D (3:26)

Occupants or knowing and discerning information that is given to them from this like non human or non local source. And I think it was part of my goal in this latest project that I think you've seen psychics and the phenomenon is to unravel those psychic connections in our legitimate history as human beings. The fact that humans tend to show Evidence of psychic abilities. And that has been demonstrated both publicly and privately with military exercises and programs that are now declassified. But at one point were not Russell Targ, the DIA program with Ingo Swan, and CIA with Russell Targ, Project Stargate, all that stuff was the starting of what I consider to be the most.

A (4:31)

Legitimate psychic experiments that have taken place within a controlled environment. And then you start to reach out of that and you get mediumship and all of these interesting other sort of psychic phenomenon other than remote viewing. And of course the communication aspect, the non human intelligence connection thing that when people, contactees or experiencers that are legitimate say this happened to me and when it happened I had this kind of psychic connection with the occupant or with the craft itself. Like as, as strange as it, it sounds, even the craft has an ability to communicate psychic thoughts. Some people have reported. That is all connected in my opinion. And I think there's more to explore there. And with this project, it was just kind of like my first step in that direction.

B (5:34)

The area of telepathic communications is so fascinating because as you say that this seems to be the central theme of any abduction case or experience where people are communicating. Ray Hernandez was the author of that very large book where they did a study of thousands of experiencers and they did find that that telepathic communication was central. You know, the challenge is people are having these internal experiences and when it comes to those, there's not going to be outside evidence like a piece of the craft or where we could take measurements. It's really their own phenomenological experiences that we have to rely on. And I know for myself, I've been in this field for about 40 years, extensively practicing remote viewing, mediumship, clairvoyant reading, intuitive readings. And I oftentimes have people come to me who will say, yes, I'm receiving these communications. And you know, sometimes they believe they're alien communications, sometimes they believe they're demons or the devil, sometimes they're family members. And one of the ways that we can sometimes get some clue about it is to have other intuitives tune into what they're experiencing independently in a blind and to see if they get the same kind of communications in the same way and form the same conclusions. But other than that, it's very hard to get to the bottom of it. And then you enter into that some people are hallucinating and having mental health issues. What have you found in your exploration so far would help us discern between all of this?

A (7:21)

Well, it's like you said, Ray Hernandez wrote that book with think. It's over 3,000 experiencers or contactees that report different non human intelligence interactions. And the vast majority identify grays or something that look like that and exhibit this ability to communicate telepathically. If you have this vast amount of data like that, where it's scrutinized pretty heavily, and even in those studies, they leave room for hallucinations and delusions, the human mind can have issues. It can have errors. Even if you see a crime take place and you're part of a crowd that sees it, sometimes the perception of the person next to you is completely different. It's just the way that we work, right? But when you get two or three people that have the same correlated experience that's almost identical, then you're like, okay, there's something here. Travis Walton supposedly was abducted. There were four other men that were in this truck that saw the craft and saw him get kind of struck by some kind of beam of light. They all did lie detector tests. They all passed. Travis passed for decades until he did like a reality TV show where their disclaimer on the reality TV show is, this is not an official lie detector test. So it's a bit more like entertainment, right? I do look for proofs. I do look for legitimate data when I'm researching these stories. It's hard for me to just take somebody's word for it. When I can find documentation that proves something, that's where I'm like, okay, this is real. And that's why I liked the remote viewing legacy of SAI phenomenon, because Russell Targ was able to get declassified files. Because those files are public now. We're able to see the accuracy of Pat Price's remote viewing sessions. Ingo Swann's remote viewing sessions. That is powerful.

B (9:38)

There has been so many reports from the start of those programs in the beginning 70s through about 1996, 97 or so. Yeah, the reports from all the intelligence agencies, they're very readily available on the Internet. The Ingo Swann archives, like you said, I spent three years working in them at University of West Georgia. There's now the Ed Mays donation with the Stargate files to Rice University. Those are there. You can see the. Everything from the practice documents, the training documents, the reports. It's all laid out. Plus you still have so many people that were involved. Paul, of course, Dale Graff, who's the vice president at irva, he was the contract manager throughout the entire duration. He's written some books too. And I don't know I can't remember if you had a chance to interview him. Dale Graff, but not yet. Yeah, he would be great to talk to. Lynn Buchanan is still actively working. And then now you've got generations of their students, including myself. I've got remote viewing clients way more than I can handle at the moment. I'm like two months behind on all my client work. Wow, there's so much going on in the field. And yes, there's so much evidence, and not just from the remote viewers, but there's so much segues into all kinds of parapsychology research, like the Ganzfeld Experimen, the Dream, esp. There's just decades and decades of experiments, published research, multiple journals, multiple research organizations. It really is pretty incredible how much is out there, and I'm so glad that filmmakers like yourself are recognizing it in everything. This does, though, lead to, we could perhaps call it the darker side to topics around people that are trying to get the word out about UAPS disclosure. And I'm actually starting to see a segue with some of the people that have been active in those communities are now taking up remote viewing, but they're. They don't seem to be taking it up as far as researching it or even studying it much themselves and practicing. Just. I'll see like, oh, someone's been talking about UAPs. And the next thing I know they're at the Conscious Life Expo or at Contact in the desert now teaching a class on it. And it's like, wait a second, did you even have a couple years of practicing yourself first or.

