NASA Whistleblower: “We Systematically Suppress UFO Data!”

Transcript

They're not coming in from another star system every other Tuesday. They're 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 talked to me and said, "Oh, yeah.

I was interested. I know something about this or that." >> Have you met anybody working on the crafts themselves? >> I've met people who've claimed to have worked on them or seen them. 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 Skyab, they actually photographed a red flashing light. Nobody puts lights on satellites. First, you don't need them, and second, it's more weight. >> Also, satellites back then weren't doing proximity operations. They were just following predictable orbit.

They weren't changing orbits. >> They weren't changing orbits either. >> Yeah. >> They actually had a craft pull up alongside of them in half their orbit. And the cosminaut drew a picture of the object.

The story Musgrave, 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. Balls of light coming out of the water, hovering next to the ship, following the ship, and then taking off into the clouds. And um that's why I think there's probably bases underwater is 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 daysaze, 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 markup. The Essential Open earbuds are here to help you crush your New Year's goals. Go to byracon.com/jesseopen.

That's jes sm i h e ls open to get 20% off sitewide. Again, that's j s m i h e ls no a in michaelels open pen to get 20% off sitewide. Thanks so much to Raycon for sponsoring this episode. Now, back to the show. Kevin Kuth, uh, this is an absolute honor.

It's been a long time coming. Um, you're a physicist at the University of Albany and 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. Um, and so I'm really excited to have you. Thank you.

>> Well, then thank you so much for having me. This is very exciting. >> Oh, no. It's an absolute honor. And you you have a a NASA background as well.

I I I want to know how you got into UFOs to begin with because a lot of people with your sort of credentials and background uh think UFOs are a joke, >> right? Yeah. I mean, I've I've always been interested in in UFOs. I was 12 when Star Wars came out in 1977. And during and during that time, I mean, it was the same year Close Encounters: The Third Kind came out. It was, you know, another movie studios response to Star Wars that came out in December.

And I didn't I didn't like it as much cuz there weren't spaceships shooting each others with lasers, right? [laughter] So So as a 12-year-old, that wasn't that exciting. But um but at the same time, you know, there were TV shows like In Search of with Leonard Leonard Nemoy um and they would cover UFO topics and that was on every night like at 6:30 when we're eating dinner. So So I watched that all the time. So I've always been interested in them and um and I think I wasn't so so this so I went to graduate school in 1988. Um, I'm grew up in Wisconsin and I moved out to Montana to go to graduate school at Montana State University in Bosezeman.

And our first week or two there, I had just moved there. And um, there was a cattle mutilation >> where two cows were killed and surgically manipulated. I don't have a good word for what happened to them. [laughter] >> The blood was drained. >> The blood was drained.

The the the sensory organs removed. the genitals removed. One of them had like a core sample. It had this cylindrical hole punched through it. Just bizarre.

I mean, really bizarre. And the stand and the people on the news were crazed about this, right? Oh my god, there's, you know, these two cows on this ranch were killed. And there were UFO reports in the county that night, hundreds of reports. And um so the two stories were that it was either aliens or Satanists. And and and everybody's all got their undies in a bundle over this, right? And so, so we're at the physics department and um 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 where did what kind of place did we just move to where cows are [laughter] >> murdered this way, right? This is really bizarre. So, we're discussing this in the hallway >> and it was this heated discussion and I remember 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 that level of stupid discussion, right, that 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 cuz it was the opposite, but he said, "Oh yeah, yeah, this happens from time to time and they'll 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? That's even crazier than [laughter] 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 Malmstrom 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 cuz 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 the the the our our entire military should be mobilized or something like that, right? >> So we just didn't believe it. We thought this was just silly and it 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 Msrom Air Force. And we would all laugh, right? This and so that was a running joke for a whole year.

And so now time passes and um that was September of 1988 and he had said that it was ongoing. He said they are doing this presently. Right. >> Mhm. >> And so now fast forward to [gasps] it was about 2015.

So it's a couple years before the New York Times article and um I was teaching an astronomy class. And we got to the point we're 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 So I was just poking around on the internet if there is there anything reasonable I can actually say other than the Drake equation and the Fairmy 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 um Robert Hastings news um conference from like 2010 where he had six people on from the Air Force, various Air Force positions. The first one was Robert Solace talking about UFOs shutting down nuclear missiles at Monstrom Air 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. I'm like, that's is not a joke. >> Between September of ' 66 and March of ' 67, we lost 30 missiles to UFO activity. >> It's wild.

Yeah. >> 30. >> 30. That's pretty pretty insane. >> Now, now what are you doing? 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. [laughter] 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 and I and I spent some time thinking about it.

I was up late that night [laughter] teaching class early, right? I didn't barely slept. But I was 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 who we shouldn't be trusting with anything, or this is actually real, which makes more sense considering the amount of time that's involved, a 20-year time span, and um 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 what is here? How real is this? How possible is this?" And I so I so that's when I started looking into it.

>> And I was 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 um and the room was packed. I mean we I don't know how many people can actually sit in that room but it was well over the fire limit, right? [laughter] I mean we had people sitting cross-legged right up to the front screen >> and um and I the talk went on there were so many questions I talk of it for almost 3 hours >> and and most people just stayed for it cuz 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 the New York Times article comes out and um [clears throat] >> and I thought well somebody has to be somebody ought to study this and I 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 a rigorous scientist like yourself because I think science in the conventional sense has to be repeatable. you need, you know, every time you 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 >> yeah, and that's that's one thing that worried me once I looked into it.

I thought, wow, 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 Leno, which is a town next to their Fukushima prefraracture, where they have they're 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. Vice did a 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. There was a Netflix encounter episode I think episode 4 focused on that as well. >> And Malmstrom where you mentioned that is the site of >> tons and tons of activity.

You have Bob Salace obviously in in ' 67 but before that you had this this Echoflight incident you know I think it was like very it was 10 days before or something. One was March 16th one was March 24th. Then you have uh 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 Langan, which say what you will about the guy. He says he's has the highest IQ in the world.

He seems a little cocky to me, but he's just offhand. He's saying he's he's seen UFOs and he's seen them around Malmstrom uh 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 uh I was there and suddenly I look up and I I say suddenly it was just in the sky. I became aware that it was up there and I looked up there's this huge spheroidal you know but elliptical not not a perfect spheroid like a saucer that was turned partially on its side >> right >> and so it's just this recurring trope from all these uncorrelated sources.

uh Robert Hastings who wrote the book UFOs and Nukes got into this whole subject because his father was actually uh um working at Malmstrom base and um he was learning radar theory from one of the radar operators there. Uh Bob Hastings was while he was a janitor. He was in high school and the the radar operator was like, "We're tracking some of these unknowns. You should take a look." And then that that was it for him. He was hooked and he dedicated his life to studying this stuff.

>> Crazy. Yeah. >> So yeah. >> Yeah. It's cool.

