The FDA concludes the primary active ingredient in over-the-counter decongestants may be nothing more than the placebo effect. A retired secret service agent goes public with his recollection of the JFK assassination in advance of his upcoming memoir. Ben dives into the news from Mexico, asking: Why did the Mexican Congress hold a hearing to examine purported alien corpses, knowing the people making these claims have an established track record of hoaxing the public? All this and more in this week's strange news 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 this stuff they don't want you to know.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
A production of Iheartrading.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
Hello, welcome back to the show. We're still humans. We're
still humans.
Speaker 4 (00:30):
Going to say the way.
Speaker 5 (00:30):
Your phone, this is your found and my name is Matt.
My name is Noah.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
They called me Ben. We're joined as always with our
super producer Alexis code named dot Holliday Jackson. Most importantly,
you are you. You are here, and that makes this
the stuff they don't want you to know. Big, big
thank you to our fellow conspiracy realist who reached out
all across the Internet through so many different platforms with
some news of the strange variety that we're excited to
(00:58):
explore with you this year. We're going to learn about
alien corpses displayed to the lawmakers of Mexico. True story.
We're going to catch you up on an upcoming memoir
from a former secret Service agent around during the assassination
of JFK. We're going to talk about nasal d congestion,
(01:21):
which is a promised more interesting than it sounds, but
we thought for this evening, we would open up with
the JFK story. Assassination of JFK and anything related to
it remains one of the most prevalent subjects of conspiracy
theories in the world today, so it's no surprise that
(01:43):
the latest news is of great, great interest.
Speaker 6 (01:47):
Did y'all read or watch The eleven twenty two sixty
three by Stephen King?
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Oh? Yes, both both?
Speaker 5 (01:54):
Okay.
Speaker 6 (01:54):
I did the audiobook of the book and then I
watched the series about maybe three weeks ago.
Speaker 5 (02:00):
The series was fantastic.
Speaker 6 (02:01):
I know, James Franco is kind of like canceled, but
I thought he's good when he's good man. When he's
cast as sort of like an everyman, he fits the bill.
He does a fine job, and I thought the things
that I thought were heartwarming from the book they translated
beautifully into the series. One thing I love about Stephen King,
not to get too sidetracked, is that he just sets
rules and doesn't explain himself. He's like, there's a portal
(02:23):
in the closet, and that's that's just what it is.
Speaker 5 (02:26):
And I'm not going to tell you how.
Speaker 6 (02:27):
It got there or why it's there, but here's how
it interfaces with the story, and I love it, and
he's so entertaining that you never really questioned that. But
I have a hard time remembering dates, So whenever I'm
trying to describe this movie or series slash book to somebody,
I have to google it. Eleven twenty two, sixty three
is the day that John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas.
(02:51):
And you're right, Ben, it really has been sort of
like this high water mark, you know, American conspiracy about
the Grassy Knoll. I get that a lot, and like
the Second Shooter, the magic bullet theory, that's what we're
talking about today, the idea that a single bullet ripped
through JFK exited him, and then I believe entered the
(03:11):
governor like through the wrists, and then somehow ended up,
you know, out of their bodies, and you know, they
captured it. But today we're talking about an update that's
taken place sixty years later from a former Secret Service agent,
You're right, Ben, by the name of Paul Landis, who
(03:32):
I'm just gonna go ahead and lead with it.
Speaker 5 (03:34):
Somewhat suspiciously, has just come out with the book.
Speaker 6 (03:37):
So whenever someone's doing revelations about something that happened a
long time ago, and they're coming out with a book.
I'm always a little bit kind of hesitant to, oh,
you're doing this out of the kindness of your heart.
But this guy I heard an interview with him a
couple of sources, and he essentially was one of the
main Secret Service agents who was you know, the ones
that are like running alongside, like jogging alongside the president motorcade.
(04:01):
And he just flew into action when the shots were fired.
It was obviously, if you were in that situation, a
very traumatic, very very aggressively chaotic experience, You're not always
going to be on your a game, you know, but
these Secret Service agents is what they're trained to do.
And he basically was one of the ones who shielded
(04:22):
Jackie O.
Speaker 5 (04:23):
NASAs Kennedy.
Speaker 6 (04:24):
And he also realized that she wanted to stay with
the president after he had been shot. But he realized
that she had covered him because she didn't want anyone
to see that he had been shot in the head.
Like she really was clearly very concerned with people seeing this.
And he told her, you can go, you can like
take care of yourself. I'll do it, and he put
(04:46):
his jacket over it. And he talks about all of
this in these interviews surrounding the book, and he also
talks about the fact that he found a bullet after
all of the chaos of the event, they get to
the emergency room. Right when they're loading the pre president
and the governor onto gurney's, he finds lodged in the
leather of the presidential limousine an unexploded bullet. And I
(05:09):
want to ask you guys about this whole, like the
state of the bullet. He acknowledges that it had rifle
striations on it, which is one way they can match
a bullet, you know, to a gun, because it has
these like rifling marks on the side. And he, in
his mind at the time, according to him now sixty
years later, didn't want it to get lost, didn't want
(05:29):
it to fall out of the car, so he put
it in his pocket. And then here's where it gets
really interesting. He says he was so kind of traumatized
in the moment, this is a you know, a highly
trained secret service agent, that he didn't tell anybody about it.
He just placed it on the president's gurney and then
(05:50):
never told.
Speaker 5 (05:51):
Anybody about it.
Speaker 6 (05:52):
And he said he was, he had nightmares about it.
He intentionally didn't read anything about the theories or about
the coverage or whatever, and he, I believe work with
his partner for about six more months. I don't think
he retired, but I can't really speak to that part
of it. But he didn't tell anybody. I think that's
so fascinating. And now sixty years later he's saying he
(06:13):
found this bullet. He realized after the fact, not until
I think twenty fourteen when he decided I'm gonna Someone
gave him I think a book about all of the
theories and he read it and he was like, oh no,
they got it totally wrong, this magic bullet theory. There
was another bullet and it was found on the Governor
of Texas's gurney, and he feels like it rolled off
(06:37):
of JFK's gurney onto the governor's gurney, and he feels
like it was this whole kind of lynch pin in
these incorrect theories.
Speaker 5 (06:46):
And I just think that's so yeah, please.
Speaker 3 (06:48):
Okay, So the co I just want to make sure
I'm understanding it correctly. The magic bullet, right, is the
concept that we've discussed for a long time on this show,
that one single bullet, one magic bullet, is the one
that represents the first time the president in the Zapruder
film kind of leans down. Is that correct?
Speaker 2 (07:08):
Yeah, Yeah, you're right, Matt.
Speaker 3 (07:09):
Okay, And then there's a second bullet that killed John F.
Kennedy when it hit him in the head.
Speaker 6 (07:14):
I mean, you know, a head SHOT's got to be
a direct shot. You're not going to get a head shot.
Speaker 5 (07:18):
From a bounce.
Speaker 6 (07:18):
You know, you might get injured or get some shrapnel
or like a flesh wound, but a head shot, which
is clearly what killed the president, has to be a
very direct shot. And for a long time, you know,
the War and Commission, which was the official party line
on what happened, has been questioned because of what you're
talking about, Matt, this magic bullet theory, that it doesn't
(07:39):
make sense, and there have been, you know, many folks
who have conjectured that there had to have been a
second shooter for these trajectories to make.
Speaker 2 (07:47):
Sense, like ballistic lead I guess speaking.
Speaker 6 (07:50):
And now all of a sudden there's this other bullet,
which again I'm not an expert on this. I'm not
an expert in ballistics. I don't quite understand what it means.
But I think what people are implying that it means,
or will, at least the New York Times and Vanity
Fair and this memoir are implying, is that it it
sort of explains the magic bullet theory, that there was
(08:11):
this other bullet that did a lot of those things,
or did it in combination with a first shot. So
this guy Landis who wrote the memoir and is now
making the interview rounds. And I'm sorry, I don't mean
to sound skeptical. He's an older He's an older man.
He must be in his eighties now. He's in the Yeah, exactly,
He's in the twilight of his life. He's decided he
(08:32):
wants to tell his story. It just so happens that
his story involves one of the most you know, insane
conspiratorial events in American history. But understandably, what a lot
of people who are interviewing him are asking is, why
didn't you say anything at the time this second bullet
or this other bullet that he found lodged in the seat.
(08:53):
He said it was again unexploded.
Speaker 5 (08:56):
What does that mean? By the way, I mean, I
sort of tease that.
Speaker 6 (08:58):
So like you have a shell casing, right, and then
you have the bullet. But to find a completely intact bullet,
isn't that sort of unusual?
Speaker 3 (09:05):
Well, it means the I whatever it impacted right after
it's fired, it flies through the air, whatever it impacts,
you didn't shatter it. Yeah, you think about when let's
say law enforcement uses the ballistic gel right to test
out the rifling or something like that on a bullet,
Often that bullet isn't exploded, like it isn't turned into
(09:27):
shrapnel metal, it is still intact somewhat.
Speaker 6 (09:32):
Ago would explode a bullet right ben a direct hit
with like bone.
Speaker 2 (09:38):
So for this kind of the one that Land has
found or says he found sixty years ago, it's it's
like a it's got a copper jacket. I also don't
I'm not tuned in enough to the ballistics to know
what exactly they mean by an exploded bullet, because a
lot of small arms ammunition doesn't really contain an explosive
(10:02):
that would to the point where it be unexploded ordinance
like you would say see in a military grade stuff.
But I think you guys have a good lay of
the land with the mystery, and I think there's also
you know, tad On, just in full disclosure, I pre
ordered this memoir a while back. It comes out in October,
so well, hopefully we'll get a deep dive into it.
(10:25):
But in addition to the idea, you're right to be
skeptical about the concept of a We always have to
ask the question, is this person just trying to sell
a book in this case, I don't think so. Just
the sense I get from you know, some of the
articles you talked about, some of the interviews that I've
heard shout out to Peter Baker at NYT the What
(10:48):
what gets me is the problem of eyewitness recollection, even
just two weeks after something happens versus you know, many decades.
Because there's a moment where he talks about moving the
bullet that he finds lodged in the back seat of
the limo, correct in the backseat of that Lincoln Continental,
and then he puts it on we get this right,
(11:10):
puts it on Kennedy's stretcher, and so he's got shaken
around and moved to uh, the Governor's stretcher. It's it's
a pickle, but it's worth it's worth learning. Now, I
don't know additional Could you tell me do they have
the bullet?
Speaker 6 (11:26):
You know, I haven't actually heard anybody unequivocally say that
they would have to have. His whole point was he
slipped it in his pocket. He said he want he
knew it was evidence, and he didn't want it to like,
you know, in all of the hubbub fall out of
the limo and like end up, you know. But again,
it's weird, weird hearing him say that, because protocol would
be they would have searched high and low for anything
(11:47):
in that area.
Speaker 2 (11:48):
He also says he did this for reasons that are
fuzzy even to himself at.
Speaker 6 (11:52):
This and he gave it an inaccurate account at the
time that he has since recanted, and and said he
heard three shots.
Speaker 5 (12:01):
In his original report.
Speaker 6 (12:02):
He said he never went into the not operating room
or whatever the area where he could have put it
on Kennedy's gurney. He says he never did that, but
he now sixty years later, says he was under duress.
He was again traumatized. I heard him interviewed on NBC
or something, and he said, I thought it was very interesting.
(12:23):
He said, I knew that if I looked at Kennedy's
head wound that I would pass out. And I just
thought that was a very interesting thing to say for
someone who's so highly trained like that, you know, not
that they're showing you all kinds of horrific you know,
faces of death kind of thing to make sure you're
not going to pass out, but you are trained to
kind of be you know, made of sterner stuff. So
(12:44):
for him to say that so many years later, I
thought was interesting. He was he wouldn't look at the body,
and he was looking he was thinking mainly of missus Kennedy.
And he even talked about how he found a lighter,
a Zippo lighter that had that was covered in blood
and that had the presidential seal on it, and he thought, okay,
this probably belonged to Jackie Kennedy, And he said, I
(13:06):
don't think she would have wanted to see that, like
her personal Zippo lighter covered in the blood of her husband,
so she slipped that in his pocket too. But in
everything I've read, and again you know, to your point, Bend,
the memoir is not out yet, but in everything I've
read and in the interview that I heard, he doesn't
talk about who he.
Speaker 5 (13:21):
Gave that to. Maybe maybe he did say he.
Speaker 6 (13:24):
I just think it's weird that he put it on
the gurney and didn't keep it in his pocket and
then give it to investigators directly. I moved it because
he shouldn't have moved it exactly to my point, they
would have found it on the concrete ben That is
a really good point. And I didn't fully even think
about that he technically tampered with.
Speaker 5 (13:44):
A crime scene. I think that's very unusual.
Speaker 2 (13:48):
And to exercise, you know, just some empathy from his perspective.
We haven't spoken to mister Landis herselves at this point.
You know, imagine you're the Secret Service. Your entire job
is to preserve the presidency. So there's not really way
to articulate how crazy that must feel when things go
(14:09):
so tragically wrong. No. One thing that stood out to
me reading about this is that some historians and assassination
I don't want to say enthusiast, that's good, people who've
read widely about it. They're saying that if some of
these statements are true, it reopens the question of a
(14:32):
second shooter.
Speaker 5 (14:33):
That's right.
Speaker 6 (14:36):
I'm having a hard time remembering the gentleman's name, but
a journalist who wrote a piece for Vanity Fair about
this topic. He met with mister Landis. He said no
less than fifteen times, because he realized that this guy
is going to be the subject of intense questioning. You
know at this point coming out with this information. I
(14:58):
need to help him. Interesting this guy James Robinault's I
just looked it up in the article from the New
York Times. He I think he reached out to Landis
and said, hey, man, you need a little media schooling,
and I'm going to help you do that. And then
he I think the memoir was already done. This guy
didn't write the memoir.
Speaker 5 (15:17):
He just like, yeah, he.
Speaker 6 (15:18):
Wrote a profile of the memoir in Vanity Fair.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
Yeah. And he's a he's a Robinoults attorney. He's also
written several books, not all necessarily about JFK. But I
think the way I hear it most often described is
he helped Landis process his memories is the word there's
the phrase you'll see you'll see coming up a lot.
