Hi, Nick here from Pods with Nick and James. Just a quick one before we get into this podcast.
I want to say a massive thank you for the support that we've received since starting these podcasts.
We thoroughly enjoy it and we look forward to creating more.
If you want to have your say on any topics that we've discussed or suggest future topics,
you can do so at www.reddit.com.com.au.
And if you want to support us, you can do so from as little as £1 a month.
You can do that at www.patreon.com.au.
Anyway, back to the podcast.
Hi, welcome back to Pods with Nick and James. My name's Nick. This is James.
Hi there.
Today, we're going to discuss the amazing feats of ancient Egypt
and how the mainstream narrative is contradicted by the evidence.
To give a better context, there is a narrative given out.
I know I learned it at school that Egyptians were Stone Age to Early Bronze Age peoples,
maybe into the mid Iron Age, and they managed to craft some rather incredible things.
Not just talking about the pyramids.
We're going to try and stay away from the pyramids if we can. My interest in this is mainly to do with the smaller things they crafted.
But we will talk a little bit about the Sphinx and the Pyramids.
How can you talk about them without talking about either of those things?
I know when I was growing up in school, they taught us that they would use hammers.
I've watched enough videos on YouTube to know that they tried to tell you that the obelisks,
the massive granite obelisks that they've got in and throughout Egypt,
they were pulled out of the ground by pounding diorite stones against the granite to shape it.
Then they were lifted and moved on rollers across miles and miles and up rivers and whatnot,
and then put into the Valley of the Kings and certain temples around Egypt.
I mean, there are thousands of just obelisks, but even they're a little bit big for what we're discussing in this podcast.
But I wonder if to give the context and to give the foundation of the conversation,
you'd like to do your best at bringing us the narrative, bringing us the mainstream of what?
Okay, so the mainstream foundation of basic Egyptology is that ancient, ancient, ancient humans and Neanderthals
followed the flow of the cradle of humanity in Africa and followed the
banks of the Nile River as it flowed northward, which is interesting that they call
upper Egypt is upstream, which is south, and lower Egypt is downstream, which is north.
The Nile is the lifeblood of Egypt. But the basic narrative is that in ancient, ancient times, prehistoric,
before I didn't even know there were multiple ages to the Stone Age, which really shows my ignorance on this.
The fact that Neolithic is still considered to be relatively new.
But the idea is in Neolithic times before any written records existed,
ancient people were able to spread from Africa into Europe using the Nile by traveling along its banks.
The reason why they could do this is that at the time it is theorized, I say, well,
it's genuine consensus is that the land was incredibly fertile because the Nile River,
unlike the Tigris and the Euphrates, which create the golden crescent,
which move all the time and are unreliable by comparison, the Nile is consistent, benign,
traversable, and so reliable that it bursts its banks at the same time every single year,
depositing rich soils on the surrounding area.
In fact, it's theorized that the reason why ancient Egypt was so incredibly strong is that in order to create a food source,
the ancient Egyptians didn't even need to plow fields.
They just waited for the Nile to burst its banks, threw a load of seed into the muddy, into the now muddy earth,
and then got their cattle or their children or whoever to just walk up and down it a couple of times.
And that was enough to create a surplus of food, allowing for art and for huge amounts of kind of ancient culture to be invested in.
The basic idea is that for some reason, and they don't even go into this, this is the bit...
I don't know what I believe when I come to this.
I'm more certain of my own metaphysical beliefs rather than what my historical beliefs in this,
but the historical narrative is that somehow the ancient Egyptians were... the Nile was so...
and the lands surrounding it were so fertile that before there was even a pharaoh in Egypt,
and it was made up of different kingdoms, the people were so well fed that they could create the Great Pyramids,
that they could create... not the Great Pyramids, sorry, those were pharaoh based, but they could create loads...
well, if I'm honest with you, thousands of these granite vases, which is going to be the main topic of...
or the main focus of this pod to my understanding.
These granite vases... the narrative... and the narrative that up until watching these videos, I did believe myself,
was that the Egyptians were just incredibly skilled craftsmen who were able to use materials on the same scale of measurement as diamond,
and through using hand tools at a time when only the hand axe, which isn't actually an axe, it's just a stone that you hold in your hand,
and has been melded to the shape of your palm, were able to create these near... we'll go into the precision later,
but near perfect cylindrical vases with additional lode handles which do not match the... yeah...
the basic idea is that somehow it's not known, but it's just believed through traditional methods,
Ancient Egypt became incredibly advanced, and then for some reason slowly declined over the course of...
I think it's in about 4000 years? I know it was 3000 BC is when the early pharaohs started,
and then it was Cleopatra VII who's the famous one, who was the last...
With Mark Antony? Married to Mark Antony?
Yeah, with the last bit of that...
That was 30 BC, he lived until 30 BC, and that was...
She was seen as the last Egyptian queen, yeah.
