Now we are right there. I'm not going to die. You're listening to the Hour of the Time, and I'm Pooh. And I'm Joelle. And I'm William Cooper. I thank you, Jesus, to the flag, to the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Amen. Amen. The End Thank you. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. across the nation and around the world. You're listening once again to the Hour of the Time. And what an hour this is going to be, followed by another hour. How about that? Our guest tonight, ladies and gentlemen, is Michael Cremo. And I'm not sure if you pronounce that Cremo or Cremo. We'll find out in just a few minutes. He's a truth and science advocate. He's a long-time, ardent critic. and I might add a real critic of how scientists have abused their position and power. Michael Cremo is a member of the History of Science Society, the American Anthropological Association, and a research associate with the Bhaktivedanta Institute specializing in history and philosophy of science. His persistent investigation during the eight years of writing the internationally acclaimed book Forbidden Archaeology has documented a major scientific screw up in my estimation he is an international authority on archaeological anomalies he is considered a leading authority on anomalous archaeological evidence relating to the antiquity of the human race and I think you're going to be very surprised with some of the things he's going to reveal to you that the establishment of archaeologists have been hiding from the people of the world. He has a reputation for exposing major scientific cover-ups in the field of archaeology. Michael Cremo has enliveled audiences around the world on this fascinating subject as the author of the highly controversial book, Forbidden Archaeology, and several other volumes, one of which is along exactly the same lines. He is an internationally sought-after speaker and media guest. Most recently he was a featured guest on the controversial national broadcast of Communists primetime special hosted by Charlton Heston entitled The Mysterious Origins of Man. Michael Cremo, welcome to the Hour of the Time. Thank you, Bill. So, would you like to start off and just sort of give our listening audience your standard introduction into what it is that you've been doing and why it's so important? Yes. If you were to look at archaeology as a big museum, what you'd find is that the public has only led into one small room of that museum. And on display there, you see only the artifacts and skeletons, the stones and bones, that go along with the orthodox scientific idea today, which is that human beings like ourselves have only been around for about 100,000 years or so. And before that, there would have been only more ape-like creatures, ape men of various kinds, and before that, apes and monkeys. But what most people don't realize is there are other rooms to that museum of archaeology, other rooms with locks on the doors. So what I've tried to do in my work is to take the locks off of those doors and those hidden rooms in the big museum of archaeology and let people in to see what's there. And what you find is you find that over the past 150 years or so, scientists have found abundant evidence, massive amounts of evidence, showing that human beings like ourselves have been on this planet for literally millions of years, tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of years. And, of course, this blows out of the water most of the theories that have been presented to us over the past 100 years or so, the Darwinian theory of evolution in particular. it completely contradicts that theory because we find that there isn't any evidence that human beings evolved from apes or ape men rather it appears we've coexisted with these creatures for vast periods of time on this planet so of course people will ask well why if so much of this evidence is there why don't we hear about it and that's because it's been suppressed by what I call a process of knowledge filtration You know, if you have these facts that go against the established theories, then people just don't hear about them. And I hope we'll get a chance to talk about a lot of these cases this evening with your audience. Oh, I certainly am looking forward to it, Michael. I heard you on the Art Bell broadcast one night a few weeks ago, and I was absolutely appalled that the only interest Art Bell had was in trying to somehow course you into saying that all of this stuff means that we had been visited by some alien species from some other planet and you were not able to do that. And so tonight we're going to give you all the time that you want to talk about all of these things and I am extremely interested in what you have to say. whatever in the world got you interested in this because I never would have thought to question a scientific venue like archaeology I would never believe that archaeologists would be hiding things from us well that's a very good question Phil and I think you're right most people they wouldn't have any reason to suspect that anything was wrong. Now, you mentioned in the introduction that I'm a member of the Bhaktivedanta Institute, and that's the science studies branch of a Hindu-based organization called the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. And my involvement with that organization led me about 25 years ago to begin some very intense study of the ancient writings of various civilizations, in particular the ancient Sanskrit writings of India. And among those writings I found a very