Graham Hancock and Randall Carlson: A Catastrophic History of the World

Randall will be joining me on stage in half an hour or so. Um, and in the meantime, I'm going to give a a short presentation on the role of what I regard as the um, you know, the mammoth in the room in prehistory, which is that we're being told our history and our prehistory without really taking account of global cataclysmic events. Uh and this is most unfortunate since the role of global cataclysmic events in the human story, it's becoming increasingly obvious, is is very very large. Uh and we should be paying more attention to it if we care if we care for the future of humanity on this beautiful garden of the planet that the universe has gifted to us. We need to pay attention to our future. So I think everybody's heard of the Mount Toba eruption. 74,000 years ago. Uh it was a very very serious eruption. 2,800 cubic kilometers of volcanic ash and lava were thrown into the atmosphere. 12% more than was ejected by the last Yellowstone eruption. Um and and um basically what what is what is being suggested uh is that this eruption 74,000 years ago may have almost completely obliterated the human race. That we might have been reduced, our ancestors might have been reduced to just 3,000 individuals around the world. Now that may not be correct. Um and and and like all theories of cataclysm uh it has come in for a great deal of of criticism and scrutiny. And there's nothing wrong with that. I don't think the criticism and scrutiny has has had the ad ad homonym element that that often happens in archaeology. Um but it's worth keeping this in mind. Um actually, you know, we we are very focused on impact events at the moment. But but if we look at the geological record, uh volcanic activity is uh looks like a much more dangerous culprit. Uh and let's be clear, volcanic activity and impacts can be connected. A large impact on the surface of the earth can send shock waves through the earth and can set off volcanism as well. Um but of of we we the the four uh mass extinctions are definitely uh vulcanism is definitely implicated. Uh and only one the the the extinction of the dinosaurs we can say definitely it was a it was a cosmic impact. So other than the Mount Toba event, if if we say that anatomically modern humans have been around on the planet for 300,000 years, which we can safely say now, I suspect it's probably much longer than that. But but if we say that, then we can say that in the lifetime of anatomically modern humans, there has not been other than Mount Toma, there has not been a volcanic event which has which has threatened the future of the human species. um and and and uh in a world which humanity was present, there's just not been any extinction level volcanic events, but there have been significant asteroid and and and comet events. Um, so how can we get a sense of the size of the force of cosmic impacts and and and perhaps um comparing it with with the aftermath of nuclear warfare might might give us uh an idea. We're looking at Hiroshima on the right and and Nagasaki on the left after the explosion of those two very small atomic bombs. The explosive effect of of each um was about 15 kilotons. That's 15,000 tons of TNT. And Nagasaki was about 25 kilotons. 25,000 tons of TNT. Let's compare that with Chickixaloop. The impact that destroyed the dinosaurs. As much explosive energy as a 100 teratons of TNT. 4.5 billion times the explosive power of the Hiroshima atomic bomb. It was the beginning of the end for the for the dinosaurs as we've seen. And again with the younger Dryus impacts we see just as with the dinosaurs mass extinctions taking place all around the world. And and on this occasion it's very clear and as as Alan helped us to understand yesterday we're not dealing with one single big impact. We're dealing with a scatter gun of smaller impacts all around the world. There may have been big imp impacts on the North American ice cap. We do suspect that. But what we've got definite evidence for is the the the the younger driest boundary layer and the impact proxies uh within it. And that we've talked about Aba Herrera heat sufficient to melt quartz. And quartz melts at 2,200 degrees centigrade. uh and of course it had uh a huge effect in that area. Now, Alan mentioned yesterday the Talal Hamam um study and and the suggestion that a Tungusized air burst destroyed Tal Ham and that this may have been the biblical Sodom. Um and and they're they're talking about a Tungusized air burst. And let's just look at Tangusa again in Siberia. Altitude of 5 to six kilometers, flattened, 80 million trees. Um a very serious event if it had taken place over an inhabited area. Uh how many megat tons was Tunguska? Estimated to between 10 and 40 megat tons. Uh and and the energy of the explosion is estimated to have been equivalent to the explosive force of as much as 15 megat tons of TNT. A thousand times more powerful than the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. So these uh these events are very very serious when they happen. Um and the most recent that we are all aware of was Chelabinsk. Uh and that's the last that's a bit of um the Chelinks in impactor. Um it's been slightly you can see that the tip the top end of it is narrower than the bottom end. That's that's because it's been oriented by passage through the atmosphere. The atmosphere has bent off into this almost pyramidal shape. Um and here's Randall to talk about Chelab >> Chelabinsk. happened in was it 2013? It detonated like 15 miles up, but it still caused 1,500 injuries. Nobody was killed, but it caused 1,500 injuries, some of them serious. And it also damaged 7,000 buildings. And I don't know if you've ever seen some of the video clips of that, but the soundwave, the shock wave. Where did it hit? It's a little town called Chelabes. So it was not anywhere close to the magnitude of the Tundus object, but there's a possibility that it also was part of the same torid meteor stream. There's a paper that just came out on um new studies of the torid meteor stream. They've actually referred to it as the smoking gun for the younger dus event. Um and yes, we're talking about the torid complex. Um, very likely indeed that the Tunguska event was an object that fell out of the Torid meteor stream. Um, and and uh, yeah, we are now getting the authorities admitting that Earth could be at risk of meteor impacts. We might have wrongly assumed we're in a safe era. I just want to show a few of these wakeup calls from the universe. 2013, Chela Binsk 2015 unexpected asteroid flyby this Halloween. If it's covenant at Halloween, it's almost certainly a torid object. 