← Julian Dorey Podcast
Julian Dorey Podcast
#298 - Ancient History Expert on Nikola Tesla’s Theory & Strangest NEW Discovery | Matt LaCroix
03:18:35
Loading summary
Transcript484 lines
- [00:00]
A
The story of human civilization is more complex and more mysterious than we've been told. The paradigm of our reality could significantly change if we understood our past and who we used to be. These incredible cultures, the reason they were able to build these magnificent megalithic things that we have no idea how they move them, how they carved them, any of these questions of how they did these things they did, they were mimicking. The more that I started digging into it, we may be looking at a completely different chapter of human civilization in which they knew things that even we don't know today. Which is why I think most of the world doesn't know about these sites yet. There's like this underbelly of ancient knowledge that seems to have passed around the ancient world, then destroyed, but then preserved and protected in small little key pockets by different secret societies and other groups. And I was doing research and I stumbled across something very significant that actually may change this whole ball game, this lost time period of human history.
- [00:58]
B
Hey guys, if you're not following me on Spotify, please hit that follow button and leave a five star review. They're both a huge, huge help.
- [01:04]
A
Thank you.
- [01:15]
B
Matt Lacroix returns again. Welcome back, sir.
- [01:18]
A
Hey, Julian, it's good to be back again, my friend.
- [01:20]
B
It's, it's been a little bit. You've been, you've been around the world, doing a lot of having a good time since the last time we talked?
- [01:26]
A
Yeah, it's been, what, a little over a year since we talked last time and yeah, I've been to Turkey twice and then Peru. So it's been very exciting. It's been an incredible year.
- [01:38]
B
Had you been in Peru before?
- [01:39]
A
No, this is my first time actually getting on the ground to see the sites. I've been talking about it for a long time. But just like Turkey, I had been talking about that, but I hadn't been there as well. So now I have got those under my belt. And we certainly made some incredible discoveries. We got to see some private, off off limits sites that were remarkable and all the research and a lot of the things that I've talked about that we built up has really come to a different place now. It's quite exciting.
- [02:09]
B
What, what makes it in a different place now?
- [02:12]
A
Well, when you go to these locations, actually get a chance to investigate them, see them, you see a lot of things that you've never seen before. When you're, you know, you're looking online, you only have so much in front of you. You know, who's taking pictures of this, who's Taking video of this. But what about the things that didn't get photographed or you didn't see things that you're there in person? Even just being there gives you a different experience of those locations. And for me, being there with a team of. Of experts, you know, I just got back from. From Turkey on my second trip in early October with Dr. Robert Schoch.
- [02:49]
B
Oh, you went with him?
- [02:50]
A
Famous geologist. And we went with an archaeologist named Hans Orheim out of Sweden. We got a chance to go and scout out some of the locations that they need to see as well. Before we do filming this year that we're going to be going and doing, a whole. A whole team. A whole team of experts is going to be going with me to film a lot of sites, including underwater under Lake Vaughan.
- [03:14]
B
Who's doing the underwater shots?
- [03:16]
A
Well, we have a team of underwater divers that are going to be coming. And one of the things I can bring up is that the person who discovered the underwater ruins in 2017. And that's a. That's a great story. I can tell.
- [03:27]
B
Please.
- [03:28]
A
Okay, well, his name is Tossen Salen and he is a pretty famous underwater photographer and videographer.
- [03:35]
B
And tell people where. Just for people who haven't heard you in the past on the show, you've talked about Lake Von, but just give them a layout of like where this is in Turkey and what the significance is.
- [03:44]
A
A lot of the ancient world has these hot spots that people talk about, right? Everyone's talking about Kli Tepe. Kli Tepe over and over. Right. Terahan Tepe. But they're not talking about a lot of these newer places because they haven't hit the mainstream. It's not something that most people really know about. And the reason is that they're too new. For instance, the underwater Lake Fawn discoveries that I'm referring to, that wasn't found until 2017. And so we're talking about very, very new discoveries that the world has not grasped yet. And the reason is that archaeologists have mislabeled them from, in my opinion, from the wrong time period, which has created a scenario where people are like, oh, well, that's not that interesting. It's, you know, it's from this time period when really what we're looking at are places that are equally, if not older than Gobekli Tepe, in my opinion.
- [04:36]
B
What are the archaeologists labeling on a time period scale Lake Von, and what do you think it actually is?
- [04:43]
A
So the Lake Vaughan region was part of what's called the Urartian civilization. In that archaeologists are crediting for. And I obviously agree that was a major civilization in that region that was around 2800 B.C. okay, so about 3000 years ago, there was a civilization there that was during the same time as the Neo Assyrian civilizations further south in ancient Mesopotamia. Right. Ashurbanipal, Sennacherib, We've talked about them before. There was a competition going on over empires fighting during that time period. And they were being invaded constantly. And they were a war civilization. Now, that is that group, the Eratians, is what archaeologists believe built all of these sites around not only Lake Vaugh, but further east in Armenia and other locations. And we can talk about why they believe that and what we know we're getting into. But the. What really broke this open is that getting back to what I was just referring to, Lake Vaughan in eastern Turkey, there's a. It's one of the. By the way, it's one of the largest and deepest lakes on Earth.
- [05:48]
B
Yes.
- [05:49]
A
It's over 1500ft deep.
- [05:51]
B
That's crazy.
- [05:52]
A
Unbelievable, right? I mean, Baikal in Siberia is the deepest. But this on a scale of others, it's. It's unbelievable. I mean, it's deeper than most of the Great Lakes. It's very, very deep lake. And it has a very unique environment. It's what's known as a soda lake, an alkaline lake. And this actually can tie into a lot of the exciting news that we're going to get into is because it's a soda lake, it creates an environment that preserves things underwater. And it has these massive type of structures from the. The salt formations that have created these incredible, almost like dreamlike environments of these towers underwater.
- [06:30]
B
What's the science there? Why does that preserve it? My head would immediately think that it would do the opposite. But why does it not.
- [06:37]
A
If you get. If you get a lake that has river outlets, you get a current flowing through it, you're going to get moving water, you're going to get moving sediments. You're going to get an environment underwater that is more volatile. Okay. When you have an alkaline environment, it doesn't create. It doesn't create a scenario where there is much as much acidification to like, breaking down of materials underwater. It actually creates a preservation type of quality. And that is what we're finding in Lake Vaughan. It's probably is. It's the best example in the world of a soda alkaline lake. There's no better example than that. And because of that, it's created this preservation underwater. Again, as I Say these giant towers of basically alkaline like calcified environments that have formed because of the amount of sodium. There's only one fish that lives in the entire lake. It's called a pearl mullet.
- [07:31]
B
They only have one fish.
- [07:32]
A
Only one fish lives in the entire lake. There's nothing else.
- [07:35]
B
There's no other life.
- [07:36]
A
There is, there's in. There's some small little shrimp like creatures and some types of insects, but there's no other fish that live in the entire lake. It's a very unusual type of scenario and that's what leads to. What I'm about to tell you is that this wasn't even an archeologist. There was a. There's a famous videographer, underwater photographer, Tossen Salen, who travels all over the world. Yeah. T A H S I N Tossen Salen. S E Y L A N and Lake Von and he. Well, he primarily does underwater ocean photography in the Red Sea and off of Egypt and other places around the world. He's actually quite popular and he's been in a number of different high level type of document documentaries and others. Well, he came to Turkey, but he lives in Turkey, but he came to Lake Vaughan because he wanted to photograph the underwater microinvertebrate type of environments underwater and the life. It's a beautiful lake. I mean Lake Vaughan is surrounded by the Taurus Mountains to the south and this huge mountain volcano to the north called Sufon mountain that's over 13,000ft high. Huge volcano. And because it's surrounded by giant mountains and it's this huge kind of crystalline lake. It's beautiful. It's got like blue water because of the salt. The lake literally looks blue. I got a chance to go swim in it. Oh, you did?
- [09:05]
B
I was going to ask you that.
- [09:06]
A
Yeah.
- [09:06]
B
What was that?
- [09:07]
A
I went down with Robert Schock and you know, my girlfriend Jenny and Hans and we got a chance to swim in it. The shore. It's one of the most beautiful lakes I've ever seen and I've. I've hiked and traveled to a lot of beautiful lakes in the world. But I have to say Lake Vaughan is arguably one of the most beautiful lakes I've ever been to.
- [09:23]
B
And there's like. There's only one type of fish in it. So you're just. It's almost like swimming through like a freshwater pond, but it's 1600 meters deep or whatever.
- [09:31]
A
In fact there's, there's arguments that in. They may have never found the true depth of the lake because I was talking to fishermen there and our tour guide. Yeah. Who have depth sounded. Who have depth sounded the lake. They catch those pearl mullet nets. Yeah. There's tossing and you can see there's.
- [09:51]
B
Like a lot of them.
- [09:52]
A
There's a huge, huge schools of them. But there's. It's the only fish in the lake. So you can see, like, the image of the underwater stuff under Lake Vaughan that's tossing now.
- [10:02]
B
How. So Tossen's swimming there, and I can see it looks like he has a light up above that. How do you know, like, how deep he got for something like this?
- [10:10]
A
And that's what we can. That's the big part of what we're going to get into is the depth. That's actually a really big part of this. It's important. So he. Tossen is photographing in different parts of the lake. Okay. He's checking that. He's doing photography of the. The migrations of the pearl mullets in the spring when they spawn. Right. They. They flood the rivers and they're like jumping all over the place. It's quite an expectacle. The pearl mullets are not, you know, they're not more than a foot long, but they're huge schools of them in the lake. Okay. So he's photographing that as a nature documentary, but he's also photographing and filming the underwater areas, which, by the way, there's been very little done under Lake Vaughan. It's a very mysterious lake. So he's filming off of Actumar island and in these different areas. And there are a number of different ruins that are known about under Lake Vaughan, but they're shallow. Well, he's diving off of a place called a giga vez, which is in the northern part of Lake Vaughan in 2017. And you can only dive into in the lake for the first, like, two hours in the morning because once you get into the afternoon, the sunlight reflects off of all the salt and he makes it so you can almost not even see underwater. So you have this small window where you can actually dive. Okay. So he's diving off of a Gigives, which is right in adjacent to Kef Kalesi, an ancient, ancient megalithic site that I talked about.
- [11:35]
B
Yes.
- [11:35]
A
On some of the other shows and I was subsequently gone to. And we can talk about that as well. So he's diving off of that, and there are ruins down near the edge of the shoreline, but there had never been anything done out underwater. So he's underwater and he's diving and he gets down to 75ft underwater. 75ft underwater. Unbelievably deep area. Which, by the way, there's no underwater ruins in the world that are found that depth anywhere in the world. Yes. If you go off of, like, for instance, their underwater ruins in Lake Titicaca.
- [12:07]
B
Yeah.
- [12:07]
A
They're like 20, 30ft at max.
- [12:09]
B
You're just talking about for lakes, though.
- [12:11]
A
No, for oceans included.
- [12:13]
B
What about. What about the. The ruins that are off the coast of. No, of Cuba?
- [12:18]
A
Well, that's not. Okay, hold on, we'll pause there for a second. That's not. That may exist, and there is a lot of evidence that supports that it does exist, but we don't have enough evidence yet. And I've talked. I talked about that last time we were on.
- [12:33]
B
Yeah, I'm trying to remember the context because I just had any X T in here. We had a. We had a long little segment in there where he was going through whether or not that could be true or not. So I couldn't remember all the evidence.
- [12:44]
A
But it's too deep for that. Those ruins off of. Of Cuba are too deep for an actual diver to go to. Right. They're 2,000ft underwater, which means you need a submersible to get down there and look at them. Now there, that's a whole Titanic situation. Right. That's a whole argument in itself of whether or not that's real. And I've. I've talked about that before on episodes. It is very interesting. More. More exploration is needed to completely confirm that.
- [13:11]
B
Jaz, do your balls ever stink? Yes. Mine do, too. You know, sometimes you get sweaty and then you gotta do stuff the rest of the day. You're running around and that stench kind of creeps up, and suddenly you're thinking, maybe that's going beyond my nostrils. And guess what? Sometimes it is. That's why we have Mando.
- [13:28]
A
Mando.
- [13:28]
B
Yeah, yeah. They're sponsoring us now. They're fire, bro. You use this? Yeah, let's go. Let's go. See, we got people in the peanut gallery who use it. Mando's Whole Body Deodorant is safe to use anywhere on your body. Pits, balls, thigh folds, belly buttons, butt cracks, and feet. And you know that this is a trustworthy product because a doctor made it, and they've never been wrong before. Never ever. Now, the doctor who made Mando saw firsthand how normal BO Was being misdiagnosed and mistreated. So he made a product clinically proven to block odor all day and control odor for up to 72 hours. That's pretty nuts. And besides the whole body deodorant, you have some other options too. There's the solid deodorant stick, formulated and powered by mandelic acid to stop odor before it starts. And then there's the spray deodorant, aluminum free and ideal for hard to reach places. If you've never used Mando before, then I got good news for you today because Mando's starter pack is the best possible thing you can get right up front. It comes with a solid stick deodorant cream tube deodorant, two free products of your choice like mini body wash and deodorant wipes, and oh yeah, free free shipping. As a special offer for our listeners today, you're gonna get $5 off a starter pack using our exclusive code, which by the way equates to over 40 of your starter pack. So use code Julian at shopmando.com S-H-O-P-M-A-N-O.com link in description below and you'll get that $5 off. And you'll also support our show if you tell them we sent you. Once again, that's code julian@shopmando.com smell fresher, stay drier, and boost your confidence from head to toe with Mando.
- [14:59]
A
Look, if you're still buying weed from some guy named Trevor in a parking lot, you're doing it wrong. Mood.com delivers legal THC products straight to your door. Gummies, vapes, flour, the good stuff. No sketchy DMs, no med card. Just add to cart, check out and boom, it's at your doorstep. It's legal in all 50 states thanks to the farm bill. And Mood's products actually work. Seriously, this isn't gas station garbage. It's small batch lab tested real results. Go to mood.com, use code FIR S T20 for 20% off and never run dry again. That's mood.com go get lit legally. But in terms of confirmations, a place that like divers can get to and see that has been confirmed. These are by far, without a doubt the deepest ruins anywhere in the world.
- [15:47]
B
See, I. I don't want to make it sound less 75. Sometimes I fuck up feet in meters. So sorry, if I did that earlier.
- [15:54]
A
It would be about 23 meters.
- [15:55]
B
So 75ft underground or down below is, is obviously deep. I don't want to make that sound like it's not deep. That doesn't sound like the deepest we'd ever find like that doesn't seem that deep for the deepest we'd ever find. Some ancient history artifacts.
- [16:10]
A
What? Well, think about this for a minute. So the underwater ruins off of Alexandria, Egypt and off of Greece, they're near the shoreline, yes. Right. They're not. We've never found any that are a greater depth than that. And I'm going to give you something. I'm not saying there has never been ruins that are deeper. Considering ocean level increase after the younger dries. Right. You get 400ft increase in ocean. Ocean levels around a lot of parts of the Earth. I'm sure there were underwater ruins, but they were, they were never found or they were destroyed.
- [16:41]
B
To be clear, you're saying ruins. That doesn't necessarily include like artifacts, though.
- [16:46]
A
No, I'm talking about actual substantial ruins of a civilization.
- [16:50]
B
Okay, that makes sense because I was going to say like the antikythera mechanism that was found, the old 2000 year computer, I believe that was found in the Mediterranean.
- [16:58]
A
Those things can sink from a shipwreck or something.
- [17:00]
B
That's right.
- [17:01]
A
Okay, so we're talking about, we're on the same page. Ruins, extensive ruins, megalithic blocks. And that's the other part of this. Even the ruins that have been found in the world, they weren't megalithic. So megalithic meaning large, finely cut blocks put together, like precise. Like we see in Lake Fawn area that I've talked about before, we see in Peru, Bolivia and Egypt. Highly precise. Ancient, ancient work. This not only is the only underwater megaliths in the world, but it's the deepest ruins anywhere in the world.
- [17:37]
B
And this guy just stumbled upon it.
- [17:39]
A
So he was diving off of a giga VEZ and he completely randomly found them.
- [17:47]
B
What did he think? Have you talked with him?
- [17:49]
A
Oh, I've talked with them. He's actually on the team. He's on the documentary team. I'm working directly with him and he's going to be leading us when we film at the end of June, early July, to the ruins to go.
- [18:02]
B
What did he think it was when he first stumbled upon it?
- [18:05]
A
He just, he saw it was the underwater ruins of a castle, they called it, and he reported it to. And I can tell you the story after, but he reported it to the, the institutions and the Turkish government and they didn't believe him.
- [18:21]
B
Did he show him the picture?
- [18:22]
A
And he's like, look, look at all the pictures. And then he basically had it published in different magazines. And it got some attention, but not nearly enough attention because it was labeled as being like a Urartian or a medieval later time period. But we're going to. We can get into how. Not only is that grossly wrong, but it actually. This could be one of the better examples of dating evidence of anywhere in the world.
- [18:48]
B
And why is that? And what is our evidence for it?
- [18:51]
A
So 75ft is, is a very, very deep depth. It's for. The first question you'd have to ask is how could a lake fluctuate by that much? This isn't the ocean. We're talking about a lake that's a long way from the ocean. How could you have depths fluctuate 80 to 100ft? Because obviously, if it's found at 75ft underwater, they would had to have been substantially less for civilization to build on the edge of it. They're not going to build with the waves lapping up against that wouldn't make sense. They would have to build, you know, at least a little ways away from the edge of the shoreline. But so that would have to mean that the lake was at least 80, if not 100ft lower when they built it. Okay, now that creates a number of problems. It creates a number of problems because when you look at historic lake levels of Lake Vaughan, there is nothing within the last 12,000 years that can account for those like those, the levels of that lake being that low. It creates a very interesting scenario where we may have the next best piece of evidence we have besides the weathering on the Sphinx that Robert Schoch had identified, which is, you know, a big part of this. Because Robert Schock is on the team.
- [20:08]
B
Yeah.
- [20:08]
A
And he was. Well, he's. Well, he's. We're going to call him an independent, objective researcher on the team who is investigating these sites. I don't want to put him under the category of. He already has a predetermined conclusion for this. I want to be very clear. He's an objective scientist exploring these sites with us.
- [20:27]
B
That's important.
- [20:28]
A
Yes. So it doesn't mean any predetermined hypothesis or conclusions have already been determined. We are investigating anomalies and ancient ruins to determine whether or not they may be from a much earlier time period. Okay, got it. So toss in his underwater. He finds this extremely extensive area of megalithic ruins. It's over a kilometer in. In area. Huge.
- [20:58]
B
Whoa.