interesting group called the Puranas, or the Histories. and these piranhas they talked about the existence of human civilizations on this planet going back into the very very dimmest regions of time tens of millions even hundreds of millions of years into the past and I began to notice that the writings of other ancient civilizations the Egyptians, the Babylonians the Chinese, the Mayan and Incan civilizations of the New World they all seem to give a vastly longer period of time to human history than does modern science. So I thought, well, if there's such an agreement among all of these different wisdom traditions in the world that human beings do have a vastly longer period of history than modern science has, then perhaps there might be some physical evidence to back up what these ancient sources were saying. Now, I had been aware of one or two interesting little anomalies that I had encountered in my studies of the history of archaeology, and I thought, well, perhaps if I spend a few more weeks digging into this, I might be able to turn up a few more examples, and maybe I'd write a little pamphlet or a small book about it and go on to something else. But when I started looking into things, when I started looking into the entire history of archaeology over the past 150 years or so, I was really quite shocked to find that these archaeologists have literally buried almost as much evidence as they've taken out of the ground. In other words, they discovered massive amounts of evidence showing that human beings have been present on Earth for millions of years, just as these ancient sources had said. So that's what really got me into it. If I hadn't been involved in some of these studies of ancient writings of German civilizations, particularly the ancient writings of India, I probably wouldn't have thought to question the ideas that I have been taught in school. What most people are taught in school today, most of what you see presented in these science specials on television, like NOVA and the National Geographic Science Specials, I wouldn't have thought to question the exhibits that you see in your local museum of natural history. They always have these very interesting little displays of the very little monkey that grows up and becomes the little ape man, and then finally you get the human being like ourselves. I wouldn't have thought to have questioned any of that, perhaps without having taken the time to look at things from a different perspective. The only thing that ever caused me to wonder, and I didn't wonder very long really, was in my own research in the ancient culture of the Egyptians, I discovered that the Egyptians had never claimed to have built the Sphinx instead you read that it was always there and they were always preserving it and repainting it and taking care of it but they had no idea who had built the Sphinx and that made me stop and wonder and of course I had read some of the Vedas and some of the Indian texts and they talked about ancient civilizations that had pretty advanced technology from what I could gather. But you could also attribute those kinds of things, if you wanted to, and I chose to, to religious myths. And so I didn't pursue any of that. And apparently, not only have you pursued it, but you've pried the lid off of sort of a Pandora's box, if I'm not mistaken. As I said, I just thought that this little bit of research that I was going to do was just going to take a few weeks. And it really, when I began to find out the vast quantities of evidence that had been suppressed, it just was one thing was just leading to another. And it was just taking one year, two years, three years, and I wasn't getting to the bottom of it, you know, five years, six years. It took me eight years until I figured out, well, basically I had pretty much found most of the major skeletons that were in the closet there. Now, I think there's a lot more, and as time goes on, I find that people are writing to me. They're cluing me into other discoveries. But I thought I had the basic lay of the land after about eight years. But I tell you, it really did make me, I have to confess, it made me a little bit angry as I started to find out more and more about this. I just could not believe the audacity of the mainstream scientific community, that they could be sitting on so much information that contradicted what they had been telling the public. It really made me a little bit angry, I have to confess. Well, it makes me angry, too, and extremely curious. What was the first major discovery that you made when you began to dig into this that you can honestly say actually contradicts and almost could be said to destroy the modern anthropological teachings that, well, if I were to go to college today, which I'm not about to, at my age, but if I were to go to college and study anthropology, I would get a completely different story from what the evidence that you turned up is telling us. What is the first major discovery that you made that would cause any reasonable person to say, wow, we've really been scammed here? Well, the one case that I found really fascinating right in the beginning of my research, which still fascinates me today is the California gold mine discoveries. You know, in the last century, there was a gold rush in California. You know, gold was discovered in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, and people from all over the United States went to California to get the gold. And when they first went there, they were panning for gold in the streams. But later on, they