SkyWatchMesh – UAP Intelligence Network

UAP Intelligence Network – Real-time monitoring of official UAP reports from government agencies and scientific institutions worldwide

Blog

  • AlienCon: Stratton, Taylor & Knapp – “We’re Here To Help Get To The Bottom Of What In The World Is Going On”

    AlienCon: Stratton, Taylor & Knapp – “We’re Here To Help Get To The Bottom Of What In The World Is Going On”

    “If we don’t know what it is, tell the American people we don’t know what it is. Don’t play these games.” ~Jay Stratton

    ~~~

    “We’re here to help get to the bottom of what in the world is going on.” ~Dr. Travis Taylor

    ~~~

    If you like what you see on my blog, my Twitter and YouTube Channel and appreciate the time and effort, here are links to my Patreon, Pay Pal and Venmo. I appreciate any and all support. Without that support, I would struggle to do this as much as I do.

    ~~~

    Patreon = https://www.patreon.com/ufojoe

    Pay Pal – ufojoe11@aol.com

    Venmo – www.venmo.com/u/ufojoe

    ~~~

    The following is from the AlienCon conference in Pasadena, California. This interview took place on March 5th, 2023. 

    ~~~

    George Knapp (GK): Well, this is a big one here. I’ve really been looking forward to this one for a long time, since I was asked to do it. I’ve just been thrilled by the opportunity to be here to talk to these two guys. This is a special occasion for them to be on here to respond to the kind of questions that I’ve anticipated asking. The first panelist here is somebody you know really well from television, except he doesn’t just play a scientist on TV, he really is a scientist. He’s got multiple PhDs, master’s degrees. He’s been working in classified programs for the Department of Defense since he was a teenager, including becoming the chief scientist for the UAP Task Force. His name is Dr. Travis Taylor.

    KLAS Article: “Not Just a TV Scientist: Dr. Travis Taylor’s Deep Roots with NASA, DoD”

    GK: The guy he works with now, at a company called Radiance Technologies, is someone he has worked with before at something called the UAP Task Force. The guy who created the UAP Task Force, who was its director. The only person that we know of who worked with AAWSAP, for the DIA…the AATIP program, and then for the UAP Task Force. His name is Jay Stratton.

    So let’s get to it. You guys knew, when you decided to go public, when you left the government sector, that, once it became known what you did for the government, you were gonna catch grief. You’ve monitored the UFO world for a while. I mean, you knew it, right? Jay?

    Jay Stratton (JS): Absolutely.

    GK: Travis, you’re kind of used to it. You’ve been getting it for a number of years. When I made it public last summer, that you were the chief scientist for the UAP Task Force, was there any additional heartburn for you, from that?

    Dr. Travis Taylor (TT): Yeah, if I could address that a little bit. I remember one particular headline, something about, “no wonder the Task Force didn’t find anything, they had that ‘Ancient Aliens‘ guy who believes in paranormal stuff.

    ~~~

    TT: And basically, that’s what the headline and the article kind of read was, you know? Number one, I hate the word, paranormal. I don’t like use it, I don’t use the word poltergeist, never believed in ghosts, none of that kind of stuff. Instead of saying that I had two PhDs, three master’s degrees, a bachelor’s degree, a professional engineer and licensed in Alabama, thirty years of experience working in intelligence-community systems, NASA systems and DoD systems. Top-Secret SCI clearance, all those things. Instead of any of that, I was that “Ancient Aliens” guy. But you know? Hell yeah, because Ancient Aliens rocks!

    (The crowd went wild)

    JS: Travis is forgetting one more thing. When I talked to his boss and convinced him to let me borrow Travis, I said, “He can do all that stuff, he’s got all those degrees, he’s great on a whiteboard. He can explain quantum engineering to General Officers, bring it down to the level that everyone can understand it. But also, he can build stuff.” I didn’t use the stuff word.

    TT: No, Jay said, “He can build shit.”

    JS: Yeah. Take an engineer that can move from the whiteboard, to the barn, and put something together. When we work in reverse engineering, it’s a hands-on business, it’s an applied business and you need that bigger picture.

    GK: There’s a story that came out, I don’t wanna dwell on it too much but it just happened, right in advance of this conference here, this get together. And I think it was meant to slap you around a little bit before you came out in public and answered questions about what you’ve done for the government and at Radiance. And it implies that you have colleagues, Jay, at the Pentagon, anonymous colleagues – which I think is pretty piss-poor journalism to go ahead and say…attack your character and your credibility, after a long, distinguished career and an unblemished record, and trusted with high security clearances – that you’re some kind of an alien nut, and the work you did at the UAP Task Force is really to blame for Balloon-apalooza and for NORAD ignoring balloons and drones and things like that for all these years.

    Story/article Knapp referenced 👇🏼

    Here are a few excerpts from that article by Tom Rogan…

    A number of personnel speaking to the Washington Examiner on the condition of anonymity say that they believe that the leadership of the now-defunct Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force co-opted reports of what were likely foreign espionage tools involving small balloons or drones in order to characterize them as extraordinary for purposes of personal bias. They believe that military flight crews were sometimes ill-served by the manner in which their witness reporting was later presented by the UAP Task Force as evidence of truly extraordinary, rather than more conventionally explainable, UFOs belonging to a foreign government.

    …officials say the Chinese balloons have been a well-known foreign intelligence concern for a number of years. They say that the UAP Task Force, then led by Jay Stratton, was reluctant to confront the balloon UFO consideration. Stratton’s relationship with Tom DeLonge, a musician who established a UFO research group, and his association with research at Skinwalker Ranch (where anomalous phenomena have been reported) also raised concerns with the Navy.

    Stratton adamantly resists this characterization and rejects the aforementioned claim of other officials that the UFO task force was primarily focused on air safety. In a statement to the Washington Examiner, he asserted, “No one involved with the Pentagon’s UAP Task Force ever labeled something a UAP, Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, if it was identified as anything known or if it performed in a similar manner to known conventional technology, obviously including balloons. Anyone suggesting otherwise is simply trying to mislead the public into thinking very real UAP are balloons.”

    Regardless, one key contention was whether radar returns indicating some UFOs traveling at very high speed (multi-Mach) were truly unconventional UFOs or simply balloons producing bad data returns due to their particular physical profile. Directly knowledgeable personnel convinced of the latter scenario felt ignored by leaders in Congress and the Pentagon when they offered their concerns. They say they believed that the UAP Task Force was diverting government resources to researching truly unconventional UFOs at the expense of addressing Chinese balloons. It bears noting, however, that some UFO reports include military eyewitness sightings of apparently sizable vehicles performing extraordinary maneuvers (with apparently corroborating radar/other sensor recordings of the same object). This type of UFO is not what the complainant sources are referring to.

    ~~~

    GK: You wanna talk about that?

    JS: Absolutely. The Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force was chartered to study and look at Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, right? It’s in the name. With that, it highlighted a whole lot of gaps across the Department of Defense and the Intelligence Community, and our sensor network and our capabilities on the aircraft. Sometimes better capabilities lead to new problems in that the modern, active electronically scanned array radar, things that are in the front nose of an F-18, an F-15, etcetera, [are] highly sensitive [and] can see a lot of things, and I’m not going into great detail here. But, we really had to learn how to sort the wheat from the chaff and highlight what was unidentified and what could be identified. And the multitude of sensors that we had really kind of needed to be retuned. And I can tell you, absolutely, the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force saw balloons, our pilots were reporting balloons. At any point, when something went from U (Unidentified ~Joe), to being Identified – it became, you know, a balloon, I think, other, traditional kind of counter…UAS or Unmanned Aerial Systems – that became a counterintelligence concern that went over to a completely different group inside the Pentagon, to deal with. The UAP Task Force was not a large organization. We were science and data driven, focused on trying to understand the bigger-picture phenomena. And, to think, that my small group in the Pentagon…

    TT: Which didn’t actually sit in the Pentagon.

    JS: True.

    TT: And I’m gonna jump in and tell you that right now, because you’re too humble to do it, Jay.

    JS: Okay.

    TT: Because it’s just horseshit. There was one person on the UAP Task Force that sat in the Pentagon. One. We know him, trust him, a very good person (This person has not gone public and I have no idea who he is. ~Joe). And there’s no way there was an unidentified or anonymous source that sat at the Pentagon on the Task Force, that said this is nonsense (The Rogan article didn’t say that any of the sources (“personnel”) were part of the UAPTF. ~Joe). And the other thing…not one single meeting did we discuss poltergeist activity, dire wolves or anything like that. Every single meeting was professional. We would talk about unidentified things in secure areas that shouldn’t be there, looking with sensors, radar, infrared cameras and other equipment that were assets and most of it classified. And it had nothing to do with anything about Skinwalker Ranch, or any of that stuff. So anybody that’s saying things like that, they’re full of it.

    GK: Or they made it up.

    TT: Or they absolutely made it up. Because I don’t even understand what the point of that is. I mean, we’re here to help get to the bottom of what in the world is going on, and it makes me…and it really concerns me, George, about this Balloon-apalooza. We actually identified that there were gaps in our technology that our radar systems, and so on, were designed to look for ICBMs and fighter planes, and things that moved really quickly, and they had filters to throw that other stuff out. So we wouldn’t see the UFOs if they came in, right? And also, guess what else we wouldn’t see? Balloons. And we actually even talked about that. So to say that we made all this up and it was balloons? I wanna meet that guy out back.

    [the_ad id=”1724″]

    GK: The larger narrative that’s been going on – a lot of it was aimed at your friend, Lue Elizondo – is that a group of you guys…you two, Lue, Chris Mellon, a few others, have pulled the wool over Congress’s eyes. You fooled them into believing there’s an alien threat and that’s why we need to study this stuff. You ever use the term alien in any briefing, anywhere?

    JS: I have not. I was very cautious to point out what I knew and what I didn’t know and what I think, and focus on the technologies. 100% of the approach to all the briefings I did with Congress, even over to the White House, was, “Here’s what we’re seeing, and based on what we’re seeing, using multiple sensors: radar, ground-based, air-based, ship-based…my assessment, or my team’s assessment of that.” And as you can imagine, I can’t get into a lot of detail, but the first question is: “Is it us?” The second question: “Is it some other nation?” And if you can’t answer those questions, then what is it? And that’s where the word phenomena comes in. Is it a nuts and bolts thing or is this some new weather…Travis and I spent too much time on ball lightning, trying to understand weather phenomena and other things. Phenomena (Emphasizing that it’s plural ~Joe), right?

    The biggest job, I was gonna say a moment ago, was moving the paradigm inside of big government to acknowledge that we’ve got a concern, a complex airspace environment up there that has a lot of things going on. And it’s really easy for an adversary to hide in that complex, airspace environment. But do we have other things going on? And the stigma to think outside the box on other things that these could be, is so hardcore that I had to ease everyone into working through the data to understand, “Hey, we still have questions and here’s why we have questions.” I led an effort to change the AEGIS radar to be able to see UAS and to be able to see quadcopters, because we would miss that, right? You’ve seen plenty of news stories of quadcopters coming near our naval vessels. So we had new things put into the fleet in order to try to detect these things and track these things. And then, with that, you still had some anomalies that we had to work through. But at the end of the day, it was all about the technology and trying to prevent an emerging and disruptive technology, and then attributing that to some thing in order to get to that threat word like we talked about yesterday. The capability plus intent.

    TT: There was only one time, on one page, and it was a draft, where the word extraterrestrial, or something like that, was written. And we were writing down a list of what could it be? We started with near peers, and then we said, “If it wasn’t near peers, then it’s some oligarch, or group of oligarchs that pooled their money together and done something.” Then we said, “Okay, mother nature’s invented something that we haven’t seen before,” right? And then we said, “Other than that, the only other bucket we could find is if it was extra-something: terrestrial, temporal, dimensional, whatever.” That’s because it’s just the only other bucket we can think of…an unknown bucket. And we even were nervous about putting that list on the official document, and so we didn’t. We left it as, just unknown. We never put the word alien or extraterrestrial on any memo, document, or anything that went forward, other than a draft between us and the few other members of the team that were reading the draft.

    GK: Can you tell me a little bit about the everyday workings of the UAP Task Force? Jay, you put it together. It was something else before it became that, it was formalized. But, how did information come in? Did you have to go out and get it, or did people start sending it to you? Was it like pulling teeth, in general?

    JS: It was like building a business, was the analogy I use, because 2018 is when I was tasked to start building it and I knew what I needed. As you stated as I was walking on stage, you know, I’ve been involved in the other programs and knew the mistakes, and the paths that we should never go down. Because again, my job is to focus on that potential threat, potential concern…adversary, disruptive and emerging technologies, right? I keep jumping back to that. But it’s really looking at that technology. So, I knew I had a problem, you know, well before 2018 – because I’ve been doing this so long – of pilots reporting things. So, the first stop I made was, you know, with the aircrew, with a variety of the fleet-concentration centers (Any region of the world where large numbers of Navy ships congregate, such as Norfolk, Va. ~Joe) and talking to them and seeing where we’re at. And do they have data, right? Everywhere, I went…data, data, data.

    And basically, that’s my customer. That’s who I’m looking in the eyes every day and saying, “We got this, we’re gonna try to figure out the answer for you.” From there, I gotta start trying to get those answers, so I need capabilities and authorities. And that’s where I went out to all of the, you know, across the intelligence community, to the other services, and walked in the door. And at this point, I was senior enough, rank-wise, that I can get in the door pretty easily. And I would go through the situation with them and make them understand that hey, “Here’s what we’ve got, and I need your help to try to solve this puzzle.” And I walked in knowing what I needed and I had an ask for every organization, just like when I asked to get Travis on the team. And I built out this infrastructure that, at the end of the day, was, you know, it kind of hurt me a little bit, in the recent news media, to hear, “Oh, what we need is an interagency, whole-of-government effort.” Well…I built that. And the government let it go away. And we started over again with the new group called AARO. So it’s frustrating, as a government employee, to go through and try to build up this thing, and [we] finally made what the government needs. And, you know, I’m briefing Congress about this whole government, interagency effort. I’m briefing all the way over to the White House. Everybody knew we had this thing, and it just fizzled away when I went away, when I went back to my regular job.

    And I’ll explain that real quick, publicly. I was on rotation as a senior executive in the government and those positions don’t grow on trees. So Naval Intelligence loaned me to the DoD and the Pentagon, to lead the Task Force. That loan had an expiration date of January of 2021. So at the end of that loan date, my boss called me back said, “I need you here to do your job.” So I had to leave, and then, as I left, it’s kind of like, all the momentum fizzled away.

    TT: Let me add something to that real quick, because, again, he’s too humble to tell you this. So Jay is a two-star, admiral equivalent. He’s a civilian equivalent of a two-star admiral, that’s his rank. And when Jay was asked to go back to his official, other job, you know, he had two official jobs…that’s just the way the government works. And when he was asked to go back, they didn’t backfill the leader of the (UAP Task Force) group with a two-star, admiral equivalent, they filled it with someone of my rank which is like a full-bird colonel equivalent. In the Army and in the Navy, that’d be a captain. And so, he (Stratton ~Joe) could open doors, right? And when he went in rooms, colonels got him coffee. But now they put a guy who’s been getting coffee in charge of the group. It sounds pretty interesting to me, that it’s almost like we were being led to some sort of a dismantling or a failure.

    ~~~

    JS: You know, they called it an insult, right? But the people that I heard back [from], after the fact…the criticism was that I was too proactive. So, in the government, being proactive is apparently a bad thing. But…built that out, George…I got us where we needed to be.

    TT: And I’ll tell you, we had many meetings, a lot of times, since I was in Huntsville, and Jay was in Maryland, we had a lot of meetings through classified, video conferences. And there would be three or four people in his office, and he was calling people from different offices around DC, across out to California and Denver, you name it, you just pick places. There were people that were in the different services and agencies, because he built a huge team, where then we had a representative, pretty much from every government agency and office.

    Jay: That’s about forty different organizations.

    TT: And so, it was a huge group of experts and professionals, every single one of them were professionals. I mean, we even had…we were getting prepared to start our first round of experiments, for example. I can’t go into too much detail about it, but it was one of those things where we were gonna instrument out a thing and fly it around…looking and try to gather data. And I was going to be one of the payload specialists with that mission, and like, the week I was gonna go and do the duct tape, certification and all that stuff, COVID hit, and it just shut down everything. No travel in the government, no this or that. And work from home? How do you do classified work from home?

    GK: We know that the UAP Task Force gathered a lot of information, that there was a briefing document. I think it’s publicly known, Jay, that you put that thing together.

    ~~~

    GK: A lot of the images and things that you guys studied and analyzed, some of them have come out, many of them have not. How did you get ’em? How hard was it to get ’em? And I’m asking, sort of specifically about, like, [the] Air Force. We know the Navy led the charge on us.

    JS: Right.

    GK: A lot of the videos and the images that the public is aware of came from the Navy. Don’t see a lot from the Air Force. So, tell me about how you gathered images for this program?

    JS: Yeah. Actually, the first image…video I got was from the Air Force, which is surprising now, you know, where we’re at today and some things, and there’s some definite political reasons for the way things ended up. But, reporting…the mission of the Task Force, as I said yesterday in the panel, I said, “Take it seriously, and own it.” Own it is a great example of why, for the first time…George probably dropped his coffee when he saw the response back from the DoD spokesperson saying, “Yep, it’s unidentified.” Right?

    GK: I was flabbergasted.

    ~~~

    JS: That’s the owning. You know, because if we don’t know what it is, tell the American people we don’t know what it is. Don’t play these games. And reporting…centralized-data repository and the data-focus, science-focus, was a big, big, big drum I beat every day, right? And to get that reporting, you gotta work through the stigma, and to work through the stigma, you gotta handle each service, each organization separately, and differently. Because I was Naval Intelligence, and I had a long-standing relationship with naval aviation, that was my focus. If you were there yesterday, I pointed out, the Navy’s got a big air force, the Navy has an army and the Navy’s army has an air force. We’ve got a lot of aircraft. So I knew, right there, I’ve got half the DoD flying capability. If I built that reporting process and that ability and willingness to report in the Navy and the Marine Corps, then I can ease over to the Air Force because we work so closely together, so often.

    ~~~

    The 2019 West Coast Incidents were mentioned a few times during this panel, so if you’re unfamiliar with the controversy, take the time to read about them before moving on.

    Transcript – Active-Duty Navy Commander Comes Forward & Witnesses Speak Out On 2019 UFO Swarms: We’ve Never Seen Anything Like This. They Just Seemed To Appear

    ~~~

    JS: So I built a formal, reporting process, and some of this has been in the media. But the other thing is, I had this working Task Force. So, data preservation and speed was very important. So, everyone knows, when the 2019 incidents happened, my Task Force was fully functional, pretty much, at this point, and I got a classified email from the carrier-strike-group commander saying, “Jay, we’ve got some UAP.” And I said, “Got it.” I had a guy on board his carrier within a day, in order to start educating, start collecting data, start getting the folks talking, going to each ship, via helicopter, and bringing everything back to DC., immediately. I don’t have to wait for anything. That’s functional. You know, that’s the ability to get out there. And the key is we wanted the data, we wanted to do the analysis, sure. But, to those naval aviators on board the carrier? This is, you know…go back to the 2004 Tic Tac incident, it’s night and day from what those folks had to deal with.

    [the_ad_placement id=”content”]

    GK: Travis, give me a sense of…did you know much about Jay before you got asked to join the UAP Task Force? And was your answer, “Yes,” or “Hell, yes”?

    TT: Well, I’d never met him in my life. I didn’t have any idea who he was. What happened was, the first week I went to Skinwalker Ranch, I had detected some microwave signals that I thought were dangerous and I thought they were bad actors. And since I had security clearance and worked for the Army, I went to our counterintelligence security people and said, “Hey, I think I’ve detected something and I need to talk to counterintelligence.” And that went to another layer, and to another layer, and they ended up saying, “Well, we got someone that you need to brief at the Pentagon.” So I went to the Pentagon to do the briefing, and Jay and another guy walks into the room. I didn’t know who they were. And they said, “Well, tell us what you got.” And we briefed them. And then, after a few minutes, he kind of asked everybody else [to get] out of the room. And it was just he and I, and his other colleague in the room. And then I did happen to notice, though, that he had a copy of one of my books with him. And so, he had done his homework and I had done mine, apparently.

    And he started telling me to give him more details about the signals that we were seeing, maybe what they were, and he had me brief some folks. And then he said, “Well, so this is what I’m doing.” And then he told me about UAP Task Force and asked if I would be interested in helping out. And my answer was, “Hell, yes!” It was in another meeting that we were at, probably a couple months later, where he introduced me as the chief scientist. And that was kind of a surprise to me. So I just continued on with what we were doing, and at that point, he said, “Yeah, you should put that in your header on your email.” And I was like, “Well, okay.” And that’s kind of how it worked. And so I worked for him from 2019 to 2021, when you (Stratton) retired, and then I stayed on with the team for another six or eight months, and then I retired.

    GK: The West Coast events. I recognize there are limits on what you guys can say, still. Jeremy and I put out some images that the public has now…the whole world has seen.

    ~~~

    GK: These pyramids, these green pyramid things that have been explained away as bokeh. Can you address that?

    TT: Yes, I can absolutely address that. And you know, and I’m not the only person who has addressed that and looked at it. On the Task Force, we looked at it. We have other data that everybody else didn’t get to see, and I’ll have to leave that at that. But, so…I wanna go off on a tangent for just a second. Has anybody ever heard of the idea of Huxley’s monkeys? So, Huxley…it was attributed to him, but it wasn’t actually Huxley, it was actually a priest that came up with it, but for some reason, it’s attributed to Huxley. As a strawman argument on…that evolution doesn’t need any assistance to happen, is that you can take a roomful of monkeys, a roomful of typewriters – so this is back when they had typewriters – and [if you] give them enough time, they would write all of the words in Psalms, and it’s since been kind of skewed towards all the works of Shakespeare. Doesn’t matter. Some big grouping of words that are put in the right order, with the right punctuation.

    ~~~

    TT: And so, Huxley said, “So, your DNA could randomly evolve, and happen just by happenstance, and this is gonna happen, this is gonna happen, this is gonna happen, and so on. And that’s how, you know, it’s gonna happen. Well, it sounds like a good argument. Well, a roomful of monkeys, slapping away at keys, eventually, they would write a full novel. Well, I make all of my graduate students actually work that problem out. And it turns out, that the Universe would have to be 10 orders of magnitude older than it is, for that to actually occur, without some sort of cheating. And so, that’s called a strawman argument. You give someone something that sounds good, and they say, “Oh yeah, I get that.” And then it explains it away.

    So, somebody came up with this great idea of saying, “Let’s say there’s a optical distortion that everybody has never heard of. It’s a Japanese word that nobody knows what it means…we’re gonna say bokeh.” And you think, “A flower?” No, it’s not spelled that way! It’s actually a Japanese word that means, like, distortion, it means, you know, blurry. And the idea is, you see photographers use it all the time as an artistic effect, where you take something here, that you wanna take a picture of, you do a slight out of focus, and do a soft focus with the F number (f-stop ~Joe) and it’ll put the things behind you, out of focus, and they will take on the shape of the internal aperture of the optical system. And that’s what bokeh is. So this thing in front of you, that you’re looking at, wouldn’t have this bokeh effect, but everything else, like this, would take on the shape of the aperture [on the] inside. And most apertures nowadays, like the one in your cell phone, is the shape of a stop sign, right? And then they keep that inside so it looks more circular, it looks more like something real.

