Dr. Jacques Vallée: UAP Encounters, Patterns, and the Signals of Intelligence | The Sol Forum #4

Transcript

Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music] Hi everyone and welcome to the third meeting of the soul forum. As always, this space exists to foster serious, elevated and interdisciplinary conversation about UAP and the questions they raise for science, policy and philosophy. Today's session is devoted entirely to a single guest, one whose work has shaped our very understanding of what UAP are and how we should do research on them.

Dr. Jacques Valet. Jacques has persistently challenged the idea that UAP or what he calls the phenomenon is reducible to something simple, singular, or strictly material. We also have some very exciting news to share. The Soul Foundation's 2025 symposium will take place this fall from October 24th to 26th in Italy.

We'll be announcing details soon, including registration process, speakers, and the event schedule. In the meantime, please visit our website for updates, and you'll find a link for that in the description below. So, today we're very, very excited to have Jacques with us. as you know, he's a computer scientist, information scientist, a venture capitalist, and a founding figure in uh we could say UAP studies, but really just any kind of research into UAP and absolutely foundational for our understanding of UAP in in general. And we have him here today because he's recently published a book uh the the sixth volume of a multibook series called Forbidden Science uh which is a chronicle of his research, his uh encounters with witnesses, his reflection on UAP.

Um and it's also a window into how he developed his thinking as he was going. And so Jacques, welcome uh to the soul forum. It's really nice to have you here again. >> Thank you for inviting me. I I look forward to this.

>> Yeah, it's going to be a great conversation. I know uh our our member audience and other people will see this in the future. really excited uh to have you and I'm excited because uh you know the forbidden science series is to me as a researcher and also just as somebody who you know is very concerned about UAP is it's a really interesting series of books because it's very rare for someone who's published a lot and done foundational thinking about anything to publish uh books like this that give you a window into how they came to think what they think. You know, usually when we read research books or uh academic work, uh we discover what the writer thinks, uh but not how they get to what they think. And these books are very uh different in that regard.

So maybe to start off, you could tell us a bit about um you know, why you chose to do this at all uh over the last couple decades. Well, u journals are more of a tradition in Europe than than they are in the US. In the US, literature deals with, you know, current topics and uh in in Europe, a number of um writers have uh chosen the format of the diary because they felt they lived through exceptional times. And uh that was my my motivation for selling as a really as a as a student, as a young astronomer because I thought, you know, uh I was living in exceptional times with the the the end of World War II, the transition to computers, the transition to new approaches to astronomy, which was my my first career. What I didn't know was that those exceptional times would would last um you know 70 more years and I'm still writing although now I'm thinking of you know the closing volume in that whole series.

What people will find there is not just and and and people occasionally write to me in a friendly way. Why don't you stick to you know UFOs in in your journals because there are many things that why do you need to talk about you know that you moved to a new house or that you know your kid did something amusing or something like why do we need to know that? Well, that's the whole point of a of a diary as opposed to just a chronicle, you know, a historical chronicle. And in in the the diaries, you find uh you find yourself going back to a time when, you know, there were no personal computers. Um a time when um you know, there were no satellites in the sky. and you know when I started writing and um so it's important for people who this is not for you know everybody who wants to listen or read something about UFOs or flying saucers.

It it's really for people who want to understand how things have changed because they continue to change and sometimes you know people criticize me by saying why don't you stick to the new things you know why do you want to talk about the old stuff well the the old stuff and we keep rediscovering the old stuff because it's it's very much in the research we do and I'm amused uh and that's my last comment on that. I'm amused when in Washington when they say you know IRO is going to look at the data from the last year um because it's too much of the other stuff and anyway we're only interested in what's making an impact now. Well, the things that happened 25 years ago are making an impact now. And if we ignore them, you know, it would be like an astronomer saying, I'm only going to look at new comets. You know, we we don't care about what Kepler did in the 16th century.

Well, the the the comet that Kepler saw in the 16th century is coming back, you know, every 50 or 60 odd years. And um if without without it there are a lot of things we wouldn't know about the solar system. So we do need to uh keep track of of things and doing it through the continuous continuing um observations of a you know a scientist who's been involved since the beginning with the different personalities moving across the the screen can be useful as part of of a total assessment. So that's what I do. Okay, fantastic answer and and it gives us a lot of insight into to why to read these books and I I would advocate for people to to take them seriously as much as your your more famous works.

So I think to to go into the book I have a question for you which is how have things uh changed in in research and inquiring into UAP and our understanding of them and and how have they stayed the same? I ask you that because you you provide a window into what was happening in the background in the BAS group, the OAP group and what came after. um uh you call the the group the Lone Stars in the the uh book which I think is a euphemism but um uh you give us a window into those conversations and what I see there is that um you know it shows that there's not as much consensus as people think even among the best researchers >> the the first you know interest official interest and and scientific interest in the subject just came from having all these reports from both from military people but mostly from civilians who were exposed to to the phenomenon. And the response was generally skeptical. But there was a feeling that you know we cannot ignore those reports because you know frankly because they um you know the the the the feeling of of danger in international relations. There could be could be something going on that would be that would be a threat.

