From the unexplained to the mundane, come join us on our journey to the fringe.
Hello and welcome to Journey to the Fringe, the place where mainstream topics go to get
their freak on.
We are your purveyors of metaphorical filth, Taylor and Chussy, and today we are going
to be going back to one of those plastics that had terrible audio.
And I think this is very timely and in a leap year nonetheless too.
So Chelsie, we are once again going to be looking at the Phantom Time Hypothesis.
I don't know how much of this episode you remember.
I think it's a fun episode and I'm hoping we can actually hear it very well this time
around.
Fingers are crossed.
Because you never know.
But yeah, I think this is a great topic, especially when we're hitting this time of year.
That is the original start of the year.
It has been suggested that April Fools originates because in the Middle Ages New Year's Day
was celebrated in Europe on March 25th, which would be the start of the actual year.
That's the spring solstice, the refresh, that's when the year starts.
With a holiday that in some areas of France specifically ended on April 1st.
Those who celebrated New Year's Eve on January 1st made fun of those who celebrated on the
other date by the invention of April Fools Day.
It's funny that it became kind of like a cultural acceptance of making fun of people
to push them into the original peer pressure, I guess.
I can get behind that.
Yeah.
And instead of it being wild mushrooms that they found in the forest, it was just pushing
them to use a different calendar, which picks a very arbitrary day I might add to celebrate
its start of the year on.
It's nothing special happens on January 1st.
Maybe after Christmas?
The whole point is like the winter solstice is December 21st.
So like why 10 days after the winter solstice?
Just seems kind of arbitrary.
I wonder who we would ask answers to get answers that was weird.
Ask it into the void.
The void?
Yeah.
But who answers back?
You might get an echo.
An echo?
Yes.
So the use of January 1st as a New Year's Day became common in Europe around the mid-16th
century, and that date was not adopted officially until 1564 by the Edict of Roussillon, which
is of course impeccable French around here, when France switched from the Julian calendar
to the Gregorian calendar as called for during the Council of Trent in 1563.
Now, Chelsea, I think it's important at this point where we get into a little bit of that
complicated math.
Do you remember how long an astronomical year is?
I think you can take a guess, can't you?
Because we have this whole like calendar thing in place.
Oh wait, wait, wait, wait, we are right.
Now that you put it that way, I just heard math and I was like nope.
Not really math at this point.
How long is a year?
365?
A calendar is usually 365, you are correct.
Oh good, I got it right.
This year is 366.
So most people would say an astronomical year is 365.25 because every four it adds one.
Yeah, that's what I meant.
Yeah.
But that's not actually how it works.
It did under the Julian calendar, which was introduced in 45 BC.
However, an actual year is 365.24219 days.
And that means a difference of 11 minutes per year between 365.25 and that calendar.
We're losing or gaining that per year?
We have a slightly longer year by 11 minutes, with that's our the 0.25 year.
Okay, how do we catch it?
That's actually, it seems weird.
Like 11 minutes isn't that long, but over a thousand years, 11 minutes will add up to
a lot and it'll completely throw off all of our seasons based on calendars.
This calendar, the Julian calendar, falls a day behind an astronomical year every 128
years.
Over a millennium, that's going to be eight days that you're going to fall off.
It will always accumulate that way unless you're actively taking steps to change your
calendar.
And we haven't.
Well we haven't.
Don't remember ever adjusting by 11 minutes.
You got to remember that our calendar isn't actually 365.25.
The Gregorian calendar is a leap year every four years.
Unless it's divisible by 100, then we take out the leap year.
Unless it's also divisible by 400, in which case we add in the leap.
The 2100 will not be a leap year, but 2000 was.
Okay, that is complicated.
But that's why, like I said, it's not 365.25, it's 365.24219 days.
So that's where we get all those extra decimals.
So we adjust for this.
Our calendars always take it into account.
We don't need to think about it.
Our phones got it on them already.
It's dictated from above.
Great.
I love that.
I wouldn't age to be alive.