2016, huge comet unexpectedly whizzes past the Earth. Hours after discovery, asteroid swept by. 2016, asteroid zip through Earth's shadow last night. Rerun asteroid buzzes Earth in a second close shave of 2017. And it goes on through 2017. Gibralarized space rock passes Earth, nailbiting near miss with buso asteroid. I I close shave from an undirected undetected asteroid. I mean, is the universe sending us messages? Are we being are we being told that we should be paying attention to something? Um, another Tongaskka sized asteroid makes a supply surprise flyby. Small asteroids buzzing Earth this weekend. It keeps on going on. 2019 NASA asteroid warning this colossal asteroid will skim Earth today. Astronomers potted a This is 2019, a car- sized asteroid just be hours before impact. 2019 asteroid surprise close approach illustrates the need for more eyes on the sky. Yes, definitely it does. Um and and so on and so forth. August 2020, March 2021, record number of asteroids seen whizzing past Earth in 2020. Asteroid the size of the Great Pyramid of Giza just flew safely by Earth. 2021, more of it happening. And then I I stopped keeping a record after 2021. But here's a kind of summary. Asteroids which came closer to Earth than the moon in 2022 by time of discovery. That's the red bit of that chart. 80 asteroids came closer to the Earth than the moon in 2022. In 2023, it was 62 asteroids that came closer than the moon. And uh in 2024 after closest approach it was 65 asteroids. In other words, we are sometimes not seeing these things until they've gone by. Uh and and that is not necessary. We do not have to we do not have to uh face doom and gloom because the universe can be a dangerous place. We are an intelligent and innovative species. Uh we are capable of solving this problem. Actually, we could sleep, sweep the the skies clean of of of everything in the near-Earth environment that could harm us if we chose to do so. But unfortunately, we're locked in such a state of tribal war in the world today that our leaders are spending whichever country they live in are are are spending much more money, vastly huge ma orders of magnitude more money on so-called defense, which is basically just another word for aggression. um and and and not defending the earth from the random dangers of the universe. Uh this is a choice we're making. We don't have to face another tunguska or another dinosaur event. We can do something about it. It's just a choice. It's just a choice that we make as a species. And it's unfortunate that we're not able to to make these choices in a in a rational way. That the tribal instincts in humanity lead us to target one another rather than to look for the collective future of the human race because we're all human beings. It doesn't matter which tribe we come from. We're all the same. We all need love. We all give love. We all love our kids. We all have hopes, fears, ambitions. It doesn't matter where we live, what religion we belong to. fundamentally what unites us is far far far more significant than what divides us. And and this this issue with the way we're relating to the universe is is is an example of how we're getting our priorities seriously seriously wrong. Um and then of course the asteroid hits and near misses. You've never heard about uh so many of those. Um it just keeps on going on. November 21, the Tunguska. We're talking now about the torid meteor stream again and the work of Dr. Emlio Spedicato who's a mathematician at the University of Burgamo together with Victor Kuban and and Bill Napier looking at the at the torid meteor stream. Uh it's clear that the torid meteor stream is uh made up of filaments of debris. Imagine a huge tube surrounding the entire solar system and that tube is 30 million kilometers wide and that is the torid meteor stream and in it there are filaments of debris which are not potentially harmful but there are also filaments of debris that are indeed potentially harmful. And the calculations of Ailio Spericato uh are that before 2040 we are going to be entering one of those very lumpy dangerous filaments of the torid meteor stream and we're going to be passing through it twice a year and he's urging that we pay attention to this unique complex of debris which is undoubtedly the greatest collision hazard facing the earth at the present time. Um, and uh, we started seeing reported in the media some news about the dangers of the torid meteor stream, which I'd been drawing attention to for for for years before that. Um, and and uh, there seemed to be a growing awareness of the torid meteor stream, but then now there's been the usual backlash to that and and and the critics as as as Allan told us yesterday have piled in on the comet research group and tried to say, "No, there's no real danger. There's no real threat. Uh nothing to worry about guys. Um catastrophism in context of geology and earth's history is often contrasted with uniformitarianism. Uniformitarianism meaning it's almost a philosophy of of science that as we observe the earth today the processes that we see today are the same processes that we saw in the past. Nothing very radical or dramatic suddenly happens. We shouldn't expect it to happen. that's going to all unfold in a nice friendly polite nurturing way. Um that that that's uniformisformitarianism. But catastrophism believes that big violent events cause quick large changes while uniformitarianism says these changes occur very slowly over long periods. So I want to look at the issue of um Jay Harland Brett great geologist 2nd of September 1882 to 3rd of February 1981. I was introduced to Jay Harland Brett's work by by Randall. Um and and we're looking at a remnant of a lost landscape here. This island of ancient soil crowned by a crop of wheat survived the ice age floods that sculpted the region known today as the chneled scablands. Brettz uh was one of those scientific rebels who wouldn't be told what to think by other scientists and he believed the evidence of his eyes and he began he he did this most intense protracted investigation into the chneled scablands of the Pacific Northwest. Um and and uh began that in 199. Experts couldn't give him any explanation of the giant potholes in the Quincy basin or indeed in many of the other bizarre features. And the mystery inspired him to train as a geologist and he did and he qualified. Uh and he went back as a tenure PhD geologist to study the channel scablands again. Um and the conclusion he came to after all those years of work studying the nature of the landscape, the deep scars, the the huge bees and maces left isolated, the only possible explanation he he said for all the region's features was a massive flood, perhaps the largest in the earth's history. a debacle which swe --- be carried in an iceberg on