In 2002, deep in the mountains of Afghanistan, a U.S. Special Forces unit allegedly encountered something straight out of ancient mythology.
A 12 foot-tall, red haired giant with six fingers on each hand, double rows of teeth, and a stench of death. According to the legend, the creature emerged from a cave, impaled a soldier with a massive spear, and was eventually killed in a hail of gunfire.

The body was reportedly flown out of the mountains aboard a Chinook helicopter before being transferred to a C-17 Globemaster and transported back to America under extreme secrecy. After that, it disappeared from public view.

Some believe the creature was a remnant of the Nephilim, the mysterious race of giants mentioned in biblical texts. Others connect the story to ancient legends of giant, red haired beings said to inhabit Afghanistan’s remote mountains and caves.

But here’s where the story gets even more interesting.

Two American military veterans have come forward with accounts of the incident. One claims he was present when the giant was killed. Another claims he was involved in flying the body out of Afghanistan, involving the aircraft that supposedly transported the remains back to America.

Their accounts have helped keep one of the internet’s strangest military legends alive.
This is the story of the Kandahar Giant, a modern military urban legend blending alleged eyewitness testimony, ancient mythology, and claims of a government cover up.

To be clear, this is a conspiracy theory being shared for discussion in a conspiracy theory group. I am not claiming that every detail is 100% true, nor am I presenting the story as established historical fact. The incident remains unverified, and the accounts surrounding it are disputed.

So, did American soldiers really encounter a giant in the mountains of Afghanistan, or has this story grown into one of the most fascinating urban legends associated with the U.S. military?

Included are the two interviews with the American veterans who claim to have been involved and decide for yourself.

Over 5,000 years ago, five centuries before the Great Pyramid was built, the first pharaohs of Egypt dragged an armada of 14 massive wooden ships (some exceeding 75 feet in length) more than a mile into the scorching desert sands of Abydos, encased them in white mudbrick tombs, and covered them with gravel.

These were not crude canoes; they were sophisticated cedar and acacia vessels with fitted planks, mortise-and-tenon joints, and reed caulking, capable of carrying over 30 rowers.

Alongside this maritime enigma lies the grim cemetery of Umm el-Qa'ab, where King Djer was buried with 300+ courtiers, and where millions of broken pots were deposited over millennia by ancient pilgrims seeking the legendary burial site of Osiris.

I put together a 6-minute visual documentary exploring the archaeology of the Abydos boat graves, the forensic evidence of human sacrifice, and the mysteries of Dynasty 0 & 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDW3GkemMaA

What is your take on the purpose of burying a functioning naval armada in the arid desert sands miles from the Nile?

The knights Templar invented the modern banking system, that King Philip IV of France was deeply indebted to. Gérard de Villiers, Précepteur de France, was the master banker at the Temple of Paris until he disappeared from records in June 1307. Hugues de Pairaud stepped down from his superior office of Visiteur de France and stepped into the office Villers vacated. Jacques de Molay was the last official Grand Master of the Knights Templar in France, as the grand master de Molay was in full contact with his officers. While King Philip IV, and his Chief Minister Guillaume de Nogaret were paying gold for ex-Templars and false witnesses, the gold they were paying them with came from the Knights Templar banking system. Villiers realized what was going on and fled as Brother Jean de Châlon described in the trial records. On September 14. 1307 King Philip IV drafts the arrest orders, writing that the Templars were guilty of an “execrable evil” and a “thing most inhumane”. Those orders were leaked, and preceding the leak, Villiers disappeared. On the morning of October 12, 1307, Jacques de Molay arrives in Paris as an invited pallbearer. De Molay is often viewed as an unsuspecting guest, blindsided, having no idea the orders for his arrest were already signed. Jacques de Molay was the Grand Master (Commanding General) of the Knights Templar, he was in full contact with his officers, he knew very well what was going on. Jacques de Molay did not arrive at the funeral unaware; he arrived as a masterful chess player. Jacques de Molay stood tall in public on Main Street while Huges de Châlon was carting off Pairaud’s treasury down Front Street. Jacques de Molay remained in Paris to be arrested and serve as a human lightning rod (the grand masters always lead from the front never the rear) along with numerous others while the main body and assets disappeared into the night. Jacques de Molay was no fool. He was, as I read the playing field, the most underrated player on the field in October of 1307.

On May 15, 1293, the Battle of St. Mahé erupts; and King Edward I’s privateers send King Philip IV’s navy into a rout. This was the beginning of the conflicts in Flanders and the English Channel that tied up Edward’s and Philip’s navies. While the king’s battled on the waters, the entire western seaboard was a military blind spot. On the day of September 14, 1307, King Philip IV issues orders for the arrests of the Knights Templar and the seizure of all assets thereof. The orders were given under penalty of death, not to be open until the dawn on October 13. These orders being sent to all of Philip’s bailiffs, seneschals, and royal patrols. With specific, orders to open at dawn, the men enforcing these orders would be gathering (pre-staging) at their command centers awaiting the reading of the orders. With all the bailiffs, seneschals, and royal patrols held up at the commandries, the cities, residences, temples, and docks; the coastal ways north and south of the Port of La Rochelle were complete military blind spot. The only Ships on the Atlantic were the ships belonging to the Crown of Castile, and the Crown of Aragon; both military allies with the Knights Templar. If an 18-ship fleet were to sail into these waterways outside of La Rochelle, they would have an entire western coast of Europe to sail out of, under the extreme threat of a  sunburn.

Was the ghost fleet a myth, or did GÉRARD DE VILLIERS who disappeared from public records 4 months prior stage a masterful evacuation?