I was maybe 3 years ago. We were down in Louisiana visiting my in-laws for for Marty Gro. And so we're it was February and we're grill outside grilling, right? And um and I was grilling with my wife's uncle Matt and he had his Air Force cap on and I and I spotted Malmstrom Air Force Base on his Air Force cap and I was like, [gasps] "Uncle Matt, you were at the air you were in the Air Force and you were at Mstrom. You were at Malmstrom." And he goes, "Yeah, I was stationed in Malta." I When were you there? And he goes, "Uh, like 1971 through 74 or something like that and early '7s." And I said, "Did you ever hear anything about UFO incursions at nuclear weapons sites?" He goes, "Oh, that happened all the time. These things would come in and shut down the nuclear weapons." And he was going on and on about this.

I'm like, like it's common knowledge. Yep. >> Right. And how how is it Congress is just finding out about this, right? And my wife's uncle Matt has known this [laughter] since 1971. Th this is something to worry about, right? And I was so excited.

I I I told him, "Okay, can you tell my wife this because I'm tired of being the only crazy person in [laughter] but but it was his response was amazing. Oh yeah, this happened all the time." And like 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 ibuprofen. These are people who work at the nuclear bases. They're the picture of mental health and of sound mind and they all see tic tac, 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? That's that's clear. >> Absolutely clear.

Yeah. >> Do you think the US government has saucers and hangers and we have a 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 that's probably the case. Yeah.

>> Have you met anybody working on the crafts themselves? >> I've met people who've claimed to have worked on them or seen them. So, yeah. Anybody that you can mention or >> No, I shouldn't do [laughter] that. >> Okay. >> These are these are whispers that you get every note and I can't.

>> Did you Did you find them believable though? >> Yeah. Entirely believable. Yeah. >> Really? Yeah. >> 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 and I was like, "All right, that makes sense." >> Interesting. >> Yeah. >> So, it's like um you know, giving an iPhone to a a just caveman or something >> something like that. Yeah. >> Interesting.

>> I mean, it seem it seems like that the tech any technologies they've got from it are just, you know, surface level type stuff. Oh, this is some interesting material. What's it made of that that level? >> If if I were on the inside, I would probably want somebody like you working on this sort of thing. >> I'd love to be working on this, but I not not black work. I'd love to work on this in the open.

>> Have you ever been contacted to do black work? Uh, I had the opportunity to to have clearance when I worked at NASA. Okay. But but I turned it down >> because you've always wanted to do things in an open transparent way. >> 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 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 UFO program? >> Back. If if it's held back at all, it's because you've got 10 people closeted working on one thing and they [clears throat] don't get extra information that you might need to get interesting ideas.

You know, the more people you have working on a problem, the more diversity of ideas you're going to get. And >> do you think that there are certain scientific things that you can't work on in the kind of civil side, you know, open world of of science without receiving backlash? Uh, UFOs is one of them. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. We There was some backlash some backlash when we started working on UFOs.

There's You mentioned on Danny Jones that you've had various friends work on anti-gravity and receive sort of backlash, >> threatened 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. Yeah, I mean I, you know, 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 could jump to that conclusion, but I don't [gasps] I don't actually know what the situation is. It's hard to tell.

>> Doesn't that feel like the base case conclusion? Like if you if somebody's getting threatened over discovering a thing, um 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, right? Yeah. Like that seems like the AAMS razor easy explanation. >> It leads to a whole sets of conspiracy theories, right? And it's it's difficult. >> Yeah. Yeah.

I've done deep dives on this guy like Towns and Brown who I'm really fascinated with and I I talk about him probably too much for the audience always laughs when I talk but [laughter] but you know I I find him to be really interesting because I do think he made breakthroughs in the world of gravity. this sort of biffield brown effect which is I think a very simple experiment but I have you looked into that at all or >> I haven't looked into that much at all. Um you have limited time that's the problem. I've got stacks of books I want to read and things I want to look at and yeah, it's just you have to pick and choose. And I think that's and 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 sending 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 >> except at this point I don't think it's nonsensical. So the payoff's huge, right? How do you think UFOs fly? >> I have no idea. They're ve they're very strange in a lot of ways. First, the um how many ways are they strange, right? [gasps] The the speeds and accelerations are crazy, right? The accelerations, nobody's going to survive that.

So, so the equipment isn't going to survive it. So, you know, in the Nimtt's case, we estimated the acceleration of the tic tac dropping from 28,000 ft to sea level in 7 5 seconds or so, 78 seconds. Um, it's about 5,000 gs of acceleration minimum, right? 5,000 gs is insane. Um, the new F-35 fighter jets, their wings rip off at 13gs. You know, most missile frames can't handle more than a 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 got this tic tac thing accelerating at 5,000 gs. That's not possible. I mean, equipment won't survive. So now this leads you to think the only solutions there is you've got to be playing with inertia somehow.

You've got to be playing with gravity somehow. And um and so that leads you down the path of general relativity and warp drive and that way of thinking, right? >> Do you have a like a prop a propulsion modality that you like best when it comes to UFOs? >> No, I don't exactly. So then but then the other problem is power. If you look at energies and power involved, the the amount of power for that tic tac dropping >> is something like um what was it was,00 gawatt of power. You know, I remember Back to the Future with Doc Doc Brown 2.1 gaww like that's crazy or something.

This thing was,00 gawatts, right? I mean, this is >> And he had he had Mr. Fusion, which was a nuclear fusion machine. Yeah, [laughter] >> that's right. Yeah. So, this is more power.

The tic tac maneuver took more power than the total nuclear power output of the United States. >> Wow. Wow. >> And that's in in that tic tac in the size of an F-18. I mean, that's crazy.

And so now how do you how do you get your head around that if so if if you so let's say they're they can deal with that kind of power for some reason they have access to that much energy. >> Um equipment is never 100% efficient. >> So a 1% inefficiency. So you most of the things we make are like 20% efficient at best, right? Um 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 1,000 gawatt is like 11 gawatt of power. >> That means 11 gawatts of power is going into waste heat. >> The thing would melt. >> Mhm.

>> So now what's happening? Are they really more efficient than 99%. >> Or is or do 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. Um warp drive is certainly on the table. >> Um but that too is messy because we don't know enough about how you know since there has been theoretical work done on on warp bubbles um we don't really know how these would interact with matter.

M so what does a warp bubble do in an atmosphere? We don't nobody's I don't think has looked into that. So 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.

Uh the underwater UFOs you've even got more in you should should be a much more friction there. These things are moving. The the one with the H the the New Zealand frigot in 1980s, the HMNZS Southland um had an 800 foot long USO following it and it was about 2 km 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 the width of this thing was about 150 ft in diameter. This cylindrical shaped object 800 ft long.

