Speaker 1: Hey, this is Cliff your host. This is a special
Speaker 1: edition of Earth Ancients, and we have doctor Auvi Low
Speaker 1: joining us to Harvard astrophysicist because he has been in
Speaker 1: the news and we have a direct line to his
Speaker 1: lab and whenever he shows up in the news. He
Speaker 1: was in USA today on CNN and he's been on
Speaker 1: a lot of TV. We had to get a hold
Speaker 1: of him immediately. And what's going on is there's an
Speaker 1: alien probe known as it's been identified and classified as
Speaker 1: three I Atlas, the letter I three I Atlas and
Speaker 1: this is another a mile mala kind of asteroid that
Speaker 1: appears to be self directed, appears to be coming from
Speaker 1: an ancient civilization outside of our cosmos, is entering our cosmos.
Speaker 1: And what's a little unnerving is that the hypothesis from
Speaker 1: this laboratory, from the scientific team is that it is
Speaker 1: heading our way. And I don't want to frighten anybody,
Speaker 1: but it's one of those situations where we just don't know,
Speaker 1: and there's so much to talk about. We're gonna unload
Speaker 1: quite a bit of data today. But the most important thing,
Speaker 1: and why I have doctor loebe on the program fairly regularly,
Speaker 1: is the fact that he is, without a doubt, the
Speaker 1: most transparent scientist out there right now, and he's not
Speaker 1: behooving to the government. I don't know if you guys
Speaker 1: remember about five years ago when he came on, he
Speaker 1: refused to sign a non disclosure agreement with the Department
Speaker 1: of Defense, and he wanted to the public to know
Speaker 1: what was going on in our base, in our cosmos.
Speaker 1: And I'm not saying or suggesting that what we're going
Speaker 1: to talk about today is a UAP, an unidentified aerial phenomenon.
Speaker 1: It's that he is blowing the whistle on this because
Speaker 1: within his hypothesis for what this is, there are consequences
Speaker 1: and defense measures that need to be appropriated if this
Speaker 1: so called asteroid UAP comes our way. So this is
Speaker 1: going to be to the point. It's gonna be shorter
Speaker 1: than normal, a little less an hour, and there are
Speaker 1: very few interruptions, a few ads just to cover our bases.
Speaker 1: But this is going to be short and sweet and
Speaker 1: to the point, and that's what we need. And this
Speaker 1: is why I really appreciate AVI coming on at such
Speaker 1: short notice and to give us the details. So today's
Speaker 1: program is Alien Probe three I at lasts and my
Speaker 1: guest is doctor Avi Lobe. Well, I got a white
Speaker 1: paper from my producer, Gail Tour. Asteroids are coming at us,
Speaker 1: Asteroids are everywhere. That means that we have to think
Speaker 1: of doctor Avi Lobe, and he has written an amazing paper.
Speaker 1: We're always looking to see what he's up to. We
Speaker 1: have him on I think at least once a year
Speaker 1: to get an update on anything like the olma O
Speaker 1: Maala asteroid that came by a few years ago. But
Speaker 1: this is a really I don't know if it's an
Speaker 1: alarmist paper or not. I was just talking to doctor
Speaker 1: Lobe about this. But what makes this new object, we'll
Speaker 1: call it unique, is the fact that it is an
Speaker 1: interstellar I guess we're not gonna call it a probe
Speaker 1: until doctor Lobe identifies it as a probe. But it's
Speaker 1: very unique. It's got some kind of scary ramifications if
Speaker 1: it's more than just a hypothesis. And for all the details,
Speaker 1: guess what doctor Avi Lobe is with us. So hiy Avi,
Speaker 1: welcome to Earth.
Speaker 2: Agent.
Speaker 1: It's great to see you. How you doing.
Speaker 2: Thanks thank for having me. It's a great pleasure.
Speaker 1: All right, we got to get to the basics on
Speaker 1: this are you set up at your observatory in Harvard
Speaker 1: to observe this or this actually came from another observatory,
Speaker 1: Is that correct?
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, it was actually a half a meter telescope
Speaker 2: called Atlas in Chile that discovered it on the first
Speaker 2: of July twenty twenty five. And then, as it turns out,
Speaker 2: the neighbor of that telescope is the Rubin Observatory that
Speaker 2: was just inaugurated a few weeks earlier. And when they
Speaker 2: looked back the data from the Ruby Observatory, which is
Speaker 2: an eight point four meter telescope, they realized that it
Speaker 2: was there. Now it's coming. The reason it was difficult
Speaker 2: to spot it is because it's coming from the direction
Speaker 2: of the center of the Milky Way, which is very
Speaker 2: crowded with lots of stars. And you know, just this morning,
Speaker 2: I wrote a new paper about the so called the
Speaker 2: Lobe scale that's after my life name. I proposed an
Speaker 2: idea a week ago after a Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna
Speaker 2: called me on the phone and asked me for an
Speaker 2: update about this new object, new interstellar object called three
Speaker 2: I Atlas three because it's the third object spotted by
Speaker 2: telescopes on Earth, is coming from outside the Solar System.
Speaker 2: The first was of Muamua that you mentioned. Second was Boriso,
Speaker 2: which was a comet. Ommu was very anomalous. We can
Speaker 2: get into more details. But this one, which is called
Speaker 2: three I I for interstellar and Atlas for the name
Speaker 2: of the telescope. She wanted to know more about it,
Speaker 2: and I told her. In fact, I said that there is.
Speaker 2: It will come very close to Jupiter in mid March
Speaker 2: twenty twenty six, and I wrote another paper suggesting that
Speaker 2: we use Juno, a spacecraft that is currently orbiting Jupiter.
Speaker 2: We give it a push away from Jupiter in mid
Speaker 2: September twenty five. It was supposed to plunge into Jupiter's
Speaker 2: atmosphere in mid September, the end of the mission. They
Speaker 2: wanted to kill it, basically turn it to ashes, and
Speaker 2: I said, don't do that, just push it the other way.
Speaker 2: And with a sufficient push it could in principle intercept
Speaker 2: three I at lasts, if it doesn't have enough fuel,
Speaker 2: it will just get closer to it. And even with
Speaker 2: very little fuel, like less than ten percent of the
Speaker 2: original fuel that it had, it can come within ten
Speaker 2: to twenty five million kilometers from three I atlas and
Speaker 2: give us more information. Now, why is this information warranted?
