Secret Soup Can hips the guys to the newest 'Big If True' -- aka alleged -- breakthrough in alternative propulsion. Matt the Firefighter shares a widely-unacknowledged danger of fighting fires. GP Scootch prompts a conversation about Superfund sites. Rob provides a mission-critical update on the continuing adventures of a certain humble farmer. All this and more in this week's listener mail segment.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn the stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Nola.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
They call me Ben. We're joined as always with our
super producer Alexis code named dot Holiday Jackson. Most importantly,
you are you.
Speaker 4 (00:36):
You are here.
Speaker 3 (00:37):
That makes this the stuff they don't want.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
You to know.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
It is Thursday evening, which means it's time for some
listener mail, some letters from home. We're gonna hear a
bunch of voicemails. We're gonna learn about bridges and coincidences.
We're going to learn about impossible propulsion that may be possible.
We're gonna have some crucial updates on an ongoing investigation.
(01:02):
And we'll end with a lot of thank yous and
maybe some jokes. When you are walking by the gallows
of modern civilization, strolling through the graveyard of society, we
lift our voices. We can't help sing or whistle or
maybe make sport? What sports?
Speaker 4 (01:21):
What you play?
Speaker 5 (01:22):
Oh?
Speaker 3 (01:22):
All right?
Speaker 5 (01:22):
A veritable field of dreams is what we were all
about here. I've never seen that movie. Have you guys
seen Field of Dreams? Starting with the baseball ghosts?
Speaker 4 (01:33):
Is that the deal?
Speaker 3 (01:34):
He's during the halcyon days of the Coostner Garth Brooks era.
Speaker 4 (01:38):
Oh okay, So are the ghosts?
Speaker 5 (01:39):
Do they appear as like apparitions like force ghosts in
the Star Wars movies?
Speaker 4 (01:44):
What do they look like when you meet these baseball ghosts?
Speaker 3 (01:47):
I don't want to spoil it for you, man, fild
the field.
Speaker 4 (01:50):
Fair enough, we'll come.
Speaker 5 (01:56):
Well, we're talking about baseball a little bit, and we're
also talking about super fun sites and how the Twain meets.
And remember how I joked about how when I first
started hearing about super fun sites, for the longest time,
I thought they were saying super fun sites, which one
could apply that designation to a baseball field. So let's
hear from one of our regular contributors, GP Scooch Gents.
(02:21):
In a recent episode, you asked for our stories and
experience with local superfund or hazardous waste sites. Well, I
do have quite a few acres on which we live,
so not exactly in my backyard, but there are actually
two such sites nearby about six miles from our home
is a former lead mine. Actually pretty common in this
part of southwest Missouri. This one, However, in Aurora, Missouri,
(02:44):
has am I allowed.
Speaker 4 (02:45):
To say Missouri? Is that like? Sounds like I'm being
too colloquial, Isn't.
Speaker 5 (02:49):
It's American English? Okay, we'll just go for it. I
don't know why I'm saying it. I feel like I'm
pronouncing it the way the locals pronounced.
Speaker 4 (02:54):
I'm just gonna go with that.
Speaker 5 (02:56):
In Aurora, Missouri has never been completely sealed and the
surround in grounds completely cleaned, So naturally the city built
a park bordering the site, including a baseball field we
used at the high school when I was teaching slash
coaching there. The area was clearly marked and signage advised
everyone to keep out. This meant most foul balls and
(03:17):
some home runs hit out of the field along the
first base side wound up inside the perimeter of the
old mine.
Speaker 4 (03:23):
There are two big problems here.
Speaker 5 (03:25):
Baseballs are not inexpensive, and schools have budgets. There was
no way to just leave them within sight. Also rare
is the parent who does not wish to have their
son's home run baseball as a Trophy. It became necessary
to station an adult each game to be the official
baseball retriever from the restricted area. Oof do they issue
(03:46):
them has bat suits?
Speaker 4 (03:48):
Holy Cow.
Speaker 5 (03:49):
More importantly, twelve miles away is the community of Verona Fair, Verona, Missouri.
In the nineteen seventies, the chemical dioxin caused the evacuation
and federal buy out of the Saint Louis suburb of
Times Beach. I do not remember if you or the
stuff you should know guys did an episode on this.
It was one of the first superfund sites and the
(04:10):
town was destroyed and the soil to something like four
feet deep was removed and incinerated. The area is now
yes a park. The contamination had been caused by road
oil sprayed regularly to keep down the dust of the
dirt and gravel roads. While all of this was discovered
in the investigation, it was also discovered the dioxin originally
(04:31):
was sold to the company doing the spraying by a
chemical company in Verona, where the dioxin infused oil was
a waste product. This plant still exists and operates today. Yes,
cleanup was done, but over the last fifty years it
has experienced a series of problems. In twenty nineteen, the
EPA investigated the area and found remnants of agent orange.
(04:52):
In twenty twenty two, the EPA issued sixteen citations against
the plant and its safety programs. In twenty twenty too,
Pro Publica identified the area as a toxic air pollution hotspot,
and in twenty twenty three, the EPA again sent representatives
to Verona to hear concerns about the Pro Publica and
other reports to help explain the higher than average rates
(05:16):
of cancer in the small town heard this story before
through all owners. The problems continue. The state and federal
government are involved, but as of just last year, cancer
rates and violations both continue. My personal opinion is that
if the products produced at the plant helped cause the
evacuation of a community on the other side of the state,
(05:37):
the originator of such substances might require a little more supervision, inspection,
and involvement by regulatory agencies. Still, GP scoochs here and
use what you will, and we will and we did.
Speaker 3 (05:52):
GP.
Speaker 4 (05:53):
This is fabulous.
Speaker 5 (05:55):
Not fabulous in the content of what this means, but
this is exactly the kind of stuff we were looking for.
Speaker 4 (06:01):
Like, what is it like to live around this stuff.
Speaker 5 (06:04):
What does the government to do with these as they
pertain to communities? And in this situation, it sure feels
like just kind of building something on top of it
that like kids are going to be playing in. It's
very dystopian feeling to me. I don't know, maybe I'm
overreacting a little bit, but I don't think so. I
don't think you are a lot like brushing it under.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
The rug, you know, right, Yeah, And we heard from
we heard from Scooch quite recently as well, GGP Scooch
who hipped us to an obscene clone fall, which still
it's a great shaggy dog story, but we know this
is we know this is serious business, Scooch. And you
know this may be in reaction to letter from another
(06:48):
conspiracy realist about the Westlake landfill. There are tons of
these things, and a lot of them don't make any
national news. Like to your point, no, we need need
the public to be more aware of these things because often,
you know, often the way you hide this sort of
(07:08):
stuff from your constituency or your municipality is to make
it one of the public commons, right, make it a
public area. Here is a park, Here is where all
the kids can go play. It's tough.
Speaker 5 (07:23):
Well, the implication being it's fine, right, because we wouldn't
have done this if it weren't fine, because this is
the most vulnerable of our population that we're telling it's
okay to go there.
Speaker 4 (07:34):
And yet the whole.
Speaker 5 (07:35):
Baseball retrieval thing, for some reason, it makes me think
of the sandlot. You know, there is that neighbor with
the big scary dog, and in order to get the
balls they had.
Speaker 4 (07:43):
To like go, you know, do battle with this giant
monster kind of mutant dog.
Speaker 5 (07:48):
I just can't imagine how comfortable these parents or teachers
would be having to go scavenge and what they know
is a potentially contaminated area just to get back a baseball.
Speaker 3 (08:00):
Recently, I think, just as Reesay is a few years ago,
was twenty twenty one, I think the US Supreme Court
made an increasingly rare unanimous ruling regarding superfund sites and
the Clean Water Act all to say, people know there
is a problem, right, and the time window on this
(08:22):
problem could be quite elongated, right because exposure to some
of the chemicals or contamination of superfund sites, the bill
doesn't come do there sometimes for decades? Right, But you know,
trust us, it's fine, take your kids to the playground.
Speaker 5 (08:38):
Well, I just found an EPA dot gov page where
you can search for superfund sites near you, and I
just narrowed it down to Georgia. And I guess I
had to have known this when I was working for
public radio back in the day. But Augusta, which is
where I was stationed and where I grew up, it
seems like it comes up on the list more than
just about any other place in the state.
Speaker 4 (09:00):
There's I think five, let's see.
Speaker 5 (09:02):
There's only one in Atlanta, in Fulton County, the west
side lead plant, and that's the only I'm not seeing
any in like adjacent counties here in Atlanta.
Speaker 4 (09:13):
One in Athens.
Speaker 5 (09:16):
Yeah, but you know, the whole deal with these is
like we don't really know what the long term ramifications
of some of the stuff is. And we often see
scientists and researchers trying to draw lines between these sites
and rates of cancer, and they're often a little bit
hard to kind of draw those direct lines, the direct correlations.
Speaker 3 (09:37):
Yeah, and a super fun site, to be clear, is
is not always contaminated with the same kind of nasty stuff. Right.
It's a group term similar to saying cancer or saying chair.
So the contamination in one site may indeed be more
dangerous than the contamination in another site, or it may
(09:57):
have a different set of deleitaria health effects. So there's
it's rough and it's terrifying because again of that of
that window of time to your point, No, yes, there
are searchable databases, but a lot of it is not
out there in your face. Right, these kind of warnings,
(10:18):
I would argue, you do need to be out there
in your face. You need to know immediately your location,
your proximity two a super fun site, and your possible
exposure to anything within that site, because they're also not
all cleaned up to the same level, that's.
Speaker 5 (10:36):
Right, and also to know what the cleanup efforts ongoing,
you know, look like or if they are ongoing.
Speaker 4 (10:43):
And I'm sorry I misspoke.