Yeah, okay, well that... I know I've probably...
No, you're alright, so from about 3000...
I've missed out a whole bunch there, but...
From about 3200 BC until... and this is like civilized Egypt, from about 3200 BC until about 30 BC,
Egypt existed, which is longer than any country that exists on the planet now.
It's older than China, which is interesting.
I love the way that it's put in some of the videos that they pointed out that...
the vases that we're going to look at predate the Great Pyramid,
which King Tut, or Tutankhamun, had been around... or sorry, Tutankhamun would look at the Great Pyramids
and go, okay cool, those were made 1000 years ago.
So they were already ancient when he existed.
I mean, a really cool thing that I've heard, and it's really awesome to think about.
It's actually closer in our time to the days of Cleopatra than it was from Cleopatra to the days of the first Egyptians.
That's it. That's it.
So you've got several thousand years between the Great Pyramids and King Tut,
and then another over a thousand years from King Tut to Cleopatra.
Ancient Egypt was literally looking back, looking back, looking back, constantly looking back and having these...
We talk about in this country how Londinium, for example, was abandoned for a couple of hundred years,
when the Romans buggered off and left us.
And there's talk of the poetry that was made at the time of this deep sense of loss
and how people would look at these buildings and not understand how they were built
and this idea that we can't do this anymore.
I can only imagine how much on a more horrible scale it was for anyone living in Egypt
and how it must be in many ways to have the sprawl...
No, that's the wrong way of saying it, but to have the modern structures of Egypt, to my knowledge,
and I'm very sorry if I'm wrong and this is ignorant and an ignorant Western point of view,
but pale in comparison to the Great Pyramids.
And it's just...
I think that the... To put it in context for people, I think basically what you're saying is
if you think about Western advancement technologies, etc., you've got like the Empire State building, etc.
You've got... What's that one in Dubai?
Oh, God damn it. I know the one you mean. Yeah.
The really big one.
No, we need to look this up. We need to look this up. This is so bad.
Yeah, but you've got buildings like that that are feats of years and years of refining
and developing techniques for building and constructing,
which I'm being quite broad in the way that I'm talking, but the point is there.
The Western world developed these techniques over hundreds of years to be able to slowly but surely
build bigger and bigger and bigger things.
And you can say the same thing with the quality of worksmanship with the smaller objects too.
Over time, our abilities have grown with the knowledge of our forebears and our skill has grown as a result of it.
No, our skill has grown. We've been able to build bigger buildings and taller objects
and more beautiful jewellery over time, etc. And that's not the case with Egypt.
That's the thing, I think, that could be quite a good starting point here.
So the vase that James was talking about with...
It's the Baraj Khalifa.
Yeah, Baraj Khalifa.
Standing at 800, around 825 meters tall.
And even looking at the wall, the city, I think I showed you it last time, the Saudis wall,
they're building the city that is basically just a long, I think they call it the line or something like that,
building in Saudi Arabia. My God, that thing's going to be incredible.
It's actually a city that is one building and it's going to be miles long and thousands of shops and houses and whatnot all inside it.
Anyway, that wouldn't have been possible without the thousands of people that have come before,
the hundreds and hundreds of years of technology development that have come before.
Now, these vases we're talking about, these objects that are incredibly detailed,
I wouldn't even say detailed, they're quite minimalist, aren't they?
However, they are, for lack of a better term, perfect.
They are perfectly sculpted vases.
And I know it sounds ridiculous to be talking about vases, I'll explain in more detail about the vases in a moment.
But these vases were pre-dynastic.
And to explain what that means to the laymen, they are pre-recorded history of Egypt.
So, for example, there are 30 to 40, maybe even 50,000 of these vases that are incredibly detailed and incredibly precise,
should we say not detailed, but they are incredibly precise, found in one of the earliest temples,
in one of the earliest pyramids, the steppe pyramid, Joseph's pyramid, in Egypt, buried with Joseph.
So Joseph being the Pharaoh of the time, this is 2600 BC.
2600 BC is the Pharaoh of the time, he's got all the gold and the wealth and whatever he chooses to be buried with 50,000 of these vases,
instead of gold and all the gems and whatever else he wants to take these vases to the afterlife.
That's how important these things were to a Pharaoh at the time, a Pharaoh that built one of the earliest still standing pyramids that you can go and visit.
It's called the steppe pyramid, please do.
These vases, they're not made on a turning wheel, the Egyptians didn't have the wheel as far as mainstream theologians go,
mainstream historians if you want to be pathetic, they didn't have the wheel to be able to turn a pot.
Not only that, but they're not clay, are they James?
No, so I guess I'll talk a little bit.
So, although Egypt doesn't have marble, it does have granite.
I didn't even know about the hardness scale, but the fact that it's included in the top ten hardest natural materials.
So I have got the hardness scale here and I'll just quickly give a run down of this.
Alright, I'm going to learn something too.
