Speaker 1: You see, something's going to happen.
Speaker 2: What's going to happen?
Speaker 3: What?
Speaker 4: Welcome to the Occult Rejects. Today's episode, we got a
Speaker 4: very very very special guest, uh, somebody that had the
Speaker 4: actual pleasure to meet at the Cosmic Summit. But before
Speaker 4: we introduce the guest, I'm going to introduce the other
Speaker 4: rejects that are joining us.
Speaker 2: And today we got my man Tyrone. What is going on? Sir?
Speaker 2: How are you? Please? Let everybody know where they can
Speaker 2: find all your amazing work.
Speaker 1: What's up everybody?
Speaker 5: What's going on?
Speaker 2: Asking?
Speaker 1: How you doing?
Speaker 2: Broy?
Speaker 5: Everything you can find on me is on my website
Speaker 5: www dot rebirth atoword dot com. You can also buy
Speaker 5: my best selling book that was on Amazon, Journey through
Speaker 5: the Origins of History.
Speaker 1: Thanks Nick, you say it, Bro.
Speaker 4: Of course, thank you for joining us. And we got
Speaker 4: my man Headless Giant. What is going on, sir?
Speaker 6: How are you doing? You can find me on Twitter
Speaker 6: at the Headless Giant and on YouTube Headless Giant as well.
Speaker 6: Check out my Instagram page. I'm going to be putting
Speaker 6: up a bunch of art there. And if you have
Speaker 6: any sort of paranormal slash strange dream stories, you can
Speaker 6: email it to me at the Headless Giant Podcast at
Speaker 6: gmail dot com and we will read those on Thursdays tomorrow.
Speaker 6: I got my buddies Ricardo and Ethan Indigo coming on
Speaker 6: to do our trialogues on Sunday, so definitely check that out.
Speaker 2: Thank you awesome, Thank you very much, sir.
Speaker 4: And we got Doc Brown Prometheus Lens joining us today.
Speaker 4: What is going on, sir?
Speaker 2: How are you? Thank you very much for making.
Speaker 7: It and I appreciate it.
Speaker 1: Man.
Speaker 7: I'm honored to be part of this panel. Man as
Speaker 7: excited when you told me who he had coming on
Speaker 7: and you invitted me to come on, So I'm extremely
Speaker 7: grateful for the opportunity to sit down and talk with
Speaker 7: this man. But yeah, Prometheus Linn's podcast is my show.
Speaker 7: Websites Prometheus linnspodcast dot com anywhere you can consume content,
Speaker 7: you can find find me there. And also I had
Speaker 7: a book I just released this year. You can find
Speaker 7: it on Amazon, the Epic of Esol burs Right D
Speaker 7: and seed War.
Speaker 2: Thank you very much, Nick, I appreciate it, of course, no,
Speaker 2: thank you, And we got Sarah What is going on? Sarah?
Speaker 2: Thank you very much for making it. Appreciate it.
Speaker 1: Hi, thanks for having me. I'm Sarah.
Speaker 3: I am public relations for the Institute for Natural Philosophy,
Speaker 3: so I will be filling in for Ricardo today. I'm
Speaker 3: also the co host of the Universal Unveiled podcast, so
Speaker 3: be sure to check that out.
Speaker 4: Awesome, Thank you very much. Definitely go check out that podcast.
Speaker 4: They've had some really good guests on so far. You know,
Speaker 4: I was one of them. So and then finally finally
Speaker 4: to the man of the episode. But you know, before
Speaker 4: I introduced Ashon, I do want to say that when
Speaker 4: I was at the Cosmic Summit, there's a few things
Speaker 4: I had noticed that there was a few speakers there
Speaker 4: that actually seemed to hang out with the crowd and
Speaker 4: the people more than others instead of just hanging out
Speaker 4: with the other speakers. And besides Billy Carson, I will
Speaker 4: say that Ashton Forbes, in my opinion, was probably with
Speaker 4: the people the most. They saw him hanging out with
Speaker 4: them talking to him. He's out there on his computer,
Speaker 4: he's trolling people on Twitter. Way he's hanging out with
Speaker 4: his friends at the Cosmic Summit. It was unreal, you know,
Speaker 4: and I was like, this is a real motherfucker. I'm
Speaker 4: gonna beg him to come on the show and he's
Speaker 4: gonna do it eventually because he got tired of me asking.
Speaker 2: So here he is, Ashton.
Speaker 4: And before before we get into the show, something I
Speaker 4: just want to mention for the people who are into
Speaker 4: the occult. I don't want to kind of screw up
Speaker 4: the flow of the show today because it's gonna be
Speaker 4: a lot more science and technical, but something that we
Speaker 4: have talked about before. Even when it comes to nine
Speaker 4: to eleven, every one of those planes was an Alice
Speaker 4: the Crowley book. It was a number that matched Alice
Speaker 4: to Crowley. The Boeing seven seven seven matches Alice to
Speaker 4: Crowley seven seven seven, and he does even have a
Speaker 4: book that's liber three seventy. So again I just do
Speaker 4: find it interesting how what's going on with this plane?
Speaker 4: Even the numbers match Crowley again, So think of it
Speaker 4: whatever you will with that. But now we're gonna get
Speaker 4: into some smart stuff. I'm gonna ask me a bunch
Speaker 4: of questions to explain things that I don't understand. So Ashton,
Speaker 4: please let everybody know what your deal is, what you're about,
Speaker 4: and where they can find all of your amazing works.
Speaker 2: Please.
Speaker 1: I'm the ORB guy. Now I'm I May three to
Speaker 1: seven zero guy. I don't know, I go buy a
Speaker 1: lot of names. People call me. Some people call me
Speaker 1: the UFO guy, which is weird because I don't really
Speaker 1: talk about aliens or UFOs that much. But I guess
Speaker 1: it just comes with the territory. So I became like
Speaker 1: e famous, I guess you could say from researching the
Speaker 1: MH three seven zero videos, some very controversial videos that
Speaker 1: are out there that date back to twenty fourteen. After
Speaker 1: Malaysian Airlines Flight three seven zero disappeared on March seventh,
Speaker 1: twenty fourteen. These videos began to re emerge or emerge
Speaker 1: for the first time around May nineteenth of twenty fourteen,
Speaker 1: but we just ignored them for like nine ten years basically,
Speaker 1: and then even when I started to promote them and
Speaker 1: investigate them, there was so much controversy over them. People say, oh,
Speaker 1: these people are you know, disinfo or FEDS attacking you
Speaker 1: or what have you. But I think a lot of
Speaker 1: it's really just like we are just now as a
Speaker 1: species starting to wake up to that type of technology,
Speaker 1: that type of physics, that type of science being able
Speaker 1: to be real. The same way where like cavemen would
Speaker 1: have struggled with like understanding why we have like an iPhone,
Speaker 1: Like how can this be a thing that's real? You know,
Speaker 1: that wouldn't be something they could understand either. So I've
Speaker 1: been investigating. I started by investigating the plane and realizing
Speaker 1: that like those videos are real and there is a
Speaker 1: conspiracy around the missing plane, and then took it in
Speaker 1: another direction where I said, Okay, well, I mean something
Speaker 1: this incredible, like how is this scientifically possible? How is
Speaker 1: this physically possible? And to me that was the biggest revelation,
Speaker 1: which was finding out that the science to support it,
Speaker 1: like this idea of zero point energy basically is out there.
Speaker 1: The papers have been written. It goes back you know,
Speaker 1: maybe seventy eighty one hundred years, maybe all the way
Speaker 1: back to Tesla essentially, And that's where this journey has
Speaker 1: taken me today, is trying to understand that physics zero
Speaker 1: point energy and realizing that it all leads back to
Speaker 1: plasma and nuke's actually, which means it leads back to
Speaker 1: fusion as well. So the craziest part is it all
Speaker 1: kind of comes full circle. Where I went from an
Speaker 1: area of like, Okay, this is impossible, like this would
Speaker 1: require magical new physics to oh, no, that the physics
Speaker 1: is actually all out there, but you know it's been suppressed,
Speaker 1: and then realizing like, no, the physics is just out there,
Speaker 1: but like literally all the Department of Energy labs are
Speaker 1: like literally researching this, and I'm going like, we just
Speaker 1: not we don't pay attention to what they're doing. Like
Speaker 1: that's that seems to me the answer. So that's the
Speaker 1: long winded answer to who I am.
Speaker 2: Nice, Thank you very much.
Speaker 6: That's a.
Speaker 2: I think.
Speaker 6: I think if if people knew more about the Department
Speaker 6: of Energy, we wouldn't be in this situation. Is there
Speaker 6: a quick way that you can describe to people all
Speaker 6: the roles that Department of Energy has in this sort
Speaker 6: of development.
Speaker 1: Well, I think the most edge occational thing people should
Speaker 1: learn is how the research functions. So you have Aerospace Corporation,
Speaker 1: and you have Battel Institute and Betel sorry, Bettel Institute
Speaker 1: is the ones that's like the contractor for all the labs,
Speaker 1: so they actually manage all the labs like eleven billion
Speaker 1: dollars per year, but that's all just federal money. They
Speaker 1: don't have any commercial clients, so it's basically our tax dollars, right,
Speaker 1: But because it's being filtered through this third party management
Speaker 1: company where all the labs would be managed, my guess
Speaker 1: is they use that to shield things from fouer requests
Speaker 1: because now it's not government anymore. So that's the first
Speaker 1: thing people need to know. Then Aerospace Corporation they also
Speaker 1: get like a billion dollars every year from the government.
Speaker 1: Not they're like federal non for profits is what they
Speaker 1: call them. And these are the people that actually outsource
Speaker 1: these scientists. So if you're an engineer, what have you like, Okay,
Speaker 1: you get a contract, it goes through Aerospace Corporation, but
Speaker 1: it might be for like a DOE lab to work
Speaker 1: on this plasma blah blah blah. So that's the important
Speaker 1: thing to understand is how is the how's the funding
Speaker 1: work for the DOE. I think the other thing that
Speaker 1: people understand that's important in this context is more I
Speaker 1: would say speculative, which is why is the DOE connected
Speaker 1: to the UFO topic? Like everybody says, oh, the doees
Speaker 1: the top dog and the que clearance of what have you? Well,
Speaker 1: it's because of the energy sources, Like whatever is the
Speaker 1: UFO is flying around with it's got to be the
Speaker 1: energy source. So when we are looking for the answers
Speaker 1: to what's what is these what are these UFOs? How
Speaker 1: are they flying around? How are they floating freely? How
Speaker 1: are they teleporting? We should probably looking at what the
Speaker 1: DOE is doing, because they're apparently the ones who are
Speaker 1: gatekeeping it. So that's where I think it leads back
Speaker 1: to all what are they studying in all those labs?
Speaker 1: Fusion plasma stabilization, like all these concepts that if you
Speaker 1: take them to their extreme and what you could do
Speaker 1: you come up with a plasma word that can like
Speaker 1: fly around.
Speaker 2: Nice.
Speaker 4: That was actually something I did want to get into.
Speaker 4: Uh honestly, I just didn't even know where to start.
Speaker 4: I mean, I know you had gone over one thing
Speaker 4: I thought was awesome about the Cosmic Summit.
Speaker 2: You went over patents.
Speaker 4: Now, I don't know if that's something that you want
Speaker 4: to like really get into, if that's something you have
Speaker 4: to cover to get into orbs, But I do know
Speaker 4: that's something you've usually been going into recently too, is
Speaker 4: the whole ORB thing and what your you know, what
Speaker 4: is your idea of those orbs? Like what are they
Speaker 4: doing and how are they even there with this plane.
Speaker 1: Yeah you want me to share.
Speaker 2: Video, Yeah yeah, you can, yeah share what it pull
Speaker 2: up whatever you want.
Speaker 1: Let me pull up this one because this is the
Speaker 1: Here's Gorgon's stair wide area motion imagery video, which is
Speaker 1: from a drone from above and these orbs. You know,
Speaker 1: this isn't a situation where like I came up with
Speaker 1: an idea of what the orbs were. It was like,
Speaker 1: just follow the science and figure out where the science leads.
Speaker 1: And where the science led was a compact fusion reactor.
Speaker 1: It's like when you look up fusion reactors, you find
Speaker 1: it's just all about manipulating plasma. And these orbs are
Speaker 1: a plasma ball that's being contained by a magnetic field.
Speaker 1: It's not a solid thing around it. You can't really
Speaker 1: tell from this particular video. Thankfully, we have a second
Speaker 1: video that tells us more detail about the orbs. If
Speaker 1: this tells us that we got, you know, three things
Speaker 1: perfectly aligned in a triangle formation, and plasma can explain
Speaker 1: that too, because it's the magnetic fields that are causing
Speaker 1: it to link up in that perfect triangle, which that
Speaker 1: was one of the things I thought was just totally wild,
Speaker 1: is that we have seen orbs and triangle formations get
Speaker 1: talked about in the UFO community over like the last
Speaker 1: ten years or so. It's gotten kind of popular. Let
Speaker 1: me switch and show the other video real quick.
Speaker 4: Do those orbs switch the way the directions at some
Speaker 4: point too? Looks like they spin more like.
Speaker 1: It's really hard to tell because they're spinning three hundred
Speaker 1: and sixty degrees around the plane.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and once they lock in because you can use
Speaker 1: something called magnetic inversion. Magnetic inversion means that, like you
Speaker 1: have a positive and minus charge that are somewhat separated,
Speaker 1: and if you take two positive and minus charges that
Speaker 1: are separated like that and bring them close, they kind
Speaker 1: of get to an equilibrium point where they don't come
Speaker 1: together anymore, but they don't pull apart anymore. So check
Speaker 1: out magnet and version if that's intrigues you. The real
Speaker 1: giveaway here, Like, first of all, when you're looking at this,
Speaker 1: you look at these orbs here, that's not a solid
Speaker 1: structure around the orb. How do we know? Because in
Speaker 1: a second, you're gonna be able to basically see through them,
Speaker 1: like they become partially transparent. You can see that. So
Speaker 1: it's like, wait, that means it's not a solid thing.
Speaker 1: And this is how early on I was able to
Speaker 1: deduce that must be a plasma field, like a plasma
Speaker 1: structure around something inside that we can't see. But the
Speaker 1: other giveaways. Look at those dark lines, these guys, see
Speaker 1: those dark lines like behind the orbs. That actually turns
Speaker 1: out if you look at a different color version of this,
Speaker 1: which I'll show here in just a second, those dark
Speaker 1: lines are clearly in front of the orbs. Like even
Speaker 1: right here you can pretty much tell these dark lines,
Speaker 1: or not even behind the orbs anymore. I'm just kind
Speaker 1: of pausing it and one slow the dark lines are
Speaker 1: actually in front of the orbs. And look at the
Speaker 1: heat signatures spin around like that, and just I mean,
Speaker 1: look at the heat signature. That's the craziest thing I've
Speaker 1: ever seen. I could even imagine someone inventing that, let alone,
Speaker 1: like making all these frames. You can see it distort
Speaker 1: a little bit there too, So it's not something that's
Speaker 1: like a solid structure like the airplane. It's something that's
Speaker 1: a little bit more amorphous. But the reason why that
Speaker 1: you see the dark lines in front of it. Let
Speaker 1: me show you one last version which will make that
Speaker 1: part clear is because when you look into fusion, there's
Speaker 1: all these instabilities and all these different instabilities. Uh wait
Speaker 1: that canceled. Oh okay, there we go. We're gonna pull
Speaker 1: that up. All these different instabilities basically boil down to
Speaker 1: when we try to do fusion, it always tries to escape,
Speaker 1: and when it's escaping confinement, it's damaging the thing that's
Speaker 1: confining it. Usually, like these reactors have superconducting magnets and
Speaker 1: they have all this stuff to protect it from radiation
Speaker 1: and damage. But ultimately that's the reason why we can't
Speaker 1: keep these fusion reactors running for a long time. So
Speaker 1: they figured out something really smart, which was don't try
Speaker 1: to force it to be confined into a sphere. Let
Speaker 1: it leak out. Let it leak out in controlled way,
Speaker 1: and when you do that, then you can use it
Speaker 1: as propulsion. So in this you can clearly see those
Speaker 1: dark lines are in front of the orbs like leading
Speaker 1: them pretty much. So what this means is there's actually
Speaker 1: not that many possible effusion configurations for this. These have
Speaker 1: to be sphere maas. I mean, they're literally we're looking
Speaker 1: at a sphere, so that must be a plasma that's
Speaker 1: being confined in by a spherical magnetic fields. And one
Speaker 1: of the only ways that only configurations for this is
Speaker 1: something called field reverse configuration. A field reverse configuration creates
Speaker 1: an axial poloidal magnetic field just like the Earth. And
Speaker 1: with the Earth, how does the Earth work? We at
Speaker 1: we have a north and a south pole. If you
Speaker 1: imagine like a neutron star. These neutron stars have jets
Speaker 1: shooting out of either end of them, like what they
Speaker 1: call it, I don't know what the name of it is,
Speaker 1: some you know, death beam or they say they're like, oh,
Speaker 1: if that beam is facing us, it'll like instantly wipe
Speaker 1: us out. This is what they're talking about. Because these
Speaker 1: plasma balls are spitting out material or X rays, you know,
Speaker 1: out of either end of it, and they just realize, like, oh,
Speaker 1: we can use that as propulsion. So that's what's going
Speaker 1: on with the orbs at a high level.
Speaker 6: Well, that brings up something interesting. So these precursor sort
Speaker 6: of shadows, right, would that be an indication of some
Speaker 6: sort of cavitation containment because I think a lot of
Speaker 6: this comes down to this cavitation idea that we see
Speaker 6: that alternative energy researchers have been working on for years
Speaker 6: that it keeps coming up over and over again. Is
Speaker 6: this cavitation force field or cavitation force.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so I think we're talking about like an implosive
Speaker 1: force basically. I think that theme comes up a lot
Speaker 1: in these videos. First of all with the zapp but
Speaker 1: the plane disappearing, which I've come to conclude must be
Speaker 1: some form of wormhole. Wormhole is like a conceptual view
Speaker 1: of how we would connect two points in space and time.
