866 segments
You're sitting there and you're sitting with David Fraber and with David Grashon.
[0:00:00 - 0:00:03] ▶
You and David Fraber have these amazing eyewitness accounts.
[0:00:03 - 0:00:06] ▶
As we convene here, UAP are in our airspace.
[0:00:06 - 0:00:09] ▶
These sightings are not rare or isolated. They are routine.
[0:00:09 - 0:00:11] ▶
There's a long history of fighter pilots like yourself having seen these things.
[0:00:11 - 0:00:16] ▶
What happened when you were there?
[0:00:16 - 0:00:18] ▶
I heard some saying at first that these were just radar air.
[0:00:18 - 0:00:20] ▶
But they weren't behaving like false traps.
[0:00:20 - 0:00:23] ▶
They were steady, they were solid, they were consistent.
[0:00:23 - 0:00:26] ▶
And some of these objects were even going over the speed of sound.
[0:00:26 - 0:00:29] ▶
As soon as they crossed that threshold, boom.
[0:00:29 - 0:00:31] ▶
Object shoots down, came within about 50 feet of the cockpit.
[0:00:31 - 0:00:34] ▶
And he described as a dark gray or black cube inside of a clear sphere.
[0:00:34 - 0:00:38] ▶
I don't have to room raise your hand.
[0:00:38 - 0:00:39] ▶
Like, oh yeah, the cube's in his fears.
[0:00:39 - 0:00:40] ▶
You know, we saw those.
[0:00:40 - 0:00:41] ▶
And I thought about five to 15 feet in diameter.
[0:00:41 - 0:00:44] ▶
Oh, by the way, they're out there all day.
[0:00:44 - 0:00:46] ▶
Do you believe that?
[0:00:46 - 0:00:46] ▶
Do you think that the US government is reverse engineering UFOs?
[0:00:46 - 0:00:49] ▶
Different parts of the brain have different activities.
[0:00:53 - 0:00:56] ▶
But you know that, don't you?
[0:00:56 - 0:00:57] ▶
We're human people that you know.
[0:01:00 - 0:01:02] ▶
Maybe you should interview me.
[0:01:02 - 0:01:03] ▶
Flow state is a popular word and you know, pop psychology.
[0:01:11 - 0:01:15] ▶
I have to think, you know, it's described as like, you know,
[0:01:16 - 0:01:20] ▶
you're purely present and you're just focused on the...
[0:01:20 - 0:01:22] ▶
You have to think that that experience,
[0:01:22 - 0:01:26] ▶
flying a fighter jet like that has to be peak flow state, right?
[0:01:26 - 0:01:30] ▶
And you know, honestly, it really even starts before we get in.
[0:01:31 - 0:01:33] ▶
We have a brief, though we have to prepare and you know,
[0:01:35 - 0:01:37] ▶
you're joshin' around.
[0:01:37 - 0:01:37] ▶
Once that brief starts, it's very serious.
[0:01:37 - 0:01:39] ▶
You finish a brief, maybe have time for a coffee and then you're walking to the jet.
[0:01:40 - 0:01:44] ▶
You're walking to maintenance, signing it out,
[0:01:44 - 0:01:46] ▶
signing out the maintenance forms, reviewing the aircraft,
[0:01:46 - 0:01:49] ▶
strapping in all the gear, you know, 60 pounds of gear or so.
[0:01:49 - 0:01:52] ▶
And hopping in the jet, you know,
[0:01:52 - 0:01:54] ▶
we do what we call building our nest, you know?
[0:01:54 - 0:01:57] ▶
Like for unloading contents from our new board or strapping in
[0:01:57 - 0:02:00] ▶
or placing things on our legs that we need for information.
[0:02:00 - 0:02:04] ▶
But then once you get airborne, it's...
[0:02:06 - 0:02:07] ▶
It's just like it's like being constantly in the moment.
[0:02:08 - 0:02:11] ▶
But you are planning ahead and you're always thinking about your fuel state
[0:02:11 - 0:02:14] ▶
where you're going, what you need to do, what the contingencies are.
[0:02:14 - 0:02:17] ▶
And I would say the greatest example of that, the...
[0:02:17 - 0:02:20] ▶
can ultimate present-smomement, if you will, is landing on the aircraft carrier.
[0:02:20 - 0:02:25] ▶
Especially at night.
[0:02:25 - 0:02:26] ▶
It's a very trippy experience.
[0:02:26 - 0:02:27] ▶
It can be almost meditative when you're out at range and you're just flying
[0:02:27 - 0:02:31] ▶
towards this singular little light that's in the sea of blackness
[0:02:31 - 0:02:35] ▶
and literally a sea as well.
[0:02:35 - 0:02:36] ▶
And, you know, you kind of have this very, like, slow,
[0:02:38 - 0:02:41] ▶
gradual perspective change.
[0:02:41 - 0:02:43] ▶
And then all of a sudden, you can start to notice it's getting faster and faster.
[0:02:43 - 0:02:46] ▶
This perspective change, the light getting brighter and bigger.
[0:02:46 - 0:02:49] ▶
All of a sudden, you almost have to kind of snap out of the state
[0:02:49 - 0:02:51] ▶
and remind yourself that you're about to go through this very intense evolution.
[0:02:51 - 0:02:55] ▶
It almost feels like, does the jet become like an appendage of your body at 100%.
[0:02:56 - 0:03:01] ▶
You're strapped in there.
[0:03:02 - 0:03:03] ▶
I mean, there's not the jet and you...
[0:03:03 - 0:03:06] ▶
It's just, you know, you think and the aircraft moves.
[0:03:07 - 0:03:10] ▶
You know, I mean, become so synchronized and part of kind of your subconscious,
[0:03:10 - 0:03:16] ▶
you know, because you train so much on it, you're constantly making corrections,
[0:03:16 - 0:03:20] ▶
you're constantly doing things.
[0:03:20 - 0:03:22] ▶
And just all those mechanisms are just so well rehearsed that it just feels like you're,
[0:03:22 - 0:03:26] ▶
you're just part of the jet and you're just moving it around.
[0:03:26 - 0:03:29] ▶
You did an amazing podcast actually with Dr. Ea Whiteley,
[0:03:29 - 0:03:32] ▶
who deals with the psychology of both fighter pilots and astronauts.
[0:03:32 - 0:03:37] ▶
What did you learn from her?
[0:03:37 - 0:03:38] ▶
I mean, I imagine she was sort of putting words and analysis and names to things
[0:03:38 - 0:03:43] ▶
that you've experienced firsthand.
[0:03:43 - 0:03:45] ▶
But what was that conversation like?
[0:03:45 - 0:03:47] ▶
Well, you know, we get a lot of what we call ground training where they bring in folks
[0:03:47 - 0:03:51] ▶
non like herself and teach it to us at a certain level.
[0:03:51 - 0:03:54] ▶
And we go through different reviews, you know,
[0:03:54 - 0:03:56] ▶
like every six months or a year where we rediscuss these different issues.
[0:03:56 - 0:03:59] ▶
But I think what was like most impactful to me, like as the operator is a guy on the leading edge,
[0:04:00 - 0:04:05] ▶
we don't always, you know, get the C behind the curtain to like the countless people
[0:04:05 - 0:04:09] ▶
that like it takes to get us there and make this mission successful.
[0:04:09 - 0:04:13] ▶
So to really talk and engage with someone who's devoted her career to this or life to this,
[0:04:13 - 0:04:18] ▶
it was just really rewarding to kind of have that perspective from someone that is ultimately
[0:04:18 - 0:04:23] ▶
always on the outside of like actual operation, but is so critical to what we do.
[0:04:23 - 0:04:27] ▶
Yeah. And I imagine you learn so much kind of in the abstract before you get into the cockpit.
[0:04:27 - 0:04:34] ▶
And then everything probably goes away at some point.
[0:04:34 - 0:04:37] ▶
Like there's a great book called the Art of Learning by a guy named Josh Wateskin.
[0:04:37 - 0:04:41] ▶
He was actually the inspiration for searching for Bobby Fisher.
[0:04:41 - 0:04:45] ▶
So he's this prodigious amazing chess player as a kid.
[0:04:45 - 0:04:48] ▶
And then he became, I think a champion in like Tai Chi push hands or whatever martial art.
[0:04:48 - 0:04:55] ▶
So he's one of the few people who've like been at the top of two different disciplines.
[0:04:55 - 0:05:00] ▶
And he writes this book about how to best learn.
[0:05:00 - 0:05:03] ▶
And it's called, it's a great book. It's called the Art of Learning.
[0:05:03 - 0:05:06] ▶
And he says that you can learn a bunch of mental models.
[0:05:06 - 0:05:09] ▶
But ultimately when you're like doing the thing, all of the mental models just go away.
[0:05:09 - 0:05:13] ▶
Yeah. And you have to kind of integrate. It's like a dog catching a frisbee is not doing vector
[0:05:13 - 0:05:18] ▶
calculus when he's catching it. I might be using it, but you know. Yeah. I mean, those models
[0:05:18 - 0:05:22] ▶
who are based on assumptions, right? You're building that model so that you can have some type of
[0:05:22 - 0:05:26] ▶
you know, pre-knowledge of what you're getting yourself into. So you can hopefully meet the
[0:05:27 - 0:05:31] ▶
expectations. But you know, I was on flight instructor for three and a half years and
[0:05:31 - 0:05:35] ▶
called us a advanced strike fighter instructor. And so I was working with students who were flying
[0:05:36 - 0:05:41] ▶
their first tactical jet for the first time. I told them all the time, you know, there's guys that
[0:05:41 - 0:05:48] ▶
and girls that are incredibly, incredibly studious, you know, memorizing the book,
[0:05:48 - 0:05:54] ▶
knowing the procedures inside and now know exactly what to do. And they get up in the air and
[0:05:54 - 0:05:58] ▶
all falls apart, you know, because they're trying to almost kind of reach back to what they learned
[0:05:58 - 0:06:03] ▶
on the ground instead of just kind of being in the moment and physically learning it, you know,
[0:06:03 - 0:06:07] ▶
which is a totally different mechanism than just memorizing something. And you know, you have to go
[0:06:07 - 0:06:12] ▶
in with the right knowledge into those variation of those missions, but the people that succeeded
[0:06:12 - 0:06:17] ▶
the best, you know, weren't trying to necessarily prove themselves in the jet. They were there to
[0:06:17 - 0:06:22] ▶
like actually take it in as a learning experience. You know, James McDonald of McDonald Douglas,
[0:06:22 - 0:06:28] ▶
you know, famous American aerospace corporation. He got really interested in this because a lot of
[0:06:28 - 0:06:35] ▶
his early planes, he would have fighter pilots fly them and they would kind of freeze up at times.
[0:06:35 - 0:06:41] ▶
And he had a word for this, he would call them gremlins. And so he spent a lot of his research
[0:06:41 - 0:06:45] ▶
career looking for ghosts in the machine. And when I imagine when you're working with F 18s, you know,
[0:06:46 - 0:06:52] ▶
these incredibly complex instruments, you know, maybe your mind leaps to the conclusion that like
[0:06:52 - 0:06:59] ▶
there's something at play here that's almost like magical or mystical or something. Did you experience
[0:06:59 - 0:07:04] ▶
anything like that when you were when you were flying or gosh, as an interesting question, I'd say,
[0:07:04 - 0:07:10] ▶
you know, I'd say the instances where that was, you know, maybe part of my assessment of the
[0:07:11 - 0:07:19] ▶
situation, if you will, was during the abnormal times, during emergencies where there was uncertain
[0:07:19 - 0:07:26] ▶
you about how things were going to go down, right? You know, one example is I was about 80 miles,
[0:07:26 - 0:07:32] ▶
west of the boat, 30,000 feet or so, night time. And all of a sudden,
[0:07:32 - 0:07:39] ▶
my canopy starts leaking. And I don't know if it's cracked, I don't know if it's sealed blue.