The bigger the number, the harder the object.
So you've got sandstone, talc, those kind of rocks are one on the hardness scale, like chalk.
Gypsum is two, calcite is three, fluorite is four.
So if you think about your fingernail is between two and three on the hardness scale.
A copper penny is between three and four.
You've got apartheid, which is five, orthoclast, which is six.
Now between five and six you've got glass plates and knives and things like that, manufactured metals.
They're between five and six on the hardness scale.
Quartz is seven on the hardness scale, between six and seven is a steel nail.
Quartz is harder than a steel nail.
Topaz and other gems are eight on the hardness scale.
Corundum is nine on the hardness scale and between eight and nine.
What is corundum used for?
Corundum is, I'm not sure, but granite falls at nine as well.
Okay.
And diamond is ten.
Between eight and nine you have a masonry drill bit, okay, which is obviously like machine made.
And it is between eight and nine on the hardness scale.
We do have things that can cut through, like cut through the use of diamonds.
And tip drill bits, they would be ten on the hardness scale, but that's because they're using diamond.
Okay.
But it's technology that has brought it to the point where we have that level of hardness.
Sorry, I'll go back to you.
So yeah, granite falls at nine on the hardness scale, but that's the Mohs hardness scale.
So what really, really surprises me about these vases is a number of them were discovered in the 1920s.
Whereas they may have just...
So one of the first...
Oh, I'm not sure, Nick, whether we start to talk about why they're amazing or put it in context, but I guess I'll quickly put it in context.
Let's go context first, yeah.
These things were found in a number of tombs and apparently there was found, what was it, 50,000?
Yeah, in Joseph's pyramid there were 50,000, up to 50,000, yeah.
50,000 of these, if I'm honest with you, small, almost like gym flask size vases, which were clearly used almost as like an everyday cup or an everyday container.
Could almost pass as a flower pot.
I mean, you expect to see them with flowers on, on your nan's shelf kind of thing, you know.
Absolutely, like somewhere between that and an urn for storing ashes in or something like that.
Yeah, I'd give you that, yeah.
An everyday sort of item.
So what's weird about them is first the material that they're made out of is far harder than bronze, which is the material that all civilisations had afterwards.
Yeah.
So it's really frustrating for...
Egyptians would have had copper, yeah, which is even softer because obviously bronze is an alloy of copper.
Yeah, it's, isn't it copper and tin or is it copper and zinc?
I know one makes brass, one of those combinations makes brass, one of those combinations makes bronze.
If you wanted specifics you should have told me earlier, I've got a metallurgist to join us.
Sorry. Well, regardless, bronze tools are, bronze became a popular tool, became the most popular tool element because it shatters less than stone.
Although some traditional materials can hold an edge as good as steel, famously obsidian can hold its edge even better than steel, but it becomes brittle very easily.
Stone is fantastic, but it's brittle every single time.
Bronze, copper is good because it can hold an edge fairly well.
Bronze is better because it can hold an edge a little bit better, but unfortunately including tin, again, makes it slightly brittle, which is why a lot of swords were kind of like smaller.
Because you push bronze too far, it shatters.
It's why iron was such a huge step forwards because all of a sudden you had this metal which was so much stronger and didn't like bend and then snap.
It would then bend and go back or even better, not bend at all.
It's honestly, so at this time, iron, I can't even remember when the Iron Age began, but it's still, it's ages away.
It's like we're talking that what's considered the new kingdom of Egypt is the time when iron became even mildly used anywhere in the world.
Yes, 1200 BC to 500 BC.
Yes, so this is before iron.
This is before bronze.
They are literally using copper somehow to shape a material which is far harder than copper, which doesn't, it doesn't make sense.
Well, I sent you a video, didn't I, of a guy, an Egyptian bloke who still lives in, get the place now, in Egypt.
And he makes sculptures in what he believes to be as close to the ancient method as possible.
And this is done through the use of it. Bear in mind, he is using modern tools. He has steel hammers and he chips away at the stone with steel hammers.
And he has a hand drill, which is steel, but it's a hand drill and he cores out the bars.
And he will shape it and sand it and rub it down and make it look as good as he possibly can using these ancient methods. And this is a bloke that makes a living doing what he does.
However, the quality of his work is a shadow of the quality of these vases.
And he has also been doing this for his entire life.
Yes, 60 years, yes. And he spends months on each of these things.
Now I know you can say that, all right, maybe one of these people, maybe these ancient crafters knew something that he didn't. Very probable.
Absolutely. And maybe if you're a rich-ass pharaoh, you can afford to have 50 of these blokes, 100 of these blokes, spending years making these things.
Those are really 50,000 of these things. Exactly. Exactly. In his pyramid.
The number doesn't add up. Additionally, when these vases were scanned,
this is the thing that really kind of. Okay, so, you know, I'm going to let you talk a bit about these vases and why they're important and then I'll jump in with anything that's missed because this is something you've opened my eyes to.
