NASA Whistleblower: “We Systematically Suppress UFO Data!”

Emers yourself in herbal essences new Moroccan organ oil elixir infused with pure organ oil just one drop delivers up to 100 hours of hair nourishment with the indulgence scent of a Moroccan garden. Herbal essences new Moroccan organ oil elixir spark quality hair repair without the price tag. Try it now. Herbal essences. Narish McMurray The freshman usevests is non-conditioning shampoo. They're not coming in from another starsace to marry other Tuesday. They're present here. There are handfuls of people doing weird things here and there. Those people are all over the place. Some of them I knew when I was at NASA have come to talk to me and said, oh yeah, I was interested. I know something about this with that. Have you met anybody working on the crafts themselves? I've met people whose claim to have worked on them or seen them at the same time. So yeah. So the question I've had is why when we had the NASA commission, why was there no section on what astronauts have seen in space? I talked to Alan Bean. He was from Apollo 12. He said that when he went up to Skylab, they actually photographed a red flashing light. Nobody puts lights on satellites. First, you don't need them. And second, it's more white. Also, satellites back then weren't doing proximity operations. They were just falling in the warbots. They weren't changing orbits. They weren't changing orbits. They actually had a craft pull up alongside of them. Whoa! After orbit. And the cosmonaut drew a picture of the object. The story must grave a shuttle pilot also talked about seeing things like snakes. Wow! Things writhing around in space. Really? Yeah. This is a phenomena that people have seen for centuries. This case is going back to the 1800s. Factical evidence. All the photos of light coming out of the water, hovering next to the ship following the ship and then taking off into the clouds. And that's why I think there's probably bases underwater to your best bet. This message is sponsored by my favorite headphones, Raycon. One thing we talk about a lot on this channel is one's awareness, what you notice, what you miss, and how technology quietly shapes your perception. Most earbuds completely shut you off from your surroundings. That's fine sometimes. But when you're moving through the world, when you're on a run or you're at the gym, I personally don't want to be cut off from reality. That's why I've been using these Raycon essential open earbuds. They sit just outside the ear canal so you get clear audio, but you still hear what's happening around you. You're fully aware. You're not in a day's out of it or cut off from reality. I use them when I'm walking, working, or exploring the city of Austin. They're super lightweight, they stay in place, and I don't feel like I need to constantly take them out to reorient myself. Battery life for me is the biggest thing. I get 36 hours with the charging case, so I barely have to charge them and they connect to multiple devices without friction. Also, Raycon keeps them super affordable by skipping the celebrity market. The essential open earbuds are here to help you crush your New Year's goals. Go to buyraycon.com slash Jesse Michaels open. That's J-E-S-S-E-M-I-C-H-E-L-S open to get 20% off site wide. Again, that's J-E-S-S-E-M-I-C-H-E-L-S no A in Michaels open OPEN to get 20% off site wide. Thanks so much to Raycon for sponsoring this episode and now back to the show. Kevin Knuth, this is an absolute honor and it's been a long time coming. You're a physicist at the University of Albany, and to me, you are one of the few people who speaks about UFOs in a really concrete, hard-headed way. I think you're one of the few people I know who are studying how these crafts actually fly, how to detect them, and so I'm really excited to have you. Thank you so much for having me. That's very exciting. Oh, no, it's an absolute honor. You have a NASA background as well. I want to know how you got into UFOs to begin with because a lot of people with your credentials and background, I think UFOs are a joke. Right, yeah. I've always been interested in UFOs. I was 12 when Star Wars came out in 1977. During that time, I mean, it was the same year closing counters that the third kind came out. It was another movie studios response to Star Wars that came out in December. I didn't like it as much because there weren't spaceships shooting each other with lasers. It was a 12-year-old that wasn't that exciting. But at the same time, there were TV shows in search of with Leonard Emoj and they would cover UFO topics. That was on every night at 630 when we were eating dinner. So I watched that all the time. So I've always been interested in them. I went to graduate school in 1988. I'm Lyck Rupp and Wisconsin and I moved out to Montana to go to graduate school at Montana State University in Bozeman. And our first week or two there, I just moved there and there was a cattle mutilation. Two cows were killed and surgically manipulated. I don't have a good word for what happened. The blood was drained. The sensory organs removed, the genitals removed. One of them had like a core sample. It had a cylindrical hole punched through it. It was bizarre. I mean really bizarre. And the people on the news were crazed about this. Oh my God, these two cows on this ranch were killed. And there were UFO reports in the county that night, hundreds of reports. And so the two stories were that it was either aliens or Satanists. And everybody's all got their undies and a bundle over this. Right. So we're at the physics department and some of us grad students are talking about this. And especially the new graduate students, we've all just moved there into a PhD program. So you're looking down the barrel of spending five or six years of your life at this place. And we want what kind of place did we just move to where cows are murdered this way. Right. This really bizarre. So we're discussing this in the hallway. And it was this heated discussion. And I remember shouting at one point, I don't know why aliens would do it. And I don't know how Satanists would do it. I mean, it was that level of stupid discussion right there. That students would have. And we were quite loud and disturbed one of the professors down the hall. And he came out from his office to find out what we're talking about. He comes down the hall and we tell him, and I don't know if he was trying to make us feel better because it was the opposite. But he said, oh, yeah, yeah, this happens from time to time and don't investigate it. And they won't figure anything out. And then everybody will just forget about until it happens again. And we're just like, what? This even crazier than what we're already talking about. And then he adds and he goes, but you know what's really strange. There are he goes, I have friends who work up at Mom's from Air Force Base. And they have problems with UFOs flying over the nuclear missile sites and shutting down nuclear missiles. And you know, we listened politely and when he walked away, we laughed our asses off. Because this was the, at the time, it was the silliest thing I thought I'd ever heard. I mean, UFOs are shutting down nuclear missiles. And this isn't, everybody's not on red alert. I mean, our entire military should be mobilized for something like that, right? Well, we just didn't believe it. We thought this was just silly. And he became kind of a running joke. Anytime something weird would happen at, you know, at school or somebody's telling a story, oh, this weird thing happened to me. Someone would invariably interject, but you know what's really strange. UFOs are shutting down nuclear missiles up in Mom's from Air Force Base. We were all laugh right. And so that was the running joke for a whole year. And so now time passes. And that was September of 1988. And he had said that it was ongoing. He said they are doing this presently, right? And so now fast forward to, it was about 2015. So it's a couple years before the New York Times article. And I was teaching an astronomy class. And we got to the point we were talking about possibility of life elsewhere. And some of the students wanted me to comment on UFOs. I'm like, well, I don't know anything about UFOs. And it's not certainly not science. This is an astronomy class. So I was just poking around on the internet. Is there anything reasonable I can actually say other than the Drake equation and the Fermi paradox, right? The two typical things that scientists might talk about. And I was just poking around at like 2 a.m. and I stumbled on Robert Hastings news conference from like 2010, where he had 6 people on from the Air Force, who varies Air Force positions. The first one was Robert Salis. Talking about UFOs shutting down nuclear missiles at Monster Mara Force Base. And I was like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. I heard about this in grad school. That was a joke, right? And then I'm listening to this and like, that's not a joke. Between September of 1966 and March of 1967, we lost 30 missiles to UFO activity. It's wild. Yeah. 30. 30. That's pretty insane. Now, now what do you do? He's talking about events from 1966. And I heard about it in 1988. And the professor that told me in 1988 about this was said that it is happening. So this has been going on for 20 years. And no one's paying any attention to this. I mean, the army is still not, the military is still not mobilized. And worrying about this. And I thought, there is something really wrong here. And I spent some time thinking about it. I was up late that night teaching class early. I didn't barely slept. But I'm thinking about it. And I thought, I mean, it's either nonsense. And the people who are in charge of our nuclear missiles are people we shouldn't be trusting with anything. Or this is actually real, which makes more sense considering the amount of time that's involved, 20-year time span. And nobody's reacting to it. Maybe because they all think it's nonsense. And I thought, this is extremely dangerous. We're going to get blindsided by something if we're not careful. And I thought, somebody ought to look into this. And I thought, I'm going to start looking into this UFO business. What's all, what is here? How real is this? How possible is this? And so that's when I started looking into it. And I had actually given a talk in our department, like a year later, after I looked into it, somewhat I thought, this is actually really interesting. So I gave a talk in our physics department about it, just an informal talk. And the room was packed. I mean, I don't know how many people can actually sit in that room, but it was well over the fire limit right. We had people sitting cross-legged right up to the front screen. And the talk went on. There were so many questions. A talk with for almost three hours. And most people just stayed for it, because everybody was really interested. And I thought, yeah, see, this is interesting. I mean, this is an interesting problem here. And it's not that simple. And then of course, a year after that, then your time's article comes out. And I thought, well, somebody has to be somebody ought to study this. And we thought, well, shoot, you just do it. Yeah. I should do it. And the nuclear link, I could see that being the perfect gateway for rigorous scientists like yourself, because I think science and the conventional sense has to be repeatable. Every time you drop this pen, it needs to fall in sort of the same way for it to be science. Right. And so I think the nuclear link is a version of that with UFOs, where UFOs seem to show up across nuclear bases, not only in the US, but all over the world. And that's one thing that worried me. Once I looked into it, I thought, well, this is happening in the Soviet Union. This is happening in France. This is happening in England. We were talking before the show. I'm wearing my American Alchemy, Japan shirt, which is paying homage to Lino, which is a town next to their Fukushima prefecture, where they have their famous for their nuclear spill in 2011. They have their civilian energy grid. And UFOs were reported to show up there. They have a whole museum dedicated to UFOs. Right. Vice to the documentary on them in 2022. And it's the town in Japan that's obsessed with UFOs. And it's right next to this nuclear door. There was a Netflix encounter episode, I think episode four focused on that as well. And Malmstrom, where you mentioned, that is the site of tons and tons of activity. You have Bob Salis, obviously, and 67. But before that, you had this echo flight incident. I think it was like 10 days before or something. When it was March 16th, when it was March 24th, then you have John Mills, this retired missile technician in the early 90s, seeing a bunch of UFOs there. You even have an interview with this guy, Chris Langen, which say what you will about the guy says he has the highest IQ in the world. He seems a little cocky to me. But he's just offhand. He's saying he's seen UFOs and he's seen them around Malmstrom Air Force Base. On the UFO thing, I was working for the Forest Service not too far from Malmstrom Air Force Base. One day I was up there in a Forest Service pickup truck at a certain campground. And I was there and suddenly I looked up and I said, suddenly it was just in