Ep. #866: Parabnormal Moments of 2025

We look back at some of the parabnormal stories of the year: renewed efforts to release the JFK files; alleged discoveries beneath the Giza pyramids and under the ice of Antarctica; a revived search for Flight MH370 along with viral claims it was swallowed by a wormhole; blueprints purportedly showing the reverse-engineering of a UFO; a flight surgeon says he witnessed non-human technology in the government’s possession; the suspicious death of a paranormal investigator while touring with the infamous Annabelle doll; and the year’s most talked-about mystery of all — interstellar object 3I/ATLAS.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Five four three two one.

Speaker 2 (00:08):
We interrupt our program to bring you this important message.

Speaker 3 (00:13):
A confirmed attack is taking place against the United States.
Aliens from an unknown location have been reported in multiple states.

Speaker 4 (00:21):
We are controlling transmissions.

Speaker 5 (00:24):
There is another world that a waits far beyond what
we can see and feel, of a place that's anything
but ordinary.

Speaker 3 (00:32):
Would you believe? I not think?

Speaker 6 (00:38):
Step into the south?

Speaker 4 (00:40):
How the best time?

Speaker 7 (00:41):
Know the aire both take the expiracies and cover into
the pair red not a weego.

Speaker 6 (00:53):
We go with Jeremy's Scott.

Speaker 3 (00:57):
It's the pair of normal moments of twenty twenty five.

Speaker 8 (01:08):
We are tomorrow announcing and giving all of the Kennedy files.
So people have been waiting for decades for this.

Speaker 9 (01:21):
In order to put to bed some of the theories
that have been out there on John F. Kennedy, you
have to know the full truth, and the full truth
starts with transparency, and that's why these files are so
important for the American people to read for themselves. In
previous investigations, they didn't have access to the information that
we are going to have access to, and so that's
a big deal, especially if you're looking at what truly
happened with JFKA.

Speaker 10 (01:42):
It's many pages, is it eighty thousand pages?

Speaker 8 (01:45):
Approximately eighty thousand pages, So it's a lot of stuff
and you'll make your own determination.

Speaker 3 (01:53):
Here's Jefferson Morley.

Speaker 4 (01:56):
This story is be deviled by on the one hand,
you know, false statements from the government, you know, bad
faith evidence, manipulation of the facts for self serving means.
And then on the other hand, because the government is
not credible, people who want an explanation go crazy and

(02:19):
develop all kinds of conspiracy theories, you know, to try
and solve what the government can't solve for them, or
what the government is incredible about. And so in between
those two things, if you're trying to find the firm
ground of like so what actually happened? You know, like
how can I be sure? It's very difficult because those

(02:40):
are those are like two storms on either side of you.
You know that can you know, sweep you up and
confuse you and engulf you. So that's a challenge when
dealing with the JFK story, always has been and is now.
The thing that's promising about this moment is, you know,

(03:02):
in that situation, one thing that is reassuring is transparency, right,
Like we're not hiding anything, okay. And this was the
this was the great benefit of the JFK Records Act.
Back in nineteen ninety two, the Congress, in response to
indignation and furor over Stone's movie JFK said, we're not

(03:27):
going to We're not going to reinvestigate the crime, but
we aren't going to make all of the government's records
on the subject available. That's a good idea, that's just
good transparent government. People see everything and then they can
decide what they want. So the JFK Records Act created
the Assassination Records Review Board, and this was a small

(03:48):
federal agency backed by this law, and they went to
all the federal agencies and said, give us your assassination
related records. Now it places like the Secret Service in
the CIA. Hey, they said, you know, get lost, and
they held up the law and they said, no, this
is a law. You got to provide them. And over
the course of four years, they actually did a good

(04:10):
job and got records out of these hands of these agencies.
But that independent structure was key. You had people outside
the CIA who would decide is this document going to
be made public? Because if it's somebody inside the CIA,
forget it. They're never going to make it public, right,
So that was how we actually came for the first time.

(04:33):
Thanks to my friend Oliver Stone, we started to get
something resembling the full historical record of JFK's assassination. That
is to say, all the records of the law enforcement,
the investigations, the testimony of the witnesses, anything that was
relevant was all put in one place, the JFK Records Collection,

(04:54):
which was held at the Archives two facility in College Park, Maryland.
It's right here outside of Washington. So that's the thing
that people are talking about, the JFK Records Collection. It's
a body of records, huge pile of paper, three hundred
and twenty thousand documents, three four million pages of material

(05:15):
that's all supposed to be made public, but it hasn't
been made public, and it hasn't been made public under
these curious circumstances. The law, the JFK Records Act, was
quite explicit. That was passed in October nineteen ninety two,
and it said all government records related to the assassination

(05:37):
have the presumption of immediate release. Okay, So with that
kind of government blessed, that kind of law there was
this imperative these things should be made public, and the
law said it gave room to CIA and other federal agents.

(05:57):
Is said, look, if you don't want to release this
because of national security or personal privacy or whatever, you
can request a postponement. And the board did that. They
postponed things. CIA said, this guy's still alive. He doesn't
want his name out there. Okay, we don't release his name.
But the law said after twenty five years everything becomes public.

(06:20):
So twenty five years after October nineteen ninety two is
October twenty seventeen. Donald Trump has been elected president and
the question comes to him, are all the JFK files
going to be released? So Trump does what Trump does.
He tweets and says all the JFK files have been

(06:40):
released ahead of time, which was a fine sentiment, but
the truth was all the JFK records were not released,
and the ones that were released were released behind schedule.
So what Trump did was he basically agreed to the
demands of the CIA and FBI to keep a lot
of materials secret, fifteen thousand different documents with reactions at

(07:04):
that point, and Trump kicked the can down the road.
He basically said they can keep this stuff secret, and
four years from now we'll revisit it. So four years
from October twenty seventeen, now we're October twenty twenty one,
and Joe Biden as president, and the question comes to
him and he does the same thing Trump does. He
agrees to whatever the CIA and the FBI want. They say,

(07:27):
we don't want to release these things. We'll give you
some other things. And so like Trump, I can release
some records, and he lets the CIA keep some records back.
So eight years after the statutory deadline, we find ourselves
there's still thirty five hundred documents. There are still at

(07:50):
least have one word or one sentence or one paragraph
or one page or many pages redacted. Eight years after
the statutory deadline. Okay, So you know, people started complaining
about this, and we talked about this on my JFK
Fax blog JFK Fax newsletter on Substack, and we pointed out, like,

(08:13):
what is going on? You know, the law is pretty clear,
why is this stuff still public? And we made a
fuss about it, made a fuss about it and kind
of embarrassed Trump because we pointed out that his tweet
was false and that, and there was really no disputing it. Well,
friends of Trump, Tucker Carlson, Andrew to Polaitano, these guys

(08:34):
started giving him a hard time and saying like, why
didn't you do that? And if you listen to these interviews,
Trump rarely is at a loss for words, but when
he's challenged on this subject, I mean, he just didn't
want to answer it. He was embarrassed. You could you
could tell he doesn't embarrass easily, but he was not
comfortable when his friends were saying, why didn't you do that?

(08:57):
Why didn't you do that? I mean he would m
this excuse and that excuse. Well, anyway, when the twenty
twenty four campaign rolled around, there was Robert Kennedy who
first ran as a Democrat and then ran as an
independent and then went over to Trump. And Robert Kennedy
always made an issue about his uncle's murder and he said,
I believe the CIA was involved, very frank about that.

(09:23):
He didn't make it a major issue of his campaign,
but kind of a my issue. He started a campaign
for full disclosure of JFK records, So this was something
he cared about personally. And you can understand that, you
know his father had been killed, his uncle had been killed,
so you know, of course he had strong feelings. So
when RFK went over to Trump in August in Arizona

(09:45):
and they meet on the stage and it's very exciting,
and Trump says, and we're going to release all of
the JFK files.