Speaker 5 (10:44):
Augusta has three, but it does seem to be one
of the most super funded cities in the state of Georgia.
Cedar Town is another one that has three as well.
But that's the maximum number that I'm seeing on this list,
and of the overall number in the entire list, it
looks like there's oney nine hundred and one.
Speaker 3 (11:04):
Which doesn't cover the full extent of possibly contaminated sites
in the US, because I think it did. Super funds
didn't become a thing until nineteen eighty, which was a
long time ago now, but still there was also a
lot of other dirty stuff. The soil was sour around
the US well before nineteen eighty.
Speaker 5 (11:24):
Well, these are the ones that get that designation, and
there's obviously some bureaucratic red tape that has to be
you know, sifted through to even get these to be recognized.
Speaker 3 (11:33):
And I wonder if anybody has been able to lobby
or buy their way out of a super fun designation,
you know.
Speaker 5 (11:42):
Or certainly a good question, ben, because do you get
wind No one intend that, I guess if we're talking
about fallout or the way contamination can spread, of this
in advance and then kind of try to call in
a favor. Certainly wouldn't be a good look if the
public found out. But again, these are exactly making front
page headlines.
Speaker 3 (12:02):
Yeah, there are, I guess. Unfortunately, there are entities or
groups that would prefer you not know about a local
superfund site, or prefer that something not be designated as one.
But probably the most important part of this conversation. Is
that searchable database that you brought up there at all?
(12:23):
Can you tell people the easiest way to find it? Yeah?
Speaker 5 (12:25):
I just googled superfund sites, you know, and this EPA
list came right up, and you can search it by
state and by keyword. And like I said, it's not
a massive I mean, you know, two thousand roughly, it's
pretty big number in terms of this kind of thing,
I guess, but it's maybe I would have thought there
might have been more. But you can search and make
sure that you know where they are in your area.
Speaker 4 (12:46):
But I don't know what do you guys think about?
Speaker 5 (12:47):
Like again, all super fund the sites aren't created equal,
and you know, one would hope that if they're building
a baseball field or a park that the areas adjacent
to them would.
Speaker 4 (13:00):
Be like an outright death trap.
Speaker 5 (13:02):
But do we trust them to make that assessments or
what do you guys think?
Speaker 2 (13:09):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (13:09):
There are two there are two main paths that the
Congressional Act, like the super Fund deal allows for the
first is what's removable, what's called removable actions. That's the
more short term where you just take the dirty stuff out.
And then there are remedial actions which are more long term,
which is where you try to uh, you attempt to
(13:32):
make the thing a usable piece of land again, right,
this this remediation which they try to make the potentially
responsible party or PRP pay for it, you know, the
person or the group who did the pollution. So in theory,
when things are properly cleaned out and brought back to
(13:54):
some kind of baseline of safety in theory, then that
land and all the stuff around it is okay, is safe.
The problem is how often does the practice jibe with
the theory, right or the letters of the law.
Speaker 5 (14:10):
I think that's very well said Ben Matt. You got
anything else to add before we take a break.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
Yeah, I want to shoot people over to that pro
publica piece that was talked about in the message. It
is titled quote when Home is a Toxic hot Spot.
It was written December fifteenth, twenty twenty one, and it's
a rather extensive piece on Verona, Missouri there and just
what the folks were going through at the time, just
(14:37):
being aware of these substances, you know, in the air,
in the soil, in the water, and not being able
to do anything about it, but still having to just
live your life.
Speaker 5 (14:47):
That's the thing too you mentioned in the soil, because
a lot of these things can leach into the soil,
and you know, of course they take tests over time
to make sure that the levels are allowable or like
within certain acceptable you know, ranges or whatever.
Speaker 4 (15:01):
But some of these pits that they you know, bury
some of.
Speaker 5 (15:04):
These materials, and certainly that was the case in one
near where I was growing up in Augusta. They have
these linings that can over time be compromised and can leak.
So even if that the lining or whatever is the mitigation,
it has to be maintained and has to be like
checked on. And sometimes you know, with budgets and stuff
(15:25):
and just shuffling and bureaucracy, sometimes those things can't fall
between the cracks. So yeah, just something to keep an
eye on. Well, let's take a quick break, have a
word from one of our sponsors, and then come back
with another piece of listener mail.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
And we've returned. We're gonna jump to the phone lines
and hear first from Joe.
Speaker 6 (15:48):
Say, man, no one, Ben, I had a thing I'd
like you guys to look into. My name's Joe from Pittsburgh.
I am seeming to be the only one that finds
it extremely coincident that on January twenty eighth of twenty two,
there is a bridge in a area of Pittsburgh that
(16:08):
collapsed early in the morning. And usually this bridge has
massive amounts of traffic. There was like three there was
a uh, you know, a mass transit bus, and then
two passenger vehicles on this bridge when this bridge collapsed.
The coincidental part about it is President Joe Biden was
(16:32):
flying to Pittsburgh that morning to pitch his infrastructure bill.
What better way to get to, you know, chum up
support for your infrastructure bill than the city you're going
to to pitch your bill has a bridge collapse. I
(16:55):
found it extremely odd. I've had a few people that
I've spoke to. I've also emailed multiple podcasts about this.
Can't seem to get anybody to look into it. Don't
think I'm crazy, but just not a coincidence.
Speaker 3 (17:07):
Thank you, m thank you for calling. Ten people were injured,
but non fatally if I recall correctly.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Yes, you can find an article right now in whereas
this Pittsburgh magazine and it says ten people escape serious
injury and Forbes Avenue fo r Bes Avenue bridge collapse
and that is a bridge that goes over a place
called fern Hollow f e r n h o Lllow
(17:35):
Creek that it really did collapse on the morning that
President Joe Biden actually was headed to Pittsburgh to go
and pitch his infrastructure bill. And there is a picture
you can find on Getty Images of President Biden standing
there shaking hands with somebody and the background is the
collapsed bridge.
Speaker 3 (17:56):
You can also see video of it on New York Times.
I mean, this was pub was pretty widely. You can
see the immediate aftermath, and we're just very fortunate no
one died because it's heinus.
Speaker 2 (18:08):
Yeah, there really is a You can see a picture
of the bus, the red bus that fell down and
one of the passenger vehicles that landed or ended up
on its roof like laying on the ground. It looks horrifying.
It looks like people died, but again thankfully they did not.
Speaker 5 (18:26):
Well, I mean, perhaps an opportunistic photo op, but it
does appear that this bridge should have been condemned many
years prior because of disrepair and issues.
Speaker 2 (18:38):
Well yeah, well, you see, here's the problem. We've been
talking about infrastructure in the United States for how many
years now, guys.
Speaker 3 (18:45):
I mean when we first started the video series, it
was one of the things I was going to write
an episode about it. But for a long time, the
American public didn't care, right, Yeah, and that's hopefully slowly changing.
But yeah, we have on the audio side of this,
(19:05):
as a group, we've been talking about infrastructure for quite
some time. And thankful, by the way for anybody else
who does so. You know, John Oliver did a great
piece of it on it last week tonight.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
Yeah, and just the need to revamp a lot of
the bridges. I mean really it's bridges, roads, what levies,
all kinds of things that exist in states across the
United States. That water wire, oh yeah, how everything It
all requires constant upkeep just to make sure things are
running smoothly. But often state and federal budgets go to
(19:40):
other things because other things take priority over the stuff
that's already working. Right, That's at least the perception that
often occurs in our own minds, because you don't think
about the bridge when you go over it. If you're
going across Spaghetti Junction here in Atlanta, you do.
Speaker 4 (19:57):
Sometimes No, I do I do it, freaks.
Speaker 3 (20:02):
I've walked the length of the highest one non consensually.
And I wish more people thought about the fact that
they are in a very dangerous situation. No matter what,
you know, it doesn't matter if you have easy listening
playing in your car, you know what I mean. You're
at a high speed in some tight curves, and you know,
(20:22):
the rule with driving and playing the dark lottery of
traffic is always you can do your best, but it
doesn't really matter. If you do your best, it matters
that everybody else adheres to him. I don't know, man.
You know, we were doing a live tour a while back,
and a bridge on I eighty five here in our
(20:44):
fair metropolis, a segment of that just collapsed under I'll
still say it murky circumstance, as of.
Speaker 5 (20:51):
Some fire that happened underneath it, like weakened it or
something that was supposedly caused by a errant crack pipe,
if I'm not mistaken.
Speaker 3 (21:00):
Shopping cart on fire and then and you.
Speaker 2 (21:02):
Know the mark still video of that incident.
Speaker 3 (21:04):
By the way, Yeah, the murky part of that. Even if,
even if that those official public conclusions are true in
the ID five case, how horrifying is it that that
bridge was hanging on by such a thread, Like how
many bridges in America are one crack pipe on the
underbelly away from collapsing? Right now?
Speaker 2 (21:23):
Well, that's the whole point of this. Okay, let's get
back to this Forbes Avenue Bridge again. That's going over
that place called fern Hollow Creek in Pittsburgh that collapsed
the day President Biden showed up. According to the Pennsylvania
Dot this bridge is owned by the City of Pittsburgh.
It was built in nineteen seventy and it had a
(21:45):
very recent inspection report as of that date in twenty
twenty two that rated both its deck and its superstructure
the entirety of it as quote poor, which is not good.
And it's one of eighty bridges in that county, Allegheny County,
that were rated as in poor condition overall. So one
(22:07):
of eighty in that one county, one of them collapsed.
It just happened to be, you know, perfect timing somehow.
I don't know, guys, I don't think it's a matter
of I mean, it is a coincidence, but I don't
think it's a matter of like collapsing a bridge on purpose.
I think it's just actually the state of a lot
of the infrastructure.
Speaker 4 (22:26):
Well, yeah, I'd agree with that.
