October 9, 2024 • 55 mins
Today's guest is known as Missileman on UFOTwitter. He has a BS in Mathematics, MS in aerospace engineering, and is working on a PhD in Materials Science focused on topological materials and metamaterials.
He has been an engineer in defense & space for about 16 years.
Since 2022 he has been active on ufotwitter, and he attended Sol and SCU events. He's primarily interested in interrogating the theory and operation of UFO physics from a nuts and bolts perspective.
He is also cohost of the Catastrophic Disclosure Podcast on YouTube and Spotify.
About Director Darcy Weir
Diving into the chaos of UFOTwitter like a fearless spelunker, Darcy Weir is a documentary filmmaker who over the past two decades has chosen to explore some of the most intriguing topics of discussion today, including UFOs, Cryptids, and even Bitcoin. He has completed over 15 feature-length documentaries on these topics, all of which are available on Amazon Prime and Apple. His goal is to make the world of UFOs more accessible to the general public by shedding light on the subject in new ways. Enjoy fresh conversations with him on Twitter. Join the Twitter Space to share in the conversation.
Links
Amazon: https://amzn.to/3wHv7JJ
Apple TV: https://apple.co/3TlQQ2Q
https://x.com/occultjourneys
https://www.instagram.com/darcyweirfilms/
https://www.youtube.com/@OccultJourneys
About Andy Marcial
Andy is a researcher of 20+ yrs who was forced down the rabbit hole after very personal and life changing close encounters which started in Puerto Rico. His entire life, all he has done, is try to understand what he saw and why he went through what he went through. It changed him and showed him that there is an entire reality out there beyond human comprehension. It also drove him to reach out to others like himself because of how psychologically damaging this can be. He also recently leaked three Department of Homeland Security videos to the public, which were controversial, but officially recognized as UAP by Customs and Border Patrol in August of 2023. Andy doesn't do what he does for any other reason than to open the minds of anyone willing to listen and to show those affected by this phenomenon that they are not alone.
Links
https://www.instagram.com/ny_uap_discussion/
https://www.youtube.com/@UFOCompilation
He has been an engineer in defense & space for about 16 years.
Since 2022 he has been active on ufotwitter, and he attended Sol and SCU events. He's primarily interested in interrogating the theory and operation of UFO physics from a nuts and bolts perspective.
He is also cohost of the Catastrophic Disclosure Podcast on YouTube and Spotify.
About Director Darcy Weir
Diving into the chaos of UFOTwitter like a fearless spelunker, Darcy Weir is a documentary filmmaker who over the past two decades has chosen to explore some of the most intriguing topics of discussion today, including UFOs, Cryptids, and even Bitcoin. He has completed over 15 feature-length documentaries on these topics, all of which are available on Amazon Prime and Apple. His goal is to make the world of UFOs more accessible to the general public by shedding light on the subject in new ways. Enjoy fresh conversations with him on Twitter. Join the Twitter Space to share in the conversation.
Links
Amazon: https://amzn.to/3wHv7JJ
Apple TV: https://apple.co/3TlQQ2Q
https://x.com/occultjourneys
https://www.instagram.com/darcyweirfilms/
https://www.youtube.com/@OccultJourneys
About Andy Marcial
Andy is a researcher of 20+ yrs who was forced down the rabbit hole after very personal and life changing close encounters which started in Puerto Rico. His entire life, all he has done, is try to understand what he saw and why he went through what he went through. It changed him and showed him that there is an entire reality out there beyond human comprehension. It also drove him to reach out to others like himself because of how psychologically damaging this can be. He also recently leaked three Department of Homeland Security videos to the public, which were controversial, but officially recognized as UAP by Customs and Border Patrol in August of 2023. Andy doesn't do what he does for any other reason than to open the minds of anyone willing to listen and to show those affected by this phenomenon that they are not alone.
Links
https://www.instagram.com/ny_uap_discussion/
https://www.youtube.com/@UFOCompilation
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
Two hundred years ago, two thousand years ago.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
This isn't going to work.
Speaker 3 (00:12):
She's picking up a massive object in this video.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Ships that might be closed.
Speaker 4 (00:18):
I can sense them in my vicinity, So I guess
I'm just very tuned in.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
Bulk in head. Honcho walks out ear reveal. Yeah. The
crowd goes, oh, my God. Was to protect the secrets
from the Air Force that were not out there in public.
So you're listening to KGr Radio. This is Darcy Where
(00:48):
and I'm coming to you live from a basement room
at my parents' place. I hope everybody's doing well. Tonight.
I'm gonna pipe in the audio from Twitter and we
will hear from our men, Dale Pastor Dale.
Speaker 5 (01:07):
Where's Dale?
Speaker 3 (01:09):
We got Dale somewhere here? There we go, and tonight
we're also gonna be hearing from Missileman. I'm just gonna
pop up missileman.
Speaker 6 (01:25):
Dale.
Speaker 3 (01:26):
Can you hear me? Can we hear you? Dale? Hello?
Everybody good?
Speaker 5 (01:43):
I'm good?
Speaker 3 (01:44):
All right? So I've got I can hear one person there. Dale.
I think we need to pop you up, brother.
Speaker 5 (01:56):
Dale.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
You gotta know, Mike, you're Mike. It's not working. Why
don't we missileman? How are you feeling? Do you want
to start off the show? I wanted to let me
just sort of introduce you. You give me a sec here,
so check in my audio.
Speaker 7 (02:20):
Do you hear me?
Speaker 3 (02:21):
Yeah? I can hear you. Can you hear me? We
can hear you. Missileman. All right, So this week I
(02:44):
wanted to introduce Missileman. First of all, he's a pretty
interesting guy. I've listened to him in a bunch of
spaces already. The fascinating thing about him is that he's, uh,
you know, obviously a scientist in the field of material science.
So his bio here is he has a BS, Bachelor
(03:11):
of Science and mathematics. I'm a MS a Masters in
Aerospace engineering, and he's working on his PhD in material
science focused on topograph, top topological materials and meta materials.
(03:32):
He's been an engineer in defense and space for about
sixteen years. Since twenty twenty two, he's been active on
UFO Twitter and he attends the SAUL and SCU events.
He's primarily interested interrogating the theory and operation of the
(03:53):
UFO physics from a nuts and bolts perspective, which I like.
And he's also the co host of Catastrophic Disclosure podcast
on YouTube and Spotify. So, Missileman, if that was a
good intro, why don't you pop.
Speaker 5 (04:11):
Up and just.
Speaker 3 (04:13):
Tell us a bit more about what's been interesting you
on UFO Twitter this week? Get out on mute man. Oh,
(04:39):
I am one sec my bad. I've got a give
me two sects. There we go, I got them. I
got Dale?
Speaker 1 (04:49):
All right, I can hear you?
Speaker 7 (04:50):
Can you hear me?
Speaker 1 (04:51):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (04:51):
We can?
Speaker 1 (04:52):
All right?
Speaker 4 (04:53):
Thanks a lot for the bio. Yeah, I heard all that.
That was great, perfectly, glad to be here. Audio is okay, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (05:00):
Audio is perfect.
Speaker 5 (05:01):
Man.
Speaker 3 (05:01):
You're coming through on kg R as well.
Speaker 5 (05:04):
Dale. Can you try out your mic? I just want
to check you.
Speaker 8 (05:08):
Yeah, I'm here. Can you hear me? Other people were
able to hear me. I'm not sure what the problem is.
Speaker 3 (05:13):
It's all good. Sometimes Twitter's buggy. But we got you.
We've got you both. So why don't we go with
missile Man for a moment and uh, and then we're
gonna we're gonna hear some I'd like to hear something
enlightening from you.
Speaker 9 (05:34):
Okay, yeah, I mean it's been an interesting week with
uh Schallenberger's article and the reveal of what appears to
be a code name classified program that is sort of.
Speaker 4 (05:48):
The parent program for capturing all credible UFO media. I've
I've heard a couple of different descriptions of what this
program is purported to be. My understanding is it's not
supposed it's not purported to be like the parent UFO
program for everything, but rather the control program that you know,
goes out and tries to interdict anytime there's like good
(06:12):
quality media out there of like a siting, particularly if
it's collected by like a government agency like Border Patrol
or NOAH or Coast Guard. You know, that's the kind
of thing they would have particularly good access to. But
you know, is that your understanding that that's what this
program is reported to be.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
Well, I have a bit of a different understanding of it.
I I figured that it was something to do with
actually satellite systems that are actually Andy's gonna pop up,
I mean, he's coming back up. He just asked the request.
But he's got a really good explanation. He's gotten a
(06:52):
bit of an inside scoop from let's call an insider.
But essentially, the Immaculate Constellation is supposed to be a
satellite system and ground based targeting or let's say DISH
(07:14):
system that is a United intelligence and defense front from
the UK, Australia, the United States. Apparently Canada is not involved, and.
Speaker 7 (07:34):
So it's a collection infrastructure for good data.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
Yeah, and I think it's supposed to be defense based
first of all. Agencies like the NRO and the NSA
are supposedly taking advantage of it, which makes sense.
Speaker 4 (07:53):
But like early warning satellites or early warning to launch
Detshian satellites, missile defense radars like like clear in Alaska
and X band radars and things like that, i'd imagine.
Speaker 3 (08:08):
Yeah, I think exactly. But I think these are perfect
listening systems for tracking UAP. And whoever has been talking.
Speaker 4 (08:19):
Really interesting is there were probably some lessons learned on
this from the state of of you know, Chinese weather,
Chinese spy balloon slash exotic objects over dead Horse, over Yukon,
because you know, the NORAD commander kind of publicly talked about, oh,
we had you know, velocity filters on the radar algorithms,
(08:42):
which tracks that is something they would have to do
otherwise there'd be like a lot of clutter from you know,
I mean the more sensitive these systems have gotten. They
pick up they pick up birds, they pick up all
kinds of things, and you know, student projects and what
have you.
Speaker 7 (08:55):
So there would be these filters.
Speaker 4 (08:57):
So it seems as though they kind of were like, oh, hey,
let's lower the filters and pick up more slow moving
objects or smaller objects or less reflective objects. And maybe
now there, I don't know, maybe this is a somewhat
realization from that that their systems are actually quite good
at picking these up. Perhaps they didn't fully realize that.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (09:20):
Yeah, I think that makes sense. And actually, not long ago,
I was speaking with Bob maguire, who's quite active these
days on like Twitter and stuff.
Speaker 5 (09:34):
A lot of people call him science Bob.
Speaker 3 (09:37):
He had contracts with the NSA back in the day
because he was like launching micro satellites and stuff. And
he essentially told me that the intelligence agencies had a
filter in place, they had that implemented for like a
(09:57):
long time to basically block out the UAP activity because
all they were interested in was listening and watching Russia, China,
you know, any foreign adversaries. And you're probably right. I
think Schellenberger's spoken to somebody that's gotten the inside scoop
(10:21):
on how the intelligence and defense agencies have been possibly
starting to listen to that data. And you know, Tim
McMillan's posting today that, of course, the moment that you
announced to the public that a ts or TSI program
(10:44):
like that the name of it, it's going to be
scrubbed from the Internet and the Pentagon is going to
completely deny it exists. That's part of the intelligence and
defense game, right right.