Speaker 3 (09:51):
The pair of normal moments of twenty twenty five into the.

Speaker 6 (09:56):
Pair of normal pear of.

Speaker 3 (10:07):
The book Underground structures supposedly underneath the Egyptian Pyramids to the.

Speaker 11 (10:13):
Team of researchers came in hospitibus being NASA structure.

Speaker 4 (10:16):
Underneath the lease of the pyramids, and this turuture would
extend to longer.

Speaker 6 (10:21):
See.

Speaker 11 (10:23):
Italian and Scottish researcher conducted advanced high frequency radar mapping
under Egypt's famous pyramids.

Speaker 3 (10:31):
They claim to have discovered wells, caverns.

Speaker 12 (10:34):
And shafts that are more than two thousand feet underground.

Speaker 5 (10:37):
What the thirty doings of the westar techniques of the
pyramids to find instructures within them and the process it
claims to have found some sort of a network beneath that.

Speaker 13 (10:48):
How could something this enormous stay hidden for thousands of years?

Speaker 3 (10:52):
And what would it mean for everything? We thought we
knew about ancient Egypt.

Speaker 14 (10:56):
If this turned out to be true, the pair abnormal
Moments of twenty twenty five tonights, here's my conversation with
Robert Stanley.

Speaker 15 (11:09):
Any of us in this audience who have taken a
seashell that has actually has chambers in it, like a
nautilus or something like a con shell, if you hold
that up to your ear, you'll hear what some people
say it sounds like the ocean. Obviously it's not. But
what that is is your ear is actually hearing frequency
vibrating in the chambers, resonating in the chambers of the shell.

(11:34):
So what this the synthetic aperture radar is actually sitting
a beam down that is then picking up the sensitive
It's so sensitive, it's just all it has to do
is touch the surface and then it registers these micro
frequencies of resonance underneath the ground. So it doesn't have

(11:54):
to penetrate hundreds of feet or whatever two kilometers or
whatever they're claiming, but they're picking up signatures. Now they've
been using that kind of system, similar systems to find
voids in the paramid under the plateau, and for sure
we know it works but it's as far as accessing

(12:17):
some of these things, it's very difficult. Like I said,
the two of us Iris has already been open, that
was a few years ago, but I don't think they
found any remains.

Speaker 4 (12:24):
This particular clip I'm going to read to you here.

Speaker 15 (12:28):
I'm not sure exactly what year it is because I've
put so much information in these reports, I kind of
get lost of which article it came from. But I
think this guy's name is Colin Wilson, but he said
obviously Egypt just had an intriguing political pass in the
battle between East and West. Interestingly, during the writing of
this article, one source contact me claiming that frequently the

(12:48):
SCA and I think that's an archaeological group in Egypt,
receives from the US National Security Agency satellite imagery containing
information as to whether or not there may be subterranean
structure at certain sites in Egypt. So if it works
for the NSA, I imagine it could work for these

(13:09):
these teams over in Europe because NASA uses the synthetic
abature radar as well, and they have found all kinds
of things that are typically not seen by the regular satellite,
you know, the satellite imagery is is different. So even Noah,
the National oshi Inographic Institute, they they use beam satellites

(13:34):
to map the oceans. Those you know like on Google
Earth when you go to the ocean. Yeah, a lot
of that stuff is actually from space, so there's a
way to do it. Obviously, the beams don't penetrate all
the way to the water. So we're talking about a
level of technology. Most people don't even know how it works,
is all I'm saying. So I realize people are upset.

(13:55):
They're trying to make arguments against it. And the people
that are screaming aloud to start the e Gyptologists as usual,
because they don't want to lose their positions of authority
and basically have all their historical narratives destroyed.

Speaker 3 (14:11):
So it's possible that this discovery, with the method that
they're reporting is actually feasible.

Speaker 15 (14:21):
Yeah, but okay, look a lot of people, especially with
artificial intelligence now, they just plug it in and they say,
you know, give me a rendering of this thing, and
it just it pops it out and you see it
everywhere right now. It's a lot of clickbait, in my opinion,
and so people are confused. They really don't know what

(14:42):
to believe.

Speaker 3 (14:44):
All right, So do you think that the evidence is
strong one way or another?

Speaker 15 (14:52):
Yes, yes, because historically, as I said, there's an incredible
amount of evidence that are you know, documented evidence that
other people have actually been there in the past. To
this place underground, it's not called the Halls of Amente.
My understanding is that that's another dimension if it exists

(15:14):
at all. But this complex under the Giza plateau, I
guess parts of it could be natural because there is
an aquifer there, you know, and it would rot like
the Nile would flood seasonally. I think it still does.
But obviously that limestone is rather porous, and I think

(15:35):
I read recently too that the Sphinx actually has to
have water pumped out of that area on a regular basis.
I mean, it's actually accumulatively a lot of water. So
where's that coming from?

Speaker 3 (15:47):
Right? So were the if there was a city beneath
the pyramids, I mean safe to say it probably doesn't
exist in the form that it is civilized today. So
if it was civilized in the past, do we know

(16:07):
exactly when that may have been? And then, of course
the second part of that is is how would it
have met its demise.

Speaker 15 (16:18):
Yeah, that's a good question. Actually a lot of good questions.
I really have no idea. There's no way to validate,
first of all, that it does exist. Second of all,
how old is it? And obviously it did mean its
demise at some point. Otherwise you would think that we
would have found it by now, or whoever was living
there would have let us know that they're there, unless

(16:39):
unless that they were hiding. Like I mean, most of
the underground bases, slash cities that the US government built
back in the fifties, sixties, et cetera. Most people don't
know where those are, and they certainly don't know how
to access them, and if you did, you'd probably get
arrested or worse. So there's a lot going on underground.

(17:01):
Are you familiar with the underground cities in Turkey?

Speaker 3 (17:04):
I've heard about some of them, actually, yes.

Speaker 13 (17:07):
Okay, So if I read this correctly, some of those
cities could could house up to thirty thousand people. And
the tunnel systems that connected these various cities underground that
were like like some of them were ten stories deep,
I remember correctly. I just it's mind boggling. Okay, whoever
did that first question, how did they see You really

(17:31):
think they're running around with torches in the dark all
that all that time for something that deep. I mean, yes,
they had ventilation systems, but you okay, maybe they had candles.
That would take a lot of candles. For thirty thousand
people to be living underground with, you know, water supplies
and stuff, food stores. I just it boggles. And here's

(17:52):
the other thing it was. It was only accidentally rediscovered
back in the sixties. Somebody was doing construction or whatever
and they, you know, knock something through the wall and
next thing you know, they're like, wait a second, there's
a whole city underneath this area. And it turned out
there was quite a few of them, and most of
them are actually yet to be fully excavated. If that,

(18:15):
If that gives you any idea of what we're dealing
with here. It's not just Egypt, although that is fascinating.
And I just I got to ask, have you.

Speaker 4 (18:23):
Ever been there?

Speaker 3 (18:24):
No? Absolutely, never been out of the industry.

Speaker 13 (18:26):
Actually okay, well I wouldn't recommend it, but I went
there when I was fifteen.

