Nilesh Nilkanth Oak Returns: UNTOLD Realities Of Mahabharat, Ramayana & Lost History | TRS 404

Now, when you're talking about Mahabharat, this is the first time I've actually heard someone on the show visualizing a map of ancient Bharat that spreads from Indonesia right up to Syria. In the Mahabharat, the people came from as far west as Syria, wow, and as far east as Indonesia. The Bhagad who fought during the Mahabharat war came from Iraq, Baghdad. Where was Atlantis? That was like a Sundaland, a beautiful place, but most of it went underwater. Plato referred to Atlantis disappearing into the ocean, but something came out that has a connection with the Ramayana.

Do you agree with the fact that human beings originated in Africa? There is a recent paper, a 2020 paper. The paper title goes something like this: Homo erectus left Africa, returning as Homo sapiens sapiens, like a thinking human. And do you know where they became thinking humans? Take a guess. India, obviously.

Everyone's favorite topic: vimanas, which somehow made it to the West. Joe Rogan keeps talking about vimanas. There are enough descriptions about Pushpak Viman in Valmiki Ramayana, which many people don't know. They match with what we know about the vimanas today. For example, when they took off, they made a big noise; air currents made them unstable. I can sense so many archaeologists getting pissed off with this conversation, and I'm enjoying it. They will say four-tusk elephants existed 9 million years ago; that's what I know. Now, they accept science, by the way. Therefore, Ramayana happened 9 million years ago. How stupid is that?

There's a lot of people who consumed both these episodes and are saluting you in their hearts. At this point, we need more Indians like you. I'd argue that this is the decade where centuries of cultural wisdom meet modern-day historical tools, finally. While the whole world is waking up to its own lost history in Africa and the Amazon, we need more people like N. S. O. K. to help us understand the lost history of India much better.

The last episode was centered around both the Ramayana and Mahabharata. This episode has moments that will blow your mind away. It's much more centered around the Mahabharata. Please sit back, relax, and deep dive into the research presented in this episode because the all-star L. S. O. K. is back with another spectacular research-oriented, study-oriented special of Mahabharata on DRS.

We released that last episode a few weeks ago, but actually, we're recording it just one hour apart. I'm still blown away by everything you spoke about in the last episode. I was waiting to find the Indian version of Randall Carlson and Graham Hancock. I'm glad we have him on TRS today. Welcome back, N. O. A.

Thank you. Very happy to be back. The last conversation needed me to speak on behalf of the skeptics because it was possibly your introduction to the mainstream Indian internet in many ways. I'm pretty sure in the last few weeks, people have made clips of you talking about the Mahabharata and Ramayana.

We stopped that conversation at the point of Dwaraka's submergence, destruction because of flood-seeing waters. You were talking about cataclysmic events; you were talking about worldwide floods that we also hear about in other cultures, like the story of Gilgamesh in Mesopotamia or the Greeks' Atlantis. Plato talked about Atlantis 9,000 years before him, and bingo, we have the evidence for it.

Yeah, we'll definitely dive deep into Indian culture in this one as well. I think we didn't complete that loop in the last episode about Atlantis. You spoke about Dwaraka; you spoke about what was possibly the land of Lanka, which is not the same as Sri Lanka today. We also spoke about that land outside of Tamil Nadu, Kumari Kandam.

So, I will give you two options. I would prefer that you pick the second option. The first option is that we talk a little bit about Kumari Kandam. The second option is we complete last time's loop and we speak about Atlantis.

Let's begin in the west and then slowly move to India in this one. Basically, the graph you showed us the last time, where we spoke about how the Earth generally has warming and cooling periods, that's why the ice ages exist. That's why periods of warming, like the current one that we're in, exist. There are also jumps in terms of warming. Now, jumps could be because of multiple reasons. One of the main reasons is tectonic plate shifts and randomly a massive portion of ice melting, not just because of pollution, but just because of how nature works.

Now, a massive piece of ice melting can actually change sea levels all over the world, and that's what people attribute the formation of the Black Sea to. That's what people attribute the disappearance of Dwaraka to, and also Lanka. Simple question to you, so I'm not giving you an option: where was Atlantis?

Okay, great question. I would love to answer that, and here is the reason why I called it a great question: because I don't know the answer. Do people know the answer? People really don't know the answer; that's why there are speculations all over. Right from Antarctica, was it Atlantis? Now, this is Graham Hancock, but they have thought of Indonesia, which is now much of it is underwater, but it wasn't.

So, if you go back, say, 10,000 years ago or 15,000 years ago, and definitely 20,000 years ago, that was like a Sundaland. You know, it's called the Sundaland. Amazing fertile place, beautiful place, but most of it went underwater. Talk about Indonesia. So, could that be Atlantis? Essentially, think of any place around the world, and somebody has speculated if that is Atlantis. So, that's everywhere. Honestly, I don't know the answer, but something to think about on Indonesia.

So, right now, our model for anthropology is that everything started in Africa, and from there it went out. Of course, it came to India, a significant portion. Then India was like a genetic melting pot, not just a melting pot; in fact, a genetic cuisine. All kinds of dishes were prepared, you know? All you have to do is go to Google and type "a genetic map." You will see a thread coming from Africa to India, but India has all kinds of genetic markers going outside India on the Y chromosome, but also on the X chromosome.

But talking of Atlantis, although the search for Atlantis is still going on, and really nobody knows, two things we know for sure: that Plato referred to Atlantis flooding, I mean, Atlantis disappearing into the ocean 9,000 years before him. Now, Plato's time is about 2,000 years ago. 9,000 years before that, or Plato's time is 500 BC, so 2,500 years ago before 9,000 years before that is what? 11,500 years ago, and that's that catastrophic rise event too that we looked at.

But where was Atlantis? Honestly, I don't know, but something came out. I'll just mention Antarctica because that has a connection with the Ramayana. Right now, Antarctica is under a very thick sheet of ice, but the geological data shows—and this is the wonderful work of many researchers, but specifically just to name one individual person, I would say Charles Hapgood. He taught at MIT; he taught at Harvard College history. He taught history there, but he was a scientist par excellence and not truly appreciated by the mainstream academic community.

Again, they object to his research, but they cannot come up with an alternative. Okay, so basically, it's a useless type of discussion. He has shown with phenomenal research—and I have studied that for many years now—that there was a time when Antarctica was ice-free. Maybe not the entire land, but parts of Antarctica were ice-free to the extent there were possibly human habitation or definitely rivers flowing and vegetation.

Lo and behold, that Piri Reis map I mentioned in the previous episode, the Turkish admiral, you know, the Navy guy, when he shows that landmass called Antarctica, like Antarctica, which fits the right location, that map is shown with river channels on Antarctica. Now, isn't that fascinating? Because as far as the mainstream academia is concerned, Antarctica is covered with ice for thousands and thousands of years, but that is not so.

Now, what is the relationship to the Ramayana? Ramayana describes that actually Ravana, this is in the Uttarakanda of Valmiki Ramayana, Ravana is going around the world conquering all lands, and he goes to—there is a description—he goes to Yamapuri, and the southern tip is the Yamapuri. Yama, the land of Yama, that's why we consider the southern direction as a direction of Yama. Yama is the one who supposedly takes our atmas, you know, afterwards, once we die; that's the religious point of view.

So, actually, there's a description in Uttarakanda. He goes to Yamapuri, then he reconciles with Yama, and from there he goes to Patala. Now, if you put the geography together, you can very easily see India going to Antarctica, and if you just go on the other side, do you know where you go? You go to Argentina.

I have been to Patagonia, both on the Chilean side and also the Argentinian side. In fact, geologically, you can see in the past those landmasses were connected. Now, there is water because of sea level rising. So, that's the point on Atlantis. Atlantis has not been found, but Atlantis research pulled out these wonderful gems, you know? That's the benefit of it.

I mean, in my seventh-grade geography class, I learned that the North Pole and the South Pole, in the region surrounding it, are cold because of the lack of the sun's heat basically reaching those two parts of the Earth because of the tilt of the axis. So, kind of the physics fan in me is questioning how they were ice-free.

Ah, great question, great question. Two answers, and I'm simplifying it. Sure, the first answer is where the ice is formed is a somewhat complex phenomenon. It's just not purely related to how much sun ray goes or how far it is from the equator. It's somewhat complex; you know, it is a mixture of too many factors going into it. But broadly speaking, what you said is correct: as you go away from the equator, there are more colder places.

The second one is beyond the tectonic shift, which is the work of Wagner, like about 100 years ago, and he was basically rejected, ignored by the mainstream academia in the 1930s. He could not see the success of his great theory in his lifetime. What was his theory? Wagner, the tectonic plates shifting, of tectonic plates.

Okay, but there is now—finally, they accepted tectonic plates. Now, there is another theory. This is not a new theory. Einstein was fascinated by this theory. I'm going to tell you, and I just briefly mentioned it in the previous episode. It's called Earth crust displacement. Now, this is fascinating.

