transcript

Speaker 1:
[00:00] Membership means more with American Express Business Gold. Earn four times membership rewards points in your top two eligible spending categories every month, including eligible US advertising purchases in select media and US purchases at restaurants, including takeout and delivery. What are you waiting for? Get the card that flexes with your spending every month. Terms and points cap apply. Learn more at americanexpress.com/businessdashgold, MX Business Gold Card, built for business by American Express.

Speaker 2:
[00:57] Welcome back to Mysterious Universe Season 35, Episode 15. We are halfway, actually more than halfway through this season.

Speaker 3:
[01:04] Son of a bitch.

Speaker 2:
[01:04] We have a break coming up in July, and that'll be our first official two-week vacay for us. I am Joe Hodgdon. Joining me, as always, is Brandon Thomas.

Speaker 3:
[01:15] Good day, mate. Good to see you, always.

Speaker 2:
[01:16] Yeah, good to see you, too. How's your week going?

Speaker 3:
[01:19] It's been spectacular, honestly. A lot of focus, a lot of directed focus, undistracted focus, and seeing incredible results, my man. Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[01:29] Nice. If there's anything I've noticed about doing this as a profession now is that it does take a lot of time management skills and definite focus, especially since we're doing this from our, I mean, our houses. Like, we don't have an actual studio yet or anything. This is, I have a dedicated room for the studio, but it's a double, I was going to say a double-sorted blade, but yeah, whatever works. It's hard because I got animals constantly wanting stuff from me and doors slamming and things going on in the kitchen. But it is also nice because when I get done with work, I get to go out and I'm just instantly in my kitchen. So can't complain. This week, though, we have, I mentioned it on the free show on Tuesday or the plus show on Tuesday, but I wanted to give a shout out to the Mysteries of Durland County. It's a dorky dumb humor audio drama that's out there. And if you're into that kind of thing, this is the show for you because me and my wife have been doing some voiceovers as like actors, I guess. But we play cult members. Just a quick heads up. But it's a fun show and you'll definitely enjoy it if you like audio drama. So that's the big reveal there.

Speaker 3:
[02:45] To be fair, you said that we weren't going to start cults based on the raw material because a guy started a cult and then killed himself. But then you also are now playing a cult leader in an audio drama. Do you see how slippery of a slope this can be, my friend?

Speaker 2:
[02:58] I know. And I've got the hair for it too. I got to watch myself. Oh, and update. We should be getting our library of books in soon. We're still waiting on the final ETA on that. Hopefully, that's going to be coming in soon, and we'll just have all kinds of new, weird stuff to look into, as if the 24 gigabytes of the archive isn't enough. It really isn't. Nothing's ever enough. So I can't wait to have the hard copy books in and start digging through all that stuff.

Speaker 3:
[03:27] I keep finding new sub files in the thing. I'm like, oh, okay, there's a list of a thousand things. I'll click one of them and there's a sub list of a fractal more thousand things that you could also click on. I'm like, holy shit, it really is truly just this narnia of information. It's so cool.

Speaker 2:
[03:41] Yeah, because a lot of it's like the old like Fate magazines and Nexium or whatever those other magazines are and they have all kinds of cool little tasty tidbits in there, but you got to put them together and it does become a lot.

Speaker 3:
[03:53] It's a whole tapestry of all kinds of stuff going on in there. Just puzzles waiting to be arranged.

Speaker 2:
[03:58] Very cool. Can't complain though. But today we're going to get into Who Built the Moon? And this is by Alan Butler and Christopher Knight. And I couldn't, so on Amazon, the paperback at least says it was published in 2006. And for all the old timers out there, Ben and Aaron did cover this book about 10 years ago. But I think it was on a plus show. So we're bringing it to the free members who maybe didn't hear that one. But it's a really interesting take on the Moon and all the weirdness associated with the measurements. It's a lot about, it is kind of dense as far as, you know, the measurements between the Earth and the Sun and the Moon, all these relationships. But it's kind of worth a go over, especially since the Artemis mission just, as far as we're told, just dropped down last week. So, and so, yeah, a lot of this is kind of, they're very careful to stay on the, you know, the widely accepted, I guess you could say, narrative of things about what the Moon is. They, you can tell they're kind of leaning towards this is a, this is a, the Moon's too weird to just take at face value that it was a chunk that fell off the Earth or, you know, got dragged into our gravity or something. So they go over, that's the point of kind of the, the dense measurement section of this, is to kind of point out how coincidental all of these things are to just line up the way they do.

Speaker 3:
[05:26] So just kind of doubting, Thomas, the whole idea, just, okay, we heard the, we heard the accepted science version of it. Now, maybe it's something else.

Speaker 2:
[05:35] Well, yeah, they're, they're using, and I love this approach too, because they're using the, the mainstream accepted measurements and all that to kind of show, doesn't that seem odd? Doesn't that seem a bit too coincidental?

Speaker 3:
[05:50] That's suspicious.

Speaker 2:
[05:51] As we'll get into, yeah, mainstream astronomy does just go with that. It's coincidental. I mean, how lucky are we?

Speaker 3:
[05:58] But how often in science has that been an acceptable answer?

Speaker 2:
[06:02] So we'll kind of get into that because they kind of start out, and this is again Alan Butler and Christopher Knight, so I'll just heretofore refer to them as they them.

Speaker 3:
[06:13] They them?

Speaker 2:
[06:14] Because it is 2026 now.

Speaker 3:
[06:16] Yep. How progressive of you.

Speaker 2:
[06:19] Yeah. They start out early in the book just by kind of pointing out that humans didn't just casually notice the moon at some point along the way. It's been sitting at the center of how we understand time for basically as long as we've been capable of understanding anything. And there is, I think there's another book too, I'll have to look it up, but it's basically a book on a civilization that saw the moon appear or didn't know the moon was there or just didn't notice it or something.

Speaker 3:
[06:45] Yes. Different show. This is something I was going to ask about. Do they address the thought that the moon was either brought here or wasn't always here and that there was a humanity observing it? Meaning then that the idea that the tides depend on life based on the moon could be called into question because if somebody was here living without those effects, how does that explain it?

Speaker 2:
[07:04] That's kind of the basic thing they're alluding to is like in the tone of the book. I don't think they really come out and say that specifically, but you can tell it's kind of what they're getting at. Right. So yeah, when you start thinking about how early humans would have experienced the sky, it kind of makes sense why the moon would stand out. It's obvious the sun is kind of this overwhelming thing in the sky, and you can't stare at it because it's too bright, and the stars move slowly enough that the changes aren't obvious night to night unless you're really paying attention, but the moon is doing something constantly visible. It's always changing shapes. You can actually watch it move across the sky. I've done this out in my backyard. I've watched it from a single point and literally seen it move past a tree. Like it's fast enough where you can actually watch it move.

Speaker 3:
[07:50] And a pain in the ass in a telescope. Have you ever looked at it through a telescope?

Speaker 2:
[07:54] Oh yeah, no, I have a telescope and I've put my phone on it. It has a phone adjustment or phone holder thing. And I've taken some pretty decent pictures of it, but it is a bitch to focus on.

Speaker 3:
[08:04] Well, and you're constantly moving the damn thing. You're like, here honey, come check out this crater I just saw. And she's like, what do you mean? And you look back and it's gone. You're like, son of a bitch, you gotta chase the damn thing.

Speaker 2:
[08:13] Yeah, and I'm by no means a professional astrophotographer. So I have little more than a toy telescope. It was like a hundred bucks.

Speaker 3:
[08:21] It counts, that's science.

Speaker 2:
[08:22] It's still fun. And still an amazing shot for an iPhone. But yeah, so the moon's always doing these noticeable things and the obvious cycles that go over and over again. And you don't need math back in the day to notice that something's happening there. And they actually start out, the very beginning of the book, with the example of the total solar eclipse that happened in August of 99. And they kind of say that even in modern times, with everyone totally aware that eclipses are just these apparent orbital mechanics playing out, people still travel large distances just to stand outside and watch it happen. I mean, the streets fill up, there's people passing around welding masks, so strangers could look safely up at the sun.