Speaker 4 (10:58):
And I saw others also suggest that, of course, there
was the Google search history indicating that back in twenty
three the name popped.
Speaker 7 (11:06):
You know, some people googled it.
Speaker 4 (11:08):
These I've imagined these are like staffers or people who
were you know, told this name.
Speaker 7 (11:14):
It could be a couple of things.
Speaker 4 (11:16):
It could have been some kind of classified briefing revealed
that program name to a handful of like civilians or
people being read on for the first time, and some
of them, you know, undisciplined, went to the Internet to
see if there was anything out there about it. It
could also have been this is a little more shaky
and just speculative. When they were choosing the name of
(11:37):
the program, they may have wanted to know if there
was already something out there that, like some famous sci
fi novel, you know, something that would have a similar
that would have the exact same name, and they would
want to be aware of that, like, hey, something I
already used this phrase. That might have also been what
it was. But in any case, I've heard people suggest
(11:58):
that when that happened, that would have triggered an awareness
in our cybersecurity intelligence infrastructure and they would have scrubed
this program back then.
Speaker 7 (12:08):
I don't know if that's true.
Speaker 4 (12:09):
I don't know if that was a big enough blip,
you know, to cause that level of concern, But perhaps.
Speaker 3 (12:16):
Yeah, darthor go for it, interjecting yeah, of course, speak up, brother.
Speaker 10 (12:22):
So what I was told is that Immaculate Constellation is
not a program.
Speaker 2 (12:27):
It's just the name that was given to a group
of assets.
Speaker 10 (12:31):
So the explanation that I got was in eight parts,
so they're not long, so i'll read them to you quickly.
Speaker 2 (12:39):
The first part was in regard to the intelligence community.
Speaker 10 (12:42):
So the IC has had integrated approach to intelligence gathering
using space based systems and ground based systems. This has
been in place since the seventies. TDRS program's role. NASA's
TDRS program, initiated in nineteen seventy, had a dual purpose,
supporting both NASA's space communications needs and the IC's covert activities.
(13:03):
While TDRS is known publicly as communication relay for NASA,
it also secretly supported intelligence gathering. The third is NRO's
COVID role in it. The National Reconnaissance Office, which designs
and operates reconnaissance satellites, covertly with NASA to use TDRS
for intelligence purposes. NRO us TDRS to relay imagery and
(13:23):
signals intelligence gathered by its satellites two designated ground stations
ground stations. These ground stations, located in Denver, Las Bruces,
New Mexico, Fort Belvoir, Virginia, Pine Gap, Australia. RIF men
men with Hill in the UK, process data from NRO satellites.
These facilities received and analyzed the satellite intelligence gathered into orbit.
(13:48):
Mission numbers and satellites. NRO statellites are assigned unique four
digit vision numbers that correspond to specific statellite constellations. For example,
Mission seventy one hundred and Mission seventy three hundred series
are examples of these constellations. Mission seventy three hundred included
satellites that were jointly controlled by the UK's GHQ Government
(14:12):
Communications Headquarters and the NSA National Security Agency.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
Six dynamic missions.
Speaker 10 (14:18):
Specific missions were created as needed to target particular objectives.
This means that these satellites could adapt to changing intelligence needs,
with different satellites or systems focused on different targets at
different times. Immaculate constellation doesn't exist. The term immaculate constellation
is not an actual system, but rather a metaphor for
the complex integrated system of satellite constellations working together across
(14:41):
different disciplines. These systems can bolt, can bolth, collect data
through electromagnetic, electro optical, and hyperspectral technologies, meaning they gather
information across a wide spectrum of signals and imagery, and
last is coordination for analysis. Once the data is collected
from satellites, targets of interest can be selected for in
depth analysis by the ground element. This process allows the
(15:04):
IC to focus on specific targets that are immediate intell
are are of immediate intelligence interest. In summary these this
description highlights the covert accomplished collaboration between NASA and intelligence
agencies like NRO, NSA and GCHQ to collect, relay analyze
intelligence data from space based assets. The system of systems
(15:26):
refers to the combination of multiple satellite constellations, ground stations,
and intelligence disciplines all working together. So basically that's the
sum of the quote on pro program they're talking about,
which is technically not a program. It's just the terminology
used for the systems in place that has been used
to apparently get some pretty amazing UFO and or UAP
(15:52):
footage and data.
Speaker 3 (15:54):
Pretty wild. I like that very detailed explanation. I was
kind of hitting on some of those points. But you know,
what people may not even know is that the DoD
has had satellite systems called the DSP since the seventies.
I think they started launching them actually late sixties, and
(16:17):
they decommissioned that in the nineties. And that was basically
satellites that were aimed at Earth in orbit and they
were just constantly recording with you know, radar and infrared
and optical like cameras, all kinds of stuff entering and
(16:42):
exiting the planet's atmosphere and kind of covered some UFO
events the DSP picked up in my doc Secret Space
UFOs Fast Walkers, but Yeah, it would make sense that
they've been upgrading that type of infrastructure, replacing it and
(17:04):
just improving that listening and observation data every decade that
went by.
Speaker 4 (17:13):
Yeah, as far as I understand it, DSP was replaced
by a constellation called SIVERS, and SIVERS is in the
process of being replaced by a handful of additional capabilities.
There's a public there's a public program called HPTSS that's
intended to be a supplemental bollisted missile defense constellation intended
(17:36):
to help missile defense's target hypersonic threats. And there's an
overall constellation or a very high level effort called jad
C two Joint All Domain Command and Control Constellation something
other that will have multiple tranches, like multiple shelves of
satellites that will is meant to be multi branch accessible
(18:00):
like the Army and the Air Force and the Navy
and Space Force. And an analogous to that description of
this of this named named you know, System of Systems
is meant to in fact encapsulate sort of multiple different
constellations for similar sorts of multitasking purposes.
Speaker 3 (18:21):
Very interesting. So I'm gonna have Dale pop up just
before he does you know, Pastor Dale is a good
friend of Mine's growing quickly on my friends list here.
But I just want to say that as announcements like
this happened today, it seems as though, you know, this
(18:44):
disclosure movement is kind of growing. You know, it's becoming
stronger as every month goes by and people are getting
more interested in This is getting more public mainstream media coverage,
and and the idea that we're not alone and then
(19:05):
that's being covered up by defense and intelligence agencies around
the world is becoming more of a mainstream thought. And
you know, I guess look, I'm I try to stay
positive because you know, there's all kinds of things that
(19:25):
can bring you down, and I've been I've been through depression,
I've been through all kinds of boats in my life,
and I'm trying to bring a bit more positivity to
this community. Don't get it twisted. This is not love
and light. So you know, there's the doumer end of
the spectrum and then there's the love and light end
(19:47):
of the spectrum. We're not trying to sell you cult
shit here. We're trying to just speak to you plainly
and make sure that people feel positive. You know about
certain things in life, so I'll turn it over you
to Dale.
Speaker 1 (20:04):
Okay, thank you, Darcy.
Speaker 8 (20:06):
I want to start by thanking you for allowing me
to try and be light in this space now. The
reason Darcy asked me to start the space off with
words of hope, wisdom and inspiration is because he knows
that's what I try to be wherever I go. I
want to be light, and I encourage everyone to be
light wherever you go. I don't think most people understand
(20:29):
how unique this community is.
Speaker 1 (20:31):
Let's start with Darcy and me.
Speaker 8 (20:33):
Darcy and I are good friends, and I consider Darcy
to be one of the most generous people I know.
But people like Darcy and me are not usually friends,
let alone good friends. Why Because Darcy is an atheist
and I'm a pastor. Unlike many pastors, I get where
Darcy is coming from. He asks questions, and so do I.
(20:55):
He has a right to his opinions, just as I
do to mine. Might be wondering how do an atheist
and a pastor become friends. It's the same way Republicans
and Democrats become friends. It's by having a common interest.
Darcy and I are sold out on trying to help
make disclosure a reality at the end of the day,
(21:18):
at least for this topic. It doesn't matter if you're
a person of faith or an atheist. It doesn't matter
if you're a Republican or a Democrat. It doesn't matter
if you are an African American, Native American, Latin American,
Asian American, or even white American. What matters is that
we are united in our effort to bring about disclosure.
(21:40):
Here's something that does matter. What matters is that we
are united. Now, I'd like to give a catchphrase for
each of the messages I give.
Speaker 1 (21:50):
The first week, it was be careful who you listen to.
Speaker 8 (21:54):
Last week it was words matter because people matter. This
week it is Stronger Together. You see, we are stronger together.
And the beautiful thing is we can be diverse and
united at the same time. Darcy and I are perfect
examples of this. I want to talk about what causes
(22:16):
division in this community. First, it's because of trolls, and
second it is because of pride. Trolls are here for
one reason and one reason only, and that is to
create conflict. I talked about them last week, so I
will leave them alone and just say this hurt people
hurt people.
Speaker 1 (22:36):
Let me say that again. Hurt people hurt people.
Speaker 8 (22:40):
The second way people cause division in this community is
because of pride. It usually happens when someone thinks they
have all the answers. They say something like aliens are
all good or they're all bad. If people aren't arguing
over that, then they're arguing over whether it's aliens are
interdimensional being or it is people arguing whether they are
(23:03):
physical or spiritual beings. Some people say it's anti gravity. Well,
others say it's wormholes and so propulsion systems don't really matter.
Here's how I look at it. If someone tells me
it's this or it's that, that's usually the last person
I listened to. Why because no one knows. You See,
(23:24):
these are all theories, not facts. Let me say it again,
these are all theories not facts. Just as this community
is diverse, the phenomenon is all also diverse. But it
is more than diverse. It is unknown. Now I didn't
say unknowable. I said unknown. And that's why we're working
(23:46):
so hard on getting to disclosure so that some of
this can be known. And let me just remind you
that the phenomenon is not one thing. It is many things,
and so tonight as we all get together with all
of our diversity, let us do so with humility and
with unity. Stronger together, that's what we are Stronger together,
(24:12):
not just in this space, but in this movement.
Speaker 1 (24:15):
We are stronger together.
Speaker 3 (24:19):
Thank you, Pastor Dale. That is really cool. I love
those words that you just shared with the group. You know,
I'll share one other thing too. Look, this community hurt people,
hurt people. I agree with that. That's just everywhere in
the world. But you know, in terms of conspiracy, there's
(24:41):
always people that are very paranoid, and I think unhinged,
unchecked paranoia causes others to be unhinged, unchecked and paranoid.