I know because, you know, daylight savings would be the death of all of us if we had
it.
Yes, it would.
Great.
Now, with this all, it's this is one more thing I need to talk about.
And that is the date of Easter, which is basically one of our only holidays that isn't necessarily
calendar based.
It's actually lunar based because Easter is a function of the date of the spring equinox
the Sunday after the ecclesiastical full moon on or after March 21st, which was adopted
as an approximation of the March equinox.
European scholars have been well aware of the calendar drift since the early medieval
period.
And that is something that people wanted to make sure is Easter is always falling in
this period.
It has to do a lot with Passover, I believe, for the Jewish calendar as well.
The Gregorian calendar comes along and he says, wait, we're getting way out of hand
here.
We need to change the calendar.
This Julian calendar, we're losing a day every 128 years.
We need to fix this.
How do they find that out?
I wonder.
We've been looking at the sky for a long time.
We're able to figure shit out like this.
I think it's the easiest way to explain it.
Okay, I can accept that.
The Gregorian reform shortened the average calendar year by.0075 days to 365.2425 based
on those calculations we talked about, which stopped the drift of the calendar with respect
to the equinoxes.
Now, it's not perfect.
We still lose about 20 seconds per year with this new calendar, but that's a lot less than
11 minutes.
Yeah, I guess.
And the error accumulated over the 13th century since the Council of Nicea, where the Julian
calendar was put into place, was corrected by a deletion of 10 days from the calendar.
The Julian calendar day, Thursday, October 4th, 1582 was followed by the first day of
the Gregorian calendar, Friday, October 15th, 1582.
The cycle of the weekday was not affected.
I know I should have been taking that in.
October 4th to October 15th, the next day.
And it's still the same year, right?
Same year, yeah.
Yeah, it was totally listening to you.
So that's, yeah, it's a bunch of nerd stuff with calendars.
There's not many calendar nerds anymore, but back in the day, boy, were there tons of calendar
nerds.
Can I just quickly ask, I'm not sure if you know, why is the Pope in Church of the calendar?
Basically the calendar is in place because we need to know when we have festivals, which
include Easter and Christmas, which are big in the churches.
There's also, you know, the whole farming side of it, but basically why the church is
so controlling of it is because of the religious holidays.
Okay.
And then, so he's not really in church, but he would be like all the Catholics like adopted
it and maybe it was just like the religion most people followed that.
Oh yeah, the Catholic Church was massive at the time.
Yeah, I guess it still is.
Yeah.
But you know, if the new Pope actually came out and said we're using a different calendar,
probably wouldn't get as adopted as fast.
Oh, that's true, but he does.
Unless the Pope talked to, oh no, what's his name?
Friar Decephir, whatever.
And he goes and talks to...
I was just going to bring up the Friar.
Yeah.
If that Friar went and talked to Microsoft and Apple and just got them to change the
phones, like we would all just follow.
We would have no joy.
I guarantee it.
We would have no joy.
And that's just going to leave behind the Amish, which I'm going to feel bad for, but
there I don't know what's going to happen in that situation, guys.
I know A24 just coming up with a new Civil War movie in the US, and I'm guessing that
might actually be the entire story of it.
Is that this Friar, I forget his name, Benati?
I think that's it, but it sounds familiar.
Something like that.
I've got to assume that's the story of it, is that this Friar goes and talks to the
big tech companies and they says, hey, let's change the calendar up and all hell breaks
lose from there.
This is really a war between phone users and phone non-users.
I mean, yeah, I guess the Amish probably do follow their own calendar, right?
But I think they're an offshoot of Catholicism, are they not?
I have no friends.
I'm speculating way too much.
I know they're Christian.
I have no idea what kind.
This is a strange way to look at them.
So Chelsea, I had to give you that backstory.
Brace yourself for this.
This is the true Phantom Time Hypothesis.
Oh no.
We don't live in the year 2024.
It's actually the 1700s, 1726, I believe, to be accurate, as proposed by Haribot Illig.
That seems like quite the loss.
