Speaker A
The smartest doctors are the ones who are least insistent on the doctor, uh, what is it called? The prefix, the doctor title.
In-depth discussion on the Anunnaki, occult origins, and elite influence with Dr. Heather Lynn, exploring mythology, history, and conspiracy theories.
Ask about this video. Answers come from its transcript only — with the timestamp, so you can check them.
Generated from the transcript and can be wrong — check the timestamp.
Key Takeaways
- Expertise in fringe topics like the Anunnaki is fluid and often self-defined due to lack of formal academic fields.
- Cults of personality can hinder objective research and understanding in occult and conspiracy studies.
- Ancient myths like the Anunnaki remain seminal to human cultural narratives, neither fully true nor false.
- Modern issues such as AI and institutional decay may have symbolic or thematic links to ancient mythologies.
- Interactive formats that combine deep interviews and audience engagement enrich the exploration of complex topics.
What the video covers
- Dr. Heather Lynn shares her perspective on the Anunnaki and their significance in mythology and modern conspiracy theories.
- The conversation covers the challenges of being labeled an 'expert' in fringe topics without formal academic recognition.
- Hosts discuss the impact of cults of personality on research and the importance of fresh perspectives.
- Heather Lynn explains her background and motivations for using the 'Dr.' title despite controversies.
- The interview explores the intersection of economic history, cognitive archaeology, and Anunnaki lore.
- Discussion includes the role of AI, biocurity, and institutional decay as modern connectors to ancient myths.
- The conversation touches on political and racial debates influenced by historical narratives.
- Heather Lynn addresses the controversy and public reaction to her previous interviews and work.
- The format of the show blends deep interviews with interactive audience participation via live questions.
- The dialogue emphasizes open-mindedness while acknowledging the complexity and ambiguity of Anunnaki-related topics.
Chapters
- 00:00Introduction and Heather Lynn's background on the 'Dr.' title
- 26:10Discussion on expertise and cults of personality in Anunnaki studies
- 53:51Economic history, cognitive archaeology, and their relation to Anunnaki lore
- 88:51Controversies and public reactions to Heather Lynn's previous work
- 120:26Modern connections: AI, biocurity, and institutional decay
- 182:11Political and racial debates influenced by historical narratives
- 222:36Audience interaction and live Q&A format explanation
- 277:00Closing thoughts on Anunnaki mythology and open-minded research
Full Transcript — Download SRT & Markdown
Speaker A
Yeah. Um, I've noticed that. I know I just insulted a bunch of doctors, but it's true.
Speaker A
It's funny. I always say that I use it just, uh, because people have these debates all the time like, "You're not a physician." It's like, whatever. It doesn't matter. I use it for two reasons. One, I was very proud that I
Speaker A
was able to accomplish that level of education given all of my trials and setbacks. It wasn't handed to me by any means. And two, back when I started this, if you Googled Heather Lynn, there'd be all sorts of things you'd
Speaker A
find that were not connected to the line of work that I was in. So, I thought it was better. [laughter] Yes, we'll just say that. And so, I thought it would be better, uh, because that was always available, um, in URLs and
Speaker A
that sort of thing. So, it was a win-win. But no, it's just Heather there. There may be a spike in searches for Heather Lynn right now. Uh, Dr.
Speaker A
Heather [laughter] Lynn. Um, my goal is to be the Heather Lynn that comes up when you just put in Heather Lynn. So we'll see if we can make that happen one day. But yeah.
Speaker A
Um, well Heather, thank you so much for joining us. Um, the Anunnaki topic comes up, uh, all the time, but we've never had an Anuna expert in one of our spaces. Um, your Danny Jones show
Speaker A
caused a bunch of talk, controversy. Um, before people were even able to watch it, they were blowing up my DMs.
Speaker A
And I, um, I can't wait to have this conversation with you. Um, so I'm just going to do some housekeeping. Um, my name is Olri. I'm Doom Doom or Daddy Olrich. Whatever is most comfortable for you. Um, my hosts are Fringe and Tiff.
Speaker A
And I, I will be honest with you. I had been studying the Nuna so much. I was very conflicted about what to do for this interview. And there were so many people who were excited and were watching it. Um, you know, friends
Speaker A
friends of the show and they were DMing me a bunch of timestamps and I decided not to watch the interview because I had so many different, um, questions already for you. I kind of wanted to go like I
Speaker A
like I, I didn't want it to bias me. So I, I don't think the questions and the, or the order I would go in would be any different if I had watched it, but I, I didn't want it to just be a Danny Jones
Speaker A
reaction. However, uh, there's Fringe who's watched the interview. Tiff, I don't know if, if you've watched it, and then we have all these questions. So I hope that's okay that I'm going in with a little bit of, of virginal innocence
Speaker A
here. Uh, because I, I'm, I'm, I'm fairly well studied on the, on the Anuna. Not as well as you, but I, I have, I already have a ton of questions. Is, is that okay with you?
Speaker A
Oh, no. That's absolutely great. And I don't, I honestly don't think anybody, uh, could necessarily be an expert on this even though Danny opted to put my, uh, my title as Anunnaki expert. Um, I saw a lot of people DM me say, "How does one
Speaker A
become an Anunnaki expert?" uh, because as you know there's no honorology major in college. So, uh, I think it's really just an interesting open field if you will and a lot of people have a lot of things to, uh, ask and research on their
Speaker A
own and there have already been authors and so I think it's great to come in with a fresher perspective anyway.
Speaker A
That's something that I really try to champion as it is because if you did listen to the interviewer whoever knows my work knows that I'm very much against the cults of personality that are out there. I think it limits our research
Speaker A
ability and understanding. I agree with you. But, uh, I do have a hope in a sense you may become a cult of personality voluntarily or involuntarily. I would love to see an anakiology [laughter] and because it is, it's seminal
Speaker A
to even if it's all a lie, it's seminal to our story and there's no way it's all a lie and there's no way it's all true.
Speaker A
Um, but I'm just going to do a little bit of housekeeping. Is this your first space you've ever done?
Speaker A
It is actually. I'm relatively new to X. I used to have a, uh, a profile that I rarely used but had some good connections on there and then I got locked out of it and it was a whole
Speaker A
thing to, you know, so I started a new one reluctantly and, uh, so yeah, this is, this is my first space. So thank you so much for having me.
Speaker A
Thank you for saying yes. Um, uh, uh, Tiff and, and Fringe Mav is requesting. I don't know whether it's AI Mav, whether it's the real Mav, whether we're going to hear his real voice or his fake voice. Do you want to, do you want to
Speaker A
bring him up? Uh, I mean, we definitely need an explanation after the news that dropped this morning.
Speaker A
Okay. Um, Mav Mav is a friend of the show. We, we do spaces a bit differently.
Speaker A
Typically, spaces are conversations where a bunch of people jump in and they can be chaotic, they can be historical, they can be news-breaking and they can be toxic, they can be a total [ __ ] show.
Speaker A
Spaces can be everything. And when we do doom spaces, we try to do a hybrid model of, of podcasting and spaces. So we normally go really deep on an interview for like the first half to two-thirds or three-quarters in and then once our, our
Speaker A
audience has been edge-lorded and frustrated and we've lost, you know, anywhere between half and 90% of our followers then we open the floodgates so that people have questions that, that pick up from, from the depth of the interview. Uh, if you don't want to do
Speaker A
and and you get to drive here. So if you're like, all right, I'm sick of, I'm sick of doomer's dumb questions. I'm tired of, if you can be like open floodgates or at any point you can be like I need to leave. Um, so, so you, you
Speaker A
will be driving the pace. Uh, if you want to do live questions or if you don't want to do, it's, it's all up to you. But that's typically what we do. We do like a deep interview and then we, we open up
Speaker A
the floodgates and we're not just crazy and, and toxic in the UFO community. Some of us are also smart and, um, some of us are also crazy and sometimes some of us are both. Uh, and, um, you're going to see
Speaker A
above the profile pictures, you're going to see something that we call a nest. Some people call it a, a megatron.
Speaker A
Um, but this is where if you have any post on X, unless you have certain iPhones or certain Androids, but you, if you see any post on X, including your own, you can hit the share button in the
Speaker A
bottom right to the right of the bookmark and you can push it up there and then people can see it. Uh, so I'll be doing that a couple times. I have some questions for you. Uh, uh, you know
Speaker A
about the Dolce and Gabbana handbag, the Apple Watch that the Anuna are wearing and the, the other one that, uh, that, that you have, uh, interesting theories on. Um, and if there's anything you want to share or you have trouble with that
Speaker A
stuff, feel free to use the chat or you can just unmute. You don't need to be super secretive. We, everything is live.
Speaker A
Uh, you know, it's, it's one, it's one take. Um, so feel free to unmute if you need to interrupt us, if you need a break.
Speaker A
Uh, just let us know. Fringe talks up a storm. I can barely get her to shut up so we can fill time by time anytime we need to. Um, just, just talk to us and I want you to have a ton of fun and be
Speaker A
comfortable. Does that make sense? Yeah. Thank you so much for that introduction. I really appreciate it and it sounds like a lot of fun. Uh, as I think I, I don't know if we call it tweeting anymore or how do I, don't know
Speaker A
what we do when we, um, post on here, but, uh, I said earlier that I'm an open book to somebody who, uh, had a question. So, I'm down with anything. I just, you know, I expect it because there is a lot of
Speaker A
toxicity and that's okay. It's no sweat off me. I mean you, uh, for just for the backstory and then I'm going to let Fringe and Tiff, uh, briefly introduce themselves. Uh [laughter] Ma Mav Mav is this mysterious person. Uh, I'll let him say a few words
Speaker A
as well, but the, the reason why this came about is because the UFO community is, is understandably incredibly paranoid and, and I would also say naval gazin
Speaker A
misqu misqued you [laughter] and it was in this toxicity in in [ __ ] flinging. Um that a huge fan of yours and a fan of the doom room. Uh this this led to you being on the show. So I I
Speaker A
want to say my my deep gratitude to Interstellar for misquing you. Um because this is how we we got you in here. And Interstellar, I know you're listening deep in the anonymous section uh with with with maybe a bunch of
Speaker A
counter intel people. And I hope you guys enjoy the show. Please share it and uh just allow us to create a backup before you take it down in case you you decide to shadowban this episode. I do think that what we have here when we're
Speaker A
dealing with the Anuna um may be may be tantamount to to catastrophic disclosure if we can through the difference between um lore and and what actually took place. I think we're about to touch uh one of the most controversial
Speaker A
uh seinal and dangerous areas of human history and depending on some people's belief beliefs even even beyond human history. Um so Fringe, I'll let you say a couple of words. Everybody please retweet the space. Um, Heather, I'm going to go to your profile and I'm
Speaker A
going to push up your post uh that you just made to the nest to promote the space, which was which was uh awesome. I think you made this one like four hours ago. And um everybody else, please repost the space, DM it to everybody. I
Speaker A
want to get as many people in here uh as possible. Um yeah, I think it's going to be super exciting. So u handing it to you French.
Speaker A
Thank you, Oric. Uh welcome, Dr. Heather. Thank you so much for being here. Like Orier was saying, um, spaces are not like podcasts. So, the greatest thing about spaces is it's just a lot more like a town hall. And especially
Speaker A
when you're open for questions, it just it just gives us all the ability to participate in the conversation and ask questions of our our favorite personality. So, I really appreciate you being here today and uh I will hand it
Speaker A
off to Tiff and we'll get going. I have a feeling that first of all um Doomer Daddy is fangirling over you Dr.
Speaker A
Heather. So I suspect this conversation will largely between be between the two of you very much like when I sucked Jason Georgiani into the doom room and I knew in that moment that I would actually be handing it over to because
Speaker A
he was such a fan. I think that's how today is going to go. I did listen to your Danny Jones interview and I learned that we used to eat mummies. So, that was fantastic. Um, I definitely needed to add that to my brain, you know, to
Speaker A
chew on and think about for just a little bit. Um, I will hand it off to Tiff and then we'll go to Mav and Doomer will be ready to get started.
Speaker A
Uh, I'm Tiff. Like Dave said, I appreciate your time. I'm looking forward to the conversation and hearing more about what you have to say. I won't take up too much mic time unless I have something relevant to say, but I
Speaker A
appreciate you being here. Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. It's uh really exciting. I love the idea of a town hall in a kind of hybrid model like this. It seems more um I don't know personal even though it may
Speaker A
have a lot of listeners or participants. It does seem like an opportunity to have a better discussion perhaps.
Speaker A
So good. Okay, Mav go ahead with your breaking news this morning before we get before we get into this with Dr.
Speaker A
Heather. Please just give us your breaking news. Uh, no breaking news, but French, your voice sounds outstanding. Sounds great.
Speaker A
Uh, I just want to give a big shout out Interstellar because he's the one who made this possible.
Speaker A
Oh gosh, was I muted that whole time? It was so good. No, looking forward to a great space.
Speaker A
Uh, very interested the topic. I'm just going to sit back and listen. Uh, but friends, yeah, you sound great, friends.
Speaker A
Um, yeah, man. Feel free to hang out here. Uh, I like to I I think it's really important to communicate clearly to the audience because most people are going to think that we're ignoring them.
Speaker A
So, if you're new to the doom rooms, um, we we are not running a power play or power trip. You're welcome to put your requests in, but we will be letting everybody up for live Q&A when whenever we're done with all the interview
Speaker A
questions. So, don't think you're being ignored. It's just your first time in the Doom room and there's no need to put in a request now. Um, so just hang tight. Mav is gonna hang out here with us. Wait a second. I almost got gas lit.
Speaker A
Mav, are you using a voice changer? Is this true? No, I am not using a voice changer. When I Now my microphone, I got a road mic with a voice filter that gives me a nice deep dark sexy voice. [laughter] That's
Speaker A
all. Now Fr is saying I'm using a voice changer and I'm not. So, so there have been it's called catfishing mav.
Speaker A
So, so, um, Dr. Heather, there have there have been so many stupid, slanderous, lielist rumors that have been started in the last couple of weeks. And I joked with Mav, I said, "We should just start manufacturing our own
Speaker A
gossip about ourselves so that we can be in control of the lies." So, now in every space, Mav and I just come up and say the craziest [ __ ] Uh, so that's where this is where [laughter] this is coming from.
Speaker A
Um, great tactic. Yeah, I mean we we're basically there, you know, what is truth? Everybody's losing their minds. Um, so yeah, Heather, first question I have for you is um there's this term cognitive archaeologist. What What does that mean?
Speaker A
Where did it come from? And how did you even get involved in in the in the Anunnaki?
Speaker A
Well, that's a it's a long sorted story. It wasn't something that I intended to do um by any means. Um I think my if anyone did listen to Danny or if they've listened to me, I I hate to have to go
Speaker A
over it again and bore people because it's a it is an actual interesting story to me, but as far as you know, paranormal or ufology or any of these topics go. It's more mundane. But I just, you know, I left home when I was
Speaker A
16 and uh had assorted adventures. they actually weren't very adventurous. I was very um not adventurous because when you do those sorts of things, you have to actually survive. So, I was mired in just the day-to-day survival and uh
Speaker A
eventually made my way back to community college and then well, in doing that, of course, I didn't say I'm going to go into cognitive archaeology. I thought I'm going to study something like business or something to just go back to
Speaker A
school. And uh I had a phenomenal art history professor who uh really was encouraging and uh I found that it was just a a sacred space to be able to go into that classroom and listen to her lectures and it was a real inspiration
Speaker A
to me and I didn't even realize that level of education would be available in something like a community college because I had no idea and she had complimented me on my first paper which was sort of huge. You know they say that
Speaker A
professors or people in your life uh can have a great influence on you for just the littlest things and this was one of those examples. So she kind of just complimented my paper and asked to speak with me afterward. Told me I had some
Speaker A
really great ideas and was very encouraging and that was enough I think to just say okay well I I don't know if I can go into this as a career because how uh but I think I'll just keep taking
Speaker A
more classes like this and um thankfully with the I guess mentorship of other professors and people I just sort of followed that trajectory to bachelors masters etc. And um but again it was not necessarily with this interest in the
Speaker A
Anunnaki although I had always been interested in so-called alternative subjects um as people now call it pseudoarchchaeology and so that came from those times that I were lived in my car essentially and had nothing to listen to except long
Speaker A
stretches of Bob Seager and country music uh because that's what would play in middle America uh for those long stretches. And while I love Bob Seager, there's really just only so much music I think uh I could listen to. And I needed
Speaker A
some more intellectual stimulation. And um fortunately or unfortunately, I got that from George Nory, Artbell, and that sort of thing on overnight radio. And uh it was a real comfort to me. And I thought, this is wild. All of the people
Speaker A
that they interview are just absolutely bonkers or just at least interesting. You'd have people going from, you know, like Mitchioaku or people with like legitimate degrees or expertise and then the next guy, the next guy would be somebody who thought he was a
Speaker A
reincarnation of a dolphin. So, it was just good fun and it kept me distracted.
Speaker A
I would say also kept me company and so I think it was a comfort show, but it also opened up a channel in my mind that hearkened back to when I was young and I was just, you know, a product of the
Speaker A
time period where we watch things like Unsolved Mysteries and whatnot. So I've always been a seeker, but it came to I guess full completion when I was in school and I decided to just follow my interests. So I always had a little bit
Speaker A
of a thing in the background of like, you know, reading things like Michael Cremo or any of this like alternative belief set, but I really just wanted to learn the so-called real stuff. And so I was very earnest in my efforts. I wanted
Speaker A
to study everything. I listened to everybody. I was very much especially well you know back then it wasn't really that um common to rent textbooks so I bought these textbooks and they were a fortune so I was like I'm listening to
Speaker A
these textbooks I had no idea of the corruption of the world um and so I just found out on my own I think along the way and I had a bit of a polyiana view of it so along the way I would just keep
Speaker A
seeing more corruption more corruption and and before you knew it I I say corruption Heather do you mean the Anuno or do you mean our our world?
Speaker A
Oh, specifically academia. Specifically, specifically programs that deal with history and the narratives around us, but mostly academia, whether it was something as far as like narrative control or uh even at the very basic local level where I was where it
Speaker A
was writing, you know, trying to write grants to fund programs that actually didn't exist. uh actually trying to get involved with government organizations to shape narratives. um just things like that and the funding questions and all and then just some of the I think these
Speaker A
notions of of being involved in these big communities like the American Anthropological Association or all of these where a lot of the work in the very beginning is uh to reinforce their credibility, their expertise, their authority rather than actually learn the
Speaker A
methodology and that kind of stuck out to me like I felt that a lot of the work assigned was often grooming us to completely be a mouthpiece for those governing bodies and it almost felt like a project mocking bird academia edition
Speaker A
and it just it would have and then I noticed a lot of things like you know Marxism and and those ideas which I didn't even oppose at the time because I didn't even know it was just handed to
Speaker A
us like okay now we do this through a Marxist lens now we do this through a gender lens now we do this and I'm like okay sounds good to me and I just keep rolling with it until I started
Speaker A
questioning things on my own like well wait a minute if this happens then how does this solve that and if the and I just started questioning and um then when I would simply question there would be a lot of push back as though this
Speaker A
this was the given this was the set of criteria and this is what we had to do as a professional moving forward and it was just to the point where I thought about giving up and maybe just going
Speaker A
into some other field or just I don't know just giving up that whole thing and uh going into actually a psychology program and then uh I reached out to the author Michael Kremo. He wrote Forbidden Archaeology and I just was like, you
Speaker A
know, this is where I'm at and I think I want to just leave this and I had a psychology professor who was getting me deeply involved in neuroscience and it looked like there was more of a a possibility for a field, you know,
Speaker A
something like a position or a job there that might have made a difference. and he talked me off the ledge by giving me uh I think a realistic view of my choice. He said, "If you stay in academia, you're able to push the
Speaker A
envelope ever so slightly on those narratives that you may find objection to. If you leave, you can I mean, he didn't say this, I'm paraphrasing, but you could go hog wild and explore everything. However, not just the credibility factor, but you
Speaker A
would actually not have the tools necessary to even do the work." And you know, it was just a very cogent, responsible way to speak to somebody who was, you know, in their 20s trying to figure out what they wanted to do. And I
Speaker A
think just the mere fact that he contacted me and was so supportive, uh, was enough to get me to say, "Okay, good point." And so from that point onward, I thought, I these are valuable tools. Uh, I can pick up the tools along the way
Speaker A
and uh, at least know what I'm against or for and just have a open mind as well. And mostly what I've tried to do or at least wanted to do was look at topics that the so-called mainstream or
Speaker A
any of these um you know institutions may think are humorous, ridiculous, controversial and apply the actual methodologies and conceptual frameworks of trying to understand them and have new perspectives on you know what they could be. And so often in my writing
Speaker A
I'll do hisoggraphies which sometimes confuses people I think uh and I have to usually unpack that a lot. Uh but so I'll I'll apply just different frameworks and methodologies to these topics to maybe legitimize them in some way because I think there's no
Speaker A
illegitimate questions. And what is a historioggraphy and if you could also define cognitive archaeology for us.
Speaker A
Yes. So along the way I discovered with my multid-disciplinary approach I ended up uh going into anthropology and archaeology of course but then I had an interest in information technology and so I kind of double majored in that and
Speaker A
then once I saw that anthropology was completely taken by a lot of political ideology it left a bad taste in my mouth and so I went on to uh study history in particular and then I was interested in
Speaker A
in cognition and the understanding of things like language, how people retain knowledge, how people control knowledge.
Speaker A
And my goal was to become a professor. Uh because I wanted to kind of do the same thing that somebody had done for me, which was maybe inspire somebody. Uh so then I went and had a doctorate in
Speaker A
education and learning about sort of how specifically um adults learn differently than children when it comes to interacting with ancient objects in museums. and running across the corruption there in museums of many museums not actually showing real artifacts anymore and instead opting for
Speaker A
gamification or um the replicas of the artifacts and how that's I you know I had a real problem with that and so I I started looking into basically cognition from and prehistory actually so what how did we become conscious the big brain
Speaker A
bang so to speak all the way up to what is it that you know people think now consciously how do our brains work? How do we retain knowledge? How can we be maybe propagandize? That sort of thing.
Speaker A
And of course, the role of information technology in that. And so in archaeology, there's many different specialties. And uh one of them, it's a a little one um and sometimes hotly debated, but there is a field called cognitive archaeology.
Speaker A
And in cognitive archaeology, uh what we seek to do is see if we can use the past, specifically the cultural resources that are found in um you know, archaeological sites or what have you to try to understand the mindset of the
Speaker A
ancient people who created it. Uh so again, it's it's like many things and I did mention on Danny Joneses that it is still a soft science. um but trying to use scientific methodology and trying to make inferences using qualitative methods to
Speaker A
understand the past way that humans thought their mind and maybe more specifically their symbolic behavior.
Speaker A
Um, so there's uh the examination of art, artifacts, technology, their burial practices and things like spatial organization as maybe like how people could have perceived things or categorize things. Um, it draws on u more of an interdisciplinary approach of
Speaker A
cognitive science, evolutionary psychology and semiodics. And the goal I think overall is to try to understand the mental capacities uh like language and abstraction symbolic thought planning depth all of that um and and how it is that we've come about. So it's
Speaker A
different than something another sub field called intellectual history which is like the history of ideas and how people started to think. This is more about the uh how the brain works in that and what we can learn perhaps from that.
Speaker A
So Colin Renfu and Steven Mythan are the central figures and uh so but it's it's little known it's it's not huge but I think you know in the world of supreme specialization where when you're in a discipline you have to basically get
Speaker A
very much siloed which I'm against but you have to this would be essentially where I would be. So on a on a practical level I am a economic historian and a cognitive archaeologist. But when you say economic historian it could conjure
Speaker A
up the idea of just how about money? What what happened with money money but economics is much deeper than that. So it's uh more about the management of energy flow and power dynamics and globalization that sort of thing. So
Speaker A
those are the the hyper specialized fields that I'm in. Uh but what I try to do is just look at everything from that multid-disciplinary and interdicciplinary approach which then I guess kind of takes us to well how in
Speaker A
the world do the Anunnaki fit into that? That's a strange one. But uh I ended up having a blog some years ago where I was writing about different archaeological topics and one of those was the Anunnaki and primarily the the concept of them as
Speaker A
gods and their role in ancient Sumer as a whole. And I came across a story that was about an archaeological excavation that took place and it had been kind of important because there weren't many excavations going on in
Speaker A
that region of Iraq for a long time because of the wars and instability. And so this one caught my eye. It was big news. It was done by the University of Manchester.
Speaker A
And I thought, "Oh, I'm going to share this with my audience." And a lot of the questions that came back were centered on things like Stargates. And I was like, "Oh, this is new. I'm not sure I know how this connects, but okay, we'll
Speaker A
we'll roll with it." And I started looking into some of the different works and questions, but I was really just interested in um the the site itself kind of at a basic level. And so I reached out to the university and I
Speaker A
asked if I would be able to have a discussion with the lead professor. And they said, "Sure." They arranged it. I just had to submit my questions ahead of time and I did and I had about four or
Speaker A
five maybe five questions. I I published this in a in a small report. So those questions were there and uh they were pretty basic questions except for the last when I threw it to my community and said, "Hey, what what question would you
Speaker A
have?" And overwhelmingly it had to do with the the question of the Anunnaki and Stargates. And so I put that in there and I think that was enough to make him say, "Oh, this is a a nut." So
Speaker A
I was ghosted completely after that, which I So he never answered the he never answered the question.
Speaker A
He never and his secretary never responded. And that just gave me sort of this um quest for more. And so of course I follow the money on that trail because I just was like, "Well, why wouldn't you answer those questions?" I mean I had my
Speaker A
own ideas as to why um at a very superficial level with my experience with people like that. Uh something that I learned along the way was that many uh not all of course but maybe historians or archaeologists or people in those
Speaker A
types of fields uh will sometimes argue that they don't have uh they don't owe the public anything. So this is uh like their time is valuable which it is. I'm not saying it's not. But there was this, I guess, naive on my part that, you
Speaker A
know, if somebody was in their backyard and they happened upon an artifact and they wanted to know what it was or even treat it responsibly, you would maybe contact your local college or university or museum and talk about it or show it
Speaker A
to somebody. And uh, from my understanding being on the inside, that's not always a a that that's kind of frowned upon because it's like, well, I'm not getting paid hourly by you. Why should I answer your questions? And my
Speaker A
thought on that was well because a lot of times you're working within the public trust. Maybe your tax maybe you're at a state school and tax dollars are paying for this. Or how about just the love of the the question? Did you
Speaker A
not get into this because or maybe because it's their job or their specialty? I mean, isn't that what you do?
Speaker A
I would think that'd be a fun part of the job personally like, oh yeah, bring me the antiquities. Let me discover with you. It'd be an adventure. But that was a naive thought on my part. So, initially I could just chalk it off as
Speaker A
that that this uh professor was like, "Yeah, I'm not going to answer your questions for free or this is whatever." But that that was sort of like not enough either. I wanted to know something was telling me that there was
Speaker A
more to it. And then that's when I started doing the deeper dive on the financing and the whole thing blew up and people started contacting me about, you know, an investigation on this and and and it was just it made me question
Speaker A
things differently. So rather than say there's no Stargates, there's no such thing as Stargates, I started asking what is a Stargate? How are we defining that? Let's let's think of the terms.
Speaker A
What would I consider a Stargate? What would others consider? What could somebody in ancient Sumer consider a Stargate? That's and that kind of just sent me down the whole path and understanding, you know, what it is that people are looking at and the interest
Speaker A
in it and a whole set of other weird sets occurrences that I guess made it so that I couldn't leave this particular thread. Um, and to answer your other question about what is hisoggraphy because I feel that's very important.
Speaker A
Historyography is essentially the history of the history of which is a little meta but that's by design. And so I had an article recently on my Substack. It was a large one that was two parts um talking about Sitchin and
Speaker A
his background. And what I did was I took a comprehensive hyoggraphy of that and I discussed the history of the field of seriology or sumerology. And so that usually goes as this. You would look at the field or the subject whatever it may
Speaker A
be. And then you would ask the questions of who are the key authors in this field and what have they said and argued and then you would establish those. And then you would look at their arguments with and against each other by saying okay so
Speaker A
maybe in this you know instance you have John and John says that there's no such thing as X. And then you would say well but Bob says I think there is X and in fact X is that. And then you would say
Speaker A
you would just document those arguments. And then you would trace it in a linear fashion and say maybe then in the next few decades this new person came about and created a different way of looking at it. And as usual, what happens is
Speaker A
those larger names in the field like as I reference uh in cognitive archaeology Colin Renfu uh somebody like that is a big name in that field and others then would come up and uh you start referencing him or you know being like a
Speaker A
a protege maybe they're going to become bigger than that individual and then you would say now this person is the one who is leading that field in those arguments because say Colin Renf passed away or you know as things go over a course of
Speaker A
time of empirical research. So when you do a historioggraphy you're essentially trying to step back and map the landscape of how that history has been discussed and perceived. That's very important and a lot not a lot of people
Speaker A
tend to do that and instead what they do is just plain old history like this is what happened or this is that. Now, when I perform a hyoggraphy on this topic or whatever the topic could be, and sometimes people will come at me and
Speaker A
say, "Well, that's not right. You're saying that this that or the other, it's like, I'm not saying it. I'm saying this guy said it." And then as a result, the the the questions changed into this direction and then this person said.
Speaker A
It's almost like history gossip. You're spilling the tea on what all these different historians over time have said and you're just kind of sitting back looking at it like, "Oh, and then she said that and then he said what?" And
Speaker A
then you're mapping that out. And the purpose for hisoggraphy is so that you're able to have a map of the landscape of what you're talking about so that you can say, you know what, about four years into this, this thing
Speaker A
entered and nobody questioned it and it changed the whole course and maybe we should reexamine that particular like course change and ask what what was that? Was it a bias? And that's usually where we try to look at things called
Speaker A
historical lenses. And that is usually like a bias. And so some of that comes from critical theory out of literature.
Speaker A
And uh so you'll recognize some of those quote lenses as being Marxist lens, gender theory lens, but you can you can have a lens of of just about anything.
Speaker A
It's just that in uh in the past 20 years, they've narrowed those to hey, you have your grab bag of about five of them because that's like what we want to talk about. But a lens is simply what it
Speaker A
is is you're putting on a set of glasses and that you're seeing everything through those lenses of that those glasses. And there's nothing essentially inherently wrong with that because we all wear glasses. We all have our own biases because we're human. The job
Speaker A
though when you're doing research authentically is to call your own bias out and to recognize that, lay the cards out on the table and then look at other people's biases. And that's the that's what you would want say like uh and this
Speaker A
is getting in the weeds, but that's what an annotated bibliography would be for. That's what a historioggraphy does because sometimes people don't even know they have those biases. And so the job isn't to debunk or this or that on that
Speaker A
level. It's to have a clearer bird's eye view understanding of what's going on. And you're then doing literal research.
Speaker A
You're researching through the data points and trying to understand maybe what was missed. And then you present that like here's a historaphy. Now can you have your own conclusions? Of course. But when you do a historaphy you're trying to give that like survey.
Speaker A
And so in some cases somebody may read something that I've written and they'll say um well this this Okay. So a great example of this I referenced the um the article I did on Sitchin and uh Jason Kolivido
Speaker A
uh he's kind of um a skeptic. That's that's his whole I think job at this point. He has a blog where he does um you know breakdowns of people and and all of that. And so he did one on this
Speaker A
particular Sitchin thing and uh so he claimed that I claimed that there was an quote Aryan Jesus.
Speaker A
So you know this is not I never said there was an Aryan Jesus. That's preposterous. Um I couldn't I have no claim on authority about the existence of these people or not but I did show the hisography of an individual who was
Speaker A
um kind of like thrown out of the of the field of a seriology in some ways after being an originator of it for over 10 to a dozen years and everything was based off of his work. But then eventually he
Speaker A
started questioning the narrative and and feeling uncomfortable with different ways that it it went and he was German and so that never helps and he was pushing [laughter] right so he was pushing for this idea of a nonssemetic origin of Jesus and this
Speaker A
sort of thing and it wasn't even Aryan because this was in the 1800s so but you could then make that you could and people do and have and that's one of the reasons this particular author um his Burke had been kind of
Speaker A
tossed out. But I think that's interesting. I think we should look at those arguments, the petty arguments between people, especially in something like archaeology, which is a newer field. So, we have a really good record of how it all developed and the
Speaker A
personality personalities in that and how they were arguing. And then you can say, well, how come we all think this?
Speaker A
But there's evidence for that. It's like, well, maybe because in 1820, some one guy said, hey, you know, I don't like this. We're going to go this direction. And but I I think that's worth looking at. But but instead of
Speaker A
engaging with those questions or arguments, there are some people who will instead just go, "And then she says there's an Aryan Jesus." It's like, "No, I never claimed that, but you know, that wouldn't make an interesting article if
Speaker A
you It's more fun to find things like that to talk about." And so I I don't sweat it. But it's a misunderstanding of his. Um yeah, Dr. Heather, I'm sure the um handle Aryan Jesus has already been taken in the last 30 seconds and
Speaker A
somebody's probably launching an Aryan Jesus memecoin as we speak. [laughter] I wish them luck with their millions. Um I'm locked in here on this interview. Uh so I am neither endorsing nor saying you should or shouldn't buy into Ary and
Speaker A
Jesus whenever it launches. However, you have to give us the name of this German just so that I don't get suspected. Who is this who is this German who is u uh promoting or promulgating ideas of a a
Speaker A
nonssemitic Jesus? So, uh his his um last name is Ditch. So you can you uh can you spell that for the the non-tutonic?
Speaker A
[laughter] Yes. Um so, it is It's Frederick Frederick Deich. So it's like d e l i t zs c h.
Speaker A
Yeah. So he was a um that's delicious. Um I know I've made that joke like 50 times and I just can't not You cannot do it. Right.
Speaker A
I cannot do it. Is it is it freedish? Is it like the typical German Frederick?
Speaker A
Yeah. Okay. And he's delicious. And and what what time [laughter] what time was he around?
Speaker A
Like can you date? So about uh his initial work was through 1885 to 1897. I think he died I think his last publication was 2021 like 1920 1921 and then he he died around then. So um wait you're saying he was active 85 to
Speaker A
97. Yes. Yes. And so in 1902 though is when he delivered a really important kind of lecture. So he he was still working. He had just changed his mind from about 1885 to 1897 about some of his own views
Speaker A
and then kind of launched into something a little different that made people go wait what it was.
Speaker A
What was that? Can you can you just Yeah, it was called Babel and Bible. And at that point he was a leading assriologist and he was the guy who put the whole grammar and lexicon of the ancient Mesopotamian language on its
Speaker A
foundation. So he wasn't just a small time guy. I mean without him there wouldn't we wouldn't even have the understanding of Assyrian or any of the Mesopotamian languages really. He was a professor of seemetic languages and assriology um in Berlin and he was also
Speaker A
son of um France Ditch and that was a uh famous Hebrist and u missionary. So he was uh you know brought up in this sort of direction to question and try to understand a lot of the I think
Speaker A
biblically based and I don't want to say like biblical archaeology because that wasn't really a thing either but those were some of his uh motivations I think initially as many were so but he did two lectures called uh babel unbel uh before
Speaker A
the German oriental society. So back then it a lot of this was called orientalism before they had sumerology or seriology.
Speaker A
They called it orientalism. Yes. So and that's that's important to remember too. It's like UAP UFO kind of word shifts. So if you really want to dig in deep, you want to look into journals and things that discuss
Speaker A
orientalists. My PC snowflake heart is offended. Orientalism. Yes. Oh my goodness. I'm not going to be able to get over it. Okay.
Speaker A
Come on snowflake. We got this. We can get [laughter] So, I mean you guys, I'm 57 and we used to say oriental, right? I mean, even in my lifetime, we said oriental.
Speaker A
Oh, yeah. Like there used to be like an oriental like you would Yeah, that was a thing. I'm 45. So, there was definitely like that at least in um in that I can remember as a kid. So, yeah. I think it's an old switcheroo
Speaker A
thing. I mean, clearly the these terms too like Mediterranean isn't actually like a thing. I mean, obviously there's the the Mediterranean. Um, but the concept of what we would call the Mediterranean in that more abstract form, like say you go to a doctor and
Speaker A
you want to lower your blood pressure and he says, "Oh, the best thing to do is a Mediterranean diet." Well, what country, sir? Because the Mediterranean is a a lot of different places. The Mediterranean came out of economics.
Speaker A
that was an economic term that came from um I think um Bruel uh and that would have been um just an economic term discussing a region of trade and so likewise things like the Orient that would have been a trade region and so
Speaker A
they've fallen out of favor except for Mediterranean just sticks I think because [laughter] there's no consistency here so but those terms you know it's like oriental okay but which countries or you know so it just fill out a favor. Um, but I don't I
Speaker A
don't think there was anything inherently wrong with it if you understand that it's referencing more of a trade region and that sort of thing.
Speaker A
And was that named by, you know, people who are say colonists and and whatnot?
Speaker A
Sure. Uh, but, you know, it is what it is. So, when you go doing the research, you have to look up those terms. Whether it offends or it doesn't, it's not the question. But I do think that's a
Speaker A
slipperoo that they do so that you're less likely to be able to find some of the good stuff is change the language along the way.
Speaker A
Yeah. Um, so Heather, I'm actually at this point I'm really grateful I did not watch I love Danny Jones, by the way.
Speaker A
Um, but I'm really grateful I did not watch that interview yet because I obviously there's similar main main points I'm going to want to cover. But there's so I have like 20 different roads I want to go down here with you.
Speaker A
And at any point if you're like we should skin this cat differently, let me know. So I can I just free associate and word vomit here for a second. So Oh yeah, just roll with it.
Speaker A
You can sort of tell me how how we want to go about this. Sure.
Speaker A
Um I have a million questions. One of them is what's your take on the um on the from where did kunoiform derive? Right. Because I um it it does it does not seem to have evolved like other languages. It does
Speaker A
not seem to have evolved like phonetic languages, pictographic languages, idographic languages. There seems to be something um almost unearly about cunia form. So you brought up semiodics. Uh I had to look up the word semiodics is the study
Speaker A
of signs, symbols and how they create meaning. When you talk about you know the the ar the the arising and the development of cognition and consciousness and how language plays a role. One of the questions I had was,
Speaker A
are you familiar with Ken Wilbur? Did his theory about integral consciousness affect any of your work? Um, when you talk about neuroscience, it makes me wonder whether you're whether you're looking at ego development, you know, things on the
Speaker A
Maslo pyramid as you're looking at how the the histography. Yeah. Hisographical historioggraphy kind of like geography like you're you're making a map of history.
Speaker A
Yeah. Are you are you looking at the lens of the lens for the meta perception of how people are interpreting it? Um you know what I I guess I want to know like what is because I want to get to
Speaker A
the point where you just lay out your whole this is what I think the Anunnaki are, right? I mean, so I I do want you to drive in that sense, but I just I just also want to get into
Speaker A
some of the background or the the fundamentals before we dive in there that I think a lot of people gloss over.
Speaker A
So, could you could you because because we're going to have to talk about Sitchins.
Speaker A
Um Matt Lacroy, I don't know if you heard about him, but he kind of has a story that's the the a little bit the opposite of yours. he didn't have an an academically rooted archaeological background and then his research forced
Speaker A
him to say all right I need to develop the rigors and the and the tools and so I I think he got an archaeology degree or he's getting one so it's very interesting that bo both of you sort of
Speaker A
came to the same conclusion you need the tools but the the field of academia itself has has an immune system against certain truths um So, you know, h if we're looking at CUNI form and we're looking at interpretations,
Speaker A
what what is the closest thing to a a neutral interpretation of of of these symbols? Are you saying George Smith?
Speaker A
Obviously, Sitchens has has issues. What should we view as as the source interpretation for for Cunia? I guess that's my first question here.
Speaker A
Okay. So just the idea of punyiform itself um the term isn't a language name it's specifically a script name from the Latin cunius meaning wedge-shaped and that is describing the physical form pressed into the wet clay with the reed
Speaker A
stylus. It looks like a little I I usually I do a workshop on this when I do conferences or or whatever where I bring these. Um and so rather than a reed stylist, I usually get uh it looks
Speaker A
like a dowel rod or something, but you can cut them for crafts and they're triangular. Um that would be the closest thing to what they looked like. So they would be triangular a little bit and then you would press that into the clay
Speaker A
and then make those little symbols and shapes like um like that. And so cunia form is the form of wedge shaped. So it's describing the physical form pressed into the wet wet clay to begin with. Um and so the start of that
Speaker A
initially uh did evolve from pictographic signs. And so those are direct images of the objects and those would be then maybe a hand say um and eventually those would become signs representing sounds and then abstract concepts. And so that's the shift though
Speaker A
from a tally system to a true writing system that was eventually enabled to enabled them to do all the things they did like write code like write their laws and u myths and contracts and all of that. Uh so that essentially will be
Speaker A
the difference between a say protounia form and you'll see maybe the little pictographs and then ununiform that's sumerian. You may see it look a little rougher around the edges until maybe even later in uh Babylon. You see kunia
Speaker A
form still being used uh because it was the language of business like uh eventually Latin would be in say the medieval era or during a Christian theocracy it would be Latin. Now we would maybe say the language of business
Speaker A
would be English and increasingly Mandarin. So they had uh ununiform as that language and if you looked at how it was written in say uh Babylon much later it would have been very clear very very um style like less stylized and and
Speaker A
on lines that were very uh uh ordered. So you see this evolution over time so u the Aadians inherited Sumer after Sargon of Akad built the world's first empire in 2334 B.CE CE, but they still were using Sumerian on their older tablets as
Speaker A
that language of learning and also like in in a way like Latin was language of prestige and um so they in medieval Europe they were using Latin long after Rome fell for those very reasons to link them to that older culture and that
Speaker A
sense of prestige particularly because in the so-called dark ages they uh looked around them and saw these great monuments and things like domes and they lost the recipe to Roman do in concrete.
Speaker A
They couldn't make these things after all anymore. They didn't know how and they didn't know how to make a dome until, you know, you have Brunoleski's dome which appears during the Renaissance and this sort of thing. And so you have this long stretch of people
Speaker A
in medieval Europe walking around like how do they do it? And so they romanticized which is where we even get the word romance. It means like Roman romanticized comes from this idea that we are longing for Rome. So that is the
Speaker A
same a similar thing that happened with the Aadians. They inherited Sumerian um and Cunia form because of that. Now in the language system itself you have what's called the Sumerian problem and that shows a story of civilization's first technology
Speaker A
um specifically the language itself. Um, and that is something that is uh I think where a lot of this falls. The idea that well we didn't have it and then all of a sudden boom it just appears and it's
Speaker A
unlike anything else in the region. And that that problem refers to the debate over who invented the world's first known writing system. And I say known because there's goepe there's who knows what. I mean I'm open to all sorts of
Speaker A
ideas that perhaps underneath ice sheets there's cities. I mean, we don't know, right? I'm I'm not going to go so far as to say I could know one way or another, but it's always going to be until you
Speaker A
discover that next thing that it changes the timeline. So, currently it's the first writing system, but I would like to always emphasize it's the first uh writing system that we know of. And so, that is the question is what happened?
Speaker A
And in the 19th century, there was a fight over this. and French and American archaeologists at the end of the 19th century uh found huge caches of ununiform tablets at Lagos and Nepur and when the scholars deciphered them the
Speaker A
words and grammar didn't match at all uh any of the Aadian or known seemetic language and so they found that okay this is something completely different and then it didn't fit into any of the major linguistic family that we know now
Speaker A
the it it takes a high stake uh turn here because there is a difference and this is again going back to the idea of interdisciplinary research or multiddisciplinary and things being siloed. you have something called like protoindo-uropean and that is a term that comes out of
Speaker A
linguistics and if you apply that to a different field that it it wouldn't be accepted and in some cases in cultural anthropology they'll argue we don't even use that anymore it's it's uh the abbreviation is pi p i'll say that's old
Speaker A
and outdated that doesn't matter who cares but language is an artifact that's carried along with you for a long time and you can find like vestigial tales of particular particular language families, you know, all over and that could help
Speaker A
us identify maybe those matches. But because of the uh the idea that things get siloed and also then the stakes of the racial debate that started happening um this is where it gets tricky. So the core question driving that 19th century
Speaker A
question um from scholars was who could claim the invention of writing and then by extension civilization itself because if you could do that well then you could be the highest most superior racial group right so that's why it was a
Speaker A
tricky situation and even though you may be able to research say an artifact on one hand or maybe a language group on another it it just has this little twinge of like so are you saying then you know that it's like then are you
Speaker A
saying this? So, and then of course you could see that maybe in um in early forms of what is now biological anthropology, it did go in that direction like let's travel around and you know measure people's heads and
Speaker A
noses to see if they're somehow superior based on these subjective ideas of superiority and and and so as we all know that ended up going in uh getting weaponized and in different directions and then people throw all of it out or
Speaker A
change the names because remember like they still do eugenics. it's just called something else. So it's they do that that whole switch on us again. So the there was a camp that held that only Seemetic people had ever lived in
Speaker A
Babylon. So, Semites must have invented writing. And the leading voice on that was Joseph Halevi who argued that the Sumerians uh were not a real separate language at all, but an artificial priestly class of ciphers invented by Seemetic Babylonians. And so, you can
Speaker A
find this information in the Encyclopedia Judic Judeica. And they say plainly that this was um uh motivated by Seemetic pride and argued and that it was argued against the say Sumerian existence of a of their language connected based on that. So I bring that
Speaker A
up because then you have like Dich and others saying well it it looks like this is non-Semitic.
Speaker A
Well currently the idea is that it's yeah it's probably non-Semitic I suppose or it's Seemetic. the the the the solving of the problem hasn't been done yet because no matter what we still have that question of we haven't found what
Speaker A
language group it's related to. But because of the way that these questions were looked at back then, it was really divisive and people were really interested in it putting down a flag and saying whoever discovers like the answer
Speaker A
to this can claim superiority because it's the quote first civilization and therefore it must be superior because what you have is before that an entire millennia plus of of semi-ettled hunter gatherers before just hunter gatherers and then in this like historic blink of
Speaker A
an that would be a roughly 200 years span. You have boom civilization and all these advances that come with it with writing.
Speaker A
Um so the first epic, the first story, you have um the all of these firsts. Now over time we have Samuel and Noah Kramer who uh could be credited with putting a bunch of books out later that uh I think
Speaker A
popularized um the idea of the Sumerians of doing all the firsts and that's where we get uh the list of firsts and that's usually cited in mainstream textbooks. It's something that I, you know, taught my students when I was teaching at the
Speaker A
college as well. Very entry levelvel kind of like, okay, so we have the Sumerians. Here's this list of of things that they did. Um, now the interesting part about that and in this book he it was um called history begins at Sumer.
Speaker A
It's a seminal book and from the 1950s and uh he has in it like 39 firsts in recorded history. And so that's where that comes from. So the things like the first schools, the first love song, the first legal code and first surgeries and
Speaker A
all of that. Um but but eventually those things kind of get questioned because you can find you can go through the list now and find uh some of those first have been challenged uh with finding things that were maybe older. Um so these are
Speaker A
very subjective questions when you say well what is civilization anyway? Um, well, that's a great question because that's only been defined by an academic set of terms that, you know, so you're you're basically agreeing to that set of
Speaker A
terms. So, and I only mean to say that not to confuse, but to actually just demonstrate how confused the whole thing is. Um, and I don't even have a pro I'm not saying that's even a problem because how can we have that certainty? I only
Speaker A
like to stress that because you have these Flint Dibble types and others who come out and say, "Well, we know this and we know that and and we don't know.
Speaker A
There's very few things we can say we know in this subjective field. You can use scientific methodology and even scientific tools of measurement and come really close to knowing certain things, but those things that you know become data points. And then in order to have a
Speaker A
history, which is a story, a narrative of what happened, you have to make executive decisions over how you're going to portray those data points. And that is subjective. And I think the more we can be comfortable with that, living
Speaker A
in that gray area instead of debate me, bro, and and instead say, you know what, we've been lied to. We've been lied to about a lot of things, maybe intentionally, maybe by people who lied to themselves. It that's what hisography
Speaker A
is for, is to look at that and examine it. But to be able to say, you know, let's look at this. None of this is settled. And don't just say, well, clearly it's because X, Y, and Z. It's
Speaker A
never settled. In fact, there are things you could look into. Now, if if we if there are anybody out there that is in a program or would like to, you know, study history or something and are looking for thesis topics, you could go
Speaker A
revisit some of the most tired topics and find new things about them. And so, for instance, the burning of the Library of Alexandria. Um, and I hate to, you know, burst bubbles there, but that is not as it seems either. Um, so,
Speaker A
oh, let's go. Let's take this rabbit. We can go into the weeds all day, all night, by the way. If you want, if there are weeds and you want to make it a target, like we can go deep into the
Speaker A
weeds. We But you've got to you can't just tease us and not go into that.
Speaker A
Like, go ahead and and burst some destroy some dreams. Like only 10,000 books were destroyed or something like that.
Speaker A
Well, um I mean, yes, these are uh Yeah. So, the Library of Alexandria um there is an author um I'm blanking on his name. It's very easily googleable.
Speaker A
He is an Italian author. Um wrote a great book on this. Um I use his work a lot, but uh it starts with a C. Um so tell tell me what to Google, Dr.
Speaker A
Heather. I'm your I'm your Google [ __ ] right now. Okay. Um I think it's um you just look for Library of Alexandria and then um it's like an obscure book because it's like an academic book. Um, if you hold on one second. I actually
Speaker A
have it in my bookshelf. Yeah. Yeah. Take your time. Go ahead and grab it.