[0:07:41 - 0:07:46] ▶
But, you know, what we essentially just diverted the jet and pulled down as fast as we could so
[0:07:48 - 0:07:53] ▶
that we didn't have a hypoxic situation if it did burst. And, you know, those are the times when
[0:07:53 - 0:07:58] ▶
you kind of start maybe fitting the pieces together a bit as far as, you know, am I going to get
[0:07:58 - 0:08:04] ▶
through this and I get back to the boat in time? Is this going to get worse? I've had multiple
[0:08:04 - 0:08:10] ▶
issues like that. And, you know, in fact, maybe even a better story is a time we were going to drop
[0:08:10 - 0:08:16] ▶
a training round in Saudi Arabia. And I was flying on the way out and I just, it was very hard to
[0:08:16 - 0:08:24] ▶
describe the stick just didn't feel right. And I had been on this boat. I just got to this squadron,
[0:08:24 - 0:08:29] ▶
my first fleet squadron, operational squadron. And, you know, as a new guy, it's like, last
[0:08:29 - 0:08:35] ▶
thing you know, I do is be like, my stick feels funny, you know, like, yeah, this is not, that's not
[0:08:35 - 0:08:39] ▶
a diagnosis. It's just maybe it's in my head, right? Right. And, you know, we're getting out there
[0:08:39 - 0:08:44] ▶
and I'm noticing it more and more. And then we get to the point where we're going to drop the bomb,
[0:08:44 - 0:08:49] ▶
we roll in, you know, 40 degrees nose down. And I'm in the dive for about two out of the six
[0:08:50 - 0:08:56] ▶
seconds. I pull up and I abort. And my commanding, obviously, who was leading the flight was like,
[0:08:56 - 0:09:01] ▶
you know, what happened? And I'm like, I, it's there. I don't know what to tell you, but my, my stick
[0:09:01 - 0:09:05] ▶
is just not performing the way I would expect. I think it feels tough to move in certain directions.
[0:09:05 - 0:09:10] ▶
And I have no warnings, no cautions, no advisories. And so not all what we can do other than just kind
[0:09:10 - 0:09:16] ▶
of hang on. And we're progressing back to the boat. It's probably about a hundred miles or so.
[0:09:16 - 0:09:21] ▶
And it's getting worse and it's getting worse and it's getting to the point as I'm like 10 miles
[0:09:22 - 0:09:26] ▶
from the ship where if I want to move the jet to the right, I have to take both hands and force
[0:09:26 - 0:09:31] ▶
to stick to the right. And if I tap it lightly to the left, the aircraft would essentially overbank 120
[0:09:31 - 0:09:37] ▶
degrees immediately. Still no warnings, no cautions. And you know, there's a lot of lessons learned from
[0:09:37 - 0:09:43] ▶
that from that situation, but came back boarded uneventfully on the carrier. And it turns out there's
[0:09:44 - 0:09:50] ▶
one of our bleed lines we call it, they take air and the intake and they siphon some of it off to
[0:09:50 - 0:09:54] ▶
power generators and do other things. One of those had broken and it was essentially like a plasma
[0:09:54 - 0:10:00] ▶
being just cutting things inside the jet. Oh my god. And it was cutting through the control feedback
[0:10:00 - 0:10:04] ▶
lines that attached to the stick. They ended up having like crane the jet off of it. But you know,
[0:10:04 - 0:10:10] ▶
that was certainly a moment where it was, you know, and it wasn't a doubt of the aircraft at first.
[0:10:10 - 0:10:15] ▶
You dug yourself first before you kind of jump to the aircraft and you don't have any indications.
[0:10:15 - 0:10:20] ▶
But that was certainly a time where, you know, you're really questioning what's going on. You know,
[0:10:21 - 0:10:27] ▶
where does this go? And you know, is there a ghost in this machine that I'm battling?
[0:10:27 - 0:10:31] ▶
And what did you experience per a lot of the listeners of this show that care about the UFO and UAP
[0:10:32 - 0:10:39] ▶
phenomena, which you've played a massive role in both public advocacy wise, but also just in
[0:10:39 - 0:10:45] ▶
relaying this experience, what happened when you were there? Yeah. So when we came back from that
[0:10:45 - 0:10:49] ▶
deployment, we began and heard what we call maintenance phase where we just were not flying as much.
[0:10:49 - 0:10:54] ▶
We're upgrading some systems, even sending some jets to four deploy squadrons. And one of the
[0:10:54 - 0:11:01] ▶
we are slated for a major upgrade of our radar system, which is our primary detection tool and
[0:11:01 - 0:11:05] ▶
what we use for all the weapon systems. We were going from something called the APG-73.
[0:11:06 - 0:11:12] ▶
It's considered a mechanically scanned array radar. So basically a big dish in front that's
[0:11:13 - 0:11:17] ▶
moving around sending trons down range, receiving them back and giving us a picture of what's out there.
[0:11:17 - 0:11:22] ▶
And we were upgrading to like a very new technology, very capable technology called actively
[0:11:23 - 0:11:29] ▶
electronically scanned array radar, the APG-79. And so this system, it's fixed and it's much,
[0:11:29 - 0:11:37] ▶
much more precise under a lot more energy and in smaller packets with wherever it wants. And it
[0:11:37 - 0:11:43] ▶
took about eight months for this process to occur, you know, maybe like a month per jet. And so you
[0:11:43 - 0:11:48] ▶
might be flying one mission in the morning with the older radar and you might be flying later in
[0:11:48 - 0:11:53] ▶
the evening with the newer radar system. And immediately we noticed that when we were flying,
[0:11:53 - 0:11:57] ▶
we're flying in this big cube off the coast of Virginia Beach that there were objects in a
[0:11:57 - 0:12:03] ▶
working area that we were detecting with the newer radars. And the older radars could have errors,
[0:12:03 - 0:12:10] ▶
not software errors per se, but they might pick up reflections of radar energy from say,
[0:12:11 - 0:12:15] ▶
a moving car or a thick cloud or something of that nature. So, you know, these kind of false
[0:12:15 - 0:12:21] ▶
tracks as we would call them weren't we're something we were used to. This system wasn't supposed to
[0:12:21 - 0:12:26] ▶
have those errors. It was supposed to essentially filter them out, but our assumption at first
[0:12:26 - 0:12:31] ▶
were that these were just simply radar errors. Not nonexistent objects, just kind of a bug,
[0:12:31 - 0:12:37] ▶
a bug, a ghost in the machine, if you will. But they weren't behaving like false tracks, right?
[0:12:37 - 0:12:44] ▶
They were steady, they were solid, they were consistent, and they were behaving in ways that
[0:12:44 - 0:12:50] ▶
didn't really make sense for a false track. They were sometimes completely stationary, 0.0 Mach,
[0:12:50 - 0:12:56] ▶
over a piece of the ground, very high winds, category three hurricane type winds. And even in
[0:12:56 - 0:13:01] ▶
an F-18 you're working in winds like that, you have to like maybe plan your turn, you know, like
[0:13:01 - 0:13:06] ▶
three miles earlier because you're going to get blown three or five miles as you're making that turn.
[0:13:06 - 0:13:10] ▶
And these things would just be perfectly stationary, not even like vibrating, right? Not like kind of
[0:13:11 - 0:13:17] ▶
like being moved around and per pulse back into a position, but perfectly stationary. We'd see
[0:13:17 - 0:13:23] ▶
them at 0.6 or 0.8 Mach, around 250 to 350 knots. And those are speeds that we typically operate at.
[0:13:23 - 0:13:31] ▶
And they would be doing that in a holding pattern, in a circular pattern, and a racetrack,
[0:13:32 - 0:13:37] ▶
but and these are not consistent with what we would expect to see from radar errors, but
[0:13:37 - 0:13:40] ▶
that's what we were seeing. We'd see them meandering sometimes, so non-consistent heading,
[0:13:41 - 0:13:48] ▶
non-consistent altitudes, kind of just moving in a general direction, but doing it a very sloppy
[0:13:48 - 0:13:52] ▶
way, which is not, you get in the how we operate, just wasting a few olders, no further reason to do
[0:13:52 - 0:13:57] ▶
that. And this is you and roughly how many other people in your squadron are kind of noticing that.
[0:13:57 - 0:14:02] ▶
Yeah, well, at this time we didn't really know. Okay. We weren't really discussing it. And I think
[0:14:02 - 0:14:08] ▶
a lot of guys that were seeing it just, you know, either maybe I didn't hear them talk about it or
[0:14:08 - 0:14:12] ▶
they just weren't talking about it. Yeah. But even some of these objects were even going over
[0:14:12 - 0:14:17] ▶
the speed of sound. Yeah, 1.1, 1.2. So you're kind of at this point, personally noticing this,
[0:14:17 - 0:14:22] ▶
and kind of keeping it to yourself. Pretty much. Yeah, we're talking a little bit because there's
[0:14:22 - 0:14:25] ▶
a guy on my back seat. So there's a little bit of chatter, but it's not something we're like
[0:14:25 - 0:14:29] ▶
debriefing. Yep. It's not something we're going to the commanding officer with, but when we're
[0:14:29 - 0:14:34] ▶
out there, you know, with this radar system, whatnot, when we see targets or tracks, we're not just
[0:14:34 - 0:14:40] ▶
like looking at them. We're basically fly with a trackpad on our throttle and we're moving it around
[0:14:40 - 0:14:46] ▶
like a computer mouse. And we're selecting these targets. We're categorizing them and organizing
[0:14:46 - 0:14:50] ▶
switching between them. And it just so happened that some folks started flying with the ATF
[0:14:51 - 0:14:57] ▶
FLIR, it's an infrared and electro-optical targeting system. And as they happen to be within a
[0:14:57 - 0:15:04] ▶
relatively close range of these radar errors, they notice that the FLIR, which is looking where the
[0:15:04 - 0:15:09] ▶
radar is looking, is seeing something at these locations. There's IR energy coming back from it.
[0:15:09 - 0:15:16] ▶
And typically, it almost just looked like someone was shining a flashlight into this sensor. It wasn't
[0:15:16 - 0:15:20] ▶
you know, the skid of an aircraft and we're seeing propulsion come out the back. And at that same
[0:15:20 - 0:15:26] ▶
range, our aim 9x missile systems that we're carrying are also detecting and locking onto these
[0:15:26 - 0:15:31] ▶
objects. And so now we're having correlation across three different sensors telling us that
[0:15:31 - 0:15:36] ▶
there's a physical object here. And that was kind of the moment we were, you know, at least those
[0:15:36 - 0:15:40] ▶
outweigh where we're like, okay, this is like these probably physical objects. Like you can't assume
[0:15:40 - 0:15:45] ▶
that they're just errors in the radar. It's, you know, it would be irresponsible, could lead to a
[0:15:45 - 0:15:49] ▶
safety risk because we are essentially just flying through these ignoring them. And so that's
[0:15:49 - 0:15:55] ▶
really kind of started at least for me. And a few others, the process of trying to fly up and
[0:15:55 - 0:15:59] ▶
visually seeing what these objects. And so we get on in a radar, we get on our FLIR, detect one that's
[0:15:59 - 0:16:05] ▶
slow. And you know, we step down about 800 feet outside of our 500 foot safety bubble, getting
[0:16:05 - 0:16:13] ▶
a look up. So we can see it against the blue sky. All our center data get pumped into our helmet,
[0:16:13 - 0:16:19] ▶
like an augmented reality system. So I was telling us exactly where to look. And we come by this very
[0:16:19 - 0:16:24] ▶
manageable meriddle. Say, we're not doing a 1200 knots like we usually do. And we couldn't see
[0:16:24 - 0:16:30] ▶
anything. Nothing there. We would turn back around. And our sensors would be reacquired.
[0:16:30 - 0:16:37] ▶
There it is again. And yet it seemed to be displaced a bit, but it was generally in the same location.
[0:16:38 - 0:16:43] ▶
And that, you know, just led to more confusion because we had to trust our sensors.
[0:16:43 - 0:16:48] ▶
And we didn't know really what else to do at that point. And that was kind of the status quo for a
[0:16:50 - 0:16:56] ▶
few weeks. But eventually, a few of my buddies in the squadron, they're flying out, two aircraft
[0:16:56 - 0:17:03] ▶
taking off together. They're probably about 150 feet apart as they approach this kind of entry point
[0:17:03 - 0:17:09] ▶
at a fixed GPS location altitude where they enter that working area. And as soon as they cross
[0:17:09 - 0:17:16] ▶
that threshold, boom, object shoots down the left or the right wing of the lead aircraft,
[0:17:16 - 0:17:20] ▶
came within about 50 feet of the cockpit, which is extremely close. And anything splitting a
[0:17:22 - 0:17:27] ▶
section is a problem. They canceled the flight, turned back around. And I saw them in the ready room.
