4,864 segments
No expert in the world agrees with you. I know you're eager for eroded abunk this. There's zero evidence of what you're proposing.
[0:00:00 - 0:00:06] ▶
No, this isn't a miracle. What we're seeing here is a cup, but it's basically a mathematical projection.
[0:00:06 - 0:00:11] ▶
It's not. Like, propose one plane that would fly like this.
[0:00:11 - 0:00:14] ▶
Well, why don't you propose one type of UFO?
[0:00:14 - 0:00:16] ▶
The broader problem with ufology is that it's always been the basalt between hot evidence and cool stories.
[0:00:16 - 0:00:23] ▶
There's just happened to be a discoget exactly where the close thing is? Is that what you're saying?
[0:00:23 - 0:00:28] ▶
Just behind us, so what? Really? You're very familiar with this theory of my America.
[0:00:28 - 0:00:32] ▶
I think this is laying in the cryo-tier a little. I brought all the experts to you. Bring some experts to the public.
[0:00:32 - 0:00:37] ▶
Unfortunately, stigma that you promote is the big part of why they don't want to come out. These guys are fighting a stigma.
[0:00:37 - 0:00:42] ▶
I encourage them to come forward. Like, come forward and then I won't laugh at you.
[0:00:42 - 0:00:46] ▶
Different parts of the brain have different activities. You know that, don't you?
[0:00:50 - 0:00:54] ▶
I know that you're going to be there.
[0:00:54 - 0:00:58] ▶
Maybe you should interview me.
[0:00:58 - 0:01:00] ▶
I am here with Midwest and Merrick Von Rennencamp.
[0:01:08 - 0:01:12] ▶
And this couldn't be better timing for this debate. We planned this maybe a couple of weeks ago.
[0:01:12 - 0:01:17] ▶
Both of you are very well-known. Merrick, kind of on the pro side in certain cases where I wouldn't call you dogmatically pro-UFO.
[0:01:17 - 0:01:27] ▶
But there are a few videos that you've looked at where you think there's something substantial or worthy of investigation there.
[0:01:27 - 0:01:34] ▶
And Mick has done an amazing job. I think you're doing a service of debunking a lot of UFO videos that just are clearly fake.
[0:01:34 - 0:01:43] ▶
And so I'm honored to have you both here because I think you're both the most serious on this sort of, you know, this is a poor way of saying it, but pro and anti-side.
[0:01:43 - 0:01:52] ▶
And with this couldn't be better timing, right? It's just insane how many quote unquote drones we're seeing over Air Force bases all over the world right now.
[0:01:52 - 0:02:02] ▶
And so yeah, I'm very excited.
[0:02:02 - 0:02:04] ▶
You kind of came on my radar because you published in the Hill and your former DOD employee.
[0:02:04 - 0:02:10] ▶
And so you kind of know that world. And you were publishing really substantive pieces around some of these videos.
[0:02:10 - 0:02:17] ▶
And you Mick have been doing this for how long? Like five plus years or...
[0:02:17 - 0:02:22] ▶
Since 2016. And I think you've always done a pretty good job. And I've heard things from, you know, UFO junky friends of mine.
[0:02:24 - 0:02:31] ▶
Like, oh, it makes like a bad faith actor, but all of our conversations we've had. I find you to be pretty earnest and cool.
[0:02:31 - 0:02:37] ▶
So why don't you guys kind of introduce yourselves and tell the audience how you got into this sort of vigilante job of debunking or, you know, confirming UFO videos to begin with.
[0:02:37 - 0:02:50] ▶
I'll start with you, Mary.
[0:02:50 - 0:02:52] ▶
Well, Jesse, thanks for having us and Mick, thanks for being here.
[0:02:52 - 0:02:56] ▶
So I will, I'll be very honest. I didn't think about this topic.
[0:02:56 - 0:03:01] ▶
I thought it was squarely in tinfoil hat territory. This is not anything on my radar.
[0:03:01 - 0:03:08] ▶
I missed the big 2017 story with Leslie Cain and Ralph Blumenthal.
[0:03:08 - 0:03:13] ▶
It's just as a testament to how little I was tracking this.
[0:03:13 - 0:03:17] ▶
But I did stumble upon, I think it was late 2019, the interview that Commander Fraver did on Joe Rogan.
[0:03:17 - 0:03:29] ▶
And I previously worked at the Pentagon. I worked with some Navy aviators, naval aviators, more rotary wing guys.
[0:03:29 - 0:03:36] ▶
But I know the type, the bravado, the way they carry themselves. And as soon as I watch five minutes of Fraver in this guy is the real deal, right?
[0:03:36 - 0:03:43] ▶
I'm a skipper of a story squadron out on the West Coast, the FAA 41, black aces.
[0:03:43 - 0:03:50] ▶
And he tells a pretty, an incredible story. And oh, by the way, it was just him.
[0:03:50 - 0:03:55] ▶
It was three other aviators that were out there. And that was my ticket kind of into the down the rabbit hole.
[0:03:55 - 0:04:02] ▶
And then believe it or not, Mick West has a lot to do with my kind of my interests in this topic.
[0:04:02 - 0:04:10] ▶
We exchanged a whole lot of emails. I think we did a few Zoom calls. Yeah.
[0:04:10 - 0:04:15] ▶
This is years ago. And, you know, just be transparent. I, the deeper I dug into mixed theories.
[0:04:15 - 0:04:21] ▶
And first of all, I'll just say, like, who's this Mick West guy? Who thinks he knows more than the government? Like, okay.
[0:04:21 - 0:04:26] ▶
And, and you know, when there's some pretty deep nuance. And from my perspective, I found, again, from my pit and my opinion, he was wrong about a lot of his theories.
[0:04:26 - 0:04:38] ▶
And the deeper we dug, I'm like, my goodness. There's something to this.
[0:04:38 - 0:04:43] ▶
And that was, that was really kind of the, the, kind of the twin tickets down the rabbit hole, dug into the history and started writing articles about it.
[0:04:43 - 0:04:51] ▶
Awesome. And before we get to you, Mick, for context for the audience, we're going to be going over kind of the classic historic landmark cases.
[0:04:51 - 0:04:59] ▶
So, Nimitz, Fleer videos or video, rather, the gimbal and go fast videos, which were taking at the USS Roosevelt, 300 miles off the coast of Jacksonville.
[0:04:59 - 0:05:10] ▶
Mick, what about you? How did you get into this?
[0:05:10 - 0:05:13] ▶
Well, I am a retired video game programmer, which is very different background to America. And I, after I retired, I took a writing.
[0:05:13 - 0:05:21] ▶
And I was just doing stuff like writing for Gain De Nantes, magazine, and so I actually kind of moved into the skeptical arena, like investigating conspiracy theories, things like that.
[0:05:21 - 0:05:33] ▶
And one of the first things I did was I was on Wikipedia, just messing around with I used to edit Wikipedia about, I've got about 18 years ago.
[0:05:33 - 0:05:43] ▶
And I saw this article on the Chem Trail conspiracy theory, which is this fun theory where the government is spreading things behind planes.
[0:05:44 - 0:05:51] ▶
And we did some, well, I did some work on that on my blog. And that blog cannot be evolved into my current site, Metabung.org.
[0:05:51 - 0:06:00] ▶
Metabunk is just a forum where you have lots of people just chatting about various different conspiracy theories.
[0:06:00 - 0:06:06] ▶
And it's going to grow now to be more UFO-focused, but we have a lot of older stuff like 9, 11 conspiracy theories, false flags, and even the flat earth stuff.
[0:06:06 - 0:06:16] ▶
But with the Chem Trail stuff, I got really into doing things like tracking planes and trying to figure out what people were seeing in their videos.
[0:06:16 - 0:06:24] ▶
And so after that, it became kind of a natural thing for me to start looking at UFO videos. And I occasionally did a few over the years, but it really kind of took off in, I think it was 2016, or perhaps the start of 2017.
[0:06:24 - 0:06:35] ▶
With this case from Chile, Chilean Navy video. And this is a video looks really spectacular.
[0:06:36 - 0:06:44] ▶
It was released by Elis de Keying, who you mentioned, in the Huckington Post in 2016 or 2017. And she was very effusive about how amazing it was.
[0:06:44 - 0:06:54] ▶
And me and a few other people looked into it, and we very quickly determined that she was wrong about that. It wasn't that amazing.
[0:06:54 - 0:07:02] ▶
And it was actually just a discipline. And we were able to prove that pretty conclusively. Not everybody agrees straight away, but I think like the American would agree that case is pretty much solved.
[0:07:02 - 0:07:13] ▶
And that really kind of got me hooked on UFOs. And that kind of always coincided with the 2017 December 2017 release of a New York Times article, which came with these other videos in Gimbal and the Flier 1 video and GoFast, which released a little later.
[0:07:14 - 0:07:31] ▶
And when I first looked at them, when I looked at the Flier 1 video, it seemed very similar to this Chilean video. And so I thought, perhaps it's the same type of thing. So I started delving into it.
[0:07:31 - 0:07:41] ▶
It wasn't exactly the same type of thing, but there were related aspects. And I really enjoyed the process of investigating UFO videos.
[0:07:41 - 0:07:50] ▶
Because it was so similar to the work I used to do with video games, except kind of in reverse, but it was all the same mathematical techniques or the analysis techniques debugging and debunking of various similar things because they're both about finding the root cause of something.
[0:07:50 - 0:08:05] ▶
And so I got hooked and I've been doing it ever since and I've done a whole bunch of different videos. American Eye of agreements on several of these. And we have disagreements on a few of them.
[0:08:05 - 0:08:16] ▶
And I think a lot of the time those disagreements kind of fall in the videos that are somewhat more ambiguous. And this is a problem in general with the UFO videos, but I'm keeping going.
[0:08:16 - 0:08:28] ▶
Real quick, before we get into the actual substance about kind of your priors, do you believe in the possibility of UFOs, notwithstanding the fact that you don't sort of agree that any of these videos are legit?
[0:08:28 - 0:08:42] ▶
No, definitely. I mean, I would certainly agree that people asked me, don't you believe aliens might exist? And I think obviously in the universe, almost certainly, there's some type of alien life, probably some type of alien civilization.
[0:08:42 - 0:08:53] ▶
I just don't see it as good evidence of emisiting this here. I wouldn't really hours, but I just don't think there was good evidence of that happening.
[0:08:53 - 0:09:02] ▶
Okay, what about you, Mayor?
[0:09:02 - 0:09:04] ▶
I previously before I went down the rabbit hole, I was in Midwest scamp. I thought the universe is exceptionally large. We just cannot conceive how large it is.
[0:09:04 - 0:09:14] ▶
And I firmly believe that there was life out there, not that it was here. Fast forward. Over the last, I'd say three, four years. I have done it.
[0:09:14 - 0:09:25] ▶
I'd say a deep dive into the history of this topic. And I've read the raw case files, the raw blue book, casepalm.
[0:09:25 - 0:09:34] ▶
No analysis, just right, just the straight reports. And I've come to a very different conclusion. I'm a big fan of James McDonald. I don't know if you guys are familiar with him, but very, very prominent figure in the history of this topic.
[0:09:34 - 0:09:50] ▶
He's an atmospheric physicist. I encourage anybody watching to read anything and everything that he has written start with science and default. It's a remarkable critique of the Condon committee, which we can get.
[0:09:50 - 0:10:03] ▶
But in his bottom line assessment was that the extraterrestrial hypothesis is the least unsatisfactory hypothesis for what hundreds and thousands of people have observed at close range over the last 80 years in many cases.
[0:10:03 - 0:10:23] ▶
I am, I'd say I'm partial to that because of just the the long historical record and I've got a ton of cases that I'd like to get into because I think they are related to some of these videos and we can talk about that.
[0:10:23 - 0:10:34] ▶
Fellow alchemists, Lucy breakers are changing the game for nicotine user. If you're looking for a hundred percent pure nicotine product that's tobacco free, Lucy breakers are where it's at.
[0:10:34 - 0:10:45] ▶
Each pouch has a cool twist inside is a capsule that can pop to release an extra burst of flavor and hydration. It's a unique experience that makes your nicotine routine more enjoyable and convenient.
[0:10:45 - 0:10:58] ▶
As someone who delves into the most heretical thinkers and ideas of our time, I appreciate products that challenge the norm.
[0:10:58 - 0:11:05] ▶
Lucy breakers do just that. My personal go to flavor is mint, whether I'm deep into a podcast discussion exploring new frontiers or brainstorming ideas throwing in a Lucy is an easy way to keep the day moving.
[0:11:05 - 0:11:19] ▶
Plus the flexibility and strengths let you choose what suits you best. Let's level up your nicotine routine with Lucy.
[0:11:19 - 0:11:26] ▶
Go to Lucy dot co slash Jesse and use promo code Jesse to get 20% off your first order. Lucy has a 30 day refund policy if you change your mind again. That's Lucy dot co and use code Jesse to get 20% off.
[0:11:26 - 0:11:41] ▶
And here comes the fine print. Lucy products are only for adults of legal age. Every order is age verified warning. This product contains nicotine nicotine is an addictive chemical.
[0:11:41 - 0:11:52] ▶
Thanks so much to Lucy, sponsoring today's episode. So I think we should just dive into the footage. And you know, yeah, that's just interrupt. I just want to quickly just acknowledge and again, I bring a historical kind of government perspective this. Can we just acknowledge what has happened over the last five years. We've gone 80 years and I we're literally at the 80 year anniversary of the first reports of food fighters. Like that happened November of 1944 80 years of denial, ridicule of the scation to.
[0:11:52 - 0:12:21] ▶
And I love this quote from Mick June 20, 2020. This is when Rubio snuck a provision into, he know what we're talking about right stuck a provision into Senate intelligence committee language and mixed quote is years will pass. It will recede in memory little will come of it. I assure you in in June of 2020, I probably would have agreed with that. Now we have arrow.
[0:12:21 - 0:12:48] ▶
I think it's about 3 4 dozen. We just heard yes or with this week that they're at full operational capability. 3 4 dozen people working at a at a UFO office. Right. 1600 cases as a last count.
[0:12:48 - 0:13:00] ▶
And his director just came out and said in essence, we're I'm baffled. I have an engineering and science degree. I'm baffled. I don't know what's going on. And I don't know anybody else who knows what's going on with some of these cases.
[0:13:00 - 0:13:12] ▶
And he's pretty extraordinary. He was a former NSA director. He's an essay scientist. Scientist. Yeah. So it is pretty remarkable. We had just about every single. We had former CIA directors, former national intelligence directors.
[0:13:12 - 0:13:26] ▶
Just extraordinary things. You know, Ratcliffe said. You you AP UFO's exhibit technologies that we do not have and cannot defend against. Right.
[0:13:26 - 0:13:37] ▶
They appear to be right. I'm just I'm just saying I'm just I'm just I'm trying to acknowledge where we've come. It is a corner. It is astounding. Right. I don't think I suspect if I had shown you a picture of Dave Grush testifying under oath with the former inspector general, the intelligence committee seeing right behind him.
[0:13:37 - 0:13:55] ▶
Four years ago when you wrote that tweet, I you would you probably thought I was crazy. The name. The nothing will happen was not that nothing would happen. It was more than nothing would happen in terms of getting evidence that aliens are visiting, which is the thing they really want. I'm actually really happy that we've got all this progress. And we've got this these investigations and the arrows doing a lot of work. You have the spending millions of dollars on investigating it. And hopefully they will release their information.
[0:13:55 - 0:14:22] ▶
Don't think we've really got much further along the road in terms of actual evidence of genuinely anomalous phenomena that didn't exist five years ago.
[0:14:22 - 0:14:32] ▶
The stuff that arrows released, obviously like people are disappointed with that. And there's overall assessment is, you know, there's no evidence of alien life. Right.
[0:14:32 - 0:14:40] ▶
We have lots of talk about things going on behind persons and in skiffs and in secret and things that people can't talk about. And that's interesting.
[0:14:40 - 0:14:51] ▶
But I think it kind of speaks to the broader problem with with your apology is that it's always been a bit of a battle between hard evidence, hard data and cool stories.
[0:14:51 - 0:15:05] ▶
And we have a lot of really amazing eyewitness accounts. A lot of the blue book stuff is is eyewitness accounts and very little that's you can actually get this tangible data.
[0:15:05 - 0:15:15] ▶
There's some data that's written down, but there isn't really very much we can we can actually analyze. And that's what we really need to move the conversation forward.
[0:15:15 - 0:15:23] ▶
And having people come forward and say, I worked on a program in the six days that did crash retrieval. I don't think it's really going to move the needle very much unless they can actually produce some evidence of something.
[0:15:23 - 0:15:35] ▶
It's just more cool stories, which you know, maybe that's true, maybe they're not, but we can't actually do very much with them. And that's always been the problem.
[0:15:35 - 0:15:44] ▶
And then there's the intersection of a cool stories with the data with the videos, which we're getting to laser where people are talking about.
[0:15:44 - 0:15:50] ▶
I'll take give you two points that maybe maybe give us a little bit of hope to really address your point. And I think Kuzlowski has said and the quote here is.
[0:15:50 - 0:15:59] ▶
And Kuzlowski is the director of the director. Dr. Kuzlowski is the new director of arrow, which is the government's UFO analysis office. And his direct quote is we're going to need the help of academia and the public to address some of these cases.
[0:15:59 - 0:16:14] ▶
And he's plunged to release them. Now I'm skeptical, right? I know how the government works. They don't release anything. They don't have to. But he said this. So just to just kind of kind of address your point. Maybe we'll see some more. I don't know.
[0:16:14 - 0:16:28] ▶
I think that's notable. And then secondarily, Dr. Kuzlowski and his hearing said that at least two multiple first hand witnesses have gone arrow.
[0:16:28 - 0:16:39] ▶
When this is a lot to the unreported UAP programs. That's that that was the question from Jill. Anyway, we can go down that. I'm just I'm just saying like, you know, the story of UFOs, right? It's okay. There's something coming. But there is. We'll see. But there is some chatter about.
[0:16:39 - 0:16:55] ▶
Mick, how do you to Merrick's point? There has been a lot of momentum if you're just tracking social consensus hype around this stuff. I mean, I run a YouTube channel that is, you know, really surrounds this topic, particularly. I've seen a lot of interesting.
[0:16:55 - 0:17:07] ▶
My my my sight is all UFOs now. Well, there you go. So how do you explain that? Do you think it's some sort of coordinated sideop? Do you think it's just this contagion mass, you know, social psychosis thing? What's going on?
[0:17:07 - 0:17:21] ▶
I think it's something that was maybe bubbling beneath the surface and it's just been kind of allowed to come out. The New York Times story basically opened the flood gates. It was something that gave the lidacy, gave it allowed people to talk about it. I've had other journalists to talk about it. And when she gets that going, it becomes this kind of feedback loop.
[0:17:21 - 0:17:42] ▶
People talk about it in the media, the general public talks about it. And then Congress gets involved because it's what people are interested in. And then you can kind of push these things.
[0:17:42 - 0:17:52] ▶
Perhaps without the stigma that you had before. And if there are things like un-engly SAP programs, which you know, I wouldn't rule out, of course, you know, it's entirely possible that people were running crash retrieval programs for things that they thought were were UFOs, you know, back in the back in the day.
[0:17:52 - 0:18:09] ▶
But perhaps some of those were under the radar. We know the government has done dodgy things before in the past. So, you know, that's the type of thing that should come to light. You know, the church commission, the church commission.
[0:18:09 - 0:18:20] ▶
Yeah, church commission. Yeah, they, something like that where we can actually get these things out. And I've been really enthusiastic about people like David Grush testifying and I wish he would come out and actually say more.
[0:18:20 - 0:18:32] ▶
Because I want this to come into the sunlight. I want to know what's actually going on.
[0:18:32 - 0:18:37] ▶
Well, if that's your goal, that's I think the goal of everybody here. And we, yeah, we love I would love for this to either be falsified for forever or.
[0:18:37 - 0:18:47] ▶
No, I'm not having to happen.
[0:18:47 - 0:18:49] ▶
It's no one of those things impossible to possibly go for the so is the idea that the light over there might be an alien.
[0:18:49 - 0:18:55] ▶
Well, I would say you can prove it's true. I think there's not a lot of daylight probably between us where like I think whatever is going on is interesting.
[0:18:55 - 0:19:05] ▶
If it's mass social psychosis, a coordinated side up, I think those are extremely interesting because I think it's the best side up, maybe of all time.
[0:19:05 - 0:19:12] ▶
If it's a side up or something.
[0:19:12 - 0:19:14] ▶
Guys, we can talk about this for hours of that even get I will say the commentary direct commentary from Rubio Gallagher, Kirk McConnell, former Senate staffer.
[0:19:14 - 0:19:24] ▶
Sask, sissy, sorry, Senate armed services in the Senate intelligence committees. They all stated.
[0:19:24 - 0:19:31] ▶
Gillibrand, her first question in the hearing. There are, she said right there reports that firsthand witnesses are reluctant to go to the UFO, the Pentagon's UFO office.
[0:19:31 - 0:19:41] ▶
Rubio has stated very clearly over and over. These are credible people with high clearances and high positions and they fear for their lives.
[0:19:41 - 0:19:49] ▶
He said that on camera. That's fascinating. So if it's mass psychosis and people in high positions and government are saying yes, I was on a retrieval program, then we have a major, major problem because they're just fantasists out there that are in important positions.
[0:19:49 - 0:20:05] ▶
And very sensitive areas.
[0:20:05 - 0:20:07] ▶
The other thing I would say is say this is all unacknowledged, deep black programs. I find that fascinating too.
[0:20:07 - 0:20:14] ▶
Absolutely. Maybe it's a bit of both. We do know that there are people in governments who are fantasists.
[0:20:14 - 0:20:19] ▶
I'm not everybody who's in government or in the military is going to be on the level.
[0:20:19 - 0:20:23] ▶
Well, the thing that I've found because I've met all these people deep inside the government post doing this show, they are often more conspiratorial than people who are civil side.
[0:20:23 - 0:20:33] ▶
And that can be one of two things. That can be like, oh, that discredits them in some way or it can be like they are somehow privy to a lot crazier stuff.
[0:20:33 - 0:20:41] ▶
And that makes them more conspiratorial.
[0:20:42 - 0:20:44] ▶
Mick, can I put you on the spot actually?
[0:20:44 - 0:20:46] ▶
Just curious, when Grush says under oath, I had the firsthand people go to the Inspector General to submit a complaint.
[0:20:46 - 0:20:54] ▶
Louis Celesando goes under oath. Yes, we have crashed retrieval programs.
[0:20:54 - 0:20:59] ▶
Rubio says not under oath, but he says publicly in a very long interview, first-hand witnesses. They fear further lives.
[0:20:59 - 0:21:05] ▶
Curtin Connell has been tracking this and is convinced that there's something to this.
[0:21:06 - 0:21:12] ▶
I talked to a congressional source told me I asked point blank, what's your confidence level in the existence of such programs?
[0:21:12 - 0:21:21] ▶
The answer was hovering around 100%. What am I, as an analyst, supposed to do with that? What do you think?
[0:21:21 - 0:21:27] ▶
I wouldn't be surprised if there was such programs.
[0:21:27 - 0:21:29] ▶
I mean, this is something I've been saying for a while.
[0:21:29 - 0:21:31] ▶
I'm sorry, I let it's NHI. It's non-human intelligence.
[0:21:31 - 0:21:33] ▶
There's actually NHI there, but those programs that existed in the passables of the even now,
[0:21:33 - 0:21:39] ▶
where some people who work on those programs think that it's NHI.
[0:21:39 - 0:21:42] ▶
It's quite clear from people I don't begrudge that people do actually believe these things happen.
[0:21:42 - 0:21:47] ▶
They believe that we have bodies. They believe that we have crushed alien craft and they believe that these programs are steady.
[0:21:47 - 0:21:52] ▶
Maybe the programs exist, but what were they actually studying?
[0:21:52 - 0:21:56] ▶
Why do you think the Inspector General didn't just shut this down immediately?
[0:21:56 - 0:22:00] ▶
No idea, I'm not really familiar with what the Inspector General does, but
[0:22:01 - 0:22:05] ▶
Graschie's claims covered a range of settings. There's the whistleblower of criminal nations.
[0:22:05 - 0:22:11] ▶
It seems a little bit mixed up as to what the Inspector General was actually investigating and what they're referring to when they sent that.
[0:22:11 - 0:22:17] ▶
Ruby goes very clearly. He's a vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence.
[0:22:17 - 0:22:19] ▶
Ruby has said that the unreported, the misuse of funds, that portion of it,
[0:22:19 - 0:22:24] ▶
they didn't say anything about the reprisal part, but the misallocation of funds was deemed credible in it.
[0:22:24 - 0:22:31] ▶
If there are any special access programs, I'd be happy to say them like this.
[0:22:31 - 0:22:36] ▶
It's interesting because that's also unfalse file.
[0:22:36 - 0:22:40] ▶
That's like also in finements not even wrong.
[0:22:40 - 0:22:44] ▶
If they deny it, you can't say they're lying. If they admit it and show it, then that's one thing.
[0:22:44 - 0:22:51] ▶
It's like anything, you only need one. You just need one ace to win the game.
[0:22:51 - 0:22:56] ▶
But everything that's not an ace doesn't mean there's no ace.
[0:22:56 - 0:22:59] ▶
You think it's going to stay in this liminal category for a very long time?
[0:22:59 - 0:23:03] ▶
I hope it doesn't, but I think all we can hope for really is to get more sunlight on it.
[0:23:03 - 0:23:09] ▶
If there is something that something that they may actually pop out, and if there isn't something that we will see that all the things from the dark corners become illuminated,
[0:23:09 - 0:23:16] ▶
and we see that there was nothing there, and perhaps there's something in one of the dark corners that's really interesting.
[0:23:16 - 0:23:21] ▶
That would be great.
[0:23:21 - 0:23:22] ▶
How did non-human intelligence get into a bill sponsored by Chuck Schumer and signed on to by Rubio and Gillibrand former presidential candidates?
[0:23:22 - 0:23:31] ▶
And then biological evidence of non-human intelligence.
[0:23:33 - 0:23:37] ▶
Well, he does trust Schumer about that.
[0:23:37 - 0:23:39] ▶
Schumer said he was doing it to honor the legacy of his friend Harry Reid.
[0:23:39 - 0:23:43] ▶
So he just randomly puts in tailings and then like a 64 pages?
[0:23:43 - 0:23:47] ▶
Maybe, I don't know, but his saffron did it. Some saffron did it.
[0:23:47 - 0:23:52] ▶
Well, he put his name next to it.
[0:23:52 - 0:23:54] ▶
Yes, he does that for everything, doesn't it? But he doesn't write a legislation.
[0:23:54 - 0:23:58] ▶
So Schumer put his name next to Bigfoot legislation.
[0:23:58 - 0:24:01] ▶
He could just listen.
[0:24:01 - 0:24:03] ▶
Well, I think, okay, this is great.
[0:24:03 - 0:24:05] ▶
I think we should get in due, because this is all dealing with sort of social proof, which does carry a lot of people.
[0:24:05 - 0:24:11] ▶
We should get into first principle.
[0:24:11 - 0:24:12] ▶
That's where I think both of you add really tremendous, unique value.
[0:24:13 - 0:24:16] ▶
And so why don't we start with the famous Nimitz case of 2004, this amazing flea video, thermal video,
[0:24:16 - 0:24:25] ▶
that was brought in November of 2004.
[0:24:25 - 0:24:27] ▶
You have eyewitnesses, David Fraver, who you mentioned, who is really, I think, a source of belief for a lot of people, kind of proxy belief,
[0:24:27 - 0:24:36] ▶
because he's a very serious sounding guy. I mean, you heard him on Rogan and like, I think he was tasked with defending L.A.
[0:24:36 - 0:24:43] ▶
Actually, around 9-11. I don't know if you're familiar with that.
[0:24:43 - 0:24:46] ▶
I didn't know that. Yeah, because it was like unclear how many planes were going to be.
[0:24:46 - 0:24:49] ▶
Yeah, that's how big the threat was.
[0:24:49 - 0:24:51] ▶
And you can hear him speak and he seems very sort of matter of fact.
[0:24:51 - 0:24:54] ▶
And so, but mixed on a great sort of debunk on this. So why don't we watch the video?
[0:24:54 - 0:24:58] ▶
And we'll get both of your assessments. But before we do that, why don't we do a little rock paper scissors to see who you got first?
[0:24:59 - 0:25:05] ▶
I'm also going to have to take and just kick it off.
[0:25:05 - 0:25:07] ▶
You want to take, you want to take, you want to take it off?
[0:25:07 - 0:25:09] ▶
You try to shake me out, love it. Let's do a little rock paper scissors.
[0:25:09 - 0:25:11] ▶
I'm too honest for my own good.
[0:25:16 - 0:25:18] ▶
Well, I don't even see who won that.
[0:25:18 - 0:25:20] ▶
So just for the audience, before we went live here, Mick said we agreed to rock paper scissors.
[0:25:20 - 0:25:27] ▶
Mick said he's going to go with paper and I went with scissors. So here we are.
[0:25:27 - 0:25:30] ▶
Will you, Mary, you take the first?
[0:25:32 - 0:25:33] ▶
Yeah. So, but seriously, please jump in if, if, you know, if I missed anything.
[0:25:33 - 0:25:38] ▶
But so the background is in November of 2004.
[0:25:38 - 0:25:43] ▶
The Nimitz carrier strike groups, that's the Nimitz and other vessels, Navy ships, or out for pre-deployment workups, pre-deployment training basically to make sure their equipment is working before they deploy and go to combat.
[0:25:43 - 0:25:58] ▶
And I think they're setting out for a rock.
[0:25:58 - 0:26:00] ▶
There's early stages of the Iraq war.
[0:26:01 - 0:26:03] ▶
Very high operational tempo.
[0:26:03 - 0:26:06] ▶
They're during their training missions.
[0:26:06 - 0:26:08] ▶
The US is printed as a guided missile cruiser.
[0:26:09 - 0:26:12] ▶
And it is part of this Nimitz strike group.
[0:26:12 - 0:26:15] ▶
And it is over the course of, I think, a week, according to one of the witnesses, the key witness Kevin Day.
[0:26:15 - 0:26:23] ▶
They be in tracking anomalous objects at 28,000 feet, heading south at 100 knots.
[0:26:26 - 0:26:33] ▶
Very strange tracks.
[0:26:33 - 0:26:34] ▶
Occasionally, if I understand right, they, you know, they're tracking them coming from above 80,000 feet, zipping down, and to the surface of the ocean, or they'd hover around 28,000 feet.
[0:26:35 - 0:26:47] ▶
Notably, Kevin Day has been very specific about this, and consistent, 28,000 feet, 100 knots south.
[0:26:47 - 0:26:54] ▶
And Kevin Day oversaw rate our operations.
[0:26:54 - 0:26:56] ▶
Kevin Day's story has actually changed a few times, and he's given different figures.
[0:26:58 - 0:27:02] ▶
28,000 feet, 80,000 feet, and 20,000 feet, and mixing things up.
[0:27:02 - 0:27:07] ▶
And it's changed in other ways as well.
[0:27:07 - 0:27:09] ▶
I've only seen 20,000 feet.
[0:27:09 - 0:27:11] ▶
All the interviews I've seen, I think he wrote it down, and he kind of memorialized it in a little bit of novella.
[0:27:11 - 0:27:16] ▶
Yeah, he had a healthily-dance holiday.
[0:27:16 - 0:27:18] ▶
I did find this interesting.
[0:27:18 - 0:27:19] ▶
He wrote this like, he would be in the background.
[0:27:19 - 0:27:20] ▶
He would clearly stuck with these a lot of these people, right?
[0:27:20 - 0:27:22] ▶
So Kevin Day is concerned that this is flight safety.
[0:27:28 - 0:27:32] ▶
I mean, you have objects.
[0:27:33 - 0:27:34] ▶
I mean, you sanitize your airspace, and you want to know what's out there.
[0:27:34 - 0:27:39] ▶
So when you're aircrew or out there that they're not going to have, you know, potential collision risk.
[0:27:39 - 0:27:44] ▶
So one day, he vectored, you know, sends out two F-18 hornets.
[0:27:44 - 0:27:51] ▶
Commander Fraver is flying one of them.
[0:27:52 - 0:27:55] ▶
We have not heard from his backseater publicly yet.
[0:27:55 - 0:27:59] ▶
The other plane, Fraver's wingman, wing woman, was Commander Alex.
[0:27:59 - 0:28:05] ▶
She's pretty new to the squadron, but it's probably a lieutenant.
[0:28:05 - 0:28:09] ▶
Alex Dietrich, correct.
[0:28:11 - 0:28:12] ▶
And her backseat is Jim Slate.
[0:28:12 - 0:28:14] ▶
Wizzo is a weapon systems officer.
[0:28:15 - 0:28:18] ▶
That's the backseater that does kind of all the...
[0:28:18 - 0:28:20] ▶
A lot of the tactical systems.
[0:28:20 - 0:28:23] ▶
And they get out to this...
[0:28:23 - 0:28:26] ▶
They call them urge, so that they're basically in the same air spaces where one of these tracks is.
[0:28:26 - 0:28:33] ▶
Look out and see an object doing basically kind of like a weird ping ponging zigzagging pattern.
[0:28:33 - 0:28:41] ▶
Apparently right over the ocean, and there's this roiling water underneath.
[0:28:41 - 0:28:46] ▶
And so they have these two jets, if I understand correctly.
[0:28:49 - 0:28:52] ▶
Fraver departs Dietrich stays up high and starts circling.
[0:28:52 - 0:28:57] ▶
And they both start circling.
[0:28:57 - 0:28:59] ▶
And Fraver's going lower and lower.
[0:28:59 - 0:29:00] ▶
And as he goes down, the jet, according to Fraver, kind of reacts to him coming down.
[0:29:00 - 0:29:07] ▶
And it kind of does... Fraver does a...
[0:29:07 - 0:29:10] ▶
No, I don't know if you guys have seen that, but that is...
[0:29:10 - 0:29:12] ▶
Somebody did a pretty good compilation of his reenactment.
[0:29:12 - 0:29:17] ▶
And then it kind of shoots off at just unbelievable speeds according to the witnesses.
[0:29:17 - 0:29:24] ▶
Anything else before?
[0:29:24 - 0:29:26] ▶
A couple other interesting things.
[0:29:26 - 0:29:28] ▶
It's 80,000 feet and then right above the surface of the water.
[0:29:30 - 0:29:33] ▶
And then he says it goes back up, 80,000 feet.
[0:29:33 - 0:29:36] ▶
And then he goes 80,000 feet is space.
[0:29:36 - 0:29:38] ▶
So that was like this interesting line.
[0:29:38 - 0:29:40] ▶
And then he also says when he sees the craft, and this is...
[0:29:40 - 0:29:43] ▶
I found very interesting.
[0:29:43 - 0:29:45] ▶
He was like... it almost seemed like it knew that he saw it.
[0:29:45 - 0:29:50] ▶
Yeah, and it recognized him or something.
[0:29:50 - 0:29:52] ▶
There's some kind of a...
[0:29:52 - 0:29:53] ▶
It mirrors the experience.
[0:29:53 - 0:29:54] ▶
No, I'm sorry. Good point.
[0:29:55 - 0:29:56] ▶
Yeah, nothing you mentioned.
[0:29:56 - 0:29:57] ▶
So as Fraver's going down the circle, the thing does one of these...
[0:29:57 - 0:30:01] ▶
It's kind of a counter-circle, right?
[0:30:01 - 0:30:03] ▶
And then it's... I think it's called a tooth, wait a minute.
[0:30:03 - 0:30:06] ▶
It shoots off and apparently ends up at a pre-designated...
[0:30:06 - 0:30:11] ▶
rendezvous point, let's call it a cap point.
[0:30:11 - 0:30:14] ▶
And it is an area known to aircrew.
[0:30:14 - 0:30:17] ▶
So that is interesting.
[0:30:17 - 0:30:20] ▶
Yeah, it is interesting.
[0:30:20 - 0:30:22] ▶
A lot of this information kind of comes second-hand by various people.
[0:30:22 - 0:30:26] ▶
Like we're talking about the 80,000 feet.
[0:30:26 - 0:30:28] ▶
And you said Fraver said that.
[0:30:28 - 0:30:30] ▶
Fraver didn't see that.
[0:30:30 - 0:30:32] ▶
And he didn't even get some blip on the radar.
[0:30:32 - 0:30:35] ▶
They didn't actually see it on their own planes radar.
[0:30:35 - 0:30:38] ▶
And when they arrived at this location, they didn't first see anything.
[0:30:38 - 0:30:43] ▶
And you know, the jets are hauling along a section of miles per hour,
[0:30:43 - 0:30:46] ▶
which means that you're not just hovering over one spot, waiting for something to appear.
[0:30:46 - 0:30:50] ▶
You end up a few miles down the road very, very quickly.
[0:30:50 - 0:30:53] ▶
So Commander Alex D. Trigg disputes that very clearly.
[0:30:53 - 0:30:58] ▶
She disputes that to you, as you know,
[0:30:58 - 0:31:00] ▶
because in Fraver has said that that log is third-hand.
[0:31:00 - 0:31:03] ▶
It's just inaccurate.
[0:31:03 - 0:31:05] ▶
They both said that they...
[0:31:06 - 0:31:08] ▶
I'm just going to write that 20,000 feet.
[0:31:08 - 0:31:10] ▶
And there was nothing out 20,000 feet.
[0:31:10 - 0:31:12] ▶
So they both said that when they merged plot, they looked out and they saw it.
[0:31:12 - 0:31:15] ▶
Like you're suggesting that there's no link between the radar.
[0:31:15 - 0:31:17] ▶
I'm just trying to be clear.
[0:31:18 - 0:31:19] ▶
And she disputes that to you, as you know.
[0:31:19 - 0:31:21] ▶
I think Fraver himself, as I actually said, that when they arrived,
[0:31:24 - 0:31:27] ▶
they had to look around a little while before they saw it.
[0:31:27 - 0:31:29] ▶
I think they was pretty quick.
[0:31:29 - 0:31:31] ▶
Well, of course, let Dietrich's account...
[0:31:31 - 0:31:33] ▶
I'll literally leave it at...
[0:31:33 - 0:31:34] ▶
There's a discrepancy.
[0:31:34 - 0:31:35] ▶
Well, no, there's a big discrepancy.
[0:31:35 - 0:31:37] ▶
If you're saying that Dietrich's account matches Fraver's account,
[0:31:37 - 0:31:40] ▶
you have to say that also Dietrich says her experience...
[0:31:40 - 0:31:44] ▶
...and he lasted five...
[0:31:45 - 0:31:46] ▶
Sorry, eight, ten seconds.
[0:31:46 - 0:31:47] ▶
The entire thing, from merge plot to the thing flying away.
[0:31:47 - 0:31:51] ▶
And Commander Fraver says it lasted about five minutes.
[0:31:52 - 0:31:55] ▶
He said that all four pilots had eyes on for five minutes.
[0:31:55 - 0:31:59] ▶
So using one person's account, you know,
[0:31:59 - 0:32:03] ▶
we don't really know which one was the more accurate.
[0:32:03 - 0:32:05] ▶
I would think probably Fraver, because there's some more experience, pilot.
[0:32:05 - 0:32:08] ▶
But he himself said that he did tick a little while to...
[0:32:08 - 0:32:12] ▶
And Dietrich is addressing...
[0:32:12 - 0:32:13] ▶
...and we can go down this rabbit hole.
[0:32:13 - 0:32:15] ▶
But she's a said, like, as a number two, like, she's watching him.
[0:32:15 - 0:32:18] ▶
She's not watching the target.
[0:32:18 - 0:32:19] ▶
Yeah, but she said, from merge plot.
[0:32:20 - 0:32:22] ▶
Well, look at Twitter.
[0:32:23 - 0:32:24] ▶
Which you'd ask very specifically, as it was from merge plot to when the thing shot away.
[0:32:24 - 0:32:28] ▶
I'm acknowledging that there's a dispute there, and that's fine.
[0:32:29 - 0:32:32] ▶
Just a big discotency, I think.
[0:32:33 - 0:32:34] ▶
Well, one other thing I think to discuss is just this idea that this was caught by many sensors.
[0:32:34 - 0:32:41] ▶
So all we have, and all we can go off of on a, you know, first principles analysis,
[0:32:41 - 0:32:46] ▶
semi-distressful of government, in a lot of cases, is this fleer video.
[0:32:46 - 0:32:51] ▶
And we're going to play that in post-production.
[0:32:52 - 0:32:54] ▶
We can also watch it here if it's useful to both of you.
[0:32:54 - 0:32:56] ▶
But they say that they caught it on phased array radar, and then you also have, you know, eyewitnesses as well.
[0:32:56 - 0:33:02] ▶
Can we even use that as data?
[0:33:04 - 0:33:05] ▶
Or what do you guys think?
[0:33:05 - 0:33:06] ▶
Yeah, I think it's a bit of an issue.
[0:33:07 - 0:33:08] ▶
Like, some of the stuff, like dropping from 80,000 feet, was something that Kevin Day said
[0:33:08 - 0:33:13] ▶
that someone else told him the people were working the kind of...
[0:33:13 - 0:33:16] ▶
...the missile defense program, I'm sure, told him that they saw it later.
[0:33:16 - 0:33:19] ▶
He didn't actually see that at the time.
[0:33:19 - 0:33:21] ▶
He says, like, you know, 28,000 feet, but they went in at 20,000 feet, and it wasn't there either.
[0:33:21 - 0:33:27] ▶
So there's a lot of...
[0:33:27 - 0:33:28] ▶
In actual verbal accounts, there's a lot of variation.
[0:33:28 - 0:33:32] ▶
I think we can get an overall sense that something happened.
[0:33:32 - 0:33:35] ▶
And there was something that was showed up on the radar, and they did see some object.
[0:33:35 - 0:33:39] ▶
But there is quite a bit of variation.
[0:33:40 - 0:33:42] ▶
Was it a seagull, Mick?
[0:33:42 - 0:33:43] ▶
Because I've seen a video of you suggesting it might have been a seagull.
[0:33:43 - 0:33:45] ▶
I don't think it was a seagull.
[0:33:45 - 0:33:46] ▶
I suggested that when Fred was looking down, it might have been a variety of things that he might have seen looking down, like white caps and boats and things and seagulls were...
[0:33:47 - 0:33:54] ▶
I think he said, I think the code was...
[0:33:54 - 0:33:55] ▶
One of the things I said.
[0:33:55 - 0:33:56] ▶
I think he said, I hate to say this, but there would have been seagulls out there.
[0:33:56 - 0:34:00] ▶
Yeah, there would have been.
[0:34:00 - 0:34:01] ▶
Yeah, but a hundred miles offshore?
[0:34:01 - 0:34:03] ▶
Like, I actually looked this up. Seagulls really don't go.
[0:34:06 - 0:34:07] ▶
I'm not an ornithologist.
[0:34:07 - 0:34:08] ▶
They don't venture very far from their shores.
[0:34:09 - 0:34:10] ▶
The real thing is...
[0:34:11 - 0:34:12] ▶
I don't think you can find an inter-team.
[0:34:12 - 0:34:14] ▶
It's going to be interesting.
[0:34:16 - 0:34:17] ▶
Little Segway, we're talking about Hainek, earlier.
[0:34:17 - 0:34:19] ▶
Hainek was a person who came up with a swamp gas thing.
[0:34:19 - 0:34:22] ▶
And then later kind of admitted that he was lying and covering things up.
[0:34:24 - 0:34:27] ▶
I think it was lying about that particular case.
[0:34:27 - 0:34:29] ▶
I think then he actually thought that might have been a reasonable explanation,
[0:34:29 - 0:34:32] ▶
because there was a marsh in the middle where they were looking across.
[0:34:32 - 0:34:35] ▶
But it was a pretty silly explanation, and it was kind of rightly ridiculed by the press.
[0:34:35 - 0:34:42] ▶
Then it was seized upon by kind of UFO fans to label any explanation of what UFOs
[0:34:43 - 0:34:49] ▶
was being like, you know, they just say a swamp gas or they just say it's a weather balloon.
[0:34:49 - 0:34:53] ▶
And I think to a degree, the seagull explanation has become like the modern swamp gas.
[0:34:53 - 0:34:58] ▶
So I get seagull comments almost every day.
[0:34:58 - 0:35:02] ▶
Almost every day on Twitter.
[0:35:02 - 0:35:04] ▶
So you're saying you would admit that seagull is not your base case?
[0:35:04 - 0:35:08] ▶
What Freyversol was some kind of tick-tock-shaped object.
[0:35:11 - 0:35:14] ▶
And it was it was it appeared to be moving around.
[0:35:15 - 0:35:18] ▶
If it was a seagull, I don't think you would have made that mistake.
[0:35:19 - 0:35:21] ▶
Let's talk about a guilt-free alternative to alcohol that's perfect for your dry January
[0:35:21 - 0:35:27] ▶
or any time you want to unwind.
[0:35:27 - 0:35:29] ▶
Cornbreads organic CBD gummies.
[0:35:29 - 0:35:31] ▶
These gummies are an absolute lifesaver for my evening routine.
[0:35:31 - 0:35:35] ▶
They're a natural way to relax, celebrate or wind down without the hangover.
