(Not So) Deep Sh*t with Chris & Steve
(Not So) Deep Sh*t with Chris & Steve
(Not So) Deep Sh*t on UFO Cover-Ups and UAP Disclosure
It's a double-shot of (Not So) Deep Sh*t!
We've been a little (ok, maybe a lot) off schedule getting episodes out, so instead of splitting this in two we figured we'd just release it all together as a two-hour extravaganza!
Once Steve and I get back to a regular recording schedule we'll probably go back to every other week, but for the time being releases might be like this.
But anyway, hope you enjoy and thanks so much for listening!
~Chris
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
What if every UFO sighting you've heard of is part of a much larger cover-up? Join us as we unravel the layers of secrecy surrounding the UAP Disclosure Act, reintroduced in 2024, and explore the legislative battles it faces. With insights from Luis Elizondo, we ponder the incredible possibilities and national security implications of UFO technologies, questioning the energy sources behind these mysterious crafts that defy gravity and time. The act holds the potential to change how UFO-related information is shared with the public, but it may also reveal uncomfortable truths about historical cover-ups and the protection of classified materials.
Peeling back the curtain on government secrecy, we navigate the tangled web of classified information, the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, and the mysterious propulsion systems of UFOs. The conversation shifts to the media's role in shaping public perception, highlighting how conspiracy theories and propaganda influence what we believe about the universe and our place within it. We also touch on controversial topics like the "Skinny Bob" video and the enigmatic Nazca mummies, questioning the authenticity and motivations behind these intriguing phenomena.
As we reflect on the mysteries of ancient civilizations and the persistent rumors of extraterrestrial discoveries, we consider the challenges in distilling fact from fiction amidst a sea of speculation. The potential revelations from the James Webb Telescope add another layer of intrigue, with whispers of groundbreaking findings that could reshape our understanding of life beyond Earth. Throughout our discussion, we emphasize the importance of critical thinking in evaluating the evidence before us, urging listeners to question not just what is known, but the narratives that shape our understanding of the unknown.
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 to talk about some more deep shit. How's it going, steve, chris, how you doing Good.
Speaker 2:It's been a while since we've recorded. It has been. We go through these phases. Sometimes we're trying to get more consistent.
Speaker 1:Yeah, the summer, it's always the summertime. Summer gets really busy for both of us and it's hard to stay on track as much as we want to.
Speaker 2:Right, right. The older I'm getting, it's getting a little more, a little easier. But you know this year was very crazy, and as was with you too, so hopefully we get on a better track here, which I'm sure we will.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and that's how it goes. Right In the early parts of our lives we have so much free time that we don't know what to do with ourselves, and then you get to that middle part where you have little or no free time, right, and then eventually you get to the other side where the free time opens up a little bit. So hopefully we're both getting towards that area yes, I think so.
Speaker 2:We'll see.
Speaker 1:But yeah, this you know, and but there's so much we've missed, so much has gone on as far as the topics we love to discuss over this last couple of months, so there's a lot to talk about today.
Speaker 2:Yeah, and I'm excited to talk to you about, and get your thoughts on, different topics, because we were reviewing prior to recording and some of us had some of the same things and some of them a little different, so there's a lot going on.
Speaker 1:It's such a great time for this topic.
Speaker 2:Right, right, and some of them a little different. So there's a lot going on.
Speaker 1:It's such a great time for this topic, right, right. So what would you like to talk about first? I mean, a good place to start would be the UAP Disclosure Act. It was the UAP Disclosure Act of 2023, but now they're trying to reintroduce it the UAP Disclosure Act of 2024. They reintroduced that legislation and they're trying to get it in the national defense authorization act, and, if that goes through, it will establish a presidential panel that will review all ufo material for release, and, um, yeah, it's a big deal. We'll see if that goes through, though. As of the other day, congress has left for recess and that is not in the National Defense Authorization Act, so it hasn't happened yet.
Speaker 2:So I know you well. At least I believe you know a little bit more about this than I do. I know some stuff about it and I know you do your the talks you do right. So I know some stuff about it and I know you do your the talks you do right. So I know you probably have to look into it a little more.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and I follow it on Twitter as well. That's a good source of stuff.
Speaker 2:What do you think is the major holdup? What's the pushback? What is it that you think that's maybe? What's the official pushback?
Speaker 1:That's a good question. What's interesting is, no one will even cop to pushing back against it. So when Congress let out, there's this reporter, matt Laszlo, and he runs this. I think it's a site called Ask a Poll. Ask a Poll like Ask a Politician.
Speaker 1:Oh, okay he just asked. So he's done a great job of getting politicians to talk to him about what's going on. So that's how a lot of information is found out. So he cornered Mike Rounds, who is one of the co -sponsors of this legislation, along with Chuck Schumer. So again you have Republicans and Democrats one of the few topics that they are working together on and basically asked them about them about.
Speaker 1:The word went out oh, it's been gutted again. That's what people say when it doesn't make the last year. It didn't. It made the authorization, the National Defense Authorization Act, but not all of it. That made it is that all UFO material that every branch of government has is supposed to be delivered to the National Archives by October of this year. I can't remember the specific date, but there's a specific date that every branch is supposed to turn over all their material to the National Archives and there is a presumption that anything that is 25 years or older there is an automatic presumption of automatic release, because they figure anything 25 years or older.
Speaker 1:Why would you? What could possibly be the reason to hold that back? There's no, how could you make an excuse that, okay, this information is 30 years old? Well, if it's classified. You can only classify stuff to protect sources and methods. What sources and methods were being used 30 years ago? That would still be in use today, and so you couldn't release it. So the thought process is anything that old. There's no reason not to release it. So the thought process is anything that old, there's no reason not to release it.
Speaker 1:And the National Archives just had a huge dump of all this material, so people are going through it now. That's the thing is, they're not putting it out piece by piece, they're putting it out in bulk, and so people are gonna have to comb through it to find the treasures. But as far as what's holding it out, the thought is, or the rumor is, that there are a couple people who don't want. They don't want this to move forward, for whatever reason they're trying to protect. I mean, remember we've talked about this before If this indeed has been covered up, crimes have been committed, like there's really serious issues.
Speaker 1:I think that people, because this is UFOs, people don't take it seriously. But if you take UFOs out of it and just think about the implications of some information being kept from Congress and the executive branch illegally for how many years, I mean let's just say let's start at it in the late 40s. So you're talking like 90 years, 70 years. You know that this information is I mean, you're talking about a constitutional crisis Like this is more than just UFOs. This could potentially be a big deal, and so that's the thought process is that people don't want to get caught up in this, so we'll see.
Speaker 2:But is there a why is it not passing then? I don't understand. It's not that it's not passing.
Speaker 1:It's the way these things work. Legislation is such. It's such a convoluted process. So the way these things work is the House will have their version of the National Defense Authorization Act right, all the things that they want to fund the military Right and then the Senate will have their version, and then they have to get together in committees and sort of hammer it out. So it's a one, and so that's where the agreements come in. Everyone's trying to add stuff to the National Defense Authorization Act.
Speaker 1:It's not like the UFO stuff is the only thing that's trying to be added.
Speaker 1:It's one of a bunch of things and they can't add it all, and so there's a fight in committee and so that's where it's been happening is behind the scenes.
Speaker 1:Last year there was some word that, uh, a representative, mike turner, from ohio, I believe, who actually represents the district of right patterson Air Force Base, and if you know, you know, in UFO lore, wright Patterson is supposedly the place where the Roswell bodies went after they're taken, they're deep in this stuff and some defense contractors, and so if defense contractors have some of this material from crashed vehicles, they have a vested interest in not losing their resource and not being outed.
Speaker 1:I mean, there's a lot of problems here that I don't think people are thinking about, like what if you're one of these aerospace companies and names that have been thrown out there by people in the know Lockheed Martin, boeing, there's a few others, basically, and so what if one of these, one of these defense industry you know companies got material and this other one didn't? And so now flash forward many years and the one that got the material is among the biggest defense you know, lockheed Martin and all that and the one that didn't is out of business. And now, years later, you find out the government handed one of these companies material and didn't hand it to the other. I mean, you're talking about potential lawsuits, you're talking about fiscal fraud, people who are investing in that company. You have to tell your stockholders, your shareholders, all the company resources. But if this company has had secret resources that it's been exploiting and not telling its shareholders, that's a problem too.
Speaker 2:So there's a lot of that's the thing you think, though, even if this gets passed, you think that that's something anybody will ever find out that's the question, right is, you can't predict what questions will be asked.
Speaker 1:that's always been a thing that people have said is, once you open this can of worms and the press starts actually taking interest in it, what are the questions that they're going to ask? Are they going to say, okay, you're telling us all this stuff is real. When did you know it was real? Well, we knew. The government knew in 49, or whatever. Okay, or 47, 1947. Okay. So for you know, the government knew in 49, you know, or whatever, okay, or 47, 1947. Okay. So, for that many years, how many lies have been told? How many, how many you know? Has anyone been hurt or killed to keep the secret?
Speaker 2:That's an allegation that's been made over and over and over again do you think that we'll ever be actually told by the government that they knew that things were real, or do you think? Sometimes I think to myself that maybe we're going to be told in dribs and drabs, kind of dripping it to you, but more along the lines that we're really not sure that they're not real.
Speaker 1:And that's probably not untrue. There's parts of the majority of the government probably has no idea that this stuff is real because this stuff's been kept so locked tight. The number of people who've been privy to this information over the years has been relatively small.
Speaker 2:You know what I mean, though I wonder if it'll be a big reveal or it'll be more like well, we're not as sure as we thought we were.
Speaker 1:I think they're going to want to pretend like they're discovering it along with the people, like that's going to be that's what I mean. That's why everything you hear from the government, it pretends that this issue started in 2004. Like, if you listen to any of the government stuff they've been putting out, even the UAP reports, when were the first UAP reports? 2004,? The Tic Tac incident? That's it. They're really pretending that this just started in 2000. Oh, we just discovered this thing, and that's probably true for a lot of the government. I mean, that's the thing when people say the government it's not one big monolith, it's like anything else. There's little individual pockets and these people and these people and they're all doing their thing.
Speaker 1:But the number of people who were probably in on this from the beginning, most of them are dead. Most of them are not around anymore. So all you have is the few people who kind of took on the secret, and that number is probably relatively small and there's probably some information that's just lost. You know, like information we'll never get, just because only a handful of people knew about it and those people are now dead. So it'll. One of the biggest holdups to all of this stuff is a lot of it falls under the 1954 Atomic Energy Act. That makes some atomic information information about, about, you know, nuclear bombs, even if you don't get it from a classified source. Meaning if two physicists were talking, there's certain aspects if they started talking about how to make nuclear weapons, there's certain aspects of it that the information is born classified.
Speaker 2:So even if these what does that mean?
Speaker 1:Meaning that if two physicists that didn't have access to any insider information but were just figuring stuff out, let's just say they were like Just your idea, your idea is already class If it has to, if it already, if it has to do with nuclear, certain level of nuclear weapons, there's an assumption that it's automatically classified, even if you didn't. Yeah, it's one Wait a minute.
Speaker 2:So if I just happen to think of something and I write it down, that could be classified Yep, even though I don't know it and they could actually.
Speaker 1:So is it a?
Speaker 2:crime, to give away the information even if you don't know it's classified. Yes, that's weird.
Speaker 1:Yes, and they couple it with the. There's an espionage act from way back. I can't that.
Speaker 2:yes, that's the thing is people underestimate how, how, like, well, why don't the people in government who know this just come out and say it, because they could go to prison for the rest of their life or executed, like you say that? How did it get?
Speaker 1:I wonder how this topic UFO, uap how did it get interwoven with the Nuclear Act, Because when this was coming up in the late 40s it really picked up right around the same time nuclear was so there's some concepts of the two things that are similar. Well, let's put it this way let's take the Tic Tac. Whatever the power source that runs on, that it's not unleaded gas.
Speaker 2:No, and it's probably not nuclear?
Speaker 1:actually, Probably not nuclear either, but it generates a lot of power.
Speaker 2:Even nuclear power has waste and has some remnants that something's being used. But when you watch that Tic Tac video it appears as if the energy is not being released anything around that, around that the unit or the craft, whatever it might be.
Speaker 1:You know it's interesting in. Luis Elizondo just had his book come out, eminent, great book. I felt, if you, if you haven't read that, I out there like get it. The audio version is really good because it's read by Lou. He has a good way with transmitting the information, but the book is very interesting and he talks a lot about that and actually gives what their working theory was on how these things operate. It's really interesting.
Speaker 2:But basically, Do you want to tell me? Yeah, we'll talk about it.
Speaker 1:Yes, it's basically the way it was explained in very simplistic terms is if you were able to generate enough energy. That's the question. You have to have a lot of energy to be able to put a bubble around a craft and that bubble would make what's inside the bubble immune to the effects of gravity. Now a lot of people, when they hear that, just says okay, that'll make it just float. No, it's more than just that.
Speaker 1:When gravity and time are so interlinked that if you can insulate something from gravity, you can also insulate it, in a certain sense, from time. So if the craft were to move inside the craft, time is moving slightly different, actually a lot different than it is if the craft were to move inside the craft, time is moving slightly different, actually a lot different than it is outside the craft. So we to us, we see it doing these crazy things that don't make sense. But if you're in the bubble, you're not doing anything that crazy. It's just you're moving at such a fast speed outside the bubble that people think you're doing crazy things.
Speaker 1:I'm probably not explaining it well, but there's a theory that puts it all together and says no, this actually would explain all the observables the instantaneous acceleration, the transmedium travel, everything about it is explained with one simple thing, but the key is energy. And so that's, where can you get that much energy? And I think the theory is is that if you could access the, the empty space and hydrogen water, why are uaps seen around water a lot? Well, maybe they use water as a way of perpet, you know, creating the energy that they use to do what they do.