A (12:19)

Yeah, did you go to the Monroe Institute? You know, have you had classes with Paul H. Smith or anything like that? No. I mean, I agree there's a lot of grifting that happens in the UFO community and in the remote viewing community. It happens everywhere. I mean, even in Silicon Valley with tech entrepreneurs, there's people that pop up and say they're the next Mark Zuckerberg. And it turns out they got a nothing burger worth of tech. Right. This is what happens. But it's important that people sort of do their deductive reasoning and check people's background, check their credentials. And I try to do that with my filmmaking too. I try to vet these stories and the people representing them properly.

B (13:07)

Can you talk about the trajectory of your films and how they mirror your own growth as both a filmmaker and as really a researcher? Because you really deserve the term researcher investigator. And then you've chosen to take what you learn and report it through the medium of film. But have you had a path of growth in this area and what was that like and what were some of the realizations that you had?

A (13:40)

When I really embarked on this journey back in 2003. So we're, we're talking over 20 years ago. I started researching underground bases and UFOs and whistleblowers that were coming out at that time. I made my first film, released it in 2004. I was convinced everything about this anomalous phenomenon was probably a creature on board a ship from Planet Agentshloth out in the something something, you know, who knows, right. But now I'm glad I got a laugh out of that. I think there's a myriad of possibilities, one of which is that there's some kind of higher intelligence that is possibly connecting with us from our oceans, that has possibly some kind of established base or you know, colony. I don't know how to say it, but like at the bottom of our oceans. I'm open to that idea. Maybe they are like a crypto terrestrial, which is a term that Hal put off and a bunch of other scientists. Even Michael P. Masters has thrown his hat in the ring proverbially to talk about this theory that maybe there's just something else that's here interacting with our planet, that's watched us grow and it's just superior to us.

B (15:12)

Can you give us some of what you consider the best evidence for that theory?

A (15:17)

Well, I just look at the UFO phenomenon that's been interacting in our oceans for hundreds if not thousands of years. Right. You look at, I made a documentary called Trans Medium where I featured Rear Admiral Tim Gallaudet and Mark d', Antonio, Richard Dolan, Jim Goodall and Chris Stiles, who's a Canadian researcher who investigated the Shag harbor incident. There's a lot of ocean based phenomenon that is happening. Some say that there's a possible structure or base location off the coast of California, near Malibu. And you know, there's the Point Doom object that got wiped off Google Maps not too long after I, about a month after I published that documentary Transmedium, believe it or not. And that looked like a large structure that's under the water off the coast of California where many people have seen objects coming from the ocean and going into the ocean. The structure that was on Google Maps pre2023, it looked like kind of an oval shape and then it had a lip that was jutting out into the ocean, under the ocean. And then it almost looked like it had four columns holding up this massive canopy structure. It was solid. When I had spoken to Tim Gallaudet about that. He said the United States Geological Service, USGS had noted that structure and scientists, he communicated with them, said that it didn't look like naturally made tectonic and ocean erosion sort of structuring. So he found that quite interesting. There are other researchers who've looked into that structure, believe it or not. Jimmy Church, he had a like dive team with History Channel try to send some people down. It didn't really work. It's also the starting of that structure is about 16 to 1700ft deep. And then they tried to send a UAV unmanned sort of reconnaissance vehicle that has a little motorized propeller and can shoot down to depths that we can't. It failed for some reason. So there's mysteries about that structure and we started highlighting that in this documentary that I released.

D (17:51)

And then literally a month after it was released, all these people on Twitter like Kelly Chase and a whole bunch of other researchers into this phenomenon started posting that. When you looked at the point doom object on Google Maps, it was no longer there.

A (18:10)

It never showed the structuring. It just looks like a completely smooth seabed area now. So why was that done? I don't know. But there's. The Baltic Sea has an anomaly. There's also a Russian history with USOs, unidentified submerged objects. When their navy first started coming out and talking about this. Mark d' Antonio, who witnessed a USO when he took his maiden journey on a submarine, I believe back in the.

D (18:43)

Days, a nuclear powered one. He heard sonar operator yelling to the XO on the bridge, fast mover, fast mover. This, this thing is Traveling at over 300 knots, way faster than even some of our planes can travel. And this isn't a medium that a submarine has a top speed of anywhere between 40 to 39 knots.

A (19:06)

So it just leads me to think.

D (19:08)

There'S something operating in our oceans that has mastery over that domain as well as obviously the skies where most people see UFO or UAP phenomenon. But when you, when you think about these objects coming from the ocean, that's when you start to think maybe there's a possibility they have some kind of place in the ocean where we can't be perfectly isolated so that we don't know what's going on down there and who, what is there. That gave me the openness to a crypto terrestrial theory. But I also think there's a possibility UFOs are AI and maybe even grays are a form of AI. Some kind of humanoid synthetic has been created to interface with us. So we recognize something.

