Speaker 1: I was reading through the stack of sources you brought
in for us today and I just I couldn't get
this one specific image out of my head.
Speaker 2: Oh, the Cold War file.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. It feels like something pulled straight out of
out of a Cold War thriller, but it's completely real.
Speaker 2: It is.
Speaker 1: Imagine you're a military officer in the nineteen sixties, right,
You're stationed in a reinforced concrete capsule, buried deep, yeah,
buried sixty feet underground, beneath the American Midwest. You're entirely
cut off from the surface world, surrounded by like the
hum of electronics, fixed steel blast doors, and just this
heavy crushing weight of national.
Speaker 2: Security, ultimate responsibility.
Speaker 1: Exactly, your fingers are literally inches away from the launch
sequence of a nuclear arsenal that could end civilization in
a matter of minutes. And then the phone rings, and
then the phone rings. It's a top side guard and
he isn't reporting a Soviet bomber or a drill. He's frantic, frantic,
screaming about an unknown, silent, glowing object hovering effortlessly above
the front gate of the base. And before you can
even process what that implies, the board changes the most powerful,
highly secured weapons on planet Earth. The missiles you are
actively guarding suddenly and inexplicably start deactivating one by one.
It is.
Speaker 2: It's the kind of scenario that forces you to just
completely reevaluate everything you think you know about global security.
When you actually dig into the declassified documentation of that event,
the institutional panic is palpable. And what makes this so
compelling is that it isn't an isolated anomaly. It's just
one data point in a much larger, decade spanning puzzle.
Speaker 1: Well, welcome to Thrilling Threads. I am incredibly excited to
have you with.
Speaker 2: Us today, glad to be here.
Speaker 1: We are looking at a collection of materials that absolutely
shifted my perspective. We've been pouring over declassified military testimonies,
detailed historical records, reports from former intelligence officers, and some
deeply provocative research regarding ancient anomala artifacts. Quite a stack,
it is. And our mission today is to explore a chilling,
highly documented pattern of unidentified anomalist phenomena interacting directly with
human nuclear technology.
Speaker 2: And we should probably establish right from the start the
origin of these phenomena. You know, whether you suspect it's
secret government technology, extraterrestrial intelligence, or something we don't even
have a vocabulary for yet. Right, that's almost secondary, exactly,
it's secondary to the immedia tactical reality. What matters is
that this represents a documented national security enigma of the
highest order. Absolutely, we are looking at unknown entities operating
in highly restricted airspace, completely bypassing the most secure defense
networks on the planet and frankly outperforming our aerospace technology
by an astronomical margin.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's unpack this, because the sheer scale of it
is what gets me. We aren't talking about, you know,
a weird light seen by a camper in the woods.
Speaker 2: No, not at all.
Speaker 1: We are talking about the military industrial common plex encountering
an intelligence it fundamentally cannot manage. To really understand the
gravity of that, we need to go back and set
the stage. We're looking at the late nineteen sixties.
Speaker 2: To truly grasp the significance of these incursions, you have
to remember the atmosphere of the era. The nineteen sixties
were defined by a suffocating existential paranoia, the Cold War, right,
the Cuban Missile Crisis had happened just a few years prior.
The strategy of the day was mutually assured destruction mad. Yes,
the United States and the Soviet Union were locked in
a constant state of hypervigilance, both armed with arsenals that
could glass the planet several times.
Speaker 1: Over, and the yield on those weapons was staggering. I'm
talking with the Minuteman I intercontinenta ballistic missiles. One of
our sources provided a comparison that genuinely made me stop
and reread.
Speaker 2: The paragraph the Hiroshima comparison.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima had an explosive
yield of roughly fifteen kilotons.
Speaker 2: Which is fifteen thousand tons of tntqu equivalent, enough to
instantly level a city and alter the course of human history.
Speaker 1: Right, But a single minute Man I warhead it had
a yield of one point two megatons.
Speaker 2: The massive jump that is.
Speaker 1: One point two million tons of TNT It is almost
mathematically impossible to visualize. One single missile is magnitudes more
destructive than the bomb that ended the Second World War.
Speaker 2: And the United States had one hundred and fifty of
these apocalyptic weapons stationed just at Malmstrom Air Force Base
in Montana.