Speaker 5 (22:27):
It would be the kind of place where it would
make sense already to visit. But I bet there were
some people on Biden's team.
Speaker 4 (22:34):
That were like, yes, that's a win.
Speaker 2 (22:35):
Oh sure.
Speaker 7 (22:37):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (22:37):
So here's here's a helpful rubric or heuristic for thinking
through these kind of things. When we question coincidence or
causation or conspiracy, correlation, et cetera, we have to also
ask ourselves what else happened on that day? Right if
the president time had not visited on that day. Pittsburgh's
(22:59):
a big city, and it is quite possible that we
could draw another troubling correlation between some other event that
happened in Pittsburgh at that time. I'm not saying that
is the case. I'm just saying that's a helpful critical
thinking approach to some of this stuff. To Knowles's point
about opportunism, yeah I agree, absolutely, But opportunism is not
(23:22):
the same thing as conspiracy. It's just a cynical coattail
writing of disaster.
Speaker 2 (23:28):
Quick snap that picture. Let's go all right, guys, do
you think we have time for one more before we
get out of this segment. I think, so okay, here
we go. Let's jump to Matt the firefighter.
Speaker 8 (23:38):
I got, I got you. Dylan's been listen to see
for a long time, for several years now. Just wanted
to give you a shot. My name's Matt. I am
a firefighter, been a firefighter for about twelve years. One
thing that they might not want us to know is
that firefighter turnout gear has a chemical called pithos fas.
(24:01):
It is a known carcinogen. It causes cancer in firefighters.
And all of our turnout gear, the gear that we
wear whenever we go into fires as p pass in it.
It is causing us cancer. They know that it does this,
and yet they have no turnout gear that's n FPA approved.
(24:23):
That NFPA is National Fire Protection Agency. They create the
national standards for our turnout.
Speaker 7 (24:29):
Gears as well as.
Speaker 8 (24:31):
Many many other topics. But anyways, they know that our
turnout gear causes cancer, and we still have no alternative.
We have no alternative turnout gear that we can purchase
and wear that is NFPA approved, that does not cause cancer,
that does not have p foss in it. So I
encourage you guys to look into that and to do
(24:55):
an episode on that because it's a it's a big
deal firefighters have. Depending on study you read, firefighters have
between a two hundred to three and fifty percent increase
chance of catching cancer because of the work we do.
And I think that this is something that people should
know about. Thank you for hearing me out. Wish you
guys the boss, love your work. I'm going to continue
(25:16):
listening to you guys. Good luck to you, talk to you.
Speaker 3 (25:19):
Later, and good luck to you. Matt the firefighter. Thank
you for being a firefighter. I think there's some of
the most unappreciated professionals in society.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
Yeah, absolutely, Matt. Thank you for letting us know about that. Previously,
when we've talked about these forever chemicals like the per
and poly fluoro alcohol substances that's p FOSS. When we've
talked about those in the past, we've talked about all
the stuff that they're in, including well mostly we've talked
(25:50):
about firefighting chemicals. Right, the foams that are often used
in the process of fighting a fire. Someone something a
firefighter would wield.
Speaker 3 (25:59):
Right suppression flame Retardan says they were called as a
general term.
Speaker 2 (26:03):
Yeah, exactly. We talked about those things and how dangerous
they can be if you get exposed to them. A lot.
One thing we didn't consider what the firefighter is actually
wearing on their body. It makes sense that these pieces
of heavy clothing would also be treated with something like
this that would be again a repellent or a retardant
of fire. Oh my gosh, you guys in what was
(26:27):
the thing that Matt referenced? The National Fire Protection Association.
It's a thing you can look up right now, and
recently several organizations, including NIST put out let's see this
is January twenty sixteen, they put out a report about
how wear and tear on firefighter's warrant equipment is going
(26:48):
to actually cause those pieces of equipment to release even
more forever chemicals than the firefighter is already being exposed
to just by wearing them consistently, and it's just increasing
the potential to have cancer. It's like the increasing your
probability that you will one day develop cancer.
Speaker 4 (27:07):
It does appear.
Speaker 5 (27:07):
There's a pretty significant class action lawsuit against pfast manufacturers,
with thousands of firefighters across.
Speaker 4 (27:14):
The country suing.
Speaker 5 (27:16):
I believe three M is one of the parties named
to manufacture these types of chemicals, and I believe the
FDA only recently just pass something that limits the amount
of the stuff that can be in drinking water, which
seems like we're behind the times.
Speaker 4 (27:31):
On this one.
Speaker 2 (27:31):
Oh yeah, and that stuff is in everything there was
These forever chemicals were found in sources of water that
should not have any forever chemicals in them, because that
water is theoretically dropping from the sky from clouds and
rain water into sources higher up, like in mountains, that
go into springs that then flow down and get filtered naturally,
(27:53):
and yet somehow there's still p foss in them.
Speaker 4 (27:57):
Yikes.
Speaker 2 (27:58):
You can read a statement, actually a joint statement from
the International Association of Firefighters or the IAFF and the
Metropolitan Fire Chiefs Association that discusses this exact thing. Again.
It's going to just what do What do you do?
As Matt the firefighter, when you know the stuff you're
(28:20):
going to wear to go fight a fire is probably
going to contribute to you getting cancer one day, And
right now, there is, as Matt said, nothing else you
can do, because you can't just wear civ's or regular
clothes when you go into fight a fire, because those
are flammable. We need an alternative basically, So this is
(28:40):
a call to all you entrepreneurs out there who are
good in textiles or maybe have some friends or family
in the textiles industry. Create something new that firefighters can
wear that don't have these specific chemical treatments. That's all
I've got. Guys, you're here all right, And with that
we will take a break and then hear more messages
from you.
Speaker 3 (29:06):
And we have returned at the conclusion of our weekly
listener mail. We wanted to begin with a critical update.
If you just had this on in the background and
you were, you know, kind of tuning out. We've all
been there, please snap in the fingers conspiracy realist, hear
(29:26):
us and hear us Well, I'd like to play a
message from Rob with a crucial update on something that
I know has been on everybody's mind.
Speaker 7 (29:36):
Here we go, Hey, guys, this is Rob from the
Armpit of the Midwest. Just an observation here. I'm watching
Rebel Moon Part two and I just wanted to chime
in on the humble Farmer. Within the first thirty seconds
(29:56):
of this movie, the word humble was uttered and I
couldn't help but remember your fine episodes, the Humble Farmer
has been mentioned. Just made me laugh, made me laugh
pretty hard.
Speaker 3 (30:13):
Thank you. That is why you tune in, folks for
the up to the minute breaking news on the Humble Farmer.
We brought the Scargiver back. Did you see that? That's
the name of I saw the second part. It's getting
rebel Moon to the scar Giver.
Speaker 2 (30:30):
Rob, the same guy you called it about Hard Candy
last week.
Speaker 3 (30:34):
Rob. Appreciate your update there and thank you on behalf
of everybody tuning in. Honestly behind the curtain and I
just put that in because I love those updates.
Speaker 4 (30:46):
It's the Humble Farmer effect.
Speaker 3 (30:48):
Yes, yeah, it is. It is. Ask your sociologist friends
about it. We have something else that I think maybe
a future episode. Would love to hear your thoughts, fellow
conspiracy realist. It comes from Secret Soup Can. Secret Soup Can,
you said the following, Good morning, lads, I ran across
this article this morning. What do you think? Love the show?
(31:11):
Keep up the great work. Secret soup Can sent us
a link that you can and should read if you
are interested at all In the following conversation. It comes
to us from the debrief dot Org NASA veterans, propellantless
propulsion drive that physics says shouldn't work, just produced enough
(31:31):
thrust to overcome Earth's gravity. This is big if true.
Speaker 2 (31:37):
Both WHOA Sorry, I've read the same article and I
don't think I just don't believe it until I see
it happen.
Speaker 3 (31:48):
That's the thing too, right. This is something I think
is good for us to unpack because what was it
the em drive a few years back, the electromagnetic drive
that was supposed to revolutionari space exploration. This is the
story of a guy. This one is a story of a
guy named doctor Charles Buller Bueller Bueller, Yeah, rus who's
(32:11):
they is a NASA engineer and the co founder of
an organization called Exodus Propulsion Technologies. And their claims are
pretty extraordinary and thus far they have not been universally confirmed.
Let's just give you a piece from what the doctor said.
(32:32):
He is a NASA engineer, He's not just some random
guy that he told the debrief the following quote. The
most important message to convey to the public is that
a major discovery occurred. This discovery of a new force
is fundamental in that electric fields alone can generate a
sustainable force onto an object and allow center of mass
(32:52):
translation of said object without expelling mass. All right, just
unpack that current. That's not a thing outside of science fiction,
like the idea of this technology. I'm with you there, Matt.
I also thought this felt a little bit vaporware, like
we were talking about biotech earlier, expelling mass meaning.
Speaker 2 (33:14):
What Well, like, okay, imagine you're burning jet fuel, right,
you watch the launch of anything that's going to escape
Earth's gravitational poll. It is shoving shoving stuff out the
tail end right through the form of gas that's ignited.
This is basically saying that nothing is going out the
(33:34):
tail end. It's just turned on and then the flow
of what electrons.
Speaker 4 (33:39):
Yeah, it just goes. It's like cold fusion esque kind
of stuff.
Speaker 1 (33:44):
Right.
Speaker 4 (33:44):
I mean, it's like all the good stuff.
Speaker 5 (33:46):
Without any of the bad stuff or any of the
byproducts or violent reactions.
Speaker 2 (33:49):
I don't want to know, get me wrong. I think
it's amazing, Like, oh yeah, sweet, just just show show me,
don't tell me.
Speaker 4 (33:57):
That's all fair.