the scouts. I became aware that it was up there and I looked up. It was this huge, spheroidal, elliptical, not a perfect spheroid, like a saucer that was turned partially on its side. Right. And so it's this recurring trope from all these uncorrelated sources. Robert Hastings, who wrote the book, UFOs and Nukes, got into this whole subject because his father was actually working at Malmstrom Base. And he was learning radar theory from one of the radar operators there, Bob Hastings was while he was a janitor. He was in high school. And the radar operator was like, we're tracking some of these unknowns. You should take a look. And then that was it for him. He was hooked and he dedicated his life to studying this stuff. That's amazing. Yeah. Yeah, it's cool. It was maybe three years ago we were down in Louisiana visiting my in-laws for Mardi Gras. And so we're, this February and we're outside grilling right. And I was grilling with my wife's uncle Matt. And he had his Air Force cap on. And I spotted Malmstrom Air Force Base on his Air Force cap. And I was like, Uncle Matt, you were there. You were in the Air Force and you were at Malmstrom. You were at Malmstrom. And he goes, yeah, I was stationed at Malmstrom. I went, where are you there? And he goes, like 1971 through 74 or something like that. And early 70s. And I said, did you ever hear anything about UFO incursions at nuclear weapons sites? He goes, oh, that had happened all the time. These things would come in and shut down the nuclear weapons. And he was going on and on about this. And I was like, it's common knowledge. Yep. Right. And how is it Congress is just finding out about this, right? And my wife's uncle Matt has known this in 1971. This is something to worry about, right? And I was so excited. I told him, okay, can you tell my wife this because I'm tired of being the only crazy person. Yeah. But it was his response with saying, oh, yeah, this happened all the time. And like, it's nothing, right? So on the one hand, you have UFOs showing up around our most important assets or nuclear assets with people who are on the PRP program who literally, like, they have to report if they're on, I'd be profan. These are people who work at the nuclear basis. So they're the picture of mental health and of sound mind. And they all see tick-tax saucers orbs, you know, shutting down nukes. Right. There's that. And then there's the idea that the US government might have saucers and hangers. Right. Do you think, it's clear that this is happening, the nuclear thing. Yeah, absolutely clear. Do you think the US government has saucers and hangers? And we have an active reverse engineering program for nuts and bolts, physical craft. I think that's probably true. I've heard this from enough people who've done that kind of work for years now. That's probably the case. Have you met anybody working on the crafts themselves? I've met people whose claim to have worked on them or seen them. Really? So yeah. Anybody that you can mention? No, I should see that. Okay. These are whispers that you get every now and again. Did you find them believable, though? Yeah, entirely believable. Really? No. You didn't sense any sort of deception. No. No. One of the most believable things I've heard is, well, have you been able to figure anything out? No, we don't know. We don't know what anything is or how anything works. Yes. That was my most. And I was like, right, that makes sense. Interesting. Yeah. So it's like giving an iPhone to a just caveman or something. Something like that. Interesting. It seems like any technology they've got from it are just surface level type stuff. Oh, this is some interesting material. What's it made of? That level. If I were on the inside, I would probably want somebody like you working on this sort of thing. I would like to be working on this, but I'm not black work. I'd love to work on this in the open. Have you ever been contacted to do black work? I had the opportunity to have clearance when I worked at NASA, but I turned it down. Because you've always wanted to do things in an open, transparent way. And I'm a scientist and I want to, and this, and one of the benefits of being a scientist is we share information. We work together, we cooperate. Do you think that's, and yeah, there's some competition, but there's a lot of collaboration as well. So, and that's very healthy. Do you think that's part of what's held back the legacy of a phone program? If it's held back at all, it's because you've got ten people closeted working on one thing. And they don't get extra information that you might need to get interesting ideas. The more people you have working on a problem, the more diversity of ideas you're going to get. Do you think that there are certain scientific things that you can't work on in the kind of civil side open world of science without receiving backlash? A UFO's is one of them. Yeah. There was some backlash when we started working on UFO's. You mentioned on Danny Jones that you've had various friends work on anti-gravity and receive sort of backlash. You get different threats and things like that, yeah, too. That's scary. That's very strange, yeah. What do you think that is with the anti-gravity stuff? I really have no idea. You can jump to conclusions and say, well, because somebody doesn't want other people discovering things that they know about and have control over. I mean, you can jump to that conclusion, but I don't actually know what the situation is. It's hard to tell. Doesn't that feel like the base case conclusion? If somebody's getting threatened over discovering a thing, it would seem like there'd be some group on the inside that would be tracking people trying to discover a thing that they're already aware of. That seems like the awkums are easy explanation. Yeah, I mean, it leads to a whole sets of conspiracy theories, right? And it's difficult. Yeah. Yeah, I've done deep dives on the sky like Towns and Brown, who I'm really fascinated with. And I talk about them probably too much for the audience always laughs when I talk. But I find him to be really interesting because I do think he made breakthroughs in the world of gravity at this sort of byfield brown effect, which is, I think a very simple experiment. Have you looked into that at all? Or I haven't looked into that much at all. You've limited time. That's the problem. I've got stacks of books I want to read and things I want to look at. Yeah. It's just you have to pick and choose. And I think that's one reason why you don't have academics in the past looking into UFOs because why spend time on something that's probably nonsensical when you can be spending time on something that is probably going to pay off. And I think that's the calculation most people are doing. And how do you accept at this point? I don't think it's nonsensical. So the pay off is huge. Right. How do you think UFOs fly? I have no idea. They're very strange in a lot of ways. First, how many ways are they strange? Right. And the speeds and accelerations are crazy. Right. The accelerations, nobody's going to survive that. So the equipment doesn't go into survive it. So in the Nimitz case, we estimated the acceleration of the tick-tack dropping from 28,000 feet to sea level and 0.75 seconds or so. 0.78 seconds. It's about 5,000 Gs of acceleration minimum. Right. 5,000 Gs is insane. And the new F-35 fighter jets, the wings rip off at 13 Gs. You know, most missile frames can't handle more than a missile, can't maneuver at more than about 35 Gs. And the frame isn't going to survive more than 60 Gs. And now you've got this tick-tack thing accelerating at 5,000 Gs. That's not possible. The equipment won't survive. So now this leads you to think the only solution says you've got to be playing with inertia somehow. You've got to be playing with gravity somehow. And so that leads you down the path of general relativity and warp drive in that way of thinking. Do you have a propulsion modality that you like best when it comes to UFOs? No, I don't. Exactly. But then the other problem is power. If you look at energies and power involved, the amount of power for that tick-tack dropping is something like, what was it? It was 1,100 GW of power. You know, I remember back to the future with Doc Brown, 2.1 GW, like that's crazy or something. This thing was 1,100 GW. Right. I mean, this is. And he had Mr. Fusion, which is a new fusion machine. That's right. Yeah. So this is more power. The tick-tack maneuver took more power than the total nuclear power output of the United States. Wow. Wow. And that's in that tick-tack in the size of an F18. I mean, that's crazy. The world moves fast. You work day, even faster, pitching products, drafting reports, analyzing data. Microsoft 365 co-pilot is your AI assistant for work. Built into Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and other Microsoft 365 apps you use, helping you quickly write, analyze, create, and summarize. So you can cut through clutter and clear path to your best work. Learn more at Microsoft.com slash M365 co-pilot. And so now, how do you, how do you get your head around that? So let's say they can deal with that kind of power. For some reason, they have access to that much energy. Equipment is never 100% efficient. So 1% inefficiency. So in most of the things we make are like 20% efficient at best, right? So let's say they're really good at this. They can get to 99% efficiency. That means you've got a 1% inefficiency. 1% of 1000 gigawatts is like 11 gigawatts of power. That means 11 gigawatts of power is going into waste heat. The thing went melt. So now what's happening? Are they really more efficient than 99% or is, or we have something wrong? Are we looking at this the wrong way maybe? Maybe they're not actually moving in such a way that takes that much power. Do you have any theories? I don't exactly. Warp drive is certainly on the table. But that too is messy because we don't know enough about how, you know, since there has been theoretical work done on warp bubbles, we don't really know how this would interact with matter. So what does a warp bubble do in an atmosphere? We don't, nobody's, I don't think it's looked into that. So these things are strange because they don't appear to be interacting with the atmosphere at all. There's no sonic boom, there's no fireball. There's no sound in many cases. The underwater UFOs, you've even got more and you should, you should be have much more friction there. These things are moving the one with the, the, the New Zealand frigate in 1980s. The HMNCS Southland had a 800 foot long USO following it. And it was about two kilometers behind the ship and actually closed that distance in 25 seconds and went under the ship and drained all the batteries, drained all the power from the ship. And you've got a clear, the width of this thing was about 150 feet in diameter. This cylindrical shaped object, 800 feet long. So it's, so it's what is that? That's 30% longer than the largest Russian sub to be the Typhoon class subs, right? So it's 30% bigger than a Typhoon class sub. The thing closes two kilometers in 25 seconds. This gives you an excel, a crazy acceleration, right, underwater. The top speed is something like 3,500 miles an hour. And you've got to clear a 150 foot diameter, cylinder, two kilometer long cylinder of water out of the way to move this thing in 25 seconds. A water had to go somewhere, water is not compressible. So you would have had waves coming up that did not happen. So the thing is acting like it's not even interacting with the water. Yet we have sonar records from this, which mean sonar works by water molecules banging on things, right, and bouncing off. So the water molecules are bouncing off this thing, but it's not interacting with the water all at the same time. How this works? I have no explanation for this. But that's the data. Now, now what do you do? Interesting. It's a really perplexing. These things are really not simple. Do you think you've ever studied UFO parts? My colleague, Matthew Shadalgas, has been working on studying debris from purported crashes. Really? Yeah, he has a new technique for detecting isotopes using neutron activation. So he's developed this technique and he's been working on this furiously for the last couple months. How is that different than mass spec? Mass spec, basically, you typically dissolve the material in nitric acid and then you spray it into a... some electric plates that basically electrify it, ionize it, and then you shoot it into a magnetic field that... a constant magnetic field, a thing will move in a circle. And the radius of the circle depends on the mass, so then it hits a screen depending on where the mass is, changes where it hits the screen. So you can measure the mass of the isotopes inside that spray. And to back up for the audience, isotope differences are neutron differences in various elements. And if you were to find some isotope ratios in a material that don't occur naturally on Earth and don't pattern match to asteroids, that would be this really exciting, you know, possible smoking gun that the thing is actually UFO. Right, exactly. Well said. Yeah, that's exactly it. And so, Matthew's technique is different. He basically irradiates the material with neutrons, with a neutron source, and basically creates heavier isotopes