Speaker 3:
[09:04] Yes. My buddies in the auto shop did that. They showed me through their welding glasses. I'd never thought of that before. And I was down there by fleet, and they were like, here, check it out through this. I was like, oh yeah, that's brilliant. And it looked cool as shit. And then last year, we had the huge, or a few years ago, we had the huge one. And I have a pair of Dysonian Dye Goggles that I got from the Museum of Terror guy. And we sat out there and looked at them through the phone, and you could see these different reflections. This guy, Tyler Hanson, grabbed part of it and said that that's why we had multiple firmaments. I'm not claiming that. I'm saying that we caught the footage that he passes around. And it was really cool looking. I mean, everybody, you know, we laid outside on the blanket and everything. It was just a, it's an ordeal, man. But then there are superstitions that say you shouldn't go out during the eclipse because it's like, I don't know, bad for your soul, demons are running around or some shit.

Speaker 2:
[09:48] No, and there's still noticeable things that happen like birds stop flying, you know, thinking about it from an early man, early civilization point of view before they had, you know, all these astromechanical computations and whatnot. Daylight dimming in this pretty unsettling way in the middle of the day would be something catastrophic to early ancient people.

Speaker 3:
[10:14] You'd have to do cocaine about it.

Speaker 2:
[10:16] Right, a lot of it too. So imagine experiencing that but with zero prior explanation at all. There's nobody who's like, oh, it's the moon moving in front of the sun or whatever. You wake up, you're going about your day and suddenly the sky is dark in the middle of the day.

Speaker 3:
[10:29] Wow, what the fuck?

Speaker 2:
[10:30] Oh my God.

Speaker 3:
[10:31] Oh, okay. All right. I guess I'll just keep doing what I was doing then.

Speaker 2:
[10:34] Yeah, especially depending on where you're at in the time of the year this, you know, what happens, the temperature notice will be drops too. Animals start acting strange and there's this glowing ring around where the sun used to be. And seeing it for the first time, you'd be like, oh no, is the sun ever going to come back or are we just stuck in this weird twilight?

Speaker 3:
[10:54] It's like a cosmic prank from the gods or whatever. They're like, watch this, they all freak out and wave across the realm. It's great. Watch.

Speaker 2:
[11:01] They think something just fucking broke up there. Yeah, they killed so many kids because of this. Check it out. Yeah, and that's kind of what they're wanting, you know, what I feel they're wanting you to think about is not just that eclipses look dramatic but that they can happen at all. So for the moon to completely cover the sun from Earth's point of view, their apparent sizes in the sky have to be almost exactly the same. And this is kind of a running thread through the whole book that the sun, again, according to, you know, the measurements we're given is enormous compared to the moon, almost 400 times wider, but it just also happens to be 400 times farther away from Earth, which makes these two things line up almost perfectly when, you know, depending on where you're at, again.

Speaker 3:
[11:44] Isn't that interesting?

Speaker 2:
[11:45] It's coinkydinks, dude.

Speaker 3:
[11:47] Coinkydinks galore.

Speaker 2:
[11:50] Right, and so that exact 400 times, you know, difference is what produces that clean edge of a total eclipse instead of just a partial overlap. So if their proportions were even a little bit different, eclipses would look totally different from what we see now.

Speaker 3:
[12:04] Right.

Speaker 2:
[12:04] And again, astronomers are perfectly comfortable calling this coincidence, and I guess technically that's fair. But the authors are kind of… they lean more into like how strangely tidy this coincidence is, especially when you consider how many variables are involved in, you know, what we're told is planetary formations. And it isn't just the size match either. The moon also moves through the sky in a way that mirrors the sun's seasonal path. So when the sun hits low along the horizon in winter, the full moon rides higher in the sky. During the summer, when the sun is high and dominant for these long stretches of daylight, the moon tends to take a lower path. And the geometry behind this involves, you know, what we're told is Earth's axial tilt and the tilt of the moon's orbit relative to Earth's path around the sun. All these things that you learn in school, or hopefully you… Maybe not hopefully, you learned in school.

Speaker 3:
[12:57] And maybe, we would say to that, that's a possible explanation for it.

Speaker 2:
[13:02] A possibility.

Speaker 3:
[13:04] A possibility.

Speaker 2:
[13:05] And most people never even think about this or notice it unless they're deliberately tracking where the sun and moon rise and set throughout the year, kind of like what you brought up on the last show with the, what's it called, the analemma?

Speaker 3:
[13:15] Analemma. Yeah, you spell it like anal-emma, and that's how I remember it.

Speaker 2:
[13:20] Oh, it's a great mnemonic device.

Speaker 3:
[13:21] Analemma.

Speaker 2:
[13:22] Analemma, all right. But yeah, once you start noticing that, though, it's pretty obvious there's this structured relationship between these two things, and that idea that the moon behaves in a structured and predictable way goes extremely far back in human history. There's been archaeological reports that kind of suggest that humans were carefully observing these lunar cycles tens of thousands of years ago.

Speaker 3:
[13:47] Sure.

Speaker 2:
[13:47] Little things like carved bones discovered in France, they show these markings that at least appear to correspond with these repeating lunar phases and cycles, and kind of would look to be like an early calendar.

Speaker 3:
[14:01] I can't wait for Jim to die. His femur is going to make a hell of a calendar.

Speaker 2:
[14:07] What are we going to name this month after? Yeah. There's one example from Avery Blanchard, and it has markings consistent with two-month lunar cycle, with a two-month lunar cycle, indicating that someone was tracking changes in the moon's appearance long before the written language even existed. There's another artifact from Central Africa called the Eishango bone.

Speaker 3:
[14:28] That's fun.

Speaker 2:
[14:28] And it contains sequences of notches that many researchers are seeing as like numerical groupings tied to these lunar observations. So when you see these similar behaviors appearing in these locations that are thousands of miles apart, it kind of makes you think that noticing of this moon cycle wasn't some isolated curiosity or something just a couple of people were looking at. It was kind of this widespread useful information type of thing. And it would have been one of the easiest repeating natural patterns to track because you don't need tools or lenses or anything. You just basically need patience because it's a... As we'll get into, there's like an 18 and a half year cycle that apparently a lot of people back then were figuring out.

Speaker 3:
[15:15] Any patience and a reference. Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[15:17] Right. Yes. There's also the Venus of Laussel carving. It's this limestone carving found in France that dates back around 20,000 years, if you can believe that. The figure is holding a curved object marked with 13 lines, which sounds a lot like the 13 lunar cycles that occur each year, which is why we should probably have a calendar that is 13 months. 28 days each.

Speaker 3:
[15:43] This thing's got some sweet tits too. I'm going to share a screen and show it to you, because it would be selfish of me as a good partner not to. Look at these tits. Look at that.

Speaker 2:
[15:50] Oh, why would I say no to that?

Speaker 3:
[15:51] Check that out.

Speaker 2:
[15:52] Boom!

Speaker 3:
[15:52] It's got the foopa too, the front butt.

Speaker 2:
[15:55] A lot of those old carvings had that, and it was like a fertility thing. They were like, oh, look at how big my my gunt is.

Speaker 3:
[16:01] This thing looks fertile as fuck. Look at that.

Speaker 2:
[16:03] Oh, yeah. Definitely full of child.

Speaker 3:
[16:06] But holding the horn, and if we see it, it's a ram's horn. If we're, you know, it looks like a ram's horn, which could signify the age of Aries, maybe. And then there are 13 notches on it. Yeah, that would perhaps correlate to the moon's. And then the woman's menstrual cycle, 13 cycles per year. And that's how they would track it there, the moon's.

Speaker 2:
[16:24] And our menstrual cycles are synced yet again, because that's the next thing I was going to go into.

Speaker 3:
[16:28] Goddamn.

Speaker 2:
[16:29] Reading each other's minds.

