(Not So) Deep Sh*t with Chris & Steve
(Not So) Deep Sh*t with Chris & Steve
(Not So) Deep Sh*t on More NewJersey Drone Madness and UFO Disclosure
Strange drone sightings above New Jersey and US military bases have disappeared from headlines despite contradictory government explanations and ongoing activity.
Chris & Steve explore the bizarre timeline from "we don't know what they are" to "they're FAA approved" and why these inconsistencies matter.
• Dozens of credible witnesses including state police and Coast Guard personnel reported structured craft, often operating in formations
• Government agencies first claimed ignorance about the objects, then later stated they were "approved" without explaining the contradiction
• Military officials acknowledged 350 drone detections over 100 installations yet claimed they lacked authority to respond
• Reports described objects that could "go dark" and evade conventional detection when pursued
• Whistleblower Jake Barber's testimony suggests non-human craft recoveries and the ability to "summon" UAPs through consciousness
• The newly established Task Force on Declassification promises to release sensitive information about UAPs, JFK, and other classified topics
• Evidence points toward a controlled disclosure process involving military, religious, and financial sectors preparing for paradigm shifts
The disclosure of UFO/UAP reality appears both impossible and inevitable—a fuse of indeterminate length that's steadily burning toward a moment when humanity must confront a fundamental shift in our understanding of reality.
Contact Us:
Twitter: @NotSoDeepShit
Facebook.com/NSDSChrisandSteve
Instagram.com/nsdschrisandsteve
Email: nsdschrisandsteve@gmail.com
Don't forget to SUBSCRIBE, LIKE and LEAVE A REVIEW for the show!
I'm Chris, I'm Steve, and we're talking about some deep shit, and we're back to talk about some more deep shit. Hey, steve, what's going on? Chris, how you doing Not too bad. It's been a little bit since we recorded it has, but here we are.
Speaker 2:Yeah, we're back at it, Happy to be here.
Speaker 1:And so much has gone on. I think our last episode, our last long episode, we talked about the drone situation.
Speaker 2:We did, and it was kind of at its height.
Speaker 1:It was, and I really I was so sure that there was no way that that was going to go away completely.
Speaker 2:And here we are, I was gobsmacked.
Speaker 1:It's funny, it was right. Right as the Christmas season started it went away, and you kind of understood that, because Christmas and you know it stopped around Thanksgiving, which I thought was weird. And then it kind of did stop again on Christmas, right, and you didn't hear much of it, at least you didn't hear about it. And then I mean it's still going on, like that's the crazy part of it, it's not over.
Speaker 2:It must be much less now, though, right.
Speaker 1:Depends who you talk to. I mean, if you talk to some of the, some of the mayors in new jersey are still talking about, well, let's, let's give a brief overview, just if, in case people listening to this, this saga, I will we'll say it started november 2024. I mean it, it had been going on sooner than and I think they said in 2017. There was like several weeks of something over Langley. Yes, right, so these drone things have been going on for a while, but it captured the public's attention kind of November, and that's when the United Kingdom there was unauthorized drones over four US Air Force bases in the United Kingdom RAF Lakenheath, raf Mildenhall, raf Feltwell and RAF Fairford and they had small, multiple unmanned aerial vehicles getting over the bases. And this is the same thing that has happened in other places, right, it's supposedly happened in December in Germany, and then it started happening over Jersey, right, which is, which is crazy. So, and a lot of them were in the area where military bases were. I mean, there are military bases and stuff in Germany, in Germany, in New Jersey, right, so it was over that and, yeah, it became quite a few and, like we talked about, people saw misidentified things.
Speaker 1:You know, everybody was looking up at the sky, everybody was looking for these drones. So a lot of people looked up and saw a star, or saw a regular aircraft, or you know, I've been tricked multiple times. We get tricked once by what ended up being a medvac helicopter, just because at a distance and with the cloud cover it looked so different. Um, and another time, in miami, we thought we saw something but ended up just being planes coming in because of the weird cloud cover, because of the way the lights of the plane bounced off of the clouds, it made it look very weird.
Speaker 1:So there was a lot of misidentification. But, that being said, there also were very reputable witnesses like state police, state officials, state officials I guess the New Jersey police had a whole unit out there trying to apprehend one of these things and couldn't do it. It went dark. One of the congresspeople talked about the National Guard sorry, the Coast Guard saying that there was like a whole bunch of them shadowing one of their ships. So so while you can say there's people who like brush this entire thing off to hysteria, there was a little bit of that.
Speaker 2:At the core, something was going on here, right. Right, and when you talk about it, chris, just the fact that the coast guard said what they said about being kind of chased, I know there was the police what was the name of that police, the town but there was the police at the beach basically saying they saw them coming from the water. So there's just some weird things that never have been explained, right.
Speaker 1:Right, and so you know, in like early December, there were significant sightings. In early December there were significant sightings, hunterdon County in New Jersey. Witnesses described large drones operating in groups up to 30. And then around the 11th, new Jersey lawmakers met with security officials and asked questions and I remember they came out of that meeting very disillusioned, like we got no answers and during this whole time, uh, the faa, the fbi, um, you know, state police, obviously, like every federal and state organization that was asked about these drones, said we don't know what they are like, like. You have to remember that that that statement was said over and over again under oath and stuff. There was a hearing at that point, remember there was some sort of hearing and FBI was asked about it and I think even the FAA was asked about it and they said no, we don't know what these things are.
Speaker 2:That's why it makes me uncomfortable. They said we don't know what they are, clearly Right. Then the Trump administration said they were cleared by the FAA, which those two things can't live in the same universe. Right, and so if it was cleared by the FAA, why in December, was there a House Intelligent Committee closed-door briefing? So none of these things can all exist at the same time, right?
Speaker 1:I remember one of the New Jersey lawmakers saying that, saying if there's nothing to this, why were they in a closed-door briefing for like two and a half hours?
Speaker 2:Right. What could they possibly have? What did you talk about? I'm sorry to overspeak you, but what did you talk about? What could you possibly have? What did you talk about? I'm sorry to overspeak you, but what did you talk about? What could you possibly? Talk about we talked about something that we all know about. That's been cleared. It doesn't make any sense.
Speaker 1:And that's the thing too is like, towards the end, you know, john Kirby, the spokesman for the Pentagon under the previous administration, was saying up and down, these are not us, these are not, you know. And reporters were trying to give them an out, like well, is this a private concern operating Not that we know of? Is this some department? No, is this testing, like the press wanted them to say? Oh no, this is something very normal, here's what it is. And the press kept getting kind of almost annoyed that they weren't getting that, they weren't getting anything right. And then trump said, you know, hey, you know, weird that they're not telling you what's going on. Uh, I'll tell you what's going on. And so wait till we get in there and I'll tell you what's going on.
Speaker 1:We really weren't told well, and what's weird too is when he got in there and then or maybe it was before that, he was having a meeting and there were some other governors, republican governors, and right there in the press, in front of the press, a bunch of them started telling stories. Well, we had him in Oregon, we had him in this in Virginia, like it's a concern, it's a concern. So then he gets in office, a little time passes and then all of a sudden the White House spokesperson comes out and said I just just you know something like the full quote. I might add it in here, but it's like something like I just came from the president and you know, the drones that were operating over New Jersey was something like. They were lawful drones. They didn't say they were operated by the FAA, they said they were approved by the FAA for and this was my favorite part of the quote it was like for research and other purposes.
Speaker 1:That's clear as mud and no reporter in that. In the press briefing room not a single one asked the question. Wait, hold on. But the FAA testified under oath that they did not know anything. So are you saying that they lied under oath or they did not know anything? So are you saying that they lied under oath or they didn't know about? Like, explain to us how this is what the answer is. When you were telling us where everybody was telling us up and down it, it wasn't. Nobody asked that question and it just quietly went away. Even though, again, the you know new officials, I still see a couple of the mayors out there saying, no, this is still happening, not at the frequency, it was not at the frequency it was, but it's still happening.
Speaker 2:Of course, I will tell you, even if it's not happening. Let's just say Right, it stopped. I believe that it is still happening. What it is, we don't know. So when we say it is it right. But even if it just stopped, that doesn't take away from the fact that we don't know what the hell it was right, what is this, and it's just. You know, we're just on to the next thing, the next shiny object kind of I guess I don't know right, but I saw these videos. Um, some of them well, I don't know what it was. Some of them, well, I don't know what it was. Some of them, it was clearly something quite large for a drone, right, it wasn't just something you or I could have put up there, right, Clearly, you could look at them. So maybe that was one out of every 10 videos, but it was still there. What is that?
Speaker 1:Not to mention the ones that didn't even look like aircraft, but look like or, and there's a couple of those make me actually more nervous the ones that where it looks like an aircraft, then it looks like an orb, then it looks like an aircraft and it looks like an like there's. There's been a couple out there.
Speaker 2:I don't like that and I that if I saw that myself, that would make me nervous the people who've seen these things.
Speaker 1:And again you run into this problem. Right Person sees it, so if they just watch it, they get a pretty good account of it. But then they tell you that and people say, well, where's the proof? You saw this, supposedly all right, where's the proof? Okay, that's the first category. Then the second category is I saw this. I had the presence of mind to grab my phone and try to record it. This presence of mind to grab my phone and try to record it.
Speaker 1:This is a message to all of you out here listening. No matter how hard you try, you're not going to capture what it really looks like through your iPhone or your Android. You're going to get a picture of it, but you're you know that that's not going to give you the same visual as a person who looked up and saw it, because the camera is going to be, you know, little bits of light are going to, especially the fact that these things have a lot of light on them at night. You know, take your camera and go out and point it at night your phone camera at something with lights on it.
Speaker 2:Was there being oncoming car? Just point it at a street light.
Speaker 1:Right, and look at how the image is distorted, how that just that little bit of light makes it so none of the videos are going to be great. And then, of course, you have the added problem is that every time somebody sees a video, the first thing that comes out of people's mouth is well, that's ai, that's, that's cgi, with no, no knowledge of. And even though a lot of these people can say, no, you can see the metadata like. I can show you that the the original from my phone that shows the metadata when it was filmed, how it was. You know, there are people who are taking this seriously, who are looking into that, and people who don't take it seriously, just sort of brush it all off and go nah, those are all faked, all right. How do you explain the fact that experts have looked at them and said, no, this was a video taken from this phone, this is what it captured. And then they find other explanations. So it's Just.
Speaker 2:I'm just saying, though, just the fact that our own government says we have no idea what. They are right. And then the same government. It's the same government, it's just a different person in charge of the executive branch, that's all it is. Everybody's the same, the FAA is the same. They say, oh wait, yeah, but oh, we approved it. Well, okay, so you didn't know what it was. You now have approved it. What is it? We're not gonna tell you, right, I don't need anybody debunking anything, because it's just there in front of you. Something is happening, because it's something, because FAA wouldn't have approved nothing, or did?
Speaker 1:the FAA also approve the ones flying over the UK. How is that?
Speaker 2:Did the FAA approve the ones that were flying over? Like you said, Langley, Right that there are reports that they tried to bring those down and they failed at it.
Speaker 1:Same thing we heard about the New Jersey drones. They tried various methods to use anti. There are anti-drone technology.
Speaker 2:They flew above them, and then the thing would just shut its lights off and take a different course.
Speaker 1:Actually it's funny because the direct term they said was go dark, but that didn't just mean it shut its lights off. What?
Speaker 2:does that mean, it meant?
Speaker 1:it vanished from all visual.
Speaker 2:They couldn't see it. They couldn't see it On radar. You mean, they couldn't capture it.
Speaker 1:It went dark completely. So it means that it evaded all their functions. And there are your normal commercial drones operate, you know, by a signal, right, a signal from wherever you're controlling the drone to the drone. So the technology exists to block that signal. Like there are jammers that you can get you know they're cell phone jammers, but they're not supposed to have them. But like it is very easy to have technology, hey, there's a drone flying around, well, we point this thing at it which shoots out a, um, you know a wave that disrupts the communication. Now that drone all of a sudden drops to the ground because the signal it's getting to say fly goes away. Like they can kill the power of drones. Like there's a have all this anti-drone technology that does work, but not on these things. It didn't work, you're right, not any of them and I guess it it.
Speaker 2:It boggles my mind. I don't. Our podcast is generally light, right, we try to have a good time. I have a really nice time doing this, but it boggles my mind, chris, that people can live in a world where the government can tell you. They know what it is flying above you. They're not going to tell you what it is, but don't worry about it. What the heck are you talking about?
Speaker 1:You got things flying over me and my family. What is this? Well, especially when your initial thing you said was you didn't know what they were. So your first line was I don't know what's flying over you and your family, but don't worry about it.
Speaker 2:Then it was like well, we know we, we, we know I mean they were approved.
Speaker 1:Yeah Well, what are they? I can't tell you, but don't worry about it. And then people say well, you know, this is the other issue with this the word drone got attached to these objects and that's how we started this, right.
Speaker 2:And it sounds very Right, and some of them it's non-aggressive, it just sounds easy. You know drone.
Speaker 1:But when they say it's a drone the size of an SUV, that's not a drone anymore.
Speaker 2:Some people said like a camper, right.
Speaker 1:So that's not a drone. If there is an object the size of a camper or SUV or whatever that is flying, that's not a drone, that's a craft. Now you can argue is it a remote, a remote operated craft? Okay, is there somebody in there? Okay, you can argue that, but you can't call it a drone. A drone is, you know, by most accounts, a smaller unmanned vehicle that's operated remotely. That is a drone, operated remotely. That is a drone. But if you're seeing these large objects flying in the sky, the reason why they attach a drone to it and this is interesting, this is the way they kind of get around this stuff is is I'm not saying they know what it is, or maybe some people know what it is, but the way they kind of keep it kind of frosty is they call them drones. Why is the um arrow the all-domain anomaly resolution office? Why are they not involved in the investigation? Well, we don't investigate drones.
Speaker 2:Really.
Speaker 1:But there have been other cases. Why aren't you?
Speaker 2:investigating when the government says we don't know what this is. But there have been other cases that they've debunked.
Speaker 1:That turned out to be, according to them, some sort of aerial vehicle, so obviously they do interact with them. They're in the air. They weren't doing it because they knew what they were Right. They don't want Arrow to get involved because Arrow would make people go wait a second is this a UAP?
Speaker 2:You know it's mind boggling because it's in the sky. Maybe people don't pay as much attention. I'm not sure. Can you imagine, chris? Just you know you live up at the, you live at the beach. Wherever neighborhood you lived in, right, there was just cars driving around with no lights on or something, and nobody knew what they were doing every single night. What are they doing? And they only showed up at night. And they only showed up at night. You don't know what they are. Why are they here? And then the local police say we don't know, we don't know where they're coming from, we don't know how to stop this from coming into your neighborhood. People wouldn't put up with it. No, they would not. They just wouldn't in any other aspect. But you know they're told. Well, it's in the. I don't know. You know if it's a social experiment to see what people put up with, I think people failed.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I think it did. Or maybe it was excessive if the theory was hey, we put stuff up in the air above people's heads to make them worry, but then we tell them not to worry and eventually they stop worrying, and of course you know. The other thing is remember, the FAA put a restriction on drone flights. I mean, the FAA put in a no-fly for a bunch of days, right, why would they do that if they had a…. If they gave it prior approval. If they were FAA approved and again….
Speaker 2:None of it makes any sense it doesn't make any sense.
Speaker 1:And it doesn't make any sense to why that was the answer, because that was the answer we were getting from the previous administration, after they initially said they didn't know what it was Right. And then the story morphed to well, they're approved, and hobbyists and misidentifications, don't worry about it. Basically, you're not seeing what you say. You're seeing Like, that was the gaslighting, right, right. And then the next administration came in and said well, we're going to stop the gaslighting and then proceeded to gaslight, right.
Speaker 1:So my general theory and again I don't is they're being told a like, they're being told oh, don't worry, it's FAA-approved. We discovered it was FAA-approved stuff. Not that they know that it's FAA, it's just to make it go away. Because, honestly, like you, like you said before, if you start thinking about this stuff, it it should get worrisome. Yeah, no matter what they are. Because if they're fa approved drones, well, how are they operating? Like, how are these big, huge drones that seem to fly for a long period of time? Where are they coming from? We can't detect where they're coming from where are they going?
Speaker 1:what they're up to and then get into the orb thing, because that's where it gets. Really weird is when people say and they see drones and they see orbs, some people have taken videos of drones interacting with orbs. Really, I haven't seen that some of the drones that are up there are probably US assets. People have taken videos of drones interacting with orbs.
