UFOlogist Malanga answers Under-Pyramid Scan Questioners

              Corrado Malanga 'explains'               
 

Italian Giza researcher Corrado Malanga answers debunkers who claim that SAR technology can only scan the surface, laying out the techniques behind the new 'discoveries' on the Giza Plateau (nine parts). Pt. 1/9 It starts off with the kind of argument that raises a red flag for me: "it is very simple, a small child would understand it" - belittling those who do not understand what he's saying. The fact is however that what he says is very disorganised and rambling, not to mention inconsistent. If the whole idea is to turn "photonic" (eh?) into "sonic" information, why does he then talk of analysing it in terms of "pixels"? The idea of a tomographic slice througgh a site i9n which you can see "pixels" in front and behind the plane completely ignores what the basic definition of a tomographic slice actually is. This explanation (with the personal attacks on the project's critics) obscures much more than it reveals, and calls into question Malaga's ability to explain it, and indeed his motives for giving this unfocussed justification.

US Tourists Break into Turkish Excavation; Claim Entitlement

In this video ( Nerdrotic (Forbidden Frontier 096): 'Gobekli Tepe Coverup, Pyramid Structures w/ Jimmy Corsetti and Wandering Wolf'), Jimmy Corsetti  @BrightInsight6 and @WWolfProd admit (at 38:57mins +) to breaking into the sensitive Sayburç archaeological site in Turkeycurrently under excavation and taking lots of photos (did they have a permit to be on site and to take photos for commercial use?). They felt that this was OK because they are both entitled Americans and "there was no sign" telling them not to. 

They admit: "we went in there, big time... I broke some rules. There's no signs, these was no fencing, we went in there, and I crawled around in there, I was very respectful [sic], and very careful. I got a lot of photos... This is on the side of a road with a bunch of houses around it and this lady gets on her phone holding her baby and it looks like she was calling somebody to report on us, so we got out of there [...]. Yeah, we were in there [...] They'd put a roofing system in [...] and you crawl under it to get into the site".  

Now, the site looks like this, it is clear that this is not public land but the excavation was on somebody's property, but actually asking the property owner of they might take a look seems not to have crossed their mind (the property owner probably still lives in the village)

Photo: Collins/ Corsetti - note, possibly illicitly obtained

Here he is stomping around on the excavated surfaces INSIDE the building (even if you are on somebody's property, actually entering one of their buildings...): 

Photo: Collins/ Corsetti - note, possibly illicitly obtained

More potential damage to excavated surface inside the protective building 

Photo: Collins/ Corsetti - note, possibly illicitly obtained

Photo: Collins/ Corsetti - note, possibly illicitly obtained

These clowns claim to have "explosive" evidence on film of archaeological malpractice by the German and Turkish archaeologists there who are allegedly "damaging history". Two of them ( @WWolfProd & @LivingExtraord1 ) are making money taking tourist groups to Turkey ..

Just recently US YouTuber Jimmy Corsetti has reacted to online comments about these activities:

Archaeologists are so terrified at what we documented in Turkey, they are now claiming we broke the law! 😂 I don’t believe any laws were broken But IDGAF [Americanism - I don't give a f**k  PMB] if they were 🤷🏼‍♂️ 📍I posses smoking-gun evidence of destroyed ruins at *multiple* ancient sites in Turkey - which are the oldest on earth‼️  Archaeological malpractice 💯 📍These are just a few pictures from Sayburç, Gobekli Tepe’s sister site. It is an archaeological travesty. Ruins scatted (sic) outside the enclosed “protective” roof, laying all over the place like trash 🤯  The most egregious evidence (not seen here) is backed up on multiple computers, multiple external hard drives, multiple encrypted cloud servers, as well as in the hands of others that I trust. Archaeologists might want to get off the railroad tracks, cuz nothing is going to stop this train. Tick tock, tick tock ⏰🔥

