33.09 - MU Podcast - The Architects
01:11:38 Share

Today at T-Mobile, I'm joined by a special co-anchor. What up, everybody? It's your boy, Big Snoop D.O. Double G. Snoop, where can people go to find great deals? Head to T-Mobile.com and get four iPhone 16s with Apple Intelligence on us, plus four lines for $25. That's quite a deal, Snoop. And when you switch to T-Mobile, you can save versus the other big guys comparable plans plus streaming. Respect. Only up out of here. See how you can save on wireless and streaming versus the other big guys at T-Mobile.com slash switch. Apple Intelligence requires iOS 18.1 or later.

Welcome to Mysterious Universe, Season 33, Episode 9. Coming up on this show, we've got the instinct of the supernatural, the solar system's message to humankind, and the signature of the Earth's architect.

I'm your host, Benjamin Grundy. Joining me is Aaron Wright. Nice to be back, typhoon free. Yeah, you survived the hurricane. I did. The once in a 70 year cyclone that was going to eradicate the great southeast of Queensland. Yeah, like I was saying to you earlier, the only sufferers of the cyclone here were the free listeners who didn't get a show last week. Pretty much. Everyone else was pretty much fine. Kids were swimming in the pool the day of the cyclone. Nothing happened. We got a bit of wind. Yeah, so it doesn't matter. We've got a great show coming up for you today, though. I got half flooded.

Well, that doesn't count. Half-blooding doesn't count. No, there was a big puddle on the road and I had to go to the other side of the road to get to the shops. And as I was going, the news media was there with their cameras trying to interview people. And so I made sure that I just went straight through the puddle as fast as I could. So the reporter got splashed. I was like, there's your story. Yeah.

But other than that, nothing happened. I think I actually saw that. There was, I've got to find it now. There was a news clip of some reporter. How disgusting is it that they're driving this fast? Yeah, that was me.

Because I wanted to go get some milk and eggs before the road got fully flooded. Otherwise, I wouldn't be able to get back in. I was in a hurry. And toilet paper. Don't forget toilet paper. That was completely wiped out. No, it's good to be back. I've got a great new book, which isn't actually out yet. I had to do some internet trickery to get my hands on an advanced copy. But it comes from some of our favorite authors, Alan Butler and Christopher Knight. Oh. Who did the legendary... Oh.

I don't have anything on my screen there. They did the legendary Civilization I, which was going into the megalithic yard and all these ancient units of measurement that, incredibly, being over 4,000 years old, corresponded to the dimensions of the Earth and the Moon. Astronomical units as well. Yeah, perfectly. Here it is on the screen here. So that was way back in 2011. After they wrote this, they found all these strange correlations with those ancient units of measurement that,

with the moon. And so Who Built the Moon came out, I think it was in 2014, they released this book, another favorite of ours on the show. And a new one is coming out in May. They Built the Earth. Oh, that's a new angle. Now they're really stepping it up to this idea that the earth itself is a design. There's an architect behind it.

Well, that's quite an extension upon what people have been suggesting about the moon. There's some speculation that the moon itself is somehow engineered by a far more advanced race because of all the details about how it's 400 units from the Earth, but it's still 400 times smaller than the Earth. Yeah, we were just talking about that. What a coincidence. What a coincidence. Yeah, I mean, that precision, though. That precision is impossible. It's too impossible. Yeah, in this new book, they show this precision and the...

ridiculous idea that it's a coincidence it can be seen not only in the moon but and its relationship to the earth but uh a very specific object in the asteroid belt which gives a clue as to well the whole thrust of their idea that the earth was actually the the existence or the way the earth is configured is from an architect something in the asteroid belt so is there a some type of

What, planetary body or... Yeah, there's this mysterious object. What, like the Black Knight satellite kind of thing? No, not kind of sci-fi like that, but it is a known body. NASA mysteriously studied it after they released their book about the moon, and they think there's something to that. So I'll be going into that, and they believe there's the fingerprints of an architect that have been left behind, and it's indisputable. So this is almost kind of...

collating all of their previous books into this one unifying theory of the design behind our planet. I mean...

Yeah, they're amazing authors. What have you got coming up? Well, I want to go into this. It's an old theory, but I was just digging around looking for some details about the trickster phenomenon. And I happened to come across an old lecture by the late, great Christopher O'Brien. And he came up with this really fascinating idea of the coming trickastrophe phenomenon.

So what do you mean? What trick? Yeah, the trick-castrophe. So it's, and of course, is this tricknology? It's like tricknology. No, no. It's about this idea that essentially that throughout history, and once again, you only recently mentioned the idea of like clowns and jesters. Like we don't,

really know where they came from. Like we've got some, you know, idea, but we don't really know where that form came. And we were talking about DMT and similar experiences that possibly they've formed in the human psyche from connecting with these entities. But the other idea, and we've talked about this a lot in the show, is that there is an intelligence behind the phenomenon and that intelligence functions to, uh,

influence humanity in certain ways. Well, Christopher O'Brien has a different approach to it. He thinks that this is very much tied in with the trickster phenomena, which is clowns, but it also can be a whole wide range of different things. So we're going to talk about

about high strangeness from the trickster perspective of where it's high strangeness on purpose because it's done to create this kind of confusion and oddity and of course the high strangeness. But he comes up with this really interesting idea, which I'll get into in the plus extension, about why it's not an intelligence. Oh, okay. It's something different, but it actually has a role in keeping humanity alive.

basically in its lane. You've got to do Paul Stobbs' book on the next post-show. Oh, what's that book? The Nephilim Looked Like Clowns, Volume 1, The History. It's pretty psycho. Oh, is it? Yeah, I tried getting it. I got it last year, but it's heavy on the biblical context. Okay. So it's kind of hard for show material. Yeah. But his argument is that, yeah, the Nephilim from the Old Testament. Yeah.

they're actually, they looked like clowns. That would be truly terrifying because no one really thinks that clowns are fun. Let's be honest. No one looks at a clown and goes, oh, geez, that guy's fun. They're freaking terrifying. It's like looking at a snake.

Yeah. There's no real difference between them. Yeah. Shocking. Well, let's get into The Architects of Our Earth. And yeah, this is the new book from Christopher Knight and Alan Butler. Like I said, it's not coming out until May in paperback, but there's a little bit of a loophole. You can get the audio book version now from Audible. Use AI to transcribe it. No, I got a galley. I got a net galley version. Yeah.

And I think it's definitely worth talking about now. I don't want to hang on to it till May because they've really knocked it out of the park and you can just get the audible version. So I couldn't wait to share it with you. And of course, have I got my, I don't have my images up either. I'm so ill-prepared.

So ill-prepared. Well, our software did collapse last week, so it's fine. Talk about something else while I put my pics on the server. Just entertain us. Give us a joke or something. Go. I can't do this like at the last second. Like, I can't do it. I can't do improv like that. It doesn't work for me. Give us a joke, some kind of stand-up. Do a stand-up routine for 30 seconds while I load the images, please. Oh, a stand-up routine.