Speaker 2:Really, I haven't seen that.
Speaker 1:Some of the drones that are up there are probably US assets that are up there because there's something else up there, I'd hope. That they're trying to. Right.
Speaker 2:I'd hope. Right, I hope they're not some other foreign asset. That's unlikely. I believe it's very unlikely.
Speaker 1:They're ridiculous. And that was what got even weirder too when that some congressperson was like oh, he was told by reliable sources there's an Iranian mothership off the coast and it's like Iran is not sailing, a ship off the Atlantic Ocean that somehow is evading detection from our coast guard, from our navy Wow, that, our Navy, wow, those tricky and flying drones. In First of all, why would they do that? Like, why are you going to do that? You're just going to like, why would any nation do that? If you had that technology, maybe you'd be utilizing it. You certainly wouldn't be turning lights on and going hey, look at us, catch me if you can. Like you wouldn't do that. I mean, I suppose you know at some level they're using it as a test of whatever. All right. So if that's the case, let's say that's the case.
Speaker 1:It's China, china's doing it, but our government doesn't want to admit it. But if our government knew that it was China, like knew for 100% that it was china, like knew for 100 that it was china, you don't think that action would be taken. You don't think it's provocative to be flying unidentified aircraft over over our military bases, like the absurdity of this just defies comprehension. Like there's no world in which we could could stop something that's flying over our military bases. But we wouldn't Like if we could stop it we would. We're not, so obviously we can't, and they've admitted as such and nobody's worried.
Speaker 2:It's weird. I mean, there was that the other thing that was being floated around, that they were trying to detect a nuclear weapon. Did you hear that one?
Speaker 1:Yes, and then what was funny about that is is a couple like Ryan Graves came out and he said I talked to the people who, if that were the case, they would be involved, and none of them are deployed. I've heard that, like they're all, they're all just, you know, at home doing their regular thing and like if this were going on, I wouldn't be able to get in touch with these people because that's what they'd be. They're the ones who are trained to do such a thing, but yet they're all chilling. So it's obviously not that. And again, all right, if that were the case, then it would resolve right. If they, let's say they were looking for a nuclear thing, either they were going to find it or it was going to do whatever somebody was going to do with it. Neither of those things happened.
Speaker 1:And the weirdness of just like it's, a couple of New Jersey lawmakers were like these things come out as soon as it gets dark. They don't come out before dark, it's after it gets dark and they stay out until like 1 or 2 in the morning and when most people go to bed you know at that point most people are in bed most of the time they all go away. So they want to be seen, because if they didn't want to be seen, they'd be coming out at 1 o'clock in the morning when most people were in bed and a few people who were out probably wouldn't notice anything. Oh, and they probably wouldn't turn their lights on because these drones apparently a lot of them were silent. Some made noises, some made noises that didn't make sense.
Speaker 1:Remember that You'd hear some of them be like. It made the noise like it had propellers, but it didn't seem to have propellers, which is even weirder. It's like masquerading Like, which is even weirder. It's like masquerading. Like I said last time, as absurd as I think this sounds and we're going to get more absurd as this episode continues but as absurd as it sounds, I think some small number of those things were some sort of something from somewhere else that was masquerading to some degree to look like our tech, to just sort of like I don't know, just sort of kind of expose us to it.
Speaker 2:What do you mean?
Speaker 1:Tell me what you mean. This is something that a lot. There's been a lot of cases of UFO sightings where, like sometimes the UFO or sometimes right after they see like military craft, but they don't make sense. There've been a couple of like sightings where, okay, well then then a helicopter went by but it didn't make noise like a helicopter, but it looked like a helicopter. It seemed to look like a helicopter Like this. Look at this, chris, right.
Speaker 2:Just look in this headline from CNN December 21st Drones continue to buzz over US bases. The military isn't sure why or how to stop them. How is that not something that concerns everyone? Right, and we just say, well, I mean, they told us it's.
Speaker 1:FAA approved Right.
Speaker 2:Well, how does that live in the same world where the military doesn't know what it is over their own base?
Speaker 1:It's just double talk continually it's very disheartening how people accept the double talk, though yeah like, like I, I, you know, I before we were chatting before um, before we hit record, but I was saying, you know, one of the things is the news. It seems that the major let's we'll just say the major networks, right, are perfectly happy to not cover this because it's too weird. Right, it's too weird, it's. It was an interesting story for a little bit, but then, you know, okay, real world politics, real world events, they'd rather cover this because this, you know, started out as weird objects in the sky, but then it was starting to get really strange.
Speaker 2:And hey, listen, I don't want to talk about why something's flying over the military base. Let's just yell at each other about, right, certain people playing certain sports. Let's just yell him, right, I mean that's, that's the thing, right.
Speaker 1:Who cares?
Speaker 2:you know when you're dealing with something. To me, that's could be who knows what it could be in terms of how it's affecting us as even just as humanity, right, right, but no, we're going to yell at each other about something else.
Speaker 1:Well, but like what? If the answer is like let's just you know, let's just kind of suppose for a second right? What would be a logical answer for the answers that we've gotten? First answer was we don't know what it is, don't worry, right? Why would you say that? Well, if you didn't know what it is, you're gonna be truthful. You're saying don't worry because we don't want people to worry. Well, I mean, but you really shouldn't be telling them not to worry, because you can't say you don't know what it is, but don't worry about it in the same breath, right? But then the story changes. We know what it is. Uh, they're approved, don't worry about it, right? Why would you say that? Because it's still going on and people were starting to get, as you know, starting to get agitated. You know, as the story grew, people were really stuck wait, hold on what's going on. So then the story became no, don't worry about it.
Speaker 1:Trump said hey, when we get in there, we're going to tell you what's what. Well, what if he got in and the answer he was given was we don't know what this, we don't know where it's coming from. Do you want to tell people? Hey, I checked into this. Yeah, I guess we don't know where they're coming from, we don't know who's doing this, we don't know where these things fly from, we don't know where they fly to, we don't know what they're doing while they're up there. You're probably better off going. Oh, I guess I should just fall back on.
Speaker 2:Knowing all that, American citizens, if I were you, I'd be, worried Like no one's going to say that.
Speaker 1:And that's the thing and this has been said before one of the major reasons why the UAP topic. You know, if what is going on seems to be, you know what we think. Well, do you think the government wants to come out and say that, hey guys, there's things flying around, we can't stop, they come and go as they please. Yeah, any questions. And then one person's question will go wait, okay, you're saying these things are real. So what about alien abductions? Oh yeah, those are real. Wait, so American citizens, citizens all over all of the world? Okay, just worry. Taking it will put back nothing anyone can do about it. They can do with you what they wish and return you or not return you as is, as is, their, you know, preference. Um, yeah, sleep tight, enjoy, relax, like there's no world in which you can do that. No, so it's understating. We'll pause for the. Is it the garage door?
Speaker 1:yeah now it's going up like.
Speaker 2:So I don't know like it may go down, she'd leave. What's she doing? I I heard a door close.
Speaker 1:Somebody coming in maybe.
Speaker 2:It was a car door. We'll have to cut the spot out, obviously.
Speaker 1:Oh yeah, I'll trim this whole section out, yeah.
Speaker 2:She didn't say she was leaving anywhere, but she doesn't have to fucking run it by me.
Speaker 1:That's true. She might have just gone out to do something. All right, I feel like as soon as I start talking, the garage door is going to go down, right. But yeah, there's no world in which you want to make that. That. You know. Admission, you know Sorry, there's nothing. So like I get it right, you get it, and we knew that was going to happen. What goes up must come down, or else critters will get in the garage.
Speaker 1:That's true alright, it's going to be good now so, yeah, there's no world where you want to make that, that admission. So it makes sense. Right, it does make sense, but it's still. You know, when the White House said, oh, they're authorized by the FAA, most press were perfectly happy to let that one go.
Speaker 2:Right, but this is what keeps us talking right, because there's always something happening that we're really not begin be. We're not given the entire explanation now. And this is just one more thing how many is it going to take before people say what's going on here?
Speaker 1:And and it's funny too, because that was in in like late January that the white house gave that statement. And then, in like mid February, a general Gregory uh, good, good, oh, like a lot again, and like mid-February, a General Gregory Godot, commander of NORAD and US Northern Command. He reported that 350 drone detections occurred over 100 military installations in the previous year, so 2024. Right, so, he said, in 2024, over one 350 drones over 100 military installations. And he advocated for expanding the authorities. Because that was the other weird thing, right? Hey, these drones are over the military bases.
Speaker 1:Well, why didn't you shoot them down? Oh, we're not allowed to what it's like. No, if it's under, you know, we're not allowed to shoot them down, we need the authority to shoot them down. Wait a second. So you're telling me the military didn't have the authority, that if some unidentified object flew over one of our bases, did not have the authority to take it out? Are you really telling me that? Are you telling me that if it didn't have, like, a Chinese flag or a Russian flag or Iranian iranian flag on it and it hovered over, they would go? Nope, guys, our hands are tied, we just can't take these things down, just let it hang up there like no, it'd be taken down. In moments something doesn't make sense. It's because they can't take it down, like that's the thing is. They have to say they're not allowed to take it down because otherwise the question would be why didn't you take it down? The answer they don't want to say is well, we tried, we just can't Like. We tried to disrupt it, it ignored it.
Speaker 2:I would think listen, I'm not a military person I would think that if there's something in the air approaching a military base, they know it's coming before it gets there. I would hope right, I mean I'm not, but again, I hope that that's what happens. So you think at some point they would try to identify what it is before it gets there.
Speaker 1:Right.
Speaker 2:And during that time of being unable to identify it, you might ask who you need to to say what do we do now if this thing gets here? We don't know what it is. We keep trying to communicate with it. You think that kind of conversation would happen. Maybe it's I'm in a dream state, but that seems reasonable to me.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:Right, like if, if there's something coming that we don't know, even at an airport they try to talk. They don't just let planes just come in that they don't know what they are.
Speaker 1:Every object come in that they don't know what they are. Every object, right. As soon as it gets in near an airport, every object needs to, you need to know where it's going and what, because that's how think. Well, as we know, we had some things happen recently, right, some horrible air crashes when that helicopter hit the plane, and I mean that that's horrific, right just, you'll hear about how united states, like alaska, like russia, tries playing games.
Speaker 2:Every once in a while They'll get a little closer than they should. You'll hear that in the news. And we went up and intercepted, right, what did you? And that's when we know who. It is Right, you wouldn't intercept something you don't know what it is. It seems you'd be even on a higher alert, right? It just doesn't make sense.
Speaker 1:The other thing that never makes sense is when that happens. We see it. They show it all over the news. Hey, look, here's the gun camera footage of this Russian MiG that came, that buzzed our cockpit. Look at that, you can count the rivets on the side of the thing.
Speaker 1:And then there's a UAP thing. Oh, we just don't have any good pictures of it. I don't know the other other thing too, and this is something to consider. The thing I hear a lot is well, these drones are new drones. Technology is new. Commercial drone technology is relatively new. The military has had drones for quite some time. They were using drones once using drones like desert storm right, like they were high-end military drones that did that kind of thing At that point, like no regular consumer could ever have hoped to have such a thing. But like most technology, over time it gets cheaper, right?
Speaker 1:So when drones were just a military thing, you don't think at the same time they developed counter drone technology, because if they developed it then it's conceivable an enemy could develop it and, as a matter of fact, it's likely. Once somebody develops something, it's likely that their adversaries are going to develop it, because there's all sorts of espionage and things get stolen and ideas get out there, or just knowing that such a thing is possible can make it like oh, they figured out a way to do X. Well, well, we have smart people figure out what you know and then, through a little bit of spying and a little bit of this and a little bit of that, next thing, you know, other countries are having this. That's why they want to a lot of times. They want to keep technology secret is because they don't even want the enemy knowing we have it, because once an enemy knows we have it, then they know it's's possible, and once they know it's possible, they can possibly do it.
Speaker 1:So anti-drone technology has been around for a long time. Right, but what do we hear when all this drone stuff happens? Well, this stuff is really new. We don't have the this, we don't have the that. I think I said it last time. Our federal government pretends to be either really competent or really incompetent, depending on what they need at the time, and for some reason, the press just sort of goes with it without really oh, you don't have the things to the authority, you don't have the things in place. Yeah, I can believe that. Yeah, that's the story. And then other times it's like don't worry, we know everything where the government, you know we, you know we're watching, we're protecting the oh yeah, yeah, we can rest easy, cause they're protecting us. Well, they're not really protecting us very well If they can't detect these drones. Like we operate in that thing where both things are true.
Speaker 2:Right, Excuse me, we we're going to get to a place that we're going to be able to make sure no one crosses our southern border, because we'll be able to monitor it, but we don't know what the heck's up in the sky.
Speaker 1:They're on a drone, though.
Speaker 2:I don't know what it is. It doesn't make any sense.
Speaker 1:No, so that story has yet to be completed. What I'm waiting for it's happened to some degree. There's a YouTube channel called Project Fear.
Speaker 1:Okay, I haven't heard of it they mostly do ghost stuff, where they go to haunted locations. They have high quality cameras and stuff. So they had two specials where they one was from December and one just came out earlier where they spent a couple of nights in New Jersey and they had like two teams with decent cameras and they went out to some of the hotspots and they got some interesting footage and they, you know, right there on the thing that, okay, look at those lights, what do you think those is? Oh, we look at the flight tracker, oh, it's a plane coming in. So there was a bunch of ones that they showed where they like, okay, here's this light that we filmed, that's weird. And here's the flight tracker at the time totally empty. And look at the light, like, there's some weird ones that they got. And they also were showing weird ones.
Speaker 1:There's an app called Enigma which you can download, that basically you can upload a UFO. Like if you saw a UFO UAP and you took a video of it, you can use this app to upload it and then say, hey, I saw this, here's the location, here's the you know, and so this app keeps track of all that. Okay, what's it called? Enigma? Enigma, and so I think it's like an Enigma Labs that runs it. And now there's some allegations that, oh, that app is that organization is the intelligence agencies, because they want you reporting UFO things to them. They want to know about it. But regardless they are, it is open for people to. When you're on the app, you can actually look at other ones that happen in your area and stuff like that.
Speaker 1:So I've only played with it a little bit, but I'm saying is is that so they do? So there are others too, like there are other people with good equipment and this thing has been going on for a while. So I have to imagine that out there and people are probably doing it and still putting the, that we're going to see some things come out where people are like hey, I spent a month and I took the best quality equipment, night vision cameras and all this stuff, and here's what I you know here. So I'm still waiting. There's more to be said on this, I think. I think it's not over yet. I think the FAA story was just to hey, we got to get people to stop talking about this now, because if people start talking about this, they're going to start asking questions and it's a slippery slope right it's. I always say that disclosure, catastrophic disclosure, is that thing that'll happen when enough people catch on that something's happening and enough people really grasp like the scope of it that's when.
Speaker 2:What do you mean? Well, like, let's say, when you, when you say catastrophic disclosure, what do you mean when you say that?
Speaker 1:So and these are concepts that are thrown around out there among the people who are working to get this information out to the public they say there's a couple of ways that disclosure can happen. Disclosure can happen in an organized fashion where we very methodically and logically let the public in on the fact that this stuff's going on, but we can't dump it all in their laps. We have to get them to understand that this is going on and then get them to see slowly, kind of like it started right. Slowly, kind of like it started right. It started when the US government said hey, uap are real. Like numerous government officials all up and down the thing, like anyone who looks into this topic and I say this all the time anyone who looks into this topic sees how much there is. But somebody who doesn't look into this topic at all and brushes it off with like a wave of the hand oh, they explain those drones, there's no evidence whatever. Leave me alone. This ain't happening. But anyone who's looked into it sees that. If you look how many senators, how many congress people, how many government heads of this our current secretary of state Rubio, has said many things about this basically said, said we're talking to whistleblowers. We're talking to people who say this is what we're dealing with Tulsi Gabbard, the new DNI director of national intelligence she's open to this thing. John Ratcliffe, who's now going to be the head of the CIA he's another one who has made public statements saying we are looking at these objects that are flying around out there, that we like it's happening, right, but the general public hasn't taken it in, right. Like, you hear the drone story and the UAP story, but those are two separate things, because the drone story is about drones and all this uap stuff that's happening behind like congress has been four congressional hearings, five congressional hearings, a bunch of things. That's uap. This is a drone story. That's why they're not bringing those together, because if you brought those together, if right out of the gate, the drone story was being, they weren't calling it drones, they, they were calling them UAP. Like, change the wording on that. Hey, there are all these UAP over New Jersey. There are UAP unidentified, anomalous phenomena that are flying around New Jersey and over military bases, and we have an organization in the Pentagon that is called Arrow and they look into this stuff. You've seen them at the various hearings where they talked about alien bodies.
