Abductions, Implants, and Disclosure: The Questions that won’t go away | #66 John Blitch

I was paralyzed with fear looking out the window. I I had a teeny little bedroom and looking at me through the window was one of those guys. This is something that I know from based on what occurred with me. We are powerless to prevent abductions from happening. Part of the cover up, the deepest part of the cover up is the strong evidence of human mutilation.

He was connecting with abductees and removing implants from them. Yes. 19 of them. There was no scar tissue. And that is the most compelling thing of all. Never mind the metallurgical analysis of it. I think the NHI have probably already shut down all of our nukes. It is most likely that they are trying to be overt and send us the message that we are kids playing with matchsticks. Multiple species standing on stages around the globe in every country, every big city. People can walk up and touch them. That's what disclosure looks like to me.

[Music] I think it's a critical part of your your story, you know, is is the experiences that you've had because a lot of, you know, a lot of people want to have experience, as terrifying as they are, a lot of people want to experience that and want to, you know, understand what it's like, but but you've had that. So, so if you could, I mean, you let's start off with the first one. You're five years old. Uh, what what happened? um terrifying nightmares that, you know, I would complain to to my folks and I I was, you know, paralyzed with fear looking out the window. I I had a teeny little bedroom. You could probably fit three of my bedrooms here in your studio. Teeny little bedroom. And uh but I had two sisters, so I had my own little space. and um looking at me through the window was one of those guys. But I got to say I have no fear, no physiological response to him or her. I'm looking for genitalia.

I know that's one of the things, right? He was facing the camera earlier when I first sat him up there and it was like full frontal. It was weird. We we had to shift him a little bit. It was just was uncomfortable for just just sitting here. Now I got to button up. Yeah. Yeah. So did it look just like him? Was it like Yeah. But I I What you see? I guess this is Yeah. So this is what's what's really fascinating that that's not scary to me because of the eyes.

Okay. Those eyes are around and the scary guys for me had the almond shaped eyes. So you wouldn't think that that would be a big difference, right? But it but it's huge. And there are certain times where um a particular face with the right alignment and I didn't realize this until you know studying the the cognural world of of how how minor details in the the face. So you have a in your brain, we all have a fusiform face area is what we call it. And it's and it lights up really intensively when you're trying to recognize other other faces. So um what what caused fear in me was the size of them much larger relative to their head than that than than this guy. and the angular shape going kind of on an angle up. And so I I I told Ross the story of being paralyzed, you know, much later in 1996, uh 1995 96 time frame and I saw the Whitley Shriber book and I it paralyzed me. I stopped in the middle of the store. I was walking with my daughter at the time and what pulled me out of that that paralyzed state was she kept had come back and she's like, "Dad, come on. We're going to be late." And it it it wasn't until she came back that it it shook me out of that. And then I came back uh you know, I made some excuse with my wife. She was she was taking our daughters to go, you know, shop for clothes and and get ready for school. So, I went straight back to the bookstore. I'll I'll link up with you you later. and I went and bought the book right away, ripped the cover off before I even left the store. And so it was that level of fear with that that face. But this guy's got round eyes and they don't wrap around the side of the head. So it's subtle little changes differences like that.

Were they were they black? Were they the same color? Oh yeah. And so that was another aspect of it that that my parents couldn't resolve was that I had I I was a I was a relatively fearless kid in a lot of ways but not when it came to deer, horses, squirrels because the solid black eye with no iris and it was just terrifying beyond I would I would stop in in my tracks, I would be paralyzed. And and so I remember I think I overheard them one time, you know, through we had this little paper thin little doors and so you could still hear some of the conversation. They think they're they're not being heard, but they are. And they're like, why is he so what what kind of kid is afraid of Bambi for cry out loud? Right. And and so it was just so it was that

that conversation was after you you you've started to see this. Yeah. Yeah. Well, you know, and one of the many conversations they had trying to deal with my nightmares where I I would end up in their room, you know, screaming and crying about the spacemen are coming to get me, which is another interesting aspect of it, right? Because, you know, you had all the bee movies, uh, the black and white bee movies. I know I really dated myself right there, but you know, you had the creature of the from the black lagoon and all these terrifying movies, and they didn't scare me in the slightest. Uh, it was it was the dark eyes that's that scared the be Jesus out of me.

So, how many times did you see this? Uh, I really don't know. It's it's I would say anywhere from five to 15, maybe even 20.

Wow. And so what's interesting about it is um so my dad was teaching in at MIT and working at Draper Laboratories downtown Boston, Cambridge. My mom was teaching at Northeastern University. She was on a satellite campus up out near uh Burlington, but she she had to go downtown sometimes. And so their getaway was up in the White Mountains in New Hampshire. So I think you know before I became an Eagle Scout I had already climbed Mount Washington like five times and that's a deathdeying mountain. You know there I remember looking on the way up and he had showed us there were 54 deaths on that mountain and this was in what 1969 as we were climbing up. So, so we had spent a lot of time up there and I had a couple of other, you know, really anomalous experiences up there. Terrifying, you know, sorts of things. I remember uh driving home, you know. So, we would we would go up like Friday afternoon, camp out Friday night, camp out Saturday night. Every now and then we would uh climb up into the presidential range. So you have it's not just Mount Washington, you have Mount Adams, Mount Jefferson. So there's the presidential range up there. And once you get up there, it's kind of nice to to knock out three or four of them, you know, before you come back. So there was this hut up there called the Lake of the Clouds hut. and it and it's, you know, it's huge nowadays, but every now and then we'd spend a night there and get another climb another mountain or two or three and then come home late on Sunday. We're coming back through um uh Franconia Notch and there was this little resort called uh the Jacko Lantern Resort. It's still there. I I took my wife up there a couple of weeks ago and we stopped by it and I remember the the big black eyes on the jacko'lantern on top of that little motel. And same thing, I'm just getting, you know, this is where this is how I kind of know it's it's a real memory instead of a a false or fuzzy memory is when you have that physiological response. So, I probably got a little bit of sweat going down the back of my back right now. The hair is standing up uh on my arms here. So absolutely terrifying. And again, the the jacko'lantern. Yeah, there you go. There it is. But see see the the white shadowing on those those eyes there, Matt.

So that that takes all the fear away from me. So if if you had put a a classic ET face, if you put the the communion face over that jacko'lantern, that would scare the Jesus out of him. And I would, you know, a lot of times it it's it's like paralytic, right? Not not in terms of sleep paralysis, you know, this this that is a a misnomer that a lot of people try to misapply. You know, sleep paralysis is a situation where in stage four sleep, REM sleep, real deep, um, if you get woken up too quickly instead of naturally, allow yourself to back out of those sleep stages. So as we sleep, we go, you know, from um from awake down through several stages, four stages typically, and then you come back up and and you go through that cycle three or four times over the course of the Eden. So, if it's by by luck of the drawer, by some anomalous situation, an abnormal sound in the background, you know, a backfire on a car or whatever, and you're in in stage four, rent sleep, your your body has uh your brain has some neurotransmitters in there that prevent you from moving around. And so what you you try to do like an athlete does you try to rehearse what has occurred during the day. So athletes you go through the drills in your head. So this is well known in in sports literature that you can really help your game out by practicing it and just without even moving you go through the motions. So that's what sleep paralysis is. It's very simple but it only lasts a few seconds. At the longest maybe a minute. So what has occurred over the years especially since ancient times in the times of fairies and so forth since fairies don't exist ETS don't exist this has been misattributed in the literature to sleep paralysis look sleep paralysis doesn't last 5 days with Travis Walton didn't last five hours for me blah blah blah so for me and and and reliving it when you have a prompt like that the jacko'lantern that's um paralytic for for a little bit but the terror subsides. This is this is how we have become resilient as a species over time. We we finally are able to deal with so that little bit of paralytic injection of that neurotransmitter fades pretty quick.

So I got to ask of course is there anything that could have that you could have been exposed to prior to age five like a movie or anything or like like what any any of that

is really insightful of you. Yeah, because you know what, 50 years later, half a century later and I'm studying cognitive psychology, cognitive science across the board. And I attributed like I I swallowed the hook that the rest of the world is with this stigma and I figured, well, it it must just have been movies or or science fiction stuff that I saw. So, I watched science fiction like every kid on our block, right? Um, but this is what I did after, matter of fact, I think it was after my interview with Ross. And I I constantly go back and forth, you know, from science to speculation. And, you know, it's kind it's almost like a sine wave. It's probably a little more erratic than that. And so I did my own little research project and I went back and and through the wonderful magic of the internet, but not just the internet, you know, libraries. And I went back to try to find those guys in the the uh late 50s, early 60s, and they're not there. I could not find a single episode in the original Star Trek, you know, with William Shatner where you had one of those guys that they're not there. And then Lost in Space that I also saw in Black and White. And so part of part of uh that generation is that we we were the generation that that transitioned from black and white television to color television. So it was kind of cool. And so Lost in Space was one of those that that bridged that gap. So there were early episodes that were black and white. And it all of the aliens in both of those were laughable to me. Nothing was scary in the slightest. And then you look at Yeah, look at those.

Excellent job, Ryan. Look at that. So that's what I did. So I have a bunch of those and then a bunch of other ones. There's some where um, you know, you have a a good-looking gal in a silver outfit kind of like hers, but she has little spikes coming out of her head. Um and and so they're all just laughable.

Sure. There's nothing scary about that at all. And there's no praying mantis guys either.

So I could never find a little gray guy. I could never find a praying mantis guy in anything when I was growing up. So I this this is how science works, right? You come up with a hypothesis, the null hypothesis, you assume the opposite and then you try to find evidence for that. So my null hypothesis is not valid. I I couldn't find any of them. So now I got to look back at these childhood dreams. Here we go again. And now I'm thinking maybe maybe they were real. Maybe they maybe there was something to that.

Were you were you frozen at the time when you're looking at these or was there were you able to move? Yeah, that that's a great question. I I guess to tease that, take that a step further. I was definitely frozen and uh but I could move my eyes, you know, back and forth. And this is I now know this, you know, from going to through the inverible invisible grad school. So Jacqu file the talks about the invisible college and I would I would argue that I was in the invisible college while I was in college cuz while I was at West Point and and long after that, you know, the through a lot of the military, we spent a lot of time doing boring stuff. I think you you talked with Mario about that. I just talked with Terry Lovely about that recently. And so a lot of the other guys on on Century Duty or during those boring times, you know, they're they're reading Playboy magazine, right? Or or comic books or other other books. A lot a lot of, you know, especially officers are are reading military history. I'm reading um Jacqu Valet's. I'm reading Jaylen Heinik. I'm reading Stanton Freriedman. I'm reading Kathy Martin's books. And so when you when you look at that literature, it is really really common for folks that that are reporting on their abduction experiences to be paralyzed with the exception of their eyes. And it it always puzzled me.

I had an experience like that. Did you really? Yeah. Yeah. And and and so but you could still move your eyes. Could still move my eyes. Oh, you got to tell me more about that. So,

I mean, I'm I'm laying in bed, I was probably It's hard to even I think I was in my late 20s probably and um laying in bed and felt like I was awake. You know, my my eyes were open. I was looking around the room and I see this black mist behind the bed and Yeah. It's like this black smoky stuff and it just started to climb the wall and it went up onto the ceiling and I was just frozen. just freaking out and you know looking all over the room but couldn't move and um eventually it just uh I mean it covered the entire ceiling and um

Wow. And I'm just sitting there looking at it like Was that here? Was that in Florida? That was in Bradon. Yeah, in Bradon. Wow. Yeah. Yeah. It was not the current house that I'm in actually but um about two houses ago. But uh yeah, I I still don't have a good explanation for it, you know, for what happened. It was the only time in my life that I've had what you might call sleep paralysis or whatever you would, you know, I don't know if it was or if it wasn't, but I couldn't move. And the only thing that could move was my eyes. And I don't even think that I wanted to move. You know, it felt like I was just deeply connected to the ether, you know? It just felt like I was just being weighted down by something almost like a heavy blanket or something. And I probably could have broken out of it if I wanted to, but I was like, "What the hell's going on here?" You know, kind of kind of a thing. So yeah, that's fascinating.

It's very strange. Yeah. And and and so that's that's what begs the question that is still replete throughout the literature. So so that's fairly common. Um and and so it begs the qu two things. Uh and that's what science all about. You know, the question that results in 100 other questions. So do you think that you were paralyzing yourself or that there was an external Yeah.

I don't know, man. And that's what that's that's how I was going to answer that if you had gone down that road with me is I don't know if that was me doing it out of the the the uh fight orflight situation. Um because that's really common. It's not just in humans, you know, other animals. Look at prey animals in particular do that, right? The first thing a a a deer does is freeze. And it makes sense when you go through uh the biology and evolution of of prey versus predator animals, the prey animals immediately freeze because the predator is looking for movement. And so if if you're in a herd and you're the last one to freeze, bro, you're going down. They're going to take you out.

Right. Right. And so so part of the having those big black eyes for horses, deer and and squirrels, those are all prey animals, right? Is they really need that huge field of view so that they can freeze first and maybe maybe somebody else gets taken or maybe even another species gets grabbed by the hunter. So So I I still don't know to this day, you know, I'm in the same boat as you. Yeah. I don't know if I was freezing myself out of fear or whether it was some external entity that was paralyzing me and that's what was causing the fear. So I want to I want to shout out to to Michael Masters, Michael P. Masters, Dr. Michael P. masters and his uh extra temporal theory which is fascinating to me because he builds a very compelling case I think that these guys could be future humans when you look at that right in that structure

it's very compelling it it's very compelling and one of the most compelling parts of it for me was when he linked the evolutionary development of the brain with the eyes, the bigger brain in the eyes. So, so those two organs are linked like no other organs are. There's no other organ in your that that is linked to your brain like the eyes are. Uh we are very visual creatures. You know, I I used to use my fist as a model of the brain, you know, the human brain. So this is this is kind of the motor control area of your brain, the prefrontal cortex, dorsal out of prefrontal cortex right up there where your executive functions are. And I you know your watch I would have my cad turn their watch around. This is your cerebellum. So we play that a little bit. And what what is really important is is I would take them and and and have them go like this. So the back of your head is your V1 visual processing area. That's why you know in sports you see stars when you when you take a hard punch if you're boxing kickboxing whatever and so what's happening is there's a coup counterc coup in your head your your gray matter is slloshing back and forward and it smacks against the back of your brain or your skull and that's what causes those stars.

So the first step been there. Yeah. You know that. Yeah. You can relate to that, right? Yeah. And so one of the first things you you do when you uh when you meditate is you close your eyes. So you're you're just trying to quiet things down and and also it's a key aspect of hypnosis. Uh the Spiegel eye roll test that David Spiegel I I I can't I can't remember if it was that or him. They're out of Stanford, worldrenowned magnificent psychologist. um and and they have really delved into the the the psychiatry of uh hypnosis and uh using it. David uh I think came up with the Rey app that that has helped so many people and resolve trauma and anxiety and so forth. And one of the first steps in that is just close your eyes and calm yourself. Right? So we're such visual creatures. So, Michael gives a a wonderful um case for that evolutionary aspect. So, I think it's it's it's beyond just possible. It is probable that those guys are are coming back, but

there's some options. There's there's some possibilities for for what it is. I feel like like biological robots or you know I mean like creations like like some some um I don't know if it was um one of my guests I think it might have been um Timothy Alberino mentioned that he talked to some abductees who were on ships and that they saw the mantis that you saw and that there were a ton of these little guys but he got the sense that they were like biological robots that were reporting up to the mantis beings and that they were just kind of their worker bees, you know. I think Mario mentioned something else about being on the ship and saying that that he through hypnosis he saw just hundreds of these out just working and doing various things while he was there. So yeah, it's interesting like future humans versus they're biological I guess if you believe what some of the the crash retrieval's and you see, you know, human remains or biologics not human but but uh biologic remains have been found and sometimes they've been, you know, broken up and just the bodies have been destroyed. But but but it looks like they were biological living beings from some of these eyewitness you know crash retrieval things. So

I I don't know, man. There's a lot of possibilities as to as to what they are. Yeah. And you know, I love how Dave Dave Grush used that term. You know, he is such a brilliant guy and they tried, you know, during his testimony and many times since then people try to pigeon hole him into a canyon and he is so intellectually agile and he so he came up with that term biologics, right? There were biological stuff in there. That's the best he can. So, he doesn't weigh in either way.

Non-human biologics, right? Yes. Yeah. Yeah. And and it could be a mix. You could have the the cloned robots, biological robots mixed in with the other folks. I think I I know Terry mentioned that and I think Mario mentioned that too that there's there was a a delineation even between the gray guys, you know, a couple that are a little bit higher, a little taller and that they were actually uh sentient beings versus the little clone guys. So, they look very similar, but there's there's a hierarchy there, right? And so that is totally consistent in in my perspective with Michael's um uh you know, extra temp temporal which is a brilliant way to to use the same letters ET right that was brilliant. So he's just as agile as Dave. I would love to be in the room with those two guys talking. But in any case, so but but what that doesn't address is the 33 other species that Richard Dolan has in his book that he has accumulated over his historical many historical reviews. Very well done, very well researched historical reviews of this subject. 34 different and and that's by no means exhaustive. to kind of close this out, the the multiecies aspect of this, uh, I I vehemently vigorously agree with that extra temporal hypothesis for them, but it doesn't explain the mantis guys, the the all the other the the weird I call them the scarecrows, the from Pasigula, the the guys with the the lobster claw hands and the, you know, carrots sticking out of their noses and so forth that um Charlie Hixon and um the past ghoul incident. So, so lots of variety in that.