- [20:58]
A
This is not just like, like a town. Well, let me tell you why that's important. One of the considerations from geologists are like, well, what if this was a, a set of ruins on the shoreline that, like, slid into the lake? That's Actually a hypothesis, but that's been considered. If you have a geologic area of instability in the shoreline, you could get like a landslide which sinks into the lake.
- [21:23]
B
How far into it was it though?
- [21:24]
A
Like how far? Over half a mile from the shore.
- [21:27]
B
No, that's not, I'm not an expert.
- [21:29]
A
Well, no, because it's over a kilometer wide. You can't, you would have to have like a small area sink in. You couldn't have like an entire, almost a mile, you know, of the common sense.
- [21:40]
B
That seems crazy. I agree.
- [21:41]
A
Right. So they, he, so he goes and he, he tells the Turkish government. They don't, they didn't believe him at the, at first. How could that be possible? 75ft underwater to have extensive, extensive megalithic ruins of blocks that are over in, in some cases, you know, over a foot wide. These are massive megalithic blocks that are very finely cut and put together. So that's the first thing to pay attention to. Now the second thing is that they, they're not built out of what the Urartians built with. So the Artians built with limestone blocks. That's what I've postulated and talked about is that the, the tools available, Iron Age and Bronze Age tools would, would never be able to manipulate a harder stone. That's one of the arguments for the documentary and we're talking about because we see basalt, giant basalt blocks like at Kef Kalesi and others that are finely carved and then we see limestone in, associated with it. Now the blocks underwater would never have been able to survive if they were limestone. They would get eaten away by this, by the acidification or the, by the underwater, you know, by the salt. It would never would have been able to survive. But there, that's why we believe they're basalt. And that creates a whole nother animal itself because it adds in. Well, how were they, how were they created? You know, were they. From what I'm considering is an earlier, like an earlier time period is one of the arguments.
- [23:08]
B
So we haven't been able to take some sort of like sedimentary sample of.
- [23:13]
A
This and no sampling has been done yet. So when.
- [23:15]
B
Why not?
- [23:16]
A
Well, Tossen dove down with. He's a photographer.
- [23:19]
B
Yeah.
- [23:19]
A
He didn't even have an archaeologist.
- [23:21]
B
I know, but this is 2017. It's been eight years.
- [23:23]
A
Yeah. Nothing's happened since.
- [23:25]
B
So no one's going down there.
- [23:27]
A
No. We're going to be the first team of experts in the world that has ever gone down to analyze, study it and potentially take samples if we get permits. We have to.
- [23:40]
B
If you get permits.
- [23:41]
A
How does that work? Well, we're going to be, we're applying and getting, working on getting all the permits necessary. That shouldn't be an issue. We're going to be doing this in a completely scientific way. We're not going to disturb anything. We're not going to touch anything.
- [23:53]
B
We're.
- [23:53]
A
We're not going to cause any damage to the environment around it. We're simply going to be photographing and analyzing and investigating these and looking at them to potentially see that they may be from a completely lost time period of human civilization. And that because there's such an anomaly, again, you can't see that anywhere else in the world. It gives us a couple really unique type of opportunities. The first is that the sediments have been relatively undisturbed. So we get it. We have a chance to see something that has not been touched, that has not really been altered by anything and really get a chance to review it. The second thing, and we can. We'll get into the symbols that are on some of the stones. But I want to bring up a really significant part of this that I think is, is significant to dating evidence that we don't have. So when a lot of people wish be easy enough, we could date a lot of these structures around the world. You know, the argument is that, well, is there a lost time period of human civilization around the world in which a culture that no longer exists built giant megalithic structures and temples all across the planet that was wiped out during the catastrophes during the last ice age of the Younger Dryas? Right.
- [25:14]
B
Which is what, like 11,000 something 11,600.
- [25:16]
A
Years ago or so. And that's the argument that a lot of you call them alternative researchers have postulated and put forth. And, you know, you've talked to others a lot. We've talked about it. You know, Robert Schock was brought into the Sphinx enclosure because John Anthony west saw what he believed and other experts had believed was water weathering and not wind erosion. Right.
- [25:36]
B
Yes.
- [25:36]
A
And that was one of the arguments put forth that, look, the Sphinx was actually built by an earlier culture, before the dynastic Egyptians, because it's water erosion and Egypt hasn't had any rain and that's substantial enough in the last 12,000 years.
- [25:49]
B
Yeah.
- [25:50]
A
So there's already this position. And Graham Hancock did a great job with his, his Netflix series season one and two of Ancient Apocalypse. I don't know if you've seen it yet.
- [25:59]
B
I've seen a lot of season one.
- [26:01]
A
He did a great job. I give him Props for that. Thank you for laying that foundation down. You know, Randall Carlson, Graham Hancock, John Anthony West, Robert Schock, Robert Baval. There's so many names that I could say. Props to all of you guys. Thank you so much for laying such a great foundation down of us exploring what potentially could be a much earlier and sophisticated and lost time period of human history.
- [26:23]
B
Has it hit you yet that someone like you, who's been a real student of the game for so many years, who wanted to learn more, just started with your own curiosity and worked your way into being an expert then now you are potentially sitting here on the precipice of being able to go in with an official team that you're in charge of to do an excavation of sorts on something that could change the way we view a certain part of history in really towards the middle of the earth right there.
- [26:57]
A
Yeah, I feel extremely blessed, very, very, very appreciative that I have been able to take a lot of this research and a lot of this passion and that I've done in writing to a completely different level. One that's never, frankly, has never been done. We've never had a team of academics and top experts in their field truly go in and investigate these in a scientific objective way to, to finally create something where we can say, look, we have evidence to support that there may this last human chapter of human civilization is real. And that it has been overlooked and has been something that the narrative main needs to strongly consider is that the story of human civilization is more complex and more mysterious than we've been told.
- [27:45]
B
Now, what are you, when you get down there? What are you most looking for? Like, what are the top three ish type things that you're going to be trying to identify?
- [27:53]
A
So what we're going to be doing is we are going to be identifying the type of stone that has been used to build these. That's a really, really big deal. Again, it gets back to understanding the Mohs hardness scale. If you have stone that is of a hardness of 6 or 7, which is basalt, it's a type of volcanic stone. Tools, the tools you have available for a civilization and the capabilities of that civilization come in, come in, they matter, they really come into hand because it's not that easy just to create a giant megalithic temple. The amount of work and people involved and calculations and everything involved is not simple. It's a great undertaking and you have to have a civilization that has reached a certain level to be able to do that. It's not, it's not easy. It's a nomadic tribe of hunter gatherers or primitive kind of warlike people, would not be able to create great works of art through stone because it is art. It's. It's beautiful to create stones that are so tightly fit together that you can't even put a piece of paper between them.
- [28:53]
B
It's incredible.
- [28:54]
A
And then carve seams, seamlessly, beautiful, beautiful motifs and symbols into them. Even cross fitting on the stones between them.
- [29:02]
B
Cross fitting on the stones, Cutting it.
- [29:04]
A
Some of the, Some of the. That's. This is another fascinating aspect of this, is that Ionis, one of the sites, Ionis Kalessi, on the banks of Lake Vaughan, has symbols carved between the stone fitting. So. Which is wild to think about. If. So if you're carving with a chisel and you're like. And you're trying to put that in, how would you seamlessly carve with razor sharp edges? Laser, almost laser like, cuts seamlessly between two blocks that fit together.
- [29:32]
B
How would you do that with a chisel? I don't. I don't see the possibility.
- [29:36]
A
That's the problem is at these sites, especially Ionis, we see this extremely fine andesite basalt stonework that is, again, beautiful. Some of the, Some of the. Arguably the finest, Some of the finest megaliths in the world in terms of how they're polished and put together and seamless. And in that way we, we see these where the, where the fittings are, where the blocks come together very, very precisely. There are symbols carved right between. That overlaps where the blocks come together in a completely seamless way. So when you look at. I don't know if Alessi can pull something up. Can you look up Ionis Khaleesi for me? I can show you an example of this.
- [30:21]
B
Yeah, please. I was just going to ask, Curious what this looks like.
- [30:26]
A
Yeah. A Y, A N, I, S. And then Kalesi, K, A, L, E, S, Y, I. Yeah, yeah.
- [30:36]
B
Okay.
- [30:36]
A
It'll be. Yeah, you'll be able to find it and I'll give you some. I just want to give some examples of this as we're talking about it, because I think it really is easily. The one right in the center. Right down, Right, right. The left. Right there. By the way, that's me on the 1. The picture of the right of. You see that?
- [30:51]
B
I did not see that. Can we zoom in on that, Alyssa?
- [30:55]
A
This is a perfect example. Now scroll above the altar and go right into the cross. Yes, Go right in there. Tight, right in there.
- [31:04]
B
That's the best we got.
- [31:05]
A
Okay, so take a look at these symbols carved in. You can see a griffin on the left. You can see some of the symbols of Haldi and then some of the crosses.
- [31:13]
B
The pine cone type figure.
- [31:15]
A
Right?
- [31:15]
B
Yeah.
- [31:16]
A
Now look at how the symbols are carved between the blocks fitting together. It's to do that. Oh, and they're. And they're so seamless that they don't even. They're not even off fitted like, they're not even like off by a. Even.
- [31:32]
B
They're not by a centimeter. Yeah.
- [31:35]
A
How would you do that? With modern tools or ancient tools, I should say. How would you be able to seamlessly cut these symbols out of. By the way, one of the hardest stone on Earth. This is what's called andesite. It's even harder than basalt. They're both volcanic. But andesite is a type of metamorphosized volcanic rock that is 7/2 on the Mohs hardness scale out of 10. One of the hardest stones on Earth. Look at how precisely these symbols are carved. And by the way, that is what's called the Sun Cross in the center, which becomes the Knights Templar Cross and the Red Cross we see in the night we've talked about in the Vatican and others, which is very peculiar. But that's what I'm talking about is on the left side you can see what I think is like an hourglass figure next to the griffin. Those symbols are carved seamlessly into blocks that are fitted together. Now the only way to do that in my mind is if it hit back once. You can see a couple other examples. But the only way you could do that is to have the blocks already put together and then carve it into them. Right. Because if you were to carve two symbols into two into blocks like that, how would you then fit them together to have them align perfectly? Right. It wouldn't.
- [32:52]
B
It would be too hard.
- [32:53]
A
It would be too difficult.
- [32:54]
B
And so, yeah, I mean, we can. This picture right here is so like hd, you can see it even better.
- [33:00]
A
And look at the griffin on that one.
- [33:01]
B
Yeah. The lining is insane.
- [33:05]
A
So that's what we're talking about is number one, how could an Iron Age. The Auroraans were an Iron Age civilization, means they only had Iron Age tools available to them 2800 BC how would they have been able to cut and create symbols out of that kind of stone? Which, by the way, we don't even know where some of these quarries. Geologists have identified some of the quarries where these blocks came from. Some of them are over 200 miles away. One of them is. Is speculated to be 400 miles away because of the type of basalt and andesite. It's, it's. It's insane how we don't even know how they cut, moved them. But then once they put them in place, how could they get seamless symbols and motifs cut out of them? You know what it looks like? People have told me it looks like almost like cookie cutters.
- [33:57]
B
Yeah.
- [33:57]
A
So like, if you like a 3D printer or something, right. If you had something that was like, you stick it right in. Boop. It's like clay or something and it comes out. Now that brings up the question of whether or not these rocks were super heated.
- [34:09]
B
That's what I was gonna ask, right. If, if. But if they do that and they're so massive, like, obviously if they're heated at that kind of level, it's like if you touch it, you're gonna burn.
- [34:19]
A
It's mysterious. If anything, it would be to the point where I don't even know, outside of laser type of tools, if we could even do this today with that kind of precision. A stone mason, like, give me an example. There have been stone masons that have brought into t. Brought into Tiwanaku in Puma Punku in Bolivia, which also has laser like cut edges and symbols just very similar to this. In fact, we're going to talk about a lot of parallels to that today. They've been brought into that and they're like, I couldn't do this. I don't know any stonemason that could do this by hand, maybe with some kind of a technology, like some kind of a laser like technology. But it brings up the question is, if we could barely do it or not do it, how could a bronze, An Iron age civilization from 2800 BC do this? And that's really where the question comes in. And I want to. Alessi, can you go back once? I just want to show another example before we move on to get to some other stuff. Okay, right there. Just leave it there for a minute. Now, we've talked about this before, but I want to bring it up one more time. All of that brown dirt you see on top of the andesite.
- [35:31]
B
And for people listening, not watching, we're back on the original image we had of all the.
- [35:34]
A
Thank you.
- [35:35]
B
Of all the same crosses that are carved into this packages by Expedia. You were made to occasionally take the hard route to the top of the Eiffel Tower.
- [35:45]
A
We were made to easily bundle your trip Expedia made to travel flight inclusive packages are Atoll protected. Hey, it's Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. Now I was looking for fun ways to tell you that Mint's offer of unlimited Premium Wireless for $15 a month is back. So I thought it would be fun if we made $15 bills, but it turns out that's very illegal. So there goes my big idea for the commercial. Give it a try@mintmobile.com Switch upfront payment of $45 for three month plan equivalent to $15 per month required new customer offer for first three months only. Speed slow after 35 gigabytes of networks busy. Taxes and fees extra see mint mobile.com that is not actually dirt. All of the brown material above the stone is actually eroded mud brick.
- [36:30]
B
Okay, Mud brick.
- [36:31]
A
Mud brick. So the Erartians primarily build out of what's called mud brick, where they would take mud and types of soil material and they would basically create bricks out of them. Let them sit out in the sun, they harden, right? And then they would build with them. And that none of that is actually dirt. It's eroded mud brick. Now if they built twenty hundred years ago with the mud brick and it eroded to that level, how imagine those blocks being in that level of, of being precise still and not eroded. Imagine the difference there. First of all, now, archaeologists claim that this is a building style now and I would agree it is a style. Some, some places around the world, a culture or even today, you'll build, you'll see Roman, Greco and other things where they build out of stone and they have something like something more lighter on top because they, you need a foundation that is stronger. Okay? That's the argument that they use that the Urartians built with stonework on the bottom and then mud brick above it on top. Because these were all incorporated into castles. That's what the word Khaleesi means. They're castles and they were castles, but that doesn't mean they originally were castles. Okay, that's the thing that really needs to come across here is that the, any civilization we see around the world adopts ancient sites. They know it's important. They often will like incorporate symbols into their culture from another ancient site. We see it all around the world. They'll adopt a site and then build right on top of it. It happens all the time. The Romans are famous for building on top of older foundations of structures. We see that in Baalbek, Lebanon all the time. So what were, what is being laid out right now is that archaeologists are saying the Urartians built this unbelievable andesite in the bottom with These stonework and then built primitive mud work on mud brick right on top of it. And that's what. Where it was everywhere. But the problem is that it doesn't really make sense. And the only reason why they're saying that is because there's cuneiform writing written into some areas of these temples and these structures. Cuneiform. So we see the wedge like cuneiform design into the outer part of Ionis when you first come in. However, that's the only piece of evidence and there's no other evidence they're using to back it up. Because if you translate this Urartian cuneiform, it talks about like rulers like Rusa II and other rulers who have wrote in like oh, this temple was. Was built or they don't even say they built it. They just say this temple is, is it is built in honor or whatever it is. But they don't say anything about the original foundations or anything. But they, they claim ownership of these sites. Okay. And for a certain dynasty or time period, that is the only evidence that archaeologists are using to say that who built it is the cuneiform. Except there's a problem. Throughout Egypt we have evidence from say, Rams, the Ramsay culture and other dynastic Egyptians that they would write and carve hieroglyphics into other existing structures and claim ownership for them. Right. That's one of the arguments for the Sphinx is that it was recarved and it was originally not that the same head. Well, that's the same problem we have here is that the Erartians and it's a famous. It's a thing that is very common in the ancient world, is trying to take credit for something because you want to seem greater and more majestic. And I postulate that all the cuneiform, all of it is from the Erartians and that this mysterious civilization that built this left no writings at all behind. None. We see the same thing in Egypt is there's no writings left behind from like the build the builders of the Great Pyramid of Egypt of Giza. Yeah.
- [40:25]
B
There's no writing caverns in here going through a bunch of that timeline.
- [40:29]
A
It's crazy. It's. It's a. There's no writings anywhere inside the Great Pyramid at all. There's one. Something scribbled that is supposedly scribbled with Khufu's name that is very likely a forgery that's been talked about from the 1800s. It's a whole story that you can get into. But there's no writings anywhere in any of those, in fact, most megalithic structures around the world, for instance, Peru and Bolivia, there's no writings in any of the megaliths anywhere there. It just got back from Peru. There's not one place where there's writings like in it. Okay. Same with Egypt. The blocks don't have writings. So here we have beautiful megalithic work around Lake Vaughan with writings that are sporadic in a couple places, but most of them have nothing on them. And so the argument that I'm putting forth is that the Erartians came forward and had a warlike culture, and they were. They were fighting the Assyrians like crazy back and forth. They, through their own, wanting to be a superior civilization and showing their dominance. They put their names and their. They take it. They took credit for an earlier civilization that built these and then put their cuneiform into it.
- [41:40]
B
So that's where we get like. They build the castle on top of what?
- [41:44]
A
Exactly.
- [41:44]
B
Yeah.
- [41:45]
A
And then they incorporate the existing structures into their culture. Whereas if we look at the capabilities of the Eratians through their art, pottery, what they were doing, they severely lacked any of the capability. In my mind. It's from everything I've studied and other archaeologists have put forth and have talked about as well, is that they just. It doesn't match any of their other building styles. You can see other Urartian building styles with crude stonework and mud brick, and it doesn't match that time period at all. It just doesn't.
- [42:15]
B
So it's an outlier. And there would have to be something unforeseen in the capabilities of their civilization or in the stylistic culture or whatever of their civilization for this to actually be attributed to them completely from where the base was.
- [42:27]
A
If you take out the cuneiform, there's no evidence that the Eratians built it at all. Okay. None. And so that's where we get into is whether or not they just carved cuneiform into some of these structures to take credit for them. Like Shavu's Tepe, like Ionis. We see a lot of examples of that around the world, as I said, of cultures adopting and trying to take ownership of something that they didn't actually build.
- [42:52]
B
Sure.
- [42:52]
A
Now, let's get back to Lake Vaughan.
- [42:55]
B
Yes. Because I originally opened up this tangent with asking about the main, you know, three, five things, whatever it is that you're going to be looking for going down there.
- [43:03]
A
So the stonework, that was a long side tangent to talk about the stonework. When you go down under Lake Vaughan, you see highly precise stonework just like we see above the water at Ionis, Shavuz Tepe, Kefkalesi Azva and Etepe Toprakol, all their other sites where you see beautiful, beautiful stonework at the bases of these with basalt and andesite, where it's finely cut and polished. And we see the same thing underwater. Okay, and that's. So that's a one. That's the first thing we bring up is that it has the same kind of architecture. Now, the big thing about the next piece of evidence I want to bring up is for dating. And then we can talk about the symbols that are carved in the stone.
