[@JesseMichels] NASA Whistleblower: “We Systematically Suppress UFO Data!”

Link: https://youtu.be/IWui5cBkwoE

Duration: 112 min

Short Summary

Kevin Knuth, a physicist at the University at Albany studying UFO craft physics and detection, discusses the documented connection between UFO sightings and nuclear facilities worldwide, examining evidence including the Nimitz Tic Tac requiring 5,000+ Gs acceleration and the JAL Flight 1628 incident reaching 250,000 mph. The episode covers scientific analysis of UFO materials using neutron activation techniques, water world theories, historical photographic plate research correlating UFO transients with nuclear detonations, and astronaut sightings from Gemini 11 and Apollo 14. Also explores the push for academic legitimacy including the University at Albany's new UAP research endowment and potential private funding from hedge fund pioneer Jim Simons.

Key Quotes

1. "It's about 5,000 Gs of acceleration minimum, right? 5,000 Gs is insane." (00:21:21)
2. "why spend all this time on something that's probably nonsensical when you can be sending spending time on something that is probably going to pay off" (00:20:16)

Detailed Summary

Introduction and Kevin Knuth's Path to UAP Research

Kevin Knuth, a physicist at the University at Albany, recounts his journey into studying UFO craft physics and detection beginning at age 12 in 1977, inspired by Star Wars, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, and Leonard Nimoy's television program "In Search Of." During his first week of graduate school at Montana State University in September 1988, a cattle mutilation occurred in Bozeman with hundreds of UFO reports in the county that night, and a professor told students that friends at Malmstrom Air Force Base had ongoing problems with UFOs shutting down nuclear missiles.

The UFO-Nuclear Facilities Connection

Robert Hastings' 2010 news conference featured six Air Force personnel including Robert Salas testifying that UFOs shut down nuclear missiles at Malmstrom Air Force Base.

• Between September 1966 and March 1967, 30 nuclear missiles were reportedly lost to UFO activity at Malmstrom
• Uncle Matt, stationed at Malmstrom from 1971-1974, confirmed these incursions happened "all the time" and were common knowledge among personnel
• Robert Hastings wrote the book "UFOs and Nukes" documenting this connection, covering incidents at nuclear bases not only in the US but also in the Soviet Union, France, England, and Japan
• An SCU study found nuclear sites had statistically significantly more UFO sightings in the 1940s, with UFOs appearing before construction was complete and before radioactive material was present
• Pilot Bud Clem reported UFOs over Hanford Ordinance Works in 1945 while it was still under construction

Scientific Analysis of UFO Materials

Matthew Shostak is developing neutron activation techniques to detect non-terrestrial isotopes in UFO debris by irradiating materials with neutron sources and analyzing decay patterns non-destructively.

• Garry Nolan at Stanford is independently using mass spectrometry to analyze UFO material, finding magnesium bismuth samples similar to Art Bell's collection from the purported Roswell crash
• Bismuth, a high-k dielectric material, stores and discharges electromagnetism easily, and when used in the Biefeld-Brown effect, creates greater thrust
• Samples contain nano-layers of bismuth and magnesium where one material is paramagnetic and the other diamagnetic—relevant to modern spintronics research
• Neutron activation analysis can detect isotope ratios that don't occur naturally on Earth or match asteroid patterns, potentially identifying UFO artifacts

Physics-Defying Accelerations: The Nimitz Tic Tac

The Nimitz Tic Tac object dropped from 28,000 feet to sea level in 0.78 seconds, requiring an estimated minimum of 5,000 Gs of acceleration—far exceeding the 13 Gs that rip F-35 wings off or the 35-60 G limits of missile frames.

• The Tic Tac maneuver required approximately 1,100 gigawatts of power, exceeding total US nuclear power output
• At 99% efficiency, this power output would generate 11 gigawatts of waste heat that would melt the object
• Daniel Koumbi's radar analysis of the JAL Flight 1628 incident revealed three acceleration instances exceeding 9,000 Gs, including one at 11,000 Gs
• JAL Flight 1628's estimated top speed was 250,000 mph—allowing travel from Earth to the moon in approximately 54 minutes

Japan Airlines Flight 1628 Incident

Japan Airlines Flight 1628, a cargo 747 piloted by Captain Kenju Terauchi transporting Beaujolais Nouveau wine across Alaska, was followed by a carrier-sized, walnut-shaped UFO for 45 minutes in 1986.

• Military height-finding radar detected the object while FAA commercial radar did not
• John Callahan, FAA chief of accidents and investigations, copied the radar data before the CIA and Reagan's scientific team could confiscate it
• Callahan held the radar data for approximately 20 years before going public
• Reagan's team reportedly said they had never previously obtained 45 minutes of radar data from a UFO event
• Captain Terauchi was fired and had his pilot's license revoked for publicly reporting the encounter but was later reinstated

Historical Research and Photographic Plate Analysis

Nathan Twining, head of Air Material Command, wrote the 1947 Twining Memo stating UFOs were "not visionary nor fictitious."

• Donald Hornig, scientific advisor to Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson who designed electronic triggers for the plutonium bomb, was present at the Kecksburg, Pennsylvania UFO crash in 1965
• At the Trinity test, Oppenheimer gave Donald Hornig a sidearm and had him babysit the bomb in the tower during a thunderstorm the night before the first nuclear detonation
• Beatriz Villarroel at Stockholm University analyzed Palomar Observatory photographic plates from 1949-1957 and identified over 100,000 apparent UFO transients
• These objects were 68% more likely to appear a day before or after a nuclear detonation
• The Simkinson lithograph from Gemini 11—once considered potentially the best UFO photograph—was analyzed and found to show a mock-up or artist's rendition, not an actual photograph from the University of Arizona archive

Astronaut Sightings: Gemini 11 and Apollo 14

Gemini 11 astronauts Pete Conrad and Gordon Cooper reported a UFO causing a 6-minute transcript gap and draining battery stack C.

• Story Musgrave independently reported seeing snake-like objects in space, though this was omitted from the NASA commission report
• Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell, who grew up in Roswell and was close with Wernher von Braun, became heavily involved with UFO research after his mission
• Herman Oberth's 1954 lecture documented radar measurements showing UFO speeds up to 40,000 mph and claimed the rocket program was aided by non-human beings

Interstellar Objects: Oumuamua and 3I Atlas

Harvard physicist Avi Loeb claimed Oumuamua had a 40% chance of being an alien spacecraft.

• Oumuamua showed only approximately 4% water vapor upon return trajectory and contained nickel without iron—indicating anomalous formation
• The object had both a tail and anti-tail, unusual features for a natural celestial body
• Loeb estimated approximately 40% chance that 3I Atlas, a Manhattan-sized object heading toward Jupiter, is an alien craft
• Critics argue NASA's press conferences on these objects constituted "gaslighting" and dismissing them without study is "stupid and ignorant"

Water Worlds and Unidentified Submerged Objects (USOs)

The HMNZS Southland encountered an 800-foot-long USO in the 1980s that closed 2 km in 25 seconds, drained all ship batteries, and was 150 feet in diameter—30% larger than the largest Russian Typhoon class submarine.

• UFOs exhibit no sonic boom, fireball, or sound, suggesting no interaction with atmosphere despite sonar detection
• Tim identified five oceanic hot spots worldwide where deep water areas correlate with higher UFO sighting propensity, including Catalina Island off Southern California documented in Preston Dennett's book "Undersea UFO Base"
• Warp drive theory is complicated by unknowns about how warp bubbles would interact with matter in an atmosphere, potentially explaining why UFOs appear not to interact with air or water
• Water's high heat capacity prevents significant temperature fluctuations, making water worlds potentially ideal for advanced civilizations seeking stable conditions and radiation protection

International Perspectives and Insider Claims

France's 1999 Cometa report was approximately 100 pages, far more comprehensive than typical US UFO reports of about 10 pages.

• France's official UFO research group GEIPAN openly acknowledges phenomena, unlike AARO which critics say "gaslights the population"
• Alain Juillet, former head of the French CIA, remains a public UFO proponent
• Per an insider, uncorrelated targets are tracked by Space Force rather than NASA
• Richard Dolan documented underwater UFO cases dating back to the 1800s, with consistent descriptions matching modern sightings

Scientific Community Response and Debates

The speaker argues the scientific community shows "bipolar disorder" on UFOs—astronomers ignore data while advocates jump to extraterrestrial conclusions without evidence.

• Neil deGrasse Tyson argues the lack of high-resolution imagery is evidence against existence
• David Kipping counters that despite not having high-resolution pictures of exoplanets, they still exist
• Exoplanet researcher David Kipping appeared on Piers Morgan discussing UFOs but may not be familiar with broader NASA data sets
• The speaker notes this represents a "ubiquitous global pattern" at nuclear weapons facilities

Academic Funding and Research Programs

Jim Simons ran Renaissance Technologies, whose Medallion Fund was the best-performing hedge fund in the US over 30 years; he was also an NSA code breaker.

• Eric Weinstein suspected Simons may have been funding UFO research
• David Spergel, Simons' top science advisor, was the main author of the NASA UAP review panel report
• The University at Albany received a donation to create an endowment supporting UAP research in perpetuity
• UAPx researchers Matthew Schdagis and Kevin Knapp moved there as "U Albany Project X" alongside Professor Kevin Knuth