So there's a lot of riff raff in Twitter or
(25:02):
on Twitter, and some people are just pumping really dark paranoia,
and it's just it's winding other people up, you know,
it's kind of programming other people to be extremely paranoid
and unhinged. So I don't like that, and I hope
(25:24):
that people come to spaces they feel welcome here and
they can you know, speak their mind and feel you know,
safe and not super paranoid or you know, I guess unwelcome,
but with that, why don't we turn it over to missileman.
(25:46):
I wanted to bring this discussion over. We've talked about
immaculate constellation. We can probably come back to that. But
you know, giving your research over the years, and you
worked in many different sort of I guess scientific fields,
(26:06):
you're saying, based on your bio here, what has you
convinced that we've cracked the gravity gravity barrier, that we've
actually figured out anti gravity?
Speaker 7 (26:21):
Well, let's start with something I really like. Pastor Dave said.
Speaker 4 (26:25):
It's unknown, it's not unknowable. And I come back to
this a lot when we have technical debates about what
are the odds that we can reverse engineer this?
Speaker 7 (26:38):
You know, the analogies of in fact that I just
I just had a really.
Speaker 4 (26:42):
Interesting exchange with Nick Gold where we were talking about
this and how the three possible buckets of technological superiority
that we could be dealing with are sort of like
analogous to the sort of the Kardashiev scale almost you know,
you could have uh a bucket of technologies where that
(27:02):
are fairly accessible, fairly comprehensible and recognizable to your eyes,
to your to your sciences, things like really advanced quantum computing, uh,
you know, really effective fusion propulsion or anti matter power generation,
different technologies that are exquisite engineering solutions to well understood
(27:24):
physical phenomena. That's bucket one. Bucket two is new types
of physics that we maybe have some sense might be around,
that might be the explanation for the gap between quantum
mechanics and general relativity. That might explain concepts like the
like the quantum vacuum, or that solve the dark energy
(27:45):
and dark matter problems, or the hierarchy problem. So fringe
basically fringe problems that I should say, systems that operate
with the assistance of solutions to our hardest physical problems.
Speaker 7 (28:01):
That's bucket too.
Speaker 4 (28:02):
Those are the kinds of things that we could probably
figure out with a lot of time, but we would
be forced to reinvent our engineering methodologies to come up
with new tools. These are things that if they fell
into our hands the nineteen forties, we would look at
them and we would have no idea what's going on.
They would be like semiconductors on steroids. They would be
(28:22):
like nuclear reactors on steroids. They would there'd be materials
there that are barely recognizable, but recognizable in their most
elemental form. So everything probably on the periodic table basically
to our modernized not to the nineteen forties, of course
they would, there would be heavy elements. Bucket three is
where things get really weird. You can imagine this to
(28:45):
be like your.
Speaker 3 (28:45):
Heightst we lost Twitter spaces. WHOA, that was weird. Give
me a second here, folks. I don't know what's going on. No, okay,
we're gonna start another one real quick, right quick, coming back,
(29:14):
We're coming back, okay, okay, Well, we have totally lost
Twitter spaces. I don't know what's going on here, folks,
but I do apologize for that. Let me try and
see if I can salvage it. I don't know why.
Speaker 5 (29:35):
Weird, weird, weird weird.
Speaker 3 (29:40):
Maybe it was the riff raft we were talking about
took us down. I don't know.
Speaker 6 (29:48):
Oh, oh I got it. I got it thirty four minutes.
So it changes you guys here me, yeah, I hear you.
Speaker 5 (30:01):
What the fuck? It seriously bugged out tonight.
Speaker 3 (30:06):
I don't know what the hell like that space got
totally taken down, and obviously somebody did not like what
we were talking about. I appreciate some good folks popping
back in and I'll work it out with Twitter. I'll
figure out if like my Space has been reported or
(30:28):
somebody has been like, you know, botting.
Speaker 5 (30:30):
But it's pretty fucked up.
Speaker 3 (30:32):
You know, we had a thing going on there, good
healthy conversation, nuts and bolts, missileman, you were doing a
great job explaining some stuff about an I gravity And
I've got this being recorded to kg R so they'll
be able to take this recovery space audio and they
(30:53):
can put that out tomorrow to like Spotify and stuff
like that. So if you do feel like picking up
the conversation from where you left off in terms of
do we have anti gravity technology and what leads you
to think that, you know, go ahead and just shoot.
Speaker 1 (31:15):
Sure.
Speaker 4 (31:17):
So I will leave my metaphor where it was and
and pick up to the next piece, which is, uh,
I don't think that there is a breakaway section of
the dB or the m C with complete command of
new physics such that they can go manufacture FTL craft
(31:41):
and similar to what we were talking about earlier, I'm
not totally convinced I know what it is.
Speaker 5 (31:49):
Oh, let the dog that no kidding.
Speaker 1 (31:53):
So I'm on a walk.
Speaker 4 (31:55):
So we conveniently talk about anti gravity or gravity control.
Speaker 7 (31:59):
And in the intro you made.
Speaker 4 (32:01):
The comment about, well, some people think it's wormholes, et cetera. Yeah,
I have no idea.
Speaker 5 (32:05):
Is it.
Speaker 4 (32:05):
Is it collapsing and expanding the space time vacuum such
that you, you know, compress yourself through space time? Is
it literally an anti gravity feel? Is it torsional gravity?
Is it something, uh, something else we're.
Speaker 7 (32:19):
Not even thinking of.
Speaker 4 (32:20):
You know, there's a there's a great scene that's meant
to be very humbling in the TV shows Target SG
one when they meet a very advanced human civilization and
he goes outside to send a covert message to their
people from like thousands of light years away, and he
hits this little button and it shoots a like a
(32:40):
stream of light into the sky that looks very much
like just a pulse of light. And she's like, you
gotta be shitting me, right, it's gonna take thousands of
years to get to your home planet.
Speaker 7 (32:49):
And he's like, let me try to explain it.
Speaker 4 (32:52):
Takes a piece of paper and he like punches a
hole through two sides of it and does the whole
wormhole explanation, you know, the very the very catchy like cliche,
and she's like, oh, like Einstein Rosenbridge like a wormhole,
and he's like looking off into the side, and he's
like looking off from the space.
Speaker 7 (33:05):
Thing about how to explain. He's like, no, not at all.
So this like this genius physicist.
Speaker 4 (33:12):
Who has you know, this idea of humanity's most exotic
notion of how to manipulate space time. He's like, no, no, no,
it's not that at all. You have no fucking idea
what I'm talking about, right, So it could be something
very high strangeness and very exotic that we don't even
have a language to describe.
Speaker 7 (33:28):
That's very possible.
Speaker 4 (33:30):
But it does seem like we have figured out how
to hijack the technology, to bootstrap it, to take a functional,
perfectly working reactor from perhaps an NHI craft and just
drop it in a new craft and go fly it
around and use it and whatever, which is not so
(33:51):
much reverse engineering, because perhaps we haven't figured out how
to actually remake the reactor. We've just learned how to
hijack it, right, and so that that could be something doing.
But if we have a not if we have some
piece of an understanding of how the physics actually operates.
Speaker 7 (34:07):
I suspect it's pretty minimal.
Speaker 10 (34:10):
Yeah, I mean, I'm sorry, go ahead.
Speaker 5 (34:14):
Oh, I was just gonna ask missileman.
Speaker 11 (34:17):
You know, I had sent him some stuff recently about
like some of I found these like documents talking about
like Tesla technology and like Scaler tech and stuff.
Speaker 5 (34:26):
And then one of one of these like.
Speaker 11 (34:28):
News articles talk talking about it was saying basically this
type of you know beam whatever, you hit enough energy
and it'll send it back in time, uh to to
where like I don't know. It was talking about like
using it as a defense for nukes, right, and then
they'd like shoot these nukes and then it would like
(34:50):
send it back to where you know, it wouldn't affect
us here. And that sounds like high strangeness weird shit,
but like maybe they figured something out and that's why
they like rated Tesla's desk after he died and stuff
like that.
Speaker 1 (35:06):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (35:06):
There, you can arrive at some extremely high strangeness outcomes
by playing with time, you know. Eric Weinstein was sorry
in a very interesting podcast with Jesse Michaels and help
put off when he basically says, if you have multiple
dimensions of time, some of which are orthogonal to one another.
(35:28):
We won't really have any idea what that means, and
we don't have any idea how to internalize the consequences
of something like that and what it could mean in
an everyday sense. So, for example, I was explaining to
my girlfriend the other night that when some UFO videos
appear to show an object in the sky whose aspect
to you aspect ratio like it's it's it's reflection to
(35:50):
you or it's angle to you, appears to change in
really strange ways that don't really.
Speaker 7 (35:54):
Make sense to your eye and don't really make sense
to your brain.
Speaker 4 (35:56):
That it's been suggested that these could be hyper objects
that have tom mentions, that that have physical dimensions that
are not interacting with our space time, and so when
they rotate, you're seeing something very non trivial and it's
not making sense to your eye.
Speaker 7 (36:12):
And something analogous could be going on with time in that.
Speaker 4 (36:15):
Sort of vein that would appear very high strating this,
it'd be very hard to internalize what that means, you know.
Speaker 5 (36:24):
Very cool.
Speaker 3 (36:25):
I just wanted to give a shadow of clauses join
the space.
Speaker 5 (36:30):
A buddy on Twitter.
Speaker 3 (36:31):
Is got an amazing podcast called patterns tell stories, so
we've got to have him onto the kg R show
coming up.
Speaker 5 (36:42):
I think it'd be great.
Speaker 3 (36:45):
To hear some words of wisdom on u A pu
phobe history would be great. But feel free to chat
in the space too, Man and bad Swan, welcome, Thanks.
Speaker 12 (36:57):
Docs, you for having me. What's up everybody? A long time?
I just wanted to say what Missilman is saying about
anti gravity and UAP. So I was watching some videos
from other scientists like astrobiologists and then explaining how warp
physics works and warp drive works. Right, So, while they
(37:22):
were explaining it, the theoretical observations of warp drives matches
to a t the exact six observables of UAP. So
one of the theoretical aspects of a warp drive is
shimmering effect that some uapiece exhibit, right, So there are
(37:42):
videos of UAP that shimmer and look like they're glitterating almost,
And these observations are exactly what you would see and
a warp drive even grush at the hearing and in
his the debrief article or it was a News Nation interview,
(38:03):
described how they were their interdimensional craft where they would
just appear like in star wars, just like materialize out
of thin air. So when you're moving at warp speed,
and when you stop moving at that speed, that's exactly
what you would see is just complete materialization. There are
(38:24):
accounts of auct abductions of things moving through walls and
all that. Right, the transmedium capability is another property of
a functioning warp drive. And like what miss Oleman was
saying about reverse engineering crafts and all that, I believe
based on the the our understanding of warp drive, if
(38:52):
we have a functional FTL drive from a reverse engineered craft,
we are not experimenting on that because the risk of
air to the national security state and to the world
in large is just too high. Unlike a nuclear propulsion
device or anything like that, where there's a series of
(39:12):
faults before a catastrophic here, there is nothing like that in.
