Hello, and welcome to the show. I'm Martin Willis your host, and
we have an interesting guest this evening. We have doctor Michael Masters, and
he has he has a very interesting idea of what UFOs could possibly be.
And as most of my long time listeners know, I have absolutely know what
idea, what they are or what's in them, if anything is in them
at all. And and so I loved hearing different ideas and exploring the different
thoughts that people come up with. It's really enjoyable for me. So he'll
be coming up right after the news with Alajandro Rojas, who's joining us today
in just a minute. I want to thank everyone that helps us out and
supports a show. Anyone can do that. That information is over at podcast
ufo dot com. And speaking of that, we have blogs now every week
from Charles Leir check it out. This week we have something that's close to
home for him. He talks about UFOs in his backyard and that's just in
the area which he lives in the Long Island area, and he involves a
number of people that actually have been on the show in the past and talking
about you know, what's going on over there, and there has been a
lot of sightings out there. I think it's one of the top I don't
know if you want to call hotspots, but one of the top places in
the country where there's sightings in New York. And of course a lot of
that has to do with population. Um. You know, New York City
the most populated city by by far. Um. So anyway, that blog
is up there, and h I think that is it. Next week.
I just wanted to talk about because I always announced my guest for next week.
I don't have a guest for next week. I do, um he
is H. He's going to let me know for sure if he can be
on the show, so I don't want to announce his name. Um.
But anyway, I, like I said, I usually it's going to be
a surprise next week whoever the guest is going to be. And anyway,
I'm going to start the show with Alejandro Aurojas. Welcome to the show,
Alejandro, Thank you very much. I am happy to be here. Yeah,
I'm always happy that you're here. And so hey, it's been a
Newsy Newsy day. Newsy weeds been Newsy a f I'd like to put it
a f okay as heck as flip as flip. Okay, thank you for
using that word instead of what I thought you were gonna say. Well,
you're not supposed to say out the acronym. Yeah, that's the whole point.
Yeah. But yeah, but just so people know, and I've told
this people on this on my show. If I use like af I mean
as flip, I always mean that the flip sounds good to know. But
anyways, yes, it's been so news he because so much has been going
on. Really, we're kind of in the middle of this mega media blast
kind of fervor around UFOs, and it all does hie back and habits everything
to do with Unidentified America's UFO Investigation, which is the television show that is
coming out on Friday that covers essentially to the stars as they investigate UFOs.
The main lead character in it is Louise Elizondo. It's a reality show.
Of course. He used to run the Pentagon program, the Advanced Daispace Threat
Identification Program a TIP and so it also gets into cases that he looked at.
Now this all started the fervor, of course, all of this started
in December twenty seventeen when Leslie Kane, Ralph Blumenthal and Helen Cooper wrote this
story about a tip, and everybody's been really excited about it, but we
haven't gotten a whole lot of information, and that has mostly been I know,
for her back because of this television show was an idea of how do
we get this information out there for better or worse. So a lot of
people have criticized it, but those of us who have seen the program,
like you and I Martin, think that this program is really good, at
least the first episode that we've seen. So this is how they decided to
release this information. But people who have been wondering what is going to be
in the show, and there's been some interviews that we've all had to talk
about what was in the show. Lose dropped him said other cases are going
to be in there. And of course when the New York Times article came
out, there was a video in there. There were two Flair videos,
one of them from the two thousand and four Limits event, the other one.
We didn't have much information. Then soon after two the Stars released a
third video. And there's a lot of debate over the last year or so
and did the DoD really release these videos. We do know that they did,
well, this all hit another huge It's all making a big deal again
right now because the New York Times, well for a couple articles. First
the Politico, they wrote, Brian Bender, the guy working with Politico who
is actually in this new History Channel television show. He wrote an article about
the Navy making new guidelines. Tom DeLong. They came out and said that
To the Stars influenced getting the Navy to make UFO reporting guidelines. Chris Mellon
then backed him up a little bit later in an article with George Knapp,
and then some of us such as yourself and myself spoken to one of the
executive producers, Anthony Lapey, and he confirmed that not only did these guys
have an influence with the Navy, but that is going to be in the
show. We're going to actually see this influence and see lu Alisando and the
other two the Stars guys working with the Navy to get all of this information.
Now, so on top of that, there are also going to be
some more exciting cases related to those other videos in the History Channel show.
And The New York Times finally, you know what, a year and a
half later, has done a follow up to their original a tip article and
this one's called their headlines are really weird. Actually both articles. The headlines
are weird, but the headlines and this is wow, what is that?
Navy pilots report unexplained flying objects. I do agree about the headlines. I
thought of it. Yeah, the other one was auroras and whatever. But
this has a couple more pilots that are coming forward about events that took place
in twenty fourteen and twenty fifteen. So they're talking about these UFO sightings,
and you know, essentially, I don't think these encounters that they're talking about
here are necessarily as exciting as Faver's personal account. However, they are talking
about more credible accounts where they're chasing, essentially looking for objects that are showing
up on radar. One case that they talked about is really exciting, where
these two jets are flying along in this jet and his wingman are about one
hundred feet apart and some object zips in between them. And this actually was
a pivotal moment. This happened I think at twenty fourteen or twenty fifteen,
early twenty fifteen, and up until this point they weren't sure what these objects
were that were showing up on radar. But once this thing zipped through in
between them, then they really took it seriously for two reasons. One because
they were getting close. This was a near miss they could have been hurt.
And two because the object was a cube inside of a circle. They
describe it as like a clear beach ball with a cube inside of it,
so it was extremely flipping odd. They even said people have described it as
kind of X files. Titler Rogue away from war Zone wrote about how it's
X file like because it's just so weird. So at that point, you
know, they took it really seriously. And we've got a new story that
came out just today the Washington Post. This is a great title of this
article too. It's called essentially that UFOs are a big deal and now we
can't He says UFOs exist and everyone needs to adjust to that fact. And
what's great about this article, it's a political writer and he says UFOs are
not the same as aliens, that we don't know what UFOs are. They're
unidentified. What's beautiful about that is all of us know that. But this
has been a real hard cell. This has been hard to educate The main
stream and mainstream media on that point, because they always want to go to
aliens. So it's great to see him writing that. And then just now
I just posted some videos that I got from history of interviews with these pilots
from that New York Times article, And these are small clips about minute and
a half of these pilots talking about these counters. And these are clips from
the show from upcoming episodes. So really exciting stuff. One other story to
plug my stories, I wrote another story that just came out yesterday. Oh
no, it just came out this morning, and den of Geek, but
this was centered around why tommed along. I think a lot of people are
seeing the previews for Unidentified and they see lu Alisando, you know, this
career intelligence guy. They show Chris Mellon, who was, you know,
worked in intelligence with like the deputy assistant to you know, National Intelligence,
crazy working at the White House and the Pentagon and everything. Steve Justice,
a guy who worked for Lockheed Martin Skunkworks. These are the guys who built
the SR seventy one. So you have all of these very highly credible people.
What's with this rock star right in the middle of it. Yeah,
of course, a lot of us know who have been following this, and
this is the gist of the article is that none of this really would have
happened without Tom DeLong. And what's really funny is I wrote this article probably
two three weeks ago, but after this news with not just the Navy changing
their guidelines, with all of these Navy pilots coming forward, and the mainstream
taking this seriously, and it all comes back to Tom DeLong. Really,
Tom DeLong, this might have happened maybe in the months from now or years
from now as people kind of came out, but he was kind of the
person who coalesced all this and brought everybody together and focused this effort. And
Tom DeLong deserves an immense amount of credit for all of this. Yeah,
as long as he stays off Chill Rogan's show, you know, yeah,
as long as he says he still has some really crazy ideas. And I
don't know about you, but I have a lot of people harassing me,
well what about Tom. Tom said this, and Tom said that, and
it's like it's great, but what Tom says, we don't have anything corroborating
what Lou says. Now, we have a lot of government documents that have
come out d D at first kind of claim that Lou was inaccurate in some
things. But you know, finally recently they've had to admit that no,
Lou was right about all of these things, that a tip was about UFOs
that they did release the videos. So Lou has a lot of corroborating evidence.
All of these navy guys have you know, other pilots radar that they
came back up their claims. So a lot of the more fringey, kind
of wild ideas that Tom Delongs has have still really really don't have any idea
where he got some of those ideas. But nevertheless, this crazy rock star
guys rock and their UFO world. Oh what a great title off Rocket the
World. There will be a song, um, you know it. You've
got to give credit where credits due exactly, And I think, you know,
there's a lot of people that really really do not want to give Tom
DeLong any credit at all. And I kind of get that. The reason
I kind of get that is because you know, he comes out of nowhere
basically, and there's people who have been working really hard, you know,
perhaps their entire life, trying to you know, get some headway here.
I've been at it a couple of decades. I've spent and lord knows how
much money, and he just kind of, you know, I don't want
to say he fell into it, but maybe he did fall into it.