Speaker 2:Again, these are all just theories.
Speaker 1:I don't know the truth of this and I don't have enough of a science background to really dig into it, but it's interesting how he talks about it in the book, and so that's the key.
Speaker 1:So back to the original question why would this stuff be classified so high? If you can generate that much energy, you can do a lot of things. The first things humans would probably do is make something that goes boom, and if you could generate that much energy, you potentially could have enough energy to destroy everything. Like that's the thing. What if this craft really required people to have like a perspective and say, okay, we can generate unlimited energy to power this craft, but if you turn your your sites to wanting to make a bomb with this unleashing, this would be bad because you could get more powerful than any nuke that we have. They calculated the energy required to do some of those moves of the tic-tac and basically said the amount of energy that would be required to do what the tic-tac did is more than a hundred times of all the nuclear output of the entire united states for a year that's, that's what I mean.
Speaker 1:I did, that's why it can't be nuclear it's not, but it's just that amount of energy.
Speaker 2:So but what do you, chris? This is, I find it fascinating. What do you think? What is the motivation of different branches or sectors of the government to the Tic Tac, for example? Right, we watch it and you say what is that? Right, the people that were there don't know what it was. People that watched it afterward don't know what it was. People that watched it afterward don't know what it was. I'm they're unsure, you know. Oh, it's light off the ocean it's not light off the ocean right, um, because that's not.
Speaker 2:How would that be classified? Right um but what's the motivation? But to not want to figure it out in terms of the government, like saying that's classified, that's this, that's that. Do you think they somehow that they have an idea what it is?
Speaker 1:Oh, I'm sure, I'm sure there's some who have a much better idea of what it is than most.
Speaker 2:Now, why do you think? This always fascinates me? Why do you think that there is some part of the government, so maybe some agency or something, that has an idea, but there's no private people that have an idea? You know like that, have such a clear idea about it?
Speaker 1:Well, we think that, but I mean, if there's defense contractors involved in all this, let's say, somebody that's a physicist or something.
Speaker 1:Well, but I think a lot because a lot of physicists haven't even looked into it. This topic is so stigmatized, even still you think so. It's so hard to talk about this topic. We are so well-trained to react a certain way when certain words are said Paranormal, ufos, ghosts, there's a lot of things like that that you just meant bringing up in your average setting and watch people's reaction. It's immediate, it's visceral. They've been so well-trained to mock this that for years you know reputable scientists wouldn't go anywhere near it. People who could solve it didn't want to touch it because the very topic was like radioactive, and I mean that in the general sense like if you touch this topic, it would ruin your career, and that's you know.
Speaker 1:Back to the the numerous reasons why you wouldn't let this out. What? What would you say to somebody who had a sighting years ago and saw something and everyone said they were crazy. Everyone said what you saw couldn't, doesn't exist. The government says it doesn't exist. You're lying. That person's life got ruined. They lost, maybe, their job, they lost their marriage, they lost everything, right, they may have even lost their life. Now, years later, the government says oh yeah, you know what these, these things are real and we knew about it and we made the decision to not tell anybody.
Speaker 2:That's why I think that's not going to happen.
Speaker 1:Well, that's the thing is. That's why it's not going to happen. Unless you preempt that by passing some legislation that protects Like maybe you have to do a thing. This is not unheard of. This is like we've done this before with the intelligence agencies, basically to say, listen, we need to know what you did and so we're going to give immunity to people who come forward and talk. Like that would be the best thing is to say, all right, anyone who knows stuff about this, you can come talk to these specific people. And if you come out and talk to these specific people, we'll forgive anything you may have done in the course of trying to keep this secret, because we understand that you did it, you know for ostensibly good reasons, but if you don't come forward and we find you, then we're going to prosecute you to the fullest extent of the law for everything you did. So come forward now, tell us what you know and you won't get punished or don't, and if we find you, you're going to be in trouble.
Speaker 1:Maybe that would do it, but the problem is is that you can't even if you know some of this stuff, because it's classified, you can't just wander into you know some office and talk about it. You can only talk about it. You can only talk about it with people who are cleared to know it. And that's the other piece of you know, people who don't really understand classification think that you know everybody with a certain clearance can read everything of that clearance. That's not true. You have to have the clearance, but you also have to demonstrate a need to know. So there are people who are theoretically able to get this level of top secret information, but there's all sorts of stuff at that level that they don't have a need to know, so they don't know it. So that's the problem you get into is how do you do it when these secrets are so wrapped up that even talking about them, you're breaking the law? So you have to do something about that. You have to give people a path to say, hey, here's this little office and here's a handful of people who are cleared to know everything. Everything doesn't matter what it is, no matter, doesn't matter how high it's, it's, they know it. So if you know anything about this stuff, you can come, you can talk to those people and get it out there.
Speaker 1:But that's the. The hold up is that it's everything just so siloed and it's hurting the topic actually. I mean, if if we have crashed craft and if we haven't discerned anything useful out of it, it's because we don't have the best and the brightest working on it. I mean, I I'm not to put down government. I'm sure government scientists are really good, but so are academic scientists and so are corporate. You know what I'm saying. There's a lot of scientists out there who maybe wouldn't get a clearance. Maybe just, you know, maybe their life they just lived the kind of life that they wouldn't get a clearance. Because, you know, whatever they had some, whatever they were a little smoking some pot in college or something like that and or something like that, and so you can't let these people in. So it's just, keeping information siloed is just not a good way to-.
Speaker 2:When you say siloed, I kind of know what you mean, just like in these little things. The people not communicating with each other.
Speaker 1:Hey, these people know, and these people over here who could help solve the problem don't have any of the information of the people over here, so they can't contribute. Because that's how science works, right? Somebody has information, writes a paper on it. Other scientists look at it, try to prove it or disprove it, write other papers and somehow, through it all information is eventually utilized and stuff is created. Now take that discussion away.
Speaker 1:This person is only going to be able to take this topic so far before whatever. They can't take it any further Now. They need some fresh infusion of information to bring it further, but they can't discuss it with anybody. So it's just it's putting it, it's kind of putting in these little pockets, since nothing is ever going to happen. I don't know. I mean, that's. The biggest problem, though, is is there's so many cans of worms that get open with this topic that they have to do something preemptive. They have to pass something to say we're going to protect anyone who may have done something. What about the people who may have been hurt or killed? And I know a lot of people are like that can't happen. Of course it can. You don't think the government would kill to protect a secret if they considered that secret important enough.
Speaker 2:Well, I mean, that's the whole. I mean it's a whole different topic, but we did a podcast on it. That's the whole premise of the JFK conspiracy that there is some branch not a branch, but some group within the government that did that Right, and even if they're all dead, even if none of them are alive, what about the damage?
Speaker 1:What if, let's just say theoretically, what if they were hard proof out there in documents that basically says, yeah, our intelligence, us intelligence agencies, some element of them, had a hand in removing the president of the United States by the worst way possible by having him killed. Well, how much damage would that do I mean? Something's got to explain why nobody's ever let these documents out, and so far in the past. Now what again? Same with the UFO stuff. What could be in there? That could possibly everybody who had any hand in that is long gone for the most part you maybe that power kind of transfers well, that's the thing is the power transfers, then you're in trouble too, right?
Speaker 1:okay, you may not have been the one to plan it, but now you, the knowledge of that planning, went into your hands and you kept it secret, just like anyone else. Right, there's actually something really interesting. There's a man named harold mal malmgren and he was an advisor to. He's a fascinating individual. He basically was an advisor to presidents johnson, kennedy, nixon, and this is a guy who's been like he's. He's been in the, in the depths of power, and he came out on Twitter and pretty much said yeah, we have.
Speaker 1:I was told years ago that we have technology from and it's interesting people like that getting into the. Really, he doesn't have any. He's alive still.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and he's, and he posted on Twitter. Actually, he posts on Twitter all the time. He's basically I don't know, he's got to be probably in his 80s, probably right, he's got to be yeah. But he was basically saying yeah, we have this stuff. And people were going I don't believe you. And he's like I don't care whether you believe me or not and he's like I'm not. He even says I'm not a firsthand witness. Again, I was told. But oh, you were told lies. Why lies? Why? Why? Why? You know, I love the, the, the theory of this is all some sort of psyop what?
Speaker 2:yeah, so what is I? Because that I see that all the time. Well, they're just trying to distract us from what what they're trying to distract us from the votes in georgia I'm like come on right, really this is quite a ruse that there is a you know these, that navy fighter pilots are chasing these things, all to get us to not look at the big picture of money not being spent on a certain thing in the government it's just kind of strange.
Speaker 1:You want to talk about a conspiracy theory, figuring that the government had enough foresight. Listen, we're going to start laying the groundwork for this alien thing. I know it's 1940, 47 and we're just fresh out of you know, world war ii and we're gonna start laying the groundwork for this alien thing. I know it's 1940, 47 and we're just fresh out of you know, world war ii and we're just trying to get our own stuff going. But we're gonna pour all this money where the money come from. We're gonna pour all this money into faking these things. So over the years, maybe I don't know maybe 70, 80, some number of years from now we can what you know, it doesn't the the theories that people come up with we can distract you from illegal immigration right like like has the government ever had problems getting get like?
Speaker 1:all they have to do is say the word. You know the, the terrorism word. That's all you got to do?
Speaker 2:oh it's it.
Speaker 1:Okay, how many of our rights do we want to sign away? We'll sign away all of album, like you don't need aliens for that. And to figure that you could, you could orchestrate this kind of thing, why would you do it? Why would you even start and how would you keep that a secret like, oh, we're gonna fake an alien invasion, why? Why are we gonna fake it so we can take over the world?
Speaker 2:although I really don't think, chris, I think there's a good amount of people, excuse me, that will always care a lot about this issue or a lot of different issues, right, but I think there's a lot of people that because I just I was just thinking the iraq thing after the uh, you know, we, we invaded right.
Speaker 2:And then, not that long after it all went down, we were told oh yeah, because there was an investigation, right, oh yeah, that there were no weapons of mass destruction. He never had uranium. It was bad intelligence. We just I don't know what to tell you, whoops. But even though that happened, and we all most of us at least, over what 30, 40 years old know, that is what happened Every single time our country goes into another war or aids in another war we go.
Speaker 2:Oh, everything you're telling us must be exactly the way it's going down we somehow like there's a lot of people that think that and in many cases, it's the exact same people who told us the first line like, hey, we're telling you for sure that these weapons of mass destruction are in there, so we got to go in there and get it All right.
Speaker 1:Tons of blood and treasure, spentons of you know, blood and treasure spent. And you know it's not like things are great over there. It's like we made more of a mess than anything else and lots of lives lost and lots of money spent and just a waste of everything and it was all for nothing. And now the same exact people, some of them Okay, I may have screwed that one up this time I'm telling you this time we're going to do it this time.
Speaker 1:You're right, we have a short attention span and that's partially the media's fault because, you know, it's more interesting what an ex-president said about a pop star than you know what's going on in our government. It's silly, but we like the silly, like that's the. I heard a great thing and I think I saw it on Twitter. I thought it was such an interesting take. Somebody said that they had a friend in China who just made a comment and go, a lot of Americans watch the news, right, that's weird. And they're like I don't understand, why do you think it's weird? And the person said well, in China we just know the news is propaganda. Like that's just well known. Like most people don't watch the news because it's just kind of known that everything you're seeing on the news is propaganda. But Americans don't seem to have realized that yet. And it's almost kind of like yeah, we kind of haven't.
Speaker 2:We realize it about other people's news and we realize it about news that we don't agree with.
Speaker 2:right, right so we'll say not the stuff we watch, right say well, I mean like, let's say, you watch whatever uh, msnbc, right? What's on fox? You say, come on now, that's all baloney, right, it's all it's got to be. It can't be real, right? Then you, if it's just, you know the same thing that when the tables are turned, it can't be real. Well, do you realize that someone's saying the exact same thing about what you're watching, exactly?
Speaker 1:and propaganda can be very subtle it doesn't have to be in your face.
Speaker 1:It could just be a matter of picking and choosing which stories to cover and which stories to not cover, or how to cover them, because Because you can't cover everything, so much happens every day everywhere. But what is cable? Let's take cable news. What do they generally do If you watch cable news? If you turned on any cable news channel at 8 in the morning and watched it continuously until 5 pm, odds are you saw the same stories again and again, and again.
Speaker 1:Handful, whatever that number is right, and then, intermixed with it would be a few new things. But generally speaking, there's the, the topic du jour, what's the topic of the day, right, and so they'll talk about it, and then they'll have talking heads on to talk about it. So you're not really bringing us information, you're bringing us opinion, like, okay, I'm gonna have this panel of people now giving us their opinion on what we think about, what we're telling you right and it's like well, why don't you just stop telling me what you think about it and just bring me more stuff?
Speaker 1:right, bring me what? To tell me more things? But that's boring, that's not. Most people won't watch that. And I guess something else we forget and again it doesn't. When I say it's propaganda, everybody's oh well, you think the government's controlling all the media. Well, I think they're controlling more than you think, but let's just say they're not. It's just the system. It's what news channels don't? Their main agenda isn't to inform you, it's to get people to watch.
Speaker 2:Well, you saw what Elon Musk released. Right, and we know it from people that have been in the CIA that they have close relationships with large news organizations. We know it from people that have been in the CIA that they have close relationships with large news organizations.