Speaker 1 (39:17):
The warp drive.
Speaker 12 (39:19):
If one little thing goes wrong, it's the end of
the end of this planet and the end of the
world at least that's what theoretical scientists believe on the
energy identities and the requirements and how warp physics works.
Speaker 5 (39:39):
Can you speak to that missione.
Speaker 4 (39:41):
Yeah, So let's talk a little bit about the taxonomy
tree that makes up some of these some of these
ideas that have been elucidated about different ways to do
FEL And when we say warp drive, what we're generally
referring to is the work of Galao Kubier.
Speaker 7 (40:01):
Meshican physicist from the nineties who came up.
Speaker 4 (40:05):
With an idea for how to warp space time based
entirely on principles within general relativity. It doesn't require anything
outside of general relativity to be true. However, the consequences
of the math require enormous amounts of energy or negative
mass to perform this effect on space time to have
(40:27):
this geometric warping effect.
Speaker 7 (40:29):
So that was like ninety four.
Speaker 4 (40:31):
So people started iterating upon how Kubier's work, and there
was a NASA scientist named doctor Sonny White that a
number of years ago who took on this kind of
sub specialty and started iterating upon that work and trying
to reduce the energy requirements in order to try to
find a way to make this a plausible explanation for FTL.
Now it's now probably become apparent that so Sonny White
(40:56):
was at NASA Ames at one point and he was
a colleague of a doctor Mark Millis, and at least
by way of Mark Millis was familiar with doctor Eric Davis.
I know they've met at this conference that I was
at twenty eleven. So I now think that a lot
of this was motivated by as app work that was
trying to identify ways that this could be possible. We
(41:17):
were trying to sort of reverse engineer the physics in
the abstract at the blackboard without a device right in
front of us, how might this be plausible? So one
branch of this tree is ol Kubi air physics, popularly
known as warp drive, which requires things like negative mass
or enormous amounts of energy and operates entirely within the
(41:38):
language of general relativity.
Speaker 7 (41:39):
It doesn't require anything else. Okay, that's important.
Speaker 4 (41:42):
A second bucket of possibilities of those things that we
generally refer to as electro gravitics, basically the idea that
there is a missing theory that we don't have a
grapple on yet that allows a coupling between general relativity
and electromagnetism, which would in some way allow you to
train douce electrical energy into gravitational energy, meaning you could
(42:04):
have some kind of a nuclear reactor on board. You
feed the power through like a warped coil or whatever,
and it turns it into gravity waves and whiz bang pal,
you are now manipulating space time with this device. That's
another variant is some sort of a coupling between electromagnetism
and gravitation. There are a third bucket of more exotic approaches,
(42:24):
things like zero point energy, quantitum vacuum compression. Help put
Off's ideas live in this bucket where you're not exactly
relying entirely on general relativity. You're not exactly relying on
coupling between general relativity and electromagnetism. Rather, you are positing
that there is some greater unification theory at work, some
(42:47):
grand unification that leads you to an ability to manipulate
the fundamental fabric of reality and to move what sort
of becomes perceived as FTL. And this has something to
do with some of those high strangeness ideas that might
involve multiple time dimensions and those kind of things. But
those are generally the three buckets that these different approaches
(43:10):
fall into.
Speaker 2 (43:12):
Misten Man, I got a question the ness individual you're
talking about. I could have sworn.
Speaker 10 (43:19):
I read a few years back regarding this exact same
thing where they were attempting to create or generate a
warp field or something like that, and mentioned the exact
same thing you mentioned in regards to the amount of energy.
Speaker 2 (43:36):
But I do recall.
Speaker 10 (43:38):
Seeing an article once where it was due to the
shape of the device that they were using that they
found was the reason why they weren't able to generate
that kind of energy or something like that, and it
was like a circular device. And then once shape, once
the shape was changed to a football type shape, all
of a sudden they were able to.
Speaker 2 (44:00):
Generate that kind of energy or something like that.
Speaker 4 (44:04):
Uh yeah, So I remember that they were going to
execute and experiments.
Speaker 7 (44:08):
You know, this is this is tough because like these kind.
Speaker 4 (44:11):
Of efforts are are so lampooned and looked down upon
by the by sort of broader scientific authorities that you know,
this could have been a one million dollar experiment, which
is like nothing in defense dollars and science dollars, and
probably it took absolute hell for them to get that funding.
And so from my understanding is, yes, at one point
they executed this experiment and they got some kind of
(44:33):
a result and you know, naturally you're trying to do
something at very very under very exotic conditions. And the
challenge is with very high energy physics experiments is that
the slightest perturbations in your sensors and your equipment in
the effect that you're looking for.
Speaker 7 (44:48):
You're making a lot.
Speaker 4 (44:49):
Of assumptions about what scale you think the observable is
going to be.
Speaker 7 (44:53):
You can very easily arrive.
Speaker 4 (44:54):
At at a null result, or a bad result, or
a completely unclear result. You know, I've talked before about
this book that I have, the Frontiers of Frontiers of
Breakthrough Propulsion or Frontiers of Propulsion Science, which was an
anthology composed by Eric Davis and another physicist to basically
encapsulate all of the science done by the Breakthrough Physics
(45:17):
Propulsion lab that Davis and Mark Millis ran together. And
it's just hundreds of papers about zero point energy and
anti gravity and different explorations of anti gravity. And it's
like a graveyard of dead attempts at anti gravity since
nineteen fifties. And what you take away from this is
that it's very easy to run a bad anti gravity experiment.
Speaker 1 (45:40):
It's very easy.
Speaker 4 (45:42):
And so when I see modern folks like John Bradenberg
give this APEC talk and they walk through.
Speaker 7 (45:47):
This experiment it was meant to show.
Speaker 4 (45:50):
So he has this thing called GEM theory, right, which
is a derivative of Bryce Dwitt's work from the sixties,
which is meant to be sort of one of these
examples of gravity, gravity and electromagnetic coupling. And Brandenburg walks
through this experiment they did and this result that they
apparently you had, well, Podzanov had a result, Ninglely had
a result like then they tried it again and they
(46:12):
couldn't repeat it, you know what I mean, Like LK
ninety nine had to result and then tried again they
couldn't repeat it.
Speaker 7 (46:17):
This this is rife.
Speaker 4 (46:19):
This happens in this field all the time because it's
extremely hard to do it right. And so I've kind
of wandered here, But the point is is that experimental
verifications of claims to anti gravity theories are extremely hard
to execute properly, and that's why there are so many.
Speaker 7 (46:35):
You know, in a previous space Doomer.
Speaker 4 (46:38):
Daddy, we were interviewing Jack star Body and Dumer Daddy said,
why are we still having this conversation? How is this
not resolved, and the answer is that partly it's really
fucking hard, Partly it's been stigmatized for seventy five years,
and partly the community has moved on and is.
Speaker 7 (46:54):
Not trying anymore.
Speaker 4 (46:55):
Right, the theoretical physics community is not actively trying to
solve this problem anymore. They're playing with string theory and
they have been for fifty years, and they just don't
care anymore. So that's kind of why we're still hand
ringing over the same claims, the same attempts.
Speaker 12 (47:11):
Kind of like what Mistleman was saying, if I could
interact really quickly. Is one of the reasons why the
legacy people are so confident that these UAPs are using
warp physics. I think Eric Davis has alluded to this recently,
hell put Off and loose book Eminent has alluded to
(47:34):
this as well.
Speaker 2 (47:36):
Is the I think even in.
Speaker 12 (47:42):
Grushes are the brief article, the material engineering to create
something that can sustain a warp drive is beyond something
that humans can create on this planet. So just based
on that alone makes it very makes it very you know,
(48:04):
very likely that these are non human intelligence based craft.
And again, even if you don't have a craft and
anything be the high definition, the videos and all that.
You can run almost like the scientific experiment if you
have these videos, if you constantly get to see these
HD videos and all that, based on the amount of
(48:26):
data in there that you can start observing, you know,
and make hypothesis based on what kind of popotial system
these crafts are using.
Speaker 1 (48:37):
That's right.
Speaker 4 (48:38):
And in fact, doctor Kevin Knooth did a notable paper
that was presented at SOUL last year and people have
talked about that was essentially this kinematic analysis of the
tech TAC flight based on the video and the radar
data that was described to him and to do his
best to arrive at some numbers. And that makes the
(48:58):
case that this is definitely something that it's not experiencing inertia.
And I've had this discussion with others who approach this
with skepticism that the tic TAC may have been some
kind of incredibly sophisticated black ops military project.
Speaker 1 (49:10):
Whatever.
Speaker 4 (49:11):
Well, the point is the ultimate question. All I care
about is is it operating on new physics or not?
Because if it's operating on new physics, I make the
argument that it's not something we developed natively and all
we have to do then is to analyze its flight
characteristics to figure out if this is something that could
be flying while it's experiencing inertia, and canute analysis found that,
(49:31):
like the peak peak loads on this thing were like
thirteen hundred and fifty g's and to get a notion
of like how wildly unsurvivable that is to a structure.
Some of the most highly rapidly accelerating anti ballistic missile
systems that we ever developed back in the seventies, the
Nike and Zeus missiles, they sustained something like one hundred
(49:52):
and twenty g's one hundred g's actially down the length
of the vehicle in during first stage burn for like
eight seconds, right, And the entire vehicle was designed around
surviving that acxial lobe in one direction.
Speaker 7 (50:04):
One direction. You cannot take.
Speaker 4 (50:05):
That thing and bounce at sideways and bounce it at
a forty five degree angle and expect it to survive.
It is designed to survive one hundred and twenty g's
in the axial direction for eight seconds period.
Speaker 1 (50:15):
That's it.
Speaker 4 (50:16):
So you you are two orders of magnitude, well one
order of magnitude away from being anywhere near that right
to survive something like thirteen fifty. Not to mention the
fact that it's in it's in like wildly, you know,
it's in six dimensions. Where it's in I'm sorry, it's
it's in sixth off, it's in four dimensions. It's up, down, left, right, sideways.
(50:36):
And so the notion power production and power density is
not even the problem. The problem is structural survivability. This
thing would fly apart at the seams no matter what,
no matter what kind of power source you've got in there,
driving these kinds of propulsion, propulsive accelerations. It's really a
problem of material survivability.
Speaker 5 (50:56):
I got, I got an interesting.
Speaker 10 (51:00):
Not theory, but a question regarding the theory, and I
want to see what your thought on this is.
Speaker 2 (51:06):
It's these beings are not etraterrestrial.
Speaker 13 (51:09):
Let's let's say that there's a species that has been
existing on this planet longer than us that we've been around,
possibly underground. Let's say, right, do you think that there's
a possibility that physics may somehow work differently the closer
you get to the Earth's core, or something may be
(51:30):
different that they may have been able to.
Speaker 2 (51:32):
Have access to if they existed, you know.