Speaker 3:
[16:30] I love it.

Speaker 2:
[16:32] Yeah, this whole interpreting the moon's cycle with fertility, and that shows up everywhere across early cultures. I mean, like you said, the average menstrual cycle lasts about 28 days, which is very close to the length of a lunar month. Obviously, it doesn't take much imagination to see why these early societies might have connected those particular cycles and rhythms. When something in the sky lines up closely with something happening in the body, humans like to assign meanings to things, even if there isn't any. But like we've gone into, as above so below, it's easy for those early people to go, wait a minute, something's going on here. Why do these match up?

Speaker 3:
[17:10] And that's to say if they ever didn't know it in the first place. And this is to toss ignorance on the ancient folks and to say that they didn't know exactly what the hell they were doing here. And perhaps this is more art so that lizard turds couldn't tell that they were depicting in this amazing-titted woman here. Then I'm going to go ahead and link an article about guys that you can share on this. It's a woman standing there with a horn, 13 notches. And so things like this are encoded. And again, that's to say that, and not to malign the ancients, that's the whole point here is maybe they were so in tune with this that they got the as above, so below nature of it. You talk about the indigenous folks talking that they lost a sight after they started integrating, where there was sort of a vision that they had of lights, of interconnectivity, of communications happening that were unspoken, but they could see visually with colors and they could see sound and things like this and they lost that when they were domesticated by speech and writing and reading and things like this. So perhaps again, maybe they knew exactly what the hell they were talking about and they were just doing their best to pass it down to us dummies in this time when we were gonna be removed from the wisdom.

Speaker 2:
[18:12] Right, and we'll get into kind of how that information is passed down over the generations, but I mean there's even the Egyptian mythology links with Isis with lunar symbolism and the Greek tradition associates Selene and guess what? Artemis with the moon, aptly named moon missions.

Speaker 3:
[18:33] Yeah, hey. I happened to catch a video of, I don't mean to, I don't do it on purpose, somebody sent it to me, and it was of people filming the astronauts. They were all very excited to see these folks. They were like, oh look, it's the astronauts. But then of course somebody can see the camera of the person taking the picture in front of them and there's no one on there. There's a blank stage there where there should be these bright orange objects that are in these jumpsuits. Again, it's very interesting. We're having a good time with it.

Speaker 2:
[18:59] I actually saw that same one today and of course you have the people who are like, it's AI. And this is the point we're at now in time where you can't believe anything because there's always gonna be someone in the comments saying, that's AI.

Speaker 3:
[19:10] It's great.

Speaker 2:
[19:11] Yeah, it's awesome. And there's similar mythological themes even with Celtic or Roman or even Mesoamerican traditions that associate the moon with this feminine or fertility type of thing. So I mean even the structure of the calendar still is connected with this. The word month traces back to the moon cycle, moon through whatever. And some religious holidays still rely on lunar timing. Easter, for example, set at the first Sunday following the first full moon after the spring equinox. But the Butler and Knight here are basically just pointing out that way before formal science, humans were already using the moon as a way to organize experiences because it marks time and predicts tides and it has a lot to do with planting and the timing of that type of thing.

Speaker 3:
[20:04] Well, this is the thing about Easter. What does it celebrate for the Christian tradition?

Speaker 2:
[20:09] The death of Jesus, or the resurrection, I guess, technically.

Speaker 3:
[20:14] Right, which happened at a very specific time in history, did it not? But yet, their goal was just kind of, oh, maybe this month or that month, we're going to do it the first moon after the thing, you know, we'll just do it then.

Speaker 2:
[20:24] Just so it's consistent.

Speaker 3:
[20:25] It's arbitrary and moves around, though. But it's very, very important. It's the hallmark, right? It's the whole point. It's the whole point.

Speaker 2:
[20:32] Yeah. And they kind of say that astronomy may have been the very first discipline where humans recognized that nature follows these predictable rules. I mean, if you track the moon long enough, you notice that these phases repeat. A lot of the stuff that they start out with is pretty obvious to most people these days. But then you can start noticing the eclipse patterns and then you expect it. And the ancient Mesopotamian astronomers even found out about what we now call the Ceros Cycle, which is the eclipses predicted roughly every 18 years, 11 days and several hours. And that kind of prediction requires really careful record keeping but across generations, which kind of suggests that knowledge about the moon is treated as something worth preserving. It wasn't just this, oh yeah, it does this thing every once in a while. Yeah, yeah. They made sure people knew about it.

Speaker 3:
[21:24] Absolutely. And statues of women with tits.

Speaker 2:
[21:27] Yes. There's also apparent fossil evidence suggesting that around 30,000 years ago, humans began living longer on average, meaning more individuals survived well beyond reproductive age. And that matters because older individuals can transmit all this accumulated knowledge instead of having it disappear every generation. Because tracking even the 18 and a half year eclipse cycle, it still takes 18 years of observation and then another 18 years to go, okay, yes, we're on the right track here with every roughly 36 years, two of these happened or whatever. Yes, obviously depending on where you're at, I know it happens every year, but if you're in one location.

Speaker 3:
[22:08] And that's the thing too, it's an interesting fact that a lot of the traditions and mythologies look at the Zodiac the same no matter where they are in the realm, they just have a different legend about them. So for instance, we're in Australia, Orion is tilted on his head and they call him the hunter that fell. So he's this dude that got tripped and fell on his head. So from their point of view, it's still a dude, he's still upright and he's still got those anatomical features of a humanoid, but he's tilted and so therefore there's a mythology about how he fell on his head because of the position he's in in the sky. But it's still a dude, you see what I mean? The same Zodiacs but they have different because of where they're at. It's so interesting.

Speaker 2:
[22:47] I know. So obviously these longer lifespans allow for more of a specialization in these disciplines that we call now and then the specialization leads to an even deeper observation and then that produces better predictions. And over time that whole process starts looking a lot like what we'd call science now.

Speaker 3:
[23:06] Looks like science.

Speaker 2:
[23:08] And they also bring in the, you know, the megalithic sites like Noth and Newgrange in Ireland where these carved patterns seem to appear to correspond with these lunar cycles and celestial alignments. And there is one carving at Noth has been interpreted by researcher Philip Stook as a representation of major visible features on the moon's surface, which would make it one of the oldest known attempts to map out the moon. I doubt they would call those things the same that we do now, but you know. Right, right.

Speaker 3:
[23:38] And they thought they were seas, right? And that what Galileo said, mares, which is Latin for seas. So they thought it was a whole different world up there with land masses and oceans and all kinds of cool shit.

Speaker 1:
[23:48] Yeah.

Speaker 3:
[23:49] Ever spend all day fishing and catch nothing?

Speaker 1:
[23:52] That's what happens to hackers when Cisco Duo is on watch. Every login, every device, every user protected.

Speaker 2:
[24:00] Cisco Duo, fishing season is over.

Speaker 1:
[24:04] Learn more at duo.com.

Speaker 2:
[24:07] The new Grange megalithic site is aligned in such a way that light enters the structure at specific times of year, indicating maybe a deliberate astronomical observation is incorporated into architecture and that shouldn't be much new. I mean even the pyramids and a lot of these old structures, kind of even the sphinx, certain times of year, certain things seem to line up with these. So that's where you come into the debate of whether these megalithic things were just marking astronomical things or whether it was something more. Because the effort that was required to build these things seems to be a little bit deeper than just, oh, the stars appear here at this time of the year, so we're going to build these huge monuments to that. Unless they were that bored back then, which I don't think so.

Speaker 3:
[25:00] I agree, I completely agree. And then in Zodiacs and the Salts of Salvation, which we're going to wrap up on this extension, guys, so make sure that you check it out. Sign up in the links below. We're going to go buy your sign, so you can check it out for you, your family, which is not health advice. We're going to talk about some really cool information that we found, some remedies and stuff. In that though, they talk about that really the sphinx symbolizes the, because of the Zodiac, if you look at it, it's got Aquarius and then you have its opposition, which is Leo. So it's about man taming the animal nature. So the man's face, which represents Aquarius because of the opposition, on the body of Leo representing animal nature, it's man transcending that. That's what it's supposed to signify. And yes, of course, it's going to be lined up to the heavenly bodies as well.

