Speaker 1: Everyone. This is Matt Ford from The Good Trouble Show. Firstly,
Speaker 1: thank you very much for joining us on this podcast.
Speaker 1: I wanted to give you a little heads up about
Speaker 1: this incredible interview we had with doctor Eric Davis. For
Speaker 1: the most part, we tape our interviews so if we
Speaker 1: have any technical issues, we can fix them right then
Speaker 1: and there. But this interview we actually did live, and
Speaker 1: sure enough, as things would have it, my microphone was
Speaker 1: cutting in and out. So during this interview you may
Speaker 1: hear doctor Davis reference that he didn't hear my question,
Speaker 1: or you might hear sort of jumps or pauses in
Speaker 1: the audio. That is why. Hopefully that won't happen again,
Speaker 1: but hey, when you're doing things live, shit happens. Anyway.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much for joining us, and I hope
Speaker 1: you enjoy this interview.
Speaker 2: Doctor Davis, how are you, sir?
Speaker 3: Good? Your audio was cutting out during your introduction? Oh boy,
Speaker 3: well yeah, I was going in and out.
Speaker 1: Oh okay, Well hopefully hopefully it will come back and
Speaker 1: maybe a NSA is messing with us a little bit here.
Speaker 3: Uh well, thank you for having me on your show.
Speaker 3: I think you've been trying to pull arms and legs
Speaker 3: off my body to get me to appear on your
Speaker 3: show for quite a long time. And I'm happy to
Speaker 3: be here today.
Speaker 1: I am so excited to be here. We've we've spoken
Speaker 1: in person a couple of times. I think last time
Speaker 1: I saw you might be might have been the Soul Foundation.
Speaker 2: Does that sound familiar? I think that was.
Speaker 1: I think that was That was probably it. So if
Speaker 1: for some reason my audio cuts out, just ask me
Speaker 1: to repeat. I don't know why it is, but you know,
Speaker 1: I'm a one man's show. This is this is sort
Speaker 1: of like cable access TV on steroids, So who who
Speaker 1: knows what? What is? What is going to happen? So,
Speaker 1: so I want to jump right into it.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 2: I am a.
Speaker 1: Huge fan of skin Walker, the Legend, Skinwalker Ranch, whatever
Speaker 1: whatever the full name.
Speaker 2: Is of the show.
Speaker 3: And so you were part of NED this is Rocker Ranch.
Speaker 2: Yes, there you go? Okay, So, okay, so you were
Speaker 2: part of NIDS.
Speaker 1: This is billionaire Robert Bigelow's private science institute, and you
Speaker 1: were what the astro physics research director?
Speaker 2: Am I right in that?
Speaker 3: I was the astrophysics and aerospace physics director.
Speaker 1: Okay and okay, So so this ranch was under Robert
Speaker 1: Bigelow before before it came under Brandon Brandon Fugel. So
Speaker 1: you were you ever personally on the ranch, as I
Speaker 1: understand it, you were, is that right?
Speaker 3: For five of the six years I worked for NIDS. Yeah,
Speaker 3: I was on the ranch between one and two weeks
Speaker 3: out of every month, but by myself. I'd be with
Speaker 3: two of my co workers or one of my co workers,
Speaker 3: and then sometimes they would get swapped out from with
Speaker 3: one of Bob's contract investigators who was always on retainer
Speaker 3: to him. And then other times I'd be off the
Speaker 3: ranch for a period of time on vacation or be cycling,
Speaker 3: you know, letting somebody else take to take a trip
Speaker 3: cycle so I could stay home and and stay in
Speaker 3: my office and actually get work done.
Speaker 1: So your time on the ranch, what did you personally
Speaker 1: witness or investigate on that ranch that was anomalous? I mean,
Speaker 1: obviously you investigated a lot of stuff, but stuff that
Speaker 1: you personally encountered.
Speaker 3: A craft. On the first night that we were there
Speaker 3: for the very first time, Bob Bigelow took us out there.
Speaker 3: Then in November, so that was September of nineteen ninety
Speaker 3: six and November of ninety six, Colin Kelliher and I
Speaker 3: were out on the back of the double whe manufactured
Speaker 3: home that he had installed next to the Sherman house
Speaker 3: and the Shermans were still living in it. We saw
Speaker 3: another craft and it was similar to the one that
Speaker 3: we saw in September in color, size, dimensions, and it
Speaker 3: was different in that in September it had vertically landed
Speaker 3: or descended down from the sky, landed roughly half a
Speaker 3: mile to a quarter of a mile away from where
Speaker 3: we were. The light went out, the craft was lit,
Speaker 3: and its light went out, and then for thirty minutes
Speaker 3: we couldn't see any other movement or action. And then
Speaker 3: at the end of that thirty minute period the light
Speaker 3: returned on the ground level, but it was displaced to
Speaker 3: my left quite a distance, so somehow it had moved
Speaker 3: horizontally in a thirty minute period. And then it went
Speaker 3: out and it was gone forever. We went out there
Speaker 3: the next day and couldn't find a trace of anything.
Speaker 3: We scoured that whole property between where the house was
Speaker 3: all the way to the far west fence line adjoining
Speaker 3: the next door neighbor, and we went from I think
Speaker 3: we were from north to south. Yeah, So we went
Speaker 3: north to south and couldn't find anything. And then the
Speaker 3: one in November was a flyover. So Colin kell Her
Speaker 3: and I are out maink at about two thirty three
Speaker 3: am in the morning and it's cold, and here comes
Speaker 3: that very same type of craft flying over the Mesa
Speaker 3: or the bluff is as we called it. And it
Speaker 3: made a straight bee line right over the pasture about
Speaker 3: the centroid of the pasture, and then it made a
Speaker 3: perfect ninety degree turn toward our direction where our where
Speaker 3: the house was located with respect to where it made
Speaker 3: its turn, and it kept going straight and till it
Speaker 3: disappeared from you, and it would have been traveling east
Speaker 3: and so yeah, and so it was really it went
Speaker 3: north to south and then traveltyes. So it was very
Speaker 3: very interesting. No noise, no nothing, no aircraft lights. It
Speaker 3: was all dark amber light, very large.
Speaker 2: So was this an orb Was there a physical structure too?
Speaker 3: Well, we couldn't see because the light was very bright,
Speaker 3: but it was obviously a solid object. You couldn't see
Speaker 3: through it. But the light was an amber colored, very bright,
Speaker 3: very intense. I don't think we could make out any
Speaker 3: structure other than you couldn't see through. It was very opaque,
Speaker 3: and I don't think we would want to call it
Speaker 3: an orb because the orbs that were known on the ranch,
Speaker 3: which we are salt later saw the following year year
Speaker 3: and a half were small. They were probably human head
Speaker 3: size or basketball size. Nothing bigger, nothing smaller. And those
Speaker 3: orbs that have been seen on the ranch by the
Speaker 3: Sherman family and by us were consistently basketball to human
Speaker 3: head size, Okay, okay, And they never flew up in
Speaker 3: the sky. They were always at human height, you know,
Speaker 3: above the ground level, maybe no more than six feet
Speaker 3: above the ground at the best. This thing that I
Speaker 3: reported from September November was much larger and was up
Speaker 3: in the sky. Now, I don't recall when it first
Speaker 3: made its appearance on its vertical descent to the ground
Speaker 3: on the far west side of the ranch in September
Speaker 3: of ninety six and the similar one that flew over
Speaker 3: the ranch in November nineteen ninety six. But in the
Speaker 3: November case, that thing was not like a satellite up
Speaker 3: in orbit or a star. This thing was I would
Speaker 3: estimate about five hundred feet above ground level. That's how
Speaker 3: low it was.
Speaker 1: Okay, Okay. So this this thing was big, and I'm
Speaker 1: curious your opinion. You wrote the Air Force's Teleportation Study
Speaker 1: as the Teleworking.
Speaker 3: Teleportation Physics Study. Yeah, and that included using a solution
Speaker 3: of Einstein's general theory's relativity to find a equivalent for
Speaker 3: a traversible wormhole that would resemble the stargate like in
Speaker 3: the k. Kurt Russell movie and the television series. And
Speaker 3: I forget the name of the actor who was leading
Speaker 3: the series. I never got it. Because of work schedules
Speaker 3: and other family things. I never got to be able
Speaker 3: to see that show. I'm always busy writing Air Force
Speaker 3: reports or at that time I was working full time
Speaker 3: it needs so I never did get to see the show.
Speaker 3: But I did get to see occasional parts of the episode,
Speaker 3: so I'm familiar with the show. It's based on the movie,
Speaker 3: which is phenomenal. Yeah. So this is a flat This
Speaker 3: is called the flat face traversible wormhole, and that it's
Speaker 3: not phispherically, it does not have a spherical geometry like
Speaker 3: the first traversible wormhole solution to the Einstein equations that
Speaker 3: Kip Thorn and Michael Morris had derived back in nineteen
Speaker 3: eighty five, and they worked three years to do the
Speaker 3: mathematical development of that solution to find out its implications,
Speaker 3: its applications, and then they published their first paper in
Speaker 3: the American journal Physics in nineteen eighty eight and simultaneously
Speaker 3: a paper in phyz read D Physical Review D I
Speaker 3: think it was, and that one was about using wormholes
Speaker 3: time machines. And so this is this is not the
Speaker 3: spherically symmetric wormhole throat. This is a flat wormhole throat
Speaker 3: like a doorway. You stepped through it, and you come out,
Speaker 3: you go out the other side, but when you go
Speaker 3: out the other side, you're light years away from where
Speaker 3: you stepped into it at you know your departure point.
Speaker 3: So it comes to the snuggate.
Speaker 1: Okay, sure, So in your opinion, do you think there's
Speaker 1: a wormhole at Skinwalker Ranch or do you think there's
Speaker 1: a craft buried underneath?
Speaker 2: What do you think that is?
Speaker 3: The wormhole phenomenon had been seen at Skinwalker Ranch by
Speaker 3: Terry Sherman. I don't recall now, it's been so fricking
Speaker 3: long ago. It's already been thirty years this month next
Speaker 3: month actually actually beat thirty years next month when Bob
Speaker 3: Bigelow and I sat in his big office suite at
Speaker 3: Park house on Southeastern Avenue in Las Vegas, and we
Speaker 3: had a speaker phone call with Terry Sherman where Bob
Speaker 3: had kind of like an overarching discussion with Terry his family,
Speaker 3: his and his family's history with the phenomenon on the ranch,
Speaker 3: which finally led at the end of the conversation a
Speaker 3: discussion about Bob buying the ranch for a new And
Speaker 3: I had been hired before Colin kellerher and George Arnette
Speaker 3: were hired just the month before that, so all three
Speaker 3: of us, actually all three of us got got hired
Speaker 3: in the month of July, but I was the first hired.
Speaker 3: They came on board about roughly two weeks later, and
Speaker 3: then in August, Bob Bigelow and I are having on
Speaker 3: the speakerphone Terry Sherman about all what was going on.
Speaker 3: Bob was made to wear the ranch by his field
Speaker 3: investigator on retainer, Shelley Wadsworth up in Pilch, Nevada, and
Speaker 3: she's very close to the Utah border, and so she
Speaker 3: sees the newspapers coming out of Salt Lake City, like
Speaker 3: the Deseret News. And Zach van Nick is one of
Speaker 3: the reporters of the Deseret News that picked up the
Speaker 3: story about the Sherman's terrible experiences on that ranch, and
Speaker 3: so Shelley brought that to Bob's attention, faxed him copies
Speaker 3: of the newspaper articles. One thing led to another. That's
Speaker 3: how Bob got connected up to Terry Sherman was through
Speaker 3: Zach van Nick and Shelley Widsboro.
Speaker 1: One of the things that really blew me away when
Speaker 1: I read skin Walkers at the Pentagon was this whole
Speaker 1: concept of a hitchhiker effect, this thing where people would
Speaker 1: experience things at the ranch as part of this investigative effort,
Speaker 1: and then they would go all the way to the
Speaker 1: east coast to their home in Virginia and they would
Speaker 1: have bad things sort of happen. Did you ever experience
Speaker 1: anything yourself as far as the hits hiker effect?
Speaker 3: Oh? Yeah, yeah. It made its appearance known in my
Speaker 3: house in Las Vegas. I lived in a small enclave
Speaker 3: of southeast Las Vegas, which was still in the county.
Speaker 3: It was not incorporated into the city of Las Vegas.
Speaker 3: So we were on East Tropicana Road in Mountain Vista,
Speaker 3: in that neighborhood there, and yep, that phenomenon made its
Speaker 3: way into our house and created some havoc. And I've
Speaker 3: got three kids and two girls in elementary school, and
Speaker 3: my son was just a little tight not old enough
Speaker 3: to go to school. And then my wife is at home.
Speaker 3: She did have a job that was at home when
Speaker 3: she needed to be. So anyway, yes, the phenomenon in
Speaker 3: the old and Golden days, we didn't call that hitchhiker phenomenon.
Speaker 3: That's traditionally called Poldergeist phenomenon as in the movie, and
Speaker 3: the movie didn't invent that name. That's a technical name
Speaker 3: that was invented by research psychologists who looked into paranormal phenomenon.
Speaker 3: Paranormal was the word that Travis Taylor hates because because
Speaker 3: he said, there's always a physics explanation for things, of course,
Speaker 3: and so paranormal is a terrible label, and it's like, well,
Speaker 3: I I I agree with that thinking, but unfortunately we
Speaker 3: are humans and we attach convenient metaphorical labels to things
Speaker 3: like idiot over there or paranormal for you know, ghost
Speaker 3: story apparitions, uh so, uh psycho uh so, polder Geist
Speaker 3: was the YEP. And then little to my knowledge or
Speaker 3: little actually unknown to me apparently that follows uh. Colin
Speaker 3: Keller her home and affected his family because uh, and
Speaker 3: I was not and I didn't know about it because
Speaker 3: he didn't confide in any of us about it. He
Speaker 3: might have confided to Bob Bigelow, but I'm not aware
Speaker 3: that he did, because even Bob Bigelow didn't report that
Speaker 3: back to me or Georgiannette. Georgiannette also didn't confide to
Speaker 3: me to say anything about whether it affected him. Now
Speaker 3: he was married and his daughters were grown and lived
Speaker 3: in different states. His wife was still living in Sioue Falls, Iowa.
Speaker 3: I think it is is that right, Sue Falls, Iowa,
Speaker 3: and she was working there, and she was not living
Speaker 3: with him in the apartment. The permanent home was in
Speaker 3: Sue Falls, and he just was running an apartment in
Speaker 3: Las Vegas while he was working for NIWS. So I
Speaker 3: don't know whether the poltergeist phenomenon or slash hitchhiker phenomenon
Speaker 3: followed him home as well. He didn't say anything about it.
Speaker 3: I can't speak for John Alexander. John had only been
Speaker 3: to the ranch one time that I recall. That's not
Speaker 3: enough for the poltergeist to latch onto you. And I
Speaker 3: think you need to make a repeated presence out there.
Speaker 3: Bob Bigelow did not repeated presences or trips out there,
Speaker 3: I should say, very very often. Early in the days
Speaker 3: after he bought the ranch, he ause he'd be out
Speaker 3: there about twice in September, twice in October, once in November.
Speaker 3: And then after that it just dropped off. We just
Speaker 3: didn't see him after ranch anymore. And so but let
Speaker 3: me let me fast forward to the future. So in
Speaker 3: the future we now have the ranches out of the
Speaker 3: neds is out of business, and big older ail space
Speaker 3: has emerged as Bob's number one business next to the
Speaker 3: budget Suites of America and big a little ailspace. He
Speaker 3: then decides to he had after the Shermans moved to
Speaker 3: the Northwest Pacific. Northwest, Gene and Richard Diets were nearby
Speaker 3: property owners not far from where skin Wall ranches, and
Speaker 3: they retired. Richard worked for Chevron, I believe he was
Speaker 3: an oil company man, and he retired, and uh, we
Speaker 3: had encountered with them because they thought that there they
Speaker 3: raised they had ostrich form. They raised ostriches on a farm.
Speaker 3: One of the ostriches got attacked and they thought that
Speaker 3: was a mutilation attempt so we got called about it investigated,
Speaker 3: and that's how we met Gene and Richard Deets and
Speaker 3: turned out that see Georgio Neette is a world renowned
Speaker 3: Romanian bovine and avian disease pathologist, microbiologist and veterinarian. He's
Speaker 3: a he has a he's a DVM and a pH d,
Speaker 3: and he's got tons of books and pay review journal
Speaker 3: paper published in the veterinary medicine arena. And so he
Speaker 3: took a look at the ostriches leg and said, this
Speaker 3: is clearly a big cat attack. Big cat can mean
Speaker 3: Bob cat. We never saw mountain lions around the ranch.
Speaker 3: Terry Sherman never did either, but he said they were
Speaker 3: out there. Some of them would cross that bad lands
Speaker 3: where the ranch is located in and make its way
Speaker 3: make its way in. So they always worried about mountain lions,
Speaker 3: but normally they were the smaller size big cats, and
Speaker 3: that's what that's what had attacked the oster. So the
Speaker 3: point is is after Richard retired Bob Big and the
Speaker 3: Sherman's left, Bob needed somebody as caretakers on the ranch
Speaker 3: twenty four to seven to keep an eye out on
Speaker 3: things and report on any unusual phenomena and uh. And
Speaker 3: so he recruited Richard and Gene to move into the
Speaker 3: Sherman Home where they would live in retirement. And fast
Speaker 3: forward to that period. That's when Big Louros Space started
Speaker 3: deploying rotating teams of security guys to work on the ranch.
Speaker 3: They were given instrumentation by Colin Kellerher. I think he
Speaker 3: trained them in how to use the equipment and train
Speaker 3: them on how to record the data. And like us
Speaker 3: back at HISS, they would have to write it down
Speaker 3: on paper and facts it to Bob Bigelow every night
Speaker 3: or to call him every night. So that's what was
Speaker 3: going on back in those days. So I don't know
Speaker 3: what I can get at is I know that the
Speaker 3: hitchhiker phenomenon affected at least two or three of the
Speaker 3: security officers. I don't know that it affected all of them,
Speaker 3: because I don't know how many of them were in
Speaker 3: the rotation lineup, or whether it was always the same
Speaker 3: one guy, the same two guys, same three guys, or
Speaker 3: maybe they rotated a combination of those guys with a
Speaker 3: different group of security officers. I don't know. I didn't
Speaker 3: get into the weeds of that so I do the
Speaker 3: hitchhiker phenomenon finally affected Bob Bigelow and sell because he yeah,
Speaker 3: he's out at the ranch a lot more during the
Speaker 3: ASP and he's escorting Senator Harry Reid and Jay Stratton
Speaker 3: and Jim Lekatsky and other people whose names don't want
Speaker 3: they don't want publicized from the intelligence community, military intelligence. Actually,
Speaker 3: and they had been on the ranch, and they and yes,
Speaker 3: they had been on the ranch just one freaking time.
Speaker 3: And they had the misfortune of poltergeist following them their
Speaker 3: homes in Virginia and terrible things happen to them. And
Speaker 3: that's more than two that's more than two or three people,
Speaker 3: I think it is. And then they also it also
Speaker 3: finally followed Bob Bigelow home and it really upset the
Speaker 3: balance of his family life. So and I can't guess
Speaker 3: what they were going through, but I've heard tidbits of it.
Speaker 1: Well, Hey, Brandon Fugel, if you're watching, I would come
Speaker 1: to your ranch, but only for a day. That sounds
Speaker 1: like that's that's the end sarance policy.
Speaker 2: You want to circle back.
Speaker 1: I want to circle back to the cattle mutilations because
Speaker 1: I know you guys study that is as part of NIDS,
Speaker 1: what was what did? What did you determine what was
Speaker 1: going on? Or or your personal opinion as to what
Speaker 1: is going on? If you can't, you know, sort of
Speaker 1: you know, talk about the official determination.
Speaker 3: Right. Well, Big Aero Space was emerging. Then I played
Speaker 3: a role in helping Bob Bigelow stand up that company
Speaker 3: by defining what sort of company it was going to be.
Speaker 3: Bob made it clear he wanted space hotel, so I
Speaker 3: put him into contact with the leading space hotel thinkers
Speaker 3: and from there it went uh so, oh gosh, I
Speaker 3: lost the question, smil Can so repeat your question?
Speaker 1: Yeah, so what is your opinion as far as what
Speaker 1: is behind the whole cattle mutilation phenomenon, as far as
Speaker 1: what you.