Speaker 7 (51:36):
Underground like it to accelerate their technical development.
Speaker 4 (51:40):
Is that where you're getting at, Yeah, nothing I can
think of in terms of different physics. I do think
that that's plausible. I think the ultraterrestrial hypothesis, I don't.
I don't think there's anything. I don't think there are
any fairly you know, uh well accepted data points in
quote unquote the lore that make that wildly improbable. For instance,
(52:05):
like the space refugee hypothesis has been leveled, this idea
that yes, they are here and have been here for
quite some time, but they arrived here from somewhere else
and they're not human. It's also the possibility they evolved
here like many millions of years ago. I think that
the notion that they evolved here recently is problematic for
archaeology and paleontology because we don't have any archaeology of them.
So for them to have been here any more recently,
(52:27):
like for them to have evolved here on the surface
any more recently than like a million years or so
would be would be difficult to justify because of the
lack of archaeological evidence. But in terms of developing underground,
one of the things that is interesting about this is.
Speaker 7 (52:44):
It's possible. I don't know that we have a lot of.
Speaker 4 (52:47):
Evidence of this, but it's possible that this FTL propulsion
system can actually allow you to travel through solid matter.
And we know from Slide nine and some other claims
and things that that is part of some of the
extended lore, this idea of not just passing through water
and space and air, but also passing through solid matter.
Speaker 7 (53:06):
And so the interesting thing.
Speaker 4 (53:07):
About that is that if you lived in these deep
underground caverns, it would behoove you to develop a technology
that allowed you to travel through solid matter, because you know,
otherwise you're like extremely limited to like where you can go.
I mean you have to dig massive tunnels to sort
of get out and get to the surface and what
have you.
Speaker 7 (53:24):
So that it certainly.
Speaker 4 (53:25):
Would encourage you to develop something that warps space time
instead of things that just you know, play around with
kinematics and Newton's Newtonian physics and all this.
Speaker 14 (53:37):
I would say, I would say there's definitely like there's
talks among folks that are pretty close to the UAP issue.
Speaker 3 (53:48):
Like I was talking to Sean Cahill not too long ago,
and he was saying that he's come across a few
cases that seem to point that point note that, yeah,
these craft are able to pass through solid matter like
mountains and and like you know.
Speaker 5 (54:08):
Island structures and stuff like that. Where are they going?
You know, how are they doing that?
Speaker 3 (54:15):
If this sort of like trans medium capability involves being
able to move through solid matter, like I believe it.
I mean, but I'm gonna I'm gonna jump down because
I gotta get onto some other stuff.
Speaker 5 (54:30):
But I'm gonna end the kg r A recording.
Speaker 3 (54:34):
Side of this so that we can salvage this side
of the this week.
Speaker 5 (54:40):
Next week, I don't think we'll crash. Hopefully we won't get.
Speaker 3 (54:43):
Mass reported as I suspect the first space got Yeah,
thanks everybody for jumping in coming back, and uh well
we'll get it going again next week too.
Speaker 5 (54:57):
But I feel free to continue the conversation.
Speaker 3 (55:00):
I'm just going to end the kg r A recording
side and jump down.
Speaker 5 (55:04):
Thanks guys,
Two hundred years ago, two thousand years ago.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
This isn't going to work.
Speaker 3 (00:12):
She's picking up a massive object in this video.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Ships that might be closed.
Speaker 4 (00:18):
I can sense them in my vicinity, So I guess
I'm just very tuned in.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
Bulk in head. Honcho walks out ear reveal. Yeah. The
crowd goes, oh, my God. Was to protect the secrets
from the Air Force that were not out there in public.
So you're listening to KGr Radio. This is Darcy Where
(00:48):
and I'm coming to you live from a basement room
at my parents' place. I hope everybody's doing well. Tonight.
I'm gonna pipe in the audio from Twitter and we
will hear from our men, Dale Pastor Dale.
Speaker 5 (01:07):
Where's Dale?
Speaker 3 (01:09):
We got Dale somewhere here? There we go, and tonight
we're also gonna be hearing from Missileman. I'm just gonna
pop up missileman.
Speaker 6 (01:25):
Dale.
Speaker 3 (01:26):
Can you hear me? Can we hear you? Dale? Hello?
Everybody good?
Speaker 5 (01:43):
I'm good?
Speaker 3 (01:44):
All right? So I've got I can hear one person there. Dale.
I think we need to pop you up, brother.
Speaker 5 (01:56):
Dale.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
You gotta know, Mike, you're Mike. It's not working. Why
don't we missileman? How are you feeling? Do you want
to start off the show? I wanted to let me
just sort of introduce you. You give me a sec here,
so check in my audio.
Speaker 7 (02:20):
Do you hear me?
Speaker 3 (02:21):
Yeah? I can hear you. Can you hear me? We
can hear you. Missileman. All right, So this week I
(02:44):
wanted to introduce Missileman. First of all, he's a pretty
interesting guy. I've listened to him in a bunch of
spaces already. The fascinating thing about him is that he's, uh,
you know, obviously a scientist in the field of material science.
So his bio here is he has a BS, Bachelor
(03:11):
of Science and mathematics. I'm a MS a Masters in
Aerospace engineering, and he's working on his PhD in material
science focused on topograph, top topological materials and meta materials.
(03:32):
He's been an engineer in defense and space for about
sixteen years. Since twenty twenty two, he's been active on
UFO Twitter and he attends the SAUL and SCU events.
He's primarily interested interrogating the theory and operation of the
(03:53):
UFO physics from a nuts and bolts perspective, which I like.
And he's also the co host of Catastrophic Disclosure podcast
on YouTube and Spotify. So, Missileman, if that was a
good intro, why don't you pop.
Speaker 5 (04:11):
Up and just.
Speaker 3 (04:13):
Tell us a bit more about what's been interesting you
on UFO Twitter this week? Get out on mute man. Oh,
(04:39):
I am one sec my bad. I've got a give
me two sects. There we go, I got them. I
got Dale?
Speaker 1 (04:49):
All right, I can hear you?
Speaker 7 (04:50):
Can you hear me?
Speaker 1 (04:51):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (04:51):
We can?
Speaker 1 (04:52):
All right?
Speaker 4 (04:53):
Thanks a lot for the bio. Yeah, I heard all that.
That was great, perfectly, glad to be here. Audio is okay, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (05:00):
Audio is perfect.
Speaker 5 (05:01):
Man.
Speaker 3 (05:01):
You're coming through on kg R as well.
Speaker 5 (05:04):
Dale. Can you try out your mic? I just want
to check you.
Speaker 8 (05:08):
Yeah, I'm here. Can you hear me? Other people were
able to hear me. I'm not sure what the problem is.
Speaker 3 (05:13):
It's all good. Sometimes Twitter's buggy. But we got you.
We've got you both. So why don't we go with
missile Man for a moment and uh, and then we're
gonna we're gonna hear some I'd like to hear something
enlightening from you.
Speaker 9 (05:34):
Okay, yeah, I mean it's been an interesting week with
uh Schallenberger's article and the reveal of what appears to
be a code name classified program that is sort of.
Speaker 4 (05:48):
The parent program for capturing all credible UFO media. I've
I've heard a couple of different descriptions of what this
program is purported to be. My understanding is it's not
supposed it's not purported to be like the parent UFO
program for everything, but rather the control program that you know,
goes out and tries to interdict anytime there's like good
(06:12):
quality media out there of like a siting, particularly if
it's collected by like a government agency like Border Patrol
or NOAH or Coast Guard. You know, that's the kind
of thing they would have particularly good access to. But
you know, is that your understanding that that's what this
program is reported to be.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
Well, I have a bit of a different understanding of it.
I I figured that it was something to do with
actually satellite systems that are actually Andy's gonna pop up,
I mean, he's coming back up. He just asked the request.
But he's got a really good explanation. He's gotten a
(06:52):
bit of an inside scoop from let's call an insider.
But essentially, the Immaculate Constellation is supposed to be a
satellite system and ground based targeting or let's say DISH
(07:14):
system that is a United intelligence and defense front from
the UK, Australia, the United States. Apparently Canada is not involved, and.
Speaker 7 (07:34):
So it's a collection infrastructure for good data.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
Yeah, and I think it's supposed to be defense based
first of all. Agencies like the NRO and the NSA
are supposedly taking advantage of it, which makes sense.
Speaker 4 (07:53):
But like early warning satellites or early warning to launch
Detshian satellites, missile defense radars like like clear in Alaska
and X band radars and things like that, i'd imagine.
Speaker 3 (08:08):
Yeah, I think exactly. But I think these are perfect
listening systems for tracking UAP. And whoever has been talking.
Speaker 4 (08:19):
Really interesting is there were probably some lessons learned on
this from the state of of you know, Chinese weather,
Chinese spy balloon slash exotic objects over dead Horse, over Yukon,
because you know, the NORAD commander kind of publicly talked about, oh,
we had you know, velocity filters on the radar algorithms,
(08:42):
which tracks that is something they would have to do
otherwise there'd be like a lot of clutter from you know,
I mean the more sensitive these systems have gotten. They
pick up they pick up birds, they pick up all
kinds of things, and you know, student projects and what
have you.
Speaker 7 (08:55):
So there would be these filters.
Speaker 4 (08:57):
So it seems as though they kind of were like, oh, hey,
let's lower the filters and pick up more slow moving
objects or smaller objects or less reflective objects. And maybe
now there, I don't know, maybe this is a somewhat
realization from that that their systems are actually quite good
at picking these up. Perhaps they didn't fully realize that.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (09:20):
Yeah, I think that makes sense. And actually, not long ago,
I was speaking with Bob maguire, who's quite active these
days on like Twitter and stuff.
Speaker 5 (09:34):
A lot of people call him science Bob.
Speaker 3 (09:37):
He had contracts with the NSA back in the day
because he was like launching micro satellites and stuff. And
he essentially told me that the intelligence agencies had a
filter in place, they had that implemented for like a
(09:57):
long time to basically block out the UAP activity because
all they were interested in was listening and watching Russia, China,
you know, any foreign adversaries. And you're probably right. I
think Schellenberger's spoken to somebody that's gotten the inside scoop
(10:21):
on how the intelligence and defense agencies have been possibly
starting to listen to that data. And you know, Tim
McMillan's posting today that, of course, the moment that you
announced to the public that a ts or TSI program
(10:44):
like that the name of it, it's going to be
scrubbed from the Internet and the Pentagon is going to
completely deny it exists. That's part of the intelligence and
defense game, right right.
Speaker 4 (10:58):
And I saw others also suggest that, of course, there
was the Google search history indicating that back in twenty
three the name popped.
Speaker 7 (11:06):
You know, some people googled it.
Speaker 4 (11:08):
These I've imagined these are like staffers or people who
were you know, told this name.
Speaker 7 (11:14):
It could be a couple of things.