Speaker 1: Which brings us to the operational reality of the men
guarding them. Let's look at Lieutenant Robert Sallis.
Speaker 2: He was the deputy missile Combat crew commander on duty
that night at Malmstrom March twenty seven, nineteen sixty seven.
Speaker 1: So Sallis is sixty feet underground in this launch control facility.
It's essentially a submarine buried in the dirt.
Speaker 2: That's a good way to describe it.
Speaker 1: It's him and his commander locked in for twenty four
hour shift. The two man rules in effect, the isolation
is total, and then he gets that first phone call
from the surface.
Speaker 2: The top side guard reports strange lights flying over the facility,
but it's the specific flight characteristics that are crucial here.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the guard notes they are behaving in ways that
defy aerodynamics. They're flying in incredible steeds then stopping on a.
Speaker 2: Dime reversing course instantly.
Speaker 1: Instantly, without a turning radius, and there's no sound, no
engine noise, no sonic boom, no exhaust trail. The guard
explicitly tells Solas, these are not aircraft, sir.
Speaker 2: In nineteen sixty seven, the pinnacle of aviation was the
SR seventy one Blackbird, Right the Blackbird was a marvel,
but it was definitely loud, required massive logistical support, and
possessed a turning radius measured in states, not feet.
Speaker 1: Wow.
Speaker 2: The physics described by that frightened guard at Malmstrom defy
aerodynamic principles as we understand them even today, let alone
in the sixties.
Speaker 1: I can imagine Solas down there, probably thinking the guard
is seeing a localized weather phenomenon, or just getting spooked
by the sheer emptiness of the Montana planes at night.
Speaker 2: Right, you want a rational explanation.
Speaker 1: He tells them, call back if anything more significant happens.
But minutes later the phone rings again, and this time
the guard is absolutely terrified.
Speaker 2: Screaming into the receiver.
Speaker 1: He reports a gigantic, reddish orange pulsating oval object hovering
silently directly over the front aid of the nuclear facility.
The guards have their weapons drawn.
Speaker 2: You have to put yourself in the mindset of a
missileer in that exact moment, You're in command of ten
nuclear weapons, You're blind to the surface, relying entirely on
a panicked voice on a secure line.
Speaker 1: What's your first thought?
Speaker 2: The immediate terrifying assumption has to be that this is
a Soviet preemptive strike. Right, you'd assume it's some kind
of advanced jamming platform designed to neutralize your defenses before
a broader attack.
Speaker 1: So Sallus orders the guards to use whatever force is
necessary to secure the perimeter. He wakes his commander, and
right at that moment, the alarms.
Speaker 2: Start going off, the claxons.
Speaker 1: The claxons start blaring in this confined, echoing concrete space.
Speaker 2: This is the pivot point. It shifts instantly from a
bizarre sighting into a critical, localized strategic failure.
Speaker 1: They look over the command board. It's a bank of
lights representing the readiness of their ten minute man missiles.
And while this reddish orange object is hovering topside, the
lights on the board start changing one by one rapidly.
They drop from a green operational status to a red
no go. They lose their entire flight of missiles in
a matter of seconds.
Speaker 2: What's fascinating here is the engineering implications of that shutdown.
That's what really demands our attention.
Speaker 1: Tell me more about that.
Speaker 2: These missiles were deliberately designed to be independent of one another,
specifically to prevent a cascading failure, So.
Speaker 1: They aren't wired like Christmas tree lights exactly.
Speaker 2: They aren't wired together on a single circuit. Each missile
silo is physically separated by miles of terrain, and each
operates on its own isolated power and guidance system.
Speaker 1: I had the same thought when reading the report. Couldn't
a massive electromagnetic pulse an EMP just fry the whole
grid at.
Speaker 2: An EMP would certainly cause widespread damage, but the launch
control facilities and the silos were heavily shielded against EMPs
because of the Cold War, because they were designed to
survive and function in a post nuclear strike environment. Furthermore,
an EMP is a blunt instrument. It fries everything.
Speaker 1: But everything else was fine right.
Speaker 2: The lights in the bunker didn't go out, the phone
still worked, the environmental controls functioned perfectly. Whatever happened to
those missiles wasn't a blunt force electrical surge.
