PBD Podcast - "Mapping the World Long Before Us" - Graham Hancock on Atlantis, Pyramids and Lost Civilizations | PBD Podcast | Ep. 490

Episode Date: October 18, 2024

Patrick Bet-David and Graham Hancock dive into the mysteries of ancient civilizations, exploring advanced knowledge, hidden chambers in the Great Pyramid, and the controversial idea of a forgotten Ice Age-era seafaring culture. Hancock shares his bold theories on lost history. — 📕 PBD'S BOOK "THE ACADEMY": https://bit.ly/3XC5ftN 👕 PURCHASE THE NEW VT POLO SHIRTS: ⁠⁠https://bit.ly/3Y4Npig⁠⁠ 🎟️ ELECTION NIGHT IN AMERICA @ VT HQ: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/3XPbyt0⁠⁠⁠⁠ 📰 VTNEWS.AI: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/3Zn2Moj⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 👕 VT "2024 ELECTION COLLECTION": ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/3XD7Bsm⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 🇺🇸 VT USA COLLECTION: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/47zLCWO⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 🎙️ FOLLOW THE PODCAST ON SPOTIFY: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/3ze3RUM⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 🎙️ FOLLOW THE PODCAST ON ITUNES: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/47iOGGx⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 🎙️ FOLLOW THE PODCAST ON ALL PLATFORMS: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/4e0FgCe⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 📱 CONNECT ON MINNECT: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/3MGK5EE⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 📕 CHOOSE YOUR ENEMIES WISELY: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/3XnEpo0⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 👔 BET-DAVID CONSULTING: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/4d5nYlU⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 🎓 VALUETAINMENT UNIVERSITY: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/3XC8L7k⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 📺 JOIN THE CHANNEL: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/3XjSSRK⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ 💬 TEXT US: Text “PODCAST” to 310-340-1132 to get the latest updates in real-time! ABOUT US: Patrick Bet-David is the founder and CEO of Valuetainment Media. He is the author of the #1 Wall Street Journal Bestseller “Your Next Five Moves” (Simon & Schuster) and a father of 2 boys and 2 girls. He currently resides in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/pbdpodcast/support

This is where I get myself into a lot of trouble with archaeologists. You've climbed all the way to the top five times you said, right? If you're more than 20 feet up and you fall, you're pretty much certain to be dead. The limestone that I was holding, which was very eroding, broke off in my hands. I fell back. Back in the 90s, a special robot was designed, which was sent up there. What it found was a door blocking the shaft. So the question is, what lies beyond that door?

What we're getting is evidence that the Great Pyramid still has many secrets to reveal. If you were given an unlimited budget, open checkbook, a team that you get to put together, and ample time to go investigate everything you can about the pyramid, what would you do? There is one temple in Egypt that's left standing, which still contains the Atlantis account. Maps based on copies of even older source maps, that somebody was mapping the world long before us. This is puzzling. Why would you bet on Goliath when we got bet David? Valuetainment, giving values contagious. This world are entrepreneurs, we get no value to haters. How they running, homie? Look what I become.

I'm the one. All right, so today we have a very special guest here with us. Okay, very. Not only does his name sound like a major Hollywood movie star, Graham Hancock, right? That's a powerful name. No relation to John Hancock is what I mean, right? I suspect there is a relationship somewhere. Maybe something. Because the name comes out of Cornwall in the West of England and then there were settlers who came over to the US. So that could be it. There's not that many Hancocks around. Maybe you guys are from an

ancient civilization that we don't know about. We got to go through ancestry and figure this one out. But definitely no relation to the Hancock from Will Smith, the movie that he played. That's a fictional character we're talking about. So we got a New York Times bestselling author, Fingerprints of the Gods. And you're about to go on your season two of Ancient Apocalypse, October 16th. Which launches on October 16th. And it's six episodes of 40 minutes each. So I had Randall Carlson on,

I've had Stephen Greer on multiple times, Billy Carlson on, and we have all these conversations, right? And you know, you listen, and a part of the level of curiosity is kind of like, well, I don't know, they sound convincing, but I don't know, but I want to learn, I'm curious. I'm curious to know what they're going to be saying. So to me, you know, there's three different types of people when it comes down to the

ancient civilization. There is the establishment side that maybe will say, look, there is no such thing as ancient civilization. Indeed so. Or no such thing as a lost civilization. Lost civilization, right. No, no, lost civilization. That's the right word.

Yeah. And then number two is, yeah, there was a lost civilization. A lost civilization, right. No, no lost civilization. That's the right word. Yeah. And then number two is, yeah, there was a lost civilization. Then there's a different camp that says, yes, there's a lost civilization, but they didn't have no advanced technology that you're talking about. And then there's the third camp that says there is the lost civilization and they had incredible advanced technology, which of those three do you associate yourself more with? None of them. None of them. No, because the word advanced is extremely nuanced.

What I'm talking about, and this is an area where my work has been repeatedly, deliberately and in a calculated way misrepresented by archaeologists who don't like my work and the ideas that I'm suggesting. When I talk about an advanced civilization, let's be clear, I think that all civilizations on this planet emerged ultimately out of shamanism. If we go back into the Stone Age, if we go back into what's called the Upper Paleolithic, we will find that the world was pretty much shamanistic at that time. Every culture, every tribe, every group would have had its shaman who was bringing healing and who was dealing, if you like,

with the supernatural. That's what shamans still do today in the Amazon rainforest. So I think that all cultures emerged out of a shamanistic background, but what I'm suggesting is that during the Ice Age, there was one culture which went quite a bit further than other cultures from that same shamanistic background. It's a characteristic of shamanism, which a lot of people don't realize, is that true shamans are extremely scientific. If you go to the Amazon rainforest, as I've done quite frequently and as I do for season two of Ancient Apocalypse, and sit down to drink the powerful visionary brew ayahuasca, you will discover that the shamans are constantly

sampling plants. They're in an experimental, highly rigorous, rational way. They're in an experimental highly rigorous rational way. They're sampling plants, they're adding admixtures to an existing brew if that's the case. How else could they have created curare for example? Curare is an Amazonian invention. Curani is still the basis of modern anesthesiology. It involves 11 different plants, none of which are effective on their own. You have to mix them all together. Same with ayahuasca, it involves two different plants,

none of which are effective on their own, but mixed together, they become effective. And when you remember that there's more than 100,000 different species of plants and trees in the Amazon, then you are looking at a scientific project to find, locate, and create these things. And this is true of shamanism in general. So I think that there was one shamanistic culture

back during the Ice Age, which went further than others. And when I say advanced, I want to be absolutely clear. I am not looking for us in the past. I am not talking about a civilization that had iPhones and flew to the moon or built rocket ships or Tesla's for example, a high tech machine civilization, but I am talking about a civilization that had gone much further than others during the stone age. And where it had gone, where I derive this from is the evidence of a knowledge of longitude on ancient maps.

Now longitude are the vertical lines down the map, the latitude is the horizontal. Longitude is a problem that our civilization was unable to solve until the mid 18th century. It was always a risk being out at sea in a sailing ship and you can't quite calculate the wind speed and the currency. If you say you're sailing from from Britain to America, you have no idea at any point exactly how far away you are from the American coast and it's quite possible in the dead of night if you've done your calculations wrong that you're going to crash into that coast and hit it. It was a deadly, deadly problem. It was really important to know where you were at sea. It wasn't until the mid 18th century that Western civilization solved the longitude problem. And in fact there was a huge prize being offered for anybody who could solve the longitude problem. Well eventually they did

by creating a chronometer which could keep accurate time at sea. But before that nobody knew where they were in terms of longitude. It was always a rough guess. What did they use back then? What did Columbus use when he went from Spain to Caribbean? Was it just a wing job? Yeah, just rough guesswork. And he of course didn't know, Columbus didn't even know for sure whether he was going to find a continent on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean.

But he had reason to believe he would, which touches on these ancient maps that I speak about. There was a sense that there was something there, but he wouldn't have known at any point in his voyage how far west of Greenwich in the UK he was. He wouldn't have had any idea. So knowing longitude was a real huge breakthrough for seafarers in our epoch, for our civilization. But these ancient maps that I'm speaking about, which are in many cases maps that were produced in the 14th, 13th, maybe 15th century, but always based on copies of older source maps now lost. The Orontius Finneas world map is an example. The Pyrrhus map is an example.

And many of the maps that are called Portolanos that map the Mediterranean Sea are an example. They all contain extremely accurate relative longitudes and they should not do so. Even if they were just made in the 14th century and not based on earlier source maps, they shouldn't have relative longitudes but they do. So that's one reason why I'm pretty confident that the Longitude problem was cracked much much earlier because some of these maps show the world as it looked during the last ice age The errantius Phineas map actually shows Antarctica as well yet Our civilization didn't discover Antarctica until 1820 and and there it is on a map from the 1500s I want to show you this so maybe to the audience that doesn't follow this if you can pull this out until 1820 and there it is on a map from the 1500s.

I want to show you this, so maybe to the audience that doesn't follow this, if you can pull this out, I just pulled up the Piri Reis map. Well, Piri Reis is only a bit of a map. That's all that survived from the map and it shows a bit of South America and a bit of Africa. The relative longitudes are good, but can we find the Orontius Finneas,

O-R-O-N-T-I-U-S, F-I-N-A-E-U-S? Orontius? Yeah, and there we are. Well what you're seeing on that map from the mid-1500s is at the very tip of South America and at the very tip of South Africa, you're seeing Antarctica. That's what that huge land, that's South America on the right and that's the tip of South America And it's touching an enormous continent, which is also at the south of South rap Can you show which one is South America that you're shown?