So, these vases were scanned by Christopher Dunn's son. Now Christopher Dunn is quite famous in the less than mainstream, shall we say, Egyptian history niche.
His son, Christopher Dunn is an engineer that released a book about the pyramids being an ancient power plant.
It's well worth a read and please do not dismiss it based on the fact that it sounds outlandish.
The bloke is an engineer. He's lived his entire life as an engineer and he approached the other thing what set him apart from historians when it come to how he looked at ancient Egypt,
is he approached it with a scientific mind and he thought with the technologies that we have now,
how would I do this and what would I use and what would I use it for?
And all that he found was he had more than more than just questions when trying to apply that thinking and that mentality to the mainstream narrative.
So, he had to put aside the mainstream narrative in order to find possible explanation for a lot of what the Egyptians did.
And please, please do quote me on this. He does not aim to take anything away from the ancient Egyptians.
What he does aim to do is change the narrative surrounding it.
I think that's really important to state because the last thing anybody that I've listened to or spoken to about this wants to do is the last thing they want to do is take anything away from the ancient Egyptians.
They're not saying that the ancient Egyptians didn't do any of these things.
They're saying the way that we believe they were done cannot possibly be the way that they were done.
Anyway, I've digressed. So, Alex Dunn is Christopher Dunn's son.
He's also an engineer and he has scanned a pre-dynastic vase, which is from a private collection.
And the video about it is on Ben Van Kirkwick's YouTube channel called Uncharted X. Please do go check it out.
It's a fantastic video where he and Nick Sierra, I believe his name is, go into much, much more detail than I'm going to hear about how precise these vase is.
Now, it's not the only vase they scanned. There is other videos on Ben's channel where they talk about other vases that they scanned and they are just as incredible as this one.
Some of them, possibly more so. Christopher Dunn was actually wowed by one that was slightly more flat and bulbous.
And you go check the YouTube videos out if you want more details on those. I'm going to be focusing on the first object that they scanned.
So, this is using really detailed light scanning and they have this vase centered on a platform and then a light scanner orbits this vase and scans it thousands and thousands and thousands of times.
It creates a digital image of this, which can be brought up in programs such as Blender on your computer.
And then they analyzed the geometries of this vase.
And to say that it is symmetrical is an understatement. To say that it is precise is almost laughable because Alex Dunn, Nick Sierra, Christopher Dunn,
all were blown away by the level of precision in these vases. Bear in mind the age of these vases. They have been through the mill.
They have passed hands. However, they are still incredibly precise and incredibly well made to the point where they would struggle to make them like this now with the tools that they have.
The reason for this is because granite is not a single material. Granite is like a matrix of materials all blended together, vitrified together to create a stone.
You've got quartz in there. You've got alabaster in there. You've also got granite in there.
Now the main thing that makes this incredible is that if you've got all of these different objects, all of these different materials when you're working,
I think the easiest way to describe it is think about a tree rubbing.
You know when you put a bit of paper over a tree and you grab a crayon and you rub the crayon across the tree and it makes that pretty pattern on the paper, yeah?
Yeah.
Yeah. So the reason your crayon makes those lines across the paper is because as you rub that crayon, let's get a bit scientific now,
as you rub that crayon across the paper, it goes across surfaces which are resistant and then it goes across areas of the surface which are not resistant.
And so there's drag and there's no drag and there's areas where the crayon leaves a massive entrail and there's areas where the crayon does not.
That's where you get the rubbing from. It's the same thing when you're working on granite.
You are going across areas where there are, there's quartz and then all of a sudden you hear alabaster which is as hard as sandstone and your proverbial pen, your tool,
would shoot across the paper and your precision is lost. Your geometry, your perfection is lost.
So you have to be able to change how hard you are pushing your tool through the object so frequently to give you the level of precision that is within this vase.
To go into detail about how precise these vases are, if you put a center point at the vertical center of the vase, so from bottom to top,
add a pin and went from bottom to top and then rotated the vase around it, the spherical nature of the vase is to within a couple of thousands of an inch all the way around from bottom to top.
The top is flat to within a couple of thousands of an inch. There is a circular nature to the vase. If you look at it face on and you took the outer edges of the vase as your diameter
and then added a center point at your vertical center and you drew, you used from the vertical center to the outer edge as your radius and you just almost like a pin to the center and run a pencil in a circle like that,
it would be perfect to within a thousandth of an inch from edge to edge. The most incredible thing about this is that in order to get this now with modern technology would spin this thing on a lathe.
You would spin it on a turn or a lathe and you would rub it from bottom to top. But the thing that throws that off is these lug handles, these little nubbins on opposite sides of this vase.
Now these these lug handles are perfectly opposite each other to within a thousandth of an inch. They are parallel. If you had a straight line drawn across the top of the vase, they are parallel to within to that top of the vase from one lug handle to the other to within thousandth of an inch.