It kind of but if you know, without his celebrity status, he would
have never gone anywhere. Really with with that, you know what, I
think that you've got a great point there because in a way I think he
did. It's not just his celebrity status. He was wise enough to go
to the right place. You know, it keeps sending us notes, but
I think that the person who's sending us notes doesn't have everything right. But
in a way they do. I think that you know, they're mentioning like
help put Off, who's part of the group, Which is true that help
put Off is part of the group and has been very helpful Kick Green,
It's worked in this field. But the point being at Robert Bigelow, a
lot of this comes back to all of this group of researchers and very credible
people who have worked inside of government to make the paranormal serious, to make
people pay attention to the credible evidence towards different paranormal aspects. Decades and now,
really, with the help of Tom DeLong and kind of a more of
a coalescing and a team kind of atmosphere among all of these people, and
help from people like Leslie Kane and Ralph Blumenthal who write these articles from the
New York Times, we've got this perfect storm situation where it's all coming together
now with a History Channel show, and people are going to have to take
our word for it that the History Channel's good show is good and I don't
blame them. In my review, I wrote, I could see how you'd
be skeptical, especially when History Channels doing Ancient Aliens, and this show's coming
right after Ancient Aliens, but it's much much different than Ancient Aliens, and
you can attest to that. Yeah, I have only watched up Ancient Aliens
a couple of times in my life, so and it was a long time
ago, so I don't really I can't really remember much about it. Only
Suculist's hair, you know, Well that kind of speaks volumes though, because
you're into this topic yet you're you're not that big of a fan of Ancient
Aliens, and I'm in the same boat. I love Georgio, I love
the guys who are in the show. They're personal friends, many of them.
But that's really not my cup of tea so much, however, unidentified
is. It's it's hard hitting evidence and facts, navy pilots, jet fighters,
exciting stuff. Yeah, great stuff. Excellent, Well, Alejandro,
thank you so much out and it's really you know, the news is breaking
daily, it seems it is. I mean, it's it's keeping me so
busy. It's uh, I think it's breaking even you know, throughout the
day, even today has been so hot with several great stories and now these
videos that I literally just posted because before coming on with you. So yeah,
it's exciting, Steff. So check out. Is it at your own
channel? What's the name of your channel? Most of this news you can
find at open Minds dot tv, and I'll have this article up there soon,
but otherwise you can also find it at on my social media Alejandro t.
Rojas is my Twitter or also Alejandro Rojas dot com. Excellent. All
right, alhandro thanks so much, and I'll be talking to you next week.
All talk to you later, Thanks man. Thank you. All right,
our guest this evening pretty excited about talking about this subject and it's doctor
Michael P. Masters, and he is a professor of biological anthropology at Montana
Tech and Butte Montana. He received a PhD in anthropology from the Ohio State
University in two thousand and nine, where he specialized in human evolutionary anatomy,
archaeology, and biomedicine. His new book is called Identified Flying Objects, a
multidisciplinary scientific approach to the UFO phenomena, challenges readers to consider the new possibilities
while cultivating conversations about our ever evolving understanding of time and time travel. And
this is why he's on to cultivate a conversation. Welcome to the show,
Doctor Masters. Thanks Martin's so great to be here. Thanks for having me
on. Yes, yeah, So, I guess I'm going to start out
by asking you to talk about your background and kind of what major decide to
look take a look at this whole idea of yours. Well, it all
started when I was a small child. I was about eight years old and
overheard a conversation that my parents were having with some friends that were over at
our house. And I remember creeping down the stairs and kind of sitting up
on the stairs and listening, and it was this crazy story about this glowing
ball of light that my father saw a short period of time before I was
born, and described it as this glowing orb sitting across the horizon in a
very dark part of Ohio and Amish country, and said it shot toward the
truck. Him and someone a colleague that we're riding along with him that night
both observed the same thing, sat there for a little bit, shot back
across the horizon, hovered there for a while, and then went straight up.
And that that really piqued my interest and made me want to learn more
about it. Well, and did he ever try to, you know,
tried to decide what he thought he saw? I mean, did he did
the actual the word UFL actually come out? You know, what do you
think you saw? Yeah? Well, I mean I think he was really
confused, as as are most people that have an experience like that. He
did try to get some level of understanding. What was really formative for me
personally was that he got Whitley Stryber's book Communion, and I remember seeing it
up on the shelf in our living room and kind of had this mental image
that I describe early in the book is just kind of a chimpanzee and early
hominin form, a modern human form, and then this archetypal alien form with
a big head, big guy's small face and whatnot. And it sort of
made me wonder if there could be some sort of phylogenetic evolutionary connection there,
and that's that's what set me down this path. But he really didn't talk
about it much. I remember actually having to ask him about it. I
think I was in college, maybe a sophomore junior in college, and sat
down just just because I was really starting to look into this more and wanted
to get a take on his personal experiences. But other than that little sitdown
we had many years ago, it really wasn't something he brought up or or
discussed willingly. Kind of took some proudying to get him to to even describe
his personal experience, but I know he was certainly interested in trying to get
more information, because when you see something like that, there's there's really no
way to just ignore it. I think everybody it's a life changing thing,
and people really want some explanation or at least some answers for what that might
have been. Yeah, that's actually why I'm here. You know what was
it really experienced? Yeah, what was yours? It was? You know
what's it's by most people's sightings, I have to tell you it was.
It was you know, boring, um, you know it was. I
was in basically in a hot tub and something caught my eye. It was
in Carmel Valley, California, back in two thousand and six. Something caught
my eye. I told this story a number of times, so listener,
bear with me here. And so I looked up and it was it was
sort of dusk, you know, it wasn't really nightfall, and I saw
this perfectly shaped disc u I would say it's like probably the size of it's
hard to say, look like the size of a quarter, I guess.
I don't know exactly how high up it was. And it had like a
light blue glow and no lights or anything, and it just it moved and
silently. And that was the thing that freaked me out the most. It's
like, wow, there's no noise this thing is, you know, not
a single noise. And then it just stopped and then went off at an
angle toward Carmel, I'm sorry, towards Monterey. So I jumped out of
the hot tub and called. I didn't know what. I didn't know any
reporting centers or anything like that, never even dawned to meet, to look
online or anything. And so I called the police department and said, as
anyone else seeing this? And I was put on hold for about twenty minutes
and gave up. So it's kind of a boring site. I don't think
so at all. In fact, it's I haven't seen anything, so to
me, that's that's phenomenal. It's a really great experience and a cool place
to see it too. Actually this came from Monterey last week. I was
there's part of a book tour I was on, and so beautiful, beautiful
area. Oh isn't it. Yeah, it was really nice. I've lived
out that way for I think it was nine years. So the the thing
I'm coming up with, did your did your father actually see an entity of
some type? No? No, just the just the light and it was
the same thing. There were lights on it. He just he described it
as glowing as just not not radiating beams of light as they do when you
look at a bright light and a dark street light or whatever, but just
sort of a glow that it had. Yeah, but no, I don't
think I don't think it was any sort of presence of a being or any
sort of communication or anything like that. Yeah. Yeah, you know we're
gonna be talking about time travel, the possibility of it, and this is
what your book kind of I believe the basis of the possible basis of it.
And you know, as a kid, I remember I used to I
used to make a lot of stupid jokes and one of them was, well,
we'll never invent time travel because we never see anyone from the future.
But I think your book kind of is questioning that it addresses that specifically.
That was always Stephen Hawking's principal argument too, is that because we're not inundated
with time and tourists, it must mean that time travel will never be possible.
Yeah. Yeah. One of the things that I was thinking about it
and I want I wanted to tell you your get your thoughts on this is
I had an astro biologist on this show, astrophysicists on this show a number
of years ago, and Jeffrey, I just can't think of his last name
right now, and he said that him and his colleagues at NASA was a
senior visiting scientists at NASA, and he said they would kind of talk,
you know, quietly. And one of the things you know about the possibility
of you know, space travel and all that, and one of the things
they can you know that they kind of bounced off each other is that if
a civilization can get through the bottleneck of technology without blowing themselves up, then
they would be traveling the stars. And so I wanted to wanted to get
your your feedback on that phrase. Yeah, I mean that was a big
part of the Drake equation too. I think one of the most important variables
is l in his equation is how long does a civilization exist? How how
long can they persist after they reach that point when they developed complex societies and
politics and economics and war, And yeah, it does seem like there would
be some sort of intrinsic bottleneck associated with that. And looking at humanity on
this planet, and that is currently our only frame of reference, since we
don't have other visitors from other planets coming here and interacting with us openly and
telling us what's going on on their own planet. But here, Yeah,
we've been a very warmongering species for a long time, and there have been
very peaceful societies throughout history and prehistory, but they tend to not last very
long or have been driven to the outskirts by agricultural groups, especially up to
the Neolithic Revolution in the dawn of agriculture. And yeah, ever since then,
we anytime, as I tell my anthropology classes, anytime humans have developed
technology to kill each other better, that technology and those people spread very rapidly.
You see it with the copper age, Iron age, gunpowder age,
and now with the potential to complete wipe ourselves out or at least to really
damage the human population and the earth that we live on with nuclear war.
Uh yeah, it really makes you think about that and contemplate how important that
might be. What if we did create a true bottleneck, both genetically technologically,
it set us back tremendously and all of the progress that's brought us to
where we are today. I definitely think that's important to consider. Yeah,
yeah, well, we're right at our break right now. So the first
time this has happened when in doubt, When in doubt, keep going,
I guess yeah, yeah, yeah, So, um no, I think,
you know, I think of a number of things, and you know
you've heard, you know, the fear of artificial intelligence, you know,
I mean what that can do in the future. I mean, you know,
you could create a machine that says destroy the world, and you know,
keep creating new machines to destroy the world, and you know, and
then it can get out of control. You know, But that's kind of
like, you know, maybe that's a little way out there, but I
mean, if well, it's it's been a theme in so many science fiction
films, and a lot of times those are based in real fears, real
possibilities. I could certainly see where where there might be the potential for that.