Let me just tell you about my life for the last decade. It won't be funny either. It'll be extremely depressing. So you're doing it already. Yeah. That's good material. Pull it up. It's all right. Is that all you've got? That's all I've got. 30 seconds of material? Yeah. That wasn't even 30 seconds. That was like nine seconds. I got nine seconds of material ready to go. There it is on the screen there. They built the earth.

And after that, or before that, sorry, we had Who Built the Moon and before that, Civilization I. So brilliant writers. I hope you check out their work. They begin with a quote from this philosopher. His name's Antony Flew's late philosopher, Antony.

This guy spent his entire career in opposition to religious belief. He's like your penultimate, you know, hat-tipping atheist, right? He believed in the superiority of science above all else, didn't believe in any kind of, you know, obviously created God. He thought that was absurd. But a strange turn came over him in his 80s.

He stated that a super intelligence is the only good explanation for the origins of life and the complexity of nature. So this is a man, his entire life was supernatural.

philosophy. But is this because his mortality suddenly comes into view and he's like, I probably better think about my creator? You could argue that, but no, he didn't believe in a creator. He still didn't believe in the, I guess, the idea of an all-powerful omnipresent God, but he did believe that the origins of life on our planet came from a superintelligence.

Now, there's an interesting distinction there, and the authors in the book sort of walk that line as well. So when we're talking about an architect of our Earth, we're not necessarily talking about God. And that doesn't say that the authors don't believe that God exists in terms of a being that created the cosmos. It's a little bit Prometheus. But yeah, there's something local going on. There's something unique to our little corner of the cosmos.

He, the author said, what we have found largely by accident is a deliberate and detailed message from the entity that that philosopher called a super intelligence. And it uses the language of mathematics. So wait a second. Is he suggesting he was in contact with something or this is just his philosophy changed?

No, he's just, basically, that's his reasoning. Right. And I'll get into why he thought that. So they mentioned their previous work from 2005, again, Who Built the Moon? And before they were going to release that book, they were unsure of the response they'd get. Because, again, in that previous book, Who Built the Moon?, they're arguing that the moon is engineered. It's a created thing. Yes. They expect it to be attacked by astronomers. They expect it to be attacked by scientists.

physicists from all sides about this hypothesis. But the sales went ahead, the book was launched, and it did very well. It still today has a 4.5 star average. And they said, we received overwhelmingly vast response from the readers saying that our hypothesis was sensible, well thought out, it made sense. But what they didn't receive, they said, was even the tiniest comment

from those whose job it is to know about the nature of the solar system. They didn't get anything. They didn't get any criticism. They didn't get any praise. That doesn't necessarily mean anything, though. They could just be like, well, we're not going to bother giving this a time of day. Well, they did get reactions from professionals in those fields, like physicists and astronomers, if they were retired.

if they had no stake in the game anymore. If they were out. Not worried about funding. They were happy to get some feedback. Those guys gave some feedback. And what did they say? Well, they said in general that they were appreciative of their hypothesis. They not outright agreed with it, but thought it was well thought out and an interesting idea. They felt, the authors felt, that even criticizing their hypothesis might be seen as engaging with the enemy from those who were in the status quo. Right? Yeah.

But after the book was released, something strange happened. They said it acted as a kind of trigger. Astronomers suddenly began to make references to the moon and to its all-important role in nurturing life on Earth. And they said after their book came out, there was almost a response where there was a proliferation of television documentaries about the moon.

They said the BBC website still contains educational videos that we're certain were written and produced as a direct result of our book, Who Built the Moon? They said, we know this because of the production companies consulted with us on how to create the program. So actually dealt with us. Are they suggesting that there was some kind of subtle controlled release of information or... Not in the terms of a conspiracy, but...

There was just a renewed interest in the importance of the moon, but their ultimate conclusions were never acknowledged. There were other influences like, this is a kind of silly one, but the movie Moonfall, for example, the director, his name's Roland Emmerich, he did Independence Day as well.

He stated that reading their book was the direct influence that led to this movie. Have you seen that? I downloaded it last night while I was reading this. And it's so... I can't watch anything that's that corny. Yeah. It's pretty bad. But the director...

The main character is Casey Houseman and Casey is like Christopher Knight. That's his initials reversed. And Houseman is Alan Butler, the other author. Like Butler is Houseman. Houseman, yeah. So the director was like giving a direct reference to the authors. So they thought that was pretty cool. But something more significant than this kind of B-grade Hollywood movie was the Dawn space mission. Now they said this was odd. The Dawn space mission was,

was a NASA mission that was slated to examine asteroids in the asteroid belt. And it was basically put on hold. It was, you know, they wrote up the mission description and the cost analysis and all that sort of stuff. And then it was just shelved.

But then after their book came out, suddenly NASA was like, okay, well, we need to get the Dawn mission going again. All of a sudden it got renewed. That's weird because that ties in a little bit to some of the funding conspiracies that surround the Apollo missions because it was Apollo. I can't remember which it was. I mean, some people in conspiracy circles have said it went up to like Apollo 20 or something. Oh, really? Yeah, something crazy, right? But what was odd is I think after the Apollo missions ended, the last one that ended, there were still two more Apollo missions that were funded. They're

They're actually already funded and planned, and then NASA just killed them off. But the argument is that they still went ahead, but under the cover of darkness for the purposes of going to the moon to seek out more information about the moon being an artificial satellite. Okay.

It's not quite that much of a conspiracy. Like the authors themselves admit, look, this is just maybe a coincidence. Like they're not convinced of this, but they say it is odd. So they ended up rebooting this Dawn space mission in September of 2007. And I think I've got the Dawn's spacecraft on the screen there. So that's what they sent up and they sent it to the asteroid belt. That tinfoil is expensive. Yeah, they always look so crap.

So they specifically wanted to look at the asteroids Vesta and Ceres. And we just mentioned Ceres on the last show with that kind of silly space soldier story we were doing. That, yeah. So they go up in this spacecraft. It examines Vesta. And Vesta's basically, you know, your average looking asteroid.

asteroid. It's not a sphere. It's just like a big chunk of rock full of pockmarks. And it was exactly what they expected the makeup to be. Nothing out of the ordinary. But the spherical planet that you're seeing in the render there, and I think that's an actual photo of Ceres,

it's very different. And they wanted to understand why it was there. Like, why was this spheroid mini planet in the middle of the asteroid belt? It didn't make sense. So it's often been labeled as an asteroid, but it kind of, yeah, it looks like a little planet, like it is a little sphere. And they point out that

series is different to any other asteroid and orbiting where it does, it's so alien in comparison with its companions that it seems like the proverbial, like lonely little petunia in an onion patch. It's really out of place. Has it fallen out of orbit in our solar system or something? It was like a dwarf planet at some point. That's what people, well, that's what NASA wanted to understand. Or that's presumed what they wanted to understand is

How did it get there? It doesn't really make sense that it's there. So NASA was trying to understand this. Now, Ceres has often been thought of as an interloper, the idea that it's a rogue body, as you suggested, that came in and got detached from some other orbit and just ended up there.

