Speaker 1: I've been writing about and investigating UFOs for well over
Speaker 1: twenty years, and most of that time I've been employed
Speaker 1: full time to do that work. I've written dozens of articles,
Speaker 1: I've been on many UFO programs, and I'm often interviewed
Speaker 1: by news outlets. Claims from credible witnesses of incredible things
Speaker 1: have inspired me to keep an open mind to the
Speaker 1: extraordinary possibilities when it comes to the nature of UFOs,
Speaker 1: often referred to as UAP when it comes to the
Speaker 1: scientific investigation. The goal of this podcast is to provide
Speaker 1: critible news and information to ground this cosmic conversation. Welcome
Speaker 1: to Open minds UAP News. Hello, and welcome to Open
Speaker 1: Mind UFO Radio where Open minds UAP Radio. Now. I
Speaker 1: am your host, Alejandro Rojas, and I have with me
Speaker 1: Jason McClellan.
Speaker 2: Hello, Jason, Hey, Alejandro, Good to see you, buddy, Just.
Speaker 1: Like the old days. For those of you who are
Speaker 1: new to the show, like some of the people who've
Speaker 1: joined because of Denn of Geek, Jason and I started
Speaker 1: Open minds UFO News, I think we called it at
Speaker 1: the time in what was it, twenty eleven, probably twenty ten,
Speaker 1: probably twenty ten yeah, yeah, so quite some time ago,
Speaker 1: and then it was the weekly podcast. In fact, some
Speaker 1: of you subscribers, because it's the same podcast feed that
Speaker 1: we use today, you know, probably hurt those shows way
Speaker 1: back in the day. Although things were a lot more
Speaker 1: fun back then.
Speaker 2: UFOs in general were a lot more fun.
Speaker 1: Yes, yeah, back when, you know, there was just when
Speaker 1: they weren't so popular in a mainstream thing. It was
Speaker 1: kind of like, you know, we're flying under the radar.
Speaker 1: We're kind of this niche group where people are just
Speaker 1: exploring and talking and thinking about things and not as
Speaker 1: intense about everything as ar these days.
Speaker 2: And the research community was was a hell of a
Speaker 2: lot of fun. It was very cordial, very everybody was
Speaker 2: excited to chip in and contribute and work together and
Speaker 2: hear different ideas and bounce ideas off of each other,
Speaker 2: not just you know, fish for the answer they wanted
Speaker 2: to hear or you know, push a certain agenda. People
Speaker 2: were very curious about finding the truth and working together
Speaker 2: to get there.
Speaker 1: And you know, you and I and I don't think
Speaker 1: people realize this. For ten years or so or longer,
Speaker 1: we were writing articles every day, like an article every day,
Speaker 1: a news posting news articles, every day. I mean, we
Speaker 1: were following all of this very closely, including the development
Speaker 1: up into you know, the twenty seventeen kind of period, right,
Speaker 1: and you.
Speaker 2: Know that's that's even wild for us to think back
Speaker 2: on and realize even to this day, we're probably a
Speaker 2: couple of the you know, a handful of people whoever
Speaker 2: have been paid full time to research and write about
Speaker 2: UFOs exactly.
Speaker 1: I try to explain that to people and what a
Speaker 1: big gil it is is just because we live and
Speaker 1: breathe it. I mean it's everything. Yeah, paid full time.
Speaker 1: You know how many people can say that. I can't
Speaker 1: think of really practically anybody.
Speaker 2: Else, right, Yeah, our buddy Lee Spiegel was was one
Speaker 2: of the others in that elite group. I guess if
Speaker 2: you want to call el.
Speaker 1: You know, and and this just came to mind, you know,
Speaker 1: on the show, I try to do kind of like
Speaker 1: we did back in the day, you know, fullest growth, disclosure,
Speaker 1: everything's on the table. In fact, I just wrote an
Speaker 1: article that I posted on open Minds today, which is
Speaker 1: only the second article I've done in the last five
Speaker 1: six years on Open Minds, but where I reveal them
Speaker 1: kind of behind the scenes with big a low and movefront.
Speaker 1: But the end of Open Minds. I'm not saying that
Speaker 1: Tom DeLonge had anything to do with the demise of
Speaker 1: Open Minds, but at the end of Open Minds we
Speaker 1: were working very closely, and in fact, you and Marine
Speaker 1: are colleague with open Minds. We're writing for him for
Speaker 1: a short period of time.
Speaker 2: Yeah, absolutely, Yeah, to the end of end of Open Minds. Yeah,
Speaker 2: to to the Stars was just coming on the scene,
Speaker 2: and and we were actually hired by Tom to to
Speaker 2: write for for to the Stars. So yeah, it all
Speaker 2: all kinds of ties ties together.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's so funny how we were just all immersed
Speaker 1: in that. But the reason that I bring that up
Speaker 1: also is because you know, since then, you've been doing,
Speaker 1: from what I understand, a lot of uh PR type
Speaker 1: of or more communications and online kind of social media stuff.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Absolutely so, I've I've uh yeah, haven't haven't ever
Speaker 2: been able to step away from the UFO field. I've
Speaker 2: definitely been very active in UFOs and I still follow
Speaker 2: it every day and I always have. UFOs is one
Speaker 2: of those things that I don't want to say, it's
Speaker 2: like a like an infection, but you can't get rid
Speaker 2: of it, you know. No matter how how bad you
Speaker 2: want to get out of UFOs, sometimes you just can't.
Speaker 2: And you know, we've invested so much time in this
Speaker 2: topic and we love it, we really do. And I
Speaker 2: think you and I care about genuine research and actively
Speaker 2: looking for answers to this incredibly exciting mystery. So that's
Speaker 2: what keeps pulling me in. And you know, I have
Speaker 2: done in my professional career lots of communications and marketing
Speaker 2: roles for both the public and private sector. I'm currently
Speaker 2: with NASA, but you know, I've done a lot of
Speaker 2: these roles, but I have maintained my active following of
Speaker 2: UFO news. I've done a podcast. I put that on
Speaker 2: hiatus right now just because I don't have time with
Speaker 2: all my NASA duties. But you know something I do
Speaker 2: keep up is a weekly UFO newsletter, because again we're
Speaker 2: news geeks, and I love to follow it and you know,
Speaker 2: let people know because we hear that tired refrain that, oh,
Speaker 2: the mainstream media doesn't report UFOs. That's not true, and
Speaker 2: that's never been true. They've always mainstream media outlets around
Speaker 2: the world report on UFOs every single day. So I
Speaker 2: like to highlight that. And so that's what I do
Speaker 2: with my weekly UFO newsletter totally.
Speaker 1: And we'll get into some of the news from the
Speaker 1: last week that mainstream news has been covering really soon here.
Speaker 1: But one of the reasons I wanted to go over
Speaker 1: all of this and cover this, and why I'm so
Speaker 1: excited to be talking to you, let alone that we
Speaker 1: had so much fun doing this in the past, is
Speaker 1: that you know, at the time that we started doing
Speaker 1: Open Minds and it was kind of you know, Antonio
Speaker 1: Juneez was writing with us, and we all felt like
Speaker 1: we had to cover this in a legit news skeptical
Speaker 1: kind of perspective, just putting the facts out there, not
Speaker 1: making assumptions what I think is the right way to
Speaker 1: do it, and that wasn't being done before. And I
Speaker 1: think that once we stop doing it, besides some of
Speaker 1: the mainstream press that has picked it up here and there,
Speaker 1: that's not being done anymore.
Speaker 2: I agree with you one hundred percent. And you know,
Speaker 2: we can talk about this more later, and I know
Speaker 2: you and I have talked about it before, But I
Speaker 2: think there's a lot of indoctrination that happens when you
Speaker 2: get into the UFO topic and you start researching, reading
Speaker 2: the literature, hearing what some of the leading voices have
Speaker 2: to say. And one of the things that gets pushed
Speaker 2: very early on in your UFO research is that skeptic
Speaker 2: or skepticism is a bad word. And to your point,
Speaker 2: I don't think you can responsibly cover the UFO topic
Speaker 2: or communicate about the UFO topic if you don't do
Speaker 2: it with responsible skepticism that is required. That's what makes
Speaker 2: it journalistic, that's what makes it unbiased. That's what is
Speaker 2: required for a genuine pursuit of truth wherever that leads.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I'm smiling because I'm really excited to get
Speaker 1: into the news because we're gonna rip some people apart,
Speaker 1: i know, for for not adhering to this, but also
Speaker 1: you know, not just for the case sake of you know,
Speaker 1: wooing what they're doing, but to also demonstrate the problems
Speaker 1: when you don't do it correctly. And so we'll get
Speaker 1: into that. I'm really excited to get into the news here.
Speaker 1: So let's start taking a look. And just so people know,
Speaker 1: Jason doesn't know what I'm about to get into.
Speaker 2: So no, this is this is fun. This is like
Speaker 2: a news roulette, exactly cool, like Vamp music.
Speaker 1: All right here we go. Let's begin with the National Archives.
Speaker 1: So this was kind of cool. About a week ago
Speaker 1: last Thursday, the National Archives put out this press release
Speaker 1: and it made a bunch of news that they had
Speaker 1: to put a bunch of new stuff in the archives
Speaker 1: guarding UAP or UFOs, and I guess I'll just continue
Speaker 1: to use both terms. What term do you mostly use
Speaker 1: these days?
Speaker 2: I am tam UFO all the way.
Speaker 1: Oh you are cool, okay, so we can stick to
Speaker 1: that mostly. I go back and forth depending on the topic.
Speaker 1: But sure, U I p r UFOs, so you know,
Speaker 1: deal with it, deal with it, National Archives. But as
Speaker 1: far as I know, there's nothing new in these most
Speaker 1: of the all of these files were essentially released prior,
Speaker 1: but just here and there, and now at least they're
Speaker 1: all in one place, which is nice. Do you have
Speaker 1: any more information than that?
Speaker 2: No, that's my understanding as well. And you know, we
Speaker 2: see this a lot, you know, when different groups have
Speaker 2: decided to release UFO records or files. There are things
Speaker 2: that have been in the public before, but it's more
Speaker 2: of a reorganization effort or just a kind of a
Speaker 2: moving into different different folder sort of scenarios and that's
Speaker 2: what we have. You know, this was congressionally mandated, so
Speaker 2: a lot of these files that have been out before
Speaker 2: are being moved to a central location. And hey, that's
Speaker 2: always a good.
Speaker 1: Thing, right And one of the some of the pictures,
Speaker 1: like a lot of articles are using this picture here
Speaker 1: or similar ones. They were from a guy named Paul Villa.