Full Transcript

Show transcript

They're not coming in from another star
system every other Tuesday. They're
they're present here.
There are handfuls of people doing weird
things here and there. Those people are
all over the place. Some of them I knew
when I was at NASA have come to talk to
me and said, "Oh yeah, I was interested.
I know something about this or that."
Have you met anybody working on the
crafts themselves? I've met people who
who've claimed to have worked on them or
seen them.
>> Really? So, yeah.
So, the question I've had is why when we
had the NASA commission, why was there
no section on what astronauts have seen
in space?
I talked to Alan Bean. He was from
Apollo 12. He said that when he went up
to Skylab, they actually photographed a
red flashing light. Nobody puts lights
on satellites. First, you don't need
them. And second, it's more weight.
>> Also, satellites back then weren't doing
proximity operations. They were just
following predictable orbits.
>> orbits or anything like that either.
>> They actually had a craft pull up
alongside of them. They had their orbit.
And the cosmonaut drew a picture of the
object. The story Musgrave, a shuttle
pilot, also talked about seeing things
like snakes. Wow.
>> writhing around in space. Really? Yeah.
This is a phenomena that people have
seen for centuries. There's cases going
back to the 1800s. Also, balls of light
coming out of the water, hovering next
to the ship, following the ship, and
then taking off into the clouds.
And um that's why I think there's
probably bases underwater is your best
bet.
This message is sponsored by my favorite
headphones, Raycon. One thing we talk
about a lot on this channel is one's
awareness, what you notice, what you
miss, and how technology quietly shapes
your perception. Most earbuds completely
shut you off from your surroundings.
That's fine sometimes, but when you're
moving through the world, when you're on
a run or you're at the gym, I personally
don't want to be cut off from reality.
That's why I've been using these Raycon
Essential Open Earbuds. They sit just
outside the ear canal, so you get clear
audio, but you still hear what's
happening around you. You're fully
aware. You're not in a daze, out of it,
or cut off from reality. I use them when
I'm walking, working, or exploring the
city of Austin. They're super
lightweight, they stay in place, and I
don't feel like I need to constantly
take them out to reorient myself.
Battery life for me is the biggest
thing. I get 36 hours with the charging
case, so I barely have to charge them,
and they connect to multiple devices
without friction. Also, Raycon keeps
them super affordable by skipping the
celebrity markup. The Essential Open
Earbuds are here to help you crush your
New Year's goals. Go to
buyraycon.com/jessiemichaelsopen.
That's j e s s e m i c h e l s open to
get 20% off sitewide. Again, that's j e
s s e m i c h e l s, no a in Michaels,
open, o p e n, to get 20% off sitewide.
Thanks so much to Raycon for sponsoring
this episode. Now, back to the show.
Kevin Knuth, uh this is an absolute
honor, and it's been a long time coming.
You're a physicist at the University of
Albany, and and to me, you are one of
the few people who speaks about UFOs in
a really concrete, hard-headed way. I
think you're one of the few people I
know who are studying how these crafts
actually fly, how to detect them,
um and so I'm really excited to have
you. Thank you.
>> Well, then thank you so much for having
me. It was very exciting. Oh, no, it's
an absolute honor. And you you have a a
NASA background as well.
I want to know how you got into UFOs to
begin with, because a lot of people with
your sort of credentials and background
think UFOs are a joke.
Right. Yeah, I mean I've I've always
been interested in in UFOs. I was 12
when Star Wars came out in 1977. And
during and during that time, I mean that
was the same year Close Encounters of
the Third Kind came out. It was, you
know, the another
movie studio's response to Star Wars. It
came out in December. And I didn't I
didn't like it as much, cuz there
weren't spaceships shooting each others
with lasers, right?
>> [laughter]
>> You know, so so as a 12-year-old, that
wasn't that exciting. But um
but at the same time, you know, there
were TV shows like In Search Of with
Leonard Nimoy, um and they would cover
UFO topics. And that was on every night
like at 6:30 when we're eating dinner.
So, so I watched that all the time.
So, I've always been interested in them,
and um
and I think
I wasn't so so this So, I went to
graduate school in 1988. Um I'm I grew
up in Wisconsin, and I moved out to
Montana to go to graduate school at
Montana State University in Bozeman.
And our first week or two there,
I just moved there, and um
there was a cattle mutilation. Mhm.
Where two cows were killed and
surgically manipulated. I don't have a
good word for what happened to them.
[laughter]
The blood was drained and
>> The blood was drained, the the the
sensory organs removed, the genitals
removed.
One of them had like a core sample. It
had a cylindrical hole punched through
it.
It's just bizarre. I mean, really
bizarre. And the stand and the people on
the news were crazed about this, right?
Oh my god, there's, you know, these two
cows on this ranch were killed, and
there were UFO reports in the county
that night, hundreds of reports, and um
so the two stories were that it was
either aliens or Satanists.
And and and everybody's all got their
undies in a bundle over this, right? And
so so we're at the physics department,
and um
some of us grad students were talking
about this, and especially the new grad
students, we've all just moved there
into a PhD program, so you're looking
down the barrel of spending five or six
years of your life at this place.
And we want what where did
what kind of place did we just move to
where cows are
>> [laughter]
>> murdered in this way, right? It's really
bizarre. So, we're discussing this in
the hallway,
and it was this heated discussion, and I
remember I remember shouting at one
point, "I don't know why aliens would do
it, and I don't know how Satanists would
do it." You know, it was that that level
of stupid discussion, right, that that
students would have. And we were quite
loud and disturbed one of the professors
down the hall, and he came out from his
office to find out what we were talking
about. He comes down the hall, and
we tell him, and I don't know if he's
trying to make us feel better, cuz it
was the opposite, but he said, "Oh,
yeah, yeah, this happens from time to
time, and they'll investigate it, and
they won't figure anything out, and then
everybody will just forget about it
until it happens again."
And we're just like,
"What? That's even crazier than
>> [laughter]
>> than than what we're already talking
about." And then he adds, he goes, "But
you know what's really strange? There
are He goes, "I have friends who work up
at Malmstrom Air Force Base, and they
have problems with UFOs flying over the
nuclear missile sites and shutting down
nuclear missiles."
And, you know, we listened politely, and
he when he walked away, we laughed our
asses off, cuz this was the at the time
it was the silliest thing I thought I'd
ever heard. I mean, UFOs are shutting
down nuclear missiles, and this isn't
n- everybody's not on red alert. I mean,
they
the our
our entire military should be mobilized
for something like that, right? So, we
just didn't believe it. We thought this
was just silly. And it became kind of a
running joke. Anytime something weird
would happen at, you know, at school or
somebody's telling a story, "Oh, this
weird thing happened to me."
Someone would invariably interject, "But
you know what's really strange? UFOs are
shutting down nuclear missiles up in
Malmstrom Air Force So, we would all
laugh, right? This was And so, that was
the running joke for a whole year.
And so now time passes, and that was
September of 1988.
And he had said that it was
ongoing. He said they are doing this
presently, right? Mhm. And so now fast
forward to
>> [gasps]
>> it was about 2015, so it's a couple
years before the New York Times article.
And um
I was teaching an astronomy class,
and
we got to the point where we're talking
about possibility of life elsewhere. And
some of the students wanted me to
comment on UFOs. I don't know anything
about UFOs, and it's not certainly not
science. This is an astronomy class, so
so I was just poking around on the
internet if there is there anything
reasonable I can actually say other than
the Drake equation and the Fermi
paradox, right? The two typical things
that scientists might talk about. And I
was just poking around at like 2:00
a.m., and I stumbled on um
Robert Hastings' news um conference
from like 2010, where he had six people
on from the Air Force in various Air
Force positions. The first one was
Robert Salas
talking about UFOs shutting down nuclear
missiles at Malmstrom Air Force Base.
And I was like, "Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
I heard about this in grad school.
That was a joke, right?" And then I'm
listening to this, I'm like,
that's this not a joke. Between
September of '66
and March of '67,
we lost 30
missiles
to UFO activity. It's wild. Yeah. 30?
30? That's pretty pretty insane. Now now
what are you doing? He's talking about
events from 1966.
And I heard about it in 1988.
>> Mhm. And the professor that told me in
1988 about this was said that it is
happening. Mhm. So, this has been going
on for 20 years?
And no one's paying any attention to
this? [laughter]
I I the army's still not the military's
still not mobilized and worrying about
this and I thought
there is something really wrong here
and
and I and I spent some time thinking
about it. I was up late that night.
>> [laughter]
>> Teaching class early, right? I didn't
barely slept. But I was thinking about
it and I thought
I mean, it's either nonsense and the
people who are in charge of our nuclear
missiles are
people who we shouldn't be trusting with
anything
or
this is actually real
which makes more sense considering the
amount of time that's involved, a
20-year time span
and um
and nobody's reacting to it maybe
because they all think it's nonsense and
I thought this is extremely dangerous.
We're going to get blindsided by
something if we're not careful.
And I thought so somebody ought to look
into this and I thought I'm going to
start looking into this UFO business.
What's all what is what is here? How
real is this? How possible is this? And
I so I so that's when I started looking
into it.
And I was
and I had actually given a talk in our
department
like a year later after I looked into it
somewhat. I thought this is actually
really interesting.
So I gave a talk in our physics
department about it just an informal
talk and um
and the room was packed. I mean, we I
don't know how many people can actually
sit in that room, but it was well over
the
fire limit, right? [laughter] We had
people sitting cross-legged right up to
the front screen.
And um and I the talk went on there were
so many questions. I talked for it for
almost 3 hours. And and most people just
stayed for it cuz everybody was really
interested and I thought yeah, see this
is interesting. I mean, this is an
interesting problem here and it's not
that simple.
And then of course
a year after that the New York Times
article comes out and um [clears throat]
and I thought well, somebody has to be
somebody ought to study this and I
thought well, shoot you just do it.
Yeah. I should do it. And the nuclear
link I could see that being the perfect
gateway for rigorous scientist like
yourself because I think science in the
conventional sense has to be repeatable.
You need you know, every time you drop
this pen it needs to fall in sort of the
same way for it to be science. And so I
think the nuclear link is a version of
that with UFOs where UFOs seem to show
up across nuclear bases not only in the
US but all over the world and
>> that's that's one thing that worried me.
Once I looked into it, I thought wow,
this is happening in the Soviet Union.
This is happening in France. This is
happening in England. We were talking
before the show. I'm wearing my American
Alchemy Japan shirt which is paying
homage to Leno which is a town next to
their Fukushima prefecture where they
have they're famous for their nuclear
spill in 2011. They have their civilian
energy grid and UFOs were reported to
show up there. They have a whole museum
dedicated to UFOs. Vice did a
documentary on them in 2022 and it's the
town in Japan that's obsessed with UFOs
and it's right next to this nuclear
grid.
>> encounter episode. I think
episode 4 focused on that as well. And
Malmstrom where you mentioned that is
the site of tons and tons of activity.
You have Bob Salas obviously in in '67
but before that you had this this Echo
Flight incident, you know, I think it
was like very 10 days before or
something. One was March 16th, one was
March 24th.
Then you have John Mills, this retired
missile technician in the early '90s
seeing a bunch of UFOs there. You even
have an interview with this guy Chris
Langan which say what about the guy he
says he has the highest IQ in the world.
He seems a little cocky to me. But he's
just offhand he's saying he's he's seen
UFOs and he's he's seen them around
Malmstrom
Air Force Base. On the UFO thing, I was
working for the Forest Service not too
far from Malmstrom Air Force Base. One
day I was up there in a Forest Service
pickup truck at a certain campground and
I was there and suddenly I look up and I
say suddenly it was just in the sky.
I became aware that it was up there and
I looked up. There's this huge
spheroidal, you know, but elliptical not
not a perfect spheroid like a saucer
that was turned partially on its side.
>> Right. And so it's this this recurring
trope from all these uncorrelated
sources. Robert Hastings who wrote the
book UFOs and Nukes got into this whole
subject because his father was actually
working at Malmstrom Base and he was
learning radar theory from one of the
radar operators there. Bob Hastings was
while he was a janitor. He was in high
school and the the radar operator was
like we're tracking some of these
unknowns. You should take a look. And
then that that was it for him. He was
hooked and he dedicated his life to
studying this stuff.
>> Yeah.
>> So yeah. Yeah, it's cool. I was it was
maybe 3 years ago we were down in
Louisiana visiting my in-laws
for for Mardi Gras and so we're
it's February and we're grill outside
grilling, right? And
and I was grilling with my wife's Uncle
Matt.
And he had his he had his Air Force cap
on and I and I spotted Malmstrom Air
Force Base on his Air Force cap and I
was like
>> [gasps]
>> Uncle Matt, you were there you were in
the Air Force and you were at Malmstrom
you were at Malmstrom? He goes, yeah, I
was stationed Malmstrom. I when were you
there? He goes,
like 1971 through '74 or something like
that in early '70s and I said
did you ever hear anything about UFO
incursions at nuclear weapons sites? He
goes, oh, that happened all the time.
These things would come in and shut down
the nuclear weapons. And he was going on
and on about this and I'm like like it's
common knowledge.
>> Yep. Right? And how how is it Congress
is just finding out about this, right?
And
my wife's Uncle Matt has known this
[laughter] since 1971.
This is something to worry about, right?
And I was so excited. I I I told him,
okay, can you tell my wife this because
I'm tired of being the only crazy person
in the
>> [laughter]
>> But it but it was his response was
amazing. I mean, yeah, this happened all
the time and like like it's nothing.
Right. So on the one hand you have UFOs