So South America would so keep going down bottom right bottom right keep going keep going that South America guy go left That's South Africa. Okay, go right from there. That's Antarctica. And it even says the Antarctic Circle. That is Antarctica. And that's a problem because our civilization did not discover Antarctica until 1820. We had no idea. And there are other maps. Could you find the Pinkerton World Map from 1813, say, or 18, roughly 1813? Let's see how it shows Antarctica. Finketon world map. No, that's not the bit of it. Keep going. Ah yes, the next one, the first one on the left there.

Bottom, bottom middle, right there. Middle, right. No, no, no, no, go right, one more. That's it. There, that's how Antarctica is shown on a map. Non-existent. It isn't there. Right. And that's because it's an on a map not existent it isn't there right and that's because it's an honest map that's 1818 yeah 1880 you said that's because it's an honest map it's an honest map because at that time navigators from our civilization hadn't found that time so they could only say

they couldn't map it because they hadn't seen it okay that's the thing that's why there's no Antarctica on this map but But a few years later, 1820, Antarctica is discovered and it starts to appear on maps. But the anomaly is that it appears on these much earlier maps as well. Maps based on copies of even older source maps. And that suggests to me that somebody was mapping the world long before us. And furthermore, these maps often show the world, amazingly, much as it looked during the last ice age. The world was very different during the ice age. Antarctica was much bigger during the ice age

than it is today. And for example, the Malaysian Peninsula and the Indonesian islands were all joined together into a single land mass that reached almost as far as New Guinea. New Guinea was joined to Australia. This was because sea level was 400 feet lower during the Ice Age than it is today. The world looked very different and

some of these ancient maps show the world as it looked during the last Ice Age. Very interesting and the fellow who discovered Antarctica was Nathaniel Palmer. I believe so. Do you know who discovered Antarctica was Nathaniel Palmer. I believe so. And do you know who he was and what he did? No, because I'm fundamentally not interested in who discovered Antarctica in our era. What I am interested in is the fact that it was discovered in our era, around about 1820, and before that, there was no knowledge of Antarctica.

And so what's your point with this? Is it to go back and say the other map, which is the Pinkton map. Pinkton world map. Pinkton world map had Antarctica. No, the Pinkton world map. It's the honest map that didn't have it. The Pinkton world map is an honest map

based on the latest information that was available to navigators at that time. And Antarctica is not on that map because they hadn't found it yet. Why does this matter? Well, it matters because if Antarctica is present on ancient maps, then it means that somebody was able to sail the world, to explore the world's oceans, and to map the world's oceans, and furthermore to do so with rather good relative longitudes. That's what I mean when I talk about an advanced civilization, a civilization that had advanced astronomy

that was able to observe the stars, understand the rising and setting points of stars, navigate using stars, and that was able to explore and map the world. Therefore it had some significant seafaring ability. But I'm not talking about a civilization that had motor cars or airplanes or iPhones. I got you. So you've said, I think in the ancient apocalypse that you don't see yourself as an archeologist,

not a scientist, but as a journalist, right? Like as a researcher. Definitely. So as you research and go even deeper, do you, is there any fingerprints of who was the first to find out about Antarctica? That's especially if it's 1400, 1300, 1500. What name is mentioned? No name to mention. It's just said to be there. There's a, on that Orontius Phineas map, there's a legend written in Latin at the bottom of it and where the mapmaker

boasts about revealing to the world areas that had been hidden in darkness before that. And that sounds to me like ancient maps that had been hidden away and that some had been found. Hidden in darkness. In traditional academia archaeologists, okay, and let's call them the establishment versus some of the guys that are challenged, you know, like yourself. Yeah. Like me and Randall Carson. Sure, let's call anti-establishment the establishment, the traditional way of looking at it. Fair enough, yeah. And what is their position on this? What do they say? So, these are the ones that have all the degrees and the fancy degrees and universities and professors and all these papers they've written.

What do they teach students since they're the... They don't take the ancient maps seriously. They think they were exercises in fantasy by ancient map makers. They don't believe that Antarctica was discovered until 1820. They think that some map makers just thought that there should be a land mass at the bottom of the earth and just thought that there should be a landmass at the bottom of the earth and just stuck it there imaginatively in exactly the place that Antarctica is. They dismiss the whole line of reasoning on that. But for me, I'm not claiming that these maps prove there was a lost civilization, but I am saying they are a huge anomaly and a puzzle, which I have plunged myself into. I'm following my curiosity wherever I go, and I'm doing so in a journalistic,

not in an archaeological way. So what archaeologists study, much of it is very useful to me, and I have great respect for many archaeologists, and they do very detailed, nitty-gritty work down there in the dust, and it should be valued, and it should be treasured, but I don't think it's the only way to investigate the past. I think we have to take other issues into account as well. So, for example, with the great Sphinx of Giza, archaeologists will tell you that the Sphinx is the work of a particular pharaoh, a pharaoh Khafre, who they say built it during the fourth dynasty around 2500 BC, give or take 50 years. There isn't a single contemporary inscription that says Caffrey built the Sphinx, nothing

whatsoever. There is a stella that's in between the paws of the Sphinx, but that was erected more than a thousand years later, and it doesn't even contain the name Khafre. It did once contain the single syllable kaaf, but the rest of the line is missing and there's nothing on it which says Khafre built the Sphinx. That pharaoh who put that stela up some decades, some centuries later, could have been saying that Khafre restored the Sphinx. There's nothing contemporary that says Khafre was the maker of the Sphinx. And there are other stela on the Giza Plateau which say that even Khuffre was the maker of the Sphinx. And there are other stellar on the Giza plateau,

which say that even Khufu, the predecessor of Khafre, knew the Sphinx. The Sphinx was already there in his time. So I think that the Egyptological case to attach the Sphinx to Khafre is extremely flimsy. The Sphinx is roughly in front of a second pyramid at Giza, which is attributed to Khafre. That's one of the reasons they connect connected to him, and they think that the head of the Sphinx looks a bit like Khafre, although I kind of disagree with that, but that's not a central point. I and my colleagues, Robert Bovall, John Anthony West sadly passed away, Professor Robert Shock from Boston University, Randall Carlson as well, are generally of the view that the great sphinx was originally a fully lion bodied statue.

And that it goes back more than 12,000 years, and I can explain to you why we think that. Please. That it goes back more than 12,000 years, that the head sticking up there, the lion head was badly damaged and eroded. And that in pharaonic times, perhaps indeed in the fourth dynasty,

perhaps even during the reign of Khafre, they remodeled the head and put it into this head wearing a classic ancient Egyptian pharaoh's headdress, which is called the Nemeh's headdress. But what we think is that there was a lion there before that and there's a very special reason for that. Why is that? Well, there's two reasons actually. The first reason is the orientation of the Sphinx. The gaze of the Sphinx targets directly the rising sun on a very special day of the year.

And that's at dawn on the spring equinox. That's when night and day are of absolutely equal length. The Sphinx looks directly at the point where the sun rises. And you can confirm that today, and I have done by going on the Giza Plateau before dawn, stand behind the Sphinx, and you can see that it is looking directly at the Sphinx. And in fact, the Sphinx is perfectly oriented due east, and your monument must be oriented due east if it's going to target the rising sun at dawn on the spring equinox.

The sun does not always rise due east. In the summer solstice, it rises far to the north of east. In the winter solstice, the shortest day of the year, it rises far to the south of east. But on the spring, it's like a pendulum along the horizon. But on the spring equinox, spot on due east. Now the question is, in the ancient world, what was considered to govern the character of a world age was the constellation that lay behind the sun at dawn on the spring equinox in our epoch, the 2024, the epoch of 2024, and indeed going back right to the time of Christ, going back to AD 0,

the constellation that housed the sun on the spring equinox was Pisces and it remains Pisces to this day. It will quite soon, within 150 years or so, be Aquarius that's housing the sun on the spring equinox. We all know the old song, we live in the dawning of the age of Aquarius. That's actually what it's all about. This effect of the constellation behind the sun constantly shifting as though it's a kind of roundabout that's going round and round behind the sun is caused by a wobble on the axis of the Earth. The Earth is our viewing platform from which we observe the stars and that wobble causes the rising times of different stars and constellations to change in a very slow process. It's a complete cycle which unfolds over 25,920 years. And as a result of our observation platform being the

Earth and as a result of the Earth wobbling, we see the Sun housed, that's the language that tends to be used, by a different constellation roughly every 2160 years. So we've had Pisces for 2000 years plus, we're going to have Aquarius before Pisces, it was Aries. At that time the symbolism in ancient Egypt was all about rams. If you just go to the Temple of Karnak in Upper Egypt, you'll find that there's an avenue of ram-headed sphinxes which lead down into the Temple of Canach. Well, not those, no. It's the front entrance. We need to see the whole front of

the temple. That one on the top left. Yeah, these ones. These are ram-headed sphinxes. These are celebrating the age of Ares. That's when Ares housed the sun at that time, at the time that the temple of Cana was built. Go back further and you'll find that Egypt's all about bulls. Why? Because before the age of Ares, it was the age of T to find a very significant constellation housing the Sun at dawn on the spring equinox and that's the constellation of Leo. That's the constellation of Leo. In cut a long story short, what I and my colleagues think is that the Sphinx was originally constructed as a terrestrial representation of the constellation of Leo, that it targeted the constellation of Leo when it rose targeted the constellation of Leo

when it rose behind the sun. That's the first reason. The second reason is the geology of the Sphinx. And here the work of Professor Robert Schock of Boston University is fundamental because he has demonstrated to the fury of Egyptologists and has received a great deal of extremely negative criticism from Egyptologists, but he's a highly credentialed geologist. And he's stuck his neck out, looking at the erosion patterns on the body of the Sphinx, and particularly because the Sphinx has been constantly restored, particularly on the trench out of which the Sphinx was cut.