But it doesn't quite add up while it's there. So I've got some better images. It looks very moony, doesn't it? Yeah. See, that's a clue. That's a little clue as to what's coming up. And you see these bright patches on it as well. Is that ice?

Yeah, it has these kind of ice volcanoes. Apparently, it's full of water. Like the entire thing has more water inside its crust than all the water on our planet. Do they mention any analysis of the craters? Because one of the arguments about the moon being artificial is that it has these craters everywhere, but the craters are too shallow and in their consistency for it to be just a natural bombardment effect. Uh...

Nothing mentioned specifically about the craters, but the makeup of it is strange, right? So it contains a ton of water, ammonia, and clay and gases, right? But it has a number of craters, as you can see on the image there, but that's nothing compared to what it would look like if it didn't have its particular unique makeup. See, what happens when something impacts into Ceres is

say another asteroid oh the water absorbs the shock yeah it gets sucked into the sphere weird and just like disappears from the surface and that's why it still looks kind of like a little planet and not just like a destroyed rock so hey are they saying it's not entirely solid like how can no it's not yeah it kind of absorbs into the surface yeah

It seems to have the ability to swallow objects that strike it and to even eventually eradicate any crater that may have been formed by the impact. So you could sort of argue... That's definitely different to the moon. ...that it's self-healing in a way. So the Dawn spacecraft goes up to examine it. It arrives at Ceres on March 6, 2015. And by June of 2016, Dawn was still there, constantly orbiting Ceres, sending back information to NASA. And at that point...

Other NASA engineers were like, okay, we've got all the information on Ceres and the spacecraft is doing fine. We've got plenty of fuel left. Let's go and see another body in the asteroid belt. But the NASA higher-ups said, no, keep orbiting Ceres. And it was a little strange. They continued orbiting until June the 20th, 2017. And now Ceres is the most studied object by NASA ever.

in the entire solar system. Have they given an official reason why they decided to stay there for so long? Well, again, the authors are like, we don't really know. It's a little bit of a mystery. They're not outright saying it's any kind of conspiracy, but it's just, it's a little bit, it makes you think, like, why did they spend so much time on Ceres? Well, surely there's only so much data you can collect from an orbiting spacecraft. Yeah, you would think that. So this is really important to the story. So keep this, uh,

little spheroid rock in your mind because it's going to come back later in the story. So continuing on with their book, they talk about viruses. They talk about the emergence of life from the whole primordial soup idea, which, you know, I won't spend any time on those chapters because they're quite big and complex, but ultimately it's nonsense. Like the idea that

there was this chemical soup and some random spark of life just created the first life on our planet. Well, I think it's so ridiculous as to, from what I recall with the official theory is that it was like, yeah, it was a primordial soup with all the components required for the generation of nucleotides. It just took some sparks of lightning and all of a sudden life kind of existed. They tried to recreate this in a lab and they couldn't do it. They couldn't do it without isolating...

the right amino acids and really tinkering with it, which kind of disproved the whole idea that it's just emerged out of nothing. But it is fascinating though how it's like the whole biblical, you know, ideology of let there be light. And it was like there was flashes of light and then

you know, life somehow formed. Well, the biggest issue with this is it's a probability problem. And the authors go through this in detail. So I'll just touch on this a little bit. They say just one average protein contains over 300 amino acids. In order to create the protein, it would take a gene of DNA that would have to contain 1000 nucleotides in its chain.

Every DNA chain contains four sorts of nucleotides. It results in a possible four to the power of 1,000 possible forms. So that's a four followed by 1,000 zeros. So that's a pretty big number. Still though, I mean, people get struck by lightning and the chances of getting struck by lightning is like one in what, two billion? Something like that. So I mean, I know it's an exorbitant number. Okay, that's how many zeros are in a billion?

Is it nine? Yeah, nine. I'm saying a thousand zeros. Okay, that's a lot more. That's like, again, the probability, we're talking probabilities here, a thousand zeros. That's a number we can't even conceive of to get

some perspective on this, it's estimated that there are only 10 to the power of 80 particles in the whole universe. Okay, yeah, so the probability is a little bit different there. It's like winning probably the best lottery of existence. Yeah, even in the entire existence of the universe, you would never win that lottery. So one begins to realize, they say, how utterly impossible it would have been for complex DNA to be accidentally created in the primeval soup of the young Earth.

For a minimum living cell, there are 60,000 proteins of 150 configurations. So you had Joseph Mastropaolo. Oh, nailed it. PhD in physiology. He's an expert who's tackled this at great length. They say he estimates that the probability of the evolution of this very first cell would be in an absolutely staggering one in 10 percentage.

to the power of 4,478,296. So that's 10 with nearly 4.5 million zeros behind it. Don't make me imagine numbers. The point is that you can't. It's too big for the human mind. So were it not for the fact that DNA does clearly exist, no self-respecting scientist could uphold the possibility of it having originated.

by chance. It's just absurd. So if every particle in the universe had one chance for every second since the beginning of time, you still wouldn't have DNA. That lottery still wouldn't have been won. Yeah. But the issue that I have with that is like, again, like for that individual that is struck by lightning, yeah, you've got a one in 2 billion chance of it, but it happened, right? So yeah, we've got all this like indescribably large numbers about what could happen. But then again,

It happened. So is it that chance? Put it this way. If you're going to make a bet on which answer is most likely true, right? And that's why I mentioned that philosopher flew earlier at the start of the show. By the end of his life, he was like, well, the least incorrect answer is a super intelligence. And he's not the only one that said this. For example...

Who is he? Peter T. Mora from the National Cancer Institute in Maryland. He's a macromolecular biologist. He says the presence of a living unit is exactly opposite to what we would expect on the basis of pure statistical and probability considerations. There should be no life.

It just shouldn't exist. The English scientist J.D. Bernal said way back in 1965, the answer would seem to me to lead to the conclusion that some sequences other than chance occurrences must have led to the appearance of life as we know it. It can't just be chance. The late Professor Sir Fred Hoyle, one of the most respected astronomers who has ever lived,

said, rather than accept the fantastically small probability of life having arisen through the blind forces of nature, it seemed better to suppose that the origin of life was a deliberate intellectual act. So people that are rational...

come to this same conclusion, that you're less likely to be wrong if you believe in intelligent design for life. And intelligent cosmic control was the term that Sir Fred Hoyle used. But surely there are so many people, like it's saying, yeah, any reasonable, rational person, but there's plenty of people would not come anywhere near this that are reasonable and rational or considered to be reasonable and rational. That's true. So that opinion though, by many of these heavyweight thinkers,

that there must be some directed kind of intelligent design. They go into directed panspermia. That's one of the ideas that the authors float. But they ultimately say this means that an intelligence we have called the UCA, got an acronym already. This is the Unknown Creative Agency.

deliberately directed DNA-based material at our planet shortly after the Earth slash Moon duopoly came into existence. But that also, it doesn't have to be intelligently directed. It could just be panspermia, which in itself though is crazy because then that suggests that there are other humans elsewhere in the cosmos and somehow that DNA has gone from them to here, which would also explain though why there are UFO reports of human-looking aliens. Well, yeah.

