#2244 - Ryan Graves

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Joe Rogan Experience #2244 - Ryan Graves

Release Date: December 17, 2024
Host: Joe Rogan
Guest: Ryan Graves
Description: In this episode, Joe Rogan engages in a deep and extensive conversation with Ryan Graves, a former Navy fighter pilot turned aerospace engineer and UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) investigator. The discussion delves into recent drone sightings over the United States, government responses, advanced technologies, and the broader implications of UAP encounters.

---

1. Introduction to Ryan Graves and UAP Concerns

[00:13] Joe Rogan: "Good to see you again."
[00:15] Joe Rogan: "Congratulations on that [about to have a child]."

Overview:
Joe Rogan welcomes Ryan Graves, who begins by addressing recent concerns about drone sightings across the Eastern Seaboard. The conversation quickly shifts to the anxiety surrounding narratives that drones might be searching for gamma radiation due to a missing nuclear weapon.

---

2. Government Interactions and Reassurances

[00:44] Ryan Graves:
"I've interacted with federal law enforcement, Department of Defense, and other agencies that handle weapons of mass destruction. They assured me that there’s no loose nuke or WMD threat associated with these drones."

Discussion Points:

• Graves highlights his interactions with government organizations to investigate UAPs.
• [02:58] Ryan Graves: "If there was an imminent WMD threat, these agencies would prioritize neutralizing it nonstop."
• He emphasizes that the lack of active measures suggests the drones aren't linked to an immediate weapons threat.

---

3. Historical Context of Drone Incursions

[05:05] Ryan Graves:
"This isn't a new phenomenon. For the past three years, we've seen drone incursions around military bases like Langley Air Force Base during similar timeframes each year."

Key Insights:

• Repeated drone sightings over military installations indicate a persistent issue.
• [05:28] Ryan Graves:
  "Over the years, these objects have become more widespread, now reported from Texas to California and beyond."
• The increase in sightings correlates with advancements in social media, amplifying public awareness and concern.

---

4. Technical Analysis of the Drones

[11:21] Ryan Graves:
"These drones exhibit signature management, meaning they minimize their heat and electromagnetic emissions to avoid detection."

Notable Points:

• Stealth Capabilities: The drones’ ability to evade IR (Infrared) detection implies advanced technology.
• [12:08] Ryan Graves:
  "They perform high-G maneuvers and remain operational for extended periods, suggesting significant power supplies or advanced propulsion systems."
• Movement Patterns: Sharp turns and unconventional flight paths distinguish these drones from typical UAVs.

---

5. Government Regulations and Response Challenges

[16:19] Ryan Graves:
"Current aviation laws classify most drone operations under Class G airspace, limiting governmental intervention. To take action, officials require extensive legal procedures, delaying response efforts."

Discussion Highlights:

• Legal Hurdles: Strict regulations impede swift action against unidentified drones.
• [17:01] Ryan Graves:
  "The Patriot Act would still necessitate a 120-page report to intercept and track these drones, making proactive measures cumbersome."
• [18:12] Moderator (C):
  "Recent press conferences by New Jersey lawmakers have called for the government to authorize drone shootdowns for inspection."

---

6. Public Perception and Misinformation

[03:22] Ryan Graves:
"With the proliferation of social media, misinformation spreads rapidly, complicating the public’s understanding of the drone phenomena."

Key Points:

• Misinformation Threat: Blurry videos and unverified reports fuel conspiracy theories.
• [08:36] Ryan Graves:
  "It's challenging to discern authentic sightings from fabricated ones due to the ease of sharing content online."
• Digital Manipulation: Advanced AI and CGI make it difficult to verify the authenticity of UAP footage.

---

7. Ryan Graves' Background and Credibility

[19:12] Ryan Graves:
"I’m a former Navy F-18 Super Hornet pilot with 11 years of flight experience, including two deployments. My firsthand encounters with unidentified objects began after upgrading our radar systems around 2013."

Establishing Expertise:

• Military Experience: Graves’ background as a fighter pilot provides him with firsthand exposure to UAPs.
• [23:01] Ryan Graves:
  "During deployments, we recorded the now-famous 'gimbal' and 'go fast' videos, which captured these objects performing maneuvers beyond known aviation capabilities."
• [25:14] Ryan Graves:
  "The inability to lock onto these objects with our sensors indicates a level of technological sophistication we currently don’t possess."

---

8. Potential Origins and Motivations of UAPs

[34:25] Ryan Graves:
"If these drones aren't from foreign adversaries, they could be domestically operated with intent to instill fear or surveil without public knowledge."

Speculations Include:

• Foreign Adversaries: Possibility of drones developed by nations like China or Russia.
• Domestic Operations: Suggestion that domestic entities might be deploying advanced drones covertly.
• [37:33] Ryan Graves:
  "China’s advanced drone technology poses a significant threat if they deploy systems capable of these stealth operations."

---

9. Advanced Technologies and Future Implications

[55:09] Ryan Graves:
"China is investing heavily in technologies like quantum computing and AI, which could enhance their drone capabilities exponentially."

Technology Discussion:

• AI and Quantum Computing: These technologies could revolutionize drone operation, making them more autonomous and harder to detect.
• [58:59] Ryan Graves:
  "The U.S. needs to invest in deep technologies to keep pace with adversaries who are rapidly advancing their capabilities."
• [60:00] Exploration of Speculative Technologies: Conversations touch upon concepts like anti-gravity, extended electrodynamics, and synthetic biology as potential game-changers in UAP technology.

---

10. Disclosure and Public Awareness

[96:27] Ryan Graves:
"We need a national priority to conduct public, unclassified scientific investigations into UAPs to alleviate uncertainty and drive technological innovation."

Key Takeaways:

• Transparency Urged: Graves advocates for governmental openness and public scientific engagement.
• Whistleblower Challenges: Current laws insufficiently protect individuals who might expose classified UAP information.
• [106:04] Ryan Graves:
  "A comprehensive, public scientific approach could demystify these phenomena and harness technological advancements for national defense."

---

11. Speculative Scenarios and Philosophical Musings

[120:19] Ryan Graves:
"If UAPs are proof of extraterrestrial intelligence or advanced AI, it fundamentally alters our understanding of our place in the universe."

Philosophical Insights:

• Evolution vs. Technological Advancement: Discussion on how technological leaps could outpace biological and societal development.
• Potential for Global Unity: Drawing parallels to Reagan’s vision of unity in the face of extraterrestrial threats.
• [122:39] Ryan Graves:
  "A clear understanding of UAPs could redirect humanity’s focus towards collaborative technological and societal progress."

---

12. Closing Remarks and Call to Action

[65:20] Ryan Graves:
"Join Americans for Safe Aerospace at saferowspace.org to contribute to the largest UAP organization in the world. Together, we can pressure the government to take this issue seriously and drive public scientific inquiry."

Final Thoughts:

• Community Engagement: Encouragement for listeners to get involved with UAP research organizations.
• [166:42] Ryan Graves:
  "Sign up on our website and participate in the movement to better understand and address the UAP phenomenon."

---

Conclusion

In this episode, Ryan Graves provides an in-depth perspective on the UAP phenomenon, backed by his military experience and ongoing interactions with government agencies. The conversation underscores the complexity of addressing unidentified aerial phenomena amidst technological advancements and legal constraints. Graves advocates for greater transparency, public scientific involvement, and strategic investment in advanced technologies to comprehend and mitigate potential threats posed by these mysterious drones. The discussion also ventures into speculative realms, considering the broader implications of discovering extraterrestrial intelligence or advanced artificial systems, ultimately emphasizing the need for collective action and informed discourse on this pressing issue.

---

Notable Quotes:

• Ryan Graves [00:54]:
  "If there's a loose nuke in the United States, among other agencies, they would be some of the people that would be sitting in a SCIF for 24 hours a day trying to figure out where it is and to go get it."

• Ryan Graves [11:21]:
  "These drones exhibit signature management, meaning they minimize their heat and electromagnetic emissions to avoid detection."

• Ryan Graves [34:25]:
  "If these drones aren't from foreign adversaries, they could be domestically operated with intent to instill fear or surveil without public knowledge."

• Ryan Graves [55:09]:
  "China is investing heavily in technologies like quantum computing and AI, which could enhance their drone capabilities exponentially."

• Ryan Graves [96:27]:
  "We need a national priority to conduct public, unclassified scientific investigations into UAPs to alleviate uncertainty and drive technological innovation."

• Ryan Graves [120:19]:
  "If UAPs are proof of extraterrestrial intelligence or advanced AI, it fundamentally alters our understanding of our place in the universe."

• Ryan Graves [65:20]:
  "Join Americans for Safe Aerospace at saferowspace.org to contribute to the largest UAP organization in the world. Together, we can pressure the government to take this issue seriously and drive public scientific inquiry."

---

Website Mentioned:

• Americans for Safe Aerospace: saferowspace.org

---

This comprehensive summary captures the essence of the conversation between Joe Rogan and Ryan Graves, highlighting key discussions, insights, and conclusions about the ongoing UAP phenomenon, its potential implications, and the necessary steps toward understanding and addressing these mysterious aerial activities.

Transcript

[A]

Joe Rogan podcast.

[B]

Check it out. The Joe Rogan Experience. Train by day, Joe Rogan podcast by night, all day. Hello.

[A]

Good to see you again.

[B]

Nice to see you.

[A]

What is the latest in the world of Ryan, other than the fact you're about to have a child? Congratulations on that.

[B]

Thank you.

[A]

What we wanted. You wanted to talk to me about this drone situation, and I've become very concerned. I don't understand what's going on. I think there's a bunch of different narratives. Some of them are very scary. The scariest one that I've heard is that they're. The drones are looking for gamma radiation because there's a missing nuke.

[B]

Yeah, let's address that first, please. So there has been a lot going on. I made a next post about this yesterday to try to assuage some fears.

[A]

I saw it, but I purposely didn't read it because I wanted to get it from you.

[B]

Yeah. So, you know, I've had the privilege of interacting with a lot of government organizations over the past few years as I've been digging down this rabbit hole. Law enforcement at a federal level, DoD, executive branch, legislative branch, and some of the folks that I've come in contact with, they specifically work on weapons of mass destruction. So that's their job. So if there's a loose nuke in the United States, among other agencies, they would be some of the people that would be sitting in a SCIF for 24 hours a day trying to figure out where it is and to go get it. You can imagine that would be their number one priority. I engage with these folks. I ask them, what's the sense here? People are starting to panic a little bit, and this message is getting out there more and more broadly. They assured me that's not the case, that there is not loose nuke or other type of weapon of mass destruction that these objects, whatever they are, are pursuing right now. Otherwise, they would be working in a skiff nonstop to make. Make that go away, that problem go away. So, you know, that's part of why I have a high confidence level that this is not a response to a massive, imminent, you know, weapons of mass destruction threat on the Eastern seaboard. So I just want to try to dispel that rumor right now. I've seen a lot of talk of that online, and I don't, you know, although this is a, you know, I think a dangerous and scary situation that's going on right now, at least from that particular angle, that's not the indications I'm receiving.

[A]

So how would they persuaded you just by saying that's not the case, or have they given you any information that leads to this conclusion?

[B]

Like they would be the people actively working it, essentially. Right, so. And they're not, they're not working it right. So either government is holding back that secret from the direct resources within the government that are responsible for finding these systems, or they're not working the issue because there's an issue there to work.

[A]

So the thing that I had heard was that it was a missing nuke from Ukraine. And if that was the case, so what could they do? Is there any truth to this idea that we have the type of drone capability, that we could send these things out and they would search for gamma radiation and they'd be able to find a nuke?

[B]

Is that so there are teams that respond to those types of potential emergencies. Typically within the Department of Energy, having potentially hundreds of drones flying around trying to identify these isn't necessarily the best way. Gamma radiation is typically well shielded in weapons and at very high altitudes or even moderate altitudes like we're seeing these objects, it would be pretty difficult to detect them. And the way that nist, the doe, typically operates in this environment is ground based teams searching for radiation itself. So it's not necessarily consistent with how they would do it to begin with. And then based off of that other information, that's what leads me to believe that's not the case.

[A]

Well, that makes me feel better because I was freaking out this weekend.

[B]

I think a lot of people were.

[A]

Yeah, I got a couple. But it's one of those things, especially in this day and age with social media, there's so many narratives that get spread and retweeted. And, you know, I know a guy who's an insider and he says to get out of the east coast and, you know, head for Nevada or, you know, there's a lot of that going on. There's a lot of different versions of these drones. And this is what's weird. If they weren't ours, if they're not ours, you would think that they could just track them and find out, well, where are they landing, who's got them, how are they being used? Is it rfi, like radio frequency? Is it some sort of different technology that's allowing them to pilot these things? Like, what is it? They'd be able to tune into that and figure it out. Right. So how come no one's been arrested? How come no one's been caught? How come they haven't, you know, track these things down to the source yeah.

[B]

So there's a lot of good questions there. Let me back up by starting with the fact that this started about two years ago at least.

[A]

So not like this. A little bit like this really in this volume.

[B]

Not in this volume. That's the differentiator right there. But so Langley Air Force Base, you might be familiar with the fact that they had drone incursions of an unknown type, unknown origin last year.

[A]

Right.

[B]

That happened during about a two and a half, three week period right before Christmas, right where we are now. That also happened the year before over Langley. Unknown objects operating over the base, they couldn't tell where they're going. They were unprepared for them. Same period of time, two, three weeks before Christmas. This is year three. Right. And they were expecting them to come again for third year in a row over Langley. And there was some effort put forward to be able to better understand these when they came back. And they did come back, but they came back in a much wider swath. Right now we have them all over New Jersey, all the way up to Massachusetts. And it's hard to tell exactly with the quality of the reporting right now because it seems to be the bigger this story gets, the more people are just looking up and seeing anything and pointing it out. But there are reports from Texas to Florida to California, Ohio, Minnesota, Pennsylvania. It's not just New Jersey itself. It seems even the Wright Patterson Air Force Base was shut down for a drone incursion just this last Friday, a couple days ago. This isn't just a one off event. It is in the sense that it's so large and so many people are paying attention to it. But this has been occurring for at least three years around military bases. And that's not, that's nothing to say with the incidents that we were seeing over the Eastern Seaboard and other training ranges that fighter, fighter pilots were seeing as they were doing their operations. So I'm a little hesitant to link it to that, the full story that we've been having here and this full conversation. But at least for three years this has been occurring. So, you know, kind of getting back to your question, you know, why can't we do more about it? It's a hard problem. I think for a number of reasons. It's hard, but it's very solvable. Right. I think this can be solved, we can solve it. But right now, kind of the word on the street is that these objects appear to be coming from over the ocean. There's senior congressmen, there's Coast Guard personnel, there's law enforcement. They're seeing a large number of these come from somewhere over the ocean. I don't know if that means necessarily they're popping out of the water physically or if they're coming from some unknown location in the water and then proceeding over the coast. I don't know how that relates to Ohio. That's a pretty long trip if they are coming over the ocean. And from the videos I've seen in the conversation I've had, they are detecting these objects through kind of normal mechanisms like radar systems, optical camera systems. They are flying very low. In some cases they seem to be operating as a group in the vicinity of each other, flying past each other, flying very up close to each other and then proceeding to do whatever they are that they're doing. Is it unknown right now if they are emitting energy or not? So, you know, like radio communications or their own maybe active sensor systems? It's unknown. I've poked on that front and the best I can tell, the government doesn't know either.

[A]

That seems so weird that they don't know that. Like, it's just very disturbing that someone could operate these things and have. I mean, how many, what is the estimated number of them?

[B]

That's a great question. I mean, at this point I'm comfortable making a guess of probably over 800 or 1000. And how many of those are sightings of the same object? How many of those are individual objects? How many of those are unique objects that. So it's tough to say. But this isn't just a few objects that people are seeing. And so I can imagine some technologies that will allow traditional UAVs or drones to operate without emitting. Right. So they could be, they could have a self contained navigational system, right. Maybe they have their own onboard maps and they're using cameras to map where they are.

[A]

So then they would be completely autonomous. You just send them out there and they would have a task and they would go through whatever their task is and navigate via their GPS or whatever tracking system they're using.

[B]

Exactly. And then you know what is their task? Right. Is it just to instill panic and fear? Is it because they're sensing something? And if they are sensing something, they would have to be using what's called passive sensors. Right. So like a camera system is passive, but if you're shooting a radar out and having it bounce off of something that's active. Right. And that's easier to detect than a passive system. So I could imagine a fully self contained autonomous drone system that is Doing something potentially with passive sensors that allows it to operate without emissions, which is going to make it harder to track.

[A]

If they're doing it at night. If they do have passive systems like some sort of an optical system, wouldn't that be hindered by the low light conditions? Or do we have stuff that is able to detect whatever they're looking for at night?

[B]

Yeah, depends what they're looking for. But ultimately there is tech. There's electro optical systems, there's infrared camera systems, not unlike the jets that or the systems that we had on my jet. But we were able to detect these objects with infrared when we were flying off the eastern seaboard. There are a number of reports from law enforcement that their infrared systems are not able to pick these objects up. And not just this year, but also the incidents over Langley last year. The pilots that responded to that incidents, I've spoken to them, they weren't able to lock these up with their infrared systems either. So they do seem to be exhibiting some type of signature management.

