Jacques Vallee - The Bizarre Nature of UFOs

Transcript

1917 and and [music] the experience of Fatima where most people they portrayed it as a cultural [music] or religious event and you looked at it you know from the observations scientifically >> Fatima is very deep um both in terms of uh testimony I mean there were 80,000 people there you know on the last operation um they didn't see the virgin They they saw a [music] disc uh silver thing between them and the sun. >> You showed me a case this morning uh something you wanted to talk about and when you showed me the image, [music] it uh reminded me of a a military image that George and I obtained and released to [music] the public. Can you show me or show our audience that image and and why that case is important? The photo that you said you wanted to talk about? >> Yes. But what they described to me is a very sophisticated process by which we may be able to interact with the entities. >> But so, so you're saying you've been made aware [music] that there is a government project, maybe it was 20 years ago, that was able to establish direct communication with a nonhuman intelligence and that you believe this information to be true and that and that and and [music] that this is a reality.

This is what you understand to be true. Is that correct? >> Um I cannot tell. Yes. Yes. Uh it it's factual.

>> This is weaponized. [music] >> This is weaponized. I'm George Knap coming to you from Las Vegas. Jeremy Corbel, friend and colleague of mine. How you doing? >> Great, man.

Good to see you. >> This is a pretty big day for us here. I mean, in the, you know, in the long and tortured history of the UFO subject, investigations into that mystery as well as offshoot phenomena related to UFOs that are bizarre and frightening on their own. There's there's no more singular and more important figure than Jacqu Balet. And you and I have talked about this a lot over the years.

uh he's like at the forefront of so many key moments in history, not just UFO history, but history. I mean in other industries and topics as well. He he was a pioneer in the development of the internet, in the development of AI, which is huge. Uh he was there at key moments in the overall investigation of of UFOs both in France where he was trained as an astrophysicist here in the US in in cases all over the place. He was there with Jay Allen Heinik on Project Blue Book in the beginning.

He became a venture capitalist in Silicon Valley, kind of a key place to be. He's done breakthrough research with NIDS, the organization that was created here in Las Vegas 30 years ago, almost exactly to the day, and with BASS, I mean BAS, the organization that Robert Bigalow created to handle the contract for the DIA and this OSAP program. Half of the budget for that program was creating a data warehouse and Jacques designed it, created it. It is the world's largest UFO data warehouse that we know of anyway. 260,000 cases.

Um, you know, he's done boots on the ground research in Brazil, in Argentina, in France, uh, elsewhere in Europe and Central America and South America, all over North America as well. He's been there at the forefront of this topic for as long as you know as long as I've known him, which is a heck of a long time and longer. And you know, I mean, the books that he has written, if you have a a UFO library at home, those are the essential books. Jeremy, you've been to my house, you know, the piles of books. I don't even know how many there are here in UFOs and related subjects.

Certainly more than 10,000 or so. that valet uh shelf that I've got and the ballet books that are scattered all over the place. That's the that's the core that that's the core information um in the entire library. He's the deepest thinker and probably the best writer on the subject in my estimation in the world. So, you know, getting Jacqu Valet on weaponized is something you and I have imagined and have talked about, but until today I never really was sure we would do it.

>> Yeah. You know, as I said in 2019 on the Rogan podcast, it's Jacques Valet. I the guy's a legend. You know, he's been uh involved in this o over decades and he has really been a changer. He's changed things up.

He shook things up. Specifically, what I mean by that is when everybody was talking about the extraterrestrial hypothesis, you know, he pushed that on its head and came up with the interdimensional idea and he and in a lot of ways he's revolutionized the way that we look at the UFO phenomenon. I've got a few key points of why I thought it'd be great to have him on. Now, now look, he's very mercurial. He's like a jazz musician.

He'll talk and and you have to like listen because he goes, "Yeah, he weaves because his life is so rich. He doesn't think about the UFO phenomenon in the same way we do." And and I think you'll see that in the interview. But I was really excited because as a friend, I've been able to talk with him and correspond and have him to to my house a couple times. And I really got the most insight from that is just one-on-one dialogue. But the reason I wanted to have him on today is because a few of the revolutions that he's created in this field is really about um when when we're looking at the government control, he said some very material things over the years.

For example, he says that the governments don't control the phenomenon, they react to it, which is contrary to like the conspiratorial assumptions that we all have. Valet concludes often when you talk with him that governments are not orchestrating the phenomenon and that they struggle to even understand it themselves. He once said, "Intelligence agencies collect data but they do not control the phenomenon and they misinterpret it through their own institutional bias." So, I wanted to talk with him because right now there's all this talk that a lot of what we're seeing is black budget uh programs of US technology. Look, I wish that was true. He has definitively proven through his research over the decades that this phenomenon is pervasive.

It's persistent. It's unusual. That it's got extreme depth and it's got a everchanging uh characteristic to it. He said, "A secret program cannot explain identical phenomena reported centuries before aviation across rival nations and in eras with no technological infrastructure capable of producing such effects." He's told us for decades that this cannot be explained with military, government, craft, and that sort of thing. So having him on today I think is really important especially in the era um that we're in because he sees the real mystery not just being the craft themselves but what he calls the interface the human interface.

He once said Jock Valet once said the most important data may not be what the objects are made of but how they change us. And I just thought that was such a cool and material way to look at it. So this is Jacques Valet on weaponiz a dream come true. excited to have you, Jacques. Well, Dr.

Valet, it's Jeremy and I have been looking forward to speaking to you on Weaponized for a long time. You and I spoke a few months ago, earlier this year, but there's always so much more to ask. I'd like to get your impressions of current events, Congress. So, we've had five hearings in since 2017, public hearings. Do you see value in those hearings? because it seems like the members of Congress are frustrated that they're not quite getting what they want.

And can you reflect on your own experience with Congress? 1968, you were involved in that first hearing. Um, were you hopeful back then? Are you hopeful now that uh congressional investigation might actually lead somewhere? >> Well, I um I did not participate. I was not asked to participate in the in the latest hearings. I was asked to uh to meet with the um the the experts for the intelligence committees, you know, as an extension of the work I had done with pass and uh in in you know in terms of background data that that the committee could use and should know about. So I I went to Washington, spent a couple of hours uh with the staffer of the intelligence committee which is a very impressive place in Washington.

Um I obviously we we went over you know a lot of details and so on. So my impression is that Congress is doing this with a number of people who are knowledgeable about the long-term research and they are building some of a a database uh that they can use to place the new information and I think that's the the right thing to do is to uh you know to fill to back fill uh versus the new testimony coming and and uh which is what we see you know what what you George you know and both of you participated in so uh I'm I'm hopeful that that's um you know I had experience with congressional hearings before twice and you know that's sort of funny the the first time was as you know I' I've worked extensively in the early days of the internet and the openet and that raised a lot of questions for Congress about where this was going and what they should be funding. Uh the um uh Mr. Kennedy uh in those days uh had a a hearing uh with that involved uh the post office among other things to see what the impact. So that was my experience going to Washington to testify and to to be part of those discussions both uh official and and back you know discussions about the impact that the network if it developed would have on the post office and that was very interesting because uh I was there you know there were two of us who were considered you know internet experts uh everybody else was with different communication companies and the post office and the the consensus was that they could wait and that the technology would help them and so uh I had concerns about that because I could see how fast the network was going to develop and especially develop in terms of message systems and and systems like what we're using now and the you know I approached some of the people there saying look uh you know we should we should also consider that first class mail is going to disappear.

I mean when is the last time you put a stamp on a letter on a handwritten letter that you mailed? Okay. And uh the answer was look uh one in every worker in the US uh one in every 100 workers in the US works for the post office directly or indirectly. So we're not going to raise that question now. So the the the message I got from that is that yes they they know the some of the answers they understand very well what's going on but they it has to be balanced with the social reality and you know the uh the bureaucratic reality of of the whole country and I I was reminded of that by some of the discussion that you know that you I participated in that uh watching the reaction of the congressmen. I I think they they they understand what's going on.

But those meetings are not science meetings. They're not technology meetings. And a lot of people want to talk about technology. And that's not what Congress is about. I mean, Congress is about uh adjusting the laws of the country and managing the social reactions to events and uh you know many of these people have a background in law or business not not in mathematics or astronomy or uh so uh that's that's important to know you know and and to understand the the problem they have in taking the the the data that you know that that they got from us or from the UFO community and and then managing it properly so that you know the community can understand it.