I think it's It is fascinating because the majority of
(15:45):
the US public to this day does not accept the
official narrative here, and you can check out our earlier
episodes to see why it is reasonable to question the
you know, not just that assassination, but the series of
assassinations that occurred immediately in the wake of it.
Speaker 6 (16:02):
So I guess my question to you, then, Ben, is
this revelation if they did find the bullet, which they
should have, but yet they found it on the governor's gurney,
how does that change anything. Doesn't that mean there was
a third shot, because that was one thing that landis
In his original statement he said he heard two shots,
(16:23):
but then later he was like in these interviews he's
doing now at eighty eight years old, saying I heard
three shots.
Speaker 5 (16:28):
And that's a big deal.
Speaker 2 (16:29):
Right.
Speaker 6 (16:29):
Hearing three shots is like a big change in the narrative,
I believe. But the fact that this bullet was in
some way to your question, Ben, do they have the
bullet or maybe Matt you asked that surely they do
if it was found, and then that was entered into
part of the narrative, Right, how does this really change anything?
Speaker 3 (16:49):
It would just potentially contradict the Warren Commission, and we're
not allowed to contradict the Warren Commission. Guys, that's a
conspiracy theory. Come on, we've learned that over time. Can
I read a tiny, tiny paragraph from that Vanity Fair article,
It just leaves it's something I didn't know. And this
is when we're talking about how did Landis's recollections of
(17:14):
what occurred? How did they get written down right?
Speaker 5 (17:17):
And that's what I'm asking exactly.
Speaker 6 (17:19):
Okay, so how was this entered into evidence? Including what
happened with the bullet?
Speaker 3 (17:24):
So this is what James Robinaald is saying for Vanity Fair.
The sad fact is that Landis, though required to provide
his version of events to the Secret Service and in
a second report to what would become the Warren Commission,
he never sat for an interview before the FBI, and
he never testified before the commission itself. He left the
(17:44):
Secret Service months after the assassination and before the panel
finished its work and issued its report. So he like,
that is weird to me that he got out in between, right.
Speaker 6 (17:55):
And the statement that he did give was very procedural
and not like a deep It wasn't someone really grilling him.
It was just sort of like if you're a cop
and you shoot somebody, they do a panel to determine
whether it was like a legitimate shooting or not. And
again that even probably involved more grilling than this did.
This seemed to be procedural. He didn't do anything wrong.
(18:16):
He was just asked to make his statement so they
could place it in the pile of statements about the event.
Speaker 3 (18:23):
And to your point, Ben, he was experiencing intense PTSD,
at least according to his own account, which you can
only imagine would be true.
Speaker 2 (18:29):
So the book is called The Final Witness, A Kennedy's
Secret Service agent breaks his silence after sixty years. I'll
dive in and you know, off air, give the scuty
in the scoop right, and we'll see. We'll see. But
it's an important story, I think, to your point, Noel,
there's a reason that so many people still have so
(18:51):
many questions, and it's not wrong to ask those questions.
I would argue that it is the ethically correct thing
to do.
Speaker 6 (18:57):
And I just want to add before we move on
that his partner, who I mentioned earlier, Clint Hill, fully
rejects his news story says it doesn't make any sense.
Clint Hill was the one who famously was photographed jumping
onto the back of the limousine. He's like in like
these iconic photos of the whole thing, and he now
you know, also up there in age is saying, nah,
(19:19):
none of that makes any sense. So that to me,
in addition to the whole thing that he didn't say anything.
I don't know what his motivation would be other than
to sell books, but I think that's too ghost. That
doesn't make sense.
Speaker 5 (19:32):
Usually, these people that we.
Speaker 6 (19:33):
Know that are lifelong public servants or people that are
you know, put their life on the line to protect
someone in power, you know, in American government, They're not
going to just all of a sudden become gold diggers.
Doesn't make sense to me. I just don't buy it.
So maybe he's experiencing some dementia or something brought on
by old age, and maybe there are some publishers that
(19:56):
are taking advantage of that. There is part of me
that thinks maybe that's true. But the PTSD angle is
very interesting.
Speaker 5 (20:02):
All of this is very interesting.
Speaker 3 (20:05):
Yeah, we'll have to stay tuned.
Speaker 6 (20:07):
I guess it's may well once you've read the book
then and again, I'm going to order rate as well,
maybe worth a full episode. I'm interested to see what
constitutes an entire book on this topic. But in any case,
let's take a break, hear a word from our sponsor,
and then come back with another piece of strange news.
Speaker 3 (20:31):
Welcome back everyone. It is September, mid of the septembers
as we record this, the.
Speaker 5 (20:40):
Multiple septembers.
Speaker 3 (20:42):
Yes, I don't know if anyone else is experiencing you know,
a little, a little stuffiness. Yes, my family certainly is.
And when my family is experiencing those kinds of things,
we reach out well to the counter. We reach out
to the counter, whatever pharmacy we find ourselves in over
the counterpass it to you over the counter. No note,
(21:04):
we reached directly to the counter, and the counter provides.
That's what I always say, The counter provides.
Speaker 6 (21:09):
The counter given you've never said that, man says, I'm yes,
and I'd be really silly.
Speaker 3 (21:17):
But the point is, when somebody in my family is
feeling a little sick, we go out and we get
something you can get over the counter, just that's sitting
there on the shelf. You pick it up and it says, hey,
this helps with making your nose less stuffy, and it
helps you feel less bad when you got a little
cold or show.
Speaker 6 (21:34):
It has a graphic on the front of it that's
got like predator like vision, you know, like the you know,
heat seeking kind of vision where it's like targets.
Speaker 5 (21:42):
Your nasal cavity. He's like, this is what his pill will.
Speaker 3 (21:45):
Do for you.
Speaker 6 (21:46):
This is what this is gonna do. You're fine, look
at the picture.
Speaker 5 (21:49):
Believe us.
Speaker 3 (21:50):
Yes, And since, guys, since I've been an adult, I've
been using pretty much the same ones. Oh, pretty much
the same ones, I think. Yeah, right after college, right
around that time, been using the things that they'll put
pe at the end. If it's like a pseudo fed
or just a standard day quill niquill.
Speaker 5 (22:10):
What is P stand for?
Speaker 2 (22:11):
Uh, well, finnling? Is that correct?
Speaker 3 (22:14):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (22:15):
Is that the math stuff?
Speaker 3 (22:16):
No, it is not.
Speaker 5 (22:18):
It is in some of some.
Speaker 6 (22:19):
Of these drugs are now you have to like show
your ID to get them because they have some what
do they call it pseudo pseudoaphagrine?
Speaker 2 (22:27):
I believe pseudophedrine is another one.
Speaker 3 (22:29):
Yeah. Yes, we are going to get to all that stuff. Boys.
So let's tell the story.
Speaker 2 (22:33):
Here.
Speaker 3 (22:33):
It goes right now as we record this, the day
before the FDA has come out and they've made an
announcement that their advisors have declared again side advisors, the
little board they put together when they want to make
a big decision, they have decided that the leading active
(22:57):
ingredient in leading nasal d congestants that are used by
millions of Americans every day are basically placebos.
Speaker 2 (23:07):
Oh, nice snake oil.
Speaker 3 (23:09):
Huh, snake oil, it's pretty powerful, or sugar pills. But
but here's the crazy thing, the one that you mentioned,
ben pennilefern. That is the particular drug, the thing, the
chemical that is in question here, and it is something
that has been in question since it became an active
(23:32):
ingredient in over the counter nasal decongestics. Literally the same
year that it got pushed as a major ingredient and
active ingredient in these things, it was questioned by scientists
across the globe, and since that day in two thousand
and six, by the way, the FDA has just said, no,
(23:53):
this is fine. And drug manufacturers, the major ones, all
the ones you're thinking about right now head when you
think of a drug manufacturer, they've been putting out drugs,
over the counter medicines that use this thing as the
primary nasal decongestin ingredient. This is one of the craziest things.
Speaker 5 (24:14):
I'm annoyed. I'm personally annoyed.
Speaker 3 (24:16):
Well, I think maybe we all are. I think. Let
me read a bit from this AP article. It's titled
popular nasal decongestin doesn't actually relieve congestion, FDA advisors say.
It's written by Matthew Perone for AP News, and it
is saying, well, let's just read it this way. Advisors
of the FDA voted unanimously on Tuesday, that's literally yesterday
(24:41):
as we record this against the effectiveness of the key
drug found in popular versions of pseudofed dequil and other
medications stocked on store shelves. And here's a quote. Modern studies,
when well conducted, are not showing any improvement in congestion
with phenyl ephrine, right, And that's from an allergy specialist
from Saint Louis University School of Medicine. Guys, because of
(25:08):
these findings from the FDA, it is highly likely that
Jaye and j Johnson and Johnson Bear and pretty much
everybody else who make drugs are going to have to
pull these things that we've all been using for almost
two decades off the shelves.
Speaker 6 (25:23):
It was occurring to me that an alternative could be.
They would just like, like what the cigarette companies do.
It's like, this stuff is very bad for you and
very addictive. Maybe they would just put this doesn't work
very well, like as a big sticker on the FA.
Speaker 2 (25:36):
The main ingredient is officially vibes. It appears. I mean,
you know what's next. They're going to get into Nettie pots.
Speaker 3 (25:42):
Hey, that's the thing, because that's one of the alternatives
that's recommended if you got a stuff he knows, Nettie pot.
But we also know there's a very low chance that
you can get some crazy infections in your nasal cavity
if you use one of those very little, tiny little chants.
But it's possible.
Speaker 6 (25:57):
Well, this might be another story we should cover at
some point. But I don't mean to be too confessional.
But I recently started taking a new, a relatively new
drug called manjarro that's like for weight loss, and my
doctor prescribed it to me, but my insurance wouldn't cover it.
And if the insurance isn't cover it, it's like thirteen
hundred dollars a month for these injections. So I was
(26:17):
like that, so I had a friend that told me, well,
there's there are these like diet dietitians and weight loss
clinics that can get it for you at half the cost,
but it's compounded, and I didn't realize that that was
a different thing. I did notice that the manjarro you
get prescribed comes in a cool, fancy little thing like
a pen, you know, and the ones that I got
(26:39):
came in an envelope full of syringes and like a
little bottle. And I only just recently started googling it
compounded Munjarro versus you know, prescription Manjarro, and all this
stuff came up saying like, Munjarro is intellectual property that
is owned by Novo Nordisk, and they have not let
that out to like anybody else. So whatever these dieticians
(27:03):
are saying they have, it's not exactly the same thing,
but it probably is close.
Speaker 5 (27:07):
It's called a try trezeptide, is what it's called.
Speaker 6 (27:10):
I'm sorry, I don't mean to derail, but really quickly
I was all of a sudden really freaked out. I
was like, you know, it's not twelve hundred dollars, but
it's not cheap, and I felt like it was really
working for me. I was like, my appetite has decreased
and I've lost about thirteen pounds in the last couple
of months. But I've also been like exercising and seeing
a trainer a bunch. So I was like, am I
full of Am I entirely the victim of placebo? That
(27:34):
really occurred to me because I'd read all this stuff
about how this drug is like a miracle drug, and
I all of a sudden was like, am I just
totally experiencing the placebo effect?
Speaker 2 (27:44):
Oh?
Speaker 3 (27:44):
Man, Noel, that's crazy that you're going through that, because
it is. I mean, it's shown now that this is
what everyone's been doing every time you took day quill
or been niquill, even with Honey. Now we've read ads
for that product. We have been giving ourselves that placebo effects.
But it's not entirely true because there are other active
(28:04):
ingredients in every one of those medicines, right, just not
a not another primary nasal decongestin, which is one of
the big issues here. That's really nol. I can't believe
that I haven't been through anything like that. So you're
gonna have to report back to this way you find
really quickly.
Speaker 6 (28:22):
What I did find was that what a lot of
these compounding pharmacies do.
Speaker 5 (28:26):
Is it's like B twelve.
Speaker 6 (28:27):
It's like a ton of B twelve, or like something
that makes you feel a thing, but isn't the thing.
Speaker 3 (28:33):
Oh wow, Well, in the case of this medicine, you're
not feeling the fenyl eferne at all. If the only
way to feel the effects of fenyl eferne, well, actually
there are a couple of different ways, but the primary one,
if you want to actually use it as a nasal decongestant,
is to snort it, to shoot it into your nose instantly, right, yes, exactly,
(28:54):
I think that's right. Then it is highly effective. It's
it does exactly what it says as on all of
those bottles.
Speaker 6 (29:02):
There's times of little snooter like you know, decongested things
like Vicks, little things that you shoot up your nosey.
Why don't they release it in that form to make
it more effective?
Speaker 3 (29:12):
It is, It is released in that form. It's available
in that form. It's just Americans especially, but many human
beings across the world like to take their drugs orally
it's just an easier task, and especially since like little
kids often will take a little sippy cup basically of
medicine rather and they like that better than getting stuff
(29:33):
shut up their shoes. Sure, that's one of the primary
reasons why it became a take your pill medicine rather
than shoot it up your nose medicine marketing. Oh yeah.
So the other thing is the reason why this is
very similar to your story, nol is because phenylephrine as
an active ingredient in those take a pill or drink
(29:56):
it down drugs is because of a law that got
passed in two thousand and six associated with methamphetamine production.
With the other drug that we mentioned at the top
of this, pseudo afedrin. Pseudo a fedrin was the active
ingredient in things like dequill and niquil and pseudo actually sudou. Yeah,
(30:18):
it's because exactly, and those drugs are still available. You
just have to go to the pharmacist and ask them
for them. Then you have to in this country at least,
and also in the UK, I believe, you have to
sign a log book basically show your ID and you.
Speaker 2 (30:34):
Can only get by a certain amount. Right.
Speaker 6 (30:37):
That came up in the plot of Breaking Bad. They
call them smurfs, people that go and buy the pseudo
and like have like a whole team that like divvies
it up so they can get enough to make a
batch of crystal meth. Because one person can't get enough
in one purchase to do that, so they have to
like have these little smurfs they call them exactly.
Speaker 3 (30:56):
And I would highly recommend everyone read the New Scientist
article from May twenty sixteen, breaking bad sniffles colon crystal
meth made cold medicine rubbish. That is a twenty sixteen
article talking about how the active ingredient in most nasal
decongestins doesn't work bulls.