- [43:45]
B
Yes, we'll get there.
- [43:46]
A
I think that the dating potential under Lake Vaughan creates a scenario that is unusual anywhere in the world. First thing is that you can't date stone above water. It gets extremely affected by the. The environment of weathering and other environments. The only reason Gobekli Tepe was able to be dated is because it was buried.
- [44:05]
B
Yes, buried.
- [44:06]
A
Okay. So then they were able to go in and carbon date the organic material in the cracks of that. Now, some of that could be possible at some of these sites if they do it right, because we have evidence that Kev Kalesi and Ionis was buried as well, evidence that the Urartians buried it because they were being invaded and it was potentially going to be destroyed by. By other cultures. And they knew it was important. And so, like Ionis was a giant hillside mound on top, and they found evidence that not only was it either potentially deliberately, basically, it was like a castle on top that it was broke, not broken in, but basically collapsed in on itself and then. And then buried on top of that with a. A very thick layer, up to five or sometimes even 10ft of material that was then put on top. So the amount of work necessary to bury these would have been enormous, but you would have done that if you wanted to preserve them. So that is what we've found, is that that possibly could be another avenue is some of the soil and some of the dating done on this. And I'm in talks with Robert Schock on whether or not that's something we're going to be pursuing with some of these sites as well.
- [45:18]
B
And because it's in the lake, you can actually do it in a more verifiable way.
- [45:23]
A
You have. But the potential of soil sampling, core sampling of soil, that is different with an undisturbed underwater situation than you do above ground. And so that's something that's possible in the future. But let me bring up the Big one here is a big one again. How do you date any of this then? Besides what I just said? That's a. You don't get much more than that. You get some, some types of organic dating if you, if you have it available based on the scenario. And then there's like vitrification of melting of rock that we, we identified. That's another possibility to do some dating on. But the big one is this. So as I mentioned, this, this, this underwater ruins are. Lake Vaughan are 75ft underwater, which means that Lake Vaughan would have had to fluctuate at least 80ft to be able to have these exposed above water. Now, Lake Vaughan is at what's called a closed basin system, meaning that it doesn't have any rivers that leave it. Okay, so it has rivers coming in and then nothing leaves. The only way that water can leave the lake is through evaporation or cooling. There's no other way.
- [46:31]
B
Because of the flow of the river, you're saying.
- [46:33]
A
And so. But the problem is that it wasn't always like that. Lake Vaughan used to have a river that exited it. In the southwest part of the river, there's a river called the Murat River, M U R A T that used to exit the lake and it was the only river that exited the lake. Now, if you imagine climatically in the last 12,000 years, if you're going to try to discuss how a lake can fluctuate its water levels, you will be like, oh, well, it went through different periods of rain and then less rain and less snow. Right. And then dry periods. Well, that would only be able to fluctuate the lake a few hundred meters at most, right? Yeah, feet, not 80ft. That would be, that would be something beyond any kind of mega drought to be able to do something like that, especially in a region that doesn't have those kinds of droughts. So I was doing research and I stumbled across something very significant that actually may change this whole ballgame. That, and I think it's one of the ways that we could have some, what you call a smoking, smoking gun piece of evidence.
- [47:42]
B
And what is that?
- [47:43]
A
That joins Robert Shocks and John Anthony West's Water Water weathering of the Sphinx enclosure. When you look at historic records of Lake Vaughn, there's an anomaly you can find. There's a volcano on the southwest part of Mount of Lake Vaughn called Mount Nemrud, not to be confused with the other mountain Emirate. That's more in central Turkey. It is one of the largest volcanic calderas in the world. It's Enormous. And in fact, Alexander the Great, when he traveled to, to that region, they visited that and they talked about it. Xerxes the Great visited this region too. It was a, it was an ancient region. We've talked about the biblical connections to the sons of Noah and this whole Ararat civilization thing that maybe may tie into this mysterious civilization. So other cultures were coming here like as tourists to see it. In fact, in, in Vaughan, there's a inscription carved out of the stone in a place called Tusba, the castle in Vaughan from Xerxes the Great. That's in that. So they were visiting this place anyway. In the southwest part of the lake, as I mentioned, is a massive volcano that has an eruption that was so big that it altered that entire region. Literally the entire mountain blew up. And it has a volcanic crater, a caldera that is miles across. It's enormous. Now when, when you look at data of this volcano, you find out that it's been extremely studied because it's one of the better calderas in the world. The bigger and more like older and more well studied. And so you look at the dating and they've gone in, they've done cores into the volcano and they've studied the hell out of it. So we have a bunch of data from the volcano, which is interesting because it gives us the scientific evidence we need to help potentially prove the dating of this civilization. Let me tell you why. When you look into the records of what they found with this volcano is they found out that the volcano has had its last major eruption. So the one where it blew its top off. Right. And scattered stuff all over Vaughan happened right at the end of the Younger Dryas.
- [49:57]
B
Oh, convenient.
- [49:59]
A
Right at the end of the Younger Dryas, around 11,000 to 12,000 years ago. Somewhere in there, 12, 13, maybe 13. Somewhere in that time period that your driest. Okay, so they know that that's when it last had its, its major eruption. There has been little minor ones since then, but usually volcanoes kind of burp a little bit, you know, over time, but not, not a major one.
- [50:20]
B
Yep.
- [50:21]
A
So what happened was you find out that they have great geologic records of this, that when Mountain Nemrud exploded its debris, because it's right next to the Murat river, the Mirror River. It's only a couple miles away. Blocked off the access outlet of the Murat river from Lake Vaughan, the only river that exits Lake Vaughan, blocking it off and basically completely separating it from the lake, creating a closed bake based closed basin system where no water could leave Lake Vaughn again. Now, if you have a bathtub, I'm going to give the bathtub analogy. And you are filling the bathtub with water, meaning rivers coming in. Right. Because there's big rivers that flow into Lake Vaughan and you have a plug that's partially open. You're going to have the water come in, but some leaves. So you're going to have a somewhat consistent level of water that fluctuates a little bit. Right. Based on how much you put in, but something's always going to leave. That's. That's how lakes work. Right. That's how you fluctuate the lake. What happens if you plug it up? Boom. You put the plug in. What happens? It all of a sudden fills up with an enormous amount, doesn't it? Well, how else could you account for 80 to 100ft of. Of lake depth change that could do it. To then flood over ancient civilization ruins and then put it somewhere. You now have dating from a geologic event that occurred that specifically blocks off the only outlet that would have allowed water to leave, keeping a steady flow in that lake to then flood it over. And you have geologic dating proving when that event occurs.
- [52:01]
B
Which means that this is older than that event.
- [52:04]
A
Exactly. Wow. Which means that we now have what may be the best tangible evidence or some of the best we've ever had to prove that these are lost civilization evidence before the Younger Dryas.
- [52:17]
B
How old again do they say gobekli.
- [52:19]
A
Tepe is 11,800 years old.
- [52:22]
B
Okay. So also right in that, right in that time period.
- [52:25]
A
But that's the dating they get. It may be older than that. It just means that that's the organic. Well, it means that that's. That's the age of the organic matter that was on that crevice. It doesn't mean that that's when the stones were built. You see what I'm saying? That's, that's like saying, well, we know it's at least 11,800 years old because you can't, you can't date stone. So you're like, just like we're saying here. Well, we know this geologic event happened where it blocked off the Murat river and then raised like Vaughn, flooding over this ruins. We know it's at least 12,000 years old.
- [52:58]
B
Yes, but it could be way older.
- [53:00]
A
Exactly, exactly. It could be way older than that. So this is very exciting because we have scientific evidence now that is very extensive that is really adding up to a smoking gun potentially of changing this entire narrative.
- [53:18]
B
And when are. So you have to get the permits and everything. When are you looking to do this?
- [53:21]
A
We're going to be diving down with Tossen, who is the one who discovered these underwater ruins. We're going to be going with a whole team at the end of June, early July.
- [53:31]
B
That's coming up. And what was the, the other thing you were, you said you hinted at you were going to be looking for is the symbolism?
- [53:38]
A
Yeah. One of the things that, that he found when he went down there is that not only does it have the same type of stonework and the type of stone that would be, is important to understand, but there is a various set of prominent symbols carved into the top of these blocks. And that is the flower of life, this giant six figured spoked, I'll call them spokes, flower of life, which is very important, that number of spokes because it's going to tie into numerology and this motif around the world that we're going to talk about in symbols that connect to all the stuff above that we're going to get into as well.
- [54:18]
B
And for people who aren't familiar, who haven't heard on previous podcasts and stuff, can you explain the flower of life and what that is and its history is?
- [54:25]
A
So the flower of life is a type of symbol that has been used by ancient cultures throughout history. It's one of the most common motif symbols we find. I think that one of the best examples for it we can see in, in ancient times is if we go to the Osirion in Abydos, Egypt. And in the Osirion is this massive subterranean area that is built out of these huge granite columns that are many, many multi ton granite columns that are is a very mysterious place because there's primitive limestone built above it, just like we talked about with different cultures building on top of older existing things. And down in the Osirion you can see these numerous patterns that have been carved into the rock of this six spoked flower of life. Now why six? Well, the flower of life is basically the way that you would embody and show the intelligent design of life in the entire universe. And let me get into why that statement. So this gets into Nikola Tesla. So Nikola Tesla, he has this famous quote, he says basically if you want to uncover the mysteries of the universe, it's found within the numbers 3, 6 and 9. He realized that there was a repeating pattern of the of life everywhere, all on Earth. If you see the designs of like a honeycomb or the designs of the flowers and patterns everywhere, it follows and mimics this design of three, six and Then nine. It's basically. It's a repeating pattern of life. It's a life pattern and it's. It's possible evidence to also discuss the idea of an intelligence that for our universe as well, it's like a pattern. It's like a blueprint. It's a blueprint of the creation of life in the universe. Now, the reason three is the first number is that three is, Is the first, most simplistic number where you can create a triangle.
- [56:22]
B
Yes.
- [56:23]
A
Right. And so it gets into. We get into, you know, the. The tetrahedron and all of that. Right.
- [56:29]
B
Can't close a shape without at least three.
- [56:31]
A
And so it's. We're talking about this type of pattern, like design that mimics life, the creation of life everywhere in the universe. And that pattern that he had identified as being like a blueprint. Okay.
- [56:44]
B
Do you know how he came across this and when he did.
- [56:47]
A
Using. When he was doing cymatic types of projects. You know what cymatics is?
- [56:53]
B
No.
- [56:54]
A
Cymatics is when you use electricity using. Playing with the magnetism of the Earth, and it creates like these designs. It's like plasma type of electric, electric electricity designs, and it creates the cymatics. And I'm not an expert on this. I just want to point out there's people that could talk much more extensively about this than I could. But it basically is a way of seeing patterns that are designed based on electromagnetic forces and magnetism. And it creates patterns. Like there's already this natural inherent pattern that comes from energetics that then is. In that it's embodied through physical things. Right. Shells and fossil shells and flowers and other things. It's a type of design that has to do with the creation of life and how life mimics this pattern. And he determined that through his experimentation with. With plasma and through. With electricity and magnetism. And that's where you get down that whole rabbit hole of free energy and understanding that there's an energetic force that has to do with the magnetism of the Earth and all this thing, these things. Right. Well, getting a little away from that, it's. We find that pattern was known about by the ancients. They knew about this pattern of creation. Yes.
- [58:09]
B
How do we know that?
- [58:11]
A
Because they. When we look at all of these symbols, you look at every single symbol that we're looking at except for one, the cross. Cross is more of a totality symbol. But you look at the step pyramid design, there's always three levels to it every time we go around the world, whether or not it's Peru. And I just got back looking at it. For instance, there's a place called the Spring of the Newsta at Ollante Tombo has three levels to it. You can also go across just down the road from it to a place called Napa Glacier. There's these doorways that are like false doorways. There's always three levels every time. Anytime you see these ancient motif designs, you see this type of pyramid, like three level pyramid design, or three level kind of entrance way. Like, for instance, if you look at the Gate of the sun at Tiwanaku and Puma Punku, there's a doorway there. If you look at the back side of that, there are three levels to that. Just like Vera Kosha is. That's. That's depicted on. That is standing on a platform with three levels. Okay. So you get this repeating pattern over and over and over again. They show three over and over everywhere. And then they see that you see the pattern of the flower of life, which is six. And then you get these three level step pyramids, like on the kef bar relief. Three pyramids. Nine, right? Three plus three plus three. Every single time you look at the motifs and designs they had, they were mimicking this pattern of creation in the universe, like they already understood it. And this gets down into this, this whole discussion of whether or not this lost time period of human history, this, these incredible cultures, the reason they were able to build the things that they were these magnificent megalithic, megalithic things that we have no idea how they move them, how they carved them, any of these questions of how they did these things they did. It comes down into, well did. Comes down to the question of, well, did they understand physics and aspects of the energetics and designs woven into our universe that Nikola Tesla stumbled upon? That's really what this conversation is about, is whether or not there was already something known that. It's not like he invented it, it's like he found it again.
- [60:26]
B
Yes.
- [60:26]
A
Through what was already. Yeah. Rediscovered it from what was already known. And they may help us to understand the capabilities of this lost civilization to do the things that they were doing because they understood these fundamental key things of not only the Earth, but the universe.
- [60:44]
B
But if something's like that simple, that it's amazing. But it strikes me as a. As something that they could have figured out just looking at physical patterns around them, as opposed to putting it to work, say, totally technologically. And when I say technologically, I'm referring more to like what we have now, like computers and things like that. Technically, everything Is technology like when you're building something or something like that. So let's keep it simple. But they may have been looking at those things on a simplistic level and possibly discovered something that is insanely accurate and points to scientific, underlying scientific discoveries yet to be made after them that could help us go down the right track in that way. Whereas when Tesla's looking at it, and I hope this is making sense to people out there, but when Tesla's looking at it, he's now at a point where we've advanced more in human history. He's working on things that are highly complex and would have been viewed as insane magic by those previous civilizations. And he's able to more advance that into more of a model modern version of the theory, while taking the base case that they figured out, meaning they weren't more advanced than where he is, but they did have certain things figured out that were ahead of their time, if you will.
- [61:55]
A
Okay, I'll give you some examples for why I think it's more complex and they knew more than that. First of all, we have this premonition that's been very much established into our mindsets that if it's old, it's primitive. That's often something that is. Oh, wow, that's, that's, that's really old, so that must be. Or that's primitive, so it must be old. Right, I agree. And I think that that is the first place we need to try to separate, is to say, well, wait a minute. Yes, everything in the last few thousand years, like Stonehenge and other things, they're more primitive, older designs, I agree. But when we're looking at this time period of what the, the things that we're looking at right now, Lake Fawn, around the Osir, around parts of Peru and Bolivia, we may be looking at a completely different chapter of human civilization in which they knew things and understood things that even we don't know today. And let me get into why I say that. Let's get past for a moment that they built things that we don't know how they built them, and move things that are so enormous that we don't know how they move them. Like for instance, in the Great Pyramid of Giza, the king's chamber is over 150ft above the base. And yet on, in the king's chamber, there are blocks of granite that are 50 over to 50 to sometimes 100 tons.
- [63:16]
B
Yeah.
- [63:17]
A
How did they move them in there? How did they put them in place in there?
- [63:20]
B
I've never heard good Explanations for this.
- [63:22]
A
It doesn't make any sense now except for the fact that we're dealing with a culture that wasn't using primitive means to do that. Because it doesn't make sense that they were using, you know, pulleys and whatever systems it is to do that. It's just, it's so massive and so perfect in its designs. Just put that on the table for a minute. That, that sound of sophistication. Now then go to Lake Vaughan. You had that level of sophistication there with blocks that are unbelievably large and finely cut. But then you have these symbols we find around the world that's that, that have this type of connection back to understanding these fundamental principles of the universe. And we're going to get into that. These fundamental principles of the universe not only are just mimicking the natural environment of creation, they see around them through the flower of life. It gets far deeper than that. As I've talked about in the kef bas relief. These massive stone boxes, they're like granite. They're like, they're basalt boxes that are feet across. They're enormous. They're multi ton granite boxes. And I got a chance when we were at Kev Kalessi to go down into the storage unit to see them. And there's more than one. There's actually at least 10. And I got to see seven of them in a storage unit, storage room down there. And what they have on them are not just random symbols, but they're basically the, the fundamental principles of what we, we think of as what became hermeticism. And the knowledge of hermeticism all around the world. The ancient Greek and Egyptian knowledge that became what are called natural laws or the laws of the universe. And I'll get into what that means in a second. But they show things like this type of step pyramid like design that has the same parameters we see around the world as this concept of understanding time and understanding the trip, the trinity, the aspects of the totality of what makes us us. Now if you take all the symbols they have there on the kef bov relief and you and you put them together, what I believe they truly show to the tree of Life, the step pyramid, the pine cone, the flowering that we see in the passing of the null, all of it. What I believe they represent is, and I've studied and talked to many, many experts around the world is over and over again it's echoed that they are trying to talk about this balance of creation, destruction and harmony in the entire Universe. So if, give you an example of this. If you, if you come to, if you're Julian is a, is an extraterrestrial for another planet. Okay. And this is the best way to say this.
- [66:01]
B
Okay.
- [66:01]
A
You're like, hey, I want to go check out Earth. Let's see this cool place, right? You come to Earth and no humans are here. Hey, it's Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. Now I was looking for fun ways to tell you that Mint's offer of unlimited Premium Wireless for $15 a month is back. So I thought it would be fun if we made $15 bills but it turns out that's very illegal. So there goes my big idea for the commercial. Give it a try@mintmobile.com Switch upfront payment of $45 for a three month plan equivalent to $15 per month. Required new customer offer for first three months only. Speed slow. After 35 gigabytes of networks busy. Taxes and fees extra. See mintmobile.com and you land in some beautiful place and you're a scientist and you're like studying everything. You're like, wow, look at this, how beautiful, how perfect the balance and harmony of this planet is. Right. A tree has leaves. The leaves fall, turn into soil. You then have the nutrients for something new to grow. And then you, it rains and then you have, sometimes you have droughts where something will then die. So then, then that nutrients can then lead to the regrowing of something else. You have just, just the right amount of sunshine, just the right amount of cold. Right. Like I heard a. There was a wonderful listening to a physics whole discussion the other day with Brian Cox.
- [67:17]
B
Yes.
- [67:18]
A
Who did you see the thing he said? He goes, did you know that if the Earth and the moon were in 10, just 10% different location than they are? Right. Just 10%. If the earth was 10%, you know, further away than where it is and the moon was 10% further away, especially the earth from the sun, 10% further away, the Earth would just be a complete ice cap. There wouldn't be any, it wouldn't be any life here.
- [67:44]
B
That makes sense. 10 is a lot.