Speaker A
That would be great. Yeah. Because I don't want to I don't want to um I want to give him his dues here.
Speaker A
Yeah. Yeah. Do what you got to do. Um, Mav Tiff, what do you think? I have a I have a million questions. Um, and I I actually do, even if I end up disagreeing with Dr. about everything. I
Speaker A
think the the title Anunnaki expert is is justified. Uh I think I'm I'm pretty excited. What are your thoughts?
Speaker A
Yeah, I think I mean I understand that she wants to be humble, right? That makes a lot of sense, but I'm really loving it so far. And I think you could use it. I understand why she's not going
Speaker A
to use it for herself. Uh but I think we could leave that in the title for sure.
Speaker A
I love the uh history of history um direction she was sharing with us. So I I'm looking forward to asking her, you know, about the priest class from the past in Samaran because that's kind of how they controlled the masses with the
Speaker A
math and the the writings and they were gatekeeping a lot of that and how that compares to today with the artificial intelligence that's coming out and the tech uh you know how we're seeing a new priest class arise.
Speaker A
Yeah. And and I mean we have a lot to get into and I I want to unpeel this onion in a certain way because I I do know some of the pain points where all of this contention is. Um so I'm going
Speaker A
to I'm going to take my time with this. I'm I'm enjoying this like crazy. Uh Dr.
Speaker A
Heather, are you are you back? Yes, I am back and I have the book in my hand and I would highly recommend this book for anyone interested in the the uh tragedy of the library of Alexandria and it's
Speaker A
called The Vanished Library, a wonder of the ancient world by Luchiano Canora. All right, I'm I'm typing it in here.
Speaker A
The Vanished Library. And I'll see if I can get a post out and um that way it has What's that thing on the on the cover? That's not Ary and Jesus, is it?
Speaker A
[snorts] [laughter] I I don't know, but maybe maybe we'll just say it is and get somebody mad. So, feed the feed the feed the machine there the luch that it wants.
Speaker A
Uh Luchiano Anora. And what's his what's his core contention here? Um well, he didn't really necessarily have a a core contention. This is just a basic I think the book is from 1990.
Speaker A
It's from a university press. It was just a uh um sort of a look at the entire thing. He goes over the chronology, rival libraries, like is a real great just overall look at the fire, the fire that happened and all of
Speaker A
the sources as well. It's actually not even a long book because, you know, it's just a it's an academic um piece. So, it's about 200 I think with the index it's about 200 so uh pages. So, great pretty easy read. Um but yeah, so I
Speaker A
think the um about 1990 it came out. Um it's uh it's it's a bit of a detective narrative. I would say a reconstructive detective narrative. Um so it's a nice read. I I like to I would like to usually make the
Speaker A
students that I had in my humanities class read this one because it reads easier than just a boring textbook. So it kind of gets you like sucked into it like oh and then what happened? But the uh core arguments are essentially that
Speaker A
the um the destruction has many suspects and that because the the propaganda at the time blamed everybody. It blamed Jewish people. It it blamed Muslims. It it blamed Christian mobs. It blame it blamed everybody and everybody was sort of uh
Speaker A
the scapegoat for this. Um, so and it goes over, like I said, it's great with the sources, so you can really get a a good narrative uh from start to finish like what was going on. He claims that
Speaker A
the library was an institution of royal power and not a neutral civic amenity like how we would have uh say libraries and things now. Um, of course that you know, you could you could imagine what that means. Um but most uh libraries and
Speaker A
things like that at the time were they were um they didn't have the same kind of um I I don't know public access as as we do now. Um but the the whole thing too was more than a library. There was a
Speaker A
what we now would call a museum. Um and that's where the like if you think of coliseum or museum that was a temple built to to the muses. And so in that context, like say you go to an art
Speaker A
museum in that in that theory, you're going into a temple and hoping to be inspired by the muse. You'd look at those art pieces and whatever inspired and the word inspire uh from the Latin inspir would mean specifically a deity
Speaker A
blowing divine breath into you. So like a mini possession, we'll say. And so the notion was you'd walk around a museum and hope to be slightly possessed by the muse so that you could do their bidding or do the work and things. So that was a
Speaker A
a an instrument of hellistic statecraft at the time. Um and it was a mechanism for controlling and monopolizing textual uh evidence or patrimony even of the known world or history essentially. So um but the author in this book
Speaker A
emphasized that the practices of getting the books um were from the ships and different things um were sort of forfeited um there was a lot of bureaucracy involved. I mean long story short he says something that I don't think is I
Speaker A
mean he he supports it and there's a lot of people who support this argument that it wasn't one burning. So, you know, long story short, the burning was at one incident that over time it is seems to be very clear in the original records
Speaker A
that the whole thing was kind of going under uh and then they let it go under.
Speaker A
And why that matters, why that really matters and there was a fire and uh but why it matters to to kind of make that distinction of it wasn't just some madman building a fire and that's it.
Speaker A
that this was a way to kind of um I don't know great reset it that before that they were already pulling out the documents. This is this is why it's so important and I it is very again romantic to think of this beautiful
Speaker A
library with all of the knowledge and then one day it just burns down and nobody has it and we'll just never know and that's not it. The evidence is very clear that over time they had been taking the knowledge out of it and on
Speaker A
putting it on boats and people were taking it away before because they saw the writing on the wall and that eventually you're saying there was like a book exodus before the burning.
Speaker A
Yes. Yes. Okay. and they let it burn. And so yes, things did, of course, things were lost, but um and and another little just a point of contention that's, you know, maybe just splitting hairs, but the idea of the books too, the way they would
Speaker A
have been stored meant that there there weren't as many books as it would seem.
Speaker A
Um just because of each one being like a a chapter kind of of the book sort of like a the Bible has many books, but each one would have been maybe Matthew would have been stored here, Mark there,
Speaker A
etc. So uh in that case um there uh the most people I think would agree that the collection size was wildly inflated and that the whole library as a lost utopia is essentially a myth based on modern romantic projection which is again like
Speaker A
amp but I don't think so because I think it really opens up a floodgate of new information because think of the possibilities of the consequences of that that means that the information potentially or supposedly lost in in the
Speaker A
library was not lost but rather hidden. That meant that someone had it. Someone probably has it. And I mean this isn't even u I we know that that's how the Renaissance came about anyway uh was because in those dark ages which you
Speaker A
know it's kind of fallen out of favor like orientalism to say dark ages because it really minimizes the arts and abilities of the people in that time.
Speaker A
Um, but for discussion purposes, it's the dark ages. In that time was the golden age of Islam. And they had all of these different texts from you antiquity that they had kept and kept the traditions going. Well, when the
Speaker A
merchant class, I mean, uh, it's just a a basic survey. When the merchant class rose up and had the money and had the clout then to like, so the merchant class would have been like the Medici, uh, the banking families. when they had
Speaker A
the money and the clout, they had to have both. When they were able to start having the the church owe them money and for them to win favor, initially what they were doing was building cathedrals and building taking money and making
Speaker A
great arts in the the service of the pope and for God. Well, over time they would they would like a little it was a little thing like they would paint their themselves into a portrait or you know maybe a little statue of you know this
Speaker A
person is in that cathedral and then over time they got bolder and bolder and aside from just placing Medici in those roles as pope um they did they did start doing these things like funding massive projects to gain the awe and support of
Speaker A
the people uh and as I mentioned earlier with Brunoleski's dome that's one of the things they did because nobody could figure out how to build this dome. And uh they hired somebody to do it and he did it and it was this amazing moment in
Speaker A
Italian history like where people just saw that wow you you were able to bring back ancient wisdom. So it would have been like this. Imagine the the arguments we all have over who built the pyramids? We can't build that now. Blah
Speaker A
blah blah. But somebody say like Elon Musk says, "Hey, hey y'all. I have the technology to build a pyramid." And we watch this extraordinary building project where he does in fact build a pyramid that is just like what they had
Speaker A
in Egypt. And we're all like, "Damn, he did what the government couldn't." And uh that's essentially what the Medici were doing. What that does is it makes people say, "Well, wait a minute. Our government's pretty like lousy. I mean,
Speaker A
maybe you should be our government, Mr. um Medici, Mr. Musk, whoever is the innovator. And that's the power move they were doing. And then they start building public works like rather than just a concert hall to celebrate uh
Speaker A
lurggical music, they would do something for the public. And uh but again, these are it was it was only a transfer of power. And so how did they do this? How did they facilitate this? How were they able to understand the new concepts
Speaker A
needed to build the Renaissance? It came from the rediscovery of the ancient texts. They were able to do that because of the trade that was happening with the Islamic world and the money that was available to have these ancient texts
Speaker A
translated then into Latin and more readable script. And then those people were able to use the information they had that was maybe incomplete and then they rediscovered an entire new world of things. And that's why that's why we
Speaker A
have in that time this period of alchemy hermeticism of the Freemasons come about during that because I mean they were free because they had the secrets that were found of like how to build these cathedrals using not just practical
Speaker A
means but also the sacred knowledge of um harmonic sounds how you'd make everything look in terms of sacred geometry etc. And that was so valuable that those individuals kept those trade secrets. And you have all the guilds that come about aside from the
Speaker A
Freemasons and they were free because they were freely able to move to different um areas in order to build those. So they they could go anywhere they needed to to do the work and they kept that freedom by keeping the
Speaker A
secrets. This all happened because of the access of ancient knowledge that was able to be then translated and understood and over time then overshadowed the church itself and which was their government the theocracy in you know the west this way and that was
Speaker A
facilitated through the merchant class and the bank and the new banking elite. So it was like, "Oh, this is really cool." You know, the people are getting stuff and you know, screw the church, right? Right. But then who's your
Speaker A
church, right? Then it's the bankers. So it's always just this transition of big power and power elites. And we're seeing that very same thing happen. And so in the li the con the context of the library of Alexandria, it is most likely
Speaker A
the case that the most important documents were spared that fire. And what happened to them? Well, they went to the elites and they've gone through families. To this day, they have been hidden and uh translated and in private
Speaker A
collections and who knows what. So, on one hand, it might be sad that they it burned, but on the other hand, I think it actually just opens up the possibility that maybe not all is not lost.
Speaker A
That's that's fascinating. You're saying it's kind of like a backdoor disclosure kind it kind of like the military looking for how to build the looking glass when they invade the library in Iraq and fight fight a giant. You're saying
Speaker A
there's um there's a transaction going on a transformation of currency and energy through through the the conveyance of of knowledge. And we're we're seeing knowledge existing and [clears throat] knowledge being destroyed and knowledge missing. But you're saying it's it's just changing
Speaker A
hands and changing mediums possibly I would say. So of course everything does go missing to the sands of time. So it wouldn't be complete but I believe that there would be some very important things that uh were saved. Now whether
Speaker A
those were religious texts, uh alchemical texts, uh philosophical, scientific, you name it. It's probably all of the above and more that we wouldn't even know. But I think that's maybe it's it's a yeah, I think it's hopeful. Uh but I would definitely
Speaker A
recommend uh reading that and and all the work coming out of um Italy itself discussing the library because um it it may be not as pop culturally uh known but that is again the benefit of yeah as much as academia kind of sucks uh
Speaker A
there's a lot of great information in the um journals and in older books and I would definitely encourage people to look a little older yet like the '9s was good like before a lot of this stuff was completely corrupt. corrupted mostly
Speaker A
corrupted by Robert Maxwell and Peramon Press who uh created the peerreview system for profit.
Speaker A
Um on this topic I hope you know you don't need to worry about walking on eggshells here. So like we're we're dealing with bloodlines, race, ethnicity, genetics. Um everybody who could be offended I've already offended. So you're you're safe here. I
Speaker A
don't want you to to feel like you need to qualify anything. No, I I totally speak my mind. But in some cases, if it seems like I'm qualifying, that's only because I want clarity. Like, so this is my this will
Speaker A
be my statement on on that really because I get, as everyone does, I think now gets accused of being anti-Semitic.
Speaker A
So I'm like, okay, let's do the anti-semitic disclaimer. Let's do it. So the here's the anti-semitic disclaimer. um not all Jews are Zionists and not all Zionists are Jews. So if if I my bias can be known because it's
Speaker A
clearly I think displayed in my writing is that uh I don't quite appreciate Zionism that's that's a problem. I I think that uh I I've anyone who sees an idea of national supremacy and then it does link to racial supremacy, religious
Speaker A
supremacy, uh and then those ideas actually causing massive death of innocent children and victims. Um and just absolute insanity. Um, I just don't see how anybody could be for that.
Speaker A
Regardless of if you know the history of Zionism or some of the, you know, occult aspects of, say, particular types of cabala that may underpin organizations like Kabad or whatever, none of that even matters at the end of the day when
Speaker A
you can just look and say, "Oh yeah, um, there's a woman holding her headless infant and crying or you know th this is this is just clearly not right." So if if me saying that causes people to call
Speaker A
me anti-semitic, that's fine. That just shows me what kind of view they have, but it's clearly about Zionism itself.
Speaker A
Um, and I I know plenty of I'm sure there's plenty of Jewish people who would agree with this. Um, and to say Jewish too is also strange because it's like blaming Christians for something.
Speaker A
If you say Christian, I mean it it yes, there's a common denominator, but you really can't say that a Catholic, an Eastern Orthodox, um a Baptist, a Lutheran, a snake handler down south, and all of these different things or
Speaker A
Joel Ostein type, you know, these are all Christians. They're all very different in their approaches to worship, their beliefs, their everything. And so to me, when people just say, "Oh, so you're saying it's about the Jews?" I say, "Oh, okay." And
Speaker A
so just then you just you're just not even able to see what I'm saying. And so but I do feel that it's important to qualify where needed because um things do need to be precise in this. I don't
Speaker A
want to paint a broad brush because um well I just try to be careful uh with you want to be as clear as you can be.
Speaker A
Very clear because I think that's how we're going to get to the truth because everything's just been so muddied.
Speaker A
Everything's just been so And it's so tempting to do it too, right? to say um to to blame groups of people or to do this sort of thing. And it's just I'm really so against that and I'm so tired
Speaker A
of the whole thing. Um this idea of a leftright paradigm. Like come on people.
Speaker A
Why are we even saying left and right? And I get it. People might lean towards one thinking or another. And and that's that's not even the point. The point is is that they are pushing us into these false choices. And so
Speaker A
and the words aren't even loyal to what they used to mean. Not at all. Right.
Speaker A
Denotatively or connotatively. They're they're completely unanchored. They're unanchored. Yes, it's [clears throat] just [ __ ] I mean, it totally is. No, it's completely [ __ ] And that is the problem though with this leftright paradigm is that it
Speaker A
is uh like we're using terms that came from the French idea of like which side were would of the king would you be on?
Speaker A
I mean, it's just not even relevant. Oh, really? Is that where it comes from?
Speaker A
Oh, yeah. It's completely irrelevant to us. like it just doesn't have anything to do with America and that's why they can that's why they can um flip it like what used to be uh say a left idea is
Speaker A
now a right one or um you know that sort of thing. So terms like left and right uh are just clearly Hegelian dialectics to get us to think we have we live in a false paradigm where it's only one
Speaker A
choice over the other and maybe a quirky third choice. you know, they always have to kind of throw that in, but then it's like that's all there is to it. So, and I see that that happens everywhere and
Speaker A
not just with politics. It's like, so, um, you know, you're either anti-semitic or you're not. You either denounce this or you're for it. You either believe this or you don't. There's, and I don't know, you either you either voted against
Speaker A
Trump or you're racist. Yeah. Like all of these if thens. And it sounds logical because it's using an if then sort of, you know, idea, but we are not logical. I I mean, news flash, the humans are very illogical. We strived
Speaker A
for logic, but we we do things based in emotion, and we're just hard to figure out. And I think the more authentic and truthful way of looking at the world is to say we live in a world of gray where
Speaker A
we we there it's like just general science. There is a normative value. And yes, there's there is a maybe a left and a right to like a number line, but there's also deviation from the so-called norm. There's a lot of
Speaker A
different things here. There's not just black and white. And uh the more that they put us into um those boxes, it's only serving to keep us in those boxes so that they can go on and know um you
Speaker A
know the the real truth. And so it even goes into sort of this idea that you and I think we're talking about a bit here of like the Anunnaki. We we we're given false ideas, false choices.
Speaker A
Um well, we see that even with elections. You either have this candidate or that candidate. Sure, you can write somebody in, but are you really going to quote waste your vote?
Speaker A
And it is kind of a waste, isn't it? And I hate to break that to anybody. All of it's a waste. But we're given this idea that you have this or you have that. And those are controlled choices. And we see
Speaker A
this actually everywhere now. Um, and a lot of that has been formalized into a system. Here's another book I would recommend everybody write down and read.
Speaker A
It's another a little bit older. It is called Nudge. It was uh a New York Times bestseller um rated like best book of the year by the economist which is a Rothschild rag. Um that is a book from
Speaker A
um the one I think was Cass Sunstein is the big driver of that one.
Speaker A
Yeah. So that that book is essential. Yes. It's essential in understanding how we are forced into false choices and then like we have to make these choices.
Speaker A
So like going back to Anunnaki and those types of say choices, we're often given just one or the other. It's either just the myths of old or as like space creatures that flew around in 1960s nuts and bolts spaceship
Speaker A
technology. And there's nothing else. If you don't believe Sitchin, then you must just believe in something like the mainstream. You're a debunker or a skeptic. Or if you say, "I don't think I believe in Sitchin's account uh completely. I don't buy all of it."
Speaker A
Which why should we buy all of anything? But anyway, if you do that, well, then you must just be, you know, close-minded or a mainstream or a this or that or or if you do believe it, maybe then you're
Speaker A
just crazy and you just aren't educated and you're whatever. And so it just keeps us now arguing. And I've been doing this for a long time now. I would say uh it's at least in this alternative field say maybe like tw formally I think
Speaker A
2013 and I've watched this whole field of say ufology change a lot and not for the not for the better but it's become uh completely I think taken over and uh I there you mean like a high school lunch table
Speaker A
people are just concerned about who's doing the saying and not what is being said.
Speaker A
Yes. And uh I think too that there's still great people working in this. But I think that it's it's to me to me very clear that this notion of disclosure. Uh there's so many uh hidden hands that are actually now
Speaker A
showing their hand that come in and they've meddled with the narrative. They've come in and like co-intel proed it and made it something that it's not.
Speaker A
And uh they've made a really cool LAR out of it and a lot of people still buy it. And while some of that could be fun, I mean, a lot of times some of this wasn't even harmful in the past to sort
Speaker A
of, I don't know, stay up late, you know, listening to some radio shows, maybe get high, maybe talk about like, oh man, well, look at the dollar bill I have. When you fold it, it makes symbols. I mean, some of that was fun
Speaker A
and cool and this [ __ ] got serious. I don't know if we can use profanity here, so excited that out, but it's encouraged. Please, it's encouraged. Okay.
Speaker A
Yeah, there's no censorship here. Oh, sounds good to me. It's the doom room. That's the doom room. Okay. Awesome. So, um, yeah. So, it's it's basically that in my view after watching how it's kind of developed from the inside, from somebody
Speaker A
who's done some of these conferences, who's been on all these like shows and been on Ancient Aliens and done all of this, um, I've I've seen things and I'm just like, no, no, I I can't be on board
Speaker A
with this anymore. And uh I never was fully in it because I was teaching.
Speaker A
What do you mean? What are you referring to? Uh Heather, you've seen things and you can't be on board with it anymore.
Speaker A
Well, um Okay. So, here's an example. I'm I'm really going to make everybody just hate hate hate hate. So, pour it out. Pour it out. Here we go. I'm just going to tell it like this. So, we all
Speaker A
know and love Linda Molton How and she is a great woman and she did great things back in the day and for many years she has, shall we say, fallen off.
Speaker A
Um, she's also been involved behind the scenes and kind of I I don't know if anyone even saw Mirage Men. I mean, that was kind of not that that uh conspiracy.
Speaker A
A lot of us are familiar with Mirage Men. Yeah. Yeah. So, um, so it's kind of clear, it's made clear that people have tried to get to her. She also has a lot of connections, you know, been on the
Speaker A
Rockefeller ranch with a lot of different people who've been funded by a lot of different operations, etc. And, uh, over time her research has become shoddy. Um, there's been people who have kind of exposed her narratives easily, uh embarrassingly.
Speaker A
And you could look at it like, well, maybe she's just getting older. Maybe I mean you can make many excuses but you know I've I've met her on the the at the at the ancient aliens house as they call
Speaker A
it because they they film in one particular house and uh you know waiting for filming and had lunch with her just she and I sitting in the back talking and I was really trying to make a human connection with her because she's you
Speaker A
know a person we're having lunch and this and again this is just very anecdotal but this was my experience uh that She how do I say the way that she speaks in a very rehearsed journalistic sort of way which I I I there I can make an
Speaker A
excuse there too because you know I may do the same for being a professor or however but the it was the cadence it was something else and it was the eyes it seemed to me that she was programmed
Speaker A
and I I mean that with the the truest sense of that she wasn't owning her words anymore that this was whether it be through some sort of brainwashing or whether it be just old age and sility whether it be just she's bought her own
Speaker A
grift I don't know but something was just not human there as in there was no connection and she was just saying the things over and over when I tried to break that spell and ask questions and discuss things on a very let's talk shop
Speaker A
level the cameras aren't rolling let's just talk we're having a salad we're outside in you know sunny beautiful California the birds are chirping and I I just she just talked at me. It was very strange. And I know a lot of
Speaker A
backstories of you different people who have dealt with her in different ways and all of this. And there's so many examples over the years where it's like I'll just shrug it off like whatever. I don't know. I don't care. Um because
Speaker A
then I have the luxury of at the time going back to my day job. And I'm interested in these topics for what they are. And so I didn't get in the weeds on this. I wasn't going to come out and
Speaker A
say, you know, I just I met when she blah blah blah. Nope, not at all. Um, but over the years, I I I started realizing that, and this is going to sound like a big like, well, duh, Heather, but I really did start
Speaker A
finding out that a lot of these people in this are not genuinely interested in finding the truth about stuff or researching or anything. And uh call me dumb, that's fine. I just didn't realize that. I I didn't know. I could tell some
Speaker A
people were in it for showmanship, but I didn't I didn't know how deep that went.
Speaker A
And I just was like, "Wow, okay. I I I can't get on board with any of this." Like, if I'm invited to a particular thing or to participate in in a particular thing, I just Yeah. No, no thanks. I'm just I do my own thing. And
Speaker A
not to not as some like weird flex or something because you know I say crazy [ __ ] too and I have controversial takes and I'm people can call me a grifter as well because I sell books and and all
Speaker A
that and my substack. Um but it's just one of those where it's like I I've seen too much over the years heard too much and then not even just with those personalities because we could all have problems with personalities. It was more
Speaker A
of the inside that came about when I was first putting out the work on the the the little report I did of the Sumerian controversy. And that was I think the beginning of my um I this is something I brought up on
Speaker A
Danny Jones. And uh I'll bring this up here too. Um I think the best part uh there was this very old movie from like the '9s. Um, and if you if you're pro if you were around back then and a teenager
Speaker A
or something like I was, you might remember Wiggers and that I that concept I know like Jay Dyer and people like that kind of have like a funny joke that they do, but that's a that was like a
Speaker A
whole thing and um there was a joke movie like a parody made of that called White Boys. And it's corny. It's an indie film, but you know, I think it's a pretty decent little flick because what it did is it followed the story of these
Speaker A
like like Midwestern corn field like white guys that think that they're rappers and they're like these young guys and they're like we're going to go up to Cababrini Green, you know, we're going to really become like gangsters or
Speaker A
whatever. They were just inundated with this like notion, this romanticized view of something. And so they're essentially doing like laring and until and is spoiler alert, but until they go into uh actually go into Chicago and they face
Speaker A
it and they act like they're going to be part of it and then [ __ ] gets real and the movie becomes a little darker after that and it's just a little lesson of like, you know, be careful of the games
Speaker A
that you play. These are not games. There are a lot of larers out there, but but the stuff can get real. I didn't know that. I was like the white girls of this whole industry, so to speak, because I go in thinking, well, that's
Speaker A
funny. Why won't they say this? Well, that's strange. Why is this person contacting me? What? And then I just followed that because I'm deeply curious and then kept finding out really wacky stuff. So, an example of that would be
Speaker A
when I did the Samrian controversy, I get people reaching out to me and they're just like, "Hey, you know, I'm talking to you. there's a book you should look at and have you ever met this person and how about how about you
Speaker A
go to Iraq and we can arrange it and I'm like wait who are you what like uh no maybe sure who are you no no we have you know connections in the government okay um tell me more about it well and and I
Speaker A
was talking to this person in Facebook back in the day and they were trying to arrange for me to go on this exclusive sort of you know trip to Iraq before you could kind of go there and they uh
Speaker A
assuring my uh safety, getting me wrapped up with government officials and all of this. And I was like, "Yeah, right." But then all of a sudden, I got blown up on LinkedIn with a ton of people from like official capacity and
Speaker A
like military in the Middle East. And I'm like, "Wait, what? How is this?" And then I start looking into these people and then their claims and and then I find out that they're um related to uh other things that are
Speaker A
going on. Let's just say it goes like more into the occult. So because some people will say after a while when they maybe first discover my work looking at the Anunnaki they'll often confuse because they'll say well why are you
Speaker A
writing about things like Baffomet like how does that have to do with the Anunnaki um and it's like actually more than you know and I can't tell you that it has to do like directly one for one like Anki and Baffomet there's any
Speaker A
relation there I'm not claiming that what I'm saying is that the individuals who are deeply interested in the question of say the Sumerian problem that we discussed earlier the problem of who was the first, what are those bloodlines, you know, where is the
Speaker A
evidence? Those individuals who are hyper concerned with those things are also concerned with perhaps an Aryan Jesus or a non-Semitic Jesus or even an Atlantean Jesus or some sort of connection to things that are very much Illuminati coded. And then you're like,
Speaker A
well, isn't that strange? And so it just kind of I just followed it wherever it went. And so now here I am in 2026 doing work on Anunnaki and like the occult, Crowley, Baffomet, all of this stuff because it is related on a on a very
Speaker A
deep level on one hand and then a very just um political level on the other because whoever can claim, you know, that that they were the first or they are the elite or perhaps they're even the bloodline of these Anunnaki, then
Speaker A
they're going to have a stake in uh the divine right to rule and perhaps they're divinely uh entitled to rule us and that's that's the danger I think. So yeah, that was my uh beginning of naive where over time uh I saw people who I
Speaker A
might have been friends with and associated with some of these people actually die and uh again I I wasn't full in I I would write my books just I'm sorry say that again Heather. You saw um some of your friends actually died
Speaker A
um So, and many people might colleagues, yeah, many people might remember uh Tracy Twimman, the author.
Speaker A
So, um and so she wrote, uh prolifically about, uh Baffomet and these topics and uh she was another example of somebody that uh you know, and this isn't to I think she would she would agree with this. She even said this. So, don't come
Speaker A
at me anyone. And I'm not disparaging the dead, but her initial intrigue into her research was to maybe build her own secret society years and years ago to see if she could get people to interact and help her research. And the whole
Speaker A
thing became, I think, a little bit more than she had anticipated. And she got connected with um people involved in like the European elite bloodlines and this sort of thing. she got a little too involved and uh there's, you know, she
Speaker A
ended up being found uh dead in her garage. Um ruled a suicide, but of course there's many questions about that. Um it's it's a whole thing and people who are fans of hers will know.
Speaker A
Uh I was a friend of hers, but not a close friend. I didn't even know any of this was going on. I knew she wrote, but I mean I had no idea because at that time I was still going down the ancient
Speaker A
mysteries route. I was still looking at aliens and Anunnaki and this sort of thing and she was on full-on occult ritual sacrifice this that and the other and uh I didn't realize that that was going on but eventually what I found out
Speaker A
u because of well people she worked with uh people who are close to her reached out to me I actually had some in-person meetings uh with a few individuals about this and compared notes and found that in fact we had similar ideas and we came
Speaker A
to similar conclusions because we were having connections to similar people and that alone kind of freaked me out because I thought, "Oh, okay." So, I I you know, that that freaked me out to have that level of connection. Um, and
Speaker A
similar to uh I guess people you've said you've had Jason Georgiani on here. So, I had seen Jason on a episode of Danny Jones. Actually, I think it might have been one of the first Danny Jones episodes. I just had it on in the
Speaker A
background like the first one that I listened to and I was do literally doing laundry and I just was listening and it was sounding wacky and it was fun and then I started recognizing some references he was making and I was like
Speaker A
wait who is this guy? I had to rewind it a bit and then something that everybody has to do the first time they listen to Georgiani.
Speaker A
Yes. and he referenced somebody called the Londoner and I was like wait and he kept going on and on and I was like no way this is someone that I know I know the London.
Speaker A
So I reached out to Jason and confirmed that it was in fact the Londoner and uh a couple of people related to that group uh were also rel kind of in connection to Tracy Toy and many different authors
Speaker A
and people uh and so and then people who were involved with that group um who've reached out to me um claiming to be part of a uh Masonic lodge actually two lodges uh one in London in one in Paris
Speaker A
um actually had a beef with this Londoner and wanted to tell me all sorts of things that were going on in that lodge. Uh so I I've been on the receiving end of a lot of information, a lot of I have flash drives of
Speaker A
information, things I didn't necessarily ask for or want and I didn't realize how deep it went. All of this to say just to say simply it's it's not to say these people are right about that or this or
Speaker A
that. It's to simply point out that when I started doing this, I didn't realize how it was. I was coming at it from a, you know, late night talk show interest.
Speaker A
It was Stanton Freriedman, you know, level knowledge like, oh, this is great. I'm going to learn about this or research the pyramids or whatever. Did not realize that so many people in positions of power took this so seriously. that became my overall
Speaker A
interest then maybe less so about like okay do the are the NASCA lines like actually alien runways like I don't give a [ __ ] at this point and by the way they're not I have evidence for that and
Speaker A
mostly it's not from me having evidence it's just look through the academic journals there's a lot of great argument as to why they're not and what they actually are that are I think more fascinating than the alien runways and
Speaker A
again this isn't to say that I don't believe in aliens I believe in a lot of strange things but those are beliefs those aren't knowledge and I can't claim to be an expert on something that is a belief of mine and nobody should I can't
Speaker A
I'm not if I believe something I'm not an expert I may be an expert about the knowledge like around the belief but my beliefs are my beliefs and my knowledge are is something else and can be changed but I'm just trying to essentially say
Speaker A
and I think this is a message I really want to get out there into that sphere that we there are there are things out here that seem either innocent or harmless or wacky or unbelievable.
Speaker A
And even if they are wacky and unbelievable or fake altogether, I know I know what I know. And I know that there are individuals in places of power and influence that believe things that we may think are crazy or that others
Speaker A
may think are crazy. And why that matters is because they have the resources to make decisions based on those beliefs. And we should know that because they make decisions for us. So we are living in someone else's LAR at
Speaker A
that point. And I like liberty and freedom and I like choice and I don't want to have to live in someone else's narrative that way. And so I I just like to point that out that that was my
Speaker A
learning experience with the whole thing. That's why sometimes it sounds like I don't have a solid answer about like what do you do you believe in this or do you believe in that? It's like it there's there's a back to that left and
Speaker A
right. Those are two political coordinates that came from a seating chart in 1789 from the French National Constitute Assembly. And it was a debate over how much power to leave the king. And they argued and argued and argued and at the
Speaker A
end of it the choices were the right or the left. Which which side would you be on on the the loyalist? say if the loy if you were loyal to the king you would go to the right and um it was a physical
Speaker A
thing because they were so like crazy in there they were yelling at each other and even fighting each other and so they literally just separated them from left to right and that's where we get so if you were conserving the
Speaker A
[clears throat] power or the monarchy you were on the right yes that's and and the left was just did it have to do with like the left-hand path or anything satanic ord was just not righteous.
Speaker A
I think it wasn't intentionally um not the left-hand path. That's a very interesting thing though because there is a little bit of a veneer there that you could later say that is connected.
Speaker A
But I it wasn't necessarily at that moment. At that moment it was just simply um that they were not loyalist to to the to the crown. And so they wanted um well I mean what we saw later right a
Speaker A
revolution. So they they wanted more of that. So it was the idea of uh the right versus the left. The left wanted um constitutional limits on the crown and they wanted individual rights against the throne and they wanted careers open
Speaker A
to talent and meritocracy and free uh commerce and like a free market. They were fighting against the guilds and they were fighting against corporate monopolies that came from those guilds.
Speaker A
Now that sounds great because it would have been great. Um, so that's why it's that's why it's hard to you can't even use these words to describe, right? Yeah. The left was the the left used to be the uh what do you call them?
Speaker A
Libertarians, I would say. So, and they're classical liberals. That's why they call them classical liberals because it comes from this older period and they wanted uh free markets to be a thing and they wanted defense against the um
Speaker A
aristocracy and established religion and they didn't want inherited privilege. So, you could see what was going on. You have the loyalists who are like divine rights and all that. You have the lefts who were more like what we would
Speaker A
consider our founding fathers to be like enlightenment figures. Now if you want to draw the connection to say something luciferian, you kind of can in a way because you can say enlightenment, Lucifer, the Illuminati, this was all a
Speaker A
light-based idea of of rebellion. It was about freedom. Do as thou wilt. Before that was actually, you know, cruyism, but it was the same idea. It was about saying no to this sort of divine right to rule and about divinity in in such a
Speaker A
case more broadly because you have the question of what is nature because the enlightenment brought in this question of nature versus God. Everything before was divine providence. Now there's a question of nature which we kind of take for granted. Now if I say nature it's
Speaker A
going to sound like trees and butterflies and organisms but nature supplanted God. And so now you could overcome nature. You could understand nature. You could do things in a very scientific way to become God. You know, it's a very nichin thing. But that's
Speaker A
what was going on. That was the start of that. And of course, you know, again, it's like, can I tell you that the enlightenment was good or bad? The Enlightenment was probably pretty sucky in a lot of ways because it led to a lot
Speaker A
of crazy things. But the Enlightenment was also good because would you want to live under, you know, the the king, the crown in that system? No. But the thing about it is is to make those judgments now is very difficult. And um you know,
Speaker A
I I can say what I would want. And I'm glad that it's happened the way that it's happened because I would like to live in freedom and not be like a peasant and not have to like milk cows
Speaker A
and whatever. But at the same time, I'm a product of my time. So, of course, I'm going to say that. Would I have been that way? Maybe then. I don't know. How would we know? It would be dishonest to
Speaker A
to say that we would know how we would be in that particular time and place.
Speaker A
So, I the only reason to point that out again is just to say there's more nuance. And I know somebody recently told me that X is not the place for nuance, but [ __ ] it. I it there needs to
Speaker A
be nuance. We're adults. We're not children. They've neatenized us so that we go he's a good guy or a bad guy. It's no no that's how they win. We we that's want to push us in those directions. We
Speaker A
can make moral judgments of course and we have to. But when it's so simplistic that you say like to a child, do you feel bad? Are you sad? those you still now you want to develop that child's mind later to say okay you're feeling
Speaker A
uncomfortable perhaps later you can say to the child are you feeling melancholy are you feeling grief that's sophistication and nuance you need to have that because feeling so if you're feeling grief is that bad are you sad yes but it's a little different it's
Speaker A
nuanced it's something else it's more precise so precision is very important in this discussion and when we have everyone going left right this bad, good, bad. Yes, we have to have a a system in place like a a good or bad. We
Speaker A
have to make judgments otherwise we'd have chaos, right? I mean, we can't just all do as thou wilt. But at another level, we have to be real here and understand there's nuance to all of this. So, yeah, it's um I think it's
Speaker A
really important to just point that out over and over again. Um Heather, um the the term Semitic are is it linked to the term semiodics and and what does it mean to be Semitic?
Speaker A
Um I I don't I don't know that the uh term semiodic is is linked. There might be an etmology there that I'm not aware of. So I wouldn't rule that out. Um but it's sort of an obsolete term like the
Speaker A
orientals. you know those terms that or or um Mediterranean that that sort of thing. It's a just a term for an ethnic or racial group um that was associated with people in the Middle East uh but especially um Acadians, Assyrians and
Speaker A
Babylonians and um Jewish people of course, Canaanites, a whole host of people, Phoenicians. Um and so it really goes into the idea of a cemetic language. Uh, so perhaps it is, you know, I there probably is, but I'm not
Speaker A
sure that there's a a direct um, you know, etmology, but I'm sure anyone could Google that and find out if there is. To totally totally fair. I I couldn't help but but think about it because we're dealing with languages, derivations, and
Speaker A
I I find it ironic that, you know, in in terms of the the view of the eugenicists, they're they're so interested in trying to find the claim to the the the originators of of civilization when it seems like the Anuna or the Anunnaki are
Speaker A
doing that as well. And I [clears throat] regardless of whether you subscribe to the the ancient astronaut theory, there does seem to be a sense of something is is pissing on trees to try to claim um authorship of of origin of man. Would
Speaker A
would you agree with that that assertion or that view that something seems to be imposing a a stylized kind of art architecture there's a choice that's made not just in the geometry and in the placement of these pyramids but but also they seem to
Speaker A
be showing up on different continents around the same time and I would even argue on the moon and on Mars. So something seems to be fighting a war over uh a claim of of the origin of man.
Speaker A
I would I would agree with that 100%. And I think they're fighting it in a a mult multi-level front too. And so, [snorts] you know, when you talk about like Seemetic, um, yeah, I if the root word perhaps is involved in semiodics, I
Speaker A
don't know, but the when you have those types of groups, what those groups have supposedly in common, it was believed that they were um descendants of Noah.
Speaker A
So, that's sort of that idea of that of like who who is the the beginning, the story of man or whatever. Um, it's it's fallen out of favor though because I mean in a scientific context you can't really, you know, I I'm I'm not saying
Speaker A
there wasn't these people like Shem or the sons of Noah or any of that, but it's just a question of theology to say like a Seemetic group of people in these locations was actually bloodline related to Shem, making them like Semites or
Speaker A
Shemmites, however that would be. Um, so I don't I don't I think that what we have here is um this question of who can stake the claim to like the first and the bloodlines. And I think that's uh
Speaker A
been a quest for a lot of different people over a lot of different eras. And it is like it's there's questions of it based in theology like that. There's questions of it in uh just mainstream say evolutionary biology. there's uh
Speaker A
they're coming at it with questions of um uh language groups. So on all these different fronts there seems to be that interest. I think on one hand it makes sense because people are interested in the first, right? Who's the first? I
Speaker A
think that's why maybe a lot of us even like history is to figure out where did this all begin? But there becomes then a pathizing of that where it then links to well if it started here it must be the
Speaker A
best or it must originally belong to us. And that's where we're having great problems, I think, in the world today.
Speaker A
I um I have to assume you're not religious. Oh, no. I'm I actually I mean, I would say religious.
Speaker A
Maybe not in a traditional sense. I was raised Catholic and uh I think that's beautiful. I don't I don't have any problems there other than the obvious problems like everything's uh everything's corrupt and terrible. Like I mean I I suppose I'm not religious but
Speaker A
the word religion uh comes from you know speaking of etmology is the word to uh like comes from the idea of to relegate like you're relegated um I don't I'm not going to relegate myself to a man-made organizational system because I could
Speaker A
just say I see that everywhere like so for instance if I say okay I'm Catholic okay great that just tells you that I have relegated myself to this man-made structure that has these pregiven say like uh brands, right? I got I got
Speaker A
symbols, I got colors, I got codes, I have things I can say, a community built in, ready-made ideas so that if I feel one way about something, I better not because the institution says I should feel that way. And if I don't like
Speaker A
religion, well, that's fine. I can still have religion. I can have like brand loyalty or I can make my religion, say, uh a superhero franchise or a a political party. Whatever ism I want, I can make. And those are all humanra.
Speaker A
Those are made by men. And I I don't have a problem with that obviously. I mean, I I like society. I like to live in a society. I don't want to be like the Bohemians like and run out into the
Speaker A
woods and take off my clothes and say that I'll, you know, live a free natural life only to end up dead in the first winter. But at the same time, uh, I can't I don't fit anywhere. So, and I I
Speaker A
I know there is an importance though to the humility of relegating yourself to something um to a set of principles and ideals and stuff. So, in that sense, I would classify classify myself as um a Christian, but I don't even like that
Speaker A
word because it's kind of gross. No offense to any Christian, but I'm saying from my personal point of view because you're talking about still a religion with many different questions of who who, you know, put these books together.
Speaker A
um which ones are we to believe and which ones are we not to believe and belief is such a I don't I like the the quote from Nichzche of there's two different types of people in the world those who want to know and those who
Speaker A
want to believe and it's especially fun given the I want to believe poster from the X Files you know that classic trope but I don't want to believe I want to know but belief is different than faith so I do have faith I just can't I'm a
Speaker A
little agnostic because I can't in good faith say to somebody there is this way and I know the way and you by the way you better follow the the the way that I do because I just think that's I
Speaker A
personally think that's inherently wrong and if that means that I have souls that I've not saved and they perish because I wasn't there to save them hey so be it you know then I'll burn in hell for that
Speaker A
but that'll be my lot to bear but for me um I I I was brought up Catholic and I as I ran away from home uh I traveled and met many different people from many backgrounds and studied religion and
Speaker A
practiced a lot of different things a little like loosely as a teenager could and I learned a lot and then I took up a formal study of that and uh strangely I think the stranger part would be that
Speaker A
over that actual study it brought me a little closer to a faith. It it did the opposite of like what it might with somebody who's like, "Okay, now I'm an atheist." Like, I am by no means atheist. Just as I could I could not
Speaker A
tell you what God is, I I can't tell you what he is not. I say he just because it's it's how I was raised. I'm inculturated as a Christian. Um and I don't reject that because when I look at
Speaker A
um the the core tenants that I would believe, um love, redemption, I mean, these are things that are valuable to me. Uh, so it aligns with a generically Christian ethos. I would call myself a c This is I know this is tired, but I
Speaker A
would call myself um like culturally Christian, maybe generically Christian aspiring with an aesthetic of Catholicism and an appreciation for great art. Um, and to me, truth is supreme. And uh I hate that Blovatzky took the phrase from uh she actually
Speaker A
stole this phrase uh from Sanskrit, but the tr the that she stole for the Theosophical Society, there's no religion higher than truth. So, you know, [ __ ] her for that. But I do like that statement. Um because I think that
Speaker A
if you try to follow truth, beauty and goodness, the Platonic triad that is also uh revered in the Catholic faith and therefore then later denominations of Christianity, then it's the the truth is bigger than that. And if something
Speaker A
doesn't align with your denomination or your flavor, whatever your brand aesthetic, then then it's then it's not good because truth, right? if something is true and and whatever it is your club your club wants you to deny the truth
Speaker A
then maybe that's the problem with the club and not the truth and so that's I wish I could be a little more um precise with that though and say yeah I'm Catholic come follow me or I or one of
Speaker A
these like uh people who I call like brothodox there's like this whole group of orthodox people out now that are just like debate me bro about orthodoxy and I'm like okay I have no I can't debate somebody on whether or not somebody
Speaker A
should believe a thing. I mean, that's not my Queen Elizabeth I said that she was not going to make windows into the souls of men. And that's how I feel. I feel like, you know what, we can all
Speaker A
have our beliefs. We can all have our faith journey. Um, unless if and unless it starts becoming a societal problem, then we have then there's there then there's rule of law. So, like for instance, if I believe my my God is
Speaker A
telling me that I deserve this promised land from 3,000 years or whatever, and then so I'm going to go like carpet bomb and kill innocent people. I think it's time for people to step in and say, you know, I don't really care about your
Speaker A
beliefs at this point because it's hurting me and it's it's wrong. It's wrong to kill. It's wrong to kill innocent people especially. So, I mean, I but I do wish I could have a better uh answer for people like that
Speaker A
because it does seem to get under everybody's skin that I'm not committed to a faith, but um Oh, it does.
Speaker A
It is. It is what it is. This show is set up as a trap. So, no matter what you say, you're going to offend 50% of the people.
Speaker A
Oh, I know. But that's life in general. That's just life in general. And I I always just have to speak Oh, this is going to sound talk about woke. Um I have to speak my truth. [laughter] So, you know, it is what it is.
Speaker A
If um modern modern eupfology or UFO disclosure is a scop astroturfing Armageddon, what do you think the endgame is? And speaking of religion, are we ushering in a new religion? Is this the new world order?
Speaker A
Or what do you think the endgame of of this modern movement is? Great question. I have written a lot on this and so like for big details, I would say, you know, not not to plug myself, but just go, you know, read us
Speaker A
some of those details. And what I'll give here is a more abbreviated answer because I could talk forever and like so um so I I do think that a lot of what's going on especially in disclosure so-called is this astrourfing the end
Speaker A
times and that is uh shout out to Sam tripoly he's he's the first one to say that to me and I was like yes that's what it is so I'm not taking uh credit for astrourfing the end times but that
Speaker A
is what they're doing and I believe and by they they are a um people who are involved at high levels of government but also technology business religion.
Speaker A
You can't call it like the Illuminati. I mean, you kind of can. It's a nice like catch-all, but it it's a it's not just like a left or a right or a this or a that. It's it's factions from those that
Speaker A
are all trying to work towards this one goal. And there are people that can be named. I believe Peter Thiel's part of that. I believe that a lot of people with that cash that are able to fund these ventures are part of that. And
Speaker A
what they're doing in my view is using biblical text to gameplay to sort of act out like a script the end times prophecies. So that so but it but it isn't just a target of like Christians or Abrahamic faiths.
Speaker A
It's all fronts. So, if you, and this is where it's going to sound really like anti-semitic, uh, but here's where it is. If you have a group of individuals who have an interest in claiming that they have the right to rule over the
Speaker A
world and in that then own the world as in the land and all of that because they're supreme, they're superior.
Speaker A
You're going to have to go to great crazy lengths to convince people because you have people who are not faithful at all. They have no religion. They don't care about what God told you. So, you know, [ __ ] you and you're a dumb God.
Speaker A
I'm a scientist. Like, whatever. So, you're going to have to then appeal to that group with science. You're going to have to do different things there alto together and say well you know according to the u maybe the archaeological record
Speaker A
you can see that we've carbon dated this to be this old meaning these people have had this land for this long so there's some science you could say okay science etc check the box you could say you know
Speaker A
what I don't care about science I am not interested in that I'm also not very religious I don't care I just want power man I'm I'm into like politics and governance and and okay great well now we can make the argument say, well, we
Speaker A
have the right to this land. Well, what is a right anyway? I mean, well, it's a democratic concept. We have rights. We have Okay, so you can go into the weeds on that and construct an argument that does not need a god or a Bible or any of
Speaker A
this. Then you can convince people that there is a very logical and uh political reason that this land should be theirs.
Speaker A
Then you can say okay we have the you know the politics we have scientists now of course we're gonna have religion although yeah you know it takes it takes a lot to uh convince certain people because maybe you have to then make a a
Speaker A
certain translation say a certain thing or whatever or interpretation of that translation either way let's say we convince the religious people that you know this is great this is promised to us we're chosen people etc. Well, now you're still going to have those people
Speaker A
who I mean, maybe are like a little more creative. Maybe they think that there's a veil that is pierced every so often that maybe God and the organized religions don't really represent that well. Maybe they don't even care about
Speaker A
politics because, you know, they're all just liars. Maybe they don't have the same line of thinking and they think just out of the box, maybe more psychically or metaphysically or however. What story do you give them to get them on board your supreme, you
Speaker A
know, narrative of of being owed this land and being having the divine right to rule? If you don't believe in a divinity, well, you can say like Sitchin said, uh, Jerusalem was where the Anunnaki first stepped and where they're
Speaker A
going to come back. and you can say things having more to do with like uh you know maybe science fiction or mythology or you pick the narrative um and then you'll have those potential naysayers covered. So it's a multiffront
Speaker A
war of of information and so you have to have as many people kind of buying it as possible in their own way and they have people that have gone out and tried to make these narratives. And so it just
Speaker A
when you look at it you say you could say at least isn't it funny that the most desperate people that make no they don't agree on anything right? They don't agree on anything at all. Yet, they can all somehow go around the same
Speaker A
maze and circle the same thing and all come back to the one thing that's most important for these individual narrative makers to agree on, which is we are owed this land. We are superior. So, it's like it that those questions are are
Speaker A
kind of what make me wonder. Uh so, I look at it that way. Um, now does none of that needs there to be a god or no god or a bible or armageddon or none of this. This is it's inconsequential in
Speaker A
because if somebody wants to use the narrative, it's not proof of the the the things in the narrative or you know evidence against it either. It's just simply that it's being hijacked. uh Peter Teal has spoken about you he's
Speaker A
he's an evangelical Christian uh raised that way and he's spoken about it already where you know we need a new human narrative. He says we need a new story to kind of explain all the changes that are happening so that we can break
Speaker A
out of this chaos that he thinks there is which you know arguably we're it's pretty chaotic but he comes from a background that is heavily informed by a philosopher named Renee Gerard and and Gerard great philosopher really great
Speaker A
interesting uh concepts I do not have a problem with that or anything and I highly recommend everybody read everything Gerard has done because you will then understand what these people are doing particularly the so he is a Gerardian and his view of things then if
Speaker A
we look at him say and we see these paradox like questions like okay well he's an evangelical Christian but isn't he acting like the antichrist well why is he going around doing anti-antichrist speeches and lectures uh but at the same
Speaker A
time he doesn't seem to be like uh stereot stereotypically Christian in values because he's homosexual and uh maybe promiscuous and you know very power oriented. Um so that would seem inconsistent. So all of these inconsistencies are only inconsistent
Speaker A
when you've been forced into that leftright paradigm or whatever that Hegelian dialectic is. You're like well he can't be Christian because he's this or well of course he's Christian because he says that when the real truth is he's
Speaker A
not he's not in that paradigm. He's something else. it's more nuanced. And so those people who understand the the third, fourth, fifth ways or any of those, they speak to each other at those levels and they look at us, so to speak,
Speaker A
or the collective, those profane that, oh, we're stuck in their little scop. We're they're stuck in their WWE, you know, uh, ring fighting it out while in the meantime, we we are following a whole new set of philosophies. And so
Speaker A
Peele is outwardly saying the things that he'd like to see happen. And one of them is that there's this push towards Christianity. And the push towards Christianity is because it it's argued by Gerard that that is the best way to
Speaker A
satisfy and take away the chaos because of the notion of scapegoating. So it's this whole anthropological idea of um you know people getting all worked into a fervor. I'm really paraphrasing to uh but getting essentially worked into a
Speaker A
fervor because of their economic pressure valve was taken away from them. Um and so the economy is it just can't go on forever. And the idea of something called mimemetic desire is fueling all of this. You just want and want and want
Speaker A
but it comes to a head because all of that want and desire and that growth engine and economics creates violence and creates a whole system of violence.
