives me both without having to steam clean or dry clean. It's the most comfortable dress shirt I've ever owned and I don't even like to wear dress shirts. But when I wear this thing I don't mind because it's so stretchy soft. It actually keeps me cool in the hot Florida heat, like when I'm going out golfing or whatever. Yeah, it's beautiful. M deaine makes classic menswear using performance fabrics so looking put together doesn't have to feel like a chore. They actually invented the performance fabric dress shirt with over 10 years ago and they've been refining it ever since. Their shirts and pants look polished, they feel stretchy, lightweight, moisture wicking, they're wrinkle resistant and they're completely machine washable. No iron, no dry cleaner, just throw it on and go. Whether you're in the office, traveling, golfing, up a sweat, you feel the difference immediately. Professional style that flexes with you. Mizzen Maine is a veteran LE company that gives back offering a year round military discount and supporting veteran foundations. Right now Mizzen Main is offering our listeners 20% off your first purchase at mizzen and main.com by using the promo code Danny20. That's Mizzen spelled M I Z Z N and Main m a I n.com and use the promo code Danny20 for 20% off Mizzen and Maine.com promo code Danny20. But if you'd rather shop in person, you can find Mizzen and Main stores in select states. Yeah, it's interesting too how the telluric currents in certain parts of the world will directly correlate with like lightning strikes, you know, with like the upper ionosphere and like thunderstorms and this kind of things and like, and like rain and lightning and the, the charge in the earth being directly core correlated with all this stuff. It's just wild how it does seem like it's, it is alive.
- [16:36]
Stefan Burns
That's my impression. And if you go to a lot of these ancient sites that built, been built in those areas and if you go to them, you kind of feel it. I mean we're, we're resonant with the earth. Our brain waves are the same frequency and strength as Schumann resonances, which are one of the byproducts of all these geophysical energies. These are frequencies of about 8 Hz, 14 Hz, 20 Hz, 26, 33, 39, 45. They fade as you go up higher in frequency. But that's the same brainwave architecture that our brain uses. And if you go to those sites, there seems to just be kind of a change that you experience, especially if you're more sensitive to currents are interesting because the, the positive energy accumulates in topographically elevated areas. So like hills and mountains will accumulate a positive charge. And if you have a change in the charge of the surface, you're affecting the flow of energy going through the atmosphere, the atmospheric electrical current, because the ionosphere Is in general pretty stable in terms of its electric potential. A lot of this is also, we also think mostly like the mainstream, I guess you could say, or just people's understanding is that they look at this often just from a magnetic perspective. But I think the electric perspective is really also just as important. I mean, there are two sides of the same thing. So looking at the magnetic, the electric field dynamics is really important. And so I think just across time, people felt these areas intuitively and happened to start building things there. Or I think there's also a deeper connection and understanding to this in the past, but we're starting to reclaim that, I guess you could say.
- [18:27]
Danny
So what made you get interested in geology in the first place?
- [18:32]
Stefan Burns
You know, I guess I just liked being outside and yeah, I just always had fun. You know, I, I was originally going to be a history major for college, and then I took a geology class and I just did really well at it. I was like, this is great. And the more I've gone into it, the, the deeper I've like a connection I felt to it. And I guess I just have a really macro brain. I just like to see the really big picture. And I think one of the best things that I've done is through the study of geology, I've developed a sense of geologic time and that broad time horizon. Building those neural connections to kind of grasp at that as best as possible has helped me in a bunch of other ways with smaller time dimensions. And then from that it's fairly easy to branch off into the space environment and cosmological environments and not get totally lost. Because if your, if your mind is set on just the daily frequency, it's going to be hard to grasp some process that unfolds over a billion years, let's say. Yeah, and I don't think it's easy for anyone to do, but if you train that, it gets a little easier at least. And so I just think it's fascinating what the Earth is and what we don't know about it still. And maybe what the ancient people knew a little bit more in certain aspects. And what's there still to be discovered?
- [19:53]
Danny
I mean, it's also fascinating the amount of minerals and natural gases you can extract from the Earth. How do we come up with, how do geologists come up with the hypothesis that, like, this is where we can go drill for oil?
- [20:06]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, that's mostly based off of seismic reflection, marine seismic reflection mapping. So they'll take a boat out and they have a whole bunch of seizographs Basically like these seismic tow. Well, these tow cables where they have a whole bunch of seismographs in them and then they have this massive, like, sound pulse, like sonar pulse.
- [20:28]
Danny
They'll drag it, like under the water.
- [20:30]
Stefan Burns
No, it's at the surface. Okay. Though they can be submerged at depth a little bit too. But generally they're floating at the surface and then they're using these massive sonar pulses. And as a result, you'll get these reflections off of the different layers. Yeah.
- [20:45]
Danny
Oh, whoa. So it goes into the rock, into the, into the surface, like, like underneath the ocean floor.
- [20:51]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. Hydrophones is the better term to use, but yeah, it'll. You'll get first reflection off of the, the boundary between water and sediment, and then you'll get different reflections and off different layers. And those are pretty easy to categorize. So there's a lot of processing that goes into it. But if you get good data, the cross sections are really quite illustrative. And you can see what's hard rock, what's sediment. For example, there you see that like, kind of sediment cap in the, in the valley. But you can use that to.
- [21:25]
Danny
So this is all like sound type stuff, like sound technology.
- [21:29]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, that's all seismic. So you're not really using much in terms of like, for example, magnetic field exploration for oil and gas. It's almost all seismic. Sometimes you'll do some mapping with like, tellurics, like magnetotalurics, but that's typically on land. But there's all these different tools that we have. We can look at gravity and gravitational anomalies and like the variations.
- [21:55]
Danny
Yeah.
- [21:55]
Stefan Burns
To understand the subsurface, we can look at, of course, seismic, we can look at tellurics, we can look at the magnetic field. Those are the main ones. There's offshoots of those. But the key with geophysics is to put at least two of those together and see if they agree at least on some sort of anomalous result. You could say. Because if they both point to the same area saying, hey, this is a little different, then you have a pretty good sense that there's probably something there. If you use just one technique, then it may show something, but it could just be fluke noise, anomalous, whatever. So if you're ever tracking this stuff and someone's come out with like a discovery or something and they're using geophysics, if there's not two methods being used at least, then you should just look at it closely and not just immediately take it at face value, because that's A common thing. Oh, we just did this one method and like how you do the survey matters. Like I think they did this seismic survey of the Sphinx a while back. Some people have talked about this and they found this void under like one of the paws. I guess I can't be the end all be all definitive answer on this. But looking at the way they laid out the survey, if you don't have seizograms over that void area and you're only getting it from the side of the Sphinx, it's gonna be hard to get good resolution where you think you're looking. There's certain rules that you can follow and maybe there's something there, but it wasn't confirmed with other methods as well. So sometimes you have to be careful with these results because it is very indirect. Everything's super indirect to geophysics. So you have to pile these techniques together and when they all confirm something, then you're good to go, right. Or at the marine seismic, we've been doing it so long and they have so many results that these marine seismologists are really good now and they can just look at across and be like, boom, there's your oil drill, baby. Wow. So and then they go in with the horizontal drilling and they get that they use the magnetic field.
- [24:07]
Danny
Horizontal drilling?
- [24:08]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, for fracking.
- [24:09]
Danny
Oh, okay.
- [24:10]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, they'll drill down, but they keep track of where that drill bit is in many aspects. Like sometimes they'll use the magnetic field. They need these ultra high resolution magnetic field models and measurements. So then they can track where it is. Because you can pick that up anywhere on the earth, doesn't matter where you are, you can measure the magnetic field. And so if we have a super high res model which different government agencies release at a regular update frequency, if they need to change it quickly because the magnetic field has changed quickly, then they'll do that update that will allow them to precisely pinpoint they're exactly there in that stratum, that layer, and you're good to go. We're right on the area that we found earlier with the.
- [24:53]
Danny
But it's always a gamble, right? It's not always a hundred percent.
- [24:56]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, I don't know what the. Yeah, like the, the.
- [24:59]
Danny
I'm sure it's always a risk like when you're drilling. I mean, I don't know about the, the oil industry, but I watched, I watched a TV show about it. I imagine that there's a huge risk like when you're, you know, taking all that equipment and risking all that money to like go like set up a drilling off. Because I mean, I've heard stories of, of like the, the wells that they have in Venezuela and they take years to drill them. So I can't imagine you don't have, do you, do you have any like former friends or acquaintances that you went to school with who got hired by big oil companies?
- [25:35]
Stefan Burns
I'm sure I do. I. One of my buddies in San Diego, he's a Venezuelan and he actually is a marine seismic. And so he processes.
- [25:44]
Danny
Oh, really?
- [25:45]
Stefan Burns
Data and everything. No way. There's a lot of. Yeah, there's a lot of geophysics that's being done in South America, people from Brazil, Venezuela, because it's a field that has a lot of opportunity in it. It's also very interesting, it's dynamic. And so a lot of people get into that. And then if you're a geophysicist, you can kind of go anywhere in the world if you want to. If you are more on the research side, there's tons of conferences everywhere. So it's really a pretty cool industry field niche that is really always in demand, doesn't experience like setbacks. When there's recessions, for example, there's always typically. I mean, there can be big booms and busts with oil and gas, but there's always demand for Earth's resources that's never going to go away. And so our understanding that Earth is basically only going to go forward with time, as I see it, maybe we'd have to have some sort of cataclysm to take us offline, I guess for that to stop. But there's this need for society continue for there to be increased geophysical understanding, geologic understanding of our planet, or else if we don't have the resources we need, it's all of a sudden we're stagnant.
- [27:04]
Danny
How many other geophysicists do you speak with or do you keep in touch with?
- [27:09]
Stefan Burns
A few. Not too many, honestly. I'm kind of in my own bubble with my research and stuff. But every now and then I'll touch base with acquaintances and I want to.
- [27:20]
Danny
Get back, compare notes or anything, or talk about.
- [27:23]
Stefan Burns
Well, I'm a little different. The fact that now I make a lot of educational videos and I explore a lot of kind of offshoot ideas for geology, geophysics, space weather. And also most geophysicists, let's say, aren't really concerned about space weather unless they're like doing a magnetic field survey and they're not going to get good data if there's a geostorm because the magnetic field's going nuts. So they may learn a little bit about it then, but unless their interest takes them there, they're probably not going to learn about that. So there's these. There's these kind of silos in the sciences where people just stick in their one box and very few people venture to explore the others. But I feel like if we're going to understand things to a better degree, we kind of need to go interdisciplinary. But the normal workforce doesn't reward you for learning about this thing. If, if you're a magnetic field surveyor and you know, what is learning about solar activity, how does that help you or your paycheck? But I've been able to kind of buck that trend by extracting myself from the normal system and just, you know, floating on top of the ocean of Internet interest and education and such. And so I have free reign to.
- [28:41]
Danny
Did you have a traditional job in geology before? Before the YouTube stuff?
- [28:47]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, before. Before I launched into YouTube, I was doing a lot of field work out of California. And then also I've had two, two main, like geology jobs before. I just launched into my own research and video production. The first one was a lot of field work in around the Bay Area, but also further abroad.
- [29:06]
Danny
San Francisco.
- [29:07]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. And then so that was a lot of seismic surveys and a lot of ground penetrating radar. I was using that a ton. I'm really good with gpr, though I haven't done it recently. But for what?
- [29:18]
Danny
Apple? Like, for what?
- [29:20]
Stefan Burns
So there were some archaeological investigations that we did. One in particular was. This was pretty cool. There was a Japanese POW who was buried in one of the, like Marine camps or I think it's like. It's the one in Monterey, California, one of the military bases there where they, you know, they train soldiers and everything. I don't remember the exact name of it, but it's in Monterey and they bury them there and the Japanese wanted to bring them back. And so there wasn't really much for the remains, but they knew the plot where he was because there was like different headstones. And so they hired my company and I was the guy sent off to do a GPR survey of that location to try to find those specific remains because they didn't want to dig up the whole thing. It'd be a whole crazy thing. And they probably chose me because I, you know, I can get very detailed. So I like finely tuned the settings on the device. We had to like, get the exact most data possible. And it was kind of tough conditions because it was Raining, and when you have clay soil, it's wet. It basically absorbs all the energy. So it's hard to get good data. But I was able to find some anomalous signatures with the gpr. And then they dug there and turns out we were right on. They got the pow.
- [30:42]
Danny
Found it.
- [30:43]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. And that was the first. That was like a really big event too because it was the first time, from what I remember them telling me, it's like the first time the Japanese had come over to do this sort of like ceremony. It was like a big ceremony between the two to then get those remains and then bring them back to Japan. So that's one example. A lot of work was also done looking for utilities, but sometimes it's like we need to find this big line that's buried 12ft down and we have no idea where it is. So a lot of like detective work goes into this.
- [31:17]
Danny
2026 begins this month. And every year I tell myself the same thing. I want more energy, better focus and faster recovery. And not in the New Year's resolution way. I mean, actually feeling sharper and stronger day to day. And if you're around my age, you've probably noticed, even if you're training, eating right, doing all the things, your energy just isn't what it used to be. That constant brain fog, slower recovery, feeling worn down for no obvious reason. There's a real culprit. It's NAD. By the time you hit 30, your NAD levels drop by almost 50%. And NAD is critical for how your body creates energy, repairs itself and keeps your brain firing on all cylinders. And that's why I use ROW nutrition's liposomal nad. And I'm not exaggerating when I say the difference is noticeable. The energy is clean and steady, the focus is sharper, and the recovery is way faster without having to rely on caffeine and stimulants. NAD fuels your mitochondria, the powerhouse of the cell. And up until recently, replenishing it meant expensive clinic visits and IVs. But Ro uses an advanced liposomal delivery system designed to help your body absorb NAD efficiently without the hassle or insane cost. I've been using rose liposomal NAD consistently and it's already become a staple in my routine. You're seeing pro athletes, trainers and health focused people all leaning into nad. And that's for a reason, because it works. If you want to start out 2026 feeling your best, you can try it risk free with a 60 day money back guarantee. Plus get 20% off by using the code Danny. And@rownutrition.com Again, that's code D A N N Y for 20% off at r h o nutrition.com so G for GPR, how do you do that? What do you like, fly a drone? You fly a plane, Fly a kite. How does it work?
- [33:03]
Stefan Burns
You can fly a drone. I don't think they have GPR from planes. Definitely not kites now. But they do have drone based gpr, which is cool. Okay. But generally you want the antenna to be as close to the surface as possible because this is a. Basically it's a. It's a low frequency antenna. You can almost think of it like a radio dish and that's broadcasting electromagnetic waves into the ground and it's also looking for reflections on those. So a lot of the physics is the same whether it's electromagnetic or whether it's sound waves. Right. Seismic or gpr, it's the same deal. And different frequencies will give you different depths of penetration. And certain geologic materials, or even manmade materials like asphalt for example, will behave differently. How does water affect this? That's a big, A big thing too. Cool thing with GPR is these electromagnetic waves pass through ice super easily. So that's how they've done a lot of mapping of, for example, like Greenland and other places like that because they can go through the ice like many kilometers, many miles. Mm. And so they can get really good data there with these low frequency antennas. They drag those behind those like massive. It's not a snowmobile, but you know those big snow vehicles that they'll drive. It's almost like a tank. So GPR works on that principle and you get these waves to reflect off the layers and then you can look at that and there's a lot of. Yeah.
- [34:33]
Danny
Oh, wow. Okay.
- [34:34]
Stefan Burns
That's a pretty interesting one.
- [34:36]
Danny
Oh, so that thing in the front is the. Is the device?
- [34:39]
Stefan Burns
Looks like it, yeah. I've never seen that wild. But they. A lot of GPR now is done for a road scanning to find, let's say like potholes and such.
- [34:49]
Danny
Right.
- [34:50]
Stefan Burns
That could be a good example. So there's tons of applications for this and it's. It's cool to see it grow. Now they're doing the UAV gpr.
- [34:57]
Danny
Right.
- [34:58]
Stefan Burns
Because you can cover really vast areas with that quickly. But the difficulty is that you're. Now you have to fly it close to the ground. You have to account for the elevation changes. Right. So you need a high resolution map of the topography, which usually involves lidar. And then you also do get A dissipation of the signal and a reflection off the surface of the ground. So ideally it's typically right close to the ground and you're dragging that kind of sled or box. Um, but there's, there's tons of ways to do it. It's. It's a huge field and they keep finding more and more utility for it.
- [35:31]
Danny
Would there, would there be a way to do it well out of an airplane or would that be too far from the surface? Like we're, we don't have that kind of technology yet.
- [35:42]
Stefan Burns
It would.
- [35:43]
Danny
Will we ever be, be able to do that? Do you think?
- [35:46]
Stefan Burns
We. I think it had to be a low enough frequency for that. And there's also the issue of maybe the plane is moving a bit too fast to accurately get the nice reflection. I mean, this is light, so it's pretty quick. But there is an aspect of a lot of this data processing and just collection where you need enough stacking of data points. If you just get like one or two data points, your signal to noise ratio isn't good enough. So you want to be able to hyper stack this, for example. And um, yeah, I'm not sure. I'm. There's probably people that have experimented at a minimum with GPR from a plane, but I know with the, with UAV tech, that's a big area of exploration. They do a lot of magnetic field surveying with planes and they do that for mineral exploration. Like that's a very common.
- [36:36]
Danny
Oh really?
- [36:38]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, Especially up in Alaska and Canada.
- [36:41]
Danny
The magnetic field is correlated with minerals in the ground.
- [36:46]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. Because a lot of minerals are. Either they either alter the, the magnetic field locally, like they have their own magnetization to them, or they are associated with magnetic minerals and just let's say geologic layers in their creation, let's say. So you may not be looking. I mean, I don't have an example off the top of my head. Just there could be some sort of mineral that's not magnetic, but maybe it comes with a lot of magnetic minerals normally. So you look for that signature. And then a lot of minerals also come from for example, like past impacts, which is interesting. So that will usually leave a magnetic signature if you get this impact coming in and then that creates remnant magnetization. And also perhaps, let's say it was an asteroid, it has a whole bunch of magnetic minerals in the first place. Often it's those deposits which are super enhanced compared to normal. And when it comes to mineral exploration and mining and stuff, often it's just a percentage equation. If you don't have enhancement that's high enough, it doesn't become economically feasible.