Also Jimmy Corsetti:

for the record, we didn’t break into anything. This site is on the side of the road, no fences, and no trespassing signs. And we certainly don’t need permits to take photos for investigative journalism. @FlintDibble  has never been to Turkey, and is desperate to protect corrupt archaeological practices

What? Mr Corsetti should know that Turkey has indeed very strict laws controlling access to archaeological excavations and sites  (through a permit system) and also laws concerning photos taken for commercial use, which his undoubtedly is. Whether it is fenced or signed or not, in the USA as elsewhere, you cannot just walk into somebody's property (still less enter buildings on it) willy nilly without seeking permission. That is what is called trespass.  

Spurious Giza 'Discoveries' Coming Fast and Furious from Niccole Ciccole Expedition Team

 
And .... another one! (Stacy Liberatore, 'Hidden tomb discovered by scientists investigating vast city beneath Giza pyramid' Daily Mail 30 March 2025

Italian researchers told DailyMail.com that they identified an unknown chamber under the Tomb [recte 'shaft'] of Osiris, which is believed to be a symbolic burial site dedicated to the Egyptian god of the afterlife. Last week, the team announced the discovery of wells and chambers more than 2,000 feet below the Khafre Pyramid. If confirmed, these findings could rewrite human history.[...] An image produced by the technology revealed the known levels within the Tomb of Osiris, descending 114 feet below the surface, along with a vertical shaft followed by three distinct steps. It also detected a previously unknown structure, which 'appears to reach an empty chamber' 656 feet below the surface. 'There is also a sarcophagus (?), which remains surrounded by running water,' said the team. [...] The work by Corrado Malanga of Italy's University of Pisa, Filippo Biondi of the University of Strathclyde in Scotland, and Egyptologist Armando Mei has not yet been published in a scientific journal for independent expert review.

Researchers told DailyMail.com that they released the new image 'in response to concerns raised regarding the effectiveness' of the technology used to identify an 'entire world of structures' more than 4,000 feet beneath Khafre.

Niccole Ciccole, the project's spokesperson, said: 'This presents the tomographic analysis of the Tomb of Osiris—an interior structure that is extensively documented—demonstrating how satellite radar tomography has successfully replicated its features.

It would have helped evaluate the evidence if the "Khafre Research Project" had not overlain  large part of the scan with a downloaded picture from the German internetshowing the three levels of this complex. They do this to (a) show how the wozzy green bits of their scan if the picture is reduced down to the right scale 'sort of' match, and 9b) to hide the green wozzy bits with black blodges in the middle on the left hand side. We are not supposed to notice them. But they do not differ from what's on the right, and why aren't THESE black blodges not empty sarcophagi, eh?

Concentrating on the bits we do know, in the middle chamber, there are niches some of which contain just air, others massive empty sarcophagi. NONE of this is visible in the scan - even though this is one of the most distinctive features of the whole complex. The third, bottom, chamber much of the time is half-filled with water (this is the level of the water table)  - yet the Expedition Ciccole team reckon there were excavated a further four levels below that, all underwater. That really is a bit unlikely. It seems to me what is in question is what this scan really shows, random noise, a bit of which just happens to look like the Shaft of Osiris? What is notable is there is no horizontal or vertical scale on the plot of the "features" - so how do the investigators know where those features are in real space? They are presented as floating colour blobs. Also one really would like to know what the scan looks like undernetah the overlaid image - let us see it without.

Surely, the best method to answer concerns/questions about the three-dimensional renders of shafts and chambers under the middle pyramid made from the scan results would be to run the results from the Shaft of Osiris through the SAME software to produce an accurate three-dimensional render to compare with (a) the original and (b) the depiction of the results under the pyramid. Why was this obvious step not taken?