Speaker 1: It was surgical. The military investigated this relentlessly, tearing the
systems apart. They found no physical damage, no short circuits,
no burned.
Speaker 2: Out components, nothing to explain a conventional failure.
Speaker 1: Whatever this object was, it transmitted a signal or a
localized field that penetrated sixty feet of earth bypassed the
heavily shielded, isolated security protocols and selectively scrambled the guidance
and control systems of ten independent nuclear weapons.
Speaker 2: Exactly. It implies an intimate, terrifying understanding of how how
our most classified advanced weapons systems functioned. They didn't destroy
the infrastructure, They simply initiated a controlled shut down sequence.
Speaker 1: It was a precise neutralization of the ultimate deterrent. Yes,
and think about the psychological impact of that for a second.
Imagine you're the listener putting yourself in the shoes of
the top brass of the Pentagon, realizing that the impenetrable
nuclear shield you spent billions building can be casually switched
off by an unknown entity.
Speaker 2: It's the ultimate helplessness.
Speaker 1: And then Salus's commander makes a frantic call to the
command post, only to learn that the exact same thing
had happened at another launch facility echo flight, just a
week earlier. Ten more missiles, ten more missiles disabled under
identical circumstances.
Speaker 2: It establishes a deliberate pattern of behavior, and it forces
a very uncomfortable process of elimination.
Speaker 1: How So, if.
Speaker 2: Human adversaries possessed that technology in nineteen sixty seven, the
Cold War would have ended immediately.
Speaker 1: Oh wow.
Speaker 2: The Soviets could have parked the objects over every minute
man field, and the Dakotas in Montana disabled our entire
retaliatory capability and demanded unconditional surrender.
Speaker 1: Because we would have nothing left to fire back with.
Speaker 2: Exactly. The fact that no nation capitalized on this vulnerability
strongly suggests the origin of the interference was not geopolitical.
Speaker 1: Here's where it gets really interesting, though. If this localized
interference at land based silos was the only data point,
it would be fascinating enough. But if these entities are
so hyper focused on our atomic capabilities, what happens when
we take those capabilities on the move.
Speaker 2: You're referring to the maritime encounters.
Speaker 1: Exactly what happens when we take this to the ocean.
Speaker 2: Which present an entirely different set of tactical challenges. The
environment changes, but the core interaction, the absolute suppression of
human military technology, remains consistent.
Speaker 1: Let's jump to July two, nineteen seventy one. We are
looking at the USS John F.
Speaker 2: Kennedy, a massive vessel.
Speaker 1: This isn't a submarine, it's a massive of nuclear powered
aircraft carrier essentially a floating, heavily armed city. They're returning
from a deployment in the Caribbean.
Speaker 2: It's night and a watchman sees something.
Speaker 1: The watchman reports a massive, glowing, orange, pulsating sphere. The
description is remarkably consistent with the Malmstrom object.
Speaker 2: The atmosphere conditions that see amplify the isolation too. An
aircraft carrier operates with a sophisticated suite of radar, sonar,
and communications arraysed.
Speaker 1: It's a fortress.
Speaker 2: It is designed to be the undisputed master of its
immediate airspace and waters.
Speaker 1: Yet this enormous sphere positions itself directly over the flight deck.
Almost immediately, the ship's communications are completely disabled, jammed entirely.
They're cut off from the fleet and from the mainland.
The captain calls the ship to battle stations. You have
thousands of sailors scrambling, pilots rushing to their aircraft, gunners
manning the defense.
Speaker 2: Systems, but they can't do anything right.
Speaker 1: When they try to actually engage the object, their weapons
systems completely fail. The targeting radars won't lock, the electronic
triggers are dead.
Speaker 2: For roughly twenty agonizing minutes, a vessel that represented the
absolute pinnacle of human naval engineering was rendered completely impotent.
Speaker 1: A sitting deck.
Speaker 2: A sitting deck, the crew could do nothing but observe
this pulsating sphere hovering above them, projecting a field of
influence that nullified their defensive capabilities.
Speaker 1: And then the sphere just slowly ascends and departs. The
system's reboot, But the institutional reaction afterward is incredibly telling.