Speaker 2:
[25:46] Thank you for that. I totally forgot to plug plus.

Speaker 3:
[25:49] That's all we get into this. Yeah, we're excited about it. I could have just as easily plugged it in the old time, too. I was excited to hear what you were talking about, too. But yeah, stick it out, guys. It's wrapping up our Salts Saga. We went into the myths, the Zodiac and the myths of salvation on the last one. Took it a little bit deeper and we did talk about the Anilema. This one we're going to wrap up with very specific stuff for you. It's going to mainly be the Salts of Salvation and you. Very specific for you and your family and loved ones.

Speaker 2:
[26:16] Nice.

Speaker 3:
[26:17] Entertainment purposes only.

Speaker 2:
[26:18] Of course. We're not experts. We're just ding-dongs talking into mics. They also, from there, get into a lot of not just how ancient people measured things, but why they would have agreed on this shared unit in the first place. Because once you start looking at these megalithic structures, not only across Britain but also broader parts of Europe, there's a pattern that shows up again and again that these things were not just thrown together casually. As I was saying, these stones are all placed with intention, and they're usually shown up in ways that line up with these astronomical events and the distances between key points, and these repeat in ways that maybe suggest some sort of standard was being followed. That's where this dude named Alexander Thom comes in, and he was an engineer, not an archaeologist or anything, but he looked at these stone circles and all these megalithic structures in the way an engineer would look at a machine. So he's coming out thinking, okay, these builders had a purpose, and if they had purpose, then the geometry should show something about what they were trying to do with these things. So over the course of a few decades, he surveyed hundreds of sites and just carefully recorded all these distances between the stones and the angles, especially relative to the horizon and how different structures related to one another, especially spatially. What he kept finding was that many of these sites appeared to use this consistent unit of length, which he eventually called the megalithic yard. And that comes out to about 2.722 feet, or just under 83 centimeters for our metric people. And at first, it doesn't sound like that interesting, but what kind of caught his attention is how often this measurement appeared in these site layouts that were separated by hundreds of miles and built across centuries. And so if that was accurate, it implies that people who had no writing system and no real centralized authority that we know of, at least across these vast distances, and no obvious way to distribute the standardized measuring tools or anything like that, they somehow still working with the same reference length. And he kind of said that the megalithic yard was divided into smaller units, which he called megalithic inches, so apparently subdividing the larger unit into 40 equal parts. And whether every archaeologist agrees with that is obviously a different story, but Butler and Knight here are interested in the possibility, at least, that early builders had a practical reason for adopting this consistent unit. Because if you want structures to align with these astronomical events, then obviously precision kind of matters. If you're trying to mark where the moon rises at a particular point in the long cycle, you can't just eyeball it once and be like, oh, that's good, whatever. You would need to observe that position over and over again and then compare these observations over years and then translate those observations into a physical layout, some kind of standardized measurement.

Speaker 3:
[29:18] But then the measurement might be the observations themselves. They may have determined that measurement based on the observations of the heavens. Like again, maybe how far away the moon was from the horizon at these certain times or an average of that and that gave them that length.

Speaker 2:
[29:32] Right. That's what we're going to get to do. Shut the fuck up.

Speaker 3:
[29:34] Come on. This is what I'm saying, though, when you look at this stuff, if observation is key, then if it was being observed just openly uninfluenced, then yes, you would draw these same conclusions, right? And especially if you had some sort of, again, I'm feeling that the realm was much, much, much different. The way that they knew things, the way they came about information and the way that they were also taught information, the way they perceive the world and their relationship to it. It was very different.

Speaker 2:
[30:01] Basically a different world back then.

Speaker 3:
[30:02] Totally, man. Totally.

Speaker 2:
[30:04] So yeah, they start wondering then, if a standard unit existed, then what would it have been based on? Because body parts vary. We got into the qubit and how it's about 18 inches or the average length of the tip of the middle finger to the elbow.

Speaker 3:
[30:22] I was biting my tongue on this when you were talking a minute ago. Yes, because I was sitting there going over the different body parts. I had the joke of, oh, it was the King Shlong and I joked, oh, ho, ho. But then I was sitting there thinking, well, man, the distance from a leg or from a shoulder to the tip of the finger, but that varies so wildly. So yes, there needed to be a heavenly example of a standard measurement.

Speaker 2:
[30:40] Something that lasts over time.

Speaker 3:
[30:43] Right, right. That doesn't change over the human body.

Speaker 2:
[30:46] A wooden rod or whatever they would use would shrink and warp over time. The stone markers even erode. Even as long as those last, they still erode.

Speaker 3:
[30:55] That's a brilliant, yes, of course. Because you could have been given some, like let's say, best case scenario, okay, like some alien, okay, and it goes to all these different primitive tribes sitting around fires and hands them a tool. But that tool is probably made of a material and over time it either gets lost, gets copied onto something else that, like you said, would then degrade or alter or fatigue. Be untrue is what we'll say. And the true is what you need and what is true. The clock above you, man. This is brilliant.

Speaker 2:
[31:23] The sky clock. Yeah, so a unit of measure is going to survive across all these years and it needs to be taken from something stable and observable by everybody. So that's where they start looking at measurement and going back to astronomy again. And obviously the Earth itself provides several repeating cycles that could function as like a natural standard. The rotation of the planet establishes a consistent day length. You know, then we have the year and then the moon phases are on the months. And you go through all these cycles and… So I guess if early observers were already watching the sky carefully, then it would make sense to get some units of measure from things that anybody could reproduce by observation alone. And one of the things they get into is that early astronomers may have conceptualized geometry differently than we do today. So we divide circles into 360 degrees, mostly because of the historical convention that comes from Babylonian mathematics. But the authors here are saying that the Earth completes 366 rotations relative to the stars during one orbit around the Sun. So the difference comes from the fact that Earth is moving along its orbit while rotating, meaning it must spin slightly more than once for the Sun to return to the same position in the sky on consecutive days.

Speaker 3:
[32:41] If you're spinning around. But if it's spinning around you, it may be understood differently.

Speaker 2:
[32:47] Right. And we're going off of, and the authors are going off of what we're given.

Speaker 3:
[32:52] Right. Right. And this is funny too, because even Tom's calendar includes 366 days. And it's divided by 75, I think. And that was the only way that he could do the math correctly, which I'm sure lines up with this as well. Very interesting.

Speaker 2:
[33:09] So each sidereal day is about four minutes shorter than a solar day. And those tiny little differences accumulate across the year to produce that one additional rotation relative to the stars. And they're kind of saying that early observers who focused on star positions rather than clock time, as we do today, may have thought about circular motion in terms of 366 instead of 360.

Speaker 3:
[33:34] Which makes sense. If you're going over natural cycles, you would go over, and that's probably, if I'm betting here, what they determined would be the longest length that they would measure off of. And then they would break that longer length, which represented the year down, because then the moons would then break that up as well. And that's how they would determine a measurement system. God, this is so interesting.

Speaker 2:
[33:55] Yeah, so basically from there, they would say that a unit of length could be derived from dividing Earth's circumference into fractions tied to that system. Earth's polar circumference is often estimated at around 40,008 kilometers, depending on how the measurement is defined. If a circle representing Earth were divided into 366 parts, and those parts were subdivided further, the resulting lengths can be made to correspond closely to the megalithic yard. And they're not really saying that ancient people calculated Earth's circumference using the modern methods, obviously, but that long-term astronomical observation could have produced these proportional relationships that were consistent across regions, even though the Earth is apparently pear-shaped. What did they call it? What does Neil deGrasse Tyson say?

Speaker 3:
[34:47] They say we're a sexy pear, right? We bulge out in the middle.

Speaker 2:
[34:51] A sphere of oblique spheroid?