The isometric (?) drawing of a complex tomb shgown underneath the blobby image is NOT the complex in Giza, but one recently excavated near Luxor (!). Far from addressing "concerns raised regarding the effectiveness' of the technology used to represent features under the Khafre pyramid, or "demonstrating how satellite radar tomography has successfully replicated" the features of the Shaft of Osiris, this presentation raises more questions. But this feature is a discrete complex, so let us see the team publish in full the scans and full supporting data for discussion.

Where are you Getting Your Information From? YouTube channel "Nicole Ciccolo's Expedition"

With regard to the Biondi-Malanga-Mei under-pyramid scanning being discussed widely in the media, it is worth looking at the venue where the results and their interpretation were published (more accurately, publicised). 

The Italian language YouTube channel "Nicole Ciccolo's Expedition" claims to focus on a journey through time, exploring topics from the origins of the universe to the mysteries of ancient civilizations and contemporary issues. The channel’s description emphasizes it as a "journey in the writing of time," aiming to raise awareness about humanity’s place in the "great ocean that is the mystery of Life". Through a mix of live streams, conferences, and discussions, it covers a broad range of subjects, including historical, scientific, and philosophical themes, but leaning toward alternative or unconventional perspectives. It thus sometimes blends ancient history, alternative archaeology, ufology, spirituality, geopolitics, and consciousness exploration. The channel positions itself as an exploratory platform, inviting viewers to join in a collective "expedition" through knowledge and consciousness. There are frequent discussions with various guests with a focus on specific perspectives that often diverge from mainstream narratives.  The content leans toward the mysterious, unconventional, and thought-provoking, often questioning official narratives (e.g., "LA VERA STORIA DELL'UMANITA'"). It’s presented as an intellectual and exploratory "expedition," aligning with the channel’s stated mission of fostering open dialogue and freedom of thought.

Recent high-viewership content shows strong audience engagement with fresh, sensational claims.

Titles like "Conferenza: #Giza - Le piramidi e la porta del tempo" (224K views, 8 days ago) and "Comunicato stampa..Piana di Giza: Scoperta una citta' sotto le Piramidi" (28K views, 1 month ago) highlight a strong interest in Egyptology, particularly the Giza Plateau. The channel seems to promote theories about hidden cities or time-related secrets tied to the pyramids, featuring guests like Armando Mei and Filippo Biondi alongside Corrado Malanga.

"GLI ANTICHI DEI: i simboli #occulti" (Parts 1 & 2, plus an integral version) delves into esoteric interpretations of ancient deities and symbols, suggesting a narrative of lost or suppressed knowledge.

Videos such as "ESOBIOLOGIA: La vita oltre la terra" (29K views, 5 months ago) and "Relazioni tra Terrestri ed #Extraterrestri" (4.2K views, 2 weeks ago) indicate a significant focus on extraterrestrial phenomena.  "CORRADO MALANGA: O.B:E.", 27K views, 3 months ago).Corrado Malanga, a recurring figure known for his work on alien abductions and regressive hypnosis, ties this theme to his research on abductions (e.g.,

"SFERE ALIENE o DRONI NEI CIELI" (3.6K views, 2 months ago) explores modern sightings, blending ufology with apocalyptic undertones ("La fine dei tempi?").

Titles like "CONTATTARE L'ENERGIA CRISTICA CON L'IPNOSI SPIRITUALE" (1.4K views, 1 month ago) and "LA MENTE UNIVERSALE e #MIRACOLI" (1.1K views, 10 months ago) reflect an exploration of spiritual practices, consciousness expansion, and metaphysical concepts.

Angela Francia’s series ("Momenti per l’anima") covers topics like spiritism, biorisonance, and numerology, appealing to viewers interested in holistic and esoteric spirituality.

Live streams like "Live dal Cairo: TOUR EGITTO SVELATO" (multiple dates, 20K-22K views, 3 weeks ago) indicate on-the-ground explorations, possibly tied to the Giza discoveries, reinforcing the channel’s "expedition" branding.