Speaker 2: Why is am I speaking about it so much? I
Speaker 2: wrote maybe by now twenty six essays on medium dot
Speaker 2: com over the past month that you can read all
Speaker 2: the details about two of them. This morning, just this morning,
Speaker 2: there was a paper from the Hubard Space Telescope that
Speaker 2: image did and by the way, that's the latest news.
Speaker 2: There seemed to be a glow of material preceding it.
Speaker 2: Not there is no trailing tail. There is no tail
Speaker 2: of this supposingly comet, So astronomers associated it with just
Speaker 2: a comet from interstellar space moving too fast, moving at
Speaker 2: sixty kilometers per second. Therefore it's not bound to the Sun.
Speaker 2: It's approaching us. But what I've noticed is the brightness
Speaker 2: of this object, and I noticed it on the first
Speaker 2: day when it was discovered. The brightness implies a diameter
Speaker 2: of twenty kilometers. And you know, amu Wa was just
Speaker 2: about one hundred meters, you know, and this one is
Speaker 2: twenty kilometers. There should be hundreds of thousands of objects
Speaker 2: like Omuama for every object that is twenty kilometers. We
Speaker 2: haven't seen hundreds of thousands. We've seen om and moa
Speaker 2: and now this one after Boriso, which was also a
Speaker 2: few hundred meters, so that's surprising. And moreover, you know,
Speaker 2: there is not enough rocky material in interstellar space where
Speaker 2: it came from to give us an object that is
Speaker 2: made of rock which is twenty kilometers in diameter every decade.
Speaker 2: In fact, if you just take a census of the
Speaker 2: rocky material industrial space, you would expect such a giant
Speaker 2: rock which is twice as large as the asteroid that
Speaker 2: killed the dinosaurs. You expect that to be delivered to
Speaker 2: the Inner Solar System once per ten thousand years. We've
Speaker 2: detected it over a decade. It's supposed to have once
Speaker 2: per ten thousand years. What's going on here? Of course,
Speaker 2: one possibility, which I pointed out in my paper which
Speaker 2: is now published, is that it wasn't a directed trajectory
Speaker 2: targeting the Inner Solar System, meaning maybe it's technological. Maybe
Speaker 2: the trajectory was designed. And then with two other collaborators,
Speaker 2: Adam Hibbert and Adam Krawl, I wrote a paper that
Speaker 2: is pointing out that the trajectory is indeed really unusual
Speaker 2: in the sense that it's aligned with the orbital plane
Speaker 2: of the planets around the Sun. Okay, to within five degrees,
Speaker 2: and the chances of that happening at random is one
Speaker 2: in five hundred. That's extremely unusual, and we haven't had
Speaker 2: five hundred objects from interstellar space.
Speaker 1: And ask you real quickly, just for the Lettuce imaging
Speaker 1: of this object, are you suggesting that we're looking at
Speaker 1: a propulsion system of some kind.
Speaker 2: Not necessarily right now. It may have been propelled in that,
Speaker 2: you know, before it arrived to our vicinity, before we
Speaker 2: could see it. But the point is that the trajectory
Speaker 2: is very fine tuned, first of all, to be in
Speaker 2: the orbital plane of the planets. You know that, as
Speaker 2: I said, that's one in five hundred chants of it
Speaker 2: being so close to the orbital plane. It comes on
Speaker 2: a retrograde orbit, which is opposite to the motion of
Speaker 2: the planets around the Sun, meaning that if it wants
Speaker 2: to deploy mini probes that will visit the planets there
Speaker 2: is because the plants are moving towards it, so to speak.
Speaker 2: And then it will arrive very close to Jupiter, Mars,
Speaker 2: and Venus. And the chance of that happening at random,
Speaker 2: you know, if you just take that trajectory, you say, okay,
Speaker 2: I accept it's in the plane of the planet. I
Speaker 2: just change the arrival time. Still, the chance is one
Speaker 2: in twenty thousand that it will arrive so close to Mars,
Speaker 2: Venus and Jupiter, and you know that makes it unusual.
Speaker 2: And also it arrives closest to the Sun when the
Speaker 2: Earth is on the opposite side, we won't be able
Speaker 2: to observe it from Earth. If they know about us,
Speaker 2: that's the best strategy if they wanted to do a
Speaker 2: maneuver near the Sun, because that's when the gravitational assist
Speaker 2: of the Sun can help do a very significant maneuver.
Speaker 2: That's what we do, is spacecraft. We make a maneuver
Speaker 2: close to the Sun because you are taking advantage of
Speaker 2: the Sun's gravity to prepare yourself at a different speed.
Speaker 2: So if they wanted, for example, to slow down, you know,
Speaker 2: if they don't show up on the other side of
Speaker 2: the Sun after we can't see them during the month
Speaker 2: of October twenty twenty five, you know they will pass
Speaker 2: closest to the Sun on October twenty ninth. If they
Speaker 2: don't show up on the other side as expected, I
Speaker 2: think the stock market may crash.
Speaker 1: Oh my god, amazing.
Speaker 2: Now I should also say that this morning I wrote
Speaker 2: a paper. It's also available on medium dot com, where
Speaker 2: I suggested it already a week ago, but I now
Speaker 2: elaborated on that of what I is being called the
Speaker 2: Lobe scale, which is a risk scale for interstellar objects,
Speaker 2: objects coming from outside the Solar System. Zero implies that
Speaker 2: it's a natural object, a rock like, for example, an
Speaker 2: asteroid or an icy rock like a comet, the type
Speaker 2: of rocks that we are familiar with in the Solar System.
Speaker 2: And you know that would be a zero because the
Speaker 2: chance of that hitting the Earth is very small. You know,
Speaker 2: it really needs to be on a straight trajectory towards
Speaker 2: Earth and that's a very small probability. But ten on
Speaker 2: that scale is definitely artificial in origin, definitely technological, meaning
Speaker 2: that we can see maneuvering in a way, you know,
Speaker 2: non gravitational acceleration that represents perhaps propulsion or some engine.
Speaker 2: We see evidence for artificial lights or excess heat from
Speaker 2: an engine, or we see an unusual shape of the object.
Speaker 2: All of these are indicative of a technological signature. And
Speaker 2: you know, I think it's important for us to scale
Speaker 2: any incoming interstellar object on this scale. And now the
Speaker 2: Rubin Observatory in Chile will start discovering every few months
Speaker 2: a new interstellar object. Until now, we had only three
Speaker 2: spotted by telescopes over the past eight years. But from
Speaker 2: now on, you know, there is an increase by almost
Speaker 2: two orders of magnitude in the detection rate, and therefore
Speaker 2: we should be alert because the implications would be huge
Speaker 2: to humanity, not only in terms of US understanding that
Speaker 2: there might be a smarter kid on the blog, us
Speaker 2: being able to learn from their technologies, but also there
Speaker 2: is a threat. You know, there is an existential threat
Speaker 2: to humanity. And in the past we worried about the
Speaker 2: existential threat from artificial intelligence or from climate change. Lots
Speaker 2: of people are talking about this all the time, and
Speaker 2: every now and then we also talk about a threat
Speaker 2: from a killer asteroid of the type that killed the dinosaurs.