What have you what have you seen personally? So, you've seen these guys and you've seen a mantis is what what I'm aware of, but what what was the experience like with this with the mantis? Um yeah. So, so just like my childhood experiences, I was I was still in the the um common uh perspective of the rest of society at that time that all aliens were these guys. And so,

and about how old were you? Uh, that was 1995. So, let me see. I was born in 59. So, um, you know, I'm in my 30s. Yeah. And and uh I had I what I can't what I can't recall right now is whether or not that incident where I saw Whitley's book and froze, whether or not that was before or after that mountain bike ride. It was right around the same time. It was that that very interesting summer uh after the Oklahoma City bombing. I I do distinctly remember that it was after the Oklahoma City bombing because when I was doing that bike ride, I remember telling the cattle I I'd become a vegetarian because of some of my own trauma from entering the Mura building, you know, the day after Timothy McFay, you know, the Oklahoma City bombings, seeing the lady in purple dress, uh just that color right there up, you know, she was impaled up in the raft. It was horrible. Anyway, so I had gone vegetarian after that because of the smell and and just the appearance uh of like taco meat and I and I don't want to I don't want to go too much further. I don't want to trigger any of your audience, but it was it was pretty horrific. So, I remember riding along and seeing these these uh cows out in the pasture and I'm like, "Hey guys, you don't got to worry about me. I'm not I'm not eating you." And so it was right around that time and and I the the whole Mantis thing was so shocking to me, you know, from a from a stigma perspective, from a onlogical what John Mack would call my world view that it couldn't be real. There's no way that this that that that first of all taller than me, right? Whereas all these guys have been shorter than me and uh it had big eyes, but it it didn't look humanoid. It looked insectish. And so it had to be fake. It had to be something that I came up with on my own. I had I had not at that point in my I I don't think I was in the invisible graduate school at that point. I was in the invisible college. So I hadn't gone into the the more recent, you know, publications that had talked about mand. So I had I I think I might have come across one or two cases in the literature that had talked about the mantis. Uh, and and I think while I was reading it, you know, I I was just like the rest of society. That's okay. That's all BS. So these other 10 chapters, yeah, they're good because they're talking about these guys. But that chapter about the Mantis thing, I'm going to dismiss that and go on to the next chapter, right? I read through it, but you know, I didn't believe it. So, it wasn't until much later that I became aware that there are plenty of reports of people interacting with these big mantis. You seem very familiar with that.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Very familiar. Yeah. I mean, uh, Tim Timothy Alberino kind of educated me on it a little bit, you know, and some of the the experiences that people have had. And then I think the guys in Las Vegas which the the family of people that got there was that big um looked like a meteor looking thing streaming down and then they called the police and said we've got these 8ft guys in our backyard. I'm almost positive those were mantis.

I think you're right. I and I remember the cops talk they cuz that the the ball whatever it was um came like across their field of view right and crashing. seems to be a very credible case. I would love to get that 16-year-old kid on the show that maybe he's 17 now, but but I mean, he's he's he's talked about it publicly. The the family's talked about it uh publicly. There doesn't seem to be anybody that has been able to debunk it. The cops showed up, they were freaking out. Like, I mean, it it seemed like a legitimate case.

It seemed pretty compelling to me. Yeah. Yeah. So that's got to add some kind of u just it's got to make you feel better about your experience to have stuff like that actually, you know, kind of Yeah, there it is. Yeah, there you go. Well done, Ryan. Thank you. Yeah, again it's a that it's tough to make that out.

Oh yeah, I mean it's like the whole phenomena. You never get a good You never get a perfect video, but yeah. Yeah. I mean, I think they said that they had that the thing came into their house and that a cross on the wall that it actually went invisible and that a cross on the wall was turned upside down and was kind of like floating in the room as if it was carrying it and then it threw it across the wall like across the house. So, yeah, it's a crazy crazy experience. I love what you just said that it went invisible because part of the the skeptics's world loves to to use you know, the Fermy paradox which I I got to haul the BS flag up on. I mean I have all the respect in your world the the respect in the world for Dr. Firm me. But you know, it is such an arrogant perspective to take that if all if there is a galactic society society out there where are they? That's what that question that that Fermy posed why don't they land on the White House lawn right and Musk has quoted that too and Musk is a bright guy. It's like the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Let's

Right. But I mean, it's discounting millions of people's experiences and sightings and of of the phenomenon. It's like, it's like that that just doesn't exist, you know. So, u yeah, it's it's doesn't make any sense. I'm I'm with you. But

I I agree. Um and and it's it comes from a place of arrogance because it assumes that they think we're worthy of that. You know, if you're to use Gary Nolan's um analogy of the angry monkeys, but you know, why would I expose myself to a bunch of angry monkeys? Why would I land in the middle of all that anger, of all that aggression? Why wouldn't I pick some place that has been neutral through multiple wars? the less angry monkeys. Why wouldn't I land in the middle of Switzerland and maybe seek out this poor farmer like uh Edward Meyer, Billy Meyer? So, there's there's something there that, you know, from the logic of it that makes a little more sense. But I want to, you know, I go in into this in my book about the need to be deceptive sometimes to do behavioral research. And this is this is what a lot of the world just doesn't understand. And I didn't understand until I was running my own human subjects, human participant uh experiments. Because if you want if you want to study a species in their national or their natural not national natural environment uh you got to conceal yourself. uh you know, I don't want to uh Jane Goodall was obviously a brilliant scientist and wonderful but her approach was absolutely flawed in terms of uh analyzing the behavior of those uh primates that she was studying because she exposed herself to them. You know, what makes the most sense is to have a duck blind. If you're going to be studying uh wolves, you better be able to run as fast as a wolf. And you don't want the wolves to detect you. So even a duck blind isn't good enough. That's why hunters got to spray themselves with urine, right? This is you don't want to be detected, visually in in any way, shape, or form. So it makes sense that many of these, not all, many of these folks, the scientist versions of these folks, this galactic society would be deceptive or at least maybe not deceptive, but maybe they would camouflage themselves. So it makes all the sense in the world that they would come with an ability to disappear and be able to turn that on and off. So, let's say for example, you know, these guys that landed in Vegas, they're studying the Angry Monkeys, but something goes wrong with the spaceship or their craft, whatever it is, or their interdimensional hopper, whatever it is. And let's, you know, I want to put that to rest as well. Look, if you can if you can travel faster than light, if you can bend space time, if you can bend space by Einstein, you can bend time as well. So, you are inherently a time traveler. it it's it comes with the territory and you can skip across dimensions, you know, just all three of those are interconnected. So, it's not either or. Just like with the big species thing, it's not either or. It's all the above. In any case, there's a strong case to be made that if you can warp, if you have enough power to to warp that fabric of space, then you can u redirect photons, light packets around you and be invisible as well. It it comes with it. So, so those beings going in and out of visibility make all the sense in the world. And you would you would want that if you were going to study the angry monkeys without upsetting them. Now,

if you want to survive, yeah, invisibility would be key. But that's only for the scientists agenda. For those of us who may be trying to or those of them who may be trying to influence us, then they may want to be overt like with the tic tac, like with all of the exercises that Ryan Graves talked about, you know, on the on the other coast, right? So, you had left coast, right coast, west coast, um, east coast incursion on both of those, not to mention all of the nuclear stuff. Clearly the nuclear incursions as Robert Hastings talks about in his phenomenal book, as Bob Jacobs talks about, uh, Terry Mario and, uh, Terry Mario and also Jeff Goodrich all talk about is that that those were overt and it is, you know, the general consensus. Um, and I don't want to speak for anybody else, but from what I've gleaned from interactions with these folks, as well as reading not just Robert's book, but others who have written about um the UFO nuke relationship, it is it is most likely that they are trying to be overt and send us the message that we are kids playing with matchsticks. I have a chapter called nuclear matchsticks and it's like wake the hell up. You don't realize the magnitude of the consequences of what you're doing. You could, you know, just like the the matches in the backyard, you could not only burn down our house but the entire neighborhood if the winds are right. And how do we know that those detonations, you know, at the subatomic level that's not disrupting the other dimensions where maybe there's other folks in those dimensions that you're killing? We don't know that. We don't know enough about that. And so it's like we're children in the galactic society that

angry monkey children. Yeah. Yeah. There you go. That's what a great phrase. You just combined all three of those in one. Well done, man. So yeah. So that's so you need to be overt if you're going to do that.

Well, we are just coming out of like, you know, um just just freefor-all, total survival, you know, like instinctually we're not that far removed from being just killer, you know, like like predator species. I mean, we're still basically predator species, but but yeah, we'd be terrifying to walk up on, you know, I mean, it's uh yeah, nobody wants to to comm community. I mean, I guess the one thing that I go back to uh that always takes me back to this phenomenon is real as opposed to like, you know, some government um misinformation campaign or whatever because I think those are basically the only two options at this point. You know, it's either it's a government misinformation disinformation or this is legitimate extraterrestrials. I mean, the other possibility is this is all man-made technology that we've somehow been able to develop, you know, but but the one the case that always brings me back to extraterrestrial is the school kids in Zimbabwe the aerial school. Yeah. Yeah.

And Westall School as well in in uh Australia. In Australia. Yeah. That one was big as well. But I mean, the the aerial school thing um, you know, and I guess the Westall was like 30 years earlier I guess right. So, you know, but these all these kids are still alive of these these this was like 1995, I think. And you've got 60 something school children who all saw a saucer land or a spacecraft land. Uh, something get out of it, an entity, you know, appeared on the top of the spacecraft and is communicating with them telepathically and, you know, they've been investigated. They have psych Mack goes out there and he's talking to them. He's talking to them individually. They're all writing down images of the same thing that they saw. Very consistent, you know, and it's like, well, if if it it just always brings me back to um this phenomenon is real and this phenomenon is extraterrestrial, at least in part, you know, because it's like there's no other explanation for that. If you believe people, if you believe like kids, school kids, you know, I mean, these people are still alive today and clearly very traumatized by the incident and still telling the exact same story that they were telling story, right? I'd love to have one or two of those people on and, you know, kind of talk to them about it. But but it's like I was going to ask you, you know, the the tic tac incident, your percentage in terms of you think that that there's a what percent chance that that's extraterrestrial versus what percent chance that that's US technology? You know, I've I've kind of always leaned extraterrestrial, but but um, you know, what what do you think on that one?

Well, so so I want to go back. I'll answer that, but I want to but I but I want to address what you you said about the kids because um it's it's super important to uh give a little extra weight to the data. Gary talks a lot about the difference between data and evidence, but the data that you gather from kids and the data that you gather from a deathbed that deserves extra weight in terms of the motivation to deceive. Now, kids have plenty of motivation to deceive, especially if they're in trouble. But here's the thing, they're lousy criminals. They they have not learned to lie effectively yet. They just don't have enough experience in the world to do it. And a lot of I was just talking to this uh with somebody I think at the airport yesterday about my oldest daughter versus my youngest daughter. My youngest daughter only 18 months younger. She's a better liar than the older one because she saw what the older one was able to get away with and what was not able to get away with it. And so she was able to be a more skilled uh decetor. So that's what's so important about those aerial kids is and and as you already pointed out, the story says the same. It wasn't like they suddenly woke up and realized, oh, I misinterpreted. No. And and Randall Nickerson, who did that documentary, a lot of people don't realize Randall was one of John Mack's uh patients, if you will. And so I could put you in touch with Randall about that. And and and he did a great job on that on that documentary. So that's really important. But on the other side, the deathbed confessions of folks, you know, Area 51, Roswell, and so forth, where's the motivation to lie? There's there's no value to you. You know, you're you're you're about to kick, so come clean. So So those deserve a little extra weight as data points uh into the evidence. As far as the tic tac goes, I have enormous respect for David Fraver, Ryan Graves. I haven't uh uh met David, but I have met and talked with Ryan Graves at length. Uh I haven't met Alex Dietrich uh either, but but they are just about as as reliable a witness as you could ever imagine.

Yeah. Right. That that happened. I mean, like, can we we that's 100% that that event happened. I mean, there's there's there's Yeah, it's it's been it's been proven to have taken place. So it's it's not even there's no question about it anymore.

Yeah. Not not in my mind. Uh I don't think that you know but there's there's radar, right? I mean, there's fleer there's there's forward looking infrared. There's there's the the I mean, the testimony from the people on the ship that saw the the the crafts dropping 80,000 ft down sea level. Right. Right. All of that. I mean, all those folks there's like eight different ways that this thing has been proven to be a factual incident that actually took place. The only question is was it extraterrestrial or is this some advanced human technology? I mean, that's this that's all that's left to figure out it seems like.

Yeah. And and that's where I would have to defer to them, right? Because you know I have a I have arguably a little bit higher level of understanding of physics than the average Joe because I had to take it at Whoops. By the way, one thing I forgot to mention about the Idaho Falls thing, that was all classified until like 2017, 2018, right before that book came out. So, I remember and I didn't get into this with Ross and so I want to get into it with you as to why I know that uh I I interacted with NHI but I believe my birth certificate. So, there was a little independent corroboration of my birth certificate because I you know do you remember when when you were born coming out of your mom's womb? There are very very small percentage like you know 10 sigma people who literally remember being in the womb and that's that's a fantastic uh aspect of it because their brain their memory circuits haven't haven't arrived yet. So how does how does that you know but in any case I did receive some independent corroboration that my my parents were not lying to me they were not Russian agents and that I was born in Vlad Vladivosto and trans transplanted here because I remember going home on leave from West Point and I had uh my physics class required us to do a classified uh project on nuclear uh we could pick nuclear energy or nuclear weapons but it had to have something to do with that area and it was all in the basement of Mahan Hall which was which was a classified area and so I did it on that I did my uh subject on Idaho Falls when I saw it me and John Dubson. So, I remember going home to my dad. He's like, you know, how's school going? Blah, blah, blah. And I told him about uh doing this research project on Idaho Falls. And he was dumbfounded. He's like, "How the hell did you know all that?" I was like, "Dad, I was just, you know, it was classified, but we got into it." and and and so his physical reaction made me realize that it wasn't just a story that that that that what he said was true because those details matched up with what he told me and what I found on the other side. So so it's that sort of independence of

information. But what I can't do, Matt, is sitting here, you know, I all of us were trained in identifying Soviet aircraft, right, throughout the Cold War. So, we used to have these little um aircraft recognition cards that we would play poker with on or played card games on while you're bored out of your mind, right? And so, it was to get used to identifying those aircraft.

So, I brought this up at SEU yesterday maybe as a method to desensitize our our second responders. First responders are me and you when we get in the action. The second responders are the heroes. They come in when everybody else is coming out. So those second responders, law enforcement, firefighters, EMTs, and so forth that come across this this UFO crash, right, or UAP crash, in order to desensitize them to the beings that they might see in that and and send them into onlogical shock and and interfere with their ability to perform their jobs. Maybe we pass out these these cards with instead of hearts, we have little gray guys and instead of diamonds are the mantis guys and instead of you know and and you put that image to get them used to it and to desensitize to them just like we used to desensitize our astronauts.

I was talking about, you know, seeing John Glenn in a centrifuge. That wasn't that wasn't at Marshall. But what they did do with astronauts at in Huntsville is they put him on shaker tables to get him used to, you know, the the rocket launch. I remember Gordon Cooper reading about him falling asleep on the launch pad because he'd be so desensitized. It was like, give me something scary to keep me awake, you know?

So, so I would have to defer to Ryan Graves or Dave Fraver or Alex Dietrich as to whether or not they thought that that was man-made or not. And and David, I mean, Top Gun >> was adamant that it was not man-made. >> He was adamant. Absolutely. So, that that satisfies both the credibility and the accuracy components to that report. And so I I I I have no reason I have there's no reason for me to be um to not believe he or Ryan or or Kevin Day or any of the other folks. So Kevin Day is the equivalent of looking at a radar track to decide whether or not that's uh human or not just based on that behavior. and Sean Cahill same way in terms of identifying lights in the sky with the big eye binoculars right at night. So each of those independent folks are experts in their area of identifying and making that call, friend or foe, IFFF, right? Is it is it theirs or ours? and and ours now, you know, zooming out to a global perspective, human versus non-human, they have all stated for the record, you know, and I I have no reason to believe that they wouldn't, but Ryan, you know, swore and Dave in front of Congress, so you can't get much higher than that. That that So, if if they think it's of nonh human origin, I have no reason not to agree with that.

>> Totally agree with you. Um there let let's double click on that a little bit and explore the other um the other possibility. Did did you see that this Wall Street Journal article that came out last week and they're they're talking about how it's Ryan maybe you can pull it up. They're talking about how it's disinformation that's kind of fooled the um the world and the >> Yeah. Yeah. That Yeah. the Pentagon's disinformation that fueled America's UFO mythology. So they're they're leaving the door open that okay that maybe some of it's real, but they're they're stating really strongly that um uh that that this has been just a series of disinformation um campaigns within the US military and within the government where they're feeding people information and these people feel as if they're telling the truth and that they're, you know, they're reporting on what they know, but in reality it's just this big government campaign to um to confuse people and to confuse our enemies and to not have Russia thinking about what we're building and and you know, so I guess like that kind of I think that's a good segue off of the tic-tac incident, you know, and and like what type of tech is this extraterrestrial, is this human? because they're saying, okay, they're they're they're heavily implying now that this is all um this is all human technology. So, just want to get your thoughts on that.