Speaker 2 (31:16):
Yes, yeah, it's fascinating. I remember, I, you know, I'm
a bit of a square in that sphere of vice.
I remember I had to I picked up no Dose
or something like that, which is basically mainly caffeine, right,
But then there was some other thing. When I was
on the road a lot more often domestically, there would
be those that little aisle or that little display by
(31:40):
the cashier stand of all the pressed pills that were
like truck er crack and then white crosses, the jackets
stream games. Yeah, yeah, yeah, And so I remember one
time I thought the coffee's just not cutting it. You know,
I have to be in a different part of the
continent in a few hours. I can't sleep. And so
(32:00):
for the first time ever, I was gonna buy some
of this and the cashier at the time, I think
it was like a flying j or a pilot or
a quick trip or something. The cashier said, yeah, buddy,
hurry up, because uh, they're gonna be a lot harder
to find in a while. And then he asked me
if I was sure. I didn't want to buy more
while I could, and so I just got one pack.
(32:22):
I decided not to try, and I sat in my
car and did, like, uh, who am I inventory? I
was like, I look like I do.
Speaker 5 (32:32):
He was trying to give you some good intel man.
Speaker 1 (32:34):
You know.
Speaker 2 (32:34):
Yeah, it's probably not the first time he had a conversation.
Speaker 5 (32:37):
That he was trying to move their their units.
Speaker 4 (32:39):
You know.
Speaker 6 (32:39):
I was in a punk band when I was younger,
and there we had a song called Mini Things and
Many Things were a street name for these kind of
trucker pills, and the lyric was effhagrine. Effhagrine shrinks your
penis makes it hard to pee, because apparently efhagrine does
like cause like shrinkings or whatever. But that was the
first time I heard of efhagrine. And we're talking about now,
(33:00):
Matt is pseudoefi dream. So does that mean it's like
a like a different formulation of efidream, Like what is pseudoefidrin?
Speaker 3 (33:08):
Oh, God, pseudoephidrin U. We can get into that. I
would recommend the article from Science titled the Uselessness of
Phenylephrine that's from May thirtieth, twenty twenty two. In that
article you can learn all about how these drugs actually
interact with the body, with some things that I can't
(33:30):
really understand. I'll read this a little excerpt. Why is
oral phenylefrine so useless? It is extensively metabolized starting in
the gut wall. You can find a bioavailability figure of
thirty eight percent in the literature, but that appears to
be the most optimistic number possible, and it goes I mean,
it's kind of tough to get through in that way,
(33:51):
but it does go into the one you're talking about
nol and like why how that drug actually breaks down.
Speaker 5 (33:58):
Breaks through that wall?
Speaker 2 (33:59):
Right?
Speaker 6 (34:00):
It is metabolized correctly, like certain drugs, to your point,
they break down beyond the point of efficacy by the
time they actually reach the part of your body that
needs to be tweaked or whatever.
Speaker 5 (34:11):
You know.
Speaker 3 (34:12):
Oh yeah, exactly, guys. We we're gonna end this in
just one moment. Here I have to do. You have
to say one last thing. There is another article everybody
needs to read right now. It is from the Journal
of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. It's titled oral fenyle Effering
and Ineffective replacement for pseudoephedrin, and that is from May first,
(34:36):
two thousand and six, and it goes exactly the look
Jesus Christ. Well, it goes into the nineteen seventy six
FDA review panel that concluded oral, I'm gonna read these out.
This is gonna be tough. But here he goes oral
fenyl pro penulummin oral propanolamine. That's what it is. Pseudoinether
(35:04):
and fenylephyrine are safe and effective for non prescription relief
of nasal congestion caused by the common cold. Okay, that
happened in nineteen seventy six. Then in two thousand, that
crazy one that I read a fenyl propylanomane.
Speaker 2 (35:20):
It was every time, man.
Speaker 6 (35:23):
Like a fine wine like a fine wine.
Speaker 3 (35:26):
It was voluntarily removed from all products because of hemorrhagic strokes.
They were so sweet with.
Speaker 5 (35:33):
Sorry drug, I'm sorry you buried the lead there.
Speaker 6 (35:36):
You're saying the active ingredient they are now touting and
pushing is the thing that gives you morrhagic strokes. No,
that is one three.
Speaker 3 (35:46):
That's one of the three that was approved back in
nineteen seventy six. Then pseudoephedrin, the one that's used to
cook meth, went out of style in two thousand and
six because of an amendment to the Patriot Act. By
the way, that's that's why it came out. That's when
it got put behind the counter. And it is still
purchased by a lot of US adults, but not as
(36:08):
many when in proportion now the fenel efrene products are
purchased way, way, way more.
Speaker 6 (36:14):
But doesn't it just go to show that, like, despite
FDA approvals, quote unquote, medicine is bulls, Like doesn't it
kind of like just in general point to that, Like
we were talking recently on an episode about the whole
thing with artificial sweeteners.
Speaker 5 (36:29):
How it took the FDA.
Speaker 6 (36:30):
They already knew when the thing came out that it
wasn't good for you. But now, however, many fifty years later,
they're like, actually, we finally got done with our book
report and we think it's actually we're gonna come out
and say it's not great.
Speaker 3 (36:44):
Yeah, FDA is garbage man, Well, but check this out.
It's not just the FDA, because there are powerful forces
at play. Because of that change in the Patriot Act
of two thousand and six, finel Efrene came out and
it was Peiser that introduced pseudo fed pe which was
the original one. Because you can't use that active ingredient
to make meth. Right, and it was only a marketing
(37:08):
it was only a ten milligram dose. It was marketing.
You're right, but it was known at the time. It
was known then that it had poor bioavailability.
Speaker 2 (37:20):
Also, we got to point out, Matt, I don't want
to take up too. And seven We've got to point
out though that this is another example of legislation lagging
behind technology because because the problem is, if you are
a legislator, you are playing a very rigged game of
whack a mole. It is is super easy to make
(37:42):
a drug that is well, what's the word, uh not
parasympathetic simply yes, yes, like a cousin of it. That
is to say, change is one little factor, one little molecule, sympathomemetic,
so it has the same effect, but it is just
a kissing cousin of the thing. And so now you
(38:04):
can say this is not technically the thing that's and
you know what Pfizer does it as well as your
local mad chemist from out of the nineteen sixties.
Speaker 6 (38:12):
Well, it's the same with all of those like quote
unquote lab chemicals like bath salts and like you know
a THCHC that isn't technically the molecule that is scheduled
by the government, Like THHC is one particular molecule. Then
there's something called like Delta eight that's like one molecule different.
But that means they can sell it at the gas station.
That means they can sell it at the head shop
(38:32):
quote unquote. And it takes that they get it gets targeted.
But that requires debates in the halls of government. You know,
somebody has to like die and someone has to get
mad and like write a letter to their congressman or
like create them all this stuff.
Speaker 5 (38:48):
Like what you're saying, man is actually absolutely right.
Speaker 3 (38:51):
We're talking about sales. I just have to give two figures.
And this is it. When we're talking about taking these
drugs off the shelves and not selling them anymore, we're
talking about a major hit to major drug manufacturing BILLI yeah, billion,
because in twenty twenty two, according to CBS News and
the FDA report itself, there were two hundred and forty
two million bottles, packages, units, or whatever of this cold
(39:13):
and allergy medication sold.
Speaker 6 (39:15):
And that stuff's like thirty five bucks a pop, like
each one of those, Like they're very pricey, you know
that that type of medication over the counter.
Speaker 3 (39:22):
Yeah, and it depending I don't have I don't know
if that's just in the US or international league guys,
but that seems like a large number. The money number
associated with that is roughly Penelefrene products make up an
annual sales amount of one point eight billion dollars. So
that's a huge hit to the bottom line if you
(39:43):
take those off.
Speaker 4 (39:44):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (39:45):
And also quick correction, sympathommetic is those are those are
drugs like pe that that mimic certain effects on the
sympathetic nervous system. The better general term is just analog drug,
but the what we're is still accurate ed. It's whenever
there's a billions of dollars on the line, things get
(40:05):
ugly so quick because the pharmaceutical lobbies are best in class,
to be quite honest.
Speaker 6 (40:11):
Oh yeah, well, and just to put a cap on it.
From my end, the thing that I was talking about
earlier with the Munjarro is what I did look up
is there's probably some of that in there, but it's
not FDA tested.
Speaker 5 (40:21):
Or approved, and proceed at your own risk.
Speaker 6 (40:24):
The reason I even found this out was I had
a physical and I told my doctor, who prescribed me
the Manjarro, but it was like thirteen hundred dollars. And
then I found this dietitian. I told him, Oh, I've
been taking this Manjaro.
Speaker 5 (40:34):
It's great. He's like, wait, you got it for us.
I'm like, nope, I got it from this dietitian.
Speaker 6 (40:38):
He's like, ooh hmm, not sure about that. These compounding pharmacies,
you'd really never really know what you're gonna get. I
thought that was very because again I looked it up FDA.
But to my previous statement, and then I'm done, FDA
approval is bullsh who cares well.
Speaker 3 (40:55):
I mean to some extent. That's what we've been finding
out right. No, to everyone listening, you are not going
to get sick. You're not going to get your kids
sick from using these drugs. They are just not going
to be effective at doing the thing they say they
do on the box. That's it.
Speaker 4 (41:09):
We'll be back with more strange news, and we have returned.
Speaker 2 (41:21):
Folks. If you are a longtime conspiracy realist, there is
little doubt that you have heard a bit about UAPs, UFOs, aliens, extraterrestrials,
non human intelligence, especially in the past few months or
the past few years. Our last story today bit of
a combo meal. We've got a palate cleanser for you
(41:41):
at the end. I hope it's a pallet cleanser. Comes
to us from North America, which is absolutely blowing up
with alleged UAP news. Quite recently, the Congress of Mexico
had an amazing experience. I think it's an amazing experience.
We'll see. I wasn't there in person. Lawmakers of Mexico
(42:02):
got together and convened a session wherein they were shown
allegedly alien corpses retrieved from Peru that's our first clue.
Uh yeah, that's our first clue. The guys running the
running point on this is a journalist and ufologist named
(42:23):
Jamie Mawson m aussa n and took an oath and said,
you know, these mummified specimens are not part of quote
our terrestrial evolution now that a third of their DNA
is unknown.
Speaker 6 (42:38):
Doesn't it feel like these kinds of stories are starting
to get printed in more and more prestigious publications Like sure,
it used to be that this kind of story would
be in like the Daily Mail or like the Sun
or whatever, the National Inquirer. But now we've got like
experts saying, Yep, there was definitely a mummified corpse an
alien autopsy situation that I've never seen before.
Speaker 5 (43:01):
That's wild.
Speaker 2 (43:02):
It's interesting because Peru does subconsciously make most people think
of mummies when you say there's an ancient corpse found there.
That's that's part of the debate. That's a good point too,
because one of the biggest Western sources reporting this is
The Independent. So shout out to Tara Cobham, who wrote
(43:22):
a great story here that you can read. Now alien
corpse has shown to Congress as UFO expert is forced
to testify under oath. I think it's a little bit
of editorialization to say forced to testify because a guy
totally volunteered. But you can look at pictures of these
things on the independent there. I want to shout out
(43:44):
everybody reached out on Instagram and various social meds to
point this story out the pictures themselves, and be honest
with you, not super duper impressive. The skeptics are already
having a field day, as are of course, the true believers.
But what did they talk about? So it's you can
(44:06):
watch the entirety of the hearing. It is in Spanish,
but you can also find some pretty good English transcriptions
if you're not if you're not feeling super duper confident
in you're Spanish. And we know that they did radiocarbon
dating per what they say. We know that they did
DNA testing. We know that they took X rays, and
(44:28):
the X rays are interesting because it appears that one
of these two corpses has what are being described as
eggs inside inside wear metal metal eggs in their bodies,
god made of stuff like osmium.
Speaker 6 (44:45):
Dude, Okay, I mean the first image in the Independent
piece looks like Yoda. I just want to say that
right now, and like fully looks like Yoda. He's got
like a law or et. He's got like an elongated
head that is like a hammer. It's interesting immediately if
this is real, looks unlike any mummy I've ever seen.
(45:06):
It's not shrunken in the same way that a human
specimen would be shrunken in the way mummification occurs.
Speaker 3 (45:12):
I I'm sorry, I'm flabbergasted here. Okay, So I'm looking
at the images Ben from the Independent that we're talking about.
I'm looking at a thing specifically. Gosh, this thing it's everything,
is what you're talking about. No, it's the shoulders. For me,
I don't understand where they're classical particulation.
Speaker 2 (45:35):
It looks like your kid made one.
Speaker 6 (45:36):
I was about to say, it looks like a mud sculpture,
like a like a paper machet, like dummy.
Speaker 5 (45:41):
It's weird.
Speaker 3 (45:42):
But again, like I don't want to completely discount it
because there it's striking. It's just I don't know, man.
Speaker 2 (45:50):
Yeah, he uh. This guy claims Jamie claims they were
These two corpses were found in gru in twenty seventeen.
And he also there's something interesting in some of these statements.
The folks who are saying that this is unusual and
not just a typical Peruvian mummified human corpse. They're saying, look,
(46:14):
we want to publish the science. We want to get
this out come disprove us. Look, this is how science works.
Look into what we're doing right now. We think these
are anywhere between seven hundred to eighteen hundred years old.
And they have weirdly elongated heads. They only got three
fingers on each hand. That's what they're trying to demonstrate.
(46:36):
And it does come upon the hills of the UAP
statement to US Congress with you know, of course Grush, Travlor,
Ryan Graves and so on. And it's nuts to see
how this. So I started digging into the story a little.
And the first thing you want to do on these things,
(46:57):
you want to read the official statements. You want to
learn about the source of the statement. Right, who is
saying this and do they have any sort of motivation?
Do they have a book coming out? You know what
I mean? Do they own a for profit entity that
publicizes putting osmium eggs in your body or something like
that in and again I don't want to cast dispersion here,
(47:22):
but it is proven that this is not our guy's
first rodeo. He has previously been associated with claims of
extraterrestrial or non human intelligence discoveries that had later been debunked,
including five mummies also found in Peru in twenty seventeen
(47:43):
that were later shown to be human children.