Speaker 4 (11:16):
It could have been some kind of classified briefing revealed
that program name to a handful of like civilians or
people being read on for the first time, and some
of them, you know, undisciplined, went to the Internet to
see if there was anything out there about it. It
could also have been this is a little more shaky
and just speculative. When they were choosing the name of
(11:37):
the program, they may have wanted to know if there
was already something out there that, like some famous sci
fi novel, you know, something that would have a similar
that would have the exact same name, and they would
want to be aware of that, like, hey, something I
already used this phrase. That might have also been what
it was. But in any case, I've heard people suggest
(11:58):
that when that happened, that would have triggered an awareness
in our cybersecurity intelligence infrastructure and they would have scrubed
this program back then.
Speaker 7 (12:08):
I don't know if that's true.
Speaker 4 (12:09):
I don't know if that was a big enough blip,
you know, to cause that level of concern, But perhaps.
Speaker 3 (12:16):
Yeah, darthor go for it, interjecting yeah, of course, speak up, brother.
Speaker 10 (12:22):
So what I was told is that Immaculate Constellation is
not a program.
Speaker 2 (12:27):
It's just the name that was given to a group
of assets.
Speaker 10 (12:31):
So the explanation that I got was in eight parts,
so they're not long, so i'll read them to you quickly.
Speaker 2 (12:39):
The first part was in regard to the intelligence community.
Speaker 10 (12:42):
So the IC has had integrated approach to intelligence gathering
using space based systems and ground based systems. This has
been in place since the seventies. TDRS program's role. NASA's
TDRS program, initiated in nineteen seventy, had a dual purpose,
supporting both NASA's space communications needs and the IC's covert activities.
(13:03):
While TDRS is known publicly as communication relay for NASA,
it also secretly supported intelligence gathering. The third is NRO's
COVID role in it. The National Reconnaissance Office, which designs
and operates reconnaissance satellites, covertly with NASA to use TDRS
for intelligence purposes. NRO us TDRS to relay imagery and
(13:23):
signals intelligence gathered by its satellites two designated ground stations
ground stations. These ground stations, located in Denver, Las Bruces,
New Mexico, Fort Belvoir, Virginia, Pine Gap, Australia. RIF men
men with Hill in the UK, process data from NRO satellites.
These facilities received and analyzed the satellite intelligence gathered into orbit.
(13:48):
Mission numbers and satellites. NRO statellites are assigned unique four
digit vision numbers that correspond to specific statellite constellations. For example,
Mission seventy one hundred and Mission seventy three hundred series
are examples of these constellations. Mission seventy three hundred included
satellites that were jointly controlled by the UK's GHQ Government
(14:12):
Communications Headquarters and the NSA National Security Agency.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
Six dynamic missions.
Speaker 10 (14:18):
Specific missions were created as needed to target particular objectives.
This means that these satellites could adapt to changing intelligence needs,
with different satellites or systems focused on different targets at
different times. Immaculate constellation doesn't exist. The term immaculate constellation
is not an actual system, but rather a metaphor for
the complex integrated system of satellite constellations working together across
(14:41):
different disciplines. These systems can bolt, can bolth, collect data
through electromagnetic, electro optical, and hyperspectral technologies, meaning they gather
information across a wide spectrum of signals and imagery, and
last is coordination for analysis. Once the data is collected
from satellites, targets of interest can be selected for in
depth analysis by the ground element. This process allows the
(15:04):
IC to focus on specific targets that are immediate intell
are are of immediate intelligence interest. In summary these this
description highlights the covert accomplished collaboration between NASA and intelligence
agencies like NRO, NSA and GCHQ to collect, relay analyze
intelligence data from space based assets. The system of systems
(15:26):
refers to the combination of multiple satellite constellations, ground stations,
and intelligence disciplines all working together. So basically that's the
sum of the quote on pro program they're talking about,
which is technically not a program. It's just the terminology
used for the systems in place that has been used
to apparently get some pretty amazing UFO and or UAP
(15:52):
footage and data.
Speaker 3 (15:54):
Pretty wild. I like that very detailed explanation. I was
kind of hitting on some of those points. But you know,
what people may not even know is that the DoD
has had satellite systems called the DSP since the seventies.
I think they started launching them actually late sixties, and
(16:17):
they decommissioned that in the nineties. And that was basically
satellites that were aimed at Earth in orbit and they
were just constantly recording with you know, radar and infrared
and optical like cameras, all kinds of stuff entering and
(16:42):
exiting the planet's atmosphere and kind of covered some UFO
events the DSP picked up in my doc Secret Space
UFOs Fast Walkers, but Yeah, it would make sense that
they've been upgrading that type of infrastructure, replacing it and
(17:04):
just improving that listening and observation data every decade that
went by.
Speaker 4 (17:13):
Yeah, as far as I understand it, DSP was replaced
by a constellation called SIVERS, and SIVERS is in the
process of being replaced by a handful of additional capabilities.
There's a public there's a public program called HPTSS that's
intended to be a supplemental bollisted missile defense constellation intended
(17:36):
to help missile defense's target hypersonic threats. And there's an
overall constellation or a very high level effort called jad
C two Joint All Domain Command and Control Constellation something
other that will have multiple tranches, like multiple shelves of
satellites that will is meant to be multi branch accessible
(18:00):
like the Army and the Air Force and the Navy
and Space Force. And an analogous to that description of
this of this named named you know, System of Systems
is meant to in fact encapsulate sort of multiple different
constellations for similar sorts of multitasking purposes.
Speaker 3 (18:21):
Very interesting. So I'm gonna have Dale pop up just
before he does you know, Pastor Dale is a good
friend of Mine's growing quickly on my friends list here.
But I just want to say that as announcements like
this happened today, it seems as though, you know, this
(18:44):
disclosure movement is kind of growing. You know, it's becoming
stronger as every month goes by and people are getting
more interested in This is getting more public mainstream media coverage,
and and the idea that we're not alone and then
(19:05):
that's being covered up by defense and intelligence agencies around
the world is becoming more of a mainstream thought. And
you know, I guess look, I'm I try to stay
positive because you know, there's all kinds of things that
(19:25):
can bring you down, and I've been I've been through depression,
I've been through all kinds of boats in my life,
and I'm trying to bring a bit more positivity to
this community. Don't get it twisted. This is not love
and light. So you know, there's the doumer end of
the spectrum and then there's the love and light end
(19:47):
of the spectrum. We're not trying to sell you cult
shit here. We're trying to just speak to you plainly
and make sure that people feel positive. You know about
certain things in life, so I'll turn it over you
to Dale.
Speaker 1 (20:04):
Okay, thank you, Darcy.
Speaker 8 (20:06):
I want to start by thanking you for allowing me
to try and be light in this space now. The
reason Darcy asked me to start the space off with
words of hope, wisdom and inspiration is because he knows
that's what I try to be wherever I go. I
want to be light, and I encourage everyone to be
light wherever you go. I don't think most people understand
(20:29):
how unique this community is.
Speaker 1 (20:31):
Let's start with Darcy and me.
Speaker 8 (20:33):
Darcy and I are good friends, and I consider Darcy
to be one of the most generous people I know.
But people like Darcy and me are not usually friends,
let alone good friends. Why Because Darcy is an atheist
and I'm a pastor. Unlike many pastors, I get where
Darcy is coming from. He asks questions, and so do I.
(20:55):
He has a right to his opinions, just as I
do to mine. Might be wondering how do an atheist
and a pastor become friends. It's the same way Republicans
and Democrats become friends. It's by having a common interest.
Darcy and I are sold out on trying to help
make disclosure a reality at the end of the day,
(21:18):
at least for this topic. It doesn't matter if you're
a person of faith or an atheist. It doesn't matter
if you're a Republican or a Democrat. It doesn't matter
if you are an African American, Native American, Latin American,
Asian American, or even white American. What matters is that
we are united in our effort to bring about disclosure.
(21:40):
Here's something that does matter. What matters is that we
are united. Now, I'd like to give a catchphrase for
each of the messages I give.
Speaker 1 (21:50):
The first week, it was be careful who you listen to.
Speaker 8 (21:54):
Last week it was words matter because people matter. This
week it is Stronger Together. You see, we are stronger together.
And the beautiful thing is we can be diverse and
united at the same time. Darcy and I are perfect
examples of this. I want to talk about what causes
(22:16):
division in this community. First, it's because of trolls, and
second it is because of pride. Trolls are here for
one reason and one reason only, and that is to
create conflict. I talked about them last week, so I
will leave them alone and just say this hurt people
hurt people.
Speaker 1 (22:36):
Let me say that again. Hurt people hurt people.
Speaker 8 (22:40):
The second way people cause division in this community is
because of pride. It usually happens when someone thinks they
have all the answers. They say something like aliens are
all good or they're all bad. If people aren't arguing
over that, then they're arguing over whether it's aliens are
interdimensional being or it is people arguing whether they are
(23:03):
physical or spiritual beings. Some people say it's anti gravity. Well,
others say it's wormholes and so propulsion systems don't really matter.
Here's how I look at it. If someone tells me
it's this or it's that, that's usually the last person
I listened to. Why because no one knows. You See,
(23:24):
these are all theories, not facts. Let me say it again,
these are all theories not facts. Just as this community
is diverse, the phenomenon is all also diverse. But it
is more than diverse. It is unknown. Now I didn't
say unknowable. I said unknown. And that's why we're working
(23:46):
so hard on getting to disclosure so that some of
this can be known. And let me just remind you
that the phenomenon is not one thing. It is many things,
and so tonight as we all get together with all
of our diversity, let us do so with humility and
with unity. Stronger together, that's what we are Stronger together,
(24:12):
not just in this space, but in this movement.
Speaker 1 (24:15):
We are stronger together.
Speaker 3 (24:19):
Thank you, Pastor Dale. That is really cool. I love
those words that you just shared with the group. You know,
I'll share one other thing too. Look, this community hurt people,
hurt people. I agree with that. That's just everywhere in
the world. But you know, in terms of conspiracy, there's
(24:41):
always people that are very paranoid, and I think unhinged,
unchecked paranoia causes others to be unhinged, unchecked and paranoid.
So there's a lot of riff raff in Twitter or
(25:02):
on Twitter, and some people are just pumping really dark paranoia,
and it's just it's winding other people up, you know,
it's kind of programming other people to be extremely paranoid
and unhinged. So I don't like that, and I hope
(25:24):
that people come to spaces they feel welcome here and
they can you know, speak their mind and feel you know,
safe and not super paranoid or you know, I guess unwelcome,
but with that, why don't we turn it over to missileman.
(25:46):
I wanted to bring this discussion over. We've talked about
immaculate constellation. We can probably come back to that. But
you know, giving your research over the years, and you
worked in many different sort of I guess scientific fields,
(26:06):
you're saying, based on your bio here, what has you
convinced that we've cracked the gravity gravity barrier, that we've
actually figured out anti gravity?
Speaker 7 (26:21):
Well, let's start with something I really like. Pastor Dave said.