Yeah, that's 300 years right there.
Now this really comes up because it answers the question like a lot of people are like
dark ages happen.
We don't know a lot about them, but there are these things that happen.
But what if they actually didn't?
And that's why we don't know much about them.
It's because we just skipped 300 years.
Why would we skip 300 years because of everything you just said?
So this theory comes from 1995, was revised in the year 2000, and it says between antiquity,
1 AD, and the Renaissance, historians count approximately 300 years too many in their chronology.
In other words, the Roman Emperor Augustus really lived 1700 years ago instead of the
conventional 2000 years ago as a result of the year 614-911 simply being made up.
Okay, does he give reason?
A little bit.
The easiest way to understand doubts about the accepted chronology of well-known history
is to seriously systematize the problems of medieval research.
This will lead us to detect a pattern which proves my thesis.
And this, sorry, this comes from Ulrich's writings.
This will lead us to detect a pattern which proves my thesis and gives reason to assume
that a phantom time period of approximately 300 years has been inserted between 600 AD
and 900 AD either by accident, by an misinterpretation of documents, or by deliberate falsification.
This period and all events are supposed to have happened therein never existed.
Buildings and artifacts described in this period really belong to another period.
Art historians explain and describe artifacts and buildings of this period as anachronistic,
but they never follow up on their assessments.
One of the best examples, intensively surveyed, is the Chapel of Achaen, circa 800 AD, which
seems to come approximately 200 years too early.
The way of constructing an arch shown in this chapel has no predecessor.
Arched isles are usually only in the 11th century in spare, and the construction of
choirs with rising arch and also rising barrel vaulting is not resumed until 200 years later
at the portal of Tornus.
The vertical steepness of the interior arches of the Achaen Chapel is more accentuated than
those of churches built two centuries later.
One of these is the 1094 consecrated Abbey Church of Atmarsheim, although missing some
details of the early model, nevertheless it is the best copy of Achaen.
However, these and many other arguments implicate that the Chapel of Achaen has to be regarded
as a building of the second part of the 11th century.
Ferdosis, well known epic the Chaename, written around 1010 AD, ends in the last Persian king
Yazdegerd III, who died 651 AD.
The epic tells nothing about the Islamic conquest of Persia and has no allusions to Islam at
all.
It simply skips 300 years of Islamic influence as if it had never existed.
And many hilltop strongholds are known in Italy and throughout southern France, as well
as in various parts of Achaen region and Asia Minor.
But although castle building began in these regions in the 7th century, none of the structures
built at that time have survived into the modern age.
Especially the 7th century fortresses were replaced by greater and larger edifices in
the 10th, and more especially 11th centuries, and it is these which we see today.
The 10th and 11th century fortresses were built directly on the 7th century foundations,
with nothing of the 8th or 9th century intervening.
Even stranger, we find that whilst the age of castle building commenced in southern Europe
during the 7th century, it only began in northern Europe in the 10th.
And what is even worse, the boundary between the two ages of castle building is often no
more than a few kilometers apart.
Thus for example, the first fortified hilltop sites on the southern coast of France appear
in the 7th century, whilst just a few kilometers away, the Perinian foothills, the first castles
appear in the 10th century.
This is the case for example at Lourdes, where the fortified stronghold was clearly designed
to guard the Perinian passes against Muslim raids in the 10th century.
Yet just a few kilometers to the west at Montseguer, a fortified stronghold also designed to guard
against Muslim raids is dated to the 7th century.
Illeg found a document stating almost 1700 structures were built in these missing years.
He could not even find archaeological evidence that 97% of these structures ever even existed,
let alone were built in this period.
Moreover the Parsis, the Zerothustra worshippers in India have been debating their own chronology
furiously since messengers from Iran in the 18th century told them that they made a mistake
in counting the years since their flight from the homeland.
Modern encyclopedias vary in their assertions between the 7th and 10th century for the events.
The history of the Jews shows centuries of darkness as a discontinuity that support the
thesis of the Phantom Time as well.