But I always remember that that comment about the post office. Yes, of course they're going to lose all first class mail in a few just a few years. And my point was they should concentrate on packages because people will want to send more packages because there will be much more communication and all the first class communication is going to be with the software that we're developing which is what's actually you know what went on and uh yes today they uh you know the post office manages a lot of packages but most of that business has gone two private companies, >> FedEx being the first >> the other. So they've lost that market. >> They've lost a leadership in that market.

>> You you've se you saw hearings happen in the 60s and George was telling me about that with J. Allen Heinik and there was two congressional hearings, but now we've had a number of modern-day hearings with people coming forward. Do you feel those are valuable? Do you think these hearings are good for the UFO topic for the American public that we're doing that again since the 60s? >> Well, in in part uh I think this is back because there is a new generation of people discovering UFOs on on the web on you know and they don't know the the depth of the information and who was involved and what was done. So if you suddenly try to make a decision uh about publication of certain things and so on, people you know might not understand the context and I think what they are doing which is wise is to expose the public to the the the the context of all of that. I think when George spoke about Russia, about the documents from Russia, uh, as you know, I've been in in contact with in those days.

I I don't plan to go back now, but in those days I was in in contact with some of the same people in and the scientists and Russia was surprisingly open at that point. you know, at certain times they there were some openings when um you know, when I went there, there were three different scientific panels looking at UFOs from different areas and uh so all all of that uh needs to be brought up so that people are you know the culture is brought in at the same time. Uh we're still waiting as you said you know it's been 5 years we're still waiting for the just the resistance for for the for the real thing that we can uh that that that science can look at. Do you see any any chance any hope that Congress will be able to pierce that veil of secrecy and find out where the goodies are stored? If if in fact we have nonhuman intelligence and non-human intelligence and technology, is Congress the way to go? Uh it seems to me there is value in the hearings even if members of Congress are frustrated because they can't get to that point that the keepers of the secrets are never going to give this up not even to Congress. What do you think? As as you know, I I was a member of the NIDS organization of of the science board for meds in Las Vegas with Mr.

Bealoo uh and and the team uh and then of the BAS project which was sponsored by the government. Um my area of responsibility was uh together with the team that they recruited was about half of the budget. Okay. Uh people have spoken about some of the things that were uh you know some of the investigations that were done and so on. uh nothing has been said about the data with the database which was really a data warehouse that we built.

Um the idea that that that I proposed and that I initiated was a three-stage process on on the computer. We recruited you know about 25 to 30 people who were investigators, translators. We had translators from u French, Spanish, Portuguese and Russian. Uh we took uh a number of databases that I donated to the project and a number of others that their own that were brought in and we we built a data warehouse of 14 databases communicating among them. and that that project uh was going to go into a second phase.

We ended up with 260,000 filtered cases for which there was real information out of you know all the things that are floating around and in you know in in those several languages and countries. The the the next phase in the plan was to reduce that to you don't need 260,000 cases. You need maybe 50,000 filtered cases where you maximize the information that you can you can get. And uh we had uh you know a process of selection we were going to go through and this has been published by the way uh in uh in in a couple of books that have come out but you collaborated with uh George your name is on on the first one. So I'm not you know uh disseminating any great secret but the information was is still classified.

Now without that second phase of data reduction and data improvement and cleaning the database is useless. Okay. It's uh you can yeah you can put AI on top of it but the AI is going to go you know off the road because you know too much of it is information that looks like it's relevant to UFOs. It may be margin marginally relevant but it's not what you're looking for you know in science. And so whoever has that now um you know it doesn't know what the plan the real plan was.

So the plan was a data reduction and then two years of AI. In other words I was told that you have five years. So I said two years to for data gathering around the world and translation so that everything is in English. um and then uh one year of data filtering and and improvement and then we'll have two years for AI and then we'll get you know we'll drive it to the point where we have the basic answers to the the nature of the the data itself at the ground level not just you know pilot data not just some you know astronomical pictures so on but the real data in the field and uh we don't know where that is you know the the project was cut off um usually as you know I had clearances on other projects at at Stanford Research Institute working with Dr. put off and and his team and so on and uh at the end of the project I was debriefed.

Uh then there was a second project with Ed May uh and again I was debriefed here. I I wasn't debriefed. So I I called Dr. Put off I called Dr. Keller.

They haven't been debriefed either. So we don't even know what's still classified and what's not classified. So I'm treating essentially every everything we did including the data as no as classified um and I respect that. But there is a a deeper problem here that in um in in the military area uh you you need if you're developing if we're developing a new rocket it it needs to be classified um at least throughout the development project. uh when you start testing it, people will understand that there is a new technology.

that that all you need is, you know, you're going to call two of your friends who are experts in propulsion and one who's expert in optics and one who is expert in electronics and you know, six or seven people and you can keep the secret and you'll be funded to develop that particular you know that particular weapon or that particular uh instrument. That's not true with UFOs. I mean, the information is in the mind of the farmer I'm going to meet somewhere, you know, in Kansas. And as you know, I've spent a lot of my time going to uh to to meet people at their farm or in their their house um gathering that kind of information. It's not what Congress is looking at.

They are looking at pictures from fighter craft, you know, fighter planes and satellites and and all that. And they are looking at mainly at the military because there is this idea that the phenomena may be a threat, which is a valuable, you know, idea to to look at. But that's not all. I mean in in many of the cases I had um that published uh the thing was not a threat. It was it was minding its own business.

You know it appears and it's not something you're going to track out of space with a telescope. It appears as a point of light and people are intrigued by the point of light and then it expands into you know an an area of light and then out of that emerges something that looks like a craft and then it lands uh it may be 40 ft in in diameter and it makes an impact on the ground and in the case in Valenc So, you know, is a perfect case it, you know, and so you can you can analyze with soil. We we've done all of that, but it's not something you can track that anybody can track with a telescope. And uh in the case in Valenc, there's a a very good movie now about Valenc. Um the um when I I met with with the witness, spent three days there with with the witness and it took us to the place and I said, "Well, you know h how did it go away?" And he said, "Well, it it lifted and then it went off at an angle and then it vanished." And I said, "Well, do you mean it vanished by just accelerating?" He said, "No, it just wasn't there anymore." Okay.

So, and I have a number of cases like that that I've that the people did not want to publish. Uh, so I' I've kept them but very well described and very well you know I'm in Silicon Valley so people have been in Silicon Valley for 40 years. uh I funded about 70 companies with my you know with my friends from a number of funds uh within that community people know me pretty well. So, I've had a number of CEOs coming to me saying, you know, we have a a a house on the coast and me and my family, you know, we've seen something and and I say, well, can I can I publish it? Can I put it that? He said, "No, you know, I'm the I'm running a company and uh people cannot, you know, people on Wall Street has to know that I'm I'm a serious guy." And I run into that situation all the time. So, Congress does not have that information.

They may have it from other people. They may have that kind of information, but so far they've only concentrated on on the the armed forces because again the the motivation is in order to to get um you know funding for anything the the best way to do it is to say this is a potential threat. Now in the rest of the world people are not treating it as a threat. You know the the Russians never thought it was a threat. I mean you you went there George uh they they their attitude certainly the the scientists have spoken to was uh you know this is a fascinating phenomenon and we should study it because we're going to learn something important about physics and um there is no none of that filter that that we we have here the same thing in France um you know the the official group studying it is uh the French science agency that's been know since the days of cloer in the late in the early 70s you know has been consistently just uh taking reports from the from the public and uh sending people there to do analysis and so on and you know I've worked I've been working with them on and off for a number of of years.

Uh and uh that's not considered necessarily as a threat or is a is a military subject. The military is obviously interested interested in the potential technologies that could derive from it, but they the the public is still seeing it as um you know, more like an extension of science fiction. You know, wouldn't it be nice to know what else is in the universe? Yeah. Um, Jacques, I got a question. For for 50 years, you've been looking at this problem not just as technological, but also as cultural.

A lot of your writing is about that. And I I want to talk about that, but a lot of people like me, we get introduced to this through the nuts and bolts, the the technology. There's rumors that the United States government has been able to reverse engineer what we call UFOs. Do you have any personal knowledge if we've made any headway? You say as a as a scientist, you say it's important that we can look at this to be able to reverse engineer it. That's what a scientist would want to do.