Speaker 5 (47:45):
See, there we go.
Speaker 6 (47:47):
And I did just look up The Independent on a
site that scores reliability and the Independent gets forty point
three to two on the reliability scale negative seven point
five to four, by which I don't quite understand the
scale of this, but I do think The Independent is
sort of a old school British sort of tabloid kind
(48:09):
of thing to a degree.
Speaker 2 (48:11):
I don't know if I call it a tablet.
Speaker 5 (48:13):
No, I've always signed exactly.
Speaker 6 (48:16):
But even the Mirror of the Sun by some journalist
type folks are considered to be not as you know,
Oh that's.
Speaker 2 (48:23):
What I'm saying. Yeah, those are trash. The Independents more
like the Telegraph.
Speaker 5 (48:27):
And there you go.
Speaker 6 (48:28):
So my point is like, this is the kind of
story that you used to see on papers in the
grocery store. Bat Boy things like that. Now we have
too much information. We can't be fooled by that stuff anymore.
We have to be fed more data to be like
maybe maybe this is an alien mummy, but this is
the type of paper that would print a bogus story.
(48:50):
That's all I'm saying.
Speaker 2 (48:51):
I see what you're saying. Uh there, And of course
uh this one journalist who has been associated with previously
debunked claims he's not the only person who spoke with
Congress there in Mexico. I want to shout out Jose Dijesuslt. Benitez,
who is a forensic sciences specialist, and he's got his
bona fides. You can read his full statement in Spanish
(49:16):
and English. And he talks in detail, kind of similar
to some previous reports we saw to US Congress. He
talks in detail about different things. One thing to your
earlier question, Matt, one thing you spend some time on
is articulation points. You know, you look at it and
you're like, Wow, this is a crappy g I Joe,
(49:36):
it's elbows.
Speaker 5 (49:37):
Don't bend, yeah, doesn't you know? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (49:43):
And so he talks through, he talks through the anatomy
of these corpses. He talks through unusual developments, like how
it has in the thorax. There's a structure similar to
that of birds, and he says, the thorax structure that
is kind of like a bird. It kind of avian
(50:06):
allows those shoulder joints to continue and move very well,
so at the very least, if it's a cod. He
he was up at night saying, I know that Matt
Frederick's gonna ask about the shoulders, so let me get
my work in.
Speaker 3 (50:20):
Now, got stick and move on this guy.
Speaker 5 (50:22):
Can we talk about the hips though?
Speaker 6 (50:23):
The hips are aggressive, I mean they are jutting.
Speaker 5 (50:28):
They are They're like a shelf, and then the and
the butt.
Speaker 6 (50:32):
It's clearly laying flat on a flat surface and there's
no nothing poking out.
Speaker 5 (50:35):
The back of the hips are protruding like three four inches.
Speaker 3 (50:40):
It's crazy because the hips look like bones to me, right,
the weavers are, but then the arms. I think that's
what's making maybe tripping up my mind.
Speaker 5 (50:48):
It looks phony, man, it looks phony.
Speaker 3 (50:50):
Well because the shoulders don't look bony to me. It
looks like musculature or something that would make it look
more smooth. Sorry, which is weird.
Speaker 2 (51:01):
It is a very strange thing too. And you know,
I would say, in all fairness, if you have looked
at mummified remains in the past for animals as well
as humans, they could look at hokey a little bit
hokey as well. You know, I hate to look at
these remnants of ancient, amazing civilizations and think their production
(51:24):
value wasn't where I wanted it to be.
Speaker 6 (51:26):
Is this a fossil that we're looking at like or like,
what are we Is this like a fossilized skeleton that
is you know, we're looking at the shape that was
made by rock intrusions into where it left the hole
in the fossilt, just making sure.
Speaker 2 (51:43):
Yeah, this is a so whatever it is, it definitely
at least appears to hold up the scans. The big
extraordinary claim is that it's not human, and that needs
to be verified by multiple people. But also you have
part of that verification is looking at the track record
of the person who is making these claims. And this
(52:04):
person apparently has attempted to or has made similar claims
in the past. That doesn't mean what they're saying now
is not true. That just means we've got to think
about it. We've got to think through what their motivations
could be. And you can, of course you can find
again the transcripts here, which seem to be made in
(52:26):
good faith. You can watch the entire hearing and espanel
on any number of video platforms. Of course, Twitter loves
this or x loves this, and I gotta say it's
been really interesting to get into the weeds and read
(52:46):
the back and forth of what they're saying, because if
you listen to the folks who are saying this is extraordinary,
they've got specialist and metallurgy radiologists, geneticis.
Speaker 6 (52:58):
The interior eggs. That's fascinating. That's a real eyebrow raiser
for me. The idea of metal eggs is interesting.
Speaker 3 (53:06):
Ben, did you give a length or like a height
or just a size?
Speaker 2 (53:11):
No, not yet, not yet. That's good.
Speaker 6 (53:14):
Let's it's in a drawer. It looks like in the image,
it's like in a drawer. It's like a velvety kind
of you know, sunken thing like you would present a
king's crown. You know, it's very unusual.
Speaker 2 (53:27):
They're a little oshkosh bagosh caskets basically because there it is. Yeah,
they're not gonna be. They're not gonna be point guards
in the NBA. You know what I mean that that
part is true? Uh, they are. The thing that's strange
is they fit a lot of the popular description of
little green men, you know, create heads, somewhat vestigial noses,
(53:51):
a lower number of flangies or whatever, and much smaller
heights or toes as well. I guess this is yeah,
this like we I was talking with some Mexican contacts
who are also UFO fans about this, and even the
(54:11):
guys that I thought would be super on board, like
super yes, tell us more, even they were saying, yeah.
Even they were saying, I don't know if this is
because they all knew about this guy previously. I did not.
Speaker 5 (54:27):
I didn't either.
Speaker 6 (54:28):
But isn't it funny that like the mainstream relatively quote
unquote mainstream press is picking up this story that was
you know, how.
Speaker 5 (54:35):
Did this come up? Again?
Speaker 6 (54:36):
It was presented before Mexican lawmakers kind of like how
was there an official panel about this? Like it was
kind of official. That's why they picked it up over here,
I think right.
Speaker 3 (54:47):
It was a congressional hearing understanding Yeah.
Speaker 2 (54:50):
Yeah exactly.
Speaker 6 (54:51):
So that's enough to make a quote unquote reputable American
journalist agency be like, we're going to report on this.
We also know it's gonna get us click because you know,
disclosure it's happening, like like, come on, we're going to
get clicks.
Speaker 3 (55:05):
Ben, Who else was that that? Hearing Lindsey?
Speaker 2 (55:08):
Yeah, yeah, there were there were some greatest hits. I
think Graves was there, right.
Speaker 3 (55:14):
Uh, Look, we mentioned recently.
Speaker 2 (55:18):
Yeah, what do the big reveal man, Mister.
Speaker 3 (55:20):
Lob we just talked about.
Speaker 6 (55:22):
I don't know who that is.
Speaker 2 (55:25):
Abby Lobe is a storied Harvard astrophysicist that I had
mentioned in previous Strange News last week who discovered some
fascinating ferials we're calling them off the coast of New Guinea.
And if you would if you had asked me, if
you had been like, hey, Ben, I'm the editor of
(55:46):
the Independent. I need to do a show to get
I need to do an article to get some clicks.
And if you asked me off record, I would say, UFOs.
That's what the point I'm making to the you know,
to the question you asked, there has to be some
skepticism there and that that means that, once again, I
(56:06):
don't know about you guys, I'm putting on my foxmoulder
hat I want to believe so badly though you know no,
But indeed so they do have, but they do have
appeal to us. I think in modern folklore there's this
this concept that there are inexplicable things about the world,
(56:28):
or there is some mystery to decode, and the question
always becomes one of good versus bad faith actors. Do
these folks really believe what they're saying or is it
a cynical grift in order to make some sort of profit,
And that can be a difficult question to answer when
(56:49):
you are living in history as it's being written. Before
we move on, to be absolutely clear, I am personally
ninety nine point nine percent sure these purported alien bodies
are absolutely a hoax. In fact, I would advance to
you the idea that they are a modern version of P. T.
(57:12):
Barnum's famous Fiji mermaid. These are absolutely debunked, in my opinion,
they are part of a scam. As a matter of fact,
if you look at several articles around this, including the
Vox article by Aja Romano, you will find that there
is in fact a crowdfunding project over on ulula dot
(57:38):
com which is entirely about constructing these things. So our
big question, our big conspiracy now is why did the
Mexican Congress agree to play these reindeer games in the
first place. Curiouser and curiouser, so would love to hear
your thoughts on that. Folks, tell you how to get
in touch with us at the end as a palate
(58:01):
cleanser here or a very worrying thing. Your mileage may vary.
I want to give a special shout out to Joseph
s on Instagram hipped us to this story. Speaking of tabloids,
this is from the Mirror in the UK. The first
red heifer in two thousand years fulfills the biblical prophecies
(58:22):
and signals the quote end of days.
Speaker 5 (58:25):
Okay, what tell no more?
Speaker 2 (58:29):
Murder not with a bang, but with some cattle. Apparently,
in Christianity and Judaism, red heifers show up in stories
about the end times, and the birth and sacrifice of
a red cow is said to proceed the construction of
the Third Temple in Jerusalem, and then in Orthodox Judaism,
(58:50):
rebuilding that temple happens before the Jewish Messiah arrives.
Speaker 6 (58:54):
Isn't that fascinating that the cow is a big deal
in Hinduism, the sacred cow. It's a big deal in
the golden calf, the idol that you worship and all
of that stuff. It's a very like it comes up
a lot in all of these various religious iconographies.
Speaker 4 (59:09):
Hmm.
Speaker 3 (59:10):
Okay, now this is a weird one for me. This
is really weird one for me. And I was a
Bible boy for a long time, but this I don't.
I didn't know a lot about this. The red heifer
of that concept looks to me and I may be
completely wrong to be associated with almost a virginal human.
(59:32):
Its a bovine, a female bovine which has never been
pregnant or milked or yoked.
Speaker 2 (59:40):
Yes, I think the specific line is something like, to
your point, Matt, speak unto the children of Israel, the
Lord commanded that they bring the red heifer without spot,
wherein is no blemish, and upon which never came a yoke.
Speaker 6 (59:54):
Isn't that asking for a sacrifice?
Speaker 2 (59:56):
Though?
Speaker 3 (59:56):
Sort of it is. It was for sacrificial purposes. That's
the virginals.
Speaker 6 (01:00:01):
Sacrifices are like a thing, you know.
Speaker 5 (01:00:03):
It's very interesting.
Speaker 3 (01:00:04):
Maybe I just don't understand the significance of this one
perfectly spotless whatever, whatever the criterias.
Speaker 6 (01:00:12):
I mean, there's so many little mentions, and I think
it's actually sort of been debunked that like six sixty
six is mentioned in revelations. I think that's not true, right,
and like there right, the number of the beasts. But
there are things in the Bible that portent an end
of times thing, and anybody that wants to interpret it
and spit it out to their followers can flip it
(01:00:33):
and do whatever they want with it.
Speaker 2 (01:00:34):
And the director of the Temple Institute, Rabbi Chai Richmond,
spoke about this and said, we have we and several
other rabbinical experts have examined this cow, and it is
indeed a viable candidate for the biblical red heifer. I
had no idea that they were so candidingly rare. And
(01:00:59):
as someone you know who has a color blindness or
color deficiency, if there were people like me on the far,
we would have never known in the world with just.
Speaker 6 (01:01:08):
Event, but that they have criteria ready like for the thing, like, oh,
here it is, let's check the boxes.
Speaker 5 (01:01:14):
You know, that's wild to me.
Speaker 3 (01:01:16):
Red is also a translated color. Remember this is man.
Red doesn't mean red necessarily, it could mean yellow, eric
could be yellowish, like check it out. There's there are
translation differences that have been associated with this thing and
what it actually means or would look like.
Speaker 6 (01:01:33):
Well, to the point then of someone with colorblindness, color.
Speaker 5 (01:01:36):
Is all relative.
Speaker 6 (01:01:37):
It's all about like what you ascribe that color to be,
and then you know the word you choose to use
to like describe it to other people. That is usually
pretty irrelevant.
Speaker 2 (01:01:47):
Well, it seems, of course in this case, to both
your points, this seems extremely relevant to some people. Again,
not not everyone of these faiths is agreeing with this
to I think one of the big takeaways here is
that apparently that's a very rare type of cow and
will it lead to huge revelations to apocalyptic times? Well,
(01:02:11):
you can make the argument that we live in those
and already have. So we would love to hear your
take on this, folks. Biblical prophecy is just so unundingly fascinating.
Speaker 3 (01:02:23):
Give it to us, Matt, We've got to talk about one.
This episode is coming out on September eighteenth, twenty twenty three. Okay,
in twenty seventeen, you guys, we made an episode titled
will the or will the world end tomorrow or today
or something like that. Do you remember this, Yeah, it
(01:02:44):
was September twenty third, twenty seventeen. There are a ton
of rumors circulating right now that the world is going
to end this year. I guess on Saturday, as you're
hearing this episode on September two, twenty third, twenty twenty three.
So everybody get ready. I guess for either nothing or
(01:03:07):
the end of the world.
Speaker 2 (01:03:07):
I guess, And we'll be here until the lights go out.
Your mileage may vary. The world is ending for someone
somewhere every day, hopefully not you. We can't wait to
hear your thoughts on this. Let us know what you think.
We try to be easy to find online.
Speaker 6 (01:03:23):
Oh, Conspiracy Stuff is where you can find us on Twitter,
nay xx, name, Twitter, whatever you want to call it,
Facebook where we have our group. Here's where it gets
crazy and YouTube. Conspiracy Stuff show on Instagram and TikTok.
Speaker 3 (01:03:38):
We have a voicemail system. It's simple to use. You
dial one eight three three STDWYTK. You've got three minutes,
give us a cool nickname, say whatever you'd like.
Speaker 5 (01:03:48):
Just do.
Speaker 3 (01:03:49):
Let us know if we can use your name and message.
Speaker 4 (01:03:51):
On the air.