- [67:46]
A
10%. 10% and I might even be close to less than that. 10% the other way would be an inferno here. Everything would burn and it would be no life here. The means for which we have this harmony here of balance is incredible.
- [68:01]
B
It's when you look at the probabilities of us existing and being able to function in the environments with which we have to choose from on this Earth, it is, it gets stressful to think.
- [68:16]
A
About, because you're like, whoa, it's almost impossible that all of this would set up in the perfect way. If you look at the balance of the Earth, the moon, the sun, for its distances to each other, and how the whole system plays into the harmony of things on this planet with tides and life, it's actually unbelievably strange how in the impossibility of it occurring, even the formation of the moon and the location of the moon is, and the size of the moon versus with Earth, the whole thing is very strange. But the point I'm trying to make is that there's a harmony and a balance that exists here on Earth. And it's an extremely interesting intelligent design based on that harmony and balance. These civilizations seem to understand the details of the importance of that harmony and balance. And we're encoding all of their symbols and motifs to show that. It's like they understood the blueprint for the fabric of our reality, and they understood the fundamental principles for why everything worked the way it was, why everything functioned the way it did. Not only do they understand it, but it seems that with the gods that are depicting and showing holding balance over it, that there's something completely mysterious going on here where there seems to be the whole nother level of intelligence we'll call it. What do you mean? It's not. It doesn't look like it's just a group of a civilization of people that are showing this balance.
- [69:49]
B
The aliens.
- [69:51]
A
There's something else going on here. I'm not going to say aliens, because I just did. You said aliens. There's. There's a celestial intelligence that seems to be playing a part with maintaining this balance. Here is what these depictions are showing. They're showing passing the knowledge to the. The civilization. It's not the civilization, people doing it. Every depiction in this is an image of Haldi, this creator God within their pantheon. Culture, who we see is nearly replicated with Viracocha in South America, and it's replicated with Kukukan and Quetzalcoatl in the Americas, Mexico and Central America, and in Enki in Mesopotamia and other places where there's this. This type of celestial intelligence that is passing this knowledge, but not only passing it, they're in charge of preserving and protecting it. That's what it seems to show on every single relief, every depiction.
- [70:54]
B
What makes you say they're in charge of preserving?
- [70:55]
A
Well, look at right now. That's above there. Okay. This is what we're looking at as Ionis in the center of Ionis you can see Haldi. He's a winged God. Whenever you see these.
- [71:05]
B
Wait on this picture.
- [71:06]
A
Yes. Can you see Hollywood next to each cross?
- [71:10]
B
Oh, yes, yes, yes.
- [71:12]
A
Now, on the. The very left side, on each corner, you see. You see griffins on each corner. You see that? Okay. Those are the griffins. And then you see a very mysterious type of hourglass with, like, a sun symbol.
- [71:25]
B
Yes. Below where the.
- [71:26]
A
Yeah. Now you see Haldi on each. The bottom parts around the sun. And then you see Haldi kneel down in front of the left and the right crosses up there. You see that?
- [71:37]
B
Yes.
- [71:37]
A
Okay. In the center, there's. He's not. Because. Let me go over what I think this means. I believe it has to do with doorways of time, like time keepers. And because if the symbols that are on this are all symbols of the sun, it's a sun temple and they're talking. And sun is usually the way you. You track time. And the way you track time is through measurements of the sun. And the depictions on this and on the kefba relief, all of them, they're all identical. They're all about these pillars of balance with the tree of life and passing the knowledge to. Of the tree of life to this civilization. But it's never people on it. It's always this God, Haldi, and this, his. His altar God, Toshiba, the God of destruction. So it's like this, too, symbolic aspect of a creator and a destroyer. Because if you had a world where nothing died, you would disrupt balance. Right. Death is a. Is an integral part of life here. Right. The cycle of rebirth and then death is a. Is an important aspect of all mortal existence here, of all physical life. It has to die eventually and then be reborn again. That's the cycle of life. So on the Kef bar relief, it shows to Sheba on the left and then Holly on the right, passing the knowledge with the. With the pine cone with the tree of life in the center, with the pillars on each corner, with the step pyramids and the flowering of life at the top. The whole thing discusses this aspect of preserving balance and harmony here, but not just now for all of time. And what I believe these symbols represent with the cross that he's kneeling down and showing is the balance and harmony that exist in all, not just Earth, but in the universe with these celestial creators that they are maintaining balance for all of time. And that the three doorways that we see, the three doors is not only representing the three aspects of us, because we remember we're the microcosm of the macrocosm of the universe. But it's talking about time. So look up there for a minute and you see the left, the right in the central cross, past, present in the center, past, present and then the future.
- [73:56]
B
So scroll to the right Alessi on the picture. If we come out.
- [74:02]
A
So if you, if you're preserving balance in the past and the future, you would be preserving balance in the present.
- [74:08]
B
One, two, three. Okay.
- [74:09]
A
And so again, there's a lot of other symbols on other motifs that are really unbelievably interesting. But when we look at this, this civilization, this lost civilization from before the last younger Dryas, the mysterious thing is that how. How did they possibly invent everything that they invented? Right. When we look at the Sumerians, they invented agriculture, mathematics, animal husbandry, how to basically laws and rules, mathematics. Everything was invented that time period. But where did it come from? Where did any of this knowledge come from? How could you have a civilization just wakes up one day and understands the fundamental principles of the universe and understands universal laws.
- [74:51]
B
Is there an explanation for, you know, having their own. Maybe something we haven't found yet, evidence of this, but having their own people who were the Nikola Tesla's of their time, that could have figured this out. Meaning it didn't come from like a celestial place. It actually did come from someone, you know, like the apple falling on Newton and being like holy.
- [75:11]
A
Well, the real. Yes, and. But it comes the part of that to answer your question is it seems as though. And all the tablets describe this. We look at the cuneiform tablets out of Mesopotamia. They describe these teachers around the world, called the Apkallu, that traveled around the world to pass knowledge. And this could get into a great conversation. Talk about the pine cone hand handbag as well.
- [75:35]
B
Yeah.
- [75:36]
A
Is that. We see evidence around the world in culture, indigenous cultures and ancient cultures. They talk of. And they have these symbols everywhere. Is this passing of knowledge around the world and creating civilizations, but out of something. If you had. And let's give this as a preface for a minute, if you had knowledge lowered somewhere. Like if some place had the ultimate knowledge that was given to that place, that created some kind of a grand civilization. And then they were traveling around the world to the create offshoots, offsets, shoots of that civilization. And you had teachers traveling around the world doing that. That's exactly what we see with symbols everywhere in the world. Like give you an example. This mysterious pine cone and hand handbag we see that's all over Lake Vaughan and in Mesopotamia is shown Also across the world in, like, the Olmec civilization in Mexico. Right. And we see it at Gobekli Tepe on the pillars. We see in other numerous cultures in different parts of Iraq and other places where there's this depiction of knowledge being passed around the world. Go to the Vatican. There's a giant statue outside the Vatican of a pine cone. Giant statue sitting right outside the Vatican of a pine cone. And we see the same cross from Ionis in all of the Vatican on their. The, you know, the. The miter hat and on the cloak they wear and on the staff, there's like this underbelly of ancient knowledge that seems to have passed around the ancient world, then destroyed, but then preserved and protected in small little key pockets by different secret societies and other groups to preserve it. And one of the. The challenges has been, well, what do these symbols mean and what do this knowledge mean? Means around the world, and how do we understand and figure that out? And I had brought up to you talking about this real. This new piece of evidence that's come forth for the handbag that may completely change our understanding of what the handbag means and how we finally have some definitive evidence of what it means. And I can give you a background on that, please.
- [77:46]
B
Yeah, this was kind of. This was before we were on camera. This is kind of blowing my mind, because it's like a map within a map.
- [77:52]
A
Exactly. So I'll give a little bit of background on. This is in the 1800s, Austin Henry Laird was traveling down on a boat in the Tigris river in Iraq, and outside of the area of Nineveh in Sapar, that area of ancient Iraq, he saw a huge mound that looked artificial to him. And he subsequently came back with an archeological team. They got permission from the Ottoman Empire, who was in control of that area at the time, and they excavated this area, and they found it to be an extension of the Ashurbanipal Palace. Now, if you remember, we talked about Ashurbanipal. We did with the ancient library. Right. That connects all around the world, which, by the way, if nobody knows, you know, the famous writer H.D. wells.
- [78:38]
B
Of course. Yeah. H.D.
- [78:40]
A
Wells. Yeah. He called the Ashurbanipal Library, the most important ancient library in the world. That's what his quote was for, that library. So he was studying it.
- [78:50]
B
You were saying that the Library of Alexandria even pales in comparison.
- [78:53]
A
Yeah. Because it was all paper records and it was younger. This is a. This is an ancient library of cuneiform records and murals and statues from all over the World Ashurbanipal was an Assyrian king that was a son of Sennacherib, who basically was a priest as well. And he went out in the world and collected all of these ancient relics from around the ancient world. And he believed it was very, very important. So he amassed it all together. Now, we've talked about the Ashurban Paul Library, but we haven't talked about what was in his palace. So Austin Henry later finds this palace in the 1800s separate from the library. They're part of an area, but in the palace contained these 12 giant murals that are like 7ft tall, made out of gypsum, alabaster. Okay. And they have been frequently shown around the world when people are talking about the pine cone and hand basket or handbag because they have all these different depictions of eagle headed winged gods and also just regular horned headed winged gods as well. They either have an eagle head or they have like a human like head with horns on top of it. Okay, well, 12 of those were found. 12 of them. And those 12 were brought to the British Museum in the 1800s, but the British Museum didn't have room for them to house them all. Okay. And so they sold 12, and there may have been more than 12 originally found. Well, they sold 12 of them off to a private collector in none other than New York City.
- [80:31]
B
Can we go find them?
- [80:32]
A
We can go find them.
- [80:33]
B
Who is he?
- [80:34]
A
The pride. That private collection was put into a part of what, what became the New York Library, but was then moved years later, was then moved and it was displayed in the early 2000s in the Brooklyn Museum.
- [80:51]
B
So it's there. It was displayed then and it hasn't been displayed since.
- [80:54]
A
Yes. And so somebody actually tipped me off to this. I will not take full credit for this, but I appreciate the person who did is that we have been studying all of these depictions of the handbag around the world. Every single depiction of the handbag has nothing on it except for little, like creative designs, like little circles and things like that. It's always blank. And this big controversy and discussion has been, well, what are the handbags? Are they a physical object? What's in them? Right? Or are they something symbolic? What does it mean? And there's been so much debate and discussion for countless years about this. Now, of those 12 murals that ended up in the Brooklyn Museum, they're all identical except for one. Only one of the murals that was brought there has something carved within it in the. In the handbag. Okay, Now I showed you offline this before just to give you an idea of it. But on this, on this handbag is its own depiction carved in it of the two eagle headed gods.
- [82:05]
B
Yes.
- [82:06]
A
With a tree of life in the middle with Anu in the center with wings. And then passing the pine cone to the tree of life. Okay, now this gets into what I believe the handbag truly means and I think is evidence to finally prove what it means. Remember when I was talking about how these civilizations seem to have the knowledge of all of life, the creation of life, the balance and harmony of life. And so they have, you see the pine cone, which by the way, the pine cone is like a seed of the tree, of the tree of life, but it's through a sacred geometry. So sacred geometry gets into what I was just talking about with 369, with the flower of life.
- [82:43]
B
This is what Leonardo da Vinci discovered.
- [82:45]
A
Exactly. Well, with Tesla too.
- [82:49]
B
Yeah. But the sacred geometry was Leonardo da Vinci. Right.
- [82:51]
A
Leonardo da Vinci drew the three trip to the three doorways on the Last Supper. I actually just went to the display in Los Angeles, had the da Vinci display right now. I just, just got back from that actually a couple days ago.
- [83:03]
B
Wow, that had to be insane.
- [83:04]
A
Where you. Yeah, you can look at all of his designs and everything.
- [83:07]
B
They didn't have that one. That's in Saudi though.
- [83:10]
A
No, but he had. They had. They show the Last Supper and they show how behind Jesus is the, is the middle door. It suggests like the Kafba relief with the three doorways with the central door in the center that Haldi has passing the knowledge to the central door. It's the same thing. Now this pine cone, this pine cone aspect that we see, they're passing the pine cone all around the world. Right. And they have the handbag. Now again, this is the whole debate about what the handbag means. Well, this, this evidence gives us strong, strong a hypothesis to present that it is in fact a symbolic depiction of having the totality of all knowledge being like the guardians, all of all knowledge, but not just like regular knowledge, the knowledge of all of creation and balance in the entire universe. And this is where I believe it gets into the mysterious concept that these are not just cultures and around the world that discovered it, that it was something that was passed to them and that that's why they're depicting this all around the world. Because it's like something divine. Right. If you were to think of it as divine knowledge being then passed. And so they would show it in all their artwork because they then had their civilizations connected, created through like divine means, which then often became corrupted and destroyed later on. But it started in this divine place. And I think this really helps us to understand these symbols in a way that it never has before. And we can. We can finally understand look that not only are these some of the most important symbols in the world that come. That tie into a mysterious civilization that would rewrite history as we know it. I don't think it would even just rewrite history. I thought it's not just about saying our. Our time period is older than it is civilization.
- [85:03]
B
Meaning a civilization that maybe isn't even necessarily from here.
- [85:08]
A
Something that may have been lowered from a celestial higher intelligence from above. Something great that we were the progenitors of something far greater than just hunter gatherers. That that's why humanity seems so different is talked about in so many ways of us being from a divine place. And I think this is really, really where we can merge with some of the religious concepts, with esoteric mysticism and ancient concepts. Is that all this evidence is pointing towards us coming from or being given divine knowledge that was then created and then passed around the world to create the greatest. The greatest civilizations and the greatest structures that have ever existed.
- [85:57]
B
Do you think that this is going to get a little meta right here? But do you think that there's any evidence to point to that divine knowledge being. How do I want to say this related to like a simulation or something like that? Meaning these ancient people maybe couldn't understand what a computer is or what the concept of that was. But the divine beings that were giving them this information or whatever were actually a part of the people controlling. I'm just thinking this way because I just had Riz Burke in here as well who was going through this whole thing.
- [86:33]
A
Who's.
- [86:34]
B
Who's laid out his own simulation theory. But they're like controlling the video game that is us. And these people therefore were looking at it like, oh, I can't understand this. But thank you.
- [86:46]
A
Yeah. I do think there's an aspect of the simulation theory in our universe that may be accurate. Let me. I can tell you why.
- [86:52]
B
Please.
- [86:54]
A
When if you ever get into ancient hermeticism again. This is where we can tie into the Emerald Tablet. I can. We can finally tell the real story of the Emerald Tablet. Not the Emerald Tablets. They are very different.
- [87:06]
B
Okay.
- [87:06]
A
And that. This is a great segue. We can get into that. But yeah, hermetics that for a second second. Hermeticism is based on the ancient Greek and Egyptian knowledge of Hermes. Okay. Hermes Trismiscus is basically the equivalent of Thoth in Egypt. They're ancient. They're, they're, they're basically sages of humanity, right, that were teaching great knowledge to humanity. Now there's a number of different texts associated with hermeticism. The Hermetica, the Cabalian, if you ever heard of some of those. And some like Poimander and the dragon. And all of these are all stories within what's called hermeticism from Hermes. Now Hermes describes how there is what's called natural law. And this gets into everything I was just saying. And all the symbols that are shown on these structures, all of it is that there was, there's a knowledge that became known again. So if you imagine you have an ancient civilization that perfects all of this because it's probably, it's handed down to them, I believe they lose it because they're destroyed in catastrophes around the world. And then another secret society in a group of civilizations emerges and then they reclaim it again. Now how they reclaim that is a whole nother conversation, whether or not it was handed to them again or whatever happened. And then other civilizations, civilizations emerge, Dynastic Egyptians, ancient Greeks, and they then incorporate that knowledge back into their culture. The flower of life, these symbols of the triptych, all of it reintegrated back in again because they understand it, right? Well, Hermes was basically the greatest sage of the Greek civilization. He is their patron sage who taught them all the knowledge, right? It gets in, it's a mysterious place like who is Hermes? That's. Then you're now getting into a difficult road to answer is who actually was Hermes? Was he just a man or was he something else? Like something, some kind of a celestial incarnation of something greater. Right. And so that's where that conversation comes in. But hermeticism is, are some of the best records that have been preserved from ancient times of anything. There's more of the hermetic stuff preserved than a lot of the other stuff because it got burned in the library Alexandria, it was destroyed, corrupted, rewritten. But her the hermetic stuff was particularly protected because people like Isaac Newton were really interested in it. And we can get into all how that all worked. Isaac Newton ended up, I believe a lot of what his influences were with developing the concepts of the scientific revolution that occurred in the 16 and 1700s came from its him studying ancient hermeticism and understand like, so Isaac Newton developed, he was the one who developed all of the laws of motion, gravity, the Earth's understanding the planetary motions, and how the procession of the equinoxes and a lot of what we. What we think of is called classical mechanics.
- [90:09]
B
Yes.
- [90:10]
A
Came from Isaac Newton.
- [90:11]
B
He's the godfather of it for sure.
- [90:13]
A
He was only superseded when. When Einstein came along with the theory of relativity. Well, Isaac Newton, you've turns out one of his core studying areas was hermeticism. In fact, he translated a version of the Emerald Tablet, which is an ancient hermetic text. Okay.
- [90:34]
B
Different from the Emerald Tablet.
- [90:35]
A
Completely different. They could not be more different.
- [90:37]
B
All right, so the Emerald Tablet and the Emerald Tablets, two completely different things.
- [90:42]
A
Yeah. This has been an area that has been, I think, really misunderstood from a lot of different angles. I feel like the Emerald Tablets have had a lot of attention throughout the years, and I've even spoken about them earlier in my work, in some of the earlier books that I've done and things that I've written about. But the Emerald Tablet is. It needs more attention. It needs more people talking about it because it directly ties with a little bit more of a historical artifact that is more traceable, that has a lot more evidence to support it. So let me first mention what the other is, and then we'll get into the story of the Emerald Tablet. The Emerald Tablets is a mysterious writing from a man named Maurice Dorielle. It supposedly is from Ancient Egypt, but we don't actually have any evidence that it's. It's true. No physical copy has ever been found. It was simply one man writing a bunch of things down that he says came from something. Now, I'm not saying it's completely a forgery and that there's nothing good in it. There's definitely concepts and things in there that are helpful and seem to tie to other things, but it's not like the Emerald Tablet, where we have extremely tangible evidence from throughout cultures throughout history who re translated it and had it be a basis for knowledge. So it's. I think that the. One of the problem is that they get confused and then one gets confused as being the other and then vice versa. So I would personally lean a lot more on the Emerald Tablet for people that want a historical basis of understanding ancient hermeticism and ancient Egyptian knowledge rather than the other. So, I mean, that's a whole nother conversation regarding if it's. If the other. The other is real or not. Whereas the Emerald Tablet has a long history to it.
