- há 7 semanas
Categoria
📚
AprendizadoTranscrição
00:00We should switch topics here.
00:03I wanted to go over your background with you
00:05to establish for everybody listening who you are.
00:09And it's pretty obvious that you have a multitude of abilities
00:14and a stellar track record that's continuing.
00:19And so that sets the foundation for our next discussion.
00:24You started to become interested,
00:26and I would like to know the story,
00:29in unidentified aerial phenomena.
00:33And that's definitely a lateral move from your other interests.
00:37And so I'm very curious about all of that.
00:40I guess what I'd like to start with is why the interest
00:44and why take the risk to pursue it as well?
00:49Because you have a lot to lose, let's say, on the reputational front.
00:52And it's clear you're a very creative person.
00:54So I'm sure your interests go everywhere.
00:56But tell us how it is that you became interested in this
01:02and why you decided to pursue it with some degree of seriousness.
01:06So, I mean, there's a couple of origin stories to it,
01:11but I think the easiest to start with is with the Atacama mummy, right?
01:17The small mummy that people had been promoting as being an alien, right?
01:23The mummy that was found in Atacama, Chile.
01:27Right, that was a couple of years ago.
01:29Not too long ago.
01:30Oh, actually, no, it was 12 years.
01:32Oh, was it 12 years ago?
01:33Yeah, yeah, actually already.
01:34Oh, my God.
01:35Yeah, it was a long, long time ago.
01:36I mean, that was...
01:37And so I had seen it on YouTube.
01:40I reached out to the people who were, let's say, marketing it.
01:44And I said, hey, I can figure this out for you.
01:47I can tell you what it is.
01:48And so we arranged to get a small piece of the body, a rib.
01:56I wanted the rib because I wanted the bone marrow from within the rib
01:59because I felt that that would be the place best protected from bacterial contamination.
02:04And the long and the short of it was that we showed that it was a human baby, probably...
02:11Well, it was probably preterm birth, but that we found a number of mutations in the genome
02:18that could explain what it looked like and why it looked the way it did.
02:23And so when a movie came out regarding that circa 2012 or so, it was like sending up a flare to two sides of the world.
02:39One, the people who didn't like that I was debunking the alien.
02:44So I became an instant symbol of dislike for the UFO community, which is interesting paradoxically these days.
02:55But then it also was a flare to scientists, as it turned out, as well, the intelligence community,
03:01that here's a guy willing to look at things and just call them as he sees it.
03:07And so that led, as it turned out, to somebody representing the CIA and an aerospace company
03:16showing up at my office at Stanford, literally unannounced, showed me their credentials and said,
03:21we need your help looking at patients who've had harm done to them.
03:28And I was like, well, what kind of harm?
03:30And then they laid out the data, literally like MRIs and x-rays of internal scarring of...
03:39Are these people who reported abductions?
03:41No, no, no.
03:43Oh, no. Oh, sorry. Okay.
03:45These were...
03:45I'm off on a wrong tangent.
03:47These are intelligence agents, diplomatic corps, military personnel, etc.
03:53All who said that they were hearing buzzing in their ears or, you know, and then a small subset of them
04:01said that they'd been in proximity to things that you would call a UFO.
04:06So I thought it was a joke at the beginning, especially when they mentioned the UFO stuff,
04:12because I had no intention at the time of going back and doing more alien research
04:17after the Atacama mummy escapade.
04:23And so they had come to me.
04:26I mean, why come to me?
04:27Well, one, I was willing to talk to people about this stuff.
04:31But two, they wanted to do blood analysis of the individuals who'd been harmed as part of a complete medical workup.
04:39And so they'd asked around, and they said, well, who does the best blood analysis?
04:43Oh, you need to go talk to this guy, Nolan, at Stanford.
04:45He has this thing called Cytoff that can do the deepest analysis of blood that, you know, currently today and still.
04:52So basically, over the course of two or three years on working with this group and on these patients,
05:02it turned out that these were actually the first of the Havana syndrome patients.