showing up around our most important
assets or nuclear assets with people who
are on the PRP program who literally
like they have to report if they're on
ibuprofen. These are people who work at
the nuclear bases. So they're the
picture of mental health and of sound
mind and they all see Tic Tac saucers,
orbs, you know, shutting down nukes.
Right. There's that and then there's the
idea that the US government might have
saucers and hangers. Right. Do you think
it's clear that this is happening, the
nuclear thing? Yeah, yeah, that's
absolutely clear, yeah. Do you think the
US government has saucers and hangers
and we have a an active reverse
engineering program for nuts and bolts
physical craft?
>> I think that's probably true. I've heard
this from enough people who've done that
kind of work
for years now that that's probably the
case, yeah.
>> Have you met anybody working on the
crafts themselves? I've met people
who've claimed to have worked on them or
seen them at bases.
>> Really? Oh, yeah. Anybody that you can
mention or No, I shouldn't do that.
[laughter] Okay.
Well, these are these are whispers that
you get every now and again, right? Did
you did you find them believable though?
>> Yeah, entirely believable, yeah. Yeah.
>> No, you sent didn't sense any sort of
deception. No. No. One of the most
believable things I've heard is, well,
have you been able to figure anything
out? No, we don't know we don't know
what anything is or how anything works.
Yeah.
>> That was my most and and I was like, all
right, that makes sense. Interesting.
Yeah. So it's like
you know, giving an iPhone to a
this caveman or something. Something
like that, yeah. Interesting.
>> it seem it seems like that the tech any
technologies they've got from it are
just you know, surface level type stuff.
Oh, this is some interesting material.
What's it made of? That that level.
If if I were on the inside, I would
probably want somebody like you working
on this sort of thing.
>> to be working on this but I'm not not
black work. I'd love to work on this in
the open.
>> Okay. Have you ever been contacted to do
black work? Uh I had the opportunity to
to have clearance when I worked at NASA
but but I turned it down.
Cuz you've always wanted to do things in
an open transparent way.
>> and I want to and this and one of the
benefits of being a scientist is we
share information, we work together, we
cooperate. Do you think that's
>> And and you know, there's some
competition but there's a lot of
collaboration as well. So and that's
very healthy. Do you think that's part
of what's held back the legacy UFO
program?
>> If if it's held back at all, it's
because you've got 10 people closeted
working on one thing and they
[clears throat]
don't get extra information that you
might need to get interesting ideas, you
know? The more people you have working
on a problem, the more diversity of
ideas you're going to get and
Do you think that there are certain
scientific things that you can't work on
in the kind of civil side, you know,
open world of of science without
receiving backlash?
Uh UFOs is one of them. Yeah. Yeah, we
there was some backlash.
Some backlash when we started working on
UFOs. It is You mentioned on Danny Jones
that you've had various friends work on
anti-gravity and receive sort of
backlash.
>> threatened threats and things like that,
yeah, too. That's scary. That's very
strange, yeah. What do you think that is
with the anti-gravity stuff?
I really have no idea. I mean, I you
know, you can jump to conclusions and
say, well, because somebody doesn't want
other people discovering things that
they know about and have control over. I
mean, you could jump to that conclusion
but I don't
>> [gasps]
>> I don't actually know what the situation
is. It's hard to tell. Doesn't that feel
like the base case conclusion? Like if
you if somebody's getting threatened
over discovering a thing
um it would seem like there'd be some
group on the inside that would be
tracking people trying to discover a
thing that they're already aware of,
right?
>> Yeah, exactly. Like that seems like the
Occam's razor easy explanation.
>> leads to a whole sets of conspiracy
theories, right? And this it's
difficult. Yeah. Yeah, I've done deep
dives on the Sky like Townsend Brown who
I'm really fascinated with and I talk
about him probably too much for the
audience always laughs when I talk but
>> [laughter]
>> But you know, I I find him to be really
interesting because I do think he made
breakthroughs in the world of gravity
and this sort of Biefeld-Brown effect
which is I think a very simple
experiment. But have you looked into
that at all or I haven't looked into
that
much at all. Um
You have limited time, that's the
problem. I've got stacks of books I want
to read and things I want to look at and
Yeah. It's just you have to pick and
choose and I think that's one that's one
reason why you don't have academics in
the past looking into UFOs because
why spend all this time on something
that's probably nonsensical when you can
be sending spending time on something
that is probably going to pay off and I
think that's the calculation most people
are doing and
How do you
>> Except that at this point I don't think
it's nonsensical. So the payoff is huge,
right? But how do you think UFOs fly?
I have no idea.
They're very they're very strange in a
lot of ways. First the um
How many ways are they strange, right?
And
>> [gasps]
>> The speeds and accelerations are
crazy, right? The accelerations nobody's
going to survive that. So so the
equipment isn't going to survive it. So
you know, in the Nimitz case we
estimated the acceleration of the Tic
Tac dropping from 28,000 ft to sea level
in 0.7
5 seconds or so. 0.78 seconds. Um
It's about 5,000 Gs of acceleration
minimum, right?
5,000 Gs is insane. Um the new F-35
fighter jets, the wings rip off at 13
Gs.
You know, most missile frames can't
handle more than a missile can't
maneuver at more than about 35 Gs. And
the frame isn't going to survive more
than 60 Gs.
And now you got this Tic Tac thing
accelerating at 5,000 Gs. That's not
possible. I mean equipment won't
survive. So now this leads you to think
the only solution there is you've got to
be
playing with inertia somehow. You've got
to be playing with gravity somehow and
um
And so that leads you down the path of
general relativity and warp drive and
that way of thinking, right? Do you have
a like a
propulsion modality that you like best
when it comes to UFOs?
>> No, I don't exactly. So then but then
the other problem is power. If you look
at energies and power involved, the the
amount of power for that Tic Tac
dropping is something like um
What was it? It was 1,100 gigawatts of
power.
You know,
remember Back to the Future with Doc Doc
Brown, 2.1 gigawatts like that's crazy
or something. This thing was 1,100
gigawatts, right? I mean this is And he
had he had Mr. Fusion which was a
nuclear fusion machine, yeah.
>> [laughter]
>> That's right. Yeah, so this is more
power the Tic Tac maneuver took more
power than the total nuclear power
output of the United States. Wow. Wow.
>> in in that Tic Tac in the size of an
F-18. I mean that's crazy.
And so now how do you
how do you get your head around that? If
you So if if you So let's say they're
they can deal with that kind of power.
For some reason they have access to
that much energy.
Um
Equipment is never 100% efficient.
So a 1% inefficiency. So most of the
things we make are like 20% efficient at
best, right? Um So let's say they're
really good at this. They can get to 99%
efficiency. That means you've got a 1%
inefficiency.
1% of 1,000 gigawatts is like 11
gigawatts of power.
That means 11 gigawatts of power is
going into waste heat.
The thing would melt.
So now what's happening? Are they really
more efficient than 99%?
Or is or do we have something wrong? Are
we looking at this the wrong way maybe?
Maybe they're not actually moving in
such a way that takes that much power.
Do you have any theories?
I don't exactly. Um warp drive is
certainly on the table.
Um
But that too is messy because we don't
know enough about
how you know, since there has been
theoretical work done on warp bubbles.
Um
We don't really know how those would
interact with matter.
So what is a warp bubble do in an
atmosphere? We don't Nobody's I don't
think has looked into that. So So these
things are strange because they don't
appear to be interacting with the
atmosphere at all. There's no sonic
boom, there's no fireball.
There's no sound in many cases.
Uh the underwater UFOs you've you've got
more and you should should be have much
more friction there. These things are
moving the the one with the H the
the New Zealand frigate in 1980s the
HMNZS
Southland
um had an 800 ft long USO
following it and it was about 2 km
behind the ship and actually closed that
distance in 25 seconds and went under
the ship and drained all the batteries.
Drained all the power from the ship.
And you've got to clear the the width of
this thing was about 150 ft in diameter.
This cylindrical shaped object 800 ft
long. So it's
So it's what is that? That's 30% longer
than the largest
Russian sub which would be the Typhoon
class subs, right? So it's 30% bigger
than a Typhoon class sub.
The thing closes 2 km in 25 seconds.
This gives you
an accel- a crazy acceleration, right?
Underwater the top speed is something
like 3,500 mph.
And you've got to clear a
a 150 ft diameter cylinder 2 km long
cylinder of water
out of the way to move this thing
in to in 25 seconds.
That water had to go somewhere. Water's
not compressible.
So you would have had waves coming up
that did not happen. So the thing is
acting like it's not even interacting
with the water.
Yet we have sonar records from this.
Which means sonar works by water
molecules
banging on things, right? And bouncing
off.
So the water molecules are bouncing off
this thing
but it's not interacting with the water
all at the same time.
How how this works I I have no
explanation for this. Um
>> [clears throat]
>> But that's the data. Now now what do you
do? Hm. Interesting.
>> It's really perplexing. These things are
really not simple. Yeah. Do you think
you've ever studied UFO parts?
>> [gasps]
>> Do have um My colleague Matthew Shostak
has been working on studying debris from
purported crashes.
>> Really?
>> Yeah, he has a new technique for um
detecting isotopes
um using neutron activation. So he's
developed this technique and he's been
working on this furiously for the last
couple months.
>> Neutron activation, how is that
different than mass spec? Um mass spec
you basically you um
typically you you dissolve the material
in nitric acid and then you spray it
into a
into a some electric plates that
basically electrify ionize it and then
you shoot it into a magnetic field that
a constant magnetic field the thing will
move in a circle. So and the radius of
the circle depends on the mass. So then
it hits a screen depending on where the
mass is changes where it hits the
screen. So you can measure the mass of
the isotopes inside that spray. And to
back up for the audience,
um
isotope differences are are neutron
differences in various elements. And if
you were to find some, you know, isotope
ratios in a material that don't occur
naturally on Earth and don't pattern
match to asteroids, that would be this
really exciting, you know, possible
smoking gun that the thing is actually a
UFO. Right, exactly. Well said.
You [laughter] summarized that very
nicely.
Yeah, that's exactly it. And um so
Matthew's technique is different. He
basically
irradiates the material with neutrons
with with a neutron source and basically
creates um
>> [snorts]
>> heavier isotopes with these extra
neutrons. And um
and then he watches them decay back into
the
the states that they were in before. So
he can tell what the isotopes he created
were and then he can infer what they
were originally
from that. And it's non-destructive
because the
they they decay back to where they were
and pretty quickly. And and you're not
doing it to most of the material. You're
only
you know, reading thousands of these
atoms rather than
as compared to Avogadro's number for the
whole sample, right? So amazing. I mean
Garry Nolan is also doing this at
Stanford. He's using mass spec but
>> mass spec, right. So it's cool to see
that there's, you know, there are
updates even on his work as far as this
material analysis. The UFO legacy
program has to be keeping tabs on what
you guys are doing. That would be my
guess, right?
>> Right, right, right.
>> Like they you'd want some sort of like
civilian like the smartest like
>> I know there's there's interest in
Matthew's work. He's had contact with
government people and I I can't really
talk [clears throat] about those details
but Okay. Are the parts like Art's
parts? The the parts that
>> Some of them were Art's parts but he's
he's had other ones too. He's had
material from Ukraine and Israel and
Whoa.
>> All over, yeah. Interesting.
>> Yeah. Yeah, Art's parts it's this rumor
that Art Bell, right?
Eventually ended up in possession of
this material that I think was from the
Was it from the Roswell crash?
>> from Roswell, yeah. Yeah. And and the
material is and Art Bell obviously
famous Coast to Coast, you know,
amazing, you know,
radio show host that reached, you know,
10 to 15 million people every night. He
was super into UFOs. And it's so
interesting that he received these
pieces cuz he you know, he was so
passionate about about this stuff. I
believe one of the pieces is magnesium
bismuth. Is that right?
>> Yeah. Yeah. Cuz that's what Nolan has as
well. I find this really interesting
because in the Biefeld-Brown effect with
Townsend Brown, the anti-gravity stuff,
and I don't have any
I have a little bit of evidence that
Townsend Brown might have been involved
in one UFO crash retrieval, but I don't
have a ton I I mostly have evidence that
he figured out an anti-gravity modality.
But at magnesium or bismuth rather is
constantly talked about bismuth because
bismuth is a high-k dielectric. So it
stores and discharges easily a lot of
electromagnetism. And that in the
Biefeld-Brown effect, if you use that as
the insulator between the two, you know,
negative and positive electrodes, that
creates greater thrust. So I find it
fascinating that you have UFO parts that
in the only anti-gravity or in one of
the few anti-gravity experiments that we
know of, it creates more thrust in that
experiment. That seems really
significant to me. Right. And the other
interesting thing is this is nano layers
of the bismuth and magnesium and the
and one of one of the two is
paramagnetic and the other's
diamagnetic. So they're they have two
very different magnetic properties,
which is interesting. So a lot of the a
lot of the modern work that we do in
material science on like spintronics and
this sort of thing basically is dealing
with magnetic spins with diamagnetic and
paramagnetic materials. So
So a lot of on the new
breakthroughs in material science is
related to these types of materials as
well. So this is interesting stuff.
Super interesting. Yeah, Gary was also
when I was at his lab, he showed me some
of the pieces and he mentioned that some
of these materials might be able to
micro size wave guides for terahertz
power. And
do you do you think that that that's
true? Do you think these these pieces
are able to do that?
>> if that's I don't know if that's
possible. Um that we haven't looked
into.
And I and
I know I know what Matthew's done, but I
don't think that he's looked into that
at all. Yeah.
>> [clears throat]
>> What is what is one scientific truth
that you adamantly believe that
conventional science disagrees with you
vehemently on?
Ooh.