Speaker 2: And of course NASA was tasked by Congress, the US
Speaker 2: Congress to look for all objects above the size of
Speaker 2: a fotball field that may risk that may come close
Speaker 2: to Earth. And that's the reason the Rubin Observatory was constructed.
Speaker 2: But I'm saying there is another type of objects that
Speaker 2: we should be worried about, and we don't discuss those,
Speaker 2: and that is alien technology objects. And we should just
Speaker 2: check each and every object entering the Solar system if
Speaker 2: it has anomalies that put it high above I would
Speaker 2: say above level four on the Lob scale. That I
Speaker 2: propose we should definitely have policy makers discuss them, getting
Speaker 2: more data from scientists and deciding how to respond to them,
Speaker 2: and then of course psychologists to decide how to communicate
Speaker 2: the message to the public without creating panic, without the
Speaker 2: economic meltdown.
Speaker 1: Have you been able to determine the shape? Is it
Speaker 1: like the Omauma asteroid which just looks aerodynamic to me?
Speaker 1: But do we have an idea idea.
Speaker 2: Or Muama changed its brightness every eight hours. It was
Speaker 2: stumbling by a factor of ten, and the best fit
Speaker 2: for the variation of reflected sunlight from it implied that
Speaker 2: it has a disk like shape, very unusual. And moreover,
Speaker 2: it was pushed away from the Sun by some mysterious force,
Speaker 2: and there wasn't any evaporation that is visible, no cometary
Speaker 2: tail whatsoever, no molecules of dust or carbon based molecules
Speaker 2: that are usually accompanying any comet, so there was no
Speaker 2: rocket effect acting on it. The question was what is
Speaker 2: pushing it, what's creating this non gravitational acceleration, And unfortunately
Speaker 2: we were left in the dark about it because we
Speaker 2: didn't get enough data to figure out its nature. And
Speaker 2: I said, look, these anomalies should alert us because it
Speaker 2: may be just like our own space debris, you know,
Speaker 2: the space trash without For example, three years later, the
Speaker 2: same telescope in Hawaii pan stars that discovered them as
Speaker 2: a near Earth object found another near Earth object that
Speaker 2: was pushed by reflecting sunlight, and that one ended up
Speaker 2: being a rocket booster from a nineteen sixty six launch
Speaker 2: by NASA. And just on January second this year, twenty
Speaker 2: twenty five, the Minor Planet Center reported about a new
Speaker 2: asteroid near Earth and then they realized, oh wait a minute,
Speaker 2: this one moves along the path of the Tesla Roads,
Speaker 2: the car that was launched by SpaceX, and then they
Speaker 2: removed it from their list. So this one was not
Speaker 2: a rock, It was a car, okay. And all I'm
Speaker 2: saying is that maybe Elon Musk is not the most
Speaker 2: accomplished space entrepreneur since the Big Bank. You know, thirteen
Speaker 2: point eight billionaires passed since the Big Bank the Sun formed.
Speaker 2: Just in the last one third of cosmic history, most
Speaker 2: of the stars from billions of years before the Sun,
Speaker 2: and you can ask where will Voyager be in a billionaeres,
Speaker 2: it will be on the other side of the Milky
Speaker 2: Way galaxy. And therefore there was plenty of time for
Speaker 2: their space artifacts to arrive to our backyard. So we
Speaker 2: should simply be agnostic and check each and every interest
Speaker 2: our object, whether it has some technological features.
Speaker 1: We're going to take a short commercial break to allow
Speaker 1: our sponsors to identify themselves, and we will return shortly
Speaker 1: with my guest today, doctor Avi Lobe coming to us
Speaker 1: from Harvard University, will be right back. We're discussing the
Speaker 1: alien probe three I atlas and what the ramifications are
Speaker 1: for an impact scenario here on planet Earth. With our
Speaker 1: guest today, doctor Avi Loebe. Can you tell with your
Speaker 1: equipment if an object is changing its trajectory as it's
Speaker 1: coming from an interstellar location.
Speaker 2: Definitely you can. In fact, with the help of the Web,
Speaker 2: which is positioned one and a half million kilometers away
Speaker 2: from Earth, we can look at the object from two directions,
Speaker 2: from telescopes on Earth and from the Web. It's just
Speaker 2: like having two eyes that allow us to gauge distances
Speaker 2: of objects, and in fact, I believe the Web observatory
Speaker 2: is actually looking at it today. Okay, so we should see.
Speaker 2: But the point of that is not only the Web
Speaker 2: telescope is able to help us pinpoint the trajector of
Speaker 2: the object and figure out if it has nongravitational acceleration
Speaker 2: to a very high precision. We didn't have that with
Speaker 2: more we had just the hubrid Space telescope, which is
Speaker 2: much closer to Earth. The Web is further. We can
Speaker 2: get the position of three ieutlats much better. But moreover,
Speaker 2: the Web telescope can detect the heat emitted by three iyatlasers.
Speaker 2: In other words, not just the reflection of sunlight from it,
Speaker 2: but the infrared radiation that it emits, and that can
Speaker 2: help us figure out its face temperature, to figure out
Speaker 2: its surface area, and then a see spins every sixteen hours,
Speaker 2: we could actually sort of get a three dimensional mapping
Speaker 2: on of how it looks like, you know, and then
Speaker 2: I'm waiting to see what the results will show. It's
Speaker 2: you know, science is exciting because you don't need to
Speaker 2: know the answer in advance. Despite what my colleagues are
Speaker 2: or you know, they always know the answer in advance,
Speaker 2: like it must be a comet, you know, and then
Speaker 2: they get surprised. So in this case, just to give
Speaker 2: you the surprise of the morning, there was the first
Speaker 2: paper analyzing images from the Hubble Space telescope taken on
Speaker 2: the fourth of July twenty twenty five, and they show
Speaker 2: a glow of something in front of the object, in front,
Speaker 2: not behind. Usually with comets you have a tail. That's
Speaker 2: why we say comet retail. It's behind. This time you
Speaker 2: see some glow in front of it, in the direction
Speaker 2: that it moves towards the sun. And the question is why.