Have we been successful? Has the United States do do we have craft that traverse the cosmos because we've reverse engineered them from UFOs or is that mythology? As far as you're concerned, >> the the investment community, the venture capital community in California is is a sophisticated community and it has its own way of keeping secrets and exchanging secrets because a secret that you keep uh is is pretty useless in business. No, you you at the end of the day, you have to be able to sell something that people like uh or want. And uh so there is a network and you know someone you know who used to be with the CIA for a long time told me you know don't think that we have these great secrets first in Washington. uh we we find a technology when we come to San Jose uh that could be applicable to something we do and then we you know we we use it we take it we use it we may classify some applications of it but uh you guys have been working on it you know openly for two years and there may even so there there is even a curve that uh people look at of of are patents. You know, you have patent one, two, and three about a new technology and then all of a sudden nothing is published for 10 years and then some product comes out that everybody thinks is extraordinary.

Well, what happened during those 10 years when nothing was published? And there are a number of areas in science like that that you can look at. It's very interesting. Well, for 10 years it was classified. They it was then, you know, in some lab somewhere, maybe at Los Alamos, maybe at uh Battel, maybe at developed it into something that could be a product, either a product for a computer you're going to buy. I mean it's uh or it could be uh it could be a product that will go into a new weapon system.

So if in Silicon Valley if if you're trusted they you know people don't sign special contracts or secrecy things and so on. But if if uh if you're told something which is sensitive and you don't keep it to yourself or you don't then you can't be trusted and you're not going to you know it's like Hollywood you know you're you're not going to you go eat eat lunch in San Jose you know next year and that's the way the system works. It works on trust. And people think Silicon Valley is all new stuff. It's not new stuff.

It goes way back, you know, it goes back to actually before World War II. So those those relationships of trust are very deep and people talk about UFOs within those relationships. >> I'm just asking you, have we reverse engineered technology from non-human intelligence? Do you have knowledge of that? Have we done that? >> So I I wanted to get back to that the if if we had there are there would be signs that would be visible you know certainly in Silicon Valley and in other places they there there would be repercussions you would see um um and You know, that's one of, you know, if you read espionage novels, I mean, that's a typical thing, uh, of of claiming that you know something to elicit information from witnesses or from other people or agents or and uh there are a number of things that have intrigued me that in in documents that we've looked at you know within NDS and and Bas looked at a number of quote official documents that had very surprising thing you know uh the MJ12 documents you know massive and they contain a lot of them where we can trace historically to an authentic document somewhere and then along the way somebody talks about flying saucers and where did that come from? So did General Eisenhower who was he briefed about flying saucers and what and you so you have all these rumors and someone you know explained to me that if you suspect that there is someone within an organization who is uh an agent from foreign power and you want to know say you know a science scientist at Los Rosalamos who's in a classified project. uh you want to know if he's likely to leak information somewhere, you can plant a document that comes to his knowledge that has a number of keywords and then you have somebody in Czechoslovakia who looks at what comes in within a particular group or particular office and if you see that keyword coming up then you can you have two two parts of the link. Uh you know I I've never been trained to learn about those things but those are tricks that and we know you know I'm not going to use any names but we know people within the UFO community who were a t asked to work with researchers and so on to help do exactly that.

get documents and sort them. I was told by a member of the Academy of Sciences who had worked on UFOs. Um I I I I asked him about the way the database from Bas had vanished essentially and he said well you know it may be reborn somewhere um in a salted state. And I asked what he meant because I had never understood I had never heard that concatenation of words. And he said, well, you know, you take data and you want to know who is going to use it.

So you you you change the data and then you you alter the data or you destroy the data so that if it shows up somewhere you'll know um you know how it was how it was leaked or how it was used and that um you know I don't know about those techniques. I've never been trained in in that that kind of uh you know that kind of skill and uh of course that would explain why scientists don't want to get into this business because this is not the way science is done. You know if I if as you know I I've turned over all my samples to Dr. Nolan at Stanford uh so that we can continue to do the investigations together about those cases. We've started to publish as you know in the number one aerospace journal about the analysis of some of those cases and uh you know it's all cases where I have verified the history.

I verified, you know, where they came from and how they were acquired to the best of my ability and he knows that. Okay. And he can he knows he can trust that. Of course, you know, we're we may discover something in the analysis that tells us more about where it may have occurred naturally or whatever. That doesn't mean that all of it is valid, you know, UFO data, but uh at least the the data is clean to this level.

Uh he knows I'm not salulting the you know the stones or the data, you know. Uh and uh that's the way you do science. Now if if those games are being played as they seem to have been played with the BAS project in Las Vegas, then the data is useless, which means we have to start from the beginning. But George, you know, it's been 14 years since the end of the BAS project. 14 years during which that database of 260,000 cases has disappeared.

Now suppose that somebody has a database and they may be very good people somewhere in a classified project and they want to use it. How you know in 14 years many of those witnesses have died. They've moved you can't find them anymore. you know, how are you going to validate the data because the there are there are cases where you need to go back and find additional witnesses, you know, from that area. Well, all that is gone.

So, if somebody wanted to essentially derail the study we were doing, that would have been the way to do it. Okay? Even if it went to a new group of scientists, they didn't have the the internal plan for the uh how the AI was going to be applied to the project. So what I'm doing is you know I have all the data uh it's not as good as of course as what Bass had done but I have the original data that I had donated to the project but I have the right to use it and then A lot of it is actually public data but um you know I spent as you know a lot of years uh compiling it and reducing it to the right format. So I've restarted to work on it but to work on it by myself. Now fortunately you know computers now are much more capable and they are they have primitive AI and you know my PhD was in AI from the days of Dr.

Heinik. So uh I I understand what you can what you can do with hard physical data. Uh, and I'm I'm doing it on my own now. Uh, just out of curiosity for the the years that I may uh I I may still have. And uh I'm am going to um start publishing some results from from that, you know, as as time goes on.

The first one was the uh the presentation I made at Saul, you know, a few weeks ago in Italy uh about that uh that that case which is actually in um you know in in the in the report from um from the Condan report uh that nobody has noticed because it's in in the appendex of the Condan report and everybody threw that out because they thought there was nothing there. Well, um this is a case that's unidentified after extensive study by the content committee, the both the physicist and the social science guys um with um with analysis with u infrared photographs from aircraft at night and so on over that forest. And um and I have the wood, you know, I I still have not not here. It's in a safe place, but I I have the wood that was impacted by the radiation from that object, which was an object in the forest. The the witness was a nuclear physicist.

So I put him in touch with Condan. Dr. Hinek and I were the first scientists who were called to testify, you know, in in Boulder before the Condan Committee to brief them on the history of all that. And um I'm going to continue that that study. We want to get the uh get the data from the wood the the data we've uh we've looked at it in France and we published that that paper with my my French uh physics uh uh colleagues and uh it was taken to Saklay in in France which is the main atomic research facility and we think that within the wood there are layers of radiation intens intensity.

The the witness saw the object pulsating and the the calculations on the energy would give you something equivalent to the energy of a reactor at Diablo Canyon and uh a sort of ball of light in a clearing in a pine forest. At night when it was raining, temperature was close to zero uh I mean to freezing and the the the thing was pulsating but it was no more than two or 3 meters in diameter. Uh the witness being a a nuclear physicist young professor at a local university um you know got the hell out of there. He was just driving home with his family and all that was published in the Condan report. No, not not all of that because they continued to do the research afterwards.

Um, they took wood from the the trees that had been burned, but it was it's not a burn, it's a radiation impact. Uh so they took the the bark and the bark from the intact part of the tree and uh they sent it to the government, you know, radiation expertise lab that returned it with no comment. They obviously had looked at it and didn't want to be involved. So I I called uh the witnesses and I said, "Can I have it?" this was a few years after the sighting and they said sure. So they they sent it to me and uh I've kept it uh ever since.

So we have the report from the witness uh who had computed the the energy and Dr. Comeden recomputed the energy and found twice as much from the actual distances and so on after they they have done that's in the common report and again that's a case that's not that euphologists have never talked about. >> So you wrote >> I have all the data so I'm going to continue working on it and I really don't need anybody else. I mean, I I don't need uh you know, a big group. I don't need funding.

I don't need anything. I can just go ahead go ahead with my friends and do that. You wrote a book about a crash at Trinity 1945. It's 80 years ago. Where is that? They didn't just take it to the dump and cover it with dirt.