flood. And it's not alone. There's hundreds of them. Hundreds of these massive boulders. So, these are not just flood waters. These are churning waters filled with icebergs, filled with ripped up forests. There's mass in those waters. It's not just liquid. It's it's a solid, deadly, dangerous slurry that's pouring down. Uh, and you can see examples. These erratics are scattered all over the region, all left behind by retreating floodwaters. Boulder Park. Um, the Wamit meteorite is is interesting. It fell on the North American ice cap and was transported in an iceberg to the Wamtt Valley, Oregon during the cataclysmic younger dest floods 12,800 years ago. It was known and venerated by the Clackmouth tribe who called it Tamanowas before being seized by the Oregon Iron and Steel Company. According to tribal legend, Tammanowas was sent to Earth as a representative of the sky people exemplifying a union of sky, earth, and water. It is a an oriented meteorite. Again, if you see this shape, that's called an oriented meteorite. And that's because as it's entering the Earth's atmosphere, the atmosphere burns away the front part of it and turns it into almost this pyramid shape. In fact, there's very serious evidence that the origin of the pyramid form in ancient Egypt was based on uh what is called the Benben. Uh and this was a meteorite, an oriented meteorite that the ancient Egyptians saw this coming from the sky. they saw the pyramidial shape and and reflected that in the in the pyramids. Um so the truth is that Brett's never really abandoned his model even though he had to accommodate the prevailing opinion. But the unique assemblage of forms described as the channel Scablance records a unique episode in Plyesine history. Clearly special causes seem indicated. So now I'll ask Randle to join me and we will have a conversation. Thank you. Okay. So my dear friend Rand Carlson and Randall has taught me so much about the geological history of the earth and how we cannot disentangle the geological story of the earth from the story of humanity. These these are have to be absolutely connected. Uh and it was a great privilege to travel through the channel Scablads with you. >> Really good memories. I'm I'm I think we should do another journey. >> Pardon me? >> I think we should do another journey to the channel. I'd love to go see them again. >> You know, next month um Bradley and I have organized, you remember Bradley? >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. Of course. He was he was our driver on the trip and uh >> tremendously helpful in organizing these expeditions. >> So, we're going to do uh follow the great Bonavville flood. >> Ah, >> up from Bonavville Basin in Utah north into Idaho. and we'll follow its route along the Snake River. >> Right. >> Last fall, we did a trip uh >> looking at the Missoula floods and Bradley arranged for us to get into a large gravel pit, a large gravel quarry and we got the tour of the place. >> What was interesting about this gravel quarry is it's right there at a place called Tam Bar. And what happened when the Missoula floods came down, you had a slide up there of Paloo Falls, >> right? So that was part of the Cheney Paloo scabland track. >> It that water came down I believe out of Canada. >> Yeah. >> Hit the Snake River. It back flooded nearly 150 miles >> up up the Snake and finally reached its distal uh flow right there at Tamony Bar. >> Right. >> So what happens is if the water is moving upstream, it's slowing down. Mhm. >> And as it's slowing down, it's depositing its sediment. Right? >> So what happens is at the distal point of a backflow, you're going to find really fine grain sediment, whereas at the uh proximal end of the uh of the flow, you'll find the big boulders, right? >> Well, so you had the Bonavville flood coming north up through Hell's Canyon, the deepest canyon in North America. >> Yeah. As it discharged from the mouth of the canyon, it laid these thick gravel thicker than this room is tall. >> Right there at Tam Bar. >> Mhm. >> And if you go there, you can see these dark gray very coarse bouldery deposits from the Bonavville flood coming north >> sandwiched almost like frosting on the top of it. You see these fine grained buffcoled silts that were the back flood sediments of the Missoula flood. >> Right. >> They're juxtaposed right on top of one another. >> Now I think we had first seen that when I I think we went by there as early as 1998. >> And I remember seeing that looked like there was a direct contact between the two flood deposits. >> Yeah. So what I was became interested in was what was the timing? Was there a hiatus between the two events? >> Yeah. >> Well, so getting into this quarry last fall, >> I was able to they had a pit that was excavated. >> We were able to go down in that pit and under the Bonavville was more Missoula flood backflood silts. So you had Missoula flood silts, >> you had the Bonavville course stuff coming up ultimately out of Utah in southern Idaho and then on top of that you had more Missoula flood sediments. The sequence gave the appearance that essentially >> and that's what I was looking for. I predicted that we might find if we could get access to the base of the Bonavville flood sediments, we would find Missoula sediments and there there they were. What that suggests is that these two events were happening simultaneous. >> Simultaneously, not multiple separate floods. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Simultaneous. Now, Missoula flood, the theory is that you had a great glacially damned lake. >> Yeah. >> The ice dam gave way and this happened repeat like you said repeatedly. >> Up to 80 times apparently. >> Up to 80 times, which personally I think is ridiculous. >> Me too. >> Okay. And then but the Bonavville flood you had this gigantic lake over 20,000 square miles. you know, the Bonavville Salt Flats. How many of you guys know what the the Bonavville Salt Flats where they test? Yeah. So, that was the lake bottom. And if you're traveling in say uh Salt Lake City, if you look uh to the east up on the Wasach Mountains, you're going to see two great shorelines etched, right? Uh one of them is a thousand feet above the valley floor. And that was the depth of this temporary gigantic lake that formed. It rose up. I suspect that there was probably a seismic event fractured a sedimentary rock dam to the north that gave way and over the next 3 to four months 350 ft of water drained out. >> And so when you see the two shorelines, you see one that's above roughly 1,000 ft above the valley floor and then about 350 ft below that you see a second shoreline. Right? So this flood wound its way through, carved out the Snake River Canyon, carved over deepened