began to dig tunnels into the sides of mountains through solid rock to get out the gold. And sometimes inside these tunnels, hundreds, perhaps even a thousand or more feet inside these tunnels, in the solid rock, the miners were finding human skeletons just like ours, not ape men, but skeletons of anatomically modern humans like ourselves. Now, when you say solid rock, what are you talking about? Well, they were digging these tunnels into the sides of mountains, which were composed of, at first, heavy layers of volcanic rock called basalt. And after digging through those, then you get into this very compact gold-bearing of deposits, which are old river deposits dating back 50 million years, where you had a mixture of sand and stone and lakes and nuggets of gold that had solidified into a very hard conglomerate rock. So that's the material that they were digging into. And these materials, as I said, they were covered over by hundreds of feet of solid basalt and volcanic rock. The discoveries were made in tunnels that were dug through this rock. In other words, it was an area where there were no fissures through which little objects could come down. Obviously, these weren't skeletons that were buried by Indians, because, as I said, to get to these things, the miners had to dig through solid rock to get to the point where they found these objects and skeletons embedded in this rock. and according to the modern geological reports, the rock in which these skeletons and objects are found is about 50 million years old. Now that's really quite extraordinary because according to your orthodox scientific ideas, human beings like those skeletons there, human beings like ourselves, didn't come into existence until about 100,000 years ago and then only in Africa, according to the modern ideas. Leaky, yeah. To have evidence for anatomically modern humans existing in California 50 million years ago, it is quite shocking from the standpoint of modern science. From the standpoint of some of these ancient traditions and writings, it wouldn't be surprising at all because they'd expect to find evidence for human presence going back even further than that. But in terms of modern science, it's completely, totally out of the question. and they would say that at that time, 50 million years ago, you wouldn't have had even your most primitive apes and monkeys existing at that time. So to have human beings existing at that time, that was really quite extraordinary. Now, all of this evidence, it was collected by a Dr. J.D. Whitney, who was the state geologist of California at the time, and he was a professional scientist, a geologist. he wrote a massive book about these discoveries, which was published by Harvard University in 1883. But the question is, well, why don't we hear about these discoveries today? You won't find them mentioned in the textbooks. You won't find the objects on display in the museums. You don't hear it talked about by the scientists who appear on these television specials that you see on PBS and the history channel and the writing channel, you know, that you don't hear about it. And why is that? It's because of what I call this process of knowledge filtration. And the person who did the suppressing of this particular evidence was a scientist, a very influential scientist, named Dr. William B. Holmes. He was working at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. He said about this Dr. Whitney out in California, he said, well, if this Dr. Whitney had understood the theory of human evolution, then he would have announced his discoveries despite the imposing array of facts with which he was confronted. In other words, if the facts, even a great number of well-attested facts, goes against a particular theory of human origin that is held by the orthodox scientific community, then those facts have to be put aside, and the person that reports them has to be discredited, and that's exactly what happened. Those discoveries were suppressed. They were filtered out. And, you know, I had my own little personal experience with the knowledge filtration process connected with those California gold mine discoveries. Because I think two things are important here. The very facts themselves and what they say is important, and the whole process by which they are suppressed and continue to be suppressed is also very interesting. That has to be documented. So I've always tried to document both things. The factual evidence itself and its extraordinary significance for our whole concept of human origins and antiquity. And also, perhaps even more important, I find it more interesting, more fascinating and intriguing is the process by which this evidence is filtered out, the process by which it's suppressed. And I had a very interesting experience with that myself. You mentioned earlier that our book, Forbidden Archaeology, had been featured in an NBC television special which aired in February 1996 called The Mysterious Origins of Man, hosted by Charles and Heston. I also appeared in that show. But when they were filming it, I told the producers they should go to the Phoebe Hearst Museum of Natural History at the University of California at Berkeley, because that is where these objects from the California gold mines are being kept. Now, when they got in touch with a museum official. They were told, well, you know, you're working on a television program. You probably have a very tight deadline. We just wouldn't have the time to go and search for these objects and bring them up for you to film. So then the producers