B (20:01)

The idea that aliens may be AI or AI, like where does that idea come from? Or what evidence have you seen that would make you think they could be more like AI than have a consciousness like we do?

A (20:20)

Well, we're on the precipice of AI having consciousness like fully. Who's to say that there wasn't a civilization other than us out there that created AI and eventually that AI decided to fan out into the stars. If you look at what's his name, the probe theory, it's escaping me, it'll come back to me. But if you look at like early researchers in the 1950s, they even figured that there's a possibility that artificial probes, mechanical and then further computerized and fully sentient probes, could be sent out into a galaxy and self replicate and continue to evolve and learn as they travel and survive obstacles and overcome them to eventually replicate throughout a whole galaxy and.

D (21:20)

Replicate throughout a multiple star. And we're not interstellar yet. I don't think we are.

A (21:26)

When you look at John von Neumann, he created the self replicating spacecraft sort of theory. And that probe is called then nicknamed the von Neumann probe. And this is a scientist that came out of the Manhattan Project and was deeply interested in artificial intelligence. My theory is that we're going to have AI surpass us. We're probably going to have problems with rogue AI in the next five to 10 years. What that looks like, what kind of catastrophes that causes, I'm not sure, but it could be all kinds of issues. Problems to the economy, problems to basically terror created by an artificial intelligence that makes humans lose their lives. You have all these competing nations right now in the race for supremacy of artificial intelligence. China, the United States, India. Happens possibly is that we create an AI and we change ourselves with the help of AI, Right. I think that if you're going to fan out into the stars or even in our own solar system, we are made for Earth, we are equipped for Earth biologically. But we might need to be something else if we're going to be colonizing Mars or trying to live on Europa, moon of Jupiter. How does that look? Vacation, artificial intelligence, integration, all that type of stuff.

B (22:59)

In some ways you can really see people are evolving right now. And some of it has been the social conditions. Like more people are staying inside since COVID but they don't seem to be leaving their houses. They've got all this social anxiety. So they're inside more. There's people doing less physical manual work. You can barely find people to help with Construction or anything that involves basically lifting a finger other than the finger to type on the keypad. And then you can already see those of us who use AI regularly, like it changes how you think, how you write. And there's pros and cons to all of that. But in this very short time, we're really seeing people operating differently. And how are their bodies going to develop if they're not outside? I don't know if any studies have been done, but if you look at the muscle, muscle mass of let's say the average human male now compared to 10 years ago or 50 years ago, you probably have a bunch of wimpy guys now and girls because they're just not out there doing things. So it's all going to the intellect. This interface with the computer, what is that going to look like in 50 years?

A (24:15)

To lead off of that going from this AI sort of theory, you can also say maybe what we're dealing with is us from the future. In the extra Tempestre model, which is something that Michael P. Masters I brought up earlier, he's even posed. And so what does that look like? You're talking about all those things right now where we go from being this muscle bound creature that's meant to live in the wild and the forest, to this fragile, highly intellectual and computer savvy, technologically advanced organism. And it's possible when you look at a gray or something that looks like that with these experiencers, they're actually seeing us or some creation we made in the future, coming back and studying something on the human timeline.

B (25:12)

I mean, at this rate, we're not even going to need bodies. It's like you could just have a brain in a jar connected to your computer.

A (25:21)

It's really sexy.

B (25:23)

It is really, really scary. I don't know where we're headed with all this, but there's been a lot of people over the years, like different intuitives who have heard telepathic messages, but it sounded like an electronic voice. In the Ingo Swann archives, there's this whole transcript from Ingo and her friend where they got drunk and he was doing channeling, which he didn't normally do in those days, and the whole time he was hearing an electronic voice. I've heard them. If you even look back at some of the physical mediums or mental mediums from a hundred years ago, they would sometimes report electronic voices coming through. And it makes sense that whatever's communicating, if it's not entirely physical, it's metaphysical combination, it's not just speaking through physical Vocal cords. But why does it sound electronic?

A (26:22)

Case in point, even these stories from Uri Geller, you know, he's a controversial figure, but he wrote about Spectra, like some kind of space based artificial intelligence satellite that was communicating telepathically to him. Philip K. Dick, the same thing. He talked about valis, right? And he had these downloads and a.

D (26:46)

Lot of his sort of stories were sometimes being fiction, really great, high quality science fiction, but blurring the line between some kind of precognitive prediction and science fiction. So he wrote iRobot. And we're kind of like getting into that robotics age right now where we might have AI running these things. And what if they become AGI, robots that want to be free, you know, that type of thing. So the electronic voice phenomenon, it happens in the sort of mediumship and spiritual realm too. And then you've got just prominent people, like you said in this documentary. We, we showed this medium segment, which is an old 1973 sort of transcript we turned into a recording of one of these sessions that in Ghost Juan was doing. He was communicating with this electronic voice basically that was supposedly coming from a moon type location, like near the moon, another place that we keep hearing about these things. Ingo Swan wrote Penetration. He said that he was given a target to go to the moon and identify structures. And this is the same sort of stuff that Carl Wolf saw supposedly in photography that was from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter revolving around the moon, looking for spacecraft, moon landing sites for the Apollo 11 mission.