So, think of this as an orange; it's a good example. So, let's say we loosen the skin on the surface of the orange. So, the orange inside core remains the same; we don't make it move. But the Earth crust, which is about 50 km thick, you know, on average, we can move the crust without actually moving the core.

Now, be fascinated; be ready to be fascinated. Now, what happens is suppose my Antarctica is here on the southern side. So, inside, the core remains the same, but because of Earth crust displacement, if I shift it a little bit, so because the Earth core is the same, still the South Pole is at the same position, but my Antarctica is no longer at the South Pole.

So, Antarctica has shifted, and you can have that. And actually, there is evidence. This is the work of Charles Hapgood. So, the South was still as cold as it is today, correct? But the landmass of Antarctica was probably at a different position on the globe. Very good.

And not too far from it, but shifted from where it is today. It was cold, but not so cold that it's covered in ice because it had a different position, different latitude. Right? Now, in the South, there is not much land, so it's very difficult to explain. But in the North, it is very easy to explain.

In fact, today, the North Pole, the terrestrial North Pole, is right in the middle of the Arctic Sea. But if you go back about 15,000 years ago—and now you might get a goosebump moment—if you go 15,000 years ago, the North Pole, the terrestrial point location of the North Pole, there is evidence to show that, and Charles Hapgood's work does a great job, was right in the middle of Hudson Bay, which is, if you look at the Canadian map, like the big ingressing sea kind of thing, that's Hudson Bay.

Now, imagine if the North Pole is in Hudson Bay, and we can draw the map. If we can open another one and draw the map of North America, I'll show you where Hudson Bay is. If there is a North Pole right there, now can you tell me what will happen in the area surrounding it? It will be filled with ice.

Yeah, well, that's the North America ice age. Watch out. Okay, and before that, if you go another 15,000 years before, the terrestrial pole was near between Alaska and Canada. There is a place called Yukon Territory in that area. Again, like we've seen. Very good.

So, right now, think of that, where the Canadian border, that light orange color ends further there, you know where the pole is, right? Basically, all the lines going together, which is right in the middle of the Arctic Sea. Now you see Hudson Bay, yes, and that's where the North Pole was, the terrestrial North Pole, about 15,000 years ago. Bingo! That explains why there was an ice age there.

Now, what happened once that became ice? A lot of water is stored on the ground. What that did basically, the Gulf of what you call the Gulf Stream, the hot water going there, that current was stopped because there was ice in the Newfoundland area, the eastern part. Therefore, now Western Europe also became frozen because of the Gulf Stream. The Gulf Stream water is no longer going there.

And that's why when you go to Ramayana times and even before, Europe and North America, both Western Europe, Northern Europe, and North America were covered in ice, very cold. They were the actual North Pole region, what we count as the Arctic Sea today. This is based on Earth crust displacement. Mainstream academia does not understand it; therefore, does not agree with it. But there is sufficient evidence for it.

So, parallel, like the north of Russia, yeah, and the Arctic Sea, which is at the north of Russia, must have been habitable. Yes, and that's what if you check the work of Graham Hancock or otherwise, Siberia was like a beautiful place, like a semi-tropical type of thing or lighter tropical. And those are the descriptions we see.

Therefore, Sugriva, before Sugriva is referring to the time before Ramayana, saying Sugriva says, "I am aware of this land." And in the Mahabharata, there is no description of that area being bad or something because, you know, the pole has not seen the effect of it yet.

So, that's fascinating. What causes the pole shifts? Just tectonic plate movement? No, the tectonic is the ground plate. Think of it like, you know, there are seven or eight—actually, there are more—but these are physical plates. Like India is on a certain plate; that plate came from Africa, floating on lava.

Yeah, floating on lava. Japan gets tons of earthquakes because almost, if you see that tectonic plate graph, seven plates come together in Japan. So, just imagine, you know, they're trying to push each other, and it results in just earthquakes and shaking of land in Japan because of that. That's one phenomenon that is not to be confused with the Earth crust displacement because displacement doesn't change the core; it just moves the piece somewhere there, whereas tectonic is like India coming away from Africa and meeting Asia.

Okay, that's the difference. Gotcha. Okay, back to India. I think a good point to begin today's conversation when it comes to the Indian epics is a book on astronomy that you were telling me about outside. Huh, what is that book?

Okay, the Astro. So, remember we talked about why only India has a stable language with low to no drift? That is very critical. The second most critical aspect is the very precise, accurate, sophisticated understanding of astronomy. India can check their boxes. Ancient India can check the boxes on these both counts.

And the third one is the guru-shishya parampara, which is also phenomenal in the field of astronomy. Surya Siddhanta, I mean, there were many texts; many might have been lost, but whatever is remaining within that, the Surya Siddhanta is an ancient Indian text on astronomy, much revered, of course, within India, but even outside India.

When the British became aware of it, the first thing they did, one of the first things they did, was taking away Surya Siddhanta. Taking away meaning translating it was actually a transatlantic project about the 17th-18th century. After that transatlantic project, professors from America and professors from the United Kingdom and professors from France were working together to translate Surya Siddhanta.

Is that much important? They understood the importance of it. Many of our modern-day Indian academics or otherwise do not understand it. Why? I won't blame them completely because this is not just a simple pocketbook that anyone can understand. In fact, it has about 500 shlokas, okay? 500 shlokas, 14-16 chapters, something like this. It is meant as a pocketbook, but a pocketbook for an astronomy expert or astronomy genius.

It's like, think of all the physics formulas in modern physics just summarized there. Somebody, a novice, will not know what to do with them, but somebody who is an expert will know what to do. That's how it is. So, it is written in a very cryptic language, but it is fascinating because in the last episode, we looked at the multiples of 7,000, like starting with us 7,000 years ago, Mahabharata 14,000 years ago, Ramayana, and more than 21,000 years ago.

Just as a simplicity for simplicity's sake, you will find that there are epics in the Surya Siddhanta text. Now, these are not easily revealed to us, but somebody has to work on it, and many great researchers have worked on it. If you find those epics, they parallel these great historical developments in Indian civilization or ancient Indian civilization.

You mean at these points, the book was slightly changed? Slightly changed; something significant was happening. Okay, let's take this quick journey through the different epics of Surya Siddhanta, and then you can see the connection with Ramayana, Mahabharata, and even other things.

If you look at Surya Siddhanta today and you want to say, "Okay, how long have we had this text?" There is some reference that you can read into Surya Siddhanta for technicality. I will just remove it and just say these are the longitudes of nakshatras. Okay, we'll leave it at that, whatever that may be. What are their numbers?

So, they are given in Surya Siddhanta. Today, we know the longitudes of nakshatras. If we see the gap between today's measurements of longitudes of nakshatras and those given in Surya Siddhanta, we can immediately calculate that it happened about 1,500 years ago. The measurements made in Surya Siddhanta of longitudes of nakshatras, 580 CE, 600 CE, something like this, about the time of Aryabhata, you know, something like this.

Now, when Westerners came across Surya Siddhanta and they found this reference, do you know what they said? They said, "Oh, Surya Siddhanta is written 1,500 years ago." Now, that itself was fascinating to them because they had the whole entire dark period until Copernicus and Newton and so on. So, they were fascinated. But that is not the truth, unfortunately. This fakery, or maybe error on their part, maybe not fakery, it still continues in academic circles.

Like, they think Surya Siddhanta is of very recent origin. It is not. Let me walk you now further. If you go further back and find out what is another epoch where some correction, some update was made to Surya Siddhanta. Now, why do we need updates? Because astronomy is very, very stable, but when you go back thousands and thousands of years, even those things start changing.

You mean astronomy is the study of the stars around, the study of the stars, planets, nakshatra positions, seasons, the connection of seasons with Indian lunar months, and so on and so forth. Got it. But over thousands of years, the map of the sky changes slightly. The map changes; the constants change.

For example, Earth has many motions. One is Earth is rotating around itself; that's one motion. The second one is Earth is rotating around the Sun; that's a second motion. Then Earth is, when it's rotating around the Sun, it's inclined at an angle with respect to the Sun. Interesting.

Now, it has one motion around itself, then around the Sun. Those are two. There are many motions. I'll tell you only four. Sure. The third one is like this: the Earth's axis, where it points to, over a very long period of time, the Earth's axis points in a different direction. So, like a top, the motion of a top, it goes like this. That's called precession of the equinoxes.

Precession of the Earth's axis is a 26,000-year-long circle. And then there is another one, a nod, like a Japanese nod, like this. So, right now, the angle is 23.5, but it's not always 23.5. It goes from 22 to 24.5 or something like this.

No, this is where it comes into the picture. Now, these are the Milankovitch cycles, you know? These all add up to those cycles that we talked about, the sea level rise and so on. Okay, now let's go back beyond that 500 CE. The first epoch going backwards we find is about 3,000 BCE. Something interesting happened; that is when the Earth's axis was at 24 degrees.