[0:17:27 - 0:17:34] ▶
He saw it all his gear on. Had his mouth gaped open a bit, kind of just looking like, you know,
[0:17:34 - 0:17:39] ▶
with the heck, he's like, I was hit when I was fucking things. And we didn't know, I mean,
[0:17:39 - 0:17:45] ▶
we knew he was talking about, we never named for it. But, well, like, what, you know, what it
[0:17:45 - 0:17:50] ▶
looked like, because this was the first time we had really ever seen one as far as we knew at this
[0:17:50 - 0:17:55] ▶
point, at least I did. And he described as a dark gray or a black cube inside of a clear sphere,
[0:17:55 - 0:18:00] ▶
about five to 15 feet in diameter was the best estimate he could give it. And that really
[0:18:01 - 0:18:09] ▶
triggered a pretty big reaction to squadron. Because now we had the file paperwork, a safety
[0:18:09 - 0:18:13] ▶
report, a hazard report. And so we did that. And the safety officer took the time to kind of
[0:18:13 - 0:18:20] ▶
survey the rest of the squadron and see, you know, okay, what other experiences have you had
[0:18:20 - 0:18:24] ▶
around this? Yeah. And as it turned out, there were like four other near mid-airs that are
[0:18:24 - 0:18:28] ▶
squalting it had over the past, you know, a few months with this issue that went unreported.
[0:18:28 - 0:18:33] ▶
What was, so you're taking all this in? What was your first instinct as to what this thing might
[0:18:34 - 0:18:40] ▶
have been? You know, at the time, I really, I didn't speculate in what, what it could be that,
[0:18:40 - 0:18:45] ▶
UAP wasn't a term I was familiar with. You know, there were some jokes about UFOs. But, you know,
[0:18:45 - 0:18:54] ▶
I think the general assumption was that this must have been something that blew in, it must have
[0:18:54 - 0:18:59] ▶
been some kind of civilian attack. It must have been maybe even worst case and adversarial capability.
[0:18:59 - 0:19:05] ▶
But, you know, the more that we kind of talked about the various experiences of what people had
[0:19:05 - 0:19:10] ▶
and what they were seeing, just they didn't fit any of those categories. Even though like we
[0:19:10 - 0:19:14] ▶
didn't really have anything, any other label to give it, you know, or any other category to put it in.
[0:19:14 - 0:19:19] ▶
You know, there's no propellers, there's no propulsion. It seems to be masking its IR
[0:19:19 - 0:19:24] ▶
signature, so it can't even break out to see what it looks like. And they're traveling at speeds and,
[0:19:24 - 0:19:30] ▶
oh, by the way, they're out there all day. What were the top speeds?
[0:19:30 - 0:19:33] ▶
At 1.2 Mach was the fastest I detected one of them. Yeah. Which as I told you, my top speed
[0:19:33 - 0:19:38] ▶
was 1.3. That's fast, even for a super hornet. Especially for something with no exhaust
[0:19:38 - 0:19:44] ▶
totally. So the main anomalies you'd say would be, yeah, low observability and masking signatures.
[0:19:45 - 0:19:52] ▶
It would be being able to withstand extreme amounts of wind and stay stationary. That's not
[0:19:52 - 0:19:57] ▶
obviously normal. The shape, the geometric shape, anything else I imagine speed combined with
[0:19:57 - 0:20:03] ▶
those factors is anomalous, but maybe speed alone would not be considered anomalous. Anything
[0:20:03 - 0:20:08] ▶
else that you'd consider anomalous? Well, there would typically be like a handful of them out in the
[0:20:08 - 0:20:13] ▶
areas. It wasn't just like one that we might see. It was like three to five, seven of them.
[0:20:13 - 0:20:18] ▶
They're only over water. They're only going fast when they're heading like deweas, essentially.
[0:20:18 - 0:20:23] ▶
Did any of them go? Because obviously your friend, Commander David Fraver, who testified with you
[0:20:24 - 0:20:29] ▶
in front of Congress, and I want to talk about that, he had an experience at Nimitz in 2004 with
[0:20:30 - 0:20:34] ▶
their Carrier Strike Group. And he mentions that the craft that he saw was hovering right above
[0:20:34 - 0:20:41] ▶
the water and then it almost seemed to go in and out of the water like this to be this kind of
[0:20:41 - 0:20:45] ▶
transmedium object, which is another observable when it comes to UAP. You experience anything like that?
[0:20:45 - 0:20:51] ▶
So I haven't heard of us in that time frame experiencing that. We can see down to the ocean,
[0:20:51 - 0:20:57] ▶
the ocean with our radar system, and then get the little worse as we get really close.
[0:20:57 - 0:21:01] ▶
We really don't have the system to tell us that something's entering the water unless we're up
[0:21:02 - 0:21:06] ▶
on it and we can visually see it. But these things would be climbing into sending various
[0:21:06 - 0:21:10] ▶
altitudes. We kind of cap our radar at around 30,000 feet or so. So if they were coming from higher
[0:21:10 - 0:21:18] ▶
than that, we weren't really observing it, but very likely that they were operating even higher than
[0:21:18 - 0:21:22] ▶
that. And they weren't respecting the boundaries of our area at all, which was a big clue, right?
[0:21:22 - 0:21:27] ▶
I mean, if it was some test, they would not be flying through the international commercial channel
[0:21:27 - 0:21:32] ▶
less to the North via area, but these would be almost hitting one of the pilots. Yeah.
[0:21:32 - 0:21:36] ▶
Like that seems pretty unsafe, even if you're it's funny because we did this great talk last night.
[0:21:36 - 0:21:41] ▶
It was a lot of fun. And I was telling you one of the guys in the audience was an arrow and NASA.
[0:21:41 - 0:21:45] ▶
And he came up to me afterwards and was like, I do think some of these things might be
[0:21:46 - 0:21:52] ▶
red teaming our systems, our detection capabilities in our airspace, which may be true in certain
[0:21:53 - 0:22:00] ▶
cases, but you wouldn't try to hit a pilot, you know, if that were the case. I don't know what
[0:22:00 - 0:22:05] ▶
your take is on that. Yeah, you know, it's hard for me to imagine that they would unwittingly expose
[0:22:05 - 0:22:12] ▶
us to what would very likely be what's considered like special access program type tech. That would
[0:22:12 - 0:22:19] ▶
that it in itself would be a massive security flaw almost equivalent of telling someone that
[0:22:19 - 0:22:23] ▶
doesn't even have security clearance. Yeah. And all the by the way, we have, you know,
[0:22:23 - 0:22:27] ▶
very secure ranges that are in the middle of the country to test these types of things.
[0:22:27 - 0:22:31] ▶
They have engineers, they have pilots, they have whole squadrons that can do that type of work.
[0:22:31 - 0:22:34] ▶
And so to take that type of tech, basically doing a legal activity to expose us to something
[0:22:35 - 0:22:41] ▶
we're not read into. And by the way, doing it over international waters, whether it's very well
[0:22:41 - 0:22:46] ▶
documented that there are, you know, adversaries that are hanging out down there that are trying to
[0:22:46 - 0:22:50] ▶
see what we're doing, it just doesn't make sense to me. Yeah. I think that's that's right. And then
[0:22:50 - 0:22:56] ▶
also just the shape as well, because the final sensor is the human eye, right? And so you guys
[0:22:56 - 0:23:03] ▶
saw these things. And that's incredibly important as well. How many eyewitnesses were there to
[0:23:04 - 0:23:10] ▶
the actual physical object? That's a good question. There was probably, I mean, I would say probably,
[0:23:10 - 0:23:16] ▶
let's see, there was five shape reports. There's two people in each air or each jet. I mean,
[0:23:17 - 0:23:22] ▶
so at least 10 out of the 25 pilots or so that we have, but I imagine it's much higher than that.
[0:23:22 - 0:23:26] ▶
And then it wasn't just our squadron. I later learned to talk to other squadrons that were
[0:23:27 - 0:23:33] ▶
operating out of the same area and even other areas later. But, you know, when the New York Times
[0:23:33 - 0:23:40] ▶
article came out and I saw that, I started asking people back on the East Coast because I was in
[0:23:40 - 0:23:45] ▶
a different area. I was asking people in my ready room and, you know, have to room raise their
[0:23:45 - 0:23:50] ▶
hand like, yeah, the cubes and his fears, you know, we saw those. Yeah. And I know, no prompting,
[0:23:50 - 0:23:53] ▶
you know, like, and I didn't even realize these people that had their experience. I know them for
[0:23:53 - 0:23:57] ▶
a few years. That's just not something they talked about. Have you met fighter pilots stationed
[0:23:57 - 0:24:03] ▶
elsewhere who've experienced that shape? Because that shape, when I first heard about your test
[0:24:03 - 0:24:07] ▶
amount, I was like, that's so not even what you hear kind of in the history of UFO lore. It's like,
[0:24:07 - 0:24:13] ▶
you know, discs and saucers and that sort of thing. Have you heard other fighter pilots seeing that
[0:24:13 - 0:24:18] ▶
shape? Yeah. And I've heard that one and the spheres very common as well. One that are like
[0:24:18 - 0:24:25] ▶
outpacing jets. But, you know, I mean, basically every base that we have in the U.S. I mean,
[0:24:25 - 0:24:31] ▶
Norfolk for Virginia Beach area, of course, out in California on the West Coast. Yes,
[0:24:32 - 0:24:38] ▶
further inland, Lamor, Fallon. These are other, you know, big Navy training ranges. They're seeing
[0:24:39 - 0:24:43] ▶
them there. Pax River, we do our test pilot training. They're having incidents up there. So, you
[0:24:43 - 0:24:50] ▶
know, I think where these centers are guys are seeing them. It's so fascinating. And we're on the
[0:24:50 - 0:24:55] ▶
heels of very interesting reports that last year at Langley, Hampton Air Force Base, for 17 days,
[0:24:55 - 0:25:03] ▶
you had quote unquote drones, swarming the base. And there was nothing that the U.S. could do about
[0:25:03 - 0:25:10] ▶
this. Yeah, I mean, it's incredible, right? I mean, Langley provides air response to DC. I mean,
[0:25:11 - 0:25:16] ▶
that's a major, major, you know, piece of the puzzle here. Yeah. House is F-22s. They had the move
[0:25:16 - 0:25:23] ▶
of the F-22s to a new base because they were afraid of potentially losing those assets.
[0:25:23 - 0:25:27] ▶
They had similar incursions at Norfolk, the Norfolk Naval Base, which is the largest naval base
[0:25:28 - 0:25:35] ▶
in these coasts, if not the country. It's basically where our carriers are stationed. And there's
[0:25:35 - 0:25:40] ▶
other reports of similar objects that have been further in, like actually over DC itself. So,
[0:25:40 - 0:25:45] ▶
I mean, these are all adjacent to the areas that we were having our experiences. And now we're
[0:25:46 - 0:25:50] ▶
having this influx of other issues that are occurring further north and further north. And
[0:25:50 - 0:25:55] ▶
if only someone told them that this could potentially be an issue. Yeah. If you were to pull,
[0:25:56 - 0:26:00] ▶
you know, people on the street at this point, we're in pretty interesting times. I think probably
[0:26:00 - 0:26:05] ▶
50% maybe over 50% of the American population now believes in the reality of UFOs.
[0:26:05 - 0:26:10] ▶
You know, this is obviously going to be sort of a guesstimate on your part. But you speak. I'm
[0:26:11 - 0:26:16] ▶
sure with a lot of other fighter pilots, you advocate for, you know, all these safety initiatives
[0:26:16 - 0:26:20] ▶
around the UAP topic. What percentage of fighter pilots in and around, you know, military circles?
[0:26:20 - 0:26:27] ▶
Do you think are bought into UAPs exist? Yeah. That's a tough question. I'll tell you what,
[0:26:27 - 0:26:34] ▶
100% of people that have had their own experiences are about it. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
[0:26:34 - 0:26:38] ▶
You know, I've heard from some of the staunchest critics on this topic. They come embarrassing
[0:26:38 - 0:26:43] ▶
the community by having this conversation. And then they have their own experience. And they're
[0:26:43 - 0:26:48] ▶
just, you know, like holy shit. You know, I guess that was the guy that was wrong here. So, you know,
[0:26:48 - 0:26:53] ▶
it's tough to say. I don't know if I can quantify it with any precision. But, you know, in my
[0:26:53 - 0:26:59] ▶
experience, guys that are flying that radar, they are seeing these objects in a way that they've had
[0:26:59 - 0:27:03] ▶
agency to go check it out and gain a visual. I couldn't have put a number on that. But it's
[0:27:03 - 0:27:09] ▶
definitely a topic, at least within the Navy, maybe not the Air Force that guys are smart on.