Speaker 3: Got to know? Why? I forgot that? Yeah, it's okay. So,
Speaker 3: so I lost my job because of the rise of
Speaker 3: Bigelo Aerospace. A lot of us did. Bob Bigelow started
Speaker 3: laying off staff in two thousand and one and then
Speaker 3: in two thousand and two, and that's when I lost
Speaker 3: my job. With John Alexander and the second ranch manager.
Speaker 3: On a second, I'll skip that. It's Pete Pickup, who
Speaker 3: was on the staff in Utah at the ranch, but
Speaker 3: he didn't live on the ranch. This is before Gene
Speaker 3: and Richard started living on the ranch, and Pete followed
Speaker 3: Terry Sherman. Actually, so there's terryt the Shermans, then Pete
Speaker 3: pickup and then the deets is okay. So in two
Speaker 3: thousand and two, after I got permanently furloughed along with
Speaker 3: several others, I wasn't that connected up anymore, and I
Speaker 3: don't know what was particularly going on, but Colin Keller hurt.
Speaker 3: We'll see George Ohnette unfortunately got had his position laid
Speaker 3: off eliminated January two thousand and one, and so we
Speaker 3: had no more veterinarian. So some time after I got
Speaker 3: laid off, Colin Kelleher continued his investigations into cattle mutilations.
Speaker 3: He got in contact with experts that had some connection
Speaker 3: to this at Los Alamos National Laboratory, and he wrote
Speaker 3: a book about it, brain Trust. And to my surprise,
Speaker 3: because I wasn't involved in the milu of all that,
Speaker 3: since I'm no longer on the staff and I was
Speaker 3: at the time working as a principal investigator under contract
Speaker 3: to the Air Force Research Lab Advanced Concepts office at
Speaker 3: Edward's Air Force Base. But I'm still living in Vegas.
Speaker 3: I just traveled to Edwards about once or twice a
Speaker 3: month to give briefings and have meetings with my program
Speaker 3: manager there. So anyway, Colin came to the conclusion from
Speaker 3: all of his research on cattle mutilations that followed George's
Speaker 3: termination and my termination, and came to the conclusion that
Speaker 3: he found a poorly designed horror protocols anti livestock weapon
Speaker 3: testing operation or program that involved cattle. And this is
Speaker 3: what they did during the Cold War. This is circa
Speaker 3: like nineteen sixty sixty one thereabouts, or maybe the late fifties,
Speaker 3: but it was in the period of late fifties early sixties,
Speaker 3: just by a spread of maybe three or four years.
Speaker 3: And what happened is the biological warfare guys came up
Speaker 3: with the virus that was not meant to kill cattle.
Speaker 3: It was meant to infect them because they need to
Speaker 3: see if they can come up with the very intense vector,
Speaker 3: a viral vector that can infect animals rapidly, highly infectious.
Speaker 3: And they did not make it lethal or make the
Speaker 3: cattle sick, even by mild standards. So the idea was
Speaker 3: to find out it's affectiveness. Can we shoot this thing
Speaker 3: at the Soviet Union, at their cattle ranches and farm
Speaker 3: their livestock ranches, I should say, and take out their
Speaker 3: primary food source by a highly infectious lethal livestock virus.
Speaker 3: So this was the precursor to that done by the
Speaker 3: United States government government, probably Department of Agriculture and Fort
Speaker 3: Dietrich were entwined into that one. What he found out
Speaker 3: is that is that the protocols were terrible. The cattle
Speaker 3: were not contained. I think I haven't read Collins book
Speaker 3: in twenty some years, so I'd forgotten the details. But
Speaker 3: I think the cattle were mixed with cattle from private
Speaker 3: ranches that were allowed to graze on the same federal property,
Speaker 3: because a lot of ranchers grazed their cattle on federal
Speaker 3: properties that are life that are open for licensed grazing use.
Speaker 3: So you can pay a fee, get a license and
Speaker 3: graze your cattle, you know, your livestock, horses, cattle, goats,
Speaker 3: and sheep and whatever. So the brus got transmitted from
Speaker 3: the government cattles to the private cattles and then it
Speaker 3: made its wildfire entrance into the US beef supply. H
Speaker 3: and Colins thesis is that the mutilations are a result
Speaker 3: of a need to do random, sporadic, not frequent, but
Speaker 3: sporadic killing and sampling of selected cattle across the United
Speaker 3: States at big ranches where there are a lot of cattle,
Speaker 3: and it can be done covertly and quietly by a
Speaker 3: contractor company that can has access to unmarked US Army
Speaker 3: Special Forces helicopters, and they'll fly over day or night,
Speaker 3: actually not in the middle of the night. They'll fly
Speaker 3: in day or night. Nobody's around is at least from
Speaker 3: what they could see up in the air, but probably
Speaker 3: have ground guys, you know, driving around keeping an eye
Speaker 3: on people and automobile traffic. So once the coast is clear,
Speaker 3: they land, they sit et a cattle, a cow or
Speaker 3: a bull, and they mutilated. What they're doing is they're
Speaker 3: taking tissues. The soft tissues are the places that are
Speaker 3: well known in the cattle industry, especially among veterinarians like
Speaker 3: Georgia Ornette. They are the parts of the body that
Speaker 3: accumulate viral diseases and bacterial parasites the most compared to
Speaker 3: the rest of the body, and that would be the eyes,
Speaker 3: the ears, the lips, the utters, the rectum, and I
Speaker 3: think that's about it. So generles. So those are the
Speaker 3: parts that always get mutilated. There might be some stragglers
Speaker 3: where they get something in the side where the ribs are,
Speaker 3: but but that's not where the disease accumulates. Viral and
Speaker 3: bacterial diseases accumulate the most in those soft tissues, and
Speaker 3: that's why they were always mutilated. So that's Column's thesis,
Speaker 3: is that this is a group that he found out
Speaker 3: about from contacts at Los Alamos. I don't recall if
Speaker 3: he named them in the book, he might have been
Speaker 3: able to. I'd have to go back and look at
Speaker 3: my book to refresh my memory on it. But that
Speaker 3: was the answer, and so for all intensive And we
Speaker 3: also had one more piece of evidence from retired Cascade
Speaker 3: Cascade County, Montana Sheriff's Department Captain Keith Wolverton, who investigated
Speaker 3: waves of cattle mutilations, UFO flyovers over the northern Tier,
Speaker 3: sack ICBM silos in Cascade County and surrounding counties, and
Speaker 3: bigfoot sightings all kind of well, I'm done to one
Speaker 3: geographical region in uh Montana. And so his deputies in
Speaker 3: the desk would take you know, they would write police
Speaker 3: blodders of all called in reports from angry cattle ranchers
Speaker 3: or upset air force, security police officers and whatnot, or
Speaker 3: farmers who see a bigfoot running acrosser their property not
Speaker 3: far from the front porch or back porch. Anyway, So
Speaker 3: he he documented this for several years, wrote a book
Speaker 3: about it, Mystery Stocks the Prairie. The book is long
Speaker 3: out of print, but it looks like it's available on
Speaker 3: Amazon for a hefty price. And he documented it. So
Speaker 3: he produced a very big case file of all of
Speaker 3: that they found. Yeah, they found hard evidence that the
Speaker 3: cattle that one mutilated were drugged just like I said,
Speaker 3: but they but I thought they'd be drugged with the sedative.
Speaker 3: I'm probably putting the word sedative in Colum Killer's mouth.
Speaker 3: They might have been drug differently, but I would have
Speaker 3: done a sedative, and I think George Andnett would agree
Speaker 3: with me. So anyway, we found amphetamine speed in their blood,
Speaker 3: in their body. We found the tinfoil that was used
Speaker 3: to contain and carry wrap. You wrap it up and
Speaker 3: you've got powdered speed and an amphetamine, and that would
Speaker 3: be mixed in solution and put into a big cattle syringe.
Speaker 3: We also found where they drained the blood out, they
Speaker 3: used the equivalent you know, when you get a blood draw,
Speaker 3: they use a phlebotomist to forebotomis use the big needle
Speaker 3: that goes into your vein near the near the bend
Speaker 3: of your elbow. Well, they do similar with cattle, only
Speaker 3: it's not on their legs, it's up in somewhere in
Speaker 3: their body where they get draw blood from. But they
Speaker 3: have a much bigger needle. It's ugly, scary looking. So
Speaker 3: they found needles like that. They found foils were tainted
Speaker 3: with amphetamine, and not just at one location, not just
Speaker 3: in Montana, but there were locations or ranch areas in Florida, Kentucky, Tennessee, Colorado,
Speaker 3: probably also New Mexico and so forth where they were
Speaker 3: the similar things were a drug. A blood pathology panel
Speaker 3: was run on what blood was left in the cattle,
Speaker 3: and they found drugs in its system, narcotics the type
Speaker 3: that humans use. So it's like, what the hell are
Speaker 3: the aliens doing with speed, you know? And so that's
Speaker 3: what the answer is. It wasn't aliens. It was covert
Speaker 3: clandestine government contractors, probably bio warfare contractors conducting this. And
Speaker 3: unfortunately Linda Howe had gotten all that confused with the
Speaker 3: UFO explanation on the basis of one uncorroborated case where
Speaker 3: only one person. She might say differently, but I read
Speaker 3: her books, I've talked to her many times in person.
Speaker 3: It's always comes down to one witness that was never corroborated,
Speaker 3: who saw UFO at the site of cattle mutilation on
Speaker 3: her ranch, but were some of the aspects of the
Speaker 3: story don't hold, and the story changes a little bit
Speaker 3: when you talk to that witness over time. So I'm
Speaker 3: less inclined to believe that on the basis of one
Speaker 3: case versus dozens and dozens of cattle mutilation cases were
Speaker 3: where law enforcement and veterinarians who did on site neck
Speaker 3: cropsies and ran histologies on the animals had found human
Speaker 3: narcotics of high concentration or high doses i should say,
Speaker 3: in the animals, along with evidence that the narcotics were there,
Speaker 3: like in the Cascade County case. So Keith Wilverton fast
Speaker 3: forward to the early two thousands before I'm axed at
Speaker 3: NIDS and he arrives at NIDS and says, hey, I'd
Speaker 3: like to meet with you guys. And we already knew
Speaker 3: about him because we had talked to him on the phone.
Speaker 3: I think that would be Colin Kellerher had talked to
Speaker 3: him on the phone. Maybe even George No Georgia Nette
Speaker 3: got acced in two thousand and one, bed as possible.
Speaker 3: He talked to Keith Wolverton in two thousand. I just
Speaker 3: don't recall that level of my minutia. So Keith showed
Speaker 3: up and he said, I have retired and I'm looking
Speaker 3: at a snowbird retirement home here in Vegas. He's still
Speaker 3: living in a Montana near Billings, and when the weather
Speaker 3: gets cold there he wants to come to Vegas for
Speaker 3: the warmer winners. And he brought with him this really
Speaker 3: big three ring notebook binder, and it is chock full
Speaker 3: of all of his UFO Bigfoot and cattle mutilation cases,
Speaker 3: including the sealed power is that contained that big veterinary,
Speaker 3: that bonvine phlebotomy needle, and the tinfoil that the speed
Speaker 3: was stored and carried in and so we have the evidence.
Speaker 3: So he said, you know, this stuff had reached its
Speaker 3: seventeen year maximum life span. For storage according to county regulations,
Speaker 3: and they were due to be pulled out of the
Speaker 3: vault and destroyed because there's a seventeen year life span
Speaker 3: for everything that stored in their archival vault for the
Speaker 3: Cascade County Sheriff's Department. So he's already retired. He remembered
Speaker 3: that he had all that evidence there and all those reports,
Speaker 3: all those extensive reports of interviews with UFO witnesses, Air
Speaker 3: Force security police, cattle ranchers with mutilations, and cattle ranchers
Speaker 3: and farmers who saw bigfoot, and he got all that
Speaker 3: in there, and so he went back and he remembered
Speaker 3: all that. He kept in contact with the people in
Speaker 3: the Sheriff's Department administrative office, and I think they were
Speaker 3: communicating routinely, and that I think he got word that, hey,
Speaker 3: your stuff is going to be destroyed pretty soon, because
Speaker 3: it's coming up on seventeen years since you entered all
Speaker 3: that into the records or into storage. And so he
Speaker 3: went and he got permission from the Sheriff's department to
Speaker 3: remove that big three ring notebook binder containing all his
Speaker 3: case files and to keep them because they're going to
Speaker 3: be destroyed. And as far as they're concerned, there's no
Speaker 3: problem with just giving it away to a former captain
Speaker 3: of the department. Big deal. He wrote the book back
Speaker 3: in the mid seventies, and they don't have trouble. So
Speaker 3: he brings it to us, and he gives it to us.
Speaker 3: We got it for keeps and I went through that
Speaker 3: and did a statistical pattern analysis on every one of
Speaker 3: those cases. I did a pattern analysis on all the
Speaker 3: bigfoot cases, the icbm UFO encountercases, and the cattlelation cases.
Speaker 3: It was really interesting to see the pattern and I
Speaker 3: made bar charge the graphs of all that, and we
Speaker 3: presented that at the NID Science Advisory Board. So the
Speaker 3: sum total of columns work getting information from Osalamos, plus
Speaker 3: what we did at NIDS before George left NDS unceremoniously unfortunately,
Speaker 3: and Keith Wolverton's evidence and all the other and like
Speaker 3: I said, the sum total of the NIDS evidence includes
Speaker 3: not just mutilations in Utah, but the mutilations and other
Speaker 3: states that we were able to go to or collect
Speaker 3: data from veterinarians and law enforcement in those states that
Speaker 3: they were willing to share with us. So that's what
Speaker 3: it looks like at and made mutilations.
Speaker 1: Okay, well, at least we know that the government treats
Speaker 1: animals ethically.
Speaker 2: So I'm really glad to hear that.
Speaker 3: So, by the way, I want to tell you something.
Speaker 3: There's something you should know. The people are going to say, Hey,
Speaker 3: wait a minute, isn't the government contractor committing a felony
Speaker 3: by killing a two thousand and pound cow or bull?
Speaker 3: And you know they could be taken to the market
Speaker 3: for auction and make big money for the rancher. And
Speaker 3: I would think that'd be like uh, brand theft atto
Speaker 3: the equivalent of brand theft auto, based on the kind
Speaker 3: of money those ranchers can get at the auction houses
Speaker 3: for cattle and uh and the answer is no. So
Speaker 3: our former chairman of the Science Advisory Board, the founding
Speaker 3: chairman was doctor Christopher C. Green a k A. Kit Green,
Speaker 3: uh formerly of the c I A uh director of
Speaker 3: Intelligence and later General Motors and the number three man
Speaker 3: at General Motors. And uh so he I kind of
Speaker 3: got lost my point, and I'm sorry. Uh so, uh M,
Speaker 3: you know when.
Speaker 1: I want to I want to move on, if if,
Speaker 1: if you don't mind. H So, you were on American
Speaker 1: alchemy and you talked about on Corona, which is what
Speaker 1: people were born more commonly known as Roswell.
Speaker 3: Correct, it's commonly called Roswell because the news press was
Speaker 3: given press releases from the five or ninth Bombardment Group
Speaker 3: stationed at the Roswell Army Airfield in Roswell, New Mexico,
Speaker 3: which is where future Apollo fourteen astronaut and Navy pilot
Speaker 3: and astronautical engineer Edgar Mitchell lived and when he was
Speaker 3: in high school. So the actual crash took place in Corona,
Speaker 3: New Mexico, on the Foster Ranch that was managed by
Speaker 3: Mac Brazel. And that ranch is about one hundred and
Speaker 3: six miles from Roswey, the city of Roswell.
Speaker 1: And you're certain that you're certain that this occurred. And
Speaker 1: I believe you said that there were biologics found as well.
Speaker 3: Correct, Okay, biologics were to vaccines. I don't know who
Speaker 3: the hell started Dave Grush on this use of the
Speaker 3: word biologics when he testified before the House Committee Oversight
Speaker 3: Committee two years ago, three years ago. Actually, and no
Speaker 3: biologics is using viruses and bacteria to find vaccine cures
Speaker 3: for diseases. Viral disease vacial it should be any I
Speaker 3: like the old fashioned word dead alien bodies. I mean,
Speaker 3: why not?
Speaker 1: Okay, So are you one hundred percent sure that that
Speaker 1: this this did indeed happen in your investigation and NIDS
Speaker 1: and because you were looking into crash retrievals during it,
Speaker 1: it's correct.
Speaker 3: Starting in ninety eight, yeah, and I interviewed Brigadier General
Speaker 3: Arthur Exon, who was a lieutenant colonel at the time
Speaker 3: at Right Airfield. He was there in doing temporary duty
Speaker 3: to work on getting his master's degree in industrial engineering,
Speaker 3: and he happened to know everybody at the r AAF.
Speaker 3: You knew Colonel Blanchard, you knew Jesse, Marcel, senior Major Marcel,
Speaker 3: You knew Walderhouse the I think Walderhouse was the press officer,
Speaker 3: Marcel was the intelligence officer, and so forth and so on.
Speaker 3: So he knew these guys back in those days. He
Speaker 3: also knew Pappy Henderson, who was a pilot in the
Speaker 3: Air Transportation Command and I may not have that name
Speaker 3: rights the Air Force Transport Command possibly, so yeah, so
Speaker 3: he knew him and he was right there when Pappy
Speaker 3: arrived with craids from from the Foster Ranch. Geologist field
Speaker 3: kit that didn't have the tools in it, but it
Speaker 3: had samples filling it filled up in it from the craft.
Speaker 3: Debris that was recovered from the craft. The craft was
Speaker 3: not a one hundred debris field. It was a partial
Speaker 3: craft with some chunks of it that splintered off into debris,
Speaker 3: a hitter on Arroyo and busted up, and plus it
Speaker 3: skidded for several hundred yards. Uh so it left debris
Speaker 3: along its skid mark until it came to arrest at
Speaker 3: in at Arroyo where it hit that it hit, So
Speaker 3: you got a raft that's crumpled, broken off and all
Speaker 3: that kind of craft. So he knew all about that.
Speaker 2: And and how many did you hear?
Speaker 1: Like, how many we'll call them alien bodies were on
Speaker 1: that craft?
Speaker 2: And do we know what they looked like?
Speaker 3: There were four and they were the grays, the guy
Speaker 3: the little four foot guys with big heads and very
Speaker 3: diminutive bodies. Like there's a medical word I'd want to use,
Speaker 3: but I can't think of it. But anyway, Yeah, it's
Speaker 3: it's consistently the grays in that case, the one at
Speaker 3: seued Atticunia, Mexico, which is on the other side of
Speaker 3: the Rio Grand from Del Rio, Texas. That was in
Speaker 3: December nineteen fifty. There was a single occupant on that
Speaker 3: and that was also a gray and in that craft.
Speaker 3: And I haven't heard any other cases that had grays
Speaker 3: or any other type of species. It's usually been the grays.
Speaker 3: But I haven't been able during my work at nid's
Speaker 3: my work for AFRL and my work for how put
Speaker 3: Up where we were both at the time at which
Speaker 3: we were both working for the AFS app under contract
Speaker 3: to bass, I could never crack that net. I could
Speaker 3: never crack the net of alien communication with the government
Speaker 3: other than my interviews with retired President George Trubert Walker
Speaker 3: Bush in two thousand and three and letters exchanged in
Speaker 3: two thousand and five. So yeah, there was alien contact,
Speaker 3: but somebody's got that department and dy boy, they keep
Speaker 3: it hidden well.
Speaker 1: And I'm sorry to interrupt, but as far as I
Speaker 1: get your work at NID, were you ever privy and
Speaker 1: you probably can't even answer this, were you ever pritty
Speaker 1: to any classified information that would give you a clue that.
Speaker 2: Roswell did happen?
Speaker 3: Not Roswell specifically, I was given leaked classified information by
Speaker 3: someone who was an executive administrative assistant and field security
Speaker 3: officer for one of the legacy aerospace companies that no
Speaker 3: longer exist. It got absorbed by one or the other
Speaker 3: legacy aerospace companies after two thousand or about that period
Speaker 3: of time. And that individual revealed that Wright Patterson Air
Speaker 3: Force Base where they had a facility at her company
Speaker 3: that employed her, and they had intact craft there that
Speaker 3: they were trying to reverse engineer, and so that I
Speaker 3: knew about that was illegal information. She shouldn't have told me,
Speaker 3: but I didn't have security clearances with the need to
Speaker 3: know to get that that was leaked, and that was
Speaker 3: kept very quiet until the leak of the Wilson Notes,
Speaker 3: in which elements of her store of that woman, that's
Speaker 3: a woman, that individual's story were included as context to
Speaker 3: provide context to the Wilson Notes. It wasn't. It was
Speaker 3: just kind of glomb down to the Wilson transcript to
Speaker 3: provide context to the crash retrievals, absurd security measures to
Speaker 3: keep it hidden.