So it's so it's what is that? That's 30% longer than the largest um Russian sub to be the typhoon class subs, right? So it's 30% bigger than a typhoon class sub. The thing closes 2 km in 25 seconds. This gives you an acceleration right underwater. The top speed is something like 3,500 miles an hour and you've got to clear a a 150 foot diameter cylind 2 kmter long cylinder of water out of the way to move this thing in in 25 seconds. That water had to go somewhere.

Water is not compressible. So you would have had waves coming up. Um 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 how this works I I have no explanation for this. Um [clears throat] but that's the data. Now now what do you do? Hm. Interesting.

>> It's really perplexing. These things are really not simple. >> Yeah. Do you think you've ever studied UFO parts? [gasps] >> Um my colleague Matthew Shadalagus has been working on studying debris from purported crashes. >> Really? >> Yeah.

He has a new technique for um detecting isotopes um using neutron activation. So he's developed this technique and he's been working on this furiously for the last couple months. >> Neutron activations, how is that different than massspec? >> Um mass spec basically you um typically you you dissolve the material in nitric acid and then you spray it into a into a some electric plates that basically electrify it, ionize it and then you shoot it into a magnetic field that constant magnetic field. The thing will move in a circle. So, and the radius of the circle depends on the mass.

So, then it hits a screen depending on where the mass is. It 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, um, isotope differences are are neutron differences in various elements, right? And if you were to find some, you know, 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 a UFO, >> right? Exactly. Well said.

[laughter] You summarized that very nicely. >> Yeah, that's exactly it. And um so Matthew's technique is different. He basically irradiates the material with neutrons >> with with a neutron source and basically creates um [snorts] heavier isotopes with these extra neutrons >> and um and then he watches them decay back into the 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 um from that.

And it's non-destructive because the they they decipate back to where they were and u pretty quickly. And um and you're not doing it to most of the material. You're only you know rating thousands of these atoms rather than as compared to Avagadro's number for the whole sample. >> Right. >> It's so amazing.

I mean Gary Nolan is also doing this at Stanford. He's using mass spec. Right. So, 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. >> Like they you'd want some sort of like civilian like the smartest like >> Yeah. No, I know there there's there's interest in Matthew's work. He's had contact with government people and I can't really [clears throat] talk about those details, but >> Okay. Yeah.

Are the parts like arts parts? the the parts that >> some of them were arts parts, but he's he's had other ones, too. He's had material from Ukraine and Israel and >> Wow. >> all over. Yeah. >> Interesting.

>> Yeah. >> Yeah. Arts parts. It's this rumor that Art Bell, right, eventually ended up uh in possession of this material that I think was from the Was it from the Roswell? >> Some of it's from Roswell. Yeah.

Yeah. and and the the material is in Artbell obviously famous coast to coast you know amazing you know um 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 cuz he you know he's so passionate about about this stuff I believe one of the pieces is magnesium bismouth is that right >> because that's what Nolan has as well I find this really interesting because in the Biffield brown effect with towns and brown the anti-gravity stuff. Uh, 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 ton I I mostly have evidence that he figured out an anti-gravity modality, but magnesium uh or or bismouth rather is constantly talked about bismouth because bismouth is a high K dialectric. So it stores and discharges easily a lot of electromagnetism and that in the Bfield Brown effect if you use that as the insulator between the two 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-gra 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 nano layers of the bismouth and magnesium. And the and one of one of the two is paramagnetic and the other is diamagnetic. >> So they're 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 spinronics and this sort of thing basically is dealing with magnetic spins with diamagnetic and paramagnetic materials. So >> 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 microsize wave guides for terraertz power. >> And um do do you think that that that's true? Do you think these these pieces are able to >> I don't know if that's I don't know if that's possible. Um that we haven't looked into and I know I know what Matthew's done, but I don't think that he's looked into that at all. Yeah. [clears throat] >> What is 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 you could dwell on it if you want for in the movie if it comes up. >> Have to think about that. What do I What do I What interesting? Yeah. I don't know if I don't know if there is one exactly.

>> Yeah. At at NASA um 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 and like I don't know, you have like um Diana Pulka. Have you ever read her book American Cosmic? So, she has this NASA mission controller who >> I guess now is public, but his 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 there are individuals at NASA who are interested and I and since I've gotten interested and been vocal about it.

I've had some of the some of them I knew when I was at NASA have come talked to me and said, "Oh, yeah. I was interested or I knew I know some something about this or that." >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> It's so strange cuz it Yeah. You have Hal Pavmeer who was a I think he was both CIA and NASA showing up at Chris Bledso's door when he starts to attract UFOs.

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 [clears throat] wouldn't have thought that when I was back, you know, when I worked there, but >> interesting. >> Yeah.

>> Is there a are they doing remote viewing in a professional capacity at NASA? >> No. 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 this is public. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Well, then well, we can people are going to look it up.

>> You can figure out who it is. >> Okay. [laughter] All right. >> Yeah. No, I actually I was Yeah, there was a Yeah.

So, but >> Well, if it's public, it's you know interesting. >> Yeah. >> That's fascinating. and and that person did it before they came to NASA but um but are currently or were were NASA they may be retired now at this point >> 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 the these there are handfuls of people doing weird things here and there right and 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 they're not supposed to be studying which is >> fascinating.

>> On that patent that NASA patent I believe Larry Smallley 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 superconductorbased you know kind of weight reduction uh via kind of anti-gravity I think she she called it gravitons gravity particles um 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 MITER 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 a company I think it's called anti-gravity LLC or something and then her physics chair Larry Smallley goes and joins her which I think is lends credence to the actual findings right if your physics chair leaves I mean you 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 tenure position >> and then his name shows up on a patent around a barrel-shaped asymmetric capacitor which is town that's talking about towns and brown and I'm like, okay, what's going on? >> Yeah, that's interesting. [laughter] Yeah. Wow.

>> I find it fascinating. Yeah. But 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. Um, but a lot of a lot of the names that pop up in in UFO science, quote unquote, uh, 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.

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 wellcoordinated >> it's a different thing. Yeah. >> So like what I always try to ask 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 synchronicities >> just people doing things. Um, I mean that's one thing.

I mean scientists tinker as well, right? 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 as as long as I mean the requirement was you had to convince your aerial lead that this was in line with NASA's missions basically in some way. And so um, 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 and while I worked there, near the end of the time I worked there during the Bush 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 um story and I was struck by the fact that the picture, you know, Jesse Marcel says one thing about the the material and and sounds entirely believable and then they get the picture the in the newspaper with General Remy with what clearly is aluminum foil and balsa wood. >> Oh yeah. >> In the picture. Right. and and you look at that picture and you think there's no way anybody's going to mistake that for any kind of craft debris.

So, what was Jesse Marcel 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, Marcel claimed that the the real UFO debris was off to the side right outside of the frame that frame. Did he say that? >> He did. Yeah. He also said he brought it home and that his son played with it.

>> He showed it with his son. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So I think he would know the difference.