- [92:40]
B
And how do we know this?
- [92:41]
A
So the Emerald Tablet has been translated from not only Latin and Greek, but also Arabic. It's been in numerous cultures for hundreds and hundreds of Years. And a lot of philosophers and experts have leaned on it because of the knowledge it contains. And as we were talking about before in Isaac Newton actually translated his own version. One of the versions in Latin that came out was from Isaac Newton. And he extensively studied the Emerald Tablet. And I believe based on what you learned from the Emerald Tablet, that he may have formulated a lot of his scientific theories based on. Yeah, based on the knowledge that came out of that. Which then leads us to be like, realize, well, is our understanding of science coming out of the 16 and 1700s? Is it attributed towards, from, from ancient hermetic knowledge?
- [93:34]
B
Do you have like examples of things he took from that?
- [93:36]
A
Yes, specifically. Okay, so one of the things he got are cosmic laws. So the laws that he just discusses, the laws of motion, the laws of planetary bodies, the laws of life creating I think different things that the functionality of physical reality. A lot of that is described, discussed in the Emerald Tablet. So the Emerald Tablet is. It's again it's discussing natural law and how everything functions in our world. So if we get into the, the background of it, if the famous concept as above, so below I'm sure you've heard that concept that came from the Emerald Tablet. That's where that, that concept first originated for is talking about how celestial aspects like astrology and planetary movements play a huge role with how consciousness and life functions here on Earth. And that's where the idea that like da Vinci got where we are the microcosm of the macrocosm is that a lot of what's playing out on the external is playing out within us. And a lot of those ideas came from that. But also natural law, like planetary movements and functions and how he determined gravity. A lot of those core concepts came from hermetic knowledge, which is again it ties into your original question. How do we know that those ancient cultures knew more than just looking and mimicking nature, that they actually knew real detailed knowledge of higher level things? And so the story of the Emerald Tablet is pretty incredible actually. And I don't really hear many people talk about it. So I wanted to tell you the story of how it got found. There was a man named Balinus. Balinus is described in the Arabic and Latin versions as being a philosopher and a mystic and a master of talismans who is studying ancient knowledge. And he's an esoteric master and he ends up having a dream. His this dream tells him of a, of a statue of Hermes Trismiscus, in which there's a. There's something buried underneath it. And so he goes on this expedition to go and find this statue based off a dream. Based off a dream. That's exactly what that really says. And so Balanis travels to southern Turkey to a place called Tyana. And in Tyana, he's searching because that's where I guess his leads or his information is led to. He finds this ancient statue of Hermes, just like in his dream. And in that. And below that statue, he finds an ancient crypt, a passageway that leads to a cave underneath. It's. This is wild, but I'm telling you, it's a hundred percent true. And when he goes down into this cave, he finds this. This stone statue of a man with his hands sticking out in an. With two hands. One hand has the Emerald Tablet and the other hand has a book. The book is called the Book of Secrets or Secret of Secrets of Secrets.
- [96:42]
B
The Chamber of Secrets.
- [96:43]
A
It's wild, but that's. This is the story that is actually like, has a lot of evidence to support it that it was. It's really true. Now, the Emerald Tablet was not made out of emerald. It was. That's. That's a misnomer. It was actually made out of jade. And that's. That's the material it was called. It was just called the Emerald Tablet. But that. From that tablet, it then became translated in, again I said Arabic, Latin and Greek, and was taught by philosophers around the world. It became the basis for where the philosopher's stone came from. That's the entire basis behind the philosopher's stone is based on the. Yes, because the tablet not only talks about natural law and phenomenon, but it talks about alchemy. And it talks about how you can create any, any kind of alchemical output, metal that you want out of two things, sulfur and iron, which is strange, but it discusses how that's the basis behind anything you want to create, including gold. And so that was where a lot of philosophers became extremely interested in the Emerald Tablet because of this idea of a philosopher's stone.
- [97:54]
B
And where again did we get the story, what was his name? Balthum?
- [97:57]
A
Balinus.
- [97:57]
B
Balinus. Where again did we get that story?
- [98:00]
A
Where it's verified. That story comes from a number of Arabic, Latin and Greek sources from different books. The Book of Creation and the Book of Secrets. There's different books that are based on the story of where the Emerald Tablet was found. And it's well documented from where, from how that story goes. Because it was such an obsession of philosophers and alchemists, the story was, was continued and well inversed over in numerous different Places. And actually there's a lot of evidence to support it. That's why Isaac Newton ended up studying it.
- [98:33]
B
And what years, again, is it purported to have happened?
- [98:36]
A
The Emerald Tablet was found in the 8th century. Around 1200 years ago, Balanis traveled to a place that no longer exists any longer, called Tyana. And that was where this statue of Hermes was supposedly found with this crypto, where it was discovered underneath it. So again, we know that the Greeks had a. Had a lot of roles in south southern and western Turkey. There's a lot of ancient Greek cities. And so we know that that area was an ancient region and of course ties into even some of the other things we were talking about. But it forms the basis of us trying to understand how ancient civilizations and cultures seem to understand knowledge different than even we do today, and that other. And then other cultures have come along and tried to mimic it. But we. I don't think we personally give ancient civilizations enough credit because we often are looking at them through the lens of a primitive type of people.
- [99:35]
B
Yeah, you make a good point on that, because I'm guilty of it too, where you just think about the concept of how long ago it was and what we've been thinking fed about, you know, how humans have evolved over time, which includes our developments and our technology. You assume that they weren't brilliant. The. A major exception always occurs whenever we talk about things like the pyramids and stuff, because we're like, oh my God, how the did they pull that off? But there's still the thought of like, oh, those people would. They'd look at an iPhone like, no different than a fish would look at an iPhone. Like, what is that? You know what I mean?
- [100:10]
A
Yeah, but.
- [100:11]
B
But it doesn't mean that the knowledge that they possessed or were able to put into action was not something amazing, including things that we don't understand today.
- [100:20]
A
Absolutely. I mean, we have to think about technology in different ways. I think that that's one of the core things here to talk about is that our technology is based on these machines that we've mastered to become advanced. Right. Like, if you think about how far we've come from the very first computers and radios and televisions to where we are now with phones. Crazy. Unbelievable, right?
- [100:44]
B
Yeah.
- [100:45]
A
But what about the idea of how far a culture could come thousands of years under their belt with a different kind of technology? What about the technology of harnessing forces of the sun through plasma and different aspects of energy? One of the examples I want to give is if we look at Ionis, when I was. And the structure of how Ionis is built, it's very mysterious. I'll give you. I'll give you an example. I was in the Coracancha in Peru. I just. We did trips to all those locations. And when I was in the Cora Concha, it's an ancient sun temple of the Inca or pre Inca civilization. And in fact, you can walk down roads that are right adjacent to the coracancha, and you can see really primitive Incan work on one side and then the highly advanced work on the other. And that's just like the Europeans, like I was talking about, where we're giving credit all to one culture for building something, rather than accepting that they may have adopted and built near or on top of other older things. Well, in the Cora Concha, there's this altar, this very, very mysterious stone altar that has these edges that stick out, these square, like, elongated edges. I showed you before. And when I saw that, I couldn't believe it, because that same design is the same design as the pillars we see at Ionis and Kef Kalesi outside of the. Of the temples. There are these pillar designs that have these extensions sticking out of them that are perfectly aligned in a square around these structures. It is very mysterious because we know there were sun temples and we know that they likely had some kind of a function with the movement of the sun. But how they worked gets really mysterious. A lot of people that I've talked to that deal with sacred geometry and looking at sacred architecture, there's actually two people on the team, Lydia de Leon and Arturo, that are part of these groups of. They're called geophilia, where they study sacred geometry and structures around the world for energetic components and how it alters different states of consciousness and different energy fields. And what we've found is that a lot of these designs, both in the Greeks and in earlier cultures, are designing buildings to have a harmonic type of solar component that connects geometry and sacred geometry with energy in a way that we don't understand today. It's very, very mysterious. But that same pillar around the world, the same design, is where we find it all the way over in Lake Vaughan. But not only that, there's a T pillar that's also exactly mimicked around the world as well. This, like, the idea of, like, this tea type of design that we. Robert Schock and I were just analyzing at Chavuus Tepe with Hans, these huge basalt tees on the ground that we see in numerous other places, like in Tiwanaku in Bolivia. It's like they're mimicking all these same designs, but I don't think it was just for the reason of, oh, wow, that's cool. Let's, let's make it too. I think that they were designing and creating temples with some kind of a functionality that we don't fully grasp or understand today. If, like, if you look at our building style, we build just to get some primary function of like, livability and get in, make sure the structure stands for however long it can. But we don't build based on like sun movements and energy. Like, we don't, we don't do that. We just don't do that anymore. It's like we don't understand any longer what they used to know. And I say that because when we look at the designs specifically of places like Ionis and others, this type of pillar design, this and the type of way that they were mimicking the solar movements is it can't just be a coincidence. It's not just for tracking time. There's something else going on. And the reason I say that is that the stone that they picked at all of these sites is like a basalt andesite, is the highest level of magnetic magnetite type of stone that exists, meaning it's a magnetic stone. So if you went up and you put a compass on it, your compass would spin. We saw that. I saw the same thing in Peru, all over the place in Bolivia. They're all highly magnetic stones, just like at Lake Vaughan. They're only, they're only picking these magnetic type of stones. But what's bizarre is that they're building on top of like limestone hills. And even though they could just quarry the limestone, they weren't even interested. It's. They were going, as I said, sometimes hundreds of miles to go find these high league magnetic type of stones to build with. That's not a coincidence, I would say. No, it's like, give me an example. In Egypt, the, we see the granite, the pink granite and the granite stones in the king's chamber and throughout the Giza Plateau. They didn't take any stone from around the Giza plateau to build that. They went all the way down the aswan quarry over 400 miles away to obtain that granite. Right? That's the same thing we see in Turkey and we see same thing we see in South America. Why would a civilization do that if they just, if it was just like, oh, we could use any stone we want to. It brings up questions about whether or not there was something very specific that they were looking to achieve by building with those types of stones something energetic. And the reason I mention all of this is because it gets into hermeticism and it gets into the flower of life. It gets into all of this knowledge is that they were trying to do something with building these structures in a certain way. That unlocks something, Julian. It unlocks something with this. This idea of. Right. Like we. We know that they built on the 30th parallel most times the Giza Plateau, Eridu, Persepolis, and Iran. Numerous other sites are on the 30th parallel of Earth. Yes, that's what's known as the geodesi. It's a concept where you take these. You take these geomagnetic magnetic locations, these geolocations that are important in the Earth, and you build in specific spots because it has some kind of relationship with the Earth and then the cosmos. And that's why you then find things like the great pyramids of Giza is aligned to the three belt stars of Orion. We see so many of these correlations with building to align with stars in the heavens to mimic down below.
- [107:15]
B
Now, obviously that means they understood something up above at the time and perhaps understood more than we give them credit for.
- [107:22]
A
Yeah.
- [107:22]
B
About that. But is there, Is there anything to say that these ideas are, like, not just symbolic, that they were doing that, rather than something deeper, maybe scientific, with where they place these things?
- [107:35]
A
Well, that's what I mean is not just. I think the symbology comes into, like, artifacts and motifs showing us teachings, but what they were doing was something tangible and physical. Well, energetic. They were. They were actually trying to do something that is far more than just based on a theoretical concept. They were creating some kind of a form of energy. This is. Then this gets into Nikola Tesla. They were creating some kind of a form of energy I'm sure you've heard of, like the Giza power plant and all these different ideas. Well, they have a lot of things in common. For instance, the great. The great pyramids are built over aquifer centers of water. Right. We know that that water is an excellent transmuter of electricity. And we see that they had. They usually, the great pyramids had limestone covering the outside of it, but in the inner parts had granite inside the center. Like, why. Why do that? Unless there's something to do with the energetic components of all those stones. We see the same thing in all these parts of the world is that there's specific stones used and then relationships with water and relationships with the locations of the Earth and then relationships with the heavens, they're all being taken into account right now. It's, it's like they understood these concepts far more than we ever, ever have, or at least have in modern times. And I think that that's why when we look at the past, we should look at it in a completely different lens. I see it as. Humanity can go down two different paths, and I think there's only, there's only two paths that makes that make logical sense. There's like an industrial type of path that's based on consuming large amounts of resources and then creating like machines and things that do work and a lot of things like that. And that's, that's the path that we've taken, but there's also a very different kind of path. And I think Nikola Tesla really talked a lot about that alternate path, which is why I think a lot of his work was silenced and a lot of it was demonized, is that there's a path of, of building in a more organic, harmonious way with the Earth and the cosmos and having a connection and relationship with magnetism and with the types of components of the earth, like within stone. He believed, Nikola Tesla believed that a quartz crystal was some, a type of living being. He talked about that in his work. Not a living being like we think of an organic living being, but some kind of a non organic vibrational being.
- [110:06]
B
What does that mean?
- [110:07]
A
It means that it has some kind of existence that's beyond just regular stones. That quartz itself is almost alive and we find that course, but it's not breathing. Well, like a resonator. No, it's some kind of a resonator of energy. And I'm not an expert on this area, this field, but I can tell you it's interesting to me that the Earth has more silica quartz than any planet we know of.
- [110:35]
B
Does that change our definition or would that change our definition of life, though?
- [110:39]
A
Yes, I think it would.
- [110:41]
B
Because to me, I mean, without looking it up in the fucking dictionary, to me life is, is something that's living, breathing, and has the ability to feel.
- [110:50]
A
Well, he, he talks about how the vibrational frequency and how quartz reacts to different things, gives it more characteristics of something that's more living. And again, I'm not, I'm not a fizz, I'm not a physicist, but it. Nikola Tesla, But Nikola Tesla believed that quartz had certain properties. And again and again, you know what the prime primary mineral in granite is?
- [111:14]
B
No.
- [111:15]
A
Quartz. The primary primary component within granite is quartz. And so isn't that interesting that the Egyptians would go to such great lengths to obtain granitics that are high in quartz. And, and we find that in other stones as well. So it's for the.
- [111:34]
B
Just to. Sorry to cut you off. But could it also be anything with aesthetics though too? Like, aesthetically speaking, they. Meaning there's like a simpler explanation. Like they, they wanted granite as opposed to something else.
- [111:47]
A
So they go more than 400 miles and you're trying to move multi ton block.
- [111:50]
B
I agree that's pretty insane. But like we see people are willing to do some crazy things for aesthetics. You know, there's people who will fly halfway around the world to get, you know, the piece of jewelry they want or something like that. That's kind of a bad example, but.
- [112:03]
A
You know what I mean?
- [112:04]
B
Like there's, there's where there is a demand for a small supply of something or a rarity, if you will, something shiny. Human beings throughout history seem to gravitate towards that. So is it possible that that could be.
- [112:19]
A
Well, I guess the way that I'll answer that is we have to understand the undertaking, the absolutely insane amount of work it would have taken to construct and build these things. Oh yeah. So if it was based on aesthetic principles, it would be almost like an insanity. And it doesn't seem that these ancient cultures, the ancient ancient ones, before even the dynastic Egyptians, I mean we're talking lost civilizations, were doing anything by accident. It was like everything was on purpose. There was no mistakes made. We don't find, we don't find these beautiful murals with like mistakes on them. I just showed you the Ionis altar. We were looking at it. They didn't make any mistakes on anything. Everything that we're looking at from this time period, it was like everything was done almost perfectly. Yeah, it was, it was very mysterious where it was like everything was well thought out and was done for a very important reason. And then what those reasons were, we're still, we're still exploring today.
- [113:19]
B
Yeah, it always just gets strange to me. I was saying this earlier, but whenever you see things that are halfway around the world from each other, from these ancient times that have not just similarities, but they're quite literally like the same thing. Like some of the pictures you were showing me off air with some of the stuff you were just describing maybe 15 minutes ago with, with the, with the four sided edges of, of some of the stuff they were building, it's like you see that and you go, how the. Could these people in Turkey have passed this so perfectly to these people in Peru or Bolivia? You know what I mean? Like, it's. That's the stuff that keeps me up at night. Because it's like, what is the connection there? It's not as simple to me as. I mean, I guess technically it could be, but it would be insane. It's not as simple, though, as, like a few guys arriving on some primitive boat from all the way across the Atlantic and saying, here's how to build a pyramid or here's how to build, you know, the edge of granite or something like that. And here's a book with a how to on all of it. That seems like a stretch to me.
- [114:18]
A
Yeah, I think it is. And it. You can't ignore when you look at the same type of gods that they're showing. I'll call the gods. These figures that they're showing that are passing this knowledge. It's. They're identical. Again, I mentioned, Haldi is nearly identical. Identical in all his traits as Vera Kosha. How is that a coincidence? How is it possible that we have, again, the same designs that were like symbols of teachings that we see not only across continents, but even woven into things like Da Vinci's work and others? It's very mysterious. It's like we've forgotten what we once knew. And we're trying to put the puzzle pieces back together to something that is the puzzle of who we are and the puzzle of the divinity of what we used to know. And I think that's the fun in this is that, you know, we become so disconnected into it. And as we put these pieces back together, we realize that it's far more than just ancient history. It's our own. It's our own divinity of the universe. And realizing that we are far greater than what we've just simply been told that we are. We are like creator gods that have forgotten we are. And our abilities, I think the abilities that we once had and the. And the. The understanding we once had is just like an echo of its. Of this former self lost over time from great millennia, forgetting the status of. Of where we once stood as balancers and stewards of this Earth and remembering how important we are. And here we are now, destroying the world and polluting it and fighting out with silly wars, not realizing that we're all just human beings here that are divinely guy. Divinely connected everywhere.
- [116:02]
B
Not to say that any of that is acceptable to me, but at the same time, something like wars, though, that. That's been happening forever. Every civilization we look at was at war.
- [116:11]
A
Except that we have no evidence that the lost civilizations ever were at war. And that's, that's, I think that's really.
- [116:17]
B
But it's, it would be during a time where the earth is unbelievably less populated, so harder to go find people. And do you think that that could really be the case? Like ancient civilizations just went against all human nature and didn't have war? That seems like a stretch to me.
- [116:33]
A
Let me give you an example though. If you have. Would you say the inherent nature of a person is violence, though?
- [116:41]
B
The inherent nature? No.
- [116:42]
A
Okay, so if you, if you were being. We talked about, we talked about how like someone can raise, remember, different dogs, right?
- [116:51]
B
Yes.
- [116:51]
A
What? And you could raise one dog like very kindness and, and positivity and giving it a reinforcement of love. And that dog will probably never bite anyone his entire life. Right? That's right now. And if someone at the same token raises a dog and through violence, that dog will probably bite you.