You'd think as humans, we would tame it once it got to the
point where maybe that could potentially happen. And a lot of it comes down
to consciousness too, and this idea of free will, and there may be
more to it than just the robots decide to do this. But no,
it's it's definitely something. Who was it? I think Elon Musk just came
out recently and warned us of that, and a couple other high level executives
of smart people, UM certainly very intelligent and connected people. So yeah,
when when people like Elon Musks say we should be afraid of that, I
definitely sit up and listen. Yeah, yeah, definitely yeah, And so
if if one of the things I have said many times on this show,
also when talking with people that had different ideas on you know, what possibly
could UFOs be? I always say a lot of times that we often think
in terms of human terms, and it's so hard too, and that that
comes to everything, even down to physics. You know, we think of,
um, well, they can't get they can't get here from there because
it's it is extremely vast. I mean it's you can't even comprehend the vastness
of from one start to another and all that. So I understand that,
but I also understand that we are we are thinking in human terms. We're
thinking of terms of what we know, and we don't know if everything has
been thought of in physics, it's most likely not. Um So what are
your what were your thoughts that kind of led you on the path of possible
time travel instead of visitors? Well, I think you're absolutely right, and
humans have a tremendous knack for anthropomorphizing things and ascribing human characteristics or I mean,
it's really all we know. We can't sit down with dolphins and have
these conversations about dolphin points of view or chimpanzee points of view. We're kind
of alone in our intellect, at least with regard to these higher level cognition
types of things. But for me personally, the main thing is the physiology,
the physical characteristics, and looking at long term evolutionary changes in the Homanan
lineage and two of the main changes that characterize us as humans and hominins,
which is just us and our upright walking ancestors, going back to the split
between us and eventually what became the chimpanzee, which was about six to eight
million years ago when we shared a common ancestor. But the two main changes
have to do with our brains increasing in size and expanding laterally from the inside
out, but also forward and coming out over top of our eyeballs. And
in fact, we're the only mammal that has that cranio facial configuration in which
our forebrain sits right on top of our eye orbits, and the tradeoff there
is that our faces have to get out of the way. It would be
like it would be like putting a camper trailer on top of a corvette and
expecting that to work out logistically, it's just and it's the same thing with
craniofacial morphology. You can see it very clearly in dogs, as an example,
a Doberman pincher, a Collie versus a pug or a even a Rottweiler,
larger dogs that still have those retract faces and larger, larger forehead.
So over evolutionary time, and especially more recently in recent human evolution the last
day hundred thousand years or so, our brains have continued this increase in size,
but also a change in shape. They've become what we as anthropologists called
globular and increasing popularity where they become more rounded, more balloon likeker we become
more bubbleheaded, essentially, and our faces continue to get out of the way
of this runaway brain. And it's it's not just that morphology, but it's
also given us this evolution in our culture going back three three point three million
years ago with the advent of the first stone tools that set in motion this
accelerating rate of change in our culture and technology as well, and the phones
that we have, any sort of machinery, computers, all of it is
the direct descendants of those first stone tools three million years ago. And so
if we look at time and the sense of deep time and human evolution both
culturally and biologically, you can really see this consistent pattern, these tenacious trends
both in our morphology and culture, and projecting those forward you would get something
that very much trees numbles, the most commonly described alien form or what I
referred to as an extra tempestrial in the book, replacing tear the Latin root
for Earth, with tom the root for a time. So even even without
making claims or speculating about what might happen if we did blow ourselves up and
there was nuclear war and we had to live in space or underground, without
even going down that speculative road, just looking at the continuation of these same
enduring trends throughout hominan evolution into the future, you would expect to get something
very similar to what's commonly described in these reports of close encounters. Wow,
well I just found out that we are we are on break Oh Kgarry,
But that's okay. Where this is? So that was moot? No,
no, no, that's okay. It's all going to be on YouTube and
on my podcast. So it's all good. It's all good. So but
we're going back in about half a minute from now, so we won't well,
we'll just we'll just continue on with the conversation. That's all we can
do at this point, because I wasn't prepared for that. So I'll try
to work some of that back in at some pointcause I do think it's important
to understand in the argument. Yeah, and the holistic aspects of the argument.
Yeah, okay, Um, so I'm just gonna break here for just
a second. Race, you want to count us back in race? You
there? I panted the mic w I had to meet but sorry, okay,
we're ready to go. Yeah, we're ready here. Five four three
two, all right, welcome back. My guest is doctor Michael Masters.
And during the break we were talking about how the evolution is possible and can
you kind of just go since um, since we didn't realize we were on
a break here, I want to repeat the same thing right over again,
but can you kind of give like a nutshell of what you were saying just
so to catch the people up over where they're at KGr radio, Yeah,
no problem. And instructing and being a professor, we have to give cliff
notes versions of things all the time. So yeah, the bottom line is
the after we stood upright, after we became bipedal about six to eight million
years ago. One of the main changes that results from that, and I
actually didn't mention this in the brake, so it adds new content to what
was just mentioned, is that our heads have to rotate down in order to
see where we're going. Our heads have to come forward to keep our eyes
in line with the horizon, and quadrupedal animals don't have that requirement. So
we stood upright, our heads rotated down, and that created a flexing of
our cranial base. So the anterior cranial base, the area where the four
brain sits right on top of the eye orbits, came down, and the
frame and magnum, the big hole where our spinal cord passes to connect with
our brain, rotated downward and forward in association with their It's rotating down,
and that, really, more than anything else, is a big part of
why we grew such large brains in the first place. It created what's called
cranial flexing. Can think of bending two ends of a slinky down toward each
other. It creates this bowing on the top and this more bulbous characteristic that
is essentially what our brains look like. So beyond any of the other changes
that took place in hominan evolution, really just standing upright was a big catalyst
for the development of these larger brains, more retracted faces, more intelligence.
You certainly have to add to that the free use of our hands. We're
not using our arms and our hands to walk around anymore. Rather, we
can use them to make tools and to communicate, to do things that we
couldn't do if they're burdened with locomotion. So really standing upright set in motion
a number of important changes that really contributed to the uniqueness of modern humans and
a lot of the unique traits of our ancestors as well. Now I know,
I understand, I've read it quite a bit just from my own interested
you know, Neanderthals and now they're you know, with recent discoveries they believed
that they were actually cooking with fire, which is pretty amazing. And oh
not, that goes way back at one point eight million years ago. Let's
see the first events and that amo erectus. Oh wow, and that also
adds to intelligence too, right, absolutely, yeah, And the tradeoff I
was mentioning between our brain size and our facial size. Our face had to
get out of the way of our expanding brains, and by cooking our food
it helped with a number of things that made the food safer to eat.
It cooked off bacteria and parasites and viruses and things. But it also reduced
selective pressure to maintain big teeth and a big chewing apparatus or mastication masticatory muscles
as we call them. So so it allowed a reduction in the face because
of culture, that allowed the brain to continue expanding. And that's why an
anthropology we talk about biocultural evolution. We can't really separate those. There's many
things about our physiology that they that are the direct result of our culture,
and many things in our culture that are influenced by our biology. So we
really look at them as the synergy, this relationship that's that's inseparable. And
looking at the long history of human evolution on this planet, well um,
modern humans. Um. Now that's always baffled me because you know, they
say modern humans have doesn't appear that they've been around that long. And as
far as it's in the hundreds of thousands of years and it's it's just baffling
to me. Where do you Where do you? I think I read somewhere
in some of your literature or whatever. There's no such thing as a missing
link anymore. So do you want to do you want to tackle that a
little you know, talk about that a little bit. Yeah, if somebody
says something about Amissian link, that's an instant red flag. It's sort of
an archaic idea, mostly an attempt to refute evolutionary change, or human evolutionary
change specifically. But no, at this point, we have a very very
good understanding of our revolutionary history, as I mentioned, going back to that
time when we first started walking up right about six to eight million years ago,
and a big part of my research is looking at those evolutionary changes,
and there are places where there's not as much information. Beginning with our own
genus, Homo habilists is one of the best examples. We have a number
of skulls, bones, and there were some of the first to use stone
tools, so we have a lot of information, but it's all relative.
But there is no point that we just don't know what was going on.
And I think a big part of that comes down to for some people,
it's a desire to not understand it or to try to find some reason to
criticize it, even though it's an outdated idea. But it's also that there's
a disconnect between what we do as scientists and where we publish and then what
is released in more mainstream media outlets. And that's just an aspect of science
in generals that we write for each other the vast majority of time, in
order to communicate new things, new discoveries, to have really detailed arguments about
the morphology of this hominant and how it fits in with these other ones and
should it be a different species or classified as the same species. But the
general public is left out of that conversation because it's very esoteric and it's complicated
speech. But you do have stories come out, there's big finds, And
one thing I try to do with this book is to really explain things in
understandable terms and to present not just an argument about what or who rather these
aliens might be, these extra tempestrials, but also to really give people a
deep understanding of human origins and of human evolution and of cultural evolution and what
things really got us to where we are. Today and tie it into all
of this. But it would be impossible to read this book, I think,
and to walk away without a much deeper knowledge of anthropology, astrobiology,
astronomy, and physics, because I really try to do a science communication thing
and really convey in real understandable terms what we can learn from each of these
fields and how it applies to this UFO phenomenon. I remember reading something in
a dentist's office or something, an article I forget what magazine was in,
but it was saying that, you know, they think, within you know,
I forget about a thousand years or something like that, that most people
will have more of a darker complexion than you know, dark care and all
that. What would be the basis of you know, I don't know if
you've ever heard that as well, but what would be the basis for thoughts
of that? I mean, how can someone judge where we're heading? Or
is it just by the subtle things that you have repeated in the past.
