January 20, 2025 • 16 mins
Guest Host George Knapp and Guest Beatriz Villarroel discuss her discovery of vanishing stars and the possibility of them being UFO's.
- A bright triple transient that vanished within 50 min (journal article)
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):
Now here's a highlight from coast to coast am on
iHeartRadio Beatrice.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
When we met before in twenty twenty three, we had
private conversations about what this has been like for you personally.
I don't know how far you want to go, but
I'd like to ask you about it. You make this
really astonishing discovery and it's physical evidence of a sort.
We don't know what it proves exactly. I'm wondering did
you share it with some colleagues there to get input on, Hey,
am I missing something? Is there some explanation I'm not
(00:27):
thinking of here? And if so, what kind of reactions
did you get?
Speaker 3 (00:32):
So when we first found or when I first found
these nine stars or this image, I talked to my
office mate with a co author, Alina Strichanska, so she
was also like, wow, what is this? And more colleagues
I started showing to some more people like what am
I seeing? So I contacted a professor or emeritus professor
(00:57):
in California. Again, we were in pandemics, so everything was
happening or email, and I asked him do you have
any idea? So his name was Jeff Marcy, and he
helped me to start like trying to figure out what
is happening on this image. So we did publish that
(01:19):
paper in twenty twenty one. So in the end of
May or beginning of June twenty twenty one, I got
the acceptance letter and yeah, and then it was published,
and of course there were some people who were very
excited about what we have found in like some astronomers
(01:41):
like wow, what is that? Like this is so weird
and this could be something really really important. However, it
coincided with something else that happened exactly the same time
to my co author, and we got so much black
that I started getting like, well, I got some kind
(02:03):
of partially canceled with it.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
So that's a story warning warning.
Speaker 3 (02:10):
People forgot about about the discovery and only focused on
how to be angry with me for my choice of
co author.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
Well, welcome to Welcome to the world of the UFO Mystery.
I guess.
Speaker 1 (02:22):
So.
Speaker 2 (02:23):
Was there any kind of threat to your employment or
anything like that?
Speaker 3 (02:27):
Oh, I've had so much that I don't like of
stuff happening like, well, I can't tell quite some why
should I be holding everything secret? And then I can
tell also some parallels that I see with a friend
of mine here in Sweden who also discovered something, and
he also got complete slack, and I start noticing, I
(02:49):
don't know, there might be some patterns that I see.
So what happened was that my colleague Jeff Marcy, he
had the scandal twenty fifteen which cost him the Nobel
Price for discovering in the first extra planets. That was
twenty fifteen. So he retired and he kept but he
(03:09):
kept doing science, and he had some between twenty fifteen
and twenty twenty one, he had papers in collaborations, something
like seventy papers. But exactly the same week as we
were getting our paper accepted for whatever reason, just the
wonderful timing of coincidental timing, and the National Academy of
(03:32):
Sciences they went to Science and Nature and they said, oh,
we have looked at the sexual harassment scandal of Jeff
mars in twenty fifteen. Now remember he was later convicted
in any courtes or internal things that happened at Berkeley
in times, and I didn't know he was, so I
(03:54):
forgot what I wanted to say. Oh, well, the National
Academy of Science is exactly that same week as we
were about to well we were about to get our
paper accepted. They decided to throw him out from the
National Academy of Sciences as the first example ever. So
it became a big story in science and nature. And
(04:14):
then they said, but why do people still collaborate with
him seven years after So of course they attacked the
groups and collaborators that came with papers with him the
coming weeks, which is another group in California. They got
lots of flag and I got so there was this
woman that posted I photo from my paper the manuscripture
(04:38):
with my name and Jeff's names and wrote something like, yes,
women participate in rape culture. I got removed from another conference.
I got phone calls from people saying, don't advertise your paper,
don't make any press release, because you're going to be
in trouble if you do. And that was just the
first wave, because it became like lots of stuff like
(04:59):
it just contained, and it continued and it never stopped.
And like I got, I was in one place where
like I was at that time abroad, I wasn't in Sweden,
and I remember someone said, you, well, if you're going
to co author with if you're going to co author,
which I please don't use the institute's affiliation. And I
was like, come on, that's not correct. I'm gonna do
(05:21):
it anyway, which wasn't appreciated.
Speaker 2 (05:23):
Of course.