Speaker 4 (26:25):
It's unknown, it's not unknowable. And I come back to
this a lot when we have technical debates about what
are the odds that we can reverse engineer this?
Speaker 7 (26:38):
You know, the analogies of in fact that I just
I just had a really.
Speaker 4 (26:42):
Interesting exchange with Nick Gold where we were talking about
this and how the three possible buckets of technological superiority
that we could be dealing with are sort of like
analogous to the sort of the Kardashiev scale almost you know,
you could have uh a bucket of technologies where that
(27:02):
are fairly accessible, fairly comprehensible and recognizable to your eyes,
to your to your sciences, things like really advanced quantum computing, uh,
you know, really effective fusion propulsion or anti matter power generation,
different technologies that are exquisite engineering solutions to well understood
(27:24):
physical phenomena. That's bucket one. Bucket two is new types
of physics that we maybe have some sense might be around,
that might be the explanation for the gap between quantum
mechanics and general relativity. That might explain concepts like the
like the quantum vacuum, or that solve the dark energy
(27:45):
and dark matter problems, or the hierarchy problem. So fringe
basically fringe problems that I should say, systems that operate
with the assistance of solutions to our hardest physical problems.
Speaker 7 (28:01):
That's bucket too.
Speaker 4 (28:02):
Those are the kinds of things that we could probably
figure out with a lot of time, but we would
be forced to reinvent our engineering methodologies to come up
with new tools. These are things that if they fell
into our hands the nineteen forties, we would look at
them and we would have no idea what's going on.
They would be like semiconductors on steroids. They would be
(28:22):
like nuclear reactors on steroids. They would there'd be materials
there that are barely recognizable, but recognizable in their most
elemental form. So everything probably on the periodic table basically
to our modernized not to the nineteen forties, of course
they would, there would be heavy elements. Bucket three is
where things get really weird. You can imagine this to
(28:45):
be like your.
Speaker 3 (28:45):
Heightst we lost Twitter spaces. WHOA, that was weird. Give
me a second here, folks. I don't know what's going on. No, okay,
we're gonna start another one real quick, right quick, coming back,
(29:14):
We're coming back, okay, okay, Well, we have totally lost
Twitter spaces. I don't know what's going on here, folks,
but I do apologize for that. Let me try and
see if I can salvage it. I don't know why.
Speaker 5 (29:35):
Weird, weird, weird weird.
Speaker 3 (29:40):
Maybe it was the riff raft we were talking about
took us down. I don't know.
Speaker 6 (29:48):
Oh, oh I got it. I got it thirty four minutes.
So it changes you guys here me, yeah, I hear you.
Speaker 5 (30:01):
What the fuck? It seriously bugged out tonight.
Speaker 3 (30:06):
I don't know what the hell like that space got
totally taken down, and obviously somebody did not like what
we were talking about. I appreciate some good folks popping
back in and I'll work it out with Twitter. I'll
figure out if like my Space has been reported or
(30:28):
somebody has been like, you know, botting.
Speaker 5 (30:30):
But it's pretty fucked up.
Speaker 3 (30:32):
You know, we had a thing going on there, good
healthy conversation, nuts and bolts, missileman, you were doing a
great job explaining some stuff about an I gravity And
I've got this being recorded to kg R so they'll
be able to take this recovery space audio and they
(30:53):
can put that out tomorrow to like Spotify and stuff
like that. So if you do feel like picking up
the conversation from where you left off in terms of
do we have anti gravity technology and what leads you
to think that, you know, go ahead and just shoot.
Speaker 1 (31:15):
Sure.
Speaker 4 (31:17):
So I will leave my metaphor where it was and
and pick up to the next piece, which is, uh,
I don't think that there is a breakaway section of
the dB or the m C with complete command of
new physics such that they can go manufacture FTL craft
(31:41):
and similar to what we were talking about earlier, I'm
not totally convinced I know what it is.
Speaker 5 (31:49):
Oh, let the dog that no kidding.
Speaker 1 (31:53):
So I'm on a walk.
Speaker 4 (31:55):
So we conveniently talk about anti gravity or gravity control.
Speaker 7 (31:59):
And in the intro you made.
Speaker 4 (32:01):
The comment about, well, some people think it's wormholes, et cetera. Yeah,
I have no idea.
Speaker 5 (32:05):
Is it.
Speaker 4 (32:05):
Is it collapsing and expanding the space time vacuum such
that you, you know, compress yourself through space time? Is
it literally an anti gravity feel? Is it torsional gravity?
Is it something, uh, something else we're.
Speaker 7 (32:19):
Not even thinking of.
Speaker 4 (32:20):
You know, there's a there's a great scene that's meant
to be very humbling in the TV shows Target SG
one when they meet a very advanced human civilization and
he goes outside to send a covert message to their
people from like thousands of light years away, and he
hits this little button and it shoots a like a
(32:40):
stream of light into the sky that looks very much
like just a pulse of light. And she's like, you
gotta be shitting me, right, it's gonna take thousands of
years to get to your home planet.
Speaker 7 (32:49):
And he's like, let me try to explain it.
Speaker 4 (32:52):
Takes a piece of paper and he like punches a
hole through two sides of it and does the whole
wormhole explanation, you know, the very the very catchy like cliche,
and she's like, oh, like Einstein Rosenbridge like a wormhole,
and he's like looking off into the side, and he's
like looking off from the space.
Speaker 7 (33:05):
Thing about how to explain. He's like, no, not at all.
So this like this genius physicist.
Speaker 4 (33:12):
Who has you know, this idea of humanity's most exotic
notion of how to manipulate space time. He's like, no, no, no,
it's not that at all. You have no fucking idea
what I'm talking about, right, So it could be something
very high strangeness and very exotic that we don't even
have a language to describe.
Speaker 7 (33:28):
That's very possible.
Speaker 4 (33:30):
But it does seem like we have figured out how
to hijack the technology, to bootstrap it, to take a functional,
perfectly working reactor from perhaps an NHI craft and just
drop it in a new craft and go fly it
around and use it and whatever, which is not so
(33:51):
much reverse engineering, because perhaps we haven't figured out how
to actually remake the reactor. We've just learned how to
hijack it, right, and so that that could be something doing.
But if we have a not if we have some
piece of an understanding of how the physics actually operates.
Speaker 7 (34:07):
I suspect it's pretty minimal.
Speaker 10 (34:10):
Yeah, I mean, I'm sorry, go ahead.
Speaker 5 (34:14):
Oh, I was just gonna ask missileman.
Speaker 11 (34:17):
You know, I had sent him some stuff recently about
like some of I found these like documents talking about
like Tesla technology and like Scaler tech and stuff.
Speaker 5 (34:26):
And then one of one of these like.
Speaker 11 (34:28):
News articles talk talking about it was saying basically this
type of you know beam whatever, you hit enough energy
and it'll send it back in time, uh to to
where like I don't know. It was talking about like
using it as a defense for nukes, right, and then
they'd like shoot these nukes and then it would like
(34:50):
send it back to where you know, it wouldn't affect
us here. And that sounds like high strangeness weird shit,
but like maybe they figured something out and that's why
they like rated Tesla's desk after he died and stuff
like that.
Speaker 1 (35:06):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (35:06):
There, you can arrive at some extremely high strangeness outcomes
by playing with time, you know. Eric Weinstein was sorry
in a very interesting podcast with Jesse Michaels and help
put off when he basically says, if you have multiple
dimensions of time, some of which are orthogonal to one another.
(35:28):
We won't really have any idea what that means, and
we don't have any idea how to internalize the consequences
of something like that and what it could mean in
an everyday sense. So, for example, I was explaining to
my girlfriend the other night that when some UFO videos
appear to show an object in the sky whose aspect
to you aspect ratio like it's it's it's reflection to
(35:50):
you or it's angle to you, appears to change in
really strange ways that don't really.
Speaker 7 (35:54):
Make sense to your eye and don't really make sense
to your brain.
Speaker 4 (35:56):
That it's been suggested that these could be hyper objects
that have tom mentions, that that have physical dimensions that
are not interacting with our space time, and so when
they rotate, you're seeing something very non trivial and it's
not making sense to your eye.
Speaker 7 (36:12):
And something analogous could be going on with time in that.
Speaker 4 (36:15):
Sort of vein that would appear very high strating this,
it'd be very hard to internalize what that means, you know.
Speaker 5 (36:24):
Very cool.
Speaker 3 (36:25):
I just wanted to give a shadow of clauses join
the space.
Speaker 5 (36:30):
A buddy on Twitter.
Speaker 3 (36:31):
Is got an amazing podcast called patterns tell stories, so
we've got to have him onto the kg R show
coming up.
Speaker 5 (36:42):
I think it'd be great.
Speaker 3 (36:45):
To hear some words of wisdom on u A pu
phobe history would be great. But feel free to chat
in the space too, Man and bad Swan, welcome, Thanks.
Speaker 12 (36:57):
Docs, you for having me. What's up everybody? A long time?
I just wanted to say what Missilman is saying about
anti gravity and UAP. So I was watching some videos
from other scientists like astrobiologists and then explaining how warp
physics works and warp drive works. Right, So, while they
(37:22):
were explaining it, the theoretical observations of warp drives matches
to a t the exact six observables of UAP. So
one of the theoretical aspects of a warp drive is
shimmering effect that some uapiece exhibit, right, So there are
(37:42):
videos of UAP that shimmer and look like they're glitterating almost,
And these observations are exactly what you would see and
a warp drive even grush at the hearing and in
his the debrief article or it was a News Nation interview,
(38:03):
described how they were their interdimensional craft where they would
just appear like in star wars, just like materialize out
of thin air. So when you're moving at warp speed,
and when you stop moving at that speed, that's exactly
what you would see is just complete materialization. There are
(38:24):
accounts of auct abductions of things moving through walls and
all that. Right, the transmedium capability is another property of
a functioning warp drive. And like what miss Oleman was
saying about reverse engineering crafts and all that, I believe
based on the the our understanding of warp drive, if
(38:52):
we have a functional FTL drive from a reverse engineered craft,
we are not experimenting on that because the risk of
air to the national security state and to the world
in large is just too high. Unlike a nuclear propulsion
device or anything like that, where there's a series of
(39:12):
faults before a catastrophic here, there is nothing like that in.
Speaker 1 (39:17):
The warp drive.
Speaker 12 (39:19):
If one little thing goes wrong, it's the end of
the end of this planet and the end of the
world at least that's what theoretical scientists believe on the
energy identities and the requirements and how warp physics works.
Speaker 5 (39:39):
Can you speak to that missione.
Speaker 4 (39:41):
Yeah, So let's talk a little bit about the taxonomy
tree that makes up some of these some of these
ideas that have been elucidated about different ways to do
FEL And when we say warp drive, what we're generally
referring to is the work of Galao Kubier.
Speaker 7 (40:01):
Meshican physicist from the nineties who came up.