Yeah, that's a sticky wicket. Really. I try to stay away from
those types of conjectures in my own research because there really is no way to
know it. So many little things like that, especially stature, height,
weight, Different characteristics that are already so variable among humans, like skin color,
and that have a long evolutionary history associated with them, those tend to
also respond to environmental variables, and without knowing what those environmental variables are going
to be in the proximate or distant future, it's much harder to say what
those traits would be or would look like. I touch on them a little
bit in the book. In the context of current cultural trends, there is
a tendency to to whitewash. A lot of people with darker skin try to
lighten their skin. But at the same time, a lot of people with
light skin spend a lot of money and a lot of time and put themselves
at risk or skin cancer and trying to darken their skin too. So there's
a number of things that play into that issue of skin color. I do
talk a little bit about the self domestication process, and one of the things
that happens as we domesticate other animals and as we domesticate ourselves, because beginning
with agriculture, we've started domesticating ourselves as well, is that you have a
reduction and pigmentation. And so in looking at this commonly reported characteristic in close
encounters where the bean was actually seen or an individual was abducted. They often
report a sort of grayish looking skin, and that doesn't exist in humans.
We don't have gray skin. We have brown skin and black skin and white
skin and everything in between. And if you did average out the skin tone
and of the whole human population, it would sort of be a brownish color,
and that could potentially be what they were talking about in that article,
is more of an averaging or a homogenization of these genes that code for skin
color. But even outside of that and domesticating ourselves, we may start to
just reduce pigmentation in general, which over time could potentially result in those characteristics
a grayish color skin without all of the melanocytes firing off melanin and creating the
brown skin color just a sort of a pale grayish color that lacks pigmentation.
But again, that's that's rooted and things we've already shown experimentally with other animals,
So there's a little bit more of a basis for arguments like that,
rather than saying that that will will have more sun or LESSO zone. We
can't know those things for sure. So I do try to stay away from
those as much as possible on my own research. Now, a number of
things I've thought of over the year, the years or whatever is. You
know, we're a rare solar system where we only have one son um.
You know, most a lot of solar systems have you know, more than
one son um. There's all these different things that play into with how we
evolved, and so it's it's always been curious to me to wonder how something
could evolve on another planet. The variables of oxygen or breathable air or whatever
it is they can learn to breathe, the weight of the planet gravity,
that's a major part in the development of something something as simple as a moon
or not having a moon, with the tides and things like that or all
all stepping stones with to how we got here. And so is that just
some of the variables on an e and how we crawled out of the water
basically, Yeah, but those are certainly important ones. A binary star system
would really complicate the formation of life in different ways. It can certainly happen,
but it's evolutionary trajectory would certainly be very different than our own. And
yeah, you're right, the chemistry, the climate, the distance from the
Sun, the amount of water, the amount of ice, the moon.
All of those things are important. I'm really glad you mentioned gravity too,
because that's one that I talk about a lot in the book. Is we
suffer a lot of maladies associated with our upright form of walking, bipedal locomotion
as we call it, and we're one of few mammals that does it habitually.
Most animals or quadrupedal walking on all four. So the fact that we
have things like like herniated discs, fractured discs, blown out knees, hemorrhoids,
hernias, just all kinds of problems with our knees, ankles, hi
broken hips, and older age with osteoporosis. All of these things indicate that
we are at the upper limit of what a planet might be able to sustain
with regard to bipedalism, and we're only at nine point eight meters per second
squared. And an argument I make in the book is that most of the
planets that have been found as part of the Kepler mission are far heavier than
Earth. I think only about two point two two point seven I forget the
exact number, but somewhere under three percent of them are much larger than Earth,
which would really make it prohibitive for an upright walking humanoid form to evolve.
And a big part of what I was talking about earlier but for during
I guess a little bit after the break, is that bipedalism was so important
for us becoming what we are today, having the ability to sit down and
have these conversations in different parts of the country. I can't see you,
you can't see me, I guess we can through Skype, which also is
a testament to our success. But we have all of these technologies and these
abilities that really are either directly or indirectly the result of our bipedalism. So
so in looking at all of this variability in size across these different planets,
even taking out of the equation, the chemistry and the climate and the binary
or Uni one star systems, we still aren't likely to have bipedalism on those
planets, and we aren't likely to have this humanoid form. So even looking
at the other reports of mantis men and insects like humanoids and reptilians, there's
still almost universality universally described as being bipedal And that's just not something you would
expect to see based on the current data coming out of the Kepler Mission.
Interesting, never would think of that. And I know we're going to get
into all of that topic. We're coming up in about seven minutes on the
next break. And so is evolution. I mean, this has always been
kind of fascinating to me. It's very very slow. It seems to be
very very slow. I know, you know, have done they've done studies
and like the Gallops Islands, the different islands, the same bird changed with
a lot of it had to do with the food and environment and all that.
But how slow is first of all, is part of evolution? Can
part of evolution be a freak of nature, like you know someone that is
all of a sudden born differently and then they you know, proceed to have
children and that that change happens like that or is it just very very always
known to be extremely slow and very subtle. How does that work? Well,
it really depends on the reproductive time of the organism. So one of
the reasons why we're constantly having to develop new drugs to combat diseases that we've
evolved with over many millennials, because they evolve much faster than we do.
So if you have, for instance, influenza as a good example, because
each year we have to identify which strain of influenza is going to be the
dominant one. Sometimes they get it wrong, as it turns out, and
then we have a different strain in the vaccine is completely useless. But what
the reason we have to do that is because that's constantly evolving. It's evolving
very very quickly, because viruses evolve very rapidly. You take a petri dish
and subjects bacteria to these strong environmental conditions, You add radiation or a lot
of solvents, and they're going to evolve very quickly. We've created many really
interesting forms of drossoft full of fruit flies. A lot of our early genetics
data and understanding of the double helix came from research that was done with these
fruit flies. And the main reasons because they have a very rapid reproductive cycle.
They don't live very long they reproduce. I think it's just a couple
of days or something like that. So those organisms evolve very quickly. Us
with it taking until puberty age twelve thirteen, and in modern times we typically
wait even longer to reproduce. It is a much slower process as seen by
us obviously. You know, if you asked a sloth or a tortoise,
they'd probably think we look like the drosophila. And if you asked drosophila,
they'd think it was incredibly slow, and they'd be dead before they even finished
that thought because they are born and die so quickly. But it really just
comes down to the organism and also the environment. Like I mentioned, if
you were subjecting those organisms to a very strong selective pressure, they're going to
evolved very quickly. So it's both both of those things. And yeah,
as you point out, those freaks of nature mostly result from mutations. And
if there's a mutation that's beneficial and that individual is able to make more babies
relative to other individuals that don't have that mutation, and then their offspring also
have it and they make more babies, you're very quickly going to see that
trait spread throughout the population and over subsequent generations. If that trait's a negative
characteristic, and especially if it kills that individual before reproductive age, it's not
going to show up anywhere. It dies with that individual. So yeah,
those freaks of nature those random things that happen are really an important part of
evolution and understanding the evolutionary process. Now, I know that, you know,
the lifespans have changed dramatically, you know, even over the last four
or four hundred years, you know, I mean you think of the thirties
were the average age of a um, you know, due to all different
types of reasons and so um and like you said, you know, the
the children were I mean basically there were there was childbirth at you know,
fourteen twelve, and you know all that, um so. But other than
um, I know that, you know, like I've I've seen um um
armor from nights from you know, the fifteen hundreds and Middle Ages or whatever,
and they're very small, you know, I mean very short and for
the most part. But other than height and things like that, have we
been able to record in human you know, recorded human history, any type
of changes in development of of of our species. Well, yeah, absolutely,
um. I know we're coming up on a break, so I'll keep
it pretty short. But but yeah, you're you're right. Heights a dia
chronic thing, and you can easily see whenever there's one of the first studies
I worked on in grad school looked at this. Whenever you have a recess
or a depression or a war, height drops tremendously and it starts to come
back up. Yeah, no, it's very It's one of the main variables
we use in biarchaeological analyzes when we dig up past cemeteries. There's a big
study to have a state that looked at pre agricultural and post agricultural populations,
and just after agriculture, that same thing happened. Our health deteriorated. We
started having all kinds of new problems diseases, but one of the biggest indicators
is our size. Our height decreased tremendously, as it did with other animals
that we are trying to domesticate. So yeah, there's quite a few of
those. Malaria is an important one. Another biocultural example, where we started
to live in places with standing pools of water and worthound the trees that other
animals inhabit, and we started to evolve sickle cell alleles sickle cell anemia,
which in itself is a negative thing, but in a malarial environment it actually
protects you against malaria. So there's quite a few changes like that, and
I mentioned a number of them. In the book that are associated with more
recent evolutionary changes, things that you can identify that have happened in very recent
human history. I wonder if we're going to I was in a cafe yesterday
and I happened to look out, and the whole entire cafe, everyone in
that cafe was looking down at their phone, a single person, and I
thought, or if we're going to develop somehow, if our bodies are going
to develop to change with the cell phone. We're right at the break,
So we're going to come back right after these messages. Everyone hang in there.
We'll be back in just a few minutes. Alrighty, welcome back.
This is Martin Willis with podcast UFO, and my guest is doctor Michael P.
