Ben van Kerkwyk

There's no doubt there is a strand line, but it's tilted.

So I question whether in the period that they say Tiwanaku was built, 1100 AD, less than a thousand years between then and now, that there's been enough geological upheaval in the Andes to tilt this strand line a couple of degrees.

I don't think it can happen anything like that fast.

I think this strand line and the evidence that it was a port shows us that this city was in fact vastly more ancient than that.

And that it was destroyed by cataclysm, by flooding from the melting of the glaciers in the Andes.

There's strong evidence there that it may have seen multiple cycles of...

of glaciation.

And the climate would have been different during this period.

The climate changed to make it this arid sort of inhospitable place that it is today, where it's just tough to exist at 12 and a half thousand feet above the tree line, where hardly anything except for varieties of potato grow.

They must have had better climate or, I don't know, lower altitude, but a better climate at least.

I don't think so.

How much has that changed the timeline?

You're talking millions of years for that.

Oh, boy.

Because Lake Titicaca, it is seawater.

It's not today.

It has unique species in it.

There's a native seahorse.

It's brackish water.

So it was originally part of the ocean that was uplifted.