(Not So) Deep Sh*t with Chris & Steve
(Not So) Deep Sh*t with Chris & Steve
(Not So) Deep Sh*t on The UAP Whistleblower
(Not So) Deep Shit with Chris and Steve is BACK !
What happens when a high-ranking Pentagon whistleblower exposes the US government's covert operations involving the retrieval and study of nonhuman materials? Strap in as Chris and Steve unravel the shocking revelations and the ensuing debate on the implications of such claims. With David Grusch, the former leader of the UAP Task Force, at the center of this controversy, (Not So) Deep Shit with Chris and Steve leave no stone unturned in examining his credibility and the role of investigative journalism in pushing for transparency.
As we navigate this labyrinth of secrecy, we dive deep into the factions within the Pentagon, each battling for the release or concealment of this potentially revolutionary information. From exploring the credibility of Grusch's claims to pondering the consequences of revealing such secrets, Chris and Steve provide a comprehensive analysis of this fascinating story that has the potential to change our understanding of unidentified aerial phenomena and extraterrestrial life.
And finally, Chris and Steve discuss the motivations behind the government's silence and the possibility of an arms race dynamic in play. Could the knowledge of advanced life forms and their technology be withheld for nefarious purposes, or is there something even weirder than extraterrestrials at play? Join us in this gripping episode, as we embark on a journey through the enigmatic world of UFOs, government cover-ups, and the relentless pursuit of truth.
https://www.newsnationnow.com/space/ufo/we-are-not-alone-the-ufo-whistleblower-speaks/
https://thedebrief.org/intelligence-officials-say-u-s-has-retrieved-non-human-craft/
Episode Chapters
- 0:00 UFO Whistleblower Claims Nonhuman Craft Retrieval
- 6:51 Government Employee Speaks Out on UFOs
- 12:27 US Officer Exposes UFO Program
- 20:18 Non-Human Craft Claims and Testimony
- 29:45 US Government Confirms Existence of UFOs
- 42:27 Government Lies and the UFO Cover-Up
- 51:05 UFO Sightings and Government Response
- 1:05:23. Implications of Discovering Advanced Life Forms
Contact Us:
Twitter: @NotSoDeepShit
Facebook.com/NSDSChrisandSteve
Instagram.com/nsdschrisandsteve
Email: nsdschrisandsteve@gmail.com
Don't forget to SUBSCRIBE, LIKE and LEAVE A REVIEW for the show!
I'm Chris, i'm Steve, and we're talking about some deep shit. And we're back to talk about some more deep shit. How you doing tonight, steve, i'm doing pretty good. How about yourself? Not too bad. It's been a little bit since we've recorded an episode.
Speaker 2:It's been a minute, as they say now.
Speaker 1:Yes, so we're very sorry about that. We're working on getting our scheduling together to record on a regular basis, so we'll be putting out more content very, very soon.
Speaker 2:Yep, both of us, and some bonus episodes solo too. That might be kind of exciting.
Speaker 1:We're working on a lot of different ways of doing that, but we will see how that goes. So we always say that we're going to talk about something that's not UFOs, and we often plan to talk about something that's not UFOs, and then when we finally get together to record, usually something major on the topic of UFOs has happened and we have to talk about it.
Speaker 2:Yes, and I enjoy it. There's always something that comes up with UFOs, but this story is quite a large story, so we could always find something to talk about it, but we don't. We try to diversify ourselves, but when there's a story such as this, i think it needs attention.
Speaker 1:Yeah, there's no way we can not cover it. So this is huge. This is huge. On Monday, june 5th, an article dropped about 8 am in the morning And I'll just sort of read the our synopsis of it to bring everybody up to speed, and then we'll talk about it. So, on Monday, june 5th, an investigative story was published in the debrief And it was written by Leslie Keen and Ralph Blumenthal, and they were the ones responsible for the 2017 New York Times article, and we've talked about that to death, right, steve Well yes, we've talked about it.
Speaker 2:I don't know.
Speaker 1:We've talked about death, But it's that was a major turning point for UFOs for a long time, that that brought it back into the public consciousness. So these are the two authors who were responsible for that. So just to set that up, So the name of the article was intelligence officials say US has retrieved craft of nonhuman origin. It details allegations from a high ranking whistleblower from within the United States Pentagon. So David Grush, the former leader of the UAP Task Force, has detailed the government's covert involvement in retrieving and studying materials of nonhuman origin and illegally concealing it from Congress and the public. Grush also reveals the existence of a secret arms race that the US is having with its adversaries like China and Russia, focused on reverse engineering technologies of unknown origin that may derived from nonhuman intelligence.
Speaker 1:This is pretty big huh, Steve Sounds it. Through his attorney, Grush filed a disclosure of urgent concerns complaint of reprisal in May 2022, and it was a document that outlines information that he'd been gathering since 2019. So Grush resigned his position in the government in April of this year, 2023, stating his intentions to promote government accountability, and the intelligence community inspector general found Grush's complaint credible and urgent in July 2022. This whistleblower case has sparked an investigation into Grush's allegations and represents a test for the new whistleblower protections that were recently implemented by the government. And just to end this up, also quoted in the article is Jonathan Gray, an intelligence officer at the National Air and Space Intelligence Center, who confirmed the existence of programs studying exotic materials. This aligns with Grush's allegations of the government's involvement in retrieving and examining materials of unknown origin. Okay, that was a mouthful, Steve. What are your thoughts?
Speaker 2:There's a lot to unpack there. My thoughts when I first saw it were excitement, kind of optimism that this is leading somewhere. Well, let me say this I was really intrigued by this arms race of reverse engineering because that's something that's been said for a long time now, for years, maybe even decades, that the government has had people trying to reverse engineer different things found extraterrestrial, however you want to phrase it. So the reverse engineering thing really got me interested.
Speaker 2:And you read what our synopsis is right to start us off. But when I first read the article, yeah, i'm a skeptic, i am, i am, i'm an optimistic skeptic. But when I listened to him, i became more optimistic than skeptical.
Speaker 1:Yeah, i agree. First of all, i'll say I encourage everyone to go out there and to the debrief and read the original article, because now that article has been written about a lot. I think Newsweek was the first one to pick it up, but now a lot of other publications have, but if you're reading one of those, you're getting their lens of the story. I would just encourage everyone to read the actual debrief article, because read that and then move on to other things, but I think too many people are jumping to someone else's interpretation of what this means. Well, let's talk for a second about David Charles Grush. He actually now has a Wikipedia page Just to so. This is what Wikipedia agrees is his background.
Speaker 1:David Charles Grush, born in 1987, is an American Air Force Officer, former intelligence official in a US government whistleblower. Grush was a decorated combat officer within the United States Air Force during the war in Afghanistan and is a veteran of the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, the NGA, and the National Reconnaissance Office, nro, from 2019 to 2021. He was the representative of the NRO to the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force from late 2021 to July 2022. He was the co-lead for UAP analysis at the NGA and it's representative to the task force He helped draft the language for the National Defense Authorization Act 2023. As we said in our setup, he was a government employee right up until April. This just happened. I think it's unprecedented. That's my-.
Speaker 2:What makes you think it's unprecedented? Because I think that we haven't heard exactly this before, but we've heard bits from different people that add up to some of this kind of stuff. But we haven't heard from somebody that people hold in such high regard.