Masters, and we're having a very interesting conversation. We haven't really got
into what these things possibly are yet, and I'm heading that way just to
let you know, if you're the listener. We're going to take calls in
about a half an hour or so from now, so that number is going
to be the same as always. Next week we should have a call screening
set in place with a different phone number. That number will be announced And
I did want to tell the listener that if anyone wants to jump over at
the the International UFO Congress website that's UFO Congress dot com. There is a
code you can put in there that's i u f O C. That's i
u f O C. That's like a UFO with an eye in front of
it and a C after it, and put in that code and you get
thirty dollars off if you want to get a ticket for the International UFO Congress
coming up this September. I can't wait. I'll be there as usual and
it'll be a lot of fun, and so will our guests, Doctor Michael
Masters will be there. Ye like, that will be really nice to meet
you in person. Absolutely, I'm really looking forward to that. I think
it's going to be a really great event. I'd also like to mention that
I thought Aleandro's news segment was tremendously fascinating, really informative, and yeah,
that was it was super fun to listen to. Oh that's great. I'm
glad I'll give him that feedback. Um, yeah, he does. He's
you know, there's not too many people in the topic as deeply as he
is. And uh, yeah, that's a lot of Funny's a good guy.
Yeah. So, um, the we haven't really touched on the possible
things that people are seeing, possibly time travels yet where we're going to get
into that some more. But a couple more questions I had for you is,
um, you have heard what people have described as what they're seeing in
these abduction sequences. You mentioned the grays, that's a one typical. There's
a lot of different ones that people are saying a different species or whatever.
And you know, and I'm on the fence about all that stuff because I
don't really know, you know, but do you think that we are on
a path of evolution to head toward a species with the characteristics that you're seeing.
They always talk about the large eyes, they always talk about the little
slit for the mouth, thin bodies, small and stature. Mostly this is
what a lot of people are reporting. Um. I don't know if you've
ever listened to any of the Ariel School incident in South Africa, but that
you know, they describe very well on what they saw in similar aspects but
skin like porcelain, and you know, just there's been so many accounts.
Do you so the question? I know I'm rambling here, but do you
see like a trend of evolution going in any of these directions slowly? Yeah.
Absolutely. That's really a big focus of the book, I think,
is to really focus on what we can know now and looking back our revolutionary
past. We can see these changes taking place, and we have a very
good record of them, and we have very good means with which to study
them, primarily through CT scans and endocasts and MRI, which is something I've
used in my own research quite a lot. And yeah, if you look
at these evolutionary changes in our own lineage here on Earth, projecting those forward,
you would get something very very similar to what is so ubiquitously reported in
these accounts, And I break it down into more concrete terms and talk about
what specifically has led to our brains growing larger and our face is growing smaller,
and even trying to address things like telepathy that's so commonly reported and what
might contribute to that over evolutionary time, and looking at modern research into brain
to brain and action and different evolutionary trends related to the reduction of our face
and how that could impact vocalization over the long term. So yeah, I
very much took time to research, numerous abduction accounts and other close encounters of
the fourth and fifth kind in which these beans were observed or people claim to
have observed them. And like I tell people all the time, if they
were consistently describing some ten legged squid like monster creature, I never would have
written this book. But the fact that they so often so consistently or described
as hominins. I mean, if you look at the form of these organisms
and the average, say even taken into account the reptile like, insect like,
but even if you average them all out, what you get is something
that if you put them next to us and our hominoid relatives, the chimp,
anzi, rangantan, gorilla, all of the different primates, there's no
question that they would be considered a hominant. They have all of the characteristics
that we have. And like I said earlier, we fight a lot about
what traits should be used to classify a specific species or a specific genus within
our own human evolutionary history. But but looking at this form that's so commonly
reported and described in these accounts, there's there's absolutely no question. And something
that came up I gave a talk at a moof on meeting an Oregon just
last week two weeks ago, and something that came up, we're hybrids,
and I mentioned to them, well, I mentioned to them that if you
believe that we are hybridizing with these extra tempestrials, as I call them,
then you have to acknowledge that they are human, because that's the definition of
a species. The biological criteria of species classification is that if two organisms can
mate with each other and produce viable offspring, meaning that offspring itself is able
to reproduce, then by definition, they are the same species. So if
you believe that we are hybridizing with these aliens and whatever capacity you understand them,
you have to admit that they are humans simply because that's the criteria we
use to define humanness and to define a species. So there's a lot of
traits even beyond that that I think are really important to consider and the point
of the book, in addition to looking at questions of what extraterrestrial life might
look like in other planets, and the question of time and time travel and
the cosmos written large, they're the main focus of the book, or at
least a principal focus of the book, is that is what have we done,
what has happened to us? How have we evolved over the last six
to eight million years, and what's that going to look like going forward?
Just if we project those same things forward, and it's hard to argue that
it wouldn't look like what's being described in these encounters. As all of these
different thoughts are going through, my miners are speaking, and one of them
is, you know I talked about earlier the bottleneck of technology. It's possible
we could wipe ourselves out and start over again. I mean, if time
is you know, if we have enough time left before the sun swells up
and burns everything on Earth, we have time to evolve again. Possibly,
But I don't know. I'm going off on that one. But one of
the things I was thinking about is you talked about telepathy, and a lot
of people have reported kind of something that kind of fits with what you're talking
about. I would have to say, a lot of people report of take
care of your planet. You know, they're along those lines, like you
know you hear about that, and I mentioned, you know, the r
L school very commonly. Yeah, yeah, so that kind of fits with
your thoughts. But another thing that comes to mind is like the butterfly effect.
You know, don't change anything because that one little subtle change may wipe
out the effect that you even exist. So what were your how did you
get into any of that stuff? Oh? Absolutely, we dive. We
dive very very deep into that part of the swimming pool. Um. I'd
like to circle back to something you just said though, is there if a
big part of this model, And what I think is important, especially for
your scientific listeners or your listeners that are involved in the scientists, is to
understand is that it is a testable hypothesis. It's falsifiable, and as you
mentioned, even if we wipe ourselves out, we've still tested this model.
We by definition, we would become them, and at that point at which
we do, or whatever point they decide to let us in on this,
we would understand this. We would with this, we could search the heavens
for millennia trying to find organisms on other planets that fit our hominan form and
just keep looking. But at some point we would eventually become them under this
model. I think that's an important thing to mention. And like you said,
yeah, why would they why would they constantly be telling us take care
of your planet, or warning us about nuclear weapons, or why would there
be so many reports during major historic events like World War two and the food
Fighters, or with all of the sightings over major historic prehistoric sites. All
of those things just make more sense in the context of future humans investigating their
past, or possibly even tourism like hockey. And always said what we started
this conversation with earlier is that if because we're not inundated with time and tourists
means time travel must not exist. And I counter that by saying, we're
probably seeing them all the time, and that's what the UFO phenomenon is,
or at least a big part of it. So I think it's important to
also acknowledge those things. But yeah, no, the big part, I
would say, as I just mentioned, the first major focus of this book
is on our evolutionary anatomy and what links are pasted to our present and our
present to our presumed future. But the other big part is time. You
can't talk about time and time travel and the context of this phenomenon without providing
a very detailed account of our current understanding of what time is or how backward
time travel may be achieved. So a big section throughout the middle of the
book focuses on the history of our understanding of time and what time means cross
culturally. It's really interesting to look at how other cultures perceive time or don't
at all. Some societies don't have any word or any verbs that describe actions
and the past the future. So just acknowledging that variation and our understanding or
perception of time, and then really getting into how physicists understand time. They
historians and logicians and philosophers would probably argue with this to some extent, but
but physicists are in the best position to really understand what time is, and
they and engineers and people and material sciences are probably going to be the most
instrumental and actually developing a time machine. So I really turned to modern physics
research, researching quantum mechanics with regard to not just how we might achieve backward
time travel, and I go into great detail about that and looking at early
research in this with Van Stockham and Godell and Tippler, and modern research that's
come from that, much of which really all of which started with Einstein and
his general relativity model and different solutions to his field equations. So I go
deep into that, but then also get into what you're you're talking about.
You know, what happens if we travel through time? And the big questions
always sent around paradoxes, the grandfather paradox and other consistency paradoxes, and you
see these in television and movies all the time. Many books really look at
time travel and obscure terms and fantasy terms. But but what I've found that
I have to do often times, and talking about this book and talking about
modern physics research into this question is correct a lot of those assumptions that people
have that they've gotten from things like Back to the Future or Futurama or any
other show that talks about the future. Futurama, they actually do a great
job. They really acknowledge paradoxes and try to stay consistent with it. And
they have I think collectively they had fifty years at Harvard and masters and PhD
programs. The writers on that show, it's a very good show, and
they do a great job. But there are a lot of others that don't.
They don't have that expertise to draw from, and and so I find
that that I often am addressing those things, and those questions that relate to
the paradoxes, and you're right, the butterfly effect is a big one,
and it's important to acknowledge though that the main idea, or the consensus among
physicists is that time and space exist as one giant entity. What they refer
to as block time or landscape time or the block universe is something that you
often time here where all moments, all events that ever existed or will exist,
from the beginning of the Big Bang to the end of time when all
matter is sucked up into black holes or however happened, exists as one static
block of space time, and we, as cognizant organisms biological beings, move
through that, and it feels like we do so linearly. We perceive these
events that are exist as part of the static block universe as a sequential series
of events. So we have this entrenched idea of an arrow of time or
linear time, which really is kind of a false sense of how things work.