>> Yeah, and I love that you brought that up because I wanted to I wanted to bring this in when we were talking about the SEU conference. Um, so that was such a fantastic experience for me that I was invited to to to go there, but I got there late because I I flew in from LA and you know, you're swimming upstream when you go west coast to East Coast. So I got there late and I did not see Jay Stratton's um keynote address which was Friday night, the opening for the whole conference. And it was also before I I finally, you know, again, Neanderthal frontal slope, uh, it occurred to me that Rich Hoffman, who was running the whole thing, was the same Rich Hoffman that was the Muon guy. So, I thought I was going into a disinformation campaign. I thought that's what SCU was going to be, and they didn't want anything to do with freaking abductions, and it's just going to be all nuts and bolts about disproving. So, I thought this was sort of a disinformation conference. That's what that's what I didn't really think that was the case, but that was my concern. Right.

>> You're you're saying that because MUON is No, I didn't realize there was any MUON, anybody from MUON at that conference. I was really surprised that Rich that that was the same Rich Hoffman.

>> Oh, I see. I see. Okay. You're just saying the scientific component of it uh made you think Yeah. Okay. So, so that's one, but the second thing was, >> my god, they got a disinformation agent as their keynote speaker. Here's Jay Stratton who ran the UAP task force, you know, and he didn't freaking blow the whistle on anything, blah, blah, blah. So, I'm like, "All right, well, I'm going to go, but I'll be a wallflower and I'll just be rolling my eyes in the back." And it turned out to be just the opposite. Man, I got to tell you, Jay's uh so Jay and I have uh interacted indirectly through other folks uh you know on like text strings and things like this and I've always found him to be uh very credible in in what he says. But I had put him just like I accused humanity of doing. I put him in the disinformation bucket because he was part of the UAP. He established the UAP task force. Him and Jim Lowsky established Osap and AIP depending on, you know, so he he blew me away because right off the bat, uh, and this this is very subtle but hugely significant. And what he said was at early in his talk, and and by the way, I didn't I wasn't there for the talk, so I had to watch it. They had a an app that everybody at that was at the conference could watch any of the the um because all the presentations were filmed and so you could watch it afterwards. So I watched it yesterday I think in my hotel room. No, I watched it while I was driving back down to Birmingham to fly down here and I almost pulled the car over cuz what he said was early on in his speech, it was it was it was uh uh phenomenal uh cuz and he got choked up in it uh when he was talking about 911. But uh and so that that got me choked up about 9 experiences uh 911 experiences. But what really what really threw me was when he said that, and this is the first time I've heard a government official do this, uh he said that when he and Lasski were looking at all of the uh reports in in 2005 time frame, 0405 time frame, not the legacy reports from the ' 60s and 70s, which I'm excited, which I really wanted to hear uh but they didn't they didn't dig into that stuff. They they were they were spun up, you know, all in the current century. And what he said was that really blew me away was that the instance that they saw about the incursions of UFOs, they were still using the term UFO at the time, UFO incursions on nuclear installations. that was mostly Lacatsky's stuff and Jay's stuff was, you know, the aeronautics, aerospace, the rest, pretty much everything besides the nukes. And he said what he saw was UAP activity that was a concern. And I was I I stopped the recording. I was like, whoa, that is huge. that is that one term because he didn't say threat and and the thing that keeps pissing me off about this and I've I've I've you know here I am on my little soap box here as never being read in on any of that and even though I was a I was you know my my OB my officer record brief shows that I was an intelligence officer as a a first lieutenant in Germany during the Cold War in 80 I think it was 84 to 85. Um I I was a commander five times, right? Not a very good one. I've said that many times, but I but I saw what good commanders do. And and a commander's perspective is is different than an intelligence officer perspective. An intelligence officer, whether or not you're a civilian or in uniform, an intelligence officer has to has to look at the world through threated glasses. Rosecolored, threat colored. You have to. That's what your job is. Your job is to warn the commander what the worst possible thing that you may have to threat. So, the worst thing an intelligence officer can do is say, you know, boss, you know, when we go into the jungle there, not a lot of bad guys. And then when you go in and it's a freaking hornets nest and you lose half of your dog on patrol, right? Or your half of your unit, whatever it is, brigade, you know, battalion, uh, battery company. And so so the just about everybody else that had ever heard including Lou had Lou Ozando had used the term threat almost synonymously with UAP. And here's this guy who I think is part of the cover up and and he's like he didn't say threat, he said concern. And this is the kicker. And then like the next sentence or maybe the sentence after that in his speech he says that he realiz that that the stigma is the threat. And I was like wow. So we just converge big time right then and there with our perspectives because that's what my claim is. It's the stigma, the the the [Music] narrowminded perspective that is a greater threat to national security than the UAP themselves. And to hear him, a two-star equivalent, say that in public uh in front of God and country, that that just blew me away. And uh so that was that was the the one thing that probably the most momentous aspect not to mention uh you know when Rich Hoffford Hoffman came out and almost tackled me over that question about you know how do you keep your people motivated if you can't get access for a literature review and so so we would you know it was just a sort of a big convergence sort of love fest there uh with those two but then the next thing that Jay said also shook me up he said that when they when he and Jim Latsky were originally uh spinning up OSAP uh with the 22 million from uh Harry Reid and Ted Stevens and Daniel Inuway the those the three you know senators and which is which is really you know Lou likes to talk about he's absolutely correct that you know this is this is a potential to unite us because there's bipartisan support for this politically but it's not just now and it's Not just since Lou came out. I mean, you had Stevens, a Republican from Alaska, and um Reed, a Democrat from Nevada, and in a way, a Democrat from Hawaii, all getting together to start up to to to give Jim and Jay the money to start this up. So it was bipartisan way back then, right? When they spun up OSAP and then it got squashed and then became ATIP and then and then the UAP task force, etc. But what what he said was that he and Jim went looking for the leg the legacy program. They went looking for the the cover up folks that had, you know, after the Condan committee, the the story, the official story was, "Yeah, we don't care about UFOs anymore because there's no such thing." And and and any of us that are in the uh invisible college, you know, yourself included, obviously, right? And a lot of us that have stayed engaged in this, that's BS. You know, that, you know, that they continue to do that. So Jay and Jim went looking for that and they said they couldn't find it. They couldn't find one. There was no organization anywhere in the government that was taking this seriously. So they started off later. He doesn't he's not very clear about how much later. But uh once they got into it, it turned out that there was another organization. and he never he never gets into the details of it for good reason. You know, it's just like the FBI. You don't want to advertise all of your suspects, you know, because if because if they all dry up, then the real suspect is is gone, right? So, you've just warned the folks that you're trying to catch. So, you know, a lot of the folks that, you know, claim, why don't you just come open kimono? Well, dog gone it, folks. You got to you got to realize this is like the FBI investigating a crime, right? So you don't want to advertise to the criminals that you know who they are, right? And so that's a case against full open komodo right off the bat. And a lot of the civilian world just doesn't understand that. Um but what what he did say was that they did come across and so now he was admitting that there's another program that is competing with his and he and Jim Macsky approached him and tried to get them and they wanted nothing to do with it. It was it was a competition and they so they thought they saw reading between the lines in J speech they this legacy program saw OAP as a competition and they shut them down. They won that battle by squashing their funding. And so um so that's how Nids and Bigalow and all the rest of that dried up because it it didn't you know Bigalow claims or a lot of the folks in that that sequence claimed that CO you know they got as of CO they shut everything down. No, it was this other program I think that was able to terminate the funding because why didn't they just come back after CO like everybody else did? You guys were remarkably resilient after CO, right? And a lot of that's tribute to your leadership and the fact that you don't have the debt and all the rest of that which is your legacy which again I applaud vigorously. So so humans by nature are resilient. We'll bounce back from that stuff. So why didn't they bounce back? They were dead and then they became ATIP and then and then Jay again heroically in my mind established the UAP task force and then that faded away. So so this other program has been successful in squashing them. So, I had thought that Jay Stratton was part of the coverup and he's not. He's a victim. He and OAP and and UAP task force has have been a victim of that. And I you know what I what I wonder about is whether or not this other program has come to the surface through Arrow because it's pretty clear that Sean Kurpatre is part of that other effort and so there's contention. So what we're seeing here is elements of the government infighting against each other. And so when when the civilian world and I heard this at at content does a lot of time the government there's it's not a collective. It's like you're it's like these guys we could have and I there's a lot of innuendo that there are grays fighting grays. There's good grays and bad grays. And there are many stories of the good gray guys re-abducting folks and removing implants that the bad gray guys had put in.

>> And and so in in Terry's case, you know, he talks about Betty wearing this ridiculous wig. I know of several other cases very similar where they actually wear masks, like a plastic Halloween mask. and and the person that's taken, you know, wakes up kind of like after your black mist occurs and then after the the mist clears and you're looking at somebody sitting on that couch over there in your bedroom and you can't move because they're afraid they're more afraid of us. It's kind of like if you were to do an interview with, I don't know, a gorilla, right? That could snap you in two, like Mario Woods could snap me in two. That's been pretty well established. And so I would want to paralyze Mario. You know, I'm not going to paralyze your mouth or your your tele telepathic capacity so we can communicate, but I don't want you jumping across and snapping my neck. So, and what they what they telepathically tell the person that's taken is, "Look, we don't want to scare you. We know our our presence scares you. So, I'm wearing this stupid mask to make you less afraid. And then I think it was Deb Cobbles like, "Well, it ain't working. Take it off." Right? It's now you're just pissing me off. So, it's amplified. So, so in all of that in context to say that we don't have a cohesive message coming from our own government. We can pretend, but it ain't. It is not cohesive. when we need to have somebody that's got enough courage to pull it all together and admit to us, yeah, look, we have had factions within our own government on both sides of this.

>> It's so freaking confusing, isn't it? You know, it's like it's so it's such a show. It is. It's it's it's like it's a conf it's a confusing enough phenomenon, but all of the agencies and all the people involved and all the you know the history and and all the intentions that people have and their motives and why they're saying what they're saying and what they're nobody can make any sense of it. Like it's such like a you have to like have this as your full-time thing in order to even you know have a remote chance of understanding the reality of the situation. Yeah, it's it's very challenging, but at the end of the day, I mean, there's there's these there's things that are happening to people around the world. They're seeing things. They're they're encountering things, and some of them are just undeniable. I mean, West Westall and and Ariel School and uh the Tic Tac incident, and there's I mean, there's that's just where it where it starts. I mean, there's there's there's thousands of other >> incidents like that. And so, you know, the the disinformation, the possibility about disinformation. I asked AI yesterday. I said, you know, just based on everything that you know, every you know, take take into account everything, tell me in your opinion, what do you think the percentage chance is that this is a legitimate phenomenon versus a government, you know, um, whatever disinformation campaign versus a combination of both versus other versus, you know, and I gave it a couple other options and it said in 2025, based on everything that we know, Right now there's a 63% chance that this is real. There's a 25% chance that it's a disinformation. This is what chat GPT said.

>> This is what Chat GBT said. Yeah. Like yesterday.

>> 63%.

>> Yeah. 63% chance that it's real. And so, you know, if you ask if if AI had been around >> 10 years ago, you know, you might have gotten like a 30% number. You know, if it was around 25 years ago, you might have gotten a 15% number. You know, I mean, you go back into the 80s and you're talking 5%. So, I mean, you know, we're we're we're skyrocketing in terms of like and and this is like global intelligence, you know, that that's telling us that this that that this is real and it's getting more real every day.

>> So, I'm going to put my psychologist hat on and ask you how how does that make you feel, Matt?

>> Yeah. I mean, it's uh I've always been super interested in understanding the true nature of reality, you know, since I was a kid. Like, I I I was told stories by my parents about Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny, you know, all this. And it's like and then like I hear Bob Lazar coming on the television when I'm 11 years old talking about you know working at this space station working on on reverse engineering spacecraft and it's like okay you know I've always kind of been trying to figure out what's what's really real out there and what are you know and so the nature of beliefs is is super fascinating to me and and just the fact that that >> the entire human species is confusing beliefs with reality and with truth and that there's really no distin distinguishing between the two. When we talk about what our belief is about something, we're talking about it as if it's a reality. And and this is how we talk to our children and this is how we raise our children. And so this is a part of the >> the current human condition, the current human dysfunction, if you would call it that. And um and it's it's we need a baseline for what reality is and for the place that we're operating in. I mean, we're just entities of awareness. We're attempting to take in light as it comes to us and and that's what our entire brain is there to, you know, to to and our eyes are are inputting in inputting light and then our brains are processing it. And so we really just need to figure out what is what is truth and what is not truth. You know, is it a are we in a simulation? Are we in base reality? Are there UFOs? you know, are there what what's what is there other life in the in the in the universe, in the galaxy, in the solar system? Um, you know, on our planet, you know, like um these are just key fundamental questions. What is life? You know, like that's a fundamental question that I had a conversation with Avi Lobe about a couple weeks ago and you know, scientist and um he just dismisses it. He's like it's not even you know, when you're dead, you're dead. The human brain is the center of consciousness and there's nothing after that. It's like unplugging a computer. It's done. And this is like what science thinks today that there's no continuation of consciousness. Meanwhile, you've got people having near-death experiences and out-of- body experiences. And you know, you've got science saying, "Oh, it's just your mind. It's just your brain." You know, it's like uh but these people are seeing things. They're they're experiencing things that they come back and report on that they couldn't have otherwise known if it was just a mind thing and they were still just in their body. they're seeing things, you know, in other places, in other locations physically. So, the reality, the nature of reality is super important. and and and just for us as a species to understand like to be able to progress and and I feel like there's going to be more continuity, more connection, more compassion if we start to answer some of these basic questions and that we can advance more and that maybe we don't have to spend, you know, 30% of our resources on bombs and nuclear weapons and blowing each other up. Maybe we can start to spend some of that on advancement because there's less fear because we're more connected because we we know for example what what is life? You know, we we don't even know what life is like. We don't even know what we are, who we are, what what are you know why we're here, why what you know what's the some of these these are just basic things that I think we have to start to get to the bottom of. And this is a big part of the reason why I created the podcast is to kind of explore some of these questions.

>> Well, I I want to I want to make you feel even better, >> okay? because I want to throw you up on the the hero pedestal. Uh because you're making it happen, bro. You are part of the reason for this shift. And so, one of the other things that Jay said, which was really, really important is he addresses that. You know, here you have your own government. You got two programs. One's trying to to to break it out and the other is trying to cover it up. And arguably that Wall Street Journal article came from that other side, right? So you have this thing going back and forth and and it's, you know, that's that's meta misinformation. It's misinformation about misinformation, right? So,

>> so you should feel real good about that because what what Jay said is that you know the way to bring about this change is is you know not from your government. Don't sit back and let your government tell you what to think. Go out and do it but you got to you got to do it with the rigor that helps you sort through the disinformation. Right? So that's why peer-reviewed journal articles are so important and that's what makes SCU important as a new place that you can publish on a controversial subject. But that doesn't mean they're going to wave science and just take any any story. Stories are important. It's it's not it's data. It's not to be dismissed. uh and but it takes a bit for data to become evidence, right? So it it's got to be analyzed and so forth. And so what I would call for is is compassionate skepticism. You need to be skeptical, but you need to be skeptical in a compassionate way. And so we had a little quite a bit of a discussion about this with Rich and some other folks about this the problem that law enforcement has because the vast majority of people that they pull over if it's a traffic stop are trying to get out of a ticket. So you you got to kind of be harshly skeptical. But here's the problem is if you have somebody that has been traumatized with an anomalous experience, whether it's in their car or or you know on a mountain bike in broad daylight, the minute that you start asking them those skeptical those necessary questions, have you been drinking? All right. You know what? Uh, you know, I'm going to I'm going to use a little foul language here, but but to play this scenario, um, you know, you know what, I you don't trust me, so I'm not there's nothing that I'm going to say that you're going to that you're going to listen to. So then you just bottle up and you don't share anything. And that does us all a disservice. So the way that Sean mentioned this yesterday that his answer to the question was well what I would suggest is that you know we we just have a conversation and so maybe you don't even ask the question you just let them just tell the story and then you know if there's some way that you can and you got to be clever but you got to be compassionately clever to bring that that situation up. And maybe part of the way to do it is to admit, hey, I had a couple of beers, you know, when before I came out here to to see you. And then if that person says, well, you know what? I probably would have, too. But but I was I was driving to the bar, right? Or I was driving home, so I could have a cocktail or, you know, do some dupies or whatever it is, right? And bring that in. So there's it's got to be a compassion mechanism because you know I I I mentioned and and Rich and I agree on this vigorously that that experiencers are traumatized twice. First by the experience then by coming coming uh public and this is what I want to applaud you for is being compassionate with everybody that you have. But I'm going to argue for a third. It's a triple because then the third time is on social media when somebody sees you treating them compassionately and then they just freaking all the trolls come out. And so I I couldn't agree with you more that we got to drag humanity into being more compassionate amongst ourselves to get to the truth because when you when you treat somebody harshly and you interrogate them about this anomalous experience, you button it up. That's that's anti-truth. It may not necessarily be deception, but it is suppression of the truth. And again, this is what I'm that's the only thing I can blow the whistle on is the way that Mario was treated by his own chain of command,

>> right?