Speaker 2: The gag order.
Speaker 1: A few days later, the captain gets on the ship's
intercom and issues a strict fleet wide gag order. He
tells the thousands of personnel on board that they are
never to speak about the event, not to their families,
not to the press, not to each other. Absolute silence.
Speaker 2: The suppression is a natural institutional defense mechanism.
Speaker 1: You think so well.
Speaker 2: When a military apparatus whose entire existence is predicated on
control and superiority is confronted with an insurmountable technol logical gap,
the default posture is secrecy.
Speaker 1: Acknowledging it means admitting weakness.
Speaker 2: Acknowledging the event means acknowledging a profound vulnerability that undermines
the entire defense budget.
Speaker 1: That makes total sense from an American pr perspective, But
what about our adversaries? Did the Soviets experience this? They
did because the declassified records from the Eastern Bloc showed
that the phenomenon didn't play favorites, but the way it
interacted with Soviet weapons was fundamentally different.
Speaker 2: The Soviet experience, particularly an incident in Ukraine during the
nineteen eighties, represents the terrifying inverse of the American encounters.
Speaker 1: This one genuinely gave me chills. It's a Soviet missile
silo in Ukraine. An ORB appears over the site, but
the controllers down in the bunker don't see their systems
go offline like in Malmstrom.
Speaker 2: No, the opposite.
Speaker 1: Instead, they look at their consoles and realize the missiles
are mysteriously powering up.
Speaker 2: They start fueling without orders.
Speaker 1: It is insane.
Speaker 2: Fueling a liquid propellant ballistic missile is a massive, highlight
volatile logistical step. It is the immediate precursor.
Speaker 1: To a launch, and it requires authorization.
Speaker 2: Explicit, authenticated authorization from the highest levels of the Soviet
command structure.
Speaker 1: But nobody gave the order. The controllers in the bunker
are frantically trying to abort the sequence, but they find
that they are completely locked out of their own command terminals.
The manual overrides are unresponsive.
Speaker 2: You're looking at a complete system hijack. The automated retaliatory
systems of the Soviet Union were complex, but they were
still terrestrial machines. To have an outside force remotely initiate
a launch sequence while actively locking out the human operators
is a nightmare scenario.
Speaker 1: The ultimate nightmare. Because the launch codes for the United
States are automatically entered, the targeting is set, the countdown begins.
The offices in that bunker are panicking, physically trying to
rip out wiring harnesses, washing the seconds tick down to
World War.
Speaker 2: Three, a launch that would guarantee an American retaliatory strike.
Speaker 1: It would essentially end human history.
Speaker 2: And then right at the precipice, right as the countdown progresses.
Speaker 1: To the bring, the system just shuts down.
Speaker 2: The sequence aborts, the control consoles unlock, and the orb
flies away.
Speaker 1: Why the difference? I keep thinking about this, Why gracefully
turn the American missiles off but aggressively turn the Soviet
missiles on, only to pull the plug at the last second.
Speaker 2: That is the core philosophical question of this entire phenomenon.
If we connect this to the bigger picture and assume
a unified intelligence behind both events, we have to analyze
the intent. One interpretation is that it's a diagnostic test.
They're probing the different architectures of the American solid state
systems versus the Soviet liquid fueled systems to see how
they respond external override, a stress test exactly. But another
interpretation is purely psychological.
Speaker 1: An overwhelming display of dominance.
Speaker 2: Precisely, it is a demonstration that our ultimate weapons, the
things we use to hold the entire world hostage, are
effectively toys to them. By shutting down the Americans and
hijacking the Soviets, the intelligence is communicating that nuclear deterrence
is an illusion. We only control these weapons because they
allow us to.
Speaker 1: And this isn't just dusty Cold War history. Former intelligence
officer lou Elizondo has been remarkably blunt about this. He
states clearly that these incursions are.
Speaker 2: Ongoing, still happening today.
Speaker 1: Orbs are continually witnessed hovering over modern nuclear equities, active
power plants, weapons storage facilities, and development sites.
Speaker 2: Today Alizana's perspective is deeply pragmatic. If we connect this
to the bigger picture, the terrifying reality is an unknown
intelligence operating in controlled airspace with complete.