Speaker 3 (05:25):
Yeah, I thought all the time it was from so
many directions and it was so unbelievably exhausting, and I
had an even like more difficult thing here that happened
locally where it was such an enormous tension for a
few weeks that in the end I got such a
(05:45):
chest pain and ended up in hospital. I was there
for a complete day, and well, you know how it
can be if you get some really serious chest pain
and you can't stand up or anything like that. So
that was how it went. And then I was like,
after it happened, I said, I'm not going to be
silent about it anymore. I don't want to get to
hospital again. I don't want to be continuously under that
(06:08):
kind of harassment. So I wrote to the International Astronomical
Union and they actually supported me. So they made a
code of conduct change where they forbid harassment people were
like collaborating with someone like Jeff and guess what. A
number of professors then decided to fight back, so they
(06:29):
took it to Nature. They took it to Science then
early in this year, and Nature journal wrote about it,
and they wrote a story where they had included of
how I was removed from a conference, and they interviewed
they pretended they interviewed a neutral guy, another professor in
a US institution. But this guy, he was heavily involved,
(06:52):
and he even has a big blog post of why
it was correct to remove me from the conference. But
the journalist knew about it, the Nature journalist, and she
still decided to include him like a neutral voice. And
when she sent me the part of the article, she
removed his quote so that I couldn't see that it
was commenting, because otherwise I would have made a comment
(07:15):
or something like that. So, I mean, it's all everything
they tried to tilt to hide what they have been
doing to me, like play down the effects the damage
were being, like simply I don't get invited to conference
of CONCOT and his set the conferences, and now I
don't want to go to set the conferences anymore because
I just associated with these aggressive people.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
I think that I think you think this is a
reaction to the content of what you are trying to publish,
as opposed to legitimate concern about a personal improprieties by
the guy who co wrote the paper with you. I
mean it's a it was. It was pushback against you
to stifle your voice. Correct.
Speaker 3 (07:59):
Let me let me be like blunt about this. Like
I have another friend of mine here in Sweden. He
discovered something called like the Baltic Sea anomaly, and he
also discovered our antiqu Crussian submarine. So this Baltic Sea
anomaly looks like a crushed UFO. And he had this
wonderful company like where that are doing like they are
(08:23):
diving for Rex. The same time as he discovers this,
he gets a lot of flat from military, from the
security police, intelligence services. He gets the tax office for
mysterious reason go in and they start like investigating his
company and they crash him entirely, and so he lose
(08:44):
all the money. He later wins in the highest court
against the Swedish state and the tax company that they
had treated him badly. So it is all documented that
he was right and he never got a penny back.
So the damage to his life is still none. The
damage to his career his life, and he can't continue
explorations of the Baltics. The anomal anymore because of the
(09:06):
way how they treated him. And again that didn't come
under It wasn't that anyone came and said to him, Hey,
you're working on Baltics C anomaly or and that's why
we stop you. It just happens by a coincidence in time.
And I'm worrying, why did we have that coincidence in
time that the same week as we are about to
(09:27):
publish this super cool thing, he gets Jeff Marcy gets
thrown out from the National Academy of Sciences. And if
you look at the Sety community, there is such quite
some connections also to the military. So I don't know,
how can I know? I don't believe in that there
are too many coincidences when there are humans involved.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
That's Jeff Marcy. Jeff Marcy, you mentioned that he had
discovered the first exo planet. He'd written seventy. I mean
that's a big deal.
Speaker 3 (09:56):
That's first exp Planet's like seventy out of hundred exsp
that the first set the out of hundred extra planets
were discovered by his team and the first planetary system.
So he should have shared a nobel price with Michelle
Major and the dear kilos in twenty nineteen, of course,
but it didn't happen.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
So they drag up a seventy year old allegation about
improprieties personal improprieties and use that to stifle the publication
of your paper with him about these anomalies that you
had found.
Speaker 3 (10:26):
Now, I'm a bit confused that they dragged up something
like that. Was maybe I think the investigations were in
two thousand and five, or I don't know. I wasn't around.
I didn't even know Jeff until twenty twenty after the scandal,
or twenty nineteen. And he had some investigations at Berkeley
(10:47):
in two thousand and five, but once he started a
big breakthrough listing programs. So he got one hundred million
dollars from Urie Millner to such for extraterrestial intelligence, and
three month after someone leaks this internal report to the media.