Speaker 3:
[34:52] Oblique spheroid, that's right. We're just making shit up. Electricity Gremlin.

Speaker 2:
[34:56] You just, I love it.

Speaker 3:
[34:57] You're just putting words together. It's in the movie.

Speaker 2:
[35:01] They're basically saying that the early measurement, especially the standardized measurement, may have come from observation instead of this abstraction that we use now. They also discuss the geographic placement of these major megalithic sites, and pointing out that Stonehenge sits near a latitude that produces an unusually long, near-continuous oceanic circumference when traced around the globe. They argue that such a line passing mostly through water rather than land would represent a geometrically distinctive feature of the planet's surface. This is one of those areas where mainstream archaeology tends to be a bit skeptical, but they see it as another example of how ancient builders may have been paying a lot closer attention to planetary geometry than we would assume. Oh shit, I just skipped ahead, sorry. Whoa, I just scrolled way down.

Speaker 3:
[35:52] I love that. I'll go into my notes, I'll click something and it'll go, whut? I'm like, no, I'm not going to find it again. I get it.

Speaker 2:
[35:57] I know. My scroll thing is backwards too, so if I push it the wrong way, it goes, ugh. They also bring up sites like Calanish in Scotland, where the stone alignments appear to correspond to lunar standstill positions. So the moon's orbit obviously shifts gradually over that 18.5-year cycle, causing the points where it rises and sets on the horizon to move slightly over time, and at certain moments in that cycle, the moon reaches extreme northern or southern positions relative to the horizon, and tracking that cycle requires patience and continuity because you can't observe an 18.5-year cycle in a single lifetime without recording information for future observers, especially if you want to make sure that that's correct over, like I said earlier, over 36 years and then so on and so forth.

Speaker 3:
[36:46] Yeah, you got to convince your kids or somebody's kids to go out there every day and do this with you. You know, they're like, but dad, I want to guard goats.

Speaker 2:
[36:52] Don't we have anything better to do, like try not to starve?

Speaker 3:
[36:54] Yeah, this sucks. I don't want to watch the stars like you did and like grandpa did. Like the fuck you dads of the time.

Speaker 2:
[37:02] And of course, this brings back in the idea of intentional knowledge transfer and the moon pops up again because the moon provides one of the most visually accessible long-term cycles available without instruments. It's large enough to that everybody can see it clearly in its obvious motion and, you know, really measurable phase changes that everybody can see. And better than that, it can be tracked across seasons and years and centuries. So, they're basically saying that early scientific thinking may have been shaped by the need to understand celestial cycles well enough to predict them, and if those cycles became the basis for measurement, then astronomy would have influenced architecture and land planning and the layout of some of these ceremonial structures and maybe even cathedrals, who knows? And whether or not that's correct, the bigger idea here is that early builders appear to have treated the sky as a reference system. And I don't even think that's even arguable now. Again, this book was like 20 years ago, so I think more people are on that boat by now.

Speaker 3:
[38:04] Yeah, I mean, even something as simple as sundials, right? We knew that they've been tracking the sun and keeping time by that for a while.

Speaker 2:
[38:11] Oh, yeah. So once they kind of finished laying out this idea that ancient people may have been paying a bit closer attention to these cycles than we give them credit for, then they start going up the moon a little bit more directly. This is where it shifts from archaeology into astronomy, and they start talking less about how humans reacted to the moon and more about whether the moon's physical characteristics are as ordinary as we tend to assume. There you go. One of the things they were looking at is just how large the moon is compared to Earth. Like we were talking about earlier, this weird relationship between the sun and the moon. To kind of bring that out more, most of the other planet-moon relationships across what we can apparently see in telescopes are tiny. The moons are super small compared to the planets they're orbiting. So Jupiter has dozens of moons, but Jupiter is enormous. Mars has two moons that look more like captured asteroids than these like perfectly round, or supposedly perfectly round bodies.

Speaker 3:
[39:11] One of them allegedly has a huge monolith on it that Buzz Aldrin talked about.

Speaker 2:
[39:15] Oh yeah, I remember that.

Speaker 3:
[39:16] That's right, yeah.

Speaker 2:
[39:18] But Earth, on the other hand, has a moon that is more than one quarter of the diameter of Earth, which makes this Earth-Moon pairing kind of pop out as unusual compared to the other rocky planets. And that size difference does matter, see, size does matter, because a large moon, apparently, what we're told, exerts a stronger gravitational influence on the planet's orbit. So one consequence of that influence is long-term stability in Earth's axial tilt. So if Earth is tilted a little over 23 degrees relative to its orbital plane, that's what we're told gives us the seasonal variation, because you're going back and forth, right?

Speaker 3:
[39:58] The wobble.

Speaker 2:
[39:59] Right. And without something moderating that tilt, the simulations they've run, at least, suggest that the angle could drift pretty crazy over long periods of time and produce more extreme climate shifts. And maybe that's where we get what are called ice ages and whatnot.

Speaker 3:
[40:17] It reminds me of the game Skip It. Remember that as a kid, you slipped your foot to your ankle in this big ring, and then it had a weighted end on the other thing, and you spun that around your leg and jumped over it with the other leg, and it was supposed to be fun? But it's like this moon out there orbiting, but it rocked your inertia a little bit. And that was the whole point, right? It's that relationship. And that's sort of what they're saying about the Gravitational Body Series is because of its size. Like you can imagine a Skip It giant one, like the size of a big yoga ball you could sit on or something. That bitch is going to throw you around. It's just interesting when you start talking about gravitational forces and bodies that react through the mainstream science, then yes, they do need to come up with some pretty interesting explanations for the things that are seen that are questionable.

Speaker 2:
[41:01] Right. The biggest explanation is that it's just a really lucky coincidence.

Speaker 3:
[41:07] Man, like where you were born, you happen to be born in the country with the correct God. How great is that? How lucky are you?

Speaker 2:
[41:13] I know everyone is. Yeah, exactly.

Speaker 3:
[41:16] How wild.

Speaker 2:
[41:17] So, they're basically saying that the Moon acts as a stabilizing factor, so it doesn't lock Earth's tilt into a fixed angle, but it helps prevent dramatic swings that could disrupt these long-term climate patterns. Then they go into the tides, because everyone associates the Moon with the tides.

Speaker 3:
[41:34] That's what shut down the throats, isn't it? Oh, life would not happen without the Moon.

Speaker 2:
[41:40] And they don't really go into it in a mystical sense, because that's for a different show, a different book.

Speaker 3:
[41:45] Right.

Speaker 2:
[41:46] More of like a physical consequence of this gravitational influence that it has. So the Moon's pull apparently causes ocean levels to rise and fall in repeating cycles, creating constantly shifting coastal environments. Some researchers have proposed that tidal zones could have played a role in early biological development because they repeatedly concentrate organic material in shallow areas where chemical reactions can occur more easily. Even if that specific scenario isn't the full explanation of how life developed, which I don't think so, but yeah. What?

Speaker 3:
[42:21] That covers it, Joe. What do you mean? That covers it. That's it. We don't need to ask any further questions or books written on it. People have made money standing there talking to you about it. Science is settled. Yes, sir.

Speaker 2:
[42:34] Of course, then there's also the way the moon has influenced the length of Earth's day. So early in Earth's history, and again, this is the official story, the planet rotated much faster than it does now. And over very long time scales, we're talking hundreds of millions of years, these tidal interactions between Earth and the moon gradually slowed that rotation. So that gradual change affects atmospheric circulation and temperature distribution, which in turn influences a long-term environmental stability. And again, none of this really, and this is where they kind of are careful to not be like, well, somebody made it, but I love that the title is Who Made the Moon.

Speaker 3:
[43:11] Yes, I like that too.

Speaker 2:
[43:12] Because none of this requires anything artificial. They're just kind of pointing out that the moon plays a more active role in Earth's physical system than most people realize, or think about, I guess you could say.