[0:35:35 - 0:35:39] ▶
I've cut back a lot on my alcohol consumption over the last few years.
[0:35:39 - 0:35:43] ▶
For a lot of you trying out dry January or cutting back generally, it's not always easy.
[0:35:43 - 0:35:48] ▶
But swapping that glass of wine for Cornbread's CBD gummies is a total game changer.
[0:35:48 - 0:35:53] ▶
It's a simple upgrade to your evening routine that leaves you feeling great the next day,
[0:35:53 - 0:35:58] ▶
without sacrificing the fun.
[0:35:58 - 0:36:00] ▶
Plus with all natural ingredients, they're the perfect way to stay balanced.
[0:36:00 - 0:36:04] ▶
Cornbread hemp isn't just a product, it's a small way to bring balance into your life.
[0:36:04 - 0:36:08] ▶
Whether you're journaling, meditating or simply enjoying some downtime,
[0:36:08 - 0:36:11] ▶
these gummies elevate the experience without any of the guilt.
[0:36:11 - 0:36:15] ▶
It's like having a moment of calm in your pocket, ready whenever you need it.
[0:36:15 - 0:36:19] ▶
Alcohol doesn't have to be the default anymore.
[0:36:19 - 0:36:21] ▶
Whether you're cutting back for dry January or just looking for a healthier way to relax,
[0:36:21 - 0:36:25] ▶
you've got to try Cornbread CBD gummies.
[0:36:25 - 0:36:28] ▶
Right now, American Alchemy listeners can save 30% on their first order.
[0:36:28 - 0:36:33] ▶
Just head to cornbreadhemp.com slash Jesse and use code Jesse at checkout.
[0:36:33 - 0:36:38] ▶
Again, that's cornbreadhemp.com slash Jesse code Jesse.
[0:36:38 - 0:36:42] ▶
Cornbread hemp, this is the good life.
[0:36:42 - 0:36:45] ▶
And then how many eyewitnesses do we have?
[0:36:45 - 0:36:47] ▶
It's a great... We have a few, right?
[0:36:48 - 0:36:50] ▶
Can I just quickly back up maybe?
[0:36:50 - 0:36:52] ▶
And gosh, me the setup is taken so long.
[0:36:52 - 0:36:54] ▶
We might have been able to look at the video.
[0:36:54 - 0:36:56] ▶
But there's another... I believe it's Squadra Commander from a Marine Corps Squadron
[0:36:56 - 0:37:00] ▶
that was actually flying by...
[0:37:00 - 0:37:02] ▶
Curth, I think is his name.
[0:37:02 - 0:37:04] ▶
Curth, Curth, whatever.
[0:37:04 - 0:37:06] ▶
And they decided not to vector him out there.
[0:37:06 - 0:37:10] ▶
I think because of fuel issues, I'm not sure.
[0:37:10 - 0:37:12] ▶
But he saw the roiling white water.
[0:37:12 - 0:37:14] ▶
Didn't see the tick-tack, but the roiling white water.
[0:37:14 - 0:37:16] ▶
That's interesting, right?
[0:37:16 - 0:37:18] ▶
But to your point, for that first encounter, we're talking about eight eyeballs on this thing.
[0:37:18 - 0:37:22] ▶
One of them is Squadra Commander.
[0:37:23 - 0:37:26] ▶
The others are, you know, pretty well trained.
[0:37:26 - 0:37:28] ▶
And what do you think about that?
[0:37:29 - 0:37:31] ▶
Yeah, I wish that we'd get more witnesses coming forward.
[0:37:31 - 0:37:34] ▶
I think it's difficult now because it's literally 20 years since this happened.
[0:37:35 - 0:37:38] ▶
And memory phase and Alex Dietrich herself has said that she doesn't really remember the details that well now.
[0:37:39 - 0:37:44] ▶
And probably the people won't either.
[0:37:44 - 0:37:46] ▶
But, you know, I think once you've got past the initial year or so of people remembering things,
[0:37:46 - 0:37:53] ▶
it's very difficult to get that much more good information.
[0:37:53 - 0:37:56] ▶
And using accounts from the time if available is usually the best way.
[0:37:56 - 0:38:01] ▶
But we don't really have those.
[0:38:01 - 0:38:02] ▶
Alex does say she has some notes that she made and some diagrams.
[0:38:02 - 0:38:06] ▶
How do we get those?
[0:38:06 - 0:38:07] ▶
Well, you give her a call and that's right.
[0:38:07 - 0:38:09] ▶
Well, there are a couple other interesting things.
[0:38:13 - 0:38:15] ▶
I think there were two radar systems.
[0:38:15 - 0:38:17] ▶
The SPY-1B radar and the APS-145 radar.
[0:38:17 - 0:38:21] ▶
And we've seen neither of those.
[0:38:21 - 0:38:22] ▶
We just have the fleer, you know, geos recorded after.
[0:38:22 - 0:38:24] ▶
This is recorded after.
[0:38:24 - 0:38:25] ▶
This is like an hour or two after the video.
[0:38:25 - 0:38:27] ▶
Which I think that's when you had the E2 Hawkeye and then the Princeton.
[0:38:28 - 0:38:33] ▶
So just to back up the E2 is like a flying radar basically, right?
[0:38:33 - 0:38:36] ▶
And it had a week, apparently had a week hit on this target.
[0:38:36 - 0:38:41] ▶
What's in the video.
[0:38:41 - 0:38:44] ▶
And the Princeton did as well, which is how.
[0:38:44 - 0:38:46] ▶
And under what had it on his radar, too, he said.
[0:38:46 - 0:38:49] ▶
Yeah, he said he got a hit on his radar.
[0:38:50 - 0:38:51] ▶
He had three radar systems on whatever that is.
[0:38:52 - 0:38:54] ▶
And this is Chad Underwood.
[0:38:54 - 0:38:56] ▶
So that original air crew, the four air crew and those two jets go back to the carrier.
[0:38:59 - 0:39:06] ▶
Apparently, Fraver tells Underwood, hey, we just saw something weird.
[0:39:08 - 0:39:13] ▶
Try to go catch it and Underwood's really gunned ho about it apparently.
[0:39:13 - 0:39:16] ▶
And yeah, I'm going to go get it.
[0:39:16 - 0:39:19] ▶
Yeah, he's vectored out.
[0:39:19 - 0:39:20] ▶
I'm guessing like an hour or two after.
[0:39:20 - 0:39:22] ▶
I'm, I'm, it's not clear.
[0:39:22 - 0:39:23] ▶
They don't roughly say, okay?
[0:39:23 - 0:39:24] ▶
So they cycle through people about it.
[0:39:24 - 0:39:26] ▶
And they said they don't want to, I think I asked Kevin about it.
[0:39:26 - 0:39:28] ▶
And he didn't want to tell me.
[0:39:28 - 0:39:29] ▶
But they cycle through the, Underwood gets out and he gets these hits on the E.
[0:39:30 - 0:39:35] ▶
Was the E2 on the, on the E2 on the first encounter was on the second one.
[0:39:35 - 0:39:39] ▶
And I, I guess don't remember.
[0:39:39 - 0:39:41] ▶
I think there was some high-winded accounts from the,
[0:39:42 - 0:39:45] ▶
people they said they saw it out the window.
[0:39:45 - 0:39:47] ▶
But I don't think they're not seen really come forward.
[0:39:47 - 0:39:49] ▶
The other, swear on it.
[0:39:50 - 0:39:52] ▶
Interesting piece of information, which I'll just speculate on.
[0:39:53 - 0:39:56] ▶
And that maybe we'll never get to the bottom.
[0:39:56 - 0:39:58] ▶
We probably will never get to the bottom of it.
[0:39:58 - 0:39:59] ▶
You have this interesting nuclear connection with past UFO sightings.
[0:39:59 - 0:40:03] ▶
This seems to be some possibly repeatable thread.
[0:40:03 - 0:40:06] ▶
You have a great book called UFOs in Newk's by again named Robert Hastings,
[0:40:06 - 0:40:09] ▶
which I always tell you.
[0:40:09 - 0:40:10] ▶
I was reading it on the way here.
[0:40:10 - 0:40:12] ▶
And so what's interesting about the Nimitz carrier strike group is
[0:40:15 - 0:40:20] ▶
there were a likely tactical nuke on board.
[0:40:20 - 0:40:23] ▶
That's, yeah, just when it comes to, I think, yes,
[0:40:23 - 0:40:30] ▶
when it comes to ships like that.
[0:40:30 - 0:40:32] ▶
I know, I can say with certainty that the,
[0:40:32 - 0:40:34] ▶
I think the Nimitz is a nuclear power carrier.
[0:40:34 - 0:40:36] ▶
I don't know about the weapons and that's, that's out of my expertise.
[0:40:36 - 0:40:40] ▶
It's both nuclear power and then most of those whole tactical nikes,
[0:40:40 - 0:40:44] ▶
it's what my understanding.
[0:40:44 - 0:40:45] ▶
But yeah, it's both my paper.
[0:40:45 - 0:40:47] ▶
That was, yeah, you got me there.
[0:40:47 - 0:40:49] ▶
My source there is Robert Hastings.
[0:40:49 - 0:40:51] ▶
Well, I'm a big Robert Hastings fan.
[0:40:52 - 0:40:54] ▶
Well, yeah, you would say that's biased.
[0:40:54 - 0:40:57] ▶
You would say that's pretty good.
[0:40:57 - 0:40:58] ▶
I think Hastings is very, it is a tangent we can, you know,
[0:40:58 - 0:41:02] ▶
get into this later.
[0:41:02 - 0:41:03] ▶
But I think Hastings is pretty solid.
[0:41:03 - 0:41:06] ▶
He is, yeah, go for it.
[0:41:07 - 0:41:08] ▶
I mixed background, I was saying.
[0:41:08 - 0:41:09] ▶
I think, I was listening to his books.
[0:41:09 - 0:41:11] ▶
He's, he's does a pretty good job of doing all the research.
[0:41:12 - 0:41:15] ▶
But it just seemed very much,
[0:41:16 - 0:41:19] ▶
we have biased towards trying to prove that point.
[0:41:19 - 0:41:23] ▶
And it'll lay out a few things.
[0:41:23 - 0:41:25] ▶
Well, it could be this, it could be that.
[0:41:25 - 0:41:27] ▶
But I think he's actually aliens.
[0:41:27 - 0:41:29] ▶
On the theory side, but on the kind of what happens,
[0:41:29 - 0:41:32] ▶
he's like, pretty empirically rigorous.
[0:41:32 - 0:41:34] ▶
Yeah, is repeating things.
[0:41:34 - 0:41:36] ▶
So it's mostly ironistic and it's a question.
[0:41:36 - 0:41:37] ▶
Well, I got to give him credit.
[0:41:37 - 0:41:38] ▶
I mean, he's compiled and from a, I take an intelligence analysis approach to this topic.
[0:41:38 - 0:41:45] ▶
Much more than make takes a much more technical approach.
[0:41:45 - 0:41:48] ▶
But the, like the documentation that Robert Hastings is secured is unbelievable.
[0:41:48 - 0:41:54] ▶
I mean, it'll, it'll, it's extraordinary.
[0:41:54 - 0:41:57] ▶
It's 170 eyewitnesses.
[0:41:57 - 0:42:00] ▶
And also the government documents, right?
[0:42:01 - 0:42:03] ▶
That is what that, to me, is also of interest.
[0:42:04 - 0:42:06] ▶
Anyway, we can go, that's a whole other risk.
[0:42:06 - 0:42:08] ▶
It's a whole other level, but I think it's important for establishing some sort of priors on this stuff,
[0:42:08 - 0:42:12] ▶
because, you know, just to kind of out myself here as,
[0:42:12 - 0:42:16] ▶
I want to be as much of kind of a non-factor and just, you know, honest judge,
[0:42:16 - 0:42:20] ▶
and let you guys have at it.
[0:42:20 - 0:42:22] ▶
But my own kind of way I process this is, I usually think these things are prosaic or explainable way.
[0:42:22 - 0:42:28] ▶
I can explain it a way.
[0:42:28 - 0:42:29] ▶
They're, you know, air trash or balloons or whatever, or exotic, you know, craft.
[0:42:29 - 0:42:35] ▶
But I think in the case of nuclear, that might be the exception.
[0:42:35 - 0:42:40] ▶
Just because I think you have this repeatable, you know, they say science needs to be repeatable,
[0:42:40 - 0:42:44] ▶
and you do have this like really interesting repeatable thread where you have all these witnesses
[0:42:44 - 0:42:49] ▶
who have, you know, cue clearances, it's hurt their careers to come out there.
[0:42:49 - 0:42:53] ▶
And sentives are not to come out.
[0:42:53 - 0:42:55] ▶
And if 170 have come out in the form of this book,
[0:42:55 - 0:42:58] ▶
and you have a researcher who's now in his 70s, how many more are there?
[0:42:58 - 0:43:02] ▶
And that would be my question.
[0:43:02 - 0:43:04] ▶
Well, to your point, we wouldn't know about these videos if they hadn't been leaked.
[0:43:04 - 0:43:07] ▶
Well, this is interesting too, because let's talk about the provenance of Nimitz,
[0:43:10 - 0:43:12] ▶
because Nimitz, Gimbal Ango Fast, were popularized in this New York Times article in 2017.
[0:43:12 - 0:43:19] ▶
But Nimitz, I believe, the video itself was kind of floating around on Reddit,
[0:43:19 - 0:43:24] ▶
and it was even on a Germans server.
[0:43:24 - 0:43:26] ▶
And you can still access it via the, I've got a dog, the wave on machine.
[0:43:26 - 0:43:30] ▶
So there's actually a live link to this from, I think, I'm not sure it's out there when, like, 2010 or something.
[0:43:30 - 0:43:35] ▶
So, like, German, this is, this is, this is a CGI.
[0:43:35 - 0:43:37] ▶
I did a little digging into this, and it could quickly just make a point here.
[0:43:37 - 0:43:41] ▶
Like, this is when debunking goes wrong, because when that came out,
[0:43:41 - 0:43:45] ▶
and it was on above top secret, all these message boards or whatever,
[0:43:45 - 0:43:49] ▶
people had decided, oh, that's a hoax, that's not real.
[0:43:49 - 0:43:53] ▶
And then, Mick, I got, I love this.
[0:43:53 - 0:43:55] ▶
So, in December of 2017, I think, to the Star's Academy,
[0:43:56 - 0:44:05] ▶
put out an interview with, I think it's Commander Alex Dietrich.
[0:44:05 - 0:44:11] ▶
And your quote here on Metabunk, December 30th is,
[0:44:11 - 0:44:14] ▶
and she kind of described the whole encounter,
[0:44:14 - 0:44:18] ▶
and described everything that, you know, that we just discussed.
[0:44:18 - 0:44:21] ▶
And her quote here is, frankly, it's laughable that anyone is taking this seriously.
[0:44:21 - 0:44:26] ▶
Right? I have to say a bit more context about what I was saying.
[0:44:26 - 0:44:29] ▶
No, I see. It's metabunk post 84, December 30th, 2017.
[0:44:29 - 0:44:33] ▶
I see. I'm trying to be moving forward.
[0:44:33 - 0:44:35] ▶
Well, but on a particular thread, on a clear one thread.
[0:44:35 - 0:44:38] ▶
So, I just want to be caught, like, right, debunking can, can, I think, can really go wrong,
[0:44:38 - 0:44:43] ▶
because this is the most perplexing, arguably the most perplexing case.
[0:44:43 - 0:44:46] ▶
I mean, I'm not accusing you of a sermon.
[0:44:47 - 0:44:50] ▶
Taking you seriously must have been like,
[0:44:51 - 0:44:53] ▶
taking you seriously that this was something performing amazing maneuver.
[0:44:53 - 0:44:56] ▶
So, it's just something I wanted to bring up.
[0:44:56 - 0:44:58] ▶
With all these videos, there's really two questions that we better ask.
[0:44:58 - 0:45:01] ▶
The first one is, is this object on the screen doing anything amazing?
[0:45:01 - 0:45:05] ▶
Is it demonstrating unique physics that we don't understand, or advanced technology?
[0:45:05 - 0:45:10] ▶
And then, after you've answered that question, or, you know, address that question,
[0:45:10 - 0:45:15] ▶
do you have a base case assumption?
[0:45:15 - 0:45:18] ▶
Because it doesn't seem to be flying normally.
[0:45:18 - 0:45:21] ▶
Well, my base assumption for, well, my base determination for these three videos is that they don't demonstrate anything amazingly anomalous.
[0:45:21 - 0:45:31] ▶
And so, with Fleeer specifically, so, like, Seagull is not the base case.
[0:45:31 - 0:45:36] ▶
So, you have any other sort of explanations, or you're just, just like, not one.
[0:45:36 - 0:45:40] ▶
Well, so, Mary knows, I think it's some kind of distant aircraft.
[0:45:40 - 0:45:43] ▶
There is not moving, not moving, latherally.
[0:45:44 - 0:45:48] ▶
When these videos first came out, there were people talking about how amazing they were.
[0:45:48 - 0:45:53] ▶
Fleeer one, in particular, was deemed to be amazing because the object appears to zip off screen.
[0:45:53 - 0:45:59] ▶
And there's parts of the video where it seems to accelerate very rapidly, and then it loses track at the end.
[0:45:59 - 0:46:06] ▶
And that's one of the first videos that I analyzed, and I went through it frame by frame.
[0:46:06 - 0:46:12] ▶
And I showed fairly conclusively that all those things are just camera movement.
[0:46:12 - 0:46:17] ▶
So, and you really think David Fraver saw just a normal aircraft?
[0:46:17 - 0:46:21] ▶
No, I don't think so.
[0:46:21 - 0:46:22] ▶
No, these are two separate things.
[0:46:23 - 0:46:24] ▶
You know, Fraver and Patrick, like, had an encounter with a little tick-tack of some sort.
[0:46:24 - 0:46:29] ▶
And then this video was taken out later.
[0:46:29 - 0:46:31] ▶
Maybe the same thing, but I think it's probably a different thing.
[0:46:31 - 0:46:34] ▶
Despite the fact that the sightings had gone on in this little week-long stretch in November, you think they're different?
[0:46:34 - 0:46:41] ▶
We have weeks of radar returns.
[0:46:43 - 0:46:45] ▶
And then they went out for intercept.
[0:46:45 - 0:46:46] ▶
They went out for intercept.
[0:46:46 - 0:46:47] ▶
And then apparently a stock.
[0:46:47 - 0:46:49] ▶
That was it after that.
[0:46:49 - 0:46:50] ▶
That's what Kevin Day said after that encounter.
[0:46:50 - 0:46:52] ▶
They didn't, nothing ever happened afterwards.
[0:46:52 - 0:46:55] ▶
But yeah, it's the video itself.
[0:46:55 - 0:47:00] ▶
I don't think shows any, like, a bounce physics or anything like that.
[0:47:00 - 0:47:05] ▶
We don't know exactly what it is.
[0:47:05 - 0:47:07] ▶
I think it's some type of distance aircraft that's flying away, but as Mark will explain later, there are issues with determining what type of aircraft it is.
[0:47:07 - 0:47:17] ▶
Because of the angles of the image and things like that.
[0:47:17 - 0:47:21] ▶
Merrick, if you just had the video, and you didn't have the eyewitness accounts, is there anything that would lead you to believe that this is anomalous?
[0:47:21 - 0:47:28] ▶
I'd probably, without the eyewitness accounts, I probably would have...
[0:47:30 - 0:47:34] ▶
That's a really good question.
[0:47:34 - 0:47:36] ▶
Old me would have just dismissed it.
[0:47:37 - 0:47:39] ▶
The me who's engaged with Mick, who has studied this topic, would be much more interested.
[0:47:40 - 0:47:47] ▶
It's absent the eyewitness accounts.
[0:47:48 - 0:47:49] ▶
Absent the eyewitness accounts, but maybe with the promise of other sensors that picked this up, but that are too sensitive to release or something.
[0:47:49 - 0:47:56] ▶
Yeah, it's odd, obviously.
[0:47:58 - 0:48:00] ▶
Sorry, just removing the context.
[0:48:00 - 0:48:02] ▶
It is odd on its face.
[0:48:02 - 0:48:03] ▶
And I'll just just counter Mick, or just to maybe respond, I'm very much on the opposite of the spectrum.
[0:48:05 - 0:48:11] ▶
I'm glad we started with this case because ruling out a plane is probably the easiest thing we can do today.
[0:48:11 - 0:48:15] ▶
Like it is pretty simple, didn't I?
[0:48:15 - 0:48:17] ▶
That's fine. We'll get to that.
[0:48:18 - 0:48:19] ▶
So, look, I mean, it is fascinating.
[0:48:22 - 0:48:25] ▶
I have, based on the analysis that, and it's not just me, but the analysis that some of my colleagues, and one of them, as you know,
[0:48:25 - 0:48:33] ▶
was a scientific university, a California scientist, brings superb expertise to the table.
[0:48:33 - 0:48:39] ▶
And I would say, I'll speak for myself, but I have fairly high confidence that that was a tick-tock shape.
[0:48:39 - 0:48:44] ▶
Crap, and we can go through the data, you know, as we...
[0:48:44 - 0:48:47] ▶
And then to kind of flip it on you, Mick, if the video didn't exist, and you couldn't easily straw man it with a debunk,
[0:48:47 - 0:48:54] ▶
and you just had like these super credible pilots, like eight plus, all saying, you know, we've seen this anomalous thing,
[0:48:54 - 0:49:03] ▶
would that lend all of this more credence?
[0:49:03 - 0:49:06] ▶
I think the Dietrich and Fraver encounter sounds by itself as being a really interesting event.
[0:49:06 - 0:49:13] ▶
And it's... Fraver's account of it, the commensuous people, is what commenced you, with his Joe Robin thing,
[0:49:13 - 0:49:19] ▶
and a lot of people on the hill have talked to Fraver and heard his account, and they've been commenced by it.
[0:49:19 - 0:49:24] ▶
So this video isn't what's commencing people.
[0:49:24 - 0:49:27] ▶
It's the I-Winter's account, then do it.
[0:49:27 - 0:49:29] ▶
Having this video as well, kind of lend some credence to those I-Winter's accounts.
[0:49:29 - 0:49:34] ▶
It says, like, we saw an object, and here's a video of an object.
[0:49:34 - 0:49:37] ▶
It doesn't really look like the same object, but, you know, it's extra evidence that something was there.
[0:49:37 - 0:49:43] ▶
And the more witnesses you have, the more likely something is to have actually happened.
[0:49:43 - 0:49:48] ▶
So Mick, can I just quickly say, this video's not commencing to folks on its own.
[0:49:48 - 0:49:52] ▶
And I think my job here today is to make it convincing, and thank you for giving me the opportunity,
[0:49:52 - 0:49:57] ▶
because I think we have some compelling data to show.
[0:49:57 - 0:50:00] ▶
Well, the final other thing that I'll say about this case, which I find interesting, is I think a new Raytheon Flier system had just been installed before detection.
[0:50:01 - 0:50:10] ▶
And Raytheon, I think, came out with a statement, because they were like,
[0:50:10 - 0:50:14] ▶
what's going on with our Flier system? This is kind of crazy.
[0:50:14 - 0:50:17] ▶
And Raytheon was like, we're not responsible for what you detect with our system, which I found very interesting as well.
[0:50:17 - 0:50:23] ▶
Yeah, I think they just upgraded the system, upgraded the software perhaps.
[0:50:23 - 0:50:27] ▶
Okay, okay. Sockware wasn't back.
[0:50:27 - 0:50:29] ▶
I mean, this wasn't known probably, right?
[0:50:29 - 0:50:30] ▶
So nobody knew about this until, I mean, 2007 people didn't know about it.
[0:50:30 - 0:50:35] ▶
I think it was 2015 when Fraver started talking on, like, Viter-Pada, like, podcast.
[0:50:35 - 0:50:41] ▶
And it really didn't bubble up until 1516.
[0:50:42 - 0:50:45] ▶
The German server thing is fascinating.
[0:50:45 - 0:50:47] ▶
Yeah, super bizarre, because it was like a graphic design shop or something.
[0:50:47 - 0:50:51] ▶
I think it was CGI or something like that.
[0:50:51 - 0:50:53] ▶
When I hear that, my mind goes to like, they were trying to see if you could possibly recreate it.
[0:50:55 - 0:51:01] ▶
What's the idea about it?
[0:51:01 - 0:51:02] ▶
Yeah, I think what happened there was that it was just basically a site where you could upload stuff.
[0:51:02 - 0:51:06] ▶
Like an open FTP server back in the day.
[0:51:06 - 0:51:09] ▶
You would use that for uploading stuff.
[0:51:10 - 0:51:12] ▶
And they just dropped it there.
[0:51:12 - 0:51:14] ▶
That's where it was from.
[0:51:14 - 0:51:15] ▶
Who dropped it there?
[0:51:15 - 0:51:16] ▶
The person who leaked it.
[0:51:16 - 0:51:17] ▶
So it's just a leak.
[0:51:17 - 0:51:19] ▶
But on a German, it was like a place you would leak a video like that.
[0:51:19 - 0:51:23] ▶
The US military doesn't have the original.
[0:51:23 - 0:51:25] ▶
The one that they released is the same.
[0:51:25 - 0:51:27] ▶
It's the one that they got from the German FTP server.
[0:51:27 - 0:51:30] ▶
And then they released it.
[0:51:30 - 0:51:31] ▶
Well, they just re-recorded over the tapes.
[0:51:32 - 0:51:35] ▶
Can they now release the original?
[0:51:35 - 0:51:36] ▶
There are allegations from some of the sailors aboard the Princeton, I think, that people in suits landed in helicopters and took all the radar data.
[0:51:41 - 0:51:53] ▶
I don't know what to make of that.
[0:51:53 - 0:51:54] ▶
I think he's mentioned that.
[0:51:59 - 0:52:01] ▶
And there are a couple others that have said it.
[0:52:01 - 0:52:03] ▶
I know Fraver has been used.
[0:52:07 - 0:52:09] ▶
I need to be careful.
[0:52:11 - 0:52:12] ▶
Fraver has been skeptical of that publicly.
[0:52:12 - 0:52:14] ▶
I don't know how to make it that.
[0:52:14 - 0:52:16] ▶
So just to the point of data retention, it adds a spooky...
[0:52:16 - 0:52:19] ▶
It adds a spooky, immaculate constellation level.
[0:52:19 - 0:52:22] ▶
Because that's what the allegation of immaculate constellation is.
[0:52:22 - 0:52:25] ▶
All this stuff is siphoned off.
[0:52:25 - 0:52:26] ▶
I don't know what to make of that.
[0:52:27 - 0:52:28] ▶
I'm not looking at any sample.
[0:52:28 - 0:52:29] ▶
I have the stories very quite a lot.
[0:52:29 - 0:52:30] ▶
You've got all these enlisted men on the boat.
[0:52:30 - 0:52:32] ▶
Who have this story about how the data bricks were stolen.
[0:52:32 - 0:52:35] ▶
And then Fraver just happened.
[0:52:35 - 0:52:37] ▶
It's difficult to reconcile with.
[0:52:38 - 0:52:41] ▶
But yeah, obviously maybe Fraver didn't know.
[0:52:42 - 0:52:44] ▶
We've got to dive into the...
[0:52:47 - 0:52:49] ▶
I think you guys will see this.
[0:52:53 - 0:52:55] ▶
There's a start here.
[0:52:58 - 0:53:01] ▶
So it's in infrared mode.
[0:53:01 - 0:53:03] ▶
And let's explain so...
[0:53:03 - 0:53:05] ▶
It's white dot in the middle, mean.
[0:53:09 - 0:53:10] ▶
Well, it's not actually a white dot.
[0:53:10 - 0:53:11] ▶
It's actually kind of a spiky shape of the start.
[0:53:11 - 0:53:13] ▶
And it switches to TV mode.
[0:53:16 - 0:53:17] ▶
And a TV mode means...
[0:53:17 - 0:53:19] ▶
It's basically a video camera.
[0:53:19 - 0:53:20] ▶
Black-white video camera.
[0:53:20 - 0:53:22] ▶
And we see it's black here.
[0:53:22 - 0:53:24] ▶
Now, I originally thought this was infrared and this is what makes me...
[0:53:24 - 0:53:27] ▶
Because it looks almost exactly like the Chilean case.
[0:53:27 - 0:53:29] ▶
But of course it's this TV mode.
[0:53:29 - 0:53:31] ▶
So this is actually...
[0:53:31 - 0:53:33] ▶
You know, what you would...
[0:53:33 - 0:53:35] ▶
Stereetically see, like, with your own eyes.
[0:53:35 - 0:53:37] ▶
They switch his back to infrared.
[0:53:37 - 0:53:39] ▶
You can see the object kind of moved around a little bit.
[0:53:39 - 0:53:42] ▶
A little spin, though.
[0:53:42 - 0:53:44] ▶
Now, that's the camera doing a gimbal roll.
[0:53:44 - 0:53:46] ▶
It's kind of the camera has to readjust itself occasionally.
[0:53:46 - 0:53:49] ▶
There's not a little roll there.
[0:53:49 - 0:53:51] ▶
Do we want to get into symbology, or...
[0:53:51 - 0:53:54] ▶
It's just going to do some interesting stuff in a second, but...
[0:53:57 - 0:53:59] ▶
I suppose there's going to be a long-boring part, I guess.
[0:54:01 - 0:54:03] ▶
It looked there like it zoomed off screen.
[0:54:06 - 0:54:08] ▶
And then this is the end thing where it appears to zoom off to the left.
[0:54:08 - 0:54:11] ▶
See how the symbology...
[0:54:12 - 0:54:14] ▶
We go like an whole bunch of stuff, numbers on screen.
[0:54:14 - 0:54:16] ▶
And this is how we kind of get to do the analysis.
[0:54:16 - 0:54:19] ▶
So we have the angles.
[0:54:19 - 0:54:21] ▶
We have the top of the screen.
[0:54:21 - 0:54:22] ▶
We have the heading, the azimuth.
[0:54:22 - 0:54:24] ▶
And then we've got the elevation.
[0:54:24 - 0:54:26] ▶
Was it like a 60 degrees here?
[0:54:28 - 0:54:30] ▶
You mean from right to left?
[0:54:31 - 0:54:32] ▶
Now the elevation is...
[0:54:32 - 0:54:33] ▶
I think it's five-up.
[0:54:33 - 0:54:34] ▶
It sticks up in the device.
[0:54:34 - 0:54:35] ▶
Yeah, it sticks to the device.
[0:54:35 - 0:54:36] ▶
So that gives us kind of a line of sight.
[0:54:38 - 0:54:40] ▶
So we know that it's somewhere along this line of sight.
[0:54:40 - 0:54:42] ▶
And this line of sight moves for our right to left.
[0:54:42 - 0:54:45] ▶
And so we can kind of correlate that with the other numbers on the screen,
[0:54:47 - 0:54:51] ▶
which is the as speed of the jet.
[0:54:51 - 0:54:54] ▶
She's expressed in a calibrated as speed.
[0:54:54 - 0:54:57] ▶
You have to convert it to true as speed.
[0:54:57 - 0:54:59] ▶
And then the altitude.
[0:54:59 - 0:55:00] ▶
You know, the altitude of playing from there.
[0:55:00 - 0:55:02] ▶
You can use all that to kind of set up a model of what we're looking at
[0:55:03 - 0:55:06] ▶
and what's actually happening.
[0:55:06 - 0:55:08] ▶
But that's kind of like almost like the second part of the analysis.
[0:55:08 - 0:55:11] ▶
Like the first part is actually, is it doing anything amazing?
[0:55:11 - 0:55:14] ▶
And we saw at the end of the video, it kind of zooms off to the left of the screen.
[0:55:14 - 0:55:19] ▶
And there's kind of two parts to that.
[0:55:19 - 0:55:20] ▶
There's one way it kind of...
[0:55:20 - 0:55:21] ▶
Well, first of all, it kind of drifts a little bit.
[0:55:21 - 0:55:23] ▶
And then it seems to shoot off very rapidly.
[0:55:23 - 0:55:25] ▶
And people initially thought that that was it,
[0:55:25 - 0:55:27] ▶
it's accelerating very rapidly.
[0:55:27 - 0:55:28] ▶
But it's actually just changing zoom levels, kind of halfway through the movement.
[0:55:28 - 0:55:31] ▶
If you kind of undo that zoom back from two times to one time,
[0:55:31 - 0:55:35] ▶
it just basically smoothly goes off.
[0:55:35 - 0:55:37] ▶
And the analysis I did on there, using all the angles and everything,
[0:55:37 - 0:55:41] ▶
was that the drift that he moved off from left to right was exactly the same as the drift
[0:55:41 - 0:55:47] ▶
that the camera was moving at.
[0:55:47 - 0:55:49] ▶
So I think what we're actually looking at here is the camera was tracking something
[0:55:49 - 0:55:52] ▶
like this and then the camera lost lock and the object just kept going.
[0:55:52 - 0:55:56] ▶
And it's exactly the same speed.
[0:55:56 - 0:55:58] ▶
So it gives the same effects of the object zooming off to the side.
[0:55:58 - 0:56:01] ▶
But it isn't actually moving.
[0:56:01 - 0:56:04] ▶
Make are you familiar with a Yonix analysis that it actually drifts off?
[0:56:04 - 0:56:09] ▶
It moves off four times faster at the very end than it does during the other losses of lock.
[0:56:10 - 0:56:15] ▶
Are you familiar with that?
[0:56:15 - 0:56:17] ▶
And I wouldn't be surprised because it's only a partial loss loss of lock.
[0:56:18 - 0:56:20] ▶
And the other ones, it's still basically kind of tracking it.
[0:56:21 - 0:56:24] ▶
I don't think, when you see it losing lock,
[0:56:24 - 0:56:30] ▶
it's not really lost the lock at those points.
[0:56:30 - 0:56:32] ▶
Can I just say, we're getting so in the weeds.
[0:56:32 - 0:56:35] ▶
And I think part of, I just want to say just maybe for the audience,
[0:56:35 - 0:56:38] ▶
that part of the reason that I'm doing this is I want to engage more people.
[0:56:38 - 0:56:42] ▶
I want more people mathematically scientifically and client folks to grapple with this stuff.
[0:56:42 - 0:56:47] ▶
That's why I write these articles.
[0:56:48 - 0:56:50] ▶
I'm trying to encourage interests.
[0:56:50 - 0:56:52] ▶
We should teach this in colleges because it's a fun analysis.
[0:56:54 - 0:56:57] ▶
The people can get the teeth in terms of that PSA.
[0:56:59 - 0:57:01] ▶
But I really just want to convey that.
[0:57:01 - 0:57:03] ▶
That's probably the whole problem here between you and I is just you and me.
[0:57:03 - 0:57:07] ▶
And there's other people.
[0:57:08 - 0:57:10] ▶
The person and the same.
[0:57:10 - 0:57:12] ▶
There's no reason why other people can't analyze these videos.
[0:57:12 - 0:57:16] ▶
But it does take a long time though.
[0:57:17 - 0:57:19] ▶
It is quite a lot of work.
[0:57:20 - 0:57:21] ▶
I mean, this is like years of work that we pray.
[0:57:21 - 0:57:23] ▶
Oh, and put these things on my side.
[0:57:23 - 0:57:26] ▶
So I got to give them credit and get in the Christmas world as well.
[0:57:26 - 0:57:30] ▶
And they would say that the loss of lock just wouldn't account for that sort of z-
[0:57:30 - 0:57:35] ▶
Chad Underwood, who was the wizard who filmed it, he said,
[0:57:37 - 0:57:39] ▶
nope, there's no way the system would have lost it.
[0:57:39 - 0:57:41] ▶
I've talked to an active duty wizard serving now.
[0:57:41 - 0:57:44] ▶
And he said, it's a finicky, I sent you the emails, right?
[0:57:44 - 0:57:46] ▶
But the system can be finicky and can lose a lock.
[0:57:49 - 0:57:51] ▶
I don't know what to make of that.
[0:57:52 - 0:57:53] ▶
Is the FLEAR auto-tracking or is there somebody operating that?
[0:57:53 - 0:57:56] ▶
That is auto-tracking.
[0:57:56 - 0:57:57] ▶
So yeah, that is correct.
[0:57:57 - 0:57:58] ▶
Yeah, it's using the basically the contrast between pixels and it's just like an image tracking and after effects.
[0:58:01 - 0:58:05] ▶
You just lock on to it something and it follows it.
[0:58:05 - 0:58:08] ▶
It doesn't do a very good job.
[0:58:09 - 0:58:10] ▶
It's going to be interesting comparing the technology in 2004 with the later things in gimbal and go fast.
[0:58:10 - 0:58:13] ▶
Which the lock seems a lot more solid.
[0:58:13 - 0:58:15] ▶
What I like about this is I feel like both of you are being very reasonable.
[0:58:15 - 0:58:18] ▶
And if anything, I'm more confused and I help you with.
[0:58:18 - 0:58:22] ▶
You know, I really, I mean, in my mind, the assessment there might be like the net assessment,
[0:58:22 - 0:58:27] ▶
quote, unquote, would be like, you know, really interesting eyewitness accounts and then kind of inconclusive on the video front.
[0:58:27 - 0:58:34] ▶
Well, this way till we get to the analysis.
[0:58:34 - 0:58:36] ▶
By becoming a member, you'll gain access to weekly premium videos behind the scenes footage and monthly group calls where we discuss the ideas we love most.
[0:59:09 - 0:59:18] ▶
Plus, you'll get early access to merchandise drops and be the first to know about the upcoming conference will be holding later in 2025.
[0:59:18 - 0:59:26] ▶
Our walk community will serve as a private space where curious individuals and tech enthusiasts can come together to challenge the status quo and explore ideas shaping our future.
[0:59:26 - 0:59:37] ▶
If you're passionate about exploring unconventional ideas and want to dive even deeper into our content, I invite you to join our walk today head over to walk.com slash American Alchemy premium to become a premium member today.
[0:59:37 - 0:59:50] ▶
Thank you so much and enjoy the rest of today's episode.
[0:59:50 - 0:59:53] ▶
Should we move to go faster?
[0:59:55 - 0:59:57] ▶
The slideshow real quick.
[0:59:57 - 0:59:58] ▶
Oh, yeah, I really want to show you the kind of what what road and and Mick.
[0:59:58 - 1:00:03] ▶
You know, you know, this, this is the video that you still have up and I got a bone to pick with you, right? Cause video still up and that it's clearly not an error.
[1:00:04 - 1:00:11] ▶
I mean, let's describe what's talking about.
[1:00:11 - 1:00:14] ▶
So Mick has several videos up looking at the flare one video and one of them, he hypothesizes that it's a distant airliner.
[1:00:16 - 1:00:24] ▶
I think you said on a podcast that it's probably 50 to 100 miles away.
[1:00:24 - 1:00:28] ▶
Yeah, I think this video on me is like what do you know what it was like 20?
[1:00:28 - 1:00:32] ▶
Yeah, I just think it's still up there and I think that's that's misinformation.
[1:00:32 - 1:00:36] ▶
I have the description of the video on there.
[1:00:36 - 1:00:38] ▶
You put one sentence on there. Nobody's going to read that one sentence.
[1:00:38 - 1:00:40] ▶
I think it's very misleading to have that video still up there.
[1:00:40 - 1:00:43] ▶
If you said it's an airliner, 100 miles away.
[1:00:43 - 1:00:47] ▶
What's in the video?
[1:00:47 - 1:00:49] ▶
That thing's what I do.
[1:00:49 - 1:00:50] ▶
Originally, I had done this analysis.
[1:00:53 - 1:00:55] ▶
Very much analysis. This was pretty early on in the discussion thread.
[1:00:55 - 1:00:59] ▶
And so I was saying like what it might look like.
[1:00:59 - 1:01:02] ▶
And I picked an airliner because that's what I'm going to use to from the Chilean case.
[1:01:03 - 1:01:08] ▶
I was still kind of maybe biased by that Chilean case.
[1:01:08 - 1:01:11] ▶
And I kind of did a little side by side comparison and it looks somewhat similar.
[1:01:11 - 1:01:15] ▶
You can kind of see they look somewhat similar.
[1:01:15 - 1:01:17] ▶
Well, you were moving that video because it's clearly there's no.
[1:01:19 - 1:01:22] ▶
I think the basic analysis is right.
[1:01:22 - 1:01:24] ▶
And I can maybe change the title of it.
[1:01:24 - 1:01:26] ▶
The analysis isn't that this is what he is.
[1:01:26 - 1:01:28] ▶
Is that a blurry shape can look like another blurry shape.
[1:01:28 - 1:01:32] ▶
You clearly see in the video like, oh, it looks kind of like an airliner going off to the right.
[1:01:32 - 1:01:36] ▶
It does kind of look like one.
[1:01:36 - 1:01:38] ▶
The analysis of the video is still about it.
[1:01:42 - 1:01:45] ▶
But it kind of looks like that.
[1:01:45 - 1:01:47] ▶
I can't say my point right?
[1:01:48 - 1:01:49] ▶
And I think it's not the key point.
[1:01:49 - 1:01:50] ▶
I didn't think that's the description of the video.
[1:01:50 - 1:01:52] ▶
No, it's going to be weird.
[1:01:52 - 1:01:53] ▶
Okay, let's move on.
[1:01:53 - 1:01:54] ▶
So this is why it's so easy to rule out a plane.
[1:01:54 - 1:01:57] ▶
Number one, there's no tail.
[1:01:57 - 1:01:59] ▶
Number two, if you're looking five degrees up, right?
[1:02:01 - 1:02:04] ▶
The perspective is if mixed theory is that it's another plane.
[1:02:04 - 1:02:07] ▶
He uses another F18 in his example.
[1:02:07 - 1:02:10] ▶
I'm trying to do this for the camera.
[1:02:10 - 1:02:12] ▶
If you're looking five degrees up, it'll have...
[1:02:12 - 1:02:14] ▶
The jet will have kind of like a downward slope like this.
[1:02:14 - 1:02:18] ▶
Clearly the object is tilted up this way.
[1:02:19 - 1:02:21] ▶
And there's no plane.
[1:02:21 - 1:02:22] ▶
You can change the plane type.
[1:02:22 - 1:02:23] ▶
There's no plane that'll fly late.
[1:02:23 - 1:02:25] ▶
What do you have this just to plane go?
[1:02:25 - 1:02:27] ▶
No plane is going to fly at like a 13, 15, 20 degree angle of attack
[1:02:29 - 1:02:34] ▶
It's just not reasonable.
[1:02:35 - 1:02:36] ▶
Ruling out a plane is the easiest thing we'll do all day today
[1:02:39 - 1:02:41] ▶
from my perspective.
[1:02:41 - 1:02:42] ▶
Yeah, I think you can there.
[1:02:42 - 1:02:43] ▶
I think the problem with this video is that it's a super low resolution video.
[1:02:43 - 1:02:45] ▶
But the angle is really...
[1:02:45 - 1:02:47] ▶
It's not really like you...
[1:02:48 - 1:02:49] ▶
You will talk later about how the angle of the sun is going to affect
[1:02:49 - 1:02:52] ▶
where you're looking at things.
[1:02:52 - 1:02:53] ▶
And we don't know exactly what we're looking at here.
[1:02:53 - 1:02:55] ▶
We're looking at a dark shape.
[1:02:55 - 1:02:57] ▶
Maybe some parts that are being eliminated by the certain...
[1:02:57 - 1:02:59] ▶
I mean, that's a similar...
[1:03:00 - 1:03:01] ▶
Maybe that's the similar color to the sky.
[1:03:01 - 1:03:03] ▶
Lots of planes have been different...
[1:03:03 - 1:03:05] ▶
This works by contrast.
[1:03:06 - 1:03:07] ▶
Could be a contrast.
[1:03:07 - 1:03:08] ▶
Or in contrast in the optical spectrum.
[1:03:08 - 1:03:10] ▶
Yeah, there's a white tail.
[1:03:10 - 1:03:12] ▶
The plane's going to not have white tails.
[1:03:12 - 1:03:14] ▶
This is black against the sky.
[1:03:15 - 1:03:17] ▶
You're saying that it's a white tic-tac shape.
[1:03:17 - 1:03:20] ▶
You're saying that it's got all...
[1:03:20 - 1:03:24] ▶
Is this funny weird shape?
[1:03:24 - 1:03:25] ▶
Yeah, weird because of the light shape.
[1:03:25 - 1:03:27] ▶
So it's not a plane from my perspective.
[1:03:27 - 1:03:29] ▶
It could be a tic-tac shape that's somehow morphed into this bizarre peanut shape
[1:03:29 - 1:03:35] ▶
because of the sunlight.
[1:03:35 - 1:03:39] ▶
And these little legs are supposedly sticking out.
[1:03:39 - 1:03:41] ▶
Then why couldn't it be a different type of plane?
[1:03:42 - 1:03:44] ▶
Perhaps not this FAAC.
[1:03:44 - 1:03:46] ▶
There's a whole bunch of different types of planes.
[1:03:46 - 1:03:47] ▶
What plane flies like at this angle?
[1:03:47 - 1:03:49] ▶
Yeah, I don't think you're just flying at that angle.
[1:03:49 - 1:03:51] ▶
So your eyes are just...