The individuals doing the under-pyramid scanning are recurring guests in the commercial productions of "Expedition Nicole Ciccolo".

Corrado Malanga: A central figure, known for abduction research, appearing in discussions on Giza, ancient symbols, ufology, and consciousness (e.g., "L'ANELLO AL #NASA: come andare su #marte a piedi"). His involvement lends a speculative, fringe-science flavor.

Armando Mei: Frequently paired with Malanga, focusing on Egyptology and ancient mysteries, likely contributing historical or archaeological interpretations.

Filippo Biondi: Appears in Giza-related content, as a collaborator in these investigations.

The channel’s mix of live streams, long-form conferences (some exceeding 3 hours), and shorter messages caters to both casual viewers and dedicated followers, with members-only content suggesting a loyal subscriber base. View counts vary widely, from hundreds to 200K, with recent Giza content (e.g., 200K views in 6 days) showing significant traction, due to the bold but unsubstantianed claims like a city beneath the pyramids. 

Conclusion

"EXPEDITION -Nicole Ciccolo-" is a multifaceted platform that blends alternative history, ufology, spirituality, and societal critique, hosted by Nicole Ciccolo and featuring a roster of recurring contributors like Corrado Malanga and Armando Mei. Its appeal lies in its bold, speculative takes on ancient mysteries (especially Giza), extraterrestrial life, and human consciousness, delivered through lengthy discussions and live expeditions. 

Fight, Fight, Fight and the Antiquities Trade

             The Controversial Manuscript                  

In a bold move to enact the new Executive Order 'Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History', the National Scripture Museum in Washington, DC, has placed on display the so-called 'Fight, Fight, Fight Manuscript,' donated by a staunch supporter to commemorate 100 days of President Trump’s latest term. Museum Director Percival Lickspittle explains that this manuscript displayed in a prominent place at the entrance to the main gallery is a keystone exhibit in the museum's mission to spotlight the remarkable achievements of the United States and deepen public understanding of the shared heritage of the American People. This effort, he says, reflects the Museum's purpose to promote societal unity and national pride by presenting a narrative that celebrates "our Nation’s founding principles and historical milestones; emphasising, without room for nuance, America’s unparalleled legacy of advancing liberty, individual rights, and human happiness, fostering unity, and championing ideals that continue to inspire millions worldwide".

This ancient text, dated to the 2nd century AD (though some scholars argue for the late 1st century) was acquired for an undisclosed sum of money by billionaire collector Mortimer J. Goldstack and last month donated to the Museuum as a "expression of a Nation's gratitude to the Divine Will, saving our President Donald Trump from the assassin's bullet on July 13, 2024 at the open-air campaign rally near Butler, Pennsylvania. This is its firest public display and in the showcase it is shown alongside one of the nine AR15-type bullets recovered from the site during the subsequesnt detailed FBI investigation of the shooting. .

Purchased from antiquities dealers Grebkesh and Runn, who claim it emerged from an “old Italian collection,” the manuscript bears the stirring words of Ephesians 6:11-14 that are linked to the words "Fight, Fight, Fight!" shouted by the Nation's Once-and-Future President as he rose unscathed from the attack.

"Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness."

Yet controversy looms, as experts suspect its origins may trace to recent looting in the Middle East rather than a dusty Italian vault. Displayed in a bulletproof case, this potent relic has ignited both reverence and debate — fitting for a presidency defined by unyielding resolve.