Where is that object? Where hanger 18? Where did they keep it? and and and in the same vein I mean >> it was taken to Los Alamos which is a logical place to take it. Um the the book when it first came out was uh you know book know Trinity was uh with with Paola Harris who had done four years of investigation before I got involved. So which is valuable because at that time both of the witnesses were alive. By the time I got involved, Remy had died. that uh you know one one witness is still you know very much uh very much alive and you know and uh the book was criticized with some flaws in my you know I mean uh it's my fault not digging fast enough in or deep enough into the actual documents um a a critic, you know, a good critic, a good skeptic, there are good skeptics, the ones who actually do the work, >> uh, went and got a number of documents that, uh, showed that there were some inaccuracies in what I had published.

And now that happens in science, I mean, it happened to Einstein. So, you know, I'm not going to apologize too much for that. that I did go back and now we have four more years of of research on it and we have verified you know all the information we could. There are two cases where um he's right about the actual name of the policeman who was there was not the name that the witness remembered. Okay.

Well, the witness is a little bit older than I am, and uh you know, memory uh plays games, but he was there with another policeman. Uh and you know, little by little, we've we've done all that. So, we've republished the book now with with a lot more information that answers all those all those questions. >> But after 80 years, the government has not acknowledged that as being real. It doesn't tell us where that is.

I think about Stephen Spielberg uh his magnificent film Close Encounters. Lome the character based on you arranges this meeting with aliens. If that event happened today, I don't believe the public would ever hear about it just as we have not heard about the object that crashed at Trinity for 80 years. Um can you address the idea of secrecy? whether some level of secrecy is necessary and where are we ever going to learn um you know the the physical objects are real that the government's been stashing them away and no matter how many times Congress asks questions or holds hearings they're not going to tell us >> well some of them are real and you know I I I respect the research has being done by the you know Muon and Kufas and Appro especially and so on. uh they've gone to the site, they've interviewed the people, they've seen the traces uh I've done some of that um um you know with with with colleagues and uh the recently you know where that you you can still go to the site some enough of the witnesses are still alive that you can get your own data and make up your own, you know, your own decision about that.

But, um, I think a number of those cases are fake or they were that doesn't mean that there wasn't an official report that there had been a UFO. But, um, you know, I I remember that discussion with Dr. He neck. I know that there are cases there are cases in the blue book fives that are unidentified and classified. Very few of them.

Most of the blue book fives were unclassified from the beginning. Okay. That was the whole point was to reassure the public. Uh no scientist bothered to look at them except Heneck and me and and Dr. Macdonald.

Um but in in those in those cases uh you know the classified cases uh you know I I asked Dr. behind neck. Well, you know when why is this particular case classified? Don't tell me if it's, you know, if there is something really secret, but and he laughed. He said, "Well, you know, this is in the very early days. This woman in Alaska saw a light in the sky that was a big light at sunset that was flying, you know, and it was flying from east to west over Alaska." Well, you know what would be flying from east to west at very high altitude over Alaska in the 50s? It would be an early U2.

The Air Force knew that it was reported as a UFO. So they I you know they they labeled it as unidentified UFO and they you know kept it as classified. So if you look at the file now, if somebody you know innocently goes back to the file which are still there, they find this classified case which by now has been declassified and they find this this UFO over Alaska, they you know they are going to be very intrigued if they don't know the backstory that you know this woman innocently had detected you know a secret CIA aircraft and of course it's unidentified. So you have to get into the details. You have to do the you have to do the the homework, you know, as as you guys have done.

And uh that's that's how you get to the to the truth instead of, you know, going off on a tangent somewhere. that it you know it takes time and it you you need to have the trust and it's all about trust. The fact that the um that there is something unique somewhere doesn't really you you have to you cannot base it on secrecy because sooner or later somebody is going to sell it to somebody. I mean there are too many spies in Washington and so on and they you know that again that information will be salted and changed and used uh and that that world is that's not a world where you can do science. It's not a world where you can advance knowledge.

Knowledge is based on trust. Um so um if you want to build something that really changes the world, it's not by spreading misinformation around or making making little secrets look like big secrets because uh sooner or later you'll be caught. I mean that's not the way to do it. Um [snorts] I think that in this again there is a place for secrecy that I respect. There is a place for classification of of certain things that I respect and I've always followed.

Uh but this is too big now. I mean it involves too many countries. It involves if if we keep secrets the French are going to keep secrets. They already do. The Russians certainly are going to keep secrets and the Chinese even more.

And then where do we go? I mean, everybody has part of the information. >> Jeremy. >> Yeah. So, Jacques, I wanted to talk with you a little bit about a these days a lot of people are saying that the UAP we're seeing are reverse engineered black projects. I gather from your answer that you don't think we've made a lot of progress with reverse engineering the technology over the last 50 years you've been studying this but more importantly you say this is not a modern phenomenon that it crosses all cultures and all time that the UFO phenomenon is persistent global and adaptive that's something you talk about and you've really you've really um proven that case by going back into antiquity in a couple of your books and talking about how people are seeing the same things back then that they're seeing now.

One of those cases that you wrote about and I wanted just to hear about it from you is 1917 and and the experience of Fatima where most people they portrayed it as a cultural or religious event and you looked at it you know from the observations scientifically. Can you tell me how cases like Fatima in 1917, how they relate to the modern-day UFO thing? Explain to us what happened in Fatima. >> Um, how much time do we have? No, Fatima is very deep. Um, both in terms of uh testimony. I mean, there were 80,000 people there, you know, on the the last operation.

Uh, they didn't see the virgin. They they saw a disc uh silver thing between them and the sun. Um, and uh everything dried up. There had it had been raining and everything dried up very quickly. uh which was surprising and the the social environment was was remarkable was really remarkable.

Um it it started by three shepherds uh seeing just a ball of light and uh then messages coming from an entity in that ball of light primarily to one of them Lucia who was these were kids I mean they were 10 12 13 uh just guarding the, you know, sheep. Uh, it's a area with fairly poor vegetation, but they they do have agriculture and and and sheep and goats. Uh, that's the setting where it took place. Um I I went there uh with my wife and uh saw the basilica that has been built there and also saw the you know the the area that really hasn't changed very much in terms of the vegetation and so on. Um and by coincidence it was also a day where it was there was alternate rain and and sunshine.

Um the the second so first uh they they they saw this and then they they had a number of meetings every month on the same day of the month. So uh but some months are 30 days, some are 31 days and well it was always the same day. So you know whatever that phenomenon is, it has the same calendar we do which is again one of those things you hit you know why would that be um which may of course make people suspicious of the authorities. So uh it built up it came to a point where more and more people were going there and the authorities were concerned because people say well Portugal you know that this is a super Catholic country uh they believe in all those miracles. Well the government in in Portugal at the time in 1917 was socialist.

They were not believers. They were not Christians. they were they they were rather with you know more the the leninist you know current in all of Europe and so on. Uh they of course 1917 is the time of the Russian revolution. So you have that coincidence of different things.

They tried to prevent people from going back to the place and that didn't work. that at the last predicted, you know, operation, uh, there were 70,000 people coming from all over Portugal with, you know, a a donkey and a cart carrying food and so on. So, for the travel and and uh, you know, entire families and they were there and that's what the photographs show. They show this large crowd at the site and then at the indicated time the sun was covered by a a disc you could look at without being blinded, a silver disc. And then uh they were rotating beams of color around around that.

There were I I have here you know the the books uh behind me and in front of me I have 10 books about fatim were mostly written by um experts hired by the church or by uh uh churchmen who were there who had interviewed the people. Um there were also uh non-believers. There were two scientists there who described what they saw as everybody was was kneeling, you know, around praying around them when the these beams were going. They described it as cimated beams uh which is a you know a perfect physical description of it in physics. So th those were again this is in the language of you know the physics professor uh so they were not believers they were just describing an actual phenomena there there is testimony from somebody who was not interested in miracles he was working in the fields couple of miles away saw the sun was still in the sky and he saw a disc between the sun and the crowd and he testified to that extent.

Unfortunately, there were no photographs in those days. It would have been very very hard to have a camera that could capture that. There are photographs of the crowd but not of the phenomenon itself unfortunately. So, um I professor Miss who is a physicist and a euphologist from Belgium. I I've worked with him over the years.

Uh we and we disagreed about Fatima and he said that Fatima was an after effect in the eyes of people from staring at the sun because of the atmosphere being so thin. Well, when I was there, it had just been raining. There was a lot of water vapor in the atmosphere. I was there with my wife and I stared at the sun a little bit too long and I didn't have, you know, rotating beams, but I I obviously saw colors and so on. I mean, obviously it uh, you know, saturated my my retina.