Speaker A
And that in the past the way that that was solved was a pressure valve being released by the ruling class and that was through sacrifice. That is through the scapegoat. And so over time of course Jesus is the is like the last if
Speaker A
if you look at it in a cultural sense okay you would say um because we're in the west and you look at the amount of people that practice or at least have been influenced by the fumes of this
Speaker A
practice. Okay. So it's not to paint it in a lens of purely western christryendom. It is just to say that even if you are agnostic and you live in America, all your culture has been shaped by even the the last breaths of Christianity. So
Speaker A
there's not escaping this bias. So, in that sense, you're leveraging that bias because you say, "Well, Peter Teal, we need a new religion for all this like new era of posthuman AI future, but people aren't going to want to sign on
Speaker A
to a new religion, and there's going to be too many uh like too much baggage that needs to be dealt with." And historically, the and anthropologically, it's argued by Gerard that the best way to do that is to have the pressure valve
Speaker A
have a scapegoat. And it has to be like a big like a killing essentially. So you have the scapegoat and now a new dawn can occur. And you would have that but you can't jump into like a brand new
Speaker A
Peter Teal boat because people would be very skeptical of that most. So instead what you do is you get something from the ancient world that it will persist.
Speaker A
So you can have something like Christianity that says okay look we're all going Christian. It's just a new way of being Christian. So essentially he's using Christianity as the lifeboat trying to get us all to jump ship into
Speaker A
this little lifeboat and to to and some people will then look at that and say that's great because I want to be Christian and I believe in Christianity and maybe JD Vance even someone like that if if someone would be an apologist
Speaker A
they could take that approach and say well they they see that it's a good idea. Peter Teal will take people to lunch and woo them a little bit. you and from my understanding I've not been to these lunches but I know people who have
Speaker A
and said that yeah that's like what he does is just try to reason and talk and he could come across as reasonable if you're already sympathetic towards the idea of having to you know you want this craziness to end and maybe it's not so
Speaker A
bad to have at least a Christian world so sure we'll sign on to that but is it Christianity what is it what denomination what is what are we even talking about so he's making he's using it as a Trojan horse I ass. Maybe that's
Speaker A
probably not the best metaphor, but it's something like that. And so that kind of answers the questions that some people have had, which is why are all these people in the alt media, which is now kind of the mainstream media, why is
Speaker A
there this push to convert to Christianity? And then Christians will say to me, what's wrong with you? Like it's a good thing. And it's like, it doesn't matter if it's good or bad. It it's even if you're a Christian, you
Speaker A
should be looking at this as, hold on, you are using my religion and faith. you know, you're misusing it. You're you're you're this is not good. So, this isn't a time to argue about those specifics.
Speaker A
It's a time to look at what's really going on. We can argue about those things later. That's what in sociology they call luxury belief. It's like, you know, you're you're in a gated community, right? And you say, "I think
Speaker A
we should defund the police." Well, you think that because you have a gate and uh you know, private protection and probably a couple guns in your house.
Speaker A
But ask somebody in a more vulnerable neighborhood, do you really want to defund the police? Um, and you don't have to make it racial. You could say, "How about in the in the country where it's very rural and maybe something
Speaker A
happens and it takes so long for them to get to you?" Like, it doesn't matter.
Speaker A
This idea that you defund something, you can say that from your luxury living where you don't have to worry about things like guns and and whatever because you're protected. It's like why, you know, people in positions of power
Speaker A
who have secret service and whatnot say, "Ah, we should get rid of guns." Well, you can say that because no one's threatening you. So, it's called a a luxury belief. And what they're doing, and I I talked about this in my Substack
Speaker A
about are the aliens like demons? I mean, that we shouldn't we shouldn't be uh worrying about that right now. Of course we will and it is interesting and everyone should talk. But when the overall narrative has us being pushed
Speaker A
into these camps where all we're talking about is like angry arguments about is Christianity good or bad? Maybe that means Peter Teal's good if he's Christian. These are the arguments they want us to have because we'll be fighting each other over all of this.
Speaker A
Those things can wait. It's like the house is on fire and we're worried about who is going to like have the last piece of cake in the fridge. It's like, you know what, we if the fridge is still
Speaker A
here, we'll worry about that later, but right now we need to like stop the house from burning. So, but they use those things against us because they're easy or it's an easy fun thing to say, you know, should we all worry about if
Speaker A
everyone's becoming Christian or not? Or should we hate Muslims? Or maybe we hate Jews now or are they aliens or demons?
Speaker A
And I it's just like how about who's planting these narratives for one thing and and then we'll talk later about those those interesting questions.
Speaker A
I'm I'm going to take the target a little bit off your back and put it way more on my back because I want you to go deeper. I don't want you to back off because you hit the teal subject and teal might be a luxury
Speaker A
meme, but I can't unless I'm going to get out of UFO rooms. He's going to keep coming up. He's like high up on the Antichrist list up there with Georgiani, Trump, Sam Olman, sometimes myself, but he's Tal is
Speaker A
way up there. So even if he is a luxury meme, I mean even even even better if you offend the entire room, you seem to have a unique perspective on teal.
Speaker A
Can can you just rip off the kimono and go full teal like expose? Because we have Georgiani where he was the last time Georgian Johnny was in here was was December and I knew he was referring to Teal as the head of the Collins elite
Speaker A
and he wasn't ready to fully disclose it and then I think January February he straight up calls out Teal as the one behind the purveyor of this. they're all angels or demons.
Speaker A
And he he straight up blames him for narrowing or constricting the the conversation to to that level of myopia.
Speaker A
And then there are people who can't watch a single Jesse Michaels interview because I think uh Teal funds has some sort of business relationship with Jesse Michaels. And often those same people can't hear a single word from Eric
Speaker A
Weinstein without saying, "Yeah, but he's corrupted by Teal." So, I mean, I think Teal is a brilliant entrepreneur and I used to listen to a lot of what Teal had to say about money and economy and capitalism and companies. I had zero
Speaker A
uh religious thoughts about Teal, zero Prometheian thoughts, zero thoughts about Christianity or the Antichrist.
Speaker A
Now, Teal is synonymous with the Antichrist. So my question to you is what the [ __ ] is going on with Teal and how should we think about the people associated with him and what do you think he's his role is
Speaker A
uh and what he's what he's trying to do and if you can keep one more thing in the shortterm memory what what is the sacrifice that is supposed to function as the pressure release valve.
Speaker A
So very good questions and yes I wouldn't I don't know that I would classif well I guess teal could become a luxury meme at this point because it is like you said everybody can talk about them and pile on and it can also become
Speaker A
a distraction. Um you know sort of like even the Epstein list u so a lot of this can be like I think leveraged so that we're just still fighting each other and fighting over these details and then everything gets thrown out at once like
Speaker A
you mentioned. um you know uh I don't know if you mentioned it was Eric or Brett uh the the funding there or the relationships there or any of that that's something that people have talked about frequently as well they may be
Speaker A
funded by teal or um or something like I know Tucker Carlson network was heavily funded u by teal and so it's like everybody treat an association with teal as though it's captured by teal captur invalidates everything and and to take
Speaker A
the target off your back you said what did you say luxury belief Was that the term that you use?
Speaker A
Yeah. I Okay. I think I kind of think meme is a good one though. I think I I kind of think that's a good one too though because it because are are we really believing a lot or do
Speaker A
we have enough info to believe or do we just in this like rapid fire social media landscape? We just have these memes where it's almost absurdism. So I almost think that you've coined something better with luxury memes.
Speaker A
I was just I was just picking up where you left off. I was just expanding it.
Speaker A
But I like it better. [laughter] Isn't Isn't Alzando a luxury belief? The idea that Alzando still matters. The conversation around Alzando. That's why I wanted to get get the slings and arrows my way.
Speaker A
Like, who gives a [ __ ] about Alzando at this point? Exactly. And I'm talking about them.
Speaker A
Oh, I love it. That's No, but that's your ex pointing to the exact thing. I mean, and when you have a luxury, uh, you can do that because there is admitted fun, a guilty pleasure of being able to, you know, maybe listen to
Speaker A
people's interviews and debate and think, "Oh, could this be a real video of a tic tac or could this be the jellyfish thing?" That's great. But we all kind of can participate in that willingly. when it's something that
Speaker A
we're not willingly participating in and it's a scop or a narrative being placed upon us that can dictate how our lives go or maybe don't then there's something more serious about it and we don't have the luxury anymore of sitting around
Speaker A
just talking [ __ ] it's okay we we'll go back to that once we've stabilized you know so in terms of the um the idea of teal and what he is in this and the obsession with the antichrist and
Speaker A
whatnot uh so my read on it and and the that others have had as well is that he doesn't necessarily see himself as the Antichrist. Otherwise, I think in his lectures, he would be like, "Hey, I'm the Antichrist." And I know a lot of
Speaker A
people would say he is at least an an antichrist figure. uh but I think he aligns more with what is called the catacon in uh and that is a a a term from Paul actually in second Thessalonians and the word means
Speaker A
restrainer and it is a specific so there's all these different things right and so you have the antichrist but you also have the catacon which is supposedly the figure or force that holds back the arrival of the antichrist
Speaker A
and he keeps history from collapsing ing into the final chaos of Armageddon. So if you consider Theel and his study under Rene Gerard at Stanford and in a set of his closed lectures at the Commonwealth Club, he that was later
Speaker A
transcribed and published by the Guardian uh last year, he even cast himself in that role. He reads the Katakon through uh who was a this Nazi guy uh Carl Schmidt. um via Wolf Gang Palver scholarship. So the these are
Speaker A
things I would recommend everybody kind of Google and look into these people. Uh it will give you a great understanding a much broader understanding of what is in the mind of him and others. Um, but they argue that the surveillance
Speaker A
infrastructure AI and Palunteer is the now while we might say that's like a very dark thing, right? I I think many would agree that like flock or all of this is like an antichrist or big brother system. It instead is
Speaker A
reinterpreted to be the damn holding back the one world antichrist state rather than an instrument of it.
Speaker A
You just [ __ ] everybody up. Everybody's like calling in sick for work tomorrow. Hold hold on. I need I need to inhale on my vape again. What?
Speaker A
But do you see do you see now I like to I really like to refer to a lot of this as laring liveaction roleplay. And the reason for that is because in the occult world going back to you know the 1800s
Speaker A
even uh you could be placed in what was called an occult prison. And they say Blavzky, Helena Bllovsky, uh the theosophical society, you know that uh woman, she was placed in an occult prison. This idea is that you can have a
Speaker A
liveaction roleplay happening where you are a part of it. Kind of like the Truman Show where you don't even know that you're part of it. So this is not to give people free passes and this that and the other. It's for understanding
Speaker A
because the questions are very uh counterintuitive like okay so how come this person who's saying all the things I might like to hear and maybe write on whatever he's getting funded by teal and how come this person's bad but it's not
Speaker A
there's all these like difficult ways to look at this and it's very ob it's obtuse but you could say in some cases uh maybe some of these individuals don't even know that they have a lar around them that there's characters and bad
Speaker A
actor that are placed in front of them to pull them in. So, um I and and keep keep on going where you're going. I didn't want to derail you and I I I can put a put a bookmark in that about the
Speaker A
LAR because I I would like to revisit that when it comes to David Wilco.
Speaker A
I was only expressing the collective unconscious as a release valve so we wouldn't have to sacrifice someone. Uh, and my my my handler was telling me you have to because just to recap for people, your take on Teal,
Speaker A
at least in how he might see himself or in a way that he's functioning is the anti- Antichrist.
Speaker A
Yes. Not accelerating the antichrist, but holding it back. Holding it back. Yep. How do you spell catacon?
Speaker A
It's a k a t c h o n. Oh, wow. Okay. So you were talking Go ahead, Tiff.
Speaker A
No, no, I was just I was going to say that when uh Heather Dr. Heather Lyn was speaking earlier, uh I something when she was talking about I can't remember what it was, but I was going to inquire
Speaker A
about the priest class, how the priest class used to be the gatekeepers of the knowledge and the maths and now the tech, you know, the tech world, the tech tech bros, they basically are the new priest cast.
Speaker A
100% without a doubt. in in almost a literal form because what the priest class were the scribes they controlled the word because in the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God the idea of worshiping
Speaker A
the word that is so important to control that's why the the scribal this beyond the the biblical narrative if you go to Sumer again you have the scribal class using cunioform and learning how to write over and over again they would
Speaker A
repeat this and if you wouldn't if you made a mistake or intentionally if you intentionally changed the words of a text say the epic of Gilgamesh you would be punished you'd lose your hand so it was very serious sometimes you'd lose
Speaker A
your life so that that affected things like the the Old Testament and so on this idea of the reverence and almost worship for the word itself that the the magic words that could be said or written down are sacred and So in our in
Speaker A
the way that we consume information currently it is through often the internet right digital means uh but those are through words and symbols and symbols aren't just little scratch marks or pictures symbols uh how symbols could like include the sounds. So symbols
Speaker A
doesn't just reference the the the a visual thing. Anything that holds meaning uh an abstract meaning say it's like a payload and then it can uh be shown or sensed by another. So like music can be a symbol, right?
Speaker A
The cross, the swastika, the ank. Yes. And those are those are symbols, but also um theme songs, light motifs like the Darth Vader theme song. That's a light motif. That's um uh Vagner uh in Germany kind of uh invented that. And I
Speaker A
would argue that uh John Williams like took that off, right? So this idea that when you have a uh character come about the song subtly has maybe the the same four tones or a particular melody and you can integrate that then within other
Speaker A
songs so that you kind of pick up on that this is the uh appearance of this figure that's symbolic. So anything symbolic like that. So we communicate what's in our minds. That's how we materialize things. That's why it
Speaker A
matters because otherwise it's all in our heads. Everything is there. So we have to materialize it through what essentially people have thought of to be magical. So there's magic words. And so the priest class, it's associated with u
Speaker A
you know religion or theocracy. They were also the healers and the scribes because this this was just a different way of looking at it. What they did too is they were the intermediaries between the base of the pyramid quite literally
Speaker A
and the top of the pyramid and they were a they had so much power as a result because they could go between the two.
Speaker A
Now in a technocratic system like this of course the priest class would be those who have control of the word what we can say. I mean I can say whatever I want to say. If I'm if I'm looking at
Speaker A
you face to face in a say a coffee shop or something I could say whatever. Um and but if I'm on a particular platform I you know maybe I have to use code words or maybe I can't say what I want
Speaker A
to say. So the control of the word whether it's in print or otherwise control is happening through these digital means more and more. It's going to be even worse too and uh soon when they are using artificial intelligence
Speaker A
as they are to go back over ununiform and other texts to translate them and then promote those meanings and then that way they'll say hey we've discovered what all this stuff means and because people just will accept it we'll
Speaker A
just they can change the narrative because it's they're trying to make us think that this AI is this like all knowing all sentient uh being and that whatever it says like a say a translation is is what it is because
Speaker A
it's so much smarter than us. But um while artificial intelligence is definitely amazing etc. it's it most people don't understand it. Most people are being afraid of it and there's a lot more out there to suggest that it is um
Speaker A
not as powerful as uh they would like it to be. Um I would recommend the work of Jiren Laneir and uh he was like one of the inventors of virtual reality and he has older book called you are not a
Speaker A
gadget. um while he is very pro- technology, he's made a a great body of work discussing um how we should maybe not lean on technology of course, but also uh I would recommend a uh a it was a debate I would say or a discussion um
Speaker A
called like don't promise the uh don't don't believe the promise. I would I would Google um don't believe the promise of AI and this is an older one before we had access to large language models and things like that and you can
Speaker A
see both sides a transhumanist and then people who were legitimately like the four founding fathers of Silicon Valley argue over the false promises and utopia that um artificial intelligence will bring versus what the practical matter is. And remember too when people are
Speaker A
trying to convince us of the magnificent potential of um anything technologically oriented, they do so a lot of times in an inflated way because of investors.
Speaker A
They want to promise a lot and then they get investors and so that makes a lot of headlines and news and it can serve to you know make people afraid. I'd be more afraid of the data centers right now and
Speaker A
the fact that so many people will want to use AI and rely on it for these nefarious things like changing the historical narrative and they're already doing that now uh with with these university projects. One of them is from
Speaker A
the transatlantic platform funding it and big like transnational organizations. So it really is a a question of who is controlling the word, who is controlling our information and our access at the end of the day to the divine. And this would definitely be the
Speaker A
priest class now I would say is um giving way to the people in Silicon Valley more broadly. and and I say giving way only because it's been a constant fight uh for a very long time particularly post-enlightenment where it
Speaker A
is um you know we have like kingship um we we have like a religious sort of theocracy thing happening the and then we have like the the kings have a contentious relationship with the with the church as we've seen in history um
Speaker A
but when they join together like you see in an ancient symbol of cross going into the crown. Um they have joined forces to kind of work uh against people and then of course you see the people as we
Speaker A
talked about the left and right who say enough of this we don't like this um this arrangement we're going to rise up and then they rise up but they're not rising up alone because they're funded by like a banking elites who are kind of
Speaker A
doing this. So you you see this exchange of power between the say religious secular uh but divine like half they build themselves as half divine because they're they have a divine right to rule. So there's the kings and then
Speaker A
there's the governments and then there's the banks or the people right and then it they are always fighting and changing and whatnot. So that's why you have what they themselves call aristo populism and that is another term that people should
Speaker A
Google and look into because notice that these Silicon Valley types the ones who are literal billionaires who have all of this power are building themselves not only as possibly like Christian which is usually considered a populist religion in historical context um but they are
Speaker A
building themselves as actual populists. So they go and they support populist movements. They are like not considering themselves liberal um or or any of that, but primarily populists. But how are they populists when they're when they're basically making a breakaway
Speaker A
civilization for billionaires? Well, they're not populists. They're aristo populist. They're the they believe in populism, but that there is an aristocratic framework to it and they sit at the top of it. So it's it's all different than it seems and that's by
Speaker A
design. And so something like we're given the false choice of is Teal the Antichrist or is is he a bad guy or is he a good guy? Well, he is the he he's the in between who thinks he is going to
Speaker A
keep us safe from the bad guy. And that's how people are able to maybe be fooled in my view. I think that that's one of the ways that he's been able to maybe fool some people who are unwilling
Speaker A
or rather unwitting participants in his grand scheme. So you may have a figure that's like, I don't know, he made a good case. We don't want the end to come. We don't want the collapse into the final chaos. Um so this seems like a
Speaker A
great idea and he seems to mean well. maybe I don't care for aspects of it, but we're going to get together and you know, so maybe people can talk themselves into that because they can see that he's keeping bad things at bay,
Speaker A
right? But if you're not even of that uh kind of Pauline Christian background, you would look at that and say, "No, he's just a [ __ ] Too much money. Eat the rich." Right? You could use a a
Speaker A
different lens that way for it. So, and I hope I didn't derail you. I want you to be able to flesh out your whole teal expose or exposition.
Speaker A
You you were talking about Carl Schmidt. We should look at him and that he has a Gerardian view and you you talked about how and and this is where I'm I'm I'm sort of missing the connective tissue.
Speaker A
Where where in this view would Palunteer um and I guess these ostensibly authoritarian or potentially authoritarian technologies like AI, how would that aid in holding back the antichrist?
Speaker A
Yeah. So because it is a um it would be a hard pill to swallow because we could look at it like that's just sounds really crazy. Um, so I think the uh the the danger isn't that it's Hold on one second. Matt, you have a hot
Speaker A
mic just so you know. All right. G go ahead. So in a in in this sort of view of it, I guess there would be like a coming world state like a new world order like the one we all generally think of. Um, but
Speaker A
in Teal's reading of it, uh, he could get control through centralized surveillance and the biometric identification, uh, programmable currency, of course, all of those really nightmarish things that we think would be the antichrist, but and and it would be, right, but that
Speaker A
would be the antichrist mechanism, but not supernatural power. It's the totalformational control. And so he views that you have to build systems capable of seeing everything too. And that that is what Palunteer is doing.
Speaker A
It's it's doing the whole mass data integration, pattern detection across like huge data sets and predictive targeting kind of like minority report stuff like thought crimes or whatever because it's sold to militaries, intelligence agencies, and even governments. But the stated purpose of
Speaker A
it as always is defensive. It's to identify the threats before a centralized totalitarian system can consolidate that power. So in his view, it's just a tool. The architecture itself doesn't distinguish between defensive or offensive. It's just a system. So a system built to detect and
Speaker A
preempt threats globally um is actually identical as we all can plainly see uh to a system that would built be built to actually control a population. So if the but if the antichrist power um in this theology is total visibility and control
Speaker A
over everybody and everything and information um the the idea is that if building the most powerful control apparatus on earth uh could actually stop it. Um, but it could put it, but obviously I mean I would say it's
Speaker A
obvious that this is just complete hubris and crazy people because it it just puts it into the hands of somebody else. So I think he just is thinking that he could do better. It's like when people say, "Well, communism hasn't
Speaker A
really worked." Sure, but it's because it's not been done right yet. And so, yeah, a totalitarian system that spies on you and ends up having you like synced into the system or whatever, uh, it won't work if it's done with the
Speaker A
intent of like evil. But maybe in the with the intent of you know the old chestnut the catacon maybe he can use that to to help us like it's either extremely naive or it's absolute disassociation of everything because you
Speaker A
are so rich and so above everybody that you have deified yourself or don't think you're corruptible.
Speaker A
I it's it's but that is the idea. So those are the questions that I think would be probably more beneficial to discuss and put out there. How could he think uh that this would actually work?
Speaker A
He can think whatever he wants. He's wealthy. You know, he has power to enact some of these ideas. But I really feel like the questions then should be discussed more broadly and more publicly because then we have the maybe the
Speaker A
answers of why is this person going along with it or why did this person take the money? Is it because they also agree? Um I I think that it's almost like what keeps happening where uh you have this intention like to the French
Speaker A
left and right, right? You have well we're the left and we don't want these kings anymore. We don't want this system. We're going to have like a French revolution and you know whatever.
Speaker A
But then the people who ran the revolution bring in a reign of terror and then it's it's like no better. But I it almost seems like that's what's happening is that yet again the human drive to say but in my hands it will be
Speaker A
different because I'm somehow special or more knowledgeable or better or whatever. I think that might be at play.
Speaker A
I I don't know but that's just on a basic human level. That's where I would place that is uh if I were to give him the benefit of the doubt. otherwise he just absolutely it it's just all fake and he's just
Speaker A
running this ruse to convince people of that. Um and it and that could be as well but there and and thank you and I just wanted your honest answer because there are some things that don't look like paradoxes they do look like
Speaker A
contradictions. So if for instance if Jesse Michael is is captured by Teal, why do we have what looks like a revealing of hidden science and a reality of some sort of intelligence being here? And at the same time, how
Speaker A
can he be the head of the Collins elite wanting to reduce this conversation to don't look up, they're all angels and demons, right? There's there's something there that doesn't make sense. And then you have some sort of mediator in
Speaker A
between one foot with almost and I and I know Eric you're probably not listening but in case you do it's almost like Eric Weinstein himself is dealing with some major cognitive dissonance where he seems to have one foot
Speaker A
uh firmly entrenched in a pathological nostalgia for for for where academia went wrong when it comes to the practice of science.
Speaker A
and on the other hand is clearly pointing out the failures of academia. It's it's so hard. I don't know what to do with this with this trinity of figures, right? Like do you do you do you have a view here?
Speaker A
Do do you do you even try to make sense of those three or or is that the mistake?
Speaker A
I think that no those are very good questions because they are I mean even with Eric and like sort of that connection to wines um to Epstein you know where it's like there's a lot of of uh inconsistencies
Speaker A
and a lot of troubling connections um but then sometimes people are able to make really good points and so you know I'm I'm not going to just like throw it off as one big LAR. Uh, but I will say
Speaker A
that there is there is a um there is a connection here with something called game B. B is in boy.
Speaker A
Game B. That would be another thing I would recommend people if if anyone's taking notes to sort of um you know look into or write down or or Google or whatever. Uh game B is a how do I explain it? It's a sort of um
Speaker A
project if you will. Um, it it Brett was really big into this. It's this I don't know if he still is. I can't say. I don't know. I've not talked to him. I've not met him. I just know that you can
Speaker A
see his own um discussions on game B. And so it's not like a secret. It's just maybe not necessarily uh like I don't know well-known. I don't know. But you can find it on YouTube.
Speaker A
You can look it up. But game B is sort of this notion of a uh scalable omni win-win new way of doing civilization. It the the theory or the idea is that there's a game a civilization that has like destructive externalities
Speaker A
and power asymmetries and that produces like an ex existential risk. Uh but game B on the other hand which has been proposed uh it's it's not a prescriptive ideology in that same sense um in the eyes of people who are would consider
Speaker A
themselves game B players um they they feel that no player individually is equipped to map out everything in advance. So they're it's almost like a libertarian kind of like when you have people who are literally in a libertarian party but they don't have a
Speaker A
leader and so it's hard for them to maybe get traction because like it's or like an anarchist like if you don't have rules then you can't really have a system to promote anarchy. So it's I don't want to say it's self-defeating
Speaker A
but it's something like that. Um so in this idea um there is this it's like game theory and different things but it used to be big on I think Facebook or Reddit they they had a I think a group
Speaker A
for it I want to say on Facebook I you'd have to look but um it was where people got together and wanted to discuss like a potential for you know like plan B right um I think that on their their
Speaker A
Reddit they used to have a a page there too that they were saying that they were going to kind of like jokingly say they're gaining the power of the gods but um without love or all of these other
Speaker A
features. Um it is a self-extinction scenario. So they they want to make a new social operating system. It's on game theory. So they feel like game A, as they call it, is what has brought us here to what they call a meta crisis and
Speaker A
then eventual collapse. And a lot of these academics got together and decided that game B is a good way to have a response to that. And and you can hear Brett talk about it here and there where it was very uh I guess scientific in in
Speaker A
some ways you could say and then eventually people got tired of aspects of it becoming more metaphysical and maybe even religious. So it's it's not as though everybody got agreed, but it's just this cluster of thinkers that it
Speaker A
kind of started getting together around 2013 and their whole idea was to hypothesize a replacement for the current civilizational so-called operating system. So and again they call that game A. And so they don't have a doctrine necessarily um and a diagnosis
Speaker A
uh but they're working they they kind of run uh models of that and talk about it and Brett was very involved in that. Um, and so, and again, in and of itself, someone could say, "Well, that's not bad. There should maybe be a plan B,
Speaker A
right?" But it also then points to this notion of people getting together, maybe like reimagining how civilization could look, um, maybe getting funding from different things. I don't know. You could see how people could get involved. But the fact
Speaker A
that it's not talked about a lot is always the thing to me that, um, I think stands out the most. It's like where is that discussion? Where where is that? Um the I think the the originators we'll call them were Jim Rut and Jordan Hall
Speaker A
and they published for years as Jordan Greenhall. That was like the pen name Jordan Greenhall. Um and then Rut was former chairman of the board of the Santa Fe Institute and also a tech entrepreneur. And um so the whole
Speaker A
enterprise is just like complexity science and systems theory and game theory as opposed to like just plain old political history or class analysis. So literally like trying to put game theory and things like that to civilization.
Speaker A
Um, and so then they use words like again I mentioned the metacar crisis and some of the figures involved in that are Brett Weinstein, uh, Forest Landry and, uh, John Vervi, if if anyone's familiar with with him. He's, um, I know Jordan
Speaker A
Peterson was like drunk off of his work, too. Um so uh he wrote a book called Awakening from the Meaning Crisis and that uh kind of over overlapped this idea of like game B. So it was the naming of it was like specifically
Speaker A
minimalist. They wanted to just do it like A B to avoid naming it and calling it something more like the regenerative civilization. Um that way you don't commit to a blueprint or a thing. You try to keep it very generic. So game B
Speaker A
is a placeholder for a solution that they claim has to be discovered rather than specified. So it's it's like trying to make this intellectually honest move towards developing a solution to our civilizational problem and all the meta crisises that we have and and all of
Speaker A
that. So this is like I would just encourage people to kind of look into that direction because a lot of it does cover AI uh biocurity institutional decay and um a lot of different things but uh I would say that's a connector to
Speaker A
that and so when people don't know those things necessarily like they're not really I mean people do know but if it's not really part of that like overt discussion then you know we don't have all the data to talk out.
Speaker A
I'm so glad you brought up game B. I I agree. Many people should look it up.
Speaker A
I'll add a few posts later so that people can get into it because there's a lot there that I just did not cover. It's very I think it's a really good thing to start looking at.
Speaker A
Um it has like Silicon Valley kind of residue all over it, too. And of course, anytime there's a group that's trying to maybe do something even in good faith with like, you know, new ideas or freedom or not having a a a leader, so
Speaker A
to speak, well, that creates a vacuum. And so people will step into that leadership whether others are like it or not, and then claim things and run off with it. And so we may see people who, you know, maybe aren't so bad and, you
Speaker A
know, running off game B. and others it might spawn some other more um I don't know nefarious folks we'll say but but it's sort of like a a practical behaviorally informed way to deal with the apocalypse.
Speaker A
Yeah. Yep. Okay. I would say I suppose that like well and and that's to assume that there is apocalypse coming. So and I feel like it's almost safe to say that a lot of people are banking on that.
Speaker A
I mean is there I mean the the word is so broad you can call it confirmation or disclosure or you can say that there's an extinction level event but if if we take your read teal even though it might
Speaker A
be ironic or naive has an anti- Antichrist view and a Silicon Valley what's the saying build it build the plane as you're falling down. Yeah.
Speaker A
kind of kind of approach to rearchitect society as it's falling apart so that systems in place.
Speaker A
Yeah. Where where where the in where the incentive is to bring the best out of out of human nature.
Speaker A
Exactly. I it sounds I mean if you have a person now say you are you know a person that might have something to contribute to some sort of venture like that and somebody comes to you and says hey this
Speaker A
is what we're doing and it's existential like we need to do this this is going to save civilization and you can be a big part of it and you know you might be enticed to join even if it
Speaker A
is somebody that's maybe funding it or people involved I mean because nobody's perfect nothing's perfect if if if I say if I asked you maybe what college you went to. You could say X and I'll say you know who really funded that in like
Speaker A
I mean everything's tied to something bad. So you could easily say well yeah this is the way the world works. We can't always approve of everything but at least I have a position here where I can make something good happen and I can
Speaker A
contribute in a meaningful way to save humanity. So, you could see that you might get people involved who don't even kind of realize or they're not even ideologically driven enough to care and they they don't want to say, "Well, I'm
Speaker A
not going to take Peter Teal money." Because if you don't take Peter Teal money, whose other money are you going to take? We're all taking money. You know, we're taking money from we're in a system where we have to get money. And
Speaker A
so, you could you have to take money from your employer. You got to take money from somewhere. And uh it's it's all corrupt and bad. So people can really talk themselves into a lot of different things and maybe even not mean
Speaker A
to. But I think that's why it's important to really look at those nuance questions because if you start if you just paint it with such a broad brush, not only would you blame people unfairly like they didn't know they were part of
Speaker A
it or they meant well, you could also then uh look at it inaccurately and then make somebody the fall guy for something and and say, "Well, this will be great if we just get rid of Peter Teal." All
Speaker A
right, get rid of Peter Teal. you have like you know four other teals pop up who are involved in the same venture in some way shape or form like a hydra because you're not getting to the root of the problem. The root of the problem
Speaker A
becomes like an egregor. It becomes its own thing. It takes on a life of its own. It's a thought form that takes the collective energy of people and and has its own life above and beyond the creators of whatever program or project.
Speaker A
So those people you can knock out of positions of power but it keeps going on. So it that and I think the solution to that is the deconstruction.
Speaker A
If an egregor or a thought form is created by all of the collective thoughts and ideas of people giving it power then you got to start going through and kind of deconstructing the whole thing as opposed to just seeing it
Speaker A
as one big monster that if you try to like you know raise a sword to it'll just cut right through because it's kind of a ghostly apparition.
Speaker A
You heard it here first folks from uh Dr. Heatherlyn, Peter Teal is the good guy. Buy stock and palent here. No, I'm joking.
Speaker A
There you go. Right. [laughter] Getting rid of all of your nuance for the last couple of hours. I couldn't help myself.
Speaker A
I can't wait till that gets clipped right there. Um, yeah, I have to admit it's not something I thought of. I actually I appreciate that perspective actually. I can totally see that being a possibility.
Speaker A
And then what's going to happen? I mean, the bad guys are going to come along.
Speaker A
Let's just say he's a good guy. bad guys come along, take the technology, you know, use it for for bad guy stuff is probably how it's going to go down.
Speaker A
Oh, yeah. And he's either a bad guy in the sense that he's tricking everyone like the classical trickster bad guy to make them think he's this catacon or good guy or he's just that dumb that he thinks that he could well and remember
Speaker A
this too, he's obsessed with Lord of the Rings. So that informs his whole worldview really to a point like many people are fanboys of something. But this guy takes it to a whole new level naming everything after you know Lord of
Speaker A
the Rings stuff and really just like so that's another way to like maybe look into his mind a bit like he may actually in his mind think hey I'm this great hero and I'm going to save everything and that's just childlike and foolish.
Speaker A
Um or he's completely just pulling one over on everybody who wants to look at him and say, "Oh, he's going to save everybody." I mean, we can't know because we don't know him. We even if we knew him. How many times do you know
Speaker A
somebody in your own family or somebody close to you and they do something completely shocking or you find out something about them you never knew?
Speaker A
Like we can never fully know. So, we can only do what we can do, which is expose ideas.
Speaker A
We may never fully know. I'm not going to I'm not going to dismiss that. We'll never know. Like we if we what if we get Georgiani and Weinstein and Teal in the space with you, you know, we might be
Speaker A
able to get to the bottom of some of this stuff. Get Jesse Michaels in here, too.
Speaker A
I'm all for that. I think that'd be that's a really good idea. And then you just you just have to hope that everyone's acting in good faith. And um I've had limited discussion with Georgiani. Um I have my thoughts about
Speaker A
him and uh I I think a lot of You want to make it exciting, Heather?
Speaker A
You want do you want to share some of your thoughts? Oh, yeah. No. Yeah, I would say it to him directly. Um, I I think he has amazing work. He sent me his books because I was like, we have some similar
Speaker A
ideas and things. Um, I think that, uh, you know, his his engagement with the Londoner and others was unfortunate. And I I think though that maybe that maybe you see the writing on the wall, maybe don't get involved with people in
Speaker A
that way. I mean, hindsight's 2020, so he probably regrets it, too. But I don't I don't know um if it's Yeah, I'm not I'm not sure of this whole push towards uh his idea of Prometheism. Prometheianism rather like
Speaker A
like this doomer in shambles. Breaking alert. Doomer in shambles. Not only did Dr. Heather say she was a Christian, which is going to get clipped exactly like that. Actually say that, but but that's that will be the clip.
Speaker A
Uh I'm evangelical. That'll be the clip. There we go. There we go. Doomer is in shambles right now. [laughter] I think he argues it really well. I think he I love his books. Like I have I love his work and I would love to talk
Speaker A
to him um publicly or even personally. I just haven't texted him recently because I've been busy, but I should. And uh I would love to like touch base with where he is now on some stuff because I just
Speaker A
think he's fascinating. Uh but there's some stuff that he'll say that I'm just like wait what? like and I'm not sure if it's he's saying I don't want to make accusations per se, but I would like to ask him is some of the stuff you're
Speaker A
saying like a little chaos magic or you you know doing something here that's like a you think you're doing a 5D chess or do you actually believe some of this and if you do believe some of it um you
Speaker A
know I believe he believes what he says and I know he has some connections and I've known similar connections so I would ask like well where are you getting this information and uh I would like to know what what there is to it
Speaker A
because I do think that he is earnest and and now he's he's kind of showy he's a character but I mean it is what it is he's creative um well I mean a lot of his information is coming from the entities right I think
Speaker A
he well I think he admits that yeah and I and my question to some of that well some of it and then other things like the the entities themselves that's where we could sort of diverge like his sources that are human. I'm
Speaker A
like I I get it. I would like to know more. But the entity component of it is where I'm like I you know like sure I believe you're having these experiences but I would like to know when you encount I'm very
Speaker A
fascinated with the notion of discarnate entities and I've talked to people over the years especially ones who say experience DMT and psychedelics and they meet el clockwork elves and I really am interested in disembodied entities of some sort but my question always is to
Speaker A
everybody who interacts with these things. I've spoken to Whitley Streber about this and I kind of agree with him on this, which is, you know, how do you know if they're good? You know, like, can you trust what these things are
Speaker A
saying? And every single, no joke, every single person I've spoken with about the DMT experience and I say, "Okay, you've talked with these entities. Are they good or are they bad?" Number one question, are they good or are they bad?
Speaker A
And it's always like, "Well, they're kind of both. They're like us. It's hard to say." And so it's the question of discernment again. Uh you know and and Whitley's had some really bad experiences and I believe he believes
Speaker A
he's had these experiences and that's I so therefore they are his experiences. They're the phenomenology.
Speaker A
They're his lived reality. So in that case they're not good. I mean they're not doing good things to people necessarily. I don't think these alien encounters are welcome. Now some people will say the opposite. They'll say, "Oh, they came in and it was very comforting
Speaker A
and reassuring." Well, that's valid, too. So, what what is the truth here? It seems as though we can't trust. That's the the takeaway because I can't say they're good or bad. I can say there's many cases where they seem like really
Speaker A
bad. There's many cases where they seem that the people who have encountered this are saying that they're very good.
Speaker A
It was good and life-changing. So there's this inconsistency here which leads me to constantly question if you are in fact involved with an entity whether it is an orb, it is a you know something coming straight off of a
Speaker A
metallic UFO, if it's an entity you've summoned from an a Ouija board, if you're it doesn't [ __ ] matter. Is it good or is it bad? How do you know?
Speaker A
Because that's where it all lies. Is this going to be something that is positive or negative? And so I I it it's a hard thing to say. So I would like to say, "Hey, Jason, how do you know that
Speaker A
these are telling you the right things?" These is this a trick? Not that Jason would be tricking, but how how can he know for sure he is not being tricked by an entity? How can any of us? And I know
Speaker A
that's mindbending because we have to have some level of certainty at some point just to function. So we're forced to make those decisions, but how do we know? How will we ever know? the next time we get Jason in here and just to
Speaker A
put it out there in the ether and to cast the spell. My dream is to get Jason in here live for when Trump gives us limpic disclosure. So that's because I know Georgiani will be ranting and angry and he'll make me look tame. But next
Speaker A
time we have him in here, that's got to be one of our questions for him to disamiguate. What which of his insights or views would he attribute to amuse an entity? Right. And which ones? Yeah. Is is that basically you're saying like you
Speaker A
you want to clear I would like to I would like a a bit of a delin. Yes. I would like that. And then I would also then the follow-up question would be of this muse of the entity whatever entity or entities
Speaker A
how how have you been satisfied that they have your best interest and our collective best interest at heart and that you're not being tricked? Is there is there a something piece of evidence that at least was enough for you to
Speaker A
accept that? Like where is that? Like what how do we know? How do you know?
Speaker A
How do you accept that? so easily, especially knowing what we know about our nervous systems. You know, we can have we can be made to have religious experiences even by just, you know, like I if you have a neurosurgeon open your
Speaker A
skull and they, you know, poke a little part of your brain, you can either have an orgasm or you get a little poke in the other part of your brain and you can feel like you just saw God. I mean, a
Speaker A
lot of this there are these neurological components and chemical components to it. So at some level the question is even if you felt that you were in the presence of something supremely divine you know people who have seizures feel
Speaker A
that or epilepsy they can have those types of experiences. I'm not saying he's having seizures or anything like that. I'm just simply saying what metric are you using to fully resolve for him that this is an entity worth listening to and that it is not
Speaker A
tricking or doing something uh wrong and u and I'm just genuinely interested because I you know I want to who wouldn't want to know. Well, correct me if I'm wrong, Doomer, but his main entity, he's in touch with the female
Speaker A
Satana. He says she's a trickster. He He does have a different view on the trickster archetype and entity.
Speaker A
I don't think Trick, yes, he does say this, but he does. I don't think he has your view of trickster or my view of trickster.
Speaker A
Uh I think I think he has a different view of it. But yes, that is what he says.
Speaker A
I think I think the trickster archetype is is problematic. Um especially because there's a trickster archetype there there's a trickster archetype as an entity and then there is also a whatever you want to call it in in religious mythology. there's a recurring
Speaker A
hermetic messenger uh resourceful kind of maggyverish theme that keeps on recurring. And although one definitely inspires the other, I think I think they they the significance is different when you're talking about a um some sort of tricksterish hermetic figure or
Speaker A
Prometheian figure or you're dealing with a trickster entity. I think I think the distinction matters is all I'm saying. Right. And so I we I think we need to speak more directly with Jason.
Speaker A
And I don't I'm not comfortable uh assuming what Jason's view is on on the trickster entity because I because my conversations with you Fringe have changed the way I look at entities and God and you know but it it's funny because
Speaker A
Heather you kind of sit in between me and French so I I will proudly proclaim that I I think truth is more important than faith and um you know but but yet you you have some sort of self-titling uh with with a
Speaker A
religion and there's I I think intelligent hesitation around anything that that is possessing or inspiring somebody that that's an entity, right? And and so when you when you put all the all those things together, um I I think I I think you have a very
Speaker A
interesting perspective. I you know I mean since we're since we're sort of there and talking about this I have a very hard time hearing narratives coming from NHI uh recounted by experiencers and reading religious texts and really hearing something different.
Speaker A
So when I when I'm looking at our history and the history of histories, some of this historioggraphy involves entity transmission as well, right? Isn't isn't the entire um you know, Islamic religion one that came through entity contact, right? So it's it's it's hard for me to
Speaker A
see a distinction between aliens and God to be honest with you. Uh, so I have my own personal biases that that are hard for me to to separate my my lens on the subject. Um, but I will I will
Speaker A
definitely make those I think I think these are questions that everybody has specific to Georgiani and Fringe and and Heather feel free to comment on on whatever I said.
Speaker A
Well, oh, sorry, Dr. Heather. I'm gonna let Dr. Heather answer this, but Doomer, I think um even if you want to see the NHI contact uh that we're having today and what you just mentioned about the Muslim religion and we could go to the
Speaker A
Mormonism and and all the UFO religions and all the alien religions if you want to even equate that as the same exact thing as what's documented in all the many books of the Bible, which most pastors would disagree with that, but
Speaker A
let's just take that at face value. Now, we're just back to what Dr. Heather said. You're looking at the entity. What entity is it you're in contact with? And what is the message? So, you know, we could at least start there.
Speaker A
Yeah, I think that's really important, right? Like the what is the Sorry, let me make sure my sound isn't completely messed up. I I hope this is better. What ground truth here? Because on the one hand, it's hard to say the ground truth
Speaker A
is your experience. the experience can be manipulated, corrupted, captured by entities. Um, but books, the internet, Sumerian clay tablets, even if they're fired nine or 10 times, uh, just because something is in kunoiform or Hebrew or Greek, does not
Speaker A
mean it's not corrupted. So, you know, this this is a fundamental question for me and I think um unlike most Christians, I do not think that there is protecting the written word from capture in a special way that human
Speaker A
neurology isn't. Um, and that's my own that's my own personal view, but but Heather, I'd be curious to hear what what you have to say. Well, that's that's interesting that uh to differentiate that because u something that I had a hard time
Speaker A
grasping um back in school was this idea like back at uh when I was taking anthropology and this sort of thing was the idea that the oral tradition is actually superior to the written that it's usually shows to be more accurate
Speaker A
which kind of blows my mind because I would think that if you're printing it you know but that is like some of the consensus in that field is that oral tradition uh is is a little more accurate which I I think of the game of
Speaker A
telephone and I think how is that even a thing because clearly that that little game demonstrates it's not very accurate. So if that's the case then you know what what is real you know just because something's old and written in a
Speaker A
text doesn't make it true because the writer of that text could have had an agenda and probably did as well. Even if they don't have an outright agenda, they have their own perspective or their own language. And that language comes not
Speaker A
with a one forone translation. There are many words and languages that anybody who can speak multiple languages understands that it's not a one for one.
Speaker A
You know, there's words that exist in other languages that capture an idea that don't have a direct translation.
Speaker A
And then of course there's slang or how we use the idea. Like if I say something is really cool, it doesn't mean that it's like temperature is lower than what was expected. It means that it's like approved socially or I like it. So
Speaker A
there's so much that goes into communication that yeah, it's uh it's difficult to navigate the landscape of history and try to find any truth out of it which is why it is again a social science and not um well sometimes even
Speaker A
not classified as a science at all uh in some fields and colleges or countries at all. So, but it is a social science or a soft science discipline and not a hard science because at every level, how can
Speaker A
we like we can't definitively test whether any of these texts are true? We can only definitively quantify maybe their dates like when they were written based on a series of tools and instruments that we have that we can
Speaker A
calibrate to a mathematic, you know, equation and go on and whatever. But we don't it's still so subjective that to find the truth in the past is is going to be I don't want to say impossible but there's always going to be that room for
Speaker A
discussion or debate. And at the end of the day like Napoleon said what is history but a fable agreed upon. So essentially what you're doing with history is you're talking about a series of stories and narratives. And that's
Speaker A
might be disappointing but it it is what it is. And so at least we can start there and then we can try to deconstruct it a little bit and ask those questions.
Speaker A
And as far as Georgiani it goes, I would really love to talk to him about that. I probably will text him after we talk just to touch base and see if I can uh you know just touch base a little bit.
Speaker A
It's been a while since I spoke to him and I would like to reconnect that way.
Speaker A
If you do get him on and feel like inviting me on uh at the same time, I totally be there.
Speaker A
Well, yeah. next time he's on, we'll we'll bring you up. You can be part of the panel.
Speaker A
Uh m make make things extra spicy and um you know and and I didn't mean to to cut you off, but yes, please reach out to him. And when you do message him, ask him this question as well for me
Speaker A
regarding his post, I'm just going to read it out loud for those who are driving. The reason Musk keeps reposting this video is because he's been briefed that what's supposed to pass for quote disclosure is imminent. It may be later
Speaker A
today referring to yesterday July 8th 2026. It may be tomorrow which would be today or a few days from now. Imminent quote unquote disclosure from pus. So just go and tell me those sweet lies. dot dot dot quoting from the video and he quoted
Speaker A
that five minute video that had a bunch of Aryan looking women and American patriotic flags and a bunch of other stuff. Uh it's a poor summary of the video, but a a lot of people saw it yesterday on X. Um what I don't know if
Speaker A
you saw this post, Heather, it's it's up in the nest, the one I just read. What do you make of that? I think Georgiani is is fairly aligned with me. We're just expecting confirmation.
Speaker A
We're not alone. But what do you make of that post? What do you think is giving Georgiani the certainty that some sort of confirmation is is imminent? Because I'm like, what the [ __ ] is going on?
Speaker A
Well, I from my perspective, I the only thing I without talking to him, the only thing that I would say is that uh I've I know he has a lot of connections and people he speaks to and I've seen him
Speaker A
kind of, you know, have inside information on those things. So, uh I I wouldn't doubt it. I wouldn't be, you know, if he's saying that, then I would just trust that he has a reason to say that. Uh now what it is I we'll see but
Speaker A
um I I would I would tend to take that seriously. You this I agree with you. This doesn't sound like an entity uh intel, right?
Speaker A
Yeah. I mean that is the differentiate. I I he Yeah, that's that's where I would draw those lines. You know, did the entity tell him or does he just have information? Because he probably just has I mean could be both. Who knows? But
Speaker A
uh it's very it's it's not impossible that he doesn't just have uh an insight into that or a connection into that and he knows and so yeah Johnny is incredibly wellconnected very much.
Speaker A
Yeah, I think some of it is his charm. I think some of it is is his preient research and and some of it is because he's a dangerous person and other people want to be in contact with him. That's
Speaker A
my conjecture. I think he has a background too of connections like his family and you know yeah so I think he's just always been surrounded by uh I mean I would guess that he's always been surrounded by people with connections uh
Speaker A
to different things geopolitically and and whatnot. So he can't be around that and not pick up a few things.
Speaker A
Yeah. But do you have do you have your your own thoughts any reason why now Trump might say we're not alone? What what purpose that might serve?