05:06I'm sure you've heard of Havana syndrome.
05:08Uh-huh.
05:08Yeah.
05:09Review that for everyone.
05:10So Havana syndrome was something that basically came out around 2015, 2016.
05:18And it was called Havana because it was the diplomatic core individuals in our government who were getting headaches or having to be sent home.
05:29And it turned out that it's probably a kind of microwave technology being used by some of our adversaries.
05:36It's 100% real.
05:38You know, some people in the CIA tried to debunk it, but now there's a whole, like, set of paperwork out, put out by the Department of Health and Human Services on anomalous,
05:51what's now called anomalous health incidents, where Havana syndrome and all of the sets of associated symptoms are all listed.
06:00And there's a path now for people who think that they have it to go follow it up, you know, appropriately with the Veterans Administration or what have you.
06:11But, you know, in the three years—
06:13Okay, so let me get this straight.
06:15So you had someone from the CIA show up to your office, and he had a list of people who had medical problems.
06:24And some of those medical problems were a consequence of people coming into contact with, what, technology that is mysterious?
06:36Is that the right way of thinking about it?
06:38Yeah, well, I mean, they didn't know what the source of it is, but now we know that it was basically—I mean, it's an energy weapon, just a microwave weapon.
06:46Just imagine you could focus the beam of your microwave in a very narrow path towards a person's head.
06:53You'll bake the brain cells in their head.
06:56So, I mean, there's nothing magical about it.
06:58We have them.
06:59Everybody knows that these things exist.
07:02At the time, when we were working on it, we were calling it interference syndrome.
07:06You call something a syndrome when you don't know the exact cause, but it can have a variety of manifestations.
07:13And so what we had done was we had matched the symptoms to what are called the international diagnostic codes, so that we had the ability to say, oh, it's this, and it's this, and it's this.
07:24And if you have 10 of 15 of these, you have interference syndrome.
07:29So at the same time, somebody was figuring out what Havana syndrome was, and it turned out that our set of symptomologies matched perfectly with the Havana syndrome ones for most of our patients.
07:42We were able to hand all of that over to the U.S. government, and I've worked with Senate staff and others on that, and that's something I can't talk much about.
07:53But what remained, and this is what's good about how science is done, once you've characterized something and you find it uninteresting, not that it's uninteresting that these patients are being harmed, but I could hand it off to somebody else who would then take care of it as a national security concern.
08:09What was left on the table were the oddities, and those were now the people who had gotten close to UAP, they claimed, at least some of them.
08:20And they had, as it turned out, slightly different symptomologies.
08:25Some of those were more likely to have erythemas or scarring on the skin as opposed to internally, or manifestations on the back of their neck of some kind of irradiative damage of some kind.
08:42Now, there though—
08:43And there was a pattern to this.
08:45Yes, there was—yes.
08:46And the pattern was always anecdotal, unfortunately, in that they had a story that you—
08:52Right, but I mean the symptom pattern was stable.
08:56And how many people, how many individuals approximately, like what kind of sample pool were you assessing?
09:03Now you're down to about five or six people because of the original—
09:07Okay, so it's a small number of people.
09:08Of the original hundred that we started with, 90 or so, it turned out, were what we could think of as Havana syndrome.
09:15The remaining were what were interesting.
09:17And, you know, but sort of back to, let's say, my career.
09:22My career has always been—I've always been good at seeing the data point off the curve and realizing that it's not noise.
09:34Or at least asking the question, how did that data point get there?
09:39And not just, you know, going with what's sitting on the line, but understanding why the data point off the curve is important.
09:48And then being able to quickly, again, back to that, iterate the possibilities, say, ah, well, if we know that it's not a problem with the instrumentation, then it's an indication that we don't understand something.
10:07And so that was where I was already starting to get introduced because of this UAP stuff, because of that we had these groups of individuals who said that they'd gotten harmed by UAP.
10:19And we diligenced them to make sure that they didn't have some sort of psychological problem.