Speaker 1:Like, once the public puts all that together and people really get it, that's when you can have catastrophic disclosure, meaning catastrophic things can happen. People will panic. How do you account for the future? How do you predict the future when, all of a sudden, you've been thrown this freaking what. There's a non-human intelligence here messing with us. Yeah, what stocks do you buy next year? I don't know. Like how do you? You know what I'm saying? Like this is.
Speaker 1:I don't think a lot of people grasp how big of a deal this is. Like. If this is true and I don't know, don't know personally, but I mean just looking at the evidence, I'm pretty convinced. But let's, whatever, if this is true, this is the biggest story of ever, ever. Like there's no story in human history that's bigger than this, bigger than a non-human end. You know, like it doesn't matter what story is going on in the world. There's a lot of important things going on in the world, but the fact a lot of important things going on in the world, but the fact that we are not alone and not only are we not alone, that other thing or other things are here and have been like that's the biggest story ever, but that's scary as crap.
Speaker 2:So that's what I'm saying is is that yeah, and that's something that I think people will not will not accept until it's in front of their face.
Speaker 1:And even then not.
Speaker 2:Maybe not, because at that point you might have a debate as to you know, how are we supposed to relate with these, whatever. Let's just say you're right. Let's just say this is all true and there is some other being to relate with. I think you'll have a debate with people on being to relate with. I think you'll have a debate with people on how to do that. I mean, I just as you should, right, right, and you'll have people that you know they're just going about their business.
Speaker 1:I'm not comfortable if there is a non-human intelligence wanting to interact with us. I'm not entirely comfortable with our emissaries being military. Do you know what I'm saying? Like, because you know, if you're a hammer, every problem is a nail right, and so that's what our military is for. I mean, you know, I'm not against the military.
Speaker 1:Their job is to break stuff and blow up stuff, right, defend stuff, but let's face it, their job at its is to to break stuff and blow up stuff. I don't want them being the emissaries of a non-human intelligence, right, I don't. I don't want. I want you know thinkers, I want you know world leaders I know you're not world leaders, not politicians. I want, like actual people with skills, like it's high-end sociologists, psychologists, economists, like people who actually understand how stuff works and say, okay, how can we integrate this in?
Speaker 1:There's also the X factor of whatever this thing is itself, right, I mean, as a lot of people say this, if these beings non-human intelligence, whatever the hell they are if they wanted to blow up their spot, they could do it tomorrow. What do you mean? Blow up their spot? If they wanted to just basically say we're here, they could fly over every city in the middle of the daytime with these huge ass crafts that mostly are seen. You know what I'm saying? Like, think of the sightings, the various sightings that happen. Right, you see the phoenix lights. This big craft flies over phoenix in 1997, right, what?
Speaker 2:if that happened today.
Speaker 1:What if a big craft flew over phoenix, arizona, like it happened? Then you wouldn't just have a, you know, and there was a decent amount of footage you can go out on youtube. You can see a lot of footage of that, right.
Speaker 1:How much would you have now, though, especially if that was a prolonged thing, that wasn't just one, that was like a big object that flew over, like everybody would have footage of it, right. So, whatever this thing is, if they wanted to like, hey, we're here, your government can't tell you we're not here because we're just going to, we're just going to hover over everything.
Speaker 2:Well, I mean, if you think about it, they already, but they're doing it quietly like right.
Speaker 1:In a weird way, they're doing it seemingly with a concern for the effects, because if they didn't care they would just be in the middle of the daytime and people would probably lose their crap right?
Speaker 2:yeah, it's hard to. It's hard to even have a an actual discussion, I mean we're having one but about motives, because you don't know what someone's trying to, someone, something or whatever is trying to even accomplish so it's hard to know what's the motivation it is, but you can.
Speaker 1:You can make a at least a reasonable hypothesis of motive based on action. Right, we can't judge their motive because we don't know their motive, but we know their actions. And their actions seem to be to be seen, but not too much To be there, but not too much Because they seem. You know UFO sightings, uap sightings happen, they tend to be there, but not too much because they seem. You know ufo sightings, uap sightings happen, they tend to be fleeting, they tend to be quick, they tend to be generally like very, not generally prolonged, not, you know.
Speaker 1:Again, what would happen if big ass craft started hovering over our major cities. Well, I think most people would think about, like Independence Day, like, can you imagine if, like a big, huge craft like the size that flew over Phoenix, arizona, was hovering over the White House, was hovering over New York, was hovering over LA and just hovering there? Like people would lose their crap because our media, everything we do, is like hey, independence day, and when that happened it didn't end well for us. Like, our media basically tells us anything If there's aliens, you know we're the native Americans and the aliens are the Europeans. There's no calculus with native Americans and come out on top on that, right In that, in that set there was no. Yeah, if you're the indigenous people and technologically superior, possibly like much more technologically superior, but even a little bit, even if it's just a little bit technologically superior, that probably is not going to bode well From what we oops From what we know about anything any relation we've ever had in the history of our humanity.
Speaker 2:That's the way it's always gone. So again, that might not be a motivation of some other being or something, but we only know what we know, right.
Speaker 1:But the fact that they haven't annihilated us Gives some hope. I mean, it means that that's not top priority for them, right? If that was top priority for them, they would have done it.
Speaker 1:They certainly wouldn't have waited for us to become more technologically a challenge, right? I mean, let's say that they're far ahead of us, um, and they could beat us now. Right, they could destroy us now, but they'd probably take some hits, even if it's just minor, right? I mean, our technology, our government, our military technology is so good. You know, we have nukes, we have microwave weapons, laser weapons. We have all these things that we didn't have 50, 60, 70 years ago. If these things were here and their eventual goal was to wipe us out, if that was their eventual goal, they would have done it already, cause there's no world where you go. Well, let's give them a couple of decades to build up, build up their technology. Let's give them time to recover our craft and, you know, glean some technological advancement from our like. There's no Well you're.
Speaker 2:You're talking as if time is static forever. This is true, right? We don't know.
Speaker 1:This could be. Well, we'll get to this when we talk about the, our next topic. But I mean this idea of even this idea of crashes. It's getting kind of put on its head that oftentimes, you know, up until this point we were like, oh, ufos are coming here and crashing and we're recovering them. And then that brings up the obvious question, the stupid question in my mind well, if you're flying, you know light years and they get here, how come they crash? Well, I mean, it is a question, but it's kind of not, because it's like, well, obviously, most likely, most likely let's just be logical the craft that, the craft that you're seeing, probably didn't travel thousands, millions of light years. Like we wouldn't do that, like it's just you would, if I guess you could, because these objects seem to have like multi-purpose.
Speaker 1:But let's just say, for the sake of you could say, okay, but maybe what they're coming here in first, or what they came here in because they're here now. So they don't necessarily need craft that can fly billions of light years, they just need craft that can fly here because they're here now. But you'd think that they'd come over in something different, right of light years. They just need craft that can fly here because they're here now, um, but you think that they'd come over in something different? Right, they did. But even if they didn't, um, the explanation too is that okay, well, no, no, vehicle is infallible, you know. Sure you can say, oh, they can fly, you know thousands of light years to come here. Well, well, how do they crash? They crash like any vehicle crashes, because if you're coming thousands of light years, that's great, but you're probably not encountering much because space is pretty open and that's.
Speaker 2:I mean I keep did you see how they found that there may actually be wormholes? Did you see that that was kind of a theory by Einstein, maybe a hundred years ago, a little less, and now they're saying that that actually might be real? Have you seen that? Yeah, science fiction is becoming reality very quickly. So I mean, maybe something doesn't have to travel as far as you think. If that's the case, right, and I agree with you. You know, when a um, a battleship comes in um, it's not the battleship that then goes and has the planes that take. You know they have, you know they're capable of doing something else. So, yes, I agree with you, but it's just it.
Speaker 1:You could conceive of a world where okay, let's say, these things came from somewhere else, they didn't have to come in the very same ships that they are flying around here and they could come in something else and then be flying ships that only need to fly, you know, or they could be coming from you know, because, like you said, maybe because of wormholes folding space, I mean, there's all sorts of talk like real talk, like not just science fictiony talk, but like real physics talk about, well, how could such a thing be possible with the laws of physics? And there are ways, right, there are ways of theoretically folding space or encasing craft in a bubble that you could be making very normal, very reasonable maneuvers Outside the bubble. You're seeing it at a different clip and what you're seeing looks like it's doing crazy stuff.
Speaker 1:Maybe time is meaningless for these people, because even just normal space travel, like, let's just say that someday we're able to travel through space into different planets. How would we ever deal with the fact that time moves differently based on what planet you're on? Yeah, like, like, how would you ever like? They kind of brush past this and all like Star Trek, star Wars, like all the all the sci-fi. I love Star Wars, I consider sort of space fantasy more Right, but but anyway, they kind of brush past the fact that, well, but like, this planet, like time would move differently. So how would trade work, how would diplomatic relations work? How would all that work if on this planet four administrations went and on this planet it hasn't the same administration has been in.
Speaker 1:But this planet, because time is actually moving differently, it's not just like a time, it's not like on Earth where it's a time zone thing, where it's well, everybody's on the same time. It's just the other side of the world, it's the next day, but it's not really the next day, it's now. It's just because of the time zones, but we're all actually operating in the same time. Like it's not, it's an illusion that there's different time zones, it's just they're on the other side of the planet, so it's operating differently, but if I call them it's-.
Speaker 2:We all age the same way.
Speaker 1:Right, because we're all on planet Earth and the International Space Station loses a little bit of time. It has to be the clock on the International Space Station, but it's not by a lot.
Speaker 2:It's not, but it's a little. When they come back, it's not going to change their versus everyone else that hasn't done that, but if you, went far enough out.
Speaker 1:Theoretically, you could go there and back and come back and a thousand years would have passed on earth, right, you know like? So that's the thing.
Speaker 2:So what if? I think that's a mind-boggling thing for most people to think about.
Speaker 1:It is and then now, if you say, okay, now these craft are outside of time because they they insulate, the craft is insulated from the effects of gravity, meaning insulated from the effects of time, meaning while they're flying the craft, they're outside of all of that. So, theoretically, wow could it be like. But the same craft that they saw in 1876 and the same craft they saw in 23 ad is the same craft we're seeing in 2024, because it's outside of time and it's popping in when it needs to and like and other thing that and these are all mind-boggling concepts, but they're real concepts is that time is not linear in the sense that's an illusion.
Speaker 1:That linear time is kind of an to put this framework in with our very narrow perspective, which is why you get questions like oh, they're flying here, how did they crash? It's more than that. It's like this. It's that's what this deal is. This deal is if this was just physical aliens coming from a physical place and popping in and saying hi, it would be shocking, but we could adjust. I think the more I hear stuff, the more I see what's coming out. It's a lot weirder than that. So I think that's a good place to head on to our next topic, which is this recent whistleblower. Anything, anything, more to say on the drones?
Speaker 2:Well, the only thing I'll say we said a lot. The only thing I was thinking, Chris, is there's stories about how we've reacted through the years, Like there's that famous newspaper article about a battle in Los Angeles at the beach, right, and we were shooting at it, right. So you know, if we are constantly being aggressive, maybe that explains why. You know, maybe they're not trying to be so in our face. We've never actually tried to relate with any of these sightings in a friendly way. We're always chasing them or shooting at them or doing something. We're never just saying, hey, what's going on? We've never done anything, except that in terms of military.
Speaker 1:Well, that's the thing, right. And as we move on to this next topic, that's where that all falls on its head, because I had been led to believe that, actually, I think most people who research this topic really had, if you had asked me six months ago and said what's happening with? Well, uaps are checking us out or doing their thing. We are occasionally shooting them down or they're crashing through other methods. And if you don't think things could crash through other methods, I mean and again, this is all speculation, but it's speculation that the roswell crash might have been caused not by the thunderstorms, which don't make really sense, but that we were doing nuclear testing at that time. Right, and what happens when you launch, when you fire off a nuke? We, back in the late 40s particularly like we're blasting off nukes quite a lot right in the middle of the desert and stuff right to test them, which is scary when you think about that right that first nuke when they, when they weren't 100, sure that it wouldn't light the atmosphere on fire, but they did it anyway yeah
Speaker 1:that's kind of messed up, but anyway, that shoots off an emp, an electromagnetic pulse. So if it doesn't matter how these craft operate, probably an electromagnetic pulse would mess with them, right? So that's what I've been led to believe. But now it's almost like well, maybe that's not it, because I've heard, maybe there is some of that. But I've also heard them refer to some of these recoveries not as crashes but as donations.
Speaker 2:I've heard that, yeah, so that's the thing crashes, but as donations.
Speaker 1:I've heard that, yeah, so that's the thing. So so, if so, we're led to believe that it was all military, it was all aggressive. But now it's starting to sound like maybe it's not all aggressive, like it is our. It is our military doing it, and some of it is aggressive. And that's also the question of when you say interacting with it. What if there's multiple?
Speaker 1:it's right, I mean it doesn't necessarily have to be all the same, you're right, I mean, when you like, I always use the analogy of of, like the americas, when the europeans first got here, right, you had the dutch, you had the french, you had the um spanish, you had the english, you had a bunch of different ones here. They're all human, but they were different entities, different, you know, and they all had their own motives, their own agendas. They didn't always get along with each other particularly well and their interaction with the natives of the land were different, depending on who they were. Universally, it all ended up pretty bad, but not all of them had bad intent, right, I mean, some were. I think the Spanish were pretty horrible. The English weren't that great, I don't know. Were the Dutch?
Speaker 2:I don't think they were fantastic.
Speaker 1:I don't think they weren't fantastic, but they also weren't quite as but they also were smaller power, so they were also kind of had to keep. So that's the thing is, they could afford to be a little bit more friendly with the natives, or actually probably needed to be a little bit more friendly with the natives, because they couldn't fight them at the same time as they fought the other powers which were much more powerful than them. So there could be this whole thing where there's like and it seems to be again, if you go back and look at the whole database, it seems to be more than one thing here, right, and some of them could be, you know, more kindly inclined towards us. Some could be less kindly inclined and some of them could be just, you know, whatever, like totally ambivalent, like whatever they're there.
Speaker 1:You know, we have to deal with these creatures because they're on this planet. We won't mess with them. They won't mess with us. They get in our way, though. We'll take care of them, and that's the thing, right? What if that's the case? What if there's so? Then all of a sudden, it's like well, you can't just say interacting with this non-human intelligence, because if there's multiple and they all got their own particular spin on it. Then maybe we're interacting with one and maybe others we're not interacting with. Maybe the ones that are doing the abductions are not ones that we're on particular, but there are others that we have some rudimentary. Remember the David Grush question, right when Luna asked Grush in that hearing and said no, sorry, it wasn't Luna.
Speaker 1:It was Nancy Mace and she said does the US government did that in public and that's long in the lore that supposedly, supposedly, all this UFO cover up comes from from. Was it Truman that put in a you know, an executive order that basically moved all this stuff off the books and kind of kept it quiet? But supposedly there was a landing in an Air Force base. Supposedly, if you believe some of the lore, there have been interactions between us and someone else to some degree. Right, who knows? I mean who knows? But that's the thing. Are we ready for that box of can of worms? Are we ready for that can of worms to open?
Speaker 2:No.
Speaker 1:I mean, that's the thing, but would we ever be ready? No, so you just got to do it.
Speaker 2:I don't think. I think, if this is something that eventually is going to happen, right, that's the premise of everything we're talking about, right, right, I just think, eventually it's either going to be something along the lines of ripping the band-aid off or the people that are trying for us to not know will be forced. It's. It's going to be one or the other. I I don't think it's, chris, something that you could certainly look at all the things that are happening and make an argument that we're kind of like the frogs in the boiling water.
Speaker 1:Right.
Speaker 2:But I just don't see it. I don't see where there's a gain for us, for them, to tell people without being forced into it. We'll find out, I guess, eventually, hopefully.
Speaker 1:I think that the thought process would be it's only a matter of time before this comes out, especially now, where-.
