Matthew LaCroix

That's, and if I go just, I'm just going to jump ahead just for a second and show you if no one believes me, you just do a Google search and look.

So this is not me saying this.

Academics actually believe that not only was Gilgamesh part of the Sumerian civilization, but Iraq was a Sumerian city, which none of those are true.

Neither of those are true.

But this is consensus though.

yes this is consensus is in what they consider to be truth the problem is that none of the tablets say that iraq was one of the first cities at all okay none of them do so why are they saying that well because this is literally a lost time period of human history so what i mean is if you look at this image again this is a real image when they dug down way beneath what they called stratum layer number two which is the iraq and gilgamesh time period which they identified in the reports

So it doesn't make any sense.

They're already contradicting themselves.

Anyway, when they discuss this, they state that they dug way down below Gilgamesh.

Why?

Well, they shouldn't have been because nothing should have existed beneath there.

Not only that, but like 60 or 70% of the team left because they didn't expect anything to find because there's not supposed to be anything that exists beneath that layer.

That layer of Gilgamesh represents the layer they consider to be the rise of human civilization.

Does that make sense?

And everything before then is hunter gatherer Stone Age.

Where did they find these tablets?

Well, the tablets have come from all throughout Iraq, places like Sapar and the Ashurbanipal Library, which are these ancient libraries that the Assyrian and Neocadian kings had preserved.

So the tablets are all what we call Neocadian, Assyrian, and Babylonian tablets.

Now, they say they're Sumerian, but I have come up to evidence to show that there are no Sumerian tablets.

It's all Neocadian tablets.