10:26They had full psychological workups.
10:29And we knew that these were people that we're, you know, we're trusting the nation's security with.
10:33You know, it's kind of like, okay, well, it's an anecdote, it's a story, and now I've heard 50 stories like this by that point.
10:44Right, right.
10:45And it's like, well—
10:46No, they say the plural of anecdote isn't data, but the plural of anecdote is definitely hypothesis.
10:52Yes, right.
10:53And so once you start to get that, it's like, okay, well, there seems to be something here.
10:58And you raised a point that you'd ruin your career.
11:02I literally was told by a senior official at the National Cancer Institute by around circa 2014, 2015, because I was just talking about this, just saying, isn't this an interesting idea?
11:14You're going to ruin your career, Gary.
11:16And I was just like, but it's—but the data's on the table.
11:22It isn't ridiculous to ask the question.
11:27But the fact that they were trying to push it off the table incensed me.
11:31It was just like, that's not how a scientist thinks.
11:35That is just your—and I said to him, I said, you sound more like a priest than a scientist.
11:41Maybe you should give your PhD back.
11:44Oh, and—
11:44Well, there aren't that many scientists, you know.
11:46There are a lot of people who act out the role of scientists, but that's not the same thing.
11:51Yeah.
11:51Scientists are very peculiar people when they're real.
11:56So, and that's been sort of my approach to it.
12:01It's like, how dare you tell me I can't ask the question?
12:04Because there's more than enough evidence that there's something worth studying.
12:10And people mix up evidence with proof.
12:13You know, data sits in isolation and has no meaning whatsoever.
12:18It only has meaning in the context of a hypothesis.
12:22And, you know, so does the hypothesis and the data match to mean that it is perhaps evidence?
12:30Evidence, just as in court, is not proof of anything.
12:33That requires a jury to decide whether or not the evidence is sufficient to, you know, manifest guilt or not.
12:40The same thing in a paper.
12:42There's very few papers that you will ever read that ever say there is, at least in biology, this is a conclusion.
12:49There's all kinds of weasel words that we as biologists use to give ourselves diplomatic egress, just in case.
12:58So, but, you know, when people like Neil deGrasse Tyson say there's no evidence, well, that's just a lack of understanding of what the difference between data and evidence is.
13:09There's reams of evidence.
13:12There's libraries full of evidence.
13:14There's books I could throw, I could drown people in with evidence.
13:19But that's not a conclusion.
13:22That's not what we think of as scientists as proof.
13:26Now, I have, I'm of personally two minds.
13:29As far as I'm concerned, there's definitely something going on that appears to be not human.
13:36That's just my person.
13:38Okay, so, so, okay.
13:39But that's different than science, right?
13:42I'm sure.
13:43Yeah, right, right, right.
13:44Go for it.
13:45Okay, so tell me, well, tell me a typical story, like the typical story pattern that characterized the testimony of these leftover individuals whose symptoms were troublesome but somewhat anomalous.
13:59It's like, what were they reporting, and then you took it seriously because there had been psychological workups done on them, and there were a number of people reporting the same thing.
14:10So, you know that something's up.
14:12So, tell me a story, and then tell me what you started thinking about with regards to a potential cause.
14:20Well, one was a guy by the name of John Burroughs in the Randall Shum Forrest case where he literally got close to one.
14:30That came down near our nuclear storage facilities there.
14:35It's a very famous case.
14:36And he came to me as part of this group of 10 remainders, and I was introduced to him to do the blood analysis and do the collection of the blood.
14:50And then later, as it turned out, and here's an interesting thing, later, he developed a heart problem, and he couldn't get the Veterans Administration to open up his file so that he could get – he could prove that – or that it might have actually been originally caused at Randall Shum in England because his medical file was deemed top secret.
15:15So, we literally had to go to – and this is on the record – we literally had to go to Senator McCain, in whose state this guy lived in Arizona, and get him to write a letter to the Veterans Administration forcing them to open his file so that he could get insurance payment for his heart condition.