Speaker 2:Oh, I agree with you, but what's the incentive for doing it before you have to?
Speaker 1:Because you could do it controlled. That's the idea of controlled disclosure that's the difference between controlled disclosure and catastrophic disclosure or uncontrolled disclosure um.
Speaker 2:My opinion is there's no such thing as controlled disclosure I think just the fact that the way our government is set up, we constantly have different administrations. It's difficult to keep that in a continuum right.
Speaker 1:Right, because as soon as the administration changes, priorities change and stuff. But like you can only do controlled disclosure up to a certain point, because there's that tipping point, there's that moment where a majority of the population understand that this is real. It's crazy and when we're not near there, we're not the thing is is that you can't tell, because it could happen in an instant, and that's the thing is.
Speaker 2:It's oh, it's a fuse, but at that point it's almost not, you know. Yeah, the cat's out of the bag right and it's it's.
Speaker 1:I think of it as a fuse of indeterminate length, and you know the fuse is burning and you know at some point it's going to go off and that's when disclosure is either going to be enough people are going to be out and comfortable with the idea that when the public gets into it, there'll be enough trusted, you know, individuals, trusted organizations, trusted you, whatever to come out and say they're there, don't worry, here's all the stuff we've figured out about this. So this is all new to you, but it's not new to us. Here's what we know. I don't think there is that, I don't think there's a controlled plan. And then you have these X factors, like what we're about Jake Barber, who we're about to talk about, who you know, or Abby Loeb says the sky is not classified.
Speaker 1:Technology is getting to the point now where you don't need and, and also the others, whatever these others are, and and I think you know it's been said, you know pretty by some people who, you know, claim to know whatever these things are. They don't respect the US government's kind of like dominion over this topic, like we like to think. Well, we're not going to know anything until the government decides to tell us what we need to know, but do we really need them to tell us? Does the government need to tell us that Alaska exists?
Speaker 1:No, we know that does, because we've seen enough evidence to you know, even if you haven't been to Alaska or been to China, you've seen enough evidence to know that China exists right, I've never been there.
Speaker 2:What do you think we would do as an American society if Russia came out and said hey, look at this evidence. We're pretty sure that we've had contact. Now, right? I just wonder. You think we'd say that's propaganda? I just wonder what Right?
Speaker 1:You know what? I'm actually less worried about Russia. I'm actually more worried about China. The reason being is that China, because of their you know, their form of government, of government.
Speaker 1:They're basically a dictatorship, right? Their people are kind of staying in line to a certain degree, as much as we know. Right? So the negative effects of disclosure would probably affect China less than it would affect us in a free society where people would react in crazy ways. But let now let's move over china, because the chinese government kind of has control of everything, right, I mean most, most of the most businesses. They're not necessarily owned by the government, but they don't, you know, they don't do much without the government saying yes or no, right, right? So they have a greater control over their population, right? So the negative effects of disclosure would affect China, in my mind, would affect them less, not necessarily not affect them at all, but it would affect them less. Here is where we'd have the problem, because of what do you think?
Speaker 2:the problem would be? Why do you think it would affect differently?
Speaker 1:People losing their minds and and and things breaking down.
Speaker 1:Because, because in a free society, so much relies on the social contract, like there is no, so much relies on our understanding that these things because, really, when you think about it, if everybody rebelled all at once, the, the most powerful government in the world couldn't stop Like it couldn't stop things from falling apart. If everything falls apart at once, right, let's say, the stock market crashes and people lose their minds and panic because, oh my God, there's some possibly malevolent, non-human entity here, I'm going to start stacking guns, I'm going to start hoarding toilet paper and I mean we saw a little taste of this right in 2020 when people got panicked. Right, you can't do anything when your population starts to panic because you don't have full control. You can't. You can try. You can try to, you know, kind of tamp down in places, but you don't have full control, so you're never going to be able to really tamp it down and move that over to China. China can tamp that stuff down a little bit better because they already have full control of things.
Speaker 2:Well, every society that I know of on this planet, that's a civilized society, right? If you, if the majority of the population, or even a major minority of the population, stops working, the whole system collapses, right, right. So I think, even in China, you know, if you people get scared enough that they stopped working, that's the whole thing. The whole thing collapses in on itself.
Speaker 1:Right, and the world is so interconnected now, right. That that's the thing, is, if you?
Speaker 2:had one society do that's, it's just like dominoes. They'd all start doing it because that you're right. Things would start panicking. That would be the end, and I think that that could be a motivation to not disclose immediately. If that's how, if that's what you're thinking you disclose in my.
Speaker 1:You disclose in a certain order. This has always been my kind of thought process on it. You can't tell everybody at once. One is because that causes problems, you know, if everybody knows at once.
Speaker 2:And also when you say that, though, what do you mean? When you say you can't tell everyone, because they're kind of, if you listen to these, these hearings, there are people telling everyone at once.
Speaker 1:But why is everybody not taking it in? Because it's not messaged to them. Right, like, like. If you think about what do you mean? You can put information out and you can't stop people from hearing it, but you can direct it towards a particular type of people with a little forethought on how you roll it out. And you roll it out by having people who they. So here's my example.
Speaker 1:First, people you need to get on board and say we need to bring everybody up to speed. Right, we know this stuff's happening. We need everybody to know. First people we need to know are the military. We need the military to understand that this is real. So how do you do that? Well, you get a lot of military people who, when we look at somebody like Colonel Nell or David Grush or Luella Zondo, right, we can appreciate to some degree their credentials. But if you're a military person, person, you probably appreciate it more because you understand. You understand what all that stuff means. So when you see david gresh's uh cv and you see carl nell's cv and you see the type of people who are coming out and saying, no, this stuff's real, man, this stuff's real.
Speaker 1:The normal person hears lou elizondo, he's a counterintelligence agency. That doesn't mean anything to me, but somebody, somebody in the military who knows yeah, I worked with him on this operation. I know him, I know the type of jobs he's had. I know the type of people who have the type of jobs he's had. I understand his voice has weight and I'm not using Lou specifically, but I'm just saying anybody who, any of the people in the military who are coming out and being used, kind of say hey, this is happening. Those are the people who are kind of, they're the ones who are kind of taking it in first so who do you?
Speaker 2:were you saying that? Um, we need um taylor swift to tell us well, no, it's.
Speaker 1:It's that that's who you do first and that's been happening for a while. Then what's the next people you have to bring in? Religious. You got to bring the religion in because you, because they're going to be a big part of holding people together.
Speaker 2:It's funny you say that Cause I actually, the more this is going on, they think there's a connection between the different things we're talking about it is, but let's just so.
Speaker 1:But a lot of people, when this comes out, are going to start to lose their mind. But the Catholic Church has already come out and said they have no problem with the fact, basically saying if there's a non-human intelligence, they can be children of God just like us and that doesn't like. The Catholic Church has already basically come out and said well, we're not concerned if there are aliens, that doesn't disrupt our worldview at all. Our aliens, that doesn't disrupt our worldview at all. So they'll be very important to calm Catholics down. So, as the religions take it in, now they're in place to help calm the masses. And then, who's the last? Before you let everybody else in, there's one more sector of people that you should let in. What's that? That's the financial, because you've let the military in and you've got the religious. You know institutions, and not all of them, not across the board, but you've had messaging that is going to touch them, whereas the normal people? Again, you can't stop normal people from hearing it, but it's not calibrated to them. So some people take it in and believe it, like us, and other people don't take it in and don't believe it.
Speaker 1:The number of people I run into on a daily basis who still deny that any of this is happening. Blows my mind Like I still get people saying to me you believe in UFOs. That's the stupidest question I've ever heard in my entire life. Blows my mind Like I still get people saying to me you believe in UFOs. That's the stupidest question I've ever heard in my entire life. There's no believing in UFOs.
Speaker 1:We know that UFOs like they exist now, like it's been admitted by everybody that there's something. You can argue about what it is, but you can't argue that there isn't something. So now we've let the military in, now we've let the religious people in. But that's happening now too with the financial people. Now the hedge funds like this, the high-end financial people, are getting briefed and getting let in on the secret. Now, when the bulk of people hear it and they start to panic, you'll have the military people being like no, we got this, we, you know you're right. Then you get the religious people going no, don't, don't panic, it's there, you know, that's okay. And then you get the financial people going we prepared for this, we're all ready for the, the instability that's going to happen when you guys take this in, when there's like when?
Speaker 2:how could they?
Speaker 1:I don't understand how you could ever be ready you can't be, you can never be 100 ready, but you can at least soften the blow. And that's the thing about disclosure you can never predict it. You can never say, if we roll it out this way, it's all going to be fine. Because, as I said, disclosure is a fuse of indeterminate length that can blow at any time. And they will come that point where the bulk of society go wait, hold on. Holy crap, this is real, isn't it? And that's when you'll need the military, that's when you'll need the religious people and that's when you'll need the financial people.
Speaker 1:I'm not saying they'll all be, I'm not saying it's a big cabal, I'm just saying you get those people kind of on your side, kind of, hey, we need to protect the, not the status quo quo, it's the wrong way of saying it, but we need to hold society together.
Speaker 1:So we have the, we have those three branches of kind of like society, and you know you could subdivide a lot more, but but that's generally it right. So now all the financial people are kind of getting let in the salt conference, right, we, we watch those. Yeah, right, that's a huge. Your average person doesn't know crap about what the salt conference is because they're like well, what is that, you know? And it's like well, if you're a financial person, if you're hedge funds, like you know what that conference is? That's put on by that Alex Crocus guy and it's you know, he's the one who does the interviews on the thing. But basically it's bringing high net worth individuals in and saying, hey guys, this exists, there's going to be opportunities, there's going to be research and development by private companies into non-human technology, probably some of which will take decades to unravel.
Speaker 2:I think it's kind of arrogant on some level to think that there's some opportunity or something to control.
Speaker 1:That's unfortunately the society we live in. Oh, I know that.
Speaker 2:But I just think that that's not. I don't think that's going to be a reality. I think it might actually be the other way around. But I just don't see this, as you know, the next you know, oil baron. I just don't see. I don't see, probably not. If this is true, I don't see this as a resource to exploit.
Speaker 1:I think it's, it's much larger than that it is, and I hope, and and when you know, I hope, the financial people, some of them, are into exploit.
Speaker 1:Let's just face it oh yeah, just like some of the military people are in to uh to conquer, and some of the military people are in to conquer and some of the religious people are in to convert. Right, you have the zealots in military, you have the zealots in religion, you have the zealots in finance. You got them right, then you hopefully have a hopefully not insignificant amount of people who are reasonable, those reasonable, the military people who are like, not everything is a target to be shot at. You know we need to defer to some, you know, diplomacy whatever it is.
Speaker 1:And then you have the religious people are like, okay, we need to figure out how to integrate this into our worldview so it doesn't disrupt, you know, people's faith. And then you have the financial people who are like I want to find a way to not to monetize it, not to suck it dry, but to make it a viable thing, to make it a thing that now is a plus on society instead of a minus. So maybe people stop working. Society breaks down in one way. But then all of a sudden it's like, hey, do you want to train to be, you know, psychic, psionic, whatever communicators like? Or you want to sign up to help us just understand this technology? Like there's opportunities for development. I don't know.
Speaker 1:Like I said, that's just my theory. But again it all comes down to that thing of you can't, you can't 100% predict it. You can prepare for the best, you can try to ready the battlefield and say, when people get it, we have, you know, hopefully, things in place. We're going to make the announcement on, you know, on a friday night and we're going to shut this. You know we're going to have the stock market is going to be shut down for the following two weeks because we can't have volatility.
Speaker 2:Well, even just that, chris, I mean if people had their money in stocks, and but if everything was?
Speaker 1:frozen. That's the thing is. If you freeze it and say everything is frozen, nothing is happening. That would create panic. Everything is going to create panic. You cannot change everybody's worldview and not create panic. That's the thing is there's no way.
Speaker 2:Well, that's what I'm trying to say.
Speaker 1:This is an omelet. We're going to break some eggs.
Speaker 2:Yeah, at that point all bets are off, because you just don't know how people are going to react. I think that, in a vacuum, the only way you could possibly introduce something the magnitude that you're talking about and not create lasting panic would be maybe if there was whatever technology there existed that you know, whatever this we're dealing with I have no idea Right Showed people a way that, that the resources, that, because basically, we all work because the resources are limited. That's why everyone works. Right, because you have to pay for resources to live, right, scarcity, right. I mean, you want to live a nice life, that's what people want, but at the end of the day, you know you want the heat on Well, that's a limited resource. You want to drink water? That's a limited resource. You want to eat food? That's a limited resource, right, so you got to pay for it. Right, if there was a way that that human beings were shown that?
Speaker 1:no, in fact need or have any limitation to them, right, so they really don't have any value, just your your ability to collect them is limited.
Speaker 2:Yeah, yeah, yeah, but generally speaking, if you want to eat, you'll be able to eat, right, don't worry about it. You want to breathe? You can breathe. You want to drink water? You can drink water. You want to eat, you need this. You can have it. There's no price on it because it's not limited. There's actually. It's unlimited, right, right so if a resource is unlimited, it has little value, right so. But again, that would turn the world on its head too. It's going to have to, right.
Speaker 1:If zero point energy and that's part of the goal of a lot of this right Is that if these craft are operating like they seem to be, they obviously have access to a large storehouse of energy. Right, it's been calculated Some of these maneuvers that these vehicles do, the amount of energy required to do that maneuver outstrips every nuclear reactor on Earth for a year, generating power, and some of the maneuver you know. So, some of these things that. So if zero point energy is a thing, and eventually you gotta, you gotta be careful how you transition into it, you just can't open up the, open up the gate and say, okay, everybody, energy's unlimited, great for that person who wants to heat their home or, you know, heat their swimming pool or whatever. Do you want that person who's trying to build a bomb and saying, really, I have access to unlimited energy, I can build quite a big bomb if I have a lot of energy.
Speaker 1:And that's the other part of this technology which seems to be part and parcel of it is you also have to be concerned that if the wrong people knew how to exploit this technology, it could go really bad, really quick, right, right. So it needs to be kept in responsible hands, but it's not like we don't have some experience in doing that right. We kind of have that with nuclear weapons, right. We don't want to let every Tom Dick and Harry have a nuclear weapon, because it's kind of understood that nuclear weapons should be in the hands of and again, you can argue whether they really are the best people to be. But for certain United States, certain big world governments, have access to nukes, whereas the smaller ones we don't necessarily want Iran getting nuclear power, we don't want a bunch of others, right?
Speaker 2:We generally don't want the more volatile Right.
Speaker 1:Because you never know what they're going to do. And and and and so, and that's just nuclear right, and that's considered destructive enough to blow up. But now what if there's a type of energy that's unlimited, that, literally, if you wanted to, if you wanted to, if you tapped into this energy and you utilized it in the wrong way?
Speaker 1:you could blow up the planet, as absurd as that sounds. We watch Star Wars, we watch the Death Star blow up a planet. We say that's not really possible, right, how much energy would that thing need to produce? But now, if you have unlimited energy, well, you could produce enough energy to blow up a planet. And there's unstable people, right and so so that's the thing is, that's another problem.
Speaker 1:But all of this comes down to say there's a million reasons not to disclose. But the problem is is that there's one main reason why you have to disclose is that's gonna come out at some point, and you'd rather it come out controlled to some degree. You're not going to be able to control every aspect of it, and there are going to be transition pains, um, and and quite big transition pains, like, like significant pains, but you're not going to avoid them, because if you try to avoid them, it's just going to come out in a way that is going to cause all those things that you're, all those things that you're worried about are sure to happen if you don't have a plan. So that's why I'm saying is, I think, I'm trying to think who coined this term? I think it was, um, oh, what's his name? Uh, have you heard of Steven Bassett? No, oh, what's his name? Have you heard of Stephen Bassett? No, he's one of the UFO. He runs like a UFO organization, but he's one of those people who's just been in the game for a long time and he's actually. Maybe it wasn't him, no, I think it was actually Richard Dolan and Bryce Zabel.
Speaker 1:In their book After Disclosure, they said that disclosure of UFOs is impossible but inevitable, meaning that it's impossible that it can happen. But it's also inevitable that it's going to happen because it's a reality and so we have to prepare for it. And not everybody agrees. Some people are like your mindset that there's never going to be a good time to do this. There's never going to be a good time to do this. The problem is is that there's a lot of people who think, no, we got to do it now because if we don't, it's going to be done to us. We can't control. We could say the US isn't going to say anything, but, like you said earlier, we can't control China, we can't control Russia.