Speaker 1: It's not really a technical how do you do this
Speaker 1: kind of thing? It's more of a how would you
Speaker 1: think about the universe and doing something like that and cavitation.
Speaker 1: So we also when when that plane disappears, if that
Speaker 1: was an explosion, I would expect this white hot explosion
Speaker 1: on the thermal camera and then the gorgon stair whammy.
Speaker 1: It's like this flash for just one like second. So
Speaker 1: photons are being released, but they're not hot photons because
Speaker 1: they're not hot in the other video. This is like
Speaker 1: another one of the biggest giveaways. That means that's some
Speaker 1: kind of endothermic reaction. It's like a monopole one half
Speaker 1: of a magnet. It's like one end of a magnet.
Speaker 1: It's blipping out and that must be blipping back in
Speaker 1: somewhere else. That's what it seems to represent from the
Speaker 1: color and the heat signatures that we're seeing on the
Speaker 1: videos and cavitation. This idea of implosive effect. It's almost
Speaker 1: like the difference between fission and fusion. So we have
Speaker 1: like an A bomb, which is like a release of
Speaker 1: explosion of you know, energy, But from a fusion perspective,
Speaker 1: is that the opposite? Like what would a fusion a
Speaker 1: pure fusion bomb actually look like. This is what I
Speaker 1: would challenge people because when I first had this idea
Speaker 1: of like, are we looking at like a pure fusion
Speaker 1: bomb with no fission, no neutrons being released as heat?
Speaker 1: Is that why it's like purely dark in that thermal
Speaker 1: One of the things I started researching was the history
Speaker 1: of it, Like, okay, well what's the history of the
Speaker 1: H bomb? Well, the H bomb was figured out in
Speaker 1: the sixties, but it was never dropped, at least not
Speaker 1: publicly publicly. There was never an H bomb that was
Speaker 1: set off and nuclear uh whatever it is, anti prohibition
Speaker 1: or whatever, it was like we basically stopped making nukes
Speaker 1: and what have you. So I wonder if there is
Speaker 1: this connection to cavitation and implosive effect that we figured
Speaker 1: out from fusion bombs, and we never showed what they do,
Speaker 1: and everybody in their mind is just thought, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: thermonuclear bombs just like a bigger nuke, that must be
Speaker 1: what it is. But what if it's not that. What
Speaker 1: if it's actually just like straight up so much electromagnetic
Speaker 1: energy in a region of space time and a condensed
Speaker 1: region of space time that it actually just detaches that
Speaker 1: region from space time, like just attaches it. That would
Speaker 1: actually make kind of a lot of sense in terms
Speaker 1: of like when and how they would have branched this technology.
Speaker 1: It would have been in the sixties when they figured
Speaker 1: out fusion and they figured out this whole aspect of
Speaker 1: manipulating space time from fusion bombs, and then they would
Speaker 1: have had to classify inertial confinement fusion research, which is
Speaker 1: also potentially linked to cavitation, because this idea of like
Speaker 1: this super powerful compressive pressure force, you know, going inward
Speaker 1: on your object, and so basically maybe that you know, cavitation, compression, fusion,
Speaker 1: all of this was suppressed while they were trying to
Speaker 1: figure out h bombs and how to make the waves
Speaker 1: like hit these h bombs, and to make you know,
Speaker 1: these these massive effects, they figured out something completely different.
Speaker 6: Potentially, it would be like a different form of mathematic Right,
Speaker 6: we're operating on one form of mathematics. They're operating on
Speaker 6: a completely different form. And so this is where that
Speaker 6: disconnect really starts to line up.
Speaker 1: I mean, I wouldn't take it that far personally. I
Speaker 1: think that what I've found is that you don't need
Speaker 1: new math or physics to actually figure this out. That's
Speaker 1: part of the rub too, So we don't have to
Speaker 1: have some oh, here's the hidden the hidden physics, here's
Speaker 1: the hidden math. It's actually just conceptual perspective change, in
Speaker 1: my opinion, and it's a simple one too. It's we
Speaker 1: go from thinking that we're in an empty vacuum to
Speaker 1: realizing we're in a medium, we're in a fish tank.
Speaker 1: And we do kind of think that, but we think
Speaker 1: of it as like the air around us. But we
Speaker 1: don't really think about the air around us. We don't
Speaker 1: really think, you know, we just assume, yeah, were chilling,
Speaker 1: and this bubble here it seems like nothing. But that's
Speaker 1: also true of empty space. Empty space also isn't nothing.
Speaker 1: It's also not nothing. And this conceptual viewpoint change changes
Speaker 1: everything because what it means then is the space the
Speaker 1: distance between here and the moon or here in anywhere
Speaker 1: is the zoo or a point energy that that is
Speaker 1: a substance. So if you remove that substance, what happens, Oh,
Speaker 1: you shrink the distance between here and there potentially. Now
Speaker 1: this conceptual viewpoint helps understand how Einstein was right about
Speaker 1: general relativity. Einstein was right. Actually, all the equations about
Speaker 1: like warp drives and wormholes they come from Einstein's general relativity.
Speaker 1: It's a big misconception that people think that like Einstein,
Speaker 1: thought space was empty. No. For for Einstein was the
Speaker 1: one that said there would be gravitational waves and we
Speaker 1: found them, and that shows that space time is some
Speaker 1: kind of medium. It's not just some fixed thing that
Speaker 1: you know, is empty.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I asked, and I had a question.
Speaker 1: Man.
Speaker 7: When I first seen that video, I thought that was
Speaker 7: pretty fascinating. But the past few years I've seen some
Speaker 7: people that posted on REDIT and they were going through
Speaker 7: and they were editors and looking at this stuff.
Speaker 8: I didn't know.
Speaker 7: I wanted to get your comments on the people that
Speaker 7: claim that this is you know, edited. And one of
Speaker 7: the things that one of the videos I seen, they
Speaker 7: put side by side a video from this nineteen nineties
Speaker 7: video game Killing Time when this portal opens up and
Speaker 7: the guy that you know steal the frame and put
Speaker 7: him side by side. I mean, they look almost identical,
Speaker 7: if I'm just being honest. But I've not heard anybody
Speaker 7: rebuttle it or anything like that. I just want to
Speaker 7: know what your thoughts were on it.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, yeah, I mean I've refuted it a lot
Speaker 1: of times. I mean, I don't know. I was surprised
Speaker 1: that that actually caught on as well as it did.
Speaker 1: When you see the debunks, usually this is like a
Speaker 1: magician's trick. What they do is they edit it and
Speaker 1: then they hide the parts that don't match, and they
Speaker 1: show you, like one edge, they go, oh, look, it's
Speaker 1: a perfect match, Like after I've changed it, after I've
Speaker 1: recolored it, after I've shown you the part I don't
Speaker 1: show you, But they don't say that part. They just
Speaker 1: say it's a perfect match. Oh, you forgot the five
Speaker 1: steps before that. And so usually what I do, like
Speaker 1: the easiest way to break down and just prove that
Speaker 1: those people are lying to you, is I just literally
Speaker 1: will show you like an exact overlay like that's like
Speaker 1: and they'll never show you that, those debunkers never will,
Speaker 1: So like, pull this up if you don't mind, real quick,
Speaker 1: so I can just show this. So, I mean, this
Speaker 1: is an exact overlay of the two frames. And I
Speaker 1: don't want to point out the people that say it's
Speaker 1: an exact match. They're saying that someone took a stock
Speaker 1: effect which is multiple frames and put it into the video.
Speaker 1: But this is the only frame that's even close. And
Speaker 1: as you can see here, I can see what they did.
Speaker 1: They found something where the edges on the right are similar,
Speaker 1: but in the middle it's not even close to the same. Now,
Speaker 1: I'll be honest, it is pretty amazing. They found something
Speaker 1: that has a dot that's almost kind of in a
Speaker 1: similar spot here. But again, yeah, this needs to be
Speaker 1: a perfect match. This can't be a partial match. Partial
Speaker 1: match means is not a match. You're telling me that
Speaker 1: someone edited this into the video. It needs to be
Speaker 1: a perfect match, like literally pixel for pixel perfect match.
Speaker 1: Not Oh, it's pretty close. And again I'm gonna point out,
Speaker 1: I know these videos are real. So what do you
Speaker 1: really want from me? If you're gonna make up stuff
Speaker 1: like that, like, oh, it's close enough. No, it's not
Speaker 1: good enough. You can't just stay as close up. In fact, here,
Speaker 1: let me if you pull this up. This is the
Speaker 1: actual full stock effect, not just the one frame, the
Speaker 1: whole stock effect put into the video. That's it. One frame.
Speaker 1: You can see, Yeah, it looks kind of similar if
Speaker 1: you resize it right, but you can see the edges
Speaker 1: don't actually really match. It's just it's close. And then
Speaker 1: after that nothing's even remote. How would you even edit
Speaker 1: this frame to get this to match? I don't know how.
Speaker 1: You can see there's like a blast effect, and that's
Speaker 1: because this is actually not what the this stock effect here.
Speaker 1: This isn't even CGI. This is photos we found the
Speaker 1: guy that made this. Those are pictures of fire. So
Speaker 1: what you're telling me someone modified pictures of fire? Photos
Speaker 1: of fire. That's a photo, not a CGI. So like,
Speaker 1: that's how easy it is to just debunk. That's the
Speaker 1: number one debunk. By the way, most people think that
Speaker 1: that stock effect is a perfect match because people on
Speaker 1: YouTube keep repeating the lie that it is when I
Speaker 1: can just show you in five seconds that it's not.
Speaker 1: And so my question would be if they're willing to
Speaker 1: like lie that boldly. Never show you what I just
Speaker 1: showed you, never explain in simple terms like I just did.
Speaker 1: Why are you? Why is anyone listening to those people
Speaker 1: at all? What else are they lying about? In fact? Too,
Speaker 1: because the people that are making those claims are not
Speaker 1: just like one time debunker people. There are people that
Speaker 1: like Mick West, who's the monking literally everything out there,
Speaker 1: and if he's willing to lie, it's so boldly about
Speaker 1: something like that, or the Corridor crew who make multiple
Speaker 1: debunk like reaction videos. You know, what else are they
Speaker 1: willing to lie about? I think it's crazy that people
Speaker 1: think that I don't like have credibility when you know,
Speaker 1: I'm happy to discuss this. And do you see those
Speaker 1: people on podcasts answering questions? Never? Never, ever, Mick West
Speaker 1: will never go on a podcast where anyone's going to
Speaker 1: be adversarial towards him ever, because he's afraid.
Speaker 7: Well, I'm glad I asked man, because that's obviously something
Speaker 7: you've been asked a lot, and I just I wouldn't
Speaker 7: a wire but you had the film at the ready, man.
Speaker 1: I appreciate that I've got all the debunks read. I mean.
Speaker 1: The only other thing too, I'll say is that the
Speaker 1: way that I saw it kind of play out is
Speaker 1: like people online just kind of make stuff up like oh,
Speaker 1: this shouldn't look this way or this shouldn't look that way,
Speaker 1: and then they'll like try to google something that they'll
Speaker 1: think that like supports their view, but it's kind of
Speaker 1: out of context because they don't really no, they don't
Speaker 1: google it no more. Man, they chat shept or Rochet, Hey, Groc,
Speaker 1: what's the answer this right? Like, oh my god, and
Speaker 1: then you know, and Groc is just lying too now
Speaker 1: at this point, because Groc's just reading whatever people saw
Speaker 1: on the internet, which that scares me more than anything.
Speaker 1: So really what I wanted And this is if you
Speaker 1: go back to my early liveship that told people like
Speaker 1: people need to learn to think critically, like we have
Speaker 1: to think critically about everything. And this is where the
Speaker 1: debunkers are the ones trying to tell you think critically,
Speaker 1: but they're not the ones thinking critically. They're the ones going, oh,
Speaker 1: this close enough match, we don't have to think about
Speaker 1: where this plane disappeared into and how that could have
Speaker 1: been possible, and why we never really found anything where
Speaker 1: we were searching, you know. So what I tell people
Speaker 1: to try to like really rationalize how this is real
Speaker 1: to people to say, like, what do you think the
Speaker 1: whole stories if you believe the videos are fake, what
Speaker 1: do you think the story is about who made those videos?
Speaker 1: Because there's nobody that's claiming to be the person that
Speaker 1: made those videos. In fact, one person was claiming for
Speaker 1: like a year and a half and turned out they
Speaker 1: were a huge scammer and it turned out they were
Speaker 1: like texting with this website owner place and like asking
Speaker 1: them the fake receipts to pretend like they made the videos.
Speaker 1: So wow, I mean, like, who made the videos if
Speaker 1: you think they did? And we're even not even if
Speaker 1: you don't know the exact person, But what's the mental
Speaker 1: profile of the person who faked videos of a missing
Speaker 1: plane within a few days with this looks like military footage?
Speaker 1: And how did they know all of that? And why
Speaker 1: did they waste all this time to do this? And
Speaker 1: how do they know what coordinates to put in the plane?
Speaker 1: And why did they put a satellite designation the bottom
Speaker 1: left that says NROL twenty two, which is a real satellite,
Speaker 1: and why did they know to call it NROL twenty two,
Speaker 1: which nobody, I don't think would have ever thought to
Speaker 1: do that. Like, these are all just a few of
Speaker 1: the completely inexplicable questions. But the big killer, the real
Speaker 1: nail in the coffin, is Gorgon Stare. I mean, once
Speaker 1: I found out that that was Gorgan's Stare wide air
Speaker 1: e motion imager, everyone's wondering that first video I showed,
Speaker 1: it's actually not video at all. The frame rate's too low,
Speaker 1: it's only six frames per second. Why is the screen
Speaker 1: moving around like this? Why is there a mouse cursor
Speaker 1: that like comes off the screen and is moving around
Speaker 1: on the screen. Because you're looking at someone who's on
Speaker 1: software recording with their mouse and they're recording a screen
Speaker 1: a window, like right now, I have a bunch of
Speaker 1: windows up on my screen. They're recording one of those windows,
Speaker 1: and that's why you see the mouse come onto the window.
Speaker 1: And then why does it go black at the end?
Speaker 1: It goes black at the end because they close the window,
Speaker 1: and now the screen goes black. And that surveillance capability,
Speaker 1: that whammy was basically brand new, that capability we're looking
Speaker 1: I was almost brand new in twenty fourteen when that
Speaker 1: would have leaked, so those leaks wouldn't have just been
Speaker 1: crazy plasma ORBS teleportation black operation, but also revealing our
Speaker 1: secret drone surveillance capability, which apparently is like Google Earth.
Speaker 1: Wherever you have a drone flying overhere, you can just
Speaker 1: you know, I'm gonna do some DVR playback. Oh I
Speaker 1: missed that episode of Teleport the Plane. Let's go ahead
Speaker 1: and pull that back up.
Speaker 6: Well, and the most important part about this debunking is
Speaker 6: that they're focusing on the messenger.
Speaker 1: You found these videos.
Speaker 6: It's not like you created them, and we can't find
Speaker 6: the guys who created them. So if they were really
Speaker 6: trying to debunk it, they'd be going after finding who
Speaker 6: posted these videos, and they're not interested.
Speaker 1: So that's the big This is the giveaway. There's so
Speaker 1: many ways to show that the people trying to debunk
Speaker 1: these videos aren't doing it in good faith. But the
Speaker 1: best one is early on too. They have a whole
Speaker 1: debunker subreddit that they banned me from right away because
Speaker 1: I can't have people like actually solving the mystery. They
Speaker 1: would say that, oh, I'm the one hurting the you
Speaker 1: know the case, I'm the one making it, so that
Speaker 1: We're never going to get the truth because I'm spreading
Speaker 1: so much disinformation about it. And I'd laugh in those
Speaker 1: people's faces because none of them have been trying to
Speaker 1: solve MH three seven zero. None of them have been
Speaker 1: trying to solve the videos. They've all been trying to
Speaker 1: make it go away. That's all they've been trying to
Speaker 1: do from the beginning. They're trying to make people not
Speaker 1: listen to me. They've been trying to make nobody look
Speaker 1: at those videos, trying to make content related to Magery
Speaker 1: seven zreing those videos not be seen, deboosted, whatever they
Speaker 1: can do. They want as many people as possible think
Speaker 1: those videos are fake because they need that to happen,
Speaker 1: because that's the only way those videos stay hidden is
Speaker 1: that the moment people start to wake up those videos,
Speaker 1: that's the biggest nightmare of the US government could have
Speaker 1: ever ever imagined. So, once again, why are these people
Speaker 1: not trying to solve the case. Why are they attacking me?
Speaker 1: Why are they trying to debunk the videos at all?
Speaker 1: Like anybody there's a good faith researcher, they should just
Speaker 1: be trying to figure out, like who made the videos?
Speaker 1: If I didn't think the videos were real, I'd be
Speaker 1: trying to figure out who made them. I'd be like,
Speaker 1: that's crazy, how could somebody have made this? We need
Speaker 1: to find that person. They're not interested in that though,
Speaker 1: because they know there's nobody that ma.
Speaker 2: They don't want the basics.
Speaker 8: Man.
Speaker 5: I always say, you got to know the basics before
Speaker 5: you even attack anything else. And that's the basics right there.
Speaker 5: Who to Hill made the video in the first place,
Speaker 5: and then let's go from there.
Speaker 4: You know, Like even as me as like a video
Speaker 4: person podcasting, I'd be like, all right, I'm gonna pull
Speaker 4: apart that video because that's where I'm gonna find out
Speaker 4: if it's real or not.
Speaker 2: Like I wouldn't. Yeah, I understand what you get. Man,
Speaker 2: did you go to the source? Yeah? Yeah.
Speaker 1: Here's the thing. Even if they come back and say like, oh, well,
Speaker 1: you know what, can you can you find the person
Speaker 1: that leaked them? Yes?
Speaker 6: I did.
Speaker 1: I literally found the person that leaked the videos. And
Speaker 1: that's the whole point is like, if those videos were fake,
Speaker 1: you should be able to find the person that made them,
Speaker 1: no excuses whatsoever. They're not dead or whatever other bs
Speaker 1: people try to come up with. If it was in
Speaker 1: some eighty year old man making those videos in twenty
Speaker 1: fourteen or something like that. I literally found the guy
Speaker 1: that leaked them because just from looking at the videos,
Speaker 1: that's how you can only do this. From real videos,
Speaker 1: you can tell the intent of the person leaking them.