The inclination right now is 23.5; that was at 24 degrees. All Indian astronomy texts, as a simplicity, used 24 degrees as the inclination. But people, the Westerners thought when they translated Surya Siddhanta, they thought Indians don't know how to measure it properly. So, they took, you know, very crude measurement, 23.5.

They're taking it 24 because they did not know at that time the precession of the Earth's axis or what it does. But Indians are talking to the precision. You are an engineer; do you know what precision they are talking about? Just as a simple thing, 1 divided by 3,438. That much precision they're talking when it comes to Earth's inclination and so on.

So, if you go back 3,000 BCE, something happened, which is the Earth's inclination is 24 degrees. There is enough evidence in Surya Siddhanta that there were, what you call, readjusting of parameters. Okay, you have enough evidence that many parameters in astronomy texts were readjusted in 3,000 BCE.

That, unfortunately, we think that's the beginning of Kali Yuga. No, it was the beginning of a calendar because they corrected the calendar. So, 3,000 BCE is another epoch. Now, go further. The equation of the Sun, which means predicting where exactly the Sun will be in the sky. Now, because we see it every day, we think, "Oh, that must be easy." No, it's not easy.

The equation of the Sun that was adjusted, not defined for the first time, it was adjusted, rewritten, corrected at the same time as Mahabharata, 5,500 BCE. That we can show purely based on the internal evidence of Surya Siddhanta. This is the work of great researcher Dr. Anil Naran.

Did it happen because of a celestial event also taking place? Why they could have done it, we don't know, at least not for the equation of the Sun. Sure, 3,000 BCE is correct because many things were changing, so they did that. But the question you ask is very important for the next epoch.

Now, if you go beyond 5,500 BCE, let's come to 8,000 BCE. Just like I told you about the longitudes of the nakshatras, now there is another on. So, longitude is the vertical; where they are, latitudes is like the circles, like this. Mumbai is like 19 latitude north, you know?

The latitudes of nakshatras that are given in Surya Siddhanta, if you try to take the latitudes then and now, look at the latitudes now and see how long we have to go before we can match the both. You have to go to 8,000 BCE, which is 10,000 years before today.

As in the point at which a star has been above a point on the Earth? No, no star. No, no, that is when the stars are there; they're fixed, and they are there. There is some motion. Okay, nakshatra is a portion of the sky. A star or a portion of a sky, so a portion of a sky is a nakshatra.

And to designate that portion, just like when we say Mumbai, exactly which one is Mumbai, we might say Flora Fountain or Hutatma is a Mumbai, right? So, to specify something, they use a specific star in that area, 13-degree area, and they call it a yogatara, yogatara of that nakshatra.

So, effectively, right now, the way modern humans map out the Earth is latitude and longitude of the Earth by drawing lines on the Earth. Similarly, at that point, they used to map out portions of the sky with respect to points on the Earth. They did both. It's amazing.

Okay, and that's why Ujjain has so much importance because Ujjain is the northernmost point for the Sun to go as far as North, 23 degrees. Remember 23 degrees? So, 21st Tropic of Cancer, huh? So, 21st June, and simplifying it, 21st June, the Sun would be exactly above Ujjain because it has gone all the way to the North, and then now it's going to start turning backwards.

You know, backwards meaning to the southwards. So, it was mapped, actually. See, again, this is another digression, but when they refer to Brahma, they sometimes say it is a 2D, and people sometimes descriptions come like that and say 2D of what? They are taking the longitude and latitudes there and mapping it on the surface.

So, like when you go about 110 km, the latitude approximately will change by 1 degree. They knew this. But back to this. So, at 8,000 BCE, the Surya Siddhanta latitudes numbers are such that if we do the mathematical precise analysis based on the best of modern astronomy we know, it tells us that those latitude measurements of nakshatras were made 10,000 years ago.

Now, even to have the concept of latitude and longitude, the measure them—see, this discussion that you and I are having would be completely alien to a good number of academics, a good number of modern individuals who simply are stuck in like 2,000 BCE and 3,000 BCE and cannot go any further.

But 8,000 BCE is not the end. If you go further back now, 8,000 BCE, why? Now you ask me, like, was there any specific reason? There was a specific reason, a couple of reasons. One thing, think of this as the end of Younger Dryas. So, maybe the civilization is beginning now. That's my speculation.

Younger Dryas impact is about the meteor hitting the Earth. Yeah, cold first, fire, and then cold for very miserable life conditions for like 500 years or so, an unnatural ice age. I mean, for lack of a better word, it's natural. No, that's a good way to describe it. Fabulous. It wouldn't have happened in the natural course of the Earth. Correct?

Correct. Unless a meteor hit, which it did. So, basically, when the conditions became okay, correct? That's the end of the Younger Dryas. And so, that is one reason. Another one is that very traumatic period is remembered in Indian memory by making use of astronomy. Again, it will be a digression; maybe I'll not go too much into it, but just briefly touching on it.

It's known as Rohini Shakha. Rohini is a nakshatra, one of the 27 nakshatras. It is made up of that area of five stars, like a V, English V, you know? So, the end of that corner, that V, is that Rohini star. And then there are two stars. Anytime Saturn or Mars goes inside that V shape, it is considered that planet did the B of A Rohini.

Rohini Shakha, it split the cart of Rohini; that is the astronomy term in Indian astronomy. Why is that important? You see, Saturn and, in Indian astronomy texts like the Surya Siddhanta, says who does the splitting of the cart of Rohini? It says the Moon, of course, always does it. But the two planets, additional two planets who do it, are Mars and Saturn.

Now, I'm telling you, until 100 years ago, other than Indian astronomers like Shankar Balakrishna Dikshit, a contemporary of L. Man, everyone around the world considered this impossible, that Saturn and Mars could not enter going inside that. Right? In about 150 years ago, Shankar Balakrishna Dikshit did the calculation. Just imagine, without computers, and said, "If Saturn does it, or Mars does it, it will happen before 5,000 BCE."

Now, that itself is fascinating. I have shown with a simulation that yes, that indeed happens. Both Mars and Saturn start splitting the cart of Rohini only if you go before 5,000 BCE. Sure, that's with the modern thing. Right now, TIFR, right in Mumbai, they published a paper maybe 20 years ago, and they showed that Mars can do it.

And they showed the data using the NASA data, Jet Propulsion Lab data, which is great, and kudos to them, Mayank and I know them. But they also claimed Saturn will not do it. And again, just like that, Arundhati Vishakha, I said, "If Surya Siddhanta is saying it, I trust Surya Siddhanta more than the modern guys."

Modern academics? Okay, I don't trust academics anyways. Okay, but I said, "Let me do it." And when I actually tested it, I have shown, and there is a co-researcher of mine, M. A. Modak from Pune; he's in Finland right now. We actually showed there are four or five instances of Saturn splitting the cart.

The point is these are all things happening, most of them during the Younger Dryas. And what is the correlation? After saying this, Rohini Shakha, Surya Siddhanta, and the commentators on Surya Siddhanta, Indian commentators like Ganesh Dadhya go on to saying when Saturn or Mars split the cart of Rohini, it is a very bad time for human beings, a bad time for the Earth.

They're saying based on their Younger Dryas experience, so there were people who could do it. Okay, a couple of questions. One, I'm an engineer; I know how computers work. I know how the universe works in terms of—they say that mathematics is the language of the universe. So, even astronomy, it seems to me that when you're talking about angles of the Earth's rotation, revolution, all that, it's basically mathematics.

Yes, so if you fill all the mathematics into a computer program, won't the computer software be able to simulate the past in great detail? Yes, I'm assuming that that's the case. So then why do we need research to be done on when Saturn and Mars enter a particular?

Okay, great point. It does, but just like if you dig, there are archaeological objects down there, and they have a date in them. There is carbon organic matter in them, but somebody has to dig them. Somebody has to take it out, take it to the lab, you know, mass spectrometry, spectroscopy. It's something similar.

So, the data exists. See, the NASA Jet Propulsion data on the astronomy exists, but in order for someone to go and look at it, that person should know Surya Siddhanta. That person should know these verses. That person should understand the meaning of it. That person should have a conviction that this is a factual narration of some time and then would be willing to work for many years with no guarantee of success and no monetary benefit.

Very likely spend money from your own pocket to figure out something, and somebody says, "Okay, so Saturn split the cart of Rohini, so what? Okay, how does that benefit me today, dear ISRO?" That's all I have to say.

Okay, end of that particular tangent. Yeah, the other question I have for you is when is the next point that Saturn and Mars are going to split the cart of Rohini? We don't know. It will because it's a combination of many complex phenomena that need to occur. But let me quickly complete that in the sense beyond that 8,000 BCE, there is a 12,000 BCE epoch, right, which matches with Ramayana.

What Surya Siddhanta says is that there were times when there were two pole stars, two pole stars in the sense one in the North, one in the South. Very bright, and anyone standing at the equator, like Singapore, so to say, looking in both directions, they would see these pole stars at the horizon.