Speaker 1:We know this Project Mockingbird. Back in the day they were caught having on the CIA payroll. They were caught having journalists who were on the payroll for the CIA. And this is not information, this is not a conspiracy theory. This has been proven. There was all sorts of hearings back in the day to say, whoa, whoa, whoa, our intelligence agencies are getting a little. You're not supposed to do psychological operations, psyops. You're not supposed to do them on American citizens. We have no problem you doing them. So we have this organization that can manipulate the media in another country and we don't think it's ever turned to us.
Speaker 2:we're fine don't worry about it, we're resilient, we're not gonna right.
Speaker 1:So that's, that's, that's the. The issue is, I think, that there's it's not all uh malevolent some of it's. It's just it's the way it works. Like, hey, we want people to watch our news program. If we talk, if we deliver real issues to you all day, people are going our news program. If we talk, if we deliver real issues to you all day, people are going to turn it off, because we know a lot of what's going on in the world is not, it's not fun, it's not good or it's complicated. You know a lot of things. You can't boil it down to a three minute cable news segment. A lot of things require you have to talk, you have to the background, you have to be brought up to speed on. You know why we are where we are. Okay, now let's talk about the issue, but that's a long conversation. That's not something we can do in a three minute hit on cable news. That's all they want to have. They don't want to have you know.
Speaker 1:You know Luis Elizondo is out there doing a book tour for his book and it's funny to see him. He's talking about the possibility that a non-human intelligence has been visiting this planet and we have crashed craft, like all this crazy stuff and I will give you three minutes, son, I'll give you a five-minute segment. Maybe we can talk about this real quick and with reporters who are so unversed on the topic that their questions are asinine, like I don't know how many times I've heard the question over and over and over again. Well, well, I mean, there's some who say this could be our own technology. It's like do I, do we really need to go through this again? The number of reasons why this is not our own technology, like it's been going on since the late 40s. We didn't have that technology, russia didn't have that technology.
Speaker 2:And we've never seen it Right.
Speaker 1:And also we would never test experimental top secret stuff and just say, hey, what do you want to do with it? I don't know why don't we fly it near this carrier strike group and just see what happens? Don't tell them Right, like you could possibly have your you know multi-million dollar thing that you're experimenting with could crash or get shot down. Like you would never test this stuff near other us assets and not tell them. One of the things I talk about in my in my ufo talks is how often training and and restricted airspace these objects are seen and it's just a natural thing. John Kirby at the White House has said oh, these things have affected some of our training. You know, we've trained Basically saying these objects pop up and we've had to divert where we train but because we don't know where they're from we're not worried about it and it's just like.
Speaker 1:That's absurd. So like if this nuclear submarine popped up in the middle of, like, uh, the boston harbor, but it didn't have any markings on it, didn't have a russian flag or a chinese flag, would we look out and go well, we don't know what that is, but you know what we don't know. It's bad it is. I don't worry about it, worry about it. Right. There's no other country that could be like sending stuff in our restricted airspace and we would just go. We'll move over here then, but for these objects we seem to do it.
Speaker 2:And again people Well, at least that's what we're being told.
Speaker 1:By a lot of different sources, like it's not, they're admitting. Yes, I know the government always lies, and so when the government admits something, yeah, you're not getting the whole truth, but it's not like they're trying to serve this stuff up. That's. The other thing is they're not serving this stuff up. Every bit of information we get from them it's clawed out Like they're being very. They don't want to release this stuff. Even just the fact that they admitted it's all true, but then they don't go out of their way to talk about it, because why?
Speaker 2:would you?
Speaker 1:Right, you want to tell the American people hey, by the way, there's these things that fly in and fly out. We can't stop them. Well, here's the question that would come up. All right, so if UFOs are true, what about alien abduction? Is that true? Are American citizens really being kidnapped by someone else and being assaulted because they're having things done to them when they're taken Like that's? That's a major crime.
Speaker 2:So again I'm I don't know why the alien abduction part of this whole phenomenon has never really been something I'm kind of interested in it, but I don't know why it's not something that I gravitate towards because it's disturbing if you really start to think.
Speaker 1:Maybe that's why I mean if, if you take it, if you first of all, if you start going down that road and looking at it, uh well, I guess it might get scary. It's scary, I mean it's if it's true, right and again, so are you telling it's true.
Speaker 2:I find it very hard to believe that the number of people who have claimed this, that they're all lying, that they're all like do you think there's anything to it that it could be purely psychological, and not so much that what they believe happened didn't happen in their minds, but maybe their bodies didn't actually go anywhere In some cases?
Speaker 1:I'm sure, that's true. You know what I'm trying to say. I'm sure and I'm not saying the dynamic isn't happening.
Speaker 2:So maybe that's true, but I'm wondering, I just wonder about that.
Speaker 1:That was even so far back as Betty and Barney Hill up in Exeter, new Hampshire.
Speaker 2:I mean there's some yeah, that's a great story.
Speaker 1:That they weren't. It wasn't aliens that took them, it was some other kind of kidnapping in their brains. You know that in their story they made this story up, so there's a couple of things about that that kind of rubbed me.
Speaker 2:The wrong way. No, that's not what I meant. What do you mean? What I meant was maybe there's actually some sort of I guess alien type of thing, but they have a way of doing something with you mentally. They're not necessarily taking your physical body, but it feels the same to you. Do you know what I'm?
Speaker 1:trying to say, yeah, that it's your perceptions, that what happened? I mean, how else do you explain? You know this person goes missing and they turn up and they're. You know, according to their watch, more time has passed or less time has passed than they were gone.
Speaker 1:They were gone five days and for some reason, you know, their watch doesn't show that those stories are crazy, but if you go back to our early discussion, when you're talking about the bubble and how these craft would work, yeah, that kind of makes. You're talking about time. You're talking about um, you're talking about insulating a craft from gravity, which also insulates it from time, which means that the people in that craft uh, time is all over the place for them, like they take a quick trip and, in their perspective, a long time could have passed. So how would your society be different? You know, you see sci-fi about like us having like a galactic. You know like planets.
Speaker 2:That's apparently that movie.
Speaker 1:Interstellar Right. So gravity time is a function of gravity. Time passes for us on earth at the approximately the same rate, because we're all on earth and the earth is our source of gravity. If you want another planet, time would be moving right at a different rate they even know that time moves infinitesimally faster for birds flying in the sky.
Speaker 1:It's not a lot, it's, it's a. It's it not a lot? It's not a lot to notice. It's not like you're going to lose a second or whatever. It's like the Planck scale, it's even like the seconds within seconds. Within seconds it's infinitesimal. But it's there, the clocks on the International Space Station. Occasionally they have to be recalibrated because after a while they're wrong.
Speaker 1:Because time is moving slightly different the further you get away from the gravity source. So we take it for granted that time moves. Like if you were traveling that way all the time, it would be a different. Your society would have to be different. It would. You couldn't have it like we have it where. Like if you went away for 10 years and you came back, you know your spouse would be 10 years old, your kids would be 10 years older. You know your sibling, who was younger than you, is now older than you because you're gone for that amount of time. Um, it would be a totally different ball game, like time wouldn't, wouldn't be meaning.
Speaker 1:When they talk about these things as being time travelers, we always think time travelers like somebody in the future got in a time machine to come back here. They're all time travelers in an essence, because they're all moving outside of time. When they're moving, how do we know these same crafts aren't exactly the same crafts that were seen in, you know, let's say the Tic Tac, right, how do we know that's not exactly the same craft that we've seen another time in the forties? Well, how could that be? Because time is moving faster. Is is moving faster outside than for them, than in, and they're traveling around in this thing. And so outside the bubble, you know, many, many, many years have gone by, but inside the bubble, not that much has gone by.
Speaker 1:I don't even know it's not to be mind boggling Like how, how would you even interact with anyone else If you went away and 10 years you came back and go? I was on a little trip in 10 years, what's gone? What did I miss? Like it would be a few things. Completely different way of thinking. But I think you know we just take it for granted that time moves at a certain certain it moves the same for all of us. Of course it does. We're all on earth, we, none of us are. You know, if, if, uh, if, reality of mars. You know people on mars ever became real?
Speaker 1:Um, how would you handle communication between the two? Like time's moving at different speeds? How would you ever handle trade? How would you ever handle trade? How would you ever handle anything into relation you know any kind of relations, because on this place time is moving faster. What if? What if time moved faster in in England than it did here? So for every day that passed here, two days passed in England. Let's just say that was that was the case. How hard would it be to have any kind of like communication between the two? All right, I'll get back to you tomorrow and then, all right, I'm getting back to you tomorrow. What do you mean get back? I haven't heard from you in a month. Right, oh, it was just a day for me, right, like how it would get so confusing. You couldn't do it unless you moved past the ways we do things, that time and all that stuff matters. It's trippy to think about.
Speaker 1:And again, I'm not. I'm not as scientifically inclined to to be able to speak about all this stuff, but just my basic level of knowledge is. It's interesting.
Speaker 2:Yeah, so all of these things are time travels in a sense yeah, it's, it's, it's, it's a, it's a fascinating thing.
Speaker 1:So, aside from Louis Louis Elizondo's book called Eminent and I highly recommend it you should get it. The audio is really good. He puts more clarity on the Tic Tac incident, puts more clarity on the Gimbal and Go Fast videos that were in the 2015 taken on that event. He just puts more context in this stuff.
Speaker 1:He goes to the videos too, which I found very useful because I talk about those three ufo videos in my in my ufo talk and, uh, he does a good job of going through and explaining each one and exactly what you're seeing the, the three that you always see, the, the ones um, and three ufo videos the um fleer one, which is that first one that came from 2004, yep, and then the gimbal and the go fast, which came from the 2015 so when's the gimbal?
Speaker 1:uh, the gimbal is the one where it's rotating. The guy says it's rotating, right, that one he's chasing, and that's why they call it the gimbal. It's because the gimbal is something that you know. Yeah, so, and I talked and talked about the significance of that, like why is that interesting? Well, because if most things, if they rotate, they're going to lose altitude because it's lift that holds them up. But this object was rotating, but not losing any altitude, and along with that you can't tell the source of propulsion and all that.
Speaker 1:Like that first video, the FL, the flare one, there's no audio. You know what I'm talking about, right, you just see this object and it's kind of changing. The screen is changing. I didn't realize it's because the pilot is flipping through different modes, trying to see if he can lock on a chad underwood who's a pilot. He was trying to flip through different things. Let's check here, let's see, like, how can I lock on to this thing? And so that's why the screen is changing in different ways. But he was like he gives a lot of context on those and says, well, this is what you're seeing, that you're seeing it's something that's moving very fast that we can't lock onto. It doesn't seem to have a heat source, it doesn't seem to be propuls, you know, it doesn't seem to be being pushed by a gen engine. Um, those videos are a lot more impressive, but what happens happens is is they get kind of lumped People first of all. People say, well, they're black and white videos, they're not videos in the sense of, like your iPhone video.
Speaker 1:They're sensor. You're seeing sensor information. You're seeing a video of the sensor, so it's not the image that you're looking at. You're looking at something that a sensor is trying to figure out And-.
Speaker 2:What's the name of the video where it was kind of leaked? I guess Talk about the Border Patrol one? No, we can talk about that one, but I guess what I mean is the one where they're on the naval ship and it looks like the thing goes into.
Speaker 1:Oh, that one with Splash, splash, that one.
Speaker 2:Yeah, does that have a name? I can't remember.
Speaker 1:uh, I think the one with the drones, yeah that's supposed to be drones.
Speaker 2:Is that the nimitz? Is it?
Speaker 1:uh, no, it's that one, oh, I can't remember. There's a color, there's one that, um, I can't remember the name of it. There was a one where it shows this weird thing actually kind of looks very similar to the thing that explored the planet Hoth on. Empire Strikes Back. It does kind of.
Speaker 2:Doesn't it right?
Speaker 1:Yes, and then one of the things it does is it dips in the water and it comes out of the water, doesn't slow down, doesn't even make an impact on the water. That's the other thing. That's weird, right, is it goes from the air into the water but it doesn't splash. They say splash in the sense it went in but it doesn't actually make any kind of thing.
Speaker 2:And then it comes out and then it splits into two and it has that look of like that weird robot thing from You're talking about, like it was kind of like a probe yeah With arms little arms hanging off it Looking for things.
Speaker 1:Right, and that's what it looked like, and, of course, a lot of people take on that oh, it's, it's. Yeah, there's a lot of videos out there, and that's that's. One of the other issues is that we're at a point now where every video that's seen, the first thing people are going to say is well that of them, but I will say, if this video has been floating around for years, that's a different matter, right?
Speaker 1:Because if it's been floating around for years and it wasn't AI that did it, if this is a video that's, you know, like some of those alien autopsy videos or not autopsy, specifically because that one was supposedly remember that Fox had their alien autopsy.
Speaker 2:I remember the buildup to that. We were in high school or maybe a little after high school, I can't remember.
Speaker 1:I think that has been proven to be a fake, but it's persisted by those who support it to say that it's a fake that was duplicated of an actual thing, because they couldn't release the actual thing and so they duplicated it. But there's some weird footage out there, something called Skinny Bob. Have you ever heard of skinny bob? No, it's this weird like video of a what looks like an alien and it's just a it's.
Speaker 2:It's a big-headed alien and it looks like it's black and white film and kind of what the alien and and it's, but it's not autopsy.
Speaker 1:It's like an interrogation of this alien and his eyes are blinking and everything, and so one of the things they say about it as well, this was, this was um, this somebody made. This is fake and other people have pointed out. Okay, we can't find any source. This is from, this is not from anything, it's not from a movie, it's not like there's nothing we can find, and if somebody created this, they spent a lot of resources to do it, because it isn't just a dummy looking thing. Whatever it is looks really like animatronic Like if it's fake, it's a high quality animatronic.
