Transcript of #2530 - Timothy Alberino New

Joe Rogan Podcast, check it out. The Joe Rogan Experience. Train by day, Joe Rogan Podcast by night.

All day. Do you prefer a Tim or a Timid?

Tim is fine.

All right. What's up, Tim? What's going on?

What's up, Joe?

Nice to meet you.

Great to be with you.

I've seen a lot of your content online, but the one that got me the most was absolutely the giant in Afghanistan, the Kandahar giant story. And I don't know if you know, but I had Devon Larratt on the podcast, the arm wrestler, and he told a story about how when he was in the Canadian military, he was deployed in Afghanistan, and one of the guys that he was working with over there had to have a conversation with a warlord, with a local warlord. And he said this guy was 8 feet tall. He said this guy was fucking huge, and not just tall but wide. He said it was the biggest man he's ever seen in his life.

Well, I've heard a lot of things about giants in Afghanistan, and I find that, you know, I talk about a lot of different topics. I talk about a lot of UFO stuff, and I say some things that I know are— that I know could get me in trouble. But nothing makes me more nervous than talking about giants specifically. The Kandahar Giant and, and the giants in Kandahar in general.

Why?

You know, mainly because when I talk to people who know things, they're very, very nervous when we get to this topic. And some of them will just flat out will not talk about giants in general, but specifically giants in Afghanistan. And some of these guys are high-level guys that worked at the Pentagon Um, and they'll talk rather freely with me about UFOs, but as soon as we broach this topic, it's, it's like they warn— they literally will warn me, be careful with this topic.

What do you make of that?

Well, I think that, uh, the, the topic of giants is intermeshed with the occult. That's my personal theory, because nothing else makes sense. Who cares if there's 8-foot-tall guys, right? Big deal.

Well, there's 8-foot-tall humans, right? There's— we were just talking about that young kid that's a basketball player that's 7 foot 9, right? Yeah, so there's actual giants that are in public, right? They're like, play for the NBA, right? They're out there. You could meet them. Mm-hmm.

But when I talk— when I say giants, I'm talking about 9 to 12 feet tall. That's 8 to 12 feet tall. I would classify an 8-foot-tall person as a giant as well, as long as they don't have gigantism.

Right.

That's a completely different thing.

Right.

Gigantism is a disability.

This Kandahar giant story is very crazy because what's interesting about it is the people that I've talked to that have been in Afghanistan, that were deployed in Afghanistan, not just Devin, but other people. They don't dismiss it. They say, "We've heard some weird shit about that place." And the thing that they always say is, you gotta realize, like, Afghanistan is an old country. It's old and it's very remote. Like, most of it is very mountainous. It's controlled by warlords. And, you know, look, there's these—

what are those?

Are they Greek or Roman, those structures that are there?

Date—

the Greek, they look like Greek temples that date back to Alexander the Great, and archaeologists can't study them. They can't go there because it's too dangerous.

It's one of the most remote places on the planet, specifically because it's so dangerous. You can't just go strolling around Afghanistan. I mean, you probably would— it probably would be easier to go to Antarctica than Afghanistan. And it's hilarious. So the story of the Kandahar Giant.

Yeah, let's tell the story.

This story has grown into a mythology over the years. Um, years ago, I was working with a gentleman named Steve Quayle, and we started a production company called Gen 6 Productions, and we were making documentary films mainly about giants, mainly on the topic of giants.

Giants as like referred to in, in the Bible, in ancient history, the Smithsonian giants.

That's right, biblical and historical accounts of giants. So I was traveling around the world investigating giants, and Steve is known for his investigations into giants. And he got a phone call from an elderly woman who told him, "You need to talk to my son. My son has a story he needs to tell you." And she had to convince her son to talk to Steve, and ultimately he did. And he was active duty. He was a C-130 pilot, active duty. He actually went on Coast to Coast with Steve. They went on Coast to Coast together, and he related his story, I believe, with George Noory, him, Steve, and George. And then later on, we flew him into Bozeman, Montana to put him in our documentary film that we were making. And he did not— he wanted to be filmed in silhouette. He did not want his face out there, even though he knew that they're gonna be able to mark him just by his voice. So he flies into Bozeman. We meet with him. He shows us his credentials. He was active duty C-130. And then he told us the following story, among many other things that he told us.

He said back in 2005, he was deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq running missions as a C-130 cargo pilot. And oftentimes they would have him fly into Bagram Airfield. And these were routine missions. And so on one of these missions, he's flying into Bagram, but this time when he landed, he was met— as soon as he deplaned, he was met on the tarmac by some individuals that he describes as the babysitters. He calls them the babysitters. He thinks they were either Army intelligence or Air Force intelligence guys. They didn't tell him. But this was different because when he disembarked They told him, "No photos, no mention of this ever. This never happened." So he knew that whatever was about to happen was top secret. And he had flown classified missions before, usually retrieving Taliban guys, what he described as high-valued assets. But this was different, because these were— there were intelligence guys on the tarmac waiting for something. And it turns out what they were waiting for was the cargo that was being delivered on a forklift to the C-130. And the pilot says that the first thing that struck him as this cargo was moving toward him and his crew was the odor.

He said it smelled like this, like musk, B.O., and death. And it was extremely pungent. And when the cargo arrived It was on an air cargo pallet, which is 7 by 9, and there was a— he could see that there was a person on the pallet in the fetal position. And this individual was so large that his hands and his feet and part of his head were hanging off the pallet. And he and his loadmaster, and there were some Marines who accompanied the pallet, who accompanied this cargo, uh, they were actually putting their feet up to this guy's feet, this dead giant's feet, and seeing how small their feet were compared to his. Now, the giant had red hair. He had 6 fingers on each hand, 6 toes on each foot. His feet were wrapped in like a crude canvas foot wrapping, and he was solid as a rock. Again, most of his body was covered by a tarp, but the pilot and the guys around him were hitting him with their fists. And he came up to about their midsection, laying in the fetal position. And the pilot told me he was solid as a rock, this guy.

And he asked the Marines, "What happened? Where did this guy come from?" And they told him that they had heard that there was a team that was out in Afghanistan that was looking for Taliban or something, and they came upon a cave because there was a nearby village and the villagers were, were bringing food and other artifacts to the mouth of this cave. And so they thought that they're aiding and abetting the Taliban. So they went into the cave, and rather than encountering the Taliban, what they found was this enormous humanoid who killed them all. And then, according to these soldiers, they deployed another team to go look for that team. And when they found the cave, they found the traces of that other team. They were ready. They were prepared. And they were able to kill the giant. In fact, the soldiers told the pilot that the giant was eating on members of the team who he had, who had killed previously. But these new guys, they took him down, and then they had a transport helicopter come in and airlift him to Bagram.

This episode is brought to you by Squarespace, the home of my website, JoeRogan.com. If you want to level up your business, you got to improve your website. Squarespace gives you everything you need to get a fully custom website, offer services, sell products, and get paid all in one place. Go to squarespace.com/rogan for a free trial, and when you are ready to launch, use code ROGAN to get 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain. Did you ever try to find records of who was there and casualties that were reported, deaths that were reported?

Um, it's very difficult. The Pentagon actually released a statement some years ago, which is bizarre to me. You know, basically saying, paraphrasing, the Kandahar giant incident never happened. There was never a giant that was killed in Afghanistan.

The Pentagon?

Yes, it was a representative, like a spokesman from the Pentagon or something, or a release from the Pentagon.

Is this available online?

Yeah, they actually felt the need to debunk this. That's hilarious.

Now, that gets me sketchy.

Well, I believe the pilot because he's a very credible guy. He didn't want his name out there. He didn't want fame or notoriety. He was very nervous. He thought, "There's a good chance that they're gonna recognize me by my voice." He was on Coast to Coast AM. And then he's on in our documentary. "There's a good chance I'm gonna get recognized and there's gonna be some reprisal." He was nervous. Now, they weighed the Giant before they loaded him on the C-130, 'cause they have to load everything that goes under the C-130. The loadmaster weighed him. He weighed £1,100. £100. And they estimated his height at 10 to 12 feet tall. And so they loaded him onto the C-130 and then they flew him to Qatar. And then they unloaded the cargo in Qatar. And our pilot told me he heard through the grapevine that the body ended up at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. He said, I don't know, that's just what I heard. So this is a firsthand account from the C-130 pilot who flew the body himself from Bagram Airfield to Qatar.

Why does all the weird shit go to Wright-Patterson?

That's a good question.

You know, that's where the weird shit goes.

Wright-Patterson used to have the Blue Room. I don't know if they still have it, but they used to have a room there called the Blue Room where they had all of the alien artifacts that had been recovered and that they were studying. And it was completely off limits to anybody except for people who had access, the very few who had access. And— but the Kandahar Giant, you know, that story, a colleague of mine, L.A. Marsili, he had another guy come to him, a different guy. We interviewed the pilot, Steve and I. L.A. had another guy come to him that was— I can't remember the details. He was a Special Forces guy. He had firsthand knowledge of the event as well. And we're not sure if it's the same one or a different one. If there was just one incident with the Giants or if there were multiple incidents. Now, years later, this would be just a couple of years ago because we published that film, I think, back in 2016. But just a couple of years ago, and I do have to be very careful here, I ran into a gentleman who was, who was a, very high up, let's say, in the operations happening out there during the Iraq War and in Afghanistan.

And this individual had— he'd flown a lot of missions and he was a commander. And I asked him, we were having a casual conversation and he starts to walk away and I said, hey, 'You were flying missions in Afghanistan.' I said, 'Have you ever heard about the Kandahar Giant?' And his wife was standing next to me and he's sort of walking away. He turns around, the blood rushes out of his face, and he literally goes like this to me, points to his phone, and his wife whispers, 'He can't talk about that.' So later on, I was able to— we agreed to meet at later on and in a very controlled environment. And he related a story to me that's the most wild story I've ever heard in my life. And I'm sorry, I can't relate it. I love this guy, I want to protect him. But it's not the giant of Kandahar, it's the giants of Kandahar. There's more than one. The military has known about it. Aside from him, I talked to other soldiers who've also had knowledge of that, the specific incident that I cited earlier, but then also in general, the giants in Afghanistan.

And I have a friend of mine who I met some years ago. Actually, I was with Lou Elizondo at Luz Barre in Wyoming. And there was a friend of Lou's who's now a friend of mine there, and we were talking about the Kandahar Giant. I was just telling him the story I told you, and he just couldn't believe it. He thought, "This is nuts. This is crazy." And I said, "Okay, do something for me. Next time you're talking to somebody in government or in the military who you think maybe might know something about this, bring it up. See what happens." So he called me one day and he said, "Tim, you're not gonna believe it." He said, I was talking to— I have to be very careful here too. He said, I was talking to a certain individual who works for a senator. He's a staffer. I believe he's one of the— a chief of staff for the senator, or at the very least an advisor. And he's got a military background, Special Forces. And he said, I was sitting there, we're really good friends. He said, we're having a casual conversation as we always do.

And just in the midst of this conversation, I said, "Hey, what do you know about the Kandahar Giant?" And he said, his face completely contorted, and he was no longer just— they were no longer just being happy and laughing. He became very stern, and he said, "What have you gotten yourself into?" 'What are you looking into?' He said, 'You need to be really careful,' and he wouldn't tell him anything else. That's the kind of reaction that I get and others get whenever we try and get information on this story.

It's a very fun story. I don't know why it's so fun, but it's very fun. But the question is, what would be the reason why they would want to keep something like this a secret? I don't totally understand it.

I don't either.

I mean, if there really were a race of giants that survived, let's assume that what we're talking about is what's referenced in the Bible, right? Let's assume, or at least the Book of Enoch, the Nephilim, right? If we're talking about giants, like, the thing about giants is like Native Americans have stories about redheaded giants. They talk about the same thing about them having 6 fingers and 6 toes. They have these same myths. Like, how is it that people from the Middle East and people from North America have this same ancient story? And what is it in reference to? Like, why does that—

It's ubiquitous. This, I mean, the legends of giants are universal all over the Earth.

Well, why hide that? That's what I don't understand. Like, the stories about the Smithsonian are always fascinating. Yeah. Because the stories are, there have been archaeological digs and they have discovered like enormous femurs that they thought were like wooly mammoths or something. And then they realize like, well, this is a giant human. And they find hair and the hair is red. And that they take these bones and they tuck them away somewhere. I mean, this is always the myth. They tuck them away in the basement of the Smithsonian or somewhere else. And for whatever reason, the general public is not allowed to know about this. And I don't totally understand. What is it about giants that they would try to keep from us? Like, if they find a new species of dinosaur that's extinct, they'll let you know.

Right.

Fascinating.

Amazing. They find Homo floresiensis, or however you say it, the little hobbit people.

Yeah.

Let you know, look, we found little hobbit people. Pretty cool. Giants, for whatever reason.

You know, it is a— it's a conundrum. And if it's real, it's You think it's real? Giants in general?

Yeah.

Oh yeah, 100%.

What makes you think it's real?

Okay, so, um, let me tell you why I think that this thing's being covered up, and then, okay, and then I'll tell you why I think it's real, and we'll go to Sardinia for that. So I, like you, have been wondering for a long time, like, what is the big deal? And initially, people in my field, especially people who are coming from a biblical perspective, The common answer is, well, the existence of giants would affirm the biblical narrative, right? And so, the secular atheist types don't want the biblical narrative affirmed. That can't be— that can't be right because the existence of giants doesn't just affirm the biblical narrative, it affirms the myths and legends of every ancient culture across the globe.

Right.

Including the Bible. So, it's not something that's specific, exclusive to the text of Scripture. So, it would just affirm all these legends in general. So, the only thing that makes sense to me at this point, and the other line of thinking, by the way, would be that it would somehow conflict with the theory of evolution by natural selection, which I don't really buy into that either because they would just say that this branch of humanoids, they descended from Gigantopithecus or something like that. I don't think it would be that difficult of a problem for the theory of evolution by natural selection either. I'm not myself an evolutionist, but I don't, I don't see them having that difficult of a problem here. So the only thing left on the table for me is that there's something very sinister going on in regard to the remains of giants. And if you study the mythology of giants all over the world, especially in the ancient Near East, you will discover that there was in fact a cult of giants, that there were cultures that venerated giants, and that there was a very particular belief about giants. And this goes back into the Book of Enoch.