Modern descendants of the Villiers family frequently claim that after the initial raids on Friday, October 13, 1307, the Précepteur de France, Gérard de Villiers, simply "went over to the Knights Hospitaller" to find safety.

It is a clean, comfortable family myth because the Villiers family did hold ranks within the Order of the Knights Hospitallers. But it completely falls apart under raw, tactical mechanics and institutional physics.

First, look at the strict structural rules of the era. In 1307, the Templars and Hospitallers were fierce institutional rivals, competing for favor of King Philip IV, and Pope Clement V. The Rule of the Order of St. John explicitly blocked them from taking in defectors or high-profile fugitives from another military order. If the most wanted man in France showed up at a Hospitaller commandery gate in 1307, harboring him would have been an open declaration of war against King Philip IV. The Hospitallers wouldn't have hidden him; they would have detained him instantly to secure political favor from the Crown, that the Hospitallers and the Templar contended for.

Second, look at the timeline math. Pope Clement V did not authorize the Hospitallers to absorb the Templars' assets until May of 1312—a massive 4.5-year (54-month) bureaucratic lag after the initial raids.

Any military evaluator or modern commando will tell you the same thing: hiding out on a heavily fortified European mainland, under an intense royal dragnet, for four solid years without leaving a single paper trail, arrest record, or signature is an operational impossibility. For 4 months? Yes, a master operative can disappear in the initial chaos. For 4 years? Absolutely not. The King's network of spies would have squeezed the region until he surfaced.

Furthermore, Villiers was not a spy trained in deep-cover anonymity. His face was instantly recognized as the high-ranking, elite Templar that he was. He could not simply "blend in" to a local crowd. It would be like trying to hide John Wayne or Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson in a crowd on Main Street; he would have been instantly identified and reported for the massive royal rewards on his head.

He wasn't hiding in a French cellar, and he didn't check into a rival monastery. Gérard de Villiers' only path of escape was the Atlantic Ocean. Because he could not stay on the mainland, Villiers exited the theater entirely by pulling out onto the open, unpatrolled waters of the Atlantic Ocean—vanishing from the European map.

i've always been fascinated by derinkuyu in turkey (that massive underground city carved 18 stories deep into solid rock that could hold 20,000 people) and the official history says primitive locals carved it with hand tools just to hide from raiders, which never really made sense to me considering it has deep ventilation shafts and giant rolling stone doors that only bolt from the inside

you don't carve an underground city for 20,000 people just to hide from guys on horses for a few days... while i was reading up on the tunnels last night, i stumbled across an article talking about a weird 1966 FOIA release that connected dots i had never even thought about. apparently during the height of the cold war, the CIA took a 57 page geology paper written by a researcher named chan thomas and locked the whole thing in a vault for nearly fifty years

the paper wasn't about soviet missiles or spying at all. thomas had mapped out evidence that human history isn't a straight line, and that the earth goes through violent surface resets on a regular clock where the magnetic field weakens and ocean basins flood across the continents.if you look at derinkuyu in that context, those giant stone doors locking from the inside suddenly make way more sense. whoever carved 18 levels into the bedrock wasn't hiding from local tribes, they were sealing themselves underground to wait out what was happening on the surface

what really messed with my head though is the second half of the article, where the writer breaks down the specific signs showing why the people at the top think the next cycle has already started, and how our whole modern system is basically set up to keep the public distracted while they prepare for it behind closed doors

i'm not doing the whole timeline justice here, so i'll just leave the link, if anyone wants to read the rest of it

In 1712, Giacomo Filippo Maraldi measured the three rhombic plates at the bottom of a honeybee’s hexagonal cell at θ_M = arccos(-1/3) ≈ 109.4712° (with ridge slope γ_M = arccos(1/√3) ≈ 54.7356°). Ever since Réaumur and König (1739), textbooks have repeated the same claim: bees build this trihedron purely to minimize wax consumption.

While formalizing a larger metamaterial engineering project in Lean 4, I ran a strict mathematical and wave-physics audit on this geometry. The textbook narrative falls apart—and leads somewhere nobody expected:

1. The 2.22% Wax Myth vs. The +24.43 dB (277x) Cube-Corner Amplifier

If you compute the exact surface area derivative dS/dh₀ = 0 at strictly invariant cell volume (ΔV = 0), the global minimum occurs at dimensionless apex depth:

u∗ = h₀∗ / a = 1 / (2√2) ≈ 0.35355 (where 8·(u∗)² = 1)

While this saves 18.35% on the basal closure cup alone, across the total cell walls it saves barely 2.223% of wax—and deviating by several degrees changes wax usage by less than 0.3%. Evolution does not lock onto an exact crystallographic constant to save 0.3% of wax.

What does happen exclusively at u = 1 / (2√2)?

• Exact 90.000° Orthogonal Cube-Corner (Ω = π/2 sr): The dot products of the three minor diagonals of the rhombi vanish identically (d₁·d₂ = d₂·d₃ = d₃·d₁ = 0). They form an exact 90° orthogonal basis in ℝ³, subtending a solid angle of one octant of a sphere: Ω = π/2 steradians (≈ 1.5708 sr).
• Stiffness Cancellation & 5.42x Stress Funnel: Because cos(54.7356°) = 1/√3, its square is cos²(γ_M) = 1/3, which identically cancels the factor of 3 in the axial membrane stiffness equation. Instead of bending like a flat plate, the trihedron channels surface pressure along its three 54.74° ridges, multiplying apex stress by 5.42x (+14.68 dB).
• +24.43 dB (277x) Telemetry Gain: In the pitch darkness of the hive, bees communicate via 250 Hz thoracic vibrations. Over d = 15 cm of comb, the triangulated Maraldi truss reduces attenuation from 0.80 dB/cm (flat comb) to 0.15 dB/cm. Combined with the +14.68 dB apex focus, the net vibrational signal gain is +24.43 dB (277x in power), allowing a bee’s 6 legs (13 mm span) to triangulate dancers within ±2.0°.