Speaker 2:How long do they? Can they say? Can anyone say they know the?
Speaker 1:video has been around. That's. That would be interesting. A bunch of years, I mean, it's been around, it's been out there floating Skinny Bob. It's called Skinny Bob.
Speaker 2:I think that's just like. The nickname is what I'm sure, but what they it. It looks so good. Yeah, the official name. Hey, I'm skinny bob. What do you call this video? Well, I mean, I was.
Speaker 1:I think there's a lot of scientific things we could use, but you know, we've we've landed on skinny bob but what's weird is is like you see its eyelids. Like somebody said, if this said, if this is an animatronic, it's a good one, and why would anyone create it and spend all that money and resources to create it? To make a simple little video that they just sort of release out there for what? Nobody's ever tried to make money off of it? Just to fool people. You know. It's like oh yes, are there people who go out in the middle of cornfields and make some crop circles? Of course there are. I mean, there's always people who will. But how much effort are you going to put into that? I mean, at a certain point, aren't you going to? You know, you can't just like all right, I'm going to spend all this money, I'm going to spend all this money, I'm going to create.
Speaker 2:Did you find it? Well, yeah, I did. There's somebody talking about it, but one of the comments here on this YouTube video is pretty funny.
Speaker 1:What does it say?
Speaker 2:It says it's not CGI, I was there. He go by thin Robert, not skinny Bob.
Speaker 1:That's funny. Yeah, it's funny, but I mean, if you see it, little video and it's not very long and it looks like this alien sitting there. Yes, now watch it move and watch its eyelids. I'm sorry for the audience listening who cannot see this right, google.
Speaker 2:How'd you find it? Google, skinny bob, I just googled it. Yeah, well, no, I put on youtube.
Speaker 1:I should say yeah so look at it and you and you see it, and you kind of see it. There's not much to the video. No, there isn't, but look at the way it moves. Look at the way it moves. Look at the way its eyelids move, look at the way it it has this look to it. Is it possible? It's faked. Of course it is. Of course it's possible it's faked. Question is is why? Why would you fake such a thing? For what purpose? Just to put it out there, just to have? But the majority of people look at that and immediately say that's fake. So what are you accomplishing?
Speaker 2:I'd love to know how old it is. Yeah, that would help me it.
Speaker 1:Yeah that would help me. It's been floating around for, like it's one of those things been floating around for at least I think at least 10 or 15 years. It's not, it's not new. It's been out there, and so that's the thing. There's a lot of videos that are out there that are authentic. Problem is that most people are going to look at them and in their mind they're going to say, well, this was just created because I'm just seeing it now I mean you could say somebody that was in the movies or something could have put that.
Speaker 1:Hollywood can do amazing stuff. We watch it all the time and we see that amazing stuff. But here's the question Is Hollywood going to do that stuff? Just hey, we're going to make this crazy video and just kind of release it out there quietly. No, no, but it could be somebody that works, it could be. But again, all this stuff takes resources.
Speaker 2:All this stuff takes no, but if they happen to be making something anyway, right?
Speaker 1:now. But that's the thing is, you'd be able to find a source for it. Okay, if you could find a movie where there was an alien that looked even if that particular part wasn't in the movie, but you could find a movie where there was an alien that looked very much like that in other things, then you could say, okay, this is an outtake from that movie and just because you know this specific scene isn't in there, it's still, uh, it's still this from this movie. But nobody's ever found anything. There's nothing, there's nothing out there that has this animatronic in it. So you're saying somebody created this animatronic, filmed a few minutes of it and then what Dumped it Got rid of it.
Speaker 2:Yeah, was there an entire video.
Speaker 1:I think that's all the clip that's there and that's the thing is. When you look at how some of these things came about again earlier days of the internet, a lot of them just kind of appeared online Like it just appeared.
Speaker 2:Look into that one if you're listening, uh, do yourself a favor and just look at it, because I'm just looking at it. You're gonna briefly hear as we're talking and I gotta tell you, uh, again, I I can't vouch for.
Speaker 1:Could it be an animatronic? Yes, it certainly could be, could it's?
Speaker 2:interesting. There's just this small little clip. Yes, I wonder if there's more to it somewhere I think I've seen.
Speaker 1:I've seen some, but that's.
Speaker 2:There's been a couple, it's just kind of this thing, kind of looking around, I mean yeah could it be an? Animatronic toys are good, yeah, um, but again, I'm not an expert on the way muscles move and all that.
Speaker 1:But that's what somebody said, but you notice what I said about the eyelids, right yeah like wait a minute, the body is moving right.
Speaker 2:He's moving his arms right Like I don't know. Is that technically possible to make some?
Speaker 1:of course it is it would be expensive, it would be, it would be a lot of work.
Speaker 2:Why would you weird to have this? I mean again, people do funny things, but but doesn't it look like it's old footage?
Speaker 1:Doesn't it look like it's Again?
Speaker 2:you can make something look like that you could do that. Now it looks like something that was done in the 40s or 50s.
Speaker 1:Right To me it does. It's just fascinating. There he is yeah. So, that's some of what's going on. You're always a wealth of knowledge, Chris. This is what I follow. I follow this stuff every day, I didn't, I know.
Speaker 2:So I thought I followed this, but I never heard of that.
Speaker 1:It's something I get exposed to. You know I like Twitter. I don't. I don't. I just started actually getting on it. I don't tweet a lot, I don't interact a lot because it is, like most social media, a toxic hole. I made it, I've tried it. I don't get involved anymore. There's no value to it. There's no value to wading in Banter. There's when people are like it's just, it's not worth it.
Speaker 2:It's fun to read the comments.
Speaker 1:Yes, and I follow stuff Once.
Speaker 2:I ever sorry to over talk you Once, I ever, if I just and I've stopped years ago because, you know, sometimes I'm just making a funny joke and you get attacked. Sometimes you're just saying I think this, you get attacked. I'm just saying to myself, you know what?
Speaker 1:I don't need this baloney.
Speaker 2:So, but I can tell you something funny, kind of what we were just talking about secrets and withholding information. Know what we were just talking about secrets and withholding information. I actually um never have really been on twitter x whatever you want to call it right now I just never, I don't know why, right, um, but recently I'm like, yeah, I've been on more after the story came out that the government was trying to censor certain information in Twitter regarding, I think it was COVID.
Speaker 1:Facebook admitted the same thing.
Speaker 2:Right, but I guess Twitter, basically after Elon Musk bought it, they were pretty much like, yeah, we're not doing that. Yeah, that's what he says, right, and that's what kind of made the story, yeah, and I was like, oh, all right. So I started looking at Twitter a little more and I was like you know what? There seems to be a little more information right to obtain through twitter than it does through facebook I mean it's right information, you know but I I like information more than um I don't know like what.
Speaker 2:Here's what I ate last night, right?
Speaker 1:oh, I also like you for posting that. I like it because it's because a I don't know what we call it now that it's called X. That's the stupidest you know. Elon Musk, save us from the capricious whims of billionaires who takes it over and goes. I'm going to change the name of it, okay. So what is a tweet now? It needed a better name. It was. He named it X because I guess there was some company that he started that was I don't know whatever. He had some reason why he wanted to rename it X Now it would be funny to just name it.
Speaker 1:Chirper Didn't think through the natural question. It was called Twitter. You would tweet. All right, that's pretty stupid, but it is. We all use it. So now, what is it? People have to continuously say well on Twitter, well X. Then I continuously say well on twitter, well x. Then I tweet. You know, it's like when prince changed his name to that unpronounceable symbol and you had to constantly say the, the artist formerly known as prince, stop being so damn precious. Your name is prince. That alone is whatever you name yourself prince. Okay, it was king and queen and joker, but okay, now I'm going to change my name to a symbol and I guess there was a reason for that. Actually, again, I don't. My understanding is there was something, it was a legal thing.
Speaker 1:It was some record company.
Speaker 2:It was kind of tied to somebody.
Speaker 1:It was something where a record company, I don't know.
Speaker 2:It was something to get around ownership of something. Maybe they own a percentage of everything Of Prince.
Speaker 1:But when he changed his name to a symbol I don't know something like that but even then it made it unwieldy for those of us trying to reference Prince, because you had to say the artist formerly known as Prince, and nobody does, and so people still call Twitter Twitter. They'll just say Twitter. Well, x, formerly known as Twitter. So you haven't changed the name, you've just made the name longer. Now You've made us. We all have to say more, because we can't just say Twitter anymore, because what's Twitter? It's X now. Well, it's still tweets. If you go to twittercom, you still end up at Twitter. So it's still there. People still say tweet all the time. It was just, it was an unnecessary change and he just did it, didn't think it through, just did it. And it's still not right. But I do like the platform, just because more information. That's where I saw that Harold Malgrim thing.
Speaker 2:What do you do Now? I don't know much about the platform.
Speaker 1:I just actually recently started looking at it again. What's with this premium thing? Oh, that you get access to Grok, which is their ai. Oh, and you can do longer tweets. Um, I guess you're limited to certain number of characters, I think 250 characters or something like that. Yep, and then if you go premium, you can um, you can tweet longer, but honestly, if things go much longer than that, I, I lose. I lose interest. I need to, you need to keep it short, like, like, if that's why Facebook. I kind of have gone away from Facebook because sometimes people just post way too much like a wall of text. I can't.
Speaker 2:I can't do it. I just can't and I'm sorry if if anyone's listening that I'm Facebook friends with. I kind of go on very rarely now.
Speaker 2:And when I go on I'll say, oh my God, it's everyone's birthday and I say happy birthday to people. But I think because I'm really not on that much that when I do click on I see nothing except kind of maybe groups that I like. I don't even see people's things anymore. So once in a while I say to myself I wonder if someone thinks like he's a dink for not liking my stuff.
Speaker 1:but I'm not seeing any of it I don't know that people give it that much thought.
Speaker 2:You know, I think one person, chris, say this to me. This was a few years ago now. Yeah, they told me that they noticed I'm not making any of this up. They told me that they noticed I wasn't liking their posts. Oh my God. And I said, and it just, it was like this. I'm very rarely speechless, yeah, and I was just trying to formulate what to say in response and all I said was, oh, I'm sorry, like I didn't know what to say, but later on I was like I don't, I don't. I honestly can't think of any time I've looked at people that have liked something and then thought about the people that didn't Like.
Speaker 1:I just never went down that hole, that rabbit hole of thought. But if you spend a lot of time on it, likes are the currency of social media.
Speaker 2:Right, I guess you're right.
Speaker 1:So if you spend a lot of time in it, that is something you obsess over, because it's something that is how many likes you get is how far your post gets, how the reach of your post and all that stuff.
Speaker 1:And you also have to post all the time because if you don't post enough when I rarely post nobody sees my stuff Like I can post something on Facebook and I'm probably not in most people's feeds just because it's been so long, so I've given up on kind of. I do it a little bit cause you have to do it for certain, certain reasons.
Speaker 2:you do it Right. I post now if I go somewhere with my family or something, cause I'm like, well, you know, there's other people in my family that might like to see this, but it's other than that.
Speaker 1:It almost becomes a an obligation, a hassle Right becomes a? Um, an obligation, a hassle right. You got to make sure you post on facebook like I get it. It's very appreciative that people wish me a happy birthday. Um, it's nice that's nice but you know what I if you didn't, I'm okay with that too.
Speaker 2:Like you know, if my birthday came and went and nary a person said happy birthday, I'm okay with that you know, before facebook or social media, I should say I was okay not knowing what someone ate on tuesday night. I was I. You know what. I was okay with it. Yeah, and you know, I'm okay with not knowing it.
Speaker 1:Now and I'm guilty of it as well. When we go out we'll take a picture of a you know of not our food necessarily, but like if we like she'll, rosie will always post like a picture. Just she gets it out of the way. Took a picture she'll, she'll throw it out there and then we just put the phones away and enjoy.
Speaker 2:Everyone does it, yeah no, no, I, the older I've gotten, I've gotten away with like away from it, um, but uh, yeah, I'm just all. My only, my only thought was you know, we were all okay, yeah, with not having that information. Right, some days people are going to say, hey, do you want to see pictures of everything? You know we were all okay with not having that information.
Speaker 1:Right. Some days people are going to say, hey, do you want to see pictures of everything my grandfather ate?
Speaker 2:No, he took pictures. No one's ever going to ask no, no one's ever.
Speaker 1:No, I don't want to see that Now they might want a picture of your grandfather.
Speaker 1:Right, okay, yeah, that's cool, look at him, right, you, he's playing baseball, uh, but oh, here he is, um, whatever, I don't know. Think about how much trash data, like pictures, like even like everybody knows, everyone can pick up their phone and probably look at it and flip through and be like, oh my god, this is random pictures of things that you, you took a screenshot, you don't need it anymore, but just fills up and fills up and fills up, like we have so many pictures but yet we don't, because they're most of them aren't printed out, they're all in the cloud, right? So if somebody passes away, what?
Speaker 1:happens to their stuff, like when somebody passes uh, does anyone go? Like, is all the stuff on their phone just lost? Like all the pictures they took all the things I mean because you can't you know, unless someone you know, unless you actually hand it off to someone. Someone cares enough to go in, but for most people it's like it's just, it's just out, and eventually the wherever it's being stored gets shut down or whatever okay, this person hasn't like how much of our, or is it all being backed up somewhere?
Speaker 1:is there some mass thing that's just like collecting all the information that you know, the cloud all that means is someone else's computer. Everybody thinks of it, like when people think of cloud. There's no real cloud, it's just a computer somewhere else that's holding it. But does that? Is all that stuff being backed up? Will somebody show up someday, you know, when this planet is just a withered husk, and find some sort of thing and go through and say, oh my God, billions and billions of pictures.