with these extra neutrons. And then he watches them decay back into the states that they were in before. So he can tell what the isotopes he created were, and then he can infer what they were originally from that. And it's non-destructive because they did decay back to where they were, and pretty quickly. And you're not doing it to most of the material. You're only, you know, writing thousands of these atoms rather than, yes, compared to Avogadro's number for the whole single. So amazing. I mean, Gary Nolan is also doing this at Stanford. He's using mass spec, but it's cool to see that there's, you know, there are updates even on his work as far as this material analysis. The UFO legacy program has to be keeping tabs on what you guys are doing. That would be my guess, right? Right, right. Like they, you'd want some sort of like civilian, like the smartest like, you know, I know there's, there's interest in Matthew's work. He's had contact with government people. Okay. We can't really talk about those details, but. Yeah, the parts like arts parts, the parts that some of them were arts parts. He's had other ones too. He's had material from Ukraine and Israel and all over. Interesting. Yeah, arts parts. It's this rumor that art bell, right? Eventually ended up in possession of this material that I think was from the, was it from the Roswell? Some of it's from Roswell, yeah. And the material in art bell, obviously, famous coast to coast, you know, amazing, you know, radio show host that reached, you know, 10 to 15 million people every night. Super into UFOs. And it's so interesting that he received these pieces because he, you know, who's so passionate about, about this stuff. I believe one of the pieces is magnesium bismuth, is that right? Yeah. Because that's what Nolan has as well. I find this really interesting because in the bifield brown effect with towns and brown, the anti-gravity stuff. And I don't have any, I have a little bit of evidence that towns and brown might have been involved in one UFO crash retrieval. But I don't have a, I mostly have evidence that he figured out an anti-gravity modality. But magnesium or bismuth rather is constantly talked about, bismuth, because bismuth is a high-k dielectric. So it stores and discharges easily a lot of electromagnetism. And that in the bifield brown effect, if you're used that as the insulator between the, you know, negative and positive electrodes, that creates greater thrust. So I find it fascinating that you have UFO parts that in the only anti-gravity, or in one of the few anti-gravity experiments that we know of, it creates more thrust in that experiment. That seems really significant to me. Right. And the other interesting thing is it has nanolayers of the bismuth and magnesium. And the, and one of the two is paramagnetic and the other is diamagnetic. So they have two very different magnetic properties, which is interesting. So a lot of the, a lot of the modern work that we do in material science on like spintronics and this sort of thing basically is dealing with magnetic spins with diamagnetic and paramagnetic materials. So, a lot of the new breakthroughs in material science is related to these types of materials as well. So this is interesting stuff. Super interesting. Yeah, Gary was also when I was at his lab. He showed me some of the pieces. And he mentioned that some of these materials might be able to micro-size waveguides for tear-a-herts power. And do you think that that's true? Do you think these, these pieces are able to, to do that? Yeah, I don't know if that's possible. That we haven't looked into. Okay. And I know, I know what Matthew's done, but I don't think that he's looked into that at all. What is one scientific truth that you adamantly believe that conventional science disagrees with you vehemently on? Oh, that's a good question. I don't know if I have an answer immediately. You could dwell on it if you want, for the movie. I don't know if that's a think about that. What do I, what? Interesting. Yeah, I don't know if I don't know if there is one exactly. Yeah. At NASA, you mentioned the people there weren't really into UFOs. How does, how do you square that with all this lore of them being interested in UFOs? I don't know, you have like Diana Pousolka. Have you ever read her book, American Cosmic? Yeah. So she has this NASA mission controller who I guess now is public, but his name is Tim Taylor. And you know, he's going around taking them to crash UFO crash sites. Right. Seems extremely read into any sort of UFO program that exists. There are individuals at NASA who are interested in that. And since I've gotten interested in Pitnvokal about it, I've had some of them I knew when I was at NASA have come to talk to me and said, oh yeah, I was interested. I knew I know something that thinks something about this for that. Yeah. Yeah. It's so strange because yeah, you have Hal Pobbenmeyer who was a, I think he was both CIA and NASA showing up at Chris Bledso's door when he starts to attract UFOs. Right. Very, it's like, yeah, well, people come kind of come out of the woodwork. You find that, you know, I've now had a couple people from NASA I find out were interested in remote viewing. Like I wouldn't have thought that when I was back, you know, when I worked there, but interesting. Yeah. Is there a, when were they doing remote viewing in a professional capacity at NASA? Well, yeah. So, um, I don't know, I don't want to tell on anybody, but some of this is actually public, but nobody's noticed. Um, so one of the people at NASA's actually written a CIA training manual for remote viewing. Really? Yeah. But this is, this is public. Yeah. Okay. Well, then, well, we can, people are going to look it up. So, you can figure out who it is. Okay. All right. Yeah. Now, actually, I was, yeah, there was a, yeah, so, but. Well, if it's public, it's, but you know, it's interesting. Yeah. That's fascinating. And that person did it before they came to NASA, but, um, but are currently or were NASA. They maybe retired. It does. Hmm. You know, they also have a patent, I believe in 2003 on a barrel shaped asymmetric capacitor. And they put, they say this is, we're talking about Thomas Towns and Brown. Oh, yeah. That, that works interesting too. Yeah. It's very interesting. Yeah. There are, these, there are handfuls of people doing weird things here and there. Right. And it's. Yeah. And they've been, I mean, you, and once I've gotten involved with this, I find that those people are all over the place. And they're all studying things are not supposed to be studying, which is, yeah, fascinating. On that patent, that NASA patent, I believe, Larry Smalley has his name there. He's a University of Alabama, Huntsville. He was the physics chair. And under him was a woman named Ning Lee. And she was studying, I think, like, um, a super conductor based, you know, a kind of weight reduction via kind of anti-gravity. I think she, she called it gravitons gravity particles would, would cause this sort of effect. And, um, you know, obviously, you know, groundbreaking sort of controversial claim. And she speaks about this at some sort of MITRE Corporation event. And, um, then she kind of, you know, goes dark. I think gets a security clearance. But, um, her physics, she leaves and starts a company. I think it's called anti-gravity LLC or something. And then her physics chair, Larry Smalley, goes and joins her, which I think is London's credence to the actual findings. Right. Their physics chair leaves. I mean, you know, academia. It's kind of, okay, everybody's got to be high conviction at that point. Yeah, yeah, you don't leave a tender position. And then his name shows up on a patent around a barrel shaped asymmetric capacitor, which is town. And it's talking about towns and brown. And I'm like, okay, what's going on? Yeah, that's interesting. Yeah. Wow. I've been fascinating. Yeah. But I mean, one question I have is you have all these names pop up, right? And you have, you know, how put off is obviously like seems so at the center of so much UFO physics. But a lot of a lot of the names that pop up in in UFO science, quote unquote, it's almost like there's some sort of like substructure of a lot of these like mega structure. So like NASA, I don't like it almost seems like what you're saying is there is no official knowledge of UFOs. But it's like these people within NASA that are extremely interested in this stuff. How do you square that with like you watch the age of disclosure and it's like we have a legacy program, which you would that implies some sort of like, you know, it's like super well coordinated. It's a different thing. Yeah. So like what I always try to ask that I try to press on people here. Is it like, is there a program or is it like this hermetic substructure where people come together via synchronicity is just people doing things. I mean, that's one thing. I mean, scientists tinker as well. Right. Yeah. And and NASA isn't like that now. But when I worked there, which was the early 2000s, you still were able to do. Like blue sky research is as long as I mean the requirement was you had to convince your area lead that this was in line with NASA's missions basically in some way. And so. And that's all you had to do. And so then you could go off and work on this project. You know, now and while I worked there near the end of the time I worked there during the push administration, they started what they called full cost accounting where they have to account for all their costs. So now now you have to you have to account for the time you spend on things. And and if you're doing that, then you can't do this blue sky research on this. You can't do this little thing on the side. So for example, one of the things that we tried to do on the side. So this was a, um, yeah, why not. We we had. I was interested in the the Roswell story. And I was struck by the fact that the picture, you know, Jesse Marcell says, one thing about the material. And and sounds entirely believable. And then they get the picture in the newspaper with general Rami with what clearly is aluminum foil and bolsa wood in the picture, right. And and you look at that picture, you think there's no way anybody is going to mistake that for any kind of craft debris. So what was Jesse Marcell thinking or did was it as they claimed that they switched the debris, right. And I think it's more likely they switched the debris. Well, Marcell claimed that the real you a photo debris was off to the side right outside of the frame of that photo. Did he say that? Yeah, yeah. He also said he brought it home and that his son played with it. He showed it with his son. Yeah. Yeah. So I think you would know the definitely would know the difference right. So then there's the picture of general Rami and he's holding a memo that you can see in the photographs. And it's clearly a smart stamped top secret. And I thought, what does that memo say? And so me and one of my colleagues at NASA's because we were I was in the intelligent systems division. So our job was to develop, um, machine learning systems to analyze data. And so we were doing a lot of work with imagery. I worked with Hubble imagery. And I thought, why don't we try to clean? Why don't we try cleaning up this memo and see what the memo says. So we actually wrote the algorithms to actually read this this memo and um, it wrote them got them running and we're testing them and um. And we just didn't have the computer power at the time. It was a 300 megahertz machines we were working on and you know, we couldn't use the supercomputer for this. So we couldn't get away with that. Right. We could get away with using 300 megahertz computer on this. And it just didn't have the computing power and the computing time to do it. So so we abandoned the project. But but we had thought that we were going to we're going to you know, our little dream was all right. We're going to figure out what this memo says. And then we're going to publish it as a NASA publication. But it's going to be buried as an example. We're going to the publication will be on our methodology and our algorithm. And then we'll have several examples. And one of them will be the Roswell memo. And then we'll make it public and make it an official NASA publication. Right. That was that was our little plan. I love it. Our sneaky plan. I love it. It just didn't work out because we couldn't analyze that imagery. Right. But this is but this is what's going on behind the scenes. And I probably a lot of government labs people are doing stuff like this. You know, maybe not trying to publish it. But um. But trying to figure out if they can get something to work or try something interesting. Over the last couple of months, we've been designing the new American Alchemy merch drop. And I'm excited to say that the 2025 winner drop is finally ready. We now have 30 uniquely designed pieces that really reflect what American Alchemy is all about. This drop includes epic t-shirts, long sleeves, crew necks, hoodies, tapered sweatpants, hats, totes, mugs, and tumblers. The Fukushima Japan pieces, for example, have detailed left chest embroidery. The morning of earth designs went through multiple revisions to get the fit exactly right. And the iron horse tea is something I think will be a hit for anyone who loved