Speaker 15 (18:31):
I was there for a few days and it was
the worst poverty I'd ever seen in my life. I'd
already been to like fifty something countries at that point,
but it was also it was the dirtiest place I've
ever been to in my life. You know, it just

(18:51):
and and strange, just I mean otherworldly to put it mildly, like,
you know, they built whole cities for the dead now,
they do this now. And I'm like, I said why,
and guy said, because that's what we do. I'm like, yeah,
all right. And I also went to the Chiro Museum
and I saw a mummy up close that had been

(19:12):
you know, I'd been unwrapped and everything. Then that was
very strange in my young mind. What is that for?
So more questions than answers. I did get to spend
some time in the Great Pyramid. My parents and my
sister didn't want to go for reasons I still don't understand.
But all I know is when I came out there,

(19:33):
like you were in there for a long time, what
were we doing?

Speaker 3 (19:37):
Stay tuned for more pairubnormal moments. I'm into the pair abnormal.

Speaker 1 (19:52):
This is pairubnormal news. A newly disclosed group within the
FBI has secretly been tracking and investigating UFOs. According to
a handful of sources. While the agency is not commenting
on personal matters or the revelation of what the Working
Group may have found, the FBI has stated that they
investigate unidentified anomalist phenomena when there's a potential violation of

(20:17):
federal law or threats to national security. Ryan Graves, executive
director of Americans for Safe Aerospace and a former Navy pilot,
says his organization has been collaborating with the Working Group
to provide them with leads. He says the program consists
of a manager and over a dozen agents nationwide who

(20:38):
are assigned to track down UAP cases. It's unknown, though,
how long it's been in existence or how much money
has been spent. I'm George Henry, pair of normal.

Speaker 11 (20:49):
News scientists are trying to figure out it decades long mystery,
the source of a strange signal that's coming from below
the ice in Antarctica.

Speaker 13 (21:04):
There is really not even the first shred of a
clue the scientists had.

Speaker 3 (21:07):
About where these radio waves are coming from other than
the ice.

Speaker 5 (21:12):
This comes after a series of other bizarre discoveries in
Antarctica over the course of literally decades.

Speaker 14 (21:19):
Some define known physics, hinting at possible alien origins or
unknown particles interacting deep within Earth's frozen depths.

Speaker 13 (21:29):
There's something coming from down there, from down there, from
down there in.

Speaker 3 (21:35):
The Paranormal Moments of twenty twenty five. Brat Olsen.

Speaker 10 (21:39):
Yeah, I went down there six and a half years ago,
so it would have been January February twenty nineteen. Little
did we know that what was going to happen at
the end of twenty nineteen out of Wlu and China.

Speaker 6 (21:52):
But it was.

Speaker 10 (21:54):
It was quite a harrowing trip crossing the Drake Passage
on a sailboat. Almost all of us on the ship
got violently ill with seasick, including myself, and I was
thrown up for about three days and I think I
lost twenty five pounds on that trip. Jeremy, Wow, so
by far the hardest travel I've ever taken.

Speaker 3 (22:16):
And then tell us about once you get there, what
was it like, because did you have to prepare for
those conditions in any special way?

Speaker 10 (22:26):
Well, we prepared for the cold, we prepared for sailing.
But when you're on very very rough seas, including the
Drake Passages, regarded the roughest ocean in the world, the
Southern Ocean, that you really can't do a whole lot.
We took some dramamine, but took it too late, so

(22:48):
we got seasick quite badly, and we were required to
go up on deck every every eight hours. You get
a break and then they want you to go for
four hours to do watch. But if you're heaving up
your guts and you can't feel like you can leave
your cot, then you can't do it. But when I did,

(23:12):
I got up there and just saw those waves that
our boat was just riding right over. And every time
we went down into a trough, I'm looking up and
it's about three stories tall. I'm thinking, oh, we're so screwed.
But the boat just managed to ride the waves. We
did get struck by a rogue wave and it almost

(23:35):
threw one of our team members off the boat, but
he was connected with a harness so probably saved his life.
And we had some damage to the boat as well.
It was quite quite a harrowing journey, is all I
can say. But once we got down there, it was
smooth sailing because we stayed in the Bransford Strait it's

(23:57):
called it's between the islands off of the Palmer Peninsula
mainland Antarctica and several islands, which made it much calmer
seas then when we sailed back, fifteen full days in
Antarctica took our drama mean on time, and by then
we were already pretty well acquainted to the rocking and

(24:19):
rolling of the ship and did not get seasick on
the way back.

Speaker 3 (24:23):
So the way back was easier than the way down.
And what were those days like, I mean, what type
of year were you there?

Speaker 10 (24:31):
Well, you really only want to go during the summer season,
which is of course opposite of ours. So it was
January February twenty nineteen.

Speaker 3 (24:42):
And so you're not experiencing the extreme cold and dry, Yeah,
that sort of thing.

Speaker 10 (24:48):
It's not only that, but the ice pack extends halfway
to South America, so you really couldn't even get there,
at least not safely in the kind of ship we
were in. You can really We only go to Antarctica
between mid November and early March. That's really the tourist season.

Speaker 3 (25:07):
Interesting, So what did you observe when you were there?

Speaker 10 (25:12):
Well, once we got to King George Island, there was
a base called Artowski that we dropped anchor and went
ashore on the dinghy This was a Polish base, and
there were eleven Polish people on our trip and three Americans,
and we were welcomed in. We brought them fresh fruit

(25:34):
and vegetables, which they're very happy about, and we were
allowed to take showers, which I can't tell you how
good that felt after what we'd been through. Had some
two meals with them, and had some drinks and played
music with them. It was really fun evening and the
trip started to become quite enjoyable at that point. But

(25:54):
what we did mainly was every day take the sailboat
to a different location and explore around, either jumping on
the zodiac and go on ashore and checking out penguin
colonies or seals and other wildlife, or just seeing the
beautiful sites down there and going to different bases. We

(26:18):
went to in total, six different bases, and every one
of those bases I went to Jeremy. As far as
I know, I'm the only researcher in this field that
went down there with the specific purpose in mind, and
that is to ask questions and try to find out
some of these mysteries that we've heard of Antarctica.

Speaker 4 (26:39):
So my line of questioning.

Speaker 10 (26:41):
Was did you hear of these three major mother ships
that are down there, If so, could you pinpoint them?
The answer was off, always no. Do you know about
any antidiluvian civilizations down there, such as the pyramids supposedly
poking through the ice, or any other megalithic ancient architecture.

Speaker 6 (27:04):
Anthem was always.

Speaker 10 (27:05):
Now, how about UFO sidings or aliens? Only one time
we got an affirmation that another Argentinian base called the
Belgrano two had a UFO siding a few weeks before
we were there, and they were actually very reluctant to
tell us. So that's kind of how I feel. It

(27:26):
was a true sighting. And apart from that, all I
found out was that there was a no fly zone
over the South Pole region right about where the hole
in the ice is supposed to be, and other no
go zones in Antarctica. And that's kind of interesting, Jeremy,
because per the Antarctica Treaty, the whole continent is supposed

(27:51):
to be open to science and even tourism, right, so
that was kind of interesting to find out that there
were actually places you're not allowed to go.

Speaker 3 (28:02):
So did you observe anything strange when you were there?

Speaker 10 (28:06):
Well, we went to Deception Island, interesting name. And we
went into the bay and we spent a night there,
and then we went ashore to explore an old whaling
colony of the Norwegians from the nineteenth century. And everything
in wood is perfectly preserved there because it's so cold

(28:27):
and a very little animal or viruses can survive down there.

Speaker 6 (28:35):
Everything is preserved.

Speaker 10 (28:36):
But Deception Island is a volcanic caldera, and it had
erupted some years before and wiped out this part parts
of this whaling village we went to. But I bring
up Deception Island because it is a location where there
have been many UFO sidings.

Speaker 3 (28:56):
More pair ofnormal moments of twenty twenty five coming up
on end of the pair of normal H three zero.

Speaker 16 (29:39):
Zero Relaia three zero.

Speaker 10 (29:43):
The world needs to know what happened to m H
three seventy.