Wow! Now, in that chapter, chapter number 12 of Surya Siddhanta, it says two additional phenomena. Just to manage time, I will not go into the deep details. One of them is, again, the obliquity has become 24. It was in 3,000 BCE, but if you go back in 12,000 BCE, again it's 24. Do you know why? Because it's 24. It hit 24 in 12,000 BCE, then went to 24.5 and came back to 24.

That's why this 3,000. So, that's another evidence. And the third evidence is something more complicated. I presented on it at an Oxford conference, and they were totally lost; they had no idea. So, I'll not do that right now, but you can take this on a shha. Those three phenomena all come together and blurt out 12,000 BCE.

And our paper is out there, Rupa Bti and myself; the paper is published, the paper is out there, the presentation is out there. My point is that is also there in Surya Siddhanta. Now, what's the importance to Ramayana? 12,000 BCE, guess what? Here, two bright stars are given as pole stars.

Now, when does that happen? Something happened in 3,000 BCE, but also happened again in 12,000 BCE. Guess what? Ramayana describes the pole star of Ramayana times. That is not the pole star we have today because, see, the Earth's axis is pointing somewhere. When it changes, the pole star changes.

Okay, and Ramayana says in such clear, beautiful language, no ifs, no buts. "Brahmarashi, the stars are rotating around there," which is Brahmarashi. Brahmarashi is Abhijit, Vega in modern astronomy. Same time when Sugriva is going in the southern direction, again just like the east direction we talked about, southern direction, he's giving directions to W party.

He's saying, "How far you are going? Okay, go to the southern tip of India." Now, to describe where that southern tip of India is, of course, they will see the ocean anyways. He says, "Go to the southern tip, then climb Mount Mahindra, and then you will be able to see star Austa."

Now, somebody who doesn't know Austa says, "What about it?" But today we can see star Austa even from New Delhi. But during the Ramayana times, you could see star Austa only if you go to the southern tip, like Kanyakumari, then climb Mount Mahindra. There is a Mount Mahindra. Then only you can see.

And the reason you could only see after doing all of this is because Canopus, or Austa, had become a pole in the South. So, you see the Ramayana description. You take the Surya Siddhanta. Surya Siddhanta says 12,000 BCE. Ram evidence says 12,000 BCE. Bingo!

Okay, so the nakshatra at that point, which was over South India, today lies over New Delhi? No, no, not quite that. So, Austa is still further south, but what happens is because of this precession and because of their movement, Austa, what's happening is this: think of the crankshaft motion in a car.

Like, you know, the piston is going back and forth, right? But that turns into a cyclical motion. So, think of the Earth's motion here as a cyclical motion like this, but that turns into, for a person in, say, Mumbai or New Delhi, when can I see Austa? So, if a New Delhi person is standing there for 15,000 years, he will say, "I see Austa there; I don't see Austa now."

Okay, I don't see Austa. Four thousand years go by; I don't see Austa. Another 4,000 years go by; oh, I see Austa, and he's slowly coming up. So, something that's circular for a person on the ground with respect to a specific star is going to become back-and-forth motion.

Okay, wow! You explain some deep level of astronomy. How deep have you gone into astronomy in your studies? I would say not enough. See, what happens is this is true. Newton has said it. Like, you know, when people, Newton, people were fascinated with Newton, and they ask him, "So, you must be feeling great?" And he said, "No, I feel like I have found maybe a piece of sand from the whole beach, you know, the whole beach right in front of me."

It's like that. More you know, Upanishad talks about it. The more you know, you realize how little you know. True, that's been my journey over the course of the show also, AB. At every point, every 50 episodes, I think there's no more content left, and I'm humbled more at every 50 episodes. Same here, same here.

What I want to ask you about is the 34,000-year mark you mentioned outside. Yes, so effectively what you're saying is Surya Siddhanta was written 34,000 years ago? That's as far back as it—Surya Siddhanta would actually go a lot older. Okay, at least some portions of it.

No, the 34,000-year event that I refer to, 34,000 BCE, let me give the credit where it is due. My co-researcher, Rupa Bti, fascinating researcher. By the way, I translated for her. You know, we have a humor going on. She says, "When I tell these people, nobody understands." That's because she thinks at a very different level, you know? It's a difficult—

You mean in terms of astronomy? Yeah, she—I mean, you and I can do an episode on Rupa Bti's research. It is that fascinating and that deep. But just this 34,000, so she found a reference in M Upanishad or M Arak, another Upanishad, you know, where there is a king, Bradr, and he, the kings, Kwaku Dynasty, the same dynasty as Bhagwan Ram.

So, the kings in his dynasty are mentioned, but remember, Bhagwan Ram is not mentioned. Now, what does that tell you? Bhagwan Ram is so important in a Kwaku dynasty. So, if there was a discussion of Kwaku dynasty and some king after Bhagwan Ram, very likely Bhagwan Ram would have been mentioned, but that's not evidence we need to look at.

But he's not mentioned, so this is way before that. That much we know. What he's talking about is some astronomy phenomenon. I'll tell you two. He says the pole star is moving. I'll come back and explain why he's saying that. The other thing he says is that the spring equinox is in the Maga nakshatra.

So, that tells you when to nail it down. And something interesting. Now, this is astronomy, but then he says something on the ground. He says the oceans are drying up. It's a scary feeling; oceans are drying up, meaning the water levels are going down, and an ice age is beginning.

Now, we know last 20,000 years they are not drying up, meaning this incident just from a terrestrial point of view must be before 20,000. That's a very powerful evidence. Now, we have to bring three things together: oceans drying up, spring equinox in a Maga nakshatra, and the pole star moving.

Now, the pole is always moving, but in 38,000 BCE, again, we had the same situation like we had in 12,000 BCE, like Brahmarashi at the pole here and pole here. Okay, so that was existing in 38,000 BCE. So, that moving, so 4,000 years they have seen the movement. The pole is going away; Brahmarashi is going away. That's what Bradr has seen.

He's seeing oceans drying up like that, and the spring equinox in Maga. Now, from our time, if you want to go back in antiquity, when was the last time spring equinox was in Maga? It was 8,000 BCE, but that time, oceans level coming up, and they were not going down.

Okay, so we have to go to another 26,000-year cycle that takes us to 34,000 BCE. And now, if Bradr is in 34,000 BCE, and there are many kings like Sagar and many others mentioned, which means their time is even before that. Keep in mind, as we go back in antiquity, the physical evidence or even astronomy evidence is going to get less and less.

That's just the nature of it. Physical evidence is the evidence that modern-day archaeologists count as the ultimate kind of evidence. But the truth is physical evidence fades away; it erodes. It's just because of how nature works, because of how time works. Correct?

And it overlaps, right? It overlaps on each other. Like, you built there was a house before it was destroyed and built a new house. The evidence of the old house is almost gone. I just want to quickly mention something not related to India, which is that I remember Graham Hancock doing an episode with Joe Rogan about ancient Egypt.

I believe he said that the Egyptians that we talk about in the Egyptian civilization, which is also supposed to be at the same time as the Indus Valley civilization that we read about in school, those Egyptians counted them as the modern-day Egyptians. And they believe that there was a much more ancient race of Egyptians, dated back to almost 80,000 BCE.

I have looked at that research myself, and I agree with it. In fact, they talk of these three cycles of this 26,000 years, that is 75,000 years right there, 80,000 years. Yeah. I can sense so many archaeologists getting pissed off with this conversation, and I'm enjoying it because how else are you supposed to explore ancient human history?

There is no way that digging will be able to give you any evidence. Well, just because you raised the point, let me give you the evidence you can find from dirt archaeology right here in India. How's that? Going back to 70,000 years, Toba explosion. Have you heard this?

Okay, Sumatra, like the Indonesian area, the volcano, the Banda, that area, the volcano came and it spouted ash all over India, but even the big area, Arabian Sea, the evidence can be found everywhere. But if you go to India, everywhere, but Jalapur, which is in the Kurnool district of Andhra Pradesh, you see—and other places too—but you see, actually, this is very interesting, stone tools first as you dig.

Then you see an ash layer, a thick ash layer referring to that Toba explosion. You can date it to 72,000 years ago, and below that, stone tools, which means there were people before using it. There were people after who survived, and it was continuing. Bam! So, within the Earth's crust lies the Earth's story.

Yeah, yeah. I wrote three books; my fourth book I'm working on is just a simple working title: A Brief History of Hindu Civilization. And I'm going to call it A Brief History of Hindu Civilization, and essentially going to cover 75,000 years of Indian civilization.

Ah, okay. So, I'm very proud of Hinduism. I'm very proud of India. I'm very proud of this subcontinental land and our culture. I just think over the course of doing the show with skeptics as well, the one thing I've learned is that one key aspect was the Zoroastrian religion, which I truly believe was a sister religion.

I remember doing an episode on Islam with an Islamic scholar, and he spoke about how even Islam was formed due to the religions that existed before Islam, and those religions were probably an outcome of earlier religions as well. Correct.