15:38It's all on the record.
15:38So, why does an individual who had a problem that he claims had been, you know, caused through some interaction way back when, why do you have to make his file top secret?
15:52What's in it?
15:53There was nothing in it, frankly.
15:55It was just somebody had decided it needed to be top secret because things related to UFOs just need to be – you know, nobody talks about them.
16:03Brush them under the table.
16:04But we literally – and it's, again, it's public record.
16:09And so, what did he experience?
16:11He saw something.
16:13He came close to something.
16:15Something that was about five feet across on the ground.
16:18And I don't know.
16:20I mean, I wasn't there.
16:20I'm just relaying the story.
16:22Right, right, right.
16:24And was that a – what's the typical pattern of encounter?
16:28You know, I mean –
16:28Is there a pattern of the phenomenon?
16:30No, no, there's not enough of a – this is the problem, is that you can't repeat harm.
16:37You know, when harm happens, it's sort of incidental.
16:42And so, you just have to deal with – and I think it's less about the harm.
16:45So, I mean, I think we should move away from a discussion of the harm and just talk more about what it is that people are seeing.
16:56And I'm talking about credible people, right?
16:59What's the credible data that we can collect?
17:01Okay, so it's a broader conversation on unidentified aerial phenomena.
17:08That's – so, sure, Leet, and I want to talk about your Saul Foundation as well and also the fact that you've analyzed materials with unusual properties.
17:20So, if we can tangle all that together, that would be good.
17:23Yeah. So, the reason why we started the Saul Foundation, and it was me, Peter Scafish, and David Grush.
17:30David Grush was the gentleman who testified in front of Congress about what he claims were the reverse engineering programs.
17:37And the principal reason for starting the Saul Foundation was to enable, let's say, a picket fence within which people of reasonable intelligence or academics, who don't always have reasonable intelligence, but could have a conversation and not be laughed out of the room.
17:57To be able to say, here's a hypothesis, and here's the data I have.
18:01Do you think my hypothesis matches, or do you have another idea?
18:05But the spectrum of things about which we wanted to be able to talk about were everything from religion all the way through to material science on my side.
18:15So, we have Peter Scafish, who's an anthropologist, and a – what is the other one?
18:25Well, let's call him an anthropologist.
18:27And so, he's interested in people's stories, right?
18:31What are so-called experiencers?
18:33What's the pattern of the experiencers?
18:36And what kind of, let's say, trauma might they undergo, not only because of the experience itself, but the trauma of not being able to talk to your friends and or family about what it is that you think that you saw because of the stigmas associated with talking about this and not wanting to be, you know, considered crazy.
18:58And then – so, he's collecting and writing papers on that.
19:02We have a focus on religion.
19:04We had somebody from the Catholic hierarchy write a paper on that for us.
19:12Two, on the more, you know, extreme science side, the hard science side, the materials analysis that I do.
19:23And part of it, again, was to say, okay, let's have this conversation.
19:28Let's – we had our first foundation meeting.
19:32I mean, big convention at Stanford where we had about 200 or 300 people there who had come from all over the world to have a –
19:42What year was that?
19:43That was three years ago now.
19:45We've had one each year.
19:48And the funny story there was about two weeks before we were to have the meeting, I started getting these pings from administrators around Stanford that there might be a problem.
19:59And I was like, oh, God, you can't do this to me.
20:02It's – everybody's invited.
20:04The plane tickets are paid for, you know, et cetera.
20:08What's going on?
20:08And I managed to trace down who it was at Stanford that was sort of causing the trouble.
20:15It turns out it was the branding office at Stanford.
20:18And that they had a problem with that Stanford's name wasn't first, that we had put Soul Foundation first and not Stanford.
20:26And they wanted it Stanford, you know, and the Nolan Laboratory, not the Soul Foundation.
20:31So Stanford was more than willing to, you know, to be upfront about it.
20:36They were, you know, open about it.