Speaker 3:
[43:22] And if it's, let's go woo with it, man. Let's go, Alex Coyer, someone brought it here, it's a freaking machine or something. Then you have the influence pulsating on you constantly, right? The they live sort of ideal that there's a tower that's beaming down, that you can't, it's masking the lizard turds, but also keeping you in slavery. It's this ideal that, yeah, the functions of the realm would still continue. But life for the people who wrote the books, because remember that, who's giving you the message of what's important? If it's the realm giving you the message and it wasn't coming from the true wisdom, then it's on behalf of their motives and their agenda. So for them, yeah, it's probably great for all life, because we get stuck in slavery, if this is the case, based on that moon matrix, whatever, Saturn moon matrix type of idea, and then now this is the soul trap also, because now that's got to come into play. You've got all these ideals that, from a perspective, it's wonderful for the slave holders. But again, ask who it benefits, perhaps.

Speaker 2:
[44:16] Yeah, and that's why I like looking at everything. Even the mainstream explanation for a lot of these crazy things is helpful to look at, just so at least you know where maybe some half-truths or straight-up lies are being weaved into actual truth. And you can't know that unless you're looking at all of it. So it's important to look at all of it.

Speaker 3:
[44:39] The numbers they choose to throw out at you are great examples of this. The satanic increments and sizes, the perfect speeds and ratios and things like that.

Speaker 2:
[44:48] Oh, you've seen that, the sigil of, you can Google this, the sigil of Lucifer, which doesn't matter what you think about that. If you look at the sigil of Lucifer and then look at the way the light apparently comes from the sun and goes around the moon, like that, it's the exact same thing. It's just crazy. Like, what are the odds?

Speaker 3:
[45:04] I've used this as an example so many times. There's an old eye chart with the way that the pattern of how the eyes receive light. And it is identical to the sigil of Lucifer. Even the sigil of Lucifer, I feel that back part of it that comes down in hooks and comes back around and doesn't complete into two circles. That's like the back of your two eyes is what I'd see there. So, of course, exactly. So cool.

Speaker 2:
[45:26] Yeah, again, so this... They kind of come back to eclipses again, but they're kind of emphasizing that the apparent size relationship between the moon and the sun falls within this narrow range that allows the eclipses to occur. Like we brought up earlier, the moon is roughly 400 times smaller, but 400 times closer, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. But astronomers actually consider this coincidence temporary because the moon is slowly moving away from Earth. Apparently, they've done these laser measurements showing that the distance is increasing by a few centimeters each year, which means that far in the future, the moon will actually no longer appear large enough in the sky to completely cover the sun. Butler and Knight find that timing a bit interesting since the period during which total solar eclipses are possible, represents this really small portion of the solar system's life span, according to the numbers we're given. The other thing I thought was funny is, I was talking about this with our buddy JT over there at JT Follows JC, and he's like, why don't we see the silhouette of the moon not only right before an eclipse? Wouldn't you see a black disk going all the way up until it covers the sun? That's just a normal silhouetting, right?

Speaker 3:
[46:45] There are so many challenges with the moon being physical when you start talking about eclipses. It's very interesting when you look at things this way. Another one is that no eclipses have ever been filmed from space, yet we get two a year, and none of them have ever been filmed from space.

Speaker 2:
[47:02] Well, the Artemis just filmed one from the back side of the moon. There's a great picture they put out that was totally not AI. It looked really real.

Speaker 3:
[47:10] That's right. But the shadow moving across the Earth from an eclipse, I don't think has been filmed, or that interaction from space effort. It's just one of those odd things. They deleted the footage? Really? They erased all the moon footage?

Speaker 2:
[47:23] The question I had is, so on a new moon, the reason that you don't see the moon on a new moon is because it's not reflecting any of the sunlight, right?

Speaker 3:
[47:34] So from the perspective of the realm, yes.

Speaker 2:
[47:37] Right. Wouldn't you at some point somewhere on Earth, at like dusk, say, when the sun is going down, wouldn't you be able to see the silhouette of the moon? Like up there? Like a black disk? You'd think you would be just thinking as a homeschooler here. You'd think you'd be able to see that, but that's not something we see. We just don't see it at all. Just a thought.

Speaker 3:
[48:03] Even the simple concept of seeing the moon and the sun and the sky at the same time. Those are very interesting. Like a full moon and then the sun right across. How is that?

Speaker 2:
[48:11] Yeah. Well, I guess the standard explanation is because it's straight across from the sun, so it's reflecting all of it, right? There's always explanations.

Speaker 3:
[48:20] There are some interesting explanations. And again, when you start looking at it, there's an awesome lady called Nicole Murphy. If you guys want to take a listen to her, she's got just fascinating perspectives. She talks about this place from the Ken Wheeler perspective. It's possibly more of a toroidal environment where we're on an inertial plane, not necessarily a ball hurling through space. Even, you know, Teed's argument, Cyrus Teed's, about the cosmology, about the internal sphere. Again, this calls into question with similar observations what we could be seeing, but it doesn't limit the idea. It actually frees it from the restraints of the limitations of the idea we find now, like such as the question you have about New Moon. There's an ideal that it's all magnetism, and really that perhaps if you go with this total idea, that there is the Black Mountain or the Hyperborea at the very center of this realm, perhaps, and it's got an effect, and that there's a giant hole there that maybe there's a black sun within that is projecting our sun and moon, which they're simply projections or vibrations from different realms. And then if you look at it, that the other planets could be then just simply other suns vibrating in another structure of the realm, another layer of it, just a dimmer one at a higher octave, and then you bring in harmonics and music and all kinds of stuff into this, man, then it starts to look a little bit more interesting than the mainstream story that has so many questions about it.

Speaker 2:
[49:42] Oh, yeah. And again, these are just fun thought experiments, people.

Speaker 3:
[49:46] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[49:48] Yeah, I just, the funny thing is that even the mainstream science will say that the Earth is toroidal with having the North and South Pole. It does have that kind of toroidal effect, at least. This is not to infer a certain shape of the Earth, but it does have a toroidal magnetic effect. So that's not even questioned.

Speaker 3:
[50:07] The concept also has an explanation for the Van Allen radiation belts, meaning the reason that you can't necessarily go, those belts of radiation that they're certain are there. They just called Van Allen radiation belts. They could perhaps be this dome or whatever, you know, this edge to the toroidal field, which is just energetic in nature. And then the question is, is there a way to usurp that or is something bigger going on?

Speaker 2:
[50:27] Like a force field, like we said, yeah.

Speaker 3:
[50:28] Yeah, exactly. You look at Project Domino and Fishbowl and things like this that occurred where they were shooting off nukes in Antarctica, allegedly, and hitting something about 13,000 feet up, you know, is that what they were hitting or running into? It's like this plasma field almost. Very interesting.

Speaker 2:
[50:43] So then we come back to the ancient astronomers who tracked this eclipse cycle, the Cerro cycle, which is approximately 6,585 days. Tracking patterns that come about over these decades, again, require this continuity of observation, which again reinforces the idea that these early sky watchers were methodical record keepers. They also look at the moon's internal composition. So, according to the mainstream, compared to Earth, the moon has a relatively small iron core and lower overall density, which is the answer for why it has what, is it a six, wait, what's the, I didn't look at the gravity that the moon's supposed to have. It's like, anyway, modern planetary science explains this through the giant impact hypothesis, which, and again, even modern planetary science explains this through a hypothesis. Okay, that's interesting to note, which proposes that the moon formed from debris created when a large body collided with early Earth. But they're pointing out that while this model explains many aspects of the moon's formation, there are still details that scientists continue to argue about regarding orbital evolution and compositional distribution. They also talk about the interesting thing that happened, apparently, during one of the Apollo missions where these instruments that were placed on the lunar surface recorded these vibrations caused by impacts in moonquakes. Because the moon apparently lacks these large scale tectonic plate movements and internal fluid circulation like the Earth does, the seismic waves travel through it differently than they do through Earth. But that's the story of the Apollo moon mission landing and ringing like a bell.