And the idea is that this race of beings who are not entirely human, they're hybrids, that when they die, you can still make contact with their spirits, with their souls. They can be summoned. They, in fact, these are the demons that, these are the, in the New Testament of the Bible, these are the demons that possess people. This is the origin of demons, by the way, in Hebrew cosmology. So, there's this pervasive idea, again, especially in the Ancient Near East, that dead giants can be communicated with and can possess living human beings, their spirits. And so, you have a cult of giants in the Ancient Near East, especially among the Canaanites. And the Canaanites, they had— actually, there's various customs and rites related to giants, but one of the specific ones that we know about is called Kispum, the rite of Kispum. And there's a fantastic book written by my friends Derek and Sharon Gilbert called Veneration where they detail the rite of Kispum. And this idea of making contact with the spirits of dead giants and the veneration of giants. And the rite of Kispim was, it was practiced broadly speaking in the ancient Near East, but specifically among the Amorites and other Canaanite clans as well.

And what they would do is they would hold a feast and then they would invite the dead to come and join them at the feast. So, this was a necromantic rite. And they would evoke the dead, and they believed that the dead would come and eat with them. Now, the kings, and specifically the Amorite kings, they would invoke the spirits of the mighty ones, the great ones, the giants of old, the Rephaim. The biblical account names various different clans of giants that inhabited the Levant during and after the conquest by Joshua and the Hebrews. And you had the Anakim who descended from the Nephilim. You had the Rephaim, the Zamzummim, the Emim. These are various clans of giants that are specifically named in the Bible. Of course, we get Goliath of Gath. Gath is a Philistine city. After Joshua entered the Promised Land, they drove out and eradicated a lot of these giant clans. But some of them remained. Some of the individuals remained, and they were primarily went to the Philistine cities of Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod. And so you have Goliath of Gath, who David encounters later in the biblical text. So it's these heroes of old, these descendants of the Nephilim that the Amorites and the ancient Near Easterners are attempting to make contact with because they have knowledge.

And they, these are possessing spirits. And so, the rite of kisbum, the kings would summon the Rephaim by name. And you can find this in the Ugaritic texts. Ugarit was an Amorite city-state located on the shore of the Mediterranean in what is today northern Syria. And they have uncovered documents where the Amorite kings are summoning specifically by name, summoning dead giants, the Rephaim. And the idea is to summon them and then to become empowered by their spirits, their possessing spirits. Again, this goes back to the tradition of Enoch, that the giants, when they die, their spirits are in sort of a state of suspended animation, and they can be revived. They can be resurrected, as it were, and can be made to inhabit the bodies of human beings. So, there's this ancient cult that existed in the ancient Near East and other parts of the world. And it's associated with the cult of Baal. So, you have Baal, the giants were thought of as the warriors of Baal. So, today we know that the cult of Baal persists. I mean, the Epstein Files. We know that the cult of Baal is still being practiced.

When you say the Epstein Files, what do you mean? What is the cult?

There's references to Baal. And there's this recurrent theme of Baal worship. And Baal, Jesus refers to Baal as Satan in the New Testament. So it's basically Satanism. It's a satanic cult.

And how is it referenced in the Epstein Files?

There's some references to Baal. I can't remember the exact references, but there's apparently a cult of Baal. And the elites are obsessed with— some of the elites, I don't know who or how many of them, but it's becoming increasingly apparent that there's a, that there's an infatuation with these ancient Near Eastern cults, specifically the Canaanitish cults. And so the reason why I'm going through all of this is because I think it's still alive and well today in society. And I believe that they're using the bones, the remains of giants in these practices. I think it's extremely dark. I think, um, this is part of the reason why— part of the reason why there may be a cover-up around it. Um, nothing else makes sense to me. Nothing else makes sense to me.

In terms of the cover-up?

In terms of the cover-up.

We were talking about it. It makes sense to me that you have incredibly powerful, wealthy people that don't want to be exposed as being perverts and whatever the fuck they were up to. And there's all the weird shit with beef jerky and pizza. You know, there's these very strange references that seem to not be talking about beef jerky and not— it's some kind of code. Yeah. And there's also the fact that he brought an enormous amount of sulfuric acid, like, right after he was indicted, right, to the island. Like, I forget how many gallons of it, but barrels of sulfuric acid, right, which is what you would use to dissolve bodies. So, it's like, it seems like there's a lot of reasons for a cover-up. If this guy was running some sort of blackmail operation and had information on powerful people, you would— that would make sense that that's why they would cover it up.

Well, that's the cover-up of the pedophilia.

Or just— even if it's not pedophilia, even just adultery or drug use or—

Whatever.

The ball thing apparently comes up on a bank file, and it may have been misinterpreted. It does say B-A-A-L dot name, but people who are digging into this say that it might have just been a misinterpretation. That's the only mention of it.

Misinterpretation?

Uh, yeah, I mean, it's how another page here shows it. Here's like the document. It might have just— I don't— it doesn't even say it there. That I can see it.

Yeah, I'm not sure exactly.

Here's where it says it, you know, exactly where Baal is referenced specifically.

Yeah, right there. There for one place, for sure.

Bank document.

I don't know if that has anything to do with the occult specifically, but just imagine if it's the name of Satan and this is the name of your bank account.

Yeah, yeah, that's quite odd.

Yeah, that's at least creepy.

Yeah, for sure.

At least creepy.

Yeah, so you have this scenario in which, let's just say for the sake of argument that it's true.

Okay.

Okay, that the legends are true, the giants are real, that you can make contact with their spirits.

Through their bones?

Maybe through their remains. That, or at least people believe this. And so there's—

Is there some sort of a method that they use?

Yeah, well, okay, so this will get us into Sardinia. Whenever anyone asks me, what's the, what's the best evidence you've ever seen for the existence of giants? Now, you've already cited some, some, some historical context around this. The legend of giants is everywhere. It's in every continent. And you have giants aside from the biblical account, obviously, all over the Mesopotamia, the cult of giants. In the United States during this, the era of the Smithsonian Gate, the Smithsonian's apparent The Smithsonian Institution's apparent cover-up of giants, especially the ones that were being discovered in the mounds here in the United States. But it's pervasive. In Peru, there's legends of giants. And the natives, the indigenous peoples, absolutely believe there was a primordial race of giants. The same thing in Central America. They believe there was a primordial race of giants that was destroyed in a cataclysm, specifically a flood. That's what the Inca believed, that Viracocha, the god Viracocha, created first a race of giants, but they were stupid and evil. And so He destroyed them in a flood. Same story down in— up in Mexico and among the Aztec. And the Native Americans, the six-fingered red-haired giants and so forth.

So, there's a lot of historical context and I would— and of course, it's anecdotal, but it's— but how much anecdotal evidence just— at one point does anecdotal evidence just become evidence when it's so pervasive all over the world?

Right.

So, as I was traveling around the world studying giants and researching this topic and investigating different stories and legends, I went to Malta, which is very interesting. Obviously, lots of legends of giants in Malta associated with the megaliths. And then, and then I kind of hit ground zero for giants, which is the island of Sardinia. And the island of Sardinia is located west of Rome. It's part of Italy. It's in the western Mediterranean, below Corsica. And many people don't realize this about Sardinia, but Sardinia has the highest, has the most megaliths anywhere on Earth. It has the highest concentration of megaliths anywhere that I've been, as far as I'm aware of. There are these massive megalithic towers called nuraghi. That were constructed allegedly by the, or conventionally by the, uh, Nuragic civilization, Bronze Age civilization. And there are today still at least 7,000 of these things standing. You can go to Sardinia and see 7,000 Nuragi towers. There were at one time 10,000 to 30,000 of these megalithic towers. And some of these towers stood over 100 feet tall.

Jamie, can we see some pictures of these? Yeah, how would he look?

Nuraghi. Sardinia Nuraghi. Nuraghi Stone.

I got 3 different things, so I don't— I guess this is it. Is that— yeah, that's what it is.

So what is the timeline of this Nuragic— how do you say it? Nuragic?

The Nuragic civilization. It's the Bronze Age.

Yeah. The Bronze Age. So what is that?

3300 BC to about 1200 BC.

And that's what this stuff is from.

And they say that these were built in the Bronze Age. That's the conventional idea. And again, there's 7,000 of them on the island today. But there were up to— I've seen estimates up to 30,000, including at the museum in Sardinia. And aside from these towers, they also have— these are, by the way, these are megalithic. So these are megalithic towers that are constructed in the Cyclopean style. And Cyclopean masonry, Cyclopean architecture is the trademark of megaliths worldwide. And Cyclopean, this is the archaeological term for the technique, Cyclopean referencing the great Cyclopes of Greek mythology who were believed to be the inventors of tower building and, you know, the builders, the offspring of the gods who were the great builders and masons. That's the mythology. But the trademark of Cyclopean architecture is that these are large stones that are fitted together without the use of any binding agent like mortar, without any kind of mortar. And you have exquisite examples of Cyclopean masonry in different parts of the Earth, like in Peru, the walls of Sacsayhuaman are absolutely amazing, breathtakingly beautiful in regard to their design and the polygonal, tightly fitting blocks, immense blocks of stone.

Whereas in Sardinia, these are crude blocks, they're crudely worked blocks of basalt and granite and limestone. That are fitted together but without the use of mortar. So they are built in the Cyclopean style. And again, some of them were 100 feet tall. And they had a— some of them were for defensive purposes. And some of them had a wooden platform that crowned the top. And that platform was buttressed by other very large stones that were finely cut, sometimes basalt. I've seen some of these stones in Sardinia. I've been to the island a few times researching the towers. And giants. And aside from the towers, these megalithic towers, you also have megalithic tombs, which are called to this day the Tombs of the Giants. And you can go and visit them. There were— there's 800 of them extant today. And archaeologists believe there were many more in the past. No one knows exactly how many. But oftentimes, it seems to me that the towers and the tombs are closely associated. They fulfill a function, I think, that is interlaced. And the megalithic tombs of the giants, the legends in Sardinia, according to legend in Sardinia, they were associated with the bodies of giants.

But of course, today you have armchair archaeologists who'll say, that's just a myth. You couldn't even fit bodies inside of these tombs. Yes, you could. I mean, none of these guys have ever bothered to go to Sardinia with a tape measure. I did. And yes, you can. You can fit the bodies of 9, 8, 9, 10-foot-tall guys in these tombs without a problem. And there's two different styles of megalithic tombs in Sardinia. You have the stele style, which it's— there's a large stele stone, a monolithic stone in the front with a little doorway in it. And the doorway is almost like a little doggy door. At the bottom. But it's big enough, I mean, a young person could crawl through it. And then you have the Trilithon doorway, this style of megalithic tomb, which is a larger doorway. You still have to, like a guy my size would still have to bend down to get inside, but the tombs are configured the same. They're shaped the same, these two different styles. And what a lot of people misunderstand about the tombs is the tombs were not built to house the bodies of giants. They were built on top of the interred giant.

So, the giant was inhumed beneath the tomb. It was buried beneath the tomb, and then the edifice was built on top. So, that opening—

Where are you getting this information?

Oh, this is known in Sardinia. I spent a lot of time researching the tombs of the giants in Sardinia and talking to various experts.

And who are these experts, like local historians?

Some of them, yeah. You can go to the— you can also go to the museums in Sardinia and read a lot of this stuff. Now, I have a friend named Paola Loi, who's— she's a— I think she's the best tour guide in Sardinia. And she's extremely knowledgeable about all this stuff. She'd take you to the museum and you walk through all of this information with her. And they have little models in the museum of the tombs of the giants. And there's a legend in Sardinia that it's called the Rite of Incubation. And this is a necromantic rite that was practiced by the Sardinians. And it describes the purpose of the tombs. So, the tombs, when you walk into the tombs, again, they're megalithic, the walls are megalithic, some pretty large stones incorporated in these tombs. When you walk into the tombs, there's a gallery inside, and the gallery is rather large. You could fit a body of a giant in there, but that's beside the point because that's not the purpose of the tomb. The purpose of the tomb, of the gallery inside the tomb, is to accommodate a young person during a rite of passage.

And during the Bronze Age, you're talking about boys from 12 to 14 years old, right? Generally speaking. And they would go into the tomb alone. And they would be sealed in the tomb. So, that little doggy door that's in the stele, the stele version of the Tombs of the Giants, they would crawl in there and then they would be sealed inside. And there's a little, on most of those stele tombs, there's a little hole at the top as well. So, there's So it's not like they're sealed in there and they can't breathe or anything. No, they would go in there and they would spend some days in the tomb alone.

This is what it looks like.

That's one of the doors with the stele, monolithic stone. And they're all shaped the same. It's hard to tell because they've been disassembled. Many of them have been disassembled. But you can see there the trilithon. That's a trilithon tomb. That's something else. That's a well. But the tombs are all shaped— you can see down there, see right, the picture right below that one. There you go. See how the tombs are shaped?

Yeah.

Now, that's how all these tombs are shaped that way. This has to do with the rite of incubation. So the young person would go inside the gallery, they'd be sealed inside, the young boy, and they would— the purpose of this was to incubate inside of the gallery in order to be empowered and energized by the spirit of the mighty one buried beneath the tomb. And again, according to legend, the mighty ones were giants. So I don't think it's coincidental that the tombs are actually shaped like a womb. If you look at that, the, the view of the tomb from above, originally when I was researching this in Sardinia, I thought it was shaped like a bull's head, which would be something like iconographic of Molech or something like that, Canaanitish. But I realized that actually this is shaped like a womb. The tomb looks like a womb. If you pull up a womb, you'll see what I mean. It looks like a womb, shaped like a womb. And this was to accommodate the rite of incubation. And so these young people, the idea is they're in there, they are communing, incubating in the presence of the dead hero buried beneath.

And they're absorbing their spirit, their prowess. And then the tomb is unsealed, and the young person emerges from the womb, as it were. It's like a new birth. They went in a boy, they're now coming out a man empowered by the spirit of their ancestral heroes. So these are called to this day the tombs of the giants. Now, you can say, well, that's just That's just mythology. That's just Sardinian legend. The problem is, you can interview people, or at least you could in times past, interview Sardinians all across the island who have themselves dug up the bones of giants or encountered the bones of giants in some kind of a, in some context, usually around the towers, the nuraghi towers. I interviewed dozens of people in Sardinia, most of them elderly, who had themselves encountered the bones of giants in different contexts while plowing in fields. They'd pull up bones, or they would find the bones in the tombs or whatever. And it's very easy to dismiss the whole thing as, "Well, they were just digging up megafauna," right? The bones of mastodons and giant sloths. The problem is some of these bones had jewelry.