Uh so I I I I didn't stare at it obviously but I could understand that you know the the atmosphere was very special very thin very saturated and uh it could have done that. So um I don't know where I stand about Fatima but I you know I I I got more books And uh there is a book that was written about the miracle of 1915. Two years before, two years before, three shepherds in the same area. Um in the same conditions, including one of those who were at Fatima um in two years later. um saw a globe of light, not the sun, the globe of light that came to the prairie to the to the field and out of that globe of light stepped a a human uh angel.

They perceived it as an angel. gave them the feeling that he was an angel. And he taught them a prayer. And they he said they should keep praying that particular prayer. And they uh when it rained, they would go into a cave that was there.

Of course, the sheep didn't care. Uh and they, you know, they wouldn't lose them. And they went into that cave and they were praying and praying and going into sort of the second state and they reported that and you know it was dismissed and there were no other witnesses and it find interesting because very often in those in prominent UFO cases what you have to do is ask what happened before. Well, two years before the miracle at Fatima, there was this operation of this being uh of this teacher who came out of essentially uh uh you know, a globe of lights. Well, you know, we're getting reports now about globes of light moving around orbs.

Now we call them orbs. So we have a new word for that. Uh in those days it was just a globe of light, you know, up to 2 m in diameter. Well, you know, that's a complex series of of things. Um, of course, the impact of Fatima like the impact of the miracles in Mexico and so on has been enormous.

So, and it's in many ways for a scientist, you know, there isn't much more that you can do. Uh but the the the impact on humanity has been has been you know important. The impact on belief uh the year again was a year of the communist revolution in Russia. Uh the uh Maria uh thought that she had communicated she had heard communication from the virgin. The virgin appeared to her not to her cousins who were with her.

um who saw the globe uh and I think one of them saw the lady but didn't hear the message. One of the messages was that Russia would be converted. Okay. again was 1917 in a country with a socialist government that had forbidden people from coming there to see the alleged miracle and they couldn't stop, you know, 80,000 people. So, you know, that's part of our history.

It's it's part of UFO history. We can't just, you know, forget it. I mean that kind of thing is is important. The the thing that you know that movie that was made about the case in Argentina is extraordinary because he you know he started u making a movie about local traditions local beliefs of the Indians and um this funny story about the UFO and I told him it's not a funny story at Oh, and it's a complex story and it's relevant, but um you know, we they wanted to come interview me in San Francisco. And I said, well, for the same price, I I can go to Buenosis.

I still speak a little Spanish and if you give me time, I'll relearn enough Spanish to talk to the witness directly. and uh you know he changed the the thrust of the of the movie u and u I think he's captured exactly what the problem is and the the the the message from the local people um is uh is what has touched me the most you know that we misunderstand all of that we really misunderstand all of it by immediately translating it as a threat and uh I think there are cases where people have been injured there is a potential that it could be a threat there is radiation from it I mean that's well recognized in that that last latest case I published you know with with Dr. Nolan and with uh with the group the maybe they don't care we don't know what they are doing I think the the other cases that I'm looking at that are the very special cases where you you will notice that that case in from uh 1966 or 67 the skeptics have not attacked you know they have not um they have not attacked me on on that basis because they know better. This is a case that has gone through the academy of sciences. Okay.

After study by Dr. Condan who is regarded as someone who dismissed UFOs. >> Okay. So you you get into the deep stuff, you know, when you touch those cases and they're complex, but if you if you can array the the right tools and and the right science around it, you can get to the truth. And that's what um you know, we've done with uh with Trinity.

Um and um I think that that story is not over. Let me try this again about the idea of disclosure. Lome the character in in close encounters based on your life arranges and and coordinates this meeting between humans and nonhumans and it's the start of a beautiful friendship. We hope there's exchanges there. If that happened today in real life, we would not be told.

Your friend uh Dr. Hal Putoff, our mutual friend, has admitted in a in a film that recently came out and in public presentations that he was part of a brain trust during the first Bush administration, the dad, not the son, where they all got together, these brainiacs and experts. They looked at all the evidence about the effects of disclosure, and at the end of it, even somebody like Hal said, "I don't think it's a good idea. Uh, we we shouldn't do it." Well, last time you and I spoke, Jock, back in April, I asked you the question about it, and you said we need to have some discussion before we just disclose. We need to consider the potential impact.

You know what the reaction was? People wanted to scalp me and probably do worse to you. Have you thought about disclosure, how it could happen, and how far we should go? Do you believe as Hal and his colleagues did that it probably could be disastrous and have terrible effects we have to take um well that let me go back a little bit. I I knew about that um meeting when it when it happened in in in Washington. It it wasn't a a secret meeting. It was just uh you know one of those meetings that are done for uh essentially for back fill of of information and and testing of ideas so on.

So it it happens frequently in futures research you know you you simulate a situation. We did that when I was at the Institute for the Future. We would get experts together frequently, you know, and present them with a a future technology and and see what what their reaction might be. All simulated future technology. Uh we did that with video conferencing a long time ago and we've published all that.

And there I I have some problems with that meeting because yes that's a logical conclusion and I understand I had other friends in that meeting and they say the same thing that that Al says uh and they they agree with the conclusion. I've done um studies of crisis um in um in other areas and reactions to crisis. Um, you know, my I had a little computer company for a while and was asked to uh to testify about, you know, what happens during uh nuclear industrial nuclear crisis like three mile island and how we can mitigate those those crisis. Well, my little company was running. It wasn't secret, but it wasn't advertised.

But we were funded by the nuclear u industry u the civilian nuclear industry for three years to manage nuclear crisis. Now three mile island was known to the public. It was on TV and so on uh because it wasn't contained within the company. There were people in other companies who had experienced the same failure and they knew how to fix it except that they didn't have access to that particular company. There are 200 companies in the US running some sort of nuclear uh nuclear plant or nuclear applications to you know electrical current and uh to generate electrical current.

So uh they didn't communicate and as a result of three mile island the industry got together and said we need to establish a link and we had at the time uh we were pioneers in in uh computer conferencing and we had a system uh to to link together up to 54 online simultaneously 54 u individuals or groups. So, um they funded us for three years. We had a dedicated computer that did nothing but that. And we solved and extinguished a number of alerts that never became known to the press or the public because there was a simple way to fix it or there was a technical way to fix it that >> prevented a crisis. after an incident or an accident.

Okay, the accident would be reported. The incident could be solved technically, you know, by people knowing the information. They knew the information through our computer. So, we we ran that that thing for three years and then we sold it to a larger company that's still running it. Uh we had five countries by the way linked into this uh because they couldn't afford the industry couldn't afford another three mile island you know it would have stopped nuclear power as an industry um because it it's scary so I I had the experience of of that the what does it take to uh present that to the public.

It takes again the key the coin of the realm is trust. Um, you know, I'm old enough to remember the end of World War II. I was born at the beginning of World War II. I don't remember the beginning. I remember the end.

I remember the bombing. I remember the invasion of France. The reason France stayed together is that uh under the bombing, under the invasion, under all of that, under the crimes was the goal. The Gaul had uh moved to London and started the resistance and made a link with the resistance. uh and uh there was trust.

He was able to build trust among everybody from you know the mostly he was on the right. He was accused of being on the extreme right but he had the communist with him. Yeah, the communist maki, you know, the the the the resistance itself, in the factories, in the trains, in the, you know, in the mines, so on with with him and he had the admin, much of the administration that was still in place and he had the army and the navy and and and could present something credible to Eisenhower when it came time for the invasion. Now um that's in in many crisis in industrial crisis which I've lived through as you know as an investor I mean every every startup has a series of crisis you know uh even Google and Apple I mean look at Apple uh what happened when Apple was essentially out of business and they had no CEO well you know they they brought back their initial CEO who had been dismissed by the board of Apple 10 years before. Okay.

And um but by then he had learned something and he had the trust of the remaining people and he rebuilt Apple into what it is today which is you know admittedly the leading you know um personal computer company in the world. So um the that's what it takes is leadership uh the under and that's a question that they didn't ask at that uh at that test you know that uh my friends attended in in Washington. It it all depends if you if you trust your leader whether that's in war or in business. uh or in a situation where a desperate situation like France and it was invaded became part of Germany essentially uh the the trust in the leader you know is the is the key factor. So the question is is arising with UFOs you know uh is uh at the time when it becomes obvious that that there phenomenon is here is there going to be a leader who can reassure the population and the scientific community which right now is silent it's absent you know it's not I mean In spite of all the all the work that Dr.