Trump Redefines US Historiography in Executive Order

It will be interesting to see whether any American academics are going to have the guts to challenge this. As part of the Trump regime's 'war on woke', US President Donald Trump has signed an executive order intended to "eliminate improper, divisive, or anti-American ideology" and prevent "a false revision of history". The move is part of Trump's effort to radically reshape American culture, which he says has been contaminated by "woke" left-wing ideology. This comes after the recent signing of several puzzling Executive Orders that are intended to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) measures from the federal government. The new order "Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History" March 27, 2025 is even more problematic, setting boundaries on US historiography that are open to question

"By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Purpose and Policy.
Over the past decade, Americans have witnessed a concerted and widespread effort to rewrite our Nation’s history, replacing objective facts with a distorted narrative driven by ideology rather than truth. This revisionist movement seeks to undermine the remarkable achievements of the United States by casting its founding principles and historical milestones in a negative light. Under this historical revision, our Nation’s unparalleled legacy of advancing liberty, individual rights, and human happiness is reconstructed as inherently racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed. Rather than fostering unity and a deeper understanding of our shared past, the widespread effort to rewrite history deepens societal divides and fosters a sense of national shame, disregarding the progress America has made and the ideals that continue to inspire millions around the globe. The prior administration advanced this corrosive ideology [...]."

This directive for historiography presented in the President's Executive Order, its characterization of historical practice and polemical stance on historical interpretation, already diverges from the perspective of current trends in the philosophy of history, its principles, and its methodology, not only in the US. It strongly reflects a particular ideological stance rather than being based in a nuanced understanding of historiography as a discipline. The latter is not merely about rewriting history but the study of how history is written, including the methodologies, interpretations, and biases that shape historical narratives. This strongly suggests the President did not seek the advice of qualified members of the academic community in drafting these policy guidelines.

The directive takes a reductionist approach and frames historiography as a battleground between “objective facts” and “distorted narrative driven by ideology”. This binary suggests a misunderstanding of how history is actually constructed and studied. Contemporary philosophy of history, drawing from thinkers like Hayden White (e.g., 1973 and 1986) and Frank Ankersmit (e.g., 1983; 2005, 2024), emphasizes that writing history is not a mere recitation of facts but an interpretive act. All historical narratives/representations are influenced by the historian’s perspective, cultural context, and methodological choices. Historians select, organize, and narrate events based on available evidence, and this process is inherently shaped by perspective, though not necessarily by “ideology” in the pejorative sense implied here. The claim that recent historical work replaces “objective facts” with distortion oversimplifies the discipline, ignoring the methodologies through which historians grapple with primary sources, competing interpretations, and the limits of evidence. It overlooks how historiography involves critical examination of sources, selection of details, and synthesis into coherent narratives, rather than serving as a mere instrumental political tool.

The text’s assertion of a “concerted and widespread effort to rewrite history” aligns with a popular critique from the political right often levelled at trends like critical race theory or postcolonial historiography. These approaches, prominent in current scholarship, reexamine traditional narratives (such as the triumphalist view of America’s founding) through lenses that highlight marginalized voices or systemic inequities. These voices or marginal elements are often only recoverable by rigorous archival work, looking beneath the surface. Philosophers of history like Dominick LaCapra (e.g., 1985, 2001, 2013) would argue this isn’t “revisionism” for its own sake but a methodological shift toward inclusivity and complexity. Dipesh Chakrabarty (2000) explicitly ties postcolonial historiography to a methodological shift that challenges Western historical frameworks, advocating uncovering subaltern histories, arguing that this emphasis on complexity and inclusivity isn’t revisionism for its own sake but a necessary expansion of historical inquiry. This aligns with modern historiography’s aim to uncover marginalized voices and challenge dominant narratives. This is a legitimate scholarly endeavour in its own right. The Executive Order’s language, however, represents this somehow as an attack on national identity and casts it as a moral failing (“national shame”) rather than a scholarly evolution, betraying a non-historian’s discomfort with ambiguity over a clear, unifying story. The text attempts to conflate the descriptive aims of scholarship as an autonomous field with the promotion of a prescriptive cultural agenda.

Methodologically, the text assumes historians once delivered a pure, untainted truth that’s now been corrupted. Yet, as E.H. Carr noted in What Is History? (1961), history has always been a dialogue between past and present. This implies that historians interpret the past based on their present concerns and conditions. In other words, historians' understanding of the past is inevitably influenced by the social, political, and cultural factors of their own time. The “remarkable achievements” the text defends (such as liberty and individual rights) aren’t denied in modern historiography but contextualized alongside contradictions like slavery or gender exclusion.