Speaker 3 (29:46):
How, how does a Boeing Triple seven disappear? And could
this happen again? The Bow seven seven seven disappeared with
a two hundred and thirty nine people on board en
route from Kuala to Beijing em twenty fourteen.

Speaker 11 (30:02):
Conspiracy theorists believe they know what happened, even where the
missing plane.

Speaker 3 (30:07):
Is the Malaysia m H three seventy footage is real.

Speaker 2 (30:12):
It gets zapped out of existence, it gets wormholed.

Speaker 1 (30:17):
Zero context to zero.

Speaker 13 (30:19):
Last night.

Speaker 3 (30:25):
Ashed in Forbes on the pair of normal Moments of
twenty twenty five.

Speaker 17 (30:31):
So I came about upon them like many others did,
in August of twenty twenty three on the social media
site Reddit. On the subreddit UFOs, it was August seventh
that they were posted and got a lot of chattered.
One of the first things we noticed they had been
posted previously in January of the same year of twenty
twenty three, but didn't get like almost any attention, and

(30:53):
a lot of the comments where this is terrible, this
hurts the family's weird stuff, which now looks like boch comments.
And for about twelve days, maybe a little bit longer, actually, yeah,
twelve days. That was basically the only thing the entire
stub Bright discussed. Every single thread was either people trying
to find more evidence about what we were seeing in

(31:15):
the videos or people trying to debunk to the videos.

Speaker 18 (31:18):
There's never been.

Speaker 17 (31:19):
Any videos that have ever drawn before or since that
amount of tension on Reddit.

Speaker 18 (31:25):
For me, when I got let's say, activist about it.

Speaker 17 (31:28):
I'm somebody that's just I'm a healthcare IT guy for
twenty years, and I got interested in the UFO phenomenon when,
like the Tictac Navy videos, the New York Times article
came out in twenty seventeen, and I started to think
there might be something to this, so I started paying attention.
But I've never had a social media presence or anything
before this. And when I saw the evidence that the

(31:51):
mouse cursor in what we now know is Gorgan Stare
Whammy footage, when I saw the mouse cursor scrolling over
the video, when the video and the background was playing
at a different frame rate than what the mouse cursor
was working at, I knew we were looking at a
screen recording, and an actual screen recording. Whether or not
it was fake or real, it was it. A screen
recording is what we were looking at. And that was

(32:13):
an incredible detail, especially because that detail implied that someone
we were looking at a remote terminal session. And what
I mean by that is that my normal job's a
database consultant. So when you work at like a hospital,
for example, when I'm logged into a system, it's actually
connected to a database somewhere else come me on the
other side of the planet or the other side of

(32:34):
the country, and a database server somewhere, and usually those
database servers are guarded by people's guns. And when that happens,
there's this connection that you do from the terminal that
you're logged into to the actual database. And that's what
this was implying some type of system like that which
would imply its authenticity, especially because I knew the government
used stuff like that. I've done contract work through healthcare

(32:56):
for the government. And the evidence only began to p
after that. I started this organization, started digging into it,
digging into the missing plane. Immediately found out there's definitely
a cover up, found out that they had been hiding
a huge amount of evidence. I found out that a
bunch of evidence that if you just pull it in,
tells a completely different story about what happened to the plane.
And then find out recently in the last week that

(33:19):
the one video is not a satellite video at all,
even though it's called satellite video. It's something called Gorgan's
stare wide area of motion imagery. That's why it looks
so weird. That's why the clouds in some cases don't
look like they're moving very much because it's actually like
three D Google Earth video playback also real time, and
they do this like anti parallax type thing to it

(33:41):
so that you can like interactively track objects on it.
And so since then, now obviously we've been able to
identify who the company is that makes that system, we
now know that this is definitely a covert operation that
we're seeing in the videos that's being conducted against the plane,
and so you know, we can kind of take it
from there.

Speaker 18 (34:01):
That's where this is at at the moment.

Speaker 3 (34:03):
So this system that you refer to for those who
aren't familiar, was this developed by the Air Force?

Speaker 17 (34:09):
Yeah, so Gorgan Stair was developed by the Air Force
and a company called Sierra Nevada Corporation. Just in the
last week, I've realized Seria Nevada Corporation is basically the
Lockheed Martin of the legal spy surveillance. And this Gorgon
Stair thing that we're looking at has never been publicly
revealed ever. They've taught they stopped even giving updates around
the time that these videos leaked, and I've been told

(34:32):
now behind the scenes at least that it may even
be obsolete they may even have better stuff than this,
But what they were doing is they were flying drones
above anywhere they want, and it would give a one
hundred square kilometer view. And what it was doing is
just taking hundreds of pictures that once essentially and then
stitching them together using this software, so it creates this
seamless interactive map, and then you can click on points

(34:53):
and it would pop up a window, and it pops
up a zoomed in window, and then you can move
that window around to track the object you want on
the bigger field of view that you can see behind you.
And that's exactly what we're looking at in the video.
Someone's recording one of those windows as they're tracking the
plane while it's flying low, very low, and there's a
drone above it, and they're tracking this plane. And then

(35:14):
the question everybody asks is, well, why are they tracking it?
And why is there a second video of another drone
horizontal to the plane.

Speaker 18 (35:21):
Because the whole thing was in.

Speaker 17 (35:22):
An operation by the CIA something called the Special Activities Center,
which is some thing for the CIA where they take Jasock,
the special Forces people like Delta Force, Steal Team six,
they take the special of those people. They get something
called a green door assignment, which is like if you
go through the green door, you can never talk about

(35:43):
that mission that you went on like ever. And so
they go on these types of missions, and so like
the camera operator presumably is somebody that's like a special
Forces person that would never talk ever in a million
years about what happened. And how the videos got on
the internet. Is that somebody else accessed because none of
those people are ever gonna None of people on those
operations would ever leak it. They would never take a

(36:04):
chance of being putting someone in operation that would even
have a remote chance of leaking footage like that. So
what happened was the Gorgan Stair footage, and apparently the
drone footage must have got put somewhere on a shared
network where other military had access to it. In this case,
a guy named Edward Lynn from the Navy. He was
in a special secret spy plane program called the VPU

(36:25):
two Wizards, and so he probably was high ranked enough,
and we looked his history up and he would have
been to accidentally have seen this footage and then he
might have freaked out because it's so foreign when you
look at it. Everybody thinks it's aliens at first, but
it's actually not it' human technology that he probably thought
it was aliens and he leaked it or showed somebody
it and they got it on the internet, and so

(36:45):
ultimately the responsibility fell back on Edward Lynn for those
videos being on the internet, and he was lucky that
nobody until ten years later realized that those videos were real,
because they probably would have killed him if people had
realized that was real. But because nobody realized it was real,
and because he probably wasn't intentionally trying to leak the footage,
he probably didn't know what was going on. He only

(37:05):
got nine years nine years so and the Edward Link
case I go on time to go all into it,
but he triggered a national security alert at the highest levels.
They tried to get him with espionage and had to
admit there was no evidence of espionage. They were terrified
that what he was going to leak was gonna that
he would say something like in the trial about what
he leaked, so they had him in pre trial detainment.

(37:27):
They made him take a plea deal because they were
afraid the case would go to trial, because they were
afraid they'd have to show the evidence. His lawyer said,
the evidence in questions available on the internet, and he
got caught with flight manifests that included search and rescue
code names. Meaning the reason why he saw the videos
he was on the rescue operation, the search and rescue
operation for the Navy afterwards, and he accessed the video

(37:48):
to probably help look for the plane. And he saw
that and went, holy, I just found out what happened
to the plane.

Speaker 3 (37:55):
Edward Lynn the individual member of the Air Force, Ashton,
he brought these forward, leaked them.