Some of them had Roman coins associated with them. Some of them had rings on the fingers and necklaces around the neck, the collar. And they would actually— and most of these were old-timers because this doesn't— it's not really happening anymore in Sardinia. This is something that was happening in the '60s, '50s, '40s, '30s, and back. But especially between like, post-World War II, when the island was undergoing a process of industrialization, and they were building new roads and digging for foundations and stuff, they were digging up the bones of giants. And there's a particular church called Sant'Anastasia in Sardinia. And it's in the region of Sadara. And I interviewed two gentlemen in Sardinia, two guys, who were officially employed by the municipality and by the University of Cagliari. Cagliari is the capital city of Sardinia. They were specifically employed to excavate the ruins, the Nuragic ruins on the premises of the Church of Sant'Anastasia. Sant'Anastasia is a small little Catholic church, but if you go there, you'll see that even today you can see the remains of a Nuragic settlement there. There's a There are nuraghi towers there. It's just, it's an archaeological site. And these two individuals, one of them, his name was Giuseppe, the other's name was Roberto.

And Giuseppe worked there from, he worked there from, I believe it was 1979 to 1981. And then Roberto worked there from 1982 to 1984. Both of these guys employed officially, in an official capacity from the municipality. Of Sadara to do this excavation. And so they would be there. The protocol was you go and you excavate the ruins and all the artifacts you find get put into the church. So all the artifacts went into the church of Sant'Anastasia. And you can see this church, by the way, if you pull it up, it's called Sant'Anastasia in Sardinia. And all the bones were put into the church. All the artifacts were put into the church. And among the artifacts that were being collected were the skeletons of giants. And not mastodons, not giant sloths.

Do you have photographs of these things?

These guys, they— well, of course not. But these guys were very reluctant to talk to us. The one guy, Roberto, was very nervous. He said, "We were told never to talk about this. This never happened." Again, this was back in the '80s. He didn't think anything of it. He wasn't told, "Go to Sant'Anastasia and look for the bones of giants." He was just told, "Go excavate the site." He was one of the excavators at Santa Anastasia. And the whole thing was being supervised by the municipality and the university. And he dug up, personally, he said he dug up the bodies, 2 bodies, 10-foot-tall guys, full skeletons. And he laid them out in the— these ones he laid out in the courtyard of the church. And he said he notified the people in Kajeti, of the discovery. And what would happen is all the artifacts that would go into the church, or in this case outside of the church, somebody would come at night and take them all away. So they get there in the morning, all the artifacts are gone. He didn't know where they went. Um, the other individual, Giuseppe, he also excavated giants from Sant'Anastasia, various, various artifacts related to the giants, gigantic plates, gigantic cups and goblets, chalices.

They excavated a lot of different artifacts, rings and earrings and necklaces and all kinds of, all manner of artifacts. And he told me that he remembers a particular case in which he and his wife, his wife was helping on this particular day, they're excavating in the ruins and they found a skull that was so large. He said the skulls were 3 to 4 times larger than ours. He found this skull that was very large and it had part of the vertebrae attached. Some of these remains were not just skeletal, they were almost like mummified. And he and his wife together carried it into the church. He told me that while they were digging, they unsealed a compartment inside of one of the towers. There was this large room that was sealed. Like it was just, it had collapsed or whatever, it was sealed. And they opened it up and they went inside and there was a giant, this very large person sitting at a table. And there were, there's a really large plate and an oversized chalice there. And he even had, he was eating oysters and mussels and clams that were still on the plate.

And he was very large. I mean, these guys are, when I say large, they're 9 to 12 feet tall. That's how tall these guys are. And they were— it was remarkable. He was extremely well preserved. And because apparently he had been almost like hermetically sealed in this thing. And so they took all the artifacts and the bones and put them into the church, and the next day they were all gone. I mean, this was the procedure. It was— these guys uncovered a lot of interesting stuff at those— at that one particular that one particular excavation at the Church of Sant'Anastasia in Sardara. And they were filling the church up with so many artifacts that Giuseppe told me that he went over to the mayor and he told the mayor, is there anywhere else that we can put these bones, these artifacts, because we're running out of space in the church? And he was surprised at the mayor's response. The mayor looked at him and said, mind your own effing business. Put the artifacts in the church and shut your mouth. So, these are the kind of stories I would hear all the time in Sardinia.

I mean, I could go on and on and on. I talked to one guy that was— Sai Virgilio was his name. He was 100 years old, very, very interesting guy. And Sai had been on a site when he was a young man. He told me a couple of stories, but he told me that He was working in a vineyard one time. And they were excavating in this— they weren't excavating, they were tilling the soil to plant a vineyard. And as they're tilling the soil, they start to dig up bones. And they realize these are very large skeletal remains. And they found like 20 of them, and they were laying on top of each other in a crisscross pattern. And so as soon as they started to find these bones, the owner of the vineyard said, "Stop, stop. I have to notify the authorities." So he notifies the authorities and he came back to the workers and said, "You guys have to get out of here. The authorities are coming. You have to leave now." And Sai said that everyone left, but he hid in the bushes until everyone had left. And he went back to work in the field because he said, "I needed the money and I wanted to actually get paid for the day's wage.

So I went back and I worked." And I kept tilling the field. And he said, all of a sudden, well, the owner of the field came back and he said, what are you doing here? I told you to leave. And he said, I needed the money, so I'm going to keep working. And the guy said, no, no, I'll pay you double, just get out of here. And while they're talking, the government guys pull up. And they pull up in some various vans and they come out and they start taking pictures of all the bones. And they They take pictures of the bones of these skeletal remains that are laying in these cross configurations, and then they load them all into the vans. And then they went up into the nearby nuraghe. There was a nuraghe there, one of these megalithic towers. And they were inside the nuraghe looking at something, taking pictures. And Sy said that they sealed up, like with cement, they sealed up this, this, um, tunnel, this something inside of it. And then they left. And I heard dozens of these kind of stories in Sardinia. Dozens. These people have no reason to lie to me.

I mean, most of these are old-timers. We didn't pay them. They, you know, they live out in the country. I don't know if you've ever been to Sardinia. It's like going back in time in Italy. These are very simple people who live out in the country. But as I said earlier, the bones— these giants are being found with artifacts.

Sorry to interrupt, but I'm looking at a story, but they're talking about finding skeletons there. They're calling them skeletons. They're calling them giants, but they're referring to statues.

Those are the Giants of Monte Prado. Those are, um, those are just statues of the Giants of Monte Prama.

I mean, there's news articles. It goes back to the '70s.

Yeah, those are just statues. Yeah, those are in a museum there.

But they call them skeletons is the only thing I was saying. So there's like a little bit of—

No, they're stone. They're in the museum.

I know.

They're about 7 feet tall, I think. Some people wonder if those are actually uncovered skeletons.

I saw another article here where it said like they found 2 giant skulls, but they're talking about the statues.

Yeah, those—

some people wonder if those statues actually represented the, you know, the anatomical proportions of the giants. I don't know. I don't know that that's the case. But yeah, that's about all you're going to hear if you go search.

It just seems insane that there's not a photo, something, of all these things, or that some wealthy crazy person didn't get a hold of someone and say, listen, I'll give you $10 million, get me a hand, you know, I want to put it in a glass case in my house. We know that they've done that with Egyptian stuff. Like, a lot of Egyptian artifacts have been pilfered.

Yep.

Artifacts from— a lot of artifacts from Peru.

Yes.

Central and South America. Yeah, there's a, there's a very robust black market, which is so wild.

Like, who are these people that have these things?

That's a good question. Well, I was told in Sardinia, they told me that in some cases they— the bones were confiscated. They were gathered up and thrown into vehicles and carted away. Sai told me another story where he was digging a foundation for a house, he and an associate, and they came upon a very large sarcophagus and they pried it open and he said there was a body of a very large person inside and had a black— it was wearing some sort of black fabric and there were coins. That were minted from Antoninus Pius, the Roman emperor from that time. And they reported, there was a local priest, and they told the priest that they found a body, right? Like, "We found a dead body. What do we do?" And so the priest came over and he looked down in the pit. He said, "Give me the coins." They gave him the coins. He said, "Break the bones up and distribute them in the foundation of the house." I mean, this was, you know, if you went to Sardinia today, I think you'd, you would think to yourself, okay, yeah, I can see how there's no one's taking pictures or anything over here.

This is like going way back in time in Italy, especially, um, especially back in the '40s, '50s, and '60s when most of these things happen. Now, the excavations at Sant'Anastasia happened in the late '70s, early '80s, but all these other stories are coming from the, you know, '60s, '50s, '40s. So, um, I, I mean, there was just so many people who I talked to, you know, random people would tell me as I interviewed them that, oh yeah, yeah, I was digging in my basement one time and, you know, years ago, and, and, and I dug up a hand. It was a hand, 5 fingers, and, you know, it was, it was 3 times the size of my hand. Now, 5 fingers, yeah, that's random. That could just be you know, megafauna something. I don't know how many— what a giant sloth hand looks like or whatever. And let me say this, there is no question, none, no question that a lot of the accounts that you hear about giants, not the ones associated with coins and jewelry, but a lot of the accounts that you hear about giants and the skeletons of giants, they do have prosaic explanations.

A lot of them do end up being megafauna bones, especially giant sloths and stuff like that. There was a case in Peru Actually, it was in Ecuador. This is referenced in the Chronicles of Peru, that there's a place called Santa Elena, and it's a peninsula in Ecuador. And there's various chroniclers who talk about this. And these are the chroniclers who chronicled the history of the conquest of Peru, the Pizarro and the conquistadors who defeated the Inca. They say that, you know, there was a race of giants, that there was giants came up, the natives told the conquistadors and the chroniclers that according to legend, giants came over the sea on large reed boats. And these giants were, they were very, very large. And they had red hair. And some of them were naked and some of them were dressed in, very primitive clothing. And they landed on the shores of Santa Elena, one of the places they landed, and they began to terrorize the local population. The indigenous people hated them because they were eating all of the food. I mean, the natives said that they consumed 50 times the amount of food as a regular-sized person.

And so the natives hated them. They said that the giants built these deep wells. They dug these really deep wells, which you could still see. The conquistadors said we could still see them today. They built these houses with very large blocks and huge beams of wood, which were still there when the conquistadors were writing about this in the 17th and 18th centuries. And according to legend, these giants, they were sodomites, and they didn't have any women with them. And they were basically struck down by God. And the natives have that and other legends regarding giants being destroyed by God in various ways. But it turns out that Santa Elena is one of the most important sites for megafauna bones. And there's tons of megafauna, especially giant sloths. So, you have lots of megafauna bones in Santa Elena. And I have no doubt that the the natives and the people living during that time in the aftermath of the conquest of the Inca Empire thought that those were the bones of giants.

Right, because there was no giant sloths alive at that time.

Exactly. And in some of the accounts, you can see where they're saying, and the giants, and, you know, we uncovered a giant that had a deformed body. And I thought, oh, that's probably a giant sloth or something, right? So yeah, there's a lot of that, unquestionably. And you have to be very careful as a researcher. And in the beginning, when I— this was years ago when I first started out researching this stuff— I made the mistake of just taking that story literally and believing, oh yeah, they were digging up bones of giants, Santa Elena, until I realized that that is like one of the best places in the world to find megafauna bones. So obviously you have to concede to the facts of reality. They're digging up megafauna there. However, however, there are other stories that come from the chronicles in Peru where there's no way they're talking about megafauna. And these stories come from the same chroniclers who, from which we derive, from the same text from which we derive the history of the conquest of Peru, the same guys. Guys like Bernabé Cobo and Antonio de la Calancha and Pedro Cieza de León, all of the famous chroniclers.

And there's one case in particular I find very intriguing. There's lots of them, by the way. When I was in— I lived in Peru for 10 years at some point, and then later on I went back to Peru and doing various investigations when I was looking into this, making documentaries about giants. And when I was in Peru, I was in Puno some years ago, probably back in 2015, 2016, I was in Puno. And I met with an archaeologist in Puno. His name was Edmundo de la Vega, very well-known archaeologist. And I asked him, hey, are there any accounts of giants in the historical records here? And he said, yeah, I think there's a couple accounts of giants. And I said, okay, He said, "I don't think there's many, but I think there's a couple." Okay. Well, the next morning he comes walking into my hotel in the lobby and he's got a big smile on his face and he hands me a disc. And he said, "I went, after we talked, I went into the archives." They have access to the digital archives. "And I did a word search to try and see if I could find some of these accounts of giants." He said, "I cannot believe how many references to giants there are in the Chronicles." And he handed me the disc and I opened the files and indeed there were many.

Now, some of them were in reference to Santa Elena, but some of them were much more remarkable. For example, I'll give you one example here. There was a Jesuit priest named Pablo José Arriaga who was going around Peru and he wrote a book called The Extirpation of Idolatry in Peru. I think it was 1602. And he's going around Peru with the, what are called, which were called the visitadores, who were the, these were officials, they were clergymen that were dispatched to Peru who were extirpating idolatry. These were the, they were very fair, these people, these visitadores, these official Idolatry hunters, basically, because they were brutal. And what they would do is they would go with the priests into the villages, they would find out what are the natives worshiping, and then they would destroy it and then force convert the population. And they chronicled everything, everything they found, because they had to. This was an official assignment, right? So they chronicle everything that they find. This village, they go into this village, they're worshiping this. We broke it into pieces or we burned it in the fire. And these are official records. And among these records, and this comes from, as I said, Pablo José Arriaga, but also later on Antonio de la Calancha, who is an Augustinian monk, enlarges the story.

He expands on the story using other documents, including, including, um, Ariaga's version. And the story goes that Ariaga and the visitadores, they went into the village and they were led— they inquired, "What are you worshiping? Where are your gods?" And the indigenous people of Peru, they worshiped huacas. And the huaca could be anything. It could be an idol, it could be a mountain, it could be a hill. It was just huacas. Even to this day, they call them huacas. And so they inquired, where are your huacas? And they led them to the other side of the village where there was a large cave. And they go into the cave. And when they went in there, they record that there were many dead Gentiles. And among them were two giants dressed in kumbi. And they were enshrined. Now that's very interesting.

Kumbi?

Kumbi is a very fine fabric that is, it was used exclusively by the Inca nobility. In fact, it was illegal for anyone else to wear kumbi. Only the Inca nobility could wear kumbi. It's very fine fabric, so it's very ceremonial, and it belongs by law to the noble class. So these indigenous people, they can't wear kumbi, but yet they dressed these two And it said that the bodies were well preserved, almost like mummified. They dressed these two giants in kumbi, and they were enshrined in this tomb. And so when they realized that they were worshiping these giants, these dead giants, and the natives told them that these were their ancestors, these were their progenitors, that's what they told the visitadores of idolatry. They took the bodies out of the tomb and they burned them in the village. Now, that's very interesting to me because you have two bodies, not just skeletal remains, bodies of giants, decayed with time but still quite well preserved, dressed in kumbi. This doesn't sound like a giant sloth to me. This doesn't sound like a mastodon. This is something else. And it corresponds to all the legends among the natives there in Peru regarding the existence of giants who were their progenitors.

So those are just, those are some historical details, some historical accounts that I find very intriguing.