>> The way that Terry was treated by his own chain of command. He's got burned retinas. He's in a hotel room or he's in a hospital room in the very hospital that he had served in knew the staff. And so the nurse tells the AFOSI agents coming in that, hey, you we got to leave the lights low. And they flick on the lights and dismiss the nurse in direct violation of the the hospital orders to to treat this patient with low light conditions. Well, and this is I'm paraphrasing Terry who is paraphrasing the OSI guy. Well, can't work in the dark. We got to ask him questions. So, they're intentionally causing discomfort. And like with Mario, his commanding officer intentionally guy's freaking exhausted. He's burned. He's obviously got some sort of radiation thing, even though maybe his his tooth wiggle the gum thing again, which we you guys did a great job on kind of helping him. So, we've got to, you know, when you treat people badly who are telling you about this these anomalous experiences, you are anti-truth. You are suppressing the truth, which I think

>> and you're a bully.

>> And you're a bully.

>> Yeah.

>> And you're a lot of things. And so if you're if you're looking at these angry monkeys treating each other like this,

>> especially within the military, I mean, it's corrosive to the military, you know, so

>> especially somebody who's just gone through a significant amount of trauma that absolutely.

>> Yeah. Just to judge it as all, you know, whatever because it doesn't fit into your reality. you're judging it as, you know, fake or that they're lying or grifting or what, you know, it's like there's a I think open-mindedness cures that if you can just stay open to possibilities and and trust people and and you know, stay open along the way. There's no everybody tries to, like you said earlier, we're just label stuff and and you know, it's like we we label situations, we label people, and it's like, okay, well, this one's he's just we we go through life doing that so that we we take everything to 100 or zero. you know, this is uh this guy's lying, this guy's telling the truth. This is right, this is wrong, this is good, this is bad. We put it aside like, okay, now my brain, it's compartmentalized all that stuff. So now I I feel comfortable in this reality that I've created by, you know, labeling everything and judging everything and it's uh Yeah.

>> And we approach it, we approach it binary, right? It's either white or black.

>> There's not a We got to have the gray. We got to have room for the gray.

>> Exactly. Exactly.

>> And that's this is what what Jay was talking about is we got to embrace the gray. You know, there is a middle ground here. And so it you simplify it by by putting it in one bin or the other and let's let's dive into the gray with a compassionate skepticism and use the peerreview process, you know, to sort that out. But as soon as you as soon as you dump somebody into the crazy bucket uh just because they even use the word and so that was the other thing that that he really flipped me on because I was I was furious about over the the the term UAP, you know, when they started using that. And so

>> that was you know where that came from?

>> Uh oh gosh, I had him on the show. Um Nick Pope created that.

>> Did he?

>> Yeah. Yeah.

>> So Jay admits that he didn't invent the term. He didn't he didn't uh credit Nick with that. I've met Nick Pope Nick Pope back in Roswell, believe it or not. One of the very few I think I've been to three now four UAP UFO conferences in in my life, but Nick was at one of them. It was it was when I was I was at the Air Force Academy and um you know the the Lou had just come out with those videos. was and Chris Mullen again heroically sacrificing themselves their own careers for taking on this subject. Um, and uh I was stunned that the Air Force Academy was was doing nothing about it. And I'm like if anybody ought to be addressing this as part of their curriculum, if nothing else, your own cadets are going to see this. You need to help them negotiate this gray area like Jay was talking about. You got you got people out there that have now they know that there's these two programs. There's these that the the good guys trying to bring it out. The Dave Greses, the J Strats, the Lou Alzandos of the world, the Jim Latis of the world, and then you got Sean Kurpatre and this legacy group that's trying to squash it. So what are you what are you supposed to do in that? So if there's any place that should have been dealing with that, it was the Air Force Academy, the Naval Academy with USOS, right? And at least the the the Naval Academy has a a professor who is teaching a class on UAP and paranormal stuff and the history of it. Great guy. Um, and I'll I'll link you up with him. I don't want to use his name unless he wants to come on. So I'll we can talk about that later. So, so I had gone to Roswell to try to invite some prominent folks back to the Air Force Academy to let's do a faculty debate and it was in the summer break, you know, between semesters and I had actually even attended a Treky party at the end of the semester with a bunch of faculty. Apparently they do this every semester. And so you got a bunch of people that have gone out and purchased Star Trek uniforms and they're in this, you know, uh uh I guess uh arboritum or whatever you want to call it, a meeting room where you teach classes and so forth. And I, you know, I try to bring up this subject and and they're like, "What do you what do you can't talk about that?" And this is six months after the Wall Street uh or the the New York Times article had come out and the videos the tic tac videos were all over the place. And so that summer I was so I was gonna ask uh Rich Dolan and uh Nick and Lyn Molton How and I wanted to get uh a a panel of the you know prominent researchers wellestablished researchers and let's have a debate with some of the the folks on the the very ultra skeptical folks at the Air Force Academy. my faculty members couldn't get it together and it that was no small part in my you know resigning my my job there but but again what Jay pointed out was the the way to to do the shift is not to to sit back and let your government tell you what to think. You need to be in charge. And that's why you're so important with this is because through the media and and letting people come on and tell their stories, that's what's going to get. So I would argue, you know, we're that's just chat GPT was the 63%. Who knows what if you got put EG caps on as the ultimate lie detector, what folks are really going to think, you know, and and spread that out. You may be bumping it up to 70 or 80. We'll see how that goes. It's gonna go up. It's going to go up over time. Uh yeah, the the I posted that article on Facebook in 2017 right after it came out, the New York Times article and and like I'm thinking, "Oh man, this is going to get this is going to get people talking. Why aren't people talking about this?" It was like the next day, you know, and uh I posted it and usually my post will get, you know, a bunch of replies and people will talk or whatever. Nothing.

>> Crickets chirping, right?

>> Crickets. Zero. Nobody even touched it, you know, and and uh and it it it made me quit Facebook. Like I I it made me quit social media completely. Like that that moment of oh my god, this is like the most important thing, the most important news that's ever come out about reality and about like and and everybody's like just totally ignoring it. And it's like, you know, just continue to post pictures of, you know, smiley, happy, I'm at dinner, I'm drinking beer, you know, but like nobody will talk about this. And it's like what is going on? Like what kind what is this place? Where you know where am I?

>> It's just like Arrow, right? And I don't I know I know of John Kosowski. I know his boss. And uh he he's he's in a tough place cuz I think he's just being muzzled, you know, and it's so the default is we have no evidence, right? I have no evidence that there's a couch over there or that there's a microphone in front of me, right? I mean, it's and and it's such a a copout. It's such a cowardly effort. Now, I don't want to call him a coward, but whoever's pulling his strings, you're a freaking coward, right? So, so from a leadership perspective, that the good leaders that I mentioned uh that I would follow into a hail of gunfire, number one, are willing to be vulnerable. They will admit their mistakes. they will admit the problems that they had just like I saw, you know, Jay was tap dancing around it a little bit in this talk, but there he was

>> and and and coming clean. Uh he didn't necessarily admit any mistakes, but but he was he was being forthright. Now, he's not going to tell you all the government secrets, right? Because he probably still has a security clearance and so forth. And there are things that that look, there are good secrets. And I want to challenge, you know, my civilian friends out there that want the government to to share everything open. Come on. I think a lot of civilians look at me like Colonel Jessup, you know, from they they look at anybody any military colonel as you can't handle the truth. And that is sort of the stance that arrows take. You can't handle the truth. There is that that uh yin to the yang here of Jay and and and Dave Grush and Lou and all these folks and Chris Melon who are are trying to do this this disclosure. Some are softer than others. Um I am much more of the open kimono thing, but there are those who claim that it, you know, that humanity can't handle it. And I'm here with whatever scientific credentials I have to claim that is BS. You have a BS guy, you know. So I used to tell my buddies, you know, they'd ask, "So, what are you teaching at the Air Force Academy?" I'm like, "Bro, the only thing I'm qualified to teach, which is BS, right?" And so from a behavioral science standpoint, I'm I'm here to pull haul up the BS flag on the Robertson panel's claim that we can't handle the truth. That is absolutely ridiculous.

>> Like what would the truth be? So that would be so hard for us to

>> Now we get into it. Here we go.

>> Yeah.

>> This is this is I claim it's the abduction phenomenon. The abduction phenomenon. And this is the the title of the book is my first book is is the abduction amnesty knot. Little K big N O T. And the knot is a complicated thing that's difficult to undo. I don't know if you ever un un try to undone a nautical knot. You know, now I have a sailboat. I'm dealing with this all the time, especially if something's been underwater for two years and there's all this crap around it. Getting that kn that's why you have a marlin spike to pull that out. And I and I was wondering if if you were you and Mario were going to get into that during his interview because his dad had all that nautical background as a maritime sale. Anyway, the the abduction the reason why I think the abduction phenomenon is at the very core of it is that it gets to every dinner table, not just here in the United States, across the globe. because you're talking about parents who are powerless to prevent their kids from being taken off the school ground at Ariel School. Now, know those kids that I'm aware of and I've talked to Randall Nicholson many times and many of the other folks involved in that in that documentary uh that I don't I don't have any reason to believe and I don't think any of them have claimed an abduction experience in association with that, but they could have, right? same similar beings. You know, you'll get the sketches, and I think you've shown that up before, the sketches of that the kids have drawn that John Mack had in at least one of his books, and they're very similar to this guy. So, but but the you know, the the whole Robinson panel thing was based on HG Wells War of the Worlds radio program from from when the 30 when did when did the War of the Worlds when was that radio broadcast? 30s.

>> Yeah. Maybe 40s, but right around Yeah. Yeah.

>> So, it's pre-World War II

>> and um the uh Oh, 38. That's what I thought. Thank you, Ryan. And so, here's the thing. That was right between World War II and or World War I and World War II, right? And so, the world is already in a fear mongering status. But I think it was it was aired in New Jersey, wasn't it? It was on a radio station in New Jersey. And so, yeah, a few people in New Jersey might have freaked out because that radio broadcast was in their backyard. I'm here to claim that nobody in Boston was freaking out about it. Nobody in LA was freaking out about it. So, so this legacy coverup part of the government used that um to clamp down that that it was literally Colonel J. Jessup telling all of the US and then by extension the rest of the world, you can't handle this fact and I'm going to claim it's a fact. This is something that I know from based on what occurred with me. We are powerless to prevent abductions from happening. And that's what Sergeant Major Robert Odin told me in that hallway at the International UFO Congress uh in 2008. And I was troubled by this claim that, you know, all abductions are military abductions. I didn't see any military guys in mind. Well, now Terry Loveless did, Jeff Goodrich did, but they were but they were not they were not, at least in Terry's case, he's very clear about how they were not part of the abduction. They were there, but they refused to look at him. And he was because all he could move was his eyes. He could see Toby, his buddy Toby over on the side, you know, given whatever field of view you can do with a sakad that the the eye movement that you can do, even though the rest of your body's paralyzed, but those the the guys in the tan flight suits never looked at him and it was like they were they were obviously trying to avoid making eye contact. And I, you know, I weighed in on that board show about, you know, from a condom psychology standpoint that that is very consistent with sort of a guilt that you feel like, you know, you kind of want to help them, but you're not allowed to and that sort of thing. So, what Sergeant Major Dean told me was uh begrudgingly that yes, that we did start to have uh an involvement, but but it was like we were UN observers, you know, with the blue helmets. you know, you got military guys, you don't have weapons. You're allowed to observe, but it it was kind of just to, you know, be able to be able to testify that nobody's being permanently harmed and that we're that their memories are taken away so that they can live a

relatively productive life. And so you have five PRP qualified guys, which I claim again is a is a level even above David Fraver's credibility because if you can't trust somebody in proximity of nuclear weapons who then becomes a assistant attorney general, who who who are you going to trust? Find me somebody more reliable than that. I I I can't the intersection with the overlap of of nuclear weapons with the that job as attorney general. I I I just can't come up with them. Maybe you can, maybe somebody else can. I I can't. So, if in in that context, you you have a a situation where there's an awareness, but you can't you're powerless to intervene. So I think that's where our government has been since possibly even before '47, the infamous Roswell thing.

Now what Kevin Can just presented was a phenomenal spike. The data that he presented. Now this this guy's a a very well-respected, top of the heap scientist, and he showed this spike two days ago. His talk was on Saturday. That was 26 sigma in terms of its significance of all the reports that occurred in in that summer of 1947 around the June time frame. Nothing before it had ever come anywhere close. So you had this spike. So the so this, you know, government claim that there's there's no evidence is absolutely ridiculous. And that's that's what he presented, that there is absolute evidence. But he doesn't, it doesn't get to the core of the why.

My buddies, my friends and sisters in uniform and out of uniform, good, very patriotic people. I would I would argue more trustworthy than the average citizen. And that's why they get a security clearance and others don't. Your average Joe doesn't take an oath to not talk about XYZ, not betray their country, whatever it is. And that's why I I'm I'm in direct contravention. I'm going to stand up against Colonel Jessup and say, we can handle the truth. And as a behavioral scientist, all my training says that we can handle the truth. We can handle the fact that human beings have been plucked out of various occupations, off of highways, in the middle of the daylight. Not just at night, during dreams, not just at at night before you go to bed. And by the way, you didn't have a bloody nose before you went to bed, and then in the morning there's blood on your sheets. You didn't have any bruises on your arm. You didn't have any sunburn. You didn't have any burns between the webbings of your fingers, between the webbings on your toes and the bottoms of your feet. How do you get a sunburn on the bottom of your foot while you're dreaming? That is that's not sleep paralysis, bro. That that that does not. And and and sleep paralysis doesn't put something under your skin that then when you go to have it removed, evades the scalpel. Right? That's in Lou Alzando's book. He's got a picture of it in his book and he describes how the the military surgeon freaked out because as he was trying to extract this thing, it was actively trying to evade him.

And while I'm on that subject, that what a lot of folks, this is kind of the smoke and mirrors thing with that the debunkers try to to come up with. They they never address Roger Lear's tissue samples. So he not only, when Roger Roger Lear, the the the uh podiatrist that extracted implants out of 19 patients, and he had, he has in the back of his book the metallurgical analysis of that. But it's not just the metallurgical analysis. It's the analysis of the tissue around the implant that is also anomalous, more anomalous than the metallurgy.

>> So he was he was he was connecting with abductees and removing implants from them?

>> Yes.

>> Okay.

>> 19 of them. He's and and he got sick and tired of being so he turned all of his data over to

>> Like the 80s or something or when was this?

>> Oh, yeah. No, this was uh well over a period of time, uh, you know, 90s all the way up to his death. I think he passed, I want to say he passed in 2018. Maybe Ryan can look that up for us. But uh his his initial uh let me see. 2014. There you go. Thank you, Ryan. And remember when this book was published, I want to say, uh, "Aliens and the Scalpel." Um, I think it was '05 maybe.

>> '99 it looks like.

>> Uh uh Casebook was '01. Okay.

>> So does he he has images of these?

>> He he Oh yeah. Yeah. Oh yeah. Let's find those, Ryan. And and he did like this is fresh to me. So

>> Oh, is it? Okay.

>> Yeah. So what what did he find? What was the point?

>> Yeah. So, so he only provided two stories with two, he he picked two representative stories to go along with the implants, but that everybody had a story. And what what stood out to me was again, applying science to this. What's what stood out to me was that he uh sent a lot of that data, all of it, as I understand it, over to Bigelow and the NIDS uh project that we now know is was obviously part of J. Stratton's OSAP uh uh project. I don't know if Jay ever saw any of those reports, but uh Roger got frustrated that he wasn't able to publish a lot of that stuff. So then he later republished his book with um the the actual results, graphs of the metallurgical analysis in the back as an appendix. So that book was originally published in I think '90s, but then he he I think there was another edition that came out with with the rest of the data because he wasn't he wasn't able to wrestle it loose from Bigelow and get it out there. Um, so the the metallurgical analysis is there, but then also the analysis of the tissue around it. And this is what's so compelling to me is he's describing in the book about how long it's taking him to get this done because he's he's renting this facility. He's doing this on the weekend because no hospital is going to let him, you know, do surgeries on of alien implants. Ain't happening. So, he quietly on his own dime works works this out and does this. And so, he's he's got to get it done quick because he's got to get, you know, two or three folks done in a day and he's tremendously under the gun. And I couldn't understand why why the hell is he, you know, I thought he's kind of whining about how long it takes. And, you know, look, we all have our egos. And I and I thought it was but a bit of an embellishment. Both of my my grandfathers, by the way, were army doctors. They they ran evacuation hospitals. Uh my mom's dad ran an evac hospital at the Battle of the Bulge. And my dad's dad ran an evac hospital uh island hopping riding Navy frigates and destroyers between islands in during the war Pacific. Both decorated heroes, Bronze Star, but fascinating stories that go along with that. But all that to say that I'm I'm appreciative and I'm aware enough about the medical community to understand that it's a pretty quick job to go in and remove the bullet. I talked a little bit about the John Wayne thing, you know, just bite a stick and have a couple of shots of whiskey and we'll get that bullet out of you, you know, and they just literally go in with the forceps and rip it out.

>> Because there's a path. There's a hole. So you just follow the hole down and take it out. And I'm thinking to myself this whole time while I'm reading through Roger's reports of these surgical procedures, why the hell is it taking this long? Why is everybody all ramped up and worried? And then it finally dawned on me at some point, and I remember uh putting the book down and I grabbed my phone to make a note of this. He had no path. There was no scar tissue. And that is the most compelling thing of all. Never mind the metallurgical analysis of it. The weird structure it's. There you go. Well done, Ryan. Look at that. So, yes. So, see that? There's a couple of those. Um,

>> So those are them, huh?

>> But that doesn't show the tissue around it, right? And so when. There you go. Wonderful. And what he what he talks about is how there's no immune system response and the tissue around it was tremendously anomalous and there was no path. So when you're taking a bullet out, you just follow the path that the bullet went in. Sure.