You can see these deep vertical fissures and that kind of scalloped rounded profile, and that is classic rainfall- weathering and in Shocks view the Sphinx at some point in its history was exposed to more than a thousand years of extremely heavy rainfall and the bottom line is such rains do not fall in the Giza Plateau today they did not fall in the Giza Plateau five thousand years ago but they did fall on the Giza Plateau if000 years ago, but they did fall on the Giza plateau if you go back 12,000 years. That was the time when the Sahara Desert was green. That was the time when the world climate was completely different.

And this is what the attributing for the creation of Plato's law civilization planned us over 11,500 years ago. By the way, don't necessarily believe everything you read on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an agenda-driven is an agenda-driven Even the founder says that. Yeah, I agree with that. Let me ask a different question. How many, I've seen you talk about the fact that you've climbed up the pyramid five times, I think you've said that, right? And when you go there to the Sphinx of Giza, and you're there, right, the Great Sphinx of Giza. What do locals say when you talk to them? Is there a debate of what it is? Well, the local name is Abou Al-Hol, the father of terror, but nobody can really explain why. I've asked that question. Is there any ideas?

No, nobody's ever given me an idea. But that's how it's known. Have researchers given opinions why it's called the father of Terror? Not that I know of, no. It's just locally known. Anybody who lives in the village of Nazad al-Saman. Father of Terror in Arabic, the name is a reference of legendary Sphinx that would terrorize people by making them answer a riddle. Yeah.

The Sphinx is a world famous monument that sits in front. So, but what- The people who live in Nazad al-Saman, which is the village directly under the Sphinx, they can't tell you why it's called Abu Abu. How do they feel about it? What's their, you know, like- They're very proud of it. They can't tell you why it's called Abu Al-Hod. How do they feel about it? What's their, you know, like- They're very proud of it.

In what way? Why are they proud of it? Because it's a beautiful, magnificent thing. It's 270 feet long, it's 70 feet high. It's towers over the Nile River. It looks out due east over the basin of the Nile. And fundamentally, because it is a worldwide icon, it's something that Egypt rightly is very proud of. Nobody else has the great sphinx of Giza. Plenty of people have got pyramids, but nobody else has got the great sphinx. So there's a sense of pride, there's a sense of

pride for the whole Giza plateau, that it's something special that Egypt has, which other cultures don't have. What's the story that they tell? When they're having kids and their kids go to school, what story do they tell on what happened there? When I've talked to Egyptians, local Egyptians living in Nazareth-el-Sama, they believe that the Sphinx is much, much older than the time of the dynastic Egyptians. They believe that it's as old as time itself. They believe it's as old as time itself. They believe it's as old as time itself. And why do they believe that? Well, just look at it. That's why. Those erosion patterns around the side. There's a sense that there's a sense of feeling of

great antiquity about it. Of course, they're not doing, they're not looking up encyclopedias and going into the archaeological textbooks. They're just giving a gut reaction to this amazing thing. So when you when you talked about what it took to build a pyramid, right, the stats you gave, you said it's six million tons, 481 feet high. You can say probably better than that. I'll say it exactly. It is, it does, the calculated weight is six million tons. The height is presently around 450 feet, but that's because the top 30 feet of the Great Pyramid came off in an earthquake around about the year 1300. So when you calculate the angle of slope, and it's 52 degrees angle of slope on each

side and project it further beyond the broken off top, and it's 52 degrees angle of slope on each side, and project it further beyond the broken off top, you'll find that the original height of the Great Pyramid was 481 feet in height. Right now it's about 450. What do we, what do we, how studied and researched is it? And what do we not, I mean, I guess the question would be how studied and research is it? The pyramid well, I would say that this is amongst the most Excavated and most studied Archaeological sites in the entire world. So it's amazing that they're still finding new things there

For example, there's been a using a high-tech scanning equipment, MUON scanning, I believe. Just in the last three years, enormous cavities have been identified within the Great Pyramid, which nobody knew were there. There's a huge feature, a famous feature within the Great Pyramid called the Grand Gallery. And it looks like there's another Grand Gallery above it, which has been identified by scanning, but nobody's got into it yet. Yeah, you can see it in some of those. No, that's the Grand Gallery,

but you can also see the scanning there. Zoom in right. You see there's the Grand Gallery, and above it is the Scam Pyramid's big void. Well, nobody knew that was there until very, very recently, and it's not the only void that's in the Great Pyramid. So we're still finding out about new things about the Great Pyramid. That void could be an architectural feature. It appears to slope at the same angle as the Grand Gallery,

or it might not be. It might just be, it's hard to understand why a sort of random vacant space would be left in this monument. But the fact is, all we know at the moment is that there's this huge cavity inside the pyramid that nobody has yet got into. And it isn't the only part of the pyramid. Out of the Queen's Chamber, so-called, when we call the chambers of the pyramids Queen's Chamber, King's Chamber, there's no basis for that. There's no evidence that any Queen was ever buried in the Great Pyramid. Nor is there any evidence that any king, any pharaoh was ever buried in the Great Pyramid because no pharaonic burial was ever found inside it. But there's the queen's chamber. And on the right-hand wall and on the left-hand

wall there are two little shafts cut into the wall. Actually, those shafts were invisible until, I believe, it was 1872, when a curious British researcher went around tapping on the walls of the Queen's Chamber. He had a reason to do that, because the King's Chamber, I suspect that's a King's Chamber one. It is. Yeah. The King's Chamber shafts were already known. There were shafts in the King's Chamber chamber and actually you could find their exit on the

outside of the pyramid. You could roll a cannonball down them and they would end up in the King's chamber. But there's no exit for the Queen's chamber shafts. But he figured, look, if there's shafts in the King's chamber, maybe there's shafts in the Queen's chamber too. So he went around tapping on the walls and sure enough he found two hollow points. People didn't care about vandalism in those days. He got out a hammer and chisel and just hammered them through and lo and behold there's a horizontal passageway and then it's leading up at an angle. It's about that high and that wide. Let's say eight

inches high and eight inches wide. It's just very, very small. You can't get a human being in there. But back in the nineties a special robot was designed which was sent up there Sent up the the the southern shaft first and and and what it found After a journey of more than 160 feet what it found was a door a little Stone door with two metal handles blocking the shaft So the question is what lies beyond that door? A new robot was designed with a drill on the front of it. They send the robot back up the shaft, they drill a hole in that door.

What do they see when the camera goes through that hole? They see a cavity about four feet wide and another door at the end of that closed shut and of course they've not been able to drill through that one yet so it's the same story on the other shaft as well so there's what we're getting is evidence that the Great Pyramid still has many secrets to reveal years of study in some ways you could say thousands of years of study and you can definitely say a hundred and fifty years of detailed archaeological study,

have still not got to the bottom of the mysteries of the Great Pyramid. They've not solved how it was built, or many theories as to how it was built. But this is roughly 2,500 BC, right? Something like that. Yeah, that's the establishment date for the construction of the Great Pyramid. I don't have a big problem with that date. I think in the Great Pyramid. I don't have a big problem with that date. I think in the Great Pyramid we're looking at a multi-generational project. I completely reject the notion that the Great Pyramid was a tomb and only a tomb, which is what Egyptologists say.

And I reject the notion that this massive, incredibly precise monument, because it is almost perfectly aligned to true north, south, east and west that it could have been built in the 23 years of Khufu's reign I mean you don't start building your own tomb until you're actually on the throne so he was on the throne for 23 years and that's what Egyptologists say the pyramid was built in 23 years. I can't accept that. Nobody who's got a background in engineering and construction who I've talked to can accept that either. This thing couldn't be built in 23 years unless there was some kind of

extraordinary technology that the ancient Egyptians possessed which we don't yet know that they possessed. It looks much more likely that it was built up over a long period of time but that undoubtedly the pharaohs of the fourth dynasty finished it off and put the casing stones that were once on the outside of the Great Pyramid But I'm of the opinion and again This is just my view based on my own research and my own work is that what stood at the Giza Plateau 12 and a half thousand years ago Was the Sphinx in the form of a lion?

Were some megalithic temples. There's a huge megalithic temple called the Valley Temple right next door to the Great Sphinx. Again, there's nothing that connects it in writing that connects it to any particular epoch, but it has blocks of stone that weigh 100 tons each. And those are also heavily weathered, just as the Sphinx is. So my suggestion is that on the Giza Plateau you have a

number of megalithic temples which still stand, you have the great Sphinx, and you had ground platforms not very high where the three pyramids were built, laid out in a very specific, very precise angle to one another. And that specific, that precise angle matches the angle of the, yes, this is the Valley Temple and what we're looking at there is exactly an interesting point, because you're looking at granite blocks that were put there in Old Kingdom times that face limestone blocks. And it's those limestone blocks that are behind those granite blocks. You can see them if you look right to the back, you can see the limestone blocks that

haven't been covered with facing stones. So just as we believe that the Sphinx was restored by the pharaohs, we also, I'm speaking of, I and my colleagues, are also of the opinion that the valley temple was restored by the pharaohs. But what they found was a much, much, much older monument, which they treasured and valued and venerated. You've climbed all the way to the top five times you said, right? I have. Now let me ask you, when you climb all the way, are you tied to anything or is it open like it's... Rob, can you... because I just found a video of somebody climbing all the

way to the top and this is... can you play this clip Rob, the one I just sent you? So this is a fellow, I don't know who this is. Yeah. They posted this video. Is this literally what it looks like when you climb to the top? You bet. That's exactly what it looks like. It's mountaineering to a certain extent. If you fall, you're falling. If you're more than 20 feet up and you fall, you're pretty much certain to be dead.

If you're 200 feet up, you definitely will be dead. People die every year climbing the Great Pyramid. How do you come down carefully? This is essentially 45 stories high. Yeah, that's right. You come down very carefully. I was actually on one of the climbs that I and my wife, Santha, did.