And they are exactly the same shape on both sides to within a thousandth of an inch. Now I want to just explain the context, the width of a human hair in order to help you understand how precise this is.
Okay. Bear with me. So a human hair is one thousandth of an inch thick at least and is 0.006 of an inch.
That's six thousandth of an inch thick at the most for people that have thick hair. Okay. So these the level of precision on these vases is to within the width of a human hair across so many different points.
The interesting thing is that there are multiples of these. Yeah, it's not just one that was perfect. Yeah, if you had multiple. So first off a single, I'm trying to think of the right way of putting this, a single human hair.
The difference in the difference in a couple of vases of a single human hair is not something now I can't speak for ancient crafts people, but it is not something that I could notice.
I wouldn't be able to notice I wouldn't know what.
Yeah, I wouldn't know how to see that how to.
I'm trying to think of the right wording here.
I wouldn't be able to take a fine, fine sand sanding tool.
And then turn a turn this vase on a wheel or whatever. Look at another vase and go hmm my one needs a little bit more off. Yeah, when it was when it is to within hairs breadth. And the other thing that there's two points that obviously you've made there that are bang on the money one.
Perfect to compare it against in order to know that yours isn't quite there yet. The other is that you would need to be rotating in some way and they didn't have the wheel.
What also really surprised me is the, the easy kind of cop out or disprover here that I imagine a lot of people going to is, well, these things were discovered in the 1920s.
Couldn't somebody have just made them then.
And what really surprises me is that modern scientists are looking at these today.
They don't know how they were made.
You know, like that they say that okay well we could make something that's similar, or, and they don't say they, they do say, we can make this.
They say we would struggle to make something this precise.
They, they do say that but in order to make one of these they would have to use aeronautic machines. Now what I mean by that is they would have to use machines that are used in the manufacture of aerospace machinery and aircraft.
Yeah, they couldn't do it by hand.
Certainly not with copper tools.
They couldn't do it by hand, they couldn't do it with copper tools, and annoyingly they couldn't do it to the point where one of these would be affordable for an individual like it just the scanning equipment alone that Nick talked about earlier is worth several million dollars.
Yeah.
And in order to scan these things in order to scan it, shape it, rescan it, and just kind of to do the whole process.
I don't even want to think how much one of these would cost.
But it would be massive.
It would be this is your prized possession in your home. This is, I don't know, I don't actually, I suppose the most expensive thing I own other than my car is the PC that I'm currently recording this on.
But it would be more expensive than that.
Yeah.
Way more.
Because the level of precision that you need, you'd need to be using the most top of the range technologies to make it. And that would cost extortionate amounts of money.
And the most incredible thing about some of this is that some of these vases that they were looking at are almost paper thin. Like they've sculpted them to a point where you can put a light inside the vase and see the light through stone.
Yeah, like, well, what, what really
what really gets me as well is that these vases, they stop appearing.
They stop appearing in
I'm just trying to think of the right way of putting it. They're found in certain tombs which date them to pre dynastics.
And there are some pharaohs who had less, like less of these vases as time goes on.
Yeah.
And it gets to the point where they disappear.
Before the New Dynasty, really.
Yeah.
I mean, they're, they're almost not, they're almost not there after the pre after the New Dynasty, which we're talking like, I think it's about a thousand BC, isn't it?
Yeah, it's still 2000 years after the first vase that was found. The first vase was buried with in the Joseph's period.
Still several hundred years before the first coins.
Yeah.
So you've still got people who trade in bronze ingots and silver ingots in imperfect measurements using Wales weighing scales to determine value.
Yeah.
Rather than, rather than simply the symbology of coins, it was still very much trade using physical products. To put it in, in context.
So you've got, it's just, it just, it doesn't.
I don't know how these things are made. I'm sure a million and one people can come up with a million and one different theories on how they might have been made.
All I can say is that the classic narrative doesn't fit.
No, I don't. I, I, I don't, I, you know, I don't know what that actually means. I don't know.
I'll tell you what also doesn't fit. It's, what also doesn't fit is that people forgot how to make them.
A civilization existed that had knowledge and when, yeah, we don't need that anymore. And it's not like they were constantly at war.
Like they were thriving for 3000 years.
Yeah, 2000 years. Let's say 2000 years. They were certainly doing well for 2000 years.
To the point where they could build megalithic structures.
Not just one, not just the Kufu pyramid, the Great Pyramid of Giza.
But hundreds of pyramids.
Across their country.
Temples all over the place. Obelisks everywhere.
Like the level, like you have to have an abundance and, and the level of status quo, shall we say, to have the time on your hands to build these temples and to build these, these great structures.
So.
Don't just lose technology over time.
You develop technology. If we lost technology, we're going to wake up tomorrow and all of a sudden we're back in the Stone Age.
That's basically what they're saying in the mainstream narrative is that they just forgot how to do it like this.