Speaker 1: Impunity, outperforming everything we have.
Speaker 2: From a defense standpoint, intent almost doesn't matter if the
capability is that vastly superior. If a foreign nation could
do this, it would be considered an act of war.
The fact that an unknown intelligence operates with total impunity
over our most sensitive sites is an ongoing critical vulnerability.
Speaker 1: So we've looked extensively a weapons the deliberate militarization of
the atom. But let's shift focus from weapons of war
to civilian.
Speaker 2: Nuclear power the power plants.
Speaker 1: Right, The phenomenon seems equally drawn to our nuclear power plants,
and the way it interacts with them during catastrophic failures
opens up a really complex debate about its motivations.
Speaker 2: We are shifting the context from deliberate geopolitical posturing to
the sheer generation of raw energy, and specifically to the
moments when human engineering fails to contain that energy.
Speaker 1: Let's examine Fukushima Dichi in Japan, March eleventh, twenty eleven.
A nine point zero magnitude earthquake strikes off the coast.
Speaker 2: The seismic violence was intense.
Speaker 1: It literally shifted the earth axis, but the earthquake was
just the catalyst.
Speaker 2: The true devastation was delivered by the resulting tsunami. The
Fukushima plant was designed to withstand earthquakes, but the sea
walls were entirely insufficient for the one hundred and thirty
foot waves that devastated the coast and overwhelmed the plant's
safety systems.
Speaker 1: The water floods the backup diesel generators, the plant loses
all power. Now for a boiling ladder reactor, active cooling
is non negotiable.
Speaker 2: The decay heat is massive.
Speaker 1: Even after the fission process is shut down, the nuclear
fuel continues to generate massive amounts of heat without the
water pump circulating coolant. The water in the reactor boils away,
exposing the fuel rods.
Speaker 2: Which initiates a meltdown. The zirconium cladding on the fuel
rods reacts with the steam to produce hydrogen gas, leading
to the massive explosions that blew the roofs off the
reactor buildings.
Speaker 1: The situation was teetering on the edge of a total
uncontained radiological release.
Speaker 2: Had all the compromised reactors fully breached containment, it could
have rendered a massive swath of Asia uninhabitable.
Speaker 1: And absolute catastrophe. But introduce the researcher reports here, because
hidden within the chaots of that disaster are accounts that
add a bizarre layer to the event.
Speaker 2: The sightings yes in the weeks leading.
Speaker 1: Up to the earthquake and specifically during the height of
the reactor meltdowns. Researchers note a significant number of UFO
sightings directly over the Fukushima facility.
Speaker 2: Corroborated by multiple witnesses.
Speaker 1: Corroborated by witnesses and local reporting. The ancient astronaut theorists
propose a really wild theory here did extraterrestrials intervene to
stabilize the melting reactors.
Speaker 2: The presence of anomalous aerial vehicles during a catastrophic nuclear
event raises profound questions. Are they merely passive observers gathering
data on our engineering failures or is there an active
intervention taking place?
Speaker 1: The theorists suggest they might have been utilizing advanced technology
to stabilize the reactors to slow the meltdown process. But
I have to push.
Speaker 2: Back here, play devil's advocate during.
Speaker 1: A disaster of that magnitude, earthquakes, tsunamis, hydrogen explosions. Couldn't
these sightings just be stress induced hallucinations or maybe atmospheric
anomalies caused by the fires and the radiation. People see
what they want to see when they're desperate.
Speaker 2: That is the standard skeptical counter argument, and it's a
necessary filter. In highly traumatic, chaotic environments, Eyewitness testimony can
be notoriously unreliable. Misidentifications of helicopters, drones, or burning debris
are highly probable.
Speaker 1: That makes sense.
Speaker 2: However, researchers point out that some of these objects were
tracked on localized radar, exhibiting the same impossible flight characteristics
instantaneous acceleration, lack of inertia that we saw at Malmstrom.
That makes it harder to dismiss purely as optical illusions
or debris.
Speaker 1: And Fukushima doesn't stand alone in this regard. If we
look back twenty five years prior to the Chernobyl disaster
in Ukraine in nineteen eighty six, we see an almost
identical pattern.
Speaker 2: The Chernobyl reports are fascinating after reactor.