the UFO cowboy or our atomic age shirts from our last drop. We cut a lot of things that didn't meet our standards and were really, really proud of each of these items. Everything is pretty limited. So there's no endless restocks. Once it's gone, it's entirely gone. If you missed anything from our original drops and you want to go out and represent, now's the time to go grab something. So go to AmericanAlchemyMurch.com to check it all out. So it's like there is this UFO truth. You have, you know, various crashes. You have various maybe scientific frameworks that are not public. And then you just have a bunch of vigilante efforts and little pockets and compartments like attempting things. You got people smart people trying things. And it's, you know, I think what, you know, John, I think it was John's towards said, is it an amazing what scientists can do and no one makes them stop? And I think that's all it is. It's no one's making them stop and they're discovering things. And some of them are useful, some aren't. And some are really interesting. And some they feel they probably shouldn't talk about. I think that it's that simple. Yeah. A lot of cases. Yeah. It's so fascinating. You have an interesting theory around water worlds. And, you know, water being this really important kind of variable for UFO transport. Do you want to explain that? Yeah. Well, there's a few. Yeah. So it has two aspects. The first one is, is why, you know, I was at one point wondering why are there so many USOs submerged unidentified submerged craft? Why is that such a big thing? And when you think about living on a planet, living under an atmosphere is horrible. It's difficult. The weather is, the conditions change every day. You know, it changed daily, you know, hourly even. And I'm coming down here from Albany. I'm down here to Austin. You know, we had snowstorm this weekend in Albany or North of Albany. I drove through it from Montreal to Albany through the snowstorm. And now we're down here. And it's what 60 degrees in sunny. And I hope to go to the botanical garden before I leave or something. Right. So the atmospheres are very are quite variable. And now, now you go from Earth to Venus. Venus's atmosphere has 100 times the air pressure on Earth, which would crush you. And it's about 800 degrees Fahrenheit. And actually I was at NASA Ames when the Magellan probe was doing radar mapping of Venus. And we were perplexed because the mountain tops would become radar reflective at times. And then it would fade. And then they would become reflective again and fade. And we're like, what's going on with these mountain tops? And realize they would become reflective when the temperature would drop. So the temperature would drop. The mountain tops would become radar reflective. And they realized what was happening is vaporized, lead and bismuth was making was actually making snowflakes. And so it was actually snowing, lead and bismuth snow on the mountain tops. I mean, imagine what I can't imagine what that would look like to have metal snow. I want to go there and actually see that. But that's what they think. That's a cold day in hell, by the way. When you've got metal snow raining on the mountain tops. So that's what Venus is. Atmasphere is like, right? And then you go to Mars and Mars has one one hundredth the atmospheric pressure of Earth. So you need a space suit. And it's cold, you know, 100 degrees below zero Fahrenheit, something like that. Colder than Antarctica temperatures. So now, so now comparing Venus to Mars, the temperature difference is is a factor of 10,000 different. It's huge. And now you consider a water world water. Water is only liquid from zero degrees Celsius to 100 degrees Celsius, right? So you've got as long as you have liquid water, you you are in that temperature range. You're not going out of it. And so it's much more stable temperature wise. The pressure varies with depth dramatically. I mean, I am a certain pressure varies with atmospheric height as well. But because water is so much more dense, it's much more dramatic. So you can control what pressure you like by controlling the depth. And water has such a high heat capacity. The temperature doesn't change that much. You don't have the temperature fluctuations. So water temperature that you do in an air temperature. So it's a much more stable environment. You're protected from solar radiation. You're protected from ultraviolet rays. You're protected from cosmic rays. You're protected from, you know, small meteorites, at least. And it's, and it's a great place to hide electromagnetism. Electromagnetic waves don't travel far in water. So you can't see far. You can't detect things with electromagnetism very well. And which is why we use Sonar, right? And so it's a great place to hide. Yeah. So there's every reason to go to the water. It's fascinating. So if you were like a Kardashev three or four scale civilization, and you wanted to colonize a bunch of other planets, water is the perfect hideout spot. It's evidence. It's a water. Yeah. Well, that's the other thing. So you only have, you only have a couple choices, right? So if you're going to go to colonize another star system, you've got to carry everything you need to do it with you. Right. So getting already the traveling is hard. It's going to be hard for anybody. But, but bringing everything you need to build up a base or some kind of settlement is going to be extra difficult. So you see, you really have have a few options. And water worlds we now know are relatively common. You know, we have several water worlds in our, in our solar system, mostly most of the northern frozen moons, I see surfaces, but there's oceans underneath, right? So you can either you can either plan to colonize. You can either just plan to stay in your spaceships, right? We're just going to live in our spaceships. That's probably the easiest thing to do, right? Or to colonize airless worlds like the moon, which is no different than staying in your spaceship. But then the other option is to live on a planet. And if you want to live on a planet to access its resources, you're going to go with an airless world in state in your spaceship. Or the next most reasonable choice could go to be to go to water. Yeah. And so it's also evidence, as you said, of this kind of Goldilocks temperature zone. I think water is specifically unique as well, because the way that hydrogen and oxygen bond in an H2O molecule is a perfect crystal lattice structure. And so it's unique in that the solid form of it is actually less dense than the liquid form of it. So you end up with these worlds that don't flood because you end up with a lot of a lot of ice. And so that's fascinating as well. And then I think the final thing on the UFO front is you're talking about tons and tons of power. If you were to theoretically break hydrogen and oxygen bonds in H2O, you would get a ton of power. Yeah, you can use water for storing energy that way. Yeah. Or for fuel. And then seas and you know seas have dissolved minerals in them. So you could I mean, it's not a fast process, but you can you could extract any kind of mineral you want. Any any atom any atom you want, you can probably pull out of sea water. You know, whether you can do it fast enough to get a substantial amount is really the question. But so, but that would be easier than mining. Right. Do you think they're UFO bases in our oceans, Timber Shet recently said there are five oceanic hot spots across the world. We have a higher propensity of sightings around these five or six, I believe, be very deep water areas. And so to me, it just creates a question there. Do you think they're UFO bases? I think it's probably that's probably the best bet really. And you went to Catalina, right? Catalina, which is one of the it's off the coast of Southern California. And a lot of people think it's this UFO hot spot. There's a great book. I think it's called Under Underwater or under C UFO base by Preston Dennett. Right. And there's a ton of history in the region. And so what did you find when you went out there? Yeah, well, we spent we spent five days on a rooftop in the Philippines and watching the skies and. And it's all documented in the movie a tear in the sky. So, and the movie best documents what the basically how the mission progressed, right? And so it's one of the first, you know, universities supported UFO data collection missions that we know of has happened. Right. So, so there's a lot of excitement. There's a lot of excitement in that movie. And that's real excitement, right? Yeah. And, and we did see we did see some interesting things that and so here comes some spoilers. Yeah. So, and so I'm going to spoil things twice. So, so there's a one point there's a bright light that's seen from the team in Catalina Island, which is across the Catalina channel. We had two teams. They spotted this bright light that was moving. And they said it's too bright to be a satellite. It's, it's, you know, going in this direction. So we're looking for it as well. So we recorded this object and then it just abruptly disappears. And which is very strange. And, and the problem with documentaries is that yes, it takes a long time to make a film maybe a year to two years in some cases. Science takes a lot longer. Yeah, we're a lot slower. And so the scientific study of what the data we collected took a lot longer and that got published just last year. So our mission was what in 2021 tear in the sky. I think came out in 2023 something like that. And our scientific paper on the mission came out just this summer. Matthew should August was the first author of that paper. And so we found that that bright light was the space station. Why didn't we figure that out earlier? The app we were using to track satellites didn't take into account daylight savings time. A stupid mistake right that we shouldn't have made. But this is your first time doing this. And I remember telling Matthew on our space station looks weird. By the way, it looks really weird. It looks like you know, yeah. And I remember telling Matthew on the airplane. You know, we were both excited. Oh, there's going to be so much fun. Think of magic. What we can see. And I said, yeah, but the problem is we're just what we're probably going to learn is what not to do. Yeah. And that's really what happened that first mission. We learned how not to do it. But Matthew is the one who figured out it was the space station. He put it all together and he actually took the pixel size on the camera. And then knowing the altitude of the space station figured out how big this space station should be. And he was within one foot. So the side of the space size of this base station. It's really a nice analysis. He does put it in the appendix and. And yeah, he was something to be proud of the fact that, yeah, we identified it to be this base station and actually proved it right. So that's cool. And another another event that happened, whereas these one of the flare cameras was showing these objects dropping to the sea. And I was actually at the time looking through night vision goggles. This didn't end up in the movie and people were too excited about the flare camera to hear me shouting about the night. I was telling people put on your night vision goggles and look over here. But I saw something actually drop and hit the water in infrared. Whoa. You got that on video? No, no. I was just looking through the goggles watching for things and. But it was through infrared. It was in infrared. Yeah. And then then. And I think they tried to simulate this in the film, but it's not simulated properly. They showed the same hovering. It wasn't it just dropped. Wow. But but the flare cameras recorded things dropping into the sea. And we. So you think you saw you. I don't know what I saw actually, but because but I was excited because it happened about the same time the flare camera is showing things dropping. But then we figured out later that the flare camera was actually malfunctioning. And that's a failure mode of the flare cameras. We actually talked to the engineers who was on something. Something dropped. Yeah, these things falling down is actually a failure. Oh, so maybe it was an issue with the camera. So the flare camera recording we had was not something dropping into the sea. I don't know what I saw and probably will never know because you can be reproducible. Right. You have to be able to see it again and try different things. Is there a best sensor modality if you're trying to spot UFOs? I think as many sensors you can. Is there one kind of say you didn't say to pick one and you had to, you know, what would you pick? If I picked one, I would try. That's tough. I think I would go with a flare camera is a good choice for a few reasons. One, you get a visual record of the object. It's not a very good visual record because it's going to be blurry because it's infrared. I've heard people complain, oh, the Navy produces all these and these blurry photos of UFOs. Well, they're infrared images. What do you expect? I've heard scientists say this and you want to slap them upside the head and say, what did you think was going to happen? So, you know, but the other benefit is for with the flare cameras, you can measure the temperature of the object because you're picking up infrared emissions