One of the important modern works of Jewish history bears the descriptive title the Dark
Ages, Jews in Christian Europe 711-1096.
Here are two quotations from this.
It seemed that they, the Jews, totally disappeared together with the breakdown of the Roman Empire.
However we don't find any evidence of their presence until the Carolinian period.
For the Carolinian period historians find only written sources whereas material sources
like buildings and artifacts exist just for the time of 1000 AD.
And for the region outside of Germany we are told, quote, of course we know from inscriptions
and other sources about Jewish societies and single persons in nearly all provinces of the
Roman Empire.
And we can reasonably suppose, with or without proof, that there is in fact no district without
Jews.
Nevertheless there doesn't exist any evidence and only little probability that a substantial
number of Jews lived anywhere in the western world at this time.
The new existing stratigraphies of German towns give evidence of the Phantom Time in
Frankfurt and main archaeological excavations did not find any layer for the period between
659-1080.
Nevertheless, it has been assumed that something has been found in order to avoid empty centuries
which is unconceivable.
Thus the absent period was construed by layers composed of waste ceramic fragments from other
locations which were spread to fill in the gap to support no one chronology.
Archaeological research in ceramics encounters big problems for the projected Phantom Time.
Two quotations here for this, quote, the evolution of a half century is unclear, writes Peter
Vichitil in his 1991 publication about ceramics of the 8th to 13th century from settlements
of the main triangle and 30 years earlier Werner Harnigl had some troubles with the slow moving
evolution of vessel forms in the 7th, 8th, and 9th centuries at the North Sea coast.
It is impossible to find an order in their ceramic vessels.
Even to construct a relative chronology still seems to be impossible.
Therefore the ceramic experts try to solve this problem with mathematical statistical
methods.
The medievalists is confronted with a dangerous and confusing host of false documents and
this was the reason for organizing the conference.
This is with regards to the Gregorian Conference.
The Bavarian State Secretary of Education, Culture Hans Meier summarized the problem and
nobody came to contradict him, quote, falsification of the Middle Ages, end quote, are really
no minor subject for medievalists.
In this conference we treat the central problem of historical scientific research, the question
for authenticity of the documents and even more the concept of truth in an important
period of history of mankind.
Horace Fierman, president of the Monumenta Germania Historica, emphasized a special peculiarity
of some of the important fake documents.
He demonstrated that the important fakes of the Roman Catholic Church have an anticipating
character.
These documents had to wait for their great moment to come.
The centuries after being produced, these fakes were integrated into the framework of
the clerical and laical world.
This is from Fierman, 1988, page 90.
Fierman's opinion was that in the first place, the environment must exist before a fake can
be effective.
We were shown fakes from preceding centuries.
We divined chronological distortions, therefore we inspected the calendar calculations mentioned
above with the results of a time error amounting to three centuries.
Then we looked for gaps in special reports and publications, also for periods of stagnation
or strange events repeating in similar manners after approximately 300 years.
I only refer to some of these great numbers of puzzles, a gap in the history of buildings
in Constantinople's, a gap in the doctrine of faith, especially in the gap of evolution
in theory and meaning of purgatory, a 300 year reluctant introduction of farming techniques,
and of war techniques, a gap in mosaic art, and a repeated beginning of the German orthography.
The puzzles historiography led the way, pointing out again and again, the gap which we soon
termed phantom time.
Now Chelsea, this probably is where we get to the question I guarantee you have right
now.
Why the hell are you just making up 300 years?
Yeah.
Is it because of the 11 minutes?
This is where we get to it.
But who could have an interest in faking so many documents and why did the fakers need
a phantom time of 300 years?
We developed two hypotheses which basically don't contradict.
Hypothesi one, Otto the third didn't live accidentally around the year 1000 AD.
He himself made this date.
He wanted to reign in this year because this suited his understanding of Christian millennialism.
He defined this date with the help of his famous and well-versed friend Gerbert de Roulac.
Gerbert pulp Sylvester II, in reality they lived approximately 700 years after the birth
of Jesus.