Speaker A
I mean, I think the I I think the classic uh response to that might just be a distraction. Um, but yeah, I I I would I'm just so skeptical these days on on those types of things that uh I would feel that it's another
Speaker A
op. And it's too bad because just like COVID where it was just like what did they you know they they eroded whatever trust people had left. Now, if there was some sort of awful disease that came out where maybe a a little face mask would
Speaker A
help, like [laughter] maybe whatever the advice would be, like 15 days to flatten the curve, uh whatever happens, we're not going to listen. I mean, they're going to tell us maybe something will happen and we're going to be like, "Ah,
Speaker A
[ __ ] off. We're not going down, you know, that route. I've already seen Tiger King. I don't need to follow up to that era." Uh, and then maybe the joke will be on us and we all drop dead. I
Speaker A
don't know. But that's the problem with the erosion of trust in institutions. There needs to be trust in institutions if we live in a institution like a civilization if we we have to be able to have trust. Um but that's been eroded
Speaker A
and not just eroded but like now literally destroyed almost by design. So from my perspective if if the president I mean at this point if if they landed on the White House lawn I would go scop project blue beam I don't give a [ __ ]
Speaker A
It's a hologram. I would just not believe anything. Um, it would take a lot now for me. Maybe not. I mean, but you know, they have all the technology where they can beam thoughts into your head and whatever. Like, I mean, that's
Speaker A
a marketing tactic anyway. They've had that for a while where you can, you know, hear the things that they want you to hear on different levels. And there's just so much technology that I would be so skeptical of almost anything. And
Speaker A
perhaps that's the point. And perhaps that's why there's so much AI slop out there is now uh we're going to say ah we can't believe anything anymore. Um and in fact I don't even believe you're who you say you are and I need proof of that
Speaker A
because maybe there's been something you know the consequence that's great to that and there's liability. So uh we'll be begging to have biometrics to just get online and that's you maybe that's the point is to confuse everybody to the
Speaker A
point where they feel that they need uh that infrastructure and maybe that infrastructure is Peter Teal's game B paradise and they'll just come in and we'll love our servitude and think that it was all great. I mean, maybe that's
Speaker A
what they think is going to happen, but I uh I just tend to be skeptical, especially these days. Like, so I don't know. Distraction maybe, but uh I don't want to believe. I I kind of want to know the truth. So, I'll just always be
Speaker A
asking those questions. I'll be like, I don't know. That alien seemed kind of short. I thought he'd be taller. It's I suspect there's something be debating that it may be uh an antichrist like or Prometheian or Luciferian thing to say. But if truth is
Speaker A
possibly the next evolution of faith, wouldn't wouldn't that mean that trust is not sustainable anymore?
Speaker A
that maybe we shouldn't be living in a society where there is intrinsic trust regarding even the fundamentals of our reality. Maybe there there needs to be a shift there as well.
Speaker A
Well, I mean it would depend I think on what what the uh outcome you're looking for for that would be like there would be a practical concern. So, uh, if you're looking at it in a pragmatic way, that would be one thing. But I think if
Speaker A
you reduce that question down as much as you could, you're the question is um, what is the value of faith? Is there any value of faith at all?
Speaker A
I mean, not even necessarily believe again, but just like anything of course. I mean you have you kind of have to have some faith like you can't even draw breath if you if you don't have some will to believe right that
Speaker A
there's enough oxygen in the next breath. I so I think it's never sustainable at to have no trust and no faith. I'm saying you know this this idea that trust is the thing that we're aiming for. Maybe we're setting the bar
Speaker A
a bit too low in society by looking for trust and authority. And maybe we've set the bar too low spirit spiritually as well. You know, maybe people of faith should want to know God and maybe people in a functioning society should aim for
Speaker A
something higher than trust. I think that's a I I I like that a lot.
Speaker A
My only question with that would be how do we know truth? Is that only observable? Is it observable truth? Like we can observe it through say like a a Hegelian dialectic. We have a thesis, an antithesis and out of that we should
Speaker A
come to a synthesis where both parties can see and let go and look up and say I objectively see this third way or I've done these tests and I've been able to replicate the data and now others can
Speaker A
see that this is what emerges that is the truth because I've observed it that makes it objective. So is that contingent upon our objectivity which would mean it mean it be what what is it contingent on then our senses? Do we
Speaker A
have to see to believe? Do we have to have math or like to quantify it? What is tr how do we what is the ultimate tool that will convince somebody that there is truth? Like what is that truth?
Speaker A
Because I think no matter what you'll get to that point where it's like yeah but is it true? you know, I I yeah, I mean, my personal best answer to you, I think I mean, I and this is my biased lens, but I'm I'm
Speaker A
observing what I think to be um a a mass psychosis that is that is pervading scientific thinking and also just practical intelligence. And I think we should what you can definitively prove even in this age are lies. So, it's it's
Speaker A
easier to prove the lie than it is to prove the truth. Um So I think deductive reasoning and deductive logic uh can eliminate a lot of the lies. And then I would take the Sherlock Holmes quote if you burn all
Speaker A
the lies then you're at least approximating the truth and whatever you're left with no matter how crazy it is.
Speaker A
If it's if you're left with one thing then that is the truth. Um and if you're left with a few things then at least you've approximated it. But I think we what we've done cuz you cuz you talked
Speaker A
about you mentioned that there was a a list of firsts, right? And then that there were some things that were proven to not be the very first for for Sumer.
Speaker A
And then it made me wonder what are the some somebody commented in in in our thread here on the space. Why would investigating our ancient history be referred to as pseudocience? And I think what you were referring to was that
Speaker A
there's certain invisible boundaries in certain fields in academia. um you know in in physics, in biology when it comes to evolutionary theory and in archaeology I assume some of these boundaries are it's treated as as a given that civilization is only x years
Speaker A
old. It's treated as a given that we were hunter gatherers for hundreds of thousands of years. It's treated as a given that we didn't have more advanced uh societies even though we might not be able to track what we did or didn't
Speaker A
have. I was wondering if you could reverse the list of firsts and maybe give me a list of of forbiddens when it comes to your field. Um things were things that were treated as axiomatic truths.
Speaker A
uh even though the evidence for for for those assumptions is is lacking at best.
Speaker A
So So you're looking for a counter list of first or just maybe a list of the taboss that Yeah, a list of the taboos approached.
Speaker A
Yeah. What were the things that that that triggered an allergic reaction uh from from your field? Oh, that [laughter] um some of them seem like they could make sense and others seemed like nonsense. Um like like you can't see the
Speaker A
logic necessarily or maybe some could but I couldn't. Uh I would say the most untouchable thing there's a couple and they're they're all a little related. So it's like one big thing and it usually has to do with human origins. So whether
Speaker A
and those origins this human story of like where did we come from and this maybe so-called myth of progress where it's just we're progressive right we're always getting better and better and better because of evolution and so like
Speaker A
evolution not in just a in a natural selection sense but also behaviorally or socially. So this concept that you know the Victorians are really supercharged with they were making up stories of medieval torture devices that are not proven to be real. So like a lot of
Speaker A
those so-called medieval torture devices um I think the Iron Maiden is an example of one that there's no evidence that it existed really. But in the Victorian era, they were becoming very excited with their own progress. And it was even
Speaker A
called a progressive era. And they had, you know, steam engines and all kinds of inventions. And so in order to portray themselves as not only like technologically progressive, but they were linking it still to a moral progression. Like if we are becoming
Speaker A
better materially, it's because we're also better spiritually, racially, whateverly. And as such, the people, you know, who were behind us, well, clearly that there our truth would only be true if they were not as good as us or worse.
Speaker A
And so there was a big traveling show that depicted uh so-called medieval torture devices. And it people loved it.
Speaker A
They were just recreations of things that were rumored or legend or whatever. And uh it made people feel good about themselves like, "Oh, it's good. Good thing we're Victorians and we're so much better than that. U but we always seem
Speaker A
to have this notion now of progress and it's not natural. It's not innate because you can see examples of this uh in a different direction like cyclical time. Uh the idea of uh things having a golden age that we must go back to and
Speaker A
you see this in various uh philosophies or religions or whatever. So it's not a given that we're getting better or that people think we're getting better. But if you challenge that in a just generic academic sense or even a societal sense,
Speaker A
if you start to push back on that and say, hey, maybe there was an advanced civilization at some point in history or even prehistory, then it's like, well, that's bonkers because clearly they wouldn't have had the internet because
Speaker A
we have the internet and so we're better. And it's like, well, okay, but maybe they had something. Well, what do you you know, like then people could bring up something like Vmanas, the flying machines, and well, you can start
Speaker A
those arguments. And my thought about some of that is that uh these stories don't emerge from nothing and that perhaps they're like cultural memories that maybe there was something. I wouldn't dismiss that alto together. I wouldn't dismiss any of this the the
Speaker A
idea of human innovation. And there was a it's a probably a silly example, but there's an old uh documentary series. It was on the History Channel some years ago. I think it was called Life After People. And it was fun. It It's probably
Speaker A
now if you look at it a little dated, like the CGI was crap. But it was uh interesting in so far as that it showed what would happen after a cataclysm and how long it would take before nature
Speaker A
would reclaim everything. And they did it systematically. And some of it's a little eerie, like they showed that like the like language would be completely erased except for some of the birds that would still be able to speak and carry
Speaker A
on a language and pass it along. So you'd have no human language on Earth anymore, but you might hear a bird in the distance saying hello or something like that, something a little creepy.
Speaker A
But you'd also see buildings that you know would be grown over or you would see things that would be either biodegradable or at least things that would be buried by the sands of time so to speak. Uh so it wouldn't take long
Speaker A
and that's the point is that even the arch roughly roughly how long would it take to bury let's say the new freedom towers?
Speaker A
Oh. Um, good question because I think it would depend um I think it would depend on what that actual like cataclysm was. Um, so if it was something where there was like a instant say great freeze or something uh
Speaker A
yeah that would be that would be hard. So, I wouldn't want to necessarily put a date on that, but yeah.
Speaker A
Um, that's fair. Yeah, but it wouldn't take as long. It wouldn't take a billion years. It wouldn't even take a million. Um, so, so another thing that's interesting, I think, about that, if you, uh, look into what NASA called the Cerillion
Speaker A
hypothesis, if anyone's familiar with that, Ceruan hypo hypothesis, it was named after like the Doctor Who creatures, uh, like reptilians. Um there is a I think the it's available on the NASA site still. Uh but it was a group of
Speaker A
scientists that got together to actually do this research and put it together. It was like a thought experiment and you can download the PDF for free uh because it is from you know government research.
Speaker A
Um but it was uh they used the science necessary to understand maybe extraterrestrial life uh and then also maybe natural sciences as well to try to understand if there was a possibility for advanced civilizations to have existed before humanity. And um there it
Speaker A
was um there was a climate scientist uh who proposed it the the name of it.
Speaker A
Um there was an astrophysicist involved and they argued that like finding the evidence for technological artifacts would be unlikely because of the rarity of fossilization um on the earth as well. And then also maybe they could find indirect evidence
Speaker A
like climate change or traces of nuclear waste or things that you know could be there but that um you know it' be very hard but they wrote it they had a they have a whole report on that that they
Speaker A
looked into. Um it's hard to I mean the hypothesis also kind of speculated that you might be able to use this understanding uh to find out if there was life on the moon or Mars or something like that. Um but uh
Speaker A
essentially I think the the the key is the archaeological record itself. It it only goes so far back. So there it would be lost to time. Then you have the geological record. And in this particular research they were looking at
Speaker A
the potential geological record and the rarity of that fossilization. And even that can only go back so far. And so while I think they kind of said that they doubt that there was any previous say industrial civilization uh before ours um they
Speaker A
couldn't rule it out and they would have to maybe look into say like astrobiology or other things. But um so it really just pushes back the time periods we're talking about. So if you were if somebody were to suggest like okay let's
Speaker A
say Atlantis because that's always the fun one. um Atlantis existed and it must have been, you know, maybe 6,000 years ago because that's how how old our planet is. It's like, okay, we have science that kind of says otherwise. Um
Speaker A
and then you could push back, well, how about 12,000 years ago or so, like to younger dus? Well, maybe, but what could that look like? And then it would all depend on what that cataclysm was to say like, well, did it get covered by ice?
Speaker A
If it got covered by ice, then maybe it was gone almost immediately. Maybe it's could still be retrieved somehow with the right technology. Um otherwise, is it in the fossil record? Maybe. Or is it so long ago that it's not even there?
Speaker A
So, I know it just it doesn't really give solid answers, but I think the key takeaway is to say that um it's fair and acceptable to still ask the questions of, you know, when did humanity spring up? how far long, you know, how far away
Speaker A
was the timeline of maybe a civilization? I I just think that it keeps the door open for those questions.
Speaker A
And something that you because you mentioned taboos, something that I noticed from day one in my anthropology program especially was this taboo against creative thinking that or creative anything really. And I I've told this story at Nauseium, but it was
Speaker A
and it's a minor story, but it kind of stuck with me because I was an excited student that really was into this. And uh it was like a a day at the natural history museum where it was supposed to
Speaker A
be a day where we set up tables and tried to get people encouraged to sign up to the summer program that we had to teach archaeology to students and whatnot. And so we needed to get people interested in the community. And I was
Speaker A
charged with uh since I was an underling, I was charged with making like the flyers and trying to be there at the table and entice people to come over and talk. And so they didn't approve my flyers. I just made them. And
Speaker A
I made them with like a skull and melting candle. And I made it all like crazy looking. I don't even remember what I did, but I made it fun, right? I made it kind of commercial. I think I
Speaker A
used the Indiana Jones font or something real like lowhanging fruit. And uh they they used them because they were screwed. I that was what I brought. But afterward I got a big admonishment and was and and for this reason they said
Speaker A
you cannot make archaeology look this fun. And I said the hell are you talking about? Because isn't that the point? We got to meet people where they are. These are maybe 11 year olds and you know whatever and they're at this museum.
Speaker A
Like we're supposed to sort of like get them and say look at this. and they're like, "No, because this is serious and we don't want people who are interested in those types of things like an Indiana Jones or whatever to come into the
Speaker A
field." And I was like, "But why?" Because everybody I've talked to kind of said that's where that's where that that's what inspired them. And they're like, "Well, because, you know, we have to fight against those um uh stereotypes
Speaker A
because it it it takes credibility away." So I'm like, okay. So it was a back and forth about how we needed to constantly massage the reputation of the discipline, even if it meant disengaging creative-minded, enthusiastic young people. And so that was always like a a
Speaker A
little pink flag to me, like, well, that's strange. And then I think about that's very weird. Yeah, that is weird.
Speaker A
Especially when you're dealing with 11 year olds, you know, it's it almost reminds me of that conversation between Sigman Freud and Carl Young. uh remember to make uh dogma of the sexual unconscious uh to provide a bull work. And then Carl
Speaker A
Young is saying a bull work against what? And then Sigman Freud has a long pause and he says against the black tide of mud of occultism.
Speaker A
[laughter] It Yeah. I mean that's that that's that famous scene that inspires Carl Young's midlife crisis theories. But what what is going on there? It's when I hear somebody in euphology saying like, you know, covering this subject or bringing this
Speaker A
person into a space is going to ruin the reputation. Yes, euphology needs to have a reputation before it can worry about protecting one.
Speaker A
It's that's insane. And when it comes to archaeology, I mean, why why do people's opinions matter if everything you're talking about is about people who've already died, right? It's kind of crazy because it has the the tentacles of
Speaker A
power reach far from the past into the present because even now just again to the the wars that we're facing are often wars about blood and soil and things that are insignificant in the in the here and now to us and our you know
Speaker A
ancestors. Like we can look past that. We may not have blood feuds. We don't that's kind of should be irrelevant but it's still very relevant. it reaches past and it has the potential to do so.
Speaker A
So people really want that continuity and they want that story and they want that consistency. They want the linear timeline. They want to understand where they are in the concept of time. And I think it's hard for people to uh accept
Speaker A
that even when it comes to what we were discussing about like epistemology and the question of truth at large when it's can we ever really know what's true. And the question could maybe be answered as yes, but it would take so more time than
Speaker A
what we have now. And so it's like we are constrained by Kronos. We are constrained by time. And I think that maybe that's a a some sort of intuitive anxiety that we all carry and it affects us in these ways. And so linking
Speaker A
something I mean we see this in many examples of you know people wanting legacies or they want to attach themselves to this. So like Freemasonry, uh, you know, it's maybe a newer institution, but they'll use and associate themselves with the symbols
Speaker A
and practices of people going as far back as antiquity or ancient Egypt. And uh, so it's you usually even even uh, architecture like neocclassical architecture when you know we build the United States and what do they do? they
Speaker A
make our uh buildings look like ancient Greek buildings. And so it's like it because it associates our democracy or what our republic with these like democratic values of the west or these ideas of romanticized um Greek buildings and this sort of thing, but we're always
Speaker A
trying to make those connections and have the the the long chain of legitimacy. And I think that has a lot to do with it because otherwise if we're untethered maybe, and this is just my thought about it, maybe if we're
Speaker A
untethered to something, it can cause that existential crisis that would have the, you know, darkness of the occult kind of come over us and that being just the uh maybe losing the grounding of reality and instead looking for things
Speaker A
unseen, which you know is I I think pretty good in some cases, but other cases it can literally drive a person mad. It can be a complete breakdown of your mind because our whole mind is working to not um like I mean this is
Speaker A
this is what our brain does. It partitions information from the very beginning. It groups it into little bits so that we can just navigate our environment and not go crazy. So when they have tested people on psychedelics under an fMRI they initially thought
Speaker A
that they would see the their brain would just light up with all kinds of activity because clearly they're tripping. But what they found instead was the opposite really that it shut things down and it made it so they could
Speaker A
have like a a freedom of their neurological constraints. And so um yeah, it's uh it's it's it can drive a person crazy. So there's this necessity even when it comes to epistemology to say maybe we won't ever know the truth.
Speaker A
We just don't have enough time for the truth. But because time keeps rolling on in a practical pragmatic sense there's a necessity to make a choice to say okay we have to say this is true because we have to navigate our world right now and
Speaker A
so we have to make those difficult choices u but I think we try to legitimize them maybe by looking in the past so I don't know those are those are just my musings I don't have anything for that
Speaker A
no I I appreciate it is it okay if I if I gently push back and and offer an alternate theory oh I'd love that. That would be great as a psychological perspective.
Speaker A
That would be fantastic. But let me ask you one question. I have um my cat is is crying at the door. And let me uh let my let me let my cat in real quick if Yeah, but by all means do what you need
Speaker A
to do and just unmic and scream and and we'll stop uh we'll stop talking behind [laughter] your back. Okay. Thanks.
Speaker A
Yeah, do what you got to do. Um Mav Fringe, uh any thoughts? Uh any questions so far?
Speaker A
Yeah, well, we have lost Tiff, possibly permanently to the glitch in the system. I'm blaming you, Doomer.
Speaker A
I um I've been looking to see if she's popping up. Um so, if you see her, of course, bring bring her up again.
Speaker A
Otherwise, uh a brilliant conversation. Um I really love Dr. Heather's ideas and um I'm really glad we we have her today.
Speaker A
I thought I would have a much easier time just putting her in a box and labeling her one thing or the other. And this was part of the reason I I didn't watch the Danny Jones interview because I had I had so many people agreeing and
Speaker A
disagreeing with her and I didn't I I I felt like I would I would have too much of a bias and I think I that was that was correct. Um, I love what she says about academia that it's this weird it's
Speaker A
this weird place that seems to be more obsessed in some cases with with optics than with a relentless pursuit of the truth. And there there's something that went really wrong in academia a couple of decades ago. And I also love her
Speaker A
open-mindedness um as to how how non-definitive the state is uh in terms of our history and archaeology. Um, so yeah, I couldn't agree more.
Speaker A
Yeah, actually I loved all of that. I I really do. I was actually looking up, you know, just a little grock search on her thoughts on the age of the tablets and uh the civilization would be interesting for me. Um, I do want to do
Speaker A
a little housekeeping. Doomer, uh, if and when you do open up for questions, our dear friend Jenny actually waited in line overnight, like she camped out overnight.
Speaker A
um starting I think on Monday and she's got a question all all ready to go for Dr. Heather. So I just want to make sure that she knows that she got into line like last week sometime. I can't even
Speaker A
remember what it [laughter] was. Noted. Noted. Yeah. Even though her request keeps falling off.
Speaker A
So I let my cat uh in she was she was it's her dinner time. So, we've been doing a little marathon and so she got hungry and I had to like feed her.
Speaker A
Yeah. And and by all means, I want you want you to tend to your needs there.
Speaker A
There um Heather, I had so much fun that I didn't dive straight in straight into the meat. But if there was if if somebody didn't know anything about um Syrian history, the Acadians, Sumer, the Anuna, and you were to give your view on
Speaker A
what the [ __ ] is going on, who are the Yeah. Well, what what would you say?
Speaker A
So, I wrote two books on this. The first one was the Anunnaki connection where I was I was compelled to after I was introduced to the topic and I had to sort of look at the connections and try
Speaker A
to figure it out for myself. Um, but it was a little bit of a hisoggraphy, little bit of an overview. I think that's why it did so well. It's a I think a good primer on what is all this.
Speaker A
And it wasn't until like the end that I started developing my own sort of hypothesis, if you will. And of course, like anything, it's like, well, then I have to write another book because I couldn't get it all in. And I didn't
Speaker A
actually have a firm footing on it. So that's why I wrote the Anunnaki Revelation where I sort of revealed my own um working hypothesis as of now. And so that's the one that I've I've talked about on some different shows. And I
Speaker A
think in a nutshell, if I had to just condense it completely and again I I would hope that it before anyone hears it, it's like how can that even be? It's like, well, I actually talk about it in
Speaker A
the books. I think I I talk about it in great detail, cite the sources, show all the different things. And so but for this for this discussion I'm just going to briefly say uh in my view there was
Speaker A
something that happened uh a cataclysm. I lean towards the younger dus impact event because that is something that there seems to be a fair amount of evidence for although I know it is contested. So it could I could the doors
Speaker A
open for that but as of now date-wise it appears that something happened and it was a bit of a cataclysm and it caused great climate changes to happen in a short amount of time and there as a result there are many flood myths that
Speaker A
come about that same time. But most importantly, I look at the more ancient blood myths, the Sumerian account, that sort of thing. And I look at the original text for that. And we talk a little bit about Sitchin and, you know,
Speaker A
if his translations were correct or whatever. What I will say about Sitchin, contrary to my I guess you could call it even a hit piece that I put out on him, uh, it wasn't intended to be. So it was
Speaker A
intended to draw attention to the overall bias of his work and his um connections to Zionism and the President Truman and the involvement in uh pushing for Zionism as a uh you know political ideology and and that sort of thing. So
Speaker A
that that's an important component to his uh the bibliography and then the overall hisoggraphy then. However, I don't think that he was completely off on his translations. I think that many things he translated were off, but I also don't see that as a problem for
Speaker A
anyone to admit because even the most accomplished assiologists have had their translations um debunked, so to speak, but not debunked because it's just we learn and grow over time. And this is a newer field. It's only come about since
Speaker A
the 1800s and that's pretty new really. So, it's over time people have adjusted their thinking about this. So, I'm less interested in who was right and who was wrong about any sort of translation because for the most part, the whole of
Speaker A
the translations, the overall story seems to work out. And those overall stories can be found in uh the works of like Stephanie and Dowi and people who have just compiled these things in a very mainstream way. And you can access
Speaker A
a lot of the text online yourself to look through them. And so there is now there's always the possibility that some of that is completely wrong uh because of the histography I laid out in my article that the beginning of this was
Speaker A
already kind of polluted a bit but we can only we have to have faith at some point. So I think that also to say that people are continuing to research this.
Speaker A
So more translations come out and it's important for us to keep updating our firmware uh when translations come out and things like this. So I I never want to devolve into a this was right or this was wrong. I will say that what didn't
Speaker A
sit with me with the Sitchin narrative is just simply to cast them aside as aliens in this very uh science fiction sort of way. But the narrative that he followed about there being say uh this different race of entities and they
Speaker A
enslaved us and had us work and all of this. this aligns very well with what the texts are proposing themselves. And so if you instead of looking at it with a science fiction lens and you just look at what they're saying, they they
Speaker A
encountered entities that enslave them for labor. But there's a lot of ways that this was written and it and it could definitely in my view have a more mundane kind of explanation. And so in this context of say a massive cataclysm where
Speaker A
there's a great flood um in different regions there's lots of different climate pushing people into different regions um there could be climate migrants um and not in the sense that the wokeism is saying like but like literal climate migrants because their
Speaker A
homelands have been destroyed in the oldest accounts of the Dearan text when it comes to like a Noah's arc type story. The texts will say things like that this figure knew that this cataclysm was coming because they could read the stars. They
Speaker A
were like astrologers. Um which it there wasn't a differentiator between say meteorology, astronomy and astrology. It was just that they knew the stars and the workings of the heavens. What they did when they knew it was coming or that
Speaker A
something was coming is they gathered all of the greatest say scientists. It doesn't use the word scientist, but instead it just says the those who were adept in the arts and the technologies.
Speaker A
And so things like agriculture or metallurgy, that sort of thing. They gathered those individuals up as well as the quote animals of the step, those that's a very important term that comes right out of the text. And that means
Speaker A
that well in my view in my reading of it this is a group of individuals who saw it coming got together and didn't want a bunch of people as an anchor and instead we are the what technocratic elite of
Speaker A
our time and we are going to make a breakaway civilization. And they gathered the animals of the step because they would need that for agriculture.
Speaker A
They would need that for sustenance. And then when they reached drier land, they encountered semi-ettled hunter gatherers of the region of Mesopotamia whose bodies would have been painted red and red like the ochre clay that's very specific to the region because they
Speaker A
called them the adma and the adoma specifically meant the red clay of the earth later gets translated or interpreted into being atom meaning like dust from dust and you know or in um maybe the Quran or any of these other uh
Speaker A
translations or interpretations, it's as though God physically grabs clay and molds man out of that. But either way, the source of it discusses the the beings seeing these people of the earth of the red clay in particular, and they
Speaker A
had black hair because they called them the blackheaded ones. Now in that region, the archaeological evidence shows that the semi-ettled hunter gatherer culture at that time haderary practices where they rub that red ochre all over their skeletons. So it wouldn't
Speaker A
be unreasonable to surmise that they could have done that in life like many people do when they live in uh exposure.
Speaker A
They often will use mud or something to that effect for you know protection against the sun. So if by chance there were semi-ettled hunter gatherers who had rubbed them down in red ochre and had dark hair and were shorter because
Speaker A
the bodies that would would have been there have been measured to be a roughly five foot or so for a male and given their nutrition constraints they would have been smaller in stature. If they would have come in counter with this
Speaker A
what they called the shining ones that could mean I mean there's many people over time that have put a spin on that to say it meant they were shining like with brightness because they were holy.
Speaker A
They were shining because they knew things. They perhaps were shining because they had metallurgy and so they were wearing something shiny. It was hard to say and I can't say because I I can only say what it says. How it is
Speaker A
translated or interpreted are two different questions. But I'll say in a hypothesis, I would say that perhaps they had metallergy. But either way, they might have been larger in stature because if you do have access to animal protein and animal products,
Speaker A
someone has a hot mic. Super hot. Sorry. Try not to cry. If um if you have the access to animal products like the animals of the step, uh you could have used them as it's been shown that was done to uh use them for
Speaker A
milk uh milk products that can last over a long hall because you can make cheese from uh the enzymes in the in the bladder of the stomach. You can dry the cheese and and uh you know Mongolian people do this all the time and it's a
Speaker A
very it's like an early type of protein bar, right? So you can use cheese. You can also drink the blood of the animal which was a common practice to cut the animal and bleed the animal in a way
Speaker A
that would not be deadly so that you could have those nutrients. And if an animal uh breeds or it's time to go, you could eat the animal. But either way, it's a moving food source. And it's a moving food source that would allow you
Speaker A
to maintain uh your robust stature because you would have come from a place that already had easier access to agriculture which leads to larger stature. Not larger perhaps by like you're not maybe 8 foot of course but if
Speaker A
you're say 6 foot we'll be generous and say 6' three and you encounter a five foot tall person um you may it may be very you know different for that five foot tall person. And if they've never seen anybody like that before, it would
Speaker A
be very different. And in that case, these individuals are not painted to in a in a nice light. They subjugate those individuals and they make them they make them their worker class. They have them they trick them like a cargo cult and
Speaker A
say we are gods and look we can make things happen. like if you plant this here, you can have food there or we've tamed the animals or you know whatever.
Speaker A
Uh so you could subjugate these people and make them dig your canals as they supposedly did anyway and you could say well now we're your kings, we're your gods and you would need then an intermediary priest class to enable
Speaker A
that. So you would have a translator or a go-between and that would be a very privileged position. And you would also, as they did, you would want some rules around that, like what it means to worship, what foods do you eat, how much
Speaker A
do you get, and they do, they had recipes and cookbooks about how to prepare food for the gods. The gods actually ate. And these gods ate specifically meats that have been roasted. They did not want it boiled, and they wanted certain parts. And so,
Speaker A
they wanted to have the meat on a over a fire and then offered to them first.
Speaker A
They liked uh beer. They liked animal products and they liked uh offerings of those libations and things that we would eventually come to see as things that a lot of mainstream or relatable religions like as well. Additionally, they had uh
Speaker A
boundaries on who could breed and so because you would have that royal bloodline and you wouldn't want the those individuals to then breed with the underling class that you just created to worship you. But over time, it would
Speaker A
necessitate that there would be breeding because that's a small group of people. And then you would have these um perhaps giants on the earth or the people who get, you know, called something or they're demonized or or whatever. Um,
Speaker A
the story goes though that Enki specifically felt bad for these individuals and uh was the one to break with the Anunnaki and teach the humans all of the things that the Anunnaki knew. And that made him a Prometheian
Speaker A
type figure where what he was able to do was enlighten them through the word specifically. And in the Sumerian uh practice, what they did was they would over and over write these these uh hymns and texts and they would go into
Speaker A
different degrees. Like you you didn't have to, of course, but you could choose to go on to higher degrees. The highest degree meant that you had access to the very top of the ziggurat where there was the like the prototype for the holy of
Speaker A
holies. And so there would be a container, an arc up there and it would contain the god. And in this case maybe it would be Anki and sometimes they would call it Anki's secret and you would earn your way up to this path of
Speaker A
over and over again writing a particular text. It could have been the epic of Gilgamesh, but you would be writing it in such a way you're also learning all of the exoteric and esoteric meanings of it. and you would finally prove yourself
Speaker A
and you would go up to the very top and you would be alone and you would walk in and you would open that ark only to find the same tablets with the same story that you had written all along. And that
Speaker A
was sort of a um a symbolic gesture but it was about specifically getting the information from Anky that was through the word and communication. So, it was very symbolic and it always had to do with Anki being the one to enlighten and
Speaker A
that knowledge was power and that was what was the actual god that was on top of the pyramid so to speak.
Speaker A
Oh no, that is the song of death. Dr. Guys, I'm having trouble with audio.
Speaker A
Just hang in there. That is the song of death. Right when I Right when I [laughter] I'm unveiling. That's uh interesting. Oh, yeah. It sounds like our host is having some connection issues. So, normally or or generally speaking, when there's also
Speaker A
a co-host, and we like to have two co-hosts, but Tiff was getting um ejected from the space today as well. Um normally when there's a co-host, the host is able to kind of reset and come back in and everything's fine. However,
Speaker A
there is a small chance, actually at least a medium chance that if the host's connection is lost, we the whole room will be lost. And if that actually happens, just go ahead and go back to our chat. It's not good.
Speaker A
Okay, that's okay. I would hope nothing was lost or did is it No, nothing has been lost. Great.
Speaker A
Nothing was lost. Then I'll just pick up where I was because essentially what I'm describing and I do again I I glossing over a lot of it but I cite all of this in great detail in my work and what I do
Speaker A
is kind of propose I guess a more human aspect of this anunnaki which can be very upsetting to some people but I always say hold on now because there's anunnaki and then there's akcalu and they're two different things and the
Speaker A
akcalu are the ones that are often shown when if you say google anunnaki sometimes You'll see these images and they're proposed to be Anunnaki, but they're really upcalu. And the upcallu in the texts were described very differently than the Anunnaki who the
Speaker A
Anunnaki are kind of interchangeable as in like the idea of lore. Like there's 40 plus Anunnaki. There's a 12 uh sort of main Anunnaki um like the Olympian gods, but there were all different types and it became a diluted term over time
Speaker A
to mean sort of like lord. And then you see there's a merging too of uh certain kings being kind of referred to as Anunnaki. And that's that's over time that as I said it gets diluted. But in the in the kings list there will be a a
Speaker A
little notation on some of them that say and it sage was this and this so-called sage are the akalu and they're associated specifically with the plleadian star system and what's known as the seven sages. and they were wing
Speaker A
deities that were now we don't know if they have actual wings or if this was a communication to say that they could actually fly or be a messenger um or something to that effect. I would lean more towards that they could be a
Speaker A
messenger given the state of that culture and Mala and being angel being me messenger etc. but this notion that they were birdlike. So you have that and they were described as being semibiological entities that could fade in and out of reality and that they were
Speaker A
older than the Anunnaki and they were the source of the Anunnaki's wisdom and that they could be communed with and they gave the advice to the rulers. So that's uh the direction that I've sort of ended up where I believe that the
Speaker A
stories that we hear are the stories of the meeting of two different types of of people and those people shared not only their technologies the enabling the the invention of civilization say but rather it wasn't an invention of civilization
Speaker A
it was the remembering of civil civilization. That's why it was all able to be downloaded so quickly, so to speak, in just the 200 years. They weren't inventing it from nothing. They were having it already preloaded because these people who were escaping and now
Speaker A
you can call them Atlantanss, you could call them whatever. That's what people uh have done over time is claim that there's this I guess Graham Hancock calls it civilization X or whatever.
Speaker A
There's this enigmatic group of people. And of course now, yeah, we could say Aryan because that's where people have gone with that as well. And it's it's everybody wants to put that spin on it because they're still grasping for who's the first
Speaker A
because who's the most supreme? So that's just an argument that's going to come up. But regardless of who where they come from or what, it is my belief that the reason that they seemingly come out of nowhere is because they came from
Speaker A
somewhere so far that they had developed a completely different language and we're looking at something very human.
Speaker A
And with that they had shamanic abilities. They had a different set of spiritual practices and including using uh different plant medicines and technologies in that sense. and they were able to transmit their spirituality and their religious beliefs and
Speaker A
incorporate them in a way that was almost religiously synchretatized. And those beliefs I think are the ones that um you have to kind of parse through.
Speaker A
And so if I if someone were to say to me, are any of these things alien? Well, first I'd say, are they extraterrestrial? Are they I mean that's the question. Um I would call them ultraterrestrial. I would say this is a
Speaker A
phenomena that we don't have a name for but is something that's happened for a very long time and some people have called them we'll say like the hopy ant people and if people have known about the hopes and they're you know there's
Speaker A
many indigenous people that have very similar stories and they name these entities you could call them angels you can call them demons you can call them jin how about archons you can call them whatever you want and I think that we're
Speaker A
just circling a specific phenomena that we could just call phenomena X and that is real and it's it's strange. It's like more than supernatural. It's like pradernatural and it's always been here and experienced. And I think that the
Speaker A
people who are often um associated with the Anunnaki, they're bringing all of that tradition with them to some extent.
Speaker A
And I think that it's that there's so much more to be understood about this that nobody can quite say, well, they were these or they were this or the because there's just as of right now half a million ununiform tablets in the
Speaker A
possession of museums and universities right now with what's estimated to be millions of more not found. And so we we have so much left to do. And that's of course their argument for unleashing AI on it because it would uh condense the
Speaker A
work and make it so much quicker that we may be able to have those answers. Uh you know and so that that's a a debate that will be happening sooner rather than later. But as it stands, I think
Speaker A
that there's nobody that can say that they have it all figured out and that what's going to be more important for finding any sense of truth is to maybe take a little step back from Sitchin or from uh even Michael Heiser. I know
Speaker A
people are usually I mean he put himself in that position with sitchinis.com, you know, right? So we only then now get a choice between the Heiser or Sitchin or maybe we'll throw in a flint dibble, right? Or we can put in all these
Speaker A
personalities and egos and at the end of the day it's all about ego and it shouldn't be. We should look at all of these as you know going through and looking at the histories of things putting it together and seeing what
Speaker A
emerges and going at it with a complete open mind to say you know it's actually a a clean new frontier and we should look at this and uh see what happens.
Speaker A
And I don't know, but I feel and this is just the field. It's a vibe. It's not science. My vibe on this is that we may find out that our that humanity is much older than we thought. That it it has
Speaker A
gone through cycles of creation and destruction or you know like earth cycles and that at points in times there was great advancement and then it's been taken down. It had to be rebuilt over and over again. And that we are
Speaker A
incredibly adaptable. And that there are capabilities in human beings that set us apart from just your average animal, latent capabilities, and that people in the past at certain points understood this. Maybe they named the phenomena. they understood how to maybe
Speaker A
dip into that phenomena and and control it somehow or access it somehow. And uh that's more technology as say a spiritual or an unseen technology that they were able to pass on. Uh but I I just think that two things can be true
Speaker A
at once. In fact, five things can be true at once. And if we're stuck in the binary of just sit or bust, then it's only doing us a disservice. And in fact, those people at the very top who are the
Speaker A
current priest class, who have access to contemporary information, big data, and possibly stuff from the damn library of Alexandria, for all we know, they're sitting on information that they can use to entrench themselves as the not only priest class, but the gods. It will make
Speaker A
us think we're gods. They're gods because they're going to have omnipotence, right? They're going to see everything. They're going to know everything. They're going to palanteer in all of this and then they're going to be able to answer all those questions
Speaker A
for us by giving us the narrative to ease our anxiety about what's true and what's not. They'll just tell us what's true. So, I think they've positioned themselves and they've also scared us with things like climate change saying,
Speaker A
well, you know, because you've not been good, uh, you know, the the earth is going to get hot or cold or what you name it. So, it'll be if there's a cataclysm, of course, we are to blame.
Speaker A
So, it's the same bag of tricks they've learned from the past and they don't want us to know those tricks because then we'll be able to see it for what it is. The same stupid sort of power play.
Speaker A
And yes, those people who are in the elite priest class now, they're communing with entities. So, I don't think that or at least they think they are. I mean, this is like a whole thing that they're up to. And when people, you
Speaker A
know, want to doubt that, just look at the the Third Reich, you have um people wearing their nice pressed Hugo Boss, you know, uh uniforms and looking pretty much like they have their [ __ ] together. And uh and
Speaker A
meanwhile, back at the ranch, Himmler has a castle and they're doing crazy occult secret society uh rituals and things in caves. like you you could tell a Berliner at the time that that was happening and they would literally say
Speaker A
you're a conspiracy theorist. So when we see these fools up in their press suits and their cleancut hair saying things about like the economy and all of this, it's hard to maybe imagine them, maybe not now because we're all kind of awake
Speaker A
to things, but some people still have a hard time imagining any of them doing anything weird like on eyes wide shut.
Speaker A
But the truth is everybody has some strange beliefs at some level. even if you don't think it's strange. Um there's a great book I would recommend, another great book I would recommend called uh Paranormal America and that is a book
Speaker A
written by a few sociologists some years ago. It's like a textbook but very accessible. And it basically goes through uh their sociological work of observing people interested in things that are supernatural like Bigfoot or UFOs or astrology and they map out the
Speaker A
dem the demography of it and they make some interesting associations and conclusions about that. And one of the takeaways was even the people who say that they don't hold any kind of objective or offbelief, they do. It just
Speaker A
looks different. So, it's like, I don't believe in UFOs. That's nonsense. But Bigfoot on the other hand, you know, you'll always see that. Or you could say, I don't believe in any of that stuff, but you know, I'm a devout
Speaker A
Christian or you name it. So, don't look at people in positions of power and assume that they're purely reasonable and logical or that they're not ideologically driven in such a way that gets them communing with entities because that is not the case. We're all
Speaker A
just batshit crazy out here trying to make sense of a world that's flying through space and we have no idea what we're doing. And so we have to make ourselves stories to understand that so we can actually function in our
Speaker A
day-to-day lives. And I know it sounds cynical, but it doesn't have to be. We can also take we can transmute that into something great and creative and we can enjoy the stories we make and we can and we do. We make art and that's what art
Speaker A
is. That's literal magic because it's something that comes in. It's it comes from inside you and you bring it out into the material. You materialize it and it can outlive you and it can inspire others. And so it literally
Speaker A
travels from it. It defies space and time because a piece of art, if you write a story that's intended to make someone move to tears, you can die and have that book go into circulation aundred years later and a person who
Speaker A
doesn't even speak your language anymore or knows your culture can pick that book up and be moved to tears because of your will that you put into place a long time ago. That's magic. Magic is real. We just have to allow ourselves to, you
Speaker A
know, kind of understand that there's many different things that can be true at once. And that the powers that be, they uh they want to keep our minds small and keep us arguing with all all of this and each other and all of that.
Speaker A
And then the ego gets involved and we see all of this kind of mudslinging and toxicity. And that's what they want because then they're they can be the magicians and they can create the story and the narrative that we live in. But
Speaker A
we're the authors of our own book in reality. And I would another book I like to suggest books. So I apologize, but this is another one that's been really impactful to me, but it is Julian James um great great work there. Uh his book
Speaker A
on the origin of consciousness and the breakdown of the bicamal mind. He was a psychologist out of Princeton who had an interest in ancient texts and he noted that the ancient Greek texts in particular seemed to have switched their
Speaker A
perspectives when they were delivered like almost as though the people were not embodied who wrote it. And he questioned how later they seem to have more uh autonomy and personalization.
Speaker A
and he came at it from a psychological perspective and basically said that there was like a split brain kind of a the breakdown of the bicamal mind that um you know and I'm not doing any justice by saying this but I'll say that
Speaker A
he argued that uh the the human was an animal that had gone through some sort of a we'll say like a a mental breakdown and that this was like a we're dealing with that through story and it's because
Speaker A
of the voices in our head that we mistake to be our own. I mean, it sounds a little trippy, but it's definitely worth a read. And uh I would suggest none of this sounds trippy or crazy. Uh Heather like
Speaker A
to some people that one that one might that might get them. People don't seem to they either love or they hate Julian James and he had some some of his stuff doesn't uh stand up to time, but it
Speaker A
doesn't matter because the the idea was there and a lot of it did. And so and and that's my view on I think uh why science needs creativity because it's order and chaos. You can't have you can't have one only. I don't think at
Speaker A
least I think you need the balance of both. Um, can we So, you're not entirely categorically against the possibility of an extraterrestrial civilization coming here and genetically engineering something and then colonializing or civilizing it. You're you're saying Sitchens is problematic and by no means
Speaker A
is that the only viable explanation. Correct. I would say that for sure. It's because it it uh so when you say now not everybody who reads Sitchin like is this way that I'm about to caricaturize but there is and I'm sure everybody kind of
Speaker A
knows the caricature of the person who says okay the Anunnaki looked like these like cool transformeresque gods come to life and they're wearing like Mr.
Speaker A
Wizards World style white lab coats. That's an old reference but you know say Bill Nye the science guy. They're standing in a lab and they have beers with like green liquid and steam coming out and they're mixing up something and
Speaker A
making like humans and these V. Yeah. No, I just I think that's a bunch of horseshit 100%. Because even if they had the technology to do that, why would it look like our technology that we're familiar with from like nth grade
Speaker A
biology class? like no I think that there's and also AAM's razor says if you want to uh genetically manipulate anything you just you just do eugenics which is what they said they did anyway which was first of all they were experts
Speaker A
in animal husbandry and agriculture which is making a being domestic and then breeding them for desired traits to breed out of them their wildness to so it would seem to me the more logical explanation of how they could have
Speaker A
engineered us at least in a time frame that uh we can reference here would be that they would put pro uh they would prohibit who could breed with whom. So as it says they did in the text, but
Speaker A
they could also just kill people. You know, there's so many different things that they were known to do. But to be able to say, you know, we're going to genetically modify you in a way that means like you will be more
Speaker A
docile. you will be dependent now on grains. You will be dependent on the the fruits of agriculture as opposed to the hunting and gathering you're used to.
Speaker A
Basically, what they're doing to us now, they've made us uh domestic. So, when you look at uh a a domestic pig and you take that a little pig like, you know, Charlotte's Web and uh it it's pretty dependent on on people. If you take that
Speaker A
same pig though and you release it into the woods, it grows its coarse hair back, it becomes rewilded like a boar.
Speaker A
It's it will it will the genes will flip on and it will go back to its regular state. Not all animals do that though.
Speaker A
You know, how many times can you put like a uh if you put a a pug out in the wild in the woods, good luck. That pug's not going anywhere. It's it's a sad sad condition. So, just plain oldfashioned
Speaker A
animal husbandry. uh the breeding of say uh there were these foxes in Russia. I think they were called the silver fox.
Speaker A
You may want to Google that to confirm. But it was a imprompt it was an experiment eventually but I don't think it was intended to be. They had a fur they had a farm where they were you know
Speaker A
raising these poor animals fur and they noticed over time all the inbreeding and all the keeping them together in a small space. Um, some of them you could start to see the whites of their eyes a little bit and you could start to see what was
Speaker A
called a pie bald pattern uh happen on their fur. Those animals they noticed were very keyed into people and and could be pet and they were becoming docel. So what they did as they experiment was they would they would
Speaker A
breed those animals together and eventually they were able to domesticate them till they were just cute little pets. And so there are features. There are certain animals where uh the the color of their coat can mean that they're more docile. So there is a big
Speaker A
observable question here about selective breeding and how you can manipulate um the the organism to be either uh what aggressive or non-aggressive or or what have you. So I don't think that requires like huge high technology. Um so and I
Speaker A
don't think that that's how it had to be. Now, if we're talking about something in some grand cyclical thing where they perhaps had a technology that we were not aware of because this is so long ago, I mean, who's to say what they
Speaker A
had then? Maybe they had something that was just like those stupid rods on that Stephen Spielberg Disclosure Day movie.
Speaker A
I mean, how are we to know what they had? So, I couldn't rule that out either. But if I had to choose, I would say it doesn't take big sci-fi looking technology to just breed people into domesticity.
Speaker A
Um, Fringe, yeah, you have your your hand up. Go ahead. Yeah, thanks Jimmer. Thanks, Dr.
Speaker A
Heather. So, I was just wondering if you don't see the Anunnaki as some type of a god race, but yet we we did have this other this other interaction with with some creatures that might have uh might have actually been what people see as
Speaker A
the Anunnaki. Where are the Anunnaki now? Like, what happened to them? And then I have a question about occult rituals and when did we first uh attempt to transcend our known laws of physics with occult rituals? Did that
Speaker A
come from these other creatures or when did we first do it and where did that knowledge come from?
Speaker A
Well, that's a that's a good question. I'm I'm going to hit that one first. The occult knowledge thing. Um it's a cult.
Speaker A
So since occult just means hidden. Um it's it's it's going to be hard to say like when the first formalized system. I mean we could go back to uh Sumer of course because that's the written record. That's the beginning of history.
Speaker A
Um and we can see that they were trying to do that from the very beginning. And there's a great tradition of even exorcisms that uh are detailed and outlined in their texts that are uh very reminiscent of the Hollywood sort of
Speaker A
Catholic exorcism you may see in a film like where the priest goes over and says to the the possessed person you know what's your name demon you know I demand to know your name and then a series of
Speaker A
rituals happen etc. um that actually comes straight from the Samrian practice of exorcism where what the priest uh healer would do is come over a demand to know the name of the demon because if they could know the name it would be
Speaker A
like a diagnostic uh test. You could say well this demon uh is showing this person is showing symptoms of maybe X Y and Z and those usually point to it being this demon. If we can confirm that then we know what to do and that could
Speaker A
be using this particular medicine or whatever. So it was like a prototype for actual diagnostics and medicine. Um and so they because they didn't have that body mind disconnect.
Speaker A
If I could if I could interrupt quickly are are these demons we're using the word demon are they associated with this upcallu that you mentioned or is this something totally separate?
Speaker A
They're actually associated but they are separate they're associated in the sense that later the upcallu can be called genie and jin. So there is a long line.
Speaker A
So when you say demon especially in in our language it's like easy to demonize.
Speaker A
So that comes from demon and in the Greek sense but we would call them demons now because that's just how we look at them. But in to the Sumerians they weren't demons. They were just discarnate entities. They didn't have
Speaker A
bodies. And uh so in other cultures they may have been called like the smokeless flames. So they could have been the jin.
Speaker A
So the upcallu were in a similar sense, but they knew more about what they were and they weren't uh household demons.
Speaker A
We'll say we could call them demons, but then that's almost passing that it's mistakenly maybe passing that moral judgment that uh if you could you could say, "Yeah, all that shit's demons." Like it's it's not good. So, but you
Speaker A
could also then say, yeah, but we're pass we're using a a retroactive lens to declare that like those things were demonic in that like sense. So, it's not a useful term, but it is what it is. So, in that sense, these entities that would
Speaker A
have been possessing these individuals at that scale would have been more like uh household demons or smaller level demons. Whereas the Akalu were above that because they dealt with they would have been like the muses or something to
Speaker A
that effect. There'd be all these different levels to them. And so those but always always with the unseen like an unseen realm type of a situation since the beginning of our known history since the beginning of our known
Speaker A
history. And then in terms of prehistory, there's evidence to say that there's u a lot there with shamanism and uh the just the act of uh I wrote I wrote about this in a book called evil archaeology where I discussed uh a lot
Speaker A
of different things including Pizuzu, the ancient Mesopotamian demon. And uh but I started the whole venture really with the idea of prehistoric demons and trepening which is drilling the hole in the head of somebody with the hope that
Speaker A
you're going to release the demons from their head. And trepening can be can be as far back as the tens of thousands of years. There's been skulls found that way. And now you could say well maybe it was just an injury but they it's not.