2. From 3 Faces (Bee) to 4 Faces (Khufu’s 51.84° Slope)

Now ask a simple inverse geometry question: What slope α must you give a 4-sided square pyramid so that its apex subtends the exact same cube-corner solid angle (Ω = π/2 sr) as the honeybee’s 3-rhombus trihedron?

• Sneferu’s First Attempt (54.46°): At Dahshur (the Bent Pyramid), Sneferu initially applied the honeybee/tetrahedral slope directly onto 4 square faces (54.46°, within 0.27° of 54.74°). On a 4-sided base, that pinches the apex solid angle down to Ω = 1.008 sr.
• Khufu’s Mathematical Correction (51.84°): To restore the Ω = π/2 sr cube-corner invariant across 4 faces, you solve:

4 · arcsin(cos²α) = π/2 ⟹ cos(α) = √(sin(π/8)) ≈ 0.61861 ⟹ α = 51.785°

The surveyed slope of the Great Pyramid of Khufu is 51.84° (Ω = 1.579 sr, matching π/2 sr within 0.5%!). Eight Khufu pyramids joined at their apices tessellate 100% of 3D space (8 × π/2 = 4π sr), just like eight bee trihedra. And notice that cos(α) = 0.6186 coincides to within 0.09% with the reciprocal of the Golden Ratio (1/φ = 0.6180), while simultaneously yielding the 4/π height-to-half-base ratio. Both π and φ emerge in Khufu because the pyramid is governed by the π/2 sr cube-corner solid angle.

3. Proof Inside the Core: Why the King’s Chamber Coffer is Off-Center

Waveguide cutoff (L(z) < λ/2) prevents low-frequency waves from reaching a pointed apex, reflecting them downward into the lower third of the masonry (z = 21–43 m), right where the internal chambers sit.

Everyone knows the King’s Chamber dimensions in Royal Cubits (L_x = 20 Cubits = 10.472 m, L_y = 10 Cubits = 5.236 m, L_z = (10√5)/2 Cubits = 5.854 m—an exact 15-20-25 3D Pythagorean triangle). Yet two anomalies have puzzled engineers for a century:

1. Why is the monolithic granite sarcophagus displaced off-center toward the West wall (x ≈ 7.48 m) instead of sitting at the geometric center (5.236 m)?
2. Why stack 43 giant rough-tuned granite beams across 5 hidden relieving chambers above the ceiling, and why did ScanPyramids (2017) find a 60-cubit (≈ 31.4 m) "Big Void" above the Grand Gallery?

Write the standing-wave pressure equation P_n(x) = 2·P₀·cos(n·π·x / L_x) for a rigid granite Fabry–Pérot / Young interferometer (c = 343.2 m/s at 20°C):

• The 16.39 Hz Infrasonic Lock: The fundamental mode (n = 1) is f₁ = 343.2 / (2 × 10.472) = 16.39 Hz. The 3rd harmonic of the 60-cubit ScanPyramids Big Void (L_void = 3·L_x) is 3c / (2·3L_x) = 16.39 Hz. And the 7th harmonic of the Great Pyramid’s global Bessel structural shear mode (2.34 Hz dry / 2.05 Hz Nile flood, switching 7 × 2.34 = 8 × 2.05) is 16.38–16.40 Hz.
• The Geometric Center is a Young "Dark Fringe" (0 Pa): Evaluate the standing wave right at the center of the room (x = L_x / 2 = 5.236 m) for all odd harmonics—including both the 16.39 Hz fundamental (n = 1) and the 7th harmonic (f₇ = 114.7 Hz, which sits right inside the 110–117 Hz resonant band of the granite coffer):

P_odd(L_x / 2) = 2·P₀ · cos(n·π / 2) ≡ 0 Pa

By destructive interference between the East and West walls, the center of the King’s Chamber is acoustically dead (0 Pa). Had the builders placed the coffer in the middle of the room, it could never be pressure-excited by those modes.

• The 5/7 Constructive Bright Fringe: Where do the maximum pressure antinodes (|cos(7πx / L_x)| = 1) sit for mode n = 7 (114.7 Hz)? At x_k = (k / 7)·L_x. For k = 5:

x₅ = (5 / 7) × 10.472 m = 7.480 m (2.992 m from the West wall)

That is the exact spot where the Granite Sarcophagus sits. And where do the North and South acoustic shafts enter the room? At x₂ = (2 / 7)·L_x = 2.992 m from the East wall—the exact mirror-symmetric bright fringe (x₂ + x₅ = L_x)! Meanwhile, Timoshenko beam mechanics on the 43 granite monoliths above the ceiling (thickness 1.05 m to 1.50 m, span 5.236 m) shows they resonate across 96.6 Hz to 138 Hz (0.92 Hz/cm of thickness, +1 Hz per 150 kg chiseled from the top), acting as both a seismic Multiple Tuned Mass Damper (MTMD) and a 2,000-tonne sympathetic soundboard locked to the coffer.