- [117:09]
B
That's also right.
- [117:10]
A
Well, well, what if humanity is the same way?
- [117:13]
B
It could be. But when you asked me the question of like the, the inherent nature of people, whether or not I think it's, it's violent on an individual level, I don't. On a group level, I do because it's, it's not there. It's not their main inherent nature. It's one of them, though. There's a lot of inherent natures to human beings, but absolutely one of them is violence. Because what we see across any type of expression or behavior or whatever is that as you increase the size of the population, like a group, right. You move from 1 or 2 people to 4 people to 10 people to 15 people, eventually the group think ideology can fall into line to where all you have to do is. Let's say, you know, the first 14 people of a civilization aren't born with inherent violence or their environment doesn't mold them into being inherently violent and they're all peaceful and whatever. But then the 15th person who joins the civilization, maybe their upbringing was a little different. Maybe they were born with a screw loose or whatever and they're violent. Maybe at that point that doesn't start them wanting to go out and hunt other people for war. But that voice gets into the room. And then, you know, somewhere along the next five people that join the civilization, another voice of violence gets into the room. And eventually this, you know, the strongman will of certain people who want to go out and seek violence and seek war and conquer and things like that, that becomes what the group gets behind. You see what I'm Saying.
- [118:39]
A
No, I totally understand what you're saying, but what if instead of using that analogy of like a person, a person training a dog, what if we were talking about civilizations who were training. We're not training people, but teaching people different values than they were taught later. And now let me give you an example of that, please. And all of the symbols from like Vaughn and around ancient Turkey and ancient. The pre Egyptian stuff where we have symbols. Egypt's a bad example because there's only the flat. We have the flower of life. But I'll take Lake Fawn, for instance. We don't see one war symbol anywhere in all of these motifs. We're looking at whether it's a kef bar, relief sites like Ionis, the underwater stuff, all of these sites. There's. And there's like 15 different sites that I'm looking at in that area. There's never been in andesite, a spear or a bow or anything ever, a sword ever shown in any of those symbols. Except for the Urartian artwork later. We see all kinds of war symbols all over the place. We see them practicing. They were fighting the Assyrians. And then we go down into the Syrian civilization from, you know, 3,000, 3,500 years ago. We see all kinds of murals of them fighting and at war all over the place. And. But they also have this. This carrying down of some of the knowledge from the past woven in. Like we're in a different time period. Like there was a lot of conflict. But to say that because we've had conflict for, let's say, the last 4,000, 5,000 years. Right. Doesn't mean that humanity always has, because we're looking at it through the lens of that time period, representing all of humanity. And when I'm looking at a lot of these symbols, we never see a war symbol. Not only that, but how much evidence.
- [120:36]
B
Do we even have? We're trying to find civilizations that are lost. They're lost for a reason because we don't have much evidence of them.
- [120:41]
A
But if they were practicing war, don't you think that some of those symbols would have somehow found their way into these locations?
- [120:47]
B
Yeah, and who's to say that some of them actually are, and we haven't interpreted them correctly yet, that for understandable reasons, that's.
- [120:54]
A
That's fair enough. And that was actually one of the problems of archaeologists in Lake Vaughan is that they were trying to interpret through the lens of the Erartians as a war culture, and they were misidentifying a lot of these symbols. We talked about it the first time, how the symbol, the pine cone was identified as a spear by archaeologists when they were originally excavating in the 1960s, these locations. And they were labeling others as like windows in a castle and different things because they were looking at it through the lens of a war culture. So if, if it depends on the lens that you're looking at, if they were able to create such magnificent structures that were based on energy and harmony and those core principles were woven into their civilization, isn't it fair to say that maybe they were different than we are?
- [121:45]
B
I can't rule anything out, to be fair to you. Right. Because I wasn't there. But. And again, I'm looking at it through the lens of humanity that I know. So to kind of go against my argument at the beginning of this, I'm looking at it through that four or five thousand years or whatever, as you just pointed out, as opposed to something that could have existed before. But like, immediately I'll think of something like an Adolf Hitler, who was objectively a horrible person on this earth, who did horrible things to millions and millions of people around the world. And in the middle of building his Nazi Germany. Objectively, you can also say that some of the buildings and architecture are things that, that he built looked incredible, but we don't. Look, you see what I'm saying? Like, that doesn't mean that doesn't take away all the other shit he did. So some of these ancient civilizations, and perhaps I'm thinking about this wrong, they could have built things that were beautiful and harmonious or whatever and been doing blood sacrifice on the other side of it for all I know. I don't, I can't rule that out either.
- [122:47]
A
Well, it's interesting that these periods of instability seem to coincide with time periods of humanity not having, or not having at least as the, the foundation of their society, that ancient knowledge we were talking about may. You know, I think that's where religion has a lot of crossovers. Religious teachings, like morality teachings, have a lot of crossovers with these, these symbols and these teachings that we're talking about from these ancient cultures, because they seem to all be leaving behind like a message.
- [123:21]
B
Yeah.
- [123:22]
A
And they're all saying, like, look, this is how you reach higher states of consciousness. This is how you reach harmonious balance with everything around you. This is how you become like gods. This is how you walk with God in heaven. All these things were, were being passed down, and when those were the more the moral basis of different groups, they didn't commit those violent acts. But when those things were lost, then they did. So I think one of the things we have to consider is whether or not humanity was shepherded by some bad leaders that were in. Didn't want that to happen. You know, we, we have to. We have to entertain the idea that there were powerful secret societies and groups that didn't want us being walking down that road.
- [124:10]
B
Who do you think are the most notorious of those?
- [124:12]
A
Well, I mean, let's give you an example. Is. I think Constantine was a really bad guy. Constantine is. Is he. He took the Roman Empire, turned it into the, the Byzantine Holy Roman Empire, and that's where we have the basis for the Old Testament. It's called the, the Council of Nicaea. This is where the Council of Nicaea occurred, where certain things were kept and certain things were kept out and things were decided. And that's when the, the Council of Nicaea in that time period of history is when ancient history was determined. Did you know that?
- [124:44]
B
I did I. So Council Nicaea comes up a lot on this podcast.
- [124:48]
A
Yeah.
- [124:48]
B
And I've had different people from different angles, everything from you to West Huff talking about this in different ways. I did not buy all of Wes's argument on the Council Nicaea. I'll say that. Does that mean, though, that everything was like, written down about Christianity then, you know, like the Da Vinci Code would try to say? Not necessarily. But do I think that the history, like I, and I would say this about any ancient text or anything we're studying. Do I think the history is perfectly reported in the Christian religion? No, I don't think it's perfectly reported in Islam. I don't think it's perfectly reported in Judaism. I don't think it's perfectly reported in stuff you could find from the. At. From the library of Ashurbanipal. Like, nothing is going to be perfect. But where can we land on the idea of like, oh, this is in the right direction? I think that's why we have these arguments. But yes, if you want to explain more about the Council Nicaea, I'm all ears. Because it's a very fascinating thing considering that prior to this, I think it started in like 313 A.D. and maybe Randall, like there were things still going on in 325 or whatever. But prior to this, Christianity had effectively been illegal within the Roman Empire. And now you had an emperor saying like, not only are we going to legalize it, we almost. It's a growing portion of people. So we want to get out in front of this and adopt it. For our own.
- [126:11]
A
Yeah. And I'm not an expert on that area. I don't want to claim to be, but I do study is how that time period, a lot of things were established. We'll say, like what? Like history, the narrative of history. Herodotus started that, but it became woven into an accepted teaching through the Roman time period of, well, how old is human civilization? When did it begin? Yeah, that whole, that whole time period was established. And once it became established, it hasn't budged since then. Then we have the same history that we've essentially been teaching for like 2000 years.
- [126:46]
B
Yeah. Which I think is problematic because we see, I mean, you've presented some evidence yourself today just on things you're looking at. But we see so much evidence of these things when we start talking about the younger dries and things that could have existed before that. Where there is even within secular culture where people maybe have nothing to do with religion or haven't really thought of it through that lens. There is a worldview that has been just built in for hundreds and hundreds of years that has them kind of biased towards, not necessarily even create creationism, but their timelines.
- [127:18]
A
Wrong. Yeah. Because it's been established. It's. It's a lens. You know, we were just talking about the lens of how you look at something. Right. Our lens that we've been taught is that our civilization is 6,000 years old. It emerged in ancient Mesopotamia and that nothing that existed before that was anything other than hunter gatherers and then Neolithic humans. That's it. That's what we're told. Anything older than that? And yet we get places like Gobekli Tepe that are accurately dated with radiocarbon dating that are double that age. It doesn't make sense, given an example. We just, we just had within the last couple years all the announcements out of White Sands, New Mexico. Do you know about that? Where we've been told. And it's like, hey, this is an established narrative that, that humans got to the Americas through the Bering Strait. Right. They got no earlier than 13,000 years ago and that that was how they got there because it was frozen and they walked over and got here. Except that we have established now with scientific evidence that White Sands footprints of humans are like 26,000 years old.
- [128:23]
B
How were we able to establish that?
- [128:25]
A
They were able to, to uncover a layer that had been covered over. Remember we were talking about how if things are buried, they have a better chance of being able to date them. Yes. And so they were able to find different artifacts and different organic things within those buried areas near the footprints that have given them dating. And I'm not an expert on that. So I don't want to talk about that too much other than I know that has been well established and fought by mainstream academics that does not want to accept that, that, that, that, that, that age, because that age is double the age that, that we're taught that any kind of indigenous or hominid type of group was in the Americas. But it's the same thing that's echoed around the world is that, you know, we're, we need to start looking at science as an, that the, the basis of science was intended upon.
- [129:15]
B
Yeah.
- [129:16]
A
Which is always being an objective observer of whatever evidence it is and going along with that evidence, not having a predetermined conclusion that you stand by and you don't halt, you don't move from.
- [129:27]
B
And this, this is the frustration, you know, and we've talked about this in, in different levels on some of the podcasts we've done in the past. But you know, seeing this play out more and more and more over the last couple years especially, it's like given me more viewpoints into just how polarized this is and where there is wrong on both sides. You know, as an example, we saw a debate I guess like a year ago or whatever with Graham Hancock and Flint Dibble.
- [129:55]
A
Yeah.
- [129:55]
B
Now to be clear, Flint is very much like a traditionalist. Comes at it from the traditional lens. He's a smart guy, but I think there's things he's certainly closed minded on and like, his personality is like a little bit Weasley for me. So it, it wasn't exactly like a sympathetic figure in that way. I'm someone who has enjoyed a lot of Graham Hancock's work in the past and think he has done some good work. That said, that was a really sad debate for me because it felt like Graham really got his ass kicked. And it wasn't so much that Flint kicked his ass, it was that Graham spent the entire time just instead of really presenting evidence, ranting and raving against everything in quote unquote mainstream archaeology to the point that like he wasn't even open to something being right in there. Which to me the tragedy in this is that we're starting to incentivize creating the same sin from the other side in this case, like the alternative side that we were calling out on the mainstream side, which I agree with. Calling out, like when you tell me that mainstream archeologists and mainstream academia have been presented with some legitimate Evidence and I got to review it myself and whatever, for whatever that's worth. But they've been presented with some legitimate evidence that something in America could be twice the age that we once knew. Me, I would want to know all about that. I would want to try to dig into that more. I would want to try to write papers on this, fuck it, peer review it, do whatever you want. But they've created an ivory tower culture where they're like, that's just a bridge we don't want to go down. So we'll accept what we have because we think that could be right. We don't even want to explore whether or not the other thing could be right. That to me, I don't know how to, I mean that'd be like the fucking 10 trillion dollar question. I don't know how to solve that. But it seems to get worse with time and, and, and it comes back to what we were talking about with, with the whole war culture thing, what I was saying, which is groupthink, like it's very hard to take, take a group of people who are, you know, maybe there's a small percentage of them who are pushing this line, but they hold some power and the other people just kind of fall into line. And I think that's what's happened maybe on both sides of the spectrum at this point.
- [132:00]
A
Yeah, I think that it's a really sad thing to see science, mainstream science and archaeology be so close minded.
- [132:08]
B
Yes.
- [132:08]
A
To evidence that's being presented. Whereas you were also pointing out that on the other side sometimes our side can almost seem like frantic to try to prove our points, but not accepting that both sides are probably kind of right in their own, in some aspects. Right.
- [132:24]
B
Yes.
- [132:24]
A
So it's not like we throw the baby out with the bathwater.
- [132:27]
B
That's right.
- [132:28]
A
We have to understand that there are aspects of traditional archeology, and I get this all the time, doesn't mean that everything's all wrong. Right. Just because like NASA lied about some things doesn't mean all things that's right are wrong. Yes, it's, it's, it's, that's, it's not an, it's not an end all be all to that type of thinking. It's like, look, a lot of ancient history stuff is very valuable. Valuable that we've uncovered and presented. The, I think the Acadian, the Assyrian cultures are for instance, are very, in. Babylonians are very well mapped out. But there's then the mysterious Sumerians that have evidence of being from like a Different time period that, well, we should look at that more. It's, it's so. It's not like saying all of the Assyrian Acadian stuff's wrong or all the Roman stuff's wrong or all the Greek stuff is wrong. It doesn't, that's not really what we're, I think what we need to do is, is work together as objective researchers and scientists to be like, to bring back something that we once had, which is the wonder of the unknown and wanting to know more and being open minded. What's the. Why is it so dangerous to have an open mind to ask questions?
- [133:38]
B
It's so stupid. You know, we're talking about my friend Luke Caverns, who I think you know off camera earlier. And one of the reasons I really love Luke and his work is because he comes at it from both worlds. He was trained traditionally in academia under Dr. Ed Barnhart, no less, well respected genius of, of that space. And he plays in the space where he talks with guys like you and talks with guys like Graham Hancock and is, and is very interested in having that open mind and trying to figure out. He's also somebody who is willing to say the words I don't know or I was wrong about things. And I think that's part of the problem here. I think that's really what the nail on the head is. Instead of celebrating things like that. Now if someone's saying I don't know or I was wrong every five minutes about every single thing they find, I mean, they probably don't know much. But like when we, when we villainize even possibly saying those terms or not falling into line, we are creating these barriers and they're only going to get wider and wider and wider. And so it's really important that like guys can sit across from each other and find some space to say, all right, we can agree to disagree on this, maybe come back to that, but we can agree on, on, on this point. And I, I, it's not like I haven't seen that before. I have seen that. But the things that get a lot more attention now are when you have the two sides screaming at each other, which I've been a part of too, like as a podcaster here, you've seen that before, but it's like it's not really constructive.
- [135:07]
A
No, it's not. I think it comes down to compartmentalizing things. I think that's actually where the real problem is. Imagine Julian Dory is an archaeologist and he's studied archaeology all his life, but he's like he scoffs at the idea of energetics and sacred geometry and spirituality and metaphysical anything. Right. Scoffs, scoffs at. He like can't. He doesn't even want to hear it. Now he's in a site like Ionis. There's all these. And Kef Kalesi with these teachings that are about metaphysical teachings that are woven in Hermeticism and have all these symbolic aspects and aspects that are, that deal with metaphysical reality. Would Julian Dory know how to understand that site at all? No, because he's coming from it from the wrong lens. Right. And so I think that's the problem with archeology is that archaeologists are not open to considering something that is still considered kind of woo woo a little bit on the, in the mainstream. And that is this entire world that exists in the metaphysical aspect. Understanding how like Nikola Tesla type of concepts like energy, how energy can be created through structures and, and magnetism and solar alignments and how all these things function. If we don't have any clue of how to look at that, if we don't study the philosophies of theology and the philosophies of hermeticism and we're trying to understand an ancient culture that's embodying those concepts into it, how would we ever understand what we're looking at?
- [136:50]
B
I don't think you would. And you know, again, not to be cynical, I really hate that sometimes you got to play that role to be a little cynical and, and I get that, but I don't like doing it. I like to be an optimist. But you do look at history in other lenses that maybe are similar and the endings aren't good. You know, you look at something like the Templars, which were, which developed into having a different view on things than the Catholic Church. And that ended with the Church working with France to have these guys rounded up on Friday 13th and boom, you know, Jacques de Molay and all the way down, like they're killed and their ideas die with them. Does that mean the Templars were right about everything? No, but like, maybe they figured out a few things.
- [137:35]
A
They had the Ionis cross, sure.
- [137:37]
B
But like, there you go. But like maybe they figured out a few things along the way that are different than the traditional teachings that didn't have to turn it on its head.
- [137:45]
A
Yeah.
- [137:46]
B
You know, I think about stuff like this a lot because you made a great point a few minutes ago. It's like it doesn't have to be everything or nothing. Things are a mixed bag. It's like the old Bruce Lee quote. It's like, take what is good, discard what is bad, to make you know your own whole with different people. And that's what I love about this job because I sit across from people all the time who do all different things that have all different kinds of opinions ranging across various topics that we cover in here. And it's like, I know not every. They're not right about everything, but I want to figure out what, where they make good arguments or whatever and hear them out and let the audience decide for themselves. Because guess what I say.
- [138:20]
A
Shit, that's wrong too. Like.
- [138:21]
B
Like, believe it or not, I know that sounds crazy, but like, you know, we, we. That's. That's part of the learning process.
- [138:28]
A
Well, maybe instead of competing, maybe we could start collaborating with ideas. I think that's right. There's a. That movie, A Beautiful Mind. That's. That. That's the whole concept there. I love that. Is that. Can you imagine if humanity and our archaeologists and everyone that's a scientist or scientific kind of mind would all, like, come together and try to work on something common, a common goal? Can you imagine where humanity would be?
- [138:54]
B
The greatest lie I think that's ever been sold to us is that religion and science are opposed.
- [138:59]
A
And I think that's really what we're seeing here, is that it's. It gets dented to what I just said. Spirituality and religion, the only difference between them really is that one of them is. One of them is based on a theology of, Of a specific type of group presenting ideas that are like this, this is this. But spirituality, the ideas of metaphysicals and spirituality, they have a lot of crossover with a lot of religions. It's not that far off. And yet those that religion, like you just said, and spirituality are like off limits from anything related to like science.
- [139:38]
B
And archeology, which is seeking the answer to the same question. Science is trying to figure out where it all comes from and what it all means. Religion is trying to figure out where it all comes from and what it all means. Maybe somewhere we said, you know, what we gotta say each other.
- [139:51]
A
Maybe we need to start combining ideas together and looking at that in. In unison and realize that maybe everybody's a little bit right on both sides.
- [139:59]
B
Absolutely. Couldn't say it better myself, man.
- [140:01]
A
And that's, that's one of the reasons why I think what we're doing is so fundamentally important with the documentary, is having having for biblical experts. We have biblical experts, we have megalithic experts, we have sacred geometry experts, we have Architect experts, we have polymath experts, we have archaeologists, we have two archaeologists, we have geologists.