    Well, so the idea (a theory some folks have put forth on #ufotwitter. ~Joe) is that the night-vision goggles that were used, the NVG, the second gen, that was used on the Russell, that SNOOPIE guy had a triangular aperture in it and he had bokeh. Well, maybe you can get one of those and tear it apart, if you want to, but they’re expensive and I don’t wanna tear ’em apart. But, when you look at the actual images, it isn’t…the things in the far field, the stars, are out of focus. They are likely, you know, triangular or trapezoidal, or something along that nature. But you can do that with any type of out-of-focus error. My first PhD, by the way, was in optical science and engineering, and I took so many Fourier transforms of optical images and learned that, to get that PhD, that I was pretty danged good at it. And the one thing I did, was I took the imagery, and I reversed-Fournier transformed it and saw that the thing that was moving, the one object that’s moving, isn’t a star, right? And it’s not out of focus, completely, while the others are. Because there’s actually one frame in this video that is actually in focus and even the stars give you the perfect, it’s called a Bessel sinc square function. It’s a little dot with circles around it. And so it’s in focus for one frame. And then when it goes out of focus, I go, “Okay, now I know what’s happening,” This guy’s focusing the camera on the thing close to him, so they’re seeing it.

    Here are a few stills from the video Jeremy Corbell released that show the object in focus but I don’t know if any of these are the frames Taylor is talking about. Thanks to Mike Colangelo for grabbing these.

    ~~~

    TT: So the thing up close, does have some sort of triangular shape to it. I don’t know that it’s a pyramid shape, because it’s two dimensional, right? The TV screen is two dimensional.

    A Reminder: Here’s the video Taylor is referencing…

    ~~~

    TT: And also, when you do heat analysis on it, you see it had bright spots on each corner. I don’t know what that is, I’m just saying it had bright spots on each corner. Should I tell…can I tell the rest of it (looking at Stratton)?

    (I believe Stratton gave a look to Taylor, as if to say. “It’s up to you.” ~Joe)

    JS: My company did an in-depth analysis on this.

    GK: Aw, come on.

    JS: We got a lot of answers.

    TT: Well…so, we…

    (The crowd urged them to share details)

    TT: Here’s the problem. And you guys got to understand the sticky situation we’re in. So Jay and I, and a few others, we wrote the security-classification guide when we were on the UAP Task Force, and none of this was classified. None of it was. But then, when we left, the new group (AARO) is going in and trying to backdate and change the classifications of some of the stuff, and it could catch us in a trap. And so, we have to be very careful about where we go with some of it, and it’s just been weird, it’s been really weird.

    [the_ad id=”1724″]

    GK: Let me ask it this way: The work that you guys did, you know, Jay, they get you out at a critical moment, right when you’re just supposed to prepare this report to Congress. [They] pull you out. Doesn’t seem like that was coincidental to me. But your job was to separate wheat from chaff. You’re not looking for drones and balloons, you separate them out. When you can identify a balloon, you take it out, it’s identified.

    JS: Right.

    GK: Is it fair to say that you had access to a great deal of information that has not been made public, that can’t be, as a matter of national security?

    JS: Absolutely. So, you know, the two hats I wore, I was a National-Intelligence-Community-funded senior. So, that means that the Office of Director of National Intelligence paid my salary. Why is that important? It gives me access, under Title 50, to the entire intelligence community, to deal with this issue. And then I sit at the Office of Naval Intelligence, which, you know, my ID card says U.S. Navy on it, which gives me that Title-10 connection, under what’s…the military program. So, I had two hats and that was important because…and a key reason that we do that is to reduce influence. you know? Following 911, there was an Intelligence-Community directive that prevents political influence in intelligence, right? There’s WMD or there’s not WMD, and you can’t have the White House calling over, driving the assessment. You can’t have a service driving the assessment. So, to be a National Intel-funded guy gave me pretty much the menu of options at our disposal. And I mentioned earlier about changing the menu a bit, modifying the menu a bit in order to better see these kinds of things. But, we had a much bigger picture, obviously, you know, when we were briefing all of the seniors, the briefing was very detailed and very…highly footnoted, I guess you could say, right? And Travis knows this. I went over, every time, with Congress or anyone else, with my ducks in a row, right? I would not have gone and briefed Congress that I believe these triangular-shaped objects to be – at least one real and some stars – without my ducks in a row, and be able to answer every question that’s thrown at me.

    ~~~

    Debunker Mick West believes the slide that Jeremy Corbell released (shown below) shows only stars. Both Corbell and Knapp say Stratton put together the classified briefing that apparently included this unclassified slide, but Stratton has never confirmed that and when Taylor was asked about about the slide on Twitter, I recall him saying he couldn’t address it because he had signed NDAs. I cannot find that tweet/reply. I think it’s safe to assume that this slide was part of the Stratton briefing/presentation. 

    ~~~

    West makes his case in this video…

    ~~~

    West appears to be right about that particular unclassified slide (and video) showing all stars and not two unknown, triangular UAS, as noted at the bottom of the slide. 👇🏼

    And if that was actually included in a briefing, I would consider it a mistake. But as West notes, the video he uses in his analysis is different than the video Corbell released and doesn’t show the most important thing: The Corbell video shows at least one moving object which West calls an aircraft or plane. He’s also called the Gimbal and Tic Tac UFOs distant planes so it seems to be his default explanation when debunking.

    ~~~

    I don’t know what the object over the USS Russell was, or if it was triangular in shape, but the most important point is that it was flying in restricted/sensitive airspace and it should not be there. Stratton and Taylor have said they had access to other data, which, unfortunately, none of us have seen. Also remember, this was one incident on one ship. For a more extensive look at the July 2019 West Coast events, I’ll once again urge you to read or listen to the interview Corbell and Knapp did with active-duty Navy commander, John “Guts” Gutierrez, which included segments of interviews with sailors on board the USS Paul Hamilton. When judging 2019, I’d make sure to give proper weight to what was said in that interview and what Stratton and Taylor said in this AlienCon interview by Knapp. Also remember, 2019 wasn’t Stratton and Taylor looking for UFOs. According to Stratton, this all started when…

    I got a classified email from the carrier-strike-group commander saying, “Jay, we’ve got some UAP.” And I said, “Got it.” I had a guy on board his carrier within a day, in order to start educating, start collecting data, start getting the folks talking, going to each ship, via helicopter, and bringing everything back to DC., immediately.

    ~~~

    JS: So, I had access to that, I had other things, as Travis said, you know? The carrier strike group has a multitude of sensors, and, I mean, we have other ways to reach across the government.

    TT: Two other optical PhDs.

    JS: Yeah, I had to be independent, so I was a lot about, you know, going in with the data and saying, “Hey, I have two other optical PhDs in other organizations look at this, without even knowing the other’s looking at it.” And just keep it completely separate.

    ~~~

    Before I move on from Mick West, I just want to show an example of why he should not be trusted to give an unbiased view of anything related to UFOs. In his video showing that the slide features stars, he also said:

    “This great-looking example then made its way onto Stratton’s slide, past three people with PhDs in optics, and on to be used briefing high-ranking officials, who then helped to treat new laws and policies, partly because of this identification.”

    There’s no evidence the three people (including Taylor) with PhDs had anything to do with that slide. From what I understand, they were asked to look at the moving object, which is not part of that slide. And we have never seen the entire presentation, so it’s impossible to deduce how much weight one slide had on any high-ranking officials who were shown this briefing, which Corbell says, “contains an estimated 10 videos (FLIR and HUD) and about 10-12 photos documenting some of these UAPs.”

    ~~~

    JS: So I always tried to go in with that kind of understanding of everything I was briefing so that I’m not trying to…I’m certainly not selling anything and trying to get…it absolutely benefited me in no way, to get more funding, to get more people. It benefited the American people, and that’s what I went in there to do.

    (Applause)

    GK: I’ll move on from the West Coast incident in moment, but one last question. As it’s been reported, more than a hundred objects floating around, a hundred miles out to sea, over ten Navy ships, a lot of it was photographed. It is a national-security matter, I mean, because we didn’t know where they were from. I mean, that’s a legitimate mystery. I’ve seen amateur explanations by twit-fologists and debunkers, and others, who…they have to assume that you guys, the U.S. Navy, the pilots, the sensor operators, are all pretty stupid because they figured it out at home, and you don’t know. I mean, you do have access to a heck of a lot of other information, and you would still qualify those as UAP? Or do you have an answer that you can share about what was going on with that swarm?

    TT: Yep.

    JS: I mean, what I’ll say is I chased down everything. So a key access that I had was the ability to say, “It’s not us.” That’s a key access. That’s an authority and a requirement that I put in into my wish list to Congress, early on. They said, “What can make this work?” And I said, “Whoever is leading this effort,” – and I wasn’t pushing myself to lead it, believe me – “needs to know what we know, right? Needs to know what we have, and to be able to rule out us…step one.” And that ruling out us is not easy because you’re talking about DoD, IC, as well as DoE.

    TT: Lockheed, the private sector.

    JS: Exactly. So I had had this Rolodex of process (May not have said “process” ~Joe), every time we saw something new, of stepping through, to validate that first step, make sure it’s not something of ours that I’m chasing here. And then, I would have, you know, later, as the Task Force was built out, I had another Rolodex that I could use of classified emails and start sending out to learn other capabilities. So, as I said earlier, speed is of essence, right? So having my guy fly out to the carrier and get data and get back as fast as we could, that means the body is still warm. So, I’ve got other sensors and visual capabilities that I could put out there to try to find things. So, having that access really put me in a position to make a qualified answer, assessment to provide across the community in both sides of the government…executive and legislative branches. It was a game changer for a little while.

    ~~~

    More on the question of…

    Was it our technology that was encountered on the West Coast in July 2019 and was it part of a readiness-assessment test?

    https://twitter.com/Go_Kick_Rocks88/status/1636135712792690688

    ~~~

    On the January 31st episode of “Weaponized,” hosted by Corbell and Knapp, Corbell played audio from interviews he conducted with two witnesses who were onboard the USS Paul Hamilton when the 2019, West Coast incidents took place. The main interview was with John “Guts” Gutierrez (Guts), an active-duty, Navy Commander who has served for 17 years and who has spoke with some of the witnesses.  

    ~~~Audio of interview with Eyewitness #1 begins~~~

    Jeremy Corbell (JC): “What did you think was going on during this encounter series? Did you think this was a test?”

    Eyewitness #1 (E1): “So like, we didn’t really think anything of it, other than that it was like the people testing us. Like, purposefully sent out drones to go harass us. So, it’s like the most high-end technology, followed us. And then after the first night, that was pretty apparent that it wasn’t. But like, at the same time, it’s like, ‘Hey, you need to track this more closely. You need to follow them and see where they go afterwards.’”

    JC: “Isn’t it typical, though, if that were the scenario, and you were being tested, at some point afterwards, you would be made aware that you were being tested? And whether or not you passed or didn’t pass the test?”

    E1: “Yeah.”

    JC: “And that never happened?”

    E1: “No (laughs), no, because like, it wasn’t a test. Unless there’s like a secret at like the highest level and no one’s told anyone, that wasn’t a test during SWATT. But like, the mindset at the time was test during SWATT, but also looking back, with like, kind of a clear eye, it’s like, that makes no sense to have a test that lasts that long, at night, after a really busy day, when we’re shooting like, live ordnance during the day. It would just get into the safety of like, what we were doing, and it wouldn’t make any sense for them to do that.”

    ~Audio Ends~

    JC: “So, can you explain to us, like, you know, so this is somebody that’s sayinghe’s saying it wasn’t a test device, it wasn’t our tech. So explain that.”

    Guts: “So, you know, what you hear that individual talking about in the beginning is, you know, at first, that’s kind of the assumption everybody makes, right? Yeah, okay, we’re being tested, you know? They’re sending out drones, the tests are different tactics and procedures to respond to this thing. But then it starts happening night after night. It’s happening at hours that are really, really outside of the hours of testing, if you want to call it that, right? Because you got to remember, these ships are participating in other training events throughout the entire day, okay? And shooting live ordnance, you heard him talk about that. And like I told you before, whenever we shoot live ordnance, that’s a big deal, okay? Certainly, in real-world actions, but also in training, you know? We don’t do that lightly and there’s a lot that goes into that. So, the idea that we would be executing a high-stress, high-level event during the day, and then to be tested with drone swarms in the middle of the night Because you gotta remember, you got to put yourself in the mindset, in the shoes of these guys back in 2019. This is happening, you know, about 2200 to like, 0300 at night, you know? 10 o’clock at night till about two or three in the morning sometimes, right? And, I mean, is it totally out of the question that we would be tested at that time? No, but when you consider and you heard himI’m glad you heard him say it: Safety, right? No matter what we’re doing, we’re always gonna operate with a certain level or amount of safety precautions imbued into the training event, so that we don’t do something stupid, or God forbid, get somebody hurt, you know? So you heard him talk about that.

    “You heard him talk about how, okay, night one, okay, it’s probably a test. But then, something that you heard him say was that folks higher up in the chain of command started asking, ‘Hey, start gathering all the data that you can about this and feed it up.’ Okay? And who knows, maybe it was a test of our information-gathering capabilities. But that is not something that would be typically done, right? There’s much more important aspects of our tasks and procedures that need to be tested, not how information flows up and down the chain of command. That’s easy. You can easily put a report together and send it up to whoever it needs to get to.”

    JC: “Without a hundred objects, with no point of departure or landing.”

    Guts: “Exactly. So, night one? Sure, maybe. Night two, three, four, or whatever it is? They realize, okay, this is real and there’s something else going on here. And oh, by the way, again, folks higher in the chain of command are asking for us to stay on this case, you know?”

    JC: “So, to go to your point there, is that, okay, first we eliminate [that] this was our technology and it was just a test. It started becoming very apparent to everybody on the ships, you know, whoa, this is real, like, we gotta deal with this. This is not just some, you know, even like a black-projects test, which, by the way, is not something you do, like, you know, in that training area, around But I’ve talked to people that have encountered black projects, and there is a process.”

    Guts: “Oh, there’s a whole process. Absolutely. I haven’t had this happen to me, personally, but I know of guys, personally, who have seen stuff they shouldn’t have seen

    JC: “Commander Underwood did and he told me the process.”

    Guts: “There ya go. He has, you know, you come across something that you see, that you’re not supposed to see, well, you’re gonna get a call. Especially as an aviator, you know, as soon as you land on deck and you start doing all the necessary paperwork required for any flight, anyway, you’re also gonna get a call from the appropriate intelligence folks and be like, ‘Hey, sorry, I need you to come by the intel shop and you gotta fill out’ It’s a huge hassle, right? (laughs) And I can imagine that for someone, you know, a civilian, let’s say, ‘Man, I’d love to see something like that!’ No, not really (laughs). It’s kind of a pain in the ass.”

    GK: “And at the end of that process, do they say, ‘You didn’t see that’?”

    Guts: “At the end of that process, you know, you signyou agree to whatever paperwork they tell you, that, ‘Hey, you can’t talk about this.’ That didn’t happen with anybody in 2019. Certainly no one that we’ve talked to, and not that I’ve heard of through other channels, either.”

    JC: “And also, the head of the Navy was asked about this and made a statement. And they (media) were like: ‘Have you figured this out? Whose are they?’”

    ~~~

    JC: “It is undetermined. Everybody we know, involved in this [has said], ‘We don’t know whose these were.’ But let’s just start with eliminatingthese were not ours. That’s the consensus of everybody. That’s, to the best of our understanding, that’sdespite their capabilities, they weren’t ours.”

    Guts: “Well, it wasn’t a test, as I think isit certainly wasn’t a test, you know?”

    ~~~

    [the_ad_placement id=”content”]

    Back to Knapp, Stratton and Taylor

    JS: We were really making some momentum before COVID hit. And when COVID hit, like everywhere else in the world, it really put the brakes on. And I think, to this day, that Travis and I would probably still be there doing it, if not for COVID

    TT: I’ll add one more thing that you have to think about. Where was this when it happened? Well, all the information you want is in the video that’s been released. I mean, he tells you right where he is. And if you look, you’ve got the time, the date, you got pretty much the GPS coordinates to go. You can get any Stellarium software, any Orrery software, and then you can see exactly what stars you’re looking at, where everything’s going on. And here’s thing: This was happening in an exercise area that was closed off. So what does that mean? It means there’s no airplanes flying around, it means there’s no ships moving around, right? And any ship, there’s like one, but we’re not gonna talk about it.

    ~~~

    TT: The point is, there was no platform. And we did an analysis on the best, battery-life cycle, known at the time. If you put it in a quadcopter, or any other super-efficient, lightweight drone, and you flew it, you needed a place to have launched from, that was close enough before the battery would run out. And that would have been outside of the closed-off area. So, one of the things we were concerned about, was…has one of our peers developed battery technology that we don’t have, right? It wasn’t that we were making stuff up, we wanted there to be an alien spacecraft flying around. We worked for the military. We were looking to see why this was happening, why was there something where it shouldn’t be, and how do we figure out what it is and stop it?

    ~~~

    On July 27th, 2021, during the 4Bidden Disclosure Conference, Lue Elizondo had this to say about drones. 

    Lue: “Let’s look at the best drone technology we have, and I’m gonna be very careful what I say here, make sure I don’t upset anybody back in DC. But let’s say – here’s our little pen again –  this is a drone. There’s two types of drones, for the most part, and there’s other ones as well. There’s hybrids and [inaudible] and whatnot. But you have those that can take off vertically, kind of like a quadcopter, and they can hover and they can loiter around for a little while. And then you’ve got those that are fixed wing and they can fly long range but they have to fly fast enough to create lift and to continue to move. So think of a Predator or something like that. The ones that move fast and fixed wing could fly really far, but they have a very hard time loitering. They have to fly racetracks, they can’t just stop and hover and loiter for twenty, thirty minutes. And just like the quadcopters that can hover, they have a hard-time, loiter ability because you need fuel, and fuel is weight, and weight to a rotary-wing, vertical-lift is the devil. So you want to be as light as possible, and that’s why a lot of these little quadcopters are so light.

    “So, if you wanted to launch something over a Navy ship that can hover over the flight deck as has been reported through the [2019] Omaha and the Kidd incidents, then you’re talking about a drone capability that is probably not a fixed-wing, long-range capability. It means it has to be launched from somewhere near by. Even two, three miles, as far as you can with some of the more, if you will, commercially-available, control systems. Even the best military systems you have some much longer capability, but you still have to launch them and you have to recover them, you don’t just let them crash into the ocean because then they can be found, right? So they have to be launched from somewhere and they have to be controlled from somewhere by someone. And there’s an infrastructure, a huge footprint, that is required to do that. You need a trained operator to do it, with enough juice where you can send out a signal to your quadcopter, and your quadcopter can react, and then enough, if you will, payload on this, so it can send the signal back to the operator. The operator knows where the drone is, it’s looking at pictures and all that stuff, and then to be able to fly the drone all the way back.

    “So there’s more practical challenges with trying to create something like that. If you’re talking about a fixed-wing drone, that’s a little easier but it’s got to keep moving, it’s got to be moving fairly fast, and it’s not just going to stop and hover. So, therein lies the problem. If you want a loiter, you’ve got to launch it from relatively nearby. Now, the Navy has sea-domain awareness. They are the best at knowing anything that’s in the ocean. These guys know. That’s how we catch these drug runners coming in on these little tiny submersibles that you can barely see. There’s a reason we catch them. So we know, if there’s, let’s say, a Chinese frigate nearby that’s launching drones, we know that. A lot of these ships have transponders on them, AIS. We know, unless they’re squawking black, meaning they’re not transmitting, then we have other ways to find out who’s in our area and we have very high-fidelity radar systems and we have electro-optical systems. So, it’s unlikely. I’m not saying it’s impossible because the Chinese have harassed us before and vice versa, with unmanned, aerial vehicles and aerial systems and by the way, that technology is improving, exponentially, almost every year. So at some point, these things may have that capability that we’re seeing, but right now, they don’t, and that’s the problem. The foreign, adversarial technology isn’t where it needs to be for us to see the things that we’re seeing, it’s not there yet. It might be there in ten, fifteen, twenty years, but it’s not there now. And that’s why this is a problem, that’s why we need to have this conversation because if it’s not U.S. technology, and it’s not foreign, adversarial technology, then whose technology is it, right? I mean we have to have that conversation. You can’t have an intellectual…a truly, objective conversation about this topic, and not introduce that as potentially, potentially part of the calculus.

    ~~~

    And a few months before that, on May 20th, 2021, Elizondo had this conversation with researcher, Richard Dolan, about the possibility of drones over Navy ships.

    Lue: “When you really look at it, you look at what is required to have something that can hover over the flight of a boat for hours at a time, and not a single one of these have been shot down, not a single one of these have ever been recovered from the ocean, not a single one of them has had a mechanical issue, not a single one has been able to be intercepted.”

    Dolan: “It seems insane.”

    Lue: “And by the way, we have helicopters on these ships and not a single one has been caught by one of our helicopters or aircraft. You know, okaaaay. But you really got to do a lot of mental gymnastics then, to prove to me that that is some sort of drone technology. I’m not saying it’s impossible. What I’m simply saying is you’ve got to build a case then to prove that. Because at this point, that’s a greater feat than saying it’s a UAP. Really. Because at that point, it’s, ‘Okay, well, we’re really talking about something then that, if a foreign adversary has, is really incredible.’”

    ~~~

    Back to Knapp, Stratton, Taylor and the 2019 West Coast Incidents

    GK: And how did they appear out of nowhere and then go nowhere and you can track them? You know, that’s also a pretty interesting question.

    JS: Right. And it gets incredibly frustrating because, you know, the intel community, it takes exemptions, and it’s like getting a search warrant, almost, to use any kind of intel-community capabilities to look at that close to the United States. So there’s also, you know, kind of work that has to be done ahead of time to make that work. And, you know, someone in the audience is probably thinking, “Oh, well maybe there’s a submarine out there.” You know, if a foreign submarine got that close to the United States, then I failed at every job that I’ve ever had. I mean, that’s…Naval Intelligence would not let that happen.

    TT: Well, we would have jumped to, probably, DEFCON 4 or 3 at that point, too, and we didn’t, so.

    JS: That’s exactly right.

    GK: Jay, you were, as far as I know, the only person who worked for AAWSAP, AATIP and then UAPTF. Is there anybody else that did all three?

    JS: (long pause) No.

    GK: Sounds like you were the right man for the job. We know that AAWSAP, you know, part of the origin, a colleague of yours, Dr. James Lacatski, visited Skinwalker Ranch, and he had an experience that was pretty weird. But he felt that there were some national-security issues that could be raised there.

    ~~~

    On October 14th, 2021, Knapp, Dr. James Lacatski and Dr. Colm Kelleher were interviewed by George Noory on Coast to Coast AM. Lacatski, a DIA physicist and rocket scientist, and program manager for AAWSAP  described his weird experience in detail. Full transcript can be read here.

    Lacatski: We went into the ranch manager’s home and sat down. Now, we were having a casual conversation. You know, I’m certainly noticing that there are twelve or more crosses and crucifixes on the wall, and I was thinking, “Hmm, Jim, I wonder if I really should have come here.” But in any case, you know, we’re having a nice conversation and then Bob and the ranch managers went into, I’d best call it a personal finance discussion, which I felt kind of awkward being there. And I kind of went into a daze, you know, just glancing around the room, seeing what’s the lay of the land in the rooms. And then this object appears, floating in the kitchen. Quite distinct. I mean, I looked away from it and it maintained its position and allowed me, I guess, actively allowed me to come back and look at it and examine it more closely. It was not a blurry vision, it was not a speck in my eye. It was there, it was about 18 inches tall, 18 inches wide, floating in the middle of the kitchen. And that kitchen is quite distinct. Its style is 1950s style, so the colors of the tiles are quite distinct.