4. The Detail That Changes Everything About What Went Inside That Coffer

In 2008, UCLA neuroimaging studies (Cook et al.) showed that exposing the human cranium to exactly 110 Hz abruptly deactivates left-prefrontal language processing (Broca’s area), while the binaural beat between the King’s Chamber’s horizontal mode (32.77 Hz) and vertical mode (29.31 Hz) generates a 3.46 Hz standing beat right in the human Delta brainwave band—transmitted via direct bone conduction from the quartz-granite basin (Z ≈ 16.2 MRayl) into the human skull and spine (Z ≈ 6.5 MRayl).

Even stranger: when the coffer’s 1,200 kg dovetail lid was slid shut, the sealed air cavity (86.90 Hz) and clamped granite walls (115.87 Hz) locked into an exact 4:3 Pythagorean Perfect Fourth—while the 3 West-rim holes (Ø 28 mm) and a 2.5 mm lid clearance driven by 75 W of human metabolic body heat created a silent laminar thermosiphon (Re = 48.35, 20.2 L/min) that stabilized internal CO₂ at 0.83% indefinitely (and <0.22% for >11 hours with 500 g of dry natron) while reflecting 99.75% of the acoustic wave inside.

Ask yourself a simple engineering question: Why do you engineer a 99.75%-reflective 4:3 acoustic seal with a 75-Watt metabolic thermosiphon, O₂/CO₂ life-support scrubbing, bone-conduction impedance matching, and a 110 Hz / 3.46 Hz neuro-acoustic brainwave lock... for a corpse?

(Bonus: If you take the reciprocal of the bee’s depth constant, 1/u = 2√2 ≈ 2.8284, it is also the exact ratio between the 0.833 Hz quarter-wave resonance of Teotihuacan’s 103 m subterranean tunnel / Mexican basin soil and Giza’s 2.35 Hz structural mode).

I have compiled 44 formal theorems around this in Lean 4 (zero sorry statements) as part of an applied acoustic/vibrational metamaterial project I’m finalizing. Feel free to check the derivatives, the dot products, and the n = 7 nodes on your own calculator. At what point do we stop calling this a coincidence?

Napoleon I is a phantom; Napoleon III is a real historical figure. There are no other examples of such biographies. I am referring to the ten "coincidences" mentioned earlier. How should this be understood in the context of the Napoleonic Wars? The actual Napoleonic Wars took place during the era of Napoleon III.

There is one issue: Prussia—the power to which Napoleon III lost in 1870–71. In the fabricated history of the Napoleonic Wars, this power was Russia. Why was Prussia replaced by Russia? I have studied the period of the Franco-Prussian War and concluded that Russia was, in fact, a participant in the conflict of 1870–71. Although all currently known documents suggest otherwise, there is one detail: the military decorations awarded to Prussian commanders.

Consider the first example: Helmuth Karl Bernhard von Moltke the Elder—a Field Marshal of both Prussia (1871) and the Russian Empire (1872). He also served as the commander of the 69th Ryazan Infantry Regiment and was made an honorary member of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences on December 3, 1871, in recognition of his works on military theory and history.

How did the practice of conferring ranks upon foreign military officers even arise—or, as I hypothesize, was Prussia actually part of Russia at that time? While the aforementioned points might be dismissed as an odd custom, the same cannot be said for the military decorations awarded for the victory over France; these are far more difficult to explain.

Here is a list of his Russian decorations, taken from Wikipedia:

Order of Saint Andrew the First-Called (Russian Empire, December 30, 1871)

Order of Saint George, 2nd Class (Russian Empire, December 27, 1870)

Order of Saint Alexander Nevsky (Russian Empire, June 25, 1867)

Order of the White Eagle (Russian Empire)

Order of Saint Anna, 1st Class (Russian Empire)

At least two of these five decorations were awarded by France during the war. I have been unable to find the dates for the other two. He received a wide variety of honors; notably, even his Prussian decorations were only awarded from 1864 onwards—perhaps because, in a sense, Prussia did not exist prior to 1864.

His military decorations do not end there. Below is a portrait of Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke the Elder—a general in both the Prussian and Russian armies—painted by A. von Werner. The work was executed in Berlin and completed in 1874, commissioned by Emperor Alexander II.

https://antonvonwerner.de/shared/resources/art/8A30DE59-2912-4D1F-B93F-73D115BD5152_large.jpg

Moltke is depicted in a Russian general’s uniform, complete with the epaulettes of a field marshal. In his right hand, he holds a Prussian field marshal’s baton. Affixed to his uniform are the Russian Order of Saint Andrew the First-Called and the Order of Saint George (2nd Class), as well as the Prussian Iron Cross and the Order of Merit (Pour le Mérite).

The Emperor granted him the rank of Russian field marshal, showered him with decorations, and commissioned his portrait—all for a man who, according to the official historical narrative, did nothing for Russia. Perhaps we are missing something, or, more likely, we simply don’t know much.

Moltke is far from the only example. Consider the Prussian general August von Werder, who commanded the forces besieging Strasbourg. He held more Russian decorations than Prussian ones—even though, according to official records, he served in the Russian army only from 1842 to 1846, whereas he dedicated many decades to the Prussian army.

Prussian decorations:

Order of the Black Eagle with collar

Grand Cross of the Order of the Red Eagle with oak leaves and swords

Decoration for Merit (awarded September 20, 1866, and January 18, 1871)

Prussian Cross of Merit

In total, this amounts to 5 decorations—compared to 7 Russian ones:

Order of Alexander Nevsky (June 20, 1871)

Order of the White Eagle

Order of Saint Anna, 1st Class

Order of Saint Stanislaus, 1st Class (awarded June 11, 1864)

Russian medal commemorating the conclusion of the Caucasian campaign (September 16, 1864)

Order of Saint George, 3rd Class (awarded October 30, 1870)

Order of Saint Vladimir, 4th Class

These facts alone should give pause to anyone capable of critical thinking. Such circumstantial evidence suggests that these Prussian generals were, in reality, Russian generals.