Speaker 2: Of course, one possibility is that it's only you know
Speaker 2: it has it doesn't spin very rapidly, so it has
Speaker 2: a hot day side and a cold night side, and
Speaker 2: the day side is warmed up by the sunlight, and
Speaker 2: therefore you know, it ejects thus particles that you see
Speaker 2: in front of it and not behind it. But another
Speaker 2: thing that is peculiar is there is no evidence. And
Speaker 2: by now there are maybe five studies, five independent papers
Speaker 2: from different observatories using some of the best observatories in
Speaker 2: the world, that it took a spectrum of the object
Speaker 2: looking for the characteristic you know molecules that accompany cometary activity.
Speaker 2: These are carbon based molecules that you find in every
Speaker 2: comet in the Solar system. And they haven't found any spectrum.
Speaker 2: They only saw the only saw reddening of the reflected sunlight.
Speaker 2: In other words, the object is red but doesn't show
Speaker 2: evidence for gas, molecules or atoms around it.
Speaker 1: And that's puzzling, that's fascinating. In your paper, you have
Speaker 1: considerations to support your hypothesis that this is artificial. And
Speaker 1: one of the things I wanted to ask you about.
Speaker 1: You say, it's too large to be an asteroid, right,
Speaker 1: and that makes what does that mean if Oma Mau
Speaker 1: was Oma Mau too large to be an asteroid too?
Speaker 2: No, No, Omua Mua was roughly one hundred meters inside.
Speaker 2: I mean that was the length the thing. It could
Speaker 2: have been very thin, actually, but this one is two
Speaker 2: hundred times bigger. It's it's twenty kilometers in diameter. If
Speaker 2: what we are seeing is its brightness is simply reflection
Speaker 2: from a solid object, Okay, Now, of course it's possible
Speaker 2: that you know, some some cloud of dust around it
Speaker 2: is doing the reflection. It's not the object. But if
Speaker 2: it is the object, then it's twenty kilometers in diameter,
Speaker 2: And why is that puzzling? Because there is not enough
Speaker 2: mass in rocks in interstellar space to deliver a twenty
Speaker 2: kilometer rock to our vicinity every decade. You know, our
Speaker 2: survey went on for a decade. You can do that
Speaker 2: once per ten thousand years, that would be reasonable, but
Speaker 2: not every decade. So either it is a comet, but
Speaker 2: the nucleus of the comet is very small, you know,
Speaker 2: less than about a kilometer in diameter. Then you don't
Speaker 2: need a lot of mass. And then the reflection that
Speaker 2: we see, the brightness of the object results from dust
Speaker 2: that was evaporating from the small object that creates this
Speaker 2: glow around. It has nothing to do with the size
Speaker 2: of the object. Size of the object is very small.
Speaker 2: That's one possibility. And of course, if it happens to
Speaker 2: be a large object, you know, I think it's extremely puzzling.
Speaker 2: Why are we seeing it in over a survey of
Speaker 2: one decade. And the one possibility that can explain it
Speaker 2: is because it's not only a random trajectory. It's not like,
Speaker 2: you know, you have a lot of these rocks moving around.
Speaker 2: It's actually an object that targeted the inner Solar System.
Speaker 2: By design, the trajectory wanted to get to the inner
Speaker 2: part of the Solar System to visit the planets in
Speaker 2: the habitable zone, and that of course would suggest some
Speaker 2: designed the trajectory, some intelligence behind the trajectory, which is
Speaker 2: also indicated by the fact that it's in the ecliptic
Speaker 2: plane where the planets move around the Sun. With a
Speaker 2: probability of one in five hundred, is it.
Speaker 1: Possible that this came from the same civilization that sent
Speaker 1: out a more and more it's possible object in.
Speaker 2: The general it comes from a different direction. But you know,
Speaker 2: we don't know the nature of a mua mua. It
Speaker 2: could be just a surface layer or some debris lefto
Speaker 2: I mean, I should say that this object three I
Speaker 2: atlas enter the outskirts of the Solar system, you know,
Speaker 2: the edge of the Oar cloud at ae hundred thousand
Speaker 2: times the Earth Sun separation about eight thousand years ago.
Speaker 2: If it started from far out, so eight thousand years
Speaker 2: ago when humans started recording history, that's when this object
Speaker 2: was at one hundred thousand times the Earth Sun separation.
Speaker 2: On the other hand, you can imagine some kind of
Speaker 2: a base of you know, alien technologies within the Solar
Speaker 2: system like they already are not so far like if
Speaker 2: there are at a thousand Earth sun separation a thousand
Speaker 2: times that it would take them only about eight years
Speaker 2: to reach us, you know, And so they if they
Speaker 2: see that we are developing as a young technological cimilation,
Speaker 2: we are developing and opposing a potential threat to them,
Speaker 2: they might visit us. And you know, that is the
Speaker 2: dark forest hypothesis, which was a solution to Fermi's paradox.
Speaker 2: And Rico Fermi in nineteen fifty had launch in Los Alamos,
Speaker 2: and they were discussing extraterrestrials, and he asked, where is everybody?
Speaker 2: And the one possible solution is that they're out there,
Speaker 2: but they're silent because of war is about predators. That's
Speaker 2: a better strategy for them to survive. And if they
Speaker 2: see a young civilization like ours developing technologies that are
Speaker 2: on the cusp of endangering them, they might do a
Speaker 2: reconnaissance mission to visit us. We should be aware of
Speaker 2: that possibility because we don't know who exists in our
Speaker 2: cosmic neighborhood. You know, we see a lot of sun
Speaker 2: like stars, one hundred billion of them in the Milky
Speaker 2: Way galaxy. Most of them formed the billions of years
Speaker 2: before the Sun. And we see, we assess that, you know,
Speaker 2: billions of Earth Sun analogs may exist in the Milky Way. Okay,
Speaker 2: so billions of them. And you know, you can argue.
Speaker 2: And that's what my colleagues in academia keep arguing that
Speaker 2: it's an extraordinary claim to imagine that these houses that
Speaker 2: look just like ours on the cosmic street have no
Speaker 2: residence or never had residents. And I'm saying, how do
Speaker 2: you know that. Let's check. Let's assume, you know, what
Speaker 2: is called the Copernican principle that we are not special,
Speaker 2: which implies that, you know, if we are not special,
Speaker 2: things like us existed billions of years ago, and we
Speaker 2: just need to search. And you know, the simplest way
Speaker 2: to search is not to look for radio signals from
Speaker 2: the houses towards us, because you know, nobody may call
Speaker 2: us when we are listening. Actually, the best way is
Speaker 2: to check our backyard and see whether among the rocks
Speaker 2: that we find there there might be a tennis ball
Speaker 2: that was thrown by a neighbor. And that is exactly
Speaker 2: what I'm suggesting to do with interest of our objects.