- [37:57]
Danny
Sure.
- [37:58]
Stefan Burns
Whereas, like, some of the gold production in Nevada and other spots around the world, it's like, just barely feasible because they're crushing up so much tonnage of rock just to get, like, a grammar of gold, but because the price is there and, you know, it's just feasible. But if all of a sudden you bumped it up 10 times, they'd be like, let's go.
- [38:16]
Danny
Right.
- [38:17]
Stefan Burns
So they look for those impacts often or, or geologic features which naturally condense, refine, whatever they're looking for.
- [38:25]
Danny
What's the deal with this South Atlantic Anomaly? Are you familiar with that? Yeah, there's some sort of, like, hole in the electric field there, like somewhere in the Atlantic, like Southern Atlantic Ocean.
- [38:40]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. Off the coast of Brazil. An easy way to think about it, this isn't exactly, exactly precise, but if you think about Rio de Janeiro, that's effectively the center of the magnetic anomaly. It's the largest magnetic anomaly.
- [38:53]
Danny
Oh, interesting. So you can find an image of it, Steve, or like a illustration.
- [38:58]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. And so this is where the magnetic field on the Earth is the weakest and quite a bit. So it has been growing, has been weakening at a rate that is measurable in the human timeframe of years to decades. So it's pretty significant. If you look at the history of magnetic anomalies, there is quite a rich observational record of positive and negative magnetic anomalies that are transitory. So they exist for, let's say, 200 years, 300 years.
- [39:27]
Danny
Oh, interesting.
- [39:28]
Stefan Burns
So we don't fully know how long this magnetic anomaly is there. And the physics of it's called pretty complex. The general idea is that there are these patches of reverse flux that are deeper within the Earth near the core mantle boundary. The core is where the magnetic field is generated for the most part. I also think that there may be some magnetic field generation in the mantle and further up, but that's a whole different conversation. But if you have this patch of reverse flux that is canceling out the positive flux, let's say, like the positive magnetic field, and then this one's coming in with the, let's say, negative magnetic field, they're just going to equalize. And so the overall field strength would be greatly reduced as a result. And so that's what we see with the South Atlantic Anomaly. And as a result of that magnetic field being so much weaker, the strongest magnetic field strength on the planet is Antarctica with the South Magnetic Pole.
- [40:24]
Danny
Right.
- [40:24]
Stefan Burns
Or rather the magnetic pole in The Southern Hemisphere, it's actually a positive magnetic pole. But Regardless, that's about 67,000 nanotesla, which is a.
- [40:35]
Danny
How much again?
- [40:36]
Stefan Burns
67,000 nanotes.
- [40:38]
Danny
67,000 at the South Pole.
- [40:40]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. Or. Or we could say it's a 0.67 gauss. There's different.
- [40:44]
Danny
Okay.
- [40:44]
Stefan Burns
You know, varies of values that you can use, but at the South Atlantic, nominal, it goes down to like 22,000 nanotesla or 0.22 gauss. That's like a third. A third as much. It's. It's really quite weak. So you get a lot of cosmic rays that come in there that affects.
- [41:01]
Danny
That eats up like most of South America.
- [41:03]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. That's the reason why they're all dancing and going crazy down there.
- [41:07]
Danny
You think that's it?
- [41:08]
Stefan Burns
I do, actually, yeah. First time I went to Brazil, like, it is definitely different down here.
- [41:13]
Danny
How long has that anomaly been there?
- [41:15]
Stefan Burns
That we don't know. We have some data. So the first good.
- [41:19]
Danny
When were we able to first start measuring it?
- [41:21]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, exactly. So we first started gaining relative magnetic field measurements either in the late 1600s or certainly in the early 1700s. And that would be where they take a magnetic field measurement in their location. This is mostly by ship. Right. And then they would track it as they navigated across the globe, but it'd be fixed that location. Then we developed absolute magnetic field measurements around the middle 1800s. It's like 1830 or so. And since then, we deployed more and more of these stations to be able to get good magnetic field measurements across time that are absolute in scale. So everywhere can be compared to each other, whereas with the relative stuff, it's hard to piece it together. Also, across history, we've had really good coverage of the Northern Hemisphere versus the Southern hemisphere because most of land mass is in the north, most of populations in the north, and most of the ocean surveys are in the north. So our maps that we reconstructed from the historic data for the 1700s and even earlier have very limited coverage. Where the South Atlantic Anomaly is, there is evidence that it existed during this time, but you can't really go really beyond that in terms of saying it. Some people think it's been around for like hundreds of thousands to millions of years. I'm not so sure about that because we've seen positive flux magnetic anomalies that have popped up suddenly and then gone away. The Levantine Basin, Western Europe, Hawaii, Japan. A lot of these places have experienced where the magnetic field suddenly strengthened dramatically. The field strength, as I said, at its strongest right now Antarctica, 67,000 nanote. There's evidence from the Levantine Basin where It was like 120, 130,000 nanotesla, but that was just like a transitory.
- [43:18]
Danny
Where is that?
- [43:19]
Stefan Burns
It's like Israel and Lebanon and the whole area.
- [43:23]
Danny
Whoa.
- [43:24]
Stefan Burns
And the magnetic field was stronger back 1000 AD and then also 1000 BC. Those are the two rough dates where the magnetic field overall was stronger. Now, that can be tracked a few different ways. You can measure the remnant magnetization of, let's say, like a lava flow.
- [43:44]
Danny
Oh.
- [43:44]
Stefan Burns
Because these lava flows, you know, magma has a lot of metallic minerals in it, like magnetite, titano, magnetite. And so they will, upon cooling, lock in the direction and strength of the magnetic field. But we also have limited llama flows. Like they. We don't have global coverage. Right. We don't have a lava flow every single point on the planet. So you can do a lot with that.
- [44:07]
Danny
Interesting.
- [44:08]
Stefan Burns
That's probably the most useful. You can also record the remnant magnetization and the intensity direction, all that stuff from just magnetite or other magnetic minerals that settle out in sedimentary layers. It'll be very, very low density, you could say, because you have a whole bunch of, let's say, like quartz settling out, which isn't magnetic. But if you do a, a drill through, let's say, a lake, lake floor and you, you get that, that tube of sediment, then you can kind of chronicle the magnetic field that way. So that's another one.
- [44:44]
Danny
It's like a proxy, basically.
- [44:46]
Stefan Burns
Yeah.
- [44:46]
Danny
What was going on with the magnetic field?
- [44:48]
Stefan Burns
That's another good one to add in. And then the, the one that I think is the coolest is anytime you fire up pottery, you're also generating effectively a magnetic signature at the time that the pottery cooled at. Because what happens, there's something known as the Curry point. Whereas if something heats up these magnetic minerals, if they heat up beyond about 650 Celsius, I believe it is, they lose their magnetization. So if they recorded a prior magnetic field measurement, if you heat them up, they lose it and then they cool down. They'll lock in whatever the new one is at the, at the time of, let's say, for the pottery time that it was fired and cooled down. So we have archaeointensity data from all these pottery sherds that we find across the world. And so we have really good coverage of the magnetic field measurements. For example, the Levantine, because there was so much pottery and civilization across years. And talking to Matt Bell recently, and he's, you Know he's a pottery freak because he has all the Egyptian vases and everything and he's, he said something about them now finding pottery that goes back like 10,000, 12,000 plus years. Like way further back than what like beyond go Tepe. So I'm not sure if they've done any archaeo intensity data recovery from that, but if they start. Cuz you have to take a little bit of it and damage it and. But if you, if we do that we could get even more information, high, high quality information on Earth's magnetic field going back in time.
- [46:21]
Danny
Could you carbon date that? I guess you could, I guess there could be carbon in like clay, right?
- [46:29]
Stefan Burns
Maybe it's a little bit.
- [46:30]
Danny
Yeah, I'm not exactly like traces of it maybe. I don't know.
- [46:34]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, I don't know exactly how they.
- [46:35]
Danny
Date depending on what it was made of.
- [46:38]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, they, they definitely do radioisotope dating on this, whether it's carbon or otherwise.
- [46:43]
Danny
Oldest pottery. And I'm not even going to try to say that.
- [46:46]
Stefan Burns
20,000 years old though.
- [46:48]
Danny
Yeah, 20,000. Where was it Oldest pottery found yet dated about 20,000 years.
- [46:55]
Stefan Burns
Both Xian Rendang.
- [46:56]
Danny
There you go. You nailed that.
- [46:58]
Stefan Burns
Think so?
- [46:59]
Danny
Yeah. Nice geng. And go ahead, try that one.
- [47:03]
Stefan Burns
You, you, you. Chan Yan Yu.
- [47:05]
Danny
Chan Yan. There you go. The Yan Yon caves show early use of pottery by hunter gatherer communities in China.
- [47:14]
Stefan Burns
You wonder if those are fired or whether they were just. They took like wet clay and just molded them, let them air dry. Right. Because if you fire it then you'll get that magnetic signature at the moment.
- [47:26]
Danny
So go down Steve. It says that those caves in China are the oldest of a growing number of sites which support the origins of pottery as having occurred not just in the Japanese island of jamon culture of 11 to 12,000 years ago, but earlier in the Russian Far east and South China. Whoa, 18 to 20,000 years ago.
- [47:51]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, that pushes it back.
- [47:51]
Danny
I was aware of these bananas, dude.
- [47:54]
Stefan Burns
I was wearing the Japanese stuff. But this must have been what Matt was referencing or even further back. I mean he's, he's definitely super interested in all this, but if they start dating that then that's going to be really, really useful information.
- [48:08]
Danny
I had a guy on recently a. What was Max's specialty? He was, he had.
- [48:15]
Stefan Burns
Nuclear physicist.
- [48:16]
Danny
Nuclear physicist who did analysis on those vases that Matt Bell gets, the granite ones. And he basically. I don't know if he proved it but he, he's pretty confident that they're all modern. Like they were made in like modern factories or they were used using some sort of like machining, like modern tooling or whatever. And they weren't like the, the, they're super precise ones that seem like impossible. They weren't from like super ancient times. And he's, he's also been on Matt's show, so it's super interesting stuff.
- [48:55]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, it's been a cool story to watch because it's, it's one of the few things with this ancient history community and those that have interest there that you could see the ideas and then the scientific method get applied and then kind of now the results and discussion following it. And there's going to be more to that, I'm sure. Yeah, but a lot of the, a lot of the ideas that float around just in general, let's say in the Zeitgeist and on the Internet and everything, they just kind of remain unproven and no one takes the initiative to explore it more. And so it's been cool seeing multiple independent groups and people look into that.
- [49:33]
Danny
Yeah.
- [49:33]
Stefan Burns
And kind of some sort of conclusion on it.
- [49:35]
Danny
Yeah, it's been fascinating. Especially people like Max, who is able to, you know, shatter his own dreams by disproving it because, you know, he wanted that to be real. So back to that Southern Atlantic anomaly. What, like, how does that affect us? Like what is there, is there any sort of implications on that to the rest of the Earth or that area of the world?
- [50:04]
Stefan Burns
So the implications right now are that if satellites fly through that area, they, they often get hit with more high energy cosmic particles or during a really intense solar storm impact, more high energy particles from the sun will get through there. Yeah. And that can affect the electronics and such. But in general, it doesn't seem to be that big of an issue from that aspect. In terms of the biology, that's really interesting. Something we don't know much about. But the more you learn about bioelectricity and everything, we see how we're connected to all these energies. I mean, we're in resonance with the Earth across the board.
- [50:43]
Danny
So you're really getting multidisciplinary now.
- [50:46]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, so there's a lot of interesting stuff there, but we don't have much like data on that. You could say in terms of like the direct impact, let's say, on the South Atlantic Anomaly and you know, heart attacks in Brazil. Sure, that would be interesting data. We see a connection between heart attacks and geomagnetic storms and other things like cardiovascular issues. But there's some like, really precise, detailed stuff that we Just don't have data.
- [51:13]
Danny
On a lot of crazy UFO stories from Brazil. I just had a crazy podcast about that.
- [51:17]
Stefan Burns
Last week, I had a dream where this is like maybe 18 months ago, 24 months ago, where the UFOs, the aliens, announced themselves in Brazil.
- [51:27]
Danny
Oh, God.
- [51:27]
Stefan Burns
And I woke up. I was like, that makes sense.
- [51:30]
Danny
Oh, dear. There you go, peeps. There you go, folks.
- [51:35]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, it was odd, but I was like, that makes sense. I could see them being like, hey, well, this is no different than what we already have because it's raised so culturally diverse there. Oh, my God.
- [51:48]
Danny
Yeah.
- [51:49]
Stefan Burns
But in regards to your. So that's with the Atlantic Anomaly, like the real world implications now. Not really too crazy. But if it continues to weaken, if it continues to expand, then it could be a sign that we're undergoing a geomagnetic excursion, which, if that was to continue, could translate into a full geomagnetic reversal where the magnetic field actually flips.
- [52:14]
Danny
Oh, Jesus.
- [52:16]
Stefan Burns
And there's kind of a few ways of tracking that. The three main ways, I guess you could say, would be, what's the overall field strength for the Earth? And that needs to drop to a certain level, it seems, for the excursion to really kick off. And right now we're well above that threshold. That's been identified, but doesn't mean we can't continue to weaken. You know, the magnetic field has been weakening since our high ad, you know, about a thousand years ago. So it's gone down since then, but still historically very strong. But if it continues to weaken, then we have to kind of be mindful of that. But this is like geologic timing. It's unlikely to occur within our lifetime. But I also am like, hey, who the heck knows, right? And then there's also, where are the actual magnetic poles? Because we have the north and South Pole, but they start to really move, like, well outside of their historic areas of, let's say, the Arctic and Antarctic circles. Then it's like, okay, we should be mindful of this.
- [53:20]
Danny
And, well, they do move, like, pretty quick. They move like a couple. Like how long the couple feet a year. Is that right, Steve? We looked at this recently.
- [53:27]
Stefan Burns
Oh, way faster than that right now.
- [53:29]
Danny
Oh, really?
- [53:30]
Stefan Burns
Right now, the magnetic pole in the Northern Hemisphere is moving about 40 kilometers per year.
- [53:37]
Danny
40 kilometers per year?
- [53:39]
Stefan Burns
Yeah.
- [53:40]
Danny
Whoa.
- [53:40]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. So that's moving really quickly. And there's some ideas as to why, because there's some changing magnetic field dynamics between North America and Siberia, which is interesting. But that is a quick movement. Right now, the magnetic pole in the Northern Hemisphere is almost exactly on top of the actual North Pole. So while it's been moving quickly, it's almost perfectly in the Arctic Circle in terms of its positioning. Whereas the magnetic pole in the Southern Hemisphere during the same time frame has moved away from the true South Pole, like the rotation axis to be just slightly outside of the Antarctic Circle. But it's only moving about 10 kilometers per year. And it's doing it tangent to the Antarctic Circle. Whereas the, the magnetic pole in the Northern hemisphere is kind of moving towards the lower latitude zones. Like it's moving towards Siberia still off the coast in the Arctic Circle. Okay. Where there's all the sea ice over Gokul Ridge. But it's starting to that some people are worried about it actually moving into Siberia and then moving down like over India, for example.
- [54:49]
Danny
The magnetic pole.
- [54:50]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. There are some ideas that, you know, if it accelerates even more, that could be there pretty quickly and that, you know, if accelerated enough, it could. But it's been decelerating over the past 10 years roughly.
- [55:03]
Danny
Okay.
- [55:04]
Stefan Burns
Because it accelerated up to 60 kilometers per year. Now it's down to 40, but still very fast. But the magnetic poles moving are also an indication of what's happening at the magnetic field. And then you can measure specific components of magnetic field because you have like a regular bar magnets called the dipole. So there's two poles to it, the north and south. Earth's magnetic field is not exactly a dipole. It's about 90, 95% dipole. But there's these higher order modes. So like a quadruple, which is interesting because it brings the magnetic field in at the equator as well. Not just looping like this from north to south, but quadruple actually brings in at the equator as well. It's four lobes. That makes up a good portion of Earth's magnetic field as well. That's a good graphic.
- [55:51]
Danny
Which one?
- [55:52]
Stefan Burns
That one or the other one in white? But come on to the right. That one right there. That's a good one as well.
- [55:59]
Danny
Oh, cool.
- [55:59]
Stefan Burns
And so if so what happens during excursions is the dipole field strength diminishes greatly and actually goes away. And what we're left with this is what the evidence suggests is that then we're left with the quadrupole, the octopoles, the higher order modes, which make up only 5, 10% of the overall strength. Those don't seem to change. Then the dipole reemerges in the reverse polarity. And with an excursion it aborts. So it may get all the way to that flip. But then it reemerges with the polarity it had, whereas with the full reversal you, it will actually take on this new polarity. But that dipole field needs to go away for that to occur. And so then all you're left with is a quadrupole. And that would have really interesting implications in terms of space weather because now you have the magnetic cusp also not only in the high latitude zones, but also at the equator. So anywhere along the equator you get blasted with solar energy at that moment in time. Whereas right now it's funneled mostly to, you know, the Arctic Circle, the Antarctic Circle. That's why they see crazy aurora up in northern Europe, for example. Yeah, or we, we don't really get aurora down the South Atlantic Anomaly, but we get a lot of those high energy particles because the magnetic field is weak there.