Speaker 1: Okay, okay, yeah, And I want to ask you a question,
Speaker 1: but we're going to take a quick break. But the
Speaker 1: question is how many alien species are there? But hold
Speaker 1: that answer just going to watching the show, and you're
Speaker 1: not subscribed to our channel, please hit the subscribe button.
Speaker 1: We found out that YouTube is literally not recommending our
Speaker 1: show to anybody on YouTube. We had changed our sort
Speaker 1: of channel care category to news and Politics because we
Speaker 1: were talking about what was going on with UAP stuff
Speaker 1: in Washington, but apparently it's really fed up the algorithm
Speaker 1: and YouTube is literally not promoting our show whatsoever. So
Speaker 1: when you leave a comment, when you hit it sends
Speaker 1: signals to YouTube, and hopefully we'll help turn this thing
Speaker 1: a show like zero. We don't have Peter Thiel or
Speaker 1: anybody bankrolling or paying the studio round here in Los Angeles, which.
Speaker 2: Is not cheap.
Speaker 1: And if you want to help pay the bills and
Speaker 1: help us be able to bring you great shows and
Speaker 1: guests today, you can find us on Patreon at www
Speaker 1: dot patreon dot com. Forward slash the Good Trouble Show.
Speaker 1: The link is also in the YouTube, and also super
Speaker 1: chats are open. You can do the whole Super Thinks thing.
Speaker 1: All of that goes to all that kind of stuff.
Speaker 1: So all right, let's get back to doctor Davis. Now
Speaker 1: your zodiac stuff to TRW, and I understand the TRW
Speaker 1: was TRW was bought out by Northrop Grumman. So is
Speaker 1: Northrop Grumman the primary stakeholder of the UAP crash or
Speaker 1: crash retrieval program as far.
Speaker 3: As you know, Nope, Uh, there's no word on that.
Speaker 3: Chris Mellen has a friend at Northrop Grumman who was
Speaker 3: on the merger and acquisition team that was actively engaged
Speaker 3: in buying TRW. And uh he told Chris. And remember
Speaker 3: I'm getting this from Chris, so uh he What Chris
Speaker 3: tells me is he told Chris that there was no
Speaker 3: sign of this type of program. But that doesn't mean
Speaker 3: it didn't exist. What it meant is, uh, it's contract
Speaker 3: likely had been terminated. The records that they had been
Speaker 3: pouring through during this acquisition period, you know, the Uh,
Speaker 3: it's the process you do when you're buying a business
Speaker 3: and buying a home. But anyway, so due diligence. So
Speaker 3: it's the due diligence by going through TRW's papers, accounting
Speaker 3: books and all that showed that there was no revenue
Speaker 3: being generated by any kind of program of this nature.
Speaker 3: And when that happens, when they don't see any kind
Speaker 3: of program like that and there's nothing being generated. It's
Speaker 3: not in the books, and that means it's dead. It
Speaker 3: had terminated and moved on. So, for all intents and purposes,
Speaker 3: when north or Bremen bought TRW, it did not inherit
Speaker 3: what was going on right Air Force Base Circa from
Speaker 3: the beginning TRW until some time before it got bought
Speaker 3: by north or Bremen, which was roughly two thousand, two
Speaker 3: thousand and two.
Speaker 1: Okay, I want to talk about as APP uh, and
Speaker 1: I think most of our viewers viewers here know what
Speaker 1: as APP is, so I don't want to get into
Speaker 1: a you know, sort of heavy explanation of it. But
Speaker 1: in your opinion, was ASAPP ever positioned out or gain
Speaker 1: access to older legacy crash retrieval information?
Speaker 3: Okay, you'll have to ask ask the question again the
Speaker 3: first part of your question. You have a sound problem
Speaker 3: going again.
Speaker 1: Oh so sorry, it's probably Ronald Moultrie jam in my
Speaker 1: jam and my microphone here. Was was ASAP in your
Speaker 1: opinion ever positioned to locate flesh out or gain access
Speaker 1: to older legacy crash retrieval information.
Speaker 3: No, because we did not have an SAP clearance. And
Speaker 3: specifically what we found out is that has that is
Speaker 3: UH the clearances waved Unacknowledged Special Access Program, which is
Speaker 3: the higher category of SAP, and it goes beyond the
Speaker 3: classification that we had. The app itself was cleared at
Speaker 3: TS SCI level Sensitive Departmentalized Information Level TS means top
Speaker 3: secret for those of you who don't know that. So
Speaker 3: that was it, so help put off an eye. Were
Speaker 3: deputized by Jim mccatsky at the d i A Defense
Speaker 3: Warning Office three and we both got letters that were
Speaker 3: introductory letters we could give to people in the government
Speaker 3: or in the industry that identified us, said that we
Speaker 3: were official representatives of the DA and that our identification
Speaker 3: cards would show our security clearances. And that identification card
Speaker 3: was our courier card. That's the card that's issue to
Speaker 3: people that legally are allowed to courier classified information from
Speaker 3: one place to another place safely and securely. So we
Speaker 3: had courier cards, and our courier cards were valid worldwide.
Speaker 3: We had worldwide access. So no, we we did. I'm
Speaker 3: not going to get it in a long story because
Speaker 3: it was only incidental to this question. We did find
Speaker 3: out from our affiliation with one of the companies in
Speaker 3: California that the senior vice president of that company had
Speaker 3: been a young engineer who got hired in nineteen seventy
Speaker 3: at right out of graduate school with his doctorate and
Speaker 3: material science, and a friend of his was also hired
Speaker 3: at right out of graduate school at the same time
Speaker 3: with a PhD in mathematics. They both got hired by
Speaker 3: the program manager for the crash retrieval program at that company,
Speaker 3: and they worked together with the team of three or
Speaker 3: four others. The leader, the leader of that group that
Speaker 3: did the hiring, he was the third one, so that
Speaker 3: I think there were still three other guys or two
Speaker 3: other guys, and so they were under contract to the
Speaker 3: Central Intelligence Agency to do crash retrievals. They'd actually they
Speaker 3: were if there was anything in the desert of Nevada
Speaker 3: or California, they'd literally go out themselves and retrieve stuff.
Speaker 3: But ninety nine percent of it was just space junk,
Speaker 3: and the other one percent of it was, as I
Speaker 3: was told by that senior VP, very interesting and and
Speaker 3: it goes into the and he elaborated to Hall put Off,
Speaker 3: and I'm further what that one percent very interesting stuff
Speaker 3: that they recovered was falls into the category of UAP craft.
Speaker 3: But there was other UAP craft components that were sent
Speaker 3: to them by the CIA. So they got they got
Speaker 3: stuff from the government customer, the CIA, and it wasn't Yeah,
Speaker 3: it wasn't all. And they were not a bona fide
Speaker 3: a recovery team. It's just because of the convenience of
Speaker 3: their location in California and the location of where the
Speaker 3: CIA told them to go hunt for the stuff.
Speaker 1: Okay, And I want to want to kind of dig
Speaker 1: a little bit deeper into that. So, so your tasking
Speaker 1: was to hunt down a letter on DA stationery. Harry
Speaker 1: Reid tried to get you the clue. And by your
Speaker 1: own account, jimly knew about the program when he sent
Speaker 1: you huntings. You were being fed the wrong information by Lakatski.
Speaker 1: And do you think Lakotski had actually been read into
Speaker 1: the program?
Speaker 3: Okay. So Lakotski's published books and then he's made public
Speaker 3: statements in a YouTube interview video with Jeremy Corbel and
Speaker 3: George Now. Okay, So I didn't have a lot of
Speaker 3: contact with Lakotski, but briefly every now and then. It
Speaker 3: wasn't routine because I'm one of the sciences. I am
Speaker 3: one of the two science advisors. How was the chief
Speaker 3: science advisor because he owned her Tech International, Incorporated and
Speaker 3: was also he was the president's CEO, and he was
Speaker 3: also the director of the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin,
Speaker 3: which is the think tank for ar tech. It's our
Speaker 3: text think tank. So they had a cop so we
Speaker 3: the company had a set contract for the as APP
Speaker 3: through Biggeler Aerospace Advanced Spased Studies. Okay, so, uh so
Speaker 3: based on my work at NIDS and based on what
Speaker 3: Hell put off and I found out through our other interaction,
Speaker 3: non related, non UFO related work on advanced R and
Speaker 3: D with the senior vice president who was also the
Speaker 3: director of this company's Advanced Technology Center. Well he is
Speaker 3: over he is sponsoring research study on vacuum entergy. That
Speaker 3: we had a multi organizational collaboration, so it was Airthtech,
Speaker 3: cal State Long Beach, it was Mission Research, and the
Speaker 3: guy there later moved to for company and then Lucky
Speaker 3: Martin Space Systems, and so that was the group of us.
Speaker 3: And so it was only by happenstance, through that affiliation
Speaker 3: that project that we were trying to get DARPATH funding
Speaker 3: for collectively as a as a group of scientists. We
Speaker 3: find out about the senior VP who sponsored that project
Speaker 3: internally having something to do with the Legacy Craft's retrieval
Speaker 3: program in his company, not overall, just in his company.
Speaker 1: I want to ask, did insiders people that worked on
Speaker 1: the program or wait, wait, let me.
Speaker 3: Let me hang on, let me answer the rest of
Speaker 3: your questions. Okay, Katski, so Lakat's key has come out
Speaker 3: and provided two pieces of information that none of us
Speaker 3: heard before. And I understood from Colin Keller heard that
Speaker 3: he and but Bigelow. I don't know that he's speaking
Speaker 3: for Bigelow, but it's possible that the same is true
Speaker 3: for Bige Little. But I know Colin said he never
Speaker 3: heard those tidbit revelations from Lukatski during the as APP
Speaker 3: or even within the few years after the as APP
Speaker 3: and how put off. And I certainly didn't hear that
Speaker 3: information before. I met with Jim Mkatski for a long
Speaker 3: for a relatively long term, more than a day at
Speaker 3: the Army Research Lab at a Delphi, Maryland in July
Speaker 3: of twenty fifteen. We were there attending an advanced energy
Speaker 3: workshop and so he was there. I was one of
Speaker 3: the session chairs, and I gave a plenary talk on
Speaker 3: my session, which was quantum vacuum energy, and then I
Speaker 3: had experts in quantum vacuum zero point fluctuations zero point energy,
Speaker 3: which I embraced umbrella with quantum vacuum energy to simplify
Speaker 3: the terminology. And so Jim is there, he's in the audience.
Speaker 3: He's not presenting, he's just in the audience. He pulled
Speaker 3: me aside. Let's see, this was like a two day event,
Speaker 3: as I recall, So he pulled me a side one
Speaker 3: day and might have been a three day event. It was.
Speaker 3: It was a three day event. So he pulled me aside.
Speaker 3: During one of those days, we had a long break
Speaker 3: when we walked to the far end of the building.
Speaker 3: This is this workshop taking place in a big meeting
Speaker 3: room upstairs. So we're on the second floor. There's a
Speaker 3: long hallway with windows on one side of it, and
Speaker 3: then a wall on the other side with doors, big
Speaker 3: lab doors and office doors. There's no markings on them.
Speaker 3: So we're walking down the other end to get away
Speaker 3: from people. We're near the restrooms and nobody's going in
Speaker 3: and out of the restrooms, so we're over by there.
Speaker 3: He wanted to tell me about what's happening with him
Speaker 3: at the DA. He contracted leukemia and was gonna take
Speaker 3: a medical leave of absence from the DA to undergo treatment,
Speaker 3: and he didn't know exactly how long he'd be gone,
Speaker 3: but if he could successfully beat it and get it
Speaker 3: into remission, he'd go back to the DA, go back
Speaker 3: to work again, and stay until he was ready to retire.
Speaker 3: So that was the last time I saw Jim. And
Speaker 3: even then, Jim did not bring up the fact that
Speaker 3: he had gone into a UAP whose program engineers managed
Speaker 3: to figure out how to open it up. And then
Speaker 3: the other fact that he gave to Corbel and Nap
Speaker 3: that if I remember I sent that to information to you,
Speaker 3: it was about triangular shape craft. I'm going to have
Speaker 3: to refer to my notes here so I can remember
Speaker 3: the exact wording. So hang on, I think I need
Speaker 3: to expand that message a bit. Oh. Yes, So the
Speaker 3: military was seeing triangles, uh, and so we were. So
Speaker 3: the OSAP was trying to figure out the physics of
Speaker 3: how to do that type of propulsion and uh. And
Speaker 3: he was asked by Jeremy Corbell, do you think it's
Speaker 3: already been achieved by the US government or or it
Speaker 3: hasn't and that's why asapp had a ton of value,
Speaker 3: had a lot of value. And Jim mcatsky replied, it
Speaker 3: hasn't been achieved to its full extent, interesting extent? Did
Speaker 3: they achieve it seventy five percent? I don't know because
Speaker 3: he never told us. So how put Up and I
Speaker 3: have talked about these things, and we're looking at each
Speaker 3: other like huh so, uh No, this isn't disinformation. This
Speaker 3: is the DPSR telling Jim what he can say publicly
Speaker 3: in his books versus what he can't say in his books.
Speaker 3: And they cleared him to say what he says, and
Speaker 3: obviously they cleared him to say what he said to
Speaker 3: Corbella and Nap. I haven't read his second to his
Speaker 3: second and third bookshet, so I don't know if that
Speaker 3: thing about the triangles is even in there. I haven't
Speaker 3: gone all the way through the first book yet either.
Speaker 3: So you think it's so it's real. Lukatsky would have
Speaker 3: the eligibility for access, which guys like remember the the
Speaker 3: video interview involving Sammy Gerb hal put Off, Avy Lobe
Speaker 3: and Congressman Eric Burleson on what was that June twenty,
Speaker 3: I think, yeah, something like that. So it was right
Speaker 3: after it was right, was it? But I think it
Speaker 3: was either before it was either one day before. I
Speaker 3: think it was the night before the disclosure form. If
Speaker 3: not the night out. No, they had a bank with
Speaker 3: the night anyway. So this is this is the thing.
Speaker 3: It's just that I was trained and educated, well more
Speaker 3: trained and given training. It's routine when you have a
Speaker 3: net when you're employed as a contractor to support a
Speaker 3: NASA contract like I was at the Aerospace Corporation, So
Speaker 3: my government customers NASA. I'm on the NASA site interacting
Speaker 3: with those in a program that I am supporting under
Speaker 3: the contract, okay. And then I'm an employee of the company.
Speaker 3: So the company has TSSCI projects and they probably have
Speaker 3: SAP projects too, Okay. So we get routine security training frequently,
Speaker 3: like about two or three times a year. Different not
Speaker 3: all the same thing repeated, it's different elements of it,
Speaker 3: and we get it every year. So that's at the
Speaker 3: Aerospace Corporation level, and then we have that at the
Speaker 3: NASA level. If you've got NASA equities, like you have
Speaker 3: a NASA contractor badge that gives you access to all
Speaker 3: the facilities at the Marshall Space Flight Center, which sits
Speaker 3: into the red Stone Arsenal. It gets me access to
Speaker 3: the red Stone Arsenal to get in and get to
Speaker 3: the net A campus, okay. And then also it's got
Speaker 3: an air Fight RFID chip that I put in the
Speaker 3: side of my NASA issue laptop so I can access
Speaker 3: the laptop. Okay. So in return for that, I have
Speaker 3: to take all the h the equivalent NASA version of
Speaker 3: all the same training I'd had at aerospace. So I
Speaker 3: am learning everything, uh and anything. And I've taken the
Speaker 3: Special Access Program Security officer training, are taking counterintelligence training
Speaker 3: through another venue. And this is all hosted by the
Speaker 3: Defense counter Intelligence Security Agency for contractors and government people
Speaker 3: employees that have security clearances. So I can tell you
Speaker 3: that that I understand the DOP DOOPS or d O
Speaker 3: p SR. I don't remember what the full acronym is,
Speaker 3: but DA's Defense, so it's a defense office for what spr.
Speaker 2: Pre public prepublication.
Speaker 3: There you go, So, uh, I can tell you I
Speaker 3: know what the criteria is to delineate between that which
Speaker 3: is super sensitive and should not be revealed in a book, magazine, newspaper,
Speaker 3: or a podcast interview, or even whispering to your grandmother
Speaker 3: before she dies and that and then distinguished between that
Speaker 3: information information which is not considered to be sensitive. So
Speaker 3: that's how come I can tell you that what that
Speaker 3: DPSR told Jim Lukatski, what he can talk about openly
Speaker 3: that isn't that sensitive today. And I already had that training,
Speaker 3: so I know that when I talk about this stuff
Speaker 3: and you're hearing me say things, there's a lot of
Speaker 3: people out there that see me on these podcasts saying,
Speaker 3: oh my god, Eric Day, or maybe they see me
Speaker 3: at the Soul Foundation symposium and the I didn't make
Speaker 3: it to the disclosure form because of work major changes
Speaker 3: that works, so I had to stay home anyway, So
Speaker 3: they hear me say these things on podcast or at
Speaker 3: these big forms, Oh my god, he's revealing classified information.
Speaker 3: Why isn't he getting arrested in charge and going to
Speaker 3: prison and all that stuff? And it's no, it's because
Speaker 3: I've been trained on the process. I know what the
Speaker 3: criteria and the guardrails are, so I know what I
Speaker 3: can say. I can say to you guys that there
Speaker 3: are a minimum of four different alien species and they
Speaker 3: are known from the public domain and in the classified world,
Speaker 3: the credibility isn't. The credibility of that ranges on the
Speaker 3: spectrum from no credibility to high credibility. The high credibility
Speaker 3: is the classified part, and in the high credibility not
Speaker 3: on the far end of it. But there are credible
Speaker 3: witnesses who have been corroborated by multiple other witnesses or
Speaker 3: had other means of corroborating their account of an encounter
Speaker 3: with one of the species. So there's some high credibility
Speaker 3: for witness accounts, and there's medium, low, and none, and
Speaker 3: there's a minimum of four. And if you look at
Speaker 3: Bob Emmenager's book UFO's Past President in Future, published in
Speaker 3: nineteen seventy four, he's got a beautiful center section. It's
Speaker 3: black and white, and it shows you a taxonomy of
Speaker 3: the known UFOs that the US government had documentation for
Speaker 3: or classified information on. It wasn't just all Project blue Book.
Speaker 3: It incorporated Project Blue Book of course those craft but
Speaker 3: it's a taxonomy of all these different crafts. Well next
Speaker 3: to that is the taxonomy of all the different type
Speaker 3: of aliens that have been investigated in the reports that
Speaker 3: Blue Book took and investigated, as well as classified stuff
Speaker 3: that was released. So the stuff was released. The MacArthur
Speaker 3: Foundation and the Department of Defense were the sponsors Bob
Speaker 3: Emmenager's two documentary television shows, UFOs It Has Begun and
Speaker 3: then it got retitled. It might have been UFOs it
Speaker 3: had Past President and Future, but I know that it
Speaker 3: got retitled to the other one, UFOs It Has Begun.
Speaker 3: I might have him backwards, but anyway, the second one.
Speaker 3: First one came out in seventy four. Second one came
Speaker 3: out in seventy six. The second one, The Differences Shock.
Speaker 3: The Lee was added as one of the co hosts
Speaker 3: and he specifically did the segment of the show on
Speaker 3: cattle mutilations and that's why he was added to the show.
Speaker 3: But that was in seventy six. So anyway, the companion
Speaker 3: book came out in seventy four to go out to
Speaker 3: come out with the first documentary, and those are sponsored
Speaker 3: by the DoD and the Department and the MacArthur Foundation.
Speaker 3: So this is serious stuff. So there you go.
Speaker 1: Okay, and I want to circle back to Lakatski. Do
Speaker 1: you think it was possible that he was Legacy program
Speaker 1: all along?
Speaker 3: No, he wouldn't be in the Legacy program. I know
Speaker 3: his job duties. He's a ballistic missile engineer, so he
Speaker 3: wouldn't be a fit for the Legacy program. It doesn't
Speaker 3: mean they wouldn't. They wouldn't consult him on a technological
Speaker 3: basis because he has a doctorate of engineering. I have
Speaker 3: a doctorate in philosophy. I have a doctor of philosophy.
Speaker 3: There are no doctorates of physics. It's always a PhD.