Speaker 3:
[52:32] Ringing like a bell, that's right. And then they hit it with nukes. They hit it with nukes too, didn't they?

Speaker 2:
[52:37] Well, that's what they say.

Speaker 3:
[52:38] I think they said that, yeah.

Speaker 2:
[52:39] And just plunked it.

Speaker 3:
[52:41] Ringing like a bell, huh?

Speaker 2:
[52:42] How is that a true story? How retarded are you that if everything's the way we're told, why the hell would you shoot a nuke at the moon? What is wrong with you? Who is in charge?

Speaker 3:
[52:54] They had real estate locked down for a little while. They wanted to make sure that nobody was going to be there because of its uninhabitability after they set one of those things off. And so there's just no real estate up there, guys. It's all being claimed. Now, I did go ahead and check out the mass of the Moon much less than the mass of Earth, and due to that, if you weigh 100 pounds on Earth, you would only feel like you weigh about 16 pounds on the Moon, 16 and a half pounds. So it's much, much, much different. It's 9.81 milliseconds squared, where the Moon is 1.62 milliseconds squared. So your jump height is normal on Earth, it's six times higher on the Moon, so that you can jump away from those shark side of the Moon creatures that are up there.

Speaker 2:
[53:35] You get an NBA level jump there.

Speaker 3:
[53:38] Yes.

Speaker 2:
[53:41] So in other words, this Earth–Moon system provides this, what they're really getting at is this exact system provides a stable environment while also making the mechanics of that environment visible to observers capable of recognizing the patterns that it brings. And that combination is kind of what's interesting is that it's this not only provides a stable environment, but then it also has this like sky clock, like you said, like it's a visible measurement calendar that we can look at.

Speaker 3:
[54:09] If you'd like to. Yeah, it's right there. Very cool. I love this shit, man. I think it's so fascinating. We are going to get to Tom's calendar very soon. This has inspired me to kind of put the calendar work to the forefront for the new calendar system that he's got.

Speaker 2:
[54:22] Oh, let's do it.

Speaker 3:
[54:23] Yeah, we'll do that real soon.

Speaker 2:
[54:25] So let me start looking at it as less of this natural curiosity and more like something that can be analyzed the same way you'd analyze a machine, and not in the sense that they're saying there's gears and bolts or something hiding inside the Moon, but I like to think there is.

Speaker 3:
[54:38] I do too. Again, the freaking- Freaking Death Star. You know what I'm talking about when I say Alex Coyer, right? Where he would stand up there and rant about the Hollow Moon and that it was brought here and that it's a huge machine and he gives the example of the Death Star. And then if you look at the Moon, I think it's Ganymede, which is the one that looks like it's the Death Star. It's freaking out there in space. I think it's around Saturn.

Speaker 2:
[55:00] It might be. Is it Ganymede?

Speaker 3:
[55:01] I think it's Ganymede. Anyway, we're gonna see.

Speaker 2:
[55:03] There is one that has the little notch in it.

Speaker 3:
[55:04] It's got the damn notch.

Speaker 2:
[55:05] It looks exactly like the Death Star.

Speaker 3:
[55:06] And then there's one that has a seam around the outside of it, so it looks like a nut to where it was welded or something.

Speaker 2:
[55:11] Is it not the same one?

Speaker 3:
[55:14] Maybe it is the same one. You might be correct on this. Again, we might have to.

Speaker 2:
[55:17] On the fly?

Speaker 3:
[55:18] On the fly, okay. But Alex Coyerman had the coolest shit. We may do a thing on just that guy alone and his work because the first I heard about the Hollow Moon theory, because I was obsessed with the Inner Earth shit. I heard of Gartha and Inner Earth and the, you know, Bird stuff and Admiral Bird and I was just like, what the fuck? It blew my mind. And then Alex Coyer comes sauntering into my life with this Hollow Moon business and I'm just like, holy shit, same thing. Again, gears, inside, very cool. And the brilliance of it, actually, with the mechanics of space, this is how creative you get when it comes to the realm. It says, okay, things are flying around out there. You got radiation, you got distances, you got age, you got time, all this stuff. Then you come up with some really interesting creative solutions to how, if the Moon was brought here, because I think he was pretty inspired by the idea of older civilizations talking that the Moon was, a time before the Moon is what he said. But if you think about it then, of a civilization that could travel interstellar distances, it would make sense to hollow out a planetoid, put all your shit in there, and then float the thing across space so that those little asteroids that scientists talk about don't harm you and they can just beat off the surface, which is why this one's pop marked to hell, because it was kind of drug through shit to get here, and all these things bombarded, saved you from radiation, all this kinds of things, and then you hide amongst the heavenly bodies when you get to this place and it doesn't look like an invading force beaming down mind bullshit all over your planet, enslaving you. It was just a fascinating concept. We'll have to do something about Alex. It was just a cool thing.

Speaker 2:
[56:48] No, so it's, I looked it up, it's Saturn's moon, Mimas.

Speaker 3:
[56:51] Mimas.

Speaker 2:
[56:52] And it's famously known as the Death Star Moon due to its uncanny resemblance to the Star Wars Space Station. The funny thing is that this was apparently noticed from the Voyager mission in 1980 and Star Wars was written in 1971 to 73. So, was Lucas ahead of his time?

Speaker 3:
[57:11] Well, and that's what they say right about Roddenberry, the guy from Star Trek, and Lucas, and Kubrick, right, that they were kind of in on shit and they've been seen at NASA meetings and all this kind of stuff, like they've been given advanced technology, and that was the thing that Roddenberry hung out with Skunk Works, damn it, you know who I'm talking about, Ben Rich, Rich, right? The guy from Skunk Works talked about that we have the ability to take ET home. I think it's been that.

Speaker 2:
[57:39] Yeah, I don't remember his name though, but I remember that quote.

Speaker 3:
[57:41] Yeah, he and Roddenberry used to hang out, so you've got the head of Skunk Works, Lockheed, hanging out with the head writer or creator of the most popular, one of the most popular sci-fi series of the time, using all these interesting technologies and all kinds of shit. Very cool, man.

Speaker 2:
[57:56] That's where you start asking, like, is it a... Is that when it was first discovered? Was 1980, or is that just when we were told about it?

Speaker 3:
[58:04] Right.

Speaker 2:
[58:05] Like you said, maybe Lucas was giving a heads up, and he's like, oh, I'm gonna make this Death Star look like this Mimas moon.

Speaker 3:
[58:12] Or did it come out, and then the planet was found because folks expected it based on the art? And so did the tulpa of that moon, was it created and just now it's out there? Because isn't that the thing with Saturn? They keep finding new moons with that damn thing. It changes... Any reference I looked at it, even at my most nerdiest, when I was super into astronomy, I would look and it would say anywhere between 60 to 120 moons, this thing had.

Speaker 2:
[58:34] Yeah.

Speaker 3:
[58:34] They were changing all the time. So is this a tulpa because we expect spaceships and stuff? Because we had siphon... Moondella. I like that. Moondella effect. It's just interesting, man. This whole realm is wild.