told them, well, no, we have six months. We have plenty of time. Let's just see the objects. And then the museum officials came up with another excuse. They said, well, you know, we have a very tight budget. We would have to pay our workers overtime to have them go and bring these artifacts out, and we just can't afford to do it. The producers came back with an offer to pay all the overtime expenses for the workers, pay all the expenses, whatever's required. Finally, the museum officials just said, no, we're not going to let you see these objects. And I think it's pretty clear why they wouldn't let the television producers from NBC and to see those objects. It's very clear. They suspected that the evidence was going to be used publicly in a way that was detrimental to them. That opposed the theory that they have and that they're holding onto for dear life, because so much depends on it. Yeah, the future of socialism and the destruction of Christianity and other religions which insist upon belief in God, all of these things are hanging on them. Well, yes, that's absolutely right. And this became very clear to me when the program actually aired on NBC in February of 1996. there was an explosion of outrage from what I would call the fundamentalist Darwinist element within the scientific community. I'm not going to say that every scientist is close-minded and doctrinaire, but there is an element, a very influential element in there that I call the fundamentalist Darwinists who are committed to their particular idea that the human beings have evolved from the Apes fairly recently by some material process of evolution fairly recently in geological time. They're fixed on that idea more for political and ideological reasons than for genuine scientific reasons. So they exploded in outrage when this television program was aired on NBC. It was sort of like an intellectual Pearl Harbor for them, a surprise attack. They hadn't expected it. They thought they had, in particular, the mainstream media under their control, now talk radio and shortwave radio and the Internet is another thing. But they thought at least they had the mainstream broadcast media pretty much under their control. So I think it was the first time in history that a major American television network had ever broadcast a program that directly challenged the Darwinian ideas of human evolution. It was quite a shock to them. And, you know, people often ask me, well, you know, why are they feeling like that? And I think it came out, you know, one thing they did, it was very interesting, Dr. Alison Palmer, the head of the Cambrian Research Institute, one of these evolutionary research organizations in the academic world out there, he actually went to the Federal Communications Commission, the FCC and tried to get them to fine NBC millions of dollars for having shown this television program he also wanted the government through the FCC to force NBC to broadcast public apologies for having shown that program scientists of his type they also attempted to organize boycotts of the sponsors and the television program was actually so popular that NBC announced that it was going to show it again and when that happened, these fundamentalist darwinists within the scientific community, they actually became even more outraged and they began a letter-writing campaign to the president of the General Electric Company which owns the NBC network and tried to get them to force NBC not to show this program again. So I'm happy to say that none of those efforts were successful and that NBC didn't broadcast the program again, telling people, well, hey, everybody, look at the program the scientists don't want you to see. But sometimes people ask me, well, why were these efforts made? I mean, what possible reason could these scientists have for wanting this information suppressed? And after that television program was aired, these scientists were exchanging thousands of messages among each other on the Internet in their scientific discussion groups on archaeology and anthropology and evolution. And as I was studying the traffic, as I was looking at these messages, I saw two reasons emerging why they were so concerned. One was control over the educational system in the United States. It's actually illegal in all 50 of the United States to teach anything other than their idea, this Darwinian idea of evolution in the nation's tax-supported school. So that's a pretty good position to be in. If you've got the United States government saying nobody can teach anything other than your particular idea in the school system, I think that's an intellectual monopoly they would like to hang on to. Now, they do have an organization called the National Center for Science Education, and after this television program aired, the president of that organization said, Well, the telephones at my headquarters were ringing off the hook because science teachers from high schools all over the country were calling and saying, help, our students are asking us questions we can't answer after they saw this information on the television. And I just have to ask, well, what is so sacred about this particular theory that no one should even be allowed to question it? You have to have the United States government coming in and saying nobody can teach any alternative idea in the nation's public schools. What is so sacred about this theory? Why are the museums hiding the information? Why won't they let them write? Why do they try to punish and intimidate television networks for even showing this