Nolan is doing that I've done that Dr. Hine neck the you know the the professors are not following us you know they are staying in on their campus doing their research uh and they don't trust the uh the UFO medium you know the UFO they don't trust what they see on TV and and they have good reasons not to trust it because again it all comes from you know liquid thing, classified project. Somebody says, "Oh, I was part of a classified project that did this and that." Well, yeah. So, they built a gadget that can, you know, uh, outperform a Russian rocket. Well, fine.

I'm I'm glad we have that technology and I don't need to know how it works. But that's not what that farmer told me. You know that farmer told me or in one particular case some very sophisticated people, professionals who saw that little light. A little light got larger and then uh out of it came a craft the s the size of my apartment and uh it left imprints on the ground. And someone I know went there the next morning when he heard that uh through the police and he went there with pastor of Paris and he took an imprint of the impact of the leg of the craft and uh we have that and it's it's about this big.

Okay. and this high and it's round and it's perfectly round on top. You know, that's the mold from the the thing before the the dirt, you know, and at that point only the the the cops had the Jearmms had access to it and they they they secured the area. It's an area that's pretty far away anyway. I mean pretty uh it wouldn't be trampled by but he was there that very morning and he took that that task.

Okay, that's real. That's something we can study. Um there there are of course in the cast there are leaves of grass that are stuck to it. Well, you know, why don't we probe those leaves of grass to see? I know it's been many years, but we maybe we can still do some some good with that. And there were four imprints like that.

You know, the craft was about 45 ft in diameter. What was it doing there? And there was so uh I'm uh those are the cases I continue to work with and really I don't need I I don't need anybody. I mean I can I can find the labs. I can find people to you know help me interview the witnesses. I know the witnesses.

I I have interviewed some of them already. And uh uh you know I can go back and do do some more. >> You you showed me a a case you showed me a case this morning uh something you wanted to talk about. And when you showed me the image, it uh reminded me of a a military image that George and I obtained and released to the public. Can you show me or show our audience that image and and why that case is important? Can you show that to me right now? Um, I' I'd rather keep it fairly quiet because I don't want any interference with it, you know.

So, that >> Oh, no. I I'm talking about the photo that you said you wanted to talk about. >> Yes. Um, that's that's also an interesting case because it happened in France in broad daylight. um with um a a woman who was uh driving from from her home to the family home with two uh two girls in their early teens in the back of the car.

The car had a uh the roof was open, but there was a glass uh glass stop uh that was not open. So they were looking at the sky through the through the glass and the ahead of the car they saw an object coming towards them that looked like that looked like this. It was essentially a starshaped uh today we would call it a drone. Uh it uh it was it was strange because it seemed to be flying but it stayed in the same position with respect to the car. And they uh the woman had this old camera and you can see the sky.

Uh there is a re there is a spot here that could be the shadow and the the photograph is not good enough but we'll work we continue to work on it and um and again u Dr. Nolan has has looked at this also and we we're trying to work with the photograph to enhance it. Uh if it's a shadow, it's interesting because we we know the exact time. We know the exact place. The woman is a professional woman.

She's a marketing executive. She's worked in the US. She's French. Uh she works with a company. Um the uh that's her camera, but she was driving so she gave the camera to the girls on the back seat and and one of the girls took that picture through this glass.

So it's not the ideal scientific conditions to take a photograph, but uh but we have the photograph. >> That's amazing. It just it Yeah. What year was that? So this was about seven years ago and you know way before the all the stories about drones and so on. So I said can you know uh you should report it to the French uh UFO project that French research organization.

And she said she wanted nothing to do with you know with the officials because again she many people now in the US and in France and in other countries have gotten it that you see something you don't report it. >> Yeah. Right. you may report it to George, you know, to you uh or to me if if they they're in contact with me. I get those reports.

They don't go any further anymore because the those people don't want to be known in the community as crazy. They don't want to be on TV. They don't they really don't want to be ridiculed. they don't want to have to testify to the police and so on. Uh they may report it anonymously or or maybe not um maybe openly to a a group that they trust to a UFO local UFO group and they will discuss it like they discussed it with me.

I mean they she she wrote to me about this um because she had read my books but again >> that's amazing. >> A lot of people like us we we get a lot of the information and and it doesn't go to places where we think it should. George you remember this. It looks so similar to the one the military footage. This is a thermal image.

So it's showing the heat signature. But when Jacques showed me that I had heard about the case, it's just amazing that there's still so much reporting going on, but it's not going to a central location like like it would be useful, you know, for scientific data. Anyway, George, what's your next question? >> Well, I'm I'm I I go back to where we started, whether Jacques is hopeful. Now, you've seen the peaks and valleys of public interest over the years, and you know, the public is really excited. there's a case that grabs their attention.

Um they demand answers from the government, Congress reacts, has hearings, there are commissions and studies and then it all goes away. Um is there a model that you would you would recommend that could be used to push the topic forward? Jacques, I don't know if you know it, but we're coming up on the 30th anniversary of NIDS. The fir very first meeting of the science advisory board is two weeks from the time when we are talking here today. Seems like NIDS was was a wonderful model and bass was a wonderful model but the fact that it had government money in in bass put limitations on where it could go. You had great freedom to follow the evidence where it led but you're not allowed to share that information.

Is there a model that you would recommend for how to move forward and finally get some solid answers? >> Um [snorts] yes. Uh you know what you're describing is the public is chasing ambulances. Uh people will say, "Oh yeah, you know, I I heard of that case, but there was a new case just this morning on TV. Somebody took a picture at night of a light." And I say, well, you know, where was it? Oh, well, we believe it was in Africa somewhere. Well, what time was it? You know, what direction was it? That does the picture show, you know, other things, planets, or you know, oh no, it it's just a light in in the sky, you know.

I mean, there is nothing you can do with that. you you at the same time we have cases that are documented but you know when when I said uh even with my my colleagues at at saw when I said uh you know I I want the the title of my talk should be 1966 Hansville that's the title of my call it's not you know the sensational thing that was in the common republic It's not. It's 196. And and I said, people will say, who cares about 1966? Well, okay. Uh what about the wood that I have that that I, you know, was last year it was tested, you know, at an atomic lab in France.

Okay. And we we know there is new information in the wood from that tree. Okay. That we're going to continue working with. you know those uh the same thing in um in medicine you know people chase ambulances they oh there was a new case of you know COVID or something well yeah but if you if you talk to Dr.

Nolan who say well COVID is just one of many you know many things that have developed and they come and go and there will be more okay because that type of uh that type of biological entity is going to keep evolving and it will reappear in other things and he's been doing research in Africa on on other you know other things that are part of that family and so So when you talk to the scientists they they're not looking at the last thing that was on TV you know they are looking at the history of it and you need that's certainly no I I think my last responsibility in this field is to transmit some of that which is why I wanted to talk about the 1966 Hanesville case you know and really put it on you re reawaken it from its ashes and uh and and bring it bring it forward. I think we people need to get back into those books and you know uh and and look at the old the old data. >> Should there be something like bass as a way to move forward but with private money not government money so that there are no strings attached? Well, um, BAS was painful. Uh, and we didn't expect that because the needs experience, uh, you know, was essentially the most outstanding team I've ever worked with in in science. I mean, you know, of course, Cole com Keller and the whole team and, uh, Dr.

Putoff and so on. uh and uh Dr. Green uh all of us uh you know had specialties but we all brought something to the to to to the meeting. uh when it became bus all of us not only uh you know had that knowledge but and background from meds but we had top secret clearances you know with a few things attached to it so at that point you know we couldn't talk to each other anymore and I mean uh Dr. Green worked on on my my data warehouse for two years expanding it in certain areas.

I had consulted him about the structure that users would want in different disciplines and I implemented it based on the structure that the specialist gave me which is what you do in you know when you were a computer guy. and uh but then that there were new cases coming in that I never knew about that had a different structure and I never knew about that. So I couldn't adapt dynamically the structure as I would have adapted it if we had been at IBM or AT&T or in any you know in a open company because there were barriers and I didn't know about these cases. In fact, I still don't know about these cases. So, um and and you know that the the other people didn't know what I was doing um apart from apart from that and with other cases.