Speaker 3 (33:58):
Yeah, to document his team's discovery and to in an
attempt to show the process behind their work. This guy
who's leading the charge over at Exodus, which is again
a private company. He presented his findings at something that
I was not aware of, the Alternative Propulsion Energy Conference
or APEC, not to be confused with OPEK. This has
(34:21):
a lot of career engineers and then it has a
lot of what we'll call enthusiasts, right, interested people. They
may not have a degree, they may not work from
NASA or a defense corporation, but they are intensely interested
in the concept of new propulsion technology. The debrief once
referred to this as the world's most exclusive and strange
(34:45):
anti gravity club, which sounds like it'd be cool to
go to. At one point we went to a Muffon
conference before that was fascinating.
Speaker 2 (34:53):
Yeah, if we can get an invite APEC, send it
our way.
Speaker 3 (34:58):
We're talking specifically to you, Tim.
Speaker 4 (35:00):
Ventura doesn't anti gravity just in general.
Speaker 5 (35:03):
I know it describes a concept of defying gravity through
various means, but in my mind it immediately conjures hovercrafts
or like magical flying cars.
Speaker 3 (35:13):
The Nazi bell or something luck so on.
Speaker 5 (35:16):
Yeah, I know hovercrafts are real, but the idea of
being able to float without any byproduct, so just kind
of like whatever it might be, electromagnetic or otherwise.
Speaker 4 (35:26):
Right, things that don't exist is.
Speaker 3 (35:27):
What I'm getting at, things that have not been proven
to exist, right, even if and even that might be
a little bit too careful on our part, But if
we look at his background, we do know that he
is the top expert at NASA in something called electrostatics.
And again he's very careful to say, you know, this
(35:47):
endeavor is not affiliated with my day job, but he
does work with concepts that apparently he informed his work
on this apulsion alternative, and he says, we've been looking
into this. They call it propellantless propulsion, and they said
they've been working on it for over twenty years and
(36:10):
they found the answer under their proverbial noses electrostatics, which
he had already been working on. And I don't know,
Like I've looked into it, and I see a lot
of excitement, I see a lot of sound and fury.
I don't know what it signifies. We also saw different
phases of testing that they rolled out, like testing in
(36:31):
a vacuum. We saw an explanation of the materials that
they try to use to create this reaction or this phenomenon,
and they started seeing precipitous results in twenty twenty two.
Just for context here, this article from the debrief was
(36:53):
published on April nineteenth, twenty twenty four. I'm hesitant to
get too into the needs of the technology without a
lot more research on our end, Like I think this
could be an episode or the overall idea of the
alternative propulsion industry.
Speaker 4 (37:11):
Isn't it being described as a new force?
Speaker 3 (37:14):
That's yeah, yeah, he said that quote. Yeah, capital in
capital f new force, which sounds cool. You know, it
sounds like it's in the Star Wars franchise. I mean,
watch it.
Speaker 4 (37:24):
I will say that.
Speaker 5 (37:25):
You know, electrostatic energy is interesting, and I've seen it
certainly on small scales, right, like if it's what I'm
thinking of, like even just in terms of like static
electricity delivering a shock or being able to charge a
balloon and have it kind of like propel. You know,
it's magnetized essentially using electrostatic force. If I'm not mistaken,
(37:46):
I'm not a scientist here, but it's I don't quite
and maybe it's not for me to understand understand how
that could be scaled in such a way where anything
in its path wouldn't be obliterated.
Speaker 3 (37:57):
There's another aspect to it too. You know, we always
want to dig when we hear about a private company.
If you go to their website, their website is pretty
much like a dummy site with a place where you
can put your email. You're not going to see, at
least on that site, You're not going to see a
bunch of information about showing your work means methods testing.
(38:20):
The debrief article is actually much more, much more in
depth than the website, And that doesn't mean that it's
inherently fake. It just means that we the public need
the information explained in a way that the layperson can understand.
Because full disclosure, folks, the four of us recording this evening,
(38:41):
and like maybe you listeny along at home, we do
not have expertise in the bleeding edge of electrostatic science.
I think we understand it clearly.
Speaker 4 (38:51):
That's the case.
Speaker 5 (38:52):
From my hand fisted attempt at describing, not at all.
And when you do dig for information on this, you
kind of see the same press release regurgitated a bunch
of times and with some questions like from the debrief,
but no real data or video or anything tangible to
back it up.
Speaker 3 (39:10):
So I'm bringing this up because I think this would
be thank you, Thank You, Secret Soup. I'm bringing this
up because I think this is an episode based on
the other similar efforts that have happened in recent years,
like the em Drive the Quantum Drive, both of which
remained very controversial. Apparently they got some level of result
(39:35):
enough to encourage interest in the international sphere and in
the sphere of investors, but neither of those have been
tested in space. The Quantum drive got really close. There
was a launch in November of twenty twenty three, but
it was laid low. A failure the satellite's electric systems,
(39:58):
unrelated to the drive, scuttled the test. And at the
risk of sounding too cynical, it kind of calls to
mind the similarities of apocalyptic cult leaders when they're like, Hey,
the world was definitely going to end, but we got
the dates wrong, So stick with me, stay in the cult,
(40:19):
you know. And I'm not accusing these guys necessary. I'm
not accusing these guys of being con artists. We haven't
spoken with them at all. We just need much more information.
And if anything, this is a clarion call to those
of us playing along at home. If you have expertise
in this material science, engineering, physics, propulsion. If you are
(40:40):
a literal rocket scientist, we want to hear from you.
Speaker 2 (40:44):
Yes, and I just signed us up via their website
that you mentioned Ben for their emails.
Speaker 5 (40:50):
I did just want to mention I found a conversation
about this on Reddit and somebody sort.
Speaker 4 (40:55):
Of you know again, don't know. I can't really measure this.
Speaker 5 (40:57):
Person's bona fides, but said, the amount of force in
the low Millan Newtons means that this whole setup is
highly dubious, as that such a small force that anything
can influence the measurement. I myself have had setups using
electrostatic forces where the mere presence of my hand near
the apparatus caused severe measurement errors at the Milan Newton level.
(41:21):
Though to be fair, the actual forces I then measured
were higher than the variance due to.
Speaker 4 (41:25):
That, so even that's way above my pay grade.
Speaker 5 (41:28):
But it does seem like they're smarter people than be
out there asking questions about this debrief article.
Speaker 3 (41:34):
Well, human thought has no real concept of intelligence.
Speaker 4 (41:37):
They'll be yourself up fair, thanks.
Speaker 3 (41:39):
So, and with that, this is going to be an
episode in the future. Your help, your expertise, folks, is
invaluable that regard. We're going to end today with some
letters from home. We had so many beautiful pieces of
correspondence to our recent episode on supplements, so thank you.
A partial list to Reds got which herbalist Luke Tokyoki
(42:02):
Brocknest Commandant Squatch. That was a very interesting one. Tommy
Saturday Morning Cartoons, the legend big Shucks. They called me,
Frederick have confirmed that wasn't our pal Matt, Blue, Michelle,
Licensed Mutant, Ninja, Turtle, Otter Dog, Anonymous, Corey call me,
Al Baron, Eaton, Katie r In and Sosa hold the phone.
(42:22):
We've got one returning person. You guys remember the person
who used to write all those weird jokes to us?
Speaker 4 (42:31):
Oh yeah, I remember the name, but I remember the jokes.
Speaker 2 (42:35):
There was a sixty nine involved.
Speaker 3 (42:37):
Yes, yeah, nice, there was. This comes to us from
down Low Joe, a subsidiary of Humorous Harry. That was
the name. And he says, how about this Noel Matt
picking number one through ten six. Okay, did you hear
about the guy that left his smartphone on the stove?
It ended up being a real burner phone. Doc. If
(43:00):
I get like a rim shot and a groan. The
Matt is scratching his forehead here. So Matt, why pick
a number one? Th that's not six?
Speaker 2 (43:09):
Number one?
Speaker 3 (43:10):
Number one?
Speaker 4 (43:11):
Do you know what?
Speaker 2 (43:13):
Number two?
Speaker 3 (43:16):
Keep this part in because boy number one? All right,
we can't win them all, humorous, Harry, Where do crabs
go for a drink? You guys to this sand bar?
Speaker 4 (43:27):
Oh wow?
Speaker 3 (43:29):
Okay, folks with that, We're so glad and thankful to
every person entity meet or otherwise crabs as well? You know.
Speaker 2 (43:40):
Oh yeah, I've got a joke. I got a joke.
What's worse than having a bunch of ants in your pants?
A bunch of uncles?
Speaker 4 (43:53):
We were already?
Speaker 3 (43:56):
How do comedians play golf with comedy clubs? Okay, I
think we're We've exercised our full budget of sound cues.
Go ahead, joy the show. We'd love to have you.
Thanks so much for tuning in and tell us switch
on your mind. We try to be easy to find online.
Speaker 4 (44:14):
It's right.
Speaker 5 (44:15):
You can find us in the handle Conspiracy Stuff where
we exist on Facebook, on YouTube and on x FKA, Twitter,
on Instagram and TikTok.
Speaker 4 (44:24):
We are Conspiracy Stuff Show.
Speaker 2 (44:26):
Hey, do you want to call us the way?
Speaker 4 (44:28):
Matt?
Speaker 2 (44:29):
And Joe did call one eight three three std WYTK.
It's a voicemail system. You've got three minutes. Give yourself
a cool nickname and let us know if we can
use your name and message on the air. If you
don't like using your phone for such activities, why not
use it to send us an email.
Speaker 3 (44:44):
We are the folks who read every single email we get.