That's a good question.
I don't know if I have an answer
immediately.
You can you can dwell on it if you want
for then maybe it comes up.
>> that. What do I What do I What Hmm.
Interesting. Yeah, I don't know if I
don't know if there is one exactly.
Yeah.
At NASA,
you mentioned the people there weren't
really into UFOs. How how does how do
you square that with
all this allure of them being interested
in UFOs and like I don't know, you have
like Diana Pasulka. Have you ever read
her book American Cosmic? So she has
this NASA mission controller who
I guess now is public, but his name his
name is Tim Taylor and you know, he's
going around taking them to crash UFO
crash sites. Seems extremely read into
any sort of UFO program that exists.
>> there are individuals at NASA who are
interested and I and since I've gotten
interested and been vocal about it, I've
had some of the some of them I knew when
I was at NASA have come to talk to me
and said, "Oh yeah, I was interested or
I knew I know some of the something
about this or that." Yeah. It's so
strange cuz it yeah, you have Hal
Puthoff who was a I think he was both
CIA and NASA showing up at Chris
Bledsoe's door when he starts to attract
UFOs.
Very It's like Yeah, well, people come
kind of come out of the woodwork. You
find that, you know, I've now had a
couple people from NASA find out were
interested in remote viewing.
Like I wouldn't [clears throat] have
thought that when I was back, you know,
when I worked there, but
Is there a where are they doing remote
viewing in a professional capacity at
NASA?
>> No, well, yeah, so
I don't know. I don't want to tell on
anybody, but some of this is actually
public, but nobody's noticed.
So one of the people at NASA has
actually written a
CIA training manual for remote viewing.
Really? Yeah.
But but is this this is public? Yeah.
Okay. Well then well, we can people are
going to look it up. So
>> figure out who it is.
>> [laughter]
>> Yeah, no, I mean actually I was yeah,
there was a yeah, so but
Well, if it's public, it's
interesting.
That's fascinating.
>> And and that person did it before they
came to NASA, but
but are currently or were were at NASA.
They may be retired now. This is Hmm.
You know, they also have a patent, I
believe in 2003, on a barrel-shaped
asymmetric capacitor and they put they
say this is we're talking about Thomas
Townsend Brown.
>> Oh yeah, that that works interesting,
too. Yeah. It's very interesting. Yeah,
there are the these there are handfuls
of people doing weird things here and
there, right? And it's Yeah.
>> And they've been I mean, you
And once I've gotten involved with this,
I find that those people are all over
the place and
they're all studying things they're not
supposed to be studying, which is Yeah.
fascinating. On that patent, that NASA
patent, I believe Larry Smalley has his
name there. He's a University of Alabama
Huntsville. He was the physics chair.
And under him was a woman named Ning Li
and she was studying, I think like
superconductor based, you know,
kind of weight reduction
via kind of anti-gravity. I think she
she called it gravitons, gravity
particles,
would would cause this sort of effect.
And you know, it's obviously, you know,
groundbreaking, sort of controversial
claim. And she speaks about this at some
sort of MITRE Corporation event. And um
then she kind of, you know, goes dark. I
think gets a security clearance. But her
physics she leaves and starts a a
company. I think it's called
Anti-Gravity LLC or something. And then
her physics chair Larry Smalley goes and
joins her, which I think is lends
credence to the actual findings, right?
Your physics chair leaves, I mean, you
you know academia. Like it's kind of
okay, everybody's got to be high
conviction at that point.
>> Yeah, yeah, you don't leave a tenured
position. And then his name shows up on
a patent around a barrel-shaped
asymmetric capacitor, which is town and
it's talking about Townsend Brown and
I'm like, "Okay, what's going on?"
>> [laughter]
>> I find it fascinating, yeah. But I mean,
one question I have is you have all
these names pop up, right? And you have,
you know,
Hal Puthoff is obviously like seems so
at the center of so much UFO physics.
Um but a lot of a lot of the names that
pop up in in UFO science, quote unquote,
uh
it's almost like there's some sort of
like substructure of a lot of these like
mega structures. So like NASA, I don't
like it almost seems like what you're
saying is there is no official knowledge
of UFOs, but it's like these people
within NASA that are extremely
interested in this stuff.
How do you square that with like you
watch the Age of Disclosure and it's
like we have a legacy program, which you
would that implies some sort of like,
you know, it's like super well
coordinated.
>> thing, yeah. So like what I always try
to ask I try to press on people here. Is
it like
is there a program or is it like this
hermetic substructure where people come
together via synchronicities or
>> just people doing things. I mean, that's
one thing I mean, scientists tinker as
well, and
and NASA isn't like that now, but when I
worked there, which was the early 2000s,
you still were able to do like blue sky
research. As as long as I mean, the
requirement was you had to convince your
area lead that this was
in line with NASA's missions basically
in some way.
And so um
So that's all you had to do and so then
you could go off and work on this
project. You know, now and and while I
worked there near the end of the time I
worked there during the Bush
administration, they started what they
called full cost accounting where they
have to account for all their costs. So
now now you have to
you have to account for the time you
spend on things. And and if if you're
doing that, then you can't do this blue
sky research on this. You can't do this
little thing on the side. So for
example, one of the things that we tried
to do on the side
So this was a um
Yeah, why not? We we had
I was interested in the the Roswell
um
story and I
was struck by the fact that the picture,
you know, Jesse Marcel says one thing
about the the material.
And and sounds entirely believable. And
then they get the picture in the
newspaper with General Raimy with what
clearly is aluminum foil and balsa wood.
Oh yeah. in the picture, right?
And
and you look at that picture, you think
there's no way anybody's going to
mistake that for any kind of craft
debris.
So
what was Jesse Marcel thinking? Or did
was it as they claimed that they
switched the debris, right? And I think
it's more likely they switched the
debris. Well, Marcel claimed that the
the real UFO debris was off to the side
right outside of the frame of that
photo.
>> Did he say that?
>> Yeah, he did. Yeah, yeah. He also said
he brought it home and that his son
played with it.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. So I think he would know the
difference.
>> know the difference, right? So so then
there there's the picture of General
Raimy and he's holding a memo
that you can see in the photographs and
it's a clearly a it's marked stamped top
secret. And I thought, "What does that
memo say?"
And so me and one of my colleagues at
NASA, because we were I was in the
intelligent systems division, so our job
was to develop
machine learning systems to analyze
data. And so, we were doing a lot of
work with imagery. I worked with Hubble
imagery. And I thought,
"Why don't we try to clean Why don't we
try cleaning up this memo and see what
the memo says?"
So, we actually wrote the algorithms to
actually
read this this memo.
And um I wrote them, got them running,
and we're testing them, and um
and we just didn't have the computer
power at the time. We It was a 300 MHz
machines we were working on, and
you know, we couldn't use the
supercomputer for this. So,
we couldn't get away with that. Right?
We could get away with using the 300 MHz
computer
um on this, and um it would just didn't
have the computing power and the
computing time to do it. So, so we
abandoned the project. But But, we had
thought that we were going to we were
going you know, our little dream was,
"All right,
figure out what this memo says, and then
we're going to publish it as a NASA
publication, but it's going to be buried
as an example
We're going to the publication will be
on our methodology and our algorithm,
and then we'll have several examples,
and one of them will be the Roswell
memo, and then we'll make it public and
make it an official NASA publication,
right? That was That was our little
plan.
Our sneaky plan. And it just didn't work
out because we couldn't analyze that
imagery, right? But, this is But, this
is what's going on behind the scenes in
all I probably a lot of government labs
people are doing stuff like this.
You know, maybe not trying to publish
it, but um
but trying to figure out if they can get
something to work or try something
interesting.
Over the last couple of months, we've
been designing the new American Alchemy
merch drop, and I'm excited to say that
the 2025 winter drop is finally ready.
We now have 30 uniquely designed pieces
that really reflect what American
Alchemy is all about. This drop includes
epic t-shirts, long sleeves, crew necks,
hoodies, tapered sweatpants, hats,
totes, mugs, and tumblers. The Fukushima
Japan pieces, for example, have detailed
left chest embroidery.
The Morning of Earth designs went
through multiple revisions to get the
fit exactly right. And the Iron Horse
tee is something I think will be a hit
for anyone who loved the UFO cowboy or
our Atomic Age shirts from our last
drop. We cut a lot of things that didn't
meet our standards, and we're really,
really proud of each of these items.
Everything is pretty limited, so there's
no endless restocks. Once it's gone,
it's entirely gone. If you missed
anything from our original drops, and
you want to go out and represent, now's
the time to go grab something. So, go to
americanalchemymarch.com
to check it all out.
So, it's like
there is this UFO truth. You have you
know, various crashes. You have various
maybe scientific frameworks that are not
public. And then you just have a bunch
of vigilante efforts in little pockets
and compartments like a tumbleweed.
>> You got people smart people trying
things, and it's you know, I think what
you know, John I think it was John
Stewart said, "Isn't it amazing what
scientists can do when no one makes them
stop?" And I think that's all it is.
It's No one's making them stop, and
they're discovering things, and
some of them are useful, some aren't,
and some are really interesting, and
some they feel they probably shouldn't
talk about.
And I think that it's that simple.
In a lot of cases. Yeah, it's so
fascinating. You have an interesting
theory around water worlds, and you
know, water being this really important
kind of variable for UFO transport. Do
you want to explain that? Yeah, well,
there's a few Yeah, so it has two
aspects. The first one is um
is why, you know, I was at one point
wondering why are there so many
USOs, submerged unidentified submerged
craft. Why is that such a big thing? And
um
And when you think about living on a
planet um
living under an atmosphere is horrible.
It's difficult. The weather is
the the the conditions change every day.
They change daily, you know, hourly
even.
And I'm coming down here from Albany I'm
down here to Austin. You know, we had
snowstorm this weekend in Albany or
north of Albany. I drove through it from
Montreal to Albany through a snowstorm.
Um and now we're down here, and it's
what, 60° and sunny, and I hope to go to
the botanical garden before I leave or
something, right? So,
>> [gasps]
>> atmospheres are very
are quite variable. And now Now, you go
from Earth to Venus.
Venus's atmosphere has 100 times the air
pressure on Earth,
which would crush you.
And it's about 800° Fahrenheit. And
actually, I was at NASA Ames when the
Magellan probe was doing radar mapping
of Venus.
And we were perplexed because the
mountaintops
would become radar reflective at times,
and then it would fade, and then they
would become reflective again and fade,
and we're like, "What's going on with
this these mountaintops?" And realized
they would become reflective when the
temperature would drop.
>> [snorts]
>> So, the temperature would drop, the
mountaintops would become radar
reflective, and they realized what was
happening is
vaporized lead and bismuth
was making was actually um
making snowflakes.
And so, it was actually snowing lead and
bismuth snow on the mountaintops.
I mean, imagine what that would I can't
imagine what that would look like to
have metal snow.
I want to go there and actually see
that. But, that's what they That's a
cold day in hell, by the way,
>> [laughter]
>> when you've got metal snow raining on
the mountaintops.
So, that's what Venus's atmosphere is
like, right? And then you
[clears throat] go to Mars, and Mars has
1/100
the atmospheric pressure of Earth. So,
you need a space suit, and it's cold,
you know, 100° below zero Fahrenheit,
something like that.
Colder than Antarctic temperatures. So,
now So, now comparing Venus to Mars,
the temperature difference is is
a factor of 10,000
different. It's huge.
And now you consider a water world.
Water
water is only liquid from
0° C to 100° C, right? So, you've got
as long as you have liquid water, you
you are in that temperature range.
You're not going out of it.
And so, it's much more stable
temperature-wise.
The pressure varies with depth
dramatically. I mean, atmospheric
pressure varies with atmospheric height
as well, but but because water is so
much more dense, it's much more
dramatic. So, you can control what
pressure you like by controlling the
depth.
And um
and water has such a high heat capacity,
the temperature doesn't change that
much. You don't have the temperature
fluctuations of water temperature that
you do in in air temperature.
So, it's a much more stable environment.
You're protected from solar radiation.
You're protected from ultraviolet rays.
You're protected from cosmic rays.
You're protected from, you know, small
meteorites, at least. Um it's And it's a
great place to hide. Electromagnetism
Electromagnetic waves don't travel far
in water. So, you can't see far. You
can't detect things with
electromagnetism very well.
And which is why we use sonar, right?
And um
so, it's a great place to hide.
Yeah. It's So, there's every reason to
go to the water. Um It's fascinating.
So, if you were
like a Kardashev three or four scale
civilization, and you wanted to colonize
a bunch of other planets, water is the
perfect hideout spot. It's evidence.
Yeah, well, that's the other thing. So,
you you only have you only have a couple
choices, right? So, if you're going to
go to colonize another star system,
you've got to carry everything you need
to do it with you, right? So, getting
Already, the traveling is hard. It's
going to be hard for anybody.
Um but but bringing everything you need
to to build up a base or some kind of
settlement is is going to be extra
difficult. So, you So, you really have
have a few options, and um water worlds
we now know are relatively common. You
know, we have several water worlds in
our in our solar system. Mostly Most of
them are frozen moons with icy surfaces,
but there's oceans underneath, right?
So, you can either you can either plan
to colonize
You can either just plan to stay in your
spaceships, right? We're just going to
live in our spaceships. That's probably
the easiest thing to do, right? Um
or to colonize airless worlds like the
moon, which is no different than staying
in your spaceship.
Um but then the other option is to live
on a planet, and if you want to live on
a planet to access its resources, you're