Speaker 1: And actually this article is from twenty sixteen and I
Speaker 1: posted it because I thought it was a really good
Speaker 1: article in the Daily Express. I think it was the
Speaker 1: best one that goes over the history of these pictures
Speaker 1: but also demonstrating that there was research done and they
Speaker 1: were proven to be hoaxes. So a lot of people,
Speaker 1: of course, were getting excited by these incredible pictures that
Speaker 1: were in these articles when I posted this, as you know, unfortunately,
Speaker 1: a lot of people didn't read the headline, so they
Speaker 1: were debating, oh, those are hoaxes. I know they are
Speaker 1: what the article says, that's what they're adise. So it's
Speaker 1: a great article on that. But it's funny how that happens.
Speaker 2: Yeah, people have short attention spans and people don't like
Speaker 2: to read more than they have to. So that's always
Speaker 2: been the case. I mean, it's certainly gotten much worse
Speaker 2: than when you and I were doing this it Open Minds,
Speaker 2: we ran into that a lot. But yeah, people don't
Speaker 2: read beyond the headline.
Speaker 1: I actually have something exciting to announce, and this picture
Speaker 1: reminds me of that, which is you wrote what I
Speaker 1: think these pictures really remind me of the Billy Meyer picture. Sure,
Speaker 1: and I think that you've written one of the best,
Speaker 1: most well researched and unbiased, kind of comprehensive articles on
Speaker 1: the Billy Meyer photos that is in the magazine. And
Speaker 1: I recently found all the magazine files and sent those
Speaker 1: to you and Marine. I've kind of felt like, hey,
Speaker 1: that'd be great that if we had all the PDFs
Speaker 1: to all of the Open Minds magazines, and I've decided
Speaker 1: to post those, so we'll post all of those and
Speaker 1: then coming week in honor of you coming back to
Speaker 1: the show this way.
Speaker 2: Well that's exciting. Yeah, there are some fantastic content in
Speaker 2: those magazines.
Speaker 1: Mm hmm. But that was a great article. I think
Speaker 1: you did a really good job, really and what was
Speaker 1: fun and maybe we could touch on this just a second, Titi,
Speaker 1: since we're talking about it, is you know, we would
Speaker 1: always try to write, you know, unbiased articles to put
Speaker 1: out there, you know, all of the information on both
Speaker 1: sides of the debate. But it's really funny because that
Speaker 1: article had the same effect some of the you know,
Speaker 1: other articles we wrote where you just get heat from
Speaker 1: both sides because one side is saying, oh, you're saying
Speaker 1: they're real, and the other side is saying, oh, you're not.
Speaker 1: You're you're debunking them. When really it's kind of good
Speaker 1: because that means you have a balanced article, but it's
Speaker 1: also kind of a bummer because you're just getting crap
Speaker 1: from both sides.
Speaker 2: Yes, yes, that comes with journalism. I mean that's to
Speaker 2: be expected. But also, Alejandro, that's UFOs And yeah, sure,
Speaker 2: I mean UFOs can be fun and sexy, but UFOs
Speaker 2: are really hard. They are people want simple answers. UFOs
Speaker 2: don't have simple answers many times, and yeah, I mean
Speaker 2: that needs to be emphasized. UFOs are hard.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you're exactly correct, And you know you're working with
Speaker 1: NASA the last show. You know, NASA was kind of
Speaker 1: the hero of my little talk that I did because
Speaker 1: I think NASA's analysis on UAP was very good and
Speaker 1: I agree with their findings and their suggestions. They were
Speaker 1: very wise and on point, and that's what makes it.
Speaker 1: And really it's that difficulty and the heat they got
Speaker 1: for just getting involved with the topic that scientists are
Speaker 1: been really turned off, including NASA. Why do they want
Speaker 1: to stick their nake out and get beaten up?
Speaker 2: Right? Because you can't win. That's the thing. I mean,
Speaker 2: you know, love him or hate m Sean Kirkpatrick. You know,
Speaker 2: certainly it was very visible with a lot of this,
Speaker 2: But it doesn't really matter who you are, how much
Speaker 2: you're willing to stick your neck out, or the level
Speaker 2: of involvement you want to have with this and the
Speaker 2: the level or quality of contribution you can make. It
Speaker 2: doesn't matter because you're going to never hear the end
Speaker 2: of it from the UFO crowd, from the scientific crowd.
Speaker 2: You just you can't please everybody. You're not going to
Speaker 2: and again that contributes to what makes UFO so hard.
Speaker 2: That's why so many people flee this field. And you
Speaker 2: can't keep good researchers continuing this work because it's a
Speaker 2: thankless work. And again, you can't make everybody happy, and
Speaker 2: that shouldn't be the focus of UFO research. You're not
Speaker 2: trying to please somebody. You're trying to find the truth,
Speaker 2: and no matter you know what side you come out on,
Speaker 2: you're gonna piss somebody off.
Speaker 1: Another organization that I really love, uh and I'm really
Speaker 1: proud of because they stick to their guns and to
Speaker 1: your point, they stick to the facts regardless of how
Speaker 1: the public is going to take them has been PBS,
Speaker 1: and of course I got to be part of the
Speaker 1: PBS Nova Special, but they relaxed. Oh okay, an article
Speaker 1: just recently, and I know for a fact that that
Speaker 1: Nova special, because it was science specific, got a lot
Speaker 1: of heat because producers had called me and said, you know,
Speaker 1: is this normal? People are so upset. I'm like that, Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: it is normal. But I'm really proud of them because
Speaker 1: they're brave enough to still back it up and release
Speaker 1: this big video which talks about how they debunked videos
Speaker 1: and talks about some of those Navy videos that have
Speaker 1: been debunked. It's a really good video. I recommend people watch.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's cool. I love I love seeing this. I
Speaker 2: love when mainstream outlets go out on the limb and
Speaker 2: it's sad that it should be or that it is
Speaker 2: a limb, but it is because of how awful people are,
Speaker 2: and you know, but I do appreciate this. More of
Speaker 2: this needs to happen. And again coming back to the
Speaker 2: word debunk, I know it sounds terrible, and don't get
Speaker 2: the wrong impression. Alejandro and I are not anti ufo.
Speaker 2: We are very very much pro UFO in the sense
Speaker 2: that we both believe that UFOs exist. I've seen countless
Speaker 2: UFOs myself that I haven't been able to explain. So
Speaker 2: we're not pooh pooing UFOs here. What we are poo pooing.
Speaker 2: I think a lot is how a lot of UFO
Speaker 2: research is done. It's incredibly flawed. A lot of the
Speaker 2: suppositions and a lot of the talking points that people
Speaker 2: rely on are incredibly flawed because humans are incredibly flawed.
Speaker 2: So I think things like this need to be constantly
Speaker 2: put into or in front of people, because there's a
Speaker 2: lot of education that needs to happen when it comes
Speaker 2: to UFOs, because again, most UFOs are mundane objects. They're
Speaker 2: gonna be something that is just outside of somebody's experience
Speaker 2: and you know, is later identified. That is almost all
Speaker 2: of UFOs. That's not saying that there aren't potentially extraterrestrial
Speaker 2: UFOs or something that you know that's it's exotic or
Speaker 2: should be looked at, because that is certainly the case.
Speaker 2: Those things are there, but most are mundane objects. So
Speaker 2: we can't just brush that fact aside and pretend that
Speaker 2: doesn't exist and hype up every single possible UFO is
Speaker 2: something anomalous because that just muddies the water and we
Speaker 2: don't get anywhere.
Speaker 1: Mm hm, great points, and you know this is where
Speaker 1: that gets fun. So it's great to debunk. It's great
Speaker 1: to analyze most of what UFO research is exactly, and
Speaker 1: that's what that's most of what science is. You debunk
Speaker 1: your own work. And I really respect the stance of
Speaker 1: the Scientific Coalition for UAP Studies on a case of
Speaker 1: theirs that Arrow debunk. So the Aguadilla video Aguada, Puerto Rico,
Speaker 1: I guess I don't have a picture of it here,
Speaker 1: but it was you might have seen the video. They
Speaker 1: did cover it in the PBS special. What was interesting
Speaker 1: is in the PBS special Sean Kirkpatrick said he thought
Speaker 1: it was birds, but just prior to that airing of
Speaker 1: that show, Arrow had released their analysis and they said
Speaker 1: it was balloons. My argument is it can't be both,
Speaker 1: and if you look at the video, it doesn't really
Speaker 1: look like either. And so the SEU, who's the group
Speaker 1: who did kind of the original analysis of that video,
Speaker 1: they came out with a response just a couple of
Speaker 1: days ago, just yesterday, where they said, great, thank you
Speaker 1: for looking at it, but we have some questions. You
Speaker 1: said you saw this, and you said you used this
Speaker 1: data point or that data point, but you're not showing
Speaker 1: your work. You're not saying how you came to those
Speaker 1: conclusions in your paper. Could you please do that so
Speaker 1: we can look at this further because they have some
Speaker 1: good points. I mean, if they're saying, like they say,
Speaker 1: you know, it clearly moved behind a an electrical tower
Speaker 1: and so it had to be close to the ground. Well,
Speaker 1: if that's true, then we can figure out distance. And
Speaker 1: if there's distance and it's moving, maybe that doesn't fit
Speaker 1: your theory. So yeah, this is the way it's done.
Speaker 1: It's a back and forth process where all parties work together.
Speaker 2: Yeah. I love that science science.
Speaker 1: So I just wanted to announce that that, you know,
Speaker 1: SEUs asked that question. This is a way that it's done.
Speaker 1: Great job with them. But next, so this is some
Speaker 1: interesting news coming from Canada. And it's funny because all
Speaker 1: this news gets lost in all the craziness. I told
Speaker 1: my listeners, I'm I'm not going to be covering a
Speaker 1: lot of the hearsay and the tabloid stories, even though
Speaker 1: there's a big hearsay tabloid story we'll be getting into.
Speaker 1: But it's such big news that I think we've got
Speaker 1: a touch on it. So and we'll probably more than
Speaker 1: touch on it, but I think, you know, for both
Speaker 1: of us, there'll be a lot of examples on how
Speaker 1: it's not should not be done. But one of the
Speaker 1: big pieces of news is Canada. So Canada was inspired
Speaker 1: by the US government looking into UFOs. So they have
Speaker 1: created this project called the Sky Canada Project where they're
Speaker 1: reviewing their own records. They say, you know, we're getting
Speaker 1: five hundred to one thousand UFO siding reports, and they
Speaker 1: just announced that they will have that report ready in July.
Speaker 1: And you know, here's one of their statements where it's
Speaker 1: not meant to prove or deny the existence of extraterrestrial
Speaker 1: life for extraterrestrial visitors, just much like the United States reports.
Speaker 1: Even though they led with you know, we don't have
Speaker 1: enough data to prove either way. I'm sure that's what
Speaker 1: the Canadians are saying, because we don't, but at least
Speaker 1: it'll give more insight and give us a better idea
Speaker 1: of what data they have collected.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you know, this is a good reminder to people
Speaker 2: that UFOs aren't just limited to the United States. Countries
Speaker 2: all around the world having do investigate UFOs. Governments we're
Speaker 2: talking and having do release official government files on UFOs,
Speaker 2: and Canada's got a wealth of UFO information and you know,
Speaker 2: they've released reports before, so it's great to see this
Speaker 2: one coming out as well.