As you can tell from that reason, rounded jokes conspiracy
at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2 (45:11):
Stuff they don't want you to know. Is a production
of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn the stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Nola.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
They call me Ben. We're joined as always with our
super producer Alexis code named dot Holiday Jackson. Most importantly,
you are you.
Speaker 4 (00:36):
You are here.
Speaker 3 (00:37):
That makes this the stuff they don't want.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
You to know.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
It is Thursday evening, which means it's time for some
listener mail, some letters from home. We're gonna hear a
bunch of voicemails. We're gonna learn about bridges and coincidences.
We're going to learn about impossible propulsion that may be possible.
We're gonna have some crucial updates on an ongoing investigation.
(01:02):
And we'll end with a lot of thank yous and
maybe some jokes. When you are walking by the gallows
of modern civilization, strolling through the graveyard of society, we
lift our voices. We can't help sing or whistle or
maybe make sport? What sports?
Speaker 4 (01:21):
What you play?
Speaker 5 (01:22):
Oh?
Speaker 3 (01:22):
All right?
Speaker 5 (01:22):
A veritable field of dreams is what we were all
about here. I've never seen that movie. Have you guys
seen Field of Dreams? Starting with the baseball ghosts?
Speaker 4 (01:33):
Is that the deal?
Speaker 3 (01:34):
He's during the halcyon days of the Coostner Garth Brooks era.
Speaker 4 (01:38):
Oh okay, So are the ghosts?
Speaker 5 (01:39):
Do they appear as like apparitions like force ghosts in
the Star Wars movies?
Speaker 4 (01:44):
What do they look like when you meet these baseball ghosts?
Speaker 3 (01:47):
I don't want to spoil it for you, man, fild
the field.
Speaker 4 (01:50):
Fair enough, we'll come.
Speaker 5 (01:56):
Well, we're talking about baseball a little bit, and we're
also talking about super fun sites and how the Twain meets.
And remember how I joked about how when I first
started hearing about super fun sites, for the longest time,
I thought they were saying super fun sites, which one
could apply that designation to a baseball field. So let's
hear from one of our regular contributors, GP Scooch Gents.
(02:21):
In a recent episode, you asked for our stories and
experience with local superfund or hazardous waste sites. Well, I
do have quite a few acres on which we live,
so not exactly in my backyard, but there are actually
two such sites nearby about six miles from our home
is a former lead mine. Actually pretty common in this
part of southwest Missouri. This one, However, in Aurora, Missouri,
(02:44):
has am I allowed.
Speaker 4 (02:45):
To say Missouri? Is that like? Sounds like I'm being
too colloquial, Isn't.
Speaker 5 (02:49):
It's American English? Okay, we'll just go for it. I
don't know why I'm saying it. I feel like I'm
pronouncing it the way the locals pronounced.
Speaker 4 (02:54):
I'm just gonna go with that.
Speaker 5 (02:56):
In Aurora, Missouri has never been completely sealed and the
surround in grounds completely cleaned, So naturally the city built
a park bordering the site, including a baseball field we
used at the high school when I was teaching slash
coaching there. The area was clearly marked and signage advised
everyone to keep out. This meant most foul balls and
(03:17):
some home runs hit out of the field along the
first base side wound up inside the perimeter of the
old mine.
Speaker 4 (03:23):
There are two big problems here.
Speaker 5 (03:25):
Baseballs are not inexpensive, and schools have budgets. There was
no way to just leave them within sight. Also rare
is the parent who does not wish to have their
son's home run baseball as a Trophy. It became necessary
to station an adult each game to be the official
baseball retriever from the restricted area. Oof do they issue
(03:46):
them has bat suits?
Speaker 4 (03:48):
Holy Cow.
Speaker 5 (03:49):
More importantly, twelve miles away is the community of Verona Fair, Verona, Missouri.
In the nineteen seventies, the chemical dioxin caused the evacuation
and federal buy out of the Saint Louis suburb of
Times Beach. I do not remember if you or the
stuff you should know guys did an episode on this.
It was one of the first superfund sites and the
(04:10):
town was destroyed and the soil to something like four
feet deep was removed and incinerated. The area is now
yes a park. The contamination had been caused by road
oil sprayed regularly to keep down the dust of the
dirt and gravel roads. While all of this was discovered
in the investigation, it was also discovered the dioxin originally
(04:31):
was sold to the company doing the spraying by a
chemical company in Verona, where the dioxin infused oil was
a waste product. This plant still exists and operates today. Yes,
cleanup was done, but over the last fifty years it
has experienced a series of problems. In twenty nineteen, the
EPA investigated the area and found remnants of agent orange.
(04:52):
In twenty twenty two, the EPA issued sixteen citations against
the plant and its safety programs. In twenty twenty too,
Pro Publica identified the area as a toxic air pollution hotspot,
and in twenty twenty three, the EPA again sent representatives
to Verona to hear concerns about the Pro Publica and
other reports to help explain the higher than average rates
(05:16):
of cancer in the small town heard this story before
through all owners. The problems continue. The state and federal
government are involved, but as of just last year, cancer
rates and violations both continue. My personal opinion is that
if the products produced at the plant helped cause the
evacuation of a community on the other side of the state,
(05:37):
the originator of such substances might require a little more supervision, inspection,
and involvement by regulatory agencies. Still, GP scoochs here and
use what you will, and we will and we did.
Speaker 3 (05:52):
GP.
Speaker 4 (05:53):
This is fabulous.
Speaker 5 (05:55):
Not fabulous in the content of what this means, but
this is exactly the kind of stuff we were looking for.
Speaker 4 (06:01):
Like, what is it like to live around this stuff.
Speaker 5 (06:04):
What does the government to do with these as they
pertain to communities? And in this situation, it sure feels
like just kind of building something on top of it
that like kids are going to be playing in. It's
very dystopian feeling to me. I don't know, maybe I'm
overreacting a little bit, but I don't think so. I
don't think you are a lot like brushing it under.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
The rug, you know, right, Yeah, And we heard from
we heard from Scooch quite recently as well, GGP Scooch
who hipped us to an obscene clone fall, which still
it's a great shaggy dog story, but we know this
is we know this is serious business, Scooch. And you
know this may be in reaction to letter from another
(06:48):
conspiracy realist about the Westlake landfill. There are tons of
these things, and a lot of them don't make any
national news. Like to your point, no, we need need
the public to be more aware of these things because often,
you know, often the way you hide this sort of
(07:08):
stuff from your constituency or your municipality is to make
it one of the public commons, right, make it a
public area. Here is a park, Here is where all
the kids can go play. It's tough.
Speaker 5 (07:23):
Well, the implication being it's fine, right, because we wouldn't
have done this if it weren't fine, because this is
the most vulnerable of our population that we're telling it's
okay to go there.
Speaker 4 (07:34):
And yet the whole.
Speaker 5 (07:35):
Baseball retrieval thing, for some reason, it makes me think
of the sandlot. You know, there is that neighbor with
the big scary dog, and in order to get the
balls they had.
Speaker 4 (07:43):
To like go, you know, do battle with this giant
monster kind of mutant dog.
Speaker 5 (07:48):
I just can't imagine how comfortable these parents or teachers
would be having to go scavenge and what they know
is a potentially contaminated area just to get back a baseball.
Speaker 3 (08:00):
Recently, I think, just as Reesay is a few years ago,
was twenty twenty one, I think the US Supreme Court
made an increasingly rare unanimous ruling regarding superfund sites and
the Clean Water Act all to say, people know there
is a problem, right, and the time window on this
(08:22):
problem could be quite elongated, right because exposure to some
of the chemicals or contamination of superfund sites, the bill
doesn't come do there sometimes for decades? Right, But you know,
trust us, it's fine, take your kids to the playground.
Speaker 5 (08:38):
Well, I just found an EPA dot gov page where
you can search for superfund sites near you, and I
just narrowed it down to Georgia. And I guess I
had to have known this when I was working for
public radio back in the day. But Augusta, which is
where I was stationed and where I grew up, it
seems like it comes up on the list more than
just about any other place in the state.
Speaker 4 (09:00):
There's I think five, let's see.
Speaker 5 (09:02):
There's only one in Atlanta, in Fulton County, the west
side lead plant, and that's the only I'm not seeing
any in like adjacent counties here in Atlanta.
Speaker 4 (09:13):
One in Athens.
Speaker 5 (09:16):
Yeah, but you know, the whole deal with these is
like we don't really know what the long term ramifications
of some of the stuff is. And we often see
scientists and researchers trying to draw lines between these sites
and rates of cancer, and they're often a little bit
hard to kind of draw those direct lines, the direct correlations.
Speaker 3 (09:37):
Yeah, and a super fun site, to be clear, is
is not always contaminated with the same kind of nasty stuff. Right.
It's a group term similar to saying cancer or saying chair.
So the contamination in one site may indeed be more
dangerous than the contamination in another site, or it may
(09:57):
have a different set of deleitaria health effects. So there's
it's rough and it's terrifying because again of that of
that window of time to your point, No, yes, there
are searchable databases, but a lot of it is not
out there in your face. Right, these kind of warnings,
(10:18):
I would argue, you do need to be out there
in your face. You need to know immediately your location,
your proximity two a super fun site, and your possible
exposure to anything within that site, because they're also not
all cleaned up to the same level, that's.
Speaker 5 (10:36):
Right, and also to know what the cleanup efforts ongoing,
you know, look like or if they are ongoing.
Speaker 4 (10:43):
And I'm sorry I misspoke.
Speaker 5 (10:44):
Augusta has three, but it does seem to be one
of the most super funded cities in the state of Georgia.
Cedar Town is another one that has three as well.
But that's the maximum number that I'm seeing on this list,
and of the overall number in the entire list, it
looks like there's oney nine hundred and one.