[A]

That's interesting. So is the signature management. So is it a heat signature that they're giving off? So maybe there's some sort of a cooling mechanism inside of these things. Like how if they have a propulsion system. So you would imagine it's some sort of an electric engine. Right. Because a lot of them are very quiet. That's got to be giving off some kind of heat, right?

[B]

Yeah. And that goes to some like, very base physics. Right. Like we create heat whenever we have, you know, stored energy and we utilize it. So to be able to. To mitigate that to such a degree that you can't even detect them at all. You know, it's pretty tough. I mean, I can imagine you can reduce your signature. We do it in fighter jets, right. Through kind of just like baffles where we cover the engine essentially to make it harder to see. But to have zero ability to detect or lock onto these objects is not a technology I'm familiar with.

[A]

So other than that, are they exhibiting any type of movement that's extraordinary or their ability to turn angles? Is there anything about them that points to this being superior technology?

[B]

You know, it's tough to say based on what I've seen just in the public from reports and kind of amateur photographers and witnesses. Some of them do seem to be making pretty sharp turns. I wouldn't call them like physics braking turns, but they don't seem to be operating like a normal aircraft. Right. So they're down low. They're making what appear to be pretty high G turns maybe like 3, 4, 5 G turns at relatively low airspeeds, which is indicative of them having a pretty significant power supply. Right. Anytime you turn like that, you're burning energy, essentially. So for them to be able to make these high G maneuvers and then remain in the area for another five or six or seven hours and still have the battery life or whatever's propelling them to then go over the ocean to a point where they're untrackable. Again, I'm not really familiar with that type of capability either.

[A]

I know they've shot at least one of them down or people have shot. Have you seen the video? It looks like cops are shooting them down with shotguns in New Jersey.

[B]

I did see one video like that. I wasn't sure of how real it was.

[A]

I don't know. I know because it's like, hey, man, when you shoot up, those bullets land somewhere, you know they can land on people.

[B]

Yeah, yeah. I've, you know, I've heard multiple people, representative officials saying, like, hey, government needs to step in and start being more clear because people are just going to take matters their own hands. That's where people get hurt.

[A]

Well, there's also been downed ones. Right.

[B]

I've heard rumors of down ones, but.

[A]

There'S video footage and there's these people driving in their car and cop cars are surrounding this thing.

[C]

That was a plane.

[A]

It was a plane.

[C]

I think that was a plane crash.

[B]

Oh, yeah. I think if that's the one you're referring to, there happened to be like a small plane crash.

[A]

Can you find that one, Jamie? Okay, but again, this is the problem with social media, especially with someone like me who's just kind of scrolling for five minutes ago. What the. And then like, you know, my kids ask me something. I gotta get out of the house. All right, Let me put my phone down. You know, so I'm. I haven't done any kind of a deep dive, and I did that purposely just to try to pick your brain. Is this one?

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Oh, yeah, that's definitely a plane.

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

Is that the one? Yeah.

[C]

When they were driving by, they're like, look, it's a drone shot down.

[A]

That might be the one that I saw. I did watch a video. Did you see the video of the plane that crashed in Texas?

[C]

I don't know.

[A]

Pretty crazy. I'll send you that. Unrelated, but we need to get Elon.

[B]

Musk to have like a special UAP task force within the community nodes.

[A]

Elon is. Look, he's oddly sly about this stuff. He. You know, outwardly dismisses UFOs. You know, he said, well, if they're there, they're very subtle.

[B]

One might expect that.

[A]

But. Okay, but I just feel like with his contracts with NASA and being involved in SpaceX, he can't talk crazy. Yeah, he talks crazy so much about other stuff, but when it's in this, you know, multi. Multibillion dollar company that he runs, I don't think he can. Around. Yeah, I don't think he can. You know, if it was something that he had no. Just no interest in at all, in terms of like financial interest and business interest, I'm sure he would be commenting on it, but he's not commenting on it at all, which makes me go, huh? You know, And I don't think he's gonna tell me. I don't think I can call him up because I got a big mouth. I think he knows I'll be out there talking about a guy I know.

[B]

Can't tell.

[A]

Yeah, it's. The thing that disturbs me not is not just that this is happening. There's so many drones and all these people are seeing them. It just, it's happening for so long and nothing has been done. There's no, you know, they're not scrambling jets, try to meet these things and follow them and track them. They're not shooting them down. They're not. It's just there's. It. We appear so vulnerable because of this. Because if these are ours or if these are people just fucking around and it's not a threat, okay, great. But why is it, why is it so prevalent? Like, why are there so many of them? And why have, why have there been nothing that these people that are trying to investigate this have been able to do that's effective to put a stop to this?

[B]

So there's. There's some laws in this country that are a little bit antiquated when it comes to dealing with situations like this. So my understanding is right now these things are operating mostly in what's called Class G airspace, which is really low. It's away from airports. Not all, of course. Right. They're over bases, so they're over LaGuardia. Yeah, yeah. But here, here's. Here's, I think, where a lot of the trouble is coming in from. I think the government has to make the presumption at this point, based off the feedback from the DoD and others, that if this is not a foreign adversary, then we have to make the assumption that it's a U.S. citizen that's operating these. Because of that they essentially need a warrant in order to wiretap these.

[A]

What?

[B]

Yeah. Even with the Patriot act, that's the feedback I'm receiving. That's the legal limitation.

[A]

Hold on. They don't even need a warrant to get into my phone. Get the fuck out of here. I don't buy that.

[B]

Well, whether it's the reality situation or not, that's how they're proceeding to overcome that. There's 120 page report that needs to be filed all the way up to the Deputy Attorney General of the United States in order to even intercept these signals that they may or may not even be admitting to be able to determine where they're going. And so I think that's one part of what's like slowing down this whole investigation. On the other hand, for base commanders, they have limited authorities to protect their base, but when they do, they need to submit basically a request all the way up to the Secretary of Defense. So now you have this like, super politically charged situation with a lot of risk of objects flying over the US if they take action to shoot one of these down, even with this, the Secretary of Defense's permission, you know, they're on the hook. If that thing takes out a school bus or otherwise damages someone's property, kill somebody. Yeah.

[A]

Jamie, can you research. Can you just do a quick search? Have there been drones that have been shot down?

[C]

I haven't seen anything. I was the. There's a story from what today's two days ago, New Jersey lawmakers were having a press conference asking if the government could shoot one down so they can inspect it. So, like, I'm assuming they haven't shot one down. If they're asking shoot one down that. That day. You know, I hear something new that I don't know if it's even worth bringing up, but this is a new story going on. They said this might be what some of this has to do with. I don't even know if this missing.

[A]

Radioactive. Yeah, scroll up a little bit higher so I can see who put that up there.

[C]

There's a few people that have posted it.

[A]

Okay. Yes, I did see that. I did see that. While looking at Nuclear Regulatory Commission alerts, one confirmed there's a radioactive material that has gone missing on December 2, 2024, out of New J. I guess was.

[C]

Being shipped there, and it didn't make a container arrive damaged and empty.

[B]

Well, my understanding is these sightings started around November 18th.

[C]

Yeah, so I saw the November 20th too. So I don't know if that makes.

[A]

It related, but so we should explain to people that didn't listen to our first podcast why you're uniquely qualified to talk about this stuff. Could you just please tell people your background so they understand what you used to do and.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

How you got involved in this whole UAP thing in the beginning.

[B]

Yeah, absolutely. So, formerly trained aerospace engineer in college, joined the Navy immediately after with the hopes to go fly fighter jets for the Navy. Was successful in doing that. And I flew the F18 Super Hornet for 11 years and two deployments, primarily operating off of Virginia Beach. And pretty, pretty standard career until about 2013 or so when we started to, we came back from our deployment, we began to upgrade our radar systems. And when that happened, we put in essentially a much more powerful radar into our jet. It took about eight months. So you'd have, you know, you might fly with a newer radar in the morning, maybe an older radar at night. And consistently when we were flying with these newer radars, we were picking up a bunch of objects that were operating in our working area that we weren't seeing with the older radar. They were performing in strange ways. They would be stationary, they would be around 250 to 350 knots, kind of meandering around the area, not really working together per se, but kind of clearly operating in the same vicinity as one another. Right. So we weren't flying in formations necessarily. And we'd even see these supersonic as well. 1.1, 1.2 Mach, typically heading east, and we'd only see them over the water. We originally thought they were radar errors, right. Some kind of software glitch. But eventually we started to correlate these across other sensors, such as our IR FLIR system. Our missile systems would lock onto these and we would, we try to fly up to them to see them physically with our eyeballs. And when we do that, we wouldn't see anything. We come within about 500ft of these objects. All our sensors are pumped into our helmet, augmented reality style, and it would tell us exactly where to look and boom, we come right past this object and there'd be nothing there. We'd circle back around and then pick it back up on our sensors. It would be slightly displaced, but that was kind of the status quo for a few weeks until we had a near miss with one of these objects right at the entrance to our working areas. The pilot came back, canceled the flight, had a look of shock on his face and described as a dark gray or a black cube inside of a clear sphere. And once that happened, we kind of had to come together as a squadron with the safety officer in our squadron and say, hey, you know, like, okay, what's going on? This has kind of been rumor and conjecture, but, you know, we almost had a near miss. You almost lost an aircraft. You know, let's gather as much information as we can. As it turned out, there are four other near misses that had occurred in the past month that pilots were too uncomfortable to even report. And that really kind of kicked off the seriousness of this issue for us. And we started filing paperwork, safety reports, and hoping and expecting that this would get resolved in some way. As, you know, the proper people, whoever that was, got these reports and they could mitigate it in some way. That never happened, at least from our perspective. So we essentially treated them as safety issues. We would avoid them. We wouldn't fly close to them. And then in 2015, we left to go do what's called a pre deployment workup cycle aboard the USS Theater Roosevelt. So we train like we play. You get the whole air wing there, 30 jets, 40 jets. And we're doing these very complex missions. And there were a lot of objects down there as well. They either followed us down there, or they were already there. And was there a lot of visual.

[A]

Sightings of these objects, or is it just equipment?

[B]

A lot of visual sightings?

[A]

Was it the same sort of thing? A circle with a square inside of it?

[B]

Or solid spheres, some elongated spheres, kind of more tic tac shape, if you will. And during that workup cycle, that's when we recorded what's now known as the gimbal and go fast video. And they almost had to shut the entire exercise down because there were multiple near misses while we were trying to do this. And this is. This is a big deal. If they cancel that training mission, that means the people that are deployed, since they have to be there longer, they have to wait longer. So there's a lot of downstream effects. So pretty big deal to even consider canceling a training, a training, our training mission like this. So again, we filed it up. We didn't know what else to do with it, and we went back to our training, left on deployment. In 2017, a New York Times article came out. I was now an instructor pilot in Mississippi and for the Navy still. And on, you know, front page, New York Times, lo and behold, there are the video of the gimbal and the go fast with the pilot's audio on there that we've heard now. And I'm like, holy shit. You know, like, this is still going on. Massive deja Vu, as you might imagine, and that I saw that as like a cry for help, essentially that these videos has now been somewhat smuggled out. They're on the front page New York Times.

[A]

And do we know how the gimbal or the go fast videos got leaked?

[B]

My understanding is that work was done partially with Lou Elizondo and Chris Mellon. So there was two videos that were attached. Right. So when you record in the jet records two screens, it records.

[A]

Can we show those? Jamie, show those videos.

[B]

So it records these two screens, right. And the bottom screen is like a God's eye view with all your radar data. And the right one is your FLIR system. And when you watch that in the brief room after they're stitched together like side by side and that, you know, that's what I saw and that's how I built my understanding of this situation.

[A]

So with the crosshairs is that they're trying to lock in on it. So now they've locked in on it, right? Yeah.

[B]

They weren't able to gain a lock in their air to air mode, so they actually had to degrade down to an air to surface mode, kind of a manual locking mode. And that's that box that you see.

[A]

What is the difference?

[B]

Like the air to air mode should essentially be looking exactly where the radar is dropping them off and should automatically lock on it. But in the method that you're seeing here, the pilot's manually slewing the sensor. This is kind of like a last ditch effort to get it and he's like restarting it and that's why the box keeps getting bigger and it's getting smaller. It's not capturing it.

[A]

What would be the difficulty? Like why is it difficult to lock on?

[B]

We don't know. You know, one theory is that is because it's relatively close to the ground and there's a lot of background. Right. To confuse the sensor. But it's.

[A]

How far off the ocean is this supposed to be?

[B]

It's somewhere around 10,000ft or so. So it's really not that close. So it's really not a great explanation. But yeah, you can see him. Try it there.

[A]

Now, what do they estimate the size of this thing to be?

[B]

I don't know if anyone has estimated a size, to be honest. It's hard, you know, the. From the pilot's perspective, they're not going to be able to make a real time assessment of the size because how.

[A]

Far above this thing are they?

[B]

Well, they're about, they're about five miles away or so.

[A]

Five miles.

[B]

Yeah. So you see the range 3.4 right there? That range is coming strictly from the AT FLIR sensor itself. It's not a very reliable indicator of the range. That's what the radar is for. So although it says about 3.5, 4.4 and then ticks down, it's probably a little bit further away than range.

[A]

So the speed, is that on there anywhere of how fast this thing is going?

[B]

So you have 170V sub C right below the range, and that's indicating our relative velocity.

[A]

And that's miles per hour or kilometers.

[B]

It should be knots. So it's probably like 180, 190 miles per hour.

[A]

No heat signature.

[B]

Well, there is a heat differential anyway. So right now we're in. We're in white hot. So objects that are white are hotter objects in the background.

[A]

I've used infrared sun binoculars before. It's pretty cool. You can see, like, raccoons.

[B]

And so that's showing us that it's. It's cooler than the surrounding environment for whatever reason, which is very bizarre.

[A]

Yeah, that's moving 170. Whatever miles an hour.

[B]

Yeah. And it's. I just to be clear, the 170 doesn't represent. It's like raw speed.

[A]

This is the gimbal video, which is different. Yep. And this one, does it show the speed of this?

[B]

No, I don't.

[A]

This is the one that rotates.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

And when we're looking at this signature, when we're looking at the. Does that represent something that's cooler than the outside area or hotter? Like, what does that represent?

[B]

This one's black hot. So this is showing us that it's hotter than the surrounding areas right now.

[A]

And would this be similar to what you would see if you saw a jet that was flying?

[B]

No. I mean, we've seen thousands of aircraft like that.

[A]

But I mean, in terms of the signature that it gives off with the temperature, or would you be able to see a visible means of propulsion that would be accentuated?

[B]

Yeah, you would see the exhaust coming out of the back. You'd be able to see the skin of the aircraft itself. So the sensor is not great, but it's good enough where you can break out some pretty good detail on a jet. I mean, it looks like a jet, right?

[A]

Well, this definitely doesn't look like a jet. You know, it kind of looks like a flying saucer, and then it turns sideways, which is really weird. Is there anything on that that shows the speed the.

[B]

On the bottom left, you see 242 knots. That's how fast the aircraft that is recording is going. The pilots do talk about how it's going 120 knots against the whim and in my recollection it was going at a relatively slow speed for a fight aircraft around 100 knots or so at those speeds from looking at the radar data itself.

[A]

So as far as you know, we don't have anything that moves like that.

[B]

No.

[A]

And we don't have anything that gives off a signature like that.

[B]

No, no.

[A]

And were they able to figure out where this is going or keep an eye on it or do we have sensors that can detect this for any length of time?

[B]

You would assume that the sensors on the ships themselves, if they were looking there, would be able to detect these objects, but we're not really linked into those people that are doing that on the boat. The pilots essentially took this upon themselves to go investigate this and they reported the intel when they came back and that's where I saw the tapes. Whether they, whether like the air traffic management guys in the, on the boat themselves then took it upon themselves to go try to detect these objects. I don't have that information. I was never in that information stream. But presumably they would.

[A]

Is there a capability where. So if a fighter jet locks in on something like that, is there an additional source of some sort of satellite that they can team into or tune into where they can give them the coordinates and say, hey, this is at this exact coordinate and it's moving at this speed. Can you guys lock into that?

[B]

No, not within the jet itself. We can share the data amongst jets. So if you were flying out there and the aircraft that recorded that video was getting out on the radar, that information would be getting sent to other jets in the area. There was a large training mission going on and I'm not aware of anyone that, you know, was paying attention to those contacts that were say 50 miles away from where they were doing this fight. But it shouldn't have been just self contained into the aircraft itself. And additionally that information should have also been received by the ship itself. Right. They should have access to that same information. That's being.

[A]

Right. That's what I was getting to like, can the ship itself then lock in the core coordinates with a satellite or do we have that kind of capability?

[B]

We don't as pilots, we don't really get into the satellite game, if you will. You know, that's kind of like a different level than how we operate. So it's feasible that a ship might call in other national Assets to investigate. But we operate as like a self contained expeditionary group. So I don't know if that's part of their protocol.

[A]

So they wouldn't even refer to you or discuss it with you?

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Did anybody discuss any of these things with you? Like, when you're talking about the safety hazard, you know, you've got this clear circle with a black square inside of it. And they're flying in this very unusual way. When you described it to people, what's the feedback?