Hell's Canyon and then I believe met the Missoula flood waters and but unlike the Missoula flood waters, so you had these two giant lakes, >> they both break through. One's a sedimentary rock dam, that's Bonavville, one is uh supposed to be a a glacial dam. Now, the Bonavville Lake was not being fed directly by glacial meltwater. >> So, it had to be rainfall. >> Yeah. >> It had to be in intense rainfall. It had to be torrential prolonged rainfall because that rose very quickly. >> Yeah. >> Up to that thousand foot above the valley floor. So, what I was believing was if we could show that those two floods were contemporaneous. Now, what we've done is we've expanded the scale and scope of that terminal ice age catastrophe. >> Yeah. >> So, being able to get in there last September and see that for myself and see that I had imagined that if we could get to the bottom of those Bonavville flood sediments, we might see Missoula flood. Now, Missoula, >> you were testing your hypothesis basically. Pardon me. You were testing your hypothesis. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Yes. >> Which is the right thing to do in science. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. And uh you know the the the uh the the quarry man who was giving us the tour there. I asked him you know I mean when you um are excavating here um do you find you know I mean so he was sure they had a pile of boulders >> that they had pulled out of that that had been washed up out of Idaho and probably stripped out in the cutting of Hell's Canyon. Um, so we're gonna do this tour in November or >> you're gonna take a group. >> Pardon? >> You're gonna take a group. >> We're gonna take a group >> and explore the landscape >> and it's almost sold out. I think we have three or four maybe five seats left. >> So if anybody's interested, how do we access your uh your >> randcarlson.com >> and check out check out randcarson.com. Traveling in traveling in these landscapes with Randall is uh an eyeopening experience to to say the least and I highly recommend his tours. >> Thank you. >> Well, we were going to one of the one of the issues with the multiple floods model um is that when we when we look at all of the damage in the channel scablands, we find that the mainstream explanation doesn't connect it at all to the younger dus impact. It seems to suggest that it happened before that. Correct. >> Um and and I know that you're not happy with that with that view and I'm not I'm not happy with that view either. What there's no doubt that glacial lakes did release waters. That's for sure. >> That's for sure. >> But was it enough waters to do this damage? And I I think this is where I come back to the to the younger dus impact hypothesis and the notion of of a couple of large bolides hitting the North American ice cap and releasing much more water. And of course, as that water comes forth, it's going to fill up those glacial legs and force them to release their waters. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> What what do you think about the timing of these events? What's >> Well, my my thinking is still evolving. One of the things I've looked at is, you know, John Shaw referred to CRE, catastrophic rise events, which were sudden pulses of sea level rise. >> You know, that 400 ft rise in sea level from the late glacial maximum to the early holene was not a smooth curve. >> No, >> it was punctuated by several >> extreme discharge events from the melting glaciers into the global oceans. >> Yeah. The first one now, the earliest one, Meltwater pulse 1A, yeah, is dated at 14,600. >> The Meltwater pulse 1B is dated at 11,600. Correct. >> Which is the top of the younger dus, the 1200,300 year. >> When when R says the the top, this is this is speaking in a sense in archaeological terms. What's higher up is younger and what's lower down is older. So the top is younger. So the younger dus what is little less than 129 12,900 the latest dating right >> now um the question is is there evidence of the floods associated with the younger dus and if you're familiar with the work of James teller >> a little >> okay you should go ahead and look into his work >> tell us more >> pardon me >> tell us more >> uh okay well he's he has been uh studying he's probably the foremost leading expert on on Lake Agazy. >> Okay. >> Which was this gigantic meltwater freshwater lake. Yeah. >> It was so big that if you know it would take you days to sail across it. When you're out in the middle of the thing, >> you wouldn't have seen any shorelines. >> And that's further east than the Missou Lake Missoula. It's >> Yes. That was Yes. That would have been uh melt water from the Laurentide ice sheet. Yeah. Whereas the Missoula would have been melt water from the Corona >> Yeah. >> Right. Well, so he's dated that there was a major outburst flood both to the north that basically carved out the channel the the the canyon that McKenzie River now flows into the Arctic. There was also at the same time an outburst to the south and you and I >> visited the outburst on our tour. We we stopped at the outburst point of Lake Agassy as we were crossing the uh South Dakota Minnesota border. It's right there. >> And um >> it was also a bird sanctuary. I don't if you remember the bird sanctuary. I know you were >> you were wiped out, man. >> I'm always wiped out. >> The bird sanctuary doesn't ring a bell, but other aspects. >> Santa will definitely remember bird sanctuary. They were It was like they were just hallalalooing. It was amazing. But anyways, >> right there it's Big Stone Lake. Yeah. >> And I got a slide actually of you walking over looking at some of these gigantic boulders that are laying on the landscape. And this was the out >> outburst point uh the southern outburst point of Lake Agazy. Right. >> The northernmost was what led into the Arctic Ocean via the >> McKenzie. >> Taylor dates that at precisely the lower younger dest boundary. >> I see. So he's so he's dating it to the beginning of the younger dry >> at the beginning of the younger dus >> which kind of >> it's difficult to resist the conclusion that we're looking at cause and effect here >> not just a correlation but >> and I'm of the mind that we might need to be looking at maybe several huge melting events. >> Yeah. >> Uh you know not maybe not just one. I felt for quite a long time that the 12,900 or 12,860 year ago event was just the beginning of the story. >> Uh that that we we were passing through a particularly dense part of the torid meteor stream at that time. And it's reasonable to expect that that it wouldn't have been confined to one episode of >> impacts. It would have there would have been multiple episodes of impacts over that 1,200 year period p --- ve the uh the source of the floods. >> Yeah. >> And I'm preparing now a whole presentation to show I see. So, we've made subsequent uh two or three other trips up there in that region and I've collected an enormous mass of evidence that I believe demonstrates that the source of the water was rapidly melting cordier and ice sheets. >> Lake Missoula was not really a lake in the sense of a static body of water. It was like just a temporary holding pond. >> Yeah. And it 600 cubic miles of water washed in there >> and then eventually flowed back out. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And that's where and there's a new couple of new studies that have come out. Now, one of the things that we did was we made a traverse from the headarters of the Frasier River >> which uh flows down and discharges there at Vancouver, Canada. Vancouver, Canada is built on this massive delta that's spled out from the mouth of the Frasier. And we photographed, we did video footage. I've got photographs all the way down that Frasier River showing catastrophic flood effects. Well, a paper's just come out, two papers, one in 2021 and another one just this past year, um, documenting catastrophic huge flood all down that Frasier River. The point when you when you trace that up, you get to this zone up there where you have the headarters of the Colombia, the headarters of the Okonagan, the headarters of the Frasier, all up there on what's called a Nakaco plateau and then you have the Rocky Mountain trench. I think all of those which were basically north south trending valleys were conduits for gigantic meltwater flows. Then the question becomes, okay, so it appears that right up there near Prince George, British Columbia, you had an epicenter of catastrophic melting. >> Where does that point us directly to an idea? >> I feel it points us to an impact. >> I absolutely absolutely >> And is there is there anything in the dating that would rule out that being connected to the younger Dryus event? Uh the dating interestingly the dating of that flood was 11,600. >> Okay. So it's a younger drius event. It's it's the >> younger dest intriguing. >> So Randall, um I would I would say you're a catastrophist, right? >> I would call myself a catastrophe. >> Yes. Um let's look at the role of catastrophes in in human history and and what's your view about the way that that academia, science, archaeology has treated the role of catastrophes in the human story? You know, we have these big histories of of of humanity, but you very rarely hear anything about anything much more than a local flood. And when and when archaeologists are confronted with the phenomenon of more than 200 flood myths all around the world, >> uh they say, "Oh, no. This was just those poor simple primitives imagining that a local flood was a global flood." Well, I don't agree with archaeologists on that. I don't think they were poor simple primitives. I think when they said it was a global flood, they knew it was a global flood. >> Yes. And yeah, I mean what you just said is my take exactly what what they've done is they've assumed well this was a local flood that got just exaggerated in the retelling. >> No, >> that's essentially the model. But like you said, I mean there have been several hundred accounts >> and this the parallels between them are are striking. I the last rambles among the uh Native Americans. I've quoted this, I forget the exact title of it, but it was I usually just refer to it as last rambles. It's uh uh George Catelan. He was a famous Indian artist who spent decades uh traveling and living with uh and painting and studying various Native American tribes. And uh at the end of his long career in his his life's work, he writes this book last rambles and he talks about the d the the diversity amongst the various tribes, the languages, the customs, the the symbolisms, their rituals and ceremonies, all of this. But then he says, but there was one thing they all had in common. They all believed that they were descended from the survivors of a great flood. >> Yeah. >> Sometimes th those stories also involved a great great fires. Mhm. >> And I'm thinking, okay, well, is there a naturalistic phenomena? And I think the answer is obvious. Yes, there is a naturalistic phenomena. And we know now from younger dest studies that there were large scale mega fires. >> Yeah. >> As you would expect. I mean, this is the the the almost ironic situation with a with a impact event is that is that you get floods and fires. Sets off wildfires. >> Yeah. And and that's what many of the many of the stories >> many of the stories and traditions from around the world remember colossal floods. They remember colossal wildfires. They remember a time of darkness when the skies are completely dark. They remember a time of cold. It's icy frozen cold. Uh there's the there's this overwhelming sense of cataclysm and not a small local cataclysm but a very big one. >> The fimble winter of the Scandinavians. >> Yeah. Uh, sounds very much like the younger driest to me. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So, we should mention that there was a gradual warming going on from between the older dryest and the younger dus >> that got reversed. >> Yeah, it was it was warming up from about 14,000 15,000 years ago through until the beginning of the younger dry. >> Yes, it was it was warming up which I think we could probably attribute to the Milanovich. >> Yes. you know, nice slow pace of warming. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> But then that's interrupted by this massive spasm >> of return to cold. >> Yeah. The the younger dry when you look at it on the chart, it's a real anomaly. >> It is a real anomaly. >> Suddenly out of nowhere, a trend that has been going on for thousands of years is reversed and we go back almost to the the peak of the ice age. Really? Right now, circling back to the the the modern idea of multiple floods, you know, when we look at the history of geology, interestingly, you find it before geology was a a a standardized uh academic tradition. >> Virtually all the founding fathers of geology were catastrophists. >> You know, um William Buckland and very they didn't all necessarily think the same thing. They had different models, but they were all in their own way catastrophists. >> Yeah. >> You know, uh Georgie Kovier, Agaze, >> uh Rodrik Merchesen, Adam Sedwick, they were all catastrophists. Yeah. >> And and they were not looking and they came to those conclusions by looking at the landscape free of the lens of dogma. They're looking in the the landscapes >> spoke directly to them. >> Um you know, in England it was the drift. >> Yeah. >> Called the drift. looking at these massive deposits like along the Tim's River and other places. Yeah. >> Um >> and eventually, you know, by the time after Lyallian uh gradualism became the dominant paradigm, you had uh first James Hutton who actually proposed with the idea that earth history was much longer. Mhm. >> See, when you're trying to cram all of all of the changes you see embedded in the landscape in like a 7,000 year earth history model, >> the biblical notion that the earth is 6,000 years old or whatever. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. >> Well, you know, by mid to late 19th century, we we've evolved beyond that. Now we have all this additional time to work with. >> Yeah. So, so the uniformitarian model sort of emerged uh as an academic discipline about the same time uh Darwinian evolution >> incrementalism and they sort of uh sort of complemented each other. Now we've got endless amount of time for species to evolve and we've got endless amount of time to create a a giant cataract or whatever the case may be. And then there was also the contention between you know the emerging science which was primarily based on observational evidence uh and its main competitor which was biblical literalism. >> And so there was a long controversy. There was a battle between the two sides that was eventually uh won by the by the scientific models. But so there was a reluctance by the time we get to the 20th century and you know Brett's I think the last of the old catastrophists was um sh his name uh it'll come to me in a second um he was still writing papers in the 1890s 1900s early 1900s um and then nobody until Bretts came along >> and and in the 1920s but um so I think what you had there was James Hutton and and you had uh Playfair and then Charles Lyall basically codified it into a dogma. And that's what became accepted once geology became an academic discipline. >> And so the fear was if you start talking about big floods, you're you're going to try to drag us right back to biblical literalism. >> Yeah. >> And so that was kind of the the conflict there, >> right? They didn't want to go there because they felt like it was going to be a throwback. Look, we had this hard one battle. Um and and we finally prevailed after a century or two and uh we're not going to go back. >> Yeah. >> So that was kind of where they were coming from. >> Yeah. They wanted to distance themselves from anything that might be might even >> have a sniff of the biblical literalism about it. >> Right. So the idea I think that you were referring to, you know, when you talked about the multiple flood hypothesis, see there you've got the situation where when you say a multiple floods, well the model was you had this gradual filling of the lake >> over half a century to a century. And that was filled because you had this gradual encroachment of a lobe of the cordieran ice sheet called the Pcell trench lobe >> came south and where Lake Pere if you guys look at maps look there at the northern Idaho you'll see Lake Pere Lake Pere would have been right where the ice dam was pres uh proposed to be. So you have this gradual encroachment of the ice dam. You have the gradual filling over 50 to 100 years of the lake. It gets, you know, 1,800 2,000 feet deep, bursts through the ice dam, flows out over eastern Washington, and then the pro process repeats itself over and over again. But here's the thing. I mean, you've got when you look at glaciers, there's a continuum of glaciers. One end you've got a a a polar glacier which is fast frozen to the ground beneath it. and it's very slow moving. I mean, inches a year because it's so cold and it's frozen to the ground. >> Then you've got tempered glaciers that are fastm moving, but they ride on a a base of water. There's melt water, like a sheet of melt water under them. >> Yeah. >> There's no way that you could have had a polar glacier there because how do you have a polar glacier and right next to it you have 600 cubic miles of water? >> Yeah, >> that would have actually just been more glacial ice. So you've got a tempered glacier and it's riding on ice, riding riding on water. And then on the downstream side of this ice dam, you've got what they're calling a Lake Columb, which was about 1300 ft deep. So you've got at the top end, you've got Lake Missoula, 2,000 ft deep. 30 miles away, you've got the the toe of the ice dam. You've got water, 1300 ft deep. Now, how in the world in my mind do you not do you prevent hydraulic connectivity between all these bodies of water? >> And so, there was a um a geologist by the name of Se. Warren Hunt. >> You remember him, right? I do. Yeah. >> Yeah. See Warren Hunt. He was he was a Canadian geologist and he wrote a couple of papers in the 1970s >> uh in the uh what was it? The Canadian Journal of Petroleum Geology. >> Yeah. widely read academic journ I'm sure many of you in here have read uh regularly read that journal I don't remember how I came upon it but he had two papers and he was saying this idea of an ice dam for the Missoula floods is ridiculous >> and he's and and and in trying to come up with a explanation he invoked the passage of a cosmic body >> right yeah >> in 1977 >> so he's ahead of his time in that respect Pardon me. >> He He was ahead of his time. >> Way ahead of his time. So I had I called him up and had several conversations with him before that first trip to to Canada that I made in 1999. >> He was still alive. I think he was probably late 80s then. And I said, "Do you still hold to the This is 20 years after these papers." >> Yeah. >> He said, "Oh, absolutely. More than ever." Yeah. >> He said, "I think that it was we have to look at some type of a cosmic event." >> Yeah. And uh so he he needs to get credit too. >> Absolutely. Yeah. >> Yeah. So what what what what's happening is that the >> there's a sense that the paradigm is gradually shifting that that that the case you've made all along that the channel scablands need to be looked at again and the whole issue of the dating and how this damage was caused needs to be looked at again. There's there's a sense that there's some movement in this in this area and and >> I think so. Yeah. You know, I've what's happened now, interestingly, is since I've got a much broader audience, I've had geologists now coming on some of the tours. >> Oh, great. >> Yeah, >> that's good. >> And they're totally And you know, there's a whole younger generation. I've got I've been contacted probably couple of dozen times in the last 5 to 10 years by, you know, I'm I got inspired by your work and I'm I'm now I'm getting my degree in geology and I think you're right. >> Yeah. >> You know, so I think it's like you said, you know, what is it? one funeral at a time perhaps. Um >> that's