Speaker A
You can see the intentional drilling and the part that makes people say maybe it's ritual. Aside from that most archaeology that's what it devolves to is if you don't understand it it's ritual. However, in this case in caves
Speaker A
there have been found um the pieces of the skull like the caps where they would have like cut them out and they were put onto the necklace that would have been for the shaman who it would be you know
Speaker A
guessed that he was the one that did it. So it was a religious or spiritual practice in that way. Believe it or not, a lot of people survived that. So it's it's what they would do is they would
Speaker A
drill the hole and the shaman would uh urinate in the hole uh and then they would take deer fat or the fat of whatever the maybe an unulate or an animal around them would be and they would pack the wound with the the fat of
Speaker A
that animal and then patch it with they think animal skin. They don't know that part, but um yeah, there's been remnants of that and those people survived and so so it gets it gets wild. Uh Doomer, just quickly some housekeeping. I'm going to
Speaker A
have to turn my volume down for just uh a few minutes. Dr. Heather, thank you very much. I'll be right back.
Speaker A
Um Dr. Dr. Heather, the trepation, are we able to tell the difference between labbotomy and trepation when we see holes in the skull?
Speaker A
Um, I don't think so. I mean, that's when it's that old. U I think in newer skulls, yes. But I don't think when it's that old because, uh, you know, the the brain itself, there's no evidence in there anymore. So, we don't know if they
Speaker A
took a little bit out while they were at it. What What was the What was the shamanic reason for the the trepation?
Speaker A
Well, it's speculated that it has to do more so with the releasing of the evil entities. And the reason it's speculated to be that because we really don't know, but the reason that it's speculated is because in um societies that have been
Speaker A
observed uh there have been cases of what later was known as u like having epilepsy that was often associated with demonic possession. Uh so the person who uh you know a pathologist would uh say was actually having epilepsy those
Speaker A
individuals would say no they were possessed and the treatment for that was to drill the hole in the head and let those out. Now another thing too that is known is that if there's if there's swelling on the brain uh if you had an
Speaker A
injury they do that in the emergency room. Now there's still releasing pressure uh from the mind like from the brain you know so that it could be that that there could have been some fall or some injury that was very common back
Speaker A
then to happen and that it was known that when that swelling occurred you would drill the hole to release some of that pressure and then save the patient and and I'm I'm reminded of uh Amanda Fielding who was
Speaker A
I was just about to bring her up. Go ahead. Yeah. So I mean Amanda Field you you can explain that if you want. I feel like I'm talking too much. [laughter] No, you're definitely not talking too much. This is exactly what we want. Um
Speaker A
um well well I I just wanted to point out that modern trepation people Amanda Fielding I think did it herself with a drill. The theory or the motivation behind it is to get the membrane exposed to more oxygen increase
Speaker A
blood flow. there. As far as I know, there was no urination or [laughter] or or packing of deer's fat involved. Um, it's obviously not a popular thing to do. I do think that there's some I'm not saying it's worth it and I'm not
Speaker A
condoning it or advising it. Uh, but I think there's some scientific support. I just don't know. I don't think there's any studies obviously and I I don't know whether I mean it's it's definitely the proto neurolink and it is I don't think you
Speaker A
you might not even get permanent IQ benefits from it. Maybe you do, but if if I'm not mistaken, uh Heather, the theory is exposure to oxygen um resulting in increased blood flow. Yeah.
Speaker A
The blood ostensibly becomes permanent. Yeah. She uh she connected it to this idea. There was a um she was a she was a follower of a a Dutch guy Bart Hughes who argued that adult consciousness is constrained by reduced cerebral blood
Speaker A
volume once the skull sutures of uh like close you know you have a baby and the baby's head is very soft and those plates have to close and for a while they're not so those they're soft spots um and so that allowed for increased
Speaker A
cerebral blood volume but they argue of course that trepination could restore that blood volume uh that you would have had at childhood and produced like a a like an elevation of consciousness and so yeah she did in 1970 do that to
Speaker A
herself and uh she did it with a dental drill and she actually filmed it and uh it was it was quite something but uh there are people who believe that you know I'm not condoning it either I we
Speaker A
need more things like that like we need a hole in the head am I right anyway no she uh [laughter] no no no I'll be here all weeks no but she was best known as the founder now of the Beckley
Speaker A
Foundation, which has been I think since the late 90s the uh a big big player in uh like seriously looking at uh psychedelic research and um examining drug policy and working with organizations and partnering with like the Imperial College London and uh the
Speaker A
psilocybin and LSD neuroiming work that helped restart the field and how everyone now is like oh yeah we're looking into that But that field had gone away because of well you know CIA stuff and it left a bad taste in
Speaker A
everyone's mouth and so um but she was really on the forefront of trying to make that happen and uh so she's she's still a player in that but uh so it's interesting it's interesting that there's something there that is
Speaker A
associated with childhood and this is another thing I'll just throw in as like a little wild card because you know as as people are like oh but maybe they were aliens and surely they had elongated skulls and so and I look there
Speaker A
are skulls that are strange and and all of that and so people will say oh you just discount that. I don't but I also do know there's there are cases specifically of uh indigenous cultures who believe that there was tonal which
Speaker A
was like the almost the vril or the soul or the spirit of of a person. the tonali could escape through the baby's head in these these specific places that are linked by fielding, you know, to having this like increase of consciousness and
Speaker A
and all of that. So they saw those those sutures as being vulnerable to not only the the losing of the tonali but by losing them to entities that would suck them out or like take their take them or
Speaker A
even actually pierce that veil and uh take the baby and possess it. So what they did to prevent that was they do skull binding and they would wrap the baby's soft skull and protect it for a long time until those uh until the
Speaker A
sutures actually closed. Well, if you do that, you're going to get the baby skull to be, you know, conicical, which is what happened. And so, that's one way that they did um, you know, making those elongated skulls and it was for a
Speaker A
spiritual reason that is linked to consciousness and all of this thing. So, it's kind of interesting.
Speaker A
So, um, we're getting a little bit more into the the meat here. you. So your your your base case basically is the Anuna themselves, likely different place from Earth, far more technologically advanced and save themselves from total extinction, come
Speaker A
back and impose their technological supremacy. And then we have two other beings, the shining ones and those from the Akcalu or or the Akalu.
Speaker A
And you think they're often conflated, right? That that these three are often conflated also the Anuna.
Speaker A
Yeah. Where where do and correct me where I'm paraphrasing incorrectly. Where where do you see the role of there's and I'm not talking about what actually happened. I'm just talking about the translated lore, right? Even if we take
Speaker A
the George Smith interpretations, there's clearly a Prometheian figure here Anky who yeah is talking about genetic engineering. There's no other way to put it. I'm not saying that happened, but that's that's what these tablets when you translate them, even without the
Speaker A
Sitchin's lens, I don't know of a more reasonable interpretation here. Um, what what do you what do you make of this? Are you saying it's not the Anuna?
Speaker A
And I'm just saying like according to these stories, where are we supposed to fit in Anki and the constant bartering with Enlil in favor of a more agentic or self-s sovereign humanity both pre and post flood at least in the in the Samrian
Speaker A
texts. So I think to answer that again it would just be conjecture but my view on that is that those very strong archetypal entities like Anki um rightfully are Prometheian and rightfully are to be maybe confused with other entities
Speaker A
because they are the same entity because they are aronic. They are like the archetypal entity that they are constant and that the individuals. So if if you look at uh like the if you look at the ancient world aside
Speaker A
from Mesopotamia and you see some of the writings and the way that it was um done like how Jane sort of did this uh analysis you'll see I I think it is the you'll have to have to double check this. It may be the
Speaker A
Odyssey uh in the very beginning, but it it discusses how essentially the story is um like it's the gods speaking like this the author is not actually writing this from the author's perspective but this is you know the the word of the god
Speaker A
this is how it happened and this is like a common theme we see where it's like um maybe chneled information or something to that effect but it was not uncommon in the ancient world for this notion to the best I think the Easiest way to
Speaker A
understand that is just to simply say they were possessed by that, you know, and and I know possession comes with a whole host of baggage about, you know, demons and exorcist and all of this, but No, but all all the on the table here. I
Speaker A
want to I want to get your view, you know loyalty. I I just Yeah, some of those the words that we use constrain our uh creative minds to see this through a perspective that might be more accurate. Um, and so
Speaker A
I think that that is essentially what we're seeing. So for instance like an example could be that there is an Anunnaki there's a there is a human element to this where one of these humans who came from this breakaway
Speaker A
technocratic civilization um was a divinely inspired entity themselves like they they were possessed say by Anky so they were Anky so it's like they gave their body up to that like we're just simply soul containers and so they
Speaker A
they were Anky at that point and you could you could look at they were Anky and they weren't necessarily just inspired by but they were completely possessed by that so aware that they were that like an oracle would be and so
Speaker A
for all intents and purposes they were Anky and this is just the pattern you see through many different cultures and societies that the king would be the god on earth and they would give themselves up to that completely which is why they
Speaker A
could live so long or they could be there forever. It's you're looking at the possession of a human body by this like archonic force. And so you have that at play and then you have these other arcalu that are claiming to be
Speaker A
they they claim them to be like muses or advisors that they commune with these entities and they as in um the the ruler at the time. So it's as though they're getting willfully possessed. And I think that when they have the terms like Anki
Speaker A
or Enlil, I think these are just such strong figures that later get synchretatized into other figures. And I think the Romans understood that, which is why they continually synchretatized all these religions because they knew that this was one continuous entity
Speaker A
you're working through. But this just is like body hopping for lack of better term. Um, and I think when you read through, you're seeing that they're not a differentiating they're they're not differentiating between the human body and the entity. And so, for instance, if
Speaker A
you see like the behavior of the Anunnaki themselves, they act very human. They still have to eat. They have sex. They're doing things that are they're al they're very like carnal, you know, they're not etheric in any way
Speaker A
necessarily. the Akalu maybe these other like forces could be but the Anunnaki are often working within like a physical constraint. Um but they also have a metaphysical aspect to them and it depends on what era too because these
Speaker A
stories are so old and continuous that it goes from the very first writing to all the way into like you know Assyrian and um you know Babylonian and they can get reinterpreted later which you do see that happen where they don't even have
Speaker A
the sages associated with the king's list. The king's list isn't you know working anymore. There's it it's it's not one uh peoples like over time. It's it's hard it's you have to kind of keep in your mind that the Sumerian people um
Speaker A
were assimilated and we have thousands of years you know of time in this region of uh invaders and different things happening and ununiform persists but a lot of things change. Um so in my view I would say that there is more of a
Speaker A
sort of like a transfer or like a container type component to it. And um I don't know if that I don't know if that helps or not. I'm trying to it does it it does. And if I can be
Speaker A
completely honest I have you know I have a I have a pre-existing view that I'm that I'm open to changing. And some of the things I heard I instinctively disagreed with. But that doesn't that doesn't refute But that doesn't refute
Speaker A
the legitimacy of any of your research. I just want to be able to bounce a few ideas off of you.
Speaker A
Um, the King's List, right? And and so the you brought up containers, which I find fascinating because there are implications of the containerization of the soul in in some of the Sumerian translations, the the the fact that Anki
Speaker A
has to slay one of their own and the name often changes. And of course the description is mixing it with with clay and some ritual. But if we take that as a metaphor, I mean the whether you're genetically engineering in a test tube
Speaker A
in in vitro with crisper or you're just doing the equivalent of of eugenics through husbandry and crossbreeding.
Speaker A
There's no need to preserve the blood and transfer the consciousness. And yet that's coming up in the Sumerian texts.
Speaker A
There's multiple names for different parts of the soul and the spirit. I'd be curious and in the in the possession, right, the idea of ultraterrestrials, all of that I keep on the table as well.
Speaker A
And in fact, that's that's what a lot of insiders are saying took place, that we had some sort of beings here that were were operating basically on the on the metaphor of of possession. Um what what do you what do you make of the Sumerian
Speaker A
kings list which which has extraordinary continuity and suggests that whatever hominids beings people were ruling some of them were living for tens of thousands of years or ruling for tens of thousands of years ostensibly living for more than a hundred thousand.
Speaker A
Is it possible that we should be taking that literally and we're we just have one of these biases and we're dismissing it when we shouldn't be.
Speaker A
So it when it opens it it declares kingship descended from heaven. So it's essentially saying the divine right of kings that the idea of kingship itself comes from something that is not necessarily just political but it is divine in its framework and uh so that
Speaker A
is like theological ideological it's also kind of useful. Um and the earlier kings had like the longer reigns that would be like like 20 36 thousand years or so. Um, and these are often seen as, you know, mythic or symbolic and not
Speaker A
literal, but that's just because we understand that people don't typically live that long. But again, if you're just looking at it like, well, it must be that they were magical or that they are, you know, just impossible. I think
Speaker A
there's different ways to look at that as you kind of, I guess, hinted at maybe um, with the idea of metaphor. Um, and I know that may sound dismissive, but it's it's metaphor.
Speaker A
I think that if you're looking at it from this container perspective, uh I feel like that would fit a little better. Like there's an idea that maybe this this god, this entity, this this thing has lived that long. Like it's of that long tradition.
Speaker A
Um so, you know, I it's the it's like a royal ideology text sort of disguised as chronology. Um, so it it's also sometimes called political propaganda.
Speaker A
Uh, and I think a lot of people do get hung up on the timing of it and whether or not that means that people themselves are able to live a lot longer. Uh, I am sort of agnostic on that because I don't
Speaker A
see that. I just I don't see that it's likely that people are living that long and then it's like, well then that means they weren't people. Okay, sure. But they are does that mean they weren't biological entities? Because biological entities
Speaker A
still seem to have constraints on their you know life. So to me if I were to accept that they were excuse me much older I would think that there's something maybe a little metaphysical going on that could be dismissed as just saying
Speaker A
it's a metaphor or even a myth. But I don't I don't even think that that's dismissive in in it in that sense. I think myths carry actual truth just not facts. and that there's a lot uh to be
Speaker A
said in a myth that we're sort of having to read into. Um, and so I I don't I don't think that they I just have a hard time thinking that they were actually living, say, thousands of years, um, but
Speaker A
that it is actually referencing some other concept. And since I already kind of leaned towards this idea that they were vessels for um a force that maybe as young would consider them being part of the collective unconscious, which I
Speaker A
don't mean that as in too that they're just like some whimsical thing, but that they actually have an ability to have an effect on Earth. So that there perhaps a different dimension or something we just don't understand that
Speaker A
the phenomena itself has been going on for that long and that's how it's been understood. I mean for all we know they got those numbers because it was channeled through one of the kings who said that and it was through the king
Speaker A
who was saying that that this entity was speaking. So I you know it's hard to say but I I just I guess at the end of the day I reject that they were living that long physically.
Speaker A
Would you would you Would you be open-minded to reinvestigating that rejection if you were faced with more more evidence?
Speaker A
Oh, hell yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, just like send me the evidence if anyone has that, too. Uh, and you know, email me. Um, you can email me at heatherdr heatherlin.com and uh any tips, any any evidence. I'm down for that for sure.
Speaker A
Um, yeah. So, totally open to that. Always looking for that. So, and and I'm and you know, I have I have a bias, but I also want to update it with I I I care more about the truth than my bias. Um
Speaker A
be because the there is a lot that is pointing toward extraterrestrialness. the like what you mentioned when it comes to the the term the phrase that we have lowering of kingship the name Anunnaki those who descend from the heavens I
Speaker A
mean the boundary layer between space is our atmosphere which is what the heavens refer to the lowering of kingship or the fact that there's a bloodline to the gods the RH negative bloodline does for me it does point toward like
Speaker A
you mentioned there's There's both. There's there's a containerization of something. There's a possession or and possessing of something. Whether we're looking at the alien abduction lore or the NHI abduction lore, the Sumerian tablets when they talk about when they talk about, you know, killing
Speaker A
the the previous entity so that they can create the Lulu. Um, and even in the Bible there's there's implications of implications of soul recycling, luch farming.
Speaker A
If sacrifice itself is not a heavy indication of luch farming or the Epstein files, I don't I don't know what is, but um to to me I'm seeing both happening here. I'm seeing all three.
Speaker A
I'm seeing possession. I'm seeing containerization of the soul. I'm seeing cyclical cataclysms. in academia. I'm not seeing a desire to limit time complexity in order to keep a keep a clean continuum of ideas.
Speaker A
I'm actually seeing a terrifying fear that people will actually piece a story together that becomes unavoidable once you allow a subject to be investigated.
Speaker A
I'm actually seeing a phobia that that we can piece this together. Um I'm I'm wondering what you think about that because if we have cyclical cataclysms and advanced civilizations that repeatedly spring up right after the cataclysm, that does suggest a being
Speaker A
that might be viewing humans as a resource to be manipulated. And that subverts the ent the entire the entire field of saying civilization is only four to six thousand years old. You know this I'm not seeing continual progress. I'm seeing regressive
Speaker A
recursive maybe even yeah regressive or devolutionary anti-progress. What are your thoughts on that? That maybe we can figure this out and there's forces behind ensuring that we don't.
Speaker A
Oh, including extraterrestrial or ultraterrestrial. Oh, I agree with that because um a couple things with that. If if we were able if at some point even if if we can't claim that say people uh 5,000 6,000 years ago or something, they
Speaker A
were living to be 36,000 years old themselves. Um that doesn't that doesn't mean that people couldn't. Um and that's that's something that it's it's the timeline of events. And to me, what's going on here, because you have history
Speaker A
beginning at Sumer, that doesn't mean that that's literally where history begins. That people were already recording somehow, whether it's through oral tradition or perhaps lost texts that happened when they couldn't bring them with them on their or maybe they
Speaker A
did bring some or maybe they were written in such a way that they're biodegradable and they didn't have evidence or whatever. But the the history literally didn't just happen at Sumer in in the sense that we understand it. It only just begins there because
Speaker A
that's where we have the written record. So to me that means that a lot of the things that were first written down are accounts of things that are older. So even something like the epic of Gilgamesh where we're just where it's
Speaker A
discussing a run-in with Anky Doo they describe Ankidoo as a animal of the forest kind of a half beast half man and he drank with the gazels outside of the city and he had to be humanized or civilized by you know being
Speaker A
seduced into coming into the the city and then giving a he got a bath and a nice clean shave and then he was humanized. Right? Okay. So, the differentiator between being human and non-human was simply that he was clean
Speaker A
and and had a clothes and he was at within the wall of the city. Uh otherwise, he was like an animal but somewhere in between. And to me, in that account of the oldest story that we have written down,
Speaker A
that sounds like it could also be the meeting of two uh different types of people as well, as in people who were quote civilized and then maybe even a different type of homminid. like it could go way back and it was just oral
Speaker A
tradition. So we may be looking at the Anky do being some sort of uh you know Neanthal or something. I mean like who knows like just a way a different homminid even altogether that we just don't even know or have the evidence for
Speaker A
because these stories could be very old and then then remnants of those stories then imbued in newer stories and inspired by true events kind of thing.
Speaker A
So I think that uh if you look at even our language, language is carrying little hints of languages before which is why the Sumerian so strange. Uh but mostly you can trace little bits going really far back and we are right now as
Speaker A
we speak we're demonstrating our connection to a very ancient past and in our genes we have that. So it's it does get passed on and then changed. And so I think that something like the concept or the premise that a human being could
Speaker A
live for tens of thousands of years if it's possible. Maybe it happened even in a pre flood context and people knew this and they lost the recipe to it. Hence the like epic of Gilgamesh. The whole idea is he's running around trying to
Speaker A
find this plant that will bring back Ankidoo because of having to have everlasting life. Like the quest for life extension technology is in the first story ever told and it is in the quest of the technocratic elite right
Speaker A
now. That's what they're doing. They want to declare aging a disease so that grant money can be opened up to it so we can study on how to reverse aging and try to live forever.
Speaker A
So we think this possible and it's physically possible. So it's not impossible. And there there's more though, right?
Speaker A
There's there's negotiations between Enki and Enlil where he's bartering in favor of humanity for for reparations that humanity should pay for for having the audacity to survive.
Speaker A
Yeah. And part of these negotiations is the curtailing of our longevity from like a thousand years down to 120. So we h we have a Sumerian kings list that clearly details whether it's true or not rulers ostensively human living tens of
Speaker A
thousands of years and the human rulers that are that are postolvian [clears throat] are are all within our current known human time span. We have a Sumerian account or many accounts where Anki is saying you know go ahead and curtail
Speaker A
their longevity to make up for this. And then we have, I don't know, hundreds, thousands of tablets of Enlil clearly having some sort of narcissistic ambivalence where he's proud that his brother created this Lulu and also feels threatened because we seem to be
Speaker A
learning faster than they do. We have Genesis account where Yahweh clearly says that if we eat from one tree or the other tree, the tree of life or the tree of knowledge, then they shall become like us. So there's a level
Speaker A
of consonance here that um at least indicates genetic engineering, genetic devolutionary engineering. Um and and there's just countless tablets where sometimes these roles are are reversed or rewritten, right? When we're talking about Marduk, what what do you feel are the
Speaker A
implications for scripture when it comes to the the King James version of the Bible or or canonically accepted texts?
Speaker A
Um what are the implications of the the the Sumerian flood myths uh upon scriptural Christianity?
Speaker A
I mean, that was pretty much the uh main problem too that people had with Dich was that uh in his Bible and Bi Babel and Bible lectures and whatnot was that these stories will throw off the entire timeline primarily of the Old Testament.
Speaker A
that's more of a threat to the Old Testament, rarely a threat to the new only because the parts of the New Testament that actually kind of matter are not uh just retellings of old stories. They reconnect to old stories
Speaker A
so that they have again that sense of legitimacy like a fulfillment of prophecy and all of this. Um but the crux if you will of the New Testament is more of story of uh kind of influenced by Greek hero myth and Cleos the idea
Speaker A
that you're going to uh be redeemed and you know go through challenges etc. So it it has a different purpose that it fulfills aside from having the Old Testament. You could you could take the Old Testament out of it and u still have
Speaker A
a a story there that that has a purpose. So it wouldn't necessarily crumble the New Testament, but it would crumble the Old because it would just push back the dates so far and it would change them too. It would change the story a little
Speaker A
bit. So that's that's part of the argument that uh this particular German had where he was trying to say we need to take a little of the Jewishness out of Christianity for that very fact that like to divorce the two that maybe one
Speaker A
was related but it wasn't relevant to Christianity. That's where the whole accusation of an Aryan Christ comes about where you know you you de d dej Jewish it or something. So there's that [laughter] djuing.
Speaker A
Dejuing, I guess. And um yeah, so that that's an argument, but I think it's a valid argument because it's one that also stopped uh some of the people in the uh Victorian and Edwwardian era from really trying to promote anything
Speaker A
Samrian because it was like h it's a need to know basis, right? we don't need to shatter everyone's uh Christian beliefs or something like that by telling them that Noah's arc story is actually um you know a a a retelling. So
Speaker A
uh it would it would it would threaten that. But I think also it I think it's just it does have a it does push back scripture um and it changes it a lot. But I mean it is what
Speaker A
it is, right? [laughter] I think that if you're if you're if whatever religion you have is again true, it can stand up to that. And if it's not, if it can't stand up to that, then those are the things that you have
Speaker A
to kind of ditch. You have to say, well, that's not core to the belief, then I have to adapt and move on. So, but I do think that played into the the reasons that people didn't want to uh promote it
Speaker A
or talk about it. And I think to this day though, it's one of the reasons there's a lot of reasons, but I think that if it's it's a it's not really suppressed, but it's craft it's carefully crafted. I used to ask
Speaker A
students all the time, you know, who have heard of the Egyptians? And everybody, right? And I'll say, who've heard of the Sumerianss? Not as many people. Um, you know, American high schools like fail students. So, I wasn't surprised, but a little disappointed.
Speaker A
Over the years, it did get to be a little more given the popularity of shows like Ancient Aliens that discuss things like the Samrians. So, there was that, but still then their introduction to the Samrians would just simply be the
Speaker A
Sitchin narrative primarily. And that is, I think, the main problem is that in math, they don't want us to understand math. They want us to be bored by it.
Speaker A
They don't want us to know the things that would give us extreme power if we knew. They hold that secret for themselves, literally. So they want to know who these gods were. They want to know how far back people were able to
Speaker A
have life extension technology. They want the knowledge of, you know, what sort of plants could be used for healing purposes. They want the knowledge of the bloodlines that may uh be more able to tap into innate abilities or maybe tap
Speaker A
into uh abilities that would be unseen. They want to be able to stake claim to particular land and abilities and supremacy. They have all of this as their I think their primary goal is wrapped up in bloodlines. It's wrapped
Speaker A
up in technology and it's wrapped up in life extension. And the the whole driving force being to become God, a god. Because remember the the gods like we what is God? I in my view God is an unknowable thing. It's the, you know, to
Speaker A
borrow a Catholic phrase of the sum bonum, the greatest good. It's big. It's a creative force. It's it's not personal necessarily. So, it's something that it's ineffable. It can't be can't be even seen or described um by our little
Speaker A
human minds. But there's gods and gods can be whatever you choose. And so, just because these entities appear and people have worshiped them like gods doesn't make them inherently the, you know, the creator in my view. And so that means a
Speaker A
lot of things can claim to be God and gods and that includes people who are hoping that one day they will ascend and become like the gods through hacking the system. And uh I think that they look to
Speaker A
the past in these ancient stories as uh you know maybe the field guide or hoping to find the missing link or uh an artifact or something that will give them that edge which is why they don't really push the agenda as much as they
Speaker A
could. Like they push Egyptology. They did that for a while um with the King Tut exhibit in the 70s. Um but that was because they had a political agenda there. They wanted us to warm up to Egypt and be excited about Egypt because
Speaker A
of different um things that they were doing and uh with Israel and um treaties and whatnot and that you know that's old history but um there's always a scop running. So it's intentional that we're not adequately taught about Sumerian
Speaker A
life extension possibilities any of this. Um, so you I should I should disclose that I've been majorly stirring the pot here. Um, and I can't help it. And Fringe kind of stirred the pot, too. But she's she's right when you said there's
Speaker A
something doomers in shambles. Um, but I'm not going to have that the opportunity to have an Anunnaki expert here all the time. So I I have to stir the pot pot maximally here. Fringe is is uh a devout Christian, a good Christian
Speaker A
white woman. I am a DMT vaping heathen. I'm spiritual, not religious. Um I I I would love to get into what Matt Lacroy considers to be the most valuable or most important mural in in history, the Tree of Life mural. I think still
Speaker A
housed in the Asher Bonopal Library. Because here we have a depiction of beings with wings, which he he is saying are the Anuna, you might say are the shining ones. We have the Dolan Cabana bag and the Apple Watch, the pine cone,
Speaker A
or maybe poppy seeds. Can Can we get into this controversial thing? I pushed it up into the nest. Um I I'm I'm guessing you've seen this before. It's supposed to represent the lowering of kingship. I' I'd love to know what your
Speaker A
take is on on this thing. By nest, you mean I'm checking. Yeah. I mean, if you open the player above your head, my head, and Fring's head. This is where I'm sharing the post, by the way. And and I shared your
Speaker A
book as well. Everybody should buy it. The the Anunnaki revelation hidden story. Uh somebody bought the book you recommend, the first the book you first recommended, like within minutes, they're like added to cart and bought.
Speaker A
So, I really hope people get into your work. Um, the voices are so rare and and you bring a a fresh, subversive, and honest perspective. Um, and and yeah, and so let let me know if you don't see
Speaker A
that. I don't see it. I apologize. I'm clicking through it. Maybe I'm just missing it. Um, it's the very first one on the far left is the tree of life mural. Um, but I can also just DM it to our Wait, I think I
Speaker A
see it. Hold on. Yeah. Okay. And so I I don't 100% I'm not 100% familiar with all of Matt Lacroyy's uh theories and that's Oh, that's totally fine.
Speaker A
I've not done a lot of deep dives on his work. I would actually like to talk to this is an invite to talk to him because um I was reached maybe I shouldn't say the names. I don't know if this was told
Speaker A
to me in confidence or not. O Oh, that's interesting. It's so good. Yeah. Um, someone reached out to you.
Speaker A
So, um, she's I I'll tell enough that people could triangulate. I Gosh. Perfect. You know, I'll ask that.
Speaker A
Yeah. I don't It's like I would ask forgiveness instead of permission usually, but this is a real person and she's a sweetheart. Um, it's not Diana Pulka, is it?
Speaker A
No. No, I shouldn't say it like that. No, sorry. She's a Yeah. No. No. I mean, she has some cool ideas, but no. I she's in she also went to Heredicon and I think she's sus to me but shout out to
Speaker A
Diana. I'd talk to her though. I'd love to pick her brain. She has some cool writings. But that's no I have no I have no bone to pick with her. It's um I was reached out to by a friend um who's an
Speaker A
archaeologist who was working with Matt and working with his team on a um I guess a documentary project. I hadn't heard of them. I wasn't sure. Again, some of the people that even though I may be like kind of aligned with, I
Speaker A
don't know about because I've until this past year where I started doing content creation full-time. I've been teaching and uh being a museum director and then doing this part-time. So, like I don't know everybody, but she reached out to
Speaker A
me and told me that the that uh they were doing some things that she as a professional archaeologist was uncomfortable with. Um, and you know, so I don't I don't there some of it's legal issues, so I don't know that I want to
Speaker A
say exactly what that is. And so like allegedly, we'll say allegedly um was uh she was concerned because she said she didn't want to get um detained because there were not proper uh permits and mishandling of stuff and and there a lot
Speaker A
of things that were going on. she felt that it was uh unethical and also when it was brought to their attention that they didn't care and didn't take her seriously and she was a little bit afraid of that cuz she was trying to do
Speaker A
things a little bit more legitimately and didn't want to get detained because it is known that especially in Turkey Turkey a they will detain you um and rightfully so by the way rightfully so because archaeology has been a front for
Speaker A
espionage since its invention So um but they will it is a scary thing for people who are there. So she didn't want that to happen. She was trying to prevent that from happening. But that wasn't why she reached out to me specifically. She
Speaker A
reached out to me through a friend that has a podcast that everybody knows and loves. And uh he reached out to me and said, "Can I give her your information?
Speaker A
Can you talk to her?" I said, "Yeah." and we talked and she wanted to talk to me specifically because she said she had noticed that they were the they were using my Anunnaki connection book and lifting whole passages out of it and
Speaker A
plagiarizing and doing things and I was like I don't even know what they're talking about because I I've not even read I've not even read the stuff and I guess it was him and like Billy Carson did a book or something and I have no
Speaker A
idea because I legit just don't know or care and I'm not generally one of these ego people where I'm like that's my work because I don't really give a [ __ ] because um this might be a news news
Speaker A
breaking news to people but um especially because everyone calls everyone grifters like they're making so much money. Um you don't make [ __ ] money writing books unless you're doing it self-published then I think you could probably make that but I'm traditionally
Speaker A
published so I make like a dollar a book or something. It's like not it is there's no money in it. I do it because I I like it. I like the book and I like to be able to talk to people. And I
Speaker A
think my main goal for writing books was um I was told once they're a passport and they are. It's a way to get your mind, you know, like to get the stuff out of your mind and to be able then go
Speaker A
talk about it because like look, I have a book so put me on your show. And I like to talk in case you haven't noticed. And so I um I don't I don't make a ton of money off these books. I
Speaker A
don't self-publish. Um and I don't really care. I mean I appreciate everyone who buys the book, but people also know that I'll give them books. So, uh, I don't go running around trying to say that's my work and blah blah blah
Speaker A
because I I think a rising tide lifts all boats and there's room for everybody. Um, and but I just that was that my first introduction to even the name. I was like, who? And he's like, Matt Lacroy and he's taken all your work
Speaker A
and he took your ideas and I'm like, okay. But I've been accused of that even recently by someone. Um, and I'm like my response to that is this like archaic guy. I'm sure he has a lot of fans and
Speaker A
so I'll give him air time or something by saying that. But that was a whole thing because they were like, "You're a fed or something because you went on Danny Jones. I've never heard of you." And it's like,
Speaker A
"Oh my goodness." Yeah. I mean, that's the kind of stuff I've I've been talking about. People people have have sort of um decided not to use their own minds and then everything is just by association. And I'm I'm only saying I'm
Speaker A
only saying that, Lori, because that's how I was first exposed to this. Um, it's possible he stole your work or plagiarized your work.
Speaker A
And I think also too, like what I said, um, I still stand by what I said to about the whole like thing this archaic guy was saying, which is, um, if if another researcher independently arrives at similar conclusions. That's kind of
Speaker A
viewed, I think, as validation and um, as opposed to competition because nobody owns truth. We own our maybe particular books or our copyrights or products or expressions or stuff, but we don't own the truth itself. And so if a theory is
Speaker A
true, it just simply belongs to reality and not an individual ego or a person like that. And so if somebody else says like, "Oh, I found this." And if they take all my conclusions and stuff, that just means that maybe they went a
Speaker A
different direction and found it and we came to the same conclusion. I think that's probably a good thing. That's called research and validation. However, it just happened to be on a personality level. That was uh my first introduction
Speaker A
to him. And so, as such, I never bothered to read or or do whatever. But it is sort of an invite to if um I mean, Billy's reached out to me who wanted me on a show. I'm like, you know, sorry any
Speaker A
any Billy Carson fans? Big apologies there, but I'm not doing that guy's show. He can suck a dick. I don't care.
Speaker A
That's [laughter] I have no interest in Billy Carson and that whole grift. That's just ridiculous. So, I love everybody. I want to talk to everyone. I would probably talk to Billy Carson, but not um you probably wouldn't. I would
Speaker A
talk to him. Yeah, I guess I'd talk to him, but I wouldn't like um You don't want to be in the context of his of his showing that kind of stuff. Yeah, that's goofy.
Speaker A
So, but I know he worked with uh Matt Lroy and they were kind of in on stuff and so I'm just like I want to be guilty by association that way, but I do kind of like once I saw Matt, I was like I
Speaker A
think he's probably just another Billy Carson guy. And now this person that is very reliable to me told me that he's kind of sus that way and I was just like I'll just stay away. Plus I, you know,
Speaker A
was busy doing other things. So that's my only thing. And and I say that publicly because um hey, if you're out there, Matt, you know, reach out to me.
Speaker A
Uh we do write about similar things and maybe we could talk sometime. I think it's cool. You seem to a lot of people seem to think you're pretty cool and I don't know. I've seen a clip or two on
Speaker A
podcast. You seem like a nice dude. So, um, yeah, I'd be interested to like talk and hear your thoughts cuz I don't actually know what they are and it might be a cooler thing to hear his thoughts since I haven't read his books like you
Speaker A
how you didn't listen to the Danny Jones thing because you don't want to like have that I mean that that kind of makes it a little better I think because it's like Yeah. I mean, especially especially with this because I would
Speaker A
have had I would I would have had a very stupid bias. Not not from the the the interview, but from from the DMs that I got because everybody has their heels dug in on what the Anuna are and what
Speaker A
they aren't. Um Oh, yeah. That's funny. I'd love to hear those about those DMs. Oh, but I I do have to say, and I probably should have said this earlier, and I apologize, but I I'm really worried about the uh person
Speaker A
who was waiting since yesterday for a question. and I feel let's let's bring her up if she's still there. Um there's been something also h a lot of people are getting kicked out of this room. Uh Heather, so there there
Speaker A
I I don't know why, but I'm getting a bunch of DMs of people saying like they keep on getting kicked out.
Speaker A
Weird. It is very weird. Normally we'd have we'd have at least like around 100 people live and we did. And so something technical is is kind of happening. But we have we have Jenny here. Um, Jenny, go go go ahead. You've been you've been
Speaker A
waiting a long time, you know, sitting outside in a tent outside of the the exservers. Go ahead and uh fire away.
Speaker A
I I dude. Okay, Heather, this is my my first real introduction to you and we're around the same age. I I am so impressed with you and we did come to almost similar conclusions on completely different routes. So, I want to I'm so
Speaker A
excited that you exist. I have full body goosebumps. I'm not kidding. I have been here. I have put probably 150 different little papers in the not for you to read them, but for me to compile the fact that you just helped me understand
Speaker A
something. And I want to ask you if I'm understanding it correctly. I've always been sort of obs I'm a nurse with a philosophy degree. Philosophy is passion. Nurse is money. Well, phil philosophy I love more than anything, but because Assyrianology was my first,
Speaker A
but then AI came out and I was like, I don't need to do it anymore. And then you're like, well, we shouldn't trust AI. I'm like, oh my gosh, I should have, [laughter] you know, but so I wanted to
Speaker A
find truth really. It wasn't anything in particular. And I landed on the Kao form. And um so then [clears throat] I became really excited about it. This was before artificial intelligence and stuff. And you know that guy uh from
Speaker A
Hobby Lobby actually smuggled and he's like super Christian. So if you're willing to smuggle being a super Christian, what is in those tablets?
Speaker A
Right. Right. So then all of a sudden you bring in this this beyond the veil. I'm also obsessed like parallelly with um you know the the deities beyond the veil.
Speaker A
And we just discovered in Peru recently bird bone devices that the elites they think used underneath the temples to commune with someone beyond the veil using DMT. I'm not a proponent for like wild drug use, but I cannot deny because
Speaker A
I did travel with grateful debt a little. I did I cannot deny that there's something interesting there. So I kind of want to to ask you, you know, in your in your current theory that you have now, which there are several places that
Speaker A
I have access to it, you know, that I that I can see it. I think that you just put it all together. I think that you what you have explained and what you understand is the closest to something
Speaker A
that feels like it's potentially true to me only because we cannot deny that the elites have been getting information from beyond the veil. We cannot deny the kaiform text texts exist. We've just begun to translate them pretty much and
Speaker A
obviously you know we ignored them. It would abolish current religious statuses the one that the normies believe in. You know it would it would but strengthen one's own interaction with God. It strengthened my spirituality try when I learned this it didn't abolish it. So do
Speaker A
you see how crazy I am right now? I I'm trying to talk calmly and professionally, but I'm just I'm so excited that you are out there and that I can immerse myself in the things that you're understanding. If you ever need
Speaker A
somebody to volunteer, I don't care what it is. I'll I I have, you know, lifelong learner, but are we really looking at a parallel world? Is this the um you know uh what's his oh gosh his name Claude
Speaker A
Shannon you know how he talked about how there's an entanglement sort of at the edge where we're almost a a hologram inside. Is that what we're talking about here? Are these the same things? these beyond the veil, this communal with
Speaker A
something from the outside. These prophetic sort of um instances that we've been directed by something that's disembodied and it is held secret because you that's something that I learned as I grew up with it was bad.
Speaker A
You should not do anything. Get away from anything like that state. You know, this is dangerous. And of course, it seems that you know, guardianship over information is is next to sort of phenomenon. So, I'm gonna I'm gonna I
Speaker A
hope I know that was a a mess of my voice. I'm sorry that this is my first ability to talk to you and and sound like that. I just did. I just I'm so happy that you've spent your life on
Speaker A
what you're doing. It's just so important. Thank you. Oh, thank you so much. I appreciate that. And you're totally fine. It's just fun to get excited again about history because it's exactly what they don't want us to do. They don't want us to
Speaker A
have an excitement because then we'll follow that and we'll have an investment in it and you know they want us they want it to be boring like when was the war of 1812 and it's like okay okay 1812
Speaker A
you know like so they just want it to be disengaging and so I appreciate that and you can feel free to talk to me anytime you want join my discord we have great uh every other Sunday we have hangouts
Speaker A
and we talk and it's a really good group and people are really cool there and we go through like different research opportunities and um I'm building an archive and an occult museum online where I'm um scanning my own personal
Speaker A
documents of uh things that I retrieved in a mystery school and other places and uh uh just getting all that stuff available and to the public. But uh so there's plenty of opportunities to get involved and just kind of hang out. So
Speaker A
are are you you are you are you using the occult um you know the the differences between like having certain aspects available during specific rituals like natives you know air wind fire earth water directionals it's almost as if it's uh Solomon temple keys
Speaker A
you know all these different things it seems like there's some sort of a geometric u key that also has to occur and it doesn't mean that's bad because we know things resonate with each other so potentially that's changing that sort
Speaker A
of brainwave state you know We're coming up with new science that we're an antenna pretty much where we can change our state to change. So these sciences are merging. It's exciting.
Speaker A
I think so. No, and I think I think they've been uh merging. I think that the people like Epstein kind of know that and they do secret science. Like you can see that in the emails where he's trying to hire scientists and
Speaker A
people to do pet projects or even just come talk with each other or have these events. And you see that I mentioned Diana Pulka and her going to Heredicon which is a a different function that Teal puts on where he gets together
Speaker A
thinkers and people and you know that whole sharing of knowledge but it's a closed door kind of secret secret thing and so I think that yeah they know that uh you have to share this information and be multi-disiplinary and
Speaker A
interdisciplinary and that's what they don't want even if you remember Bob Lazar and his uh discussion about uh you know his view of the work that he did that all of the scientists were just so partitioned into stuff that they didn't
Speaker A
know what they're working on. It's like the I mentioned this a lot is the blind man and the elephant. The blind man and the elephant where they're all blind and they're holding something. One of them's holding a tail, another a trunk, another
Speaker A
a leg and they're describing what it is that they are holding and they're kind of right but they can't see the bigger picture. And so they argue and they bicker and they never really get anywhere because they can't see. And so
Speaker A
they are the all-seeing eye and they are placing you know they're blinding the scientists by design by putting blinders on them and forcing them to overanalyze and specialize in say elephant trunks.
Speaker A
Um but they get a piece of information that then they can use to get the fuller picture and not let anybody know. That's how they can maximize people's abilities and interests in the sciences and even arts and say well we're going to extract
Speaker A
what we can out of you. That was my recent discussion um on entropy that people kind of I think were not happy about. Uh I wasn't dis disregarding entropy as a thing or um free energy as a thing because some people came at me
Speaker A
after the show about like well you just don't know anything. You lost me there because free energy is so important. It would save lives yada yada. Well sure but if we had free energy are we getting the free energy please. They're not
Speaker A
giving us anything. They'll keep it for themselves. And my argument is not about that. It's another one of those things where it's like, okay, we're focusing on that, but what are they focusing on?
Speaker A
They're going to set their scientists out to focus on something like free energy in that physical sense. They're going to set scientists to look for free energy in the biological sense, too.
Speaker A
They're going to look for all of these different hints. And they do, this is Epstein already did this. They were talking about entropy. They were talking about nentropy and all of these concepts. And they were saying, you know, like in every field they're
Speaker A
picking up on these things, even communication, uh, the field of communication. So all of these seemingly unconnected fields get hyperfocused and they're answering though a question that ends up if you're looking for a quantifiable truth, you're going to have
Speaker A
to have a mathematic concept underpinning it. That way you can model it and that way it's actually true. So, if you're trying to find out like free energy, are you really just doing it so that you can zip around the cosmos?
Speaker A
Well, you know, that's not going to do you any good if you don't live forever.
Speaker A
Um, if you're going to have energy to have an economy going forever, what's I mean, sure, but like think a little further out. Think about what the implication of actual free energy across all systems would be. It would be the
Speaker A
key to endless life. You would just be self-perpetuating all the time. You would live forever. Because if we had the ability to get in a spaceship and fly away, they're not they wouldn't let us anyway. If we had the ability to have
Speaker A
an economy that didn't rely on actual like electricity or, you know, gasoline or whatever, it's going to be something else. They would monetize it another way. They're not going to have that actual freedom even if it exists. They
Speaker A
want something for themselves. And I believe that what they're looking for by having each blind man hold a piece of that elephant, one of them in this discipline, another in the other, and they're looking for the ultimate concept
Speaker A
though of what is it they can do to keep going forever. They want to live forever. And so that's my kind of view on that. And I think that a lot of these seemingly unconnected things are only unconnected because they were
Speaker A
disconnected. you know, body, body, mind, you know, all of that. It's all been disconnected so that they could be in control of it and not have us all communicate like a tower of babel. They want to confuse us so that we can't
Speaker A
communicate and uh reach them at the very top of that that uh you know tower that they've placed themselves as gods.
Speaker A
Now, how have how have you been in the like community? Are you because you don't seem like you're going to be ruled. you seem like you're going to think for yourself and if you can't find what you agree with, you're not going to just
Speaker A
agree to get along. Is that been hard for you to come into to like speaking engagements? Because, you know, I just the what you're speaking about it I think many many people feel that way, right? They understand that, but we lack
Speaker A
this ability to sort of self-organize within, you know, groups to to really get that. And you made me think of Christianity. We have to wait for Jesus to come back. Well, if this is really true, we could have him every day all
Speaker A
day through a conversation we have inside, which lots of us do, right? So, this sort of changes the power control paradigm. Like, do you feel you're getting push back because you, you know, obviously are not going to be stopped?
Speaker A
I'm getting a ton of push back. I've gotten all sorts of terrible things. And it's okay though because I um like my I I think uh my biography, you know, I I always find it important to tell people
Speaker A
where I came from because it's very much a part of who I am. Uh and people can dog it and say, "Oh, well, you just, you know, went to a community college or whatever." Yeah, I did and I taught at
Speaker A
one because it matters and because that's who I am. Because we all have our story. Everyone's going to be better than you or worse than you. And this comparison just it's all ego [ __ ] So my story means something to me. It means
Speaker A
that I have lived the life that I have been drawn to live. I've been authentic to myself and my quest and my interests and I've been very grounded and grateful. And I think I approach everything with this huge sense of
Speaker A
gratitude because you know whether people want to [ __ ] on me for it or not, I'm I can't like pretend I'm someone I'm not. I will tell you flat out, I have slept in a car. I have eaten out of the
Speaker A
garbage. I have had like literal like homelessness and poverty. Not even from my own hand, of course, because if you leave at 16, you're leaving something.
Speaker A
You ran away from home at 16. Dude, I I left home at at 14. Yes. To go see what the world was about. And I traveled. I hitchhiked just to and I met people because I was so sheltered and I
Speaker A
was fine. But I have two degrees now, too. So, it's not like I was dumb or a loser. And I didn't become addicted to drugs when there's a lot of drugs out there. I observed, dude, I observe.
Speaker A
Yeah. I'm telling you, I'm when I actually, you'll see later, there's a post I put on your page. It's like um it I you have you're you're far more accomplished. I do not have the degrees that you do. I only have bachelors. I
Speaker A
want someday to be as great, you know, in that level where you are. And well, I hope I Well, you know, it does because matters to you.
Speaker A
Whatever. Let me tell you something. Didn't you jump through some hoops that made you realize who you actually were while you were going to school? Like you had to do. Yes. Amen. Prove you are to yourself.
Speaker A
Amen. Well, I put on your page. I was like, dude, if we'd known each other and we were kids or something, we'd have been besties. Like cuz you [laughter] the way you're the way you speak is it's so real and authentic, which I and you
Speaker A
still have conclusions that are um they're science-based. Like when I was putting things into different accounts and looking at them, you cannot deny a lot of these things that are you are asking like you have the pieces of the
Speaker A
puzzle and you're saying why won't you let me put the puzzle together you know and that compartmentalization is a ruling divide and conquer source that we as humans you know we it's our Achilles heel but not all of us not all of us and
Speaker A
that's why I'm thankful for you. Well I'm thankful for you too and yeah so for anyone who didn't haven't heard it hasn't heard it already or whatever.
Speaker A
Yeah, I left home at 16. I had a my life was um you know, not great. Uh my mother was an alcoholic and untreated like bipolar and very abusive and you know and we lived in literal squalor. She
Speaker A
owned like 50 cats. I'm kidding you not. They were all in the basement. Like house of horror stuff that I don't even bother to get too detailed in because it's just like I you know I don't want to be defined by that. But I do want to
Speaker A
share it and I want to share enough of it to let people know that you are not, you know, who the people in your life say that you are or told you you are.
Speaker A
You are who you decide to be. Like going back to Julian James, that idea of our voices, the internalized voices, the things that we tell ourselves become real. Like I I I want to be the voice that tells me, not like the voices of
Speaker A
the past, like, well, people like us don't go to college. Well, you know what? My dad went to Notre Dame Law School. I mean, I mean, I guess I kind of have his jeans, but guess what? He was also in federal prison for SEC
Speaker A
violations and doing all kinds of stuff. He worked with Johnny Cochran and lived in West Palm doing probably Epstein stuff for all I know. Who knows? I wasn't around him. Like, it's all bad all the way around. My lived experience
Speaker A
was I was just a kid that was very traumatized and I stayed to myself and I always wondered what in the hell's life all about, right? And I will give credit where credit is due because I believe the thing that kept me from not being on
Speaker A
drugs or being promiscuous or doing anything like that um was that I was put I was uh I went to Catholic school and of course other people would have a very different experience or that is absolutely true. It just so happened
Speaker A
that my experience thankfully was good and it was good in so far as that my mother as a single mother jumped me off there forever and I would just be at like I went to a Menite uh daycare so I
Speaker A
had a very interesting experience going from like 5 in the morning the Menite school to you know the Catholic school and then back to the Menite school and so I had a very interesting experience but the Catholic school the the teaching
Speaker A
itself was very important to me because uh couple things one we were taught thought that we were inherently good, that uh that we had value, and we had value because God God created us and God gave a [ __ ] right? That to a kid, I'm
Speaker A
like, "Okay, I'm down with that." I go home and my mother burns me with cigarette butts. I go home and my mother says I'm nothing and she should have aborted me. I go home and I I get the
Speaker A
[ __ ] beat out of me I have no dinner. I go home and I'm told I'm nothing and I'll never be anything. And then I get bullied in school because I have dirty clothes or cigarette marks, right? And
Speaker A
this was before people were really great about calling children's services. They didn't. Um, and so, but I go into the school and at the same time then they're telling me these people who are propped up as the authority, right? The priests,
Speaker A
the nuns, the school, the teacher, the the statues hanging all around. They're saying, "No, no, no, no. We're the God can speak to you. Like you you just have to be here. You have to meditate. you have to pray and God's with you and all
Speaker A
of this. And so I internalized that and when my mother would tell me those terrible things, I would say, "Well, wait a minute. That doesn't make sense because uh the authority structure that I believe is telling me a different
Speaker A
story and I don't know that you trump God and all these like I don't see statues of you sitting everywhere, mom.