>> Now, even so, I'm aware of this from my grandfathers. A lot of times they would they would leave shrapnel in the body.

>> Yeah. There you go. That's a great one.

>> They would leave shrapnel in a soldier's body if it wasn't immediately threatening any of the vital organs. So if something's over here and it's not threatening to your heart or in your leg and it's not close to the femoral artery, you'll take the shrapnel that's that's life-threatening out and then you'll go back and, you know, they're they're in evac hospitals, so they just send them loose. So, um, Roger was coming in way after the fact, right? That this thing had been in there. So he's like a military surgeon coming in five years after the the, you know, the soldier or sailor comes back from Afghanistan and now they're now, you know, the shrapnel is starting to bother them. It's not necessarily life-threatening, but you know, they want it out and so let's get it out. You know, maybe maybe it's corrosive. You know, we have some uranium tipped, you know, bullets that that that hardening allows it to penetrate more. So, the half-life probably isn't threatening, but you just want it out. So, you're going to get it out. And in all those cases, you just follow the scar to get right to it. It's like a road map that I followed to get here. But in these cases that Roger was dealing with, there was no road. It was as if the shrapnel had had been teletransported, you know, using the Star Trek.

>> Sometimes there's scars, right? I mean, sometimes like my my my wife's cousin swears that he was abducted. His father was says that he was abducted when he was I believe eight years old. So, my wife's uncle says that he was abducted in Tallahassee when he was 8 years old. And he ran in and he told, um, my wife's grandfather, his dad at that time, like that what had happened. And everybody just laughed at him, like they all, you know, they just said, "You're you're crazy." But they looked where he was saying like that that uh they they stuck him with something and there was a scar and it was like on his groin area. Um, and I think that he had that scar for his entire life. And now his son is his son is u still alive. I actually want to connect with his son. His name's Matt and he lives in Tallahassee. And, um, actually was thinking about actually trying to figure out a way to get this implant out of him. He thinks that he has an implant in him. And so I was actually thinking about doing the same thing that this guy was doing. This was a couple months. I just haven't circled back to reconnect with him. But I'd like to see what it is and what it looks like if there's really something there. I don't think he can tell the doctor what you're doing. You just, you you want to remove a foreign object, you know, and so

>> Um, but I'm going to work on that. And, um, but anyway, um, the scar thing, there's there's there's sometimes when when people come back from these experiences, from what I understand from talking to Timothy Alberino and other people, that that they do leave a mark.

>> But but and you're saying that this thing actively avoided the surgeon? So is it in some cases is it as if it's it's it might be completely distant from that original mark and it the mark might not even exist. Of course it may have may have healed. But but in some cases these things are like swimming throughout the body. Is that what I'm hearing you you?

>> Yeah. So, so lots to unpack there. First of all, I want to be uh compassionate about about your friend and and definitely let's let's let's stay in touch and and let's let's work with that.

>> Okay.

>> Um, and and just because there's a scar doesn't mean that whatever's in there is naturally occurring,

>> Right?

>> Uh, I'm I'm not saying that. What I am saying is that many not many of the patients that Roger Lear was removing articles, uh, objects from, there was no scar tissue to guide him. And that's why it took so long. In Terry Lovelace's case, very similar. When when they took the X-rays, he went in because it was bothering his knee. It was going numb. And and the X-ray tech was like, "How the hell did it get in there?" But we don't see any way. Cuz apparently, I'm certain if you process the X-ray the right way or maybe use some dye or something, you can you can reveal the scar tissue. So, you know, this is this is another thing that I love about what Jay talked about is he said we got to stay away from scientism because scientism is not science. Scientism would would take that situation you just said and, you know, flip flip my uh claim on its head. And Blitz says, if there's if there's a scar, then it ain't an implant. No, I'm not saying that at all. But scientism would do that. It would be it would use what I'm saying to reject it in this binary black or white type of situation. So all I'm saying is in Terry's case and in many of Roger Lear's cases, the absence of scar tissue is kind of like some of your your your vase collection, your vase collection. We can't do that. There's there is no medical that I know of. And again, it's not me because I'm not a surgeon, but Roger L claims he is not aware of any process anywhere, even using lasers to cauterize or whatever, that you can insert a foreign object into the human body without an immune response that causes that scar.

>> What did they find out about the metal or like the the actual composition of these objects that they were removing? Like what what was there what did they learn?

>> Yeah. So there there's you know in a lot of the metallurgical analysis, uh, when and and this is another key point because science evolves over time, right? And so the methods that you would use in the 50s to look at an object inside somebody's bodies in somebody's body, the the electron microscope procedures have been refined a thousand times. times over. John Mack, as a psychiatrist, he did not have the benefit of fMRI, of of the EEG system that I purchased for $16,000 bucks back in 2009. They we didn't have the tools to look at it then. And so that's why it's very, very important. And I should have made this point at SEU. And if I ever go back, maybe next year, if I get my paper published, maybe I'll make this point, that it's worth reinvestigating because with new tools comes new analysis and new revelations. So what might have been considered to be normal metal back in 1950, 1960, 1947, now. There you go. So see where it says they cannot. So I'm going to read this for the for the viewer, or maybe they could see it, but

>> >> Yeah, go ahead. Read it.

>> >> Yeah. So, so you know it says, uh, contain a variety of elements including iron, titanium, aluminum, but the researchers could not confirm they were of extraterrestrial origin. Okay? Right? Because you don't have an extraterrestrial origin to compare it to, right? And so, but it's not just the composition. So, you throw a mass spectrometer at it and you do a derivation of and you can do this with fluoroscopy, like is mentioned there. You could do it from distant uh arrival or a arrival in our at our sensors, Hubble or Webb telescopes in orbit without having to go through the atmosphere, and you can do spectrographic analysis of those photons to give you a metal a material composition of a foreign body, of an asteroid. Does it have water on it? Yeah. If if the the photons coming to us have certain, you know, so you can get a material composition. But even if it looks like normal atomic structure, the way that it's constructed, that's a whole that's a whole different ballgame. And what has been said many times from very prominent scientists diving into this heroically diving into this UAP might be subject area, like Gary Nolan and and many many other folks. Um, it's not necessarily about the composition of the individual elements. Everybody's looking for, you know, unobtanium 123 or in in Bob Lazar's case, element 115, right? Everybody's looking for that that smoking gun. But you don't necessarily need that to show an anomalous situation. If the layering is at a subatomic particle, we don't we don't have the ability to do that to get, you know, we can we can scar, you know, carve and script out substrates, you know, but to get to a quantum level, to get to a subatomic level in that in that construction, we don't know how to do that. And so that's why we need to go back and relook that. So I'm dying to get a hold of those Roger's implants to redo it,

>> >> Right?

>> >> And relook it.

>> >> If you do, let me know. I got a scientist down the street that's got an SEM, a scanning electron microscope, and we can we can uh have a look at it and talk about on the show if you want. But but yeah, it's like that some of that material that's supposedly found at Roswell where you crinkle it up and then it goes back and it expands,

>> >> You know, or the um the the uh some of the the outfits that they or the the materials that they're said to have worn where

>> >> From the suits.

>> >> Yeah. Yeah. It's all almost like

>> >> Can you put that back up? Right.

>> >> It's all almost created at that atomic level where you're just putting, you know, atoms next to atoms next to atoms. And it's it's uh Yeah. It's it's that that kind of material is is fascinating.

>> So, so it's not just a matter of looking at spikes on a spectrographic analysis because it's, you know, what this points out is not just the layering or how it's put together, but the isotopic ratios. So, so whenever, you know, a lot of times when I'm talking to people and you use the word isotope, they're like, oh my god, their eyes glaze over. So, to make that simple, even though, you know, this is essentially, you know, depending on what high school you went, you you probably dealt with isotopes or whatever, but an isotope is a is is really simple when you when you consider that it's just, you know, same number of electrons, same number of um protons in the nucleus, same number of electrons, and you got neutrons, and it's just a little heavier, so you add a couple extra neutrons. So, um, the isotopic ratios. So when you look at the half-life of how a um an atom will get rid of its subatomic particles and that's that's all that radiation means, right? Or that's one form of radiation is you got too much stuff in there and nature, you just want it to reduce it. What nature, entropy says is you reduce things to the lowest common level and and you reduce that energy output. And so, so it naturally disperses, right? That's why alcohol kind of disperses from your skin, cools you off, blah blah blah. That that may not be the best analogy. Anyway, an isotopic ratio is really important because it's the same element, but you're you're trying to lighten it up in most cases. So, what Roger Lear's uh uh analysis, he didn't do it, he sent it out to a lab, obviously, was that they had anomalous isotopic ratios. And those ratios were inconsistent with earth-based materials. Now, that doesn't mean it's a spaceship, right? But you got to ask yourself, how did a little micro meteorite, if it's just a meteorite, how did that get under the skin without scar tissue, right? And that's that's what begs the question. And I and the skeptical folks out there, the narrow-minded folks who engage in scientism will concoct and twist themselves into a logical pretzel to ex to try to explain how this could possibly happen when Occam's Razor says no. The G the guy said one of those guys stuck it in his arm. And that's, you know, when you look at parsimony, that is a form of parsimony. So my point is that Occam's Razor cuts both ways. It cuts against scientism as well as it cuts, you know, against some of the other uh aspects. So while we're on the isotopic ratios, I wanted to bring this up too. Have Have you have you ever had uh John Brandenburg on your show yet? Are you familiar with him?

>> Um, I don't think so. Sounds vaguely familiar, but

>> So I I met John. I've I've read a bunch of his stuff over the years as part of the Invisible College. Uh I met him at my very first UFO conference that I ever presented on uh back in just a couple of months ago. Uh Lauren um Fenton runs ran the UFO 2025 conference up in San Francisco. John was presenting uh sort of representing some of his previous work as a plasma physicist. Started out at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories, ended up in uh Albuquerque at Sandia National Labs working on nuclear weapons. So he's a he's a plasma guy and he was originally working on uh plasma um from uh nuclear fuel manipulation, I'll call it, to develop plasma as a potential uh propulsion mechanism to get us to Mars. So, um, he he goes from Lawrence Livermore to Sandia Labs and while he's at Sandia Labs, he in the in the in the early 80s um is imaging or is analyzing imagery from Mars because he is going to try to use a uh variant of plasma to try to and a future spaceship on Mars as part of our colonization efforts, right? So, all that makes sense. And so, that's just part of his job. And uh they also want to, so he's dual-headed. So, he's got this propulsion thing, but they also want to investigate, you know, plasma for the classified side of things, you know, making weapons and so forth, which by the way, that's a good secret, right? We don't want the, you know, people that want us to de the the government to show all their secrets. Do you really want to advertise to the world how to build a nuclear weapon? Is that is that a good thing to do? Is it a good thing to to distribute on social media your gun safe uh uh combination? There are good secrets. Some things need to be kept a secret. So the people that are trying to tear down Skywatcher for being a little bit secretive, wake up folks. There are good secrets that we don't need to share. We don't want to share. It's to the detriment of humanity to share it. So if you have a nuclear technology that can be used for a weapon or some other exotic technology that maybe Skywatcher has developed to sense, you know, some of our own stuff. Maybe we want to keep that a secret. So that's why Skywatcher is being secretive is they have the ability with this this new mechanism, this new dog whistle to maybe detect our own stuff and they want to make sure that they don't compromise our own advanced technology that gives us an edge over. So there's reasons, there's good reasons to keep things a secret. I digress. Back to John Vandenberg.

>> I I could argue that, but we're going to let we're going to let it go. Transparency is a huge value of of of our company. I I think that if we if we get everything out there, if we get the truth out there for everybody, that we can handle it as we talked about earlier, and that ultimately you you settle. You begin to you get to a point where everybody understands the secret of nuclear weapons. And so you you you transcend the ability to want to destroy everyone with nuclear weapons. As an example, if you if you start to if if you can accept, okay, nukes are real, uh, but we can't use them, um, then maybe that's okay to talk about. It's like this this whole secrecy thing with the UFO phenomenon, it drives me crazy. Secrets in general drive me absolutely crazy. I don't think there's a good reason for any secret anywhere on the planet ever to have existed by anyone. I think that openness is incredibly incredibly important.

>> Okay. So, so, so let's go down that hole if you want.

>> We could. There's so many holes I want to go down though. Like, but you keep going with this, but then I I do have a couple of questions. I wanted to ask you about the the the implant. Like, do do you know why? Like, why are they implanting? Like, I feel like that that's such an important thing that we didn't get to um kind of finish, but like if you can just briefly close the loop on like why you think that that uh that these implants are going into us anyway. What is the per what is the metal doing within the human body? Is it just for tracking purposes? And why is titanium able to track? Like what is that all about? And then you get back to this guy that you were.

>> Yeah. Yeah.

>> Sure. Um, so I've used the example uh several times about how we used to abduct polar bears off of an iceberg, an ice flow uh during the Cold War. We would do we would essentially have a UFO unidentified to them helicopter fly over, you know, hover over them, look at them, scan them, and then from the air we shoot them with a tranquilizer dart. We knock them out. Mother, two cubs. We we lift the mother and the cubs uh in cargo nets up, bring them over onto a ship where we have a laboratory. In the laboratory, we take scoops out of them. We we sample their their body fat, their tissue because what we're trying to do is extract from that what level of radiological isotope is being absorbed by them and from that we can reverse analyze to determine what the yield of the nukes that the Russians are testing up in Kaka or Siberia, whatever it is, and we can establish lish what sort of yield and what sort of material that they're using is it plutonium, is it uh and what's the xenon ratio, xenon 129 to 132, which is what John Brandenburg does. So, so we do that. We have already done that to many other animals. And so, you know, when you do that at one point in time, that gives you one snapshot. But what's really important with radiological pollution and the half-life of these materials that degrade over time is you want to get a longitudinal uh perspective of what it's doing to those poor bears, to those poor humans, what humans are doing to other humans by polluting this atmosphere. So, it makes all the sense in the world to me because I know we did this with our polar bears that they would do that with us just to track the the nuclear pollution from our own ridiculous self-destructive stuff. We had we we got to look at nuclear testing as pollution because it most certainly is. And so after Chernobyl, we've done the same thing with deer, with lots of local flora and fauna. And it and what's important about, you know, the fauna part of it, the animal part of it is as the animal eats the flora and it bio-concentrates in their body and then it starts to interfere with the real sensitive aspects of our our um anthrop not our anthropology, our anatomy, right? And so if you want to do a longitudinal study and you want to look at especially the super sensitive reproductive organs that created those cubs. So that's why you need to take the cubs along with the mom because you need to see how that transferred and how the damage to those telomeres, that the the uh cell chromosomes that get passed from mom and dad to cubs. So you got to take all that. And so how do we we think in our arrogance that the mom just feels like she went to sleep and we're not causing her any psychological trauma, right? But how do we know that when we dump her back on that ice flow, if we even take enough care to put her on the same ice flow in the same position, how do we know we're not causing her enormous trauma? Right? And she wakes up and she can't see her cubs because we didn't take an ext an extra level of of care and compassion to put the cubs in the exact same position and pose that they were when we took them. So, she wakes up and she immediately freaking out. Her heart's going nuts and she's and then the cubs are behind her and then she finds and then she relaxes, right? But how do we know that she didn't dive right in the water and didn't even see him and had to search all over for him? So, we may be able to teach them a level of compassion because we are being more compassionate with the animals that we treat. There's a bunny app now that you can you can get, I think it's Happy Bunny or Happy Hop or whatever, and you can scan, you can go through the grocery store and scan all the products to determine whether or not there is animal testing involved.

>> And so my standard, first of all, I am in vigorous agreement with you that in a utopia world that we don't have any secrets, that would be wonderful. But how do we get there from here? So this is one step is to hold ourselves account. There it is. Well done, Leaping Bunny. That's what it was. Thank you so much, Ryan. So, there's an app that you can use to see if the product that you're you're buying, whether it's shampoo or whatever, was tested on any animals, the poor little bunnies, right? So I think that the tampering with our memories is a form of that compassion and it's to prevent us from the D to to developing a D in PTSD. So, does does um Terry Lovelace, does Mario Woods, does Jeff Goodrich, do do we all have some form of post-traumatic stress? Yeah, we got PTS. And in Terry's case, you could argue that there was a little bit of a disorder that manifested in his in his uh circum the circumnavigation of the square to get to his court appointment because that's interrupting his daily life. It's interrupting his profession. And that's kind of the definition of a disorder in the in the DSM. Well, it's it's it's scientifically able to be seen with brain scans. My my wife had PTSD and and so when you get your brain scan, there's a classic diamond pattern that appears within the the brain on the scan and u yeah, she was diagnosed with that and she she cured it. She actually she went through a lot of um healing.

>> Oh, that warms my heart.

>> Yeah. Yeah. It can it can absolutely go away with um, you know, with with a lot of work and, um, you know, um, potentially a little bit of help on on on some medicine that's that's now proven to to cure PTSD. So

>> That is wonderful to hear. Yeah, for sure.