[B]

Honestly, most people just kind of looked off in the space. Yeah. Like, huh, that's interesting.

[A]

That's fucking weird.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Did they give you the impression that this is not surprising?

[B]

Only once. So when we had the gimbal captured, and just real quick, you know, the gimbal and the go fast happen within minutes of each other.

[A]

The gimbal, two different things, but they happen within minutes.

[B]

Yeah. Or the go fast. There was multiple objects in a line formation called line of breast.

[A]

Right.

[B]

Line side by side. Four, they're about a mile apart, flying in formation, doing what they're doing. The pilots were looking at that, had a hard time locking it. And then they kind of brought their attention up to this other object that's basically co altitude with them. And that's the gimbal video. And behind the gimbal there was a, what they referred to as a fleet of objects, about four to six objects that were flying in a formation, like a tight formation, all within about a half or a mile and a half of each other in a, you know, like a V formation. And so they come, they turn, they get all discombobulated, and then they flow back out into a clean formation making 180 degree turn. And then the gimbal object, which we see, start to rotate. That's the moment it actually changes direction. Right. So it's proceeding behind this formation, it turns the gimbal, does its kind of, you know, its maneuver, and then it starts trailing in the opposite direction. So you got, you know, maybe 10, 12 objects that are out there operating in this area east of the ship. We're already 300 miles out there. And so where did they come from? You know, what are they doing? Are they. Are they assessing our fight? Are they enemy combatants? You know, it's, it's, you know, for me, this is the conversation that I've been trying to have for almost 10 years now about the seriousness of having these unknown objects in our airspace. It's a security risk. Whether, you know, they come from little green men or whether they come from our adversaries or if they just remain unknown. And that's kind of the state we're living in right now with what's happening over in New Jersey and elsewhere. We're having this massive uncertainty about what these objects are. There's a lot of rumors, it's causing fear and panic. And once again, the Biden administration and the Pentagon are unwilling to have a conversation with American people and share what information they have.

[A]

Why do you think that is?

[B]

If you had to speculate, the biggest probability is they don't know. Right. If this is something that, you know, they've been struggling with for all these years and suddenly it's happening in a much larger capacity than it has in the past, they're not easily able to write it off and they just don't have the answers. Or perhaps they do have the answers, but they fall under a category of information, much like these objects, that they're not willing to have a public conversation about it.

[A]

What is the best footage of the New Jersey drones? Do we. Why New Jersey, by the way?

[B]

I don't know. A lot of shipping.

[A]

Also military base. Right outside of Bell Labs. There's a military base. And like, what else? The proximity to New York City, I guess.

[B]

New York, D.C. yeah. I mean, there's a lot of big cities right there.

[A]

Yeah. All pretty close. I've only seen a few interesting videos and we're in this new realm of uncertainty when it comes to AI and it comes to computer generated images and video, it's like I've seen so many. I've seen me, I've seen Friends. I've seen so much stuff that's not real. I'm like, okay, I don't know what's real anymore. It's like, especially when it comes to something that's kind of blurry, it's in the sky and you got people on the ground. I've seen so many fake ones. You know, there's just so many ones that people have generated. You know, I'm friends with Jeremy Corbell and Jeremy, I always send him, like, what the fuck is this? You know, I'll send some stuff to him. Is this bullshit? And you know, he's very good at, like, we don't really know. I am very suspicious because of this. This is what we know. Like, let me send you some things that I know are not fake, but we don't still don't know what they are and see the difference. And so we'll have these long conversations and text message or phone calls about stuff like that. But no one seems to be able. There's not like one person you can go to. I mean, you have your people that are dismissing everything, think it's just hobbyists and crazy people. But if they're not giving off signatures like that are standard with these normal drones, like these heat signatures, and they're able to stay in the sky for hours and hours at a time, just that alone points to at least if it's not our adversaries, if it's domestic superior technology that we're not even aware of right now. I mean, how are they staying in the sky for five hours? Like what is the. If you got like a top of the food chain drone. And who was it that is explaining to us the issue with why China has superior drone technology has something to do with the faa? Was it Andreessen? Well, someone was explaining the reason why most of these, like high end max might have actually been a green room conversation.

[C]

Yeah, I still remember talking about now.

[A]

Yeah. So that the FAA and the rules and regulations have sort of stifled the development and the improvement of these domestic drones.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And so most of the hobbyist drones are coming from China. And China, if you haven't seen, has fucking incredible displays of drones.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Where they do. Yeah, where they do like a drag in the sky. It's amazing. And it is because of regulations, it's because of the FAA dragging their heels, being incompetent or at least being overwhelmed, where this has not been able to progress domestically the way it's been able to do in China. And so it's. That alone seems like a giant security threat. The fact that China has had just full integration with the government and been able to have this technological innovation that allows their drones to be like super powerful. Like what, what they're able to do with these displays in the sky. Unbelievable, like really wild stuff to see. That seems like many, many leaps above what we can do.

[B]

And you know, the faux firework displays that these things put on are just one part of the puzzle. Right. Because warfare is changing. It's changing drastically. And this is something I've tried to raise the alarm bells on before the Ukraine war, but we're seeing it now. Warfare is going to these highly mobile, non traditional platforms where you can have a group of guys that are basically teenagers now going out and conducting operations with these small drones. And you know, God forbid that an adversarial nation is now employing those technologies here in the United States. And if it was Russia, if it was China and they were doing it directly, that'd be the equivalent of a declaration of war. I mean, they're essentially invading our land. Right. Is there some avenue where they might be hiring criminal gangs in some way to do this in order to create a level of deniability for them? I don't know. But I'm certain that China and other nations are watching this unfold very carefully and detecting the gaps in our homeland defense systems. This is a major issue. War is changing and there are a lot of companies that within the private sector and of course within the normal defense contract, the world that is building capabilities to be able to detect and mitigate drones, whether it's kinetically or through electronic warfare. But we're not employing those. And oh by the way, the electronic warfare measures that have been employed against the New Jersey drones have been ineffective. So they have tried to take these out with non kinetic options, disabling their navigational systems, otherwise trying to fry them, bring them down has not been effective.

[A]

That's not good. No, no, that's very concerning. So is there any good footage that you could point to?

[C]

I don't even know where to look. I've looked. There's people on the news that have reported it. But the one clip I was looking at, they're just showing a plane. So like that's not good. I just found one, but it looks like a guy in the woods. I don't know what the video is. You know?

[A]

Yeah, that's the problem.

[C]

I don't know when they took it, I don't know when they shot it. They're saying it was last night, but it could have been.

[A]

Yeah, it could be bullshit. But this is part of the problem with this weird world that we're living in right now with fake information. It's so difficult to figure out what the hell is going on. Did I send you that video, Jamie, of that guy in where he's CEO of a drone manufacturing company? This is the guy that made me the most nervous. I'll send it to you right now. This guy made me the most nervous because this guy is talking about how this whatever the hell this stuff is, he believes it's looking for a nuke. I'll send this to you, Jamie, to.

[C]

The thing you tweeted.

[A]

No. Did I? I don't know, maybe this guy, CEO of drone manufacturing company who has government contracts, but the people you're talking to don't say it's this. So listen to what this guy's saying.

[D]

Y of Saxon Aerospace here in Wichita, Kansas. I'm not normally a tick tock Kind of a guy. I like watching this stuff every once in a while. But I'm a manufacturer of unmanned aircraft, military grade unmanned aircraft. As you can see, one of my systems here, there's all of these mysterious drones going on off the East Coast. And as a, as a professional, as a subject matter expert, I wanted to give you all my opinion on what I think could be going on with these drones. I don't particularly believe that these have a nefarious intent. I could be wrong. But I want to give you the truth and what I believe. It's my own opinion and I've not bounced this off of anybody. So, you know, if you think it's whatever, that's cool, you know, I, I don't want to spread misinformation as we know that there's a lot of that going around. But anyway, back in the 1980s, Ronald Reagan had dismantled the nuclear program and there were, with Russia, there were countless nuclear missiles that were, that were disarmed and disposed of. Well, there were over 80, I believe there were over 80 nuclear warheads that were in Ukraine that came up missing. Okay, we don't know where they are. Maybe somebody does, but nobody really knows where these are. And I, you know, I speak with some pretty high level government officials on this stuff and it seems as though that is the case. So I spoke to a gentleman a few months ago who was trying to raise an alarm to the highest levels of our government, which they had their ears closed about this one particular nuclear warhead that he physically put his hands on. He physically touched this warhead that was left over from Ukraine. And he knew that that thing was headed towards the United States. Okay, that is a very serious deal. And everyone knows that the United States government, this administration, is pushing to get into a war with Russia. We all know that, we all feel it, we all see it. Okay, well, back up a few years. Do you all remember when those drones were mysteriously flying across the Interstate 70 corridor from Colorado, up into Nebraska, down here into Kansas and out into Missouri? Well, it was believed that those drones were looking for radioactive material because there had been some material that come up missing here in the United States and they felt like it was high probability that it would, the nuclear or the radioactive material would be taken along the Interstate 70 corridor heading east or west or south. So from what we understand, they were out there trying to find this radioactive material. Now, drones, they have no reason to be in the air at night unless you're doing some type of ISR working, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, you know, Looking for bad guys or looking for a victim, a search and rescue victim, or law enforcement or some type of military project. Right. There's no reason for a drone to be flying at night, really. Okay. Because they don't see shit. So, you know, unless you have thermal optics, drones really don't see stuff. You need to do mapping during the day if you're going to do farming stuff, mostly do it during the day. The only reason why you would ever fly an aircraft, an unmanned aircraft at night is if you're looking for something, rather it be a person or trying to smell gas. We have methane gas detection systems that can detect gas leaks and pipelines. You really wouldn't use thermal optics for trying to find gas leaks, just simply because the only way you're actually going to find a gas leak with thermal optics is if the gas leak is aggressive enough that it has a difference in temperature. Because radio thermal imaging, it creates a digital image based off the temperature variance. So whatever is different in temperature, it creates an image. Gas. Usually gas leaks so slow that it goes quickly into ambient before you can even see it. So we have special sensors that can detect gas leaks. We also have special sensors that can detect radioactive material. So with this gentleman that I had spoken with who was trying to raise the alarm to try to get somebody in the government to say, hey, we need to work together to go try to find this nuclear warhead. None of that ever happened. They knew that warhead was on its way to the United States. That's all that ever came of it. Nothing ever happened. This government did not do anything at all to help this gentleman raise the alarm and raise awareness that there is a very deadly weapon on its way to the United States.

[A]

No. Well, go ahead. Unless maybe he's got something else.

[C]

When I was looking this up, we have six nuclear heads that we've lost. The United States has. One of them has been gone for like 71 years or something like that.

[A]

Oh, wonderful.

[C]

Didn't know that.

[A]

Wonderful. Yeah. Maybe they'll find them. I mean, there should probably a couple in the bottom of the ocean somewhere someone's going to find.

[B]

Yeah, I'm sure they're sitting there.

[A]

I mean, wasn't there like a Russian submarine that sank and they lied to us about it? And wasn't that. Can neither confirm nor deny. Isn't that where that came from?

[B]

I'm not familiar. Is that.

[A]

Yeah, that was from a radio lab podcast. The term neither can neither confirm nor den was one of those things where they had to answer a question, but they didn't want to answer it. So they said, we can neither confirm nor deny.

[B]

That's the answer.

[A]

And so that has become a way. Yeah. The Glomar response refers to covert CIA operation where a ship named the Hughes Glomar Explorer was used to recover a sunken Soviet submarine. When questioned about the operation, the agency responded with can neither confirm nor deny implication. When someone says, can either confirm nor deny, they're essentially saying they cannot provide any information on the matter, leaving the question unanswered. So they answered it without answering it because they were compelled to answer. And they said, we can either confirm nor deny. Which is interesting because, like, if you're, like, in a Senate hearing and someone says something like that, like, what do you.

[B]

Now I know you're being sneaky.

[A]

What did you say? What did you just say? What do you mean, you can either confirm nor deny. Shut the fuck up with all those words. You can't use all those words anymore. You're being tricked. So I want you to tell me what you know. Say it like that. You know. Tell me what you know. What do you know?

[B]

Well, I mean, watching that video. No, I think there's a few pieces that are still outstanding. Connections that are outstanding for me. A supposed US citizen physically touched a nuclear weapon that was then lost, and he. He knew exactly where it was going, somehow.

[A]

Why was he there? Why was he touching it?

[B]

Why was he touching it? Was he.

[A]

Why would you touch it?

[B]

Was he amongst enemies and they were carting the weapon off? He just got his fingers on it or.

[A]

I don't even like doing an X ray. Why is this motherfucker touching nuclear warheads?

[B]

Jesus. And then the jump is that that weapon eventually ended up somewhere on the Eastern seaboard, and the people that would be responsible for investigating such an issue are not even aware of it, even while somehow our government is flying hundreds of drones around to detect it. So it's compelling, it's interesting, but I don't know if it connects. I think there's a few connections short of being able to say that's exactly what's going on here, especially after the conversations I've had.

[A]

Yeah. My other thought on that would be, if you are a military contractor and you design and implement drone systems, how much do they tell you about, like, foreign policy? Why would they tell you. Why would they tell you about those type of things if you did raise, like, how much information would this guy be privy to?

[B]

Yeah, very little. It'd be very specific to his actual responsibilities, his engineering work.

[A]

Right. Whereas, like, I Can call you. And you actually used to fucking see these things. It's kind of a different, you know, different connection to the information than this guy has.

[B]

And he seems nervous, you know. I mean.

[A]

Yeah, and we should be.

[B]

He may truly believe in the beans. Yeah.

[A]

He's saying a bunch of stuff that I don't think you're supposed to be saying anyway. Like, why are you saying that? Like, I get, if you really did believe that, that you would want everyone to know that there's a nuclear warhead missing. But the other thing that I keep hearing is that the government is not telling us that these are ours, they are ours, but not telling us that we are. These are ours. Because whatever they're looking for would cause mass panic.

[B]

What's on the plate then, after weapons of mass destruction, Right?

[A]

Yeah. What is on the plate? I mean, in my eyes, nothing. Like, that's it. Right? That's the thing that everybody would really be worried about. The second thing would be that our adversaries are using these things to siphon off information, that it's like some mass wifi router that's flying over cities and sucking up everybody's passwords. As we move into this new, very bizarre realm of AI and now quantum computing. I had a conversation with someone last night, was explaining to me how cryptography and encryption and all this stuff is literally on the verge of being obsolete, and that this is going to put the financial markets into a chaos. All your passwords, everybody's email, everything is out the window. There's no more encryption. It's not. It's not even going to be possible. These things are solving. Marc Andreessen explained it this way, that these quantum computers are solving equations, that if you took every atom in the universe and converted it into computing power, the time it would take to solve these equations would be longer than the time that the universe would exist before it died of heat death. And they're able to do it in minutes. So the concept is, and this is where it gets super weird, that this is proof of the multiverse, because these computers are using the computing power of perhaps infinite parallel universes simultaneously to achieve these answers, which is like, what are you saying? Like, what the fuck did you just say? Did you just say that if you took every molecule in the universe and converted into computing power, it wouldn't be able to do this. This thing that you have in a fucking warehouse somewhere, that this thing has more computational power in this? It's like as big as this room than the fucking universe. If it was A computer. What are you saying, like, and you're saying this is the proof of the multiverse? What does that even fucking mean? And what happens if China gets this online? If we're able to do these like equations, right? It's kind of almost like proof of concept of the technology being efficient or efficacious if they're able to do that. What if someone is more advanced than us and gets this connected to AI and implements some sort of a strategy for complete global domination of power grids, financial markets, completely takes control of assets, closes down government computers, locks up databases, deletes any information that's pertinent to who knows what power grid. Fucking informational structures like satellites, cell phones, all our all, all of our radio signal all shuts everything down. Just shuts it all down. Like we're helpless. Like, most cars have computers in them. Most people don't even know this. Like your car has a computer in it. When you have a Chevy and you bring it to the dealership, they plug it in to see what's going on. And the computer, and they're like, if something shuts those off, no cars work.

[B]

Everything's open, everything's the only.

[A]

You have old cars. That's it. Everybody's like, Cuba. Everyone's driving, driving around these ancients looking for parts. Yeah, I mean, we'd basically have to go back to carburetors. All the electronic fuel injection, all that shit's done. It's all done.

[B]

My understanding is runs on an ecu. My understanding is that this is something China's been looking forward to. So what I mean by that is that they have not just been working on this technology in order to break our encryption now, but have been storing our encrypted data from in the past, such that when they do have that breakthrough, they have a lot of data to be able to utilize it on. Not just what's happening now.

[A]

I know this is absolutely happening because my friend, my friend Bobby owns Dakota, the racetrack in town. And when they had the Formula one race at his racetrack, they found these boxes that were connected to this WI fi system and these boxes were outside. So the public WI fi system had been compromised by these data sucking boxes. And so they called in Homeland Security, they had them removed, the whole deal. But like someone had gotten to the racetrack and physically connected these boxes to a public WI FI system. How many times is that going on where people don't notice it? How. This is not the first time they've done it. They picked a race in Austin. Yeah, we're going to get all those race fans, suck up all their data. It doesn't even make any sense. Right. This is something that's probably been implemented before. It's like, what are they doing with that data?