Now, these earlier set of religions are called the classical religions, and they say that only Zoroastrianism and Hinduism are the two classical religions which have survived. So, while I love the fact that we've survived, I think our time spent in survival has allowed us to create astronomy and shlokas and all these things, agriculture, navigation, everything that we attribute to the greatness of it is an outcome of us having survived.

Yes, I also feel that perhaps Zoroastrianism also was quite advanced, like in terms of it knows a lot. And I have a very close friend of mine, Zoroastrian Banjis, a Parsi, and he keeps making fun of the fact that, "Oh, we are Parsis; we're going extinct." He says it as a joke, but the unfortunate truth is that Parsi numbers are dwindling.

Yes, so even Zoroastrianism, it seems like—I don't like saying this, and I know that Parsis are watching this. Parsis are very relaxed people, yes, so they don't get easily offended, I've noticed this. But it seems like the timeline of that religion also may be coming to an end just because of the dwindling numbers.

Correct. Now, that's just the story of Zoroastrianism. How many other classical religions were there which actually came to an end? Yeah, which brings me to the point of that migration out of Africa. I get that we, as a human species, settled in India and then migrated outwards, and there's genetic studies that prove this when you study patrilineal lineage and matrilineal lineage.

But my question is, why didn't humans settle in the Gulf as well? Okay, because the Gulf is midway between Africa and India, correct? So, were the conditions in the Gulf bad or good? Good point. Well, right now, you look at the conditions; you know the answer.

You know your answer. Other than, say, parts of Oman, Oman is a beautiful place, very picturesque also. But even then, within the Gulf context, it is picturesque, you know? It's a tough land still. So, today, if the oil is not there and the external commerce doesn't exist, it's a very tough life in the Middle East, you know, just by itself.

So, similar conditions did exist there for a long time also in Northern Africa, and so therefore they did not live there. But if you look at the genetic makeup, you will find there were many times in the history of humanity that the Gulf was a thriving community. For example, especially the area near Israel, Israel, Jordan, Syria, that area.

For example, if you ask academics, "When did agriculture begin?" You will get a very ignorant answer that came from Cambridge University 7,000 years ago into the Levant, you know, that area, and from there it moved out. Well, Levant did have agriculture. I'm so surprised that evidence, a very fabulous evidence exists for 100 years, a very sophisticated evidence showing that there was a well-developed agriculture in the Levant, especially Syria, Jordan, Israel, that area going back to 15,000-plus years.

15,000—I mean, I have the information. I don't know what academics do. You mean they found tools, the grains? They are called phytoliths, like, you know, the grains also become fossilized, okay? And you can look at them to decide whether they were wild grains or basically cultivated grains and so on and so forth. Very fascinating.

Same thing in India. Just because of agriculture, let me mention, everyone says, "Oh, so agriculture came to India from Levant." Nonsense! That's the only word in the Indian subcontinent. There is evidence going back to 45,000 years of wide harvesting of grains, their storage, their cooking, their, you know, sifting, and all of this 45,000 years ago in India, in India, Africa, actually Sri Lanka, and then in India going back to 10,000 years, 12,000 years.

Very good agriculture. But do you agree with the fact that human beings originated in Africa? That is the current theory. There is based on the evidence. There is a good reason to believe that, like, you know, the L, initially the Lucy, that's why the L, you know, the oldest thing, that the fossil they found and so on. Not oldest anymore, but still, but the genetic trail does tell you that it started from Africa and came here.

However, there is more and more evidence popping up all over the world. One of my good friends and my adopted Canadian mom, U. S. I. Ringlip, she's a German Canadian, has done fascinating research on the connection of pollination languages with Sanskrit coming from Sanskrit. That's a sidebar. She has done this research too. I am doing this research; many others are doing it.

That very likely there were many pockets of human origin, just like different animals, similar-looking animals can pop up in different places. Very much like that, there is. But even if we keep that aside, maybe we have to wait for some time. There is a recent paper, a 2020 paper. The paper title goes something like this: Homo erectus left Africa, returned as Homo sapiens sapiens, like a thinking human.

And do you know where they became thinking humans? Take a guess. India, the broader India. When we say India of the past, like going back beyond 2,000 years, 4,000 years, it is very important the Indians understand it. Iran is India; Afghanistan is India; Pakistan is India; even the Uttarakuru, Uttaramadra, that is India, India in the sense of cultural landscape.

Okay, so effectively what you're saying is a predecessor, which was not entirely human, some form of Homo erectus, yeah, Homo erectus actually was migratory, and it gradually spread itself out of Africa, correct? Out of Asia and then in Iran, stretched it up to India, yes, as well as in Central Asia, stretched it up to Lanka.

Yeah, that's India. Yeah, that's ancient India that became a genetic cuisine for human beings. Lots of different, you know, ranges came, and that's how they are named right now. So, for example, when you see R, you know, that is for Rohini. That's how the name is given.

M from the Southern India, like the female gene, chromosomal mitochondrial gene is called M. That's how the names are given. N is for Nasim, now referring to the Middle East. You'll have to give a bit of genetics one here. I get what you mean. We can do it now because I think it's actually linked.

This is how you deep dive into the science of this theory, right? Right. So, imagine in a very simple way, take, think of our cricket ball. Like in India, everyone understands cricket, right? So, we take a cricket ball, and just imagine it has—we put some patch on it, like some specific patch, blue patch.

Now, because this cricket ball is dead, but with the human beings, like they produce children, they are going to produce the children with a blue patch on them, so to say. This is the change that has occurred to the gene, okay? And if we track it, we know we can track it back to which genetic tree we came from.

That's how these names are. So, certain genetic codes that you can match and say this is consistent. We call this M, but if we call it M, if it's an X chromosome, like the female chromosome, so to say, if it's on the Y chromosomes, they have given different names, like the main's name to it, so forth.

If you look at that, you essentially find—and this is a paper from 2020. I mean, you go to Google Maps, you're going to find things came from Africa through Gulf, Middle East. But then from India, just like, you know, you see the airline map from Delhi and Mumbai, like planes going everywhere, you're going to see all these lines, the mitro, the fam, the mother's lines, as well as the main's line, like R gene, for example, R, you know, going outside India.

Right. One more angle on genetic studies, and this I picked up from Dr. N. R. Matri, lineal lineage, I believe it's called matrilineal, which is a mitochondrial, is a matrilineal in terms of every girl, yeah, and her mother, and her mother, and her mother, and her mother, and you can go all the way back, shares something in common, one common.

That is called matrilineal lineage, and that can be mapped in the genome, I believe. Correct? Similarly, there's patrilineal lineage. So, you and me as men share something in common with our fathers, with their fathers, with his father, his father, his father, and it goes back. Yes, that's the basis of everything you're saying right now when you're talking about these lines that leave India.

I think what you're trying to say is that if you study modern-day Europeans and modern-day Indians, they share some common ancestor, which likely the Europeans would like to believe originated in Europe. The Indians would like to believe it originated in India. Correct?

And the science tells you that most of them originated in India based on the age, the antiquity of that gene. So, for example, I mean, I'll not go into technicality, but yes, so R exists in Europe, R exists in India. Now, who gave it to who? That is the question.

So, there is a way in genetics. It's not a perfect science; it's progressing tremendously. But based on this, you can say, like, where you find these older tennis, older cricket balls with the older stamps, you find in India, but you don't find that older one in England. So, you know that it started in India. It's something like that.

Gotcha. Okay, but on that topic, I have something in mind. Let me share that with you. Just like we looked at beyond astronomy, multidisciplinary evidence, there is genetic evidence, fascinating genetic evidence for Mahabharata showing that Mahabharata happened in 5,561 BCE.

So, that's what I wanted to share. So, Surya Siddhanta, this evidence, and then one from paleontology for Ramayana. Now, let me ask you a question. See, and if you don't know the answer, that's perfectly fine. Mahabharata war happened for 18 days, you know? In fact, Vyas used that as 18 as a number and used it everywhere: 18 chapters of Bhagavad Gita, 18 aini battalions kind of thing fought, 11 on one side, seven on another side.

The war lasted for 18 years, so you know this. They put some magical numerology number into it. 18 oini, have you heard that word? Like a battalion, the modern day, think of it as a battalion. So, there were 18 oini, that much worth of soldiers fought during the Mahabharata war, 11 on the Kaurava side, seven on the Pandava side.

If you look at the Mahabharata descriptions of what that means, how many folks, how many folks on horses and, you know, camels or whatever, and the elephants, the total number for 18 comes out equal to 4 million male. Most of the—I mean, 100% of the people who fought were men. 4 million, 4 million, 40 lakhs, 40 lakh people.

Okay, I want you to take this number, and in the engineering side, we are going to solve a lot of equations here. Equation number one: so 40 million men fought for 18 days, and practically 99.9% of them died. That's what Mahabharata tells us. The estimated population—and you know they keep on re-estimating because modern new tools, right? The number when I did this about five years ago, the number is between 5 to 20 million for our total human population.

Okay, true or false? Let's not go there; it's not important. For our exercise, I'm going to take it 20 million, the higher number. Now, in the Mahabharata, the people came from as far west as Syria, wow, and as far east as Indonesia, or maybe not Indonesia, yeah, the border of Indonesia, like Cambodia and something like this.