So basically a ruler wanted to live in the year 1000, which is a very historically important
year.
In reality they lived approximately 700 years after the birth of Jesus Christ, but never
until then had the years been reckoned after Christ.
Perhaps unaware of their error and without intending to falsify, they defined one special
year as 1000 AD.
Consequently chroniclers had to invent 300 years of history to fill up the empty period.
What a great occasion for dynasties and kings.
You can design the planned future as a construct of the past.
And this apparently happened.
Otto the third construed Charlemagne as the model hero.
He himself wanted to be.
Supposedly he sketched Charlemagne's history only a bit, or it wasn't even him but the
generations after him who lined up a whole full life picture.
Especially the clergy hoped to get advantage in its confrontation with the emperors which
had started in the 11th century.
Hypothesis 2, Constantine the 7th of Byzantium, organized a complete rewriting the whole Byzantium
history and the famous German Byzantianist Peter Schreiner has demonstrated how officially
his historiography interprets this process.
Beginning in the year 835 AD, monks rewrote piece by piece all texts which have been written
in Greek in the new form of writing, hence called meniscula.
Schreiner postulates that each text was produced only once and then the originals were destroyed.
This means that all existing texts of the then leading culture nation have been changed
or rewritten completely in new script in the lifetime of two generations or even faster
and have been well invented we suppose.
It is important to explain the motivation of the emperor Constantine the 7th.
I only want to demonstrate that an action of rewriting and faking like this has happened.
If it could happen in Byzantium, it might have happened at any other place too.
Moreover, the Ophanu, mother of Otto the 3rd, came from Byzantium and was a niece of emperor
Demyskis, a descendant of the same dynasty as Constantine the 7th as to the question
of who faked and why there could be many speculations, it seems that in this question, surprises
are ahead which could create trouble for many academic institutions as well as other social
groups.
I would like to repeat that our method consists in questioning specific research, problems
of archaeology and historiography.
I must emphasize that the thesis of the phantom year is one proposal for solving those problems.
It works surprisingly well and yields amazing results.
It seems that scientists today do not see the common pattern in all of these problems
which repeatedly appear because there exists an unexpressed and unconscious prohibition
against questioning the chronology as if it were unimpeachable.
My request therefore is this, where and how could our research work possibly join?
What could we do together until today our research work was done marginally?
But from now on it enters an important stage.
The project has become so giant that it cannot be worked out by a few people with small resources,
support from official institutions has become necessary so that we can continue our work
at the edge of specialty.
So Chelsea, that is the phantom time hypothesis.
There were 300 years which don't seem to be historically supported to have existed in
Europe because it's just funny, nothing seems to happen during it.
Yeah, I feel like I understand it a lot better this time around.
Not sure why, but I do have some things to say that just miraculously just left my head.
That makes sense.
It does.
The Dark Ages seem like nothing seems to happen, so it makes a lot of sense.
Yeah, and it almost seems like an Occam's razor.
Like the simplest answer.
Yeah, the simplest answer, it really just seems to be the simplest answer.
It makes sense, it's simple.
What I don't get is when they change the calendar, they're like, okay, we're moving 10 years,
it's documented.
10 days.
10 days, of course.
But why wouldn't they document this?
And the other part of it too, I didn't mention at this point yet.
I thought I had, I haven't looked over the script apparently enough in the year and a
half since we've done, or the two years since we've done this episode.
It was actually weird that they picked 10 days because it should have been a different number,
based on it being 128 years to one day.
That would mean that there are 13 days out of line.
So if you take those three days away, that's 300 years.
Because remember, this happened in the 1500s, they moved it 10 days, and it's 128 years
per day.
So if we just times that by 10, it would be the year 1280 would be 10 days.
Like what?
That's crazy.
So it seems weird that they picked that amount as if they knew that we were 300 years off.
That is weird.
Maybe it's in the Vatican Museum in the vaults.
Yeah, in the archives.
The other thing is, I think it's interesting that things fall in and out of 300 years that
are close by to each other, almost as if they didn't get the memo quite in time.