And that that was not so much the case in Europe. I think in Europe the reaction was always one of curiosity you know and and scientific interest in in a new report because that's where science is is made but in in the US uh everything tends to be interpreted as a threat to the stability of of the country and so on and that's very much a cultural reaction. So that precipitated a number as you know a number of classified studies and then um the the air force with project blue book which lasted most 20 years. the U blue book was not classified contrary to some of the things we still see in the press. And it it at at the beginning it was just eliminating one case after the other to give people the the feeling that nothing was hidden, nothing was classified.

uh you can report this uh although pilots did not report um but the population reported and and and there were radar data they were that kind of that kind of thing. So that triggered a controversy within the scientific community as to the relevance of that and the air force felt that they had other things to do. I mean, you you join the Air Force to to fly, you know, the fastest best planes you can you can you can find, and you don't want to be stuck in an office uh going through files, you know, one after the other of somebody seeing a light at night. I mean, who cares? and the uh the the Air Force finally u created or led to the the creation of the study at the University of Colorado um led by professor Condan who was a distinguished physicist of the Oenheimer generation. Um and after two years they concluded that in fact there was no implied threat in the phenomenon and uh although they did not explain all the cases they had looked at but that generally they thought and that's almost an exact quote that science would not be uh advanced by investing more people and more money into the study of UFOs which people understood stood to mean go home there's nothing there and it killed the research for over 10 years probably 15 years um fortunately you know there were people like me who had other income I mean you know my I had professional um uh commitments um in in technology and then in the financing of advanced technology and it's it's a credit to the people who invested in the venture funds that I that I ran with a small team of people that uh they they knew I mean I I never thought of hiding the fact that I was spending time my own time studying UFOs and um in Silicon Valley you know people thought that it was important to do that.

So uh I was in fact supported by many of the people who invested in in my funds including the the fund by NASA. So uh I had the the the privilege of having access to um I I I had no real secret access to anything except in in very very specific areas. But but that was not relevant. I mean most of the data data came from from people who had seen something and were reporting it openly um including cops um including university professors and including farmers. The farmers were probably the best because they knew their territory very well and they could see when something was when animals reacted to certain things.

U and they had there were traces you could go to those those places which I did with people who had experience with vegetation with animals with all that and then um Mr. Bigalow became interested and I was part of the first approach with Neds and when uh the the team bought the the ranch when Mr. be bought that ranch in uh um in Utah and uh we looked all over Utah and Nevada uh deeply for recurrent cases and as you know people still still are active with those with those properties where things seem to continue happening. So that's that's what brought us here. And then as you know the uh Defense Intelligence Agency took an interest in what was what was going on at um at the Bigalow Ranch and funded a study that I was part of called BAS Bigalow Aerospace Advanced Space Systems.

and um my responsibility there along with you know Dr. Putoff Dr. Keller and and and and many others. Uh all of us um at uh at in that particular study, you know, having uh classified uh access at the top secret level for the duration of the study. And um my particular assignment was the building of a database which has been partially you know not declassified and I understand why um but it um it covers 240,000 cases uh all over the world.

So it's not really a database. It's a what's called a data warehouse with uh 13 or 14 different databases that we reduced all to English to a common structure. That structure was going to feed into an an artificial intelligence system that would have two purposes. is the first one would be to refine it because we don't nobody needs 240,000 cases to know that there is some sort of a phenomenon happening. uh we need, you know, if we had 20,000 of the best ones, we could turn that over to the scientific community in different in different disciplines from medicine to chemistry to architect to uh you know agriculture and everything else and uh based on that there would be a number of teams could feed from that.

That was the idea. It was not done because we were cut off after two years. and I really don't know the current disposition of what we did. So at that point uh the project terminated and I I should make it clear I don't have any uh secret clearance or particular access you know outside of of that that that study. So right now I have no no clearance.

>> Okay. So you gave us a lot there that I'll unpack over the course of the conversation. Um one thing that you said uh which I think is a very important point is that um the focus on a possible uh threat or national security threat is a very narrow lens through which to view UAP. And yet, very interestingly, at the at the beginning of your new book, you start out by giving a a couple dozen pages to some events in Southern California that suggests something like a threat or at least injury and maybe maybe violence. and and you had said to me before this that you thought these were very important events and you'd been struck by the fact that uh in over about a dozen interviews no one had asked you about them.

So so maybe you could say a word about those. And you know it's I I understand why people didn't spend time on that because they there are some current questions that people want to ask about and and they rush into into those standard questions. Um there are several things in in this book um that are not mentioned anywhere else which are things that um that I I made an effort to go and explore because I had heard or somebody had contacted me um about some exceptional cases that were affecting them in their lives. And those were not reported anywhere. Um and you know a number of researchers of my my colleagues and uh will will tell you that there is a lot that people are not reporting to the media at all either because they affect their property uh their their cattle if they if they are farmers and or ranchers uh and and the reputation of their family or their reputation in business.

I have CEOs of Silicon Valley companies who have said, you know, Jack, can we have coffee together because I'd like to I'd like you to know about something that that I saw, you know, uh on the weekend with my family and by the way, you can't you can't report it. And those are precious. And this came from a family who lives in the Mojave away from Los Angeles and uh in an area which is the the playground of the the major um aerospace companies. So it's a very often a testing ground for new new things and they love to see new aircraft and new prototypes. Um those are not necessarily I mean they may be classified because of their performance but you know I mean you're going to see them uh because you know those those prototypes can be seen over a wide area.

Um the the particular case involved something very strange. It involved discs just like what people are reporting now as drones except that those were didn't have propellers. They were large discs about 10 10 to 12 feet as far as they could tell that appeared in the sky and they seem to exchange light um light rays, you know, uh or light flashes. But it was most of the time it was most mostly like a laser between one disc and another and they thought that this may be some new weapon that was being developed and they started in the late '7s. Now I learned on I learned of it after uh 2010 2012 uh but that had been going on for a long time and when one was hit by the beam the disc would vanish um which is reminiscent of you know some of the things around the nimmits and more recently that that everybody has known about it it would vanish but it would reappear somewhere else And they were sort of structured dances among these these objects.

Um the um this happened in the evening and at night and I go into it at some I I went there several times met with the people met with their families and recalled you know what they had seen. The the recollection was very interesting because they they do not all remember the same things which is you know any investigator will tell you that's a classic in in multiple witness cases. People are not going to tell the same story but we could reconstruct from where they were the the total observation. Um, in daylight when they came to the site, there was a truck there with what uh what they inter first interpreted as a as a dead body there, which may have been, you know, uh maybe a decoy or something else. But there was somebody setting, you know, some someone had set fire to the truck and there was a man there uh who was in a uniform and told them to go home and that there was nothing to see that.