Speaker 1: Let me just change the venue a little bit. In
Speaker 1: your most recent dredging of the Pacific Ocean for that
Speaker 1: down object that you thought may have been artificial, did
Speaker 1: you pull up any analysis of it being an exotic metal?
Speaker 2: Well, we had the I mean, the expedition cost about
Speaker 2: about one and a half million dollars. With that budget,
Speaker 2: we could only use a sled that was covered with
Speaker 2: magnets that we placed on the ocean floor, and we
Speaker 2: couldn't really see what we are picking up. There was
Speaker 2: no live video feed. So we brought up some magnetic
Speaker 2: particles molten droplets from presumably an explosion that came from
Speaker 2: a meteor, and then I brought back about eight hundred
Speaker 2: and fifty of them to have at the university, where
Speaker 2: I gave them to my colleagues, Time Jacobson, a world
Speaker 2: renowned geochemist that has the best instruments in the world,
Speaker 2: and we analyzed those materials and found that about ten
Speaker 2: percent of those spherrows molten droplets have a chemical composition
Speaker 2: that is different from solar system materials. It was never
Speaker 2: reported before in the scientific literature, but I really want
Speaker 2: to get bigger pieces. These were small. The spherals were
Speaker 2: less than a millimeter in size, and there isn't a
Speaker 2: lot of material in them. And I want to go
Speaker 2: back to that location and search for bigger pieces of
Speaker 2: in the wreckage of the original meteorite, uh, and perhaps
Speaker 2: even find the core of the meteorite. But then to
Speaker 2: do that, we need to use a remotely operated vehicle,
Speaker 2: a robot with a video feed. That would cost six
Speaker 2: and a half million dollars and we don't have the
Speaker 2: funding so yet. If we do get the funding, we'll
Speaker 2: go there again.
Speaker 1: That's fascinating, is your hypothesis, doctor, Love, that we are
Speaker 1: being observed and these are just probes. H. I mean,
Speaker 1: that's yourre That's that was what we were talking about
Speaker 1: last time. This is more dire and I don't want
Speaker 1: to get to the consequences right yet, but I do
Speaker 1: want to get your sense of what we're dealing with.
Speaker 1: This is a half a million year old civilization that
Speaker 1: perhaps is not around anymore. These are perhaps probes that
Speaker 1: are looking for signs of life.
Speaker 2: Well, it's but we don't know their agenda. We don't
Speaker 2: know what their intent is. We are a young, technological
Speaker 2: civilization with only a history of one hundred years since
Speaker 2: quantum mechanics was discovered. I mean, the two of us
Speaker 2: are speaking thanks to our understanding of quantum mechanics. You know,
Speaker 2: the instruments we're using are all based on quantum mechanics,
Speaker 2: and only one hundred years one century lapsed since we
Speaker 2: started understanding physical reality in the context of quantum mechanics.
Speaker 2: If you have another civilization that is far more advanced,
Speaker 2: you know, they might even be more intelligent than we are.
Speaker 2: You know, the human brain might not be the pinnacle
Speaker 2: of creation. That might be you know, smarter kids on
Speaker 2: our blog, and that means that we wouldn't fully understand.
Speaker 2: Even if they didn't have much more time to develop things,
Speaker 2: they could have developed things much better than we did.
Speaker 2: Just look at the world politics. We are not that intelligent,
Speaker 2: you know. But the other thing I wanted to mention
Speaker 2: is that, so far we launch the probes to interstellar space.
Speaker 2: These are Voyager one, Voyager two, Pioneer ten, Pioneer eleven
Speaker 2: New Horizons, and they will become trash once I mean,
Speaker 2: they will not be functional once they leave the outskirts
Speaker 2: of the solar system in the ore cloud, because that
Speaker 2: would be ten thousand years from now, and they were
Speaker 2: not designed to survive that loan. But another civilization that
Speaker 2: is far more advanced could have launched functional devices, and
Speaker 2: they might visit us, you know, for a purpose. And
Speaker 2: I think, just like with any blind date, my advice
Speaker 2: for young people that are only blind date is to
Speaker 2: first observe before having an opinion about the visitor. Yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean a lot of people prefer to attribute whatever
Speaker 2: they see to scripts of science fiction writers or from Hollywood,
Speaker 2: and I say, all of these scripts are just like
Speaker 2: large language models of artificial intelligence in the sense that
Speaker 2: they are based on some training data set. You know
Speaker 2: that whatever is familiar to us, the experiences we had
Speaker 2: on Earth l l m's are not smarter than us
Speaker 2: because they are trained on what we see, and what
Speaker 2: we see is limited to Earth. Okay, that's it. But
Speaker 2: then whatever comes from another star is, you know, could
Speaker 2: be out of this world. It's all bets are off,
Speaker 2: you know, and therefore we should be open minded to
Speaker 2: be surprised instead of claiming anything in the sky must
Speaker 2: be rocks. The way my colleagues that are comed experts
Speaker 2: keep doing, you know, they I call it the Stone
Speaker 2: Age of space exploration, in the sense that anything in
Speaker 2: the sky must be stones.
Speaker 1: We're going to take a short commercial break to allow
Speaker 1: our sponsors to identify themselves, and we will return shortly
Speaker 1: with my guest today, doctor Ave Loebe discussing the unusual
Speaker 1: probe three I at Lasts will be right back by
Speaker 1: Yesterday is Harvard astrophysicist Alvi Low discussing a new identified
Speaker 1: probe known as three Eye Atlas, which is coming into
Speaker 1: our cosmos in the next few weeks. Do you have
Speaker 1: a feeling of this object being a UAP or is
Speaker 1: it more just a probe?
Speaker 2: Well, that's interesting because well it depends on the size.
Speaker 2: But if it's a twenty kilometer object, by the way,
Speaker 2: very similar to the dimensions of the rama in the
Speaker 2: science fiction novel Rendezvous with Rama that out of see
Speaker 2: Clark wrote about he also envisioned the He actually envisioned
Speaker 2: the cylinder that is twenty kilometers wide and fifty kilometers long.