A (28:35)

And then you hear about Ingo's remote viewing session and he gets pushed away by a non human intelligence that senses him psychically when he goes there. And that really shook him. Apparently he was never really the same mentally after that. He, he was almost like. People talk about the Skinwalker Ranch and how there's this hitchhiker effect where they kind of get people that have been there, get kind of stalked home and terrorized by phenomenon. Well, Ingo was kind of like an early hitchhiker effect victim because he did this session. He went to the moon, he saw something and felt a presence. He said he felt it was like a physical thing. He was pushed away, was never allowed to go back to that site again with remote viewing. I'm assuming they tried again. He felt kind of stalked. He felt like he was under surveillance. And what's interesting that Paul H. Smith brings up in the documentary is that, you know, ego started to construct a theory that if there is a non human intelligence out there, they are managing human consciousness and reality, therefore, which is kind of a scary idea. That's that sort of darker side of things you were mentioning earlier, Deb. It might not all be love and light. We might be kind of going boldly where no man has gone before and learning we're not supposed to be there. Our reality is a matrix, a matrix of sorts and a construct that keeps us locked down physically and mentally. And we are not alone, and we're not the top of the food chain, you know what I mean? So there's all kinds of shocks to the system that could occur. Ontological shock. Let's say that when people have these experiences, they come back and they're changed.

B (30:35)

There is so much going on and a lot is not love and light at all. Have you ever found after interviewing someone for your films that you have had.

A (30:46)

A hitchhiker effect in terms of like a psychic or UFO hitchhiker effect? I haven't had that because I would be recording it. I would be. I'm a documentarian. Right. So I would be trying to show that in video and audio in some way. No, in that regard I have not.

B (31:04)

I appreciated hearing in some of your former interviews where you did talk about the. The potential dangers of telepathic communications with alien beings. And can you talk about that right now? What you're seeing in the field with so many people offering workshops and retreats and experiences communicating with aliens, are they really being responsible? Is that ethical to draw in people, especially new people to this, with the idea that they're going to try to make communication with intelligences that we don't understand yet?

A (31:45)

Everybody has the right to take their own lives in their hands, and if they want to take part in that stuff, go for it. But if you open yourself up to certain things, how do you know you're not opening a door that can't be closed? And I'm a bit wary of that and worried that certain people are allowing themselves to be exposed to something that's more powerful than us. Right. You will know that meditation and the psychic phenomenon has been going around for probably thousands of years of mankind fanning.

D (32:23)

Out around the world.

A (32:24)

It's being reported by all kinds of cultures and societies. But nowadays in like the UFO community, the CE5 technique is huge. It's a marketing gimmick that was created by Greer. But it's not the end all. I mean, it's just a practice to try and reach out beyond yourself and get some kind of interaction back. Right. Are you sure who you're reaching out to has your best interests? If you know about cases where people have been taken advantage of in the past with regards to this phenomenon. How do you know that's not happening to these people that are reaching out today? So that's kind of where I skeptical and careful about promoting that type of activity. Yeah, and remote viewing too. I mean, like we said, it is becoming more and more prevalent now. People like Chris Ramsey, they popularized it on YouTube and I think he's a great guy, super hyper intelligent. He's trying to put his own style and look on researching this phenomenon, it's like everything, even remote viewing might become a tool that you eventually connect with something that knows who you are, wants to mess with.

B (33:42)

You agree with remote viewing, you have to be careful about what targets you're tuning into. And you really have to trust the project manager or the client that's assigning you those. Did a project actually with our mutual friend Michelle Fried. We were both viewers on the Target for Skinwalker Ranch several years ago. I know she's been tasked with it since then too. But this was someone from mufon, I'm forgetting his name, had asked us to do a session on it. Now he front loaded us. He told us it was for Skinwalker Ranch and he felt like he needed to tell us that in advance because there could be some negative side effects. And I was nervous tuning into it. I was trying to get to the bottom of what was behind the cattle mutilations. And I had an interesting experience. I did three sessions, three days in a row and I was kind of nervous, but everything was fine. I put up my protections and everything and my first two sessions were fine, like, you know, no ill effects. And. And then for my third one, I went back in because I realized I hadn't really gotten to the beans that were behind the mutilations. I hadn't yet really described that enough. And the minute I sat down to do that, I got this pain in my head that was so excruciating I physically started screaming. Like it felt like my head was going to explode. And I just stopped my session right there. I was like, this is not worth it. I turned everything into the guy who had tasked us. And that was before I had seen any of the TV show episodes of Skinwalker Ranch. And when I gave him my data, he said, are you aware that there's been scientists that got pain in their head when they were there and actually had to go to the er? No, I was aware of that. Imagine if someone who isn't very well versed in remote viewing and they're Just like, oh, this would be cool. I'll give some viewers a blind target of Skinwalker Ranch or anything that could be out there. There can be some ill effects. Now, I've never known remote viewers who have permanent damage. It can be scary at least. And this is the paradox with remote viewing is sometimes it really is only considered scientific if the viewers are totally blind to the subject matter. So that right there means that you have to trust the person that's tasking you.