I was ahead and I reached up to- Composer. Some of the blocks, some of the blocks are only this high. Some of them are almost six feet high and you have to pull yourself up onto them. The courses vary in height from course to course. And I was levering myself. I got hold of the top of a block,

and I was pulling myself up onto that so that I could get my knees onto it and get onto the top. When the limestone that I was holding, which was very eroded, broke off in my hands, I fell back. Fortunately, my wife was right behind me, and she pushed me

very, very hard and stopped me falling. But that could have been the end of me. I just searched right now. Which many Egyptologists would wish it perhaps had been. I'm sure they would. But I just searched the following, Rob. How many people die climbing the Great Pyramid? Okay. And the numbers show over 1,600 people have died climbing the pyramid in the last 200 years. I can see that because if you fall one, two, three, four, you're not going to be able to stop yourself right there. No, no. The slope is 52 degrees. It's a steep slope. And once you start rolling you're gone. There's there's there's no and that's why people get

What do you what do you feel like when you're all the way at the top? What what? Is there an energy you feel is there what when you're looking around? What are you thinking? What are you feeling when you're all the way at the top? It's a magnificent and majestic place to be There's a first of all a sense of relief. I got to the top. How long did it take on average? For me, about 25 to 30 minutes to do the climb. There was a gentleman, in fact the gentleman who helped me with my first climb of the Great Pyramid, who's now passed away. He was known locally as Champion because back in the 1930s and 40s, people used to run races up the Great Pyramid. And he was able to run up the Great Pyramid and do the climb in 11 minutes. Well, I'm not as fit as he was. So in my case, about 25 minutes to half an hour.

That's still good though, to get up there in 25 minutes. Yeah, it's pretty good. So okay, play the other clip Rob, the other one that shows the inside of it. And this is just kind of given a glimpse. This is apparently what Harvard put together. Can you get out to kind of a... Well, that's a good place to be, actually. That's a good place to be because that's Mamoon.

That's called Mamoon's Hole. Thanks to Harvard University, you can virtually not enter that pyramid. Okay. Can you show that, Rob? Go back and play the clip. And maybe you can narrate this for us what we're looking at. Sure. Go ahead, Rob. Yeah. Okay. Go back to the beginning. I need to explain to you what we're actually looking

at here. Can I do that? Yeah, please go for it. Yes. What we're looking at here is the result of an Arab investigation of the Great Pyramid in the 9th century under a caliph called Caliph al-Ma'mun who was very curious about antiquities. And he was already aware of other pyramids in Egypt in which the entrance was in the north face. As a matter of fact, the entrance to all Egyptian pyramids is in the north face. But at that time, the true entrance of the Great Pyramid was not visible because all of the sides were covered sheer with beautiful polished limestone

facing stones, some of which individually could weigh as much as 16 tons. They were completely covered and closed the pyramid, and nobody knew where the entrance was. It seems that in ancient times there was a way to open that doorway, to open those facing stones and to get in, but nobody knew in the ninth century where it was. So Caliph al-Mamun got together a gang of workers with sledgehammers and chisels and he went up onto the north face of the Great Pyramid, roughly where he thought the door might be, and he started breaking his way in. And what we're looking at here is a man-made tunnel, physically forced into the Great Pyramid

and generally known as Mamun's Hole. Have you walked through this? You bet. I've walked through it more times than I can count. And that now is the entrance through which tourists enter the Great Pyramid. What floor is this on? Is this? Oh, it's about 25 feet up, maybe 30. 25 feet up, okay. Maybe 30 feet up. But the true entrance, of course, has now been found,

and it's a little bit above Mamun's Hole and you can see that there are slabs of stone in a kind of that sort of shape like an A figure which block it. If you search for a true entrance to the Great Pyramid you can see it as well. There it's a little bit above Mamun's Hole and but nobody who goes to the Great Pyramid today goes in through that true entrance. They all go in through Mamun's hole. But nobody who goes to the Great Pyramid today goes in through that true entrance. They all go in through Mamun's hole. Is this what you're talking about? Yeah, that's right. That's actually the real entrance to the Great Pyramid. And are you actually able to go on through it?

No, because at a certain point, this is another of the curiosities, is that the internal passageway system of the Great Pyramid was deliberately blocked with gigantic? granite blocking stones, so when the Mamoon and his team broke in they didn't know exactly where they were going But as they'd got deeper into that that cavern that you were showing us as they'd got deeper into that Hammering away. They suddenly heard something very large Falling in a nearby space. There was a space nearby where something huge fell and that struck them as interesting. They

knew where the sound came from, they started heading for that and they found themselves in what is called the ascending corridor of the Great Pyramid and underneath them, behind where they cut in, were these huge granite blocking stones which blocked that passageway. But they had gone round them and found themselves in the passageway system, and from there it was clear running. They could go up the ascending corridor, they could enter the Queen's chamber, they could then continue on up the Grand Gallery, and they could come to the King's chamber. That was the situation once they'd broken in and found the original system. So this right here, Rob, if you don't mind watching it one time all the

way through just to kind of get a feel. Rob, if you can just play this, go for it. What you're walking through is a man-made tunnel broken in by force. Put it at regular speed, Rob, go ahead. tunnel broken in by force. Put it on regular speed, Rob. Go ahead. It's a tunnel that was broken into by force, roughly hacked out of the body of the Great Pyramid, which fortunately accidentally led to this, which is the ascending corridor. So this is not built. Man opened this up. Yes. Now, we, there's, okay, this is very, this, the complications of the Great Pyramid are beyond belief. There's an ascending corridor, but there's also a descending corridor. And... Were these stairs there or did somebody build it?

No, no, those stairs have been put in in modern times. They did not exist. Let's keep on going down. Let's keep on going down. So we're going down now? No, yeah, let's go down. Let's go down, down, down, down to the descending corridor. No, we're in the Queen's chamber. No, we're not quite going the right way at the moment. We're going up, but there's two ways. You can go up or you can go down. And we did see the down view there, this is it. Then you come into the so-called subterranean chamber,

cut out of bedrock 100 feet beneath the base of the Great Pyramid. When you come up that, you then join the junction of that and the Grand Gallery, and you can then continue all the way up to the top. How high does this route go? Are you going up a lot or not a lot? You're going up hundreds of feet at a slope of 26 degrees. And by the way, that's worth making a point of too, because the external slope of the Great Pyramid is 52 degrees,

and every corridor, every passageway within the Great Pyramid is 52 degrees, and every corridor, every passageway within the Great Pyramid slopes at 26 degrees. That's, of course, half of 52. So we know that geometers and mathematicians work. It's not an easy... Once you get to the Grand Gallery, it's fine, because that's almost 30 feet high. But when you're going up the ascending corridor or going down the ascending corridor, you're in a passageway, I should call it, you're in a passage that is about three feet five inches in height. Now that means that you're going to have to bend over double pretty much to go down it. And what I've learned from years of exploration of the Great Pyramid is that if you're going down one of those passageways, it's better

to go down backwards because then you don't keep smashing your head on the top of it. If you go down forwards you're going to bump your head five times by the time you get to the bottom. But if you go down backwards, that doesn't happen. Anyway, it's very difficult to, particularly for anybody who's unwell, to actually go up there. Graeme, when somebody, an archaeologist, Rob, if you can pull up what I just sent you, this is when you go to Egypt, this is their Tours portal. But when an archaeologist or a scientist… By the way, in the middle there, one-two-third from left in the middle, the rank below, that one there, that's a newly found passageway as a result which was identified by this scanning

and it has been opened up. It's above the entrance to the Great Pyramid. What I'm asking is, if an archaeologist or a scientist wants to go in there and investigate with a team of 50, just to find out what's going on there, is there regulation? Is there approval? Do you need permits? What's the process to go in there and investigate? We are dealing with the last surviving wonder of the ancient world.

The Egyptian authorities do protect it well. In what way? Well, first of all, it's heavily guarded. And if you don't have permits, you're not going to get into it. Of course, there's a tourist traffic, but they have to get their tickets at the entrance and they come in with a guide usually. And they're heavily guarded. Yes. The Great Pyramid is guarded and indeed rightly so, as quite a number of ancient monuments are.

So if somebody would have a strong… You can't just roll up there and start working. Have you ever gotten an approval to go out there and investigate the pyramid with a team or no? No, I've not. I have had approval a couple of times to climb it. The other climbs that I've done were unapproved. Unapproved?

Mm-hmm. Middle of the night or throughout the day? First climb that Santha, my wife Santha and I did was in 1993 and we started the climb at 4 o'clock in the morning. You started climbing at 4 o'clock in the morning? Good for you. We started at 4 o'clock in the morning. If you invited me I would never join you. I just want you to know.

I would say tell me how it is at the end. I was only 43 years old then and I was pretty fit. It's not about the fit part. Middle of the night you want me to climb about 450 feet that I'm not going to see nothing. Is there light like you see when you climbed up? Was it majestic? Yeah, majestic starlight. So this means if the Egyptian authorities sees it, you're going to get arrested next time you go there. Absolutely. But no, going back to it. So is there a fight for scientists and archaeologists who, is this like, you know, I climbed Mount Everest, I did this, and I investigated this, and I went to the Amazon.