>> He would know the difference. Right. So So then there there's the picture of General Ramy and he's holding a memo that you can see in the photographs and it's a clearly a it's stamped top secret and I thought what does that memo say? And so me and one of my colleagues at NASA 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 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 the 300 MHz computer um on this and um it just didn't have the computing power and computing time to do it.

So, so we abandoned the project, but but we had thought that we were going to we're going, 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, right? Yeah, our sneaky plant and 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 all at 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 winter 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 we're 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 americanalchemymerch.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 in little pockets and compartment 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 Stewart said, "Isn't it amazing what scientists can do when 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 and I think that it's that simple. >> Yeah. >> In 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 uh explain that? >> Yeah. Well, there's a few Yeah.

So it has two aspects. The first one is um 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 um and when you think about living on a planet um living under an atmosphere is horrible. It's difficult. The weather is the the the conditions change every day. They change 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 a snowstorm. Um, and now we're down here and it's what 60° and sunny and I hope to go to the botanical garden before I leave or something.

Right. So, [gasps] the atmospheres are very >> are quite variable. 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° Fahrenheit.

And actually, I was at NASA as when the Mellan 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 were like, what's going on with this these mountain tops? And realized they would become reflective when the temperature would drop. [snorts] So the temperature would drop, the mountain tops would become radar reflective.

And they realized what was happening is vaporized lead and bismouth was making was actually um making snowflakes. And so it was actually snowing leaden bismouth snow on the mountain tops. I mean, imagine what that would 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 That's a cold day in hell, by the way, [laughter] >> when you've got metal snow raining on the mountain tops.

>> So, that's what Venus's atmosphere is like, right? And then [clears throat] you go to Mars, and Mars has 1/100th >> the atmospheric pressure of Earth. So, you need a space suit and it's cold. You know what? 100° 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 is only liquid from 0° C to 100° C, 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, atmospheric pressure varies with atmospheric height as well, but 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 um and water has such a high heat capacity, the temperature doesn't change that much. You don't have the temperature fluctuations of 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. Um, 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 um so it's a great place to hide. >> Yeah, >> it's so there's every reason to go to the water. Um >> it's fascinating.

So if you were like a cardv three or four scale civilization and you wanted to colonize a bunch of other planets, water is the perfect hideout spot. It's evidence. >> Water. >> Yeah. Well, that's the other thing.

So you you only have you only have a couple choices, right? So if you're going to go col 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. Um but but bringing everything you need to to build up a base or some kind of settlement is is going to be extra difficult. So So you really have have a few options. And um water worlds we now know are relatively common.

You know, we have several water worlds in our in our solar system. Mostly most of them are frozen moons, icy 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? Um or to colonize airless worlds like the moon, which is no different than staying in your spaceship. Um 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 either going to go with an airless world and stay in your spaceship.

Um, or the next most reasonable choice would go to be to go to water. >> Yeah. And so it's 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, you know, these worlds that don't flood because you end up with a lot of lot of ice. Um, and so, you know, that's fascinating as well. And then I think that the final thing on the UFO front is you're talking about tons and tons of power. Uh, if you were to theoretically break hydrogen and oxygen bonds in H2O, you would get a ton of power. >> Yeah.

Yeah, you can use water for 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 atom any atom you want you can probably pull out of seawater. 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 there are UFO bases in our oceans? Tim Berschett recently said there are five uh oceanic hot spots across the world. >> We have a higher propensity of sightings around these five or six I believe deep area deep water areas. And so to me it just um it creates a um a question there.

>> Do you think there are UFO bases? >> I think that's probably that that's probably the best bet. >> Really? >> Yeah. >> And you went to Catalina, right? >> Went to Catalina. which is one of the it's off the coast of Southern California and a lot of people think it's this UFO hotspot. There's a great um book I think it's called under underwater or undersea UFO base by Preston Dennit, 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 we spent we spent 5 days on a rooftop in Laguna Beach and watching the skies and um and it's all documented in the the movie A Tear in the Sky. So um 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 that we know of has happened. Right. So um so there's a lot of excitement.

There's a lot of excitement in that movie and that's real excitement, right? >> Yeah. >> And um and we did see we did see some interesting things that um and so here comes some spoilers [laughter] and and so I'm going to spoil things twice. So, so there's at 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 two teams. >> They spotted this bright light that was moving um and they said it's too bright to be a satellite.

It's it's you know going in this direction. So, we're we're looking for it as well. So, we recorded this object and um then it just abruptly disappears and which is very strange. And um 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. Um science takes a lot longer.

>> We're a lot slower. >> And um 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. >> Um, Matthew Shadagus was the first author of that paper.

And so we found that that bright light was the space station. >> Um, 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 sort of thing. And you make and and I remember telling Matthew on our way, >> the space station looks weird, by the way.

And it looks really like a UFO. Yeah. >> And I remember telling Matthew on the airplane, he you know, we were both excited. Oh, this is going to be so much fun. Think imagine 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, >> right?" And that's really what happened that first mission. We learned how not to do it. >> Um, but Matthew is the one who figured out it was the space station. and he put it all together and he actually took the pixel size on the camera >> and then um knowing the altitude of the space station figured out how big the space station should be and he was within one foot >> of the side of the space size of the space station. It's really a nice analysis he does.

We put it in the appendex and >> um and yeah something to be proud of the fact that yeah we identified it to be the space station and actually proved it right. So, that's cool. >> Um, another another event that happened was these um one of the fleer cameras was showing these objects dropping into the sea and um 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 fleer camera to hear me shouting about the night. I was telling people, "Put on your night vision goggles and look over here." Um, but I saw something actually drop and hit the water in infrared.

>> Whoa. >> Um, >> you got that on video? >> No. No. I was just looking through the goggles watching for things. And um, >> but it was through infrared.

>> It was in infrared. Yeah. And then then um and I think they tried to simulate this in the film, but it's not simulated properly. They showed this thing hovering. It wasn't It just dropped.

>> Wow. >> But but the fleer cameras recorded things dropping into the sea. And we um >> So you think you saw a UFO? I don't know what I saw actually but because but but I was excited because it happened about the same time the fleer camera was showing things dropping but then we figured out later that the fleer camera was actually malfunctioning and that's and that's a failure mode of the flare cameras. We actually talked to the engineers who worked on something. >> Yeah, these things falling down is actually a failure mode.

>> Oh, so maybe it was an issue with the camera. >> So, so the flare camera recording we had was not something dropping into the sea. Um, I don't know what I saw and probably will never know because you can't has to 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 as you can >> is there one say you had to pick one and you had to you know what what would you pick? >> If [clears throat] I picked one, I would try. That's tough.

I think I would go with a fleer 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 in 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?" >> And so, you know, but the other benefit of is for with a flare camera is you can measure the temperature of the object.

M >> because you're picking up infrared um emissions, right? So those >> that black body infrared spectrum actually gives you the temperature of the object. So >> where where white hot comes from. >> Yeah. So now so so not only do you get a visual record of the object, but you get its temperature too, which is which is in you get extra pieces of information for that. So for that reason, I probably would choose a fleer camera.