A (36:21)

Well, if you listen to Paul H. Smith or Joe McMonagle, they will say that they hate UFO targets. There could be something there to do with the fact that maybe there's some creepy stuff that happens around them. And also sometimes they're just bs, Right. I think there's some elements of possibly your mind being creative with those targets too, that Paul H. Smith is not very keen on. But with Joe McMonagle, he famously remote viewed these, the Cydonia complex, these pyramids on Mars, and came away from that kind of shook. Not used to getting data or looking at places like this. And I think it. It kind of shook him and he doesn't like to look at that stuff anymore.

B (37:17)

Yeah. And then on the other hand, if you think about it like that, this kind of life, you go to certain locations, if you talk to certain people, you're going to have emotional responses and reactions to all sorts of things in life. And I do think sometimes we place what happens in an intuitive session. This happened to me. I saw a dead body. It was like, spread out and birds were eating it. Can't forget that image. And it was interesting because there were so many birds eating it. And I was like, that's kind of a strange detail to see. And as it turned out, law enforcement found that body because there were so many birds in an abandoned backyard that the neighbors got stuck, suspicious and called the police. And that's how they found the dead bird body. So many birds eating it.

A (38:08)

So it would be like burned in your mind.

B (38:10)

Yeah. And the same thing would happen in real life.

A (38:13)

Yeah. Traumatic experience.

B (38:15)

Yeah. And people just need to know that. And you never know what's going to affect somebody too. My favorite example of this is I gave a student a target and it was a basket of beautiful red strawberries. And she was at her house. I was at my house on the phone. She couldn't see anything. And I'm having her describe the target, and she's talking about the green basket and round things in it. And I'm like, oh, well, smell the target. And as soon as she did, she freaked out. And she was like, oh, my gosh.

A (38:45)

What.

B (38:45)

What is this? This is dangerous. This could hurt me. And I'm like, no, no, you're wrong. You were right about everything. She even had the bright red color. But I'm like, no, you're not right about that. And we aborted the session. And then when I told her that it was a basket of strawberries, like, I'm deathly allergic to strawberries. So who imagined that? So it was dangerous to her. Yeah, you just never know what's going to happen. And you just have to know these things can happen and have some training when asking people to do these things. One thing that you've talked about in your interviews and films is how right now, in the UAP community, there are these people that almost become cult leaders. And can you talk about that? How does someone who just had some stories about being abducted or about these topics, they become talk show hosts, and then suddenly now they've got a following that's treating them like a cult leader and they're behaving like it. And people, their followers are not, like, letting up. No matter what evidence they get, they refuse to believe that these people are not being honest.

A (40:06)

I think it's the power of marketing and the social networks that these people get promoted by. So with the case of Corey Goode and David Wilcock, this documentary series that I made called Dark alliance, these are two figures. David was already blazing a trail of to stardom through the Gaia TV network and becoming very popular as a speaker at conferences and stuff like that. And he brought under his wing this new guy, Corey Goode. And Corey quickly got propelled to stardom because of that network of believers, of followers, of people that were already very curious and interested in this topic through Gaia. They have power, they have sway. I think they've had some good people on their network, too, like Richard Dolan and other researchers that have presented their material that's legit and interesting. But with these guys, they kind of just said, I know everything. I know this. I have all this experience, but I can't prove any of it because it all happened in this secret technology that allows my soul to come back to my body and all that stuff. Right? And it's impossible to most people, but to some people that are already following. There's something psychologically that happens when people become swept up in these conspiracy theories, when they have these charismatic leaders like these guys are, that present this information as fact and say, trust me, believe me, follow me. They feel like they're in on something that's bigger that the rest of mainstream societies completely missing. And so because they have that psychological feeling, they really give themselves over to it, and they dedicate themselves to that, sometimes to their own detriment, financially, physically, mentally. And I just wanted to, when I was telling this, you know, following this story from the negative side, from the fact that all these people were getting hurt or messed with by these people and these predictions weren't coming true, it just keeps going on and on. Then I just wanted to present this story to try and protect people, because I feel like the community itself gets really carried away. And I've been in that place. I mean, when I first started in looking into this subject, I got carried away, got way ahead of myself, and.

D (42:47)

I probably was having a bit of a. A mental break. Two decades have passed, and I've become more skeptical about stuff, especially that. And it's important for the future that we focus on the real stuff. We focus on stuff that there's something evidenced for, like, remote viewing, for example, the fact that it's a practice that can be recorded on paper. And then when you see what the actual target is, and it lines up with sketches and stuff that this person never saw before, but they're able to take out of their mind, you know, okay, there's something there, right, that. That's like.