Just to address the first thing of what you said, it actually does have to be intelligent because there's the uniqueness, like putting aside the primordial super argument,

If you just focus on that, and sure, you could have some panspermia hit the perfect Goldilocks planet, but the fact that the Earth is the perfect Goldilocks planet... Yeah, in that zone. ...is in itself, you know, more evidence that it's been done on purpose. And then an asteroid carrying DNA just happened to also hit at precisely the right time. So let me go into that briefly on why the Earth is unique. And this isn't a huge book. It's like 170 pages, so each section is pretty tight. Like, they managed to fit it in quite well, and I'm going to skip over a lot.

Your data is like gold to hackers. They're selling your passwords, bank details, and private messages. McAfee helps stop them. SecureVPN keeps your online activity private. AI-powered text scam detector spots phishing attempts instantly. And with award-winning antivirus, you get top-tier hacker protection. Plus, you'll get up to $2 million in identity theft coverage, all for just $39.99 for your first year. Visit McAfee.com. Cancel any time. Terms apply.

So the Earth, as I mentioned that term, the Goldilocks zone. So this is this perfect zone that's the perfect distance from the star. It's not too hot. It's not too cold. Yeah. So that water can exist in its three states, you know, solid, liquid, gas. The composition of the Earth is unique as well because of the iron and the nickel and the way the Earth rotates. It has this natural dynamo effect. That's what gives us our magnetic field, our magnetosphere. Protecting us from radiation. Exactly. Without that, we'd just be fried from radiation. Right.

There's more. In its earliest days, the planet's equator remained pointing directly at the sun. This would have meant that the polar regions would have received virtually no light and heat and would have been indescribably, like, beyond your recognition cold, while the equatorial belt would have been like a blazing 100 degree hell zone, like you wouldn't be able to go there.

So despite the benefits of its perfect position, the Earth was still destined to end up like Mars. Like we would have had this super rocky crust and... So what, all the liquid water would have evaporated off, everything else returned to ice at the poles and that would be it? Yeah, exactly. Yeah, that's exactly what would have happened. All the planet's minerals and metals would have been locked in its core. The atmosphere of noxious gases and surface temperatures would be either catastrophically hot and kill you or catastrophically cold and kill you.

So fortunately, though, something happened that totally changed the Earth's potential. So yes, we're in the Goldilocks zone. Yes, there was a magnetosphere, but you still wouldn't be able to survive. But then something happened. Somehow, we got the moon. We got this incredibly large moon. Now,

This is where they talk about these impossible numbers they started to come across. And they came across these numbers when they were looking at the megalithic yard from their first book, Civilization I. Yeah. So the megalithic yard was part of this, as I was mentioning at the start of the show, this ancient measurement system that

that it's really an incredible anomaly that the ancient people were using it because it means they must have understood the circumference of the earth, the weight of the earth, the distance and all these modern measurements that we understand of our solar system. Ancient people knew it and based their measurement systems on it. But they shouldn't have. That's the point. How could they possibly have known? How did they have the technology?

So they said, what followed in our research astonishes us today just as much as it did 20 years ago. We went on to realize that the moon also conformed precisely with this incredible mathematical and geodetic system. Yet no other planet in the solar system and its moon that we checked enjoyed this kind of correlation.

So again, the Earth and our Moon are unique. This super ancient system of measurement worked on an alternative form of geometry than the one we use today. It had 366 degrees in a circle, you know, rather than the normal 360. The reason 366 was chosen is because the Earth resolves on its axis this number of times in one of its orbits around the Sun.

Now, you might say, oh, hang on a second. We've got 365 days in a year. We'll be correct for that, don't we, with Alipio? Yes, but they say it's actually 366 because...

Because we're viewing it from being on the Earth, it's 365 to us. Oh, I see. Okay. But if you're viewing it outside as a system, it's 366. Meanwhile, the Earth polar circumference divided into 366 equal parts of megalithic degrees produces a linear length that is equal to 100th of the lunar circumference. So this suggests that while the Earth was split into 366 degrees, the

there are exactly 100 of the same degrees to the circumference of the moon. So there's all these connections. We've done shows on this before that show these radical connections that just go beyond coincidence. The 400 times distance from the sun and the earth from the moon that you mentioned earlier is one of the major ones. But they said that matters got even stranger the closer they looked.

The sun has to be taken into account. Seen from the surface of our planet, the sun and the moon appear to be the same size. This is what we just mentioned. It takes place because the moon is 400 times smaller than the sun, but at the same time of the total solar eclipse, it's also a neat size.

400 times closer to the viewer producing as you see there the perfect solar eclipse it's funny we were just talking about this on the last show I know it's weird isn't it as an example of course there's some kind of creation going on like how could you believe this coincidence just happened

This just happened for the only planet in our solar system that is inhabited in this dimension by sentient beings that we know of. And it just happens to be the one where this beautiful, perfect display appears in the sky. Just a coincidence. If it was one or two, then I'll be like, well, okay, look, you know, obviously that's chance. That's the randomness. That's the entropy of the universe. Like that absolutely can occur. But as you're highlighting here, there are just so

So many of them and all of them had to take place so that humanity could thrive. Well, the fact that this, as you're seeing on the screen here, this scenario that creates the perfect total eclipse, if this happened and the numbers were random,

You'd be like, okay, that's pretty amazing. Still maybe not a coincidence, but it's pretty amazing. But the fact that the numbers are a perfect neat 400 in each respect, it just adds to it tenfold, doesn't it? So when they wrote that book, Who Built the Moon, back in, was it 2014, they came to the conclusion that these repeating integer values were a sort of primordial signature of

left behind by some super intellect that had engineered the earth and constructed the moon so that they demonstrated a cohesion with the physical reality of the sun. It felt as if this was a signpost left behind for intelligent life. So was our attention being deliberately directed towards the nature of the moon? Was the earth's companion indeed artificial? And to what in particular is this potential signpost pointing us at?

So they realized there must be a message involved for humanity if this was true, if their hypothesis was correct. They just didn't know at the time when they wrote that last book what the final piece of the jigsaw puzzle was. But this time they think they've cracked it. At the time when they were writing Who Built the Moon?

There was no real satisfying consensus on how the moon was, how the earth got the moon, right? There's no real kind of sufficient understanding of how that happens. And there still isn't, is there? Well, I'll get, so I'll get into that. That's an important part of the story. They said something changed, like something changed.