Um but that was at the place where those beams had been had been exchanged at at night. So they got very scared and um did not report anything and and it only came out because I happened to know somebody in that family who led me to the site. It happens that in in in my computer files, of course, in something like that happens, I'm going to go back to the computer and see if there is anything similar or relevant that happened in in that, you know, in that time. um was a very interesting professional from Hollywood who is a high technology um consultant to the studios for special effects. So he has his own company that develops special effects for the for Hollywood, but he was also recruited by the NSA, National Security Agency, to go into the desert into that same area of the Mojave.

And this would have been in the in the late in the mid to late 80s uh to expose and they would they would give him a particular set of coordinates where some something would happen in orbit that they wanted him to photograph with a very very high special infrared film that and that as as you may know it takes uh a lot of experience to to deal uh professionally with infrared film especially at the very very high response index and that was his special team. That was why he was recruited. there were other teams like that and he learned that in one other team the truck had caught fire and the both of the agents from NSA had been killed. So at that point he resigned and went back to Hollywood and uh I knew him because he was involved in some research that Dr. Hinneck and I did um in in Hollywood in a special case where he had recorded some of the some of the effects of the of of the phenomenon of another phenomenon.

And so when I went back to talk to him about um about the cases in the desert, he told me the whole story and he said that uh he just couldn't continue to to work. He had a family and didn't want to be exposed to that. But you have two cases involving very strange things in the sky, involving the intelligence community and the satellite community back in the 70s and 80s with things that resulted in the death of some of the some of the people u involved in the in the sightings. And um >> so okay >> so I I had no way to investigate further and uh uh I just recorded the information and it's in it's in the book. >> Okay.

So, those are remarkable cases and and I'm going to ask you to um to relate them in a second to uh one of your core ideas which is that which is to summarize it is that UAP aren't what we think they are that they're a kind of system uh that's in communication with us and is trying to according to you instruct us or condition us um uh to educate us in a sense so that that um we become different by virtue of experiencing them. And you you say that UAP may be uh a kind of one system of communication of a a broader meta meta system and I think by that you mean that the the system of communication or symbols uh changes over time and it changes in response to to human thought. So a member of soul her name is uh Orianda um uh raised the question of you know do you do you see new evidence for this hypothesis um such as these cases and and has it suggested uh this evidence that maybe the system is dealing with us differently. >> So that results from discussions I had actually back in in France. I mean from the beginning when we we started I started building the databases uh based on French cases and cases in Europe uh not American cases especially although there were a few that had been published in the books by Donald Kho Rel and and some others and um discussing it with with people in the Sabban and people in French universities that that idea of is it a control system came up and that's a that's a the question that any scientist should ask you know I mean what is it I mean we we don't have one or two or 10 or 20 or 100 cases we have many thousand dozens of thousands of cases so it's doing something.

It's not hiding. It's in fact in full view. Uh there are many cases where somebody's driving on the highway and something lands in front of the car. Okay. So this is not this is not somebody hiding.

uh this is very much in your face and the um so the the idea that out of our conversations came that you know is it a control system but people have misunderstood what I meant by that in in as you know I I've published it in my my books in the in the 80s and so on I've continued to to to work on it because that's one of the things that a good computer AI study could give us an answer to. Okay. So that's what the one of the purposes of bringing AI into it uh from from the beginning. Now um a control system can is not necessarily something that humans are designing. Um you know like uh a set of signals on on on the roads is a control system.

We have you know green lights and red lights and we have different signals that tell you how to drive around and so on. And that's that's a control system. We have uh lots of of things around us. You know, a university is a control system. Um you don't necessarily know the rules.

You have to discover the rules. You know, I certainly remember as a PhD student, you know, what does it mean to become a doctor in science? Okay. Um how do you do it? Well, there is no recipe. There's no nothing that says if you take this course and this course and you pass them then you become a doctor. That's not true.

Um you have to find an environment, you have to find a subject, you have to design new research and so on. So uh there are a number of things around us that are control systems that uh we take for granted. Um the um Jacqu Berier who was a a extraordinary French um philosopher and and writer and publisher and during World War II had been a spy as one of the first scientific spies uh of our time. He was looking for, you know, heavy water and he was looking for the source, the the the place where the the V2 rockets were being built and and was one of the the the the spies that located Penamund. And so he had been he he told me, you know, a concentration camp is a control system.

I mean it's like a prison. There is a fence you can you cannot go out. If you try to get out you you will be be killed. But and as as you may may know he was captured by the Germans. He was tortured a number of times and was very lucky to finally survive World War II.

and he had survived with a a fairly amazing sense of of of humor that had helped him keep his intelligence and his mind through what he suffered. And um he said in in the camp where he was interned, one of them, Madhousen, uh one time they were astonished to see that the the SS, the Germans were bringing in the firemen from Munich. The firemen from Munich had decided to go on strike in the middle of World War II. And the um the Germans didn't like them and they arrested them and put them in the concentration camp with the French prisoners and American prisoners and um they kept them there uh for three weeks and then they released them. And he said, "That's when I understood that a concentration camp could be a university that you would go there without knowing why and you would learn something and then you may or may not come out or you may or may not be killed or you may or may not be burned to death and the the system will control that." Okay.

So we have the so he said the question you have to ask about UFOs is is it number one is it a natural system or an artificial system control system and if if it is a control system um is it open or closed? In other words, are we being taken over by a species from somewhere in space that's vastly more intelligent than we are? You know, as uh Dr. Nolan says, you know, people who have had 10, you know, re scientific revolutions or a hundred or a thousand and come here with superior science to do something. Um and uh in which case uh you know it's a closed system. We we're like prisoners. I mean something is going to happen to us and there is very little we can do or is it an open system where we can in fact communicate with it and if we can communicate with it then the question for me as an information scientist is uh what are the modalities of the interaction you know it's not just can we learn their language and they say you know we come in peace to save mankind or something or we we will give you you know the cure for cancer or something.