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 um JAL Airlines 6 JAL 1628. >> It was a Japan Airlines cargo flight piloted by Captain Kenju Teruchi. This is the sketch Tuchi drew of what he says he saw at his window that night. And this Japanese television graphic is based on his description.

>> This is just a small space ship. We can see big. This one is size is carrier. to mother ships >> and I and I remember I remember that being on the nightly news. I remember watching it was on NBC Tom Broka Connie Chung.

I remember that being on the news and being holy there's giant aircraft carriers sized walnutshaped UFO followed that Japanese Airlines for 45 minutes across Alaska. >> Wild give us the whole sequence. >> Yeah. So they've got So the Japanese airlines they it's a it's not a passenger jet. It's a 747.

They are transporting Boule Nuvo. Yep. They got wine in the back. Let the skeptics rejoice. No, the pilots were not drunk on Ballet Nuvo.

That'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 I don't remember all the events.

Several things happened. 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 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. Um, and they follow in front of the plane for some time and then um, and then this giant walnut-shaped object shows up that's something like 4747s in length.

Right? So, this thing's the thing's the 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 it's 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, um, it was later found that military heightf finding radar was picking it up. And so that radar actually that those radar records actually got collected. And um, and so this walnutshaped craft basically follow the 747 for about 45 minutes. stayed 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 um and we analyzed its speed and acceleration just crudely based on the description of what it was doing. So it would go so at one point it would be at like 1:00 and then the next sweep of the radar, which is about 12 seconds or so, would be would be at 6:00. And so we were using those that information to estimate speeds and accelerations. Um Daniel Kumbbe another um physicist from the Neils Boore 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 at took several dumps jumps different accelerations at different times. But there were three three of them were the accelerations were greater than 9,000 gs. One of them was like 11,000 gs. And the top speed he estimated to be 250,000 m an hour.

And at 250,000 mph, you can get to the moon in 54 minutes. >> Whoa. >> That's That's not a joke. [laughter] You got 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 you're dealing with here. So that's 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 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 >> And that's 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? That's amazing. >> Yeah. But he said so 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 um so that exists, but but from that radar data, it's accelerating at 10,000 gs, 250,000 miles an hour. And and you can actually see the position of the plane on the radar. 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.

>> Is the Are the pilots still alive? >> Yeah, I think so. >> I want to get in touch with that. >> 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 was reinstated. >> That's horrible that he was fired for that. I mean, what what are you supposed you experienced something that kind of traumatic and and world view shattering? >> What what would lying about it be a better thing to do for flight safety? [laughter] >> You're right. >> I think that's really the question.

>> Just ignore it. Yeah. That's crazy. Um fascinating. You know, there's that audio recording of Steven Spielberg, I believe, talking about his trip to the White House and um they do a viewing of ET.

>> Oh, right. I've heard this. Yes. And Reagan says, uh, 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 he was doing 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 and 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. >> [laughter] >> Um um but he but but but he 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 [clears throat] he said it >> and so 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 to say oh we've 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 That's something. Yeah.

I mean, Alaska is a hot spot historically uh as well. I believe um Nathan Twining, who's head of air material command, responsible for all aircraft development of the Air Force, wrote the famous Twining memo in 1947 saying UFOs are not vision visionary nor fictitious, right? [laughter] >> Um he he uh 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. >> Mhm. >> And then right after that, you had this bizarre, you know, these things seem to show up and 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' bizarre. >> I've [clears throat] heard something I've heard something about deleted emails involving this specific craft uh the National Military Command Center servers.

So I I don't know. It seems like there's something strange about this craft and this this was also in Alaska. So >> right, who knows? >> That's amazing. >> Yeah. >> Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah, it's amazing to know that, you know, his scientific Reagan scientific team had gotten that data. What did they do with it? What is, you know, what are what are their reports? I would like to see that. You know, the [sighs and gasps] you know, disclose those. That would be interesting.

You know, alone. Um the Kexsburg, Pennsylvania UFO crash. >> Yeah. 1965. >> Yeah.

And my my dad's cousin, Donald Hornig, he was later the president of Brown University was was on he was the scientific adviser to presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson. What? Yeah, that was my dad's my dad's cousin did that. In fact, he he's the person who he designed the the electronic triggers for the the um plutonium bomb. >> Whoa. >> In the um Manhattan project.

>> What was his name? Donald Hornig. >> Whoa. >> And and the night before the first test in Trinity that he was Oenheimer gave him a sidearm and had him babysit the bomb up in the tower during a thunderstorm. >> What? >> And and I was surprised that they didn't put that in the movie Oppenheimer because it's an awesome story, but the movie is about Oenheimer, not about the Manhattan Project. But but he was um Yes.

So that was and his wife was but his wife was in the movie. Lenny Lily Hornig was in the movie. She was the woman who came from Harvard and um 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 um Los Alamos and was being interviewed for a position, they asked her how fast she typed and she goes, "They don't teach typing at Harvard." And they used that line in the movie, which was great. Whoa, that is fascinating. >> So, but I but so I mentioned that because um because Donald Hering was was the chief scientific adviser to President Johnson >> who was president during the Kexsburg crash.

And I found I had actually found a document about the Kexsburg UFO and Donald Horn was listed as being present. >> I thought, "Oh my god." And I I didn't never got to meet him. Um, and and I did I did ask his wife, Lily, about it, but she didn't know >> what document. >> Uh, I don't know. I maybe I have to look for it.

There was some kind of summary about the Kexsburg crash and something. It was some kind of government summary. >> Official official government. >> Official. Yeah.

Yeah. >> And >> but he 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 a pre the presidential science adviser is on site at a UFO crash >> Yeah.

>> is amazing unto itself. >> Oh, that's true. Yeah, that's a good point. >> That's a really big deal. I think Eric Walker was supposedly present as well at the Cexsburg crash.

He was the um 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. >> He's an interesting guy. >> Wow. who like 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 Do you lend credence to any of those sorts of stories? The idea that they're sort of an elite military scientific >> I I can't I I wouldn't be surprised if they were true. >> Yeah. >> Um I don't know if I would just jump on believing they're true without any evidence, but um >> 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 some kind of group of and if it's not a formal group, there's probably informal groups and >> Yes.

>> All all that sort of thing. Yeah. >> Yeah. Do you think, you know, we've mentioned the nuclear connection a bunch in this uh conversation. Do you think that uh not only UFOs are just showing up around nuclear sites, but that the secrecy uh involved in the Atomic Energy Commission and the Department of Energy uh overlays UFO secrecy and that the program is somehow bound up in, you know, atomic stuff? >> Well, that's a good question, too.

Yeah, it's not clear how I mean what it what it it looks like the the an SEU did a study of this of UFOs monitoring nuclear sites. And so it looks like [gasps] whoever is behind the whole UFO business, whoever these guys are have been performing, you know, surveillance this whole time. They're surveilling us and and it's intelligent surveillance. They know what they're doing. >> And in fact, the SCEU study showed that >> not only do you So when you 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 um UFO sightings than any of the other places.