Speaker 3 (01:03:52):
It's that simple. If you want to send us more information,
stuff like links and pictures, why not instead send us
a good old fashioned email.
Speaker 2 (01:04:00):
We are conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 3 (01:04:21):
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 this stuff they don't want you to know.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
A production of Iheartrading.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
Hello, welcome back to the show. We're still humans. We're
still humans.
Speaker 4 (00:30):
Going to say the way.
Speaker 5 (00:30):
Your phone, this is your found and my name is Matt.
My name is Noah.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
They called me Ben. We're joined as always with our
super producer Alexis code named dot Holliday Jackson. Most importantly,
you are you. You are here, and that makes this
the stuff they don't want you to know. Big, big
thank you to our fellow conspiracy realist who reached out
all across the Internet through so many different platforms with
some news of the strange variety that we're excited to
(00:58):
explore with you this year. We're going to learn about
alien corpses displayed to the lawmakers of Mexico. True story.
We're going to catch you up on an upcoming memoir
from a former secret Service agent around during the assassination
of JFK. We're going to talk about nasal d congestion,
(01:21):
which is a promised more interesting than it sounds, but
we thought for this evening, we would open up with
the JFK story. Assassination of JFK and anything related to
it remains one of the most prevalent subjects of conspiracy
theories in the world today, so it's no surprise that
(01:43):
the latest news is of great, great interest.
Speaker 6 (01:47):
Did y'all read or watch The eleven twenty two sixty
three by Stephen King?
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Oh? Yes, both both?
Speaker 5 (01:54):
Okay.
Speaker 6 (01:54):
I did the audiobook of the book and then I
watched the series about maybe three weeks ago.
Speaker 5 (02:00):
The series was fantastic.
Speaker 6 (02:01):
I know, James Franco is kind of like canceled, but
I thought he's good when he's good man. When he's
cast as sort of like an everyman, he fits the bill.
He does a fine job, and I thought the things
that I thought were heartwarming from the book they translated
beautifully into the series. One thing I love about Stephen King,
not to get too sidetracked, is that he just sets
rules and doesn't explain himself. He's like, there's a portal
(02:23):
in the closet, and that's that's just what it is.
Speaker 5 (02:26):
And I'm not going to tell you how.
Speaker 6 (02:27):
It got there or why it's there, but here's how
it interfaces with the story, and I love it, and
he's so entertaining that you never really questioned that. But
I have a hard time remembering dates, So whenever I'm
trying to describe this movie or series slash book to somebody,
I have to google it. Eleven twenty two, sixty three
is the day that John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas.
(02:51):
And you're right, Ben, it really has been sort of
like this high water mark, you know, American conspiracy about
the Grassy Knoll. I get that a lot, and like
the Second Shooter, the magic bullet theory, that's what we're
talking about today, the idea that a single bullet ripped
through JFK exited him, and then I believe entered the
(03:11):
governor like through the wrists, and then somehow ended up,
you know, out of their bodies, and you know, they
captured it. But today we're talking about an update that's
taken place sixty years later from a former Secret Service agent,
You're right, Ben, by the name of Paul Landis, who
(03:32):
I'm just gonna go ahead and lead with it.
Speaker 5 (03:34):
Somewhat suspiciously, has just come out with the book.
Speaker 6 (03:37):
So whenever someone's doing revelations about something that happened a
long time ago, and they're coming out with a book.
I'm always a little bit kind of hesitant to, oh,
you're doing this out of the kindness of your heart.
But this guy I heard an interview with him a
couple of sources, and he essentially was one of the
main Secret Service agents who was you know, the ones
that are like running alongside, like jogging alongside the president motorcade.
(04:01):
And he just flew into action when the shots were fired.
It was obviously, if you were in that situation, a
very traumatic, very very aggressively chaotic experience, You're not always
going to be on your a game, you know, but
these Secret Service agents is what they're trained to do.
And he basically was one of the ones who shielded
(04:22):
Jackie O.
Speaker 5 (04:23):
NASAs Kennedy.
Speaker 6 (04:24):
And he also realized that she wanted to stay with
the president after he had been shot. But he realized
that she had covered him because she didn't want anyone
to see that he had been shot in the head.
Like she really was clearly very concerned with people seeing this.
And he told her, you can go, you can like
take care of yourself. I'll do it, and he put
(04:46):
his jacket over it. And he talks about all of
this in these interviews surrounding the book, and he also
talks about the fact that he found a bullet after
all of the chaos of the event, they get to
the emergency room. Right when they're loading the pre president
and the governor onto gurney's, he finds lodged in the
leather of the presidential limousine an unexploded bullet. And I
(05:09):
want to ask you guys about this whole, like the
state of the bullet. He acknowledges that it had rifle
striations on it, which is one way they can match
a bullet, you know, to a gun, because it has
these like rifling marks on the side. And he, in
his mind at the time, according to him now sixty
years later, didn't want it to get lost, didn't want
(05:29):
it to fall out of the car, so he put
it in his pocket. And then here's where it gets
really interesting. He says he was so kind of traumatized
in the moment, this is a you know, a highly
trained secret service agent, that he didn't tell anybody about it.
He just placed it on the president's gurney and then
(05:50):
never told.
Speaker 5 (05:51):
Anybody about it.
Speaker 6 (05:52):
And he said he was, he had nightmares about it.
He intentionally didn't read anything about the theories or about
the coverage or whatever, and he, I believe work with
his partner for about six more months. I don't think
he retired, but I can't really speak to that part
of it. But he didn't tell anybody. I think that's
so fascinating. And now sixty years later he's saying he
(06:13):
found this bullet. He realized after the fact, not until
I think twenty fourteen when he decided I'm gonna Someone
gave him I think a book about all of the
theories and he read it and he was like, oh no,
they got it totally wrong, this magic bullet theory. There
was another bullet and it was found on the Governor
of Texas's gurney, and he feels like it rolled off
(06:37):
of JFK's gurney onto the governor's gurney, and he feels
like it was this whole kind of lynch pin in
these incorrect theories.
Speaker 5 (06:46):
And I just think that's so yeah, please.
Speaker 3 (06:48):
Okay, So the co I just want to make sure
I'm understanding it correctly. The magic bullet, right, is the
concept that we've discussed for a long time on this show,
that one single bullet, one magic bullet, is the one
that represents the first time the president in the Zapruder
film kind of leans down. Is that correct?
Speaker 2 (07:08):
Yeah, Yeah, you're right, Matt.
Speaker 3 (07:09):
Okay, And then there's a second bullet that killed John F.
Kennedy when it hit him in the head.
Speaker 6 (07:14):
I mean, you know, a head SHOT's got to be
a direct shot. You're not going to get a head shot.
Speaker 5 (07:18):
From a bounce.
Speaker 6 (07:18):
You know, you might get injured or get some shrapnel
or like a flesh wound, but a head shot, which
is clearly what killed the president, has to be a
very direct shot. And for a long time, you know,
the War and Commission, which was the official party line
on what happened, has been questioned because of what you're
talking about, Matt, this magic bullet theory, that it doesn't
(07:39):
make sense, and there have been, you know, many folks
who have conjectured that there had to have been a
second shooter for these trajectories to make.
Speaker 2 (07:47):
Sense, like ballistic lead I guess speaking.
Speaker 6 (07:50):
And now all of a sudden there's this other bullet,
which again I'm not an expert on this. I'm not
an expert in ballistics. I don't quite understand what it means.
But I think what people are implying that it means,
or will, at least the New York Times and Vanity
Fair and this memoir are implying, is that it it
sort of explains the magic bullet theory, that there was
(08:11):
this other bullet that did a lot of those things,
or did it in combination with a first shot. So
this guy Landis who wrote the memoir and is now
making the interview rounds. And I'm sorry, I don't mean
to sound skeptical. He's an older He's an older man.
He must be in his eighties now. He's in the Yeah, exactly,
He's in the twilight of his life. He's decided he
(08:32):
wants to tell his story. It just so happens that
his story involves one of the most you know, insane
conspiratorial events in American history. But understandably, what a lot
of people who are interviewing him are asking is, why
didn't you say anything at the time this second bullet
or this other bullet that he found lodged in the seat.
(08:53):
He said it was again unexploded.
Speaker 5 (08:56):
What does that mean? By the way, I mean, I
sort of tease that.
Speaker 6 (08:58):
So like you have a shell casing, right, and then
you have the bullet. But to find a completely intact bullet,
isn't that sort of unusual?
Speaker 3 (09:05):
Well, it means the I whatever it impacted right after
it's fired, it flies through the air, whatever it impacts,
you didn't shatter it. Yeah, you think about when let's
say law enforcement uses the ballistic gel right to test
out the rifling or something like that on a bullet,
Often that bullet isn't exploded, like it isn't turned into
(09:27):
shrapnel metal, it is still intact somewhat.
Speaker 6 (09:32):
Ago would explode a bullet right ben a direct hit
with like bone.
Speaker 2 (09:38):
So for this kind of the one that Land has
found or says he found sixty years ago, it's it's
like a it's got a copper jacket. I also don't
I'm not tuned in enough to the ballistics to know
what exactly they mean by an exploded bullet, because a
lot of small arms ammunition doesn't really contain an explosive
(10:02):
that would to the point where it be unexploded ordinance
like you would say see in a military grade stuff.
But I think you guys have a good lay of
the land with the mystery, and I think there's also
you know, tad On, just in full disclosure, I pre
ordered this memoir a while back. It comes out in October,
so well, hopefully we'll get a deep dive into it.
(10:25):
But in addition to the idea, you're right to be
skeptical about the concept of a We always have to
ask the question, is this person just trying to sell
a book in this case, I don't think so. Just
the sense I get from you know, some of the
articles you talked about, some of the interviews that I've
heard shout out to Peter Baker at NYT the What
(10:48):
what gets me is the problem of eyewitness recollection, even
just two weeks after something happens versus you know, many decades.
Because there's a moment where he talks about moving the
bullet that he finds lodged in the back seat of
the limo, correct in the backseat of that Lincoln Continental,
and then he puts it on we get this right,
(11:10):
puts it on Kennedy's stretcher, and so he's got shaken
around and moved to uh, the Governor's stretcher. It's it's
a pickle, but it's worth it's worth learning. Now, I
don't know additional Could you tell me do they have
the bullet?
Speaker 6 (11:26):
You know, I haven't actually heard anybody unequivocally say that
they would have to have. His whole point was he
slipped it in his pocket. He said he want he
knew it was evidence, and he didn't want it to like,
you know, in all of the hubbub fall out of
the limo and like end up, you know. But again,
it's weird, weird hearing him say that, because protocol would
be they would have searched high and low for anything
(11:47):
in that area.
Speaker 2 (11:48):
He also says he did this for reasons that are
fuzzy even to himself at.
Speaker 6 (11:52):
This and he gave it an inaccurate account at the
time that he has since recanted, and and said he
heard three shots.
Speaker 5 (12:01):
In his original report.
Speaker 6 (12:02):
He said he never went into the not operating room
or whatever the area where he could have put it
on Kennedy's gurney. He says he never did that, but
he now sixty years later, says he was under duress.
He was again traumatized. I heard him interviewed on NBC
or something, and he said, I thought it was very interesting.
(12:23):
He said, I knew that if I looked at Kennedy's
head wound that I would pass out. And I just
thought that was a very interesting thing to say for
someone who's so highly trained like that, you know, not
that they're showing you all kinds of horrific you know,
faces of death kind of thing to make sure you're
not going to pass out, but you are trained to
kind of be you know, made of sterner stuff. So
(12:44):
for him to say that so many years later, I
thought was interesting. He was he wouldn't look at the body,
and he was looking he was thinking mainly of missus Kennedy.
And he even talked about how he found a lighter,
a Zippo lighter that had that was covered in blood
and that had the presidential seal on it, and he thought, okay,
this probably belonged to Jackie Kennedy, And he said, I
(13:06):
don't think she would have wanted to see that, like
her personal Zippo lighter covered in the blood of her husband,
so she slipped that in his pocket too. But in
everything I've read, and again you know, to your point, Bend,
the memoir is not out yet, but in everything I've
read and in the interview that I heard, he doesn't
talk about who he.
Speaker 5 (13:21):
Gave that to. Maybe maybe he did say he.
Speaker 6 (13:24):
I just think it's weird that he put it on
the gurney and didn't keep it in his pocket and
then give it to investigators directly. I moved it because
he shouldn't have moved it exactly to my point, they
would have found it on the concrete ben That is
a really good point. And I didn't fully even think
about that he technically tampered with.
Speaker 5 (13:44):
A crime scene. I think that's very unusual.
Speaker 2 (13:48):
And to exercise, you know, just some empathy from his perspective.
We haven't spoken to mister Landis herselves at this point.
You know, imagine you're the Secret Service. Your entire job
is to preserve the presidency. So there's not really way
to articulate how crazy that must feel when things go
(14:09):
so tragically wrong. No. One thing that stood out to
me reading about this is that some historians and assassination
I don't want to say enthusiast, that's good, people who've
read widely about it. They're saying that if some of
these statements are true, it reopens the question of a
(14:32):
second shooter.
Speaker 5 (14:33):
That's right.
Speaker 6 (14:36):
I'm having a hard time remembering the gentleman's name, but
a journalist who wrote a piece for Vanity Fair about
this topic. He met with mister Landis. He said no
less than fifteen times, because he realized that this guy
is going to be the subject of intense questioning. You
know at this point coming out with this information. I
(14:58):
need to help him. Interesting this guy James Robinault's I
just looked it up in the article from the New
York Times. He I think he reached out to Landis
and said, hey, man, you need a little media schooling,
and I'm going to help you do that. And then
he I think the memoir was already done. This guy
didn't write the memoir.
Speaker 5 (15:17):
He just like, yeah, he.
Speaker 6 (15:18):
Wrote a profile of the memoir in Vanity Fair.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
Yeah. And he's a he's a Robinoults attorney. He's also
written several books, not all necessarily about JFK. But I
think the way I hear it most often described is
he helped Landis process his memories is the word there's
the phrase you'll see you'll see coming up a lot.
I think it's It is fascinating because the majority of
(15:45):
the US public to this day does not accept the
official narrative here, and you can check out our earlier
episodes to see why it is reasonable to question the
you know, not just that assassination, but the series of
assassinations that occurred immediately in the wake of it.