I I don't think it's at that level. I think it's a meta system. It's not a system. And that's my fear. If if we can circle back to your earlier question about you know about NIDS and about BAS what we did for the government and what we did for the defense intelligence agency half of the budget was spent developing you know a super database and uh we don't know where it went I mean I'm not clear to know where it went uh and but that would be a very interesting question because the the people who are getting it are getting raw data which we have very well organized all in English.

So they have the luxury of you know we've translate we had five translators from French, English, uh Portuguese, Russian you know everything was translated in a single structure across 14 databases. That's what we need to answer the question about the control system and it's not being done. >> Right. Right. whole team that we had trained to work on it.

>> Yes, that's very very clear, Jacques, that it's >> so to rebuild that will take the next 10 or 15 years >> and nobody says that to Congress and I think Congress should hear it because it's our money. >> So Jacques, sorry to interrupt you, but you've said so much that I want I want people to appreciate that you've said something very profound and I want us to explore this. No, but you can start with a technical question and it you know it when you ask is it a control system that's a big question. >> I know it's a big question you know I but a lot of our members ask questions about the control system and they keyed into something uh very significant you said. Um, before going to the next question though, I want to I want to reiterate something you said because I think it'll help the conversation and help people understand you.

Um, uh, you you you asked at one point whether the system is open or closed and and you said additionally, I I believe if it's open that it would be possible to communicate back to it. And it sounds to me like that's the key question for you is if you can understand what what the system of symbols is or the modalities of communication um then you can understand enough to engage in some kind of communication or at least give some kind of uh response to show that you understand. So the so then the question and and uh we have a member named name named uh uh Jacqueline who's who has asked this is could the system be stimulating us um you know provided there is such a system could it be stimulating us to interact with it um more as uh subjects or agents than as something like animals or or objects? Um, is it is it looking for us to try to interact with it as as equals or with parity? Well, she um what I saw in the note you gave me is she was also asking is it a control system because we think it is and that's a very interesting question uh because we react to the UFO phenomenon or the UAP phenomenon and you know at at this point when I think about what I'm going to do next uh in this research if if I'm given the you know the opportunity to to to uh to live a little longer I I I'm not going to go back and write anymore computer programs there are better people to to do that now they have the data and you know we're in a different phase now we're in a whole different system I I have the luxury of doing some experiments I've wanted to do for a long time. So if if you think you are inside the control system, there are things that you can do or or if you think you're inside the simulation, you know, which was a new a new concept that I initially rejected and then you know Razor and and others have brought it back to the forefront and we have to ask that at the same time. Um can we test it? How would you test it? Well, if you know I'm I'm here in in in my apartment and the the temperature is constant in this apartment, you know, and so this could but outside I can see it's cold or I can see it's the sun is out and it's warm and how come it's constant here, you know? So this would lead me to think that there is a control system, namely a thermostat that is somewhere.

So I can start looking around the walls and if I see a dial, I can turn it. Uh or I could start a fire and and see what happens, you know, see if the temperature changes. If the temperature doesn't change, then I know I'm inside a control system. So the we can do the same thing with UFOs but we have to react. We have to number one acknowledge that it exists and number two we have to react to it.

So, um, I one of the the the things I did about 20 years ago is we were looking for a place in the country where I could keep books and we could spend time, you know, with our kids who were young at the time and so on. And so we we bought a property in the in the redwoods in Northern California, not not far from the the place where this Nobel Prize in biology had that meeting with the raccoon, you know, who um essentially desensitized his brain um and engaged in a dialogue with him. And uh we we lived, you know, about an hour from there in the Redwoods. And I built an observatory there, a small small observatory with a um you know, a library and a bedroom and uh a a work room and a a dome on top with a telescope. And I thought, you know, we're uh over half a mile from the nearest neighbor.

It's completely dark at night. The sky is completely open. And uh this could be a a signal that could be interesting to the phenomenon. So the phenomenon could manifest uh there and we would be the only witnesses but we could record something and and nothing happened. No nothing happened until the very last day and I mentioned that in the book in in in this book in number six.

Um we we sold the the property. Our kids were grown up by then. we wanted to go back to the city. Uh and um my I was I was at work uh in the city and my wife was taking uh the the the last couple of things out of the property. Everything had been cleaned up.

We sold it to our neighbors who were wonderful people running a winery in Menosino County. So in the middle of the night, there was such a bright light that that woke her up and there were no curtains anymore. There was nothing on the windows. There was a light that brightened up the whole forest. It was intense white tending to the ultra violet, the the blue and purple.

And um it was a large condensation center with again the light all over. But going down the the the dirt driveway in in front of the the ranch uh that went to the to the small road uh down the valley. and she saw this and um then told me about it and it was like something very much alive saying goodbye and that you know there there is a sense of humor in all the manifestations of UFOs. a sense of humor at a level which is difficult for us to accept because we we have very little opportunity to respond. It will choose its own time.

it will choose the the most, you know, unusual. I mean, they have that in, you know, in Nevada and in in Utah at the at at the Utah ranch. uh things that happen all of a sudden and and right in front of you, in front of your car and um with that element of surprise and and sometimes an element of humor which is I I think indicative of a of of a system that's at at a different level from us but that understands humor which is I find that encouraging, you if at least we have that in common with them. Now, you know, many animals understand humor. Um, certainly apes do.