Speaker A
So I think you're actually wrong." And so my first authority figure who literally abused my trust and vulnerability, I I doubted and doubted because I found a different reference point. Now, of course, we can take exception with that reference point.
Speaker A
That's not here nor there. It was just a a thing that I think formed me into who I am to where I was like, I don't care what you do to me or what you say to me.
Speaker A
I know that I matter and I know that I'm not limited by what you say. I think I can do better. And so, I wanted to do better. And I did better by appealing to authority. And what that meant was I
Speaker A
would ask questions. I asked for help. I I listened to people when they said, "Hey, you're good at music. Go, you know, follow that." Okay, great. So, I I did these things and developed a sense of self. And eventually though, when you
Speaker A
hit those teenage years, you can only take so much of your parents [ __ ] before you're like, you know, mom, I think you're a drunk [ __ ] And then you like leave the house, right? And I think
Speaker A
the tipping point for me was uh I was I had gotten a scholarship to Interlockan.
Speaker A
Um and that was like a prep school for Giuliard. I'd have to move. Oh yeah. Congratulations.
Speaker A
Thanks. And I because I played the French horn. I still do actually. I play in orchestras, local ones. Um and so I play the French horn. I did uh singing and um different instruments, piano and things. And I got a a scholarship. And
Speaker A
my mother wouldn't let me go. And the school was actually I think trying to help me out to get me out of that situation cuz by this time I uh you know I was vocal about everything and I was
Speaker A
like telling them help my mother's crazy and um so they invited her to come in and maybe talk and say let me express to you why it's important that you let her go to this school and my mother showed
Speaker A
up totally drunk and she punched the vice principal or the principal I can't remember but like somebody from the school she punched them but like she was 4 foot she wasn't even 5 foot And so it was kind of comical but at the same time
Speaker A
like wow. Okay. So the answer was no. And from that point on I felt humiliated and I felt that of all the things I could ever make excuses about my mother this was the the point where I was like
Speaker A
well damn you don't even have my future it at you know it's in in any of that like you don't have my best interest at at heart. So um I'm trying to see hold [ __ ] you pretty much. No call me. I I
Speaker A
apologize. Somebody was trying to call me. I have a crazy thread right now if anyone's heard on the the podcast here.
Speaker A
Um Kurt Mezer has put me in a a group chat called um TP uh Sam or Turning Point Sam Tripolley. And so we have like a lot of people in there and the text thread has just been blowing up. I have like a
Speaker A
hundred messages and the phone's ringing. So I apologize. But I I filled it out. I filled it out. You said and I was like And I'm like, "Fuck you." And that's [laughter] I'm out of here. I'm out of here. And so that was
Speaker A
what got me and I was at that like teenage time where I'm like I don't think and I tried to work it out with her. I tried to get her to go to counseling. It just wasn't happening.
Speaker A
And you know I was I was a teenager so I'm like I'm out of here. I could do this better myself. Well news flash you really can't. It's really hard. And so I I skipped around. I thought I'd go see
Speaker A
my dad. That didn't work out. And I ended up living in a car and uh you know starting a life of fast food and trying to find places to park at night to survive. And I did at least get to
Speaker A
travel a lot and meet people and it was a formative experience but it was not easy. And then I finally make it to I have a boyfriend and I end up in um I end up in uh Cleveland, Ohio. As he
Speaker A
said, I have family there. Well, you know, spoiler alert, he did not. Um and so he left me but stole my car. left me in a city. I didn't know what the hell it was. Found out my mother had died of
Speaker A
cancer, so I never got to resolve that. And then I was taking the bus back and forth to try to get to my menial job.
Speaker A
And uh then somebody I didn't realize had been stalking me. And I didn't know that. Um but then found out because they uh kidnapped me at the grocery store and assaulted me. And then I became pregnant and had to drop out of school again
Speaker A
because I had gotten into community college. and I just couldn't handle the stress of like you know here's your uh reading and writing assignment and in the meantime I'm going through like that kind of a situation. So um you know and
Speaker A
I kept the baby because a lot of people like I can't believe you have a kid.
Speaker A
It's like I know I look like a crazy liberal cat lady. Sorry. I like you know like but don't judge a book right? But um no, I have a husband and adult sons and so um I had a big long different
Speaker A
adventure that I all of that just trying to survive. Um I did not have time to be uh acting up or getting into trouble and I didn't want to anyway because I always carried my faith inside that said, "Hey,
Speaker A
you could do better than this. You could do better than this. [ __ ] everybody. You could do better than this." And what does better look like? better looks like honoring my inner child or the child that I was, which was the same child
Speaker A
that sat there and read a book and wondered about the world around me. And that's it. That's simply it. That's who I am in a nutshell. And I've worked my way through all the school and all the stuff doing everything I could trying to
Speaker A
just do the right just just do the right thing and figure it all out. And so for anybody who comes at me like, "Oh, I you know, I have beef with you or oh, [ __ ] it. I don't give a [ __ ] because guess
Speaker A
what? I don't eat in the garbage. I have a shower. I have a home. I have a I have a life. That's all that matters. And someone can say that's pretty pathetic.
Speaker A
Yeah, you know what? It is what it is. But I have gratitude in my heart and humility and a quest for knowledge and that's it. Period. There's nothing else there. And if I happen and lately I've been blessed, blessed, blessed because I
Speaker A
found Substack and Substack made it so that I could do some of this full-time because people like actually subscribe to the newsletter and I was like, "Holy [ __ ] that's really amazing. I'm really down with that." And so I have no quest
Speaker A
to be wealthy. So nobody can buy me because I don't care about money because I have everything that I want. I can buy groceries. I can pay my bills. I can, you know, do the basic things needed.
Speaker A
And I even have extra money to do the things I want, which are basically I have a flower garden and that's it. I'm I don't need anything. Part of that being homeless means you don't have like material attachments. I don't I don't
Speaker A
have any of that. I don't care. I have a family that I love and, you know, a couple of cats and a house and a flower bed and everything else is just me living the life I've always wanted to
Speaker A
live, which was meeting interesting people, learning interesting new [ __ ] and trying to figure out what the [ __ ] is going on cuz what is going on? What is this reality? Are there aliens? Do they talk to us? Are angels real? What
Speaker A
the [ __ ] is going on? So that's Have you ever wanted to go in there and have you ever I'm at that phase where I'm almost like I should go try and talk to him myself. By the way, I you made me
Speaker A
cry and you are one. Nothing, no history-making human being or anyone granted with the ability to actually change the world and get answers has an easy life. It's as if it was written in stone centuries upon centuries in the
Speaker A
past that you will be torn apart because it is only that they can handle the truth will reform themselves again into who they naturally were. And that's exactly what you did with all of that.
Speaker A
You're [ __ ] incredible. I'm I'm serious. Cool. I feel so boring. I know it doesn't sound like I'm boring.
Speaker A
What the [ __ ] You are not boring. I'm like so milked to like like really like I I seem more excited. That was part of the joke of why I wore a leather jacket on Danny Jones. Some people
Speaker A
didn't think it was a joke, but it was like a total joke because I'm a super nerd. Um and that's why I did it. I was like, look, I'm going to try to be cool, but I'm like so not cool. But that's
Speaker A
okay because like I said, I'm just happy. I'm happy every single day. And uh so that's that's uh I think that set me off to be having a thicker skin. Now, if somebody does come at me with stuff,
Speaker A
I'm a human. So, I usually try to I I kind of sometimes think that people are acting in good faith and they really like want an explanation. And so, I'll be like, "Oh, no. I think it means this." And they'll be like, "Yeah, I
Speaker A
just at the end of the day, I just kind of walk away and say, "Whatever. I'm going to go like make a cup of tea and pet my cat and, you know, just chill." And then I go back to my work. And so,
Speaker A
my work is what I love. It's really the thing that gives me meaning. And that work is is um trying to figure out what's going on and sometimes that does lead to dark places unfortunately like the occult like terrible things that
Speaker A
people do to each other. Um but I feel um equipped for that because I had such a you know maybe rough background and I know that things are not great. Um and I'm able to probably the trauma like if
Speaker A
I'm being real trauma doesn't that just uh is always something that kind of uh can get you to disassociate. So, I'm able to be an observer and disassociate from things that might bring other people down. And I'm able to put that
Speaker A
gap there to say, "Yeah, I've read a bunch about child sacrifice, but I'm cool. Where's my, you know, where's where's the the rest of the day? I can move on." That that disassociation is what Monroe really used to meet with those entities
Speaker A
that ability. I I can't disassociate. But that so have you ever questioned maybe doing some like hands-on research to I have and I and and I but I'm you know I like I did a little experimentation with I think you know I people might
Speaker A
have heard that I joined the Lucus Trust uh the Arcane School because I was really curious. I was like reading into all of this and so I joined and I was like okay this is wild and so I
Speaker A
accumulated a lot of knowledge over many years and people will say like oh you know that's a long time to just be dabbling. Well, it was a correspondence quote school, so I didn't have to do much. So, I'm like just gathering their
Speaker A
stuff and interacting here and there. And at some level, I was like, well, maybe I should try one of these meditations, right? So, I did. I dabbled. I had weird experience. And I'm like, [ __ ] that. Like, I don't know. I
Speaker A
was like, [laughter] I think I need to not have like experiences experiences or it might get me too close. However, um I'm really interested in possibly like DMT and but I don't I just don't I'm a little bit of a hypocchondric like I
Speaker A
would be like oh I don't want to die doing that but I am curious and so I have thought about that per se but in terms of like the gy or actually practicing occult things I just don't I
Speaker A
don't do that um I don't do it because uh I I don't want to be so close to it that I can't look at it. Uh, I am definitely curious and I wouldn't be afraid to do it. Although that's
Speaker A
probably just foolish. Some people have joked that I've Mr. Mcoodoo my way through life because it should have been many times I was killed or something, but I've not been. So, I kind of just go into things like, "Yeah, this will be
Speaker A
fine." And then, "Oh, wait, that's not going to be fine." But, uh, I think that eventually I would entertain the idea of doing DMT, but I'm just not a I don't even drink caffeine. Like, I have half calf coffee in the morning. Um, but so I
Speaker A
just am funny about that kind of stuff. I'm a little I don't say hypochondric, but little, you know, a little concerned. So, you're keeping your antenna clean, which I think is Yeah, exactly.
Speaker A
But the Robert Monro the Monroe stuff's interesting to me because Have you listened to the tapes like like to I did it.
Speaker A
Were you impressed with the with like the physics knowledge with like Housewives? I was. And here's the the thing about that that I I've stepped back and I I want to revisit after I was trying to make sure I didn't go crazy because I
Speaker A
don't know if you've heard of people talking about mall world any of I have. I have a little bit. But is that is that a location that they seem to people share that they go to or something? Yeah. Okay.
Speaker A
So, I had never heard of anything like that and I was on TikTok scrolling watching some stuff and I saw this woman talking about it. She was describing my dreamscape to a tea and it freaked me out because I have the most like insane
Speaker A
recurring lucid dreams. I just I have had sleep. Okay, so you're already going there and you're already doing all these things.
Speaker A
You just aren't aware of it. I don't know. And I never and I felt really invaded and I didn't even know this was a thing because when people are talking about this whole experience, these like liinal spaces and stuff and
Speaker A
really describing them uh I felt really bad. I felt really bad because one, it felt very like an invasion of privacy because it's like been my dream since I was a kid or something. And then I just didn't know how to feel about that at
Speaker A
all. It was very confusing and now it freaks me out. Um but that made me more curious of course. I took a step back and then I revisited it and started doing some research on it and that led
Speaker A
me more to the um you know telepathy tapes and that sort of thing. And yes, I did the gate program and all of that when I was a kid. So I'm like, "Oh [ __ ] is this a thing?" I'm like I mean
Speaker A
same dude. Do you remember at all? Like same that I remember going to submarines and stuff like but I didn't think it was that big of a deal. You know what I'm saying? I wasn't We did weird stuff. We
Speaker A
went weird places. We did a lot of stock market stuff. We were like kind of studying stock market. I was in Charleston, South Carolina. So the Yorktown submarine, the Navy base was right there. We did a lot of um you know
Speaker A
stuff to go there. But it wasn't like I think the pink liquid people talk about was actually fluoride. And I think everybody got that in the whole school.
Speaker A
But anyway, I understand where you're coming from in that I never I never I don't have horrible memories about it.
Speaker A
I have just benign memories about it and then some weird ones only weird if I look back as a parent, you know, like I don't I I look at like, okay, so I did the whole ear hearing test thing. I
Speaker A
remember that. I remember the pink liquid. Um I remember not drinking it because I remember the first bit of it tasted really weird and I was like, "No, I don't want that." And then I remember, but I remember the part of it that was I
Speaker A
think more interesting to me was where it was administered. Like it was like almost in the dark. It was so strange.
Speaker A
There were strange things like that. And I remember going to a um the one of these like trailers. It was in the back of the school like a temporary like when they do a construction site and they move like the office into like a trailer
Speaker A
or something. It was like that with a handicap ramp. And so we walked up the ramp and we go in and there would be like stuff we did, but then I don't remember a lot after that. And I do
Speaker A
remember something strange with like almost like a simulation of like a hot let's say like a hot air balloon ride or something where we're seeing it was weird. It was weird and I didn't question it. I just did it. And then I
Speaker A
went to a school called the Learning to Learn School and it was run by like this weird child psychologist and I had to take like weird tests to get in it. And I I was told they were like IQ tests,
Speaker A
but I can't help but think like when I I don't have great memories of it, but I have memories of like the cards that they used and later.
Speaker A
Shut up. Did you go have to sit behind a partition and say what the shape was on the other side of the person or guess the shape the other person was holding?
Speaker A
Yes. What the [ __ ] bro? That So did I. I don't get that. I didn't know about that until um I probably was like older and I watched some show or something and I was like what that's that [ __ ] we did when I
Speaker A
was a kid like yeah it was weird and I don't know what but I remember yeah I mean I've not even talked about this anywhere but it's just you know it's cuz I just don't ever want to like be a
Speaker A
story or like whatever cuz I I'm right here with you. I can I can validate and and I'm a normal person with a you know I have a license. I'm a nurse. I have to give people life-changing drugs. So, it's like I
Speaker A
just want you to know. Yeah. Yes. And and we're also we're not crazy. Okay.
Speaker A
Like this. [laughter] That's my whole point. There's degrees on the wall. Okay. People know.
Speaker A
Yeah. Well, and yeah. So, I I mean I think um I think there's something going on there. I haven't done the deepest dive on it yet, but I'm trying to and I would like to because it's just sort of
Speaker A
would be interesting for me, but maybe part of me doesn't want to because I'm like, I don't know if I want to just, you know, I don't even know if I want to.
Speaker A
Maybe maybe that's why we met. Maybe I'll let somebody else talk cuz I know I'm taking up your time again. I You sleep all night. So I want to go and the second I the second I I heard
Speaker A
you speak I just there's something about you I think that is more authentic than I ever hear. Maybe it's resonance, maybe whatever it is. But and then now that we have this connection of the gate thing and I have I've been speaking about this
Speaker A
lately a little bit, right? But um I've never had somebody turn around and say that they had the same test. So, I will join the discord and I am wanting to kind of culminate my information I've spent my life on and because it's the
Speaker A
most valuable thing I think if I found out why we are here and what we were doing, it feels like my goal. So, I want to be there. Maybe we'll be able to do something at some point. I can help. I
Speaker A
know you're busy, but maybe that'll be the connection that moves forward. And I just want to thank you from the bottom of my heart today for speaking with me.
Speaker A
I think you are freaking [snorts] fantastic. You've done an incredible job with what you've been given. And that source that you have, that drive that you have not to stop, there's a freaking reason for it. And it's funny that a
Speaker A
girl going through what you went through that somebody wants to judge may just figure out all the answers that we've all been looking for. So, I just want to say thank you, Heather. It means a lot that you spoke with me and you made my
Speaker A
day. Well, thank you so much. That makes my day to to know that I made any kind of impact. And I look forward to having more conversations and um hopefully we can all I think I I don't know what I
Speaker A
can figure out alone. I don't think anyone can. Even though some egos out there are like, I figured it all out.
Speaker A
Like, yeah, right, buddy. Nobody. No, we have to do this together because there's just so much information. And I think the things that stop us from coming together are uh intentional things and things like ego. And so, the more if I
Speaker A
can impress on everybody, the more we can just like uh have our ideas and beliefs, and that's fine, but just try to be more open-minded and have more dialogue instead of, you know, I'm really a good debate is a good debate.
Speaker A
is how we kind of use rhetoric to understand and see uh what may stand up to questions. But I think that in there's some sort of weird culture right now where everybody is like debate me bro and it's over something like are
Speaker A
there ghosts? It's like who what we can't be like having this strong of an attachment to the unseen like in this way like we have to leave room an open door for other ideas because it's foolish to be like I'm going to prove to
Speaker A
you of this unseen thing like objectively. It's like it's just silly to me. And it also I think uh it doesn't it doesn't help conversation. It only helps two things. One, the algorithm because it's hate based. Every the
Speaker A
algorithms want that louch. They just want it's just a machine. It wants to take like all the negative comments and all the negativity and like you destroyed that person or you own that person. It's like yeah, it's fine, but
Speaker A
it's it's it's in a in a way that's feeding an an algorithm that we all know has been geared towards getting us to be negative. And uh that's not to suggest we shouldn't be we should be weak, right? You got to stand up to things and
Speaker A
you have to be strong. But strength is knowing when to use that. Not just going out with your swords like I'm going to cut you apart, [ __ ] Like no. How about it's I have these swords, but I would
Speaker A
like you to have a sword. I'm going to hand you a sword and we know that we have mutually assured destruction here.
Speaker A
Let's let's uh not have a sword fight right now, you know, and let's let's just see if we can get together on this and uh maybe play by the rules of the game, have a sword fight. I don't know.
Speaker A
But I feel like it is a bunch of sword fights and pissing contests at the moment that just raises up um negativity and egos. And so my my wish for everyone is that we try to not do that as much as
Speaker A
possible and maybe be more collaborative and then um see what happens. I don't know. It's an experiment. I I have I have to do this really really fast. Really fast. Okay. Monroe, he um and with your elephant, this is
Speaker A
something analogy I use as well, the elephant, uh the blind man, the elephant. So he put people under for remote viewing, five people, he put them into their level, you know, level 25 down to that supreme meditative state.
Speaker A
These people were given the same coordinates to go and look at using remote viewing. When they came back, when they put their images together, it created a 360 degree picture and image of what they were remote viewing. So
Speaker A
what that shows is a collaborative effort of human minds including you know collective conscious I know I think hundredth monkeys been debunked or whatever but you know what I'm saying you are so right on that and and when it
Speaker A
comes down to that sort of meditative state you're you're like 99% there already. I just again I want to say thank you and put that in your ear about Monroe and how beyond the veil alone is not necessarily the way and mutually
Speaker A
assured destruction is like my favorite. I'm gonna be your friend if you understand there's a mutually assured destruction. That's my favorite phrase.
Speaker A
[laughter] I have never heard it either. That came from you and that was a good one. I'm over here laughing my ass off while you're talking. [laughter] Well, it is. It's I appreciate that. And uh yeah, hit me up and uh come to the
Speaker A
Discord and we'll talk about theories and I think we even have one on I think there's a thread right now going on Gate and all of those things. And definitely I talk about Wall World because I'm just sort of like what is that? It's so
Speaker A
weird right? Um, Heather, your your story is amazing, and I'm glad that Jenny hitchhikered in in here and got you to talk about why you left when you were 16. I wanted to ask, but I felt it was too soon to to
Speaker A
get more revealing answers. Um, so I'm really glad you went into that. Anything more you want to say, feel free to say it now or later. Um, but I I think it's really important. Um, and the whole pedigree thing. Um, I I wouldn't be more
Speaker A
honored to be talking to you if you were a Nobel laureate or had an Ivy League degree. Uh, we we care about the substance and what people have to say, not whether they agree with us or whether they have some sort of, you
Speaker A
know, I Ivy League name on their on on their um, you know, their their resume.
Speaker A
So, I mean, I'm I'm a high school dropout. I don't think it matters. Um I I think what matters is whether you have information that's so important that some people or some whatever needs to censor a space to the point that people
Speaker A
are keep on getting kicked out. I mean this is this is we're not at a this isn't conjecture right now. There's a bunch of people who can't stay in the space and it could be a technical issue, but I'm not going to chalk it up to that
Speaker A
because um I had two phones separate times like 12 plus times with each phone going back and forth. I would just my whole phone would shut.
Speaker A
Yeah, that's not an issue I've had before. Yeah. And that's why I pushed that up in the nest. This guy Shane Alexander said the space keeps rugging. What a shame.
Speaker A
Uh Inana believe is fantastic. So, we, you know, this space is going to be recorded, but we will clip it up and we'll put out some sort of a stream and we'll make up for it. But there's many
Speaker A
people here uh who who want to be here and their phone or their computer or both keeps on kicking them out. And I think that's a really good sign. I I think there's I think you have a really
Speaker A
important message at this time to deliver. And I I think you know this, but just because I have some different theories and I'm pushing back, I'm not at all uh trying to discount your work.
Speaker A
I'm I'm just taking advantage of the time I have to to talk to you because your perspective is really valuable and absolutely Oh, I appreciate that. Yeah, it's always welcome.
Speaker A
Anaki expert for sure. Well, I [clears throat] think we're I think that uh yeah, I think I love that that's a title. I think that's kind of funny to me. Um and I'll take it. It's fine. But um I I appreciate it and yeah,
Speaker A
I think we should all like push back and talk because that's how interesting discussions are. I just remember, you know, maybe I'm naive, but I remember back in the day where you were able to um I think even with family and stuff. I
Speaker A
mean, families aren't doing this, but you're able to like talk about stuff and uh maybe even get in little arguments about it and then be like, "All right, that's cool. Let's, you know, go chill or something." Like, it's just it's I
Speaker A
feel like there's just something missing now. I wish that we could have again. I did used to go to these conferences back when I first started writing. They still had the old garden like the I mentioned like the Stanton Freriedman's or people
Speaker A
like that. And I just remember the environment uh from all those older people, the the people who go to those conferences, they would there was a air of respect everybody had where I mean you could sit there and hear someone and
Speaker A
they would have a theory that would be like you'd have to think batshit crazy and you couldn't even agree with it, but you wouldn't like take that opportunity to cut them down. You just like at least find it entertaining, I think, or
Speaker A
something. But I feel like we've just lost that not just in a in a ufology or type uh environment, but just society and even in families where everything's just like you said one thing that pissed me off now I'm no contact. It's like how
Speaker A
about we just like stick stick it out, you know? So uh I appreciate the push back. I wanted I want to learn more and and I'm not married to any of my ideas.
Speaker A
Um I'm married to my values and so that's it. And one of those values is uh truth. And so if something ever comes along that's like, "Yeah, no, that's that's not how it is. We found a new tablet that actually says this." It's
Speaker A
like, "Sweet. I will throw away the rest of it and not care and we'll move on because it's about the truth." And there's no there's no use in holding on to old ideas if they don't serve you anymore. And uh well, I should say if
Speaker A
they don't serve the truth because yeah, people hold on to them if they're serving them. Like if they built a business on it or something or you know, I've not built a business on pushing a theory or a worldview. um if I have a
Speaker A
business, I've built it on just like having people hopefully come on the journey of discovery with me and um let's see what happens. I don't know.
Speaker A
I'm just I'm just trying to wade through this authentically as much as possible. And uh that's why even if people kind of come at me or uh you know like in a real way like not just uh you know somebody
Speaker A
might tweet something. I mean that's that's what X is, right? Just like people are always mad at each other. But I've had actual death threats and especially lately after the Danny Jones thing, I've had like people send crazy
Speaker A
violent porn to my email. I had to like have a whole like thing go on there. It was just really wild. And so I've had some strange things happen. Um and I I think I I've been told that I've had
Speaker A
some spiritual attacks and efforts to kind of get to me that way. So I'm sure that that's what happens when you get out there and attract people's attention. Um and it just comes with the territory. I just try to remain grounded
Speaker A
and always grateful that, you know, um, you got one life, you got one shot at this, right? You just got to be true and to hell with everything else. And I found that, you know, when you do that,
Speaker A
though, it's really easy to just like, I don't know, get along with people. And uh, it's just much better to be able to have these types of conversations. And so, I don't want to sound like a polyiana about it, but you know, I just
Speaker A
think it's important to keep the conversations going. Uh, because that's where we find uh common ground and then truth too. Uh but we just have to keep talking and not just trying to like throw down gauntlets all the time, but maybe like friendly
Speaker A
gauntlet or again I'm sounding very poly and now I'm listening and I'm like oh my gosh this sounds really like pie in the sky. Believe me, I know there's ugliness in the world but I don't think we have
Speaker A
to be that all the time. And I I see it in academia. It's so toxic there. That was one of the reasons I couldn't even deal with it anymore. It's just awful.
Speaker A
And uh I looked at this like so-called alternative space as maybe the anecdote to that. And I think it was bothersome that what I ended up finding was that that toxicity was bleeding through and has become really bad here. And uh it's
Speaker A
kind of caught the same virus as uh what the mainstream had. So uh but hopefully hopefully uh hopefully it won't be that way forever.
Speaker A
Um Heather, I mean I h you don't sound polyianish to me at all. I have uh the one of the darkest views. So I I actually think that these things are recycling us. They're anti-disclosure all the time. I'd be
Speaker A
even I'd be willing to go so far that as to say that the things you experienced in your life were to prevent you from from breaking truth later. So I I absolutely am on a much more bloodthirsty severe war mentality. I'm
Speaker A
like we we need singularity technology before they reset us. We need to get the truth, you know, like I'm I'm I'm on the extreme end, but I That's good though because we need all types in Americ so so we I I just want to say I'm
Speaker A
grateful to have you here. We have we have four four We opened the floodgates per per your instructions.
Speaker A
If if we can get through all the hands, that would be amazing. Um I I just want to say I'm really grateful for how generous you've been with your time. Um, I I was going to make a cat joke earlier whether you keep
Speaker A
cats around so you know when there demons in your house. Um, I assume you're just a cat a cat lover. Um, [laughter] I I had a cat and then I had a stray come to me and she was uh like five
Speaker A
months old and found out once I I couldn't not adopt her. I felt so bad and um found out she had actually was pregnant. I was like no. And uh she had um still worn [laughter] kittens. It was
Speaker A
really sad except for one that survived and then I couldn't separate them. So now I have three cats and so I guess I'm starting that collection. I'm not though. I swear to God I will never do that. But
Speaker A
uh enough. [laughter] Well, whenever you have any sort of um feline needs to attend to or human needs, just just speak up and let us know. Um we have four people in here who really want to talk to you. Uh so we're
Speaker A
going to go in the order of unbiased then elections then Vincent then experience. Um and I just want to say thank you to everybody and since we are being targeted by the archons and the Anuna and the Shining ones and the
Speaker A
Abcalo and the 18 intel agencies and probably JD well uh please retweet the DM it to everybody um so that we we have more people wrestling in here and and like I said we will make up for it. Uh
Speaker A
we're we're trying to be more organized here in spaces. So we're we'll do some sort of video stream. We'll clip the [ __ ] up. We'll we'll make it blow up so that the CIA regrets uh this this
Speaker A
censorship tactic. Um but but go ahead. Uh hey, Doomer. Doomer, if I could. I've had my hand up since 7 and I've got to go run my dogs. I'm gonna ask a very I'll prioritize you first. I'll let you
Speaker A
go ahead of Unbiased. Go ahead. Appreciate I appreciate it. Unbiased. Heather, thank you for being here. Uh, this been an amazing listen, a lot of good information and you showed a hell of a lot of courage and just grounding
Speaker A
by sharing your story and I really appreciate you doing that. And I understand your comments about cats and uh the flower garden and your house. I do the exact same thing, but I've got dogs and I've got to go run them.
Speaker A
Anyway, my question real quickly is this. And you can say no comment, you can go long or you can say I really, you know, have mixed feelings, whatever you want to say, but because it's political, it's a political observation question.
Speaker A
Um, I've been in a lot of rooms and I've actually had conversations with Doomer and Fringe about this a little bit as well. To me, it feels like there's some sort of dark chaos magic going on with this administration.
Speaker A
It began with uh you know the first campaign uh the snake you know you were a snake when you when you I let you let me in. You knew I was I mean it was just really strange and there's just so many
Speaker A
different aspects of you know lying uh trying to you know command the messaging space etc etc etc. But do you see an overcast of some sort of esoteric um operation with this administration? And I appreciate your answer.
Speaker A
Thank you. I I do actually. Um I I have written a substack or two about that. Um I think that initially it probably wasn't um strong. I think that there there like on the on the part of say
Speaker A
like Trump and some individuals. Um but he's been cornered and surrounded by people who have known connections to um darker arts. Uh if anyone's heard me before, they'll hear they'll recognize me um recommending the book Bannon's War for Eternity. And it's um it's a a very
Speaker A
important book by Benjamin Titlebomb. He's great. Uh the book is great and it's uh very relevant to some of the things we're discussing here, even though it kind of just looks like your run-of-the-mill boring like political book. and maybe trashing Sloppy Steve or
Speaker A
something, but it really does more so go into an ethnography of the uh what is called like the far right, but it's it's more about the like black magicians and how Steve Bannon is really wrapped up in the occult and he's a very uh genius guy
Speaker A
that has been pulling a lot of strings and connected to a lot of dark things.
Speaker A
So, highly recommend his work. So for one thing we know that uh Bannon had that influence but then people around his orbit did as well and so there's that um and that would be the work of so they follow everybody follows different
Speaker A
philosophies and things and the different than maybe what we're used to hearing when it comes to things like Marxism or this that or the other and Bannon uh is interested in the work of Ebola. So you know I would reference uh
Speaker A
Ebola anybody wants to look into that um and Gwin. So these are traditionalists and that's uh with a capital T and so they kind of Bannon is believing in like a Kaliuga cycle and a golden age. This is where Trump and the administration
Speaker A
talks about the golden age and it's referencing this notion that you know modernity is bad and uh where we need to kind of I guess blow it up. uh there's a bit of accelerationism there which is a practice of um trying to rush to the end
Speaker A
times um trying to rush to something bad. So you're accelerating that process. Um and not everybody's involved in that of course and accelerationists kind of fancy themselves as like you know high philosophers but then some of them have applied that to basic plain
Speaker A
old like Satanism and there's different movements within that. And so it's an amalgamation of a bunch of different schools of thought. And so between that and uh some of the well I mean there's even I he Trump in his own book talked about
Speaker A
his study of Cabala. So there's that and of course Jared Kushner and his involvement with um Habad. Um and now I want to specify too there people are demonizing Cabala. There's different types of Cabala. Kabala is a very old
Speaker A
practice and it's argued to that it could be traced even before Judaism. And there's a lot of different uh practices that as we talked about the tree of life in that library of Asher Bonnie Paul um this notion of a tree of life and
Speaker A
ascending through that is quite old and it is not just the sole domain of Cabala but more importantly there is a a movement within Cabala that changes the whole thing. So whether someone likes cabal or not kind of inconsequential to
Speaker A
this question the question is what kind and then you have the what uh happened in 1666 through a movement of uh what was called the salvation of sin philosophy where you would now instead of a tree of life you made a different
Speaker A
cabala practice and some people call it luranic cabala because of Isaac Lauria's contribution to that but he really didn't get it going it was like a group later and [snorts] so these uh people who followed a guy called Jacob Frank.
Speaker A
They started following this alternative to Cabala which was just like a re-examination of the tree of life and instead having the opposite which was the tree of death. And so rather than ascend through Cabala um and go up
Speaker A
through the tree of life etc you would descend and you would reverse everything. So a lot of it has to do with the reversal of stuff and poor practices like taboo and some of it then in western esotericism
Speaker A
um in the 19th century occult revival. it gets uh mixed up with eastern thought because people during that time went over to uh India and kind of fetishized the whole like um different Hindu religions and different sects within
Speaker A
that and they brought back what they were calling orientalism and they mixed it up with a bunch of western esotericism and it gave us things that like look like theosophy or you know things that Crowley practiced and so you
Speaker A
see a lot of this like east meets west thing happen and uh that's been quite influential in a lot of different schools of thought that have their hands directly into the administration and uh so I would say yeah there's there's some
Speaker A
stuff and I think that he's been fully captured. I think the the fact remains that you just can't get into a position like that without um getting trapped into that machine. So yeah, dark dark darkness all around. And I would
Speaker A
recommend again Benjamin Titlebomb's book on Bannon to get started on looking at those uh deeper occult factions especially again because Titlebomb is a um a true academic. He was an ethnomusicologist and so he did this a great justice and I don't even think I
Speaker A
think he might be liberal um so I don't even think that you know he did it with such a good kind of uh overview that it's not um you know as biased as it could be. He actually spent time with
Speaker A
those people and he, you know, talked with everybody and so they're firsthand accounts. It's a fantastic book. So, Ben, if you're listening, I think you owe me a finder fee or some of your royalties because I've been pushing that
Speaker A
book so hard. I appreciate your comment very much. I'm glad you mentioned Bannon. I mean, Bannon is an admitted trite. He wants to tear everything apart.
Speaker A
Yep. So, my question to you would be final question and then I'll let you go because I gotta go too. Um, what do you think the end goal of this is? Is it just simply a power play? I mean, what
Speaker A
what do you think is the the real arc of of what they're trying to do?
Speaker A
They're looking to create it depends on who because there's so many people at the top here vying for position. And so some of these groups, especially the Bandon types or traditionalists, there's a lot of them that are looking for
Speaker A
synarchy. So rather than anarchy, they're looking for synarchy. And uh that would be like a almost like a a royal bloodline kind of thing. Like it's a top- down hierarchical system. So it's a it's a bunch of people trying to
Speaker A
figure out how to rearrange society after this uh great chaos that some people want to uh accelerate and some people will call it like end times or Armageddon. Now what I find interesting about this is there's so many different
Speaker A
factions that don't agree on anything and are fighting each other for supremacy yet they all seem to agree that the end is coming and they all seem to kind of coales around like the years like 2030 or all of that. So my question
Speaker A
then comes down to what are they waiting on or what do they know that we don't?
Speaker A
And uh that's I think my main interest here is they believe something's going to happen and they either want it to hurry up or they're building bunkers or something's going on. But I do think that a big motivator is that they're
Speaker A
using it as an opportunity to establish a new new world order like something completely different and they want to position themselves as like the rulers of this and it's going to be as they say a golden age when that language they're
Speaker A
using hearkens back to Atlantean stuff, Theosophy, you know, Caluga, all of the things that they're kind of making a mishmash of and referencing. So, I think they want they're fighting for who's going to be in charge of this new world,
Speaker A
whatever it may be. But I think it's weird that they all seem to at least agree that there is a new world coming.
Speaker A
Whether or not they're going to make it happen and self-fulfill that prophecy is one thing. It's a possibility. Or do they think that perhaps there's a natural cataclysm on the way that that, you know, they're not telling us about?
Speaker A
I don't know, but I would like to know and I'm still researching that. Super answer. Thank you so much. Thank you for your indulgence, Denver friends.
Speaker A
Great space. Hope everybody's doing well. Have a great night and I'm off with the pooches.
Speaker A
Thanks. Thanks so much, Pix. Um, yeah, I I am paranoid and suspicious, and I don't know if something is targeting my account, but something is definitely targeting the space. We finally got you up here, Mr. Douglas. Welcome. Uh, and
Speaker A
thanks unbiased for for letting the elderly and extremely viral uh picks uh go ahead of you. I didn't want to get in his way because, you know, he's he would just blow up my DMs forever. Uh unbiased, uh and and welcome, Mr.
Speaker A
Douglas. Um uh unbiased. Welcome. And and go ahead with your question. Hey, thanks guys. Am I coming in clear?
Speaker A
Yes, you are. Awesome. All right, Heather. Awesome. This has been great. You've been going for over six hours and it sounds like the first half an hour. So, yes, clearly you do.
Speaker A
What's up? [laughter] Thank you. Um there's so many things that you touched on. Uh one of them that I'm think about you said something like probably two hours ago, but you were talking about the the transmission of the written word versus oral oral
Speaker A
traditions and oral transmission which in essence is the the cabala, right? The oral actually orally communicated wasn't actually written down I think to like the 1300s and Aramaic and I think there's some translations from Matthew something. and he's got a 20 something
Speaker A
volume series I think on it they've been going through. Um but the in the book of Enoch it talks about there's a portion in there where it's talking about the different fallen angels and the things that they're being condemned for. And
Speaker A
one of them the name was pen or starts with pen penu and it says that uh he taught the mankind all uh and writing with ink and paper thereby many sinned from eternity to eternity until this day. For men were not created for such
Speaker A
purpose to give confirmation to their good faith with pen and ink. And I think that ties into too the dynamics of um you know the akalu being the disembodied spirits that would have even even been channeled through or worked through the
Speaker A
anunnaki or uh um during those periods and then even our own personal journeys of trying to connect person is trying to connect with the true creator. Well, how do you know you're actually connecting with them? It's all telepathic. It's
Speaker A
emotional. It's internal. It's like maybe external signs. So how do you know you're connecting not just you know with the creator that your intention set towards not these other disembodied beings? I think a lot of that probably has to come to do with discernment and
Speaker A
engagement over time and all those dynamics. Um, but I think that's very true because they're told in the cabala it talks about Moses was given the the written law but also the oral law and they were never supposed to be separated
Speaker A
from the two because if something's written down I think like you were talking about it can always be misinterpreted later or used as a system as control which we've seen them do just in this last iteration of the last 6,000
Speaker A
years um based on your works. So my understanding because I listened to Danny Jones podcast and it had me rethinking plus some of the stuff I listened to some of the Matt Loy stuff in the last few days too. So it's
Speaker A
interesting you guys were bringing that up but thinking about the Anunnaki I think you said [clears throat] um that they actually may be homo sapiens sapiens just prior to the youngest dry younger dus event. Correct?
Speaker A
Mhm. That that's potentially what they are. They're just the Andalantians or more advanced uh homo sapiens sapen that carried on the knowledge through a form of an arc. And there'd be two categories for me in this. So we have our our
Speaker A
previous 6,000 yearsish with the biblical flood. I mean we call it biblical flood although it's in like 200 different I think you know religions or I mean nations and things have stories of that that cataclysm event in their
Speaker A
own way and their own starting stories with a new this iteration man and woman Adam and Eve. I think uh in the biblical text even talks about that when Adam was created he was then placed into a garden
Speaker A
in the east. So it sounds like there was some selective breeding pure husbandry with humans if you will that they took some sect of humanity in this last iteration and then made them some sort of priest class or
Speaker A
something to that effect. But then there's also the the previous 6,000 like leading up to the younger dus like what's how do you differentiate like what's gone on these last two iterations cuz I know we have agricultural innovation you know some 8,500 years ago
Speaker A
or 8,500 BC. So, we know that happened and we obviously we have the um some of the ununiform and things that go beyond well uniform the oldest is what 4,000 BC or what's the oldest uniform that we have?
Speaker A
There's like 6,000. Well, I mean there's protounior form too and that that is even older. So, um in terms of like the formalized system, I would say it's like 5,000 years old, 6,000. It can kind of go back further because if you look at
Speaker A
that protocuniform um it has cunioform on it but it also has the uh sort of u pictoraphs along with it. So uh so I think if you push it back it would probably if you include protounia form more like 3500
Speaker A
uh BCE um the irk period. So, but I mean that that's so I don't know protocia form I would include in that um I don't know different it makes a difference or or whatever but I I feel like that
Speaker A
should be because it's so close to otherwise um we have like 5,000 clay tablets coming from um about three 35 I think it's 3300 roughly BCE. So I mean there is a missing there is some missing time there. I think that you're pointing to
Speaker A
that you have like this one more physical like homo sapiens sapion but then there is like what is before the younger is that is that how I'm understanding the differentiation like where's there kind of be like three pockets I
Speaker A
guess we have our last 6,000 year iteration we have in between the last 6,000 years and younger dus and then we have the 200,000 yearish before that which is the homo sapiion to homo sapiens sap whatever happened in that
Speaker A
area like what's right what do you think happened in this little window prior to the most recent cataclysm. So just beyond what we have of uniform or protouniform like what happened just between that and then the younger dus event.
Speaker A
So [sighs and gasps] I mean that's that's hard to say. It depends on where you know because there's so many things going on in so many different places. Uh so I would just kind of follow like the mainstream I guess approach to that. um
Speaker A
with the caveat being that we don't even understand though those capabilities of those people and what they were able to do and that just because we don't come across uh large cities or anything like that doesn't mean that they didn't have
Speaker A
capability um and maybe we are just not looking in the right places uh but I think that the answer might lie in something more um how would you say I don't want to say metaphysical but more ritual more um a
Speaker A
little less in the material realm, but not for all people. You know, it's going to be different. But I think that we had a diversity of of people and uh we know that once you find the skulls and the
Speaker A
evidence of that uh they like the Smithsonian likes to kind of portray it as though we have a missing link where there is just like this beautiful linear uh thing where it's like one skull to the next to the next and we've just all
Speaker A
developed in one way. I just take exception with that and think there's been many types of uh humans and uh we don't know them all and so I kind of leave the door open for that and I think
Speaker A
that also informs then the potential for the myths that carry on through the oral tradition and perhaps written but we just don't have the evidence of it. Um, and so I think that's informed people and carried through to where we have the
Speaker A
we can find the remnants of that in the most ancient of texts that were written down. And I think that's the probably the the importance of continuing to look and parse the data as opposed to just taking one
Speaker A
uh translation and interpretation and running with it and knowing that there are so many tablets that we may actually find the answer to that because somebody may have remembered. we're looking at uh retrieval of memory and I also think
Speaker A
that some of that could be seen in our genetics like epigenetic tendencies as well. So I think that's another area to look in to see like well what genes have we carried? You know where could that have linked us? What things what
Speaker A
behaviors do we carry on now in response to that? And that's assuming you kind of believe natural selection which I think is fair. I don't I don't have a problem with natural selection. So I think the answer to some of this may actually be
Speaker A
hidden somewhere in our genes and once we're able to decode that that might be helpful. Uh but there's a lot of discouragement in that because again it comes down to uh claiming knowledge and then discouraging people from trying to
Speaker A
find that knowledge by calling it say racist or whatever misogynist or whatever likeist you want to give it. Um because you get dangerously close to the idea that perhaps there was something better before and you know we can stake
Speaker A
a claim to its lineage or blood type or whatever. Um, but I I feel like that we should be trusted more. I know humans shouldn't be trusted because we do [ __ ] up, but uh it's it's our question. It's our, you
Speaker A
know, right to to ask that question. So, um I don't know if that helps, but I think that the answers are still yet to be found and we need to look in uh places aside from the text, although the
Speaker A
texts are vitally important because there's still so many that exist, but I think we don't we may not find them in um just a blanketed way like it was actually written down. I think we're going to have to look at cave walls and
Speaker A
I think we're going to have to look at genetics and also try to find maybe the golden thread as they sometimes call it in people's cultures and language and just piece it together the best way that we can uh if we can it may be daunting
Speaker A
but I think again coming together in a more interdisciplinary approach with something like linguistics um genetics and everything it might be able to get us closer than just the texts alone.
Speaker A
Do you think with the epigenetic dynamic I know the you know the whole junk DNA dynamic of 80% of our DNA or more is potentially junk just because they don't see it encoding proteins and there's been a lot of uh you know I personally
Speaker A
ascribed to just my own experiences and it makes sense to me and we have a modern video day uh video game modern day video game example in Assassin's Creed where they access the animist and they access his DNA and he goes back
Speaker A
into his DNA lineage memories and there's been a lot of different stories I've come across us. I mean, one's like ancient traditional u meals that are prepared and as you're growing up and you smell the smells, it'll bring back,
Speaker A
you know, memories from the DNA or things like that. Do you think do you have you done any research on that or thought about that much or what are your thoughts on that?
Speaker A
Oh, yeah. Yeah. I that's a very important uh example I think is is valid and I think it's why they want us to be very homogeneous and not embrace any kind of culture. Um, and again, you know, sure, people can go overboard and
Speaker A
say like, "My culture is better than yours," yada yada, but I think the real point is that they do want us to um forget where we came from. Notice that the people in the so-called elite positions, they know their history. They
Speaker A
know their family's history. Some people in, you know, in uh the UK can, they live in a family home that's older than a thousand years. I mean, they know their history and their bloodline and their stories, and it's very important
Speaker A
that they know that. Whereas many people don't we have uh you know 23 and me in all of these organizations and we can only go so far back anyway. We can we can go far back genetically perhaps but
Speaker A
if I were to ask you tell me stories about your you know great great great grandpa. You may be able to tell me but probably not. And it's u it's by design.
Speaker A
It's because that way we lose the link to our our past. And so there's a lot of things that you know you'll see just a very generic and easy example or uh people who maybe are from uh subsaharan
Speaker A
Africa tend to be like genetically at least linked to that. Um they don't necessarily uh tolerate milk. You know they're lactose intolerant. So people in northern climates or Eurasian or or something like that may not be as lactose intolerant. So there's little
Speaker A
hints to that. And uh there's a lot of clues in our in our genes about you know what our past may have uh been. So I think that they do try to keep that. Now when it comes to again the idea of
Speaker A
triggering something I think is really important. Uh I think I did mention this on Danny Jones but the the the space in our brain that is equipped to remember song is different than it is to remember like the written word say or story. Um
Speaker A
and when you the best example I can think of this is uh where epic poems come from epic literature it was they were all poetry the Odyssey all of this is considered homeriic poetry and epic poetry and why was it poetry um well it
Speaker A
was word art but it wasn't necessarily that it rhymed but instead it had a rhythm to it and that was important in the way that it was told. it was first oral tradition and could be learned that way. Uh, and it could be more accurate
Speaker A
in that sense than the written word. And it was done because of the rhythm. So, an example could be if I asked you, as I asked Danny Jones as he sat there with a Motorhead shirt on, um, I was like,
Speaker A
"Who's your favorite band?" And, uh, he he didn't have an answer. So, I'll ask um, you know, like firstly, who is your what is your favorite book? And whatever book that is, I would ask you then to say, "Okay, well, read it to me." Like,
Speaker A
just remember it. tell me from the beginning once upon a time and just sit here and tell me the whole book and you're less likely to be able to do that. Whereas if I said who is your favorite band and you know tell me their
Speaker A
songs like sing me the songs you may if you have the time and inclination be able to go through an entire dis discography and sing all their songs and that's a that's a lot yet you're able to recall those because they are put to
Speaker A
music. It stores in a different part of the brain. So with the oral with the epic lyric poetry made to be uh played with a liar. It's a lyric. It's a it's a poem. So that when you would uh read say
Speaker A
the epic of Gilgamesh or or recount it, you're actually doing so in such a way uh telling people you're you're rehearsing it, you're saying it. So that stays in the brain longer. So there's one uh component to that that we can see
Speaker A
then a remnant of it in um so how people listen to music now. So if if you remember and this is if people are music lovers they kind of like a lot of music and that's fine but many people it's
Speaker A
been noted they like the music from a particular age. So that age is tends to be you know roughly between the ages of like 12 or pre-teen to 24 maybe 25. You know those magic times where um we're
Speaker A
kind of becoming adults and our frontal loes are developing and all of that. Well, that's when we happen to think that music is the best. Like, oh well, they just don't make music like that anymore, do they? Um, you may like
Speaker A
different music later, but that's not here nor there. The reason that that music does stick in your head, so it's so it's been theorized and tested a bit, is that the time of your life when you're young, you were built to be in a
Speaker A
tribal society. So in that you'd have all these rituals and they would be referred to in anthropology as orastic behavior, meaning that you'd be doing drum circles or songs or sometimes group sex, but whatever. You're doing stuff that gets everyone kind of in a mode and
Speaker A
feeling a vibe together and you all act in tandem and it's part of a bonding ritual. Well, music is very key to that.
Speaker A
When you're young, you would just be watching. You're not part of the tribe officially because you're young and you're watching, but you're listening to that music. when you become about like 12, like you know, you're entering what many consider to be like adulthood where
Speaker A
you become, you know, maybe you get your bar mitzvah or whatever. It's that age.