Speaker 6 (16:02):
So I guess my question to you, then, Ben, is
this revelation if they did find the bullet, which they
should have, but yet they found it on the governor's gurney,
how does that change anything. Doesn't that mean there was
a third shot, because that was one thing that landis
In his original statement he said he heard two shots,
(16:23):
but then later he was like in these interviews he's
doing now at eighty eight years old, saying I heard
three shots.
Speaker 5 (16:28):
And that's a big deal.
Speaker 2 (16:29):
Right.
Speaker 6 (16:29):
Hearing three shots is like a big change in the narrative,
I believe. But the fact that this bullet was in
some way to your question, Ben, do they have the
bullet or maybe Matt you asked that surely they do
if it was found, and then that was entered into
part of the narrative, Right, how does this really change anything?
Speaker 3 (16:49):
It would just potentially contradict the Warren Commission, and we're
not allowed to contradict the Warren Commission. Guys, that's a
conspiracy theory. Come on, we've learned that over time. Can
I read a tiny, tiny paragraph from that Vanity Fair article,
It just leaves it's something I didn't know. And this
is when we're talking about how did Landis's recollections of
(17:14):
what occurred? How did they get written down right?
Speaker 5 (17:17):
And that's what I'm asking exactly.
Speaker 6 (17:19):
Okay, so how was this entered into evidence? Including what
happened with the bullet?
Speaker 3 (17:24):
So this is what James Robinaald is saying for Vanity Fair.
The sad fact is that Landis, though required to provide
his version of events to the Secret Service and in
a second report to what would become the Warren Commission,
he never sat for an interview before the FBI, and
he never testified before the commission itself. He left the
(17:44):
Secret Service months after the assassination and before the panel
finished its work and issued its report. So he like,
that is weird to me that he got out in between, right.
Speaker 6 (17:55):
And the statement that he did give was very procedural
and not like a deep It wasn't someone really grilling him.
It was just sort of like if you're a cop
and you shoot somebody, they do a panel to determine
whether it was like a legitimate shooting or not. And
again that even probably involved more grilling than this did.
This seemed to be procedural. He didn't do anything wrong.
(18:16):
He was just asked to make his statement so they
could place it in the pile of statements about the event.
Speaker 3 (18:23):
And to your point, Ben, he was experiencing intense PTSD,
at least according to his own account, which you can
only imagine would be true.
Speaker 2 (18:29):
So the book is called The Final Witness, A Kennedy's
Secret Service agent breaks his silence after sixty years. I'll
dive in and you know, off air, give the scuty
in the scoop right, and we'll see. We'll see. But
it's an important story, I think, to your point, Noel,
there's a reason that so many people still have so
(18:51):
many questions, and it's not wrong to ask those questions.
I would argue that it is the ethically correct thing
to do.
Speaker 6 (18:57):
And I just want to add before we move on
that his partner, who I mentioned earlier, Clint Hill, fully
rejects his news story says it doesn't make any sense.
Clint Hill was the one who famously was photographed jumping
onto the back of the limousine. He's like in like
these iconic photos of the whole thing, and he now
you know, also up there in age is saying, nah,
(19:19):
none of that makes any sense. So that to me,
in addition to the whole thing that he didn't say anything.
I don't know what his motivation would be other than
to sell books, but I think that's too ghost. That
doesn't make sense.
Speaker 5 (19:32):
Usually, these people that we.
Speaker 6 (19:33):
Know that are lifelong public servants or people that are
you know, put their life on the line to protect
someone in power, you know, in American government, They're not
going to just all of a sudden become gold diggers.
Doesn't make sense to me. I just don't buy it.
So maybe he's experiencing some dementia or something brought on
by old age, and maybe there are some publishers that
(19:56):
are taking advantage of that. There is part of me
that thinks maybe that's true. But the PTSD angle is
very interesting.
Speaker 5 (20:02):
All of this is very interesting.
Speaker 3 (20:05):
Yeah, we'll have to stay tuned.
Speaker 6 (20:07):
I guess it's may well once you've read the book
then and again, I'm going to order rate as well,
maybe worth a full episode. I'm interested to see what
constitutes an entire book on this topic. But in any case,
let's take a break, hear a word from our sponsor,
and then come back with another piece of strange news.
Speaker 3 (20:31):
Welcome back everyone. It is September, mid of the septembers
as we record this, the.
Speaker 5 (20:40):
Multiple septembers.
Speaker 3 (20:42):
Yes, I don't know if anyone else is experiencing you know,
a little, a little stuffiness. Yes, my family certainly is.
And when my family is experiencing those kinds of things,
we reach out well to the counter. We reach out
to the counter, whatever pharmacy we find ourselves in over
the counterpass it to you over the counter. No note,
(21:04):
we reached directly to the counter, and the counter provides.
That's what I always say, The counter provides.
Speaker 6 (21:09):
The counter given you've never said that, man says, I'm yes,
and I'd be really silly.
Speaker 3 (21:17):
But the point is, when somebody in my family is
feeling a little sick, we go out and we get
something you can get over the counter, just that's sitting
there on the shelf. You pick it up and it says, hey,
this helps with making your nose less stuffy, and it
helps you feel less bad when you got a little
cold or show.
Speaker 6 (21:34):
It has a graphic on the front of it that's
got like predator like vision, you know, like the you know,
heat seeking kind of vision where it's like targets.
Speaker 5 (21:42):
Your nasal cavity. He's like, this is what his pill will.
Speaker 3 (21:45):
Do for you.
Speaker 6 (21:46):
This is what this is gonna do. You're fine, look
at the picture.
Speaker 5 (21:49):
Believe us.
Speaker 3 (21:50):
Yes, And since, guys, since I've been an adult, I've
been using pretty much the same ones. Oh, pretty much
the same ones, I think. Yeah, right after college, right
around that time, been using the things that they'll put
pe at the end. If it's like a pseudo fed
or just a standard day quill niquill.
Speaker 5 (22:10):
What is P stand for?
Speaker 2 (22:11):
Uh, well, finnling? Is that correct?
Speaker 3 (22:14):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (22:15):
Is that the math stuff?
Speaker 3 (22:16):
No, it is not.
Speaker 5 (22:18):
It is in some of some.
Speaker 6 (22:19):
Of these drugs are now you have to like show
your ID to get them because they have some what
do they call it pseudo pseudoaphagrine?
Speaker 2 (22:27):
I believe pseudophedrine is another one.
Speaker 3 (22:29):
Yeah. Yes, we are going to get to all that stuff. Boys.
So let's tell the story.
Speaker 2 (22:33):
Here.
Speaker 3 (22:33):
It goes right now as we record this, the day
before the FDA has come out and they've made an
announcement that their advisors have declared again side advisors, the
little board they put together when they want to make
a big decision, they have decided that the leading active
(22:57):
ingredient in leading nasal d congestants that are used by
millions of Americans every day are basically placebos.
Speaker 2 (23:07):
Oh, nice snake oil.
Speaker 3 (23:09):
Huh, snake oil, it's pretty powerful, or sugar pills. But
but here's the crazy thing, the one that you mentioned,
ben pennilefern. That is the particular drug, the thing, the
chemical that is in question here, and it is something
that has been in question since it became an active
(23:32):
ingredient in over the counter nasal decongestics. Literally the same
year that it got pushed as a major ingredient and
active ingredient in these things, it was questioned by scientists
across the globe, and since that day in two thousand
and six, by the way, the FDA has just said, no,
(23:53):
this is fine. And drug manufacturers, the major ones, all
the ones you're thinking about right now head when you
think of a drug manufacturer, they've been putting out drugs,
over the counter medicines that use this thing as the
primary nasal decongestin ingredient. This is one of the craziest things.
Speaker 5 (24:14):
I'm annoyed. I'm personally annoyed.
Speaker 3 (24:16):
Well, I think maybe we all are. I think. Let
me read a bit from this AP article. It's titled
popular nasal decongestin doesn't actually relieve congestion, FDA advisors say.
It's written by Matthew Perone for AP News, and it
is saying, well, let's just read it this way. Advisors
of the FDA voted unanimously on Tuesday, that's literally yesterday
(24:41):
as we record this against the effectiveness of the key
drug found in popular versions of pseudofed dequil and other
medications stocked on store shelves. And here's a quote. Modern studies,
when well conducted, are not showing any improvement in congestion
with phenyl ephrine, right, And that's from an allergy specialist
from Saint Louis University School of Medicine. Guys, because of
(25:08):
these findings from the FDA, it is highly likely that
Jaye and j Johnson and Johnson Bear and pretty much
everybody else who make drugs are going to have to
pull these things that we've all been using for almost
two decades off the shelves.
Speaker 6 (25:23):
It was occurring to me that an alternative could be.
They would just like, like what the cigarette companies do.
It's like, this stuff is very bad for you and
very addictive. Maybe they would just put this doesn't work
very well, like as a big sticker on the FA.
Speaker 2 (25:36):
The main ingredient is officially vibes. It appears. I mean,
you know what's next. They're going to get into Nettie pots.
Speaker 3 (25:42):
Hey, that's the thing, because that's one of the alternatives
that's recommended if you got a stuff he knows, Nettie pot.
But we also know there's a very low chance that
you can get some crazy infections in your nasal cavity
if you use one of those very little, tiny little chants.
But it's possible.
Speaker 6 (25:57):
Well, this might be another story we should cover at
some point. But I don't mean to be too confessional.
But I recently started taking a new, a relatively new
drug called manjarro that's like for weight loss, and my
doctor prescribed it to me, but my insurance wouldn't cover it.
And if the insurance isn't cover it, it's like thirteen
hundred dollars a month for these injections. So I was
(26:17):
like that, so I had a friend that told me, well,
there's there are these like diet dietitians and weight loss
clinics that can get it for you at half the cost,
but it's compounded, and I didn't realize that that was
a different thing. I did notice that the manjarro you
get prescribed comes in a cool, fancy little thing like
a pen, you know, and the ones that I got
(26:39):
came in an envelope full of syringes and like a
little bottle. And I only just recently started googling it
compounded Munjarro versus you know, prescription Manjarro, and all this
stuff came up saying like, Munjarro is intellectual property that
is owned by Novo Nordisk, and they have not let
that out to like anybody else. So whatever these dieticians
(27:03):
are saying they have, it's not exactly the same thing,
but it probably is close.
Speaker 5 (27:07):
It's called a try trezeptide, is what it's called.
Speaker 6 (27:10):
I'm sorry, I don't mean to derail, but really quickly
I was all of a sudden really freaked out. I
was like, you know, it's not twelve hundred dollars, but
it's not cheap, and I felt like it was really
working for me. I was like, my appetite has decreased
and I've lost about thirteen pounds in the last couple
of months. But I've also been like exercising and seeing
a trainer a bunch. So I was like, am I
full of Am I entirely the victim of placebo? That
(27:34):
really occurred to me because I'd read all this stuff
about how this drug is like a miracle drug, and
I all of a sudden was like, am I just
totally experiencing the placebo effect?
Speaker 2 (27:44):
Oh?
Speaker 3 (27:44):
Man, Noel, that's crazy that you're going through that, because
it is. I mean, it's shown now that this is
what everyone's been doing every time you took day quill
or been niquill, even with Honey. Now we've read ads
for that product. We have been giving ourselves that placebo effects.
But it's not entirely true because there are other active
(28:04):
ingredients in every one of those medicines, right, just not
a not another primary nasal decongestin, which is one of
the big issues here. That's really nol. I can't believe
that I haven't been through anything like that. So you're
gonna have to report back to this way you find
really quickly.
Speaker 6 (28:22):
What I did find was that what a lot of
these compounding pharmacies do.
Speaker 5 (28:26):
Is it's like B twelve.
Speaker 6 (28:27):
It's like a ton of B twelve, or like something
that makes you feel a thing, but isn't the thing.
Speaker 3 (28:33):
Oh wow, Well, in the case of this medicine, you're
not feeling the fenyl eferne at all. If the only
way to feel the effects of fenyl eferne, well, actually
there are a couple of different ways, but the primary one,
if you want to actually use it as a nasal decongestant,
is to snort it, to shoot it into your nose instantly, right, yes, exactly,
(28:54):
I think that's right. Then it is highly effective. It's
it does exactly what it says as on all of
those bottles.
Speaker 6 (29:02):
There's times of little snooter like you know, decongested things
like Vicks, little things that you shoot up your nosey.
Why don't they release it in that form to make
it more effective?
Speaker 3 (29:12):
It is, It is released in that form. It's available
in that form. It's just Americans especially, but many human
beings across the world like to take their drugs orally
it's just an easier task, and especially since like little
kids often will take a little sippy cup basically of
medicine rather and they like that better than getting stuff
(29:33):
shut up their shoes. Sure, that's one of the primary
reasons why it became a take your pill medicine rather
than shoot it up your nose medicine marketing. Oh yeah.
So the other thing is the reason why this is
very similar to your story, nol is because phenylephrine as
an active ingredient in those take a pill or drink
(29:56):
it down drugs is because of a law that got
passed in two thousand and six associated with methamphetamine production.
With the other drug that we mentioned at the top
of this, pseudo afedrin. Pseudo a fedrin was the active
ingredient in things like dequill and niquil and pseudo actually sudou. Yeah,
(30:18):
it's because exactly, and those drugs are still available. You
just have to go to the pharmacist and ask them
for them. Then you have to in this country at least,
and also in the UK, I believe, you have to
sign a log book basically show your ID and you.
Speaker 2 (30:34):
Can only get by a certain amount. Right.
Speaker 6 (30:37):
That came up in the plot of Breaking Bad. They
call them smurfs, people that go and buy the pseudo
and like have like a whole team that like divvies
it up so they can get enough to make a
batch of crystal meth. Because one person can't get enough
in one purchase to do that, so they have to
like have these little smurfs they call them exactly.
Speaker 3 (30:56):
And I would highly recommend everyone read the New Scientist
article from May twenty sixteen, breaking bad sniffles colon crystal
meth made cold medicine rubbish. That is a twenty sixteen
article talking about how the active ingredient in most nasal
decongestins doesn't work bulls.
Speaker 2 (31:16):
Yes, yeah, it's fascinating. I remember, I, you know, I'm
a bit of a square in that sphere of vice.