20:39In fact, the Alumni Association had me give at the last homecoming a big talk to probably about 200 people about it because of the interest level.
20:53So there's been no problem on that front.
20:57But then I then got interested in the materials because, again, through the connections that I had made, I came to know a gentleman by the name of Jacques Vallée.
21:09Jacques Vallée is probably one of the most famous – let's call them ufologists ever in terms of, like, his scientific prowess.
21:18He was involved in the early days of the internet.
21:21He was an astronomer.
21:22He's a venture capitalist in the Bay Area.
21:23And he's heretical in the sense that he didn't believe that whatever this was was necessarily extraterrestrial.
21:34But it was some other kind of manifestation of either the human psyche or something more beyond, something almost, you know, paranormal in its capabilities.
21:51So it was interesting to listen to this, but I was more interested in, you know, okay, well, what can I teach another scientist?
22:01How can I convince another scientist?
22:03So it turns out Jacques had a number of materials, metals and or objects that had been associated with landings of alleged UAP or UFOs.
22:14And so I said, okay, well, give me some of them.
22:21I need only tiny amounts, and we can do pretty traditional analysis on it.
22:27And so one of the things that I got a hold of we showed recently to be – that was from a beach in Ubatuba, Brazil, that a fisherman had seen this object drop from some other – from this UFO.
22:45And it was – it shattered, and he picked up some pieces of it, and it made its way through what I would consider to be a reasonable chain of custody.
22:55Okay, and we measured it, and we measured it, and it was 99.999% silicon.
23:02Okay, that's not hard to make today, but it's not something in the late 1950s or early 1960s you drop giant pieces of all over a beach in Ubatuba, Mexico.
23:17So it's – whatever that was, it was clearly an object of industrial purpose, right?
23:28There's no 99.999% silicon anywhere on planet Earth.
23:32It's all contaminated, and I actually have atomic – I have an atomic map of one of these pieces that we developed that we did with atomic probe tomography.
23:43What was fascinating was that one of the two chains of custody that I obtained also had magnesium ratios that were not what you would expect from Earth.
23:58They were different than the standard magnesium ratio.
24:01So magnesium has three isotopes, 24, 25, and 26.
24:0724 is like, let's just say, rounded up to 80%, and the other two are 9 and 11%.
24:16Whereas the – one of the two chains of custody, the magnesium ratios were just higgledy-piggledy all over the map.
24:27They had nothing – they didn't look anything like what you expect to find from a piece of silicon on Earth.
24:34Anywhere you look on Earth, you're going to find silicon – sorry, the magnesium at the 80, 11, and 9 ratio.
24:44Whereas this – one of these pieces was wrong.
24:48That doesn't prove that it's a UFO.
24:52It just proves that it's of some kind of manufacturing purpose.
25:00So that's one.
25:00We're actually writing the paper up on that one.
25:02I published a peer-reviewed paper on another thing, another object from what's called Council Bluffs, Iowa, where, again, there were multiple witnesses.
25:14In this case, even the police had seen an object, and it seemed to drop something.
25:21And when the people arrived – they thought, actually, it was a plane crash.
25:24When they arrived, they found about 30 pounds of molten metal in the middle of a frozen field.
25:31And I have the original Polaroids.
25:35And so I just did an analysis of it.
25:37And the long and the short of the analysis was there was nothing wrong with the isotope ratios, but it was a mixture of metals that nobody would normally put together.
25:46It was not fully mixed.
25:49It was only partially mixed.
25:51So it's kind of like if you were to take chocolate, vanilla, and strawberry ice cream and partially melt them and just kind of turn your spoon a couple of times around.
26:00Depending on where you looked, you'd find different ratios of chocolate, vanilla, and strawberry.
26:05As opposed to if you were to put it in a blender, everywhere you look, it would look the same.
26:10So what I found in the metals was that it was incompletely mixed.
26:15Okay, so who would drop 30 pounds of incompletely mixed iron, titanium, and aluminum in the middle of a field for no good reason from something that looks like a UFO?