[B]

I think they typically refer to that as a man in the middle attack. So you think you're connecting to the regular WI fi, but you're actually connecting to the adversary's WI fi, sending your data through there, and then they send that to the original box that you thought you were communicating with. And so they get all the information.

[A]

So all your passwords, anything you're sending. Yeah, exactly. PayPal. Yeah.

[B]

That's how they try to crack the Tor network as well.

[A]

Really?

[B]

If you're familiar with that. Yeah. By setting up their own servers, essentially, to serve as a man in the middle attack. But back to your point about China trying to work on quantum computing on AI. I think China is probably one of the biggest motivating factors that the government has right now for opening up the conversation on uap. So we haven't had this peer threat that we have to worry about that has a totally different investment government structure than we have. Right. So in the United States, we have this capitalist market and we have innovations that break out through that model, like OpenAI. But there are some capabilities where they are not appetizing to the market itself. Right. For example, how do we just suddenly stand up a chip fabrication facility in the United States that competes with the operations in Taiwan? Right. It's not something that a VC is going to invest in. It's going to take billions and billions of dollars and it could fail.

[A]

Exactly like the Samsung one that they put here.

[B]

Exactly. Well, they did that because the government took a new approach. They stepped in and said, we're going to financially support this. We're going to open up the piggy banks, we're going to help with regulations and laws, and we're going to make this happen as soon as practically possible. That's the model that China uses all the time. They see something, they go for it. They invest the money, they invest the resources. There's a risk with that. You could be wrong about the efficacy of the technology that you're trying to push forward. It could be strategically misaligned. But if China is having the same issues with the UAP that we are having, then you could imagine them putting a lot of resources into better understanding that situation in a way that we're just not equipped to do. And the fact that this conversation has grown more, that their advancements have Been getting better. I think there is this pressure right now within the US Government that if we do not further invest, somehow bring in the primary innovation makers within our economy, within the startup community, within the scientific community into this problem. If it's still just buried in a classified area, then we're going to get outcompeted by China that is able to dump all these resources into it.

[A]

Well, how do you do that though? If these people that create these things are motivated by money, if they're motivated by profits, if they run major corporations, how can you convince them to invest in something that is ultimately not going to pay off like it would if you were investing in a consumer product?

[B]

Yeah, I think it can. I mean we have a model for that in the United States with deep technology and edge technology. You know, these are capabilities that don't fit into a normal VC's life cycle of five or six years before you're seeing returns. It might take 10 years before you have a product. Right. And there's a lot of risk that they could fail along the way. But that's, you know, that's a, that's where we get a lot of our major innovations from. That's where we see very exotic technology being worked on like advanced propulsion, communication systems, energy production. And every one of these has huge potential added value to our economy, I mean, to the level that AI has. Right. So, you know, there's a couple ways you can go about it. You know, you can either create a new investment cycle or structure that is more tolerant to the risk and more tolerant to extended time to returns, which, you know, you got to fight market force with that you could have the government step in perhaps through the Office of Strategic Capital and others, to be able to support venture capitalists that are looking to make investments in these longer term technologies, perhaps in concert with the National Science foundation that does a lot of work in this area. Or you can try to structure your technologies such that they provide value to existing capabilities during the research and development process. So what I mean by that, and you know this, I've been working this problem for 10 years, Joe. Like I've thrown my entire self into this. I've approached it, you know, with my nonprofit Americans for Safe Aerospace, I've been working in the private sector, I've been collaborating with government and others. And there is a path where the capabilities to better understand this topic are aligned with our defensive needs. Right. If we had total situational awareness of our airspace, that's a very valuable thing to the Department of Defense and those are contracts you can win. Those are reasonable investments you can make through normal market forces. And then you keep working to be able to use those existing products in those markets to bring out technology that is related to the UAP topic, whether that be detection, perhaps propulsion, energy, things of that nature. So you have to find these core technologies that the government wants that is also aligned with the better understanding of uap.

[A]

Now the way you're describing this sounds like it could be done, but China's already done that. So, like, how far behind the curve are we on the implementation of this technology?

[B]

Well, that it's an unknown how far China is. You know, there's, there are some rumors and I'm not even going to mention them because they're too low confidence. But there does seem, I love a.

[A]

Good low confidence rumor.

[B]

There does seem to be investment that's been made. There are talk that they are having the same problems and perhaps have been better motivated than we are to investigate ones that they have been able to recover.

[A]

Do you know about the anti gravity lady that went missing, went back to China?

[B]

Ning Lee?

[A]

Yeah. What's your thoughts on that, that type of technology?

[B]

It's interesting, you know, I was mentioning this out front with some of the guys earlier. There seems to be this, these interesting technologies that were once ridiculed back in the day, whether it be anti gravity, cold fusion, others.

[A]

It's a good way to get rid of stuff, ridicule it.

[B]

Yeah, I'm very familiar with that strategy.

[A]

Lab leak, they did it with a lot of stuff.

[B]

Yeah, exactly.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And they all just went dark for like 30, 40 years. But some of those capabilities seem to be popping back up in mainstream scientific circles.

[A]

Have you ever heard Eric Weinstein discuss this? He has some very fucking, you gotta get that tin foil hat really tightly secured to your head. But he believes that this is one of the reasons why physics has sort of stalled over the last 20 years. He thinks some of the best minds have been moved into a project and that it very well might be something along these lines, something along some like super advanced propulsion system.

[B]

Mark Anderson had the same conversation with the White House, right. Talking about classifying AI technology and math and that they've done it before.

[A]

What is this? Justin Trump says he's staying away from his New Jersey golf club amid the drone sightings. The government doesn't know what's happening. Our military knows they know what's happening. Oh, the government knows what's happening. Our military knows where they took off from, they know where it came from. And where it went. Something strange is going on.

[C]

Play the video.

[A]

Yeah, sure, let's hear it.

[B]

Government knows what is happening. Our military knows where they took off from. If it's a garage, they can go right into that garage. They know where it came from and where it went. And for some reason they don't want to comment. And I think they'd be better off saying what it is. Our military knows and our president knows. And for some reason they want to keep people in suspense. I can't imagine it's the enemy because if it was the enemy, they'd blast it out.

[A]

Even if they were late, they'd blast it.

[B]

Something strange is going on.

[A]

For some reason they don't want to tell the people.

[B]

And they should, because the people are really. I mean, they happen to be over Bedminster.

[A]

Want to know the two. They're very close to Bedminster. I think maybe I won't spend the weekend in Bedminster. I've decided to cancel my trip.

[B]

I don't want to comment on that. Two quick questions. First on vaccines.

[A]

Okay.

[C]

I didn't want to comment on intelligence briefing.

[B]

We can figure this out, Joe. Like I said, it's a hard problem, but it's not an unsolvable problem. Like there are technologies that we could go out in the field within a couple weeks, employees, see if we can find the RF signals and try to trace them back. Right. We don't have to rely on the government for us. Let's do it.

[A]

Well, how would we do it?

[B]

Well, come join American for Safe Aerospace.

[A]

What do I have to do?

[B]

Come to my website, saferowspace.org we'll go.

[A]

Out there, go to that website. Let's see what we got to do.

[B]

We're almost the largest UAP organization in the world right now.

[A]

Really.

[B]

And you know, when I talk to people in Congress and the executive branch, you know, I point to them and say, hey, you know, we're 13,588 people care about this issue, right? This allows us to be able to go in there and talk seriously about this conversation.

[A]

So, Jamie, sign up, put in your email there. Don't show the world your email, though. Jesus Christ. They're going to know, Jamie. They're going to hear the amount of clicks that you make. These fuckers, they're very clever.

[B]

We could get us to the largest UAP organization in the world right now in this, in this show, Joe.

[A]

Well, there you go. Now we're 13,589, Jamie, so what would you do? So now that you've joined. What can you do?

[B]

We've been working with submitting operators.

[A]

Oh, boy. How. What does your submit report inbox look like? How many schizophrenics are in there?

[B]

Well, you know, it's not. It's not too bad, honestly, really. You occasionally get, you know, your people that are questionable.

[A]

How do you separate the wheat from the chaff, as it were?

[B]

It's pretty easy. You know, we focus on commercial aviators, military aviators, veterans. We receive reports from the random person on the ground. But what's really interesting, because of the work we've been doing, so many people, so many pilots have felt more comfortable reporting every major airline seeing this. I've talked with pilots from every major airline. Some of them are standing up their own UAP working groups within their. Within their airlines to be able to report on this. I'm working closely with them on this. But what's interesting is we get these reports from pilots, and we can often then see similarities or even perhaps the exact same object that's being reported by people on the ground. So one particular example, over Atlanta Airport a few years ago, there was a relatively large object, brightly lit, about 8,000ft over Atlanta. Four or five commercial airliners called it in. ATC didn't know what it was. The object started to accelerate level due south, and then to what I call, like, conventional speeds, as fast as an airliner, and then took off much faster, continuing due south. And all these pilots witnessed it. We received those reports. And the next day we received a report from, you know, a random lady in Florida that happened to be basically due south from Atlanta. She took a picture of the object. Exact same object. Right.

[A]

So do we have access to that photo?

[B]

I do.

[A]

Can we see it?

[B]

I don't have it. I could.

[A]

I could pull it on your fucking screen.

[B]

I'll text it to you when you have that.

[A]

Jamie, wouldn't that be like your wallpaper? I would have that. I would have, like, Psych. You know, at Apple, you could cycle from a bunch of wallpapers. I'd put my kids on when I get home, but through the day, top favorites.

[C]

Yeah, you can, if you have access.

[A]

I'd have my dog out of the ufo.

[B]

But, you know, getting back in the wifi, we can. We can, like. We can't figure this out, Joe. Like, I talk with engineer scientists, CEOs at drone companies, counter drone companies. Like, we can bring the capabilities. We could be out there in two weeks detecting and tracking these objects.

[A]

But what do you think about what Trump is saying, though? That they already do know and that they have tracked it, but the government just does not want to tell us.

[B]

So what's, what's that leave us?

[A]

Well, that leaves us either an enemy or us, Right? So it either leaves us. They're not concerned because this is something that they're doing with us. What if they're trying to get us comfortable because they know that some real UAPs are on the way? Like you want to go all the way out there if you really wanted to get people relaxed to the idea of flying saucers, like legitimate, whatever the hell they are, wherever the hell they're from, if you want. If you knew that was coming and you didn't want mass panic, what would you do? You would trickle it in. You would trickle it in slowly. You have a bunch of drones hovering over cities for weeks and months at a time. You would get people really accustomed to the news cycle having UAPs in it, and then real ones show up.

[B]

It doesn't feel like a trickle right now, though.

[A]

Well, you would do it this way. It's a trickle for me. I'm not seeing shit. Yeah, okay. I'm out here in Texas. We were at, we were looking at the sky last night. We went to the Mothership Christmas party. No UFOs. So it's a trickle in relatively to the world. Right. Like you have a bunch of them hovering over New Jersey. You have a few of them in San Diego. You have them in different areas. If you knew that UAPs were coming and you were in the government and you said, what can we do? Well, you'd probably bring in psychologists and these psychologists would explain human patterns of reacting to change in environments, especially radical changes in civilization and culture, and what can be done to mitigate the brutality of this process. The ultimate mass freak out that's going to come if UFOs come get people just so accustomed to UFO. Like the Mask thing. Right. Sounds like a ridiculous comparison. But like five years ago, if people were walking around wearing masks, you would go, what is going on? Is that of what's happening here? It would make you uncomfortable. Someone walked into a bank with a mask on you look. What the. Are you crazy? Now you have to do it. It's this very strange. So it took a while, but then it became normal.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

If they wanted to make it normal that things are in the sky. You put things in the sky and you put a bunch of things in the sky and you don't explain it and you have them there all the time and you let people speculate and you put a lot of wild theories of maybe they're looking for a nuke. Oh, they're looking for a nuke. Bobby heard they're looking for a nuke. Timmy got an email.

[B]

Don't worry, it's just aliens, not a nuke.

[A]

Well, it's probably not even. It's probably our shit. Or, you know, some unknown agency is involved in this. The government's not concerned, because they know exactly what's happening. That's why there's not shooting them down. That's why they're not scrambling jets. That's why they're not doing all these things. Trump's asking why they're doing this thing. If you knew something was coming, if you knew that these things that you're seeing floating in the sky that are a clear circle with a black square inside of it, and they can hover at 120 knots completely still, which doesn't make any sense. No heat signature. What is it? What the fuck is that? And what if a bunch of them are coming? Well, put a bunch of shit in the sky, freak these dummies out. That's what I would do. I would get all of our best drones and just fly them around, hover over Cities, hover over LaGuardia, hover over the White House. Who gives a. Just get people weirded out and get them accustomed to UFOs. You ever see District 9? Ever see that movie? Great movie, right? Yeah, really fucking fun movie. But it's kind of what would happen if aliens were here and there's, like, alien camps and we had them. We would just get used to it after a while. Yeah, we get used to shit. The way we live is so entirely alien to people that lived just 200 years ago that if you brought someone from the pioneer days and you put him in a Tesla and then you drove him to the movie theater and then you took him to a concert, like, what the fuck is going on? It would. And then you showed him your phone. You're like, I'm gonna FaceTime my mom. Look at that. That's my mom. What's up, Mom? You know, like, it's crazy, but we're accustomed to it. Yeah, we're so accustomed to it that people tell you to get off your phone. Hey, get off your phone. You're always on your phone. Live your life. Get off your phone. You're so connected to this bizarre new world that we live in. But it's accustomed. We're accustomed to it. It's normal. It's completely normalized. If I Wanted to normalize the idea of us being invaded. I just fucking put stuff in the sky all the time. Fly around with experimental aircrafts, do like a low trajectory over a city in some new stealth bomber. Freak these fucking people out, get them used to being freaked out and then when the real ones come, it's much less of a blow.

[B]

Well, some politicians, just as soon as yesterday, Chuck Schumer, Robert Garcia in the house, they've started to kind of use the whole drone and or UAP in their messaging. Right. They started to change their language. Did you get that photo, Jesse? Jamie or Jamie. Sorry, it's pull it up.

[A]

Young Jesse.

[B]

I sent it. Wrong guy.

[C]

Maybe that's why we were talking about Jesse before. That's why you can airdrop it to me. That'll probably be the fastest way.

[B]

Yeah, it says it's waiting. Is it the Jamie MacBook Pro?

[C]

Yeah, I have two. I'm looking at both of them. I didn't get anything.

[A]

You want to just text it to me and I'll send it to him? Yeah, okay, that works too, Techn. See even with this high level technology.

[B]

That we have, they're shutting us down.

[A]

They're shutting us down, bro. Yeah, I was thinking that last night. I was like, why does my Bluetooth keep skipping out when I'm trying to stream music? But I realized that there were so many people connected to the Bluetooth and if you have that Spotify thing on where you, you're sharing, it's like, I forget what it's called. But like a bunch of people can contribute songs. They can all like add to your little playlist while it's going on.

[B]

Dangerous.

[A]

It fucks yeah, it's dangerous. All of it's dangerous. I'm like that close to getting one of them crazy de Googled phones. But I'm like, how's that even work?

[B]

They had a good one. I get it.

[A]

I think, you know, Eric Prince apparently has a good one. He's got something called the unplugged phone and actually has a physical button you can switch where it deactivates the battery as well. Like separates, like a little piece of plastic goes between where the battery connects and so you're. Because even if you shut your phone off, they can still listen to you. Like that sounds so crazy, but it is absolutely true. Yeah, you can't take your battery out of your phone anymore. You know, it's like a convenient thing in order to make it waterproof. Sorry, your battery. And then it's also, it's like planned obsolescence so your battery's gonna die. You're gonna need an iPhone. 17. Ryan, come on.

[B]

They can sell new ones feature.

[A]

Come on. You need this in your life. You need this new Zoom feature. You need that extra 50,000 megapixels or whatever the fuck it is. You know, it's just. I don't know there. I think privacy is kind of gone. And I think it's going to be super gone with these quantum computers. It's over. Like, there's no privacy. And I think the real problem is the financial market. It's all numbers, right? It's all just ones and zeros. If somebody controls that before we do. If somebody breaks through with this type of technology and then just shuts all the other ones off, like, how many.

[B]

Bitcoin to the rescue, maybe?

[A]

I don't even know what is. Doesn't bitcoin get compromised? Google says its breakthrough quantum chip can't break modern cryptography. Sure. Like, they said it like this. Now we can't even break any of your codes. The Willow chip is not capable of breaking modern cryptography. Well, listen, I don't believe that, first of all. And second of all, my real concern is this is one step in this. We are about to go off of a technological cliff. This is one step. ChatGPT was one step. They're about to do chat GPT5, which is magnitudes greater power than ChatGPT, which is supposed to be like a giant leap. Chat, okay? And that ain't shit. That ain't shit compared to AGI, which they think 2025. So artificial general intelligence and then connected to a quantum computer. And Google is literally talking about they have plans to put their own nuclear power plants to power their AI systems. It needs so much power. They want three nuclear power plants.