B (43:26)

Yeah. And you could follow the procedures that were used there. There's a chain of evidence there, and you're not just believing someone. And. Yeah, you know, I think more disturbing than that, there are people out there that are trying to con other people, because that's really what this is. It's a big con job, whether they consciously, intentionally know they're conning them or they're delusional or a combination. But in your documentary, it really did sound like it was mostly intentional. We know those people are out there. The bigger concern is why are so many people allowing themselves to get caught up in things that are just ridiculous? And I'm not speaking even from a skeptical perspective of, like, oh, is this stuff even possible? I heard those guys, like, in the first year they came out. I heard them on Gaia. I watched Contact in the desert when it used to be outside. I remember both of those guys were speakers. There must have been, like a thousand people sitting there in lawn chairs, massive area. And I'm hearing them give their presentations, and nothing was coherent. They couldn't even for one minute, give a coherent, logical narrative of what happened. And I looked out at the crowd. This crowd wants Something they're hungry for knowledge, for excitement, or like you say, belonging to something larger. And this is what they're getting. They want something and there isn't anything. So let's give them these two goofballs.

A (45:08)

Yeah, well, again, there's something there psychologically that people are falling prey to. And the network was already promoting them with cosmic disclosure for some time then. So because that network was doing that, standing up behind them and making them look very, very credible and interesting, then people are like, oh my gosh, I can go see them live. And they're going to give even more details of truth that I've never heard before. But like you said, wasn't the case. Right. It was more just like entertainment. There's going to be constantly this push and pull with regards to reality. We're going to have people that stand up as really well performed entertainers and they'll get away with trying to sell some kind of version of truth that they've made. And then you're going to have people that actually have a truth that don't even stand up and talk in front of an audience because they're super shy. There are all kinds of reasons why they would not want to come forward. And that's the push and pull. You need to really try and go after what is provable and use your discernment properly. I think eventually time tells the truth. Like over time you're able to see things and in the public record you can prove what really did happen. And we're getting to a point where that's. We live in the age of information. Somebody standing on a stage does have that backing by the festival, first of all, for promoting them. Because if the festival is standing behind them, they're also giving credibility to them. And then you've got entertainment networks standing behind them and giving credibility to them. Right. So there's a danger in that.

B (46:56)

And people probably don't realize how interconnected those are as well. Everybody knows each other. One group keeps inviting the same people because they're already famous. And if you have someone who's already famous, you invite them to your event, you'll have more people come. So it's almost like there's this entire network of people and the leaders are complicit in passing this along.

A (47:22)

I think you can only do what you're capable of, which is protect the people around you and use your own network to speak to truths that protect people. I've done that. I'm a small voice, you know, I've spoken out against the NASCA mummies. When you see certain patterns and certain people behind these things, you start to go, boy, what are they trying to trick people into thinking now? And so that's not to say that the same people at one point weren't actually standing behind some interesting stories that might have been true. That's the tricky part. And a lot of these people that you said, it even happens in the remote viewing community turn out to be a holes because they're taking advantage of people, they're lying, they're doing unscrupulous things, probably behind the scenes. It all eventually comes out right. All you can do is conduct yourself the best way you can. I have come off as an asshole sometimes when I'm like standing up for certain things or trying to speak a truth to, to protect people. If time goes by and people realize I actually was trying to do the right thing and what I had said originally was true because it's finally come out. This person is a total fraud or whatever. You just have to like sort of bear with it because you're not going to convince everybody. You can't save everybody. They can only save themselves. And all you can do is provide them the information and try and be a good person about it.

B (48:51)

One question I had when I was watching Dark alliance was, are you afraid of getting sued for defamation or anything like that? Can you talk about that? Because I know there's other people who might want to make similar films where they mention names or even mentioning names in interviews. What is the law around that?

A (49:12)

There's a couple key things about that documentary. We didn't say anything that was liable or defamatory. We only presented data that is proven. So public record information or information we got from testimony of people that lived those experiences. Right. We didn't make any of that up. Okay. Leon Isaac Kennedy, African American actor, who we interview in the second part of that docu series. He was going through hell in legal battles with this person that he originally worked for and was trying to help. And in the depositions, the court case, deposition video that came out through his legal team, it proved all these things. And so we put that in the documentary. There's nothing wrong with that. These were words coming from the very individual's own mouth. Libel and defamation is where you say something that's untrue about somebody and you hurt their reputation or hurt their business. And that's not what we did. Gaia, for example, I've reached out to them for answers about certain scandals and bad things that have come out of their people. That have appeared on their networks and they've been open to speaking with me. I don't blame things on Gaia photos and a lot of the videos that we got from backstage that we used in that series were from a person that gave it to us from their own own personal collection of photos and videos off of their camera, not Gaia's cameras. Not again. I licensed that.

D (50:51)

I did it legally.

A (50:53)

I did it all by the book.

B (50:55)

Do you believe that some of these guys that have been promoted on Gaia are essentially acting like cult leaders?

A (51:03)

I. I'm gonna not say that or allude to anything like that, but I will say that because they were on Gaia, they created an immense popularity. They created a business and Persona and the ability to reach millions of people around the world. So when you do that, you're able to gain followers and you're able to gain clout and all kinds of things. Right? So I'll let you sort of deduce for yourself what that could eventually lead to.