Is this one of those things where if you're allowed to go in and you do get an approval, what are those approvals typical like? Are they restrictions? You can't go touch this, you have to have somebody that walks with you? What do those guidelines look like? For example, Mark Lainer of the University of Chicago is a Western archaeologist who's been specialized on the Giza Plateau for many, many years. And I could say with confidence that Mark would have access to pretty much any point on the

Giza Plateau where he wants to go. But still, there are limits. I know that there have been a couple of drilling projects around the Great Sphinx, ostensibly to clear out rainwater or groundwater from under the Sphinx. Not quite sure why those drilling projects happened. But it's very difficult to ground truth what the scanning has revealed, which is a large, regular chamber

beneath the left forepaw of the Sphinx, if you go down about a 15 or 20 feet. None of the drilling has gone to that point as far as we know. So there are limits on what can be done. Nobody wants to see the Sphinx destroyed. Drilling around the Sphinx could cause destruction. And while we have excellent remote scanning facilities

available, there's perhaps not a reason to do so. I would like to see it done, but I'd like to see it done with great care, because the Sphinx is regarded in many traditions, including in ancient Egypt itself, as a place where an archive of records was preserved from the remote past. But not everybody can just go there and work, and even those who are very experienced and have spent their lives working on the Giza Plateau are going to need to go through a series of hoops in order to do any archaeology. Nonetheless... Is it political? Is it pretty political to get up there or...

No, I don't think it's political. It's about preserving the monuments and making sure that people who are there have some sort of... Who are doing archaeological work at any rate, have some serious purpose. Egyptian archaeologists have an advantage over others because they're local, that they want to find that too? Yes. Dr. Zahi Hawass is the leading Egyptian archaeologist, Egyptologist. He's world famous. He's devoted his entire life to the study of the Giza Plateau. And I would say that Zahi has access to everything that he chooses to have access to. He's a very experienced man and he knows the Giza

Plateau. What percentage of it has been explored? You know how they say less than 5% of the ocean has been explored? Typically on archaeological sites that's the case, it's less than 5%. In the case of the Giza Plateau, very close to the Great Pyramids, I'd say it's significantly more than that, but there's a lot, a lot, a lot that has not been excavated. Could there be things in there that if we explored, it could help advance society or civilization in ways that can help us reveal a bunch of secrets about life and what to do and what not to do is do you think there's anything there or well?

That would be that would be a speculation, but it would be a reasonably fair one If you take my point of view, which is that we are a species with amnesia that we have forgotten an Incredibly significant part of our own story that unfolded during the Ice Age. We've forgotten it. And that there were certain places on earth, and the Great Sphinx is one of them, and Göbekli Tepe in Turkey is another, where survivors of a destroyed civilization made their way,

took refuge amongst local people, and passed on knowledge while at the same time receiving knowledge from those local people, and perhaps established these places as an archive, as a time capsule for future civilizations to decode. And that's not an entirely unreasonable point. The Great Pyramid itself is an archive of knowledge and information. You don't need to actually find papyri with writing on them. The Great Pyramid can speak to you with its very precise orientation to true north,

south, east and west, with its shafts which turn out to point at very specific stars in specific periods, and with its layout on the ground in connection to the other two pyramids, which matches the three stars of Orion's belt, not as they looked in 2500 BC, but as they looked in 10500 BC. Again, there's this wobble on the axis of the Earth known as precession, which changes the orientation and the rising times of stars. And in the case of a constellation of Orion, over the cycle of 26,000 years, you see it go up and down vertically on the horizon, on the meridian, the north-south line that divides the sky. And the time you get the

perfect match of the three great pyramids on the ground with the three stars of Orion's belt isn't when the pyramids are supposed to have been built. It's thousands of years earlier. It's 10,500 BC, 12,500 years ago. And that's the same time that the Sphinx locks to the constellation of Leo. So I and my colleagues are of the opinion that this cannot all be coincidental, that this place is using the language of astronomy

and powerful megalithic architecture, which is going to be very difficult to destroy, to pass down information to the future. That's why It's intriguing that when you take the height of the Great Pyramid and multiply it by forty three thousand two hundred You get the polar radius of the earth when you measure the base perimeter of the Great Pyramid and multiply it by the same number 43200 you get the equatorial circumference of the Earth. Egyptologists know this, they know that it's a case, they regard it as completely coincidental. And even my opponent in the

debate I did earlier this year on the JRE, Flint Dibble, accepts that, that the ratio is correct, but he doesn't see any significance in the ratio. He just thinks it's an accident. But that number 43,000. He's got a nice hat on. You've got to give him credit for that. You've got to give him credit for that hat. It's a good hat. And he's a very smart guy. Flint is a very clever man and he knows his stuff. But the point is that that number is not a random number. Let me explain why. There's two things that aren't random. First of all, the Great Pyramid is clearly a monument that is speaking to the Earth.

The Great Pyramid is oriented perfectly to the cardinal directions of the Earth, north, south, east and west. It is a monument that is keyed in to the Earth in its cardinal directions. And secondly, I mentioned to you this phenomenon called precession, which changes the rising points of the stars as the years go by over a cycle of 25,920 years. The rate of change is one degree every 72 years. That's a tiny little thing on the horizon. That's the width of your finger held up against the horizon.

One degree every 72 years. 43,200 is a multiple of 72. It is 600 times 72. You will find that that number is a sacred number in cultures all around the world. Multiples of that number too. For example, 432,000, that's the number of syllables in the Rig Veda. 72. 132,000, that's the number of syllables in the Rig Veda. 72, those are the conspirators who worked to kill the god Osiris at some time in the distant past. You find these numbers

occurring in mythology all around the world and you find them occurring in architecture all around the world. So if the ratio of the Great Pyramid to the earth was 1 to 60,000, I wouldn't make much of it. But here we have a monument that is locked in to the cardinal directions of the Earth and then gives you the dimensions of the Earth on a scale defined by a key motion of the Earth itself, that wobble of the axis of the Earth.

To me, this is sophistication. This is not coincidence. Yeah, I mean, it's, you know, math 72 times 643 thousand 200 by the syllables 42. 432 thousand syllables in the Rig Vagabond. Yeah, that's so many other examples. You mean that's but when okay so let's go to this basic stuff that innocent people that are this is now what they study on a daily basis. How were the tiles. You mean that's, but when, okay, so let's go to this basic stuff that innocent people that are, this is not what they study on a daily basis.

How were the pyramids built? If you go a little bit lower, this is an article when you go visit Egypt and you're touring, this is what they tell you. So here's how the pyramids were built. Go a little lower Rob. Uh, they have different methods. So theories about how it was built. Go lower, go lower Rob.

So first one is called the ramp theory, then the water shaft, right? When you look at the water elevators, they got pictures if you go lower Rob, but I want to ask Graham because this is his world. These are all suggestions. These are these are all suggestions and nobody knows how it was built. Right, if you go a little bit lower, if you go a little bit lower, go lower and then you have the, this is one way where they were bringing it up, okay? Which, okay, keep going, keep going. So when you look like that's another way, I mean, similar to the other one,

the block placements of the pyramid. A spiral ramp effect that winds around the pyramid. What is your theory of how it was built? My theory is that ramps don't do it. If you have a straight ramp, which is leading up to the Great Pyramid, if it's going to carry blocks right up to the, what will be leading up to the Great Pyramid, if it's going to carry blocks right up to what will be the top of the Great Pyramid, you're looking... No gang of workers can haul a 20-ton block up a slope that's steeper than 10 degrees.

So you're looking at a ramp which is going to extend roughly a mile out into the desert. Furthermore, that ramp is going to have to bear the load of very heavy megaliths to be carried up. Therefore, the ramp itself has got to be extremely strong in order to carry that load. And the problem is, where's the ramp? Where's the remains? There's nothing there on the Giza Plateau to suggest that. And so that's why this idea of spiral ramps has been proposed, various other suggestions have been made. But the truth is, as everybody will admit, is that these are all theories and that nobody knows how the Great Pyramid was done. I get it. There is no doubt that large numbers of strong men can haul very large blocks of stone on the level. They can if they're on a horizontal surface. There are even images from ancient Egypt with hieroglyphs which

show a kind of sled-like device with a very large statue on it, we might guess its weight at 50 tons, being hauled along by teams of workers and on the front of the sledge an individual is standing there pouring water in front of the runners of the sled to make the sand slippery underneath it. And that would work. That would absolutely work horizontally. But the problem then becomes how you get those gigantic blocks much higher up in the pyramid. And I don't think the ramp theory works at all.

And you have, for example, in the so-called King's Chamber, it is roofed by a series of granite blocks. Those granite blocks don't come from Giza, by the way. They were brought from 500 kilometers to the south. It's roofed by a series of granite blocks, and those granite blocks weigh about 70 tons each. Then there are other chambers above the King's Chamber, which most people don't get into, I've been into them. There's five chambers, they're called the relieving chambers, and each one of them is also floored and roofed by 70-ton granite blocks. And to get that massive collection of 70-ton blocks about 300 feet into the air to put them where

they are now is not going to be done with wet sand, and it's not going to be done with sledges. And to do it with ramps I think is extremely unlikely. Relieving chambers? Yeah. You said there's five of them? Yeah, one, two, three, four. The top one is one, two, three, four. There's five.

And the first one there, five, four, three, two, one. Yeah, there's five chambers there. I've been in all of them the one at the very top under that gabled roof That is one of the reasons why am I close enough to the microphone? I'm not sure. No, we're that's that's one of the reasons why Egyptologists feel confident in saying that it was the work of Kuhu because in that top chamber There is what is known as a royal cartouche. Each pharaoh, the name of each pharaoh was surrounded by a kind of oval device called a cartouche. And in that cartouche is roughly written the name Khufu.