Okay, and yeah, that's the range. Okay, for example, the Bhagad who fought during the Mahabharata war came from Iraq, Baghdad. Okay, but that's another subject. Now, what I'm saying is this is a pretty decent area, and for simplicity, I'm going to say out of that 20 million, half of the people were affected by the Mahabharata war, meaning people came from this area.

So, 10 million people were affected. They all did not come. So, if there are 10 million people who kind of related to the Mahabharata war, simple mathematics we can do is 10 million in 10 million, 5 million would be women, 5 million would be men, a reasonable thing.

Okay, now the interesting part: out of that 10 million or 5 million men, 4 million men were gone in 18 days. What are we left with? 1 million men and 5 million women. What is that ratio? The ratio is 5 to 1, right? So, suddenly there is this Y chromosome, the male chromosome, the patriarchal chromosome bottleneck.

Like, suddenly a huge male population is gone, so now there are only 1 million men for 5 million women, so to say, for the further population. And so that bottleneck in the Y chromosomes is going to come out as a signature into the future population. Makes sense?

Okay, now if we go here and type Monica Carmin space 2015, you got that? Monica, researcher there? Yeah. Okay, now, yeah, stay with this paper. It's commonly thought that human genetic diversity in non-African populations was shaped primarily by an Out of Africa dispersal 50 to 100,000 years ago.

Here we present a study of 456 geographically diverse high-coverage Y chromosome sequences, which means basically men from different parts of the world, Y chromosome is me, yeah, okay? Including 299 newly reported samples. Applying ancient DNA calibration, we date the Y chromosomal most recent common ancestor in Africa at 254 and detect a cluster of major non-African founder haplogroups in a narrow time interval at 47,000 to 52,000 years ago.

That's what I'm assuming, yeah. Uh, consistent with a rapid initial colonization model of Eurasia and Oceania after the Out of Africa bottleneck. In contrast to demographic reconstructions based on mtDNA, we infer a second strong bottleneck in Y chromosome lineages dating to the last 10,000 years.

We hypothesize that this bottleneck is caused by cultural changes affecting variance of reproductive success among males. The last line they say because they don't know about Mahabharata, so they are saying that something happened, affecting the reproductive guys. They're explaining, right? But it can't be possible that a bottleneck that happened only one other time in the last 50,000 years happened because so many men's penises stopped working.

That's what they are trying to possibly say, but it doesn't make sense. Even they are saying that we don't know why this happened. So many penises stopped working because they were dead in 18 days. Okay, we are going to look at that. Don't read too much into the diagrams below, okay?

But look at what the colors, like the sort of blue color is for India, and you know those dots. Yellow is for Europe, if you notice. Okay, the sort of orange is for, what is that, Russian area, correct? And so on and so forth. Now, so that blue area that you're seeing is India, so to say, okay?

And you find that all of them, the yellow is Europe, and so on and so forth. Okay, the light blue is North, like Middle East and so on and so forth. The dark green below is East Asia, like east of India. I think the dark green is South Asia.

Oh, South Asia, sorry. The blue is East Asia, right? Right. So, follow those kind of—I mean, just stay there right now, and you see a sudden bottleneck, which is that fall you see, okay? In all of them, we will see why, actually. What you'll find is that the green fall, if you see, the green happens before yellow, right?

Yeah, yeah, because the epicenter is India, and I'm going to give you a metaphor to explain that. Okay, can you go down and see there's another beautiful graph? I hope it is there. So, look at South Asia, okay? You see where South Asia is? Yes.

See where the line, the straight line starts going down? Compare that to exactly on the same scale. Go up to Europe and notice the bottom that Europe is later than South Asia. You see it's happening later, okay? By the way, the other graphs I showed, nobody participated in the Mahabharata war from South America, from Oceania, like Polynesia, or the northern Russia.

And if you look at their graphs, actually, you can see it right here too. They have no—for example, let's look at, say, Africa. Africa shows some—maybe that is because of Genghis Khan, you know, I'm just joking. But first, look at the dark green line, which is South Asia, which is India.

South Asia is a very bad word, you know, by the way. That is to deal with the inferiority complex of Pakistanis, okay? That's why the word South Asia is used. It's a world—it's a global conspiracy. Hasn't India? What is South Asia? You know?

Okay, so that India, look at the first line, truly the one that really came to the bottom, the first line to deviate, come down the deepest, the green line. I'm following, and then if you follow it, it stays longer at the bottom and almost the last one to recover. You see that?

That is so—it's like a BGE, you know, where we had the earthquake. That is the last bottleneck, massive genetic bottleneck, and last one to come out. Okay, then follow quickly. Two, one is the Near East, which is Middle East. You see that orange kind of line just after green? It follows down and then goes straight up, which is like it had an effect like a bad army, let's say, but then it quickly recovered, right?

Okay, right. Then you would look at the East Asia, like that Southeast Asia, which is to think of, you know, like Myanmar, you know, Thailand, Indonesia. So, they also are affected, not as much as India, and also they recover. Now, look at the yellow line here. It is very easy to see Europe.

See, whereas India is like—I mean, now you may ask the question, or skeptics should ask a question. I am saying the effect happened 7,500 years ago, right? Yeah, so that is that point between 7 and 8. So, somebody will say—and actually, people do ask me, "Oh, but why the green line is already going down from 10?"

Okay, now this is a good question, but that immediately tells me the person doesn't know anything about mathematical modeling. If there are no data points, this initial, you know, where you see 12, and they have shown one constant point, that's a control group. They assume that everything is the same, you know?

Now, from that, the first deviation data point may be found around 7.5 or 8, but how do you connect those points? Either you connect by straight line, concave, convex. That's why it is like that because actually it's a steep fall. It is a steep fall, but on the graph, you can't show a steep fall, correct?

Because they're doing modeling, and they don't know Mahabharata, so they have no reason to wait for 5,561 BCE to bring it down, you know? So, that's the point. So, this is—yeah, this is fabulous. So, the epicenter is India.

And keep on going down, you are going to find one more—one second. I just want to stay on this graph. No, no, stay on this graph. Look after 80 and 70, between 80 and 70, you see a fall in the other direction?

Yeah, as in there's more males at these points? Yeah, correct, like as if women died, right? Now, there was a Toba explosion there, okay? Now, we don't know again why men survived more and women died. Maybe men were always out there and survived, everyone in the caves, women, you know, like making the chutneys, you know, maybe, and all the ash went in, and they died, you know?

I mean, this is all speculation, but that matches with the Toba explosion. It happens in the other direction. It's a perfect data for additional research. Yeah, so this graph, I can tell you, remember I said my brief history of Hindu civilization starts with 75,000 years?

This graph is going there. Anytime you hear of an earthquake, immediately three questions typically come to our mind. If you ask any one of these, they will say the same thing immediately. Oh my God, earthquake, serious? Oh yeah, serious earthquake. We ask how serious, meaning Richter scale. We say where did it happen, and we say when did it happen?

Think of this, the Mahabharata war as a genetic earthquake. How serious it is? 16 to 1 or 5 to 1? That is the Richter scale, genetic scale. When did it happen? 7,500 years ago. Where did it happen? India. And the West knows that it happened, but they don't know why.

Now, the effect that you see on Europe, if I have those additional plots, I will show you that dip that happens or the change that happens in Europe is not in 7,500 years ago. It is about 2,000 to 3,000 years afterwards. Now you tell me what happened that the same descendants eventually gradually migrated out of India. Bingo!

That is these are the post-Mahabharata migrations. Now, is this just guesswork? Of course, here Jin is telling us, but it's not guesswork. We have the evidence not only for human beings; we have evidence for a migration of cows, the Zebu cows going to the Middle East, and those times are 3,000 BCE, 2,000 BCE.

The domestic mouse, this is something fascinating, you know? I'm saying for all Indians, but jokingly I say people from UP also because you take the gene pool of the mouse, the domestic mouse, and what is the importance of domestic mouse? It's directly connected with agriculture, established agriculture, because that's where it survives and stays, right?

Farms and in the houses, nearby houses, in our houses, going around, you know, stored grains and so on. There are many varieties of domestic mice, but let's say there are three or four main varieties. They have gone all around the world, okay? But if you start back to the future, kind of backwards, and start going back, after the gene, who is the father of this mouse, and who is the father of this mouse, and so on, it ends up in India.

And within India, it ends up in UP. This is a Bon Hami paper, 2007. There are multiple papers that domestic Indian mouse is seen as far as South France and Israel, Ram times 12,000 BCE, Mahabharata times 5,500 BCE. And afterwards, mouse did not just fly and say, "Let me take a vacation in Switzerland." It went with the migrations wherever the humans went.

Where the human being? Okay, kind of a devil's advocate style question. I get that even genetic studies point towards an outward migration from India, and this has been the case that even a genetic scientist brought on the show. So, it's not just you as a historian; it's an actual scientist also who said the same thing.