Speaker 2:And most of them are just random pictures of food on plates. We don't understand what that's right.
Speaker 1:Somebody's gonna come here and really be able to piece together. So actually this takes us to another topic that is um is uh. We had a nice episode on uh, on whether there was an ancient civilization before us. You know, know.
Speaker 2:Graham Hancock. I love that stuff.
Speaker 1:And he had his first season of Ancient Apocalypse on Netflix. Was it two years back? I think a couple of years back.
Speaker 2:It was 21.
Speaker 1:I think it was 21. Get out of here. Yeah, time moves, yeah, and talk about time moving fast. It just moves fast for people. This is a little bit of a sideline, but when you were young, didn't it seem like the summer lasted forever? Oh yeah, didn't it seem like it just stretched on? Like you, just you, I don't know. I can remember being young and being like multiple, many days of bored, you know, just not having things to do, and really hot summer, like it just seemed endless. And now, when you're adult, you realize how quick it is. You know how how brief a time it is. So, yes, it was 21. I think it was 2021 or 2020. Now I'm pretty sure it's 21. Yeah, check it out, but season two is out in october, so it's actually coming out next month. Um, and he's on the america. He's in america this time to look at some stuff, and Keanu Reeves is with him.
Speaker 2:I love that guy yeah 2022. Oh he's 22. Okay, almost 22.
Speaker 1:That wasn't too long.
Speaker 2:November 22.
Speaker 1:That's actually pretty good the fact that it came out in 22,. And now second season. He must have gone right to work on season two. Yeah, it's funny too. It's funny how they didn't announce it, like you didn't. Nothing was announced until it's like I kind of like that, like I kind of like the fact that, like you, didn't hear anything about it until it's like, hey, it's coming out in a couple of weeks. I kind of prefer that rather than this long build-up to stuff. Right, you know, like to know certain movies that are oh, they're, you know it's going to come out in three years. Okay, get back to me in right two, I forget.
Speaker 2:Then I'm like why was I excited about this? Yeah, but anyway, that's, season two is coming out, um, and I think that'll be really interesting I really like the first season, um, and it was a you know, because you and I, I think, like topics like this, yeah, so it was kind of an overview, but I think it's good to have exposure.
Speaker 1:It was nice to see that it was in the top 10. I think it was like number one or two.
Speaker 2:I like a little more detail, yeah, but I mean you have to at least start.
Speaker 1:But it was really well received. Yes, like it was in the top. It was in the top. It was in the top of netflix for quite a while. Right now it also enraged, um, some academics and stuff. And you know, am I a hundred percent convinced? I don't know that I'm a hundred percent convinced, but I certainly think there's. It's just a theory. I don't know why people get so up in arms. You know, like, like, graham Hancock is presenting you with a theory it's just a theory and he's presenting you with some data to try to support his theory and a lot of archaeologists are just so upset about that. Like it's. I don't know, I don't understand why. You know he makes a good case. Is it airtight? No, of course it's not airtight, but he makes a good case. Is it airtight? No, of course it's not airtight, but he makes a decent case. For that there's gotta be some connection. It doesn't have to be, but if you look at certain things and cultures that are far separated by time and distance or both, and the similarities, it's interesting right.
Speaker 1:I mean it's not I don't know.
Speaker 2:I think people should watch that with there's a lot of things that in different structures and different civilizations that maybe could be interwoven, obviously, but there's a lot of stuff that kind of defies explanation that even the people that are the so-called experts can't. There's always something they say well, you know, we think they don't know. No no no, you know, and we don't find the easter island thing interesting, fascinating, okay, yep, maybe it was erosion. That's why they buried like what's going, why, like, why, why they? How did they get there?
Speaker 1:How did they get there?
Speaker 2:I read that there was a volcano, not that about a mile away, but a mile is a long, long distance to have all of those monoliths, whatever you call those things that were built and what was the purpose of it.
Speaker 1:This is just a lot of stuff Like why is it?
Speaker 2:not written down, if they had enough technology, enough intelligence to, number one, carve that out Right and then number two, somehow bring it. They either brought the rock there and did it there, or did it. You know where they got the rock and brought it there. Right. So one or the other right. How do you not have the the you know wherewithal to like? Tell anyone how you did it.
Speaker 1:Well, I mean, maybe just like today, we don't, you know. We just assume that the knowledge will always be there. If you, just if you assume a continuation, you'll assume that the knowledge will transfer.
Speaker 2:No, I know, but if you wanted to know how to you know build a desk. Yeah, right you could find a book Right like plans. You could find online. I know that could disappear, but you could find something.
Speaker 1:Why would you do it too? Like cultures who are trying to like live, like hunt and gather, and you know, maybe not speaking specifically about like the heads, but just in general, like when you go back, go back to Tepe, you know, like that's been, you know at least 11,000 years, right? They think more than that, right? Well, 11,000 years, that's the upper levels, Right? The deeper you go, the older it gets. They haven't got there yet.
Speaker 2:Just by like kind of radar and they're not looking.
Speaker 1:That's a big problem. Right now. There's actually the buried, reburied parts of it. It's almost like they don't want to know. But okay, hunter-gatherers did that. Why and how Wouldn't they be trying to? You know, I got to hunt, I got to get food, I got to. You know, if we're not constantly, you know, hunting and gathering, we're going to starve. All right, everybody, stop. And we're going to build this big monument. Everybody, stop hunting. Everybody, stop gathering. We're just going to, we're going to starve. We're going to build this big monument. Why are we doing it? I don't worry about it, we're going to do it. And then we're going to bury it Because it was buried Right the other. They know that because there's a consistency to the way that it was layered, like it wasn't, like it got buried over time or a windstorm. It got buried.
Speaker 2:I don't think they're sure that the people that built it buried it.
Speaker 1:You don't even right. And that's the thing is the difference between knowing somebody built it and knowing somebody lived in it are two different things. Like you live in this house, lived in it, are two different things. Like you live in this house, if someone came across this house years from now, they would find evidence. Like if you guys left, they would find evidence that you lived here right, but you didn't build it right. Nobody else built it, you just moved in. But that's not clear from the house, because all anyone is going to find is your belongings, not necessarily going to find a thing that says okay, this was built by this person in this time. And we just always assume that if we come across something and somebody was living there, we just automatically assume they built it and maybe in many cases they did. But what if they didn't? What if they move? What if and I think Graham Hancock talks about this is that maybe it's the pyramids? It's not so much. Maybe that was a site that has been used for so much longer and it evolved.
Speaker 2:The only thing to that argument is I don't think today, as we sit here, most people can relate in any way to living in a structure built by a different society. Right, so like, if you think about it, and I can't think of a time that humans do that. They don't do that. That's not something usually. If it's a new society, it's a whole new thing. Right, they build their own stuff. You know, generally, yeah, no, but I mean it doesn't have to be necessarily the case if there's stone structures built. But I'm just saying, like, the society we live in now has been a society for a long time, um, and they kind of always had houses and you know it's just.
Speaker 2:But who knows, you know, I don't know, I just find it. You know when they'll say like, okay, the pyramids, and they think it's because of as a tomb, or they think it's because of this. I say to myself if it was something that generations of people were doing that's why I say I think it's crazy to think it's just people that did all this all the time.
Speaker 2:I sound crazy saying it but if you're going to invest generations into something and no one wrote down, why, what the hell? The Egyptians? They wrote down a lot of things, but not once did they say here's the definitive reason why we did this Right. And they say that there are two, but we've dedicated generations of our society to it, but no one can figure out why.
Speaker 1:The most current theory. It's so funny. Every now and then they'll come around and they'll say well, we figured out how the pyramids are built. We figured out how the pyramids are built and so years ago, one of the things they said was slaves how did they build the pyramids? Slaves, Like that answers the question how did you move these huge tons around? Slaves? So I guess if you get enough people and you whip them enough, you can get anything done. Where did they come from? Right, and that's the first thing. But also, like now they're talking about the Nile. That don't exist now. That existed then, as if that explains it, Although they were tributaries. So that means they were able to float these huge blocks down the.
Speaker 2:Thing.
Speaker 1:And it's like okay, so maybe maybe they were able to float the block. How did they get the block onto the? How did they lift it in order to get it on the raft or whatever it is they did down? How'd they get it off? How did they get it up in the air? Because, just getting it to the base of the pyramid, okay, if you're just starting the pyramid, not a big deal, you just plop it there. And you plop it there. There comes a point where the pyramid is high and so then that next block, you not only have to get it there but you have to hoist it, you know there's no evidence of anything and and right and it's like how would they of a ramp?
Speaker 2:Because they say a ramp, but the ramp would have to be miles long.
Speaker 1:And the ramp would have to be strong enough to hold multiple of these things. Like you couldn't just make a ramp out of sand and then, to this thousand ton, block up the sand, because you'd crush that ramp instantly. So the ramp would have to be made of such construction that you'd still see evidence of it now, because it would have to have been stronger than the pyramid, because it wouldn't have the thing, the ramp would have to mostly be made out of stone, right to carry stone right.
Speaker 1:You're not gonna, not gonna use a, you know, a wooden ramp to carry a thousand pounds. No, right and so that it's obvious questions.
Speaker 2:If there was more water in the area, there would be less trees, right. So it's just. And if you start asking the questions, then Graham Hancock at least asked questions, questions. He asked the questions. That kind of inflamed some people and that's the kind of circular issue you get into. Well, why are you asking that question? You know that's an idiotic question, yeah, but can you answer this? No, because you know, and it just becomes this whole thing and yeah they got.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I like it. You know if I like when intelligent people like on that topic. I'm not, you know, any kind of authority on that, but people that are that can just openly talk about it. That's how you get to solve something right, and he's he's asking questions and he's providing a theory.
Speaker 1:Here's a theory. Obviously we don't know, because we weren't there, um, but I'm just here's a theory that happens to fit the facts. What if there was something here before us? And what if it got wiped out? And oh, we found no evidence of that. But would you, would you find evidence if something really got like, if there was waves across this? You know, I think we talked about this before, but like the amount of destruction, how much evidence would be left? Like literally talking about land that's under sea now, that used to be above sea. How much have we looked at that? Not hardly at all. Right. And there's other places, like you've seen it in.
Speaker 1:A lot more of this stuff's coming out. The problem is it's coming out in drips and drabs and it's coming out on this little website here or there, and you know people don't pay attention to that same thing. The ufo thing to get to bring it circle around to. That is the information's out there if you go looking for it, but most people aren't going to believe it until it's delivered to them by a cnn, abc, nbc, msnbc, fox news or whatever like, until it's delivered to them on a plate as okay, officially, this is what, how. Now I'll believe right, but if you're going to look, you can find all the information. You find some really interesting stuff, like go back to tepe. They're planting olive trees and somebody pointed out and said first of all, you shouldn't be planting trees around this stuff because the roots are going to destroy it. And I guess there's something you can't cut down. It's illegal to cut down an olive tree in turkey. I don't know that for certain but that.
Speaker 1:But basically, like the accusation is being made is like you're tainting this. Now you don't want to dig it up and find out what it is, because it opens up questions that you'd rather not answer. Why wouldn't you? I don't know. That's the question. Right is, why would you hide information? The only reason why you'd hide information is if you have a vested interest in the, in people believing the other story. Whatever you know, new information is always adds to things. So when you, when you know we know enough, we don't want to look anymore. I don't want any new information. But that's how we are really. I mean, we don't humans don't generally like to have our apricot upset. I mean, how long did we hold on to the thing that we're the center of the universe?
Speaker 2:Oh yeah, you're right.
Speaker 1:And then, finally, you had to give that one up, but people held on to that for a long time. Oh, the asteroid killed the dinosaurs, and we all take that for granted now. But when that theory was first floated, the and we all take that for granted now, but when that theory was first floated, the people who floated that theory were pilloried. Pretty bad, and that's ridiculous. Are you kidding me? An asteroid destroyed dinosaurs what kind of cockamamie thing is that? And they eventually found the crater, which blows my mind too.
Speaker 1:Some of the stuff that they do find. It's like how did you figure that out? That's what blows my mind about some of this stuff. Like how did you, did you really figure this out? Cause it seems like a lot. What did you just say? You figured it out, figured it out close enough. Same thing with the debunkers, with the UFOs If you come up with a reason, what it might be, everyone just goes, okay, that's solved, right. Like, oh, this is a, oh, it's a, it's a balloon. Okay, it's solved, it's just a balloon and then you start asking the question All right, how about?
Speaker 1:well, let's stop, let's go into that a little bit more. How does a balloon fly against the wind? How does a balloon? Where did it go? How come we didn't speaking of balloons actually? Right, that brings us to that.
Speaker 2:They Information Act of what that object was, and it was kind of like a copy of an email. It said that I was when I was reading.
Speaker 1:And it said something about they were going to release it at the time, but then they decided not to because it would start too many questions Did you see, the picture yes.
Speaker 2:It's weird.
Speaker 1:It's like a crescent, but that picture has showed up in other things. Before you can find older, you can find older things.
Speaker 2:So is it interesting how they shot these things down, but the other one they let just go across the whole country.
Speaker 1:I talk about that in my talk. That's actually one of the main things in my talk, whereas I compare it to the balloon. Because the balloon, we discovered the balloon, we saw pictures of it, they showed us it in the air.
Speaker 1:They showed us it in they showed a pilot going up flying by in a plane and taking a selfie. So you saw the balloon in the background. They showed us pictures of it, of it being blown up. They showed us pictures of the wreckage. You saw all pictures of this and then a couple, you know, some number of days later there was, there were those three shoot downs and we saw none of it. And when some people would ask about pictures of it, they'd say, well, they classified, and you're right, they, why did they not classify the balloon right? And then you're meant to believe well, the three objects were nothing, they were just hobbyist balloons, all right classified so one of them took two missiles to take it down, right, so 275, 70, 750 missiles.