Speaker 1:Yeah, his credentials are pretty airtight. People are going to jump to the conclusion of he quit at the Pentagon to come out and be like hey guys, ufos which we've seen, things like that Somebody supposedly who worked with it, who comes out. The difference is, though, that he had been going through the actual whistleblower process. He had been going through the process, and then he was getting retaliated, and that's why he stepped down and that's why he put in that complaint. It's not like he's suing the government to get a paycheck, but they're putting in a complaint to say you're breaking the law. I don't know. I think what makes this one different is the degree to which he has the access to get this information.
Speaker 1:He had the access up until very recently. He's not proving it, but he's giving them a trail. If they follow the trail, they'll either find it or they won't. I can't see why we don't follow the trail. He's supposedly giving names, he's giving locations and he's giving the information, or at least he's giving them enough.
Speaker 2:They're bringing other people in, but this is amazing There are Republican and Democratic senators and congressmen that are now calling for hearings on his statement.
Speaker 1:From what my understanding is that this has set a firestorm in the Pentagon because it seems to be factions, that there's a faction that wants to get this information out to the public and there's a faction that doesn't. What you see out in the media is you see those two factions warring. I think there's supposed to be a New York Times piece dropping on Sunday. I believe Sunday, but there's a New York Times piece dropping soon. It's an open question What their take is going to be. Are they coming in with a very We don't know yet. Are they coming into further the investigation? Are they trying to come into poor cold water on it? We will see. Sunday is also when the full interview with David Grush. David Grush.
Speaker 2:I've heard in the news his name pronounced more than one way.
Speaker 1:Yeah, well, everybody's name has a real way to pronounce it. I saw her segment I think it was, on Fox News, where the anchor She was really trying to put forth like she'd been looking into, like hey, if you'd listened to the Joe Rogan podcast and heard all the interviews with Bob Laser and she kept referring to Lazar as Bob Laser, that made me think you've never heard his name spoken out loud, did you So? did you really listen to all those podcasts? But anyway, that's besides the matter. David Grush is doing a full. Well, he did seven hours of interview.
Speaker 2:That's a lot.
Speaker 1:That's a lot. So there's been a few clips played on News Nation so far. So what I have is I have some sound clips from Monday night So the story broke in the morning, and then Monday evening 6 pm on the Elizabeth Vargas show on News Nation. They got the exclusive on it. We can talk about that as to why they ended up with the exclusive News Nation not a top tier, not a top tier news station but they got the thing. So do you want to listen to some of these clips? and we can kind of have like kind of react to it.
Speaker 2:Yeah, that's fine. I will say before any of this, I had no idea what News Nation was. I never even heard of it in my life.
Speaker 1:News Nation is one of those. Had you heard of it? Yes, because I remember when that happened, there was some fledgling cable networks. That kind of popped up because Fox News was covering a particular niche and they saw an opening there. And I don't know. I have only been watching, not to say I've watched a lot of News Nation, but sometimes I keep it on in the background when I'm doing other stuff just to see if anything pops up, and often it does, which is nice, but I usually just listen to this podcast. I don't know much about them, but it seems like they're at least trying to be as balanced as any news organization can possibly be. But who knows, i don't know The only thing I'm going to say.
Speaker 2:Well, i'm going to say a lot more than one thing. You had said the different factions, right, And maybe there's two, maybe there's more than two, but I know the two you're speaking of, right. One thing to consider with all this, because I think that whatever you think of David Groszegórz, whatever you think of this person, whatever you think of his story right, everyone listening, whatever you think, the end of the day, as time goes on, it just seems to be a little more a little chip, a little chink in the arm, or of us finding out things. Right. But something I think a lot of us don't think about is this Are we better off not knowing? sometimes? I don't know, and I guess eventually we're gonna find out, but it's kind of interesting, because why is one group so vehemently opposed to people finding the information out? There might be a reason. I think that's an interesting topic on its own, but let's listen to the clips because it's pretty interesting stuff this guy has to say.
Speaker 1:Yeah, we should return to talk about that because that is worth talking about. I, from what my understanding is, and even what David Gruch said, he did many hours of interviews and there's some of it that they're I don't know how much well, actually Ross Colthart, who is an Australian investigative journalist and he's the one who ended up doing the interview. He had established connection with him So he kind of brought this story. He worked with Leslie Kane and Ralph Blumenthal who are writing a story Meanwhile he was gonna interview, so they're sort of bringing this out together, but in two different mediums. So he did the interview and he did seven hours of interview with David Gruch. David Gruch also did 11 hours of interviews with Congress.
Speaker 1:So he's set a lot on the record, basically sworn testimony. So that's something to consider. That if any of what he's been telling them is not true, then he could go to prison for a long time. So that should kind of give us at least. I don't know why he would lie to get into the glitzing glamour of UFOs. It's like, it's not. It doesn't sound like, but we'll see.
Speaker 3:News nation senior national correspondent Brian Entenis here with the story, and this is a blockbuster.
Speaker 4:It is a blockbuster. It's really hard to wrap your mind around this. I've been working on this for the past couple of weeks. I'm still having a hard time processing processing all of it. Over the last couple of years It sort of became mainstream to discuss UFOs. The government has released videos. They've acknowledged that we don't know what some of this stuff is out there that we have on camera. But this really takes it all to another level. For the very first time the world is about to hear from a former high level US intelligence officer who says the government has some of the unidentified craft in its possession. He is revealing these exclusive details about the secret government program.
Speaker 1:All right, that's a nice setup, that's sweet. I just I want to revel in each piece of this, just because to hear that sort of thing delivered seriously, like that's what strikes me about this story. Is that what coverage I've seen so far, for the most part. Yes, there's a few outlets that are trying to poke holes in it, but those who cover it just to give you the facts. There's no ex files music, there's no uncomfortable laughter, there's no those hallmarks you're used to seeing on a UFO story. You know what I mean, right.
Speaker 2:Yeah, i mean and I think you have to treat this with a certain amount of respect just because of the type of person this is. I mean, listen, we said here we were both 50 years old, the guy's 36, he's 14 years in the service, so he's a younger guy, but he has good credentials and people pretty much vouch for him different people that have worked with him. So I think that, on its face, you have to give it the respect it deserves, and I think that that's what the news outlets are doing. As the story progresses, you'll see how it gets treated Right now. On its outset, yeah, it's being treated with respect and dignity, and I think more is gonna be expected of Grush a Grush as we go along. So we'll see how it goes.
Speaker 1:I think the fact that he is so young too, kind of speaks to. I think it gives him a little more credibility. He's not someone at the end of his career, he's like I'll just burn my bridges. I mean he's 36, which means you know he has a life beyond this. So again would question, why would you torch these great credentials that you have established With no, there's no, doesn't seem to be at this point any kind of blemish on his CV. So you have to ask yourself like the motivation? that's why, whenever somebody's going well, he's doing it for X reason. I'm thinking to myself what? what is he gaining by doing this?
Speaker 2:Well, we don't right now. Basically, the story we have now is a story that he wants to tell.