[1:03:51 - 1:03:52] ▶
You're like, it's really not at that angle?
[1:03:52 - 1:03:53] ▶
No, I don't think...
[1:03:53 - 1:03:54] ▶
I think while we're looking at it...
[1:03:54 - 1:03:55] ▶
It's representative of the actual shape of the object.
[1:03:55 - 1:03:58] ▶
So anybody who can see...
[1:03:59 - 1:04:01] ▶
It's pretty clear that it's tilted out.
[1:04:01 - 1:04:03] ▶
Why wouldn't it be represented?
[1:04:03 - 1:04:04] ▶
You mean it's pretty clear that it's tilted out?
[1:04:04 - 1:04:06] ▶
You can see what you're on eyes.
[1:04:06 - 1:04:08] ▶
It's got a pointy piece at one end.
[1:04:08 - 1:04:10] ▶
So if it's tilted out...
[1:04:11 - 1:04:13] ▶
It's got a pointy piece at one end.
[1:04:16 - 1:04:17] ▶
It's not really a tic-tac shape, isn't it?
[1:04:17 - 1:04:19] ▶
Well, that is an artifact that your software...
[1:04:19 - 1:04:22] ▶
And this is why you make you even so helpful.
[1:04:22 - 1:04:24] ▶
I've shown you this.
[1:04:24 - 1:04:25] ▶
You can recreate that effect with your software.
[1:04:25 - 1:04:28] ▶
You could probably recreate it with a different plane as well.
[1:04:28 - 1:04:31] ▶
It's something you haven't done.
[1:04:31 - 1:04:32] ▶
You're a big evidence guy.
[1:04:32 - 1:04:34] ▶
Why can't you find me something with no tail?
[1:04:35 - 1:04:38] ▶
I feel it's kind of a fool's errand because there is not enough brain cells in that video to determine...
[1:04:39 - 1:04:45] ▶
It's this blurry blob.
[1:04:46 - 1:04:48] ▶
You see what I'm probably out of focus.
[1:04:50 - 1:04:52] ▶
Yeah, I see it tilt.
[1:04:52 - 1:04:53] ▶
The attitude, the tilt is that just...
[1:04:53 - 1:04:55] ▶
And if you watch the whole video, you can see that tilt.
[1:04:55 - 1:04:57] ▶
You see it turning as well.
[1:04:59 - 1:05:00] ▶
Oh, is this something that's kind of weird?
[1:05:00 - 1:05:01] ▶
It doesn't really work.
[1:05:01 - 1:05:02] ▶
I think with the tic-tac model.
[1:05:02 - 1:05:04] ▶
You want to just go to the next image.
[1:05:04 - 1:05:07] ▶
Because this is super interesting.
[1:05:07 - 1:05:08] ▶
And I owe credit to...
[1:05:08 - 1:05:09] ▶
I think his name was Paul, but he did very simple edits.
[1:05:11 - 1:05:15] ▶
Brilliance and contrast.
[1:05:15 - 1:05:18] ▶
And there's no trickery here.
[1:05:18 - 1:05:20] ▶
If you go to the next one, please.
[1:05:21 - 1:05:23] ▶
And this is kind of a Rorschach test, right?
[1:05:25 - 1:05:27] ▶
The UAP is in the item, the holder.
[1:05:27 - 1:05:29] ▶
I need to quickly add that both Commander Fraver and the Tenet Commander...
[1:05:31 - 1:05:36] ▶
The Tenet Commander Dietrich have stated that when they reviewed Underwood's tapes afterwards,
[1:05:36 - 1:05:41] ▶
they saw these little appendages, these protrusions...
[1:05:41 - 1:05:45] ▶
Which is impossible.
[1:05:45 - 1:05:46] ▶
I mean, is it Lonnie's Amora?
[1:05:46 - 1:05:48] ▶
Like that reminds me of a Lonnie's Amora craft, what he described.
[1:05:48 - 1:05:51] ▶
We know he's completely out of focus, so you wouldn't be able to see this.
[1:05:52 - 1:05:54] ▶
Lonnie's Amora is a famous...
[1:05:54 - 1:05:56] ▶
...graph that came down in 64 and in New Mexico.
[1:05:57 - 1:06:00] ▶
Allegedly had lower legs, but anyway.
[1:06:00 - 1:06:02] ▶
Allegedly had little legs.
[1:06:02 - 1:06:03] ▶
This image here, I think, is very misleading.
[1:06:03 - 1:06:05] ▶
I think it's basically being that you've tweaked the amount of brightness
[1:06:05 - 1:06:08] ▶
to bring in the edges.
[1:06:08 - 1:06:09] ▶
If you do that with...
[1:06:09 - 1:06:10] ▶
You're just sliding the middle slider in the levels adjustment.
[1:06:10 - 1:06:13] ▶
So we can't find a stick that...
[1:06:13 - 1:06:15] ▶
If you just do basic edits, it's a lot of work.
[1:06:15 - 1:06:17] ▶
You can find the gimbal shape and...
[1:06:17 - 1:06:18] ▶
What about basic edits?
[1:06:18 - 1:06:19] ▶
Brilliant and contrast.
[1:06:20 - 1:06:21] ▶
Brilliant and contrast.
[1:06:21 - 1:06:22] ▶
And what exactly does...
[1:06:22 - 1:06:24] ▶
So contrast, I think, is probably pretty obvious.
[1:06:24 - 1:06:26] ▶
Increasing the contrast.
[1:06:26 - 1:06:28] ▶
And then brilliance is...
[1:06:29 - 1:06:30] ▶
I think he turned it up.
[1:06:30 - 1:06:31] ▶
Again, I didn't do this.
[1:06:31 - 1:06:32] ▶
That's the beauty of this.
[1:06:33 - 1:06:34] ▶
Anybody can do this.
[1:06:35 - 1:06:36] ▶
It's like light saturation or what?
[1:06:37 - 1:06:39] ▶
I'm not sure, actually.
[1:06:39 - 1:06:41] ▶
I'm not sure if that's a filter.
[1:06:42 - 1:06:43] ▶
It's an unsandorded term.
[1:06:45 - 1:06:46] ▶
It's not like a Photoshop term.
[1:06:46 - 1:06:48] ▶
So what it gets really interesting is...
[1:06:48 - 1:06:50] ▶
And we can really drill down to.
[1:06:50 - 1:06:51] ▶
You see that little kind of that...
[1:06:51 - 1:06:53] ▶
That sunlit section on the tongue.
[1:06:53 - 1:06:55] ▶
We can place this object and we can see...
[1:06:59 - 1:07:02] ▶
We can actually find which direction under what was flying.
[1:07:02 - 1:07:05] ▶
And we can see where the sun was at around 3, 30, 320-ish.
[1:07:05 - 1:07:09] ▶
We'll give it a take.
[1:07:09 - 1:07:10] ▶
And you can recreate that in a three...
[1:07:10 - 1:07:12] ▶
And this is the first time I'm really presenting this.
[1:07:12 - 1:07:14] ▶
And we're going to put this in a paper very soon.
[1:07:15 - 1:07:17] ▶
But you can actually recreate that effect.
[1:07:17 - 1:07:20] ▶
And see where the sun is.
[1:07:20 - 1:07:22] ▶
And in 3D, you can move the sun around.
[1:07:22 - 1:07:24] ▶
And it gives you that effect.
[1:07:24 - 1:07:26] ▶
Interestingly enough...
[1:07:26 - 1:07:27] ▶
And that lines up with his position...
[1:07:27 - 1:07:29] ▶
So let's go to the next one.
[1:07:31 - 1:07:32] ▶
You make you brought up...
[1:07:32 - 1:07:33] ▶
Well, this is TV mode.
[1:07:34 - 1:07:36] ▶
Those F-A-T's are not black.
[1:07:36 - 1:07:38] ▶
That's how that's just some work.
[1:07:40 - 1:07:41] ▶
Yeah, so that's why we have a black shape.
[1:07:42 - 1:07:45] ▶
It's not something you can't say that is the same because it's the same color.
[1:07:45 - 1:07:49] ▶
It doesn't mean it's a different color either.
[1:07:50 - 1:07:51] ▶
We don't know what color it is.
[1:07:51 - 1:07:53] ▶
But you've moved off the plane thesis.
[1:07:53 - 1:07:55] ▶
You don't think that.
[1:07:55 - 1:07:56] ▶
I don't think we can really doubt.
[1:07:56 - 1:07:57] ▶
But you have to provide...
[1:07:58 - 1:07:59] ▶
Just give us one option.
[1:07:59 - 1:08:00] ▶
Like, to prevent some kind of...
[1:08:00 - 1:08:02] ▶
Like, propose one plane that would fly like this...
[1:08:02 - 1:08:05] ▶
Well, one type of UFO.
[1:08:05 - 1:08:06] ▶
They could fly like this.
[1:08:06 - 1:08:07] ▶
It takes you a few...
[1:08:08 - 1:08:09] ▶
The UFO is just an identifier for a model.
[1:08:09 - 1:08:12] ▶
A model for a vertex-acura-foil.
[1:08:12 - 1:08:14] ▶
It's a sport model, obviously.
[1:08:14 - 1:08:15] ▶
That's impossible for him to answer.
[1:08:15 - 1:08:17] ▶
A plane that fits...
[1:08:17 - 1:08:19] ▶
You know, flip that profile...
[1:08:20 - 1:08:22] ▶
...silloets with the lysine?
[1:08:23 - 1:08:24] ▶
You know, we just don't know...
[1:08:24 - 1:08:25] ▶
I have a couple more.
[1:08:25 - 1:08:26] ▶
You talked about that peanut...
[1:08:32 - 1:08:33] ▶
Well, just you know what type of penis...
[1:08:38 - 1:08:39] ▶
Just say it, we'll put it in post-production.
[1:08:41 - 1:08:42] ▶
So when you actually edit the video to kind of recreate the graininess
[1:08:43 - 1:08:46] ▶
and the out of focus, you can recreate the tick-tax shape.
[1:08:46 - 1:08:50] ▶
You can recreate it.
[1:08:50 - 1:08:52] ▶
I mean, it's not a plane, guys.
[1:08:52 - 1:08:54] ▶
It's an extraordinary to find a match, like a remarkable match
[1:08:56 - 1:08:59] ▶
with what eight eyeballs saw two hours earlier.
[1:08:59 - 1:09:02] ▶
You can recreate that.
[1:09:02 - 1:09:03] ▶
And with mix software.
[1:09:04 - 1:09:05] ▶
With my software, yeah.
[1:09:05 - 1:09:06] ▶
And I did that for you, Marissa.
[1:09:08 - 1:09:09] ▶
Isn't that compelling that maybe this is just sensory data?
[1:09:11 - 1:09:13] ▶
No, it's just sensory data.
[1:09:13 - 1:09:14] ▶
There's a couple of points.
[1:09:14 - 1:09:15] ▶
You know what I'm saying about...
[1:09:15 - 1:09:16] ▶
And I'll say one thing.
[1:09:16 - 1:09:17] ▶
The UFO world owes you a huge debt of gratitude for the amount of work
[1:09:19 - 1:09:21] ▶
I'm glad you're finally getting paid.
[1:09:22 - 1:09:23] ▶
I don't know who's paying you, but...
[1:09:23 - 1:09:25] ▶
So when I can't name.
[1:09:28 - 1:09:29] ▶
What Mick has done is incredible.
[1:09:30 - 1:09:32] ▶
And it allows us to test out everybody's theories.
[1:09:32 - 1:09:34] ▶
Not yours, not ours, not anybody's.
[1:09:34 - 1:09:36] ▶
And so, thank you for that.
[1:09:36 - 1:09:38] ▶
I mean, that's sincerely...
[1:09:38 - 1:09:39] ▶
Like, the reason this software exists is actually because of you.
[1:09:40 - 1:09:44] ▶
So what are the odds?
[1:09:46 - 1:09:47] ▶
The original gimbal simulator.
[1:09:48 - 1:09:49] ▶
Which is the granddaddy of this was...
[1:09:50 - 1:09:52] ▶
Because, Mark was getting so annoying with these consistent...
[1:09:52 - 1:09:54] ▶
Consistent criticism that I had to like...
[1:09:54 - 1:09:56] ▶
Finally make a good video.
[1:09:56 - 1:09:58] ▶
And I had to write all this software to do it.
[1:09:58 - 1:10:00] ▶
And then I wrote this nice long video.
[1:10:00 - 1:10:02] ▶
But Mick, you always say like,
[1:10:02 - 1:10:03] ▶
Oh, God, you know, I win this account.
[1:10:03 - 1:10:05] ▶
I was so incredible.
[1:10:06 - 1:10:07] ▶
But there's never any data to back him up.
[1:10:07 - 1:10:09] ▶
Here's a tick-tack with little legs.
[1:10:09 - 1:10:10] ▶
Which is exactly what...
[1:10:10 - 1:10:11] ▶
Do you mean the amount of...
[1:10:12 - 1:10:14] ▶
Oh, the blood that you had to add that to make them...
[1:10:14 - 1:10:17] ▶
The mint and the match...
[1:10:17 - 1:10:19] ▶
Would mean that they wouldn't be able to see it.
[1:10:19 - 1:10:21] ▶
I was asking you to give me eight plant any plant.
[1:10:21 - 1:10:23] ▶
For 71 or one plant.
[1:10:23 - 1:10:25] ▶
You can make it blurry.
[1:10:31 - 1:10:32] ▶
Well, what I guess, Mick,
[1:10:33 - 1:10:35] ▶
What would you say to the fact that you need...
[1:10:35 - 1:10:37] ▶
It's with a program that you built.
[1:10:40 - 1:10:41] ▶
This is just to recreate one frame.
[1:10:41 - 1:10:42] ▶
I think what would be interesting.
[1:10:42 - 1:10:43] ▶
Objects yourself appear to do this kind of weird rotation
[1:10:47 - 1:10:50] ▶
and get a bit more pointier one end.
[1:10:50 - 1:10:52] ▶
Which I kind of interpreted as being like a plane turning.
[1:10:53 - 1:10:56] ▶
The pointiness is recreated.
[1:10:57 - 1:10:58] ▶
It's an artifact of that front appendage.
[1:10:58 - 1:11:01] ▶
I sent you the video for a long time.
[1:11:01 - 1:11:03] ▶
We don't have the rotation, the matches.
[1:11:03 - 1:11:05] ▶
In your eyes percentage,
[1:11:05 - 1:11:07] ▶
likelihood thing is plane still.
[1:11:07 - 1:11:10] ▶
Even though there are some issues.
[1:11:10 - 1:11:11] ▶
You know, Mario brings up some good points.
[1:11:13 - 1:11:15] ▶
So, you know, I think what I would say is
[1:11:16 - 1:11:19] ▶
you can't 100% rule out a plane.
[1:11:19 - 1:11:21] ▶
I feel comfortable doing it.
[1:11:21 - 1:11:22] ▶
And it matches where...
[1:11:23 - 1:11:24] ▶
I think 100% ruling out things is a huge mistake
[1:11:24 - 1:11:26] ▶
that people have historically made.
[1:11:26 - 1:11:28] ▶
I think of the Chilean case.
[1:11:28 - 1:11:29] ▶
They spent two years ruling things out.
[1:11:29 - 1:11:32] ▶
And so they were wrong because they ruled out a plane right at the start.
[1:11:32 - 1:11:36] ▶
And then there's this...
[1:11:36 - 1:11:37] ▶
You can't see a tail.
[1:11:38 - 1:11:40] ▶
Well, what about the...
[1:11:42 - 1:11:43] ▶
Remember the video that...
[1:11:43 - 1:11:44] ▶
The Jesse Zendos a few days ago of the Tixac?
[1:11:44 - 1:11:48] ▶
Then the overnelli stuff.
[1:11:50 - 1:11:51] ▶
And you said that you would be with the natives.
[1:11:51 - 1:11:53] ▶
And that's a very common thing that people say.
[1:11:56 - 1:11:59] ▶
It would have been another plane.
[1:12:01 - 1:12:02] ▶
I'm sure it was another plane.
[1:12:02 - 1:12:03] ▶
I'm going to the next plane.
[1:12:04 - 1:12:05] ▶
It's a real quick thing.
[1:12:05 - 1:12:06] ▶
So this is how we were able to place it.
[1:12:07 - 1:12:08] ▶
There's a consistent rightward banking.
[1:12:08 - 1:12:10] ▶
You can kind of see it here.
[1:12:10 - 1:12:11] ▶
There's a strong and thank goodness Yannick is a climate scientist.
[1:12:13 - 1:12:17] ▶
I hope it didn't out you.
[1:12:19 - 1:12:20] ▶
But he has access to extremely nuanced weather data.
[1:12:20 - 1:12:24] ▶
And we can find out.
[1:12:24 - 1:12:25] ▶
If you go to the next slide there, we can look at the weather data from that time at that altitude.
[1:12:25 - 1:12:31] ▶
And there's an extremely strong, northerly wind coming from the north.
[1:12:31 - 1:12:36] ▶
And then the video, you see this kind of this consistent rightward banking, which is the autopilot compensating to maintain a straight heading as it goes.
[1:12:38 - 1:12:46] ▶
And that allows us to place the heading of that plane and see, okay, well now we know where the sun is and then we can match the sun with the top of that illuminated.
[1:12:46 - 1:12:56] ▶
The issue with that is that planes don't need to bank to maintain a heading.
[1:12:56 - 1:13:00] ▶
Okay, and then we discussed this.
[1:13:02 - 1:13:03] ▶
So you said that you thought that they did, but so yeah, so many of the chat GPUT things.
[1:13:03 - 1:13:09] ▶
Talk about crabbing, right?
[1:13:09 - 1:13:11] ▶
No, well, I'm talking about the difference between like the true heading, the ground heading and the air heading.
[1:13:11 - 1:13:18] ▶
So to maintain a particular ground heading, you just need to have an air heading that incorporates the wind vector.
[1:13:18 - 1:13:23] ▶
So the autopilot, you can see at the bottom it says HDG, that's heading.
[1:13:23 - 1:13:28] ▶
So it means the nose is going to maintain a heading.
[1:13:28 - 1:13:31] ▶
Yes, ground tracks are relevant.
[1:13:31 - 1:13:33] ▶
Ground tracks are relevant.
[1:13:34 - 1:13:35] ▶
It only would need to bank if the wind was changing.
[1:13:35 - 1:13:36] ▶
No, it needs to stay.
[1:13:36 - 1:13:37] ▶
The nose is going to stay at, let's say, 270.
[1:13:37 - 1:13:40] ▶
So how's it maintaining...
[1:13:42 - 1:13:43] ▶
You point it in the direction you want to go and you go in that direction.
[1:13:43 - 1:13:48] ▶
Or as you point to the velocity of your plane in the direction you want to go, which might involve you turning a bit to the side,
[1:13:48 - 1:13:54] ▶
but you don't need to bank to do that.
[1:13:54 - 1:13:56] ▶
If you bank, you'll keep turning.
[1:13:56 - 1:13:57] ▶
But it's consistent, right?
[1:13:57 - 1:13:59] ▶
No, it's just wobbling a little bit.
[1:14:00 - 1:14:01] ▶
That was greatly magnified.
[1:14:01 - 1:14:02] ▶
That was the thing I sent you years ago.
[1:14:02 - 1:14:03] ▶
And it goes in both directions.
[1:14:04 - 1:14:07] ▶
It's only a little bit more to one side.
[1:14:07 - 1:14:09] ▶
It does go actually to the other side a little bit.
[1:14:09 - 1:14:12] ▶
It's fundamentally wrong with the idea that you need the audience to turn to the side.
[1:14:13 - 1:14:18] ▶
So it's 100 knot winds coming in.
[1:14:18 - 1:14:20] ▶
So it's completely irrelevant.
[1:14:21 - 1:14:22] ▶
It could be a thousand knot winds.
[1:14:22 - 1:14:23] ▶
So if the wind is pushing the aircraft,
[1:14:23 - 1:14:27] ▶
planes fly relative to the air.
[1:14:27 - 1:14:29] ▶
That outage of the air is basically just a constant, how much does this mass?
[1:14:29 - 1:14:35] ▶
And there's no real turbulence to speak of in terms of like differentials between the wind directions.
[1:14:35 - 1:14:41] ▶
So if the wind is moving like this and you want to fly in that direction,
[1:14:41 - 1:14:48] ▶
you'll just have to turn a little bit into the wind.
[1:14:48 - 1:14:50] ▶
That's called crabbing.
[1:14:50 - 1:14:51] ▶
No, it's called changing the heading of your plane.
[1:14:51 - 1:14:55] ▶
Craving is something where you actually kind of slide the plane a little bit.
[1:14:55 - 1:14:59] ▶
You're using rudder exactly.
[1:14:59 - 1:15:01] ▶
But that's not talking about that.
[1:15:01 - 1:15:03] ▶
No, we're not talking about that.
[1:15:03 - 1:15:05] ▶
Your velocity relative to the air is just straight through the air.
[1:15:05 - 1:15:09] ▶
Okay, let's move on.
[1:15:09 - 1:15:10] ▶
We're going to get into the audience.
[1:15:10 - 1:15:12] ▶
Was there some plane with the antenna?
[1:15:13 - 1:15:14] ▶
We can cut that out or whatever.
[1:15:14 - 1:15:15] ▶
No, let's leave it in.
[1:15:15 - 1:15:17] ▶
But what a plane need to bank in the scenario.
[1:15:18 - 1:15:20] ▶
There's a consistent right where banking, which our hypothesis is
[1:15:20 - 1:15:23] ▶
because of the 110, 100 knotwinds.
[1:15:23 - 1:15:26] ▶
So real quick, last point on this, you might just go on up one more.
[1:15:26 - 1:15:29] ▶
This is one, sorry, just one higher.
[1:15:30 - 1:15:32] ▶
Sorry, the other way.
[1:15:33 - 1:15:34] ▶
Oh, I'm upset you gotcha.
[1:15:34 - 1:15:35] ▶
Last but not least, we can actually, so Kevin Day said that these objects were at 28,000 feet.
[1:15:35 - 1:15:41] ▶
I'd be curious to see if he has said other, but everything that I've seen is,
[1:15:41 - 1:15:44] ▶
he said that 28,000 feet heading south at 100 knots, we can find that in the data.
[1:15:44 - 1:15:48] ▶
We can find the Chad Underwood object moving south at 100 knots at 28,000 feet.
[1:15:48 - 1:15:55] ▶
The sending slowly, but we can find that as a very, very anomalous flight path.
[1:15:55 - 1:16:00] ▶
So again, we can find very, very specific descriptions of what the witnesses recall in the data.
[1:16:00 - 1:16:08] ▶
That is critical and we see that with gimbal as well.
[1:16:08 - 1:16:11] ▶
Do you not find that compelling?
[1:16:11 - 1:16:12] ▶
But you can find all kinds of things in the day.
[1:16:12 - 1:16:14] ▶
Depending on what parameters you put into it.
[1:16:14 - 1:16:16] ▶
And this is at the distance roughly that Underwood gave.
[1:16:16 - 1:16:19] ▶
That support, right?
[1:16:19 - 1:16:20] ▶
You can find basically a straight line path as well of the object moving away, consistent with it being a plane or some similar type of aircraft.
[1:16:20 - 1:16:30] ▶
And if you change things around, change the way the wind direction is, then you can find different things.
[1:16:30 - 1:16:35] ▶
If you remove, change the distance, you can find different things again.
[1:16:35 - 1:16:39] ▶
I don't think like this is the only solution here.
[1:16:39 - 1:16:43] ▶
No, but it is a potential one.
[1:16:43 - 1:16:45] ▶
We're remarkable to find that in the data.
[1:16:45 - 1:16:47] ▶
And it doesn't happen by accident.
[1:16:47 - 1:16:48] ▶
That of course suggests that what we're looking at is actually a balloon.
[1:16:48 - 1:16:51] ▶
That is absolutely, so absolutely a possibility.
[1:16:51 - 1:16:54] ▶
Yes. And that balloon would explain the radar targets possibly because they're moving with the wind.
[1:16:54 - 1:16:59] ▶
You know, we have this wind as you described it, they're moving from south to south.
[1:16:59 - 1:17:02] ▶
They can balloon more reasonable explanation than plane.
[1:17:02 - 1:17:06] ▶
I wouldn't really tell.
[1:17:06 - 1:17:07] ▶
I don't know the sound.
[1:17:07 - 1:17:08] ▶
I think, you know, like I said before, my analysis of these videos is two parts.
[1:17:08 - 1:17:12] ▶
Is it doing anything amazing?
[1:17:12 - 1:17:14] ▶
And I definitely do anything amazing.
[1:17:16 - 1:17:18] ▶
I don't think drifting south at 100 knots is doing something amazing.
[1:17:18 - 1:17:21] ▶
At 20, what, 20,000 feet?
[1:17:22 - 1:17:24] ▶
What do you know that does that?
[1:17:24 - 1:17:26] ▶
That's that's how the balloon be that far off the coast.
[1:17:27 - 1:17:31] ▶
It could be some kind of military balloon.
[1:17:32 - 1:17:35] ▶
A balloon used to be available.
[1:17:35 - 1:17:37] ▶
This is 20 years ago now.
[1:17:37 - 1:17:39] ▶
Do it for a propose them up.
[1:17:40 - 1:17:42] ▶
You can throw spaghetti right against wall.
[1:17:42 - 1:17:44] ▶
This is a debunking playbook.
[1:17:44 - 1:17:45] ▶
But it provides some options.
[1:17:45 - 1:17:46] ▶
I think we should move on.
[1:17:48 - 1:17:49] ▶
This is a great, I love it.
[1:17:51 - 1:17:52] ▶
And I think there are a lot of open questions.
[1:17:53 - 1:17:55] ▶
You just presented that the audience should go out and investigate it.
[1:17:56 - 1:17:58] ▶
And so, I don't really, I don't really out these options, but I don't think you should also run out of plane.
[1:18:01 - 1:18:05] ▶
Let's get into the GoFast video, which was recorded in January of 2015, 300 miles off the coast of Jacksonville, the USS Roosevelt.
[1:18:06 - 1:18:19] ▶
So, Mary, you set up the last one.
[1:18:19 - 1:18:21] ▶
Why don't you set up this one, Mick?
[1:18:22 - 1:18:23] ▶
This appears to be something that's moving very fast over the surface of the water.
[1:18:24 - 1:18:29] ▶
It's similar to the FLIR-1 video, and it's thermal footage.
[1:18:29 - 1:18:33] ▶
This is all thermal.
[1:18:33 - 1:18:34] ▶
So, I think they do switch between black, hard and white, but what we're looking at here is the surface of the ocean, and we see this object, and the object appears to be colder than the surface of the ocean, which is very unusual for a powered craft.
[1:18:36 - 1:18:51] ▶
We have a variety of numbers on the screen.
[1:18:51 - 1:18:54] ▶
We have the angle down minus 23 at that point of it.
[1:18:54 - 1:18:58] ▶
We have the angle down minus 22, and we have the head in which is off the top of the screen.
[1:18:58 - 1:19:05] ▶
We actually do have that, and then we have a range value.
[1:19:05 - 1:19:09] ▶
Now, unlike in the FLIR-1 video, when they lock onto this object, they actually do get a range number.
[1:19:09 - 1:19:17] ▶
Some of these features are actually where that number comes from, like how far away is this object?
[1:19:17 - 1:19:22] ▶
We don't know if it came from a radar here, or if it was some other way of doing it.
[1:19:22 - 1:19:27] ▶
We're not entirely sure how accurate it is, but if you assume that that number there is relatively accurate, you can do a reconstruction of this object.
[1:19:27 - 1:19:37] ▶
It turns out to be going a lot slower than initial estimates.
[1:19:37 - 1:19:41] ▶
Initial estimates predict that somewhere in a 600 knots, Mac, Mac 6 points something or other.
[1:19:41 - 1:19:49] ▶
It turns out to be going much, much slower, so definitely under 100 knots.
[1:19:49 - 1:19:54] ▶
Some disputers are exactly how fast this is going.
[1:19:54 - 1:19:57] ▶
I've done some reconstructions where it's about 16 knots.
[1:19:57 - 1:20:01] ▶
Yenik just pointed out one where he's done where it's about like 19 knots, and he said that's also consistent with a wind speed.
[1:20:01 - 1:20:07] ▶
My hypothesis about this one is that it's probably just a wind blown object, like a balloon.
[1:20:07 - 1:20:14] ▶
If we do some analysis to the size of the object, we can determine it's not particularly big.
[1:20:14 - 1:20:21] ▶
It's about 3 to 6 feet in diameter.
[1:20:21 - 1:20:24] ▶
So something just like a weather balloon seems like a reasonable explanation for me.
[1:20:24 - 1:20:28] ▶
Especially as it doesn't really do anything amazing.
[1:20:28 - 1:20:30] ▶
This one is really interesting because Arrow just came with the all-domain anomalous resolution office.
[1:20:30 - 1:20:36] ▶
We're talking about its director.
[1:20:36 - 1:20:38] ▶
It came out and they said that this is possibly parallax.
[1:20:38 - 1:20:42] ▶
So they're saying that there are probably certain things in the sky that we can't classify,
[1:20:42 - 1:20:47] ▶
but they are coming out against this video in particular.
[1:20:47 - 1:20:50] ▶
This video is also interesting because you have audio associated with the video and the guy goes,
[1:20:50 - 1:20:56] ▶
And I just interviewed Navy fighter pilot Ryan Graves who testified before Congress also under oath.
[1:20:57 - 1:21:03] ▶
And he admitted it was a buddy of his who he thinks is kind of the honorable.
[1:21:03 - 1:21:06] ▶
They're very close friends.
[1:21:06 - 1:21:07] ▶
I mean, they're super close.
[1:21:07 - 1:21:09] ▶
So, yeah, what's your response to make here?
[1:21:10 - 1:21:14] ▶
I think we would, I'm very confident that we would not have Arrow come out with this assessment at the recent hearing
[1:21:14 - 1:21:23] ▶
if they had actually talked to the heir crew.
[1:21:23 - 1:21:25] ▶
And I have a major bone to pick with Arrow.
[1:21:25 - 1:21:27] ▶
They didn't talk to the heir crew about this.
[1:21:27 - 1:21:29] ▶
Why wouldn't they talk to the heir crew?
[1:21:29 - 1:21:31] ▶
No, and it fits in with the blue book, the debunking playbook of never talk to witnesses.
[1:21:31 - 1:21:36] ▶
Yeah, just throw something out there.
[1:21:36 - 1:21:39] ▶
I don't know if this is part of the old guard, the previous director who I think has rumbled a lot of people the wrong way.
[1:21:39 - 1:21:46] ▶
Rub me, I had a long discussion with him.
[1:21:46 - 1:21:49] ▶
Rub me the wrong way.
[1:21:49 - 1:21:51] ▶
So I think that's a massive oversight.
[1:21:51 - 1:21:54] ▶
It is an analytic failure for them not to talk to the heir crew because clearly those guys were excited by something.
[1:21:54 - 1:22:00] ▶
You don't just lock up some little random object in the middle of 300 miles off the coast of Jacksonville, Florida.
[1:22:00 - 1:22:07] ▶
Oh, by the way, this is 10 minutes before the gimbal video.
[1:22:07 - 1:22:10] ▶
Oh, by the way, this is a mid daily observations or sensor observations of spherical objects off the east coast that Ryan told you
[1:22:10 - 1:22:20] ▶
and has been very public about were a safety of flight concern and b, you were operating in very anomalous ways.
[1:22:20 - 1:22:26] ▶
They're systems. They're locking them up on flea on their training, their infrared training missiles on their radar.
[1:22:26 - 1:22:33] ▶
You have multiple three, four sensors.
[1:22:33 - 1:22:35] ▶
Their eyeballs are seeing them sometimes occasionally.
[1:22:35 - 1:22:38] ▶
So it is a massive analytic oversight.
[1:22:38 - 1:22:41] ▶
I have a major bone to pick with arrow about that because Ryan just came out on your show and are on your discussion said that this was part of,
[1:22:41 - 1:22:51] ▶
and I think you said it previously, but shocker. This was part of, this was one of four objects.
[1:22:51 - 1:22:56] ▶
They were in a line of breast formation, right?
[1:22:56 - 1:22:58] ▶
So they're kind of like cruising along all next to each other.
[1:22:58 - 1:23:01] ▶
That's not weather balloons down to that, obviously.
[1:23:01 - 1:23:04] ▶
So I don't think we know we would be having a very different discussion of arrow to actually done their job.
[1:23:04 - 1:23:09] ▶
And this is, it's right above the surface of the water.
[1:23:09 - 1:23:12] ▶
So the air crew did not name this go fast.
[1:23:14 - 1:23:19] ▶
I don't know who named it.
[1:23:19 - 1:23:21] ▶
So I think Ryan has said, Lieutenant Graves has said, all the Pentagon did is debunk the name, which is the Pentagon.
[1:23:21 - 1:23:29] ▶
I think the Pentagon itself gave the video.
[1:23:29 - 1:23:32] ▶
So I, you know, look, I want to just be very clear.
[1:23:32 - 1:23:37] ▶
There's a reason you don't just, this is like a tiny needle in a haste.
[1:23:37 - 1:23:41] ▶
You don't just find something, just sluing your, your targeting pod around the ocean.
[1:23:41 - 1:23:46] ▶
They had a, there was a radar hit that gave them some kind of an indication that there's something there.
[1:23:46 - 1:23:50] ▶
And by the sounds of their voice, what they were seeing visually did not match up with the radar that they were, the data they were getting.
[1:23:50 - 1:23:58] ▶
That's where they are reached, I think.
[1:23:58 - 1:24:00] ▶
What's it doing, right? Whatever they said.
[1:24:01 - 1:24:03] ▶
Like they're, they're very surprised by it.
[1:24:03 - 1:24:05] ▶
You think it was surprised that they caught it on the, on the, their, their, their at flip.
[1:24:05 - 1:24:09] ▶
But to look at it fly is the actual word.
[1:24:09 - 1:24:11] ▶
Yeah, well, it looks like it's going very fast.
[1:24:11 - 1:24:13] ▶
Well, I don't think they're stumped by parallax.
[1:24:13 - 1:24:15] ▶
They might have been, but the bottom line is, you'd be surprised.
[1:24:15 - 1:24:18] ▶
I mean, the pilots are stumped by parliots all the time.
[1:24:18 - 1:24:21] ▶
Bottom line is, okay, really described with parallaxes to the audience.
[1:24:21 - 1:24:25] ▶
Yeah, parallaxes is just when your viewpoint changes, things that are closer to you appear to move faster.
[1:24:25 - 1:24:31] ▶
So if you're, you know, looking at the wall over there and you looking in my thumb and you move your head,
[1:24:32 - 1:24:37] ▶
my thumb appears to move that way.
[1:24:37 - 1:24:39] ▶
And you think that multiple eyewitnesses saw parallax, even though the gimbal video was recorded like minutes after this?
[1:24:39 - 1:24:46] ▶
No, the gopast thing isn't multiple eyewitnesses saying things.
[1:24:46 - 1:24:50] ▶
It's these people, these two guys in a plane seeing this thing probably just on the screen.
[1:24:50 - 1:24:55] ▶
And so all they're saying is this display.
[1:24:55 - 1:24:57] ▶
The field of view here is about, it's less than one degree, which is a really, really powerful zoom lens,
[1:24:58 - 1:25:04] ▶
which is the biggest zoom lens you could get.
[1:25:04 - 1:25:06] ▶
It's equivalent, I think, of over 2,000 millimeters SLR.
[1:25:06 - 1:25:11] ▶
And this is in an F18 super correct?
[1:25:11 - 1:25:15] ▶
Yeah, I just mean eyewitnesses, they're actively looking.
[1:25:17 - 1:25:20] ▶
It's not a little scary, like the nymph thing.
[1:25:20 - 1:25:22] ▶
That's what I mean, not eyewitnesses and that they're seeing the object.
[1:25:22 - 1:25:25] ▶
People did look at the video afterwards.
[1:25:25 - 1:25:27] ▶
Ron Graves said he'd be distracted looking at the gimbal video, at least I'm sure he must have seen this one as well.
[1:25:27 - 1:25:33] ▶
Yeah, it's really interesting that we have all these witnesses coming forward now.
[1:25:33 - 1:25:36] ▶
It's a shame that they didn't come forward years ago.
[1:25:36 - 1:25:39] ▶
Well, we might be hearing more from, as Ryan said on your show.
[1:25:39 - 1:25:45] ▶
And sorry, Ryan, if you're watching, I think he's annoyed at me because he paid me.
[1:25:45 - 1:25:50] ▶
And when your buddy coming out, when they're going to come out and talk, I would love that.
[1:25:50 - 1:25:53] ▶
More information was.
[1:25:53 - 1:25:54] ▶
Absolutely, because it's the same guy who recorded the gimbal video, which is the poster child of this whole.
[1:25:55 - 1:26:01] ▶
Well, that guy needs to come out.
[1:26:01 - 1:26:03] ▶
I'll do an interview with you.
[1:26:03 - 1:26:05] ▶
Guy wherever you are.
[1:26:05 - 1:26:07] ▶
But again, I cannot stress enough.
[1:26:07 - 1:26:10] ▶
I'd love to hear him expound or kind of expand rather on the formation.
[1:26:10 - 1:26:16] ▶
What I mean, your point here is that you don't think he's doing anything amazing in this video.
[1:26:16 - 1:26:20] ▶
But you think there's something amazing about the situation.
[1:26:20 - 1:26:23] ▶
It's falling formation.
[1:26:23 - 1:26:24] ▶
Of course, video doesn't show that.
[1:26:25 - 1:26:27] ▶
So we've got this kind of second hand 10 years later.
[1:26:27 - 1:26:29] ▶
Can you see what he's saying?
[1:26:29 - 1:26:30] ▶
And you're not for Ryan.
[1:26:30 - 1:26:31] ▶
Yes, it might actually be doing something.
[1:26:32 - 1:26:34] ▶
Yannick, put this in all caps.
[1:26:34 - 1:26:37] ▶
Assuming the range is exact.
[1:26:37 - 1:26:39] ▶
The best visual match, this is a scientist, folks.
[1:26:39 - 1:26:43] ▶
The best visual match in mixed simulation has the object around 100 knots.
[1:26:44 - 1:26:49] ▶
Not 60 knots is mixed claims.
[1:26:49 - 1:26:51] ▶
That's assuming this accurate, which is as we discussed earlier, it's a very dubious thing.
[1:26:52 - 1:26:58] ▶
It was it not moving against the wind or was that just a gimbal?
[1:26:58 - 1:27:02] ▶
Because if the aviator who recorded it comes out and says, oh yeah, we were freaked out because it was moving against the wind.
[1:27:04 - 1:27:12] ▶
Well, that would be great, but that doesn't happen yet.
[1:27:12 - 1:27:14] ▶
I'm just saying that's why we really need to hear from.
[1:27:14 - 1:27:16] ▶
But I really want to hear about the formation.
[1:27:16 - 1:27:18] ▶
And if there's any way he remembers what direction, maybe that's why there's a surprise.
[1:27:18 - 1:27:25] ▶
That tiny thing is moving against the wind.
[1:27:25 - 1:27:27] ▶
Bottom line is arrow drop the ball in my opinion.
[1:27:28 - 1:27:30] ▶
Yeah, well, we need more.
[1:27:30 - 1:27:32] ▶
We need these guys to come out.
[1:27:32 - 1:27:34] ▶
Yeah, and they need to at least behind the scenes interview.
[1:27:34 - 1:27:37] ▶
And arrow, I'm going to put on my old, my ex-government hat here.
[1:27:37 - 1:27:40] ▶
And then the arrow kind of put themselves in a really tough spot because they came out and did this.
[1:27:40 - 1:27:45] ▶
Now you're going to have an arrow crew come out and contradict you.
[1:27:45 - 1:27:49] ▶
That's a terrible position for a government agency to be in.
[1:27:49 - 1:27:52] ▶
Well, he already did, right?
[1:27:53 - 1:27:54] ▶
I mean, through the run.
[1:27:54 - 1:27:55] ▶
Where are they contradicting?
[1:27:55 - 1:27:56] ▶
I mean, and all they said was it a piece of me going, I'll tell you exactly why.
[1:27:56 - 1:27:59] ▶
Because it says the arrow conclusion, what is it?
[1:27:59 - 1:28:02] ▶
It does no anomalous maneuvers.
[1:28:02 - 1:28:04] ▶
And the information's doing this.
[1:28:06 - 1:28:07] ▶
The anomalous move is in this video.
[1:28:07 - 1:28:08] ▶
If it's pulling formation, that is a anomalous maneuver.
[1:28:08 - 1:28:11] ▶
Well, in strong winds.
[1:28:11 - 1:28:12] ▶
Four objects blowing in the wind will stay in the same formation.
[1:28:13 - 1:28:17] ▶
For like the 300, for 300 miles off the coast.
[1:28:17 - 1:28:21] ▶
There is information at that point.
[1:28:23 - 1:28:24] ▶
Balloons are going to stay in a perfect, or we don't know if perfect, but we don't know exactly what the formation was.
[1:28:24 - 1:28:30] ▶
It was a perfect straight line.
[1:28:30 - 1:28:32] ▶
We got to hear more of my point.
[1:28:32 - 1:28:33] ▶
We're going to hear more from this person.
[1:28:33 - 1:28:35] ▶
Track him down, Jesse.
[1:28:37 - 1:28:38] ▶
Yeah, I'm going to have Brian right after this and say we should do something.
[1:28:39 - 1:28:42] ▶
And again, the context is so critical.
[1:28:42 - 1:28:44] ▶
10 minutes before gimbal.
[1:28:44 - 1:28:45] ▶
10 minutes before the most right anomalous or at least strange video that a lot of people have seen.
[1:28:45 - 1:28:53] ▶
Was that very kind of the time that it was before?
[1:28:53 - 1:28:56] ▶
Yeah, you can see the time stamp on the bottom.
[1:28:56 - 1:28:58] ▶
I kind of wrapped around and I think it doesn't show the, it doesn't show the...
[1:28:58 - 1:29:01] ▶
I'm pretty confident it was right before.
[1:29:02 - 1:29:04] ▶
Yeah, it doesn't rain out of that much, but it was wonderful.
[1:29:05 - 1:29:09] ▶
There was some verbal confirmation from our witness.
[1:29:09 - 1:29:11] ▶
Anything else on GoFast before we go to gimbal?
[1:29:12 - 1:29:14] ▶
No, I don't think there's much.
[1:29:14 - 1:29:18] ▶
Yeah, we can play it in post.
[1:29:21 - 1:29:23] ▶
Guys, arrow, your job is to investigate UFO videos and data.
[1:29:24 - 1:29:30] ▶
And this is one of three of the most recognizable videos.
[1:29:30 - 1:29:32] ▶
How do you not talk to the air crew?
[1:29:32 - 1:29:33] ▶
I should release the analysis.
[1:29:33 - 1:29:36] ▶
Do you agree that it's kind of a gregious arrow did not interview the air crew?
[1:29:36 - 1:29:40] ▶
I don't see why they wouldn't have done that.
[1:29:40 - 1:29:42] ▶
It seems like it's a data point.
[1:29:42 - 1:29:45] ▶
I mean, they even got the year wrong in this slide.
[1:29:45 - 1:29:47] ▶
It's a January 16th.
[1:29:47 - 1:29:49] ▶
I mean, I have a major bone to pick with the analytic side of it.
[1:29:50 - 1:29:53] ▶
The thing is, we all know that they have really done a poor job on a lot of their reports.
[1:29:53 - 1:29:58] ▶
So we don't need to belay it.
[1:29:58 - 1:30:00] ▶
I'm optimistic that the new director will change around.
[1:30:00 - 1:30:03] ▶
Yeah, he changed around.
[1:30:03 - 1:30:04] ▶
I think, you know, even I both know that arrow have done said some things that are incorrect.
[1:30:04 - 1:30:10] ▶
For Patrick with character.
[1:30:10 - 1:30:11] ▶
Basically, it was astounding, and I don't need to get into it.
[1:30:11 - 1:30:14] ▶
It said various things in public as well, which didn't really tie with reality.
[1:30:15 - 1:30:18] ▶
That's very diplomatic with us.
[1:30:19 - 1:30:21] ▶
Of the NASA hearing, he said some speckles on the screen with stars when they were always in not stars.
[1:30:21 - 1:30:26] ▶
I think he phoned it in.
[1:30:27 - 1:30:28] ▶
I think he was closer retirement.
[1:30:28 - 1:30:29] ▶
I think he was more there as a standing of the organization rather than being an analyst himself.
[1:30:30 - 1:30:36] ▶
So he wasn't not familiar with everything.
[1:30:36 - 1:30:37] ▶
He did stand up there.
[1:30:38 - 1:30:39] ▶
He was the first time that he's doing things.
[1:30:41 - 1:30:42] ▶
And the salt alone cases.
[1:30:42 - 1:30:43] ▶
Do you guys ever wonder if any of these things are sort of Rorschach tests or like initiation
[1:30:43 - 1:30:48] ▶
paths for, you know, your analytical rigorabilities or whatever?
[1:30:48 - 1:30:53] ▶
And so, like, some of these videos are like halfway truths.