Speaker 1:So you spent that taking down a balloon and you can't even show me the balloon. And then this picture comes out and the Canadian government and it's released and it's like so this is a picture of it, if you want to look it up.
Speaker 2:it says a newly released image shows a UFO that was shot down by a U S fighter jet over Canada. First, I don't um talk about that. You know more than I do about why the U? S fighter jet was in Canada. Uh, in 2023, it was shot down in February 11th 2023. Now, I'm a Star Trek fan and when I look at that, I know it sounds weird, but the first thing that came to mind was the kind of the big round area of the Enterprise.
Speaker 1:But I actually think of it like the Cylon ships from Battlestar Galactica. Kind of has that look too right.
Speaker 2:You're right, kind of that crescent.
Speaker 1:If it was going the direction of yeah, it looks like a.
Speaker 2:C yeah Right, In this photograph it's a backwards C.
Speaker 1:And are we supposed to believe that's a balloon? Okay.
Speaker 1:It looks nothing like a balloon. If it's a balloon, it's an odd shape for a balloon. And also, if it's just a balloon, why was it not released in the first place, like if that's just a balloon? Why would the Canadian government say we thought about releasing this but we decided not to because it would open up too many questions? I mean, they say that within the documentation that was released like it actually says they this had been cleared for release and then it was decided that we're not going to release it because it'll open up too many questions. How does a balloon, in any context, open up too many questions, Like you're admitting right there that it's not a balloon, cause if it was a balloon there'd be no. We shot down a balloon. Here's what it looked like and here's who makes it and here's where it came from. Instead, we heard nothing and we all moved on.
Speaker 2:That was a big deal. We waited for the one that crossed the United States proper. We waited for it to get across the whole country and into almost just off the coast I think it's South Carolina right To shoot it down, right. And then we shot it down and then we showed the video of them retrieving it, right. But the one in Canada, they shot it down over the mainland, they didn't wait. Why, I don't know. No one ever said why, right. And his Justin Trudeau, the Canadian prime minister at the time, I think he still is he still is?
Speaker 1:yeah.
Speaker 2:He says, yesterday afternoon I spoke with President Biden and confirmed together that we will continue to do everything necessary to protect the sovereignty of our shared North American airspace, but also to do everything necessary to keep our citizens safe. What does that even?
Speaker 1:mean, it's an odd thing to say if it was just a balloon, right?
Speaker 2:Yeah, it's an odd thing to say and why did they never want to tell anybody? Because it was all over the place when the wind flew over the United States.
Speaker 1:Oh, this is China, right, it's just just a weather balloon, whatever they were saying, right, which I kind of don't believe I think, I think if, if nobody had ever found out about it, they would have just let that thing sail over because, honestly, it's more of a political issue than it really is a military issue. There's no information that that balloon would have been able to get that satellites you know it's like what information is it really get? But why is it?
Speaker 2:so we spy on them.
Speaker 1:The ones in Canada. They spy on us. Well, that's the question, right, what was?
Speaker 1:and if you listen to those early days, because they were having press conferences and things and you can actually go back off to do that at some point. Go back, because I think they're all on youtube. You can go back and see, like the state department, like the white house press briefings and in those couple of days when that was happening, there was a lot and they were very adamant in the beginning because the press were trying to immediately say another balloon because we'd just come off the chinese spy balloon thing. So they kept saying balloon, it was a good point. And he really was very adamant to say we're not calling it a balloon, we're calling it object.
Speaker 1:They went out of their way multiple times to not call it a balloon and correct the media when the media referred to it as a balloon. So you went out of your way to say no, this wasn't a balloon, it was an object, not a balloon object, not a balloon object. And then when it was all done, I was just a couple of everybody just went okay and moved on. It's just like but why were you so sure it wasn't a balloon in the beginning? And again, if it's just a balloon, why did you not release the pictures? Okay, we saw this one picture of the one shot down over the yukon right. This was the one in canada. Why?
Speaker 2:do we not have the the wherewithal to just retrieve it in its state without blowing it up.
Speaker 1:They said they couldn't find it, and that was another thing. That was weird. The one in Alaska.
Speaker 2:No, no, no I meant while it's in the air. They said these are smaller than the ones, than the one I should say that was over the United States. Why can't we just send up something to just get it? Why do we have to?
Speaker 1:shoot it Right because it was not a balloon. If it was a balloon, especially if it was like, not an important balloon, somebody can fly by in a plane and see what it is. That's what I mean. Like there's no type of balloon that a trained pilot couldn't immediately identify as a balloon if they got close enough.
Speaker 2:Yeah, because they said it was some hobbyist. I'm saying why are you shooting it down right for?
Speaker 1:750 000 per missile, and one of them I believe it might have been this one, but I'm not sure one of them took two missiles to shoot down. Look, I missed the first time. You missed a balloon just wafted the air and you're a multimillion dollar fighter and you couldn't shoot down a hobbyist balloon, right? Why is nobody asking that question? That's the thing about a lot of this is let's just assume that none of this is real. Let's just assume that all this so we have a lot of problems here.
Speaker 1:We have a lot of people seeing stuff that's not real. We have a lot of people in government swearing that they saw this stuff. So they're all lying or they're all crazy, and a lot of them have high security or both. We have our fighter jets trying to shoot down hobbyist balloons and only being successful 50% of the time. Like, if it's not true, it's more problematic than if it is true, because if it is true, it it explains all these things. If it's not true, then the only way you can explain this is there's a mass psychosis going on in the highest levels of government that senators, congress people, generals uh, ex-cia heads of the CIA, ex-intelligence heads of like really important people are saying this stuff, and if it's not true, then we have a really, really, really big problem, right? But nobody ever thinks that.
Speaker 2:No.
Speaker 1:They just go well, it's all made up. So you're saying all these people made it up, okay, then that's a problem too. You know, if every person who says they've been abducted by aliens, if they're all making it up, um, that's a problem, because this is like taking up so much of our, you know, like there's so much.
Speaker 2:it's the stories that persist. That always get me, and they persist through generations of time. Right, there's been stories for the last thousand years of some of these things happening. Right, so you're saying okay is it either different generations are just picking up on the old stories? I don't think so.
Speaker 1:So then wouldn't you give Betty and Barney Hill the credit for all of it, because a lot of the stuff they talked about had never really been talked about before like when they go back, you can find stories but like, did they just?
Speaker 1:did they just find it in the old like you know what I'm saying? Like they were the first ones in the modern time to talk like this and now everyone talks like this. So are you saying that they started like none of this stuff existed? Stuff existed. How do you explain it all? Like it just doesn't. It doesn't pass the smell test at all, but it makes us feel better. So we just okay, it's all explainable. And it's like is it? Is it explainable? It's, if you, I don't know, it's people's ability to just not look at something directly in their face. You know, like that's right there and people's ability to just go. I don't see it Right. It's, it's, um, it's I. I told this story before. I may have told this story before on air, but I always loved it when I was. When I was a kid, my older brother, mark, was crazy on the motorcycle and I was you know he loved to take things apart, put them back together.
Speaker 1:And he loved to push the envelope right. And so I remember being in the backseat of my parents' car and we were on our way, I think, to a wedding or a wedding. We were on our way to something wedding related. I don't remember you know who's wedding or what, but I remember on the highway and he drove by doing a wheelie and I came by on the right side of the vehicle On the highway doing a wheelie, came by on the right side of the vehicle On the highway doing a wheelie, probably doing about I don't know, probably 70 or 80. He passed us really fast right Did your parents recognize him.
Speaker 1:Oh yeah, then he faded back. Then he came up on the other side my parents, neither of them said a word, neither of them looked, they just. But they, of course they did, but they didn't want to acknowledge what they saw because there's nothing they could do about it. You know, no amount of you need to be careful was going to make him be care. He just that's the way he lived, he just lived like so to acknowledge the problem would just open up a can of worms, because then they'd be worried more. So instead they chose, and it was silent. It always strikes me, because there was no communication, it was just an understanding between the two. We're going to ignore this and pretend we don't see it, because to see it there's no value there.
Speaker 2:Maybe they've just been down that road so many times before.
Speaker 1:Right, and I always come back to that because I always think it's so interesting that people are and people do that all the time. They see something that they don't want to acknowledge because acknowledging it opens up a can of worms. Maybe you see something and you're like okay, now I have to take action. And if I take action, it's not going to end up well, like. That conversation was not going to be. Like mark, you need to stop doing wheelies on the highway. Okay, I'll stop. No, it wasn't he. He, as a matter of fact, if you called attention to him pushing the envelope, it only made him push the envelope more. It's like okay, you want to do that, now I'm gonna do. Yep, I don't know what's more than a wheelie, but like he. But that's the thing is, it's people's ability to look at something right in front of them, clear as day, and just pretend they didn't see it to make their life easier. People do that all the time.
Speaker 1:When you point it out and say this is right in front of oh, you're crazy right in front of oh, you're crazy.
Speaker 1:You're crazy for pointing that out. No, I saw getting angry with you. That's the thing is. When you attack people's, they have a way that they see the world and if you threaten that, if you challenge that, most people don't want to deal with that because, if you know, let's take again back to the ufo thing. If you take it to its natural conclusion, there's something. Okay, let's say it's true.
Speaker 1:Then there's something here that we can't stop. They can come in anytime they want, they can leave anytime they want, they can take whoever they want. They can do whatever they want to that person. They can put them back. There is nothing that your local, state, federal or world authorities can do to stop them. How do you tell a society that that's the thing? Yep, sorry, we're not the highest on the totem pole anymore. When we encounter another species meaning like animal life, that is in our way we do whatever the hell we want to to make sure that we get our way right. We don't negotiate with the otters to say, well, we want to build a bridge here, but we need to talk about this because we know that you have, this is your little otter habitat.
Speaker 2:How do?
Speaker 1:you feel about it? Right, we just do it because they're immaterial to us. But we're used to being the top of that chain. So what if you have to tell people okay, you're no longer the top of the chain, now you're the otter and there's this thing that's coming through and it's gonna do what it does and it does not care what you think. It does not care that you wanna stick the police on them or the federal like. It doesn't, none of that concerns it. Sleep tight, you know.
Speaker 1:And that's the other thing is, how do you you can't say that most people would what are you? Are you kidding me? I'm never gonna sleep again. I'm gonna, you know, like and I think we misunderstand that like it's not just. Why don't the government just come out and say it yeah, they have kind of, but are you really thinking about what would happen if they did come out and say it like? Are you really thinking about what would happen if they did come out and say it? Like you really thinking about what the downstream effects would be? Would anyone ever, you know, would you ever feel safe again if you knew that at any point, these things could come in and take whatever they wanted and have been. That's the other thing. Right is if these things have been going on for years and there's people who've been kidnapped and put back or not right, and you start to like, go down that road, start to look at disappearances that are never solved.
Speaker 1:Can you, can you chalk a certain amount of them up to you know, nefarious activities by human? Of course you can, but if you start to think of it that way, like like wow, there's a lot of people go missing and never turn up again, that's it. It's not like you know, yeah, some people go missing, and years later you'll see an article oh, they found these bones of this person who went missing, and we did find them. All right, there's a lot of people went missing and have never turned up again. Could something have taken them and done something to them? Right, it's horrible to think about, but it's theoretically possible. Oh, absolutely so. People don't want to think that, though, because if you do, you'll never relax again.
Speaker 1:I like your example of your parents because that's right in your face right there, it sticks with me, just because I'm a little kid and I was just wow, look at that, look at you know, like a, the wonderment of it all, like oh my god, can you believe what he's doing? And they just didn't want to acknowledge it. And uh, you know he was a, he was a madman as far as that stuff, you know. And just it's funny that I just always, I always think back to that. Just I don't know it sticks with me for some reason. No, because it's very true about a lot of things and the fact that there was no communication between them.
Speaker 2:I mean, who knows, there might've been beforehand, but it was just and the moment Five things might happen before that.
Speaker 1:In the moment. There was no, there was no. Hey, we're just gonna ignore it. It was just, they both chose to ignore it in the same way. Um, unspoken communication. We're not going to acknowledge this thing, because to acknowledge it doesn't add anything beneficial to our life and just causes more trouble, right, trouble, and of course I don't. You know, to me I have no problem with that, I'm going to talk about that. You know, I think I probably talked about that. The rest of the day pointed out that, hey, you went by us in a, in a motorcycle doing a wheelie I'm never one to let stuff sit.
Speaker 1:Here's another interesting topic. Have you heard of the Nazca mummies?
Speaker 2:I have, but off the top of my head I can't. I know I've heard of it. So just if you explain it just a slight I'll know exactly.
Speaker 1:So there are these mummies that were recovered in Peru.
Speaker 2:Yes.
Speaker 1:And. But some people are saying you know they're hoaxes, or that was the immediate, uh, reflexive thing, and also the guy who brought them up has some history.
Speaker 2:There's been some shadiness the ones that are smaller there's small and there's bigger ones.
Speaker 1:There's a lot of them. That's the thing, too, is that, like the smaller ones and there's bigger ones, there was a meme going around for a while of it being a cake.
Speaker 2:Yes.
Speaker 1:Yes, but but the more I'm hearing about this, there's a lot of scientists who are heading down there and just being like there's something to this. I don't know what it is, but if there are hoax, what is the big the thing is is that they're these creatures that I mean looking fine, because I had like a good breakdown of what the Nazca mummies, let's see they are. What is that? Let's see?