And this is considered to be a quarry mark that was put on the block at the time the block was quarried and was never cleared away. You're looking at a cartouche on the left there, but that's not from Khufu's, well that is actually Khufu's cartouche I think. But what you want to see is the one in the relieving chamber because that is the single piece of writing that Egyptologists rely on to attribute the whole of the Great Pyramid to Khufu

There's a whole other argument. How was that first discovered in the modern era? It was discovered by a British explorer called Howard Weiss and Howard Weiss in the mid 1800s was a Vandal of the worst kind. He blew a massive vertical hole in the southern side of the Great Pyramid, just scarred it, tore it to pieces with dynamite, and he dynamited his way into those relieving chambers as well. Now, Howard Weiss was suffering from real serious financial difficulties. He'd not made a significant discovery. He was £10,000 in debt, which was a really bad thing to be in the 1800s, and he had to come up with an amazing discovery. So there have been suggestions,

which Egyptologists do not accept, there have been suggestions that Howard Weiss actually forged that cartouche, and he put it there in order to… Just to come out and say, here's what I found, and hey, this is why it's worth funding my next project. Exactly, and it made his career. How much fraud is there in archaeologists where they have to make up something for them to get credibility in their writing so they can sell more and get another raise or ask for more money when they're giving lectures and all this other stuff? You know how they say there's 70% of art is fraud.

How much fraud is there in archaeologists? I would like to say not too much. I would like to say that. There is of course some fraud in archaeology. Human beings are human beings and it can happen. But archaeology is a profession that polices itself pretty well. And if a fraudulent claim is made, it is going to be exposed pretty soon. And I think particularly around world famous monuments like the Giza monuments, I would be very surprised to see much example of fraud. Of course, any-

Damn, I just pulled up an article. Check this out. Yeah, there it is. Crazy. Yeah, that's it. That's the cartouche in the relieving chamber. And that is the sole piece of written evidence which Egyptologists rely on to attribute the great pyramid to Khufu.

This is one of the ways in which the Giza pyramids are different from later pyramids. Giza pyramids are all attributed to the fourth dynasty. Go to the next dynasty, the fifth dynasty, and you're going to find pyramids like, classic example is the pyramid of Unas at Saqqara, that's U-N-A-S. The interior of the pyramid of Unas is completely covered in hieroglyphic inscriptions, naming the pharaoh Unas, there's a massive amount of inscriptions. But the exterior of the pyramid of Unas, as you can see there, is a mess. Now, you would have thought if the Great Pyramid was built 50 or 100 years before this, that they'd carry on improving. You wouldn't have thought they'd devolve, build something like the Great Pyramid and

then 50 years later build, or 100 years later build this mess. So what happened? Well, it seems like the ability to build pyramids was confined to a very specific period. And when they'd stopped it, they carried on building pyramids, but they weren't building them to the same standard, but they were doing something different. They were placing inscriptions inside them in detail, which do not exist in any of the Old Kingdom pyramids. This is kind of like we were better at landing on the moon 60 years ago than today.

Kind of like that. Yeah, makes sense. But it's interesting, because you normally do see a continual evolution, but in this case you definitely see a devolution. Which, a sense it doesn't make sense when I say make sense it doesn't make sense okay so let me ask you this let's say Graham Hancock is given a unlimited budget to and you're hired as the lead guy to go I just looked up right now only 10% less than 10% of findings we've explored of the pyramid.

That's what I just saw. If you were given an unlimited budget, open checkbook, a team that you get to put together, and ample time to go investigate everything you can about the pyramid, what would you do? Well, the first and most important thing would be to be ensure that whatever investigation took place did not damage or destroy anything of great importance. This is something that's not often realized about excavations.

When you excavate a site, you effectively destroy that site. So it'd have to be a very careful project with people who were very committed and in fact loving towards the Great Pyramid to undertake that project. But were it to be possible, were such a team to be assembled who we could be sure would not cause unnecessary massive damage inside the Great Pyramid, then my first priority would be to investigate what is in those voids that are all being found around the Great Pyramid. Are there other chambers in there? And if so, which have never been accessed ever by anybody since the pyramid was completed, I would like to know what's in them. That would be my goal. And I hope, perhaps, we will see that happen in the next 20 years.

Do you think there's anything revolutionary there? It's just kind of like we're just learning more about history. Well, I suspect there might be, because it's clearly great lengths we've gone to to make these places very hard to access. Just like the shaft of the Queen's Chamber that I told you about, which goes, it's like an invitation. It's please investigate me, please explore me, please find out about me. But we are going to set you a series of hurdles that's going to make it very difficult to do that. You've got to earn the right to investigate me. And now that we have this scanning technology,

we're getting to the point, at least in terms of our science, where we've earned the right, where we have the ability to ask the pyramid questions and to get answers from it. Last time Rando Carlson was here, we went and we talked about all this stuff and he's like, Pat, we haven't even talked about ancient civilization, you know, Atlantis. I'm like, oh my God, I said, we're out of time. We went for a couple hours. I really enjoyed talking to them. I said, next one, we gotta do something where we get into it.

I think when we talk to you guys, an hour and a half is not enough. You need three, four hours when we talk to you, right? But going into lost, you know, ancient civilizations that are, you know, many different words we can use with them. We hear Atlantis, I've heard you talk about India, Japan, a couple other places. Where are we at now? Are we at a place that the establishment

and the anti-establishment is united on the fact that yes, these places exist? No, not at all. The establishment archaeology regards Atlantis as a joke and doesn't take it seriously at all. The view of establishment archaeology is that Atlantis was a fiction made up by the Greek philosopher Plato. The earliest surviving reference in writing that we have to Atlantis in writing that we can read is the work of Plato, and it's in the dialogues known as the Timaeus and the Critias. And he speaks about this great civilization based upon an island, which was at one time nurturing, kind, gentle, loving, but has gradually became delirious with power and began to impose its power upon other peoples around the world

and eventually the universe struck it down with this enormous flood and Atlantis was submerged beneath the sea. Now, Egyptologists reject all of this. There is also a mention of Athens in the Atlantis story as it's passed down to us by Plato and Egypt, archaeologists in general rightly point out that there was no Athens at that time. Now, I'm getting ahead of myself because the time is important as well. Unlike many ancient myths, Plato's story of Atlantis actually contains a date, a very specific date. Here's the provenance of that story. A famous Greek lawmaker called Solon traveled to Egypt around 600 BC. And Solon did a kind of tour of Egypt with a translator. And on that tour, he stopped off at a temple in the Delta dedicated to the goddess Neith,

the temple of Sais in the Delta. And there, he saw enormous inscriptions on the walls, and he asked local priests to translate those inscriptions for him. And those inscriptions told the story of Atlantis. Atlantis is not an ancient Egyptian word. We're looking at a word that made its way from ancient Egyptian into Greek. We're getting a Greek word with Atlantis, not an Egyptian word. But that word was the result of a translation done in 600

BC by a priest for Solon. And that translation told the story of Atlantis, okay? And then Plato inherits that story and he embeds it into the dialogues of Timaeus and Critias. So here's the point. The priest that gave the translation to Solon, Solon asked him, when did this happen? When was Atlantis swallowed up by the sea? And the priest replied quite matter of factly, oh, 9,000 years ago. That's where we need to do the math. Solon was there in 600 BC. So we're now talking about 9,600 BC, which is 11,600 years ago, give or take 20 years.

And that turns out to coincide exactly with what is called meltwater pulse 1b. There was an enormous rise in sea level at that exact time, around 11,600 years ago. So if Plato just made up the date that was given to Solon, it's extraordinary that it coincides with the latest geological evidence on meltwater pulse 1b, when islands could have been swallowed up by the sea. This is the... But, Cram, how hard could it be to... I mean, if you look at the patterns

on the way it would be in the middle of the ocean, whatever the location would be, how hard is it for archaeologists to say, yeah, that makes sense, something could have been here? What is their argument to say that's... Well, it's very hard for them to say it because it means admitting that there was a lost civilization Which is something that archaeologists don't want to do. However, they say that the reason they think it's a fantasy is Because Athens is mentioned in it and there was no Athens then And and because it appears to be trying to teach moral lessons

course, no Athens then. And because it appears to be trying to teach moral lessons, that it's a sort of moral lesson about how a society can become overconfident and over proud and be brought down. I get it. I get that. But what they don't do and what they should do, and I've never seen this done in any critique of Atlantis, is they do not, they certainly do understand, but they do not inform others that there are roughly 200 myths from all around the world that speak of a global flood, of a global cataclysm that submerged and destroyed a prior civilization. And I think the Atlantis story has to be seen in context of those global flood myths. So certainly I believe that Plato drew the idea from an

ancient Egyptian original, but he then used that idea to make political points as well. But the idea itself isn't a unique or rare idea. It's found in hundreds of flood myths all around the world and Atlantis is one of those flood myths. So I'm actually very sure that Atlantis is a genuine story. Exactly where or what Atlantis was is something that requires further work. But one important development is that there are, there is one temple in Egypt that's left standing

which still contains the Atlantis account. The temple of Neith at Sais in the Delta no longer exists, but the Temple of Horus at Edfu in Upper Egypt has inscribed on its walls what are called the Edfu building texts. And when I first started working with those texts, I was working with translations that were done in the 1960s, and they were partial translations. But they talked briefly about a primeval homeland of the gods, which was an island, which was struck by something like a serpent that came down out of the sky and split the island, and then the island was swallowed up by the sea. There were survivors, they headed off in all directions, and some of them came to

Egypt. And there in Egypt they built what are called primeval mounds and those primeval mounds were to be the basis, the foundation of all future temples and pyramids that would be built in Egypt. The problem with the Edfu building tax is the temple of Edfu is a Ptolemaic temple. It dates to about 280 BC and that is after Plato. That's after Solon. But there's two things clear, that we're looking at a body of information that was preserved on the walls of a number of temples of which the last surviving is the temple of Horus at Edfu, and secondly, those words, the language that is used in the hieroglyphs of the Temple of Horus at Edfu is not the language

of 280 BC. It's not Ptolemaic Egyptian, it's Middle Kingdom Egyptian. It's language that's 2000 BC and states quite clearly that what they were doing was making permanent by carving them into the walls material that was in the ancient archives of the prior temple that had stood on Edfu. It turns out that the latest version of the temple of Edfu is indeed only the latest version, that it stands on the foundations of an older temple which stood on the foundations of an older temple, etc. etc. The archives were preserved and in Ptolemaic times they were permanently put on the walls of the temple.