By chance, after he gets all this money to search
for ET again, that must be a coincidence that the
(11:09):
top of it, after he got huge funds to look
for exceterscalepenitence.
Speaker 2 (11:15):
You know, I'm sure as you as a as a
student when you're earning your PhD in astrophysics, you're thinking,
this is what I want to do with science is
you know, the search for truth and understanding of the
world in which we live. You know that the duty,
as I've said before, the duty of science, as in journalism,
is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated.
Here you are doing what you think science should do
(11:38):
is look for evidence, try to understand big mysteries, go
after the big questions. I can't imagine for an astrophysicist
that there's anything bigger than is there somebody else out
there that's the biggest, that's as big as it gets.
And there are ingrained interests in these publications, in academia
and universities that don't want this taken seriously. I wonder why.
Speaker 3 (12:00):
I wanted to. I think they are like, first there's
a lot of dogma and there's a lot of stigma.
But then there are people who are very self serving,
like politically that they want to create, like have strong careers,
so they get influenced by people about them. They allow
themselves to be influenced so that they can get a
(12:21):
good career. And I think these people are the most
dangerous that we deal with. It's they often can play
by a certain politics, but then if they're the leadership changes,
they switch politics as well. They will have any flag
that gives them what they want career wise. And these
people are everywhere, But of course there also a lot
(12:42):
of wonderful people, and that's why I'm still around. And
it's the wonderful people that kind of make one pick.
And I think for me, like I first was very
sad about the whole thing. I was so distressed and
I was so always under stress, always a tension for
two years. But then I realized this was a blessing
(13:03):
in disguise because it freed me to work on things
that are controversial, like the UFO question. Now it freed
me in some ways that I say, Okay, yeah, it's
possible that they will be people who will not like
what I do, what I say, but it's simply a
part of the landscape, and I want to work with
(13:24):
what I love. I don't want to be chained. If
you look at like even the whole thing. Once scientists
try to work like maintain credibility by only working with
orthodox feels, they are in a golden cage. In some ways,
everything relating to scientific credibility is a Golden Cage because
(13:45):
people put themselves there for their good name and reputation
and they don't explore the hugely interesting terrain around them.
And now, after the thing I had where I was
attacked continuously for working with Jeff Marcy, I just say
I will work on what I want, I will do
the work I want, and I will say what I
think and what they want.
Speaker 2 (14:06):
So it's a separation of some sort with SETI. So
I've always thought that SETI is a cool endeavor to
look for evidence way out there using the best telescopes
we have, And I never thought it needed necessarily to
be at odds with UFO world. The UFO investigators, scientists
looking for evidence that maybe there's been something closer to
(14:28):
us than way way out there in the Solar system somewhere,
they didn't have to be at odds.
Speaker 1 (14:33):
But they are at odds.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
And people I know there are people in SETI who
are interested in UFO data as well, they just don't
admit it. And I think a lot of it has
to do with where the money comes from. So much
of the research money is from government, so much of
it comes from Pentagon affiliated groups, that if the Pentagon
doesn't want this done, and the US government and key
(14:55):
figures there don't want it done, then the research doesn't
get funded and it gets discouraged for people like you
and Jeff and others.
Speaker 3 (15:02):
Correct, yes, exactly, But like if I observe, like my
little observation is that the individuals who are mostly who
have been mostly aggressive on me for working with Jeffs
are the same individuals who are mostly aggressive on people
taking the UFO topic seriously in the SETI community. So
(15:24):
I think there's a lot of political motivations behind while
white people are trying to stop the UP research because seriously,
why if you can look for aliens far away, why
can't you look for them nearby? It makes no sense
this near earth stigma that the journals are so scared
of even touching anything related to alien artifacts near the Earth,
(15:49):
they won't even publish, They will just reject it that
the editor's desk, it won't go to review just because
of this giant stigma. And now you can see there's
an example of a conference. It can show you where
they write like, well, they make a techno signature conference.
You can look for life everywhere except the UAP topic
(16:11):
or UP related topics. Are not welcome and come on
if I mean it's the same basic question, why do
you put a physical limit on the based on the distance?
Speaker 2 (16:25):
Making sense?