Speaker 2:These are the ones that some people are trying to say the mummies. They were put together by like as a doll, but they can't explain exactly where they got the material.
Speaker 1:They were reportedly found in the Nazca region of Peru in 2015. And uh, the mummified remains are bodies, but they're not. They have like a. They have a weird look to them. They look like aliens.
Speaker 2:Yep.
Speaker 1:And there's some question about the DNA. Now, originally the first thing that these came out is oh, it's a hoax, these were just stitched together from animal parts and human parts. But as time has gone on that's been kind of like now that these are old. So if these were faked, they were faked old and then buried so like. The testing that's been done on them is interesting, because they think they could date back between a thousand and seventeen hundred years, placing them in the period of the nazca civilization. Um, so if somebody faked it again, it goes back to that question of like. Why would you like if you're in ancient culture?
Speaker 1:and this is also the area that the nazca lines, yes, right, which are those odd, you know? So, this weirdness in the world. And now this is just layered on top of it, and most people, when they first heard about this, it was immediate Ah, fake. Same thing with a good UFO video comes up, fake Testimony comes up. They're lying. It's just the reflexive. It's that reflexive like and this was rolled out at a hearing in mexico. There was like a ufo hearing and uh, ryan graves, who's one of the he was in the squadron that was involved in the 2015 incident that the gimbal and the go faster film.
Speaker 1:He wasn't the one to film any of them, but he's now has his own organization, americans for safe airspace, where he's trying to, you know, bring attention to this. But he was down there testifying and he was appalled because they suddenly rolled his body in and it became a big circus and it just was. And the guy who kind of spearheading this there's jamie, something or other. Let's Jamie Moussa M-A-U-S-S-A-M-A-S-S-A-N. He's been involved with some things that you know had a shadiness to them. So his pedigree is not clean and they were supposedly gotten from like people who were like grave robbers, like these things weren't attained normally. So the government of Peru is getting involved. So there's a lot of things there that just sort of like heap on it that make it kind of questionable. But the more information that comes out, there's something to this. I don't quite know what it is yet, but I think because it's bodies people don't even want to.
Speaker 2:Is there any DNA extractable?
Speaker 1:Well, that's the thing is they've I don't know how much testing has been done. I know it's been. Testing has been done down in Peru because, at least so far, they the Peru, Peruvian government, hasn't wanted to let them go, and so that would be the solution. Right Is okay, if these things are something, box them up, get them here to the US, to some of our, you know, research labs and tell us what's what. And that's the problem is, is is just, it doesn't seem like, uh, it's slow going. But there have been some scientists who have said and again, these are scientists who are from the area, are either from Peru or from Mexico. So that's the other problem with that is, it's not necessarily information that's getting to us or getting to us firsthand.
Speaker 2:There's something interesting, Chris. What's that? It's an article. I mean, I don't know what you think about the New York Post, but Like anything, it's you know. There's an article that says that these Nazca mummies have fingerprints, but they're not human fingerprints, if these are fakes. So if they know they're not human, they must know they're not something else. That's the question, right?
Speaker 1:It's an interesting story because it's not. It's still happening, it's still going on. It's just the people's like default position upon hearing this was immediately to reject it, Like as soon as this came up. There were people who were just, who normally are very open-minded about things, but again, it's that certain area. Everybody has those certain areas that they just won't dip into. You know, when I first started looking into this stuff so many years ago, I wanted to stay in the realm of physical machines flying. I didn't like abductions, I didn't like crop circles, I didn't like any of the woo stuff. Because to me, to me, it at first it really like I'm exactly the same but over time, right you just you can't escape it.
Speaker 1:You can't escape the woo when you get into UFOs, Um, and something I didn't realize.
Speaker 2:Let me just go back to these for one second. The Nazca moments, yeah they call one of them Maria, and that body was covered in some sort of earth. I can't pronounce it, I'm not going to try. It's a type of white powder made from the sediment, I should say of fossilized algae found in bodies of water. It's weird.
Speaker 1:It is, and what's interesting too is now what we know like there's a connection between these UAP and water and water right Like a huge connection.
Speaker 2:That's where I was going.
Speaker 1:It's funny because it's never been something that. And people have pointed out, like we know more about our, we know more about the moon than we do about our oceans, and people throw this out a lot oh, we've only explored 10% of our oceans, yeah, and you know where pretty much all that is? It's along our coastlines when you get out into the middle of the ocean. First of all, the ocean is so big that in most cases, like, unless you're on shipping lines, like two boats could never really come like, just because it's so big. Right, most times the ocean is nobody's keeping an eye on it. Well, nobody. One would think that any satellites can be seen. So if there's any activity in the, the ocean that's got to be picked up by someone, um, but that's the thing, is our oceans.
Speaker 1:This goes back to that idea of the power source like what if they're harnessing the power and they're using water? And here's a thought I had the other day um, and I don't know the answer to this, is there something fundamentally different? Water that's really deep in the ocean, because the pressure would be so much higher, like, I don't really know. Like, like is there? Could it be something fundamentally different that like, yeah, they could, you know, dip in the ocean for whatever. But it's better if they go way down, because the pressure would be bigger?
Speaker 1:I don't know you know, and somebody pointed out once, that water is a good medium, just because the the temperature fluctuations are only going to be so much if water gets too cold, it freezes right, and if it gets too hot, it evaporates right. So when you're in water you're only have to be within this range of temperatures. It's only going to get this cold because it can't get any colder, and it's only going to get this hot it can't get any hotter, whereas if in europe, in the atmosphere of a planet, it could be all over the place. So water is the best place for these things to hide out, just because it's more manageable temperature, you know condition wise but if they're utilize a power source that requires water in some way.
Speaker 1:I mean, are we just an exon station for these things?
Speaker 2:like is this.
Speaker 1:It like it's like. It's like having a gas station that's in the middle of nowhere and there's this little town around it and like you don't have much use for the town or the townsfolk, but if you're going to come in and fill up your tank, you got to interact with them to some degree or, at least you know, avoid them. Is it just that that? Like yeah, maybe we're just like a truck stop. We're a truck stop, like are they indifferent to us? Are they? Because there's three choices right, I think lou talks about this and there's three choices they're benevolent, they're malevolent and they're neutral. So either they mean us harm or they're trying to help us.
Speaker 2:Maybe they don't give a crap as it stands right now. I'd say the third one I would say too right, because there hasn't been any type of other interaction as he points out.
Speaker 1:As Lou points out, he's like they didn't stop us from dropping a couple of atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. They haven't stopped us from creating nuclear weapons. They haven't stopped us from creating better nuclear weapons and more destructive nuclear.
Speaker 2:They haven't stopped us from from nuclear weapons proliferating all around the world right now they also haven't given us the keys to right world hunger or anything like that.
Speaker 1:Quite frankly, you know, maybe they think you know we, maybe they're keeping an eye on us because they say these guys crack this thing. I don't trust them, right. What's the first thing that we would do? We'd build a bomb, right? And if we had unlimited energy, I mean?
Speaker 2:even if they showed you how to make unlimited food.
Speaker 1:Right, right, we'd still disinformation from everyone else, that's. I mean, how often have we heard, you know, rumors of energy sources that are not petroleum, or whatever coal you know, and oh, those are shut down pretty quickly and then you know it's the realm of conspiracy theory. But like we hear about it enough, remember, there's somebody back in the day that had, you know, was touting a water engine and then they died, right, and that's why so often these people just die and nobody goes around to question it, like, oh, they were working on this thing and then they died. And then somebody else was working on it and they died, and it's just like right.
Speaker 2:But anyone that because rightfully so, you know, anyone that is kind of not exactly getting along with putin, right, when they die, everyone just goes. Well, we know what happened.
Speaker 1:Right, we did automatically, we automatically, we all know right.
Speaker 2:But if somebody is against somehow the interest of OPEC, right? Well, I mean, that could have been anything.
Speaker 1:Could have been anything right Could have been. So he has this energy source that's going to wipe out the profits of all the things, but he happened to die. I'm sure there's nothing.
Speaker 2:I'm sure there's nothing. No, it's just a coincidence.
Speaker 1:So so the last thing I want to talk about cause this is interesting too, and these last two ones, the Nazca mummies, I can't say I have not done an in-depth look into them. I maybe maybe we should do that for a future episode. The Nazca mummies Like to really look in depth.
Speaker 2:Like.
Speaker 1:I haven't even take a while to gather like you can gather up, like where the source is, but when it first came out, it was almost universal that it was some hoax, right.
Speaker 2:And then, as time has gone on, it's still around more. Yeah, it's like, well, I don't really know, because at first it was like what are these little? Because when they first were shown, it was always the little ones, right, right. And it was like because when they said, well, we think these were dolls that were made in that society for the children along, right it sounded like well, yeah, okay, I could see how that but, like it's kind of a creepy doll do we bury our dolls like like?
Speaker 2:is any other society done that right?
Speaker 1:maybe again you can come up with an explanation for everything, but a lot of times the explanation is more far-fetched than like, like, I, like I keep saying this, like the excuses they come up with for what these things could be like, you have to stretch your imagination more to make those make sense.
Speaker 1:You know, and a lot of times facts, uh, you know, I um, don't come into it, because the head of arrow, which is that dr sean kirkpatrick, he the I think it was the gimbal footage because he said it's glare from the sun. And then someone pointed out, um, merrick von Rennenkamp, who is a state department guy who really wades in on this stuff and really does a good job. He pointed out, he goes these were filmed at night, there is no glare of the sun like that. And even though he corrected him on that and that a fact, that is a verifiable fact, this guy, the head of arrow, then continued to say that, even after having been corrected and it so like you start to think, okay, you, you're going to say this regardless, you're going to keep going back to that thing about it being the sun. So now we took, but a lot of people will hear that and it sounds plausible, and so so they'll go. Oh, okay, like you said, the mummies, first thing, this fake. These are dolls.
Speaker 1:It sounded plausible to you and you went okay that makes sense, right, but if you thought about it more, you'd go wait a second. Like they made these weird dolls back then, 1,700 years ago, they stitched together different things.
Speaker 2:They fabricated different things, and then they put it in the water so they get all this stuff on it.
Speaker 1:And then they did this and they buried it. For what, oh, they were tricking us. What? Like yeah, like that would be like us, like spending all this money to like bury a time capsule with all like bad information in it in the hopes that 100 years from now, somebody will dig this thing up and we'll trick them. Now we'll be long gone, so we'll get no satisfaction from that trick it will die knowing that this is a possibility sometime in the future.
Speaker 2:That's why we spent all that time doing it, especially back even now. Now it makes no sense Back when people first of all didn't even live that long right. Their time and energy needed to be spent doing productive things for the society.
Speaker 1:They certainly wouldn't think about a couple thousand years into the future and say someday, somebody's going to dig this up.
Speaker 2:You know what? Let's make a lot of these dolls, bury them. They're kind of all going to look the same. Let's take different parts from different things. It's going to be hard to figure out how we did this, and we're just going to make a whole bunch of them. It's different sizes and we're going to be chuckling. Get some, put them in the water for a while, throw for a while. Yeah, let's do this. Throw everybody off, totally Right. Then we'll bury them in the ground.
Speaker 1:It's like the same excuse for the heads on Easter Island. Like it's all a joke, right, like we're going to make these giant heads and we're going to spread them all over the island. It's not going to help us at all, zero. But someday in the distant, distant future somebody is going to uncover these things and they're going to be confused. Okay, let's put on the full force of our, of our society. Stop everything Collecting food over there. Stop that. We're going to build these heads as a practical joke to the future. Like it's so absurd. But yet this people who'd be like that's fake. Why, like in most hoaxes, why Somebody's really going to spend all this money making a hoax? Right, for what?
Speaker 1:Now, if you find a UFO video, if you find a video and then you can find it from some source, okay, there have been videos that have been put out there. Hey, this is a flying saucer. And then somebody pulls up and goes, no, this is a scene from this direct to videotape movie in the 70s and you just played a clip of it or you took it and you, you know, you manipulated it in some way. If you can find the source, great. But a lot of times people just say, oh, that's CGI, and everybody goes, oh okay, and just moves on. No, no, it's like CGI, like that doesn't explain everything. So so the last topic I want to talk about before we wrap up this is this rumor and it's just a rumor, it's not substantiated in any way that it's been coming out through different sources that the James Webb telescope has discovered proof of life on some distant planets and that information is being brought to Congress and Congress is being briefed.
Speaker 2:All right, so hold on a second. So before we even get to that, it popped into my head and I was just verifying if I was correct, right, and I was going to say this. And I do. You remember the episode on brady bunch when barbie thought he saw a ufo?
Speaker 1:oh, yes, I did, yeah, and greg was one was faking it.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I think that's the nexus of why we all think everything's fake. Because? But at least our generation? But because? Do you remember that?
Speaker 1:he was clever too. He would. He would use the clothesline, yeah, to put the sheet out there. And then he had a flashlight and I think he had a piece of cardboard that covered the flashlight enough to make it a shape. And then I think there was a whistle, some noise, and he would do that. And, yeah, that was a pretty good fake, it was.
Speaker 2:But I just think that that's why we all believe.
Speaker 1:We all believe, yeah, when they say it's a fake.
Speaker 2:So the James Webb Telescope? I was reading how it had found some, not a galaxy, a universe. I believe that the gas was hotter than the stars, so go ahead what you're saying.
Speaker 1:And again what I'm hearing is other people come out and going all right, this Webb telescope, it isn't even possible to like what you're saying it's doing. It doesn't do that. But here's something I find interesting is and somebody was pointing this out the time people use time on a Webb telescope is like registered. You can see who's using it. Who's using it then, who's using it now. But there's certain blocks of time that are classified, and somebody made a really good point. They said the James Webb telescope you cannot use that to look at anything earth side Like you. It's only for looking deep out there.