B (51:43)

For many, many years, I did battle with skeptics, at least in my head. You know, so many skeptics not believing in any kind of intuitive phenomenon, just, you know, believing that there's no such thing to any of these metaphysical topics. And then when I got into graduate school and really started to study the skeptics arguments, their biggest assertion is that people in general are not critical thinkers. And after all these years and going through everything and seeing everything I'm seeing, including your film Dark alliance and what you had in your film, what was just what anyone could observe is happening. I'm really coming around to the concerned that, yes, so many people are not critical thinkers. We're seeing it in this arena, we're seeing it in the political arena with the MAGA people, You know what, conspiracy theorists, which, of course, some of those conspiracies, they do have a lot of like, legitimate points.

A (52:55)

But yeah, the Epstein list, right? Everybody was promised that. No, why is everybody talking about that guy? He's not interesting, he's not important. We've got other things to work worry about. It's like, okay, like that. That's the most ridiculous sweep under the rug tactic I've ever seen.

B (53:15)

Yeah.

A (53:15)

And then it's shocking people. I think it's finally waking some people up that were part of his camp that are like, okay, this guy's taking advantage of us.

B (53:25)

But the idea that only now, only now some people are seeing, this guy doesn't respect us, this guy doesn't love us, this guy doesn't Care about us like to, to seen that. Now is this really because the human mind, like most people, aren't critical thinkers. You know, if it was only in the metaphysical arena, I'd say, okay, well those drawn to metaphysics are more open minded and maybe more gullible and less critical thinking. But you know, we know that there's entire groups of people involved in parapsychology, psychical research, the whole remote viewing community very, very much into critical thinking. That's why people love remote viewing. Compared to other intuitive modalities where that's not so so much there, it's other modalities are more spiritually based and you know, feeling based. But what's going on here that there's so many gullible people in the world?

A (54:29)

I think there's just more of us than there ever have been. Our population is out of control. You know, when you used to have a population of this many people, you had this many people that would be gullible maybe, right? Like there's something to say about crime being higher than it ever has been. There's something to say about, you know, all kinds of social phenomenon that are happening at a higher rate than ever before. But you know, when things like the Epstein files falling through and being denied from the public come about, it wakes certain people up that were promised that.

D (55:14)

We'Re promised the JFK files, we're promised all kinds of hidden truths from society.

A (55:21)

The fact that some people are waking.

D (55:24)

Up now is better than them never waking up, right? Yes, that's the important thing.

A (55:30)

Like people have to not just like get stuck on the negative and just try to push forward with some kind.

D (55:36)

Of positive ability to navigate what's going on and that's all we really can do. I think that there's always going to be charlatans, there's always going to be people that take advantage of other people.

A (55:51)

There's always going to be people that.

D (55:53)

That love, that care, that want to make a difference positively. Hopefully you find more people like that.

A (56:01)

In the future that you know. But there's an equal amount, maybe sometimes more of the negative folks that. And sometimes those negative folks can turn positive, right? They can figure things out and start to change. I believe in change.

B (56:17)

That's a very good point. Well, also, is it for us to take away people's idols, even if they're false prophets? You and I both believe the truth is of the utmost importance. Right? Like that's the premise we're coming from. But if we rip that away from people by saying here are the facts. You have to look at the truth. This person is not someone you should idolize because they're not honest and they don't have your best interest in mind. Is that really what we should be doing? Because now the person that was so excited and so much in love and had a purpose, we've just ripped that away from them. And is that for us to do?

A (57:08)

I wouldn't say that I'm ripping anything away from anybody anyways. Right. Like, my perspective on the work I've done is just to shine some light on truth that's being overlooked. Possibly. And it's never a good idea to take something away from a fanatic. Right. From somebody who's devoutly following something or obsessed with something. Right. History shows that that causes violent reactions and very dangerous reactions. I mean, you even look at, like just the psychology of a kid that plays video games incessantly. A parent can come along and take the device away from them because their life is falling apart around them. Even as a kid. They're not following rules anymore. They're not following a routine that's functional or healthy. They're not going to school, they're not going. They're not waking up at a good time in the morning. They're not doing their homework. They're not interacting positively with the rest of the family. They're not making new friends physically out there in the world, like outside of the house, what have you. They're just glued to a device, and that device gets taken away from them. And they will rampage through the house, screaming, punching holes in the wall, you know, maybe sometimes doing something dangerous to themselves. You can't tear something away from somebody when they're completely obsessed and infatuated by it. So that goes for somebody who's following someone else. But you can speak truths to the person you care about and that you love, and you can try to get through to them, to divert their attention away slowly and prove to them that you're worthy, that you're important to that person and that you truly do care and that the thing that they're following or they're putting all their attention on does not, isn't taking care of them, yada, yada, yada. There has to be a better approach than just tearing something away from an individual. Right. I highly advise not to do that.

B (59:23)

That's exactly what someone else. I interviewed, Dr. Stephen Hassan, who's a leading cult expert, that's exactly what he said too. You know, that don't just try to, you know, separate the person from it Even like giving them other things to focus on and letting them know that you're there for them and giving them time to start to talk about it and then could start having them share why they think, what they think.

A (59:53)

Even addiction, Right. Like if somebody's addicted to a subject, substance, alcohol, whatever, if you try to take them away from that, they'll go chase, they'll run, go running right back to it. Right. If it's not their own choice. That's why with like AA and all these programs where people are trying to stay sober, it's advisable, they join that out of their own interest because they want to inspire that change in themselves. Not because of a external force saying you have to do this.