Speaker 1:The objection I've heard a lot of is he's not showing any evidence, but he's showing more evidence to Congress that we don't get to see, i guess, and so we all want that evidence, whereas, like it's, the story is that he's making the allegation and now it has to be investigated and determined if it's true. We can't determine that it's true from his claims. It has to be investigated, and I think everybody's jumping to the. Let's conclude.
Speaker 4:If it's true or not?
Speaker 1:even though it's like not all the facts are in. Yeah, you can't.
Speaker 2:So that's why you can't, you know, just say, oh, it must all be 100% what he says. I mean, i give him a lot of credibility here, but yeah, I think it needs to be investigated. The part I guess you could kind of wonder, chris, is he did give all this information to Congress. What's the point of doing this? So what is the point? that is a question, what's?
Speaker 4:the point.
Speaker 2:Because if you told Congress and he said it was illegally being held from Congress, so he went and told them it, so why does he need to talk anymore? Congress is the representation of the country.
Speaker 1:It's a question you could say I feel like most people realize, though, that Congress doesn't do its job unless there's outside pressure, and we kind of know that from every, every group. What do you do when you want a particular legislation stopped or passed, as you? you try to get news coverage, so journalists pressure government into action. I don't think government government rarely takes action on its own with no impetus, and when it does that, usually usually it's not good, but most things that they do, they're usually pushed into doing because of pressure.
Speaker 1:So I think it's kind of this is why is he coming out like this? Well, first of all, the reason why he's coming out is because he believes the people have a right to know And I think that's I think he's bothered by this that technically, the civilian government is supposed to oversee the military. It's supposed to be civilian oversight of our military, and so what he's? his allegations are basically saying there is some element within our military that is circumventing the constitutional protections of congressional oversight, like that's a serious thing. I think everyone's looking at this on its face and trying to judge it. And oh my God, it's, it's. It's so unbelievable. And is he telling the truth? Is he lying? We can't determine that yet, but the investigation needs to be done. But the implications if he is telling the truth, implications are mind blowing.
Speaker 2:Well, no, i don't disagree with you.
Speaker 1:I like I said, i think this guy's credible It's all about whether or not the public takes notice, and I think that's that's what I think is so important to know. Is that people need to get upset about this and say I want an answer?
Speaker 2:Whatever that answer is, I want an answer And I think I hope they can get off Instagram for a minute to look.
Speaker 1:Let's hear a little bit what he said. So here's how Elizabeth Vargas sets up his the interview with Ross Cole. All right.
Speaker 4:And now in a news nation exclusive, David Grush, an Air Force veteran, former member of that task force and veteran of the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, is formally blowing the whistle on secrets He says no one has ever shared publicly before.
Speaker 5:You are one of the most trusted former intelligence officials in the US defense and intelligence establishment. Yes, i was. You were trusted with the most intimate secrets.
Speaker 1:Yes, All right, so he had the highest clearance, so let's hear a little bit more.
Speaker 4:Grush sitting down with award-winning investigative journalist Ross Colthart, who's reporting for News Nation and has spent years reporting on the UFO question.
Speaker 5:What conclusion did you come to at the end of your time on the UAP task force?
Speaker 6:The UAP task force was refused access to a broad crash retrieval program.
Speaker 5:When you say crash retrieval, what do you mean?
Speaker 6:These are retrieving non-human origin technical vehicles. Call it spacecraft, if you will. Non-human exotic origin vehicles that have either landed or crashed.
Speaker 5:We have spacecraft from another species.
Speaker 6:We do. Yeah, how many Quite a number You're kidding? No, i thought it was totally nuts and I thought at first I was being deceived. It was a ruse. People started confiding in me. They approached me. I have plenty of current former senior intelligence officers that came to me, many which I knew almost my whole career that confided in me. They were a part of a program. They named the program. I've never heard of it And they told me, based on their oral testimony and they provided me documents and other proof that there was in fact a program that the UAP task force was not read into.
Speaker 1:All right, so that's him making his claims. It's pretty straightforward.
Speaker 2:Yeah, i think it's huge news. It's huge news for people that aren't into this type of thing. People that are into this type of thing feel it's more validation. People that aren't probably are saying what do you mean? What do you got? So I think this is a huge thing, chris, for people that don't generally follow this kind of stuff.
Speaker 1:I have seen some interviews where the newscaster I can almost see the stages of ontological shock sinking in on some of these newscasters as they ask the question and the question is answered And it's not answered. In a way they expect it to go. And they're asking officials and what they're looking for, or what they seem to be looking for. Tell us that this is all nonsense. Tell us that there's nothing to this Like come on, and the way that it's being answered by some government officials, congresspeople, they're not saying that. So to clarify, the article in the debrief only covered by Leslie Keane and Ralph Blumenthal, only covered the idea that craft is in possession. Craft of a non-human origin is in possession. Now, david Gruch to Ross, on some of these interviews they actually talk about bodies. So there's that distinction of like there being like life forms, whereas the article only talks about. Because you've got to get people to that level, i feel like once you get, okay, there's craft and there's bodies, and then where does it go from there? I think people, it's a tough slope to get people at. So I think let's get everybody kind of saying, hmm, there's something here about craft, let's investigate that, and if that goes nowhere, then it doesn't matter whether there's claims of alien bodies or not. If the craft thing turns out to be a dead end, that's probably the end of it. I suspect it won't be the end of it, so it'll be very interesting This event.
Speaker 1:In and of itself. It's a little bit different than what type of things have come before. But not, you know, it's another person coming out who supposedly has knowledge. I think what's different this time is it's on top of everything that's come before And there's this cadre of really respectable ex-military that are out there doing the circuit of talk shows and stuff, like Ryan Graves, who, like they you can tell they have news stations like to have him because of his background. He's like a serious, you know, competent person, and so then they come on and they corroborate. Like all these really high competency people are corroborating each other, and I think that's what's kind of twisting people's minds. This claim is not being made in the vacuum. We're hearing from David Grush first, but like it's clear that they have said oh right, there are more of him in the wings, some of whom have closer direct knowledge and experience hands on some of this stuff.
Speaker 1:And so that's, he's opening the floodgates for them to come out and say oh, they said you should talk to me. Yes, indeed, you should talk to me, And this is where it is.
Speaker 2:I think that there's been a lot of testimony, a lot of stories from very reputable Navy pilots and government officials, military officials about sightings of UFOs, UAPs, however you wanna phrase it, But this might be the first one of somebody of this magnitude saying no, no, we have some of the items. Again if that's true, I think it's gonna be mind blowing for the regular person that really doesn't follow this kind of stuff. I really don't know if it's mind blowing for me or mind blowing for you. I don't know.
Speaker 1:It doesn't know, it's not mind blowing, because I've always kind of suspected this was the case, even when others would say you're crazy that this is the case. But I've always felt that if you don't look into the, if you never looked into anything on the UFO field, it's very easy to say there's nothing to it. If you look into it, the more you look into it, and again, not everything is true, not everything is accurately reported and all that. But if you look into it as a whole, it's hard to walk away and say there's not anything there. Do you know what I'm saying? To expect that every single instance, every single one of somebody seeing something is them mistaking something or lying, or yes, it is the case in some. But when you take it all and I think that's how debunkers shut down this stuff is they take the isolated thing. Any debunker, you take the isolated thing and you take it out of context into the larger where it sits. So, david Grush, coming up in a vacuum, all right, maybe it's, you could look at it and kind of poke holes in it. But if you take it with what has come before, what we've established is fact, what we've accepted is fact.