Speaker 1:So what could be classified? That somebody is looking way out there certainly has nothing to do with china or russia or anything like that. It's not right like we're not even looking at like, like in our solar system. So you can't even say well, it's, it's other countries that we're spying on, that is launching stuff. No, this whole thing is for looking way out into the depths of space, right? And yet time on this thing is classified. Certain blocks of time are for classified reasons, and somebody made a very good point to say what could that be?
Speaker 2:What do you mean by that?
Speaker 1:Meaning that if you look up the James Webb telescope you can see people have to put in. That's a resource that people can use in scientific things, but you have to put in for it, like you can't just take it over so that telescope has to be directed to look at certain things. So certain people have blocks of time. Hey, we get this now, so we get to take the telescope and look at this thing that we're discovering. Now we get it over here and we get to look at this thing, but there's some of the blocks of time that you can't find out. Who has it? Whoever has it, it's secret for some secret purpose. But again, if, if they're they can't look at earth, they can't look at anything around us, because if you, I guess the sunlight it would. The only reason why it works is it's far enough out there and pointing like it's, it's has the darkness of space can't why would you what?
Speaker 1:what would you be looking at? That would be classified. That would be way out in the thing. So what the rumor is.
Speaker 1:And this is, again, just a rumor and it's not substantiated in any way. It's just coming from a couple different sources, which is why I find it interesting what are the sources? Is that just different people are saying they're hearing it from insiders on things? So nothing official, but basically saying something along the lines of something is coming, what and that's. I know that sounds crazy, but it's a persistent thing. That's been said by multiple people.
Speaker 1:There was this guy, john Ramirez, and he's a CIA guy and he was out for a while and he's kind of faded into the background. But he'd come out and he was saying, yeah, and he's kind of faded into the background, but he'd come out and he was saying, yeah, something's happening, something's coming. There's going to be a time, something is on its way and when it gets here the cat's out of the bag, the secret is up. The question is how do we break it to people before that? So when that happens and he won't say what it is but and lou elizondo was asked about this the same thing, like somebody asked him and said we're hearing about something that's possibly happening. The date 2027 has been thrown out. The date 2031 has been thrown out.
Speaker 1:There's been something that's been thrown out to say that something is coming and we know it's coming, and when it gets here, the jig is up. Now they're saying that the James Webb telescope picked it up, but then, like I said, other people are pointing out and going well, no, the James Webb telescope is not going to see an object. Object, it's a huge object, it's like a planet size object, but it's not a planet because it's it's not tied to anything. And again, I don't know, but when lou elizondo was questioned about this, all he said was all he would say is he's, I'm aware of it and I can't talk about it.
Speaker 1:That's what he said. He said I'm aware of that discussion. He didn't say he was aware of the event. He just said. I'm aware that that's being that that's a thing that people are saying. I cannot talk about it, and that's interesting when somebody like that says I can't talk about honestly well, they, because if it's a no, it's like, because that's the thing.
Speaker 1:Is somebody that that matt laszlo asked, uh, andre carson, who's a? Uh, he was one of the ones that did one of the first UFO hearings back. You know he's a Democrat but a congressperson, right, he's been in there a long time, so he's like up in the chain and asked him specifically about that. Hey, we're hearing something that the James Webb telescope picked up something coming this way, something words to that effect, and Andre Carson said no comment and kind of walked away Like. And so, generally speaking, people think when somebody says no comment, it means yes, because if it's no, it's just no Like hey Well, wouldn't you?
Speaker 2:would you get in trouble for not confirming something I don't know? I don't think so because Depending on what the wording is.
Speaker 1:So if somebody walked up to somebody and said uh hey, can you confirm that? Um, you know aliens that look like otters or I keep picking otters are? Infiltrating our are infiltrating our sewers. They'd go no, no, no, like, like, like. That's so absurd.
Speaker 2:I guess you could put it that way.
Speaker 1:The answer is no. But if you asked that and said hey, we think we heard a no comment on that, you'd go wait what? Because if it were no, you would just say no.
Speaker 2:Did you hear that waters are coming from another planet to kill all of us? No comment, that would make me nervous, I guess, if you said no comment to that.
Speaker 1:And so somebody else comment, somebody else make me nervous, I guess. If you said no comment to that, and so you know, somebody else said, well, okay, they, they said maybe he just didn't want to get into it, and so instead of saying you know, no, it's just like it's easy to say it's kind of a, it's kind of a wild thing to talk about, right right.
Speaker 1:So if somebody said that not the otters, I mean like the, the, something coming from another planet, both a while like it, and then I, and then so it's one of those things that it's persistent and it's out there, but it's also one of those things that may have taken on a life of its own. You know when, like, somebody puts it out and they just say it, and then somebody else picks it up and says, hey, I heard this thing. And somebody else picks it up and says, well, I heard this thing. And so then it gets, and then so it's like, well, where is the source? Where did it originally come from? And I don't know. But there's a couple of people out there who are and I can't think of their names, but they're out there and they, you know, and they're basically saying, no, I know people who are behind the scenes. I can't tell you who they are and you know. So again, I just mention it because it's interesting to see how stuff like this spreads, and I don't necessarily believe any of it, because it's too easy for those things to just sort of pop up and become a life of their own, and then you can't find the source.
Speaker 1:You know, it's like those stories that just sort of come up and everybody talks about them but nobody can really tell you when it happened, kind of like putting razor blades inside of Halloween candy. It's one of those stories that's told, but as far as we know, there's no documented case ever that anyone's been able to find of that actually happening. Or I don't know if you remember this from when we were kids, I don't know. There's this whole time when there's this thing about some black van driving around and handing out those temporary tattoos but they'd have LSD on them. Yeah, do you remember? That was like a thing.
Speaker 1:I don't know if people didn't grow up in this era. That was the thing, and I just remember we were out constantly trying to find that when are these vans? Um, but as far as we know, they're going to give away drugs for free, right? So I was like wait, there's no, like that's never happened. So where did the story come from? The story just came from and the story was compelling enough that when it started getting told, people kept telling it, cause it's a compelling story. But, like you said, exactly like hey, there are these people that they're giving away drugs.
Speaker 2:Why? Why are they doing that Just? Because Because they're going to spend all this money.
Speaker 1:We're going to buy a van, we're going to buy all these temporary tattoos and we're going to put LSD on them. Why are you doing that? Because we're going to get little kids tripping Again. Why are you doing that? I don't know? Because it'll be fun, but it's like it might be a case of that where it's just a story. But I find it interesting that a lot of. Have you ever heard of Linda Moulton Howe? No, she's a longtime investigator. She's been out there doing investigation on UFOs forever. She's like one of the names in that field. But so these are some of these people who have some degree of bona fides, and it's something that's continuously repeated, and so it's interesting just because it's always like disclosure. This is why I bring it up is because it wraps up this thing about disclosure is there's a timer on disclosure, disclosure. You have to tell people because there's going to come a point where they're going to find out and that's the catastrophic disclosure.
Speaker 2:So do you think, which is what I think? So, if I believe that, if this is actually true, so I think sometimes people will listen to me talk on this or in conversation they'll think automatically that I 100% believe. Let's say, like this story.
Speaker 1:Right, right, I don't 100% believe it.
Speaker 2:I find it compelling, but no, I try to stay open-minded, to say what do you have to say? It's not true, right?
Speaker 1:What if I'm not going to play my life around it? Right, right.
Speaker 2:But I believe that company you work at, a company, the government, however you want to look at it, generally speaking, news about transitions are not just dropped in your lap. They kind of treat people kind of like you treat a frog in boiling water Little by little, little by little, yeah, and you'll accept it and everything will be okay.
Speaker 2:So I kind of feel like that's what's happening with the whole thing of UFOs, uaps, however you want to say it, I think that's what's. I mean. If you wanted to look at it that way, you could certainly make a very good argument that within the news, the media, however you want to, but those we were talking before we started um, recording, uh, the polls just three years ago now, what there's not. It's not a vast majority, but the majority of people believe that these exist, right, and they believe that they're intelligent. They believe a whole bunch of things that 30 years ago they would have been reversed.
Speaker 1:What if they're using the James Webb telescope as a convenient way to let out information that they've known for a long time? But they can't cop to that, so they have to pretend that the James Webb telescope is discovering it? Oh, we're just discovering this thing. Oh my God, there's a planet out there that we know, that there's life on it. The James Webb telescope told us so, but it's information that we might have known all along through another source.
Speaker 1:Well, they have skinny bob. Yeah, they have skinny bob. What's going on out there? That's a freaky thing telling you. Look it up, people, skinny bob.
Speaker 1:It is not a very long video and there's not much to it, but when you look at it carefully you're like man. If this thing thing is faked and also and I don't know off the top of my head, but it's been around, so it's not like something that just came out like the last year or so, like this is a video that's been floating around for a long time. So if somebody faked it, they didn't just fake it yesterday, they faked it a long time ago. So you have to take that into account. Yes, something comes out, and time ago. So you have to take that into account. Yes, something comes out.
Speaker 1:And that's also the reason why, if you notice, the government makes it very clear. They try to pretend this problem started in 2004,. Because it's very easy that if you start in the 2000s, it's very easy to say these things are drones or these things are our technology. It's very easy to say that in the 2000s. It's certainly easy to say that in 2024. It's just harder to say in the 60s and the 50s and the 40s, and you know, if you go hearings coming up like that is a fact and you know stuff that's not necessarily true, like this James Webb telescope information, all these Nazca mummies who knows, this could all be a big fraud. The Nazca mummies, it's just interesting. It's interesting data that's coming out. I agree with you, I'm not. I want to hear it all. I want to take it in, I want to ponder it and consider what if?
Speaker 1:because it's fun what if right, can you imagine what if the james webb telescope picked up something on its way to us and like, uh-oh, wait, hey, that's a planet. Wait now, today that planet's closer than it was yesterday. Well, now it's even closer now. Oh my god, it just left that solar system. So it's not a planet because it's not tied to it is, it's on its way.
Speaker 1:And that, oh, and the other piece of the rumor and again just a rumor is whatever this object is, course corrected like change course in a way that a celestial object couldn't meaning that it was going in one direction and then change direction but wasn't there.
Speaker 2:I know we're going to wrap up, but wasn't there that whole thing with the professor from Harvard, oh, avi Loeb? Yes, and it was that object that he said and I think other people did agree with him some didn't that it was making maneuvers. I wouldn't call it a maneuver, but it was behaving in a way that he believed it was something that had propulsion. Yeah Right.
Speaker 1:Yeah, in a way that he believed it was something that had propulsion. Yeah right, yeah, he, he, um, it's now left our solar system. So it's really kind of a like uh, but he's trying to keep out an eye for another one. And there was some other object that crashed into, crashed into earth, and he went out and did an expedition out to find um pieces of it and what he found was they found some interesting um metal. Metal melted. Something came off off it and it was stronger than iron, because we know that it didn't burn up until a certain point and so it would have to be the material strength. So I guess he's raising money to go back out there and see if he can find a bigger piece of it.
Speaker 2:Although now that I'm thinking of it, he called that thing that kind of went through the solar system a probe, right, he thought it was a. He said there was his thoughts on it. Was it possibly could be a probe?
Speaker 1:right.
Speaker 2:And it's just interesting. Maybe it's a probe for whatever the James Webb telescope is classified as seeing.
Speaker 1:You know, and then the other, the non you know. One part of it is oh, the James Webb telescope saw this thing, and the other part is maybe potentially. Is that the James Webb telescope has detected certain evidence of certain gases or something on distant planets that would indicate life? And I also understand, is that you know that's more mundane, like it's funny, there's two stories.
Speaker 2:Why would that be classified? I don't know and that's like right, and that's the big discussion is, if we are not alone, although you could see why it would be classified if it's something that wasn't going towards here, because if you told people I don't know, there's this big spaceship that's coming here It'll be here in three years. Right People might just say well, f this Right. I mean I don't know.
Speaker 1:Yeah, no, it's I. I, you know, I. I was almost hesitant bringing it up only because there's so so much scant, so such scant information at this point that it's really like, like this last one is really just like. It's really, at this point, just an online rumor and, as we know, most online rumors are full of crap. You know it's. It's. Very rarely does an online rumor turn oh, my god, that was true. Usually it's it's so at this point, that's all it is.
Speaker 1:I just find it interesting because the number of people who are saying it and not just that, but the, the, the caliber of the who won't say, won't address it, but seem to indicate that they're aware of it, and if they were sure that it was crap, they would say it. Oh yeah, I've heard that rumor. That's a couple of these other researchers who will only say they're aware of its existence as a thing, but they can't talk about it makes me think there's something to it. Now, it could be something to it in the sense that there's something to it, but the story has been exploded, be well beyond what it really is, just exaggerated, you know, and that's why they can't talk about it is because if they talk about it, they'd have to correct Well, there's some kernel of truth to it, but that's really blown out of proportion. But they can't talk about that. So maybe that's it, but it's just interesting, I don't know. Wow, yeah, so we have had a good discussion here though it's good to be back.
Speaker 1:We need to get back on track with uh now that we're out of summer. Summer's always just a hard time for us, just because we're, you know, so busy with stuff. But now that, uh, we're getting into fall, uh, let's get back on this and it's been a fun time yes it's been fun and I may split this up into two episodes. We'll see, or it might just, I don't know. We may just play around with how we release things because it's fun, but uh uh, yeah, so, uh, until until the next time we come back.
Speaker 1:Uh, this is chris and I'm steve, and uh, we've been talking about some deep shit. We'll be you next time.