Because that's how things would travel.
It's not like they send an email and like CC everybody in on it.
Yeah, they would have to go like word would have to spread like, hey, just an FYI.
And yeah, Europe's a pretty big region for the whole of Europe to have this weird 300
year window that you can't see what's going on, or it just seems super vague what's going
on.
It's a very fun hypothesis.
And had it happened say in the 1800s, boom, mud flood, you're covered.
This is perfect.
But unfortunately, I just need to say this does not work at all with mud flood because
this happens 300 years before the proposed mud flood.
So the Tartarians would have been well around during this entire thing.
Unless they're the ones who kept the normal calendar and said, you guys are all stupid.
These 300 years are made up.
So it took Europe 300 years to accumulate all this power to flood them out.
Finally.
Yeah, we're just helping out the mud flitters right now.
If they could have just picked 1500 when the mud flood happened, that would have been great,
but it doesn't make any sense because this isn't when the cities were built.
It's a fun theory.
I like it a lot.
It seems to make sense.
And it's being proposed by people who actually seem to understand the archaeology at least
of that time.
Correct?
Like it seems fun.
It's pretty cool.
I really like it.
I can really wrap my head around it this time.
Last time I got very confused.
Yeah, I remember that.
But I'm understanding it this time around.
From here, though, Chelsea, unfortunately, we're going to talk about the criticism's
phantom time hypothesis has received since it was first proposed.
The biggest one is simply that adding three centuries to European history makes it disagree
with other historical regions.
Like you know, there's the Islamic expansion throughout the Middle East, which would have
been happening during that time.
There's the Tang dynasty in China that would have been happening during this time.
We don't see any discrepancy.
The histories wouldn't line up anymore if we just deleted 300 years from our history
of those regions.
Yeah.
And it's basically saying like this is a very Western oriented theory.
You can't just delete 300 years from the entire world.
The rest of the world seems to have a natural build up throughout that is consistent and
trackable.
So if we just delete 300 years, then all the rest of the world has confusing problems
with their history.
OK, that didn't make sense to me for a second.
But yeah, that does make sense.
Yeah.
What's going on in Europe then?
Basically, famine.
It was dark.
Like the sun didn't shine.
I wouldn't say the sun was completely blotted out, but it is considered a cold period and
crops didn't grow as well in Europe during that time.
So it's hard to be building up history when you're trying to just find food.
OK, sure.
The next part of it, which actually I think this throws the biggest wrench in the cogs
for this theory, ancient astronomy, which we know all of our like the challenges are
all built off astronomy.
We've been doing astronomy for a very long time.
We've been tracking a lot of things.
Observations in ancient astronomy, especially those cited prior to 600 AD, agree with the
usual chronology and not with the phantom time hypothesis.
Besides several others that are perhaps too vague to disprove the phantom time hypothesis,
two in particular are dated with enough precision to question this hypothesis.
Then Pliny the Elder in 59 AD and Fodius in 418 AD both make astronomical observations,
which we can look at the sky, basically zoom it back to that year and say, OK, it makes
sense.
This was done exactly at this time.
We can't do that if we delete 300 years.
Basically, if you see a solar eclipse, we can go back in time based on our understanding
of astronomical movements to say when that happened.
But if we delete 300 years, it doesn't make any sense anymore.
OK, so based on astrology, astronomy, astronomy, those 300 years still have.
We're there.
Yes, because it doesn't make any sense from observations that we see prior to those 300
years to calculate it out.
That's too bad.
Yeah.
In addition, observations during the Tang Dynasty in China and Haley's Comet, for example,
are consistent with our current astronomy with no phantom time added.
You know, because this is disappointing.
Haley's Comet comes around every so many years, and if you delete 300 years and not
like a perfect cycle of Haley's Comet, then you're going to have some.
They've got us there with Haley's Comet, I think.
Comet.
Dynamech.
Comet.
Full with English today.
Archeological remains in dating methods such as dendocrinology, which is tree ring dating.