rights. So those that black body infrared spectrum actually gives you the temperature of the objects where where white hot comes from. Yes, so not only do you get a visual record of the object, but you get its temperature too, which is which isn't you get extra pieces of information for that. So for that reason, I probably would choose a flarekin. Is there a sighting or a crash that you rank as highest conviction as far as your analysis of it that like you you are convinced that this happened. Oh, I would have to say the most convincing one is one of the most hard to believe ones. It's JAL airline 6 JAL 1628. It was a Japan Airlines cargo flight piloted by Captain Kenju Tarouchi. This is the sketch Tarouchi drew of what he says he saw it is window that night. And this Japanese television graphic is based on his description. This is just a small space. We can see a big plane. This one is size is a carrier. So, Mother see. And I remember I remember that being on the nightly news. I remember watching it was on NBC. Tom Broca candy, Connie Chung. I remember that being on the news and being holy shit. There's giant aircraft carrier sized walnut shaped UFO followed that Japanese airlines for 45 minutes across Alaska. Wild touch give us the whole sequence. Yeah, so these guys. So the Japanese Airlines they say it's not a passenger jet. It's a 747. They are transporting Bouchule Nouveau. Yeah, they got wine in the back. Let the skeptics rejoice. No, the pilots were not drunk on Bouchule Nouveau. It's just a silly thing. They're just transporting it. Yeah, they're just transporting it. And they're flying across Alaska and and first I don't remember all the events and several things happen. They actually saw several UFOs. First these rectangular things show up in front of the ship and have these lights that go up and down shining light into the cockpit. And the pilots could feel the heat from the light of these objects and they're like scanning or you know like that kind of behavior. They follow in front of the plane for some time. And then and then this giant walnut shaped object shows up. That's something like 4747s in length. Right. So the things the things a size of an aircraft carrier. And the the pilot said that when it was in front of the plane, he couldn't see anything but the craft. It's that big. So it's unmistakable. I mean, and he's screaming at air traffic control. You know, what do I do about this? And they're not picking it up on radar. And so was later found that military height finding radar was picking it up. And so that radar actually that those radar records actually got collected. And and so this walnut shaped craft basically follow the 747 for about 45 minutes. State about seven kilometers away, but it would go from one side of the plane to the other. It was bouncing around from one side to the other. And and we analyzed its speed and acceleration just crudely based on the plane. Based on the description of what it was doing. So it would go so at one point it would be at like one o'clock. And then the next sweep of the radar, which was about 12 seconds or so would be would be at six o'clock. And so we were using those that information to estimate speeds and accelerations. Daniel Kumbay, another physicist from the Neal's Bohr Institute actually took the radar. I didn't I didn't know that we could get our hands on the radar measurements when we published that paper. But he actually got the radar data. And he analyzed that he was analyzing the jumps and he found that the object was accelerating. It took several dumps jumps different accelerations at different times. But there were three three of them were the accelerations were greater than 9,000 g's. One of them was like 11,000 g's. And the top speed he estimated to be 250,000 miles an hour. And at 250,000 miles an hour, you can get to the moon in 54 minutes. Whoa. That's not a joke. So you've got something the size of an aircraft carrier that could get to the moon in less than an hour. Right. That's basically what you're dealing with here. So that's what and we have and we have the radar data from that. We have the radar data. You have the radar data. That's amazing. I didn't know that. That's amazing. Yeah. John Callahan, who was the FAA chief of accident. Chief of accidents and investigations actually reviewed the case and then Reagan president Reagan's scientific team and the CIA showed up and they wanted all the data. No way. And so they came to collect the data. Callahan copied it and put it in a box that he just put under his desk. And so he had a copy of it and he didn't turn that over. So they got in that public now. And now that's public. He held on to it for like 20 years. And then when he retired, he made it public. Good for him. Yeah. He's a hero. Right. Kind of. Yeah. Yeah. But he said when he was in the meeting with Reagan's scientific team, they were all excited. They said we've never had 45 minutes of radar data from one of these things before. Wow. And so that exists. But from that radar data, it's exonerated 10,000 G's, 250,000 miles an hour. And you can actually see the position of the plane on the radar. That is remarkable. The one point where the plane actually does a 360 to try to shake this thing, you can actually see that on the radar. So the radar is working. Are the pilots still alive? Yeah. I think so. I want to get in touch with them. Yeah. I'm sure the one pilot was actually fired. Okay. For going public with it. He was fired and had his license taken away. And then several years later, it was reinstated. That's horrible that he was fired for that. I mean, what are you supposed to experience something that kind of traumatic and world views shattering. What would line about it be a better thing to do for flight safety? Yeah. That's really the question. Just ignore it. Yeah. That's crazy. Fascinate. You know, there's that audio recording of Steven Spielberg. I believe talking about his trip to the White House. And they do a viewing of ET. Right. I've heard this. Yes. And Reagan says, you know, a lot of you in this room know that everything on that screen there that you just watched is true. And he just stood up and he looked around the room almost like it was being a headcount. And he said, I want to thank you for bringing ET to the White House. We really enjoyed your movie. And then he looked around the room. He said, and there are a number of people in this room who know that everything on that screen is absolutely true. And he said it without smiling. But he said that. And everybody laughed by the way. The whole room laughed because he presented it like a joke, but he wasn't smiling as he said it. And so, yeah, pretty interesting, right? That's interesting, right? Yeah. Well, that's fascinating that people from his scientific team. I mean, it sounds like they were pretty aware of this to say, oh, we've never had 45 minutes. But it's like that implies, okay, you're sitting on maybe, you know, shorter clips of UFOs. Yeah, they've got something. I mean, Alaska is a hotspot historically as well. I believe Nathan Twining was head of air material command responsible for all aircraft development of the Air Force wrote the famous twining memo 1947 saying UFOs are not visionary nor fictitious. Right. I believe they had like an observation program going on in Alaska. And then just recently you had it was this weird sequence of events, but in 2020 early 2023 you had the Chinese spy balloon. And then right after that, you had this bizarre, you know, these things seem to show up in like jam, you know, the radars of these F-22s. And one of them specifically was in Alaska and crashed. And I've heard some very strange things around this specific craft. I've heard things like it reassembled itself and was seen in the air over Canada. I've heard something. I've heard something about deleted emails involving this specific craft, the National Military Command Center servers. So I don't know. It seems like there's something strange about this craft and this was also in Alaska. So that's amazing. Yeah. Yeah. It's amazing to know that, you know, his scientific Reagan scientific team had gotten that data. What do they do with it? What is, you know, what are what are their reports? I would like to see that, you know, the disclose those. That would be interesting. You know alone. The Kexberg, Pennsylvania, UFO crash. Yeah. 1965. Yeah. And my dad's cousin, Donald Hornig. He was later the president of Brown University was on. He was the scientific advisor to presidents Eisenhower Kennedy and Johnson. What? Yeah, that was my dad's cousin did that. In fact, he's the person who he designed the. The electronic triggers for the the plutonium bomb. Whoa. And the Manhattan project. What was his name? Donald Hornig. Whoa. And the night before the first test and Trinity, the he was up in Heimer gave him a side arm and had him babysit the bomb up in the tower during a thunderstorm. What? And I was surprised that they didn't put that in the movie out in Heimer because it's an awesome story. But the movie is about up in Heimer and not about the Manhattan project. But he was, yes, so that was in his wife was, but his wife was in the movie. Lenny Lilly Hornig was in the movie. She was the woman who came from Harvard and some of the things she actually said she told us this at dinner once we visited her in Rhode Island when she was still alive. But she said when she got to Los Alamos and was being interviewed for a position, they asked her how fast she typed and she goes, they don't teach typing in Harvard. And they use that movie, which was great. Whoa. That is fascinating. So, but I, but so I mentioned that because, because Donald Hording was was the chief scientific advisor to President Johnson. It was President during the Keckberg crash. And I found, I actually found a document about the Keckberg UFO and Donald Hornig was listed as being present. I thought, oh my God. And I, I didn't never got to meet him. And, and I did, I did ask his wife Lily about it, but she didn't know what document. I don't know. Maybe I have to look for it. There was some kind of some kind of summary about the Keckberg crash and something. It was some kind of government summary official official. Yeah. Yeah. And it was listed as being present, which he should have been. So I was like, wow, this is pretty, but that's that's even absent the fact that he's your dad's cousin, which is a remarkable synchronicity. The fact that the presidential science advisor is on site at a UFO crash. Yeah. It's amazing unto itself. That's true. Yeah. That's a good point. That's a really big deal. I think Eric Walker was supposed supposedly present as well at the Keckberg crash. She was the, I believe President of Penn State, and he was kind of a material science guy. I don't know if you know anything about him, but he's an interesting guy who seems to imply to many researchers, UFO researchers that he's very aware of the majestic 12 and what they do. And you know, who knows? Right. I don't know. Do you lend credence to any of those sorts of stories? The idea that they're sort of an elite military scientific. I can't, I wouldn't be surprised if they were true. Yeah. I don't know if I would just jump on believing they're true without any evidence, but yeah. But you know, if I was, if I found out they were true, I wouldn't it wouldn't shock me at all. Well, it's like if the UFO issue is real and understood at the highest levels of government. Of course, they would have some sort of elite body. That's a kind of group of, and if it's not a formal group, there's probably informal groups and yes. Oh, that sort of thing. Yeah. Yeah. Do you think, you know, we've mentioned the nuclear connection a bunch in this conversation. Do you think that not only UFOs are just showing up around nuclear sites, but that the secrecy involved in the atomic energy commission and the Department of Energy overlays UFO secrecy and that the program is somehow bound up in the atomic stuff? That's a good question too. Yeah. It's not clear how. I mean, what it, what it looks like the, an S.C.U. did a study of this of UFOs monitoring nuclear sites. And so it looks like whoever's behind the whole UFO business, whoever these guys are, have been performing surveillance. This is a surveillance this whole time. They're surveilling us and it's intelligence surveillance. They know what they're doing. And in fact, the S.C.U. studies showed that not only do you, so when they compared UFO sightings at nuclear sites compared to nearby military bases and nearby population centers and the nuclear sites have more, you know, in the early 40s had more UFO sightings than any of the other places nearby. It's statistically significant that they're hanging out at nuclear sites. Now what's weird about it is that they are present at the nuclear sites before we, before they were totally constructed. Yes. And before they had nuclear material there, radioactive material there. So while some of these sites were being built, UFOs were present. That's definitely right. Now you're like, wait a minute, how did they know that something important is going to be there, right? How do they know what they know? There's something about nuclear that they're really concerned with or interested in. There's, I think in 1945 there's a pilot named Bud