I still want to mention a couple of things. Like they talk about the television documentaries that came out and they go into more detail on why the moon is required for the life we have on Earth. Like they talk about tidal forces in the oceans, which allowed life to occur in the oceans. The moon plays a part on how sections of the Earth move around, which kind of

diverts the volcanic activity and kind of logs it down a bit. Yeah, and it replenishes the minerals and metals on the Earth, all essential to life. But one of the major ones is the moon controls the way the Earth spins on its axis.

They talk about that. So without that, we'd just be spinning so crazily. Like a wobbling top. Yeah, it'd be like a spinning top, but it kind of put the brakes on the hardcore spin that we had and made it more stable. It keeps the angle of that tilt the same as well so that we have seasons equal in both hemispheres. So essentially, they say the moon is effectively a machine, right?

deliberately designed to act upon the earth and make it an incubator to nurture advanced thinking life forms. The only thing is though, isn't there reports from oral traditions, from cultures that claim that there was a time before the moon?

Like there's some of those reports. I've only ever heard one reference to that. And it's supposedly from some Chinese source, but I could never pin it down. Yes. I heard that there was American Indian tribes that have this in their oral traditions, that there was a time before the moon, but whether or not that's just some, you know, superstition that has moved through their traditions. I don't know. Yeah. I'm not sure about that. Well, yeah.

Going on to that idea of what's the leading theory of how the moon was captured by the Earth? And I guess that first one is a capture. Well, didn't it smash into... The idea is that it smashed into the Earth and kind of just bounced off a little bit and then just hung around? That's one of the most popular theories, but there's a whole bunch of reasons why that's unlikely. Because we have no crater consistent with it? Well, craters can kind of get covered over time with the surface of our planet, but...

They argue that, well, a lot of it's done with simulations now. So they run computer simulations and that particular scenario of a lone body striking the earth, it doesn't quite match up because of the, it's got to do with the makeup of the rock in the moon and the earth and how it's really similar. I'll get into it in a moment. So the first one is the capture, the idea that a lone body was coming through like an asteroid and was captured by the earth and it just

stuck in our orbit and over time kind of coalesced into the moon they say the biggest issue with this is it fails to explain the present angular momentum of the moon and the way it travels around the earth and also the makeup of the rock like they're too similar so it's obviously the moon was something that was created around the same time as the earth and

Well, that's where the smash-off theory comes out, is because it's the same material, or similar material. So that next one is the giant impact hypothesis, which you're talking about. That's the most popular. Well, the other one I've seen, though, it was almost like it was when the Earth was still beginning to harden, but it was molten. And so when it smashed, and that would explain actually why there's no crater, because it was still semi-molten. It kind of just came out like a blob, like a lava lamp, and then they kind of hardened over many, many, many years or eons. I didn't realize that

this idea that some planetary body smashed into the earth, they gave a name to it. It's Thayer. So Thayer was a planet, but just bumped into us and broke into fragments, coalesced into the moon. Now they say, what amazes us about this version of the hypothesis is that it seems to demand two discrete bodies, each with the same basic composition, sharing different parts of the same orbit around the sun and which eventually came together to create the impact.

This far-fetched notion seems incredibly fanciful with the need for two virtually identical bodies sharing the same orbit for long enough to develop into fully-fledged planets. Yeah, that's true. And then something goes wrong. It's like if they had formed into fully-fledged planets and they had stable orbits, why would they collide? It doesn't really make any sense. They would collide much earlier before they had formed.

At one point, those working on the theory even went so far as to suggest that in order for this impact theory to work, there had to be another impact on the other side. To balance it out. To balance it out and account for the spin and all this sort of stuff. Next to impossible. So again, and this is another thing that this has never been fully satisfactory in explanation because the modeling can just never get this theory right. Like it just doesn't fit the simulations. Right.

Now, along come the Israeli scientists in 2017. So there was this team. I can't write their name. Anyway, Israeli scientists, 2017. They came out with this updated version of the impact hypothesis. They called it the multi-extraterrestrial impact hypothesis. So not ETs as in aliens, but foreign objects. Yeah.

So they suggest a succession of much smaller impacts on the Earth by unknown objects led to the moon. So like a, what, a meteoroid shower somehow? Kind of, yeah. Like each individual strike freed up material from the surface of the Earth. It would have created like a debris disk around the planet.

And this would have slowly over time, relatively quickly, formed into like a little glob. And then another hit and another debris field forms. It starts to coalesce and forms with the first one. And this would have happened multiple, multiple times. So what, we got rings like Saturn around Earth? Yeah, well, those rings form into very reasonably quickly form into objects that eventually form into the moon. But how would that even happen?

What would be the force that would then cause that to get it to come together? Apparently, the physics matches up. Okay. These guys, their theory has been pretty readily welcomed. They suggest there would have been upwards of 20 such happenings and one by one, they would have coalesced to form even larger bodies and the eventual result was the moon.

The theory worked well in the simulations and went a long way towards solving problems with the giant impact models for the moon's creation. So, yeah, to put it in a nutshell without going into too much detail, it basically plugged a lot of the holes with the initial impact hypothesis. So, they were close, but it just... But no cigar? So, here's the question. No cigar. Where did the ammo come from? What were these objects? Well, that's pretty obvious, right? The asteroid belt.

Because you've got on the screen there, you've got this huge section of asteroids in our solar system. Isn't the argument that the asteroid belt itself came from a planet that was destroyed in our solar system? Yes, I'll get into that. They say this is why when this zone of debris was first recognized...

they thought it may once have been a planet because that asteroid belt, it orbits exactly the same way a planet would. Yeah. Right. Yeah. Later astronomers began to believe that there was nowhere near enough material there to create a planet. They were like, it's not enough in the asteroid belt. It doesn't make sense. So that's kind of, it's not really a accepted idea now that it was a planet. However, orbiting within the asteroid belt is a strange and truly alien minor planet that,

which came to be called Ceres, which is radically different in nature and composition to anything else in the asteroid belt. So we're coming back to Ceres. Ceres is the key to all of this. But that's a bit strange. How is it in that asteroid belt for all the pieces of rock that are floating around out there that they just happen to just like the second one they come across and scan and they go, oh, that's different.

Yeah, it's weird, isn't it? Isn't that weird? There's this nice little perfect sphere that kind of looks like the moon. Is that why they... I don't know how it would work. Would they get some type of visual feedback and they saw something that was round and went, we'll go and focus on that? Well, Ceres was discovered in the 1800s. Right. I can't remember the name of the astronomer. But it's been known about for a long time. But because it looked so different, that must have piqued their interest. There's something about...

The way that it jets off water vapor that makes it really bright. Right, okay. It's like quite easy to spot. But Ceres is in exactly the location where this asteroid planet would have been. And the name for it is Phaeton. Alderaan. Yeah, Alderaan. Phaeton was the name. And it's exactly where you would predict it to be based on Titius Bode's law. You Titius Bode?

Yep. I know why you're looking for something from me, Ben. There he is. I'm a very smart man with my wig. So this guy, he was obviously a very smart man. Tittleman.