>> And good. And this is where

>> You know, back in the first Gulf War, we didn't have it, right? We didn't have a lot of these scans or even if we had it, it was so remote. But now, I mean, you can you can go get a scan, you know, out of pocket if you got $1,500 bucks, you can just do it. So, we didn't have that back then. So, this really warms my heart that we're able to deal with this. So, um, and you know, backing this out to the the nuclear testing situation. Uh, that's what I think has occurred with us. it it not all abductions are of that nature, but a lot of them are. And and so if you want to do this longitudinal study, if they if like we did, so we would go back, we would we would stick a tracker in that polar bear and we want to come back after five years and see whether the damage from that fallout from that, I don't know, 2 kiloton, 100 megaton, whatever it was, has uh has started to fade. Is at what level has that healing occurred? And then we can extrapolate and and try to determine, okay, what's the rate of recovery from that stress or what's the rate of recovery from that that pollution? So that's what I think those trackers are for, for the most part. And another that brings up another anomalous abnormal aspect of Roger Lear's work because he and several other folks used electromagnetic uh frequency um devices to monitor and and measure emissions from these subcutaneous objects. Is that it? And what's fascinating about it is that they would do it pre and post surgery. And so it's inside the body and it is transmitting consistently strongly at this frequency. And then after it's removed, it's still surrounded by some of the tissue, still transmitting. And then after the tissue is separated and and and now after it's removed from the body, it's still transmitting, but it's weaker. And then after you remove the tissue, it eventually dies off altogether. So it's like it needs the body's function to uh power the transmitter, you know, like the body's the battery to the radio, that sort of thing. So it's all these anomalous things that uh I want to bring to the public's awareness. And again, I'm working on this peer-review journal article to point out that the abduction phenomenon has just as much nuts and bolts, rigorous empirical data associated with it as as lights in the sky, as objects in the sky. You know, there's that with I would I would say the equivalent of that EMF meter, that's the radar data, right? That the anomalous tissue around it that shows no scarring, that's the equivalent, I don't know, of of a long wave um infrared sensor of it. And so there's a lot of that. But uh I I think the the fear factor is why it's all been covered up because I can't connect the dots that all those folks are bad folks. I I can't get there because, you know, we we all swore an oath to the country. We we swore an oath to defend this country and to subjugate ourselves. Look, nobody's nobody gets rich joining the military. Not rel on a relative basis. And I know you you're probably more aware of that than than most folks. You you're doing it out of a a a desire to be part of something bigger than yourself. The vast. Now, I'm not here to I'm I'm, you know, there is certainly corruption that happens in the military, just like everybody else. You got power-hungry people. You know, I use this statistic all the time of 99% of violent crime is committed by 1% of the population. Well, let's that that seems pretty small until you start thinking, well, let's say I I had a I had a graduating class from my high school was a huge high school. My high school graduating class was bigger than my West Point. My college class was a thousand kids. So, okay. So 1% is one out of a hundred. That's 10 kids out of a thousand. That's 10 psychos out of a thousand out of my entire high school. And I could probably name a few of them, right? Just from, you know, being in an environment around them. So, um, so there a matter of fact, it just occurred to me. I I I played football with one of them. Uh, and in any case, if you extrapolate that to 10,000 troops, that means you got a hundred psychos out there. You got a hundred people who are willing to uh commit a violent crime against a fellow human and now you give him a gun. So, so there's there's I'm not trying to pretend like everybody that joined the military or everybody that joined law enforcement or everybody that went into the fire service, right? But the vast majority of them of us are good folks. So, I can't get to the point that I know there's a lot of perspective that everybody at the CIA is evil and they're all about suppression and control. I can't get there. Uh what makes sense to me is that they had to be given a really good reason to threaten people to keep this a secret. You have to have a really good reason to keep a secret. The really good reason during World War II to keep the Manhattan Project a secret. Look, they didn't keep that a secret because they're going to get punished. You know, I've said this a h 100 times. I said this in my "People Behind the Science" interview back in uh 2014 with Mary McNeely, uh, and because I because I dodged one of her questions and I said, you know, um, and she goes, "Oh, please don't worry about it. I don't I would never want you to get in trouble for anything you said on my show." And I said, Marie, thank you, but that's not why I'm keeping this quiet. You know, look, I've been in trouble my whole life. I said I set a record for demerits my plebe year at West Point. It's not about being in trouble. It's about doing the right thing. And so I'm convinced that what connects all the dots for me is that these people are shown something that is equivalent to the Manhattan Project. So what what allowed them to keep that project really super secret for what three years, four years, maybe five? Uh, if you figure that it started in the fort in 1940, maybe, and say by '45 when they dropped it on dropped the bomb on uh bombs on uh Nagasaki and Hiroshima. So that's five years. And and the the justification for that was to show them everybody in the program the horrors that Hitler was creating in Europe. And so once you show them that, and once you show them similar horrors that had occurred with, you know, the Japanese, um, and neither of those cultures are proud of that. And look at now, both of those cultures are staunch allies of ours, right? And so there is hope. There is there is recovery from PTSD. There is recovery from bad, well, uh, misled, um, misguided military activities. So, I'm I'm convinced that that's what what plugged the vast majority of leaks. There weren't it wasn't zero. There were plenty of leaks, but that's that's what caused, you know, the CI people, the counter intelligence people during the Manhattan Project to do really bad things to fellow humans to keep that a secret. It was the lesser of two evils. So for me, lights in the sky, that's that is insufficient motivation to keep all those folks a secret. Even the evidence of these guys, bodies, footprints, J. I'm I'm pretty convinced that J. Allen, it's well established that J. Allen Hynek flipped over the C-section of the Loni Zamar Zamara Zamora case. I've been there several times. Used to work out of there and, you know, you'd go through Stallion Gate to to do some work when I was an Air Force scientist. But the inside of the onion, the very core of it is the fear that's generated by the abduction phenomenon because

>> Just seems like there I mean we can get abducted. Like there can be five guys that bust in here right now with guns and just shoot us up and it's game over. Like nobody can stop that. Nobody can control that. I mean the the I mean we can't control the abduction phenomenon, you know? We can't like stop that from happening. But but like who cares? Like we can handle that. Like we can handle that truth. Like there's there's stuff that you just you can't control. You can't you can't predict. You can't, you know, life is not guaranteed. The next day is not guaranteed. But that's such a it's such a small detail of the possible things that could happen to me as an individual or to my kids as an individual. The chances still, even if the phenomenon is real and the abduction phenomenon is real, the chances that my kids are going to get abducted, the chances that I'm going to get abducted are still very small compared to walking across the street and getting hit by a car after we record this episode. So, you know, it's like if that's really the reason to keep a lie in place and to keep it's like why why do why why do we continue to cover it up? Why do we continue to build lie after lie? It's because you started the lie in the first place. It's because you you told the lie in the first place and now you can't go back to it. And everything that you do, every decision that you do is built upon a lie after another lie after another lie. And it gets so big. It gets to be such a big just false reality, just a lack of truth that you just have to because it's so it's so big at that point that you just have to keep it going. And

>> Let me agree and augment. So I'm going to agree with what you said,

>> But I want to point out that in that case that you just you know, to to unpack this this um analogy uh and use the the metaphor there. uh those people that do that to us, that break in with those weapons and so forth, there is a high likelihood that they're going to pay for that, that that law enforcement will track those guys down, somebody will call and hear the gunshots, at least see them squirting out of the way, and there's there's there's at least a reasonable expectation that they will pay for that, that there will be consequences. I don't care. I'm dead.

>> Right. But the other people. So the reason why it doesn't result in fear throughout all of Bradenton

>> Was because. Yeah.

>> There are holes in law enforcement. You can't protect everybody all the time, but that there will eventually be caught and there's a deterrent. So I I love what you said about about the the lie and having to propagate that. There's another factor and that is that our government is going to have to admit as the police chief for the entire globe or at least the entire United States, the United States military, United States Department of Defense is going to have to admit, uh, sorry guys, we can't protect any of you at all.

>> Who cares? Like like why do they? Is that it's just an ego thing that they have to feel like they can protect us from everything at all time? It's Nobody can protect you from everything at all time. It's it's total. And to and to like to to like to to have the government out there pretending like they know everything about everything and everything that's going on and that they can protect us from all of these things. It's nonsense. None of it's none of that makes any sense at all. So why do they why do they feel like they have to withhold that? It's like it's it's like because it's a part of their identity. I will I've I've been sworn in to protect people that they have to then like I mean it the the amount of nonsense that that creates is it's astounding. I mean it's it's limiting us from the ability to interact with reality and for us to experience and to understand true reality because of the ego of our elected officials. It's complete nonsense. It makes no sense.

>> It is about ego, Matt, for sure. Yeah.

>> And so, uh, you know, one of the reasons that I that I used EEG, I decided to get into the neuro side when for my for my dissertation, my third trip through grad school was because of the ego. And I So, what I just I you know, my first degree was in AI and robotics. And so, I decided to flip it and go from the biological side and look at the human side of the human robot team. And and what I was in quite sensitive to was this issue that you said that we we really have a hard time admitting our failures, admitting our our incapacities. And it's it's evolutionarily that makes sense, right? Because we have to have we we had to have a biased ego to take on the saber-tooth tiger, right? If we didn't, if we had a well-calibrated ego, sense of ourselves, we we never would have left the cave, right? So, you gotta and so in my form of line of work at in hostage rescue and even in artillery and the military and law enforcement and firefighting, a big ego is part of the job. Otherwise, you wouldn't rush into that that building when everybody else is running out.

>> You can rush in without an ego. You can you can absolutely.

>> Well.

Well, so I'm trying to give you a perspective from the military mind. This is my perspective.

I I get it. I get it. But it's broken. It's like the the ego is broken. It it doesn't it doesn't make any sense. There's no logic to it. You can you can absolutely do all these things without ego. You can rush into a building. You can protect people. You can, but you can be honest and up for and and and and like upfront with them and and and and and you can you can gain more respect if you just say, "I don't know, you know, or or I can't help you there."

Like, I mean, it's one thing to have a saber-tooth tiger and everybody, you know, it's like, "Okay, this is about to uh you know, attack me or whatever." And it's one thing to realize there's nothing I can do about that. It's the same thing that when you realize there's nothing you can do about the UFO phenomenon. If they want to come here, they've traveled light years to get here in craft that we can't understand. Bending space-time, you know, accelerated propulsion faster than the speed of light. Like, sorry guys, I can't protect you. Like, that seems like people could handle that. Like, it just seems like we could handle that reality, that truth.

So, so my book is all about that that we can handle it. We can handle it. But from a military perspective, I'm just trying to give you an insight from the military mind how we looked at it. And I'm trying to I'm trying to help you be compassionate with Harry Truman and I'm trying to help you be compassionate with the people in the program because this is the way they think about it is it's our job to protect everybody else. That's what we signed up for and we we can do it with the vast majority of threats, but that threat we're we're inept. So all we can do is just like we did with Soviet technology, whenever a Soviet jet crashed, we jump on it. We reverse engineer it. We take whatever stuff that they whatever little advantage they had over us and we reverse engineer it and we bring in our stuff. And they did the same with us, right?

So, radar uh started the development was not here. It if if anybody had to jump on it, it was Marconi in Italy in the early 30s. And we have evidence from Dave Grush told us about evidence of a crash in Italy in 1933. So, I'm what what I'm connecting the dots with is a windfall where what what Marconi and and other Italians were working on in Italy was a new sensor. It was not intended as a weapon, never intended to shoot anything down, but it was not passive. It was active. Just now we're starting to have passive radar, but there was active radar and they as they were coming down to study the angry monkeys, they didn't know we had radar and all of a sudden boom, they get hit with this directed energy. Um, and it screws them up and they crash. Now we got something. Now there's hope for us. We're we're way out outgunned. We're way out technologied if if that's even a verb, right? And so there is something we can do about it is we can start diving into this, right? And so uh we, you know, radar propagates, it takes off throughout World War II. And parallel with that, you have foo fighters, you have all of these all of a sudden, here we go. We had the the sightings take off. So, um, so I think radar was the initial impetus and then the nukes came after that and then now you have this spike that that Kevin can just briefed us all on last week or or Saturday. You had this spike in attention. So, it's the rise of our technology, but it's technology that we're reverse engineering from them. And so, this is, you know, if you look at the latest uh Star Trek um franchise, it's all about they tell they lay that out as the reason behind the uh prime directive or general order one was the predecessor, whatever you want to call it.

So in my mind, that's what makes sense and that's why Lou Elizondo is still alive. Dave Grush is still alive. Jay Stratton is still alive. I'm still alive. Jay Barber is still alive. All these folks that have blown the whistle, we are now letting them live because we have started to realize what you just said. A, we can handle it. Robertson panel was was misguided, but they were just doing the best they could with their understanding, especially with religious overtones on top of things and so forth in late 40s. And that the psychology of the 1947 American citizen was, yeah, maybe they couldn't, maybe they couldn't handle it, you know, maybe maybe we're the equivalent of children at that point. And so I use the analogy of if you had a child molester move in across the street to your household, do you tell all your kids that I, you know, I use the example of my my my kids asking me, can I shovel their driveway? Yeah, everybody but except Mr. Smith on the corner. That's a child molester. I don't tell you that. It's because we don't want to live in fear.

Right. Well, maybe you would, but I wouldn't. I would argue that you may be an anomaly, but the vast majority of parents wouldn't tell because we want to keep it so it's important to entertain the way other people think, right? That's what psychology is all about. So so my argument is that in the '40s we were like the parents that wouldn't tell them they can't handle the truth. I I think the vast majority of human not just American society, but human society across the globe. Thanks to the internet and thanks to your efforts and folks like you, we are now much more like you as a parent where we're like, "Yeah, I should tell them."

I want to I Well, a lot's in the delivery, but there's also the core of the message, right? Look, Santa Claus, sorry kids, right? So, we are teaching our kids from three years old when they can first have formative memories to lie. We're creating false realities. We lie to them about the great pumpkin, the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, and so then we expect them to trust us afterwards, right? And so, so that's the way I look at it. And that's that's the way I can connect all the dots is that they the the folks in charge of the cover-up thought we couldn't handle it and now they're begrudgingly admitting that maybe we can for two reasons. Number one, they can now say that we have reverse engineered some of these guys and we can shoot some of them down. Can't get all of them. No police force can interdict every narco-terrorist. You know, to use your scenario that I'm I'm jumping the shark here a little bit saying those were narco-terrorists that came in and killed us. You can't get them all, but we can get a lot of them. And so now there is a deterrent that they some of them are talking to the other ones. Yeah, go hit somebody else, right? Stay away from Bradenton because they got they got, you know, maybe the Iron Dome or what Reagan called SDI. And and there's a lot of, you know, this literature that says SDI was a cover for an anti-UFO weapon, right? That maybe that's where a lot of that money started to come in. And that also connects the dots for me as a DARPA program manager with a $170 million portfolio at one point. Actually, it's about 130 million and then my SAP got canceled and so I chopped that in half. That's another convoluted story. But any case, that also explains to me how you can get financially responsible people to do that to charge the American taxpayer dollar $3,000 for a canteen. Right? Because you know $2,919 of that are going to the black budget to fund this reverse engineering program, right?

It's a good looking canteen though. That is I I love that, man. That is fabulous. And talk about open-mindedness, right? That captures.

Absolutely. Well, let's let's do this. Let's let's pause for a minute. Um, I I want to come back and close out, but I am I'm dying for a bio break here. So, you need to take need to take a quick break. We'll come back and close it out. Uh, you you you had started to go down another path and and introducing another character uh to this conversation. Do you want to maybe continue off with that?

Are you talking about uh John Brandenburg? Yes. Yeah. So, um I'll close it up real quick. Uh what John Brandenburg established is that through the the ratio of xenon 129 to 132 that um as he was doing his analysis of this landing site on Mars he um he saw the spectrographic analysis and saw that that isotope ratio being around uh 2.5. So that is to say that uh the concentration of xenon 132 to 129 was 2 1/2 I think and that was crazily anomalous and he couldn't understand it and there was another guy and so he asked a weapons guy and the guy said, "Oh, somebody nuked him." And then so our eyes got big blah blah blah. Anyway to to to take John's long book short, very compelling evidence. There's only two ways you can get that ratio anywhere in nature. One is a supernova, which would have destroyed our entire solar system. The other is a nuclear weapon. Not any nuclear weapon, a hydrogen bomb, a huge hydrogen bomb. And so he uh backs off from that uh along with the evidence of pyramids, the the very prominent evidence of pyramids that arguably has been covered up by NASA and obfuscated just like the rest of this as well as other artifacts and we talked a little bit about artifacts offline to suggest that uh one super advanced species eliminated another lower level species on Mars many millions of years ago. So, we've only been on this planet anywhere between 10,000 and 50,000 uh years. So, you know, it is it is not just possible but probable that we have had many versions of humanity. There you go. That's so those are the two regions that so also thorium is another really important aspect of this. So, uh, I guess I would just suggest to you and your readers to go read John Brandenburg's thing. But that I bring that up as evidence that they ain't all good guys that that uh there are outlaws in the galactic society just like we got outlaws in our society. And and there is evidence that some of the ETs, the ones wearing the masks, who are removing the implants from us that others have put in, that they don't necessarily agree. It might be like the UN coming in and interdicting our helicopter as we are tagging those polar bears and saying, "You guys knock that off. We are on Happy Bunny. We're not going to do this anymore because we need to share. We need to show our fellow uh Galactic Society members that we can be we we are worthy of being brought in there." So um so so that closes that out. Uh to get to the main objective, my main objective and it's on my website. The name of my website is fearfighter. I want to fight the fear. I don't agree with the fear, but and and the worst way to fight fear is the example I just used is to pretend that there's no reason to, right? I am I am in your camp after playing devil's advocate. I am in your camp about telling your kids that there's a child molester over there. Uh now, at what age? That still remains to be seen, right? And that's why I brought up the age of society. We were we were what in elementary school back when the H.G. Wells thing went about. So maybe we couldn't have handled it then.