Clem and he's flying over Hanford plutonium base. And it was like, yeah, before the thing was fully up. And he's seeing UFOs and Robert Hastings as an interview with him. When I got down there and I told us that this bogey was out there right over the panthered ordinance works and directed to Lieutenant Commander Brown to take off and challenge him. Yeah, I think I mentioned him in our paper. I've got the, we published a paper this year on the scientific study of UAP. It basically goes through the history of how people have tried to study this. And I mentioned Bud Clems, sightings at Hanford there. Yeah, so it's so fascinating that that connection is and they're all these theories you can one can have. One is that they're sort of doing some sort of intelligence recon or something. And then another is that they're just protecting their resources. Somehow the earth maintaining itself in its current form is important or maybe we're a resource humans are a resource to them. And so they need to intervene and ensure things don't we don't blow ourselves up or something. But it's really hard to say. I mean, I know like the age of disclosure, Lou Elzondo, you know, kind of crew, like they talk about it as far as like their monitoring our ability to achieve energy breakthroughs. So that would be the tip of the spear of energy breakthroughs like high energy physics occurs in the national labs in your, you know, atomic sites and that sort of thing. And, you know, we could we could break out of our our cage or something if we if we achieve some unlock and so they're very serious. Humans are hot mess, right? And so if they if they're present in the universe in our neighborhood and then right now they don't have to deal with us correctly. But if we go out there, they might have to deal with us. I think stint and freemen put it this way. It's kind of like we've got a neighborhood where you've got this one house on the block with crazy neighbors. There's always the police are always there. They're screaming and yelling and things breaking. And you can hear that going on in the house in the block. And then one day the neighbors come out of the out of the house and they're in the yard. And now you have to deal with them right. So it was it was describing human humanity this way. And I thought that's pretty good pretty good description. Yeah, no, that that feels pretty pretty apt to me. I want to talk because you're in a I think very unique vantage point as somebody who is at the intersection of kind of credible physics and then kind of very speculative UFO, you know, interest. There are a couple of interesting objects of interest of late that kind of hit that intersection. The first I want to talk about is actually this discovery of Beatrice V.O. Rial at Stockholm University who you know I had the pleasure of interviewing her. And she was looking at the Palomar Observatory, which was the most you know in use observatory, you know in the kind of mid century in the US. It's in San Diego. And she found over a hundred thousand in an eight year period what appeared to be UFOs mirror like objects, little transients, light flashes. And they seem to actually be correlated with nuclear sites too. There's like a follow up study that they're 68% more likely to show up a day before or after a nuclear detonation. So it's just fascinating study and nobody in the credentialed conventional physics world has debunked it. It's been peer reviewed. And you have people like Sabina Hassenfelder and Brian Keating, you know, people you don't think of as like UFO nuts. Right. Like going on, you know, YouTube and saying like this actually seems kind of intriguing. So what do you make of it? No, it's I mean, her that's the Vasco project. I mean it's an excellent idea for a project. You've got all of these photographic plates from the 1940s that that if you have something in orbit, you might pick you might be able to check it in a photograph, right. So that's the that's the premise. And she she published a few early papers, which I found really interesting. The one, you know, the ones where you have a several of them like an align or something like this. And I thought I think that's fascinating. It's tough. The most recent papers with 100,000. That's hard to believe. That was that's a little shocking. That makes me worry that you really have to double your efforts to look to make sure there's not an artifact issue that you haven't considered. Well, it's it was 100,000 between 1949 and 1957. The reason you ended in 1957 is because Sputnik goes up. Right. So it's pre satellites, which is that's remarkable. And it's they're all in geostationary orbit, geos. It's like the you know outer Earth's orbit. So it's I think it's it's pretty remarkable that does seem really high as well. I think she says there could be an air rate of up to 30% or something. So that's a you know, it's a big margin. Yeah. But what what's remarkable is like when she put this out, the main detraction, the main way people tried to kind of straw man or you know beat beat this thing was they said, you know, these have to be plate defects. These have to be sort of you know that the astronomical plates, you know, have all sorts of weird, you know, chemical issues over long periods of time. Right. And you end up with these sort of stains and issues and then you know those could look like transients or UFOs. But then she followed up on the study and she said, is there a so obviously you have the sun it's hitting the earth. And then you have the shadow of the earth, right? We have a kind of a dark side of the earth. She said, is you know, are these objects dropping off on the dark side of the earth when they shouldn't be being illuminated by the sun. I think that's the idea. That's right. Are they physical objects? Are they reflecting off the sun? A, and B, if they're plate defects, plate defects would not play favorites between the earth shadow and you know the the sun side of the earth. Right, right, should have the plate defect, right, should be constant, it would be completely proportional and constant. And so she found it, you know, a serious drop off. And so that seems like pretty significant. It's interesting. Yeah, certainly it's interesting. I think it's, it's one of the, the, I mean, the whole mark of science is reproducibility, right. So what you need to have is you need to have other other labs look at those plates and actually did the study, tried to replicate the study. And I think that's what needs to happen. And that's what she's beautiful about her kind of orientation towards this whole thing. And she's now saying you can go look at the data for yourself. So the raw data, I think, is online now for people to, it's not online. Okay, it will be. Okay, you try to get it. Okay, you try to get it. Okay, okay. Okay, then she says she's putting it online. She's working. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And then I think that the, the next holy grail would be you'd want it from another observatory and you'd want the actual transients to line up one to one, ideally, at least with some correlation. That would be really important. Yeah, it's a lot of observatories. That would be ideal. Yeah. So yeah, totally agree. There's work to be done there. But I pretty intriguing, I think. Yeah, it isn't. It is. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, it was an, it's a nice idea for a project. I mean, it's a, you've got all of these photographic records and to go through them. I mean, just to look for transients in the first place, I mean, transients would be anything that you don't have a good explanation for. So there's potential for lots of discoveries there, not just things were opening the earth. Project Hill Mary is the cinematic event of the year. We're discounting on you, Dr. Grace. Starring Ryan Gosling. I'm not an astronaut. Two worlds, one impossible mission. So I met an alien project, Hill Mary. You are brave as human I have ever met is joke. I only meet one human and is you. Incinemos everywhere March 19. Do you think UFOs come from space or do you think they are sort of, you know, going through wormholes, you know, or time travelers? Absolutely no idea. They are, they are, I think that many of them that we see that are observed by people are actually coming from earth. Presently, you know, Carl Sagan once quipped, I think it's extremely doubtful that somebody is arriving from international, from interstellar space every other Tuesday. You know, he made something like that, you know, basically saying that I don't think that he didn't say interstellar travels impossible. It wasn't going to happen every other Tuesday is basically what he was saying. It's not going to be common. And I think he's right. They're not, they're not coming in from another star system every other Tuesday. They're, they're present here. Yeah. And that's why I think there's probably bases underwater is your best bet. Yeah. Or maybe somewhere else in the solar system. But we know that they can't be more than, in many cases, they can't be more than a light day away because they showed up with the neck. Someone you had the Fukushima disaster, they showed up the next day. So if they're coming from another star system, it would take years for the, for the signal any signal, any information about Fukushima to get out to that star system. And then years for them to come, for them to come. Unless faster than like communications and travel as possible. Or something like that. But yes, in general relativity, they're probably coming from earth in that case. Interesting. Do you know of any interesting space-based encounters of UFOs like NASA encounters? That's also a good question. So, um, I know a few of them. There's, well, there's several cosmonauts have reported seeing things in space. And that's important to them. Oh, I can't, I'm blanking on his name right now. Of course, it's a long Russian name that I'm not familiar with. But they actually had a craft pull up alongside of them after orbit. And they took pictures on the cosmonaut drew a picture of the object. Whoa. Because the pictures all got confiscated by the so- Nakhagarin. The Nakhagarin. No, it's not Gagarin. Oh, check this out. Ok. Ok. Nakhaginashev. And he drew a UFO. He drew a picture of what they took photographs of. Well, what mission was this, do you know? I don't know. I think it was one when they were going to, um, one of those early space stations. Wow. Yeah. The thing pulled up and had, had, had windows. It had windows and pulled up and followed them for part of the orbit and then left. Whoa. Yeah, which is awesome. Yeah. I talked to Alan Bean. I met him and talked to him. He was from Apollo 12. And he said that when he went up to Skylab, they were on Skylab. I think it's 1977-ish. They actually photographed a red flashing light. What is Skylab for the other? Skylab was one of our early space stations. Ok. And they actually saw a red flashing light that followed them for part of the orbit and then disappeared. Really? Yeah. And they had photographs of that. What did he say happened to the photographs? Oh, they're actually public. Oh, they are. Okay. Wow. That's the big problem. You're photographing a light in the sky and it's a handheld camera on a spaceship through a window and yeah, it's a bouncy and blurry and I don't know if it's that bad. But it's a red light that seems to be following them. Red flashing light in space. Nobody, nobody puts lights on satellites. First, you don't need them. And second, it's more white. You know, every, every ounce is going to cost you a crazy thing. Also, satellites back then weren't doing proximity operations. They were just falling into orbit. And they weren't changing orbits. They weren't changing orbits. Yeah. Okay. So that's a big deal. So that whole thing is very strange. Yes. Yeah. And so you, and then you have the, um, the Gemini 11 mission where the, and from the transcripts, the, um, the astronauts are working on, uh, we're, we're working and something flew over their Houston acid that just something just fly over you and they say affirmative, weird, weird, and then there's something like six minutes of no transcript, right? And, um, but when the thing flew over the object flew over them, they, it drained, um, they're, it drained one of their battery sets, um, stack chart, Charlie stack got drained. So stack C got trained. So it's almost a classic UFO sighting and they see an object in space. It flies over their ship and then drains their batteries, right? And so that's in the transcripts of Gemini 11. Wow. And that's public that audio. Public well. Yeah. And now so, so the question I've had is why when we had the NASA commission, yeah, why was there no section on what astronauts have seen in space? I mean, story must grave a shuttle pilot also talked about seeing things like snakes, wow, things writhing around in space. Really? Yeah. None of that mentioned in the NASA commission's report. So, and so you've got, and then you have what is there? The mission, the Soviet mission to Phobos, where their craft got disabled. The last picture shows an object like a fin in the, like a tail fin of a plane looks like in the picture. Whoa. That's the last picture it took. And then the whole thing is disabled. The whole thing was disabled. And Gemini 11 also looks like the