The Middle Egyptian is important, the antiquity of the language in which these are inscribed in Ptolemaic times, and the fact that there is a reference to 7,000 years ago, this great flood, and when you add seven to 2,000 BC, you get to 9,000, very close to the date that was given to Solon. So I think that Egyptologists and archeologists should be a little more generous and perhaps a little more open-minded in looking at the Atlantis story and above all should connect

it to other traditions of civilizations destroyed in a global flood. Okay, I want to give you two things. I want to show one. That's the Temple of Horus at Edfu. Yeah, so Rob, can you play that clip and tell me how accurate this is with what you think of this? Of the Atlantis. Go ahead Rob. So this is if you want to hit the volume as well. Go ahead. This is the Rishat structure you're looking at. Yes. Yeah, yeah. Sahara actually be the lost city of Atlantis. Plato's legend of Atlantis has long occupied the minds of everyone from scientists to skeptics.

With many locations be being cited as a possibility for the location of this sunken civilization. However, this specific… I'm not in a place now where I'm going to say the Rishat structure was Atlantis, because it isn't an island. And that is very clear in Plato's story. A very large island was submerged. But secondly, the Rishat structure may be extremely interesting and goodness knows what it has to tell us. I've not been there and I don't like sort of pronouncing on places that I've not seen and studied myself. So if I were asked to put money on it right now, I would put money on the Rishat structure being natural. If I were able to go there

and investigate it firsthand and have boots on the ground, I might change my view. But right now, I don't have enough information to say that this is a man-made structure. Do you have an idea of where you think it's at? Well, again, it's provided by Plato. It's west of the pillars of Hercules, west of the Straits of Gibraltar. It's in the Atlantic Ocean. Oh, this is in Mauritania. It's in Mauritania in West Africa, the Rishat structure. Got it.

It's on land and never been underwater, not in the last few hundred million years anyway. But I don't want to diss it. I understand why people find this intriguing. It's an intriguing looking structure, my and it does you know resemble that ring structure that is according to Atlanta So I won't I I refuse to write it off completely But at the same time my work is under such hostile scrutiny by so many Archaeologists at the moment that I'd be foolish to put money on something that I've not even seen for myself

I was on my way to Vegas. I was hoping to get it out of you, but it's okay. So I'm on a history channel right now on their website. It's six theories about the Atlantis. Number one, Atlantis was a mid-Atlantic continent that suddenly sunk into the ocean. This is the whole Plato theory. Number two, the Atlantis was swallowed up by the Bermuda triangle. That's number two. Number three, Atlantis was Antarctica. That's what this was. So this is the 1958 book Earth's Shifting Crust. Yep. Number three, Atlantis was Antarctica. It's what this was. So this is the 1958 book Earth Shifting Crust. Albert Einstein, right? Okay. Well, Albert Einstein wrote the introduction, but it was by Charles Hatton. Right. Number four, the story of Atlantis was a mythical retelling of the Black Sea

Flood. Okay, so that's one. And then next, Atlantis is the story of the Minoan civilization which flourished in the Greek island 2500 to 1600 BC, and the sixth one is Atlantis didn't exist at all, Plato invented it. Yeah. Those are the ones. That pretty much sums up the theories about Atlantis. None of those theories take account of the fact that Atlantis is a flood myth and that it is part of a global tradition of flood myths. I don't think that any of

them provide a satisfactory example. The most interesting thing is that there are a number of places in the world which were radically changed by sea level rise at the end of the ice age. It is possible that one of those places was in the mid-Atlantic. There is a phenomenon called isostasy, where you have huge ice masses, and you did have enormous ice cap over North America, everywhere north of pretty much Minnesota, all the way up to Canada. The weight of these ice masses, which were at the peak about two kilometers deep would have been enormous and it pushed down on one

it's like a it's like a seesaw you push down one bit you raise up another bit and it's possible that the Mid-Atlantic Ridge may have been higher as a result of the weight of the ice caps that's called isostasy then of the ice caps, that's called isostasy. Then when the ice caps come off, the seesaw shifts the other way. And what was above water ends up underwater. It's not only sea level rise that's involved, it's the mechanics of the earth itself and the way that it's slightly elastic surface

that will allow weight to shift one thing. So for example, in the UK where I live, there was an ice cap on Northern Scotland during the Ice Age and that pushed Northern Scotland down and it pushed the south of England up. That's why the Isle of Wight in the English Channel is now sinking because the ice cap's no longer there and the seesaw has gone back the other way. So you've got a combination of sea level rise and isostasy.

It is possible. But there are other intriguing areas of the world. There's the Sunda Shelf, that's I mentioned earlier. The landmass that now on maps is the Malay Peninsula, the Malaysian Peninsula, the Indonesian Islands. That landmass was, it was all one landmass during the Ice Age. It wasn't a peninsula and a series of islands. It was called, geologists call it the Sunda Shelf

or Sundaland. And that was submerged very rapidly at the end of the last Ice Age, changed everything completely. So that is an interesting area to look. And I know a number of Indonesian researchers who think Indonesia may have been the site of Atlantis For that reason south of India fascinating

In Tamil Nadu, which is which is actually where my wife's family comes comes from. I'm fortunate to really yeah My wife was born in Malaysia, but she's of Tamil origin, and she speaks fluent Tamil. So we were able to do a series of expeditions in southern India talking to people about their traditions there. And it turns out that there is a deep and ancient tradition of a land called Kumari Kandam in southern India, a land that extended south from the tip of southern India, that Sri Lanka was not an island, that it was joined to India, and that parts of this land may have extended as far south as the Maldives. And there are traditions about sophisticated civilization there, which had academies of learning, and they called them sangams. And this too was submerged in

a global flood. And the date put on it is roughly 11 and a half thousand years ago. Meltwater pulse 1B, the same sort of thing. So there's a number of candidates around the world for this. There we are, the Kumari Kandam, that's the idea of it and of course archaeology won't have anything to do with it, but there it is. Well you said something when we talked about advanced technology, like well I don't know about the advanced technology and you know what they mean. I'm not saying they had planes and had this and they had that but how do they find the you know the Antarctica back in

fourteen thirteen hundred and then we say the first time we found that about it was in eighteen twenty so it's a valid question to be asking right so do we have any insight or research or proof on the types of technology that may have existed in the past? Well, yes, we do. This is one of the points that archaeology tends to skate around. Look, first of all, there isn't a single shipwreck that's been found anywhere in the world that is older than 6,000 years. The oldest shipwreck so far identified is the Dokos shipwreck from Greece and it's about 6,000 years old. And you can go down from there to other shipwrecks about 3,300 years old in the Mediterranean.

There's an intact shipwreck at the bottom of the Black Sea, which is about 2,400 years old. It's intact because there's no oxygen down there, almost two miles deep, and the timbers have been preserved. Yeah, that's the timbers have been preserved. Yeah, that's the Dokos shipwreck. And 2700, it's a bit older than that in my view. But anyway, that's the oldest known shipwreck in the world.

So where are you going with this? And this is used as an argument against a lost seafaring civilization of the Ice Age. The argument is, oh look, if there was a seafaring civilization that was able to map the whole Earth during the Ice Age, surely we'd find some of their ships. And the absence of ships is taken as proof that there was no seafaring civilization. This is puzzling because archaeologists universally accept that human beings were using ships 50,000 years ago. For example, it would have

been impossible to settle the island of Cyprus even at the peak of the last ice age, even when sea level was at its lowest. It would have been impossible to settle it by land because it was always an island. Cyprus is surrounded by great deeps. You could only have got to it by ships. None of those ships have ever been found but we know for sure that human beings were living in Cyprus at least 12,500 years ago during the Ice Age. And the studies that have been done suggest that quite sophisticated ships must have been used, that there were planned settlement of Cyprus, that people numbering a thousand or more were moved over to Cyprus from the mainland in a series of expeditions, they brought

animals with them, they had to have a population large enough to avoid extinction. You go with too small a population and they may become extinct within a generation or two. So everybody accepts that Cyprus was colonized by sea during the Ice Age, but no ships have survived. That doesn't dispute the fact that it was colonized by sea. Same with Australia. Human beings were in Australia at least 50,000 years ago. And even at the peak of the Ice Age,

when the whole Sunda shelf was still above water, you got as far as Timor and then you had to sail. There's a 90 kilometer gap between Timor and New Guinea, which would only have been covered by watercraft. And again, no watercraft have been found, but that doesn't invalidate the fact that human beings got there. So the absence of shipwrecks from quote unquote, my lost civilization of the ice age doesn't worry me because there's absence of shipwrecks much, much older, which, you know, in theory, if we've not found shipwrecks

from 50,000 years ago, that means that nobody settled Australia. But people did settle Australia. So what's your point when you go on that? When I ask you a question about what type of technology that we have and what proofs are there, you're saying that, you know. I'm saying that even within established archeology, it is accepted that sophisticated navigation technology existed 50,000 years ago. Ships. Specifically ships.

Ships, ships, ships, which were capable of carrying not just two or three individuals, but dozens or hundreds of individuals. What else? What else do we have proof that existed back in the days where we can sit and point to it and be like, wow, it's pretty interesting. We used to have this back in the day. That's pretty wild.