Speaker 1:The government, there are things flying around in our atmosphere which they say we don't know how they operate and how they work. Like we're there And now this has taken us to the next level, well beyond that. Yes, we were studying it for years when we said we weren't. Now we're to that level of okay, and also we have craft. Let's get people there, and then they might have to say, yeah, in the craft actually we have some bodies too, and then that takes us to a whole nother level. But that's what I'm saying is you can't you have to look at this in the larger context of what it's going to, kind of what it seems to be and can't say going to because I don't know the future but what it seems to be kind of setting up is a cascade of this point where you're gonna hit this level of evidence, where it's gonna be very hard to pull it back.
Speaker 1:Like people are gonna say at least give us an answer.
Speaker 2:I know sometimes you don't like my analogies, but I like doing analogies.
Speaker 1:All right, what do you got for an analogy It makes me very relatable, chris.
Speaker 2:All right, so I look at it.
Speaker 1:Very folksy.
Speaker 2:It is, i'm just. That's me, I think. Sometimes I look at it this way take a glass or maybe not a glass, because I'm making it out of plastic right, put some water in it and every piece of evidence. Drop a rock in right, and the water's gonna rise. And when you have public outcry is when the water's spilling, right. So this some other ones might be small, medium, this is a big rock with dropping in.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it's a boulder.
Speaker 2:So you're right.
Speaker 1:How close did we to the rim, though? That's the question, right.
Speaker 2:Right, i don't know, but I try to look at things objectively, so I will try to say what about this? Why didn't that happen? So that's just my, that's the way I operate, but you still can't deny that the rock's been dropped into that glass, right? So that's happened and we're now gonna move forward with this information. that the next. so what makes me excited but sometimes a little nervous at the same time, is what's the next shoe to drop? Because if this is now out there, the next thing has to be more than this. whatever the next shoe is right. Sometimes I wonder. our story is like this are we out in the jungle and somebody's leading us and they go hey, don't worry, the line's in ends right over here, yeah, Yeah, there's definitely a point of this where there's no turning back.
Speaker 1:I don't know exactly where that point is.
Speaker 1:I mean, i think maybe that point is when you know when they come out, if they come out and confirm it and you know, step forward and say now of course some people are not gonna believe it And other people are gonna be like you know you could show them everything and they'll say faked, especially AI now being able to do stuff Like it's. the burden of proof is harder now because everyone's gonna assume that you know every people already assume every video of a UFO you see out there is faked and many are. but there's probably some gems out there that are real, but everyone looks at it and just knee-jerk and goes fake and then moves on.
Speaker 2:Do you see the one in Las Vegas the other day?
Speaker 1:Yeah, i don't quite know. I don't quite know. I'm hearing some things about there's some holes in it, so there's definitely the timing is weird too. But anyway, let's hear a little bit more of this. Let's see number five.
Speaker 5:Let's see what we got here, if you're right, if you're telling us the truth. everyone, the entire American public, has been lied to for decades.
Speaker 6:Yeah, there's a sophisticated disinformation campaign targeting the US populace, which is extremely unethical and immoral.
Speaker 5:You are saying to the human race for the first time an official intelligence representative at a high level from the US government is saying publicly we are not alone.
Speaker 6:We're definitely not alone, absolutely the data points, empirically that we're not alone, yeah.
Speaker 5:Do we have bodies? Do we have species of non-human?
Speaker 6:Well, naturally, when you recover something that's either landed or crashed, sometimes you encounter dead pilots, And believe it or not, as fantastical as that sounds, it's true.
Speaker 1:Wow, That just. I've seen that repeated in a couple of different ways to different, on different newscasts, And there's this moment where somebody said that and you can just see it in the newscaster's face that it's sinking in and they're just kind of it's coming through the levels and suddenly they just kind of go well bodies.
Speaker 2:Well, bodies seems to indicate that they're not alive, Maybe Like if you discussed me or you as bodies it would kind of mean you weren't alive.
Speaker 1:Yeah, supposedly what some additional corroboration that has come out by towards the end of the week is somebody who did a story Michael Schoenberger, I don't have the name off the top of my head, but did basically did a story of these contractors coming out and kind of verifying this who, like described. they said we have 12 pieces of equipment and six of them are in relatively various stages of working order.
Speaker 1:Six of them are not. Some of them were gotten through crashes, some of them were obtained from other methods. Some were apparently left for us Like that's creepy, like craft landed occupants got out, gotten something else and left it open, as if to say Take a look at this, see if you can make anything of this. If you're primitive and stupid, giving you this will, you can't do anything with it.
Speaker 2:But if you can get to the point where you can do something with it, then you're interested you know He talked about in the interview he gave about the, the crap some people don't know about it. There's a I Guess you could say kind of a legend of a crash in Italy in 1933.
Speaker 1:I hadn't really heard about that one. That's a new. You never heard that. No, I had a new one to me.
Speaker 2:And the legend was that I mean I say legend because that's how it's always been spoken about that Mussolini wasn't charged back then and he, he had the government or the military take it. I mean the government was basically a military, then Take it. And you know, hold it. And there were bodies right and then the. It goes that the American military, when they pretty much liberated Italy, they took it and then they they transported it back to United States. So there's a lot of moving parts there right.
Speaker 2:And sometimes I don't know when there's a lot of moving parts. It makes me get more skeptical that in 90 years Everyone involved has always been quiet about it, that I don't know why. That's like the moon. When people that think the moon landing was faked, i always say to myself there's a lot of people that would have to hold a secret for a long, long, long time. But I Don't know. That's, you know, when things are that old, like you had said, people then they get older, they retire. They don't care if they burn a bridge. So there's been, never been anybody ever ever.
Speaker 1:We still don't know who really know the story behind who killed John F Kennedy.
Speaker 2:We don't really know no, but there's been people that come out and they said I know what happened, right and that's and that's happened here too.
Speaker 1:Like I, this is not happening in a vacuum over the years and happened on this Italy thing?
Speaker 2:no, no one's on that one but, but it that's what I meant.
Speaker 1:Over the years There have been whistleblowers of various levels saying this. They've just been almost completely Disregarded by everyone, even when they had good credentials.
Speaker 2:Because you can always find, i don't know, i just met this one particular story.
Speaker 1:That one dealing with two countries.
Speaker 2:You're dealing with all these different people and nobody ever said anything. Sometimes those types of stories, i say wow.
Speaker 1:What do you mean by nobody ever said anything? it nobody ever said anything to the point where you heard about it, but that doesn't mean nobody ever said anything. I mean that's the thing is if, if somebody experienced something and talked about it, the only way especially if it happened in Italy the only way you'd hear about it If is it became a big enough thing to be televised. You can't jump to that you didn't hear about it. Therefore, it's never been talked about. It's probably been talked about a lot if you, if you were in the right circles, you probably heard it. They're probably people who go Oh yeah, i knew about that. That's been bouncing around this, that and the other thing for the for years. It's, it's. We're all kind of judging this by well, i hadn't heard it. So apparently it's, it's, it's not, it's not out there.