Could the savage, warring Samnite tribe built this jaw-dropping, elegant theater in Pietrabbondante? The flawless, advanced cyclopean walls at the bottom, seamlessly fuse with classical Greek art on top, a combination found nowhere else. 
Are we looking at a historic masterpiece, or a massive timeline cover-up?
Hope you like the video
https://youtu.be/16QZCHfFfY8

In 1885 on the island of Lemnos in the Aegean, an old gravestone was discovered in one of the walls of a ruined chapel. The stone depicts a man carrying a spear, and what we assume is the large circular shield of a hoplite. Nothing odd there, Greek island, hoplite, gravestone, probably a dime a dozen in that part of the world. Except the language on the stone isn’t Greek, it isn’t Thracian, Phrygian, Lydian, Phoenician or even far off Persian. It isn’t any of those, and it isn’t even in the Indo-European family they all belong to. It is written to be read in a crescent moon pattern, starting in the bottom right and wrapping around the man’s head. Today we call the language Lemnian, and it only has two cousins: Etruscan in modern Tuscany, and Rhaetic, which was found in the area around the Alps.

You probably recognize Etruscan, as the Etruscans are relatively well known. They were the first rivals of Rome, and much of the great engineering achievements of Rome: the arch, the sewer, the grid layout of their cities, even Roman temples, all of them borrowed from the Etruscans. But unlike Latin or the Gallic languages of Northern Italy, Etruscan is not an Indo-European language, with many scholars speculating that much like Basque it is a remnant of the languages spoken before the arrival of the steppe hordes that gave Europe its modern languages.

So what is a language doing on this island, surrounded by other unrelated languages, with its closest kin roughly 750 miles (1,200 km) away? How did it get there?

The Theories:

First, obviously, is that the stele is a one-off gravestone for a warrior. He was a mercenary, he died, his friends buried him there, and then they went home. This was extremely popular for a while, until we found a handful of pottery fragments, and in 2009 another stele, on the island, also in the Lemnian language. These could be dated, and gave us a time period stretching from roughly 700 to 500 BC. That isn’t a one-off mercenary, that is a culture living in one place for an extended period of time.

Alright then, next idea: it was a trade outpost for their Etruscan cousins. The Greeks and Phoenicians set up countless trade outposts across the Mediterranean, why not the Etruscans too? Well, if it was a trade outpost, it was the worst one in history. We have never found a single artifact that can be traced to the Etruscans. All the Lemnian pottery is native, metalworking the same, a few Greek luxury goods but that is about it.

Now the next piece of the puzzle is that modern scholarship has started to look at the similarities between the Lemnians and what was once considered a mythical people, the Pelasgians. The Pelasgians are said to be the original inhabitants of Greece. Homer says they fought in the Trojan War, Herodotus says they were originally from around Athens, and Thucydides even bluntly says that the Pelasgians on Lemnos were the Tyrsenians, the name that gives the Etruscan, Rhaetic, and Lemnian language family (Tyrsenian) its name. According to Herodotus the Pelasgians even kidnapped a bunch of Athenian women before sailing over to the island of Lemnos. There’s this whole side story about the women teaching their children Attic Greek instead of Pelasgian, and so the men killed the women and their children.

That last one has actually led to quite a bit of speculation that they were pirates, and this is a cultural memory of the pirates kidnapping Athenian women in one of their raids. So our new theory is that they were pirates. They didn’t trade with their Etruscan cousins because they were seaborne pirates, not traders. But, yet again their material culture sticks a shiv in our theory. If they were pirates, they were awful at it. We don’t find large quantities of trade goods or other ‘looted’ items. Instead we find local items, craftsmen’s tools, farming equipment, and what weapons they had are consistent with any settled people, not seaborne raiders.

Ugh, so not pirates, not traders, and not some one-off mercenary grave. Wait, could the Lemnians be the remnants of the Etruscans? According to Herodotus, the Etruscans were refugees who fled from Lydia (modern western Turkey) and sailed to Italy. Lydia is basically right next to Lemnos, maybe their cousins stayed but the Etruscans left. Obviously the biggest problem is, as I already mentioned, Lydian is an Indo-European language, and Etruscan is not. So language is against the theory. Next, this is where we can bring in DNA, because we have quite a few Etruscan graves, and none of them contain DNA consistent with a Lydian origin. Interestingly, the Etruscans have the typical steppe DNA of Indo-European cultures, but not their language, but that is a story for another time.

So the only sensible theory standing is that they migrated from Etruria. But they were not traders, and they were not pirates. So let’s reopen the Etruscan refugee theory, but this time it’s the Lemnians fleeing. Now, we will never be able to trace their route. Maybe they sailed straight there, maybe they wandered the Aegean for a generation the way the Sea Peoples did; we can’t tell, because the only distinctive thing about these people was their language, and language doesn’t survive in a pottery shard, unless someone writes on it like on Lemnos. So the route isn’t the problem. The problem is everything else. First, refugees from what? Etruria between 700 and 600 BC wasn’t collapsing, it was at the height of its wealth and power and was expanding. Nobody was being driven out. Second, there is no size of group that makes this work. If they were a small band, a few hundred people like a typical Greek colony, they could never have become the entire population of the island and held onto their language for two hundred years surrounded by Greeks. Small groups follow the rule of three generations: their language and culture get swamped by their surroundings. Yet the Lemnians only lost their language after Athens conquered them around 500 BC. But if they were a large group, a few thousand people from one of the richest material cultures in the Mediterranean, they would have brought something Etruscan with them, a pot, a bronze, a brooch, even a metal spoon can tell us roughly where it came from. They brought nothing. Too small to bring anything with them, but too large to have left no trace, and with nothing to flee from in the first place.