[1:30:53 - 1:30:56] ▶
And it's like, you know, our job is somehow solve it.
[1:30:56 - 1:30:59] ▶
And then you solve it.
[1:30:59 - 1:31:00] ▶
You get in the program or something.
[1:31:00 - 1:31:01] ▶
Because the taxpayers need to get their money back.
[1:31:02 - 1:31:03] ▶
This is pretty awesome.
[1:31:03 - 1:31:04] ▶
It's a waste of time.
[1:31:04 - 1:31:05] ▶
It's a waste of time.
[1:31:05 - 1:31:06] ▶
It's been in nuclear and multiple world that's heating up.
[1:31:06 - 1:31:10] ▶
It's kind of a, why are you playing puzzle games?
[1:31:10 - 1:31:12] ▶
Well, because of that legislation.
[1:31:14 - 1:31:16] ▶
Well, I do want to say it's interesting that I was just on the tick-tack video.
[1:31:17 - 1:31:20] ▶
So, my buddy, Chris Ramsey, amazing magician, has a channel called Area 52.
[1:31:21 - 1:31:26] ▶
But he's actually kind of good when it comes to this stuff because the Area 52 is around the UFO thing.
[1:31:26 - 1:31:31] ▶
He actually believes in a lot of UFO stuff.
[1:31:31 - 1:31:34] ▶
As a magician, he debunks other magicians.
[1:31:34 - 1:31:36] ▶
So, he's kind of like a good person to like throw at this whole topic.
[1:31:37 - 1:31:41] ▶
He was flying a commercial flight over an Ellis testing range and he saw that tick-tack that I showed you guys.
[1:31:41 - 1:31:46] ▶
He both said probably prosaically explained.
[1:31:46 - 1:31:50] ▶
I'll play the video, but why prosaically explain?
[1:31:50 - 1:31:53] ▶
Because it is interesting in the context of traversing a tick-tack, too.
[1:31:53 - 1:31:57] ▶
It's a super common sighting.
[1:31:57 - 1:31:59] ▶
And before they would describe them as being cigar-shaped.
[1:31:59 - 1:32:02] ▶
And what it is, it just planes, the fuselage of a plane is eliminated by the sun.
[1:32:02 - 1:32:07] ▶
But the wings are either a different color if you know from above.
[1:32:07 - 1:32:11] ▶
So, like the gray wings you're seeing, plainly the gray wings.
[1:32:11 - 1:32:14] ▶
Or they're not being eliminated by the sun because the sun's above them and you're below them.
[1:32:14 - 1:32:18] ▶
So, you will see basically just the fuselage of the plane, the bright white thing.
[1:32:18 - 1:32:23] ▶
And at that distance, you just can't make out the wings.
[1:32:23 - 1:32:27] ▶
And when you take a video, I bet it doesn't show up on the video.
[1:32:27 - 1:32:30] ▶
And we've seen this numerous times with tracks after any myself flying down to LA once.
[1:32:30 - 1:32:36] ▶
And you can just like, you know, get the location and find which other planes were in the area
[1:32:36 - 1:32:41] ▶
and just drop it in to sit right by my software and you can see what it actually was.
[1:32:41 - 1:32:46] ▶
Gotcha. Well, yeah. No, that's good to hear.
[1:32:46 - 1:32:48] ▶
I mean, the way in which that didn't comport at all with the framer eye witness account is it wasn't going right next to the water.
[1:32:48 - 1:32:55] ▶
Exhibiting all these anomalous flight features.
[1:32:57 - 1:32:58] ▶
We never see these floating, but...
[1:32:58 - 1:32:59] ▶
We never see these amazing maneuvers unambiguously on the idea.
[1:32:59 - 1:33:04] ▶
And so, you know, either it's a fuzzy document distance or...
[1:33:04 - 1:33:07] ▶
You're sure they do in gimbal, you see a very anomalous and fantastic.
[1:33:07 - 1:33:09] ▶
And then the light how put off rebuttal to what you just said, Mick, is especially when it comes to kind of optical sensors,
[1:33:11 - 1:33:18] ▶
like just cameras, you get these kind of, you know, a blue shift red shift effects,
[1:33:18 - 1:33:23] ▶
where you're stretching light.
[1:33:23 - 1:33:25] ▶
If you're kind of moving away, you're kind of crunching it.
[1:33:25 - 1:33:27] ▶
If you're moving close, you get these kind of ultraviolet...
[1:33:27 - 1:33:29] ▶
Doesn't make any sense.
[1:33:29 - 1:33:30] ▶
It's an excuse for why we can't get these things on video.
[1:33:30 - 1:33:33] ▶
But people see these things and they have these eyewitness accounts of them.
[1:33:33 - 1:33:36] ▶
It's not like your eyes are somehow physically different to a camera.
[1:33:36 - 1:33:40] ▶
They're little photoreceptors in the back and there's a lens in the front.
[1:33:40 - 1:33:43] ▶
And it works basically exactly the same way.
[1:33:43 - 1:33:45] ▶
It's just, you know, it's a chemical, electrochemical reaction rather than a sensor around.
[1:33:45 - 1:33:49] ▶
I mean, that's somewhat of a biochemical reductionist view of like the way we see things.
[1:33:50 - 1:33:56] ▶
Do you think that consciousness...
[1:33:56 - 1:33:57] ▶
Well, the way we see things is important.
[1:33:57 - 1:33:58] ▶
It's extraordinarily consistent with the way cameras see things.
[1:33:58 - 1:34:00] ▶
If you take your camera and take a picture of this, you're going to see pretty much the same thing.
[1:34:00 - 1:34:04] ▶
It's not like we're magically conjuring up things in this room in our brains.
[1:34:04 - 1:34:07] ▶
There's a physical reality that we can see.
[1:34:07 - 1:34:10] ▶
And the same physical reality is what camera state pictures of.
[1:34:10 - 1:34:13] ▶
And so if UFOs exist in physical reality and we can see them,
[1:34:13 - 1:34:16] ▶
then we can also take pictures of them.
[1:34:16 - 1:34:18] ▶
Yeah, I think that's fair.
[1:34:18 - 1:34:19] ▶
I think you'd have to get into kind of trippy philosophical discussions around widening the doors of perception
[1:34:19 - 1:34:25] ▶
or kind of glitch into other realities.
[1:34:25 - 1:34:29] ▶
But then you're basically...
[1:34:29 - 1:34:30] ▶
We don't need to go there, but...
[1:34:30 - 1:34:31] ▶
Basically, magic at that point.
[1:34:31 - 1:34:32] ▶
Oh, magic or a different theory of mind.
[1:34:33 - 1:34:35] ▶
Which you could get into.
[1:34:36 - 1:34:37] ▶
I mean, that a lot of pretty well respected philosophers and people like Aldous Huxley, William James.
[1:34:37 - 1:34:44] ▶
And there's even modern neuroscientists would possibly agree with.
[1:34:44 - 1:34:48] ▶
You have Donald Hoffman talking about the brain as sort of an interface.
[1:34:48 - 1:34:52] ▶
But anyways, we don't need to get into that.
[1:34:52 - 1:34:54] ▶
So let's get into that.
[1:34:54 - 1:34:56] ▶
Let's see, one more.
[1:34:56 - 1:34:57] ▶
I mean, let's just go for it.
[1:34:58 - 1:34:59] ▶
Because it does appear spherical, right?
[1:35:01 - 1:35:02] ▶
Like, if it's balloon, it's...
[1:35:02 - 1:35:03] ▶
It's very hard to say.
[1:35:03 - 1:35:04] ▶
It's about six pixels across.
[1:35:05 - 1:35:06] ▶
And I already mentioned this.
[1:35:06 - 1:35:07] ▶
This is a mid, right?
[1:35:07 - 1:35:08] ▶
But the sphere is that one morphology, that shape that keeps popping up just over and over in the historical records,
[1:35:09 - 1:35:17] ▶
starting with 80 years ago with the food fighters.
[1:35:17 - 1:35:20] ▶
And you have metallic...
[1:35:20 - 1:35:22] ▶
I'm going to quote, right?
[1:35:22 - 1:35:23] ▶
There's a whole bunch of stories in 1944, Newsweek, ran the silver sphere puzzle Christmas
[1:35:23 - 1:35:30] ▶
So she had pressed balls of silver, seen over the German Reich in Trees science, right?
[1:35:32 - 1:35:36] ▶
So there is a consistency.
[1:35:36 - 1:35:38] ▶
If you read Captain Ed Ruppelt, he's the first director of Blue Book.
[1:35:38 - 1:35:43] ▶
His book, The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects in 1956 is a remarkable read.
[1:35:43 - 1:35:50] ▶
That would really got me down the rabbit hole.
[1:35:53 - 1:35:54] ▶
He mentions just over and over these sightings of these metallic spheres, and it's silver spheres,
[1:35:54 - 1:35:58] ▶
metallic spheres flying in formation, V-shaped formations.
[1:35:58 - 1:36:01] ▶
We'll see that in gimbal.
[1:36:01 - 1:36:02] ▶
We'll talk about that.
[1:36:02 - 1:36:03] ▶
More photos of metallic spheres.
[1:36:03 - 1:36:05] ▶
It is extremely interesting.
[1:36:05 - 1:36:06] ▶
The Eisenhower was aware of the food fighters issue from 42 to 45.
[1:36:07 - 1:36:11] ▶
You had around or possibly over 200 fighter pilot witnesses when it came to, you know, Allied
[1:36:11 - 1:36:18] ▶
fighter pilots seeing these things.
[1:36:18 - 1:36:20] ▶
You had some that were kind of prominent.
[1:36:20 - 1:36:22] ▶
Ted Stevens, you later became a senator in Alaska, and co-sponsored UFO research with
[1:36:22 - 1:36:27] ▶
Harry Reid through OSAP saw a food fighter.
[1:36:27 - 1:36:32] ▶
OSAP is why we're having this whole discussion.
[1:36:32 - 1:36:34] ▶
You can draw a direct link, OSAP to A-Tip, to Louis-Azon, Odo, New York Times.
[1:36:35 - 1:36:39] ▶
That's why we're having this conversation, right?
[1:36:39 - 1:36:41] ▶
So it's fascinating.
[1:36:41 - 1:36:42] ▶
I'll quickly wrap up Kirkpatrick.
[1:36:42 - 1:36:44] ▶
Former director of Arrow said, quote, we're seeing metallic orbs direct quote, making very
[1:36:44 - 1:36:49] ▶
interesting apparent maneuvers all over the world.
[1:36:49 - 1:36:51] ▶
Nobody in the NASA panel, by the way, raised their hand when he said that.
[1:36:52 - 1:36:55] ▶
Like, these are scientists.
[1:36:55 - 1:36:56] ▶
Why didn't every hand go up?
[1:36:56 - 1:36:57] ▶
Excuse me, could you clarify a little bit?
[1:36:57 - 1:36:59] ▶
Nobody asked a question.
[1:37:00 - 1:37:01] ▶
The chair of the panel was texting on his phone as he was saying that.
[1:37:01 - 1:37:05] ▶
It's pretty astounding.
[1:37:05 - 1:37:07] ▶
Top gun pilot, Jack Stewart came out a couple, maybe a year ago.
[1:37:07 - 1:37:11] ▶
I think Ryan mentioned this on your discussion, but he's flying along and noticed something
[1:37:11 - 1:37:17] ▶
with his body as can be kind of thought as a blue.
[1:37:17 - 1:37:19] ▶
His wingman saw it, right?
[1:37:19 - 1:37:21] ▶
He's flying, I guess, somewhere in a position to see his tail and he said, yeah, dude, that
[1:37:21 - 1:37:27] ▶
thing turned around and followed you.
[1:37:27 - 1:37:30] ▶
Donald Trump has said, I've had Air Force pilots.
[1:37:32 - 1:37:35] ▶
Very good guy better than Tom Cruise.
[1:37:35 - 1:37:39] ▶
Come out and say, you know, we've had spherical objects, circular objects out fly our F-22s.
[1:37:39 - 1:37:46] ▶
That's one of the most advanced aircraft in our arsenal.
[1:37:46 - 1:37:49] ▶
This consistency in the Korean War, you see this reporting in the old documentaries.
[1:37:49 - 1:37:54] ▶
I think there are a lot of reasons for this consistency.
[1:37:54 - 1:37:56] ▶
I think there's two reasons why we see spheres.
[1:37:56 - 1:37:59] ▶
One is that there's balloons up there.
[1:37:59 - 1:38:02] ▶
And the other one is that a lot of people are just seeing very small things that are far
[1:38:02 - 1:38:05] ▶
away and they interpret that as a point of light as a sphere because they're asked what's
[1:38:05 - 1:38:10] ▶
That's almost like a mistake that people make in uniform reporting is that they ask what
[1:38:11 - 1:38:15] ▶
the shape is and they give them a list of things to do and they don't say, you know, it's
[1:38:15 - 1:38:18] ▶
a tiny dot that we couldn't say.
[1:38:18 - 1:38:20] ▶
But the balloon thing is interesting.
[1:38:20 - 1:38:21] ▶
Like you mentioned the German things.
[1:38:21 - 1:38:24] ▶
Weather balloons get a bad rap.
[1:38:24 - 1:38:25] ▶
The Germany at that time was actually using metallic silver balloons as sighting balloons,
[1:38:25 - 1:38:31] ▶
which was an old-fashioned way of determining the wind speed at altitude.
[1:38:31 - 1:38:34] ▶
You would release a balloon, some known distance away, and then you'd use a theolar light
[1:38:34 - 1:38:39] ▶
to measure the angle.
[1:38:39 - 1:38:40] ▶
The light you brought that up, actually.
[1:38:40 - 1:38:42] ▶
But the food fighters were not really described.
[1:38:42 - 1:38:44] ▶
No, that's different.
[1:38:45 - 1:38:46] ▶
Right, like the length.
[1:38:46 - 1:38:47] ▶
So they would follow vapor trails.
[1:38:47 - 1:38:49] ▶
They seem to lock on to flight or fight past.
[1:38:49 - 1:38:52] ▶
So there were really interesting government reports that the earliest known assessment, I think
[1:38:52 - 1:38:57] ▶
was a 48 and I credit to John Greenwell for putting it on his site and his project sign
[1:38:57 - 1:39:03] ▶
one of their first reports.
[1:39:03 - 1:39:04] ▶
I think it was late 48, but it said that the most commonly reported shapes or morphologies
[1:39:04 - 1:39:11] ▶
are silver discs and spheres and balls of fire.
[1:39:11 - 1:39:16] ▶
And then they go on to hypothesize that the balls of fire are viewed at night and the metallic
[1:39:16 - 1:39:20] ▶
spheres, which again, there's that through line all the way through, are viewed during
[1:39:20 - 1:39:24] ▶
Well, disappear when cameras were invented.
[1:39:26 - 1:39:30] ▶
Kirkpat, there's the Middle East orb is the metallic sphere.
[1:39:30 - 1:39:33] ▶
Like the Middle East orb was like a metallic sphere.
[1:39:33 - 1:39:36] ▶
Go fast, arguably is a sphere.
[1:39:36 - 1:39:38] ▶
In the public domain, like America is a big country and there's like a billion cameras
[1:39:38 - 1:39:42] ▶
And we don't really have any good videos.
[1:39:43 - 1:39:45] ▶
I don't want to disagree.
[1:39:45 - 1:39:46] ▶
Oh, actually, that's not true.
[1:39:46 - 1:39:47] ▶
The LAX has had, that's not true.
[1:39:49 - 1:39:51] ▶
That's actually not true.
[1:39:51 - 1:39:52] ▶
Do you think it meant Manchester one?
[1:39:54 - 1:39:55] ▶
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
[1:39:57 - 1:39:58] ▶
We can go on and on.
[1:39:58 - 1:40:00] ▶
Okay, so let's go gimbal.
[1:40:00 - 1:40:01] ▶
Do you think there's anything?
[1:40:03 - 1:40:04] ▶
There's probably enough unique to say here that we should hit this because we are a little
[1:40:05 - 1:40:09] ▶
Yeah, I think we can wrap up here, absolutely.
[1:40:10 - 1:40:11] ▶
I want to get into contemporary stuff too, but do you think this is definitely worth
[1:40:12 - 1:40:15] ▶
touching on gimbal to recommend?
[1:40:15 - 1:40:16] ▶
I think this might be the most compelling.
[1:40:18 - 1:40:19] ▶
So, should I set it up real quick?
[1:40:19 - 1:40:21] ▶
Yeah, so very quickly.
[1:40:22 - 1:40:24] ▶
This is Ryan Graves squadron.
[1:40:24 - 1:40:26] ▶
I think VFA 11, the Red Rippers.
[1:40:26 - 1:40:29] ▶
They had just done a fairly complex air day or training mission.
[1:40:29 - 1:40:32] ▶
Just like the TickTack incident, they are, I believe this is a pre-deployment, workup
[1:40:32 - 1:40:37] ▶
They're doing their training before they ship out to the Middle East.
[1:40:38 - 1:40:42] ▶
And they had done a pretty complex air day or mission off of Florida, so the carrier is
[1:40:42 - 1:40:49] ▶
They're heading back to the ship and one of Ryan's buddies, the WIZO, the back cedar that
[1:40:50 - 1:40:56] ▶
we were talking about.
[1:40:56 - 1:40:57] ▶
The WIZO is weapons.
[1:40:57 - 1:40:58] ▶
Thank you, that's a back cedar.
[1:40:59 - 1:41:01] ▶
They're circling the land, so they don't all come down at once.
[1:41:01 - 1:41:04] ▶
They hang out, so they clear the airspace.
[1:41:04 - 1:41:10] ▶
They got hit on their radar to this object and they went to go investigate.
[1:41:10 - 1:41:19] ▶
The video picks up as they're trying to sneak in behind it, they call it a stern conversion.
[1:41:19 - 1:41:28] ▶
The video captures some very interesting maneuvers.
[1:41:28 - 1:41:32] ▶
This is why it's called the gimbal, right?
[1:41:32 - 1:41:35] ▶
You see it sort of rotating in this interesting way.
[1:41:35 - 1:41:38] ▶
Well, look who named GoFast.
[1:41:38 - 1:41:42] ▶
Clearly the name wasn't correct, right?
[1:41:42 - 1:41:43] ▶
The aircrew didn't name it.
[1:41:43 - 1:41:45] ▶
Somebody at the Pentagon named it, so we...
[1:41:45 - 1:41:46] ▶
Is the name gimbal correct or not?
[1:41:46 - 1:41:48] ▶
Because it could be correct because they're calling it that because it's still thing
[1:41:48 - 1:41:50] ▶
or it could be correct because it's the gimbal machine of the camera, which is causing
[1:41:50 - 1:41:53] ▶
The first thought was that it was a training video.
[1:41:54 - 1:41:58] ▶
I think what I told you was a training video.
[1:41:58 - 1:42:00] ▶
I don't remember now, but...
[1:42:01 - 1:42:03] ▶
Come on, I asked Susan GoFast.
[1:42:03 - 1:42:05] ▶
And she told me it wasn't a training video.
[1:42:06 - 1:42:07] ▶
Who said the last...
[1:42:07 - 1:42:08] ▶
But didn't Susan GoF run Siyop for the DOT or something when it came to rallying support
[1:42:10 - 1:42:16] ▶
for the app Danny Wart?
[1:42:16 - 1:42:17] ▶
I'm just telling you what she told me.
[1:42:17 - 1:42:19] ▶
She told me about she was doing it.
[1:42:20 - 1:42:21] ▶
I mean, don't take that.
[1:42:22 - 1:42:23] ▶
She wrote an academic paper on psychological operation.
[1:42:24 - 1:42:28] ▶
So that's why there is a suspicion of her thesis.
[1:42:29 - 1:42:31] ▶
Yeah, something like that.
[1:42:31 - 1:42:32] ▶
But then she seems to be kind of tight with Kirkpatrick or at least in the context of
[1:42:32 - 1:42:35] ▶
I met Kirkpatrick in person and I was there at that incident and she was attached at
[1:42:37 - 1:42:41] ▶
So that's interesting.
[1:42:43 - 1:42:44] ▶
This is the former director of Arrow.
[1:42:45 - 1:42:46] ▶
This office we keep bringing up the kind of authoritative, all-domain, and almost research.
[1:42:46 - 1:42:51] ▶
And you have its former director.
[1:42:53 - 1:42:57] ▶
Kirkpatrick speaking at some event and then Susan Goff is just kind of like trailing.
[1:42:57 - 1:43:01] ▶
It's like November 2023.
[1:43:02 - 1:43:03] ▶
I think it's George Mason University.
[1:43:03 - 1:43:06] ▶
I just happened to be in DC for other business and I went and had a chat with Kirkpatrick
[1:43:07 - 1:43:12] ▶
afterwards and Susan was right there.
[1:43:12 - 1:43:16] ▶
And that continues if you saw the current director, John Kuzlowski, just testified.
[1:43:16 - 1:43:20] ▶
And Susan Goff's in the background.
[1:43:20 - 1:43:21] ▶
I mean, he ran the background.
[1:43:22 - 1:43:23] ▶
Yeah, right in the background.
[1:43:23 - 1:43:24] ▶
So there's this like, he probably find like millions of reading frames or just out of
[1:43:24 - 1:43:29] ▶
I mean, let's be a reason why she's there.
[1:43:32 - 1:43:33] ▶
So I mean, the simplest reason is that she's there so that he doesn't say things that
[1:43:33 - 1:43:36] ▶
he's not supposed to say.
[1:43:36 - 1:43:37] ▶
Not because there's something he might come to say.
[1:43:38 - 1:43:39] ▶
I would like him to say things that he's not supposed to say.
[1:43:39 - 1:43:40] ▶
But he's just like the little lawyers you see behind people and they never whisper to
[1:43:43 - 1:43:47] ▶
or an answer whether he should say anything but then she would leap in and stop in if he
[1:43:47 - 1:43:50] ▶
I've been around a lot of senior government.
[1:43:51 - 1:43:52] ▶
We talked about that.
[1:43:52 - 1:43:53] ▶
Like, I have that is unique.
[1:43:53 - 1:43:55] ▶
It does seem an old strange.
[1:43:56 - 1:43:57] ▶
I'm going to have to hear what the explanation is.
[1:43:59 - 1:44:00] ▶
But she says she said that the gimbal video is not a training video.
[1:44:00 - 1:44:02] ▶
And I still like a couple of years ago.
[1:44:03 - 1:44:04] ▶
Did she say anything else?
[1:44:04 - 1:44:05] ▶
Did she say I think this video?
[1:44:05 - 1:44:06] ▶
She gives these boy plate answers for a lot of things based on the space.
[1:44:07 - 1:44:11] ▶
It's a bit frustrating.
[1:44:11 - 1:44:12] ▶
I might say a lot with that thing.
[1:44:13 - 1:44:14] ▶
You guys have to ask like 10 questions and several of them come back as like we don't
[1:44:14 - 1:44:18] ▶
That's just a little frustrating.
[1:44:20 - 1:44:21] ▶
How are you able to get in touch with them?
[1:44:21 - 1:44:24] ▶
She doesn't answer emails.
[1:44:27 - 1:44:28] ▶
I doubt she would answer mine as well.
[1:44:29 - 1:44:31] ▶
So, I guess it's probably, you know, you set this up, right?
[1:44:33 - 1:44:37] ▶
So, do you have anything to say on the gimbal?
[1:44:37 - 1:44:39] ▶
I think again we've got two aspects of it.
[1:44:44 - 1:44:45] ▶
Is it demonstrating something anomalous and what is it?
[1:44:45 - 1:44:47] ▶
And with the anomalous thing that people claim in this video is that it's a sorcery-shaped
[1:44:47 - 1:44:52] ▶
craft like a flying sorcerer.
[1:44:52 - 1:44:54] ▶
They kind of tilt surf on its side, which is aerodynamically impossibly.
[1:44:54 - 1:44:57] ▶
We're kind of forward of a sky if it did that.
[1:44:57 - 1:45:01] ▶
And that proves that it's a some kind of advanced technology, possibly aliens.
[1:45:01 - 1:45:07] ▶
The analysis I've done suggests that it might actually be a camera artifact rather than
[1:45:07 - 1:45:14] ▶
the actual shape of the object.
[1:45:14 - 1:45:15] ▶
So what we're seeing here is a sorcery-shaped.
[1:45:15 - 1:45:18] ▶
It could be just the glare.
[1:45:18 - 1:45:20] ▶
It just doesn't look like the word glare.
[1:45:22 - 1:45:23] ▶
The experts don't like it.
[1:45:23 - 1:45:24] ▶
They don't know what I'm talking about when I say it.
[1:45:24 - 1:45:26] ▶
And the problem nobody knows at this.
[1:45:26 - 1:45:27] ▶
The problem with that is that we don't actually have been in optics.
[1:45:27 - 1:45:31] ▶
The terminology for things like glare and lens flare often overlaps.
[1:45:31 - 1:45:34] ▶
It's called blooming.
[1:45:34 - 1:45:35] ▶
It's a mullular effect.
[1:45:35 - 1:45:36] ▶
It's a mullular effect.
[1:45:36 - 1:45:37] ▶
Sensor bloom is something that people sometimes call glare as well.
[1:45:37 - 1:45:40] ▶
But we don't know what's actually going here.
[1:45:40 - 1:45:42] ▶
But basically, there's an optical effect here.
[1:45:42 - 1:45:45] ▶
And there's a number of indications in the video.
[1:45:45 - 1:45:46] ▶
You can see, for example, there are bands of light and dark in the background that rotate
[1:45:46 - 1:45:51] ▶
with the object itself when it's rotating, which suggests that it's the camera that's
[1:45:51 - 1:45:56] ▶
doing the rotating rather than the object itself.
[1:45:56 - 1:46:00] ▶
There's things that look like little diffraction spikes on the top and bottom, left and right
[1:46:00 - 1:46:04] ▶
and even a little bit hinted at the 45 degrees on this object, which make it look like
[1:46:04 - 1:46:08] ▶
it's some kind of optical effect.
[1:46:08 - 1:46:11] ▶
There's instances where the turn rate of the object kind of seems to deviate from the
[1:46:11 - 1:46:16] ▶
turn rate of the horizon.
[1:46:16 - 1:46:18] ▶
And then, probably the biggest thing is the amount that it rotates and the speed and the
[1:46:18 - 1:46:24] ▶
time is all exactly the same amount.
[1:46:24 - 1:46:26] ▶
There would be required for the camera to have to rotate to traverse the forward looking
[1:46:26 - 1:46:32] ▶
Because these cameras, yes, come up to the down a little bit.
[1:46:33 - 1:46:36] ▶
Not limited to the cameras you see under helicopters or even a drone where the camera's like this
[1:46:36 - 1:46:44] ▶
and it can rotate around like this.
[1:46:44 - 1:46:46] ▶
It doesn't have the ability to rotate around.
[1:46:46 - 1:46:48] ▶
So it has to rotate using a role plus a tilt, which means the camera rotates.
[1:46:48 - 1:46:55] ▶
And then that makes the picture rotate.
[1:46:55 - 1:46:57] ▶
So it has to de-rotate that afterwards inside the camera using a device or using some
[1:46:57 - 1:47:03] ▶
kind of software to rotate the image.
[1:47:03 - 1:47:05] ▶
And that rotates the image back the right way.
[1:47:05 - 1:47:08] ▶
So nothing appears to rotate, but this optical effect within it because it's tied to the camera,
[1:47:08 - 1:47:13] ▶
the optical effect rotates.
[1:47:13 - 1:47:14] ▶
So there's like a glare.
[1:47:14 - 1:47:15] ▶
The rotate's like if you look at say this light over here, you can kind of see like around
[1:47:15 - 1:47:20] ▶
There's kind of a shade, little spikes and things.
[1:47:21 - 1:47:24] ▶
If you turn your head, I see it.
[1:47:24 - 1:47:26] ▶
It's better thing if you look at that light, it's a bit like that's a swing with your
[1:47:26 - 1:47:30] ▶
If you look at your head left and right, you'll see the kind of the rays that come from
[1:47:31 - 1:47:35] ▶
it are kind of rotating around.
[1:47:35 - 1:47:37] ▶
And that's what's happening, I think, in this miniatur.
[1:47:37 - 1:47:41] ▶
There's an optical effect, similar to what you saw there.
[1:47:41 - 1:47:44] ▶
It's gone spots in my eyes now.
[1:47:44 - 1:47:46] ▶
And there rotation plus the new rotation creates this illusion.
[1:47:46 - 1:47:53] ▶
So it's like a camera turning plus lack of focus or something.
[1:47:53 - 1:47:56] ▶
Yeah, the lack of focus actually might be something that's actually going on there as
[1:47:56 - 1:48:00] ▶
well, which the focus is something that actually changes the shape of these optical effects.
[1:48:00 - 1:48:08] ▶
And the married is not like a glare, so I'm going to call it an optical effect.
[1:48:08 - 1:48:11] ▶
I think there's enough evidence in that that's actually happening.
[1:48:11 - 1:48:15] ▶
Beyond that, we don't actually know for sure what we're looking at.
[1:48:15 - 1:48:20] ▶
My hypothesis is that it's a distant jet.
[1:48:20 - 1:48:23] ▶
And the reason I think that is that if you do this analysis with a lines of sight, you
[1:48:23 - 1:48:28] ▶
can find a path in the distance.
[1:48:28 - 1:48:30] ▶
That's more or less a straight line.
[1:48:30 - 1:48:32] ▶
It's kind of like a slight lip S to learn about that.
[1:48:32 - 1:48:36] ▶
And if you come closer, you get these weird kind of like J hooks that have been described
[1:48:36 - 1:48:43] ▶
by Ryan Graves, I think.
[1:48:43 - 1:48:46] ▶
And there's some debaters to whether this straight line of a possible jet engine powered
[1:48:46 - 1:48:51] ▶
aircraft or this J hook powered by some kind of weird anti-gravity thing is the more plausible
[1:48:51 - 1:48:58] ▶
of the two explanations.
[1:48:58 - 1:49:00] ▶
And the lot of people who are UFO fans would go with this one because it matches the verbal
[1:49:00 - 1:49:07] ▶
description and the distance that was given.
[1:49:07 - 1:49:09] ▶
I think it started out.
[1:49:09 - 1:49:11] ▶
The originally said like 8 to 10 miles and changes 6 to 8.
[1:49:11 - 1:49:14] ▶
I think 6 to 8 is the current estimate of the distance.
[1:49:14 - 1:49:17] ▶
6 to 8 nautical miles.
[1:49:17 - 1:49:20] ▶
And if you do the analysis there, you do get this kind of J hook, which does somewhat resemble
[1:49:20 - 1:49:25] ▶
the verbal description of the pilots or Ryan Graves specifically when he describes what
[1:49:25 - 1:49:31] ▶
he saw on the radar page, the S.R. page.
[1:49:31 - 1:49:35] ▶
So that's the simple theory.
[1:49:35 - 1:49:38] ▶
Super simple theory.
[1:49:38 - 1:49:39] ▶
What do you say, America?
[1:49:40 - 1:49:41] ▶
I say, I say, I put that you've seen this before, but it's quite simple.
[1:49:41 - 1:49:46] ▶
On one side, what the aviator, what the air crew says is a remarkable match with the
[1:49:46 - 1:49:53] ▶
On the other side, you have these cascading malfunctions in this anomaly, this artifact
[1:49:55 - 1:50:00] ▶
that nobody's ever heard of.
[1:50:00 - 1:50:02] ▶
And I've looped you in with, I think, several of the top experts in the world.
[1:50:02 - 1:50:07] ▶
When we go to videos, they have another video.
[1:50:08 - 1:50:10] ▶
There's zero evidence of what you're proposing.
[1:50:11 - 1:50:15] ▶
There's zero empirical evidence of what you're supposed to have.
[1:50:16 - 1:50:18] ▶
So the problem is, I'm on team Ackham here and I'm on all the data lines.
[1:50:21 - 1:50:27] ▶
I said, Ackham, you're right.
[1:50:27 - 1:50:29] ▶
It's Ackham's razor.
[1:50:29 - 1:50:30] ▶
Name it after William of Ackham.
[1:50:32 - 1:50:33] ▶
And those parsimonious simplest explanation is usually the right one.
[1:50:34 - 1:50:37] ▶
It is the assumptions here.
[1:50:37 - 1:50:39] ▶
The cascading of failures and malfunctions that and unseen artifacts that make proposals
[1:50:39 - 1:50:48] ▶
and requires for history is just, we'd be here all afternoon.
[1:50:48 - 1:50:51] ▶
It's kind of a lot missing from the left side of that page.
[1:50:51 - 1:50:54] ▶
And you have to, you know, my side of the page basically gives a complete explanation.
[1:50:55 - 1:51:00] ▶
Your side of the page says, oh, it was some kind of thing that was made.
[1:51:00 - 1:51:03] ▶
Can I bring my analytic kind of perspective to this real question?
[1:51:03 - 1:51:07] ▶
Why is it Ackham's razor?
[1:51:08 - 1:51:10] ▶
Because I don't have to account for an extraordinary amount of malfunctions and never before seen
[1:51:10 - 1:51:16] ▶
So, perhaps even new physics.
[1:51:17 - 1:51:19] ▶
So Ackham says nothing about the nature of an assumption.
[1:51:19 - 1:51:22] ▶
He's talking about purely about volume and the number of assumptions.
[1:51:22 - 1:51:25] ▶
He's not talking about assumptions.
[1:51:25 - 1:51:26] ▶
He's talking about entities.
[1:51:26 - 1:51:27] ▶
Please, please, please.
[1:51:27 - 1:51:28] ▶
It's the number of entities to explain it.
[1:51:28 - 1:51:31] ▶
So you have to create the right answer.
[1:51:32 - 1:51:33] ▶
What a big new entity, which is the entirely new form of an ensemble on the nature of the
[1:51:33 - 1:51:37] ▶
Let me just bring the analytic perspective.
[1:51:38 - 1:51:39] ▶
So, so with super interesting.
[1:51:39 - 1:51:40] ▶
I would just again just count entities and say like, I have one.
[1:51:40 - 1:51:43] ▶
Let me have a response.
[1:51:45 - 1:51:46] ▶
I mean, it's not mine.
[1:51:46 - 1:51:47] ▶
I think Ackham would be rolling in his grave if it was used in a rationalist framework
[1:51:48 - 1:51:53] ▶
because he was a 13th century monk.
[1:51:53 - 1:51:55] ▶
And so I think the fact that he probably wouldn't mind invoking angels.
[1:51:55 - 1:51:59] ▶
He wouldn't mind invoking.
[1:52:00 - 1:52:01] ▶
He wouldn't mind invoking God because that's the least number of entities to explain any miracle.
[1:52:02 - 1:52:06] ▶
So let me just, let's just operate off of hypothesis that this was.
[1:52:06 - 1:52:10] ▶
In fact, a very bright, very anomalous, let's just say, saws for shape craft.
[1:52:10 - 1:52:16] ▶
Let's just go with that.
[1:52:16 - 1:52:17] ▶
And then we get to the first five.
[1:52:17 - 1:52:18] ▶
I mean, I mean, I'm not going to say that this was a very bright hypothesis.
[1:52:18 - 1:52:20] ▶
At the end of the video, it's on its edge, right?
[1:52:20 - 1:52:21] ▶
But it's on its edge.
[1:52:23 - 1:52:24] ▶
It goes passivitical.
[1:52:24 - 1:52:25] ▶
No, I'm just, just, just, just, just, just, no, no, fair enough.
[1:52:26 - 1:52:29] ▶
Totally, fiddly with my details.
[1:52:29 - 1:52:30] ▶
No, I, that's fair enough.
[1:52:30 - 1:52:32] ▶
And, and according to the aircrew, there's no evidence for this, but according to the aircrew,
[1:52:32 - 1:52:37] ▶
it wobbles after the video cuts out, right?
[1:52:37 - 1:52:40] ▶
That's something Brian Graves did, he say that.
[1:52:41 - 1:52:44] ▶
So, maybe I'll hear, if, if, if, I'll be right, maybe I'll go down, he says, that's interesting.
[1:52:45 - 1:52:50] ▶
So, let me just put on my analytic hat real quick and bear with me, I'll do this as quickly
[1:52:50 - 1:52:54] ▶
You mentioned the Theodole, the tracking, so in the 1940s, I'm going to list several cases
[1:52:55 - 1:53:01] ▶
here and they get very interesting.
[1:53:01 - 1:53:03] ▶
April, 1947, this is months before Kenneth Arnold's citing, which kicked off the flying
[1:53:03 - 1:53:10] ▶
saucer craze if you want to call it that.
[1:53:10 - 1:53:14] ▶
Four months prior to that, two weather bureau employees observed four metallic discs flat
[1:53:14 - 1:53:20] ▶
on the bottom, domed on the top, and the US government assessed because of, because they
[1:53:20 - 1:53:24] ▶
occurred previous to Arnold's citing.
[1:53:24 - 1:53:28] ▶
They were not influenced by hysteria, mass media, anything like that.
[1:53:28 - 1:53:31] ▶
They reported internally, they never actually said this publicly.
[1:53:31 - 1:53:35] ▶
So that's, that is quite interesting.
[1:53:35 - 1:53:37] ▶
Portland, 1947, July, five law and five police officers see a total of nine discs going
[1:53:38 - 1:53:46] ▶
different directions.
[1:53:46 - 1:53:48] ▶
So five cops, three cops and one cops see different discs going in different directions
[1:53:48 - 1:53:53] ▶
wobbling or oscillating.
[1:53:53 - 1:53:54] ▶
You can see this in the project sign role reporting.
[1:53:54 - 1:53:59] ▶
New Mexico, this is in the very famous Life Magazine article of 1947, one of the Navy's
[1:53:59 - 1:54:03] ▶
top astronomers observes and takes various precise measurements of a, of a disc that,
[1:54:03 - 1:54:09] ▶
and he observes it wobbling.
[1:54:09 - 1:54:12] ▶
Masala, Japan, 1952 training exercise, a guy's flying, doing intercepts, and he sees a disc
[1:54:12 - 1:54:19] ▶
come up to his plane that engages in a slow fluttering motion, rocks back and forth, and,
[1:54:19 - 1:54:25] ▶
and flipped on its edge, direct quote, direct quote, flipped on its edge.
[1:54:25 - 1:54:30] ▶
Southern California, Lockheed Martin, air crews, as in the air, they see a metallic, a,
[1:54:30 - 1:54:38] ▶
sorry, a elliptical object flying over the Channel Islands, kind of a hotspot, if you're
[1:54:38 - 1:54:43] ▶
following this, Kelly Johnson, who is the, the, the, the, the, the most famous, the most
[1:54:43 - 1:54:51] ▶
well-known, aeronautical engineer in American history, sees the same object from his ranch.
[1:54:51 - 1:54:55] ▶
So he have two different perspectives, and they both saw this object, pretty credible.
[1:54:55 - 1:55:01] ▶
He actually goes on to say, I'm a believer in flying saucers, the most kind of credentialed
[1:55:01 - 1:55:07] ▶
aeronautical engineer that we know of, or that in American history.
[1:55:07 - 1:55:11] ▶
Exordio Hampshire, 1964, four people, two cops, see a large disc from 100 feet away and
[1:55:11 - 1:55:18] ▶
100 feet altitude, engaging in a wobbling motion.
[1:55:18 - 1:55:22] ▶
Westall, 1966, Australia, 200 or 300, depending on the accounts, students in a teacher,
[1:55:22 - 1:55:28] ▶
see a silver disc sort of banked on its side, then took off at a thousand miles per hour.
[1:55:28 - 1:55:33] ▶
Beverly, Massachusetts, 1966, nine witnesses, two law enforcement officers, see a metallic,
[1:55:33 - 1:55:40] ▶
plate-like object that hovers 20 feet, according to three women, over their heads, 20 feet.
[1:55:40 - 1:55:46] ▶
I see mixed rolling his eyes.
[1:55:46 - 1:55:48] ▶
I'm just, I'm reporting with what people have, have said.
[1:55:48 - 1:55:52] ▶
Why not Air Force Base, home of nuclear weapons, missiles, a border patrol officer, sees
[1:55:52 - 1:56:00] ▶
a metallic disc, direct quote, wobbling on its edge, 30 feet wide, 100 feet away.
[1:56:00 - 1:56:08] ▶
Six, five days later, the Air Force Base.
[1:56:08 - 1:56:13] ▶
These are all in government records, right?
[1:56:16 - 1:56:19] ▶
Are we noticing a consistency?
[1:56:19 - 1:56:20] ▶
Yeah, of course you'll pick the ones that wobble.
[1:56:21 - 1:56:24] ▶
These are the close encounters and probably the best known encounters and you do see a consistency
[1:56:24 - 1:56:30] ▶
Well, I have to say what the stuff is.
[1:56:31 - 1:56:33] ▶
If these witnesses are close enough to absorb wobbling, I think they can see the shape,
[1:56:33 - 1:56:36] ▶
It's like Fedos, it's a quickly finished up, Porter's County, law enforcement officers chase
[1:56:37 - 1:56:43] ▶
a large metallic disc-like object for 90 minutes, going 86 miles, Michigan, swamp gas,
[1:56:43 - 1:56:51] ▶
you also see large disc-like objects.
[1:56:51 - 1:56:54] ▶
Redlands, California, this is one of the most extraordinary cases that has really hasn't
[1:56:54 - 1:56:57] ▶
See Silver Disk, 40, 50 feet in diameter, 200 feet out, it's you.
[1:57:01 - 1:57:06] ▶
1968, Redlands, California, James McDonald, it had, Fair enough, Broad Haven, UK, 10 students,
[1:57:06 - 1:57:17] ▶
see Silver Disk, they draw pictures are identical, aerial.
[1:57:17 - 1:57:20] ▶
We all know the aerial, okay, a lot of people know the aerial case.
[1:57:20 - 1:57:22] ▶
62 students, see Silver Disk, pictures, identical, this disc is surrounded by this, I'm not
[1:57:22 - 1:57:27] ▶
There's a huge variety.
[1:57:28 - 1:57:29] ▶
It's all the same kind of shape.
[1:57:29 - 1:57:31] ▶
They look big, they like a, a variety of children's drawings of sewing.
[1:57:31 - 1:57:35] ▶
What I'm saying is you have this extraordinary amount of failures never before seen an artifact
[1:57:35 - 1:57:43] ▶
that just happened to all the things that are on nothing and then they all have to happen.
[1:57:43 - 1:57:46] ▶
What are the failures?
[1:57:47 - 1:57:48] ▶
Everything that I've ever hypothesized is if everything has to happen all at the same
[1:57:48 - 1:57:53] ▶
time, which isn't true.
[1:57:53 - 1:57:54] ▶
Of course it has to happen, right?
[1:57:54 - 1:57:55] ▶
Because you have a radar malfunction or...
[1:57:55 - 1:57:57] ▶
So what's on the radar?
[1:57:57 - 1:57:59] ▶
I don't know what's on the radar.
[1:57:59 - 1:58:00] ▶
We have to count for it.
[1:58:00 - 1:58:01] ▶
Writing a theory, you have to count for it.
[1:58:01 - 1:58:03] ▶
It could be a distant plane.
[1:58:03 - 1:58:05] ▶
What's on the radar that's six miles away?
[1:58:05 - 1:58:06] ▶
It could be like a training exercise site thing, which is any one's under it, it could be
[1:58:07 - 1:58:10] ▶
a malfunction or it could be some kind of whether or no more, it could be blueness.
[1:58:10 - 1:58:13] ▶
We don't know what it is.
[1:58:13 - 1:58:16] ▶
Well they're going west, so it's coming from the east.
[1:58:16 - 1:58:18] ▶
It's going against very strong.
[1:58:18 - 1:58:19] ▶
We can just cross that out.
[1:58:20 - 1:58:21] ▶
Like the aircrew saw something on the radar.
[1:58:21 - 1:58:23] ▶
Yes, I agree with it.
[1:58:23 - 1:58:24] ▶
You'd have to have to count for what it says.
[1:58:24 - 1:58:25] ▶
You didn't count for what the object actually is.
[1:58:25 - 1:58:27] ▶
You just said the aircrew saw this object.
[1:58:27 - 1:58:30] ▶
You're not telling me what it is.
[1:58:30 - 1:58:32] ▶
So it's the same thing.
[1:58:32 - 1:58:34] ▶
But the bottom line is...
[1:58:35 - 1:58:37] ▶
Let's put the video because the match...
[1:58:37 - 1:58:39] ▶
The match between the flight path that we can reconstruct...
[1:58:39 - 1:58:44] ▶
Don't mind the F-bombs.
[1:58:45 - 1:58:47] ▶
We have a one on the F-set.
[1:58:47 - 1:58:48] ▶
Oh, going against the wind.
[1:58:49 - 1:58:50] ▶
The wind's out of some white house.
[1:58:50 - 1:58:51] ▶
And that's the anomalous thing about this video is...
[1:58:54 - 1:58:57] ▶
We have 120 miles, not wind.
[1:58:57 - 1:59:00] ▶
They're going against it.
[1:59:00 - 1:59:01] ▶
Well, it's not like planes comply against the wind.
[1:59:03 - 1:59:04] ▶
We used the against the balloon, so could we rely on it?
[1:59:04 - 1:59:05] ▶
And that's the anomalous thing about this video is...