Speaker 1: You can tell what's going on. You can tell that
Speaker 1: that's a leaked military footage from the United States government
Speaker 1: just from the videos, because we can see a General
Speaker 1: Atomics MQ nine drone with like a Northrop Grumming camera
Speaker 1: on hard point number five underneath the drone. Like that
Speaker 1: information alone proves that to the United States government at play.
Speaker 1: So then it was just a matter of like, okay,
Speaker 1: they must have charged somebody with this. Like the first
Speaker 1: thing I learned was you can't actually hide these charges
Speaker 1: unless we're in martial law. If somebody does something like this,
Speaker 1: you got to charge them publicly. Okay. So, was anybody
Speaker 1: charged with like major crimes like you know, espionage that
Speaker 1: maybe it got brushed under the rug or something like
Speaker 1: that where we never really heard about it. Oh yeah,
Speaker 1: I found the guy. Took it like two weeks. But
Speaker 1: there's not that many people, and I just went systematically
Speaker 1: down the list once I hit Edward Lynn, I was like, oh,
Speaker 1: there he has found him. Like he's in this super
Speaker 1: secret Navy program. He's got the exact right access he
Speaker 1: would need. He gets charged with espionage, but there's his
Speaker 1: cases shrouded in mystery. They won't say what it is
Speaker 1: that he leaked, but his lawyer is going around saying that, oh,
Speaker 1: it's on the internet. The evidence is on the internet.
Speaker 1: What And then they make him take a plea deal.
Speaker 1: They make him take a plea deal. They convince him
Speaker 1: that what he did was wrong, which is probably like
Speaker 1: that wasn't aliens, bro, You weren't leaking aliens to the world.
Speaker 1: You were leaking our nuclear secrets to the world. Just
Speaker 1: imagine how the conversation went. And then he goes, oh,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, I'm hurt. My spirit is broken. That's almost
Speaker 1: a direct quote, by the way, and takes the plea
Speaker 1: deal so they get rid of all the espionage chargers.
Speaker 1: They're like, Okay, you took a plea deal, We're just
Speaker 1: going to get you with classified you know, information or whatever.
Speaker 1: It's like, great, I'm going to get a slap on
Speaker 1: the wrist right nine years, nine years for dissemination of
Speaker 1: classified information. That's crazy. That's a super long time. So
Speaker 1: you'd think, Okay, he appeals. We look at his appeal.
Speaker 1: His appeal. Actually, the penal codes are consistent with video
Speaker 1: evidence being what he leaked. I mean, it could be
Speaker 1: other stuff because the penal codes are multiple things, but
Speaker 1: you know, still in the realm. He argued that he
Speaker 1: got like way too much time, and so in response,
Speaker 1: the military said, nope, what he leaked was super serious,
Speaker 1: and they had people testify to the judge why it
Speaker 1: was associous. They actually needed someone to Why would you
Speaker 1: need someone to testify to the judge about? Why would
Speaker 1: he was leaked was so serious? Shouldn't it just be obvious?
Speaker 3: Right?
Speaker 1: Was it nuclear codes? Like? What was it?
Speaker 2: Oh?
Speaker 1: Because it's some crazy videos of orbs spinning around a plane.
Speaker 1: And then someone needs to me someone's got to explain
Speaker 1: that to the judge because it can't be explained otherwise, right,
Speaker 1: Like why is this guy not a hero? For example?
Speaker 1: You know he's leaking like an illegal operation to the world. Oh,
Speaker 1: because it's a classified official operation. You know, So what
Speaker 1: was the last thing I was gonna say? Uh? But yeah,
Speaker 1: so he's the guy that had to have leaked the videos,
Speaker 1: and he changed his name after I start, after I
Speaker 1: figured this out. We didn't find this out until like
Speaker 1: six months ago. But after I figured this out, three
Speaker 1: months later, I'm saying his name on podcast. He legally
Speaker 1: changes his name. I'm trying to find the guy, like
Speaker 1: I help. I'm trying to find him, trying to get
Speaker 1: in touch with him because like, maybe he'll talk to me.
Speaker 1: I don't know what the circumstances were, but now I
Speaker 1: know the circumstances. Like his sister's a lawyer in Home
Speaker 1: Land Security. His brother in law is Sean Naylor, who's
Speaker 1: a national security MSM. Mainstream media like spook guy, and
Speaker 1: I'm going, holy shit, now I see what's going on.
Speaker 1: Like nobody knows what Edward Lynn leaked. His family might
Speaker 1: not know, his friends probably don't know. I talked to
Speaker 1: somebody that was in his unit. They didn't know. They
Speaker 1: thought it was like prostitutes. I'm like, dude, does that
Speaker 1: make sense? He was telling prostitutes something. They put him
Speaker 1: in prison for nine years. He literally triggered a security
Speaker 1: alert to the Joint chiefs of Staff. What he leaked
Speaker 1: did that wasn't prostitutes, bro, That is actual video of
Speaker 1: something right, and the VPU tube two person told me
Speaker 1: this isn't even I think in any of the media
Speaker 1: releases that when Edward Lynn got arrested, they rolled him
Speaker 1: up with flash drives as well. Now that's hugely important
Speaker 1: because it implies that he was pulling data and running
Speaker 1: away with it, and that would explain how those videos
Speaker 1: got on the internet too, as he pulled them from
Speaker 1: a s gift. Oh and last thing I'll say is
Speaker 1: that his sister won't talk. His the brother in law
Speaker 1: won't talk. I can't get him to talk. I've called
Speaker 1: his business multiple times, can't get him on the phone.
Speaker 1: His lawyer tried to get his lawyer. I have his
Speaker 1: lawyer's phone number. He disconnected his phone number, turned his
Speaker 1: phone off, would never return to any phone calls. And
Speaker 1: not like I'm being psychoed, just asking him, like, hey, Broy,
Speaker 1: I want to talk to you about your your guy,
Speaker 1: you know, your your client in his case, especially because
Speaker 1: like I have some pretty compelling like I'm basically saying,
Speaker 1: he's a hero. In my opinion, he's leaking like free energy,
Speaker 1: plasma orb technology black operation. From a public perspective, he
Speaker 1: seems like he should be a hero. But I think
Speaker 1: that all the baggage that comes along with it, and
Speaker 1: he knows that, like this isn't the kind of thing
Speaker 1: that you come out and you become a hero, Like
Speaker 1: they try to bury you if you come out probably
Speaker 1: with something like this. Right. So that's the Edward Lynn story.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 6: That's incredible. So let's get into some of the patents.
Speaker 6: This is some of the new stuff that you've been
Speaker 6: talking about. What kind of patent have you found tangential
Speaker 6: to this technology?
Speaker 1: So patent wise, I mean, I think that the scientific
Speaker 1: papers are better, but the patents think about the patents,
Speaker 1: A lot of them are just like hard to read,
Speaker 1: hard to understand. They make them that way intentionally, and
Speaker 1: from watching the engineers too. Even the engineers know that,
Speaker 1: like the patent office won't approve anything that touches on
Speaker 1: like violating the first or second law of thermodynamics. So
Speaker 1: they weren't everything in like overly complex ways intentionally actually,
Speaker 1: which goes to show how mess up the system is.
Speaker 1: But the pattern that first caught my eye was a
Speaker 1: coherent matter way of being patent by Charles Chase of
Speaker 1: lockeed Martin and I never even really understood it that well.
Speaker 1: But from reading it, it seemed like the kind of
Speaker 1: thing where like you're making matter like phase through solid objects,
Speaker 1: and you're like, wait, okay, well that seems relevant if
Speaker 1: somehow we figured out teleportation.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 1: So and Bob Greenier had been talking about that past
Speaker 1: and for a while too, so I had always had
Speaker 1: my eye on that pattern. And then it wasn't until
Speaker 1: a few weeks ago when I found and I saw
Speaker 1: another video by Charles Chase, the guy that was the
Speaker 1: patent holder, and he was talking about the coherent matterwave
Speaker 1: beam and he finally explains what it can do, and
Speaker 1: he says, oh, it's a million times more powerful than
Speaker 1: a laser, and I just my eyes opened up, because
Speaker 1: lasers have gotten extremely powerful ado second lasers, I think
Speaker 1: it's like ten to the minus eighteen. Basically, the faster
Speaker 1: you can pulse something, the more energy density you can
Speaker 1: fit into a little region. And that's exactly what we
Speaker 1: need for space time manipulation, according to the math and
Speaker 1: to the physics. So if you can make something that's
Speaker 1: a million times more powerful than that, that's another six zeros.
Speaker 1: I'm going this has got to be able to manipulate
Speaker 1: spacetime like and then the other things, what else can
Speaker 1: it do? It can also do atomic scale manufacturing. And
Speaker 1: now I'm going, wait, are you talking about Star Trek replicators. Well, yeah,
Speaker 1: it turns out this Charles Chase guy just did an
Speaker 1: interview two days ago and he literally says the word replicator,
Speaker 1: says that's what he was doing with the coherent matterway,
Speaker 1: but that's what he's working on right now. And then
Speaker 1: the last thing he says is transporting matter at a distance,
Speaker 1: which I think is a head nod to teleportation. So
Speaker 1: that's my favorite pattern and that's my favorite guy, which,
Speaker 1: by the way, looked into Charles Chase, top zero point
Speaker 1: one percent of Lockheed Martin Engineers, he got Fellow designation,
Speaker 1: and he's the guy that convinced the cxos of Lockheed Martin,
Speaker 1: the top people of Lockheed Martin, to go all in
Speaker 1: on this compact fusion reactor idea like a decade ago.
Speaker 1: And on his resume it says it was successful and
Speaker 1: it's breathing on its own direct quote on his resume
Speaker 1: from the guy who invented it. Was the guy who
Speaker 1: convinced the cxos to do it, and that project went
Speaker 1: dark in twenty eighteen, and no one knows what happened
Speaker 1: to him since on guys like literally, Congress should be
Speaker 1: like compelling Charles Chase to testify, because if anyone wants
Speaker 1: to know where the supermagic technology is, like there's your
Speaker 1: smoking gun.
Speaker 6: Right, that's kind of the purpose.
Speaker 9: Oh go ahead, No, just real quickly questioned mymalogies, the
Speaker 9: actual coherent matter wave? Does that touch upon the Hutchinson effect?
Speaker 1: It could? I think that he was asked, I think
Speaker 1: about Hutchinson, but the coherent matterwave beam is essentially taking it.
Speaker 1: So with a laser, you take all that, you make
Speaker 1: sure all the wavelengths of light are in the same phase.
Speaker 1: So think of it as like the same color, right,
Speaker 1: all the same exact color. That's why laser is one
Speaker 1: single color. And then you just overlap them on top
Speaker 1: of each other. And when you overlap those waves, they amplify.
Speaker 1: That's why a laser is like stimulated amplification, light amplifications stimulated.
Speaker 1: I always forget the exact acronym. But with a mat wave,
Speaker 1: you're essentially doing the same thing. You're saying, Okay, now,
Speaker 1: matter itself is a wave. So you think of an
Speaker 1: atom or a cup and we look at it and
Speaker 1: we think of this solid object, but if you really
Speaker 1: boil it down, this is a complex series of waves.
Speaker 3: What this is.
Speaker 1: So if we can actually isolate our matter waves and
Speaker 1: the way they do this is a Bose Einstein condensate,
Speaker 1: then we can eject the matter all out at the
Speaker 1: same wavelength the same way we do with the light.
Speaker 1: With the laser, we can eject the light out of
Speaker 1: the photons of the same wavelength. We can do the
Speaker 1: same thing with matter. Then you can create a matter
Speaker 1: wave beam. But to answer your question, is it connected
Speaker 1: to the Hutchinson and stuff. Yeah, absolutely, and Thomas Townson
Speaker 1: Brown and really a lot of the engineers and scientists
Speaker 1: that you've heard in the lore around free energy and
Speaker 1: gravity manipulation. It's all connected by a common thread of
Speaker 1: science for sure.
Speaker 9: Yeah, because it would play upon the whole fusion thing
Speaker 9: that you were speaking about earlier. And then I guess
Speaker 9: a sense it would be analogous to switching out photons
Speaker 9: for matter, like they're both packets of energy, it's just
Speaker 9: the density, right, Would that be.
Speaker 1: Correct to say mass is energy? Matter is energy? So
Speaker 1: that's one of the very really important things. I think
Speaker 1: it was a Ningly presentation. She's one of these anti
Speaker 1: gravity researchers from the nineties that's aw ybco or why
Speaker 1: CBO I always get the acronymic sed uff, but these superconductors.
Speaker 1: It was her and her presentation where she points out
Speaker 1: E equals mc squared means that matter is equal to energy.
Speaker 1: Now that seems like a very basic thing, but it's
Speaker 1: so fundamental and so important because if we are now
Speaker 1: saying that we can manipulate gravity through mass like a planet, well,
Speaker 1: now if I convert that mass into energy, I should
Speaker 1: be able to calculate how much energy I need to
Speaker 1: manipulate space time as well. And so that's super important
Speaker 1: because now we're saying, okay, if I'm going to manipulate
Speaker 1: the space time with energy, now I can actually do
Speaker 1: the calculations. Now I can figure out theoretical what I
Speaker 1: would need, and this is what scientists did. They did
Speaker 1: that and they found, oh, well, to manipulate you know,
Speaker 1: space time significantly, we need like this Jupiter size amount
Speaker 1: of mass energy and so they will call it mass energy.
Speaker 1: But then they also figured it out, Okay, we start
Speaker 1: doing the math, we start finding little tricks that we
Speaker 1: can do, like you know, uh, spin is one of
Speaker 1: the things they can do. They call it a rotating wormhole.
Speaker 1: One of the other things they can do is they
Speaker 1: can make flat faced wormholes. And then these things now
Speaker 1: reduce the energy requirements significantly. So there are ways they
Speaker 1: found that even around the challenges.
Speaker 8: That they had, and I guess the and just to
Speaker 8: go ahead.
Speaker 1: Sorry. One other thing that I just wanted to this
Speaker 1: is kind of tangential or related to that, was that
Speaker 1: when it comes to waves as well, this idea of fusion.
Speaker 1: So we think of fusion as like particles forcing the
Speaker 1: particles to come together, and they want to repel each other,
Speaker 1: so they get to this point we can't get them
Speaker 1: to come any closer, the Coulan barrier, we call it.
Speaker 1: But if particles are just waves, they're not actually particles anymore.
Speaker 1: Then really we're combining waves when we're doing fusion, combining
Speaker 1: the waves together and we make a new wave from it.
Speaker 1: That would be, in my opinion, a more intuitive way
Speaker 1: of thinking about fusion. We just don't think about that
Speaker 1: way because we think of everything as particles. Charles Chase
Speaker 1: actually touches on this subject and he says, you know,
Speaker 1: the matter wave beam can create new elements, like literally
Speaker 1: even super heavy elements that we wouldn't think we could
Speaker 1: create naturally, but we can artificially create them and they
Speaker 1: become stable as well. So there may be this connection
Speaker 1: between the coherent matter wave beam and fusion. And when
Speaker 1: I see some like coherent matter way and hear that
Speaker 1: explanation myself, I go, obviously they must have figured out fusion.
Speaker 1: You can't figured out coherent matter wave beam without have
Speaker 1: already first figured it out fusion, right.
Speaker 8: So yeah, and so kind of just going based on
Speaker 8: building on what you said.
Speaker 9: In my mind, I'm relating it to biological systems, and
Speaker 9: there are points when you have a wave that's coming
Speaker 9: from both ends and they meet in the center and
Speaker 9: then they kind of go back out. But that center
Speaker 9: point is that zero point node. And it almost I
Speaker 9: almost wonder if some of these orbs wormholes.
Speaker 8: Is that center point node.
Speaker 9: And the reason I say that is because you see
Speaker 9: it kind of stand still and it is the actual
Speaker 9: point of manipulation. And when you think about DNA, you
Speaker 9: see this entire coding region, but it's in specific areas
Speaker 9: where you have a palindrome and repeating area, and it
Speaker 9: is the point where you calculate the entire genome. It
Speaker 9: is the site where viruses inject themselves to where you
Speaker 9: can manipulate the coding rerangion going in and out. And
Speaker 9: so when you bring in the wormhole thing, and then
Speaker 9: you think about gravitational as waves to me, and it
Speaker 9: probably is completely incorrect that I think of it in
Speaker 9: terms of zero point nodes, that they are points of manipulating,
Speaker 9: should enforce time space or electromagnetic fields or anything like that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think the big thing to bring up is
Speaker 1: scaleing variants. Scaleing variance things that are very small. It
Speaker 1: can be very large as well. So then I guess
Speaker 1: the question is that the smallest possible scales, what does
Speaker 1: the universe look like? If I had to guess, I'd
Speaker 1: guess it probably looks like what it looks like the
Speaker 1: very small large scales as well. And so that also
Speaker 1: applies to biology. Probably. I think all this physics absolutely
Speaker 1: applies to biology. It must, And what you'll find when
Speaker 1: you start to dig into these engineers and scientists and physicists,
Speaker 1: a lot of them make that connection. Some of them
Speaker 1: are more leap into it more than others do, but
Speaker 1: they all realize that you know, where's the energy coming from,
Speaker 1: where's consciousness coming from? Is there a connection between quantum
Speaker 1: entanglement and how our minds work? And I agree on
Speaker 1: that as well. When it comes to zero point nodes
Speaker 1: and the planes and the orbs, absolutely, that's definitely in
Speaker 1: play in these videos, like the way those orbs are
Speaker 1: stabilized where they don't seem to like they don't dissipate,
Speaker 1: Like if lightning where to strike, it's going to dissipate, right,
Speaker 1: But these are like lightning balls that are just floating
Speaker 1: around almost like I made a vortex in my pool
Speaker 1: and the vortex is just going on forever and that
Speaker 1: and that configuration implies you've created this zero point in
Speaker 1: space time. Potentially, then that's how they're able to create
Speaker 1: fusion and cause this propulsion be stable. That you've created
Speaker 1: this zero point like longitudinal wave through the ether that's
Speaker 1: like invisible to us, is how I would think of it.