Speaker 3 (11:04):
Which doesn't cover the full extent of possibly contaminated sites
in the US, because I think it did. Super funds
didn't become a thing until nineteen eighty, which was a
long time ago now, but still there was also a
lot of other dirty stuff. The soil was sour around
the US well before nineteen eighty.
Speaker 5 (11:24):
Well, these are the ones that get that designation, and
there's obviously some bureaucratic red tape that has to be
you know, sifted through to even get these to be recognized.
Speaker 3 (11:33):
And I wonder if anybody has been able to lobby
or buy their way out of a super fun designation,
you know.
Speaker 5 (11:42):
Or certainly a good question, ben, because do you get
wind No one intend that, I guess if we're talking
about fallout or the way contamination can spread, of this
in advance and then kind of try to call in
a favor. Certainly wouldn't be a good look if the
public found out. But again, these are exactly making front
page headlines.
Speaker 3 (12:02):
Yeah, there are, I guess. Unfortunately, there are entities or
groups that would prefer you not know about a local
superfund site, or prefer that something not be designated as one.
But probably the most important part of this conversation. Is
that searchable database that you brought up there at all?
(12:23):
Can you tell people the easiest way to find it? Yeah?
Speaker 5 (12:25):
I just googled superfund sites, you know, and this EPA
list came right up, and you can search it by
state and by keyword. And like I said, it's not
a massive I mean, you know, two thousand roughly, it's
pretty big number in terms of this kind of thing,
I guess, but it's maybe I would have thought there
might have been more. But you can search and make
sure that you know where they are in your area.
Speaker 4 (12:46):
But I don't know what do you guys think about?
Speaker 5 (12:47):
Like again, all super fund the sites aren't created equal,
and you know, one would hope that if they're building
a baseball field or a park that the areas adjacent
to them would.
Speaker 4 (13:00):
Be like an outright death trap.
Speaker 5 (13:02):
But do we trust them to make that assessments or
what do you guys think?
Speaker 2 (13:09):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (13:09):
There are two there are two main paths that the
Congressional Act, like the super Fund deal allows for the
first is what's removable, what's called removable actions. That's the
more short term where you just take the dirty stuff out.
And then there are remedial actions which are more long term,
which is where you try to uh, you attempt to
(13:32):
make the thing a usable piece of land again, right,
this this remediation which they try to make the potentially
responsible party or PRP pay for it, you know, the
person or the group who did the pollution. So in theory,
when things are properly cleaned out and brought back to
(13:54):
some kind of baseline of safety in theory, then that
land and all the stuff around it is okay, is safe.
The problem is how often does the practice jibe with
the theory, right or the letters of the law.
Speaker 5 (14:10):
I think that's very well said Ben Matt. You got
anything else to add before we take a break.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
Yeah, I want to shoot people over to that pro
publica piece that was talked about in the message. It
is titled quote when Home is a Toxic hot Spot.
It was written December fifteenth, twenty twenty one, and it's
a rather extensive piece on Verona, Missouri there and just
what the folks were going through at the time, just
(14:37):
being aware of these substances, you know, in the air,
in the soil, in the water, and not being able
to do anything about it, but still having to just
live your life.
Speaker 5 (14:47):
That's the thing too you mentioned in the soil, because
a lot of these things can leach into the soil,
and you know, of course they take tests over time
to make sure that the levels are allowable or like
within certain acceptable you know, ranges or whatever.
Speaker 4 (15:01):
But some of these pits that they you know, bury
some of.
Speaker 5 (15:04):
These materials, and certainly that was the case in one
near where I was growing up in Augusta. They have
these linings that can over time be compromised and can leak.
So even if that the lining or whatever is the mitigation,
it has to be maintained and has to be like
checked on. And sometimes you know, with budgets and stuff
(15:25):
and just shuffling and bureaucracy, sometimes those things can't fall
between the cracks. So yeah, just something to keep an
eye on. Well, let's take a quick break, have a
word from one of our sponsors, and then come back
with another piece of listener mail.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
And we've returned. We're gonna jump to the phone lines
and hear first from Joe.
Speaker 6 (15:48):
Say, man, no one, Ben, I had a thing I'd
like you guys to look into. My name's Joe from Pittsburgh.
I am seeming to be the only one that finds
it extremely coincident that on January twenty eighth of twenty two,
there is a bridge in a area of Pittsburgh that
(16:08):
collapsed early in the morning. And usually this bridge has
massive amounts of traffic. There was like three there was
a uh, you know, a mass transit bus, and then
two passenger vehicles on this bridge when this bridge collapsed.
The coincidental part about it is President Joe Biden was
(16:32):
flying to Pittsburgh that morning to pitch his infrastructure bill.
What better way to get to, you know, chum up
support for your infrastructure bill than the city you're going
to to pitch your bill has a bridge collapse. I
(16:55):
found it extremely odd. I've had a few people that
I've spoke to. I've also emailed multiple podcasts about this.
Can't seem to get anybody to look into it. Don't
think I'm crazy, but just not a coincidence.
Speaker 3 (17:07):
Thank you, m thank you for calling. Ten people were injured,
but non fatally if I recall correctly.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Yes, you can find an article right now in whereas
this Pittsburgh magazine and it says ten people escape serious
injury and Forbes Avenue fo r Bes Avenue bridge collapse
and that is a bridge that goes over a place
called fern Hollow f e r n h o Lllow
(17:35):
Creek that it really did collapse on the morning that
President Joe Biden actually was headed to Pittsburgh to go
and pitch his infrastructure bill. And there is a picture
you can find on Getty Images of President Biden standing
there shaking hands with somebody and the background is the
collapsed bridge.
Speaker 3 (17:56):
You can also see video of it on New York Times.
I mean, this was pub was pretty widely. You can
see the immediate aftermath, and we're just very fortunate no
one died because it's heinus.
Speaker 2 (18:08):
Yeah, there really is a You can see a picture
of the bus, the red bus that fell down and
one of the passenger vehicles that landed or ended up
on its roof like laying on the ground. It looks horrifying.
It looks like people died, but again thankfully they did not.
Speaker 5 (18:26):
Well, I mean, perhaps an opportunistic photo op, but it
does appear that this bridge should have been condemned many
years prior because of disrepair and issues.
Speaker 2 (18:38):
Well yeah, well, you see, here's the problem. We've been
talking about infrastructure in the United States for how many
years now, guys.
Speaker 3 (18:45):
I mean when we first started the video series, it
was one of the things I was going to write
an episode about it. But for a long time, the
American public didn't care, right, Yeah, and that's hopefully slowly changing.
But yeah, we have on the audio side of this,
(19:05):
as a group, we've been talking about infrastructure for quite
some time. And thankful, by the way for anybody else
who does so. You know, John Oliver did a great
piece of it on it last week tonight.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
Yeah, and just the need to revamp a lot of
the bridges. I mean really it's bridges, roads, what levies,
all kinds of things that exist in states across the
United States. That water wire, oh yeah, how everything It
all requires constant upkeep just to make sure things are
running smoothly. But often state and federal budgets go to
(19:40):
other things because other things take priority over the stuff
that's already working. Right, That's at least the perception that
often occurs in our own minds, because you don't think
about the bridge when you go over it. If you're
going across Spaghetti Junction here in Atlanta, you do.
Speaker 4 (19:57):
Sometimes No, I do I do it, freaks.
Speaker 3 (20:02):
I've walked the length of the highest one non consensually.
And I wish more people thought about the fact that
they are in a very dangerous situation. No matter what,
you know, it doesn't matter if you have easy listening
playing in your car, you know what I mean. You're
at a high speed in some tight curves, and you know,
(20:22):
the rule with driving and playing the dark lottery of
traffic is always you can do your best, but it
doesn't really matter. If you do your best, it matters
that everybody else adheres to him. I don't know, man.
You know, we were doing a live tour a while back,
and a bridge on I eighty five here in our
(20:44):
fair metropolis, a segment of that just collapsed under I'll
still say it murky circumstance, as of.
Speaker 5 (20:51):
Some fire that happened underneath it, like weakened it or
something that was supposedly caused by a errant crack pipe,
if I'm not mistaken.
Speaker 3 (21:00):
Shopping cart on fire and then and you.
Speaker 2 (21:02):
Know the mark still video of that incident.
Speaker 3 (21:04):
By the way, Yeah, the murky part of that. Even if,
even if that those official public conclusions are true in
the ID five case, how horrifying is it that that
bridge was hanging on by such a thread, Like how
many bridges in America are one crack pipe on the
underbelly away from collapsing? Right now?
Speaker 2 (21:23):
Well, that's the whole point of this. Okay, let's get
back to this Forbes Avenue Bridge again. That's going over
that place called fern Hollow Creek in Pittsburgh that collapsed
the day President Biden showed up. According to the Pennsylvania
Dot this bridge is owned by the City of Pittsburgh.
It was built in nineteen seventy and it had a
(21:45):
very recent inspection report as of that date in twenty
twenty two that rated both its deck and its superstructure
the entirety of it as quote poor, which is not good.
And it's one of eighty bridges in that county, Allegheny County,
that were rated as in poor condition overall. So one
(22:07):
of eighty in that one county, one of them collapsed.
It just happened to be, you know, perfect timing somehow.
I don't know, guys, I don't think it's a matter
of I mean, it is a coincidence, but I don't
think it's a matter of like collapsing a bridge on purpose.
I think it's just actually the state of a lot
of the infrastructure.
Speaker 4 (22:26):
Well, yeah, I'd agree with that.
Speaker 5 (22:27):
It would be the kind of place where it would
make sense already to visit. But I bet there were
some people on Biden's team.
Speaker 4 (22:34):
That were like, yes, that's a win.
Speaker 2 (22:35):
Oh sure.