[1:59:08 - 1:59:09] ▶
We have 120 miles, not wind.
[1:59:09 - 1:59:10] ▶
They're going against it.
[1:59:10 - 1:59:11] ▶
They're going against it.
[1:59:11 - 1:59:12] ▶
The balloon, so could we rely on it?
[1:59:13 - 1:59:14] ▶
No, I don't think this is a balloon.
[1:59:14 - 1:59:15] ▶
The fleet is going against the wind.
[1:59:18 - 1:59:20] ▶
So you just said that those could be balloons.
[1:59:22 - 1:59:24] ▶
No, I didn't say no.
[1:59:26 - 1:59:27] ▶
It's could be balloons.
[1:59:27 - 1:59:28] ▶
That's the different fleet.
[1:59:28 - 1:59:29] ▶
This is a fleet of five objects.
[1:59:29 - 1:59:30] ▶
We're playing the able to rotate like that.
[1:59:30 - 1:59:31] ▶
I mean, that doesn't...
[1:59:31 - 1:59:32] ▶
The fleet is described by Ryan Graves.
[1:59:32 - 1:59:34] ▶
There's nothing at all like that.
[1:59:34 - 1:59:35] ▶
So we should really dive into the empirical evidence.
[1:59:35 - 1:59:37] ▶
Let's get to the evidence, right?
[1:59:37 - 1:59:38] ▶
You might just flip it over to the video.
[1:59:39 - 1:59:41] ▶
I don't know if you ever see it.
[1:59:41 - 1:59:43] ▶
We have empirical evidence of what jets look like
[1:59:43 - 1:59:46] ▶
with this camera system.
[1:59:46 - 1:59:49] ▶
So if you just cruise down, maybe we don't have time
[1:59:49 - 1:59:52] ▶
to get through all this.
[1:59:52 - 1:59:53] ▶
I mean, we have a ton of...
[1:59:53 - 1:59:54] ▶
Let's just start there.
[1:59:54 - 1:59:55] ▶
I don't know if we can play it here, but...
[2:00:00 - 2:00:02] ▶
Maybe we can add this in.
[2:00:02 - 2:00:03] ▶
We can reconstruct and Mick mentioned this kind of this vertical
[2:00:05 - 2:00:08] ▶
u-turn, this J hook path, that matches precisely
[2:00:08 - 2:00:12] ▶
with what the aircrew say that the object
[2:00:12 - 2:00:16] ▶
that was tracked on radar does.
[2:00:16 - 2:00:19] ▶
And when you play that video, you'll see that there's a series
[2:00:19 - 2:00:22] ▶
of rotations, and then there's one really kind of
[2:00:22 - 2:00:26] ▶
pronounced one that is slower than the others.
[2:00:26 - 2:00:30] ▶
And that coincides with the apex of that turn.
[2:00:30 - 2:00:33] ▶
And if you play it, it is a remarkable match.
[2:00:33 - 2:00:36] ▶
And I've got a couple other videos there that maybe we can
[2:00:36 - 2:00:39] ▶
throw in when we edit this.
[2:00:39 - 2:00:41] ▶
But using Mick's SIEM, and again, Mick, thank you for, you know,
[2:00:41 - 2:00:44] ▶
making this possible.
[2:00:44 - 2:00:45] ▶
It is a remarkable when you watch that thing just right up the
[2:00:45 - 2:00:48] ▶
reconstructed flight path.
[2:00:48 - 2:00:50] ▶
It is a remarkable match.
[2:00:50 - 2:00:51] ▶
You can keep saying remarkable.
[2:00:51 - 2:00:52] ▶
I think you used that word a little bit soon, much.
[2:00:52 - 2:00:54] ▶
I said, this isn't remarkable.
[2:00:54 - 2:00:56] ▶
What we're seeing here is a curve that's basically
[2:00:56 - 2:00:58] ▶
a mathematical projection.
[2:00:58 - 2:00:59] ▶
It's full path of the jet onto a straight line in the distance.
[2:01:00 - 2:01:03] ▶
So you need to take what the actual jet did with the camera
[2:01:03 - 2:01:05] ▶
did, which was just basically do a little turn like that.
[2:01:05 - 2:01:08] ▶
And then draw a line over here, which is another jet,
[2:01:08 - 2:01:10] ▶
and then draw the lines of sight between the two.
[2:01:10 - 2:01:13] ▶
You're going to get these J hooks if you slice a plane through
[2:01:13 - 2:01:16] ▶
the lines at that point.
[2:01:16 - 2:01:17] ▶
And if you move them closer, it gets a bit more curvy,
[2:01:17 - 2:01:19] ▶
and then it kind of flattens out.
[2:01:19 - 2:01:21] ▶
But if you draw it there, it's just a mathematical projection.
[2:01:21 - 2:01:23] ▶
It looks like the same curve.
[2:01:24 - 2:01:26] ▶
And this rotation of the object that Eric talks about,
[2:01:26 - 2:01:29] ▶
yes, he happens at about the same time as that curve.
[2:01:29 - 2:01:31] ▶
It's exactly the same time.
[2:01:31 - 2:01:32] ▶
But that's the same time, which reversing the singularity
[2:01:32 - 2:01:37] ▶
in the gimbal, and it has to do these rotations.
[2:01:37 - 2:01:39] ▶
So it's doing these bigger rotations.
[2:01:39 - 2:01:41] ▶
And it's not the same.
[2:01:41 - 2:01:42] ▶
It doesn't match the curve.
[2:01:42 - 2:01:43] ▶
It happens roughly in the same region.
[2:01:43 - 2:01:45] ▶
And we can pull up your shell right now.
[2:01:45 - 2:01:47] ▶
You want to pull up your shell right now, too.
[2:01:47 - 2:01:48] ▶
There's three other rotations that don't match.
[2:01:48 - 2:01:51] ▶
The one big one is kind of roughly at the end,
[2:01:51 - 2:01:53] ▶
but it doesn't really match.
[2:01:53 - 2:01:54] ▶
It's kind of like a bit of a reach.
[2:01:54 - 2:01:57] ▶
It's not remarkable correlation.
[2:01:57 - 2:01:59] ▶
It's not a remarkable correlation.
[2:01:59 - 2:02:00] ▶
I will let the viewers, when we, when we, maybe we can add it,
[2:02:00 - 2:02:03] ▶
you know, put this in, but I really want to show people what,
[2:02:03 - 2:02:06] ▶
then this is directly from MixSim.
[2:02:06 - 2:02:08] ▶
I think more importantly, let's just bottom line this.
[2:02:08 - 2:02:11] ▶
Well, real quick, yeah.
[2:02:11 - 2:02:12] ▶
The audio associated with this.
[2:02:12 - 2:02:14] ▶
Do you think the operators of these systems
[2:02:14 - 2:02:18] ▶
are confused at what they're seeing?
[2:02:18 - 2:02:20] ▶
Because they seem to think it's remarkable.
[2:02:20 - 2:02:22] ▶
So they're sort of vised.
[2:02:22 - 2:02:23] ▶
We obviously don't know what they're seeing,
[2:02:23 - 2:02:25] ▶
which means either it's just something that they don't recognize.
[2:02:25 - 2:02:28] ▶
Yeah, but if you're using the camera's rotation
[2:02:28 - 2:02:31] ▶
as a way to explain it away, then presumably that would be very easy
[2:02:31 - 2:02:35] ▶
to be like, that was just the camera's rotation.
[2:02:35 - 2:02:37] ▶
That's not, there's no wild factor involved.
[2:02:37 - 2:02:39] ▶
The smoking gun for me was that it rotates in steps
[2:02:39 - 2:02:41] ▶
and that system, there's zero empirical evidence.
[2:02:41 - 2:02:45] ▶
There's no evidence in that system.
[2:02:47 - 2:02:49] ▶
We asked if you had seen that before, and he said yes.
[2:02:49 - 2:02:53] ▶
I don't believe it means just the experts.
[2:02:54 - 2:02:56] ▶
It's absolutely possible.
[2:02:56 - 2:02:58] ▶
Nobody else has seen that and is aware of that.
[2:02:58 - 2:03:02] ▶
But we did talk to, truly, the top experts in the world on this.
[2:03:03 - 2:03:07] ▶
I won't go on the record.
[2:03:07 - 2:03:08] ▶
And that is part of the stigma.
[2:03:09 - 2:03:11] ▶
I had a Zoom call with one of those individuals.
[2:03:11 - 2:03:14] ▶
Can we say who this is?
[2:03:15 - 2:03:16] ▶
I can't, unfortunately.
[2:03:16 - 2:03:17] ▶
And I had a Zoom call.
[2:03:17 - 2:03:18] ▶
And when you say experts, experts.
[2:03:18 - 2:03:19] ▶
So let me just run through.
[2:03:20 - 2:03:22] ▶
So we talked to a senior, a senior,
[2:03:22 - 2:03:24] ▶
very apare黃 engineering, who is, let's say,
[2:03:24 - 2:03:28] ▶
intimately familiar with this system.
[2:03:28 - 2:03:29] ▶
I don't want to be the way too much.
[2:03:29 - 2:03:31] ▶
We talked to two of the, like I think it's fair to say,
[2:03:31 - 2:03:34] ▶
two top academic experts on this type of technology.
[2:03:34 - 2:03:39] ▶
We have the ATF liars.
[2:03:39 - 2:03:41] ▶
It's called, indium antimine.
[2:03:41 - 2:03:43] ▶
And they are all truly perplexed by it.
[2:03:43 - 2:03:48] ▶
The one I talked to and to your point about why I won't
[2:03:48 - 2:03:52] ▶
And he said, I'm intrigued by this.
[2:03:52 - 2:03:55] ▶
I sent you an email.
[2:03:55 - 2:03:56] ▶
This is very interesting.
[2:03:56 - 2:03:57] ▶
I don't want to get involved in this, but highly credentialed, but just the stigma is
[2:03:58 - 2:04:01] ▶
And what did they say?
[2:04:02 - 2:04:03] ▶
Did you give them a mix of opposite?
[2:04:03 - 2:04:04] ▶
So basically they debunked Mixed Glare on the Glass.
[2:04:05 - 2:04:09] ▶
Would you agree that they debunked your Glare on the Glass?
[2:04:09 - 2:04:11] ▶
So the Glare on the Glass is a pretty old notion of the theory.
[2:04:12 - 2:04:15] ▶
But that's what you've been saying until we indicated you's expert.
[2:04:15 - 2:04:18] ▶
That was your theory.
[2:04:18 - 2:04:19] ▶
You did just say old version of the theory as a fear.
[2:04:20 - 2:04:23] ▶
The Glare on the Glass was just one possible way that you could get this.
[2:04:25 - 2:04:28] ▶
But the only thing you said for seven years about this, you never said, no, it could be
[2:04:28 - 2:04:33] ▶
something along the internal optical pass of the thing.
[2:04:33 - 2:04:38] ▶
And I, you may have the aperture of the camera.
[2:04:38 - 2:04:42] ▶
There's no such thing as Glare.
[2:04:42 - 2:04:44] ▶
When Mick talks, I really want to show people what this looks like.
[2:04:44 - 2:04:49] ▶
What he says, Glare is Glare is called Blooming.
[2:04:49 - 2:04:52] ▶
And that's when, and I'm not a scientist, but I've read enough of the, and this is part
[2:04:52 - 2:04:56] ▶
of why I want people to get engaged.
[2:04:56 - 2:05:00] ▶
Glare Blooming is when there's so much energy being directed at a pixel that it overcharges
[2:05:00 - 2:05:06] ▶
it and it spills over.
[2:05:06 - 2:05:08] ▶
And there's no way that that could result in that.
[2:05:08 - 2:05:11] ▶
The Blooming is not.
[2:05:12 - 2:05:14] ▶
And sorry, I disagree.
[2:05:14 - 2:05:16] ▶
How could Blooming, Blooming could create a shape?
[2:05:16 - 2:05:20] ▶
I don't think it is Blooming.
[2:05:20 - 2:05:21] ▶
But one of the experts right here said, no Blooming in the, in India, in the United
[2:05:21 - 2:05:25] ▶
United, not explain this.
[2:05:25 - 2:05:26] ▶
Right after he said, Mick might be right, but for the wrong way, there's a different
[2:05:27 - 2:05:30] ▶
And then we had here, I'll just, I'll just leave it at this.
[2:05:31 - 2:05:34] ▶
One of the top academic experts deferred to one of the top government experts on air-to-air
[2:05:34 - 2:05:40] ▶
This guy, and you saw this, right?
[2:05:41 - 2:05:43] ▶
He specifically refuted your theory.
[2:05:43 - 2:05:47] ▶
The object in the video is definitely maneuvering, causing the appearance of rotation.
[2:05:49 - 2:05:52] ▶
I think a D-roll axis of the payload would not make this phenomenon of rotation.
[2:05:52 - 2:05:57] ▶
This is specifically to your theory.
[2:05:57 - 2:05:59] ▶
And this is, this is arguably the top expert in the US government.
[2:05:59 - 2:06:03] ▶
I think in air-to-air flier imagery.
[2:06:03 - 2:06:05] ▶
I think really he, you're interpreting things that he told you.
[2:06:05 - 2:06:10] ▶
No, no, no, no, no, I'm talking about the government expert.
[2:06:10 - 2:06:13] ▶
Yeah, yeah, yeah, you're reading verbatim.
[2:06:13 - 2:06:15] ▶
I'm directly calling it, let me quote it to him.
[2:06:15 - 2:06:18] ▶
He said to me, I would not want my response sent out as I am government.
[2:06:18 - 2:06:21] ▶
I mean, it might be seen as an expert official response rather than an opinion based upon
[2:06:21 - 2:06:25] ▶
limited real information.
[2:06:25 - 2:06:27] ▶
I just wanted to point to some things out that others may have missed.
[2:06:28 - 2:06:30] ▶
Well, I'm reading what he said.
[2:06:31 - 2:06:32] ▶
Well, let's say we all have limited info.
[2:06:32 - 2:06:35] ▶
I guess specifically, you know, to Merrick's glare point, you mentioned, okay, that's probably
[2:06:35 - 2:06:43] ▶
like the earliest version of the argument.
[2:06:43 - 2:06:45] ▶
You're talking about the internal optical system.
[2:06:46 - 2:06:48] ▶
What does that mean?
[2:06:48 - 2:06:49] ▶
What is your argument now?
[2:06:49 - 2:06:50] ▶
Because now that glare has been ruled out, what is it?
[2:06:50 - 2:06:52] ▶
Now, because you guys are saying glare in quotes.
[2:06:52 - 2:06:54] ▶
Yeah, but then they can go on to talk about the lab.
[2:06:54 - 2:06:56] ▶
They know they didn't.
[2:06:56 - 2:06:57] ▶
He said there isn't a point spread function.
[2:06:57 - 2:06:59] ▶
Then he talks about a point spread function.
[2:06:59 - 2:07:01] ▶
He puts glare in quotes and he says it's all an internal and yonic did it.
[2:07:01 - 2:07:05] ▶
Yonic said, how do you reconcile this quote glare on the glass, all the self congratulating
[2:07:06 - 2:07:11] ▶
discussions on Metabunk about glare spread?
[2:07:11 - 2:07:12] ▶
The glare being a simple, hard task.
[2:07:12 - 2:07:14] ▶
That's what I was saying.
[2:07:14 - 2:07:15] ▶
That glow that grows with the, you know, right?
[2:07:15 - 2:07:18] ▶
How do you, and this is the best part.
[2:07:18 - 2:07:21] ▶
So mix, big explainer videos based on a, a, a, a cheap one is a 200 bucks, flare camera
[2:07:21 - 2:07:28] ▶
that this expert said is not a good person.
[2:07:28 - 2:07:30] ▶
That was just an example of how you can get a rotation.
[2:07:30 - 2:07:34] ▶
He literally calls you out.
[2:07:34 - 2:07:36] ▶
It's not a good comparison.
[2:07:36 - 2:07:37] ▶
There is no, there's no, there's no empirical evidence.
[2:07:37 - 2:07:40] ▶
Obviously, there's a flare one, which is cost 200 dollars versus an at flare, which cost
[2:07:40 - 2:07:43] ▶
a million dollars is not good.
[2:07:43 - 2:07:44] ▶
For your fork, but yeah, so anyway, bottom line is we, we have a lot.
[2:07:44 - 2:07:48] ▶
We have a ton of of air to air footage.
[2:07:48 - 2:07:51] ▶
Um, and there's zero empirical evidence experts who don't want to be quoted.
[2:07:51 - 2:07:56] ▶
You want to look me in?
[2:07:57 - 2:07:58] ▶
Cause I looped you and all the experts.
[2:07:58 - 2:07:59] ▶
I looped you in a lot of emails.
[2:07:59 - 2:08:00] ▶
I was the email asking me if I can read.
[2:08:01 - 2:08:04] ▶
I thought you're bringing somebody in new to the table.
[2:08:04 - 2:08:07] ▶
So every expert, the, the, the rating and engineer, he said, uh, he told you not to,
[2:08:07 - 2:08:13] ▶
to, to include him like he said, like he, and I, he says, I gave you this as a mission
[2:08:13 - 2:08:18] ▶
to publish to share any of our discussion.
[2:08:18 - 2:08:20] ▶
I now regret any discussion with him.
[2:08:20 - 2:08:22] ▶
I, I'm putting out, I believe that this is more important than the stigma.
[2:08:22 - 2:08:27] ▶
These guys are fighting a stigma.
[2:08:27 - 2:08:29] ▶
So you think you, and you, you, you, you, you aren't me, but they just weren't talk.
[2:08:29 - 2:08:33] ▶
They weren't going to go.
[2:08:33 - 2:08:34] ▶
No expert in the world agrees with you.
[2:08:34 - 2:08:36] ▶
I know you're eager for aerated a bunk this because you thought they were doing, um,
[2:08:37 - 2:08:41] ▶
like, blad experiments that Kirkpatrick was talking about.
[2:08:41 - 2:08:44] ▶
It's been seven, how long has it been since this video came out?
[2:08:44 - 2:08:47] ▶
Actually, gosh, we're on a decade now.
[2:08:48 - 2:08:50] ▶
Well, I was only going to work here.
[2:08:50 - 2:08:51] ▶
There's a couple of years, I guess.
[2:08:51 - 2:08:53] ▶
Yeah, you think you're very slow.
[2:08:53 - 2:08:54] ▶
Well, they did Ogwoodia.
[2:08:55 - 2:08:56] ▶
They're doing a whole, don't you want to show where they do?
[2:08:56 - 2:08:59] ▶
I see Ogwoodia, like when you talk about, let's stay on, let's stay on gimbal.
[2:09:00 - 2:09:02] ▶
Well, this was pretty, very quickly.
[2:09:02 - 2:09:04] ▶
I think Ogwoodia has the, the, um, SCU, the, the coalition first of, uh, yeah, they
[2:09:04 - 2:09:12] ▶
did like a 200 page document on it with a bunch of different experts, people with PhDs,
[2:09:12 - 2:09:17] ▶
they think it's, uh, they think it's some kind of, they don't have that.
[2:09:17 - 2:09:19] ▶
Well, why do you think Arrow has, or anybody has, why is nobody back to you on, on your,
[2:09:19 - 2:09:23] ▶
on your, on your, on your stereo?
[2:09:23 - 2:09:24] ▶
And why, yeah, actually, they're like, actually, on Ogwoodia and they're back me on the
[2:09:24 - 2:09:27] ▶
triangle on gimbal, because they haven't finished their analysis yet.
[2:09:27 - 2:09:30] ▶
I think that's, that's a stretch.
[2:09:31 - 2:09:33] ▶
Um, why is there no, why is there no academic literature that supports your glare theory?
[2:09:33 - 2:09:37] ▶
It's all blooming because it's not in very common reason.
[2:09:37 - 2:09:40] ▶
It's not something that happens all the time.
[2:09:40 - 2:09:42] ▶
I mean, it was, it was common.
[2:09:42 - 2:09:44] ▶
We wouldn't be having this discussion.
[2:09:44 - 2:09:45] ▶
It says in the normal of events, it says something that happened that was weird and the
[2:09:45 - 2:09:50] ▶
pilots didn't recognize it because it isn't something that happens every day.
[2:09:50 - 2:09:53] ▶
It's an active duty with them.
[2:09:53 - 2:09:55] ▶
Based on them being a narrow field of zoom, uh, I sent this to you years ago, narrow
[2:09:55 - 2:10:00] ▶
field of view zoom to, he uses this system daily and the fidelity of the picture, they're
[2:10:00 - 2:10:04] ▶
probably less than 10 miles away.
[2:10:04 - 2:10:05] ▶
He uses the system every day, life and death, right?
[2:10:11 - 2:10:13] ▶
Like they needed, they rely on the system.
[2:10:13 - 2:10:15] ▶
I never see how that can be determined from what we're saying on screen.
[2:10:15 - 2:10:18] ▶
If you point the camera of the sun, it doesn't look like it's 10 miles away, but you get
[2:10:21 - 2:10:24] ▶
One other, one of the factors I want to introduce is that possibly this was also involved
[2:10:25 - 2:10:29] ▶
in formation of other.
[2:10:29 - 2:10:31] ▶
And Ryan has done it to his credit and we can maybe throw this up.
[2:10:33 - 2:10:36] ▶
I put it in the slides, but he's recreated this and it's kind of a V shape formation.
[2:10:36 - 2:10:43] ▶
When the object is this very bizarre kind of reversal of direction with no radius of
[2:10:43 - 2:10:48] ▶
turn, they kind of do a jumbled turn and then they proceed and go in the same direction
[2:10:48 - 2:10:52] ▶
So they're all moving together in concert, basically, is the recollection from the top
[2:10:53 - 2:10:58] ▶
down view from the radar.
[2:10:58 - 2:11:01] ▶
His recreation is actually not good because it doesn't incorporate the rotation of the
[2:11:01 - 2:11:05] ▶
But what is your theory now that the glare in the glass has basically been ruled out?
[2:11:07 - 2:11:12] ▶
What is your theory?
[2:11:12 - 2:11:13] ▶
I think what we see here is some kind of optical effect and there's rotation because of
[2:11:13 - 2:11:16] ▶
the rotation mechanism.
[2:11:16 - 2:11:17] ▶
And what evidence do you have for that?
[2:11:17 - 2:11:19] ▶
Well, there's very stark, there's the bands of light and dark, the rotation in the
[2:11:19 - 2:11:22] ▶
Does the fact that the rotation exactly matches the needed rotation?
[2:11:23 - 2:11:25] ▶
So no, it doesn't, right?
[2:11:25 - 2:11:26] ▶
You don't know what the pitch angle of that, you pick.
[2:11:26 - 2:11:28] ▶
It was three points.
[2:11:30 - 2:11:31] ▶
Which is exactly what the F16s F18s through zero in a match on the profile.
[2:11:32 - 2:11:38] ▶
You were in a max range profile.
[2:11:38 - 2:11:39] ▶
You already have, you're already wrong right there.
[2:11:39 - 2:11:41] ▶
Well, if you change that, it doesn't really change you very much.
[2:11:41 - 2:11:44] ▶
It's just like the offset.
[2:11:44 - 2:11:45] ▶
It changes, it does change it.
[2:11:46 - 2:11:47] ▶
We can go down that rabbit hole.
[2:11:47 - 2:11:48] ▶
Yeah, not right now, obviously.
[2:11:50 - 2:11:51] ▶
Bottom line is I think we need to hear from, hopefully from the back.
[2:11:52 - 2:11:58] ▶
You can see by looking at it, that there's an optical effects.
[2:11:58 - 2:12:02] ▶
If you actually look at this thing, you're seeing the light and dark rotation in the background.
[2:12:02 - 2:12:06] ▶
Right now, you said you've, I talked to an anonymous expert, said, well, I'm going to
[2:12:06 - 2:12:09] ▶
I shared you, I sent you the email to you.
[2:12:10 - 2:12:12] ▶
Yeah, but like, if it's not going to record, it's going to be useless.
[2:12:12 - 2:12:14] ▶
Well, you know, I, I do, I loop you into it.
[2:12:15 - 2:12:18] ▶
So you've brought none, no experts to me.
[2:12:18 - 2:12:20] ▶
I brought all the experts to you.
[2:12:20 - 2:12:21] ▶
But it brings some experts to the public.
[2:12:22 - 2:12:25] ▶
It's not that useful, just bringing in the forward.
[2:12:25 - 2:12:26] ▶
Well, first of the stigma that you promote is, is the big part of why they don't encourage
[2:12:26 - 2:12:30] ▶
them to come forward.
[2:12:30 - 2:12:31] ▶
Like come forward and I won't laugh at you.
[2:12:31 - 2:12:33] ▶
I mean, I don't think, I don't think so.
[2:12:33 - 2:12:35] ▶
I'm so afraid of being, being, like, probably an anonymous.
[2:12:35 - 2:12:39] ▶
I'll, I'll kind of strom in both the arguments.
[2:12:39 - 2:12:43] ▶
I think on Merrick Gearside, I think we need more of these people to come forward.
[2:12:44 - 2:12:48] ▶
They come out to gain confidence on this, both on the expert side and then the operators
[2:12:48 - 2:12:54] ▶
of these flare systems and the pilots themselves.
[2:12:54 - 2:12:57] ▶
And then on, on your side, Mick, I think you probably have to take prima facia, you know,
[2:12:57 - 2:13:07] ▶
this, this, this operator of this flare system, this, this pilot who is saying, whoa, like
[2:13:07 - 2:13:13] ▶
this is, this is crazy.
[2:13:13 - 2:13:14] ▶
I mean, they have to, I mean, the idea that it's an F-18.
[2:13:15 - 2:13:18] ▶
And that this is happening around the go fast as well and that it's in this bizarre formation.
[2:13:18 - 2:13:25] ▶
And if you turn the camera and you're the person turning the camera, you're actually operating
[2:13:25 - 2:13:28] ▶
There's no reason to freak out.
[2:13:29 - 2:13:31] ▶
There's no reason to like, attach that audio.
[2:13:31 - 2:13:33] ▶
They're not turning me.
[2:13:33 - 2:13:34] ▶
It turns automatically.
[2:13:34 - 2:13:35] ▶
But if you're like, if you're like, highly aware of like the camera turning, if you're
[2:13:36 - 2:13:39] ▶
like, I'm in David Freibout, like, kind of discuss this hypothesis and he said the camera
[2:13:39 - 2:13:43] ▶
does it, or should just play it wrong.
[2:13:43 - 2:13:45] ▶
From his perspective, the camera appears out to turn.
[2:13:46 - 2:13:48] ▶
The camera turns when it tracks something underneath the plane and it means through that.
[2:13:48 - 2:13:51] ▶
You're saying David Freibout isn't like familiar with like the, like with the inner work
[2:13:51 - 2:13:57] ▶
he's, he's still using it.
[2:13:57 - 2:14:00] ▶
So he knows, he knows what does the person, you know what, what appears on screen and
[2:14:00 - 2:14:04] ▶
what it actually means in terms of what's in the air.
[2:14:04 - 2:14:06] ▶
But he doesn't know what's actually going on in the optics, what the lenses do, the mirrors
[2:14:06 - 2:14:10] ▶
do and how it rotates.
[2:14:10 - 2:14:11] ▶
So you think it's like, and then that same guy who, you know, presumably, I mean, we
[2:14:11 - 2:14:17] ▶
have to figure out who he is, but has like, some history doing this stuff.
[2:14:17 - 2:14:23] ▶
After he sees this, he doesn't see anything like it.
[2:14:24 - 2:14:27] ▶
Nobody's seeing anything like this.
[2:14:27 - 2:14:29] ▶
Say why we got this meantime?
[2:14:30 - 2:14:31] ▶
Iris is, it's one, in the 20 year thing.
[2:14:31 - 2:14:33] ▶
When the pilot, when the pilot says, and the lottery, I think you're a little bit of
[2:14:33 - 2:14:38] ▶
jargon here and it just happened to occur right, right amid all these changes.
[2:14:38 - 2:14:41] ▶
did all these encounters.
[2:14:41 - 2:14:43] ▶
When the pilot says that is the LNS,
[2:14:43 - 2:14:46] ▶
and we'll just explain the LNS is the launch
[2:14:46 - 2:14:48] ▶
and staring, which is the selected radar target.
[2:14:48 - 2:14:51] ▶
What does that mean to you?
[2:14:51 - 2:14:52] ▶
Sorry, let me just explain.
[2:14:52 - 2:14:53] ▶
Like the WIZO says, hey, is that our radar target
[2:14:53 - 2:14:57] ▶
on our FLIR, on the camera?
[2:14:57 - 2:14:58] ▶
And the pilot says yes, that is our selected radar target,
[2:14:58 - 2:15:01] ▶
which is six to eight miles away.
[2:15:01 - 2:15:04] ▶
What do you think the pilot meant when he says that is,
[2:15:04 - 2:15:06] ▶
and what do you think he meant when they brief Congress
[2:15:06 - 2:15:10] ▶
says we knew it was not a false hit?
[2:15:10 - 2:15:12] ▶
We knew we had a stable radar lock, a stable track file
[2:15:12 - 2:15:16] ▶
on it when they mentioned closest point of intercept.
[2:15:16 - 2:15:21] ▶
It make, you know what the Gehemic system is, right?
[2:15:21 - 2:15:24] ▶
It places, how does your theory square
[2:15:24 - 2:15:27] ▶
with all the technology?
[2:15:27 - 2:15:29] ▶
Let me just quickly, it's basically like an Apple vision
[2:15:29 - 2:15:32] ▶
kind of thing, a visor that puts all the data.
[2:15:32 - 2:15:37] ▶
Yeah, it pumps all the data, and you'll get a little box
[2:15:37 - 2:15:39] ▶
like where if there's a target somewhere.
[2:15:39 - 2:15:41] ▶
Right, it talks about it in your, right?
[2:15:41 - 2:15:42] ▶
So how do you square, like let's just start with the LNS, right?
[2:15:42 - 2:15:46] ▶
The pilot says that is, yes, that's our radar target.
[2:15:46 - 2:15:49] ▶
Especially in stint as to what he actually says,
[2:15:49 - 2:15:51] ▶
but what we see on the,
[2:15:51 - 2:15:52] ▶
that is the LNS, we see on the screen here is an optical track.
[2:15:52 - 2:15:56] ▶
It's actually tracking it using the,
[2:15:56 - 2:15:59] ▶
yeah, the contrast is on the screen.
[2:15:59 - 2:16:01] ▶
So what you might be referring to is something
[2:16:01 - 2:16:03] ▶
that's on the SA page, which would be like the near radar
[2:16:03 - 2:16:08] ▶
No, the, the, the wizard asks, hey, is that,
[2:16:09 - 2:16:10] ▶
is that thing that we're looking on the FLIR?
[2:16:10 - 2:16:12] ▶
It is a select thing.
[2:16:12 - 2:16:13] ▶
You know, looking in the FLIR.
[2:16:13 - 2:16:14] ▶
He said, is that, I don't know, is that LNS dude?
[2:16:14 - 2:16:19] ▶
Is that, that is the only other guy I said, yeah, that is ours.
[2:16:19 - 2:16:22] ▶
We didn't know what he's referring to.
[2:16:22 - 2:16:24] ▶
That's what the LNS is.
[2:16:26 - 2:16:28] ▶
Well, yes, but like, is that that,
[2:16:28 - 2:16:30] ▶
or is that a difference to our game?
[2:16:30 - 2:16:31] ▶
Because they also saw this fleet of things.
[2:16:31 - 2:16:34] ▶
So, so there's just happened to be a discreged exactly where
[2:16:34 - 2:16:38] ▶
the close thing is, is that what you're saying?
[2:16:38 - 2:16:40] ▶
So it just happened, like this is the,
[2:16:42 - 2:16:43] ▶
So it's saying that they're referring to another.
[2:16:44 - 2:16:46] ▶
You're very familiar with this theory of mine right?
[2:16:46 - 2:16:48] ▶
I think this is a, wait, so let me just,
[2:16:48 - 2:16:50] ▶
laying this at the cryo-tayer a little, hold on, hold on.
[2:16:50 - 2:16:52] ▶
So you, they have this radar target, right?
[2:16:52 - 2:16:55] ▶
It's six miles away and directly behind it,
[2:16:55 - 2:16:57] ▶
more or less, is something that they're talking about.
[2:16:57 - 2:16:59] ▶
Some other jet and doing like,
[2:16:59 - 2:17:02] ▶
showing a, in a, it's heat,
[2:17:02 - 2:17:05] ▶
or an engine in, in a way that's never been seen before
[2:17:05 - 2:17:09] ▶
in a malfunctioning pod and a, what else we have?
[2:17:09 - 2:17:12] ▶
Malfunctioning of all the electronic identification systems,
[2:17:12 - 2:17:16] ▶
like, it's just cascading failures.
[2:17:16 - 2:17:18] ▶
I can't wrap my head, I hope I'm like,
[2:17:18 - 2:17:20] ▶
getting through to people,
[2:17:20 - 2:17:21] ▶
but it's just, it is, it is pretty wild to me that.
[2:17:21 - 2:17:24] ▶
Yeah, it seems unlikely, right?
[2:17:24 - 2:17:25] ▶
It's just a perfectly lined up.
[2:17:25 - 2:17:27] ▶
That was what you just saw, like, law of large numbers.
[2:17:27 - 2:17:29] ▶
And we've never seen that.
[2:17:29 - 2:17:31] ▶
The AT Flirt is not rotated steps.
[2:17:31 - 2:17:32] ▶
If it's malfunctioning, maybe I don't,
[2:17:32 - 2:17:34] ▶
I just find that hard to believe.
[2:17:34 - 2:17:36] ▶
By the way, the patent, literally the patent,
[2:17:36 - 2:17:38] ▶
which you looked up, the patent,
[2:17:38 - 2:17:40] ▶
there's a sense in there, they explicitly,
[2:17:40 - 2:17:42] ▶
we can pull it up, explicitly, to sprues your theory.
[2:17:42 - 2:17:45] ▶
Why is it, why is it the patent explicitly?
[2:17:46 - 2:17:48] ▶
Well, we can, we can go, I know we have to wrap up
[2:17:48 - 2:17:49] ▶
We're going to get to four now.
[2:17:50 - 2:17:51] ▶
Oh, well, geez, okay.
[2:17:51 - 2:17:53] ▶
I don't know if I can light-list it.
[2:17:53 - 2:17:54] ▶
You tell me where the patent is.
[2:17:54 - 2:17:57] ▶
If it's towards, it's in the very,
[2:17:57 - 2:17:58] ▶
Right, that's for example,
[2:18:00 - 2:18:02] ▶
They will avoid using the role in the fact.
[2:18:03 - 2:18:04] ▶
So this is super jargon-y.
[2:18:04 - 2:18:06] ▶
Mick knows what I mean.
[2:18:06 - 2:18:07] ▶
This, on its face just proves your theory.
[2:18:07 - 2:18:10] ▶
Spacely saying that it avoids rotation of the end.
[2:18:13 - 2:18:15] ▶
Where are the three words before that paragraph?
[2:18:15 - 2:18:18] ▶
In some embodiments.
[2:18:18 - 2:18:19] ▶
That is, any patent experts will know
[2:18:19 - 2:18:21] ▶
that is every single patent, that language.
[2:18:21 - 2:18:24] ▶
And that in any case.
[2:18:25 - 2:18:26] ▶
these patents are very broad.
[2:18:28 - 2:18:30] ▶
I can explain why we have to destroy them.
[2:18:30 - 2:18:32] ▶
So this explicitly, so Mick says,
[2:18:35 - 2:18:37] ▶
this is so, I, it hurts me to,
[2:18:37 - 2:18:39] ▶
like it's so complex.
[2:18:39 - 2:18:40] ▶
So he, he says that, like,
[2:18:40 - 2:18:43] ▶
so normally the pod will just do a nice,
[2:18:43 - 2:18:45] ▶
slow rotation like this.
[2:18:45 - 2:18:47] ▶
So to find out, we'll put the video up.
[2:18:47 - 2:18:49] ▶
I, we modeled it out and it's just like this super chill.
[2:18:49 - 2:18:51] ▶
It doesn't do this for rotation.
[2:18:51 - 2:18:54] ▶
Remember that in the Gimel video,
[2:18:54 - 2:18:56] ▶
it does one, two, three, four.
[2:18:56 - 2:18:57] ▶
Normally the patent says it would just do a very simple,
[2:18:58 - 2:19:02] ▶
very gradual, nothing aggressive.
[2:19:02 - 2:19:03] ▶
It doesn't say that.
[2:19:03 - 2:19:05] ▶
So it says, it says,
[2:19:06 - 2:19:07] ▶
it says in some embodiments,
[2:19:07 - 2:19:08] ▶
the only use is the two axes,
[2:19:08 - 2:19:09] ▶
which would cook you that smooth rotation.
[2:19:09 - 2:19:12] ▶
So it doesn't say that the athlete that was used that day
[2:19:12 - 2:19:15] ▶
is that particular embodiment.
[2:19:15 - 2:19:16] ▶
So, and also this was a patent from,
[2:19:17 - 2:19:20] ▶
And we're talking about the Gimel video,
[2:19:23 - 2:19:25] ▶
which was filmed several years later.
[2:19:25 - 2:19:27] ▶
And Gina from talking to Mr. Snow,
[2:19:27 - 2:19:30] ▶
these systems change quite a lot over time.
[2:19:30 - 2:19:32] ▶
But when they get smooth, they're not less.
[2:19:32 - 2:19:34] ▶
Mechanically it makes no sense to do the crazy stuff.
[2:19:36 - 2:19:38] ▶
It is what you want to be smooth.
[2:19:38 - 2:19:39] ▶
And if you notice in the Gimel video,
[2:19:39 - 2:19:41] ▶
it actually kind of like loses a lot,
[2:19:41 - 2:19:43] ▶
weirdly, quite a lot throughout the same.
[2:19:43 - 2:19:45] ▶
And though it's not moving around very much,
[2:19:45 - 2:19:46] ▶
there's a little gimbal rotation,
[2:19:46 - 2:19:48] ▶
and it moves off to the side.
[2:19:48 - 2:19:49] ▶
But the rotation, the rotation wouldn't be
[2:19:50 - 2:19:52] ▶
It wouldn't be more like this.
[2:19:54 - 2:19:55] ▶
The two things they have to bounce,
[2:19:55 - 2:19:57] ▶
there's the actual mechanics of the part itself,
[2:19:57 - 2:19:59] ▶
and then what the pilot sees.
[2:19:59 - 2:20:00] ▶
And they want to make the tracking as accurate as possible.
[2:20:00 - 2:20:03] ▶
First, is there introducing steps?
[2:20:03 - 2:20:05] ▶
Is the worst part, because it's your like starting,
[2:20:05 - 2:20:07] ▶
stopping, starting, stopping.
[2:20:07 - 2:20:08] ▶
Well, not if you have a very agile mirror system in there,
[2:20:08 - 2:20:11] ▶
that can encounter those.
[2:20:11 - 2:20:12] ▶
So we should work, we're purely on speculation.
[2:20:12 - 2:20:14] ▶
And that speculation, that's what we actually have.
[2:20:14 - 2:20:17] ▶
And that explicitly disproves your thinking.
[2:20:17 - 2:20:19] ▶
Well, they also have the description of the mirror systems
[2:20:19 - 2:20:21] ▶
and I have some minus three degrees of source.
[2:20:21 - 2:20:24] ▶
And that's what you do with gimbal,
[2:20:24 - 2:20:25] ▶
which is about the same deviation from the lens
[2:20:25 - 2:20:27] ▶
we get with the steps.
[2:20:27 - 2:20:28] ▶
Sorry, I don't fall.
[2:20:31 - 2:20:32] ▶
But the point is, we know that we don't have to point directly
[2:20:32 - 2:20:35] ▶
or something, we can use the mirrors to steer the extra mirrors.
[2:20:35 - 2:20:38] ▶
No, just doesn't work that way.
[2:20:38 - 2:20:41] ▶
There's no evidence of that.
[2:20:41 - 2:20:42] ▶
There's no evidence of glare.
[2:20:43 - 2:20:44] ▶
There's no evidence of rotating glare.
[2:20:44 - 2:20:46] ▶
There's no evidence of any of this.
[2:20:46 - 2:20:48] ▶
Well, we've just gone over all the evidence.
[2:20:48 - 2:20:50] ▶
You can see it on the screen
[2:20:50 - 2:20:52] ▶
that we have a optical effect.
[2:20:52 - 2:20:54] ▶
You can't use the gimbal video to prove the gimbal,
[2:20:54 - 2:20:57] ▶
you're theory for the gimbal video.
[2:20:57 - 2:20:59] ▶
I'm just using it to show that there's actually
[2:21:00 - 2:21:02] ▶
some kind of optical effect going on.
[2:21:02 - 2:21:04] ▶
I hope you can maybe,
[2:21:04 - 2:21:05] ▶
if you wanted to quickly look at some imagery
[2:21:05 - 2:21:07] ▶
of what the camera actually records,
[2:21:07 - 2:21:11] ▶
Yeah, yeah, exactly.
[2:21:13 - 2:21:15] ▶
Yeah, while you're doing that,
[2:21:15 - 2:21:16] ▶
I would like to encourage anybody out there
[2:21:16 - 2:21:18] ▶
and write them in the sounds that's the way in.
[2:21:18 - 2:21:20] ▶
Yeah, because we need more people to enter this.
[2:21:20 - 2:21:23] ▶
I think that's the thing.
[2:21:23 - 2:21:24] ▶
It's just me and Margot.
[2:21:24 - 2:21:25] ▶
That's a big takeaway.
[2:21:25 - 2:21:26] ▶
No, we need more analysis, more credible eyes.
[2:21:26 - 2:21:29] ▶
We need more records, backgrounds, experts.
[2:21:29 - 2:21:31] ▶
I mean, experts are actually speak on the right.
[2:21:31 - 2:21:32] ▶
Agreed, but then also people we know
[2:21:32 - 2:21:34] ▶
because a lot of this stuff is just the systems
[2:21:34 - 2:21:36] ▶
We're debating the obscure, like,
[2:21:38 - 2:21:40] ▶
right now on patents.
[2:21:40 - 2:21:41] ▶
I think we can't go through all these.
[2:21:44 - 2:21:45] ▶
I'm just assuming that's something that's 30 miles away.
[2:21:45 - 2:21:47] ▶
And by the way, to the extent you're not compromising
[2:21:47 - 2:21:50] ▶
American national security.
[2:21:50 - 2:21:50] ▶
I think it's your patriotic duty to come out.
[2:21:53 - 2:21:55] ▶
And if you are, then maybe stay away.
[2:21:55 - 2:21:58] ▶
So varying distances, the engine exhaust is bigger and bigger.
[2:21:59 - 2:22:04] ▶
In fact, it gets smaller and I have a video.
[2:22:07 - 2:22:09] ▶
So this is from the same video
[2:22:10 - 2:22:12] ▶
and this is a lot further away at the end of it
[2:22:12 - 2:22:15] ▶
and it gets smaller.
[2:22:15 - 2:22:17] ▶
So, Raytheon, I believe it looks like they have
[2:22:17 - 2:22:20] ▶
some anti-blooming effects on there.
[2:22:20 - 2:22:22] ▶
So that is the opposite of what you are suggesting.
[2:22:22 - 2:22:26] ▶
And if you go down one more.
[2:22:27 - 2:22:30] ▶
So this is the glared-o-wing size for you.
[2:22:30 - 2:22:32] ▶
it's an awesome glared-o-wing.
[2:22:34 - 2:22:35] ▶
Glared doesn't exist.
[2:22:36 - 2:22:37] ▶
It really doesn't exist.
[2:22:37 - 2:22:37] ▶
I'm telling you, like,
[2:22:37 - 2:22:39] ▶
there's a lot of papers about blooming.
[2:22:39 - 2:22:40] ▶
If you go down to that one,
[2:22:40 - 2:22:41] ▶
where your mouse is right there, compare that to mixed theory.
[2:22:41 - 2:22:44] ▶
That's mixed theory right there.
[2:22:44 - 2:22:46] ▶
Yes, a point light source can create anything
[2:22:46 - 2:22:49] ▶
that's a specific size on the sensor.
[2:22:49 - 2:22:51] ▶
So it doesn't really matter how big it is.
[2:22:51 - 2:22:52] ▶
If that light is very, very small light source.
[2:22:52 - 2:22:55] ▶
What is the light source though?
[2:22:55 - 2:22:56] ▶
It's the heat of the engines.
[2:22:58 - 2:23:00] ▶
When there's a thermal camera,
[2:23:00 - 2:23:01] ▶
so we're looking at this camera-pissed chinet.
[2:23:01 - 2:23:04] ▶
Essentially, it's a very, very bright, brilliant light source
[2:23:04 - 2:23:07] ▶
and the camera for some reason has created this kind of glare,
[2:23:07 - 2:23:11] ▶
this optical effect.
[2:23:11 - 2:23:12] ▶
There's perhaps sensor blooming, probably not there.
[2:23:12 - 2:23:15] ▶
I'm just a bi-sting right now.
[2:23:15 - 2:23:17] ▶
I'm open to both of you guys being right.