    Noory: Did it look like it just appeared?

    Lacatski: It just appeared. It just appeared and it was very sharp. Now, let me give you an exact description, this Möbius strip and all of this. Take a piece of spaghetti about six inches long. I’m just saying, you know, in practical terms, to form a model of it. [Get] it wet or boil it, and let it drop and start bunching up on itself. But at the very end that you’re holding, allow it to droop downwards, and stick out. Now that was super clear, that portion of it. It was a truncated, it was a solid, light yellow and it was surrounded by a different shade of yellow cloud. So, you know, I’m looking at this taking notes of what it looked like and just a few minutes ago, I looked back at my original drawing of it because I wanted to catch the impact. And, as someone, I guess, I noted to someone and they’ve repeated it (Bigelow repeated it to George Knapp), it looked very much like the cover object of Tubular Bells, the album from back, I guess it was in the 80s.

    ~~~

    Lacatski: Except it wasn’t chrome, it was yellow, and it was solid. Quite clear and then it got fuzzy as the droopy portion went into the cloud. And that was it. There was nothing that dramatic about it. And that’s when we went into a discussion of, you know, I made the comment, “Well, is this your decorating style?” And Jean said, “Oh, yes, this is my decorating style. Strange, though, but, you know, before you showed up, a cross flew out of the bathroom, horizontally, into the wash basket, on top of the washing machine.” So I’m thinking, “Oh, hmm.” Well that’s when we went back and we went right through where the object was, as we all went back and toured the rest of the house and had further discussions about what was going on there. So it’s not a complex story, but that’s it.

    Knapp: Just add some context to this. Jim only made one visit on behalf of the Defense Intelligence Agency to figure out whether there was a justification for a study. He’s there on the ranch for a short period of time, he has an experience, this thing appears in the air, and only he can see it, it’s just for him. And that site, that event is what led to the creation of the program and convinced him that something was really going on. He went back to Washington, talked with Harry Reid and set this thing in motion, designed the program. He’s being too modest, I think.

    ~~~

    [the_ad_placement id=”content”]

    Back to Knapp, Stratton, Taylor and AAWSAP.

    GK:[Lacatski] started a program, Harry Reid funded it, the study began. Travis, you were a pretty big skeptic about the whole thing to begin with, because, I mean, the initial study of that place by Bigelow and NIDS was looking at UFOs, and then it led them into some really strange areas. I know you don’t want to use the word paranormal, but really weird shit that was happening…

    TT: Better word.

    GK: …in connection with UFO proximity, in principal. You know, none of those NIDS guys, those PhD guys, wanted to be investigating weird, monster/creature sightings. a bulletproof wolf, all that stuff. You can’t write a paper about it, it’s just too darned weird. Jay, was that a limiting factor in your willingness to participate in that and just how weird it got? You’re interested in UFOs and the physics of it, and can this technology be reverse engineered? And then it leads you down paths that are pretty strange.

    JS: 100%. As a science-minded guy, it interested me, right? It mean, it pulls you in. But…you know, and  I’ll be clear, we said it earlier, you know, the ranch was part of the DIA effort and it was not part of any of the follow-on efforts.

    TT: It was never part of the UAPTF, get that clear. Never.

    JS: No. However, the ranch, or, the ranch (said with a British accent), as Nick Pope says. But the big-name program… (Not sure if he said, big-name program” ~Joe) I love Nick, I don’t want to insult him. The things seen out there, to this day – and if you’re watching all the awesome, high-definition, footage that’s been caught out there – are representative of the things that our aircrew are reporting. And that’s the drawback. Now, that’s what has kept me, keeping my eye on the ranch, is that draw of the UAP side of it. The other things that George mentioned, are just strange, collateral effects of being there. And if you were in our previous panel, Travis had a really good explanation of your brain trying to interpret what it’s seeing. And I can tell you, 100%, there are technologies out there that can make you see things, that can make you hear things, and can drive all of these things. And some of those technologies are side effects from their originally-designed purpose, that might be power generation or other things. So, it all ties back to the technology for me. It’s not about chasing anything on the ground. It’s about understanding what’s above our heads, and sometimes in our own oceans.

    TT: Yeah, and not to completely redo what I did in the panel just before this, I’ll tell you this. It actually isn’t odd to me. It took me a while to get there, though. You know, when I first read your book, and then Kelleher’s book, and heard the stories, I was like, “What? No!” And then, once I got to really dive in, I measured certain signals, started looking at certain things, did a lot more research into what would it take to do some of these things that could be going on there. And then I realized, especially recently, within the last few months, when we had this experiment where they used the Sycamore Google quantum computer to simulate an ante-de Sitter spacetime…a fake, little model universe, and create a wormhole inside that universe using quantum processors. And they needed the quantum qubits to create the negative energy states that keeps the wormhole open. Entanglement, entanglement is what keeps the wormhole open. Then I realized, so, if there is something in our actual Universe that can manipulate space time, it’s gonna have to do the same thing, and it’s gonna be doing this using quantum entanglement to hold open or create a negative-energy state, so it can bend spacetime. And guess what? Our brains have more quantum processors in it than there are stars in the Universe. Each brain has more quantum processors…a little protein called tubulin. You got trillions and trillions and trillions of them in there, and you’re the most amazing quantum computer there is. And so, if this is affecting spacetime, using a quantum phenomenon, then that’s gonna be putting weirdness into your brain, because your brain is working through the same quantum-entanglement phenomena. And what you’re getting could be noise from whatever the system is, it could be information, but information that your brain has never understood before and has nothing to compare it to. And so it comes up looking like a dog wearing a…a dude with a dog head, smoking a cigarette, wearing a trench coat. I mean, it just it could really be a side effect.

    GK: They were smoking cigarettes too, by the way.

    ~~~

    TT: Oh, cigarettes, they were smoking cigarettes. Okay. But see, those are patterns your brain understands, and it could have taken this strange information and just stuck on top of it what it could understand, and that’s how you interpreted that reality.

    JS: And see, the ranch is important for you because what Travis and I realized is, we retired from the government, our hands are no longer handcuffed. We don’t have the oversight and the rules that we had to live under for so long. We’re on camera now, in an investigation where we can take our knowledge, and potentially show you the results of that, right? And none of that is classified, right? That’s the beauty of it.

    ~~~

    GK: I’m gonna go there in a second. Before we leave the government sector behind…you leave, and six months later the report is delivered to Congress and then there’s a public hearing, the first one in fifty-four years.

    (Video is cued up to the clip referenced and transcribed below)

    ~~~

    GK: And it seemed like they walked back a lot of what you guys had done. Suddenly, the East Coast incidents are bokeh and balloons, the West Coast is drones. Case closed. And then, you know, the transparency that happened while you were there, where the Pentagon would confirm images that they knew were recorded by the Navy, they stopped doing that. And we’ve seen other indications that they’re walking it back. We know that the CIA is not happy about it, we know the Air Force has dragged its feet. And there’s a new organization, AARO, we’d all like to root for it, but a lot of indications that come my way are that, you know, I’m not sure that they’re gonna take it where the public hopes they take it. Can you both address that sort of, where it’s gone since you left? Do you feel that it has regressed in some ways from where you were, where it was when you left?

    JS: Well, the fact that the talking point a few weeks ago was we need a whole of government, interagency effort, tells me we don’t have one, right? Yeah, I mean, that just drives me crazy because I put so much work and effort into that and got us where we needed to be as a country. and it was kind of thrown out with the bathwater. Over the years, I had people say, “You’re getting too close. The smoking man’s gonna show up.” The reality is, in over sixteen years of working on this topic, the smoking man never showed up. So, is there a smoking man? But I can tell you that it sure seemed like there was a hidden hand that would shut doors in my face at times, that I had to work around. And I had the personality – I’m trying not to pat myself on the back too much – to get in and people would help me and we would get further and further and further every time. And, it really, really did upset both Travis and I when we were watching that hearing. And I can also promise you that if I were back clinching (Not sure if he said, “clinching” ~Joe) that hearing or front seating that hearing that I could have told them about the Malmstrom incident. I could have told them just about any incident. They just weren’t briefed and prepared to the level that I would have prepped them. And that was a little bit, probably, by design.

    TT: It felt like it was by design. When Jay and I were sitting at Radiance in the conference and watching the HIPSI meeting as it was taking place. And when they start talking about the Russell incident. I was like, “That’s not what…we did not brief them that way. That is not what we told them.”

    ~~~

    From the May 17th, 2022, HIPSI (House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence) hearing on UAP with Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security, Ronald Moultrie, and Deputy Director of Naval Intelligence, Scott Bray 

    Cued up, here… 👇🏼

    ~~~

    Audio of Bray’s Comments: Part 1

    ~~~

    Deputy Director of Naval Intelligence, Scott Bray: We’ve also made progress in resolving the character of a limited number of UAP encounters. For example, let me show you another video and image taken years apart in different areas. In this video, U.S. Navy personnel recorded what appears to be triangles, some flashing, recorded several years ago, off the coast of the United States. This was recorded while the U.S. Navy ship (The USS Russell ~Joe) observed a number of small, unmanned aerial systems in the area. And importantly, the video was taken through night-vision goggles with a single lens, reflex camera. These remained unresolved for several years.

    Several years later, and off a different coast, U.S. Navy personnel, again, in a swarm of unmanned aerial systems, and again through night-vision goggles, and an SLR camera, recorded this image. But this time, other U.S. Navy assets also observed unmanned aerial systems nearby. And we’re now reasonably confident that these triangles correlate to unmanned aerial systems in the area. The triangular appearance is a result of light passing through the night-vision goggles, and then being recorded by an SLR camera. I don’t mean to suggest that everything that we observe is identifiable, but this is a great example of how it takes considerable effort to understand what we’re seeing in the examples that we are able to collect.

    In this example, we accumulated sufficient data from two similar encounters, from two different time periods, in two different geographic areas, to help us draw these conclusions. That’s not always the case, though. We recognize that that can be unsatisfying or insufficient in the eyes of many. This is a popular topic in our nation, with various theories as to what these objects may be, and where they originate. And by nature, we are all curious and we seek to understand the unknown. And as a lifelong intelligence professional, I’m impatient. I want immediate explanations for this as much as anyone else. However, understanding can take significant time and effort. It’s why we’ve endeavored to concentrate on this data-driven process, to drive fact-based results. And given the nature of our business, national defense, we’ve had to sometimes be less forthcoming with information in open forums than many would hope.

    If UAP do indeed represent a potential threat to our security, then the capabilities, systems, processes and sources we use to observe, record, study or analyze these phenomena, need to be classified at appropriate levels. We do not want, we do not want potential adversaries to know exactly what we’re able to see or understand, or how we come to the conclusions we make. Therefore, public disclosures must be carefully considered on a case by case basis.

    Fast Forward to 42:52 into the hearing 👇🏼

    ~~~

    Audio of Bray’s and Schiff’s Comments: Part 2

    ~~~

    Congressman Adam Schiff: With respect to the second two videos, showing the small triangles, the hypothesis is that those are commercial drones that…because of the use of night-vision goggles, appear like triangles? Is that the operating assessment?

    Bray: Some type of drone, some type of unmanned aerial system, and it is simply that that light source resolves itself through the night-vision goggles onto the SLR camera as a triangle.

    Schiff: And have we, in order to prove that hypothesis, flown a drone and observed it with that same technology to see whether we can reproduce the effect?

    Bray: UAP Task Force is aware of studies that have done that (The follow-up by Schiff should have been, “What studies? Can you get those to me by the end of the week? ~Joe).

    Schiff: Ok, Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    ~~~

    Not long after that hearing and Bray making those claims, Taylor was on a Skinwalker Ranch Insider panel and noted that in the ODNI Preliminary Assessment on UAP, released in June of 2021, of the 144 UAP reports examined by the UAPTF, one was explained and that was a deflated balloon. He added:

    TT: “Recently, I think we’ve explained, maybe, a second one, as it looks to be stars and a drone. But there’s still something a little iffy about that.”

    The related Twitter thread can be read here.

    ~~~

    In a blog published by “Liberation Times,” on May 8th, 2023, Pentagon spokesperson, Susan Gough, added some comments about the 2019 events and the alleged triangle-shaped craft above the USS Russell: 

    “As noted by Scott Bray, Deputy Director for Naval Intelligence, during a congressional hearing in May 2022, the UAPTF was reasonably confident that the triangles correlated to UAS [Unmanned Aerial Systems) in the area, given that the triangles appeared in videos from different occasions where U.S Navy assets observed a number of small UAS nearby.

    “As with all UAP cases it inherited, AARO is reviewing the associated data of past cases within its newly developed analytic framework. These triangles may be a combination of known sources, including UAS, and AARO is using its newly implemented analytic framework to definitively determine the sources and peer review the results before officially closing the case.

    “As Mr. Bray also noted during his testimony, we can confirm that the objects observed in this case appeared to the viewer as triangular shapes due to the angle of observation and optical system used. As part of the analytic framework, the source of the lights are currently being reviewed against the star/planet alignment at the time, air traffic and other likely UAS systems. As we have stated previously, there is not one solution for all UAP.”

    ~~~

    One more item related to the 2019 West Coast events.

    Condorman, who lists himself as an Aerospace Engineer (I’ve interacted with him for several years and have no reason to doubt him), added this in a multi-tweet thread in January of 2022.

    I’ve been debating whether to post this or not since there’s all this flak about naming sources. But I decided to do it. If you don’t like unnamed sources, STOP now. Earlier this week I was a testing location and ran into a friend I had not seen since we both worked at LM.

    I left [Lockheed Martin] for greener pastures and he left for a government job. I invited him to dinner (gov jobs don’t pay great, lol) and after a few beers (him) and wine (me), I brought up UAP. We started with Tic Tacs and he basically said it was the strangest incident he was aware of.

    He then volunteered that he had looked into the east coast sightings and had even visited Mayport Naval Base in 2015. He talked about swarms of spheres, some with pilot-reported cube structures inside of them, and sometimes following a larger craft (Gimbal??)

    I was blown away. I then brought up the 2019 west coast incident and inquired if he’d heard of it. He nodded and said it was the SAME. That the same swarms of spheres had flown over our ships for hours over several days. I asked if they had cubes inside and he said they only came out at night so they could not see the cubes, but they gave off the same radar and IR sigs as the east coast. He was sure they were the SAME. He changed the topic after that and we talked about our families and so on. But what a rush.

    ~~~

    [the_ad id=”1724″]

    Back to Knapp, Stratton and Taylor, as TT comments on how he felt after watching the HIPSI hearing with Moultrie and Bray…

    TT: And it seems odd. It felt like we’ve been practicing all year and got to the playoffs and we lost like, you know, forty-two to nothing. I mean, that’s how it felt. It was real weird, a kick in the gut. And it’s one of those things that, it seems like…the question is: Why? You know, I’ve never been a believer in conspiracies, but also, I’m not a big believer in coincidences, right? And the fact that, now suddenly, all of a sudden, there’s all these balloon things happening. And, “Oh, we didn’t know how to track it, and the UAPTF didn’t know what they were doing. They’re a bunch of morons, and so, it was all balloons and it wasn’t UFOs.” Well, we told them that you couldn’t chase the balloons until you fixed the damn radars! And so, it really seems very timely, and almost directed, but I can’t bring myself to believe in a conspiracy.

    JS: If I got everything on my wish list, we’d be in a much different place right now. Much different.

    ~~~

    GK: Congress passed a law that allows whistleblowers some protections to come forward. You guys have heard the same things that I’ve heard about people that have already testified, that wanna testify about legacy programs, about, as crazy as it sounds, crash retrievals, metamaterials, craft that were made by somebody else. You both specialize in reverse engineering, I know you’d like to get your hands on that kind of stuff. You said, Jay, that you had never seen evidence of the hidden hand, but you felt it. You think that such a program could exist in the private sector somewhere, that there could be materials like that, that have been hidden from the public? And same thing for you, Travis.

    (Stratton motions for Taylor to go first)

    TT: Okay.

    GK: Do you have any confidence that the whistleblower testimony that’s happening now will lead us somewhere.

    TT: Well, let me take the whistleblower thing first and then think about how you (Jay) wanna answer that first question. And I don’t know how I’m gonna answer that. So, I wanna caution everybody. So, think about this: If there was a legacy program, and I’m not saying I know there was or not. If there was a legacy program, say if there was a Roswell crash, and they had a crash retrieval and reverse engineering program, that was in 1947, if you believe all the stories. And so, in 1947, then, whoever created the Special Access Program for that is long retired and probably dead. And whoever may still have legacy continued the next generation, or whatever, if they were still in that program, inside that SAP, it’s unlikely there were new people put into it much longer than ten or twenty years after that. And so they’re getting really close to aging out. And they signed a non-disclosure agreement for life, if it’s a Special Access Program, unacknowledged. You never, as long as you live, reveal that that existed or you’ll go to jail for the rest of your life, for treason. Or espionage, it wouldn’t be treason. I’m not a lawyer so don’t…it’s a whole different… Or maybe that’s a good thing? I don’t know. Anyway…so there was no way for any of these people to actually tell anybody, because nobody in Congress has any knowledge of any of these unacknowledged SAPs, that can be briefed. So, that’s what the whistleblower clause is for, to create a super caveat, a super-access program that they can brief upwards in classification to, and there would be some elected officials that are briefed into that program so we have elected-official oversight. That doesn’t mean they’ll ever tell the general public, but at least you could be somewhat comfortable in knowing that you had an elected official that was at least doing oversight. As far as I can tell, there’s been no oversight for a long time. So, at least there’s that. But we’ll see what happens.

    JS: Basically what I was gonna say (audience laughed). You know, if…if there was something like that, industry is the place it belongs, mostly. And the reason I say that is because industry builds capabilities that make the F-22s and the F-35s and so on, of the world…or, for us. But the problem I have is, if it exists that way, then the oversight and the lack of understanding of the sitting members of Congress, that we failed, or someone has worked around them. So, that’s a concern for me. That’s the heart and soul of the whistleblower protection, but if you don’t understand that whistleblower protection, I need to manage expectations. A whistleblower can walk into Congress in the right room and tell them what they know. That does not declassify that information. That only provides them with insight and other places to potentially turn over some more rocks. It would take the President of the United States to declassify that information and provide it to the American people. So, the whistleblower language is not a bad thing, for sure, but it’s not de-classifying the information.

    TT: Well, it wouldn’t have to be the President if he was the original classification authority.

    JS: Yeah, whoever owns it.

    TT: Whoever created the program is called the classifying authority. The president is the authority, he can declassify any damn thing he wants. But the person who creates the program is called the classifying authority and he or she has the authority to do that, too.

    GK: That sounded to me like, “Good luck getting this information out.”

    TT: I think that’s what we said, yeah.

    GK: We have a few minutes left, sadly. I want to ask about Radiance Technologies. When I saw Radiance. there was two news releases they put out about two hires they did, and I was just flabbergasted. One was about Jay Stratton. And it says he worked in these UAP programs for the federal government and was a reverse engineering specialist.

    ~~~

    GK: And then they put out a release that they’d hired Travis Taylor, who’s known for UFO programs and had also worked on classified programs, and they’re gonna work together.

    ~~~

    GK: Jay, the reverse-engineer specialist, Travis, the guy who builds things, and you have to wonder: What the hell are you guys doing down there? Are you building flying saucers? Are you taking one apart? Or, what are you up to?

    TT: Anybody wants to bring us a flying saucer, we’ll be happy to reverse engineer it for ya.

    JS: So we love the company we’re with and in our heart and soul, yes, we’re founded on reverse engineering. And we’re research and development and we are a solution provider for the government, the Intel Community and the Department of Defense. What that means to me and Travis is the flexibility of job description. And our job description is, basically, go do awesome things and provide the Intel Community with an awesome product, or the Department of Defense. And sometimes, that awesome product is a derivation of something else we may have gotten our hands on.

    GK: Can the private sector solve this mystery? Can you guys get your hands on proof…the kinds of things that only the government could get in the past? Is that what you want to do?

    TT: Well, that’s exactly what I want to do and it’s exactly what my goal is. I think that…Jay always has told me this isn’t inherently a government problem, UFOs are all over the world, if they’re real, right?

    JS: The skies are not classified.

    TT: And the skies are not classified. That’s the other thing he says, yes. And so, all of you are part of our sensor network. You’ve got a supercomputer with AI access in your pocket. You get something, start spreading it around and show everybody you know. There are some apps coming online with a couple of different small businesses that are creating, like UFO tracking, like chat sort of apps that, if you see something, you can connect to other phones nearby you and tell them to look for it, too. And so you should look for those apps and try to start making use of those. And that’s all private stuff. I think the way you’re gonna get disclosure isn’t going to be from some guy walking up to a podium at the White House, press room or in the Pentagon, it’s going to be from someone like George here, that has found the right data in the open, public world and we’re gonna see it. That’s what disclosure gonna be.

    JS: Yep.

    GK: One last question. Jeremy (Corbell) made me ask this.

    ~~~

    GK: You can’t answer it but I’ll ask it anyway. Have you ever seen the Mosul Orb before we put it out?

    JS: I can’t comment.

    GK: Ahh! Jay Stratton, Travis Taylor, thank you both, very much. Thank you all. Thanks for coming.

    🛸 Recommended Intelligence Resource

    As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.

    → hotel-deals

  • Is There An Alien-Human Hybridization Program?

    In the upcoming episode of “UFO Insight Podcast”, our renowned host Marcus Lowth delves into the intricacies of an enigmatic subject – the alleged alien-human hybridization program. This topic, considered outlandish by some and compelling by others, has sparked considerable debate within the community of UFO enthusiasts and researchers.

    Firstly, we’ll take a closer look at the painstaking research of Dr. David Jacobs, a notable figure in the UFO research community. Jacobs’ controversial and thought-provoking theories regarding hybridization have certainly pushed the boundaries of mainstream discourse. His intricate work, which suggests a purposeful and meticulous alien agenda, forms the foundation of our discussion.

    In addition to Jacobs, we’ll explore the findings of other researchers who’ve drawn similar conclusions, underscoring the surprising consensus that exists despite the controversial nature of the subject. This synchronicity in findings adds an intriguing layer to the narrative and invites listeners to ponder the potential veracity of these claims.

    We won’t shy away from discussing the recent claims of alien-human hybrids either. These accounts, often dismissed as fanciful, are nonetheless thought-provoking and offer a fresh perspective on our understanding of extraterrestrial contact. Our host, with his vast wealth of knowledge and experience, will elucidate the complexities of these claims, providing listeners with the context needed to form their own interpretations.

    Lastly, we’ll tackle the million-dollar question – what could be the end goal of this supposed hybridization program? Theories abound, ranging from ominous to hopeful, and we’ll delve into these conjectures without pushing any particular agenda.

    Throughout this episode, Marcus will draw from his vast experience of almost two decades, researching UFOs and the paranormal. As a prominent figure in the field and the guiding voice behind UFO Insight since 2016, his nuanced insights will undoubtedly enrich the discussion.

    Join us on the “UFO Insight Podcast” as we traverse the winding paths of these intriguing theories, encouraging you, as always, to form your own conclusions. After all, at UFO Insight, we believe in the power of individual discernment. As we explore these provocative topics, we’ll maintain our commitment to fostering an open dialogue where all perspectives are welcome, and no theory is too far-fetched to consider.