[B]

That's why.

[A]

What are you about to do? Like, what are you doing, you fucking eggheads? What are you doing? Are you guys making God? Like, what the fuck are you doing? Do you even know what you're doing?

[B]

This movie, I swear, it hasn't even made yet.

[A]

And the problem is, if you don't do it, our enemy is going to do it. And we're so shitty at communicating with other human beings all across the world that we've been stealing resources and overthrowing governments for so long that nobody trusts us. And then while all that's going on, we're in the middle of creating an artificial intelligence that's infinitely smarter than us and might be working in parallel universes. Like, if you can. If you can do an equation. And you're telling me that this equation, through these quantum computers, is proof of a multiverse? Like, what happens if AGI gets connected to the multiverse? Do you even know? Are you just doing it? Do you even know? You guys even. Do you. Can you tell me what's the best case scenario? What's worst case scenario? Can you tell me, like, what you've thought about? Or instead of just fucking all gas, no breaks, and everyone's all gas, no brakes, we're all fucking hot rodders on the highway headed towards this weird thing that no one really knows what it's going to be, but everyone agrees it's the greatest technological breakthrough the human race has ever experienced. And it's happening so fast. And most people are like, what? What's going on? What are they doing over there? Most people, if they're not listening to podcasts, they're not on Twitter every day, and they're not on Facebook, and they're not really paying attention to this stuff. Most people are, like, blissfully unaware we're about to awaken a God. Yeah, blissfully unaware we're about to connect to some insane technology that hasn't even been. It's. It's so insane that it's sort of like one of those things where somebody tries to tell you how many stars there are in the universe. You know what?

[B]

Like, can't comprehend it.

[A]

Your head goes, what does that mean? Like, what are the. What's the number? What? Like, when they were saying that it can do. It can compute something that all the world's supercomputers, it would take some septillion number of years to do that. It can do it in 15 minutes. What are you even saying? I don't even know what you just said. I know. That's. I can. If you told me how many zeros to write, I could probably keep doing it until I got to the right amount of zeros. I don't know what the fuck that means. Yeah, my brain's. My brain's good for, like, 150, 500 people. Those three. That looks like about 3,000 people. I was at the Formula One racetrack. I'm like, how many people are in this? We're seeing Eminem. Like, how many people are here? I took a guess. Like, 50,000. I don't know. It's 110,000. It was like, I was rough by 50,000. My brain doesn't understand numbers. And then you get to millions. Imagine, like, looking at a group of people. Oh, that's about 2 million. No, you can't do it. You can recognize like 150, about 150 people. When things get big, they just get too weird. And the universe is insanely big, Insanely big. So your brain just doesn't do it. It just. Everybody's brain, even the most. Neil DeGrasse Tyson. You get a good astrophysicist, get one of those guys. They're not going to be able to. The brain's not built for it. So this thing is so much more powerful than even that. Even the whole universe as a computer. As a computer. Like that doesn't even make sense. And they're just like, what are we doing?

[B]

We have AI, we have quantum. We have mysterious objects showing up on the.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

On the coast. It does seem like a lot of things converging right now.

[A]

Well, if I was an advanced civilization that had already passed this stage, maybe this is like a common stage. Maybe this is just like how bees all over the world make beehives. They all do the same thing, right. Maybe this is a strange stage that intelligent life gets to when it reaches a point of technological sophistication where it can create an artificial version of a thinking being. And then that thinking being, of course, creates infinitely better versions of itself and figures out a way to harness power in a way that's just we can't even comprehend, which is what a quantum computer connected to AGI would be able to do. Maybe that's like. Maybe they know that this happens and they're like, oh, it's about to happen. And so then they come like, wasn't there a meeting? Some sort of a. This is another good tinfoil hat one. I was like, ooh, what are they talking about? There was some super top secret meeting with the people from the James Webb Telescope because of something they had discovered. There was something that they had seen that they decided. And I don't know what that means. You know, if you really wanted to get terrified, you'd say, oh my God, an asteroid's coming. And it might be that, or it might be there's some new thing that sort of rewrites the date of the beginning of the Big bang, which is. They're kind of starting to talk about doing that now. They're trying to. There's some people that want to push the creation of the universe back to about like 22 billion years instead of like 13 point whatever it is now.

[B]

Who cares? Why keep that secret? You know, that's not going to freak people out, but.

[A]

Well, that's. I'm just being charitable. I'M saying, like. Or there's something out there, or there's something that they know is headed our way. You know, it is. I mean, it is possible. We're doing it. We send things to Mars, right? And if we know that we're going through this thing right now where we're about to create a AGI, we're about to implement quantum computing in this country, who knows what they're doing in other countries. If this is just like a thing that beings go through and we get past this and then we find another planet out there that's also like dropping nuclear bombs on it, we would probably start circling that planet and making sure they don't fuck the whole thing up. I mean, it just seems like to be you, it's probably insanely difficult to get intelligent life to the position that we're in right now. In a volatile universe that's subject to natural disasters, asteroid impacts, super volcanoes, earthquakes, tsunamis, all different things that could wipe out technology and bring it back to the caveman days. You know, if all that is known and this is going on all throughout the universe, it'd probably be in their best interest to sort of protect this investment in evolution and not have us knock back to the Stone Age and have to start all over again and not have us nuke ourselves to the point where it was like 13 of us left, you know.

[B]

Well, outside of. Outside of, you know, us nuking ourselves, what do you think that the Trump administration, oncoming Trump administration, should do about the UAP topic? Have you thought about that?

[A]

Yes, I have. He couldn't tell me anything. I tried to get it out of him. He wasn't. He wouldn't tell me shit. He basically, you know, I've seen some things. I know some things. Transparency. I think it's very important. I think. Peel the fucking band aid off. Tell us what you're doing. Tell us what you know. And if you can't, I have to think that it's a military intelligence thing. Like, you don't want the enemy to know what you're capable of, which I totally understand. You know, that's what's going on, and that's why they can't tell us. That actually makes sense. But if it's not that, and it's that we are experiencing contact on a regular basis with something that we can't explain or understand. You don't have the right to that. You don't have the right to that information. That's not yours. That's the human races. Like, people love to have Fucking super top secrets that no one else can know. And you're in the inn, but you can't have that one. You can't have that one. If you're telling me that you have to do it because we've developed some sort of a gravity propulsion system that's infinitely superior to anything the Soviet Union has or the Russia has or China has, fine. That's not my business. I'm not in the business of the military and national security. If that's why you can't tell us, I totally understand. But if you are in contact with fucking aliens and you know they exist, you know there's something that visits us, whether it's from another dimension or whether it's from another planet, that's not yours. That's not yours to tell. You can't treat us like fucking babies. Like we can't handle this if you actually have recovered a crashed ufo. Look, I understand the implications of national security if you're trying to back engineer that thing. I understand that. If you're saying, like, we have to get to this, if China gets this, this is a game changer, we're fucked. I get it. Anything else you have to tell us? Because it doesn't make any sense that you. Some unelected official who. Some guy who's working in coordination with Raytheon or whatever the fuck you're doing. You can't keep that shit secret. That's the world's information. You know, that should be a crime. This is something the human race needs to know. We didn't know it was bullshit. We need to look again. If it's our stuff. And we can't say anything about it because we can't let China know that we have that. And we did huddle up these fucking physicists in some obscure college, and we did create some wild shit that the rest of the world is not really ready for or doesn't understand yet. Maybe we're way ahead of the curve in that. Other than that, you got to fucking tell us. You got to tell us what the fuck is going on.

[B]

I agree with you.

[A]

And how is it happening? Like, back in 2004, this is where it gets squirrely. Where it gets squirrely is like, in 2004, we didn't even have a fucking iPhone, okay? So in 2004, everybody had flip phones. You were the shit. If you had a Motorola razr, you were living in the future, you know, so that's not. It's not feasible that you would have something that moves like the Tic Tac in 2004. That's not feasible. That doesn't make any sense to me. That you have something that can go from 50,000ft above sea level to 50 in a second. What, like what, what is what, what's it made out of that it doesn't disintegrate? Like what, what is that? How fast is that? What the does that even mean? That's space. You, you go from space to the surface of the water in a second.

[B]

How it's equivalent of multiple nuclear bombs going off and energy expenditure.

[A]

How is that possible in 2004? That doesn't even make any sense to me. So if it's not ours and if it's not some back engineered stuff, then what's going on?

[B]

I think there's two conversations that kind of go on in this topic and I think they both help each other out. And you've been talking about it right now. They don't have the right to keep these essential pieces of knowledge from us about our universe. Right. And I see that as the conversation around disclosure. Right. What does the government know? What are they going to reveal to us? And we can integrate it into our knowledge. But I think there's an as important side of the conversation called discovery, if you will. Right. But what can we learn in the public sphere outside of the classification window that allows us to understand what's going on outside of the reins and control of the government itself? And I feel like they're mutually supportive. Right. The more disclosure and conversation there is within government, the more that people are motivated on the outside to investigate this and research it and invest into it, and the more that that work is done, it pressures the disclosure side of the conversation to keep up with the conversation and share with it. Now, I don't know if we're going to get to a point of full disclosure like you just talked about without increased pressure on the discovery side, on the public side. Because I think they would be content to keep that information quiet.

[A]

I don't know if Trump would be content to do that. You know, and I don't know if Tulsi would be content to do that either. You know, if she's going to be. She's what, the Director of National Intelligence?

[B]

If she's confirmed.

[A]

Yeah, if she's confirmed. I have a feeling she's gonna tell people. But here's the thing. It's like what we were talking about before. If it is a national security issue and fuck, how is it not? Right. Like if Bob Lazar is telling the truth. Right. Let's go to the wackiest of the wacky ones, right? Because Bob's story. I don't mean because Bob's wacky. I mean because it's 1989. Okay, so we're in the 80s, right? Cars suck. Fucking, you know, fighter jets of the 1980s. Imagine like the fighter jets that you flew in comparison to a fighter jet from, like 1983.

[B]

Yeah. No Internet really to speak of, even back then.

[A]

Yeah, there was like a few computers connected, right, by physical cords or something, probably. But that time period, we did not have what he was describing, if what he was describing is accurate. And then when you see that gimbal footage, that thing is moving exactly the way he described it, where he said it's built like your classic flying. That's actually an image of it right there. That. That little model that we have. This. That's what he described. So that this is what we're. 1989. He's saying that this thing, when it would fly, it would turn sideways, it would turn like 90 degrees, and that's where it would. Whatever the fuck kind of generator that's inside of it. It would point it in a general direction, want to go. That's what the gimbal did. The gimbal turned in that way. And what he's describing in this reactor is some sort of an element, and it's element 115. And this, whatever, whoever has created this thing is a stable version of this element. And when it's blasted with radiation, it creates some sort of a warp in space time. And in some way, whether it's gravity or whatever it does, it folds time and it just shoots off at insane rates of speed. But the things inside of it, I would imagine, aren't experiencing G force the way it does the traditional propulsion system. It's the only way a biological thing could survive. Right? But then I'm thinking, why would it even be biological if it's so much more advanced than us? We're already creating artificial limbs. We're already creating artificial eyes. We're already putting neural links into people. And we're fucking apes. We're apes and we're like, drill a fucking hole and stick some wires in there. Let's see what we can do to Timmy, you know? Now Timmy can fucking use his eyeballs. Like we had the. No, the guy was in there was the first ever neuralink. And he. His name's Noah, right? Noel. Noland. Sorry, Noland. Cool guy. I just have too many names in my head. No disrespect, but he has a. His. He uses eyeballs like a cursor. Like he can. He's. He says like an AIM bot when he's playing video games. So he plays video games better than people that can use their hands because he could. Like, he shoots, like, exactly where he's looking at, which is nuts. So how. How many years have to pass? Think about from like 2004, no iPhone to today, what we've got and meta virtual reality sets. How many years have to pass before it's more effective to go through the world being completely integrated into, like a. An artificial creation?

[B]

Not much.

[A]

Not much where. We're cyborgs. Not much where. Well, why would you want regular eyes? Your kid has regular eyes. That's crazy. Get them the new eyes. They have infrared radar. They can detect gases you can move away from. You know, it's like safety. It's better for you. You see better. You never go blind. When they go bad, they replace them. Everybody would just get the fake eyes.

[B]

It's just like a jet, right? I mean, fighter jets, they still be barrelling around out there looking for objects, looking for targets. But, you know, we're able to integrate and update all the technology that allows us to interact with the world. It's not put right into our brain yet, although they are working on that.

[A]

So maybe those things are what happens when technology and biology integrate over a long period of time. And they probably have eliminated all of our primate desires and weirdness that makes progress problematic. Greed and envy and trying to steal from resources from other countries and invasions and tribal behavior and manipulation. Propaganda and lying. They probably can all read minds, so there's no more lying. And they've no need for physical muscles. That's why they look like these little fucking spindly things. It kind of makes sense like that. That's where evolution and technology, if they merged, that's what it would look like. It would look like some weird fucking thing where they all look the same so nobody gives a shit. And they control one of the things. Lazar said these things have no switches or buttons or there's no controls inside of them. So he thinks they're controlling them. With their minds?

[B]

Yeah, with their intention.

[A]

Perhaps their mind is integrated and, you know, we think about that like that sounds so crazy, but how much crazier is that then typing things with your thumb? It's not that much crazier than what you can do by FaceTiming someone, like sending video. It's not that crazy. It's not that crazy that your brain could eventually Integrate completely with technology. Excuse me. And if you're a cyborg, then you have to worry about all the biological issues that we deal with, all the cancer and fucking pollutants. You don't have to worry about any of that shit. And then you're inside this ship that you're completely connected to and you can move it in any way you want.

[B]

Might as well be your body at that point.

[A]

It might as well be your body. And that's probably the future. That's probably the future here on Earth, even if we don't fuck this up.

[B]

You know, there's some. We talked about China a little bit and, you know, some theoretical ways they might be investing in these deeper technologies. But, you know, I've spoken with people that are intimately involved in deep technology at the National Science Foundations and others, and what brought them into this conversation, realized that we are falling behind on these capabilities because they attended an international consortium with, believe it or not, there were several members of. From China there, and they very specifically were asking for collaboration in some of these very deep technologies. So, you know, we talked about how, you know, gravity manipulation. Right. Kind of went dark for a while. Well, they call it something slightly different now. And it's something that China and others are actively researching. They call it extended electrodynamics. Same thing with cold.

[A]

What is the difference between saying gravity and extended electrodynamics?

[B]

Yeah, so extended electrodynamics. Electrodynamics essentially is a series of equations that we utilize to understand the electromagnetic spectrum. But there's like a large portion of those equations that we kind of just throw out because we don't utilize them in our normal engineering and scientific work. And so they're there, they're part of the equation, but we really don't know how to use them yet. And people are starting to think that by integrating the full understanding of electrodynamics through extended electrodynamics, that there are gravitational effects that pop out that we can utilize for technology.

[A]

Whoa.

[B]

And they're actively researching that, actively asking for collaboration on that from China. Same thing with cold fusion.

[A]

That lady that took off. That's what she was working on. Yeah, yeah. Tell her story, because it's a crazy one.

[B]

Well, I might not know it as full as you do, but there have been a number of instances within the United States where people have been trying to do work to manipulate gravity through large concentrations of energy, electromagnetic effects, things of that nature. And very recently, I forget the year. I don't know if you have that information, Jamie, but I think it was 2013 or around that timeframe where she had kind of a breakout paper which she was claiming was utilizing some older techniques and she was able to modify the mass of an object, essentially the force of gravity upon it. My understanding is that paper went out and then she essentially disappeared for a number of months. Like a year or two.

[A]

It's like a movie. Yeah.

[B]

And last I heard that she was potentially. They're still missing. Or there was some evidence that she might have gone to China.

[A]

I thought she died. I thought she went to China and then come back and died.

[B]

Did she come back and die?

[C]

She died.

[B]

She did die, yeah. Con.

[A]

Or did she working in the vault somewhere with masks now they just like, maybe she was the tall Biden.

[C]

She died, remember?

[A]

Was the tall Biden, remember that guy?

[C]

She died in 21. She gets struck by a car in 2014, caused permanent brain damage, resulted in Alzheimer's and then died in 21.

[A]

Wow. Was Hillary Clinton driving that car?

[B]

I was waiting for him to be like, yes, well, there's another tech too. Cold fusion. Right. Another 50, 60 topic that was ridiculed and went away. Well, it's also now the talk of certain fusion communities instead they call it low energy nuclear reactions. Instead of having a large fission or fusion reaction where a lot of heat and radiation comes out, you can do it slowly and incrementally and it releases a lot of energy, but it doesn't have accompanying radiation or super high levels of like random heat that comes out. And that's now something that very serious scientists within the fusion community are studying. And another technology that the China representative at that conference was asking for collaboration on. So are we investing in this? Is this work that we're doing in a dark lab? Because the open source community doesn't have the resources to be able to invest in this.