either going to go with an airless world
and stay in your spaceship, um or the
next most reasonable choice for go to be
to go to water. Yeah. And so, it's it's
also evidence, as you said, of this kind
of Goldilocks temperature zone. I think
water's specifically unique as well,
because the way that hydrogen and oxygen
bond in in H2O molecule is a perfect
crystal lattice structure. And so, it's
unique in that the solid form of it is
actually less dense than the liquid form
of it. So, you end up with, you know,
these worlds that don't flood because
you end up with a lot of a lot of ice.
Um and so, you know, that's fascinating
as well. And then I think that the final
thing on the UFO front is you're talking
about tons and tons of power.
Uh if you were to theoretically break
hydrogen and oxygen bonds in H2O, you
would get a ton of power. Yeah, you can
use water for for storing energy that
way. Yeah, or for fuel.
>> seas and you know, seas have dissolved
minerals in them. So,
you could I mean, it's not a fast
process, but you can you could extract
any kind of mineral you want.
Any Any atom Any atom you want, you can
probably pull out of seawater. You know,
whether you can do it fast enough to get
a substantial amount is really the
question, but so but that would be
easier than mining. Right. Do you think
there are UFO bases in our oceans? Tim
recently said there are five oceanic hot
spots across the world. We have a higher
propensity of sightings around these
five or six, I believe, deep area deep
water areas.
And so to me it just um
it creates a a question there. Do you
think there are UFO bases? I think
that's probably that that's probably the
best bet. Really?
>> Yeah.
And you went to Catalina, right?
>> yeah.
>> Which is one of the it's off the coast
of Southern California and a lot of
people think it's this UFO hotspot.
There's a great
book, I think it's called under
underwater or undersea UFO base by
Preston Dennett.
>> Right.
>> And there's a ton of history in the
region. And so what did you find when
you went out there? Yeah, well we we
spent we spent five days on a rooftop in
Laguna Beach and watching the skies and
um
and it's all documented in the the movie
A Tear in the Sky. So um
and the movie best documents what
the
basically how the mission progressed,
right? And so it's one of the first,
you know, university supported
UFO data collection missions
that we know of has happened, right? So
um
so there's a lot of excitement. There's
a lot of excitement in that movie and
that's real excitement, right? Yeah. And
um
and we did see a we did see some
interesting things that um and so here
comes some spoilers.
>> [laughter]
>> So so and and so I'm going to spoil
things twice. So so there's at one point
there's a bright light that's seen from
the team in Catalina Island, which was
across the Catalina Channel. We had two
two teams.
They spotted this bright light that was
moving um and they said it's too bright
to be a satellite. It's it's, you know,
going in this direction, so we're we're
looking for it as well. So we recorded
this object and um then it just abruptly
disappears. And which is very strange.
And um
and the problem with documentaries is
that yes, it takes a long time to make a
film.
Maybe a year to two years in some cases.
Um the science takes a lot longer. Mhm.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
>> We're a lot slower.
And um so the scientific study of what
the data we collected took a lot longer
and that got published just last year.
So our mission was what in 2021?
A Tear in the Sky then came out in 2023,
something like that.
And our scientific paper on the mission
came out just this summer. Mhm. Um
Matthew Shostakus uh was the first
author of that paper.
And so we found that that bright light
was the space station. Mhm.
Um why didn't we figure that out
earlier? The app we were using to track
satellites didn't take into account
daylight savings time.
A stupid mistake, right, that we
shouldn't have made, but
this is your first time doing this sort
of thing and you make and and I remember
telling Matthew on our way out
>> Space station looks weird, by the way.
It really looks like a UFO, yeah. And I
remember telling Matthew on the airplane
he you know, we were both excited, oh
this is going to be so much fun. Think
imagine what we can see and I said
yeah, but the problem is we're just up
what we're probably going to learn is
what not to do. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah,
yeah.
And that's really what happened that
first mission. We learned how not to do
it.
Um but Matthew is the one who figured
out it was the space station. He put it
all together and he actually took the
pixel size on the camera Mhm. and then
um knowing the altitude of the space
station figured out how big the space
station should be and he was
within one foot Woah.
>> size of the space size of the space
station. It's really a nice analysis. He
does he put it in the appendix and
um
and yeah,
something to be proud of. The fact that
yeah, we identified it to be the space
station and actually proved it, right?
So that's cool. Mhm.
Um
and another another event that happened
was these um
one of the flare cameras was showing
these objects dropping into the sea
and um
and I was actually at the time looking
through night vision goggles. This
didn't end up in the movie and people
were too excited about the flare camera
to hear me shouting about the night. I
was telling people put on your night
vision goggles and look over here.
Um but I saw something actually drop and
hit the water in infrared.
>> Woah. Um You got that on video? No, no.
I was just looking through the goggles
watching for things and um
>> But it was through infrared. It was in
infrared, yeah. And then then um and I
think they
tried to simulate this in the film, but
it's not simulated properly. They showed
this thing hovering. It wasn't it just
dropped. Wow. But but the flare cameras
recorded things dropping into the sea
and we um So you think you saw a a UFO?
I don't know what I saw actually, but
because but I was excited because it
happened about the same time the flare
camera was showing things dropping, but
then we figured out later that the flare
camera was actually malfunctioning. And
that's and that's a failure mode of the
flare cameras. We actually talked to the
engineers who worked on the design of
these.
>> Yeah, these things falling down is
actually a failure mode.
>> Oh, so maybe it was an issue with the
camera.
>> so the flare camera recording we had was
not something dropping into the sea.
Mhm. Um I don't know what I saw and
probably will never know because you
can't it has to be reproducible, right?
You have to be able to see it again and
try different things.
>> Is there a best sensor modality if
you're trying to spot UFOs?
I think as many sensors as you can.
Is there one
>> Different kinds, yeah.
>> Say you had to say you had to pick one
and you had to, you know, what what what
would you pick?
>> If I [clears throat] picked one I would
try that's tough.
I think I would go with a a flare camera
is a good choice for a few reasons.
One, you get a visual record of the
object. It's not a very good visual
record because it's going to be blurry
cuz it's infrared. Mhm. I've heard
people complain, oh the Navy produces
all these these blurry photos of UFOs.
Well, they're infrared images, what do
you expect? I've heard scientists say
this and you want to slap them upside
the head and say, what did you think was
going to happen?
And so
you know, but the other benefit of is
for with a flare camera is you can
measure the temperature of the object.
Mhm.
Because it's you're picking up infrared
emissions, right? So those that black
body infrared spectrum actually gives
you the temperature of the object.
>> it's where where white hot comes from.
Yeah, so now so so not only do you get a
visual record of the object, but you get
its temperature, too, which is which is
in you get extra pieces of information
for that. So for that reason I probably
would choose a flare again. Is there a
sighting or a crash that you rank as
highest conviction as far as your
analysis of it that like you you are
convinced that this happened? Oh.
I would have to say
the most convincing one is
one of the most hard to believe ones.
It's um JAL Airlines 6 JAL 1628. It was
a Japan Airlines cargo flight piloted by
Captain Kenju Terauchi. This is the
sketch Terauchi drew of what he says he
saw at his window that night. And this
Japanese television graphic is based on
his description. This is a just a small
spaceships. We can see
a big thing. This one is size is
carrier. So motherships. And I and I
remember I remember that being on the
nightly news. I remember watching it was
on NBC.
Tom Brokaw, Connie Chung. I remember
that being on the news and being, holy
there's
giant aircraft carrier sized walnut
shaped UFO followed that Japanese
Airlines for 45 minutes across Alaska.
Wild. Ted give us the whole sequence.
Yeah, so these guys so the
Japanese Airlines they it's a it's not a
passenger jet. It's a 747. They are
transporting Beaujolais Nouveau. Yep,
they got wine in the back. Let the
skeptics rejoice. No, the pilots were
not drunk on Beaujolais Nouveau.
That's just a silly thing.
They're just transporting it. Yeah,
they're just transporting it. And
they're flying across Alaska and and
first
I don't remember all the events. Several
things happened. They actually saw
several UFOs. First these rectangular
things show up
in front of the ship and have these
lights that go up and down shining light
into the cockpit.
And the the pilots could feel the heat
from the light of these objects and
they're like scanning there's you know,
like that kind of behavior.
Um they follow in front of the plane for
some time.
And then um
and then this giant walnut shaped
object shows up that's something like
four 747s in length, right? So this
thing's the thing's the size of an
aircraft carrier.
And the the pilot said that when it was
in front of the plane, he couldn't see
anything but the craft. It's it's it's
that big, so it's unmistakable. I mean
and he's screaming at air traffic
control
you know, what do I do about this? And
they're not picking it up on radar.
And so um was later found that military
height finding radar was picking it up.
And so that radar actually that those
radar records actually got collected.
And um
and so this walnut shaped craft
basically follow the 747 for about 45
minutes. Stayed about 7 km away, but it
would go from one side of the plane to
the other. It was bouncing around from
one side to the other.
And um
And we analyzed its
speed and acceleration just crudely
based on the description of what it was
doing. So, it would go So, at one point
it would be at like 1:00 and then the
next sweep of the radar, which is about
12 seconds or so, would be would be at
6:00.
And so, we were using those
that information to estimate speeds and
accelerations.
Um Daniel Koumbi, another um physicist
from the Niels Bohr Institute, actually
took the radar. I didn't I didn't know
that we could get our hands on the radar
measurements when we published that
paper. But he actually got the radar
data and he analyzed that. He was
analyzing the jumps and he found that
the object was accelerating at
took several dumps jumps different
accelerations at different times.
But there were three three of them were
the accelerations were greater than
9,000 Gs.
One of them was like 11,000 Gs and the
top speed he estimated to be 250,000
mph.
And at 250,000 mph, you can get to the
moon in 54 minutes.
Whoa. That's that's not a joke.
>> [laughter]
>> You've got to So, you've got something
the size of an aircraft carrier
that could get to the moon in less than
an hour, right? That's basically what
you've you're dealing with here. So,
that's what And we have And we have the
radar data from that. You have the radar
data? You have the radar data.
>> That's amazing. I didn't know that.
>> That's amazing. Yeah, John Callahan, who
was the FAA
chief of accidents and investigations,
actually reviewed the case and then
Reagan President Reagan's scientific
team and the CIA showed up and they
wanted all the data. No way. And so,
they came to collect the data. Callahan
copied copied
it and put it in a box that he just put
under his desk.
And so, he had a copy of it and he
didn't turn that over.
So, they got
>> And that's public now? And now that's
public. He held on to it for like 20
years and then when he retired, he made
it public.
>> Good for him. Yeah, he's a hero, right?
I mean, that's amazing.
>> Yeah, but he said when So, when he was
in the meeting with Reagan's scientific
team, they were all excited. They said,
"We've never had 45 minutes of radar
data from one of these things before."
Wow.
>> And so, um
So, that exists, but
but from that radar data,
it's accelerating at 10,000 Gs, 250,000
mph. And And you can actually see the
position of the plane on the radar. And
at
the one point where the plane actually
does a 360 to try to shake this thing,
you can actually see that on the radar.
So, the radar's working. Is the Are the
pilots still alive? Yeah, I think so. I
want to get in touch with them. Yeah,
I'm sure. The one pilot was actually
fired Okay. for going public with it. He
was fired and had his license taken away
and then several years later was
reinstated.
>> That's horrible that he he was fired for
that. I mean, what what are you supposed
to you experience something that kind of
traumatic and and world view shattering
and What would lying about it be a
better thing to do for flight safety?
Yeah, [laughter] right. Yeah, yeah,
yeah. That's really the question.
>> Just ignore it. Yeah, that's crazy.
Um fascinating. You know, there's that
audio recording of Steven Spielberg, I
believe, talking about his trip to the
White House and um they do a viewing of
ET. Oh, right. I've heard this. Yes. And
Reagan says, uh you know, a lot of you
in this room know that everything on
that screen there that you just watched
is true. And he just stood up and he
looked around the room almost like he
was doing a head count and then he said,
"I want to thank you for bringing ET to
the White House. We really enjoyed your
movie." And then he looked around the
room and he said, "And there are
a number of people in this room who know
that everything on that screen is
absolutely true." And he said that
without smiling.
>> [laughter]
>> Um um but he but but but he's he said
that and then everybody laughed, by the
way. The whole room laughed because he
presented it like a joke, but he wasn't
smiling as [clears throat] he said it.
And so, yeah, it's pretty interesting,
right?
>> right?
>> Yeah. Well, that's fascinating that
people from his scientific team, I mean,
it sounds like they were pretty aware of
this to to say, "Oh, we've we've never
had 45 minutes." But it's like that
implies, okay, you're sitting on maybe,
you know, shorter clips of UFOs. Yeah.
They've got something. They've got
something, yeah. I mean, Al- Alaska is a
hotspot historically
as well. I believe um Nathan Twining,
who was head of Air Material Command
responsible for all aircraft development
of the Air Force,
wrote the famous Twining memo in 1947
saying UFOs are not visi- visionary nor
fictitious.
>> [laughter]
>> He he uh I believe they have like an
observation program going on in Alaska.
And then just recently you had It was
this weird sequence of events, but in
2020 early 2023 you had the Chinese spy
balloon
and then right after that you had this
bizarre, you know, these things seem to
show up and like jam, you know, the
radars of these F-22s and one of them
specifically was in Alaska and crashed.