Speaker 1:That's that's why I get really when people Want to shoot all this down without having looked at the evidence in total. Not that I've looked at every piece of evidence, but I'm just saying if you, if you go through it and then have, like, followed this topic for a while, you see the patterns emerge. How do you keep a secret? Well, you try to limit the number of people who know the secret and you make everyone very aware the cost of Revealing the secret and you make the cost so unacceptable that most people are gonna be scared Into not revealing the secret. And if you have the occasional person who steps out of line and tries to reveal that secret, if you act quick enough, they will be a blip in history and most people will never hear about them.
Speaker 2:I mean, there are, oh, I mean I guess you, i get. No, i mean you, you make us a good.
Speaker 1:There are, there are instances of people who came out and made claims Oh let me just let me just say there are people there, instances of people, who came out and made claims. Now Their claims were disregarded and you can't go back now and say were they true or not, because it's hard. But then those people died in some questionable fashion and Whenever somebody would say, hey, that's strange, person X had these claims, they seemed, you know, they seemed wacky, but they they had them and then they died and they committed suicide or something like that. Like, we know these things intellectually, we know these things are, are possible, we know these things are done.
Speaker 1:We see it on TV all the time. Shows about you know, governments doing things like that, cia's Agents taking out targets like we're. We accept that that's a reality, that is fictionalized, and we also accept that that's a reality in our world. We all know it's going on. But yet when it comes to a concrete thing of like, well, they're lying about this, we rationalize it and go well, how would you keep a secret like that There?
Speaker 1:are many secrets that are kept for years and years and years. Some we found out about years later, some we still don't know. How do we not know that our government can keep secrets? Well, not the government as a whole, and that's the thing. This is not the government as a whole. This is a small section of people who, if you have the choke points of power, you can keep something completely off the grid of everyone else.
Speaker 1:And the the word is that a lot of this has been shunted to private Aerospace, which takes it out of the government accountability factor all together. So you have this small number of people in the government now, some of whom have probably died. So the circle gets smaller and smaller. And it's in private aerospace. So most people in government have no access to it, don't even know it exists. So that's what David Grouch is coming out and saying hey, this thing exists. I can't show you it because everything about it is classified. That's why you've never heard of it and everyone's saying, well, we've never heard of it. Therefore it can't exist, like that's no point.
Speaker 2:I mean is Chris and I? I would just disagree with you, because almost every UFO documentary you watch there's people giving Interviews in the 50s and the 60s and they're talking about things that they saw or and did. So if there's one thing I know as a man at 50 years old is this people can't keep secrets. So I'm I'm only specifically talking about that 1933 crash, right? So in 90 years that's again the same thing with the, the moon landing, i think Not to disparage anybody, but I think it's it's it's kind of It's gonna be, a, the biggest conspiracy That I've ever heard of.
Speaker 2:If, if the moon landing was not real with all those tip people involved. The more people you get involved, the less likely you can keep a secret. We have people that give Testimony a lot. They give interviews a lot about different things. So I'm not saying that they gave testimony like Grosh did in front of Congress, but they've spoken about things. So whenever there's something that had a law, has a lot of moving parts and and you can keep it a hundred percent Under wraps, i yeah, i'm not saying Jim didn't talk to Harry down at the barbershop. I'm talking about, you see, things from Start, 30, 40, 50 years ago, where people are talking about things that they probably shouldn't be, but they're doing it. Even in the JFK assassination there were people that gave testimony in court about it. You know, and that's just. It's just. It's just how things are. So that's the only thing I was trying to make a point about was that particular one.
Speaker 4:Mmm.
Speaker 2:I'm not sure about it, just because until he talked about it In his interview, everyone just kind of always assumed it was just kind of some sort of legend type of thing.
Speaker 1:That's not true, though Some people assumed it was also legend. Those people usually were the ones that did zero research into it, the people who really look into this and have been following it along and and putting all the threads together. They have, you know, puts in peace to it, not to say they're a hundred percent right.
Speaker 2:I'm just saying they're. They said you hadn't heard of it.
Speaker 1:No, oh you talking about it specifically? about that? Yeah, I'm talking about in general.
Speaker 2:I mean, no, i'm in general, i'm not gonna argue with you because I was wrong with that specific.
Speaker 1:I haven't heard of it, but I also I'll bet you there are many people who follow your folks who do know about it, like it wasn't a secret thing. A lot of people hadn't heard about it because It's one of those things that took place a long time ago and there's really nowhere else to go on. It's kind of like you Don't hear about Roswell as much anymore. It's the go-to for people But there's not a lot of new research being done in rock for Roswell because, well, it happened in 1947 and most people involved are dead.
Speaker 2:There were reports that don't in Roswell, though bodies.
Speaker 1:Oh, oh definitely. But what I'm saying is is that Roswell was a big deal for a while. There's there's not much, there's nowhere really to go with Roswell, because most of the witnesses now are dead. Even more so with this one in Italy. So where do you go? Where do you go from there? I think you need to understand that those things happened and Keep them in your head, but don't get bogged down in it, because trying to go back and prove one of those things unless you can find the ship.
Speaker 2:But no, no, he's the one that referenced it in his interview. That's why I'm talking about.
Speaker 1:I'm not talking about it, you know right, i just I think people underestimate how well the I know this sounds crazy, but this is documented and that's the other thing. If, if you haven't Looked into this, of course you're gonna say that sounds crazy, but like they actually have documents from Freedom of Information Act that kind of shows that at some point a decision was made, how are we gonna get people in, like the 50s, to stop talking about UFOs? These are a problem because they're seeing things and people are calling things in and How can we get them to stop talking about it? because it's a threat to, you know, our, our, our security because of that, because of, you know, cold war, russia, you know you don't want people reporting things in the sky. That can cause a lot of issues, according to what they say. So they had an orchestrated method of saying we're going to ridicule and Marginalize anyone who talks about this to the point where we've had how many years of It being relegated to the fringes.
Speaker 1:And I think people underestimate how well we've all been indoctrinated to Automatically dismiss this as being something that doesn't sound like it could happen. So whenever somebody says it, did we find any reason to sort of like, well, they could be lying, they could be doing this because it can't be true and We always go back to that. It was orchestrated, like it's been proven. Now, if the if, if, even a tenth of this is true, we know the government lied to us that they have been looking at UFOs since Operation Blue Book closed. Right, they said they hadn't, but then this story came out in 2017 and said well, you actually had a UFO program. Okay, caught in a lie there. Alright, we said we weren't looking into it, but we were. We actually had a secret program doing it. Okay, we caught you in that lie. And so now, if you catch them in this lie, then you go back and you say then, you've been lying the whole time, how did you get it? so we never asked about it.
Speaker 4:Well, we know how they did that.
Speaker 1:What news person wants to bring up UFOs? Everybody laughs at them. It's ridiculous. We were everybody was trained to dismiss it because it's so preposterous, And we've been well trained, very well trained.
Speaker 2:No, I listen. I'm not disagreeing with you on that at all, But I think it might be for another discussion. I guess, at the end of the day, the question is why. So it's, why why, why, why, why would, why do all that?
Speaker 1:Why do? why Cover it up? you mean, Yeah, Oh, I mean, it's a destabilizing, it's a destabilizing process.
Speaker 2:I mean, that's, that's a, that's one way of looking at it.