- [57:16]
Danny
All right, we need to talk about those so called mushroom gummies you see at all the smoke shops and gas stations around town. Because most of that stuff is no good. It's not mushrooms. It's mystery chemicals dressed up with wizard art. There's a wave of fake Amanita products out there. Some lab tests have even found research chemical tryptamines, benzodiazepines, even synthetic cannabinoids being sold as mushroom gummies. That's why I've always avoided that stuff if it's behind the counter. Between a scratch off and a boner pill, I'm out. But here's the thing. Real Amanita Miscaria is legal. And when it's legit, it's nothing like the gas station nonsense. And that's why I trust Amantara. These guys are the real deal. They're one of the main importers and processors of actual Amani to Mascaria in the country. No synthetics, no secret ingredients, just properly prepared mushroom, ethically sourced and lab tested. I personally use Amanita Mascaria as a way to keep from getting too stressed. It's an incredible feeling to be able to remain calm when you have tons of tasks and screaming fighting kids constantly tugging at you. And it does also leave me with incredible vivid dreams. So if you're curious about Amanita, don't grab something random off the counter. Use the brand. People in this space actually respect Amantara's 500 milligram capsules. And Amanita gummies are consistent and beginner friendly. Just start low and go slow. Go to amantara.com godj and use the code dj22 for 22% off your first order. That's a M E N T a r a slash, go slash dj and use the code dj22 for 22% off your first order.
- [58:54]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, this is a really great graphic.
- [58:56]
Danny
So, so does this tie into this? Seems like it could be connected to the, what's it called, the Van Allen radiation belts. Yeah, so the Van Allen radiation belts are directly tied, tied to the, the magnetics magnetospher, the Earth and like solar wind. Right?
- [59:19]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. So we have our sun which is. Well, we kind of don't know what it is inside, but we know it's surrounded by this sheath of plasma, super high energy plasma. And then we have our interplanetary environment, so that radiates out from the sun. And we have an overall heliosphere which is made up of plasma that the sun is just always pumping out plasma. It creates this larger magnetic field and also this plasma sphere which we call the heliosphere. Effectively every magnetic field contains plasma within it. Because if you look at Jupiter for example, it has a very strong magnetic field. It also has a really powerful plasma sphere. So we don't call them Van Allen belts there. I guess you could, they could be Jupiter's Van Allen belts or Jupiter's radiation belts. But the radiation environment within Jupiter's magnetic field are insane. It's like really, really high.
- [60:10]
Danny
Really?
- [60:11]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, it's, it's way more intense than Earth.
- [60:14]
Danny
Why is that?
- [60:15]
Stefan Burns
Jupiter's magnetic field is just to have.
- [60:17]
Danny
A stronger magnetic field.
- [60:18]
Stefan Burns
It's like five or 10 times stronger than Earth. It's super, super strong. So you get huge amounts. And then you also have like for example here showing IO IO is a. Volcanic planets blasting stuff into.
- [60:29]
Danny
Is it a moon?
- [60:31]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, yeah, volcanic moon that's blasting stuff into orbit around Jupiter, which then gets ionized. But every magnetic field effectively also has a plasma sphere. And what happens is that they are particle accelerators. These magnetic fields accelerate particles at speeds near the speed of light. So they go relativistic and as a result they contain a tremendous amount of energy because the faster they travel, the more energy they have. If the mass stays the same and it's not linear, it's like exponential and how that goes up. So, and Jupiter is actually so powerful that we observe what's known as Jovian flux in our interplanetary environment. So every 13 months we enter into this arrangement with Jupiter magnetically where we're connected and we get this burst of Jovian electrons which we call jovian flux. And it's a very specific energy spectrum which is how we identified it to being Jupiter or not solar in origin, but we orbit around the sun, of course, 12 months. Jupiter does 12 years. And so it's moved 1/12 of its distance in one year. So that's why it's 13 months, because as we orbit around, it's moved 112. So we need another month to catch up to that magnetic configuration. But we see particle acceleration with Jupiter and massive amounts of radiation there. And we have that here on Earth too, with our radiation belts. And so our magnetic field is also accelerating these particles. And it's being fed and replenished all the time by these solar storm impacts or solar wind that connects to Earth in a preferential way, like a conducive way, will recharge our plasma sphere, and then that plasma often will precipitate down into our planet and drive these geomagnetic storms. So it's a really complex system.
- [62:20]
Danny
Yeah.
- [62:21]
Stefan Burns
And so, yeah, it gets wild because then how does that affect the telluric currents and how does that affect maybe the, the geodynamo? And at what timescale are you considering? Is it just the, the hourly daily timescale or you think, yeah, how does maybe space weather affect the geodynamo over thousands of years? These are all open questions in many ways.
- [62:42]
Danny
Getting back to what you were just explaining about the, the North Magnetic Pole shifting down into Siberia or like India, what would happen if that happened?
- [62:55]
Stefan Burns
Well, the, the, the main thing to be aware of as it relates to the movement the magnetic poles is that if Earth. Well, so I'm sure that there's a wide range of possibility that's happened over Earth's geologic time frame. Sure. We have quite limited data on that. In terms of modern data, it's almost non existent compared to the geologic time frame. So in general though, if the magnetic poles were to move well outside their normal ranges, then that's indication that the field strength is diminishing. And that magnetic pole really doesn't become that great of a measure of what's happening anymore because the overall field is weakening. In general, the dipole field is going away. So you're going to have a lot of places where you could say the magnetic field is going in vertically. Like there'll probably be multiple magnetic poles that could pop up. But when the dipole field is strong, you have two clear magnetic cusp and two clear places where the magnetic field is going in vertically to the Earth. But as the magnetic field diminishes, that can kind of just get thrown into flux. So, and it's, it's a useful measure, but in some aspect, if we're really undergoing an excursion, it kind of becomes less useful because they can really float around really quickly because the whole field itself is so chaotic and turbulent. Like the sun undergoes a magnetic flip about every 12 years as the solar cycle. And during that time there's tons of places on the sun where the magnetic field is kind of slicing back in and oh, really make.
- [64:30]
Danny
It wouldn't really affect it. We wouldn't really notice it.
- [64:32]
Stefan Burns
I mean we would definitely be able to track this and, and it would affect us. But it's not the. I guess what I'm getting is it's not the best way to track what's happening with the magnetic field, like just the location of these magnetic cusps. It's not the best way, I think probably better is to track the dipole, the quadrupole ratio, and then also the overall field strength. But as that pole moves, you're gonna have energy flux moving with that cusp. So one interesting thing I've talked about it, talked about, and this is, you know, speculative, but we have evidence of there being a super volcano in the Arctic. This is the slowest part of the Mid Atlantic ridge is called Gokul Ridge. And it cuts from effectively Svalbard up to the Arctic Ocean. And at the very end of Gahkal Ridge there is a giant caldera that's been identified. It was first identified in 1999 and it's huge. It's like this massive depression in the sea floor there. And this is oceanic crust, so it's already thin and normal. Mid ocean ridge where the plates are being generated are spreading apart pretty quick to 4 centimeters per year. At Gakkel Ridge it's like 1 centimeter per year. And at the bottom of Gokul caldera, it's like 0.6 centimeters per year. It's like 6 millimeters per year. So it's super slow. The best idea of what generated this huge caldera, like 40 km across, 80 km wide, roughly somewhere in that zone, 1.2 km deep, is a giant super volcano eruption. And the dating evidence goes back to about 1.1 million years that there was a massive super volcano event that ejected about 3,000 cubic kilometers of material, dry rock eruption equivalent. And Yellowstone was like last time it really had a big one was 1,000 cubic kilometers. So this is up there with some of the biggest volcanic eruptions ever observed. Toba would be another huge one. But right now the magnetic field in the northern hemisphere, that, that cusp because that's where the field's going vertically in. So the energy flows down those field lines. Like these particles are guided by the field lines. If you have a neutral particle, it's not affected by magnetic fields because it's neutral. So if it's like a neutron will just go out in a straight line, but the moment it takes on charge, the magnetic field is so much of a stronger force than gravity, it will guide the flow of that particle. So right now we have the magnetic pole moving over Gawkkle Ridge. And if there is still a super volcano system there, which there's evidence that there is, we just had a huge burst of seismic activity there in 1999 and three new volcanoes were generated that created pyroclassic flows under the ocean like they, they retrieve pyroclastic glass at depth, which is insane to think about. And the fact that Gokul Ridge is still super slow in its spread, that seems to be how some of that energy gets released rather than it just being purely through the spreading of the tectonic plates that some of it accumulates in these under water underground magma reservoirs and then explosive releases. And they sampled the, you know, these samples from that volcanic event that occurred in 1999 shows that the CO2 is, the CO2 ratio is like super enhanced compared to normal. It's like 13.5% versus normal like 1.5%. So when that finally depressurizes, it's super explosive way more than normal. So I mean.
- [68:12]
Danny
That'S crazy.
- [68:13]
Stefan Burns
It's a whole rabbit hole. But we've seen the magnetic pole circle through the Arctic quite a few times now. That's just in the past 2000 years it's done loops through the Arctic. That's what the, some of these lake bed sediment cores show is that it just kind of like circles through the Arctic. But what does the magnetic pole moving over this massive energy reservoir, you know, magma reservoir do? Because you're having more high energy flux come in now, a lot of that's going to interact at the atmosphere level. But now you're generating electric currents. You know, these telluric currents then induce down into the ocean. They induce down into the surface. And I just think that there's probably a reason why one of the biggest super volcanoes that we've identified on Earth is right where the magnetic pole pool normally hangs out. Doesn't mean we're going to have it explode when it crosses over in like the next 10 years. But it's certainly just interesting to think about.
- [69:14]
Danny
What is the, is There any like consensus on when this super volcano last erupted?
- [69:21]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, about 1.1 million years ago.
- [69:23]
Danny
One million years ago?
- [69:24]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. So the last big eruption. There's really not that much research has been done on it because it's all fairly new and. Yeah, so it's good to take a step back and to not get carried away with things. But it's just one of these examples I think that you can look at to maybe better understand the space to Earth connection. Because we have a ton of data showing how certain flows of plasma in our magnetic field, the, the plasma sphere, you know, further out in space, like the radiation belts.
- [70:00]
Danny
Yeah.
- [70:01]
Stefan Burns
Influences Teller currents actually flowing through the surface.
- [70:05]
Danny
Yeah, that's interesting. I never, I, I'm new to this, but like just the term space weather seems so bizarre. Like how can there be weather in the void of space?
- [70:16]
Stefan Burns
Well, that was the thing back in the 1940s and 50s. They thought space was a void. Yeah, they didn't, they didn't really think that there was plasma flying around. And they thought that when the sun had a big solar flare and launched out of solar storm, we all of a sudden went from a void to a big, you know, impact of plasma. But what we found out the moment we put probes out there is that there's always plasma in the interplanetary environment and therefore there's the, you know, solar wind and interplanetary magnetic field. But there can be big changes. Sometimes it does become almost a complete void. And weird things happen to the Earth when we go through those patches of super, super, super low density solar wind. A good example is that right around the time like I'm talking like weeks or months here, I'm talking like days to hours. With the magnitude 9.1 Great Tohoku Earthquake, March 11th of 2011, Japan. We had a super big drop in the solar wind density, like anomalous drop. And then we had that earthquake go off. So. And there's other connections there too. There's other big earthquakes that have lined up with these huge decreases in the, in the solar wind density. Not every time, but it's just kind of coincidental that that's happened in more than once.
- [71:43]
Danny
So what contributes to more or less solar wind density?
- [71:50]
Stefan Burns
If you get a big solar storm to launch, that will create a spike in the density because it literally creates like a shock wave like that EMP you talked about. Yeah, that'll hit. And what happens if it's fast enough or some of these solar wind structures that can exist, like these high speed streams is it will Sweep up plasma in front of it because it's traveling very fast. Let's say it's traveling 1200 kilometers per second and the regular solar wind is 400 kilometers per second. So it'll sweep all this stuff up and then there'll be the actual bulk of the plasma behind it. But then behind that will just be basically nothing until a new solar wind structure sweeps by and replenishes that part of the interplanetary space with plasma. So with really big storms or some of these special solar wind structures like high speed streams, you can have these huge gaps in the solar wind density. Right. And sometimes we don't know why they occur.
- [72:51]
Danny
Like there's so behind at the back end of these solar storms that come through, there's like a void of very low density solar wind. And somehow that equals more volcanoes and earthquakes.
- [73:04]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, there's that. The, the solar storm dynamic that often seems to play out. The strongest connection between space weather earthquakes seems to be for these more structured solar wind dynamics where they're called these high speed streams, and those seem to be better correlated with earthquakes rather than sometimes just these big solar storm impacts. But either way it all, there's, there's too many odd things that occur. If you keep track of this, if you keep track of all the different things, the space weather, the earthquakes, the volcanic activity, they, there seems to be not coordinated pulses, but there's definitely like pulses of activity. And then there's periods of quiescence and it's not necessarily just homogeneous and completely random. And often when there's a big space weather impact coming in, we also happen to see like a clustering of high magnitude earthquakes. And then we often see that occur also with planetary alignments and such. So yeah, it gets, gets kind of wild, but I think this is just us coming to a better understanding of how all these factors play together and in ways that we may not really know yet.
- [74:18]
Danny
Well, the sun is like burping and belching all the time, right?
- [74:22]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, except during solar minimum when it's pretty, it, it's pretty quiet and happy.
- [74:28]
Danny
Yeah.
- [74:28]
Stefan Burns
And we go through long minimums. Like sometimes we'll have these grand minimums that last 50, 100 years. You can last a long time.
- [74:35]
Danny
And so what sort of tools are people like you using to detect or predict these solar storms or things like this? Are you just looking at the sun and you can predict it by just looking at the sun? And what happens with the sun, like ejections or solar flares or whatever? Does it all come from the sun?
- [74:57]
Stefan Burns
Well, so Miyake events, if you go back to super flares and you know these records of Miyake events, the researcher's name was Miyake, which is why they're called that. She first detected these huge radioisotope spikes and tree rings. Looking at trees and such, they've detected a whole bunch of them. Now, we don't know 100% whether those are solar or cosmic in origin.
- [75:19]
Danny
Right.
- [75:19]
Stefan Burns
They could be cosmic.
- [75:21]
Danny
Oh, coming from other systems somewhere.
- [75:24]
Stefan Burns
A lot. If you look at the cosmological environment, a lot of plasma gets focused into jets. We have these astrophysical jets across a variety of scales. So we see sometimes at the center of galaxies, they emit these jets of plasma outwards, traveling super fast. We see with gamma ray burst, where it's actual light photons at the highest frequency, gamma rays, sometimes those come focused in jets and impact the Earth. Like we had the largest gamma ray burst ever detected back in October of 2022. The research is indicating that that was a very focused jet of gamma rays that hit us from 2.0 something billion years away.
- [76:07]
Danny
Whoa.
- [76:08]
Stefan Burns
Billion light years away. So we see these. This sort of jet activity exists in our astrophysical or astronomical environment across different scales. Galactic, Interstellar, etc. And so it is possible that if some, let's say nearby supernova occurred and it was lined up in such a way that it shot its jet out at us when that hit, that could also create a Miyake event. Those are the two main ideas. It could be super flare, some sort of cosmic event where you have some. It's from outside our star system, but still significant enough to cause this massive increase in radioisotopes and energy and more. Then I also think that there's a possibility could come from within the Earth itself, though I don't know how that would occur. But I don't think we can just say that it's not a possibility.
- [77:02]
Danny
That makes sense.
- [77:03]
Stefan Burns
Those are the three main things. Sun, Earth, or cosmos.
- [77:07]
Danny
Okay.
- [77:07]
Stefan Burns
And maybe it's a convergence of all three. Like we see with these geomagnetic excursions that they seem to be correlated in time with the sun undergoing a period like multiple grand solar minimums. So there seems to be this coherence, you could say this resonance between the sun and the Earth. And when the sun is undergoing these periods with very low activity, that's when Earth's magnetic field decides to flip.
- [77:38]
Danny
Got it.
- [77:39]
Stefan Burns
At least that's what the recent data suggests for, like the lachamp excursion, where they looking at radioisotope Data. But the thing is, what's up with.
- [77:47]
Danny
All the fear, like all the crazy hypotheses and theories I hear online about like the pole flip could reset humanity.
- [77:55]
Stefan Burns
Yeah.
- [77:55]
Danny
Like everyone says that this could be like a cataclysm.
- [77:58]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. It. Well, so during an excursion. So like the Lechamp excursion, the field strength went down to like 5% of what it is now for about a hundred years, roughly. That's about the time frame and about the field strength. And that would mean that if you're out and about, you're receiving a huge amount of cosmic radiation, and that's not going to be good. Also, if there is this connection between grand solar minimums and geomagnetic excursions, during a grand solar minimum, you're not getting these big super flares or solar storms or whatever, just solar flares in general. But still most pumping out most of its energy, which is most of the radiation from the sun is infrared, visible, and then also ultraviolet.
- [78:47]
Danny
Right.
- [78:47]
Stefan Burns
And ultraviolet, you know, can break DNA bonds and, you know, single strand breaks, double strand breaks, mutations, all that. So if you had a geomagnetic excursion like the shop, which is when the Neanderthals died out and field Strengths At 5%, you're letting in a ton more cosmic radiation. The sun is still pelting you with UV light as well. So it's going to be fairly traumatic. We had a megafauna extinction in Australia at that time. You know, big animals can't hide from this stuff. Whereas when, when are we talking again? This is about 42,000 years ago. 42, 44,000. It's roughly in that zone. I think that is why those cave systems in Turkey exist, if you're aware of those.
- [79:32]
Danny
Are you talking about the cave they found underneath the house?
- [79:36]
Stefan Burns
I'm not sure about the house, but they have this elaborate cave system in Turkey that's thousands of years old. I don't remember the specific name, so.
- [79:44]
Danny
You can find it, Steve.
- [79:45]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, but a lot of people have different ideas as to why that exists. But if you have a geomagnetic excursion, the cosmic rate, like you can feel this stuff, right. When the sun's really active and you go out, or just going from, let's say Nebraska down to Mexico, you're like, wow, I can really feel the sun on my.
- [80:03]
Danny
Darren Kuyu. Talking about Darren Kuyu. Darren Ku is the one they found under the, that house. They like, they like dug under the house and they found this giant cave system. It was like a giant man made anthill. Yeah, exactly, yeah. Is that what you're talking about.