Speaker 1 (16:26):
Listen to more Coast to Coast a m. Every weeknight
at one a m. Eastern and go to Coast to
coastam dot com for more
Now here's a highlight from coast to coast am on
iHeartRadio Beatrice.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
When we met before in twenty twenty three, we had
private conversations about what this has been like for you personally.
I don't know how far you want to go, but
I'd like to ask you about it. You make this
really astonishing discovery and it's physical evidence of a sort.
We don't know what it proves exactly. I'm wondering did
you share it with some colleagues there to get input on, Hey,
am I missing something? Is there some explanation I'm not
(00:27):
thinking of here? And if so, what kind of reactions
did you get?
Speaker 3 (00:32):
So when we first found or when I first found
these nine stars or this image, I talked to my
office mate with a co author, Alina Strichanska, so she
was also like, wow, what is this? And more colleagues
I started showing to some more people like what am
I seeing? So I contacted a professor or emeritus professor
(00:57):
in California. Again, we were in pandemics, so everything was
happening or email, and I asked him do you have
any idea? So his name was Jeff Marcy, and he
helped me to start like trying to figure out what
is happening on this image. So we did publish that
(01:19):
paper in twenty twenty one. So in the end of
May or beginning of June twenty twenty one, I got
the acceptance letter and yeah, and then it was published,
and of course there were some people who were very
excited about what we have found in like some astronomers
(01:41):
like wow, what is that? Like this is so weird
and this could be something really really important. However, it
coincided with something else that happened exactly the same time
to my co author, and we got so much black
that I started getting like, well, I got some kind
(02:03):
of partially canceled with it.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
So that's a story warning warning.
Speaker 3 (02:10):
People forgot about about the discovery and only focused on
how to be angry with me for my choice of
co author.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
Well, welcome to Welcome to the world of the UFO Mystery.
I guess.
Speaker 1 (02:22):
So.
Speaker 2 (02:23):
Was there any kind of threat to your employment or
anything like that?
Speaker 3 (02:27):
Oh, I've had so much that I don't like of
stuff happening like, well, I can't tell quite some why
should I be holding everything secret? And then I can
tell also some parallels that I see with a friend
of mine here in Sweden who also discovered something, and
he also got complete slack, and I start noticing, I
(02:49):
don't know, there might be some patterns that I see.
So what happened was that my colleague Jeff Marcy, he
had the scandal twenty fifteen which cost him the Nobel
Price for discovering in the first extra planets. That was
twenty fifteen. So he retired and he kept but he
(03:09):
kept doing science, and he had some between twenty fifteen
and twenty twenty one, he had papers in collaborations, something
like seventy papers. But exactly the same week as we
were getting our paper accepted for whatever reason, just the
wonderful timing of coincidental timing, and the National Academy of
(03:32):
Sciences they went to Science and Nature and they said, oh,
we have looked at the sexual harassment scandal of Jeff
mars in twenty fifteen. Now remember he was later convicted
in any courtes or internal things that happened at Berkeley
in times, and I didn't know he was, so I
(03:54):
forgot what I wanted to say. Oh, well, the National
Academy of Science is exactly that same week as we
were about to well we were about to get our
paper accepted. They decided to throw him out from the
National Academy of Sciences as the first example ever. So
it became a big story in science and nature. And
(04:14):
then they said, but why do people still collaborate with
him seven years after So of course they attacked the
groups and collaborators that came with papers with him the
coming weeks, which is another group in California. They got
lots of flag and I got so there was this
woman that posted I photo from my paper the manuscripture
(04:38):
with my name and Jeff's names and wrote something like, yes,
women participate in rape culture. I got removed from another conference.
I got phone calls from people saying, don't advertise your paper,
don't make any press release, because you're going to be
in trouble if you do. And that was just the
first wave, because it became like lots of stuff like
(04:59):
it just contained, and it continued and it never stopped.
And like I got, I was in one place where
like I was at that time abroad, I wasn't in Sweden,
and I remember someone said, you, well, if you're going
to co author with if you're going to co author,
which I please don't use the institute's affiliation. And I
was like, come on, that's not correct. I'm gonna do
(05:21):
it anyway, which wasn't appreciated.
Speaker 2 (05:23):
Of course.