He came up with this formula, this guy in the 1800s or maybe it was even the 1700s. He came up with this formula to predict where the planets of the solar system were likely to orbit. And it's basically going out from the sun. You've got Mercury's pretty tight orbit. Then it gets a bit wider with Venus and then a bit wider with the Earth and a bit wider with Mars. And so to put it simply, it's a distance twice as great as the previous planet.

That's where you can put the next orbit. Right. Okay. Right. See how we would know that it is a universe created by a superior creator is if he was the inventor of the bra.

That would all line up. This guy? The inventor of the bra? Yeah. What? His name's Tidius? Oh, man. Were you just thinking of that joke, that horrible joke the whole time ever since I first mentioned his name? I was like brewing for 45 seconds in your mind. No, what actually is coming down to, what you're describing here, right, this whole thing, poor jokes aside, is that there's no superior creator in the sense of it being like, because immediately when you hear that you go to alien civilization, I mentioned Prometheus at the start there.

It's a simulation. This is all mathematical code. That's why it's all so perfect. It's a simulation. Oh, you're arguing that. Well, I mean, look, you could argue that more effectively if you saw the same relationships with the other planets and moons in the solar system, but you don't.

But if you're a programmer, you would throw that in so that the people in the simulation would be like, oh, well, it can't be a simulation because it's not beautiful. How can I argue against that? How can I argue against your logic? That's super tight. So here's an example. This is an early diagram from the 1800s showing Bode's Law, as it's called.

And it makes sense why you would expect that the asteroid belt would be a planet because it's precisely where Bode's law predicts it would be. Right. It's like... So it's increasing. The authors say it's like looking at a smile and there's just one giant tooth that's missing. It's like, obviously, there's a tooth meant to be there. There's obviously meant to be a planet there. So is there a uniformity to the increments? Yes. Well, it's double the previous... So double each one. Yeah. Yeah. So...

And does that apply to all of the planets? Obviously, this is going to Jupiter, but back then we hadn't discovered the outer planets, right? Well, here's the thing. They looked at this theory and it wasn't widely recognized and was kind of pushed aside when Titius Bode first presented it. But then along came this British woman. Her name was Mary Blagg.

And she kind of reanalyzed Bode's law in 1913. And she realized he made some mistakes. There were some miscalculations. And so she kind of tweaked it. There was a significant flaw. And once she tweaked it, it all lined up perfectly.

with the current understanding orbits of the planets. So how did she change it? There was just some fundamental maths that he didn't do something properly. And it was kind of slightly out. And so when he published it, people were like, well, you were close. It was a good idea, but sorry, it doesn't match up. So it was ignored. Yeah, but that's what I was wondering. This strange uniformity of it that it's like double every time. That's a bit

That's very surface level explanation. But that's very like, again, this weird perfection. Exactly. And if you look up, but if you look up Bode's law, it's more complicated than that. Of course it is. Yeah. But essentially she published a paper, this Mary Blackwin published a paper on the corrections showing that Bode's law did in fact hold true, but it was ignored. It was kind of set aside. No one really paid any attention to it. It came to light again in 1953. Yeah.

Suddenly, it was found that her predictions had been validated by new discoveries of planetary satellites. So somehow the moons of Jupiter or whatever confirmed every alteration she had made. So all evidence points to, again, this gap where the asteroid belt is, to there being a planet there. There was a planet there. Phaeton was a planet. So what happened to it? Well, here's why the authors argue that

It's kind of taboo. Like as in it was never there? No, it's taboo to really discuss this idea because if you've got a planet in a stable orbit, what can destroy it? What can possibly obliterate it like that? It's not a comfortable thing to talk about. Like when we're sitting on one of them floating through the cosmos. Well, all it would make sense is if it slammed into another planet.

But then there's no evidence of that. It's like some random disintegration. It's like a spontaneous combustion. It's like you were sitting in your chair and you just burst into flames. It's weird. No one has an answer for it. So it's like the space equivalent of like Victorian England? It is. It's like the space equivalent of spontaneous human combustion. It's like spontaneous planet combustion. It's just disintegrated. Or was it demolished on purpose? Well, this brings us back to the Dawn mission. NASA's Dawn mission.

So the authors say we had to ask ourselves the questions. Why had the Dawn mission been shelved and then suddenly taken up again in around 2005? Or 2015, sorry. Why was the mission to Ceres extended whilst Dawn was orbiting the minor planet when it was always intended that if the spacecraft was behaving well, it should be sent to another target? Why did they stay on Ceres? We felt that there was something NASA was not talking about in a public sense, they said. That's not like NASA at all. Yeah.

Now, they said in the end NASA didn't find anything. Well, they claim they didn't find anything. Well, no, he says there's no conspiracy there. They're like they missed the point. He says it would have been entirely understandable if the entity they call the unknown creative agency, God,

had engineered the earth, assembled the moon, sprayed our warm little planet with bacteria containing DNA, and then moved along to the next suitable solar system to repeat its feat of seeding life. It wouldn't make sense if it just kind of moved on. But the authors say what the evidence actually shows is that this isn't what happened at all. This superintelligence, it had created this circumstance for life to exist. It created this perfect zone.

They said it had become apparent that this intelligence went to extraordinary lengths to make sure that an intelligent species developing on the planet would realize what it had done. It left markers.

They said, we can therefore be in little doubt that there must be a message of unparalleled importance waiting to be received, understood, and acted upon. Yeah, this fits in with all the silly galactic council and galactic federation ideas that you hear in these ufological circles of that humanity is not

not allowed to leave Earth, essentially, until we reach a certain level of enlightenment and understanding. So maybe this is what they're referring to. It's like once humanity realizes that we've been created, and then it's like, well, then you can come into this galactic blue avian civilization, which sounds like hell. Well, they argue that the timing is specific because...

And this is the level of the super intelligence. They argue that they understood that humankind would reach this developmental age where we would discover space flight. And by the time we discovered space flight, all those numbers of the correlations between the Earth and the moon, for example, and the sun,

would still be current because there's a rate at which the moon is drifting away from the earth and it's like an inch or something a year. But will that lead to the destruction of earth eventually? No, well, it'll have repercussions for life on earth eventually by millions and millions of years in the future. But if it took too long for the intelligent life to, in their words, evolve and then achieve space flight. So it's a self-limiting experiment. Well, all of their signposts would be out of whack.

because those relationships wouldn't be there anymore between the earth, the sun and the moon. So it's almost like, again, this is the author's argument. I don't really buy this because I believe in ancient civilizations being advanced.

And the authors with this idea, they're kind of maintaining that we're the first ones to achieve spaceflight. I don't necessarily think that's true. The two could actually work together, right? Because you could have ancient civilizations that started to understand this, but for whatever reason, like their power technology was wrong and it irradiated everything or it exploded or their civilization collapsed due to depopulation, something like that. These civilizations

civilizations could pop up and then for whatever reason they don't make it. But eventually, one civilization does get to a point where they overcome all of these issues and they finally work this out. Yeah. And I guess the timing, because the system of these relationships won't be out of whack for like millions of years. Right. So we've got time. There's still time. There would be time for previous civilizations to recognize it as well. So here's what they believe occurred. This is it.