[0:27:09 - 0:27:15] ▶
They're briefing it in their flights. They're, they're debriefing it afterwards or submitting
[0:27:15 - 0:27:19] ▶
report. In some cases, I've talked to guys who are still not comfortable reporting it either
[0:27:19 - 0:27:24] ▶
because they just don't want to put the time in or they don't think anything's going to happen
[0:27:24 - 0:27:27] ▶
or they don't want to affect their career in some way. And so, I still think it's under reported
[0:27:27 - 0:27:33] ▶
regardless. It's fascinating. I think the Navy angle to all of this is extremely underrated.
[0:27:33 - 0:27:39] ▶
I think the Navy has experienced a lot of this stuff for a very long time. And one anecdote is,
[0:27:39 - 0:27:45] ▶
you know, I did this show on this, you know, mid-century inventor named Thomas Towns and Brown,
[0:27:45 - 0:27:49] ▶
who I'm fascinated with because I think maybe he made some interesting updates and topological
[0:27:49 - 0:27:54] ▶
physics and the world of gravity that have not met the eye. And there's this story actually,
[0:27:54 - 0:28:00] ▶
you know, he's being written about by this historian Paul LeVille, and Towns and Brown goes to
[0:28:01 - 0:28:07] ▶
Hyman Rick over, who is the head of the nuclear Navy. He basically started the American nuclear
[0:28:07 - 0:28:11] ▶
Navy. And Hyman Rick over says Towns and, you know, stop wasting your time. Like we've already figured
[0:28:11 - 0:28:18] ▶
the stuff out a while back then. Yeah. So, and then there's another guy named Robert Sarpacher,
[0:28:18 - 0:28:24] ▶
who David Grush mentions as having set up UFO secrecy along with Robert J. Oppenheimer,
[0:28:24 - 0:28:29] ▶
the Atomic Energy Commission of 1954. And Sarpacher actually worked at the Harvard Undersea Observatory.
[0:28:29 - 0:28:36] ▶
Oh, did he? Yeah. And so I think there's a lot going on underwater. And I think that the Navy's
[0:28:36 - 0:28:42] ▶
got to be, you know, have experienced this stuff for a very long time would be my guess.
[0:28:42 - 0:28:47] ▶
Yeah, you know, that's interesting. You know, underwater world is interesting. You know, the column
[0:28:47 - 0:28:52] ▶
USOs or identified some, some earth objects I believe. And, you know, I'll just say from my experience
[0:28:52 - 0:29:01] ▶
talking to the guys on subs and whatnot, they're always very cagey. They're secretive. But think about
[0:29:01 - 0:29:07] ▶
you know, you don't have the type of like air traffic that you have, you know, on a radar, we're always
[0:29:07 - 0:29:12] ▶
seeing all these different contacts, a lot of civilian air, but underwater there's much less of that.
[0:29:12 - 0:29:17] ▶
And so if you're seeing something bizarre, it's probably a very high likelihood that it truly is
[0:29:17 - 0:29:22] ▶
bizarre of some type of misinterpretation. And I know going back to gosh, even, you know, Columbus
[0:29:22 - 0:29:29] ▶
and even before that most likely that they were, you know, seeing things under the water that they
[0:29:29 - 0:29:33] ▶
didn't understand what they were. And I know Viradimal Tim Gala-Det who used to run NOAA,
[0:29:33 - 0:29:40] ▶
natural oceanic and atmospheric association is highly interested in these underwater anomalies.
[0:29:40 - 0:29:45] ▶
I know he's working on pursuing that as a research topic.
[0:29:45 - 0:29:50] ▶
Yeah, there's the little brother to the NRO, which is now public, so I can talk about it,
[0:29:50 - 0:29:56] ▶
but there's not much known about it as Nuro. And it's the underwater version of the NRO.
[0:29:56 - 0:30:02] ▶
And one gets the sense that yeah, we've probably detected a lot of these things and underwater.
[0:30:02 - 0:30:07] ▶
And do you think, you know, per what you described as kind of the observables of what you saw?
[0:30:07 - 0:30:13] ▶
And Oshianna, do you think these things have their own almost like inertial reference frames?
[0:30:14 - 0:30:19] ▶
Because one of the observables is they seem to be able to break conservation of momentum,
[0:30:19 - 0:30:23] ▶
right? Like you're flying mock, you know, one or two or whatever, and then you stop on a dime.
[0:30:23 - 0:30:27] ▶
And it's like that's just impossible, like with a gas propulsion fighter jet.
[0:30:27 - 0:30:32] ▶
And so, and the neat plasma is also coming off the craft, which can reduce, I guess,
[0:30:32 - 0:30:37] ▶
G-Force, you know, inertial drag. And so, do you think they've figured something out in that,
[0:30:37 - 0:30:43] ▶
in that realm, obviously, we're an extremely speculative territory here.
[0:30:43 - 0:30:46] ▶
Yeah, no, I mean, I think it's a natural question though, because based off of the flabic
[0:30:46 - 0:30:51] ▶
mechanics, I mean, if you have something like going supersonic or even, you know,
[0:30:51 - 0:30:54] ▶
even point eight mockers, so you immediately stop it. I mean, it's no different than just slamming
[0:30:54 - 0:30:59] ▶
into the ground, right? I mean, in fact, it's probably a faster stop than if you were to crush an
[0:30:59 - 0:31:03] ▶
aircraft into the ground. So you have to ask yourself, you know, how is it doing that? And
[0:31:03 - 0:31:08] ▶
I don't understand a physical mechanism that would allow it to do it without having to speculate
[0:31:08 - 0:31:12] ▶
about some type of ability to, you know, control or manipulate inertia. Yeah.
[0:31:12 - 0:31:16] ▶
The FLIR, which, you know, you guys picked it up with FLIR, also seems to be this important kind of
[0:31:17 - 0:31:23] ▶
sensor modality. FLIR had just been installed in 2004 in the Nimitz case with David Fraver.
[0:31:23 - 0:31:29] ▶
And so it was like this new Raytheon FLIR system and Raytheon's like, we're not in charge of what
[0:31:30 - 0:31:35] ▶
you detect, what you detect is, you know, it's on you guys or whatever. And so I find that very
[0:31:35 - 0:31:41] ▶
interesting as well, especially given, you know, how put off who actually lives in Austin out here,
[0:31:41 - 0:31:44] ▶
he's one of the deepest, you know, on some of the scientific theories around this stuff. And
[0:31:45 - 0:31:50] ▶
I think one of the questions, you know, average people will ask, which is a fair question,
[0:31:50 - 0:31:54] ▶
is like, why aren't we drowning in high resolution photo of this stuff? And I think it's because
[0:31:54 - 0:32:00] ▶
of these blue shifts and red shifts. And so if you were actually manipulating space time in these
[0:32:00 - 0:32:05] ▶
ways that would comport with all these observables that you're mentioning, you'd experience,
[0:32:05 - 0:32:10] ▶
probably, you know, it would be, it would be things at the ends of the electromagnetic wave spectrum,
[0:32:10 - 0:32:15] ▶
not in the RBG spectrum that we sort of see. And so it makes sense that FLIR would pick this stuff.
[0:32:15 - 0:32:22] ▶
You know, well, our systems too, you know, they're designed for very specific purposes. And the way
[0:32:22 - 0:32:27] ▶
our systems work is that, you know, we have two giant or one giant, you know, propulsion system
[0:32:27 - 0:32:33] ▶
and aircraft. And they expel a lot of heat. And the rest of the aircraft kind of absorbs energy
[0:32:33 - 0:32:38] ▶
from the friction of the air and things of that nature. And so the system is calibrated because
[0:32:38 - 0:32:45] ▶
that's the expectation where you're going to see. And so you can break out rivers on the jet,
[0:32:45 - 0:32:48] ▶
you can see the cockpit. And you can very clearly see, you know, the flames and the exhaust,
[0:32:48 - 0:32:56] ▶
if you will. But if you had something that was propulsion itself in an entirely different mechanism
[0:32:56 - 0:33:01] ▶
that was putting energy out equally across the skin of its body, it might just look like a blur
[0:33:01 - 0:33:06] ▶
of a, yeah, just a blur essentially because it's, you know, we're kind of getting the worst part of
[0:33:06 - 0:33:13] ▶
the image. And it's, that's what's being, that's the type of energy that's putting out across
[0:33:13 - 0:33:18] ▶
the entire surface of the object. And so the FLIR, although it might be effective for detecting
[0:33:18 - 0:33:23] ▶
that there's energy coming from there, it's essentially masking itself so that we can't see.
[0:33:23 - 0:33:27] ▶
And it might not be doing that potentially. It could be a byproduct propulsion or it could just be
[0:33:27 - 0:33:31] ▶
a clever masking system. It's fascinating. One of the things that always stood out to me about
[0:33:31 - 0:33:37] ▶
the framer testimony was he would say it almost felt like the craft detected him, like
[0:33:37 - 0:33:44] ▶
knew that, you know, he was sort of looking at it. And is that something that comports with any of
[0:33:44 - 0:33:49] ▶
what your squadron saw? No, it doesn't. Not in my experience. Well, I've heard some stories after
[0:33:49 - 0:33:53] ▶
the fact, but, you know, they would be doing their own thing, they'd be in the area. So it seemed
[0:33:53 - 0:33:58] ▶
like they were focused there, but they weren't like, if we showed up, they weren't like coming
[0:33:58 - 0:34:02] ▶
over to us or going away, they just continued to do their own thing. So we certainly didn't have
[0:34:02 - 0:34:07] ▶
that type of experience. But, you know, I have heard, you know, multiple cases of these maneuvering
[0:34:07 - 0:34:12] ▶
around aircraft, up in packs rivers, fascinating case with one of my good friends who had basically
[0:34:12 - 0:34:18] ▶
a sphere pull up about 15 feet from his cockpit while he's, you know, maneuvering pretty quickly and
[0:34:18 - 0:34:24] ▶
hang out there for about 20 seconds and then start off in front of them. There's another incident
[0:34:24 - 0:34:30] ▶
down in New Orleans where an object with the same description shot past the cockpit, initially
[0:34:30 - 0:34:36] ▶
thought it was a balloon until his wingman noticed that it turned and chased the jet and basically
[0:34:36 - 0:34:40] ▶
shot up in front of it and overtook it. So they, I think they definitely have the capability to
[0:34:40 - 0:34:47] ▶
maneuver around us, to detect us, nowhere there. But my personal experience at the time wasn't to
[0:34:47 - 0:34:54] ▶
expect these to be reacting to us in the way that they were with Fravers case.
[0:34:55 - 0:34:58] ▶
So you testified before Congress? My name is Ryan Fobs Graves and I'm a form F-18 pilot with a
[0:34:59 - 0:35:05] ▶
decorative service in the US Navy. I have experienced advanced UAP firsthand and I'm here to voice
[0:35:05 - 0:35:09] ▶
the concerns of more than 30 commercial air crew and military veterans who have confided their
[0:35:09 - 0:35:13] ▶
similar encounters with me. It was a historic day. It was incredible. I mean, I couldn't believe it.
[0:35:13 - 0:35:19] ▶
I was lucky enough to be in the room and we talked to each other for a bit afterwards and it was
[0:35:19 - 0:35:24] ▶
just like, I never thought this topic would ever get that sort of air time on that level.
[0:35:24 - 0:35:30] ▶
Yeah. And so how did you feel about that? Man, I mean, just what an incredible
[0:35:30 - 0:35:35] ▶
experience and day. It was really powerful for me when I went there. I mean, I know where I was
[0:35:36 - 0:35:41] ▶
going to show up. So it's like, I get to find the room and it just will happen to be walking
[0:35:41 - 0:35:46] ▶
in the same direction as everyone else. And we see the line of people. I'm like, oh, okay,
[0:35:46 - 0:35:52] ▶
well, this must be a spot. Interesting. You know, it's cool as a line. We kind of get to the
[0:35:52 - 0:35:56] ▶
front line and realize it was a corner and take the corner and there's another 500 people lined up
[0:35:56 - 0:36:00] ▶
on that side. And it was just, I mean, it was really powerful to just see all the support and
[0:36:00 - 0:36:06] ▶
interest in person instead of just kind of the random comments on Twitter. Excuse me.