- [140:22]
B
That's great.
- [140:23]
A
We. So we're coming at this from, you know, what if we want to understand how to rewrite a narrative and open up questions that we haven't yet been able to about lost civilizations and just ancient history, maybe we need to look at it from all sides.
- [140:39]
B
If you got down there and you did an extensive investigation and you ended up. The evidence started to mount to point to it's not what you think, would you be willing to admit that?
- [140:47]
A
Of course I have. If you look at where I was five years ago, my thinking, it's dramatically changed.
- [140:56]
B
I see a different. You know, I'm just pulling this observation right now, but I've sat with you in the studio two different times before. Or, you know, we recorded for like six hours. Last time, as you said, was over a year ago. You're a little different today.
- [141:09]
A
Well, thank you.
- [141:10]
B
I like it.
- [141:11]
A
Well, because we have to evolve. Yeah. Like, our thinking might be a certain way at some point in our past, but that's how the, the process of raising your consciousness and taking in new ideas and becoming more enlightened in whatever topics you're talking, popping about. That's what needs to happen, is that you're like, you know what? I used to believe this. And the evidence is mounted enough so that I don't believe it any longer. Why are we so afraid to admit that? Yeah, I used to be. I won't. I'm not afraid to admit it. I used to be a big ancient aliens guy. Like back in the day. That was. You're looking at the lens. Oh, my God. Everything's ancient aliens. It doesn't matter what it is. You, like, cover.
- [141:53]
B
What's that meme?
- [141:54]
A
Right? Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's always ancient aliens. And then now it's like all these years later. I'm looking at a lot of this with like. Well, you know, I don't think I really looked at it in the right way before. I didn't really have enough evidence to really study this in the way where I was. I was understanding it in the right way. I was, I was looking at it through the wrong lens. And I'm not saying that there isn't. I'm not trying to close the door on that entire topic. That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying I've. I've certainly evolved from a way of thinking that is much more evidence driven, where it's like, if you're going to make a statement. If you have nothing to back it up at all, why are you even making it? Yeah. Okay, that's your opinion. That's, that's great. But to me, we need to bring science back and not just the place of academia, but how about like anybody who wants to be an objective researcher?
- [142:43]
B
Sure.
- [142:43]
A
Why can't, why can't anybody who studies enough be an expert on something? Do you need like a piece of paper that tells you you are, Especially if you are going to a place that is teaching like a script, like way of thinking that you have to adhere to and like memorize answers? What is that?
- [143:02]
B
I think you're hitting the nail on the head with part of the problem, though. And let me, let me look at it from that perspective. Right. Because I didn't end up being a doctor, for example, and spending eight years in medical school and whatever it is and all these years of residency and really putting the time and it's like, like if you are, let's stay with that example. If you are a doctor and you did put in all this time and whether or not you and I agree with whatever the curriculum and how they teaches or not, that aside, like, it's very hard. They, a lot of people have to put themselves through incredible debt just to get through all that. They spend all these years, they learn things of which there are some things that are objectively as we know it now. True, there's other things that maybe should be updated. But, you know, then someone comes along who, you know, maybe didn't even go to college or let's say they even did go to college, but they're not a doctor, they didn't go to medical school, they have limited training in this kind of stuff. And they scream at the whole medical community and say, you're all wrong about this thing. Even if they're right, I understand where the bias of, Wait a second, who are you to be telling us where that comes in and then what happens?
- [144:09]
A
The wall credibility, Right?
- [144:11]
B
Yes. And, and you know, I've thought about how to try to bridge that gap for so long, but it's just something about human nature where the time and effort spent, the toil, the blood, sweat and tears, if you will, affects our ability to be objective on things. And I understand that. But unfortunately it does create situations where you can't get to a truth because you're preventing that conversation from even happening. And I think it's, it's no different in some of the spaces you're talking about too, because like Archeology go to school for years and, and there's certainly, there's certainly a piece of that where I can see people be, you know, like a flint dibble or something, being like, come on, you know, I've been studying this all my life. What did you read a book one time? You know, there's, there's a reason he has, he has some logic there, but it doesn't mean that things that are being introduced aren't from someone who's smart, who has done like their own research, so to speak, and has uncovered some things that maybe we should talk about more.
- [145:07]
A
And I think it creates a corundum there. It creates this problem where you have a set of teachings that are laid out for you to go to get an education in. And in order to get that education in that you have to adhere to whatever that is saying, okay, you can't be an archaeologist and, and, and, and write your dissertation papers on lost civilizations. You're not, you're not going, you're going to fail out of archaeology. You're going to be laughed out. It's a good point. So what that creates is a hole because it forces, whoever wants to have an academic background that has credibility automatically is going to be, has to be closed minded because if they're not, they will not be able to be accepted into some kind of a viewpoint of credibility. So you are, you're creating your hole there, you're creating a problem. Whereas that paradigm is starting to shift. You're starting to see that shift right now. Like for instance, we have two archaeologists on the, on, on this.
- [146:08]
B
Yeah.
- [146:09]
A
One of them is named Omer Tan Yurik and he is one of the archaeologists at Kev Kalesi, one of the sites that we work on. And he is just coming at this of saying, you know what, I'm an objective scientist, I want to look at what the evidence is.
- [146:23]
B
Good for him.
- [146:24]
A
That's it.
- [146:24]
B
That's great.
- [146:25]
A
He's not coming saying I believe this or this is what it is. He's just simply saying, I think that the evidence should be looked at again. Maybe we missed something. Maybe we need to look at this through another lens again. Maybe there's more to this than we've, than we've shown. And I think that comes up over and over again in the, in the old paradigm. And I'll give you an example is that a lot of archaeological papers that I've read on a lot of these sites, they are often unwilling to acknowledge other than pointing towards interesting coincidences and possibilities but rather than acknowledging something is a certain way, they will fall back on a previous peer that's highly valued to them who wrote their like books that are, that they studied or some, some kind of an archaeologist that they value and look up to. If that person had a viewpoint that is in contradiction, they are unwilling to often go against that. Why, why, why is that the case? Why should a scientist not be objectively exploring all possibilities just because another scientist said something?
- [147:42]
B
Yeah, I mean, we've been bringing up Tesla all day in different contexts and I think about it a lot because first of all, he was forgotten for a long time and it's only in recent years that some of his work has actually been given some of the respect that deserves the work we know about. Right. But the thing I always wonder is how many more Teslas there are out there that we'll never find out about. And it's because of exactly what you're talking about. That group think closed ivory tower, where it's like, wait, no, no, no. In order to pass this test, you have to say this. That's how you get through the deal, you know, and when you look at this in, in political situations throughout world history, if you were looking at it in that lens, that never ends well. No, you know, now this isn't politics, but like the, the same human nature concept applies. And for this space of discovery and history, that probably won't end well.
- [148:35]
A
No, it doesn't end well because then we become stagnated with a certain ideology that holds us back often. And unfortunately that comes from a place of some kind of a theology or some kind of a viewpoint that is been determined for some reason. Right? Something has been determined for some reason. Like, well, the ancient history timeline has been determined for a specific reason. Why, why is it only 6,000 years old? What was the reasoning for, for why they did that? Is that based on ancient religious reason? Is it based on just a concept of wanting to keep it there? We already, like, if we just give the White Sands example and Gobekli Tepe and all these other dating examples, it's strange to me that, that we would have an ideology that would be, have parameters that are, don't permit anything outside of it. And I think the reason is because if we were to understand a different chapter of, of us that existed, it would open up a lot of questions about what did they know? Why did they build it that way? Wait, those aren't tombs. Oh, so the pyramids never had pharaohs built in them. Why do, why were we told that they were tombs. That's misdirection. And why were we told they were built by that civilization? Okay, well, what do they really do? What's the functionality of the pyramids? So they weren't tombs. So what were they? You see what I mean? It opens up enormous amounts of questions. And I often get people, they're like, who cares? Why don't they just open it up to whatever? Because I think it's dangerous. I think that the paradigm of opening up all of these things that we talk about is a danger to a lot of things. It's a danger to. Well, it's a danger to some aspects of religion, sure. It's a danger to some aspects of the industrialization of our species and how we think. I think it's a danger to the structures we build. Why do we build them that way? Wait a minute. So this, these kinds of structures that we build now are like disconnect us and keep us in a different kind of state energetically. You know, there's a whole host of different reasons why looking at the ancient past and understanding this time period and what they built would be dangerous to our thinking now. I think that if you give me an example, if I told Julian Dory, I'm like, hey, Julian, by the way, reincarnation is real. And that you're, you're an eternal being of energy that never dies. And the lessons you're learning right now are just playing up into another lifetime that you come back again. And by the way, you're, you're really like a, like a God here who could literally become whatever he wants and could follow down the path of enlightenment like that. Julian Dory might be like, what am I doing in my life?
- [151:23]
B
It's an existential event to hear something like that. Yeah.
- [151:27]
A
Whereas rather if I go, hey, Julian Dory, you live only one life. You never exist ever again. You come from a small town where you're never going to amount to anything. Not really you, but you're never going to amount to anything. You're going to work in like a factory. You're just going to have a couple kids and die, and you're not going to leave anything behind. You really don't matter at all. By the way. What a different paradigm to look at your life. And, and, and I think that's what is a real danger is that the paradigm of our reality could significantly change if we understood our past and who we used to be.
- [152:03]
B
And that's the thing. Anytime you have something that can run up against someone's family Health, money or meaning of life. Those four things in particularly, yeah, all bets are off, especially when you do that at scale. And what I mean by that is to use your religion example.
- [152:19]
A
Yeah.
- [152:20]
B
For instance, let's look at the three most major world religions like Islam or the ones we talk about the most, Islam, Christianity and Judaism. Right. And then let's start, let's throw in Hinduism, let's throw in Buddhism, some other huge ones as well. If all at once you came out and said even just like, hey, not, not all of it's right, here's where you're right, here's where you're wrong. With proof to all the people across each of those religions individually that there, there are enough people within those populations who have literally tethered their life and their meaning of it here to what they believe, which is the time spent on studying that, the time spent on living that, the time spent on trying to wrestle with that on a day to day basis, that becomes an existential type crisis. I don't even need to see simulations to be able to be like, like, yeah, that's probably a problem. So when I think about some of these things where there could be some answers in, in ancient history that get a little dangerous, I can see where some of these people, subconsciously, the people maybe who have control over that subconsciously, even not even consciously, are like, oh, we don't want to go down that road.
- [153:32]
A
Exactly. And, and I think what you just said really hit the nail on the head. I think that's why sites like Ionis and other sites around like Vaughn are such a danger to the outside world because they could rewrite a lot of our thinking. And not only that, but so many of the symbols and the teachings relate to core concepts we see in, in ancient civilizations. But even philosophy and other things, there's so much carryover that I think that it could significantly rock the boat with such established narratives and teachings that are such an integral part of us now and that that mindset would be extremely dangerous. And I think that that has played out in some very nefarious ways in the ancient history of these places. And I could give you some examples, please. When I was digging into these, I discovered some very concerning aspects that has occurred here, which is why I think most of the world doesn't know about these sites yet. I. There was a paper written by Cambridge University that I have that was written like 30, 40 years ago and it was discussing a specific type site called Toprakali. It's right along Lake Vaughn. It's one of the sites I talk.
- [155:06]
B
About T O P O R. Is that right?
- [155:09]
A
Yeah, Toprakali. I can give you it later, but Toprakali was the first place that got my attention with a site that was deliberately dismantled. Dismantled?
- [155:22]
B
How do we know that?
- [155:23]
A
Well, that was the whole premise behind the. The university paper from Cambridge was discussing that, that a number of the. The megalithic blocks that were on the basis of these temples had been removed and moved to undisclosed locations and disappeared.
- [155:42]
B
Like, basically by the researchers.
- [155:44]
A
Yes. And so the more that I started digging into it, the more that I found that it had all occurred in this certain time period of history, during the 1960s, the late 50s and 1960s, these sites were all discovered around the same time. There was a number of them as for Natepe, Kef, Kalesi, Topra, Kali, and then some potential other ones as well, Kyla Deer, and some other ones that had images taken of them, black and white images when they were first found. And as I dug into and went into further, I found that many of them, none, those basis and those temple stones and that made up the. The original sites were no longer present. And I asked some archaeologists on some of my trips and they gave the answer. I asked why, why they would remove stones from the sites, and they said it was to protect them.
- [156:44]
B
Them.
- [156:46]
A
And it.
- [156:47]
B
That's never a good answer.
- [156:48]
A
And so it really brought up some serious questions. And I'm writing about it in the new book. I'm in the middle of writing it now and we're investigating, exploring it. I'm not trying to say archaeologists that are there today. I want to make this very, very clear. I am not saying that archaeologists that are working on these sites today had anything to do with that time period. I want to make that super clear. Whatever happened in the 19 late 50s and 60s seemed as though there was a. Again, like I said, three or four of these sites, I've determined, were just deliberately dismantled and removed and then their contents disappeared from history and was never seen again. And some of those groups that were involved were places like the British Museum and some other archaeological institutions, institutions who are highly prized and valued today. And it begs the question of whether or not some this, whether or not there was a complication that was determined that was contradicting a previous mindset of thinking. This is where I'm getting into the road of. What we were just saying is if you come into a place with a predetermined history of thinking, this is all your arteans, let's go excavate these sites. Knights and you find a number of pieces of evidence that point towards a completely different time period that is not your artan. That's mysterious. That has symbols of like ancient symbols from pre. Knights Templar, all these things, the chalice, all these symbols. Would there be interest from different places to not allow the world to know about that?
- [158:25]
B
How did you find this paper?
- [158:28]
A
I dug it up through my colleague working with my colleagues. And I can send you the paper, please, right after we're done. This. That actually talks about it and I've highlighted the areas that it does where it was proven in the paper that after a certain time period it. And I can give. I can paraphrase and essentially it says after, like night, by 1970, very little if none of the original foundation stones existed any longer.
- [158:57]
B
Alessi, can we make a note to put a link to this in the description? When Matt sends this so that people can check this out?
- [159:04]
A
I can. I can pull it up.
- [159:05]
B
Yeah, yeah, we'll pull it up.
- [159:07]
A
I'll pull it up after. I don't have the exact name off my head.
- [159:11]
B
One of the things I'm thinking about though, Matt, and this is pure speculation. This is based on zero evidence. I'm just listening to what you say right now. It's curious, the years where this is happening. The 50s, 60s, right into the 70s. Because after World War II.
- [159:24]
A
Yeah.
- [159:25]
B
And what I wonder is if there was a paranoia. I mean, this exists at high levels, that new discoveries of ancient history could give rise to a bastardization of that said history.
- [159:42]
A
Yeah.
- [159:43]
B
That could be utilized by someone to come along like a Hitler, because we know Hitler was like obsessed with ancient history and some other things as well, and then bastardized that into these crazy race laws and all this stuff he had. And I wonder if the world, you know, the. The order of the world, so to speak, coming out on the other side of that was. Yeah. Paranoid about maybe something like that occurring. It doesn't make it right what they did, to be clear. But I'm wondering if that had.
- [160:14]
A
I think. I think it might have. And I'll give you an example. One of the foundation symbols of the Nazis was the swastika.
- [160:23]
B
Yes.
- [160:23]
A
The swastika came from ancient civilizations. If you go to the site called Baalbeka, Lebanon, you can. An ancient megalithic site. Giant blocks, the second largest blocks in the world. 1200, up to 1200 tons each. They're massive. I'm sure you've heard of Baalbek.
- [160:39]
B
Oh, yeah.
- [160:39]
A
They. The swastika is present there in carved into stones. And we Know that Hitler had gone to those locations. And so what was scary was that they were using important ancient symbols that had to do with spiritual, metaphysical concepts and then bringing them into like a very demonic, nefarious kind of way.
- [161:02]
B
They bastardized it.
- [161:03]
A
Yeah, they definitely bastardized it. And could that have been a concern of others? That may have been one of the. The aspects of this is the worry of that and the worry of how the ideology might change religions, religious concepts, archaeological concepts. And basically if you have a situation where you don't have an interconnected world yet, you know, six 50s and 60s, like there was no checks and balances.
- [161:30]
B
You could do some.
- [161:31]
A
But compared to today, compared to now, like you could do a lot more things. Yeah, it's very concerning to think that there were deliberate things that might have been hidden because they didn't go along with the narrative. And I'll give you an example. There was a site called Azernatepe that is right in that area. And there were these massive steles found huge steel lace, Steelace, these long tall column pillars that are single stones, multi tons, beautifully carved, very precise. They are in the Vaughan Museum now. But the Vaughan Museum took. It took 20 years for them to obtain them. You know where they were before? In a military base.
- [162:14]
B
Where.
- [162:15]
A
There's a military base right below Azranatepe. They built this military bunkers and these huge military place right around this ancient site, which is really strange. And guess where they also built a barracks right around Toper Collie as well. They built.
- [162:34]
B
They is. Is. Are these American bases over there?
- [162:38]
A
These are. These are Turkish military sites that they had built around ancient history areas. And they had artifacts in some of these. Some of these bases that were became known and then museums wanted to obtain them to preserve them. And it was extremely difficult to do that. But why, if you're. If you're a. If you're a military place, why would you have artifacts stored there?
- [163:06]
B
Yeah, the storage of the artifacts is. That part's interesting.
- [163:09]
A
Storage for something like many, many, many, many years, like over 20 years.
- [163:14]
B
That part's a little weird.
- [163:16]
A
I'll give you another example. When they were at Kef Khaleesi and they unearthed these huge bar reliefs, the first. The first one that was the best preserved ended up in the a museum, the garden outside for 20 years before it ended up inside a museum outside, just sitting outside, it was like. It was like these places and these things, they were hiding them and they didn't want these things being found. The. The Cambridge article, university article, pointing and Showing evidence that they were dismantled and removed from the sites is completely unorthodox from archeology standpoint. You can only remove artifacts to preserve them in a museum setting to study them. You don't remove entire temples, you don't remove entire structures. And then more importantly, to have them disappear and we still don't know where some of them are is very bizarre. There's another site called Yasiliak that's right next to it that has the same type of pillars that were found that were brought to the museum, but the first ones were ended up in a military base. And I want to point another place out. And again, the world doesn't even know about these yet. I've stumbled upon something that's very significant. There's a site called Kaya La Deer that is was flooded under a reservoir in the 1970s and 80s. It's now on the bottom of a reservoir. You can't even study that site anymore. Very interesting that these certain things have happened in that region. Why do I think that happened? I think that the ancient religious context connecting back to the Noah mythos to the Ararat region and this region created a very serious situation for religious groups and other archaeological groups of having these mysterious megalithic ruins with symbols and types of architecture that didn't match anything from that time period, creating what would have been potentially, and I mean like a firestorm in archaeology at the time. That was when archeology was really being written in a lot of mainstream books and established into what it is now today. And so now we're just starting to explore these sites in a different methodical manner. But it's to find, to honestly to find that these places were dismantled and to see them like that, it really like actually hurts my heart to think that places like that could have been completely either destroyed or removed so that we don't get to know about them. And it's hidden from us. It's just a, it's a very sad thing. And again, I want to say that no current archaeologists that are working on those sites had anything to do with what was previously done to them. And it was. And as I've been told, it was a different time period. That's the answer that I've been given.