Speaker 1: You know, And I do want to take a second
Speaker 1: to kind of bash on the media a little bit
Speaker 1: in that this whole idea of why are UFOs only
Speaker 1: seen in America, it's really frustrating because you see some
Speaker 1: of the larger outlets saying that, whereas UFO researchers aren't
Speaker 1: saying that. Nobody's saying that, you're just pulling the US
Speaker 1: out in nowhere. What are your thoughts on why they
Speaker 1: say that and what's going on?
Speaker 2: I mean, yeah, that that's always been a bizarre assumption
Speaker 2: to me, A very you know, American centric thought were
Speaker 2: for people here in our home country, and I don't know,
Speaker 2: maybe other other countries have similar thoughts. You know, you
Speaker 2: think that you know, your your viewpoint is kind of
Speaker 2: the center of your reality, and you know things go
Speaker 2: from there. But I will say I have to fault
Speaker 2: a little some of the the you know, leading talking
Speaker 2: heads on this subject in the media, because even people
Speaker 2: like louel A Zondo, you know, in many, many interviews
Speaker 2: and talking points, kind of insinuated that, oh, we just
Speaker 2: realized that this isn't just a UF or a US phenomenon,
Speaker 2: and we're we're now just starting to talk to other
Speaker 2: countries about this serious issue, you know, making it seem
Speaker 2: like they're just bridging the gap. They're just starting these conversations.
Speaker 2: We're starting to realize that, oh, this is more than
Speaker 2: just a US issue, you know, when that is not
Speaker 2: the case, and that has never been the.
Speaker 1: Case, right. I mean, we've been covering throughout Open Minds.
Speaker 1: You can find articles, especially with the French, covering it
Speaker 1: with a lot of stories on Chili. In fact, Leslie
Speaker 1: Kane WoT that original New York Times story in twenty seventeen,
Speaker 1: has been covering a lot of the chilly news. I
Speaker 1: do a whole art. I do a lecture on it.
Speaker 1: But of course Antonio June has had worked with a
Speaker 1: lot of South American countries at or had official groups.
Speaker 1: So yeah, like you said, it's never been purely American.
Speaker 2: And here's the thing too, It also there's a learning
Speaker 2: curve you go through when you dive into the topic
Speaker 2: of UFOs. Right, if this isn't something you've actively been researching,
Speaker 2: it's not something you're familiar with, it's not something you've
Speaker 2: spent years of your life doing. When you get into
Speaker 2: the topic, all of this is new and you start
Speaker 2: discovering every little aspect of UFOs as something new. So
Speaker 2: if you're a young journalist or a young hobbyist getting
Speaker 2: into this, and you've got a blog or some social
Speaker 2: media presence and you all of a sudden discover there
Speaker 2: was something called the Cometa Report or you know some
Speaker 2: of these other things, you're all, wow, the US isn't
Speaker 2: the only place that has UFOs. It's all new, and
Speaker 2: you report it out is new and it's like this
Speaker 2: big discovery when that's been the case all along. So right,
Speaker 2: it happens a lot with this topic. And again with
Speaker 2: any topic, you're not going to instantly know everything about UFOs,
Speaker 2: and I think that spawns a lot of, you know,
Speaker 2: the the UFO conspiracies that come out because people discover
Speaker 2: things they're not familiar with. It's outside their life experience,
Speaker 2: and therefore it's new, it's secret, it must be a
Speaker 2: cover up, and it kind of takes on a life
Speaker 2: of its own from.
Speaker 1: There, right, And you mentioned the COMTA Report for anybody
Speaker 1: who doesn't know. That was a report written by some
Speaker 1: French engineers and very credible people, former government people, where
Speaker 1: they felt that there was something definitely going on with
Speaker 1: UAP And this is interesting. I just wanted to pull
Speaker 1: this up. But this is what we've got with Enigma
Speaker 1: so far. So when we started the app, what late
Speaker 1: twenty thirteen, we've already got like sixteen hundred and seventy
Speaker 1: sidings so far in Canada and then out of historical
Speaker 1: reports from other databases over nearly fifteen thousand. So yeah,
Speaker 1: a lot of sightings in Canada. And actually, if I
Speaker 1: back up, you can see the UK with thirteen thousand,
Speaker 1: Australia five thousand, So yeah, there's you know, sightings all
Speaker 1: around the world, all right, So getting into some of
Speaker 1: the whistleblowers and hearsay type of stuff. This is kind
Speaker 1: of wild. So there was supposed to be a skiff
Speaker 1: meeting with Loua Alzando, who you mentioned that in intelligence
Speaker 1: guy who kind of broke all this out, and David Grush,
Speaker 1: who spoke in a congressional hearing claiming stuff about aliens
Speaker 1: and all of this stuff. But David Grush keeps shirking
Speaker 1: media and attention despite his claims in what he's uh
Speaker 1: and saying that he's going to participate in these things.
Speaker 1: So there was supposed to be this skiff meeting. They
Speaker 1: had to cancel, and Representative Luna, who's kind of the
Speaker 1: head of this, said Grush couldn't make it. Luel Lozando
Speaker 1: said there was some kind of budgetary issues, But I
Speaker 1: just you know, I'd love to hear your perspective. I
Speaker 1: don't buy that Grush couldn't afford an airplane ticket. What's
Speaker 1: really weird about this also is he's supposed to be
Speaker 1: a staffer on this committee now and he can't make
Speaker 1: it to one of his own committee's meeting that is
Speaker 1: centered around him and his claims.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the red flags keep piling up. I mean, we
Speaker 2: can go down that rabbit hole. But you know, I
Speaker 2: have not not shied away from my personal feelings about
Speaker 2: David Grush and his lack of credibility or ability or
Speaker 2: willingness is to substantiate his claims. It's happy, happy to
Speaker 2: make claims all day long, but when given the opportunities
Speaker 2: to substantiate these claims, there's always an excuse why that
Speaker 2: can't happen exactly. So the more this happens, the worse
Speaker 2: it looks.
Speaker 1: Exactly, And you brought up the right word, credibility. It
Speaker 1: would be one thing if this was the first time,
Speaker 1: maybe he got sick or something. But it's not. And
Speaker 1: John Greenwald has been on X making a big point
Speaker 1: of that, because these are really good points. He points
Speaker 1: out in October twenty three that Grush was supposed to
Speaker 1: meet with Senator Jillibrien in a skiff, and then he
Speaker 1: said he would not or could not purchase a plane
Speaker 1: ticket to fly to Washington, DC. If I had money
Speaker 1: at the time, not this moment, but maybe a few
Speaker 1: weeks ago, a couple months ago, I would have been
Speaker 1: willing to have some spare money to pay for that ticket.
Speaker 1: But I think that our listeners, even our skeptical listeners
Speaker 1: would pay money to help him get there. Let alone,
Speaker 1: people are bringing up these disclosure nonprofits that are collecting money.
Speaker 1: They can't buy him a plane ticket. Yeah, what so
Speaker 1: there's that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, it doesn't make any sense. And you know
Speaker 2: also also with Arrow, he was supposed to meet with
Speaker 2: Arrow and he left them high and dry, exactly another
Speaker 2: way build on that meeting. So he's got a history
Speaker 2: of this and it's just it's piling up and you know,
Speaker 2: becoming becoming you know, kind of known that this is
Speaker 2: this is how he operates. It's not a good look, right.
Speaker 1: So yep, And you just mentioned the Arrow meeting, which
Speaker 1: John Greenwald brought up and just has some records here
Speaker 1: because we like to provide receipts, actual evidence for the
Speaker 1: stuff that we're alleging or talking about. And then further,
Speaker 1: I just for me, this was also a big hit
Speaker 1: on his credibility when he said in front of Congress
Speaker 1: that Arrow had never reached out to him, when there
Speaker 1: were a lot of records that show they did reach
Speaker 1: out to him, and he had excuse after excuse not
Speaker 1: to meet with them. It's just really wild and it
Speaker 1: kind of harkens back to the whole point of what
Speaker 1: frustrates me with a lot of the coverage and a
Speaker 1: lot of the community is like this assumption that he
Speaker 1: is credible or what he's saying is accurate, when we
Speaker 1: don't have any reason, there's no any like you said,
Speaker 1: things be piling up to undermine his credibility. Really, as
Speaker 1: someone who's writing about this, we should have a concern
Speaker 1: and be skeptical, and and those concerns are piling up.
Speaker 1: And just one more thing, I think what has happened
Speaker 1: and from the media people and very credible people I've
Speaker 1: talked to, and we've seen some very high profile people
Speaker 1: kind of talk about this and that they were really
Speaker 1: excited with the Alexander revelations and then Grush came out
Speaker 1: and they were really excited and one hundred percent on board,
Speaker 1: but when nothing came of that, they all were extremely disappointed.
Speaker 1: They felt duped, They expressed their concern and then left
Speaker 1: UAP and talking about UAP.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and look, this isn't new. This happens all the
Speaker 2: time in this field and it always needs repeating. But
Speaker 2: UFO history is cyclical. Things that have happened in the
Speaker 2: past with UFOs will certainly happen again. And we've seen
Speaker 2: it time and time again, where seemingly credible, important sounding
Speaker 2: people make incredible claims and people blindly believe it absolutely
Speaker 2: one hundred percent, simply because this is an important sounding
Speaker 2: person or they've got an impressive title. And you know,
Speaker 2: we saw that with Paul Hellier and other you know,
Speaker 2: government officials, where they blindly take on faith. And I
Speaker 2: would put Harry Reid in this category two. You know,
Speaker 2: they blindly take on faith what somebody tells them because
Speaker 2: they know that person and they trust that person. That's
Speaker 2: wonderful and that works well for you, but that does
Speaker 2: nothing for proof. And humans are humans. Again. I come
Speaker 2: back to this point a lot, but humans are pretty awful.
Speaker 2: But even if we try to be nice to humans,
Speaker 2: humans are incredibly fallible. And it doesn't matter who you are,
Speaker 2: what your title is, or your your important sounding position,
Speaker 2: you can still be taken in by things that you
Speaker 2: misunderstand or misinterpret. And most of what we're hearing these
Speaker 2: days that people get excited and hyped up about with
Speaker 2: UFOs and possible you know, government ties and proof of
Speaker 2: a government cover up, it's still based on people seeing
Speaker 2: things that they're piecing together and reading between the lines
Speaker 2: and making huge assumptions and then you know, making a
Speaker 2: big deal about and everybody's eating it up because again,
Speaker 2: the source comes from an important sounding person or government
Speaker 2: official with an important sounding title that means nothing. It
Speaker 2: really means nothing.
Speaker 1: It doesn't. And you know, you and I have a
Speaker 1: little more experience because we covered a lot of these
Speaker 1: people who we come forward and then turn out to
Speaker 1: be BS. You mentioned you had people like.