So the Israeli scientists got it right. They hit the nail on the head with their idea. The multi-impact theory. Multiple impacts created the moon over time. But what they're arguing is that this was done by the superintelligence, whatever that entails. A civilization, an alien god. It was engineered. It was engineered.

The ammo came from the asteroid belt. Okay. So they destroyed planet Phaeton, disintegrated it, and then just... The building material. Yeah, started thrusting the building material, possibly using Mars as a slingshot to hammer it in the Earth to create the moon. And very specifically went about making the moon so that it's like 400 times this from the Earth and 400 times from the sun. The perfect creation, right? Yeah.

And here's the thing with Ceres. Right where they did this, where they destroyed this planet and threw all these asteroids at Earth, as a little kind of signpost to let us know what they did, they left a little moon behind. They left a little moon. It's almost to say like, where we destroyed a planet to create your moon, here, we left you a little mini moon. Now, the reason why this is so incredible is because when you start comparing Ceres to

To the moon and to the earth. Is it identical but mini? Yes. All those correlations between the moon and the earth and the sun also apply to Ceres and the moon. No, come on. I'm serious. So. What? Say it again. What? You're serious. Serious. What do you mean? Fucking hell, guys. Do you mean like serious star system? Is this some kind of like nerd Star Trek joke?

You drop it with a star check. That's such an old trope. What are you talking about? Your joke doesn't make any sense. What? Yes, I'm serious. Back me up. You get it. Other people get it. Superior people get it. Rational people get it. Explain your joke. I'm not explaining it. Continue. Drink your water and then continue. I'm not doing my segment until you explain what your shitty joke means. As in serious star system? No, but it's serious. It's serious. Oh, it's a pun. Oh, for fuck's sake.

Serious doesn't sound like series. It's a completely different word. Your pun doesn't even work. It's like mildly connected. If I had a yellow card, I'd give you a yellow card. That's your first yellow card. All right. You better not get a red card before plus. Oh, I want a red card before plus. Please bring it on and go off the field. It'd be great. Yeah, that would actually be good. Sin bin. It'd be bad for you. I was going to sit in the corner over there. You didn't have to do the rest of the podcast. Yeah, perfect. So...

Yeah, I'm serious. So as a result, the sun had to become the intelligence's reference point, right? So they couldn't use the earth, they couldn't use the moon, but they used the sun. So the sun is the reference point. So this is where they go into some of those measurements. They ensured that the earth it engineered ended up with a circumference that was precisely 109.288 times smaller than the sun. So

Remember these numbers, 109.288 times smaller than the sun. So of course, one in 109.288, pretty arbitrary number. Like it's not like a nice neat number. Yeah, it's not like a 400. But they say this ratio appears time and time and time again, especially when you incorporate Ceres' relationship with the moon and the sun.

We can see that in terms of the length of its circumference, one quadrant of the sun is equal to the circumference of 27.322 Earths. In this way, the alien intelligence also ensured that the moon would be 27.322% the size of the Earth. So this number keeps appearing, 27.322. The intelligence also designed the motion of the moon in such a way that at the time when intelligent life on Earth reached maturity,

Each of the moon's orbits around our planet would take a neat 27.322 Earth days. These similarities are uncanny, aren't they? As a potential coincidence of the constant appearance of 27.332...

It's off the scale. Like it is not coincidence. It is mesmerizing. So this is an appendix they included in the book where they go through all the ratios. Maybe I can put this in the show notes. So 3.66 is the ratio of the size to the moon to that of the earth. 366 is the number of days in the earth year. 366 is the number of medical megalithic yards in the second of an arc of the earth. 366% is the percentage of the size of the moon to the earth.

And it just goes on and on. They've got the 400 ratio, like 1 400th is the position of the moon in terms of the Earth-Sun distance. 400, the number of kilometers the moon turns on its axis in a day. 109.25 appears over and over again. See, look, this though goes to what I was saying before though. It's like, it's a lot of effort to go to, to create these precision mathematical markers. It's more like it's just mathematics for code.

Like going back to the simulation. Again, that argument would work if this kind of relationship was consistent across the entire solar system, but it is not. You don't see these relationships with the moons of Jupiter, for example, or Phobos and... Titan and all those things. Yeah, it just doesn't exist. And they look like weird shaped pockmarked rocks and there's no mathematical harmonic relationship with the orbits. There's nothing like that. But it just so happens that it relates to Earth...

the moon and this astrological body. And Ceres. Nothing like this occurs anywhere else. So what about the Earth's rotation around the sun? The Earth completes one orbit of the sun every 366 days. The really strange thing is that the number 366 is repeated time and time again, just like 27.322. One example in terms of its size, the Earth is 366% larger than the moon. Now, the thing is, they say...

Everything you can say for the moon to the earth, you can say for Ceres to the earth. That's crazy. Every relationship is the same. It's like you mentioned Russian dolls. It's like those Russian dolls. So in terms of absolute relative sizes, the earth times the moon equals one. So if you go those numbers I mentioned earlier, 3.66, so 366 times 0.27322,

equals one. It's like off by four decimals or something. It's basically equals one. So it's like this super intelligence was saying earth plus moon or earth times moon equals one.

And then they go into relative mass. Like the moon is light, strangely light for such a large body. Going back to those conspiracies of when they did some of the moon missions that rang hollow. Rang like a bell. Rang like a bell. Well, it's also, I think that ties in with when Apollo 11 took off. They said it rang like a bell for hours afterwards. That's on purpose because it has a mass that is 81 times less than that of the relatively heavier Earth. This value 81...

Again, looks like another arbitrary number, but it's conspicuous. 3 to the power of 4. Is that part of the message as well? Well, then you start looking at Ceres. So as I said, Ceres is 27.322% smaller than the moon. Its mass is 81 times less than the moon, 3 to the power of 4.

The moon is 3.66 times smaller than the earth and only has one 81st part of the mass of the earth. Ceres is 3.66 times smaller than the moon and only has one 81st part of the mass of the moon. What is going on? This is nuts. This is incredible, they say. Well, when you think about it as well, right? Surely if this is a creator alien species, let's say,

They would have assumed that they were going to be around long enough for us to eventually make contact. They would have planned it in such a way. So that, so that means, because one of the scary thoughts is, is that they no longer exist. And that's like the whole Prometheus thing, isn't it? It's like, it's no longer, they're no longer around, but this would suggest that they're waiting for us to work it out. Well, he references Arthur C. Clarke science fiction where they find the monument on the moon and,

This idea of finding monuments on the surfaces of planets. And the authors point out that any monument that's built, no matter what it's made of, over millions of years, the odds of it still remaining are very, very slim to zero. I mean, stone's pretty good, but you're right. Like, it can be destroyed. And so the idea that the planet itself, like Ceres, and its relationship to the moon and the Earth is the marker that...