Speaker 3 (05:25):
Yeah, I thought all the time it was from so
many directions and it was so unbelievably exhausting, and I
had an even like more difficult thing here that happened
locally where it was such an enormous tension for a
few weeks that in the end I got such a
(05:45):
chest pain and ended up in hospital. I was there
for a complete day, and well, you know how it
can be if you get some really serious chest pain
and you can't stand up or anything like that. So
that was how it went. And then I was like,
after it happened, I said, I'm not going to be
silent about it anymore. I don't want to get to
hospital again. I don't want to be continuously under that
(06:08):
kind of harassment. So I wrote to the International Astronomical
Union and they actually supported me. So they made a
code of conduct change where they forbid harassment people were
like collaborating with someone like Jeff and guess what. A
number of professors then decided to fight back, so they
(06:29):
took it to Nature. They took it to Science then
early in this year, and Nature journal wrote about it,
and they wrote a story where they had included of
how I was removed from a conference, and they interviewed
they pretended they interviewed a neutral guy, another professor in
a US institution. But this guy, he was heavily involved,
(06:52):
and he even has a big blog post of why
it was correct to remove me from the conference. But
the journalist knew about it, the Nature journalist, and she
still decided to include him like a neutral voice. And
when she sent me the part of the article, she
removed his quote so that I couldn't see that it
was commenting, because otherwise I would have made a comment
(07:15):
or something like that. So, I mean, it's all everything
they tried to tilt to hide what they have been
doing to me, like play down the effects the damage
were being, like simply I don't get invited to conference
of CONCOT and his set the conferences, and now I
don't want to go to set the conferences anymore because
I just associated with these aggressive people.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
I think that I think you think this is a
reaction to the content of what you are trying to publish,
as opposed to legitimate concern about a personal improprieties by
the guy who co wrote the paper with you. I
mean it's a it was. It was pushback against you
to stifle your voice. Correct.
Speaker 3 (07:59):
Let me let me be like blunt about this. Like
I have another friend of mine here in Sweden. He
discovered something called like the Baltic Sea anomaly, and he
also discovered our antiqu Crussian submarine. So this Baltic Sea
anomaly looks like a crushed UFO. And he had this
wonderful company like where that are doing like they are
(08:23):
diving for Rex. The same time as he discovers this,
he gets a lot of flat from military, from the
security police, intelligence services. He gets the tax office for
mysterious reason go in and they start like investigating his
company and they crash him entirely, and so he lose
(08:44):
all the money. He later wins in the highest court
against the Swedish state and the tax company that they
had treated him badly. So it is all documented that
he was right and he never got a penny back.
So the damage to his life is still none. The
damage to his career his life, and he can't continue
explorations of the Baltics. The anomal anymore because of the
(09:06):
way how they treated him. And again that didn't come
under It wasn't that anyone came and said to him, Hey,
you're working on Baltics C anomaly or and that's why
we stop you. It just happens by a coincidence in time.
And I'm worrying, why did we have that coincidence in
time that the same week as we are about to
(09:27):
publish this super cool thing, he gets Jeff Marcy gets
thrown out from the National Academy of Sciences. And if
you look at the Sety community, there is such quite
some connections also to the military. So I don't know,
how can I know? I don't believe in that there
are too many coincidences when there are humans involved.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
That's Jeff Marcy. Jeff Marcy, you mentioned that he had
discovered the first exo planet. He'd written seventy. I mean
that's a big deal.
Speaker 3 (09:56):
That's first exp Planet's like seventy out of hundred exsp
that the first set the out of hundred extra planets
were discovered by his team and the first planetary system.
So he should have shared a nobel price with Michelle
Major and the dear kilos in twenty nineteen, of course,
but it didn't happen.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
So they drag up a seventy year old allegation about
improprieties personal improprieties and use that to stifle the publication
of your paper with him about these anomalies that you
had found.
Speaker 3 (10:26):
Now, I'm a bit confused that they dragged up something
like that. Was maybe I think the investigations were in
two thousand and five, or I don't know. I wasn't around.
I didn't even know Jeff until twenty twenty after the scandal,
or twenty nineteen. And he had some investigations at Berkeley
(10:47):
in two thousand and five, but once he started a
big breakthrough listing programs. So he got one hundred million
dollars from Urie Millner to such for extraterrestial intelligence, and
three month after someone leaks this internal report to the media.