information to the American people? Control over the educational system is one reason. the second reason that I saw emerging as I studied all these internet messages was money pure, simple money they were worried well, if people started getting a lot of this information then eventually it might filter down to their political representatives who might start cutting back on the millions and millions of dollars of research money that these scientists are getting to carry out their program of research so those were the two things that seemed to be on the top of the list of why they were reacting in such an extreme way control over the educational system and their own research money now all of these things that I've talked about I've documented in a book that's just come out it's called Forbidden Archaeology's Impact so if anybody wants to see the text of those letters to the FCC, trying to get them to fine NBC millions of dollars if they want to see any of these Internet messages about control over the educational system and research money. They're all there. It's all documented. I have no doubt that all of that is absolutely true. I think there's another reason also. I think the movement toward world socialism and the hold that Marxism has over our university systems would crumble. if this were acknowledged as debunking or doing away with or providing a serious setback to Darwinism. Oh, yes, I think you're absolutely right about that, and I think there are some very organized efforts to kind of keep these ideas intact for purposes of social control. You know, in my book, Forbidden Archaeology, I mentioned, I gave a lengthy discussion of the discovery of a so-called missing link in China during the 1920s, the so-called Peking Man discoveries, which were taken as evidence confirming the Darwinian theory of evolution. You know, you had some so-called ape man being discovered near Peking. So it was called Peking Man and still talked about in all the textbooks. Didn't that turn out to be some kind of a hoax or something? Well, I don't deny that ape men existed. I mean, that's one thing. I think that perhaps they're still with us today, but alongside them existed human beings like ourselves, so they can't be taken as evidence of evolution. When you look at everything that scientists have found, you'll find that, well, just that today we coexist with different kinds of apes and monkeys and perhaps some other kinds of creatures as well. So in the past, we coexisted. So if you look at everything that they found, you don't get a picture of evolution. You get a picture of coexistence. Now, in these particular set of discoveries, the Rockefeller Foundation was involved in financing the excavations for this so-called missing link, which helped shore up the Star-Winning evolution. Now, the Rockefeller Foundation was also involved in funding all kinds of research in other areas. They were funding genetic DNA research. They were funding astronomy. They were funding medical research. The Dead Sea Scrolls and a lot of other things. Yes. Now, what they said is the president of the Rockefeller Foundation said at the time, during the 1920s and 30s, looking back at that era. He said, actually, it was all one program. Whether we were studying the stars in the sky or the earthworms, the sex mating habits, the earthworms, he said it was all one program designed for one purpose. They wanted to study human beings. They wanted to study, of course, the study of organisms as complex as a human being. well, maybe you have to start out with earthworms and things like that. But they said the whole goal of their whole program was to understand human nature with the goal of establishing beneficial control. It was very explicit. Social engineering. For the benefit of whom? I think we have to ask ourselves these questions. So these aren't just little debates about the stones and bones and evolution. It's not just some ivory tower academic debate. There are people with money behind this, with influence behind this, with power behind this, who have certain goals, and the explicit goal that was stated in the publications of the Rockefeller Foundation was, yes, we have to understand human nature with the idea of establishing beneficial control. Control by whom? For what purpose? Well, we have our ideas about that. This is incredible. We're going to give you about two and a half minutes to take a little break, and you can go do whatever you want and be back in about exactly two and a half minutes, and we'll get started again. Okay, Bill. I'll do that. Thank you, Michael. Thank you. The Lord is the Son of God, and the Lord is the Son of God. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen. You're listening to the Hour of the Time. I'm William Cooper. Doyle Chamble is here. And our special guest tonight is Mr. Michael Cremo. Is that the correct way to pronounce your name, Michael? Yes, it is. I wasn't sure, and I certainly don't want to mispronounce it. during all this time I'm sure you found an awful lot of evidence of human life millions of years ago in fact I know you did and much of it as much as 50 million years are even longer or even greater time back in the history of the earth but what else did you find? I'm sure that you must have found something other than just bones and teeth. Yeah, sometimes you do find a few remnants that seem to suggest a little bit higher level of culture. Of course, I haven't come across any 747s or laptop computers down there. It's actually very interesting. I was once on an internet discussion