Speaker 17 (38:03):
Maybe nag and people were wondering, Ashton, how do you
know Edward Lynn is the guy that did it?

Speaker 18 (38:09):
Well, I just gave you the evidence.

Speaker 17 (38:11):
And in addition to that, two months after I started
naming him, which was about October of twenty twenty three,
the end of December of twenty twenty three, he files
for an official name change. So instead of suing me,
instead of reaching out to me, instead of having his
lawyer send a message to me saying I'm not the guy,
don't say my name, you're defaming me, he legally changes

(38:32):
his name and goes into Heidi. I've literally been trying
to reach him for two years and recently we found
a video on YouTube of his new name. That's how
we found out how his name change. And there he is.

Speaker 18 (38:42):
I actually couldn't even believe that he would be bold
enough to put his face on a YouTube video. And
he was using old pictures from the Navy, from like
media stuff, and he was using his new name, and
so of course I reached out to the company, try
to reach out to him again, no response. Somebody finally
gets in touch was his lawyer, and his lawyer says

(39:03):
that the Feds brought quote unquote satellite video into the
case and that he knew exactly what the person was
talking about when they brought it up, but we didn't
get to end up getting in the context of what
they meant. And then when I tried to get in
touch with the lawyer because I found his phone number
from the person or whatever, won't talk to me. We
won't pick up the phone, won't return a voicemail, won't
return a call, and now he's turned off his phone

(39:23):
phones now, deman, you know, just go straight to voicemail
for the last several weeks. So, I mean, he's got
to be the guy, absolutely has to be the guy.
And it fits the story of what his case is
and what happened with the leaks of those videos. Because
for people that think those videos are fake, first thing
I want to tell you think about this, how did

(39:45):
the hoaxer know that we would never find the plane
at any moment while they were making these elaborate military
prank hoax videos that are one's in thermal flear and
one's in infrared. They're both at nighttime.

Speaker 17 (40:00):
Any moment we could have just found the massive bowing
Triple seven that the debris show feel should have been
visible from space. We could find it any moment, blowing
up the hoax. And yet somehow the hooks are new
we would never find a plane. Other was that hoax
would fall apart. So what I'm saying is that there
is no possible way in hell that the videos are fake.
No chance, not even a slight chance, the videos are fake.

Speaker 3 (40:21):
Thanks for joining us on the pair ofnormal moments of
twenty twenty five into the para normal pair of normal.

Speaker 1 (40:35):
News of George Henry, video of a US military encounter
with the UFO made headlines at this week's congressional hearing
when Congressman Eric Berlison played a clip before the task
force that he says was obtained from an anonymous whistleblower.

Speaker 19 (40:49):
This was taken October thirtieth of twenty twenty four. This
video is of an MQ nine drone tracking an orb
or this object off the coast of Yemen. You'll see
that another m Q nine launched a hellfire missile.

Speaker 1 (41:05):
Instead of imploding the object, the missile appears to bounce
off of it, and masses of debris appear to break
away from the object. The three military witnesses who testified
at the hearing were asked about the video.

Speaker 11 (41:18):
Does this video scare you guys?

Speaker 17 (41:22):
Yes or no?

Speaker 18 (41:23):
Yes, wiggans, yes yes.

Speaker 1 (41:26):
The witnesses also testified that no US technology is capable
of surviving such an attack. Here parubnormal news every hour
on into the pair of normal.

Speaker 8 (41:42):
There's a parallel universe.

Speaker 7 (41:47):
Separation. While we received seriality into the pair of do.

Speaker 6 (42:07):
Go into the parents?

Speaker 7 (42:11):
Into the parent.

Speaker 9 (42:22):
In recent months, Congress has also been presented with evidence
that points to technologies that, to our knowledge, are beyond
our current capabilities.

Speaker 13 (42:30):
These unknown technologies that come supposedly from elsewhere.

Speaker 17 (42:35):
We have got technology that's better than George Lucas, better
than anything you see.

Speaker 3 (42:38):
In Star Wars and Star Trek whatever, and it's kept
absolutely secret.

Speaker 8 (42:44):
We already have the means to travel among the stars,
but these technologies are locked up in black project and
it will take an act of God to ever get
them out for the benefit of you, Mandy.

Speaker 3 (43:04):
These are the pair of normal moments of twenty twenty
five retired US Air Force staff Sergeant Jean Sticko.

Speaker 6 (43:11):
You know, one one gentleman looked at it.

Speaker 5 (43:13):
He recognized the engine component as being thermonuclear, but again
without sort of the whole translation.

Speaker 6 (43:23):
And things like that.

Speaker 5 (43:25):
It you know, it was really no more, really no
more than guesswork.

Speaker 6 (43:30):
So what we decided to do.

Speaker 5 (43:32):
Eventually, another friend, Mario Fialo, who's credited as a as
a co author, does a lot of work building AI
language models and things like that, and so we we
began using, you know, probably about a year and a
half ago, using AI to help us translate it. And
that's where we were. We really came down to the

(43:54):
the process. So we said, okay, we can use AI
to to train the text. Natalia can look at it
linguistically and verify it to an extent. That way, we
would run it through alternate models as well. To test

(44:15):
the translations, and then we you know, we began compiling
it that way. In the meantime, as you mentioned in
the introduction, I really started looking at it from a
forensic standpoint. So what do we know about the man?
What do we know about the timeframes? You know, there's
there's things in the book that talk about twenty twenty

(44:37):
four and twenty twenty and going into twenty twenty six,
you know, so I started breaking all that down as
as methodically and systematically as possible to say, Okay, these
look like they were written through the early nineties because
they are typewritten. They are type written with handwriting, so

(45:00):
obviously a computer wasn't involved in creating them. So that's
what it gives us a mid time nineties timeframe. We
have all of the politics and geopolitics of the collapse
of the Soviet Union. We have what he could have
known during that period when it comes to some of

(45:23):
the physics theories that he talks about, some of the theories
he challenges. And then we have obviously his death in
twenty nineteen and advancements in science that have happened since then.
And so I begin in order to validate, you know,

(45:44):
in as much as a layman Kurk can validate physics,
you know, asking those questions, you know, what did he
know then, what do we see now in the scientific community,
and then taking a step back to the sort of
intel side of it, researching what do what did official

(46:08):
Soviet documentation look like? The the papers themselves, some of
them are different colored papers, Some of them you can
see remnants of paper clips, you can see the staining
of you know, probably smoke filled rooms.

Speaker 4 (46:24):
Uh.

Speaker 5 (46:24):
Some of the papers are are carbon copies, so they're
not the originals, which would say the original has you know,
gone off to somewhere else.

Speaker 6 (46:34):
So piecing all of.

Speaker 5 (46:35):
That together and trying to put together a forensic profile
of the body of work as we had it, the
man as we knew him, and filling in the blanks
along with what we could assess as the science as
it developed, continues us, you know, on that path, and

(46:56):
continued us led us to those conclusions. I should say
that this really is an authentic body of work. The
language that he uses throughout it is not theoretical. So
if you you know, anyone's into psychle linguistics and all
of that, you know he's not talking in terms of

(47:19):
I think, and maybe he's talking in terms of specific observations.
He mentions at one point, you know, finding plasma the
the the calculations again are specific and direct.

Speaker 6 (47:36):
So that was part of the work.

Speaker 5 (47:38):
And then some of the side work I've been doing
during that period and since is looking at what publicly
available data you know, was available about ussr eerror, reported crashes,
reported recoveries and making you know, various comparisons against that,
along with ultimately looking at patents that have been filed

(48:02):
by the Russians, the Chinese, and the US and comparing
them against the craft in the book, and all of
those comparisons indicate that what we have in the book
is actually missing links to what are even in the
patents and and so what that's you know, says to

(48:26):
me is, in a sense Russia. You know, this is
probably part of what was a larger body of work
that has led to recent developments in you know, Russian
weapons systems and space. And again, these these public patents
that we can find.