Speaker 1: Number four exploded, exposing the burning core to the open air.
Emergency responders and local residents reported seeing glowing objects hovering
in the smoke plumes directly above the.
Speaker 2: Plant, and they go a step further than Fukushima. Witnesses
didn't just report the presence of crafts. They described specific interactions.
Several accounts detail anomalous beams of light projecting downward from
these hovering objects directly into the exposed burning reactor core.
Speaker 1: Beams of light shining down onto the reactors. That detail
is wild. The implication is that these crafts were actively
doing something to suppress the atomic fire.
Speaker 2: It frames the intelligence as benevolent.
Speaker 1: The guardian's theory are these entities acting as cosmic babysitters.
Speaker 2: Protecting humanity from annihilating the planet. The idea that we
are at technologically reckless species playing with matches, and when
we accidentally set the house on fire, these entities step
in with a cosmic fire extinguisher to make.
Speaker 1: Sure we don't burn down the Biosehere it's a comforting narrative,
but if we combine the disaster interventions with the military incursions,
a darker interpretation emerges.
Speaker 2: The dominance theory exactly, or.
Speaker 1: Is it a display of dominance, a way to show
a technologically primitive society who is really in charge.
Speaker 2: If they can easily neutralize a reactor meltdown that baffles
our greatest physicists, and they can efffortlessly shut down our
nuclear missiles, their actions might not be driven by benevolence,
but by resource.
Speaker 1: Management, maintaining the viability of the planet.
Speaker 2: They aren't saving us for our own sake, they are
preserving the terrarium. They step in. When our primitive technology
threatens the broader ecological stability of the Earth. It reinforces
the power dynamic we are deeply subordinate.
Speaker 1: It fundamentally reshapes how we view our place in the hierarchy.
But let's take this a massive step further. I want
to ask you, you know, as a listener, how far
back do you think this nuclear UFO connection goes ni
kids decades, what about millennia. We've established a pattern in
the modern era. But if these entities are so hyper
focused on atomic energy, is it possible the connection goes
back much further.
Speaker 2: To explore that hypothesis, we transition from modern reports to
the archaeological record. We're looking for physical anomalies that defy
the established timeline of human development.
Speaker 1: Let's go to the Indus Valley in modern day Pakistan.
In nineteen twenty two, archaeologists discovered the ruins of Mohanjo Daro.
Speaker 2: A phenomenal discovery.
Speaker 1: This was the crown jewel of a civilization flourishing roughly
four thousand, six hundred years ago, a sprawling, incredibly sophisticated
Bronze Age metropolis, grid patterned streets, complex drainage.
Speaker 2: But it's what they found inside that changes the narrative.
Speaker 1: The chilling archaeological anomalies reported by researchers. As they excavated,
they found skeletons lying dead in the streets, families holding
hands with.
Speaker 2: No signs of conventional weapon trauma.
Speaker 1: No blade marks, no embedded arrows. The positioning suggests an
instantaneous event that caught the population entirely off guard.
Speaker 2: And the environmental context is where ancient astronaut theorists lean in.
According to several reports cited in our sources, researchers detected
anomalous levels of radiation.
Speaker 1: Highlight the key evidence there because it's wild. They found
reports of radioactive.
Speaker 2: Ash, radioactive ash, and extensive evidence of vitrification explained.
Speaker 1: Vitrification for US.
Speaker 2: Vitrification is the process where immense instantaneous heat melts stone, clay,
or sand and fuses it into a glass like substance.
We see it at the Trinity Test site in New Mexico,
where the heat of the first atomic bomb fuse the
desert sand to a green glass called trintite.
Speaker 1: And at Mohindra Doo they found ceramics and breaks that
have been melted at temperatures requiring incredible unnatural heat. Sections
of the city walls fused into glass.
Speaker 2: This raises an important question, how does an ancient Bronze
Age city show physical residues akin to a modern atomic detonation.
You cannot achieve that thousands of degrees required to flash
melt clay bricks using standard Bronze Age technology. Wood fires
don't blurn hot.
Speaker 1: Enough, so the theorists conclude this might be the site
of an ancient nuclear event, or maybe a catastrophic meltdown
of an extraterrestrial power plant.