>> Wow. >> Nearby. So it shows that it's stat 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. >> Yeah. >> So while some of these sites were being built, UFOs were present. >> That's definitely right. >> So 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 uh Robert Hastings has an interview with him. When we got down there, they told us that this bogey was out there right over the Hanford Ordinance Works and directed the Lieutenant Commander Brown to take off and challenge him. >> And I think I mentioned him in our paper. I've got the um >> we published a paper this year on the scientific study of UAP and basically goes through the history of how people have tried to study this.

>> And I and I mentioned Bud Bud Clem's sightings at at Hanford there. >> Yeah. It's so it's so fascinating that that connection is and there 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 is important or maybe we're a resource you humans are a resource to them and so they need to intervene and ensure you know things don't we don't blow ourselves up or something >> but it's it's really hard to say. I mean, I know like the Age of Disclosure Lou Alzando, you know, kind of crew like they talk about it as far as like uh they're 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 and 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, there humans are a hot mess, right? And so if they if they're >> present in the universe and in our neighborhood and then right now they don't have to deal with us directly, but if we go out there they might have to deal with us. I think Stanton Freeman put it this way. It's kind of like you'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. There's 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? And so he was he was describing human the 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 cuz you're in a a I think very unique vantage point as somebody who uh is at the intersection of kind of credible physics and then kind of very speculative UFO, you know, interest. Uh there are a couple of interesting objects of interest of late that kind of you know hit that intersection. The first I want to talk about is actually this discovery of um Beatatric Valale at Stockholm University who you know I I had the pleasure of interviewing her and she was looking at the Palmer Observatory which was the most you know inuse observatory you know in kind of mid-century in the US. that's in San Diego. And she found over a 100,000 in an 8-year period what appeared to be UFOs, mirror like objects, little transients, light flashes, and um 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. Um, so this is just fascinating study and and nobody in the credentialed conventional physics world has debunked it. It's been peer- reviewviewed and you have people like Sabina Hosenfelder and Brian Keading, 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 what do you make of it? >> Oh, 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 um that if you have something in orbit, you might pick you might be able to detect it in a photograph. Right? So that's the that's the premise. Um 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 in a line or something like this and I thought I think that's fascinating. Um, it's tough.

The most recent papers with 100,000, that's hard to believe. That would that's a little shocking. >> Um, 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 Yeah, it was 100,000 between 1949 and 1957. The reason you'd ended in 1957 is because Sputnik goes up.

So, it's pre-satellites, which is that's remarkable. And it's they're all in geostationary orbit, geo, so 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 or you know beat this thing was they said uh you know uh these have to be plate defects. These have to be sort of, you know, the the the the astronomical plates, you know, uh have all sorts of weird, you know, chemical issues over long periods of time 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? You have kind of a dark side of the earth." She said, "Is um you know, are these objects dropping off on the dark side of the Earth >> when when they shouldn't be being illuminated by the sun?" I think that's the idea, right? >> 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's shadow and, you know, the the sun side of the Earth, right? >> You should have the plate defect, right? Should be constant. >> It would be completely proportional and constant. And so, uh, she found a, 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, um, it's one of the the I mean, the hallmark 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 do the study, try 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 is she's now saying you can go look at the data for yourself.

So the the raw data I think is online now for people to Oh, it's not online. Okay. It will be it will be tried to get it. >> Okay. You've tried to get it.

Okay. Okay. Then she says she's putting it online. >> She's working on that. >> 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 multiple observatories. That would be ideal.

>> Yeah. So, yeah, totally agree. There's work to be done there, but pretty intriguing, I think. >> Yeah, it is intriguing. It is.

Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It was a 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 orbiting the earth. So >> do you think UFOs come from space or do you think they are sort of, you know, going through wormholes, you know, or or time travelers? >> Absolutely no idea. They 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 Sean 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 travel was 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 um that's why I think there's probably bases underwater is your best bet 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 the ne so when you had the Fukushima disaster they showed up the next day. M [clears throat] >> so if they're coming from another star system it would take years for the for the sign any signal any information about Fukushima to get out to that star system and then years for them to come back for them to come >> unless fast and light communications and travel is possible >> or something like that right >> but yes in general relativity it would need to be >> but they're probably coming from earth in that case >> interesting uh 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 cosminauts have reported seeing things in space, and that's important. Um 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. Starts with an A. But they actually had a craft pull up alongside of them in >> half their orbit and they took pictures. Um, the cosminaut drew a picture of the object. >> Whoa.

>> Because the pictures all got confiscated by the Soviet >> the Nagarin. >> No, it's not Gagarin. It's >> Check this out. >> Akenv. Okay.

>> Akan Atanv. >> And he drew a UFO. >> He drew a picture of what they took photographs of. >> Wow. What What mission was this? Do you know? Or >> No, I think it was one when they were going to um one of the beginning early space stations.

>> Wow. >> Yeah. This thing pulled up. It had it 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 Skyab, they were on Skyab, I think 1977ish, um they actually photographed a red flashing light. Well, what is Skyab for the idea? >> Skyab was one of our early space stations. >> Okay. >> And um and they actually saw a red flashing light that followed them for part of their orbit and then disappeared.

>> Really? >> Yes. And they had photographs of that. Yeah. >> What did he say happened to the photographs? >> Oh, they're actually public. You can find them online.

>> Okay. Wow. >> It's a 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 bouncy and blurry and out.

>> But it's a red light that seems to be falling. >> It's a red flashing light in space. Nobody Nobody puts lights on satellites. First, you don't need them. And second, it's more weight.

You know, every every ounce is going to cost you a crazy amount. >> Also, satellites back then weren't doing proximity operations. They were just following predictable orbit. They weren't changing orbits. They weren't changing orbits either.

Yeah. >> Okay. So, that's a big deal. >> The whole thing is very strange. >> Yes.

>> Yeah. And so you and then you have the um the Gemini 11 mission where the from the transcripts the um the astronauts are working on were we're were working and something flew over their Houston acid that just something just fly over you and they say affirmative weird weird weird and then there's something like 6 minutes of no transcript right and um but when the thing flew over the object flew over them. They it drained um their it drained one of their battery stats. Um stack charlie stack got drained. So stack C got drained.

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 as 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 Musgrave a shuttle pilot also talked about seeing things like snakes. >> Wow.

>> Things writhing around in space. And so yeah >> none of that mentioned in the NASA commission's report. >> So >> so you've got and then you have what is there the the mission the Soviet mission to Phobos. >> Mhm. 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 was disabled. >> The whole thing was disabled. And Gemini 11 also it looks like the audio like like there was some sort of power interference or something as well.

Right. Right. Like electromagnetic interference. >> You got 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? I mean, >> they all sign NDAs, right? >> The astronauts.