By chance, after he gets all this money to search
for ET again, that must be a coincidence that the
(11:09):
top of it, after he got huge funds to look
for exceterscalepenitence.
Speaker 2 (11:15):
You know, I'm sure as you as a as a
student when you're earning your PhD in astrophysics, you're thinking,
this is what I want to do with science is
you know, the search for truth and understanding of the
world in which we live. You know that the duty,
as I've said before, the duty of science, as in journalism,
is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated.
Here you are doing what you think science should do
(11:38):
is look for evidence, try to understand big mysteries, go
after the big questions. I can't imagine for an astrophysicist
that there's anything bigger than is there somebody else out
there that's the biggest, that's as big as it gets.
And there are ingrained interests in these publications, in academia
and universities that don't want this taken seriously. I wonder why.
Speaker 3 (12:00):
I wanted to. I think they are like, first there's
a lot of dogma and there's a lot of stigma.
But then there are people who are very self serving,
like politically that they want to create, like have strong careers,
so they get influenced by people about them. They allow
themselves to be influenced so that they can get a
(12:21):
good career. And I think these people are the most
dangerous that we deal with. It's they often can play
by a certain politics, but then if they're the leadership changes,
they switch politics as well. They will have any flag
that gives them what they want career wise. And these
people are everywhere, But of course there also a lot
(12:42):
of wonderful people, and that's why I'm still around. And
it's the wonderful people that kind of make one pick.
And I think for me, like I first was very
sad about the whole thing. I was so distressed and
I was so always under stress, always a tension for
two years. But then I realized this was a blessing
(13:03):
in disguise because it freed me to work on things
that are controversial, like the UFO question. Now it freed
me in some ways that I say, Okay, yeah, it's
possible that they will be people who will not like
what I do, what I say, but it's simply a
part of the landscape, and I want to work with
(13:24):
what I love. I don't want to be chained. If
you look at like even the whole thing. Once scientists
try to work like maintain credibility by only working with
orthodox feels, they are in a golden cage. In some ways,
everything relating to scientific credibility is a Golden Cage because
(13:45):
people put themselves there for their good name and reputation
and they don't explore the hugely interesting terrain around them.
And now, after the thing I had where I was
attacked continuously for working with Jeff Marcy, I just say
I will work on what I want, I will do
the work I want, and I will say what I
think and what they want.
Speaker 2 (14:06):
So it's a separation of some sort with SETI. So
I've always thought that SETI is a cool endeavor to
look for evidence way out there using the best telescopes
we have, And I never thought it needed necessarily to
be at odds with UFO world. The UFO investigators, scientists
looking for evidence that maybe there's been something closer to
(14:28):
us than way way out there in the Solar system somewhere,
they didn't have to be at odds.
Speaker 1 (14:33):
But they are at odds.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
And people I know there are people in SETI who
are interested in UFO data as well, they just don't
admit it. And I think a lot of it has
to do with where the money comes from. So much
of the research money is from government, so much of
it comes from Pentagon affiliated groups, that if the Pentagon
doesn't want this done, and the US government and key
(14:55):
figures there don't want it done, then the research doesn't
get funded and it gets discouraged for people like you
and Jeff and others.
Speaker 3 (15:02):
Correct, yes, exactly, But like if I observe, like my
little observation is that the individuals who are mostly who
have been mostly aggressive on me for working with Jeffs
are the same individuals who are mostly aggressive on people
taking the UFO topic seriously in the SETI community. So
(15:24):
I think there's a lot of political motivations behind while
white people are trying to stop the UP research because seriously,
why if you can look for aliens far away, why
can't you look for them nearby? It makes no sense
this near earth stigma that the journals are so scared
of even touching anything related to alien artifacts near the Earth,
(15:49):
they won't even publish, They will just reject it that
the editor's desk, it won't go to review just because
of this giant stigma. And now you can see there's
an example of a conference. It can show you where
they write like, well, they make a techno signature conference.
You can look for life everywhere except the UAP topic
(16:11):
or UP related topics. Are not welcome and come on
if I mean it's the same basic question, why do
you put a physical limit on the based on the distance?
Speaker 2 (16:25):
Making sense?
Speaker 1 (16:26):
Listen to more Coast to Coast a m. Every weeknight
at one a m. Eastern and go to Coast to
coastam dot com for more
The Best of Coast to Coast AM News
Host
George Noory
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.