Conclusion:

So we have an artifact. We know its language, we even know how the people who made it lived. But how these people and this artifact got to this island is a complete mystery. Every theory of their origin collapses the second we press on it, making this a true archaeological enigma.

ive been looking for discords on this but most of them are dead anyone got a good one

Edit: Should I make one, if yes and you want to be involved comment.

All the replies and comments I see on regular posts here are from people either ridiculing or trashing any kind of theory, thoughts or research if it doesn't fit mainstream science, which is pretty wild considering this is an AlternativeHistory place, all the comments I see are "science says no so no" almost like a cult shutting down any kind of theory, funnily enough when you ask for receipts regarding questionable answers backed with "science" you get "trust science stop asking questions just trust it"

Click any post in the sub, most comments say "you don't know anything, trust science and the experts what you ask makes no sense, trust experts"

Edit: the replies charged with a laughable level of superiority seem to confirm this, and again, funny enough, the people repeating science evidence science ignore that mostly for investigations regarding ancient cultures the very "scientific" proof that they defend to death is so nonsensical and obscure you would get a better answer from a random person using critical thinking, like the structures beneath the Ancient Pyramids led by SAR experts being "debunked" by an archeologist involved in countless sketchy stuff even destroying archeological pieces and he was completely ignorant of SAR technology, but he was an expert so you MUST trust the experts (that fit in the mainstream narrative)!

And no, said study wasn't debunked by a new investigation of the ruins so we can understand it better, no, it was debunked by the same words being repeated here over and over: "ridiculous stupid without any sense just ignorance" by our dear "experts" who know so much more than us!

Ive always thought agartha was interesting but considered hollow earth to be a pretty stupid theory. But in just this last year ive learned enough things to consider that maybe it isnt as stupid as it sounds on the surface but is rather just a victim of exaggeration.

Lets breakdown what you need for Agartha

1. Space - I am still not a believe of hollow earth but the existence of large subterranean caves shouldnt be controversial. You wouldnt need the entire earth to be hollow, just a single cave of a couple miles in diameter would be sufficient to store a ecosystem large enough to sustain tens of thousands of people.

2. Water - Recently a ocean under the surface ocean has been discovered that is even larger than the Atlantic ocean. Ive not heard if this is a fresh water or salt water ocean.

3. Light - A Maintstay of the hollow earth theory is there being a internal sun. Im not on board with this. However I recently heard that the core of the earth is actually hot enough to produce white light in the visible spectrum. So effectively that is a little sun is it not? At least it could fulfil a similar function on a small scale

4. Air - This is actually the biggest hurdle in my opinion. How do you ventilate a large underground cave? I thought about it and realized that if there is a sufficiently large ecosystem of flora you could have a self sustaining biome that recycles the carbon dioxide into breathable air.

So you have mineral rich earth, water, air, light and heat... not saying its factual but it suddenly sounds mildly plausible. At least on the surface level. Im sure there are more factors I havent yet taken into account.

Why all the most hardcore, hard to believe stuff is made in pre history, and later civilizations never coming close to anything ancient?

What's mainstream explanation? They got bored working with stone, or now they got new toys so they stopped working with stone?

TLDR: The rectangular plain of Atlantis and the circular ditch surrounding it have the same perimeter length. This is a reference to the classical mathematical problem of "squaring the circle", or to be more exact "rectifying the circle", which Plato popularized as a mathematical problem and philosophical symbol. Basically, "rectifying the circle" is a riddle about solving for the value of Pi, and Plato has encoded this ancient dilemma into his dialogue. 

Plain Shape: Rectangular 
Plain: 3,000 stadia x 2,000 stadia 
Plain Perimeter = 10,000 Stadia

Ditch Shape = Circular
Ditch Circumference = 10,000 stadia

Detailed Analysis
The upcoming portions go into more detail and can be long winded. I fully expect this to be criticized, so I'm trying to cover all my bases. Also, Plato just leaves a lot of clues to talk about. 

Interpreting the Shape and Dimensions of the Plain
In the story of Atlantis, from the Critias dialogue, Plato describes a large plain on which the city of Atlantis resides when he says "I will now describe the plain, as it was fashioned by nature and by the labours of many generations of kings through long ages. It was for the most part rectangular and oblong"

Plato provides dimensions when he goes on to state the plain is "smooth and even, and of an oblong shape, extending in one direction three thousand stadia, but across the centre inland it was two thousand stadia."

What we can gather from these passages is that the plain is a natural feature that has also been modified by humans over multiple generations. The shape can be simplified as a 3 x 2 rectangle. 

If we assume the plain is a perfect rectangle, then the perimeter would come out to be 10,000 stadia and the area would be 6,000,000 stadia squared. 

Plain Shape: Rectangular 
Plain Dimensions: 3,000 stadia x 2,000 stadia
Plain Perimeter = 10,000 stadia
Plain Area = 6,000,000 stadia squared

One reason to assume the plain is a perfect rectangle comes up when Plato provides dimensions for plots of land. He wrote "each of the lots in the plain had to find a leader for the men who were fit for military service, and the size of a lot was a square of ten stadia each way, and the total number of all the lots was sixty thousand."