Um, certainly dolphins do and and many of the the the higher, you know, the higher animals have a sense of of of humor that they can they can share with us. Uh, the people training, you know, the the the They they hire uh um you know uh animals in both in circus and in in nature uh will will tell you that you know including including lions or including and those uh those are essential throughout life. So to see those reactions from which are hard I mean you know why didn't that light manifest when we were there with the telescope and with all the the scientific instruments we had in the tower you know >> yeah it's a bit it's a bit shock as if it's a bit as if it winked at you >> time we have to be to pay attention to to those moments because those are the the you So the moments that could initiate communication that would be meaningful communication. >> It's it's a bit as if uh it's a bit as if uh the system winked at you. >> Well, it if you think that we are in a control system, what you need to do is is disturb it.

you know, you can disturb, you know, the the uh the environment system by lighting a fire, you know, or by or by changing a dial and and then observe what happens. So, we have to think of experiments we can do to disturb the UFO UAP phenomena, not just observe it and, you know, document it. Well, Jacques, this is extraordinary and I want to say this before we go to our break is is I I think people don't often appreciate this about your thinking is that uh you know this isn't philosophical speculation for you. It's a scientific hypothesis that you hold as an information scientist and you're saying if I'm right about this hypothesis then then certain acts that would be distributed to the system will allow me to test uh whether it's there and to understand it better which which is really if we think of you as a scientist it's a very very remarkable point. So as we go to uh the second half of the show, I think we'll we'll explore what the practical value of that idea is for people.

So we're going to go to a break now and uh before we get to uh the second half of the show, we're going to hear from uh Marik Van Rencom, our colleague and uh uh who provides uh for us monthly uh something we call the soul briefing. Thanks for being there everyone. [Music] Hello and welcome to the May 2025 edition of the soul briefing. I'm Maric von Renenamp. On May 1st, the UAP Disclosure Fund hosted an unprecedented daylong event on Capitol Hill focused on UAP or unidentified anomalous phenomena.

The event, which was co-hosted by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, featured presentations and discussions by scientists, national security officials, members of Congress, and former congressional staffers who focused extensively on the UAP topic behind the scenes. In comments during the event, Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna, the chair of the House Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets, stated that two UAP focused hearings are in the works. The first would be quote government focused and feature quote appointees, which we assume are Trump administration appointees, and the other would feature quote military and/or former military members. According to Luna, one witness quote wants to come forward in regards to a crash retrieval program, end quote. Additionally, in comments to congressional reporter Matt Lazlo on April 29th, Luna stated that the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, quote, has been extremely helpful end quote in Congress's investigation.

Watch the space. We certainly will. In a three-part interview with investigative journalists George Knapp and Jeremy Corbel, Matthew Brown, the author of an explosive report presented and read into the congressional record during a November hearing, finally spoke out. According to Brown, a secretive government special access program dubbed Immaculate Constellation isolates and suppresses highquality imagery, video, and other data of unidentified anomalous phenomena. in essence keeping such data outside of normal military and intelligence reporting channels.

Brown also alleges that he read transcripts of the former director of the government's UAP Analysis Office, Arrow, briefing key members of the Senate Intelligence Committee. According to Brown, then vicechairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee and current Secretary of State and acting National Security Adviser Marco Rubio asked, "What the hell is the executive branch doing? Have they been running this for 60 years without congressional oversight?" End quote. an apparent reference to unreported secretive UAP programs and activities managed or overseen by the US government. Now, Rubio's alleged comments echo comments that he made in June 2023 to News Nation where he stated, quote, "Congress has been paying for it and probably for a long time." End quote. On May 13th, former intelligence official and UAP whistleblower David Grush, met with the Pentagon's UAP analysis office, Arrow, in a skiff, a sensitive compartmented information facility, which is a room where classified discussions can take place.

Congressional reporter Matt Llo broke the story, which is a significant one because Arrow is congressionally mandated. It is required to investigate the kinds of allegations that Grush made under oath in a July 2023 House Oversight Committee hearing. During the hearing, Grush testified that the US government has operated, managed, overseen a decadesl long UAP retrieval and reverse engineering program or effort. Importantly, the inspector general of the intelligence community deemed Grush's allegation that information was inappropriately concealed from Congress to be quote credible and urgent end quote. That designation triggered mandatory notifications to the Congressional Intelligence Committees.

Watch this space. We certainly will be. In a new paper published on May 12th by the Soul Foundation, retired Army Colonel Carl Nell, who also served in key technology focused positions at major corporations and defense contractors, argues compellingly for the reintroduction and passage of the UAP Disclosure Act, first introduced by then Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senator Mike Rounds in 2023. Three, the Disclosure Act would establish a blue ribbon panel of experts from various fields who would review and recommend for release records, documents, and other information related to UAP, which allegedly has been withheld from the American public for several decades now. The legislation is arguably the most extraordinary ever introduced in Congress.

Among other provisions and definitions, it defines quote nonhuman intelligence and refers to it two dozen times. Remarkably, the legislation would also require the US government to assert eminent domain to take control of quote all recovered technologies of unknown origin and biological evidence of nonhuman intelligence that may be controlled by private persons or entities. A clear nod to long-standing rumors that recovered UAP materials and craft have been transferred to private defense contractors to evade transparency provisions. On May 9th, the Pentagon's UAP analysis office, Arrow, released a new UAP video. The 8-minute footage, which was recorded in infrared by a US military drone somewhere over the Middle East in 2023, appears to show an object moving at a high rate of speed despite apparently lacking wings or any discernable or obvious means of propulsion, such as a jet engine or propellers.

Now, according to Arrow, quote, "The available data does not support a conclusive analytic evaluation." End quote. Behind that somewhat tortured bureaucratic language appears to be an admission that the government, the Pentagon, is stumped by this incident. Now, loyal soul briefing viewers will remember that the Pentagon's key UFO hunter, Dr. John Kosowski, the director of Arrow, has stated repeatedly in the past that his office is stumped by quote true anomalies end quote. Kazowski stated in November that quote, "There are interesting cases that I, with my physics and engineering background and time in the intelligence community, I do not understand and I don't know anybody else who understands them either." End quote.