[A]

Well, let me ask you this. So if you were the government, let's just say they. If you were them and you wanted to work on some very, very advanced. If you had some knowledge that this stuff was possible, but you couldn't put it in the private sector because then it would get pilfered, it would get. You get infiltrated by Chinese spies, which happens all the time. Right. Wouldn't you hide it away? Wouldn't you squirrel it away somewhere? Like if you're doing the right thing, if you're being intelligent about it? Wouldn't. If I wouldn't. It essentially can't be public because it is in the interest of national security, because it's such a big deal. Like if they Develop a propulsion system that is completely reliant on gravity. And they figure out like they're bending time, just flying places instantaneously. If that's the future of space travel, like whoever gets there first, that's a big fucking deal. That's a really big deal. And that can't be out there in the public where China could steal the data, or Russia could steal the data, or Iran could steal the. You can't have anybody get a hold of this.

[B]

Well, here's the thing. If we're the sole superpower in the world, then I think it makes sense for us to hold that information back and develop it on our pace because we're not worried about competitors. They're going to catch up to us and potentially leap progress. But when we're operating in a world where we have near peer or peer adversaries such as China that do have the ability to potentially work on the same technology, that's where the model break down a bit. Right? Because if we're artificially slowing our progress in order to maintain the secrecy and someone is catching up to us, our only real solution at that point is to activate the millions of super smart and motivated people in our country to start pushing ourselves ahead, lest we get leapfrogged by countries that can do that through their own private investment, such as China.

[A]

That's a very, very, very good point. Because wouldn't it be awesome if we were the only superpower and then we could just like slowly get into this.

[B]

Stuff and maybe that's what's been happening for the past, you know, 20, 30 years after the Cold War.

[A]

That's where, that's where this whole area 51s4 shit comes into play. Because you have to think that if this is happening, this is around the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union, right? So this is like we had a.

[B]

Good 30 years, see what we could do, relaxed and.

[A]

Have you ever seen Lazar talk about it?

[B]

Yeah, I met him once.

[A]

What did you think?

[B]

I mean, it's the type of story that, you know, you only have your own beliefs to go off of because.

[A]

You know, because it's so crazy.

[B]

It's so crazy and it's, you know, it's one of those stories where there's. It's basically impossible to validate it. So, you know, like a lot of the stories I hear, you know, I often don't have all this evidence that I can work from. So I, you know, I throw it in the, in the database in my head and I look for comparisons, right Just like the gimbal video and how it maneuvers, like. Well, that's interesting. That kind of lines up. Doesn't totally validate the story, but, you know, that's kind of how I approach this topic. I don't. I'm not there to, like, immediately judge whether it's true or not true. It's just kind of additional information I can use. Just like that photo I sent you. Right. That is just some random lady in her backyard. But as it turns out, multiple pilots and commercial airliners saw the same thing. So, you know.

[A]

So this is the one that the commercial airline saw that was flying at about the same speed as a plane and then took off?

[B]

Yep. It was completely stationary and accelerated to the speed of a plane and then went way faster than that.

[A]

And what year was this again?

[B]

I think it was 22.

[A]

Wow. So this lady got a picture of it.

[B]

That's actually a picture from the pilot in the cockpit.

[A]

Looks like a plane.

[B]

Yeah, I have the one for the lady, too. It looks the same, except from the ground, but the same in.

[A]

That doesn't look like a plane to you? Doesn't that look like a plane, Jamie?

[C]

You can't tell? I mean, I don't know.

[A]

Doesn't it look like the front. Like the nose? I mean, I'm looking at Bigfoot through the woods right now. So it's one of those things, like, look, you can see his face. That looks like a.

[C]

Multiple light sources off the window, maybe even.

[A]

Bro, that's a cloud. That lady's tripping. That lady's tripping.

[B]

The thing is, like, air traffic control didn't have it on their radar unless.

[A]

You have a really good phone. Like, if you have a Samsung that gets like that 100x zoom, how much are you going to be able to see?

[B]

Yeah, that's why, you know, with these cases in New Jersey, what's most compelling for me are these. Like, they're not the images themselves, but it's these elected officials, you know, law enforcement officers and others that are, like, very flabbergasted at what they saw. Right. They're not just like, well, yeah, there's something. But, I mean, they're. They're pissed off. They're very confident what they were seeing was not normal. They're having a hard time putting words to it and having a proper photo. But as you can tell now, I think it's not easy to just put your iPhone up in the sky and grab a photo of something that's far away. Right. They're not designed for that.

[A]

They're not designed for that. They don't look that clean, you know, and even, I mean, the best phones, if you're. If something's flying through the sky, you're gonna get a shitty blurry image of it. Like you need some very high powered equipment to be able to zoom in, and then you need image stabilization to be able to lock it into place.

[B]

You know, there's so much like AI on phones that interact with your photo before you even see it. It's hard to even tell what you're looking at.

[A]

Yeah, well, that was the thing with the Samsung phones. They got in trouble because they were taking photos of the moon. It wasn't really a photo of the moon. Did you see how that got figured out?

[B]

No.

[A]

You can't slip things by the nerds, right? They're too fucking smart. And so these guys were kind of suspicious of whether or not this thing was actually taking a photo and zooming in and getting the photo of the Moon. So they put a blurry photo of the moon on a screen and then stepped to the back end of the room and zoomed in on the blurry photo that's on the screen and it filled it in with like, high resolution and showed you all the craters.

[B]

Oh, interesting.

[A]

Like, oh, it's bullshit.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And so they're trying to say it's AI, but it's not. You're not enhancing the image, you're creating it. There's no image there. Like, we know what the image is. The image is a blurry bullshit, and you turn it into a clear photo of the moon. So this is shenanigans.

[B]

Well, let me tell you, I think what needs to happen here to be able to better understand the situation. I think this applies for New Jersey, but also applies for the much broader kind of UAP conversation as well. So I told you about discovery, I told you about disclosure. I think we can only motivate the government so much by just knocking on the door and asking for information. There needs to be a public, unclassified scientific investigation into this from the perspective of trying to attack it as a scientific anomaly instead of trying to attack it from a request from the government to release new information. I think this should be a national priority, frankly. We need to have very senior people within the White House that care about this topic, that are leading the charge, perhaps at the Office of Science and Technology Policy somewhere at that level that can lead this conversation and start to employ different organizations in a public, unclassified manner, such as Department of Energy, such as the FBI and other reporting sources so that we can be able to gather this information, investigate it and then form theories about how we can detect it. Whether that be through NEXRAD data in the United States, whether that be through weather satellites, other large data sets that we can use to detect these disturbances and work with the Department of Energy to be able to put forward scientific ideas and then utilize their compute resources to be able to process and churn through all this data and see what pops out on the other side. And I think that we can bring in organizations such as a National Science foundation or National Science Council. We can bring in or, yeah, National Science foundation, excuse me, we can bring in offices such as the Office of Strategic Capital and start to actually support the public interest in this conversation by having people that, that now can access these large data sets and these large compute to be able to run experiments, to bring forward new data sets and technologies and have this be like a true national effort at a high level. I don't think that the current structure of the all Domain Anomaly Resolution Office within the Pentagon, serving as a whole of government point is going to be effective, especially considering that they are technically charged with investigating potential crimes of the Pentagon itself. Right. Conflict of interest there. So this needs to be raised to a much higher level and we have the resource in the United States to truly study this. And I think by doing that we can then, you know, potentially confirm what is being discovered through this unclassified method with classified sensors, but leave it so that it's repeatable and unclassified, so that the scientific and academic community can see the results of that and work off.

[A]

Of it, would there be an issue with, you would have to provide amnesty to the people that could potentially lied in these programs. So like if you, if you've diverted funding, if you've, you know, not been completely honest to Congress about where the funding is going and you've had some sort of a back engineering program or whatever they have. Would there be like criminal liabilities? Would there be issues where a bunch of these people could get prosecuted?

[B]

Potentially, yeah.

[A]

So that would, if I was them, I would, you know, I'd keep hiding it like fuck this, I don't want to go to jail. But if you wanted to get full disclosure, it would seem like the only way to effectively make it happen would be to give amnesty to the people that had committed these crimes. So it become a, become a real dilemma. If they were actually crimes, there could.

[B]

Be another way to approach it. So one thing, especially after the last hearings, we've heard is that there needs to be stronger whistleblower protection laws. Right. Maybe you've heard that. I've updated my thinking on that. I've done a lot of research on whistleblower protection laws in the United States, and it's actually quite interesting. You know, we've had whistleblowers from the executive branch whistleblow to the legislative branch in the past. We had the Church Committee. We've had thousands of people that have come forward and shared classified information with Congress outside the bounds of the executive order that allows for the creation of classified information. None of them have been ever prosecuted. Now, they may have faced ramifications such as a loss of security clearance. They may have lost their job. Right. Those are real risk, and I don't want to downplay them. But the way the system is currently set up, there's an executive order that allows for the creation of classified information. You have the National Security act that was created in Congress and signed by the President. And these are the two laws that essentially allow for the creation of that type of information. So when a whistleblower goes to Congress and shares that information, the congresspeople are just as susceptible and vulnerable, perhaps, to having unclassified or having classified information that they're not privy to. Right. So they're in legal jeopardy, in a sense, for there to be prosecutions in Congress or from the whistleblowers themselves, the Supreme Court would have to step in and adjudicate that ruling between that executive order and the National Security Act. And that's never happened. They don't want to step in on that legislation. And they've had, you know, I don't know how many years, but decades and opportunities to do so, but they choose not to. So we're in this kind of stalemate where by action, by inaction, whistleblowers have this unspoken protection, if you will, to come in and share that information, lest the Supreme Court step in and change their precedent for the past several decades. So there's no reason that any of these potentially susceptible whistleblowers that do fear legal ramifications for those activities couldn't come into Congress, set up a very quiet meeting, share what they have with these congresspeople, and allow them to then run with that information clearly away from any personal identification from that whistleblower. That's the world we live in now. We don't have whistleblowers doing that. And I think some of the messaging has been inaccurate, claiming that we need to have stronger whistleblower protection laws, because that's probably not going to happen. I don't think Trump wants stronger whistleblower protections. I don't think he wants to enable people that would be calling out actions of the executive branch to Congress strengthened. That's not necessarily aligned with some of the activities that happened with Colonel Vindman and the Ukraine incident, where they essentially utilize those whistleblower laws to share information with Congress about what they perceived as wrongdoings. So I don't see those laws getting stronger. But we're in this kind of weird, false dichotomy right now where people are asking for them and not willing to come forward. But ultimately, I think we just need someone to step up to the plate and come forward to Congress with this information to be able to move the conversation forward on the disclosure side.

[A]

So what you're saying to me, what it sounds like is like you're almost like, advocating for a complete restructuring of how the information gets disclosed instead of the way they're doing it now. Like, someone come in and sort it out. Like you. Why don't you do it?

[B]

I would if I was asked.

[A]

I bet you'd be asked. I hope you'll be asked, I should say, because I think you're uniquely qualified and obviously, like, very invested in this. Like, you wouldn't want someone who's not invested in this leading this. This is a super complicated, nuanced rabbit hole that you have to go down, and you have to, like, be balancing out all the possibilities in your head at the same time while you're trying to get this information out. And whatever you guys experienced, whatever those things were, if that isn't ours, we should probably know. Yeah, we should probably know. And I don't know what it is. I don't know if it is ours. I don't. I mean, I. I get that. If it is, you can't tell me. I get that. But if it's not, what's going on, what do you think it is? Like, if you had a guess, some of it's got to be ours, right?

[B]

In, like, the broader conversation or specifically New Jersey.

[A]

Well, broader conversation, yeah.

[B]

It's clear to me, based off of all my research and connections and conversations, a couple things. One, people are absolutely seeing things that seem to be exhibiting capabilities beyond state of the art. Like, boom, end of conversation right there.

[A]

This one that you sent me, I.

[B]

Mean, that's an interesting one. Yeah, I mean, multiple witnesses, seeing capabilities of craft operating in flight regimes that we don't have the technology to do. So that's step one. Step two is I've been a lot like a blind man touching an elephant. You know, I don't know necessarily it's an elephant yet, but I'm feeling a tail, feeling a trunk, feeling the foot. And what that. What the elephant represents is the government's classified work on this topic. Right. I've butted up against it through people that have been actively engaged in programs that are investigating this in ways that are not public. So I know that there is something there behind the scenes. I don't know how deep it goes. I don't know specifically the type of, like the total amount of work that's being done, but it's very clear to me that there are boundaries that I've touched, others have touched that represent that work. So it would make sense, it would be a line that the government would be very interested in this technology. And I think it's, you know, I think it's time that we've. If we put the proper protocols and processes in place so that the public can discover this information. We have the technology, Joe. Like, it's not that we don't have the technology. I mean, I'm personally working on space situational awareness sensors that we can put in space in order to maintain custody of these objects.

[A]

Now, if no one has ever gone full disclosure, no president, how much do you think they tell them? And what, if anything, could you even imagine would be a valid reason for not telling people?

[B]

I think that there was probably a presidential order at some point in the past that is likely still in effect. And, you know, unless another president is fully read in and countermands that order, then it's business as usual. And perhaps that's one of the reasons they don't tell presidents a lot of information on this is because they want to maintain the effect of authority, keep it in play so that another president doesn't countermand it.

[A]

Yeah, because none of them spill the beans. None of them, none of them feel obligated to tell the American public. You know, I think I can see both ways, though. That's the problem. I can see it from a point of a national security thing. If they're back engineering these things and trying to. If there's a race, it's essentially no different than if we engineered ourselves. Like at the end, someone's making it.

[B]

And we might have integrated some of these capabilities into some of our technology that we might look out the window and see. Right. But deep in the bowels of the system, you know, there might be capabilities that were discovered or motivated through the investigation of these Objects. Right. So I could see why they. I agree with you 100%. Right. And I don't believe that 100% of the information should come out. You know, I mean, I've worked in secured information, I've worked in the military. I understand the needs for these capabilities. But the core information, that we're not alone in the universe, potentially. There's no government on Earth that has the right to hold that information.

[A]

Agreed. I think everybody agrees to that. There's. There's no reason why they should. But that's human information. And it's. If we really, really, if we're really confronted by an absolute fact that we're not alone, it changes everything. We kind of know it, but we're not sure and we haven't seen it. And if you have seen it, you don't know what you saw. And what is that?

[B]

Think about how that would motivate us as a populace, right, to have this carrot on a stick out to say here's, here's how we access the rest of the galaxy. Yeah, right. Imagine what that would do to our technological innovation. How many millions of kids right now would go to school in order to be engineers and scientists, to be able to work on this? Oh, yeah, it would completely change the world. Maybe we'd have, you know, less Facebook apps and things of that nature and AI wrappers, but we would be working on deep, important technology that's going to unlock the rest of the universe to.

[A]

Us or would give in to our alien overlords because they're coming and they're going to be super powerful. And every civilization that we've ever encountered that was primitive always had a terrible go of it once we showed up.

[B]

Well, maybe we'd be better prepared.

[A]

Well, I would hope they wouldn't be us, that they would be past what. Look, human beings today, as you know, especially if you follow like Stephen Pinker's work where you look at crime and violence throughout history, human beings today live in the safest environment that's ever existed for people relatively overall, despite all of our problems, it's trending in a way of more peace. But if you think about no peace, I mean, no violence at all, none ever. Just like a complete, like complete shut off of everything. That's what you would have to be if you were a civilization that's eclipsing all the problems that we have here on Earth, that's bypassing all the war, all the bullshit, the destroying the environment, inequality and the allocation of resources and the control of the populace like that's all out the window with this super, super sophisticated society. I think that is that which should motivate us, like, probably more than anything to get our shit together, to realize like, oh, this is possible. Like, this is the trajectory that these intelligent species go through on their road to evolution, the road to enlightenment. And they bypass this terrible stage that we're at right now where we're worried that these drones are searching for nuclear bombs because someone might decide to do some sort of a terrorist thing. Because, you know, there's wars going on over the. If we could just know that that's. You can get past that.

[B]

It's like we're in a phase where our technological development is outpacing our social and moral development.

[A]

Or in our biological development, Just like you can only think of so many number. Like a number of so many things. You can't think of all the stars. I don't think our biology can keep up with the input of all this technology. I think we're getting numb. We're getting weirded. Weirdly numb to it, you know? And I think it's just so. It's so inescapable in today's society that if you want to be integrated into today's society, you have to have one of those goddamn phones. You have to be connected. Like we're. We're moving in this very particular direction. And it seems like if we get through this chaos, what these things that we're visiting that are visiting us. All of the things that people describe of telekinetic communication, telepathic communication, the ability to explain things to them in a way that like, clarifies what they're here for and why they're here. That's probably what we would do. It sounds exactly like what we would do if we could get past all the problems of being a human being in 2024 and all the violence and chaos and all the lying and propaganda. If we got past that, that's what we'd become. We'd become some star faring creature that's like completely enlightened and shows up and is just checking on the apes to make sure they don't blow themselves up.

[B]

It must be a hell of a time to come watch us, right?

[A]

Right. And if. If think about like technology and technology, evolution is always so much faster than biological evolution. Like, how far ahead are they? You know, if they're a million years, what does that even look like? What does that look like?

[B]

Do you hit a wall? Like, do they just quote unquote, know everything? Right, right. Or do. And then maybe that's what allows their moral compass and their biology to catch up.