[2:23:17 - 2:23:19] ▶
I think it's kind of scary
[2:23:19 - 2:23:23] ▶
from an American national security perspective
[2:23:23 - 2:23:25] ▶
because that's such a so bad.
[2:23:26 - 2:23:28] ▶
If it's like this heat source, it's fuzzy
[2:23:28 - 2:23:30] ▶
it doesn't happen every day.
[2:23:31 - 2:23:33] ▶
It's not like it's going on all the time.
[2:23:33 - 2:23:35] ▶
But if that's an F18 at a base,
[2:23:35 - 2:23:39] ▶
that's frequently flying F18s.
[2:23:39 - 2:23:41] ▶
I mean, I don't know.
[2:23:41 - 2:23:42] ▶
It's like pretty bad detection.
[2:23:42 - 2:23:44] ▶
I don't think so, it's a glare.
[2:23:44 - 2:23:46] ▶
Patrick thought Gimbal was filmed during the daytime.
[2:23:50 - 2:23:53] ▶
Yeah, but they're actually working on,
[2:23:53 - 2:23:55] ▶
is like the assumption that this is some kind of glare,
[2:23:55 - 2:23:57] ▶
that's some kind of, well,
[2:23:57 - 2:23:59] ▶
I don't take the effect.
[2:23:59 - 2:24:00] ▶
I don't think there's any evidence of that.
[2:24:00 - 2:24:02] ▶
All right, well, we'll see.
[2:24:02 - 2:24:03] ▶
Well, you said that, you said that right
[2:24:03 - 2:24:05] ▶
before this hearing,
[2:24:05 - 2:24:05] ▶
you're very excited.
[2:24:06 - 2:24:08] ▶
Oh, we can't wait to see what Arrow has to say about this.
[2:24:08 - 2:24:10] ▶
The hearing came away.
[2:24:10 - 2:24:11] ▶
Again, it's GoFast and Aguadilla,
[2:24:11 - 2:24:13] ▶
which is good, but...
[2:24:13 - 2:24:14] ▶
they're in the right spot.
[2:24:16 - 2:24:17] ▶
So, the GoFast, as we said,
[2:24:17 - 2:24:18] ▶
because Aircrew is gonna contradict them.
[2:24:18 - 2:24:22] ▶
Yeah, well, then they'll take that
[2:24:22 - 2:24:23] ▶
and you information into their analysis.
[2:24:23 - 2:24:25] ▶
So, that is just absurd to me
[2:24:25 - 2:24:28] ▶
based on the empirical evidence, right?
[2:24:28 - 2:24:29] ▶
that matches the Chilean case.
[2:24:31 - 2:24:33] ▶
Yeah, almost exactly in terms of size.
[2:24:33 - 2:24:35] ▶
So, first of all, that's blooming, right?
[2:24:35 - 2:24:37] ▶
Chilean, the Chilean case is blooming, is?
[2:24:37 - 2:24:39] ▶
It's, again, when like a sensory gets hit with...
[2:24:40 - 2:24:44] ▶
A pixel gets hit with too much energy.
[2:24:44 - 2:24:46] ▶
That it'll spill over to other pixels.
[2:24:47 - 2:24:48] ▶
And that's what we see in the Chilean case.
[2:24:50 - 2:24:52] ▶
That is an apple-stores...
[2:24:52 - 2:24:53] ▶
That's explain what glare is.
[2:24:53 - 2:24:56] ▶
It's relevant to this conversation.
[2:24:56 - 2:24:57] ▶
Oh, but you said like,
[2:24:57 - 2:24:59] ▶
I'm going off with the people who are experts on this.
[2:25:03 - 2:25:06] ▶
Why do they talk about a point spread function
[2:25:06 - 2:25:09] ▶
if glare doesn't exist in infrared?
[2:25:09 - 2:25:11] ▶
He was talking, I'm pretty sure he was talking about
[2:25:11 - 2:25:13] ▶
your flu or one example.
[2:25:13 - 2:25:15] ▶
What point spread function is?
[2:25:16 - 2:25:17] ▶
Point spread function is when...
[2:25:17 - 2:25:20] ▶
It's a mathematical model of how light spreads from a point.
[2:25:20 - 2:25:24] ▶
So, any point on the famous is a photo of the sea.
[2:25:24 - 2:25:26] ▶
So, when context, are they bringing up the point spread function?
[2:25:26 - 2:25:29] ▶
In the context of glare, essentially.
[2:25:29 - 2:25:31] ▶
Nick, it was a little confusing as paragraph,
[2:25:32 - 2:25:34] ▶
and there was something I wanted to talk to you more,
[2:25:34 - 2:25:36] ▶
but you never responded to my emails.
[2:25:36 - 2:25:38] ▶
I know that this was the second expert.
[2:25:38 - 2:25:40] ▶
Usually the point spread function is kind of like a curve
[2:25:43 - 2:25:47] ▶
that goes like this, a very, very sharp curve like that.
[2:25:47 - 2:25:50] ▶
And that's how light spreads from any pixel
[2:25:50 - 2:25:55] ▶
on the entire scene,
[2:25:55 - 2:25:58] ▶
spreads according to this dysfunction.
[2:25:58 - 2:26:01] ▶
So, for things that are pretty dim,
[2:26:01 - 2:26:04] ▶
like most of stuff in this room,
[2:26:04 - 2:26:06] ▶
you get a very, very sharp pixel
[2:26:06 - 2:26:08] ▶
because the stuff that's to the side is very, very low level.
[2:26:08 - 2:26:11] ▶
But around a bright light like this,
[2:26:11 - 2:26:14] ▶
everything is kind of moose it up.
[2:26:14 - 2:26:16] ▶
So, you actually start to get the effects of the edges
[2:26:16 - 2:26:19] ▶
of this point spread function.
[2:26:19 - 2:26:21] ▶
And you can use this to a mystical model optical effects,
[2:26:21 - 2:26:23] ▶
and they use it to model blotter
[2:26:23 - 2:26:26] ▶
in various optical systems.
[2:26:26 - 2:26:28] ▶
And you would have a point spread function
[2:26:28 - 2:26:31] ▶
for an infrared thing.
[2:26:31 - 2:26:32] ▶
There's simply no way of not having it
[2:26:32 - 2:26:34] ▶
because you're gonna get some scatter
[2:26:34 - 2:26:36] ▶
from imperfections in the mirrors,
[2:26:36 - 2:26:38] ▶
possibly in the lenses.
[2:26:38 - 2:26:40] ▶
And you can also incorporate that into the sensor blooming
[2:26:40 - 2:26:44] ▶
These call, I think, optical transfer function
[2:26:45 - 2:26:49] ▶
is the entire thing.
[2:26:49 - 2:26:50] ▶
It's point spread plus the sensor spread as well.
[2:26:50 - 2:26:53] ▶
And these are details that we, I think,
[2:26:54 - 2:26:55] ▶
like experts should be able to weigh in.
[2:26:55 - 2:26:56] ▶
So, I'm a little skeptical,
[2:26:57 - 2:26:59] ▶
because you spent years...
[2:26:59 - 2:27:00] ▶
You went on CNN with your little glass, right?
[2:27:00 - 2:27:03] ▶
That's the glare on the glass.
[2:27:03 - 2:27:04] ▶
That was just proven what, two months ago, three months ago?
[2:27:04 - 2:27:07] ▶
Yeah, you literally...
[2:27:08 - 2:27:09] ▶
We've got you, you're saying,
[2:27:09 - 2:27:10] ▶
oh, if it's not, I got you here.
[2:27:10 - 2:27:12] ▶
Briefly, if the glare effect is indeed all in the sensor,
[2:27:12 - 2:27:14] ▶
then you've shifted to another...
[2:27:14 - 2:27:16] ▶
It's showing that it's part of the camera rotate,
[2:27:16 - 2:27:18] ▶
sort of the camera itself rotate.
[2:27:18 - 2:27:19] ▶
So that was the easiest way I'm demonstrating.
[2:27:19 - 2:27:22] ▶
So, since then, I've been doing it
[2:27:22 - 2:27:23] ▶
by rotating a camera like you, and actually...
[2:27:23 - 2:27:26] ▶
So, will you even think of seven years as raw?
[2:27:26 - 2:27:29] ▶
No, no, it's improved.
[2:27:29 - 2:27:31] ▶
The glass has been disproven, which you've been...
[2:27:33 - 2:27:35] ▶
What you want to see in it?
[2:27:35 - 2:27:36] ▶
What, according to you, he's being disproven,
[2:27:36 - 2:27:38] ▶
but I don't think he's just being disproven.
[2:27:38 - 2:27:39] ▶
How do you reconcile this with the glare on the glass?
[2:27:41 - 2:27:43] ▶
Oh, according to Yannick.
[2:27:43 - 2:27:45] ▶
Your co-author on that, that's better.
[2:27:45 - 2:27:46] ▶
He's quoted, he quotes.
[2:27:46 - 2:27:48] ▶
The, quote, glare that Mick mentions
[2:27:50 - 2:27:52] ▶
is likely from boost filters,
[2:27:52 - 2:27:53] ▶
high pass filtering, edge shut.
[2:27:53 - 2:27:55] ▶
That's all internal.
[2:27:55 - 2:27:56] ▶
That's not on the glass.
[2:27:56 - 2:27:57] ▶
Yeah, but he's assuming that the glass is clean.
[2:27:57 - 2:28:00] ▶
Oh, so we're back to the...
[2:28:00 - 2:28:01] ▶
At one point, Mick thought that he...
[2:28:04 - 2:28:06] ▶
Some source told him or somebody apparently told him
[2:28:06 - 2:28:08] ▶
that crew chiefs in the...
[2:28:08 - 2:28:10] ▶
In the military just wiped the glass.
[2:28:10 - 2:28:14] ▶
I've got a video of that happening.
[2:28:14 - 2:28:16] ▶
The guy just manhandling one of those systems with his hands.
[2:28:16 - 2:28:18] ▶
And I'm sure it was just a lead after because there's...
[2:28:18 - 2:28:20] ▶
There's pretty darn good maintenance on these systems.
[2:28:20 - 2:28:23] ▶
So is they getting up in the end?
[2:28:23 - 2:28:24] ▶
They're getting a fair call.
[2:28:24 - 2:28:25] ▶
So you're theory at one point was like...
[2:28:26 - 2:28:29] ▶
That some crew chief like...
[2:28:29 - 2:28:31] ▶
wiped a greasy sleeve on it and that's what gave us this.
[2:28:31 - 2:28:34] ▶
I've heard people say that.
[2:28:34 - 2:28:35] ▶
I mean, I don't think that's what happened
[2:28:35 - 2:28:37] ▶
because the glare on the glass thing
[2:28:37 - 2:28:39] ▶
would probably give a less even shape.
[2:28:39 - 2:28:42] ▶
I think it's probably more to do with the internal optics.
[2:28:42 - 2:28:44] ▶
I've got a camera that gives a very similar shaped glare
[2:28:44 - 2:28:48] ▶
to that, so my little helmet...
[2:28:48 - 2:28:50] ▶
So, maybe we can recap.
[2:28:50 - 2:28:52] ▶
So you have a malfunctioning...
[2:28:52 - 2:28:54] ▶
Mechanical malfunction.
[2:28:56 - 2:28:57] ▶
No, we don't know that to show
[2:28:58 - 2:28:59] ▶
because we don't know if there's an embodiment
[2:28:59 - 2:29:01] ▶
that doesn't have smooth steps.
[2:29:01 - 2:29:03] ▶
There's zero evidence for that.
[2:29:03 - 2:29:04] ▶
You have to provide evidence.
[2:29:04 - 2:29:05] ▶
You don't have evidence either way, really.
[2:29:05 - 2:29:07] ▶
There's tons of footage of...
[2:29:08 - 2:29:10] ▶
Well, you once used the top gun maverick as evidence.
[2:29:11 - 2:29:14] ▶
Oh my God, you realize I was joking, right?
[2:29:15 - 2:29:17] ▶
No, because you don't...
[2:29:17 - 2:29:18] ▶
You seem very, very serious out of the sign.
[2:29:18 - 2:29:21] ▶
It was on a tweet for crying out loud.
[2:29:21 - 2:29:23] ▶
What is that? There's tons of actual video evidence
[2:29:24 - 2:29:27] ▶
of how these systems rotate
[2:29:27 - 2:29:29] ▶
and it's a nice gradual and cynical...
[2:29:29 - 2:29:31] ▶
You can see it from the outside rotating.
[2:29:33 - 2:29:35] ▶
In a way that's tracking...
[2:29:35 - 2:29:36] ▶
I see it on the edge of the track.
[2:29:36 - 2:29:37] ▶
I have a two-minute long video of it.
[2:29:37 - 2:29:39] ▶
Let's move on, but both of you guys can follow up.
[2:29:41 - 2:29:42] ▶
Can you just follow up with the smooth rotation?
[2:29:42 - 2:29:44] ▶
I want to follow up with any videos that show the jagged.
[2:29:46 - 2:29:48] ▶
I just want to quickly reiterate how...
[2:29:48 - 2:29:50] ▶
Like, you're saying there's a distant jet right...
[2:29:50 - 2:29:54] ▶
Literally exactly in the line of sight.
[2:29:54 - 2:29:56] ▶
We have a malfunctioning pod
[2:29:59 - 2:30:02] ▶
and then you have an artifact
[2:30:02 - 2:30:06] ▶
that nobody's ever seen before
[2:30:06 - 2:30:07] ▶
and no expert know about
[2:30:07 - 2:30:08] ▶
and no aviator, whoever you are.
[2:30:08 - 2:30:10] ▶
You're saying that it's like this...
[2:30:10 - 2:30:11] ▶
New advanced technology, possibly aliens.
[2:30:11 - 2:30:13] ▶
I'm only saying it is a...
[2:30:13 - 2:30:15] ▶
There's a spectacular match between the...
[2:30:15 - 2:30:18] ▶
I witness accounts, right?
[2:30:18 - 2:30:19] ▶
Of that anomalous trajectory
[2:30:19 - 2:30:21] ▶
that direction reversal with no radius of turn,
[2:30:21 - 2:30:25] ▶
the rotation we see in the video
[2:30:25 - 2:30:27] ▶
and the flight path we can reconstraunt.
[2:30:27 - 2:30:28] ▶
Well, you bring a little bit of that.
[2:30:28 - 2:30:29] ▶
You bring a little bit of that.
[2:30:29 - 2:30:30] ▶
Well, as you say, you know,
[2:30:30 - 2:30:31] ▶
new advanced technology or possibly aliens,
[2:30:31 - 2:30:34] ▶
Dr. Stephen Greer is obviously outspoken person
[2:30:34 - 2:30:37] ▶
when it comes to the UFO issue,
[2:30:37 - 2:30:39] ▶
very polarizing figure on the topic.
[2:30:39 - 2:30:43] ▶
He will come out and say things like,
[2:30:43 - 2:30:45] ▶
oh, the Nimitz stuff, you know,
[2:30:45 - 2:30:47] ▶
that's all, you know, Lockheed Martin special access programs
[2:30:47 - 2:30:50] ▶
and we'll say that, you know,
[2:30:50 - 2:30:52] ▶
they're red teaming our detection systems
[2:30:52 - 2:30:55] ▶
or spoofing us or something.
[2:30:55 - 2:30:56] ▶
People say it doesn't happen.
[2:30:57 - 2:30:58] ▶
So do you guys have opinions on that?
[2:30:59 - 2:31:00] ▶
Do you think that that's at all possible
[2:31:00 - 2:31:02] ▶
that some of these...
[2:31:02 - 2:31:03] ▶
Well, I think if you guys are training for war,
[2:31:03 - 2:31:05] ▶
they're not going to do that to guys that are training for war
[2:31:05 - 2:31:07] ▶
in a training airspace.
[2:31:07 - 2:31:09] ▶
When I spoke to Ryan Gray...
[2:31:10 - 2:31:11] ▶
I kind of leaves aliens then.
[2:31:11 - 2:31:12] ▶
Well, I think it leaves aliens.
[2:31:12 - 2:31:14] ▶
My basic point here is that if we're going to entertain
[2:31:14 - 2:31:16] ▶
extraordinary options like aliens
[2:31:16 - 2:31:18] ▶
or even advanced technology being used
[2:31:18 - 2:31:20] ▶
by the Chinese or the Russians,
[2:31:20 - 2:31:22] ▶
then we should also entertain things like,
[2:31:22 - 2:31:25] ▶
maybe there's a series of coincidences that happen.
[2:31:25 - 2:31:28] ▶
You really say that it's less like...
[2:31:29 - 2:31:31] ▶
Entertain all options, but at some point it just borders
[2:31:31 - 2:31:33] ▶
But aliens borders on the ridiculous.
[2:31:35 - 2:31:37] ▶
The historical record is pretty remarkable of
[2:31:38 - 2:31:41] ▶
identical performance characteristics.
[2:31:41 - 2:31:43] ▶
Identical by winners.
[2:31:44 - 2:31:45] ▶
Reports and people are very similar.
[2:31:45 - 2:31:47] ▶
They've got similar brains and they report things in the same way.
[2:31:47 - 2:31:50] ▶
You picked all the ones that wobble.
[2:31:50 - 2:31:52] ▶
Where are all the videos of wobbling discs?
[2:31:52 - 2:31:55] ▶
I picked the ones that are...
[2:31:55 - 2:31:56] ▶
That are the ones that are...
[2:31:56 - 2:31:57] ▶
That are the ones that are...
[2:31:57 - 2:31:58] ▶
And they just happened to wobble.
[2:31:59 - 2:32:00] ▶
When it comes to, you know,
[2:32:00 - 2:32:02] ▶
secret American craft, again,
[2:32:02 - 2:32:04] ▶
I'm normally don't find myself kind of
[2:32:04 - 2:32:06] ▶
steel manning this position.
[2:32:06 - 2:32:07] ▶
But it's probably more conspiratorial
[2:32:07 - 2:32:11] ▶
to say that we don't have craft
[2:32:11 - 2:32:14] ▶
that exhibits exotic characteristics
[2:32:15 - 2:32:17] ▶
So like 80% plus of Locky,
[2:32:18 - 2:32:21] ▶
I think of Skunk Works projects currently are classified.
[2:32:21 - 2:32:24] ▶
And so, yeah, are there things red teaming our systems?
[2:32:24 - 2:32:27] ▶
And to steel man, your point that you just made is
[2:32:27 - 2:32:30] ▶
I just spoke to Ryan Graves.
[2:32:30 - 2:32:31] ▶
We had a great conversation.
[2:32:31 - 2:32:32] ▶
And he was like, yeah, you know,
[2:32:32 - 2:32:34] ▶
maybe that's happening in spots.
[2:32:34 - 2:32:36] ▶
But like, in his case,
[2:32:36 - 2:32:37] ▶
he was stationed at Naval Airspace,
[2:32:37 - 2:32:39] ▶
And he basically, one of his people
[2:32:41 - 2:32:46] ▶
the object almost hit the pilot.
[2:32:49 - 2:32:51] ▶
And it was this spear inside a cube.
[2:32:51 - 2:32:54] ▶
they're not going to put us in danger
[2:32:56 - 2:32:57] ▶
if they're kind of red teaming our systems.
[2:32:57 - 2:32:59] ▶
And you don't, yeah.
[2:33:00 - 2:33:01] ▶
You don't do that over international.
[2:33:01 - 2:33:02] ▶
We have ranges for that.
[2:33:02 - 2:33:03] ▶
We have designated airspace for this kind of stuff.
[2:33:03 - 2:33:06] ▶
I think it's possible that the radar hits
[2:33:06 - 2:33:09] ▶
were some kind of red teaming thing
[2:33:09 - 2:33:11] ▶
because he doesn't really put anybody in danger
[2:33:11 - 2:33:13] ▶
because there's no actual targets.
[2:33:13 - 2:33:14] ▶
it was a pilot almost hitting the other.
[2:33:15 - 2:33:17] ▶
And that case, yeah.
[2:33:17 - 2:33:18] ▶
I would have said that thing.
[2:33:18 - 2:33:19] ▶
But in the gimbal thing, pretty simple.
[2:33:19 - 2:33:20] ▶
You think it's radar spoofing or something?
[2:33:20 - 2:33:22] ▶
Yeah, some kind of radar interference.
[2:33:22 - 2:33:24] ▶
Perhaps there was a distant jet
[2:33:24 - 2:33:25] ▶
and the radar got messed up and remitted appearance.
[2:33:25 - 2:33:27] ▶
So when actually told me that,
[2:33:27 - 2:33:29] ▶
it was a possibility.
[2:33:29 - 2:33:30] ▶
How does it account like,
[2:33:30 - 2:33:31] ▶
if it's something like that,
[2:33:32 - 2:33:34] ▶
how do you get five or six objects moving in concert like that?
[2:33:34 - 2:33:37] ▶
Well, it's the same.
[2:33:37 - 2:33:38] ▶
It's just one object.
[2:33:38 - 2:33:39] ▶
You're getting five echoes of it.
[2:33:39 - 2:33:41] ▶
So now I don't understand the details,
[2:33:41 - 2:33:43] ▶
and they'd actually mention that to me as a possibility.
[2:33:43 - 2:33:45] ▶
Someone who was familiar with radar,
[2:33:45 - 2:33:47] ▶
obviously doesn't want to speak on the record
[2:33:47 - 2:33:49] ▶
because of the stigma that I'm perpetuating.
[2:33:49 - 2:33:51] ▶
how can we move forward with this?
[2:33:57 - 2:33:59] ▶
I think we actually do need more input.
[2:33:59 - 2:34:01] ▶
Let's get the wizard out there.
[2:34:01 - 2:34:03] ▶
Let's get people who actually understand the system.
[2:34:04 - 2:34:06] ▶
I would be really good if that was...
[2:34:08 - 2:34:10] ▶
I've tried to contact Raytheon,
[2:34:13 - 2:34:14] ▶
and they said, well, you should talk to the Navy.
[2:34:14 - 2:34:15] ▶
And of course, the Navy is...
[2:34:15 - 2:34:16] ▶
Or nobody else should send it on.
[2:34:17 - 2:34:18] ▶
They claim up as soon as it's UAP, they claim up.
[2:34:18 - 2:34:20] ▶
It's, I see it over and over and over again.
[2:34:20 - 2:34:23] ▶
Arrow will eventually release something,
[2:34:23 - 2:34:25] ▶
but yeah, I'm skeptical
[2:34:25 - 2:34:26] ▶
with this going to be a comprehensive explanation
[2:34:26 - 2:34:29] ▶
We should, we should move on.
[2:34:31 - 2:34:33] ▶
This is a very controversial,
[2:34:36 - 2:34:38] ▶
July of 2019, off the coast of San Diego,
[2:34:40 - 2:34:43] ▶
was released by, I believe, George Napp and Jeremy Corvall.
[2:34:43 - 2:34:45] ▶
Admiral Gallaudet, who just testified before Congress,
[2:34:46 - 2:34:50] ▶
might have some more interesting info about this case.
[2:34:50 - 2:34:53] ▶
I think it's mixed, turned.
[2:34:53 - 2:34:55] ▶
Yeah, well, I'm not, I should have familiar with it,
[2:34:57 - 2:34:58] ▶
but I'll give you my take on it.
[2:34:58 - 2:35:00] ▶
It's the video we're going to look at,
[2:35:01 - 2:35:02] ▶
it's the sphere descending into the sea.
[2:35:02 - 2:35:04] ▶
So, this is like, it's taken off the screen
[2:35:05 - 2:35:07] ▶
in the command center of the ship.
[2:35:07 - 2:35:10] ▶
We're looking at thermal video again,
[2:35:10 - 2:35:12] ▶
so we're seeing like a heat source,
[2:35:12 - 2:35:13] ▶
possibly glare or blooming.
[2:35:13 - 2:35:16] ▶
It kind of looks like it was moving around at first,
[2:35:18 - 2:35:20] ▶
but that's actually just the camera moving.
[2:35:20 - 2:35:22] ▶
The camera that's actually recording the thing,
[2:35:22 - 2:35:25] ▶
not the, the other camera.
[2:35:25 - 2:35:27] ▶
There's a cut in the video where you kind of jump down
[2:35:27 - 2:35:30] ▶
It's actually descending really, really slowly,
[2:35:32 - 2:35:34] ▶
but there's cuts where it's just above the horizon.
[2:35:34 - 2:35:37] ▶
It's not really moving at all.
[2:35:37 - 2:35:39] ▶
It's just kind of slowly, slowly descending to the ocean.
[2:35:39 - 2:35:42] ▶
And when it gets to approximately the horizon,
[2:35:42 - 2:35:46] ▶
it shrinks down to a point.
[2:35:46 - 2:35:49] ▶
Then it kind of like pops up again against,
[2:35:49 - 2:35:51] ▶
expands and then it shrinks again and disappears.
[2:35:51 - 2:35:54] ▶
And I think, at the end of it,
[2:35:54 - 2:35:57] ▶
there's a splash down,
[2:35:57 - 2:35:59] ▶
it's splash, splash, bearing a range.
[2:35:59 - 2:36:01] ▶
So they think that it's actually gone into the water.
[2:36:01 - 2:36:03] ▶
But if you zoom in on the video,
[2:36:04 - 2:36:06] ▶
I think it actually looks more like it's actually going...
[2:36:06 - 2:36:09] ▶
It's actually a heat source that is expounded,
[2:36:09 - 2:36:11] ▶
it's like the blooming or glaring.
[2:36:11 - 2:36:13] ▶
And then it goes behind the horizon.
[2:36:13 - 2:36:15] ▶
And there's some disputers to exactly where the horizon is.
[2:36:15 - 2:36:18] ▶
You can move the horizon up or down one pixel.
[2:36:18 - 2:36:20] ▶
It's in front of it if you move it up,
[2:36:20 - 2:36:22] ▶
a pixel all the way.
[2:36:22 - 2:36:23] ▶
There was a guy, I think,
[2:36:24 - 2:36:25] ▶
He did some analysis of that.
[2:36:28 - 2:36:30] ▶
I published it on Twitter
[2:36:30 - 2:36:32] ▶
and said it was very ambiguous
[2:36:32 - 2:36:34] ▶
as to where the actual horizon was.
[2:36:34 - 2:36:35] ▶
But it's very similar to like,
[2:36:35 - 2:36:37] ▶
you know, if a light going behind a solid object
[2:36:37 - 2:36:40] ▶
will actually shrink if it's a point source
[2:36:40 - 2:36:43] ▶
as it goes behind it rather than just disappearing.
[2:36:43 - 2:36:46] ▶
So we don't know what it is.
[2:36:46 - 2:36:49] ▶
It appears to be moving...
[2:36:49 - 2:36:51] ▶
I think it appears to be moving northly
[2:36:51 - 2:36:53] ▶
and the wind is coming from that direction.
[2:36:53 - 2:36:55] ▶
So it's a pretty strong wind, too.
[2:36:55 - 2:36:56] ▶
it's parent motion against the wind.
[2:36:57 - 2:36:59] ▶
I don't know what it is,
[2:37:00 - 2:37:01] ▶
but I think my best guess is that it's a strong heat source
[2:37:01 - 2:37:04] ▶
that's actually moving away.
[2:37:04 - 2:37:06] ▶
And it goes behind the horizon.
[2:37:06 - 2:37:09] ▶
But there's various interpretations.
[2:37:09 - 2:37:11] ▶
Yeah, well, maybe just paint a broader picture.
[2:37:13 - 2:37:15] ▶
This is part of six,
[2:37:15 - 2:37:17] ▶
five or six months long incursions
[2:37:17 - 2:37:18] ▶
over these naval vessels off the Channel Islands
[2:37:18 - 2:37:21] ▶
and off the Coast of Southern California.
[2:37:21 - 2:37:24] ▶
And they were reporting...
[2:37:27 - 2:37:29] ▶
In fact, Jeremy and George released a video
[2:37:29 - 2:37:32] ▶
of basically two red lights
[2:37:32 - 2:37:35] ▶
from the Omaha that night.
[2:37:35 - 2:37:38] ▶
And we know that the ship was being...
[2:37:38 - 2:37:40] ▶
Sorry, and they were just hovering there.
[2:37:40 - 2:37:41] ▶
And I think another one kind of cruises me.
[2:37:41 - 2:37:43] ▶
We can splice this in,
[2:37:43 - 2:37:44] ▶
but another one kind of cruises by it.
[2:37:44 - 2:37:46] ▶
So clearly there were objects around the ship.
[2:37:46 - 2:37:48] ▶
There's no question, right?
[2:37:48 - 2:37:49] ▶
There's radar footage from that same night
[2:37:50 - 2:37:52] ▶
and the ship is getting swarmed.
[2:37:52 - 2:37:54] ▶
I think at one point I counted 10, 12.
[2:37:54 - 2:37:56] ▶
It's up to 14 objects.
[2:37:56 - 2:37:58] ▶
Thanks, Samultaneous.
[2:37:59 - 2:38:00] ▶
The objects were described as self-illuminated spheres
[2:38:00 - 2:38:03] ▶
approximately six feet in diameter.
[2:38:03 - 2:38:05] ▶
So kind of comports with your kind of orb, you know,
[2:38:05 - 2:38:08] ▶
generally the description.
[2:38:08 - 2:38:09] ▶
Back to the orb thing that has been consistent.
[2:38:09 - 2:38:11] ▶
So, you know, where to begin, geez.
[2:38:12 - 2:38:14] ▶
Number one, you can see in the indicator
[2:38:14 - 2:38:17] ▶
that they did have a radar contact at one point.
[2:38:17 - 2:38:19] ▶
It's slave to the radar.
[2:38:19 - 2:38:20] ▶
We know the symbology.
[2:38:21 - 2:38:22] ▶
So again, this is like the gimbal.
[2:38:22 - 2:38:24] ▶
Like, the system says it's tracking a radar target.
[2:38:24 - 2:38:27] ▶
The system saying that.
[2:38:28 - 2:38:29] ▶
But it clearly isn't in this one.
[2:38:29 - 2:38:31] ▶
It's been done by joysticks.
[2:38:31 - 2:38:32] ▶
Someone's manually moving the camera around.
[2:38:32 - 2:38:34] ▶
And they probably just like with gimbal, they same thing.
[2:38:34 - 2:38:37] ▶
They probably had the radar drop it off in the system.
[2:38:37 - 2:38:39] ▶
So you're saying the same thing happened again?
[2:38:39 - 2:38:41] ▶
Like, they missed the actual radar target.
[2:38:41 - 2:38:43] ▶
And then they focused on...
[2:38:43 - 2:38:44] ▶
Maybe that was the actual radar target.
[2:38:46 - 2:38:47] ▶
And we have the radar dead.
[2:38:49 - 2:38:50] ▶
It's all within like six miles.
[2:38:50 - 2:38:51] ▶
All those radar contact.
[2:38:52 - 2:38:53] ▶
Well, yeah, that doesn't mean that's the only contact.
[2:38:53 - 2:38:56] ▶
So you think so, so, so, so, so, so you think...
[2:38:58 - 2:39:00] ▶
So they're surrounded by like 14-ob, whatever it is.
[2:39:00 - 2:39:03] ▶
I'd accounted for a lot, right, on that radar footage.
[2:39:03 - 2:39:06] ▶
And you think they decided to focus on the object
[2:39:06 - 2:39:08] ▶
that's 60 miles away, slowly going over the horizon.
[2:39:08 - 2:39:11] ▶
And there's something one of the videos that looks like.
[2:39:11 - 2:39:13] ▶
Come on, you got to apply a little common sense here.
[2:39:15 - 2:39:16] ▶
Well, it looks like a plane flying away, it's me.
[2:39:16 - 2:39:19] ▶
It's very, very similar to...
[2:39:19 - 2:39:20] ▶
Do you have any empirical evidence to the...
[2:39:20 - 2:39:22] ▶
Which is your theory.
[2:39:23 - 2:39:24] ▶
That is that perfectly spherical.
[2:39:25 - 2:39:27] ▶
Perfectly spherical.
[2:39:28 - 2:39:29] ▶
Let's go take a look.
[2:39:29 - 2:39:30] ▶
Compared to like as one of the engines of the...
[2:39:30 - 2:39:34] ▶
Right, it's all, it's all...
[2:39:35 - 2:39:36] ▶
It's because it's not circular, right?
[2:39:37 - 2:39:39] ▶
It's just because it's not circular, right?
[2:39:39 - 2:39:40] ▶
And we're kind of getting...
[2:39:40 - 2:39:41] ▶
No, no, no, no, there's zero evidence for your client.
[2:39:41 - 2:39:44] ▶
I looked at a lot of defalcishs, Flierbitt,
[2:39:44 - 2:39:47] ▶
and thanks day for all your work.
[2:39:47 - 2:39:48] ▶
There's no engine that looks like a...
[2:39:48 - 2:39:51] ▶
Oh, I didn't even know that.
[2:39:51 - 2:39:52] ▶
It's looking around, but...
[2:39:52 - 2:39:53] ▶
The generally perfectly round, really?
[2:39:53 - 2:39:55] ▶
Okay, well, if you could show me one, we can go back.
[2:39:55 - 2:39:57] ▶
I mean, we looked at...
[2:39:57 - 2:39:58] ▶
It's all jagged, it's flickering.
[2:39:58 - 2:40:00] ▶
Like, you know what I'm talking about.
[2:40:00 - 2:40:02] ▶
You know that there's frequently...
[2:40:02 - 2:40:03] ▶
It's the false one's difficult a little bit more.
[2:40:03 - 2:40:05] ▶
But I think this is a much more distant object in a zoom,
[2:40:05 - 2:40:08] ▶
a lot more distant different systems.
[2:40:08 - 2:40:09] ▶
So you have no evidence that it's blooming.
[2:40:09 - 2:40:11] ▶
It seems very similar to...
[2:40:11 - 2:40:13] ▶
Well, the evidence is blooming is that it shrinks...
[2:40:13 - 2:40:15] ▶
So it goes behind the right.
[2:40:16 - 2:40:17] ▶
You might have a few slideshow real quick,
[2:40:17 - 2:40:18] ▶
because we can test that very...
[2:40:18 - 2:40:20] ▶
If you look closely, you can see the horizon line.
[2:40:23 - 2:40:26] ▶
And the key here is...
[2:40:26 - 2:40:30] ▶
The horizon is above the center point of that sphere.
[2:40:30 - 2:40:35] ▶
So if you go down...
[2:40:35 - 2:40:36] ▶
Well, it's about the same as the center.
[2:40:36 - 2:40:38] ▶
We go down to that one.
[2:40:38 - 2:40:39] ▶
That's a line that I drew.
[2:40:39 - 2:40:43] ▶
We'll leave it up...
[2:40:43 - 2:40:44] ▶
You know, a UAP is in the eye of the beholder.
[2:40:44 - 2:40:46] ▶
Yeah, I see quite a bit of sky underneath that horizon.
[2:40:48 - 2:40:49] ▶
But if you go the next one...
[2:40:51 - 2:40:52] ▶
You see it's a lot lighter than the rest.
[2:40:52 - 2:40:53] ▶
If you go the next one, we can see the line that you drew.
[2:40:53 - 2:40:55] ▶
And I see a lot of ocean above your line.
[2:40:55 - 2:40:56] ▶
I see an enormous amount of ocean above.
[2:40:58 - 2:41:00] ▶
And if you go down to the next one, I zoomed in on one section.
[2:41:00 - 2:41:03] ▶
I mean, there's clearly ocean above it.
[2:41:04 - 2:41:05] ▶
So this is a problem with this thing.
[2:41:08 - 2:41:09] ▶
And this one Dr. Phil was saying that you come and touch it to me.
[2:41:10 - 2:41:13] ▶
We know where it looks like.
[2:41:14 - 2:41:15] ▶
It's almost exactly at the horizon.
[2:41:15 - 2:41:16] ▶
Maybe it's pixel above, pixel below.
[2:41:16 - 2:41:18] ▶
Exactly the same way.
[2:41:20 - 2:41:21] ▶
Well, if you watch SpaceX capsules go down, it does the same thing.
[2:41:23 - 2:41:26] ▶
Remember, we pulled those up and they look exactly the same.
[2:41:26 - 2:41:29] ▶
We should just use that.
[2:41:30 - 2:41:31] ▶
So again, you have no evidence?
[2:41:31 - 2:41:33] ▶
No empirical evidence that an engine actually has that very, very clear circular...
[2:41:33 - 2:41:39] ▶
Do you think this is an actual circle of shrink?
[2:41:39 - 2:41:42] ▶
It goes in the water.
[2:41:42 - 2:41:44] ▶
Well, let's talk to the air crew...
[2:41:46 - 2:41:47] ▶
Oh, sorry, the air crew.
[2:41:47 - 2:41:48] ▶
Like, let's listen to what they say, right?
[2:41:48 - 2:41:52] ▶
They say, first thing that the guy says, it took off, it's booking it.
[2:41:52 - 2:41:57] ▶
Where does that imply?
[2:41:57 - 2:41:58] ▶
We played the video.
[2:41:59 - 2:42:00] ▶
Do you want to play it?
[2:42:00 - 2:42:01] ▶
Like, the first thing he says, it took off...
[2:42:01 - 2:42:02] ▶
Do you have a house with you?
[2:42:04 - 2:42:05] ▶
It's now when they're looking at the radar.
[2:42:07 - 2:42:11] ▶
There's multiple radar targets.
[2:42:11 - 2:42:13] ▶
He said, what is it?
[2:42:15 - 2:42:17] ▶
It's left the vicinity and it's moving very fast.
[2:42:18 - 2:42:22] ▶
But it's not doing that.
[2:42:22 - 2:42:23] ▶
It means it's going very fast.
[2:42:25 - 2:42:28] ▶
So, the implication, as Tim mentioned recently, and I think some of the folks that were on the bridge
[2:42:29 - 2:42:34] ▶
of the Omaha at this point during this incident said, these things were hovering.
[2:42:34 - 2:42:39] ▶
We have video of these things hovering.
[2:42:39 - 2:42:42] ▶
Two red lights hovering and another one kind of cruising by it.
[2:42:43 - 2:42:46] ▶
It implies to me it was sitting there and then it started moving.
[2:42:48 - 2:42:52] ▶
It's not moving there.
[2:42:52 - 2:42:54] ▶
It's clearly moving.
[2:42:55 - 2:42:56] ▶
It doesn't suddenly start moving in that video.
[2:42:56 - 2:42:58] ▶
So, the assumption is it was stationary.
[2:42:59 - 2:43:03] ▶
It starts moving and he records it.
[2:43:03 - 2:43:06] ▶
Is that a fair interpretation?
[2:43:07 - 2:43:08] ▶
It's very speculative.
[2:43:10 - 2:43:11] ▶
It's interpreting what you want to be happening based on a book.
[2:43:12 - 2:43:15] ▶
Well, we were as the somebody said.
[2:43:15 - 2:43:16] ▶
We have evidence of these objects hovering over the deck of the Omaha.
[2:43:16 - 2:43:21] ▶
It's something with red lights.
[2:43:23 - 2:43:24] ▶
That video is a terrible video.
[2:43:25 - 2:43:27] ▶
It doesn't ratio anything.
[2:43:28 - 2:43:29] ▶
You know, it's probably a number of two red lights with the other one.
[2:43:31 - 2:43:33] ▶
Most people think it is a silly video.
[2:43:34 - 2:43:35] ▶
And a lot of the eyewitness stuff.
[2:43:35 - 2:43:37] ▶
So, what were those odd areas?
[2:43:37 - 2:43:38] ▶
Where they just drowns flying around?
[2:43:38 - 2:43:39] ▶
I don't know what they were.
[2:43:39 - 2:43:40] ▶
So, here's where it gets really interesting.
[2:43:40 - 2:43:42] ▶
24 hours later, the US was Paul Hamilton.
[2:43:42 - 2:43:45] ▶
Reports the same thing.
[2:43:50 - 2:43:51] ▶
One of the objects splashes.
[2:43:51 - 2:43:52] ▶
You can see it in the deck lock or in the briefing of the event.
[2:43:52 - 2:43:56] ▶
If you look at, I don't know if this is diagnostic,
[2:43:56 - 2:43:58] ▶
but if you look at the video footage from the Omaha,
[2:43:58 - 2:44:01] ▶
two of those contexts are cruising around.
[2:44:01 - 2:44:03] ▶
They just disappear off the radar.
[2:44:03 - 2:44:05] ▶
It went into the water.
[2:44:05 - 2:44:06] ▶
It could be in the water.
[2:44:06 - 2:44:07] ▶
I'm not saying that it is.
[2:44:07 - 2:44:08] ▶
But we're working under the assumption, I think,
[2:44:09 - 2:44:11] ▶
that there were drones in the area,
[2:44:11 - 2:44:12] ▶
because they reported drones.
[2:44:12 - 2:44:14] ▶
The only evidence we have shows a sphere cloud.
[2:44:15 - 2:44:18] ▶
There's no evidence.
[2:44:18 - 2:44:19] ▶
There's no empirical evidence that a...
[2:44:19 - 2:44:21] ▶
You're taking that splash just to be the same as that splash,
[2:44:21 - 2:44:24] ▶
when it was probably...
[2:44:24 - 2:44:25] ▶
Well, they're really getting it.
[2:44:25 - 2:44:26] ▶
They asked three ships around them to get a helicopter out.
[2:44:26 - 2:44:29] ▶
Yeah, because they thought that there were drones in the area.
[2:44:29 - 2:44:32] ▶
They thought it was close.
[2:44:32 - 2:44:33] ▶
There's a lot of issues with the whole drones thing.
[2:44:34 - 2:44:36] ▶
Like, the army, the military of the Navy,
[2:44:36 - 2:44:38] ▶
has misinterpreted a lot of things as drones.
[2:44:38 - 2:44:41] ▶
I just tweeted earlier today about how they once
[2:44:41 - 2:44:45] ▶
put out a photo of a jet and said it was a drone.
[2:44:45 - 2:44:50] ▶
We know that the snoopy team,
[2:44:50 - 2:44:52] ▶
the trained observers of a Navy vehicle,
[2:44:52 - 2:44:55] ▶
have misidentified stars as drones.
[2:44:55 - 2:44:59] ▶
And what does that have to do with the spherical looking object?
[2:44:59 - 2:45:03] ▶
Well, we were talking about these eyewitness accounts of things
[2:45:03 - 2:45:05] ▶
that happened that go along with these videos.
[2:45:05 - 2:45:08] ▶
Maybe they mistook something else.
[2:45:08 - 2:45:11] ▶
Maybe they thought the Venus was a spherical object
[2:45:11 - 2:45:14] ▶
because it looks like a bright light in the sky,
[2:45:14 - 2:45:17] ▶
like hundreds of yards away.
[2:45:17 - 2:45:19] ▶
Can you provide a single piece of evidence
[2:45:19 - 2:45:21] ▶
that blooming looks like that, like that very round?
[2:45:21 - 2:45:24] ▶
I looked at a lot of infrared imagery now
[2:45:26 - 2:45:28] ▶
and I've seen nothing.
[2:45:28 - 2:45:29] ▶
That's the natural stage for blooming there.
[2:45:29 - 2:45:31] ▶
I think we should move on.
[2:45:31 - 2:45:33] ▶
Admiral Gallaudet says that he has a first-hand witness
[2:45:33 - 2:45:36] ▶
who might be coming out soon.
[2:45:36 - 2:45:38] ▶
With some video items we should hope.
[2:45:39 - 2:45:41] ▶
I think you mentioned there's some video.
[2:45:41 - 2:45:43] ▶
Well, that would be great.
[2:45:43 - 2:45:44] ▶
I will say just quickly,
[2:45:44 - 2:45:46] ▶
so there was another ship that reported an object splashing on the water.
[2:45:46 - 2:45:50] ▶
This is where it gets kind of very
[2:45:51 - 2:45:53] ▶
from an analytic perspective interesting.
[2:45:53 - 2:45:56] ▶
That ship, the Paul Hamilton,
[2:45:56 - 2:45:58] ▶
so this is the day after the Omaha video.
[2:45:58 - 2:46:00] ▶
It's just swarmed by a group of drones, UAP.
[2:46:00 - 2:46:04] ▶
They, apart, we can actually track this.
[2:46:04 - 2:46:08] ▶
They depart on a heading
[2:46:08 - 2:46:09] ▶
that goes right towards Guadalupe Island.
[2:46:09 - 2:46:12] ▶
And I bring that up because there's a series
[2:46:12 - 2:46:16] ▶
on, I think, the National Geographic, unidentified,
[2:46:16 - 2:46:19] ▶
Luel Ozzondo and Hank Sean Cahill went down to Guadalupe Island
[2:46:19 - 2:46:22] ▶
because there have been reports of spheres
[2:46:22 - 2:46:25] ▶
going into the water.
[2:46:25 - 2:46:26] ▶
And I spliced the interview together.
[2:46:27 - 2:46:29] ▶
There's a five or six fishermen out there,
[2:46:29 - 2:46:31] ▶
including one of the world's most renowned shark experts, a scientist.
[2:46:31 - 2:46:34] ▶
Said they've seen these objects.
[2:46:34 - 2:46:36] ▶
The fishermen all say,
[2:46:36 - 2:46:37] ▶
yeah, I've seen these lighted luminous orbs spheres going into the water.
[2:46:37 - 2:46:41] ▶
That's interesting, right?