- [80:17]
Stefan Burns
Yeah.
- [80:18]
Danny
Okay.
- [80:19]
Stefan Burns
And so I think that that could exist specifically be during these sort of events where you would literally feel the energy hitting you and it would not be pleasant and over time you would see health effects from that. And so it makes sense that you would take shelter underground.
- [80:36]
Danny
Right.
- [80:36]
Stefan Burns
And this is a long period of time too.
- [80:38]
Danny
How long do you think?
- [80:39]
Stefan Burns
It's like 100 years. And that's just where it's at its absolute minimum for the field strength. You know, it's going to be about a thousand years of where the field's very weak. So it's a long enough time for that to make sense. Whereas some of the ideas that people have is that it's a big solar storm, like a super flare coming in and then they run to the caves. But that's like a three day thing. Like, and you don't have a heads up on that. It's not something like, okay, this is clearly a factor. Let's, let's work around it.
- [81:07]
Danny
So when you're saying this could have lasted a hundred years, what you're saying is it could have been like different day to day. Like there could be days where it was like safe to walk around. This wasn't just like a consistent 100 year period of like super intense radiation hitting the earth.
- [81:21]
Stefan Burns
No, it would be.
- [81:21]
Danny
Oh, it would be constant.
- [81:23]
Stefan Burns
In general. Yeah.
- [81:24]
Danny
Okay.
- [81:25]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. I mean it's hard to say without being there and getting the data, but.
- [81:29]
Danny
Sure, I mean we're speculating wildly but.
- [81:32]
Stefan Burns
But in general we, for the LECHAMP excursion, we see that the, the field strength dramatically, like dramatically weakened. And so you know that, that be factor same amount of UV light if you did have all these grand solar minimums.
- [81:44]
Danny
Yeah.
- [81:45]
Stefan Burns
And then a ton more cosmic radiation which is going to cause mutations and more. So something like that makes perfect sense. And it's a long enough time period for that to be a feasible engineering project that makes sense to devote resources to. It's not just a, like, why would you have that for a super flare you don't even know is coming?
- [82:04]
Danny
Yeah, well, I never understood, I've heard the explanations that these things were to protect people against floods. But why would you want an underground cave if you're getting flooded? Right. Like I never really understood that. And they claim that the rock doors could have blocked the water, but I don't know if I buy that. I don't, I don't, I don't understand how this underground Darren Kuyu, how you could un. Survive underneath that when there's like mass, like tons of flood water surging above you. It would just go down there, I would think.
- [82:37]
Stefan Burns
I mean I haven't been there. I mean I like to go to these sites so I can speak about.
- [82:42]
Danny
This is not accurate. I don't think this is accurate, Steve. I don't think that's what it looks like. Oh yeah, that's capacity. Okay. Yeah, yeah. Something different. That's volcanic caves also in Turkey. Whoa.
- [82:55]
Stefan Burns
Christian.
- [82:56]
Danny
Christian churches inside these caves.
- [83:00]
Stefan Burns
Huh? Tough. Yeah. Volcanic tuft is easy to carve out.
- [83:04]
Danny
Yeah.
- [83:04]
Stefan Burns
So that makes sense.
- [83:05]
Danny
Hold that thought. I gotta take take a leak real quick. We'll be right back. There's so many possibilities for like what could have caused extinction events in the past. You know, like is it comets? Is it volcanoes, is it solar flares? Is it all of the above? Who knows? But it's fun to, it's fun to, to speculate. You know, they're like, like some of these structures, like this had to have been like why else would they dig these underground cities unless it was to escape something, right. And, and like also it. To live without sunlight for an extended period of time has got to be super unhealthy. You would imagine that there wouldn't be long term health effects living on under underground.
- [84:00]
Stefan Burns
There has to be some health reason that outweighs that, I would think.
- [84:03]
Danny
Exactly.
- [84:05]
Stefan Burns
I don't think it's climate.
- [84:06]
Danny
That's a very, very well stated.
- [84:08]
Stefan Burns
I don't think it's climate because yeah, it gets. We don't see people in Turkey living in these underground cave systems right now.
- [84:16]
Danny
No.
- [84:16]
Stefan Burns
So, and, and actually back five, six, 7,000 years ago, it was probably quite a bit nicer there, right?
- [84:24]
Danny
Really?
- [84:24]
Stefan Burns
Well, I mean you had the. Back during the ice age, Turkey was probably a great place to live because it was quite a bit colder. It's still a very nice place, but it gets hot there during the summer. Or like Egypt for example. But you know, 6,000 years ago Sahara was still green.
- [84:40]
Danny
Right.
- [84:41]
Stefan Burns
So in terms of it being like absolute scorching desert and that's. People go there to live in cooler conditions. I mean maybe. I think it's probably doing multiple things at once.
- [84:53]
Danny
Have you ever seen those? A couple years ago we had Randall Carlson in here showing us this graph of all of the ups and downs the climate has been through for millennia. And it's like there's these insane. He was, he was using it to illustrate like the younger dus, the time period of the younger dress, how like we went from super cold to super hot. And there was these huge spikes, like at the beginning, at the end of the younger dries and all the stuff and like how the temperature has been just up and down forever. And he was showing like during, I believe, I mean it's been a while. I don't know if it's, if this is, I'm recalling it correctly, but I believe he was showing like during the medieval period. It was like super warm, like even warmer than it is now. Are you familiar with this?
- [85:41]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, the Medieval Warm Period.
- [85:43]
Danny
Right. And, and how much do you know how much warmer it was like than it is now? So you can find that graph, Steve.
- [85:49]
Stefan Burns
It was not homogenous. So a lot of the warming was concentrated in places like Iceland, northern Europe, Greenland. It was much warmer there, like much warmer than it is in the current day. That's why it was easy for them to go and settle those locations. So it wasn't, the warming was really concentrated. Some of these high latitude zones, it was not homogenous around the planet, but there was a distinct warming event. Interesting work that was in some connections put forward by my buddy Max, Max Raymond, I have a podcast with him on my channel. But he looked at the record of supernova explosions and also the Medieval Warm Period. And there's like a pretty tight correlation in time between us receiving, seeing these supernovas, which if we're seeing it, we're gaining some energy from that. Just how much? What type? What's the significance? It's hard to say.
- [86:47]
Danny
Right.
- [86:47]
Stefan Burns
But there is this connection in time because we had three big supernovas that we saw at the early, early, I guess 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th century, like the famous ones, 1054 AD. But then we see this distinct warming that occurred immediately after that. But I mean there's records of that from the Chinese, the Japanese, across the board. But effectively, I mean that's the Crab Nebula that was formed, but that was such a bright and powerful supernova explosion that it was like immediately one of the brightest things in the sky for months. So I mean a huge event and it didn't occur that far away. Right. There's supernovas that occur in other galaxies and nowadays we can detect them, but for us to see it, it's going to be, it's got to be fairly close to us. And he's, he's connected these repetitious nova or supernova events to, I think they're called like Danzberg Oshkird cycles, these random swings in the climate. I'm sure when you're with Randall, you're probably talking about those because you sometimes see these dramatic leaps up in the temperature of the Earth based off of the records from Greenland and ice core stuff. Right. That do not line up with Milankovitch orbital cycles and resonances. So the question is, what's creating this massive sudden 2 degree increase in global temperature? And you can look at the, some of these supernovas and these nebula have multiple rings to them. And so you know the velocity of the expansion. Then you, and you also know the distance that's, that's also an equation that you kind of need to figure out is how far away they are. Right. But you put those two together, you can get a sense of when the explosion occurred or explosions in time. And so Max, my buddy Max, he lined them up, he's like, this is kind of interesting. Like they line up in time with these, these sudden warming events.
- [88:46]
Danny
Interesting.
- [88:47]
Stefan Burns
So I mean you, you, you can't, I, I wouldn't like stand top of the hill and you know, tell everyone that's 100% the case. But go to that one on the.
- [88:56]
Danny
Left, Steve, where it has the actual. Yeah, that one. Click on that one.
- [89:00]
Stefan Burns
But I think we should be thinking about our environment here on Earth in a more interplanetary and interstellar sense. I think those outside forces in the environment that we're in matters a lot more than we currently think.
- [89:16]
Danny
What do you mean by that?
- [89:17]
Stefan Burns
I think, I think the surround, I think our star and also our surrounding cosmos has a much more direct impact on the Earth and therefore like our living conditions than we may think other, you know, may initially think if the younger Dries was caused by common impact. Like some of these things are fairly, you can kind of get a sense for them like a giant comet coming in and impacting. We've seen this in the movies. But if, if this supernova connection or even novas that are strong enough and they have their jets aligned with us, you know, if that has an impact on the Earth, that's a little bit less tangible. But I think we should consider these things totally.
- [90:01]
Danny
This is an interesting graph I never seen, I've never seen this one before. So from 100 A.D. or from like 0 to 100 A.D. was the Roman warm period. So it looks like it was about a degree, a degree warmer, maybe Celsius than the Dark ages, which was from. They have a, it's a little bit off there, but it's from basically like 300 to a thousand. And so is that right? It's saying it's one degree cooler from eight to nine, I'm guessing. Okay.
- [90:37]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. We go through these oscillations.
- [90:40]
Danny
That's wild. But one degree degree globally is a big, like it's a big. Is it, is this, is this global? Because if it's global, then it's. Yeah, it doesn't, I don't think it specifies if it's, if it's global, but I can't imagine one degree would make much of a difference.
- [90:58]
Stefan Burns
It, it depends. And again, these warm periods are not homogeneous in nature. So it's not that the entire Earth experiences the warming or cooling uniformly. It's, it's specific pockets of the Earth. Yeah, yeah.
- [91:12]
Danny
It's interesting though that the Medieval War period, which seems to be even warmer by maybe a half degree than the Roman War period, you know, because the Medieval period is so interesting because like there, I mean that's when human beings like created like the most incredible like architecture and stuff like that over in Europe. And you know, you have like more art and architecture and crazy stuff and, but also, you know, like, I, I'd be curious to see what the temperature was like even in the classical period. You know, I don't know if we have any. I'm sure we have a ways of determining that. See what that, see what that was. See, let's see what the.
- [91:53]
Stefan Burns
Like classic ancient Greece.
- [91:55]
Danny
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
- [91:55]
Stefan Burns
500 BC.
- [91:56]
Danny
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Like the classical period all around, like the near east and that part of the world.
- [92:04]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, it doesn't go far enough.
- [92:05]
Danny
Doesn't go far enough back, huh? I wonder why.
- [92:09]
Stefan Burns
I've seen some graphs though. I mean.
- [92:11]
Danny
And we're in a cooling period now, right?
- [92:14]
Stefan Burns
Well, overall the, the Earth is warming, but in general, I think the safest thing that you could say is that our climate and weather is becoming more volatile. So we're seeing really. Yeah, I mean, for example, in December there is a huge heat anomaly over the United States though, like the Yukon, Canada, Alaska, that was excluded. They had a huge cold snap there. Also, like Maine was quite a bit cold, but like here and also Texas and a lot of the heartland, the US had tons of temperature records broken for December. Meanwhile, Moscow, like right now has had one of the biggest like polar blizzard cyclones of all time. And the snow is piled up like crazy. So overall global temperatures are going up. The Arctic is warming like three, four times faster than other spots. But in general there's just more volatility across the board. That's my take home because what we see is sometimes we get these sudden changes in temperature. So like we could be on this warming. But I wouldn't be surprised if all of a sudden we have a cold snap that comes in because we're in an interglacial right now. That doesn't seem to be the trend, but trends sometimes suddenly reverse. But if we want to be prepared for the future and just kind of understand where we're going, then the bigger thing to be aware of in my mind is that we're to see increased volatility, stronger storms more, more frequent in locations that we typically wouldn't have storms, at least with our recent record. I guess one of the big things I really want people to be mindful of is that a lot of our data doesn't go back that far. I mean, let's say like 1850, right. For a lot of climate records, a lot of our geologic records, like the solar records, I mean, the space age started in like the 50s, so a lot of that space data only goes back to like 1950. So we have, in our seismic data for earthquakes, we have some data going further back because we found the fault trace in the slip and we can reconstruct it. But in terms of good seismic data, like 1900, these data sets are almost meaningless in a geologic sense. I mean, they're super useful and we get good information out of them. But 10,000 years of data or 50,000 years of data, that's still just a drop in the bucket for the Earth, which is millions and millions and millions, billions of years old. So I think it's important not to draw too many definitive conclusions as to. This is the only, these are the only possibilities that exist for the Earth.
- [94:52]
Danny
One of the craziest things to me is it's so hard to know what's really going on with the Earth's climate and the, and, and all this, this whole topic, it's so hard to know what's going on because it, it's like it comes with so much political baggage.
- [95:05]
Stefan Burns
Yeah.
- [95:05]
Danny
Like there's nobody who has a take on the climate that is not attached to their political ideology or like how, what they label themselves out. Yeah, right.
- [95:17]
Stefan Burns
That's because I see my first principle is I want to understand what's happening. So, and, and, well, politics. I mean, the whole thing's stupid. So like, I could care less about either side, but I just want to understand what's happening. So we know that this, like our sun, the star in our system, is the main driver of climate. Because if that was all of a sudden to go away, Earth would all of a sudden be very cold, dark, it Would not be a fun place. Right. It would change everything. We're close to the sun. We receive a lot of light radiation from the sun. That's our total solar irradiance, about 1,370 watts per square meter of energy coming in. That changes across the solar cycle. Total solar radiance doesn't change that much. We can say it goes from like 1370 to 1374 in terms of total solar radiance, because most of that energy is infrared, optical or visual light, and then also uv. But we get distinct changes in X ray light, extreme ultraviolet light. Also radio frequency light goes up quite a bit in intensity during solar maximum versus solar minimum. But that's the main driver of the climate. Then there's what's happening with the Earth and her own changes, let's say, like water vapor in the atmosphere and the hydrological cycle. And then there's what are we doing to alter that? Those systems with anthropogenic greenhouse gases and stuff. And for some reason some people are like, oh, it's just CO2 and our sun doesn't affect the climate at all. And then other people are like, oh, CO2 does nothing, it's just the sun. It's like it's a combination of all these factors. Right. And they're probably going to vary in their significance at times too.
- [97:01]
Danny
Sure. Of course we contribute to the carbon in the atmosphere, like the CO2. Of course we contribute to it. Is it, is it enough to literally like create a new ice age or. Not a new ice age, but like to warm up the Earth and melt the ice caps to where, like that's going to change the Earth? I, I don't know, but it's just, like I said, it's just so volatile and there's no middle ground in this kind of stuff. And it's hard to like hear a nuanced take on what's really happening. I see, I see articles all the time that the, the ice caps are growing. Right. Like the, the ice sheets are getting bigger right now and, you know, depending on what website you go to, you can find a different scientific take on what's happening.
- [97:48]
Stefan Burns
Well, yeah, I mean, December would be a good example because some outlets were probably reporting about the huge cold snap that hit the Yukon and parts of the U.S. meanwhile, other outlets would only cover the huge warming trend that hit, you know, the heartland and most of the United States and.
- [98:07]
Danny
Right.
- [98:07]
Stefan Burns
You know, Europe's a whole different place, but other parts of the globe. But yeah, it's, it's unfortunate that.
- [98:13]
Danny
Look at this NASA satellites show Antarctica has gained ice despite rising global temperatures. How is that possible? An abrupt change in Antarctica has caused the continent to gain ice. But this increase, documented in NASA satellite data, is a temporary anomaly rather than an indication that global warming has reversed. Scientists say. Yeah, yeah, the problem, the problem with all this is that it's just so entangled with multiple money, you know. Yeah, there's all these little financial entanglements in science that make it screwy, which sucks. What's with everything?
- [98:53]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, money's kind of a, a crazy thing, which is, I mean, I'm not perfect and you know, I've made mistakes and I'm sure in 10 years I'll look back at certain things I've said or thoughts I had and as new data comes out, like, okay, this is my new revised idea on this. But I do like the fact that I've taken myself out of any kind of constricting influence by just kind of becoming independent and, you know, by educating others publicly online, people like that, enough that it keeps me afloat and. Great. I think we need more independent voices. I think we need more independent data collection networks. Like one of my long term life goals at this moment in time is to create like a global observatory for geophysical and solar data and more. So we're not reliant just on government organizations. One of your questions earlier is where do I track this stuff? And we get a lot of great data feeds from NASA and NOAA and other space and government organizations, but there's often political interest there and yeah, conflicts of interest. And I mean, there's some things that just sometimes you're like, why are they not speaking the truth about this? Or why are they not addressing this thing that occurred?
- [100:13]
Danny
Why are they assassinating plasma physicists?
- [100:17]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, weird stuff, dude. Yeah, the MIT dude.
- [100:20]
Danny
How crazy is that? I saw some, I saw some stories about that. I didn't know what to think. There's just so many crazy takes on that. On that MIT guy. He was an MIT plasma physicist, right?
- [100:33]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, Italian guy. And I think he's like 43, 44.
- [100:37]
Danny
And he was on the cusp of like, of like he had recently like cracked something, I heard.
- [100:45]
Stefan Burns
So he was, I mean, I don't know the full story, but he was the director of plasma and fusion science at mit. Right.
- [100:53]
Danny
Plasma and fusion.
- [100:54]
Stefan Burns
And he was specifically looking into understanding turbulence in fusion reactors because plasma is really interesting. It's a four stated matter. It's the most energetic form of matter because it's highly ionized and therefore you're playing with a lot more electromagnetism than you are with solids, liquids, or gases. And plasma doesn't really like to cooperate or behave. So the whole nuclear fusion discussion is interesting because when you, when you create plasma, it often likes to bend back in on itself and undergo these instabilities, and it doesn't really like to cooperate. And so with a fusion reactor, they're effectively creating this plasma. They want to condense it down to a point where there's such a high concentration density of these ions, like hydrogen, that they eventually do run into each other and then, you know, fuse to form a helium. But if you can't get the thing to condense down the first place, you're not going to have success with your fusion reactor. Yeah, and so plasma seems to resist these dynamics, and so you need really powerful magnetic fields to confine it. But plasma is also generating its own magnetic fields, and so you create all this turbulence. So again, I don't know this guy's full life work, but he was specifically looking into plasma turbulence. And that would be a very important thing to understand as it relates to fusion and being successful with that. And I read something about it being like a personal vendetta, the guy who murdered him. But, dude, I don't believe anything nowadays after the whole especially like with that Boeing whistleblower situation and the guy gets whacked or, you know, I just saw this.