I remember I had to I picked up no Dose
or something like that, which is basically mainly caffeine, right,
But then there was some other thing. When I was
on the road a lot more often domestically, there would
be those that little aisle or that little display by
(31:40):
the cashier stand of all the pressed pills that were
like truck er crack and then white crosses, the jackets
stream games. Yeah, yeah, yeah, And so I remember one
time I thought the coffee's just not cutting it. You know,
I have to be in a different part of the
continent in a few hours. I can't sleep. And so
(32:00):
for the first time ever, I was gonna buy some
of this and the cashier at the time, I think
it was like a flying j or a pilot or
a quick trip or something. The cashier said, yeah, buddy,
hurry up, because uh, they're gonna be a lot harder
to find in a while. And then he asked me
if I was sure. I didn't want to buy more
while I could, and so I just got one pack.
(32:22):
I decided not to try, and I sat in my
car and did, like, uh, who am I inventory? I
was like, I look like I do.
Speaker 5 (32:32):
He was trying to give you some good intel man.
Speaker 1 (32:34):
You know.
Speaker 2 (32:34):
Yeah, it's probably not the first time he had a conversation.
Speaker 5 (32:37):
That he was trying to move their their units.
Speaker 4 (32:39):
You know.
Speaker 6 (32:39):
I was in a punk band when I was younger,
and there we had a song called Mini Things and
Many Things were a street name for these kind of
trucker pills, and the lyric was effhagrine. Effhagrine shrinks your
penis makes it hard to pee, because apparently efhagrine does
like cause like shrinkings or whatever. But that was the
first time I heard of efhagrine. And we're talking about now,
(33:00):
Matt is pseudoefi dream. So does that mean it's like
a like a different formulation of efidream, Like what is pseudoefidrin?
Speaker 3 (33:08):
Oh, God, pseudoephidrin U. We can get into that. I
would recommend the article from Science titled the Uselessness of
Phenylephrine that's from May thirtieth, twenty twenty two. In that
article you can learn all about how these drugs actually
interact with the body, with some things that I can't
(33:30):
really understand. I'll read this a little excerpt. Why is
oral phenylefrine so useless? It is extensively metabolized starting in
the gut wall. You can find a bioavailability figure of
thirty eight percent in the literature, but that appears to
be the most optimistic number possible, and it goes I mean,
it's kind of tough to get through in that way,
(33:51):
but it does go into the one you're talking about
nol and like why how that drug actually breaks down.
Speaker 5 (33:58):
Breaks through that wall?
Speaker 2 (33:59):
Right?
Speaker 6 (34:00):
It is metabolized correctly, like certain drugs, to your point,
they break down beyond the point of efficacy by the
time they actually reach the part of your body that
needs to be tweaked or whatever.
Speaker 5 (34:11):
You know.
Speaker 3 (34:12):
Oh yeah, exactly, guys. We we're gonna end this in
just one moment. Here I have to do. You have
to say one last thing. There is another article everybody
needs to read right now. It is from the Journal
of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. It's titled oral fenyle Effering
and Ineffective replacement for pseudoephedrin, and that is from May first,
(34:36):
two thousand and six, and it goes exactly the look
Jesus Christ. Well, it goes into the nineteen seventy six
FDA review panel that concluded oral, I'm gonna read these out.
This is gonna be tough. But here he goes oral
fenyl pro penulummin oral propanolamine. That's what it is. Pseudoinether
(35:04):
and fenylephyrine are safe and effective for non prescription relief
of nasal congestion caused by the common cold. Okay, that
happened in nineteen seventy six. Then in two thousand, that
crazy one that I read a fenyl propylanomane.
Speaker 2 (35:20):
It was every time, man.
Speaker 6 (35:23):
Like a fine wine like a fine wine.
Speaker 3 (35:26):
It was voluntarily removed from all products because of hemorrhagic strokes.
They were so sweet with.
Speaker 5 (35:33):
Sorry drug, I'm sorry you buried the lead there.
Speaker 6 (35:36):
You're saying the active ingredient they are now touting and
pushing is the thing that gives you morrhagic strokes. No,
that is one three.
Speaker 3 (35:46):
That's one of the three that was approved back in
nineteen seventy six. Then pseudoephedrin, the one that's used to
cook meth, went out of style in two thousand and
six because of an amendment to the Patriot Act. By
the way, that's that's why it came out. That's when
it got put behind the counter. And it is still
purchased by a lot of US adults, but not as
(36:08):
many when in proportion now the fenel efrene products are
purchased way, way, way more.
Speaker 6 (36:14):
But doesn't it just go to show that, like, despite
FDA approvals, quote unquote, medicine is bulls, Like doesn't it
kind of like just in general point to that, Like
we were talking recently on an episode about the whole
thing with artificial sweeteners.
Speaker 5 (36:29):
How it took the FDA.
Speaker 6 (36:30):
They already knew when the thing came out that it
wasn't good for you. But now, however, many fifty years later,
they're like, actually, we finally got done with our book
report and we think it's actually we're gonna come out
and say it's not great.
Speaker 3 (36:44):
Yeah, FDA is garbage man, Well, but check this out.
It's not just the FDA, because there are powerful forces
at play. Because of that change in the Patriot Act
of two thousand and six, finel Efrene came out and
it was Peiser that introduced pseudo fed pe which was
the original one. Because you can't use that active ingredient
to make meth. Right, and it was only a marketing
(37:08):
it was only a ten milligram dose. It was marketing.
You're right, but it was known at the time. It
was known then that it had poor bioavailability.
Speaker 2 (37:20):
Also, we got to point out, Matt, I don't want
to take up too. And seven We've got to point
out though that this is another example of legislation lagging
behind technology because because the problem is, if you are
a legislator, you are playing a very rigged game of
whack a mole. It is is super easy to make
(37:42):
a drug that is well, what's the word, uh not
parasympathetic simply yes, yes, like a cousin of it. That
is to say, change is one little factor, one little molecule, sympathomemetic,
so it has the same effect, but it is just
a kissing cousin of the thing. And so now you
(38:04):
can say this is not technically the thing that's and
you know what Pfizer does it as well as your
local mad chemist from out of the nineteen sixties.
Speaker 6 (38:12):
Well, it's the same with all of those like quote
unquote lab chemicals like bath salts and like you know
a THCHC that isn't technically the molecule that is scheduled
by the government, Like THHC is one particular molecule. Then
there's something called like Delta eight that's like one molecule different.
But that means they can sell it at the gas station.
That means they can sell it at the head shop
(38:32):
quote unquote. And it takes that they get it gets targeted.
But that requires debates in the halls of government. You know,
somebody has to like die and someone has to get
mad and like write a letter to their congressman or
like create them all this stuff.
Speaker 5 (38:48):
Like what you're saying, man is actually absolutely right.
Speaker 3 (38:51):
We're talking about sales. I just have to give two figures.
And this is it. When we're talking about taking these
drugs off the shelves and not selling them anymore, we're
talking about a major hit to major drug manufacturing BILLI yeah, billion,
because in twenty twenty two, according to CBS News and
the FDA report itself, there were two hundred and forty
two million bottles, packages, units, or whatever of this cold
(39:13):
and allergy medication sold.
Speaker 6 (39:15):
And that stuff's like thirty five bucks a pop, like
each one of those, Like they're very pricey, you know
that that type of medication over the counter.
Speaker 3 (39:22):
Yeah, and it depending I don't have I don't know
if that's just in the US or international league guys,
but that seems like a large number. The money number
associated with that is roughly Penelefrene products make up an
annual sales amount of one point eight billion dollars. So
that's a huge hit to the bottom line if you
(39:43):
take those off.
Speaker 4 (39:44):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (39:45):
And also quick correction, sympathommetic is those are those are
drugs like pe that that mimic certain effects on the
sympathetic nervous system. The better general term is just analog drug,
but the what we're is still accurate ed. It's whenever
there's a billions of dollars on the line, things get
(40:05):
ugly so quick because the pharmaceutical lobbies are best in class,
to be quite honest.
Speaker 6 (40:11):
Oh yeah, well, and just to put a cap on it.
From my end, the thing that I was talking about
earlier with the Munjarro is what I did look up
is there's probably some of that in there, but it's
not FDA tested.
Speaker 5 (40:21):
Or approved, and proceed at your own risk.
Speaker 6 (40:24):
The reason I even found this out was I had
a physical and I told my doctor, who prescribed me
the Manjarro, but it was like thirteen hundred dollars. And
then I found this dietitian. I told him, Oh, I've
been taking this Manjaro.
Speaker 5 (40:34):
It's great. He's like, wait, you got it for us.
I'm like, nope, I got it from this dietitian.
Speaker 6 (40:38):
He's like, ooh hmm, not sure about that. These compounding pharmacies,
you'd really never really know what you're gonna get. I
thought that was very because again I looked it up FDA.
But to my previous statement, and then I'm done, FDA
approval is bullsh who cares well.
Speaker 3 (40:55):
I mean to some extent. That's what we've been finding
out right. No, to everyone listening, you are not going
to get sick. You're not going to get your kids
sick from using these drugs. They are just not going
to be effective at doing the thing they say they
do on the box. That's it.
Speaker 4 (41:09):
We'll be back with more strange news, and we have returned.
Speaker 2 (41:21):
Folks. If you are a longtime conspiracy realist, there is
little doubt that you have heard a bit about UAPs, UFOs, aliens, extraterrestrials,
non human intelligence, especially in the past few months or
the past few years. Our last story today bit of
a combo meal. We've got a palate cleanser for you
(41:41):
at the end. I hope it's a pallet cleanser. Comes
to us from North America, which is absolutely blowing up
with alleged UAP news. Quite recently, the Congress of Mexico
had an amazing experience. I think it's an amazing experience.
We'll see. I wasn't there in person. Lawmakers of Mexico
(42:02):
got together and convened a session wherein they were shown
allegedly alien corpses retrieved from Peru that's our first clue.
Uh yeah, that's our first clue. The guys running the
running point on this is a journalist and ufologist named
(42:23):
Jamie Mawson m aussa n and took an oath and said,
you know, these mummified specimens are not part of quote
our terrestrial evolution now that a third of their DNA
is unknown.
Speaker 6 (42:38):
Doesn't it feel like these kinds of stories are starting
to get printed in more and more prestigious publications Like sure,
it used to be that this kind of story would
be in like the Daily Mail or like the Sun
or whatever, the National Inquirer. But now we've got like
experts saying, Yep, there was definitely a mummified corpse an
alien autopsy situation that I've never seen before.
Speaker 5 (43:01):
That's wild.
Speaker 2 (43:02):
It's interesting because Peru does subconsciously make most people think
of mummies when you say there's an ancient corpse found there.
That's that's part of the debate. That's a good point too,
because one of the biggest Western sources reporting this is
The Independent. So shout out to Tara Cobham, who wrote
(43:22):
a great story here that you can read. Now alien
corpse has shown to Congress as UFO expert is forced
to testify under oath. I think it's a little bit
of editorialization to say forced to testify because a guy
totally volunteered. But you can look at pictures of these
things on the independent there. I want to shout out
(43:44):
everybody reached out on Instagram and various social meds to
point this story out the pictures themselves, and be honest
with you, not super duper impressive. The skeptics are already
having a field day, as are of course, the true believers.
But what did they talk about? So it's you can
(44:06):
watch the entirety of the hearing. It is in Spanish,
but you can also find some pretty good English transcriptions
if you're not if you're not feeling super duper confident
in you're Spanish. And we know that they did radiocarbon
dating per what they say. We know that they did
DNA testing. We know that they took X rays, and
(44:28):
the X rays are interesting because it appears that one
of these two corpses has what are being described as
eggs inside inside wear metal metal eggs in their bodies,
god made of stuff like osmium.
Speaker 6 (44:45):
Dude, Okay, I mean the first image in the Independent
piece looks like Yoda. I just want to say that
right now, and like fully looks like Yoda. He's got
like a law or et. He's got like an elongated
head that is like a hammer. It's interesting immediately if
this is real, looks unlike any mummy I've ever seen.
(45:06):
It's not shrunken in the same way that a human
specimen would be shrunken in the way mummification occurs.
Speaker 3 (45:12):
I I'm sorry, I'm flabbergasted here. Okay, So I'm looking
at the images Ben from the Independent that we're talking about.
I'm looking at a thing specifically. Gosh, this thing it's everything,
is what you're talking about. No, it's the shoulders. For me,
I don't understand where they're classical particulation.
Speaker 2 (45:35):
It looks like your kid made one.
Speaker 6 (45:36):
I was about to say, it looks like a mud sculpture,
like a like a paper machet, like dummy.
Speaker 5 (45:41):
It's weird.
Speaker 3 (45:42):
But again, like I don't want to completely discount it
because there it's striking. It's just I don't know, man.
Speaker 2 (45:50):
Yeah, he uh. This guy claims Jamie claims they were
These two corpses were found in gru in twenty seventeen.
And he also there's something interesting in some of these statements.
The folks who are saying that this is unusual and
not just a typical Peruvian mummified human corpse. They're saying, look,
(46:14):
we want to publish the science. We want to get
this out come disprove us. Look, this is how science works.
Look into what we're doing right now. We think these
are anywhere between seven hundred to eighteen hundred years old.
And they have weirdly elongated heads. They only got three
fingers on each hand. That's what they're trying to demonstrate.
(46:36):
And it does come upon the hills of the UAP
statement to US Congress with you know, of course Grush, Travlor,
Ryan Graves and so on. And it's nuts to see
how this. So I started digging into the story a little.
And the first thing you want to do on these things,
(46:57):
you want to read the official statements. You want to
learn about the source of the statement. Right, who is
saying this and do they have any sort of motivation?
Do they have a book coming out? You know what
I mean? Do they own a for profit entity that
publicizes putting osmium eggs in your body or something like
that in and again I don't want to cast dispersion here,
(47:22):
but it is proven that this is not our guy's
first rodeo. He has previously been associated with claims of
extraterrestrial or non human intelligence discoveries that had later been debunked,
including five mummies also found in Peru in twenty seventeen
(47:43):
that were later shown to be human children.
Speaker 5 (47:45):
See, there we go.
