Sorry to be an idiot. He's not the practicing scientist.
He hasn't been talking about people like Daniel the Grass Tyson.
I was the first one to finish a PhD in that program at age 24.
And I do think that one solution that perhaps is the best for bringing back the sense of O,
with respect to reality.
A lot of people have the same issue.
And in fact, I was contacted yesterday by a group of people that wants to have a court appearance
Do you think that the academic, just academia in general would accept this because it's such an anomaly to the current model that people have a hard time.
They prefer ignoring the anomaly because it doesn't fit the model, then completely changing the model. And we've seen this over and over again.
Well, I've seen it over the past two years because when we went to the expedition, there were a number of scientists who said, we don't believe the US government.
This data is not reliable. Therefore, it's not clear that it's an interest that are meteor.
And at the time I was chair of the board on physics and astronomy of the National Academies. And I complained about it at dinner. I said, look, what else can I do?
The satellites are very reliable because they're supposed to detect the heat coming from ballistic missiles.
The defense budget is now 900 billion dollars a year.
So they obviously perfected the art of figuring out the measuring the velocity of a fireball, you know, that's an elementary thing.
So in that context, if something exists, we would see it.
Okay, because the government is not focused on this matter.
All I'm trying to say is that finding a piece of technology that is far more advanced than we produced could fill us with O in the similar way that Moses was filled with O.
You know, the fact that many scientists dismiss this subject and are not attending to the interests of the public has two negative effects.
First, this object is not being studied. We don't collect data.
You're not opposed to it.
No, I mean, if he doesn't work, I'm very much driven by whatever the evidence is.
And that validated the argument that Copernicus made before him.
And he obviously was, you know, making a big fuss about it,
Actually, within a month, I wanted me to present my research.
So I will spend a couple of days with all these important people.
And I also am finishing now writing a book about the expedition for MIT Press.
Hopefully we will come out in a year and a half from now.
We're going to do maybe one more question.
Then we're going to hop into some of the questions from the audience.
There's a couple of questions that are really eager to ask you about.
But one last final note on Galileo project.
Just a fun tangential thing.
As you walked into my office, you noticed the Bob Lazar poster.
I'm a big fan of story.
I'm a storyteller.
And I enjoy story.
But I also, you know, my personal belief is that although it might not be the best evidence, personally speaking for me,
that human connection is very important and very real when I look in someone's eyes and they're telling me something that they believe is real.
Personally, I take that as my own ontological evidence that forms my reality.
But obviously that doesn't hold up in scientific standards.
Well, it holds in court.
In court it does hold up.
That's what the Vatican wanted. The church wanted during the days of Copernicus and Galileo not to get more data.
We don't want to hear about it, because to maintain our political power, we need to tell our believers that the Earth is at the center.
I'm actually in the trenches. You have also science popularizers, you know, people like Neil de Grasthaisen as an example.
He's not practicing science. He, you know, he's, I don't know when he wrote the last paper, maybe 15 years ago or before that.
And then we, yeah, we all know about stealth fighter jets that are trying to avoid being recognized by radar. Now, I can think of at least two ways of avoiding detection by electromagnetic means.
Suppose you were to produce something made of dark matter, you know, then you won't see it. Okay. And it will be invisible because we can't see dark matter with the only way for us to detect it is gravitationally.
In principle, you cannot avoid gravity. So eventually when we build, for example, there is a plan to build Lisa, which would be an interferometer in space. It would be sensitive to smaller objects moving slower.
So that would be interesting to see if we detect anything that we can't see even something like an massive asteroid, but it doesn't reflect any sunlight. So what is going on? We see an object passing and we don't.
And I'm currently in discussion with a television company that wants to have a serious, a science series about the history of the universe and the search for the universe.
And the search for extraterrestrials.