Speaker A
There's still an in between where maybe you're allowed to go to the hunting party, but you're not able to fully participate, but about 12 is the time where you start to be allowed to generally come into those adult events,
Speaker A
but you still are a watcher. That's when you are really soaking up the culture itself. So that would be the music and you're listening and the reason it gets embedded in that time period is because it's your job to pass it on even if
Speaker A
you're separated from that tribe. That's where you get the song of my people, right? So if you get stolen away and taken far away and they put you in a different tribe where there's different uh drum circles and things, you'll
Speaker A
remember though where you came from and you may be able to hear it and come back. You'll always have that. It's like a tattoo or something on your heart. And so then even if you don't get moved away
Speaker A
or maybe everyone dies, but you have a family now, you're able to continue that because you remember the song. So we're programmed to hearken back to the music that we were exposed to at a societal level during those like preubescent and
Speaker A
teenage era going up until about when your frontal lobe develops. That's uh I think a really important commentary on how our our cognitive ability, our genes, our all of that is affected as like from external things that I don't
Speaker A
know. I just think that's an important one to consider that there's so much more to the story of how we know what we know and and whatnot that we carry this stuff with us internally and maybe it can be clicked on and off like you said
Speaker A
the the smell can trigger something, you know. So, there's a lot of triggers. Yeah, that's uh there's also stories referred to of tribes too. They'll sing a song at your birth and they sing that to you again at your you know through
Speaker A
puberty or transition or throughout your life because it's a song that connects you with like who you are. Some form of identity, some form of like you're supposed to be here, you know, or you deserve to be here to be alive like you
Speaker A
know the basic things. I mean, it's one of the things unfortunately I think humanity struggles with finding some sense of selfworth or purpose and like we've lost in culture the things you're talking about, let alone just like you're good enough cuz you you fell out
Speaker A
of your mother's vagina to be crass about it. You're here though, you were born, you're worthy, you know, and like but there's so much trauma so many people go through at a young age or abandonment and it's all cyclical and
Speaker A
like there's so many dynamics there that I think are really unfortunate. Um, and people take can take a lifetime just trying to get back to something ideally we had at a really young age in a healthy family or a healthy culture,
Speaker A
healthy dynamic. Um, with the book thing, I was actually curious. Have you read Daniel Quinn's works? Ishmail and my Ishmail story of be Daniel. Could you say that again? He kind of like Daniel Quinn.
Speaker A
Quinn. Yeah. I have no I've not heard of Daniel Quinn. It's he wrote in the 90 started in the 90s a book called Ishmail that started out and there's a ad that was in a paper a guy read it saying like
Speaker A
speaking someone who wants to save the world or something and he shows up this office building and there's a gorilla there and they have this telepathic communication sounds like a lot it's a it's a fiction non-fiction based on
Speaker A
non-fiction but he goes through the history of the world and our perception of history and prehistory and that whole paradigm that's kind of unspoken but he gets into one of the main events that you talk about I think as well is like
Speaker A
the the almost the weapon izing of agriculture systems that like before before the last I mean whatever we're aware of most people will say it's just human nature to be at war and to dominate the hierarchy and I think
Speaker A
there's there's definitely a strong you know um evidence for that that's not actually necessarily human nature that's potentially those things opposed imposed upon us by you know the anunnaki or these previous civilizations who happened to survive the previous
Speaker A
cataclysms and in institute this upon humanity And having structured agriculture is the only thing that will allow you to dominate other cultures because potentially for millions of years we've had tens of thousands of cultures living with limited conflicts or engagement and
Speaker A
they die out or move around. But there's nobody dominating the world. It wasn't until you could find a way and then have the intent just because we can supply food and don't have to go from land to land or roam or forage. Now we're going
Speaker A
to dominate others. Like where does that come from? Wow, that sounds like a really good book. I'm I'm gonna have to look him up because that sounds pretty amazing.
Speaker A
I'll be uh that that would be great. Thank you. I appreciate it. Yeah. Um that's fascinating. I have to I have to read that. But u I I'm not I I would agree with that assessment though.
Speaker A
Agriculture has been weaponized. Um yeah, and and I think it's it's uh key. I think part of it is that we've been harvested essentially. [laughter] I mean, you know, we're being farmed. Uh, and it is definitely a control. Now,
Speaker A
where that comes from like initially, I don't know. I don't I don't know where that would like originate. Um, I if you would I guess the the the the main I guess example would be the so-called fertile crescent. would be consumer but
Speaker A
I would suspect given my framework that it goes back further than that and those were uh not inventions but memories so they didn't invent agriculture they remembered it from a system that they were familiar with from before so I
Speaker A
guess the question is is uh antidolivian in nature and of and that of course goes into I guess people will say Atlantis or this that or the other but I think that's a a thing to question what was
Speaker A
what was before. Agreed. And I'll leave it there. There's so many other ways I'd love to go with and I'll send you a link to that book and um some other material I'm working on from the conversations. I've I've put
Speaker A
together like 30 of your different long form podcasts from YouTube and some other stuff. And I'm working on some materials and stuff I can send you as well and see if uh um see how accurate those are those resonate with you. But
Speaker A
thanks all here. I super appreciate your time and being here for almost seven hours now, which is fantastic. [laughter] Yeah, I I I could talk for a long time.
Speaker A
I'm I'm testing myself here. It's like a how long can I go? But yeah, definitely send those links. That's really cool. I appreciate it because I'm going to pick up uh Quinn's work. That's really interesting. I've not heard of I heard a
Speaker A
some of it sounded familiar, but really not. So, I'm I'm really excited to look into that. Thank you.
Speaker A
Heather, some [clears throat] of these people here who who will come up to speak have blown up my DMs and they have a voodoo doll ready. And the only reason they they haven't blocked me is because they want to be able to ask you first
Speaker A
and then they're going to block me afterwards. So people have been dying to ask you questions for hours. Uh there's kidney failures, kidney transplants, a whole, you know, catheterss, everything uh behind the scenes working here. So yeah, people have been have been dying
Speaker A
to talk to you. And then there's of [laughter] technical issues. I wore a diaper for this. No, I'm kidding. I didn't, you know, actually already have doomer diapers mocked up.
Speaker A
This is not a joke. Oh my god. I mean, we don't actually sell them yet, and that's only because, you know, I'm going to get cancelled if I do sell doomer diapers, but there's been a need for doomer diapers uh for for the doom
Speaker A
spaces. So, the name of his funny, your endurance is um is absolutely respected by the community. Um, wait, Doomer, I think she passed Georgiani. Didn't we have Georgiani for six hours?
Speaker A
We had Georgiani for six hours. Yeah. Yeah, it's true. It's true. Take that, Jason.
Speaker A
Take that, Jason. That's [laughter] right. Yeah. What happens if he comes on and I'm on?
Speaker A
Are we going to go like 14 hours? It' be like then we need doomer diapers.
Speaker A
I mean, if if we have you and Georgiani on, how can we make this really apocalyptic? Who's who's the third person we would need on Oh, Almond Hillman.
Speaker A
Almond Hillman would make this apocalyptic. Abs fuckingutely not happening. Look, here's on my watch. It's not happening on my watch.
Speaker A
I know, right? He's I mean, and yeah, thank you, Dr. Heather and Doomer is now in shambles. We now have another Dr. Heather agreement with Fringe.
Speaker A
Okay, so I would totally talk to Almond Helman. I see Fringe. No, no, just wait. Wait for her to finish Doomer.
Speaker A
But I think he's like I think there's something going on there. I think he's [ __ ] crazy. And I'm just like beyond crazy.
Speaker A
I think and I'm partially like say I partially wonder like when he goes on these like tangents. listen like he he freaked out on um he freaked out on Kurt because Kurt was Kurt Mezer was on Danny Jones's and was talking and he just
Speaker A
listen Kurt's a friend so I'm sure I'm biased but I listened to the episode I didn't hear where Kurt really dissed Almond maybe you know Kurt's Curtis he's abrasive but what happened was Almond freaked out and said Danny betrayed him
Speaker A
and didn't stand up for him enough and Danny's like out to lunch sometimes times like he's just like yeah he's not I don't think he's invested in trying to fight those battles so he just didn't sound enthusiastically like pro Almond
Speaker A
Hillman. Well that sent Almond off and he got crazy and starts like making all these like live streams and then like my friend Neil was like like hitting him back with that because he was attacking Neil and it's just been this big attack.
Speaker A
Well in the back of this like here's some inside baseball. Um it's not even that inside because I think Amond even said it. So, um, Danny, uh, he was reaching out to Danny and Danny was like, "Dude, you know, I think he needs
Speaker A
some help and he was like, "If if I'll pay for your counseling and that just like pissed off more." So, I'm like, "Okay [laughter] man. This is a lot going on here." Okay. The guy's got entities. Come on,
Speaker A
you guys. If you can't see that from a mile away, he's asking them to cut. He's asking Exactly.
Speaker A
I can't I just can't do it. Didn't he sort of pseudo take ownership for the entity that that came into that college girl's dorm?
Speaker A
Yes. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. So, so I think that means look, it's already out there. And and friends, you know this. You know, I've already planned this out. You You know how I'm going to get you in here in a space with
Speaker A
with Almond. I'm not doing it. I I'm not I have enough problems. I don't need someone else's entities. I really don't. We get Wesley Huff in here.
Speaker A
Aren't you Aren't you Aren't you going to dip in Doomer? Wesley Huff cannot combat Aman's entities. I mean, there's just nothing.
Speaker A
There's nothing out there that's going to get me to get into [laughter] the room with that guy. Not even in a non.
Speaker A
You guys have no idea what these things are capable of. I'm not doing it.
Speaker A
I think if Wesley Huff is in here, you're going to come in just ask him a few questions, right? Like I mean, I don't even need to ask that guy. I there's zero I have zero questions for Wes Huff. He cannot be
Speaker A
enough of a barrier between me and those entities. It's not doesn't exist. If you got Jesus in the space, I would show up.
Speaker A
Okay. [laughter] Uh but Jesus is always with us. So he's there to protect you when Almond's here.
Speaker A
Jesus, if you are listening, you're warmly cordially invited into the doom room. Heidi and Heidi Hollis. There you go. So, so if we get Jesus in here and Almond Hillman, there is a chance that Fringe will will be in here, too. And I'm not going to
Speaker A
write it off. I am the one who's dangerously open-minded here. Um, so, you know, let's keep it on the table.
Speaker A
Let's not dismiss it. Um, but but yeah, all of you have been so patient. I want every a quick technical just for every Yeah, go ahead. Unbiased.
Speaker A
for listening note because the only way I got this to work no matter what phone I used or device or app or whatever because I'm mobile right now and then put it in and that's how I'm going I mean you sound like you're you sound
Speaker A
like you're getting abducted right now Aaron what what did you do with your phone to be able to to make it in here well it was working uh go on my phone go into the browser Chrome browser browser
Speaker A
and putting it in desktop mode and then entering the space. That's the only way I haven't had any issues until now apparently.
Speaker A
For for those of you who don't know that that's an Android user. So, but it's worth a trying it if you have an iPhone as well. Um use use your browser and then view the page in desktop mode and
Speaker A
then join the space like a Neanderl through through the desktop browser on your phone. that that might work. But but normally it's the other way around.
Speaker A
People get kicked out on desktop. I I have heard reports that people are finding more success either on desktop or in the desktop browser on mobile rather than the native mobile app. So it's a struggle here. Your your words
Speaker A
are so apocalyptic uh Dr. Lynn that people are getting kicked out left and right like people who've been dying to be here in this space. So, what whatever it is that you're saying, keep saying it because uh I I I I view this as a
Speaker A
positive signal. Um the the people who are next, we're going to go to Vincent, then Experience, and then Mr. Douglas.
Speaker A
Um thank you so much for being so patient. And um Dr. Lyn, those are all the people in the queue. If we can get through those people, that'd be amazing.
Speaker A
But I I know you've been here forever. Um it's okay. I want to make sure everybody, you know, has a chance and I'll stay here as long as uh we need to [laughter] until the pole shift.
Speaker A
Until the poll shift. Yeah, I'll stay. It sounds like a a country song or some sort of romantic I'll stay here until the pole shifts.
Speaker A
Maybe maybe this will be our first track. We'll monetize it, Dr. Lynn. We'll turn you into a famous famous country singer, right? [laughter] And I can finally live up to my my grifting uh allegations. Um Vincent Thank you for being so patient, man.
Speaker A
Welcome to to the Doom Room. Thank you. And Doomer Fringe, Dr. Heather Lynn, amazing space. Dr. Heather Lynn, thank you so much for gracing us with your esoteric knowledge. Um, sort of like how Jenny started off, I wanted to give you a little bit of
Speaker A
background. And as I sit here in my doomer diaper with my newly implanted slow drip limp dick disclosure doomer catheter, I hope that my 4% uh battery airpods hold on. Um, so I uh grew up um pretty pretty much a typical American uh
Speaker A
kid with a really good upbringing. um went to college uh got a job out of college and um got a top secret security clearance uh for a government contractor. Um that opened my eyes a little bit doing some
Speaker A
secret black budget projects for the NGA and the NRO and um saw some secret stuff on top secret satellite imagery. Um, after a couple years, met a girl, fell in love. Um, left that job, got another job. We both left our uh consecutive
Speaker A
jobs because we hated our bosses. Decided to travel the world. Uh, first the United States, then later the world.
Speaker A
Um, on a on a trip uh going from the east coast to the west coast, I had a really profound experience seeing an orb out in Sedona, Arizona. Um, and then I had a a pretty wild experience after
Speaker A
that in a tent at night sleeping. Um, no, it was not sex. It was a a a void experience where my uh whole existence was surrounded in darkness after I came to um from sleep at night and then I
Speaker A
kind of entered this rocket ship and then slowly after that faded away and then I was in a state of bliss. Um, after that, my fiance and I continued to travel. We're still traveling. I have no idea what I'm doing with my life. I'm
Speaker A
looking into all things disclosure, trying to find the true meaning of this reality. Um, I have three specific questions for you. Uh, Dr. Heather Lynn, I did watch your Danny Jones podcast.
Speaker A
Loved it. Great discussion. Great discussion today. Um, in regards to your esoteric knowledge and your study into ancient civilizations, um, I'm wondering what is the connection, if any, to the ancient Samrians, their gods like the Anunnaki, the occult, and in particular the Lapis
Speaker A
Lazuli gemstone. In particular, we see these occult ties um throughout history that go into the US government's deep black budget programs. Um back in the 1930s, the founder of JPL, I I forget his name, um practiced a cult rituals of the Alistister Crowley
Speaker A
uh following the Otto. Um, Jack Parsons is his name. Um, there seems to me also to be some sort of management component to it. We do see things like a Lord of the Rings tie in to the the intelligence
Speaker A
community in in some states as well as to um as as you alluded to before Peter Teal's um uh interests. So that back to that question um because because you brought it up and Danny Jones I think it's very
Speaker A
fascinating and al also the NRO is like very obsessed it seems with gemstones when it comes to their ultra ultra fidelity satellites. What what is if any the ties between the Samrians, the Anunnaki and the Lapis Lazuli gemstone? Thank you.
Speaker A
That's a great question and you're right about the importance of particular gemstones and things like that. Not just for occult practices like say charging something or making it, you know, it's easy to laugh it off like you know you
Speaker A
have crystals and they heal and whatever, but there's real science be behind the importance of of uh minerals and we know this not only from having to eat minerals, but also the cell phone.
Speaker A
you know, there's there's there's so many rare earth minerals that are needed to uh be used in technology. And I when I was in school for a while, I also, you know, worked at at the same time. And so
Speaker A
I was working at a place called HC Stark and uh they you needed security clearance to work there as well. It was a company that was a German company, but it they did uh um rare earth met Metals
Speaker A
and um they were actually wrapped up in a big uh scandal because they were funding the war in the Congo. So that was a a great company to work for and uh they had a lot of interesting things
Speaker A
they were doing and I I remember it was an eye-opening experience because I I hadn't appreciated until I had that job um the importance of these minerals to people like like the security clearance the fact that all the customers
Speaker A
essentially were uh defense contractors and it was it was it was eye opening and so I kind of went down a little rabbit hole about the importance of of some of this. And yes, I was interested as well
Speaker A
actually in lapis lazuli because it was a very sacred um stone and it was uh prestigious. It was actually an import uh came from where would be modern Afghanistan now. And that would mean that it had to travel a proto silk road
Speaker A
network um and be transmitted through traders. And so access to lapis allowed people to uh access very distant and uh even an ultraviolet charged material which is kind of interesting. Um they didn't just use it for things for decor.
Speaker A
They really did think that it had some sort of a ritual value. They used it as a ritual substrate. They would grind it into a powder for temple ceremonies.
Speaker A
They used it for cosmetics for the priesthood specifically. Um it was uh used for votive objects and then amulets. Um particularly amulets for the the the May protocols which is spelled me but pronounced May. And those were basically you could think of them as
Speaker A
like a a set of codes or information that you would find on a thing called the tablet of destinies. And whoever had that was said to have ruled the world.
Speaker A
And so it they they had the fate. They knew everything past, present, and future. And uh so of course that's an interesting object that probably could be a good mcguffin for a film or a book series. But uh you don't hear a lot
Speaker A
about it, but I do know there are some people who have been interested in finding this uh object thinking that perhaps it's real. Um and even if it's not real, the the metaphor is fantastic because it means that it's almost like
Speaker A
Project Looking Glass or something like that. And so there's a lot there, but it was heavily tied to lapis. Um I have my own um collection, a small collection of artifacts, and one of them is actually a cylinder seal made of lapis. So they
Speaker A
were making seals themselves out of that. Um and so they used it for the eyes in statues. And so the statues, many of them are gone now of course, but you can still see examples of it where they use lapis for the eyes of statues
Speaker A
that would have represented like the gods. Um, and they were also used in uh priest regalia, royal burials and they represented a cosmic principle of the night sky and could be used in like divining and astrological things like
Speaker A
that. So it was very important. It wasn't just that they liked it. later too it it the idea of lapis being sort of magical I guess uh entered into the helenistic and even in medieval magic systems it was looked at as a protection
Speaker A
against sorcery if you wore it was also considered a truthtelling stone and so and that was because of its association with the heavens and the sky and the clarity of the cosmic order and it was linked to then later Jupiter and it's
Speaker A
always been this really important thing linking the sky and knowledge and cosmic principles. And so I I think it's interesting purely because yes, it comes from our oldest examples there in this structure, the civilizational structure, and then it travels throughout Henistic
Speaker A
and medieval magic system specifically. Now whether or not it has a an importance in um sort of I guess advanced technology now uh I couldn't tell you because that's not really uh an area of expertise I have in like
Speaker A
material sciences that way. Uh but I will say uh it would be very interesting to find out and I would like to given the the extreme interest that the ancients had in that particular stone. I mean it had other interests. There are
Speaker A
other stones that were very important, but lapis was very important, too. And um so yeah, but I I don't I'm not sure how it might play into any sort of the uh current quest in the material sciences or even perhaps the um I know
Speaker A
the questions we have on free energy or anything like that. I'm not sure. Heather, I know Vincent has two more questions for you, but just as a quick followup, do you think it has anything to do with the blue dust associated with
Speaker A
the galactic current sheet, which might regulate uh pole shift cycles and the sparkles in the lapis lazily, whether it might have something to do with DMT?
Speaker A
um the the the DMT that fractures or refracts light because the accounts of some abductees when they look into full Nordics, NHI Nordics's eyes, not the hybrids, are that they have a a rapid shimmering rainbowes changing iris and
Speaker A
considering eyes are are basically exposed brain, I've wondered whether a a homminid or a human that doesn't have, you know, MAOI, MAO um metabolizing away DMT, whether you might have more literal DMT expressed or DMT expressed in the irises. Um any
Speaker A
thoughts on that? Do you think it it has to do with either the galactic current sheet or or more DMT in in um in a in a version of human that has has more psychic potential?
Speaker A
It's hard to say, but if you think about some of the uh things it would be used for like the Sumerians and Egyptians grinding it into a pigment, um it it the that pigment had very specific and strange qualities. So, it was like it'd
Speaker A
be stable underneath oil. Um it and maybe most important to the question is it doesn't degrade under UV light. So it's um considered photostable because of the sulfur radicals that are already kind of in an excited state. So that
Speaker A
would be something that I would probably if I wanted to answer that more fully would look into that a little bit more.
Speaker A
Um so and then maybe just the color of blue altogether. Uh maybe the they also noticed that the gold fleck kind because you can see on the the some of the stones that are not um used all the way
Speaker A
there they have gold fleck varieties um instead of just like the pure blue ones.
Speaker A
So um yeah I but that's that would be my I think only guess about that would be more so um having to do with its actual qualities. But at the same time, people did associate things that they saw with,
Speaker A
you know, other things like, well, it it like gold shines like the sun and maybe it has to do with the sun, etc. So, there's many different ways they could have looked at it. I'm not familiar enough with the uh claims about DMT
Speaker A
having uh anything to do with that like sort of blue, but I I do know the shimmering aspect of it like almost like it's an iridescent veil that people go through. uh and yes with the eyes being the window to the soul actually part of
Speaker A
the brain itself it's you know not a separate part it's connected to the brain and therefore is considered part of the brain maybe maybe that's it so I've never considered that that's a new one for me but I'm open to exploring
Speaker A
this in fact I'll probably make a note of this so that I could look more deeply into uh the question of the importance of lapis uh in all of these different applications yeah and I'll hand the mic back over to
Speaker A
to Vincent. I was I was surprised when he he brought that up to me. Um the the reason why I'm a little bit obsessed with the DMT thing is because the the Sitchins lore, the Sumerian lore of, you
Speaker A
know, genetic engineering. Um they're they're almost indistinguishable from the lore that Nordics give some abductees. And there is something that seems to be not just very narcissistic, but also violent.
Speaker A
um not just in Aadian culture but in how the Anuna are described and we when you look is also the Nordic lore that's conveyed to abductees is that a firewall was installed to limit full access to our intelligence and our
Speaker A
psychic potential and MAO would be an obvious firewall because you know IA needs to be mixed with um an anominoxidase inhibitor just so that it's orally active and crosses the bloodb brain barrier. And in humans that don't have this MAO,
Speaker A
you you have a genetic byproduct. And and I'm not saying this has anything to do with DMT, but since most humans have MAO, you can't just orally ingest DMT and have it be be psychoactive.
Speaker A
People who don't have the monoamine oxidase, they're violent. In fact, they're all they're all high in psychopathy. They're almost all in jail.
Speaker A
Um, and it seems to it seems to be a coincidence that you can't overlook. So, that's wild.
Speaker A
Super cool. Yeah. If you ever look into that, um, I the violence is hard to ignore when it comes to Aadian culture and the Anuna.
Speaker A
Yeah. Does that make sense? Oh, yeah. Definitely. And, uh, that's really fascinating. I appreciate you bringing that to my attention because I'm also very interested in uh the DMT phenomenon. I've interviewed a lot of people about it. I'm so curious and I do
Speaker A
think it's so connected the experience itself and what people uh report back and I do think that there's some sort of entity and some sort of veil and all of these different things that you know I I think are connected and I think that
Speaker A
they've been able to tap into that for such a long time that it's really affected how this these myths and these accounts um you know have been told and that's why I think there's a lot of truth to them. It's like a revealed
Speaker A
knowledge. Um, so something like that. I think that's Yeah, I I'm I'm definitely gonna look into that and if you could or somebody could send me information or if I can I guess you Yeah, that would be great.
Speaker A
I'll look it up and I'll send it to you. And just to be clear, it has to do with when that gene gets deactivated then violence is, you know, psychopathy is the byproduct. I'm not saying it's due to the increase of DMT.
Speaker A
Sure. Yeah. Yeah. So, I'm just interested in the that idea of like the uh like maybe they were the the the connection with like lapis and some of these different even other minerals. I mean, it's hard to say, but I I do know that the
Speaker A
Sumerians were actually doing a lot of uh pharmarmacology really and they were actually creating pills of of their firsts, you know, of our first they were actually making compounds and pills and like they were making tablets that you
Speaker A
could take among other things. So, it it's there's so many different uh recipes and formulas um that it just makes me wonder too if they were on to something. And that's when people ask me about do you think that there was uh
Speaker A
ancient Stargate technology or you know what have you. I think that it's again goes back to what is a Stargate and I think that a lot of it has to do with these questions as opposed to just simply like a a big gate in the middle
Speaker A
of the desert that people could walk in and go. I think that instead we're looking at uh the Stargate being that veil that they maybe understood and had formulas and even mathematic codes and a great understanding for the natural
Speaker A
world around them and that they have written that down. And while a lot of most of the texts that are found are administrative in nature, not all of them are. And the and I do know for a fact that when they find some of these,
Speaker A
they keep the goods and then they give the boring so to speak ones to museums.
Speaker A
So it looks like uh most of them are administrative, but that doesn't mean all of them are. And so there's probably great keys to unlocking all of our questions in the Sumerian tablets.
Speaker A
Isn't the atroisis or I I don't know how to pronounce it. Isn't that one sorry the limiting of human life? Isn't that something?
Speaker A
Oh, yeah. No, you're dead on. Yeah, the limiting and that's Atraas. Yep. Um, Vincent, go ahead. You have two more questions and and thanks everyone for being so patient.
Speaker A
Uh, speaking of gate, um, I don't know if y'all uh watch the spiritual gateway.
Speaker A
Uh, it's with Danny and Vicki and they, uh, channel using a Ouija board. Um, very fascinating stuff. You can find them on uh the short form uh social media platforms uh Tik Tok and Instagram as well as YouTube. Um they just
Speaker A
uploaded a couple hours ago to their YouTube channel. The truth they don't want you to know the gate program. Uh it's a 25minute video, so I'm definitely going to be checking that one out after this. I myself was not in the GATE
Speaker A
program, but I did get evaluated for it in the second and third grades twice. So that was interesting. Not once, twice.
Speaker A
Um my my second question for you Heather um I am curious a bit about your worldview. We've talked about Jason Georgiani in this space a bit. Um, when it comes to your your research into ancient civilizations and in particular
Speaker A
their languages, um, such as how these primal languages interpret the future and the past. Um, I remember you uh speaking about this on the the Danny Jones podcast.
Speaker A
uh giving the idea that some of these civilizations spoke as if the past is ahead of them and the future is behind them.
Speaker A
Given this, do you subscribe to an ancient civilization timetraveling control system maybe similar to that of the Netflix series Dark or something like that?
Speaker A
Not I'm not familiar with that series, but I think that uh yeah, time is certainly a construct. So I think there's a lot of different ways to uh time travel that don't require even building some sort of a mechanism for it
Speaker A
in the in the material sense. I think that it could be possible that uh just different changes in perspective whether it be through like a meditation or a DMT or whatever there may be an ability to I guess remote view or have some sort of
Speaker A
interaction with uh time scale differences so to speak. So like uh yes I did mention that the Greeks kind of had that idea that which makes sense I think if you think about it from their perspective that you've already seen the
Speaker A
past you know it and so therefore you're facing it. It's in front of you. You can look at it and analyze it but the his the future is unknown. So it's behind you. You can't see it. You don't know
Speaker A
what it is. And so the idea is that you're being pulled uh backwards through time and watching everything kind of pass you by in the past. And so that perspective shift I think is important to note because when you do read into
Speaker A
these texts or look into them, there's uh perspective changes that maybe aren't aligned with our particular worldview.
Speaker A
Uh so yeah, again, it's quite possible, but I just couldn't I couldn't unfortunately say for sure.
Speaker A
Thank you. Um, for those that don't know the Jason Georgiani worldview, um, Nordic control system, kind of them, they are acting as our overlords, but they are also simultaneously humans themselves. Um, and traversing space and time, that kind
Speaker A
of goes hand in hand with that. Um, my last question, um, I'm wondering if you can disclose the name of the Canadian citizen that funded or that you believe funded, uh, Dr. Greer's Sirius film and the disclosure project, as well as
Speaker A
certain US congressional members campaigns pushing for us or for pushing for UAP disclosure. Hm. I know, right? I usually whenever anyone DMs me, I send them the videos and the and the name and stuff and I'm always just so hesitant to say it, but
Speaker A
maybe I should just say it. The reason I don't usually say it is because I still kind of want to get information from them. Um, but you know what?
Speaker A
Yeah, why not? I I'm going to say it, but it's not very exciting and he's not very googable because it's just not that exciting. Um, I would rather because I have a video of him. He's not active on YouTube. This was from a long
Speaker A
time ago, but it still exists. And he had posted a video where he got my Sumerian controversy book and starts going over it in detail. And it's like, it's a little strange. And that was when he first reached out to me. He sent me
Speaker A
that video. He tried to convince me that he wasn't crazy, which I'm like, "Okay, dude." But he's very like, "I promise I'm not crazy." And and he sends me this video that makes him look a little crazy, but you know, and I'm like,
Speaker A
"Okay." Um, I'll talk to you. And we just had a conversation back and forth multiple times, a Zoom call, um, a couple Zooms, and then just back and forth for quite a long time. And uh yeah, I I think if I say it then I I I
Speaker A
may I you know I'm just I'll say it and then if I'll just let the cards fall where they may because then if if he's like I don't know if he somehow knows that I'm out here like telling all this stuff
Speaker A
then and he just won't talk to me then that's just how it's meant to be and that's fine. And I I probably Oh my god, we're getting disclosure.
Speaker A
You're giving us disclosure. Thank god. Well, it's not that maybe it's interesting. I don't know. But it's at least a rabbit hole people can look at um and go down. But his name is Tom Clearwater.
Speaker A
So, do with that what you will. I could hear the the number two pencils from the CIA scraping [laughter] across the paper. I could hear it.
Speaker A
Yeah. It's the first time I've uh actually said his name. And so, sorry, Tom. I know we were having a a good thing going there, but uh he he you know I mean he I don't think he I don't know
Speaker A
that he told me anything in secret. I mean he didn't clarify, but I mean we'll see. But Tom Tom Clearwater um I think it'd be hard to find him, but I mean everybody's a detective, so I would say
Speaker A
go searching for that, but his name is Tom Clearwater. He's in Can uh Canada.
Speaker A
And um I do have a video uh that you can find on YouTube that I've sent out because it sort of shows a couple things that he's done. He's really into scalar wave technology. That's his whole stickick. He did have a website
Speaker A
somewhere too, but I think if you even Google maybe Tom Clearwater and then scalar uh wave that might be even better search results because it's kind of a common name.
Speaker A
Oh, wait. I just looked. I found them on I don't know. I'm looking through my phone. So, yeah. But if anyone wants like any like quick ways to find them, um I just DM me and I will send you the
Speaker A
links. Yeah. And any links you have um because I know you're answering questions here, you're welcome to just drop them in the group chat and I'll I'll push them to the nest. I'll I'll thread them in the post or or we can do it after the fact.
Speaker A
Um, and thank you so much. Uh, Vincent, can I go to the next person? I I didn't want to.
Speaker A
Yes, sir. Thank you so much. Thank you to everyone. And just for the record, names get dropped in the doom room. Uh, that was a George Nap moment.
Speaker A
Um [laughter] experience, thank you for being so patient. Uh, mic is yours, man. Peace. Peace. Uh, thanks for having me up, y'all. Uh, Dr. Lynn, let's continue talk. Uh, admittedly, I have not watched the Danny Jones episode, but I will. um
Speaker A
especially after hearing you speak, I had a couple of things that resonated with me that you said earlier that I just wanted to touch upon. Um one of them being that just because it's old doesn't mean it's true, which I think
Speaker A
kind of hit home on too. I I am not an overly religious person. I'm Latin, so I grew up Catholic, but I kind of denounced Catholicism a long time ago and I just have my own relationship with God and all that kind of thing. So um
Speaker A
but the Sumerian text I always felt like since it it was the oldest account of potential creation story here on this planet that it serves even almost as a primer to some of these other religions.
Speaker A
Um I don't look at uh religion as a construct. Uh I look at it for historical value as well and you know because it it kind of spreads across the whole planet and there's some things that align like the flood and the
Speaker A
creation myth and different things of course different flavors and everything. Uh but the Samrian tale always kind of stood out to me as okay well maybe this is where this is a good starting point to see how everything kind of branched
Speaker A
out from this um Anky and Enlil and Anu and all these uh these characters so to speak but uh my question to you is um cuz the other thing you said to me was just the game of telephone. That's
Speaker A
something I say a lot. I think a lot of it is just like a really [ __ ] up game of telephone and we're just trying to piece together the puzzles. Uh, and for the Anunnaki specifically, do you feel
Speaker A
like there's a correlation between them and Egyptian gods, Greek gods, Hindu gods, and eventually the the gods and the Abrahamic religions and some of the ancient Asian uh gods that pop up and is do you think that these are one and the
Speaker A
same or branch off of the same? You know what I mean? That that would be my first question.
Speaker A
I think they are. I think they really do influence each other both in a just a story sense and a shared cultural sense, but I also think that in a real spiritual sense they do too. Like going back to the idea of containers or even
Speaker A
the possession or inspiration if you you know you want to be kind of I don't know uh nicer about it if you will. Um I think that we have a collective consciousness. I do kind of uh subscribe a bit to Carl Young's interpretation of
Speaker A
these things. I think he did a good job naming what was already known. I mean, he was very much into occult studies and and that sort of thing, but I think he gave us a good vocabulary to use to try
Speaker A
to understand it with a modern mind and and I think it works. So I think in this sense that we're looking at the repetition of archetypes and the repetition of things and um the embodiment of that and the incarnation
Speaker A
of that. And so I think that it's real and I think that these gods continue to influence everybody. And what people start to see is that they have these long-standing similarities like say one could be like a continuously the god of
Speaker A
war have all of these attributes and then they get you know uh put into the same category as the other and so I think what we're looking at is in a way sort of like an informal but very long
Speaker A
peerreview system where cultures over time have looked at the phenomena that they've experienced and said you Oh, this is very similar to that and that's very similar to this and the things that have stayed are the ones that I, you
Speaker A
know, just because they're old doesn't make them true. But because they have been repeated and there's a pattern there that goes back to an older time that makes me then pause and take notice. Then I have to think, you know,
Speaker A
these are archetypal patterns. There's something to this and like something like the phenomena of angels, demons, aliens, uh, etc. I think that what we're looking at when it comes to gods are uh entities, discarnate entities that uh come through and people can experience
Speaker A
whether they call them in on on purpose, maybe embody them uh like Almond Hillman or Lady Babylon or something to that effect or something uh more benign in nature. I think that we're seeing it over and over again. So I think both in
Speaker A
a mythological sense um maybe also just the idea of the religious synretatism in an anthropological sense and I think in a maybe actual metaphysical sense what we're noticing are these relationships because people shared them but also because they stood the test of time and
Speaker A
we can kind of see it to this day and uh I I Graham Hancock often calls us a species with amnesia and I like to say we're probably that, but we're also a species with uh PTSD. Like we've all gone
Speaker A
through it somehow on a on a level and we're trying to fix that and we're repeating the patterns over and over again like a cycle. So if you you know casually know anything about say like cycles of abuse then you'll understand
Speaker A
that sometimes like maybe you have an instance where uh a woman is uh you know maybe her dad's an alcoholic or something right and she couldn't fix him and so she runs off and her boyfriend is like you know a bad dude and he's an
Speaker A
addict too and she gets with a bunch of addicts because she's like always trying to fix what she couldn't or you know that same story that trope but we do that as as humans we want to keep fixing
Speaker A
or trying again or repeating these patterns. And in some ways, I just I think that what we see at a civilizational level or humanity level uh with these stories and these gods and the same say hero's journey or villain
Speaker A
origin stories or all of that is uh the myth that we carry within us that we recognize that is like a collective unconscious that's trying to speak to us and we just you know we have that breakdown in our mind. We have a twob
Speaker A
brain system and it's but it's always there like why do stories connect with us this way? Why do we look up to these types of figures like what you know what is this? I think it's ingrained in us
Speaker A
and I think we're always trying to close the loop and I think that's why we tell the same stories over and over again like uh Joseph Campbell talked about in hero with a thousand faces. It's like, you know, that kind of based on that
Speaker A
Yian concept that we have the same heroes and they have different masks, but why do we keep doing this? It's like maybe we're trying to solve something or fix something cosmically. I don't know.
Speaker A
Yeah. I think we were kind of designed with this curiosity that just burns eternal, right? So I I feel like it's been like that since I was a kid is one of the things that had me question religion early on. But it never
Speaker A
tarnished or messed with my relationship with what I feel God is. Uh I believe you know Jesus was real and his teachings are absolutely valuable as well as some of the other religions from Krishna to Buddha to Prophet Muhammad.
Speaker A
Like all these things I take into account the good things right outside of you know being someone being human and having these flaws. Um, what I feel like we're what's happening cuz I'm super into UFOs. That's kind of like my thing
Speaker A
is while we're discovering or trying to rediscover some of the stuff about this potential other NHI presence that's probably been here for a long time is that the question remains not about them but more about us and where it kind of
Speaker A
places us every and everything and and how it should have been where as opposed to I think that some of these entities kind of were were bugging out back in the day and they kind of [ __ ] things
Speaker A
up for us for a while. Um, and you know, whether that means that they came here to meddle with us and then modified our DNA to a certain level to where we're just kind of like suppressed and we
Speaker A
don't have our full potentials and capabilities that we have to kind of rediscover that now as we kind of searching or seeing if this NHI presence thing is real. So, I feel like like going back and going and brushing uh the
Speaker A
knots out of your hair, so to speak, like if you you got a pile of laundry and you find a $20 bill in your in your in your jeans, like, oh yeah, that's I forgot about that that's there. Like, we
Speaker A
need to do that with some of the questions that were that are kind of popping up again. Um my question to you, last question is um being as we don't really have access to what was ancient Sumeriia like that. Uh it's a war torn
Speaker A
area. Iraq and Iran just in that Persian area. How much do you think is still there for us to that needs that can be potentially discovered um that can corroborate any of this stuff with uh the Anunnaki?
Speaker A
Well, I think that uh I would I would pretty much go along with the mainstream consensus on that because uh might as well. I don't have anything else uh to go on. So the consensus is that there are uh generally uh millions of tablets
Speaker A
available still and uh that's astonishing and it could be you know when you consider too the tablets can be quite small. Uh so that's how they they could have millions of them out in the desert. But um with that said then it
Speaker A
comes a question of that manpower like how are we going to translate them all?
Speaker A
And that's where they've stepped in and said well AI can do that. So the that's going to be an interesting thing, but there's so much to discover more than in Egypt because of the fragility of of papyrie. So, you know, it's a whole new
Speaker A
world out there and whoever can get to it first is going to be able to understand it and use that knowledge.
Speaker A
And I think that's part of the reason that they are so interested in uh polluting the narrative or making it uninteresting for people or distracting everybody. And uh also, you know, it I wouldn't doubt that that's part of the
Speaker A
reason that the place has been war torn for so long. Um knowledge is always power at the end of the day. But yeah, millions.
Speaker A
Awesome. Thank you. Appreciate your time. Thank you. Appreciate your questions. Experience. I loved your questions. Um, I'm I'm going to follow up with them at the at the very very end with one uh especially as it relates to the $20 in
Speaker A
our jeans. Um, Mr. Douglas, thank you for fighting your way in here. I know there were demons kicking you off the speaker panel. Uh, welcome. And just um, if you have a post promoting your podcast, put it push it to the nest or
Speaker A
put it in the purple pill so we can push it up. Um, Mr. Douglas interviewed me last week. Um, and uh I really appreciate that that you're that you care about this this subject. So, welcome to the doom room. Uh, Douglas,
Speaker A
it was a blast. Thank you very much. Uh, I you broke open my mind in so many ways and I can't appreciate it enough. But, uh, Dr. Heather Lynn, medicine woman, thank you very much for all of the uh,
Speaker A
medicine that you've been dropping today. I um only have one question. Uh and uh um it uh is with all of the uh information that you have researched and uh learned from when it comes to the abcalu and jin genie all of the nonhuman
Speaker A
intelligence interaction. Um, what do you think is the value of human consciousness and why uh do you think it matters so much to these nonhuman intelligences specifically?
Speaker A
That's a really good question because man, I mean, I wish I I knew. I think that when it comes to perhaps the I mean there's a lot of ways to look at it like the theological angle different theologies uh I did write recently or
Speaker A
relatively recently about the concept of luch and luch farming and that's a you know maybe a newer idea uh but it actually comes from an older idea and if you put that all together just just follow the pattern And um you have this
Speaker A
vital essence at plays. So um we we've talked over the the past few hours here and there about uh Monroe and uh his his thinking and it's again it's a more contemporary more modern view. Um, so aside from Monroe and the word that he
Speaker A
uh dubbed luch, it it goes back to many different things like uh we could say vril or uh some people could say soul but other people say no that's spirit or whatever but there is this kind of name
Speaker A
this this thing this some people call it a substance even. Um it was once called animal magnetism. Um, so there's many different ways to say what this thing is. And this thing is like a life force.
Speaker A
There's some sort of energy there. There's just something that we have in us. And it's apparently according to magicians and people of interest that's m it's really powerful. So um the the cynical view of it is that they are
Speaker A
uh feeding off of it like a harvest. Um and that is one of the reasons that the they keep us alive. Again, it's very cynical, but even going back to the Greek uh when in the symposium there is
Speaker A
a discussion where they're kind of joking around about you know why are why are people always looking for their spouse or what have you. And it was uh brought up that well initially God made the gods made us as
Speaker A
one entity called the reebus and the entity uh was actually strange looking uh not very humanlike or anthropomorphic but essentially was very powerful and uh it was a little too powerful and it didn't need to worship. So the gods
Speaker A
split it in half and as a result though uh it lost its other half explaining the genders and then it couldn't worship either because it was so distraught from losing its other half that all it did was roam around trying to reconnect. And
Speaker A
so they thought well we'll fix this. And the gods then said, "We'll put genitals on the front of these creatures so that they can first of all recognize that their other half that they're like puzzle pieces and secondly so that they
Speaker A
can actually come together and reunite and share that energy again, that vital force." And um so it it was not necessarily a true account obviously, but this was their metaphysical understanding and the way they're trying to express it. And it's interesting
Speaker A
because they didn't say the gods killed them and that was because the gods needed them for praise and worship and uh energy still. And so in some ways like if you consider luch as like a modern take on whatever this energy
Speaker A
force is um the who whatever is harvesting it it's not based in some sheer hatred for us it because that would imply a sort of relationship right to hate something you have to have an investment here like that the the
Speaker A
entities don't have a relationship with us that way it's essentially just agricultural like we're a product um that seems to be the story that uh even the contemporaries of Monroe would say, but again it goes all the way back to um
Speaker A
every system has a name for this thing whatever it is prana I mean you name it and this thing and we can call it luch but what it what it is is this energy that is so powerful and it and it comes
Speaker A
out during extreme human emotion. So you have what are the extremes, right? It can be either good or bad. And so if you push it to the extreme, the the best emotion that's that's a feeling that's positive would be orgasm. The worst is
Speaker A
uh torturous like pain, right? Like kind of like before death and then leading to death. So you have these two extremes and this is where you find a lot of magical practices pushing those extremes and this is where you get the blood
Speaker A
sacrifice because the this this life force is in the blood specifically. Um but it's also then in seinal fluids or menstrual fluids or anything having to do with the sexual um feelings because that would be an extreme release of
Speaker A
that. And so in some magical practices and the ideas are you either don't have sex and you live a monastic life because you're maintaining all of that vital force in you and you keep your power. Um versus maybe doing something in like a
Speaker A
ritual sex magic thing where you're putting out that power. So and this is very it's not even just western it's eastern. It's very human. And the whole point of it being that there is something in us that they believe is an
Speaker A
actual substance that can somehow be measured that makes us, for lack of better word, special that they don't have, but they need and they feed off of it. And so, could this be consciousness?
Speaker A
I don't know if we go back to Amanda Fielding and this idea of perhaps the expansion of consciousness having to do with blood volume and you know maybe the more uh physical component of what consciousness is because nobody can
Speaker A
define consciousness. Uh but you have people who are trying and who have tried and reminds me of um you know sir Penrose who had a a whole idea about locating the physical uh you know place if you will of consciousness. Um, and so
Speaker A
there are people who have maybe gotten close to finding the locality of it. Um, but it's very elusive and confusing, but there is something there. And I think that these entities or whatever it may be, whatever you could call them
Speaker A
throughout history, they they need to they need it. Like they lack it, but somehow we have it.
Speaker A
Thank you. Oh, that's fantastic. That was a beautiful answer. I cannot appreciate it enough. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Speaker A
I appreciate you. Uh Dr. Heather, it I think the containerization of the soul, the parasetism of the soul or using the soul as some sort of negantropic utility uh is is one of the few weird ideas that unites almost all ideas uh including
Speaker A
hybridization uh and even the apocalypse or so. So so I think it's really important that we we think about this. I joke in the imaginary men's chat back channels that does not exist um that there is no ejaculation for men until we have
Speaker A
disclosure. So everybody who's in this men's chat, you know, the only way we can get disclosure is by by concentrating our masculine yang and refusing all release until we have full catastrophic disclosure. Um and so you know it was a timely moment just now.
Speaker A
Uh, one witness. Uh, you are our last person in the queue. Well, hello. Thank you for the introduction there and that segue, brother. Do appreciate that. Um, yeah, a great space, civil discourse. Appreciate it. I think one of the things that has
Speaker A
been a common thread that has run through the discussion is time. And I cannot stress how important that very subject is. Time is what separates the truth and the fiction regarding our origin story. A man came in earlier. U
Speaker A
it's been maybe 30 or 45 minutes. Um I think he had a podcast with some um you guys know who I'm talking about. He dropped some real gold here guys when he mentioned in passing albeit the testimony in Enoch.
Speaker A
And the reason why that's important is not just because of the uh scenario of the watchers that descended to Mount Hermon in and the 33rd parallel in the days before uh the flood, but rather because what is also included in Enoch's
Speaker A
testimony and the book of illuminaries and of course in the Kuman writings uh is time itself. the schedule not only from the beginning and in the beginning but in this very day in the flood that is now present wars rumors of wars
Speaker A
disease earthquake and diverse places uh but rather the times of the future and uh in fact when that fellow mentioned I don't know if everybody heard it or not I think most of the people were in here but when he mentioned Adam uh being put
Speaker A
in the garden that could not be more pertinent to the day in which we're in right now. He was put in the garden the 46th day after the equinox. Now, why that significance is that's the same exact day that Yeshua, the son of David,
Speaker A
mentioned when he was in asked, "What will be the sign of thy coming?" He said, "In no uncertain terms, you'll hear of wars, rumors of wars, famine, plague, disease, earthquake. We all know that stuff. Many will be offended and
Speaker A
betray one another and hate one another, and the love of many will grow cold." There's that PTSD, right? And then moreover, he goes into granular detail regarding the specific question regarding the day of his coming. And he mentions it will be exactly, and if you
Speaker A
look at the Greek word, it's exactly as in the days of Noah. So shall be the coming of the son of man. That was the 46th day after the equinox. It's precisely why he referenced that as the lesson example for this day, the
Speaker A
antid-dolivian period. And so if that common thread runs through and that in the beginning and to the end, u we should do well to study that. And that's where calendars and things of that nature come in in handy to debunk
Speaker A
Anunnaki origin theories after the flood. Uh and that to be sure. Uh so a lot of people overlook that and just focus on the tales of the metallurgy and the pharmaceuticals and and the misogynation and the corruption of the
Speaker A
human genome. Uh but time in fact was the mantle that he bore and buried and still uh bore and um and still and still bears even this very day. So anyway, thank you for a civil disc course and uh
Speaker A
appreciate you and I know that the doctor was probably getting tired and whatnot, but uh if you all ever do have a discussion on times and seasons, brethren, like the Apostle Paul said, uh we should not be uh soon takenback by
Speaker A
these things. In other words, we should know them. They were preserved quite clearly in the temple scroll at Kuman.
Speaker A
than that from the beginning when the sun, the moon, and the stars were fashioned for those times and seasons.
Speaker A
Anyway, bless you all. Thank you, one witness. Heather, you've been uh yeah, feel free to feel free to respond. Forgive me.
Speaker A
Oh, no. [snorts] That that's a those are very interesting points, too. And and the timekeeping is a story essentially of power. I mean, it's it's just not a neutral observation, you It's it's literal a technology of control and its
Speaker A
evolution of the timekeeping itself kind of goes parallel with institutional power consolidation. So and he you know he mentions using like celestial event events like you know moon and stars and cyclical agricultural time markers that mean it meant back in the day that time
Speaker A
was seen as qualitative because it was seasonal and ritual and there wasn't really a standardization needed um because people like communities were very small and self-contained. Um but the temple when it came about started to control kundrical authority and so that
Speaker A
meant they control the ceremonial timing, harvest coordination and things like uh feast days or holidays. Uh and that gave them like access to the full control over when the idea of when when you control collective action. And so
Speaker A
centralization of timekeeping I think uh is something worth taking a closer look at. Um people like the monastic bells and um the medieval times uh they regulated daily prayer cycles. Uh we have that you know across the world. But
Speaker A
that initially was revolutionary because it imposed like this abstract divisible time into hours onto populations that were living seasonally and cyclally like kind of like how they use uh bells in schools. It was a imposing the man's order onto them. So,
Speaker A
it's like maybe you wouldn't wake up as a as a young person at the crackadon to get to school to sit in a desk at this time, but by God, you're going to now because Henry Ford needs you to, you
Speaker A
know, get into that factory at a certain time. And so, we're going to train you with bells. And so, that was a revolutionary thing as well. And mechanical clocks then came after that in the 13th and 14th century. And it was
Speaker A
not essentially invented to measure time. It was invented to enforce the discipline. And there's a whole series of work on this by a guy named Thompson um EP Thompson. Very interesting stuff.
Speaker A
But the clock is technology of labor discipline before it's actually used as a technology of measurement. But all through this you can see the weaponization of timekeeping and it divorces us then over time uh to the natural order. And then we all know of
Speaker A
the calendar systems like the Julian and Gregorian and all of that and these uh you know we we it it's really a contested thing as is weights and measurements you know if if you say this is a foot long well whose foot because
Speaker A
initially that was like the foot of your sovereign or whatever your king was um and those feet could differ right so it but there's always this need to compare and contrast uh in order to make a judgment call so it sounds mundane and
Speaker A
boring perhaps perhaps s. But the real history of power can be seen in the history of weights, measures, and timekeeping. So definitely uh for anyone interested in that rabbit hole, go down and see how in an economic historical
Speaker A
sense, aside from money and whatnot, that weights and measures uh and timekeeping uh were how uh human beings consolidated power at the temple level.