- [166:08]
B
And it's like this is the age old situation where people in the know think they know what's best for everyone else because of what they know that they can't talk about. And so they do what they think is the right thing. And in doing the right thing, when that's figured out what they did. If this is making sense to people still, if you're following me, it now becomes the wrong thing.
- [166:37]
A
Yeah. And I've been. I've had a lot of people tell me, matt, why do you even bring that up? Like, why don't you just focus on. Why don't you just focus on, like, what they. The symbols say and talking about, you know, how it could be part of a different civilization. Why bring this stuff up? Because I feel like it's not right to have something that happened, bad in the past go unanswered for. I think. I think we need to. People need to answer for things that happened that were bad. I don't think that it's okay to let something slip under the rug because it happened a long, long time ago. And so we just don't care about it any longer. Is that okay? Is that morally okay, that something destructive, that destroyed somewhere very, very sacred and important should just be not discussed? Because it's a sensitive area? I would rather be on the right side of history to talk to. To bring the. The truth about something to light rather than deciding to know something really important and to just. And to not talk about it because it's sensitive. I think it's important to be in integrity at all times and to voice the truth and not be afraid of the consequences. Because I think the truth is what we really need now.
- [167:57]
B
It's a fair point. It's a very fair point. Unfortunately, human nature is when you can't see the body stacked, you know, which in this case, it's not that type of situation. Time heals the wound for enough people that, you know, it doesn't have the, the pressure to go back and look at it. It's not to say that that that shouldn't be the case. And it's not to say that something really wrong didn't happen. Sounds like maybe it did. You know, the thing that bothers me about what you're saying is when you talk about the storage of the stuff, that's where I go, okay, there's. There's some there because if they were just building bases or whatever. They're building bases in Turkey. There's ancient history everywhere. You know what I mean? Like who, who knows all the ancient history we haven't uncovered there just because of the nature of the geography. But when you talk about the fact that they're actually taking some of this stuff, dismantling it it and putting it in storage in these places, when you talk about the fact that there are papers in Cambridge University that write about these actions happening and admit to it. I got to look at it, but.
- [168:53]
A
I'll send it to.
- [168:54]
B
You know, that is, that's egregious for sure. And I would at least love to know the logic behind what it was there.
- [169:03]
A
And I'll give him one more example is in Kev Kalessi. There's a great team and they're working there now. So I thank you guys. I love all the work you're doing and I've had a chance to work with them and I'm going to be doing more in the future. In I was showed, I was shown a storage room that had seven of those bar reliefs that I sent. There's a picture I, you guys can put up after. But that had, I had been shown and they were all extremely destroyed like to the point where it was sad to look at the one that had been preserved in the Ankara Museum, the Museum of Anatolia History. And to look at the ones they were, they were in the storage unit and I found out that the reason that it happened was that they had removed them with bulldozers and had broke them all. And had carelessly had broke them all. During the 1960s, during the same time period that these places were being dismantled, there was extremely poor archaeology being done where they severely damaged many of these to the point where they're barely even, you know, able, some of them are barely even able to be recognized for what they were. And I just, I look at that time period and it's very sad to me that, that such nefarious and terrible things were done to these sites. And so I'm trying to put the pieces together for what I consider to be the, the new kid on the block for archaeology that's going to shake everything up and change everything is that region of eastern Turkey with these sites that are connected directly to Peru and Bolivia and Egypt and all around the world and may change our understanding of who we are from a, from a, a time period when something very special happened in that, in that, that area. Something very special happened to Ionis.
- [170:50]
B
I hope you're able to uncover that. And what I like is that you're, you're going into it first of all with a really diversified team, which is great. And secondly, you're also going into it on an evidence based mission here, right? Like let's review for example, the one down in Lakevaughn. Let's review whatever materials from that kilometer wide civilization we're able to recover. Let's figure out exactly if we can date it because of where it was stored underwater and what it may mean and you know, figure out what that was and that's, that's how the process is supposed to happen. So kudos to you for, for doing it the right way with that and I wish you all the luck. But, but you know, some of the things we've talked about in the past in ancient history, it's based on stories that are passed down for sure. And it's like, well, could that have been changed? Of course, human nature says that. And then, you know, in the middle of this whole topic that's like kind of the 500 pound elephant in the room, the dirty word, so to speak, it gets to the things that are extraterrestrial. Over time we, we get the aliens and whether or not they were here. And obviously you don't want to fall into the I want to believe camp or anything like that, but it's certainly looking up at the galaxy. It's like the probability of even what we know about the galaxy, which is prime minimal, the probability that we're the only intelligent life out there, is so, so low. And then you wonder what the probability would be without knowing what the capabilities are of them, you know, that they would have been here or have been around us or among us or whatever. And the big problem we run into, and obviously I've done podcasts on this and it's a fascinating topic to me, but I always try to check myself with, with the realities here. The big problem we've run into is that we don't seem to have physical evidence of that stuff. We, we don't seem to have the, say, smoking gun proof. But when you're reviewing some of the ancient civilization things and you look at the artwork they did or the messages they left behind, you know, gut feel are, are there or based on evidence, are there, are there things you can point to that you think would support the fact that there is intelligent life out there and that life in some way or form has been here before?
- [173:08]
A
Yeah, I'll, I'll answer that, that question in two ways.
- [173:12]
B
Okay.
- [173:13]
A
The first way, the galaxy in the universe is vast. There are so many star systems and in places that could harbor life, I think life is probably infinitely all over. I mean, but when we get into intelligent life, because, I mean, that's really what the question is, obviously I think we could go to some stars, distant star system and find a planet with types of creatures, animals and different creatures and tree plants and fauna, flora and fauna there. Of, of course, that's going to be, that's going to be somewhere out there. But that is aliens in the end of the day, like that is aliens.
- [173:50]
B
Yes.
- [173:50]
A
Okay, so fine, so that's. That that exists. But what about intelligent life? Well, I want to answer that, that with a perception. I think the nearest star system to us is astronomically far away to the point where it's kind of like a joke. And I say that because I think it might have been designed that way to not have the pollution of just any culture that can get somewhere easily. They would have their own interests, right? You'd have, you see a movie like Avatar, right? You see something like that play out where some corporation is like, oh my God, Planet Tyrannium in whatever star system has got a ton of gold, right? Or it's got a ton of whatever, let's go there and just go get a bunch of it, right? There's a lot of other interests that are way beyond just that too. Like, well, let's create a colony there. Let's. Whatever it is, it doesn't matter. There's so many reasons why if a civilization could get somewhere very easily, it might and it would be potentially disastrous. And so I find it, I'll say comical because I find it funny, is that when you actually start looking at astrophysics, physics and you look at how close the nearest stars are and how far it would long it would take us just to get to them, it's mind boggling. Yeah, it's like insane. You're like, wait, so even if we could travel the speed of light, it would take like 10 light years to get to the nearest one or something. And I'm just throwing that out there. I don't remember exactly what it is, but I'm saying is like, first of all, we can't even travel near the speed of light right now, not even close to it. And even if we could, it would take whatever long that is. It's comical to me because it seems as though it was supposed to be made very, very hard for any interaction in any way to ever occur. And I thought, I thought about that a lot. And I'm like, well, why? Right? Well, maybe because of exactly what you said. What kind of interest would we have if we could get somewhere right now, if we could right now feasibly get somewhere without cryogenic sleep or something, what would we do to that place? What do you think we would do if we could get to a place that had life right now? Let's say there weren't even any intelligent forms of life There, what would we do to it? Right. We probably wouldn't do anything very good to it, would we?
- [176:33]
B
Yeah, I mean, I would imagine we try to. Well, without, even without it being intelligent life, but, but if it's livable, we try to colonize the place right away, use it, colonization, right, etc.
- [176:46]
A
Yes, well, that could be a very destructive to that place, couldn't it? So as, as I've looked at this, I've been like, well, there likely is intelligent life all over the universe and we're not the only ones. I don't know what it is. I don't know what it is looking like compared to us, but I can tell you that it seems inherently designed into it that we don't interact with because of those very reasons. Now, what about some super civilization that reaches far greater heights than we have, but not just technologically. What if they somehow master things beyond technology? Like somehow, you know, like types of wormhole technology and ways to just get somewhere. What kind of consciousness would that civilization have at that, that point? Would they be fighting each other with war still? Probably not, because if they had reached that kind of level, they probably would have banished war. Right. Can we even reach those kinds of expediated type of states of consciousness?
- [177:49]
B
And it's hard to. It's hard to guess because we haven't been there.
- [177:52]
A
Right. So if, but if a civilization did get to a point where they had, they would probably have reached some kind of a harmony within their world. How else would they have been able to achieve something that great unless they had stopped doing war and they were focusing all of their great minds on uncovering all the mysteries of the universe. Right.
- [178:10]
B
Perhaps they would have had to solve.
- [178:12]
A
Death and they would figure out things like Nikola Tesla technology, because how can you have, how can you have energy that's not like free energy that can be utilized in ways that are. We can't have like combustible engines and things that are based on like just fusion. We have to have. We'd have to have something extremely advanced. Right. So I think to me that civilization would inherently reach some state of consciousness that they would be so highly advanced that they would understand the inherent nature of wherever they went and how it could impact that place. Right. So if that's true and they could reach somewhere finally through eons of development and becoming a certain kind of conscious person being, then they would likely know that they couldn't just pollute our world. Right?
- [179:03]
B
Yeah.
- [179:04]
A
And so that's to me, the most likely scenario for any extraterrestrial. Life is that maybe they're here and they're just watching because they know that they can't interact in any way because it'll disrupt the timeline that we're on and it'll pollute something or influence us in some way. But then there's like a whole nother concept to it. And that's the whole idea of what Haldi is, what Vera Kosha is, what Enki is, what Kukulkan is, what Quetzalcoatl is, what all of these ancient gods and these like enlightened beings that are clearly not just humans. There's something completely different going on there. What is that? Why? What is that? Is that, is that an extraterrestrial? Well, the answer for me, and this is the greatest shift in my paradigm that I've had since I started, it was really easy just to throw out like ancient alien, oh, there's a super advanced species that got here and they're playing around with tech and that's why they seem so advanced. When you read ancient hermeticism, you find some very important answers to this. They discuss it. And I, I, I firmly believe that hermeticism is without a doubt. And I'd probably put Gnosticism, some Nagamati Gnostic stuff in there and some ancient Sumerian stuff just below it, and some Hinduisms sands, I put those in there just below. But I consider hermeticism the greatest source of truth of anything that exists today. Because every time I've looked at who's valued it throughout history, how it's come from ancient civilizations, when I look at the concepts woven into these sites, they're all like laws and hermeticism, like, oh, so they already figured that out. I look at Nikola Tesla taking the same information. I look at the totality of all of it and then I study it myself and I look at all the, the concepts and laws and it's like that makes the most sense of anything by far that exists that has come together with understanding natural law, understanding alchemy, understanding energy, the soul, the path of the soul, understanding spirituality, understanding the potential of a human and, and our divine nature. It's like hermeticism is the totality of so much that's come together. That's like, we got it down. And so I highly recommend anyone who hasn't studied the Hermetica or any types of their cabalian and others to look at that and be like, I just highly recommend them. I'm curious if even Wes Huff has looked at those, because I Because I'd be. Because I'm. I feel like what does it really matter if other forms of teachings exist? Do we just ignore others? Because we have, we only care about one. Because I look at, at everything, I think it's all valuable.
- [181:59]
B
I think, I think that's, I think that's how you got to be.
- [182:01]
A
I, I think there's, there's value, there's value in the New Testament. I think there's value in every aspect of teachings that exist. The Quran, all of them have valuable teachings within them. I just feel that the hermeticism contains the most valuable from every side that I've looked at. No like person's agenda side from a pure ancient, ancient place. Okay. Now having said that, just building that up. It discusses our universe, it discusses what we are. It discusses. My favorite is Poimander and the dragon. Dragon being like the source, like God or creation as a dragon. And it's like having a conversation with Hermes and he's asking him all these questions and it's giving this, this perspective about everything that you go, if you're well studied, your intuition is like, that makes the most sense. And so what it says is, it says that you mean, I'll tell you this, the story here, the premise for. And it might help explain to a lot of people, it says that there's a creator, a source God that is the sort. And it's. That it's not male or female. It says that it's both. That is, it's like it exists and that it is, it created what we think of as the archetype of the universe. And that, that archetype took an extremely long amount of time to put together, to think about and put together perfectly. Once that was put together, this archetype, the archetype was presented, but it wasn't a physical archetype. It was completely based on an energetic metaphysical archetype. And that when that happened, this creator created extensions of itself. Okay, we can think of them as like angels almost and demons. And that those creators, their responsibility was to adhere to the laws of the universe that existed. Blueprints, one of them being that duality is a constant. Which is why they can, they're. They're supposed to play the roles of angels and demons. Because duality is a constant that exists in all the universe. Good and evil, you cannot have good without evil, you cannot have evil without good. Simple as that. So that is a constant that exists. The other ones are the laws that were put into this archetype, this mold. It was called, would be then manifested and created by these extensions that their job, their primary job was to maintain creation and balance in the universe. It's wild, but that's what it discusses. And that they're like celestial creators. And it called them the second mind of God. The second mind. And that their roles and responsibilities work to create a physical manifestation of our reality out of a metaphysical one. And that they're, they're responsible for maintaining all balance, harmony and cosmic laws within the universe. Okay, and so what, what would you call that though? They're not like, they're not aliens. They're celestial beings is the best term that I would call them. Okay. That is exactly how ancient cultures call these winged, these winged deities. They consider them like celestial creators. And when all the Mesopotamian tablets, all the stories about creation, whether it's the Enuma Elish, the Atrahasis, or all the way through the myth of Adapa or into this region, we find the same thing echoed over and over and over again. Is there some kind of like a celestial creators that come here? Because it's described that man, mankind is like a perfect creation of God. That's what it describes.
- [185:51]
B
So God.
- [185:52]
A
Okay. And that we are, we were, we were created out of a mold that God created to be a micro, microcosm of the entire macrocosm. And that we are some of the most important beings like in the universe. And we don't know it, we don't understand it. We're far greater than we've ever been told that our existence here is an existence that is based on free will and destiny both at the same time.
- [186:20]
B
Yeah, maybe that's not the worst thing that we've never been told that.
- [186:23]
A
That we are divine beings that are non physical at our core, that are having a physical experience as, as man. And that it describes how man fell in love with its shadow. That's what it says, is that mankind fell in love with its physical existence and forgot about its, its source existence as a spirit. And that that's how we lost ourselves here, is that we became enamored by our own shadow. And that we forgot all about who we are. And that the, that we are, we exist in a place that is highly guarded and balanced by these celestials. That's why I'm so optimistic when I talk to people when they're like, oh my God, we're going to blow up the world or we're going to destroy ourselves.
- [187:11]
B
We can't, we can't, we can't.
- [187:14]
A
We're part of a blueprint in a path that has already been predetermined and destined. That we're part of a source. We're. We're essentially part of that is you.
- [187:23]
B
Do blow it up at some point to restart.
- [187:25]
A
We can't. That's why during World War II and the Cold War. Not World War II, but during the Cold War, there was so many stories of how there was accidental incursions with Soviet Union where they actually went and pushed the button, but it didn't work.
- [187:40]
B
So you think that celestial divine interventions. Yeah, I mean, look, you remember the old studio. I used to have the picture of the. The offshoot of the hand of God in Adam. But instead of the hand of God and Adam, it had a robot hand, which was the fear of, like, oh, what if we get into this AI world where shit gets weird? But right above that, I had the picture of the bomb tested at Bikini Atoll, and I had that there because it was giving me hope for the future. Because I looked at that and said, we've had the ability to destroy ourselves in our hands.
- [188:09]
A
Yes.
- [188:10]
B
Like. Like little footballs tossed between each other, no pun intended, for the last 80 years. And we haven't done it.
- [188:15]
A
And. And you know what? We would have. I'm telling you, the more that I looked at it, the more that I believe that if that intervention didn't occur, we'd already be gone.
- [188:25]
B
So you. All right, so you think it's. And that's heavy, man.
- [188:28]
A
And so the way it works is that. That we are God experiencing a physical reality from all archetypes, and that God is everything Source or God is everything that exists. It's what nature is, is that it describes that. If you want to know what God is, God is just nature. It is all it. But it's like it's an offhands type of existence where the interactions and the balancing that occurs is based on the celestials creating and maintaining balance here. Whereas we are basically like children trying to grow up to realize what we really are. And that every incarnation, every life, we get closer and closer to the divinity of understanding what we are. But we have time periods that occur in history. We go backwards and we completely forget everything. We have to start over. And time is just relative because you know what it says. Because it says in. Hermes asked about why. How is that possible, that we could forget everything, have to start over again? Because it states that cycles dictate everything in the universe. Everything is based on cycles. And then nothing is permanent. Nothing.
- [189:39]
B
And what seems long to us is but a speck of time.
- [189:41]
A
Exactly. Which is why how an ancient civilization could have rose up to become literally divine.
- [189:47]
B
Yeah.
- [189:48]
A
And reach the highest states of everything. Because that can't exist permanently. They were knocked down to start over again. Because cycles govern every single thing that exists. Everything must have a high and then a low, and then a high and then a low. It's just cycles based on creation and destruction.
- [190:06]
B
That's. That's a heavy combo. We go a lot deeper on this. That's like a. That's like a brain melter. But you and I got to record a Patreon episode about your time in Peru and some of the stuff you found there. And I want to make sure we do that for before you got to go to the airport. So, Matt, thank you as always for coming back. It's been fun again and I wish you all the luck in the world with this new pending excavation happening at. In. In Lake Vaughn. It's. It's really, really cool stuff, man.
- [190:34]
A
Perhaps we're going to discover we've been looking for for a very long time, maybe, and humanity can finally understand an entire different chapter that has been lost that we've forgotten. That we. That we are made to put back together again now would be pretty cool, brother.
- [190:50]
B
Well, thank you as always. And we'll have your links down description below. Everyone go subscribe to Matt's channel, check out his Instagram, and until next time, brother.
- [190:57]
A
Thanks, Julian.
- [190:58]
B
All right, everybody else, you know what it is. Give it a thought. Get back to me. Peace. Thank you guys for watching the episode. If you haven't already, please hit that subscribe button and smash that like button on the video. They're both a huge, huge help. And if you would like to follow me on Instagram and X, those links are in my description below.