Lot Shape = Square
1 plot of land = 10 stadia x 10 stadia = 100 stadia squared
Total Lot Area = 100 stadia squared x 60,000 lots = 6,000,000 stadia squared
Plain Area = 6,000,000 stadia squared

So, if a perfect rectangle is assumed, then the area of the plain is equal to the total area of the lots based on 2 separate descriptions. It's reassuring to see consistency throughout Plato's numbers. It seems more intentional. 

Oblong
However... Plato refers to the plain as "oblong" twice. Why would he provide rectangular dimensions while also making a distinction that it is oblong? Oblong usually refers to a rectangle, but it can also refer to any shape that is longer than it is wide, such as an oval. 

This is where the surrounding ditch starts to play into it. 

The Ditch:
There is a ditch, or moat, that surrounds the plain. Plato refers to it as a "circular ditch" when describing the shape. Plato goes on further to say "it was carried round the whole of the plain, and was ten thousand stadia in length." 

We get a little more clarity regarding the oblongness when Plato refers to the edge of the plain as "where falling out of the straight line followed the circular ditch". Meaning, the plain has straight edges that only curve when intersecting a surrounding ditch. Basically, the plain is a rectangle with radii, instead of 90 degree angles, on each corner. The radii on the corners of the rectangular plain are formed by the surrounding ditch. This would better fit the description of "for the most part rectangular and oblong"

So, we can deduce the ditch was most likely a circle, or even perhaps an oval, and encompassed the entire plain. Where this gets interesting is when Plato said the length of the ditch was "ten thousand stadia in length". If by “length” of a circle he means circumference, then the circumference of the ditch has the same perimeter as the plain, which is 10,000 stadia. A visual representation of these shapes is shown below.

Ditch Shape: Circle
Circumference of Ditch = 10,000 stadia

Plain Shape: Rectangle
Perimeter of Plain = 10,000 stadia

Plato is outright stating the perimeter of the rectangular plain is equal to the circumference of the circular ditch.

Rectangle Perimeter = Circle Circumference

It starts to present a dilemma and Plato knows it. 

Rectifying the Circle (Squaring the Circle)

Definition of Rectifying the Circle:
"The challenge of rectifying the circle is the classical geometric problem of constructing a straight line whose length is exactly equal to the circumference of a given circle using only an unmarked straightedge and a compass.”

So… we defined the plain as a rectangle and the ditch as a circle, both with equal perimeters. We can find the perimeter of the rectangle by measuring the sides with a ruler and adding up the dimensions. Then, to draw a circle with the same perimeter, we need to set the compass to the correct radius, but we don't have the value for the radius. We do have a value for the circumference, since it is equal to the perimeter of the rectangle, but we don't have the radius of the circle. You could theoretically solve for the radius, by using the value of Pi.

In Plato's time, the value for Pi had not been fully discovered yet, although approximations existed. For general use, the number 3 could be used to get rough calculations and was probably used in antiquity. Eventually, the ancient Babylonians landed on a value of 25/8 (3.125) for Pi around 1900BCE. Later on, the Egyptians reportedly had a value of 256/81 (3.1605) by 1650BCE. Afterwards, Archimedes calculated Pi to be near 22/7 (3.1428), but this was after Plato's lifetime.

The approximations for Pi could provide a circumference that was very close to, but not exactly equal to the perimeter of a square or rectangle. It was a challenge in ancient times to solve this dilemma, essentially referred to as "rectifying the circle". It is more popularly known as a similar problem of "squaring the circle", which is basically the same thing, but it involves area instead of perimeter. 

It was a brain teaser for ancient mathematicians. Their approximation for Pi could get close, but never exact with the mathematical tools and methods available at that time. It wasn't until 1882 when it was proven that Pi is a transcendental number, meaning you cannot solve for Pi by using algebraic equations with rational coefficients. Basically, you can't solve for Pi using fractions and algebra. The ancient Greeks did not use the decimal point, they only had fractions. This is why it was such an intriguing phenomenon to the ancient Greeks. No matter how hard they tried, they just could not get their equations to result in a perimeter that was an exact match between square and circle. Plato himself was well known for being influenced by, and heavily interested in, the riddle of solving the exact value of Pi. 

Plato Popularized the Challenge of Rectifying the Circle
He's even the one that made up the rules to use only an unmarked straightedge and a compass. Plato was highly against using curved tools, such as the Quadratrix, to solve the problem. He felt it violated the rules and strayed away from the original intent of the game. The intent of the game is to basically solve for Pi. Curved measuring tools cannot be used since Pi is naturally built into the curvature of the tool.
Perhaps more importantly, Plato used this mathematical enigma as a metaphor and incorporated it into his philosophical teachings. These geometrical problems were even taught throughout his academy. To Plato, a true circle was a representation of perfection. The rectangle represented the limitations of reality.

It is through all these connections that we can determine Plato is very intentional with the numbers and shapes he is using when describing the Atlantean plain and ditch.  

Overall Meaning
So, why would Plato include this mathematical riddle in the story of Atlantis? One take is that it goes hand in hand with the story by symbolizing the perfect society the Atlanteans strived for and ultimately fell short of. Maybe it shows the Atlanteans were highly intellectual and incorporated the value of Pi into earthworks. It could just be that Plato really enjoys this mathematical problem and included it into one of his dialogues as a riddle for the reader. 
Finally, it shows that Plato is placing hints through his texts. He is very intentional with his word choice and numbers. He doesn't outright state anything about rectifying the circle, but it is in there, buried within the fine details. We can’t assume this is the one and only single instance Plato does this. These ideas, hidden behind numerical values and molded by descriptions, are likely placed throughout the Timaeus and Critias dialogue, and perhaps other works by Plato.  