Speaker 2: But if this object three Eye Atlas is so big,
Speaker 2: you know, you could imagine that, you know, it would
Speaker 2: take a huge amount of energy for it to maneuver
Speaker 2: and visit planets. It might actually just deploy mini probes
Speaker 2: that go to the planets, sort of like a mothership.
Speaker 2: And in that case, those minni probs would result in
Speaker 2: enhanced activity of unidentified anomalous phenomenon on Earth after the visit,
Speaker 2: so that will be October twenty ninth, twenty five. And
Speaker 2: if we see more anomalies in the sky on Earth,
Speaker 2: you know, they may be related to smaller probs that
Speaker 2: have not you know, that are not the original object,
Speaker 2: but they were deposited. And the Galileo Project under my leadership,
Speaker 2: is currently assembling two additional observatories. We have one functioning
Speaker 2: in Massachusetts monitoring the sky in the infrared, visible light, radio,
Speaker 2: and audio, and we analyze the data with the machine
Speaker 2: learning software to figure out if there is any anything
Speaker 2: unfamiliar in the sky. And we are assembling additional observatories,
Speaker 2: one in Pennsylvania and the other one in Nevada, and
Speaker 2: they should be ready by September twenty twenty five, and
Speaker 2: that's a month before three I Atlas comes closest to
Speaker 2: the Sun and we will be able to tell if
Speaker 2: there are any objects, anomalous objects that produce enhance activity
Speaker 2: relative to what we see regularly. I mean, we have
Speaker 2: the ability to detect a few million objects every year
Speaker 2: with our instruments and the one special thing about these
Speaker 2: observatories is that they are not traditional astronomical observatories because
Speaker 2: those are limited to a very small region of the sky.
Speaker 2: Usually astronomers are focusing on a small part of the
Speaker 2: sky at any given time, whereas the one that we
Speaker 2: constructed from scratch is a new type of observatories where
Speaker 2: we monitor the entire sky at all times, and we
Speaker 2: pay attention to objects that move fast overhead. These are
Speaker 2: the kind of objects that astronomical telescopes often ignore. And
Speaker 2: then I really look forward to future data. I believe
Speaker 2: you know, as a scientist, I really enjoy having as
Speaker 2: much data as possible. I was asked on a podcast,
Speaker 2: how do you tell the difference between as a genuine
Speaker 2: scientists and the conspiracy theories? And I said, there is
Speaker 2: a very simple way of telling the difference. If you
Speaker 2: just deliver much more data from instruments, the scientists will
Speaker 2: be delighted, even if it changes the mind of the scientists.
Speaker 2: Many times in history scientists change the mind based on
Speaker 2: better data. That is exactly the scientific method. You have
Speaker 2: some conjecture and then you test it with data, and
Speaker 2: if the data doesn't agree with the conjecture, it's trued out. Okay,
Speaker 2: that's detective. That's the way scientists operate. However, a conspiracy
Speaker 2: theorist would be upset by more data that conspiracy theorists
Speaker 2: we say, don't give me the data, don't confuse me
Speaker 2: with facts. I know the answer on how dare you
Speaker 2: even study those facts?
Speaker 1: All right, So let's get to the conclusion of this paper.
Speaker 1: And this is so unlike the A V lobe that
Speaker 1: I am familiar with. But the dire consequences are that
Speaker 1: this is potentially coming for Earth and that we need
Speaker 1: to be thinking of defense measures in some capacity. So
Speaker 1: this is something that I've always had to chill up
Speaker 1: my back about because we really don't have any known
Speaker 1: anti asteroid defense system. But maybe it could be clandestine,
Speaker 1: a black ops project that we don't know about.
Speaker 2: No, but.
Speaker 1: Why are your conclusions like that? Is it because it's
Speaker 1: in the path of Earth's orbit?
Speaker 2: No, it's not coming close to Earth on its current path.
Speaker 2: In fact, it gets closest to the Sun when the
Speaker 2: Earth is on the opposite side. But that's the point
Speaker 2: where it can do a maneuver. It's called an oorverth maneuver,
Speaker 2: taking advantage of the Sun's gravity and perhaps it doesn't
Speaker 2: want us to see it when it For example, it
Speaker 2: could release mini probles that are doing this maneuver and
Speaker 2: it will be hidden behind the sun. So I'm just
Speaker 2: worried about it. We should see it might be just
Speaker 2: a natural comet, and then we don't have to worry
Speaker 2: about it. You know. That's the nature of getting as
Speaker 2: much data as possible about it so that we can
Speaker 2: figure it out. The reason I put it out as
Speaker 2: a possibility is to encourage my colleagues observers to get
Speaker 2: as much data as possible, because when you have a
Speaker 2: lot of data, it's impossible to shove anomalies under the
Speaker 2: carpet of traditional thinking. Just to consider Galileo Galilei, the
Speaker 2: Church put him in house arrest because they didn't like
Speaker 2: the answer he provided by looking through his telescope. But if,
Speaker 2: on the other hand, you know, they would have looked
Speaker 2: through telescopes and said, we would demonstrate that Gallegaliley is
Speaker 2: wrong by looking through telescopes collecting more data about Jupiter
Speaker 2: and showing that he was wrong, then they would have
Speaker 2: corrected course much faster. I mean it took them three
Speaker 2: hundred and fifty years after his death to admit that
Speaker 2: he was right, And I say they could have saved
Speaker 2: this time. They could have decided within a few years
Speaker 2: that he's right by looking through telescopes. And so if
Speaker 2: I can encourage my colleagues to prove me wrong by
Speaker 2: looking through telescope, we'll get data. If I am actually
Speaker 2: wrong and it's just a comet, natural object, so be it. Okay,
Speaker 2: we land it's a natural object. That's it. Case closed.
Speaker 2: But I don't want us to miss the opportunity to
Speaker 2: get all these data by being get relaxed and saying
Speaker 2: we know the answer in advance. It must be a comet.
Speaker 2: Stop talking about it. How there you speak about something else.
Speaker 2: This is not an intelligent approach to science.
Speaker 1: In this paper that you write, are you in contact
Speaker 1: with the Department of Defense, who would probably be the
Speaker 1: ones who would direct a missile towards trying to.
Speaker 2: No, I should say that right now, the trajector of
Speaker 2: free i Atlas is such that there is no way
Speaker 2: that we can reach it with any rocket it to
Speaker 2: intercept it as it comes to the Sun, because it
Speaker 2: will be moving at ninety eight kilometers per second in
Speaker 2: the opposite direction relative to Earth. And we just our
Speaker 2: best rockets are move at a third of that speed.