Um so uh that that structure again coming back to the beginning is fine if you're a small group of people developing a new weapon or a new radar. You know you all know each other you know what you're building and that that information can be contained and you're all in the same room working on the same device. This is not it. We need to open the doors and the windows. I'm uh not going to be a part of any any new secret, you know.

I'm I'm done with that. And that comes up with UFO samples, you know, and it's it's ridiculous. And I I have samples that are part of a case that people in other countries that I could name are keeping secret. And I don't know what they've done with their samples from the same case. So I'm not going to tell them what I'm doing with my samples or the ones I gave Dr.

Nolan. But it's ridiculous because we can't make any progress. And they're stuck with their samples. They think they are the only ones who have who know about that case. Now I went to that place.

I spoke to the witness and the witness was smart enough to give them he had five pieces of stuff that he picked up uh when they they came you know there are government place they came there and they said we need the the the thing and of course we'll return it to you after analysis which is what they all say no um don't don't believe that they never do uh they may return something but they've taken the good stuff in the meantime and they may return something to you that has nothing to do and you know that happened in Sakoro you know in that that case u where the the actual stuff that was was picked up by Dr. Stanford and Dr. Heck was never returned to them and they were told, you know, just a fairy story about what what was found there that it was silica. Well, it wasn't silica and uh they they fooled everybody to get it to a secret lab and it's, you know, presumably still there. Uh Dr.

Stanford died in the meantime and you know, we don't know where the actual samples are. We'll never get them. So fine. Uh but the witness kept the number five sample and I was offered the number five sample and uh which was you know which was about this this big and I said I don't need all that because Dr. Nolan is looking at very small things.

So I just need you know a few grams of it. So we carved out I said keep it. I don't want responsibility to take anything through customs. Uh, you know, you keep it. I'm going to take, you know, a few a few grams of it.

And that's what we have. Now, the people back there are surprised that I'm talking about that case because they think they have the only samples and they are secret. Well, too bad. But they're not alone. Maybe theirs are secret, but mine mine isn't secret, you know.

So we you run into this kind of stupid situation. And that's why why scientists are not going to get involved, you know, you can't do science that way. you're not going to get, you know, your your university, your lab, your students involved in something and then at the end of it, you find it's a a hoax by the DIA or or something to fool the Russians about something and and the whole thing was a joke and you know, you're not going to risk your career, you know, with that kind of thing. And I don't blame them. I've tried to pin you down on this question for as long as I've known you.

It's about the control system. A theory that you proposed, a hypothesis you proposed more than 50 years ago that there is some sort of a control system imposed on humanity on Earth from somewhere else that it limits what we can do. And whether Earthlings are aware of it, uh whether they like it or not, it's there. Is there a way to test that and and have you have you done so? Well, that that idea comes from a discussion I had in France with um with scientists and with and um because I was showing them the statistics that I had and as as you know I've done a lot of computer work on on this looking at the in at the inner structure not not the raw data the the filtered data after you get all the 90% sent you know delusions, illusions, clouds, a moon, all that out of it and you you end up with the hard data. The hub data follows a a periodicity which is very strange that that looks like an induction sequence and some psychologists looked at it and and said it looks like a schedule of reinforcement and I said what's a schedule of reinforcement and they sat me down and got me to read Skinner and the whole psychology ology, an old thesis about um about induction of changes in behavior in animals and in humans.

Uh, you know, with things that repeat but don't quite repeat the same way all the time. And that's what the the inner structure that's what I was hoping we would get to with Bash. And that's the thing that was cut off, you know, and essentially taken from us with no explanation before we could get to redo that. That's the secret. That's a big secret.

Now when I discussed it in France, I said, well, you know, a a schedule of reinforcement or a a a mechanism like that can be natural or it can be artificial. Nature presents us with lots of control systems. You know, in this room has a control system, you know, that controls the temperature. If I step out on the balcony, you know, I'm going to get a completely different temperature. The temperature inside here is controlled.

Uh if I wanted to test it, I could light a fire, you know, warm up the temperature inside and see if something controls it and dampens it down. So, I can do a test of that. Um, of course, the environment is a a series of control systems and many people don't believe that the environment is changing and there are scientists who for the last 50 years have said yes, the environment is changing and uh, you know, insects from Africa now showing up in Paris. You know, how did they get there from the from the Sahara? Well, they got they got there because temperature of France is going up two degrees in a few years, two degrees in a few years. Okay, that's a control system that it's not an evil group that's doing that.

It's just the planet, okay, is doing that. It's the environment. So, you know, UFOs could be from the environment. There could be plasmas. Many people say you know there is many UFOs manifest the way plasmas would be manifested.

So go to a physics lab and ask the professor, you know, what's a u uh what's a globe of plasma, you know, and he'll give you, you know, a bunch of equations and you say, well, how come it can last for 10 minutes? And he doesn't have an answer to that because it certainly shouldn't last for 10 minutes according to our physics. So even that is a mystery. Okay. So, but the UFOs we're talking about are not that. I mean, they are artificial.

We have to believe they are artificial. And if they show up according to a schedule of reinforcement in distinct waves over distinct countries um then it's an intelligent system and that's where my sort of control systems come comes from. Um the the question is can we interact with it or not? Are we being trained for something the way a Skinner reinforcement schedule would train a mouse or a you know a man uh to learn something and and uh one of them said look look at the university. I mean a a university is a control system but if you apply for your PhD you don't know what you have to do to come out as a doctor they don't really give you the steps you know when you in in the lower classes you have to get good notes good grades to graduate and then you graduate not so at the PhD level many people have gone for PhD studies and they never got the degree and they don't know why they didn't get the degree but there was something in the process which was not written down anywhere where they didn't get the degree so um I I spoke to Jacqu Ber who had been in a concentration camp he was he was a French spy he was a French he he helped build the first scientific fake uh espionage network against the Germans, you know, uh with the discovery of heavy water and where heavy water came from and everything else. He was invol involved in that.

He was caught. He was put in a concentration camp. He was a Jew. He was tortured. And he said in those concentration camps.

uh they wanted to know of course what the French were doing. Uh he didn't tell them so they kept torturing him which was their idea of a control system. They said it was a closed control system and we think of concentration camps as a closed control system. And he said we're wrong. One time in one of his concentration camps, the uh all of a sudden the firemen from Munich were brought there by the Nazi.

The firemen of Munich were not happy and they were on strike. The Nazi arrested all of them and moved them to uh the concentration camp for three weeks. They didn't know they were going to be released after three weeks. that they were put in the same regime as the um inmates of the concentration camp. After three weeks, they were no longer on strike and they were driven back to Munich.

So he said the concentration camp was like a university in a way you could graduate. But I didn't know that because you know they were torturing me pretty much every day. That's reality. Okay, that's that's human reality. He fortunately survived.

He escaped uh and uh he went on to be, you know, a prominent advisor to the go and and prominent publisher in Paris. That's, you know, that's a real experience. Um he was in a he said that was a control system. Uh but it could be open or closed depending on the conditions. He said I think UFOs may be the same thing.

They may be open to some people under certain conditions that they control. They certainly have uh spoken to people who were confronted with entities that were open to discussion. Um there there are cases that I know uh where there were this happened in government facilities but nobody's talking about that. So I suspect that that's true based on the people I've met but uh they were not the people who are running the program. So I cannot be completely sure but what they described to me is a very sophisticated process by which we may be able to interact with the entities.

Those are not the entities that are described um at Trinity in in uh in you know in uh in in my book um uh with Pa Harris uh they are not the entities that were uh caught in Brazil um that that are you know in that documentary. um they are they may be the controllers they may be the higher level entity they if if what I'm told is true the communication with them is very sophisticated and it's complex so there may be a group that I would respect that has access to that and this was from years ago by the way. I mean that report of of that that particular interaction was more than 20 years in in in a lab somewhere in controlled conditions. If that's true then uh there is a process ongoing where we may be able to acquire information at a very sophisticated level and that would be you know that could be a reason for stalling quote disclosure until there can be a a rational way that we're not confronted with something so uh overpowering that it would destroy our culture and our society. I mean, we have enough to deal with with AI these days, which is, you know, a foreign entity potentially.

Um, >> but so, so you're saying you've been made aware that there is a government project, maybe it was 20 years ago, that was able to establish direct communication with a nonhuman intelligence and that you believe this information to be true and that and that and and that this is a reality. This is what you understand to be true. Is that correct? >> Um, I cannot tell. Yes. Yes.