But at some point as your kids grow up and leave the nest at 18, you know, society considers them adults, they're going to find out anyway. So maybe we ought to get ahead of it. And I think that's the position. If you take global society, humanity as a maturing human, I kind of think that's where we are. We are these renegade teenagers. We think we know it all now because we have the internet. You can't constrain us anymore. We're gonna find out. Now, we're going to find out some BS along the way with that. We have to discriminate. I think that's where we are as a society. And so, I do not agree with the approach of just keep yourself in a warm cocoon that there's nothing to worry about.

Yeah. I'm I'm I'm I want to take the MMA fighter. I want to take fear by the neck and choke it out. That seems kind of counterintuitive, but that's what I'm trying to do. And I think that there is reason to have fear of galactic criminals. And part of the cover-up, the deepest part of the cover-up is the strong evidence of human mutilation that there are there is evidence that there are some of them that are are not just less than benevolent. I would I would claim that, you know, I have this sort of scale of full benevolence, which would be God, I guess, etc., to full malevolence, malevolence, which is we're to be eradicated just like we do with locusts. You know, we're pests to be eradicated because nothing good can come out of that. Now, we're starting to realize that that's not necessarily true. and we're we're realizing that we're eradicating the insects from this planet and they have a very valuable function. Look at look at honeybees, that sort of thing. So, I use that a lot. So, um to to wrap that up, uh I want to I think we need I think the government needs to share that evidence of the fact that we have been raped on occasion. There have been egregious murders, egregious murders like Hannibal Lecter sorts of things. But I think we can handle it. You know, when when that movie Hannibal Lecter came out, right, or Silence of the Lambs came out, society didn't, you know, collapse uh just like society won't collapse uh from War of the Worlds. But we in order to deal with fear, you got to confront it. You got to quit hiding it. And that's that's why I'm in vigorous agreement with you. They got to our government, all governments got to come clean and just admit it. And and and now what makes it easier for them to do and that's why I think they're heading towards that is it's kind of like my dad showing me where he keeps his .44 Magnum. But he didn't do that until I was an an a relative adult, you know, I guess what, 14, 15, right? You're you're in that pre-teen area. I'm going to be gone in two months two years anyway. You might as well get ahead of it, you know, and and so I think that's where we need to be and that's sort of the focus of my book.

Nice. Nice. Love it. Yeah. I want to get into your book, but right before we close out potentially just so you can you can uh just let us know just a little bit more about it. But I guess in terms of the in terms of DARPA, you worked you worked within DARPA and so if you could just just let people know what that is and then your your thoughts on the phenomenon and your thoughts on disclosure and what's real and what's really happened to people and abductions and and you know the the the craft and and everything else. your your your understanding of the phenomenon in totality. How much of that has come from outside of DARPA, you know, and outside of your military career? Or has any of your knowledge and understanding of the phenomenon come from anything that you've worked on personally specifically within, you know, connections to the program or or whatever, so to speak.

Yeah. So, you know, a lot of this is complicated, kind of like the knot and how to untangle it that I'm going to be very succinct answer to that before I start getting the complicated stuff and say no. I there is nothing that I can directly attribute to this phenomenon. I've never been read in on any programs. Uh but that doesn't mean that I don't have have evidence. Um you know I I've never seen the flames but I have felt the heat and I've smelled a lot of smoke and so I can I can talk about some of that smoke if you if you'd like. Is that what Yeah. So some of the smoke for me is um the training that I didn't receive to become a DARPA program manager. The rest every other uh advanced technology laboratory in the department of defense whether it's the Air Force Research Lab that I served at much later I never thought I would end up there. uh the Army Research Lab, the Navy Research Lab, um the Office of Naval Research, you know, all of these other entities, Air Force Office of of Research, whatever. There are all these other entities within the government that do advanced research and advanced weapons development. But in order to to become a program manager, you have project managers, which is at a low level. You might get a a few million bucks as a project manager to to handle uh because managers handle money primarily and and commanders command people. And I I I always use the well I I don't like the term always, but I usually I like to use the term or the the phrase that that commanders uh pull well managers push, right? So you push money around, but you pull your troops in the direction that you want them to go. So you accept the risk first. I talk a lot about risk. Um Ryan and I were talking about risk as an expression of love. Um so while I was at on my intake into DARPA was resisted by the army. The the army says no we don't you know if we put somebody into an acquisition a research or development position. They have to go to a six-month course to learn, you know, how to select contracts, what you can and cannot commit the United States government to pay for. There's all this there's a lot of this bureaucracy and regulations and so forth. And so I kind of complained to my boss when I first got there, hey sir, I you know, I'm all about taking over this robotics program, but you know, I don't I I'm a I'm a kind of a combat guy, right? That's that's my background. I don't know about who's warranted as a contracts officer or any of the rest of that. Uh don't worry about it. This is an object on on the job training. Just get at it. All right. So, you dive it is literally you're throwing me into the water and I got to figure out how to keep my head above the water. And that is very very unique. There is no other organization anywhere at least during the Cold War that did that. You had this onerous training that you had to go up. So that was a that was a data point that is smoke. And then uh shortly after that I picked up a book that I had started reading called The Day After Roswell written by Philip J. Corso that you may be familiar with.

I'm familiar with the book. Yeah, it's fantastic. And so I started rereading it and it it made me wonder, you know, where did Corso's nook file go? you know, he he ended up, you know, basically taking that stuff and seeding it throughout all these defense contractors. And then I I had my first seedling program approved. So at DARPA during the, you know, this is the Cold War 90s, um we we would ask for and you had to compete for it. You had to give a compelling um reason for it. And it was the equivalent of internal research and development funding that each office had. So they would dole that out at at about 250 million bucks quarter or 250,000. So you get a quarter of a million here and there for a research project. Usually it's about 100 million or or or 100,000. So it's just and the idea is you're going to grow that into a full program. So it's to explore. And then I'm like holy crap. Here's another data point because Corso talked about distributing this stuff at seedlings, right? So, two data points. Uh, and then I made the mistake uh of bringing a copy of that book to a Halloween party and I dressed up in camouflage. No, it wasn't a Halloween party. It was a St. Patrick's Day party. But I treated it like Halloween. So, I put on all my man makeup, right? my camouflage and you know I was always dressed in civilian clothes at DARPA. Rarely did I ever put on a uniform. Um but this time I put on my combat uniform, right? And so I show up and everybody got a chuckle of it. And then uh there was there was quite this is was in the days when you could still get away with some liquor in the work environment then. And so I got hammered. I ended up sleeping in my office that night. Uh but I brought that book in and that's when I first ran headlong into scientism. Now there are good scientists that are still guilty of scientism but that came out big time and I was surprised at the vigor with which they dismissed it all. But I I I realized, you know, after I started the contracts were awarded and so forth, I didn't have to go through the federal acquisition regulation, the FAR, everybody else did. DARPA had an exception to the FAR, and we used it, and we were way more agile, and so I could cancel a contract left and right just at my whim. Now, I had to justify it to my boss. Uh, and and depending on the magnitude, if it was a I think it was like 10 million, if it was a $10 million uh project, then he would have to get the directors, you know, that, you know, the escalation. So I had this enormous agility to hire and fire and do whatever I wanted pretty much that nobody at a lieutenant colonel level in any of the other research areas had anywhere close to. It was a level of responsibility that was was unheard of and that's why a lot of those organizations hated DARPA and that's why it was a career killer for a lot of DARPA program managers just like special forces in the early days. It was not a career-enhancing field because everybody was jealous of SF because they had all the attention blah blah blah the Gabriel teams that JFK had and so forth. So again, a lot of smoke there uh but no flames. I did have a special access program uh that I really really needed because I I had really stepped on it. I I told a joke without it being approved by the management chain at a huge conference. DARPA Techch had this conference every year and it really pissed me off. Another bit of smoke. Here's this organization that Eisenhower stood up in response to Sputnik to pursue technological surprise and we're having a conference every year. I'm like, what the hell is this? You know, talk about secrecy, right? If we're supposed to get a technological advantage over all of our adversaries and we're we're not classifying any of this, we're just broadcasting. It's kind of like in the commercial world, right? If you are, you're just going to give you're not going to patent anything. You're just going to now utopia. That's where we want to get to, right? That's for the benefit of all. But at this point, we're we're in a cold war against Russia and we are advertising to Russia. Well, instead of gallium arsenide for the basis of our computer chips, we're going to invest in this. And so I wrote a note to myself, invest in XYZ, right? and send it to Iran, you know, or whatever the the enemy du jour is, right? And so that didn't make sense to me either. Why the hell do we got to do this? And it's and and so all of this when I'm reading Corso's book, I'm like, "Holy crap, that's that's how DARPA got founded." They use Sputnik as an excuse, but but we are going to prevent technological surprise. by reverse engineering this stuff and we're going to do it with no-bid contracts and we're just going to and this is where Lou has come out as part of his rationale to blow the whistle on this because these guys are they are not using a competitive process. They have a big and once you get that edge, you know, once you got the what Corso specifically said was that he gave the angel hair the uh fiber optic to one company, he gave the the the radar absorbed material to another company, Lockheed, whatever. And these guys once they had that and they exploited it, nobody could catch up to them because it would take three or four years of internal research and development to catch up. So it's the antithesis of of free market enterprise. It is the direct contravention to what the United States was formulated on the freedom, you know, and all the rest of that stuff. So So we're using a Soviet Union sort of mentality, no competition, you know, no, we're we're just anointing you to go exploit this. So that's another thing that made me in putting all the pieces to the puzzle together. How could you corrupt a a warranted contracting officer to do that knowing that this is in direct violation of what free market enterprise is all about had to be something big. Again, I think it's the fact of that abductions were not preventable and that some of them ended up as horrific experiences beyond beyond words. Matter of fact, Leonard Stringfield, very, you know, Leonard Stringfield. Yeah. Very well respected. He he published a a uh I think it was like a white paper called the Unspeakables and he talked about these human mutilation cases. So, so anyway, that's that's as much as I uh now I did have a SAP at DARPA and it was canceled. So, I went from hero I went from zero after telling this joke and it was it was hilarious. I thought it was hilarious. But because I didn't get it approved, I was I was on the blacklist bad. And so what dug me out of that blacklist was a video of an octopus that was so well concealed, the diver that took the video, a world-famous god of cephalopod research of anis um natural camouflage within species. As he's diving along and swimming along, this coral comes to life and it becomes an octopus and it freaks everybody out. I turned that video into a $70 million research program to reverse engineer cephalopods uh for camouflage for special forces guys.

So you're reverse engineering aliens as well? We were reverse engineering and and you're probably familiar with that there is a there is a peer-reviewed paper from the UK that claims that that cephalopods did not originate on this planet because of that because the 70% offloading of their so that program disappeared.

And and that made me realize that that's another bit of smoke because I think there was a super black project I had all sorts of clearances, but there was another compartment that was already doing it and and they they probably took that 70 million that I got approved and sent it over to that other guy just like Jay Stratton revealed that happened to him. This other program squashed his and that happened to me back in the year 2000 during the hanging Chads election. So, I thought it was a political thing and then much later, 5 years later, kind of like Jay, I realized I don't think it was political at all. I think there was another compartment.

You mentioned Lou a couple of times and. Yeah. And I'd love to get him on the show at some point, but um you know, what what were your thoughts on the that that image that he released that um that I guess wasn't completely vetted? Yeah, I I go ahead. I mean that after that, of course that people had talked about him as a disinformation guy, you know, and I'm.

Oh, they've been talking about him as disinformation from the get-go. Since day one. Yeah, of course. I mean, he's he's trained in um counterintelligence, of course, but um you know, I just I that that releasing that image definitely got the UFO community on his back again, you know, and and you're trying to screw up this whole, you know, disclosure thing and make the UFO thing look like it's a joke, you know, and um um you know, so I just I you know, I'm I'm I'm um don't have an opinion on it, but I was just curious from your standpoint and knowing Lou, you know, what what you would say about that?

So, um, I chased Lou down, uh, right after. So, I told you the the thing about being at the Air Force Academy, etc. And then I got disgusted and and resigned my position. And on my terminal leave, I went out to uh uh I I had a boat out in San Diego, so I spent a lot of time out there and I'm like, I'm going to I'm going to go out there and finish my robotics book. Um that's still under Dr. View that I told you. And then I went up to TTSA, drove up the coast. Um and I'm I'm just going to I'm going to come in cold because I'm skeptical of this guy. And I'm thinking to myself, wait a minute. All right. So, he's got I know that he had gone into the army from here from Miami um uh where he grew up and I I I knew cuz he had watched every episode of Unidentified um both seasons uh I think eight episodes each season and I was really curious. I was super skeptical because he comes into the army as an enlisted guy. Now he he's he's got a degree or he's they he claims he has a degree. I've never seen it uh in microbiology. And I'm thinking to myself, this is the guy that the Department of Defense is going to put in charge of investigating these crazy UFOs. I don't get that. You can't throw a rock in Washington D.C. without hitting a retired jet jockey, right? And so if it had been David Fravor, I'm all about it. If it had been Ryan Graves, yeah, these guys or Alex Dietrich, all of these folks have enormous experience flying our most advanced aircraft. What the hell is this guy from with microbiology? What the hell is he doing in charge of this? And he was an enlisted guy. You know that that's no offense. I mean, we all look, it's just different jobs. That doesn't mean we're any smarter or better or whatever, but you know, if you're going to start dealing with advanced physics, you probably ought to have an advanced degree or two. And it and I so and I know a lot of these these pilots end up going and getting PhDs in aeronautics, you know, the um the Travis Taylor of the world. If Travis Taylor had been presented as the guy, I'm all about it. Yeah, it makes no sense. I wouldn't have been skeptical. So, an army guy who doesn't fly anything, you know, army aviators fly helicopters and I got a bunch of buddies I awesome guys. So, he doesn't he's not even have a pilot's license. What the hell is going on? So, I figure I'm just going to roll up there, you know, cold call unannounced and and just see how it goes. Cuz I love the messaging and everything it was about. It's clear that he took a big risk to himself and I'd loved to all but I got all these unanswered issues in the back of my head. So I show up, nobody there. Uh well, there were a few people there. Steve Justice was there. Uh Tom DeLonge wasn't on site. And I'm wandering around and and I had heard, you know, it said to the stars academy. So an academy to me I'm expecting an academic sort of building, you know, with a few classrooms, you know, maybe an arboretum or something, you know, maybe a little cafeteria. None of that. It was a music studio that had been converted, you know, for Tom DeLonge's, you know, rock and roll stuff, which is great. Um, which is an interesting connection between him and Jake Barber by the way because Jake Barber is a phenomenal musician talks a little bit about that, but I'll resist that temptation to open that up. So, I go track down Lou. He's not there. He's out filming. And but I meet with I I offer to take these guys to lunch and I buy them lunch so that I can uh ask them what I can do to help them because I love what they're doing. And uh it was it was weird. It turned out to be like an ad hoc job interview because they were they were investing in AI and they're going to bring an AI guy on and they wanted like a a large database AI guy, you know, a data mining kind of guy to throw at all this data that they were getting, not a not a control guy about robots and everything. So, that was a misfit. And I I just went off and and never heard, you know, never followed it up. So, uh, shortly after that, uh, Lou and Chris Mellon resigned from TTSD or TTSA and, you know, I'm shocked like the rest of the world. So, I'm just kind of, you know, still following it up. And then I saw the final episode of Unidentified on the History Channel featuring none other than Mario Woods, Jeff Goodrich, Robert Hastings, Bob Jacobs, Terry Lovelace doesn't appear, which is interesting to me because these are have become my little new brotherhood. And I remember just being furious that after Mario's interview, they brought Susan Clancy in as like the expert on abductions because she wrote so John Mack wrote three books on the abduction phenomenon plus published many papers. Susan Clancy's book is about that big and it was a very lame uh attempt to refute John Mack and it has been trashed throughout both the scientific world and and the rest of the world. And so I'm like what the hell are you guys doing? You don't they you know they put John Mack's picture up kind of like Ryan would do, right? And then they just they they just dismiss him because he's dead now. So they bring her on and they allow her to sort of trash John Mack and to and to categorize Mario's and Jeff's and and Robert's both Robert's um experiences as it's simply a case of sleep paralysis. And I'm like, "You mother, I can't believe you did that." And so I call Lou. I think I got his number from Robert Hastings. We had a couple of chats and and so we were on pretty good terms. Um but on this call, I ripped him a new one. I was like, "What the dude? What are you doing? You are throwing Well, first of all, I had resolved myself after talking to him. He is a brilliant man." And now I get why they put him in charge of this because A, he's an outsider. You don't want an aviator coming into this with all the preconceived notions. So it was a mechanism to get a fresh view on it, which was a great idea. And when once you talk to him, I mean, very sharp uh really and very and he comes across very well. So I've finally resolved that, you know, I'm over that little hump that that's why they would put him in charge of this. Uh, but I can't deny that maybe there's a misinformation component of this because he's very slick about that. But he's just a genuinely good guy. But here's what happened. I call him and I and I'm I'm like and he goes, "Dude, I I can't tell you how much anguish I have over this because I don't have control over the editorial process, right? Just like I don't sitting here. You guys can make me look like an idiot. You don't. You are really good at making knuckleheads look great, right? And and so I I love that about you and this is really and Jesse does the same thing. And so again, my hats off to you as part of that compassionate, you know, science. Uh so I ripped him a new one over Mario. And he goes, "Well, look, first of all, we didn't have content control. Secondly, we have to we had to present a non-biased situation." And I was like, "You didn't?" He goes, "What do you mean?" I go, "It was not non-biased. You gave the prosecution a lawyer and put her on stage and you didn't have a defense lawyer for our guys. There was nobody to defend Mario's status to push back against this ridiculous sleep paralysis claim and you all you did was put John Mack's picture up. So you put our guy in a courtroom without a lawyer." He goes, "All right, I think I get it." Uh, I'll call you right back. And so he hangs up and I'm like, "All right, maybe I was wrong about this guy. Maybe he is a misinformation guy." The next person to call me, Mario Woods. He goes, "Hey, brother, you are not going to believe who just called me." I go, "Yeah, it was Lou Elizondo, wasn't it?" He goes, "What? How'd you know?" I go, "Dude, I just ripped him a new one." And so what Mario what what Lou did immediately, he called Mario before calling me back and he said, "I want to apologize to you on behalf of not just me personally but the entire United States government for how you have been mistreated and I was a part of that and I want to I want to apologize to you directly." And that's the kind of guy Lou Elizondo is. And so anybody that has these suspicions, I am going to offer that up to you. Now, he may still be peddling some stuff uh as part of this, you know, this other approach that we can't handle at all. And so this is what's great about, you know, brothers in arms is we can disagree and still be friends. Wouldn't that be great for our political world to sort of embrace that? So Lou knows that I disagree with this catastrophic disclosure thing. I think it's crap. I think that is a load of bunk that is that is the very stink of the rotten vegetables that he talks about. He talks about a lot about how we got to let this secret out because it it's not like fine wine. It's going to age like vegetables rotting in your fridge. But then he then he and Carl Nell and a couple of my other friends and I love these guys but I vehemently disagree with them that it is way time. You've had 80 years to roll this out the slow way. It you've had 80 years to open the kimono and you're kind of like here just let the rest out or cry out. We are we are pregnant with expectation. And that's why I love Jake Barber's uh quote and I and I've told him I'm going to quote him and steal his phrase where he said, "I don't believe it's going to be uh ontological shock. I believe it's going to be ontological relief." And I think you and I correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's exactly what we're both talking about.