- [102:37]
Danny
There was multiple guys who got whacked with the Boeing thing. Wasn't there like, a bunch of, like, key witnesses that were getting ready to do depositions and like, the day before they died?
- [102:45]
Stefan Burns
I think it's more than one. Yeah, yeah. And then also, I mean, I don't know, but this guy just released a YouTube video that he cracked the Coca Cola recipe. I saw that, reverse engineered it. I'm like, dude, what? I would be worried if I were you, because that's funny.
- [103:02]
Danny
Like, really though, Coca Cola. Coca Cola is going to send out their assassins.
- [103:09]
Stefan Burns
I mean, it's kind of tongue in cheek, but like, after you just see when there's big money and big interests and there's monopolies and such, like, yeah, you got to be kind of mindful of. Of these things.
- [103:20]
Danny
So, yeah, the plasma stuff's super interesting because you don't really learn about plasma in school, do you? You kind of learn about all the other states of matter. But the plasma one's the weird one because that, it's. So it's true. That was that like 99 of the universe is made of plasma.
- [103:37]
Stefan Burns
That's what they say. Yeah. I mean our space environment is a mix of plasma and then also neutral gas. But it's interesting. Well, Yeah, I mean 99.9 would be because most of the mass is contained within stars and stars are highly energetic. So they're plasma.
- [103:56]
Danny
Right, right.
- [103:58]
Stefan Burns
But when you talk to a lot of astronomers or just listen to what they say, often they're not talking about plasma, they're talking about gas, they're talking about dust. But for some reason. Yeah. And these made up things which we don't have evidence for. Dark energy, dark matter, like they're trying to. They're creating new variables to fill in their, their theory and their equation, which probably is broken to begin with. Sure, that's my thought at least. I think we'll have a paradigm shift in our understanding of some of these things cosmologically in next five, 10, 20 years. I don't think dark matter, dark energy will survive. I don't think really. And I don't think Big Bang will survive. I'm not an expert like you know, end all be. But I think sometimes we get too entrenched with our ideas and you know, there's other explanations that were put forth at the time, matter, antimatter balance that would explain a lot of these things more elegantly. But because maybe someone has personal beef with someone else, it doesn't take off. These dynamics exist in Life. But yeah, 99.9 of the universe is plasma. We don't really understand it. People don't really talk about it. Like is it just in space? Is it also here on Earth we see with earthquakes, especially land based ones, sometimes these earthquake lights.
- [105:15]
Danny
Oh yeah, those are wild, huh?
- [105:17]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, really cool. We don't have that much footage of them because we need it to be at night. Needs to be a big enough earthquake and needs to be a land based earthquake. But sometimes like in New Zealand, I think it was 2017, 2018, it's like a big magnitude seven something. We see these, you know, flashes of green, blue light coming up.
- [105:38]
Danny
They often get mistaken for like UFOs too. There's a Marfa, Texas, I think there's a lot of these earthquake lights that come out of the ground. There's something. What is it about Marfa, Texas that makes it so super conducive for all these earthquake lights? Am I just because there's lots of like underground seismic activity. There's this, there's this NASA physicist I believe retired now, named Friedman. Friedman Freund.
- [106:04]
Stefan Burns
That guy's great.
- [106:05]
Danny
Yeah. You're Familiar with him? Yeah. So he's the one. He came up with this hypothesis that the igneous rock underneath the Earth, when it grinds together, because it has this. This. This charge in the igneous rock, and when. When it grinds together, it somehow produces enough energy to. To shoot these earthquake lights out of the ground. And he. Hypoth. He came up with the idea of using that as like a early warning detection for earthquakes, right?
- [106:32]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. His big thing was, if we zoom out, was really understanding electric circuits and the subsurface and so what he called rock circuits. And he did a lot of laboratory testing and then also looking at observational data. But when you put certain rock types under mechanical strain, they generate all of a sudden electric charge now flow in a circuit. And a circuit is bounded by the conductivity of the materials. So if you can all of a sudden increase the conductivity of some of the circuit pathway, that will increase the energy flow dramatically if that potential energy exists. And so one key example that he pointed out was this earthquake that struck San Jose, the Bay Area, you know, South Bay, from the calaveras fault in 2005. I believed there's a magnitude 5.1. Is that or 5.5 either way. No, not the biggest earthquake. But they noticed in the out. And that's where he was based, off of the NASA Ames Centers right there in the South Bay.
- [107:37]
Danny
Yep.
- [107:37]
Stefan Burns
So he had access all this data. There's a widespread network of conductivity sensors, atmosphere conductivity sensors, across the South Bay. And before that earthquake occurred, all the sensors in that area went up to their highest value and then went offline. So the atmospheric conductivity went up dramatically. We don't know how high because it went off the capability of the sensor to read. And then the earthquake occurred.
- [108:07]
Danny
Whoa.
- [108:08]
Stefan Burns
So his idea was that there was a huge ionization event that came up from the subsurface that was able to increase the electrical conductivity of where we live, the boundary layer in the troposphere, which is very resistive. Right. It's the very dense atmosphere where we are at the surface, but very low conductivity. If that can all of a sudden become conductive. Now you have a really strong ability to close a circuit across a vast distance because you can connect one place of the Earth to another. And if there are electric circuit dynamics involved with earthquakes, which, I mean, that's 100% where I am based off my research. And he just. Earthquake lights are great. Observational data supports that, then that could be a dynamic at play. And so the conductivity sensors all went Crazy. And then totally, you know, topped out. And then boom. Magnitude 5.1 earthquake. And then they cooled back down afterwards. But that's not even that big of an earthquake. There's Loma Prieta, magnitude 6.9, 1989. They happened to put a magnetic field sensor in the Santa Cruz Mountains. I think just about seven miles away from the epicenter, which is, you know, the surface directly above the hypocenter. And they. They noticed these magnetic field fluctuations across a variety of frequencies leading up to the Loma Prieta quake. Quake. So this is like Schumann resonance frequencies which are like 0 to 50 hertz. This is extremely low frequencies even lower than that, like.01 to 1 Hz magnetic field fluctuation. So the earth is way more complex and interconnected. The 1964, the Great Alaskan Earthquake. Magnitude 9.2. The. The founder of the company I used to work for, his name was Sheldon Briner. This is Geometrics. He was a maverick. He actually was the guy who discovered the Olmec heads. What, by horse?
- [110:13]
Danny
No way.
- [110:13]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. So by horseback he had a magnetometer and he would. I mean the Mexicans knew roughly where they were.
- [110:20]
Danny
Yeah.
- [110:20]
Stefan Burns
But they were buried down quite a bit. So he went out there and being in California, it's not that far away. And he did these magnetic field surveys and he found the anomalies associated with the Olmec heads. They dug them up. And unfortunately not that many people know about him. But he then started to get into some really interesting fields in terms of the connection between magnetic fields and magnetosomes and Alzheimer's and all this stuff. I met him just a couple months before he passed away. November 2019, because he showed up for the. The 50 year reunion for Geometrics, the anniversary. And he was in great health then. Anyways, what was his name? Sheldon Briner.
- [111:00]
Danny
Sheldon Briner.
- [111:01]
Stefan Burns
B R E I N E R. Yeah. Really interesting guy. A lot of cool research he's done. I look to him as a bit of a. Like a guiding light. He had, you know, he was basically at the front line of magnetometer technology back in the 50s and 60s. And. Yeah, there's a photo with him in the Olmec heads.
- [111:22]
Danny
Oh, wow, look at that. That's bizarre.
- [111:25]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. And so he had a magnetometer set up in Portolo Valley where he lived. And he notices long period significant magnetic fluctuations that occurred with the 1964 Alaska earthquake. He was also picking up on his magnetometer all the nuclear testing that they were doing in Nevada. I mean that was all still basically top secret. He like, checking his data. He's like, what the heck was this magnetic pulse right here? Like, this is strange. It's like, oh, actually they're doing nuclear testing nearby.
- [111:56]
Danny
Not only that, we were detonating nukes in the atmosphere in like outer space.
- [111:59]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, yeah. I think that's Starfish prime, if I recall correctly.
- [112:03]
Danny
They're trying to blow a hole in the Van Allen Belts or something.
- [112:06]
Stefan Burns
If you look into the, the geophysical observations done around all the nuclear testing, it's really insane because what happens is you have this fissile material, eventually they move to fusion bombs. But you have this fissile material and you're immediately creating a shockwave of plasma afterwards. But you're also generating a bunch of particle flux, a lot of them being neutrons. And so these neutrons are not affected by magnetic fields. They fly straight out. But they decay into a variety of other particles. The main one that we're interested in would be electrons. So you have this explosion, then the neutrons fly out and the moment it decays into an electron with the other stuff too. But the electron is now governed by the magnetic field. And the magnetic field connects one part of the planet to the other. So there's these conjugate magnetic points that exist. And so the electrons can then flow, flow from that location to the other side. And so they noticed with a lot of these nuclear testing and these blasts that were done that all of a sudden there'd be aurora on the other side of the planet. And they were trying to figure out why. And so the idea is this particle cascade dynamic.
- [113:23]
Danny
Whoa.
- [113:23]
Stefan Burns
The neutrons decay quickly. There's enough of them that do probabilistically get out far enough to then deposit their electrons. The stream of electrons in certain orbital levels that then will feed back to that complete other side of the planet. So we were really basically messing around with the Earth in a big way back with all the nuclear testing. I don't think those energetic effects have wrapped up. I think they're still, I think that's still working its way through our Earth energy system, you could say. But not too much research has been done on that now. And there's also a bit of amnesia there and, and I think there's also some cover ups have been done and such. But yeah, some really crazy dynamics existed. He was tracking this all back in the day and he had an open mind. So when he saw this, people had much more open minds back in the 50s, 60s, 70s, that's my impression, reading the research and talking to some of these People.
- [114:20]
Danny
Now, I heard you talk about this guy named Hans Alfin or something like this. He's like a plasma scientist.
- [114:28]
Stefan Burns
Yeah.
- [114:29]
Danny
What was. So is he still alive?
- [114:32]
Stefan Burns
Fortunately, no. I've thought about how if they trained some like AI model on him, how that would be nice. But of course it wouldn't actually be him. But he was a very open minded astrophysicist and he was really against the Big Bang and very. You know, if you read into his books, you get a sense of the history of astronomy and astrophysics and that helps you understand where we are now. Because back in the day, and still to this day, they had a lot of ideas and theories, but they weren't built off of observations. And then we started sending probes into space and actually collecting data which then disproved a lot of these ideas. For example, the vacuum of space.
- [115:16]
Danny
Right.
- [115:17]
Stefan Burns
They thought Earth's magnetic field was shaped a certain way. It's just basically a very simple dipole magnetic field because there's nothing influencing it's. Then we actually sent, you know, probes out into space and we realized that the magnetic field is more like a teardrop. It has the magneto tail behind it and there's all these structures, the magneto pause. And it's very complex. Depending on the solar wind dynamic, it can change. Like it's not a simple dipole field. But a lot of people were, according to what he was writing. I've been reading his books and they're great, but they were like dead set. Oh, this is the structure, this is how it looks. Then when we actually got the data. Well, no, it's actually quite a bit different. It's a lot more complex and you know, this is how it is. So a lot of theories had that first mindset. And his thoughts were, well, I think that what we see with our Earth, the magnetosphere and what we see in the interplanetary environment should be taken because those are the best observations that we have. And then also our experiments with plasma in the lab, that should be the basis for our theories for areas that we can't access directly in situ, which would be interstellar and cosmic. With the cosmic environment, the interstellar environment, you can get, you know, visual images or you can get images of light. So all the different frequencies, gamma, X, ray, whatever. Right. Going down to radio, you can use that to guide your, your kind of assessment. Because we see like for example, structure to galaxies, we see structure to galactic clusters. They form these filaments and such. So it's like, where do we see filaments in our Earth environment, Do we see filamentary structures within the plasma sphere? Yeah, we see the aurora. They form these ribbons and filaments of plasma. If we see that in the Earth environment, we're also seeing these filamentary structures at the cosmic environment. There's probably some base physics that works across all the different scales that's fractal in nature. And so that was really his mindset was work off of the plasma experiments and the observational data we have in the lab, also what we're observing in space and then build out from that. Not just, oh, I had this idea. Unless this creates some math that makes it look cool, but isn't based off of any observational data. And as more data has come in, a lot of these ideas that were taken as gospel have, you know, reached a chopping block. But not all of them. A lot of them are still there in use and, you know, not all. It's not like every single idea we have is wrong. But certainly there's a lot of inertia to ideas and not, not all these theories are what the reality is. We're always going to be coming up with new, new and better, better understandings of things. But I just think his, his mindset of thinking was really right on it because it was, it was just very logical. It wasn't fanciful. And I think more people should read his work. I mean, he's well known. But there's, there's this, there's this phenomenon that occurs where you have like a scientist and they come with all these ideas, but then they're kind of only known for one thing. And so he's known for waves traveling through plasma. They're called Alvin waves, and there's a whole bunch of different types. So he's really well known for that, but he's not really well known for some of his other ideas for the cosmos. Like, for example, matter, antimatter, symmetry. One of the big things in astrophysics is why is there this matter antimatter imbalance? Why we only see matter, but we're not seeing antimatter. That just kind of strikes me strange that if you have these things generated in equal amounts, and that's what's stipulated with the big bang, how could one overcome the other in the first place? And they say there's some particle, you know, some quantum particle physics that explains that. But I don't know. My, my spidey sense goes off.
- [119:25]
Danny
What is anti matter?
- [119:27]
Stefan Burns
It's effectively the opposite of matter. But you wouldn't really be able to tell what antimatter is until annihilation occurred. Because when matter and antimatter come into contact, they just immediately create energy. So there's nothing left over other than just pure energy. It's the most energetic thing that we know of. Like a matter antimatter collision is incredibly energetic.
- [119:55]
Danny
So what was his take on the Big Bang?
- [119:57]
Stefan Burns
Well, he didn't think the big bang is what happened. His idea was that there was more of a steady state to universe and to keep it really simple is that you have a matter anti matter balance. And we don't know exactly at what level you start to encounter antimatter. I mean, it gets kind of wild his ideas. But for example, our stunt, our, our sun and our solar system could be matter. We don't know if Sirius is antimatter. You know, Sirius A, Sirius B or Alpha Centauri and Proxima Centauri. We don't know if those stars are matter or not. They could be antimatter because the light, there's, there's not.
- [120:40]
Danny
We can see them, right?
- [120:41]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, there's not light and anti light though, so.
- [120:43]
Danny
Right.
- [120:44]
Stefan Burns
So they're just generating light. There's no way we can tell until we actually kind of get close enough to sample. But maybe the, maybe the, maybe they are matter. And instead you get these interstellar pockets of matter and antimatter. So it's a star cluster that's all anti matter and another star cluster nearby that's matter. Or maybe it's even at the galactic scale that you have this division. He was even talking about, you know, there being antimatter chunks in the sun that generate solar flares. And it gets kind of wild. But at the, the boundary between matter and antimatter, you're going to have annihilation which is extremely energetic process which generates gamma rays. And as a result of the, of that collision, there's going to be a natural repulsion between the two. And so they're going to spread out. And then a lot of that galactic flux, the cosmic, you know, the, the, the gamma rays will get absorbed into other mediums and stuff. So it may be kind of hard to detect, but that could explain some of the cosmic flux that we see in the environment. But his idea was that gravity would bring these different pockets of matter and antimatter together over time and then annihilation would become a process that outweighs them in force, which then pushes them apart again, which then would diminish the amount of annihilation that's occurring. Because these boundary layers that exist because they're not far enough apart. There's a low enough flux of matter hitting antimatter. You know, this cushion that exists is now very low energy that then gravity starts to bring them back in together and now you get more annihilation. You get this rhythmic pulsing to the universe across time.
- [122:22]
Danny
Oh, interesting.
- [122:23]
Stefan Burns
And so the universe could be, let's say, 50% smaller at one point like 10 billion years ago, let's say.
- [122:31]
Danny
Yeah.
- [122:32]
Stefan Burns
And then it expands out and eventually contracts and expands. Attract, contracts, expands. And, and that was his in general, to keep it really simple. That was his idea to the universe. And, you know, we're not really going to be able to get good data on that until, you know, we actually get probes well beyond our solar system. Voyager 1 and 2 are still basically right at the edge of our, our heliosphere. So we haven't gone to Alpha Centauri and you know, set foot down and be like, oh, what the heck is this? So it's a lot of, I dislike his mindset of build off of what we have and then go forward with that and we'll get a lot more answers as to antimatter as these particle accelerators are able to produce more and more of it and we can do more testing of it, you could say, but we don't have any direct measurements of it.
- [123:25]
Danny
Yeah, it's interesting. Did you see that? There was a recent post that I found and there was a paper attached to it where I think it was the James Webb detected some galaxies or something that were like, they, they were so big, they were like super massive galaxies that they would have to have been like. It like throws off the whole timeline of the consensus of like the Big Bang. Did you see that?
- [123:50]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, they're, they're, they just keep pushing, pushing things back and. Yeah, yeah. I just personally, I mean, the big.
- [123:56]
Danny
If you can find that paper, Steve, the James Webb super massive galaxy discovery.
- [124:01]
Stefan Burns
The big thing with the Big Bang is there's this cosmic background microwave radiation.
- [124:06]
Danny
Exactly, yes.