Speaker 6 (48:45):
And if they.

Speaker 5 (48:46):
Had it, then similarly, I would imagine the US has it,
and if they don't have it, then they are you know,
we're we're seriously behind the ball on you know, a
national security impact. But trying to get this to the
attention of people has been very difficult. And you know,

(49:08):
as you know you've seen and releasing it. We you know,
it's not a sexy book at all. It's very straightforward
in so much as we said, let's not interject opinion
into it or our ideas. Let's give a translation and
basically invite the scientific community to to do the math.

Speaker 3 (49:28):
Okay, so what do we actually know about the UFO?

Speaker 6 (49:33):
Well, I mean, what do we know about its origin?

Speaker 3 (49:36):
I I know nothing, size, that sort of thing where
it's yeah, yeah.

Speaker 5 (49:41):
So so the specific the specifications, it's about a thirty
meter in diameter object.

Speaker 6 (49:48):
What really struck me was it weighs.

Speaker 5 (49:53):
Weighs something you know, in in the realm of you know,
six million pounds. So for the size, it's extraordinarily heavy.
I think when I sort of ran numbers, it came
up with, you know, it's the size of you know,
or the weight at least of sixteen you know, fully
loaded seven forty sevens, which is you know, sort of

(50:15):
mind boggling. But one of the interesting things we finally
found sort of through a mutual friend a Russian who
understood physics enough and understood the subject matter enough, quite
quite elderly, and he put it in perspective because again,

(50:35):
running a lot of these models, particularly through AI, you know,
they would say, this is theoretical, that's there. You know, yes,
it's correct, but it's theoretical. And he offered a different perspective.
He said, well, it's theoretical according to what we know
of physics. It's theoretical according to the physics of our planet.
But if this is built someplace that has a different

(50:59):
gravitational pull and things like then it.

Speaker 6 (51:02):
You know, the math works. And as we started approaching
it that.

Speaker 5 (51:06):
Way again, it just fully validated everything within that context,
if that makes sense.

Speaker 6 (51:13):
Yeah, and that's sort of the great unknown, depending on
the circumstances of the craft.

Speaker 5 (51:19):
There's no indication of damage, there's no indication of it
being in pieces.

Speaker 3 (51:24):
The par of noormal moments of twenty twenty five.

Speaker 4 (51:34):
Into the pair of normal pair of.

Speaker 16 (51:36):
The pentodonces of the government once had of a plan
to reverse engineer any recovered UFOs.

Speaker 3 (51:49):
The United States is trying to back engineer this technology,
this idea of technology in secret facilities.

Speaker 10 (51:55):
I was informed in the course of my official duties
of a multi day gad UAP crash retrieval and reverse
engineering program.

Speaker 14 (52:04):
There's UFO materials being studied a big low aerospace in
Las Vegas, among other places.

Speaker 13 (52:09):
I don't think to anywhere near understanding and completely how.

Speaker 6 (52:13):
These things operated.

Speaker 5 (52:14):
There's something about these materials that we could not have created.

Speaker 3 (52:23):
And on the pair of normal moments of twenty twenty five,
here's doctor Gregory Rogers.

Speaker 13 (52:30):
I had gone to inspect several sites at pink Penaveral
Air Force Station. Even though the Air Force owned the
entire station, we had contractors who would perform certain duties.
Now people who know are going to know who this

(52:52):
is when I say it. But the primary contractor that
I dealt with for medical and inspection purposes was EG
and G, their well known government contractor to the Department
of Defense. And so on this day, I'd made an

(53:14):
appointment with an EG and G escort, and he was
going to show me three places where there were some
new aspects of preparation. So he was going to let
me see what they were so I would be familiar

(53:35):
with it. I went to the first and second building
and everything seemed totally normal. I went to the third
building and I had to go into a clean room area.
So I had to put a cap on, my head,
lab coat on, and gloves on, and then these non

(53:59):
electric static booties before I could go into the clean room.
So I went in saw the new processes. I said, okay,
that looks great, and so my escort and I left
the clean room and when we went into the intermediate room,

(54:21):
that was where I had to.

Speaker 18 (54:22):
Take my.

Speaker 13 (54:24):
Little cap off, take off my lab coat, my gloves,
and my electrostatic booties. Well, because this was the last
place we were going, my escort did this faster than
I did because he did it all the time. And
so just as I was finishing doffing the equipment that

(54:50):
I had worn, he said, okay, dot see you later,
and boom off he went. So maybe one minute later,
I got through, hung up my stuff and exited through
these double doors. As I did so, I was alone,
and there was a major who was standing over to

(55:12):
my right next to this small little office area, and
as I went by, he smiled and waved to me
and came up to me and said, hey, Doc, I've
got something to show you. And I said, okay, well,
what is it? And he said, I've got something even
you have never seen.

Speaker 18 (55:33):
Now.

Speaker 13 (55:33):
The reason I think he said that was most areas
on Cape Canaveral were compartmentalized security. So if you work
in these three buildings, the only place you could go
on Cape Canaveral was those three buildings. But then there
were lots of other buildings. Well, because I had to

(55:55):
oversee so much of what was going on, I could
actually go to about eighty percent of the buildings. There
were still some buildings that were too classified for me
to even go in, but I went to probably eighty
percent of the various buildings on Cape Canaveral, and so

(56:18):
I had badges for each security area. So as I
was walking along, I had this little necklace with all
of these security badges on. So he said, I've got
something to show you.

Speaker 4 (56:33):
Come here.

Speaker 13 (56:34):
So I didn't know what was going on, So I
stepped into the small little office that was there. The
office was not very deep, but it was wide enough
for four separate computer console regions. So he went over

(56:56):
to I believe it was the third computer set up,
and he sat down, and as he was talking to me,
I was just standing there wondering, okay, what's he going
to show me? Well, when he went into the room,
he shut the door and locked it. He closed the
loovers on the windows on the door and also along

(57:20):
the hallway, So I thought, that's pretty strange. When he
finally pulled up his computer and console, there was an
image there, so he said, here it is, and so
he scooted one chair to his left and allowed me
to sit at his computer station. When I looked at

(57:41):
the computer, I was very surprised, to say the least.
It looked like a typical military flight hanger. There were
a couple of guys on the left side that looked
like engineers in lab coats, dressed pretty much like I

(58:02):
had just been in the clean bait that I had
been in. And then on the right side, it looked
like three guys that were in taibek suits. But in
between them was a saucer shaped disc and it was
just reclining on the floor. It wasn't doing anything, it

(58:25):
was just sitting there. I looked at him, said where
did we get this from? Who made it? And he said, well,
I can't tell you that, And I said, well, why
did we make it? Why would we make craft looking

(58:48):
like this? Well, He made a sort of fist with
his hand with his thumb sticking up and he pointed
up to the sky several times and said, we got
it from them. So I said, oh, my goodness. Well
I looked at the screen. There were no classification markings,

(59:11):
no identification of the location, the date, or the time
of filming. So the clean the screen was completely clean,
and I'm just looking at this thing. Well, sound went
off and the people cleared out, and then within a
couple of minutes there were some electrostatic discharges that began

(59:35):
to occur surrounding this vehicle. Now it was about twenty
foot wide.

Speaker 6 (59:42):
It looked like.

Speaker 13 (59:44):
A modified egg stick.

Speaker 3 (59:46):
With us for more pair of normal moments of twenty
twenty five on into the pair of normal.