Speaker 2: This in our office almost every day. Yeah, crils and
Speaker 2: generals and you know, high ranking government officials in our
Speaker 2: office telling us the most incredible things.
Speaker 1: And at first you're like wow, and then after a
Speaker 1: while just absolutely the same. BS. You're just rolling your eyes, like,
Speaker 1: oh no, this guy's phone. For BS two, you mentioned
Speaker 1: Paul Hellier, you know, former Defense Minister for Canada, which
Speaker 1: is very similar to Tim Galladat, you know, an admiral
Speaker 1: with the Navy, both of them saying when we were
Speaker 1: working in our official capacities, we never ran across anything
Speaker 1: that was UFO's. But now that we're looking at this stuff,
Speaker 1: we find it very credible. They have nothing to say.
Speaker 1: They're just a bunch of fan boy What they say.
Speaker 2: In a sight to just like timber Chut and others,
Speaker 2: they point to the literature, right right, they point to
Speaker 2: the literature. Read the UFO books and you'll see that
Speaker 2: this aligns with all of the stuff you read in
Speaker 2: UFO books. That's your proof, folks, that's your proof.
Speaker 1: It's funny because I used to make fun of Steve Bassett,
Speaker 1: who's you know, now working with the Hollywood Disclosure Project
Speaker 1: or something like that, and he's been the guy to
Speaker 1: always say, oh, disclosures around the corner every year. But
Speaker 1: when you'd ask him, where's your evidence, to just go
Speaker 1: to the Internet. And that's what these guys are doing.
Speaker 1: And it's really frustrating because it's like, we don't want
Speaker 1: to and it's I feel really irresponsible of all of
Speaker 1: these guys in official capacities because they're using their weight
Speaker 1: and their credibility to bring credibility to things that they
Speaker 1: don't know are real, that are hearsay. And what's frustrating
Speaker 1: is you and I can say this because we don't
Speaker 1: even do this. When we write about these things. We say,
Speaker 1: here's what we know, here's the information out there. I
Speaker 1: don't know if it's real or not, even if we
Speaker 1: feel it's real and we're like all excited. You know,
Speaker 1: we're being honest and responsible by saying, here's the facts,
Speaker 1: here's the situation. We've got to wait and see.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and that's the only way you can play it, really,
Speaker 2: because it's totally irresponsible. That's a great word. It is
Speaker 2: irresponsible and knowing this is a delicate topic, it really is.
Speaker 2: People are hungry for answers. They are. That's why religion
Speaker 2: is popular. People people gravitate to where they can get answers.
Speaker 2: Religion provides that for people, and UFOs goes down the
Speaker 2: religion line. Because people hungry, desperate for those answers find
Speaker 2: plenty of people within the UFO community very happy to
Speaker 2: give those answers. Right, and this field is filled with
Speaker 2: no shortage of shady people who are happy to provide
Speaker 2: those answers because it gives them a following, because it
Speaker 2: provides them an income, and you know, they apparently have
Speaker 2: no moral qualms about that. It's horribly irresponsible and people
Speaker 2: are are We've seen this from the inside. It is
Speaker 2: really heartbreaking seeing how desperate people are for these answers
Speaker 2: about UFOs. They spend all of their money money they
Speaker 2: don't have, you know, paying people to give them answers.
Speaker 2: And you know, we've seen so many shady people just
Speaker 2: and these shady people giving these answers are laughing at
Speaker 2: these people behind their backs. You know, we've heard them
Speaker 2: behind stages just making fun of the audience that paid
Speaker 2: to see them, that you know, pay for their livelihoods.
Speaker 2: It's just it's heartbreaking, it's disgusting. And you know, again,
Speaker 2: that's why I think, especially with a topic like UFOs,
Speaker 2: where you know you have people desperate for answers, just
Speaker 2: hanging waiting for anybody to give them those answers, it
Speaker 2: puts more of an onus on us to be that
Speaker 2: extra extra especially responsible, careful with this information and not
Speaker 2: claiming that we have answers. We can provide the information
Speaker 2: and that's that's all we can do. I mean, pretending
Speaker 2: that we know we can give people definitive answers is
Speaker 2: grossly irresponsible and disgusting.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I want to take a minute to actually call
Speaker 1: someone out. And there's only one name I can think of,
Speaker 1: and you know that where we've talked about before because
Speaker 1: we were really close with this individual and it was
Speaker 1: kind of funny and I would say, uh, I have
Speaker 1: some a little bit of affection for this person, you know,
Speaker 1: and it's a showman. It's him Mussan. You know, we
Speaker 1: helped videotape and stream a conference of his. Every time
Speaker 1: he would come to town, we would hang out with him.
Speaker 1: Our boss had open Minds, bought one of his squirrel
Speaker 1: monkeys that you know, was a fake alien. He's still
Speaker 1: doing that. It's so funny.
Speaker 2: Brought heimd to my wedding. So yeah, your boss brought
Speaker 2: May Moves on to your web and Danny she had
Speaker 2: He just like randomly showed up with them at my wedding.
Speaker 1: That's right, Yeah, him Mussan and Danny sheehan, Oh my
Speaker 1: gosh at your wedding, uninvited, just showing.
Speaker 2: Up right, but stealing my booze.
Speaker 1: And Hi. May is one of those people who would
Speaker 1: laugh behind the scenes. It would kind of be grudgingly
Speaker 1: because it was his staff who would laugh and and
Speaker 1: be like, you know, making fun of people and stuff,
Speaker 1: and and you could tell normally Himay's joke around and
Speaker 1: he's trying to be play it straight in front of us.
Speaker 1: But he was one of those guys that just he
Speaker 1: And it's so funny because I found myself on Telemundo.
Speaker 1: You know, they asked me about Himan so Hai May
Speaker 1: of course took U opportunity and had this back and
Speaker 1: forth videos. Even though I didn't talk to him. They
Speaker 1: just took my interview and he disputed what I had
Speaker 1: to say. But he has been doing this forever, and
Speaker 1: he just doesn't care about the truth. We know for
Speaker 1: a fact there were a lot of times where he
Speaker 1: knew the truth, but depending on the audience, he would
Speaker 1: give different versions of what's going on.
Speaker 2: And this is a good example of how things in
Speaker 2: the UFO topic and the UFO field are cyclical, right,
Speaker 2: because it's the unfortunate. One of the unfortunate things about
Speaker 2: this field is that it doesn't matter how bad you're shamed.
Speaker 2: Just wait a little while and then you can do
Speaker 2: the same things over and over again, you know, right,
Speaker 2: if you're publicly exposed for pushing fake aliens, just wait
Speaker 2: a couple of years and then come out with more
Speaker 2: alien bodies, do the same thing all over again.
Speaker 1: Mm hmm. And I've got to say, moving on to
Speaker 1: our next story, because I wanted to bring out Heimi
Speaker 1: because he's a perfect example of that. But the thing
Speaker 1: is with him, I guess to wrap this up is
Speaker 1: that he sees himself as a showman, entertaining people and
Speaker 1: kind of like this a huge.
Speaker 2: Celebrity and I want to I want to back up
Speaker 2: and let people know that and I have I have,
Speaker 2: you know, no ill will against Hima. Jim is a sweetheart.
Speaker 2: He's always been wonderful to me. He was he was
Speaker 2: a friend, you know, so, but getting to spend time
Speaker 2: with him in Mexico City, that really lets you know
Speaker 2: how revered he is in Mexico City and what a
Speaker 2: major celebrity he is. I mean, I was in the
Speaker 2: car going down the street and people would come up
Speaker 2: and pound on the windows because they could see he
Speaker 2: was in the car and they would want his autograph, right,
Speaker 2: they would see him going down the street, and that's
Speaker 2: the kind of draw he has. You'd go to a restaurant,
Speaker 2: everybody would swarm him at the restaurant and want his autograph.
Speaker 2: I mean, fills auditoriums in Mexico City when he does
Speaker 2: presentations there. He is a massive celebrity.
Speaker 1: Right right. Yeah, So it's this this showman aspect of it,
Speaker 1: and I think even it's almost like WWF where some
Speaker 1: of the audience even appreciate that about him, and for them,
Speaker 1: it's a game. It's not like ups where we're researching.
Speaker 1: I'm looking for the truth. And you know, even when
Speaker 1: I've said stuff against him where I'm like I doubt
Speaker 1: this or I don't believe this, or even told the truth,
Speaker 1: like he knows this is wrong, but he's saying it anyway.
Speaker 1: He doesn't care. He'll still be like, can I interview
Speaker 1: you and let's debate, And you know he doesn't mind that.
Speaker 1: It's all part of the show.
Speaker 2: There are lots of showmen in this field.
Speaker 1: Unfortunately, well you know another showman, and I will come
Speaker 1: out and say, I believe he is a showman. It
Speaker 1: is Jeremy Corbell. Because there have been and we'll go
Speaker 1: over this because this is the next story. There have
Speaker 1: been several times where I've brought to him the fact
Speaker 1: regarding something he has covered, or he's called me and said,
Speaker 1: you know, I need information on this, what's the deal
Speaker 1: And I'm like, well, you know this is bs, here's
Speaker 1: the truth, and he's like eh, and he just covers
Speaker 1: it anyway. So he's done, just like I made the
Speaker 1: same thing where he covers stuff regardless of whether it's true.
Speaker 1: Or not. He just said, and we'll show examples of that.
Speaker 1: But I could go through those just real quick. Like
Speaker 1: Richard Doty, who's a liar. He wanted to bring him
Speaker 1: to the Area fifty one festival where he asked me
Speaker 1: to speak. I told him, well, then I'm not going
Speaker 1: to go to speak there, and so he got upset.
Speaker 1: But he's like, fine, Doty doesn't even show up, Dody,
Speaker 1: you know, but neither did anybody else to see this show,
Speaker 1: so it was no big deal. But that was one
Speaker 1: of them. There's this other guy, the Nano man he
Speaker 1: was covering that stole the story of this psychic alien
Speaker 1: experience that he had from this person that he went
Speaker 1: and read search that Nancy Talbot was researching in Denmark.
Speaker 1: And I told, you know, and there's plenty of evidence
Speaker 1: of this, because Nancy had been writing about this guy
Speaker 1: and this guy went out there and then totally stole
Speaker 1: a story. He didn't care. He still pushed this guy.
Speaker 1: And then the guy that we called mister Nanotubes, the
Speaker 1: guy who was examining the alleged you know, alien material
Speaker 1: and some material that our boss had had him examined.
Speaker 1: And we called him Nanoman because every mister nanotubes, because
Speaker 1: everything examined was alien nanotubes wasn't. But Jeremy again, he
Speaker 1: includes him in his documentary and everything, despite all of
Speaker 1: this that I gave him. So it's kind of frustrating.
Speaker 1: Now I don't believe that of George Knapp. I think
Speaker 1: his heart's in the right place. But still always hard.