- [124:07]
Stefan Burns
And, and they kind of like, okay, well this is here, and we have this inflation to the universe, then let's just wind the clock back and it comes to a singularity. But if there's other dynamics, like for example, this pulsing that we discuss, you could wind it back, but then maybe it doesn't actually go all the way to singularity. Like maybe you should stop winding the, the volume, the clock back at a certain point because it actually doesn't go beyond that. So it's like a lot of assumptions that have been made. But I know I just explores the open mind. I'm just a young chap who's interested in this. Yeah, I feel like I have a fairly good spidey sense and I think it's good to, to ask questions.
- [124:52]
Danny
Is this it? This is March 2025. This, this is the, the, the, the announcement. Oh okay. Is this on? This is on the NASA website. Oh yeah. NASA.gov so let's see what the summary of the top says. Using a unique infrared sensitivity of NASA's James Webb Space Telescope, researchers can examine ancient galaxies to probe secrets of the early universe. Now an international team of astronomers has identified bright hydrogen emissions from a galaxy in an unexpectedly early time in universe history. The surprise finding is challenging researchers to explain how this light could have pierced the thick fog of neutral hydrogen and filled space at that time. The James Webb telescope discovered an incredibly distant galaxy. J, J, A, D, E, S, G, S, Z. How do they come up with these names? Z13 1 observed to exist just 330 million years after the Big Bang. An image is taken by Webb's NI Nurcam near infrared camera as part of James Webb Space Telescope Advanced Deep Extra Galactic Survey. Researchers use the galaxy's brightness in different infrared filters to estimate its red. Shit, right? It's red shift which matches. See I had a dude on here recently, I was trying to show this to me and he was trying to tell me this was like some crock pseudoscience but this is on NASA's website. So this thing is, is so old and so big they have to push the timeline back because of the redshift.
- [126:29]
Stefan Burns
I mean they do incredible work and, and if you look through some of the, like this book that I'm reading right now by Hans Ollivin, it's, it was co published with NASA but it's from like the 80s so there was a much more open minded spirit of investigation back in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and there have been variety. People like Freeman Frond who you know, looked into rock circuits and the electromagnetic dynamics of earthquakes and he was with NASA. So you know, it's not like they're all closed minded people but I think when it comes to what's presented to the public there's this filtering that's done and, and I guess that makes sense but it's kind of just we're going to show the things that we're the most certain about, I guess but some of the things that are presented that they're the most certain about. I'm like, I'm Just not so sure about that. Just because a lot of people in the room are saying the same thing doesn't mean they're all right. Right. Seen that play out so many times in history. There's a lot of really cool things though that come out of NASA, that come out of noaa. A lot of amazing people that work there. Yeah. So like, it's just that these organizations kind of grab a lot of these people and I see things becoming more decentralized in the 21st century. So I think we'll see more people cart like chart their own course and do their own independent research and.
- [127:58]
Danny
Yeah, but it can lead. The problem with that too is it can, it can lead in the opposite direction where it's like nothing that the, the, the science in like the academic science or these whatever you want to call them, so called gatekeepers. True. Like everything they say is a lie and everything's a cover up and everything's a conspiracy and everything is not what it seems. And it's like it just becomes this crazy cult type mentality that people have.
- [128:25]
Stefan Burns
Yeah.
- [128:26]
Danny
Especially online.
- [128:26]
Stefan Burns
Tell me about bro. It's, that's why like, that's why psychology. I mean I, I'm not a psychologist, but you have to learn a little bit about it because you just see it play out in front of you and if you want to not be, I don't know, if you don't want to be a sheep, you got to kind of spend a little bit of time in all these different things and to learn about them because it's important and you see.
- [128:50]
Danny
Well, it's crazy. I mean just you know, to use a recent example of that Three Eye Atlas, it was like, you know, you saw like incredible Division online of what this thing could have been. You, you had either it was a space alien spaceship coming from, you know, some other star system or, or it's just a comet.
- [129:11]
Stefan Burns
Right.
- [129:11]
Danny
Like there's no in between there. It's become this game of questioning people's motives instead of actually inter interpreting the data and attacking the substance of what is happening. And you know when you're just reading stuff online or like watching YouTube videos and you don't really have the time to like look at this stuff and like look at the raw data and come to some sort of conclusion. It's like, you know, all you can do is just rely on other people's interpretations and stuff and oftentimes you're going to get that wrong.
- [129:39]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. How, how much have you been tracking the 3 Atlas store? Because I've Been doing a ton of research there.
- [129:44]
Danny
I haven't really. I heard that. So Avi was telling us that it was like December 16th was when it was going to be closest to Earth.
- [129:51]
Stefan Burns
Right.
- [129:51]
Danny
And that was the time that we were going to have like the best shot at it to figure out what it was. And I haven't heard anything about it since. Have you been tracking it?
- [129:59]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, I mean it popped into view, you know, June 1st or July 1st. We first caught our glimpse of Three Eye Atlas and then I jumped on that pretty quick because it was interesting. But yeah, it became this bifurcated kind of oppositional warfare between there's 4 million draconian soldiers on this thing versus it's just a comet. Meanwhile, our definition of comet is built off of just, I don't know, like 50, 100 years of observations.
- [130:31]
Danny
Sure.
- [130:32]
Stefan Burns
And some historic eyewitness viewing. But space is so much more vast and dynamic than we know. So to call everything just a comet is a little short sighted because comets have a fairly low bulk density. It's mostly ice and these volatile gases that are turned into ice, like the CO2 ice and methane ice and you know, they start to vaporize effectively as they get close to the sun. But one of the key things is that they're kind of fluffy and they have a low density to them. 3 Atlas has shown some signatures that it's not just that it's had these tightly collimated jets so that somewhere facing tail is one of those, it extends out quite a bit and it's not just like a shotgun super diffuse, it's, it's fairly tightly collimated. And we've also seen jets come off other locations of it. And I mean we've seen this like jets before with comets and such. But 3 Atlas certainly is different. And one of the things that we see in space is that you often get jets when there is a central body that's rotating, that's magnetized. That seems to be a key factor in the production of jets. So if you have a rotating central body and it's magnetic, just you know, an endogenous magnetic field that can create the structure to collimate these flows of plasma. So we see that certain galaxies, you know, you have the centrally rotating core of the galaxy, it's highly magnetic because it's made of all these stars and whatever, maybe black holes, you have these jets coming off of that supernova, same thing. So there's some evidence that this is kind of what I think based on my research that 3i Atlas may have a level of magnetization to it. There's even some processes that can occur in interstellar space due to the processing of cosmic rays that would generate magnetite in situ, which is magnetic. And so if 3i Atlas does have a strong magnetic field and it is rotating. We know it's rotating, but how fast is still kind of open. They say it's like 16 hours. I think it actually may be rotating faster than that, but there's no hard data on that. But there's really not that much data on this thing in general.
- [132:50]
Danny
Right. We haven't been observing these interstellar objects for very long. Like, this is the third one, right?
- [132:56]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. And since it came in super fast, like, how did it get that speed? Right. Its trajectory through the solar system, while very unusual in terms of it being aligned with the ecliptic plane, passing close to Mars and then passing close to Jupiter in March, that is just kind of a random thing. Unless it is, you know, intelligent by nature. Like it was planned, but there's always weird trajectories that you can drop. So the speed, though, is key. It's traveling super fast. What gave it that velocity or at least relative velocity to us?
- [133:28]
Danny
Well, if it was interstellar.
- [133:30]
Stefan Burns
Right.
- [133:31]
Danny
You could. How would we know? Like, we don't. Like we don't know how fast interstellar objects typically go, do we? I mean, we have three to measure. So if it's coming from some other star system, would have more time to.
- [133:43]
Stefan Burns
Gain momentum, maybe, or how is ejected. Yeah. So there's a lot of different ideas. But I mean, one idea is that you could have maybe a planet just get through tidal forces just totally fractured apart. It passes too close to a. A very like, let's say like a red dwarf that just rips the planet asunder. And if it's Earth, you know, Earth has a significant inner core. It's made up of iron and also nickel and it's magnetic. Like all this stuff. You could have a chunk of that perhaps fly off. And if that's going on fast enough speed and it has magnetization already, you don't just lose that. Right. There has to be a process for that to get lost. Then that could, you know, if this thing is compositionally different and that'd also have a much higher bulk density. Like the bulk density of that would be like 8 grams per centimeter cubed, whereas water is 1. And a comment bulk density is roughly about 1 gram per centimeter cubed. You know, it could be dramatically different. We haven't landed a probe on it. We've landed probes on comets before. We've done some missions like the Rosetta mission, but we didn't do that with three ATLAS because it kind of came out of the blue too quick.
- [134:55]
Danny
But super going super fast.
- [134:57]
Stefan Burns
Super fast. So there's a lot of unknowns. But yeah, just to throw a label of comet on it, I think is premature. So we call it a interstellar object.
- [135:06]
Danny
Right.
- [135:07]
Stefan Burns
But then also to take the word of, you know, I think these people are amazing. And the spiritual community, like channelers and psychics and all that, I think there's a lot of cool stuff there. But just to take the word of a channeler who's like, there's 4 million Draconians there. And then, and then. And that's 100% your perspective going from forward. I don't know. That's also the exact same as this person saying, it's just a comet just on the other side. And so I made a lot of videos about exploring all the different perspectives. And guaranteed, every video I made, some people were, you know, thrashing me online for saying, I can't believe you think it's a comet. Meanwhile, I'm calling it interstellar object. And other people saying, I can't believe you're not, you know, recognizing that's 100% alien filled with, with draconian soldiers. I'm like, guys, I'm just presenting all the different ideas in the middle. Interstellar object, but people see what they want to see.
- [136:01]
Danny
So was NASA able to get like a super detailed image of it on December 16 when it came as close to the Earth as it was going to get? Are you aware of that or. And then what. What were we. Were we able to analyze from that?
- [136:18]
Stefan Burns
So there were weird things that happened. I mean, we had this government shutdown.
- [136:21]
Danny
Yeah.
- [136:22]
Stefan Burns
October.
- [136:22]
Danny
They weren't releasing the images. That was like the Mars Orbiter or whatever.
- [136:26]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. And see, Loeb, he really pumped up this Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter imagery. Like if, if you. And he's also edited a lot of his blog posts who obviously has he. Yeah. So. Because there are certain things that he said which, I mean, rightfully, he edited them because they turned out to not be. I think got a little carried away at times. One of them was with the. The Mars Rover. It has a mass can that looks at basically the. The sky every single night in general. And there were some weird things that we were seeing. And one of the images is Phobos. But the Internet community took it and said, that's three I Atlas. And he, he posted it was a moon. Yeah. And so he posted that and then he went back and edited the article later, which is fine. It's good to be, you know, accurate rather than.
- [137:12]
Danny
But does he leave like a footnote saying that he made an edit?
- [137:16]
Stefan Burns
I don't know about that. But he, I mean, going from basically probably August through September, he was talking big about the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, the high rise camera. We'll get our highest resolution, look, we'll be able to focus in on that nucleus, see exactly what it looks like. And then when I actually got the imagery, he's like, I'm not surprised. It doesn't look that great. But, you know, there's, there's this thing with public communication, whereas if you're building, if you're communicating, you have to expect that people are going to sometimes take that information. Maybe they don't hear your future updates. You have to be very clear and nuanced with your communication. I feel like. And the imagery we got from NASA was the highest resolution imagery we got, but there was a lot of improper communication with it because these amateur astronomers, which were doing amazing work getting an imagery of three hours, they're looking at the whole thing. The tail, the coma. You're not seeing the nucleus because the coma is so thick. You know, this envelope of gas, dust, plasma, everything, they're seeing the whole thing. NASA was zoomed in on the coma, and so that's why it looked like a blurry blob. Right. Because you're not seeing the tail or anything. You're punched in on the coma. But they did kind of a poor job at telling people about this because, you know, they were very adamant, though. It's just a comment. And they had this whole press conference and, you know, they did some weird things too, which I kind of questioning why they behaved a certain way.
- [138:48]
Danny
Who, NASA?
- [138:48]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. There's some oddities across the board, but in general, they did give us our highest resolution. But people also, they, they want certain things. So they wanted this to be, you know, some starship. And when the imagery came out that it wasn't.
- [139:05]
Danny
Is that the image, Steve?
- [139:08]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. So I got, I got two sets.
- [139:10]
Danny
Of images for you. So this one right here is the Hawaii Telescope, Subaru telescope in Hawaii that took this on December 13th. 13th, yep. And it's just this fuzzy ball. Okay, that's great. And then here's a more cooler one. Whoa. From I'm guessing one of the space stations.
- [139:31]
Stefan Burns
Oh, this is a G3 Alice, though.
- [139:34]
Danny
Oh, yeah. It's 2024, October 1st that's so cool. Oh, it says 2025 here. Okay, well then never mind.
- [139:41]
Stefan Burns
But that's what a typical comet looks like, right?
- [139:44]
Danny
This one's super cool. Wow. Yeah. So that one's got a typical tale of a comet, right?
- [139:50]
Stefan Burns
That's R2 swan.
- [139:51]
Danny
But then, Lemon, this is 3ix. There's no tail on this one really.
- [139:57]
Stefan Burns
Now that one's probably pretty punched in. We're seeing it's only 10 arc seconds across. So that's a pretty high resolution look at the coma. And the thing is, is that these telescopes, that's what they do, they don't take good wide view pictures of space. If they want to get that, they have to take multiple pictures and then create like a mosaic and stitch them all together, right. And they're only focused on understanding the coma and the nucleus. You don't need to see the tail. But NASA probably should have taken some time to get those wide angle views because that's what everyone wanted. And they're thinking, you know, they're accusing them of all this crazy stuff and there are some weird things happening. So it's not helping them by them not doing the work, you could say. But to answer your question, yeah, Hubble started taking a lot of imagery of 3 Atlas up to this moment in time. So starting November, December and up now, they've been taking a lot of imagery of it, but still in the raw state hasn't been processed except by a few amateur astronomers are processing the Hubble data, which is showing these jets go off, which is some of that observational evidence that maybe three ATLAS is magnetized. And the Rosetta mission by esa, the European Space Agency, when they flew a probe around this comet that they were tracking, they actually picked up a magnetic field around it that typically had a strength of 30 to 50 nanotesla. But when a solar storm hit it, it went up to 300 nanotesla. So a comet, a traditional, you know, regular comet, can already have a pretty significant induced magnetic field. So you can imagine if the object itself, let's say three at Alice, original, like, has remnant magnetization to it and it is spinning fairly rapidly, then you could create the conditions for these sort of astrophysical jets. And what we see across the scales is that there is a fractal nature to reality in the universe. And so if we're seeing astrophysical jets at the galactic scale and at the interstellar scale and at the, sometimes the actual, you know, a single, like, star exploding at the supernova scale, why can't we have jets with maybe A smaller object. So there's, there's a lot of interesting things there.
- [142:18]
Danny
Yeah, yeah. It's wild.
- [142:19]
Stefan Burns
It's a big mystery. I. I don't know what it is. I think it's a unique.
- [142:24]
Danny
It's exiting, it's exiting our solar system now, right? It's like on its way out.
- [142:28]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, yeah, it's. It's leaving now. And it would have to do something dramatic for that to change because it's, again, it's moving so quickly, about 65, 66 kilometers per second right now, roughly, you know, it's sped up. With its closest approach to the sun, it's perihelion to 68. Because gravity, you know, is actually accelerating as it gets closer to the sun. And then that deviates its course a little bit.
- [142:51]
Danny
Right. It's got like an arc.
- [142:52]
Stefan Burns
The fact that only deviated a little bit shows you just how fast it's going.
- [142:56]
Danny
Yeah.
- [142:57]
Stefan Burns
Because most comets, they'll have a huge deviation in their orbit it. But 3 Atlas was just like. Yeah, it wasn't even 45 degrees. It was probably 15, 20 degrees.
- [143:07]
Danny
Yeah. We had this gentleman on the other day who was explaining to us there's this NASA mission where they, they sent a probe to land on an asteroid. And I can't remember the name of the asteroid now. Bennu. That's what it was. Oh, you're familiar with this one. And I think the goal was to, like, they were like, looking for life on the asteroid or something like that, or consciousness or something like, like this.
- [143:31]
Stefan Burns
They found a ton of organics, amino acids. They found these gums which are, from what I know, like weird assemblages of amino acids.
- [143:43]
Danny
So not exactly Osiris Rex was the name of the mission.
- [143:46]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, yeah. Not exactly proteins, like we know them, but they found more of the ingredients for life than they expected. And this is a B type asteroid, which compared to other types of asteroids, specifically like D type asteroids, are less enhanced in these organics. And the asteroid belt is made of, like, there's, there's multiple distinct populations within the asteroid belt in terms of composition, but also in terms of where they're from. So there's objects that have come in from outside the orbit of Neptune in the Kuiper Belt. So Trans Neptunian objects have come into the asteroid belt and found a home there. And it seems that there's higher concentrations of organics and amino acids and things like this when you go further away from the sun because sunlight kind of processes, processes this, these compounds and degrades them. It seems, but the interstellar environment seems to be more conducive to creating or preserving them and. Or both.
- [144:49]
Danny
Yeah.
- [144:50]
Stefan Burns
So we have of objects in our asteroid belt that have come in from the Kuiper belt and found home there. This is a B type asteroid, which is like a standard normal asteroid. If they landed on a D type asteroid or if they send a probe out to maybe one of these objects floating well beyond Neptune, who knows what they might find. It's really quite exciting stuff and full of open possibility. But we haven't found, as far as I know, we haven't found like complex proteins yet. They found these, what they called gums. Gums, which are, I guess it would be proteins because they were. They're like amino acid assemblages. But I guess they're different than standard proteins that we know. Maybe the folding is different. Right. So. But yeah, cool. Really cool stuff. So, I mean, there's a lot of great stuff that's being done and that's why I think it's kind of toxic when you, when you just look at everything and say, oh, it's all nonsense. Space is fake. Right. It's all conspiracy.
- [145:55]
Danny
Yeah.
- [145:56]
Stefan Burns
You know, that doesn't help anybody.