Uh it it's factual. What I cannot tell is whether that the entity that was presented was a simulation of a real entity or whether it was the real entity. Okay. ite that the the the people I spoke to couldn't probe it u to see if it was made of flesh or in metal or or or something else. Okay.

that the it was presented to them in a secure facility that I've never heard of anywhere else where there was structured interaction with it on a continuing basis by specialists from different areas. the the person I spoke to was an extreme, you know, specialist in in a particular discipline. Uh and uh not not a casual observer. And so that could be kind of one of the reasons we have to be careful or there's a slow roll out of disclosure because you're saying we might already have communication with some non forms of communication or ways to engineer communication at a sophisticated level. I don't think the the entities from Trinity, you know, were obviously scared.

They were not the controllers of the craft. The the witness was still alive, you know, uh who was become close friends with him. Went inside as a kid, you know. I mean, was a very curious, very smart kid who knew his, as he says still today, I know my territory, you know, this is the land from his family. He knows that ranch.

He knows the cattle. He knows where the water is. signals everything about it. And uh you know when he was inside there was essentially nothing except a very crude thing that we actually had which and we disagree about what it is but I I think it's something that the soldiers that the military brought and they forgot to take it back. But I don't think it's a sophisticated we've tested it in the lab.

It's what we spent over $10,000 testing it in Silicon Valley Labs and it's it's just perfectly normal gadget. It's not mysterious at all. So, uh, it may have been there just for the convenience of the soldiers doing work at night or whatever, but I I don't think it's part of the original of the original manufacturing equipment, you know, of whatever it was. Uh, the craft itself, we had very good description of it. By the way, the the the shape and the the You know the look and feel as as people say in Silicon Valley is identical to the one in Soro and it's identical to the one in Valencol.

So we have three cases there. And what's funny is when people uh were uh describing it in a newspaper and they they always hire an illustrator and the illustrator always draws a disc and none of those was a disc. It was eggshaped. >> Egg shaped. Yeah.

>> To the witnesses, you know, called it an avocado. And they were obviously speaking Spanish. And uh they uh you know, they called it an avocado. It was not quite oval, but it was an oval uh you know, an oval shape. There was nothing inside.

If there was a an engine, it would have been under the floor. And he they looked in under the under the thing when it was in the truck in the army truck. It was on the side to go under the overpass. I mean all that is very clear. I mean there's nothing bizarre about it and they could see the underside.

The underside was intact and there was no opening and it would have been about two feet deep and maybe six feet long. That's where you could put an engine. And you know when BAS was initiated the the task given by the DIA for us was to look at um you know propulsion um uh weight and and all kinds of things that would be the ordinary things that you'd want to know about a rocket. those things don't have protection. you know that you you could go if if you master and you know if if you talk to a modern physicist talk to Eric Davis you know who knows all of this stuff he'll tell you you know time and space are fine to do equations you know in school but that's not what physics is about and in the universe you could go from one point to another without any propulsion system to take you from one to another in the sense of we think about propulsion with engines and fuel and so on.

If you master the, you know, the superpace, you could move from one point to another. I mean, what do I do with my computer? I mean, I I can be in Romania tomorrow with my computer. Okay. >> Right. in in remote viewing.

I've been moved to places, you know, by Engle Swan just by reading a set of coordinates and I've experienced the physical data about that site physically in my body. Okay. I didn't have any rocket. I didn't take the train. I didn't take a plane.

No, he just read longitude and latitude and I felt frozen. I felt vertigo. I told him, "Engo, I can't go on. I mean, this is this is very uncomfortable. I think I'm going to fall." And he said, he said, "Jack, go home.

You you got the sight." I said, "Bingo, you know, where did you send me?" And he said, "You're at the top of a peak in the Andes, so you should be cold. You should be afraid of falling. Uh you should feel wind around you, which I was feeling." And I was in in that classified room, you know, on the third floor of the OSR in Men Park. He was at the end of the table. I was at the other end of the table, and all we had was white paper and a pen.

and he read to me a set of coordinates and I was there >> and he said >> that's pretty that's pretty amazing >> and I said you know I'm on a roll here you know let's go this was you know early in the morning and he said no I want you to I don't want to do another site I want you to stay with that because you you went to the site okay well if if that a human can do that it's not with my mind that I did that. It's with my my body was trembling and was freezing and I was afraid to fall and there was wind. Okay. Now if if a number of people have described that Ingo described that I know Yuri Geller described that um I couldn't do it again. I mean I'm not a trained remote viewer but I you know we spent a year with ingo going through a number of cases like that because he wanted it wasn't to train me it was to train his methodology because he was going to publish his his method you know of of going through step by step.

Well, in that most of the time we went step by step and [snorts] he wanted to see how good he could refine it with somebody who was not a remote viewer but understood what remote viewing was by spontaneously. And uh I um in that particular case I I I broke the the methodology but that was accidental but I know you can do that. >> Yeah. You you've experienced that now which is different. Jacques, after 50 years, right, you're looking at the UFO phenomenon and you're you're seeing that it's so vast and you've looked at it through a lens that that most people haven't.

One time you came to my ranch in Pioneer Town, California, and we were sitting out watching the the sunset, and you said something to me, and I want to see if you still feel the same way. I asked you, what is it that we truly know about UFOs? Out of all the the research you've done, what is it that we actually know for a fact? And you said there's there's only one thing that we know for sure about UFOs, that they represent an enormous amount of energy in a very, very small amount of space. That's what you told me then. That was probably 10 years ago at this point, maybe eight years ago. Do you still feel the same way? Yes.

After all that decades of research, >> more and more and after doing more more research on that case that I presented, I saw, you know, we've continued to talk to physicists about this and so uh they they really don't care about energy. They people are coming up and publishing models of how you could use uh you know thermonuclear energy in such a way that you could go very fast or you could manipulate things in the atmosphere. This is not it. I mean it's useful to do that. I mean it if it inspires people to to build those theories that's good.

I mean, they shouldn't stop, but that's not that's not it. >> Jeremy, I have no conscience. I I feel no guilt about exploiting Jacques as much as we can. I'll keep him here for two days. You, however, have a big heart, so maybe you want to wrap it up with a final question or say goodbye.

>> Yeah, absolutely. You know, Jacques, I just wanted to say, um, you know, thank you so much for coming on. you have created such a huge impact on the way that we look at the UFO phenomenon which you yourself admit we still don't know much about. But I I'm gonna ask you the same question to end this episode that I asked you on my ranch that day. And I hope you can give me a better answer than when I was at you were at my ranch, which is are we asking the right questions? And if not, what is the questions we should be asking about UFOs? I think the right question is probably not just in our brains, you know, it's really it's a phenomenon that is forcing us to look at our culture, look at um you know what we do um in wars, what we do in in business, what um you know everything is going to be in question.

Uh not just the physics, it's not just propulsion. Uh it's our culture, uh our hopes, uh our visions of, you know, of God, of of other powers, and then what we're going to be facing when we go into the solar system and beyond the solar system. And are we really prepared to do that? I mean, just look at, you know, the the silly things we do about the moon right now about just going to our closest satellite, you know, and um I I think that's that's what's in question and the the answers have to come from us, you know, not them. Are you going to get answers down to fundamental misunderstandings about the nature of the relationship? You know, we think of them as invaders from Mars. They came here from somewhere way out there as opposed to that they have coexisted with us throughout human history.

There is a one big question uh one hypothesis that's very tangible is that they can be tri time time travelers or that maybe there is no time that maybe what they are teaching us now um Eric Davis tells me the same thing and that basically the universe is not a space-time universe that It's uh the the what we perceive at space and time is a derived quality from something else which is much larger and and uh you know that we we haven't we have difficulty in perceiving with our senses. Now that may be the level where we have to continue exploring to to really come to a point where we can communicate with whatever is whatever is there. But we can trust the witnesses uh and we have to get away from that feeling that uh this is only a threat. I I think it's dangerous. Uh I think we learn more and more about it as time goes on and I think we have to learn to um cohabit with it and we have to learn to communicate with it.

Well, thank you Jacques for your continued work. Thank you for your friendship and and the things you've shared with us. Um I hope that we get some satisfaction within our lifetimes that more of this will come out but none of it will unless we keep uh you know trying to understand the phenomenon. So thank you so much for being here with us. [music]