Speaker 2: It's a radical reframing of history.
Speaker 1: But again, standard archaeologists push back hard on this. They
argue vitrification could be from a meteor, air burst or
sustain chemical fires and dispute their radiation reports is poorly
calibrated equipment.
Speaker 2: True, but the theorists maintain that the specific combination of
thermal blast damage and radiological residue in the Indus Valley
two closely mirrors modern atomic testing to be dismissed.
Speaker 1: If ancient civilizations had nuclear technology, or there was a
global ancient nuclear presence, where was the infrastructure. You don't
build a fission reactor out of mud bricks. Where are
the ancient power plants?
Speaker 2: We have to look at geological anomalies heavily veiled by mythology.
Speaker 1: Now Kylash in western Tibet. It sits at an elevation
of roughly twenty two thousand feet and it has this
physical anomaly. It is uniquely cone shaped on one side
and period shaped on another. It looks deliberately carved, and
its cultural significance is massive. It's the spiritual center of
the universe for four major religions Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Taoism.
Pilgrims walk a thirty two mile circular path around its
base to connect with the gods.
Speaker 2: The theory asks, could Kylash be an ancient, dormant power
plant that generated raw technological energy rather than just spiritual energy.
Speaker 1: That sounds like a massive leap based just on its shape,
but the researchers support it with an incredible discovery hundreds
of miles.
Speaker 2: Away, the Macau Caves discovery.
Speaker 1: In nineteen oh seven, British explorer Oral Stein makes this
thrilling Indiana Jones esque discovery along the Silk Road in China,
a seal room called the Cave of a Thousand Buddhists
a time capsule, it contained fifty thousand ancient manuscripts, including
the Diamond Sutra and crucially, a diagram from the second
century AD.
Speaker 2: The Mount Meru Diagram.
Speaker 1: Focused intensely on this diagram. It depicts Mount Meru, a
sacred cosmic mountain believed to connect heaven and Earth. For
a century, it was viewed purely as religious.
Speaker 2: Art until a Northrop grumm And scientist analyzed it.
Speaker 1: The Bombshell revelation. This is a scientist who designs particle
being weapons with the government. He looks at this two
thousand year old Buddhist diagram and when comparing it to
a modern cyclotron an atom smasher used in the Manhattan Project,
it is a perfect.
Speaker 2: Match, a flawless, a lie alignment of geometry.
Speaker 1: Lenses, stack energy focal points. It's a blueprint for a
particle accelerator. He stated on the record that the ancient
diagram and the modern atom smasher blueprint are virtually identical.
Speaker 2: If we synthesize this ancient grid. Bringing it all together.
We look at the Mongolian myth that celestial beans lived
around Mount Meru to feed off the energy it emitted.
Speaker 1: So the grand theory, Mount Kylash was the raw nuclear
power plant generating the energy, and Mount Meru, or the
device depicted as Mount Moreau, was the particle accelerator or.
Speaker 2: A transmitter utilizing that colossal influx of power.
Speaker 1: Relating this back to you, the listener, So what does
this all mean for you? We are looking at a
potential hidden hand guiding human history from the Indus Valley
thousands of years ago to a concrete bunker in Montana
in nineteen sixty seven.
Speaker 2: The thread tying everything together is undeniable. From Cold War
missiles shutting down, to Soviet codes activating, to ancient radioactive
ruins and atom smasher blueprints and Buddhist caves, the evidence
points to an ongoing incredibly advanced intelligence, closely monitoring and
sometimes controlling our ultimate power sources.
Speaker 1: We leave you with this chilling new idea. If these
orbs can easily turn off our most advanced weapons and
stabilize our worst reactor meltdowns, are we truly the masters
of our own planet? Or are we just tenants living
in a carefully monitored cosmic touarrium.
Speaker 2: It challenges the very core of human autonomy. We may
simply be flora and fauna in a managed biosphere.
Speaker 1: We want to know where you stand on this. Do
you think these orbs are protecting us from our own
destructive nature? Or are they subtly manipulating human history for
their own agenda. Drop a comment and let us know
your theory.
Speaker 2: We must be willing to follow the data wherever it leads.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for joining us for this edition
of Thrilling Threads. Stay curious and we will catch you
next time.