Speaker 2:Oh, and I don't know, chris, which which is, let's, let's just say, one of the two have to happen, right? I don't know which is better, because you know there's a lot of things that try to get planned and then you know a plan's great until you get punched in the face. So you could plan out a disclosure and it still goes sideways. So I don't know what's better.
Speaker 1:To me, knowledge is always better than ignorance.
Speaker 2:I mean, you can say ignorance is safe, no, no, no, no, what I'm saying is you could disclose in what you believe to be a control fashion. It could go sideways. Oh yeah, you could have it. Just you have to say something because of circumstances and that could go sideways, or either one could go smooth. So you just don't know until you do it.
Speaker 1:Well, don't know until you do it. Well, I say that the difference between controlled disclosure and catastrophic disclosure. But the reality is, is that controlled disclosure is an illusion. Right, you can only control it up to a point, and, like I keep saying, that point is when everybody knows, and what you can't control it anymore and what you're.
Speaker 2:The premise, though, on a controlled disclosure is that the people that are disclosing it know everything about it, so that is arrogant as well.
Speaker 1:So there could be more to it than the people disclosing even know Well that's the thing it doesn't have to be that we know everything and we're going to tell you. It's like, here's what we know.
Speaker 2:I understand.
Speaker 1:Here's what we can't tell you and here's what we need to learn together. And you know, one of the limitations to this is, Ben, when you have something that's super secret and you can't bring that many people in on it, then you can't bring the best and brightest into it.
Speaker 1:Right, Because if you, if you know to know about the UFO secret, you have to have a high, high, high security clearance. Right, it's only those people who get access to it. Well, you got a lot of great minds out there that, for one reason or another, are not going to get a security access. They're just not going to. You know, they've been. They might be great minds, but they're not. They're not going to get a security access. So now you can't bring those people in.
Speaker 1:So the main reason for disclosure, above and beyond just letting everybody know hey, this is the nature of reality, this is real Like this. You can't hide. It's not the government's right or responsibility to keep the nature of reality away from the human race. Like, that's egotistical, Like we're going to keep this away from you because we're trying to hold society together. Well, that's not your call. It's not like you're trying. This is a fundamental reality of our world. It's our right to know it. It's not any government's right to hide it for whatever purposes. Whether they want to say they're noble or not, you can tell yourself that all day long You're keeping the fundamental reality away from people. People would operate differently. There's no way to do this and not be painful. It's going to be painful. Every change is painful. What if I?
Speaker 2:mean because we want to talk about that guy, jake Barber, right, and there's one part of his story that I don't know what about. What it was about it, but it was. It was interesting the way he described how he felt, right, and I don't know if he used the words, but it came across as a religious experience.
Speaker 1:Very much so.
Speaker 2:Right, so I have a theory. Now it's a theory. I'm not saying I, I subscribe to it, but what if there is some sort of, as we would say, religious and I want it's. It's you. You already sound kind of odd, we're talking about it that way, but I mean, every civilization that we know in this world says that things emanated from the sky. Right, it's every single civilization. That's what they say.
Speaker 1:Christianity says the same thing, right?
Speaker 2:What if there was something to that? Of course and I'm just throwing out a theory and that disclosure included us understanding that that's all real right and the way we interact with each other is more important than the assets we collect, right? That itself would change societies on on their head because people would say what am I doing right? Why am I working 60 hours a week when the the real thing is this?
Speaker 2:well it it goes deeper than that Because we kind of as societies, we always look at religion as a thing right, that's right Now. I'm not saying I'm a super, I'm not a super religious person, but we say hey, we know the 10 commandments say this Right. But you know, if we did that all day, nobody would make any money.
Speaker 1:It's all built on faith. There's no, there's no. But if you found out that your faith was a hundred percent real, like you, you're supposed to do that. Like like that's the, that's the. Well, that's like it's. It's a question that's been asked before. Like what if we knew a hundred percent what happens after we die?
Speaker 1:Like what if, what if we knew, like without question, that, hey, when you die, your die, your, you know your essence go, you know your essence goes back into the pool, whatever and you were, you know, whatever you, you, but it's, it's transitory, like it's this, what we're here, what we have here is not, is not reality, it's just what you're experiencing and you die, and then you know you can come back or whatever. What would that do to all the people who now you know this for a hundred percent now?
Speaker 2:right, that's what I mean.
Speaker 1:So you have all these people who, what if you're not having a great life here? Like what if you know your, your life is not working out the way you want it to be, either from your own actions, others' actions, just where you were born, who you were, you know right, Anything right, but you knew a hundred percent that if you ended your existence here, without question you go on in a much more enlightened, better way, Right? What the hell would happen? Would there be, like mass suicides?
Speaker 1:Well, I mean, that's one way of looking at it If you knew a hundred percent, if you know like, like right now, what keeps people from doing it is that people don't know Like they. Some people kill themselves thinking that they're releasing their spirit or whatever, but nobody knows for certain. But what if you did know for certain? What if it was a? So it would just you.
Speaker 2:You couldn't stop people I was looking at it more of how people would treat each other. Yeah, knowing, you know, if you just knew, like if every story, which a lot of stories in terms of religion, are kind of the same, they're kind of the same.
Speaker 1:They read well Diana Pasalka, who's a, you know she did a religious, basically religious studies right.
Speaker 1:And she had a PhD in this and she you know she's one of those people has access to the Vatican vaults and yous and high-end academic religious studies. She's not religious herself, she just studies the Catholic Church and has gone through all and she came to the UFO thing through religion because she started to hear about these UFO things which she usually just discounted, to hear about these UFO things which she usually just discounted. And then, as she went into it, she started looking at those accounts and looking at in the Vatican the records of religious experiences that are basically sanctioned by the Vatican, saying you know, this did happen and seeing that the difference between those and what people commonly call UFO encounters is really not that different. And what if? That's the answer, like what if? And I'd say it's looking more and more like it is what if? Our religions? Because all our religions, as different as they are, they all kind of have a core.
Speaker 1:That's kind of at the core it's kind of the same right and what is the core of a lot of them? This world is transitory. You know, like all of that stuff, like this is not. You know this is not truly it. You know it's in the Bible it's. You know you're getting life on earth but then you go to the. You know you go to heaven or whatever, and spend eternity.
Speaker 1:It doesn't make any sense. You know, no matter how good a place is, if you're there for eternity, eventually it'd be boring. No matter there for eternity, eventually it'd be boring, no matter how good it is. You know, and and not to get off on jag on this but like that doesn't even make sense from like a just a logical perspective. It's just like, okay, I'm gonna create this wonderful thing called the soul and in this universe that lasts basically billions and billions and billions and billions and billions of years. But I'm gonna create this thing to be used for, I don't know, know, 70, 80, maybe even less, depending if there's an accident, and then I'm just going to put it in this place and just let it and just create a new one Like one is again.
Speaker 1:you know, I mean, wouldn't heaven eventually get really crowded if every living being that ever existed who went there? And of course some people go the other direction but like wouldn't both those places get really crowded?
Speaker 2:I mean that's if it's a place, but it could be interdimensional, which is another thing they keep with the Jake Barber thing.
Speaker 1:I'm stumbling, I'm dumbing it down, right, it's not a place, cause even a lot of times they think you know that's not a place, it's a different state. But even in that thing, like it doesn't make sense that there would be this state or this place that you would just spend the rest of eternity in, because, again, what, there has to be a purpose to it. Because, no matter what, how enlightened you are, no matter how good it is, let's say it's the best place ever, that'd be great for 50 years, 100 years, a thousand years, you know, 10 000 years. Wouldn't there come a point? I think about um, groundhog day. Yeah, right, the evolution of bill murray during that movie. He realizes that the day just keeps repeating. So at first he enjoys it, he exploits it, he, you know, he uses it for his own gratification and it's not really doesn't come across clearly in that movie, but if you pay attention, he's in that loop for a long time, right, I mean, he has the, he develops different skills that those skills alone would take if you did it one day at a time.
Speaker 1:I mean it seems like he, he went through that day like 10 000 times, not just like they only give you a bunch of them, right, but at first he starts to exploit it, but then all that becomes like meaningless, right? It's kind of like using cheat codes on a game, right, if you ever play a video game, you use cheat codes. It's really fun at first and then after a while, most times when I've used cheat codes on a game, eventually I just put that game down and never touch it again, because all the mystique is gone, because you can do anything. There's no. So that's kind of like the side end of that is like eventually there'd be, but that's so anyway. What if all our religions come from basically this non-human intelligence interacting with us and saying here are these creatures, you know. I mean, right, why did we suddenly among all the creatures on this planet? Why did we suddenly make that flip and all of a sudden be more advanced? Right, there's that, that, that wow signal. Like what is it that in our dna?
Speaker 2:that well, there's something right. There's some part of our dna that doesn't exist anywhere else on this planet, right?
Speaker 1:right. Why are we so like?
Speaker 2:it's weird so, because there isn't any other life form on the planet that can say that except us. It's, you know and I know I might sound like a nut right now, but it's scientific that we have some parts of our DNA that don't relate with anything else alive on this planet that's ever been alive on this planet Ever.
Speaker 1:The problem is right there, there, what you just said you felt the need to say I know I sound like a nut because we've been so ingrained to think that all these ideas are nuts when, in reality, when you start to think about it and go take away the take away the stigma of all this stuff, and then you start to think about it and go take away the stigma of all this stuff, and then you start to think about it and it makes perfect sense, like, of course, this universe is huge. This universe has been around a long time. You know, as long as this planet's been around. It's still only a blip of time. So, of course, there's plenty of time for other beings to be out there. There's plenty of time for them to get here.
Speaker 1:That bull crap about, oh, even if they are out there, they couldn't get here. Of course they could. The universe is so old and so, like, even through conventional means, even if you don't take an account away of like breaking the rules, somebody could have gotten here long ago just because they'd been around longer. Right, like it all makes sense. But we're so ingrained to talk about oh, that makes us sound like a nut, that makes us sound like a conspiracy theorist that night, like we are so conditioned to not think that way that we have to apologize when we do right. But what you're saying is not like you said. It's all scientific, it is so. So let's just say for the moment, let's not go down the road of they had something to do with our creation, because that's a whole other. That's a whole other cat.
Speaker 1:I think is a great but, but we'll do that another time but let's just say that, yeah, from a very simple thing, they came across us right and they said hey, here's this. Um, you know, race of people. They have potential, right. They right they're smart monkeys, right, they seem to be like building stuff and like they have potential. But we can't just let them just like go, because we gotta give them some. We should give them some structure, some framework, so they don't eat each other alive. So what do you do? You give us religion.
Speaker 1:Now, did it work perfectly? No, of course not. Nothing ever does, because you know you take tenets of most religions and it's probably pretty good. It's the stuff that was added on later by, let's face it, people in order to control, and I mean, that's basically what you know. Even if you have the Bible and you have the parts that are like legit, right, legit happen the story, whatever it is. But then you have those other parts that were massaged and thing, and you know there are many books of the bible that are included.
Speaker 2:Right, because at the core of it, the ten commandments.
Speaker 1:Guys, it's pretty cool well, maybe the coveting thing is like, you know, there's a couple of them, but like, but like it's certainly but I mean at the end of the day, a society probably is better if I'm not coveting someone else's wife, right, that's true, you know what I mean.
Speaker 2:I'm just saying like Like, but your neighborhood works better if you don't do those things.
Speaker 1:It really comes down to. Don't be a dick.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:Like it's really that's really Pretty, stop and go when I be a dick if I did this and if the answer is yes, don't do it and you know it's funny, I'm not going to get religious, but after nine 11, right, those of us that can remember it.
Speaker 2:Right, I know, because it's crazy how it's been so long but those, those of us that can remember it for the first few months after nine 11 happened, people talk still about how nice everyone was to each other. Right, and it was a great feeling. Yeah, we all felt great, yeah, right.
Speaker 1:Everyone did. It was a tragedy, but everybody pulled together.
Speaker 2:That's what I mean.
Speaker 1:Everybody's like everybody was on the same side.
Speaker 2:Yeah, everyone was polite to each other, everyone was nice to each other. Everyone was nice to each other right, and we remember it to this day, right? We remember that, that, that that moment of time, why? Probably because that's how we're supposed to be to each other, right, I mean, that's why we remember it because that's when we're at our best right but then what happens?
Speaker 1:it gets corrupted by generally. You know, hey, how can I use this crisis, this tragedy, to further my agenda, right? And that's what happened. And that's when oh wait, you know. Then there's the wars, and people against the wars and people for the wars, and people fighting and people arguing and stuff like that. But you're right, in those early days, when it was just a tragedy, everybody was on the same side. No politicians sniped at each other because it was like, hey, dude, this isn't the time, Like, put that stuff aside, right, I don't know that. That. And you can argue about whether that could even happen nowadays, right, because now a tragedy happens and both sides are just pointing at the other side and saying they are the cause of it.
Speaker 2:Right, they're the blame.
Speaker 1:So, but you know so. So there, you have that. So, if so, let's just say in the very you can make a very strong argument that if there's a non-human intelligence here, they had some hand in creating or facilitating the creation of our major religions. That fact alone is cataclysmic to our like. Just that alone, we're going to have to rethink everything. Right Cause then?
Speaker 1:you're going to have people go wait a second. Hold on, hold on, hold on. But it's like, so what? You're freaked out that a non-human intelligence gave us our religion. Isn't that what it was in the first place? You just call them angels.
Speaker 2:And well, I think the react it would be wait a minute. This isn't just a fable, right, wait a minute. This is how I'm supposed to be there is really.
Speaker 1:There is really a reckoning like hey guys, it's real man, when you get to the end of your existence, you have to be held account to what you did right and you gotta you know and you can believe this or not believe this, but I've, you know, I've heard some people who talk about these things and had various experiences. You know, I take it all in, whether I 100% believe it, but I like the sound. Of it is basically you're called to account for everything that you've done and I've heard in some cases you know, supposedly and again, who the hell knows, but that you that you are, that you go through everything that you did to others as the person you did it to oh boy, and you have to really come into.
Speaker 2:Where is that? Yeah, that's an interesting, you know, that's scary.
Speaker 1:That's just basically. But, but that's it. That that now. Okay, this is what you did, right. This is what you did wrong. Now you got to go back in the game and now the only way you can be in the game and it be an honest game is you got to. You can't know it's a game, right? You can't know, like we talked about this a little bit in the um uh, whether it's a uh, simulation, right same kind of idea is you can't know it's a simulation.
Speaker 1:Because if you know it's a simulation, you're going to treat it like a simulation. Like when you play a video game and you know you're in a video game and you do all sorts of crazy stuff, right, if you didn't know it was a video game and you treated that video game as if it were life, you'd operate differently. There's a mode I know this is off topic, but there's a mode of playing some video games which is like the extreme, like a hardcore mode, where you basically you know most video games you die and then you come back to life, right. But there's some hardcore modes where it's like, no, you get one life, you die, the game's over. So you could be 50 hours into this game that takes a hundred hours to finish and if you die, you have to you stop, delete and start over from the beginning, right, and it's a hardcore mode, that people.
Speaker 1:But but it makes you think differently. Right, you're not gonna, because in a regular video game you're like I'm gonna try this. If it doesn't work, I'll just go back to my previous save and try it again, whereas if you didn't know, and so that's the thing is right. So so that's the idea. Is that? What if that is how it's all about? You're right. What if we knew? And then, all of a sudden, it was like so you better start paying attention to how you treat people, cause you're going to have to be called an account for all of that.
Speaker 2:And some religions I don't know if it's Buddhism, hindu, clear, maybe it's both. How you are in your present life, you'll then be reincarnated. Basically, your energy comes back in another form, and whatever form you come back, you either go up the ladder or down the ladder, and how nice, your life is Right. So there's that too. That's another little wrinkle, Like maybe you'd say, oh my god, if I am crappy to people, they're going to come back as this horrible existence I don't want to do that.
Speaker 1:What if you came back as a victim of the worst thing you did to somebody else? Oh my god. So like what if like it through your life and it's like, okay, so what was the worst thing you did? Oh you, you trafficked humans. Okay, your next life you're gonna be on the other end of that.
Speaker 2:Well right, so how?