Speaker 3: But he has a doctorate of engineering based on the
Speaker 3: school he went to to earn that doctorate. They had
Speaker 3: that particular title, so he's a doctor of engineering. It
Speaker 3: could have been you know, here and there. You know,
Speaker 3: they could have briefed him or consulted him without telling
Speaker 3: him that they were the Legacy Program or one of
Speaker 3: the actors in the Legacy program and they needed his information,
Speaker 3: and it might not have been later on. Possibly, I
Speaker 3: want to spin this up a little bit as a
Speaker 3: big possible possibility. Possibly during the ass app when we
Speaker 3: were looking for the legacy programs, he understood. He knew
Speaker 3: already because he had Jay Stratton working with him. It's
Speaker 3: not Jim that stood up the ass app. It's Jim
Speaker 3: Lekotski and Jay Stratton. They both stood up the os
Speaker 3: app and Jay's memo, his memoir is finally coming out
Speaker 3: in October. He's got an actual day of that month
Speaker 3: that that memoir is coming out. I'm hoping he'll talk
Speaker 3: about that, that that issue, that era, that history. And uh,
Speaker 3: it's not out of the question that Jim could have
Speaker 3: been briefed at a superficial level for the purpose of
Speaker 3: consultations or as a courtesy briefing, because let me tell
Speaker 3: you about a man named Jim Semivan, who all of
Speaker 3: you out there in UFO Land are very familiar with
Speaker 3: from TTSA days, Jim semi Van also received a complimentary
Speaker 3: or courtesy I think situation forget that, I'll say situational
Speaker 3: awareness briefing on the crash retrieval programs. But that's at
Speaker 3: a superficial top level. That's at the top level. He
Speaker 3: was invited to get the more detailed technical information level
Speaker 3: briefings that would come after another time, another location, but
Speaker 3: he turned that invitation down because he found the top
Speaker 3: level situational awareness briefing to be pretty boring. He kind
Speaker 3: of recognized what it was about, and I think after
Speaker 3: the fact, he really recognized what they were talking about
Speaker 3: after talking to some people about it, but he did
Speaker 3: recognize what it was about. I'd say he was kind
Speaker 3: of you know, it's like, what what are they talking about?
Speaker 3: So anyway, they were gonna they invited him to get
Speaker 3: the full Monty and he did not want to do
Speaker 3: the full Monty because here's why. He works in the
Speaker 3: Clandestine Directorate, the Directorate of Operations. It might be formally
Speaker 3: known as the National Clandestine Service. I don't know if
Speaker 3: they still use that name or not, but anyway, that's
Speaker 3: what his job was. So he's not a technical guy,
Speaker 3: not at that level. He would be of no use
Speaker 3: to them to get He would be of no use
Speaker 3: to them for them to give him that briefing because
Speaker 3: he wouldn't be able to give him technical feedback on
Speaker 3: it and say, oh I got an idea, you missed something.
Speaker 3: What about that? No, that's not Jim. Jim's a spine.
Speaker 1: Sure, So you don't think it's possible that OSAFF was
Speaker 1: spun up as a kind of a side quest to
Speaker 1: see spun up as a side quest by somebody in
Speaker 1: the Legacy program to see if another program could find
Speaker 1: the Legacy Program.
Speaker 3: I don't know, and that's a good question. I really
Speaker 3: don't know. But if they did do that, that was
Speaker 3: not known to Harry Reid. I don't know that Jay
Speaker 3: Stratton and Jim McCaskey could even volunteer that information, but
Speaker 3: it's possibility. I cracked TRW and I cracked the other company.
Speaker 3: I know Sammy Gerb revealed the name of the company
Speaker 3: and even mentioned the senior VP's name. I know I've
Speaker 3: accidentally let slipped out those names at the Soul Foundation
Speaker 3: Forum in San Francisco in November two thousand and four,
Speaker 3: when Sammy and Jack Orkittt and two other guys were
Speaker 3: interviewing me during lunch, and I got flack for that
Speaker 3: because this was a lunch interview and they served lunch
Speaker 3: and drinks to all of us because we were in
Speaker 3: the middle of a very short window lunch period between
Speaker 3: technical sessions, and I didn't want to miss the next
Speaker 3: session that Admiral Galladet is leading, and I really didn't
Speaker 3: want to miss it. I ended up missing about half
Speaker 3: a bit in the end because of that interview. So
Speaker 3: I'm I'm chucking food down.
Speaker 2: I want to go back to you.
Speaker 1: You were talking about dopts her and dopts her, essentially
Speaker 1: giving people that have worked in classified programs the go
Speaker 1: ahead or no go to talk about a specific thing.
Speaker 1: You obviously were around a lot of people that had
Speaker 1: greater access to things that maybe you weren't.
Speaker 2: You weren't read able to get into those compartments.
Speaker 1: Did any of those insiders ever want you to publicly
Speaker 1: validate what they couldn't say on the record, what they
Speaker 1: you know, what they couldn't say, et cetera.
Speaker 3: We had a plan just to answer that question, help
Speaker 3: put up myself, Bob Bigelow, call him keller Her. We
Speaker 3: came up with the plan with that senior VP in
Speaker 3: that California big aerospace company, one of them, and I'm
Speaker 3: not going to name them, but you guys know who
Speaker 3: I'm talking about. Okay, So the plan was this. They're
Speaker 3: stove piping. That's the euphemism for compartmentalization under a wave
Speaker 3: and acknowledged Special Access Program security regime. It's so onerous
Speaker 3: that they've only got roughly five people working on the
Speaker 3: program at any one time. Now. The program was actually
Speaker 3: shut down in May of nineteen eighty nine for all
Speaker 3: the companies involved, not for their company it was all
Speaker 3: of the companies involved with the contract to the CIA.
Speaker 3: CIA shut it down due to the lack of progress.
Speaker 3: I mean, these guys had contracts running since probably nineteen sixty,
Speaker 3: is what I found out, So I'll take back the
Speaker 3: word probably. I know it was nineteen sixty at the
Speaker 3: beginning because TRW was found and the founded and the
Speaker 3: Aerospace Corporation was spun out of TRW, and they were
Speaker 3: both born in nineteen sixty, So that's the earliest that
Speaker 3: they could have been involved, okay in all this. And
Speaker 3: the same with the other company, and i'll name it.
Speaker 3: I'll say it Lockeyed Aircraft Company. Okay, So there's also
Speaker 3: huge aircraft company and the Aerospace Corporation. So anyway, this
Speaker 3: goes back to the sixties documentation. In the sixties I
Speaker 3: found out the Douglass Aircraft Company, which which named them. Okay. So,
Speaker 3: so the singer VP at this company thought that our
Speaker 3: program was unique and it was a great vehicle for
Speaker 3: his company to take their holdings. Their holdings being some
Speaker 3: of the crash retrieval materials that they retained which the
Speaker 3: CIA never got back when they canceled the program in
Speaker 3: eighty nine. This company retained some of the stuff. They
Speaker 3: were supposed to return one percent of it. It's like
Speaker 3: you got a box of Christmas tree ornaments under contract
Speaker 3: with us. We're you know, we're the owner, we're the CIA,
Speaker 3: We owned the Christmas tree, the box of ornaments. You
Speaker 3: guys were given the box of ornaments to analyze and
Speaker 3: when and you didn't do that. You didn't do well,
Speaker 3: you couldn't figure it out. The ornaments are too advanced.
Speaker 3: So we're taking it back. We're canceling the contract. And
Speaker 3: when we cancel that contract, you got to return the
Speaker 3: whole box filled with the ornaments that were in that box. Well,
Speaker 3: that company didn't return probably about maybe about twenty percent
Speaker 3: of the ornaments.
Speaker 2: Okay, so.
Speaker 3: Ornaments, yep, So eighty percent of the ornaments got returned,
Speaker 3: and the company quietly kept twenty percent on the chance
Speaker 3: that over the years their laboratory technology, physics, and engineering
Speaker 3: would have advanced over the years such that they reach
Speaker 3: a point where they want to pull those twenty percent
Speaker 3: of the ornaments. They for themselves out and put them
Speaker 3: back in the lab again and see if they could
Speaker 3: use the new laboratory techniques, new laboratory diagnostic tools like
Speaker 3: what Gary Norlan has at Stanford any apply any of
Speaker 3: the new applied physics theories that come from theoretical physics,
Speaker 3: and any of the new engineering principles that come out
Speaker 3: of advanced engineering developments, and so they were doing it
Speaker 3: for that reason. They were trying to see if they
Speaker 3: could get a commercial and military advantage over our foreign
Speaker 3: adversaries on the military advantage side and commercially competitive adversaries
Speaker 3: in the US capital industry, you know, the capitalist industry system,
Speaker 3: the free enterprise system. They got competitors in the aerospace
Speaker 3: defense intelligence industry, and you know, maybe some of this
Speaker 3: material they might figure it out ten years, twenty years
Speaker 3: in the future, and they got, oh, wow, we can
Speaker 3: invent a new technology that'll bring us even more revenue
Speaker 3: than the F thirty five did. Uh, that's what the
Speaker 3: that's their mentality. But when we came to them and said, hey,
Speaker 3: you know, we've been working with you on vacuum energy stuff,
Speaker 3: and uh, let's start the exchange of information about our
Speaker 3: work on us up, what we're doing, what our mission
Speaker 3: goals are. And they reached a consensus that what they
Speaker 3: could do is take the twenty percent of the Christmas
Speaker 3: Tree ornaments that they kept and initiate a contract with Artech. Okay,
Speaker 3: here Hall and I and our other staff here in Austin, Texas.
Speaker 3: Uh and we would get that material. But Hallan but
Speaker 3: Ertech did not have the advanced diagnostic laboratories that even
Speaker 3: that company had. We have access to diagnostic tools in
Speaker 3: Austin that worked for the chip fabrication companies for the
Speaker 3: like Samson is here and Advanced micro Devices was here
Speaker 3: and so forth. Okay, so the idea was to give
Speaker 3: it to Hertek, and then we turn it around. We
Speaker 3: go back to that company and we say, hey, company XYZ,
Speaker 3: we got these weird t these weird Christmas tree ornaments,
Speaker 3: and we can't figure these out. We don't have the tools,
Speaker 3: but we got the money from our government contract to
Speaker 3: pay you under a contract to have the best of
Speaker 3: your best laboratory people and theory people to do laboratory
Speaker 3: studies on these Christmas ornaments. And we'll sweeten the deal.
Speaker 3: Any new discoveries your teams make, your team or teams
Speaker 3: make you could publish in the peer review technical journals,
Speaker 3: and that would be a way of outing those materials
Speaker 3: into the public domain by going through science only, not
Speaker 3: going to the papers, not saying, Aha, we've got alien technology.
Speaker 3: You're gonna have guys like Michael Schrmer sitting on older
Speaker 3: and are you going to be given us trouble and
Speaker 3: uh you know, using ad hominem and talks against us. Yeah,
Speaker 3: the long long yeah, long distance, long duration bicyclist guy.
Speaker 3: So yeah, so uh so, No, we wanted to go
Speaker 3: to science, which is a v lob's push right now,
Speaker 3: with capturing UFO data or UAP data with instrumentation, advanced
Speaker 3: scientific instrumentation, measurements and signals intelligence is what guys like
Speaker 3: me call it. So uh so, that was the idea,
Speaker 3: get this material into science. When you make a discovery,
Speaker 3: if you make a discovery like this metal or this
Speaker 3: ceramic or this plastic is really unusual. It's nothing like
Speaker 3: what we have anywhere on Earth. Nobody on Earth is
Speaker 3: even remotely close to making these or even theoretically discussing
Speaker 3: these in the technical period viewed literature in their respective
Speaker 3: scientific disciplines. Nobody's close. This is really exotic. So this
Speaker 3: is how they would get it into the science, into
Speaker 3: the scientific community. And that's what we said. We said,
Speaker 3: you could take it out of the classification, stove piped.
Speaker 3: Get it out of the wave and acknowledged special Access program.
Speaker 3: Get it out of there, give it to earth Tech
Speaker 3: under a contract. Earth Tech turns around, gives it back
Speaker 3: to you under contract, and you no longer have it
Speaker 3: under waved and acknowledged Special Access program because we don't
Speaker 3: have that level of clearance. You've released it to us
Speaker 3: under TSSCI. We're going to give it back to you
Speaker 3: under maybe a secret level or for official use only level,
Speaker 3: maybe even non not in any collateral security level. We
Speaker 3: give it back to you. You study it, you make
Speaker 3: the discoveries of what it is, what it's about, and
Speaker 3: maybe you come up with applications. You might think of
Speaker 3: genius applications for it. You publish that in a bunch
Speaker 3: of period of view technical journals, in your research literature,
Speaker 3: your laboratory, you know, in this literature of matter science,
Speaker 3: engineering and physics and so forth, semiconductors and things like that,
Speaker 3: and then we get that information out. Then when you
Speaker 3: go do your due diligence, which is on your job,
Speaker 3: it's best to communicate your scientific discoveries, even if it's
Speaker 3: in the private industry, even if that discovery is made
Speaker 3: in the private industry. If it's not at that point
Speaker 3: this is not a classified contract, we probably want to
Speaker 3: downgrade that heavily. I don't know that we would want
Speaker 3: to do it at TS level S level, maybe official
Speaker 3: use only, or maybe at propriety. I think, you know what,
Speaker 3: now that I think about it, something like that would
Speaker 3: be done at the corporate proprietary level between two companies.
Speaker 3: So I think that's how that would actually happen. So
Speaker 3: we would bring we would do it at the proprietary
Speaker 3: information level. So then their scientists are going to want
Speaker 3: to go to the professional science conferences in their disciplines,
Speaker 3: and they'll associate with their disciplines like the I Triple LEA,
Speaker 3: the American Society for Mechanical Engineers, the American Institute of
Speaker 3: Aeronautics and Astronautics, et cetera. So you go and give
Speaker 3: a technical presentation on your discovery relevant to the discipline
Speaker 3: of that conference that you're attending. Then you might have
Speaker 3: a statement saying, which we all have to do. I
Speaker 3: had to do that for my AFRL studies. By the way,
Speaker 3: the teleportation physics study wasn't my only study. I did
Speaker 3: five or six of them totally. Only one of them
Speaker 3: didn't get published. Okay, So when you do, when you
Speaker 3: give a presentation based on a government contract and I
Speaker 3: have you have to say this study was funded under
Speaker 3: contract number XYZ one two three with the Air Force
Speaker 3: Research Lab for example. So in these guys, in this
Speaker 3: case of this scenario that we were designing, it would
Speaker 3: be the guys from company XYZ would then say on
Speaker 3: their presentation slide it was also been on their technical papers.
Speaker 3: By the way, you do the same thing. You have
Speaker 3: to do the same thing in the acknowledgement section which
Speaker 3: comes before the list of references in a technical paper.
Speaker 3: You will acknowledge that this work that you are publishing
Speaker 3: was made possible from by the funding under contract x
Speaker 3: y Z one two three with the with DARPA for example,
Speaker 3: DARPA Program Office X for example. So it's going to
Speaker 3: be on the technical paper that you were funded on
Speaker 3: that program under that contract number, and it will be
Speaker 3: in the presentation slides out at conference. So then at
Speaker 3: the conference, now in the technical paper you don't say
Speaker 3: anything about UAP from an unknown origin. At the conference,
Speaker 3: you might let that slip. You might just say, oh,
Speaker 3: by the way, you know, guess what this is not
Speaker 3: of human origin. Right, we didn't. We didn't dig this up.
Speaker 3: We didn't just make this. This was given to us
Speaker 3: from ab see, you know. So this is how we
Speaker 3: will let it gently release into the public domain through
Speaker 3: the scientific community, and that way they have the peer
Speaker 3: review first eyes on that with on that discovery, and
Speaker 3: that's how you get it more acceptable. So that was
Speaker 3: the big plan. The big plan failed when Glenn Gaffney
Speaker 3: got in the middle of our of that company's negotiation
Speaker 3: between their executive vice president the senior VP that we
Speaker 3: collaborated with during the ASP who help put off and
Speaker 3: I had been working with with uh interorganization other organizational
Speaker 3: teams on quantum vacum entergy stuff research and and uh
Speaker 3: so I think I lost my train of thought. Again.
Speaker 3: That's when I talk and.
Speaker 1: No, I do I do the same thing. Well, I
Speaker 1: have to say, I mean, I know, like c I
Speaker 1: A is supposed to open up doors. You know, it's
Speaker 1: a pretty big, big thing.
Speaker 3: Yeah, there you go. And yeah, so I was going
Speaker 3: to just say the EVP and the senior VP of
Speaker 3: that company went to Glen Gaffney to get his permission
Speaker 3: to transmit or transfer and transport the twenty percent of
Speaker 3: the Christmas ornaments to EarthTech because they didn't own it.
Speaker 3: They had to get the Glenn Gafney's permission because he
Speaker 3: was a portfolio owner of all that, And when he
Speaker 3: found out that they had twenty percent of those Christmas
Speaker 3: tree ornaments in their possession since the shutdown of the
Speaker 3: program in eighty nine, he went berserk, said absolutely not,
Speaker 3: it's not going to happen. You ain't getting it. Then
Speaker 3: Harry Reid went to Secretary Defense Leon Panetta I believe
Speaker 3: it was at the time, and asked him to intercede.
Speaker 3: Panetta refused to intercede and get in the middle of that.
Speaker 3: So that was it that killed our plan, our brilliant,
Speaker 3: genius plan.
Speaker 1: Well, and I don't know if you've seen the I
Speaker 1: don't know if you've seen the Steven Spielberg movie. But
Speaker 1: everybody's like doing their career two point zero, and I
Speaker 1: have to say Glenn Gaffney's acting career, I think is
Speaker 1: off to a pretty good start. I thought he was
Speaker 1: just absolutely fantastic in the movie, even though you know
Speaker 1: he's a bit of an asshole in real life. As
Speaker 1: I understand it now, I want to go back to
Speaker 1: the program being shut down in eighty nine. So GERB
Speaker 1: pushed back on this podcast, and by the way, folks,
Speaker 1: he is an excellent, excellent researcher. And the question was
Speaker 1: around this, you know the program being shut down, as
Speaker 1: you said in nineteen eighty nine, is that firsthand information
Speaker 1: that you know or where your ten this?
Speaker 3: It was for first ten from the legacy program senior
Speaker 3: VP at that one company, and he was not talking
Speaker 3: about his company. He was talking about all of the companies.
Speaker 3: And the problem is how hit a milestone birthday last month?
Speaker 3: And he's older than God, you know, God love him,
Speaker 3: and his memory is not quite as sharp at the
Speaker 3: detailed information level, so how how forgot? He's forgotten? So
Speaker 3: the first ten information is that the entire legacy program
Speaker 3: was shut down in eighty nine. But the CIA, what
Speaker 3: how for that to say? Is that maybe how didn't
Speaker 3: think he could say it, but I will say it
Speaker 3: the CIA, I'm sorry the legacy that senior VP said,
Speaker 3: the CIA will bring it out once every ten years
Speaker 3: and give new contracts to the companies and then they
Speaker 3: will bring it and then they will receive the materials
Speaker 3: back and they will attempt to use. Now we're ten
Speaker 3: years into the future from the shutdown, and it may
Speaker 3: take and they may not be successful, but they get
Speaker 3: a contract, they get the materials, they work on it,
Speaker 3: and they said, we still can't figure it out, so
Speaker 3: they put it back into cold storage again for another
Speaker 3: ten year period. CIA comes back says, Okay, try again.