Speaker 1: With respect to the plane itself, the zero point is
Speaker 1: around the plane those orbs in a perfect triangle formation
Speaker 1: when they're using magnetic inversion to get locked into place
Speaker 1: like that where they don't come in or out any further.
Speaker 1: There's a zero point, right, in the middle where all
Speaker 1: the magnetic fields cancel each other out means there's no
Speaker 1: magnetic field there. So how do I know this is teleportation?
Speaker 1: You wouldn't go through all that effort if you were
Speaker 1: just annihilating the plane. You would just be like shoot
Speaker 1: it with a missile.
Speaker 6: Like.
Speaker 1: The reason why you're doing this complex dance with the
Speaker 1: zero point right in the middle of the plane is
Speaker 1: because that's a warm you're like detaching everything else around it.
Speaker 1: And when the orbs come together, they're coming together right
Speaker 1: before the plane disappears, also in a perfect geometric sequence
Speaker 1: as well to your point, because they're maintaining that zero point,
Speaker 1: they're like pinching and squeezing the plane, but not squeezing
Speaker 1: it through our three dimensional space, squeezing it through the
Speaker 1: fourth dimension right like down if you would want to
Speaker 1: think of it like that, and they're saying, Okay, you're
Speaker 1: getting squeezed poop, and then it's going to pop out
Speaker 1: back over here somewhere else.
Speaker 9: This all kind of spurre was because when you showed
Speaker 9: the images if you and maybe you have when you
Speaker 9: look at conception, when the sperm has penetrated into the zone,
Speaker 9: pollution of the egg and you see that explosion of
Speaker 9: six hundred thousand dions, it looks almost identical. And you
Speaker 9: do have a wormhole being created when you trap matter
Speaker 9: and when you trap and matter and energy into matter
Speaker 9: during conception.
Speaker 8: And this is not a debate or anything like that.
Speaker 8: It's proven IVF.
Speaker 9: This is the flash that they look for or before implantation,
Speaker 9: and your charge fifty thousand for it. So it just
Speaker 9: looks similar to the images you showed right before the
Speaker 9: plane when the plane disappears, and then when you look
Speaker 9: at conception and that explosion of the zero polluca.
Speaker 1: So yeah, another fun thing reaction. Oh, space can turn
Speaker 1: into photons as well, the dynamic Kasmir effect. It's a
Speaker 1: fun experiment. No one really talks about it. I like
Speaker 1: talking about the craziest experiments that people can't really explain
Speaker 1: or understand where light. Light gets produced from manipulating just
Speaker 1: the Kasmir effect, So photons get basically the way they
Speaker 1: explain is the virtual photons get converted to real photons.
Speaker 1: So you mean basically light comes from nowhere? Yeah, exactly,
Speaker 1: light just being pulled from space time itself, like almost
Speaker 1: like you're squeezing the sponge of space. Time and light
Speaker 1: is coming out of it. That to me is the
Speaker 1: greatest because how do you even explain that without there
Speaker 1: being a zero point energy out there? So I love
Speaker 1: the connection between you know, energy mass and then space,
Speaker 1: time and light as well.
Speaker 6: Well I was gonna, I was gonna ask you. So
Speaker 6: there's there's so many scientists out there that glaze this
Speaker 6: three three body problem book. You know, I hear so
Speaker 6: many of them talking about it, and it's like, how
Speaker 6: could there not be a connection because they're talking about
Speaker 6: dimensional physics in this three body problem, you're talking about
Speaker 6: flat surface you know, wormholes and stuff. This is a
Speaker 6: dimensional idea, right.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, oh yeah, yeah, it's it's adding an extra
Speaker 1: dimension one at one extra dimension just one. And I
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, my mind has opened to all
Speaker 1: the possibilities. But I personally believe this idea of like
Speaker 1: there's not like aliens coming from the extra dimension. In
Speaker 1: my opinion, now, I think you can ghost these things
Speaker 1: like that can actually make sense and spirits and like
Speaker 1: where a consciousness comes from. But I wouldn't think of
Speaker 1: the extra dimension as like you know, our bizarro versions
Speaker 1: hanging out there or something like that. Though you know
Speaker 1: who knows anything that is totally possible. I think I'm
Speaker 1: more of like we. It's the representation of all that
Speaker 1: mass and energy when you add up everything that we
Speaker 1: see plus the zero point energy, the fabric of our universe.
Speaker 1: When you add that all up, that's the ether. That's
Speaker 1: everything all combined. Like it almost like if you were
Speaker 1: to look at a snow globe, it's like, okay, is
Speaker 1: the snow globe just the objects? No, the snow globe
Speaker 1: is the water in there and everything, and I shake
Speaker 1: it all up like that because when you then do that,
Speaker 1: now you say okay, Now I can do equations where
Speaker 1: I can say the matter me is interacting with the
Speaker 1: space time, which I previously was discounting and sane was empty.
Speaker 1: But now I can say okay, because that helps me
Speaker 1: represent where I am, where is Ashton? Am I here
Speaker 1: in front of this screen? Or am I over where
Speaker 1: you are? Et cetera. And then this also opens the
Speaker 1: door to all these star trek capabilities that we've been seeing.
Speaker 1: And I'm very careful about not shooting down the idea
Speaker 1: of like you know, spiritual extra dimensional aliens of what
Speaker 1: have you, because honestly, this actually opens the door up
Speaker 1: to more options, and to me, then the next question
Speaker 1: is simply as like, is the many world hypothesis true,
Speaker 1: which would mean that like if I were to somehow
Speaker 1: go back in time break causality, is that going to
Speaker 1: make a new universe and therefore there must be infinite
Speaker 1: new universes everywhere and different paths that everybody's taking. Or
Speaker 1: is it more of this is the one and only
Speaker 1: universe and we're in a deterministic timeline and you either
Speaker 1: can't go back in time, or if you do go
Speaker 1: back in time, you're not changing anything. It was just
Speaker 1: always that way to me. That's a tough question that
Speaker 1: maybe we can never answer, but that's the one that
Speaker 1: will determine in my opinion, like how weird this all gets.
Speaker 2: There?
Speaker 1: You go some esoteric stuff for you guys.
Speaker 4: Uh, one thing I did want to get into. I
Speaker 4: didn't want to kind of get off of where we
Speaker 4: were going. But there was like certain things that I've
Speaker 4: seen you kind of I don't know if you mentioned
Speaker 4: it in your show, but I knew I show you
Speaker 4: tweeted and it quote my attention and actually made me think.
Speaker 4: I think you kind of said you had thought that
Speaker 4: it was possible that our government was using this technology
Speaker 4: when we bombed Iran.
Speaker 1: Sorry, what was the first part.
Speaker 4: There that I assure you make a tweet saying that
Speaker 4: you thought it might have been possible that the way
Speaker 4: we went into Iran and did what we did and
Speaker 4: come back without getting caught or nothing, you suspect possible.
Speaker 1: Now that's I think people are trying to say that.
Speaker 1: I was saying that I don't think we teleported our
Speaker 1: bombers over Iran. I don't think we need to do that, honestly,
Speaker 1: And I think that would be kind of like, why
Speaker 1: do that, because you're just kind of exposing your capabilities
Speaker 1: if you do that. But I do think the angle
Speaker 1: that I was going on is that I think Iran
Speaker 1: was working on trying to get this technology and that
Speaker 1: was just never gonna happen. I think the cover was like,
Speaker 1: technically the masade are the ones that killed those nine
Speaker 1: Iranian nuclear scientists. I don't know if you guys knew this,
Speaker 1: but they assassinated nine Iranian nuclear scientists while they were
Speaker 1: sleeping simultaneously, supposing, according to the news article, was using
Speaker 1: a secret weapon. You know, call it whatever you will.
Speaker 1: To me, nukes are like an old thing. Like, we're
Speaker 1: not working on the the you know, an a bomb.
Speaker 1: We you know, a bomb is something we dropped in
Speaker 1: nineteen forty five, that was eighty years ago. If you
Speaker 1: look at all the science around nuclear physics, all really
Speaker 1: a plasma, manipulating, controlling plasma, that's what those Iranian scientists
Speaker 1: would have been working on. In fact, that would mean
Speaker 1: they were definitely understood and working on the idea of
Speaker 1: zero point energy. And that's what the CIA would never
Speaker 1: have let happen, and they would have you know, Masad
Speaker 1: can probably act and do what they want, but they're
Speaker 1: working in concert with the CIA presumably or at least
Speaker 1: get their blessing. And that's the part where I think
Speaker 1: that's that's what's really going on in that season when
Speaker 1: we're talking about like nukes, we're not scared of you know,
Speaker 1: a bombs. We're scared someone's gonna make like a black
Speaker 1: hole super weapon that's infinite energy that just wipes out
Speaker 1: the whole planet like instantly, either accidentally or intentionally. So
Speaker 1: that's my take on that, and that's why I say
Speaker 1: people say, like, oh, like a lot of people try
Speaker 1: to gaslight about Russia or Iran being more powerful than
Speaker 1: the United States. You have to be out of your
Speaker 1: absolute mind if you think that these countries are more
Speaker 1: powerful in the United States. Like we just don't talk
Speaker 1: about our crazy stuff because we don't need to. Like
Speaker 1: we don't need to. And that's why, you know, anybody
Speaker 1: that goes against the United States on this in this
Speaker 1: planet is just going to get wiped out fashion they
Speaker 1: can possibly imagine. So people then say like, oh, well,
Speaker 1: why haven't we taken over China or Russia. It's like, well,
Speaker 1: how do you think that's going to play out? Like what, Oh, okay,
Speaker 1: we conquer you now now you're Americans now, Like it's
Speaker 1: not that simple. You know, that's not how geopolitics really works.
Speaker 1: But you know, the response to the Iran conflict or
Speaker 1: whatever war whatever they're calling it, twelve Day War, I mean,
Speaker 1: China did nothing, Russia did nothing. That was their main
Speaker 1: ally Iran was and we just went and bombed them
Speaker 1: and walked out like nothing. Russia can't even get air
Speaker 1: superiority over Ukraine, Like what you think they're going to
Speaker 1: get air superiority over any over us in a way.
Speaker 1: So I think that was a big tell sign where
Speaker 1: people kind of had to wake up and go, Okay, yeah,
Speaker 1: maybe the United States can do whatever they want. But again,
Speaker 1: that's that's my controversial take on the geopolitics side.
Speaker 2: Okay, gotcha. Yeah.
Speaker 4: I actually made a comment last night that I had
Speaker 4: actually thought that might be a lot of wars or
Speaker 4: a lot of things going on because of people having
Speaker 4: certain technology and just other governments don't want you having it,
Speaker 4: you know, stargates and free energy and shit like that.
Speaker 2: There was just an idea that I've had, so I
Speaker 2: guess you're kind of saying the same thing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And there's a lot of fun rabbit holes to
Speaker 1: go down on that front, because I mean, once you
Speaker 1: realize that they've got technology that's like free energy technology
Speaker 1: or teleportation, like that's stuff that nobody, like nobody in
Speaker 1: the mainstream is talking about them, even broaching the idea
Speaker 1: of people having that level of technology. But once you
Speaker 1: realize that, I was like, oh, now you start to
Speaker 1: think of things in a whole different light. You know.
Speaker 1: It's like everything's a completely different perspective, even the way
Speaker 1: that they frame a lot of this stuff. I mean,
Speaker 1: the biggest scam is, of course, climate change, not because
Speaker 1: it's not potentially real, but because the people that are
Speaker 1: trying to gaslight us about the dangers of climate change.
Speaker 1: Have the solution, They have this solution of fusion, they
Speaker 1: just don't give it to us, you know. So I
Speaker 1: do think that understanding that we have this whole technology,
Speaker 1: you know, assuming that it is true and we do
Speaker 1: have it, which I'm convinced of course. Yeah, just changes
Speaker 1: changes the perspective on everything geopolitically, frankly and energy wise.
Speaker 6: When you identify that all the governments of the world
Speaker 6: agree on UFOs and antarctica, everything kind of comes into focus.
Speaker 6: It's like, maybe there's a linkage between what they know
Speaker 6: about this stuff and how much they don't want to
Speaker 6: get bombed for saying anything about it, because it is
Speaker 6: really like godlike power, and that's that's terrifying to all
Speaker 6: these smaller countries.
Speaker 1: Yeah, imagine they had portals and like one of the
Speaker 1: one that you think about, which I'm not endorsing this particularly,
Speaker 1: but like the idea that what if Saddam Hussein wasn't
Speaker 1: building nukes, what if you had like a secret stargate
Speaker 1: or something that he doesn't say at least right like, oh, okay,
Speaker 1: well we had to go take that over or destroy
Speaker 1: it or something right because we couldn't let them have that,
Speaker 1: We couldn't let them reverse engineer that technology or something.
Speaker 1: Or what if there's something in Antarctica under there where
Speaker 1: it's like buried under the ice and we just don't
Speaker 1: want people going near it and figuring it out. Like
Speaker 1: those are the things that I that give me pause
Speaker 1: because that's like what you would do if if we
Speaker 1: figured this technology out. To me, I really struggle with
Speaker 1: like did we just naturally figure out teleportation and free
Speaker 1: energy stuff? Like I feel like we got some help somewhere.
Speaker 1: And if you look at the last like one hundred
Speaker 1: years of our advancement, we've gone like this, it's like
Speaker 1: we're building is sentient AI is now right, and like
Speaker 1: you know, one hundred years ago we were riding around
Speaker 1: on horses, So you know something this doesn't It feels
Speaker 1: a little too And you could say, Okay, we have
Speaker 1: this technology technology singularity that's happening clearly, But still to me,
Speaker 1: I'm I'm feeling like we got some help somewhere. Maybe
Speaker 1: we dug something up, maybe crash ship, maybe we I
Speaker 1: don't know, future humans.
Speaker 3: A lot of.
Speaker 9: Ashton with the potential that Saddam Muzin had potential technology,
Speaker 9: with Iranians potentially having technology, and with the lore surrounding
Speaker 9: Nazi Germany with diglock and I'm pronouncing that, do you
Speaker 9: think that maybe that was probably one of the reasons
Speaker 9: we went in as well.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the diaglock thing man the Nazi Germany, there's so
Speaker 1: much law around it, and I actually think like almost
Speaker 1: all the law is true, Like it's just really more
Speaker 1: of like what's story that makes sense for all of it?
Speaker 1: And there's actually quite a few different stories that can
Speaker 1: make sense for it. But the Nazi one's really interesting
Speaker 1: because they were like spinning mercury, which is supposedly the
Speaker 1: way you can do anti gravity as well. That would
Speaker 1: have been one of the first rudimentary ways to do it.
Speaker 1: And I found one of the scientists that I found
Speaker 1: is actually a literal project paper clip scientists. Like I
Speaker 1: thought that was like a conspiracy theory thing. No, it's
Speaker 1: like a real thing. We just took the scientists from Germany,
Speaker 1: anyone that had prospects, like anyone that seemed like they
Speaker 1: could do something good. So we got we take this
Speaker 1: guy named fried Wart Winterberg. He studied under Werner Heisenberg.
Speaker 1: Like the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. That was his mentor. And
Speaker 1: he was like fifteen years old or eighteen years old
Speaker 1: or something like that, and we spotted him and you know, said, okay,
Speaker 1: you're coming to America. You know you're gonna come teach
Speaker 1: us do And it's crazy because he then worked on
Speaker 1: fusion and nuclear bombs and a thermonuclear weapons and all,
Speaker 1: and nobody knows about him because all his research is
Speaker 1: basically just classified. And so I read his textbook about nukes.
Speaker 1: In the very first page, it says they classified inertial
Speaker 1: confinement fusion because of thermonuclear weapon applications, and then that's
Speaker 1: probably why the world will never get fusion. Like the
Speaker 1: first page, you go, okay, well maybe we should listen
Speaker 1: to this project paper clips scientist who like came over,
Speaker 1: never got any credits, so probably has an ax to
Speaker 1: grind and like they won't declassify as research. And he's
Speaker 1: just saying straight up that we just classified fusion and
Speaker 1: of course we did make sense too, like oh yeah,
Speaker 1: it's connected to h bombs, connected to thermonuclear weapons.
Speaker 9: Well, and one of the things that I've i guess
Speaker 9: tangential notice is that when you look at some of
Speaker 9: these places where they brought some of these scientists, especially
Speaker 9: the ones looking into physics, cermo dynamics, space time and
Speaker 9: all that, and you look at where they placed them
Speaker 9: and where they were doing research. You also see a
Speaker 9: correlation orbs appearing, one of them being Marpha in Texas.
Speaker 9: There brought flip scientists there and Broswell's another one or
Speaker 9: outside of it, and you do see orbs there every
Speaker 9: now and then. And I just always found that really
Speaker 9: odd that the two exist and causation is not correlation.
Speaker 1: I get that.
Speaker 8: However, it's a big, big coincidence.
Speaker 1: In my book, Yeah, Relly could be studying it.
Speaker 6: You know, they could be there looking at these events
Speaker 6: that are natural and trying to figure out how to
Speaker 6: weaponize them.
Speaker 1: You know, that's that's a real possibility. That's one of
Speaker 1: the hypothesis is that you know, people will say, okay,
Speaker 1: Ash and you say that they've got these plasma orbs, right,
Speaker 1: but what I've been researching, Okay, maybe they've had the
Speaker 1: plasm orb since like the two thousands. That's pretty much
Speaker 1: where the science kind of culminates on humanity figuring out
Speaker 1: how to get your plasm orb to fly. Around based
Speaker 1: on the scientific papers working on in the nineties, figured
Speaker 1: it out two thousands. Now we've got plasmidrome. But we
Speaker 1: were saying, oh, people are seeing these in the you know,
Speaker 1: the Foo fighters in the twenties is a good example, right,
Speaker 1: So how do you explain that? Well, one of the
Speaker 1: answers to explain that is, well, we basically just saw
Speaker 1: the aliens or other civilizations flying around their plasma orbs
Speaker 1: and we're like, oh, we can do that. That's cool.
Speaker 9: How do they do that?