Speaker 2: It's always hard to tell with people because again we're
Speaker 2: all different, but people get very emotionally involved with this
Speaker 2: topic too, and as we see with a lot of
Speaker 2: the whistleblowers who come out, you know, it's hard to tell,
Speaker 2: and it's certainly not the blanket. You know, same situation
Speaker 2: with everybody. But I do believe that a lot of
Speaker 2: these people genuinely believe what they're saying.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: They've seen what they've seen, and in their mind they
Speaker 2: pieced it together and they've figured it all out, and
Speaker 2: you're not going to convince them otherwise. They know the truth,
Speaker 2: and they're going to tell everybody, you know, what they
Speaker 2: believe because that's what they believe to be the truth.
Speaker 2: And people get very passionately emotionally wrapped up in this.
Speaker 2: And Jeremy is somebody with a very strong personality and
Speaker 2: you know, I'm not saying this is what's happening with Jeremy,
Speaker 2: but I know there are people who get so emotionally
Speaker 2: wrapped up in this that they're full of fire, full
Speaker 2: of passion, and they need to they need to expose
Speaker 2: the cover up, and they're on a mission and nothing's
Speaker 2: going to stop them. And if you get in their way,
Speaker 2: you're the enemy. And you know what you have to say,
Speaker 2: you're just trying to obstruct the truth from getting out
Speaker 2: or whatever the case may be. But some people get
Speaker 2: so laser focused on what they've put together in their
Speaker 2: mind is the truth that they've They've you know, put
Speaker 2: all the puzzle pieces together, that everybody else has it wrong,
Speaker 2: only they have it right, And get out of my
Speaker 2: way because I'm on a mission.
Speaker 1: I kind of blame you for Jeremy Corbelt because when
Speaker 1: he came to the scene, it was that surfer Silver
Speaker 1: Surfer Ufler turned out to be the Red Bull Parachute team,
Speaker 1: But that just got the bug in him because he
Speaker 1: was in the news all over the place. You how,
Speaker 1: we're writing about it and helping bringing attention to that story,
Speaker 1: and then you know, he took off from there.
Speaker 2: There were so many people we interviewed over the years
Speaker 2: that I guess we're responsible for putting in the limelight.
Speaker 2: But you know, I I I'm to blame for a
Speaker 2: lot of things over the years, I think because I've
Speaker 2: I've also been very honest and you know I've I've
Speaker 2: even said on multiple interviews that the UFO topic is
Speaker 2: one of those topics where it's very easy to become
Speaker 2: a celebrity very quickly. Yeah, And when I said that,
Speaker 2: I always say, I know this is probably a bad
Speaker 2: thing and it's going to cause people to you know,
Speaker 2: take advantage of this, and you know, I'm going to
Speaker 2: be responsible for this, but it really is because again
Speaker 2: it comes back to the fact that there are so
Speaker 2: many people desperate and hungry for answers. If you, you know,
Speaker 2: are an unscrupulous, unscrupulous individual with no morals and you know,
Speaker 2: are happy misleading people, it's so easy to do in
Speaker 2: this field and get a massive following.
Speaker 1: And I don't want to necessarily, I don't know Jeremy's
Speaker 1: motives completely, but I guess what I would say it
Speaker 1: And this is where I think George Knapps should know better.
Speaker 1: Is the way they report things is completely wrong and
Speaker 1: it's not the way we would do it. And what
Speaker 1: I mean by that because it's it's turned on them.
Speaker 1: So we can go over UFO video and leak one
Speaker 1: after another that gets debunked almost immediately when they put
Speaker 1: it out, such as the video of the pyramid UFOs,
Speaker 1: which was obviously some sort of lens thing because every
Speaker 1: light in the sky was triangle shape. At least Travis Taylor,
Speaker 1: who is defending that, had to say, Okay, you know,
Speaker 1: there's obvious a lens effect that one that some others
Speaker 1: that we're going to talk about as we move on here.
Speaker 1: But several of these videos that get quickly debunked where
Speaker 1: they come out and these are real, these are UFOs,
Speaker 1: these are aliens, and it's like, we don't know that.
Speaker 1: That's not how this works. Just because you're discovering something,
Speaker 1: you know it, that's when something needs to be researched
Speaker 1: and investigated. If there's a liar, you can't immediately jump
Speaker 1: to that conclusion.
Speaker 2: I agree with that, and I will call this out here.
Speaker 2: This is this is where it gets into the realm
Speaker 2: of being irresponsible. You know, it doesn't doesn't do anybody
Speaker 2: any favors when you throw out you know, just kind
Speaker 2: of a flippant Eh, we're not saying it's aliens. But
Speaker 2: at the same time, everything you're saying is saying this
Speaker 2: is exotic, this is a cover up, this is not
Speaker 2: this is obviously non human intelligence. Right, You can't have
Speaker 2: it both ways, and painting it is Hey, we're just
Speaker 2: we're just presenting the facts and asking questions. No, that's
Speaker 2: usually not what's happening. You're you're painting a narrative. You're
Speaker 2: pushing things into a corner and presenting things is anomalist
Speaker 2: when in fact, all you have is some random person
Speaker 2: gave you something and you know, because of mysterious circumstances
Speaker 2: or something that seemed bizarre to them, and because it
Speaker 2: was a military source, you're thinking this is non human intelligence.
Speaker 2: And that's how you're pushing it to the world and
Speaker 2: sounding the alarm and going on the news and making
Speaker 2: it into a big deal when it doesn't need to
Speaker 2: be because you don't know what it is, and you
Speaker 2: don't really know the source of the video, you don't
Speaker 2: know all the details. You're operating with very limited details.
Speaker 2: You can't make these huge jumps. You can't sound the alarm,
Speaker 2: you can't excite people under the guise of oh, we're
Speaker 2: just we're just trying to find answers.
Speaker 1: It doesn't work. It's irresponsible. Loue Alesando did this recently,
Speaker 1: and it undermines your credibility when you know, he showed
Speaker 1: these UFO videos at a conference they got leaked at.
Speaker 1: He showed these these pictures and they were immediately debunked.
Speaker 1: They were old hoaxes or misidentifications, and he's like, oops,
Speaker 1: you can't just oops that when you're using this to
Speaker 1: justify that there's an alien cover up.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and again, I mean I give people leeway, not
Speaker 2: not you know, having the sort of institutional knowledge or
Speaker 2: the legacy knowledge that people like you and I would
Speaker 2: have having been in this for so many years and
Speaker 2: having seen so much and researched so much. Everybody's not
Speaker 2: going to have all of this information immediately. That being said,
Speaker 2: that should be understood. And again, as a responsible person
Speaker 2: communicating about this and really wanting to get to the
Speaker 2: bottom of it, or you know, pretending that you're trying
Speaker 2: to educate people or or get people interested in the topic,
Speaker 2: you have to be responsible. You have to lead with
Speaker 2: those those remarks like, well, here's something don't know what
Speaker 2: this is. Here are the circumstances kind of strange things here,
Speaker 2: strange things there. Don't know what that is, but we'll
Speaker 2: continue looking into it. But that's an example of some
Speaker 2: of the strange things we're seeing.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: You can't have your definitive answers and push things on
Speaker 2: people when you yourself have no idea.
Speaker 1: Right, and so we're starting to run short at time,
Speaker 1: But there's so much to talk about. But this is
Speaker 1: one of those instances, the new whistle blower from Jeremy
Speaker 1: and George and their Weaponize show. And what is difficult
Speaker 1: about this is that if you watch it again, this
Speaker 1: whistle blower is saying, especially at the majority already of
Speaker 1: this interview, first of all, is about his perceptions about things,
Speaker 1: and it's just that his perceptions. Then he gets into, oh,
Speaker 1: you couldn't mention this name or that name or you
Speaker 1: get fired. And they asked, well, was that you know
Speaker 1: that that wasn't something that was mandated. He's like, oh, no,
Speaker 1: that wasn't anything that came down. But I heard stories,
Speaker 1: and people said they heard stories, so it's like rumor. Again.
Speaker 2: It's just the same thing about mentioning the name of
Speaker 2: immaculate constellation. You know, and this has so many similarities
Speaker 2: to Luis Elizondo too. You know, this guy stumbled upon
Speaker 2: this while he was doing volunteer work. It wasn't part
Speaker 2: of his regular job, you know. I mean just lots
Speaker 2: of things of people coming across things that's outside of
Speaker 2: their scope, outside of their knowledge, with limited information. In
Speaker 2: this interview, he even says that things weren't spelled out
Speaker 2: in this document, that he had to put things together
Speaker 2: on his own and sort of what it was saying.
Speaker 1: And that this level of classification that this information had
Speaker 1: it was in a place that it shouldn't have been.
Speaker 1: He said, well, they're probably getting egg on their face
Speaker 1: because now it's starting to look like that they were wrong,
Speaker 1: that this wasn't what he thinks it was. First of all,
Speaker 1: one of the things he said it was that Shawn
Speaker 1: kerk Patrick, who was aware of legacy UFO programs, Shawn Kirkpatrick,
Speaker 1: Stephen green Street interviewed him and Kirkpatrick says, no, that's
Speaker 1: BS and I don't believe that whatsoever. But if you
Speaker 1: look at here David Grush, one of the things he
Speaker 1: worked on was the Shriver wargame, and the best So.
Speaker 2: This guy went through and came across was labeled as
Speaker 2: part of this this war game. So right away that
Speaker 2: should be a red flag and let people know, well
Speaker 2: maybe it was supposed to be. You know, everything in
Speaker 2: this file was part of a wargame.
Speaker 1: Exactly, and then this guy in this rush was.
Speaker 2: Part of that war game. Yeah, so an advisor on.
Speaker 1: The exactly grush was an advisor on it. And this
Speaker 1: guy is really great. He's just like, hey, guys, I
Speaker 1: think they made anonymous mistake. The twenty eighteen Sdriver wargame
Speaker 1: is not a big deal. They do this wargame scenario
Speaker 1: every year.
Speaker 2: They look at future future risks that they're looking at
Speaker 2: combat in space and adversaries, you know in space. So
Speaker 2: this is all very in line with what those wargames do.
Speaker 1: And this is a wargame that was an imaginary scenario
Speaker 1: that took place in twenty twenty eight the future.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, and and you know the twenty eighteen wargames.
Speaker 2: The guy says that the photo he mentions that he
Speaker 2: saw a photo of Russian submarine in a UFO above
Speaker 2: it or whatever, and he mentions that it was located
Speaker 2: in the in the Pacific at Konchukka or something that
Speaker 2: Kucha Peninsula, but that is in the North Pacific where
Speaker 2: the US Indo Pacific Command was sort of in charge
Speaker 2: of one of these exercises that took place at those wargames.
Speaker 2: So it's in the exact location where it should be
Speaker 2: for these people being involved. So that again ties into
Speaker 2: the wargames mentioned on the first slide. So I don't
Speaker 2: know why one would assume that it's anything else.