[2:46:41 - 2:46:42] ▶
So you have one group of UAP,
[2:46:42 - 2:46:44] ▶
one splash is recorded,
[2:46:44 - 2:46:45] ▶
is recorded as going in the water.
[2:46:45 - 2:46:47] ▶
And then this other group goes right towards the location where,
[2:46:47 - 2:46:49] ▶
oh, by the way, witnesses have been recording,
[2:46:49 - 2:46:52] ▶
reporting spheres going in the water.
[2:46:52 - 2:46:54] ▶
This is a military testing area.
[2:46:54 - 2:46:55] ▶
Isn't this drone based down there?
[2:46:55 - 2:46:57] ▶
Where they chest military drones?
[2:46:57 - 2:46:59] ▶
That's in the island.
[2:46:59 - 2:47:00] ▶
Yeah, but north of that is in the island.
[2:47:01 - 2:47:03] ▶
So we're talking about, no, we're talking about
[2:47:03 - 2:47:04] ▶
that well south of those islands.
[2:47:04 - 2:47:05] ▶
And Danny Sheen just came out as well as famous American lawyer
[2:47:05 - 2:47:10] ▶
who represents a lot of UFO whistleblowers.
[2:47:10 - 2:47:13] ▶
And he said that he has coordinates for a UFO
[2:47:13 - 2:47:17] ▶
I have got nothing out.
[2:47:18 - 2:47:20] ▶
I told I said we should all do a boat trip out there.
[2:47:20 - 2:47:23] ▶
And we got to Twitter momentum.
[2:47:23 - 2:47:25] ▶
I think that's interesting, right?
[2:47:25 - 2:47:28] ▶
Yeah, but it's just a lot of I win his accounts.
[2:47:28 - 2:47:31] ▶
It is, but it just happens to align with two splash events.
[2:47:31 - 2:47:37] ▶
A splash just means something fell into water.
[2:47:37 - 2:47:39] ▶
Do you think these guys are genuinely mistaken?
[2:47:40 - 2:47:42] ▶
Do you think they have some sort of incentive?
[2:47:42 - 2:47:44] ▶
Okay, so they, so they, they may be.
[2:47:44 - 2:47:46] ▶
Yeah, that's what I'm saying.
[2:47:46 - 2:47:47] ▶
So you don't think they're like,
[2:47:47 - 2:47:49] ▶
siopping the American public or wanting to buy a plane.
[2:47:49 - 2:47:52] ▶
You can get a plane out of it.
[2:47:52 - 2:47:53] ▶
J Straton took this slide of three stars
[2:47:53 - 2:47:55] ▶
and presented it to people in Congress.
[2:47:55 - 2:47:57] ▶
He thought that it was triangular drones.
[2:47:57 - 2:48:01] ▶
You know, this, this kind of types of mistake
[2:48:01 - 2:48:03] ▶
goes all the way out the chain.
[2:48:03 - 2:48:05] ▶
Do you think that's still happening today at Arrow?
[2:48:05 - 2:48:08] ▶
And I'm sure they're making mistakes still.
[2:48:08 - 2:48:10] ▶
They couldn't get the date right.
[2:48:10 - 2:48:12] ▶
All right, let's move on to Nellis.
[2:48:14 - 2:48:16] ▶
I'm going to go fast.
[2:48:17 - 2:48:18] ▶
I'm going to go fast.
[2:48:18 - 2:48:19] ▶
All right, let's move on to Nellis.
[2:48:19 - 2:48:21] ▶
So this is a restricted airspace, you know,
[2:48:23 - 2:48:25] ▶
There's a lot of UFO lore.
[2:48:27 - 2:48:29] ▶
You have this object moving towards the Black Mountains.
[2:48:29 - 2:48:32] ▶
Why don't we play this video?
[2:48:32 - 2:48:34] ▶
It's a little lesser known.
[2:48:34 - 2:48:36] ▶
There's two videos actually.
[2:48:43 - 2:48:46] ▶
Within this clip, you mean the clip.
[2:48:47 - 2:48:49] ▶
So within this video, I don't actually.
[2:48:49 - 2:48:53] ▶
There's a different video following this.
[2:48:53 - 2:48:57] ▶
I just throw my PC on the table here.
[2:49:01 - 2:49:04] ▶
I think that's just a balloon or a bunch of balloons
[2:49:04 - 2:49:07] ▶
floating in the wind.
[2:49:07 - 2:49:08] ▶
There's no actual movement of the objects itself.
[2:49:16 - 2:49:19] ▶
We do have a range indicator, which tells you how far away it is.
[2:49:19 - 2:49:22] ▶
And if you use that, we see that the range indicator isn't very accurate.
[2:49:22 - 2:49:26] ▶
It kind of like zips back and forward.
[2:49:26 - 2:49:28] ▶
I just think if you're.
[2:49:28 - 2:49:32] ▶
If you're operating these machines at a Nellis testing range,
[2:49:32 - 2:49:37] ▶
you have to be pretty familiar with probably exotic stuff.
[2:49:37 - 2:49:40] ▶
What can you see that it does.
[2:49:41 - 2:49:43] ▶
It does basically a 90 degree turn.
[2:49:43 - 2:49:45] ▶
It doesn't sure does.
[2:49:45 - 2:49:47] ▶
A guy made a metal bunk in 1996 or so.
[2:49:47 - 2:49:51] ▶
And he did a good job.
[2:49:52 - 2:49:53] ▶
Remember I sent you the video.
[2:49:53 - 2:49:55] ▶
But I put this in sit-rek and you can see that the range indicator is like, you know, bullshit basically.
[2:49:55 - 2:50:01] ▶
And if you just just use the lines of sight, there's a perfectly reasonable path window
[2:50:01 - 2:50:06] ▶
of a path for a balloon.
[2:50:06 - 2:50:08] ▶
So I'd love to see that because.
[2:50:08 - 2:50:10] ▶
I don't know how I look at triangle shape.
[2:50:10 - 2:50:12] ▶
This isn't infrared, I think.
[2:50:17 - 2:50:19] ▶
I mean, you asked me to do it in sit-rek, so I did.
[2:50:23 - 2:50:26] ▶
And then you took my results and you said that it drove what you originally thought.
[2:50:26 - 2:50:32] ▶
Yeah, so what I don't think it does.
[2:50:32 - 2:50:34] ▶
I think the results show that the range data is very accurate.
[2:50:34 - 2:50:38] ▶
It looks like it jumps around.
[2:50:38 - 2:50:40] ▶
It looks like a bunch of balloons.
[2:50:40 - 2:50:42] ▶
It does all over the like an Apollo, you know, like very bizarre.
[2:50:42 - 2:50:46] ▶
This is made in the weirdest video I've seen.
[2:50:46 - 2:50:48] ▶
So, isn't that like a bunch of balloons to you?
[2:50:50 - 2:50:54] ▶
Right, it kind of pivots.
[2:50:54 - 2:50:56] ▶
It looks like the balloons are like, it malleable and wafing.
[2:50:56 - 2:51:00] ▶
It looks like it rotates.
[2:51:01 - 2:51:02] ▶
It rotates like a wind steps, which is very bizarre.
[2:51:02 - 2:51:04] ▶
I just think if your balloons and you're operating these systems at, you know, restricted airspace,
[2:51:04 - 2:51:10] ▶
like you have to have some protocol for balloons.
[2:51:10 - 2:51:13] ▶
Like you have to know what...
[2:51:13 - 2:51:15] ▶
Yeah, but you wouldn't be freaking out.
[2:51:16 - 2:51:17] ▶
Like you didn't know.
[2:51:17 - 2:51:18] ▶
That's just balloon.
[2:51:18 - 2:51:19] ▶
What's interesting is it's coming from...
[2:51:19 - 2:51:21] ▶
The arrow should analyze it.
[2:51:22 - 2:51:23] ▶
It's coming from area 51.
[2:51:23 - 2:51:25] ▶
That is very interesting.
[2:51:25 - 2:51:27] ▶
Yeah, well that's...
[2:51:27 - 2:51:28] ▶
No, it's testing range is very interesting.
[2:51:28 - 2:51:29] ▶
You could trace where like it's moving west at first, and then it takes a...
[2:51:31 - 2:51:35] ▶
Basically a right turn and goes north.
[2:51:35 - 2:51:37] ▶
So, shouldn't your Occam's razor be...
[2:51:37 - 2:51:39] ▶
You know, well, it depends on what you think.
[2:51:39 - 2:51:41] ▶
What's going on at area 51, which in Occam's razor be...
[2:51:41 - 2:51:44] ▶
It is an interesting twist.
[2:51:44 - 2:51:45] ▶
This is a military aircraft, yeah.
[2:51:45 - 2:51:47] ▶
No, why didn't they scramble jets and go after it?
[2:51:47 - 2:51:50] ▶
I don't think it was...
[2:51:50 - 2:51:51] ▶
The whole thing was...
[2:51:51 - 2:51:52] ▶
You were all in shock, you could hear them like, what is that?
[2:51:52 - 2:51:54] ▶
What if they were to surprise the scramble jets and do anything?
[2:51:54 - 2:51:56] ▶
No, they didn't do anything.
[2:51:56 - 2:51:58] ▶
You know, I had no idea.
[2:52:00 - 2:52:02] ▶
Maybe they scramble jets as soon as that...
[2:52:04 - 2:52:06] ▶
Maybe they realized it was some balloons and didn't scramble jets.
[2:52:06 - 2:52:08] ▶
So, it's sipping along, right?
[2:52:08 - 2:52:10] ▶
And it's going west, and then it basically does a 90 degree turn.
[2:52:10 - 2:52:14] ▶
The range stays sort of big.
[2:52:15 - 2:52:16] ▶
No, you can see it visually.
[2:52:16 - 2:52:17] ▶
Like, you can actually see it visually.
[2:52:17 - 2:52:18] ▶
Yeah, I mean, do you want to play it again?
[2:52:20 - 2:52:23] ▶
We'll have to revisit this then.
[2:52:23 - 2:52:25] ▶
Yeah, no, I mean, it's quite clear, right?
[2:52:25 - 2:52:26] ▶
It's because it's...
[2:52:26 - 2:52:27] ▶
We do this for the...
[2:52:29 - 2:52:30] ▶
For the folks at home.
[2:52:30 - 2:52:31] ▶
It's going this way, right?
[2:52:31 - 2:52:33] ▶
Going kind of away from you.
[2:52:33 - 2:52:35] ▶
And then it does one of these and flies over the camera.
[2:52:35 - 2:52:38] ▶
Yeah, if the range stays sort of square.
[2:52:38 - 2:52:40] ▶
No, no, no, you can see it visually.
[2:52:40 - 2:52:42] ▶
You don't even need the range.
[2:52:42 - 2:52:43] ▶
Well, it's moving towards the camera.
[2:52:43 - 2:52:44] ▶
You can see it's going first.
[2:52:44 - 2:52:45] ▶
It's moving perpendicular.
[2:52:46 - 2:52:48] ▶
And then it does this.
[2:52:48 - 2:52:50] ▶
So this is off the coast of Chile.
[2:52:58 - 2:53:01] ▶
And there's a 2013...
[2:53:04 - 2:53:06] ▶
It's on the coast of Puerto Rico.
[2:53:06 - 2:53:08] ▶
2013 on the coast of Puerto Rico.
[2:53:08 - 2:53:10] ▶
Where there are a lot of sightings.
[2:53:10 - 2:53:13] ▶
This is over the port of Aguadilla.
[2:53:14 - 2:53:18] ▶
A big tourist destination.
[2:53:18 - 2:53:19] ▶
There's a bunch of hotels up the beach.
[2:53:19 - 2:53:22] ▶
It shows an object that appears to be flying in a circle around the airport.
[2:53:22 - 2:53:29] ▶
And this is something that's been analyzed by a lot of people.
[2:53:29 - 2:53:33] ▶
The interesting thing about it is that it flies in a circle, which is kind of unusual for such a small object to be doing.
[2:53:33 - 2:53:40] ▶
And then later it appears to go underwater.
[2:53:40 - 2:53:44] ▶
It looks like it goes underwater.
[2:53:44 - 2:53:45] ▶
And then it plays to spit into two.
[2:53:45 - 2:53:48] ▶
Spit into two parts.
[2:53:48 - 2:53:51] ▶
But a lot of people have analyzed this.
[2:53:51 - 2:53:54] ▶
And pretty much everyone who has analyzed it has realized that if you take the lines of sight,
[2:53:54 - 2:53:58] ▶
which you can get from the camera here, or the numbers on the screen,
[2:53:58 - 2:54:05] ▶
the line to sight all intersect over the airport.
[2:54:05 - 2:54:07] ▶
Not just at the intersection of the line over the airport.
[2:54:07 - 2:54:10] ▶
And that line represents a vector that's moving more or less at wind speed, about 18 miles per hour.
[2:54:10 - 2:54:15] ▶
And it kind of decreases a little bit as the balloon was the object sinks to a lower altitude.
[2:54:15 - 2:54:20] ▶
And a theory that was proposed by the head of Brazil's UFO investigation department, Ruben Leanza,
[2:54:21 - 2:54:30] ▶
is that it's actually two Chinese lanterns, wedding lanterns, going to tie it together.
[2:54:30 - 2:54:36] ▶
And that's why you see early on in the video, you see two shapes moving around each other.
[2:54:36 - 2:54:42] ▶
Partway through the video, you see the heat source, and then you see kind of the paper canopy of the lanterns behind it.
[2:54:43 - 2:54:51] ▶
And then when it gets to this section here, this is where we see it kind of disappear.
[2:54:51 - 2:54:55] ▶
Now, this is thermal footage.
[2:54:55 - 2:54:58] ▶
So we're seeing the black is the hot of the flame, and there's some blooming or glare.
[2:54:58 - 2:55:03] ▶
And then when it moves, so that's hidden by the paper, the paper canopy,
[2:55:03 - 2:55:08] ▶
it becomes, it's almost the same color as the ocean, the media compression, you can't keep up with it, so it disappears.
[2:55:08 - 2:55:15] ▶
You can moralist see it at that alone time.
[2:55:15 - 2:55:17] ▶
And then it reappears, and it kind of splits into two, which ties in with the earlier observations,
[2:55:17 - 2:55:23] ▶
that there appears to be two heat sources, that there's actually two wedding lanterns.
[2:55:23 - 2:55:29] ▶
And more research was that there are actually hotels up the beach, upwind from this location, which release these types of wedding lanterns.
[2:55:29 - 2:55:37] ▶
And then this was all confirmed, basically, by Arrow, analyzing this and coming to the same conclusion.
[2:55:37 - 2:55:43] ▶
What do you think, Mayor?
[2:55:43 - 2:55:45] ▶
Well, that'll probably cost me some Twitter followers. Great, I agree. I don't have any gestures.
[2:55:45 - 2:55:50] ▶
Okay. So this is what's good to hear. See you guys agree on something.
[2:55:50 - 2:55:54] ▶
There are people who won't agree. No, I can see you, for example.
[2:55:55 - 2:55:58] ▶
I mean, it's clear. I agree with the vast radio mix work.
[2:55:58 - 2:56:02] ▶
Right, because as we know throughout history, right, 80, 90% of these things are pro-Zaglic spain misidentified.
[2:56:02 - 2:56:08] ▶
We've seen this in New Jersey, right? People are literally video taping or recording aircraft.
[2:56:08 - 2:56:13] ▶
So speaking of which, the world is going crazy.
[2:56:13 - 2:56:17] ▶
They're drones in sensitive air spaces, quote unquote, drones.
[2:56:17 - 2:56:20] ▶
And I'm just saying quote unquote because nobody has any good, even you have to admit, Mick,
[2:56:20 - 2:56:26] ▶
nobody's coming out and saying anything clear about these things.
[2:56:26 - 2:56:29] ▶
One thing that's very, very clear is that there's a lot of misidentifications.
[2:56:30 - 2:56:33] ▶
I believe that I'm shy. I'm sure.
[2:56:33 - 2:56:35] ▶
And there really aren't any good videos that are unambiguously of drones or some kind of beyond-drones-type things.
[2:56:35 - 2:56:42] ▶
Sure, but would you admit that there's a spike globally of these weird sightings in sensitive air spaces?
[2:56:42 - 2:56:48] ▶
Is this because that there actually are more of them?
[2:56:48 - 2:56:51] ▶
Or is it because people are reporting more of them because of this story is kind of blossomed up from these original stories of drones over airbase?
[2:56:51 - 2:56:58] ▶
I don't know the data, but my strong bias would be that there are more sightings.
[2:56:59 - 2:57:03] ▶
All these false sightings, though.
[2:57:03 - 2:57:05] ▶
All these false sightings are just people looking out plain.
[2:57:05 - 2:57:07] ▶
So there's a huge spike in those.
[2:57:07 - 2:57:09] ▶
So why wouldn't it be like all just this from this huge spike in the mix?
[2:57:09 - 2:57:12] ▶
I'll push back slightly, Mick.
[2:57:12 - 2:57:13] ▶
You're right. People misidentify things.
[2:57:15 - 2:57:18] ▶
But I think you might be pushing this narrative a little too far because it really,
[2:57:18 - 2:57:25] ▶
the very obvious plane videos, there's only like three or four of them.
[2:57:25 - 2:57:29] ▶
They're obvious, like, that are planes.
[2:57:29 - 2:57:32] ▶
There's not that many.
[2:57:32 - 2:57:33] ▶
Oh, there's a lot more that are...
[2:57:33 - 2:57:35] ▶
Resolvable as planes if we know the actual location.
[2:57:36 - 2:57:38] ▶
I got sent one the other day and tracked down the actual planes.
[2:57:38 - 2:57:41] ▶
And you just looked like these little pilots.
[2:57:41 - 2:57:43] ▶
Let's get into the weirdest one.
[2:57:43 - 2:57:45] ▶
It's got completely viral on Twitter.
[2:57:46 - 2:57:48] ▶
It's the Manchester airport in June, 2024, citing.
[2:57:48 - 2:57:51] ▶
An employee, an anonymous pilot and co-pilot, see this thing.
[2:57:52 - 2:57:57] ▶
And I think the quote is, I've worked in aviation for a very long time.
[2:57:57 - 2:58:04] ▶
And I know what a weather balloon looks like.
[2:58:04 - 2:58:08] ▶
The report is that this orb comes down, hits the tarmac, and then shoots up.
[2:58:08 - 2:58:12] ▶
But he also said it was the side of a small car.
[2:58:12 - 2:58:15] ▶
And that's 24 inches tops.
[2:58:15 - 2:58:18] ▶
We did very detailed analysis, 3D recreation of this thing.
[2:58:19 - 2:58:22] ▶
From these exact viewpoints and using the...
[2:58:22 - 2:58:24] ▶
Oh, the taste of that is the most 24 inches.
[2:58:24 - 2:58:27] ▶
I got nothing, guys.
[2:58:28 - 2:58:29] ▶
It's... I don't know.
[2:58:31 - 2:58:33] ▶
I guess it's a balloon and some like, how it affects in the image of that.
[2:58:35 - 2:58:38] ▶
Have you have this interesting case of quote-unquote UAP activity
[2:58:41 - 2:58:44] ▶
near Duke Energy's Newtlear Facility in North Carolina?
[2:58:44 - 2:58:47] ▶
I personally find this interesting because my Occam's razor belief generally is that it's, you know, prosaically explainable way.
[2:58:47 - 2:58:55] ▶
The thing I hold out, you know, interest in is when the sighting occurs around a nuclear facility.
[2:58:55 - 2:59:02] ▶
I find it very fascinating that there is a town next to the Fukushima Prefecture in Japan called Yeno,
[2:59:02 - 2:59:09] ▶
which is dedicated to UFOs.
[2:59:09 - 2:59:11] ▶
And it's where they had their famous 2011 spill, you know, nuclear.
[2:59:11 - 2:59:16] ▶
And then, you know, there have been sightings in Barra Loce, Argentina, which has its own civilian nuclear grid.
[2:59:16 - 2:59:21] ▶
And then if you look at Edward J. Ruppelt, the book you cited,
[2:59:21 - 2:59:25] ▶
that's majority of the sightings that he takes seriously occur around sensitive nuclear facilities in the US.
[2:59:25 - 2:59:34] ▶
And then you have Robert Hastings' work.
[2:59:35 - 2:59:37] ▶
And so if I had to, you know, again, steal man the UFO position, it would be around this nuclear connection.
[2:59:37 - 2:59:43] ▶
And this I find interesting because you have UAP activity around this nuclear power plant.
[2:59:43 - 2:59:48] ▶
Should we just watch the video?
[2:59:48 - 2:59:49] ▶
And I'll just quickly say, Jesse, your point, the nuclear connection is extraordinary.
[2:59:49 - 2:59:54] ▶
And I've written about it.
[2:59:55 - 2:59:57] ▶
No, I mean, it's amazing.
[2:59:58 - 2:59:59] ▶
And more and more Roswell itself, the site of the 509th Atomic Bomber Squadron, the first bomber squadron in the US,
[2:59:59 - 3:00:06] ▶
you have, you know, the Trinity Test Site, possibly there was a crash there,
[3:00:06 - 3:00:11] ▶
uncle of DD Johnson on one side, you have Jeff Pullet on the other side, they're kind of arguing.
[3:00:11 - 3:00:15] ▶
Well, one is the more that happened, a couple miles from the trip.
[3:00:15 - 3:00:17] ▶
A couple of miles from there.
[3:00:17 - 3:00:19] ▶
It would be the reason that New Mexico is such a hotspot for all of us.
[3:00:19 - 3:00:22] ▶
It's a kind of destiny.
[3:00:22 - 3:00:23] ▶
Some with Arrow, I think there's a lot of reporting bias.
[3:00:23 - 3:00:27] ▶
You get reports on highly sensitive sites, just because people are much more vigilant.
[3:00:27 - 3:00:32] ▶
People who work on these sites are trained to report things.
[3:00:33 - 3:00:37] ▶
People who work at Walmart are not trained to report things.
[3:00:37 - 3:00:39] ▶
You got to read the cable, and this is, again, the John Greenwald's credit,
[3:00:39 - 3:00:44] ▶
like you got to read the cable, like 1975, or you wear it, do you know anything about those incursions,
[3:00:44 - 3:00:48] ▶
where you can see in a literally a cable to the Pentagon.
[3:00:48 - 3:00:53] ▶
Is that nuclear subsets?
[3:00:53 - 3:00:55] ▶
And it says, the language is a clear intent.
[3:00:57 - 3:01:00] ▶
There's objects hovering 10 feet above.
[3:01:01 - 3:01:04] ▶
They're nuclear weapon storage facilities, right?
[3:01:04 - 3:01:06] ▶
And there are videos of the plume of various detonations where you see the UFOs.
[3:01:06 - 3:01:11] ▶
There's one blue-gill triple prime.
[3:01:11 - 3:01:13] ▶
I think they were either supposed to plan or something else.
[3:01:14 - 3:01:17] ▶
But I can't remember what they were exactly, but that was resolved, as I recall.
[3:01:17 - 3:01:20] ▶
Yeah, well, look it up.
[3:01:21 - 3:01:22] ▶
We should look it up.
[3:01:22 - 3:01:23] ▶
I'd love to resolve.
[3:01:23 - 3:01:24] ▶
And even in Virginia in Brazil, where James Fox went down, investigated for a moment of contact,
[3:01:24 - 3:01:29] ▶
where you have all these, you know, hapless, local citizens who don't seem like liars.
[3:01:30 - 3:01:34] ▶
Is there a nuclear power station there?
[3:01:34 - 3:01:36] ▶
Yeah, that was the start of their nuclear program is what I've heard.
[3:01:36 - 3:01:40] ▶
And so I don't know.
[3:01:40 - 3:01:42] ▶
It just keeps popping up with a nuclear thing.
[3:01:42 - 3:01:45] ▶
And it does cut through this.
[3:01:45 - 3:01:47] ▶
It's allegedly, as Cornel Open Source reporting, that it's supposed to host U.S. nuclear weapons.
[3:01:50 - 3:01:55] ▶
And Heath was one of the site of one of the most extraordinary historical accounts in 1956.
[3:01:55 - 3:02:00] ▶
James McDonnell wrote quite a bit about this in folks at home.
[3:02:00 - 3:02:05] ▶
Like just look up Lake and Heath in 1956.
[3:02:05 - 3:02:08] ▶
McDonnell, you'll find CIA documents.
[3:02:08 - 3:02:10] ▶
You'll find a really lengthy write up on the Princeton.edu website that is just absolutely astounding.
[3:02:10 - 3:02:17] ▶
Also, Royal Air Force bent waters.
[3:02:17 - 3:02:20] ▶
You have a bunch of witnesses.
[3:02:22 - 3:02:24] ▶
Because it was joint, you know, managed by the U.S. and the Royal Air Force.
[3:02:24 - 3:02:27] ▶
You have a bunch of, you know, John Burrows, Jim Peniston, Colonel Holt, who did the investigation.
[3:02:27 - 3:02:33] ▶
And the audio and the, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
[3:02:33 - 3:02:35] ▶
I was listening to the book on the way here at U.F.R. News.
[3:02:35 - 3:02:37] ▶
And it's a lot of you think about that.
[3:02:38 - 3:02:39] ▶
Because that's, I told you you read that.
[3:02:39 - 3:02:40] ▶
And so the CIA would seem compelling.
[3:02:40 - 3:02:42] ▶
Because there's a counter after a counter after a counter of something seemed like.
[3:02:42 - 3:02:45] ▶
And if you meet, like I actually get the sense from you.
[3:02:45 - 3:02:48] ▶
I don't think you're a liar at all.
[3:02:48 - 3:02:51] ▶
I think you're very, no, I mean it.
[3:02:51 - 3:02:53] ▶
I really, I get this like clear attention to detail, like good earnest vibe.
[3:02:53 - 3:02:59] ▶
And that's the same vibe I get from Robert A. Sings.
[3:02:59 - 3:03:02] ▶
In fact, like the way I connected with Robert A. Sings.
[3:03:02 - 3:03:05] ▶
I think he was lying in the book.
[3:03:05 - 3:03:07] ▶
No, I'm not, I'm not accusing him of that.
[3:03:07 - 3:03:09] ▶
But he's dedicated his life to this in the amount of granular detail.
[3:03:09 - 3:03:13] ▶
I mean, you should meet him.
[3:03:13 - 3:03:14] ▶
If you're interested, he reached out to me.
[3:03:14 - 3:03:16] ▶
This is how I got in touch with him.
[3:03:16 - 3:03:18] ▶
I made my piece with David Grush.
[3:03:18 - 3:03:20] ▶
And I screwed it up.
[3:03:20 - 3:03:22] ▶
And I overstated the case.
[3:03:22 - 3:03:24] ▶
I was like, you know, UFOs and nukes, you have, you know, over a hundred.
[3:03:24 - 3:03:29] ▶
ICBM's 30% like a few other.
[3:03:30 - 3:03:32] ▶
And it was, it's 170 total witnesses.
[3:03:32 - 3:03:35] ▶
But it wasn't a hundred radar operators or whatever.
[3:03:35 - 3:03:38] ▶
And I just dispersed the program.
[3:03:38 - 3:03:40] ▶
He emailed me and said, Jesse, it was only like 12 to 15.
[3:03:42 - 3:03:46] ▶
I don't remember the exact number.
[3:03:46 - 3:03:48] ▶
But radar operators, the rest were ICBM's security personnel, you know, missile technicians,
[3:03:48 - 3:03:55] ▶
And it was, and then that's been literally like all of my communications with him have been around that.
[3:03:56 - 3:04:02] ▶
And he'll correct you immediately if you're wrong.
[3:04:02 - 3:04:04] ▶
And if you're overstating a case.
[3:04:04 - 3:04:06] ▶
Not tasting exact statistics here.
[3:04:06 - 3:04:08] ▶
Like actual statistical analysis of, you know,
[3:04:08 - 3:04:12] ▶
and citing near nukes, mostly so there was that are actually valid.
[3:04:12 - 3:04:16] ▶
Well, yeah, it would be Edward J. Ruppelt's original study where he came in.
[3:04:16 - 3:04:22] ▶
That was done from 1947, 1952.
[3:04:22 - 3:04:24] ▶
And then he wrote a book about a 1956.
[3:04:24 - 3:04:26] ▶
I mean, the Colorado sightings, right?
[3:04:26 - 3:04:29] ▶
Those were over those nuclear missile silos partially, partially.
[3:04:30 - 3:04:35] ▶
And they mirrored 1965.
[3:04:35 - 3:04:37] ▶
The same exact like their, their witnesses talking about up and down movement.
[3:04:37 - 3:04:40] ▶
Bright flashing lights.
[3:04:40 - 3:04:41] ▶
Where we've seen that before, right?
[3:04:41 - 3:04:42] ▶
And it's undocumented, right?
[3:04:42 - 3:04:44] ▶
And I've met some, I met Robert Salis at Malmstrom in 1967.
[3:04:46 - 3:04:50] ▶
You know, that was his sighting where, you know,
[3:04:50 - 3:04:52] ▶
ten of these sites were disarmed according to him.
[3:04:52 - 3:04:55] ▶
And I've also met Mario Woods, who was stationed at, you know, South Dakota,
[3:04:55 - 3:04:59] ▶
Ellsworth Air Force Base in 1978.
[3:04:59 - 3:05:01] ▶
He claimed to have boarded a craft and been abducted.
[3:05:01 - 3:05:04] ▶
And he, but this guy maintained a queue clearance for 20 years after this.
[3:05:04 - 3:05:08] ▶
And all these guys are, it's the most scientific clearances.
[3:05:08 - 3:05:11] ▶
They're on what's called the PRP program.
[3:05:11 - 3:05:13] ▶
It's where they're reported if they're taking IB perfect.
[3:05:13 - 3:05:15] ▶
So I do find that compelling.
[3:05:15 - 3:05:17] ▶
So it speaks to the whole issue with, you know, the Macarubian,
[3:05:17 - 3:05:21] ▶
who we talked about at the start, like, you know, either there's some crazy people in power
[3:05:21 - 3:05:24] ▶
or, you know, what they're saying is true.
[3:05:24 - 3:05:26] ▶
And he leans towards true, right?
[3:05:26 - 3:05:28] ▶
Just to be clear, Ruby was very clearly leaning towards, I trust them.
[3:05:28 - 3:05:31] ▶
But there is evidence that there are crazy people,
[3:05:31 - 3:05:34] ▶
but people with very strange ideas.
[3:05:34 - 3:05:36] ▶
Oh, Lekatsky, for example, like he's like rocket scientist, right?
[3:05:36 - 3:05:39] ▶
Yeah, but I think the more you go into, like, you know, highly competent, you know,
[3:05:39 - 3:05:45] ▶
impressive circles of people, the more you realize a lot of these people are weird.
[3:05:45 - 3:05:49] ▶
Yeah, Tim Taylor is super weird, but he's also, you know, working with Elon Musk
[3:05:51 - 3:05:55] ▶
around, you know, various launches.
[3:05:55 - 3:05:57] ▶
But that just speaks to like how much weirdness you can actually get.
[3:05:59 - 3:06:02] ▶
But at what point do you say, what point do you say,
[3:06:02 - 3:06:04] ▶
what point do you say reality is weird in that a proxy for somebody's credibility is
[3:06:04 - 3:06:11] ▶
actually how high functioning they are.
[3:06:11 - 3:06:13] ▶
Well, it's just a big tolerance for weird within the Pentagon.
[3:06:13 - 3:06:16] ▶
Yes, how weird do you have like you have to be pretty darn weird to go to the ICIG,
[3:06:16 - 3:06:21] ▶
Spectra General, and say I was part of a I was part of a reverse engineering program.
[3:06:21 - 3:06:29] ▶
40 people have done allegedly.
[3:06:30 - 3:06:33] ▶
That's what the British has fun in growth.
[3:06:34 - 3:06:35] ▶
Does that make sense?
[3:06:38 - 3:06:39] ▶
There can be weird people, but there's a different level of I was on this program.
[3:06:41 - 3:06:42] ▶
I was on the weird people.
[3:06:42 - 3:06:43] ▶
I worked on this NHI craft.
[3:06:43 - 3:06:46] ▶
That's that's that's border.
[3:06:46 - 3:06:47] ▶
Like there's weird and then there's delusion if they're not.
[3:06:48 - 3:06:50] ▶
We don't know what this is.
[3:06:50 - 3:06:51] ▶
But enough for right to send intel.
[3:06:51 - 3:06:55] ▶
We should move forward.
[3:06:56 - 3:06:57] ▶
You should be hasting at one point.
[3:06:58 - 3:06:59] ▶
Let's watch this Duke video.
[3:06:59 - 3:07:01] ▶
What about locking the lights so come on?
[3:07:23 - 3:07:26] ▶
wait so so one of them so it's a triangle and then one one seems to kind of
[3:07:44 - 3:07:48] ▶
the bottom one there is sitting on
[3:07:54 - 3:07:56] ▶
the other one is not as it came
[3:08:00 - 3:08:02] ▶
okay what do you guys make of this?