right. It was on Wes --- This this is a a a PowerPoint show that I've been working on. And essentially what I'm trying to do is widen the net and show we can see me flood features all over North America. right >> now. They're they're very spectacularly displayed in the channel scablands out there, but they're all over. So So >> let's have a look at some of it. >> What? >> Let's have a look at some of it. >> Okay, let's see what we got. >> Uh turn around a little bit here. Um okay, let's I'm going to get to the visuals. Okay. So, this is your um and you're welcome to to this graphic. I just took a map and and created the ice sheets on it. >> But you can see there the cordier and in the Laurentine. They were two ice sheets that coalesed during the late glacial maximum. And then during that warming period between the older dus and the younger dest they melted back a little bit and that's when the corridor opened up that Graham has mentioned uh you know was kind of the the uh pretty much the standard model that the the peepling of North America was through that corridor >> through that supposed ice free corridor. Yeah. >> Icefree corridor. And and hey there probably was some migration in there. Yeah. >> But um >> so here's Yeah. So here I'm kind of showing places where we can document gigantic flows of uh >> so by no means limited to the Pacific Northwest. >> Correct. Let's see if I can get the uh Yeah. Okay. So let's see. I was having all there. Uh so Missoula floods right here, but then you've got the Aabaska floods that came out of this area of the British of the Canadian Rockies and flowed down here and then carved out what is the the valley that is now occupied by the Missouri River. You have here's the Bonavville flood. So, this is going to be we're in this tour we're going to do, we're going to be starting here uh by Great Salt Lake, and we're going to be uh following the route of that flood. Uh this is not a very There we go. Up through the Snake River plane. Hell's Canyon is right here. And Tam Bar that I was talking about earlier is right here. And that's where the great Bonavville flood met the mighty Missoula flood. Then we have mega floods evidence all over the southwest um in multiple places. We have mega flood evidence in the southern appalachians that you're going to see some amazing pictures of in a minute. Uh what I'm calling the Ontario mega floods, the superior floods. Now these floods would have been the floods that we were I was just talking about that you and I were looking at the potholes, the giant potholes. >> And then the Lake Agazy super flood. And this is the one that dates at 12,900. >> Right. >> And it also flowed out this way. >> The Mackenzie River. Yeah. >> Up here. >> Mhm. >> So, glacial egg agazy filled all of this basin. >> Yeah. >> Now, I've been sitting on this for years, waiting for the right moment, but um we have a series of very deep lakes starting with Great Bear Lake. Come on here. There we go. Here, Lake uh uh Great Slave Lake, which is the deepest lake in North America. >> And if you look at the the landforms around here, they're all gigantic erosional features. >> Yeah. >> You've got you've got channels that were carved, massive channels that actually dwarf some of the stuff we see. >> Mhm. >> And uh and then we have Drumland fields. We're not going to probably have time to talk about Drumland today, but I think the Drumlands and the work of John Shaw >> John Shaw's work on the on the Drumlands and the subglacial floods as well. >> Yes. Because there's clearly evidence of really really huge subglacial floods. >> Yeah. >> And uh >> this is a a key point that water flows under the ice cap and and can destabilize the ice cap. And and >> talking about like the the the Bonavville flood, I mentioned that the most likely source, in fact, the only logical source for that sudden rapid filling of Lake Bonavville would have been extreme rainfall. >> Yeah. >> Right. Then we were talking about uh large uh erratic boulders being rafted on icebergs and that those icebergs are being carried in massive volumes of flood water. Well, so we have to come up with some kind of a scenario where we can simultaneously uh create the huge boulders that you said like hundreds even thousands of them strewn throughout the pathways of the flood. >> Yeah. >> We have to produce thousands of huge icebergs. We have to produce volumes of meltwater sufficient to transport float icebergs. Uh the the the one up here where it says um the Aabaska floods, there is an 18,000 ton erratic sitting just south of Calgary that was iceberg >> transported. Yeah. Right. >> The the iceberg that transported that boulder had to been the size of a tanker ship. >> Yeah, that's right. >> And so you're talking about flows of water that could float an iceberg the size of a tanker ship. >> Yeah. Now the the the erratic that particular erratic boulder it's called okats which I think was blackfoot for big rock right is one of hundreds of a train of these meta courtsite boulders that reach from where the aabaska river comes out roughly uh a little bit north of where the arrow is and stretches for 500 miles down into Montana. >> Right. >> Right. That meta quartzite boulder comes from Mount Edith Caval which is on the western side of the continental divide >> but the fragments these gigantic fragments of that mountain are strewn on the east side of the continental divide. >> Yeah. So we have to come up with a scenario where we could quarry tens of thousands of tons of these meta quartzite rock from Mount Edith Caval, transport it over the continental divide and spread it out in a train 500 miles long. >> How do we do that? Well, my this is where we go back to Warren Hunt because he believed that the passage of a very large extraterrestrial object would cause seismic shaking. >> Mhm. that would then cause the the the fracturing of the the shoulders of these mountains onto the ice sheet. Now, we have to add to that that within that same instant almost geological instant, we're simultaneously fracturing huge volumes, cing huge volumes of rock from these mountain shoulders. We're fracturing the ice sheets. We're melting the ice sheets. And now we've got this outflow glac what I'm calling the Aabaska floods there is the result of this and I don't know how you come up with an explanation where all those things could be happening simultaneously. >> Uh the fourth thing that you would add into the mix is instantaneous sublimation of huge volumes of melt water directly into vapor. >> Yeah. which is which we now know is being modeled through the study of oceanic impacts that there would be largecale injection of water vapor that then is going to rain out over days to weeks. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Um >> those are those are the those are the kind of levels of rainfall that we witness on the body of the sphinx actually. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And and yeah um >> we're gonna have to stop fairly soon. >> Who said that? H that was me. >> Well, we'll just I tell you what we'll do. Um if we got five more minutes. >> Yeah. >> So, here's Lake Agassy. And if you look at the bottom right here, that outlet, that's where Graham and I visited where the birds say, right at that point right there. >> And then that flowed out and created the Minnesota River Valley. That's right in here. And then we went up to where this arrow is. That's at the St. Croy and that's where we saw the potholes. >> Yeah. >> Um but you can see the size of of Lake Agaze. >> I know. >> And then to the north it drained out into the Arctic Ocean catastrophically. >> Now what I would say if I was in a debate with Flint Dibble, I would point out that we have tens of thousands of square miles of stuff like what we just saw here. And I would say, Flint, how many of you archaeologists have excavated >> into this >> in this? >> And are you going to tell me that you know for certain there's there's no fragmented pottery there or that there's no evidence of of >> you know human because No, you have never >> they never looked. >> They've never looked. Just like when you were talking about with Al Goodyear. >> Yeah. >> On Yeah. They never looked. So they're but they're certain they're convinced in their own minds. They know that there's nothing there. That's when archaeology becomes a religious faith. >> That's where Yes. >> the cult. >> This is Okatoes, the big rock, 18,000 tons. And what we can say about this is kind of using our forensic geological skills is that this was it was a single rock uh dumped onto the ice sheet. It was transported 500 miles from its place of origin, dumped in the prairies of of western Alberta right here. and it sank. You can see it sank into the alovuvium. >> So you had deposition of soft aluvium. The this would have actually the final stages of this process would have been relatively gentle because it's sitting on a huge iceberg. >> Mhm. >> And that iceberg is now melting away over many seasons, right? >> And gradually setting down. Yeah. >> This 18,000 ton rock into the landscape. >> Um so this was a completely independent flow of the Missoula floods. Um, and then where you get down where it crosses into Montana, you have this giant current ripples. >> And that that white line there, that's a mile long. >> Wow. >> So that gives you the the the wavelength. Yeah. >> And then what that does, it leads right into a huge valley that is the uh Missouri River. Uh, and then all over the Midwest, we have what are called boulder lags. Um catastrophic meltwater flood circuit 12,000 before present drumlins. >> Yeah. >> Um >> and I think the drumlins are going to end up being a key to deciphering this. And I think through the study of the drumlands, we're going to be able to pinpoint epicenters of impact in the ice sheet. Yeah. >> Um, let's just Okay. So, there's that's looking into the modern Missouri. You see the modern Missouri River in there. Now, you can look at the channel it's flowing in. >> Right. Right. >> That's classic. >> That's what you mean by an underfit >> underfit. >> Yeah. >> And then I think maybe I guess we'll stop with this one because this is spectacular. This you can see here. This is a gigantic flow. This is Lake Superior. This is like great lakes flowing over the Midwestern landscape and uh carving these fluial forms here. And then you can see like this would be uh let's see, is that the Yeah, I believe that's the Mississippi right there. >> Um but you can see that if you look up here, these would have been temporary islands and prior to the meltdown, these would have not have been isolated islands. The strata would have been continuous, let's say, from this to this, >> right? >> And all of this intervening area, hundreds of feet of material got washed away. All of this ended up going down, dumping in the Gulf of Mexico and the city of New Orleans is now built on that sediment. >> On that sediment. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Cool. >> So, I mean, there's a whole lot more we could go to. there is we could we could spend the entire evening >> talking about it >> but uh >> thank you thank you thank thank you Rand for >> oh I've thoroughly enjoyed it >> for for joining here uh I think we're a team uh and uh this is one of the points I'd like to make is that the the mainstream who dominate teaching in this area and and who are who are so hostile to alternative points of view. They're actually very organized. >> They're very what? >> Organized. They're very organized in in >> advocating their case and trying to destroy other cases. >> And one of the things that makes me sad is that is that um those of us on the alternative side are not nearly so organized. We're we're I think we're by nature chaotic and and an anarchctic people. And that's part of the reason >> probably so. But but you know what? That's why I called this the fight for the past because I do think we need we need to be more organized and and and uh you know have each other's backs and and and make make sure that these alternative ideas do not get swept away by the flood of nonsense emanating emanating from the mouths of archaeologists. >> Well, I get the impression that there is a sort of a sense of desperation. >> Yeah. because on some level they know because the evidence is too overwhelming now. It it and it continues to accumulate year by year um to the point where you know I listen to I to the extent that I'm capable of listening to some of these guys. I I I don't hear it. They're not addressing any of the points we're raising. No. Other than just dismissing dismissive. >> Well, that's nothing. you, you know, look, if you're going to go into battle here, you're going to have to do better than that. >> Yeah. >> Because um you're going to lose. And I think in the end, they're they're going to lose. >> They are losing. They are losing the argument. >> And and I think that they're they're aware of that. And so they're >> I hope within our lifetimes, we'll see some some change. >> Yeah. I'm I'm thinking the next 5 to 10 years. >> I think so, too. I I I I think we're coming to a critical moment. >> Yeah. Um, and when critical moments come, you don't and you're in the midst of them, you don't often see it. It >> right. >> You see in the rear view rear view mirror. >> Yeah. >> Thank you, Randall. It's been a very enjoyable. >> Thank you, Graeme. >> Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, guys. Thank you.