Well, there's so many of them, that's what's weird. And there's also this very bizarre desire that people have of destroying things from the past. Yeah, we find that with— I mean, the Taliban did that, you know.

That's right.

There's, there's a bunch of different incredible archaeological sites that were destroyed by past civilizations. We just talked the other day about the Kailasa Temple in India, about how they tried to destroy that for a couple of years. They sent 1,000 people, they could barely put a dent in it.

Who was trying to destroy that?

Oh, who was it, Jamie? Do we remember?

Some, some general or something.

Who— they came upon this temple that they didn't like, that someone else had built it and someone else owned it and someone else had constructed it. You know, the Kailasa Temple that was built entirely out of stone?

Yeah, the one that was built like literally carved into the ground, into the side of the mountain.

Yeah.

Emperor— say that name. You could say it. You're really good with words. Mughal? What's his name?

Looks like Mughal to me.

I've never heard of this one. What's the second one? Aurangzeb?

I don't know.

Aurangzeb?

Aurangzeb.

Historical figure widely reported to have ordered the destruction of the Kailasa Temple in 1682. However, his mission failed because the monolithic temple was carved top-down from a single solid volcanic rock. His army could only disfigure some sculptures before giving up.

Oh, this was in 1682, yeah.

But it's just wild that people have always had this inclination to destroy old fascinating things.

Yeah, that's right. Especially you find this— what's really sad is in Central America among the Aztec, the Maya, there are many codexes of the Aztec and the Maya that were intentionally destroyed by the Catholic Church, by various agents of the Catholic Church would intentionally destroy these codexes. Could you imagine the information that was stored in those things?

Library of Alexandria. Yeah, I mean, who knows what was in there. Yeah, and they burnt that several times. Yeah, it's, um, there's the historical accounts in North America are interesting because there's actual newspaper stories from— God, was it like, I believe it's the 1800s? Well, do you know what I'm talking about?

Yeah, there are all kinds of newspaper stories about giants in the 1800s.

Newspaper stories about giant skeletons that have been discovered and excavated.

Yes.

From the mid-1800s to the early 1900s.

And somehow or another they all relate to the Smithsonian.

Most of them are associated with the mounds and the mound builders. There were thousands of mounds east of the Mississippi. I mean, people don't realize how many of these mounds there were. And these are, you know, the monumental mounds and earthworks. Some of them still stand today. Not all of them are burial mounds. You have different kinds of mounds. Some of them are effigies, some of them are platform mounds, but many of them are burial mounds. And many of them contain very prosaic things, like the bones of native people. But some of them were said to have contained some very, very interesting artifacts. And among those artifacts were the bones of giants, according to the newspaper reports.

Now—

See if you can find—

There's a lot of them from the 1800s. Yeah, I mean—

Giant, 10 feet high, 1872.

Yes. Yeah, especially in the latter part of the 1800s.

How tall was it, Jimmy?

I mean, it's just—

It's a giant over 10 feet high according to Lewis and Richard Collins' History of Kentucky.

Now the contention is, of course, that these are wildly exaggerated and that the newspapers were engaging in hyperbole. And that's true to some extent. I have no problem with that. I think that's—

They did have hoaxes.

I've brought this up before. Some of them were hoaxes.

There's a whole lot of hoaxes that were going on.

Sure, some of them were hoaxes. And then, you know, these were the periodicals in the United States at the time were very competitive.

What is that photo? Is that bullshit, that far left photo?

Yeah, that's how I—

Now, now that far left one, that one was actually— that's a disputed one. Some people believe that that one is in fact— was proven a hoax. Other people think there might be a conspiracy that in fact it wasn't a hoax because it was actually on display for a while. I don't— I don't know. I don't think there's any way to know, but so many articles during that time were discussing these astounding discoveries of the bones of giants in mounds. In fact, I don't know if you're aware, but even it appears that even Abraham Lincoln references this in some lecture notes. He was waxing poetically in some lecture notes about Niagara Falls. And he says in those notes, you can still read them today, you can pull them up and read them now, he says, the eyes of that extinct species of giants whose bones fill the mounds of America, have gazed upon Niagara as ours do now. Those are from Lincoln's lecture notes.

Really?

I believe it's 1845, the date of those notes.

Oh, I gotta read that.

Now, here's the contention, okay? This is interesting because here's the contention.

Okay.

The contention is that he was talking about mastodons and mammoths, megafauna.

Right.

That's what people say because he does mention mastodon and the mammoth later on in the lecture. In the speech. However, what they won't tell you is before he mentions that, he's talking, he's in a biblical context, and he's talking about, he references Jesus and Moses and Adam right before he references the giants whose bones are found in the mounds of America.

See?

So the eyes of that species of extinct giants whose bones filled the mounds of America have gazed upon Niagara as ours do now, contemporary with the whole race of men. Older than the first man, Niagara is strong and fresh today as 10,000 years ago. The mammoth and mastodon, now so long dead that fragments of their monstrous bones alone testify that they ever lived, have gazed upon— gazed on Niagara in that long, long time, never still for a single moment, never dried, never froze, never slept, never rested. That seems like he's talking about mastodons.

Well, it very well could be.

Talking about the thousands of miles of water that they all would have seen?

Well, he could be talking about mastodons and mammoths, but look what he references before he gets to the giants: Christ and Moses. Where is that? And Adam.

He says there's still more. It calls up an indefinite past when Columbus first sought this continent, when Christ suffered on the cross, and Moses led Israel through the Red Sea. Nay, even when Adam was made. And he's talking, you know, you know, right?

So here he's in the biblical context.

Came from the hand of his maker. Yeah, he's in this now. Nagra. Was roaring here, the eyes of that species of extinct giants whose bones filled the mounds of America. That's what's weird. Yeah, now listen, bones fill the mounds of America.

So here's the question: did— were the mounds of America filled with the bones of mastodons and giant sloths? And no, no, they weren't. Now, there have been some fragments of bones from mammoths and mastodons found in the mounds. That's true. They were— they looked to be ritual pieces that people were buried with that were used for ceremonial purposes or something like that. Maybe some of them were carved ornately, but like, people weren't digging up the skeletons of giant sloths and mastodons and mammoths in the mounds routinely. That was— it was very rare.

Right, but it seems like if you found dead giants in the mounds, that it would be more specific. You would talk about it more than just that.

I don't know.

I don't know either.

The reference is ambiguous. So, we're left to wonder, is he talking about dead giants in the biblical context, which he's clearly in a biblical context before he gets there, or is he talking about Macedonians?

And the issue is that there are giants in the Bible.

And also that when he wrote, when he penned these lecture notes, there were newspaper articles circulating in the United States announcing the discovery of the bones of giants in the mountains.

Right.

So it's up for debate. I don't know the answer.

There's got to be somebody who works at the Smithsonian that is sick of this. Yeah. There's got to be someone.

We need that guy.

There's got to be some whistleblower that just— take your fucking camera phone, get down there and film something, man. It just seems like if there really are some remnants of some of these things. And the thing that's interesting is, you know, what is the museum that John Reeves has issue with?

The National American History Museum, I think. I know it's in Manhattan. I don't know.

So my friend John Reeves, are you aware of him? He owns the The Boneyard in Alaska?

No. Okay.

So this area of Alask— John's a miner and he— Museum of Natural History. So he's a miner and he bought this land in Alaska and they're doing gold mining and they're blasting into the permafrost with hoses and they have found an enormous amount of mammoths, cave bears, animals that weren't even supposed to be living in Alaska at the time, so now they have to like reformulate their idea of what the population of this, these lands were at this time, but also a layer of like dark carbon that indicates there was some sort of an event. All of this is sub-10,000 years ago. So he's finding, I mean, he has warehouses. Wow. And this is like fully, go to the Boneyard Instagram, please. He has warehouses. Of this stuff that he's pulled out of the ground. He won't let anyone take it because the Museum of Natural History has some of this stuff from the previous owners. They have tons of it, and they would not release it to him, even though it's his property. So, this is— I mean, he's finding enormous mastodon skeletons, mammoth tusks. I mean, they find tons of them. Tons. I mean, he has warehouses.

He built a scientific research facility there, and he's like, "People can come here and study it, but I'm not letting any—" Post Malone was there. Shout out to Post. Mastodon teeth and bones. He actually gave me this. This is a mammoth tooth that they take some of these things and they, they carve artwork into them, which is very cool. The artwork is kind of fucked. It's kind of weird that they do that because it's—

but this is a mat. This is— yes, like a petrified mastodon tooth.

A molar, rather. Wow, that is really cool. Yeah. Amazing. Yeah, so this is all from his property.

So, I mean, why, why is there such a distribution of, uh, megafauna bones there?

His belief is that there was some sort of a mass extinction event that happened whatever year it was, you know, that, that coincides with the Younger Dryas Impact Theory. And he— and when circa 11,000 BC— and when he's had some of these things tested and dated, they do— they're, they're post They're around this time. And he thinks that there was some sort of a mass extinction event and the flooding led them all to be washed away into this one very particular area because it's a deep concentration of these bones, too many that seem to have died around the same time and all preserved. So it seems like because they're preserved in the permafrost that this is something that happened, was enormous event. The bodies are washed down into this one area. And because of the landscape, because the contours of the land, they, they're collected into this one area. Yeah. And it's not a big place. I think it's 4 to 6 acres that he's pulling most of these things out of. And there's several other places that he's now finding things in as well.

You know, I find really fascinating are the, the specimens that they find of mammoth and mastodon that are frozen solid. Chewing food.

Yeah. With broken legs sometimes. Right.

Yeah.

Where it's like there's some sort of an impact, some massive shockwave that kills them all instantly.

Yeah. Instantly freezes them. Yeah. And I think one of the hypotheses that I've heard is that, you know, you had referencing the Younger Dryas impact event, you had a potentially a comet or comets that were ripping through the atmosphere at such high rates of speed that they were pulling in the vacuum of space that taking that subzero temperature air and like blasting it down on the Earth. Yes. And that that air was so cold it would instantly freeze whatever was in its path. You know, as these comets are breaking through the atmosphere. I don't know if that's true, but it's very difficult to explain how you can flash freeze something like that. Right. And then in other parts of the Earth you have apparent biomass burning. So you have mastodons over here freezing —right, solid—you have other megafauna over here that were clearly swept up in a flood. You have other megafauna and other kinds of extinct plants and stuff that have evidence of burning, biomass burning. So it's like some sort of absolutely unimaginable cataclysm that struck planet Earth at some time circa 11,000 BC.

And it seems like there's a lot of physical evidence in terms of iridium and soil samples. Yeah. It seems—it's very common in space, very rare on on Earth, layers of iridium, and then the dark carbon, layers of burnt material. It seems there was incredible fires. So we were probably hit by asteroids. They also find that nuclear glass, the same stuff that they found during the Trinity explosion. They find little particles of that everywhere that seems to indicate a huge impact that happened. And, you know, this is what Randall Carlson also believes, the same timeline was what caused the melting of the ice layer over North America and created the Great Lakes. And caused the massive flooding and the land features that you see from space. If you look down from satellite imagery, it clearly looks like there was just immense amounts of water that washed over the land.

Mm-hmm. Yeah. And yeah, Randall talks a lot about the impact of those comets on the ice sheets. The Laurentide Ice Sheet, for example, 2 miles thick. Yeah. What happens when you slam a comet into a 2-mile-thick ice sheet? Right.

A comet the size of a city. Yeah.

You superheat it. Then you have all the ejecta coming off of it and landing in forests and igniting the forests.

And of course, if you have advanced civilizations at the time, which I believe they did, you have a mass extinction event. Oh, everything gets annihilated. Nothing left. There's a few people survive somewhere in the world and it takes thousands of years for them to reinvent civilization.

Especially the civilizations living on the, in the coastal areas or on the banks of rivers where a lot of civilizations are. Right. They're gone. Right. I mean, they're gone. They're gone.

And not only that, the level of the ocean rises significantly. And that's all documented fact, historically accepted. Everyone, you know, geologists, archaeologists, everyone accepts that this is something that happened. And then that the ice sheets in North America were a mile, 2 miles high, 3/4 of the entire continent covered with ice. Yeah, that's wild. Recently, I mean, in terms of like the Earth, when you're going back 11,000, 12,000 years ago, that's not a long time ago. And this whole thing covered in ice. And then you also have the almost instantaneous extinction of 65% of all North American megafauna, which is kind of crazy. Yeah. Kind of crazy. Like, what caused that?

Yeah, which some anthropologists still maintain today that that's because the indigenous people killed them. Yes, that's cute. They hunted them into extinction. That's cute. It's absolutely absurd.

With atlatls.

It's absolutely absurd.

Spears and atlatls. I mean, we don't even know if they had bows and arrows yet. Right.

It's just crazy. Clearly something catastrophic happened in the relatively recent past. Yes. And this is, as I said, it's the same with giants. You know, you have this ubiquitous testimony about giants. Well, concurrent with that, you have this ubiquitous testimony about cataclysm.

Have you seen the work that there's this Italian guy, I'll send you I'll send you the article, Jamie. There's this Italian guy that is proposing that the— I'll send it to you, Jamie— that there's a way of measuring the erosion on the outside of the pyramids that he believes indicates they are at least 10,000 years older than we believe so far. I'll send this to you, Jamie. Here, but this is, you know, obviously disputed.

That they're 10,000 years older. Super controversial, at least.

He's talking about the erosion on the granite and that there's, by studying erosion and by studying the timeline of erosion, and this is something that Ben Van Kerkwyk has talked about. When you look at the older, non-updated versions of some of the sites in Egypt where it's clear that there was original stone and then there was stone that was built on top of that.

That shows some better—

Okay, here's, so here's the article. So the heading of the article, please. So it says, "Could the Great Pyramid be far older than we thought? A new study says yes." And if you go to it down there, what he's saying is, so this is from January of 2026. Go up a little bit right there. Bigger, bigger. A paper released in January 2026, Italian engineer Alberto Donini presents an unconventional, unconventional dating approach known as the relative erosion method, which he argues may challenge the long-accepted chronology placing the construction of the Pyramid of Khufu around 2560 BC. According to Donini's calculations, erosion patterns at the pyramid's base could suggest a construction date tens of thousands of years earlier. Potentially as far back as the late Paleolithic period. The claim, if substantiated, would have far-reaching implications for the history of ancient Egypt and early civilization. Yet it also raises immediate questions about methodology, assumptions, and how such results could be interpreted within archaeological science. Well, I don't think archaeology is a science. I, I just— I think what archaeology is, is they're looking at stuff and they're guessing and they're using science. And then they're also— they have timelines that they establish that they're very reluctant to let go of.