Almost everything in physics is time reversible. It's time neutral. Can it
makes just as much sense running from future to past as it does from past
to future. But we see things as progressing in this way. So a
lot of those issues related to the butterfly effect and consistency paradoxes just have to
do with our entrenched view of linear time rather than being some violation of the
physical laws of the universe. So I think it's important to make that distinction,
and then I really dive into what's referred to as the Navikov's self consistency
principle. He was a Russian physicist. He was really instrumental and continues to
be instrumental in providing clarity on these issues and helping us understand how the future
can dictate events in the past, given that the future president and pastor all
one. If you understand it in the context of this block universe and block
time, then none of them are ahead of or behind each other in the
presence of a time machine. Once you have a time machine and the ability
to travel through the block universe, there is no past to future causality any
longer. And this has actually recently been demonstrated with some experiments in physics looking
at Wheeler's Gadenkin models and things that are probably not something that should go into
now because they're pretty complex and I probably put people to sleep with it.
But the main takeaway here is that visiting the past. It's non disruptive.
So anything resulting from someone visiting the past and acting with the past already occurred
before that person ever left from the future to go to the past. It's
it's always a part of it. So there's an inherent self consistency that's maintained
across these different slices of block time. So we don't have to worry about
a butterfly effect. We don't have to worry about a new parallel universe poppying
out, or the universe having to correct itself when we traveled into the past,
because it's already self correcting. There's already self consistency inherent across the block
universe. Wow, this is this is really fascinating to me. I was
going to mention I'm just going to talk about parallel universe possible possibilities and other
dimensions and all that, but I wanted to know when you're talking about time
in the very beginning back there. It reminding me of I had a great
science teacher in high school, and he said, on a Friday afternoon,
he said, Okay, your assignment for this weekest weekend is to come back
with a full definition of time. And then he turned around and I remember,
you know, I really uh it was a fascinating Monday. It was
a fascinating day. I can't really remember. It's a long long time ago,
but yeah, but you know it was I you know, basically we're
saying, well, this is how you measure you know, like uh you
know, uh, you know, measure moments, you know type of thing.
But no one could really I mean, there really isn't um you know,
what is the best description of time and how how we understand it?
You know, you said the annial time. That's all we can really understand,
right, my my favorite definition of time. Uh. Physicists for his
first name, William Phillips, maybe uh, well he quoted this. I
guess it was Einstein that first said it, but he uh, he would
often respond to that question with time is what clocks measure? Yea, And
that was it. Yeah, because no, but if when people like Einstein
don't fully understand what time is. And we have gotten a much better idea
since then, and especially with research and quantum mechanics and particle physics and cosmology
and the formation of the universe, we have a much better understanding than we
used to, but it's still something that eludes us. And I think that's
awesome that your teacher asked that question, and especially with no clarity given whatsoever,
just throwing it out there and say, all right, you guys.
Figure that's a great teaching tool heuristic device as we call them, because it
forces you to think, well, what is he asking or she I don't
know, and why did they ask that? And well, what if they
were asking for this reason? Then you have to go and look at all
of these different things and you get a much deeper insight into that thing.
And with time, it takes that with something as complex as time, it
takes really coming at it in all of these different ways. And I remember
our social media site for academics, or at least where we can keep track
of publications and who's publishing when is a site called research gate, and I
think it was last year sometime one of my peer reviewers asked a very specific
and insightful question related to a specific aspect of time. And because there's so
many different academics from all over the world on the site, I just posted
her question copy and pasted it onto research gate, and within a day there
was something like two hundred responses by PhDs in physics and philosophy and history and
astronomy just coming out of the woodwork because people are so passionate about it,
and it's one of the last great unknowns, is not not just what time
is, but but how how do we really understand it and how could we
manipulate it potentially in the same way that you see with all of these celestial
bodies and black holes, where there's this tremendous warbage of space and time and
with very rapid movement, high velocity, and it was really insightful. I
read every single one of them, and I'd kind of jump in from time
to time, but but I really just watched as this really complex conversation unfolded
in front of me because of this one simple question that one of my period
viewers asked about. And I think that's a testament to how how interesting but
yet how elusive the question of time really is. Right right now, the
one question I have for you. Now, there have been people reporting abductions.
The earliest known one was in the nineteen twenties, and then you really
didn't hear of anything. Then you heard of nineteen sixty two with Betty and
Barney Hill and then and then you start in then Travis Walden, and then
you started hearing more and more of them. I guess the question is for
you is why now? Why in the modern more what we're going to call
the modern times modern UFO, you know, we call the modern UFOs nineteen
forty seven till now type of thing. But why would you suspect that there
wasn't these situations happening prior to or do you think they may have been happening
and just not reported. I think they've been happening as far back into the
past as our future descendants are able to go, I think, And that's
probably a really it might be an evolving point in the past too, wherewith
advances in technology, with the ability to go faster, well light cones are
oriented toward the past and you can create close time light curves. I think
the challenge will be how fast can they go where? What time can they
get to physically in the past. And I think that will be a really
important threshold and one that will continue to be pushed because it's important if you're
studying the past and you are able to collect data from that past, the
earlier you can go. The more information you have, the broader the span
of your knowledge is. So I think from whatever point they're able to,
they have been doing it, and I can't say what point in the past
that is. I think I actually saw and I think it was maybe even
under hypnosis. Jim Peniston talking about the information he was given binary code type
of situation but mentioned the same thing. I found this after I published the
book, so it was really interesting to see. But them even saying they
could only go I think it was something like fifty thousand years into the past,
just because of limitations and their craft and the speed at which they could
obtain. So no, I think I think it's probably two things. An
aspect of that is somewhat becoming normalized, and that's really amazing to see right
now that it's something that's coming out in the media more and it's becoming something
that's discussed and those that have said no, UFOs aren't real are now having
to really take a step back and think about that and try to assess whether
they're just being closed minded, or have biases, or just really don't want
them to be real. But in any case, I think that at some
point we're going to have to come to grips with this that if this has
been happening, if this is happening now, and it's becoming normalized, we're
going to hear about it more. And as we hear about it more,
it's going to help with that normality. And you can kind of hear this
drip drip drip of disclosure that we're just moving towards this point where it might
be something that's that's widely acknowledged, and I write about that towards the end
of the book, where if we do get to the point where there isn't
secrecy surrounding the subject, and these are indeed our future descendants coming back through
time and we don't have to worry about disruptions to space time or the butterfly
effect or anything like that. It's possible that in the future, even the
proximate future, the next hundred years or twenty years or whatever point they decide
we're ready to know this, it could be as common to hang out with
people from a thousand years in the future as it is now to hang out
with people from Sub Saharan Africa or Australia or the Far East, or Europe
or the United States wherever we see variation geographically referred to as geographic race or
ancestry. But in the future, we could potentially be interacting with people who
have temporal ancestry. They have variation resulting from where they came from in time,
and I think that would be an amazing thing to see, and I
certainly hope it happens in my lifetime. I wanted to just another thing that
I was just thinking of just now. Is that a lot of times we
think of how people in even sometimes just a few hundred years in the past,
maybe not being as bright as us. And I don't agree with that
at all. As a matter of fact. Um, you know, I
I transcribed as six page letter of George Washington wrote, and I had to
use the dictionary twenty five times and there wasn't And then those six pages there
wasn't one single misspell and wow, um so, but they were writing it
by hand, weren't they they were? There was no spell check. Yea
beautiful hand raising and uh so. But you go back in time, and
you know, we just assume that people weren't as bright and I and I
disagree. I feel like people have been, you know, just as smart
and and um, you know, I mean just for a college person to
pass a fourth grade test that was two hundred years ago. Um, maybe
difficult, you know, I mean, there's anyway. Um, what I'm
getting at is, do you think there is a trend toward an evolutionary trend
to actually brain size actually growing? Well, that's it's an interesting question.
There's a couple of things going on with that. Yes, our brains have
certainly been growing larger over evolutionary time, and it's an accelerating change. Over
the last eight hundred thousand years. In particular, our brains have been getting
much bigger. They've shrunk a little bit over the last ten thousand years,
which is actually just a result of our overall body size reducing since about thirty
twenty five, thirty thousand years ago. Across the board, almost every human
group has seen a reduction in body size. And but what's important to keep
in mind is it's not just size when it comes to the brain. In
fact, a lot of my research specifically looks at at MRIs and the connections
among the brain, the thickness of different gyrie within the brain, the relationship
to eye size, how the eye relates to different structures in the brain as
well. And one thing I've found in researching these things is that it's almost
as far as intelligence goes, better to have a smaller brain. There's denser
connections. It's dendritic density that really plays into intelligence more than just the overall
size of the brain. With that said, there's no doubt that our increase
in brain size over the last four to five million years in particular, and
especially in the last eight hundred thousand years, there's no doubt that it's correlated
with intelligence. We can see that clearly in our culture and the evolution of
technology. They're very intricately linked. But in looking at differences among modern humans
or between the sexes or what have you, size of the brain isn't that
important. Most of it comes down to organization of the brain, the density
of the dendritic connections, the shape. And that's the main thing to keep
in mind. Is you talked about earlier how we define modern humans, but
we actually do have a definition for that, And the two main traits that
define anatomically modern Homo sapiens sapiens are that globularity that I mentioned earlier, the
rounded skull shape where our parietal lobes and our temporal lobes have expanded media later
earlier from inside out, but then also a facial retraction to the extent that
we have a chin or a mental eminence as we call it. So the
chin is actually one of the criteria we use. And another thing to keep
in mind is that we're talking about a continuous change. So we can't necessarily
just draw a discrete line and this continuum and say, now we have modern
humans. That's the first person there with a baboustranium and a chin. It
doesn't work that way. It's a continuum. So a lot of people like
to speculate that aliens came down and made modern humans, or there's this big
jump that happened. That's just not true. There's no evidence for that whatsoever.