Speaker 1: And they just use electromagnetic theory and they just reverse
Speaker 1: the engineering and then figure out, oh, we can make
Speaker 1: a plasma orb too. So that's one possibility for sure.
Speaker 1: But I do think that if you look at the
Speaker 1: history of it of the UFO topic, a lot of
Speaker 1: things went from flying saucers in the seventies, eighties, nineties
Speaker 1: even to the twys twenty ten, specifically shifting the orbs. Specifically,
Speaker 1: I would say plasmos the balls of light basically balls
Speaker 1: of energy if you want to think of them like that,
Speaker 1: And that's definitely connected to exotic vacuum objects. Ken Shoulders
Speaker 1: research how Pudov's research and what those guys were doing
Speaker 1: and no one just no one really knows because they
Speaker 1: haven't looked into that and seem so esoteric. But once
Speaker 1: you demystify it for people, show people the papers like
Speaker 1: the Dense Plasma Focused paper by Frank Mead and George Miiley,
Speaker 1: where they're literally just talking about in the abstract, we're
Speaker 1: gonna make this plasma orb it's gonna have jets on it,
Speaker 1: and we're gonna use it for gravity waves and use
Speaker 1: it for high energy lasers. You're like, oh, okay, so
Speaker 1: there it is two thousand and five, like Air Force
Speaker 1: was clearly clearly working on it. That's why I think
Speaker 1: we're seeing more of them is that. And the other
Speaker 1: big thing is they're drones. It's not somebody flying around
Speaker 1: in the flying saucer. They realize it's a big liability
Speaker 1: if you have to like make your thing air tight.
Speaker 1: Now you have to have an air supply inside your
Speaker 1: flying saucer, especially if you're gonna warp drive it somewhere,
Speaker 1: you know, So the solution is, don't have anybody inside
Speaker 1: of it, just have it be a drone. Maybe. In fact,
Speaker 1: the aliens are on was certainly using drones too. Why
Speaker 1: would they come down and visit us in person and
Speaker 1: just send a drone to come by. So I do
Speaker 1: think there's a good possibility that they kind of you know,
Speaker 1: reversed engineered it. And then to me, it's the crazy
Speaker 1: part is I can't even really narrow it down. I
Speaker 1: can't even tell you like, oh yeah, definitely came from
Speaker 1: actually terrestrials or you know, an ancient civilization like like
Speaker 1: theory of Atlantis or heck, even the future human hypothesis.
Speaker 1: I used to think that was silly and absurd, and
Speaker 1: then you realize like, oh no, we can actually manipulate
Speaker 1: space time. So okay, if you can go back in time,
Speaker 1: then we could be manipulating our own timeline, and maybe
Speaker 1: the people gatekeeping this or like the timeline Police or something.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 4: It makes me think of like a movie where it
Speaker 4: was I think Jackie Sham might have been in an
Speaker 4: a he was going through like different timelines. I think
Speaker 4: of his own soul, his own self, and he was
Speaker 4: like knocking them off because.
Speaker 1: One ye, come on, goes straight to hero Knakamura.
Speaker 2: Talk.
Speaker 4: Did you have any questions before we move forward? I
Speaker 4: just wanted not to put you on the spot. I'm
Speaker 4: just you know, I just wanted to ask.
Speaker 7: Which I would like to ask him, because he mentioned
Speaker 7: the spiritual side of it or the interdimensional side of it,
Speaker 7: and then as we're talking about zero points or conception points.
Speaker 7: I'm friends with the doctor Greg Little and I had
Speaker 7: talked with him about a month ago, and he co
Speaker 7: wrote a book with Andrew Collins called The Origins of
Speaker 7: the Gods, and basically he talked about, you know, you
Speaker 7: hear about all these encounters and things in the old world,
Speaker 7: if we coin that term, because like the electromagnetic.
Speaker 1: Status of the.
Speaker 7: Earth was more pure, and now with all the microwaves
Speaker 7: and Wi Fi and cell phones, it's really polluted the
Speaker 7: electromagnetic field.
Speaker 2: So it's kind of.
Speaker 7: Made it hard for these things to manifest. But he
Speaker 7: talked about plasma in that book, and in the nineteen
Speaker 7: seventies they had that apparition of Mary in Egypt above
Speaker 7: that cathedral, and this was like a big phenomenon back then.
Speaker 7: I mean, millions of people gathered around and seen this
Speaker 7: thing and documented it and had photos and video all
Speaker 7: that kind of stuff. But his research, he was saying
Speaker 7: that a lot of these apparitions of these plasma bills
Speaker 7: and fields kind of held common themes with lay lines
Speaker 7: and also fault lines, and he was talking about this
Speaker 7: maybe is something that's generating under the earth like a
Speaker 7: natural energy, and it's popping out like a cracking concrete
Speaker 7: trying to find the least resistance and escape. And he
Speaker 7: said that basically he was of the opinion that these
Speaker 7: things are basically like gateways or tars or portals like
Speaker 7: you were talking about earlier. And he says that maybe
Speaker 7: extra extra dimensional or spiritual entities use these as insertion
Speaker 7: points or ways to communicate with humanity. I just didn't know,
Speaker 7: you know, since you guys had brought that up, if
Speaker 7: you've heard him talk about that or heard that idea,
Speaker 7: or what was your thoughts on that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean I've heard you know, lay lines and
Speaker 1: all in those concepts. I think that the lay line
Speaker 1: concept is interesting from the same for the same reason
Speaker 1: as like the what is the base structure of the
Speaker 1: universe reason? Because if there is some structure of the universe,
Speaker 1: and you would think why they're not structured to like
Speaker 1: the Sun or to the Earth, and we just don't
Speaker 1: see it because it's invisible to us. So I think
Speaker 1: it could be possible, but I haven't been super compelled
Speaker 1: by the lay line arguments. I do also, I do
Speaker 1: think that there's an interesting argument that you were making
Speaker 1: earlier though, as well, about like you know, he's saying
Speaker 1: that it might be harder to manifest certain spiritual aspects
Speaker 1: when we're polluted with this electromagnetic spectrum, because again we
Speaker 1: don't see it, but everything around us is emitting electromagnetic
Speaker 1: waves all the time, especially in today's day and age,
Speaker 1: where we use electricity all the time. That would be
Speaker 1: a really interesting thing if someone could study that somehow
Speaker 1: and figure out because I like to think of the
Speaker 1: zero point energy is like the white noise, the white
Speaker 1: noise that's going around in the background. So you could
Speaker 1: imagine that as a civilization is more and more advanced,
Speaker 1: you do have this pollution that could be occurring, and
Speaker 1: we don't even recognize it because we don't ever see
Speaker 1: it at all. But if there are entities that are
Speaker 1: more connected to that zero point energy, maybe they don't
Speaker 1: see the same way we see. Maybe they see it
Speaker 1: as pollution everywhere else where. It's like stopping them from
Speaker 1: coming here. That would be that would be pretty interesting.
Speaker 1: I'd never really thought about that, So thanks for presenting
Speaker 1: that interesting idea for me, Doug.
Speaker 2: That actually did make me think, really, just real quick,
Speaker 2: I just want to mention this.
Speaker 4: You're talking about lay lines, but I've also thought of
Speaker 4: I mean, if you look at birds and you look
Speaker 4: at natural weather, you know, if there is any natural
Speaker 4: weather anymore. And it's something that I think we've even
Speaker 4: spoken about when we covered well when Lisa basically covered
Speaker 4: the morning core with the birds. There is things kind
Speaker 4: of in the above us that is almost like lay
Speaker 4: lines on the ground, but like now in the air.
Speaker 4: I do wonder if like that has something to do
Speaker 4: with any of that stuff. Have you ever thought of
Speaker 4: that or stuff like that?
Speaker 1: Well, here, let me tell you about something that's, you know,
Speaker 1: pretty scientifically accept There's a peer reviewed paper that came
Speaker 1: out in the last year where they were able to
Speaker 1: take just a tube metal tube using a specific alloy,
Speaker 1: and based on how they aligned it to the Earth's
Speaker 1: magnetic field, it would produce voltage like if it was
Speaker 1: aligned the right way, it produced voltage free energy. He
Speaker 1: would say, where's that coming from. Technically you're sapping there,
Speaker 1: technically sapping the Earth of energy. I mean, you're not
Speaker 1: doing it in an appreciable amount but that's where that's coming.
Speaker 1: And the crazy part is if they turned it ninety degrees,
Speaker 1: the tube didn't work anymore because it's now now no
Speaker 1: longer aligned with magnetic fields, and it had to be
Speaker 1: perfectly a lined. So you could imagine like tweaking it
Speaker 1: and all of a sudden, this thing xacts you because
Speaker 1: it's producing electricity I mean very tiny amount. So that's
Speaker 1: why I think that, like, there clearly is obviously this
Speaker 1: connection between the field, the magnetic fields, the direction of
Speaker 1: the magnetic fields, et cetera. I think that people just
Speaker 1: kind of take it in a more esoteric aspect when
Speaker 1: they say, okay, well these specific directions and these specific
Speaker 1: points at these at these locations. But certainly, of course
Speaker 1: certain locations, just like with that experiment, certain locations are
Speaker 1: better than other locations because of either how high you
Speaker 1: are off the ground or what have you. So yeah,
Speaker 1: there's definitely a you know, at a minimum element of
Speaker 1: truth to the idea.
Speaker 2: And I even do think the Sun is somehow is
Speaker 2: possibly involved in all that.
Speaker 1: So sure, I mean, if you believe in the electromagnetic
Speaker 1: electric theory of the universe or plasma theory of the universe,
Speaker 1: then you know that there's electromagnetic fields coming from the Sun,
Speaker 1: you know, are helping to stabilize our entire solar system essentially,
Speaker 1: or there may even be these giant galaxy level magnetic
Speaker 1: fields that are wrapping around our entire galaxy, which could
Speaker 1: explain why the stars on the edges of the galaxies
Speaker 1: are rotating as fast as they are when they should
Speaker 1: be rotating a lot slower. So that's where I think
Speaker 1: it's funny. You look at the conventional classical view of physics,
Speaker 1: there's all these gaps in it that they can't explain,
Speaker 1: dark energy, dark matter. They have no idea where mass
Speaker 1: comes from or gravity comes from, just exists. I think
Speaker 1: it's fundamental force.
Speaker 2: It's not.
Speaker 1: And you realize, Oh, if they just thought about things
Speaker 1: in all like slightly more esoteric way, like a slightly
Speaker 1: different conceptional viewpoint, like all those problems just go away,
Speaker 1: they all go away.
Speaker 2: What is your not to throw this question out there randomly?
Speaker 2: What is your opinion on gravity?
Speaker 1: On gravity, gravity is a zero point fluctuation force. So
Speaker 1: the zero point energy this ocean of energy we're in, well,
Speaker 1: wherever there's divots in it, that's gravity. Right, So when
Speaker 1: we have a massive Earth or the Sun sitting in
Speaker 1: that yield of zero point energy, it pulls everything towards
Speaker 1: It pulls everything towards it. That's gravity. So I think
Speaker 1: of it as a zero point energy is the fabric
Speaker 1: of the space time, and when you're distorting that fabric,
Speaker 1: that's where the gravity is coming from. So how do
Speaker 1: I create gravity? Distort the fabric? So this is exactly
Speaker 1: why you add energy to a region, just like if
Speaker 1: you're adding a planet to a region, you're going to
Speaker 1: create going to create gravity. So that's how I view gravity.
Speaker 1: And there's a good paper by Hal Pudoff nineteen eighty nine,
Speaker 1: gravity is a zero point fluctuation force where he's probably
Speaker 1: not the first person, but I like his paper because
Speaker 1: he's prestigious, people know him. And he connected electromagnetism to gravity.
Speaker 1: I mean it had already been unified like one hundred
Speaker 1: years ago, but he does the equations shows the mass
Speaker 1: shows Einstein's equation goes, look there it is, and you know,
Speaker 1: people try to critique it, but he countered the critiques
Speaker 1: as well, and I think we're just at a point.
Speaker 1: I mean that was nineteen eighty nine, so thirty six
Speaker 1: years go. He wrote that paper. Maybe now we're ready
Speaker 1: to accept it that's how things really work.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: Oh, by the way, was dig into remote viewing too,
Speaker 1: So you know, this goes to show that he was
Speaker 1: at least thinking about the idea that the zero point
Speaker 1: energy was more than just gravity manipulation, you know, more like,
Speaker 1: is there a connection to the conscious?
Speaker 2: Interesting?
Speaker 6: But it's sort of like an informational field which which
Speaker 6: goes back into plasma because plasma seems to have self
Speaker 6: organizing properties, and if that's connected to this informational field,
Speaker 6: that kind of makes sense why there would be this
Speaker 6: linkage between plasma physics and stuff like remote viewing.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I never knew what plasma physics was all about before this.
Speaker 1: You know, I'm like, why do we care so much
Speaker 1: about plasma? What's plasma physics albout? Now I'm like, oh,
Speaker 1: it's all plasma physics. It's like all plasma physics. Because
Speaker 1: we're realizing, like, where does electricity come from? Electricity is
Speaker 1: just an asymmetry a positive and negative charge being separated.
Speaker 1: You separate a positive nay of charge, electricity willform you
Speaker 1: think about from that conceptual viewpoint, you go, Okay, well,
Speaker 1: what is a plasma. A plasma is separating the negative
Speaker 1: charge and electron from the positive charge ion. Oh what,
Speaker 1: that's the same thing as electricity. No wonder, plasma is
Speaker 1: so important. Plasma is basically the base form of what
Speaker 1: we're doing with electricity. And I saw some people in
Speaker 1: the chat mentioning cimatics like a Bose Einstein condensate is functionally,
Speaker 1: in my opinion, equivalent of taking matter, taking plasma or whatever,
Speaker 1: and turning into a coherent form shape using frequency, using wavelengths,
Speaker 1: using resonance. Because again, everything is waves. So the way
Speaker 1: we should be thinking about how are we getting these
Speaker 1: two waves to interact. If this wave is going like
Speaker 1: this and this wave is like longer, like what happens
Speaker 1: when they meet? What happens when they interact with one another.
Speaker 1: That's how I think people should be thinking about it.
Speaker 6: And that goes back to the cavitation effect and the
Speaker 6: light being created in the bubble.
Speaker 1: So you're talking about iluminescence. Soniluminescence is one of the
Speaker 1: cooler experiments where they take sound waves in water and
Speaker 1: light forms where they meet. You know, they create a
Speaker 1: scale and interference in the middle. You get this cavitation effect,
Speaker 1: and it's hard for classical physics to explain that where's
Speaker 1: the light coming from? You just put sound and water
Speaker 1: and light is coming out of nowhere, like you know,
Speaker 1: that's pretty unusual, and people would question, is there fusion happening?
Speaker 5: There?
Speaker 1: Is that where the lights, you know, coming from? I
Speaker 1: think when you just think about in terms of waves
Speaker 1: and mixing waves, makes a lot more sense. I mean,
Speaker 1: still kind of hard to wrap our brains around because
Speaker 1: we live in this three D world where we think
Speaker 1: of everything as a physical object. But when you move
Speaker 1: away from it thinking everything's a physical object, then we
Speaker 1: really open our minds up to a lot more possibilities.
Speaker 7: For sure, all the talk of water in waves, I
Speaker 7: just recently heard a turn looking into some of this
Speaker 7: stuff where you came on and I heard people talking
Speaker 7: about space foam? Is that like the scientific kind of
Speaker 7: term for these waves and waters that everything kind of
Speaker 7: risks and where there's like void space or space?
Speaker 1: Yeah? I think was it Tom Bearden? I think he
Speaker 1: said he thought of the ether. The zero point energy
Speaker 1: is like little bubbles, like, so if you were to
Speaker 1: really boil it down to the small scale, what would
Speaker 1: it look like? It would look like little bubbles in
Speaker 1: like a bubble wall basically, because that's some small level,
Speaker 1: there must be some structure, right, that's the idea behind it.
Speaker 1: So if you think about these little bubbles, it's easier
Speaker 1: to understand because you're walking through these bubbles. What's that
Speaker 1: going to do. It's gonna resist you, right, It's going
Speaker 1: to cause a force to push back. That's inertia. That's
Speaker 1: what inertia is. Why can I not accelerate to the
Speaker 1: speed of light even in outer space? I mean on
Speaker 1: the Earth it's because the friction of the air, But
Speaker 1: even in outer space, I can't accelerate to the speed
Speaker 1: of light. Why because of the zero point energy is
Speaker 1: slowing me down. That's the reason. That's what inertia is.
Speaker 1: Another thing you were talking about was the fluid. So
Speaker 1: that actually came up with a term for the whole
Speaker 1: study of the plasma, because the plasma acts like a luid.
Speaker 1: They call it magneto hydrodynamics MHD magneto hydrodynamics. Sometimes you'll
Speaker 1: hear it called different versions of that. But what that
Speaker 1: means is they create the plasma and now you treat
Speaker 1: it like a liquid and because it's flowing around different directions.
Speaker 1: What you're trying to do, We're trying to stabilize it.
Speaker 1: We're trying to figure how can we stabilize this plant,
Speaker 1: How can we get this plasma to do what we want? Well,
Speaker 1: there's a whole field of physics around it called magneto hydrodynamics.
Speaker 1: So the people they didn't know what that term meant MHD.
Speaker 1: Now you do. Anytime you see MHD, they're talking about
Speaker 1: manipulating plasma with magnetic fields. Get in to do what
Speaker 1: you want.
Speaker 6: Uh.
Speaker 4: One thing I wanted to kind of touch on is
Speaker 4: that I think you kind of mentioned Lucky Martin a
Speaker 4: few times though. It was interesting how you're kind of
Speaker 4: showing like some of the stuff that they're kind of
Speaker 4: coming out with now that I think you're saying is
Speaker 4: proving that they've been using this stuff.
Speaker 2: For a minute. Right, Is there anything on that that
Speaker 2: you want to like maybe good specific touch on.
Speaker 1: Well, for Lockheed Martin, I mean their compact fusion reactor,
Speaker 1: that's that's got to be the I mean, how are
Speaker 1: we not just like having congressional hearings from all public
Speaker 1: available data from the guy that built it literally saying
Speaker 1: it's successful. That means they have a working fusion reactor
Speaker 1: that's compact, mean, like can fit in my house, doesn't
Speaker 1: even going to fit in some giant power plant like that.