And I've heard some very strange things
around
this specific craft. I've heard things
like it reassembled itself and was seen
in the air over Canada.
Bizarre.
>> I've heard [clears throat] something
I've heard something about deleted
emails involving this specific craft uh
the National Military Command Center
servers. So, I I don't know. It seems
like there's something strange about
this craft and this this was also in
Alaska. So, who knows?
>> That's amazing. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah, it's amazing to know that, you
know, his scientific Reagan's scientific
team had gotten that data. What did they
do with it? What is you know, what are
what are their reports? I would like to
see that, you know, the
>> [sighs and gasps]
>> you know, disclose all those. That would
be interesting, you know, alone. Um the
Kecksburg, Pennsylvania
UFO
crash Yeah, 1965. Yeah, and my my dad's
cousin, Donald Hornig, he was later the
president of Brown University, was was
on
he was
the scientific advisor to Presidents
Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson. What?
Yeah, that was my dad's my dad's cousin
did that. In fact, he he's the person
who he designed the
the electronic triggers for the the um
plutonium bomb. Whoa.
>> And the um Manhattan Project. What was
his name? Donald Hornig. Whoa. And And
the night before the first test in
Trinity, the he was
Oppenheimer gave him a sidearm and had
him babysit the bomb
up in the tower during a thunderstorm.
What?
>> And And I was surprised that they didn't
put that in the movie Oppenheimer
because it's an awesome story, but the
movie's about Oppenheimer and not about
the Manhattan Project.
But But he was um Yeah, so that was And
his wife was But his wife was in the
movie. Lilli Hornig was in the movie.
She was the woman who came from Harvard
and um some of the things she actually
said She told us this at dinner once. We
visited her in Rhode Island
when she was still alive, but she said
when she got to um
Los Alamos and was being interviewed for
a position,
they asked her how fast she typed and
she goes, "They don't teach typing in
Harvard." And they used that line in the
movie, which was great. Whoa. That is
fascinating.
>> So, but I But So, I mentioned that
because um because Donald Hornig was was
the chief scientific advisor to
President Johnson. Mhm.
He was president during the Kecksburg
crash and I found I had actually found a
document about
the Kecksburg UFO and Donald Hornig was
listed as being present. Mhm.
>> "Oh my god." And I I didn't never got to
meet him. Um
and
and I did I did ask his wife, Lilli,
about it, but she didn't know. What
document? Uh I don't know. I Maybe I
have to look for it. There was some kind
of some kind of summary about the
Kecksburg crash and something It was
some kind of government summary.
>> Official official government document?
>> Official, yeah. Yeah. And And he
>> listed as being present, which he should
have been. So, I was like, "Oh, this is
pretty authentic."
>> But that's that's
even absent the fact that he's your
dad's cousin, which is a remarkable
synchronicity. The fact that a the
presidential science advisor is on site
at a UFO crash Yeah. is amazing unto
itself. Oh, that's true. Yeah, that's a
good point.
>> That's a really big deal. I think Eric
Walker was supposed supposedly present
as well at the Kecksburg crash. He was
the um
I believe president of Penn State and he
was kind of a material science guy. I
don't know if you know anything about
him, but
>> about him.
>> He's an interesting guy Wow. who like
seems to imply to many researchers, UFO
researchers, that he's very aware of the
Majestic 12 and what they do and, you
know, who knows? Right. I don't Do you
Do you Do you lend credence to
any of those sorts of stories, the idea
that they're sort of an elite military
scientific I don't I I can't I I
wouldn't be surprised if they were true.
Yeah. Um I don't know if I would
just jump on believing they're true
without any evidence, but Yeah.
but
you know, if I was if I found out they
were true, I wouldn't it wouldn't shock
me at all.
>> Well, it's like if the UFO issue is real
and understood at the highest levels of
government, of course they would have
some sort of elite body
>> kind of group of
And if it's not a formal group, there's
probably informal groups and Yes. all
that sort of thing. Yeah. Yeah. Do you
think, you know, we've mentioned the
nuclear connection a bunch in this
conversation. Do you think that uh
not only UFOs are do you are just
showing up around nuclear sites, but
that the secrecy uh involved in the
Atomic Energy Commission and the
Department of Energy overlays UFO
secrecy and that the program is somehow
bound up in, you know, atomic stuff.
Well, that's a good question, too. Yeah,
it's not clear how
I mean, what it what it looks like the
the and SCU did a study of this of UFOs
monitoring nuclear sites. And so, it
looks like
>> [gasps]
>> whoever's behind the whole UFO business,
whoever these guys are, have been
performing, you know, surveillance this
whole time. They're surveilling us. And
and it's intelligence surveillance. They
know what they're doing. And in fact,
the SCU study showed that
not only do you so you when you they
compared
UFO sightings at nuclear sites compared
to nearby military bases and nearby
population centers. And the nuclear
sites have more you know, in the early
'40s had more um
UFO sightings than any of the other
places. Whoa.
>> nearby. So, it shows that it's
statistically significant that they're
hanging out at nuclear sites. Now,
what's weird about it is that they are
present at the nuclear sites before we
before they were totally constructed.
>> Yes. And before they had nuclear
material there radioactive material
there. Yeah.
So, while some of these sites were being
built, UFOs were present.
>> That's definitely right.
>> you're like,
wait a minute. How did they know that
something important's going to be there,
right?
How do they know what they know?
>> There's something about nuclear that
they're really concerned with or
interested in. There's I think in 1945,
there's a pilot named Bud Clem, and he's
flying over Hanford plutonium base. And
it was like, yeah, before the thing was
fully up. Right.
>> And he's seeing UFOs. And Robert
Hastings has an an interview with him.
All right, got down there and I told us
that this bogey was out there right over
the Hanford Ordinance Works and
directed the Lieutenant Commander Brown
to take off and challenge him. Yeah, and
I think I mentioned him in our paper.
I've gotten the um
We published a paper this year on the
scientific study of UAP. Basically goes
through the history of how people have
tried to study this.
>> Mhm. And I and I mentioned
Bud Clem's sightings at at Hanford
there. Mhm. Mhm. Yeah, it's so it's so
fascinating. That that connection is and
there you there are all these theories
you can have one can have. One is that
they're sort of doing some sort of
intelligence recon or something. And
then another is that they're just
protecting their resources somehow the
Earth maintaining itself in its current
form is is important or maybe we're a
resource you know, humans are a resource
to them and so they need to intervene
and ensure, you know, things don't we
don't blow ourselves up or something.
But it's it's really hard to say. I
mean, I know like the Age of Disclosure
Lou Elizondo, you know, kind of crew
like they talk about it as far as
like
uh they're monitoring our ability to
achieve energy breakthroughs. So, that
would be the tip of the spear of energy
breakthroughs. Like high energy physics
occurs in the national labs and your you
know, atomic sites and that sort of
thing.
And you know, we could we could break
out of our our cage or something if we
if we achieve some unlock. And so, there
are various theories.
>> are a hot mess, right? And so, if they
if they're
present in the universe and in our
neighborhood and then right now they
don't have to deal with us directly.
But if we go out there, they might have
to deal with us. I mean, Stanton
Friedman put it this way. It's kind of
like you've got a neighborhood where
you've got this one house on the block
with crazy neighbors. There's always the
police are always there. They're
screaming and yelling and things
breaking. And you can hear that going on
in the house on the block. And then one
day the neighbors come out of the out of
the house and they're in the yard. And
now you have to deal with them, right?
And so, he he was he was describing
human humanity this way. And I thought
that's pretty good pretty good
description.
>> Yeah, no, that that feels pretty pretty
apt to me. I want to talk cuz you're in
a I think very unique vantage point as
somebody who
is at the intersection of kind of
credible physics and then kind of very
speculative UFO, you know, interest. Uh
there are a couple of interesting
objects of interest of late that kind
of, you know, hit that intersection. The
first I want to talk about is actually
this discovery of Beatriz Villarroel at
Stockholm University, who, you know, I I
had the pleasure of interviewing her.
And she was looking at the Palomar
Observatory, which was the most, you
know,
in use observatory, you know, in the
kind of mid-century in the US. It's in
San Diego. And she found over 100,000
in an 8-year period what appeared to be
UFOs, mirror-like objects, little
transients, light flashes. And um they
seemed to actually be correlated with
nuclear sites, too. There's like a
follow-up study that they're 68% more
likely to show up a day before or after
a nuclear detonation.
Um so, this is just fascinating study.
And and nobody in the credentialed
conventional physics world has debunked
it. It's been peer-reviewed. Right.
>> And you have people like Sabine
Hossenfelder and Brian Keating, you
know, people you don't think of as like
UFO nuts, like going on, you know,
YouTube and saying like this actually
seems kind of intriguing. So, what do
you what do you make of it? Oh, it's I
mean, her that's the Vasco project. I
mean, it's an excellent idea for a
project. You've got all of these
photographic plates from the 1940s
that um
that if you have something in orbit, you
might pick you might be able to detect
it in a photograph, right? So, that's
the that's the premise.
Um and she she published a few early
papers which I found really interesting.
The one, you know, the ones where you
have a several of them like in a line or
something like this.
And I thought I think that's
fascinating. Um
It's tough. The most recent paper with
100,000, that's hard to believe. That
would that's a little shocking.
Um that makes me worry that
you really have to double your efforts
to look to make sure there's not an
artifact issue that you haven't
considered. Well, it's yeah, it was
100,000 between 1949 and 1957. The
reason you'd ended in 1957 is because
Sputnik goes up. So, it's
pre-satellites, which is that's
remarkable and it's they're all in
geostationary orbit GEO. So, it's like
the, you know, outer Earth's orbit. So,
it's I think it's
it's pretty remarkable. That does seem
really high as well. I think she says
there could be an error rate of up to
30% or something. So, that's a you know,
it's a big margin. Yeah. But what what's
remarkable is like when she put this
out, the main detraction, the main way
people tried to kind of straw man or or,
you know, beat beat this thing was they
said
you know,
uh these have to be plate defects. These
have to be sort of, you know, the the
the the astronomical plates, you know,
have all sorts of weird, you know,
chemical issues over long periods of
time. And you end up with these sort of
stains and issues. And then, you know,
those could look like transients or
UFOs. But then she followed up on the
study and she said, is there a So,
obviously you have the sun, it's hitting
the Earth, and then you have the shadow
of the Earth, right? We have a kind of a
dark side of the Earth. She said, is um
you know, are these objects dropping off
on the dark side of the Earth? When when
they shouldn't be being illuminated by
the sun. I think that's the idea, right?
>> That's right. Are they physical objects?
Are they reflecting off the sun? A, and
B, if they're plate defects,
plate defects would not play favorites
between the Earth's shadow and, you
know, the the sun side of the Earth,
right?
>> the plate defect rate should be
constant.
>> be completely proportional and constant.
And so, she found a you know, a serious
drop-off. And so, that seems like pretty
significant.
>> It's interesting. Yeah, certainly it's
interesting. I think it's um it's one of
the
the
I mean, the hallmark of science is
reproducibility, right? So, what you
need to have is you need to have other
other labs look at those plates and
actually do the study. Try to replicate
the study. And I think that's what needs
to happen.
>> And that's what's beautiful about her
kind of orientation towards this whole
thing is she's now saying you can go
look at the data for yourself. So, the
the raw data I think is online now for
people to It's not online. Okay, it will
be. It will be. to get it. It's not
Okay, you tried to get it. Okay, okay.
Okay, then she says she's putting it
online.
>> She's she's working on that.
>> Yeah, yeah, yeah. And then I think that
the the next holy grail would be you'd
want it from another observatory. And
you'd want the actual transients to line
up one-to-one ideally. You at least with
some correlation. That
>> Yeah, if you have multiple
observatories, that would be ideal.
>> Yeah, so yeah, totally agree. There's
work to be done there. But I pretty
intriguing, I think. Yeah, it is
intriguing. It is. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, it
was an it's a nice idea for a project. I
mean, it's a you've got all of these
photographic records and
to go through them. I mean, just to look
for transients in the first place. I
mean, transients would be anything that
you don't have a good explanation for.
So, there's potential for lots of
discoveries there, not just things
orbiting the Earth. So, Do you think
UFOs come from space? Or do you think
they're sort of, you know, going through
wormholes, you know, or time travelers
or
>> Absolutely no idea.
They are they are
I think that many of them that we see
that are observed by people are
actually coming from Earth
presently.
You know, Carl Sagan once quipped, I
think it's extremely doubtful that
somebody is arriving from international
from interstellar space every other
Tuesday. You know, he made something
like that. You know, basically saying
that I don't think that He didn't say
interstellar travel's impossible. It
wasn't going to happen every other
Tuesday. It's basically what he was
saying. It's not going to be common and
I think he's right. Mhm. They're not
they're not coming in from another star
system every
other Tuesday. They're they're present
here. Yeah. And um that's why I think
there's probably bases underwater is
your best bet. Yeah. Or maybe somewhere
else in the solar system. But we know
that they can't be more than in many
cases they can't be more than a light
day away because they showed up the next
Someone you had the Fukushima disaster,
they showed up the next day. Mhm.
[clears throat]
So if they're coming from another star
system, it would take years for the for
the same any signal any information
about Fukushima to get out to that star
system and then years for them to come
back for them to come. Unless fast and
light communications and travel is
possible.
>> Or something like that, right? But yes,
in general relativity it would need to
be But they're probably coming from
Earth in in that case.
>> Mhm.
Interesting.