- [145:58]
Danny
How seriously, how serious do academics take the, like the whole younger Dryas hypothesis is that, do they just brush that off as pseudoscience or do in your experience, like real academic geologists and people like this take that hypothesis seriously?
- [146:19]
Stefan Burns
I can't really answer that question because I wasn't even aware of that when I went to school. We never talked about. It wasn't a topic of discussion. Maybe if I'd taken a master's or PhD, but then you start to specialize. And so I, I think a lot of these, I think in general, unless you have a innate interest in it and research into whatever the topic is yourself, a lot of people just kind of go with whatever the, the idea is that's floating around. And so if a lot of your community members or academia and you know, professor friends or whoever, all this kind of repeating the same thing, then you probably just go with that. And it kind of takes some initiative to research into something yourself in depth, come to a more nuanced view.
- [147:12]
Danny
In, in these academic fields, it just seems to be like there's not as much curiosity into this kind of stuff. But like, the reason I'm asking that is because, you know, in that black matte layer that they found in the strata of the Earth, there was like the like little nano diamonds and, and certain metals that you would Find in comets and asteroids. Right.
- [147:34]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, the micro evidence.
- [147:36]
Danny
Yeah.
- [147:36]
Stefan Burns
So I was, I recently had Randall on my show and we just talked about all this stuff and I was actually on his as well. But yeah, he's, Randall Carlson's looked at the, the macro evidence, geologic structures and you know, he relayed this spiritual experience he had when he was a teenager of seeing the actual water flowing down these massive gorges. And he says like, if it's like a visceral spiritual experience that guided him to then investigate what he does now 10 years after it happened.
- [148:07]
Danny
Right.
- [148:07]
Stefan Burns
And I think there's a lot to that. I don't think that should be just immediately dismissed as like some mind fantasy. You know, sometimes the best idea.
- [148:14]
Danny
I mean that's a huge question. Those, those, those scablands, those channeled scablands in the Midwest. It, you know, his theory on it is that there was like a billion quadrillion tons of water flowing through that or something because there was like the Laurentide ice sheet that was above that that somehow like melted instantaneously on, upon impact of some sort of comet or a bunch of comets melted it. And then this quadrillions of tons of water started flowing through and carving out those channeled scouts lands. And if you look at it and you zoom out and you think about that, it, it does look like that Right here's like a close up version. Yeah. And if you really zoom out like a lot of the, a lot of the land in that part of the country and even if you want to go into like, like Southern California area, it looks like it's the bottom of the ocean. Like a bottom, like an ocean floor, you know, so there's something to it. There's definitely something to it.
- [149:20]
Stefan Burns
Universe is fractal. So sometimes you're going to see at bigger scales and the larger process is sometimes the harder it is for us to grasp it with just kind of like visualizing it or more. And evolution used to be thought of as just like a slow, steady, homogeneous process. But we know that there's periods of punctuated equilibrium where there's rapid evolution that occurs because there's some force that causes rapid evolution. And then there may be, you know, more steady grind of evolution for 50,000 years. And then in 500 years it's really rapid because maybe some disease outbreaks or there's some new pressure placed on the island or whatever it is. I think the same is for geology. And so the thing with these, you know, channeled scablands and Randall's idea and other people too, is what deliver the energy to melt the Laurentide ice sheet so quickly.
- [150:16]
Danny
Right.
- [150:18]
Stefan Burns
The traditional idea is that you had. I think it's Lake Algiz. I could be. I think that's right. That's sitting at the base of the Laurentide ice sheet. There was an ice dam and then that broke down.
- [150:29]
Danny
Exactly.
- [150:30]
Stefan Burns
And that flooded out. But based off of Randall's geologic trips all throughout that area over for decades, right. He's like, that's not big enough. That. That's not significant enough. And it did go away quickly. And we have the climate data show that, you know, the younger drives was a massive, you know, basically pulse of volatility for a thousand years or so.
- [150:52]
Danny
And he also talks about this isostatic rebound effect that would have happened, like if the ice sheets would have melted because there's weight that they put on each end of the Earth. Right. And that somehow keeps us in some sort of rotation or keeps us balanced somehow. And if that. All that ice melts, all of a sudden, the Earth's crust will expand and create this isostatic rebound.
- [151:14]
Stefan Burns
Yeah.
- [151:15]
Danny
Are you familiar with that?
- [151:16]
Stefan Burns
That's been measured in Canada and the location, and even like down to the Great Lakes and such. So where the Laurentide ice sheet was, there is this active uplift, though I. It's, you know, certainly slowing down now as compared to when at first, you know, the ice sheet first melted. But his interesting idea, which recently got put on my radar when I was talking to him, is that if you have one location, you know, now having this rebound, there's likely going to be another location that's having this depression. So he thinks the. The Azores is that location. That's why he thinks that perhaps Atlantis was there. Because if you look at the bathymetry data for the Azores, it's actually quite deep. And so if you were to drop sea level 400ft, which is where it was during the last ice age, it doesn't really create like a plateau. But you had the Laurentide ice sheet over North America and then you also had a very like, large ice sheet over Europe, specifically, like Scandinavia. Right. And that's two points of the plate junctions for the Azores, because you have the North American plate plate, the European plate, and you also have the. I believe it's the African plate meeting there. Or. Yeah, it's. You can maybe pull up the plate tectonics of the Azores, but either way, you have this plate junction, triple plate junction there. And if two sides of that are experiencing this rebound right off to the edges, then at that Junction, perhaps, is where you're having this subsidence occurring. And that would then explain it, because if the isostatic rebound for North America, where the ice sheet was, is, you know, a thousand meters, 2,000 meters, because it was that depressed, then this would.
- [153:01]
Danny
Have somehow made the Azore sink.
- [153:03]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. Maybe now, because there's this equalization that's occurring, they're now sinking. Think of like if you have a plate, the ice sheet weighing down right on the corner, that these plates seem to be more structurally. Yeah, the African plate. So these place seem to be more structurally intact and rigid than. Than kind of maybe we currently think. Right. And so at the edge that would perhaps lift up, raising the Azores into a bit of a plateau. And then when those ice sheets go away now, they would sink back down. And what we have is what's been left.
- [153:40]
Danny
Right.
- [153:40]
Stefan Burns
This is just an idea, but I know, don't. I do think it's worth considering. It's captured my interest because we know that rebound and subsidence exist and it can happen quickly. In the Central Valley in California, they're pumping the aquifers like crazy for all the almonds and farmland there. And there's places where it's dropping like a foot a year, like 2ft per year, like rapid subsidence because they're draining the water tables. And that's just from like, like pumping water out from aquifers. I mean, imagine kilometers high, like Game of Thrones style ice sheets, even bigger. Right. It's totally different dynamics that we just don't have a concept of in the modern day. Yeah. Didn't.
- [154:23]
Danny
Didn't Randall go and, like, look at that, go to the Azores and like, explore it?
- [154:29]
Stefan Burns
I don't know how many trips he's done there, but when I talked to him just recently, I mean, he was just there, like, I think November. Yeah, 25. So just recently he did a trip there to look for geologic evidence of some of his ideas. And I haven't been there myself, but I think there's a little bit of truth in all these ideas that are floating around. And, you know, there's a lot of conspiracies attached to them, which can be fun. But I'm more interested in finding those truth gems, you could say, and seeing how they fit together and getting a better sense of the past. Because if you truly want to understand the future, then we need to see what's occurred in the past and kind of maybe see the direction that's leading us. And you're not going to do that if you're affiliated with one side or the other. You know, it's just the sun causing the climate. It's just CO2. You're never going to get to the truth that way. You're just going to fool yourself.
- [155:23]
Danny
So yeah, you have to be interdisciplinary. Kind of have your, your affliction, you know, a hand and a little touch, a little bit of all of it. Right. To have a, a real like broad picture of what's going on.
- [155:36]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. And, and you know, we're, we're tribal at the end of the day. So I think a lot of people, they, they really need like community, society. They need a tribe. Yeah. Maybe I'm a bit of a. Outside of the fact that, you know, I'm pretty chilling, I don't. Great. If I have friends, cool. If I don't have that many friends, whatever. Like, I'm more focused on seeing these bigger patterns and I don't need to fit in. Right. Really. I think there's a lot of things where you fit in. It's not to your benefit, actually. Anyone that gets anyone that's contrarian. For example, in the stock market, let's say it's going up, up, up, up and it's about to have a crash. No one knows that yet. You know, Michael Burry, he puts in a big short. Worked out very well for him.
- [156:26]
Danny
So not so much sense though.
- [156:28]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. Now he's. Everything's a big short for him.
- [156:30]
Danny
Right, right.
- [156:31]
Stefan Burns
But these just kind of ideas, like just. I think a lot of it's programming just learning to kind of separate yourself from that. And this requires a lot of internal reflection to see what your processes are. Yeah. And that's an inner journey that, that we're all, we're all taking and some people maybe do it faster than others and different paths of exploration. But yeah, I think a lot of the problems in the world would be solved if more people look internally and.
- [157:00]
Danny
Yeah, totally. Well, you, you spend a lot of time on YouTube and you're exposed to a lot of these crazy rabbit holes. Did you pay any, any attention to that, that recent scan beneath the pyramids where those guys, those Italian dudes said they found these big cylindrical shafts that go kilometers under the earth.
- [157:20]
Stefan Burns
This is interesting because we're starting to see the, like the hive mind coalesce around the idea and make it more solid and it's really interesting. I was at Cosmic Summit last year where they were and they presented. Unfortunately, I didn't get to see their presentation, but I've read some of the research on that. Sort of data collection. You know, they're using satellite pairs in space, they're doing radar measurements and with super high precision they're measuring the differences. But there's a lot of factors that go into it like the polarization of the wave, the timing of it, the, even the atmospheric factors like distortion of the radio waves. All this influences that data. And so I'm just in kind of default. Skeptical is not the right word, but cautious as to any interpretations that are made because you know, they presented some pretty like astounding, compelling results that are like very detailed.
- [158:20]
Danny
Yeah.
- [158:21]
Stefan Burns
In this data collection method from what I know, because being in all the geophysics stuff, you know, I'm able to read that paper and for the most part understand it. And that's still reading. I'm like, this is, you know, this, this is pretty out there. So for the average person, they're not gonna be able to read that research paper. So they just got, they just look.
- [158:38]
Danny
At the AI remake and be like, holy shit, there's elevators under the pyramid.
- [158:43]
Stefan Burns
They gotta take it by faith. So yeah, it's, I, I don't know what the deal is there. The geology probably is conducive because it's a lot of like sandstone, limestone. Exactly. It probably is conducive for that, for, for having these structures. But I mean they're talking about, yeah, massive, massive structures.
- [159:02]
Danny
Have you seen the raw data?
- [159:06]
Stefan Burns
I mean I, the raw scan data? Yeah. That it's quite a bit different than the 3D abstractions that they.
- [159:13]
Danny
Quite a bit different even from not even talking about the AI renders that other people have done.
- [159:17]
Stefan Burns
Yeah.
- [159:17]
Danny
But quite a bit different from those Italian dudes, their render of it.
- [159:21]
Stefan Burns
Yeah.
- [159:22]
Danny
Like he, they scan the Coffre pyramid, the central pyramid and they show like seven kings chamber sized chambers in the center of it. And we know for a fact that they're not there.
- [159:34]
Stefan Burns
Dreaming of buying your first car or a new home? Knowing your FICO score is the first.
- [159:39]
Danny
Step to making it real.
- [159:40]
Stefan Burns
With MyFico, you can check your score.
- [159:43]
Danny
For free and it won't hurt your credit.
- [159:45]
Stefan Burns
You'll get your FICO score, full credit reports and real time alerts all in one simple app.
- [159:50]
Danny
Your credit score is more than just numbers. It's the key to building the future.
- [159:54]
Stefan Burns
You'Ve been working toward.
- [159:55]
Danny
Visit myfico.com free or download the My.
- [159:59]
Stefan Burns
FICO app and take the mystery out of your FICO score.
- [160:03]
Danny
So like, why, why are they showing seven different king kings chambers inside that central pyramid when that whole thing's been explored. And there's. We know for a fact that there's those, aren't there.
- [160:15]
Stefan Burns
You know, it's interesting, it's from space. It provides like a broad view. If, if it was to stimulate a rigorous and robust, let's say, seismic and resistivity survey of the Giza Plateau, then that'd be amazing. Like, if that's the end result of all this, that'd be great because we could get high resolution data for the Giza Plateau in a way that provides maybe not irrefutable, but pretty conclusive proof of voids and structures underground. If we use that combination, again, two methods, seismic, which has a huge track record of success for exactly these sort of investigations. Then even better in some aspects, resistivity, where you're measuring the electric current flowing between different electrode pairs, and then you track that across depth and time and all these different frequencies, and you get that data. And that shows void structures or tunnels or things of that nature. Very well. You did a widespread 3D seismic and resistivity survey, the Giza Plateau. You could pretty definitively be like, yes, there's something there, or no, much more so than this radar data from space, The SAR data.
- [161:29]
Danny
Yeah, there was a lot of squirrely stuff that was happening with that SAR data and even their first analysis, their descriptions of it, and their descriptions of their scan of the Coffre Pyramid and why they couldn't detect the, the shafts that go underneath that central pyramid. In their first paper, they described that reason being they can't go that deep into the bedrock.
- [161:59]
Stefan Burns
Right. So you read a lot of these papers yourself.
- [162:01]
Danny
Oh, we recently had like a. This guy on here, Jeffrey Drum, who has a. He lives in Giza, like right by the pyramids. And he's been there, like on the ground studying this stuff for years now. And He's a great YouTube channel called Land of Chem. And like, he's been hyper focused on this stuff, reading papers. Those Italian guys invited him to their first little presentation that they did in the beginning of 2025. And he was there asking questions. And like, one of his biggest questions was like, how come in your first paper, when you scan the Coffrey pyramid, you explained that the reason you couldn't find the shaft under the coffee pyramid was because you can't see that deep into the bedrock. Now you're doing this and you're saying you have kilometer deep shafts underneath the bedrock. Like, and, and you know, to the Italian guy's credit, they were, they weren't coming up with some crazy excuse. They were just saying we don't know. I don't know. They were saying they don't know. So there's definitely a lot of very strange questions there about that. And like again like he was show, like Jeffrey, we came here and he was showing us the raw data, like the raw scans of what they were able to. You can find those Steve, of those shafts. And it's just, to me it doesn't make sense how they were able to jump from that raw data to their 3D render. Maybe there's something there I don't understand. I'm sure there is a lot I don't understand about this. Yeah, looks just like it. Well, this is. Yeah. So that is supposed to be on the right, a side view of the Great Pyramid, I believe Steve, find that and then that's, you know, the one on the right, Right there, that vertical one Steve, that's supposed to be the shafts under the pyramid. And if you look at that next to there. Yeah, go to that one in the middle Steve, where it should. Yeah, that one right there.
- [163:52]
Stefan Burns
The other thing to be mindful of, because this data is very similar to GPR data, it's actually effectively GPR to set a much larger scale, lower frequency, you know, from space, but it's still electromagnetic waves. What's the polarization, what's the frequency of this stuff? With GPR there's a million ways to process it depending on what filter you put on it. Ideally you learn how to process the data and you do it as objectively as possible. But it's not that difficult to all of a sudden make one anomaly pop out versus another based off of what your cutoff is for the colors, even just the color scheme, how they, what colors show up for what value, just even changing that can all of a sudden make that look radically different. But the end result, the person who sees that just in a five second scroll on social media, right, they're just interpreting the colors that they're seeing. They're not obviously seeing five different color renderings. And that's like the most basic of things. We could go through all the different filtering options that exist. Low frequency cutoffs, high frequency, all this stuff, stuff like. So yeah, it's.
- [165:00]
Danny
So these guys published a, a paper for peer review, I believe. And they're trying to get, they're waiting to see if there's, if it's going to get published.
- [165:07]
Stefan Burns
Okay.
- [165:08]
Danny
But I'm not sure if it's going to be. And their hope is to be able to get permission from Egypt to do more excavation and figure out what's going on there. But Jeffrey, what's what? Who lives in Giza, he's saying that he knows people in, in the antiquities department of Egypt and they're all super angry that these guys did this without like consulting them. So he's saying that those guys are never going to be get permission to move a grain of sand on Giza because of that. Because they did this sort of like cowboy style. Even though it's from like satellites.
- [165:43]
Stefan Burns
Right.
- [165:43]
Danny
Like technically it's, they're not like violating any laws or anything. I guess the fact that they did it the way they did without even talking to the, the Egyptians there, they got their panties in a bundle. But it's interesting either way.
- [166:00]
Stefan Burns
Have you been to the pyramids?
- [166:01]
Danny
Never.
- [166:01]
Stefan Burns
Oh, it's crazy.
- [166:02]
Danny
I want to go. You've been?
- [166:04]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. Back in 23. I. It's funny because I was watching ancient aliens.
- [166:09]
Danny
Oh yeah.
- [166:09]
Stefan Burns
And it just, it's just like something put on while eating, like, I don't know, lunch or something. But they, they visited the temple of Asis in the Aswan area for that show and they just, it was only like a 30 second clip, but I was like, oh my God, like I need to go there. So like a month later I'm there. W. Cause I was free reign, like you know, basically Lone Ranger. I could do whatever I want. So I flew there and it was only a 10 day trip in Egypt, but Luxor, Aswan, going to Giza and also some of it's all like, I don't know, I went to five pyramids, you know, this guy you're talking about, you know, he lives there. But even just in that trip, like there's, you can feel the energies. Like there's all the symbology. It's you know, a lot of the shapes and structures and like sacred geometry influences the energetics of the environment. And so Egypt seems to be just loaded with that.
- [167:07]
Danny
Yeah.
- [167:08]
Stefan Burns
And then all the intention put into these temples and sites over not only hundreds but thousands of years seems to leave like a long lasting, powerful energetic imprint. And then there's people that have reported certain, certain shrines will create like weird symptoms like, or electromagnetic interference, like cameras and stuff. Really? There's, I don't remember which stone it is. There's like one temple that has this, this special stone that causes weird reactions with technology. And even some people will feel really weird around it.