Yeah. And we've seen this with the dating of Göbekli Tepe. We've seen this with the erosion around the, the Temple of the Sphinx. They're very reluctant.

While simultaneously disregarding the ubiquitous testimony of our ancient antecedents who say that their ancestors were far greater than them.

Look at this right here. Other points yield far higher values. Several measurements suggest erosion equivalent to 20,000 to more than 40,000 years of exposure, while the arithmetic mean of all 12 points produces a result of approximately 24,900 years before present, corresponding to roughly 22,900 BC. I mean, holy shit, if that's accurate. Yeah. And then you have also Filippo Biondi's work where they're looking at the radiotomography below the pyramids and they have these structures that go 1.2 kilometers down into the earth. Yeah. Did you see my—

I did an interview on— I made an appearance on Piers Morgan's show and Piers had on Hawi Zawas. And I didn't know that I was going to be interacting with Hawi Zawas. Zahi. Zahi. Sorry. Zahi Hawass. The other way around. I didn't know that I was going to be interacting with him. I was just told that they wanted me to come on and talk about pyramids and stuff.

But then Pierce loves a good scramble.

Yeah, he loves a squabble. So he set me up like, here's your opportunity to say whatever you want. You know, it was me and Jimmy Corsetti and some other people. Here's your opportunity to ask Zahi whatever you want. And I'm thinking to myself, I don't, I don't really have anything to ask this guy. But then it occurred to me, I actually have— me and my team are in possession of some state-of-the-art ground-penetrating radar technology that we used to great effect in Peru. And so I'm thinking about this discovery, this alleged, these alleged megastructures under the pyramids. And I'm thinking, you know, it wouldn't be that difficult. You don't have to, you don't have to detect them all the way down. You just have to verify that there's something there, right? And so I posited this to Zahi and told him, look, I've got this equipment. Would you facilitate us coming down there? And it operates off of a drone platform. So you don't have to drag it. You can fly it around the pyramid. You don't have to touch the pyramid. You just fly it in the vicinity of the pyramids and see if you can detect something.

I mean, there's no— you would do no injury to any sort of artifacts there. And he seemed like he was very open to the idea, you know, on camera and said that, basically told Piers, get your people in contact with him so that, you know, give him my information so I can reach out to him. Of course, that never happened. So, it would not be that difficult to verify that. And that's why I'm wondering, Why? You don't have to dig. Right.

Why wouldn't you want as much exploration at the most spectacular site that human beings have ever erected on the face of the earth that has a very controversial timeline? That's right. I mean, even the conventional timeline is super controversial because like, how the fuck did they do it? Even if you just accept that it's 2500 BC, okay, great. How? I mean, I don't know why it being older is more controversial because it's still the same people. The same— it's human beings that lived a long time ago. That's all we're talking about. Yeah. But why are they sticking to 2500 BC? It's because that they've always said that they know. They've always said with great certainty and from a position of authority that this is what we know. We know Khufu did this. We know this guy did this. But you don't really know. And there's also incredible amount of evidence that these guys wrote their name on everything. When they were in power, they liked to put their names on everything.

Or re-carve the head of the Sphinx.

Yeah. Well, that's definitely true.

Yeah.

It's definitely different. There's some controversy about that as well, because there's layers of stone that have different gradients, like different hardness, and they're different types of stone. And the face, they're— what the controversy is that the face is like a harder stone and it wouldn't erode as quickly. Problem with that is like the stuff that's eroded for a long period in history was covered in sand. Mm-hmm. And we know that for a fact. So there was no erosion going on during that period of time, yet it's massively more eroded than the face.

Well, I think that one of the fundamental problems that we have as West— as modern Westerners looking at this stuff is we have an inversion of the timeline of history. When we look at the timeline of history, We generally view our antecedents as like cavemen. Yes. These are very ignorant people. They're basically, you know, chimpanzees with better brains. And as we progress through the timeline of history, we're becoming increasingly more intelligent, increasingly more capable of building and of building these monuments and technology and so forth. So we see ourselves as the pinnacle of the human species. Like, we're the smartest, we're the greatest. That's not the way that the ancients viewed the antediluvian world. That's not the way that they viewed their antecedents. They see the— for them, it was the inverse. For them, they were always trying to recover the glory of the people that had come before them, the majesty of the civilization that had come before them. So, when they look back down the timeline of history, they're the dummies. And the further you go back, the more extraordinary people are.

Because they were closer to it. Right? And they all have a myth of the flood.

Yes, and of the antediluvian world in general.

And they lived in a timeline that was closer to that and more accepted because they probably had a knowledge, an understanding, at least the earliest ones, that they didn't make this. And so they probably passed that down.

Yeah, well, they— I think they inherited traditions from their ancestors about these things. You know, I mean, you have this idea of a Golden Age among the ancients. Golden Age, meaning there was a time on Earth— the Greeks coined that particular phrase, the Golden Age. The Egyptians, the ancient Egyptians called it Zep Tepi, the first time. There was a time on Earth when the gods descended to the Earth and cohabited with human species, and to some extent, commingled with the human species. And that it was during this time that knowledge was transferred and that great cities were built. This is, of course, this is where the myth of Atlantis falls into this category. And then their world was suddenly and catastrophically destroyed. And what we've been doing since that destruction, in the mind of the ancients, what they've been doing since that destruction was attempting to rebuild, to rediscover the lost knowledge from that age, to recover it and to try and emulate their superior ancestors. That's what you see everywhere, everywhere around the world. Doesn't matter if you're in Egypt or if you're in Peru, you see the same sort of thing. I mean, the same thing applies, by the way, for the megaliths in Peru.

I don't know if you've— have you been to Peru? No. Some of the most astounding megaliths that you'll see anywhere in the world. I referenced earlier the walls of Sacsayhuaman, absolutely phenomenal, cyclopean architecture. And of course, the construction of those walls is attributed to the Inca. So if you ask archaeologists in Peru, who built Sacsayhuaman, who built Machu Picchu, who built Ollantaytambo, it's always going to be the same answer: the Inca. The Inca built it. Now, the problem is there's no record of the Inca building those walls. And if you ask the ancient Quechua people, if you ask actually the Quechua people, the Quechua people who continue in their ancient traditions, the ones who are there today, And they still wear their typical vestments and they still speak Quechua. If you talk to them and you ask them, who built the walls of Sacsayhuaman, specifically Sacsayhuaman, they'll tell you a race of giants. This goes back to those, you know, our progenitors, the giants. The giants built Sacsayhuaman. If you go up to Tiwanaku, Lake Titicaca, and you ask the Aymara people, who built Tiwanaku, which is on the other side at Lake Titicaca in Bolivia, who built those megalithic edifices?

The giants, our progenitors. That's what they'll tell you. So, and I don't necessarily think that giants built all this stuff. I don't necessarily think that at all. I just think that there's, everyone is acknowledging that something extraordinary happened in the past. That our antecedents were much more impressive than we've given them credit for. I mean our antediluvian antecedents. And that in many cases, like you said, there's no inscriptions on megalithic stuff anywhere. You go to Machu Picchu and it's apparent that in Sacsayhuaman, Machu Picchu, Ollantaytambo, and other places in Peru, it's apparent that the Incas certainly built on top. They took advantage of these megalithic foundations, right? Anyone would. I mean, if you're going to build an edifice, you would use the superior foundations here of massive stones and you'd build on top and you'd try to emulate that style of building because it's anti-seismic for one thing. So Machu Picchu, it's evident to me and I think anybody who walks around that complex You can see, and we have to keep in mind that much of Machu Picchu today is a reconstruction. It's an archaeological reconstruction except for the foundations. We have pictures from Hiram Bingham, original pictures in black and white of what Machu Picchu looked like when he discovered it accidentally.

And what's there? The megalithic foundations are there. That's what's there, the megalithic foundations. And you see, and the Inca built on top of those foundations. And that's what a lot of the archaeological reconstruction today reflects. So if you walk around in Machu Picchu, I remember I've been there several times filming and doing different things and I remember one time I was with my colleague Anselm P. Rambler and we had a guide with us and he was an older gentleman, very, very knowledgeable and he was one of their official guides in Machu Picchu. And we're walking around and he's telling us different things about the Inca and how they did certain things and certainly the Inca built a lot up there. There's no question about it. The Inca were impressive. I'm not taking anything away from the Inca. But if you look at some of the edifices at Machu Picchu, you can see these magnificent megalithic foundations, big stones, polygonal, fit together so tightly you couldn't pass a butter knife between the joints. And then you have on top what sometimes people describe as Inca slop on top, where it's like they're kind of trying to match the style of below, but it's not as precise, it's not as fine.

And you can see the clear delineation, clear delineation between the megalithic and then what the Inca are doing and then also the archaeological reconstruction. And I remember asking this guide of ours, I pointed across the courtyard to some beautiful, this exquisite polygonal foundational wall with just sort of crude Inca stuff on top. And I said, why are there two different styles? Here? Why do you see this— these large megalithic blocks fit together so precisely, and then you have this other style? And, you know, keeping in mind the archaeological reconstruction, but there was enough of the site there that they could model what they did based on what the Inca had done. And he said, because they liked the way it looked. That was the answer. They liked the way it looked. And I said, you can't really believe that. I mean, you're not an idiot, right? They didn't do that because they liked the way it looked. The reason why there's an inferior mode of building on top of those megalithic foundations is because they didn't know how to do that. They did the best they could, and they were very good, right, attempting to adopt the Cyclopean style.

They were good, the Inca. The only reason you would do that, the only reason you would put inferior architecture on top of superior foundations is because you don't know how to do that.

Yeah, well, it's also the— just the sheer size of these blocks. It just gives you so many questions because it's not like you could recreate that with whatever the Inca had. That's what's confusing. In order to move those stones into position and then put them and construct them in a way that it appears like they've been melted into place, you're— like, how? How are you moving them? How are you placing them?

What are you using? You should go to Ollantaytambo. Okay, so you go to Ollantaytambo, which is in between Cusco and Machu Picchu. You have to go to Ollantaytambo to get on the train to go up to Machu Picchu. It's the only way to get there. Ojantaytambo has some of the most exquisite megalithic architecture on planet Earth. It is so beautiful the way that they were able to— and it's large megalithic blocks, and there's two different styles represented there. You have the polygonal, like at the walls of Sacsayhuaman in Peru, and then you have the interlocking blocks like at Tiwanaku. Both of those styles are there. And there's this one spot at Ojantaytambo that I love to take people to because you're going up the stairs And the wall curves. As you're going up the stairs, the wall curves. Now, if you and I were building a wall today, even if we were like the best— we were the best masons in the world and we're building a wall for, I don't know, for some billionaire in his house, we would interlock the blocks in the corner like everyone does everywhere, right? Or if it's cement, you could take cement because cement is pliable and you could make whatever shape you want..

But if it's blocks, you're gonna interlock the blocks into that corner or do something like that. You know what they did at Ojantaytambo? They curved the stone into the wall. They curved the stone. So they took the stone— Is there images of that that we could look at? Yeah, you could pull up stones like that. And they cut the stone so that it curved into the corner. Like, who would do that? That is so intricate. That is so difficult. And by what technology? By what technology? But here's the interesting thing. You find that same the same fingerprints of these builders all over the world. You find the same thing in, in Egypt. They curve stones. Some of those stones are curved into the corners. And other places where there's megalithic constructions. I mean, these guys, there is a, there was like a ubiquitous knowledge of masonry in the world. The fingerprint is everywhere, everywhere you go. And it's interesting because one of the things I was trying to convince this guide of ours at Machu Picchu this one time of was, look, here's a problem. You guys come over to Machu Picchu. So here it is.

So yeah, that's Sacsayhuaman. Is that what you're talking about though? No. Curved stone? No, I'm talking about a stone that's curved. See that there where it says Inca stonework?

In the middle. Yeah, right there.

Yeah, Sacsayhuaman, they'll take a large stone. That one looks like it's curved too in the wall, but that's not a very large stone. Sacsayhuaman, they'll take a large stone and they'll curve it into the wall. It's— I don't see Sacsayhuaman in any of those. You have to type— I'm sorry, not Sacsayhuaman, Ollantaytambo. Ollantaytambo. How do you spell it? O-L-L-A-N-T, O-L-L-A-N-T-A-Y-T-A-M-B-O.

O-L-L-A-N-T-A-Y-T-A-M-B-O. Never gonna guess that.

Whoa, that's, uh, Ojantek Tambo. And I'm looking for that curved, uh—

what is the nubs? What are the nubs? I don't know.

There's another fingerprint of this architecture everywhere. No one really knows. I mean, there's a lot of interesting theories out there, but I think at the end of the day, nobody has any idea what the heck those nubs are. Those things are so spectacular.

Look at that. Look at the wall.

Look at the— look at the wall right there. At Ojantaytambo.

You make that look—

Look how exquisite that is. That's nuts. I mean, it is just absolutely astonishing.

And the weight, the weight of these things. Yeah. And the fact that they're carved and placed in a way that would absorb the energy of earthquakes.

Yes, they're anti-seismic. Yeah. They're anti-seismic. That's why they do it that way. Which is— Now, I want you to think about this.

Incredible technology.

Think about this, okay? So you are, you are with Francisco Pizarro. You're a conquistador in the 15— 1533 or 1532 or 1534, I can't remember exactly when he landed. And you're walking through Peru and you, you, you see this, you see this kind of architecture as you're conquering Peru. You overthrow the Inca and then you go to build, which they did, They overthrew the Inca, the capital city of Cusco. They go to build their cathedrals. They built lots of cathedrals and palaces for themselves, right? So you have the Inca palaces and cathedrals. They took the blocks from Sacsayhuaman. They took the upper layer blocks and they used them to build their cathedral. Okay, there's a couple cathedrals downtown Cusco that were built with the blocks from Sacsayhuaman. They didn't build it like that. They didn't build their cathedrals like that. They took those blocks and they just put them together with mortar like they do in Europe. So here's a question that I always ask people who think that, you know, the Inca were doing that. If you were an architect at that time, why in the world wouldn't you have forced the Inca to teach you that style so that you could build your cathedral?

I mean, you would be the greatest architect in the world, right? Right. You could build— you could build the most magnificent cathedrals in the world in the Cyclopean style, if you understood how they did it. So if the Inca were the ones who built it, why didn't they force the Inca to teach them how to build in this style?

Just look at that. That is so crazy.

That's clearly sanded down, right?

Well, those are in the process. That's Ollantaytambo. That's the Temple of the Sun at the summit.

I'm just like, the faces of it look so smooth. That's Ollantaytambo.

This was in the process of being constructed at the top when it halted. You can see the blocks there. Those blocks that you were just looking at were in the process of—

So something happened.