>> Oh, I don't know what they do. >> I believe I believe they do. >> Yeah. >> So, do do you think I mean, you were you were at NASA. Do you think NASA is sort of systematically covering this stuff up? >> I would have no idea >> because the the other interesting thing from Beatric Val is she says she was in touch with a current NASA person who said that NASA tracks what they call uncorrelated targets all the time.

So these are these are, you know, sort of, you know, noise. >> Well, they're not necessarily alien spaceships, right? But it's but >> yeah, >> 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've if you're running a commission on unidentified aerial phenomenon and you've got a bunch of unidentified things, you should talk about them to >> totally. But als apparently the uncorrelated targets are systematically tracked by Space Force, >> right? and up according to this insider again I don't I don't know if this is true but >> that's really interesting um >> so all 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 KDA report which was 100 pages or something right >> yeah it's just crazy about 10 pages >> the French have a UFO research group officially called Gipen which unlike Arrow doesn't gaslight the population they you know admit that this stuff was real and are open about it.

>> That's right. Yeah. Yeah. Committ report's 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 fascinating. >> And that's what they actually said. The United States is probably covering up information. And that was their other result. >> That was their official official report.

Yeah. >> That's amazing. So, and then and I I believe the head of their uh CIA, former head of their CIA, Elaine Juliet, uh was extremely interested in UFOs and publicly to this day is like this big, you know, UFO proponent. So, right, >> they have a long history. Um so, Gemini 11, that was Pete Conrad was the astronaut.

>> Yeah. Conrad and Gordon. >> And Gordon and did they come back and say we saw a UFO? Did they say anything? >> I don't think so. >> Okay. Yeah.

I mean, because that's the other look, I I've looked into all the moon landing stuff, and I just actually had Joe Rogan on the podcast, which was a big honor. Um, he he kind of um uh was the the first person to be in our spaceship uh set, which we just built, which is really cool. Yeah. And um >> I just couldn't couldn't think of anybody better for that. And um we we talked about uh a lot of the moon 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 the inverse of that you 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 uh you know managing of that that was that was going on that 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 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 but um I mean Edgar Mitchell came back talking about having an epiphany of how we're all connected in the un you know thinking about different way of thinking about the universe and humanity but then after that he was very very much um involved with UFOs but he grew up in Roswell >> grew up in Roswell Apollo 14 astronaut >> and he had gotten and so because he was an Apollo astronaut. He got to hear all sorts of things about Roswell from people from at all levels. So >> he was very close with Warner von Braonn who seemed really interested in UFOs as well. He's the father of our of our space program.

Essentially >> Vernon Braun's mentor was Herman Herman Oberth who who gave a lecture in 1954 on UFOs. >> After so many witnesses have seen the so-called flying saucers, their existence can no 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 they he has seen numerous radar measurements of their speeds up to 19 km a second which is about 40,000 mph. He also says that the rocket program was helped and and he was he's basically the the father of German rocketry and he said that it was aided by these these non-human beings.

So [laughter] >> that's great. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. But that so that's that's going back to 19 so 1954. We knew that these things traveled at spacecraft speeds.

>> We already knew that in 1954. >> And and why are we playing catchup just now? Yeah. >> Why did this why did this take a half a century to unfold is really crazy. >> Well, proof that um NASA, you know, probably know something a thing or two internally about the UFO stuff. And I know this is something you've looked into, and I think my buddy Chris Ramsey might be doing an interesting follow-up with you on on all this stuff, but >> Oh, yeah.

Right. >> There's um there's a the Simpson photo around Gemini 11 that flight. 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 uh right here.

I'm I'm going to take it. >> I'll go grab it. >> So, we have we have this um this Simpkinson NASA UFO archive and this photo, which is like maybe the best UFO photo of all time. Um, if it's real and it comes from Gemini 11 and you you figured out that this was a Gemini 11 photo, right? >> Um, well, Ed Wilson knew that. >> Oh, okay.

Ed Wilson did. Okay. >> 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 on the lithograph.

So it's a So what he found was a n was a lithograph which is a printing a printed photograph and they printed them um kind of like a a lithograph is kind of like a um 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're 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? >> Um, I actually I I So, what 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 um >> why is that your assessment? because um 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, NASA erased the UFO from that picture. >> Um, and it doesn't. Now, of course, doing an image analysis like that on on a scanned negative, right, where you don't know what kind of process and it's JPEG, which is which is um a lossy encoding and all this these types of image analysis problems. So, it's not great im you it's not great for doing an image analysis on, but I found no evidence that anything was erased from that picture. M >> and um and and that picture actually is showing the end of the tether experiment.

So so NASA 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 it was unique one in that their goal was to go up literally launch and dock within one orbit. So, what 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 um then were tethered to the other craft and they did a tether experiment where they actually got the two crafts spinning like this.

I'm going to knock things over. got the two crafts spinning on a tether and then um and did experiments to see how stable that is and what goes wrong. And um 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, [clears throat] they're busy with the tether experiment. >> So, when was the Cuz 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? >> 2/3 of an orbit. >> So, you did some forensic investigating and realized that the timing was off. >> The timing is off >> for for when they actually did see the UF. >> So, so the big problems with that being a real picture are are first the the um first we don't have a picture of the UF.

We don't have an actual photograph of the UFO. >> Mhm. >> We just have the lithograph. >> Um there doesn't seem to be any evidence of temp those that photograph being tampered with. Um there was no indication that they saw a UFO at that time >> and the UFO they did see happened an hour later.

>> Yeah. So so so what's your best explanation as to how that photo surfaced at all with the UFO? What I suspect happened is is it's I 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 mockup to show what the astronauts saw >> and but didn't photograph. >> Was that officially published in some NASA thing? >> No, it wasn't officially published anywhere which was it made it interesting. It was found in Scott Simkinson was a NASA engineer.

>> Okay. >> Um he was 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 and I can't help but think is there any connection between Scott Simpson Scotty and Scotty in the Enterprise? I don't know. But he was very well known right in the 50s and 60s. So there might be a connection there. >> That's fascinating. Well, it sounds like he's kind of as insidery as it gets.

Yeah. And the fact that he, you know, you find in his in his records, he >> designed some of the spacecraft. I mean, >> designed some of the spacecraft. So, if there's some sort of even if it's an artist rendition where they're >> So, he had he he had and he had a collection of his NASA files. He and his secretary Emily Erdle had a collection of of their NASA files and um and then when he died and she died they were made public and they were put to auction and Ed Wilson bought them and that's how 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. >> I saw something I think well and 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 >> record way to record what happened as best they can. Yeah, >> that's fascinating.

That's so interesting. And >> why none of this is mentioned in the NASA commission's report, I have no idea. Did they not? Maybe they didn't know. I mean, it's possible they didn't know. >> I don't know.