Speaker 1: And this guy, even at least in this interview, said
Speaker 1: he doesn't have any inside knowledge. That he got excited
Speaker 1: with the New York Times article in the Navy videos
Speaker 1: just like the rest of us, but he didn't have
Speaker 1: He said he hadn't seen those on government servers and
Speaker 1: has no special insight either than what everybody else has seen.
Speaker 1: And this has happened before in the news, even recently
Speaker 1: as an example of people misinterpreting. Of course, you and
Speaker 1: I see this all the time, and we spend so
Speaker 1: much time correcting people. But this article that first actually
Speaker 1: was covered by Weekly World News. Yep, the bat Boy
Speaker 1: people that the Russian shot down in Ufo and it
Speaker 1: turned people into stone, and the CIA knew about it.
Speaker 1: The New York Post among others talk about CIA files
Speaker 1: detailing Soviet crash, but Scopes actually are doing an analysis
Speaker 1: with the Snopes with an accurate headline. It doesn't prove
Speaker 1: aliens to turn Soviets into stone. And it was never classified.
Speaker 1: It was simply a news clipping.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And that's the funny thing about so many CIA
Speaker 2: and FBI UFO files people get excited about. But those
Speaker 2: UFO files are filled, which is scans of newspaper clippings
Speaker 2: of letters that UFO researchers wrote. They're not things that
Speaker 2: prove any sort of UFO you know, incident. They're just
Speaker 2: documenting UFO mentions, the mentions of the word UFO exactly.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think people could say, well, why are
Speaker 1: they collecting news clippings on UFOs. That's a legit question,
Speaker 1: I don't think.
Speaker 2: And you could say there were potential, you know, certainly
Speaker 2: reasons for that during the Cold War, and that's when
Speaker 2: a lot of this stuff happened.
Speaker 1: Right exactly.
Speaker 2: I will, I will, I will say something that you
Speaker 2: know might lend some credence to this story is those
Speaker 2: twenty eighteen war games that took place, that's where they
Speaker 2: were based out of Russia. No they were at the
Speaker 2: Air Force Warmongering Institute that's located at Maxwell Air Force
Speaker 2: Base's Curtis E. LeMay Center. O huh MJ twelfth throwback there.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so there. It always comes back to something, you
Speaker 1: know what. That reminds me too of another frustrating thing.
Speaker 1: In this interview, they invoke Bob Blazar. Oh, this is
Speaker 1: just like what happened to Bob Blazar. Bob Blazaar is
Speaker 1: the worst. What's really frustrating about the Bob Blazaar story
Speaker 1: is that Jeremy and George Knapp, also the original person
Speaker 1: to cover Lazar, do not cover any of the dubious
Speaker 1: or just like they're doing to this day, the dubious
Speaker 1: or items that undermine the credibility of both of these
Speaker 1: witnesses or at least Lazaar, which there are numerous ones.
Speaker 1: I mean, I've got an article coming out. But the
Speaker 1: biggest one for me is that he started these claims
Speaker 1: when he talked about aliens fighting at Area fifty one
Speaker 1: and all of this crap only weeks after Richard Doty
Speaker 1: said this on this UFO Live TV show for the
Speaker 1: first time, and then the public had ever heard, oh
Speaker 1: there's aliens in Area fifty one and he's like, the
Speaker 1: aliens have taken over the base and all of this
Speaker 1: crazy bes and then Lazar Jempson, Oh yeah, I was there.
Speaker 1: Let alone is criminal background, none of which they cover,
Speaker 1: which seriously undermined his credibility. This lone witness who they
Speaker 1: take hook line and sinker that, you know, proves that
Speaker 1: aliens were or are at Area fifty one.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and back to our earlier point of just being
Speaker 2: irresponsible and the fallout from that. You know, I really
Speaker 2: feel for this guy coming forward making himself public with
Speaker 2: this Immaculate Constellation stuff, because I do feel that a
Speaker 2: lot of the rhetoric that has been pushed, a lot
Speaker 2: of the talking points in the narrative, pushed by a
Speaker 2: lot of the leading voices in the UFO community now
Speaker 2: have really made a lot of people like this individual
Speaker 2: clearly convinced that there's this grand and cover up that
Speaker 2: humanity is you know, is being given a great disservice,
Speaker 2: that we're all being harmed by this uh you know,
Speaker 2: government cover up and this technology being held under wraps,
Speaker 2: and that we have a right to know this information,
Speaker 2: and people are willing to risk their careers and their
Speaker 2: lives to come out and share this information with the
Speaker 2: public because we all have a right to know. Well, again,
Speaker 2: if you're going to do that, it'd be great to have,
Speaker 2: you know, some something solid when a lot of this again,
Speaker 2: you know, even when you're you're trying to articulate, it
Speaker 2: is based on assumptions you've made on things you pieced
Speaker 2: together with very limited information and out of context. I
Speaker 2: don't know what to say about that. You know, that
Speaker 2: seems incredibly shortsighted and irresponsible. I don't. I don't know
Speaker 2: the guy, and I can't make you know life choices
Speaker 2: for him. But also this narrative again has been so
Speaker 2: highlighted and pushed in recent years with the big talking
Speaker 2: heads about how dangerous it is to talk about UFOs
Speaker 2: and how your life is in danger and how you
Speaker 2: give up everything if you talk about UFOs, And that
Speaker 2: is just the biggest load to me, because you and
Speaker 2: I know we've covered this over so many years. We've
Speaker 2: seen the people high ranking government officials and military personnel,
Speaker 2: let alone anybody else.
Speaker 1: Stories so much bigger than any.
Speaker 2: Of these people, and they've been just fine. They haven't
Speaker 2: been killed. All of obody who gets claimed or claim
Speaker 2: that have been executed because of their UFO pursuits. We
Speaker 2: know otherwise there are other stories that you know are
Speaker 2: are unfortunate and contributed to those deaths. But you know,
Speaker 2: everybody is on edge now and thinks that this is
Speaker 2: such a delicate topic and you can't broach it. But
Speaker 2: again back to just public reception, and even coworkers, like anybody,
Speaker 2: everybody loves UFOs. Everybody is interested in this topic and
Speaker 2: they always have. And when you talk to people and
Speaker 2: let them know that you're serious about UFOs, the flood
Speaker 2: gates open and they want to tell you their own sightings,
Speaker 2: their own stories. It's not ridicule, it's it's a lot
Speaker 2: of fear of possible ridicule that drives fear in people
Speaker 2: and keeps this such a mysterious kind of ooh topic
Speaker 2: that we can't talk about and if we do, we're
Speaker 2: going to be executed. Again. Irresponsible to be pushing these narratives.
Speaker 1: Yeah, very irresponsible And a lot of that group, the
Speaker 1: intel groups or the people working a lot of the
Speaker 1: people associated with that Soul conference. That's what they say
Speaker 1: and do, and I think it's extremely extremely irresponsible. You know.
Speaker 1: Somebody argued Travis Taylor argued with me, oh, there doesn't
Speaker 1: have to be extraordinary evidence for extraordinary claims, but there
Speaker 1: has to be some evidence something not zero. This is also,
Speaker 1: I think really interesting because one of the people speculated
Speaker 1: on that Reddit that maybe they created that war scenario
Speaker 1: to screw with like Aleizando and Corbell, and they were
Speaker 1: just taking things from the media to say, oh, you
Speaker 1: know what if this scenario happened, It's very interesting. This
Speaker 1: is called immaculate constellation, this alleged program. When Jeremy created
Speaker 1: a documentary about the ridiculous things that John Lear has
Speaker 1: to say, why was Jeremy even highlighting I felt so
Speaker 1: uncomfortable when he was doing this because we were really
Speaker 1: close with Jeremy at the time. But John Lear, who
Speaker 1: just makes up all these wild conspiracies. Anyway, it seems
Speaker 1: like it's being buried because a website's down in everything.
Speaker 1: But in twenty sixteen, Jeremy made this documentary Immaculate Deception,
Speaker 1: full of wild alien claims, none of which were verified
Speaker 1: are true.
Speaker 2: And I don't know. Here's another thing like I don't
Speaker 2: I don't know, I mean, especially knowing that and again
Speaker 2: this goes back to sort of institutional knowledge and knowing
Speaker 2: what's been done in UFO history before, but we know
Speaker 2: that people have been fed fake documents. That's a huge
Speaker 2: part of you know, disinformation campaigns for whatever reason, It's
Speaker 2: been done multiple times. And George and Jeremy certainly know
Speaker 2: that they're good friends with Richard Dody, So you know,
Speaker 2: it's very very interesting. In my mind, I don't know
Speaker 2: what's going on there. But again, because we've seen this
Speaker 2: happen before, because we know, and especially living in the
Speaker 2: age we live in now, this is a different world
Speaker 2: from when you and I were doing this at Open Minds.
Speaker 2: It is infinitely easier to fix everything, videos, images, documents,
Speaker 2: like it's all out. You can have all of the
Speaker 2: great images and videos and whatever you want, it's all out.
Speaker 2: So I know that sounds incredibly just flippant and you know,
Speaker 2: kind of morbid with this topic, just like give up.
Speaker 2: UFOs are done. There's nothing we can do. And honestly,
Speaker 2: that's kind of how UFOs are always going to be
Speaker 2: when you're dealing with the unknown. That's the frustrating part
Speaker 2: of UFOs. We're not going to have definitive answers, but
Speaker 2: something we are guaranteed to have is a lot of
Speaker 2: bus and an endless supply of it.
Speaker 1: Right, And I've that's why I've argued the science route
Speaker 1: is the only route, the Nassat route, doing the and
Speaker 1: invoking sit ince in science and crowdsourcing to get the
Speaker 1: public involved and transparently investigating and doing science. Which is
Speaker 1: our last two stories to cover very quickly what really
Speaker 1: Arrow is doing. At least they're showing their work, and
Speaker 1: they release today too of their resolution reports, or at
Speaker 1: least gave a little heads up for one, and then
Speaker 1: released this one. This one I'm not as excited about.
Speaker 1: You know, it's these volcano sightings that typically turn out
Speaker 1: to be as you and I know, you know, just
Speaker 1: lots of weird stuff is pushed out volcanoes. Things.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, we used to always report about.
Speaker 1: Yeah, good job. I've always been impressed in the way
Speaker 1: you've been able to say that. So there's this one,
Speaker 1: But even more to the point, there's yet another. This
Speaker 1: was one of Jeremy's leaks of what very quickly people
Speaker 1: identified as a local a balloon that is common to
Speaker 1: the local area during the holiday that was going on
Speaker 1: at the time, And sure enough, Aero says that this
Speaker 1: was a balloon, a cluster of partially and fully inflated
Speaker 1: balloons that came from the local area. So they're going
Speaker 1: to release that. But this was yet another one where
Speaker 1: Jeremy comes out, look proof of aliens. But no, very
Speaker 1: quickly it was the that's not how you do it,
Speaker 1: you know, you and I and I keep going back
Speaker 1: to this, but it's just the truth because we've got
Speaker 1: experience doing it. And that's what's so great about you
Speaker 1: and I talking right now. We wouldn't have released this
Speaker 1: story that way. We would have said, here's a new video.