Yes. Those blocks were in the process of being transported, and they were being worked right there. They were being prepped to be incorporated into the walls. And it just halted. And the conventional explanation is that it halted because the Spanish arrived. That's what halted the work. But I think what halted the work was cataclysm, personally. I think that's what halted the work. Something like a Younger Dryas impact. What's that, Jimmy?

See right here, it looks like the face of the wall, you know, like it looks like it's all uniform and fits together right. But if that right here is part of the wall—

Yeah, there's filler in the backing.

Then that's like—

Yeah, they have filler in the backing. It's like a facade. Yeah, some of them, the blocks are— it's just gigantic blocks. Others, it's like the facade is exquisite and— Like what we have here.

Tightly fitted. Like brick, you know, that brick in the back, the background used to just be brick at the other studio.

Uh-huh. Kind of like that, right? Right. I know what you're saying. Yeah, but except these are enormous.

Sure, sure, sure, sure, sure. Or yeah, I don't know.

Yeah, I mean, hardened in place and sanded down.

So, oh, there was a point of the guy standing— there was a picture of the guy standing in the corner. There was a guy standing in the corner that I was referencing earlier. You just had— there it is right there, that guy. No, the one below it. I don't think you can see the corner very well.

That right there, the middle.

You see the guy in the blue standing there?

Yeah, yeah, right there.

Behind him, there's this— you can see how the stone below him, it's curved into the corner. That's not a separate stone. That's— it's literally curved into that corner. It's, it's, it's just so mind-bending.

The nubs are weird. They are weird. And it's weird that they occur all over the world. And it's like, it speaks almost to like, is that how they carried them and placed them? Is that a part of the construction? Is that something about how they made them that they left these nubs? Like, what is— what are the nubs?

No one No one has any idea what the nubs are.

That seems so weird that we have no answer to a feature that occurs over and over again in all this megalithic architecture. Everywhere, all over the world.

All over the world.

Yeah. They keep showing these three. Those, they kind of look like the nubs, but they look way different than—

Yeah, they're a lot rougher. See those smaller pieces of stone there in between the large blocks? That's an anti-seismic property. That's a technology that they use so that the rocks can shift and move and not crumble. That's— it's ingenious. And like I said, you have two different styles here at Ollantaytambo. You have the polygonal and then you have the interlocking rectangular. Those are two different styles in the same site. That's one of the things that makes Ollantaytambo fascinating. And that rectangular interlocking style comes from Tiwanaku, which is another amazing megalithic site in Bolivia. Yeah.

What's interesting is when you combine all these sites all over the world and you have all these questions that are very similar, like how, how did they do this? Why is this stuff the oldest stuff? Why is this stuff the bottom stuff? Why is the base of it the most spectacular construction? And why does it seem like more primitive stuff is on top of that?

Because they like the way it looked.

Yeah. But it's the same question over and over again. And the reluctance to propose that perhaps the oldest stuff is more complicated because the civilization was more complex. That's it. That's what they're unwilling to— That's it. They're unwilling to open up that door, but that door is the only door that makes any sense.

Not only was the civilization complex, the knowledge was universal. That's a problem.

That is a problem.

The knowledge was universal.

Because that means you're talking about a seafaring, traveling civilization.

You're talking about something that's a lot more impressive than cavemen, right? Right.

So especially if this guy, this Italian guy, is right in terms of his— because 20,000 BC, we're supposed to be just brutes. Mm-hmm. Oh yeah, cavemen. Skin-wearing. Yeah, yeah, we're wearing animal skins. Yeah, we have spears. You're a chimpanzee with a better brain. Yeah, back then.

Yeah. And as I said before, you know, You look at that kind of architecture and you and I, were we to encounter the Inca, go back in time in the late 1500s, the Inca are still around. The builders, the alleged builders of these monuments, I mean, they were building Ollantaytambo, right? When you arrived, they quit building. Why did the Spanish architects not incorporate any of that into their buildings. Right.

Why did they not learn the techniques?

That's superior technology. That's anti-seismic. And the point is illustrated because in Cusco they built their cathedrals, right? They knocked down the palaces of the Inca and they raised the cathedrals in Cusco. And guess what happens? You get a big earthquake, the cathedrals crumble to the ground. Except for their megalithic foundations, which remain unmoved. Earthquake comes, cathedrals fall, the walls of Sacsayhuaman stand. And it's happened various times throughout history. Who, what architect would not have taken advantage of that knowledge had it been available to them during the time of the Inca? Yeah. I mean, like I said, you could build the most magnificent cathedrals on planet Earth and you could make the Inca build it for you. And now you can say that the Inca refused, would have refused to pass this knowledge on. Okay, maybe. I mean, there was a society within the Inca, you know, they were taught by the Grandes Almaltas, they called them, who were the great teachers of the Inca nobility and the keepers of the secrets and so forth. They had, the Inca didn't even have a written language. They used quipus. Quipus was a, it's a system of ropes and knots, of string and knots.

They didn't even have a written language. So it's absolutely extraordinary, and there is— nobody can give me an adequate explanation as to why such amazing knowledge is just forgotten. I mean, would we forget how to build computers? No. So, so why would we just forget how to build megaliths? Why? That's not something you forget. These things don't fall down in earthquakes. That's something you pass on carefully from one generation to the next, unless, like our ancient antecedents tell us, there was a cataclysm that rocked the earth and eliminated the civilizations that were inhabiting the earth. That's, to me, that, that, that's the best explanation.

Well, it's certainly the most logical explanation if you weren't attached to a timeline, if you didn't have this timeline that these archaeologists insist upon. Then you would say, okay, clearly we know that a cataclysm occurred. Clearly we know the Younger Dryas Impact Theory is accepted, and especially now.

So— becoming more so over time. More likely. Yeah.

Much more likely that there was something going on that we don't totally understand tens of thousands of years ago.

Yeah. I mean, I think we would do very well to listen to take serious the myths and legends.

Well, it's also weird that like the Aztecs, like I used to think that the Aztecs created those temples and those pyramids. And then I found out fairly recently that they never even claimed to have. No. They say they found them and that these were the birthplace of the gods.

Yes. See, that's what I was going to say about Machu Picchu. So You know what the name of Machu Picchu is? It's not Machu Picchu. In Quechua, it's Ijampu. And Ijampu means the abode of the gods or the dwelling of the gods. This is how they viewed the megaliths. I mean, this is how if we were primitive people coming upon these megalithic structures, what would we think? The gods must have done this. The gods lived here. And so then we would rebuild. We would reinhabit the habitation of the gods.

Yeah, why would you live anywhere else if you could live there? Right.

And it would be the nobility.

It's the dopest architecture you've ever imagined. Exactly. Why would you let some idiots take it over? You wouldn't. Give me that. That's mine. You wouldn't. Yeah, of course. You know, there's also the weirdness of Peru, like the Nazca Lines. Like, what the— what the hell is all that about?

I don't know. I don't know. That's a great mystery.

There's a lot of weirdness to Peru. There's a lot of weirdness. And how about those— the ancient tapestries that show those three-fingered, three-toed, big-headed people with big eyes? And it's ubiquitous. And these are 1,000 years old. Mm-hmm.

Yeah. Then you have the Paracas culture with those massive elongated skulls. Right. In the Paracas culture, by the way, you know, people see these elongated skulls online. I was in— I've been in Paracas a lot. I've done a lot of research down there on the Paracas culture and other things. Made some interesting discoveries, by the way, with our drone, with our GPR unit. But you see these images online, you think that the Paracas people, their, their skulls are so large and elongated, you think they're— these must have been big people, right? That's what it looks like. No, they were tiny. They were really little. They were bizarre. Their, their morph— the morphology of their body was different than ours.

Tiny with big heads?

Yes, the Paracas people were very small and they had a proclivity to live in, in underground. They had subterranean dwellings. And their eye sockets of some of these elongated skulls, the eye sockets are like 25% larger, the orbital socket. So they— big eyes, elongated skull, very diminutive people, in some cases living underground.

But I've heard people have theories about Neanderthals, that Neanderthals with larger eye sockets as well might have been able to see at night. Like the way deer can and— yep, the way, you know, other animals that are nocturnal can see at night, that they have a different kind of eye structure. Obviously we don't know what the eye structure was, but if you have a significantly larger eye socket and a significantly larger eyeball, it seems— I mean, we know that nocturnal vision exists in cats and exists in a bunch of different animals, but the idea of it existing in primates we've, you know, kind of dismissed that. Mm-hmm.

Yeah, I mean, a bigger eye gathers more light. Yeah. So it's a nocturnal feature.

Only that we have no idea what the soft tissue structure of their eyes was like.

No. No. Now, granted, for all the skeptics out there, yes, many of the elongated skulls in Peru and other places around the world are the result of cranial deformation. So yes, they were deforming their skulls with headboarding, cradle headboarding and binding and so forth. There's evidence of that, and you can see the evidence when you're there if you know what you're looking for on the skulls. But I don't believe that that explains all of the elongated skulls, not just in Peru, other parts of the world, but especially in Peru. There are some examples of elongated skulls that, I mean, look like a genetic alteration. Is the best way I can say it. So there's a— and you can pull this up, Jamie, if you can find it. There's a mummy. I'm trying to think of the name of the museum where it's housed. I think it's the San Marcos Museum in Lima. There's a mummy, the first mummy that was discovered by Julio Tello. Julio Tello, or one of the first, if not the first. Julio Tello was the eminent archaeologist that discovered the Paracas culture. And he's like their greatest archaeologist in Peru, was a phenomenal archaeologist, and he discovered all kinds of things about the Paracas culture.

And he dug up this mummy, and it is the most bizarre mummy I've ever seen in my life. It has a massive elongated skull. Massive. We showed a few of those the other day when Cassie Coppersmith was on.

We showed a few of these ones that don't have the sagittal suture. They're weird. Like, just the actual structure of the skull is different.

But this one has the skin on it, except for part of the face is gone. But it's got the skin on it. So you can actually see what this skull looked like with the skin on it. And then the morphology of the body is just weird. I mean, I think it's in the museum of— if I recall, the Museum of San Marcos in Lima. So these are— And how tall were these things? Oh, they were small. I mean, we're talking 4 foot tall. Wow.

These guys were little. Giant heads and 4 feet tall.

Yeah, they're little. Everyone thinks they were big. No, no, they were little. Some of them, I mean, I think they were 4 and a half, maybe average 4 to 4 and a half feet tall, somewhere in there. They were very small, um, maybe from 4 to 5 feet tall. I don't remember, but they're significantly— they're, they're very small. They're diminutive people. Tell me which one it is.

I don't know, I've never seen one with skin on it. That one's nuts.

There, the one that, uh, Brian Forrester's looking at right here, right there. Yeah, that run right there is just absolutely bizarre. When you look at— take a look at the— look at how tall that forehead is on that. There's skin on there, very well preserved. And if you look around the back, you can't see it here in this image, but if you look around the back side of it, the neck is very bizarre. It's sort of— it's a curved— that is so weird. I mean, imagine coming upon somebody here in Austin that has a skull like that. There might be a few of them here, right?

And that— I mean, that does not look like cranial deformation. That looks like a totally different kind of head.

It looks like a genetic anomaly.

Uh, what is that one in the middle? Yeah, what is that one? Jeez.

Yeah, there's all kinds of very interesting specimens like that. And as you said, Peru's a very, very strange place.

The one on the far left is the craziest one to me. That's a Chongo skull.

That one was discovered at the Chongos necropolis.

Like, what the hell is that? I mean, just the volume of the brain is so much larger than a human being's.

That picture might be elongated. You know, someone might have altered that picture. It is very impressive. That one might be elongated. Um, the picture, I mean.

Right, that's more like it. But the skull—

the— these skulls, many of these skulls, that's in the Museum of Ica and the city of Ica in Peru.

That's absolutely insane. These skulls—

the, the Chongos skull was taken from the Chongos necropolis. If you go over to the Chongos necropolis today, which is out in the desert, you see these things sticking out of the ground, and they got red hair, auburn hair. And we were, we were over there with our with our crew. And there's a pyramid there, but it's an adobe pyramid. And it's called the Chongos Pyramid. And nobody really goes to this area because it's sort of off the beaten path. It's not well known. We were actually working in an area further down the road because at the time, we were looking for treasure. We were filming a like a TV show, looking for treasure. And there was this pond that has a very interesting UFO story attached to it further up the road. And so we were working up there. But every day when we drive by the pyramid, the Chongos Pyramid, and it's an adobe pyramid, so it's not super impressive. It's made of large adobe blocks. But it was a large urban center. It was— some people think it was the capital of the Paracas culture. Very large urban center. And it was a necropolis.

There's tons of remains. And the elongated skull, some of these Paracas people, the nobility for sure, they were buried in burial bundles. And they're in the fetal position. And these burial bundles are— they're usually layers of fabric. And there's various items in there. And they're just under the surface of the sand. They're right there. And you get a lot of grave robbers, huaqueros, who go in there and steal all kinds of artifacts and stuff. But we're driving by, I looked at the pyramid and I thought, I had this intuition, there's a tunnel under that pyramid. There's a tunnel system under that pyramid. I don't know why, I just had this intuition. So we decided to go over there one day and fly our drone GPR drone around the pyramid, and we did a— we did an extensive run around that pyramid. We did like a cross-configuration with the drone to make sure that we get a good reading, and we found two massive artificial tunnels under the pyramid that intersect 100 feet below that pyramid. Matt, you could drive a semi-truck through them, and we don't know how far they go, but they go. And we actually spent some time trying to find a way into them.

We couldn't. We ran out of time. But it's remarkable because Julio Tejo remarks in his writing about the Paracas culture that the Paracas people seem to have an affinity for living under the ground. They had subterranean dwellings. And I've explored some of these subterranean dwellings out in the Paracas Reserve. And they're really cool because they— you'll see like these hills, they look like longhouses that are buried in the ground. So you see like this elongated hill, and really what it is, is it's whale bones. They use like the vertebrae of whale. So you got whale bones, and then they would pack on top all kinds of— they'd pack on earth, but then they would also add in organic material, and it would create like an insulating effect and heat the interior. But they were subterranean. So what you see are the roofs of the dwellings, and then they went down into the ground, and there were tunnels, and there was all kinds of stuff. This is where these weird people with the elongated skulls were living. It's just absolutely bizarre.

How old are these mummies?