audio, like, like there was some sort of power interference or something as well, right? Like electromagnetic interference. Like, multiple events in space that weren't even talked, weren't even mentioned in the NASA commission report. Why? Shouldn't that be of interest? They all sign NDAs, right? Why? Astronauts. Oh, I don't know what they do. I believe they do. Yeah. So, do you think, I mean, you were at NASA. Do you think NASA is sort of systematically covering this stuff up? I would have no idea. Because the other interesting thing from Beatrice Vio Realis, she said she was in touch with the current NASA person who said that NASA tracks what they call uncorrelated targets all the time. So these are sort of noise. Well, they're not necessarily alien spaceships, right? But it's, but these are things that should be reported. Figure out what they are. If you don't know what they are and you've got a, if you're running a commission on unidentified aerial phenomenon and you've got a bunch of unidentified things, you should talk about them. Totally. But also, apparently, the uncorrelated targets are systematically tracked by space force. Right. And not by, I think according to this insider, again, I don't know if this is true, but that's really interesting. So all of our government documents on these things, even the recent ones, barely have any information in them. Meanwhile, the French in 1999 put out the Commetta report, which is 100 pages or something, right? Yeah. That's just great. Yeah. The UFO research group officially called GuyPan, which unlike Arrow, doesn't gaslight the population. They admit that this stuff is real and are open about it. That's right. Yeah. Yeah. Commetta reports. Final analysis from 1999 was that was that, yeah, these things could be alien spacecraft. There might be a base somewhere in our solar system. And the US is probably hiding information. So fast. And that's what they actually said in the United States is probably covering up information. That's it. That was their official report. That was their official report. Yeah. That's amazing. And I believe the head of their CIA, former head of their CIA, Elaine Juliette was extremely interested in UFOs. And publicly to this day is like this big UFO proponent. So they have a long history. So Gemini 11, that was Pete Conrad, was the astronaut. Yeah, Conrad and Gordon. And Gordon. Yeah. And did they come back and say we saw UFO? They say anything. I mean, so. Okay. I mean, because that's the other, look, I've looked into all the moon landing stuff. And I just actually had Joe Rogan on the podcast, which was a big honor. He kind of was the first person to be in our spaceship set, which we just built, which was really cool. Yeah. And I just couldn't think of anybody better for that. We talked about a lot of the moon landing weirdness, you know, in the presentation of the moon landing. And I think neither of us are suggesting that definitively like the US didn't go to the moon. I think you can, to, you know, the inverse of that, you can say definitively the presentation of whatever happened is weird. And it was sanitized and manicured and presented in a bizarre way. And there was definitely some, you know, managing of that that was going on. That's obvious. And so I wonder if, you know, maybe, maybe we did actually attempt or go and maybe we just saw UFOs along the way or maybe there's something very ontologically weird about the trip to space that's hard to come back with as far as a revelation to the public or some, I don't know. Edgar Mitchell came back talking about having an epiphany of how we're all connected in the, you know, you know, thinking about different way of thinking about the university humanity. But then after that, he was very, very much involved with UFOs. Yeah. But he grew up in Roswell. He grew up in Roswell, Apollo 14 astronaut. And he had gotten, and so because he was in Apollo astronaut, he got to hear all sorts of things about Roswell from people from at all levels. He's very close with Morne von Braun, who seemed really interested in UFOs as well. Is the father of our space program, as well? Well, in the first round of bronze, mentor was Herman Oberth, who gave a lecture in 1954 on UFOs. After so many witnesses have seen the so-called flying saucer, their existence cannot longer be denied. I believe that these flying objects come from another solar system. I have his notes and his lecture notes. And in there, he mentions that he has seen numerous radar measurements of their speeds up to 19 kilometers a second, which is about 40,000 miles an hour. He also says that the rocket program was helped. And he was, you basically, the father of German rocketry, and he said that it was aided by these non-human beings. So that's great. Yeah. So that's going back to 1954. We knew that these things traveled at spacecraft speeds. We already knew that in 1954. And why are we playing ketchup just now? Why did this take a half a century to unfold? It's really crazy. Well, proof that NASA probably knows something, a thing or two internally about the UFO stuff. This is something you've looked into. And I think my buddy Chris Ramsey might be doing an interesting follow-up with you on all this stuff. Oh, yeah, Chris, right. There's a Simpkinson photo around Gemini 11, that play. And there's maybe the best UFO photo you could ever ask for. It's like a perfect UFO photo. In fact, I have the book right here. I'm going to take it. Oh, grab it. Sure. So we have this Simpkinson NASA UFO archive. In this photo, which is like maybe the best UFO photo of all time, if it's real. And it comes from Gemini 11. And you figured out that this was the Gemini 11 photo, right? Well, Ed Wilson knew that. Oh, OK. Ed Wilson did. Yeah. But it actually says on, it says, strange object as seen by the astronauts of Gemini 11. I think that's what it says underneath on the lithograph. So it's a, so what he found was a lithograph, which is a printing, a printed photograph. They printed them kind of like a, lithographs kind of like a comic book is printed with all the dots, right? Which makes it horrible to analyze. If you're trying to find stars in that picture, you were so out of luck. I mean, several of us were trying to identify stars and things like this in that picture. And you just can't do it. Is that a UFO? I actually, I, so when I, my best assessment of what that image shows is that it is probably a mockup of what the astronauts claim to have seen. And why is that your assessment? Because Ed actually found the original photograph in the University of Arizona archives that shows Earth with that cloud pattern in the background. And there's no UFO there. Now, of course, it's easy to claim well now. So you raise the UFO from that picture. And it doesn't now, of course, doing an image analysis like that on, on a scanned negative, right? You don't know what kind of process and it's JPEG, which is, which is a lossy encoding and all of these types of image analysis problems. So it's not great, it's not great for doing an image analysis on, but I found no evidence that anything was erased from that picture. And, and that picture actually is showing the end of the tether experiment. So so now the Gemini project, Gemini meaning twins, was all about docking. Can we actually dock with another spacecraft in space? And so Gemini 11 was the last one of the series. And a unique one in that their goal was to go up, literally launch and dock within one orbit. So but they were doing previously they'd go and they'd get up into orbit and then they'd maneuver to dock. But the trick was can we just go up and dock? And that's what they tried to do with the Gemini 11 and they were successful. And after they docked, they then were tethered to the other craft and they did a tether experiment where they actually got the two craft spinning like this. I'm going to knock things over. Got the two craft spinning on a tether and then and did experiments to see how stable that is and what goes wrong. And so they had just finished that experiment and they had just released the other craft, the unmanned craft. And that's in the picture that the background of that lithograph is from. And there's no indication that the astronauts saw any UFO at that time in the transcripts. They were busy with the, you know, yeah, they're busy with the tether experiment. So one was because you just said earlier that then the UFO sighting, the weird thing that happened happened an hour later, which would put it in another orbit, right? There are two thirds of an orbit. We did some forensic investigating and realized that the timing was off for when they actually did see the UFO. So the big problem with that being a real picture are first that the first we don't have a picture of the UFO. We don't have an actual photograph of the UFO. We just have the lithograph. There doesn't seem to be any evidence of tam, those that photograph being tampered with. There was no indication that they saw a UFO at that time. And the UFO, they did see happen an hour later. So, so what's your best explanation as to how that photo surfaced at all with the UFO? So what I suspect happened is it's, I think that what that photo is is exactly what it says under the photo. What's printed there? Strange object as seen by Gemini 11 astronauts. I think it's a mock up to show what the astronauts saw. But it didn't photograph. Was that officially published in some NASA? No, it wasn't officially published anywhere, which was it made it interesting. It was found in Scott Simkinson was a NASA engineer. Okay. He was actually the first engineer hired by NASA. Whoa. I think. And his nickname was Scotty. Everybody called him Scotty. And I can't help but think, is there any connection between Scott Simkinson, Scotty, and Scotty in the Enterprise? I don't know. Oh. He was very well known in the 50s and 60s. So there might be a connection there. That's fascinating. Yeah. Well, it sounds like he's kind of as inside or as it gets. Yeah. And the fact that he, you know, you find in his, in his records. Yes, design some of the spacecraft. I mean, design some of the spacecraft. So if there's some sort of, even if it's an artist's rendition where there was. So he had, he had, and he had a collection of his NASA files. He and his secretary Emily Erdogl had a collection of their NASA files. And then when he died and she died, they were made public and they were put to auction and Ed Wilson bought them. That's how he got them. And he discovered the lithograph amongst them. Well, if there's a painting of a UFO in that photo and it's found in his records, that implies that there's almost institutional NASA knowledge of the fact that the Gemini 11 astronauts did see a UFO. They saw something. I think, well, and they, that's what's said in the transcript. So even if it's painted on, it's like this inside joke or way to commemorate this very real event. It's not this way to record, way to record what happened as best they can. Yeah. That's fascinating. That's so interesting. Why none of this is mentioned in the NASA commissions report. I have no idea. Did they not, maybe they didn't know. I mean, that's possible. They didn't know. I don't know. I mean, speaking of NASA obstruction, three ey atlas, you know, we have this Manhattan sized object that is now come around, back around the sun, and it is headed towards Jupiter. It's going to pass the year, December 19th. So this might be out by the time, you know, it's already sort of passed. So what do you think is going on with this object? You have like most of the astronomical community basically like ignoring it or saying it doesn't matter or whatever. Then you have Avi Loeb going crazy, going on literally every single podcast that exists saying, you know, 40% chance that this is an alien craft and, you know, it could be, it could be a harbinger of, you know, either the Messiah or, you know, it could be an invader or something. So what's going on? Yeah. That's, I mean. And then NASA is, is, did it for the stupid gaslighting press conference where I was honestly a little skeptical of some of Avi's statements. I felt like he was like extrapolating and, you know, jumping to conclusions. But I ended up, I wanted to side with Avi after washing this gaslighting NASA. Well, first, NASA press conferences are the absolute worst. You want to geek out a little bit Tom? You were geeking out so expertly lucky to begin with. That was, that was fabulous. I mean, every, every, even when I was at NASA, you wait for this press conference. Oh, there's going to be some exciting news about something and it's not very exciting. No. And, and you're always, and, and the part of the problem is that your expectation for excitement from NASA is, is way too high. Right. And unreasonably high. So that's part of the problem. So, so I can't, not all the blame should go to NASA for that. But the press conferences are, are always quite, I mean, part of it also is science is kind of boring. And if you're, yeah. So if you're giving a press conference about science, that might be, that, that's often kind of boring. But you should expect a photo that's better resolution than what amateur astronomers are taking of three eyed atlas. It's like this buzz. Yeah. It's hard if you've got a, you've got a spacecraft in orbit around Mars designed to image the surface of Mars and you're trying to use it to image something much further away. That's tough. But then crowds, or if you're the official government body and you get billions in funding every year, then find the, the amateur astronomer that can do it and do it. We work with them. Contra, you have the money. It would be nice. That would be nice. Yeah. I mean, I'm not surprised that we can't get a good image of it. That's, that's hard to do. Um, I mean, three, three eyed atlas is, is weird. And I don't know, I mean, why the astronomical, astronomical society won't, or community won't recognize that is kind of strange. I mean, maybe is, is, are they kind of quieted by Avi being so loud about it being possibly an alien craft? That could be part of it. They don't want to get into this mess. Um, but, but it's a weird thing. I mean, yeah, great. Easy to say. But when it came back around from around the sun, if I'm remembering right, I mean, these are numbers that I'm not horribly infested in remembering, but it was only like 4% water paper as it came back around. That's hardly any, the things that, comets are dirty snowballs. They're made of water. 