According to Kazowski, quote, "We're going to need the help of academia and the public to address some of these." End quote. And in March comments to Scientific American, Ksowski stated, quote, "We do have some events in our holdings that are really peculiar, and I don't know yet what's behind those." End quote. So, while we applaud Arrow's transparency, the redactions in the video make independent analysis impossible. Arrow still has some work to do, but congratulations on this seemingly watershed moment in UAP disclosure. [Music] Hi, welcome back everyone to our uh conversation with Jacques fal.

So Jacques, we want to jump in now I think to a question that follows up on your uh your very lucid and helpful explanation of of your idea of the control system which is I'll put the question this way. Do do you think that the system has an interest of its own in not exposing itself? And and what I mean is that we know that UAP are very elusive. Uh they may display themselves, but they're still hard to find. They're still hard to detect. Um as happened with you when you tried to provoke the system, um it didn't it it didn't respond until the very last minute.

Um, is could this be defensive behavior? Is it somehow an intrinsic property of the system? Uh, or is this simply it being interactive? Um, I can only tell you what it seems to me, what it feels like to me, having lived through, you know, all those all those years and and and you know, my professors were the witnesses were truck drivers and farmers and and uh, you know, people who told me about what they had seen. Um there is one case in France that I like to quote. Uh it it happened you know in the uh you know very early in in the late 50s. Um a man who was um uh going to his work. He was a night watchman.

He was going through his work through a a forest through a clearing in a wood at 2:00 in the morning and there is a uh a man in front of him and a disc sitting in the clearing. So he stops and and the the man is holding, you know, something in his hand pointed at at him. And you know, he's afraid that that's a gun. And so he freezes. And the me, this is a man again in a uniform, no signs, no insignia.

And and he says, um, am I in Germany or Italy? which is stupid because for one thing there is Switzerland in between Germany and Italy and furthermore he's in Alzas. He's in France. So the the man the night watchman says no you you're in France and he says what time is it? And the the man looks at his watch and says it's 2:30. And the um the man out of the the disc says you lie. It's 4:00.

Well, it was 2:30. So, so, uh, he goes back behind the the disc. Uh, presumably he goes into the disc, but we don't know that. And the disc takes off and and and goes up in the sky. And that's the first indication for the the witness that this was not just, you know, some pilot who had lost his way.

This was something else. you tell that story, everybody is going to laugh. And I think that story was quoted to show how stupid witnesses were, you know, uh, and that he may he must have been still asleep and making up all that. Take it to the next level. Two questions, two answers.

The two answers are you're wrong. You know, you it you're not in Alzas. and it's not 230 even though you are in Alzas and it is 230. I think to me that sums up the whole phenomena. What it's saying is you don't know how to think about where you are and what time it is because space and time are irrelevant.

And that's now when I talk to Eric Davis, Dr. Davis, you know, who is my my uh number one resource in theoretical physics these days. Um he says, you know, that that's right. I mean, time and space are not considered as primary quantities in modern physics. They are secondary things that we can measure and we experience in our lives.

But um the physical phenomena go on at a different level in the form you know in the quantum form and so on and and that's where he loses me most of the time. So um we we have to be very very very careful about the structure of those things and we have to take out our reaction to it. I mean, I I'm delighted to know that Congress is going to pay attention to pilots who have these pictures of things that move around. Now, uh there is a a French pilot, you know, in the late 70s was, you know, flying a uh or 80 flying a Mirage who um has spoken on on the record on French television. And I can, you know, I I can we know his name and I can find the film.

Um he was flying home to Djon to his base. He didn't have any armorament on on his aircraft. Um his aircraft was a you know high-end um fighter uh a Mirage and and he was uh he saw a light ahead of him just like what you know what what was just said about presenting it to Congress. you know this this happened many years ago you know in another century uh he he sees this bright light he's intrigued by the light because there is nothing on radar at that particular place and then the the the thing is is going around him at very high rate of speed making a wide curve he does a little calculation in his head and he says the G forces is would be beyond what any human pilot would tolerate. So this I I think the exact time would um and the thing puts itself places itself on his tail which is of course a kill position in you know aial fight.

He doesn't like that. So he puts his jet into a dive which is difficult because he wasn't prepared to do that. He was just going home and returning the plane and uh the thing circles back comes back in front of him and um it circles around and goes on his tail a second time in the kill position again. So whatever it is understands a kill position. Uh he dives again and the thing goes off.

This is seen from the ground by Jean who reports it which is the only reason we know it because the report from the Jearm was not classified. The report from the pilot was classified but by then everybody knew about it so it became known. There is nothing else to say about it. I mean, that's those things have been happening since the 50s. So, you know, we have it's it's great that Congress is now looking at those fuzzy black and white pictures that are not pictures, by the way.

They are recordings of of um of heat signatures. And everybody is treating it as if it was a picture. And again we have, you know, the technology here is completely fuzzy and and people are making up stories that um scientists would not should not accept. And when is the last time science had to wait for a decision of Congress to study something? I mean that's not the way a university works. You know, you you're doing some experiments.

You you in the course of those experiments you discover the discrepancy. You study the discrepancy because it could lead to an invention or to a breakthrough or to a new theory of something. You have you have a patient in front of you who is dying of something that that has not been recognized before. You you document it. You you don't call your congressman.

So why are we spending all this time in Washington assuming that Congress is going to do science? This is not what we pay them for. This is not what Congress does. >> That's a fantastic laws >> and the laws may or may not have anything to do with science. So we're talking they certainly have a role in this which is very important but we are misunderstanding the the role of the legislator >> and it's it's a grave mistake. >> We should be in the lab inviting witnesses and working with them.