26:30So all the conventional explanations that it was thermite – it's not thermite because there's no aluminum hydroxide, I've checked.
26:38You know, to carry that much molten metal requires, at that temperature, a cauldron that would be like half a ton to the middle of a field.
26:49You're not going to put it in a plane.
26:51So what is it?
26:53Unexplained.
26:53But the reason for doing it, and actually there's somebody who it looks like is going to give me sort of free money to analyze more of these things, is not to prove that they're from UAP, but it's to do the right kind of analysis on the materials.
27:13So that I can get it out there and publish it with no conclusions, just here's the data and here's the story, and here's the analysis as complete as we can do at this time.
27:23Because maybe somebody else will look at it three years from now or some other enterprising student and go, ah, that's how you would – if you released this, this would be the engine control for, I don't know, anti-gravity or something.
27:41So it's part of that thing of like you come up with an intuitive idea because you've spread all of the data in front of you.
27:51Well, if you don't have the data, you can't come up with the solution.
27:55But if I can get the data out to as many people, maybe somebody else will come up with the hypothesis that unifies the story.
28:03So it's part of like the – I mean, I think of it as the open source data approach or the open science where you get the data out for everybody because somebody paid for it.
28:15So maybe you shouldn't keep it in your desktop drawer or these days in a folder on your computer.
28:22Get the data out there so that other people can use it.
28:26Does that make sense?
28:27Okay.
28:27So far it makes sense.
28:30I've got more questions.
28:31So you started by assessing the medical problems of a small subset of people whose symptoms didn't fit the pattern but whose self-reported stories had their own characteristic and that their symptoms had their own identifiable characteristics.
28:51Now, I'm not sure how you got from that to the Saul Foundation.
28:56Now, my understanding is that because you had worked on that hypothetical alien corpse and debunked that and then you got involved with the CIA project that more of these stories were coming your way?
29:14Yes.
29:14Okay, and so what other kinds of stories and tell us about the foundation itself and who's involved and then I'm also extremely curious about your conclusions.
29:27I mean, I'm sitting here thinking, you're obviously studying anomalous phenomena.
29:34Why would you make the, or have you even, derive the inference that, apart from the isotopes, why would you derive the conclusion that extraterrestrial origin is the most likely culprit?
29:50No, I never said that.
29:51Culprit?
29:52No.
29:52Okay, fine, fine.
29:53Fair enough, fair enough.
29:54You didn't, and so that, well, that's exactly why I'm posing the question.
29:57I'm not trying to corner you with that.
29:59I want to know.
30:00Like, you're studying anomalous phenomena.
30:03You know of Charles Fort, by the way?
30:05Oh, very well, yeah, yeah.
30:07Yes, okay, okay, okay, yeah.
30:09Did you ever watch Magnolia?
30:12No.
30:12The movie?
30:13No.
30:13Oh, Magnolia is a great movie, by the way, and it's about Charles.
30:17Okay.
30:18It has a sub-theme of Charles Fort.
30:20Mm-hmm.
30:21So, if you're interested in Charles Fort, Magnolia is very much worth watching.
30:25It's a great movie, also, beautifully put together musically, and, of course, Charles Fort studied anomalous phenomena his whole life, and Magnolia happens to be about that.
30:35But, okay, so you're studying anomalies, lay out the realm of hypotheses, because there's military experimentation.
30:43I mean, there's all sorts of obvious competing hypotheses.
30:46So, tell me what you've gone through, more about your foundation, and what you've concluded.
30:53So, the principal reason for starting the Sol Foundation was that I was, because of, let's say, my public persona about this, more and more scientists were coming to me and saying, hey, I want to help.
31:10How can I do it?
31:12And then a common friend of Peter Scafisch and I, along with David Grush, who I had met through all of these events.
31:23And David, again, was the guy who sat in front of Congress and testified about the alleged reverse engineering programs of which he was aware.