    View the original podcast release page here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/podcast/is-there-an-alien-human-hybridization-program

    You can check out our article on alien-human hybrids here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/aliens/agendas/alien-human-hybrids-nonsense-something

    Check out hundreds of further articles here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/

    Chapters
    0:00–0:49 – Introduction
    0:49–13:12 – The Research Of David Jacobs
    13:12–18:12 – Other Researchers With Similar Conclusions
    18:12–20:46 Recent Claims Of Alien-Human Hybrids
    20:46–21:47 – What Is The End Goal?
    21:47–23:52 – Summary

    The entire narration script and spoken narration audio track are copyright © UFO Insight.  Music, jingles, and complementary sounds may be used under license.

    🛸 Recommended Intelligence Resource

    As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.

    → Aiper

  • UFO Cover-Ups

    In the upcoming episode of the UFO Insight Podcast, our very own Marcus Lowth steers us into the enigmatic realm of alleged cover-ups surrounding unidentified flying objects (UFOs) and extraterrestrial encounters. Drawing upon his extensive years of research into the paranormal and the unidentified, Marcus promises to challenge our assumptions, stimulate our curiosity, and fuel our quest for understanding. Remember, at UFO Insight, we present the evidence and theories, and leave you to make up your own mind.

    Our journey starts with a deep dive into the rationale behind our suspicion of cover-ups. Marcus will unravel the intricate web of testimonies, circumstantial evidence, and alleged government actions that lead many to believe that more is hidden than revealed. We delve into the why, the how, and the who, seeking to illuminate the shadows where truth may lie.

    From there, we venture into the captivating sphere of UFO crashes. We examine some of the most prominent cases that have fuelled speculation for decades. From the infamous Roswell incident to lesser-known but equally intriguing events, Marcus elucidates the peculiarities that suggest these were not mere accidents involving earthly crafts.

    Intriguingly, the narrative takes a turn towards the realm of reverse-engineered alien technology. It’s a topic that has sparked heated debates in the UFO community. Marcus discusses the theories surrounding the possibility that our technological advancements are not entirely of our own making. He sheds light on claims of recovered alien technology and the astonishing complexities it presents.

    Last but not least, we navigate the chilling and mysterious world of the Men in Black, through the lens of the Danny Gordon cover-up. Gordon’s story, a tale of intimidation and alleged suppression of vital UFO evidence, has long been a source of fascination and speculation within the UFO community. Marcus dissects this enigmatic case, presenting the known facts and the lingering questions.

    Marcus Lowth, with his two-decade-long dedication to researching all aspects of the paranormal, brings an insightful perspective to these compelling subjects. He has been with UFO Insight since 2016, not just as a writer, but also as a guiding force, often appearing on various podcasts to discuss everything from UFOs and aliens to ancient mysteries.

    Join us in this riveting episode as we traverse the fine line between known and unknown, plausible and implausible, and fact and fiction. We don’t promise answers, but we guarantee a journey that will prompt you to question, to think, and to wonder. As always, we invite you to form your own conclusions. After all, the truth is out there, and the pursuit of it is a journey we are all on together.

    View the original podcast release page here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/podcast/ufo-cover-ups

    You can check out our article on the Danny Gordon investigation here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/ufos/cover-ups/men-in-black-who-what

    Check out hundreds of further articles here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/

    Chapters
    0:00–0:49 – Introduction
    0:49–2:34 – Why Do We Suspect A Cover-Up
    2:34–8:38 – UFO Crashes
    8:38–13:11 – Reverse-Engineered Alien Technology
    13:11–24:02 – The Men In Black And The Danny Gordon Cover-Up
    24:02–25:55 – Summary

    The entire narration script and spoken narration audio track are copyright © UFO Insight.  Music, jingles, and complementary sounds may be used under license.

    🛸 Recommended Intelligence Resource

    As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.

    → contabo

  • Alleged Top Secret UFO And Alien Bases

    In this riveting edition of the UFO Insight Podcast, our dedicated host, Marcus Lowth, delves deep into the enigmatic world of alleged top-secret bases and facilities around the globe, closely tied to UFOs and extraterrestrial beings. With nearly two decades of dedicated research into UFOs, the paranormal, and ancient mysteries, Marcus brings to light fascinating insights and theories, all while encouraging listeners to draw their own conclusions.

    The episode embarks on an exploration of these clandestine establishments rumored to exist in some of the most unexpected and inhospitable locations. Some, it is suggested, nestle deep within the heart of the world’s most iconic mountain ranges, a perfect camouflage for activities beyond our understanding. Marcus imparts captivating theories and accounts that hint at the presence of otherworldly activities tucked away within these rocky terrains.

    As the discussion transitions, the focus shifts to the intriguing possibility of secret bases submerged in the profound depths of the world’s seas and oceans. These underwater bases pose an even greater enigma than their terrestrial counterparts. The accounts of unidentified crafts emerging and disappearing into the aquatic depths challenge our perceptions of what could be lurking beneath the waves.

    The narrative then introduces the chilling testimonies of alleged abductees. These individuals narrate their extraordinary experiences of being whisked away to these hidden bases during their inexplicable encounters. The intricate details shared by them about these underwater bases are as enthralling as they are mysterious.

    Lastly, Marcus navigates us to the frosty expanses of Antarctica. The icy continent is a place of enigma and conspiracy theories, one that supposedly conceals a myriad of secrets related to UFOs and alien life. The mysteries of Antarctica’s connection to alien phenomena are unraveled, sparking thought-provoking questions about what might lie beneath the ice.

    In every segment of this episode, Marcus presents his meticulously researched theories and invites listeners to engage in their own exploration of truth. Remember, the aim of the UFO Insight Podcast is not to sway your belief but to provide you with information to help you make up your own mind. In the realm of UFOs and the paranormal, every story is a piece of the puzzle. Are you ready to put it together? Tune in, and let’s unravel these mysteries together.

    View the original podcast release page here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/podcast/alleged-top-secret-ufo-and-alien-bases

    You can check out our article looking at some of the conspiracies surrounding Antarctica here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/conspiracy/government/conspiracies-antarctica

    Check out hundreds of further articles here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/

    Chapters
    0:00–0:43 – Introduction
    0:43–8:45 – Bases In The Mountains
    8:45–13:37 – Underwater Bases
    13:37–20:02 – Alien Abductions And Underwater Bases
    20:02–22:29 – Antarctica
    22:29–24:22 – Summary

    The entire narration script and spoken narration audio track are copyright © UFO Insight.  Music, jingles, and complementary sounds may be used under license.

    🛸 Recommended Intelligence Resource

    As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.

    → Surfshark

  • Secret UFO Projects

    On this electrifying episode of the UFO Insight Podcast, our host and seasoned researcher, Marcus Lowth, delves deep into the clandestine abyss of alleged UFO projects and secret space missions. As we embark on this interstellar journey, we’re reminded of the need for discernment, but also the fascinating allure these tales hold.

    We begin our exploration with Project Moon Dust, an alleged operation by the United States military said to be responsible for the recovery of extraterrestrial vehicles that have crashed on Earth. Unveiling the enigmatic shroud around this project, we probe into the question: Did our military forces really retrieve otherworldly technology, and if so, how has this influenced our scientific advancement?

    Next, we venture into the whispers of Project Serpo. Purportedly an interstellar exchange program, the stories assert that human astronauts were sent to an extraterrestrial planet as a part of a secret agreement with alien entities. This narrative beckons us to ponder on the unimaginable: Could there have been an undercover space mission, perhaps a result of reverse-engineered alien technology?

    We then touch upon the intriguing narratives surrounding Project Sigma. Allegedly, this covert operation was dedicated to establishing communication with extraterrestrial civilizations. If true, this ushers in profound queries about the nature of these exchanges. What messages were exchanged and what effects have they had on our understanding of the universe?

    Lastly, we turn our gaze towards Project Redsun. This project, as per the claims, was aimed at establishing a human presence on Mars with the assistance of unidentified entities. We delve into the conjecture: Was a secret Martian base built as a result of interstellar collaboration?

    Each of these projects, whether actual or imagined, opens up a universe of questions and mysteries. Marcus Lowth, with his near two decades of research into UFOs and the paranormal, masterfully navigates through these cosmic tales, shedding light on their credibility and their implications on our understanding of reality itself.

    Tune into this episode of the UFO Insight Podcast for a voyage into the enigmatic and the extraordinary. Whether you’re a seasoned UFO enthusiast or simply curious about the unknown, this episode will surely ignite your imagination and expand your cosmic perspective. Brace yourself for an enlightening journey that ventures into the shadows of the clandestine cosmos, illuminating the intriguing and thought-provoking.

    View the original podcast release page here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/podcast/secret-ufo-projects

    You can check out our article Project Serpo here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/ufos/cover-ups/project-serpo-1947-roswell-crash

    Check out hundreds of further articles here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/

    Chapters
    0:00–0:46 – Introduction
    0:46–8:58 – Project Moon Dust
    8:58–16:27 – Project Serpo
    16:27–20:39 – Project Sigma
    20:39–23:37 – Project Redsun
    23:37–25:06 – Summary

    The entire narration script and spoken narration audio track are copyright © UFO Insight.  Music, jingles, and complementary sounds may be used under license.

    🛸 Recommended Intelligence Resource

    As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.

    → Surfshark

  • Transcript: Senate Hearing On UFOs: Gillibrand – “We Don’t Know Where They Come From, Who Made Them, Or How They Operate.”

    Transcript: Senate Hearing On UFOs: Gillibrand – “We Don’t Know Where They Come From, Who Made Them, Or How They Operate.”

    “In the event sufficient scientific data were ever obtained, that a UAP encounter can only be explained by extraterrestrial origin, we are committed to working with our interagency partners at NASA to appropriately inform U.S. Government’s leadership of its findings.”

    ~Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick – Director of AARO

    ~~~

    If you like what you see on my blog, my Twitter and YouTube Channel and appreciate the time and effort, here are links to my Patreon, Pay Pal and Venmo. I appreciate any and all support. Without that support, I would struggle to do this as much as I do.

    ~~~

    Patreon = https://www.patreon.com/ufojoe

    Pay Pal – ufojoe11@aol.com

    Venmo – www.venmo.com/u/ufojoe

    ~~~

    Full hearing…

    ~~~

    Former intelligence and defense contractor, Michael Via, joined me on April 23rd and we analyzed the hearing.

    ~~~

    Senator Kirsten Gillibrand – D-New York – (KG): “The hearing will come to order. I’d first like to thank our witness, Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, for testifying here and in today’s earlier closed session. And for his long and distinguished career, both in the intelligence community and in the Department of Defense. Dr. Kirkpatrick is the director of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, or AARO. Congress established this office, in law, to get to the bottom of the very serious problem of Unidentified Anomalous Phenomenon (That’s not a typo. KG said “phenomenon.” ~Joe) or UAP. Dr. Kirkpatrick has a very difficult mission. While we have made progress, there remains a stigma attached to these phenomenon. There is a vast and complex citizen engagement, and there’s also very challenging scientific and technical hurdles. So we appreciate the willingness of Dr. Kirkpatrick to lean in on this issue and the work that he has accomplished thus far. And we look forward to both his opening statement and his presentation of examples of the work AARO has done.

    In late 2017, media reports surfaced about activity set in motion by the late long-serving Majority Leader, Senator Harry Reid, more than a decade ago. We learned that there was strong evidence of advanced technology reflected in the features and performance characteristics of many objects observed by our highly-trained service members operating top-of-the-line, military equipment. We learned that for at least the past eight years, military pilots frequently encountered unknown objects in controlled airspace off both the East and West Coasts across the continental United States, in test and training areas, and ranges. We don’t know where they come from, who made them, or how they operate. As former Deputy Secretary of Defense, David Norquist, observed, had any of these objects had the label, Made in China, there would be an uproar in the government and media. There would be no stone unturned and no effort spared to find out what we were dealing with. We can look at the recent incursion of the unidentified, PRC (People’s Republic of China) high-altitude balloon as an example. And because of the UFO stigma, the response has been irresponsibly anemic and slow.

    Congress established AARO. We made it clear that we expect vigorous action. We added very substantial, initial funding for the office. But despite our best efforts, the President’s budget for Fiscal Years 2023 and 2024, requested only enough funding to defray the operating expenses of AARO. It included almost no funds to sustain the critical research and development necessary to support a serious investigation. It took a letter to Secretary Austin from Senator Rubio and me, and 14 other senators, to get the office temporary relief for the current fiscal year.

    ~~~

    https://twitter.com/tinyklaus/status/1626361031667724288

    ~~~

    [the_ad id=”1724″]

    KG: In this hearing, I tend to probe a series of specific issues. In the recent incidents where multiple objects were shot down over North America, it seemed that Pentagon leadership did not turn to [the] AARO office to play a leading role in advising the combatant commander. We need to know whether this will continue, we need to know whether the leadership in DoD will bring AARO into the decision-making process in a visible way, and we need to know what role AARO will play in interagency coordination after the NSC Working Group disbands.

    In the fiscal year 2023 National Defense and Intelligence Authorization Act, Congress established a direct-reporting chain from the AARO director to the Deputy Secretary of Defense. The role of the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security is limited to providing administrative support. We need to know how this direction is being implemented. UAP are frequently observed flying [at] extremely high or very-low speeds and come in various sizes and shapes. During the recent shoot downs over North America, DoD disclosed that filters on radar systems were adjusted to allow for detection and tracking of diverse sets of objects for the first time. While opening the aperture can overload the real time, analytic process, we cannot keep turning a blind eye to surveillance data that is critical to detecting and tracking UAP. We need to know whether Dr. Kirkpatrick can achieve the necessary control over sensor filters, and the storage and access to raw, surveillance data to find UAP anomalies.

    Finally, one of the tasks Congress set for AARO is serving as an open door for witnesses of UAP events, or participants in government activities related to UAPs, to come forward securely and disclose what they know without fear of retribution for any possible violations of previously signed non-disclosure-agreements. Congress mandated that AARO set up a publicly-discoverable and accessible process for safe disclosure. While we know that AARO has already conducted a significant number of interviews, many referred by Congress, we need to set up a public process and we need to know where that effort stands. With that, I’d like to turn to Senator Ernst for her opening statement.

    ~~~

    Senator Joni Ernst – R-Iowa – (JE): Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you Dr. Kirkpatrick for your testimony today. I’ll keep these remarks very brief so that we have maximum time for your briefing. The recent downing of the Chinese surveillance balloon, and three other objects, underscores the need for domain awareness. Adversaries like China and Russia are working to hold U.S. interests, including our homeland, at risk. That’s why your testimony is so important. And I so look forward to a progress update on the establishment of your office. As members know, your office evolved from the Navy-led, Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force, to the All-domain Anomalous Resolution Office known as AARO. Dr. Kirkpatrick, your extensive background in science and technology, research and development, and space, makes you well suited to discuss these emerging challenges. My priority is that we understand the full range of threats posed by our adversaries in all domains. That is what the Joint Force needs to be prepared to fight and win in defense of our nation. This committee needs to know about Chinese or Russian advanced-technology programs to exploit our vulnerabilities, and it needs to know whether your office, along with the IC, has detected potential Chinese or Russian capabilities to surveil or attack us. Finally, we need to ensure efficient, interagency coordination. Multiple elements of the DoD and IC own a piece of this mission. To add value, AARO’s efforts cannot be redundant with others. Thank you again, we look forward to your testimony.

    KG: Dr. Kirkpatrick, you can give your testimony.

    Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick (SK): Thank you, Chairwoman Gillibrand, Ranking Member Ernst, and distinguished members of the Subcommittee and Congress. It is a privilege to be here today to testify on the Department of Defense’s efforts to address Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena.

    First, I want to thank Congress for its extensive and continued partnership as the Department works to better understand and respond to UAP in an effort to minimize technical and intelligence surprise. Unidentified objects in any domain pose potential risks to safety and security, particularly for military personnel and capabilities. Congress and DoD agree that UAP cannot remain unexamined or unaddressed.

    We are grateful for sustained, congressional engagement on this issue, which paved the way for DoD’s establishment of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office in July of last year. Though AARO is still a young office, the spotlight on UAP in recent months underscores the importance of its work and the need for UAP to be taken seriously as a matter of national security. All leadership that I’ve had the pleasure of working with, whether DoD, IC, DOE, civil, scientific or industrial, view Congress as a critical partner in this endeavor.

    AARO has accomplished much in the 9 months since it was established. The AARO team of more than three dozen experts is organized around four functional areas: operations, scientific research, integrated analysis, and strategic communications. In the nine months since AARO’s establishment, we have taken important steps to improve UAP data collection, standardize the Department’s UAP internal reporting requirements, and implement a framework for rigorous scientific and intelligence analysis, allowing us to resolve cases in a systematic and prioritized manner. Meanwhile, consistent with legislative direction, AARO is also carefully reviewing and researching the U.S. Government’s UAP-related historical record.

    AARO is leading a focused effort to better characterize, understand, and attribute UAP, with priority given to UAP reports by DoD and IC personnel in or near areas of national security importance. DoD fully appreciates the eagerness from many quarters, especially here in Congress and in the American public, to quickly resolve every UAP encountered across the globe, from the distant past through today.

    It is important to note, however, that AARO is the culmination of decades of DoD, Intelligence Community, and congressionally-directed efforts to successfully resolve UAP encountered, first and foremost, by U.S. military personnel, specifically Navy and Air Force pilots.

    The law establishing AARO is ambitious, and it will take time to realize the full mission. We cannot answer decades of questions about UAP all at once, but we must begin somewhere. While I assure you that AARO will follow scientific evidence wherever it leads, I ask for your patience as DoD first prioritizes the safety and security of our military personnel and installations, in all domains.

    After all, UAP encountered first by highly-capable DoD and IC platforms, featuring the nation’s most advanced sensors, are those UAP most likely to be successfully resolved by my office, assuming the data can be collected. If AARO succeeds in first improving the ability of military personnel to quickly and confidently resolve UAP they encounter, I believe that in time, we will have greatly advanced the capability of the entire United States Government, including its civilian agencies, to resolve UAP. However, it would be naive to believe that the resolution of all UAP can be solely accomplished by the DoD and IC alone. We will need to prioritize collection and leverage authorities for monitoring all domains within the continental United States. AARO’s ultimate success will require partnerships with the interagency, industry partners, academia and the scientific community, as well as the public.

    AARO is partnering with the Services, Intelligence Community, DOE and across the U.S. government to tap into the resources of the interagency. The UAP challenge is more an operational and scientific issue than it is an intelligence issue. As such, we are working with industry, academia, and the scientific community, which bring their own resources, ideas, and expertise to this challenging problem set. Robust collaboration and peer-review across a broad range of partners will promote greater objectivity and transparency in the study of UAP.

    I want to underscore today that only a very small percentage of UAP reports display signatures that could reasonably be described as ‘anomalous.’ The majority of unidentified objects reported to AARO demonstrate mundane characteristics of balloons, unmanned aerial systems, clutter, natural phenomena, or other readily explainable sources. While a large number of cases in our holdings remain technically unresolved, this is primarily due to a lack of data associated with these cases. Without sufficient data, we are unable to reach defendable conclusions that meet the high scientific standards we set for resolution, and I will not close a case that we cannot defend the conclusions of.

    I recognize that this answer is unsatisfying to those who, in good faith, assume that what they see with their eyes, with their cameras, and with their radars is incontrovertible evidence of extraordinary characteristics and performance. Yet, time and again, with sufficient scientific-quality data, it is fact that UAP often, but not always, resolve into readily-explainable sources. Humans are subject to deception and illusions, sensors to unexpected responses and malfunctions, and in some cases, intentional interference. Getting to the handful of cases that pass this level of scrutiny is the mission of AARO.

    That is not to say that UAP, once resolved, are no longer of national security interest, however. On the contrary, learning that a UAP isn’t of exotic origin but is instead, just a quadcopter or a balloon, leads to the question of who is operating that quadcopter, and to what purpose. The answers to those questions will inform potential national security or law-enforcement responses.

    AARO is a member of the Department’s support to the administration’s “Tiger Team” effort to deal with stratospheric objects such as the PRC High-Altitude Balloon (HAB). When previously unknown objects are successfully identified, it is AARO’s role to quickly and efficiently hand off such readily-explainable objects to the Intelligence, law-enforcement or operational-safety communities for further analysis and appropriate action. In other words, AARO’s mission is to turn UAP into SEP: Somebody Else’s Problem.

    The U.S. Government, the DoD and the IC, in particular, has tremendous capabilities to deal with those encountered objects. In the wake of the PRC HAB event, the interagency is working to better integrate and share information to address identifiable stratospheric objects, but that is not AARO’s lane.

    Meanwhile, for the few cases in all domains, space, air and sea, that do demonstrate potentially anomalous characteristics, AARO exists to help the DoD, IC, and interagency resolve those anomalous cases. In doing so, AARO is approaching these cases with the highest level of objectivity and analytic rigor. This includes physically testing and employing modeling and simulation to validate our analyses and underlying theories, then peer reviewing those results within the U.S. Government, industry partners, and appropriately-cleared academic institutions, before reaching any conclusions.

    I should also state clearly, for the record, that in our research, AARO has found no credible evidence, thus far, of extraterrestrial activity, off-world technology, or objects that defy the known laws of physics. In the event sufficient scientific data were ever obtained, that a UAP encounter can only be explained by extraterrestrial origin, we are committed to working with our interagency partners at NASA to appropriately inform U.S. Government’s leadership of its findings. For those few cases that have leaked to the public previously, and subsequently commented on by the U.S. Government, I encourage those who hold alternative theories or views to submit your research to credible, peer-reviewed scientific journals. AARO is working very hard to do the same. That is how science works, not by blog or social media.

    We know that there is tremendous public interest in UAP and a desire for answers from AARO. By its very nature, the UAP challenge has, for decades, lent itself to mystery, sensationalism, and even conspiracy. For that reason, AARO remains committed to transparency, accountability, and to sharing as much with the American public as we can, consistent with our obligation to protect not only intelligence sources and methods, but U.S. and Allied capabilities. However, AARO’s work will take time if we are committed to doing it right. It means adhering to the scientific method and the highest standards of research integrity. It means being methodical and scrupulous. It means withholding judgment in favor of evidence. It means following the data where it leads, wherever it leads. It means establishing scientific, peer-reviewed, theoretical underpinnings of observed data. And AARO is committed to all of those standards.

    I’m proud of AARO’s progress over the last nine months. Much remains to be done, but the hard work is under way. Thank you for your continued support. And before we turn to questions, I’m gonna walk you through some of our analytical trends and a couple of cases that we’ve prepared.

    [the_ad_placement id=”content”]

    So one of the things that AARO does is high-integrity analysis, as I’ve said. This chart represents the trend analysis of all the cases in AARO’s holdings to date.