4% water? Well, now, now, now what is this thing? Um, it's got iron, or it's got nickel, but no iron. Iron and nickel come together. I mean, they're, they're next to each other on the periodic table to separate iron and nickel. You're going to need some weird pros, some difficult processes to separate these two in meteorites, metal meteorites are always iron, nickel meteorites iron and nickel come together. So now you've got something that's nickel and not iron. This is a weird thing. And it suggests some weird processes that went into its formation. Um, has an anti tail, not just a tail. It's got a tail and an anti tail. It's, yeah, there's, there's a lot to worry about here. And I suspect, I mean, if from, from a practical standpoint, clearly this is something that we don't know much about. Yeah. And so just claiming it's a comet and throwing up your hands and walking away is stupid. Mm-hmm. Just flat out stupid and ignorant. Um, to say it's an inter, to say it's an alien spacecraft. Well, I mean, yeah, that's, you don't have a lot of evidence for that either. So that's tough too. Um, but it is something we ought to study. And I remember there were several people who were saying, well, it's not worth studying. I'm thinking, no, this is an interstellar object that tells us what the conditions are like around another star system. Yeah, this is something you should study. If you're going to spend money to study another one of our asteroids over something from another star system, what's, there's nothing reasonable about that. What's the problem with this whole conversation around UFOs is you have, on the one hand, most conventional astronomers, not even looking at the data set often. All right. Like, I see these guys, I think this peers Morgan just had on this guy. I think David Kipping or something. He seems like a really good, you know, David, seems like a really, actually, I, I loved his episode on Rogan. He looks like a planet guy. Yeah, exoplanet guy. Really smart on that dimension. But like this data set that we're talking about with UFOs showing up around nuclear weapons, just like totally ignorant of it. I'm like, he's talking about UFOs, but it's like as if they have to be things that are traveling from from space. And I don't even think he's probably familiar with a lot of the NASA cases, you know, because these seem like anecdotal, small sample size, you know, conspiratorial things. I would argue that the nuclear thing is a ubiquitous global pattern. It's a huge deal that you have to contend with as a scientist. Right. So you end up with these people who like, again, don't want to like knock him like super smart conventional guy, but like is mired in kind of current astronomical data around UFOs and just won't really look at it. And it's all relying on, you know, it's all like, well, if the government has something, they should release it or something, but can't look at the open source stuff. And then on the other side, it's people who are sure that it's extraterrestrial. They're here. They're star seeds, probably, you know, and we have all the, it's like, you're jumping super to conclusions. You're not just following the evidence. Yeah. So it's those two, there's no like middle path of like, this is the evidence. It's like dealing with a scientific, like a scientific community with bipolar disorder. Yes. It's like, yeah, it's crazy. Yeah, it's, it's really difficult. The, I mean, the best, the, the quote that comes to mind is from Stanton Freeman, who said, if you're a scientist and a professional, you need to do your homework before you open your mouth. Period. That's it. If you haven't done your homework, if you haven't researched it, then you, you have nothing to say. You have nothing to share. And you can't go with the excuse that I hear time and time again. Well, I don't, that's mostly nonsense, and I don't have time to read nonsense. Well, then why are you finding the time to talk about, yes, argue against nonsense? You can find the time to argue against nonsense without looking into the nonsense. I mean, that's it, but you can't find the time to research it. And then, and first, my first response to that, first, it's not nonsense. This is something that, this is a phenomena that people have seen for centuries, centuries. I mean, you had Richard Dolan on and he just put out a book on, on UFOs in water, underwater, UFOs. And his case is going back to the 1800s. Mm-hmm. These are the same things. They, they're coming back to Columbus. Balls of light coming out of the water, hovering next to the ship, following the ship and then taking off into the clouds. Same things. Yes. And for, since the 1800s, and this, nobody in the 1800s is making this up to sound like what somebody reported last week. No, totally. Yeah. And you have, you have third world places now, like in third world countries where it's like these people like, Virginia, James Foxx just got back from Brazil, he keeps going back and like, this whole town uncorrelated disparate sources, they all report this cigar-shaped tic-tac like object crashing. And three beings coming out, you know, one of which was captured and, and, and taking to a hospital and everybody working at the hospital says that they saw the being in one neuroscientist who's still alive to this day goes on record says he's staring the being in the face for four minutes. Yeah. And this guy's alive and you have that this whole, there's a saucer in the town dedicated to you. Of course, none of these people are making a penny. Some of them were offered briefcases of cash to shut up about this thing. So, so like, what, like, explain to me why they would lie. Right. Like, it's ridiculous. It's actually absurd. I wish I could see you. I suppose somebody could offer me a shut to shut up. Yeah, right. Yeah, I'll take it. That's a good deal. Maybe that's what's happening with some of the scientists. Yeah. Yeah, well, maybe, maybe because I want, like, somebody like a Neil deGrasse Tyson, you know, like, he goes on these podcast tours and he's just, he'll just, it's the same thing over and over again, which is like no high resolution imagery. And you know, it's like, you know, why don't we have, and we, you know, why aren't we drowning in imagery because we have all of cell phones or whatever. And you have been there any high resolution pictures of quasars. Right. I don't think so. But they exist. Yeah. I mean, we don't have high resolution pictures of exoplanets either yet David Kipping and I study them. Yes. I mean, come on. Yes. Yeah. I mean, why are the average person to bring it? Why is it a scientist? When they come to this topic, they throw their brains out the window and then open their mouth. It's, it's, it's manning. Yeah. I think there's some sort of, well, I think on orthodox and independent thinking don't scale with IQ. And so there are a lot of people that can be shepherded into bad frameworks and to not even looking at certain stigmatized topics because ideas are fashion statements and those are bad fashion or whatever, even though they can like do well on an SAT or something. And so I think that's a really, you know, not well understood thing. And so you think of this priestly citadel as like infallible when it comes to thinking about these things. But in fact, they can be shepherded into, you know, in some ways they can be shepherded even more easily because they think they're so smart. They think they can't be tricked or something. Right. And it's just, I don't know. I think it's sad because there are all these first principles argument. So you can go at, you know, Neil deGrasse Tyson with around, you know, red shifts and blue shifts and, you know, gravitational perturbations that will like, you know, cause issues with general optical photography, you know, and, you know, it's like he wouldn't have anything to say after that. He would just say, well, it can't be. It can't be so. Like there's that's that ends of the conversation with a person like that, you know? So it's like extremely frustrated. Right. I feel with it because you have to straddle academia and this sort of more, you know, crazy world of the, I've been in numerous discussions where the academic person I've been talking to just throws their brain out the window and thinking, you know, if I talk about something else, another scientific topic, topic they're fine, but this they just seem to stop thinking. It's very, it's very odd. You're in upstate New York. Do you think you're in the general vicinity of a stony Brook University? Do you think they have anything to do with UFOs? I don't know of anything going on. It's a sunny Brook. Okay. Cause they, yeah, they have, I don't know, a bunch of interesting, they have like differential geometry stuff going on and, you know, they've Jim Simon's. It's like a big guy there. Yeah. No, stony Brook has a great physics department, but I don't think they do anything with UFO stuff. With the UFO stuff. Okay. So Jim Simon's, you know, foundation guy, so Jim Simon's is like runs, you just passed away. Ran the best performing hedge fund in the US over, you know, a 30 year period, you know, Renaissance technologies, the medallion fund. And before that, he was an NSA code breaker and also like a brilliant physicist who's contributed a lot to fundamental physics and like, Yang Mills and, you know, all interesting stuff. So my former colleague, Eric Weinstein, has suspected that maybe he has something to do with the UFO question or something and that there may be the, the Renaissance technology is sort of printing money and then they're putting it towards, you know, the UFO, the UFO question. And I honestly, I thought all of that was kind of conspiratorial and ridiculous until 2022 happened. There's a NASA UAP panel and then David Spurgel, who's, you know, Jim Simon's top science advisor runs the science foundation. Yeah, he wrote, he was the main author on the report on the NASA UAP review panel. Right. So I'm like, what's going on? Is there some sort of connection there? That's a good question. I don't know. Because we were just talking about all the weird NASA data and that seems to be, like, you know, it seems like it might be suppressed or something. So, who knows? Well, this has been a pleasure, Kevin. I really love talking to you and yeah, I wish you the best of luck with all of your interesting work at University of Albany. Oh, thank you. And is there anything you'd like to plug or anything the audience can help kind of promote or support that helps you out? Well, our work at UAlbany would be great to support. We just got a generous donation from Tony Gorman, who's a local businessman and that has really given us a big boost. And we can always use a little more boost. So if anybody wants to donate, tech free to some of our, to, or do, um, UAlbany for our work on UAPs, that'd be awesome. That's awesome. And yeah, one of the few academic institutions that is actually systematically looking into this question. And so we're basically, we met you at should August and I and, you know, we were original numbers with UAPX and now UAPX has been, has been disbanded and moved to UAlbany and it's now UAlbany Project X. And Matthew, should August and I and, and Professor Cecilia Levy has joined us as well. So awesome. And we're, and the grant, the grant, the gift we got has created an endowment, which will fund us in perpetuity to some degree. So we have, we are here to stay. Wow. Love it. Well, excited to see, you know, as you make breakthroughs on a go forward basis and we'll love to have you back and really appreciate you coming out here. Thank you so much for having me. Alchemist, did you enjoy that? If you want the full picture, head over to the American Alchemy magazine. We just launched on Substack. That's where we deep dive into all sorts of crazy topics that we don't have time to fit into every video. With weekly articles exploring all of the strange, forgotten, and conspiratorial corners of space, history, and high weirdness. So join up today at our free or paid tears on Substack. I am including the full link in the description of this video. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.