31:30And I met with Dave and spoken with him, you know, very deeply and watched every element of his body language that I possibly could to see, you know, look for evidence of being, of misconstruing him in some way.
31:47And as far as I could tell, he's telling, at least as far as he's concerned, the truth about what he knows.
31:53And I said, okay, well, we need a more formalized way to approach this.
31:58And so, what do you do as a scientist in a new area?
32:01You start a society, more or less.
32:04Or you start a foundation that becomes the lead foundation for other groups to come together.
32:10And the Sol Foundation pretty much has established itself as a nonpartisan umbrella group through which the many individuals who are interested in UAP and talking about it, you know, in a professional manner can come together.
32:29And our next, actually, event is going to be historic.
32:31It's going to be in Italy.
32:34And we've got people from the European Parliament.
32:37We've got a number of former, let's say, U.S. officials who will be there to talk about these matters.
32:46And again, it's – I don't expect a revelation.
32:51I expect just from this people to come and know that there's a place where they won't be laughed at, but they can share and maybe give ideas.
33:03And one of the sets of ideas of what's going on right now is there's a big movement for what's called the UAP Disclosure Act that, for your listeners, for the last two years, Senator Rounds and Senator Schumer, supported by multiple representatives on both sides of the aisle,
33:23have put forward a part of the bill that goes into the Defense Department bill, 60 pages of which talks about the reverse engineering programs and extraterrestrial or not – let's say not even extraterrestrial, non-human intelligence.
33:41And that for, you know, the next five to ten years, there will be an oversight group which will collect and gather all of this information for potential benefit of humanity.
33:55Now, you just asked me about ruining my career.
34:00Would Senator Schumer, the head of the Democratic Party, and Senator Rounds, an important figure on the Republican side, come out and make any of these kinds of statements or allow for their offices to be the vehicles through which such a bill would manifest itself if they felt that they were going to be derided on the floor of the Senate?
34:24Probably not.
34:25Probably not.
34:26And so there's Marco Rubio has come out openly and talked about this.
34:33He's now our Secretary of State.
34:35There's 20 minutes of part of a film that he's in where he's openly talking about the fact that there are these objects moving in ways that we don't know.
34:48I was speaking with your producer prior to your getting to the set.
34:52And the Sol Foundation, one of our purposes, we put together press kits of like 15 different snippets from former heads of the CIA, the DIA, NSA, President Obama, et cetera, all saying there's something that we don't understand and is moving in ways in our atmosphere that we can't explain.
35:15And it appears to be technology.
35:16Now, they'd like you to think that it's something out of Lockheed, perhaps.
35:22But, you know, these things were being seen before Lockheed existed, right?
35:28They were seen in World War II.
35:30They were seen subsequent to World War II, long before we had any capabilities.
35:34So, what is it?
35:36I don't care.
35:37I don't care if it's human or not.
35:40I just want to have reproducible findings.
35:43And yet, somehow, for some reason, the government won't release the information that it has.
35:49I mean, just recently, there was a Freedom of Information Act release of the so-called Mosul Orb, M-O-S-U-L, Mosul, Iraq.
36:01And a solid silver ball that Arrow, which is the anomaly resolution office of the Department of Defense, came up and said, yeah, we see lots of these things.
36:16The former assistant director of Arrow, which is the office programmed and set up by the DoD to collect the kind of information around these anomalies, openly stated just three weeks ago on a podcast that, yeah, we have videos of these black triangles that move in ways that we don't understand.
36:42Okay, if it's our technology and we can move in ways like that, why are planes still crashing at Reagan Airport, right?
36:54Why are we letting, you know, airplanes use fuel when we have some other kind of technology that can move the way that these things can and is being kept a secret?
37:06Is that just for defense?
37:08Well, are you?
37:08Are you?
Recomendado
29:27
|
A Seguir
32:14
4:08
13:03
15:51
18:48
34:03
21:00
12:44
25:19
26:21
32:05
25:10
4:01
22:44
34:41
32:00
Seja a primeira pessoa a comentar