group and I had raised this question. One of the scientists, one of the archaeologists said, well, what if it was a technologically advanced human civilization that existed 100 million years ago? What signs would we see in the Earth? What would be left? And the archaeologists had a big discussion about it among themselves. I didn't participate. I just sat in the background and listened, lurked, as they say in the discussion group. And here's what they came up with. They said, well, most of the metals would be gone because most metals oxidize. They corrode. Even the only metal that really doesn't corrode very easily is gold. Now sometimes you do get some rare cases of preservation of other metals, but most of them corrode and that's why gold is considered so valuable today because it doesn't corrode. now another point that they named was anything organic of course plastic wood paper all that would be gone plastic bags stone we actually you know we think stone is very permanent but you know like a lot of these stone buildings that we have up the stone is rotting even now it's very rare for stone buildings to last more than a few thousand years you know you're absolutely right and it's very sad when you travel to a place which has some of the most famous and most beautiful architecture that has ever been built, and you see it crumbling right before your eyes. That's right. You can go to the Parthenon in Greece and go to Egypt, and you can see that this process is going on. So they said anything made of stone would also be gone. So they said, well, probably the only thing that you would see would be some thin layers of multicolored gravel that you wouldn't even notice unless you were specifically looking for it. Now, that's just a prelude. Now, I will say that there have been some interesting things that have turned up, however, some rare cases where some items do appear to have been preserved. And, of course, one of them is gold. There was a very interesting case that I encountered in a newspaper article back from the latter part of the 19th century. It told of a woman in Morrisonville, Illinois, who was putting a piece of coal into her coal-burning stove. It was a rather big piece of coal. It broke open, and inside she found a gold chain about 10 inches long, a very exquisite workmanship. And from this report, we were able to tell what mine that the coal actually came from. So we got in touch with the State Geological Survey of Illinois, and we asked them, well, how old is the coal in this particular place? and they told us 300 million years. Now, that would be before the generally accepted time of the dinosaurs. It would be from before the Jurassic period. It would be from the Carbon Everest period. So that's really quite extraordinary evidence for a human presence, not just stones or bones, but an object of a little bit higher culture, a gold chain from 300 million years ago. And now it's very interesting. In a scientific journal called The Geologist, I encountered a report of an anatomically modern human skeleton that was found also in the state of Illinois, in the Coopin County. It was found 90 feet below the surface of the ground. Directly above it was a thick layer of slate rock, unbroken. And again, going to the State Geological Survey of Illinois, and we asked them, well, how old is the layer of rocks 90 feet below the surface of the ground at this particular location? What is the age of the layer of rock below the two-foot thick layer of slate at this particular area? Now, of course, we didn't tell them what was found there because sometimes if you tell them what was found, they don't answer your letters. I bet. But we just presented the geological evidence, So we asked them, well, how old is this layer of rock down here at the 90-foot level? And they said, again, about 300 million years. So that's a human skeleton at the same age as the gold chain. Now, when you say anatomically correct, are you talking about... Anatomically modern is the technical phrase that we use, because sometimes if we say human, well, that could mean an ape man or this or that or the other. If you're talking to Leakey, it could almost mean a chimpanzee. Right. So, when you expect by anatomically modern, that means the same form as us. In other words, not an ape man, not some kind of human ancestor, but a human being like ourselves. The skeleton was described as a skeleton like ours. Now sometimes when some orthodox scientists hear of a skeleton, an anatomically modern skeleton, human skeleton being found in some very ancient layer of rock, they immediately say, well, it must have been an intrusive burial. So what they mean by interest of burial is, say, a few thousand years ago, perhaps an Indian died in the state of Illinois there, and his comrades dug a hole, put the body in it, and therefore when you find a skeleton a few thousand years later, it's in a very ancient layer of rock, but it doesn't belong there. In other words, it doesn't belong in the layer of rock that's millions of years old. Somebody just dug a hole, buried the skeleton there, covered it over, and when you come upon it years later, you mistakenly think that the skeleton belongs to this very ancient layer of rock. That's their argument. That's an argument, but in this case it really doesn't apply because normally people don't dig holes 90 feet deep to put their skeletons in. And if they had, they would have had to have broken through the thick layer of slate rock that was found directly above the skeleton and was described by the original