My other question is that when we talk about India, okay, we usually visualize the Indian map. Some people might visualize the Akhand Bharat map, which is Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh. Now, when you're talking about Mahabharata, this is the first time I've actually heard someone on the show visualizing a map of ancient Bharat that spreads from Indonesia right up to Syria.

Now, Syria is like these are the outskirts, but the folks have come and participated in the Mahabharata war. But even their names, for example, Iraq, the Bhagad is a Sanskrit name for Baghdad. Yeah, for Baghdad, actually. Do you know how they say Baghdad? Bagda, Bagada, you know?

And that's—and by the way, the narration of that Pragjotish, which is where Bhata was from, is very consistent how it is to the west of India in Mahabharata. But also in the Ramayana, we spoke about how ice ages are part of the Earth's history, correct?

And in that, in the last podcast, we spoke about how in the Ramayana, when they've described the West, they've described the Alps as the edge of the West, correct? Right? I don't know if that's correct. That's correct. I'm assuming that again Europe and North America were not habitable at that point, correct?

Because of that Earth's tilt that we spoke about, tilt and the shift of the pole and all that, right? So, it was just too cold for human beings to be there, correct? So, perhaps this entire stretch from Syria to Indonesia, while as Indians we're very proud that, "Oh, this was Bharat," and it becomes a source of pride when you detach yourself from the emotions of being Bharti or being Indian and just look at yourself as a human, no different from the humans in Pakistan or Iraq or Syria.

Absolutely, because they're very different from us in many ways culturally today. Yes, it's a way of saying that this ancient culture was spread across this strip because it was the only habitable. That is the right way to say.

Therefore, I say once you go beyond 2000 BCE, they are us in the sense that there is no they out there, okay? You know, see, now the extreme left has already switched off from this podcast. The extreme right is rejoicing in joy, saying that an ultimate. But that's an over-emotionalization of the same human concept.

Yeah, and if they read Mahabharata, then their enthusiasm may be tamed down a little bit further. For example, when Sanjaya is describing the whole entire PRI, so to say, to Dhritarashtra just before the war, in some context, you know, to distract Dhritarashtra, maybe he's too worried, you know, but doesn't want to change the strategy.

He is saying there are lands, for example, there is a reference to Harara. He says it's better than Bharat. And in what way? The people are more relaxed, people are more beautiful, the ladies are beautiful, more fruits, fresh, fresh fruits, fresh air, better air, so on and so forth.

When the descriptions of Patala come, South America, the Bhagavat Purana also will say, "Oh, their life standards are much better than ours." Our narrators are very objective. Ancient narrators are very objective, so there is no point taking a false pride.

Yeah, it's why we need to just view these conversations as a student of human history rather than any history. Yeah, anyway, as a human history. For example, when I go to—I mean, I have been lucky, with the exception of, I would say, New Zealand and Australia, I've been to practically all places around the world thanks to the companies I work for and my luck, you know?

And every place I go, I make personal relationships. Yeah, meaning I go to Italy right now. I know 10 friends of mine who were my colleagues 20 years ago, but I can still go to their house and actually have a pasta made in the house. Same thing in China. My friends in China will take time off if I go there because my Chinese is very bad, five sentences maybe, and actually travel with me.

And when you start interacting with them, you realize no difference, actually. They will give life for you. I mean, that's the kind of relationships you build. Yeah.

There are a couple of questions I have for you. One is about the Younger Dryas impact theory and the effect it had on India, and the second one is the Toba explosion. Now, because you brought it up, have either been mentioned in Shastras?

Ah, great question. There are descriptions in the Shastras which a creative mind like yours truly can connect with the Toba explosion, but we don't know for sure. I will mention one. Let's take one. There are a few in the Mahabharata text. There is a sage Maranda, and he is talking to Pandavas. They are in the wilderness, and he's talking of an ancient history.

Now, Maranda is described as someone who has seen many creations. That is how he is described, whatever that means, you know, the metaphorical, esoteric meaning. And he says, "Oh, in the previous creation, it happened something like this." And when he's describing one of these creations or the destruction, the end of some creation

The Mahabharat, because the evidence is shouting from all sides. Anyone who's with us in this podcast until this point is fascinated by this conversation in the same way that I am, is fascinated with ancient history.

I can vouch for the fact that Randall Carlson has done an episode just like this. He's done multiple episodes with Joe Rogan, but it's in a very similar vein. He shows graphs, and he has some very similar points to what you're making. It's amazing listening to Randall Carlson and Joe Rogan episodes, but he focuses a lot on the Younger Dryas Impact Theory, obviously because it's more centered to North America.

I am sure this episode ideally should reach him somehow. But the point I'm making is that he speaks about how the Younger Dryas was very, very bad for all of human civilization. I don't know whether it's related to the Younger Dryas or something after that, but apparently there was one phase where the human population was crunched down to about 3,000 people. It may have been the Toba explosion, honestly.

Yeah, which will go back way far back, right? 70,000 versus his is like a 12,000. You know, that. Okay, the point I'm making is he talks a lot about the Younger Dryas Impact Theory, correct? And then he uses that as proof that, hey, all these floods that we read about in our epics—in Noah, Gilgamesh, Manu in Indian culture—all these are very possible on the land that we call Earth.

This planet that we live on, all these things are possible. So do not shut yourself out to these possibilities just because they were stories you heard when you were a kid. What do you think happened because of the Younger Dryas Impact Theory in India?

Okay, definitely it was a bad period. We know from the climatological data, in fact, this is what we know. Sarasti, we discussed in the previous episode. So, 200,000 years beautifully, the Big River of the Sarasti literally, the river is described as so powerful, so strong that it cuts the tops of the mountains and floats them like lotus flowers or cuts them like as easily as somebody cuts the lotus stem.

That's powerful. That has started changing 50,000 years ago when Yamuna separated, and then it further changed 15,000 years ago when Satluj separated. But in between, there is a last glacial maximum, so a lot of water has frozen into the glaciers in the Himalayas. So not enough water flow is there, and we have sufficient evidence to show about 20,000 years ago.

In fact, I use that to explain why the Sarasti is definitely before 21,000 years. One small note for those of you who don't know what the Younger Dryas Impact Theory is: a massive comet hit the Earth in the Gulf of Mexico, causing cataclysmic events that killed off many, many humans.

Yes, and very importantly, from the Indian context, it reduced temperatures significantly. Significantly, as in it created a period of global cooling. Global cooling, like a wind. I mean, they have some word for it, like a crazy winter. A lot of things would be affected, like the plants and agriculture would have been significantly affected.

You know, so effectively, like a famine. It might have resulted in famine. Effectively, the already cold Himalayas became way colder, which didn't allow enough ice to melt for the Sarasti River to flow. Right? So therefore, the Younger Dryas Impact Theory was significant for the river system and the Sarasti drying up.

Sarasti started drying up, say, after 50,000. Yamuna is gone after 15,000. Satluj is gone 20,000 years ago, LGM. So that is gone. But what happened now? So I'm saying the Younger Dryas was a really bad time. It's like a peak of the bad season.

After that, beginning 7,000 BC, we have a paper of Anindia Circar, 2016. We don't need to go there again. Evidence from the Arabian Sea to the Rajasthan desert to Harana, everywhere under the ground also, there was an intensification of monsoon beginning 7,000 BC in India.

As in, the monsoon we see now is more intense than it used to be. Than it used to be, because the Younger Dryas affected the monsoon also. So, 7,000. So, the Younger Dryas was a really bad time, even for India, but definitely not as bad as North America and other places.

To exit this scientific conversation slightly, sure, I'm just trying to wonder what God was thinking. Yeah, these idiots, let me throw a meteor at the Earth and then change up the seasons, change up rivers, change up landscapes and everything.

Okay, let me add a philosophical point to that. Sure, God created the universe. Okay, we have a— in the Bhagavad Gita, Shai Vishnu and Shakti Vishnu, if you have Hare Krishna devotees, they will go on and on on this.

And the creation is done, but God has created it so perfect, and then now he has gone Shai Vishnu to the extent it almost feels like automated. We wonder if God exists. Okay, that's how perfect the job has been done. But does God, I mean, this becomes another subject altogether. Does God have time or take interest in our affairs as individuals?

My answer is, in the broader sense, no. In another sense, actually, it does. Because if you look at the Indian tradition, the Vedanta tradition, you know, which is like in Mari, if you start understanding who you are, you realize there is no difference.

You know, there is no difference, only the quantitative difference. Qualitatively, we are the same. So when we start thinking, actually, there is that evolution of ourselves to God.

In the Bhagavad Gita, you know, we go to that stage, purpose of human life. So in that sense, God is taking interest in our individual affairs. But if you look at this, sometimes like stock market crashes, now that's like a bad thing.

But the person who is rightly poised actually makes money too through the puts and calls. So it's a way of looking at it. Effectively, we are just us growing on a wet piece of Earth.