Current trends, influenced by social history and the “linguistic turn,” reject the idea of a single, fixed narrative, favouring instead a pluralistic understanding. Here, philosophical trends like postmodernism and structuralism, which challenge the notion of ‘objective facts’ by exploring how power dynamics and cultural frameworks shape historical knowledge, are disregarded by the executive order’s emphasis on ‘truth’ and ‘sanity.’ The author’s apparent nostalgia for an undisputed “legacy” suggests a populistic preference for history as patriotism rather than as inquiry.

The charge of “fostering division” also misreads historiographical intent. Scholars like Dipesh Chakrabarty, in works like Provincializing Europe (2000), argue that rethinking history’s Eurocentric or nationalist biases can broaden, not fracture, collective understanding. The Executive Order, by contrast, frames this as a zero-sum ideological war, a view imposing political rhetoric on academic practice".

In short, this portrayal of historiography reveals a non-specialist’s unease with the field’s complexity and its departure from a monolithic, celebratory narrative. It leans on a positivist fantasy of “objective facts” untouched by interpretation, which no serious philosopher of history today would endorse. While its concern for unity and pride is clear, it sidesteps the discipline’s core principle: that truth emerges not from defending a preconceived story but from wrestling with the past in all its messiness. The Executive Order is an attempt to politicize the discipline rather than engage with its principles and methodologies. It overlooks the richness and diversity of historiographical practices and the ongoing debates in the philosophy of history about the nature of historical truth and interpretation.  

 

References

Ankersmit, Frank 1983, Narrative logic. A semantic analysis of the historian's language, Den Haag: Nijhoff. 

Ankersmit, Frank 2005 Sublime Historical Experience, Stanford University Press Stanford, California 

Ankersmit, Frank 2024, 'Representation: The Birth of Historical Reality from the Death of the Past', Columbia Themes in Philosophy. 

Carr Edward Hallett 1961, 'What Is History?' University of Cambridge and Penguin Books 

LaCapra, Dominick, 1985. History and Criticism. Cornell University Press. 

LaCapra, Dominick.2001 Writing History, Writing Trauma. Johns Hopkins University Press, . 

LaCapra, Dominick, 2013. History, Literature, Critical Theory. Cornell University Press. 

Chakrabarty Dipesh 2000, 'Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference' Princeton University Press

White, Hayden 1973, 'Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in Nineteenth-Century Europe' Baltimore : The John Hopkins University Press. 

White, Hayden, 1987. The content of the form: narrative discourse and historical representation. Baltimore : The John Hopkins University Press.

Piers Morgan Entertains with the Pyramids: Archaeologists Participate

Piers Morgan Uncensored (3.8M subscribers) has the aim of  continuing what its host announces as: "our mission to inform irritate and entertain and we'll do it all for free" (well, you have to sit through and listen to some supremely irritating promotional material). In one of the latest podcasts, Morgan decides to try and use the Biondi-Malanga-Meli under-pyramid scanning as a starting point ('INCREDIBLE Claim' Giza Pyramids Discovery SPLITS Science World Mar 28, 2025). So far this has clocked up 1,545,323 views for him, despite it being a very shoddy piece of work on his part. 

"A team of scientists, well-respected in their fields, have made a mind-boggling claim that many archeologists are struggling to believe. A team led by Corrado Malanga from University of Pisa and Filippo Biondi from the University of Strathclyde claim to have discovered huge structures lying beneath the Pyramids of Giza, based on a new technique that utilises Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR). These structures could be 10 times larger than the pyramids themselves, which is why many researchers and Egyptologists are finding it hard to believe...