Also refute rather than support phantom time hypothesis.
This thing where I'm talking about how it should have been 13 days or something like
that instead of 10 days added to the calendar.
The Gregorian reform was never actually purported to bring the calendar in line with the Julian
calendar as it had existed at the time of the institution in 45 BC, but as it had existed
in 325 AD, the year the Council of Nicaea, which had established a method for determining
the date of Easter Sunday by fixing the vernal equinox on March 21st in the Julian calendar.
By 1582, the astronomical equinox was occurring on March 10th in the Julian calendar, but
Easter was still being calculated from a nominal equinox on March 21st.
In 45 BC, the astronomical vernal equinox took place on March 23rd.
It looks missing three centuries, thus corresponding to the 369 years between the institution of
the Julian calendar in 45 and fixing it in the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD.
So there's not really 300 missing years because we didn't just set the date at zero.
That's not when the date actually happened.
It's not very disappointing.
I know.
And the last point here is if Charlemagne and the Carolingian dynasty were fabricated,
there would have to be a corresponding fabrication of history for the rest of Europe, including
the Anglo-Saxon England, the Papacy, the Byzantine Empire.
The Phantom Time Pipe period also encompasses the life of Muhammad and the Islamic expansion
into the areas of the former Western Roman Empire, including the conquest of Visigothic
Iberia.
And the history too would have to be forged or drastically misdained.
It would also have to be reconciled with the history of the Tongs in China and its contact
with the Islamic world, such as the Battle of Talas.
The other thing too, just like they're talking about there, you actually need a whole lot
of people working together to fabricate 300 years.
Because it's not just Italy's calendar doesn't add up.
It's all of Europe.
So you need people in Italy, Sweden, Britain, France, Germany, all to be making up this
history.
Having a degree at a time where communication between these regions wasn't exactly great.
There's no cables laid yet.
I did make that point.
They're just waiting on the marathon runner to go give them word.
Maybe the horse boys.
Change the calendar 300 years.
Yep, the first and most accurate game of telephone ever played.
I was fully for the Phantom Time Theory.
It's a great hypothesis.
I love it.
It's going from the mud-flood hypothesis to the Phantom Time hypothesis.
They're night and day in their reasoning.
But like, it works.
But it doesn't work.
From a European perspective, it works.
And ignoring everything else.
Like what the fuck is going on in Europe during that time?
The Dark Ages.
Okay, that's all I got.
But yeah, that's the episode.
I hope Chelsea, anything you want to say before we end?
I've been saying everything that I needed to say as I go, as I usually do.
As I save it, but no, I quite enjoyed this time around.
I feel a lot less confused and disappointed.
I personally am all for us just mentally living our best life in the 1700s and just bringing
back those fashion statements.
If we all wanted to just go back to the 1700s that way, I'm all for it.
Yeah, that would be nice if we couldn't do that.
I'm talking high collars, corsets, and like five layers of dress for women.
And I wonder what the hairstyles of the...
Do we get to go back to remember the guy with the nice facial hair that was from the mudwudge?
Mudwudge?
I don't think we've covered the mudwudge.
Oh, it's a call.
Remember the guy with the nice mustache?
I do, but that's the 1800s.
We got 100 years to go till then.
I shouldn't have even brought it up.
I can't remember anything about it.
Anyhow, we are here fully advocating for you to live your best 1700s life you can.
But in the meantime, I have been Taylor here with Chelsea.
We are Journey to the Fringe.
Thank you all for listening and we'll see you next week.
Bye.
Thank you for listening to Journey to the Fringe.
If you have liked what you have listened to, please like, share, subscribe, or follow
depending on what venue you are listening to us through.
Also please, if possible, leave a five star review as that really helps us in the algorithms.
If you wish to interact with us, please check us out on your social media of choice.
I bet you we are there.
And if you really want to communicate with us and give us ideas for new episodes or tell
us that we're wrong and terrible, either way, please send us an email at journeytothefringe.com.
For now, I'll see you in the next episode.