What else do we have? Proof of technology. Well, I think the Great Sphinx is one of the surviving remnants of that period. Is that technology though? Well, yes, it is, because the Great sphinx is cut out of natural bedrock. And I mentioned to you a megalithic temple that stands right beside the great sphinx with blocks weighing 100 tons or more. Those blocks came out of the trench around the sphinx that was excavated around the sphinx to create the body of the sphinx. So this was a culture that was able

to cut 100 ton blocks out of the bedrock and move them over and build them into a temple. What are some speculations of what it could be? Well, again, this is a subject that mainstream establishment archaeology avoids as to how this was all done. And they keep going back to the wet sand and the sledges and the teams of men. And some people believe and say slaves were involved in moving the blocks. Although there's no evidence of slavery in the old kingdom in ancient Egypt, by the way.

There's no really good explanation for it in establishment Egyptology. In ancient Egypt, in ancient Egyptian myth and tradition, which are mirrored by many myths and traditions around the world. And this is where I get myself into a lot of trouble with archeologists. There are traditions of priests singing blocks,

singing megaliths into place, huge blocks of stone being raised up into the sky by priests chanting. And I just wonder whether that's some faint memory passed down over the millennia of some kind of sonic technology that may have been used to lift blocks. But that's purely a speculation on my part. I have no proof of that whatsoever, but I don't think Egyptologists have got any proof either of how some of these things were done.

What's the movie? There was a movie that showed the types of technology that may have existed years ago that and then there was an explosion or meteor that hit and boom, we started all over again. Do you at all subscribe that that being a possibility? That's precisely the possibility that I think we're looking at. I think that there was a higher level of technology, particularly in shipbuilding, that is supposed to have existed. Navigation, exploration of the world, longitude, precise astronomy that is not supposed to have been discovered until the time of the Greeks, 2000 or 2300 years ago but which was present during the

Ice Age. Yeah because you know when you see some of this stuff that we're building today and how advanced we are right now and it seems like the last four years the acceleration of advancement is just out of control. Out of control, it's really rapid acceleration. Does that concern you or no? No, because it's the nature of human culture. Human cultures can stay stagnant for centuries and then they can suddenly leap forward.

And we're looking at one of those sudden leaps forward in our time. I mean, even within my own living and working memory, when I started out as a journalist in the 1970s, there were no computers. I was typing on a little portable typewriter. And when I made mistakes, I would use a thing called Tip-X to paint out what I typed and type over it again. And you had a carbon copy at the back.

And it was very slow and laborious. And if you wanted to gather detailed academic information, you're going to have to definitely go to a library and access that information there. But within those years, since the 1970s, that's all changed. Now we have incredible access to resources of information through the internet. And as a writer, I find the word processing technology incredibly useful. I first got onto it about 1982, that's when I got my first computer, and it was like just an amazing liberation. I don't have to tippex out anything else. If I don't like that word, I can just remove it and replace it with another one. It made the writing process much less physical and much more visceral. You just

get right into what you want to say and if you want to change it, it's so easy to change it. That's a change in our lifetime. Look at the whole thing of artificial intelligence that's happening right now. We are going through an inflection point in the human story and the question is Will we survive it or not? I'm less worried about the technologies like AI Than I am worried about the well-known technology of nuclear weapons that technology worries me a lot Because the fact of the matter is that we are living at a point of so much hostility and so much hatred and so much anger in the world that it

is not impossible that nuclear missiles will be fired perhaps even within our lifetime and why does that happen that happens because the leaders of the world the governments of the world they all have the psychology of 14-year-old teenage males. Why do you say that? Because they're just constantly engaged in warfare and anger and ego contests with one another. Their level of consciousness is not mature enough to have the ability to control weapons that could destroy the whole of civilization in a single day. We have put in the hands

of these naughty teenagers the weapons of gods, and that is a very dangerous place to be. We need an elevation of consciousness amongst our leaders in order to make the world a safer place. And perhaps the first thing that would happen with that elevation of consciousness would be less hostility, less fury, less anger, and an elimination entirely of nuclear weapons. Nobody has nuclear weapons because they want to attack other people. We have nuclear weapons because we think we want to defend ourselves. But what a terrible way to defend ourselves if it means that humanity dies out completely. It's obviously an insane idea, what was called MAD, mutually assured destruction. And that is a result of a state of mind that lives in fear and that has not fully conquered its own emotions and is unwilling to seek friendship when hostility is an easier

option. That was fine when we had swords and spears. It was even fine when it was just machine guns and rifles. But now that we've got nukes, it's not fine anymore. And we're possibly the first civilization on this planet that could be responsible for its own complete destruction. There would be survivors, if there were survivors from North America or Britain, Northern Europe. they'd be wise to take refuge amongst the few remaining hunter-gatherer populations in the world today. Because the one thing about hunter-gatherers is that these are people who know how to survive. Those of us in technological societies,

many of us haven't got a clue about how to survive. We just don't know how to do it and we'd be psychologically destroyed by the collapse of our civilization. We would fall to pieces. The only people in the world who would pass through such a disaster relatively intact would be, for example, the hunter-gatherers in the Amazon rainforest. And I'm kind of suggesting that's what happened at the end of the Ice Age too. Just as we would take refuge amongst hunter-gatherer communities, perhaps share with them some of what we knew and at the same time they're sharing with us what we what they know so that we can survive in their jungle. I

think the same thing happened in the past too. Are you open to the idea the next time Randall comes on that we do it together for four hours? I'd love to. Okay so why don't we do next time together for Rob. The next one lets do the three of us, but let's put it for four hours for us to just free flow and go through a bunch of different topics because I just had a, what is it when you when you just feel like this has happened before? Deja vu. I'm like ah I want both of you guys here to entertain this conversation together.

It's fascinating. And by the way, I think- Randall is a genius in my opinion. I mean, listen, the stuff we talked about with Randall, it was, we went one topic on Freemason and we stayed there for like 40 minutes. And that's not even why he was here. I don't wanna talk about Freemason.

I wanna talk about other things, but because he's a 32nd degree or something like that, we stayed on that topic for a while. Yeah, I believe he's a Mason. Yeah, I believe his bum. And my free sergeant, first sergeant in the army used to be one, so I was always fascinated by them. I'm not a free Mason myself.

I've known a number of free Masons over the years, and those I've known have always been very open-minded, inquiring individuals. Me too. I have good experience with them. I don't have anything. I'm a math guy myself and to me, you know when I think about More people who want to use logic to make their argument. I I support it I think it's it's great to be able to use that meanwhile to be able to question stuff

Anyways, it is a pleasure to have you here. We're gonna put the links Rob to the books and the shows Yeah, well just just to spell that out, I hope people will watch my season two on Netflix, which launches on the 16th of October. And that's season one we're looking at there, but season two launches on the 16th of October. Please look at my website, grahamhancock.com, which also will have all the links. It has the links to my video fact checking Flint Dibble. It has the links to the only talk that I'm going to be giving in the USA next year,

which will be in April in Sedona. By the way, that might be a good time to do this joint show with Randall that you're talking about. Fantastic. Because I know I'll be here next year. Then let's do that. Let's look at April. April 19th and 20th. I know this is in Austin,

but this is the second greatest city in America. I'm joking, I'm giving you a hard time because of the conversation we had earlier. No, but it's been a blast having you on. I appreciate you. Thank you so much for coming out. I feel like to be with you too. Thank you for having me on the show.

Take care everybody. Bye bye, bye bye. You're gonna think I'm crazy when I tell you this, but the last 13 and a half years, I've been working on my first fiction book to write ever. Fiction book to write ever. Fiction book to write. And while I finished this book, a year ago I got the strangest phone call about one of the characters in the book where the guy wanted to meet with me and he read

the book and afterwards it's like, wait a minute, am I the villain in the book? This is a story about a character named Asher who is half Armenian, half Assyrian, whose father was involved in the Iranian revolution linked to Savak working with the Shah that they escape and he gets recruited to a secret society. Well when you go to the secret society it's been around for a couple thousand years they've developed some of the craziest leaders of all time and they test you. There's unique tests that they have at this society where they test to see your's unique tests that they have at this society where they test to see your emotional mental toughness.

One of the tests that they have is very rigorous. It's purely mental. Of course, there's a physical one, but one is mental and emotional. If you're Armenian, if you're Syrian, if you're Persian, this is a book you're gonna be reading and saying, holy moly, this the kind of stuff you talk about in here? Yes.

If you're somebody that's fascinated by history, this is a book for you. Characters, there's a technology that this society, secret society builds where you go into a vault. I won't spoil it for you. When you go down, they have a technology where you get to sit down and watch and have a three, four hour conversation with Tupac. You can set up a debate between Karl Marx and Ayn Rand. Karl Marx is in the book who wrote Communist Manifesto. Ayn Rand who wrote Atlas Shrugged is in the book. Marilyn Monroe explains the concept of seduction and sex in the book.

When you read the book, it's about development of the next leaders in the world and how they do it and how they've been doing it for many years. And it's also about how to prevent the end of civilization and how this organization goes about doing it. So I've never written a parenting book before, but if I ever wrote a parenting book, this is the closest thing to it because it's all mindset, a lot of crazy stories. Again, 13 and a half years. Trust me, I told myself, I will not publish this book until I sell my insurance company and I'm fully disconnected from it, where it's no longer my responsibility 100% when you read this if you're a

creative person if you like fiction books if you enjoyed Atlas Shrugged if you enjoy Divergent if you like books like that I think you can enjoy reading this book it's the creative side business books is very easy here's how you do it here's how this works this is very creative if you haven't placed your order yet now you can order on Simon & Schuster Amazon I'm gonna put the link up below somewhere here maybe even in my profile go order the book and read it I sincerely I've never written a book where I can't wait to read your reviews to do see what you think about this book so I'm going on

this wild journey and we have some plans with this book here. If you support the things that I work on I would appreciate you going to reading the book, order the book on Amazon and then post a review.