[A]

Or, or maybe they're the robot custodians of the God creating intelligent beings and that all they're doing is sent for AI. AI created them and sent them out into the universe so that when the apes get to the point where they start making nuclear weapons and bombs and reactors and cold fusion and gravity, you like, just make sure they get through this okay. Boom. And then whatever the fuck quantum computing connected to AI becomes, that's what it's like. We're farming that.

[B]

That's something I thought about when talk about biological creatures and in these crafts. It could be that those are not things that traveled here from far away and are just kind of hanging out, right? That might have all the time. They might have created these objects, even the biological substrates, if you will, here using local materials and put them together. Because perhaps biological creatures are more appropriate for the type of interactions they need to do instead of a fixed machine, right?

[A]

Oh, wow. Yeah, that completely makes sense, right? Like if you can create life, which they're very close to being able to create fake artificial life, like in like single cell forms. And haven't they created like, aren't they like creating like artificial embryos? I believe they have started to create like animal embryos.

[B]

And that's just from scratch. I mean, they could beam over, you know, DNA sequences and fabricate them here.

[A]

Yeah, but that, that seems like totally doable. And that would make sense how they could breathe our air too. You just engineer it so that whatever this creature is, it does your bidding and just. They're the custodians. They're. There's. They just hang around them. They're not even like advance aliens. Synthetic human embryos created in groundbreaking advance. This is so crazy. These are human. I didn't think they were human. Synthetic human embryos using stem cells and a groundbreaking advance that sidesteps the need for eggs or sperm. Oh, it's over.

[B]

We're fucked. Yes.

[A]

So I'm so anxious. So scary, man. It's so scary. So if we can do that now, something that's a million years more advanced, it would just like probably send some ball of energy down. That energy would create a spaceship and the beings inside of it. And like they're sending someone a picture through a cell phone. It'd be that simple. Yeah, and that's probably, I mean, it's probably what it is. They're probably the custodians. You know, we think of them as like Advanced alien beings. It's probably not real. Probably advanced alien beings is AI and it's the most advanced because it just goes from nothing to God. And maybe it needs custodians.

[B]

Yeah. The only reason, the only thing that would change my mind on that is if they did truly have some kind of faster and light travel that allowed them to transport, you know.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Physical objects from extreme distances to nearby. Right. Then. Because then the cost of sending that information is irrelevant because they can just send things over. So, you know, I could see both sides of it. But it's something interesting to think about. You know, imagine the science and technology fields that a full understanding of this conversation would open up. I mean, it would open up fields of knowledge that we can only imagine right now we only see in sci fi movies.

[A]

Right. Even if we don't understand how they're doing it, if proven to be true, everybody has to stop and go, okay, what's going on here? Like, how is that thing moving that quickly? Like, where is it coming from? How did it come from 2000 light years away? Like, how is that even possible? And then they have to figure it out. And how, I don't know. I mean, maybe what, what is your take on the crashes? Because that to me is always like, God, if you're so advanced, you can come here from another galaxy, why you keep crashing? Like, what is it? And then there's, I'm sure you're aware of Diana Pasolka and her stuff, they call them donations. Like the people that research these things, whether or not that's even real. But the people that, I haven't seen it. The people that, the people that say they go there and find these fragments on the ground, they refer to it as donations.

[B]

One thing I like to think about is, you know, their planet. You know, we're making assumptions here, but their planet might be designed a different way. Right. Like their atmosphere might have significantly less oxygen. It could be much thicker. And so they might have had, they might have bypassed this whole period where they had rocket propulsions and gas shooting out the back. And so they, they might have taken them longer to get to space, but maybe they did so with a much more developed technology. So then they, they apply that technology, they come over here and now they're in a regime that perhaps they were unexpecting. There's, you know, gravity disturbances, there's, you know, more oxygen in the air. There's different things that perhaps they either weren't expecting or just was different than their home environment. And then, oh, by the Way there's these stupid apes that are shining stuff at us that are launching nuclear weapons and actually knocking us out of the sky. There's electromagnetic interference. So I could see a logic there that shows that, you know, we make the assumption that if they're here, they're gods, right? They can do anything. Maybe that's not the right way to think about it.

[A]

Well, also maybe think about the sheer numbers. So if we think that these things are real, so let's imagine they're actually coming from another planet. So if they are coming from another planet and they're capable of coming here, that means other planets are capable of sustaining intelligent life that can be star farers. So if that's possible here and there, it's probably all over the place. So if it's all over the place, who knows how many numbers of things you're dealing with and how far advanced they are. And like you said, like, what technology did they develop? We think, we always think technology is like completely linear. And we think that, like what we did and the way we did is the only way it could be done. But the best evidence that's not true is Egypt. The best evidence that that's not true exists. You can go touch it with your hand. You can see photographs of it online. We don't know what the fuck they did. And whatever they did was super advanced for 4,500 years ago. We don't know what machines they used. We don't know how they cut it. We don't know how they measured it. We don't know shit how they figured out to put it north, south, east and west almost perfectly. No one knows. No one understands how they got the stones there. It's all speculation and guesswork. But whatever it is, it's insanely impressive and a different sort of way of implementing human ingenuity and engineering and thought into construction. It's very different than anything we've done. So it's a clear path. Like they had an enormous amount of resources in that area and they had sustained a civilization there for thousands and thousands of years. To the point there. They had developed methods and technologies that we don't understand today because they're not here anymore.

[B]

The records are. I love the work that Graham Hancock has been doing. And I see it as almost like a parallel conversation than the one we're having. I mean, there's something here. A lot of people can go out and look at it. I mean, sure, I've never been in the pyramids, but the information is there. If you're willing to go look at it and there's this massive stigma within the academic community to say, no, no, that's not right. Because they're in the zero sum game. They're all trying to win the next contract and grant, and they just want to stay right within the line of what's acceptable. And he's bringing forward very interesting points about a time period that I think we all understand now is a lot less understood than we thought.

[A]

There's also parallel civilizations that coexisted with European civilizations that are very similar to what we know about in history that were like the Mayans, for instance. Like, what the fuck was going on in Mexico? Like, how come? Because we know when that was. Like, they're like, when Cortez visited, was it Cortez or Cabeza de Vaca who visited the Mayans and wrote about it? It might have been Cabeza de Vaca. I think it's in that move, the book A Strange New Land. But when they first encountered these people, before they gave them diseases, they had this insane civilization with gold headdresses and ornate dressing. And everybody's like, what is this? There's insane stone structures and this human sacrifice. The fuck are you guys doing here? This is a totally, completely different type of civilization. While in Europe, they're wearing fucking wigs and they're trotting around and like all coexisting. So we know that human beings can go in very different directions in terms of the way their society develops and the technologies they implement. Why wouldn't we think that that would be the case with everything in the known universe? Like everything in the known universe, there's probably an infinite number of paths that intelligent creatures can go to creating technology. And like you were saying, some of them might take like way longer than our path of, you know, implementing condust combustion engines and electronics. And they might be using frequencies, they might be using some sort of different way of generating energy that we don't understand.

[B]

Maybe their planet has super strong electromagnetic fields, right? And so they can leverage that in a way we can't.

[A]

Well, the thing Lazar was talking about was that this planet had a stable version of this element 115. But I think. I mean, even. What does that even mean? What does element 115, if there's 114. Element 115 is whatever the fuck you find next, right? If you don't know what it is, like it. And it was all theoretical until they. The Large Hadron Collider, they developed a version of it for you know, a millisecond, so they know that it's a real thing. He's saying they have a stable version. Like, well, if you live in a completely different solar system and a completely different planet with completely different. There's planets out there that are made entirely of diamonds. Did you see that one? Yeah, yeah, about a giant diamond in the sky.

[B]

Get up.

[A]

Yeah. What the fuck? Like, I think that there's probably an infinite number of ways intelligent life evolves, and some of it probably doesn't look anything like us. Like octopi, like octopuses, they have no need because they're in the ocean and there's no houses in the ocean. So they have no need to like, build things. But they're super smart, man. They open up jars. They figure out a way to get out of a fish tank, walk across the floor, climb into the next fish tank, kill a fish, eat it, climb back and go back in their tank.

[B]

That's why I don't own. Own a squid because. Or an octopus because if I saw that in the middle of night, it would freak me the out.

[A]

They're really smart, man. They're weirdly smart. And we don't even know why or how, you know? Yeah, they have eyes that separated from. I mean, but they like, whatever. An eye was developed and I was developed for them and an eye was developed for us, like, and we branched off from the evolutionary chain like, who knows how many hundreds of millions of years ago.

[B]

I learned a pretty interesting little tidbit here. You know, I mean, the octopus apparently is. DNA is not like anything else on this planet. But apparently the Hawaiians have a ancient tradition that octopus basically came from the sky. Isn't it interesting?

[A]

That is interesting. But, you know, with panspermia, they do think that it's possible that planets, when they get hit by asteroids, a big chunk of it can fly off and the DNA from that rock can enter into this new environment. And with some things like spores, spores survive in a vacuum. That's one of the thoughts about psilocybin mushrooms, that perhaps they were. They arrived here from somewhere else on a rock, which is. It's a real possibility. Like, that's where most of the iridium that they find when they have those big. When they do those big digs and they find that layer of iridium that's near where there's an asteroid impact. That's all just shit that came from space.

[B]

Yeah, I mean, if you look back at like the evolution of humans to monkeys, to, you know, fish and then, you know, Multicellular organisms and the introduction of the mitochondria, smaller, simple single celled organisms. There's a very linear path of evolution. And very early on there's a massive jump where we went from extremely simple bits and pieces to essentially this big jump in complexity for these small systems. And there's a theory out there that jump occurred due to seeding from elsewhere, that perhaps the whole path is linear and it occurred over time, perhaps. And they think the time period is like several billion years for the evolution from these, these components to get to essentially a single celled organism. That these components evolved independently in space, perhaps feeding off a gamma radiation or other gamma energy or other energies that are out in space. And so that evolutionary process did take billions of years. It just didn't occur on a particular planet. And then over time, as meteorites hit the Earth, then we see this uptake in complexity because of the arrival and then the further evolution of the biological chain that led to us. And it's pretty interesting. Kind of tied to that theory is that the Big Bang happened and things gradually cooled down. I mean, there was a point where, and I think the number is like 500,000 years, where the universe was essentially room temperature. Everywhere in the universe had a distance distribution of temperature that was equivalent to what we're sitting in right now before it continued to cool off and get weird. So there could have been these opportunities in the universal process that allowed for the development of lifelike components that eventually went out to seed the universe, which would be a really interesting concept because it would lead us to believe that this probably happened in multiple places and not just here.

[A]

That is a fascinating idea that it's like seeds and I mean, that's the function that these asteroids have when, that's what, that's what happens when they land and they spread whatever's on them. You could imagine, like that's the function of asteroids slamming into planets, knocking chunks off, and flying that stuff into space.

[B]

That's why we have water here. You know, I mean, we didn't just organically like create water on this planet. It came from asteroids and other debris.

[A]

It's a comet, right?

[B]

Like comets. Yeah, yeah.

[A]

A lot of comets are just made out of just ice, right?

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Which is nuts. There's a chunk of ice bigger than Manhattan flying through the sky.

[B]

Imagine. Or diamond.

[A]

It leaves it.

[B]

Right.

[A]

And leaving trails. And some of them they can mine. Like that's, that's going to be really fascinating once they figure out how to do that. Land on an asteroid and mine it.

[B]

Yeah. Trillion dollar industry.

[A]

That was a Bruce Willis movie, right? Wasn't it?

[B]

Well, I think they're trying to blow one up.

[A]

I think it was. It was a Bruce.

[B]

Miners. There.

[A]

Armageddon.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

All right. They weren't mining. Right.

[B]

They trained miners how to be astronaut because that was clearly the easiest choice of trading astronauts to mine.

[A]

Well, this. We were getting to that. The James Webb Telescope Secret. Secret Squirrel meeting. Did you find anything on that? Nothing.

[C]

I mean, I don't know what specifically I was supposed to be looking for.

[A]

Okay, let's try. Let's try it. Let's say James Webb Telescope, top secret meeting, urgent discovery.

[C]

I've had everything, but I have.

[A]

Give me the. Give me stuff. That's shady.

[B]

There was a congressman that had a classified meeting about the James Webb.

[C]

Yeah, it's like they have many discoveries. I don't know.

[A]

Oh, no, no, no. Not. Not discovery. Top secret.

[B]

Classified.

[A]

Classified meeting. Discovery. Come on, Jamie, indulge me.

[C]

You know, we don't usually type. Put classified stuff out there.

[A]

Yeah, do it. Put it out.

[C]

NASA denies existence of classified briefings on James. This is two months ago.

[B]

So. Red.

[A]

Oh, so they definitely happened. Yeah, it definitely happened. If they denied it.

[C]

I mean, I don't.

[A]

It's probably bullshit. It's probably a fun thing. NASA denies it. In recent weeks, rumors spread rapidly on social media. I think I was involved in that. Suggesting that NASA's James Webb telescope had made an extraordinary discovery, potentially alien life. The members of Congress had been briefed about it. The rumors intensified after U.S. representative Andre Carson, who had previously chaired a congressional hearing on identified aerial phenomena, declined to answer a question about classified briefings when asked by. I don't know who that is. Run by journalist Matt Lasso on X last. Excuse me. Laszlo on X.

[B]

He's been doing good work on the UAP topic.

[A]

Matt Laszlo.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Shout out to Matt. Speculation prompted a Freedom of Information act request filled by the Black vault on September 22, 2024, seeking any records, classified or unclassified, about James Webb Space Telescope briefings provided to Congress, particularly related to the telescope's findings. The request aimed to clarify whether any congressional briefings had been held again about significant discoveries made by the telescope, which has been in operation since 2021. So the response was a copy of records, which includes videos, photos, electronic or otherwise, of all briefings about James Webb's telescope and program made for Congress. I ask that you include all classified and unclassified briefings on the James Webb Telescope program or briefings on findings made by that program. It says Those searches located no records responsive to your request, Neither confirm nor deny. I mean, if I was hiding the fact we're gonna get hit by an asteroid, that's how I would do it. I wouldn't tell people. I wouldn't respond to this feed. What Freedom of information? What, are you gonna put me in jail? We're gonna be dead in 16 months. There's a planet heading our way. You know, planets get hit by other.

[B]

Planets sometimes, or maybe they detected signs of life around an exoplanet.

[A]

That's the fun one. The fun one is signs of life. The fun one is an actual spaceship. The fun one is something that they can't explain that changes everything that we hold dear and believe to be true, whatever that means.

[B]

You know, we've gone down the rabbit hole with some. Some fun, speculative conversation about what's out in space. But I just want to make the point that, like, this is still a solvable problem here on planet Earth, right? Like, we can't let, like, the fun speculation of what's going on out in the universe stop these kind of stodgy academics and others to say, well, this is not relevant to me. This is not practical. There's nothing here. Right? Like, we need an intense focus on this within our government at the highest levels, not just within an organization with the Pentagon. And we need to engage our scientific and academic community and remove the stigma at the highest levels. I'm hoping Trump will do that.

[A]

You think the bottleneck has been the security clearance of it all, or the bottleneck has been the lack of transparency, if people just knew, that would be the end of it?

[B]

I think so. I think that would absolutely. And, of course, by people knowing they're going to want to have some evidence that they can use to do research on. But even if the President just came out the other day or, you know, in the next week or in a few months and said, we don't know what they are, we have moderate to high confidence that they don't originate through any known adversary or nation on Earth. Help us figure this out.

[A]

But Biden and Harris have been, like, the last managers at Blockbuster Video. You know what I mean? The fucking gig was up. Like, don't even show up.

[B]

It's over.

[A]

This. The building's going under. The lease is done in two weeks. Fuck this.

[B]

I understand.

[A]

Not even at work.

[B]

I understand. It's a policy of the Biden administration to downplay this topic at the highest levels.

[A]

You understand that this is like a mandate. If this is something I don't Know.

[B]

If I want to use the word mandate, but their policy, this is their instructions. Yeah. So I think with the folks that are friendly to this topic coming in with the Trump administration, administration open up a very key opportunity window for us to move this conversation forward.

[A]

When you look at it from their perspective, what would rationalize trying to downplay this? Like, if you look at it from their perspective, like, what could possibly be the case where they think it would be good to propagandize or sway people in that direction, to stop our adversaries.

[B]

Being aware of the reality situation and from investing into it and proceeding past and because, again, we're artificially constraining ourselves. Right. Because we're trying to keep it a secret.

[A]

Right.

[B]

So now that game is changing. Right. That game is changing because it, you know, it appears that China is making investments and has a large amount of interest in this topic. And we're at a point now where if we continue to do that, we're going to simply fall behind. And I think there's been this delay within the Biden administration to just kind of ignore that problem for the next, you know, for whatever problem is more relevant. He's probably more, you know, worried about his son and the legal issues he's in than this massive issue.

[A]

I don't think he's running anything. Like, I really do think he's the last manager at Blockbuster right now. That's what I think. I just. I don't. She's not even showing up for it. I never see her anywhere anymore. It's unfortunate. They checked out. It's over.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

But that. That. The problem with that is. Okay, then who. Who's running it and why. Why. You know, why are you holding back that stuff?