Speaker 3: So they're gonna keep doing this until the laboratory, diagnostic, instrumentation,
Speaker 3: physics theories, applied physics, and engineering principles catch up. And
Speaker 3: then when that next ten year period comes that it
Speaker 3: gets resurfaced for another look by the legacy programs legacy companies. UH,
Speaker 3: then they may get successful. And I think, given what
Speaker 3: Lukatski said about the triangular shape crap, which I had
Speaker 3: never heard about, not just me but several of us
Speaker 3: on the offset at the contractor level, that tells me
Speaker 3: that somebody somewhere got successful. And now, since the companies
Speaker 3: can't talk to each other, it won't be Boeing and Lockheed,
Speaker 3: it won't be Lockheed and Raydeon UH, and it won't
Speaker 3: be Radion and North or Grumman or some combination thereof
Speaker 3: of all that. It could be somebody else even buttell
Speaker 3: by the way. Betel Memorial Institute was another one. A ha,
Speaker 3: so that's one that Sammy didn't think about. Uh. They
Speaker 3: are an FFRDC and they had a hand in UFO
Speaker 3: material analysis for Project Bluebook, and they had a classified
Speaker 3: report top secret.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 3: Jacques nicknamed it the Pentacle Memo in his first volume
Speaker 3: of Forbidden Science. And unfortunately, the modern versions of that
Speaker 3: book you can get, you know, the updated, newer version,
Speaker 3: they don't have that damn memo in it. You have
Speaker 3: to go back and get the old one with the
Speaker 3: green paperback cover, and it's got the Pentacle memo reproduced
Speaker 3: in it. So it's been allegedly declassified. I think it
Speaker 3: has been declassified finally. So so Hotel so I tell
Speaker 3: is another one of those companies that was involved. I
Speaker 3: know that to the labs at the Department of Energy,
Speaker 3: which back then was the AEC, the Atomic Energy Commission
Speaker 3: for those of you who are very young and uninformed,
Speaker 3: poorly educated in school, the Atomic Energy Commission owned all
Speaker 3: those Manhattan Project labs which became the National Labs. And
Speaker 3: you have Los Alamos and the IDOH National Lab. And
Speaker 3: unfortunately Samy named Livermore and Oakridge. You couldn't be more wrong.
Speaker 3: It's the other two, so okay, but Bettel works in
Speaker 3: with them. Bettel actually runs I n L. Lockheed, Martin
Speaker 3: runs Los Alamos. I don't. Yeah, So anyway, there we go.
Speaker 2: Okay, So it's entirely possible.
Speaker 1: This program, if you want to call it the Legacy
Speaker 1: program or not, has been spun up again.
Speaker 3: It's okay, here's the thing. The companies got shut down,
Speaker 3: but that doesn't mean the program offices at the CIA
Speaker 3: and the Air Force, which is their executive agent on
Speaker 3: most of this stuff, well, on this topic and other
Speaker 3: topics that have nothing to do with UFOs and aliens. Okay,
Speaker 3: So those program offices are still in existence. They have
Speaker 3: primary compartments. They'll have sub compartments within the wa've done
Speaker 3: acknowledge Special Access program, regime, security regime, okay, or infrastructure
Speaker 3: if you will. So there are compartments and sub compartments,
Speaker 3: and they all had code names, and those can keep
Speaker 3: going using government resources. So there might be some folks
Speaker 3: out at one of the national labs running it at
Speaker 3: a low level on behalf of the government program at
Speaker 3: the Air Force or of the CIA, and they might
Speaker 3: it's not out of the question, but they could just
Speaker 3: call back one or two of the industry companies, the
Speaker 3: defense industry companies like Pateel, Lockheed, Martin North through Grumman
Speaker 3: and so forth. Tirw is gone, Hughes is gone, that's
Speaker 3: Radon now and so forth. So you got North there,
Speaker 3: Grumman and Raydon replacing Hughes and Tirw, et cetera. So
Speaker 3: they out of the question for them to bring back one,
Speaker 3: maybe two companies and give them a contract. It's just
Speaker 3: that you have to understand the way you've done acknowledged
Speaker 3: Special Access program security infrastructure. It does not permit hundreds
Speaker 3: of people being cleared at anyone organization. It only permits
Speaker 3: roughly a handful.
Speaker 1: Okay, okay, okay, you're going to have two or.
Speaker 3: Three or four government guys plus the gatekeepers. That's another
Speaker 3: thing Sammy got wrong. He's a young guy. He's not
Speaker 3: thirty years. He doesn't have thirty years of experience that
Speaker 3: I have. Didn't work at these classified programs like I
Speaker 3: did with hal and Column and Bigelow and the other
Speaker 3: Bigelow Aerospace Advanced based Study staff. There's other Jacques V.
Speaker 3: Lee was on the contract. So was John Schusler, who
Speaker 3: was the former founding co founding a member of Muffine
Speaker 3: who later became one of the international directors that oh,
Speaker 3: he became the international director right after wald Andris died.
Speaker 3: He was a founding international director of move On. So
Speaker 3: we were under contract. And it's just it's just not
Speaker 3: out of the question that the legacy programs. See, we
Speaker 3: got to understand Sammy doesn't grasp that there's a distinction
Speaker 3: the legacy programs jargon. Those two words refer to the
Speaker 3: aerospace defense industry. Okay, it doesn't refer to the government offices.
Speaker 3: Because government program offices and intelligence and in the military
Speaker 3: or slash Department of Defense, Department of War, they get reorganized.
Speaker 3: They constantly get reorganized. You've got guys cycling in, cycling
Speaker 3: out your military personnel. The military leadership of these program
Speaker 3: offices cycle in on either two to four year basis.
Speaker 3: Your lower ranking officers cycle in roughly on a two
Speaker 3: year basis, very rarely four years. Some of them do,
Speaker 3: but not all of them. But it's the top level
Speaker 3: guys who are usually your generals and admirals, Okay, but
Speaker 3: they have working with them. So you've got the organizational tree.
Speaker 3: So there's the top box is the military commander and
Speaker 3: coming out shooting out from his box is the civilian commander,
Speaker 3: the GS fifteen guy. Usually at the general level, you're
Speaker 3: going to have his SES level guys a senior executive
Speaker 3: service in the intelligence community, it's an SIS for Senior
Speaker 3: Intelligence Service. And for guys like Jay Stratton. Jay moved
Speaker 3: from DIA to the Office of Naval Intelligence after the
Speaker 3: app or sometime around thereabouts, and he worked at the
Speaker 3: O and I, and so he couldn't go into SIS there.
Speaker 3: Their nomenclature for the equivalent of an SIS is DSL
Speaker 3: Defense Intelligence Senior Leader. And he and that's so he
Speaker 3: was a one. He went from GS fifteen to one
Speaker 3: d I s L one, that's the equivalent of a
Speaker 3: one star. And then he got promoted before he retired.
Speaker 3: Sometime before he retired, he got promoted to d I
Speaker 3: s L two, which is equivalent of a two star. Okay,
Speaker 3: so I have to remind you that what Sammy's young,
Speaker 3: he's green, he's not. He's not. He doesn't have a
Speaker 3: PhD in anything or a masters. I don't know if
Speaker 3: he has a bachelor's degree. The point is he doesn't
Speaker 3: know these distinctions. And the distinction is program offices in
Speaker 3: the government, They constantly change. If you have if you
Speaker 3: have a defense operation, they're going to have a general
Speaker 3: or an admiral in charge. That general and admirals usually
Speaker 3: cycled in and cycled out every two to four years.
Speaker 3: That general or admiral leader, and then the guys cycled
Speaker 3: probably every couple of years. They move on. Okay, say
Speaker 3: the CIA, Okay, now you have the civilian guys that
Speaker 3: I mentioned earlier. They are permanent. Those guys stay on
Speaker 3: unless they make a decision to transfer to another military
Speaker 3: service or another program office within the service they're working in.
Speaker 3: So those guys are more or less permanent. Okay, you
Speaker 3: have retirements, you've got deaths, You've got Ronald Reagan firing everybody.
Speaker 3: Now you have Trump firing everybody. So these guys will go,
Speaker 3: come and go to but not nearly as frequent as
Speaker 3: the military leadership. That is not the legacy program. That
Speaker 3: that's why we call it the legacy program. That refers
Speaker 3: to the aerospace defense companies that had contracts with the
Speaker 3: CI and Air Force to do UAP studies and handle
Speaker 3: the crash retrievals and probably most likely often an Yeah, okay,
Speaker 3: So to say there's the government side, of that, So
Speaker 3: we don't have a name for that. Yeah, I don't
Speaker 3: know what you would call right now. I would just
Speaker 3: stick with the compartmentalized program, is what they are.
Speaker 1: Sure, yes, And by the way, and folks, we will
Speaker 1: we'll definitely get get to some questions. We have a
Speaker 1: heart out with mister Davis and in uh in forty minutes,
Speaker 1: but we will, we will.
Speaker 2: Do our best.
Speaker 1: What have Ross Coulthart recently alluded that Lou Alexondo was
Speaker 1: out of the Legacy program and as far as what
Speaker 1: you know when he was an as APP, do you
Speaker 1: think Lou Alexander.
Speaker 3: Okay your audio quit again, but I heard you. I
Speaker 3: could read your lips, Okay. Yeah, Lou Alexandro was not
Speaker 3: part of the as APP. He was kind of peripheral
Speaker 3: out there. Uh, he was part of the A Tip
Speaker 3: was the nickname for the ass APP. Every every classified
Speaker 3: code word will.
Speaker 1: Have a nickname.
Speaker 3: You use the nickname to protect the code word, to
Speaker 3: keep the code word from getting leaked out in the public.
Speaker 3: You can leak out a nickname and nobody's going to
Speaker 3: know what it means, so you can't trace it anything.
Speaker 3: So the A tip was the nickname for OS app.
Speaker 3: Then when OSAP ended, Jay Stratton picked it up, ran
Speaker 3: with the nickname and renamed it A tip, renamed what
Speaker 3: would have been the ass app as the A Tip,
Speaker 3: and he was in charge. But Lou played a big
Speaker 3: supporting role in that. I think he was a portfolio
Speaker 3: manager somewhere in there. I think, I'm sure and certain
Speaker 3: actually that Jay is going to clarify that in his
Speaker 3: memory memoirs. So he was involved with the post asapp
Speaker 3: a tip that Jay Stratton ran, and it was not funded.
Speaker 3: It was unborrowed money, and not much got done because
Speaker 3: there wasn't much money to borrow. So it was just
Speaker 3: an existence humming along. And then Jay struck dirt when
Speaker 3: the Chief of Naval Operations came to him and said,
Speaker 3: I want you to stand up the UAP Task Force
Speaker 3: and its mission is going to be a whole of
Speaker 3: government operation. You are going to have the power to
Speaker 3: reach out to every branch of the federal government, including
Speaker 3: the National Force Service and the Department of Agriculture even
Speaker 3: and the Federal Communications FCC and so and Yes, so
Speaker 3: you're going to reach out to all of them, and
Speaker 3: you're going to get them to dedicate Liaison Officer or
Speaker 3: two and maybe not funding won't be able to get funding.
Speaker 3: He didn't get funding either. The idea was that he
Speaker 3: would be given services in kind, so the labor of
Speaker 3: the technical support people, logisticals support people, security support people
Speaker 3: would be provided for free to his task force. So
Speaker 3: because he didn't have a budget, he wasn't given any
Speaker 3: money from by a congressional appropriation or via some carve
Speaker 3: out from the O and I budget. So he basically
Speaker 3: would be given and this is my understanding, so they
Speaker 3: basically would be given services in kind to establish a
Speaker 3: whole of government operation. The core group of members in
Speaker 3: the task force numbered forty and there's approximately one thousand
Speaker 3: of them in the periphery on the outside. But they
Speaker 3: supported the program through for various reasons, doing various things.
Speaker 3: And I don't have all the picture of that because
Speaker 3: I wasn't in the middle. Hal and I were the
Speaker 3: science advisors, science consultants. Travis Taylor of the secret of
Speaker 3: Skinwalker Ranch was Jay's chief scientist. And I know the
Speaker 3: names of other people that were involved, but I'm not
Speaker 3: liberty to reveal them because they're still in government in
Speaker 3: sensitive positions in government. So anyway, I do know some
Speaker 3: of the task Force members who were out in the periphery,
Speaker 3: and I do know a couple of them, and so
Speaker 3: that's that's how that was laid out. And I believe
Speaker 3: Jay is going to really lay that out. And Lou
Speaker 3: was in that group. I think he was not peripheral.
Speaker 3: I think he was probably somewhere close, if not in
Speaker 3: the forty probably on the surface of those forty people.
Speaker 3: He provided valuable resources to the task Force. He connected
Speaker 3: Jay to important people programs, and he opened doors that
Speaker 3: Jay needed help opening where j couldn't open them, Lou
Speaker 3: was there to open them. So Lou was, you know,
Speaker 3: an intelligence officer. Then he had a counterintelligence portfolio, so
Speaker 3: I can imagine now counter Okay, I got to give
Speaker 3: a lesson to you folks. There's a difference between counterintelligence
Speaker 3: and intelligence. Counterintelligence has the word intelligence in it, but
Speaker 3: it is not an intelligence program or operation. So the
Speaker 3: word counterintelligence really means law enforcement. And those guys in
Speaker 3: counterintelligence law enforcement always get always tell everybody else where
Speaker 3: in intelligence because that's what they want to believe. Now,
Speaker 3: they don't want everybody to believe it, they want to
Speaker 3: believe it. So anyway, the intelligence operations is collecting information
Speaker 3: that's enemy information, that secret and you want to collect it,
Speaker 3: analyze it, process it, sent it up the chain of
Speaker 3: command for action items, and that's the distinction between those.
Speaker 3: So Lou worked on both sides of that aisle. But
Speaker 3: he had a big counter intelligent portfolio. So he did
Speaker 3: have an a tip portfolio. So do you I know
Speaker 3: what it was specifically, it didn't matter. Holl And I
Speaker 3: had to report to him, were reported to Jay and Lou.
Speaker 3: Lou was great. Lou was fundamental. You couldn't do without Lou.
Speaker 3: That's my that's my uh little little jingle there.
Speaker 1: So do you think it's possible Lou was actually uh
Speaker 1: running counterintelligence for the Legacy Program and was kind of
Speaker 1: bridging things between.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's very possible, but he couldn't tell how or
Speaker 3: I that because we didn't have SHO need to know
Speaker 3: for that. That's the law enforcement thing and they don't
Speaker 3: like talking to guys like us about that kind of thing.
Speaker 3: I like to keep that, you know, in the shadows.
Speaker 2: That's what do you think?
Speaker 1: Do you think it's possible, Jay Stratton, do you think
Speaker 1: it's possible? Jay Stratton was actually part of the Legacy Program.
Speaker 3: I don't you know. I don't think so, I don't
Speaker 3: think so.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 3: I know talking I know from talking with him during
Speaker 3: the offsp and during the A tip and during his
Speaker 3: task force, that I gave him enough information that he
Speaker 3: used to track down who the gatekeeper is. And that's
Speaker 3: another thing. Sammy Gerb confused all of the audience in that.
Speaker 3: Uh what was that freedom of secrecy or something?
Speaker 2: I'm not sure. Anyway, I know what, I'm glad on.
Speaker 3: You by mentioning somebody else's podcast.
Speaker 2: I don't know, a lot of people are doing really
Speaker 2: great work.
Speaker 3: So okay, good, okay. So Sammy, uh oh crap, I
Speaker 3: always skip a beat memory wise, and oh, come to me.
Speaker 3: But anyway, Sammy got that wrong about Lou. Lou was
Speaker 3: about Jay? So uh well, I think he was talking
Speaker 3: about Lou too, but uh uh Jay, okay. So the
Speaker 3: gatekeepers that's where Sammy fell down. Sammy was naming programs
Speaker 3: off program offices, the office of this, the office of that,
Speaker 3: the director of this, the director of that, uh and
Speaker 3: so forth. He said, those are the gatekeepers. That's what
Speaker 3: he's implying. Were the gatekeepers. They are not the gatekeepers,
Speaker 3: they are the program offices. He got it wrong. You
Speaker 3: want to target them, yes, absolutely, But they're not the gatekeepers.
Speaker 3: The gatekeepers are. Here's the clue. Here's the hint. Hold
Speaker 3: on to your chair. The counterintelligence officers. So those officers
Speaker 3: are fit. They have counterintelligence officials in the Air Force
Speaker 3: Office's Special Investigations. They're the criminal investigative service for the
Speaker 3: Air Force. They are also the counter intelligence service for
Speaker 3: the Air Force. Let's just say that they are the
Speaker 3: important gatekeeper since the Air Force is executive agent to
Speaker 3: the CIA's UFO Crash Retrieval program. Okay, So Jay found
Speaker 3: out who the gatekeepers were during the task Force bet
Speaker 3: COVID hit. He made an arrangement to speak to the
Speaker 3: gatekeeper once again. That gatekeeper was AFOSI, Special Agent in
Speaker 3: charge protecting Wave Done acknowledged special access programs in his
Speaker 3: portfolio that included all of them, probably also special access
Speaker 3: programs also probably hidden SCI programs. There are also hidden
Speaker 3: SCI programs. So anyway, Jay found out who that was
Speaker 3: through channels. He've learned that person's office and name. They
Speaker 3: made an arrangement to meet in a skiff and talk
Speaker 3: about how Jay can get read in and COVID struck,
Speaker 3: and that canceled all of it. You couldn't do classified
Speaker 3: work on your laptop at home. I think they could
Speaker 3: take a government laptop home, and they're no longer connected
Speaker 3: to the secured intrendnet system supernet, so he couldn't do
Speaker 3: that work. They couldn't meet in the skiff. Everything was
Speaker 3: shut down during that period. That guy ended up moving
Speaker 3: on during the COVID period. Jay distin't reconnected with him
Speaker 3: for a lack of time, and he's now winding down
Speaker 3: toward retirement at the time. So that's what I wanted
Speaker 3: to point out. Who the gatekeepers were. I do know
Speaker 3: that when hal Told answered Sammy's question during that podcast,
Speaker 3: he mentioned DHS finding the gatekeeper, and yes, that's true.
Speaker 3: That's the DHS's security chief and his deputy. Those two
Speaker 3: guys took the briefing information that how big Aelo and
Speaker 3: keller Her gave to Jane Loot at the DHS to
Speaker 3: justify standing up the ASAPH in DHS, and it was
Speaker 3: going to be in the Directorate of Intelligence. I'm sorry, wrong, wrong,
Speaker 3: Director of Science and Technology. Sorry. That was led by
Speaker 3: doctor Tara O'Toole. So she led the Directorate of Science
Speaker 3: and Technology within the Department of Homeland Security. Well it
Speaker 3: was the department's two chief security officers, and I'm not
Speaker 3: going to name them. Uh So that guy and his
Speaker 3: deputy got all that information from us, not me, but
Speaker 3: us collectively with me not being in the picture. That
Speaker 3: was probably under that temporary SAP called ConA blue that
Speaker 3: was like a framework. It was a oh it was
Speaker 3: a temporary s A P. How gave it the correct name?
Speaker 3: Uh name proposed s A P. I think it was
Speaker 3: p SAP. So anyway, so those two guys figured out
Speaker 3: from our data, which was house investigations, my investigations, and
Speaker 3: they found the gatekeeper at AFOURI. They contacted the gatekeeper
Speaker 3: and the gatekeeper confirmed that yes, he is the guy
Speaker 3: protecting the very programs they are seeking, the crash retrieval programs.
Speaker 3: So they so DHS Security found the gatekeeper at afour SI.
Speaker 3: So I've given AFO SI a big hit in the
Speaker 3: head here. They're probably going to get pissed off. They're
Speaker 3: probably going to get somebody to do a Rick Dodie
Speaker 3: on me. You know, I'm like the Paul Benowitz, and
Speaker 3: they're going to kill my reputation and credibility. They're going
Speaker 3: to do black bag operations. I'm heavily armed here in Texas.
Speaker 3: We have free firearms without a license in the public visible,
Speaker 3: and we have King of the Castle. I'll be happy
Speaker 3: to kill any of them.
Speaker 1: And that and that, and that leads me to this question, Eric,
Speaker 1: have have you ever been threatened or anyone tried to
Speaker 1: intimidate you?
Speaker 2: We've heard about the retaliation, uh that.
Speaker 1: And I know I know all of this to be
Speaker 1: true because I've personally spoken to a bunch of these
Speaker 1: whistleblowers and they've gone into a great, great detail as
Speaker 1: far as the retaliation that they've experienced. Have you, Eric Davis,
Speaker 1: ever experienced retaliation from anyone in the Legacy program or
Speaker 1: elsewhere talking about this time?
Speaker 3: Negative?
Speaker 1: OK?
Speaker 2: And why do you think but why do you think
Speaker 2: I that?
Speaker 3: Well, I might be too dangerous for them because of
Speaker 3: where I'm located. And also they they're probably well aware
Speaker 3: of Texas firearm laws. But yeah, the real serious reason, Yeah,
Speaker 3: the serious reason. I think the number one reason is
Speaker 3: that I had done special work under contract of the
Speaker 3: Air Force as an employee of another contractor I won't
Speaker 3: name him, and I was in I was stationed in
Speaker 3: Tokyo and Konsan, South Korea, which is where the eight
Speaker 3: fighter wing is still stationed there in South Korea on
Speaker 3: the southwest side of the peninsula, right on the edge
Speaker 3: of the Yellow See the eastern edge of the Yellow See.
Speaker 3: So I had been brought I wasn't there for military reasons.