[laughter] >> Who knows? >> I mean, speaking of NASA obstruction, three Atlas, uh, you know, we have this Manhattan sized object that is now uh uh come around back around the sun and it is headed towards Jupiter. It's going to pass the Earth uh December 19th. So, this might be out by the time um you know, it's it's it's already sort of passed. Um so, so what what do you think's going on with this object? You have like most of the astronomical community basically like ignoring it or saying it's so, you know, it doesn't matter or whatever. And then you have Avi Loe 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 what's going on? >> Yeah, that's I mean, >> and then NASA is is is did this stupid gaslighting press conference where I was honestly a little skeptical of some of AI's statements. I felt like he was like extrapolating and you know jumping to conclusions but I ended up I I wanted to side with Avi after watching this gaslighting NASA >> first. NASA press conferences are the absolute worst. >> You want to geek out a little bit Tom? [laughter] >> You were geeking out so expertly Nikki to begin with. So that was that was fabulous.

>> I mean that 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 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? [laughter] And unreasonably high. So that's part of the problem.

So So I can't that not all the blame should go to NASA for that. But but the press conferences are are always quite bor I mean part of it also is science is kind of boring and if you're giving a so if you're giving a press conference about science that might be kind 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 atlas it's like this >> it's hard if you've got 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 Right. But then crowdsource. If you're the official government body and you get billions in funding every year, then find the the amateur astronomer where they can do it and do it. Do you work with them? Contra.

[clears throat] You have the money. Like >> that would be nice. >> That'd be nice. >> Yeah. I 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 eye atlas is is weird. And I don't know. I mean, why the astronomical astronomical society won't [snorts] or community won't recognize that is kind of strange. I mean, maybe 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, I Yeah, great. easy to say comet, 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 invested in remembering, but was only like 4% water vapor 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 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 pro some difficult processes to separate these two. You and 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 um it suggests some weird processes that went into its formation. Um >> has an anti-ale, not just a tail. got a tail and an anti-tail. It's yeah, there's there's a lot to worry about here and 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. >> Just 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 like, "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. That'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 around like I see these guys I think this Piers Morgan just had on this guy I think David Kipping or something he seems like a really good >> oh I know David >> you know David seems like a really actually I I loved his episode on Rogan exoplanet 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 And 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 I don't even think he's probably familiar with a lot of the NASA cases, you know, cuz 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 will 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. [laughter] >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So, it's those two.

It's there's no like middle path of like this is the evidence. >> It's like dealing with a scientific It's like a scientific community with bipolar disorder. >> Yes. >> It's like crazy. >> Yeah.

It's it's really difficult. the um I mean the best the 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 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 >> argue against nonsense? You can find the time to argue against nonsense without looking into the nonsense. I mean that's 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 um UFOs in water, underwater UFOs, and his cases going back to the 1800s. >> These are the same things. They they're coming 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. And you have you have third world places now like in third world countries where it's like >> these people like Virginia, James Fox just got back, you know, from Brazil. He keeps going back and like this whole town uncorrelated disperate sources. They all report this cigar- shaped tic tac- like object crashing >> and and three beings coming out, you know, um two of one of which was captured and and and taken to a hospital.

And everybody working at the hospital says that they saw the being. And one neuroscientist who's still alive to this day goes on record says he's staring the being in the face for 4 minutes. >> Yeah. >> And this guy's alive. And you have that this whole there's a saucer in the town dedicated to you of us.

Why? They none of these people are making a penny. Some of them were offered briefcases of cash to shut up about this thing. So [laughter] So like what? Like explain to me why they would lie. Like it's ridiculous. It's actually absurd.

I wish I could see a UFO so somebody could offer me a sh to shut up. [laughter] >> Yeah, right. Yeah. Yeah, I'll take it. >> That's a good deal.

Maybe that's what's happening with some of the scientists. >> 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 all have cell phones or whatever and you you have >> there any high resolution pictures of quazars >> right >> I don't think so >> but they exist >> but they exist I mean we don't have high resolution pictures of exoplanets either Better yet, David Kipping and I study them. >> Yes.

>> I mean, come on. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

>> That's I mean, why ask the average person to >> Why is it a scientist th when they come to this topic, they throw their brains out the window and then open their mouth? It's it's it's maddening. >> Yeah. I think there's some sort of Well, I I think unorthodox and independent thinking don't scale with IQ. And so there are a lot of people that can be shephered into bad frameworks into 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 that 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 shephered 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 cuz you there are all these first principles argument. So you can you can 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 uh uh 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 there's that that ends the conversation with a person like that you know >> so it's it's like extremely frustrating >> right >> I'm sure you deal with it because you have to straddle academia and this sort of more, you know, crazy world. >> I've been in numerous discussions where the academic person I've been talking to just throws their brain out the window and stops thinking.

You know, you talk if I talk about something else, another scientific talk topic, they're fine. But this, they just seem to stop thinking. It's very it's very odd. >> You you're in upstate New York. Um do you think you're in the general vicinity of uh Stonybrook University? Do you think they have anything to do with UFOs? >> I don't know of anything going on at Stony Brook >> at Stony Brook.

Okay. Cuz they Yeah, they have I don't know a bunch of interesting They have like differential geometry stuff going on and you know they have Jim Simons is like a big guy there. >> Yeah. No, Stony Brook has a great physics department, but I don't think they do anything with UFOs. >> With UFO stuff.

Okay. Because David Spurggle, who's Jim Simons, you know, um uh foundation guy. So Jim Simons is like runs you he just passed away ran the best performing hedge fund in the US over you know a 30-year period um you know uh Renaissance Technologies the medallion fund and before that he was an NSA codereaker 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, um, my former colleague Eric Weinstein has suspected that maybe he has something to do with the UFO question or something and that they maybe that that Renaissance technology is sort of printing money and then they're putting it towards, you know, the UFO the UFO question. And I 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 Spurggle who's you know Jim Simon's top science adviser runs the science foundation. >> Yeah, he wrote he he was the main author on the report >> on the NASA UAP review panel, >> right? >> So I'm like what's going on? Is is there some sort of connection there? >> That's a good question. I don't know >> cuz we were just talking about all the weird NASA data and that seems to be Yeah. >> Like you know it seems like it might be suppressed or something. So >> yeah, >> who knows? Well, this has been a pleasure, Kevin.

I really love talking to you and um 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? Um that that that helps you out. >> Well, our work at U Albany would be great to support. We we just got a generous donation from a from Tony Gorman who's a local businessman and um and that has really given us a big boost and um we can always use a little more boost.

So if anybody wants to donate taxfree to some to or to to um you Albany 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. So >> yeah, so we're basically we Matthew Shadagus and I and >> you know we were original members with UAPX and now UAPX has been >> has been disbanded and moved to U Albany and it's now U Albany Project X >> and Matthew Shadagus 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. It's exciting.

Well excited to see uh you know as you make breakthroughs on a go forward basis and would 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 tiers on Substack. I am including the full link in the description of this video.