If you found all of this interesting, keep an eye out for Part 2 as I speculate that Plato provided an estimated value of Pi in the Critias text and Atlantis is involved once again. It will be titled something like:

The Atlantis Plain & Ditch: Plato's Estimation of Pi (Part 2)

At the December 5 Holberg Debate, Zahi Hawass, Robert Schoch and Irving Finkel will debate "The Mysteries of Our Ancient Past" at the University of Bergen, Norway. Video will be published on December 10. The organizers encourage everyone to submit questions for the panel. You may include images.

Help make this debate great by submitting well-crafted questions.

https://medium.com/the-thought-collection/mary-magdalene-was-not-a-prostitute-456573c37be9?sk=e425dd1c19693dc131b7248712f7f5d5

It’s Columbus Day, which means a good chunk of the internet is busy arguing over whether to celebrate the man or cancel him, and I’m not going to do either one today. I respect Columbus and appreciate the chain reaction his voyage to the Americas set off, but when I actually dug into his story, it turned out to be a lot weirder than I’d always thought, less heroic epic and more Our Flag Means Death (fantastic show, season 1 is very entertaining). But none of this is meant to slander the man or suggest that I, or most people, would have done any better, because given how little anyone knew about the world back then, his life was genuinely spectacular, it’s just a little hilarious in hindsight. Let’s dig into it…!

has anyone else looked closely at the sumerian king list? the numbers make no sense if you just treat it like regular history.

​the rulers before the flood had lifespans lasting tens of thousands of years. like alulim ruling for 28,800 years. historians just call it mythology or symbol math but the way the tablets describe gods coming down from the sky feels more like a real record.

​

I've been thinking about this for a while and I'd like to hear what other people here think.

Genesis 6:1-4 says the "sons of God" came down, took human women, and their children were the Nephilim, the "mighty men of old, men of renown".
The Book of Enoch goes much further. It calls them the Watchers, gives them names, and says they taught people metalworking, astrology and other knowledge (so basically multiple gods for early people)..!?

What strikes me is how close that is to other ancient traditions. Mesopotamia has the Anunnaki, and the Apkallu, the sages who brought knowledge to people before the flood..!?
Greece has gods having children with humans (Heracles, Perseus) and the Titans being locked away. Egypt has gods ruling on earth before the human kings. And almost all of them have a great flood.

One thing I found really weird: the Book of giants from the Dead sea scrolls names Gilgamesh as one of the giants. So a Jewish text is literally pointing at a Mesopotamian hero.

So what do you think, is this the same story told by different cultures, or did they just borrow from each other? Genesis was written down in a region full of Mesopotamian myths, so borrowing is the normal explanation. But if it is the same story, what was actually behind it?

And why is this almost never talked about? Enoch was left out of most Bibles, and the usual explanation in churches is that the "sons of God" were just the descendants of Seth. As far as I know early Christians mostly read it as angels and that changed later. Does anyone know when and why?

I'm not pushing a theory, I honestly don't know what to think and I'm seeking some answers 😵

The entire history of the Napoleonic Wars is a fictional story based on real events, from which false replicas have been copied. This isn't just a claim; there's evidence to support it. If you compare the key milestones in the lives of Napoleon Bonaparte and Napoleon III, you'll find that history literally repeats itself.

If you compare the key milestones in the lives of Napoleon Bonaparte and Napoleon III, you'll find that history literally repeats itself.

1. During the reign of Napoleon I, a war was organized between almost all of Europe and Russia. Napoleon represented the European army, and the brothers Alexander and Constantine represented Russia.

During the reign of Napoleon III, the Eastern (Crimean) War against Russia took place. Napoleon III represented the European army, and the brothers Alexander and Constantine represented Russia.

1. Napoleon I was an artillery officer. Napoleon III was an artillery officer.

2. Napoleon I's predecessor, King Louis XVI, reigned for 18 years and was overthrown by a revolution in which the Montagnard party played a leading role.

Napoleon III's predecessor, King Louis Philippe, reigned for 18 years and was overthrown by a revolution in which the Montagnard party played a leading role.

1. Fifteen years before Bonaparte's fall in 1815, in 1801, Russia saw a change of tsar, who implemented a peasant reform—the "Decree on Free Ploughmen" of 1803.

Fifteen years before Napoleon III's fall in 1870, in 1885, Russia saw a change of tsar, who implemented the peasant reform of 1861.

1. Revolutions occurred in Spain on the eve of the fall of both Napoleons.

   1. Afterwards, Austria, Prussia, and Russia formed the Holy Alliance (and the Alliance of the Three Emperors). Each lasted 15 years.
   2. Seven years before the fall of Bonaparte, in 1808, Denmark had a new king.

Seven years before the fall of Napoleon III, Denmark had a new king, in 1863.

1. A year after the coronation of each Napoleon, Egypt had a new ruler.

2. Nine and ten years after the Napoleonic coups, Turkey had a new sultans.

3. An attempt was made on the lives of both of them during a trip to the opera, several years before the creation of each Italian kingdom.

There are many more similarities between the fates of the two Napoleons. What are the odds of such coincidences? In my opinion it is equal to zero; in fact, one character is copied from another. The real Napoleon III—his first phantom double. Other rulers from the early 19th century were also fabricated.