Speaker 1:you're gonna experience life as it is to be. That's not to say that every person is trafficked, is deserves it because they did. But I'm just saying like that idea of like what if you come back as a victim of the worst thing you did to someone else? Right, you know that would be hard, like you're right knowing this stuff could that change society more than just unlimited resources?
Speaker 2:It just might, it might.
Speaker 1:And just the whole fact of and we've talked about this and then we'll move on to our next subject but just the fact is that, if you knew that, you know we're not, we're not like separate entities on this rock called earth. We're all, we're all humans. We entities on this rock called earth. We're all, we're all humans. We're all on the same side, right? We're all kind of like. If we could get on the same page and stop looking at ourselves as like russians and chinese and americans and this, and muslims and christians and like no, it's just, let's well, is that whole thing?
Speaker 2:there's that whole thing of? Maybe there's a um general consciousness, if you heard that theory like maybe I mean who, but it could be that those types of things are, you know, they're game changers.
Speaker 1:And they're things that we discuss theoretical, and so what if you knew, like taking it from the theoretical and the belief structure? And like, some people believe it, some people don't. Some people think that when you die, that's it. It's like that everything about Nobody knows, right.
Speaker 2:I don't know how you believe one or the other.
Speaker 1:Well, what's funny is that those people often call them say they're not religious, but they are. It's just your religion is that everything is science, right, like it's just another religion, right, right? So this person's religion is if, when you get to the end of this life, there's an afterlife, and this person's religion is that there's not an afterlife, but you come back as something else. And then there's this third group who looks at those two groups and goes silly superstition. I know that it's just one and done. We're just neurons and chemicals and when we die, that's it.
Speaker 1:They make themselves sound superior, but in reality they're just another belief structure. That their belief structure happens to just really focus on not believing anything. But it's still a belief structure. So don't give in your high and mighty horse about being an atheist. A lot of young people I know myself at one point I was atheist, agnostic at one point. Everybody who's, or most people who go through that kind of you know, intellectual discovery come to that certain point. You know, and then you end up somewhere in the middle. But it's just like it's just another belief structure. But what if all that guessing were taken away?
Speaker 2:Well, you know, and I'm not gonna structure, but what?
Speaker 1:if all that guessing were taken away.
Speaker 2:Well, you know, and I'm not going to we want to move on to this other guy but when you talk science, religion, I just think there has to be an overlap between them. Only because when you get to the base of matter that we know about, right, at the end of it, the basis is basically electrons. Where do electrons come from? Nobody knows. They just say, oh well, you know, it's matter that was created. The big bang? Well, the big bang's a theory, right, and a show and a show right, a pretty, you know kind of comical, but okay. So all matter is comprised of an element that you don't know where it came from. See, that's science, right, and I'm not disputing the scientific method.
Speaker 1:God forbid somebody call you a science denier.
Speaker 2:I am not a science denier.
Speaker 1:But you realize, at some core level it's all bullshit.
Speaker 2:The foundation of where, of how you explain. Everything cannot be explained. It's just guesses, it's educated guesses.
Speaker 1:It's the same with any science. Now you can prove repeatability and stuff like that. Obviously, you know science is real and when you can repeat things. But also science is also in some cases bullshit, because sometimes it's a theory and it's a theory that's backed up by fact and sometimes, when there are facts that don't comport to your theory, it's easier to ignore the facts than to work them into your theory until there's enough facts that it becomes so. Science wore up and down. At one point the Earth was the center of the universe, right. Science wore up and down at one point that there was the center of the universe, right. Science wore up and down. You know various things, right. Science wore up and down that. Did you know? Washing your hands? There's no need to wash your hands. There's no little like there's no little tiny things ridiculous.
Speaker 1:that's crazy talk you should, you know, trust the science, and then it's like oh wait, wait, there are germs.
Speaker 2:Washing your hands does matter, saying trust the science goes against science, because the only way you continue to prove science is by questioning science.
Speaker 1:You don't trust science. You trust religion. Science, you prove Science, you repeat Science, you demonstrate hey, I think, if you do this, this happens. Yeah, prove it. Okay, here I'm doing this, see that happen, and I do it again. I did this, that happened. Wow, do it a bunch more times. I did, hey, this guy over here, he did it too. This guy over here, he did we all do this and that happens. I guess that's science, not hey this happens.
Speaker 2:That's not science.
Speaker 1:That's belief and that's what you know. And, unfortunately, humans, we like to pat ourselves on the back and some of us like to say well, we're above that belief structure, we're serious people. We're scientists, some of it sure, some of it just belief, with a different coat of paint slapped on it.
Speaker 1:That's all it is. That's all it is. So you know we'll have to come back to this because this topic and I have a feeling we'll be brought back to this topic just as more stuff comes out. But so we got to get to this whistleblower. All right, we talk about whistleblowers a lot here. We've talked about you know. But this recent guy who came out again through NewsNation who's doing amazing, you know one of the networks. They're a newer cable network. If you're not familiar with NewsNation, they're probably in the very high spectrum of your cable box, right? They're not in the main numbers. You're not going to find them. Next, I have to put a search in Right, searching right. But I will say I can't. As I often say in my ufo talks. When I talk about news nation, I say I cannot vouch 100 for their like non-ufo coverage. Right, in many ways they operate like a any cable news network I would say they're slightly right leaning they're, yeah, although they're not as right leaning as fox.
Speaker 2:No, no, no, that, no, no, no. That's why I say slightly.
Speaker 1:Yeah, they have a nice balance to them and I pay attention because for a while I was watching them a lot, just because I was watching a lot of the UFO stuff. And they do a decent job of separating hey, we're delivering you facts, here are the facts as we know it. Delivering you facts, here are the facts as we know it. And they do a decent job of saying, hey, this guy is gonna give you some facts and then he's gonna spout his opinion about those facts, or this woman's gonna, you know, this person's gonna spout their opinion. But they do a decent job.
Speaker 2:But anyway, regardless, I know he got, I know he got kind of kicked off cnn, but I like that, I like the way that guy uh como oh yeah there's something about the way his. I like the way he delivers.
Speaker 1:He's got a very everyman kind of thing, and it's fun to see those who never would have touched the UFO topic. Chris Cuomo would not have touched this topic when he was on CNN.
Speaker 2:No.
Speaker 1:And he would have probably made derogatory comments about it. Now he has it. So, news Nation, they do a really good job. They put resources into this topic. They have somebody on Capitol Hill who frequently reports on it and asks the questions, and they hired a journalist named Ross Coulthard, an Australian journalist who is doing independent UFO research, and he's a journalist that was looking into this stuff.
Speaker 2:I do like him. He does great.
Speaker 1:He loves listening to himself. He's a very, very, yes, he's Australian, but they hired him full time so he's been bringing out stuff like left and right. He's the one who brought out David Grush one of the people because there was also an article that came out at the same time, but he was the one who brought out this new one. So the man's name is Jake Barber. He's a US Air Force official and he has a very colorful background and he's had some high credentialed people step forward, including David Grush, and say, no, he is who he says he is, and basically there's a two and a half, there's a two and a half. So News Nation had a special where they rolled out his story and it was an hour special with commercials, so it was about 40 minutes and they talked about a lot of stuff. After that, news Nation did put out on YouTube the full two and a half hour interview with this guy, jake Barber. He has since done another two and a half three hour interview with Jesse Michaels and he's done a few. I think that might be it, but he's doing more. But anyway it's worth watching.
Speaker 1:He claims to be a firsthand witness that in his professional you know occupation with the, you know, with the military. He eventually became a military, uh like a contractor, but he was still like working for the government, even though he didn't appear to be. It's really interesting story, you got it's really. He goes through and talks about basically how he was trained in certain things, kind of quietly in the army and then, or in the military, rather than it was in the army specifically, I know he did the Air Force. He was trained in certain things and then he had to go out in the private sector and learn those things, pretend to learn those things as if he didn't already know it. I thought that was really fascinating that they had he had learned in the military to fly. Know it? I thought that was really fascinating that they had he had learned in the military to fly.
Speaker 1:Yep, and he technically was an air, an aerospace mechanic, but also during the time he learned to fly and then when he got out but there was no record of him having learned these things. So when he got out he then had to go to flight school and pretend to learn to fly so he could be in a position to do what he needed. He was like a dark ops, black ops operator kind of thing, and he flew a helicopter and he would pick up high-value targets. Sometimes they were our experimental craft that crashed, sometimes they were adversaries craft vehicles that crashed, and there were some amount of times where he went and picked up something that he says and others say that was clearly non-human.
Speaker 1:All right, so that's where the story starts, right, his background, and News Nation showed a very brief clip of what looked like an egg-shaped object being suspended from a helicopter. You really couldn't see much, and I think a lot was made that, hey, we're going to show you some never-before-seen video, and okay, if you trust the providence of the video, it's interesting. If you don't, though, people look at it and go what the hell am I looking at? So it's that, but that's not where the story gets weird in this interview, and I don't know if I can do it all justice.
Speaker 1:Basically, he says that you know, uh, that they summon these uaps this is where it gets weird, this is where this is where it always goes and you can't avoid it. And but you do. And I I think I was saying earlier that like and this is true of a lot of people when you first get into the ufo topic, you're all about physical craft, physical evidence. You don't want to hear about crop circles, you don't want to hear about abductions, you certainly don't want to hear about telepathy and telekinesis and all sorts of woo-woo stuff. You just want it to be physical aliens flying from Planet X and coming here and that's okay. But as you get into this topic, that stuff comes in, it just does. You cannot avoid it. There's crossover, live with it, avoid it, there's crossover, live with it. So what Jake Barber basically alleged and um, and he again he didn't just allege this in in an, you know he had some, you know his, his background was confirmed, that he is who he says he is. You know he had. You know, basically, that they have. This is going to sound crazy.
Speaker 1:I say you know, just like I said before, I have to say this that there's a method, through meditation, that they have psionic assets who are able to mentally summon these craft and that's somehow. That's sometimes how we get them, not that they crash, that they are brought to land by psionics is what they call it. What's psionics? It's funny, you know, it's a lot of people like I've never heard that term before, but I played dnd and dungeon dragons, so that psionics has been like it's meant, it's mental, it's, it's okay, it's. Psionics is just another word for telepathy, telekinesis, being able to move things with your mind, being able to communicate with your mind, all that you would call it psychic powers.
Speaker 2:Oh, it says the study of psychic powers.
Speaker 1:It says psionics is kind of like a more. If you didn't want to say psychic, you'd say psionic, it's the study of psychic powers. You'd say psionic and it sounds it's more yeah, it's the study of psych, psychic. So. But basically that there's that they and and so he has come out with.
Speaker 2:Oh, was psionics like with the wizards, is that?
Speaker 1:No, psionics was more mind stuff, so, like I always knew it from the Dungeons and Dragons, kind of like, in Dungeons and Dragons there's obviously magic, right Right. But then there was this other kind of okay, if you wanted to have those kinds of powers but you didn't want it to be magic, there was this other subset of they could be psionics.
Speaker 2:Okay.
Speaker 1:And you know some people didn't like mixing chocolate with their peanut butter and if they fantasy fantasy. They wanted to just have any. I want to have wizards. I don't mind of psychics or whatever, so it's kind of controversial, but I I just knew that term psionics and, but to a lot of people it's the first time they're hearing it.
Speaker 2:I just had been exposed to it. Anybody played dnd, was it? Just it was a word they probably played right, but now it's like coming back.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I'm listening, but it was like you know, at one point there's like a you know a special handbook for that, like psionics handbook. You can have all these mind powers, whatever it's. Just it's a way of bringing that in. But, yeah, and so he's come out and he says, all right, I get it, this stuff sounds crazy. Right, I'm telling you this. He did a, he testified to the Senate Select Committee for Intelligence and it was supposed to be a two-hour uh briefing and he was there four and a half hours. Um, now, when you say that I briefed the senate uh intelligence committee, it doesn't mean you brief the politicians, you you you briefed their people, their lawyers there.
Speaker 1:That's usually how they insulate. They don't let you know. Not every congress I mean a senator or congressperson or whatever is necessarily sitting in the room there. It's their staffers are hearing this, because then they can selectively let the politicians in on what they need to know. But anyway, and so he came out and said basically that they have him, along with other people who were in the program, and those people to come out but are coming out, have created this organization which is being funded by, like, private equity groups, including that Alex Crocus guy who is the one who runs that SALT. Remember I told you bringing the financial people in.
Speaker 1:Well, they created this organization called Skywatcher and, according to Jake Barber and this is what he's saying he's saying watch, in the current months, we're not asking money, we funded. We don't need money from everybody, anybody, we are fully funded. We are putting together a thing. What we're going to show you, we're going to demonstrate how you can do this, how you can summon, how it can be summoned to bring these things to us. And they just had some sort of like conference was invite, only that, apparently, like a lot of wealthy people, a lot of like the movers and shakers in the finance, you know area, went to and they demonstrated it for it. Ross Coulthart was there, he talked about it a little bit, that he saw what was anything.
Speaker 1:They summoned yeah, they have, like, they have stuff and they're going to be rolling it all out. So supposedly, I mean he says quite clearly the hell he says quite clearly this is going to be, and he claims that they're working with the government. He's not doing it on his own, he's like we're working with selected things. So no, no, but what I mean?
Speaker 2:what would you be doing if you watch that?
Speaker 1:that's the question, right right, he claims that in the coming months I really hope it's something that can be watched, because it sounds crazy.
Speaker 2:It does sound crazy.
Speaker 1:And that's the thing about this.
Speaker 2:I've heard a lot of other crazy things that turn out to be all right.
Speaker 1:It's so nuts.
Speaker 2:So you're saying that one person, or does it have to be some collective?
Speaker 1:it's, they train people for it.
Speaker 2:This is just my point is like do they have to do it together?
Speaker 1:yeah, usually they have more than one person doing it, okay and, um, usually they're, a lot of times they are indigenous people because they are more like you can be trained in this. There was something called the gate program, I guess, back in the day, where young gifted children were like tested for various like whether they have like mental acuity or whatever in a lot of schools I guess, and some people went into this program and were and it was kind of like a training, for this kind of stuff sounds like stranger things. It's weird. It again like the video they showed of this egg object. Right, it's an egg, it's an egg-shaped object and Jake Barber made-.
Speaker 2:How did they get the video? Did they explain that?
Speaker 1:No, that video did not come from Jake Barber. They were showing that video Right. Ross says we got it. We can't, obviously can't say, because they're not supposed to have it.
Speaker 2:So basically, it was leaked to them, kind of like the way Corbell got some of his videos.
Speaker 1:But basically he said you know obviously what do you think of when you think of an egg spaceship.
Speaker 2:I think of Mork and Mindy Right.
Speaker 1:He made very strong indications that that was purposeful.
Speaker 2:Really.
Speaker 1:That it was purposeful making the egg the method of conveyance for Mork, because it's long been alleged, and even confirmed in some cases, that the intelligence agencies for a long time have had their fingers in the Hollywood pie.
Speaker 1:Yeah, that's always been a thing, because occasionally they hey, we want such and such depicted in a certain way, we want such and such depicted in a certain way. We want such and such. We just, you know, this is how you kind of, again, if you think for two seconds, if you have a society and you're among the people running a society, are you just going to let stuff happen or are you going to try the best of your ability to kind of manage stuff Right? People say I don't like living in a managed reality. We're always living in a managed reality. We're always living in a managed reality. It's just right now we're living in a badly managed reality.
Speaker 2:That might be true.
Speaker 1:But it's always going to be managed. A non-managed reality means that everybody has access to everything. You can't run a society that way. You have to demarcate certain things right. So the thought process is why would Mork there was nothing about him that why? Why was an egg his? Yeah, oh, it's funny. Okay, why was that chosen? Okay, it's funny all right, I get it.
Speaker 1:But what if you knew that was a fact? And you knew that there were craft of that shape? How do you make it not a thing? Well, you take something that's real and you put it in a fictional content and concept. Right and now, whenever people see that or hear that, they're going to roll their eyes and go that's mork for mork. That's fiction. Of course it is. Don't worry about it, as absurd as that sounds. Now, egg, why would it? Why would a craft be?
Speaker 1:yeah egg shape, because that's one of the most aerodynamic shapes like, if you look, if you look into it because of the way it's, everything about it it makes it makes sense that if you were going to have a craft, it's that kind of shape, know, you hear about the cigar shape, you hear about the tic-tac that's all kind of in that egg-ish kind of, you know kind of.