Speaker 7 (22:37):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (22:37):
So here's here's a helpful rubric or heuristic for thinking
through these kind of things. When we question coincidence or
causation or conspiracy, correlation, et cetera, we have to also
ask ourselves what else happened on that day? Right if
the president time had not visited on that day. Pittsburgh's
(22:59):
a big city, and it is quite possible that we
could draw another troubling correlation between some other event that
happened in Pittsburgh at that time. I'm not saying that
is the case. I'm just saying that's a helpful critical
thinking approach to some of this stuff. To Knowles's point
about opportunism, yeah I agree, absolutely, But opportunism is not
(23:22):
the same thing as conspiracy. It's just a cynical coattail
writing of disaster.
Speaker 2 (23:28):
Quick snap that picture. Let's go all right, guys, do
you think we have time for one more before we
get out of this segment. I think, so okay, here
we go. Let's jump to Matt the firefighter.
Speaker 8 (23:38):
I got, I got you. Dylan's been listen to see
for a long time, for several years now. Just wanted
to give you a shot. My name's Matt. I am
a firefighter, been a firefighter for about twelve years. One
thing that they might not want us to know is
that firefighter turnout gear has a chemical called pithos fas.
(24:01):
It is a known carcinogen. It causes cancer in firefighters.
And all of our turnout gear, the gear that we
wear whenever we go into fires as p pass in it.
It is causing us cancer. They know that it does this,
and yet they have no turnout gear that's n FPA approved.
(24:23):
That NFPA is National Fire Protection Agency. They create the
national standards for our turnout.
Speaker 7 (24:29):
Gears as well as.
Speaker 8 (24:31):
Many many other topics. But anyways, they know that our
turnout gear causes cancer, and we still have no alternative.
We have no alternative turnout gear that we can purchase
and wear that is NFPA approved, that does not cause cancer,
that does not have p foss in it. So I
encourage you guys to look into that and to do
(24:55):
an episode on that because it's a it's a big
deal firefighters have. Depending on study you read, firefighters have
between a two hundred to three and fifty percent increase
chance of catching cancer because of the work we do.
And I think that this is something that people should
know about. Thank you for hearing me out. Wish you
guys the boss, love your work. I'm going to continue
(25:16):
listening to you guys. Good luck to you, talk to you.
Speaker 3 (25:19):
Later, and good luck to you. Matt the firefighter. Thank
you for being a firefighter. I think there's some of
the most unappreciated professionals in society.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
Yeah, absolutely, Matt. Thank you for letting us know about that. Previously,
when we've talked about these forever chemicals like the per
and poly fluoro alcohol substances that's p FOSS. When we've
talked about those in the past, we've talked about all
the stuff that they're in, including well mostly we've talked
(25:50):
about firefighting chemicals. Right, the foams that are often used
in the process of fighting a fire. Someone something a
firefighter would wield.
Speaker 3 (25:59):
Right suppression flame Retardan says they were called as a
general term.
Speaker 2 (26:03):
Yeah, exactly. We talked about those things and how dangerous
they can be if you get exposed to them. A lot.
One thing we didn't consider what the firefighter is actually
wearing on their body. It makes sense that these pieces
of heavy clothing would also be treated with something like
this that would be again a repellent or a retardant
of fire. Oh my gosh, you guys in what was
(26:27):
the thing that Matt referenced? The National Fire Protection Association.
It's a thing you can look up right now, and
recently several organizations, including NIST put out let's see this
is January twenty sixteen, they put out a report about
how wear and tear on firefighter's warrant equipment is going
(26:48):
to actually cause those pieces of equipment to release even
more forever chemicals than the firefighter is already being exposed
to just by wearing them consistently, and it's just increasing
the potential to have cancer. It's like the increasing your
probability that you will one day develop cancer.
Speaker 4 (27:07):
It does appear.
Speaker 5 (27:07):
There's a pretty significant class action lawsuit against pfast manufacturers,
with thousands of firefighters across.
Speaker 4 (27:14):
The country suing.
Speaker 5 (27:16):
I believe three M is one of the parties named
to manufacture these types of chemicals, and I believe the
FDA only recently just pass something that limits the amount
of the stuff that can be in drinking water, which
seems like we're behind the times.
Speaker 4 (27:31):
On this one.
Speaker 2 (27:31):
Oh yeah, and that stuff is in everything there was
These forever chemicals were found in sources of water that
should not have any forever chemicals in them, because that
water is theoretically dropping from the sky from clouds and
rain water into sources higher up, like in mountains, that
go into springs that then flow down and get filtered naturally,
(27:53):
and yet somehow there's still p foss in them.
Speaker 4 (27:57):
Yikes.
Speaker 2 (27:58):
You can read a statement, actually a joint statement from
the International Association of Firefighters or the IAFF and the
Metropolitan Fire Chiefs Association that discusses this exact thing. Again.
It's going to just what do What do you do?
As Matt the firefighter, when you know the stuff you're
(28:20):
going to wear to go fight a fire is probably
going to contribute to you getting cancer one day, And
right now, there is, as Matt said, nothing else you
can do, because you can't just wear civ's or regular
clothes when you go into fight a fire, because those
are flammable. We need an alternative basically, So this is
(28:40):
a call to all you entrepreneurs out there who are
good in textiles or maybe have some friends or family
in the textiles industry. Create something new that firefighters can
wear that don't have these specific chemical treatments. That's all
I've got. Guys, you're here all right, And with that
we will take a break and then hear more messages
from you.
Speaker 3 (29:06):
And we have returned at the conclusion of our weekly
listener mail. We wanted to begin with a critical update.
If you just had this on in the background and
you were, you know, kind of tuning out. We've all
been there, please snap in the fingers conspiracy realist, hear
(29:26):
us and hear us Well, I'd like to play a
message from Rob with a crucial update on something that
I know has been on everybody's mind.
Speaker 7 (29:36):
Here we go, Hey, guys, this is Rob from the
Armpit of the Midwest. Just an observation here. I'm watching
Rebel Moon Part two and I just wanted to chime
in on the humble Farmer. Within the first thirty seconds
(29:56):
of this movie, the word humble was uttered and I
couldn't help but remember your fine episodes, the Humble Farmer
has been mentioned. Just made me laugh, made me laugh
pretty hard.
Speaker 3 (30:13):
Thank you. That is why you tune in, folks for
the up to the minute breaking news on the Humble Farmer.
We brought the Scargiver back. Did you see that? That's
the name of I saw the second part. It's getting
rebel Moon to the scar Giver.
Speaker 2 (30:30):
Rob, the same guy you called it about Hard Candy
last week.
Speaker 3 (30:34):
Rob. Appreciate your update there and thank you on behalf
of everybody tuning in. Honestly behind the curtain and I
just put that in because I love those updates.
Speaker 4 (30:46):
It's the Humble Farmer effect.
Speaker 3 (30:48):
Yes, yeah, it is. It is. Ask your sociologist friends
about it. We have something else that I think maybe
a future episode. Would love to hear your thoughts, fellow
conspiracy realist. It comes from Secret Soup Can. Secret Soup Can,
you said the following, Good morning, lads, I ran across
this article this morning. What do you think? Love the show?
(31:11):
Keep up the great work. Secret soup Can sent us
a link that you can and should read if you
are interested at all In the following conversation. It comes
to us from the debrief dot Org NASA veterans, propellantless
propulsion drive that physics says shouldn't work, just produced enough
(31:31):
thrust to overcome Earth's gravity. This is big if true.
Speaker 2 (31:37):
Both WHOA Sorry, I've read the same article and I
don't think I just don't believe it until I see
it happen.
Speaker 3 (31:48):
That's the thing too, right. This is something I think
is good for us to unpack because what was it
the em drive a few years back, the electromagnetic drive
that was supposed to revolutionari space exploration. This is the
story of a guy. This one is a story of a
guy named doctor Charles Buller Bueller Bueller, Yeah, rus who's
(32:11):
they is a NASA engineer and the co founder of
an organization called Exodus Propulsion Technologies. And their claims are
pretty extraordinary and thus far they have not been universally confirmed.
Let's just give you a piece from what the doctor said.
(32:32):
He is a NASA engineer, He's not just some random
guy that he told the debrief the following quote. The
most important message to convey to the public is that
a major discovery occurred. This discovery of a new force
is fundamental in that electric fields alone can generate a
sustainable force onto an object and allow center of mass
(32:52):
translation of said object without expelling mass. All right, just
unpack that current. That's not a thing outside of science fiction,
like the idea of this technology. I'm with you there, Matt.
I also thought this felt a little bit vaporware, like
we were talking about biotech earlier, expelling mass meaning.
Speaker 2 (33:14):
What Well, like, okay, imagine you're burning jet fuel, right,
you watch the launch of anything that's going to escape
Earth's gravitational poll. It is shoving shoving stuff out the
tail end right through the form of gas that's ignited.
This is basically saying that nothing is going out the
(33:34):
tail end. It's just turned on and then the flow
of what electrons.
Speaker 4 (33:39):
Yeah, it just goes. It's like cold fusion esque kind
of stuff.
Speaker 1 (33:44):
Right.
Speaker 4 (33:44):
I mean, it's like all the good stuff.
Speaker 5 (33:46):
Without any of the bad stuff or any of the
byproducts or violent reactions.
Speaker 2 (33:49):
I don't want to know, get me wrong. I think
it's amazing, Like, oh yeah, sweet, just just show show me,
don't tell me.
Speaker 4 (33:57):
That's all fair.