    I’ll break it down since it’s small and hard to see:

    UAP Reporting Trends – 1996-2023

    Reported-UAP Altitudes

    60,000 feet – 0.6%

    55,000 feet – 0.0%

    50,000 feet – 0.3%

    45,000 feet – 0.3%

    40,000 feet – 0.6%

    35,000 feet – 2.5%

    30,000 feet – 6.4%

    25,000 feet – 23.5%

    20,000 feet – 32.2%

    15,000 feet – 16.5%

    10,000 feet – 7.8%

    5,000 feet – 9.2%

    ~~~

    Typically-Reported UAP Characteristics

    Appearance 

    Morphology – Round, Atypical Orientation

    Size – 1-4 meters

    Color – White, Silver, Translucent

    Performance

    Altitude – 10,000-30,000 feet

    Velocity – Stationary to Mach 2

    Signatures

    Propulsion – No thermal exhaust detected

    Radar –  Intermittent, X-Band (8-12 GHz)

    Radio – 1-3 GHz, 8-12 Ghz

    Thermal – Intermittent, Shortwave Infrared, Medium-Wave Infrared

    ~~~

    Reported UAP Morphology

    Vector – 0%

    Tic Tac – 1%

    Polygon – 1%

    Square 1%

    Rectangle 1%

    Triangle – 2%

    Disk – 2%

    Cylinder – 2%

    Oval – 3%

    Lights – 5%

    Other – 6%

    Ambiguous Sensor Contact – 23%

    Orb. Round. Sphere – 52%

    ~~~

    SK: What you’ll see on the left is a histogram of all of our reported sightings as a function of altitude. So, most of our sightings occur in the 15 to 25,000 foot range. And that is ultimately because that’s where a lot of our aircraft are.

    ~~~

    SK: On the far right, upper corner, you’ll see a breakout of the morphologies of all of the UAP that are reported. Over half, about 52% of what’s been reported to us, are round or spheres. The rest of those breakout into all kinds of different other shapes. The gray box (Ambiguous Sensor Contact) is…essentially there is no data on what its shape is. Either it wasn’t reported or the sensor did not collect it.

    ~~~

    SK: The bottom map is a heat map of all reporting areas across the globe that we have available to us. What you’ll notice is that there is a heavy, what we call, collection bias, both in altitude and in geographic location. That’s where all of our sensors exist. That’s where our training ranges are, that’s where our operational ranges are, that’s where all of our platforms are.

    ~~~

    SK: In the middle, what we have done is reduce the most typically-reported UAP characteristics to these fields. Mostly round, mostly one to four meters. White, silver, translucent, metallic. 10,000 to 30,000 feet, with apparent velocities from stationary to Mach 2. No thermal exhausts are usually detected. We get intermittent radar returns, we get intermittent radio returns, and we get intermittent thermal signatures. That’s what we’re looking for, and trying to understand what that is.

    ~~~

    SK: Next slide. So I’m going to walk you through two cases that we’ve declassified recently. This first one is an MQ-9 in the Middle East, observing that blow up, which is an apparent spherical object via EO (electro-optical) sensors. Those are not IR (Infrared).

    ~~~

    SK: If you want to go ahead and click that and play it.

    2022 – MQ-9: Sphere/Orb – No Audio

     

    ~~~

    2022 – MQ-9: Sphere/Orb – With Kirkpatrick Audio

    ~~~

    SK: You’ll see it come through the top of the screen, there it goes, and then the camera will slew to follow it. You’ll see it pop in and out of the field of view there. This is essentially all of the data we have associated with this event from some years ago. It is going to be virtually impossible to fully identify that, just based off of that video. Now what we can do and what we are doing is keeping that as part of that group of 52% to see: What are the similarities, what are the trends across all these, and do we see these in a particular distribution? Do they all behave the same or not? As we get more data, we will be able to go back and look at these in a fuller context. How are we gonna get more data? We are working with the Joint Staff to issue guidance to all the services and commands, that will then establish: What are the reporting requirements, the timeliness, and all of the data that is required to be delivered to us and retained from all the associated sensors? That historically hasn’t been the case, and it’s been happenstance that data has been collected.

    Next slide. This particular event, South Asia, MQ-9, looking at another MQ-9. And what’s highlighted there in that red circle is an object that flies through the screen.

    ~~~

    SK: Unlike the previous one, this one actually shows some really interesting things that everyone thought was truly anomalous to start with. First of all, it’s a high-speed object that’s flying in the field of regard of two MQ-9s. Second, it appears to have this trail behind it, right? Which, at first blush, you would think, that looks like a propulsion trail. In reality, if you want to play the first slide, we’ll show you what that looks like in real time. The first video.

    2023 – MQ-9: Commuter Jet – No Audio

    ~~~

    2023 – MQ-9: Commuter Jet – With Kirkpatrick Audio

    ~~~

    SK: So we’re looking at that, there it goes. Why don’t you play it again, and then pause it halfway through. Right there. Alright, if you might be able to see that trail there behind it. That’s actually not a real trail, that is a sensor artifact. Each one of those little blobs is actually a representation of the object as it’s moving through. And later in the video, as the as the camera slews, that trail actually follows the direction of the camera, not the direction of the object.

    2023 – MQ-9: The Trail = A Sensor Artifact

    ~~~

    2023 – MQ-9: Close-up of The Trail = A Sensor Artifact 

    ~~~

    2023 – MQ-9: Close-up of Commuter Jet

    ~~~

    SK: We pulled these apart frame by frame, we were able to demonstrate that that is essentially a readout, overlap of the image. It’s a shadow image, right? It’s not real. Further, if you later follow this all the way to end, it starts to resolve itself into that blob that’s in that picture on the top right. And if you squint, it looks like an aircraft…because it actually turns out to be an aircraft. Go ahead and put that on. So you’ll see the tail sort of pop out there. And so what you’re looking at, in the infrared, this is the heat signature off of the engines of a commuter aircraft that happened to be flying in the vicinity of where those two MQ-9s were at.

    Why am I showing you this? So the first one that I showed you, we don’t have resolved yet, right? That is an unresolved case we are still studying. This one, we can resolve. But this is the kind of data that we have to work with and the type of analysis that we have to do, which can be quite extensive when you have to pull these apart, frame by frame. Further, we’re now matching all of this with the models of all of those imaging sensors, so that I can say, “I can recreate this, I can actually show how the sensor is going to respond.” All of these sensors don’t necessarily respond the way ya think they do. Especially out in the world and in the field. And I believe that’s all I have. And I will open it up for your questions.

    [the_ad id=”1724″]

    KG: Thank you so much, Dr. Kirkpatrick. Can you just give us some raw numbers of how many UAPs you’ve analyzed? How many have been resolved, and sort of in what buckets? And then how many are still left to be resolved? Just an update from your January public report, where it was 366 or something, and about 150 were balloons, and about two dozen were drones. You know, just give us an update, if you have one.

    SK: Sure. So, as of this week, we are tracking over a total of 650 cases. Now, the report in January basically said about half of the ones at that time, about 150, were likely balloon-like or something like that. That doesn’t mean they’re resolved.

    KG: Oh, I see.

    SK: Let me walk everyone through what our analytic process looks like. We have, essentially, a five-step process, right? So we have, we get our cases, and all the data. We create a case for that event. My team does a preliminary scrub of all of those cases as they come in, just to sort out: Do we have any information that says this is in one of those likely categories? It’s likely a balloon, it’s likely a bird, it’s likely some other object. Or, we don’t know. Then we prioritize those based off of where they are. Are they attached to a national-security area? Does it show some anomalous phenomenology that is of interest? If it’s just a spherical thing that’s floating around with the wind, and it has no payload on it, that’s gonna be less important than something that has a payload on it, which will be less important than something that’s maneuvering, right?

    So there’s sort of a hierarchy of just binning the priorities, because we can’t do all of them at once. Once we do that, and we prioritize them, and we take that package of data, in that case…and I have set up two teams. Think of this as a Red Team/Blue Team, or a competitive analysis. I have an intelligence-community team, made up of intelligence analysts, and I have an S & T team (science and technology) made up of scientists and engineers. And the people that actually build a lot of these sensors are physicists, because, you know, if you’re a physicist, you can do anything, right? And…but they’re not associated with the Intel Community, they’re not intel officers. They look at this through the lens of the sensor, of what the data says. We give that package to both teams. And the Intelligence Community is gonna look at it through the lens of the intelligence record, and what they assess, and their intel tradecraft, which they have very specific rules and regulations on how they do. The scientific community, technical community, is gonna look at it through the lens of: What is the data telling me? What is the sensor doing? What would I expect a sensor response to be? And back that out. Those two groups give us their answers.

    We then adjudicate. If they agree, then I am more likely to close that case, if they agree on what it is. If they disagree, we will have an adjudication. We’ll bring them together, we’ll take a look at the differences. We’ll adjudicate: Why do you say one thing and you say another? We will then come to a case recommendation [and] that will get written up by my team. That then goes to a Senior Technical Advisory Group, which is outside of all of those people, made up of senior, technical folks and intel analysts and operators from retired, out of the Community. And they essentially peer review what that case recommendation is. They write their recommendations and that comes back to me, I review it, we make a determination, and I’ll sign off one way or the other. And then that will go out as the case determination. Once we have an approved web portal to hang the unclassified stuff, we will downgrade and declassify things and put it out there. In the meantime, we’re putting a lot of these on our classified web portal, where we can then collaborate with the rest of the Community so they can see what’s going on.

    In a nutshell, that is the process, right? So, because of that…that takes time. So of those, over 650, you know, we’ve prioritized about half of them to be of anomalous, interesting value. And now we have to go through those and go, “How much do I have actual data for?” Because if all I have is [an] operator report that says, “I saw X, Y or Z, and my assessment is A, B, or C,” that’s not really sufficient. That’s a good place to start, but I have to have data. I have to have radar data, I have to have EO (electro-optical) data, I have to have thermal data, I have to have overhead data, and we need to look at all that.

    Now, from a big-picture perspective, I still have…that’s all still very valuable data, and we’re looking at applying a lot of things, new tools, analytic tools, like natural-language processing, so I can go across all of those reports and look for commonalities. How many of them are being described as round, spherical objects that are maneuvering. How many of them are not maneuvering? How many of them seem to have a plume to it, or node? That’s also going to be very valuable to give us more of a global picture and a trends analysis of: What are we seeing? And help us get to the determination.

    So, go back to your question, ma’am, we have…this next quarterly report will be coming out here pretty soon. Our next annual report, you all have given us…moved it up to June/July. We’re gonna be having that done about that timeframe and we’ll be combining a whole number of reports into that one. I think we’re currently sitting at around – if I remember correctly – we’re around twenty to thirtyish, or about halfway through that analytic process. A handful of them have made it all the way out to the other side, gone through peer review, we’ve got case-closure reports done and signed. We’re gonna get faster as we get more people on board and we get more of the Community tools to automate some of the analysis that has to be done.

    Senator Joni Ernst – R-Iowa (JE): Thank you, Madam Chair. And Dr. Kirkpatrick, the ODNI annual Threat Assessment states that China’s space activities are designed to erode U.S. influence across military, technological, economic and diplomatic spheres. Likewise, Russia will remain a key space competitor. In the course of your work, have you become aware of any Chinese or Russia[n] technical advancements to surveil or attack U.S. interests?

    SK: So that’s a great question. Part of what we have to do as we go through these – especially the ones that show signatures of advanced, technical capabilities – is determine if there’s a foreign nexus. That’s really hard if what we observe doesn’t have a Chinese or Russian flag on the side of it. Now, I think it is prudent to say, of the cases that are showing some sort of advanced technical signature – of which, we’re talking single percentages of the entire population of cases we have – I am concerned about what that nexus is. And I have indicators that some are related to foreign capabilities. We have to investigate that with our IC partners, and as we get evidence to support that, that gets then handed off to the appropriate IC agency to investigate. Again, it becomes an SEP at that point.

    JE: Yeah, Somebody Else’s Problem.

    SK: Right.

    JE: Very good. Thank you. Yes. Is it (laughs) possible that the Chinese or Russian advanced technologies could be causing some of these anomalous behaviors? And you said, there’s seems to be some indicators. So, just for us today, could you describe potential threat[s] that might exist out there if they are foreign nexus?

    SK: Sure. In order to do this research appropriately, we have to also be cognizant of what is the state of the art in development across the S&T community. What are the DARPAs of the world doing? What’s the horizon scanning of emerging technologies – appropriate to this subcommittee – what is happening out there? And if somebody could accelerate that capability, how would that manifest itself and what would it look like? And do those signatures match what we’re seeing? There are emerging capabilities out there that, in many instances, Russia and China, well, China in particular, are on par or ahead of us in some areas. So previously, I used to be the Defense Department’s intelligence officer for science and technical intelligence. That was our job, was to look for…what does all that look like? And then, you know, my last several years, of course, in Space Command, doing space. The adversary is not waiting. They are advancing and they’re advancing quickly. If I were to put on some of my old hats, I would tell you, they are less risk averse at technical advancement than we are, right? They are just willing to try things and see if it works. Are there capabilities that could be employed against us in both an ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance), in a weapons fashion? Absolutely. Do I have evidence that they’re doing it in these cases? No, but I have concerning indicators.

    JE: Thank you. I appreciate that. And that is why it’s so important that you are working with the Intelligence Community as well. Because you have the science, the data background, but you also need to know, from various sources, what adversaries may be working on. Correct. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chair.

    [the_ad_placement id=”content”]

    KG: Senator Rosen?

    Senator Jackie Rosen – D-Nevada (JR): Well, thank you, Chair Gillibrand, Ranking Member Ernst, this is a really important hearing. I’d like to thank you, Dr. Kirkpatrick, for your service to the country. And as a former systems analyst myself, I really appreciate your flowchart, the description of the process, and particularly the trends analysis going forward, how that’s gonna help us. And you talked about language, the LLMs, the large-language models of artificial intelligence. That’s really gonna help us in the hunt forward, predictive analysis, I think, to some of your point of what we’d be worried about.

    But I want to focus on Nevada because I want to talk about the impact of UAPs on aviation safety. So when it comes to Unidentified Aerial Phenomenal…phenomena, excuse me, one of my first concerns is really about the safety of Nevada’s military aviator. So we have airmen stationed at Nellis Air Force Base, naval aviators flying at Naval Air Station Fallon, and service members from across the world, training at the Nevada test and training range. I know you know all this. And unfortunately, the existence of advanced UAPs in the U.S. airspace and over U.S. military installations [is] not a new phenomenon. The Navy’s officially acknowledged that between 2004 and 2021, eleven near misses occurred involving UAPs that required pilot action and follow up reports. As a result, in 2019, the Navy established a protocol for pilots to report on their dangerous encounters. So, could you speak to any ongoing efforts within DoD to ensure the safety of our aviators with a potential UAP encounter? And what’s your relationship with NORTHCOM, NORAD, Space Comm, when it comes to this immediate, real-time response? And how they’re right there in the moment, right?

    SK: Absolutely. That’s a great question. So, let me start with…my relationship with the Commands are very good. I just came back from sitting down with with General van Herk, and all the J Staff out at NORTHCOMM a couple of weeks ago, talking through exactly what we need to do to help them get their arms around this. We are also working very closely with Joint Staff. And the Joint Staff has just been very outstanding in helping work through policy and guidance issues to the forces and to the services. And I would like to just make sure that we message back to all of the operators, the importance of their reporting, and the fact that you’re about to get a bunch of new requirements that we’re issuing through the Joint Staff, on all of the data that we’re gonna need you to save and report back to us. It is invaluable and we are working to try to take the most advantage of that, to learn what it is that we’re trying to mitigate.

    To get directly to your question: First thing that we’re doing is normalizing our reporting, right? We’re standardizing our reporting and the requirements associated with that. Guidance from the Joint Staff, I think goes out maybe this week, maybe next week, on…that we’ve been working with them for some months, that does exactly what I just said. It gives them timelines, it gives them requirements, it gives them…here’s all the data you have to have. And you gotta retain it. The next thing that comes after that is a plan ord (Planning Order) that will go out to the Commands for mitigation and response. So there’s a couple of things that we have to do. One, I need to work with the Commands and with the IC, and with our…outside of our DoD and IC partners, to extend our collection posture, targeted at some of these key areas that you saw on that heat map that have a lot of activity, so that we can turn on extra collection when an operator sees something. So part of this is generating, as a response function, and what we call a tactic technique and procedure for an operator, when he sees something, calls back to the operations floor, they can turn on additional collection. What does that collection look like? How do I bring all that together so I can get more data on, what is that thing?

    JR: Can I ask, really quickly.

    SK: Sure.

    JR: Do you have the authorities you need to extend your collection posture between agencies or branches of the military? Because that seems to me to maybe be a sticking point. I know my time is just about up. I’d love to follow up about your risk-management methodologies for some of these. But do you have need any authorities that you don’t have to get the data you need?

    SK: There are some authorities that we need. We currently are operating under Title 10 authorities, but we have good relationships across the other agencies. But having additional authorities for collection, tasking, counter-intelligence…

    JR: That’s something you…

    SK: Those are all things that would be helpful, yes.

    KG: Thank you. To follow up. Dr. Kirkpatrick, will you help us write that language so we can put it in the defense bill this year, so that we know what authorities you need?

    SK: Uh huh.We can do that.

    KG: Thank you. We’re gonna start second round, so if you want to stay, you can ask another round. I have at least three more questions.

    JR: I have about a dozen more (laughs).

    KG: Do you want to go right now in case you have to leave? Yeah, go ahead.

    JR: I’m gonna stay on the drones issue because, obviously, we also have Creech Air Force Base, we talked about those Reapers…they’re flying out there. The last category, the Chinese spy balloon, it did cross through the U.S. airspace, shot down by a sidewinder missile, fired from an F-22. Sidewinders cost us close to half a million dollars each. So, given the cost of these missiles, the cost per flight, all of these other things, like I said…follow up on the authorities, your methodologies, the data collection, they can help us in other ways. But how do you think we can develop a sustainable, affordable response to UAPs, where we need to, that may…that will definitely violate our airspace, not may. Definitely violate our airspace every chance that they can get, because they’re our adversaries and they want this information. So what do you think some cost-effective measures might be that we can get what we need out of that, or take them down? Whatever is appropriate, whatever the appropriate measure is, let’s put it that way.

    SK: So that is actually wrapped into the plan ord that we’re working with Joint Staff to send out. What are the Commands need from both a capabilities perspective for kinetic and non-kinetic engagements? What are the response functions of the particular wings or Navy, what have you? And then, what authorities do they need? So one of the challenges that we’ve seen is, you know, there’s an authorities issues with the owners, operators of those ranges, that they need to work through. And we’re working with Joint Staff and OSD. So big picture, we need to do all that. If you want to get down to the specifics for, you know, there are non-kinetic options to engage pretty much everything, right? Whether it’s electronic warfare, whether it’s laser technologies…

    JR: That’s where this data…having the good data collection, predicting analytics, you can make some assumptions on possibilities.

    SK: That’s right. And we will inform recommendations back to The Department on, here’s what could work, here’s what we’ve seen work, here’s what doesn’t work.

    JR: Thank you so much. Thank you, Madam Chair. Appreciate it.

    KG: Thank you very much. I just want to just talk a little bit about your logistics, who you report to, how that’s going, whether you need different reporting lines. By congressional legislation, your office is administratively located within the office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security, but you’re not substantively subordinate to the undersecretary. Rather, you are to direct report to the deputy secretary. Are you taking direction directly from the deputy secretary? Are you able to meet and brief the deputy secretary? Is the office of USD(I&S) working with you to have the right framework?

    SK: So, USD(I&S) and the…I currently report to USD(I&S) until they come up with the plan for how they’re going to implement legislation. DoD and DNI are working through that now. I’d have to refer you back to USD(I&S) on what their plan is. Umm…

    KG: Do I need to update your reporting structure in the next defense bill or is this something that you think will work its way out, or does it need further clarity?

    SK: I think they’re planning on coming back to you with an answer on what that plan is, and I think, at that time, that will inform what you want to do.

    KG: Okay, thank you. As you know, Dr. Kirkpatrick, Congress has mandated that your office establish a discoverable and accessible electronic method for potential witnesses of UAP incidents and potential participants in government UAP-related activities, to contact to your office and tell their stories. Congress also set up a process whereby people subject to non-disclosure agreements, preventing them from disclosing what they may have witnessed or participated in, could tell you what they know without risk of retribution from the…or violation of their NDAs. Have you submitted a public-facing website product for approval to your superiors, and how long has it been under review?

    SK: I have. We submitted the first version of that before Christmas.

    KG: And do you have an estimate from them when they will respond and when you’ll have feedback on that?

    SK: No, I don’t.

    KG: Okay. We will author a letter – asking for that timely response – to your superiors.

    ~~~

    KG: When do you expect that you will establish a public facing, discoverable and access portal for people to use to contact your office, as the law requires?

    SK: So, I would like to first say, thank you all very much for referring the witnesses that you have thus far to us. I appreciate that. We’ve brought in nearly two dozen, so far. It’s been very helpful. I’d ask that you continue to do that until we have an approved plan. We have a multi-phased approach for doing that, that we’ve been socializing and have submitted for approval, some time. And once that happens, then we should be able to push all that out and get this a little more automated.

    KG: Great.

    SK: What I would ask, though, is, as you all continue to refer to us and refer witnesses to us – I’d appreciate if you’d do that – please try to prioritize the ones that you want to do, because we do have a small research staff, dealing with that.

    KG: Thank you. And then, do you have any plans for public engagement that you want to share now, that you think it’s important that the public knows what the plan is?

    SK: So we have a number of public-engagement recommendations, according to our strategic plan. All of those have been submitted for approval, they have to be approved by USD(I&S). We are waiting for approval to go do that.

    KG: Okay, I will follow up on that. And then my last question is about the integration of departments, UAP operations, research, analysis and strategic communications. During the recent UAP incidents over North America, it didn’t appear that you were allowed to play that role. Do you agree that the public perception is generally that you and your office did not appear to play a major role in the Department’s response to the detection of objects over North America? What can you tell us that’s going on behind the scenes, from your perspective? And in the after-action-assessment process, is there awareness that there is a need to operate differently in the future and a commitment to doing so?

    SK: When the objects were first detected, I got called by Joint-Staff leadership to come in late one night to review events as they were unfolding and to give them an assessment, based on what we knew at that time. I did that. I worked with the director of the Joint Staff, the J2 and the J3 that night and over the couple of following days on, what are the types of things that we are tracking from a unidentified object perspective? What databases do we use? Those sorts of things for normal…for known objects, known tracking. Beyond that, their response, I would have to refer you back to the White House for the decision on how they did the response. We did not play a role in what you would respond, other than that initial, you know, advice on what we are seeing and how we are seeing it.

    [the_ad id=”1724″]

    KG: Senator Ernst? (KG’s mic was muted so I’m assuming that’s what she said. ~Joe).

    Senator Joni Ernst (JE): Thank you, Madam Chair. Dr. Kirkpatrick, I know that your office has gotten a lot of attention recently. And, of course, any new agency, there tends to be a push to increase size and funding. We want to make sure that you’re able to meet your goals, but what I also need to ensure is that we’re not duplicating or replicating existing functions and creating redundancy within DoD and the inter-agencies. So, what steps are you taking right now to make sure that your particular office and function is unique to any of the other agencies that might be involved in these types of cases?

    SK: Yeah, that’s a great question. So, I would like to lay down…here’s one of my, you know, sort of my mission and my goal and my vision here. So the vision is, at one point…at some point in the future, you should not need an AARO. If I’m successful in what I’m doing, we should be able to normalize everything that we’re doing into existing processes, functions, agencies and organizations, and make that part of their mission and their role. Right now, the niche that we form is really going after the unknowns. I think you articulated it early on, this is a hunt mission for what might somebody be doing in our backyard that we don’t know about. Alright, well, that, that, that is what we are doing, right? But at some point, we should be able to normalize that. That’s why it’s so important the work we’re doing with Joint Staff to normalize that into DoD policy and guidance. We are bringing in all of our interagency partners. So NASA is providing a liaison for us. I have FBI liaison, I have OSI liaison, I have service liaisons. Half of my staff come from the IC. Half of my staff come from other scientific and technical backgrounds. I have DOE. And so, what we’re trying to do is ensure, again, as I make UAP into SEP, they get handed off to the people that that is their mission to go do. So that we aren’t duplicating that. I’m not gonna go chase the Chinese high-altitude balloon, for example. That’s not my job. It’s not an unknown and it’s not anomalous, anymore. Now it goes over to them…right?