I think the Paracas culture— oh geez, it goes back maybe to— I don't remember, 200 BC or something like that. I can't remember. Maybe not that far back. I really don't remember. They're— that can't be accurate. I think it goes back to definitely to the 1st century AD. I don't remember off the top of my head how the Paracas culture— So the question is, what happened? Where'd those people go? That's the question. I mean, the— I think that the prevailing theory is that they became the Nazca people. That they didn't go anywhere. That essentially the Nazca people were the Paracas people. Like they interbred? No, that the culture just sort of migrated and became the Nazca people. So what happened to those genetic features? Well, there are some among the Nazca, but not as much as among the Paracas. Others think that the Paracas, they just disappeared, like they were either exterminated or— there's, you know, there's multiple theories. But there's no question that they were bizarre. Bizarre. And of course—

And there's physical evidence of this, like we're talking about the the mummies before— excuse me, the giants before— and we, you know, like, it's just stories. This is actual physical evidence. You mean the elongated skulls?

Yeah. Oh yeah, they're everywhere down there. Now granted, as I said before, many of them are the result— many of them are the result of cranial deformation.

But what about these motherfuckers? I don't know. They're not all elongated. I mean, yeah, how do you elongate that? You got a balloon in someone's head?

I've seen some really big heart-shaped heads.

That is so— in Peru, meeting that guy. I would just imagine—

That's small compared to some ones I've seen. Like some of the ones I've seen like look like a heart, really big. And actually that particular skull was exceptionally large. The one I saw that looked like a heart. Yeah, so just keep in mind, yes, cranial deformation is what— What, Jamie?

It says that these two in the front left row are from the billabate. And now I don't know what the hell that means.

Billabate? Yeah, that's what the picture says. What does that mean? Do you know what that means?

No. Yeah, it says, "These skulls from the front are from the Billow Bait." Bro. It's italicized. They are Billow Bait.

I don't know what they mean.

Look at that one on the left in the middle. Those are nuts. That is just— imagine meeting that cat.

And here's the other question. Look at the size of his eyes. Here's the other question, though. Why bind the head? Right. And this is all over, as you know, all over the world. They do it in Africa. They do it all— Native Americans, the Flathead tribe up in Montana, They're called the Flathead because they would cradleboard their young and they get these flat— they would have these very distinct skulls. So, why? Why are these cultures doing— they're emulating something. Yeah. Who or what are they emulating? That's the question. And of course you have in ancient Egypt, you have, you know, figures with elongated skulls like Nefertiti and her daughters. Who are depicted with very pronounced elongated skulls. Now, is that the— is that just the result of cradle headboarding? Probably. I don't know. But why do that?

Well, the problem is some of these skulls have actual larger volume than a human skull.

That's true. Some of them do. That's where it gets really weird. That's true.

So if you have 20%, 30%, even 40% more volume, which is like, okay, 40% more brain is nuts. What does that mean?

There's a slight explanation for what we were just looking up, and that was— what is the— I got to do with male and female.

So it says bi— bi— bilobate, that thing you were talking about. Tubular erect was the most common among both sexes. Bilobate skulls were observed at a much higher rate in female skulls. This association with sex is evidenced in some Paracas ceramics where men and women are depicted with distinctly tubular, erect, or biobait heads respectively.

And then it even goes into this.

So the biobait is then the heart-shaped— fucking weird bending. It is weird. It is extremely weird. And then of course you have those, you know, the alleged alien mummies down there.

Yeah, what do you think about those? Because there's a lot of people now that are saying that those are elaborate hoaxes.

I went down to Peru. I was invited to go down there, um, by, uh, Dr. Roger Zúñiga, or Professor Roger Zúñiga. Go down and look at the specimens that they have at the Eco Museum. They have 4 specimens at the Eco Museum. The most impressive specimen that they have there is called Maria, and Maria is in the fetal position. She's one of the larger mummies. Then they have a few other ones. They have 2 of the small ones, the ones that Jaime Maussan famously, you know, revealed over there in Mexico during that thing that he did over there, that press thing. And then you have one that's called Wawita, which seems to be like some kind of a combination of different things. And so I went down there to the university and walked up to these things. And at first, I have to say, my first impression of Maria, I didn't really care about the little ones. I never believed that the little ones were ever—

Right, the little ones look squirrely.

Yeah, I never believed that they were living, organic beings. They're very rigid. Yeah, they're very rigid. I don't think that, you know, like their morphology really could have worked in the real world.

Like Monsterrat, like that one.

Monsterrat and, and Maria, and there's a bunch of them. Those are very compelling when you, when you're standing next to them looking at them. They were compelling. So I looked at the mummies and then I interviewed Roger Zuniga, and he's very, very convinced that they're 100% real. Sincerely. I mean, I like Professor Zúñiga, and he really is convinced. I don't think he's not trying to perpetrate some kind of a hoax, and neither is anybody at the University of Ica. There's a good faith effort going on there to try and investigate this and continually do testing, and they're— it's an open field. Have they done genetic testing? Yeah, they've done all kinds of testing. So what do they find? Here's the problem: there's been a lot of testing done, but, but I don't think the interpretation of the data has been competent. Um, and so initially I was pretty impressed. I thought it was more likely than not— I even said this on the Michael Knowles show— that it was more likely than not in my mind that the, the larger mummies like Maria were real. But I've since reversed that position. I think it's more likely than not that all of them are a hoax.

That's my personal opinion. And this is a hot topic, you know, like on X and stuff. There's a lot of people who are absolutely sincerely convinced that these things are real. The problem is that this entire thing started with a, with a grave robber, a very shady individual. And the very first mummies that were brought forward were hoaxes, were fake. That's how it started. And, you know, this is a whole— it's a whole saga we don't have to get into, but it started with fakes. It started with a hoax, and then they, you know, then allegedly they started to produce the real ones. And I just have a hard time believing that this isn't an elaborate hoax. Now, I've talked to some of the individuals who've done some of the scientific work on these. They don't They don't want me to mention their names or anything. They're trying to just sort of stay neutral. They don't want the press. And they also doubt that they're real. They think they're really, really elaborate hoaxes. And I know that a lot of money has exchanged hands in regard to these things. Maria was up for sale for $1 million at one point.

And I mean, if you're a proven grave robber, $1 million It's like a billion dollars. I mean, um, so that's, to me, that's, uh, can we see what the Marian one looks like? That's not— that casts a lot of shade on the whole thing for me. Now, I can't say scientifically the DNA data, this, that, the other, but there's a lot of debate going back and forth on this thing.

Well, I think one of the problems is anatomists, uh, experts in anatomy, have looked at the structure of the feet Yes, in the hands. And they— they— it doesn't seem to jive with what they understand about the structure of feet. That's true, that the bones are not in the proper position, they're not the proper size, they don't— it doesn't look like it makes sense. But damn, that's amazing. That's Maria. Like, here's the thing, if it is a hoax, like, what an amazing job they did.

Yeah, maybe, maybe the greatest hoax ever perpetrated in the history of archaeology. Like, who did it?

And like, what what talent this person has. There's a new note because this website was—

this is the tridactyls.org. It got updated. There's a little note that popped up. It says they have ongoing research that just got updated. This is a great website.

Uh, what is the ongoing research?

They're just—

there's more videos down here than Maria.

Might be Mario. Yeah, Mario. They call him Mario now.

It's a dude. Yeah, maybe he's non-binary.

A bunch more data down here. I don't know what all this stuff is interesting. Much more data.

That's a great resource there. So it's tridactyls.org.

Tridactyls. Um, go to the images of it again. Go down like right there. So this, uh, okay, this is a 3D scan. Yeah, these are all scans.

These are videos of the scans.

Fucking weird, man. Look at the length also of the fingers and the toes. But you think that's a hoax?

People said it wouldn't work.

You know, I would just say, Jamie, people said that like the—

you can't grab stuff. There's pictures down here they have of people trying to— now where was it— trying to like grab stuff with, uh, I might have been looking at different— yeah, I was looking at this. These are the fingers that you couldn't bend. They wouldn't bend or something like that. It's hard to— like this person trying to grab stuff with long fingers without bendable, you know, appendages, I guess.

Well, we're assuming that they had to grab things.

Well, what would you have fingers for?

Well, maybe they put them on a spaceship. That's how they pilot it. Maybe they've gone past the idea of picking things up. Maybe they lift things with their mind. Maybe that's how they move the blocks into place.

I don't know. I'm more convinced than not that they're a hoax. I don't—

I can't say definitively. Yeah, I would lean in that direction because I want them to be real. And the problem— but also, whoever did hoax them, like Monstruo, whoever hoaxed that, like, what an amazing job you guys did. And also, there's some of them that have weird implants in their heads.

They have metal implants. Yeah. And the one— a couple of them have them in the hand, others have them in the forehead. Very weird stuff. Some of them have fetuses, apparently, although that's— there's some dispute about that. They say the fetuses look like, you know, that they look the same as the adults, which would be remarkable if true. But that's disputed. Everything's disputed. Right. There's, I mean, there's a factional battle here between the believers and the naysayers. Right. And they're both looking at the same data, interpreting it differently. So that's why I just sort of stand back and say, I don't know. I mean, I can tell you how it started. It started with grave robbers, very seedy people. And it started the initial ones were not real. I know that because I know, um, the individuals who were involved in that whole thing. So just that alone.

Yeah, just that alone. But then how did they make the skin? How did they cover it? How did they make it look like that?

They're really good. Yeah, I mean, you know, if you were selling these things for hundreds of thousands, if you're making $100,000 on just $100,000 on one of these mummies and you're a poor grave robber You would do anything, take whatever time it— whatever it took to produce one of these to sell it to make $100,000.

But haven't they aged them, like, and they're really old?

They harvest the pieces from the graves. Okay. From the Nazca, Paracas graves.

So they construct this somehow from really old skeletons, pieced it together.

That's the allegation, and also from old llamas and stuff like that.

Yeah, one of the other weird things about these elongated heads is that they have— where it connects to the spine is in a different position than a human skull.

Yes, there is some indication of that. Um, that's why I was pointing out on that, the one that with the skin on it, there is a very interesting morphology with it, with it, of the neck where it connects into the spinal cord. Now, I'm not an expert on anatomy. I don't know. All I can look at it and say is That's freaking weird. I mean, really, really weird. And all I— and I mean, I always just remind people, just, you can argue about all the data all day long, but if one of those people walked into this room right now, right, it wouldn't just be a little weird, right? It would be— it would be utterly bizarre. Yeah.

And an actual real human mummy, or whatever it is, mummy, if that was alive today, it would freak you out.

Yeah. Larger orbital sockets, very small, extremely elongated head. Yeah, it would freak you out.

It just makes you wonder, like, what was the world like back then? What were these people like? Was there a separate branch of the human species?

I don't know. I think I'm pretty sure now I'm recalling the date, 2000, 2500 BC, somewhere around there is where the Prakas culture goes back to. And then it, I think it existed until 700 AD. I'm Not sure that those numbers are accurate, but that's what I remember. Yeah, there's a lot of weird stuff in Peru.

A lot of weird stuff in just ancient history in particular. What do you make of like things like Zep Tepi and the Sumerian Kings List where you, you go back in time and you have these incredible ages of some of these rulers that ruled for thousands of years?

Well, what's really interesting is that if you overlay the Sumerian Kings List with the list of patriarchs, pre-flood patriarchs in Genesis 5, it's like a one-to-one match. So I'm not convinced that— I think that the Sumerian Kings List is— the ages is mythological. I don't think that they were ruling for thousands and thousands of years. I, like I said, I see this very interesting overlay over the, over the Genesis 6 genealogy. These are the patriarchs from Adam to Noah. And specifically, I mean, these are the patriarchs who lived before the flood. The flood came in the time of Noah. And, you know, there's a lot of debate right now, especially online, and I think you've had people here on your show as well, that talk about the Sumerian story being the oldest story and being our sort of the original story of the flood and of the antediluvian world. But I actually, I have a different view of that. I think actually the oldest story is the story of Enoch, is the Enochian story. I think that's the original story. And maybe some of this strangeness, maybe some of the bizarre things that we see and that the stories of the flood and of the giants and all of that, maybe something like the Book of Enoch is actually an accurate account of affairs, of things that happen in the antediluvian world.

And certainly the writers of the biblical narrative believe that. I mean, the writer of Genesis, and then obviously in the New Testament, you have references to what I call the Enochian tale. And so when you think about this, the antediluvian world, the cataclysm that destroyed it seemingly overnight, the great civilizations that existed back then. You see a series of parallels in all the stories, all the ancient stories, whether it be the Sumerians, whether it be the ancient Egyptians, the the Hebrews, the Greeks, the Romans, there are parallels in certain details. Great civilizations inhabited the Earth, or at least a great civilization. That doesn't necessarily mean that they had the kind of technology that we have today. I think that's a mistake that some people make when they're thinking about the antediluvian world and a lost civilization. They think, well, that means that there were skyscrapers and automobiles and aircraft and things like that. That's not necessarily what it means. And so, I think it's very, very interesting that you have all of these parallels: a cataclysm, giants, you have a fratricidal war that's discussed, for example, in— you have the Vedas and some of the ancient Indian origin stories.

And another component that you find everywhere is this idea that the gods descended to the earth. Earth, commingled with human species, progenerated a race of demigods, in many accounts giants, who then governed the earth. And depending on what version of the story you're reading, they were either good guys or bad guys, leading up to the cataclysm that destroyed everything. You know, in the biblical account, the Great Flood, and other accounts record various kinds of cataclysm, right, all over the world. So, the question is, I think, an intriguing question is, is it true? I mean, are these basic constituents of these stories, is it true? And I happen to believe that the Book of Enoch is the beginning of the Book of Enoch, The oldest portion of the Book of Enoch called the Book of the Watchers is the earliest account of the antediluvian world. And I don't mean necessarily the Book of Enoch that we have today. I mean the tradition of Enoch. Was there a manuscript that Enoch wrote himself? Enoch was the seventh from Adam. So he's one of those individuals on the Sumerian Kings List. I believe he corresponds to Endemaronki. I can't remember how to pronounce the name in The Sumerian name.

But again, you have this overlay with the pre-flood patriarchs. You have all of these details that correspond. Now we have evidence of cataclysm. We're finding evidence of cataclysm, right? We talked about the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis. So are some of the other details true as well? Were there giants? Were there beings who descended to the Earth? In the antediluvian world? Did they copulate with human women? I mean, that's essentially the story of Enoch. Enoch begins with— this is 1 Enoch— Enoch begins with a company of 200 Watchers, these beings that are designated as Watchers. And they are heavenly beings. And the Watcher designation is not exclusively extra-biblical. You find it in the Book of Daniel. In a very interesting scene in which holy watchers are judging Nebuchadnezzar, the Babylonian king. And they sentence him to a period of time of madness where he's given the mind of a beast and he's eating grass. And this is a judgment from the watchers. He's eating grass like an animal. And his hair grows long and he's basically like a beast out in the field. The haughty king of Babylon. Humbled in that way. And so the Watcher designation is, you find it in Daniel, but then in the Book of Enoch, it's much more specific.