Speaker 3: I was there for more mundane scientific and satellite technology
Speaker 3: based reasons. I did get thrown into clandestine covert situation
Speaker 3: concerning the presidential election in Taiwan in early nineteen ninety six,
Speaker 3: and China and North Korea were doing things to the
Speaker 3: US military on the South Korean Peninsula, and I was
Speaker 3: brought in to help investigate and clear up or find
Speaker 3: the origin of some threat actors and threat actions. So
Speaker 3: the government knows that, well, I wasn't an employee of
Speaker 3: an intelligence agency, not by any means, okay uh, And
Speaker 3: so they probably know that record I have, and they
Speaker 3: know what I'm capable of doing, and.
Speaker 1: They know that I live in and they know they
Speaker 1: know that you you live in Texas. And I'm going
Speaker 1: to ask you one last question, one last question, getting
Speaker 1: tongue tied before we get to some viewer questions here,
Speaker 1: did any agency or contractor ever require you to sign
Speaker 1: a non disclosure agreement specifically tied to UAP.
Speaker 3: When we got our security clearances for the afs APP,
Speaker 3: we had to sign the standard for Standard Form three
Speaker 3: twelve three one two. That's the UH secrecy NDA for
Speaker 3: the United States government for anything that has to do
Speaker 3: with classified information, secret, top secret, TSSCI, and SAP as well.
Speaker 3: So that's the only m DA I signed was a
Speaker 3: government one. I have never been asked to sign a
Speaker 3: corporate NDA. But how had had an ASAPP subcontract through Bass,
Speaker 3: so Bass was providing us our security officer, and they
Speaker 3: were responsible for facilitating getting our security clearances UH set
Speaker 3: up and established at the d I A with Jim
Speaker 3: mccatsky's UH Defense Warning Office three Security Officer, or it
Speaker 3: might have been the whole agency Security Office. So in
Speaker 3: that case, how put Up would have signed some sort
Speaker 3: of NDA with with Big Oo Space Advanced Space Studies.
Speaker 3: He is the owner and uh UH CEO and president
Speaker 3: of VerTech would have signed that with Big Oil Space,
Speaker 3: not me. I was I was his chief scientist and
Speaker 3: senior research businessist. So I didn't. I don't. I don't
Speaker 3: need to be signing documents for business transactions.
Speaker 2: Okay, let's get let's get to some some audience questions.
Speaker 1: Folks, anyone that that is a superchat donor they all
Speaker 1: get priorities because of course we're trying to keep the
Speaker 1: lights on here and we actually have a very generous
Speaker 1: superchat from a Disclosure Tonight. This is really an outstanding question,
Speaker 1: and thank you very much for asking this. Thanks Matt
Speaker 1: and doctor Davis for a great interview. Question are you
Speaker 1: And let me preface this, there are a ton of questions,
Speaker 1: so as best you can try to keep your answers
Speaker 1: short so we can try to get to everyone anyway.
Speaker 1: Disclosure Tonight asks are you aware of any hitchhiker incidents
Speaker 1: that resulted in the death of the family member.
Speaker 3: No, I'm not aware of any.
Speaker 1: Okay, okay, let's see here. Rob Miltronto, thanks again for
Speaker 1: the superchat. Really really appreciate it. Let's see a question here,
Speaker 1: ask if he has any knowledge of if Gary Reid
Speaker 1: left his executive secretary role at AOI MSG when it
Speaker 1: expanded and was renamed to the Pentagon Bullshit Factory known
Speaker 1: as Zero.
Speaker 3: I have no knowledge of that. I wasn't involved in
Speaker 3: the middle of that.
Speaker 2: Okay, okay, let's see just for a cat.
Speaker 1: There's a giant electro magnetic anomaly around where the South
Speaker 1: Atlantic anomaly is, and that's around where Brazil Choloris attacks
Speaker 1: took place, or any of those related.
Speaker 3: I have no knowledge of that. That's a geophysics thing,
Speaker 3: and I don't do geophysics. I know about the South
Speaker 3: Atlantic Anomaly as a lay person. I don't study the
Speaker 3: geophysics technical literature or read it for any reason, because
Speaker 3: that's out of my discipline. I've out of my professional discipline.
Speaker 3: So I can't comment on that particular question because I
Speaker 3: just don't know.
Speaker 1: Okay, here's another one from a good friend of mine
Speaker 1: in the show, David Smethurst, Has Eric ever heard of
Speaker 1: US government having communication or agreements with NHI?
Speaker 2: And what about China and Russia.
Speaker 3: I can't speak about China and Russia because I've never
Speaker 3: seen intelligence on what they had in that to answer
Speaker 3: that question, but I only have been made aware that
Speaker 3: there was a US government communication with NHIS at the
Speaker 3: Holloman Air Force Base incident of nineteen sixty four, and
Speaker 3: that information was given to me by President George Herbert
Speaker 3: Walker Bush when he was long into retirement back in
Speaker 3: two thousand and three in two thousand and five.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's see here are UFOs is from just a Cat?
Speaker 1: Are UFOs UAP? Oh wait, no, sorry, I just asked that.
Speaker 1: One last track here from Phoenix Wizard. The most plausible
Speaker 1: propulsion system behind triangle shaped UAP advanced human aerospace technology
Speaker 1: is a field propulsion or something non human. In your opinion,
Speaker 1: it's going to be non human.
Speaker 3: But you know, the laws of physics are pretty darn good.
Speaker 3: We still have some theories of physics that haven't been
Speaker 3: turned into logs yet. That would be Einstein's general theory
Speaker 3: of relativity and quantum Fueld theory. Those theories have predicted
Speaker 3: faster and light propulsion by way of warping space to
Speaker 3: produce a worm a traversible wormhole, and a warp drive.
Speaker 3: And just to make it very short, traversible wormholes are
Speaker 3: not black holes. There's no model of a black hole
Speaker 3: that's traversible in that Einstein rosen Bridge picture of wormholes
Speaker 3: that is a blocked wormal there's a singularity that will
Speaker 3: destroy you, so you don't go through it and come
Speaker 3: out the other side. So a traversible wormhole does not
Speaker 3: have a singularity, and it does not have an event horizon,
Speaker 3: so you can go in and go out without troubles. Okay,
Speaker 3: so we've got the theory for that, but the problem
Speaker 3: is the mathematics shows that the energy required to produce
Speaker 3: those kinds of space worms are beyond our capability. So
Speaker 3: then that leaves open the question do we need new physics. No,
Speaker 3: it just means we haven't engineered. We haven't advanced our
Speaker 3: state of engineering, material science, the engineering behind quantum vacuum
Speaker 3: energies and so forth, haven't advanced to a state where
Speaker 3: we can address that and be confident at an applied
Speaker 3: physics level that we can engineer it. And so it's
Speaker 3: just too far in advance. It might actually be something
Speaker 3: different too. It might be something that's hiding in plain sight.
Speaker 3: We already have the physics for it, but we have
Speaker 3: it might be recent and new. It comes out of
Speaker 3: quantum theory. It's already based on an existing theory of
Speaker 3: physics that's very successful for over one hundred years. That'd
Speaker 3: be one hundred and one years now. That'd be quantum mechanics.
Speaker 3: Quantum field theory was officially discovered in nineteen fifty. It
Speaker 3: was quantum electro dynamics was the first one for rich
Speaker 3: Rich refinement, and I think John Wheeler got the Nobel
Speaker 3: Prize in physics for so that they are so new
Speaker 3: relatively on the scale of human lifetimes that we haven't
Speaker 3: pushed them far enough to find new solutions that could
Speaker 3: get us excited. So I just do know that there's
Speaker 3: now coming out of quantum theory in the way of
Speaker 3: quantum entanglement and teleportation aspects that they're that the theoreticians
Speaker 3: are mimicking, mimicking using quantum theory spacetime curvature or gravity,
Speaker 3: So that might be the alternative path instead of going
Speaker 3: through generalativity. We want to mimic what generalativity does by
Speaker 3: tinkering with quantum entanglement. That might solve our stupendous energy
Speaker 3: requirement for making wormholes and warp drives. And that energy
Speaker 3: is negative energy by the way.
Speaker 1: Okay, so yeah, let's let's move on. So I appreciate that,
Speaker 1: appreciate that answer. This is from heath Jet. Really appreciate
Speaker 1: the super chat. Also, e fra M eighty three, thanks
Speaker 1: for the superchat. So heath Jet asks you've mentioned that
Speaker 1: you don't believe Bob the Bob Lazar story that you
Speaker 1: spoke to a woman's supervisor that said he was just
Speaker 1: a technician at Area fifty one. Can he briefly briefly
Speaker 1: elaborate on that.
Speaker 3: Now, that was a colleague of mine and John Alexanders
Speaker 3: who worked at Los Alamo's and knew Lazarre was a
Speaker 3: Kirk Mayor employee. He was hired as an hourly paid
Speaker 3: radiation health monitor. It was this gentleman who is now
Speaker 3: in an assistant living facility. He's very old. His wife
Speaker 3: died a couple of years ago. He saw George. Now
Speaker 3: he had a home in Indian Springs, a mobile home
Speaker 3: because he was his part of his job was to
Speaker 3: run programs a Los Alamos programs at Area fifty one,
Speaker 3: so he was home in Indian Springs. Saw the KLAS
Speaker 3: TV broadcast of George Knapp's interviews with Bob Lazarre and
Speaker 3: his investigations in a Lazarre strip, and he thought, oh
Speaker 3: my god, this guy is leaking Area fifty one classified information.
Speaker 3: He's going to be bounced on by the Counterintelligence Corps
Speaker 3: that lives in Las Vegas and that surrounds Area fifty
Speaker 3: one in and outside, and the DOJ is going to
Speaker 3: charge him. They're going to diet him, They're going to
Speaker 3: nail him and that did not happen. So he found
Speaker 3: out from being on the bay, being on the National
Speaker 3: Laboratory who was our work for? And he found out
Speaker 3: he worked for Kirk Mayor. Kirk Mayor is a logistical
Speaker 3: support company to Los Alama's national app and a radiation
Speaker 3: health monitor is a guy that checks in and he
Speaker 3: checks out the radiation badges to Los Alamo's personnel that
Speaker 3: work around radioactive materials. And the same is truth for
Speaker 3: some people at Area fifty one. So he doesn't know
Speaker 3: that they work at Area fifty one because people on
Speaker 3: those Janet flights to Las Vegas, they don't carry signs
Speaker 3: that say I work at Area fifty one, and their
Speaker 3: name badge is that probably don't even have a name badge.
Speaker 3: If they have one or a lanyard, they probably have
Speaker 3: to take it off before they even land in Vegas.
Speaker 3: That because that will identify their their who they are,
Speaker 3: their photograph, and where they work and it won't say
Speaker 3: Area fifty one on it, but it will give something
Speaker 3: away probably. Okay, So fifty one is really Air Force
Speaker 3: Test Center Detachment three and their field security officers, their
Speaker 3: program security officers, and our friend John Alexander and my
Speaker 3: friend have no record of Lazaarre going to Area fifty one,
Speaker 3: and his job did not have a security clearance requirement.
Speaker 3: He did not qualify for security clearance because he ended
Speaker 3: up he and his wife, first wife, got a home
Speaker 3: in Vegas. They didn't make their home payments. Home got
Speaker 3: repossessed by the bank under foreclosure. Foreclosed is the word
Speaker 3: I was looking for. He got involved in running a
Speaker 3: prostitution ring in Vegas because in that county, that's one
Speaker 3: of the two counties or so, I don't think it's
Speaker 3: more than two counties in Nevada where prostitution is illegal.
Speaker 3: So he got arrested state felony, went to prison, got
Speaker 3: convicted of that felony, went to prison. Then after all that,
Speaker 3: he's now in the Upper Midwest and he's sending explosives
Speaker 3: and explosive paraphernalia through the US mail to customers that
Speaker 3: want to buy that stuff from him. That's a federal felony.
Speaker 3: Got in trouble for that, and so people people with
Speaker 3: people with foreclosures on when he went on two home foreclosures,
Speaker 3: multiple car repossessions because he'd get a car and didn't
Speaker 3: make the first car payment sure and qualify for security
Speaker 3: clearances in that with that kind of history and record,
Speaker 3: he's not trustworthy. So a radiation health minor, he's paid
Speaker 3: like five dollars an hour. I think he made seven
Speaker 3: by the time he got booted out of Los Alamo's
Speaker 3: got a kirk Meyer. Kirk Mayor is what m A
Speaker 3: Y E R.
Speaker 1: So.
Speaker 3: Kirk Mayor is where he worked. And my friend Bill
Speaker 3: is the one that knew his supervisor metver. She pulled
Speaker 3: up his personnel record and showed what he doesn't have
Speaker 3: a college degree of any kind.
Speaker 1: Understood he's not a.
Speaker 3: Physicist, and he works as a as a radiation health monitor,
Speaker 3: and we're paying him five bucks an hour.
Speaker 1: Somebody there, Yeah, okay, let's let's move on.
Speaker 2: If you don't mind.
Speaker 1: This is a from Chris Chris Devout, thanks for the superchat.
Speaker 1: Doctor Davis is nineteen ninety four through nineteen ninety seven,
Speaker 1: Perry Kaminski the right window to study legacy program SAP records,
Speaker 1: ousd A and t SAPCO, SAPPOC waived carve out programs
Speaker 1: and contractor access control that time period. So mouthful, I
Speaker 1: don't know, okay, never heard of him. Okay, got it
Speaker 1: all right, let's see here, Let's see a great show.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much for the super chat. Is Lani's
Speaker 1: amora legit? And is it possible I could get an
Speaker 1: interview with Davis. He's looking for me to connect you
Speaker 1: and I'll do that after. Is Lani samoral zamora? Legit?
Speaker 3: Is?
Speaker 1: Is what a landing report UAP landing report from the fifties?
Speaker 1: What are your thoughts?
Speaker 3: Yeah? One thousand percent legit. But the expert on that
Speaker 3: is jacques Ville.
Speaker 1: Okay, okay, great, let's see here scrolling through. There are
Speaker 1: a bunch let's see this is Oh I already have
Speaker 1: that one. Okay, sorry, catch back up here. Question why
Speaker 1: did the legacy UAPRE program get shut down in nineteen
Speaker 1: eighty nine? And who told you this?
Speaker 3: Well again, I think.
Speaker 2: I think somebody already you can explain that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it got shut down because of a lack of
Speaker 3: progress in the reverse engineering programs by all the companies
Speaker 3: that were contracted and to do work on that. And
Speaker 3: who told me that was the senior vice president of
Speaker 3: one of those companies who was working on the crash
Speaker 3: retrieval program after graduate school, after he got his doctorate,
Speaker 3: and got hired to work for that company. So he
Speaker 3: worked a good chunk of his early career on the
Speaker 3: crash retrieval program, and as a senior VP in the future,
Speaker 3: which would have been during the ASAPP era, he still
Speaker 3: read in on the aspects of that that were still
Speaker 3: operating at the low level, what was going on after
Speaker 3: the eighty nine cancelation. The programs were put into semi hibernation.
Speaker 3: That's the word I would put it. The aerospace companies
Speaker 3: didn't have contracts, but I did say earlier in this
Speaker 3: broadcast or this interview that they would be resurrected every
Speaker 3: now and then to see if they had the ability
Speaker 3: to figure it out. Okay, so that would be every
Speaker 3: once every ten years, according to what that senior VP
Speaker 3: told us at the as APP and that would be
Speaker 3: help put off in myself. He might have also set
Speaker 3: that to kill her and Big and Big a little bit.
Speaker 3: I didn't know. I just know how, and I know
Speaker 3: because we were in the most we had the most
Speaker 3: frequent contact with that senior VP for several years actually
Speaker 3: even after he retired.
Speaker 1: So uh.
Speaker 3: But the government side of that is the program offices,
Speaker 3: and the program offices could have closed down the sub
Speaker 3: compartments could have been terminated. Compartments could have been terminated,
Speaker 3: but there's going to be a number of them that
Speaker 3: are kept going at a minimal level, at the level
Speaker 3: of being in cyber semi hibernation, their their quasi or
Speaker 3: semi hibernation state. There's some employees there. They're doing some
Speaker 3: mental stuff. They might be working with the National Labs,
Speaker 3: and every once in a while they might let out
Speaker 3: a contractor with one of the companies to do something.
Speaker 2: Okay, question from Cortez zero.
Speaker 1: Jacques Valle recently spoke on communication established on a continuous
Speaker 1: basis in a secure facility with NHI over twenty years
Speaker 1: ago through a sophisticated process, as he called it. Can
Speaker 1: you add to any any Do you have any information
Speaker 1: to add on top of that?
Speaker 3: Where did that come from? Was that one of the
Speaker 3: forbidden science volumes?
Speaker 1: I it must must have been. He didn't specify it,
Speaker 1: But yeah.
Speaker 3: Okay, I just don't remember that. I'm not disagreeing with
Speaker 3: Jacques or disputing it. I just don't recall the details.
Speaker 3: It's been ages since I've read those and I don't
Speaker 3: That doesn't come to mind, So I can't answer that. Question.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's see here. Could some of this is from Phoenix?
Speaker 1: Could some of could some UAP be interfaces rather than
Speaker 1: vehicles in the normal sense? Manifestations or projections from a
Speaker 1: deeper reality?
Speaker 3: Negative, they're physical.
Speaker 2: They are definitely physical.
Speaker 1: Okay. Have you ever been in a craft or touched one?
Speaker 3: Nope? I wish I was. I wish I did. I
Speaker 3: wish I had same with how put off, same with
Speaker 3: Bigelow and kill her and everybody else at Bath We
Speaker 3: all were aiming for that. I don't believe. Well, I
Speaker 3: don't want to put words in Jay Stratton's mouth. Let's
Speaker 3: wait for his memoir to come out. Maybe he'll make
Speaker 3: a big reveal.
Speaker 1: Okay, all right, we have another great question and very
Speaker 1: generous super chat from Disclosure tonight a really great show. Bam, Matt, Matt,
Speaker 1: do you believe doctor Eric Davis is a super genius
Speaker 1: and deserves a presidential order to remove the impedance from
Speaker 1: Form three twelve to deliver the truth?
Speaker 2: You're clearly a super genius. He's definitely having.
Speaker 3: A super genius, not by many means. If I was,
Speaker 3: I'd probably be richer than Stephen Hockey was when he died.
Speaker 3: Kept born is a multi millionaire by the way, so
Speaker 3: that makes them a super genius. You've got to be
Speaker 3: a super genius to use your physics to make millions
Speaker 3: of dollars man, So anyway, I appreciate that. Thank you
Speaker 3: for whoever asked that question from Phoenix, so I forgot
Speaker 3: what's the rest of her question besides that? Just bring
Speaker 3: repe The question is.
Speaker 1: Do you believe doctor Eric Davis is a super genius,
Speaker 1: which clearly I do, despite maybe he may disagree with me,
Speaker 1: but I can spot super geniuses a mile away. Does
Speaker 1: he deserve a presidential order? Do you deserve a presidential
Speaker 1: order to remove the impedance of Form three twelve to
Speaker 1: deliver the rest of what you know?
Speaker 3: That's the question I want to answer to. And I
Speaker 3: understand it better now after you said it a second time.
Speaker 3: That would be nice. Now the s F three twelve
Speaker 3: allows me to talk to Congress. So the Disclosure Foundation
Speaker 3: broke through the black wall of the security training that
Speaker 3: has been drilled into me about three times every year
Speaker 3: at the Aerospace Corporation and twice every year at NASA,
Speaker 3: and have gone through and said you got to readers
Speaker 3: three twelve read the whole fricking thing, because there's a
Speaker 3: part of it that says you are not forbidden. It
Speaker 3: is not illegal for you to go to Congress with
Speaker 3: classified information if you're concerned about fraud, waste, or abuse.
Speaker 3: That's my understanding. I just can't go to Congress just
Speaker 3: to freely give them, matter of factly, just to shoot
Speaker 3: the breeze classified information I've been read in on or
Speaker 3: been involved with. No. I have to have a reason,
Speaker 3: and that reason is provided in the s F three twelve.