Speaker 1: That's free energy for everybody. Like this is the thing
Speaker 1: where I'm just like, how do people reconcile the fact
Speaker 1: that Lockheed Martin just has a compact fusion reactor. They're
Speaker 1: just not telling us about it. And they've had seven
Speaker 1: years minimum to tell us about probably longer than that,
Speaker 1: and we're just okay with them hiding that wall, this
Speaker 1: big charade of fusion, pretending like we're researching fusion trying
Speaker 1: to figure it out when Locked Martin's already had it solved.
Speaker 1: That's the thing that I just can't wrap my brain around.
Speaker 1: In fact, let's play this video here a little intermission
Speaker 1: for us, because I have the Lockheed Martin. This is
Speaker 1: from their website, Like this is the guy that helped
Speaker 1: develop this. Let's just listen to this video here and
Speaker 1: we'll listen to this is Thomas.
Speaker 10: Hyt is a much safer option. So a next generation
Speaker 10: of airplanes that doesn't rely on fuel, it can just
Speaker 10: stay aloft, unlimited range, unlimited endurance. That's what nuclear fusion
Speaker 10: can do for an airplane. We put it in a
Speaker 10: magnetic bottle that can contain the high temperatures you need
Speaker 10: hundreds of millions of degrees we can release in a
Speaker 10: controlled fashion energy. We think we have a very robust
Speaker 10: strategy going forward that has potential for success. What this
Speaker 10: concept does is it's a high beta concept, which means
Speaker 10: we use a high fraction of the magnetic field pressure.
Speaker 10: We use all of its potential, and that means we
Speaker 10: can make our devices ten times small. So instead of
Speaker 10: something the size of a building, we have something the
Speaker 10: size of a large truck.
Speaker 1: The small is the reason we.
Speaker 10: Can do this quickly. If something small you can build
Speaker 10: up momentum, you can develop it fast. It doesn't take
Speaker 10: five years.
Speaker 1: To design it. It takes three months. We can design it,
Speaker 1: build it, test it in under a year. We can
Speaker 1: do several of these cycles, and we think we can
Speaker 1: get to a prototype in five years.
Speaker 10: Every time you do plasma physics, you learn something new,
Speaker 10: and that's why this is a high risk.
Speaker 1: High payoff endeavor.
Speaker 10: That's what we're doing here is testing that concept out
Speaker 10: to see if it really holds the promise that it
Speaker 10: appears to. And as a defense company, our increasing mission
Speaker 10: is to enhance global security, and this is how we
Speaker 10: do that.
Speaker 1: In the energy realm.
Speaker 10: Gas turbines are a huge improvement over other technologies in
Speaker 10: terms of climate change, but they're only a fifty percent improvement.
Speaker 10: We take it all the way so no emissions, safe operation,
Speaker 10: proeferation free. That means we can ship it to the
Speaker 10: whole world with a good conscience. The old promise of
Speaker 10: atoms for peace was a noble one, but ultimately flawed
Speaker 10: because the technology wasn't right for it.
Speaker 1: Can achieve that grand vision and bring clean.
Speaker 5: Power to the world.
Speaker 1: The true atomic age can start.
Speaker 10: Ten years we have great military vehicles. Twenty years we
Speaker 10: have clean power for the world. This isn't online by
Speaker 10: twenty one hundred. This is online by the time. I
Speaker 10: can't even retire after we finish this. No, I still
Speaker 10: have to find another.
Speaker 1: Job after this is done. Absolute absolutely configuration there looks
Speaker 1: just like fried Wart Winterberg's fusion design thermonuclear designs as well,
Speaker 1: with the ring on the inside. Basically there's a tube
Speaker 1: and then there's an outer ring on the outer side.
Speaker 1: As how they make those devices. A couple things I
Speaker 1: want to point out there. He says, we could have
Speaker 1: this in five years. That videos from like twenty fourteen,
Speaker 1: videos from twenty fourteen. What happened brough is twenty twenty five?
Speaker 1: Now where did it go? The guy that literally that
Speaker 1: wasn't the guy. That guy was one of the main engineers.
Speaker 1: But Charles Chase is the guy that like oversaw the
Speaker 1: whole thing that convinced the xos. He said it was
Speaker 1: all successful. It says unlimited endurance, unlimited range. They're saying
Speaker 1: that fusion can cause your planing to stay in the
Speaker 1: air forever, forever, never have to come down ever again,
Speaker 1: no emissions, no emissions whatsoever. Yeah, the crazy part about
Speaker 1: this is some point in the chats that this is
Speaker 1: actually just all real. Like that's the craziest part about
Speaker 1: all this is they're literally just real. It's just there,
Speaker 1: like there you go, there's your thing. And somebody asks, like,
Speaker 1: how how are they doing fusion? If fusion supposedly takes
Speaker 1: one hundred million degrees, how are those orbs doing fusion?
Speaker 1: How can they do compact fusion reactor like that while
Speaker 1: everybody else is struggling. Well, one the theory says that
Speaker 1: it takes one hundred million degrees or even one billion
Speaker 1: degrees if you're doing a neutronic fusion, which is what
Speaker 1: they're doing, by the way, So how are they doing that?
Speaker 1: Clearly they're looking at the universe in a different way
Speaker 1: than everybody else's. If you just listen to heal You Infusion,
Speaker 1: who's also doing field reverse configuration. They're CXO or CEO.
Speaker 1: In one of their publicly available YouTube video that says
Speaker 1: straight up the theory says that it should take like
Speaker 1: one hundred evs or whatever to cause fusion to happen
Speaker 1: in these a neutronic fusion reactions. Experimentally, they're seeing that
Speaker 1: ten times lower than that, ten times lower than that experimentally.
Speaker 1: The other difference, so difference first of all is theory
Speaker 1: versus actual experimentation. The second thing is that when we
Speaker 1: talk about the temperatures needed, we have to stop thinking
Speaker 1: about it in terms of actual just temperature. That's not
Speaker 1: what they're doing. We're not just heating it up. We're
Speaker 1: pressurizing it. When we put pressure on something, it does
Speaker 1: heat up. It's the pressure that what causes fusion because
Speaker 1: we have to overcome the coolan barrier. It's not just
Speaker 1: making it hotter. That's that's why I think hot fusion
Speaker 1: is such a stupid way to think about it. That's
Speaker 1: not really not what's happening. We want to be thinking about.
Speaker 1: As we're making a gravitational well, it's causing things to
Speaker 1: come ever together. That's probably the more accurate way to
Speaker 1: think about it from from the realistic perspective. But long
Speaker 1: story short, they are causing. With plasma, they cause things
Speaker 1: to come together, and with the orbs. The way you
Speaker 1: should imagine is you've got this plasma ball, but we've
Speaker 1: got two ends on it. So one end you got
Speaker 1: this air coming in getting iron eyes turned into plasma.
Speaker 1: And then it's like a traffic jam. It's getting pushed
Speaker 1: through this squeeze from this little tube and the magnetic
Speaker 1: field lines are squeezing it together. So what does that do?
Speaker 1: Oh slows it down, It gets stuck those that matter
Speaker 1: coming in through the front. It's kind of getting stuck.
Speaker 1: And then when it's getting pressed together, boom, there you go.
Speaker 1: You've got fusion. That's exactly what we need to happen.
Speaker 1: So I think the big thing they figured out is
Speaker 1: stop trying to like perfectly confine it. Let the plasma
Speaker 1: do what it wants to do. The plasma wants to
Speaker 1: shoot jets out, use them can control the jets, and
Speaker 1: then where that jets shoot through your plasma ball, use
Speaker 1: that as the fusion where you're gonna have the fusion occur.
Speaker 1: The last bit is this, how do you manage the heat?
Speaker 1: Because even if that okay, you are creating these pressures
Speaker 1: that are caused the infusion to occur, there should be
Speaker 1: thermal heat coming out of this thing. You have to
Speaker 1: have really good thermal regulation. And so they figured out
Speaker 1: several ways to do this. I think it's Charles Chase
Speaker 1: or somebody else I found, I think has plasma actuators. Basically,
Speaker 1: it's like the shear of the plasma going over the
Speaker 1: surface can be like turned into turn into electricity. And
Speaker 1: then the other thing you found is that there's like
Speaker 1: thermal electric generators they can use to So they've clearly
Speaker 1: figured out some additional technology to basically manage the heat
Speaker 1: that's coming out of that so that it stays at
Speaker 1: a very like room temperature level. Because when we leave
Speaker 1: those plasma balls, they were like the same temperature as
Speaker 1: like the air and the plane. They weren't like red
Speaker 1: hot or anything like that. So even if in the
Speaker 1: middle there's this red hot thing happening. It must get
Speaker 1: cool by the time it gets to like the edge
Speaker 1: of the bubble. There you go, that's my best guess.
Speaker 2: At that, thank you. Well.
Speaker 6: It could also it could also be a geometric factor,
Speaker 6: you know, like the geometric field that they're generating actually
Speaker 6: do create that compression, and so you know, looking at
Speaker 6: it from that perspective, you can kind of understand why
Speaker 6: they would want to do it in the open air
Speaker 6: and not have that confinement.
Speaker 1: And it might be able to work underwater too. I
Speaker 1: think those orbs are probably trans medium. I think that
Speaker 1: the place where they would work the lease spwell is
Speaker 1: actually in outer space, because I think they're actually using
Speaker 1: the air to preionize, to like add plasma to the reaction.
Speaker 1: And so I think they design those orbs to imagine
Speaker 1: they would be used in our atmosphere and maybe underwater
Speaker 1: as well if they can ionize the hydro you know,
Speaker 1: the hydrogen out of the water and use that. But
Speaker 1: I think you need a different solution if you're going
Speaker 1: to go outer space, which maybe is that teleportation thing.
Speaker 1: And there's definitely a geometrical aspect, no question to all
Speaker 1: of this, which is the thing that I've been tiptoed
Speaker 1: around the most because a lot of people call it
Speaker 1: sacred geometry. I don't really care what the geometry is
Speaker 1: that allows it to work, but absolutely if you start
Speaker 1: digging into wormholes and nukes, you will find that they
Speaker 1: both are heavily reliant on geometry. Heavily reliant on geometry.
Speaker 1: Inside of all, it's all about with the geometry of
Speaker 1: nukes that they're trying to figure out. If we are
Speaker 1: trying to ignite a fusion reaction, how do I get
Speaker 1: the waves to hit it at the exact right point
Speaker 1: in the way where it will cause that fusion reaction,
Speaker 1: that fusion bomb to go off. That's how they were
Speaker 1: thinking about it. So Fridert Winterberg has this polyhedral configuration,
Speaker 1: geometric configuration, perfect equilateral triangle around your fusion detonation. I
Speaker 1: saw that in his textbo I'm going wow, looks just
Speaker 1: like the orbs in the videos. Like maybe even wonder
Speaker 1: second guess, like maybe the lithium in the plane was
Speaker 1: being used as a fusion bomb and those orbs are
Speaker 1: the triggers essentially to make it go off. I can't
Speaker 1: say for sure, but still possible. So sorry, I got
Speaker 1: a little sidetracked there, but yeah, oh yeah, sorry. The
Speaker 1: other thing without the wormhole, there's also a polyhedral wormhole configuration.
Speaker 1: I can't believe that. I can't believe how many there's
Speaker 1: like five different kinds of wormholes. I thought there was
Speaker 1: just like one, but no, there's like all these different kinds.
Speaker 1: One of them is a spinning configuration, and you can
Speaker 1: mix the spinning configuration with a polyhedral configuration, which creates
Speaker 1: a flat face surface. The benefit being if you need
Speaker 1: negative energy, this minimizes the amount of negative energy you
Speaker 1: need because you're not trying to move this huge region
Speaker 1: like this. You're just trying to make a flat surface.
Speaker 1: So what you're really doing is you're making like a mirror.
Speaker 1: And what they do is they stitch together two points.
Speaker 1: So you say, okay, my negative energy, all I have
Speaker 1: to do is stitch together this flat face surface, and
Speaker 1: I'm going to connect here it over here, and then
Speaker 1: if I go through over here on this side right now,
Speaker 1: all of a sudden, I just appear over here. But
Speaker 1: it's only a temporary wormhole too, it's not a permanent portal.
Speaker 1: And this is one of the other things I found
Speaker 1: is that if you read the Non Locality Paper, a
Speaker 1: defense intelligence reference document by John Kramer. He talks about
Speaker 1: we may not be able to make like permanent portals
Speaker 1: because this idea of time becomes really fuzzy, Like your
Speaker 1: flow of time might not be the same over here
Speaker 1: as it is over here. We just assume it is
Speaker 1: because we're all on Earth. Our flow of times all
Speaker 1: the same because we're all on the same planet. But
Speaker 1: if you were on a planet this a lot more
Speaker 1: massive than our planet, your gravity would be different. Therefore
Speaker 1: your flow of time would be different compared to ourt
Speaker 1: flow of time. So if you imagine a portal between
Speaker 1: a super heavy planet and our planet, if you were
Speaker 1: looking through it, one side would look like they're moving
Speaker 1: in super speed and the other side would look like
Speaker 1: they're moving in slow mo. So that would be very
Speaker 1: bizarre if you were to go through that. What happens when,
Speaker 1: like your your arm goes through it, and now your
Speaker 1: arm is moving in slow mo, but your rest of
Speaker 1: your bodies on the other side. Like this is the
Speaker 1: reason why I think even from like just some thinking
Speaker 1: about a perspective, it would start to get really weird
Speaker 1: on how that could work.
Speaker 6: Right, But I think I think there's precedent to kind
Speaker 6: of look at these things as side effects of what
Speaker 6: they were originally trying to do, and so you could
Speaker 6: see how these type of side effects could have, you know,
Speaker 6: massive implications that nobody's even thought of yet.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, yeah, I mean, and I think the biggest
Speaker 1: one is like, are you going to break the time stream?
Speaker 1: You know, like if we can go back in time,
Speaker 1: that would be the biggest fear. My fears were somewhat
Speaker 1: alleviated reading the same John Kramer paper where he says
Speaker 1: that all the og physicists that figured out atom bombs
Speaker 1: and all this stuff, they believe that nature wasn't going
Speaker 1: to let us go back in time, that somehow like
Speaker 1: quantum entanglement would break down or something when you try
Speaker 1: to do that, and they actually worked around it. They
Speaker 1: built a teleportation protocol just assuming that you can't go
Speaker 1: back in time with no retrocausality. They created an EPR
Speaker 1: experiment where they can control the length of the path
Speaker 1: of one of the two entangled photons, and they say, Okay,
Speaker 1: don't make it go back in time, just make it
Speaker 1: be exactly like instant transmission, because that way there's no retrocausality,
Speaker 1: like what's the fastest you can go without going back
Speaker 1: in time? Instant like instant teleportation from one point to
Speaker 1: the next. Right that way, you're not there's no retro
Speaker 1: causality issue. So that's what they built. And that's crazy
Speaker 1: because that would mean that those if that's what's happening
Speaker 1: in the plane video, that would mean there's something at
Speaker 1: the destination. I mean they've created like here's point A
Speaker 1: and here's point B, and they've engineered the two points.
Speaker 1: So actually that would mean it's more of like a
Speaker 1: warp gate or something like that, right in sci fi,
Speaker 1: like you have to have something at this point where
Speaker 1: it's like actually connecting those and then you flick it
Speaker 1: on and then you go through and then you appear
Speaker 1: at the other side.
Speaker 9: I was Asha, and I was going to say, doesn't
Speaker 9: it somewhat have a basis in the WU experiment when
Speaker 9: she was looking at ultraweek electromagnetic forces and you know,
Speaker 9: they moved her over to the Manhattan Project. But also
Speaker 9: the new papers that have come out about neutrinos, how
Speaker 9: they're traveling back in time, so.
Speaker 8: To speak, would that all be related to what you are.
Speaker 1: I think in neutrinos as like the ether. I think
Speaker 1: that's the mainstream, like the relic neutrinos is the way
Speaker 1: they like. I think that when they're talk about the trees,
Speaker 1: they're talking about like sub atomic particles, everything below electrons
Speaker 1: and atoms. To me, like I think of as like
Speaker 1: when physicists are talking about it. I think of it
Speaker 1: as like a fuzzy concept, not something that's like super
Speaker 1: hard because we don't see that stuff. It's really more
Speaker 1: how we kind of conceptualize it. So that's how I
Speaker 1: think about the neutrino aspect. Sorry, what was the other
Speaker 1: thing that you were saying?
Speaker 8: Oh about the Wu experiment, how she capitalized on the week.
Speaker 1: So people should check up my interview with doctor U
Speaker 1: from NASA, doctor you from NASA, who has a yuon theory,
Speaker 1: his unification theory that everything is just magnetism, because he
Speaker 1: has a really good experiment of how this is possible
Speaker 1: where he says, okay, you imagine your two atoms that
Speaker 1: are repelling each other, they don't want to come together. Now,
Speaker 1: just imagine that it's a magnet where it's got positive
Speaker 1: north and negative south. And this is the reason why
Speaker 1: they're you know, two norths are gonna repel each other. Okay,
Speaker 1: but what happens if I flip this one over? Now
Speaker 1: the south is facing this way. Now they're going to
Speaker 1: come together. And he says, what if this is how
Speaker 1: it's really working. What if we have these extra degrees
Speaker 1: of freedom. Everything is just spinning, spinning little spheres and
Speaker 1: it seems like they can't come together. But all we
Speaker 1: have to do is just reorient it. If we just
Speaker 1: reorient it, now they'll boom come together. That would be
Speaker 1: anyone who's research nuclear physics. You know, if you start
Speaker 1: to figure something like that out, you're going dark because
Speaker 1: now you've figured out how we can do fusion really easily, potentially,
Speaker 1: because once you figure out the mechanism for flipping around
Speaker 1: that that spin, changing manipulating that spin, now you can
Speaker 1: get rid of the cool on barrier. Essentially the thing
Speaker 1: hold space.