Speaker 1:And there's also the military of trying to exploit it. And if you want to exploit something, that's another way of looking at it. You know you don't want to and there are probably reasons I look at it this way.
Speaker 2:Let's just say go with the premise that they have craft. So if they have the craft, they have technology. Right, if they have that, there's one reason would be there are a small amount of people making an outlandish amount of money on that intelligence and technology. That's one. And they don't want other people having access to it. Number one, that could be one right, Oh, definitely.
Speaker 1:Never underestimate the motivating power of human greed.
Speaker 2:Yeah right, Without gravity, right, yeah, two, they're doing it for the benefit of everyone else. That could. That's another option. I mean, i think that option is not usually thought about, that maybe you're better off not going down that rabbit hole. Oh, probably, right, that's. I mean it might not be, but it could be. And then, yeah, i think there could be like he talked about this kind of arms race and the government could just say listen, if we, if this people know about this stuff, it's just going to attract problems from Russia and China. So I think and there could be many more that I'm not even thinking about, right, but it's really interesting because I think, Chris, with my analogy on the glass with the rocks in it or whatever you want to put in that glass that causes the water to rise, it's not going to say anymore.
Speaker 2:We're close, we're a couple of pebbles away.
Speaker 1:We're close Yeah.
Speaker 2:And I guess at that point it's not going to be that far away until you find out.
Speaker 1:The danger of doing what they do, though, and keeping it compartmentalized, is that you don't have your best and brightest working on it, and I think that that has always been the argument is, if they have this craft and only a select few know about it, that means only a select few have access to it, and because it's classified, they can't compare notes. They can't. I mean, that's how a lot of scientists have said. That's how science advances, is that one scientist does something. Other scientists look at the work. They rip it apart. That's how scientists. It's a messy process, but that's what happens, and in this case, if only a handful of scientists are looking at it and I'm not disparaging any scientist that works for the government, but most of the best and the brightest are in academia or private industry So you only have that's the problem, is, you only have a limited number of people who are looking at it, and that's why no breakthroughs have come through. Now, the other thing that's out there in the ether that they talk about is that we don't understand how the technology works, that it's not a big red button that you press and turn the thing on, that it operates in principles that we don't quite have a grasp on If you really wanna go down the wacky road. According to what is out there, there's some connection with consciousness, that it's not all physical craft although it is that but there's also an element to it that's the more consciousness. So it's outside of anything.
Speaker 1:I think this is gonna wrap our brains, because I think, if you're coming at this, as we have craft from non-humans, that means aliens from outer space, from Planet X It doesn't necessarily mean that It doesn't, but I think most people don't even know that there's other options, because one of the biggest objections I hear to all this is well, they fly from, you know, 50 million light years away, and so you mean they have vehicles that can fly from there and then they crash here. That sounds unbelievable And it's like well, no, they're not flying that vehicle from that planet to here. They're here and they're flying vehicles around in the same way that you know we would take a different vehicle to get to a place than we would, you know, to fly to an island and then on the island, we'd drive around in a dune buggy. It's the same thing, like they're here and they've probably been here, and it's probably weirder than just extra terrestrials, which I think is the part that's freaking people out.
Speaker 2:I get mixed up on the names of the different events that happened. One was with the Navy pilot off the coast of California.
Speaker 1:Was that the 2015,? the 2000,. No, that was off Virginia Beach. Which one are you talking about?
Speaker 2:David Fravor. Oh, the Tic Tac, the Tic Tac right. So that is a smaller right, like just like Ryan Graves talked about with his pilots. There was like those spheres with the cube inside which is kind of freaky.
Speaker 1:We had a variety of freaky. They described a different when they talked the story that had about the 12 vehicles, like the scribes from all various shapes And yeah, it's weird, They're not just one shape, So it's crazy because you know I was thinking about the ones where Graves and other Navy pilots have talked about.
Speaker 2:We don't really hear a lot from Air Force pilots but Navy pilots talking about those spheres with the cube inside.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I was gonna mention that.
Speaker 2:And then there's a lot of reports of these metallic spheres. Is that the same thing that they're seeing?
Speaker 1:No, these are smaller. Yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 2:But to your point that there could be something here already. So, david Fravor, and there was a female.
Speaker 4:Alex Dietrich That was with him.
Speaker 2:Yes, i think it was her that had maybe both of them had stated that they were following this tic-tac which you know. is that a sphere? I don't know. Is it a?
Speaker 1:No, it's an oblong tic-tac shape, i know that.
Speaker 2:but I'm just saying, is it? they then saw it Kind of over what they thought was a larger thing in the water.
Speaker 1:Yeah right, So it goes to your point of what you were saying There are parts of this planet that we don't have ready access to, one of them being deep in the ocean, like that, like when you hear the stat of how much of our ocean we know, which is like a small percentage, somewhere between five and ten percent I don't know exactly what it's at now, most of our ocean We have no idea about. There could be anything there Deep, deep, deep inside the earth We think we know. I mean, we have, you know, we have some idea. But like there are parts of this, but you know the Antarctica, you know there's, there's, there's that, you know there's that mystery which we'll talk about at some point.
Speaker 2:So is there a relationship between the increase in activity? If you want to talk about Antarctica, right, if that is it, that's a thing which It's one of the last pieces of earth that people don't really understand. Is there a relationship between how it keeps losing its ice shelf and this continued activity Couldn't be?
Speaker 1:you know there's some, you know there's some people talking about are we nearing, just killing ourselves Just because of all of our stupidity? and they're, they're about to step in this, this life form, and say now We need you guys around, for whatever reason. I, i, you can tell me. It's so fun to talk about this.
Speaker 1:One of the the things that over the years studying UFOs is that the Dizzying array of different styles of ships, like the saucers, this cubes, there's this, there's that, and that was always a debunking point. Well, you know, you think if somebody were here, that their ships would be consistent. You know why are there other different ships? and I think that's another layer of how, like our own limitations, it's not just one, like it's, it's, it's not just you know, it's not just life form. A is here, it's, it's almost analogous to of us being the new world and and the Europeans have landed, the different Europeans from different parts of Europe, and they're all doing their own thing and they're interacting with each other and and We're just like the People who can't see most of it because it's happening. You know, in places We can't. It's just, it sounds crazy, it really does, but when this starts to pop up, it's like what if we go to that.
Speaker 2:There's more than one the dog that goes to a fire hydrant.
Speaker 1:Yeah, you know, they're all different kinds and maybe the reason why some of this has been kept secret from us, you know, besides, the Technological thing is, you're right, maybe. Maybe they thought at that time you know, we can't handle that. I think we're in a different place now. Some would argue we still can't handle that, but I feel like we we have to. I feel like we have if, if it is the truth, we need to know now or We're at a state now, as a society, that was so distracted that they can.
Speaker 2:They can tell you, fifty years ago people didn't have all these distractions. I think I don't know. I mean, it's a thousand ways of looking at there's a reckoning.
Speaker 1:Well, let's, let's hear a little bit more. I want to, yeah, finish up this, this part on the initial broadcast. They had, you know, a bunch of back and forth with Ross Colthard and there's more to come on this, but let's listen to this little part and see what we get here.
Speaker 5:So I've got to be blunt about this. You're not making this up, this is not a lie.
Speaker 6:No, absolutely not.