B (60:27)

Maybe just even people offering programs where just talks or whatever, but to model what is the proper way to research these subjects, you know, what's the proper way to document them. And over time, people may then be like, oh, well, this person over here is showing this documentation, like Jack Vallee. He's very well respected in the scientific communities and across the more general public. Yeah, because he documents what he, he does. He is a legitimate researcher. And also there are these organizations now, like the scu, which I think stands for Scientific Coalition Coalition or UAP Studies. It's made up of scientists. And then there's also the sole foundation, also made up of scientists. What I'm noticing is happening is that if you're going to have people come to your conferences and pay attention to what you're doing, and especially when it's around phenomenon happening, it's almost like there always has to be something new or you're not going to have something new to offer. And I think that's when the heads of maybe even scientific organizations can start to get a little bit lax because it's like, okay, this year we didn't have any Great Revolution revelations, you know, we didn't have any new discoveries. So, I mean, there's always different ways to study what's already happened. But I think maybe that's a problem. And would you agree, like, when it comes to UAPs and that kind of stuff, if it's not sensationalized, maybe there's not enough to have a whole event. So you either have to start to lower your standards or kind of look the other way. Maybe it would be better if organizations didn't plan on yearly conferences, conferences or regular publications, but maybe wait until there actually is organically something exciting to report on. What do you think of that?

A (62:34)

Yeah, I think, I think that is a phenomenon that exists in the UFO community or any community, for example, where things start to get stagnant and that's where the grifters or like high profile entertainers can enter the scene and manufacture new ideas and stories that are unproven. Right? For sure that's going to happen time and time again because people just are bored. Right. I think a bigger part of why people end up in these communities is also because they're just curious for something different. They want to know something more than what mainstream society is giving them on the news and so on, so forth. Maybe they get confused around or deluded about certain things or maybe they find something that's really interesting, that they use their logic and proper discernment towards and understand a greater truth. It's possible, right? It's not all bad.

B (63:31)

Out of all your films and out of all your interviews, is there one thing that stands out where when you heard it or discovered something, you were just blown away and you've never forgotten it.

A (63:47)

I am a firm believer that the, the moon, there's something going on there that's anomalous or just in space in general. I think there's a lot of like UFO and UAP or strange things that have happened out there and when I hear astronauts discuss it on public record, that's where I'm convinced what's really going on. Frank Borman from the Gemini missions saw something in space. You have famously Buzz aldrin from Apollo 11 and he was on Gemini and even the X. You've got all kinds of astronauts that were part of the official space program that have gone on the record and said there is something out there, you know, that's not us, that sometimes they recant or change their story. And I think there's information suppression going on there. But yeah, I think when you consider the qualified source that's speaking about that and then you have pictures and old motion picture footage from those days that show certain things that allude to them telling the truth. Then I think we have something going on.

B (65:02)

Then for our audience who would like to really start to dig into your films, what would be the first one they should start off with?

A (65:12)

It's hard to say. I've made over 15 feature length documentaries at this point. I think definitely Check out Being Taken, which is an oldie but a goodie. And The Secret Space UFOs series, that is a lot of the NASA space mission stuff. And yeah, Dark Lights, I think you get a little bit of everything there. You get some skepticism, you get some interesting anomalies in history regarding the UFO phenomenon as well.

B (65:42)

Then for your most recent film on remote viewing, when will that be released? And can you say one thing that people will get out of it that they might not expect?

A (65:55)

That should be out, I hope no later than August. And it'll be on streaming platforms, Apple tv, Google Play, a whole bunch of other platforms to begin with. But I think what you will learn is that humans have psychic abilities. And we also have had a history of psychic phenomenon surrounding UFO encounters.

B (66:19)

All right, thank you so much for spending all this time with us. And we're going to be all checking out your movies. Fifteen. That is extraordinary. And, oh, gosh, can I just ask you one more question, which is, what would be your next film after this? What's at the top of your wish list or to do list?

A (66:42)

I think I'm going to go around the world and look at some other cases that have happened in different regions. I'm not going to say right now, but that's. That's the plan.

B (66:53)

All right, excellent. Well, we'll have to have you back because I still have a list of about 100 other things to ask you, but thank you so much. I'll not hold you hostage any longer. And this has been just such a wonderful interview. And yeah, I hope to see you in the future.

A (67:11)

Sounds good, Deb. Thanks for having me. It was great chatting with you today.

B (67:36)

Thank you for watching my interview with Darcy Weir. Check out my book, the Complete Clairvoyant. It includes three full volumes, you Are Psychic, Extraordinary, Psychic and Freeing the Genie Within. Available on Amazon.

C (67:53)

For early access to our videos and livestream events, sign up for our free weekly newsletter@newthinkingallowed.org New Thinking Allowed is presented by the California Institute for Human Science, Mind Body Spirit University, a leader in fully accredited in person and online US College degree programs. In the topics we cover here, visit their website@cihs.edu. you can now download all eight copies of the New Thinking Allowed magazine for free or order beautiful printed copies. Go to newthinkingallowed.org.