[0:36:06 - 0:36:11] ▶
But in a sense, it's almost like landing on the boat, at least it was for me, where you're just
[0:36:13 - 0:36:18] ▶
kind of locked in and trying to push away all the, you know, all the doubts and other thoughts
[0:36:18 - 0:36:24] ▶
that you might have. It was kind of getting to the zone. Be very present like, you know, we mentioned
[0:36:24 - 0:36:28] ▶
earlier. I met Dave for the first time there. Got to speak to his lawyer and some of the folks out
[0:36:28 - 0:36:35] ▶
back. It's kind of funny anecdote. We were kind of getting rid of line up to walk out. And it was like,
[0:36:35 - 0:36:43] ▶
Dave was, well, Dave brush was standing there and then framer. They both just kind of like grab my
[0:36:43 - 0:36:48] ▶
shoulders and push me in front. It's pretty wild. And it's like here we go, you know, and
[0:36:48 - 0:36:56] ▶
yeah, I mean, cameras clicking. You could almost feel them. It's almost like you came in here
[0:36:56 - 0:37:01] ▶
in some sense. Yeah, I mean, it's just really powerful. But you know, what was so fast and you know,
[0:37:01 - 0:37:06] ▶
what are so rewarding? I think for me was that, you know, you see hearings on the news and it's
[0:37:06 - 0:37:11] ▶
usually like, you know, the members are maybe attacking the witness or whoever's testifying
[0:37:11 - 0:37:16] ▶
or maybe it's a partisan issue. And there's just a lot of back and forth on the sides of the aisle.
[0:37:17 - 0:37:22] ▶
But I've never seen a hearing that was quite like that where it just seemed like everyone was
[0:37:22 - 0:37:27] ▶
working together. Right. We were all trying to figure this out. It wasn't partisan. It wasn't
[0:37:27 - 0:37:32] ▶
adversarial. And I think it's, you know, strange that this is an issue that's starting to bring out
[0:37:33 - 0:37:39] ▶
at least politically like some of the best of us where we can have like a normal adult conversation
[0:37:39 - 0:37:44] ▶
maybe move the ball forward. That was wild to see AOC and Matt Gaetz just completely some patico.
[0:37:44 - 0:37:50] ▶
Yeah. You know, just in total agreement over this issue. Yeah. It's a I think that this might
[0:37:50 - 0:37:56] ▶
be the only issue. Which they agree on everything. So you're you're sitting there and you're sitting
[0:37:56 - 0:38:03] ▶
with, you know, David Fraber and with David Grush and you and David Fraber have these amazing
[0:38:03 - 0:38:09] ▶
kind of eyewitness accounts. And then you have David Grush sitting next to you saying that there's
[0:38:09 - 0:38:13] ▶
been a covert reverse engineering program. We've actually had a crash retrieval program for,
[0:38:13 - 0:38:19] ▶
you know, 70 plus years around this stuff. Do you believe that? Do you think that the US
[0:38:19 - 0:38:25] ▶
government is reverse engineering UFOs? Well, that's tough one, you know. I, you know, in my job as
[0:38:25 - 0:38:32] ▶
Navy pilot, I was not exposed to any type of technology like that or any type of programs like
[0:38:32 - 0:38:37] ▶
that. And so the only information that I have to go off of is the same information that
[0:38:38 - 0:38:43] ▶
basically everyone else has. That's in the public sphere. You know, I respect David Grush. Yep.
[0:38:43 - 0:38:48] ▶
He was tasked to do a job with the UAP task force. And that was the jobs who understand and
[0:38:48 - 0:38:55] ▶
uncovered this information and he did it to the best of his ability and he reported his findings.
[0:38:55 - 0:38:59] ▶
And so there's there's nothing, you know, in his background or in his professional experience
[0:39:00 - 0:39:04] ▶
that would lead me to believe that he's lying or making it up or being facetious in any scent.
[0:39:04 - 0:39:09] ▶
Now how do I integrate that into like a wider belief system? It's tough.
[0:39:10 - 0:39:14] ▶
I mean, it's tough for everybody.
[0:39:14 - 0:39:16] ▶
One of those things I think that, you know, the only satisfying
[0:39:18 - 0:39:21] ▶
resolution is to have it essentially be admitted and pulled out to some degree by the government
[0:39:23 - 0:39:27] ▶
itself. Yeah. And although I think people are, you know, they have their scales of probability.
[0:39:27 - 0:39:33] ▶
And I think, you know, he moved the needle quite a bit closer to certainty than before.
[0:39:33 - 0:39:38] ▶
And you know, it's, you know, I listened to a little bit of his story before the hearing, but,
[0:39:38 - 0:39:46] ▶
you know, a lot of that was new information for me as well. And it was very surreal experience.
[0:39:46 - 0:39:52] ▶
Be sitting next to someone testifying to that type of information. So yeah, I mean, I believe what
[0:39:52 - 0:40:00] ▶
he said, I believe he did it in earnest. And unless he was being manipulated, you know, I think that
[0:40:00 - 0:40:04] ▶
the statements that he made are, you know, the first line of attack for a representative
[0:40:06 - 0:40:11] ▶
to further understand this and hopefully uncover what's going on. Totally.
[0:40:11 - 0:40:15] ▶
And he gave over a thousand pages to the Inspector General, the ICIG, Thomas Monheim, who,
[0:40:15 - 0:40:22] ▶
the quote from Monheim was, this is urgent and credible. And so, I don't know, unless it's like
[0:40:22 - 0:40:29] ▶
something where the tip of the iceberg doesn't resemble the rest of the iceberg or something. And so,
[0:40:29 - 0:40:34] ▶
we're jumping to conclusions around exotic material falling from the sky, but it like has to do
[0:40:36 - 0:40:40] ▶
with something that we're not even thinking of. There are things you can fathom like that. But
[0:40:40 - 0:40:45] ▶
on the surface, you have a guy I've gotten to know him personally. I think he's extremely high
[0:40:45 - 0:40:50] ▶
integrity, really, really smart, has literally an autistic attention to detail. And yeah, I think it's
[0:40:50 - 0:40:59] ▶
hard to argue with. And it's so near term falsifiable where it's like he brought 40 people who
[0:40:59 - 0:41:04] ▶
claim to have worked on this stuff firsthand to the IC Inspector General.
[0:41:04 - 0:41:08] ▶
If something doesn't pop in the next 20 years, I think you, you know, it's kind of falsifiable,
[0:41:10 - 0:41:16] ▶
right? So it's like, it inflect one way or the other where people will be like, that was a
[0:41:16 - 0:41:20] ▶
siop where they'll be like, this was real. And just incentive or motivation wise, it doesn't make
[0:41:20 - 0:41:25] ▶
sense for him to, you know, do that if he doesn't actually believe it. Yeah, I mean, it was being
[0:41:25 - 0:41:30] ▶
very specific. He wasn't just kind of saying, oh, we've heard rumors of this and the other thing.
[0:41:30 - 0:41:34] ▶
I mean, you know, I mean, I heard him say, I can tell you the location. Let's get in a skip. So,
[0:41:34 - 0:41:39] ▶
you don't say that unless you're highly confident about what you're saying, because you're
[0:41:39 - 0:41:43] ▶
just setting yourself up for failure. And more and more have come out around like possible past
[0:41:43 - 0:41:49] ▶
gatekeepers and politics. You hear Dick Cheney's name, you know, around, you hear George W. Bush
[0:41:49 - 0:41:56] ▶
might have contemplated UFO disclosure. And a part of me, and then you, you know, we talked about
[0:41:56 - 0:42:01] ▶
it last night, John Podesta, who's, you know, you could say Clinton's chief political operative,
[0:42:01 - 0:42:05] ▶
you know, was the White House chief staff under Bill Clinton, basically ran Hillary's campaign
[0:42:05 - 0:42:10] ▶
extremely into this topic. I sort of want to question some of these public figures and be like,
[0:42:10 - 0:42:16] ▶
what do you know about this stuff? I mean, it's fascinating. I mean, a lot of these people
[0:42:16 - 0:42:21] ▶
are alive, you know, let's have the conversation. I certainly understand why they would be hesitant
[0:42:21 - 0:42:25] ▶
to do that. But, you know, I agree with it. I think more attention should be put on these folks and
[0:42:25 - 0:42:30] ▶
have them at least provide a statement about what they know. And, you know, there's always a few,
[0:42:30 - 0:42:36] ▶
not fear, but, you know, the expectation that they're just something to deny it. Because, I mean,
[0:42:36 - 0:42:40] ▶
if they are read into these details, they would be breaking the law and would very likely face
[0:42:40 - 0:42:44] ▶
consequences totally. Yeah, no, it's understandable that it would move in this sort of step function
[0:42:44 - 0:42:51] ▶
way where it's like a little more comes out. And then, you know, you get regulatory action,
[0:42:51 - 0:42:56] ▶
and then a little more can come out and that you wouldn't get this kind of catastrophic blow-up.
[0:42:56 - 0:43:01] ▶
Is that, do you think that's part of an intentional strategy or is that just kind of what's
[0:43:01 - 0:43:05] ▶
happening through a outside group? I think it's, I think it's probably somewhat both. So, like,
[0:43:05 - 0:43:12] ▶
I don't think we talked about this last night. Think about the psychology of what was the blow,
[0:43:12 - 0:43:16] ▶
right? Like, you're this like patriotic guy with a military or intel background. Maybe you bump
[0:43:16 - 0:43:20] ▶
into this stuff. There was, you know, this UAE task force that was created that rush kind of came
[0:43:20 - 0:43:26] ▶
out of this guy, David Grush, you testified with Brian. And there are other kind of, you know,
[0:43:26 - 0:43:31] ▶
high-level officials who came out of that, you know, task force. If you bump into any of these
[0:43:31 - 0:43:36] ▶
programs, maybe these people have intersected with your career in the past as David Grush has
[0:43:36 - 0:43:41] ▶
said in himself, you're probably going to want to coordinate somewhat with people on the inside
[0:43:41 - 0:43:48] ▶
to do this in a safe way that makes sense for American national security. So, yeah, I don't think
[0:43:48 - 0:43:54] ▶
any of the people at the forefront of disclosure, by the way, myself included want everything
[0:43:55 - 0:44:01] ▶
all out, all at once. Having said that as an academic feel, I mean, it's like, it's like the
[0:44:01 - 0:44:07] ▶
nuclear thing is a great example, right? So, you have like nuclear trade secrets that like,
[0:44:07 - 0:44:10] ▶
should never get out, but like nuclear science, like nuclear physics is a program at every elite
[0:44:10 - 0:44:16] ▶
university. And the idea that, you know, I think we're kind of stuck in these physics cul-de-sacs,
[0:44:16 - 0:44:21] ▶
you know, a string theory and some other stuff. That's really travesty because it's just like we
[0:44:21 - 0:44:27] ▶
have this like massive brain drain going on on this like really, really big level where not to
[0:44:27 - 0:44:33] ▶
insult any string theory set there. I think they're very smart trick there. But if we don't have
[0:44:33 - 0:44:39] ▶
access to kind of greater ontological truth, like your physics theories are going to be like
[0:44:39 - 0:44:43] ▶
way off. But yeah, I don't think there is, there are very many proponents of quote of
[0:44:43 - 0:44:48] ▶
what catastrophic disclosure on the inside. But I don't think most people on the inside want
[0:44:48 - 0:44:54] ▶
everything out. I don't think they want trade secrets that will give China, Russia, and
[0:44:54 - 0:44:59] ▶
advantage over the US, you know, they don't want those things out. But I do think, and then I also
[0:44:59 - 0:45:04] ▶
think there's probably something around softening the blow for the ontological shock or whatever,
[0:45:04 - 0:45:09] ▶
where it's like if you have some top of the pyramid view of this, it's probably pretty expansive
[0:45:09 - 0:45:15] ▶
and deviates a lot from the average person's worldview. And so maybe some sort of conditioning
[0:45:15 - 0:45:20] ▶
thing is happening. I think more likely though, it's emergent. And so like it's like one person
[0:45:20 - 0:45:30] ▶
makes a move here. There are these like game theory dynamics around disclosure. Like this person
[0:45:30 - 0:45:34] ▶
wants this stuff to come out. And then this person over here is like, wait, I've been sitting on
[0:45:34 - 0:45:37] ▶
this stuff and they're getting the glory here. And then it's like stuff like that happening.
[0:45:37 - 0:45:41] ▶
That's like doesn't seem that coordinated. It seems like human. And then in the world in which
[0:45:41 - 0:45:46] ▶
there are NHI, which I'm pretty sympathetic to, I think, you know, we're not apex, you know,
[0:45:46 - 0:45:52] ▶
consciousness. I think more likely than not, if it's coordinated, it's not being coordinated by us.
[0:45:52 - 0:45:57] ▶
In the world in which they exist. Yeah. We always talk about what's happening
[0:45:58 - 0:46:02] ▶
within our community, if you could say, but yeah, I mean, if that's true, then, you know,
[0:46:03 - 0:46:08] ▶
there's other calculus that we're totally not taking into account. Yeah. Yeah. It's fascinating.