Yeah, but the way that it's done is they forgot how to do it like this. Yeah, these nice, these vases are quite nice. They're not that nice though.
Yeah. It's just, it's just skipped over.
Yeah, and it's only people like, like Petri, who was, I suppose, one of the first people to really start to look at some of the core samples from.
So basically there's like holes in the feet of some of these granite structures and the cores from the drills that made these holes are also in some of the temples.
And one of the things that really drew Flinders Petri to Egypt was the fact that there's a consistent rotation on some of these granite core samples.
Meaning that you had a object that could cut through granite at such a rate that it could make a spiral and not just a bunch of concentric circles all the way down because essentially you have to think about it along the lines of if you're going to,
if you're going to core out something, you need it to be, you need the object to core it out to be sufficiently harder so that it can make that spiral pattern.
Otherwise, what you get is a number of rotations before you actually make headway. And so what you get is concentric circles instead. Does that make sense?
Yeah.
There's a consistent spiral pattern all the way down granite, which is nine on the Mohs scale of hardness.
Ridiculous to think that they had an object that could core granite out so effectively.
And he went, wow, this is incredible. We need to look at this. Historians went, it's just a core sample. What are you talking about?
And they completely dismissed him. But he was the first person that kind of went, we need to look at how some of this stuff was done because they weren't using copper tools.
And then to try and debunk Petrie, they genuinely, they almost like debunked themselves. It was hilarious because they dumped, they had a massive copper core drill and they had a granite block and then they had a bow string and they were drilling and they'd use sand to dump into the hole that they were trying to drill
because in the sand is little bits of corundum and little bits of granite and little bits of quartz that would effectively act as the blade whilst the copper tool was rubbing.
And it would effectively would start to core out granite tool, granite hot, it would core out granite and make the hole in a rendition of what this core sample was showing.
But what you wouldn't see is this concentric ring, this consistent spiral all the way down the core. You would see a bunch of concentric circles.
As Petrie explained, you would if you were using copper tools without needing to test it.
He went, that's not how this was happening. That would show this result. And then they went, no, no, no, this is how he did it. And then they used the copper tool and they showed exactly what Petrie said they would get if they, it was actually quite funny.
But then they still said, oh, we've proven that it can be done. So it's how they did it.
It does annoy me when news articles or reviews of debates don't show what actually happened. You know, like, it's so easy to package things in a way because how often do people actually watch the whole video or read the whole article?
No, what they're doing is they're going there for information. They're not going there for the keys to their own investigation. And they are going there for you to tell me the findings of your investigation.
And not from a scientific perspective, from a purely hypothetical, I don't really care, I don't need to know, kind of basis. You just tell me what you think and I'll take that as gospel.
Yeah, that's that.
That's it. And that's that is that is the problem.
I think.
Right. My worldview hasn't been tipped on its core, but I will admit that this is a very interesting anomaly, which does raise a lot of questions and does make me, it makes me very aware how much of my knowledge is secondhand knowledge.
Yeah, I'm in the same boat and it's only because I am like maybe two years ahead of you on that journey that I feel like I've had, I'm a bit more wise, should we say, to checking the factors.
Checking your sources. Well, I will admit that this has actually come up in other ways as well.
Like even listening to just a quick shout out to one of the things which taught me about the basic.
So we did crash course by somebody.
It's really weird. There seems to be multiple people with the last name of green, but during this video, at least he claims himself as John Green.
He, he gave us a, he did a really good video on the ancient history of Egypt.
The great courses plus also did a book, but on ancient Egypt, the history of ancient Egypt, which I'm currently going through.
Even, and that was by Bob Breyer, who actually also narrates the book so that's actually interesting to see that they didn't get a professional narrator it's just, he did it.
Even in that, he's telling me.
So, Robert, sorry Bob as he goes by, Breyer is telling me things about Neanderthals which contradicts all of the other scientific things that I've been told about Neanderthals, because in several versions of like abbreviated history of mankind.
We killed out in the Neanderthals, because they were stupider, they were like they were stronger than us, like physically tougher, but they didn't have imaginations and then what Robert Breyer says is no no no no, they were basically the same.
Like they were literally the same they had burial rights they showed, you know, uses.
Neanderthals were a level up to us. They were stronger than us, they were smarter, they were able to coordinate attacks better than we were, and yet somehow, Homo Sapien managed to trump.
We were nearly wiped out. We were nearly wiped out. We were nearly extinct because of Neanderthals.
It is interesting though that the historical sources on this disagree.
Like that's the thing that kind of annoys me, because when you take all of this as gospel as you do when you're accepting information, and it's one of the things that's making me wonder if the younger generation has it right with the number of them that are refusing to go to school, although that's a whole other topic and a whole other kettle of fish.
Which reason is the main thing that I query.
Yeah, I'm with you, but yeah carry on.