[B]

Whoever's been running it, I think.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

So I think this is. I mean, can you imagine how President Trump would be remembered across history if he moved this conversation forward?

[A]

Yeah, we just knew what they know. Just. You don't have to tell us what it. What's possible, what. What it can do, what you've engineered from it. Tell us something's going on. What is that thing? What's that thing that's going on?

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Is that thing ours? If that's. If it is, that's fucking crazy. You guys have been holding back some insane shit. And if it's not ours, then we need to know. And I think that that would change the human conversation. I mean, it would. I mean, Ronald Reagan talked about that in the United nations speech in, like, was it the 1980s? You remember that speech?

[B]

Well, I remember learning about it.

[A]

He talked about how united we would all be if the threat of an alien invasion was happening on Earth. How quickly we'd put aside our differences is.

[B]

Well, that's why we have the red phone with Russia, right? To be really red.

[A]

Is it really red?

[B]

Yeah, it used to be. I'm sure it's, you know, a text message now, but I wonder if they.

[A]

Even have a phone anymore.

[B]

Well, they do. And they do a China as well now, although it's.

[A]

It's less like a phone phone, like hello.

[B]

I also don't know the structure of it used to be, but it was there. In order to hear this.

[A]

All the members of humanity, perhaps we need some outside universal threat to make us recognize this common bound. I occasionally think how quickly our differences worldwide would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world. And yet, I ask you, is not an alien force already among us? What could be more alien to the universal aspirations of our peoples than war and the threat of war? Two centuries ago, in a hall much smaller than this one in Philadelphia, Americans met to draft hell of a speech.

[B]

Yeah, maybe it's time for another one.

[A]

Yeah, if they know, tell us. It'd be good. Be good if you let us know. And if we did have disclosure, like what can you imagine? Let's imagine that you get into this position and it's your job to get this information out to the public. What kind of resistance you think you're going to face? Because it seems like if there's been deals that have been done with defense contractors and like that's how you kind of have to have work on it, right? Like who else is going to know what to do? Like you kind of have to get contractors on this thing. You're going to have to get the best and the brightest. You got a fucking ufo, all right? Figure this out.

[B]

We haven't had support from the top in the past, right? So were I in such a position, you would have to have me working closely with the White House and you would have to have the White House's buy in on this. I think that's the only way. And from the top of the executive branch, you use that position of influence. You pass additional, you know, presidential memorandums and executive orders that countermand previous memorandums that may have existed in the past in order to legally compel these organizations from the chief executive to be able to move the conversation forward, to require them to bring this information out, to require them to collaborate. And, you know, it doesn't have to be a one person job. You bring in some of the brightest people in our country in order to evaluate this data, come to a conclusion, and then share those conclusions with the American people.

[A]

Okay, let's imagine you get this position and you go through this search and you find out that this is all our technology and that we can't allow China or Russia to know that we're capable of using these kind of technologies that are unheard of right now. So we have to keep it as a national security secret. What do you do about something like that?

[B]

I mean, ultimately, if the answer is that there is nothing unusual going on here, then we have to respect that, right? I mean, it is very unusual if.

[A]

You'Ve got these things that are moving the way these things are moving. And there are.

[B]

Yeah, and I don't think that's the case here, you know, for all the reasons that we've discussed today. So, you know, ultimately it's about finding the truth, right? It's not about finding your way to a conclusion that you already support.

[A]

Okay. I wonder what the world would be like if it was fully accepted, if disclosure was fully accepted. I wonder what the world would be like if, like, Trump gets into office. Trump has a press conference, he brings you up, you explain what we know. This is. Over the last 16 months, our team has discovered this, that and that. We've personally investigated this, that and the other. Where's the, where are the crashed ones? Okay, where the fuck are you guys hiding those? Because if that's real, that's the end. All you have to do is bring the president to the crash site and, you know, you bring him into the warehouse and you show them this thing and you walk around and you go, what the fuck is this? What the fuck is this? That would be the end. All you'd have to do is just get a camera crew, go with them. Trump walking around a spaceship. Okay, we've been visited. Now we know by whatever, by whoever. Maybe it's not even a visitor. Maybe it's always been here. Maybe it lives in the ocean. Maybe it's been monitoring us from there. And its sole purpose is, like I said before, custodian, to make sure we don't blow ourselves up. But either way, we should probably know that. We should probably know there's fucking bases in the ocean. Because a lot of them, they've seen their trans medium, they move through the air and then they go into the water and they don't even make a splash. And so like, okay, what is that?

[B]

We would have for the first time, I think a clear direction of where we need to go as a society. It would revamp our academic processes, our fields of study, our beliefs in religious structures. I don't think they would nullify it. I think they would probably amplify it. It would, I think, have the equivalent impact of a positive nuclear bomb on our economy. We would have certainty in what direction to invest in and what technologies to pursue. And I think that by having that direction that would again, nuclear bomb level increase in capabilities where we would be able to be working on propulsion and energy systems and material systems that would advance us well beyond where we are today. It would leap progress. And if we sit on our hands, we don't do that. We're going to find our adversaries in a position to do that instead, which would completely rewrite the geopolitical environment.

[A]

If we reach technological proficiency in all this AI stuff and quantum, if we reach this first, then what do you think that looks like?

[B]

I think, well, we already are in AI to some degree, but I don't think it's a technology you can necessarily contain to one country. I mean, China's already has their own AI out there. So I think it's going to be somewhat business as usual, at least on the AI side. Quantum computing a little bit different. The technology investment is much higher. But still, if China can come in and potentially steal that technology and replicate it, then we're just in another level of arms race at that point. But if we have the ability to invest in deep technologies that we aware have an endpoint in reality, instead of having to guess the strategic value of something, it's going to allow us to focus our resources in a way that we haven't had the opportunity to do in this country.

[A]

That's a great rose colored glasses view of it. That sounds really good. It does. When you say it that way, I'm like, wow. It's a very positive outlook. I hope you're right.

[B]

What do you think?

[A]

I don't know. You know, I definitely don't know. I go back and forth a lot. I go back and forth as to whether or not these are visitors or whether or not they're interdimensional and they're always here. I go back and forth, whether or not they're hours. I think some of them are ours probably. I go back and forth to Lazar's talk about how they had been doing flights with these things. They'd figured out how to at least get them off the ground and move them around the sky. And have them land again. If that was going on, if that's real, that was going on in 1989. Who knows? Who knows what the fuck we have right now, if that's real. But if we are being visited, it's is a complete revamping of our position in the universe. If we do realize we're part of a community of intelligent life that's in the universe and that it just takes a while for you to be technologically sophisticated enough where you can communicate or travel to these places. But it eventually happens. And then we just realize, like, the lights come on. There's like a billion eyes out there staring back at us like, whoa, we're all connected in this thing.

[B]

I think it would give us a lot of reason to collaborate.

[A]

It would give us a lot of reason to collaborate. And like Ronald Reagan was saying, it would force us to recognize that we really are one thing here on planet Earth. It's us together. We're not different countries. It's fucking. It's crazy. We're all just. There's. Of course there's different countries, but we're just human beings. We should all just be like, the same thing. We don't need to fight. There's no reason for any. This stuff. All this shit can be worked out, and in the future, it should be. I just think technology's got to kind of, like, help us along in that direction. That's probably exactly what's happening. But it's pretty strange that in the meanwhile, like, in the. What we're facing today with these superpowers duking it out and trying to develop technological and military dominance, this would be in the movie, the exact time that alien life would start showing up. If you're gonna have a movie like, where the aliens come to make sure we don't kill ourselves, now would be arrival time. Yeah, now would be the time.

[B]

It's like we're all sitting in Plato's cave, duking it out, arguing about what's on the wall.

[A]

Right.

[B]

When a few people are creeping upstairs, realizing that we have a lot bigger things to worry about.

[A]

Yeah, Yeah. A lot bigger things to worry about and a lot bigger things to look forward to.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And I think the only way we're going to know what the territory is is if we get a legitimate map. I think some people have a legitimate map of what we're looking at, and some people don't. And that's where you and I agree that's kind of fucked up. And it's not their position. You shouldn't be able to, well, people.

[B]

Like yourself bring into tension. This topic, Joe, is huge. You know, I mean, we have, I think the momentum that we've seen over the past three, four, five, eight years since I've been doing this, is really changing the conversation. I speak with people every single day. I work this every single day, Joe, seven days a week. And the amount of people that are changing their tune and coming around in this conversation at all levels of engineering, scientific background, financial resources is absolutely huge. And I think the pressure is going to continue to build. And I think that the opportunity we have here with the new administration is unprecedented. And I think we need to do everything we can do to leverage that to move the conversation to a point of no return.

[A]

I think it's possible to do. I really do. And I think that's what the general public wants at this point.

[B]

We're doing it.

[A]

I think people are really tired of not knowing, like, if they're. It's all bullshit. Tell me it's bullshit. Like, tell me how you know it's bullshit if it's all real. Fuck. You fried it for so long. How you've been hiding this for so long. How do you think this, if you had a guess, how do you think this drone thing gets resolved? I mean, they can't just stay in the sky.

[B]

I have this kind of pit in my stomach that this will probably stop in like a week or two and then we won't learn anything new. Now, I don't know if that's how it's going to play out, but that would be consistent with what happened in past years.

[A]

Do you think it's possible that they're just testing to see how people would react to drones flying around in space?

[B]

Due to the lack of coordination in government on this topic, I would assume if that's what they were doing, they would have had a better plan to communicate.

[A]

But why would they communicate with state and local authorities if they could do it in a way where they get clearance to do it and, you know, it's a need to know thing and they just like have these things fly around just to gauge how the public's perception would be.

[B]

Even within the federal government, there seems to be confusion. Right. So I'm not even referring to local government and law enforcement. I'm talking about like government agencies that are actively investigating this seem to be out of the loop as well. So if they are trying to trick us, when I mean us, I mean like basically everyone, even within the government, even what people would need to know it's so hard for me to rationalize that they would be willing to manipulate 95% of the government in order to run some kind of experiment or social test with unclear value. At the end of that chain, what exactly are they preparing us for? Is it a broader integration of UAP knowledge into our conversation? That's the only thing I could think that would require such secrecy.

[A]

Well, do we have drones that are capable of doing exactly what these things are doing?

[B]

I think so. I mean, for the vast majority of cases that I've seen, you know, on social media, whatnot, I think so.

[A]

So is this domestic or these Chinese drones, like the top of the line drones that can do what these things are doing? Are we making those here?

[B]

I would have to make the assumption that the government, with the defense community, has built various drones that are capable of doing similar things for deployment overseas. So again, there's not one video I know we've looked a little bit for one that exhibits capabilities, that gives us a high level of confidence that they're completely unusual. But we're not seeing that necessarily. So I can't jump to that conclusion yet based off of the information that's being presented. But the overall activities of all these objects and the historical consistency with other sightings in this part of the country led me to still consider that there's anomalous activity that's going on in this area.

[A]

Anomalous in terms of what we know we're capable of?

[B]

Yes.

[A]

Like, what is an example of anomalous that exceeds our capabilities?

[B]

Increased signal management. Right. Not being able to be detected. We have very sophisticated radar systems on the Eastern seaboard, including in New Jersey. So to have objects that are able to essentially evade those detection mechanisms and appear mysterious and disappear over the ocean or come from the ocean in a way that's untrackable should not be possible. That's why we have these billion dollar systems. So have we developed these capabilities and not just radar, but infrared. Being able to block infrared and even being able to detect objects in their proximity and even turn their lights off. Right. And of course, these aren't magical technologies. We can probably imagine a path there, but it creates a lot of uncertainty about the origin of these objects and their intent. Are we trying to evade our own capabilities and cause a mass panic over our own country? Is this a foreign adversary that has had breakthroughs in these capabilities? Not just breakthroughs in these capabilities, but, you know, Iran and China and Russia, for them to be operating off the Eastern seaboard, it's not a small Task, right, to like load up a ship, have it be stealthy, and then launch all these drones without a point of origin. That's not a trivial problem for them, Right. We're one of the only countries in the world that has a true global navy. And it would even be difficult for us to do civilian drones. You know, I mean, are there civilians operating these hundreds of drones without detection, without flaw, without failure, without crashing? Very, very strange that that would be the case as well. So again, I can't, I look at all these different options and I can, I can, I can see a rationale to say, okay, some of these are not exhibiting capabilities that make me think it came from somewhere else necessarily. But all these, all these kind of facts lined up one after another makes it really anomalous and quite the mystery still. But again, I think we can figure this out, Joe. Like we can get the proper technology there. We can go figure this out. And if the government's not going to do it, I will.

[A]

How are you going to do it though? Like without the government, like, what would you do? There's right now. Yeah, Trump never calls you. Yeah, go figure it out. What are you going to do?

[B]

I'm going to take RF receivers from counter drone technologies. I'm going to go out into these hotspots. We're going to be looking for the signals that they may be emitting and then using mobile platforms, we'll be there to be able to detect the strength of the signals and we'll essentially follow them, see where they go. And that might include, you know, operating an aircraft. That might include a ship offshore that we can hand off this information to so they can track them when they go over the water. It's just a resource problem, it's not a technology problem.

[A]

So if there is a ship that's launched them off the coast, what kind of technological capabilities would that ship have to have to be there undetected, where they don't know where these things are coming from? How far away would it have to be where that's even feasible?

[B]

There's a couple paths. One of them, you know, it would have to be perhaps like a submarine launched ship. Right. And we have very good detection underwater, especially off our coast.

[A]

How many like drones could you fit on a submarine?

[B]

Well, that's the thing, right? So especially car sized drones, probably not too many. So we're talking about perhaps a different class of submarine or multiple submarines. They probably don't have the ability to recover these objects.

[A]

Would it have to be a submarine or could it Be a giant ship.

[B]

I don't. I don't think we could have a giant ship off our coast without the Navy or other DoD assets knowing it's there. So satellites and everything else.

[A]

If these things are launching from the water, they must be launching from something that was under the water.

[B]

That would be my hypothesis.

[A]

But there's no ship that's been sighted, right?

[B]

Correct.

[A]

What if there's a fucking civilization in the water? It sounds so stupid, but did you ever see that one video where they showed this thing? It was an underwater camera. I think it was focused on an oil rig. And you see something flying through the background?

[B]

Yeah, I do see that.

[A]

Something like 500 knots. Yeah.

[B]

I have reports from submarine operators of very fast objects under the water.

[A]

Yeah. What the fuck?

[B]

Usos underwater or unidentified submersed objects. I mean, our water, our plan is mostly covered in water. Our sensing underwater is not as good as in the air. There's less traffic under there. It would be, you know, a logical place to set up shop.

[A]

Yeah. I mean, and how much of the ocean has actually been discovered or explored, rather? It's like 10% or something crazy.

[B]

Yeah. Pretty small.

[A]

And there's an insane deep spots that something could just go and hang out.

[B]

Or move around, stay mobile.

[A]

Yeah. Well, listen, I hope you get a phone call. I hope you get a phone call and somebody listens to this and says, that sounds like it would be a good thing for everybody if we knew what the hell was going on. If it's possible to talk about. But again, without you out there telling your story and guys like Commander David Fravor and all these different people that have had these experiences and encountered things and are aware of it and know that it's a real issue. Without real credible voices like yourself, this conversation falls into the hands of silly people like me. You know, like if I'm interested in UFOs, I was interested in Bigfoot for a long time. You know what I mean? Some of it is just fun for me. But when guys like you come out and talk about it, and when the New York Times writes that article in 2017 and you get the gimbal video and the Go Fast video, all of a sudden it's like, okay, this is a phenomenon. This is a real thing. What is it? And why don't we know? And why aren't we being told what we do know?

[B]

They don't deny it anymore. I mean, within government, when they communicate, it's clear from the Pentagon to the executive branch to Legislative branch that yes, there are objects we don't know what they are. And they seem to be exhibiting capabilities beyond the state of the art. I mean, that's. We're at a point in the conversation where that seems to be pretty widely accepted at this point.

[A]

How hard would it be for people to accept that it's coming from an underwater civilization that's popping out to check on us?

[B]

That might be harder than the whole alien theory, right?

[A]

It would be almost crazier. Almost crazier to think that we coexisted with an alien civilization that's under the water that we didn't know about.

[B]

Wouldn't we feel foolish?

[A]

We would feel so stupid. We thought we're the apex predators. We thought we were running shit. These things are just hovering over our cities. Listen, man, I really hope you get that phone call. It's always a pleasure to talk to you. And like I said, I really mean it. If it wasn't for people like you that had the courage to come out and talk about these things, because I know there was a long time where airline pilots, a lot of different people, just didn't want to talk about their experience because it seemed like they were silly and they would be mocked and it was widely dismissed. And now it's kind of generally acknowledged that something's going on, you know, even from our own governors, our own government. So thank you. If it wasn't for guys like you, I'm. I don't know where this whole conversation would be.

[B]

So.

[A]

I hope you get a job. Yeah. Please do it. Tell everybody the website one more time.

[B]

Safearrowspace.org okay. Please sign up and you can report there. Please sign up as well. Instagram, Twitter. Uncertain Vector. Excuse me.

[A]

X. X. Yes. Okay. Thank you.

[B]

Appreciate it. Thanks, y'all.

[A]

Bye, everybody.