Speaker 5:Because everybody watching this right now is looking at your face. They're going is this guy for real?
Speaker 6:I Am for real and I'm. You know. I'm sitting here at great personal risk and obvious professional risk by talking to you today.
Speaker 1:Yeah, that's, yeah. So before you know, let's hear how the Pentagon responds to this. That's, that's the last clip I have here. So let's just let's hear the Pentagon's response, because I kind of like this.
Speaker 4:And just within the last 10 minutes or so, the Pentagon has released a statement to news nation about this report. They say to date Arrow has not discovered any verifiable information to substantiate claims that any programs regarding the possession or reverse Engineering of extraterrestrial materials have existed in the past or exist currently. Arrow is committed to following the data and its investigation Wherever it leads. Arrow, working with the office of the general counsel and the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, has established a Safe and secure process for individuals to come forward with information to aid arrow in its Congressionally mandated historical review. Arrow's historical review of records and testimonies is ongoing and due to Congress by June 2024 and arrow welcomes the opportunity to speak with a former or current employee or Contractor who believes they have information Relevant to this historical review. And Elizabeth, we know that David Grush, he's filed that whistleblower complaint.
Speaker 3:He's he's been on the record under oath Testifying to many of these things that he said in our report tonight right and it's important to point out that this statement from the Pentagon, from arrow Gresh's, is alleging that this top secret, top, top secret, secret program is keeping the secret from arrow.
Speaker 4:So exactly, and if Gresh is, what he's saying is true, you know the spokespeople, all of those folks at that level wouldn't even know This was going on anyway.
Speaker 1:So that's important to note is every time the Pentagon puts out a statement They say arrow. The all-domain anomaly resolution office has found no verifiable evidence of this. So the qualifiers in there a term of art like this, that there's a, the qualifiers are large enough to drive a truck through. So arrow, not the Pentagon as a whole, arrow, arrow doesn't have the authority, doesn't have the title 50 authority to access these programs. So just because arrow doesn't know about them doesn't mean they don't exist.
Speaker 2:It's a. It's a.
Speaker 1:It's a non statement and the verifiable because everything is. You use that when you say well, what is verifiable?
Speaker 2:because what he said is not verifiable.
Speaker 1:It's it's.
Speaker 2:So how do you vary? Yeah, you can't verify again. It's a term, it's, it's it's art, it's a, it's yeah, right. And so he says basically what he's saying is Grush. He's saying I was told this right, so it's not verifiable, because what he was told was classified. He's he didn't say I saw it. No, if he said I saw it, they wouldn't, they might not say it's not verifiable.
Speaker 1:I think what he's doing, though, is seeing, saying I was told this, and In classified setting, i'll tell you who told me this like he's giving them the breadcrumbs. We can't have those because that's classified, but they're getting them. So I think that's the part is. Is that this? we should be paying attention to this, but we shouldn't be. We're not seeing the whole story. A lot of this is playing out in the halls of Congress. What we can't see we're a necessary component of this story, because without public pressure and without media pressure, nothing happens on this, so that's why I think that's why I think it's important to see this in in the context of it has to. It's a piece of the puzzle, and everyone wants disclosure to be an event. This thing is going to disclose it. This thing is gonna push us over the limit and eventually.
Speaker 1:Eventually it will but each thing adds to it and the more we Tear it down and again, i'm not saying you just wholeheartedly accept it I think there's a difference. When somebody says I'm being objective, and then they, they proceed to try to shoot the thing down, that's not being objective, that's being you're being adversarial. If you're being objective, you go huh, interesting, take it into effect. Yeah, there's some things against it, there's some things for it. Let's see where the next level is. That's being objective. But when you you're arguing the pack, arguing whether or not it's true, you've lost your objectivity. Now you're trying to.
Speaker 1:Well you can always argue against anything. I think enough.
Speaker 2:Um I I don't agree with you 100% only because I think that There's nothing wrong with Taking in information and then having questions about it.
Speaker 1:Oh, yes, Oh yeah.
Speaker 2:And so, and if that question can't be answered, it goes into your, your bank of. Okay, i'm being objective, but if you can't answer that question that I have, it goes into my, my, my bank of is this Incredible or not? I mean, i don't think there's a problem with that. Now, if that's all you're doing, then You're probably not and you're not giving weight to the things that can be answered, then you're not being objective.
Speaker 1:Yeah, ice. What I'm seeing a lot of is I'm seeing a lot of people make an objection to what is out there Because they haven't read or followed everything that's out there. So what they're bringing up has already been answered in another place And and it's it's. It's gonna take a while to get all this information out and to get it all in one place.
Speaker 2:It's um, yeah, an objection is different than a question, so what one quick question?
Speaker 1:that before, before we go Yeah, let's just play, let's, let's just play. What if? for a second? Okay. What if everything he's saying is true and verified to some degree? Like What? what do you think happens in the short term? What do you think happens in the immediate? Like, do you think so what?
Speaker 1:if I might, the government comes out and says we've, we, we investigated his, his allegations And we have in fact found evidence of this. And here the you know, here are the culprits, here, you know, some of whom are are dead, some are whom are still alive and they're gonna be Prosecuted for it. Do you think that would happen? or just how do we react if the government comes out and says, yep, We're not alone.
Speaker 1:have the craft We have the craft, we have bodies. We can't tell you everything. We'll show you what we can. this parts of it We have to keep you know under national security. But yeah, it's verified, we are not alone.
Speaker 2:I think if they came out and said that, then They would know that China and Russia let's say, if there was this arms race that he spoke about, right, that Well, i think there's a lot of moving parts of them it's coming out to say that okay, but let's just say they did. I Think there'd be something very another shooter drop very soon after after that, because that's a, that's a big one to say if you're really concerned about an arms race with these other other Superpowers. So I don't know, that's a, that's a difficult question.
Speaker 1:We also don't know if these other superpowers could they come out and reveal, i mean well, i mean you're acting.
Speaker 2:You're asking if there's gonna be a concert effort and I don't think. I don't think you're gonna see If.
Speaker 1:If there's an arms race, that means it's adversarial but isn't there a, isn't there a PR advantage to being this thick, the country that the state that, that Announces this to the people like what if we have things that other countries don't?
Speaker 1:Well, that's not to say they announce what they have, like that's that's. There's two levels of this. There's admitting that there's something to it, and that doesn't mean opening the doors and and taking everybody on a tour of where we store the, the ships, like there's. You know, we're never gonna get 100% disclosure on everything, because we don't get 100% disclosure on anything like there's nothing that we know all about. There's always those things that the government does that we know bits and pieces of it, but there's always a few pieces that they for national security.
Speaker 2:They're always in, i think, if the Like, let's say the court of public opinion, i think if people found out that, that our government had pieces or actual intact craft, however you want to call it, honestly, i don't think people care that much. I think they'd care a lot more about any kind of life form. Yeah, i, because I think we talked about it, but I Think that we're at now. I think I think more than half of the country probably believes that we're not alone in this universe, right? So I mean, you talked about where are these, where the craft's coming from. I think most people say they think it's coming from space.
Speaker 4:Right.
Speaker 2:This is just me thinking it, but I do believe that there's a large percentage of the country the majority, so over 50% believe that we're not alone. I mean, that's another snowball down the hill that just keeps going as time goes on.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it's gotten bigger and bigger over the years, so I don't think it's a major surprise to people.