[0:46:08 - 0:46:13] ▶
Yeah. I'm really curious to see where it goes. Do you feel like you have any sort of prognosis
[0:46:15 - 0:46:20] ▶
or, yeah, prediction for the next few years? I'm just playing that game. That's good on you.
[0:46:20 - 0:46:26] ▶
I mean, I see the change that's happening right now. I don't know necessarily where it comes
[0:46:26 - 0:46:31] ▶
to culmination. I don't know when it ends, but there certainly is an acceleration of the process.
[0:46:31 - 0:46:37] ▶
You know, there's going to be more cases. There's going to be more people that want to talk about it.
[0:46:37 - 0:46:41] ▶
And you know, I think there's this kind of interplay between this disclosure process where the
[0:46:41 - 0:46:45] ▶
government is willing to share information and release stuff, whether, you know, the government
[0:46:45 - 0:46:50] ▶
or whether factions within the government are doing that. And the process of people out in this
[0:46:50 - 0:46:55] ▶
civilian world and the commercial world that are saying, hey, you know, like, well, I guess I'll
[0:46:55 - 0:46:58] ▶
investigate this. I could but resources here. I might be able to detect these objects. I might
[0:46:58 - 0:47:02] ▶
be able to understand this. And the more the disclosure process moves forward and information comes
[0:47:02 - 0:47:08] ▶
out, it motivates the outside. And the more work that happens on that side, the more pressure that's
[0:47:08 - 0:47:13] ▶
exerted to release information on the government. And I think we've been seeing this kind of interplay
[0:47:13 - 0:47:17] ▶
and build up between those two groups. And you know, what's going to, what's going to be the end
[0:47:17 - 0:47:23] ▶
result? Where's the, where's the big reveal that I come from? I guess it's to be seen.
[0:47:23 - 0:47:27] ▶
Totally. It's this beautiful crowdsourced effort. And I think there can sometimes be ego in
[0:47:27 - 0:47:33] ▶
this space of like, I want to be the one or whatever. But it's, it's this amazing thing where if you,
[0:47:33 - 0:47:38] ▶
if you push it, you know, a little farther, you often get something back. It's a social movement
[0:47:38 - 0:47:44] ▶
in a lot of ways, right? I mean, the more information that comes out, the more people understand
[0:47:44 - 0:47:48] ▶
it's okay to talk about. And they stopped dismissing the things that they maybe have as far as
[0:47:48 - 0:47:54] ▶
information or maybe that they've experienced. And, you know, I've been privileged to talk to a ton
[0:47:54 - 0:47:59] ▶
of people on this topic. And, you know, the amount of people that have had their own personal
[0:47:59 - 0:48:04] ▶
experiences are, I mean, pretty close to 50%. And maybe that's even higher once people feel
[0:48:04 - 0:48:11] ▶
more comfortable. I mean, even last night, you know, the question was asked. And, you know, maybe
[0:48:11 - 0:48:16] ▶
like 30% of the crowd raised their hands. And so, yeah, I mean, the more, you know, even if
[0:48:16 - 0:48:21] ▶
you do an action in this, in this space and it doesn't lead to the government releasing a new
[0:48:22 - 0:48:26] ▶
video or something, you're, you're educating the populace on why this matters, why it's important.
[0:48:26 - 0:48:32] ▶
And, you know, once I've met a lot of naysayers as well. And it's easy to tell that they haven't
[0:48:32 - 0:48:37] ▶
done any research into this because they would see the connections and at least have some interest in
[0:48:37 - 0:48:42] ▶
it instead of being completely dismissive. And so, more information that gets out there, you know,
[0:48:42 - 0:48:46] ▶
we're changing minds, making people understand this serious issue. And all that's going to just
[0:48:46 - 0:48:51] ▶
lead to greater understanding. Absolutely. Couldn't agree more. You're doing work with that. I mean,
[0:48:51 - 0:48:57] ▶
you're doing, you're doing that job, you know, with this podcast. So thank you. Oh, man. Well,
[0:48:57 - 0:49:02] ▶
doing my small part, but I appreciate that. Something we share is an interest in the private sector
[0:49:02 - 0:49:10] ▶
applications of this stuff. And despite conspiracy theories about, you know, I work with Peter
[0:49:10 - 0:49:15] ▶
Teal. People think he's reverse engineering a UFO. I wish that's not happening. It's not happening.
[0:49:15 - 0:49:20] ▶
It's not happening. I wish he were more interested in doing things like that. But I think the,
[0:49:20 - 0:49:26] ▶
the trouble with some of this stuff in the private sector world is it's just a long time horizon.
[0:49:27 - 0:49:32] ▶
It's their moonshots. They're really like, you know, low probability, but extremely important,
[0:49:32 - 0:49:38] ▶
you know, work. And so we were talking about this last night. There's a part of me that thinks like
[0:49:38 - 0:49:43] ▶
the Bell Labs model of like quasi public private funding just needs to come back. If we are in, you
[0:49:43 - 0:49:51] ▶
know, some sort of arms race vis-a-vis the Russians and the Chinese. And you know, what Carl Nell says
[0:49:51 - 0:49:57] ▶
is right. He was a, you know, set up army features command and he was on the UAP task force with
[0:49:57 - 0:50:02] ▶
David Grush. If we're in this arms race, I think we need sort of more nationalized support
[0:50:02 - 0:50:08] ▶
towards some of these technology efforts. And I don't know what your experience is, but mine is that
[0:50:08 - 0:50:13] ▶
a lot of our best and brightest talent aren't working at the big primes anymore or in government
[0:50:13 - 0:50:18] ▶
positions. They're working at, you know, private sector companies. And so what do you see? Do you think
[0:50:18 - 0:50:23] ▶
there's opportunity here? I know you're doing some interesting work in this area. Yeah. I, you know,
[0:50:23 - 0:50:28] ▶
I think I consider this part of the kind of discovery process. How can we motivate the government
[0:50:28 - 0:50:32] ▶
to release information because there's a pressure coming from outside to move the conversation
[0:50:32 - 0:50:37] ▶
forward? And I think it takes, you know, it takes place in kind of two categories. There are
[0:50:37 - 0:50:42] ▶
there are companies and people that are working on tech that doesn't aspired by this topic.
[0:50:42 - 0:50:48] ▶
Some very interesting technologies by some very, you know, intelligent people and mainstream people.
[0:50:49 - 0:50:54] ▶
Advanced propulsion, advanced materials, energy production, and integrating that in
[0:50:55 - 0:51:02] ▶
say unique way is that would be consistent with some of the things that we're observing. And
[0:51:02 - 0:51:06] ▶
you know, I think some of these capabilities are capabilities that can come online say like in
[0:51:07 - 0:51:11] ▶
a normal five to six year timeline without having to be a 10 or 15 year type project. I think
[0:51:11 - 0:51:18] ▶
they can be broken down. And I think really the key to doing that is finding opportunities that
[0:51:18 - 0:51:22] ▶
have wide applicability, right? So of course, if you can say generate energy in the skin of an
[0:51:22 - 0:51:28] ▶
aircraft, that would be highly applicable to many different industries, but it also might validate
[0:51:28 - 0:51:33] ▶
or invalidate something that we're seeing in the UAP topic. On the other side of that coin,
[0:51:33 - 0:51:38] ▶
it's not just about trying to put forward these different technologies. It's about, you know,
[0:51:38 - 0:51:42] ▶
how do we better understand what we're seeing? How do we sense these better? And that's an area I've
[0:51:42 - 0:51:47] ▶
spent a lot of time thinking on what technologies can we put forward that will provide us, you know,
[0:51:47 - 0:51:52] ▶
the ability to detect these objects, to characterize them and then further evaluate, you know,
[0:51:52 - 0:51:56] ▶
exactly what they are, what their intent are, and you know, where they came from.
[0:51:56 - 0:51:59] ▶
I've started a small company that is building what we believe to be the next generation of
[0:52:01 - 0:52:05] ▶
space situational awareness cameras that will be able to provide highly detailed information
[0:52:05 - 0:52:10] ▶
around non-traditional orbital trajectories. These can go on satellites and it has a great use case
[0:52:10 - 0:52:17] ▶
where, you know, it can provide awareness to the satellite operator so they can choose or not
[0:52:17 - 0:52:22] ▶
choose to maneuver their space vehicle and extend the lifespan, but this would also be a source of
[0:52:22 - 0:52:28] ▶
UAP detection that could be commercialized and sold as potentially intelligence product or
[0:52:30 - 0:52:35] ▶
whether within DOD or within the commercial markets. And so I think, you know, the way that
[0:52:36 - 0:52:42] ▶
commercial space is evolving and being deregulated, at least not deregulated, but it's loosening
[0:52:42 - 0:52:47] ▶
up quite a bit. I think the time is now for companies and other folks to look to how they can
[0:52:47 - 0:52:54] ▶
contribute to this project through open source technology through commercial projects and,
[0:52:54 - 0:52:58] ▶
you know, that's an area that I've talked to a number of people that are interested in funding.
[0:52:59 - 0:53:03] ▶
If anyone's interested in learning more about that, be happy to share that information and
[0:53:04 - 0:53:09] ▶
help them on their journey because that's the, I think, the path that's going to move us into
[0:53:09 - 0:53:14] ▶
understanding this and not having to simply sit back and wait for the government to share with us.
[0:53:14 - 0:53:18] ▶
And I think also unconstraining or opening up some of these like prior biases that we have,
[0:53:18 - 0:53:26] ▶
especially in physics, Carl Nell just did a great interview for Danny Shehans, New Paradigm Institute.
[0:53:26 - 0:53:32] ▶
And he was talking about not only the preponderance of life in the universe and how, you know,
[0:53:33 - 0:53:38] ▶
it's probably much older than we think it is. And, you know, all sorts of things there,
[0:53:39 - 0:53:44] ▶
but also when it comes to physics, faster than light travel, you know, Miguel Alcubiere figured out
[0:53:44 - 0:53:50] ▶
this sort of theoretical model. And NASA has been studying this for years and you have sunny
[0:53:50 - 0:53:54] ▶
white at NASA, you know, doing interesting work in this area. And it involves, I guess, negative
[0:53:54 - 0:54:00] ▶
mass or negative energy, but we actually detected negative energy, you know, with the chasmereffect.
[0:54:00 - 0:54:04] ▶
And so there are all these ways in which if you talk to an average scientist at, you know, any sort
[0:54:04 - 0:54:10] ▶
of university, they'll say these things are just impossible. And then you'll talk to like somebody
[0:54:10 - 0:54:15] ▶
doing interesting work at the frontier of our and de-it aerospace. Like I just met this
[0:54:15 - 0:54:20] ▶
former head of revolutionary tech at skunk works. And it's like he agrees with all this kind of
[0:54:20 - 0:54:27] ▶
ostensibly wacky stuff that I believe way more than, you know, any of these like prestigious professors.
[0:54:27 - 0:54:32] ▶
And it's this weird thing where it feels like aerospace has the real science. And academia just
[0:54:32 - 0:54:37] ▶
doesn't. Yeah. What do you think? Yeah, I mean, I agree with you. It seems kind of like a zero-sum
[0:54:37 - 0:54:42] ▶
game in academia where everyone's competing for the same grants, the standards are extremely high.