>> It's a fantastic point Jacqu and it it really affirms the value of research here. So I want to take another question. uh from our members uh a guy named uh Max Millian who wants advice as a young researcher on on how what kind of technical expertise he might need or uh I would also say academic expertise and what the motivation would be to contribute meaningfully to to UAP research. And I I think we are asking you that question in light of the fact that you've emphasized that very strange, very weird, very embarrassing, very absurd data is part of the spectrum of data. >> Well, um you know, he can look at the the people who are doing this work now and see where they come from.

uh none of us was trained at the university to work on UFOs. All of us, whether you're talking about Dr. Pov, you know, Color or Eric Davis or or others, we came to this out of other things we were doing. Now, in my case, I was a, you know, pretty good programmer and I trained in astrophysics. So, I had a job um and uh I had a job at the University of Texas and I had a job at Paris Observatory and I had a job at Stanford.

Um and uh as part of that, I had access to computers and I had access to people who could answer my my questions about physics or about other things and tell me where to go to find the information and I would I would turn it into my, you know, interest in information science and that's what I've done, but I've never been paid to do that. So, my advice is get a good basic scientific education. Find a place that you're passionate about, whether it's in in medicine, in biology, in physics, or in any of the related areas. And then um you know you you have plenty of time uh if you don't watch television you have plenty of time to work on your own thing. Nobody's going to stop you.

Uh then you don't need a security clearance and you don't need to go to any of those places. You can just talk to people around you and you'll find people who have had experiences and you can begin to document them and then you can begin to design your own and you'll find other people like you as as we did. Um and and you can you can build your own you know your own research field and you know these days thanks to Saul and other um groups like that you can publish which wasn't true you know in in in the old days I can tell you the uh Dr. Heck, who was director of an observatory and head of a department of astronomy, uh, sent multiple case reports and case analysis to science magazine and to other magazines where he could publish anything on astrophysics, but those things about UFOs, even though they were just as well or better documented, were never accepted. they were never published.

>> So, Jacques, following up on that, uh, you know, we continue to have a lot of great questions for our members and and I think this is a fantastic one. Um, because it it it tells us something about the limits of science or science as it's usually practiced. um you know someone her her name is uh Maryanne has has asked a question about what the role of the artist is in understanding uh UAP or the the phenomenon um and and I think that's a question that interests you um as a writer and and someone who appreciates uh uh aesthetic culture. Well, the the artists um are there. I mean, you know, they are in Hollywood, they are in uh they've conveyed um the the impression of the witnesses, you know, through film and drawings and and cartoons, some wonderful cartoons about that that have captured the what what we were saying before, you know, the the contradictions, the absurdity of, you know, in many of those cartoons, the the aliens are are landing and and they are stupified at some something humans are doing.

You know that creates some a moment of humor. Humor is very very important. So um artists have been there. They have not done as much as they could do to capture the you know very often what the the witness is describing to me is graphic. It it's an impression of an object.

So they will describe the object and they will describe the conditions around the object. But obviously they are struggling with words. They describing colors describing colors that change all at the same time with uh colors I've never seen before. Well, what's a color you've never seen before? So I I think that is where you know my ability to to work with that discourse stops. You know I I it this is where I would love to be there with an artist who can draw something and say is was it more like this or was it more like that? you know, ideally somebody with a with a terminal where or a computer where they could do some special effects, you know, with different flashes and different things and and trying to reconstruct.

Of course, we're never going to do it exactly, but we could try to reconstruct the the environmental conditions that um that were there. And I think that's the role of the artist which would be really really important. >> Well, I can imagine too Jacqu that um your own work as someone who's written uh literature namely science fiction. Uh you might think that the artist is also a source of imagination for uh scientific hypotheses or for insight into UAP. Well, the um in in my one of my science fiction novels in French was called Subspace and it had to do it was it earned the uh the journal Prize in in in France.

Uh and it was about a group of um of students of science students. I I was a science student at the time. So it was easy for me to relate to what happened and they were seeing little lights going through the wall of different different colors and different frequencies and they wanted they tried to study the lights and realized that the lights were conveying a message. I didn't want to use discs and so on because I didn't want to be, you know, in a UFO book. And and they they follow what the lights are telling them and they get into a space which is the the the title was subspace.

So it it goes into a space that has a different topology from our space. Not just another planet, not just another another universe with a similar thing, but another topology of space itself. So uh so the the the spacecraft that they build gets distorted and gets encrusted with all kinds of things. And there was one I I did work with one artist who did the cover for the book. The cover for the book is the best thing about about the book.

I can tell you that. His name is Forest. F O R E S T. and he's well known for another one of his works which is Barbarella, you know, the the movie about Barbarella that uh all young men at the time were very excited about. Uh and uh so he was a designer behind Barbarella.

>> Wow. Wow. That's that that's an amazing connection, Chuck. Um so you know you told us earlier that you know your your the personal subjective dimension to your your research was so strong that you you constructed an observation tower um not just to observe objects but to uh you know provoke uh whatever is behind the objects uh what you call the control system. So, here's a here's a question for you coming again from one of our members whose name is uh is Sue.

It and I think it's a difficult question um uh to ask you publicly, but I I still want to try it. Do you have any personal conclusions about UAP and uh and why they're here? Um, you know, in in science you rarely reach you, of course you you hope to reach a conclusion, but you're always aware that it's a temporary conclusion on the way to something else. And usually people ask me in a much more direct way, you know, at at your age, aren't you afraid that you're going to die without knowing what it is? You know, which is a a more direct way of asking the same question. Your, you know, correspondent is very polite. Um the um I I I I don't care.

I mean that's if if you ask you know Dr. Nolan who has many discoveries to his credit you know do you uh do you want to solve the problem of cancer he probably would say you you know we've already made a lot of progress and there are types of of cancers that we can cure or detect early enough to cure. There are other types that we just don't understand at all and the um we will at some point if you know as science makes progress but u you know any scientist has to expect to die without having all the answers. Um I think that um you know we relativity has given us a number of answers in physics but we now find that that's insufficient to explain the contradictions that we have with quantum mechanics and so on and the contradictions continue and that's been the case for almost a century that we haven't overcome the contradictions. So yes, you uh you make small advances and once in a while you make a big advance.