Speaker 2:
[58:47] I know. We'll wrap up here and get into Plus soon, but just to kind of close it out. And again, this is... If we were to do a complete deep dive on all these books, it would take hours to actually go over all the things. I mean, this is why we recommend that you buy... get the Kindle for whatever you want to do. If you want to look into these things deeper and get their full argument on it, it's because an hour, hour and a half is just not long enough to be able to fully flesh out their arguments. And again, this is a 20-year-old book, so keep that in mind. But yeah, by the time they're done kind of wrapping it up, the whole thing they've been building towards isn't really about proving the moon is artificial in this sci-fi sense, which would be way more fun. They never have the smoking gun that says, oh, this was definitely manufactured. What they're doing is just asking whether this Earth–Moon system looks more like a random byproduct of planetary formation, or more like a configuration that just so happens to be extremely helpful for producing long-term environmental stability. And they keep coming back to the idea that stable conditions give complexity the time to build. And if a planet's tilt swings wildly over these vast time frames, climate conditions would fluctuate in ways that would make long-term biological development more difficult. And again, that's where apparent ice ages come in, right? Yeah. If rotational speed changes dramatically, atmospheric behavior changes. And if tides are too weak, ocean circulation kind of behaves differently. If cycles are chaotic, predictions become harder. So, they're basically saying that the Moon is just the perfect... Besides the fact that we're in the Goldilocks Zone, as far as Earth goes, the Moon also plays this huge role in making sure that we survive. And the main thing that I got out of it was that the sheer size of our Moon compared to all of these other planetary bodies that have these tiny Moons that really don't affect their gravity or anything else the same way the Moon does. And again, the size versus distance, all these different things. There's so many more of these in the book, but just all these anomalies or apparent coincidences just really kind of point towards. Either somebody put that there or this whole system, it's like a clockwork, like we say. Like it behaves like this well-oiled machine, whether it's gears and knobs or not, it's this whole well-oiled machine that's easy to notice and repeat and apparently measure from, too.

Speaker 3:
[61:27] So you can set your watch by it. I mean, isn't that the whole point? That's the whole thing. Very interesting, man. This shit blows my mind, honestly.

Speaker 2:
[61:36] They basically have these three possibilities, and then we'll close on that. But one possibility is that the moon formed entirely through natural processes and just simply happens to possess these characteristics that are beneficial. Another possibility is the aspects of planetary formation are not yet fully understood and that future research may clarify why these configurations occur.

Speaker 3:
[61:58] Okay, that's probably the most honest one. That's the temporary truth, right?

Speaker 2:
[62:02] Yeah. And the third possibility, of course, is that intelligence played a role in shaping planetary environments in ways that leave detectable structural relationships behind. And obviously, the third is the most speculative. But the way that they put it in the book is kind of like, huh? What? Yeah. What? What do you think?

Speaker 3:
[62:22] You could combine two and three, though. If you really thought about it, the explanation of three could explain two. And then that's the whole, this is so interesting, man. I am going to tease something that I'm reading right now. I'm not through it yet. It's this From the Mundane to the Magnificent, Vera Stanley, Alder. I highly recommend it, guys. But I'm going to recommend it again when I get to it. But as you're going through this, what I'm thinking about is there's a bullshit chapter in there. Well, what I thought was a bullshit chapter, chapter five. I was like, what the fuck is even the point of this thing? She talks about just these soldiers coming in to start occupying half of her house because it's set in wartime, blah, blah, blah. And then finally we get to chapter six and holy shit, chapter six blew my mind. I was telling Mary about it. I was like, are you kidding me with this shit? Because it's talking about, again, this cosmological cellular sort of biology to where it's all connected. And when you start talking about heavenly bodies and things, she's taken out of her body, kind of spoiler alert, but I'll go deeper into it. And she's shown things in this astral form. But the key to chapter six is that they shrink down. And it explains why chapter five exists, because then they go into the pore of a soldier's foot. So setting up that the soldiers were there is why we needed that. We go into the pore of the foot, but she shrinks down even further and keeps going and keeps going and talks to a cell, and then keeps going and goes down and talks and sees an atom, and sees that it's simply another solar system, and that it's all one big-ass thing that's a part of another huge big-ass thing. That's all scaled and fractal. It's turtles all the way down. And then she delineates the difference between physical site and electrical site. So there are different ways in which we can't even perceive the world. And then there's fairies and all sorts of things, entities actually conducting the mechanics that you're talking about on a deep level that she has shown. So we're going to go deeper into that.

Speaker 2:
[64:08] The nature devas are elemental spirits.

Speaker 3:
[64:12] Exactly. But she's talking about that they're pouring green onto the grass to make sure that it's green and that you can see it in distributing color throughout the landscape and that colors themselves are entities that are choosing to have that form and function to make the realm possible.

Speaker 2:
[64:27] Panpsychism.

Speaker 3:
[64:28] It blew my fucking mind, dude. So we're going to go into it a little bit later on.

Speaker 2:
[64:31] But we'll probably do a calendar before that now based on this because I think that's nice and that's funny because I actually was getting back around to looking at more near death experiences again and I promised I would stay off of it for a month or two but I found a couple more that I'm like oh man I want to do these but there was just recently a new not really near death but this chick it just came out I just saw the story and it was from like March 26 I think I don't remember her name I have it bookmarked somewhere but she basically spent three weeks in a coma but to her it was 20 years of raising a family having twins or triplets or something and it's one of these newer stories and I haven't found the full breakdown on it yet but I might include it as part of you know a segment or something but just another example of these people living entire existences with this time dilation while she's in a coma and she woke up super bummed out because she's like where's my family? I had kids and a husband like what why am I here like oh that would be terrible.

Speaker 3:
[65:33] Dude these stories trip me the hell out. Please do this definitely that sounds awesome. There was a guy who had a trip like a heroin trip or something like this. He comes back he comes back to baseline basically essentially. Same thing freaks out loses his mind swore he spent 30 years had the love of his life there had children. This entire life was huge and successful in his career and all of this kind of stuff and then comes back air-closed to his physical body and was just super bummed out about it and couldn't handle it. Damn.

Speaker 2:
[66:02] And like we've talked about maybe that's what it's like when you die you just wake up and you're like whoa that was what a trip. Where's my kids? Where's my wife?

Speaker 3:
[66:10] Or your friends nudging you dude hand me the bong you've had it for a minute like come on.

Speaker 2:
[66:14] Stop hitting the salvia from the gas station. Yeah right. dude. At least I'm not a bedsheet for 20 years in this life thank the gods. Right.

Speaker 3:
[66:22] No god. Well and then think about that. If you're in a vegetated state, what is time like for you? Because if it was three weeks for her lived 26 years, this is like some inception shit. You're on the planet for 10 minutes, but 30 years go by and that poor dude's up there on the space thing by himself or whatever. Like that sucks. And then if you think about someone imprisoned in a body, stuck there, what's their time dilation like?

Speaker 2:
[66:44] Yeah. It's like the Rick and Morty the Roy game where he runs that carpet or rug store or whatever. We've mentioned it a couple of times, but yeah. It's the same thing. He comes out and it's been like 58 seconds or something.

Speaker 3:
[66:54] Exactly. And this is where you get into scale with the book that Vera Stanley is talking about, which we'll get into. But scale has everything to do with time. That's the relativity of time. It's how big you are. So are you then, when you're going into one of those states, is your consciousness going into a smaller realm relative to your size?

Speaker 2:
[67:12] I would like to think so because that brings up the ant hill thing again. And to us, ants only have what? A couple of days of a life. But since they're so tiny to them, that might seem like 80 years. Right, because they have full lives.

Speaker 3:
[67:22] Yeah, exactly. It takes them weeks to do something. But really, for them, the sun travels in seven years. It takes years to go across the sky. Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[67:31] They're like, we got to get ready for the long winter because winter's seven and a half years.

Speaker 3:
[67:35] Which is just night to us. It's so crazy, man. This whole damn thing. Fascinating.

Speaker 2:
[67:40] Well done. I can't wait to dig into more of these indie topics. I'll probably bring that for the next Plus show. So if you're on Plus, stick around for that. Also, the extension coming up after the break. Again, that was Who Built the Moon? by Alan Butler and Christopher Knight. Again, I'll link to it in the show notes. Pick it up on Amazon or Kindle or wherever you want. But thanks for joining us, and we hope you have a great weekend. Stick around for Plus. If not, we'll see you next week.

Speaker 3:
[68:23] The reason we like that one is because Steve Segal dies like in the first 20 minutes of the month.

Speaker 2:
[68:28] Yeah, I've been flying a helicopter for about 87 years.

Speaker 3:
[68:31] Yeah, no shit. He gets sucked out of some silly tunnel that they created. Anyway, okay, are you ready to do this? Yeah. Welcome to your Plus Extension as we wrap up this Salts of Salvation Saga Series.