Speaker 1:So basically that's one part of it is that you know, a lot of this stuff that's going to be coming out is going to sound like fiction and you may have even heard it in fiction, but that doesn't mean it's not real. It just means that you've heard it in fiction but that doesn't mean it's not real. It just means that you've heard it in fiction and you could have heard it, because it becomes this weird. He said he coined this term, which I thought was kind of funny. He's like when you take something that's fiction, when you take something that's real and you put it in fiction, he's like you kind of you take fact and you make it fiction, then you kind of it becomes this weird thing of sort of like faction I thought that was kind of funny where it's like if people hear egg-shaped craft, they're going to say Mork for Mork and they're going to not pay any more attention to it.
Speaker 1:So that's what's going on. There's a two and a half hour interview. It's worth the watch because, like I said, it's they go into all that stuff in more depth. One of the things I thought was really fascinating was all right, here's the question how come he can talk about it and he's like he tells this story of how they the DOPSER process. That's the, the, the where you have to, if you're going to, if you have top secret clearance and you're going to talk about anything that has to do with you know stuff.
Speaker 1:You have to submit it all to adopter review. David Grush had to do this. So everything David Grush said he had put in for adopter review and had been cleared for him to say that's why some things he said he couldn't answer Lou Elizondo was the same way he put in for adopter clearance. Anybody who has a classified um, you know, classified level has to put in for this. So what he did this is this is a fascinating story. I just re-heard this this morning. When I listened to it, they pretended to be creating a work of fiction. Now he had it. It was coming through him because the reason why a adopter process is done is the person.
Speaker 2:So what process can you explain?
Speaker 1:The adopter. That's the process of hey, this is what I'm going to say out loud. Take a look at it. Oh, you can't say this. You can't say this, you can't say this Right.
Speaker 2:That's why they did that.
Speaker 1:So, but it's a slip. It's a weird thing, because if they tell you you can't talk about something, that's kind of admitting that there's something to it, right?
Speaker 1:So what he did was and he tells the story how how they said he's like how are you able to talk about this? He's like well, this is what we did. I put in adopter, hey, I'm going to be I. I think they did it as episodes of a show. It wasn't going to exist and so he did. Here's the first 10,000 words of this is the first episode of the show, and what he did is he worked in stuff that he knew was classified and knew that would be yanked. Stuff that he knew was classified but it was still out in the public domain. Stuff he knew didn't know was classified but it was still out in the public domain. Stuff he knew didn't know was classified but knew was crap, right. And then other stuff that he, like he knew it was a test to see some of his suspicions. It was kind of doing counterintel, because this was his job in the military, was Red Force. He would be the guy who would act as the enemy in training and try to outthink our guys. He would be the guy who would be doing kind of counterintelligence kind of stuff, and he was doing that against the federal government. So he was basically saying, okay, now when I get the thing back, oh, they said I can't talk about that. Oh, they said I can't talk about that. And then they had other stuff where he said other stuff that they would take stuff they knew and would make logical conclusions to almost going fishing and saying, hey, here's this thing we're gonna talk about. They don't know, it's true. But if they come back and say, well, you can't talk about that, ding, ding, it's true, because if it wasn't true you wouldn't care if I said it. So it's true, because if it wasn't true you wouldn't care if I said it. Right, so it was really interesting. So he's able to talk about what he's able to talk about. But he kind of tricked them in a way, because some of the things that he said he was going to talk about they the Dopster review, which is fairly, it's not like the people you send it to know everything. They have to send it to the respective people like, hey, he's talking about this. Oh, this is run by the CIA. So I better send it to the CIA and say, hey, can you talk about this? This part is run by the NSA. Hey, nsa, he's talking about this. So the trick is is that if the people running the Dobson Review don't know something's real, because such a thing is so off the books that it's not nobody knows it exists, then the doctor people can't tell him not to talk about it. Therefore, when he puts in his request and says, well, I, I said I was going to talk about these things and they didn't mark this, he can't get in trouble for saying it gotcha. So it was really clever the way he did it. And he did it in such a way that it it won, it freed up some things for him to talk about that would normally would have been not able to be talked about, because and and then also answered some questions for him, because he had his own questions, because, again, he's only.
Speaker 1:He describes himself as being like the. He's the fingers of the operation. You know he's the one on the ground doing this stuff and he talks about how. You know, between the fingers you have, you have the shoulder and you have the brain which is telling the shoulder what to do, and then the shoulder and he's like but in between the shoulder and in the fingertips you got the, you got the elbow, and if the elbow has its own ideas of what to do. Then the shoulder it's basically explaining how a lot of these things work. That it's like, and he realized that he was being used on things that weren't sanctioned, things that weren't, and there was cases of and gone down.
Speaker 1:And private aerospace has recovery teams and the government, secretly, has recovery teams and there have been cases where two recovery teams converged on an object at the same time and shots were fired. Really, two people were supposedly killed and again, this would have been something that would have been completely covered up, that those two individuals who were killed, their families, would have never been told that they died doing what they were doing, because the whole thing's secret. So there's a lot to this and in the coming months, skywatcher is going to be in concert with some agencies of the government and rolling out. Basically, you know, here's proof, here's proof. This is going on Like. So there's those saying that in the next you know couple of months, stuff's going to be coming out. That is going to make our previous conversation kind of moot because it's going to. It's going to, it's going to tip the thing. But yeah, what are your thoughts on his, on his, what are your thoughts on his whole? You know what his claims were.
Speaker 2:Well, I like I said, like we talked about a little earlier, I was kind of struck the way he said he kind of thought was it when they were retrieving the egg? He said he was flying the object, yeah, and he had this kind of felt like it was communicating with him, but not words, but feelings that kind of well, either one or two things are happening. One, the guy's out of his mind, or two it happened.
Speaker 1:To him at least. He wasn't sure at the time.
Speaker 2:he said he said he almost wanted to cry. He started to cry and he was like am I having a breakdown?
Speaker 1:Yeah, and this whole idea of these UAP being connected with consciousness. This has been like a newer kind of thing that's been talked about. It's seeming more and more like that's the thing. Consciousness is the way these craft are controlled.
Speaker 2:I've heard Well, I mean yes, but how are they communicating? And then the question would be who's communicating? Do they think they're communicating with one person, or do they think they're communicating with what some people describe as a collective consciousness? Of human beings. They're not necessarily it's really kind of like, kind of it's weird Big brain kind of stuff.
Speaker 1:They're not necessarily communicating with who's in the craft. They're communicating with whatever's controlling the craft and the craft in some cases is not being flown. I mean, whatever's controlling the craft and the craft in some cases is not being controlled, is not being flown. I mean, there's a lot to this that you know, the little gray aliens, right, the little, the one, the traditional gray aliens that you see right there everywhere, right, big, big eyes, you know, um, there's been a lot of talk about like what, what you know, are those us? Is that what the human would eventually become if you go in the future? And there's other people, there's others who say and again, I can't answer this stuff, but I cannot say this supposedly in cases where said beings were recovered and autopsies were done, that those things do not have stomachs, that those things do not eat, and those, those are, in essence, biological robots.
Speaker 2:That's what I was going to say.
Speaker 1:We are at the point now, humans are at the point now. We're just about at that point, right, we're almost there where we can construct, we can put genes together and DNA and all that stuff. Theoretically we could do that if you had the funding and stuff to do it. But it is theoretically possible that idea that those gray aliens are not what this thing is, they're the emissary, they're the fingertips of this thing that we're interacting with, but we're not interacting with it.
Speaker 1:We're interacting with what it's choosing to send, it's biological robots that it sends to do the interacting because maybe, I mean, it's going to get really weird, but maybe what those things are, we couldn't even conceive them. What if we couldn't even, like I said, dimensional, like?
Speaker 2:what if we couldn't even see them? I mean because we know what if?
Speaker 1:what? Here's a scary, we know there a certain light we can't see what if these things are all around us?
Speaker 1:that's what I mean. Can you imagine if, like, can you imagine, if that's the answer if you have to tell people at some point like hey, yeah, and uh, oh, by the way, these things are everywhere, like everywhere, like they're probably right next to you right now and they're doing their own thing and they're not paying any attention to you because they're in another phase of existence. But if they wanted to pay attention to you, which they do sometimes, they could. Um, so when you're sitting on the toilet, theoretically there's an alien who could look at you if he wanted to, and he could be looking at you and go I look at that thing like maybe we live in a version of that movie.
Speaker 2:They live right, right where that's another one.
Speaker 1:Did that like, could that have been just kind of like hey guys, this is what's going on. I'm going to let you. I'm going to put it in a movie, though, because that way, when you hear that's really going on, you're going to go that's they live.
Speaker 2:I saw that Roddy Roddy, right Piper.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 1:And the longest fight scene, remember it does. And every time you think the fight's wrapping up, then all of a sudden it starts up again. It's like a street fight wrestling match. Oh my God, that's a great movie that I saw that not too long ago, but yeah, so, yeah, this. That's the thing about this right Is yeah. But if he'd come out and it had just been, hey, I was one of the ones recovering the craft and here's my story and like, if you had everything and left out all that psionic stuff, there's a lot of people who would be more comfortable with it, because that's what made a lot of people uncomfortable, like. A lot of people are like I don't know, I don't know, I don't believe in that stuff, and it's like okay, I don't know, I don't believe in that stuff, and it's like okay, but in another way. I'm like okay, but if that was his experience, it would be inauthentic to not say that just because you're afraid, like all of this stuff, either you're in or you're out.
Speaker 1:Like, where are you going to draw the line, are you?
Speaker 2:non-human. I'm not drawing a line. I'm not drawing a line, just my mind. When someone says that, I say okay, that needs to be verified to me.
Speaker 1:That's all I'm just saying the general, like where does one draw the line? I can believe in aliens and UFOs, but this part is a road too far. It's like, at what point are you starting to go? It's like do you believe there's UFOs? Okay, there are UFOs. Do you believe there's aliens? Well, I guess if there are UFOs, there have to be aliens. Okay, so do you believe the aliens could be abducting people? Well, I guess. If they're aliens and they fly UFOs, I guess by the transitive properties, I guess that has to be true. Okay, so now these things are controlled Once you get on there.
Speaker 2:It's just like it's a slippery slope. The rest of it, you can at least relate it with other parts of your life, right? When someone says I can think about it and those things come to me, right, it's like you know, most people say to themselves what are you, aquaman, like? How are you doing this when? Because no one's experienced that in any other aspect of their life.
Speaker 1:We have been again kind of indoctrinated with the idea that stuff isn't real. But then you go back and you look at old CIA files and there was a project called Stargate where they trained remote viewers.
Speaker 1:And they said, they saw the moon and they said they saw Mars. Mars and this isn't CIA documents, the moon too, though the moon too, but they said that Mars from a million years ago, right, and in the CIA documents that are declassified, it talks about like yeah, we had a remote viewer and looked at Mars and saw, you know, ruins there and things like that, and like so.
Speaker 2:And then they found now they just found this thing with like a square, Do you see?
Speaker 1:this yeah, nature does not do right, and they know that water.
Speaker 2:Yeah, now they know, water did flow.
Speaker 1:It's the same thing. Life is just getting closer and closer, like, like I always say, when we were kids, no life in the universe, right, they said cold and dead were the only thing. And then I said, oh, maybe there's life on distant planets, but we can't get there. Now it's like, well, there's like now. It's like well, it could be life on you know, microbe life on, you know, jupiter's, one of Jupiter's moons. It could have been. Yeah, there could have been microbe life on Mars. It's like getting closer and closer it's getting.
Speaker 1:This is all part of the process. This is all part of the desensitization process. It's been going on for a while. I'm not saying it's 100% like organized, but it's the general desensitization process where you get people comfortable oh, you're not comfortable with the idea of non-human life. Okay, there's non-human life out there, way out there. Okay, you're comfortable with that. Okay, now it's a little closer. Now it's a little closer. Now it's an O tier, you know, and you hope that by the time you get to the point where you say it's here, you've warmed people up and it's that same kind of thing where, like, some of this stuff just gets so weird.
Speaker 2:So weird, but well, it's not as yes, it does, but it's not as weird as it could be If you didn't take the other thing before it.
Speaker 1:You know what I'm trying to say. Yeah, it's.
Speaker 2:It's like you keep. There are some jumps that are kind of further than others, yes, but they're in succession kind of and it comes a certain point we're in for a penny and for a pound.
Speaker 1:like it comes a certain point where it's like if I'm going to believe a, b, c and d, then I I can't by all rights reject efg and h out of hand. I, I mean, I don't have to necessarily believe them, but you've gotten me this far and this is where the evidence is leading. I guess I'm all in Right and so that's the it's. It's a funny watching the like, the evolution of of this topic, but that's the scary part is in the mainstream.
Speaker 1:That's the only part I question is like I said earlier, we're not all there yet. I still have to. I still have to have stupid discussions with people about whether this stuff even exists, and at that point I'm like I don't know what to tell you, man. But how much is going to come out before you realize there's a there there? How many politicians, how many high-ranking politicians, how many projects are you going to see? How much billions of dollars do you see our military putting into this stuff before you say, obviously there's something to it.
Speaker 1:They do this nice little trick too, like with the Stargate program. Right, oh, the CIA looked at remote viewing and they shut the Stargate program. Right, oh, the CIA looked at remote viewing and they shut the Stargate program down. Guess, it didn't work. And most people will tell you programs are shut down all the time. All that means is that they shifted over to a new name. No intelligence agency is going to stop using a method that works, and certainly our adversaries are not going to like, are not going to not use a method that works. So you don't think that Russia, you don't think that China has their own remote viewing programs. You're deluding yourself, do you not even think the U? S still has remote view? Of course they do.
Speaker 1:The Stargategate program, which was the remote viewing process, you know program that we told you about, that got shut down and then the press goes oh, I guess it, there was nothing to it. Yeah, I guess so, and it's like no. Well, the question is, does this program still exist under a different name? Oh, we can't tell you that, but don't worry about it, you know that's the thing is like. So now, okay, if your government is putting time and effort and money into remote viewing, there must be something to it. What the hell does that mean? Right, does that mean that? And does that mean that there are people right now who are trained and are sitting in a room and looking at, um, you far away places and getting intelligence from it? I guess it does. That stuff's real. What the hell does that change everything? What do you mean? Again, it's that acceptance of what if you found all this like what if? What happens, when everyone accepts and realizes that that stuff isn't just fantasy? That I mean, and one of the it's hard to prove, prove.
Speaker 2:I think that those has to be demonstrated still exist. It's hard to prove um and I it when I say hard to prove, um, let's just say there is a program right now and there's someone doing remote viewing right and it's not necessarily always going to be to look at another planet plan.
Speaker 2:It could be to look something in this, something on this planet, those methods like we've talked about before would be classified and no one's going to talk about them. Because that method might have told somebody I mean it's kind of outlandish, but maybe it told somebody where Osama bin Laden was. I mean, who knows? But if that's what someone's using it for, for they're never going to tell you and and and at what point?
Speaker 1:if you know about this process, there must be protection against it. Right, could you have your own, maybe not remote viewers, but remote uh blockers? Right?
Speaker 2:could there be people?
Speaker 1:who sit there and basically just go. Our job is to mentally keep out other remote viewers. It's like a sci-fi movie and again, this stuff sounds ridiculous but it's looking, you know. So anyway, jake Barber Skywatcher is the name of the organization I highly recommend. I'll, if I I'm going to try to put the link to the.
Speaker 2:I want to look a little more up, Cause I I don't know a lot about that skywatcher program.
Speaker 1:It's brand new, he like it's an organization and again it's. You know a lot of people like, oh grift, and it's like they're not asking for money. They're not saying they don't want your money, they there are deep pockets who are looking into this stuff because, again, the money people are getting this is the last stage of the military was first, the religion was second, not to say they're all there. But you know, and now you're bringing the money people in to be able to keep, or any government is not going to be able to keep this secret now that private individuals um have the ability to do this and supposedly this is a skill.
Speaker 1:This is not some specialized thing that you that supposedly this is something that every one of us has the capacity to learn how to do. Some people may have more aptitude for it and some people may have more of a penchant for it, but it's like any learned skill, right? I mean, you'll have people who are really great at baseball and just have an innate talent for baseball, but anyone can learn to play baseball. They may not be the greatest baseball player, but if they learn the game and learn how to play it, they can play it fairly well. And it's the same thing with this. This is just a skill like any other skill.
Speaker 2:I wonder what it's rooted in, only because I always thought that remote viewing had something to do with the collective consciousness of people, and that's how you see things but I'm not sure how you see things on Mars.