Speaker 2:It'll be a surprise that they had it and didn't tell us. But again, like we've been talking about this whole episode, i don't think people would be blown away that they were lied to by the government.
Speaker 1:No, no, I think it wouldn't surprise.
Speaker 2:But if somebody said we have a life form Right. And it's alive. That changes the game, I think people okay, now you got something that's changing the dynamic of the way people interact.
Speaker 1:Well, there's a different levels. Right, it's the. Let's accept the premise that there's life out there, that we're not alone. All right, accept that premise, there's life out there, we're not alone, Okay, we're comfortable with that. Potentially, that life is visiting here. Oh, that's tougher. There's all sorts of questions. Okay, something's flying around in our atmosphere. So it's like accepting it, right, but there's still a distance to that. There's still that comfortable distance between you know, ufos, something flying around. It's not real. Yet This is that thing that makes it real. This is that thing you can't come back from Right. Up until now, you can kind of, you can, waffle, right, but once you say we have craft, and if you say we have bodies dead alive, doesn't matter, A verified life form, that is not us. But as soon as you say that the game has changed And you know we talk about, you know, predicting how it's gonna go, i don't think anyone can really predict how it's gonna go, Cause we just we don't know It's so many factors of how people will react.
Speaker 1:Will they react? well, I would like to see people react with a little bit of anger And a little bit of like what did we miss out on by the secret being kept, Because there's a lot of scientific advances that could come. Even Dr Gary Nolan from Stanford talks about this. A lot. There are scientific advances could come from having exposure to these materials, even if you didn't know how to operate the craft, If you learned one thing about an element that we put together in a different way to do a different thing. he talks about silicone.
Speaker 2:But that's running in the assumption that we haven't already done that.
Speaker 1:Right, but what they're saying is that maybe we have on a small level, but if those discoveries are not shared with the scientific community, then they're not doing what they're supposed to do. You know, with the silicone chip I said silicone a moment ago the silicone chip.
Speaker 1:You know that made the difference, right. That suddenly launched us into the computer age and all of a sudden, the chip smaller and smaller, like the things that we have now that we use are because of that. If we never had that, we'd still have like big tube TVs and things like that. You know it's the chip that made everything possible.
Speaker 1:What other discoveries are being? you know, if these vehicles operate like they seem to do, their power source is much more powerful than what we traditionally have with a combustible source, right? Well, that opens up the questions of you know, could somebody take it? you know, if it's a lot of power, okay, bad things. Could somebody take it and make a bomb? right. But then the good parts, if there's something that makes power like that and exists and we have our hands on it. But because they kept it to themselves and kept it away from the scientific community, all that knowledge was either not gleaned from it, because there weren't enough bright minds working on it, or what was was kept. Then all of humanity was robbed of the benefits of that discovery, and I think-.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I mean, that's a good way of looking at it.
Speaker 2:There's another option. People could be angry that our government decided that there's a different type of life form and we just basically treated it like it was a frog at science class. There could be a contingent of people, which I would imagine there would be. I don't know how large it would be, but I think there would be enough people that would say why. Who gives you the right to act like this? You have a life form that has intelligence and you decided to just hold it and run an experiment on it Let's just say that's what happened, right?
Speaker 2:I think you'd have a lot of people that were. Maybe. That's why I mean you think about it, right, what's life? and you decide to do that to it.
Speaker 1:I mean there's a lot of people that get angry because of the way the whales get treated, right, and that's coming from the perspective of us being the advanced life form, doing it to a lesser life form, which does not seem to be the case. I mean, if whatever it is is advanced and intelligent enough to do what it does, they're beyond us, and I think that's the real scary part. I think it's not. I don't think it's so much discovering that we're not alone, because I think that's everyone intellectually accepts that but I think the implications of it haven't quite sank, in that if there is a life form that is coming here that we can't go visit them, we can't go to where they are, they can come to us. So obviously they're more advanced, in the same way that the Europeans came over to the new world where the natives here couldn't get there. it's, they're more advanced.
Speaker 1:That's troubling because we know historically that has never gone well for the less advanced thing.
Speaker 2:Ever, ever, And all we have is our framework of references our little blue dot yeah. But in the animal world, any world that we're aware of on this planet, there's never been a group of animals, people that can be dominant and then doesn't exert that dominance. They always do And it generally never ends well.
Speaker 1:But the other argument is is they could have done this at any time If they've been here as long as That's thinking and that's not true, that their time is the same as our time, right, well, that's It's like-.
Speaker 1:Time is relative. There's a, you know, it's weird to think that in some way, you know how they say. Well, these ships, you know, these types of ships have been around since biblical time. There is a scenario, which is not that far fetched, in which they could be some of the same ships, because the way they operate, they appear then and they appear now, and it's not linear to them.
Speaker 2:Well, I know, but also on different planets time moves quicker, or?
Speaker 1:slower, based on how the right yeah time is. I think most people don't appreciate that time is not a universal.
Speaker 2:2000 years to someone could be 10 years to someone else you know in terms of that type of-.
Speaker 1:Especially if they're power source, which again, this is all getting speculative, but from what is out there in the ether that there's some time coming. I think that's the biggest thing is that the biggest adjustment is not going to be the acceptance of life. That'll be rough, don't get me wrong. That will be rough then accepting that there's another life form that's not us. I think the more difficult thing will be seemingly I don't know, but seemingly it appears like it's not as simple as we're drawing it based on our limited experiences of saying like it's not.
Speaker 1:I think a lot of people are going to be thrown off by the fact it's not nuts and bolts craft flying 50 million light years Like that's to. that's limiting your frame of reference to what you know. And we already realized from this phenomenon there's a lot we don't know. So why are we taking what we don't know And we're still trying to stuff it in that bucket of what we know? And I think, accepting that, that there's going to be some revelations beyond just non-human life form. I think there's going to be revelations that stretch people's mind and ontological shock beyond just that. I think that's the tip of the iceberg of what, and not to say that I know what the answer is. I'm just saying my gut is that the answer is far more complicated and more nuanced and more layered than anyone is giving it credit for, and it opens up this can of worms that I don't. I don't think anyone can predict how it's going to go, because we've never been anywhere near here before.
Speaker 1:I don't know. That's what I'm thinking. I'm excited, though.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I'm very excited.
Speaker 1:All right, so let's close up shop on this one, but we promise we are going to bring more episodes right. We're going to get more content out in varied ways, trying different things, and, yeah, we'll be rolling things out. So stay tuned, keep watching the feed and I don't Check us out on Instagram.
Speaker 1:Yes, just trying to put some reels out, nice, nice, and we'll have all our socials and any links to this article and anything relevant that we think needs to go along with this. I'll have links in the show notes So that we, if you want to research further, you can check that out. So anything we want to add before we close shop.
Speaker 2:I think that's it. I'm sure we'll be back very soon.
Speaker 1:All right, so until then, i'm Chris And I'm Steve And we've been talking about some deep shit. Yeah, now, if you're wondering what we are going to talk about tomorrow, well, we'll talk about not having an episode on grown ups, not instates, but we're going to talk to you about performance and articles. Okay, like what kind of raw images should we look at ourselves?