That is the monument. That relationship is the monument. Its existence is the monument. It makes more sense. And when you look at this example...

Ceres literally looks like the moon. And remember I was describing all those elements of its makeup and its composition. If it didn't have that particular composition of it being able to absorb foreign bodies, it would look like one of these things, one of these asteroids. A classic asteroid, oblong kind of weird shape. Yeah, it looks like a peanut or something. But because it, and this is why they argue it's been constructed as well. It's been constructed with this makeup so that

Because the intelligences knew over time it would retain this form. So they left this signpost, they left this marker to say, hey, here was the planet that we destroyed to create your moon so that you would have life, so that life could exist on the planet. Doesn't this fit in with the story you did about ant people?

I don't know, does it? Yeah. And it kept on stuffing, every civilization was stuffed up. So they created ant people and dog people and dinosaur people and they kept on messing it up. So part of what they are, see, I'm just really scratching the surface of what their larger message is because- And surely they're walking the line because already they're controversial in what they're suggesting. So they must be walking the line. They're arguing that once this-

Marker is understood and this supreme intelligence is understood, it's going to

Well, it's going to create something. It's going to allow human beings to understand something. Well, the difference is, I believe it probably already is understood. Like we talk about Breckway civilizations and cover-ups and all that kind of stuff. It probably already is understood by occult groups. But perhaps what they're saying is once it becomes general knowledge, that's when things will change. Well, they even go so far as to say that this creative entity left a logo behind.

A logo? Yeah. What do you mean by a logo? It's this on the screen here. So it's basically- What's the square root of 54,289? Well, the numbers, yeah, but it's a square around a circle. It's a circle inside a square. And so let me explain it. So a square around the circle of the Earth's circumference is the length of the Earth plus the moon, and a square around the moon is equal to the moon plus Ceres,

This gives pi to four decimal places. So if it's like 3.1416. So those relationships I've just been describing represented in this visual mathematical relationship equals pi. In this diagram you're seeing there, it's showing everything I've described, like the relationship between Ceres, the moon and the earth and the sun.

It's all in. So it's like they left this logo behind. And again, this is just underlying how perfect it is, how indescribably perfect the design is. It's not like they were out by a little bit and they, or they, the other thing is to think like they tried and then they screwed it up. It's like, what do you mean by that? Well, I mean, whenever humans make things,

You can see the levels of creation. Like, you can see it slowly reaching perfection. Like a trial and error kind of thing. Yeah, like an early building technique and then a hundred years later it gets perfected. Or you see the reverse. Probably a bad example because it's in the reverse. Or the first iPhone versus the latest iPhone. Like, it advances. But,

How do you have evidence for that with what we have? Well, again, how do we know it's the first time? Yeah, exactly. They've tried to do this in multiple galaxies over millennia. Yeah, there's some other neighboring solar system where the Earth is like, whoa, whoa, whoa, because they messed it up. Yeah, exactly. Like the ant people think. Yeah, the moon swings into it and they're like, ooh. Yeah. So ultimately, they say this stunning message with all of its repeating values was laid down nearly 4 billion years ago

with the clear intention of us, the ultimate intelligent life form, recognizing what was done for us. There must be a very good reason why we need to know. And so that's where I'll leave it. But that's not the end of where they go. Because in this book, which again is coming out in May, but the audio book is available now, They Built the Earth by Alan Butler and Christopher Knight.

In the latter half of the book, they go into who the super intelligence is. Ooh. And it's wild. It's the Ant People creators, isn't it? It makes the Ant People idea look like something Richard Dawkins would come up with.

Like just boring slop. No, it is wild. So I might give a little teaser on what that is. You know I'm going to ask you in plus. In plus. So I'm going to, I'll give a little reveal in plus. But keep an eye on the book. Make sure you check it out. I'll link to it in the show notes. They Built the Earth. Great work, Butler and Knight, once again. It didn't work.

And yeah, we'll do a little reveal coming up in our Plus extension. If you want to get access to Plus, head to mysteriousuniverse.org forward slash plus. Sign up today. You get access to these big extensions we do on these shows every single Friday. That's it. Bring up your scripts. That's it. Bring it up. I'm just showing the website. And of course, you get access to our exclusive show that comes out on Tuesdays as well. Plus members also get higher quality MP3 version of the show, totally ad-free version of the show.

Access to 17 years worth of work. If you get MU Max. Yes. If you get MU Max, you get, yeah, 17 years worth of content. All the videos are on the website. Make sure you check it out. Mysteriousuniverse.org forward slash plus. Sign up today. Help support your favorite show. And of course, it is our last year of Mysterious Universe. As hosts, we will be kickstarting our replacements, uh,

Pretty soon, like probably getting into the details, probably mid-year. And of course, a reminder that Aaron and I aren't retiring. We're going to start a new show in 2026 called Brunch with the Boys. Yep. That's it. I might change it now. It's done. Working project title, Brunch with the Boys. I can't commit to it because I was thinking the other day, if we call our show Brunch with the Boys...

Imagine if the gender was reversed. It'd be like coffee with the girls. So what? But no one would ever listen to that. Have you seen all the trash that is online? Yeah, but I don't want to be like a boy version of brunch with the, like coffee with the girls. Yeah, that's a good point. Yeah, you got it there. I just want to make it really irreverent. So that's why I'm like, yeah, brunch with the boys, whatever. That works. I put so much effort and time and planning and all this into the series. None of that. This new show, none of that.

Completely fly by the seat of my pants. That's why it's going to be great. Researching. That's why it's... There'll still be research, please. Stop. What are you going to talk about without research? Completely by the seat of my pants. Come up with your puns? You're going to come up with another pun? Coming up, Aaron's top 10 puns in PLOS. Yeah, see? There you go. What have you got coming up, actually, in PLOS? Puns. Literally puns. I've got the trick catastrophe. You do have fucking puns. Oh, my God. Oh, God. Oh, God.

And one of the supernatural will destroy us all. Actually, it's not so far to that level. But yeah, we will be going into...

This idea I picked up from Chris O'Brien, which I've kind of run with, it ties in with this idea that shapeshifters and the high strangeness that people experience is some type of instinct that is pushed forward by the supernatural to push humanity in a certain direction. But what that direction is, we're not entirely sure, but it seems to have some type of healing effect upon what happens to our societies and civilizations. So all of that is coming up in the Plus extension. Mysteriousuniverse.org forward slash plus sign up today.

That's a wrap for this free edition of MU. Thanks for listening. Thanks for watching. If you're on Plus, stick around for the big reveal after the break. For everyone else, we'll catch you next week.

♪♪

Welcome back to your Plus extension. Great to have you with us. This is fascinating. Like it's really fab because it's mind blowing when you think of it that we have this.