Speaker 1: It looks pretty interesting, just like I do all the
Speaker 1: time when the next segment of my show is going
Speaker 1: to be about some of the cool sightings this week
Speaker 1: from Enigma, but not one of them will I say
Speaker 1: is real. In fact, I always tell the audience I
Speaker 1: expect these videos that I put out that I think
Speaker 1: are weird to be debunked. But what I'm hoping is
Speaker 1: that there will be one that can't be debunked. And
Speaker 1: that's I think the angle that you have to have
Speaker 1: it out. Look, this is interesting, it needs more research.
Speaker 1: We don't know what it is. Not look proof of aliens.
Speaker 1: The government tiding everything. Be careful who you show this
Speaker 1: video to or you might get killed.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and again public education comes back to so much
Speaker 2: emphasis on public education because cause again, we all are different.
Speaker 2: We all have different life experiences. We've all seen different
Speaker 2: seen and experienced different things in our lives. We all
Speaker 2: live in different different parts of the world. There are
Speaker 2: different different things in the sky and different parts of
Speaker 2: the world. There are new things being launched into the
Speaker 2: sky all the time. I mean, where where we see
Speaker 2: starlink all the time. That's gonna get worse, infinitely worse.
Speaker 2: Amazon is getting into that game. They just launched a
Speaker 2: bunch of satellites and they're gonna have thousands of satellites
Speaker 2: in the air doing the same thing as starlink, providing
Speaker 2: Internet to remote locations. So space is just absolutely littered.
Speaker 2: Our skies are absolutely littered, and you know we it
Speaker 2: behooves us all to familiarize ourselves and for us as
Speaker 2: researchers too, in stories like that where you have something weird,
Speaker 2: we can lean on our experience and share that and say, look,
Speaker 2: this is bizarre here that, here's the situation, here are
Speaker 2: the details we have. This you know strongly resembles this
Speaker 2: that we've seen many times before, and here's a video
Speaker 2: showing a similar thing, but we don't know at this point.
Speaker 2: That's a likely explanation, but other more exotic explanations are possibilities.
Speaker 2: You've got to be responsible with this stuff.
Speaker 1: Right, right, And and I do want to kind of
Speaker 1: finish this off with that's all the news. I had
Speaker 1: to cover a lot of stuff, but that kind of
Speaker 1: like we mentioned with hai May before, just because we're
Speaker 1: critical of the way that people approach this sometimes very
Speaker 1: concerned about the way that they reproach approach it because
Speaker 1: it's irresponsible. Quite frankly, in the past, we haven't had
Speaker 1: so many people who were former government officials kind of
Speaker 1: grouping together and doing this and irresponsible kind.
Speaker 2: Of steering a narrative. It's very concerning steering.
Speaker 1: But we still it doesn't mean that we hate these people,
Speaker 1: that we think they're evil. You and I have spent
Speaker 1: a lot of time with many of these people and
Speaker 1: and have do consider them friends, even though some of
Speaker 1: them of friends anymore because I'm vocal about not agreeing
Speaker 1: with them, which is unfortunate because you know, I don't.
Speaker 2: We all have our perspectives.
Speaker 1: Exactly, and yeah, you've probably are the same. You have
Speaker 1: a lot of affection for many of those people. Still
Speaker 1: I meet mine.
Speaker 2: And again that that's what another part of what makes
Speaker 2: you up O so hard, right, And it's even more
Speaker 2: emotional for for us, you know, at this this stage
Speaker 2: in our careers. And I'm glad you brought that up
Speaker 2: because we we are this way and we're we're talking
Speaker 2: this way now because we care so much about this topic,
Speaker 2: because we've invested so much time in this topic, because
Speaker 2: we want to see good research done, and we're really
Speaker 2: alarmed and disappointed in where this conversation has gone. It's
Speaker 2: really been. Yeah, it is just it's frustrating to see.
Speaker 2: I don't like seeing people take an advantage of I
Speaker 2: don't like seeing people given full hope and false narratives
Speaker 2: and told what to believe. This isn't the field where
Speaker 2: you can be told what to believe. Yes, belief drives
Speaker 2: a lot of UFOs, but belief is individual for all
Speaker 2: of us. We all have to individually weigh the evidence
Speaker 2: for ourselves and make our own conclusions.
Speaker 1: Well, thank you so much for coming on. We used
Speaker 1: step that entire first hour and then a little more.
Speaker 1: But it was a lot of fun, a lot and
Speaker 1: we were able to get through a lot of stuff.
Speaker 1: I mean, if you feel there's anything unsaid that you
Speaker 1: want to share, maybe something you're working on or you
Speaker 1: want to talk to people about.
Speaker 2: No, I don't think so. But we'll do this again soon.
Speaker 2: I mean, we can go on and on and on exactly.
Speaker 1: And one of the things I want to do is
Speaker 1: not necessarily focus on having new guests, but having a
Speaker 1: lot of the guests like you, that are high quality
Speaker 1: guests where we can analyze some of this stuff, can
Speaker 1: look at some of this stuff that's going on, because
Speaker 1: I think that's what the audience wants. They're like, well,
Speaker 1: what am I supposed to make of all of this?
Speaker 1: And not to say, listen to what we have to say,
Speaker 1: and we've got you've got to adhere to what we say.
Speaker 1: But at least it's a different perspective, and we're just
Speaker 1: sharing our insights from our years and years of doing
Speaker 1: this much of that full time.
Speaker 2: Don't listen to that show. Those just the crabby old
Speaker 2: UFO guys bitching and moaning. There is bryaning about something's
Speaker 2: something we might have to do is uh. You know,
Speaker 2: when you get the uh start getting the magazines posted,
Speaker 2: we can maybe do some behind the scenes stories about
Speaker 2: some of those.
Speaker 1: That would be a lot of fun.
Speaker 2: That's great to go through through each, uh, you know,
Speaker 2: each issue and kind of talk about some of the
Speaker 2: stories related to those.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Karen's always telling me the stories and everything are
Speaker 1: so crazy that you guys got to write about some
Speaker 1: of that. It's just I get hesitant sometimes because I
Speaker 1: don't necessarily want to embarrass people, but because there's yeah,
Speaker 1: that's right.
Speaker 2: And again, I mean, all these people are our friends.
Speaker 2: We have so much history with these people. I do
Speaker 2: consider them friends. But yeah, I think this functional family
Speaker 2: almost dysfunctional family. There we go.
Speaker 1: All right, Well, thanks so much for joining my pleasure.
Speaker 2: Allahandra, thank you.
Speaker 1: It was great to talk to you fos with Jason again.
Speaker 1: I hope you enjoyed that. I certainly did. But now
Speaker 1: let's move on to the Enigma sidings of the week.
Speaker 1: I look at videos literally every day to come through
Speaker 1: and find the most interesting videos, and that's what we'ld
Speaker 1: be looking at to start with. Let's look at one
Speaker 1: that is been really popular with users. All right, so
Speaker 1: let's take a look here. This is from Palermo, Italy,
Speaker 1: from Monreal or MONREALI so this person said that they
Speaker 1: saw these three silver triangular shapes. We only recently got
Speaker 1: this video, that's why I'm covering it now. However, they
Speaker 1: say this event took place on October twenty four, twenty
Speaker 1: twenty four. So let's take a look here, and just
Speaker 1: for the listeners to tell you a little bit more
Speaker 1: about what we're looking at. Is you do see this
Speaker 1: palm tree in the foreground in the distance, then you
Speaker 1: see some hills. You see one hill, then another kind
Speaker 1: of larger hill, kind of cliff behind it that's more
Speaker 1: kind of in shadow. Over the hill, you see these
Speaker 1: three luminous lights, and it kind of looks like three
Speaker 1: objects that are over the hill. However, I think they're
Speaker 1: further back in the background and actually on that cliff
Speaker 1: side or on that mountain that's in the background. It's
Speaker 1: hard to say for sure. When I look at videos
Speaker 1: like this, often videos that have a hill or mountain
Speaker 1: in the background, the objects typically turn out to be
Speaker 1: something that is on the hill in the background. Here,
Speaker 1: the hill is in shadow, potentially three shiny objects that
Speaker 1: are reflecting light that are not in shadow, so they
Speaker 1: look more stunning. But yeah, there's no movement in them,
Speaker 1: so that's what makes me think they're not floating? Now
Speaker 1: the palm tree isn't moving either, so there's no wind.
Speaker 1: If they were balloons or something like that, that would
Speaker 1: be possible, but you would probably see at least some movement.
Speaker 1: But yeah, very interesting video, and this one's gotten a
Speaker 1: lot of attention with a lot of people discussing it
Speaker 1: on that app So really interesting video. Love to know
Speaker 1: what you think. Moving on from Palermo, Italy, let's take
Speaker 1: a look at the next video. This one is from Maryland, Columbia, Maryland.
Speaker 1: This was on April fifteenth of this year, so just
Speaker 1: a couple weeks ago at almost nine pm. Now, immediately
Speaker 1: most of you are probably gonna know what this is,
Speaker 1: but not everybody does, surprisingly, and that's why I wanted
Speaker 1: to show it, to make sure and educate people, but
Speaker 1: also because it's so stunning. It's such an amazing video
Speaker 1: and we live in such weird times. So let me
Speaker 1: describe this for the listeners. What you see is someone
Speaker 1: on the side of the road. It looks like because
Speaker 1: there's some street lamps, and it looks like maybe they
Speaker 1: even pulled over to get this video, which is great.
Speaker 1: I'm glad they did that. Hopefully be safe if you
Speaker 1: do that and they're filming up above in the sky
Speaker 1: and you see multiple small dots of lights in a
Speaker 1: perfect row moving together, just a bunch of them, like
Speaker 1: probably fifty or sixty of them. These, of course are
Speaker 1: starlink satellites. Some of them are closer to each other
Speaker 1: than others. But this kind of shows you what I've
Speaker 1: talked about before, where when the starlink are launched, they
Speaker 1: can be really close to each other and kind of
Speaker 1: look like one object. So you'll see this almost looks like,
Speaker 1: you know, there are objects in a long string, some
Speaker 1: are closer than us, and when in a couple of
Speaker 1: spots where they're really close, they almost look like one
Speaker 1: kind of longer object. When they're not, these are multiple
Speaker 1: objects in a row. But look at that. And this
Speaker 1: is what a train, a starlink train, looks like. Now
Speaker 1: I haven't seen this, A lot of people have. Of course,
Speaker 1: a lot of people submit these to Enigma, so I've
Speaker 1: got a few of them. But this is one of
Speaker 1: my favorites, and definitely one of the best we've gotten recently.