Speaker 1 (01:00:27):
This is parubnormal. News video has just been released of
what appears to be another encounter that the US military
had with a tic TAC shaped UFO. The video is
from the USS Jackson, a US Navy destroyer. In February
twenty twenty three, off the coast of San Diego, California,
naval officers encountered four unidentified objects that performed a synchronized

(01:00:52):
maneuvers with two emerging from the ocean before disappearing from radar.
At least one exhibited transmedia capabilities by transitioning seamlessly from
underwater to the air without visible propulsion or exhaust. This
encounter happened in the same area of the Pacific Ocean
where other sailors have reported similar incidents, including the two

(01:01:15):
thousand and four tic TAC encounter involving the USS nimics
that has become widely known within the UFO community. I'm
George Henry. Pair of normal.

Speaker 12 (01:01:25):
News tragedy at estop on the nationwide tour is supposedly
possessed Annabel Doll.

Speaker 3 (01:01:41):
The paranormal community is leverating. Dan Rivera, the ghost hunter
and paranormal.

Speaker 14 (01:01:46):
Investigator, died over the weekend while on tour with the
infamous Annabel Doll.

Speaker 3 (01:01:53):
There's a spirit of death involved around this doll.

Speaker 10 (01:01:55):
Other people have died around this doll.

Speaker 9 (01:01:57):
Decades of lor surrounding Annabel, causing a social media a
great among those fascinated by the paranormal.

Speaker 15 (01:02:06):
There's no such thing as Annabelle, and there never was.

Speaker 12 (01:02:11):
Rocking in the chair with Arabelle.

Speaker 5 (01:02:21):
Annabelle did not escape.

Speaker 8 (01:02:24):
I'd be concerned if Annabel I really did leave because
she's nothing to play.

Speaker 3 (01:02:28):
With the pair of normal moments of twenty twenty five
Fiona Dardwell, you.

Speaker 20 (01:02:39):
Know, as you mentioned at the beginning of the show,
with Annabelle, for instance, her legend and everything that's grown
around her has been in the public consciousness since the
seventies now, so you know, it's quite a common thing.
You can mention Annabelle and people will automatically know who
you're thrown to, and you have that imagery and the
dark things that have happened around her, and without needing

(01:03:01):
to say much else but the name. And then Robert
the Doll is quite similar. There's some very famous cases
like this in modern times. Peggy the Doll, who's now
at zach Begen's museum, and Harold the Doll. You know,
these have become quite entrenched in popular culture now, and
you know they're quite well known all over the world,

(01:03:24):
so even the names themselves get fully loaded the kind
of have a huge association for people.

Speaker 3 (01:03:31):
So the story of Annabelle, where does it begin?

Speaker 20 (01:03:35):
So it traces right back to the seventies when a
young student was gifted the doll from her mum, and
as the legend goes. Donna owned this doll for some
time in her apartment, and it wasn't too long before
she noticed some weird things happening. So she noticed things

(01:03:57):
like the doll would be found in places that she
hadn't left it, that it would be moved around different positions.
She started to write, like find handwritten notes that were
written in an eerie, childlike scraw around the place where
she lived. And then it began to affect visitors, like
her friend's boyfriend came over and apparently he experienced nightmares

(01:04:21):
and woke with scratches. And it wasn't long before they
made that association that there was something with the doll itself,
and as I'm sure most of your listeners know, that
it wasn't well ed and Lorraine Warren wasn't too long
before they became involved, and they said that there was

(01:04:42):
an energy attached to Anna Belle and that it was
something demonic and negative, and that it was really trying
to eventually find a way to possess the owner. So
eventually they took the doll to their museum where it
resided for me the years and ever since then we've

(01:05:02):
had all sorts, So you know, we've had the documentaries
and the movie franchise and books, and obviously, as recent
headlines have shown us, she's still making a bit of
a dramatic splash in the world. So she's definitely one
of the more well known cases and one that still
frightens a lot of people, and I can see why.

Speaker 3 (01:05:23):
So did the doll take on a different image in
people's minds over the years, particularly in appearance.

Speaker 20 (01:05:32):
I think so. And I think that the film, well,
the film itself, which really brought the story kind of
to a new audience, and they used a whole different
imagery for Annabella as well. I mean, as I'm sure
you know that the original Annabelle doll is a cute,
little raggedy an dole, and the film used like a
quite dark, demonic, ugly looking doll. And you know, I

(01:05:57):
think the film wanted to play into sort of the
horror image, but actually, you know, the doll itself was
quite a cute, cute looking thing, and if anything, I
was thinking about this recently. If anything, I think that
when you see something like a little vintage doll that's
quite pretty and dainty or kind of very childlike, that's

(01:06:19):
actually more eerie than what Hollywood tries to portray. I
think honestly they try and use the more obvious things
to kind of make something look scary. But yeah, Annabelle
herself was a raggedy andle and I think that her
image has certainly transformed along with Hollywood's adaptation of her story.

(01:06:42):
But the core truth of well, if you believe in her,
you know, I have to say truth. You know, that's
your perception and whether you believe in these things or not.
But the core story of her legend and what's happened
around her has remained the same. It's just it's found
a way to evolve through three adaptations of film.

Speaker 3 (01:07:04):
This was designed in the early nineteen hundreds, this particular
raggedy Ann doll which later became Annabelle. Right, yes, yes,
it was.

Speaker 20 (01:07:16):
Yeah, it goes back many years and the gentleman who
actually came up with her design had a daughter and
she found the doll, or a raggedy Ann type doll
in the family home attic, and she loved it so much,
and her dad really thought that this was something that

(01:07:38):
could prove to be a popular toy in general for
a public market, so he patented the design and he
came up with the idea of mass producing this raggedy
ann doll, and that's exactly what happened, and they became
quite popular, quite popular for children. But the sad truth
is that there were reports that his daughter passed away

(01:08:02):
from an illness when she was quite young. So there
was already quite a sad link to the Annabelle story.
And going back to that kind of the roots of
that story.

Speaker 3 (01:08:12):
Marcella I believe was her name, And how do we
know how long after they had the doll in their
possession she passed.

Speaker 20 (01:08:23):
Unfortunately, it's not something I know because I've read various
different things. It's it's hard to ascertain which, you know,
which is true. So I know that she was supposed
to have been young, she was supposed to have still
being a child when it happened, but I don't know
how in close proximity.

Speaker 3 (01:08:40):
That was her early teens.

Speaker 20 (01:08:44):
Yes, she was quite young. I think maybe thirteen or something.
But it's really yeah, it's really hard to you know,
as I'm sure you know, you can go on online
and to see various accounts, so it's really hard to
get to the route the root facts of the story.

Speaker 3 (01:09:02):
But do we know where even the faithless doll that
Marcella found in the attic came from.

Speaker 20 (01:09:12):
No, And that's quite unusual, isn't it, because that almost
adds to the mystery of the story, especially when this is,
you know, brings us back to the origins of the
Raggedy ann and then Anna Belle and her story and everything.
So that's something that was never, as far as I
could find anyway, reported on where that doll came from,

(01:09:33):
or what that doll was, who it belonged to, or anything.
So that's not something that I've been able to confirm
what that was.

Speaker 3 (01:09:43):
Just imagine though, the grief of the father and maybe
you know, responsibility he may have felt by allowing his
daughter to possess the doll. What did his life become
after his daughter's passing.

Speaker 20 (01:10:01):
I you know, the thing is that I think because
we have to remember that the doll that his daughter
had was way before any of the legend to do
with Annabelle that we know of today. So it's more
just that that The reason I mentioned that in the
book was more just because it was something I wanted

(01:10:22):
to research about the origins of how the Raggedy and
Doles came about in general.