Speaker 3 (33:58):
Yeah, to document his team's discovery and to in an
attempt to show the process behind their work. This guy
who's leading the charge over at Exodus, which is again
a private company. He presented his findings at something that
I was not aware of, the Alternative Propulsion Energy Conference
or APEC, not to be confused with OPEK. This has
(34:21):
a lot of career engineers and then it has a
lot of what we'll call enthusiasts, right, interested people. They
may not have a degree, they may not work from
NASA or a defense corporation, but they are intensely interested
in the concept of new propulsion technology. The debrief once
referred to this as the world's most exclusive and strange
(34:45):
anti gravity club, which sounds like it'd be cool to
go to. At one point we went to a Muffon
conference before that was fascinating.
Speaker 2 (34:53):
Yeah, if we can get an invite APEC, send it
our way.
Speaker 3 (34:58):
We're talking specifically to you, Tim.
Speaker 4 (35:00):
Ventura doesn't anti gravity just in general.
Speaker 5 (35:03):
I know it describes a concept of defying gravity through
various means, but in my mind it immediately conjures hovercrafts
or like magical flying cars.
Speaker 3 (35:13):
The Nazi bell or something luck so on.
Speaker 5 (35:16):
Yeah, I know hovercrafts are real, but the idea of
being able to float without any byproduct, so just kind
of like whatever it might be, electromagnetic or otherwise.
Speaker 4 (35:26):
Right, things that don't exist is.
Speaker 3 (35:27):
What I'm getting at, things that have not been proven
to exist, right, even if and even that might be
a little bit too careful on our part, But if
we look at his background, we do know that he
is the top expert at NASA in something called electrostatics.
And again he's very careful to say, you know, this
(35:47):
endeavor is not affiliated with my day job, but he
does work with concepts that apparently he informed his work
on this apulsion alternative, and he says, we've been looking
into this. They call it propellantless propulsion, and they said
they've been working on it for over twenty years and
(36:10):
they found the answer under their proverbial noses electrostatics, which
he had already been working on. And I don't know,
Like I've looked into it, and I see a lot
of excitement, I see a lot of sound and fury.
I don't know what it signifies. We also saw different
phases of testing that they rolled out, like testing in
(36:31):
a vacuum. We saw an explanation of the materials that
they try to use to create this reaction or this phenomenon,
and they started seeing precipitous results in twenty twenty two.
Just for context here, this article from the debrief was
(36:53):
published on April nineteenth, twenty twenty four. I'm hesitant to
get too into the needs of the technology without a
lot more research on our end, Like I think this
could be an episode or the overall idea of the
alternative propulsion industry.
Speaker 4 (37:11):
Isn't it being described as a new force?
Speaker 3 (37:14):
That's yeah, yeah, he said that quote. Yeah, capital in
capital f new force, which sounds cool. You know, it
sounds like it's in the Star Wars franchise. I mean,
watch it.
Speaker 4 (37:24):
I will say that.
Speaker 5 (37:25):
You know, electrostatic energy is interesting, and I've seen it
certainly on small scales, right, like if it's what I'm
thinking of, like even just in terms of like static
electricity delivering a shock or being able to charge a
balloon and have it kind of like propel. You know,
it's magnetized essentially using electrostatic force. If I'm not mistaken,
(37:46):
I'm not a scientist here, but it's I don't quite
and maybe it's not for me to understand understand how
that could be scaled in such a way where anything
in its path wouldn't be obliterated.
Speaker 3 (37:57):
There's another aspect to it too. You know, we always
want to dig when we hear about a private company.
If you go to their website, their website is pretty
much like a dummy site with a place where you
can put your email. You're not going to see, at
least on that site, You're not going to see a
bunch of information about showing your work means methods testing.
(38:20):
The debrief article is actually much more, much more in
depth than the website, And that doesn't mean that it's
inherently fake. It just means that we the public need
the information explained in a way that the layperson can understand.
Because full disclosure, folks, the four of us recording this evening,
(38:41):
and like maybe you listeny along at home, we do
not have expertise in the bleeding edge of electrostatic science.
I think we understand it clearly.
Speaker 4 (38:51):
That's the case.
Speaker 5 (38:52):
From my hand fisted attempt at describing, not at all.
And when you do dig for information on this, you
kind of see the same press release regurgitated a bunch
of times and with some questions like from the debrief,
but no real data or video or anything tangible to
back it up.
Speaker 3 (39:10):
So I'm bringing this up because I think this would
be thank you, Thank You, Secret Soup. I'm bringing this
up because I think this is an episode based on
the other similar efforts that have happened in recent years,
like the em Drive the Quantum Drive, both of which
remained very controversial. Apparently they got some level of result
(39:35):
enough to encourage interest in the international sphere and in
the sphere of investors, but neither of those have been
tested in space. The Quantum drive got really close. There
was a launch in November of twenty twenty three, but
it was laid low. A failure the satellite's electric systems,
(39:58):
unrelated to the drive, scuttled the test. And at the
risk of sounding too cynical, it kind of calls to
mind the similarities of apocalyptic cult leaders when they're like, Hey,
the world was definitely going to end, but we got
the dates wrong, So stick with me, stay in the cult,
(40:19):
you know. And I'm not accusing these guys necessary. I'm
not accusing these guys of being con artists. We haven't
spoken with them at all. We just need much more information.
And if anything, this is a clarion call to those
of us playing along at home. If you have expertise
in this material science, engineering, physics, propulsion. If you are
(40:40):
a literal rocket scientist, we want to hear from you.
Speaker 2 (40:44):
Yes, and I just signed us up via their website
that you mentioned Ben for their emails.
Speaker 5 (40:50):
I did just want to mention I found a conversation
about this on Reddit and somebody sort.
Speaker 4 (40:55):
Of you know again, don't know. I can't really measure this.
Speaker 5 (40:57):
Person's bona fides, but said, the amount of force in
the low Millan Newtons means that this whole setup is
highly dubious, as that such a small force that anything
can influence the measurement. I myself have had setups using
electrostatic forces where the mere presence of my hand near
the apparatus caused severe measurement errors at the Milan Newton level.
(41:21):
Though to be fair, the actual forces I then measured
were higher than the variance due to.
Speaker 4 (41:25):
That, so even that's way above my pay grade.
Speaker 5 (41:28):
But it does seem like they're smarter people than be
out there asking questions about this debrief article.
Speaker 3 (41:34):
Well, human thought has no real concept of intelligence.
Speaker 4 (41:37):
They'll be yourself up fair, thanks.
Speaker 3 (41:39):
So, and with that, this is going to be an
episode in the future. Your help, your expertise, folks, is
invaluable that regard. We're going to end today with some
letters from home. We had so many beautiful pieces of
correspondence to our recent episode on supplements, so thank you.
A partial list to Reds got which herbalist Luke Tokyoki
(42:02):
Brocknest Commandant Squatch. That was a very interesting one. Tommy
Saturday Morning Cartoons, the legend big Shucks. They called me,
Frederick have confirmed that wasn't our pal Matt, Blue, Michelle,
Licensed Mutant, Ninja, Turtle, Otter Dog, Anonymous, Corey call me,
Al Baron, Eaton, Katie r In and Sosa hold the phone.
(42:22):
We've got one returning person. You guys remember the person
who used to write all those weird jokes to us?
Speaker 4 (42:31):
Oh yeah, I remember the name, but I remember the jokes.
Speaker 2 (42:35):
There was a sixty nine involved.
Speaker 3 (42:37):
Yes, yeah, nice, there was. This comes to us from
down Low Joe, a subsidiary of Humorous Harry. That was
the name. And he says, how about this Noel Matt
picking number one through ten six. Okay, did you hear
about the guy that left his smartphone on the stove?
It ended up being a real burner phone. Doc. If
(43:00):
I get like a rim shot and a groan. The
Matt is scratching his forehead here. So Matt, why pick
a number one? Th that's not six?
Speaker 2 (43:09):
Number one?
Speaker 3 (43:10):
Number one?
Speaker 4 (43:11):
Do you know what?
Speaker 2 (43:13):
Number two?
Speaker 3 (43:16):
Keep this part in because boy number one? All right,
we can't win them all, humorous, Harry, Where do crabs
go for a drink? You guys to this sand bar?
Speaker 4 (43:27):
Oh wow?
Speaker 3 (43:29):
Okay, folks with that, We're so glad and thankful to
every person entity meet or otherwise crabs as well? You know.
Speaker 2 (43:40):
Oh yeah, I've got a joke. I got a joke.
What's worse than having a bunch of ants in your pants?
A bunch of uncles?
Speaker 4 (43:53):
We were already?
Speaker 3 (43:56):
How do comedians play golf with comedy clubs? Okay, I
think we're We've exercised our full budget of sound cues.
Go ahead, joy the show. We'd love to have you.
Thanks so much for tuning in and tell us switch
on your mind. We try to be easy to find online.
Speaker 4 (44:14):
It's right.
Speaker 5 (44:15):
You can find us in the handle Conspiracy Stuff where
we exist on Facebook, on YouTube and on x FKA, Twitter,
on Instagram and TikTok.
Speaker 4 (44:24):
We are Conspiracy Stuff Show.
Speaker 2 (44:26):
Hey, do you want to call us the way?
Speaker 4 (44:28):
Matt?
Speaker 2 (44:29):
And Joe did call one eight three three std WYTK.
It's a voicemail system. You've got three minutes. Give yourself
a cool nickname and let us know if we can
use your name and message on the air. If you
don't like using your phone for such activities, why not
use it to send us an email.
Speaker 3 (44:44):
We are the folks who read every single email we get.
As you can tell from that reason, rounded jokes conspiracy
at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2 (45:11):
Stuff they don't want you to know. Is a production
of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Stuff They Don't Want You To Know News
Hosts And Creators
Matt Frederick
Ben Bowlin
Noel Brown
Show Links
RSSStoreAboutLive ShowsPopular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
The Nikki Glaser Podcast
Every week comedian and infamous roaster Nikki Glaser provides a fun, fast-paced, and brutally honest look into current pop-culture and her own personal life.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.