Speaker A
On that note, and Fringe, uh, we're going to be wrapping up here. Do you have any last lingering questions?
Speaker A
No, I I really don't. This has been really good. I've really enjoyed the space. Um, just mostly listening to Dr.
Speaker A
Heather. I mean, I have to say, Doomer, you didn't even You know, a lot of times you're doing a lot of the talking in these spaces and you didn't and you listened today, which was very interesting.
Speaker A
Oh my god, that's [laughter] going to get clipped. Somebody's going to clip that one for sure.
Speaker A
Um, so I have two final questions for you. One, uh, I'm going to I'm going to make it a a jumbled mess, so take it wherever you want. Um my question f first it's it's about what you said
Speaker A
about metrics time measurement uh if I'm not mistaken and and and [snorts] I'm glad you corrected me uniform it's a it's a form of script it's not a language right so correct yeah is what what if is there there is no one
Speaker A
unified language right there's there's we use cicadian. We use different things like what language should I be referring to here?
Speaker A
Well, I mean it depends on the context. So I mean they spoke Sumerian and we imagine it was reflected in the cuniform but then people who were speaking a cadian were writing in Cunia form. So it depends. So I don't know I don't know
Speaker A
which language. So, so when we're when we're talking about Sumerian, Sumerian, the Sumerian language, the writing was done in in kunoiform script, but was it not also a um a numerical kind of language kind of like Hebrew? They used a sex adimal
Speaker A
system. Is is aren't aren't the glyphs themselves numerical more in origin than they are phonetic initially? Yeah, you see that uh you can see that on really interesting tablets that look like they're just holes kind of drilled on them
Speaker A
if you if you look up some of those images. Um but yeah, then then they were uh they had a numeric system, but then it became phonetic sort of and this is this is also sort of unless I'm reading too much into it, this is
Speaker A
part of the Sumerian problem. We have all of this metaphorically and perhaps literally fall from the skies out of nowhere.
Speaker A
That's that's part of the problem, isn't it? All of a sudden Okay. Yeah. Like they can't to this day. They can't figure out what was going on there. So it's it's like logoraphic with a phonetic overlay which so it's you
Speaker A
know it's a little weird. So the earliest earliest uniform was uh the signs representing whole words. So but but it's not it's not purely logoraphic if we're saying it's it's it's derivative of numbers right? It's well well yeah it it's not but they had
Speaker A
numbers like they had they would use uh quantity. Um and any any thoughts on why sex decimal why a 60 base number system is the first number system that we have evidence of still remaining. Do you have any
Speaker A
thoughts on on that? Yeah. Um so, so base 60 um the the number system in that in that uh it might have a well there's a couple different things but I I don't know that if it's like the
Speaker A
first I think ba I think technically base 10 might have been used for basic tallying and smaller quantities and then later it became the dominant one for specifically administrative and astronomical work because they say it's because it's very divisible.
Speaker A
because 60 breaks down evenly by two three five um six almost anything that you would need it for. Um so and that comes from the the original which would have been the first base 10 uh comes from the fact we have 10 fingers and
Speaker A
this is this is how it's kind of given. So I'm just relaying that. So that base 10 is the the basic tallying for smaller quantities because we have 10 digits and we would count that way. But then base
Speaker A
60 becomes dominant because we're able to um expand it and uh have it divisible. So another reason though ties to their love of calendars and astronomy and that has to do more so with the solar reconciliation of 12 lunar months as
Speaker A
opposed to the solar year. And that would point it would fit more cleanly with the 60 unit cycle. and Babylonian astronomers were the ones who really leaned on the base 60 for their celestial work. Um, and now whether the
Speaker A
choice was uh sort of astronomy drove accounting or whether both systems emerged from the same cultural mathematic lineage is still something people debate. They don't know exactly which came first. Um but once base 60 became the standardized uh way in
Speaker A
ununiform across all of Mesopotamia uh it was a it allowed them to have a unified accounting protocol that expanded their uh reach and trade and so that would mean a scribe or and a scribe in Babylon used the same numerical base
Speaker A
and they could have the knowledge transfer better and then institutional continuity and pretty much creating a broker class infrastructure and that's why it was survived. so long and even to this day because that's what we use to timekeep uh with 60 seconds you know 60
Speaker A
minutes etc. So in and geometry included, right? So there's there's a unification of time and space.
Speaker A
Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. In in our in our astronomy from minutes and seconds to angles, the the the base 61 is is almost suspicious, especially if you consider that polyactyl is a is a dominant gene. I think we might need to question whether
Speaker A
whether we actually started counting in tens and whether there might have been some sort of intentionalized censorship.
Speaker A
I I don't know. But I can't help but think um when you hear the Tower of Babel story that that God is going to split our tongues to more easily be able to corrupt our history.
Speaker A
Maybe we're doing something wrong in our in our number 10 uh numerical system. Am I Am I sounding It could be. No, no, that's It makes sense because in some cases they used base 12 because of the joints in your
Speaker A
finger. like they would go like one on your pinky. If you if anyone looks at their hands right now and looks down, you could count by saying, you know, one, two, three on your pinky and then four, five, six. So you could do 12 in
Speaker A
some context. Um, but if you look back at uh and and there would be different conversions. Um, and so for different purposes like for grain rations, land management would use another. But when we're talking about astronomical calculations, uh that one would
Speaker A
generally rely on base 30 um for higher order thinking that way. And that's why you get the 62nd minute and then 360° circle. Um so that all comes from Babylon that way. And um it really you really have to look at it as like well
Speaker A
maybe it's accidental or maybe it's just because we're all connected that way and that there is a a deep underlying truth to math and geometry. and they say it's a the language of God, so to speak. So, it is a governing force perhaps. So,
Speaker A
maybe it's not a coincidence that all of those things line up. And they really thought it was sacred. And to this day, people uh go look in like actual mathematicians. There's a few of them that have happened in peer-reviewed
Speaker A
journals, but um they've gone back and consulted uh the Babylonian tablets uh that are at the British Museum to try to help them make discoveries now. And one in particular was a a geometry professor who was working on a problem for many
Speaker A
years. His graduate students couldn't help him solve it. They have computers obviously and nothing was working. And he happened upon a tablet in the British Museum that uh helped him crack the code and it got into a peer-reviewed journal
Speaker A
and because of that he's able to understand a lot more about the problem that he was trying to solve. But they knew a lot more than we give them credit for. And I think that's uh I think a lot
Speaker A
of people understand that. And um you know, maybe that's what makes it so dangerous.
Speaker A
If um if we can go go back to this is uh this is to wrap everything up. The tree of life mural. Um this is supposed to be a mural showing the the lowering kingship. I I put it in
Speaker A
our our little chat and I also uh pushed it to the nest to the very front. Again, let me know if you don't see it, but there are two winged beings on the far left and the far right. Uh, two beings
Speaker A
of equal height in the center. Um, on either side of what is ostensibly the tree of life. Uh, there's uh the the typical watch and what most people consider a pine cone and the handbag.
Speaker A
Um, mo most people say that the wing beings are the Anuna. I'm open to them being anything, but what is what is your first impression when you look at this?
Speaker A
And what do you what is your best guess as to what the the handbag, the watch, and the the thing in the shape of the pine cone represent?
Speaker A
So, [snorts] I first of all, I think it is a a very important uh image without a doubt. Um, in terms of the the watches, so to speak, uh, I've I've actually, uh, put out a substack about this that I not
Speaker A
just to plug the substack, but would recommend people look at as opposed to even in the book because the book is in black and white and so the pictures don't come across very well, but I posted the colored picture on my
Speaker A
Substack. It's under the uh article the Anunnaki wristwatch is found and what they are are golden cuffs and they are ceremonial in nature. They're not iPhone or I you know Apple eye watches or something like that but they are um
Speaker A
beautiful and more advanced than anyone thought they'd be capable of of creating at that time. Um, and what's interesting too is the motif going around the cuff itself depicts exactly what we're seeing in this tree of life mural. So, it's
Speaker A
showing like what appears to be the anointing of the god. So if you if you were to read this um you could see the the ruler or the king and behind them though is this winged entity that could
Speaker A
be uh considered like an akalu or some sort of other worldly figure and they're they're doing something that appears to be that they're giving them some sort of anointing or opening their third eye if you will or what what have you but it
Speaker A
matches that and there's an eye motif on these actual cuffs And they're they're it's largely forgotten, which is why I think people kind of just call them watches. But the photograph was taken by an Iraqi journal uh archaeologist who
Speaker A
worked in the aftermath of the uh tomb discoveries of Nimred's Queens. And uh his archive was missing or inaccessible.
Speaker A
Um but a lot of it was logged because he had the foresight to catalog everything and put it in a uh you know both English and Arabic. This was hap this happened he found this in um 1989.
Speaker A
um his name was Musahim Muhammad Hussein and he found this this queen's tomb and it was after people from the west had left and they thought that they really didn't have anything else but he felt like no there's something else here and
Speaker A
he went through and found what is considered the largest gold discovery uh ex second to King Tut's tomb something we don't actually hear about a lot you know but it was an assemblage of gold like no one had ever seen really. It was
Speaker A
crowns and jewelry and beads and I mean everything torqu bowls crystal vessels, mirrors, earrings, and these cuffs and amulets and jewelry, just everything. And it uh the the gold crown itself weighed like over a kilogram and it had 140 grape leaves and little
Speaker A
ornate things all over it and the more of these opalu just amazing things. So, what happened to it though is well, um, the war and they tried to put everything into, uh, bank vaults and and hide it the best they could, but it was looted
Speaker A
and stolen. Some things were found, some things were lost forever. Uh, so some of these things can't be retrieved. I'm sure they went into private collections.
Speaker A
Uh, but we do have some pictures. And uh the professor himself disappeared, was last seen in Mosul and under distress with him and his family. Uh it looked like, and I've dug really hard, no pun intended, to try to find if he had ever
Speaker A
been seen again. I did see something that might have indicated that he was alive in maybe 2016, but I just, you know, it's hard to hard to know. So his work right now is available in a document um at the University of Chicago
Speaker A
and it shows these cuffs and it I think it paints a different picture than one of just say like uh extraterrestrial like you know watches that can zoom someone up or down or what have you. I think it more so uh is a a
Speaker A
representation of a a right that they went through. Um I I sort of in the book connect it to an what would be considered maybe a suppressed initiatory uh act that I called the whole gillrite and that term is derived from Sumerian
Speaker A
uh text found in Nepur that that where whole gill translates to joy plant and it was a term that referred to the opium poppy and uh the psychoactive effects that it was known to have in uh conjunction with other
Speaker A
things. And so in that sense, I sort of propose that the Akcalu, those winged beings that are there um are using um these these methods of enthogens and stuff to um I guess get this individual, this king to be able to commune with
Speaker A
that higher order entity and uh sort of go through that process that we've talked about a little bit already of like letting the god or the sage enter them or giving them that divine right to rule. So essentially just an anointing
Speaker A
of the king. Hey. Um No, no, you didn't lose me. I'm sorry. I have tech issues. Um so that's not too far off. Uh, so there's when it comes to the pine cones, you're you're thinking it's it's a
Speaker A
poppy but not the pine cone. No, not the pine cone. Okay. No, no, no, no, no, no. The um the the the motif, not not so much on this one, but the motif that we see a lot where
Speaker A
they're holding the little branches. If you look at one where um they're holding what looks like uh some people have called it pomegranate, but the pomegranate reference is one that was sublimated over what the original Iraqis called the opium poppy. So like later
Speaker A
that was changed in the academic work. If you look at the older references, these were all considered to be um both the flower, the fuette the itself, but then also the um the the little pod that would be used um in in the collecting
Speaker A
for the collecting of the opium latex. Okay, that's interesting. And so do you generally agree with the pine cone we're looking at something um like like the golden ratio maybe reference to the pineal gland maybe yes yes and I think it could but I also
Speaker A
um go into this a little bit in the in the book too in more detail about the how how delicate it is to harvest the op the opium itself when it comes out. um the the if you were to the the the the
Speaker A
harvesting of it uh would require something that would be similar to what this uh pine cone could be. So I guess uh in a roundabout way again I the I I could direct people to either the book or the Substack to look at the the
Speaker A
details of this but just to kind of in a nutshell answer I would say that these uh handbags so to speak. Um there have been ones that have been found uh in Iran and different regions that are they're made of stone. So they're not
Speaker A
porous in the same way that maybe a little bag would be. And then you have the connection to this anointing right?
Speaker A
And then you have the pine cone itself and the way that they would have used the pine cone in the application process. So the handbag is holding a a substance and the pine cone is the the mechanism the the vehicle where these
Speaker A
entities are anointing. And I think it's representative of that third eye, that opening of the third eye so that these individuals can see things for as what they really are to get the wisdom of the sages or who knows what. But I think
Speaker A
it's a an initiatory right that we're seeing with that. Yeah, I agree with you there. Um and uh and maybe even a keeping secret of of this initiatory knowledge, right?
Speaker A
um because it's behind the person's head and and not really in front of theirs.
Speaker A
Um what about the handbag? What do you think? Are we thinking seeds, literal seeds, grain? Sedentary farming. What are your thoughts on the handbag?
Speaker A
Um you know, that is uh a question because it does seem to pop up in those areas where there's, you know, the connection to agriculture and that sort of thing. But I think it might be similar to the chlorite vessels that are
Speaker A
found at Girrooft. And so I think that um because of that we I we don't know.
Speaker A
But the way that they look they look like they're similar to the ones that have already been found. And at which case it would seem kind of impractical to just be like a say a basket for seeds or something. It would seem to be more
Speaker A
permanent, like some material that would be uh made of chlorite would be something uh you know like set in stone if you will, something that's meant to be a little less uh biodegradable and and more um I think ritualistic in its
Speaker A
use. So I I mean I don't I don't know, but I think the non-porous container component to it um could mean that it would be able to hold something pharmacological.
Speaker A
um better. Dr. Heather, the the Native Americans um the pipe carriers when they dance at at uh you know some of the different dances that they have like in in uh what would you call it? Pow house. Um pipe
Speaker A
carriers, there's different in the outfit itself, they carry different products based on that type of ceremonial usage, whether it's peyote, you know, these different traditional things that they do. So that reminds me of that like potentially. I hadn't I
Speaker A
have never thought of that. I've never heard it either until you just said it that that is probably one of the representations and I can see that, you know, kind of reflected in more Indian or Native American uh dress.
Speaker A
Yeah. No, I I definitely think that's connected and I think that there's no it's not a coincidence that those things are related. I think that's that ancient um anti-delivian wisdom coming in there that we all kind of either somehow
Speaker A
collectively remembered along the way or were taught. Um but I think it uh really has more to do with uh pharmarmacology and the substances used to expand the mind um and for whatever purposes. But that that was that's my read on it. And
Speaker A
uh you know again I do go into I'm I'm sort of I think I'm reaching my my limit.
Speaker A
[laughter] I'm like I'm kind of failing. I was like how long can I talk? So if I've not been clear on a couple of those things I do apologize. Um but you're great. I do have some citations and and
Speaker A
that sort of thing in the Anunnaki revelation um to trace uh the archo botany of the opium poppy and it has an interesting story as well there and uh how it was very prized for its um potentially psychoactive uses that and I
Speaker A
did go in a little bit into the mushroom tablets. Um there are um foundation nails and things that you know are often confused with these mushroom tablets.
Speaker A
These are not the same. Uh the mushroom tablets are different. They actually look like mushrooms and they're in the Berlin Museum, but they were little stones of ununiform going around them where you would put your prayer or whatever it was you wanted to
Speaker A
communicate to the gods and you'd put that into the temple wall much like how you know people might do that at the whailing wall is they would put like a a prayer or some little piece of paper and
Speaker A
put that in there. Um, but what that tells me because there's a lot of different uniform uh ways you can do tablets so to speak. Like I even have one that's a hedgehog that they used.
Speaker A
It's a little hedgehog and it has uniform going all around it. Um, they were using these as mushroom tablets, which leads you to, I think, question whether or not they saw the mushroom as the messenger conduit between, you know,
Speaker A
themselves in that moment through the temple and the god if that could communicate. So, I think that there's a lot there to still uncover about what the Sumerians were actually understanding and using uh to get them to maybe be put into these altered
Speaker A
states to meet with or commune with the entities like say the Upcalu and who were adept at doing that um might have been holding the keys uh in the priest class.
Speaker A
Um Heather, I think we're incredibly close to actually unlocking this. I think maybe even closer than you realize. I don't think we're we have to wait uh until our next reincarnations after this reset. I actually think we'll get there. We we could get there this in
Speaker A
in your lifetime, in my lifetime. Um hope Yeah. I mean, I' I'd like to Yeah. And and I agree with the hope thing, but that's also not enough for me. I actually think we we might be able to figure this out in this space.
Speaker A
Briefly, I'd like to introduce some of my my theories regarding what we're looking at. I saw this when and it's just I only came across it because Matt Lacroy brought up this mural on the Julian Dory podcast. And by the way,
Speaker A
when we were five minutes in to you speaking, uh one of the first comments was uh Dr. Heather needs to be on on the Joe Rogan show. So I I do think we can even make that happen this year. Uh I
Speaker A
think many more people need to hear your perspective and your research. And since you are open-minded, I just want to um I have a new book coming out, so maybe it's about AI. So be a fun one.
Speaker A
Do you already know the Do you know the title? Um yes, actually. Um I I'm not supposed to share it, but I will because what are they going to do? Not publish it, right?
Speaker A
I I love how you're such a bad girl. You're like, I'm I shouldn't do it, but I will. What's the What's the title?
Speaker A
It's a CEX Machina. So, Codex McKina. So, kind of like Xmachina a little bit. Yeah. So, it's it's looking at um the first thing was to look at I I I experimented with a case study using artificial intelligence to
Speaker A
try to translate the Rango Rango tablets. And in doing so, I learned about the limitations and the problems of course with uh technology. And I discussed that at great length, the ethics, the problems, the practicality, but also the the the way the elites are
Speaker A
taking this so to speak. And I discuss the uh the I guess new religion of technosis, technosticism, and and all of this uh this push towards a technological posthuman future. And um so it's a lot of different things. one
Speaker A
but it starts with uh the question of a lot of the things we've talked about actually here today of just you know what is truth who is in charge what are they doing to the language how are they
Speaker A
going to use AI against us what are the possibilities of artificial intelligence can it can it actually open us up to the uniform tablets and more and I so I give a bunch of different case studies and explore the ethics and the uh potential
Speaker A
for I guess uh artificial intelligence to either become conscious or at least become so much of a simulation that we think it is and you know what does that mean for our future and uh looking at it in more of a I guess a
Speaker A
like a a black cube prison kind of question but I look at transhumanism a lot in that as well. So uh yeah, it took me on a a whole adventure uh really to come down to arguing that the civilization itself was the first
Speaker A
artificial intelligence and how we've always been on this quest to sort of externalize our knowledge or externalize our thinking and how that can create this problem that we have now and maybe what we need to do about it perhaps uh
Speaker A
to stay human without not uh you know without being like philistines about it like don't don't necessarily throw away your cell phone but I mean hey you know what can we do to retain meaning so it's about finding meaning making meaning
Speaker A
what is meaning it's a a little bit of a deviation from what I've usually written that's because I went to a different publisher who allowed me to get out of contracts and do different things differently so this should be very
Speaker A
different than what I've written before and I'm very excited about that opportunity to to kind of cover the stuff that I do in the H files and more.
Speaker A
Um I wonder about used as like the next mechanism to to talk with the entities, right? Isn't that something you've exper Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I've been definitely talking about how perhaps what we're doing is building the the god, you know?
Speaker A
So all of this the idea of the AI god that we're building. Maybe we're the crysalis for a new entity itself. Maybe that's our whole purpose. like I'm just going through and questioning that and of course discussing uh the key players
Speaker A
and the history of it and and analyzing it as I would in like a an H file article. So So since we're you're talking about the code C codeex machina, you brought up the may I'd like to suggest that
Speaker A
possibly the may just like AI could unlock more more of our truths if we have like a million untransated tablets. Who knows what we could find? There's a Sorry for the background noise. There's a similar possibility.
Speaker A
There's a similar possibility here that we could find something in our DNA that may reveal the truth about everything.
Speaker A
Yeah, I would agree with that. I would agree with that. And that's the code.
Speaker A
We're looking for the code to all things, all life. And that is what I've um suggested in a lot of different uh whether it be books or programs that what is on the tablet of destinies is actually a code just in in the same
Speaker A
sense that you are able to look back at uniform tablets and understand mathematical truths that can be applied to our world today. There very well could be some sort of code that you know even Epstein was looking for. he in his
Speaker A
words, quote, NSA style codereers to understand things to unlock the secrets of of free energy and whatnot. So, I think that it's possible that it's a code. So, I'd like to suggest to you that there there may be some truth to
Speaker A
the lowering of kingship through bloodlines and even to the genetic engineering. Even if we're not dealing with beings that are were physically extraterrestrial, I'd like to suggest to you that the very mural you're looking at contains not just evidence of but actual proof of the
Speaker A
genetic rewiring of chromosome 2 from the binding of two chromosomes. Uh in this case, pantrogodite uh acknowledged by mainstream science of of being the chimpanzeee chromosomes.
Speaker A
you have 22 autosomal chromosomes in the in the human genome and then the 23rd sex determining one. But if there was a re rewiring of a of a terrestrial primate here, it would have been a 48 chromosomeal one. And so for meiosis to
Speaker A
line up for the creation of hloid cells, you would need to at least bind two chromosomes so that you have 22 autotosomal and then a 23rd sex chromosome. And if you take a look at this tree, you'll actually discover
Speaker A
centromeirs and chromatids. And if you're super super careful about the com the counting of the actual chromatids, you'll find out that they're they're actually uh 23 or 46 um you know, a redundant set. And further than that, you'll also find a
Speaker A
sectioning off of the autotosomal 22 from the sex determining 23. The flowering of that of that bud of that um that that pedal is right after you have the 22 and you have a you have a a strange re-engineering of these
Speaker A
chromatid strands. This was something that nobody's picked up on and I I I've talked about this briefly in two or three spaces, but I haven't written anything about it. But this has been my my assertion for at least the last two
Speaker A
years since I saw uh Matt Lacroy talk about this. I think we're actually looking at a mural um showing showing the necessary re-engineering of of a Lulu so that you can lower kingship from a different chromosomeal count species and pass on knowledge also
Speaker A
through blood. you would need to have a sexually reproducing species in in order to convey knowledge through a bloodline.
Speaker A
Um, just something for you to chew on. But I I think there's there's another thing that that points to genetic engineering and that is I I Yeah. No, you said there's another thing. Well, I I just want to kind of
Speaker A
throw another little thing in there when it comes to genetic engineering that I wrote about in the first book. Um and that is uh the I guess we pansspermia um whether or not it's directed is is a bigger question but um
Speaker A
there was a uh a paper in 2018 it kind of made some news because it was there was something funny attached to it but um there there was a peer-review paper um that was asking about the uh cause of
Speaker A
the Cambrian explosion whether it was terrestrial or cosmic. And um so the argument wasn't that like a biogenesis on Earth wouldn't fully account for the um sudden burst of genetic diversity. Um but the it was more about the alternative being that
Speaker A
lifebearing comets have been seeding earth continuously uh since like they said like billions of years ago delivering things like bacteria and viruses and complex genetic material that could then integrate into the terrestrial genome through and this is kind of important the uh horizontal gene
Speaker A
transfer that would be the same nonsexual mechanism that uh a retrovirus us inserts uh its own RNA and DNA into like a host genome and then that gets passed down to the offspring and the best example that was used was the
Speaker A
octopus. Um so seephalopods appear in the late Cambrian and they have a nervous system and they can camouflage and they have all this complex cognitive capability that doesn't track a normal gradual evolutionary path. And so this idea that, you know, there's this
Speaker A
evolution and it's slow and then all of a sudden there's these bursts of something that changes um that doesn't even have to be done sexually, but specifically it's through RNA editing.
Speaker A
And that's found in octopus neural tissue um genetic material that isn't present in any known primitive ancestor and it appears to come from nowhere in the lineage. And that's one of the reasons that the article got out there
Speaker A
is because the I think the um like news news articles kind of posted the headline of uh octopus is a is an alien or something like that. And so it kind of made the rounds. But um their own
Speaker A
paper said that these genes look like they came from a distant u terrestrial evolutionary system or something that was um completely foreign. But it goes back to this idea of a retrovirus and how it works. Um, it goes by reverse
Speaker A
transcribing its RNA into DNA and then inserting itself into that host chromosome. And so that if an infection reaches the germ uh like line cells or sperm or anything like that, um, you can inherit it because when people talk
Speaker A
about like say the big brain bang, you know, there's the stone date theory, right? That's a fun one where maybe people did mushrooms and then uh they expanded their consciousness and then what have you, but that wouldn't have
Speaker A
passed down genetically. Um and then you have the question of well uh I think Richard Rangham is a primatologist out of Harvard wrote a book called Catching Fire where he discussed the uh the necessity of cooking food. And it's it's
Speaker A
a fair point that if you have um nutrients you're trying to get to, if you eat uh vegetables, the cell wall, as we all remember from school, I'm sure, is a lot thicker and harder to access the nutrients inside than an animal. Uh
Speaker A
so if you're eating raw vegetables, you're not getting as much nutrients from it than when you would cook it. So cooking, he argued, allowed us to access a lot more nutrients, and that can affect your offspring, but not in that
Speaker A
direct, you know, sense. Whereas something like a virus, a retrovirus specifically, can go in and actually change your DNA and then be passed on uh through genes. And so you can have uh over uh a millennia you could have very
Speaker A
slow evolutionary changes and then one extraterrestrial retroviral bombardment from a comet could have come in into the ocean and driven the entire Cambrian explosion of bio biodiversity with the octopus RNA as like the residue of it. And so it's
Speaker A
just, you know, another little thing to consider where it's like as opposed to, you know, one way of doing it. Um there could be other ways of uh extreme genetic engineering happening in the so-called blink of an eye. And uh who
Speaker A
are we to say that they didn't even know that that could be possible or that there weren't some ways that they understood that? But yeah, definitely ways to change genetics uh that don't require the long march of history and uh
Speaker A
old style Darwinian evolution. And and um I mean just I if I if I can say something boldly, aiogenesis though theoretically possible is the least it should not even be considered AAM's razor. It's the least scientific idea that we have. If science has to do with
Speaker A
probability, statistical odds against chance, replication or any experiment, it's it's the one that has a 100% failure rate when we try to make it happen in laboratory. And any panspermia argument is extraterrestrial in origin.
Speaker A
Is it not? Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. And then the question always remains is it directed or accidental? And I think that I mean who's to say right? I mean if it's a method maybe it's accidental that could be and well it could be both. It could
Speaker A
be something that is both. Yeah. It's like farming itself. It's literally seeding. It's you know pam spermia. So you're seeding the cosmos that that is something that's naturally done. There could just be accidental seeds that get planted on planets. And then there could
Speaker A
be uh something like the great agrarians that we constantly see. So maybe back to the earlier question that somebody had which was when did we begin this great agricultural kind of control system or what have you. Um maybe it's just always
Speaker A
been there. Maybe we've always known that even when it comes to seeding planets uh it's not just random but that you can control it. You can direct it and then you can be the cause of life on other planets. And in a way that almost
Speaker A
circles back to some of those uh occult arguments that we see over and over again, which is like as soon as you ascend up that tree of life um or you go through a gnostic awakening or um whichever way you do it through
Speaker A
different methodologies, the reward is generally uh a few things. One, you get your own system. And that could look like you also like you're Elron Hubard and you have your own religion and you've ascended to be worshiped in some
Speaker A
ways or the system is that like in a Mormon sense you kind of get your own I guess planet or world. Um but this idea that you become God because you've ascended but you've ascended and now you're able to seed things. You're able
Speaker A
to be the farmer. So maybe instead of the grand architect, we should all be talking about the grand farmer. what is the the real thing that is seeding, you know, and what is that what they're trying to be? Are they trying to be the
Speaker A
architects or are they are they like, you know, farming us and they're seeding planets? Um, so it could be random and it could be intentional if somebody were to get the technology.
Speaker A
That is fascinating. I could talk to you for another 168 hours. I'm sure there are people, you know, violating of their Viveance prescriptions right now and and popping an extra one. Um, uh, Dr. Lynn, I hope you will grace us
Speaker A
again with your presence. We have a million more questions for you. I want to say thank you for your generosity, for being truly an open book, um for allowing me to exploit uh the AI slop that Interstellar posts
Speaker A
and lure you into the doom room. Um I'm I'm truly very lucky. Everybody, please follow every single person you heard speak on the panel uh today. Um uh Dr.
Speaker A
Lynn, I hope people pick up your your books. Uh, I certainly will. And um if I can end this on a on a doomy note and on an uplifting note, you are a Christian and I assume your research of the
Speaker A
Sumerian tablets has led you to the conclusion that you cannot assume that the Old Testament has um that that it is a work denovo that I assume you you think there's some lifting or some plagiarism involved. D here. Is that a categorical statement
Speaker A
you can make? Not not that that takes anything away from Christianity or the faith, but is it your understanding based on all of the evidence we have that there's no way that Genesis could be written completely separately from
Speaker A
what we have uh in in all the different flood myths uh in the Sumerian tablets.
Speaker A
Right? So I think that the Bible so to speak is a not a book, it's a collection of books. It's a library. So it's just a collection of of books and those have been divinely inspired because you know
Speaker A
things are inspired. Um so they can be divinely inspired but then also incorporate memories and oral traditions and things all the way through. I think their importance is not in in so much as that they're literal at all. I think the
Speaker A
importance is that these are stories. These are messages that were so important that people died for them.
Speaker A
They're so important that they did actually get synchretatized and retold and changed that there's some grain of of you know mythic truth at least in it.
Speaker A
That there's something valuable that is uh up for us to discover if we so choose. It's not the responsibility of the ancients to uh make themselves clear. We have to do the work if we want to. So with that said, I think that all
Speaker A
of it is uh up for debate and question. And it's the great opportunity we have as seekers to go look into that and find those truths. And if your faith, if your religion can't hold hold up to that, if
Speaker A
it if it's threatened by simply pushing a date back or, you know, denying that this thing happened or that thing happened or whatever, then maybe it's just not the right one. But who knows what the right one is. So I don't
Speaker A
discount it. I think that what's important is that we look at these things that have lasted the test of time and say why what is so important here.
Speaker A
Let's investigate that. Don't throw it out. Um but then also don't be so married to it that you say that this is exactly how it has to happen. And you know because I I think like the Gnostic texts are extraordinarily important. I
Speaker A
think that so many of these texts that were banned and then brought back or then banned again, but texts that we've not even had are important to the story.
Speaker A
And I think we're working on one big collective human story and we need an extraordinary library, not just one library. Uh we need an extraordinary library of information to help us get through that. So um and I think we all
Speaker A
inherently know and feel that which is why no matter if it can be debunked so to speak or not the uh story of the burning of the library of Alexandria hurts us all because in it is a very
Speaker A
hard truth is that history and time and Kronos eats its children. So all of the things that we could have known or maybe did know has been lost to time and we just want that back so bad and we feel
Speaker A
like we, you know, are so grieving what it is that we don't know. So I think that things like the library of Alexandria burning just stay in our collective memory for that very reason.
Speaker A
So um yeah, I I don't think it's harmful. I think it's important to question everything and uh and then also have faith because we can't live in a complete you know uh we can't stare at the abyss so long that it stares back at
Speaker A
us you know we can't become the thing so we do have to make those choices but then know that we can change our minds so and yeah would you also agree hypothetically let's say it does become absolutely definitively proven that parts of the
Speaker A
old testament were changed corrupted lifted plagiarized That still doesn't mean that it isn't possible for many parts to be literally true as well.
Speaker A
Yeah. Right. Like we're not living in a binary here. Yeah. Exactly. It's all things can be true at once or no things can be true. I mean it's really you know we just have to look at it that way as a as a as an
Speaker A
adventure and look at it and know that you know it's all something that should still be discussed. And uh so I like to think about when people try to have a gotcha moment over Christmas, you know, it's like, well, it's actually pagan and
Speaker A
did you know, you know, this thing you're doing is actually pagan and there was no such thing as this? And it's like, yeah, and how can you be a historian and know all this and still, you know, celebrate Christmas? Um, well,
Speaker A
because I know all this and I choose to enjoy it and be grateful that I am celebrating a holiday every year that has all of this wrapped up into one thing where somehow all of these things were put into an amalgamation so that it
Speaker A
can be celebrated now by me and my family and there's something to unpack there. What What is it that's about like that's so important that we're holding on to it cross-culturally? Why does one culture recognize its significance and
Speaker A
maybe a certain practice related to it and then it resonates with another so much that they incorporate it into their own? Something's there and it's worth holding on to. It's just simply not dogma and it's not religion. It doesn't
Speaker A
have to be, of course. It can be simply tradition. Tradition with a lowercase T.
Speaker A
Um, I am going to give the last words to my handler, Mav. He was running He Can you imagine? He ran a space while we had our space. Uh, and then he came back. I can't believe for for all we know, he
Speaker A
stole our audience temporarily, took them over to his, and then dropped them back here. But I think he also encountered technical issues. Um, Heather, I'm I'm pushing something up to the nest. I think you should uh consider looking at this re researcher. He's a a
Speaker A
bioinformatics geneticist kind of half computer science half geneticist and it's about the six fractal codes that he discovered in DNA and it relates to something that it you at least have in the Sitchin account namely this talk about the vessel
Speaker A
getting the vessel right where there was something they couldn't make the viable Lulu the first couple of times and this is the first thing that makes me wonder whether this is what the Samarans might have been talking about if there was
Speaker A
real genetic engineering going on. He discovered that when you take the six most common elements found in biology, carbon hydrogen oxygen nitrogen phosphorus, and uh sulfur that they show up in the the entire human genome, the the 3.2 two billion base pairs. So
Speaker A
including the non-coding DNA, they show up in specific ratios. Um when you divide them there, but only in their isotopic proportions as they exist on Earth. So you have to use the exact atomic weights as you find them on the periodic table
Speaker A
on Earth. And then when you divide them by the golden ratio and by pi, so both two irrational numbers, you end up with a a disturbingly and suspiciously clean code.
Speaker A
And this would actually explain uh if if this was the vessel they were talking about, if they were engaged in genetic engineering and they came from a different planet or a different star system where they had the same elements
Speaker A
on the periodic table but in different isotopic proportions. If there was something in the in the code where you need for these atomic elements in the base pairs to line up, this would explain why they struggled and couldn't get the viable lulus until
Speaker A
they used the the natural vessel or the clay of Earth. In other words, maybe if we were really hybridized, you you actually need to use the the carbon elements here in the same isotopic proportions. I know that's a bit of a
Speaker A
stretch, but this is the one paper that I found that really points toward that being a requirement in human DNA. So, if you ever take a look at it uh and and you think there might be some overlap
Speaker A
there, please reach out to me. He's he speaks that'd be cool. And he said it's would be fascinating.
Speaker A
I I don't Maybe I'm not seeing it for some reason. Sometimes you probably No, I think look I am not the the most modern version of human. whatever the if there's any genetic improvements. They did not give me the ones for
Speaker A
multitasking. Send it to me or like Yeah. Great. Thank you so much. I appreciate it. I'll definitely look at it. Sounds awesome.
Speaker A
Um Yeah. Yeah. And um Mav's Mav's got the last word and then I promise to let you go. Uh can you hang in there for like 30 more seconds?
Speaker A
Sure. [laughter] Yeah. Actually, I have my hand up too, Doomer. I'm not sure if you can see it. It's super glitchy.
Speaker A
Forgive me. No, forgive me. Uh should should I go to you first? course. No, no, you can go first now. Just just come to me after.
Speaker A
No, go ahead. Nope. It's all right. Oh my god. Now we're fighting for All right Mav.
Speaker A
Um, I just had a couple of things. Actually, I had a drop. I asked you a question hours ago when I had a drop.
Speaker A
I'm not sure I got the final answer on it but I'm not as familiar with the story obviously as Dumer is. And this might be a really dumb question, but if the Anunnaki in your opinion were not the
Speaker A
gods and they were just um some civilization with, you know, a higher degree of technology and they came along and they enslaved us. Why are we us humans? Why are we identifying as the slaves? Like what makes it how do we
Speaker A
know we're not the Anunnaki? Um so I did have a question like what happened to the Anunnaki? How do we know we're not the Anunnaki or or some of us are not the Anunnaki?
Speaker A
And then um to your point, Doomer, you were talking about the Old Testament, all this kind of stuff. I I just I might be a very simple-minded person, but this is all the same story to me. Like I
Speaker A
don't I don't understand um I don't understand what the issues are. If you just look at all of so many cultures across the whole planet, we all have the same story. And it appears that we are somehow caught up in like a Game of
Speaker A
Thrones episode or perhaps multiple seasons of the Game of Thrones of the unseen realm. And these creatures have superpowers and appear to be in charge of the afterlife. So fun times for sure, but this all seems like the same story
Speaker A
to me. Now, I personally do not water down um being a Christian at all. Uh I have just have a different view of of the entire thing that we spoke about today. But I have absolutely no issue with any of these stories or this
Speaker A
history. Um we might have a prehistory. We might have pademic races. The earth might have been made multiple times. I mean it's just all right there. It's all possible. Um so it seems like all the same story to me. So I'd like to get
Speaker A
your comment on that, Dr. Heather. And also on how do we know we're not the Anunnaki? And there might be a very simple answer to that that I'm just not aware of. [snorts] Well, I do think these are all the same
Speaker A
story and and it's just being told in different ways by by different languages and and you know different flavors. But uh which is why I think it's so important because it is a shared history. But in terms of like whether or
Speaker A
not we are uh just the slave species of the gods or what are we say that this that we're definitely having some Anunnaki in us in that case because you know like some people would ask me I think in um as I was teaching before
Speaker A
like what happened to the Sumerians? Well, the Sumerians themselves became, you know, uh I guess assimilating into the people that, you know, took over it just they are there, but over time a lot of people just assimilate and mix and um
Speaker A
you can see that in the genetic uh lines. And so when it comes to something like well the Anunnaki I think that is the the whole of the argument with people thinking that they have these divine bloodlines that they're trying to
Speaker A
trace it back to having Anunnaki bloodline and who's pure of it because it's going to be much harder to find a pure Anunnaki um than you know somebody who has partial or or remnants of it.
Speaker A
And so I do believe that uh there are people interested in trying to find their genetic connection to what they feel are the Anunnaki and you see that in like uh people you know the the rumors about them using 23 and me and
Speaker A
results like that to locate the uh the certain blood and that sort of thing.
Speaker A
But it's it's all around there's there's many different conspiracies so to speak about it. Uh, but I do think that it it is a a group effort that they're trying to there are people who are trying to connect themselves to that lineage and
Speaker A
figure that out. I think that's partially why people have been so interested in stuff like um genetics or racial science and this sort of thing is always trying to put themselves out there as supreme or better or the best
Speaker A
or the first. And how who was the first? Well, these Anunnaki, these entities, this this whole thing and as far as we know. And so I think in theory, if we do find out that there was a first set of
Speaker A
gods or a different story in a different region, then maybe the focus would switch a little more to that, like, okay, we have to trace the genome back to this then because it's the first, it's the best. Um but first not as in
Speaker A
first homo sapiens sapien necessarily but who has the evidence of being able to rule completely and have uh maybe magical tendencies or you know warlike abilities or whatever it is that they deem to be uh important and productive.
Speaker A
So um I think there's an argument to be had that there are people among us who are part Anunnaki um and whatever that would mean.
Speaker A
Yeah that's important right? Hang on Jenny. um whatever that would mean. So at that point we are them and they are us at at this point. I mean at this point in our history or which I think is
Speaker A
interesting because I know there's a lot of arguments that these Anunnaki or they genetically engineered us and we were their slaves and they were our gods and all this kind of stuff and and you're basically saying well you think they
Speaker A
were like some uh earlier civilization probably of humans. Is that am I getting that correct?
Speaker A
Yeah. for the most part and they were being in interbreeding with us and but they were maybe in some ways uh different I don't want to say special but they had maybe unique abilities or like inspired by the gods or maybe
Speaker A
even possessed by the gods and and and these same type of magical uh abilities or psychic abilities that humans can get to today from interacting with these entities. So, it just all sounds um like history repeating itself.
Speaker A
And I think what you've done today, I hope, cuz I happen to agree with you, so of course I hope um just kind of demystifying the Anunnaki as perhaps not being as special as we like to make them. You know, maybe they didn't come
Speaker A
down from the stars. Maybe they aren't the gods. U maybe it's actually this unseen realm that's manipulating us all.
Speaker A
um to the same degree today as as in the past. It sounds like Yes. And and some more accepted translations of their name means uh of of princely offspring which can also then be considered you know coming from
Speaker A
above like the heavens if you associate your ruling classes being associated with the heavens. So there is even a contention there between what their name means and uh but even if you do accept a different uh translation for that
Speaker A
meaning the princely blood or princely offspring then it still means royal bloodline it still means the you know it's all in the blood it's about the importance of blood at the end of the day and uh I think that does go back to
Speaker A
those occult practices that there's something whatever it is in the blood that they believe can for lack of better word be uh magical and then they would like to um you know locate that or or do something with
Speaker A
that. But there's something about the blood and then that really fits in too with the whole idea of the Nephilim, right?
Speaker A
With these creatures, these these maybe godlike creatures uh again mating with human women and making these like demigods uh in in our myths. I mean, it just all sounds like the same story to me. Um, maybe that's just too simple of
Speaker A
a way to look at it. And then it's it's not holding. Hold on. Uh, oh, Doomer, real quick. I wanted to point out to Dr. Heather that we have Heidi Hollis in the Vatican has told her that she's of Christ's bloodline
Speaker A
somehow. Remember that one? Yeah. Yeah. She's the one who trademarked um, shadow people, right? To say that with Yeah.
Speaker A
Yeah. Yeah. She was here earlier. She's been She she retweeted Yeah, she retweeted the space. Um, I don't know. I have not really looked into her work a lot, but it'd be interesting to hear what she has to say about the uh Bloodline situation
Speaker A
because I've known a couple of people who've said that over the years and strangely enough, they were associated with uh the Londoner. They were associated with people who are on a grail quest uh interested in Bloodlines and that sort of thing. So, uh yeah,
Speaker A
and I hope it doesn't sound like I'm trying to diminish your work. I I'm saying this this is all the same story.
Speaker A
It's fascinating to me because there seems to be this great controversy of well the Samrian came first or like you said earlier just because it was first doesn't mean it was the more true version. Uh it's all the same version.
Speaker A
Like this is all the same story to me and uh we should all just kind of go hey this is all the same story. Maybe we need to figure it out from there rather than worrying about you know who was
Speaker A
first or who's the most right. Stuff like that. Yeah. And I think those commonalities will get us closer to the truth. And you know, like later we can discuss the the the veneer of it. But I I do think if
Speaker A
you're wanting to look at what is actually going on, it might be better to kind of look at all the commonalities first and say, "Okay, what is the story here? What it seems very similar." And so to simplify it.
Speaker A
So, uh, that's where I'm coming from. And the the problem is once you start recognizing they're all the same story, the implications are that Yahweh is a demon. And so that it is right. You you [snorts] agree that
Speaker A
Yahweh is you guys can agree, but I don't agree. So you can't just make a blanket statement like that. Do that's my point. You can't oversimplify it.
Speaker A
Yes, that's that's [laughter] what I'm trying. Okay. I'm saying it's all the same story, right? But it's all the same.
Speaker A
Okay, let me let me rephrase that. Doomer. It's all the same basic story, right? It's all the same premise. And then what we do with these entities in this unseen realm, all of these other characters who are having a full-blown
Speaker A
cosmic war and we're like basically they're they're they're proxies, you know, in many ways. Um, how we figure out who's who, I think, is very very important. I'm just saying the basic story is the same.
Speaker A
Ye. Yes. But it my my point is that there you can have basic stories but you switch one or two characters and the message is very different. Enlil hates Oh, absolutely. I don't I don't disagree with you at all.
Speaker A
Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. That's all I'm saying. And and just like Enki is known as a Enlil is also known as Bal who many believe becomes Bal who many believe becomes Yaldos who some believe becomes Yahweh. And we are at a
Speaker A
place where we do need to figure out the truth so that we're certain in our faith whether we're of faith or whether we're not of faith. This is something that this is this is something I don't think that anybody can afford to not figure
Speaker A
out if it's within our grasp. Oh, no. I I couldn't agree more with you. And of course there's the the other side of that doomer which is that uh the Israelites came along and actually told their version of the story which they
Speaker A
believe was the correct version of the story. Right. Um so you know there's always another side to all of that. um and then of course and and I just want to point out too that even though this was a personal
Speaker A
experience for me um having been through literal hell with the actual entities and you know I'm not saying I've been in contact with every single entity by any means but a plethora of uh of a variety of entities
Speaker A
um I can tell you from the entity's point of view they are 100% uh Luciferian. I mean, they're on that side, right? They're on the side, this like the Luciferian um satanic side is what we would call it in Christianity.
Speaker A
That's their religion. That's their side. That's what they want all of us to believe. And that's what they're going to come at us with um possibly any day now. You know, maybe a thousand years from now. I'm not sure. But I also have
Speaker A
that added experience, doomer, of starting out believing these were our space brothers and then finding out they were not our space brothers and they were very interested in religion and um all of our religious beliefs. And just looking at even the abduction research,
Speaker A
you can see their um they take abductees and they turn abductees luciferian. That's what they do. And so then we have to ask ourselves if the beings who are snatching us out of our beds at night, abducting us, raping us on the ships, um
Speaker A
raping our children, if those entities want us to be luciferian, either they're playing a very very long game of reverse psychology, which is entirely possible.
Speaker A
I just don't think it's probable. Um or these entities want us to be luciferian.
Speaker A
So, I kind of again just in a simple-minded way, um I always have to add that to my own experience, which I know you guys didn't have, but I just like to put that out there.
Speaker A
No. And your your your experiences have have changed and and caused me to to modify my view of the whole thing.
Speaker A
Right. I used to just assume Anky was uh was this was this clean, clear-cut figure. Um, and I've I've absolutely changed my views.
Speaker A
Um, Mav, uh, I need to shut this thing down at at some point. Uh, Jenny, if you can make it quick, you know, you guys, [laughter] you guys talked about a code a minute ago. You said um bloodlines. Um, if we
Speaker A
look at all the different things, say like Solomon's um, seals, all the different things when it comes to geometric sort of occult practices where um, ritual is part of it, usually certain elements have to be at play. And
Speaker A
since we're thinking that a human might be able to be inhabited, perhaps there's a specific um you know chemical ratio that a human would need in order to house whatever is beyond. So that's one thing I just wanted to add that
Speaker A
potentially it's really just the makeup of the human that they're looking for the bloodline in order to house whatever it is on the other side.
Speaker A
Yeah, good point. Yeah. Uh Mav, so Mav's regretting handing the mic earlier. No, great great space marathon. Great question, Fringe. That was that was very interesting. And I like I I agree with Fringe's point of view, not doomers. So,
Speaker A
there's still some hope for me. Uh but yeah, he's he's he is my handler. So, he's he's putting pressure on me, but my question for is for Dr. Heather, how can you talk on Doomer Space about Zionism?
Speaker A
And then I start a space about Zionism and the Noah loss and they freaking destroyed my space and made all kinds of crazy things happen. I should have just stayed in this space. I don't know what happened.
Speaker A
What happened in your space? Like people kept on getting kicked out. Oh, I had 30 people in my space.
Speaker A
Couldn't see them. And then they couldn't see anyone in the space. Then I only had four people up a speaker.
Speaker A
Couldn't see anyone else. It was rugging like crazy. So, I ended the space, started up again, and then still had all kinds of crazy issues. So, I guess don't put Noah high laws or Zionism in your title. That's
Speaker A
my my DMs look like a battlefield. I'm just seeing from Mav had 30 DM me saying they were in the space and seen no other people. And I have one DM from a person saying, "I have been kicked out of the
Speaker A
space between 130 and 150 times." And then we have a crazy person here who spoke who's still here on stage.
Speaker A
Vincent, set a world record here. Let's go till dawn. Vincent, you're [ __ ] crazy. Um, [laughter] oh yeah, I would need a bathroom break at that point. I've been going strong, but I'm dancing.
Speaker A
Advertisement. Poor Vincent. Poor Vincent reached out to me during said he's got a question. He'd be waiting seven hours. Can you let him answer the damn question, [laughter] bro?
Speaker A
Um, do Dr. together for the next doom room. You should always assert uh your your bathroom needs all the time. You would not be the first and you will not be the last. I will I will end your pee
Speaker A
dance here and just say thank you from the bottom of everyone's hearts. Um yeah, demons, good and bad, CIA counterintel, we all thank you. Um and please do back.
Speaker A
Oh yeah, anytime really. Um, and definitely when you get those really cool branded doomer diapers in your merch shop, uh, send them my way and we'll do this again.
Speaker A
Commemorative one. Oh, good. Yeah. Out of out of tin foil, out of gold and lapis lasso.
Speaker A
Okay, [laughter] sounds good. And, uh, yeah, I'll snap a picture wearing it and so we'll put that up and then uh, yeah, anytime. Maybe we'll go to Dawn next time.
Speaker A
Truly, thank you so much. Um, and uh, from everybody here, remember uh, doom deep, doom dark, doom hard.
Topics:AnunnakiHeather Lynnoccult originselite conspiracyeconomic historycognitive archaeologyDanny Jonesfringe topicsconspiracy theoriespodcast interview