Speaker 18 (01:10:28):
So his daughter.

Speaker 20 (01:10:30):
I think it was just a sad coincidence that she
had become ill and that it happened to be you know,
her father happened to be the person that was bringing
The Raggedy and Ale to popular production. So it's not
necessary that there was a direct link in that sense.
It's just something that I felt worthy mentioning because of

(01:10:51):
the connection. I'm not sure exactly what her circumstances were
when she when she died, other than that there was
reports that she maybe possibly had like a flu or
some kind of illness. Yeah, yeah, yeah, that was definitely mentioned.
So it was something like that, and that must have
been very sad, you know, for him to lose her

(01:11:12):
at such a young age.

Speaker 3 (01:11:14):
From my understanding, kept the doll around afterwards as kind
of a to help him grieve over the loss of
his daughter.

Speaker 20 (01:11:24):
Yeah, this is something I've that I've come across to
and you know in my research that he kept the doll.
So maybe because he, you know, knew how special it
had been to her, that was something that he kept.
But it was just it was just it was just
part of the sad history of the beginning of the

(01:11:46):
doll itself.

Speaker 3 (01:11:47):
Next our final pair ofnormal moment of twenty twenty five.

Speaker 8 (01:12:05):
Three Iye Atlas was discovered on July first by the
NASA funded Atlas Survey. I was discovered using their telescope.

Speaker 12 (01:12:13):
It is only the third time we have detected an
object that have come from beyond our Solar system.

Speaker 5 (01:12:18):
We know that it's relatively big compared to the other two.

Speaker 11 (01:12:23):
It's now officially confirm that not only is this an
object from outside of the Solar System, it also is
potentially the oldest comet ever observed.

Speaker 17 (01:12:32):
This object was moving too fast for something would normally
be bound to our Solar system.

Speaker 1 (01:12:39):
The newly discovered space traveler is turning heads across the
astronomical world.

Speaker 3 (01:12:49):
The paranormal moments of twenty twenty five leaders.

Speaker 2 (01:12:53):
To Professor Robbie loebe basically because the survey telescopes that
can detect them were only available over the past decade,
and it started with the Pants Stars Observatory it in
Hawaii that was constructed as a result of a directive
from the US Congress to NASA to search for all

(01:13:16):
objects bigger than the size of a football field about
one hundred and forty meters or so. That may impact
the Earth that come close to Earth.

Speaker 18 (01:13:25):
And so.

Speaker 2 (01:13:27):
That was the beginning of the search for such objects.
And in the process of looking for near Earth objects,
punt Stars discovered in twenty seventeen a near earth object
that was moving too fast to be bound to the Sun.
It was given the name of Muhumoir, which means a
scout in the Hawaiian language. And prior to that we

(01:13:47):
just didn't have the facility to the text such objects.
We expect lots of them. So an object the size
of a muhoma which was of the order of one
hundred meters in size at least in length, know how
thin it was. Those arrive every year through the region

(01:14:10):
within the orbit of the Earth around the Sun. And moreover,
if you imagine smaller objects you know existing, we might
have you know, a million objects that are the size
of a person or so within the orbit of the
Earth around the Sun. At this point in time, we

(01:14:30):
just can't see them because they reflect very little sunlight.
And the reason we have this detection of a one
boy is because it was big enough to reflect sufficient
amount of sunlight for our telescope, the Pansla's telescope to
find it. Then it took a couple of years before
we found the second one. It was an amateur astronomer

(01:14:52):
that discovered it. That one was easier to detect because
it was a comet, meaning that it produced a glow
of gas and dust around it because it evaporated as
it came close to the sun about We discovered it
when it was about two point five times the Earth
sun separation, so comets are easier to detect. Its size

(01:15:15):
was actually the core size. The nucleus of that comet
was probably about four hundred five hundred meters in diameter.
We don't know exactly, but the plume of gas and
dust was much bigger, reflected enough sunlight to be detectable easily.

Speaker 4 (01:15:35):
And then.

Speaker 2 (01:15:37):
Just now, on July first, twenty twenty five, and a
few weeks ago, the third object was discovered. It was
discovered in the distance of four point five times the
Earth sun separation. There is a little bit of fuzz
around it. It's a bit more extended than the image
of a star in the background. Some people argue with

(01:16:02):
a lot of confidence that it must be a comet.
We have to wait another month or so before it
comes close enough to the sun, so that it will
be beyond any reasonable doubt that it has a huge
cometary tail if it gets warmed up by the sun
and the icy surf as evaporate. But as of now,

(01:16:23):
it's you know, it's the existence of a comma is
sort of marginal. And I actually wrote a paper shortly
after it was discovered because the claim was that based
on the flax, it's very bright, and therefore, if it

(01:16:43):
was a rock, it had to be twenty kilometers in diameter,
which is huge, twice as large as the rock that
killed the dinosaurs sixty six million years ago. And I
calculated that it makes no sense to have such a
big rock because we found it after five years of

(01:17:03):
survey with the Atlas telescope, half a meter telescope that
surveyed the sky from Chile. And that means that, you know,
if it's a giant rock, not only should we have
found of the order of a million or more and
more like objects before we find one object that is

(01:17:24):
twenty kilometers in size simply because it's so much bigger,
but also the amount of masks that need to be
supplied from interstellar space exceeds all reasonable estimates of how
many rocks and how much mass in rocks there is
perimit volume interstell space. So I argue that you know,

(01:17:45):
the simpler solution would be it's a comet with a
small nucleus less than a kilometer in size, not very
different from Borisov maybe a factor of a few bigger,
but not much bigger than that. And then there is
no issue with the mask because it's a small object
surrounded by a plume of dust that reflects sunlight, and

(01:18:06):
that's why we see it as bright as we do.
But it yet to remains to be seen that the
reason died a cloud around it. And moreover, when people
took a spectrum of this object, it's called three eye
Atlas because the Atlas telescope found it the survey of
the telescope. And by the way, it was a half

(01:18:28):
a meter telescope where just next to the Rubin Observatory
that was inaugurated in June twenty twenty five, and so
this small telescope scooped the Ruben Observatory. It's just their
neighbors in Chile. But the Rubin telescope found data on

(01:18:49):
this object that preceded the discovery day with the Atlas telescope.
So there was a very nice paper by the Rubin
team providing the image of this object and additional data
on its trajectory. So altogether, you know, if I had

(01:19:10):
to bet, I would say it's probably a comet. And
what we see is the reflection of sunlight from a
cloud of dust around a very compact nucleus. But we
haven't resolved yet the nucleus. We haven't seen the cloud
of dust clearly. So as a result, you know, I
was willing to consider that it's something else and we

(01:19:32):
can talk about it more sure.

Speaker 3 (01:19:35):
But do you suspect that we will find more of
these interstellar objects over time?

Speaker 20 (01:19:42):
Oh?

Speaker 18 (01:19:42):
Definitely.

Speaker 2 (01:19:43):
So the Rubin Observatory that by the way, was constructed.
It's about eight hundred million dollars cost and that cost
was paid by the National Science Foundation in collaboration with
Department of Energy, and the main goal of that observatory

(01:20:05):
is to find what the Panstars observatory could not, so
complete the task of puantstars and perhaps get to find
most of the objects bigger than one and forty meters
in them.

Speaker 3 (01:20:18):
And those are the pair of normal moments of twenty
twenty five. We'll make more together with you in twenty
twenty six, God willing, and if you missed any of
these shows you want to hear the entire episodes, find
them free. It's our gift to you on all the
podcast apps. From the cold dark depths of a secret

(01:20:40):
dungeon somewhere deep in the remote Pacific Northwest, good night,
thank god Less.

Speaker 20 (01:21:00):
The fact is Satatattatur