I really can’t be bothered listening to all of this, but skimming I find that Creighton is still in 2019 pushing his spin on Vyse’s writing just after their discovery that the “quarry marks” were “nothing like hieroglyphics”.
To be specific, Vyse wrote this:
“. . . In Wellington’s Chamber, there are ?marks in ?area of the ?Stones like Quarry Marks of ?red paint, also the ?Figure of a Bird near them, but nothi[n]g like Hieglyhics.”
To those with clue it will be obvious that this was merely a first impression and the marks in this chamber are no different in kind to those in the other chambers. As Creighton knows perfectly well, the writings in these chambers are in a cursive script whose connection with the more formal hieroglyphic script might not be immediately obvious to an amateur such as Vyse—but spin is all he has and spin he does. My having debunked it on this board, Creighton has reason to know that his spin is junk:
http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/search.php?1,search=nothing+like+hieroglyphics,author=martin+stower, . . .
It gets worse.
From circa 40:35, Creighton tells his hosts that Vyse’s published account places the discovery of the cartouche of Khufu in this chamber. With more charity than I’m sure he merits, I take this to be a garbling of the truth of the matter, that some of the marks in this chamber were recognised later—after the discovery of other, better-preserved examples—as incomplete and fragmentary examples of the cartouche name “Khnum Khufu”.
Beyond Reality indeed.