Speaker 9: It reminds me of and when you look at the
Speaker 9: I guess, not the prototype but the actual mechanism of
Speaker 9: the guy from Locked Martin that you just showed with
Speaker 9: the film, If you look at it on Google, it
Speaker 9: almost looks like a mitochondria, you know, within the cell
Speaker 9: with power houses the cell right mitochondria itself somewhat has
Speaker 9: fusion itself by finding photons into you know, utilizing that
Speaker 9: as its currency. But what it also does is it
Speaker 9: also produces its own light, and it also produces its
Speaker 9: own water. And with mitochondria, it can also produce waves
Speaker 9: to manipulate.
Speaker 8: I guess it's like a preprint paper that.
Speaker 9: Came out that was talking about how it can send
Speaker 9: out signals in a plasma formation or form.
Speaker 8: So it showed that mechanism. Kid was shows like, oh
Speaker 8: my god, that looks like monochondria.
Speaker 1: It's funny because they literally the two ways to stabilize
Speaker 1: plasma I saw one is axial rotation. The other one
Speaker 1: is a helical rotation. Helical meaning DNA right a spiral.
Speaker 1: And if you play this video that I was put out,
Speaker 1: I think you're going to enjoy this. What does plasma
Speaker 1: do in outer space? In zero G? If you just
Speaker 1: put some dust into it so that you give it
Speaker 1: some substance and they just let the plasma do its
Speaker 1: own thing form structures, it begins to naturally form structures
Speaker 1: in zero G. Can you pull up this video here?
Speaker 1: I think it'll be a fun one to watch because
Speaker 1: it's going to connect to those ideas that you're talking about.
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna mute it because it might be a
Speaker 1: copyright thing or whatever. I think the music's fine. But
Speaker 1: you can see here, look at the plasma form these structures.
Speaker 1: You can see these tendrils being formed from it. So
Speaker 1: why is this important? Because we're seeing these electrostatic forces,
Speaker 1: we're seeing those nuclear forces. That's why it's doing this.
Speaker 1: So whatever it's structuring into it has to be because
Speaker 1: of these forces. One of the cool things they're going
Speaker 1: to show here in a second is that avoid just
Speaker 1: naturally forms like just a black circle. Void forms where
Speaker 1: the plasma just goes all around. It almost looks like
Speaker 1: a black hole. So this is a Russian experiment that
Speaker 1: these guys were testing. That's why we've got the subtitles here.
Speaker 1: And so yeah, because of their repulsion and attraction, they
Speaker 1: form this lattice structure. Look at that lattice structure right there.
Speaker 1: You can see the structure basically informed from it. And
Speaker 1: then they would see this empty void appear in the
Speaker 1: middle of the lattice structure. Look at that void. How
Speaker 1: crazy is that? That's just zero G plasma floating around
Speaker 1: in zero G of natural void just forms. Look at that.
Speaker 1: That's insane. But the best part coming up here in
Speaker 1: a second is that the plasma also doesn't just organize
Speaker 1: like this where it almost looks like a squid or
Speaker 1: something creepy. It also forms to explain galaxies, and it
Speaker 1: also formed to explain there's your galaxy right there. Look
Speaker 1: at that. Look at how fast the stars of the
Speaker 1: edges or these are just little particles of dust, But
Speaker 1: this explains, like we don't need dark matter. There's your
Speaker 1: answer right there. The edges are spinning almost as fast
Speaker 1: as the center because it's just plasma in space. And
Speaker 1: then the last part is the DNA. The plasma also
Speaker 1: forms double helix structures naturally in outer space as well,
Speaker 1: so it goes to show these double helix structures. It
Speaker 1: must be a natural pheno. I look at that. This
Speaker 1: is the craziest to me looking at that, like that
Speaker 1: looks just like a double helix. So that's one of
Speaker 1: my favorite videos on plasma. When I'm trying to get
Speaker 1: people inve be like why is plasma cool? It's like,
Speaker 1: have you seen what it does in outer space when
Speaker 1: it's just floating around freely? Pretty cool?
Speaker 9: It almost it almost gives a nod to vortex ma
Speaker 9: and some of those concepts of thirty six nine.
Speaker 8: And then you look at secret.
Speaker 9: Societies and how they kind of manipulate their sigils and
Speaker 9: what have you. And when you look at these sigils,
Speaker 9: these sigils almost manipulate what formations are made in biological structure.
Speaker 9: And I think biological structures, yes, they are intelligent themselves,
Speaker 9: but I think they are following what is it Nature
Speaker 9: follows the path of the these right, pick the most common.
Speaker 9: It's not a female. It's not going to pick the
Speaker 9: most complicated, you know anything. It's going to follow the
Speaker 9: path of least resistance. And I think that is what
Speaker 9: we're seeing. Whether it is with the Fibonacci sequence or
Speaker 9: the golden ratio or plasma forming into helical structures, it's
Speaker 9: basically showing you what the plasma itself is doing.
Speaker 1: I think, in my opinion, you're right, the vortex structures
Speaker 1: are connected all of this. And I'm not somebody I
Speaker 1: don't really care about the you know, imagery or numerology.
Speaker 1: And if that stuff connects, it connects right great for me.
Speaker 1: That's how I view it. I'm not saying it's I'm
Speaker 1: not discrediting it, but the vortex stuff people like that's
Speaker 1: in the science vortex motion related to it is like
Speaker 1: the way they view it is the same way where
Speaker 1: you'd view pulling the drain on your bathtub, so like
Speaker 1: you pull the drain in your bathtub. In the vortex forms,
Speaker 1: it's extra dimensional vortex, right Like when we look at
Speaker 1: it on the surface, it just looks like a ring.
Speaker 1: But if you were to measure it, you could see
Speaker 1: this is actual vortex pulling through the medium. That's how
Speaker 1: you can look at the zero point energy when we're
Speaker 1: interacting with it as well. And in fact, it's gone
Speaker 1: so far as they're solving those vortex equations, solving Schrodinger's equations.
Speaker 1: And then you would ask, like what could you do
Speaker 1: if you could solve that vortex? And what if you
Speaker 1: if you could solve that vortex in the ether that
Speaker 1: we can't physically see because it's extra dimensional, could you
Speaker 1: like actually control entanglement? Could you cause something to appear
Speaker 1: here and over here and be connected to one another?
Speaker 1: I think the answer is yes, And I think that's
Speaker 1: how they figured out teleportation was first figure out how
Speaker 1: we can actually control the ethic control the medium, and
Speaker 1: now you can get things that look like magic to
Speaker 1: begin to happen.
Speaker 6: Victor Schauberger was writing about that. He was another one
Speaker 6: of these Operation paper Clip type scientists who started over
Speaker 6: in Austria and then came to America, had all of
Speaker 6: his papers stolen and he was just kicked out. It's
Speaker 6: like you're fired. Now we're taking all this stuff. I'm real.
Speaker 1: Yeah, in Tesla, there were a lot of guys that
Speaker 1: were probably like one hundred years before their time, honestly,
Speaker 1: and you think back going that far, those people had
Speaker 1: no chance. You were never going to convince people that
Speaker 1: were riding on horses and what have you that you know,
Speaker 1: you could do, you could levitate and things like that
Speaker 1: that they were saying, or that free energy was possible.
Speaker 1: I mean, those people were living in you know, at
Speaker 1: the time, we were living in a world where there's
Speaker 1: you couldn't think of stuff that was esoteric like that.
Speaker 1: The idea that an object is a wave. I mean,
Speaker 1: that's even too far out there for most people right
Speaker 1: now twenty twenty five. So that's what makes it so
Speaker 1: difficult for people. And that's why I think that the
Speaker 1: best thing that we can do people ask me like,
Speaker 1: why are you not building something? Why are you not
Speaker 1: doing whatever? It's like building something's not gonna help. People
Speaker 1: are already building it and they just get ignored, discredited
Speaker 1: or whatever. It's like we have to demystify this. We
Speaker 1: have to like actually break it down for people and
Speaker 1: be like, okay, no, like actually matter is really a wave,
Speaker 1: so that means we can do you know, a matter
Speaker 1: wave and things like that and explain, like what can
Speaker 1: we actually do with this stuff talk about it in
Speaker 1: a normal way and not talk about it and laugh
Speaker 1: about it like they do on mainstream media when they
Speaker 1: talk about aliens and stuff like that, like, oh, you know,
Speaker 1: it turns out we can make a replicator with this.
Speaker 1: That's my favorite one Star Trek replicator. People can get
Speaker 1: their minds around that. They go, wait, we can make
Speaker 1: a replicator. Doesn't that like free everything forever? Yes, exactly,
Speaker 1: unlimited abundance, the end of scarcity.
Speaker 7: Well, even that double slid experiment they did a while back,
Speaker 7: they were going back and forth if it was a
Speaker 7: wave or a particle, wave or a particle And from
Speaker 7: my understanding, and like I said, I'm a Southern man,
Speaker 7: so I'm a little slow but from what I took
Speaker 7: from it was that they had come to the conclusion
Speaker 7: that it was.
Speaker 1: Basically both that when you observe it, it's a wave.
Speaker 7: When you observe it, it's almost like it has a consciousness,
Speaker 7: but when you are not observing it, it turns into
Speaker 7: a particle. So I thought that was pretty wild concept.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's the reason why it's the most mysterious
Speaker 1: experiment in all of physics. I mean, my interpretation is
Speaker 1: that it's not a particle. Is that we give it
Speaker 1: a particle like quality to explain it in our reality.
Speaker 1: But the answer is it's always was a wave. And
Speaker 1: I think where Einstein was wrong. Einstein actually won his
Speaker 1: Nobel Prize in the photoelectric effects, which was we take
Speaker 1: a piece of metal and we shoot light at it,
Speaker 1: and the electrons are gonna get ripped off the metal.
Speaker 1: So we know that that should happen from a physics perspective.
Speaker 1: What we did not expect is that if I increased
Speaker 1: the brightness of the light, we'd expect the electrons to
Speaker 1: get shot off faster, like that's just normal physic If
Speaker 1: I increased the intensity, there should be more energy. Therefore
Speaker 1: the electron should get shot off at a higher speed.
Speaker 1: But that didn't happen. The electrons were getting shot off
Speaker 1: the same speed even when I increased the brightness of
Speaker 1: the light. But that doesn't make sense. If I push
Speaker 1: on a rock harder, the rock's going to move further, right,
Speaker 1: simple physics. So what was going on? So Einstein all
Speaker 1: these scientists came up with, how do we explain this? Well,
Speaker 1: there's another mystery. They figured out how to make the
Speaker 1: electrons shoot out faster, and it's not increasing the brightness.
Speaker 1: It's by changing the color of the light. What well,
Speaker 1: what is changing the color of the light? Changing the
Speaker 1: color lights, changing the frequency of the light. So it's
Speaker 1: not increasing the brightness and the intensity. It's changing the
Speaker 1: wavelength of the light. Causes the electron either shoot at
Speaker 1: a higher or lower So Einstein thought, oh, well, there
Speaker 1: must be this magical quantum of light. We'll call it
Speaker 1: a photon. This quantum of light, this packet of light,
Speaker 1: and the packet size can change, and that's how it's
Speaker 1: interacting with that. I think that's retarded, no offense. I
Speaker 1: think that's stupid. But because the answer is resonance. Once
Speaker 1: you told me that it's the color of the light
Speaker 1: changing the intensity. The answer is frequency. The answer is
Speaker 1: if I have this wave of going like this and
Speaker 1: this wave is exactly the same, there's gonna be a
Speaker 1: significant reaction. They're going to cancel each other out perfectly.
Speaker 1: But if one of them just going like this and
Speaker 1: the other one's going crazy, there's gonna be a different reaction.
Speaker 1: Maybe there'll be very little reaction to that case. So
Speaker 1: resonance is the answer, which is sad because it would
Speaker 1: mean the Tesla is right about everything. Energy, frequency, vibration
Speaker 1: is all of it. And that would mean that Einstein,
Speaker 1: when he went down with this photon and particle interpretation
Speaker 1: like set us back really far, because that mindset is
Speaker 1: what's holding this back, that mindset that everything's a particle,
Speaker 1: because we really desperately want this to be a physical object.
Speaker 1: But when you look at it and you boil it down,
Speaker 1: this isn't a physical This is mostly empty. This cup
Speaker 1: is mostly empty And the only reason why I didn't
Speaker 1: go through the cup is because the electrons in this
Speaker 1: cup repelled the electrons in my hand. That's the real
Speaker 1: way the world works. We just don't perceive it though.
Speaker 2: Yes, exactly head So I don't know if you're trying
Speaker 2: to say something, but your mute. Sorry.
Speaker 6: Super cold hydrogen fork creates a superfluid that can go
Speaker 6: through any object. So is it really going through the
Speaker 6: object or is it just not going along with the
Speaker 6: same sort of frequency.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it came through the question right right, yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: superfluid helium too. And then that's the thing is that
Speaker 1: when we bring some of these liquids to like near zero,
Speaker 1: they begin to act like a quantum We see quantum
Speaker 1: effects occur to act in one big unison. You can
Speaker 1: watch these Fara fluids or some of the fun things
Speaker 1: to watch. But this is the same idea as bose
Speaker 1: eins conesse. The Boseeisen connoise begins to act in unison
Speaker 1: and we see these quantum effects occur. So when we
Speaker 1: are trying to cheat and create free energy, almost all
Speaker 1: the concepts are free energy manipulate quantum mechanics because on
Speaker 1: the quantum level, a pendulum never stops. At the quantum level,
Speaker 1: the pendulum is always going back and forth, always jiggling,
Speaker 1: which means there's infinite energy there. So if we can
Speaker 1: somehow scale that up, we can take that effect and
Speaker 1: make it big. Macroscoptic there's your free energy. So a
Speaker 1: lot of the best designs that I reviewed for microchips
Speaker 1: andavy that's what they're doing. They're just like, oh, we
Speaker 1: found this crazy quantum effect that never stops, and now
Speaker 1: we're just trying to scale it up.
Speaker 6: Absolutely.
Speaker 4: Did anybody have any other questions or anything that you
Speaker 4: wanted to get in? I did have one thing, And
Speaker 4: maybe it might be too long, but I just think
Speaker 4: for our listeners might be interesting because I heard you
Speaker 4: mentioned it recently.
Speaker 2: I think you're even mentioning Peter Tiel and so Sam
Speaker 2: Moltman kind of involved in this stuff. What's your thoughts
Speaker 2: on that. We have our opinion of Peter Teel too.
Speaker 2: It's probably the same thing as yours. I think you
Speaker 2: said the anti christ.
Speaker 1: I mean he talks about it's weird, but I mean
Speaker 1: I don't hate the guy.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, yeah, I just trust him.
Speaker 1: He's definitely got insider information, you know. So it's like,
Speaker 1: you know, you apply the same stuff that happens to
Speaker 1: the Congress. Congress is like Nancy Pelosi has the best
Speaker 1: stock market portfolio, Like there is like seventy percent gains
Speaker 1: or something like that. It's like, obviously she has inside
Speaker 1: information right, because she's connected to people that are in
Speaker 1: the know what have you. Same thing is true for
Speaker 1: Peter Teel. I mean that's why he's connected the CIA.
Speaker 1: He's connected the people that know about this technology, and
Speaker 1: therefore they know where to invest, they know what to do.
Speaker 1: In some cases probably a backroom sweetheart handshake deals already
Speaker 1: in place. And this is how the CI controls these
Speaker 1: people too. If they tell you, oh, hey, go invest
Speaker 1: in heally infusion because field diverse configuration fusion is the
Speaker 1: secret and they're gonna be the one that's successful. You
Speaker 1: go invest all your money there. You will be a
Speaker 1: trillionaire in the future. But here's the drawback. Now you
Speaker 1: got to do it, we say, right, we own you now.
Speaker 1: Pretty much. That's my opinion of Peter Thiel and all
Speaker 1: these other people. I think they're just complete phone us
Speaker 1: and I think they've basically just been elevated to this level.
Speaker 1: I hate that we give them status like they're better
Speaker 1: than other people, like their opinion means more than other people,
Speaker 1: because it doesn't doesn't at all. They were basically just
Speaker 1: selected to be that thing. So I don't have a
Speaker 1: huge amount of respect for Peter Thiel and I also
Speaker 1: don't like what Palenteer is doing because I know that
Speaker 1: Pallenteer is basically just taking all the data that's available
Speaker 1: on the Internet about you, and they're making a profile
Speaker 1: of you. Doesn't even have to say your name, and
Speaker 1: they still know who you are. They don't. They probably
Speaker 1: know you better than you know you, but they just
Speaker 1: give it some dummy number. And this is how they
Speaker 1: get around privacy violations. And then if the law enforcement,
Speaker 1: if you ever do something illegal, they'll just say, okay,
Speaker 1: it turns out that you know Astion Forbes was X one, two, three,
Speaker 1: four five. Now they have a whole profile for you.
Speaker 1: Now Palenteer just spits at the law enforcement. They know
Speaker 1: everything you've ever done in your whole life, and they
Speaker 1: have it all package. You're ready to go where you've
Speaker 1: ever lived, everything like that. For a lot of people
Speaker 1: they would say that's a privacy issue, absolutely. I mean sure,
Speaker 1: But at the same time, we're not going backwards, man.
Speaker 1: People aren't using the Internet less and less. You know
Speaker 1: that's going to happen no matter what. My answer to
Speaker 1: that is, make the tools available for everybody, let the
Speaker 1: public use those tools, let the public know what's out there.
Speaker 1: About if I search for me what I find. That
Speaker 1: way I can control what I put out there and
Speaker 1: know what's available for people, including law enforcement.
Speaker 2: Well, sir lisaid, you want to say something.
Speaker 9: Yeah, just really a quick comment, just going back to
Speaker 9: the I guess the technology you were talking about with
Speaker 9: the missing plane when it disappeared in that the disinformation people,
Speaker 9: the people that are coming out saying that it's fake,
Speaker 9: you know, and what have you.
Speaker 8: Would you think that some of these people that are.
Speaker 9: Saying that is a way of distracting the rest of
Speaker 9: us from realizing the technology of Whammy and that you
Speaker 9: do have drones that that do have the ability scale
Speaker 9: down such a small remote sensing viewability so to speak,
Speaker 9: and that they are watching, they are surveilling, that they
Speaker 9: are collecting all this data in real time from these
Speaker 9: drones with that forget what the you called it the Groxstair,
Speaker 9: thank you?