Speaker 3: So the s F three twelve I would need a
Speaker 3: waiver for I would need President Trump to issue a
Speaker 3: directive that gives me a waiver to go outside the
Speaker 3: three to forget the three twelve. It doesn't exist, and
Speaker 3: I can blab everything. But for now I can talk
Speaker 3: to Congress. I could give them sensitive information. Now I
Speaker 3: don't have classified information to give them. I have some
Speaker 3: I do, actually I do, but most of it is proprietary,
Speaker 3: and back in the ASAP era it would have been
Speaker 3: for official use only level so official only yeah, and
Speaker 3: that and that no longer exists. Now it's controlled and
Speaker 3: unclassified information that makes it immune from FOYA. But it's
Speaker 3: the company owned information, not government it's company owned. It's
Speaker 3: what I gave the government and since I generated it
Speaker 3: in EarthTech, Uh it it Foya can't touch it, Boy
Speaker 3: can't touch it. It's protected by ERTHTEX intellectual property rights.
Speaker 1: What what percentage? Let let me ask it this way.
Speaker 1: The you know, the your whole knowledge, your class you're classified? Well,
Speaker 1: how should I put this your entire knowledge of the
Speaker 1: UAP issue? What percentage? And and this is including this
Speaker 1: would be classified information? What percentage and unclassified? Obviously? What
Speaker 1: percentage do you think that you've publicly been able to
Speaker 1: speak about? Is it five percent of your total knowledge?
Speaker 1: Is it fifty percent? Like if if Trump were to
Speaker 1: release this, how much information?
Speaker 2: Yeah, could you could you put back?
Speaker 1: Could you put out there?
Speaker 2: Would you say?
Speaker 1: How much have you been able to publicly speak about?
Speaker 3: Zero percent? Classified? The rest is under adopts or allowance.
Speaker 3: I wasn't. I didn't formally talk to DOPTSR and get
Speaker 3: a written permission. No, this is what I know from
Speaker 3: my security training. So what the adopt you guardrails allowed
Speaker 3: me to say? And it's based on the proprietary information
Speaker 3: I developed at Ortech for the offs app.
Speaker 1: Okay, gotcha? Uh what let's see here scroll.
Speaker 3: Well, there's only one piece of classified and information that
Speaker 3: I have not revealed, and that's still kept quiet. I
Speaker 3: didn't generate it as a classified information. The government customer
Speaker 3: classified it, and so the unclassified version remains unclassified in
Speaker 3: my possession and in the er Tech possession. But that's
Speaker 3: where it stays.
Speaker 1: Okay, got it? If this is a great screen screen
Speaker 1: name crackhead three three zero.
Speaker 2: Did Eric Davis ever Yeah, that's a good one.
Speaker 1: Did Eric Davis ever investigate the work of Kenneth Ratford, shoulders,
Speaker 1: coworker of how put Off.
Speaker 3: I've never heard of that guy.
Speaker 1: I know who that is. I have no idea, no idea.
Speaker 3: I know the employees that have worked for House since
Speaker 3: nineteen eighty five, all the way up until we had
Speaker 3: to shut down Urtech. Now Ertech is only existing by
Speaker 3: name only. It is still in corporate, but there's no laboratory,
Speaker 3: no employees anymore. I'm Hal's volunteer senior science advisor now
Speaker 3: because we've been friends and colleagues since I got hired
Speaker 3: in July of ninety six, so I was his employee
Speaker 3: for fifteen years. So that guy's name has never come up.
Speaker 3: Never saw that guy working at r Tech. Nobody by
Speaker 3: that name. We had a small staff.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's see this is I can't tell, but thank
Speaker 1: you for the super chat favorite UA, What is your
Speaker 1: favorite UAP case from Doctor Davis or one that you
Speaker 1: think is a hoax?
Speaker 2: We'll just say, what is your favorite UAP case?
Speaker 3: Oh, my favorite UAP case? Okay, ah, boy, I would
Speaker 3: have to say the Roswell case is my favorite. It's great.
Speaker 3: It's a great example of government tripping over itself to
Speaker 3: hide it in plane sight.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, you know.
Speaker 3: General Roger Raimies bullshit ra wind balloon target shredded debris
Speaker 3: at the feet of Major Marcel in Ramie's office. The
Speaker 3: press wasn't allowed into the office. They had to stand
Speaker 3: in the doorway to ask questions and take photos. Then
Speaker 3: you got the follow up to that to the Clinton administration,
Speaker 3: where that Air Force Captain McAndrew issued the Mogul Project
Speaker 3: Mobile Balloon Explanation for the Roswell crash, and then the
Speaker 3: separate second volume that invoked nineteen fifty three era crash
Speaker 3: test dummies to explain away the alien bodies that were
Speaker 3: recovered on July eighth of nineteen forty seven.
Speaker 1: Okay, okay, and even Colonel.
Speaker 3: John Alexander had a hearty laugh and puzzle extreme puzzlement
Speaker 3: over the government, over the Air Force tripping over itself
Speaker 3: to give that bullshit disinformation story.
Speaker 1: Okay, So so speaking of bullshit disinformation, Uh, there's doctor
Speaker 1: Sean Kirkpatrick, who ran the Pentagon's ARROW office, the All
Speaker 1: Domain Anomaly Resolution Office, which I prefer quite often on
Speaker 1: this show to the Pentagon's in house bullshit factory. What
Speaker 1: are your thoughts on doctor Sean Kirkpatrick? And should Representative
Speaker 1: Anna Polina A Luna and others from the UAP Caucus
Speaker 1: believe what should they? Should they even trust ARROW at
Speaker 1: this at this point, even though it's under new leadership
Speaker 1: under from doctor John Kaslowski.
Speaker 3: Okay, John Koslowski used to work for Jay's UAP traft
Speaker 3: task force. He was one of the funny insiders.
Speaker 2: Yeah really so yeah?
Speaker 3: So should you have talked to John at length? Jay
Speaker 3: has brought John up to speed on this topic and
Speaker 3: all that. But you know, John already knew it because
Speaker 3: he worked on the task work. So I can't say
Speaker 3: anything bad about that now because it's under John's leadership,
Speaker 3: so things should change. But I don't know what kind
Speaker 3: of pressure John is under from his two bosses, the
Speaker 3: under Secretary Defense for Intelligence and the Office of the
Speaker 3: Director of National Intelligence. And as you now know, we
Speaker 3: have two clowns that have been running the ODN. I
Speaker 3: the first clown quit and the second one is now
Speaker 3: going to accuse everybody of forging their mortgage loan paperwork
Speaker 3: or something like that so he can fire them. So
Speaker 3: we got two clowns in a row that have been
Speaker 3: running od and I John could have political this is
Speaker 3: the political job, and he's not in a political office.
Speaker 3: He's not in a political function running a political function.
Speaker 3: I don't know how they're doing. But I have met
Speaker 3: with some of the folks that worked with Sean who
Speaker 3: still worked there under John, and they're great people. They're patriotic,
Speaker 3: they are very enthusiastic about the UA topic. But I
Speaker 3: think they're going to be constrained by the mission objectives
Speaker 3: of that office and can't go outside of it. I
Speaker 3: don't know what they can or if they can do
Speaker 3: anything about the crash retrieval programs. I really don't Kirkpatrick.
Speaker 3: I met in person, supposed to be for about an
Speaker 3: hour or so, briefing in a skiff at the DIA's
Speaker 3: Missile and Space Intelligence Center at the red Stone Arsenal
Speaker 3: when I was working for NASA there at the red
Speaker 3: Stone Arsenal on the space nuclear Propulsion program that I
Speaker 3: supported from twenty nineteen until my job got terminated due
Speaker 3: to a contract termination in nearly at mid twenty twenty four.
Speaker 3: So Kirkpatrick is a great and brilliant and highly decorated physicist.
Speaker 3: Lasers was a big thing for him, So he's a
Speaker 3: laser physicist. But he's done and other stuff in the
Speaker 3: areas of spectroscopy and optics and I think quantum optics.
Speaker 3: So he's done brilliant work, no doubt about it. But
Speaker 3: as the leader of Arrow, he was a bent ultimate
Speaker 3: disinformation officer. Dave Grush had to work with him or
Speaker 3: interact with him on some intelligence operation back in twenty fifteen,
Speaker 3: and I brought this up with Dave and Dave said, yeah,
Speaker 3: he had a he's like pig pen and peanuts, Like
Speaker 3: you get too close, you're going to smell the stink.
Speaker 3: You know, he's having dirtiness and steak around here. He said,
Speaker 3: you can't trust Kirkpatrick. Kirkpatrick's not a team player and
Speaker 3: he's deceitful, and so he lied to Congress in volume one.
Speaker 3: He literally liked to Congress, and then he lied to
Speaker 3: the public and his public speeches about the OSAP and
Speaker 3: the people involved with the ASAPP, and he made us
Speaker 3: all look like a cabal that big Oelod put together
Speaker 3: in the nineties. And we've been maror trotting on our
Speaker 3: white horses, pronouncing and promoting the crash retrieval story. And
Speaker 3: that's something that a nefarious CIA analyst who's now long
Speaker 3: retired used to accuse us of. We used to be
Speaker 3: accused by him, Ronald S. Pendolfhi, of being thieves and
Speaker 3: crooks and loans and liars, were manipulating global billionaires into
Speaker 3: giving us their money to continue research on UAP when
Speaker 3: farthest was when the further was the truth, because they
Speaker 3: approached us. The thing is they recruited us, not us
Speaker 3: manipulating them. They recruited us to work for them. And
Speaker 3: there's two of them involved. And so Kirkpatrick was parroting
Speaker 3: that same language that Pendulphie was always using during the nineties,
Speaker 3: twenty and twenty tens, and I almost wondered whether the
Speaker 3: two slept together. So so I think I don't want to.
Speaker 3: I don't want to say anything about today's ERRO because
Speaker 3: I don't know what they're doing. I'm not read into it,
Speaker 3: I'm not privy to it. I want I think they
Speaker 3: should be allowed to do the work they're supposed to
Speaker 3: be doing. I just don't know how in depth and
Speaker 3: thorough they're going. I do know they've got to be
Speaker 3: involved with scientific instrumentation of UAPs and get data gathering.
Speaker 3: I just don't know how much money they've got, how
Speaker 3: much they can spend beyond their labor costs, for their
Speaker 3: personnel and facility costs and security costs. I just don't
Speaker 3: know how successful they'll be. There's no reason why Luna's
Speaker 3: task force can't interact with arrows. I think she should.
Speaker 3: Sure when Kirkpatrick was in power over there or in
Speaker 3: his job as director, it probably would have been best
Speaker 3: to advise her task force to carry butcher knives, machetes
Speaker 3: and with them when they go meet for Patrick.
Speaker 1: And and do you think I mean, obviously Kirkpatrick has
Speaker 1: been caught caught lying, and I have it on good
Speaker 1: information that the government has actually given him a legal
Speaker 1: waiver that will protect him from any kind of criminal
Speaker 1: prosecution for lying to Congress.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 1: And it's a very informed, very informed thing. But do
Speaker 1: you it seems odd that Sean Kirkpatrick would exit Arrow,
Speaker 1: continue to work for the government and continue to parrot
Speaker 1: this disinformation. Do you think it's possible he was given
Speaker 1: top cover and when he exited, they said, here's your
Speaker 1: pot of gold. We're going to give you, but we
Speaker 1: need you to do a couple of things, one of
Speaker 1: which is lie to the Wall Street Journal, lie to
Speaker 1: the public, and to continue to sow disinformation on this topic.
Speaker 1: Do you think that this Kirkpatrick's continued behavior, and even
Speaker 1: Tim Phillips for that matter, they could possibly be running
Speaker 1: an op.
Speaker 3: No, they're not running an op. They're encouraging Kirkpatrick to
Speaker 3: do that. So they're encouraging him. Yeah, they're encouraging him
Speaker 3: to do that. That'll be the op on their side,
Speaker 3: on the government side. But for Kirkpatrick, he's not getting paid.
Speaker 3: He's not getting paid for that. This is something they're
Speaker 3: encouraging him to do.
Speaker 1: So what's in it for Kirkpatrick to continue to throw
Speaker 1: himself under the bus in terms of opinion?
Speaker 2: There's got to be some kind of some kind of
Speaker 2: quid pro quo.
Speaker 3: I would think, no, it's probably cognitive dissonance and Dunning
Speaker 3: Kruger effect.
Speaker 1: I know, I know a few debunkers that like Michael
Speaker 1: Shermer and Nick West. I would definitely say our poster
Speaker 1: children of Dunning Krueger. But I want to go back
Speaker 1: to Errow for just a So Arrows two primary contractors,
Speaker 1: one with sand Corp and Arrow actually fired sand Corp.
Speaker 1: And there's a new one called Arlow's Solutions. They're the
Speaker 1: ones that reached out to me asked me to apply
Speaker 1: for a position of which they wanted me to have
Speaker 1: background in information operations and deception operations and information operations.
Speaker 2: But here's the thing.
Speaker 1: Both of those contractors, they are known for insider threat
Speaker 1: management that is what the Lions share, and information and
Speaker 1: perception management that is the Lion's share of what Arrows
Speaker 1: two primary contractors. And from what I understand, the contractors
Speaker 1: are really the ones doing the work in the in Arrow,
Speaker 1: They're the ones really the muscle behind it. Do you
Speaker 1: think that it is possible, and I'm going to add
Speaker 1: one other thing to this, do you think that it
Speaker 1: is possible that Arrow as part of one of the
Speaker 1: where undisclosed missions is to be a fly paper operation
Speaker 1: for whistleblowers. And what I'll tack onto that is two
Speaker 1: years ago I submitted a letter to Congress that is
Speaker 1: now part of the Congressional record that revealed for the
Speaker 1: first time that the current actor Glenn Gaffnew who's on
Speaker 1: this great Steven Spielberg movie, was on this back when
Speaker 1: he was at c C, I, A, D, S and T.
Speaker 1: He was actually on the Arrow advisory board, which, again
Speaker 1: in my letter I said to Congress is, look, you've
Speaker 1: got this guy that is a gatekeeper and is seeing
Speaker 1: all of the classified testimony from whistleblowers and therefore could
Speaker 1: be a back channel. Do you think that Arrow could
Speaker 1: have a counterintelligence backchannel, fly paper type operation to get
Speaker 1: stuff back into the Legacy program information?
Speaker 3: It sounds like it based on what you said, I've
Speaker 3: never heard of Arrow's contractors. I only knew one Arrow contractor,
Speaker 3: my former employer, because they were hired to provide some
Speaker 3: sort of office support and the people that worked there
Speaker 3: were engineers, so they're doing some kind of support for Arrow.
Speaker 3: So given that I only knew about aerospace, I've never
Speaker 3: heard of the other two companies before. Given that they
Speaker 3: do threat insider threat assessments. I happen to know from
Speaker 3: my security training at Aerospace and that insider threat is
Speaker 3: a big component of counterintelligence and that's very interesting. So
Speaker 3: you link that with Kirkpatrick's role and Gaffney's role, and
Speaker 3: it's like, well, what should people might know by now?
Speaker 3: I don't know if they do. But Gaffney was actually
Speaker 3: Kirkpatrick's mentor. Kirkpatrick did work at the CIA, Yes, Kirkpatrick
Speaker 3: was his Boston mentor at one time during his career.
Speaker 1: Explains everything, Holy shit, Okay you're here.
Speaker 3: On the Yeah, so there you go. That's why volume
Speaker 3: one was filled with bullshit because Glenn Gafney is working
Speaker 3: around in this whirl of Kirkpatrick's life.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean I sometimes I wonder if if Sean
Speaker 1: Kirkpatrick is a managed asset and he's managed by Gaffney.
Speaker 1: After revealing that that that wouldn't wouldn't surprise me at all.
Speaker 3: Yeah, Well, Dafney's retired. Well I think Daphney's retired if
Speaker 3: I'm not mistaken. If not, he's no longer in that role.
Speaker 3: But he's going to be an advisor, a friend, you know,
Speaker 3: a consultant, that's easy to understand. That's easy to imagine.
Speaker 3: So Kirkpatrick is not a gatekeeper by the way, he is.
Speaker 3: He was a portfolio owner for this.
Speaker 1: What does that mean for u AP?
Speaker 3: Oh? He his office, being the director of being the
Speaker 3: deputy director of the CIA for the Director of Science
Speaker 3: and Technology means it is in his house that the
Speaker 3: crash retrieval program exists. Okay, And so that was his role.
Speaker 3: And so that makes him not a gatekeeper, but the
Speaker 3: portfolio owner. He owns the portfolio. His house owns that
Speaker 3: portfolio and there might be divided among different offices for
Speaker 3: all I know, but and I don't know how, but
Speaker 3: that's his role. The gatekeepers, like I said, are the
Speaker 3: counterintelligence guys wherever they are in the government.
Speaker 1: So with with what you just said, and in your
Speaker 1: personal opinion, do you think Sean Kirkpatrick when he was
Speaker 1: testifying in front of Congress had a full read on
Speaker 1: to the UAP issue, the past legacy program efforts and
Speaker 1: possibly current current reverse engineering efforts.
Speaker 2: Do you think he not?
Speaker 3: Very possible? That's very possible. We did scenario playing on
Speaker 3: what he knew or what he didn't know, and we
Speaker 3: thought and our an aerial role playing ended up on
Speaker 3: a large probability, a big fraction of one percent, that
Speaker 3: he was read in, but we weren't certain. We couldn't
Speaker 3: confirm that probability to make it. Yeah, definitely one hundred percent. No,
Speaker 3: we only had a good chunk of one percent that
Speaker 3: he would have had to have been read in. It
Speaker 3: makes sense that he got read in or would have
Speaker 3: been read in, but we don't have any proof of
Speaker 3: that because that was outside of our clearances our Okay,
Speaker 3: so along with your eligibility for access, which is a
Speaker 3: security clearance, you have need to know. So, uh, it
Speaker 3: isn't beyond our eligibility for access, it's beyond our need
Speaker 3: to know. So it's outside of our need to know
Speaker 3: how that relationship worked within Gafney's organization and where Sean
Speaker 3: played a role in it when he worked for Gaffney,
Speaker 3: but Gaffney was his career mentor and and boss at
Speaker 3: one time during his long intelligence career.
Speaker 1: Oh my god, it's all it's all come together in
Speaker 1: your in your work in the classified world. When I
Speaker 1: received this, this message, this d M on LinkedIn from
Speaker 1: the recruiter for r Low Solutions, who has took who
Speaker 1: took the place of sand Corp.
Speaker 2: When when uh, when they were fired?
Speaker 1: When it's when the job is saying that that they
Speaker 1: want me that they want my desired qualifications uh to
Speaker 1: be information operations, uh, information activities and I'm sorry, uh
Speaker 1: information operations, uh, information activities and deception operations? Would that
Speaker 1: be a red flag? Like like Era was trying to
Speaker 1: hire me to to be a puppet. You know, I've
Speaker 1: had people tell me yes.
Speaker 3: Yeah, deception is a part of perception management, which is
Speaker 3: a role of counterintelligence. So it's like whoa Uh Joel
Speaker 3: Scheckman at the Wall Street Journal worked for his artists
Speaker 3: front organization, you know, pr information organization. So that's what
Speaker 3: he did, was perception management. That's part of counter intelligence. Yeah,
Speaker 3: that's part of official disinformation.
Speaker 1: So so it's it's entirely possible that that was indeed
Speaker 1: what they were wanting me to do. Yeah, it's possible.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I can't imagine they're going to have you do
Speaker 3: that with Chinese intelligence information. That's not what you would
Speaker 3: be doing. That's what the intelligence analyst does. They take
Speaker 3: Chinese intelligence, pars it down into its pieces, figure out
Speaker 3: who needs what of that, figure out what the whole
Speaker 3: picture is figure out what the little pieces of the
Speaker 3: picture are and all that. But that doesn't they're not
Speaker 3: looking for counterintelligence. Counterintelligence on China side is to prevent
Speaker 3: their classified programs from leaking to so we're being stolen
Speaker 3: by US. Okay, they're they're to prevent that. But for
Speaker 3: you to work for counter intelligence operation that's involved in
Speaker 3: UAP in a UAP office, that's very interesting. It's very interesting.
Speaker 3: It sounds like perception management counter intelligence well.
Speaker 1: And and the thing that was interesting was it was
Speaker 1: the direct message that I got from Arrows Arrow's prime contractor.
Speaker 2: It didn't have any of that in there.
Speaker 3: You know.
Speaker 1: The guy reached out and said, hey, we think that
Speaker 1: you might be a good fit for this position. Of
Speaker 1: course I don't hold a security clearance, so right away
Speaker 1: I knew that wasn't going to happen. But then when I,
Speaker 1: you know, I went and looked at the link for
Speaker 1: the job position they wanted me to apply for. That's
Speaker 1: when it said information operations in information activities and deception
Speaker 1: deception operations. And again this is under doctor John Koslowski's leadership,
Speaker 1: which to me says that members of Congress, and I
Speaker 1: know Congresswoman Anna Polina you watched this as well as
Speaker 1: many other members of Congress and their staffers. I don't
Speaker 1: think that you can trust a goddamn thing pardon my French,
Speaker 1: that Arrow puts out there personally.