Speaker 1: But look how cool that is. Isn't that weird? But yeah,
Speaker 1: that is starlink and I just wanted to show that
Speaker 1: to the audience for those of you who haven't seen
Speaker 1: that before. For you listeners, you know, look out for this.
Speaker 1: It's something that is fairly common and a lot of
Speaker 1: people see these. I haven't yet, and I can't wait
Speaker 1: for my first time to see a starlink train. This
Speaker 1: one is Enigma three one two three ZHO five. And
Speaker 1: remember I put the links to all of these in
Speaker 1: the show notes, so you can go look at these
Speaker 1: also if you get the app. Some of these are
Speaker 1: in that content feed and what we call the content
Speaker 1: but it's the good videos in the first tab. We
Speaker 1: usually don't put much starlink in there unless they're really extraordinary.
Speaker 1: But moving on. This one is a little bit more mysterious.
Speaker 1: And I don't know what this one is. So this
Speaker 1: is small white dots moving quickly. This is in Rosendale, England,
Speaker 1: so this is in the United Kingdom. The explanation says,
Speaker 1: the short three second video you have to watch in
Speaker 1: slow motion. It's just a flicker on normal speed. Forty
Speaker 1: to fifty drones were spotted. I don't see that many,
Speaker 1: all coming from the same direction, headed the same way.
Speaker 1: They moved from a heel around two miles away to
Speaker 1: the next town over in five to eight seconds, somewhere
Speaker 1: under one hundred meters high, some few hundred, maybe it's
Speaker 1: hard to tell. I have lots of videos filming for
Speaker 1: a while, so it's really interesting here. A couple things
Speaker 1: about it is, first of all, what the witnesses described
Speaker 1: versus what's in the video, and I don't feel like
Speaker 1: the description fits very well. Still, this video is really interesting.
Speaker 1: We see essentially someone zooming in and out of these
Speaker 1: three white objects that are moving together. They are obviously,
Speaker 1: you know, it looks like at their house. It almost
Speaker 1: looks like they're on a keel because they are at
Speaker 1: level with like the second story of the houses down
Speaker 1: the block. There's trees in the way, and you can
Speaker 1: see rooftops as they are filming these lights. And this
Speaker 1: video is only thirty seven seconds, so it's pretty quick,
Speaker 1: but it almost looks like a triangular object with three
Speaker 1: lights at the end of it, kind of moving together. Now,
Speaker 1: this is a daytime sighting. The other the last one
Speaker 1: was was a nighttime siding, and this one's during the day.
Speaker 1: So you can see these three white objects, but you
Speaker 1: can't really see anything in between them. So you don't
Speaker 1: know that they're all together. In fact, I would imagine
Speaker 1: they're not because you don't see a song object between them.
Speaker 1: You just see these three dots at first their kind
Speaker 1: of level, and then as it moves, they're not. What's
Speaker 1: weird about this is I don't think it's balloons because
Speaker 1: these lights seem to be self luminescent. They don't seem
Speaker 1: to be reflecting light. There are clouds in the background,
Speaker 1: so you can tell that these are under the clouds,
Speaker 1: although they disappear into the cloud so that gives you
Speaker 1: kind of an idea of the height. The clouds are
Speaker 1: very thick that they go into, and they don't seem
Speaker 1: to slow down at all when they do move into
Speaker 1: these clouds, so to me, they don't move like balloons. Now,
Speaker 1: the witness assumed they were droned, which is kind of
Speaker 1: a weird assumption to make. I think I don't know
Speaker 1: why they make that assumption. It could be three drones
Speaker 1: flying together. It's a possibility, each with their own light.
Speaker 1: I don't know about that, but this is a really
Speaker 1: interesting sighting. Now. I posted this one online and I
Speaker 1: got some responses. I said, what do you guys think
Speaker 1: this is? One person said Chinese balloons has to be
Speaker 1: and I understand why this user is saying that, because
Speaker 1: you know they are self luminescent. But Chinese balloons are
Speaker 1: usually orange because the lights that the skin of the
Speaker 1: object is usually an orange color or red color, and
Speaker 1: then you've got a flickering light which is also kind
Speaker 1: of a warm color that illuminates those lights, so usually
Speaker 1: it's kind of a warm color. These are seem very
Speaker 1: very white, so I don't know that these are a
Speaker 1: Chinese lantern. But yeah, really really interesting video. The movement
Speaker 1: of the lights is just kind of strange. It does
Speaker 1: kind of move like it's one object, but you can
Speaker 1: see there's not an object in between them. It's clear daylight.
Speaker 1: So really weird, really great video. I like this one.
Speaker 1: I can't figure this one out, so I would love
Speaker 1: your suggestions and let me know. This is Enigma three one, two, four,
Speaker 1: eight six. Again you can find a link to these
Speaker 1: in the show notes. But a really strange video from England.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure what the heck that is. So those
Speaker 1: are my Enigma videos for the week. Let me know
Speaker 1: what you think they are. And if you are on
Speaker 1: the Enigma app and you've got some cases that you've
Speaker 1: looked at and you're like, what the heck is this,
Speaker 1: and you would like some more feedback, feel free to
Speaker 1: share that in the comments and we will take a look.
Speaker 1: Before I end the show, there is an update. So
Speaker 1: Jason and I filmed the interview portion of this show
Speaker 1: yesterday and today there was a hearing in the House
Speaker 1: Oversight Committee were dealing with UAP and information came out
Speaker 1: of it. Now, a lot of the people we just
Speaker 1: talked about who we had, you know, we used a
Speaker 1: word irresponsible a bit, who were sharing information and videos
Speaker 1: before they had done some research, were in this panel,
Speaker 1: and unfortunately they're back to their same old antics. Loue
Speaker 1: Elizondo held up a picture. He said, was this huge
Speaker 1: disc floating over the ground, and we'll take a look here.
Speaker 1: The group that had sponsored it, the UAP Disclosure Fund,
Speaker 1: they're obviously really excited. Oh my gosh, look at this
Speaker 1: big disc. And you could see the picture there and
Speaker 1: at first glance, it does look like a shadow. But
Speaker 1: you know what, I now that I know what it is,
Speaker 1: I can't unsee it. And to me, it doesn't look
Speaker 1: like a disc or a shadow at all. And those
Speaker 1: of you in the southwest kind of can have an idea.
Speaker 1: There's a picture of Lou showing this picture. Of course,
Speaker 1: the picture he shows is very, very very fuzzy, so
Speaker 1: it looks more mysterious, but within an instant people were
Speaker 1: very quickly able to figure out what it is. Here
Speaker 1: is a picture that Stephen green Street posted that I
Speaker 1: think shows it more clearly. But they're irrigation circles. And
Speaker 1: you know, there's a lot of research going on out
Speaker 1: there now, even people taking the photo and looking at
Speaker 1: it from a different angle, and you can very clearly
Speaker 1: see that there is a road that is around this
Speaker 1: circle that is allegedly a shadow. Obviously not a shadow.
Speaker 1: They're irrigation circle. So once again they're trying to tell
Speaker 1: the public that look at this evidence of aliens. Look
Speaker 1: at my amazing photo here, and the photos quickly debunked.
Speaker 1: I don't know why they couldn't have done just the
Speaker 1: smallest iota of research and looking on Google Maps, which
Speaker 1: is how people figured it out. Look on Google Maps
Speaker 1: of the area, and they would have noticed there are
Speaker 1: dozens and dozens and dozens of these circles around. So
Speaker 1: oh yeah, yeah, we'll talk more about all of this
Speaker 1: next time. However, you know, I just wanted to give
Speaker 1: you guys this update before we move on. It's just
Speaker 1: gotten you know, I hate to use the term, but
Speaker 1: it's gotten silly. It really has, you know. I if
Speaker 1: these guys are taking this field seriously, I think that
Speaker 1: they just need to be patient, do the research, and
Speaker 1: work with others. You know, all of this is best
Speaker 1: when we work as a team and even get the
Speaker 1: debunkers in so you know what they're gonna say before
Speaker 1: you post this stuff, or you can argue, and it's
Speaker 1: fair just to say that, hey, you know, I got
Speaker 1: this to some skeptics. They think it's this. I disagree
Speaker 1: with them. I think it's that, And here's my argument.
Speaker 1: And let your argument and your data speak for itself.
Speaker 1: If it's strong enough, then you know you will win
Speaker 1: the day, especially if you can get some other scientists
Speaker 1: and researchers on your side. But just to kind of
Speaker 1: put this stuff out there and then have it debunked
Speaker 1: just really undermines credibility. And again, think of what the
Speaker 1: people who were like, Okay, I'm going to give these
Speaker 1: guys a shot, and I'm going to hear what they
Speaker 1: have to say, and then this happens, you know, it
Speaker 1: underminds the credibility of the whole field, and then a
Speaker 1: lot of people take it less seriously. So that's what
Speaker 1: we're trying to say. And it's not like we're trying
Speaker 1: to say we don't want to play a role. We
Speaker 1: would love to help out. Jason and I have been
Speaker 1: doing this for a long time and we're always open
Speaker 1: to these guys and working with these guys and they
Speaker 1: know that. So, but to be honest, who are we
Speaker 1: We don't have any credentials as far as being scientists,
Speaker 1: so you know, that's who they should probably employ to
Speaker 1: do some of this work. But at the very least
Speaker 1: the credentials Jason and I do have is that we
Speaker 1: did this full time for many, many many years. But anyway,
Speaker 1: thank you so much for listening. Thank you very much
Speaker 1: to Denn of Geek who is sponsoring the show, and
Speaker 1: hopefully some of you our new listeners from Den of
Speaker 1: Geek if you are and you want to discuss more
Speaker 1: and you want to have more direct contact with me.
Speaker 1: I do have a Patreon now it is you do
Speaker 1: have to pay it again onto my Patreon, but as
Speaker 1: low as one dollar a month, which is the lowest
Speaker 1: that I can put and the reason that I put
Speaker 1: it that lowest. I just want serious people. I don't
Speaker 1: want people trolls to come in and get all upset
Speaker 1: that you know, I am denying that aliens are here. Whatever.
Speaker 1: You know, we can save that kind of conversation for
Speaker 1: social media. I want to save space at his trophy
Speaker 1: where we can all kind of work and discuss together
Speaker 1: more constructively. So if you would like to come join
Speaker 1: my Patreon, I also put a lot more stuff on
Speaker 1: the other things that I'm into, such as travel. I'm
Speaker 1: actually customizing a camper vand that I'm building right now,
Speaker 1: and I'm sharing information about that. So I'm sharing all
Speaker 1: kinds of stuff on there, so you know, I would
Speaker 1: love to have you in there to be able to
Speaker 1: see the content there and then to discuss your interests
Speaker 1: and our shared interests. So just a place for us
Speaker 1: to have some fun. Thank you all so much for listening.
Speaker 1: Until next time, Audios move Chacho's