So, to do some decent " independent uncensored media" work, on this, a decent programme host('s team) would invite somebody qualified to talk independently and uncensored on the geophysics and remote sensing, maybe an Egyptologist and... but that's not what he did at all. 

First of all, in order to get the background, he talks (02:06 to 15:45) to You Tube pseudoarchaeologist Jay Anderson (Project Unity) who seems not to have been briefed on what the programme's plan was. 

Morgan then turns to a four-member "pyramid panel" beginning at 15:45 to comment. This consists of academic  archaeologist and YouTuber Dr Flint Dibble, archaeologist and YouTuber Milo Rossi (AKA Miniminuteman) Jimmy Corsetti from the 'Bright Insight' Podcast, Dan Richards from 'DeDunking the Past'. 

He then asks them to react in turn to this discovery. They give more or less the same opinion, that this an untested technique, the results were presented in a rather unsatisfactory manner, without proper peer review, there are no details of the actual techniques used. Morgan then reveals the whole reason why he's got these people in. Corsetti imagines (in his layman's way - not really seeing the practical realities involved)   suggests that testing the presence of these alleged features by "drilling down with a camera", Dr Dibble points out that it's not so simple as that... and Morgan drops in, in a taunting tone "why cant you just drill down?...". What he clearly wants is for a conflict to break out online, its why he got two random archaeologists and two random outspoken Youtuber "content creators" in his panel. Note the "or, or, Jimmy..." that follows what Dr Dibble says about remote sensing.  Jimmy Corsetti begins confidently that it'd be "easy" to just drill down and take a look, but then makes the odd assertion that somebody could drill down into features [all of which are shown as tucked away UNDER the Khafre pyramid], but "we are not talking of doing it straight through the pyramid" - so he wants somehow to come in from the side? Eh? But when questioned starts floundering...  including about how data from a radar scan are presented... he gets cut off. 

and so on, then talk shifts away from the pyramids and onto a rather lacklustre chat on pseudoarchaeology in general. Then Morgan announces "OK, we are going to have a bit of fun with you now" and proposes a "quickfire quiz" of cringey archaeology questions or what he thinks archaeology is:

1) Is the earth flat?

2) Life did not evolve randomly, there was intelligent design, true or false?

3) What was there before the Big Bang? Was it not God? 

4) CIA found the Ark of the Covenant in Ethiopia, guarded by a celibate monk, true or false? (alternatively: is the "Ark of the Covenant real"?)

5) Lost civilization of Atlantis, did it exist, yes or no?

6) Man has never landed on the Moon, yes or no? 

7) UFOs have visited earth and governments are keeping it secret, yes or no?

The surprised panelists struggle to provide an answer short enough for the attention-span Morgan has in mind. The idiot presenter also kept jumping in with his own vacuous opinion before adding: "There you go, it does not make me a pseudoscientist not to be able to answer that" in a slightly disappointed voice a couple of times, showing what his agenda was. The guy has no idea what pseudoarchaeology is. Several of these questions touch on religious faith and belief, at one point, he forces Corsetti into a confession of Faith... I think this line of questioning has no place in a discussion like this. Totally unethical journalism. 

Morgan closes off by turning to the editor of Skeptic Magazine, Michael Shermer to discuss .. well, it is interesting to consider what this discussion would have looked like had a heated quarrel broken out between the academics and the YouTubers on the "panel" as it seems to me he was envisaging. 

Probably the participants in that discussion thought they had all been invited along to give their opinion about the topic they were told was being discussed. Anderson clearly had prepared a lot of material but was abruptly cut short . In fact it seems to me that Morgan had invited the four "panel" members to poke fun at them, and perhaps humiliate them. I do not think any actual archaeology outreach was done here, because the format of the programme simply fragmented the contribution of each of them. 

I'll add at the end, though I am not at all a fan of his, quite the contrary, Dan Richards gave a couple of intelligent answers - it is a shame he abuses his abilities by using them only to attack academics to earn cheap YouTube clicks.