[3:08:09 - 3:08:11] ▶
Well the white slice at the top you can see there is got two lights which kind of
[3:08:13 - 3:08:16] ▶
suggests to me that it's the landing lights of a distant plane very far away we see this quite a lot in
[3:08:16 - 3:08:21] ▶
in these videos people will see a plane that's coming directly towards them it could be like
[3:08:21 - 3:08:25] ▶
you know 45 to 100 miles away and it looks like this it just sits there and it kind of eventually
[3:08:25 - 3:08:31] ▶
raises up and it will eventually go over them the other lights I don't know they were kind of
[3:08:31 - 3:08:35] ▶
orange looking yeah i'm not sure what they they were could be helicopters could be drones if
[3:08:35 - 3:08:39] ▶
they're landing lights Mick can we test this right because if I were what yeah we could
[3:08:39 - 3:08:44] ▶
I'm just saying like because we know where this would we know what facility this was yeah
[3:08:44 - 3:08:49] ▶
Duke's energy we do we have the time location one or no but but landing lights implies that there's
[3:08:49 - 3:08:53] ▶
an airport and a and a final approach path somewhere close by we can test your hypothesis if we have
[3:08:53 - 3:08:58] ▶
the location yeah so south port north Carolina so we should we should look at it really
[3:08:58 - 3:09:02] ▶
accurate enough you need it okay fair enough down to the street pretty much and then we have some
[3:09:02 - 3:09:07] ▶
other people commenting I have seven videos of them from last night around 30 minutes of good video
[3:09:07 - 3:09:11] ▶
I'm an afel north carolina the two mean ones were in red were a red and blue one the blue one
[3:09:11 - 3:09:18] ▶
was amazing to watch pulsate grow 5x larger than shrink back to size I don't know people post videos
[3:09:18 - 3:09:26] ▶
of things that are obviously planes and think that the you are so so it's not surprising people
[3:09:26 - 3:09:30] ▶
will post videos of lights in the sky and think that the you are I'm glad he's like to play your song
[3:09:30 - 3:09:35] ▶
what I find more compelling maybe than this is I'll just be very quick the Langley incursions view
[3:09:36 - 3:09:43] ▶
there's a there's a witness video where the guy zooms out and you can see I don't know 10 15
[3:09:43 - 3:09:48] ▶
flashing light and you can tell they're very very far out no that is interesting in itself but
[3:09:49 - 3:09:54] ▶
you see that over the goldwater training rangers of videos same thing just just unbelievable
[3:09:54 - 3:09:59] ▶
amounts of flashing lights in the sky drones and oh by the way air force pilots have been reporting
[3:09:59 - 3:10:04] ▶
drones up to 36th drones up to 36,000 feet there's there's like 30 or 40 reports over the last
[3:10:04 - 3:10:10] ▶
couple years that they metallic objects eight or nine it's all documented you know it's it's it's
[3:10:10 - 3:10:17] ▶
it's all out there can we all agree that we need to figure out what what's going on and the
[3:10:17 - 3:10:23] ▶
information would be great more videos would be great more analysis from arrow would be great
[3:10:23 - 3:10:27] ▶
and more expert should weigh in that's the way I think that's the takeaway please if you're
[3:10:27 - 3:10:31] ▶
watching at home we have to wrap up the minute but do you have any opinion on this new jersey
[3:10:31 - 3:10:35] ▶
thing should we should we play this I look I I always do a from the new Jersey I'll just like
[3:10:35 - 3:10:41] ▶
always see the other guys and quickly we have FBI we have FAA there's drone restrictions in place
[3:10:41 - 3:10:48] ▶
there's the governors involved all the elected officials it's a flat you think it's a flat yeah
[3:10:49 - 3:10:55] ▶
I think it's a flat by dancing there's there's very much that maybe so
[3:10:55 - 3:10:58] ▶
you think Colorado 2019 2020 was a flat out very much so can I read a couple emails or do we
[3:10:58 - 3:11:03] ▶
do we have to go emails quick okay so thanks to Doug Johnson I'll I'll make this very quick
[3:11:03 - 3:11:08] ▶
drone activity here we go reports from Colorado indicate that drones were not flying as a
[3:11:09 - 3:11:13] ▶
group or pack but as a single unit chase county Nebraska sheriff deputy reported observing 30 to
[3:11:13 - 3:11:18] ▶
50 sheriff I mean 30 exactly hold on 30 to 50 flying independently of each other with a larger
[3:11:18 - 3:11:24] ▶
quote mothership hovering hovering for hours it's seen planes flying over has yeah this idea
[3:11:24 - 3:11:29] ▶
of a mothership and then the other 50s coming out of the mothership Chris melon former deputy
[3:11:29 - 3:11:33] ▶
assistant secretary of defense for intelligence under both Clinton and Bush yeah uh said that
[3:11:33 - 3:11:39] ▶
there was this mothership dynamic going on with the Hampton Air Force base incursion as well where
[3:11:39 - 3:11:44] ▶
you have these little saucers flying out of a mothership I don't know here's the hypothesis for
[3:11:44 - 3:11:49] ▶
the green meteorites and you've heard in Duke's that there was a mothership outside the atmosphere
[3:11:49 - 3:11:53] ▶
and the green meteorites will e if as nakes mentions this as well yes here's a canine trooper from
[3:11:53 - 3:11:58] ▶
I'll be very quick canine trooper from Kansas uh he had these flow fly right over his head he said
[3:11:58 - 3:12:04] ▶
one of the drones had a really bright light on it like a spotlight that drone stayed relatively
[3:12:04 - 3:12:07] ▶
stationary at that location he then said there were anywhere from 10 to 15 drones that flew all kinds
[3:12:07 - 3:12:13] ▶
of patterns around that stationary drone at one point one of those drew flew directly over his house
[3:12:13 - 3:12:19] ▶
he had night vision with them so he tried to look at it made no sound even though the wind was
[3:12:19 - 3:12:24] ▶
calm all right I win this counts great video for what we need Merrick Mick this was awesome I
[3:12:24 - 3:12:30] ▶
appreciate you guys both things you're doing this Mick thank you yeah it is this is great I mean
[3:12:30 - 3:12:34] ▶
you guys were I felt like you know mostly pretty civil and cool with each other and I think I think
[3:12:34 - 3:12:39] ▶
both of all of us want just more experts to look at this more data uh and and more witnesses again
[3:12:39 - 3:12:46] ▶
to the extent you're not compromising American national security come out and talk about this stuff
[3:12:46 - 3:12:51] ▶
I enjoy this very much I enjoy solving cases and you might investigating them and if he turns out
[3:12:51 - 3:12:56] ▶
that I'm wrong about things that would be really interesting you'll buy me a grid and if gimbals
[3:12:56 - 3:13:00] ▶
debunk I'm not you bear and I I have a bet I have a bet that I guess we never result we were talking
[3:13:00 - 3:13:05] ▶
about this before the show I bet you $10,000 which is insane because I gave you one-to-one odds and
[3:13:05 - 3:13:12] ▶
it should be million-to-one odds that uh 80 percent we get 80 percent consensus in like academia
[3:13:12 - 3:13:19] ▶
military and civilian sector that uh non-human intelligence or future humans are occupying these
[3:13:19 - 3:13:26] ▶
sort of anomalous crafts and that people would this would become the consensus in 10 years which is
[3:13:26 - 3:13:31] ▶
as you pointed out kind of hard to verify ultimately this 80 percent consensus but you
[3:13:31 - 3:13:37] ▶
moved that number from 10,000 to 1,000 I just like more reasonable bets because they took
[3:13:37 - 3:13:43] ▶
for it's legal I think it's an unreasonable bet for me on it's like a joke for me I'm giving you
[3:13:43 - 3:13:48] ▶
free money but let's let's just better be here then okay let's do it awesome thanks man yeah
[3:13:48 - 3:13:55] ▶
thank you guys this is great yeah all right cool
[3:13:55 - 3:13:58] ▶
so we're back with Mick and Merrick and uh we felt compelled to extend our debate somewhat
[3:13:58 - 3:14:11] ▶
because so much bombshell footage has been released uh since our our long debate specifically
[3:14:11 - 3:14:17] ▶
we're talking about this egg video that has kind of broken the internet over the last couple of
[3:14:17 - 3:14:22] ▶
days associated with uh Ross Coolathard's news nation story involving psionic assets specifically
[3:14:22 - 3:14:29] ▶
a guy named Jake Barber who was part of a crash retrieval team involving these psionic assets
[3:14:29 - 3:14:35] ▶
people psychically calling in exotic material of which uh this egg is is is claimed to be kind of
[3:14:35 - 3:14:44] ▶
a part of that and it's being hooked on do well I guess you you want to play it Nick and we can
[3:14:44 - 3:14:49] ▶
we can turn it on yeah yeah yeah so like it looks like it's on the end of a long rope it's like a big
[3:14:49 - 3:14:54] ▶
egg yeah it's kind of swaying around and it hits the ground and you see it kind of roll over and
[3:14:54 - 3:15:00] ▶
you see the kind of like the wrapping around it loosens and then you see these these wires and this
[3:15:00 - 3:15:05] ▶
is from the TV show they kind of went in and slowed it down a little bit um and you can see like
[3:15:05 - 3:15:11] ▶
you know he's there's lighting coming from over here there's a shadow in this direction uh there's
[3:15:11 - 3:15:17] ▶
you know a little bit of a roll when it hits the ground which shows he has a little bit of inertia
[3:15:19 - 3:15:23] ▶
um and you know it's it's not a super high quality video but you can see that it is kind of like
[3:15:23 - 3:15:29] ▶
an egg shaped object on the end of uh of a rope of some sort you know we don't know the
[3:15:29 - 3:15:34] ▶
whether it's is this a real video is it's something that someone's someone's faked uh it's I think
[3:15:34 - 3:15:39] ▶
it was sent in nominously anonymously uh to to Ross it wasn't actually taken by the Jake Barber
[3:15:39 - 3:15:46] ▶
guy what was it it was sent anonymously now i'm just
[3:15:46 - 3:15:51] ▶
I'm just clicking a number yeah it was sent by a third party uh to use nation not not by Jake
[3:15:52 - 3:15:59] ▶
um yeah and it doesn't show that the actual event that he was talking about which he's
[3:15:59 - 3:16:05] ▶
like what's that means that there's there's multiple versions of these these eggs uh being
[3:16:05 - 3:16:09] ▶
picked up by different people which uh apparently you know there's all these different eggs that
[3:16:09 - 3:16:13] ▶
people are picking up maybe it's a very common shape but uh it's kind of a new shape to me like
[3:16:13 - 3:16:18] ▶
the egg i guess it's one of the ones that crops up but it's not like a tiktok it's not like
[3:16:18 - 3:16:21] ▶
they're flying saucer it's an egg i did spend a little bit of time trying to replicate it as
[3:16:21 - 3:16:26] ▶
i made a little uh egg in a little sling so i've got like the whole uh the kebudo always it you know
[3:16:26 - 3:16:33] ▶
kind of led me to think it's probably not a scale model i don't think he's actually an egg
[3:16:33 - 3:16:39] ▶
shaped thing i think it's probably something larger i think it might actually be from a helicop
[3:16:39 - 3:16:43] ▶
journey it might be something being moved uh but yeah it like all these videos though quality really
[3:16:43 - 3:16:51] ▶
isn't there it's just uh very low resolution and very short where did they chop it off so
[3:16:51 - 3:16:57] ▶
not a lot to go by interesting though oh and the back story of course is very interesting i
[3:16:58 - 3:17:03] ▶
saw uh maric you were talking to to roscoffert uh and uh uh uh tim gole debt about this and
[3:17:03 - 3:17:11] ▶
they were talking all about what kind of strange things like the like psychic powers and stuff like
[3:17:11 - 3:17:15] ▶
that which was kind of an interesting mixture of things i think you know we've got this this you know
[3:17:15 - 3:17:22] ▶
a lot of this ufo survey just nuts and bolts this would be nuts and bolts if it was just like
[3:17:22 - 3:17:26] ▶
an object being retrieved but then we've got the whole psychic scianic aspect of it which is a bit
[3:17:26 - 3:17:31] ▶
bit weird yeah maric what's your take dammit it looks like an egg that's all really um
[3:17:31 - 3:17:40] ▶
yeah what i do find interesting is and again i'm again i try to bring a bit of an analytic
[3:17:40 - 3:17:46] ▶
perspective but there's a gentleman named eric taber who went to arrow uh i don't know if
[3:17:46 - 3:17:51] ▶
Jess if you're familiar with this but you yeah who did speak to arrow and he spoke of
[3:17:51 - 3:17:56] ▶
um an egg shaped craft being retrieved and i believe this is at area 51 um i don't believe he
[3:17:57 - 3:18:03] ▶
was a firsthand witness so take it as you will but again um that that shape does come up i agree
[3:18:03 - 3:18:09] ▶
with mick it's not your standard saucer it's not your or it's not your sphere or the the stuff that
[3:18:09 - 3:18:14] ▶
you you hear a lot it's not a triangle um but um you know there there is it seems like there is
[3:18:14 - 3:18:20] ▶
some precedent for ace another story um uh of you know of this nature and and involving an
[3:18:20 - 3:18:25] ▶
anomalous craft that is egg shaped it's just a shame we don't have better video of it because it's
[3:18:25 - 3:18:31] ▶
just remains somewhat ambiguous yeah it definitely felt like you know this like high resolution
[3:18:31 - 3:18:39] ▶
footage promise you know maybe maybe you know it's it's slightly underwhelming and then at the same
[3:18:40 - 3:18:45] ▶
time in the instance in which this was a real thing this is actually like very good footage comparable
[3:18:45 - 3:18:50] ▶
to like what we've had in the past so yeah kind of depends on like the objective truth which is
[3:18:50 - 3:18:55] ▶
you know it's this weird epistemic impasse that we're facing where if it is true it's actually
[3:18:55 - 3:19:01] ▶
a really good video and then if it's not you know obviously not yeah i guess that's all like all
[3:19:01 - 3:19:06] ▶
these videos is big big if true like all these claims are big if true but but better better than
[3:19:06 - 3:19:13] ▶
flair and gimbal and go fast and you know these are these are different sensor modalities like
[3:19:13 - 3:19:19] ▶
the soft and different jesse but well not better from like an analytic perspective
[3:19:19 - 3:19:23] ▶
the way you're looking at it americ but better for like a just like a again like if we were to get
[3:19:23 - 3:19:29] ▶
cooperative sensor data it would like be better for the the eye but yeah this isn't this isn't
[3:19:29 - 3:19:34] ▶
doing anything though this is just uh inertly hanging on the end of a rope uh and you know we've got
[3:19:34 - 3:19:41] ▶
upp especially all these observables like sudden acceleration did defying gravity being uh you know
[3:19:41 - 3:19:47] ▶
hard to see i think what was the low observability and uh transmitting travel it's doing none of these
[3:19:48 - 3:19:54] ▶
none of these things uh so it's hard to kind of classify this even as a uap i guess this is the
[3:19:54 - 3:20:00] ▶
context of the story that's around it that makes it interesting then we got this jake barba
[3:20:00 - 3:20:06] ▶
who you know is i believe he was a mechanic on the helicopter and not the pilot i'm not sure
[3:20:07 - 3:20:12] ▶
yet i would be i think we might be learning more about that mc no okay that's that's good yeah but you
[3:20:12 - 3:20:19] ▶
know it's uh he did some kind of crash retrieval apparently and you know there's an interesting story
[3:20:19 - 3:20:25] ▶
and also all kinds of other aspects of that story but um you know it's not doing anything
[3:20:25 - 3:20:31] ▶
right uh it's what we need we need we need videos of things doing things what what do you guys make a
[3:20:31 - 3:20:39] ▶
you know i feel like ufo world took a bit of a hard left turn away from cartesian space you know aliens
[3:20:39 - 3:20:48] ▶
from a distant galaxy and into kind of uh cypher psychology almost more in line with like a
[3:20:48 - 3:20:55] ▶
cult practice is such something what i don't know guys feel about that
[3:20:56 - 3:21:01] ▶
seems like there's a lot of that just suddenly cropped up it was weird because like you know before
[3:21:02 - 3:21:06] ▶
it was all nuts and bolts and then we suddenly had these drone stuff which is even more nuts and
[3:21:06 - 3:21:11] ▶
bolts everybody's getting into drones and then it's kind of like a hard swing now to psionic powers and
[3:21:11 - 3:21:17] ▶
like steven griotype stuff like dr steven griot who does this c5 stuff and then ross culfert
[3:21:17 - 3:21:23] ▶
uh uh who brought this out it says that he went out with the people and they had these psionic
[3:21:24 - 3:21:28] ▶
assets who could take control of craft uh which sounds you know bizarre and you know frankly ridiculous
[3:21:28 - 3:21:36] ▶
claim that you could actually cyclic this type take over an alien craft you think the aliens would be
[3:21:36 - 3:21:40] ▶
able to stop that type of thing but uh it does seem like a weird shift and someone mentioned that
[3:21:40 - 3:21:47] ▶
they thought like you know things were kind of dying down a bit in the ufo space and so perhaps
[3:21:47 - 3:21:52] ▶
people are reaching for more interesting things i don't know but it was weird definitely
[3:21:53 - 3:21:57] ▶
what do you think marit? i agree it's a shift um again i you know i focused on the nuts and bolts
[3:21:58 - 3:22:05] ▶
aspect i will say just my own personal progression i i was i've been very open about this i was
[3:22:05 - 3:22:10] ▶
deeply skeptical of uofos uh you i missed the 2017 story i think i mentioned this in in the
[3:22:11 - 3:22:17] ▶
longer version but i've gone through a few of my own mini ontological shocks throughout this
[3:22:17 - 3:22:23] ▶
journey right and um and and and you know again i'm skeptical of of everything i see just
[3:22:23 - 3:22:29] ▶
just kind of right off the bat i i wouldn't need to see evidence i have seen evidence now the gimbal
[3:22:29 - 3:22:33] ▶
video net make nose that we've talked to some experts and none of them agree with his theory and
[3:22:33 - 3:22:38] ▶
one of the most important ones explicitly disagrees with this series so that those those are
[3:22:38 - 3:22:43] ▶
those are steps on my journey from from this is all tinfoil hat whack jobbery to wow there's
[3:22:43 - 3:22:50] ▶
something to this then i then the next step was i had people telling me guy hey man there
[3:22:50 - 3:22:55] ▶
there have been crash retrievals and i was deeply skeptical of that having been in the government
[3:22:55 - 3:22:58] ▶
i was like there's no possible way that secret could have been kept for x amount of years
[3:22:58 - 3:23:03] ▶
and now we have people under we had chuck schumer alleging that in um in in congressional legislation
[3:23:03 - 3:23:09] ▶
right so it's it's remarkable i've gone through this several logical shocks and i might go through
[3:23:09 - 3:23:14] ▶
another one with a science i don't know i can't open mind okay interesting right off the bat
[3:23:14 - 3:23:19] ▶
and i'm keeping an open mind and i'll just say last um i'll add that jake and i think the other
[3:23:19 - 3:23:26] ▶
special operator Fred Baker who's is truly a legend in the community i've found in over the last
[3:23:26 - 3:23:31] ▶
24 hours they've said openly um don't trust us we'll show you so okay all right that's
[3:23:31 - 3:23:39] ▶
yeah they got a timeline on that they know we're doing it when it's good no but um but i you know
[3:23:39 - 3:23:46] ▶
i think that's great that's the right answer yeah yeah i definitely definitely i would definitely
[3:23:46 - 3:23:50] ▶
appreciate seeing more data and uh you know just you know the the stories aren't cutting it we need
[3:23:50 - 3:23:55] ▶
to see actual evidence i agree i think everybody agrees on that right yeah yeah
[3:23:55 - 3:23:58] ▶
yeah and maric you had uh something you want to bring up as well yeah
[3:24:00 - 3:24:04] ▶
roll roll quick so i'll i'll just tee this up um and and Jeremy Corbell um there's a video
[3:24:05 - 3:24:11] ▶
Mick i think you figured out one of those is post in first but this is the the quote unquote a
[3:24:11 - 3:24:15] ▶
rack gimbal video um but i'll just tee it up first Jeremy got an interview with the the marine who
[3:24:15 - 3:24:21] ▶
actually recorded this this was a uh in 2008 uh in easinod what's called a lab lab 25 i think it's
[3:24:21 - 3:24:29] ▶
a lightly armored vehicle um he's got a thermal site and he's they're they're out there in the
[3:24:29 - 3:24:34] ▶
middle of the desert truly in the middle of nowhere close to like 100 miles from the Syrian border
[3:24:34 - 3:24:39] ▶
doing uh overwatched reconnaissance so he's looking around to see what's around to make sure
[3:24:39 - 3:24:43] ▶
nobody the bad guys aren't sneaking up on them on them at night so they he's got this thermal site
[3:24:43 - 3:24:48] ▶
and he sees an object rising in his words rising up off of the desert floor and he says it goes up
[3:24:48 - 3:24:54] ▶
about 25 meters that it moves to is about 30 to 50 meters to his left comes back to that center point
[3:24:54 - 3:25:02] ▶
moves about 30 meters to his right and then goes back to that center point and then slowly starts um
[3:25:02 - 3:25:08] ▶
climbing and then he then and that point he's like this is bizarre i'm going to record this he
[3:25:08 - 3:25:13] ▶
and he starts recording the screen and then we have this video i won't bore people with with
[3:25:13 - 3:25:18] ▶
the full video but i do want to maybe quickly just point out if i can share my screen um there are
[3:25:18 - 3:25:24] ▶
some intriguing similarities is that coming through for you guys yeah see it yeah um there are
[3:25:24 - 3:25:31] ▶
some intriguing similarities to to gimbal i think we can agree on that um and if gimbal is
[3:25:31 - 3:25:36] ▶
never basalt before seen anomaly um no expert has ever seen this before i mean make we were on
[3:25:36 - 3:25:43] ▶
on the call with the at flerex where he says this is quote bizarre i've never seen anything like this
[3:25:43 - 3:25:47] ▶
no one appears you're maybe like this um so when you see these matches that's that's interesting
[3:25:47 - 3:25:52] ▶
to be oh and by the way these uh anomalies just happen to look like the classic saucer what are
[3:25:52 - 3:25:58] ▶
the other right yeah so it makes it fun isn't very it makes it more interesting
[3:25:58 - 3:26:03] ▶
classic saucer man i'll just quickly add one more thing um there's an interesting video and
[3:26:03 - 3:26:09] ▶
and make i know you did it uh you did uh uh semi debunk of this with but i do have a a few bones
[3:26:09 - 3:26:15] ▶
to pick per usual is that uh i'm in there for you guys yeah i see it yep it's kind of stepping
[3:26:15 - 3:26:21] ▶
or you don't play the yeah yeah yeah so it does this all right the stepping thing right and then wow
[3:26:21 - 3:26:27] ▶
it's slow down and half speed um so he moves it he moves the camera up and you see it jolt down right
[3:26:27 - 3:26:33] ▶
so that's moving the moving the camera right so this this system is a thermal it's a thermal
[3:26:33 - 3:26:38] ▶
system you can move it left right up down and it's a thermal site so the barrel the gun barrel
[3:26:38 - 3:26:44] ▶
there's video of this online the gun barrel is actually pointed to where he this is how they
[3:26:44 - 3:26:48] ▶
shoot the weapon without getting out of vehicle right it's a gun site exactly it's literally a
[3:26:48 - 3:26:53] ▶
non-site so so you can see a moving but but that that up and down that kind of that that jittery that
[3:26:53 - 3:27:00] ▶
jumpy ascent is very interesting yeah yeah it's just it's an interesting little thing i think
[3:27:00 - 3:27:06] ▶
again we have the issue of being being very poor quality we see here like you see all the compression
[3:27:06 - 3:27:10] ▶
blocks and everything and the pixels i think there's a couple of points i'd like to make the first
[3:27:10 - 3:27:15] ▶
is like you you did that comparison earlier where you you did two frames that look very similar with
[3:27:15 - 3:27:19] ▶
the gimbal and this rocky gimbal one one of them is in the gimbal frame that you show was in
[3:27:19 - 3:27:26] ▶
black hot mode and this is in white hot and the contrast curve is very different for those two modes
[3:27:26 - 3:27:34] ▶
it's not really one isn't the inverse of the other so you're comparing a black hot to a white
[3:27:34 - 3:27:39] ▶
hot isn't a very good comparison and if you were to take the white hot images which are at the start
[3:27:39 - 3:27:44] ▶
of the gimbal video there are actually quite different different shapes to the rest you see a more
[3:27:44 - 3:27:48] ▶
irregular shape it's kind of like you're familiar with it is kind of like like a narrower at one end
[3:27:48 - 3:27:54] ▶
and then wider the other it doesn't really look like that so you would actually to take that
[3:27:54 - 3:27:59] ▶
i saw your comment and and as you know make over the course of the gimbal video
[3:27:59 - 3:28:04] ▶
object grows it gets bigger and it does actually become that shape so i think you're you're
[3:28:04 - 3:28:09] ▶
missing the point anyway we could we could talk about it why is it changing shape though
[3:28:09 - 3:28:13] ▶
that is it magically morphing from one shape into another it doesn't make any sense
[3:28:13 - 3:28:17] ▶
as the jacket is closer it becomes more defined right well i think you know obviously i mean
[3:28:17 - 3:28:21] ▶
as you know i think that the gimbal shape is actually you know a camera artifact and i don't
[3:28:21 - 3:28:27] ▶
like the word glare you don't like the word glare all of a lot of people agree with me but
[3:28:27 - 3:28:31] ▶
no no people do your panel yeah but then the experts that you found here we we went over this
[3:28:31 - 3:28:36] ▶
before the experts you found they also thought that it looked like an SR 71 which it looks
[3:28:36 - 3:28:40] ▶
absolutely nothing like an SR 71 so you know really are this experts really very good at analyzing
[3:28:40 - 3:28:45] ▶
this particular video they took a week take and the guy told you that it was just a quick take
[3:28:45 - 3:28:50] ▶
and it wasn't meant to be an assessment let's get to that rule but you what do you think this
[3:28:50 - 3:28:54] ▶
video what do you think we're looking at right here i don't know what we're looking at but like i think
[3:28:54 - 3:28:58] ▶
it again it's something that doesn't show the observables it doesn't it's far away so we can't
[3:28:59 - 3:29:05] ▶
really see it it's not the motion yeah the motion i think you know there's there's obviously we
[3:29:05 - 3:29:11] ▶
didn't we don't see the really dramatic movement that he talked about you know he's rising it
[3:29:11 - 3:29:17] ▶
from the desert moving left and right we see it moving slowly up now we see it kind of looking
[3:29:17 - 3:29:22] ▶
like it's kind of moving a little bit like this up and down like kind of relative to the
[3:29:22 - 3:29:26] ▶
background i think what we're seeing there is actually the turret of the vehicle or perhaps the
[3:29:26 - 3:29:32] ▶
vehicle itself with the engine just moving a tiny little bit up and down which should make the
[3:29:32 - 3:29:37] ▶
camera move you know he talked about how he was raising the uh i have to be careful not to do a
[3:29:37 - 3:29:41] ▶
analysis salute here like Elon Musk just did uh raising up the the camera things there was always
[3:29:41 - 3:29:48] ▶
pointing in the sky and he got like embarrassed that he thought other people might be looking at him
[3:29:48 - 3:29:51] ▶
and he's so he lowered it down but i think doing that is going to make it kind of a wobble a little
[3:29:51 - 3:29:55] ▶
bit because we're kind of zoomed in quite a lot here so i think we're just seeing camera movement
[3:29:55 - 3:30:00] ▶
it doesn't register exactly with the clouds because the clouds are very low low frequency
[3:30:00 - 3:30:06] ▶
in technical terms so they're the the very smooth curve so they don't move very much because of the
[3:30:06 - 3:30:11] ▶
video compression now this video i think it was part of a dump that somebody did uh there's a
[3:30:11 - 3:30:18] ▶
a uh a UFO site on twitter i think it's called ray fios or something like aria f o u s u f o's
[3:30:18 - 3:30:25] ▶
and they uploaded a whole bunch of stuff to mega dot code on uz and new zeland and z uh and so
[3:30:25 - 3:30:33] ▶
there might actually be a better version of this out there which might actually help resolve some
[3:30:33 - 3:30:36] ▶
of these things so if someone knows of that better version then that would be good to have this
[3:30:36 - 3:30:41] ▶
is thermal you you incorrectly thought this was a night vision i thought that was not yeah yeah
[3:30:41 - 3:30:45] ▶
what do you think it is uh oh yeah i still think the most likely thing is is essentially the the
[3:30:45 - 3:30:51] ▶
landing lights of aircraft which do show up in thermal because it's the the holidays lights
[3:30:51 - 3:30:55] ▶
how would it be hot lights but the calibere lights wouldn't show up how would they be bouncing
[3:30:56 - 3:31:01] ▶
up and down like that if they're led or i mean that's not that's not that's the camera bouncing
[3:31:01 - 3:31:07] ▶
up and down so it's like you've very little like jiggles of the camera like here uh would actually
[3:31:07 - 3:31:12] ▶
things move around and why would that why would the lights be a regularly shaped why wouldn't
[3:31:13 - 3:31:17] ▶
they be like sort of uniformly distributed uh because it's it's brightest looking at directly into
[3:31:17 - 3:31:23] ▶
the the camera uh you know it's like the usual kind of glare type thing so i think he would be like
[3:31:23 - 3:31:27] ▶
you know bright lights in the middle on the landing gear and maybe two lights on the side i don't
[3:31:27 - 3:31:31] ▶
know though i mean it could be like the light is visible light landing lights why would there be
[3:31:31 - 3:31:37] ▶
landing lights a hundred miles from the Syrian border um in the middle of the desert it in in
[3:31:37 - 3:31:43] ▶
N bar province or wherever this was well maybe because it was landing somewhere it's a plane
[3:31:43 - 3:31:47] ▶
you know it's a military plane it's not like every single five five five black you can't see lights
[3:31:47 - 3:31:53] ▶
in thermal like you just cannot see like oh you can see heat in thermal though and some lights are
[3:31:53 - 3:31:56] ▶
very hot so like you know how it's in light you're telling that i don't know i don't know like
[3:31:56 - 3:32:01] ▶
but i don't think i i'm not ready to rule these out i'm not ready to be engineered this is a
[3:32:01 - 3:32:05] ▶
plane because also it would be it would be behind the where you're looking at if it's coming at you
[3:32:05 - 3:32:11] ▶
you'd be yeah no it's behind something where something comes at you you don't see the things
[3:32:11 - 3:32:16] ▶
that are behind it i mean you can't see the back of my head can you really it's like this right
[3:32:16 - 3:32:21] ▶
you can see the plumes going no you you really can't you really can't because if it's far away like
[3:32:21 - 3:32:27] ▶
i've taken lots of video of planes that are say like 50 to a hundred miles away and whether
[3:32:27 - 3:32:32] ▶
they come into ward you the angle between like the plane and you know and you really isn't that much
[3:32:32 - 3:32:37] ▶
there's actually kind of one big one we're looking at like i just just so bizarre to me like that
[3:32:37 - 3:32:42] ▶
it is pretty bizarre isn't it yeah but i don't know what it is i mean it could be like a weird drone
[3:32:42 - 3:32:46] ▶
or something but i don't really think it just shows any kind of stump i'm done yours
[3:32:46 - 3:32:51] ▶
well it's very interesting you know it just happens to look like him i mean look at look at this
[3:32:54 - 3:32:57] ▶
video it's like you can barely read the the timecode at the top of it it's a crappy video
[3:32:57 - 3:33:03] ▶
you know if we had the original video maybe we'll be able to see a little bit more maybe we'll
[3:33:04 - 3:33:09] ▶
be able to prove that it was you know one thing or another but i really don't think we can
[3:33:09 - 3:33:12] ▶
rule things out from this particular video yeah see like the plane thing isn't like you're
[3:33:12 - 3:33:17] ▶
you know super compelling uh but not compelling at all i don't what i what i think is it don't
[3:33:17 - 3:33:23] ▶
it doesn't actually demonstrate any of the observables it doesn't the demonstrate like extraordinary
[3:33:23 - 3:33:28] ▶
really much extraordinary motion it's just something it just happens to look like the gimbal in this
[3:33:28 - 3:33:33] ▶
particular frame as i said you're taking white heart against black heart to think you take all the
[3:33:33 - 3:33:38] ▶
the the black the white hot frames and gimbal did they don't actually match um because the
[3:33:38 - 3:33:44] ▶
because it's not morphed into a different shape yet gets closer to it it gets 15% larger as it gets
[3:33:46 - 3:33:51] ▶
closer which is the exact size at the correct distance so why is it changing shape and getting
[3:33:51 - 3:33:56] ▶
look getting larger doesn't change shape you know and you show you pick some frames so you're
[3:33:56 - 3:34:00] ▶
trying to get in and get make your pilots you know that's right if you're flying at something it
[3:34:00 - 3:34:04] ▶
gets larger as you get closer jump right i'm really out with perspectives in America yeah yeah exactly
[3:34:04 - 3:34:09] ▶
so that's what happens in gimbal and it just happens yes i know it gets a lot of the exact same size
[3:34:09 - 3:34:15] ▶
but it doesn't change shape i mean this egg isn't changing shape from here to here it's just a
[3:34:15 - 3:34:22] ▶
bigger egg it's not going to get one end isn't going to get thicker which is what i'm seeing gimbal
[3:34:22 - 3:34:28] ▶
you realize perspective right and the way they come up from behind right or they're they're
[3:34:28 - 3:34:33] ▶
moving they're maneuvering to come in behind it right so it's not like they're coming directly at
[3:34:33 - 3:34:38] ▶
it make you know that so you say the angle of the object changes yes absolutely as
[3:34:38 - 3:34:47] ▶
no i look for what you doing a 3d model of the gimbal object that will demonstrate this this
[3:34:47 - 3:34:53] ▶
change in shape it's already in your sirac anyway we can go on for days every quick we could go
[3:34:53 - 3:34:58] ▶
on to ties i just i just need to and i go into this in in the in the longer interview but again
[3:34:58 - 3:35:04] ▶
the bottom line is no experts agree with mick and the literally the the one of the top infrared
[3:35:04 - 3:35:10] ▶
air-to-air infrared experts explicitly disagree with it yeah i came up with another
[3:35:10 - 3:35:15] ▶
cockamani theory which was completely wrong as well so what you're going to do i think we've got
[3:35:15 - 3:35:20] ▶
some crappy videos here which unfortunately the best videos that we have and i think that in
[3:35:20 - 3:35:24] ▶
itself is a huge clue about ufology the only videos that we get are crappy videos and the reason
[3:35:24 - 3:35:30] ▶
that we only get crappy videos is if the videos were better quality would be able to tell what
[3:35:30 - 3:35:34] ▶
the thing was and then you know we'd be we'd know it was a uf oh no i'm saying none of the good
[3:35:34 - 3:35:39] ▶
videos show ufos all were left with is these crappy videos is the low information zone that's how
[3:35:39 - 3:35:46] ▶
ufos work i don't think so mick and i i hope we learn more but but the pentagonist said that they
[3:35:46 - 3:35:52] ▶
have quote true anomalies that they're so stumping this is because of the new director of the
[3:35:52 - 3:35:58] ▶
pentagon's ufos office has said we have true anomalies that i as an engineer and a physicist
[3:35:58 - 3:36:03] ▶
and paraphrasing do not understand and i do not know anybody else who understands so let's see
[3:36:03 - 3:36:09] ▶
what those videos are because they haven't got the the information but yeah i'm looking forward
[3:36:09 - 3:36:12] ▶
to seeing those two anomalies looking for stuff that they need the public so that's me that's you
[3:36:12 - 3:36:18] ▶
miss me that's everybody that's that's everybody that's watching they can use my my software open source
[3:36:18 - 3:36:24] ▶
sit wreck anyone can use it and uh hopefully they will and maybe it'll help himself i'd be happy
[3:36:24 - 3:36:28] ▶
to help well whatever whatever whatever whatever we're seeing is definitely at the margins of
[3:36:28 - 3:36:34] ▶
reality and so i think we wouldn't be having this debate if it was like super clear the margins of
[3:36:34 - 3:36:39] ▶
the section which isn't really the margins of reality well there you go that now you're talking like
[3:36:39 - 3:36:46] ▶
it like us i mean i think i think yeah the margins of our you because we there are doors of perception
[3:36:46 - 3:36:52] ▶
to quote William Blake or Aldi Suxley and that you know in the optical range that involves 400 to
[3:36:52 - 3:36:58] ▶
700 nanometers and uh if you have these things traveling uh you know close to the speed of light
[3:36:58 - 3:37:04] ▶
they're probably doing two one of two things they're probably uh you know if they're moving away
[3:37:04 - 3:37:09] ▶
from you they're stretching light and so that's like the low the you know the bottom end of the
[3:37:09 - 3:37:14] ▶
visible band but but probably lower than what we can actually see and then if they're coming towards
[3:37:14 - 3:37:18] ▶
you they're they're crunching light and so that's you know your your microwaves and so it's either
[3:37:18 - 3:37:23] ▶
you know it's going to be infrared or microwave and he needs these sensor modalities normal civilians
[3:37:23 - 3:37:28] ▶
don't have those sensor modalities and so it kind of makes sense that you would either get blue
[3:37:28 - 3:37:33] ▶
shifted red shifted optical or you would get like other sensors and you'd have to debate it endlessly
[3:37:33 - 3:37:40] ▶
because you should really look at the the normal eye it makes you some good UFO uh physicists about
[3:37:40 - 3:37:46] ▶
that I mean how put off says things like that yes but I think you should need to ask some
[3:37:46 - 3:37:51] ▶
I hesitate to say real physicists but someone who's isn't perhaps so enmeshed in this whole uh
[3:37:51 - 3:37:56] ▶
UAP thing well let me put it what would they say yeah go quick just just very quickly and Jesse to
[3:37:56 - 3:38:02] ▶
build on that there's a documented history of the most important kind one of the most important
[3:38:02 - 3:38:08] ▶
historical documents in in this whole topic is what's called the twining memo from from 1947
[3:38:08 - 3:38:14] ▶
general Nathan twining who I believe went on to become the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff
[3:38:14 - 3:38:18] ▶
he wrote a memo that that said listed all the the kind of the characteristics of UFOs and I think
[3:38:19 - 3:38:24] ▶
the one word that was underlying was that they are invasive as soon as they are contacted by
[3:38:24 - 3:38:29] ▶
that's how they look by but but you've had you'd had aviators that have seen metallic discs within
[3:38:29 - 3:38:35] ▶
a few hundred feet uh and I laid this out right there's there's I think there are at least 30 cases where
[3:38:35 - 3:38:41] ▶
multiple credible witnesses police officers pilots engineers have seen these objects a hundred
[3:38:41 - 3:38:46] ▶
feet away and they're all they all just happen to be look like the gimbal and the Iraq this
[3:38:46 - 3:38:51] ▶
they're the invasive but not when there's no camera available you know they're invasive but they
[3:38:51 - 3:38:57] ▶
they appear a hundred feet away where you would be able to get wonderful 4k video if you had your
[3:38:57 - 3:39:01] ▶
camera with you yeah and not really invasive that just evading cameras which this is the flaw in
[3:39:01 - 3:39:07] ▶
your analytic approach and yeah and this is but you you I wish you took some time to read through
[3:39:07 - 3:39:13] ▶
the actual and I'm happy to send you the most most compelling ones and you have to read through the
[3:39:13 - 3:39:19] ▶
compelling the most compelling reports that are out there multi witness within several hundred
[3:39:19 - 3:39:24] ▶
feet um you had go ahead that's fine I'm just telling you that's my analytic basis that's what I
[3:39:24 - 3:39:29] ▶
go off yeah your analytic basically stories from 70 80 years ago it's it's not really very useful
[3:39:29 - 3:39:35] ▶
video and well yeah I would also say if we're talking about things that travel the speed of
[3:39:35 - 3:39:44] ▶
light or do any of the things that seem to break are conventional physics uh you know and then you
[3:39:44 - 3:39:50] ▶
accept any of these stories around consciousness they probably know how to evade perception on
[3:39:50 - 3:39:57] ▶
more of a level than were you know able to even understand so uh we're getting away from the
[3:39:57 - 3:40:03] ▶
nuts and bolts here this is this is kind of like well I wouldn't say it's getting away from nuts
[3:40:03 - 3:40:08] ▶
and bolts it's just you know goes toward the Arthur C. Clark quote that any sufficiently advanced
[3:40:08 - 3:40:12] ▶
technology appears to be magic and so can you demonstrate that is happening though
[3:40:12 - 3:40:17] ▶
demonstrate what is happening and you have what you just said the the detecting cameras and
[3:40:18 - 3:40:23] ▶
avoiding them well that's it's all good science is the interplay between uh experimentation
[3:40:23 - 3:40:30] ▶
and theory and I would bucket in anomalies with experimentation where you see these observable
[3:40:30 - 3:40:35] ▶
things you can't just snap them to grid on the present theory of you know this can exist because
[3:40:35 - 3:40:41] ▶
of present physical models that would have you know stagnated science in all sorts of cases in the
[3:40:41 - 3:40:46] ▶
past whether it's black body radiation or the orbit of mercury which were both very anomalous and
[3:40:46 - 3:40:52] ▶
so in this case you're seeing this anomalous thing it's actually somewhat repeatable with two things
[3:40:52 - 3:40:56] ▶
nuclear and consciousness and it's kind of on us to theorize and we could again snap it back
[3:40:57 - 3:41:01] ▶
to the grid of like general relativity and say it's impossible but usually that loses the snapping
[3:41:01 - 3:41:07] ▶
back to the grid and maybe you know the the person you know uh making theories around this thing is
[3:41:07 - 3:41:14] ▶
is a heretic of the present but they're often vindicated in the future as kind of the the hero of
[3:41:14 - 3:41:18] ▶
the future scientifically speaking so I'd say if you're looking at it from like a meta scientific
[3:41:18 - 3:41:23] ▶
you know um Thomas Koonian model of like the structure of scientific revolutions you'd probably bet
[3:41:23 - 3:41:29] ▶
on the anomaly you wouldn't bet on the present physics model the present physics model always goes away
[3:41:29 - 3:41:35] ▶
you kind of spend on every single anomaly out there and expect them all to be true it's not like
[3:41:35 - 3:41:39] ▶
you know they're lapping you and you're right it's it's the most things that are weird aren't
[3:41:39 - 3:41:44] ▶
actually real there are very few of them that actually turn out to be interesting things and those
[3:41:44 - 3:41:48] ▶
are things that when we do have repeatable and measurable data like the you know the orbit of
[3:41:48 - 3:41:52] ▶
Mercury and things like that uh uh we don't have that you know we've got an accumulation of anecdotes
[3:41:52 - 3:41:58] ▶
and accumulation of stories and we've got lots a lot of the scenes compelling it seems compelling
[3:41:58 - 3:42:04] ▶
because you just you just gather together all the ones that seem similar look here all the ones
[3:42:04 - 3:42:08] ▶
from nuclear power stations here all the ones that show like shiny disks so yes of course
[3:42:08 - 3:42:13] ▶
there that remarkably consistent because you gather them together my glissime sure statistical
[3:42:13 - 3:42:18] ▶
analysis on this and see what comes out.
[3:42:18 - 3:42:20] ▶
Well, that might, but yeah, go for it.
[3:42:20 - 3:42:23] ▶
Yeah, I'm sure you did.
[3:42:23 - 3:42:24] ▶
But tell, but tell put on a room, a very, very deep analysis of the 1947, 1952
[3:42:27 - 3:42:35] ▶
sightings and guess what?
[3:42:35 - 3:42:37] ▶
33% of the most credible sightings were unknown.
[3:42:39 - 3:42:43] ▶
And those are ones that had enough data to be analyzed.
[3:42:43 - 3:42:47] ▶
Sure, but we have no idea what they considered to be enough data.
[3:42:47 - 3:42:50] ▶
And we don't know any of those cases.
[3:42:50 - 3:42:52] ▶
And it was like 80 years ago.
[3:42:52 - 3:42:55] ▶
And then I wrote, I wrote, I wrote, I wrote, I also, you know, did, did a, you know, study for
[3:42:56 - 3:43:03] ▶
free blue book, signing bridge and it's the same thing.
[3:43:03 - 3:43:06] ▶
It was like 70% of these cases show up around nuclear.
[3:43:06 - 3:43:09] ▶
That's the reason Bittell was involved in the first place to their managing all this,
[3:43:09 - 3:43:12] ▶
you know, nuclear stuff to begin with.
[3:43:12 - 3:43:14] ▶
And then you have again, we, you know, my editor's going to kill me because I wanted to keep
[3:43:14 - 3:43:19] ▶
this kind of targeted.
[3:43:19 - 3:43:20] ▶
But we have 167 guys with few clearances who have no reason that have made a dime from
[3:43:20 - 3:43:28] ▶
this. They're, you know, they're sort of, they've been castigated and shamed and they've
[3:43:28 - 3:43:34] ▶
been exposed to reporting.
[3:43:34 - 3:43:36] ▶
And exactly as reported if they're either on the personal,
[3:43:36 - 3:43:39] ▶
reliability program.
[3:43:39 - 3:43:41] ▶
And so, and that has to be an extremely depressed number that 167 has to actually be 10,700
[3:43:41 - 3:43:49] ▶
You have to, you really have to like multiply that by a ton.
[3:43:50 - 3:43:53] ▶
How many people have cute clearance and how many of them are in positions where they
[3:43:54 - 3:43:57] ▶
have to report things regardless?
[3:43:57 - 3:43:59] ▶
And so that in the end, they're reporting a whole bunch more stuff than your regular,
[3:43:59 - 3:44:03] ▶
you know, guy at Walmart would, that is a, that is a very high subset of people with
[3:44:03 - 3:44:07] ▶
And it's not just people, you know, seeing these things in distant places in the sky because
[3:44:08 - 3:44:13] ▶
of hypervigilance around nuclear assets, it's them shutting down the power around these
[3:44:13 - 3:44:19] ▶
nuclear sites, disarming the nukes themselves.
[3:44:19 - 3:44:22] ▶
And in certain cases, these guys claim to board crafts and gavved things implanted inside
[3:44:22 - 3:44:27] ▶
Well, it just seems a bit implausible.
[3:44:29 - 3:44:30] ▶
You can just talk with a nuclear button if they're all insane.
[3:44:30 - 3:44:34] ▶
They're just normal people.
[3:44:36 - 3:44:37] ▶
They're regular people.
[3:44:37 - 3:44:38] ▶
They have no major failings.
[3:44:38 - 3:44:40] ▶
I mean, if a guy was, was guarding these nuclear assets and claimed these things and it wasn't
[3:44:41 - 3:44:47] ▶
Like I just interviewed again in Mario Woods, 1977, Ellsworth Air Force Base South Dakota,
[3:44:48 - 3:44:53] ▶
you know, boarded a craft or whatever and, and, you know, woke up nine miles and, and
[3:44:53 - 3:44:59] ▶
Lake Newell away from the base and has marks on his body.
[3:44:59 - 3:45:05] ▶
And, you know, it's just a really crazy experience.
[3:45:05 - 3:45:08] ▶
And he had his few clearance and retained it and worked at Sandia and all sorts of other
[3:45:08 - 3:45:12] ▶
I think Oak Ridge for another 20 years.
[3:45:13 - 3:45:16] ▶
If you're like a higher up, you know, person in, you know, the DOE and you see that and
[3:45:16 - 3:45:22] ▶
you see you have this one guy claiming this crazy shit.
[3:45:22 - 3:45:26] ▶
Why would you continue to hire him for the next 20 years unless that was actually just
[3:45:26 - 3:45:31] ▶
this repeatable thing happening to a lot of people and you were hyper aware of the phenomenon
[3:45:31 - 3:45:35] ▶
overall and you didn't blame the guy and you realized he was totally lucid and mentally
[3:45:35 - 3:45:39] ▶
I wouldn't want that guy near my new period.
[3:45:40 - 3:45:42] ▶
If he was the one guy, if he was just the one guy, he's not like he had his finger on
[3:45:42 - 3:45:48] ▶
He could launch things.
[3:45:49 - 3:45:50] ▶
He was someone who worked there.
[3:45:50 - 3:45:51] ▶
He had a queue clearance and people like David, David Gresh was like, you know, psychotic
[3:45:51 - 3:45:55] ▶
episode and was voluntarily hospitalized and he kept his clearance because you know,
[3:45:55 - 3:45:59] ▶
people just because they have episodes, doesn't mean automatically lose that you lose
[3:45:59 - 3:46:04] ▶
that you never say, kind of episode at all.
[3:46:04 - 3:46:06] ▶
And he had too much to drink one night.
[3:46:06 - 3:46:08] ▶
But next to him was blown up and wore because of that.
[3:46:08 - 3:46:11] ▶
I don't want to get into the combat.
[3:46:11 - 3:46:12] ▶
So it's, you know, I argue all, but I'm just saying that you don't lose your click.
[3:46:13 - 3:46:18] ▶
Your clearance just because you have, you know, one thing happens to you.
[3:46:18 - 3:46:21] ▶
If you get cleared by Dr. Lacer, you go to therapy, whatever you can carry on.
[3:46:21 - 3:46:25] ▶
Obviously, like we don't know the details of that, you know, hip or everything.
[3:46:26 - 3:46:29] ▶
And I don't know if he like, you know, volunteer exactly what happens.
[3:46:29 - 3:46:32] ▶
They're about to work the next day.
[3:46:32 - 3:46:34] ▶
I saw Rayleigh and so they're like, okay, go back to work.
[3:46:34 - 3:46:36] ▶
No, there was a, there was a very clear protocol he underwent due to obviously the
[3:46:36 - 3:46:43] ▶
Air Force having seen this before.
[3:46:43 - 3:46:45] ▶
They checked him for certain things.
[3:46:45 - 3:46:47] ▶
They checked it to you.
[3:46:47 - 3:46:49] ▶
I'll just say in the post in the post global war on terror era, their, their PTS has been
[3:46:49 - 3:46:56] ▶
a significant issue.
[3:46:56 - 3:46:57] ▶
And yes, Jesse's correct that military services have had to deal with this all lot.
[3:46:57 - 3:47:03] ▶
And there are protocols indeed, Jesse's correct about that that had to be followed for
[3:47:03 - 3:47:09] ▶
grush to retain his clearance.
[3:47:09 - 3:47:10] ▶
But I don't want to get into personal stuff.
[3:47:10 - 3:47:12] ▶
Jet Mick and I just quickly, I will shut up after this.
[3:47:12 - 3:47:15] ▶
Jet Mick and I pin you down.
[3:47:15 - 3:47:17] ▶
The experts have spoken.
[3:47:17 - 3:47:18] ▶
They say, glare is not a thing.
[3:47:18 - 3:47:20] ▶
They say, well, we're seeing in those engines is what's called blooming, which is a well-known
[3:47:20 - 3:47:25] ▶
artifact at infrared technology.
[3:47:25 - 3:47:27] ▶
And they said, and you know exactly what I'm talking about.
[3:47:27 - 3:47:30] ▶
The credentials are impeccable.
[3:47:30 - 3:47:33] ▶
Blooming would not have resulted in that rotation.
[3:47:33 - 3:47:35] ▶
Yeah, unless the theory for the gimbal video.
[3:47:35 - 3:47:38] ▶
Yeah, I think one of those two possibilities, three possibilities.
[3:47:38 - 3:47:42] ▶
One is a real craft that's rotating.
[3:47:42 - 3:47:43] ▶
One is that what I suggest is correct, then, there's some kind of obstacle artifact that
[3:47:43 - 3:47:47] ▶
happens before the sensor.
[3:47:47 - 3:47:49] ▶
And the other one is like glare and other ones again.
[3:47:49 - 3:47:53] ▶
You said you shut up, Marick.
[3:47:54 - 3:47:57] ▶
Then the third one is that the de-rotation happens after the sensor, like it's a digital
[3:47:57 - 3:48:01] ▶
de-rotation, which is something that's in the patent.
[3:48:01 - 3:48:05] ▶
So I don't know which one of those it is.
[3:48:05 - 3:48:07] ▶
I do know that it looks like it's an obstacle artifact that's rotating because of de-rotation
[3:48:07 - 3:48:11] ▶
because of all the barriers, observables that I listed in my video.
[3:48:11 - 3:48:16] ▶
And one of the experts says that he thought I was right, but for the wrong reason.
[3:48:16 - 3:48:21] ▶
Another one said that he looked like an SLS 71, well they both said that actually.
[3:48:21 - 3:48:24] ▶
So, you know, I think perhaps we need to talk to these experts in a bit more detail, drill
[3:48:24 - 3:48:28] ▶
And for the record, the one who said you were right, he actually did not say that.
[3:48:31 - 3:48:34] ▶
I'll put out those emails happily after this.
[3:48:35 - 3:48:37] ▶
And we can have that discussion.
[3:48:37 - 3:48:38] ▶
That is, you know, that's not true.
[3:48:38 - 3:48:40] ▶
I said I think Mick is right, but for the wrong reason.
[3:48:40 - 3:48:43] ▶
I don't think that's correct.
[3:48:43 - 3:48:45] ▶
And I put that other.
[3:48:45 - 3:48:47] ▶
I might be wrong too, but I saw how I recall it.
[3:48:49 - 3:48:51] ▶
Please do because everything he described was an internal thing.
[3:48:51 - 3:48:54] ▶
It's not on the glass.
[3:48:54 - 3:48:56] ▶
Anyway, bottom line is the experts have rolled in very fast.
[3:48:56 - 3:49:01] ▶
Yeah, the patent does the same thing.
[3:49:04 - 3:49:06] ▶
Those experts did not give a definite answer.
[3:49:06 - 3:49:10] ▶
They gave an opinion based on limited data.
[3:49:10 - 3:49:13] ▶
The one that I read the email to you.
[3:49:13 - 3:49:16] ▶
Glyssit Lee wrote that out.
[3:49:16 - 3:49:18] ▶
He explicitly said this was an initial impression based on limited data.
[3:49:18 - 3:49:22] ▶
And that it was not intended to be something.
[3:49:23 - 3:49:25] ▶
It wasn't even something that he wanted to share.
[3:49:25 - 3:49:26] ▶
He didn't want his emails to be shared.
[3:49:26 - 3:49:29] ▶
And he didn't come to lunch with a conclusion.
[3:49:29 - 3:49:31] ▶
Because I think it's important to hear those voices.
[3:49:32 - 3:49:34] ▶
Did you get permission from him to share those emails?
[3:49:36 - 3:49:39] ▶
I put it out anonymously.
[3:49:40 - 3:49:41] ▶
I anonymized it because I think it's important for people to see what the world's leading
[3:49:41 - 3:49:44] ▶
experts say about this.
[3:49:44 - 3:49:46] ▶
I asked him for permission because I wanted to share it myself.
[3:49:46 - 3:49:49] ▶
So the other one didn't reply.
[3:49:50 - 3:49:52] ▶
I already heard that.
[3:49:52 - 3:49:54] ▶
Does it bother you that Arrow does not endorse your theory?
[3:49:54 - 3:49:57] ▶
No, yeah, I think they've got round to it yet.
[3:49:57 - 3:50:00] ▶
It's the most reckoning of the world.
[3:50:00 - 3:50:02] ▶
What did you fall time?
[3:50:02 - 3:50:04] ▶
The Aguidia, which is one that's existed before that.
[3:50:04 - 3:50:08] ▶
I think the fraction of people who see Aguidia are coming up all the time.
[3:50:08 - 3:50:14] ▶
It's a very famous UFO video.
[3:50:14 - 3:50:16] ▶
And you agree with them on that one.
[3:50:16 - 3:50:20] ▶
I know you've had, like you talked to Patrick and he told you some ridiculous interpretation
[3:50:22 - 3:50:27] ▶
of his head and then other people have said things.
[3:50:27 - 3:50:31] ▶
So, you know, and it's disappointing that we're not getting more information from Arrow,
[3:50:33 - 3:50:37] ▶
but we haven't got the official word yet from them.
[3:50:37 - 3:50:42] ▶
Maybe we can leave it at.
[3:50:42 - 3:50:43] ▶
Let's hope Kuzlowski is Trudeau's word and he can whatever bureaucratic plastic issues
[3:50:43 - 3:50:49] ▶
he has to overcome to get the really anomalous stuff that he said he is stumped by.
[3:50:49 - 3:50:55] ▶
That the true, the quote, true anomalies, maybe we can leave it here.
[3:50:55 - 3:50:58] ▶
No, that'd be great.
[3:50:59 - 3:51:00] ▶
I mean, so I'm figuring this out.
[3:51:01 - 3:51:03] ▶
Why doesn't someone leak something that's really good?
[3:51:03 - 3:51:05] ▶
Why are we getting these crappy egg videos and these bouncy objects?
[3:51:05 - 3:51:09] ▶
Leak the 4K stuff, please.
[3:51:09 - 3:51:11] ▶
Well, I think we can all, let's end on that note of, you know, collegiality between us.
[3:51:11 - 3:51:17] ▶
We would all like to see better, better footage.
[3:51:17 - 3:51:20] ▶
No matter what our takes are on the existing record and what we currently have.
[3:51:21 - 3:51:26] ▶
So, Mick Merrick, appreciate you guys.
[3:51:26 - 3:51:28] ▶
We're going to put this up pretty, pretty soon and just tag it on to our finished videos.
[3:51:28 - 3:51:34] ▶