Well, if you look at it, we say this is the age of human beings or something. But the place where I'm at, the Institute of Advanced Sciences, the main research there is on the Borinium, which is a bacteria or a virus, you can say, something like that.

You know, bacteria, very deadly bacteria. But basically, the age of bacteria has never left. Even right now, our body is like a significant percentage bacteria. You know, I think this is the reason I love ancient history, that it truly teaches you the insignificance of your own existence as a modern-day human who uses Apple Vision Pro.

And we think, Apple Vision Pro, wow, that's a big step in the technological creations of humanity. But you don't even know what you don't know. You know, this is something Hancock and Joe Rogan both say, that just because something is older than you doesn't mean it wasn't more advanced.

That is very true. You don't know how many cataclysmic events have happened which have just destroyed things before you, which then can be attributed to all these Sanjay having a TV in Mahabharat or, you know, Atlantis also having televisions.

And obviously, everyone's favorite topic, vimanas. Yeah, which has somehow made it to the West. Joe Rogan keeps talking about vimanas. We will talk about vimanas too sometime.

Okay, I think they found a Viman Shastra, right? That's a Bja Raja, like, you know, from the 12th century. It will be another edition, a long one. But the brief one on the Pushpak Viman, the triangulation structure that I mention, explanation of vimanas.

For those people who don't know, are the ancient airplanes which apparently existed in the time of the Ramayana. Also, like Pushpak, for example, and Mahabharata. Mahabharata Uparichara, who is slightly before Pandavas, had an airplane.

And somebody who attacked Krishna, Krishna's Dwarka, I'm not remembering his name right now, but his plane, viman, was called Saba. And if you look at the descriptions, there is no description of a technology, none of that.

And so people, skeptics say, so hey, why should I believe? No, if you don't want to believe, don't believe. No, we believe a lot of things that we don't truly understand. You know, if you ask the skeptics or the leftists or whoever, artists, whoever to call, do you believe in Einstein's relativity theory or Newton's gravity theory?

They, of course, and if I said, now explain it to me, please, then they just shut up. Well, he was a white guy, so it was a theory from Europe. Maybe that's right.

But a quick note on the Pushpak Viman, and this is a somewhat bigger subject, but the triangulation metrics that I explain, explanation, prediction, testing in the context of a theory, in the context of background knowledge can be used to fill all the five places using the viman descriptions from Ramayana.

For example, we don't have a technology, and actually, I had a recent debate on Facebook or something, you know, with some of my good friends. But the reality is there are enough descriptions about Pushpak Viman in Valmiki Ramayana, which many people don't know, and they match with what we know about the vimanas today.

As in modern-day airplanes, modern-day airplanes, for example, when they took off, they made big noise. If it's a magical plane, imaginary plane, it may not have to make a noise. I mean, how did Valmiki know that it makes a noise?

You know, so to say, then air currents made them unstable. That is what Valmiki says. Something else, just look at the confidence of Vibhishan after Ram kills Ravana.

Vibhishan says, please come to my city and enjoy the beauty of the city. He says, I cannot enter the city. Ram says, I cannot enter the city. I have to go back to Ayodhya. Bat is waiting for me.

And this discussion is happening at the equator, and Vibhishan very confidently says, you need not worry. We have a Pushpak Viman. Within a day's time, less than a day's time, it will take you to Ayodhya.

Now, just the descriptions, just like we find in the modern novel today. But do they not match with what we know about the airplane technology today? So based on that, I mean, we can actually make a case for it.

I think we had Dr. Prabakar on the show, who's an archaeologist. He spoke very briefly about the Viman Shastra. He said that he's gone through it, but the thing is the materials that they've described in it are described using words that we don't know the meaning of.

So it could have just been another word for some kind of a metallic compound, but we don't know what that metallic compound is. Correct? So, yeah, I mean, my style is to go where the evidence takes you, but not go too much beyond the evidence.

Sure, you know, so I say this is what we know. We don't know the engine, we don't know this. But, yeah, so no, I mean, perhaps 20 years later, we'll be talking to a much older version of you, breaking down the Viman Shastra that's been broken down in 2044 rather than 2024.

It is possible because, see, if you would have met me in 1995 and asked about Arundhati Vist, I had nothing to say. I had nothing to show for the next 15 years until 2009.

Yeah, yeah. Anyway, let's come back to the Ramayana because we've spoken a lot about the Mahabharat in today's episode. And I know that there's something about the Ramayana that you wanted to mention. You told me that before we entered the studio, right? What's up?

Okay, because, you know, we call Pindy Marati. We say Pindy to Brahmi. You know, like whatever you see microscopic, you see the microscopic, you know, the same structures repeat.

Similarly, Galileo showed when he pointed his binoculars and telescopes to the sky, he said celestial is equal to terrestrial. Because until Galileo, at least in Western Europe, everyone was thinking that up there is everything perfect; here it is imperfect.

He said, no, the moon also has bumps like Earth and so on. So celestial is equal to terrestrial. I have used the celestial evidence from Ramayana and Mahabharata to show when did they happen.

Now, people say, but please show me something on the ground, like the archaeologist. You know, well, I am an archaeologist. I said, well, actually, there's a lot on the ground. How much evidence, how much you have dug, and how much you have found out, and how much you have dated?

If you have done it, I can connect the dots, and this is one of those connecting the dots. So there is a description when Hanuman goes into Lanka, and he's roaming around, like comes to near Ravana's palace, and Pushpak Viman, he sees that Pushpak Viman is guarded by the soldiers, like Ravana's soldiers, but also by elephants with two, three, and four tusks.

Now, all of us have done elephants with two tusks or no tusks because they're removed. A three-tusk, I have seen one, and that was a genetic abnormality. But four tusks, we have not seen it. So what are they talking about?

So even that was used as a point by those people who don't believe in the historicity of Ramayana to ridicule it, like look, anything is written here. What is interesting is if you go back into the area of paleontology, which is to say again the megafauna, you know, like mammoths.

We have heard about the mammoths; they also became extinct 11,000 BC. But there are these elephant-like creatures; they go with different names, Stokton and Gu. In fact, I'm going to ask you in a minute to type Gu.

Now look at the timing there. Okay, so there it says these Gu were there from 2.6 million to 11,700 years. If you look at some other, they say, oh, these creatures were there 9 million years ago.

And I would say the right side of our folks, if you want to use the side, you know, they will say four-tusk elephants existed 9 million years ago. That's what I know. Now, they accept science, by the way.

Therefore, Ramayana happened 9 million years ago. How stupid is that? Okay, like a person has given away its via buddhi. Okay, because just because four-tusk elephants existed sometime doesn't mean Ramayana immediately happened.

By the way, this same blunder has been done by many archaeologists when they try to decide the timing of Ramayana, timing to try to decide the timing of Mahabharata. Like suddenly they find a chariot in 2000 BC, they say Mahabharata happened 2000 BC.

How stupid is that? Chariots exist even now. Why do we not say Mahabharata happened now? You know, so now we already know from an independent source, by independent I mean Valmiki Ramayana, and tremendous evidence on all fronts that Ramayana happened 12,29 BC.

Now look at the range of it. These creatures did exist until 11,700 years ago, 9,700 BC. That is the Younger Dryas, the mass extinction, perhaps the drowning of Lanka.

Yeah, but these Gu were not only in Lanka, by the way. They were all around the world. Actually, if you look at the map for it, you'll see everywhere they were found, these all Stokton and all these folks.

But the point is they became extinct about 9,000, about 10,000 BC. Bingo! Ramayana happened in 12,000 BC. There is no conflict for four-tusk-like elephant creatures existing during the Ramayana times.

It is corroborative evidence. Since this podcast began five years ago, I've asked these questions to hordes and hordes of guests, and today is that one day where one of my guests has answered these questions in detail.

I think you're guest number 65 or 620. Okay, and it took me 620 guests to answer the basic question of, well, and what you have learned is never give up, keep on asking the question. You know, the day will come.

God damn, this was too much fun, sir. I have so much respect for the deep dive that you've gone through over the last 30 years of your life, almost.

Yeah, it's crazy. Need more Indians like you to actually explore Indian culture and Indian history in this way. That's all I'll say. There's a lot of people who've consumed both these episodes and are saluting you in their hearts at this point.

So I salute you as well. You're a warrior of history, according to me. I know there'll be lots of people who will be upset that I claim that you are the warrior of history and not a history grad being the warrior of history.

But that's how the modern world works. It's based on hard work, research, and evidence, and lateral thinking, alternative thinking. That's the only way you can actually deep dive into a culture like ours that's supposedly thousands of years old.

So, NES, thank you, sir. Andar, I hope to have you again on TRS. Yes, look forward to it. Thank you.

Thank you. That was the episode with N. Oh, ladies and gentlemen, as usual, please drop your feedback in the comment section down below. Tell me what else you like for us to cover with N, sir, the next time around.

And please send in your guest recommendations if you have any. We're always on the lookout for people who are helping unearth Bharatiya history. Once again, TRS and the whole team will be back very, very soon.

Thank you for listening in. This is the best job in the world.