But, um, it's like,
it's like you know,
the, there are several versions of the official history. When it comes to the death of the Neanderthals and the ancient, is it Neolithic? I know it's not Neolithic because Neolithic is new Stone Age.
It's Mesolithic.
It's Middle.
What's the old, old, old Stone Age?
Is it Paleolithic?
Yes, there we go. Paleolithic. All right, in the Paleolithic, the accounts of the Paleolithic times, every single scholar seems to have their own ideas and yet every single one of them, even though they are contradictory, is accepted into the manifold of
mainstream history.
Yet, when it comes to these vases, because of the weird ass implications, and the fact that it sheds light on just how little we know about the situation, it's immediately sidelined into alternative history.
Which may as well. Not even like they say, they don't exist. They do, they accept the fact they exist and they even go, yes they're there, you can go see them in the museums, but they don't really matter.
You don't have to go and see them. That's not the real thing. Look at these pyramids. Aren't they fantastic?
We need to talk about these vases for a second guys. Come on. No, no, no, no, no, they're just pretty vases.
The weird thing is as well, like they're not even, they don't even have, there's not even a group name for it.
No, there's not. You know what I mean? Like we keep on going, all these vases, nobody's going to know what the flip we're talking about.
Yeah, I mean, I've got to be completely honest. When Ben, when, because I watched a little bit of Uncharted X before he got into the scanning of these prediagnostic vases.
And when he first showed this vase, I was like, it's just a bloody vase mate.
And then I watched a video and I was like, I was like, what are you talking about? Exactly the same. And then just slowly but surely it's just layer after layer after layer.
And the people who are doing this as well, it's not like, I'm sorry, I'm sorry to say this, this is going to sound really bad, but it's not even like the guys who did Zeitgeist, who use even minorly, minorly, sensationalism.
These are, these are hardcore scientists who they don't, they don't even come out with the, oh well, they must be using lasers or, oh well, it must have been aliens or it must have been this, it must have been that.
They just literally say this is incredibly perfect.
Yeah, this is accurate to within thousands of an inch.
I don't think, I don't think you can do this with, with this tool.
I don't think we can make something this, this good nowadays.
As a matter of fact, as a matter of fact, Ben has said and has got offers from members of the public who are going to try and use hand tools to manufacture these vases.
They've got the stands of the vases on their computers, they are happy to go and grab the materials and use specifically the tools that they have available to them.
Are you going to include the videos and maybe a link to the pots in there?
Maybe on the Reddit, I will put Uncharted X YouTube channel, I'll specifically link the videos that I'm talking, that we're talking about here and specifically talk about the scans of the vases and the conversations with Alex Dunn and Nick Sierra.
And I mean, go and watch them, go and watch them because as I said, it's just a bloody farce mate, but my God, it will change your life.
It will change how you think about history.
And it's one of the main things that actually got me into thinking about history in a different way.
And it kind of led me down the road.
I think I sent you a link for Robert Shock.
Now Robert Shock is a historian.
He is a historian who implied that the narrative surrounding the great Sphinx is not necessarily correct.
And he got broken for it.
Historians destroyed the guy for it.
His theory was just based on the fact that within the Sphinx enclosure, there is a great wall around it where the ground was cut away for the Sphinx to be sat in.
And along the wall of the enclosure, there is water damage.
Obviously, the Sphinx itself has been restored over time, probably numerous times.
We know the head of the Sphinx was almost definitely replaced, not replaced, but re-sculpted into the head of a human.
It was more than likely the head of a jackal or the head of a fox-like creature previously, but it's been re-sculpted into the head of a human.
They believe this because of the proportions of the head to the body.
It's not right. And there's one thing we know about Egyptians is that everything was perfect.
They wouldn't get something like that wrong.
So it almost implies that it was re-sculpted at one point.
But the wall of the great Sphinx enclosure has got water damage on it.
And it's got wind damage as well. So you can tell the difference between wind damage and water damage based on the angle of the cuts into the rock.
So wind damage over time where wind picks up sand and it throws it at the wall will cause horizontal carvings into a sandstone wall.
Okay. Water where it picks up the sand and it drags the sand over these walls, it will cause vertical cuts, what you call striations.
We've talked about striations in the past.
It essentially looked like water damage down the side of the Sphinx enclosure.
But the observation that Robert Shock made was the level of striations on the Sphinx enclosure imply a level of water erosion that hasn't been seen in Giza for 14,000 years.
And that in itself blew my mind. And like I said, I went from these vases and I kind of got caught up in a lot of the stuff that Ben Van Kirkwick was talking about.
And then I heard about Robert Shock's work and I was blown away by how the mainstream historians kind of didn't they didn't just poo poo his theory.
They didn't just say, I know you're rubbish, mate.
Just you don't know what you're talking about. They attacked him.
They wanted to make sure that he didn't look at this ever again.
And I thought that's a really interesting thing because if you don't agree with someone, you just say, you know what, mate, you believe what you want to believe.