Speaker 2: I mean, we can intercept it much further out, but
Speaker 2: not as it approaches the sun. There is no way
Speaker 2: right now. And then the other thing, the other comment
Speaker 2: I wanted to make is that you can see that
Speaker 2: also as an opportunity because if it happens, if we
Speaker 2: happen to have an alien technological threat, I think it
Speaker 2: will bring people together because we would realize that we
Speaker 2: are all in the same boat, and you know, we
Speaker 2: will perhaps stop fighting over territories on this rock that
Speaker 2: we were born on the earth, because there is much
Speaker 2: more real estate out there and we are very limited
Speaker 2: in our mindset, you know of zero some games on
Speaker 2: this earth. But if we see some other threat coming
Speaker 2: beyond you know, this Earth, then perhaps we'll realize that
Speaker 2: we're all in the same boat. Let's work together. And
Speaker 2: in a way, it's the messianic message of peace, you know,
Speaker 2: like perhaps we need a messiah from another star. AVI.
Speaker 1: I love this material, you know, I have to say this.
Speaker 1: It's so refreshing. They have your transparent point of view
Speaker 1: because other scientists would not be so free in the data.
Speaker 1: And perhaps this is the big problem with UAPs is
Speaker 1: the fact that here they are, they're observing us, but
Speaker 1: no one's really taking it serious. I think in your
Speaker 1: paper you say it's important to take it serious because
Speaker 1: this could be a dire threat.
Speaker 2: Yeah, definitely. I mean we we should allow of this possibility.
Speaker 2: We should not ridicule it. Which if you want to
Speaker 2: refute it, if you want to show that it's wrong,
Speaker 2: instead of expressing your opinion, look through telescopes, collect data
Speaker 2: and show that it's wrong. This is my request to
Speaker 2: the critics. It's not enough to just say blog on
Speaker 2: it or write on it on social media. You know,
Speaker 2: I was criticized over the past few weeks by people
Speaker 2: who are not practicing science. Just check their record. They
Speaker 2: don't have a single scientific paper over the past decade,
Speaker 2: and they criticize me, a practicing scientist. I wrote nine
Speaker 2: scientific papers in the month of July twenty twenty five,
Speaker 2: just over the past thirty days. I wrote nine scientific papers.
Speaker 2: They didn't write a single one over the past decade.
Speaker 2: And they're protecting science against practicing scientists. How are they? Yeah,
Speaker 2: I mean, this is really ridiculous. Obviously they just want
Speaker 2: to get clicks, But their opinions should not matter because
Speaker 2: science should be guided by evidence, And my point is
Speaker 2: science should not censor questions. Any question should be allowed. Okay,
Speaker 2: the question of whether it's technological should be allowed. The
Speaker 2: scientific method is not about which questions to avoid. It's
Speaker 2: about using data evidence to answer these questions. Okay, so
Speaker 2: is it technological, Get data and show that it's not,
Speaker 2: but don't express your opinion and move on. That's not
Speaker 2: the scientific method.
Speaker 1: Are you, and we're closing here, are you anticipating alien
Speaker 1: contact at some time in our lifetime?
Speaker 2: Well, it all depends if they're out there, you know,
Speaker 2: and I'm trying to find out. Obviously, by saying they
Speaker 2: don't exist and saying that it's an extraordinary claim, you know,
Speaker 2: you're entering a self fulfilling prophecy because you're not seeking
Speaker 2: the evidence, and in that case, you will obviously maintain
Speaker 2: your ignorance. It's just like you look down without looking up,
Speaker 2: or you act like the Vatican that didn't want to
Speaker 2: look through Galileo's telescope. So did that change the reality
Speaker 2: of the situation? You know, the Earth was moving around
Speaker 2: the sun for four point five you know, billionaires before
Speaker 2: the Church even existed, and it continued to move around
Speaker 2: the sun even after they put the learned house arrests.
Speaker 2: It doesn't change whether we have neighbors or not. If
Speaker 2: we ridicule this, The question is can we find out
Speaker 2: scientifically if that's the case, And for that we need
Speaker 2: to collect data. And my point is, let's just be
Speaker 2: agnostic and not ridicule ideas. Let's try to test them,
Speaker 2: you know, by finding as much data as possible.
Speaker 1: Fantastic three I Atlas is fascinating thought. Where do we
Speaker 1: take it from here? We're going to watch it as
Speaker 1: it leaves our cosmos or why?
Speaker 2: Well, it's in the coming months. It's getting closer to
Speaker 2: the Sun. So by October first we won't be able
Speaker 2: to observe it because it will be too close to
Speaker 2: the Sun and the Sun will basically burn up any
Speaker 2: telescope looking there. But it will come closest to the
Speaker 2: Sun on October twenty ninth, and after that, you know,
Speaker 2: during the month of November and December, we should be
Speaker 2: able to observe it as long as it continues along
Speaker 2: the expected path, by the way, and we will learn
Speaker 2: a lot about it in the coming two months, and
Speaker 2: I expect us to know more about its nature. And
Speaker 2: that's the way science is done. That my opinion will
Speaker 2: change as more data comes in. But even if it
Speaker 2: turns out to be just a natural comment, I say,
Speaker 2: we should examine each and every new interstellar object that
Speaker 2: the Rubin Observatory discovers every few months over the next decades.
Speaker 2: So it's a completely new reality that we never had before,
Speaker 2: where we are now on the path to discovering every
Speaker 2: few months a new interestar object. And let's just be
Speaker 2: open minded and check each and everyone, whether it's a
Speaker 2: rock or some something else.
Speaker 1: Fantastic, AVI, wonderful being with you. Thank you for this
Speaker 1: and always an eye opener when I have you on
Speaker 1: the program, always something fantastic. So hey continue success on
Speaker 1: this and I will. It's it's just a part of
Speaker 1: a book you're working on. We think there's a book
Speaker 1: right now.
Speaker 2: I'm working on a book about the expedition to the
Speaker 2: Pacific Ocean. Will also be a Netflix documentary coming out
Speaker 2: in early twenty twenty six that includes the footage from
Speaker 2: the expedition, so stay tuned. And there are lots of
Speaker 2: other exciting developments that I cannot speak about right now.
Speaker 2: But you know, my life is interesting. We didn't have
Speaker 2: time to discuss it. Lots of other interesting things going on.
Speaker 1: Where can people read more about your work? Do you
Speaker 1: have a space website that they can check?
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, every day or two, I post an essay
Speaker 2: on medium dot com. So just search for a v
Speaker 2: AVII lobe looe B at medium dot com and you
Speaker 2: can subscribe for free to my essays for email notifications.