These were 200 of these Watchers. These are non-human celestial entities. You could describe them as extraterrestrial entities. And they begin to lust after the daughters of man. And they desire to progenerate families. They want to have families.

Do you think that this is a simplification of genetic engineering and that this depiction of it is just, you know, like the game of telephone, you're telling the old story through oral tradition for a long period of time as it gets relayed over time post-flood So you get this sort of distorted version of what the actual event was.

I think it's possible there was genetic engineering involved.

Because we certainly look different than everything else on the planet.

Well, the Book of Enoch, the, at least the Hebrew account, both in the Book of Genesis, because there's a verse in Genesis 6 that says, now it came to pass that when men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful. And they took wives of all whom they chose. There were giants, or nephilim, in the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came into the daughters of men and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men of old, the men of renown. That's the reference to the origin of giants and nephilim in the book of Genesis. And so in the Bible, you have these angelic beings, the sons of God, who are lusting. They're looking down at the daughters of men, they see that they're beautiful. The Book of Enoch is even more explicit. The Book of Enoch says that the angels of heaven, the Watchers, lusted after the daughters of men and they desired to progenerate families. So they descended to the earth on the summit of Mount Hermon and they bound themselves by a pact of mutual imprecations.

In other words, we're all in this together. They knew what they were about to do was going to be a very grave sin. So they bind themselves with an oath. That's why Mount Hermon has been known since time immemorial as the mountain of oath. Then they descended into the plains and they began to choose wives from among the daughters of men with whom to copulate. But first, these were maidens that they intended to marry. And there was a transaction that happened. Because in exchange for the maidens' hands in marriage, their fathers were given technology. So, the Watchers taught men the knowledge that they were already striving to learn. So, there's— and that's implied in the text. It's not explicit, but it's implied because the Watchers give technology and they give knowledge, which results in technology. And they get in exchange the maidens that they desire to marry. And then they copulate with them. They have sexual intercourse with them. The women conceive and give birth to giants. And then these giants begin to terrorize the earth. They're cannibalistic. They begin to devour men.

So, maybe a hybrid, sort of like a liger. You know how a liger is a combination of a tiger and a lion? It's much larger.

Very large. Yeah. But they can't reproduce. Right. Yeah. So the result is you have these Watchers, yeah, their DNA mixed with the DNA of human women produces giants. And, you know, this story, by the way, is attested in the Dead Sea Scrolls, not just in the Bible, not just in the Book of Enoch. The Book of Enoch, of course, fragments of it were discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls. But you find this story in, for example, you find it in the Book of Giants, The Book of Jubilees, the Genesis Apocryphon, and other texts as well. And so, this story, as bizarre as it is, is foundational to Hebrew cosmology. This is what the ancient Hebrews believed literally happened. Like, this was a— in their minds, this was a historical event. You go back in time, you go into the antediluvian world, the world before the flood, what do they envision? They envision the Watchers, these gods living among men, copulating with human women. Giants who were cannibalistic. And then God decides to intervene because the giants are— it's a very bad scene on planet Earth, and people begin to cry out, petition heaven. God decides to intervene, according to Enoch, and he dispatches some angels.

And one of the things that they do is they set the giants against each other in a fratricidal war. So they make the giants go to war with each other. Now, when I envision this scenario, playing with the idea here that this actually happened, right, in the antediluvian world, I don't imagine big dumb giants, you know, bopping each other over the heads with clubs. I imagine a technological war. Because what I see unfolding here, and I think again this is implicit in the Enochian story, is that the Watchers are essentially creating a dynasty. They are building an empire called the Empire of the Gods in the antediluvian world. They are each portioning the Earth among themselves, and their hybrids are ruling each of these kingdoms. And then they go to war with each other. And again, I see this as a technological war because I don't believe that In the biblical account, angels never have wings, only in prophetic iconography. But in the historical narrative of the Bible, angels are never depicted with wings. They are depicted as operating what I would describe as advanced aerospace vehicles, the chariots of God, the chariots of Yahweh, the chariots of fire, variously denominated.

And I think that these are vehicles. Of conveyance. And so, the Watchers, when they descended to the earth, I think they descended to the earth in some kind of a vehicle, you know, like that, right? So, they would have the knowledge and there would be some technology. And so, when their offspring, the giants, went to war with each other in this fratricidal war, it would have been a technological war. Now, the reason why I say that is because You have the story of the Watchers as chronicled in the Book of Enoch, but then overlay the story of Atlantis. You have the same story. So, of course, the story of Atlantis comes to us from Plato's Timaeus and Critias dialogue. And he has Solon of Athens traveling to Egypt and interfacing with the priests of Sais. And they tell him You know, you don't have any history that's hoary with age and so forth. And then they begin to relate to him the story of Atlantis because they told him that his ancestors were remarkable people. They were the Athenians and only they could resist the warlike Atlanteans, right? And then we get the story of Atlantis.

How does the story of Atlantis begin in Plato's dialogue? Well, it begins with the gods apportioning the earth amongst themselves. That's how it begins. So here are the gods dividing, divvying up the earth. They're going to create what I again describe as an empire of the gods. They're divvying up the earth, and each one is going to take a portion of the earth for himself. Poseidon, Plato tells us, gets the area of Atlantis. And what does Poseidon do? Well, he becomes enamored of a human woman named Cleito. He takes her to wife. He copulates with her, she gives birth to 10 hybrid sons who become the kings of Atlantis. And I think there's reason to believe that they were giants in the myths. Atlas, for example, was chief among them. So you have these 10 hybrid sons ruling over Atlantis. Then what happens? Then you have— and presumably the other gods did the same thing in other parts of the world, right? They went out and and married human women and gave birth to hybrid offspring, which is of course what happens in Greek mythology with a lot of these gods. They progenerate hybrid offspring.

Then you have a war that breaks out. The Atlanteans become very warlike. They go on a campaign and they're steamrolling everybody in their way until they get to the Athenians. And they're locked in this conflict. So I'm hoping people are picking up the parallels here with the Book of Enoch, with this, with the story of Enoch. And in the midst of this conflict, what happens? Cataclysm ensues. Atlantis, but not just Atlantis. Atlantis, in the insinuation, is everybody gets destroyed in a cataclysm that erupts suddenly and Atlantis is consumed in the waves and is no more. Well, the whole point of the Egyptians when they're telling this story to Solon, one of the points that they're trying to convey to Solon is there have been many cataclysms, world-ending cataclysms. And every time a cataclysm happens, we have to start over like children. Right? So the parallels between the Book of Enoch and— I think it, by the way, I think Atlantis, that Atlantis is an allegory of the antediluvian world in general. I think that there was something like an empire of the gods in the antediluvian world. And I personally believe that the biblical record is the faithful account of what happened in the antediluvian world and with the addition of the Book of Enoch.

Because you cannot separate, you cannot separate the Enochian narrative, the Enochic traditions from the Bible.

Well, Enoch is referenced in the Bible. And the only reason why the Book of Enoch is not in the canon of the Bible is because of some rabbis, right?

Well, it's complicated. So, the Book of Enoch is a compilation of texts. And ranging from the 4th century BC to probably the 1st century AD. The tradition of Enoch, I think, is very old. I think the tradition of Enoch, that story I just outlined, that tradition of Enoch is the oldest story we have. The one upon which all the other stories are based. That's my personal opinion. Now, the actual Book of Enoch that we have today, the only reason we have it is because it was preserved in Ethiopia. That's the only reason we have the Book of Enoch today. The Ethiopian Bible. The Ethiopians preserved it, both the, the, the, the Beta Israel Jews, very, very ancient Jewish community, and the Tawahedo Orthodox Christians.

Do you think they have the Ark of the Covenant?

I think, let's put it this way, I think Graham Hancock makes a very compelling case that they do. Have you read his book, The Sign and the Seal?

Yeah, it's the whole depiction of these people that are the watchers of this thing get cataracts because it has some radiation properties.

Yeah, very compelling.

Yeah, none of them live more than a couple years after they get the assignment.

Yeah, it's— I think it's a very strong possibility that they do.

That's crazy.

It would be crazy. Yeah, and I think that many people, including Graham, think that the Ark of the Covenant was— there's something technological about it, something radioactive about it. But it is— it's interesting though, because you have the idea, at the very least, the potential for technology in the antediluvian world, right? Advanced technology. So what do I mean? Well, what if we're talking about the Watchers who descended to the Earth? Like I said, the Hebrews believed that that actually happened, that that was historical. That wasn't mythological to them. That was historical, that event. Well, what if they did arrive in something like that, like a flying saucer, right? What if there was some level of technology introduced But I don't believe that it would have been distributed, broadly distributed, you know, talking about like an advanced lost civilization. I don't think that technology would be broadly distributed. I think that the technology would remain in these family lines, in these dynasties, because their desire was to govern everyone. So I think what we might be looking for instead of a technologically advanced civilization, maybe a technologically advanced fraternity within civilization. You see what I mean?

Mm-hmm. Like a group that was in, that was in control of something advanced, but the rest of the people maybe were Iron Age or something like that, or whatever, Bronze Age level, which is kind of a different perspective.

Well, we see that today, right? I mean, there's plenty of people today that are uncontacted tribes that are living like people lived tens of thousands of years ago. That's exactly right. Yeah. So it's not uniform even today.

Right. So we may— so I think that's why when we think about, was there a technologically advanced civilization in the antediluvian world, in the world before the great cataclysm? I think really what we're looking for, what I'm looking for is a fraternity who were in possession of technology that the rest of everyone didn't have. Maybe something like that. Although I will say that I believe that the antediluvians were much more remarkable than we are. Better in every way. I think they were physically more robust than we are. I think that they were intellectually much more— they were intellectually superior to us. As I was saying before, this is how the ancients thought of their antecedents. And so, when I look back on the timeline of history, the further you go back, all the way to those pre-flood patriarchs, you're looking at human beings who were so superior to us I mean, certainly according to the biblical account, they were living much, much longer, almost 1,000 years. You're looking at human beings who we would scarcely be regarded as human like them, because they would have been more human than we are, because we've degenerated. So, I see a degeneration, I see a devolution in the human species.

We started as something really, really remarkable, and we've been gradually devolving over time, so to speak. We've been degenerating. I think that our antecedents, our antediluvian antecedents, I think they were telepathic. I think that they had these incredible abilities, capabilities that are perhaps latent in the human species today.

Well, that might have been why these people had such large heads in Peru too.

Maybe. Right? Maybe everybody had elongated skulls at one time. I don't know. But I mean, think about that though. I mean, if you were— see, from a biblical perspective, Adam was created for two fundamental reasons. He was created to govern the earth, but more than that, he was created to fellowship with the Maker, to commune with the Maker. He was created for fellowship. So think about that. If you were created to fellowship with the Maker, with God, you would have some extraordinary capabilities built into your anatomy, into your biology. You would be given the ability to interface with the Maker, and not just with the Maker, but with whatever else is out there as well. So from the very beginning, I think that mankind was imbued, was— it was intrinsic in our design that we had all of these incredible capabilities, maybe remote viewing, maybe certainly I would say telepathy, because telepathy is conversation at the speed of thought, right? I mean, we fumble around with words. It takes us kind of a long time to try and say what we mean. But what if what you wanted to convey to me was done so instantaneously?

How much more could you convey? How much more information? How much more How much more efficient would that mode of conversation be?

It certainly seems like if we keep evolving, that's the future. Or if we keep developing better and better versions of technology, one of the things that the gaps that we would bridge is— Elon said that. He said we're going to be able to talk without words.

Well, the problem is that our technology is getting better, but our species is getting dumber.

And our biology is getting weaker. Is getting weaker.

And we're poisoning ourselves. But it's not just because of poison. Yes, we poison our environment, we poison our bodies, certainly. But I believe that there's— it's clear to me that we have degenerating and we are degenerating. We are degenerating. So, and this is genetic degeneration. So we have what's called mutational load, human beings, all creatures. We have mutational load. And mutational load is all of the deleterious mutations, all of the negative mutations that happen in our genome. They compile and it becomes this, it becomes this burden, this genetic burden. We have all of these mutations that we're carrying, mutational load. And the further we go down the line, the more mutational load we have. And again, these are deleterious mutations. So, You get all kinds of problems from that. I mean, we basically— what it amounts to is we become less and less and less impressive over time. And there's nothing we can do. You can't reverse that. You can't just have a good diet and regain the capabilities that were lost. That's impossible. So, we're declining. Our technology is ascending. We're declining. So, what we're headed for essentially is a post-human future, a future in which we have to evolve ourselves out of this condition, I would say out of Adam, into something else.

And I'm not in favor of that, by the way. I'm not a transhumanist. But clearly you have this conundrum where we are clearly getting dumber as a species. There's no doubt about it. I mean, I saw, I can't reference it here, but I saw some data on this the other day, and it's astounding. It's kind of alarming. And not only that, we've realized— I'm trying to remember the reference to this book that details this, but the human species is essentially becoming reproductively inviable. The sperm count of males in the West is declining precipitously. As is our fitness. So that is on the decline, such that I think the projection is in 2045 or something like that, we're going to basically be reproductively inviable. We're going to need a technological intervention like artificial wombs. Well, what's happening right now? We're developing things like artificial wombs. So it's, it's very interesting that these two things are running in parallel. We're degenerating, but our technology is increasingly getting better. So the result of this is going to be what I describe as post-human apocalypse. I mean, we're headed for a future that's not human. That's what Yuval Noah Harari is out there prognosticating, that in, I think he says in 120 to 130 years from now, there will be no more human beings left on planet Earth.

So, why am I saying this? Because I'm illustrating that you go back in time, go all the way back to the beginning. If you come from a biblical paradigm like I do, you're the first man, Adam, the prototypical man. He has all of the incredible capabilities that are innate, built into his system. He can— he's communing with his maker, he's governing the Earth, he can do all of these amazing things. And then as we become copies of copies of copies of copies of copies of Adam all the way down, we're gradually losing these abilities. But I think that some of them are still latent in the human species. And I think that explains remote viewing and telepathy and things like that. I don't know how I got on that.

Listen, it makes a lot of sense. And it's a fascinating conversation. And I enjoyed this very much. I did as well. Thank you very much for being here.

Thanks for having me.

Tell everybody if they want to get a hold of your stuff, they want to find you, where they can find you on social media, where they can find your website.

Timothy Alberino on social media, on Instagram, on X. I have a YouTube channel, Timothy Alberino. So I have a book called Birthright. And I also published commentary on— commentary and introduction to the Book of Enoch with my friends. Oh, Cydonia. We're going to have to get to that. That's a whole other conversation. Next time. We're gonna have to have that conversation.

I would love to. I would love to. Thank you very much.

Thank you. My pleasure. Bye, everybody.