    JE: Very good. Thank you, Madam Chair.

    KG: Thank you. I want to just to follow up on the filters for surveillance. Outside observers have speculated that DoD sets filters on certain sensors to eliminate objects that are moving really fast or slow, because what we are looking for, militarily, are conventional aircraft and missiles.

    ~~~

    “If these radars are so heavily filtered that they did not detect the objects swarming the USS Omaha and USS Russell off the coast of California in 2019, then perhaps it is time to modify the filtering algorithms of these radars or perhaps feed the same radar data in real-time into a separate filtering process tailored to detect and assess these new potential new threats. Otherwise, we risk needlessly missing vital intelligence information.”

    ~Christopher Mellon in “The Debrief”

    ~~~

    KG: UAP that doesn’t fit into these programs would thereby be weeded out and never noticed. The spectrum of speculation was proven to be true during the UAP incidents over North America, where DoD publicly acknowledged that we were able to start seeing these UAPs only when we opened up these filters. Obviously, our military operators cannot be overloaded with objects that are not conventional aircraft or missiles. Can you nonetheless make sure that the raw data is being captured and subsequently processed so that your office knows what’s really out there? And is that going to cost money, will you expect to pay for that money out of AARO’s budget?

    SK: One of the key tenants that we’re trying to do in our science plan is understand what those signatures are. So we get all the raw, for example, radar data, prior to the scrubbing and filtering to allow it to enter into our weapon systems and our detection systems. We are now taking all that data and cross correlating it to what pilots are saying they’re seeing or other observations from other operators. What that allows us to do is then see if there are any signatures in that data that I can pull out, generate – what we’ll call automatic-target-recognition algorithms – that allow us to then use that signature associated with [an] observed UAP, whatever that UAP may be. We will then make those recommendations, of what those changes should be, back to the department. So the deputy secretary had asked me last October to make those recommendations. What changes do we need to make to radars, to platforms, to detection systems, and algorithms, to pull on those algorithms [and] make those changes? That’s gonna take some time, that’s where the research and development comes in, right? It’s not instantaneous. Right now, a lot of the…I won’t say, a lot of the things that fall outside of the ranges of those filters have been identified by people in the loop, and you can’t have people in the loop all the time. It’s just not cost effective. So part of our budget is working through, what does that look like, and then making those recommendations back to the big-program offices for them to put into changes and acquisition.

    KG: My last question is about the academic community. Can you give us an update on sort of how you collaborate with the academic community and whether…how the independent study being done by NASA complements AARO’s work?

    SK: Sure. Two questions so I’m gonna try to make it quick. In 1979, Carl Sagan said, “Extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence.” I would go one step further, and I would say, extraordinary claims, require not only extraordinary evidence, but extraordinary science. And so how do you do that? You do that with the scientific method, right? And so as AARO is developing and implementing its science plan, it has to do so grounded in a solid foundation of scientific theory, across the entire range of hypotheses that have been presented for what UAP are. That range spans, adversary-breakthrough technology on one hand, known objects and phenomena in the middle, all the way to the extreme theories of extraterrestrials. All of that has physics-based signatures associated with it. Whether it’s theoretical, from the academic community, known from things like hypersonic weapons, or adversary-breakthrough technologies, as we’ve talked about before. Or the known objects that we have to go measure. The idea is, across that entire range, you have to come up with peer-reviewed, scientific basis for all of it. The academic community plays a very big role on the one end of the spectrum, the intelligence community on the other end of the spectrum, and then measurement in the middle. Once I have those signatures identified in validated, peer-reviewed documents, then I have something to point to for all that data. Because all that data is gonna match one of those signatures, right? And then I can go, “Well, it’s that and not that,” or, “It’s that.” And that helps us go through all that.

    Where NASA comes in and the study that they’re doing, which I’m supporting, is really looking at the unclassified, data sources that might be used to augment our classified data sources, to understand if there’s a signature there we can pull on. So very similar to the radars, but civil capabilities. So, for example, we have a lot of climate-science satellites, for example, that look at Earth. Lots of them. How many of those is the data valuable in seeing these kinds of objects? The challenge in that is those platforms don’t necessarily have the resolution you need. So if you remember the slide I put up there with the trends, the size of the objects we’re looking for are typically reported to be one to four meters. Well, the resolution of many of the climate science, civil satellites, is much larger than that, which means you’d have a hard time picking out something that’s smaller than a pixel on the imagery, on the data. That’s not to say all of it’s not useful and there are ways of pulling through that data and going… That is what NASA is focused on right now. What are some other data sources that could be used? In addition, things like open source and crowdsourcing of data, we’re exploring public/private partnerships. Ma’am, as you know, we’ve talked about in the past, to look at: Is there a way to smartly crowdsource additional data that might be useful to augment some of my classified sources? And what does that look like? And how would we do it so that we’re not overwhelmed by, you know, everybody who wants to take a picture of everything?

    KG: Is there anything else you’d like to tell the committee before we close?

    SK: Thank you very much for allowing us to come and share a little bit of insight into what AARO’s up to and what we’re doing. I hope to be able to share a whole lot more in the future. We have a lot of work to do, so if you don’t hear from me outside, it’s because we’ve got a lot of work to do.

    KG: Well, thank you so much, Dr. Kirkpatrick, thank you for the hearing.

    SK: Thank you.

    [the_ad_placement id=”content”]

    🛸 Recommended Intelligence Resource

    As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.

    → PaternityLab

  • Witnesses From The Sky – UFO Encounters Reported By Pilots

    In this enthralling episode of the UFO Insight Podcast, our host Marcus Lowth delves into a series of intriguing UFO sightings reported by pilots and crew members. With years of experience in aviation, these professionals possess a keen eye for the unexplained phenomena in the skies.

    The episode begins with a deep analysis of the trailblazing Kenneth Arnold sighting in the summer of 1947, an event that ignited the modern UFO era. Marcus shares insights into Arnold’s account of witnessing nine crescent-shaped objects moving at breakneck speeds across the skies, which ultimately led to the coining of the term “flying saucers.”

    Following this, the discussion moves on to the riveting Flight 1628 Encounter that occurred in 1986. The Japan Air Lines cargo flight experienced an extraordinary event when the crew spotted a series of unidentified lights and enormous structures during their journey over Alaska. The incident resulted in extensive radar confirmation and attracted significant media attention.

    The Air France Flight AF3532 Near Miss Incident is yet another compelling case. In 1994, a commercial flight encountered an unidentified object flying at high altitude over Paris, France. The object was described as being reddish-brown and having an elongated shape, ultimately posing a potential threat to the aircraft.

    As the episode progresses, Marcus delves into the Air Shuttle Flight 5959 Incident, which took place in 1995. During this event, both the crew and passengers on board witnessed a pulsating, multicolored light hovering in the sky. The incident was further corroborated by another aircraft in the vicinity, confirming the mysterious nature of the sighting.

    The 1995 Manchester Airport Incident involved a near-collision between an aircraft and an unidentified object during the plane’s final approach. The incident led to a thorough investigation, but the object remains unidentified to this day.

    Marcus then discusses the enigmatic Long Island Incident, which took place in 1996. In this case, a seasoned pilot witnessed a formation of white lights while flying over the eastern United States. Despite an extensive inquiry, the lights’ origin remains a mystery.

    The captivating Kennedy Airport Incident took place in 2001, involving an air traffic controller who observed a fast-moving, cigar-shaped object. The episode dives into the details and potential explanations for this intriguing sighting.

    Finally, the episode concludes with the Sweden to Humberside Sighting, which occurred in 2003. The crew of a commercial flight observed an inexplicable triangular-shaped object while flying over the North Sea. The sighting is considered one of the most credible UFO encounters due to the detailed descriptions provided by the experienced crew.

    Join Marcus Lowth in this spellbinding episode of the UFO Insight Podcast as he uncovers the truth behind these remarkable encounters, offering a unique perspective on the UFO phenomenon from the vantage point of those who navigate the skies.

    View the original podcast release page here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/podcast/witnesses-from-the-sky-ufo-encounters-reported-by-pilots

    You can check out our article on the Kenneth Arnold sighting here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/ufos/sightings/kenneth-arnold-sighting-modern-ufo-era

    Check out hundreds of further articles here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/

    Chapters
    0:00–0:43 – Introduction
    0:43–6:59 – The Kenneth Arnold Sighting
    6:59–9:47 – The Flight 1628 Encounter
    9:47–14:13 – The Air France Flight AF3532 Near Miss Incident
    14:13–15:54 – The Air Shuttle Flight 5959 Incide

    🛸 Recommended Intelligence Resource

    As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.

    → Ecovacs

  • UFOs, Aliens, And The Paranormal

    In this intriguing episode of the UFO Insight Podcast, our seasoned researcher Marcus Lowth delves into the fascinating connections between UFO and alien encounters, and paranormal activities suggestive of ghosts and hauntings. With years of expertise in investigating all aspects of the paranormal, Marcus will lead listeners through an eye-opening journey, discussing how understanding these seemingly disparate phenomena may be crucial to unlocking the mysteries of our universe.

    Marcus initiates the conversation by exploring the general connections between UFOs and the paranormal, focusing on the uncanny similarities that often arise in encounters with aliens. He questions whether aliens, ghosts, and poltergeists might be interrelated or even identical entities, and how this possibility could signify a greater interconnectedness within the paranormal spectrum. By examining one phenomenon, he posits, we may gain insight into the others, broadening our understanding of the unknown.

    Throughout the episode, Marcus delves into the concept of frequency and vibration, and how these underlying forces could play a role in connecting various paranormal experiences. He explains how these frequencies might be manipulated or harnessed by extraterrestrial beings, allowing them to interact with our world and potentially explain the diverse range of encounters reported by witnesses.

    Marcus also shares the gripping alien abduction encounters of Tracey Jones, recounting the chilling details of her experiences, and how they intersect with other paranormal events. By examining the consistency in the accounts of her abductions and comparing them with other cases, Marcus sheds light on the potential patterns and connections that exist within this realm.

    The enigmatic case of Bob Rylance is another captivating story Marcus discusses, exploring the possible connections between his UFO sightings, alleged alien communication, and strange occurrences in his home. Marcus highlights how these events may be linked and offer valuable insights into the complex relationships between UFOs, aliens, and the paranormal.

    Lastly, Marcus delves into the bizarre encounters of a woman referred to as “Julie,” who experienced a series of unexplained phenomena involving UFO sightings, alien visitations, and ghostly manifestations. By examining Julie’s encounters, Marcus aims to reveal a deeper understanding of the interconnectedness between these phenomena and how they might be intertwined in ways we have yet to fully comprehend.

    Join us for this captivating episode of UFO Insight Podcast, as Marcus Lowth takes us on a journey through the enigmatic world of UFOs, aliens, and the paranormal, uncovering the intricate connections that exist between these mysterious phenomena.

    View the original podcast release page here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/podcast/ufos-aliens-and-the-paranormal

    You can check out our article on UFOs and The Paranormal here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/aliens/agendas/ufos-aliens-paranormal

    You can also read about the encounter of “Julie” here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/aliens/reptilians/encounters-of-julie

    Chapters
    0:00–0:39 – Introduction
    0:39–4:01 – General Connections Between UFOs And The Paranormal
    4:01–6:58 – Frequency And Vibration
    6:58–14:45 – The Alien Abduction Encounters Of Tracey Jones
    14:45–17:07 – The Case Of Bob Rylance
    17:07–26:01 – The Bizarre Encounters Of “Julie”
    26:01–28:19 – Summary

    The entire narration script and spoken narration audio track are copyright © UFO Insight.  Music, jingles, and complementary sounds may be used under license.

    🛸 Recommended Intelligence Resource

    As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.

    → contabo

  • The Ancient Astronaut Theory

    In this thought-provoking episode of the UFO Insight Podcast, our host Marcus Lowth delves into the fascinating world of the Ancient Astronaut Theory. This hypothesis postulates that extraterrestrial beings visited our planet thousands of years ago, significantly impacting human civilization and shaping our history.

    Join Marcus as he scrutinizes the work of Swiss author Erich von Däniken, who played a pivotal role in popularizing this theory. The conversation then expands to explore various legends and myths from antiquity that seem to allude to encounters with otherworldly beings. Dive deep into the enigmatic Indus Valley Civilization, one of the most advanced ancient societies, and examine the reasons behind recording these intriguing legends.

    The discussion further examines the perplexing megalithic structures found across the globe. Marcus ponders whether these awe-inspiring constructions could be evidence of an unknown, advanced civilization, potentially linked to extraterrestrial intervention. As the episode unfolds, Marcus searches for the elusive “missing link” that could bridge the gap between traditional historical accounts and the Ancient Astronaut Theory.

    Listeners will be captivated by Marcus’s extensive research into UFOs, the paranormal, and ancient mysteries, which he has honed over two decades. Don’t miss this enthralling episode that connects the dots between the past and the present, as we continue to unravel the enigma of Earth’s enigmatic history and its possible otherworldly influences. So, buckle up and get ready for a mind-bending journey into the unknown.

    View the original podcast release page here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/podcast/the-ancient-astronaut-theory

    You can check out our article on the Ancient Astronaut Theory here:
    https://www.ufoinsight.com/aliens/agendas/ancient-astronaut-theory

    Chapters
    0:00–0:52 – Introduction
    0:52–5:14 – What Is The Ancient Astronaut Theory?
    5:14–7:57 – The Theories Of Eric Von Daniken
    7:57–11:02 – Other Legends From Antiquity
    11:02–13:15 – The Indus Valley Civilization
    13:15–14:57 – Why Were These Legends Recorded?
    14:57–16:17 – Megalithic Structures
    16:17–18:07 – An Unknown Civilization
    18:07–19:54 – The Missing Link
    19:54–22:38 – Summary

    The entire narration script and spoken narration audio track are copyright © UFO Insight.  Music, jingles, and complementary sounds may be used under license.

    🛸 Recommended Intelligence Resource

    As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.

    → Ecovacs

  • Transcript: Dr. Garry Nolan on TC: It’s Clearly Been Here For A Long Time And It Doesn’t Necessarily Care So Much About Us. Whose Planet Is This, Really?

    Transcript: Dr. Garry Nolan on TC: It’s Clearly Been Here For A Long Time And It Doesn’t Necessarily Care So Much About Us. Whose Planet Is This, Really?

    “When you see something like that, you never forget it. It’s changes your life in a way that it puts things in perspective. So when you hear other people’s stories about this stuff, I feel inherently like I want to protect them. I want to help them not be attacked for something that they saw, because it’s wrong.”

    ~Dr. Garry Nolan

    ~~~

    Earth Image Credit: NASA/Goddard/Arizona State University

    ~~~

    If you like what you see on my blog, my Twitter and YouTube Channel and appreciate the time and effort, here are links to my Patreon, Pay Pal and Venmo. I appreciate any and all support. Without that support, I would struggle to do this as much as I do.

    ~~~

    Patreon = https://www.patreon.com/ufojoe

    PayPal – ufojoe11@aol.com

    Venmo – www.venmo.com/u/ufojoe

    ~~~

    ~~~

    Tucker Carlson (TC): Welcome to Tucker Carlson. Today, the crazy thing about the topic of UFOs is how, when you get into it, how really non-crazy a lot of the people who know a lot about the topic turn out to be. They’re kind of the opposite of what you imagine. They’re not fruity conspiracy nuts, a lot of them are just scientists. Garry Nolan is definitely at the top of that list. He’s a Stanford professor, Stanford, PhD. He’s an immunologist. And he has, over the last decade or two, spent a lot of time studying the harmful effects that apparent encounters with UFOs have on the human brain. This is a field of study, and he is at the very top of it. Dr. Garry Nolan, he joins us in studio. Professor, thanks so much for coming on.

    Dr. Garry Nolan (GN): Thank you so much.

    TC: I was just reading your (Full Bio) again, just to restate the same point, once more: It’s just remarkable, once you get into this topic…I don’t know if mainstream is the word, but it’s not fringe, at all. So just to kind of accentuate that point, explain your background for our viewers, if you would.

    GN: So my main job, my day job at Stanford for the last thirty years, has been the development of technologies to look at cancer, and blood. And so, we’ve spun a number of companies and sold a number of companies that we started out in my lab. Two of them are actually on NASDAQ. And the idea has always been that if money is coming in from the National Institutes of Health, we should give back to the public. And so, in the process of developing some of these, we developed an instrument called CyTOF, which is really all about studying blood cells at a deeper level than anybody has been able to do before.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: And so, it was circa 2011 or so when some people from the CIA, and an aerospace company (Nolan has confirmed that this was Dr. Kit Green and Dr. Colm Kelleher ~Joe) came to me to ask me for their help on the analysis of some individuals who had encountered some anomalous objects, they said. And they came to my office, unannounced, and then started laying out pictures and data on the table in front of me. And I honestly thought it was a joke. I thought it was… (cross talk)

    TC: You’re a Stanford professor…(laughs), an immunologist, doing medical research and building companies, and all of a sudden, one day the CIA shows up at your office?

    GN: Because they had asked around and said, “Okay, we have these people who’ve been injured.” And one of the things that they wanted to do in a complete medical workup of these individuals was to look at the blood. It’s a natural thing to do. If you’re looking for an inflammation, the blood is one of the places you might look to get sort of a more complete list of everything that’s going on in the body. And so, that’s when somebody said, “Well, if you want to do this [and] do it properly, you gotta go talk to this guy Nolan at Stanford because he has the world’s best instrument that he’s developed for doing it.” And that’s what started it.

    TC: So what was your view of UFOs/UAPs at the time?

    GN: You know, I was kind of a science fiction fan, and I was interested in it as any mainstream individual might have been. But it wasn’t something that I had any kind of focus on in my life.

    TC: So you had no deep knowledge of the topic.

    GN: No deep knowledge.

    TC: Were you surprised that a US government agency was doing this kind of work? I mean, presumably, the question was settled for them.

    GN: Yeah.

    TC: They didn’t wonder if UFOs were real, they knew at that point, right?

    GN: Right. Right. No, of course. I mean, like I said, I mean, at first I thought it was a joke. I mean, I really thought that I was being…somebody was about to put me on Candid Camera, and make a joke of it.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: But as they started showing me the data, and they were deadly serious. I mean, I tried to lure them into making a joke about it. They were deadly serious about it, because they had basically said, at that point, people have died. And so, and then they showed me some brain images of individuals who had been damaged and internal scarring, you could see through MRIs. And, you know, it’s data, it’s unmistakable. You have to say, “Okay, well, what did that?” I can conjecture, or hypothesize about, you know, is it the Russians, is it UFOs or whatever. But the fact is, there is data that says something is happening and so we need to study it. And that’s what a scientist should do.

    ~~~

    TC: Of course! Oh, absolutely! But first, some context. Who were these people who had been injured or killed?

    GN: Oh, they were military personnel, people, intelligence agents on the ground, a pilot – a few pilots, actually – who had gotten close enough and they had some sort of effects.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    ~~~

    ~~~

    ~~~

    [the_ad id=”1724″]

    TC: Gotten close enough to some sort of unknown aircraft.

    GN: To some sort of object. One of them, on the ground, as well…walked right up to it and touched it. And actually, his case is pretty famous.

    ~~~

    The Rendlesham Forest Case

    ~~~

    GN: And even Senator McCain was able to come in and help this individual (John Burroughs) because the Army was denying him – was it the Army or the Air Force – was denying him medical benefits. And so, eventually it reached the office of Senator McCain. And he stepped in and forced the Veterans Affairs to…

    TC: He walked up and touched it? Can you back up and just tell me…what was the story there?

    GN: That was the so-called Rendlesham Forest case in England, where objects were seen over the bunkers where the nuclear weapons were stored. And things were seen…

    TC: In the 70s?

    GN: In the 70s or so, yeah. There’s quite a few documentaries on it. But the individuals who were actually there, I know one of them quite well (once again, John Burroughs). And he was the person who was basically denied benefits and his medical records were classified for quite a while. They wouldn’t let anything out about him. Why?

    TC: So he touched this object?

    GN: Yeah.

    (It was Jim Penniston, co-author of “The Rendlesham Enigma,” who says he touched the craft. ~Joe)

    ~~~

    TC: Did he describe the object?

    GN: Yeah, he described the object as basically about four or five feet across, with strange writing on it. I don’t know. I mean, it’s a longtime story.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: I don’t try too much to get into the stories and to the ancient literature because there’s so many arguments and mis and disinformation about it. I’m more interested in: Let’s collect new data and study it, right? Let’s collate the data in a way and try to convince other scientists that the data is real, not that a conclusion is real. So, I try to stay away from that because there’s plenty of arguments and historians who know how to do that.

    TC: You stay right in your lane.

    GN: I stay in my lane because that’s what I’m good at!

    TC: Yeah. Good call.

    GN: So, just stay away from it.

    TC: So this man, specifically, military personnel who touched this object in the woods near a nuclear bunker in Great Britain, what happened to him?

    GN: He had all kinds of…he had nausea, he had long-term consequences to his heart. Now, whether any of this was directly caused by the object or not is open to debate. But, in the immediate aftermath of the interaction that he had with it, there were medical consequences. So, you’d have to imagine that somewhere back then, something happened to him that he’s still dealing with, years later. I mean, long COVID is an example of…there can be a traumatic incident that occurs to your body, and later on, you’re still dealing with it.

    TC: Of course! Well, many of those.

    GN: But part of the issue with him was sort of a PTSD, that nobody would believe him, right? And then when he tried to follow up with the Veterans Affairs Office, the medical offices, they just denied him coverage, which was ridiculous because he served his country, and yet they were ignoring him.

    TC: But the CIA believed him, it sounds like?

    GN: Yes. Well, what happened is that a number of cases like this started becoming known, right? And so, what happens is that these cases and events kind of trickle up the chain, and then get moved across the DoD and put in a bucket. Let’s just call it the weird bucket…until enough of them have occurred, that somebody says, “Okay, there’s something we should be paying attention to.” Havana Syndrome is an example of that, right? That enough individuals in diplomatic offices, etc, were getting sick and so there was a pattern beginning to occur and emerge, and so somebody realized, okay, somebody is probably attacking our personnel in these offices, the diplomatic corps, etc. So, those cases all end up over in a bucket where eventually somebody pays attention to it, and that was what then instigated them to come to me.

    ~~~

    TC: Interesting. So how many cases, roughly?

    GN: About a hundred?

    TC: A hundred?!