Uh do you know of any interesting
space-based encounters of UFOs like NASA
encounters?
That's also a good question. So um
I know a few of them. There's Well,
there's several cosmonauts have reported
seeing things in space and that's
important to them.
Oh, I can't I'm blanking on his name
right now. Of course it's a long Russian
name that I'm not familiar with. Starts
with an A. But they actually had a craft
pull up alongside of them. Whoa.
>> their orbit. And they took pictures. Um
the cosmonaut drew a picture of the
object.
>> Whoa. Because the pictures all got
confiscated by the Soviet
government.
>> Mhm. The knock Gagarin? No, it's not
Gagarin. It's
>> Oh, I'll check this out.
>> Akinashev. Okay.
>> Akinashev.
And he drew a UFO. He drew a picture of
what they took photographs of.
>> Whoa. What what mission was this? Do you
know or what
>> know. I think it was one when they were
going to um
one of the beginning early space
stations.
>> Whoa. Yeah. Fast.
>> The thing pulled up. It had had windows.
It had windows and pulled up and
followed them for part of the orbit and
then left. Whoa. Yeah, which is awesome.
Yeah.
>> I talked to Alan Bean. I'm met him and
talked to him. He was from Apollo
12.
And he said that when he went up to
Skylab, they were on Skylab I think it's
1977-ish.
Um
they actually photographed a red
flashing light.
What what is Skylab for the Skylab was
one of our early space stations. Okay.
And um and they actually saw a red
flashing light that followed them for
part of the orbit and then disappeared.
>> Really? Yes, and they had photographs of
that. Yeah. What did he say happened to
the photographs?
Uh they're actually public. You can find
them online.
>> Okay. Well, well we'll surface this.
>> big problem. You're photographing a
light in the sky and it's a handheld
camera Sure. on a spaceship through a
window and yeah, it's a bouncy and
blurry and I don't
>> Yeah, but it's a red light that seems to
be following
>> flashing light in space. Nobody Nobody
puts lights on satellites. First you
don't need them and second it's more
weight. You know, every every ounce is
going to cost you a crazy amount
>> Also satellites back then weren't doing
proximity operations. They were just
following predictable orbits.
>> orbits. They weren't moving around
either. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So that's a
big deal.
>> very strange.
>> Yes. Yeah. And so you and then you have
the the Gemini 11 mission
where the and from the transcripts the
um
the astronauts are working on uh we're
we're working and something flew over
their Houston assets that just something
just fly over you and they say
affirmative. Weird weird weird. And then
there's something like
6 minutes of no transcript, right? And
um
but when the thing flew over the object
flew over them, they it drained um their
it drained one of their battery stacks
um stack char- Charlie stack got
drained. So stack C got drained.
So it's almost a classic UFO sighting
and they see an object in space that
flies over their ship and then drains
their batteries.
Right? And so that's in the transcripts
of Gemini 11. Whoa. And that's public.
That audio is
>> public as well, yeah. And now so so the
question I've had is why when we had the
NASA commission Yeah. why was there no
section on what astronauts have seen in
space?
Yeah. I mean Story Musgrave, a shuttle
pilot, also talked about seeing things
like snakes. Whoa.
>> writhing around in space. Really? Yeah.
None of that mentioned in the NASA
commission's report. So bizarre.
>> you've got and then you have what is
there the the mission the Soviet mission
to Phobos Mhm. where their craft got
disabled. Mhm.
The last picture shows an object like a
fin in the like a tail fin of a plane
looks like in the picture. Whoa.
>> That's the last picture it took. And
then the whole thing is disabled. The
whole thing was disabled and Gemini 11
also looks like the audio like like
there was some sort of power
interference or something as well,
right? Like electromagnetic
interference.
>> multiple events in space that
weren't even talked weren't even
mentioned in the NASA commission report.
Why? Shouldn't that be of interest? They
all sign NDAs, right? I
>> Oh, I don't know what they do. I believe
I believe they do. Yeah. So do you think
I mean you were you were at NASA. Do you
think NASA's sort of systematically
covering this stuff up? I would have no
idea. Because the other interesting
thing from Beatrice Vial Real she said
she was in touch with a current NASA
person who said that NASA tracks what
they call uncorrelated targets all the
time.
So these are these are you know, it's
sort of you know, noise.
>> they're not necessarily alien
spaceships, right? But it's but Yeah,
but
>> these are things that should be
reported.
>> Figure out what they are. If you don't
know what they are and you've got a
if you've if you're running a commission
on unidentified aerial phenomenon and
you've got a bunch of unidentified
things, you should talk about them.
Totally, but also apparently the
uncorrelated targets are systematically
tracked by Space Force. Right. And not
by NASA. Like according to this insider,
again, I don't I don't know if this is
true, but that's really interesting. So
all all of our government documents on
these things, even the recent ones
barely have any information in them.
Meanwhile, the French in 1999 put out
the Cometa report which was
100 pages or something, right? Yeah.
Ours was like 10 pages. Ours was like 10
pages, you know.
>> The French have a UFO research group
officially called GEIPAN which unlike
AARO doesn't gaslight the population.
They you know, admit that this stuff is
real and are open about it
>> That's right. Yeah. Yeah, Cometa
report's
final analysis from 1999 was that
was that
yeah, these things could be alien
spacecraft. There might be a base
somewhere in our solar system and the US
is probably hiding information. So
fascinating.
>> And that's what they actually said. The
United States is probably covering up
information and that was their other
reason. That was their official report.
That's amazing. So and then and I I
believe the head of their
CIA former head of their CIA Alain
Juillet was extremely interested in UFOs
and still publicly to this day is like
this big you know, UFO proponent. So
Right. they have a long history.
So Gemini 11 that was Pete Conrad was
the astronaut.
>> Yeah, Conrad and Gordon. And Gordon. And
did they come back and say we saw a UFO?
Did they say anything?
>> think so. Okay. Yeah. I mean cuz that's
the other look, I I've looked into all
the moon landing stuff and I just
actually had Joe Rogan on the podcast
which was a big honor. Um he he kind of
um uh was the the first person to be in
our spaceship set which we just built
which is really cool, yeah. And um
I just couldn't couldn't think of
anybody better for that and um we we
talked about
a lot of the moon moon landing
weirdness. Yeah. You know, in the
presentation of the moon landing. And I
I I think neither of us are suggesting
that definitively like the US didn't go
to the moon. I think you can
to you know, the the inverse of that you
you can say definitively the
presentation of whatever happened is
weird and it was sanitized and manicured
and presented in a bizarre way. And
there was definitely some
uh you know,
managing of that that was that was going
on. That that's obvious. Mhm. And so I
wonder if you know, maybe maybe we did
actually attempt or go and maybe we just
saw UFOs along the way or maybe there's
something very ontologically weird about
the trip to space that's hard to come
back with as far as a revelation to the
public or something. I don't know.
But um I mean Edgar Mitchell came back
talking about having an epiphany of how
we're all connected in the you know,
I thinking about different way of
thinking about the universe and
humanity. But then after that he was
very
very much um involved with UFOs. Yeah,
pop
>> grew up in Roswell. Grew up in Roswell,
Apollo 14 astronaut. And he had gotten
and so because he was an Apollo
astronaut, he got to hear all sorts of
things about Roswell from people from at
all levels.
>> He's very close with Wernher von Braun
who seemed really interested in UFOs as
well. He's the father of our of our
space program essentially.
>> Well, Wernher von Braun's mentor was
Herman Hermann Oberth
who who gave a lecture in 1954 on UFOs.
After so many witnesses have seen the
so-called flying saucers
the existence cannot longer be denied.
I believe that these flying objects come
from another solar system.
I have his notes and his lecture notes.
And in there he mentions that he has
they he has seen
numerous radar measurements
of their speeds up to 19 km a second
which is about 40,000 miles an hour. He
also says that the rocket program was
helped and then he was he was basically
the the father of German rocketry and he
said that it was aided by these these
non-human beings. So
>> [laughter]
>> That's great. Yeah, but that so that's
that's going back to 19 So 1954 we knew
that these things traveled at spacecraft
speeds. We already knew that in 1954.
And and
why are we playing catch-up just now?
Why did this
Why did this take a half a century to
unfold? It's really crazy. Well, proof
that um NASA, you know, probably knows
something a thing or two internally
about the UFO stuff and I know this is
something you've looked into. And I
think my buddy Chris Ramsey might be
doing an interesting follow-up with you
on on all this stuff, but
>> Oh yeah, Chris, right. There's um
there's a the Simkinson photo around
Gemini 11 that flight and there's
maybe the best UFO photo
you could ever ask for. It's like a
perfect UFO photo. In fact, have the
book
uh right here. I'm I'm I'm going to I'm
going to take it.
>> Oh, go grab it. Sure. So we have we have
this um this Simkinson NASA UFO archive
and this photo which is like maybe the
best UFO photo of all time um if it's
real and it comes from Gemini 11 and you
you figured out that this was a Gemini
11 photo, right? Um well, Ed Wilson knew
that.
>> Oh, okay. Ed Wilson did. Okay.
But it actually says on it says strange
object as seen by the astronauts of
Gemini 11. I think that's what it says.
Underneath on on the lithograph. So it's
a So what he found was a was a
lithograph which is a printing a printed
photograph. And they printed them um
kind of like a
a lithograph's kind of like a um
comic book is printed with all the dots,
right?
Which makes it horrible to analyze. If
you're trying to find stars in that
picture, you're you are so out of luck.
I mean, several of us were trying to
identify stars and things like this in
that picture and you just can't do it.
Is that a UFO? Um I actually I I So what
I my best assessment of what that image
shows is that it is probably a mock-up
of what the astronauts claim to have
seen.
And um Why is that your assessment?
Because um
And actually found the
original photograph in the University of
Arizona archives that shows Earth with
that cloud pattern in the background and
there's no UFO there.
Now,
of course, it's easy to claim well, NASA
erased the UFO from that picture. Um
and it doesn't Now, of course, doing an
image analysis like that on
on a scanned
negative, right? Where you don't know
what kind of process and it's a JPEG
which is which is um
a lossy encoding and all this these
types of image analysis problems. So
it's not great image you it's not great
for doing an image analysis on, but I
found no evidence that they anything was
erased from that picture.
And um
and and that picture actually is showing
the end of the tether experiment. So So
now the Gemini project Gemini meaning
twins was all about docking.
Can we actually dock with another
spacecraft in space?
And so Gemini 11 was the last one of the
series and a unique one in that their
goal was to go up literally launch and
dock within one orbit.
So but they were doing previously they'd
go and they'd get up into orbit and then
they'd maneuver to dock, but the trick
was can we just go up and dock?
And that's what they tried to do with
the Gemini 11 and they were successful.
And after they docked they um
then were tethered to the other craft
and they did a tether experiment where
they actually got the two crafts
spinning like this. I'm going to knock
things over. Got the two crafts spinning
on a tether
and then um
and did experiments to see how stable
that is and what goes wrong. And um
So they had just finished that
experiment and they had just released
the other craft the unmanned craft and
that's in the picture
that the background of that lithograph
is from.
And there's no indication that the
astronauts saw any UFO at that time in
the transcripts. They were busy with the
you know, yeah, they're [clears throat]
busy with the tether experiment. So when
was the cuz you just said earlier that
>> Then the UFO sighting, the weird thing
that happened happened an hour later.
Oh. Put it in another orbit, right? Oh.
Two thirds of an orbit. So you did some
forensic investigating and realized that
the timing was
>> off. for for when they actually did see
the UFO. So the so the big power
problems with that being a real picture
are are first the the um
First, we don't have a picture of the
UFO We don't have an actual photograph
of the UFO.
We don't just have the lithograph.
Um
there doesn't seem to be any evidence of
temp
this that photograph being tampered
with.
Um there was no indication that they saw
a UFO at that time.
And the UFO they did see happen an hour
later. Yeah. So so so what's your best
explanation as to how that photo
surfaced at all that with the UFO? What
I suspect happened is is it's I I think
that what that photo is is exactly what
it says under the photo. It's printed
there. Strange object as seen by Gemini
11 astronauts. I think it's a mock-up
to show what the astronauts saw.
And but but they didn't photograph. Was
that officially published in some NASA
thing or
>> officially published anywhere which was
it made it interesting. It was found in
Scott Simkinson was a NASA engineer.
Okay. Um he was he was actually the
first engineer hired by NASA. Whoa. I
think. And his nickname was Scotty.
Everybody called him Scotty and I can't
and I can't help but think is there any
connection between Scott Simkinson
Scotty and Scotty in the Enterprise? I
don't know. But he was very well known
right in the 50s and 60s. So there might
be a connection. That's fascinating.
Well, sounds like he's kind of as
insidery as it gets. Yeah. And the fact
that he, you know, you find in his in
his records
>> some of the spacecraft. Designed some of
the spacecraft. So if there's some sort
of even if it's an artist's rendition
where they're So he had he he had any a
collection of his NASA files. He and his
secretary Emily Erdle had a collection
of of their NASA files.
And um
and then when he died and she died, they
were made public and they were put to
auction and Ed Wilson bought them. Wow.
That's how he got them and he discovered
the lithograph amongst them. Well, if
there's a painting of a UFO
in that photo and it's found in his
records, that implies that there's
almost institutional NASA knowledge of
the fact that the Gemini 11 astronauts
did see a UFO.
>> I think well, and and they
that's what's said in the transcripts.
So Even if it's painted on, it's like
this inside joke or way to commemorate
this very real event. It's not this
>> way to record what happened as best they
can, yeah. That's fascinating. That's so
interesting.
>> Why none of this is mentioned in the
NASA Commission's report, I have no
idea. Did they not Maybe they didn't
know. I mean, it's possible they didn't
know. I don't know.
>> [laughter]
>> Who knows? I mean, speaking of NASA