- [167:45]
Danny
Really?
- [167:45]
Stefan Burns
I think it's a, it's like a rock carving of the line goddess. Is that Sekhmet? Maybe? I, I, I can't recall exactly. But there's a. People I've talked about that. So there's like weird things there for sure. And if we find out that there were, you know, maybe structures under the pyramids, I wouldn't necessarily be surprised.
- [168:09]
Danny
One of the things that Jeffrey is saying is he thinks there's. He doesn't know for a fact, but he has discovered iron veins around the edge of the pyramids and he thinks it's very possible that there's natural iron vein deposits underneath those pyramids. He has an elaborate theory on how the pyramids were basically chemical processing plants. And, and his theory incorporates all of the pyramids, not just the Great Pyramid, and how they would have used like ammonia and sulfur and sulfur production by basically using like the, the natural resources of the Earth to create these chemicals, which could been applied for, for things like agriculture or even metallurgy. So he has like the, you know, it's kind of like an out there hypothesis, but it does, it makes rational sense. You know, it's not like it's not aliens and it's not tombs. It's kind of like a little bit of an in between. That makes a lot of sense. And he spent a lot of time in those pyramids. They even, he even showed a guy who made a one. Was it like 1-20-1-20 scale model of the red pyramid and it was, Was it ammonia they were processing in the red pyramid?
- [169:31]
Stefan Burns
I don't remember.
- [169:32]
Danny
I believe it was ammonia. High pressure. It was like a high pressure chemical processing. And they replicated it with all the chambers the Red Pyramid, in like a, in like a small model. And they were able to replicate it. And they. But the model exploded because his theory is that like all of the blocks that are stacked on top of it were. And in that perfect symmetry of that pyramid is supposed to be able to contain that pressure and that high pressure creates those chemicals. It's wild, it's deep. It takes a lot of, a lot of time for him to explain it, to understand it, but it makes so much sense, man.
- [170:07]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, I'm aware of some of his work because I started watching part one of his interview with Matt Bell, who did like a nine hour podcast with him.
- [170:16]
Danny
Yeah.
- [170:17]
Stefan Burns
And I, I'm like, I'll get through this. But I, I haven't finished part one yet. There's part two, there's part three. But he started laying out a lot of groundwork as to ancient sites and their use. And yeah, like high points form these positive charges because they naturally accumulate there. And light lightning Strikes, Exactly.
- [170:35]
Danny
The tor occurrence and the lightning strikes have a lot to do with it. And he connects that to different sites around the world.
- [170:41]
Stefan Burns
It's very interesting.
- [170:42]
Danny
Yeah. If we were to go to another planet and colonize another planet, the first thing we would do is build factories there so we could manufacture our own stuff. We wouldn't bring all of our own stuff. We would figure out how to utilize the resources of that planet or that moon or whatever it was to be able to manufacture, like utilize the resources that are already native to that location and figure out how to build and create all the new stuff there. And if there was some sort of civilization that was coming here to colonize Earth, well, that's exactly what those pyramids were. They were using the natural resources of the Earth to do things like agriculture and metallurgy and that kind of stuff. And he incorporates it in everything. There's, there's crazy theories out there to like, you know, where was this? Some sort of like Tesla machine. Right. A free energy machine. Right. And then it doesn't incorporate all the pyramids, just incorporates the Great Pyramid. What's interesting about his theory is that it doesn't just incorporate all of the pyramids in Egypt. He also can tie it into all the pyramids in South America and Central America and Mexico. And he connects the dots between all of it. And it's just so compelling, man, it's hard to ignore.
- [171:55]
Stefan Burns
If we really want to figure out what was happening and why these are created, you have to think about, there has to be some payoff for that. I mean, you're not going to create these things for no reason. There's got to be. There's got to be some reason and it's got to kind of be universal across time and something that would be fairly easy to figure out. Or you have like, you just see it clearly observationally. Like some of the first, let's say rocks that were thrown in a fire, all of a sudden you get copper out of them. You're like, oh, you know, that happens frequently enough around the globe that all of a sudden copper smelting kind of popped up everywhere roughly the same time, some places earlier than that. Because, for example, Michigan, they have like float copper that's just on the surface. So they had those tools earlier, but kind of needed to be something like that where anyone can kind of figure it out. And I would need to look more into his stuff. But certainly anything that is related to agriculture is probably going to be closer to it than something that's totally fanciful.
- [173:03]
Danny
Right.
- [173:06]
Stefan Burns
And, yeah, there's just a lot of unusual things of technology being replicated around the world at the same time. Yeah, just kind of bizarre. I don't think you need, though, like, some explorers of a lost civilization transmuting those ideas outwards necessarily to explain that. I don't know how familiar you are with the Schuma resonances. Maybe a little bit.
- [173:35]
Danny
Not super.
- [173:35]
Stefan Burns
Yeah. They're these resident energy fields that exist on Earth that are generated through lightning strikes primarily. There's like 50 every second or so around the world. And they produce energy across the entire light spectrum. Sometimes even gamma rays for like a super bolt. It'll be so strong it can boost camera radiation. But of course, we see the visible light when we see a lightning strike. So it's producing visible light. If you get close enough to one, you could feel the heat from it. That's infrared, the thermal. It produces ultraviolet extreme, ultraviolet X ray. But those quickly get absorbed into the atmosphere because they're very high frequency. But it also produces radio microwave frequencies. So you can pick that up and when there's a big thunderstorm overhead, that can kind of scramble the lower frequencies in the radio microwave band. But the frequencies going from 0 to 50 Hz are such a low frequency that they don't get absorbed easily into the atmosphere or even into the ocean or the surface. So they form these standing waves. And specifically, 7.8 Hz is approximately the frequency and therefore the wavelength of the circumference of the Earth. Because the Earth's circumference is 40,000 kilometers, you take the speed of light, which is 300,000 kilometers per second, you get 7.5 hertz as the frequency. And what we see is that at about 7.8 Hertz ranges from 7.2 to 8.5, 8.6 or so. But at that frequency, we see an elevation in power as compared to all the nearby frequencies. Let's say like 6Hz or 10Hz. Those aren't elevated in power, but 7.8Hz is. It's consistently elevated in power. Then 14Hz is a second mode, so a higher frequency. It's also harmonic with the Earth. Not as much power as the first mode, the foundational, but still elevated over normal than mode 3, 4, 5. That's the same architecture frequency as our brain waves, which I touched on at the very beginning. And they have the same strength. So Schumann resonances are measured in the picotesla range, which is very, very, very minute, as a 1,000th of a nanotesla. And Earth's magnetic field is like 23,000 to 67,000 nanotes. So these are extremely minor variations. But when we measure brainwaves, they also come in at the exact same range. In picotesilas, if you have the same strength and frequency, that means there can be resonance between them. Because if one was stronger than the other though the same frequency, then one would be considered noise and the other would be considered signal signal. So if the schumann resonances were 10 times weaker than brain waves, maybe there's a mechanism to extract information from that. But the signal of our brain waves would be 10 times stronger. So it'd be difficult to get any data out of that. But they're exactly the same strength and frequency. Then the brain could theoretically grab information from the Schumann resonances, Because energy is information. There's always information encoded into any energy waveform. So if we have this natural resonance with the Earth that we evolved with, it's probably going back, like, back to our evolution. It's kind of a pretty deep thing. But that could then perhaps be an explanation for this dissemination of ideas that pop up all at the same time. Because if one person figures something out.
- [177:13]
Danny
Yeah.
- [177:13]
Stefan Burns
And, you know, the thinking about this, and maybe that just permeates into the Schumann resonances. And then, you know, it's speed of light. So eight times per second, this thing's pulsing for the foundational mode. Then someone in South America, the other person's in Asia. You know, it could happen maybe the same day all of a sudden, like, they just get hit with an idea. Everyone's had that experience.
- [177:32]
Danny
Yeah.
- [177:33]
Stefan Burns
Where they just get hit with an idea. And it doesn't feel like ears.
- [177:35]
Danny
Right.
- [177:36]
Stefan Burns
It just feels like external. Like. Whoa. Okay.
- [177:39]
Danny
Yeah.
- [177:39]
Stefan Burns
Especially if you do any sort of, like, psychedelic. Then you really explore into these fields and you realize that, you know, consciousness is a lot more open, expanded than we think it is.
- [177:51]
Danny
Is this like a different approach to morphic resonance? Like, Rupert Sheldrake's idea? Is this like a. Is. Was he talking about the. The.
- [178:01]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, it's all this. This would be the. The actual, like. Like, you could say electromagnetic layer that could explain that morphic resonance would exist across, like, basically everything, you know, the universe. Yeah. I mean, at a consciousness level, at electromagnetic level, a whole bunch of things.
- [178:19]
Danny
But.
- [178:20]
Stefan Burns
But this would be a specific subset that could help explain this.
- [178:25]
Danny
Right.
- [178:27]
Stefan Burns
But they've done experiments tracking the Schumann resonances in. In the Earth environment. Then also someone's brainwaves at the same time, and they found time periods where they entered into coherence with each other because they can look at the frequency, the phase and see, okay, we have coherence for 1 second or 5 seconds. And the. The research in general, is that what they call an atom of thought, which is like the. The base, smallest unit of like a thought. It's like a quanta of thought, I guess, measures to like 100, 200, 400 milliseconds, something like that.
- [179:05]
Danny
Yeah.
- [179:06]
Stefan Burns
And so if you're able to enter into coherence with the Schumacher resonances for just. Even just a few seconds, you could have perhaps a few thoughts, like, pop into your brain.
- [179:16]
Danny
Sure.
- [179:16]
Stefan Burns
Maybe we're stored in the earth resonant field. That's not just from us, but from all life. And there's more to it than that as well.
- [179:26]
Danny
How, how do we measure this and study this.
- [179:32]
Stefan Burns
The Schumann resonance.
- [179:33]
Danny
Yeah. Or like if this idea that these, that these ideas can be stored in this. This specific resonance and it have human. The human brain be able to pick it up simultaneously on opposite ends of the earth.
- [179:47]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, that would be.
- [179:48]
Danny
Has anyone ever tried that?
- [179:51]
Stefan Burns
Not exactly like that, but there has been a lot of work adjacent to that. There's been work looking at people's like, bio signatures and then what happens to Schumann resonances and then like a solar storm impact and seeing how that affects their. Their heart and their brain waves and everything, which is kind of related, but not exactly. But for that, I guess you would. You would need a good enough receiver and a good enough transmitter. So I would think that. And you'd probably need a big sample size of multiple times. So maybe like some mass meditation event of thousands of people in India, let's say, focusing on one idea.
- [180:33]
Danny
Right.
- [180:34]
Stefan Burns
And then a receiving group in meditation in South America, let's say, trying to receive that and then doing that over and over and over to see maybe if they can pull in the information. There's probably a more elegant, like, experimental design that you can make. But just off the top of my head, I don't know. It's kind of a. It connects into these esoteric realms of how do you measure this stuff?
- [181:03]
Danny
Exactly.
- [181:03]
Stefan Burns
There's enough data there to point to something that's interesting. But then in terms of how can we prove it, it is this in a field that's beyond our ability to prove empirically. Like, is this too. Too right. Brain to. To do that?
- [181:19]
Danny
Right. Well, I mean, a lot of this type of stuff that you're talking about, you doesn't really. You can't really use the scientific method to figure it out.
- [181:27]
Stefan Burns
Right.
- [181:27]
Danny
Like it doesn't pass scientific method muster, these kinds of ideas.
- [181:31]
Stefan Burns
I think we'll look back in like 500 years and we'll see the scientific method and scientific revolution as a really cool thing, but just as a stepping stone to one new, more integrated approach.
- [181:43]
Danny
Yeah. Which is, you know, that's a wild thing too, is like the foundation of the scientific method hasn't really evolved much.
- [181:53]
Stefan Burns
Right.
- [181:53]
Danny
Like everything is just kind of like floats on top of that. We haven't really like adopt. Adapted that foundation very much. We're kind of very. It's very. We've stuck to that rigid foundation. And I feel like it has to evolve.
- [182:08]
Stefan Burns
We know it's not 100% correct because when the scientific method and the consensus right now is that consciousness is just an epiphenomenon that just manifests somehow in the human brain and basically nowhere else, then it's like, okay guys, this is nonsense. So there's a whole bunch. Like the Big bang is another example of that. It's just, guys, there's, there's more to this. Like consciousness isn't. If, if we're the only conscious beings in the universe and then everything else is not conscious and just completely materialistic and doesn't matter, then what does that say about us?
- [182:48]
Danny
Right.
- [182:48]
Stefan Burns
Like everything except us is not conscious, but it makes us puny in comparison because we're basically speck of nothing in the, the vastness of the universe. So there's just some problems with the scientific foundation. I think we'll look at it in the future as one tool of many to use. And I think the science of the future is going to be more a science of consciousness exploration. But how is that going to be done and what methods actually turn out to be verifiable across time? Yeah, I'm not sure remote viewing is that that.
- [183:26]
Danny
Yeah. Definitely falls into that category.
- [183:28]
Stefan Burns
There's remote viewing. It's all the 4 million Draconians on Three Eye Atlas.
- [183:32]
Danny
So remote viewing found that.
- [183:34]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, that's what some people said. Like I'm seeing 4, 000. Oh my God, 4 million Draconians. There's a lot of. Just nonsense.
- [183:41]
Danny
There's just so much nonsense and there's so many charlatans out there, man.
- [183:45]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, it's a low consciousness mindset. Like you know the Yuga cycle. Are you wear like the Yugoslavia?
- [183:52]
Danny
Not super familiar.
- [183:53]
Stefan Burns
There's the, I'm sure you're aware of like the 24,000, roughly a year processional.
- [183:59]
Danny
Cycle of the equinox.
- [184:00]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, yeah. And Then the, the Greeks have what they call the Great Year.
- [184:04]
Danny
Oh yeah, I'm familiar with this, yes.
- [184:06]
Stefan Burns
The Yuga cycle is the same. It's just the Indian version that we go through cycles of consciousness and right now supposedly we're basically at the bottom and that. Well there's, there's two different main ideas. The, the main one of them is that we were at the absolute bottom of the consciousness cycle with the fall the Roman Empire around 500 AD which makes a lot of sense. Our history of 500 AD is almost non existent for at least Europe.
- [184:34]
Danny
And that's when we went to the Dark Ages. Right?
- [184:37]
Stefan Burns
Exactly.
- [184:37]
Danny
Yes.
- [184:38]
Stefan Burns
500, 600 A.D. almost no record of anything. So it was definitely a dark period in time. Poor for, for Europe, you know, other places it was different.
- [184:46]
Danny
That was right when they destroyed the Temple of Eleusis and got rid of all magic. Right. That's when, that's when the Church got its hold. Right. That's when basically Christianity became like the dominant thing. They destroyed up paganism, all the other religions kind of went away. That's when the Church took hold and basically like everything like science and everything went stagnant effectively.
- [185:12]
Stefan Burns
I mean the Temple of Assis in Egypt was the last cult temple to, to be active in Egypt. And that was going through even the Roman Empire that also collapsed around 500 AD. So that's one time point for the bottom of the Yuga cycle. It's called the Kali Yuga with the lowest consciousness. It's just materialistic, everyone's liars and cheaters and more. And then we'll ascend up into different Yugas. There's the dwarf Yuga, the Treta Yuga and these are more enlightened states. And the other idea is that we're at the bottom of the Kali Yuga right now in 2025. That was the bottom of the Kali Yuga. So there's, there's some be surprised man conflicting ideas. But it does seem we're more on the ascent, like the ascent up out of it because we're coming to more like energy based technology and understanding of frequency and information and such. And that seems to have existed also in the past too with like for example we've been talking about the pyramids, some of these ancient sites. This, under this kind of more macro greater understanding of the flow of energy around the planet. There's, I think there's enough evidence there to say that that probably was the case at least with certain maybe more educated groups like the Druids perhaps. Right. Like the this. So we seen and there's like the, you know, the Babylon Battery. And we had evidence that they were aware of some of these things in the past, and then we really dipped out of it and now we seem to be coming back into it. But guess according to that, in 12,000 years, we're all going to be enlightened masters walking on the planet. Sounds pretty great. But.
- [186:48]
Danny
Yeah, if we can survive the machine rapture that's coming.
- [186:52]
Stefan Burns
Yeah, that'll be our test to see if we actually learned something, I guess.
- [186:57]
Danny
Yeah.
- [186:58]
Stefan Burns
You guys. Yeah.
- [186:59]
Danny
Yeah, it's scary. But listen, man, we just did like three and a half hours. Thank you so much for doing this. I learned a lot. Tell people where they can find you on YouTube, social media and all that stuff.
- [187:09]
Stefan Burns
Sure, yeah. Thanks. My YouTube channel is Stefan Burns. So S T F a N B R N S and then my X account, which I post updates there in between videos would be same Stephan Burns, but then also Geo. So S T E F a N B U R N S G E O and I also have a website that's earthevolution.com I sell holistic wellness products and some merch there. It's just some basic stuff. But the YouTube channel, I'm posting video almost every day. I'm starting to do more podcast interviews, so it's a good spot. You'll learn a lot if you watch videos across time. You'll learn about all this stuff.
- [187:44]
Danny
Oh, shit, dude, you got. Dude, you got a huge audience on your YouTube channel. That's amazing.
- [187:50]
Stefan Burns
It's. It's been great. People are loving it. It Impressive stuff, man. I think it's mainly because I'm independent and just chasing this out and trying to understand it. And, you know, I have my own thoughts and beliefs, but I'm not too attached to anything. So I think that's kind of the key going forward. And definitely just wanting to deliver good information to people and keep a roof over my head. Yeah. So that's really. Those are the. And. And better understand the earth, the sun, all that. That's. Those are my goals.
- [188:20]
Danny
Well, good stuff, man. I really enjoyed this and I learned a lot. I'll link all your stuff below people to find it. That's all folks.