[0:54:42 - 0:54:46] ▶
And no one wants to screw with their career path. So I think get 10 year and then kind of
[0:54:47 - 0:54:51] ▶
settle into whatever they actually really want to do. But, you know, that's different than how the
[0:54:51 - 0:54:55] ▶
startup world works in the technology world. You know, guys are they're pushing the edge of the
[0:54:55 - 0:54:59] ▶
boundaries and the only limitations they have are their resources and what's capable. So yeah,
[0:55:00 - 0:55:06] ▶
I agree with you 100%. I think a lot of the real interesting work is happening out there. And
[0:55:06 - 0:55:11] ▶
that's why again, I think it's such an interesting time now where that type of environment,
[0:55:11 - 0:55:15] ▶
this, you know, this startup community that you have could be leveraged to be able to push this
[0:55:15 - 0:55:19] ▶
conversation forward. I don't think we can rely on academia to do that. Absolutely. It would be awesome
[0:55:19 - 0:55:25] ▶
young talented STEM students watch content like this and they get opened up to these frameworks and
[0:55:26 - 0:55:33] ▶
they can work on that. And we were talking about it last night. As important as the process of
[0:55:33 - 0:55:38] ▶
discovery, right? What can we do in the private sector? What can we do in a commercial world in
[0:55:38 - 0:55:42] ▶
order to bring forward capabilities, technology, and understanding that's going to allow us to
[0:55:42 - 0:55:47] ▶
decipher this without waiting for the government to throw us graphs essentially. And so there's
[0:55:47 - 0:55:52] ▶
multiple organizations out there. Some of them are attacking it from a technology side. Can we
[0:55:52 - 0:55:58] ▶
potentially create technology that replicates some of the kinematics that we're seeing if we can
[0:55:59 - 0:56:04] ▶
imagine perhaps they have capabilities in the skin of their vehicle to generate power versus
[0:56:04 - 0:56:09] ▶
having that engine in the back. So there are companies working on the very interesting energy
[0:56:09 - 0:56:13] ▶
and materials and propulsion technologies. On the other side, there's how do we better understand
[0:56:13 - 0:56:19] ▶
the scientific? It's like SpaceX is an amazing company, but it's an earth based space company and
[0:56:19 - 0:56:24] ▶
it will take a human on a chemical combustion rocket 80,000 years to get to Proxima Centauri B,
[0:56:24 - 0:56:30] ▶
which is not viable obviously. And so we need some sort of space to metric engineering.
[0:56:32 - 0:56:36] ▶
You know, just to kind of speculate a little bit, one of the things that fascinates me about the
[0:56:36 - 0:56:40] ▶
UAP topic is if you know if we can make the assumption that these are from somewhere else,
[0:56:40 - 0:56:45] ▶
they're observable, they're studyable, you know, are we one or two like breakthroughs away from
[0:56:46 - 0:56:51] ▶
having the same capabilities? You know, that would, you know, immediately lock potentially close
[0:56:51 - 0:56:56] ▶
to our lifetime access to the rest of the galaxy in a lot of ways. And I can't think of a grand
[0:56:56 - 0:57:01] ▶
or vision for focusing our energy on something. Oh, yeah, it would be amazing. And that was actually
[0:57:01 - 0:57:06] ▶
probably when I interviewed David Grush right after your guys' amazing testimony. That was probably
[0:57:06 - 0:57:13] ▶
the most thing, the thing he said that was seared the most in my mind, which is he said, if I were
[0:57:13 - 0:57:19] ▶
a betting man, I think that this represents tech that is not a stepwise leap ahead of humanity.
[0:57:19 - 0:57:25] ▶
But it's almost an alternative timeline in which they went some civil propulsion route and we
[0:57:25 - 0:57:32] ▶
want this destructive catastrophic nuclear route. And I just, I was like, holy shit, that's amazing.
[0:57:32 - 0:57:37] ▶
Yeah, I thought of similar things, right? Like, I mean, again, making the assumption they're from
[0:57:37 - 0:57:40] ▶
elsewhere. I mean, what if they evolved on a highly large planet that had very high gravity,
[0:57:40 - 0:57:47] ▶
right? And perhaps the economics didn't work out such that chemical rockets were a solution that
[0:57:47 - 0:57:53] ▶
was ever viable. Right. And so they maybe it took them longer to get this space. But then when they
[0:57:53 - 0:57:58] ▶
did, they did it by developing a technology that either we haven't got to or never considered
[0:57:58 - 0:58:02] ▶
because there was more economic option on the level of fascinating. Yeah. So like mass ejection
[0:58:02 - 0:58:07] ▶
wouldn't even work because the gravity was so intense, you need some sort of space time
[0:58:07 - 0:58:11] ▶
working. Wow, that's cool. Yeah, like that. Yeah, there's so many. There's a plethora of options
[0:58:11 - 0:58:17] ▶
when it comes to this stuff. And yeah, I think per our conversation on, you know, kind of academia,
[0:58:17 - 0:58:22] ▶
aerospace in the 40s and 50s, you were telling me earlier that you live in New Hampshire and you live
[0:58:22 - 0:58:28] ▶
pretty close to this pub that is dedicated to the gravity, gravity research foundation, I believe.
[0:58:28 - 0:58:35] ▶
You know, this work of Roger Babson, they're doing all sorts of gravity research. And this is
[0:58:36 - 0:58:39] ▶
a time when military and academia were extremely entangled. And then he had these things called
[0:58:39 - 0:58:45] ▶
the Mansfield Amendments, which disentangled them. And you have the invention secrecy act of 1952 as
[0:58:45 - 0:58:50] ▶
well, where it felt like, you know, physics became dangerous. You had, you know, Adam bomb up until
[0:58:50 - 0:58:59] ▶
thermonuclear bomb. And you have to think, you know, that like physics itself needs to be treated
[0:58:59 - 0:59:06] ▶
in this sort of more careful way. And so, yeah, I think we're in this weird time now where a lot of
[0:59:06 - 0:59:13] ▶
people feel very kind of deep by a lot of the frameworks that are public string theory quantum
[0:59:13 - 0:59:18] ▶
gravity, that sort of thing. And yeah, they want tech to reaccelerate because we live in this,
[0:59:18 - 0:59:24] ▶
we live in this horrible multi-puller world that's on the brink of nuclear catastrophe. Like if there's
[0:59:24 - 0:59:29] ▶
ever time to get better exciting civil side use cases and explore the stars, it would be now.
[0:59:29 - 0:59:34] ▶
Yeah, absolutely. And you know, when I think about that, I kind of go back to your comment earlier
[0:59:34 - 0:59:40] ▶
about, you know, we can't release things that are going to damage our national security, right?
[0:59:41 - 0:59:45] ▶
We're not suicidal. It doesn't make sense to do that. We certainly can't rely on something else.
[0:59:45 - 0:59:49] ▶
I may be out there to stop us from wronging ourselves. But, you know, nuclear physics is a known
[0:59:49 - 0:59:57] ▶
quantity. It exists and people share that. We don't share the secrets to our nuclear weapons.
[0:59:57 - 1:00:02] ▶
And I think, you know, I think that's a fair model for how this can be understood, right? We don't
[1:00:02 - 1:00:06] ▶
have to maybe give away the secrets of the material science or the propulsion system of how it's
[1:00:06 - 1:00:11] ▶
integrated in other tech, but the base reality that exists, I think that's my hope for, you know,
[1:00:11 - 1:00:16] ▶
people talk about disclosure. What does that really mean? But I think ultimately that's what it needs
[1:00:16 - 1:00:21] ▶
to be, just to acknowledge about the reality of the situation and allowing them to share hopefully,
[1:00:21 - 1:00:27] ▶
you know, an assessment of maybe not the star system they're from, but, you know, the understand
[1:00:27 - 1:00:31] ▶
that they're not from here. It's not an adversary system. It's not trickery. And yeah, and I think
[1:00:31 - 1:00:36] ▶
the public would be very accepting and understanding of the fact that, of course, not everything is
[1:00:36 - 1:00:40] ▶
going to be shared. But I think it's really just basically a crime against humanity to just
[1:00:40 - 1:00:45] ▶
withhold such port and information about the reality of it from the world populist.
[1:00:45 - 1:00:50] ▶
Couldn't agree more. So right now in government, you have the all domain anomaly resolution
[1:00:50 - 1:00:56] ▶
office, right? Yes. Arrow. And there's kind of a split in our world of people who are advocating for
[1:00:56 - 1:01:04] ▶
UFO disclosure. Some people support Arrow. Others say that, you know, they are somehow co-opted or
[1:01:04 - 1:01:13] ▶
they're not doing their job in good faith in collecting this data. They've recently had a change
[1:01:13 - 1:01:18] ▶
of the guards. So from this guy Patrick to, I think you told me who the new leader is.
[1:01:18 - 1:01:23] ▶
John Colosski. John Colosski. What do you think of Arrow as an organization?
[1:01:23 - 1:01:26] ▶
Yeah. You know, as an organization, I think that, you know, one, they've been given a very challenging
[1:01:27 - 1:01:34] ▶
task. And it's something that requires them to interface with essentially the whole of the
[1:01:34 - 1:01:40] ▶
government to be able to resolve. So just right off the bat, understanding that they have a very
[1:01:40 - 1:01:45] ▶
colossal task on their hands. But, you know, I've, you know, I know they've received a lot of
[1:01:45 - 1:01:51] ▶
criticism as well from people online that have suggested that they're not doing their job earnestly.
[1:01:51 - 1:01:58] ▶
And, you know, I think the individuals within the office themselves are, you know, doing the
[1:01:59 - 1:02:04] ▶
best work that they can do with the resources they have. But ultimately, you know, they need to be
[1:02:04 - 1:02:10] ▶
properly funded, which I believe has occurred. And they need to have access to the right information.
[1:02:10 - 1:02:15] ▶
And ultimately, it's a DOD organization, right? They're not there to, to come to the needs and
[1:02:16 - 1:02:22] ▶
desires of the American people necessarily that are looking for particular answers to questions they
[1:02:22 - 1:02:28] ▶
have. And so we, you know, I think we need to understand that, you know, they're doing it within
[1:02:28 - 1:02:33] ▶
the confines of, of, of answering to a customer that isn't necessarily the American people. And
[1:02:33 - 1:02:38] ▶
I think that's why the legislation, such as the UAP disclosure act, is so important, right? Because
[1:02:39 - 1:02:44] ▶
it created that mechanism that does answer the mail for the American people, specifically with
[1:02:44 - 1:02:50] ▶
the suggestion of a review panel, which essentially would receive the output from ARON others,
[1:02:50 - 1:02:55] ▶
and be able to do a security assessment or risk assessment of the threat to national security
[1:02:55 - 1:03:01] ▶
of the information and have the authority to declassify information for public consumption.
[1:03:01 - 1:03:06] ▶
I think that was my biggest disappointment that that was removed from the first version of the
[1:03:07 - 1:03:12] ▶
UAP disclosure act, and we're dwindling on our options for this year's version. But I think that
[1:03:12 - 1:03:17] ▶
is really going to be the key piece, the key piece that, you know, ARO just simply can't,
[1:03:17 - 1:03:22] ▶
can't fulfill, right? They're not designed to do that. They don't have the, the, the authorities
[1:03:23 - 1:03:27] ▶
be able to share and declassify information for the most part. And so yeah, I think, you know,
[1:03:27 - 1:03:33] ▶
I think there was other components that are needed outside of just ARO.
[1:03:33 - 1:03:35] ▶
Yeah, it would be amazing if we got that executive panel of Ninja disciplinary experts to sort of,
[1:03:36 - 1:03:43] ▶
you know, help with this process. You have worked a lot on kind of aviation safety initiatives
[1:03:43 - 1:03:49] ▶
around this. I guess I'm somewhat of a split mind where I'm like, my take is going to be very
[1:03:49 - 1:03:55] ▶
armchair compared to somebody like yours when it comes to aviation safety. So I'll sort of like
[1:03:55 - 1:03:59] ▶
be deferential to like you and other fighter pilots. And then at the same time, I'm like,
[1:04:00 - 1:04:06] ▶
this stuff has probably been going on for a long time if it's the UAP phenomena. And so
[1:04:06 - 1:04:11] ▶
I don't know if too many incidents, there's, I think one from like 1979 that James Fox covers
[1:04:13 - 1:04:18] ▶
where this Iranian pilot like shoots at the UAP and then there's, you know, this sort of dogfight
[1:04:18 - 1:04:24] ▶
and then he starts going down. And so there clearly are safety implications. But how
[1:04:24 - 1:04:29] ▶
kind of near term important is the safety component of this? Yeah, you know, so, you know,
[1:04:31 - 1:04:37] ▶
it's a sliding scale, right? So people that don't fly, you know, think safety issues, you
[1:04:37 - 1:04:42] ▶
hit something in the air and you lose your aircraft. And you know, that's obviously the worst case
[1:04:42 - 1:04:46] ▶
scenario. And I think for a military pilot that is not treating this seriously, that's a much
[1:04:46 - 1:04:52] ▶
higher probability than say a commercial airliner that they're just sitting in the chair, you know,
[1:04:52 - 1:04:56] ▶
they're looking outside, they get all the time in the world, they're cognitive loading as we call it,
[1:04:56 - 1:05:00] ▶
is pretty low. They don't have the agency in the maneuver, so they're on a very strict path.