Speaker 1:It's more than the non locality of everything like that. Time and space are an artificial construct and really at its core, fundamental, and really at its core fundamental, everything is happening at once and everywhere is everywhere at once. You know?
Speaker 2:kind of thing that's like wasn't that a movie? Yeah, I didn't see it, but I heard it was good.
Speaker 1:It's again. It's getting at this fundamental, like our understanding of our universe and our place in it is so elementary and fundamental.
Speaker 1:And we like to think that we're so advanced and we like to, but I feel like a certain whole part of our existence has been kind of kept from us. I often say I think over the years we've been artificially led to believe that the world is smaller, more understood and less mysterious than it really is. And I think over time it's kind of been that you know again, it's just that general. How do you keep a society in line? Well, you don't want the society to know that there's anything to be learned. Like, hey, we know everything, don't worry about it, you just produce and consume. Yeah, don't worry, your pretty little heads.
Speaker 2:Those are the tenets of society because we understand everything.
Speaker 1:We've mapped every inch of this planet, we know everything about it. We know everything about every other planet and we know how the universe works and we know that these phenomena do exist. These phenomena do not exist, so don't worry about them. And it's like okay, but but maybe not. Maybe the world we've been kind of taught to exist, there's more to it and the stuff is pressing a lot of those buttons and there's a lot of even ufo people who are like whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
Speaker 1:I did not sign up for this again, I'm okay with physical craft flying from planet x and coming here. If you start talking about psionics and summoning, you know, remote viewing and all this stuff, uh, I can't get on board. And jake barber basically says I don't know what to tell you. He's like he. He can tell he's religious because he quotes the bible a lot and one of the things he's like, he's like to quote one of the Bible verses. He's like you'll know us by our fruits, basically saying don't have to believe what I'm telling you.
Speaker 1:We're going to show you. And he's like we're doing it. We've been doing it, we've been working on this for years and we're rolling it out now. We're not just starting this. This has been in operation, for this has been in progress for a long time and now sky watcher is rolled out. You can look it up and see and they're they're saying they're going to be totally transparent and that they have, and you know again, they demonstrated this for select individuals and they're not ready to roll it out to the public yet, but the eventual plan is we're going to roll it out, we're going to show you, we're going to demonstrate in no uncertain terms this is how you do it, this is how you summon one of these crafts.
Speaker 2:And here it comes and you're going to make it land. Now that's a really tall.
Speaker 1:You know that's a really big claim. Right Proof's going to be in the pudding.
Speaker 2:I want to see it.
Speaker 1:I do too. I do too. The dangerous part about this stuff, though, is the fact that a lot of people now you know. Have you heard of CE5? Dr Stephen Greer, You've heard of him?
Speaker 2:right, yes.
Speaker 1:That's his like. Ce5 is basically what they're talking about here, which is basically the idea of putting yourself into trance and getting to a state of mind and being able to summon. He's been talking about this stuff for years and most people just kind of roll their eyes and go and stuff's ridiculous. And now all of a sudden you have jake barbara coming out going no, he's, he's been talking about this stuff, he's, we've been doing this, but basically that's what CE5 is. So again, it's not something that is impossible to learn. There are people out there doing it and there's a lot of other people cautioning and going whoa, whoa, whoa. Just because you know this thing exists, don't start messing with it. Now Jake Barber says that, hey, everything that they've interacted with has been great and, like he said and as other people say, you know, very similar to the spirit thing. You know you don't necessarily open up the conduit. You can't always count that what's going to come through is going to have your best interest at heart.
Speaker 1:And it's a similar thing with this is now kind of getting worried because there's a lot of people now who know, okay, this is real, this is something that can be done. Now I want to learn how to do it. And being cautioned and saying, listen, you could do it, you, you could learn how to do it. Just beware, because you don't necessarily people who have these kind of experiences. It's not one done.
Speaker 1:Usually you maybe hear about skywalker, um, skywalker ranch, um, skinwalker Right, skywalker that's the Skywalker Ranch is where Lucas makes does his thing. Skinwalker Ranch this is supposedly the hitchhiker effect, where sometimes people have experiences there and then it follows them home, it latches itself. Wow, and these are not things like a lot of people who have these experiences. They're like, they're not all fun and games. They're not. They're not all great. You know, know, and you got to be careful about this stuff. This is messing with stuff, you know. So there's that other danger of once this stuff really gets out there in the public, are people going to be like trying this on their own and could it cause more problems.
Speaker 2:So it's a lot, there's a lot another, another, uh, another, um possibility of a connection between a religious thing and something else, because it sounds like that, it sounds like communion.
Speaker 1:It sounds exactly like that, right? So anyway, we'll have more to say on this at a later time, I'm sure. As evidence come out, we'll certainly be talking about it here. So the last thing I want to talk about the last thing, and we'll do this relatively quickly and wrap this up. We'll keep this. We'll keep this.
Speaker 2:Because this last thing could be another two hour discussion.
Speaker 1:I won't be. Task force, that is. It operates under the um, let's see, it operates under the authority of the house committee on oversight and government reform and it's called the task force on the declassification of federal secrets. And so trump uh signed an executive order uh 146, and he signed that on January 23rd 2025. Luther king jr uh, as well as um, the unidentified anomalous phenomena, they say ufos and usos, unidentified submerged objects, yep, uh, as well as a few other things like 9-11 and covid. So supposedly they're going to be declassifying stuff. So the first thing that the task force is looking into is supposedly the JFK files in total are going to be released and this task force is going to have they're going to have they operate under that committee on oversight, so they don't have subpoena power, but the overall committee has it and the committee Jay Comer, I think was the is the guy who, right.
Speaker 2:He basically said they have our support and you know when the documents are released is everyone have access to them?
Speaker 1:So supposedly when they're released they're going to everybody's going to have access to them and they're going to hold hearings. I mean it's kind of crazy, anna, pauline and Luna said in the first press conference. They said the first thing they're going to tackle is the John F Kennedy assassination and there's strong indications that the the original, you know the Warren commission was wrong. Well, I want to see that. And they and she said right there, she said the strong evidence and we're going to be showing this.
Speaker 2:Something about the. They're saying there was strong evidence, two shooters more than one shooter. So did they say two or more than one, they said more than one.
Speaker 1:At least two shooters. Well, they said two shooters.
Speaker 2:But like Listen, if there's something in there that it's not just you're saying, it could be that that's in it's-.
Speaker 1:It's kind of almost like the worst kept secret. It's kind of well like, it's kind of well understood by those who've looked at it that what we're probably going to find out is the intelligence agencies, the CIA, had something to do with it. Well, that would be Because they were already caught for doing stuff like that in other countries.
Speaker 2:I know that. But that's killing a president, I know.
Speaker 1:And that's the thing right Is that's why it's been kept secret, like a lot of people say, like why these files supposedly have been declassified time and time again, but there was a certain subsect of them that every president has chosen to defer. That any president at any time, from Bush Bush you know Bush one, you know elder Bush to Clinton, to W Bush, to Obama, to Trump I mean all of them, like they could have declassified them, and every one of them both parties have decided to defer. And even Trump in his first four years, he was looking at opening them up and Mike Pompeo, who I believe was head of CIA at the time, advised him and said you know what, you're better off, we should keep this stuff secret. And he deferred. And he said okay, and he kept it secret. So I think what we're going to end up finding out is that our intelligence agencies had something to do. We talked, we did a whole episode on this at JFK.
Speaker 2:I really hope not.
Speaker 1:I think it's inevitable. And you know what? Don't be surprised if there is a link between this and UAP. There's strong indications that in those waning days before what, one of the things JFK was doing before he went to Dallas and didn't come back is he was trying to rein in the CIA.
Speaker 2:Well, that's yeah.
Speaker 1:And one of the topics he was looking at was UAP.
Speaker 2:Oh.
Speaker 1:And he made some, you know, like again, like what? This you can't, we gotta let this he. Actually there's some indication that JFK wanted us to share with the Soviets and work together on this UAP thing and that the intelligence agency is like no, no, no, no, no, we're not doing that. And then he got murdered and then everybody moved on. So again, I'm not saying it's 100%, but there are strong indications that there's a connection between that. And then you're going to find out about Senator Robert F Kennedy, right?
Speaker 1:I mean yeah, I still think there's like something up sir hanser like like there's something there, and what if you find out?
Speaker 2:martin luther king like all three, all three crazy lone gunmen, yeah yeah, and what if you find out our intelligence agencies? I mean, that's now well, because I mean, if you look at it, I know we're gonna, we're gonna not talk about it for a while, but those three people that were killed, if they weren't killed, you kind of looking at, you wonder sometimes how societies would have gone. They were very, you know, very much revolutionary kind of people in terms of their, their, how they were viewing things going forward.
Speaker 1:I would love to see a world is. You know, I often think about like alternate timelines and that idea of like you change one thing and I would love to see, if I had like what changes. We'd like to see how things came up. Obviously, one is like I'd love to see how the world would have unfolded had you knowedy and and senator robert kennedy and martin luther king, like what how would the world have unfolded if they did not die right?
Speaker 1:the other one I think would be really interested is what would happen if christopher columbus's three ships just sank before they got here. Like, like, like, like. How much longer would it have been before they attempted that again, and what? How would that change things?
Speaker 1:right like like would it still have? Like would still have when they eventually got here, um, or like what? What would happen if, like, I don't know what would happen if every ship that tried for a long time got like axed and like nobody ever? And the, the cultures over here which you know, initially we were led to believe were pretty primitive and savage. But now they were not at all, they just were different. And if their society had been allowed to advance-.
Speaker 2:Oh, I thought of that, Chris, myself. Yeah, like what would happen. Where would we be if the Mayans just they just went in their own direction, right. What type of technology would they have come up with?
Speaker 1:Probably.
Speaker 2:Except, you know, because everyone's pretty much Western civilization now, right, right.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 2:So what if China was just allowed to be China, without Western influence?
Speaker 1:And it's interesting because if you think of China as a very good example, because for the longest time they did separate themselves and it had a profound effect on how different they are from us they actually insulated themselves yeah and they and so where they're, where they're different from us, is very apparent by the fact that, well, they look kind of sequestered for the longest time, right.
Speaker 1:They're not so different anymore now, because now they've been kind of integrated in, right. So that would be fascinating. But you're right, I think, I think. I just feel like right now is just an era of uncovering of secrets and I think in the next client list would Epstein. Everyone wants that. That's supposedly on the talk at two, Right and does that change the power structure?
Speaker 1:Like you, just wonder how the origins of COVID all this and and what's really surprising is the 9-11 files, like what is there? And I mean I'm sure you've heard some of the conspiracy theories and they're interesting. Is there anything to any of?
Speaker 2:that.
Speaker 1:Right. I mean, it's easy to say no, it's easy to be like no, of course not, that's a conspiracy theory. But like, well, this task force is looking at it. There's obviously files that haven't been declassified about 9-11. So there's some facts that haven't been out there.
Speaker 2:It was a conspiracy theory that COVID came from a lab in China. Now it's almost becoming reality, common knowledge that that's what happened. Right yeah.
Speaker 1:So you know, Today's conspiracy theory is tomorrow's fact.
Speaker 2:It's easy just to say oh, that's a conspiracy theory. Well, we've talked about that, yeah.
Speaker 1:Anybody who uses the term conspiracy theory go back and research where that even term came from and realize that every time you use it, you're just doing what you're told Because, honestly, there are conspiracies all over the place. Conspiracies happen all the time and sometimes they're discovered, sometimes they're not. Sometimes they're discovered at the time, sometimes they're discovered years later, sometimes they're never discovered because all the people who were in the conspiracy died without telling anyone and people were just left to wonder well, what happened in this case? Right, and the idea that conspiracy theories can't happen and like, oh, that's a conspiracy theory, because that would be weird. I think I saw a thing is like at the rate we're running out, the rate we're going through conspiracy theories, we estimate we'll be out of them by 2028 because they all would have been like oh no, that was proven true, and that was proven true.
Speaker 2:You know what the covid went to all?
Speaker 1:the time.
Speaker 2:Um well, we were doing gain of function research. Yeah, it's like okay. So at first I didn't even know what that meant. Yeah, did you? Yeah?
Speaker 1:I. I knew pretty early on, because it's a euphemism gain of function it means giving the disease, gaining more function of the disease. Yeah, so you wanted to kill more people.
Speaker 2:Yes, that's the gain of function. Yeah, the function was to kill people.
Speaker 1:Well, it gets even worse now, right, so why were you even doing that? But it doesn't even stop with that Now. I mean, it's looking seriously and again, this is not a conspiracy. This is being reported now that it's looking very clear like Lyme disease might have been a similar thing.
Speaker 2:Yes, that Lyme disease just didn't-. That was a conspiracy theory.
Speaker 1:That didn't just pop up. It came up because they were. A lab in Connecticut was messing with things they ought not have messed with, and that's why it's called Lyme disease, because it was like Connecticut right the first time they found it. Yes, and it may not have been.
Speaker 2:They were coming up with a way of transmitting a virus or, however, bacteria, through an insect they could use during war. That's a conspiracy theory. But where did it? Why did it just start?
Speaker 1:Well, whatever, and the fact that you have you know the fact also not to go too much down a road of this is, but you know they're finding, you know the ice under the ice of Antarctica and stuff you know they can find. You know viruses and things that have been locked in ice for you know, and in some cases they're, they're unthawing these things and messing around with them.
Speaker 2:Yeah, and it's like you do realize that right.
Speaker 1:You do realize that this like nobody has any immunity to that stuff because that that particular virus has not been on the planet for like whatever, and god forbid that. Get out, and don't you people learn from your mistakes? No wonder why, if there's a non-human intelligence that they're not 100% sure of us. I'm not 100% sure of us like we are. Just, we're just angry little monkeys that mess with things that ought not to be messed with, you know.
Speaker 1:So, um, so, anyway it. It's remains to be seen where this goes, uh, but supposedly they're having, you know, the first hearings are going to be jfk and supposedly they're going to be, you know, moving through the things and releasing things. And I gotta tell you, between this declassification thing and between skywatcher and just just everything that's going on, I keep saying, you know, I, I persist. We are on the inevitable march towards disclosure. Nobody can predict when it's gonna happen. It's, it's gonna happen though it's it's not. You can't put it back, and you just can't put it back in the, in the, in the bottle. You can try and you can try to shut it down, but too much has already come out and now you have too many people who are already going. Wait a second, okay, so stuff's flying to the sky. All right, I can detect it too. I don't need the military, I can, you know, you can get. This wasn't always possible, right In the sixties and the seventies, even the eighties. Yous, you know the. You couldn't get that kind of technology, you know, reasonably priced.
Speaker 1:But now, you can you know, now people go on amazon and buy something that'll detect, like you know, all sorts of things, so you can't stop this. It's it's. If it is true, it's going to come out, and if it's not true, even that's the biggest story of the millennia. That's the fact that this, if all this stuff ends up not being true, that's a bigger story than if it is true. The fact that you know how it was that we all thought this was true. If it wasn't.
Speaker 2:Do you know what I'm saying and why and how?
Speaker 1:like, what explains it then? Like, okay, say, if you take a non-human intelligence off the table, how do you explain sightings of craft since you know the late 40s? You gotta explain them somehow of apparent non, you know. If it isn't a non-human entity intelligence, you gotta explain it somehow. You know. Imagine if it's like a breakaway civilization, like basically, like at some point somebody went underground. You know like there's a million of those talks. But all right, we're almost at the three-hour mark. This is probably a good place to stop. So for a while we were doing hour episodes and we're trying to be really good, but now we get together so infrequently that I just put it out.
Speaker 2:We got to get the frequency up.
Speaker 1:I got to say, if you don't like three hour episodes, I recommend listening to it in our increments, and then you can have yourself three one hour episodes.
Speaker 1:Chris, you're groundbreaking. It's good, all right, so. But yeah, we're gonna have a lot more fun stuff to talk about because there's a lot going on. Yes, but every time we get together there's just so much UAP stuff to talk about. But we will. We will at some point be getting to all this stuff. That's not. We have stuff on a list that just we've never gotten to. I think we've talked about talking about hollow earth, and that's been just keep getting pushed down just because stuff comes up.
Speaker 2:Maybe it has something to do with this. We'll find it.
Speaker 1:But until next time, I'm Chris and I'm Steve and we've been talking about some deep shit. We'll be right back you.