discoverers as being unbroken. So that kind of objection doesn't appear to apply in a case like this and getting on to some other discoveries that kind of go beyond just stone tools and the human bones. There was a very interesting report from Scientific American from the year 1852 which told of a beautiful metallic vase with floral inlaid silver patterns on it that was blasted out of solid rock 15 feet below the surface of the ground by workers who were excavating a foundation for a building near Boston. So, all right, so you have this beautiful metallic vase coming from 15 feet deep and solid rock. Again, from this report, we were able to go to the United States Geological Survey and ask them, well, how old is the rock at this particular location and that particular depth? And they said, oh, it's a very well-known formation. It's called the Roxbury Conglomerate, and it's from the pre-Cambrian period, and it would be about 600 million years old. So that's evidence there. coming from a scientific journal, a report of a beautiful object being found in layers of rock 600 million years old. And there are just dozens and dozens of such discoveries. There are reports of coal miners at Hebener, Oklahoma, digging. they were at the coal mine about two miles down, two miles down, and they were blasting out cavities, they called them rooms, to get at the coal, and some of the miners reported finding a stone wall two miles below the surface of the ground, a stone wall made of polished stone, polished rectangular stones, and they said what happened is when they reported this to their supervisors, they were ordered out of the mine, the mine was filled up, and they were sent to another mine quite far away. There are a lot of interesting reports of discoveries that were made in coal mines and I'm told by sources that these discoveries continue to be made up to the present day. of course what often happens with these discoveries is we never hear about them because the coal miners will just take these objects and put it on their mantle over their fireplace and nobody will hear about it. Eventually they die and the family members just take it and sell the objects at a rubbish sale or something. We don't get the objects preserved. You said something that's intriguing, that the coal miners would report their fine to their supervisor and then they would call them all out of the mine and close the mine and fill it up and send them somewhere else. This is, I find this incredible in light of the fact that neither the supervisor nor the mine owners would probably realize the significance nor would they probably care, especially in light of the fact that they had money down there that they were trying to bring up. who in the world could have influenced them to fill up a mine and walk away from money? Well, I think it may have something to do with geologists they may have employed, and it may also, because through their boards of directors, They may have been in contact with foundations who realize the explosive impact that these discoveries could have on people's worldview. And it may, I think it's the same sort of reason. Well, why would scientists today try to stop NBC from showing a television program about some strange archaeological discoveries? discoveries, I think they realize that these discoveries, which tell us something about our human origins, who we are and where we came from, could have ultimately a big impact. Because I think we have to understand that our whole civilization is based on us having a particular concept of who we are and where we came from. For example, the civilization of Europe in the Middle Ages was heavily based on Christian concepts of who we are and where we came from. And you had a whole culture that was based on all those big, beautiful cathedrals being built. All the artwork that came down from those times was religiously inspired. The whole way of life turned around the sacred calendar of the church. Those were the big events. and most people were involved in all of that. Now today we have an entirely different emphasis in society. If you go to any city in Europe that was there since the Middle Ages, you always see that the biggest building was the cathedral, the church. Today you go to a city in the United States or Europe that's a more modern city, the biggest building is what? It's always the bank buildings. and the main activity the main activity that everyone revolves around is consuming products that are made by industries that the same people work in and people are getting rich off of that and I think there's a whole one of the reasons why so many of the very wealthy people in this country like Darwinism they called it social Darwinism because it justified the positions that they found themselves in. And I think they want to keep the current social arrangements intact. And if we get another picture of who we are and where we came from, that ultimately might disturb all these different arrangements that people want to keep intact. I think you're absolutely right. not just keep intact, but that they've taken great pains to build in order to destroy, or attempt to destroy, the system that had prevailed before. I think the biggest target, of course, is religion. Not just the Christian religion, but Orthodox Judaism, Islamic religion, all religions that there are except the religions that allow man to be God what do you think about that? oh I do think that there's an agenda like that I mean we can see it in this country that you've got it mandated that you can't teach anything