obstruction, 3I Atlas, you know, we have
this Manhattan-sized object that is now
come around back around the sun and it
is headed towards Jupiter. It's going to
pass the Earth December 19th. So this
might be out by the time
you know, it's it's it's already sort of
passed.
So so what do what do you think's going
on with this object? You have like most
of the astronomical community
basically like ignoring it or saying
it's doesn't matter or whatever and then
you have Avi Loeb going crazy going on
literally every single podcast that
exists saying, you know, 40% chance that
this is an alien craft and you know, it
could be it could be a harbinger of, you
know, either the Messiah or you know, it
could be an invader or something. So
what what's going on? Yeah, that's I
mean, And then NASA as is is did did a
this stupid gaslighting press conference
where I was honestly a little skeptical
of some of Avi's statements. I felt like
he was like extrapolating and you know,
jumping to conclusions, but I ended up I
I wanted to side with Avi after watching
this gaslighting NASA press
>> press conferences are the absolute
worst. You want to geek out a little
bit, Tom?
>> [laughter]
>> You were geeking out so expertly Nikki
to begin with. So that was that was
fabulous. I mean, that every every even
when I was at NASA, you wait for this
press conference. Oh, there's going to
be some exciting news about something
and it's
not very exciting.
And and you're always and and the part
of the problem is that your expectation
for excitement from NASA is is way too
high, right? And [laughter]
unreasonably high. So that's part of the
problem. So So I can't not all the blame
should go to NASA for that. But but the
press conferences are are always quite
bo I mean,
part of it also is science is kind of
boring. And if you're giving a So if
you're giving a press conference about
science that might be kind that that's
often kind of boring.
>> But you should expect a photo that's
better resolution than what amateur
astronomers are taking of 3I Atlas. It's
like this Yeah, but it's hard if you've
got you've got a you've got a spacecraft
in orbit around Mars designed to image
the surface of Mars and you're trying to
use it to image something much further
away. That's tough.
Right, but then crowd So if you're the
official government body and you get
billions in funding every year,
then find the the amateur astronomer
that can do it and do it do you work
with them?
>> [clears throat]
>> You have the money like
>> That would be nice. That would be nice.
Yeah, I I mean I'm not surprised that
that we can't get a good image of it.
That's that's hard to do. Um
I mean three three I Atlas is is weird
and I don't know I mean
why the astronomical
astronomical society won't
>> [snorts]
>> or community won't recognize that is
kind of strange. I mean maybe it is are
they kind of quieted by Avi being so
loud about it being possibly an alien
craft? That could be part of it. They
don't want to get into this mess.
Um but but it's a weird thing. I mean I
Yeah, great easy to say comment but
when it came back around from around the
sun if I'm remembering right, I mean
these are numbers that I not horribly
invested in remembering but it was only
like 4% water
vapor as it came back around. That's
hardly any The thing's
Comets are dirty snowballs. They're made
of water.
4% water? Well, now now what is this
thing? Um
It's got iron
or it's got nickel but no iron.
Iron and nickel come together. I mean
they're they're next to each other on
the periodic table. To separate iron and
nickel you're going to need some weird
pro some difficult processes to separate
these two.
You and
meteorites metal meteorites are always
iron nickel meteorites. Iron and nickel
come together. So now you've got
something that's nickel and not iron.
This is a weird thing.
And um it suggests some weird processes
that went into its formation.
Um It has an anti-tail not just a tail.
>> a tail and an anti-tail. It's Yeah,
there's there's a lot to worry about
here and
and I
suspect I mean if from from a practical
standpoint
clearly this is something that we don't
know much about.
Yeah. And so just claiming it's a comet
and throwing up your hands and walking
away is stupid. I mean just just flat
out stupid and ignorant. Um
To say it's an inter to say it's an
alien spacecraft, well I mean yeah
that's you don't have a lot of evidence
for that either. So that's tough too.
Um but it is something we ought to
study. And I remember there were several
people who were saying, well you it's
not worth studying. I'm like no this is
an interstellar object that tells us
what the conditions are like around
another star system. Yeah, this is
something you should study. If you're
going to spend money to study another
one of our asteroids over something from
another star system, what's there's
nothing reasonable about that.
>> This is a problem with this whole
conversation around UFOs is you have on
the one hand most conventional
astronomers not even looking at the data
set often around like I see these guys I
think this Piers Morgan just had on this
guy I think David Kipping or something.
He seems like a really good
>> David You know David. Seems like a
really actually I loved his episode on
Rogan.
Yeah, exoplanet guy really smart on that
dimension but like this data set that
we're talking about with UFOs showing up
around nuclear weapons just like totally
ignorant of it. And like he's talking
about UFOs but it's like
as if they have to be things that are
traveling from from space and he I I
don't even think he's probably familiar
with a lot of the NASA cases, you know?
Cuz these seem like anecdotal small
sample size, you know, conspiratorial
things. I would argue that the nuclear
thing is a ubiquitous global pattern.
>> It's a huge deal. That you have to
contend with as a scientist.
>> Right. So you end up with these people
who like again don't want to like knock
him like super smart conventional guy
but like is mired in kind of current
astronomical data around UFOs and just
will won't really look at it and it it's
all relying on you know it's all like
well if the government has something
they should release it or something but
can't look at the open source stuff. And
then on the other side it's people who
are sure that it's extraterrestrial.
They're here. They're star seeds
probably, you know, and then we have all
the it's like
you're jumping super to conclusions.
You're not just following the evidence.
>> [laughter]
>> Yeah.
So it's those two that's that there's no
like middle path of like this is the
evidence.
>> It's like dealing with a scientific it's
like a scientific community with bipolar
disorder. Yes. It's like Yes. It's
crazy.
Yeah, it's it's really difficult. The um
I mean the best the the the quote that
comes to mind is from Stanton Friedman
who said
if you're a scientist and a professional
you need to do your homework before you
open your mouth.
Mhm. Period. That's it. Mhm. If you
haven't done your homework, if you
haven't researched it
then you
you have nothing to say. You have
nothing to share. And and you can't go
with the excuse that I hear time and
time again. Well, I don't that's mostly
nonsense and I don't have time to read
nonsense.
Well, then why are you finding the time
to talk about
Yeah.
>> argue against nonsense? You can find the
time to argue against nonsense without
looking into the nonsense.
And then that's it. But you can't find
the time to research it. And then and
first my first response to that first
it's not nonsense.
This is something that this is a
phenomenon that people have seen for
centuries.
Centuries. I mean you had Richard Dolan
on and he just put out a book on
on um
UFOs in water underwater UFOs and his
case is going back to the 1800s.
>> Mhm. These are the same things. They
they're coming Back to Columbus. balls
of white coming out of the water
hovering next to the ship following the
ship and then taking off into the
clouds. Same things. Yes. And for since
the 1800s and this nobody in the 1800s
is making this up to sound like what
somebody reported last week. No,
totally. And you have you have third
world places now like in third world
countries where it's like these people
like Virginia James Fox just got back
you know from Brazil. He keeps going
back and like this whole town
uncorrelated disparate sources. They all
report this cigar-shaped tic-tac-like
object crashing. Right. And and three
beings coming out you know two of one of
which was captured. And and and taken to
a hospital and everybody working at the
hospital says that they saw the being
and one neuroscientist who's still alive
to this day goes on record says he's
staring the being in the face for 4
minutes. Yeah. And this guy's alive and
you have that this whole time there's a
saucer in the town dedicated UFOs. What
they none of these people are making a
penny. Some of them were offered
briefcases of cash to shut up about this
thing.
So [laughter] so like what like Explain
to me why they would lie. Like it's
ridiculous. It's actually absurd.
>> I wish I could see a UFO so somebody
could offer me to shut up. Yeah,
[laughter] right. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Yeah, I'll take it. That's a good deal.
Maybe that's what's happening with some
of the scientists.
Yeah, well maybe maybe because I want
like somebody like a a Neil deGrasse
Tyson, you know, like he goes on these
podcast tours and he's just he'll just
it's the same thing over and over again
which is like no high resolution imagery
and you know it's like you know why
don't we have and we were you know why
aren't we drowning in imagery cuz we
have all of cell phones or whatever. And
you you have
>> any high resolution pictures of quasars?
Right. I don't think so. But they exist.
But they exist. I mean
we don't have high resolution pictures
of exoplanets either yet David Kipping
and I study them. Yes. I mean come on.
That's Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's I mean
why Or ask the average person to
>> it a scientist through when they come to
this topic they throw their brains out
the window and then open their mouths.
It's it's it's maddening. Yeah, I think
there's some sort of Well, I I think
unorthodox and independent thinking
don't scale with IQ. And so there are a
lot of people that can be shepherded
into bad frameworks and they're not even
looking at certain stigmatized topics
because
ideas are fashion statements and those
are bad fashion or whatever. Even though
they can like do well on an SAT or
something. And so that I think that's a
really
you know, not well understood thing. And
so you think of this priestly citadel is
like infallible when it comes to
thinking about these things but in fact
they can be shepherded into you know, in
some ways they can be shepherded even
more easily because they think they're
so smart. They think they can't be
tricked or something.
>> Right. And it's just I don't know. I
think it's sad cuz you there are all
these first principles arguments so you
can you can you can go at you know Neil
deGrasse Tyson with around you know, red
shifts and blue shifts and you know,
gravitational perturbations that will
like you know,
cause issues with general optical
photography you know, and
you know, it's like he wouldn't have
anything to say after that. He would
just say, well it can't be. It can't be
so. Like there's there's that's that
ends the conversation with a person like
that, you know?
So it's it's like extremely frustrating.
Right. I'm sure you deal with it cuz you
have to straddle academia and this sort
of more you know, crazy world of UFOs.
>> numerous discussions where the
academic person I've been talking to
just throws their brain out the window
and stops thinking. You know, you talk
if I talk about something else another
scientific topic topic they're fine but
this they just seem to stop thinking.
It's very it's very odd. You're in
upstate New York.
Do you think
you're in the general vicinity of Stony
Brook University. Do you think they have
anything to do with UFOs?
I don't know of anything going on at
Stony Brook.
>> Brook, okay.
Cuz they yeah, they have I don't know a
bunch of interesting
they have like differential geometry
stuff going on and you know, they have
Jim Simons is like a big guy there.
>> I know Stony Brook has a great physics
department but I don't think they do
anything with UFOs.
>> With UFO stuff, okay. Cuz David Spergel
who's Jim Simons, you know, um uh
foundation guy. So Jim Simons is like
runs you he just passed away. Ran the
best performing hedge fund in the US
over you know, a 30-year period. Um you
know, Renaissance Technologies the
Medallion Fund. And before that he was
an NSA code breaker and also like a
brilliant physicist who's contributed a
lot to fundamental physics and like
Yang-Mills and you know, interesting
stuff. So, um
yeah, my former colleague Eric Weinstein
has suspected that maybe he has
something to do with the UFO question or
something, and that there maybe that
that Renaissance Technologies sort of
printing money and then they're putting
it towards, you know, the UFO the UFO
question. And I I honestly I thought all
of that was kind of conspiratorial and
ridiculous until 2022 happened. There's
a NASA UAP panel and then David Spergel
who's, you know, Jim Simons top science
advisor runs the science foundation.
Yeah, he wrote he wrote he was the main
author on the report. On the NASA UAP
review panel. Right.
>> So, I'm like, what's going on? Is is
there some sort of connection there?
That's a good question. I don't know.
Cuz we were just talking about all the
weird NASA data and that seems to be
like it, you know, it seems like it
might be suppressed or something, so.
Yeah. Who knows? Well,
this has been a pleasure, Kevin. I
really love talking to you and yeah, I
wish you the best of luck with all of
your interesting work at University of
Albany. Oh, thank you. And is there
anything you'd like to plug or anything
the audience can help kind of promote or
support
that that that helps you out?
>> Well, our work at U Albany would be
great to support. Uh we we just got a
generous donation from a from Tony
Gorman who's a local businessman and um
and that has really given us a big boost
and um we can always use a little more
boost. So, if anybody wants to donate
tax-free to some
to or
to um
U Albany for our work on UAPs, that'd be
awesome. That's awesome. And yeah, one
of the few academic institutions that is
actually systematically looking into
this question, so.
>> so we're basically we Matthew Schdagis
and I and
you know, we were
original members with UAPx and now UAPx
has been
has been disbanded and moved to U Albany
and it's now U Albany Project X. Mhm.
And Matthew Schdagis and I and and
Professor Cecilia Levy has joined us as
well, so. Awesome. And we're
and the grant the grant the gift we got
has created an endowment which will fund
us in perpetuity to some degree. So, we
have we are here to stay. Wow, love it.
It's exciting. Well, excited to see you
know, as you make breakthroughs on a go
forward basis and we'll love to have you
back and really appreciate you coming
out here. Thank you so much for having
me.
Alchemist, did you enjoy that? If you
want the full picture, head over to the
American Alchemy magazine we just
launched on Substack. That's where we
deep dive into all sorts of crazy topics
that we don't have time to fit into
every video with weekly articles
exploring all of the strange, forgotten,
and conspiratorial corners of space,
history, and high weirdness. So, join up
today at our free or paid tiers on
Substack. I am including the full link
in the description of this video.