That that it is going to be a relief to society. Yeah. We know we can smell those vegetables.

So, quit trying to close it. There might be a day or two, you know, or a week or two or a year or two or what, you know, a decade even, who knows, where, you know, they they played that that video in New Jersey that you alluded to, the radio broadcast. Yeah. H.G. Wells, War of the Worlds. Yeah. And people are freaking out. And that might happen initially, right? Right. When the news comes out, right when it's disclosed, right when you know that comes out, but then we we rebound. We get over it. we move on. We continue on with life. We figure out how to incorporate that reality into our, you know, whatever we however we need to to incorporate it. But.

That's why I love I I use that that galactic veterinarian say, you know, I talk about abducting my Labrador Retriever. It is painful initially, but it it you eventually end up much better off, right? Because they got to they got to wiggle that leg around to cause the pain to know where the problem is. But then once the procedure is done, once the komodo's open, I think society's going to be much better off.

For sure. For sure. 100%. And we always are when we know what the truth is. But but what what what is disclosure then? I mean disclosure, the word itself is so like like we really need a government official to tell us what's real. I mean, we kind of do so that we agree upon it, but it's so frustrating at the same time, you know, that that like that that that's that that's what it's going to take. And then even when that does occur, you're still going to have people that just, you know, no, it doesn't fit into my belief system. It's not it's not a part of my reality no matter what my president says or because it's a different president from a different party or like, you know, like what is what is that what is that disclosure going to look like? Or maybe an even better question. What is the what does disclosure have to look like in order for it to be accepted globally as a new reality?

You know, I got to tell you, Matt, this is my 25th podcast interview on this subject. I've had a bunch of others on rescue robotics and so forth. Nobody has asked me that question. And I've I've seen them ask other people around the table and so forth. And I really want to chime in, but I want to be respectful and not interrupt people because we do that all the time, right, when we're doing this. And that's another thing I love about your format here. Um, I've got to commiserate with Jake and Dave Grush and Lou to a certain extent uh, with their frustration over our government and their intentional naivety of again, I don't see any evidence. Well, you're not freaking looking for it. And for you to not look for it, that is incompetence and you should be fired for your job if you're not the all the other senators and congressmen that have been ignoring this and haven't done the deep dive in. So this I'm going to I'm going to throw and I never thought I would do this with a congressman or a senator, right? Because of all the there's absolute blatant corruption with people benefiting from from insider trading of the stocks. Why? I still don't understand how our government can't prevent people from buying stock if you're a member of Congress. That is a direct conflict of interest. But I I will resist the temptation to go down that hole and just say that the courage that that those government members on both sides of the of the the schism that we have that's keeps getting wider, the courage that those folks have taken that the the risk that they've taken to their career that is that is blatant courage. And so I want to put them all on a pedestal for it. But for every one of them, there are what a hundred who are voluntarily uh refusing to look into it. And that is that is a mixture of cowardice and incompetence because this is this the the most important thing that we are doing right now without a doubt. Right. And and again, my heads off to you, but I gotta I've gotta I've gotta agree with all the other guys and Jay because Jay, you know, reading between the lines and I don't want to put words in his mouth because he didn't say this directly, but I think he is also frustrated with government and so I don't think disclosure is going to be a government official uh admitting it. I think it's going to be they are going to have their they all governments across the entire globe are going to have their dogs nose rubbed in their own poop. That's the way I think it's going to happen. So I think you know uh this is this is a a worldview that has evolved uh rapidly over the last two or three years especially uh after meeting Jake and everything that's occurred since then. What disclosure looks like to me are multiple species representatives. Uh, you know, nine, 10, maybe 20 of them of a wide variety of different species standing on stages around the globe in every country, every big city as representatives, some in uniform, some without, whatever. And they are all they are suddenly there and all around the globe people can walk up and.

touch them. They they probably have some sort of advanced technology where they can, you know, uh, anticipate, uh, potential violence against them, and the force field will run up, and the, you know, the bullets will stop short or whatever. That's what that's what disclosure looks like to me. I don't think anybody is going to come clean because of the ego issues we already talked about. It is so difficult for for people to admit their mistakes, and our our trend is not going in that direction. Our trend is going in the opposite direction where here in the United States, everybody's blaming somebody else. Look at these the spat that we got between our president and this billionaire right now, you know, and they are looking at us act, we're acting like children on the flipping playground. And it's not just them, you know. Democrats are doing the same thing. Everybody is doing this playground behavior rather than trying to convince them that we're worthy of this and treating each other with respect and d respectful dialogue instead of calling. As soon as you know, my dad told me this one time. He said, "If you ever get in a debate and somebody starts calling you names, you have won the debate because you just got under their they have become so desperate that they can't present a logical counter to what you're saying that they got to resort to that." And we see that all the time now. It's just and it's and it's an it's an act of intellectual cowardice. If you have to resort to calling somebody a name, you're you're conceding the argument because you got nothing to to contribute. That's what disclosure looks like to me.

>> Interesting. Okay. Yeah. Fascinating. Um, yeah, it's like it's a big it's a big step to get to aliens on stage with, you know, with like like and I get that. That's that's I feel like that's like part two or part three or something. It feels like or part five, you know, like part part one feels like we have to show the world population that we have ships and that we have bodies like like the the human biologics like where are those like and let's get them on camera and let's, you know, that'll be the first step to actually say, okay, we have these on camera. Next step would be to put them in a public place, which is guarded of course, where people can come and look at them and say, these are real. We have we have bodies of of non-aterrestrial objects and then to show people the ships if we have if we've been reverse engineering ships, if we have, you know, nine of them at S4, wherever the hell they are now, a Martin or Rathon or whoever whoever's working on them. Like Congress has to get into those locations where we're keeping these ships and where we're keeping, I don't know if it's Congress, I don't know who the hell it is, but somebody within the government has to get in there and be like, "Look, guys, this is we've got to let this out. We've got to tell people that you have this." And and when that decision's made, it can happen very quickly. And then it's just that shock of that shock to the world, that shock to everybody's reality of, okay, this is real. Now, I have to factor this into what my my version of reality. Like, that might take some time for some people. And for some people it'll happen instantaneously and they and they'll get it and they'll be okay with it. For some people there'll be a tremendous amount of resistance and and just, you know, that this isn't real and and and I don't believe these people because it doesn't fit into their reality. It's like the the people that you're talking about uh earlier who are just unwilling to won't go down that rabbit hole, but it doesn't fit it doesn't fit into their reality. Right. And so that's why people >> Well, I don't believe it. You know, I typically like to be very optimistic and not cold pour cold water on it, but I don't think that's going to happen.

>> Okay.

>> I, you know, I was in a meeting with with Lou and and Carl Nell,

>> showing show showing craft and showing beings you don't think will happen.

>> No.

>> Okay.

>> Nope. I don't think any of that's going to happen.

>> How does disclosure happen without that?

>> Well, so, uh, I was in a meeting with these guys and they kept arguing about how we have to avoid catastrophic disclosure. And again, What is catastrophic disclosure?

>> Catastrophic disclosure is HG Wells, you come out and and society collapses. We we we, you know, banks close, the stock market collapses because nobody respects our government because there's a higher power. Nobody respects the Pope anymore because there's a higher power than even our religions. Nobody respects uh the, you know, the the Maharaj that all religions collapse because we realize that there's somebody's out there. Okay. So so so to push back against that, the the Vatican has already come out in 2008 and said they have already gotten ahead of this. The the Vatican astronomer, I think his his name was Father Nunees, that broadcast to the world on behalf of the Pope that the Catholic Church no longer sees any, I shouldn't even say no longer does not see any conflict between belief in Christ and belief in God and belief in other extraterrestrials and and what takes this off the table every time I get into this arguments, you know, some of my best buddies are like, you know, if if somehow across the dinner table or over beers, it comes up or or we're watching, you know, we're at a we're at a sports bar and Lou Alzando comes up on the screen or or Chris Melon or whatever and it comes up like, "Hey, bro, I'm a god guy." I'm like, "Yeah." So, it's not binary, bro. I'm a god guy, too.

>> I can identify with multiple things.

>> Yeah. Exactly. So, I don't agree with that. And here's the other thing. I'm in a little bit of a unique position having been at three huge disasters that had the potential to cause societal collapse. You had Timothy McVey blow up blow up the the Murrah building, right? Domestic terrorism. Society didn't collapse. Oklahoma City didn't collapse. It it congealed around that. You you had to turn volunteers away. Same thing at the World Trade Center. I was there that night. Same thing. It wasn't a collapse. It was a call to to unity. Same thing after Hurricane Katrina. I brought robots into to New Orleans. Couple of days after that, I saw the same thing. In every one of those scenarios, you had to turn the volunteers away. There were a few anomalies. The chief of police in New Orleans went home to take care of his own family, which is in direct violation of his oath. Right? If everybody, you know, I and I and I know we say this a lot, family first. Well, if everybody treated their family first, who's putting out the fire, right? Who's taking down the narot terrorists? So there's got to be a subset of society that puts families second in the middle of an emergency situation.

>> But what is the what is the fear like? What does societal collapse really look like? I mean society doesn't collapse until the power grid is turned off. That's when there's no more society.

>> I agree. That's my whole point.

>> Right. So so there's going to be some rioting. Maybe there's going to be some people freaking out. There's going to people some people whose worldviews are shaken. It's like who cares? Like we get over that. We can deal with that. Like I it's it's that's 10 minutes.

>> So I use I use your example of that. There have been countless disasters just like that, not just the ones that I've been personally involved in, but countless other situations that that we are a resilient species. So I push back against that. So, in this meeting with Carl and Moon and some some other folks from the back of the room and and it was kind of fancy and, you know, it was wonderful and and and the guy that hosted it was a wonderful guy. I I blurted out right in the middle of them talking about this catastrophic disclosure notion, Boston Tea Party. I I said we need a Boston Tea Party. And that's my version of the Boston Tea Party. They, the NHI, cause disclosure. They personally put themselves at risk all over the planet on TV all over the world. And there's going to be people that are going to say that's AI generated nonsense to to make us submit, right? But they don't. They just expose themselves as a means to to spark this unity that we realized on 9/11. Wow, there's something bigger than me here that that, you know. So, and there's there in in that same context I'm going to mention false flag operations because false flag operations are real. I think somebody's going to claim that this presence of all these different species is a false flag operation. But guess what? When when they shut down all of our military activity after that for, I don't know, 30, 40, 60 days, then pretty soon that starts to die out, right? It takes a while, like you said, for folks to load up, to to to realize, to adapt, to come to grips with it. And I've postulated this already, you know, the the nuclear incursions that Bob Sal has heroically revealed and Hastings and all the folks that that Bob Hast Robert Hastings has brought into the limelight. Um, those are just the the overt ones. And in every one of those cases, as we talked about, as Mario described, you know, that the big sphere walnut looking thing, you know, beaming down into the to the LF, the launch facility. That's all very overt with what is arguably a very strong message. Quit playing with matchsticks. But how do we know that they didn't covertly with the invisible guys like the invisible guys in Vegas, you know, shut them all down? How do I I many times I discussed with with some of my colleagues in the nuclear industry when I was in it. Couldn't wait to get out of it by the way because of all the there's so much negativity and that's that's why I ended up going into hostage rescue by way of special forces. But anyway, how do we really know that they work? You know, we have two detonations on on record during wartime. We have multiple tests, but after that last test, and I don't even know when the the last test was, do can Ryan look that up for us when I don't know. But how did I I'm not sure that any of that stuff works, you know, after Salis talks about how how quickly every one of those 10 missiles in his flight were shut down. And then we have the same exact thing happening in Russia in both directions. They shut them down and they they spin them up without any human getting ready to launch it. So I think that was a dual message. It was a dual message of you're playing with matchsticks, not just with nukes, but with AI. If you turn all this stuff over to automation, that automation can launch that stuff before you can interdict. So that was a dual message and there's a much bigger overlap of the AI UAP areas that we can get into maybe after after my book comes out because that's what another reason why I need to get my robot book out first because it builds a case against autonomous weaponry and and the dark side of AI for that. So, so that's why I think the NHI have probably already shut down all of our nukes. So, after this, after they're exposed and you get, you know, you're going to get the trolls saying, "Don't don't go for it. Don't believe it. It's a false flag." Well, why would they do a false flag all over the entire globe? That's why a global presence is critical. And and secondly, okay, after six months and nobody has nobody has launched a war against each other, not with nukes anyway, and there's spats, right? And so that like you said, there's going to be turmoil and unrest and everything, but as long as the lights are still on and as long as everybody can still feed themselves, there's going to be some disruption. But I don't think it's going to be the end of humanity. I don't think we're going to self-destruct on that, especially if they stick around for a while and make sure that the kids play nice in the playground. I think that's how it's going to go and I don't think I don't think it's going to be too long. I think we are living in interesting times and I am I am counting my lucky stars than I'm alive at this point on this planet at this time because it is an absolutely fascinating study of behavior as a behavioral scientist. I couldn't ask for a better, you know, experiment to be involved in, you know.

>> right? Yeah. For sure. For sure. Yeah. It's a great time to live. It's a great time to be here. There's so many fascinating things. At the same time, there's a lot that's that could be coming at us here in the in the near future that, uh, you know, people that, uh, could be, um, also a bit terrifying for people as well.

>> Yeah. But the statistics speak for themselves. Like we talked about already, 99% of violent crime by 1%. That means 99% of us aren't doing murderous things.

>> I'm not packing. You know, you like you said already, you don't need to go buy an assault gun at Walmart to walk across the street, not in the US, you know, not in the vast majority of this planet. Now, some places less secure than others, but the vast majority of us, we don't. It fear is the enemy. Resist that urge to go run down to Walmart and get that freaking machine gun. You don't need it. The vast majority of us vast majority of us are good folks and and the few, you know, um, misguided people in uniform that do have um that do have and misuse deadly force. Try to put yourself in their shoes. That's all I can ask. You know, that you got to with it. You know, compassion goes both ways. It's not just from law enforcement and military down. It's from us up towards them.

>> Well, hey man, I've I've thoroughly enjoyed our conversation. It's super enlightening. It's definitely really cool to get to know you and uh Mario spoke super highly of you and I see why he spoke so highly of me. Same back at you, brother. Yeah. No, I appreciate it very much. And uh would love to have you back on at some point. I know you got some books coming on. Uh sure. you know, but um yeah, I think it could be a good future conversation as well that we could continue, you know.

>> Absolutely. And thank you for your insight. Extremely valuable. Good.

>> and we need more of that across the world. This is how innovation happens, right? Is exchange, not compartments.

>> Right. Right. And people, I think, are starting to get that. people get that and that, you know, they're not going to the the mainstream news so much anymore as they are independent creators that are actually exploring ideas like this, you know.

>> and that's what makes what you do so important.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Please keep doing it.

>> Oh, yeah. No, I'm not stopping. Yeah. No, I'm I'm having the best time of my life. It's been it's been really cool.

>> Wonderful.

>> So, um, Yeah. But, uh, yeah. Any any other kind of closing thoughts for you?

>> No, I think I've been flapping my gums enough. Thank you for the freedom to do that.

>> No doubt. No doubt. No, I appreciate it. Great time. It's great to get to know you and uh Thank you, Ryan. Appreciate it.

>> Thank you, Ryan. That was magical. Yep.

>> Wonderful.

>> Good stuff.