Joe Rogan's latest podcast guest delved into controversial scans showing an enormous underground structure beneath the Great Pyramid of Giza, potentially rewriting ancient history.

The scans were conducted by Italian scientist Filippo Biondi and the Khafre Project team using synthetic aperture radar. This satellite imaging technology maps subsurface features by bouncing radio waves off the ground.

More than 200 scans from multiple satellites, including Italy's Cosmo-SkyMed and the US-based Capella Space, showed uniform results suggesting massive pillars about 65 feet in diameter wrapped in spirals and plunging nearly 4,000 feet deep.

Those pillars appear to end in 260-foot cubic chambers beneath all three pyramids and the Sphinx, which Biondi described as 'huge chambers' measuring roughly 260 feet in length and width.

The scans also highlighted shafts descending about 2,000 feet that intersect horizontal corridors roughly 10 feet tall, leading Biondi to speculate the pyramids may not be tombs but ancient power plants or vibration devices for out-of-body experiences.

Rogan echoed the radical implications, saying: 'They're not tombs,' and adding that if the data is accurate, the pyramids may be 'just the tip of the iceberg.'

Biondi dated the underground structures to 18,000 to 20,000 years ago, linking them to Zep Tepi, the mythic 'First Time' when gods first ruled and civilization began.

He also pointed to salt residues from ancient seawater flooding as evidence of a great flood event that could support the theory of a far older civilization beneath Giza.

The Giza complex consists of three pyramids, Khufu, Khafre and Menkaure, built 4,500 years ago on a rocky plateau on the west bank of the Nile River in northern Egypt.

However, the Khafre Pyramid team believes the structures are much older and are hiding an underground world built by a lost civilization. 

The key driver of the controversy is the credibility of the technology, which Biondi said he developed through 'top secret projects for the Italian military' and has applied to sites like the Mosul Dam and Italy's Grand Sasso laboratory.

It's patented, peer-reviewed, and built for precision, yet when the scans are applied to Giza, the reaction is fierce. Mainstream archaeologist Dr Zahi Hawass has called the scans 'This is bulls***.'

Biondi admitted that he and Armando Mei, who is part of the team, initially doubted the data, holding the results for six months, suspecting processing artifacts.

'My opinion was that it was not real. I was thinking that maybe it was noise or some artifacts due to our processing procedures,' he said.

Confirmation came from multiple satellite systems and benchmarks, including exact mapping of Italy's Grand Sasso particle collider, which lies about 4,600 feet deep inside a mountain.

Biondi said the consistency across datasets was what ultimately convinced him the findings were real. 

After initially relying only on Italy's Cosmo-SkyMed satellites, the team expanded its analysis to US-based Capella Space satellites and others, seeking confirmation through diversity of sources. 

'Once we had the same results while we were using American satellites… and also other satellites always the same results, we decided to disclose,' he said.

In total, more than 200 scans returned the same structural patterns. 

Rogan pointed out that the technology has already been validated elsewhere, including its ability to precisely map Italy's underground Gran Sasso laboratory, a particle physics facility buried roughly 4,600 feet inside a mountain. '

We know it's accurate, we know it works,' Rogan said, calling resistance to the findings 'confirmation bias.'

Biondi emphasized that his work does not involve penetrating the ground with radar beams, a common online criticism. 

Hawass has used that argument to dismiss the claims, telling the Daily Mail: 'They used topographic radar.

'They claim it reaches more than 1,000 feet down to a city. But any scientist who understands tomographic radar knows it only reaches about 60 feet. Their theory is completely wrong.'

However, Biondi explained that the method analyzes mechanical vibrations naturally present on Earth's surface and reconstructs subsurface features through tomographic inversion. 

'We are not penetrating anything,' he said. 'We are just grabbing the entropy that is on the surface of the earth.'

The scans indicated not only vertical structures but horizontal corridors roughly nine feet tall that connect the shafts and chambers beneath the plateau. 

According to Biondi, existing shafts between the pyramids, currently blocked by debris, may already provide access points to the underground system. 

'Those shafts go down, down, down… and they reach chambers that are below,' he said, estimating depths of about 1,968 feet.

Biondi argued that physical excavation may not even be necessary to confirm the findings. 

He has proposed a project to Egyptian authorities that would focus on clearing debris from existing shafts and deploying robotic drones, rather than digging new tunnels. 

'We want to use machines, not humans,' he said, estimating the cost of such an effort at roughly $20 million.

Rogan repeatedly returned to the scale of the implications. If the data holds up, he said, the pyramids, long considered among humanity's greatest architectural achievements, may be only the visible remnants of something far larger. 

'Those immense structures that have baffled mankind forever are just the tip of the iceberg,' Rogan said.

Biondi agreed, stressing that the measurements are the only subsurface data currently available for the Giza Plateau. 

'What we found is something that has been confirmed by our measurements,' he said. 'At the moment, these are the only data that we have.'

Despite the controversy, Biondi said he welcomes replication by other research groups and remains open to scrutiny. 

'I am happy if somebody can replicate things,' he said. 'If other research groups can replicate the things that I'm showing, I'm happy.'

For now, the scans remain unverified by direct exploration, suspended between radical possibility and entrenched skepticism. 

But as Rogan put it, ignoring the data outright would be a mistake. 'If you're skeptical, we should probably explore it,' he said. 'And if it's wrong, okay. But if it's right, it's a crime not to investigate.'