    GN: Yeah. Now of those, about probably 80 to 90% of them ended up being actually Havana Syndrome. So as we were studying these cases, the guy who was doing the work, his name is Kit Green. He’s a neurophysiologist, and is also associated with the CIA, used to be in the CIA. He was going back to what are called the diagnostic codes, because, when you have a new medical issue, you start saying, “Okay, well, what happened to them?” Let’s say they’ve got this kind of phenomena, they got this kind of problem with their lungs, and they’ve got inflammation of the skin, et cetera. And you put them into these codes. And so, it was around 2015-2016 that…and we had, up to that point in time, called this interference syndrome. Something was interfering with these individuals. But then it became obvious that the diplomatic corps issues were happening and that many of the symptoms in those individuals, in the Havana Syndrome individuals, matched some of the, or most of the symptoms that we had in our big bucket. Why? Because they were in the weird bucket at the time and they just ended up being Havana Syndrome, but that was good, in a way, because we were able to take those individuals out and out of consideration [and] I didn’t have to worry about them anymore. It now became a national security concern. But the people who were remaining were the really interesting ones to me because those are the people who claim to have interactions with UAPs, right? So it was kind of like, in science, you first characterize, you collate into categories.

    TC: Yes.

    GN: The categories that are understood, you just step aside, and put them aside and they’re handed off. It’s a huge operation in the government to deal with those. In fact, the Senate Intelligence Committee just came out with a report this morning, that has language specifically in it to look at the Havana Syndrome cases and to understand it. Also has interesting – I don’t know if you saw it – it also has language about UAPs, and basically, admonishing the Defense Department, saying, “You guys have been dragging your feet. No more.” [It also contains] whistleblower language. There was also a situation where they want to go all the way back to 1947…all the Defense Department and the CIA, etc, to collect all the information around events that have occurred. They want all of, interestingly, the NDAs, the non-disclosure-agreements. They want those all listed because the NDAs are associated to people, and that means they can start to name the people who have been involved. They want all of the information on the disinformation and the obfuscation that’s been going on, and they want information about the medical harms that have occurred. And that’s all in the National Defense Appropriations (Authorization ~Joe) Act for 2023.

    TC: So this is way outside your lane, but since you’ve had so much experience dealing with all the people involved, maybe you have a theory? Why do you think DoD, or the U.S. government, more broadly, has lied about this for so long?

    GN: So, I think that they were just afraid of admitting that they don’t have control over the airspace. That’s one thing. But also, it’s really back to what it is that I was saying before: We have the data, to the extent that there is proof that there’s something else here. They didn’t want anybody to know about it because they’re scared of what the reaction might be.

    TC: No, it makes sense. I mean, that’s a human reaction.

    GN: It’s a human reaction. But, the other point is, I think that’s important to realize, is that: When a lot of, let’s say, these events were occurring, and there’s claimed crash materials that might have been collected, this went off to places like Lockheed and all of the big aerospace companies, [and] they wanted to profit off of it.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    [the_ad_placement id=”content”]

    GN: And many of them basically took a lot of the information, set it aside, and they decided, “Okay, well, we’re going to profit off it. We’re not going to tell Congress what this is all about because, if we do, then maybe we have to share this with McDonnell Douglas, or someone else.”

    TC: So if an aerospace – and I’ve heard this theory from very informed people, I don’t think it’s a theory, it sounds true – that, if there are crash materials, and apparently there are, those reside in the custody of not the U.S. government (Nolan: Exactly) but of contractors who work for the U.S. government, aerospace, defense contractors…McDonnell Douglas, Lockheed, etc. How could they profit off those materials?

    GN: Well, one, they can continue to ask for black-budget money.

    TC: Oh (both laugh). I should know this, I lived in Washington! Right. The funding continues.

    GN: Right? I mean, the funding can continue. You might hope, eventually, that you can understand it and thereby profit off of it. You know, but my point has been that whatever this stuff is, is hundreds of technology revolutions ahead of us and understandings of physics that we don’t appreciate. So, it’s kind of like, I mean, the old…send a cell phone back to a Neanderthal and see what he does with it. Pound rocks, so.

    TC (laughs) He eats it, yeah. No, it’s totally right. Fascinating. So, it sounds like in the world that you live in, it is taken for granted, which is assumed to be true, that this stuff is real.

    GN: Yes. Yeah, it’s 100% real. I mean, there’s just no doubt about it. I mean, the data is real. And this is what I [hear] when I have these conversations with other scientists who have told me, “Garry, you’re gonna ruin your reputation.” And I’m like, “Well, my reputation has been always going against the grain and look at where I am. I’m perfectly fine going against the grain.” This is real and we need to pay attention to it and it’s just unscientific to not study it.

    TC: Yes. Amen.

    GN: Right? I mean, it’s just wrong. And if you’re going to be that way, you’re a priest, you’re not a scientist.

    TC: Amen. Thank you for saying that. I feel that way about a lot of things that touch science, but this is definitely one of them. So why would the aerospace company – that you have not named, I’ve noticed – why would they be interested in finding [out], along with the CIA, the answers to these questions?

    GN: Technology! You’ve seen the reports on how these things move: Zero to five thousand miles an hour, instantaneous acceleration and deceleration, trans-medium travel.

    TC: Meaning from air to water to water?

    GN: Air to water. Yeah. We can’t do any of that. We just can’t.

    ~~~

    USS Omaha – Safire FLIR footage of alleged trans-medium object 

    👇🏼👇🏼👇🏼

    ~~~

    TC: And moreover, we don’t know how it’s done.

    GN: We don’t know how it’s done. And so that means that there’s a level of physics that can be appreciated and maybe taken advantage of. I mean, hundreds, thousands of years ago, we looked at birds, and we saw they could fly and we said, “We want to fly.” So now we see this happening and now we realize that our physics doesn’t answer how that moves. So, we need new physics. And so that, to me, is the most important aspect of this. But, if we go back to like, where my career came from, I always look at data and say, “What can I do with this and make something out of it to give back? What technology can I create that can be used by everybody?” So, similarly, I look at these materials –  and I do have some public materials – and I say, “If I can understand these at the atomic level, and understand how these things are put together, I might not understand how anti-gravity works but I can now bring in scientists who might be experts in the kinds of atoms that are there and say, “Tell me what this might have been used for, because this is where it came from.”

    TC: But, I mean, all of it…we’re sort of, like, alighting around the central question, which is like, “Who made these things? Who are these people, these things? What is this force? Not human?

    GN: Yeah. I don’t know. I mean…and that’s why it’s so hard for me not to say what I think it really is because if I do say, “It is absolutely this,” people will start to question me.

    TC: Of course. Because you can’t know, right?

    GN: Right. But I think the better way to do it is to convince people that the data is real.

    TC: Let’s move back just one sentence. So, without putting your professional credibility, reputation, on the line, etc. – You’re around people who study this stuff for a living who are the most knowledgeable people on this topic in the world…

    GN: Yes.

    TC: What is their general sense of what this might be?

    GN: That this is not from Earth?

    TC: Right. That it’s not from Earth, that this is some…these are aliens, essentially?

    GN: Right. And, you know, until I see a piece of technology that does something I don’t understand, or until I see an alien body, I’m going to also remain skeptical.

    TC: Of course, as you should.

    GN: But, it doesn’t mean I won’t study it. And people say, “Well, why, if you are so skeptical, still, you’re studying it?” Because it’s the most important thing that could have ever happened.

    TC: Of course! (laughs) That’s why we cover it on the show! Not because…I have no special knowledge, I know nothing, really. But…by definition, it’s the most important. So, is the general belief that these objects, these, whatever this is, is coming from outside our atmosphere, or that it’s coming from beneath the oceans?

    GN: Both, I think. I mean, whatever it is, it’s clearly been here for a long time and it doesn’t necessarily care so much about us. But in terms of, you know…if it wanted to wipe us out, it could.

    TC: Clearly, obviously.

    GN: All you got to do is go out to the asteroid belt and push a big rock our way  and that’s the end of us. We’re the next dinosaur problem.

    TC: Yes.

    GN: So, the next question is: Well, if they’ve been here all along, before we were even civilized, well, whose planet is this, really?

    TC: And do you think that there is evidence that this is an ongoing thing?

    GN: Yeah! Yeah, yeah. I mean, so, I don’t know if you know, the astronomer and venture capitalist, Jacques Vallée? You’ve probably heard of him.

    TC: Of course, yes.

    GN: And…so he’s actually a good friend. And he’s written books about the matter, showing that if you go back into the historical records, things written by the scientists and philosophers and mayors and kings of the day, you know, it’s in the record.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: This object was seen, it looked like a wheel, or it looked like a shield. And it showed up over our battles, and, you know, et cetera, et cetera. So, you can go back and re-context the observations and say, “Well, if somebody wrote that today, I’d call it a UFO or a UAP, right?”

    TC: Of course.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: So, it’s been here. I think, really, you know, one thing you have to ask is: Well, why do they show up? And maybe it’s just…and why don’t they land? That’s a question I often get asked. Well, why would you? I mean, do you try to establish diplomatic relations with the ants in your garden when you move into a new house?

    TC: (laughs hysterically)

    GN: (laughs) Right? No, you do what you want and you dig up the yard and you do as you please. You try not to interfere with them. You know, if there’s a nest of birds, you’re not going to interfere, you’re gonna try not to bother them because you’ve got your own business going on, you’re doing your own thing. So, what that thing is, I don’t know.

    TC: There does seem to be some connection between nuclear power, nuclear weapons, nuclear fission itself, and these objects. I mean, if you’ve clearly noticed this?

    ~~~

    Lue Elizondo on what attracts UFOs to our nukes 👇🏼👇🏼👇🏼

    Click on this sentence for my complete interview with Lue Elizondo

    ~~~

    GN: Yes. Well, I think, if you ask yourself the question: How could we negatively interact with them, right? I mean, there’s probably little that even they could do if we blew up a nuclear bomb around them. So, to the extent that we have reached a level of technological capability, where we can be a problem to them, nuclear weapons are one of them, right? I mean, but look as far as where we’re gonna be a thousand years from now. We’re starting to move out, like, with Elon Musk, into Mars, maybe someday we’ll be able to travel to other solar systems, even by conventional means. So, if you are an emerging species in this area of the galaxy and there are elders running around, maybe they want to pay attention to the monkeys who, you know, are usually throwing mud up against each other on the walls and stuff (smiles).

    TC: (laughs) No, it’s a completely… Does this bother you at all?

    GN: No. I think it’s exciting. I mean, why would it bother me? I mean, because I don’t think that they’re here necessarily to harm us. And if they want to, they can, so nothing I have any control over. So..

    TC: Is there any evidence of the hundred cases that you’ve looked at, that any of those human beings were harmed on purpose?

    GN: No. I think it’s just [similar to] if you happen to walk across an airfield and get in the way of the exhaust plume of a jet engine, you’re gonna get harmed.

    TC: Before I ask you to describe what those harms are, because you’ve seen strong patterns, right? In the harms?

    GN: Yeah.

    TC: There are innumerable first person accounts of people who say/claim they have been taken into some craft and experimented upon.

    GN: Right.

    This “Unsolved Mysteries” episode is one of the best I’ve ever seen on abductions. 👇🏼

    ~~~

    [the_ad id=”1724″]

    TC: Have you come across those, and how do you assess them?

    GN: I come across those, but I, you know, have a hard time…it’s like what I was saying before: It’s an encounter, it’s an experience, but whether those experiences are real, or whether or not they’re imposed on these individuals as sort of an altered-reality memory, I don’t know. I mean, here’s an example. There’s a great case, it’s in France. This family – this is just within the last few years – driving down the highway, a mother and two children in the back, they have an open-top car, during the day [on] a crowded highway. They see, over their head, through the window, craft. I mean, it’s obvious. And then the mother’s looking around and noticing that nobody else seems to see this. Okay? So the kids in the back have a camera phone, take a picture. When they get home, they take a look at the picture [and] there’s not a craft, but there’s an object, a small sort of star-shaped object about thirty or forty feet over their car.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: So, let’s say that that’s the object, but it projected an image of something else. And yet, that’s all they saw. So what happened? It’s sort of like it was a projected, 3D image of something, but it was only seen by them. So, when you start to hear many of these cases, and Jacques Vallée talks about this a lot…that whatever these things are, seem to have the ability to project altered reality into people’s minds. I know that sounds crazy. And I’m just repeating the stories and raised the thing…

    TC: Well no crazier than any other thing that we’ve been talking about.

    GN: Right.

    TC: I mean, it’s all outside the bounds of what we understand the science anyway, right?

    GN: Yeah. I mean… and I have the picture that they took of that star-shaped object, and the story. And Jacques had been the person who went and did the interviews for it. And that was sort of a mind bender for me. The first time that I had seen evidence of something that was different than what people had perceived, right? And so, this notion of a projected reality is something that really has to be part of the discussion at some point.

    ~~~

    (If the phenomenon can make people see an object that’s not actually there, can they make one person see something and the person standing next to them see something else? Or nothing at all? Here’s an excerpt from a KLAS article on this subject. I believe the senior manager was Dr. Colm Kelleher and Nolan helped out with the immune-system analysis.  ~Joe)

    Statement from a Senior Manager of BAASS

    One of the major successes of BAASS was in adopting the novel approach of utilizing the human body as a readout system for dissecting interactions with the UFO phenomenon. This novel approach aimed to circumvent the increasing evidence of deception and subterfuge by the UFO phenomenon in that multiple eyewitnesses co-located in the same vicinity frequently reported seeing widely different events. The evidence was multiplying that the UFO phenomenon was capable of manipulating and distorting human perception and therefore eyewitness testimony of UFO activity was becoming increasingly untrustworthy.

    The BAASS approach was to view the human body as a readout system for UFO effects by utilizing forensic technology, the tools of immunology, cell biology, genomics and neuroanatomy for in depth study of the effects of UFOs on humans. This approach marked a dramatic shift away from the traditional norms of relying on eyewitness testimony as the central evidentiary arm in UFO investigations. The approach aimed to bypass UFO deception and manipulation of human perception by utilizing molecular forensics to decipher the biological consequences of the phenomenon.

    The result of applying this new approach was a revolution in delineating the threat level of UFOs.

    ~~~

    TC: So there have been, over centuries, many centuries, reports of livestock being killed, drained of blood, in conjunction with sightings of these objects.

    GN: Right.

    TC: Have you come across anything like that?

    GN: I know of it and I know a woman, Linda Moulton Howe, who did a lot of these original studies.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    I would recommend any interview with Dr. Colm Kelleher or Christopher O’Brien, or either book of theirs, if you want to delve into cattle mutilations.  O’Brien is more mutilation-centric while Kelleher focuses a lot on the mad cow disease connection.

    Click on either cover to buy and support my work. 

    ~~~

    ~~~

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: You know, again, its data. I don’t know why anything would want to do that. I really don’t. And I don’t know how it fits into the big picture of this because there’s so many moving parts, it’s very hard to create a consolidated story about it. And, you know, the only way that I can create a consolidated story is to say that there’s more than one thing here, right?

    TC: Right.

    GN: And that these things are somehow in tension with each other. I mean, much like when the colonial Europe went around the world, into Africa, and India, etc., and basically were fighting each other. You know, England, against Spain, and France, etc. Maybe that’s a little bit about what we’re seeing here…is that these things are in some kind of tension with each other, and that there is no unifying motivation.

    TC: Is there evidence that there’s a lot of this kind of activity under sea?

    GN: Yes. Yeah. I mean, plenty, right? The sonar images show these things moving at speeds a dozen times faster than our fastest submarines, with no cavitation, right? No, you know, no, basically bubbles behind them, because the movement would create a vacuum and would, you know, basically make a giant bubble and we’d get this noise. No noise, just sonar images.

    TC: So, given your background in science, is that explicable?

    GN: No, no, it’s not. No.

    TC: Okay.

    GN: You have to imagine a new kinds of physics. But interestingly, the physicists have come up with a unifying, let’s say, mathematics, for what these things might be doing and how they’re doing it.

    TC: Huh. Does make sense to you?

    GN: Yeah. Yeah, I mean, one of them is called…it’s, well, there’s actually a Mexican physicist, he has worked out the equations for a warp drive. I mean, we can’t do it. The amounts of energy required are extraordinary. It’s called the Alcubierre drive.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: But then there’s a number of other individuals who have then taken his equations, and shown that, yeah, that actually explains how these things might be moving.

    TC: But there’s a lot of data from underwater?

    GN: Correct. But, get that out of the Navy. And that’s part of what the announcement today was all about. This idea that Congress has said, “Enough is enough. We want the data. You’re not gonna hide this anymore. We’re going to give anybody in the entire DoD and intelligence community a secure channel by which you can actually report this. You can basically set aside the NDAs or oaths that you’ve given, because you’re basically reporting it to us, and it will be given to the Senate and the congressional leadership.”

    TC: Right.

    GN: And this is the first time ever that this has been done.

    TC: It’s about time.

    GN: So, I mean, if anybody wants to question whether this is something to pay attention to, you have to realize that these are the senators and Congresspeople who, behind closed doors, have seen the classified briefings, right? They’re the people who’ve seen this in a way…they’ve seen stuff I haven’t seen. And some of them come out, and their eyes are wide, about this.

    TC: Yes. Harry Reid of Nevada was constantly talking about it.

    GN: Yeah. You know, and I actually, briefly, I briefed Congressman Gallagher about this issue before he did the congressional hearings on it about the Wilson/Davis memo.

    ~~~

    ~~~

     

    ~~~

    ~~~

    [the_ad_placement id=”content”]

    GN: And, you know, these people are taking it seriously. And you have to!

    TC: Amazing.  So tell us about the the injuries. So, again, you’ve seen a hundred cases, what kinds of injuries have people sustained?

    GN: I think the most dramatic are the…because we have MRIs, the things that you see within the body. And so, what we had done was, in looking at some of these MRIs, we had noticed damage in the brain, white matter disease, it’s called. If you know anybody, for instance, who’s had multiple sclerosis, and you look at an image of their brain, you’ll see these white matter objects.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: Yes, you can see it there (Experiencer graphic (below) from Tucker interview). Those white tracts there are just damage to the brain, right? Those are dead areas of the brain.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: And so, if you have that dead area of the brain, whatever that function might have been, is now gone, right? So memory, movement, etc., can all be affected. Now the brain can luckily rewire some things and so depending upon the extent of the damage, you can maybe get over it.

    ~~~

    How to Rewire Your Brain After Trauma

    ~~~

    GN: But, you know, the ones that you just saw on that image before, on the right, those are serious. And that was what essentially convinced me. But, what I asked for, of these people, I said, “Look, I’m not just going to believe you because you showed me images of these people. I want to meet the people.” And so, I was taken to meet the people and interview them, and I took their blood for later analysis. And so, you know, it was…seeing is believing and validation and verification. I did as much as I reasonably can. Now, they could be lying to me. I don’t know, but I doubt it because I saw some of the, sort of the consequences of their injuries…that you could sort of see how they were acting, etc.

    TC: And did they describe the encounters that they had?

    GN: Yeah, they did. And I shouldn’t talk about some of them because some of those people’s names have kind of become, you know, public. And so, sort of HIPAA rules really prevent from…

    TC: Of course, but without identifying them, what kinds of encounters did they have?

    GN: Uhh, objects on the ground (Landed? ~Joe) that were, you know, glowing, or, you know, moving too fast, or they were there and they got too close to it, and then it just disappeared.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: And then, afterwards, they get these radiation burns. Very often, some of them have been, basically, on the skin, you see a sclerosis of the skin…reddening, inflammation of the skin.

    TC: Like at Nagasaki.

    GN: Exactly! So, some sort of electromagnetic radiation, we imagine. But then, it’s goes deep enough into some of their bodies, if they got too close, that would cause lasting scarring within the body, which is not something you ever wanna have.

    TC: Huh. And then, the brain injuries.

    GN: Then the brain injuries. And the brain injuries were interesting because one of the things that we noticed in these individuals – and this is sort of a side study, which I’m working on with a group at Harvard – is we noticed that an area of the brain, the caudate putamen in many of these individuals was overdeveloped.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: And that’s a whole other story. But, basically, we figured out that this is an area where intuition happens, and a lot of these individuals who we had, were…it’s called them high functioning. You don’t get to be a pilot of an expensive craft without being reasonably smart and having intuition.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: And so, just a side benefit of studying this, allowed us to come up with a medical understanding of where cognition is happening in the brain, and we’re following up with that in a mainstream science way with a neurophysiology group at Harvard. And we’ve validated the original findings.

    ~~~

    GN: But that was sort of an example of: Because we paid attention to anomalous data, we found an anomaly that really had nothing to do with the injury in the first place, but it told us something about what makes people intuitive and smart. And that is going off in a mainstream direction.

    TC: That’s cool.

    GN: Yeah.

    TC: Was there consistency in symptoms?

    GN: Yes. Yeah. I mean…

    TC: What were some of the symptoms?

    GN: Inflammation and nausea are the two most. I mean, if I irradiate you with a whole body of irradiation, you’re gonna get sick, you’re gonna throw up, you’re gonna – depending upon which organ system was, let’s say, most impacted directly – you’re gonna, basically, have problems with that. But the commonalities were the skin issues, and then some internal issues with the brain. When you see brain damage, that’s when people start paying attention. It’s hard to localize brain damage or damage in the rest of the body, you know, and associate it with something.

    TC: Did you see consistent cognitive symptoms?

    GN: No.

    TC: Okay.

    GN: No, just…I mean, again, it’s like in that image, depending upon where in the brain it happens, where the damage happened to be caused, that function associated with that part of the brain would be hurt.

    TC: Yeah? Scary.

    GN: Like arms not being able to move or, you know, walking, cognition…

    TC: Memory loss, yeah. I don’t remember ever reading about any of the survivors of Nagasaki and Hiroshima suffering cognitive problems, brain damage.

    GN: I would bet that there was.

    TC: So, in other words…

    GN: Who was collecting data back then?

    ~~~

    Radiation-related brain damage and growth retardation among the prenatally exposed atomic bomb survivors

    ~~~

    TC: It’s such a great point, right? It’s exactly right. John Hersey? So, the injuries you saw are not inconsistent with, like, exposure to nuclear material?

    GN: Correct. Yeah. And so, what that tells us is…I mean, at the very least, what I would say, is that, you know, let’s say in the next round of UAP directives from Congress, or from the Army, or the Air Force, is…stay away.

    TC: (laughs loudly) Right! Stay away!

    GN: You know?

    TC: (laughing) If you see a glowing craft on the ground, don’t approach?

    GN: Right. I mean, it seems obvious, but, you know, I mean, some of the people who I know were so intrigued by what they were seeing, they felt that they had to walk up and touch it because this couldn’t possibly be real. I mean, I would probably be in that category

    TC: Oh, me, too. Oh, totally.

    ~~~

    Why Are UFOs Dangerous? – From Hal Puthoff’s 2020 lecture

    ~

    Hal Puthoff (HP): In this room, most of the electromagnetic energy you can’t see. Why? Because it is in the infrared, in the form of heat. And there’s a very narrow band in the electromagnetic spectrum that you can see. And that’s what we call the visible spectrum. And then there are higher frequencies into the ultra-violent and beyond that we don’t see.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    HP: Now it turns out that one of the side effects of engineering the spacetime metric, to get this kind of flight performance, is that itwe call itblueshifts the frequencies. All the frequencies that are involved, get moved to a higher frequency. It’s just built in to what the equations say, when you generate these anomalous effects. So what that means then, and it has significance for usis the infrared, we don’t ordinarily see, gets blue-shifted up into the visible. So when we hear that these craft are so bright and so luminous when you see them, it’s no surprise.

    And then what was in the visible spectrum, gets shifted up into, let’s say, the ultraviolet. And so, if you get too close to one of these things that are powered up, you’ll get a sunburn, often reported by people who’ve claimed to have gotten close to a craft. And if you get too close, you might actually pick up some of the blue-shifted radiation from the visible that’s now blueshifted up into the soft x-ray region and get radiation poisoning. And there have been cases where that’s been reported.