Speaker 3: Let me just interject briefly that there's a small possibility
Speaker 3: that came to mind just now that maybe they want
Speaker 3: you to do that type of work to figure out
Speaker 3: who's doing that disinformation against the United States government. You know,
Speaker 3: so that would be an intelligence gathering thing, but maybe
Speaker 3: they want the perception management, you know, disinformation side to
Speaker 3: a threat and now you know, threat insider threat assessment
Speaker 3: to look at that from the counterintelligence side involving a
Speaker 3: foreign actor. But now that I think about it even more,
Speaker 3: I'm thinking that's that doesn't line. Well, that's still yeah,
Speaker 3: that's very curious. But I don't want to get upset
Speaker 3: with John because you know, there's going to be memos,
Speaker 3: phone calls, and agreements going on in the background, and
Speaker 3: there's gonna be a lot of missing information. We cannot
Speaker 3: connect together. Uh and you know, dots very close together
Speaker 3: versus the dots that are wide apart, like we're talking
Speaker 3: about right now. We need the dots that are closer together.
Speaker 3: So we don't have that. And I don't know why
Speaker 3: that's necessary for AERRO. That's not a scientific endeavor and
Speaker 3: as matter of fact, that goes against science to do
Speaker 3: that kind of thing.
Speaker 1: Well, but and it certainly would be in alignment with
Speaker 1: Sean Kirkpatrick's behavior as as the leader of AERRO.
Speaker 2: I mean clearly, Uh, they were.
Speaker 1: They were a massive disinformation arm and uh and pushing
Speaker 1: propaganda on the American public and the world. I want
Speaker 1: to end this interview, uh with with this Science Advisory Panel.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 1: We've we had doctor Alvi Lob on the show. I
Speaker 1: think it was a week and a half ago, folks.
Speaker 1: It was a really great interview. I encourage everyone to
Speaker 1: watch it now.
Speaker 2: There are.
Speaker 1: Quite a few people on this panel that have been
Speaker 1: on the show that I have absolutely tremendous, tremendous respect for.
Speaker 1: For Rear Admiral retired Admiral Tim Galia Datis comes to mind,
Speaker 1: and then also doctor Gary Nolan, who I would count
Speaker 1: as a personal friend and just absolutely one of Peter,
Speaker 1: Peter Skaith, Peter Skafish, all of these folks that are
Speaker 1: doctor av Lobe himself a wonderful human being. And then
Speaker 1: you have Michael Shermer, who has this entire five oh
Speaker 1: one C three with I think he had like eight
Speaker 1: hundred thousand in revenue or a million in revenue, or
Speaker 1: you can anyone can go look up on the I
Speaker 1: R S. Form nine to ninety site. Just looked up
Speaker 1: for Skeptic Society. This is Michael Shermer's organization. Of course,
Speaker 1: Michael Shermer went on after he was actually it may
Speaker 1: have been right before or shortly after he was named
Speaker 1: this panel. He goes on X puts up a photo
Speaker 1: of David Grush, whistle blower David Grush, and compares him
Speaker 1: to the Heaven's Gate cult leader. Now, my personal opinion
Speaker 1: is that Michael Shermer should go take a hike. He
Speaker 1: has unqualified, He has unqualified ethically, he has unqualified professionally.
Speaker 2: He should not be on this panel.
Speaker 1: What is your personal opinion about doctor Michael Shermer and
Speaker 1: what would be your message to doctor Avi Lobe.
Speaker 3: I got two opinions. One Obviy is absolutely right in
Speaker 3: that if you have a hardcore skeptic on that council,
Speaker 3: and you can use the data, the UAP measurement data
Speaker 3: of something that can be identified as unknown it is
Speaker 3: not human made, not by any chance, not by any means.
Speaker 3: It is not a human made data that his that
Speaker 3: his council has collected data on are gathered from whoever
Speaker 3: feeds that data to their council, whether it be a
Speaker 3: government agency or private organizations like uap X and be
Speaker 3: a Trisvilla Villero and others. And I apologize for the
Speaker 3: other the Tidesco brothers if I didn't, I hope I
Speaker 3: didn't mispronounce their name. So if you can get the data,
Speaker 3: and the data is clearly irrefutably anomalous and can and
Speaker 3: as of a craft of some type that cannot be
Speaker 3: identified as human made, and if you can use that
Speaker 3: data to convince a guy like Michael Shermer, then Michael
Speaker 3: Schrmer should psychologically react by by blowing the carry clarion
Speaker 3: call to say UAPs are real, they are here, they
Speaker 3: are bus. So if you can convince a guy like
Speaker 3: Michael Shermer that the data proves that there are U
Speaker 3: A P that are non human technologies, non human entities
Speaker 3: of whatever form, and uh they take a real then
Speaker 3: then basically you you put down the skeptics arguments. You
Speaker 3: put down Penn and Gillette, you put down Shermer, you
Speaker 3: put down all the other skeptics people that I don't
Speaker 3: they all, you know, the older guys have all died
Speaker 3: off and moved off, so we have a new generation.
Speaker 3: I'm sure. So that's the that's the that's the gold standard.
Speaker 3: I agree with it. But Michael Shermer himself, he's ethically compromised,
Speaker 3: and I think I know from reading the Skeptics bloggers
Speaker 3: from the two thousands, they have complaints about his moral problems.
Speaker 3: And I won't discuss that on this show, but you
Speaker 3: already know what that is. So he has some moral issues.
Speaker 3: Who knows. Maybe he's reformed now, maybe he's a better guy.
Speaker 3: That's great, But unfortunately he has behaviors the exhibited that
Speaker 3: were very unprofessional and lack morals, very unethical. So uh,
Speaker 3: it's just not the best choice. He Let's let we
Speaker 3: can set that aside. Let's go ahead and set that
Speaker 3: aside and forget I even said it. Let's just look
Speaker 3: at the fact that his personality is highly biased against
Speaker 3: some of this phenomenon, the various things they call pseudoscience,
Speaker 3: especially UAP. So he's he's he exhibits cognitive dissonance, very strongly,
Speaker 3: and he's he's demonstrating the reason why. Alan Lightman, one
Speaker 3: of my former astrophysics professors who did a sabbatical at
Speaker 3: my university. I took an astrophysics course from him in
Speaker 3: graduate school. He wrote an article with the with the
Speaker 3: that was published in Science magazine in nineteen ninety three,
Speaker 3: where do Anomalies Begin? And it talked about galiles, travails,
Speaker 3: It talked about meteors. It talked about how we had
Speaker 3: these anomalous phenomena that retroactively, retrospectively were realized to be
Speaker 3: new phenomenon that were not predicted by prevailing accepted scientific theories,
Speaker 3: therefore tossing those theories aside, either to have to be
Speaker 3: rewritten to incorporate this new data they had, or they
Speaker 3: couldn't be rewritten and they have to be replaced altogether.
Speaker 3: So that's what the gist of when do Anomalies Begin?
Speaker 3: Is that the words cognitive dissonance appear in that article.
Speaker 3: And let me glad Armor is not a scientist, that's
Speaker 3: the problem. Is a soft scientist, a stem scientist science, technology, engineering, mathematics.
Speaker 3: We live by the scientific method Shermer does not. He
Speaker 3: doesn't have a scientific method. Well, he might be able
Speaker 3: to adapt it for the science he practices, but the
Speaker 3: problem is the word cognitive dissonance applies to him. And
Speaker 3: Thomas Kuhne's book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions is the
Speaker 3: feature and focus of that article in that you get
Speaker 3: data that contradicts your worldview of science, and you're going
Speaker 3: to suffer cognitive dissonance. And then when more data comes
Speaker 3: in that keeps contradicting your worldview and more of your
Speaker 3: fellow scientists are upset and they're realizing, you know what,
Speaker 3: this data is solid. That means our worldview secks. It's wrong.
Speaker 3: We've got to redo it from scratch. Okay, that's where
Speaker 3: Schumer can't go. It seems like he's psychologically predisposed, like
Speaker 3: he's got some psychosis that prevents him from going there.
Speaker 3: That's why he's not a valid pick for the board.
Speaker 3: There's the council. Avi has many, many, many other choices
Speaker 3: of excellent, unbiased scientists and many disciplines who don't suffer
Speaker 3: from cognitive dissonance. And he could do a simple test
Speaker 3: to find that out by interviewing these people. Somehow, Michael
Speaker 3: Shermer passed the test, but here's what here's what we know.
Speaker 3: AVI and Shermer both sit on the editorial board of
Speaker 3: Scientific American. I don't know if that's true today, they
Speaker 3: had been for many many years. Yes, Wow, they both
Speaker 3: are on the They both are or were on the
Speaker 3: editorial board of Scientific Americans. So obviously they're going to
Speaker 3: come across each other. You know, Shermer writes some stuff
Speaker 3: that I agree with. Actually, but on uap oh, he's
Speaker 3: way off the beaten path on psycho on psychic stuff
Speaker 3: like remote viewing and psychokinesis. He's way off the beaten
Speaker 3: path because there's already laboratory with statistics. In other words,
Speaker 3: Avi's gold standard has been met, and it turns out
Speaker 3: how it put offs the one that brought psychic research
Speaker 3: into a modern laboratory science at Stanford Research instance. Yeah,
Speaker 3: it's that, Okay, this is what cognitive dissonance also means.
Speaker 3: It means he refuses to read and look at the
Speaker 3: data and think about it. That's where the cognitive dissonance
Speaker 3: is blinding him psychologically. He's got a barrier he can't
Speaker 3: get across because he refuses to read the published scientific literature,
Speaker 3: which there is in Nature magazine and in the I
Speaker 3: tripole journals and books on the remote viewing program, including
Speaker 3: that it passed the CIA and Defense Science Review Boards repeatedly.
Speaker 3: How was able to take the most stnscious Science Science
Speaker 3: Board members who were skeptical. They come in audit the
Speaker 3: remote viewing program at Stanford and they said this all
Speaker 3: bill shit. I want you to run a session for me.
Speaker 3: So How ran a session and the skeptical scientist said, oh,
Speaker 3: I can figure out a magic trick that can explain that.
Speaker 3: And how would prove to him he was wrong? Okay?
Speaker 3: And these are double blind studies, by the way, for
Speaker 3: which how would not know what the target is? Okay?
Speaker 3: So then the key to persuading them is not to
Speaker 3: let somebody else be the remote view not let not
Speaker 3: let an established military remote viewer or an SRI remote
Speaker 3: viewer do the session. It's how briefly trains the skeptic
Speaker 3: on how to do the remote viewing. And every time
Speaker 3: that a skeptic came in to audit the program because
Speaker 3: they were skeptical and they were hoping they were advising
Speaker 3: to cancel the budget for that program, how would teach
Speaker 3: him how to remote view? He'd have a guy out there,
Speaker 3: somebody in the office would get some guy hell would
Speaker 3: know who he was, would go out in some random location,
Speaker 3: find a target, sit there, look at it, and then
Speaker 3: then How would just sit there and after the training
Speaker 3: the skeptic would start getting mental images and start scribbling
Speaker 3: it down verbally describing it, and boom. Every time Hal
Speaker 3: ran different sessions with the skeptics, he was remote viewing
Speaker 3: accurately where the guy who Hal didn't know, or the
Speaker 3: scientist did know, some random guy picked by the office
Speaker 3: to go out to some target. It might have been
Speaker 3: a donut shop with the giant donut on top of
Speaker 3: the building, that kind of thing. So how was able
Speaker 3: to persuade those skeptics. Well, we need to do something
Speaker 3: equivalent for UAP. Now, my ultimate evidence to persuade them
Speaker 3: is to get them into a crash retrieval program, have
Speaker 3: them touch a craft and go in it, and maybe
Speaker 3: even have them see evidence of the recovered NHI bodies,
Speaker 3: and that'll be an ontological shock that will shake them.
Speaker 2: Well, and here's the thing.
Speaker 1: Excuse me, Eric, can we trust Michael Shermer, who whose
Speaker 1: entire livelihood income is based on books.
Speaker 2: I can't talk book sales and twenty to thirty thousand.
Speaker 1: That was the other thing, you know he posted about
Speaker 1: saying that all these UAP whistleblowers are grifting and available
Speaker 1: for doing talks, paid talks. But yet Michael Shermer, if
Speaker 1: you go and you look at these booking services, is
Speaker 1: charging twenty to thirty thousand dollars to go talk. So
Speaker 1: can you trust Michael Shermer to be a honest broker
Speaker 1: on this committee when his when his entire bank account
Speaker 1: is reliant on debunking this stuff.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I went to my first TWUFO conference and only
Speaker 3: got a fifteen hundred dollars honorarium with travel first time. Yeah,
Speaker 3: it was at the end of May this year, and
Speaker 3: that's the first time I ever went. I got a
Speaker 3: full time job. I make a good amount of money.
Speaker 3: I'm in the upper middle class way up there, and
Speaker 3: I don't need to grift. I'm not looking to write
Speaker 3: a book. Although people are pressing me and pressing me
Speaker 3: to write a book. I probably have less information than
Speaker 3: Lakatski and Strattenham and lou Lose book IM and it
Speaker 3: too so so no, I'm not looking to make money
Speaker 3: on it. As a matter of fact, I don't make
Speaker 3: money on it. I just was given a courtesy honorarium.
Speaker 3: It was fifteen hundred bucks plus the travel expenses. And
Speaker 3: that's the first one I've attended since twenty thirteen. The
Speaker 3: twenty thirteen one was the International move On Symposium that year,
Speaker 3: and the previous time I went and got it and
Speaker 3: they gave me an honorary. No, they did not. They
Speaker 3: did not pay me even an honorarium, but they paid
Speaker 3: my travel expenses. But the last one I attended and
Speaker 3: the first win was the last win previous to that
Speaker 3: was in the two thousand and one International move On
Speaker 3: Supposium in Irvine, California. I did not collect an honorarium,
Speaker 3: but they covered my travel expenses and that's it. So
Speaker 3: I don't do the UFO lecture circuit. I don't have
Speaker 3: the time. I'm training PhDs between Baylor University and the
Speaker 3: State University of New York at Albany aka University of Albany,
Speaker 3: where UAPx is located in the Physics department under Kevin
Speaker 3: professor's Kevin Kanu, Mike Matt Shadegas, and I'll leave the
Speaker 3: third professor's name out. She doesn't want a high profile.
Speaker 3: So anyway, so That's how I feel about it. I'm
Speaker 3: not in this toma the money. I was actually a
Speaker 3: paid professional ufologist, a UFO field investigator using forensic field
Speaker 3: investigation techniques at NIDS for six years, and then I
Speaker 3: carried that forward when I worked for AFRO. My program
Speaker 3: director was heavy into this stuff as well, this topic,
Speaker 3: so he had me keep that going. Matter of fact,
Speaker 3: the guy I replaced you died from glioblastoma was his
Speaker 3: longtime contractor, doctor Robert L. Forward at Hughes Research Labs
Speaker 3: in Malibu. And Robert Forward did a UFO investigation for
Speaker 3: one of his study reports for my program manager, and
Speaker 3: that was circa mid eighties. So my program manager was
Speaker 3: into the topic because he himself had his own inside
Speaker 3: government information. He's running the Advanced Concepts Office at AFROL
Speaker 3: Atwards Air Force Space and he is there as a
Speaker 3: government service employee, research scientist, program manager actually, uh, and
Speaker 3: so he's got his security clearances, and he knows what
Speaker 3: he's been read in on stuff, and there's the rumor
Speaker 3: mill that kind of you know, you whisper in the
Speaker 3: air of your coworker, and he's heard stuff and he's uh, credible,
Speaker 3: credible people. He talked to at Wright Patterson Air Force Space.
Speaker 3: There's a there's an Advanced Concepts office at airfarl A
Speaker 3: fr all there too, so uh uh so this has
Speaker 3: been going on and then worked for how put up
Speaker 3: we we again like Bigelow, and we were funded by
Speaker 3: a very wealthy benefactor who was interested in the topic.
Speaker 3: But that benefactor had no role in the OFFSET because
Speaker 3: that was a d A contract that went to Big
Speaker 3: Lowerospace Advanced Space Studies and that and they led out
Speaker 3: subcontracts to several of us. And the reason why, well,
Speaker 3: there was several of us from NIDS the NIDS era
Speaker 3: makes sense. We were either staff or members of the
Speaker 3: Science Advisory Board. But it wasn't all of us. It
Speaker 3: was just a very small number of us. The rest
Speaker 3: of the people at Big Little Aerospace Advanced Based Studies
Speaker 3: were retired Navy and Marine Corps fighter pilots and uh
Speaker 3: data management analysis staff, people who work with information technology.
Speaker 3: Those guys, those are all guys that had nothing to
Speaker 3: do with NIDS. They had nothing to do with Skinwalker Ranch.
Speaker 3: They just got hired to run their job duties to
Speaker 3: meet the mission goals of the ASAPP contract that ba
Speaker 3: ASS had. Uh So, so Schmer Schurmer. I I don't
Speaker 3: want to upset people by using a series of foul words.
Speaker 2: It's all the time here.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we gotta we speak politely. Uh, he's the wrong candidate.
Speaker 3: He's the wrong guy nominated. Obby should look for somebody else.
Speaker 3: Bobby wants me to give him a list of prospective replacements.
Speaker 3: I'll be happy to and and I will not necessarily
Speaker 3: go with anybody in physics, although I have physics people
Speaker 3: I can immediately pick, like an American physicist at CERN
Speaker 3: who would be a great skeptic. I think he's too biased.
Speaker 3: Bet he's not Michael Schrmer. He's ethical, he's a moral guy.
Speaker 3: He's straight arrow, but he's a little twisted. So anyway,
Speaker 3: there are there are people in psychology, psychiatry, other medical fields,
Speaker 3: material sciences, other fields of engineering, physics, mathematics, astronomy, astrophysics.
Speaker 3: There are people there that have not made contact into it.
Speaker 3: They may be they may have read popular literature about UFOs,
Speaker 3: but they don't. This isn't their thing. This is they
Speaker 3: don't ride the horse of UAP. So they would be
Speaker 3: great for AVI. He he needs to have somebody who's
Speaker 3: removed from the uap field in my opinion, uh, that way,
Speaker 3: they won't suffer from some form of cognitive dissonance. In
Speaker 3: the pro or con direction he wants to I'm unbiased.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, and not charging twenty and thirty thousand dollars
Speaker 1: to give talks, some of which are certainly about.
Speaker 2: Debunking debunking UFOs.
Speaker 1: Well, Eric, I have to say this has been one
Speaker 1: of the most enjoyable interviews I have done in quite
Speaker 1: some time. We've blown way past your heart out at
Speaker 1: three thirty three thirty Pacific.
Speaker 2: And unfortunately we won't be able to get to all
Speaker 2: of the questions.
Speaker 1: But I am just truly, truly grateful for your candor
Speaker 1: and the generosity of your time. I know everyone watching
Speaker 1: this show certainly is, and we appreciate it every appreciate
Speaker 1: everything that you've done on this topic.
Speaker 3: Oh, thank you very much. And I was very happy
Speaker 3: to be here, and I'm very happy that I'm in
Speaker 3: an employment status that allows me more freedom than I
Speaker 3: had at the Real Space Corporation, which banned me. The
Speaker 3: corporate communications office banned me from making these kind of appearances.
Speaker 3: I couldn't even go do scientific conferences or talk to
Speaker 3: the press about the work of my PhD students at
Speaker 3: Baylor on wormholes and warp drives or even time machines.
Speaker 3: Couldn't do it. That's all general relativity with a mixture
Speaker 3: of quantum field theory. They wouldn't let me do that.
Speaker 3: They had a problem with a famous celebrity scientist getting
Speaker 3: hired by the company, and that individual brought a lot
Speaker 3: of the political and public controversy his work engendered into
Speaker 3: the company and they had to manage that somehow, So
Speaker 3: they put a herdband on me, and I worked for
Speaker 3: an employer who actually very open minded and involved in
Speaker 3: UAPs in the background. Whoever that employer, I will not
Speaker 3: name him.
Speaker 1: I have a guest.
Speaker 2: Well, Eric, thank you, thank you so much.
Speaker 1: This as just I mean, bombshell after bombshell with this interview,
Speaker 1: so this is really really big, great thank you for
Speaker 1: your time.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much. Have a great day. Hi.
Speaker 1: All right,