Speaker 6 (47:47):
And I did just look up The Independent on a
site that scores reliability and the Independent gets forty point
three to two on the reliability scale negative seven point
five to four, by which I don't quite understand the
scale of this, but I do think The Independent is
sort of a old school British sort of tabloid kind
(48:09):
of thing to a degree.
Speaker 2 (48:11):
I don't know if I call it a tablet.
Speaker 5 (48:13):
No, I've always signed exactly.
Speaker 6 (48:16):
But even the Mirror of the Sun by some journalist
type folks are considered to be not as you know,
Oh that's.
Speaker 2 (48:23):
What I'm saying. Yeah, those are trash. The Independents more
like the Telegraph.
Speaker 5 (48:27):
And there you go.
Speaker 6 (48:28):
So my point is like, this is the kind of
story that you used to see on papers in the
grocery store. Bat Boy things like that. Now we have
too much information. We can't be fooled by that stuff anymore.
We have to be fed more data to be like
maybe maybe this is an alien mummy, but this is
the type of paper that would print a bogus story.
(48:50):
That's all I'm saying.
Speaker 2 (48:51):
I see what you're saying. Uh there, And of course
uh this one journalist who has been associated with previously
debunked claims he's not the only person who spoke with
Congress there in Mexico. I want to shout out Jose Dijesuslt. Benitez,
who is a forensic sciences specialist, and he's got his
bona fides. You can read his full statement in Spanish
(49:16):
and English. And he talks in detail, kind of similar
to some previous reports we saw to US Congress. He
talks in detail about different things. One thing to your
earlier question, Matt, one thing you spend some time on
is articulation points. You know, you look at it and
you're like, Wow, this is a crappy g I Joe,
(49:36):
it's elbows.
Speaker 5 (49:37):
Don't bend, yeah, doesn't you know? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (49:43):
And so he talks through, he talks through the anatomy
of these corpses. He talks through unusual developments, like how
it has in the thorax. There's a structure similar to
that of birds, and he says, the thorax structure that
is kind of like a bird. It kind of avian
(50:06):
allows those shoulder joints to continue and move very well,
so at the very least, if it's a cod. He
he was up at night saying, I know that Matt
Frederick's gonna ask about the shoulders, so let me get
my work in.
Speaker 3 (50:20):
Now, got stick and move on this guy.
Speaker 5 (50:22):
Can we talk about the hips though?
Speaker 6 (50:23):
The hips are aggressive, I mean they are jutting.
Speaker 5 (50:28):
They are They're like a shelf, and then the and
the butt.
Speaker 6 (50:32):
It's clearly laying flat on a flat surface and there's
no nothing poking out.
Speaker 5 (50:35):
The back of the hips are protruding like three four inches.
Speaker 3 (50:40):
It's crazy because the hips look like bones to me, right,
the weavers are, but then the arms. I think that's
what's making maybe tripping up my mind.
Speaker 5 (50:48):
It looks phony, man, it looks phony.
Speaker 3 (50:50):
Well because the shoulders don't look bony to me. It
looks like musculature or something that would make it look
more smooth. Sorry, which is weird.
Speaker 2 (51:01):
It is a very strange thing too. And you know,
I would say, in all fairness, if you have looked
at mummified remains in the past for animals as well
as humans, they could look at hokey a little bit
hokey as well. You know, I hate to look at
these remnants of ancient, amazing civilizations and think their production
(51:24):
value wasn't where I wanted it to be.
Speaker 6 (51:26):
Is this a fossil that we're looking at like or like,
what are we Is this like a fossilized skeleton that
is you know, we're looking at the shape that was
made by rock intrusions into where it left the hole
in the fossilt, just making sure.
Speaker 2 (51:43):
Yeah, this is a so whatever it is, it definitely
at least appears to hold up the scans. The big
extraordinary claim is that it's not human, and that needs
to be verified by multiple people. But also you have
part of that verification is looking at the track record
of the person who is making these claims. And this
(52:04):
person apparently has attempted to or has made similar claims
in the past. That doesn't mean what they're saying now
is not true. That just means we've got to think
about it. We've got to think through what their motivations
could be. And you can, of course you can find
again the transcripts here, which seem to be made in
(52:26):
good faith. You can watch the entire hearing and espanel
on any number of video platforms. Of course, Twitter loves
this or x loves this, and I gotta say it's
been really interesting to get into the weeds and read
(52:46):
the back and forth of what they're saying, because if
you listen to the folks who are saying this is extraordinary,
they've got specialist and metallurgy radiologists, geneticis.
Speaker 6 (52:58):
The interior eggs. That's fascinating. That's a real eyebrow raiser
for me. The idea of metal eggs is interesting.
Speaker 3 (53:06):
Ben, did you give a length or like a height
or just a size?
Speaker 2 (53:11):
No, not yet, not yet. That's good.
Speaker 6 (53:14):
Let's it's in a drawer. It looks like in the image,
it's like in a drawer. It's like a velvety kind
of you know, sunken thing like you would present a
king's crown. You know, it's very unusual.
Speaker 2 (53:27):
They're a little oshkosh bagosh caskets basically because there it is. Yeah,
they're not gonna be. They're not gonna be point guards
in the NBA. You know what I mean that that
part is true? Uh, they are. The thing that's strange
is they fit a lot of the popular description of
little green men, you know, create heads, somewhat vestigial noses,
(53:51):
a lower number of flangies or whatever, and much smaller
heights or toes as well. I guess this is yeah,
this like we I was talking with some Mexican contacts
who are also UFO fans about this, and even the
(54:11):
guys that I thought would be super on board, like
super yes, tell us more, even they were saying, yeah.
Even they were saying, I don't know if this is
because they all knew about this guy previously. I did not.
Speaker 5 (54:27):
I didn't either.
Speaker 6 (54:28):
But isn't it funny that like the mainstream relatively quote
unquote mainstream press is picking up this story that was
you know, how.
Speaker 5 (54:35):
Did this come up? Again?
Speaker 6 (54:36):
It was presented before Mexican lawmakers kind of like how
was there an official panel about this? Like it was
kind of official. That's why they picked it up over here,
I think right.
Speaker 3 (54:47):
It was a congressional hearing understanding Yeah.
Speaker 2 (54:50):
Yeah exactly.
Speaker 6 (54:51):
So that's enough to make a quote unquote reputable American
journalist agency be like, we're going to report on this.
We also know it's gonna get us click because you know,
disclosure it's happening, like like, come on, we're going to
get clicks.
Speaker 3 (55:05):
Ben, Who else was that that? Hearing Lindsey?
Speaker 2 (55:08):
Yeah, yeah, there were there were some greatest hits. I
think Graves was there, right.
Speaker 3 (55:14):
Uh, Look, we mentioned recently.
Speaker 2 (55:18):
Yeah, what do the big reveal man, Mister.
Speaker 3 (55:20):
Lob we just talked about.
Speaker 6 (55:22):
I don't know who that is.
Speaker 2 (55:25):
Abby Lobe is a storied Harvard astrophysicist that I had
mentioned in previous Strange News last week who discovered some
fascinating ferials we're calling them off the coast of New Guinea.
And if you would if you had asked me, if
you had been like, hey, Ben, I'm the editor of
(55:46):
the Independent. I need to do a show to get
I need to do an article to get some clicks.
And if you asked me off record, I would say, UFOs.
That's what the point I'm making to the you know,
to the question you asked, there has to be some
skepticism there and that that means that, once again, I
(56:06):
don't know about you guys, I'm putting on my foxmoulder
hat I want to believe so badly though you know no,
But indeed so they do have, but they do have
appeal to us. I think in modern folklore there's this
this concept that there are inexplicable things about the world,
(56:28):
or there is some mystery to decode, and the question
always becomes one of good versus bad faith actors. Do
these folks really believe what they're saying or is it
a cynical grift in order to make some sort of profit,
And that can be a difficult question to answer when
(56:49):
you are living in history as it's being written. Before
we move on, to be absolutely clear, I am personally
ninety nine point nine percent sure these purported alien bodies
are absolutely a hoax. In fact, I would advance to
you the idea that they are a modern version of P. T.
(57:12):
Barnum's famous Fiji mermaid. These are absolutely debunked, in my opinion,
they are part of a scam. As a matter of fact,
if you look at several articles around this, including the
Vox article by Aja Romano, you will find that there
is in fact a crowdfunding project over on ulula dot
(57:38):
com which is entirely about constructing these things. So our
big question, our big conspiracy now is why did the
Mexican Congress agree to play these reindeer games in the
first place. Curiouser and curiouser, so would love to hear
your thoughts on that. Folks, tell you how to get
in touch with us at the end as a palate
(58:01):
cleanser here or a very worrying thing. Your mileage may vary.
I want to give a special shout out to Joseph
s on Instagram hipped us to this story. Speaking of tabloids,
this is from the Mirror in the UK. The first
red heifer in two thousand years fulfills the biblical prophecies
(58:22):
and signals the quote end of days.
Speaker 5 (58:25):
Okay, what tell no more?
Speaker 2 (58:29):
Murder not with a bang, but with some cattle. Apparently,
in Christianity and Judaism, red heifers show up in stories
about the end times, and the birth and sacrifice of
a red cow is said to proceed the construction of
the Third Temple in Jerusalem, and then in Orthodox Judaism,
(58:50):
rebuilding that temple happens before the Jewish Messiah arrives.
Speaker 6 (58:54):
Isn't that fascinating that the cow is a big deal
in Hinduism, the sacred cow. It's a big deal in
the golden calf, the idol that you worship and all
of that stuff. It's a very like it comes up
a lot in all of these various religious iconographies.
Speaker 4 (59:09):
Hmm.
Speaker 3 (59:10):
Okay, now this is a weird one for me. This
is really weird one for me. And I was a
Bible boy for a long time, but this I don't.
I didn't know a lot about this. The red heifer
of that concept looks to me and I may be
completely wrong to be associated with almost a virginal human.
(59:32):
Its a bovine, a female bovine which has never been
pregnant or milked or yoked.
Speaker 2 (59:40):
Yes, I think the specific line is something like, to
your point, Matt, speak unto the children of Israel, the
Lord commanded that they bring the red heifer without spot,
wherein is no blemish, and upon which never came a yoke.
Speaker 6 (59:54):
Isn't that asking for a sacrifice?
Speaker 2 (59:56):
Though?
Speaker 3 (59:56):
Sort of it is. It was for sacrificial purposes. That's
the virginals.
Speaker 6 (01:00:01):
Sacrifices are like a thing, you know.
Speaker 5 (01:00:03):
It's very interesting.
Speaker 3 (01:00:04):
Maybe I just don't understand the significance of this one
perfectly spotless whatever, whatever the criterias.
Speaker 6 (01:00:12):
I mean, there's so many little mentions, and I think
it's actually sort of been debunked that like six sixty
six is mentioned in revelations. I think that's not true, right,
and like there right, the number of the beasts. But
there are things in the Bible that portent an end
of times thing, and anybody that wants to interpret it
and spit it out to their followers can flip it
(01:00:33):
and do whatever they want with it.
Speaker 2 (01:00:34):
And the director of the Temple Institute, Rabbi Chai Richmond,
spoke about this and said, we have we and several
other rabbinical experts have examined this cow, and it is
indeed a viable candidate for the biblical red heifer. I
had no idea that they were so candidingly rare. And
(01:00:59):
as someone you know who has a color blindness or
color deficiency, if there were people like me on the far,
we would have never known in the world with just.
Speaker 6 (01:01:08):
Event, but that they have criteria ready like for the thing, like, oh,
here it is, let's check the boxes.
Speaker 5 (01:01:14):
You know, that's wild to me.
Speaker 3 (01:01:16):
Red is also a translated color. Remember this is man.
Red doesn't mean red necessarily, it could mean yellow, eric
could be yellowish, like check it out. There's there are
translation differences that have been associated with this thing and
what it actually means or would look like.
Speaker 6 (01:01:33):
Well, to the point then of someone with colorblindness, color.
Speaker 5 (01:01:36):
Is all relative.
Speaker 6 (01:01:37):
It's all about like what you ascribe that color to be,
and then you know the word you choose to use
to like describe it to other people. That is usually
pretty irrelevant.
Speaker 2 (01:01:47):
Well, it seems, of course in this case, to both
your points, this seems extremely relevant to some people. Again,
not not everyone of these faiths is agreeing with this
to I think one of the big takeaways here is
that apparently that's a very rare type of cow and
will it lead to huge revelations to apocalyptic times? Well,
(01:02:11):
you can make the argument that we live in those
and already have. So we would love to hear your
take on this, folks. Biblical prophecy is just so unundingly fascinating.
Speaker 3 (01:02:23):
Give it to us, Matt, We've got to talk about one.
This episode is coming out on September eighteenth, twenty twenty three. Okay,
in twenty seventeen, you guys, we made an episode titled
will the or will the world end tomorrow or today
or something like that. Do you remember this, Yeah, it
(01:02:44):
was September twenty third, twenty seventeen. There are a ton
of rumors circulating right now that the world is going
to end this year. I guess on Saturday, as you're
hearing this episode on September two, twenty third, twenty twenty three.
So everybody get ready. I guess for either nothing or
(01:03:07):
the end of the world.
Speaker 2 (01:03:07):
I guess, And we'll be here until the lights go out.
Your mileage may vary. The world is ending for someone
somewhere every day, hopefully not you. We can't wait to
hear your thoughts on this. Let us know what you think.
We try to be easy to find online.
Speaker 6 (01:03:23):
Oh, Conspiracy Stuff is where you can find us on Twitter,
nay xx, name, Twitter, whatever you want to call it,
Facebook where we have our group. Here's where it gets
crazy and YouTube. Conspiracy Stuff show on Instagram and TikTok.
Speaker 3 (01:03:38):
We have a voicemail system. It's simple to use. You
dial one eight three three STDWYTK. You've got three minutes,
give us a cool nickname, say whatever you'd like.
Speaker 5 (01:03:48):
Just do.
Speaker 3 (01:03:49):
Let us know if we can use your name and message.
Speaker 4 (01:03:51):
On the air.
Speaker 3 (01:03:52):
It's that simple. If you want to send us more information,
stuff like links and pictures, why not instead send us
a good old fashioned email.
Speaker 2 (01:04:00):
We are conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 3 (01:04:21):
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. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.