[1:05:00 - 1:05:05] ▶
And, you know, I think the risk is lessened in that particular scenario. As a military pilot,
[1:05:07 - 1:05:12] ▶
we are often operating at the edge of your cognitive ability, you know, and starting to maybe shed
[1:05:12 - 1:05:17] ▶
things. That's when you have a much higher risk of having an incident. When you're, you work as
[1:05:17 - 1:05:24] ▶
hard as you can, you're doing, you know, mental math, you're targeting into all these different
[1:05:24 - 1:05:27] ▶
groups, you're getting blown with the wind, you're flying next to your lead, all these things
[1:05:27 - 1:05:32] ▶
compound. And that's when you have an issue. There's a gentleman that sends me several times a month
[1:05:32 - 1:05:42] ▶
stories that he's pulled up about aircraft that have mysteriously got missing. Wow. And so there,
[1:05:43 - 1:05:50] ▶
you know, some of them are, hey, he saw an object and he chased it. And then, you know, five minutes
[1:05:50 - 1:05:55] ▶
later, he flamed out or he crashed. There's a number of cases where it's just, you know, an aircraft
[1:05:55 - 1:06:02] ▶
hits an airborne object. Yeah. And it crashes and there's no knowledge or understanding of what the
[1:06:02 - 1:06:08] ▶
object was they hit. And I'm not necessarily attributing to UAP specifically, but I think there's
[1:06:08 - 1:06:13] ▶
a lot more research that can be done to validate some, some issues that have occurred in the past
[1:06:13 - 1:06:19] ▶
that may or may not be related to that. Yeah. Well, it was considered a national security issue in
[1:06:19 - 1:06:24] ▶
the context of food fighters, 1942 to 1945, and specifically in Bavaria, southern Germany,
[1:06:24 - 1:06:30] ▶
you had these like, what looked like controlled, controlled balls of lightning kind of showing up,
[1:06:30 - 1:06:34] ▶
messing with allied fighter flight paths and fighter pilot flight pass. And it was, it seemed like,
[1:06:35 - 1:06:41] ▶
you know, there was some sort of intentionality on the part of these objects. And the pilots were
[1:06:42 - 1:06:46] ▶
definitely kind of, they felt like they're, they were being kind of obstructed in their abilities
[1:06:46 - 1:06:51] ▶
to fly safety is one thing. National security, however, I think it's very clear and present danger.
[1:06:51 - 1:06:56] ▶
Mm-hmm. Right. So when we're flying around in our jet, we're being very cautious about what
[1:06:56 - 1:07:02] ▶
aircraft are out there. And if this was a tactical scenario, I mean, we have to know 100% what each
[1:07:02 - 1:07:08] ▶
one of those aircraft are, are they a threat? Are they a commercial airliner? And we're going to,
[1:07:08 - 1:07:13] ▶
you know, start World War III by shooting down 100 people in an aircraft. And so
[1:07:13 - 1:07:18] ▶
we have so much technology and so much training into that. And so when you just, you take this very
[1:07:20 - 1:07:24] ▶
complex scenario and then you just kind of sprinkle in all these unknowns. Sure. It becomes a massive
[1:07:24 - 1:07:30] ▶
issue. Yeah. Even if the conclusion is we know the signatures of these things, there's not much
[1:07:30 - 1:07:36] ▶
you can do. But like when you detect it, you know, what's going on, you know, maybe don't be aggressive
[1:07:36 - 1:07:41] ▶
and kind of deer thing. Yeah. So even if that's the take away, like it's good to have that, right?
[1:07:41 - 1:07:46] ▶
And look what's happening, you know, in Ukraine, of course, I mean, having unidentified non-responsive,
[1:07:46 - 1:07:53] ▶
unknown origin type vehicles that are operating near a military base is, I mean, you can see that
[1:07:53 - 1:07:57] ▶
devastating effects that that could potentially lead to. And, you know, I think one of the big
[1:07:57 - 1:08:02] ▶
things we see is that guy just said, oh, you know, someone that might be a bit incredulous on this
[1:08:02 - 1:08:06] ▶
topic is saying, oh, yeah, I don't believe in UFOs. That's nothing or I don't even want to report
[1:08:06 - 1:08:11] ▶
this. And what if it is an adversary that is observing our bases and doing something, you know,
[1:08:11 - 1:08:17] ▶
that it's just as massive flaw. And we've learned these lessons in the past, but it seems like we're
[1:08:17 - 1:08:21] ▶
repeating this error by just the force of the stigma that is surrounding this topic. What, what do
[1:08:21 - 1:08:27] ▶
you think of, you know, Luel Zondo has been out for a while now, you know, since 2017, he was kind of
[1:08:27 - 1:08:35] ▶
one of the first whistleblowers. And he in the past has said, maybe UFOs are sort of prepping the
[1:08:35 - 1:08:42] ▶
battle space, maybe they're doing recon or sort of a scouting job. And maybe they're, they are
[1:08:42 - 1:08:47] ▶
somewhat adversarial. Yeah. And they haven't stopped nuclear wars in the past. Do you think
[1:08:47 - 1:08:52] ▶
that that's a possibility? Well, that was one of my first assumptions when I, we were seeing these
[1:08:52 - 1:08:57] ▶
on the Eastern Seaboard, we weren't assuming they were UFOs doing that, but we're like, hey,
[1:08:57 - 1:09:02] ▶
this could be an adversary that is soaking up our waveforms that is trying to decrypt our radios,
[1:09:02 - 1:09:07] ▶
that is observing our tactics. And if we just ignore them, let that happen. You know, the next
[1:09:07 - 1:09:12] ▶
time we go into a major conflict, all of a sudden they know everything we're doing, they can jam us,
[1:09:12 - 1:09:16] ▶
they can break our radios. And so we were setting ourselves up for failure in that point. So I do get
[1:09:16 - 1:09:22] ▶
the sense that even just having them out there in the passive kind of nondescripts way they were,
[1:09:22 - 1:09:26] ▶
could very well just be a recon type mission. There's a long history of fighter pilots like
[1:09:26 - 1:09:32] ▶
yourself having seen these things. So you have Gordon Cooper who, you know, is one of the first
[1:09:32 - 1:09:39] ▶
American astronauts who spent more time in space. I think he spent 36 hours in space or something
[1:09:39 - 1:09:43] ▶
for the Mercury mission. Ted Stevens, who is a senator from Alaska, who actually helped start
[1:09:43 - 1:09:49] ▶
OSAP with Harry Reid. Actually saw, saw UFO, I think in World War II as well. And then recently,
[1:09:49 - 1:09:56] ▶
I interviewed our mutual friend James Fox. He talked about Buzz Aldrin's sister telling him that
[1:09:57 - 1:10:02] ▶
Buzz Aldrin as a fighter pilot in World War II saw UFO, I think in Japan. I don't know where.
[1:10:02 - 1:10:09] ▶
So I think this is a very, it's probably a much more common occurrence. And I'm just very
[1:10:09 - 1:10:16] ▶
grateful for you to be the tip of the spear as far as coming out and destigmatizing it. Because a
[1:10:16 - 1:10:21] ▶
lot of this stuff is going on water cooler conversations, hallway conversations, and you're really
[1:10:21 - 1:10:26] ▶
making it public. Yeah, I mean, before before I spoke out, I mean, you'd hear the talks, right? Even
[1:10:26 - 1:10:31] ▶
just not just a historical one, but guys, you know, kind of older guys have been flying for a while.
[1:10:31 - 1:10:35] ▶
Like they all just seem to have that cool story. They tell you, you know, once they had a few drinks
[1:10:35 - 1:10:39] ▶
in them. And so yeah, I think this is, I think this is much more pervasive. I think it's been
[1:10:39 - 1:10:44] ▶
happening for a while. And it's still happening. You know, I mean, I've spoke to current astronauts
[1:10:44 - 1:10:49] ▶
that have had their own instances. So it's, you know, it's strange how we tend to discount the past,
[1:10:49 - 1:10:55] ▶
even the recent past on this topic. But it does seem to be very pervasive. And you know, when I,
[1:10:55 - 1:11:02] ▶
when I spoke out about this, I did it simply because I was hearing that my colleagues were having
[1:11:02 - 1:11:08] ▶
no resolution to this issue. It was still a safety issue. It wasn't getting run up the chain. It
[1:11:08 - 1:11:12] ▶
wasn't getting resolved. And you know, my motivation was simply to be able to provide some
[1:11:12 - 1:11:18] ▶
additional information so that this would hopefully get the attention it needed to get resolved.
[1:11:18 - 1:11:24] ▶
And of course, since then, I've learned it's not usually resolvable, as Arrow has learned.
[1:11:24 - 1:11:29] ▶
Despite the name. And then I kind of became a beacon for people to call and report their,
[1:11:31 - 1:11:39] ▶
their instance from a primarily aviators, but all sorts of people. And that, you know, that's what
[1:11:39 - 1:11:43] ▶
led me to believe that, you know, wow, this isn't just military pilots. It's commercial pilots. And,
[1:11:43 - 1:11:48] ▶
you know, that was my goal going back to the hearing was just simply to be able to do the same
[1:11:48 - 1:11:52] ▶
thing I was trying to do for the military guys is to be able to share just how prevalent this was.
[1:11:52 - 1:11:57] ▶
And how this was something that was just going unmitigated. Yeah, was, you know, a real issue.
[1:11:57 - 1:12:02] ▶
I'm eager to see where this conversation is in five years. Whether there's full disclosure
[1:12:04 - 1:12:08] ▶
or not, I think that this topic and conversation is going to continue to grow in the public sphere.
[1:12:09 - 1:12:14] ▶
People are going to be more willing to share their experiences and stories. And I think we're
[1:12:14 - 1:12:18] ▶
going to learn a lot from that. I'm equally eager. I think you're going to play a big part in it.
[1:12:18 - 1:12:22] ▶
And before we wrap up, you mentioned something fascinating to me, which is you know
[1:12:22 - 1:12:28] ▶
one of the central characters whose voice we all know from one of the three videos that the
[1:12:28 - 1:12:34] ▶
New York Times released in 2017 that the Pentagon admitted was real in 2020.
[1:12:34 - 1:12:38] ▶
That's not how I like it. That's not how I do it.
[1:13:04 - 1:13:07] ▶
But there's something that's broken.
[1:13:07 - 1:13:11] ▶
You want to talk about that? Yeah, I'll talk about it a little bit.
[1:13:13 - 1:13:16] ▶
You know, so I mean when I first saw the New York Times pop a massive day of,
[1:13:16 - 1:13:20] ▶
I'm seeing this, what the heck, you know, and to my gosh, that's the video I saw on the
[1:13:20 - 1:13:25] ▶
Classified Space by very good buddy. I'm not going to say his name, who recorded that video.
[1:13:25 - 1:13:31] ▶
And of course, the pilot in the front seat as well. But this particular gentleman,
[1:13:31 - 1:13:35] ▶
he's my wedding party. Wow. We went through training in Virginia when we first got on F-18 together.
[1:13:35 - 1:13:40] ▶
We went to the boat for the first time at night together. We got sent to the same squadron after
[1:13:40 - 1:13:45] ▶
that together. And then as I was leaving that squadron, he actually put in a package to
[1:13:45 - 1:13:50] ▶
transfer from a weaponsist monster, the backseat guy, to become a pilot. Then he got assigned to
[1:13:51 - 1:13:56] ▶
the same place I was instructing. We spent most of those 11 years or so hanging out together.
[1:13:56 - 1:14:01] ▶
We were very good friends. And we got to talk just recently. And he actually shared something with me.
[1:14:01 - 1:14:08] ▶
Which we should specify which video? Yeah. But he shared something new on one of the
[1:14:09 - 1:14:16] ▶
now famous videos, particularly the Go Fast video.
[1:14:17 - 1:14:26] ▶
And what this was was that it wasn't just a singular object when they detected that.
[1:14:31 - 1:14:58] ▶
They were actually four objects that were in what we call line of brass,
[1:14:58 - 1:15:02] ▶
or basically a straight line about a mile apart. Which I'm flying formation that way. Which
[1:15:02 - 1:15:07] ▶
makes you think they have to be connected to each other in some sense digitally. They have to
[1:15:07 - 1:15:12] ▶
know where they are in relation to each other. They'll fly that precise formation. But he's still
[1:15:12 - 1:15:17] ▶
very interesting as topic, at least in the context of his experiences. It's still something
[1:15:18 - 1:15:24] ▶
that he thinks about. And I think we'll be hearing some more from him.
[1:15:24 - 1:15:27] ▶
Can't wait and excited to see what you do too. And hopefully we can keep collabing. And
[1:15:28 - 1:15:33] ▶
thanks for coming out to Austin Ryan and coming on the show. My pleasure. Thanks for having me.
[1:15:33 - 1:15:37] ▶