We see this continuous change, but we as anthropologists have to have some
criteria with which to mark that change or mark that new form, and those
are the two main characteristics we use. So so answer your question size of
the brain, what happens from now on isn't as important as what shape changes
take place and how those shape changes are associated with other characteristics in the face
and the body, and the context of neotny ptomorphosis, retaining juvenilized traits into
adulthood is a big part of the shape change that we see and and so
so, Yeah, brain size is important, has been important, but it's
it's really more about how our brains are connected, what's going on inside them,
and at least in the sense of what we see from the outside,
what that overall shape of the brain is. M This is probably kind of
a bizarre question, but is there those are those are my favorite of questions,
just so you know, okay, um, is there a part of
the brain that could develop enough um or has there ever been any research into
what makes someone be able to have telepathy, you know, to send like
a telepathic message. Is there part of the brain that that would um originate
or start to develop or could that Actually, it's really funny you mentioned that
is the subject of my next research project. I would I I would really
like to know that too. And um, I just actually agreed to co
author a book with another PhD who also has a very very deep interest in
this and for a very good reason. And and we've talked a lot about
consciousness and telepathy and locid dreaming and teleport It was mentioned earlier. Um Alejandro
mentioned it in his news report the oh remote viewing people. People claim to
be able to do this, and there's a lot of evidence that, you
know, some people are actually doing these things. Um. So yeah,
we we're planning to research that more to my knowledge, No, it's one
of the it's one of these things that much like studying UFOs or talking about
UFOs and aliens just instantly gets you nowhere in academia. Yeah, there's there's
a lot of people that have research that. Don't get me wrong, but
at least in the sense of getting grant money to do functional MRI analyzes of
which part of the brain is firing when someone is remote viewing or connecting with
another brain telepathically. I think there's a lot of a lot of room to
move about the cabin there. There's a lot of research that could help us
with actual testable hypotheses. Like I mentioned before, it's important in doing these
things to work with and the scientific method and to develop testable hypotheses and data
collection. And I'd like to continue with that in this research. And that
to me is the next big question is to understand consciousness and to understand people's
psychic abilities. Certain people have real abilities to tell what's going to happen in
some capacity or another. And telepathy, I think is just a big part
of that overarching aspect of consciousness that I think is something that the humanity should
certainly be looking into more. Yeah. Yeah, it certainly would save a
lot of time and you know, to gether their cell phones and all that.
Well. As someone pointed out previously, though, it would make podcasters
jobs somewhat difficult. You know, how do you do your job that everyone's
communicating telepathically? That's right, Yeah, so tune in to the nog Yeah,
this brain wave, this frequency. Yeah, yeah, that's pretty funny.
So I do want to let you know that I did put the phone
number up. We are accepting calls for those of you over at KGr A
Radio. Write this number down. It's six zero three nine six seven four
zero three. Oh if anyone would like to give us a jingle, and
I got a question for for doctor Masters, so feel free to give us
a call. I think it's to me. This is a very fascinating topic.
It's a little do you do you mind if I plug the book?
Well, absolutely, go right to it. Yes, Well, the name
of The book is Identified Flying Objects, a multidisciplinary scientific approach to the UFO
phenomenon, and it's available on all major platforms. The website's probably the best
place to find places to purchase it or to find out more information or talks.
I think it came up earlier that i'd be at the International UFO Congress
and Phoenix in September. I'll be speaking at move on fiftieth anniversary event in
Irvine, California on in late July, so there's yeah, there's a lot
going on. There's a lot of moving bits and pieces, and like I've
said from the beginning, it's just an evolving process, an evolving project,
and doing things like this having conversations with you right now is a very important
part of that. Yeah. Yeah, I would put that. I've actually
got bumped off of YouTube monetization actually when I put a cover of a book
up, so I can't do that anymore. But it is easy to find
on Amazon or actually you have, as you mentioned, your website which actually
stands for Identified Objects, right, is that what? Yeah, Yeah,
it's just a shortened version of the book i'd flyob dot com, idfly O
b J which in retrospect. I was on coast to coast and George Nori
was, you know, doing the whole spiel, and he was like,
and his website is just a random string of numbers. All right, we'll
be right. We ran a string up letters, he said. I was
like, ah, yeah, he's right. I probably should have done something
else. But IFO was taken, I couldn't use IO and that was that
was the next best idea in my mind. I'd fly obs. But yeah,
George Norri called me out and he was doing so yeah. Yeah,
um, well again the lines help, but if anyone like to call in
and so on. As far as the future traits of the human anatomy,
um, you said, A lot of it is a lot of it is
shaped around environment. I know, you know, food, supply of food
and all that. Um, but do you think that we're um, you
know, I was talking earlier about intelligence and you know, some I've heard
people say this, and I don't know it's just people talking or whatever,
but they say people are getting less intelligent? Is there there's no way to
to track that that's not really happening? Is it that you we're aware of?
Oh? No, there's tons of ways to track that absolutely, and
we do all the time. Yeah, anytime you see any quantitative metric about
schools or tests, or especially because we've standardized tests for so long, i
Q tests or I don't know what the FCC rules are, so I'll just
use a nice term our our bunk essentially, And we're developed for very horrible
reasons as part of the eugenics movement. They're very racist, really, and
I don't Yeah, I don't lend much credence to i Q tests, but
there are standard, standardized tests that are very useful, and we can compare
these across different countries, across different demographic groups obviously different ages, different ethnicities
and whatnot, and see what our intelligence is like. And yeah, we've
been fallen by the wayside certainly. And as you mentioned, I think it's
important to think about this too. Is we're people smarter in the past.
Sure, as you mentioned, they were able to write without spelling errors,
with very beautiful handwriting, and they took their time to do it. But
what did they really produce and how quickly did they produce it? But culture
builds on top of culture, and technology builds on top of technology, and
there are people that drive that forward, who are very very smart people.
But it almost sounds like you're asking, are we as a species or the
average of humans sort of devolving or getting am I often left field? There?
No, No, that's exactly what I was where I was going.
Yes, Yeah, And I think a lot of that comes down to a
couple things. This is anecdotal to some extent, but there is also data
to back this up and studies to back this up that on average, there
are more less intelligent people in this country then in the past, and that
could partly be because there were fewer people in the past. It also comes
down to birth rates among different demographic groups, and especially those in poverty,
they tend to have more children, but that's also socio political if they have
less access to birth control and less education about ways to prevent unwanted births.
There's also more rape and abuse and a number of things that play into it.
So so yeah, and looking at if we are sort of devolving or
getting dumber, we have to also factor into it the economic situation and the
political situation. If we're cutting access to education, healthcare, preventative measures,
then yeah, you could definitely see the beginning of a trend. That would
continue to push us toward more people that have a lower education and therefore less
intelligence as indicated by these standardized tests. You know, I myself have seen
a trend in just what I do as far as you know, your your
phone has spell checked for you now, um, you know there's all these
little things that calculators. Yeah, right out hand, you know, right
out and really you know, use your brain for it's so much easier to
ask Surry or or Alexa or whatever it is. Um. But you know,
and that that way, and in that way in particular, I can
see that technology is harmful to us. And actually, but but let me
ask you this. Does that does that mean we're dumber or does that mean
we're smarter? Because again, on average, you know, regardless of what
we can do or can't do within our brains, we're still able to learn
this technology, and we're still able to learn how to use these apps.
And it's constantly evolving technology that we have to adapt to. And and and
even though yeah, we might be getting dumber and certain segments of the population,
I think we're still we still are required to do things that one hundred
years ago just wouldn't really even be something we could conceptualize. So I don't
know. I g it's a tough one. I think it's a multifaceted they
I'm really glad you brought it up, actually, because it's it's something that
I think we all kind of bounce around in our heads and as something we
should have more of a discussion about. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, you
know, getting back to the topic that you know my shows about UFOs.
Basically, do you think that or is some of your thoughts that what people
are seeing as far as the ufou are actually carrying people, you know,
from the future to the past, or do you think some possibly that some
of them are Is that is that kind of your theory that these are actually
time machines? Yeah, I do. I that's a main argument, and
the book is that these devices, these UFOs themselves, are the actual time
machine. And I look at, like I mentioned earlier, some of the
early solution st. Einstein's field equations, and most of them involved some sort
of rotating cylinder or silenoid or a disc, many times a disc, especially
in more recent research, and the main thing that happens the main way in
which you can travel into the past, that you reorient light cones toward the
past, and a light cone is just all of the possibilities within the speed
of light, within the laws of physics, any moment radiating out into the
future. If you can imagine beams of light on either side, it creates
this probability layer, this cone of probabilities, which is what's known as a
light cone. But in order to travel into the past, you have to
re orient those toward the past. You have to get them to tip over
so that you can actually move physically into a past period. And one of
this has been demonstrated many times. It's something that we understand, we can't
create it. Yet. More recent research actually is starting to investigate these things
in a laboratory setting and look into how we create these frame dragging lens Thirin
effects to create an actual time machine. But what they all come down to
is the rotation, or at least a dominant theme throughout is the rotation of
a highly massive or highly energetic disc. And if you think about black holes,
the only thing in the known universe that can actually send matter back in
time at the event horizon, the Schwartzschild radius of a black hole, that
is when it disappears from our four dimensions of space time. Even light can't
penetrate that event horizon because of the massive gravitation. And I certainly don't think
that these UFOs or ifos as I call them in the book are like black
holes. That would the tidal forces of a black hole and singularity associated with
it would rip apart anything that entered it. But a good surrogate for that
is the electromagnetic force. And what a lot of people don't realize is the
electromagnetic force is ten to the forty times stronger than gravity. We think of
gravity is this thing that holds us to the Earth, and it holds the
Earth to the Sun and the Moon to the Earth, and it is an
important force of the four forces in nature. But electromagnetism is so much stronger.