I'm pretty sure I'm right. So I'm going to leave you to be wrong.
You just walk on by, which you see it all the time, you know, like people canvas for different political and religious groups all the time.
Yeah, like I didn't somebody approached me outside Westfields, an Islamic missionary, and I did a terrible job making a case for my faith.
He did a good job making a case for his faith. I didn't kick off because he beat me in an argument.
Like I just said, OK, you've given me some things to think about. And that is what everybody should do.
Sorry, that's making too much of a right.
In my mind, everyone should be able to express themselves a little bit better than we can.
But in my mind, although I made a terrible defense of my own faith, I at least stuck to my guns in the fact that I didn't get all riled up by it.
You just literally what is it that gave you the ability to not get riled up by this difference of opinion?
It's your confidence in your faith. Yeah.
You know, you might not be able to get that message across effectively.
However, you still have your confidence in your faith.
The only people that I personally believe attack others when they are challenged in their faith is those people who don't have that level of confidence in their own faith.
Or those people who think they're wrong. Exactly. They genuinely feel threatened by this different opinion.
Maybe they're right and I'm wrong and that's horrible.
Somebody who when accused of something goes far too much on the attack and says says far too much that it's ridiculous and that the attacker is ridiculous.
They attack the person in on a personal level.
Yeah. Instead of just going at that. I mean, let's let's.
What did they do? How did they try and debunk him and like his work? What did they do?
They didn't try to debunk his work. They were comments made to him about him being a plastic historian.
And he is I mean, Robert Shock has got doctorates and he's he's got numerous qualifications and he was a very well respected historian.
And I think he worked in geology as well, which is why he kind of got drawn to the point about astriations in the Sphinx enclosure.
And he was very well respected before he made this comment.
But because he was very well respected, they couldn't just go and attack his work.
They had to almost slander him.
I don't have on hand some of the slanderous things that were said about him, but you can YouTube them or you can Google them.
As a matter of fact, I will do so now to see if I can find something.
Anti sci the mysterious anti scientific agenda of Robert Shock as a comment, and he builds a lot.
There's a couple of things that are on there about how Robert Shock is like he's almost anti establishment, anti scientific.
And none of it's like based on real fact.
It's like the comments that you see in Ben Van Kirkwik's video about the vases where they're like, no, no, no, we can see it in paintings on the wall in the Egyptian tombs.
We know how they create those vases.
You're lying.
Sort off.
And it's like.
No, that's not that's not what we said here.
But we didn't know any points say they didn't create vases like that.
What we did say was they didn't create these vases like that.
And yet.
You know.
They didn't like the the they almost dismissed based on the fact that there is some information on how they created vases like this.
So go away.
You're an idiot.
And they weren't kind in the way they were talking about it.
And it's the same thing that they did with Robert Shock.
And Randall Carlson worked for a long time as a engineer and as a architect and then got into talking about the the flood proof of megalithic floods or catastrophic floods in ancient times in America.
And.
Land ripples in America and talks about the geographical effects of water.
Don't just take what you've been told is given.
I ask more questions.
And I personally believe that the pyramids were built by the Egyptians.
I don't think they dragged those stones up the up up massive hills.
It's more than likely that they created them from some kind of geo polymer concrete.
There was a lot of sandstone around there's a lot of limestone around the area as well or lime around the area.
And there is a reservoir of water underneath pyramids themselves at the Great Pyramids themselves.
But there's enough resources nearby to make concrete that would essentially turn into stone as you would perceive it over time.
There's a good chance that they just built a pyramid through buckets and buckets of concrete over time, which makes a damn sight more sense than dragging tons and tons and tons of stone up hundreds and hundreds of feet.
However, I was not there.
I do not know what I am trying to do is I'm trying to put a logical answer to questions that the mainstream narrative does not have a logical answer for.
These vases are one of those things which the mainstream narrative does not have a logical answer for.
I'm afraid I don't have a logical answer for it myself, given the fact that we would struggle and I quote here, we would struggle to make vases like this now.
And that's exactly it.
That's it. So yeah, I think.
I mean, the annoying thing is there are other examples of this sort of stuff, but it's.
We got an hour out of one vase.
Yeah, that's it.
We could go into this for days. If we go any deeper, we will be here for the rest of your lives and guys, you don't need that.
That's it. Okay, well, yeah, if it's right, Nick, I think we've covered what we can without covering the same, the same stuff again or going on a complete, complete tangent.
If we're going to go into more, I would like to do more research first to make sure that I'm not just driveling.
I need to do it justice. We want to do it justice.
And at the same time, people want to hear back to not just regurgitated libel and nonsense. So let's draw it to a close there.
Thank you very much for listening listeners. That was a double listeners.
Let's go again. Very happy to have you here and thank you again for all the support you show.
It's a buy from me and it's a buy from James.
Goodbye.
Thank you.