Chance Garton | The Tartaria Psyop? Investigating Old World Myths & Conspiracies

Overview

Chance Garton (from the Interverse podcast) discusses the popular “Tartaria old world reset/cover-up” conspiracy—an alleged advanced pre-modern civilization that was supposedly destroyed or erased by ruling powers.

The episode’s core aim is to argue that many Tartaria claims rely on selective reading of history and rhetoric, and that a more skeptical approach—using falsifiability and primary-source documentation—undermines the most viral narratives.

Trigger warning / framing

• The host (Chris Matthew) and Chance issue a warning that Tartaria proponents may feel challenged or “triggered.”
• Chance frames his work as “all possibilities” research, while stating that he now concludes many Tartaria claims can be disproven.

Why Tartaria is popular now (psychology of the movement)

Chance argues that Tartaria has been popular for years, but its current “zeitgeist” strength comes from community formation around contrarian truth claims.

He also claims conspiracy communities can develop their own “orthodoxies,” creating a false binary:

“Our community is right; everyone else is wrong.”

Further, he argues Tartaria communities often respond to evidence with emotional or identity-based reactions rather than evaluating evidence on its merits.

Primary sources vs. secondary narratives

Chance emphasizes a methodological difference:

• Primary sources: archival documents, engineering journals, construction records, newspaper archives, and preserved records.
• Secondary summaries: generalized accounts such as Wikipedia or broad history books.

He argues that many Tartaria creators treat primary evidence inconsistently—either cherry-picking documents that fit the theory or dismissing documents that don’t—then falling back on broad claims such as:

“No records exist.”

Chance’s central debunking method: falsifiability

Chance describes a shift toward falsifiability:

1. Identify which Tartaria claims could be proven wrong.
2. Attempt to refute them using verifiable, documentary evidence.

He says his “scoreboard” is essentially that, in the Tartaria material he investigated, he has found nothing he couldn’t falsify—relying on documented receipts and archival sources.

“Genre template” of Tartaria content (repeating claims + contradictions)

Chance argues many Tartaria videos follow a recognizable pattern, often including:

• “How could they build this?” (impossible construction framing)
• Advanced tech / free energy / a “mystery civilization”
• “No blueprints or paper trail”
• A shifting tech explanation:
  • “They didn’t have the technology” or
  • “They built it with suppressed/lost tech”
• Claims that photos are:
  • fake / altered / misdated
• “Wikipedia lies” / “everything against my idea is forgery”
• Contradictions inside the same media, presented with certainty—undermining the claims while still asserting confidence.

Logical fallacy: Mott & Bailey (“Castle Courtyard”)

Chance (and the host) explain the “Mott and Bailey” / “Castle Courtyard” rhetorical strategy:

• Start with an outrageous, specific claim that’s hard to defend.
• When challenged, retreat to a vaguer, more defensible position—such as:
  • “History is unreliable; we only know inconsistencies.”

They argue this lets creators preserve the core narrative without proving the stronger version.

Evidence example #1: 19th-century insane asylums (state-by-state funding)

Chance focuses heavily on asylum architecture and funding as a case study.

Disputing a “nationwide federal conspiracy” claim

He disputes a creator’s assertion of a nationwide federal effort to build asylums. Instead, he claims he found evidence of a Congress/presidential veto (Franklin Pierce, 1854) of a bill that would have funded indigent insane care via land-sale profits—arguing that if the federal government funded insanity care, it would have to fund care for all poor people.

This, Chance argues, supports regional/state-driven asylum building rather than a coordinated national conspiracy.

He also cites:

• A Missouri example (Fulton asylum-related records)
• Detailed legislative documentation (cost breakdowns, bids, and architect cost overruns)

Iowa Independence asylum (1868–1873)

Chance addresses claims that records for the architect/construction are absent, saying he found:

• Iowa legislative bill/appropriation amounts
• A requirement for local county land donation
• “Public subscription” (framed as early crowdfunding—local donors contribute)
• Newspaper records listing donors

He also counters “no architect record” by naming an architect (Steven Von Shipman), which he claims appears in receipt/accounting documents and in public references.

Evidence example #2: 1893 Chicago World’s Fair photos and construction plausibility

Chance argues Tartaria claims about impossible timelines or fake photos don’t hold.

Key points include:

• Large fair structures could be built quickly, comparing them to modern temporary/fast construction associated with major events.
• He discusses photo authenticity using a calibration reference (“QP card”) to infer camera/photo characteristics.
• He argues different photos align with feasible exposure and camera capabilities for the era.
• He addresses the claim “flags aren’t blurry” by suggesting the photographic method and achievable exposure times explain the result.
• He also notes street grading/raised street levels (e.g., in Chicago) as an alternative explanation for partial “burying.”

Evidence example #3: “Maple Leaf Gardens” (Toronto arena) fast construction in 1931

Chance examines a separate “old world” type claim that an arena allegedly existed before (or was pre-existing), using construction evidence:

• He highlights the documented construction period (mid-1931 to Nov 1931).
• He says blueprints/drawings exist but weren’t publicly accessible due to fragility.
• He argues against “it must have existed already” using older Toronto maps:
  • Earlier maps (e.g., 1884) reportedly show no major building footprint at the relevant intersection.
  • Later street/lot planning documents (1910) reportedly show housing rather than a large existing arena.

He concludes the “suspicion” claim isn’t supported by the mapping evidence he found.

Mud-flood question (brief)

Chance says he intends to investigate mud-flood claims more in context (e.g., Chicago). He notes he found precedent that street levels were intentionally raised—potentially covering parts of older buildings—while not dismissing other geological possibilities (e.g., liquefaction).

Bottom-line conclusion

Chance argues Tartaria content often relies on:

• rhetorical templates,
• selective disbelief, and
• logical/argument tactics (especially Mott & Bailey),

rather than rigorous, falsifiable claims.

He doesn’t deny that uncertainties or oddities may exist, but he claims he hasn’t found solid evidence for an “old world cover-up/reset” that survives falsification.

He also portrays his work as investigative and corrective—“war against bad ideas”—and suggests primary-source research is “necessary but not sexy,” which he says contributes to why debunks are less popular.

Presenters / contributors

• Chris Matthew — host of Forbidden Knowledge News
• Chance Garton — guest (from Interverse podcast)