So if we could harness that electromagnetic force and still create this frame dragon
effect or this rotational energy that's needed to reorient those light cones towards the past,
we could potentially create a time machine without having to create singularities associated with
black holes and the physics and particle physics involved with that. So yeah,
an idiom. A common mantra in biology is that form follows function. And
that applies to anything, and it certainly applies here. I think where the
form of these craft and the properties that they have, the common description of
them being disc like and having h rotating h could facilitate the function of backward
time travels. Yeah, I really do believe, and I feel like I
make a strong argument for this in the book, that these are the actual
time machines themselves. Wow, amazing, amazing m so and the food fighters
mostly were orbs, So that that doesn't that doesn't kind of follow that same
line, you know, I mean mostly what people were seeing or No,
No, I'd like to address that rightfully, actually, as I don't.
I don't think all of them aren't. Um, there are things like like
what was described recently, the cube and the orb or the something like that.
I've been shown images of things that appear to be drones that aren't that
certainly aren't time machines. Many of them are more circular. But the actual
craft that the large I hate to use this word because it's so cliche,
but mothership type craft they do seem to have the capacity what comes out of
those to do whatever sort of thing is happening. Obviously, you're not just
going to take that down in someone's bedroom and see if you can get in
there to abduct them. At that time, you're going to send a little
a little probe, a little drone type thing. So I think a lot
of the UFO phenomenon is people observing those types of things that are being sent
out by our time traveling descendants in order to do their research. Pick up
a couple of people, do their biomedical examination, then return to their own
time without having to really be there and hovering over large metropolitan areas. So
I think a lot of the UFO phenomenon is just what they're sending out as
part of their research mission. Well well, and care to speculate how many
thousands and thousands of years in the future you think that this could be.
I hate speculating about that. However, to be fair, I was just
talking about being on Coast to coast a couple of months ago, and George
Nori made me do it. He wouldn't he wouldn't go to commercial really until
I did it. So if I do it for George nor I feel like
I should have to do it for everyone who asked that question. But the
number I gave him it was I think around I think around twenty thousand years,
and that's what Again, that's not that at all really, But again
it's also complicated because we could potentially have the technology to do this in a
couple of thousand years, but we also wouldn't expect to see people from that
time because they likely already have records of what happened, and we wouldn't be
that interesting too, there's no real incentive to do it. So I think
the vast majority of accounts, abduction accounts and whatnot, where we see these
more evolved humans with still very hominant traits but slightly derived versions of them based
on those is where I get that twenty thousand year estimate. Though I think
the technology will probably be available before that, it just won't be used for
this necessarily. And it's important to keep in mind too that once that technology
exists, as I mentioned earlier in the context of Novikov's self consistency principle,
none of these things are ahead of or behind the other once that time machine
is developed, So there could potentially be an IFO chocked full of our future
humans who actually have the technology who went back and picked up a bunch of
Neanderthals, and maybe they drop some off just to mess with us, and
that's where the bigfoot sasquash thing comes from. They pick them up in the
past, they come back and get a couple of humans from a thousand years
in the future, and then you know, some major celebrity just because it's
funny, and then pick us up. And we're looking at this whole spectrum
of human evolution because they have the technology to do that. So I think
it's important that even you know when I throw out this arbitrary number because obviously
have no idea, I'm just speculating. But based on those physical traits,
they seem to be from a period in our future that's somewhat consistent with twenty
fifty thousand years. But anybody could be in there. They can pick up
anybody they want, within the limits of what their craft can do, within
the limits of when the earliest point their craft can reach. So I think
we need to still consider it holistically and think about the whole of space time
and not just when they might be coming from in the future. Yeah,
I'm sure you probably caught the headline a few months ago where it said major
breakthrough in time travel and ended up just being something with a quantum computer and
it really I hate disappointing with it. It was yeah, yeah, there's
a question in the chat room Constantineous, that's the screen name. Have you
ever come in contact with Bashar bas Hr Bishar shares the same concept of them
being descendants thus from the future. Did you ever Are you aware of that
name or I'm not, But I would like to respond to that question by
saying that I've been really excited about how many people have also thought of this
and have also researched this tremendously, and I certainly plan on looking this person
up as well, because what I've also found is that we've all come at
it with a similar sort of reason, but with very different things to add.
And I've always said that, you know, this is an evolving project,
and I'm just trying to put some pieces of the puzzle in where they
might fit and then hopefully start more dialogue and more conversation, especially among my
academic peers, because this is what science is supposed to be, is asking
questions about things that are unknown. So I would hope that more people would
start to look at these questions and develop testable hypotheses. But but I've already
been really excited by how many other people have really thought about this and in
deep terms, and I've had the chance to talk to many of them with
really exciting conversations. Actually just started signed a contract to start working with a
TV production company with a couple really amazing people who who are excited about the
project and who have also thought about this and have have really been excited to
build this and to present it in a more main to a more mainstream audience.
I sure hope they don't go off the fringe fringe side with it to
make it more well. No, no, no, no, no,
we that was the very first thing we talked about, the very last thing
that I can sat by your your manner in general, that you would oh
my god, no, you guys spoke about Ancient Aliens earlier. I've been
contacted by two producers of Ancient Aliens in the last five months, and and
I I hope we can find common grounds soon because I really would like to
be on the show. But I'm not I'm not going to sell out my
integrity good, I'm not gonna I'm not gonna lie. I'm not gonna make
things up Um and and these guys know that We've had some really great discussions
and I'm really excited to work with them. I think it'll be phenomenal.
Great. We do have a call on the line. Caller, your first
name? Where are you calling from? James? And I'm in Bellevue,
Washington. Oh, yes, James, you've called him before. You you're
kind of a science type guy. How are you? Yes, that's right,
Yes, I'm good, great show. Thank you. Yes, yeah,
my I really can't wait to read the book. And and I like
the the whole idea of the ifos UM. I'm just wonder what your thoughts
are. Um. You know, there's such a huge variety of descriptions of
the various ships. You know, there's triangles and I've heard of rectangles and
saucers and all of that. And do you what do you think about do
you think it is possible that there are other, you know, cultures or
species that maybe visiting or maybe they're von Newman probes or something along those lines.
Yeah, that's a great question. I actually really appreciate that question because
it's something that I didn't really go into in much detail on the book,
but I wished i'd had. Once I published it, you'll you'll you'll be
able to see where that should have gone and where I wished I would have
put it if if you end up getting it. But one thing I would
like to mention, I don't necessarily think that they're they're extraterrestrial. There are
different shapes, absolutely, there's the cigar shape is a very common one.
What I personally think, and I'm just speculating here, but what I personally
think is that the triangle ones are our ours rurs. Now. I want
to talk about that well well modern man made because if you think about it,
um, if they don't have to worry about the time travel aspects,
if they don't have to maintain that that symmetrical shape and have a material that
couldn't stand not just the centripical forces, but all of the kinetic forces and
the friction, uh and spinning something that fast and with that much energy.
Yeah, exactly. But the triangles almost seem like a primitive attempt by us
to use that anti gravity electromagnetic propulsion system to still make something that's unidentifiable to
us, because we're used to vector propulsion and we're used to airplanes with jets
or helicopters, But I almost think the triangles are ours. I almost think
that those have been developed, perhaps even with technology that was acquired during the
Roswell crash where we reverse the engineer didn't figured out fifty years is a long
time, oh ship, We're almost a like seventy years now since that happened,
so that's actually a very long time to reverse engineer something like that.
I personally think the triangles, and again I'm just speculating, but those shapes
where it's just about trying to get stability, you know, like if you
think about sitting on a chair, you have three legs, you're gonna wobble
in three different directions. You have four, you're better situated for that.
So that takes some of the variables out of it where it's not a rotational
thing. It's not like trying to maintain a rotating frisbee in the air,
but it's just these these three places where you have to control those independently.
Well, I would argue I'm actually gonna have to cut this short, but
because we are out of time, and thanks for the call. Well,
thanks Marty, all right, thanks for the call, Thanks James, and
I wish I had longer time to argue the triangular UFO with you. I'd
still like to hear your idea. Okay, well hang on, don't you
give me cliff notes? Okay, wait, don't go away, stay on
Skype for a minute. And this is going to be the end of the
show. Again, I want to thank everyone for helping out with the show,
and Aljandro and the first at the first part of the show, and
a guest of course, doctor Michael Masters. You can get his book,
check it out online. Go ahead and throw that website out there one more
time if you would, I'd fly obj dot com I d O b J.
Okay, since you are on and I'm asking you to stay on,
there's going to be an outro. You're not gonna hear it, so you're
just gonna have to um hang in there and not make any noises because we're
going to go into it. So thanks so much for everyone, everyone for
listening, and uh, we'll see you next week. I'm not sure who
our guest will be, but remember to keep your eyes to the sky.