other but a very atheistic materialistic Darwinian theory of evolution of the nation's tax supported schools at any time, that's challenged. You get committees of Nobel Prize winning scientists getting together to pressure the courts to keep these laws intact. Every once in a while in one of our southern states or midwestern states, the state legislature will attempt to pass a law saying, well, let's present an alternative in the science classrooms. They don't even call it, they say, well, we won't even talk about the Bible. We'll just talk about intelligent design. We'll make it non-sectarian. But in every single case, the federal courts have always struck those laws down at the direction of the fundamentalist Darwinists within the scientific community. The correct term, I think, is Marxist-socialist. Charles Darwin certainly was one. Well, he certainly was very popular among the Marxists and the socialists. Many people, they don't attach these labels to themselves. That's because they don't want anybody to know what they're doing. Yes. So that's probably true. whatever label you attach to it. I think it is, we're talking about social philosophies, whatever label you attach to them. You could call them Marxist or whatever, but they are social philosophies that emphasize working hard simply to exploit and dominate matter. they want to keep this separation between church and state which I think I found the fathers really didn't intend I think they intended for what they intended was to keep the government illuminated and inspired by godly sentiments I think they really intended that from my reading of their writing what they intended was that there be no state approved our state religion and that that was that was the religion which they've actually got now that's what the Darwinists actually have they've gotten the state to approve of their religion you're right exactly the opposite of what the founders intended I think that the federal government's mandate by law that nothing else can be taught in the school systems other than this Darwinian theory of evolution amounts to an establishment of religion. Yeah, state religion. And they're funded, the priests of this religion are funded by our tax money. In other words, you've got professors and teachers at schools and colleges who are being given, you know, salaries of $50,000 to $100,000 a year to make this propaganda. You know, to to say these things. We have to pay for this propaganda, this materialistic, basically atheistic propaganda that's coming from this people. We're being forced to pay our tax money to support these people, and I think that's wrong. I'm curious, Michael, when you first started this journey when you were reading the ancient texts of the different countries and peoples... That started back in the early 1970s when I was, of course, I'm 50 years old now. Welcome to the club. About 24, 25, starting seriously looking into these matters. Were you trying to look for some validation for your religious beliefs when you did that? Well, initially I was just interested in seeing what these writings had to say. Now, I would say yes. In the introductions to my books, I always mention that I do come from a particular standpoint. I do have some faith in God, and I've gotten that faith from many sources, but the source that I've been pursuing for the past 25 years or so, I found a lot of inspiration in some of these ancient writings from India, but I've always been very much inspired by them. and I visited that country several times, and I'm very inspired by that. And I do admit that that's the source of my ideas and the inspiration behind a lot of the work that I do. Now, in my books that I've published thus far, like Forbidden Archaeology, in the text of those books, I really don't get into my ideas, because what I simply have tried to do is I admit that I had some inspiration to start digging for these facts. But in my books, I just put the facts out there, and I'm quite happy to have anybody look at those facts and interpret them as they will. And a lot of people from a lot of different perspectives have made use of the information that I've provided. For example, there are Christian creationists scientists who very much like the work that I've done, even though I'm coming at it from a different angle, religiously speaking, and I might disagree with them about the age of the earth. Many of them prefer a very short age for the earth, and I don't have a problem with a very long age for the earth. But they said, for example, there's the Christian Research Society Quarterly, which is the main scientific publication of the Christian creationist scientists, and they've written a very nice review of my book where they say, yes, this is the show required reading for anybody who's interested in this subject. And they say, well, we disagree with the author as far as his religious ideas go. But as far as the evidence that he's presented, it goes against the Darwinian theory of evolution. And we find it quite an important book in that respect. And then I've also had Islamic scientists say that they appreciate the evidence because it goes along with some of their ideas. because they say in the Koran there are descriptions of generations of humans existing before Adam and Eve. So they found it interesting. People who are involved in UFO research, who believe that the Earth has been visited by extraterrestrials in ancient times, they look at the work and they find it valuable for their purposes. and you go across the intellectual spectrum.