    [End Puthoff lecture excerpt]

    ~~~

    [the_ad id=”1724″]

    GN: You know? And so, you can kind of understand, but, I mean, I think that one of the directives is: Until we know what is going on, stay away. I mean, you know, for all…

    TC:  So put a warning label on UFOs?

    GN: Yeah! Yeah. I would! I, you know… (TC laughs and GN joins in) Demand that they wear a seat belt!

    TC: (Laughs loudly) Did any of the people you interviewed…I just can’t believe you’ve had this experience. I cannot…just to backtrack, I can’t believe you were (laughs loudly) at your office at Stanford the CIA shows up?

    GN: It is out of a movie.

    ~~~

    Excerpt from, “American Cosmic” by Diana Pasulka

    (Note: The pseudonym of “James” = Dr. Garry Nolan ~Joe)

    The Visit

    James’s reason for affiliating with the more public ufologists was to achieve a goal—to meet serious researchers of the phenomenon so he could carry on with his new research agenda. He needed a community of researchers who played by the rules of science and peer review. Soon after the much-publicized event, he met with success. The serious researchers actually came to him, but his introduction to them was extraordinary and frightening. The title of the television series Punk’d had become a part of everyday, ordinary vocabulary. Being “punk’d” by one’s friends meant that one was the butt of a practical joke while simultaneously being filmed and even streamed in real time online or, worse, on television. It was, to some, an honorary humiliation. James, who lived in a university town, was aware of the show and had seen a few of his friends get punk’d. When the men in black suits knocked on James’s office door, he opened it and stared into two very grim, unhappy faces. Who are these people? he wondered. The men asked if they could come in and talk to him about the artifact and “other things.” James wondered, “What have I gotten myself into this time?” He invited them into his office, and they accepted the invitation, not saying another word. The silence felt to James like a vague sort of threat. He made a joke to lighten the mood, but the men did not respond. After James offered them some water, he decided that he would match their cold demeanor.

    “What is it that you want?” he asked.

    “We want to know what you really found out about the artifact.”

    “I already stated many times I can’t find any evidence it has an alien origin.” “We already know that. We want to know why you got involved and what else you might know.” After a moment passed, James came to the conclusion that he was most likely being punk’d. Amused, and ready for the charade to be revealed, he looked around for evidence of a camera or film crew. There was none. Hmm. With neither side knowing exactly what the other knew, there ensued one of the most interesting conversations of James’s life. One of the men turned out to be, like him, a top researcher at one of the world’s most renowned universities, but with a long association with intelligence agencies (I believe this is Dr. Kit Green. ~Joe). The other man was with a large aerospace firm (I believe this is Dr. Colm Kelleher ~Joe). What started as a disturbing encounter became a meeting of minds. The two visitors seemed grim and serious primarily because their own research into the phenomenon had proved to be very disturbing. They dealt with radiation effects and other biological interactions of the phenomenon with humans, a subject of which James knew nothing. As they talked, he realized that the serious researchers he’d been looking for had arrived, and they weren’t who he had thought they would be. Instead, they were very much like him and not public ufologists. They were not the “Men in Black.” They weren’t interested in publicity. But they were very interested in helping people who needed help. Over the next several months, his two (fully human) visitors exposed him to a nontraditional path that was as much a science as what he practiced at his “day job.” James had found his peers.

    (End excerpt from “American Cosmic.”)

    ~~~

    TC: And just turns your life in this amazing direction. But, umm, I wish that would happen to me. Did any of the people you interviewed see anybody in control of these craft? See any?

    GN: Not in these injury cases, [but] I do know of cases, non-injury associated, where things were seen.

    TC: What kind of things?

    GN: Little beings (smiles). I don’t know what to say!

    TC: I know it sounds crazy.

    GN: I don’t know what to say!

    TC: I just want you to tell me what the eyewitness accounts say. You’re not ratifying this.

    GN: I’m not ratifying it. No, the eyewitnesses always talk about something about that tall, right?

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: You know, they call them the Greys, I don’t know what to say.

    TC: But with humanoid features?

    GN: Humanoid features. Now, I have a problem with humanoid features because, you know, one of my backgrounds is evolutionary biology.

    TC: Yes.

    GN: And so, I don’t see the possibility of something else evolving on another planet that looks like us, you know? Unless God is intervening in very specific ways, almost anything…an octopus could become intelligent and fly around the Universe.

    TC: Yes.

    GN: So, I think that part of what we’re seeing here…I mean, look, if you’re an intelligence, are you going to go down on a planet with a bunch of angry monkeys who might kill you? No, unlikely. You’ll send some intermediary. Well, what kind of intermediary are you gonna send? You’re gonna send something that maybe almost looks like them, but isn’t them? So, I think, and this is, again, from inside the intelligence community, most of what we think we’re seeing are avatars, biological robots that are basically put there to be the minions, if you will.

    TC: And that’s the current view of the intelligence community?

    GN: That is a…it is a hypothesis. I mean, to me, if I were going to another place, or if I were going to study a native tribe of, let’s say, cannibals, maybe I wouldn’t show up in the middle of their village so that I don’t inadvertently become dinner.

    TC: Yes.

    GN: Right? So, you would send an intermediary first. But I’ve used this example, I don’t know if you know Lex Fridman, you probably know Lex Fridman. He’s an interviewer, he’s an AI scientist at Stanford. I did one with him.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: And using the example of the ants, as well. Let’s say that there was a race of intelligent ants at the bottom of your garden. How do you tell them about Instagram, right? How do you talk with them? How do you interact with them? You would probably make something that looked almost like an ant and you’d put it down there. But then how are you going to interact with them? Well, with pheromones, that’s how they talk. But you do something else, right? You’re speaking about whatever it is you talk about at the dinner table, but to translate down to their terms, you would have to use some sort of an intermediary. So, it’s kind of a lost in translation problem, right? You want to put something there that can interact with them so that they can know that there’s an object, but you, for instance, you’re not going to show up and put yourself in danger. I wouldn’t. I mean, we send drones. You understand what I mean?

    TC: Of course. I’m tracking intently. I just wonder if this has changed your perspective.

    GN: It’s changed everything. I look at everything now and wonder, what’s going on.

    TC: But it also, sort of, by comparison, makes a lot of the things that we debate or fret about seem pretty small.

    GN: Right. You know, and I think Ronald Reagan had a conversation with Gorbachev back in the days of the Cold War, where he said, at one point, “If aliens showed up, would you work with us against them, and drop the Cold War?” I mean, that was that’s a recorded statement.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: He got in front of the UN and said something similar.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: And that all came from a sighting that he had had when he was the governor of California, right?

    ~~~

    Excerpt from How Stuff Works:

    One night in 1974, from a Cessna Citation aircraft, one of America’s most famous citizens saw a UFO.

    There were four persons aboard the plane: pilot Bill Paynter, two security guards, and the governor of California, Ronald Reagan.

    A week later Reagan recounted the sighting to Norman C. Miller, then Washington bureau chief for the Wall Street Journal. Reagan told Miller, “We followed it for several minutes. It was a bright white light. We followed it to Bakersfield, and all of a sudden to our utter amazement it went straight up into the heavens.” When Miller expressed some doubt, a “look of horror came over [Reagan]. It suddenly dawned on him . . . that he was talking to a reporter.” Immediately afterward, according to Miller, Reagan “clammed up.”

    Reagan has not discussed the incident publicly since.­

    ~~~

    GN: So, basically what he was saying was: Something like this could bring us together. I mean, what law can you remember, in the last year or two, that has complete bipartisan support? This.

    TC: Yes.

    GN: Right? This has brought people together. And people say to me, “Well, why are you talking about it on this show or that show?” I said, “Because this is above politics.”

    TC: Yes, it certainly is.

    GN: It has to be. You know, and if we can’t talk about this in a non-political way, then why are we bothering with anything? We might as well just silo ourselves and build walls around everybody. That’s how I think about it.

    TC: I couldn’t agree with you more. And it’s also inherently fascinating, but it raises a lot of questions, a lot of theological questions, also, people would say.

    GN: Right! Yeah! Well, the Vatican is deeply involved (TC: Yes) in trying to understand this as well. And the Vatican has already come out and said, “If there are aliens, they can also be children of God, right? (TC: Yes) There’s no reason they can’t be. There’s no reason we can’t treat them as, you know, as humans, if you will, even though they might not be, right? That we need to treat them as equals, because…why not? They have no problem with it. And this is more, I mean, especially if you speak more with the Jesuits, right? The Jesuits are a little bit more amenable to this kind of thing. But the Vatican has come right out and said it. End of story.

    TC: Well, they have their own observatory, I believe.

    GN: Yeah. The Vatican Observatory, and the Vatican astronomer has come out and said positive things.

    TC: And they’ve been on this for a long time.

    GN: Yeah. And, you know, there are rumors of stuff that’s deep in the Vatican library that a good friend of mine, who you might want to eventually have on a show like this, is Diana Pasulka at the University of North Carolina. She’s a comparative religion professor. Fascinating work.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    [the_ad_placement id=”content”]

    GN: When you start asking the question: How will the admission that we are not at the top of the food chain anymore, change all the religions, right? Because one of the first questions that somebody’s going to ask is, “Okay, well, if they do show up and want to talk with us, who is their God? How do they see…

    TC: Great question.

    GN: And then, everybody, every other religion will be looking for anything that anything like this says, for a mirror of what they believe in. And that will just start a whole new series of arguments. So that is yet another thing, or another reason why the government might feel a little, you know, hesitancy about bringing this kind of information forward.

    TC: Oh, it’s inherently destabilizing.

    GN: Yeah.

    TC: Yeah. Sure, because if the U.S. military is not the most powerful force in the Universe, then it kind of…

    GN: Then we’re…yeah.

    TC: (laughs) [It] resets your expectation!

    GN: Then the populace might, you know, might, you know, revolt (laughs).

    TC: So, how are you treated at Stanford?

    GN: Uhh, you know, I think, five, six years ago, there was a fair amount of giggling about it, but I, you know, I mean, luckily, I have, you know, frankly, a really good reputation as a serious scientist. I mean, like I said, I’ve commercialized a lot of the things so I…and the stuff we do is, you know, cutting edge. I don’t want to pat myself on the back too much. But, umm, it’s cutting edge. And this is actually what’s brought over some people, is: “If Garry thinks this is real, maybe we should be paying attention to it.” Well, here’s an example. So I’ll go give a talk in Boston, and you know, a bunch of professors will take me out to dinner. Inevitably, after one drink, this question comes up. And not to make fun of me, but to have a serious conversation. And almost inevitably, one of the group has said, “Yeah, well, I saw something when I was a kid,” right? Or one of them comes up to me afterwards and says, “Garry, you know (mumbles)…this,” right? So, if you give people permission in a place where they will not be ridiculed, you have a much more open conversation about a subject matter that’s so important. And for many people, you call them experiencers if you see something like that. I mean, I saw something when I was very young, when I was twelve, as a paperboy. Went right over my head.

    TC: What did you see, where were you?

    GN: This was Connecticut.

    TC: What town?

    GN: Windsor?

    TC: I know it.

    GN: Yeah, you went to Trinity.

    TC: Outside Hartford.

    GN: Yeah.

    TC: Windsor, Windsor Locks!

    GN: Windsor Locks! And it was early in the morning, I was delivering neswpapers, I was walking through the woods between one street and another…

    TC: The Hartford Courant?

    GN: Hartford Courant!. Exactly! Exactly (laughs). And [I was] going from one street to another, through the woods, and this…I saw the lights – it was like March – the tree branches, and my shadow in front of me. And then the shadow started moving and I looked up and this object went – I mean, right at that level of the top of the trees – went right over my head, with lights shining down. I could kind of see the outline of something round. No sign…

    TC: How big was it?

    GN: Probably thirty, forty feet across.

    TC: Wow.

    GN: And…I mean, it was unmistakable. I wasn’t dreaming, I wasn’t asleep, etc. But, I didn’t call it a UFO, I didn’t know what it was. I just didn’t know what it was. And it wasn’t until a decade or so later when, you know, you start seeing movies, “Close Encounters of the Third Kind,” that kind of stuff. I thought, “Is that what I saw?” You look back, retrospectively, and say…

    TC: But you never forgot it.

    GN: I never forgot. No, it’s one of those moments and thank you…that was actually the point I was trying to get to. When you see something like that, you never forget it, it changes your life, I hate to call it…it’s almost like a spiritual experience. This is what Diana Pasulka writes about, that professor I told you about. And not that I’m not Christian or I’m one thing or another. It’s changes your life in a way that it puts things in perspective. So when you hear other people’s stories about this stuff, I feel inherently like I want to protect them. I want to help them not be attacked for something that they saw, because it’s wrong, first of all, that they shouldn’t be.

    TC: It’s absolutely wrong.

    GN: So you should…I sort of feel like we need to give people that open space. Some of them might be delusional. Perfectly fine. But a lot of them are not. As you said, at the beginning of the show, that there’s any of a number of people who are otherwise credible, who are absolutely dead focused on this now. And so, you know, through the efforts of Lue Elizondo, and Chris Mellon, and many others on the inside that, unfortunately, will not ever be known in the roles that they’ve played to bring this forward, they have given a level of credibility to this that has opened the area up for all kinds of people to move in. I mean, the National Association of Aerospace Engineers (I believe he meant – American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) now has a committee on this. It’s a 50,000-strong, or  so, union of scientists, right?

    ~~~

    ~~~

    NASA has come out and said – you probably have seen this – that they’re studying it, right? They’re saying this is worth study. And they use the same language that we’ve been pushing: It’s data, it’s science…scientists should be interested in things that they don’t understand, and we shouldn’t take anything off the table. It doesn’t mean you…

    TC: (laughing as he says it) Scientists should be interested in things they don’t understand. That’s the whole point!

    GN: That’s the whole point of it!

    TC: (laughs) So that leads to the bigger and very obvious question, which is: How can we have a society in which many people have first-hand experience of these things, in which mountains of data exist, proving that there’s something there that we don’t understand, and yet there’s still this social sanction levied against anyone who mentions it?

    GN: Right.

    TC: What is that?

    GN: Well, I mean, it was directed misinformation and disinformation.

    ~~~

    Excerpt from The Robertson Panel– January 14-18, 1953

    The Panel’s concept of a broad educational program integrating efforts of all concerned agencies was that it should have two major aims: training and “debunking.” The training aim would result in proper recognition of unusually illuminated objects (e.g., balloons, aircraft reflections) as well as natural phenomena (meteors, fireballs, mirages, noctilucent clouds). Both visual and radar recognition are concerned.  There would be many levels in such education from enlisted personnel to command and research personnel.  Relative emphasis and degree of explanation of different programs would correspond to the categories of duty (e.g., radar operators; pilots; control tower operators; Ground Observer Corps personnel; and officers and enlisted men in other categories).  This training should result in a marked reduction in reports caused by misidentification and resultant confusion.

    The “debunking” aim would result in reduction in public interest in “flying saucers” which today evokes a strong psychological reaction. This education could be accomplished by mass media such as television, motion pictures, and popular articles.  Basis of such education would be actual case histories which had been puzzling at first but later explained.  As in the case of conjuring tricks, there is much less stimulation if the “secret” is known.  Such a program should tend to reduce the current gullibility of the public and consequently their susceptibility to clever hostile propaganda.  The Panel noted that the general absence of Russian propaganda based on a subject with so many obvious possibilities for exploitation might indicate a possible Russian official policy.

    Members of the Panel had various suggestions related to the planning of such an educational program.  It was felt strongly that psychologists familiar with mass psychology should advise on the nature and extent of the program.  In this connection, Dr. Hadley Cantril (Princeton University) was suggested.  Cantril authored “Invasion from Mars,” (a study in the psychology of panic, written about the famous Orson Welles radio broadcast in 1938) and has since performed advanced laboratory studies in the field of perception.  The names of Don Marquis (University of Michigan) and Leo Roston were mentioned as possibly suitable as consultant psychologists.  Also, someone familiar with mass communications techniques, perhaps an advertising expert, would be helpful. Arthur Godfrey was mentioned as possibly a valuable channel of communication reaching a mass audience of certain levels.

    End Excerpt from The Robertson Panel

    ~~~

    GN: And so, one of the things, you might want to look at the language of the new bill that just came out today, literally. Lue sent it to me, you know, with exclamation points, saying, “We want you to catalog – you the intelligence services – all the attempts at obfuscation and disinformation, of the U.S. public that you have been doing…

    ~~~

    Here’s the actual NDAA language…

    “…for the period beginning on January 1, 1947, and ending on the date on which the Comptroller General completes activities under this subsection, compile and itemize a complete historical record of the intelligence community’s involvement with unidentified aerospace-undersea phenomena, including successful or unsuccessful efforts to identify and track unidentified aerospace-undersea phenomena, and any intelligence community efforts to obfuscate, manipulate public opinion, hide, or otherwise provide unclassified or classified misinformation about unidentified aerospace-undersea phenomena or related activities, based on the review conducted under paragraph (1).”

    ~~~

    TC: Beginning with Roswell.

    GN: Beginning with Roswell. 1947, right? Actually, there was a case two years before Roswell, but that is not really very well known.

    TC: Where was that?

    GN: Trinity, actually. It was just very close to Roswell.

    TC: Trinity, New Mexico,

    GN: New Mexico, yeah. Interesting case.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    [the_ad id=”1724″]

    GN: But, you know, the reason why that’s important is because, you know, people’s lives were ruined, right? People’s careers were derailed. And it’s not that we need to go back and fix all of that, and, you know, come up with some kind of, you know, monetary compensation for those individuals. But I think, visa vie, the PTSD issue, sometimes people just want to know that when they were called crazy, that somebody finally says, “You weren’t.”

    TC: Of course.

    GN: But going forward, now, I mean, we might not be able to fix the past, but let’s not recreate the past moving forward.

    TC: And the trust is worth telling for its own sake.

    GN: Yeah.

    TC: It’s a virtue to tell the truth, period.

    GN: And, you know, it’s interesting, I think. You know, I go around, and I will talk to people about this issue. So many people have not heard about this, that it kind of surprises me in a way because, you know, I would be interested in it. But then I realized, if it isn’t affecting the bread and butter issues at their table every day, why should they care, right? And so, you know, I think that those of us who are in the middle of it, need to realize that we do live in a bit of a bubble, and that the rest of the world is trying to just survive. And whether or not there are aliens or whatever, it’s not going to change…when it changes their lives, then they might pay attention, right? So, I mean, it is still something which the public finds fascinating, and, you know, if you do a public survey of it, if you were to list that amongst the things that: Do you think this is interesting? People would check, “Yes, it’s interesting.” But they aren’t actively going out and seeking answers yet. Except it’s begun now to open up to the point where the government has said, “Yes, it’s okay.” Now scientists are saying, “Okay, it’s okay now.” All the people who were kind of in the closet are now coming out and saying…

    TC: But it’s been almost eighty years! And even before that, I mean, pilots throughout the Second World War, they called them Foo Fighters, as you know.

    GN: Yes, right.

    ~~~

    ~~~

    TC: So what we’re seeing is this entire edifice of lies starting to crack.

    GN: Right.

    TC: And clearly, it’s coming down. But, you know, that disinformation manufactured by propagandists in the U.S. government has been taken as truth for generations.

    GN: Right, right.

    TC: So, knowing that…and that’s true, we know that.

    GN: Yeah.

    TC: Does it get you reassessing anything else we think we know?

    GN: Uh…yes, in some ways (laughs).

    TC: (laughs) Like, if they lied about it, what else did they lie about?

    GN: But I’m not sure I want to say it here.

    TC: (laughs) Okay, That’s a…I totally get it. But the answer, “Yes,” is enough. So it has?

    GN: Yes, yes. I think that the nature of our reality is yet to be fully understood (GN smiles and TC laughs). I think that there’s a lot of things that people think are fringe that appear to have some evidence. And my interest, frankly, has been: Can I place this fringe object in the mainstream of science, right? Can I come up with some kind of explanation about how this weird stuff people think is happening, can be real, right? Not that I have to believe it, but what I want to do is place it into our physics or find a bridge and a connection to it, so that we can explain it. Now, what’s good about all of these things is that money now is starting to appear, right? I mean, New Jersey actually now put out a postdoctoral fellowship for people to study UAPs. The state of New Jersey, right?

    ~~~

    ~~~

    GN: I’m involved with, you know, trying to set up resources to be able to fund researchers for this kind of stuff. Because, you know, scientists inherently will follow the money. I can’t take my NIH dollars and go study UFOs, right? I mean, I have a certain box I have to stay in. But I do have money from an endowed chair that I have, which I can do anything I want with. It’s $400,000 a year. And I have talked to the donors, and they’re fine with me using some of this to study UFOs, right? So I have the money to do it. I also spent a lot of money on my own pocket on it. But now that there is going to be, let’s say, validation, you know, the National Science Foundation could get involved. Lockheed might want to.

    TC: Yes.

    GN: One of the things that’s actually in this new bill is calling for…I think they use the word, “A cadre of academics and scientists who would advise the intelligence agencies on all of these issues.” Not just UAPs, but other things. For the first time! Because there are so many barriers for this. But one of the things that…I wrote a white paper for some of these committees, and I called for that. I said, “You need to bring the scientists in.” Not that we know better than anybody else, because most scientists can actually be dorks (laughs). It’s because you want that outside opinion, you want the crazy opinion, because you just want it on the table, sometimes, because it might be true.

    TC: Yes!

    GN: And, you know, when you do have a decision to make, you don’t want it to be a political decision, at some level. You want it to be science, and you want to use the best science to inform the politics and the policymakers so that they have the information at their disposal. But, we don’t have it yet. So, now we do, now it’s starting to come. And it’s literally in the bill today that says we will now try to establish and find ways to bring scientists on board, in secure manners, right? With classified access. Because, I don’t want to give it to the Chinese. And I certainly don’t want to give it to the Russians.

    TC: Yes.

    GN: Right? So, obviously, this information has to be vetted, whatever we might learn. But then at some level, though, you need to get the information out to academics because the silo approach of the last eighties years has not worked. Having one piece of it at Lockheed, having another piece of it over here, another piece of it over there, they can’t talk to each other, right? By definition of how these things are set up. That isn’t how a laboratory works. That isn’t how science works. I need to know all this other stuff.

    TC: Of course.

    GN: And so, we need to find a way to declassify enough things so that the collective smarts of the country can come to bear on it, to hopefully use it. I mean, I come back to, constantly: If there’s something here, can we use it, and can we take advantage of it? Well, first for the country, and then for the planet. That’s just my interest. That’s always been my approach to life.

    TC: I think the most heartening part of this conversation, not only has it been fascinating, but, is the confirmation that science still exists, scientific thinking, the open mindedness that science requires still exists. It’s not all just superstition.

    GN: Right.

    TC: And reflexive, political orthodoxy. So anyway, I’m grateful that you’re doing this. I’m grateful you’re taken so seriously at Stanford, and above all, I appreciate your telling us all this.

    GN: Thank you very much.

    TC: Dr. Garry Nolan, thank you very much.

    GN: Appreciate it.

    TC: Amazing.

    [the_ad_placement id=”content”]

    ~~~

    © Joe Murgia and www.ufojoe.net, 2018-2023. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Joe Murgia and www.ufojoe.net with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

    🛸 Recommended Intelligence Resource

    As UAP researchers and tech enthusiasts, we’re always seeking tools and resources to enhance our investigations and stay ahead of emerging technologies. Check out this resource that fellow researchers have found valuable.

    → contabo