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, no, that was it.
Speaker 9: It was just more of like a decoy, like, let's
Speaker 9: decoy that it's all fake and it's all aliens versus
Speaker 9: everybody kind of looking the Gorgon Stair is actually the
Speaker 9: bigger you know thing.
Speaker 1: I don't like to say, like a lot of people
Speaker 1: want I only have there be like one answer. What
Speaker 1: have you like? I think aliens are definitely real. I
Speaker 1: mean I don't know if they're visiting us, but they're
Speaker 1: definitely aliens out there somewhere. In fact, we might be
Speaker 1: like their cousins, We might be aliens, who knows. I
Speaker 1: just think it's so much more impactful to our society
Speaker 1: a boy like free energy, teleportation, and then even the
Speaker 1: surveillance capabilities I had argue are more important than the
Speaker 1: alien question. Aliens existing, Fine, that's not really a big
Speaker 1: thing for me. Sure you know they exist. If they're
Speaker 1: going to start, you know, interfering, then they should start
Speaker 1: paying taxes or whatever else everybody else has to do.
Speaker 1: But the surveillance cability, they definitely don't want people knowing
Speaker 1: about that surveillance capability. I mean that's really advanced, like
Speaker 1: you're talking DVR capabilities. Because now you take what I said,
Speaker 1: just a second of them making a profile about you,
Speaker 1: and by the way, what am I gonna tell you
Speaker 1: they've already done, like we've got the videos on it
Speaker 1: can show them. They combine that now with the whammy,
Speaker 1: and now the AI is tracking every moving object on
Speaker 1: the screen, every moving object on the screen, every car,
Speaker 1: every plane, every person walking around is all being tracked
Speaker 1: by the AI. Now, not only do they have a
Speaker 1: profile of you, they know where you've ever been, and
Speaker 1: they could be like, okay, pull up last week when
Speaker 1: ashtonal was walking his dog out of the park and
Speaker 1: then just pull that up and just follow you around
Speaker 1: reversing like that movie The Net with Sandra Bullock or
Speaker 1: Enemy at the State in the nineties. Like they've got
Speaker 1: that now, that's the stuff that's scary now. For now,
Speaker 1: I think that we're somewhat safe from that until the
Speaker 1: zones are flying above the cities. But in the riots
Speaker 1: and things like that, the drones were flying above the
Speaker 1: cities and they were doing that. It's not like that
Speaker 1: data goes away. They've got that forever. And it's not
Speaker 1: like they were just limited to the one little area
Speaker 1: either they've got the one hundred square kilometers or something
Speaker 1: like that minimum. It's a whole city they're covering with
Speaker 1: these drones. So yeah, I definitely think there's a big
Speaker 1: risk there. And then the next step is, Okay, they
Speaker 1: were doing this on a drone in twenty fourteen, that
Speaker 1: was eleven years ago. Have they figured out how to
Speaker 1: put it on the satellites or like Starlink satellites for example,
Speaker 1: and now do that same idea, but with satellites where
Speaker 1: they don't even have to have a drone. That's the
Speaker 1: next level. And I would be surprised if they don't
Speaker 1: have that.
Speaker 6: Now. Well, as long as we don't know about it,
Speaker 6: then they can use it for infinite social engineering, you know,
Speaker 6: because it's not just about what they can get one
Speaker 6: person to do, is how can they link all this
Speaker 6: behavior together in a certain direction using you know, maybe
Speaker 6: household objects that are all connected to the Internet.
Speaker 1: Absolutely everything that's a sensor is probably feeding into palanteer.
Speaker 1: I would look at it like that, you know. That's
Speaker 1: that's the way of the world. There's not going to
Speaker 1: be very much privacy in the future, for sure. I
Speaker 1: mean I don't I just don't know. If there's not
Speaker 1: much you I'm not saying it's a good or bathroom,
Speaker 1: just saying it is what it is. The best we
Speaker 1: can do is probably be aware of it, you know,
Speaker 1: be aware of what they're doing on that front. That's
Speaker 1: why those videos were so important, is they exposed this
Speaker 1: whammy capability, this whammy capability that you can see where
Speaker 1: that's going to lead to, and it gives us some
Speaker 1: context to understand it, whereas before no one even knew
Speaker 1: what that was. It also tells us, man, they have
Speaker 1: a lot of surveillance when it comes to their covert operations,
Speaker 1: and it also shows that must be a covert operation.
Speaker 1: I mean that drone is one hundred square kilometers is big,
Speaker 1: but that's in the middle of the ocean. They don't
Speaker 1: have drones everywhere on the planet, you know, So that
Speaker 1: meant they were ready for that thing to go down.
Speaker 1: They were ready for that to happen. They had two
Speaker 1: drones recording it from two different angles. So the scary
Speaker 1: part there is like, oh, man, we're doing some sketchy
Speaker 1: black operations with this technology, with this surveillance capability that
Speaker 1: I guarantee they have some legal justification for what they did.
Speaker 1: But if that comes out to the public, screw your
Speaker 1: legal justification. Your legal justification is, oh, well, it killed
Speaker 1: ninety percent of innocent people, but we got the ten
Speaker 1: percent that we wanted, so it's okay. Public's not going
Speaker 1: to buy that.
Speaker 5: You know, Hey, Ashen, I was taking a lot of
Speaker 5: notes that you was talking about. But one thing that
Speaker 5: caught my attention is that you said that we got
Speaker 5: this information is technology from somewhere. Now.
Speaker 2: You mentioned the.
Speaker 5: Word aliens a lot, and you mentioned, you know, you know,
Speaker 5: the craft that can go underwater and stuff like that.
Speaker 5: I'm really big on the Anona slash to Ananaki. I
Speaker 5: know if you've heard of them plenty of times, and
Speaker 5: a lot of people will say that they came from
Speaker 5: a planet named Nibert orbits are still in every thirty
Speaker 5: six hundred years. Well, their actual texts, their cuneiform texts,
Speaker 5: and their depictions actually say that they came from the
Speaker 5: deaths of the sea. I've shared the resources for that
Speaker 5: so many different times, and it's just interesting that you
Speaker 5: said that their technology would probably be better underwater than
Speaker 5: it would be in space. And that makes more of
Speaker 5: an idea of there is something that has to do
Speaker 5: with our water that's giving us this disability. And a
Speaker 5: case in point is inky slash Ea. He came from
Speaker 5: the deaths of the seas to give humans technology and
Speaker 5: information and so on and so forth. So you know,
Speaker 5: I wonder you know, because you said that nobody has
Speaker 5: ever been able to debunk you and say that that
Speaker 5: your information is wrong. And you've been able to counter
Speaker 5: everything that they've said that they brought to you in
Speaker 5: so many different way. I'm that kind of that way
Speaker 5: with when it comes to ancient texts. If they said
Speaker 5: that the Sumerian says something, I want to see where
Speaker 5: they got that information from, so I can be just
Speaker 5: as accurate as they are. And I'm telling you everything
Speaker 5: that I keep hearing right now is something from the
Speaker 5: Deaths of the Seas has given us information that we
Speaker 5: possibly are trying to figure out on the easy basis
Speaker 5: up here.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, I'm not an expert on anaky, I'm
Speaker 1: familiar with the idea, but I do like it because
Speaker 1: I think that if there is a civilization hiding on
Speaker 1: this planet, it's definitely underwater. I mean that's the place
Speaker 1: you would hide for sure. With this kind of technology
Speaker 1: being having a civilization underwater is no problem either. I mean,
Speaker 1: you can just make a bubble and you can. You
Speaker 1: have alchemy, you have transmutation, you have everything you need.
Speaker 1: You can make a society anywhere you want. So I
Speaker 1: do like that idea, and I'm very intrigued by the
Speaker 1: lore around, like underwater UFO bases and things like that,
Speaker 1: which would surprise me if we do find something down there.
Speaker 1: And I also like the idea of like we are
Speaker 1: the alien or we were put here by the aliens
Speaker 1: or something like that, because that's one of the only
Speaker 1: ways where it can kind of make sense where there's
Speaker 1: this hyper advanced technology that doesn't seem like we found
Speaker 1: it organically, where it seems like there was something happening
Speaker 1: to it. And also just just this idea of like,
Speaker 1: if you look at this planet, out of all the
Speaker 1: different species that exist on this planet, billions of species,
Speaker 1: what's the one that sticks out? Oh, it's us. We
Speaker 1: stick out like a sore thumb on this planet. We've
Speaker 1: like reshaped the planet. We have the one of the
Speaker 1: biggest populations if you don't include insects, right, Like, we're
Speaker 1: the ones that stick out the most. We're the ones
Speaker 1: that are like the alien species on this planet. So
Speaker 1: the uninoccupying I think is really interesting and also because
Speaker 1: of how it connects to ancient history and you know
Speaker 1: whether or not, like the pyramids and stuff like that
Speaker 1: are really as young as they say they are or
Speaker 1: potentially maybe a lot older, or that there was you know,
Speaker 1: major flooding and things that coincide with the Bible. I
Speaker 1: think a lot of those allow for this option where
Speaker 1: we forgot our history, like something happened and we forgot
Speaker 1: who we really were, Like maybe we were more advanced
Speaker 1: or advanced in more in different ways in the past,
Speaker 1: more than we think now. All of those I think
Speaker 1: are just interesting ideas that I think are very possible
Speaker 1: to be real.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Don't do anybody else have anything else they
Speaker 2: wanted to ask or bring up before we wrap it up? Okay,
Speaker 2: all right, a great interview.
Speaker 7: Yeah, hell yeah, my brain is scrambled, your job ashed,
Speaker 7: and yeah, yeah it's fun.
Speaker 1: You guys are fun. That was cool. Yeah, and I'm glad.
Speaker 1: I'm glad you guys aren't afraid of Like I mean,
Speaker 1: if you want to ask me something about debunks and
Speaker 1: things like that too, you know. I just I like
Speaker 1: to answer any questions that are out there, and I'm
Speaker 1: not here to tell you like you know you're saying,
Speaker 1: you know you've debunked all the demustle. But yeah, I
Speaker 1: feel like I've given adequate explanations for all the debunks
Speaker 1: that are out there. And I happen to know the
Speaker 1: videos are real. But I understand why people don't believe it.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm somebody myself that even if you go
Speaker 1: back like ten years ago, I would add a completely
Speaker 1: different mindset of everything going on in the world. So
Speaker 1: I look at it more of like everybody's kind of
Speaker 1: on their own journey of discovery for the most part. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and I'm just trying to like push it along as
Speaker 1: best as I can for the people that are ready,
Speaker 1: you know.
Speaker 2: Doing a great job. I think, thank you, sir.
Speaker 4: Before we wrap it up, I'll have the other people
Speaker 4: here just plug their shows again and Lisa, what is
Speaker 4: going on? They cult reject mad scientists.
Speaker 8: Thank you so much.
Speaker 9: Oh sorry, Nick, I'll just go jump to tell Ashton
Speaker 9: that I thought this was an amazing presentation. I apologize, Nick,
Speaker 9: that's amazing. I've heard, I've heard of you, I've listened
Speaker 9: to a little bit of you. It was a very
Speaker 9: candid interview. I thank you for answering all our different questions,
Speaker 9: and you left with like Tylone was saying, I took
Speaker 9: so many notes, You've left so many seeds to kind
Speaker 9: of launch from. Thank you again, and thank you fellow
Speaker 9: rejects for having me on and letting me interrupt again
Speaker 9: as usual. The only thing I like to plug is
Speaker 9: a cult Research Institute org We have a couple of
Speaker 9: prejects that contribute to that website in literary form. If
Speaker 9: you'd like to check us out a cult research institut
Speaker 9: John Orgon, if you'd like to get a hold of
Speaker 9: me through Twitter. Soalise Lisa is the best place.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Thank you very much, and we got the
Speaker 2: Hell's Giant.
Speaker 6: Well. I don't want to leave the audience not having
Speaker 6: a complete or near complete list of authors that you
Speaker 6: would recommend for them to read up on so that
Speaker 6: they can get on the same level of knowledge that
Speaker 6: you have right now. So if you could give the
Speaker 6: people a quick list or you know, maybe a long
Speaker 6: list of the authors you've read that have led you here,
Speaker 6: that would be perfect.
Speaker 1: I don't really have a list ready, but I mean
Speaker 1: start with Hal put Off, Tom Bearden, Eric W. Davis.
Speaker 1: Those are probably the first three to start with, the
Speaker 1: reason being that help put Off and Eric Davis are
Speaker 1: both alive still. Eric Davis is testifying at these UFO
Speaker 1: whistleblower conferences, but he's written papers on teleportation for the
Speaker 1: Air Force. I mean, the disconnect is intane. So that's
Speaker 1: where I would start with those guys papers, the ones
Speaker 1: and hal Putoffs when I mentioned earlier, gravity is a
Speaker 1: zero point fluctuation force. And even if you're somebody that's
Speaker 1: not deep in physics, okay, we'll have the AI interpret
Speaker 1: it for you and explain it to you in a
Speaker 1: way that you can understand, you know, And that's that's
Speaker 1: where you start. Nobody starts understanding everything perfectly right away.
Speaker 1: So those are probably the first three that I would
Speaker 1: start with, and then from there, I would say move
Speaker 1: into the durds, the Defense Intelligence Reference Documents. Eric Davis
Speaker 1: wrote six of them actually, and how Putoff wrote one
Speaker 1: as well, And that's where you'll begin to find some
Speaker 1: of these other engineers and scientists like John Kramer and
Speaker 1: Fred wert Winnerberg that I mentioned, including Paul SiZ Is
Speaker 1: another guy that I liked that wrote the papers on
Speaker 1: megneto hydrodynamics for propulsion. I think he wrote the a
Speaker 1: neutronic propulsion fusion propulsion paper too. So all these concepts
Speaker 1: are all peer reviewed, signed to be papers. They've been
Speaker 1: written by you know, PhDs and black project engineers that
Speaker 1: are out there. So one more time, the durd's Defense
Speaker 1: Intelligence Reference Documents, they were declined assified slash like released
Speaker 1: via Foya back in like twenty seventeen, but they were
Speaker 1: the most popular scientific papers on the Pentagon's like secret
Speaker 1: air Gap server for a number of years before that.
Speaker 1: So that's where I recommend checking those out. Everything you
Speaker 1: see in those papers is real.
Speaker 2: Nice good question, Lis. Did you want to plug your
Speaker 2: show Headless?
Speaker 5: Oh?
Speaker 6: Yeah, you can find my show on Thursday nights. We
Speaker 6: look at your mail. If it has something to do
Speaker 6: with a paranormal or an interesting dream that you've had
Speaker 6: or stuff like that, you can find me on YouTube
Speaker 6: and uh yeah, so check out the Headless Giant podcast
Speaker 6: at gmail dot.
Speaker 2: Com if you have those stories. Thank you awesome, Thank
Speaker 2: you very much. And Sarah, what is going on? I will?
Speaker 1: I'm good.
Speaker 3: That was an excellent presentation and I like that it
Speaker 3: was put in a way that I could mostly understand it.
Speaker 3: I'm also from the South, some little slow, like you said,
Speaker 3: I just want to plug the Institute for Natural Philosophy
Speaker 3: as well as our magazine. You can see that at
Speaker 3: Institute for Naturalphilosophy dot org. And I would also like
Speaker 3: to plug our podcast Universe Unveiled.
Speaker 2: Awesome, Thank you very much.
Speaker 5: Man Tyron, Yeah, that was an excellent presentation. I took
Speaker 5: a lot of notes, so I'm gonna be hitting you
Speaker 5: up in the future. Everything you can find on me
Speaker 5: is on my westside rebirth of theWord dot com. I
Speaker 5: love ancient history, I love religion, I love your foes,
Speaker 5: I love orbs. I actually have a video of an
Speaker 5: ORB from my greencam that I'll show you. I'll send
Speaker 5: it to you whatnot.
Speaker 1: But yeah, this is.
Speaker 5: Definitely amazing everybody. I appreciate everybody for letting me be here. Nick,
Speaker 5: thanks for letting me be here man.
Speaker 2: Of course, of course, no, thank you for joining us.
Speaker 2: And let's been not at least Doc what is going on, sir?
Speaker 2: Everybody know where they can find with me?
Speaker 7: Not much many, I'm ninety three percent sure. But He's
Speaker 7: connected a lot of dots from me today and gave
Speaker 7: me some puzzle pieces to contemplate on. So thank you
Speaker 7: for your time and research. And I really enjoyed myself today.
Speaker 7: But Prometheus Lynn's podcast, Prometheus lnspodcast dot com. Anywhere find
Speaker 7: content is consumed, you can find me there and be
Speaker 7: sure to go to Amazon help a Whole Country boy
Speaker 7: out and check out the epic of Esyle birth right and.
Speaker 1: Seed War, I appreciate it.
Speaker 2: Thank you very much. Doch I always appreciate you here.
Speaker 4: And finally, Astin, I'm pretty sure everybody knows who you
Speaker 4: are already, but if they don't, please let them know
Speaker 4: where they can find all your amazing work and anything again,
Speaker 4: you want to promote a suggest.
Speaker 1: Yeah, check me out at just x Ashton all social
Speaker 1: media's guys YouTube. You can find all my stuff there.
Speaker 1: X very active on accent check out and everybody else's
Speaker 1: content that was on this awesome panel. Guys, thank you
Speaker 1: for having me, No, no, for sure, thank you.
Speaker 4: Definitely go check out his Twitter. That man is on fire,
Speaker 4: so yeah, definitely check it out. And again, thank you
Speaker 4: all for making the show. I really appreciate you all
Speaker 4: putting the time aside and coming on. I really had
Speaker 4: some awesome questions and thank you all and everybody in
Speaker 4: the chat. There was just too many for me to
Speaker 4: even put it up on the screen anymore, but thank
Speaker 4: you everybody that was here.
Speaker 2: It was a great time.
Speaker 4: And that is the end of another Recult Rejects and
Speaker 4: until the next one, Everybody'll be well Later