00:02.97 kinkella And welcome back to the pseudo archeology podcast episode 129 I'm still your host Dr Andrew Kingkeella and we are talking about the gunng paong non pyramid so where are we at here right? Um, when we left we need to know what the what? The new information is and. I do have to say before I get into it that you know it serves us right? You know why? because when Graham Hancock originally came out with this a year ago on his Netflix special. Let's be honest. Those of us who are part of this podcast. We laughed at him. We scoffed at him and again while we're being honest, we guffawed I I definitely heard some guffaws out there. You know who you are gaars out there and so he. Is having the last laugh right now. So what do I mean by the last laugh so it really boils down to this article in this journal called archeological perspective now I hadn't really heard about this journal before I think this is a smaller journal I'm not here to poo poo an archeology project who um. Publishes in smaller journals or that kind of stuff I've done that kind of stuff. Um, and so I got nothing against sexual journal itself. But the article man I got major problems and I find that it's sad that something like this got through. 01:32.33 kinkella You know I what I don't get here is where were the peer reviewers like how did this get through so what? what? it actually is is. It's basically an article that says there's a they've done a bunch of new carbon 14 dates at this site which they have. And they kind of layout here's and here's how old the carbon 14 dates are and some I think the oldest ones are like 25000 years they're saying that the original pyramid was the first parts of the building began at Twenty five thousand years ago and then layered on after that. And then that's really what the article is about showing that these dates are indeed great and this is a classic thing that so not only just pseud our archeology but bad researchers do is they double down I think you've heard me say this before they'll double down on some. Little sciencey part right? in this case, it's carbon 14 dating now I don't have any problem with their carbon 14 dates and you're like what kincua you're saying that those dates are actually 25000 years I'm like sure but they're not dating anything that has. Anything to do with human beings. They're just dating stuff in the soil that was burned. They're dating things like a forest fire from Twenty Five thousand years ago that's what they're dating. So. 02:57.59 kinkella Remember that carbon 14 has to be organic material and they're just digging into a hillside Basically they're digging into a natural hillside and so as you go down every so often you will find little burn little shards of stuff that you could date. So I'm sure the dates are fine but they have nothing to do with people. They just have to do with like geological layers if that makes sense. There is no proof zero. They're literally digging into a hill. There's not like tons of bricks down there. It's none of that kind of stuff they do find ah um, there's like a void and Graham Hancock talks about this in the Netflix special. Yeah, because sometimes especially in a volcanic environment. Yeah there's voids down there. You know gas gets trapped and you don't have fully solid rock. It wasn't made by a person. It's not a tomb I mean it is you guys. It is just idiotic and i'm. Again I'm shocked that it got this far. It's almost It's kind of a joke you know I'm like wow ah dear archeological perspective. Um, you might want to double check once or twice because there's some funny stuff getting through so this is just again. It's just like. Totally laughable There's there's nothing to do with reality in this you know it's that classic. Um I think I think this is a version of a straw man argument right? Where you're talking about something separate you are angling away from the real argument which is. 04:30.86 kinkella You have no evidence at all that people were there or any construction was taking place of any kind you are dating parts of the earth and since the earth is four point six billion years old yeah you could get some pretty old dates. So but we're really looking at what Graham hot. Graham Hancock is saying vindicated him is just a horrendous waste of everyone's time which is classic Graham Hancock like this is just a spiral into Nowhereville right? Ah, we aren't learning anything new. It's just we're just we should be doing something else now. 05:08.66 kinkella This comes out and then as I I touched on before um there is a more like popular article that that comes from that um in this ah in this arena called science alert which I'll talk about a bit later. Um. But what I find is really difficult with um situations like this is finding real facts or real art because that's what so many of us want right? We're like dude well then what is the real deal with gunng paang like there. There. Is structures at the top of it like what is this place. One of my favorite articles on this I was cruising around and 1 of the nice things that that I hope I can do for you. You know as an archeologist I can tell what's real online and what is just you know a bunch of false bs there is on the um. Ah, hot cup of joe.net there's a guy named um, Carl fagins and he is part of the um oh what's it called the ah the fraudulent archeology wall of shame. Facebook group that I've that I've brought up before right and Carl wrote this great article. Um that he did just fairly recently. But in late August and it's just called gnung paang what archeology really says and he does a great job of breaking down the real site. 06:44.60 kinkella You know and what is really there and what's not really there I will definitely link this article at the bottom of this podcast so you guys can go further in depth if you want he has some really great drawings there of what this type of structure would really be um and he goes through like the the history of the research there. Was originally found I believe in 1915 right? It's been generally known for a really long time but he goes through it and talks about the real age of what this stuff probably is you know dates like that the very earliest earliest like human. Um. 07:20.52 kinkella Settlement you know there or human interaction with that area that you find archaeologically maybe right around the time of Christ maybe a tick before you know me 500 Bc um, there's stuff that dates. Yeah, 500 a d and as one of the true sadnesses of pseudo archeology. You just have all this pure bullshit that. Layers over this real and interesting archeological past. No, it's not 25000 years old no it's not a pyramid but it is an interesting structure. That's 2000 years old it's on top of a natural hill like that's cool and it is sizable. It's not just some little tiny building or something. It is a interesting sort of multi-platform structure at the top of this natural outcrop and and that's. That's great. You know that's that's really interesting stuff. And he of course goes on to break down the geology of the area and the archeology of the area and man I got to say carl nice work. My friend just really well written very understandable, very thoughtful article I highly recommend. 08:35.23 kinkella It just cuts through all the crap. You know it's refreshing. Um way better written than the other articles that that we've been talking about speaking of which when we come back. The worst bits of this. Yes. We haven't got there yet.