I think the point the important thing now I mean it's great that Congress is doing this work and so on and I have a lot of respect for it having been part of congressional hearings on on other things in and the use of u information networks for managing crisis and so on where I I was uh I was asked to to be part of the the process of you know as as a technical witness. So I I know how it works and I have a lot of respect for that work. The uh in in the lab I'm not trying to evade the question, you know, it it's a big question. What I hope is to have a chance to to explore the idea that we're dealing with a a meta system, not just a system. And what we were designing with Mr.

Bigalow was a meta system, you know, that an an assembly of good observations that we could refine and then take us take up to the next level. And I think that's what is not being done. and that the the the people who are trained to be, you know, the the the the the troops that would help us refine that system have been the project has been shut down for reasons I never understood and the financing was terminated and that's gone. It's evaporated. So I'm so I'm not going to jump into just hoping that this thing is going to happen again.

I think those things happen rarely that you can assemble the kind of talent that uh Dr. Cole Keller assembled with Mr. bigger, you know, on on in the days of Bass and uh and the support we had from from Washington at the time, it was very small, but I I think that um we were on the way to to getting the right questions answered. So, I I would um I would hope somebody would do it again. It's not going to be me.

Uh I I would hope to um to add to to get some certainty about the nature of the dialogue with the phenomenon. You know what kind of dialogue that is it? Is it just like a dialogue between us and a whale for example or or an ape or a bird that we can develop and we there are number of experiments to do that. There are experiments also on how you would communicate with aliens that have not been disclosed but we know they exist. uh I know specifically that from people who were involved in those experiments that they exist and I think that's a a big hope for me that we can go forward to that and build the kind of language constructs that would enable us to tap into that higher level you know I mean we know there have to be higher levels of existence and we know that they and communicate with us be by sharing the space. I mean, you know, we communicate with all kinds of of with ants and mice that don't necessarily are not necessarily interested in a dialogue with us.

But in in this case, it's going to be vital for us in terms of survival of humans to communicate in a way that's intelligent. um even though we may be at in some ways at lower levels from what what we're perceiving and I think that's what we need to come to grips with from certainly my from what I can bring to the party which is the information information science and meta science side of it. Well, Jacques, you just said something very interesting and it and it speaks to a question that was on my mind. Um, you've told me before that you think there's a real stake for humanity in understanding how to respond to the phenomenon. Um, in in that there's something in stake in trying to understand it.

Um and you just said something remarkable which is that you think that um this might have to do with human survival. Uh so so what did you mean by that and and what do you really think the stakes are for human beings in in understanding the phenomenon? >> We know from other work we've done and we've published we know that the phenomenon has been with us for a long time. maybe as long as humans have been on the earth. And that you know that raises a question of why do we see this um concentration now? Well, now is the first time now we're coming to a test and astronomers have have said, you know, for many years that in the evolution of a planet, in life evolving on a planet, we'll get to a point of discontinuity where it it can it assembles technology to the point where it can destroy its own environment and there are indications that maybe we haven't destroyed it but we have committed a number of faulty decisions in in our technical development and um in our economic development that threaten our own existence on the planet. So uh uh people including intellectuals I think make the mistake of saying you need to save the planet.

Well you know let me reassure you the best thing the that uh the the the only thing that would happen if we continue this way is that humans would disappear. But the planet wouldn't I mean the planet has seen many things you know whether three billion years of development it has developed many many forms of life that have disappeared for one reason or another and um and it will continue. So if if we exterminate ourselves by the stupid things we're doing to the environment that's not a big problem for the earth. I mean the the earth will be without this form of life for a few centuries and then something else will grow to replace us and hopefully it will be better at survival. The issue we have here today is our survival and that may be the reason of the increased intensity of a number of phenomena that are impinging on us now.

You know, certainly the the behavior of a phenomenon has it's much more intense than it was in the 40s and 50s. Now, part of it is we're aware of it. Part of it is we have very good detection system that we didn't have before. Uh and and we now we go in space and we go everywhere fast. So, we have more information.

But I I I do think that the behavior is changing, that the interaction is getting more intense and um I think we have to pay attention to that because it may lead us to a transition. And I think more advanced races in the galaxy would would know that. They would know that life there life is rare but there are so many opportunities for planets to develop that you know there must be life throughout the galaxy uh in different places. The question is does it succeed in growing beyond the stage where we are now in the in the 21st century where we can in fact destroy life. Okay.

uh before we couldn't I mean we could we could kill lots of people and we have I know for all kinds of reasons but the uh we couldn't eliminate advanced life you know rats were there millennia before humans developed and they are still doing the same thing that they did you know uh 10,000 years ago and and they probably will survive life because they're underground and they're, you know, able to adapt in incredible intelligence to to their environment. U they haven't developed science, but under the right conditions, you know, who knows, >> Jacqu, that's that's a remarkable uh answer. And I, you know, it's very unfortunate we don't have more time because uh you just said a number of of profound things that that show us that the UAP problem is is related to other problems uh including one of a existential nature for us that have a lot to do with our our ethical and and social and and uh political development. So So thank you for closing with that. It's it's appreciated and and and I have to say this is a remarkable interview because I think that uh in a very short span of time we were able to um uh glean a great deal of uh insight from your comments and and you you packed your wisdom into a a small span of time.

So >> thank you to all the the the people who uh that's all who asked the questions. I think we're in a field where the questions are more important than the answers right now. We have to come up with new questions. >> Yeah, I I couldn't agree more. The questions are more important than the answers.

So So thank you, Jacques, and and thanks to the audience for being here. >> Thank you. [Music]