Speaker 2: Every time an update comes along, you will get it.
Speaker 1: I fully expect you to be the one who's going
Speaker 1: to make the first contact with an alien race.
Speaker 2: Av Well, I already you know. I was asked in
Speaker 2: one of the podcasts whether I'm seeking a Nobel price,
Speaker 2: and I say, and I said not at all, because
Speaker 2: if we discover some alien intelligence, you know, technological artifact
Speaker 2: in your Earth, I just will not waste my time
Speaker 2: going to Stockholm to get, you know, some recognition from
Speaker 2: a committee. Instead, I would like to dedicate the time
Speaker 2: to exploring this encounter. And I will basically follow Bob
Speaker 2: Dylan on that front and not acknowledge the price.
Speaker 1: Fantastic. Hey, I really appreciate your time, Thanks for being with.
Speaker 2: Us, Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1: One thing we didn't discuss is the what he calls
Speaker 1: the consequences, which he features in this white paper that
Speaker 1: he has published for everyone to look at, and that
Speaker 1: the middle portion of this paper, consequences are in a
Speaker 1: square in a box, and it basically says this, should
Speaker 1: the hypothesis turn correct, this could be potentially dire for humanity,
Speaker 1: and defense measures must be a consideration. Well, if you
Speaker 1: remember Randall Carlson talking to us about asteroids, we go
Speaker 1: on this turn filled every couple of twice a year.
Speaker 1: We don't have any defense mechanisms. We have nothing to
Speaker 1: repel a asteroid or a alien ship. And this is
Speaker 1: why it's kind of he as Avy calls it. It's
Speaker 1: dire news. What are we supposed to do? And I
Speaker 1: don't want to upset anybody. This is likely projections of
Speaker 1: the worst case scenario. I would hope that alien off
Speaker 1: world for beings would not want to destroy us. It's
Speaker 1: not like AP something out of a script for a
Speaker 1: sci fi movie. It really really does. But I love
Speaker 1: to talk about this because we need to wake up
Speaker 1: regarding UAP's UFOs, whatever you want to call them, and
Speaker 1: incidents of alien interactions when they actually land get out
Speaker 1: and go hey we're here, where I'm from Planet X?
Speaker 1: And how are you? Or you know the scenario is
Speaker 1: we've been watching you for five hundred thousand years or whatever,
Speaker 1: and we want to make contact now. Unfortunately, sophisticated countries
Speaker 1: like the United States are or shoot first, ask questions later,
Speaker 1: and that's just not the way to do it. We're
Speaker 1: very animalistic when it comes to I mean, it's fear mongering.
Speaker 1: We're gonna shoot you down because we can't understand your technology.
Speaker 1: You're too sophisticated, and we're worried, we're upset, we're afraid.
Speaker 1: We're children, and that's what it is. We act like children,
Speaker 1: and that's just not going to cut it. So I
Speaker 1: don't know to think. I am going to post this
Speaker 1: paper that he has written that's going out to all
Speaker 1: the news agencies on the Facebook page and also we'll
Speaker 1: make it available on YouTube so that you can take
Speaker 1: a look at it and see for yourself why he
Speaker 1: is not only concerned but also suggesting that we need
Speaker 1: to keep a more a closer look at these interstellar probes.
Speaker 1: And as he was talking, mentioning before many of them
Speaker 1: burn up in our atmosphere, but what if they were
Speaker 1: to hover or park outside of our atmosphere to observe us,
Speaker 1: or if there's a mothership. If it comes from a mothership,
Speaker 1: maybe these are artificial probes that are scanning us, gaining
Speaker 1: a sense of our technological status where we're at, and
Speaker 1: then take it from there. So hard to know, but
Speaker 1: I love this stuff, and come on, you gotta like
Speaker 1: it too, or you want to be listening right? You
Speaker 1: love this want We all want contact. We're all tired
Speaker 1: of this kind of secretive UAPs are observing us, they're landing,
Speaker 1: they're making contact, but we're not going to talk about it.
Speaker 1: And you know what, we're not going to admit it either.
Speaker 1: What do they think we are children? This is why
Speaker 1: doctor Avi Lob is just brilliant in this whole presentation,
Speaker 1: because he wants us to know what's going going on.
Speaker 1: And I really appreciate it. Don't you want to know?
Speaker 1: I want to know. Wouldn't it be nice to meet
Speaker 1: and understand that we are part of a collective group
Speaker 1: of planets in our cosmos?
Speaker 2: I would?
Speaker 1: I really would. We have an end of year tour
Speaker 1: coming up. It is our Sacred Temples of Guatemala, and
Speaker 1: I gotta tell you, I am really really excited. I
Speaker 1: mentioned all the time that you can't climb touch or
Speaker 1: interact with pyramids, temples or even in some cases causeways.
Speaker 1: In Mexico, they've just basically shut everything down, and this
Speaker 1: is a huge disappointment because the ancestors that built these
Speaker 1: buildings designed them so that you can that you could
Speaker 1: interact with them. This is a huge problem. Our tour
Speaker 1: in Guatemala is special because we're going to interact with shaman,
Speaker 1: archaeologists and specialists who regularly connect with pyramids, temples, and
Speaker 1: ancient buildings that were designed to emit to loric energy.
Speaker 1: To connect that. We're designed to sit, meditate, heal, and
Speaker 1: we are gonna do that on a regular basis. The
Speaker 1: tour dates are December first of the twelfth. We all
Speaker 1: meet in Guatemala City and then we have twelve days
Speaker 1: of just exquisite experiences and a great time. No drugs allowed,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry. This is all about connecting with the Gaya
Speaker 1: and getting a sense of where we've been and where
Speaker 1: we're going. For more information on this tour, go to
Speaker 1: Earth Ancients dot com forward slash tours and you can
Speaker 1: check it out. And if you have any questions whatsoever,
Speaker 1: send me an email Earth Agents. The number for the
Speaker 1: letter you at gmail dot com. That's Earth Ancients for
Speaker 1: you at gmail dot com. Come out and join us.
Speaker 1: It's going to be We only have a few places left. Okay,
Speaker 1: that's it for this program. I want to thank my
Speaker 1: guest today, doctor Alvi Lowe, coming to us from Harvard,
Speaker 1: and what a great presentation that was. As always, a
Speaker 1: team of Gail tour, Mark Foster and Faisal Pavel. You
Speaker 1: guys rock all right. Take care of me well and
Speaker 1: we'll talk to you next time.