Speaker 4 (40:05):
With an idea for how to warp space time based
entirely on principles within general relativity. It doesn't require anything
outside of general relativity to be true. However, the consequences
of the math require enormous amounts of energy or negative
mass to perform this effect on space time to have
(40:27):
this geometric warping effect.
Speaker 7 (40:29):
So that was like ninety four.
Speaker 4 (40:31):
So people started iterating upon how Kubier's work, and there
was a NASA scientist named doctor Sonny White that a
number of years ago who took on this kind of
sub specialty and started iterating upon that work and trying
to reduce the energy requirements in order to try to
find a way to make this a plausible explanation for FTL.
Now it's now probably become apparent that so Sonny White
(40:56):
was at NASA Ames at one point and he was
a colleague of a doctor Mark Millis, and at least
by way of Mark Millis was familiar with doctor Eric Davis.
I know they've met at this conference that I was
at twenty eleven. So I now think that a lot
of this was motivated by as app work that was
trying to identify ways that this could be possible. We
(41:17):
were trying to sort of reverse engineer the physics in
the abstract at the blackboard without a device right in
front of us, how might this be plausible? So one
branch of this tree is ol Kubi air physics, popularly
known as warp drive, which requires things like negative mass
or enormous amounts of energy and operates entirely within the
(41:38):
language of general relativity.
Speaker 7 (41:39):
It doesn't require anything else. Okay, that's important.
Speaker 4 (41:42):
A second bucket of possibilities of those things that we
generally refer to as electro gravitics, basically the idea that
there is a missing theory that we don't have a
grapple on yet that allows a coupling between general relativity
and electromagnetism, which would in some way allow you to
train douce electrical energy into gravitational energy, meaning you could
(42:04):
have some kind of a nuclear reactor on board. You
feed the power through like a warped coil or whatever,
and it turns it into gravity waves and whiz bang pal,
you are now manipulating space time with this device. That's
another variant is some sort of a coupling between electromagnetism
and gravitation. There are a third bucket of more exotic approaches,
(42:24):
things like zero point energy, quantitum vacuum compression. Help put
Off's ideas live in this bucket where you're not exactly
relying entirely on general relativity. You're not exactly relying on
coupling between general relativity and electromagnetism. Rather, you are positing
that there is some greater unification theory at work, some
(42:47):
grand unification that leads you to an ability to manipulate
the fundamental fabric of reality and to move what sort
of becomes perceived as FTL. And this has something to
do with some of those high strangeness ideas that might
involve multiple time dimensions and those kind of things. But
those are generally the three buckets that these different approaches
(43:10):
fall into.
Speaker 2 (43:12):
Misten Man, I got a question the ness individual you're
talking about. I could have sworn.
Speaker 10 (43:19):
I read a few years back regarding this exact same
thing where they were attempting to create or generate a
warp field or something like that, and mentioned the exact
same thing you mentioned in regards to the amount of energy.
Speaker 2 (43:36):
But I do recall.
Speaker 10 (43:38):
Seeing an article once where it was due to the
shape of the device that they were using that they
found was the reason why they weren't able to generate
that kind of energy or something like that, and it
was like a circular device. And then once shape, once
the shape was changed to a football type shape, all
of a sudden they were able to.
Speaker 2 (44:00):
Generate that kind of energy or something like that.
Speaker 4 (44:04):
Uh yeah, So I remember that they were going to
execute and experiments.
Speaker 7 (44:08):
You know, this is this is tough because like these kind.
Speaker 4 (44:11):
Of efforts are are so lampooned and looked down upon
by the by sort of broader scientific authorities that you know,
this could have been a one million dollar experiment, which
is like nothing in defense dollars and science dollars, and
probably it took absolute hell for them to get that funding.
And so from my understanding is, yes, at one point
they executed this experiment and they got some kind of
(44:33):
a result and you know, naturally you're trying to do
something at very very under very exotic conditions. And the
challenge is with very high energy physics experiments is that
the slightest perturbations in your sensors and your equipment in
the effect that you're looking for.
Speaker 7 (44:48):
You're making a lot.
Speaker 4 (44:49):
Of assumptions about what scale you think the observable is
going to be.
Speaker 7 (44:53):
You can very easily arrive.
Speaker 4 (44:54):
At at a null result, or a bad result, or
a completely unclear result. You know, I've talked before about
this book that I have, the Frontiers of Frontiers of
Breakthrough Propulsion or Frontiers of Propulsion Science, which was an
anthology composed by Eric Davis and another physicist to basically
encapsulate all of the science done by the Breakthrough Physics
(45:17):
Propulsion lab that Davis and Mark Millis ran together. And
it's just hundreds of papers about zero point energy and
anti gravity and different explorations of anti gravity. And it's
like a graveyard of dead attempts at anti gravity since
nineteen fifties. And what you take away from this is
that it's very easy to run a bad anti gravity experiment.
Speaker 1 (45:40):
It's very easy.
Speaker 4 (45:42):
And so when I see modern folks like John Bradenberg
give this APEC talk and they walk through.
Speaker 7 (45:47):
This experiment it was meant to show.
Speaker 4 (45:50):
So he has this thing called GEM theory, right, which
is a derivative of Bryce Dwitt's work from the sixties,
which is meant to be sort of one of these
examples of gravity, gravity and electromagnetic coupling. And Brandenburg walks
through this experiment they did and this result that they
apparently you had, well, Podzanov had a result, Ninglely had
a result like then they tried it again and they
(46:12):
couldn't repeat it, you know what I mean, Like LK
ninety nine had to result and then tried again they
couldn't repeat it.
Speaker 7 (46:17):
This this is rife.
Speaker 4 (46:19):
This happens in this field all the time because it's
extremely hard to do it right. And so I've kind
of wandered here, But the point is is that experimental
verifications of claims to anti gravity theories are extremely hard
to execute properly, and that's why there are so many.
Speaker 7 (46:35):
You know, in a previous space Doomer.
Speaker 4 (46:38):
Daddy, we were interviewing Jack star Body and Dumer Daddy said,
why are we still having this conversation? How is this
not resolved, and the answer is that partly it's really
fucking hard, Partly it's been stigmatized for seventy five years,
and partly the community has moved on and is.
Speaker 7 (46:54):
Not trying anymore.
Speaker 4 (46:55):
Right, the theoretical physics community is not actively trying to
solve this problem anymore. They're playing with string theory and
they have been for fifty years, and they just don't
care anymore. So that's kind of why we're still hand
ringing over the same claims, the same attempts.
Speaker 12 (47:11):
Kind of like what Mistleman was saying, if I could
interact really quickly. Is one of the reasons why the
legacy people are so confident that these UAPs are using
warp physics. I think Eric Davis has alluded to this recently,
hell put Off and loose book Eminent has alluded to
(47:34):
this as well.
Speaker 2 (47:36):
Is the I think even in.
Speaker 12 (47:42):
Grushes are the brief article, the material engineering to create
something that can sustain a warp drive is beyond something
that humans can create on this planet. So just based
on that alone makes it very makes it very you know,
(48:04):
very likely that these are non human intelligence based craft.
And again, even if you don't have a craft and
anything be the high definition, the videos and all that.
You can run almost like the scientific experiment if you
have these videos, if you constantly get to see these
HD videos and all that, based on the amount of
(48:26):
data in there that you can start observing, you know,
and make hypothesis based on what kind of popotial system
these crafts are using.
Speaker 1 (48:37):
That's right.
Speaker 4 (48:38):
And in fact, doctor Kevin Knooth did a notable paper
that was presented at SOUL last year and people have
talked about that was essentially this kinematic analysis of the
tech TAC flight based on the video and the radar
data that was described to him and to do his
best to arrive at some numbers. And that makes the
(48:58):
case that this is definitely something that it's not experiencing inertia.
And I've had this discussion with others who approach this
with skepticism that the tic TAC may have been some
kind of incredibly sophisticated black ops military project.
Speaker 1 (49:10):
Whatever.
Speaker 4 (49:11):
Well, the point is the ultimate question. All I care
about is is it operating on new physics or not?
Because if it's operating on new physics, I make the
argument that it's not something we developed natively and all
we have to do then is to analyze its flight
characteristics to figure out if this is something that could
be flying while it's experiencing inertia, and canute analysis found that,
(49:31):
like the peak peak loads on this thing were like
thirteen hundred and fifty g's and to get a notion
of like how wildly unsurvivable that is to a structure.
Some of the most highly rapidly accelerating anti ballistic missile
systems that we ever developed back in the seventies, the
Nike and Zeus missiles, they sustained something like one hundred
(49:52):
and twenty g's one hundred g's actially down the length
of the vehicle in during first stage burn for like
eight seconds, right, And the entire vehicle was designed around
surviving that acxial lobe in one direction.
Speaker 7 (50:04):
One direction. You cannot take.
Speaker 4 (50:05):
That thing and bounce at sideways and bounce it at
a forty five degree angle and expect it to survive.
It is designed to survive one hundred and twenty g's
in the axial direction for eight seconds period.
Speaker 1 (50:15):
That's it.
Speaker 4 (50:16):
So you you are two orders of magnitude, well one
order of magnitude away from being anywhere near that right
to survive something like thirteen fifty. Not to mention the
fact that it's in it's in like wildly, you know,
it's in six dimensions. Where it's in I'm sorry, it's
it's in sixth off, it's in four dimensions. It's up, down, left, right, sideways.
(50:36):
And so the notion power production and power density is
not even the problem. The problem is structural survivability. This
thing would fly apart at the seams no matter what,
no matter what kind of power source you've got in there,
driving these kinds of propulsion, propulsive accelerations. It's really a
problem of material survivability.
Speaker 5 (50:56):
I got, I got an interesting.
Speaker 10 (51:00):
Not theory, but a question regarding the theory, and I
want to see what your thought on this is.
Speaker 2 (51:06):
It's these beings are not etraterrestrial.
Speaker 13 (51:09):
Let's let's say that there's a species that has been
existing on this planet longer than us that we've been around,
possibly underground. Let's say, right, do you think that there's
a possibility that physics may somehow work differently the closer
you get to the Earth's core, or something may be
(51:30):
different that they may have been able to.
Speaker 2 (51:32):
Have access to if they existed, you know.
Speaker 7 (51:36):
Underground like it to accelerate their technical development.
Speaker 4 (51:40):
Is that where you're getting at, Yeah, nothing I can
think of in terms of different physics. I do think
that that's plausible. I think the ultraterrestrial hypothesis, I don't.
I don't think there's anything. I don't think there are
any fairly you know, uh well accepted data points in
quote unquote the lore that make that wildly improbable. For instance,
(52:05):
like the space refugee hypothesis has been leveled, this idea
that yes, they are here and have been here for
quite some time, but they arrived here from somewhere else
and they're not human. It's also the possibility they evolved
here like many millions of years ago. I think that
the notion that they evolved here recently is problematic for
archaeology and paleontology because we don't have any archaeology of them.
So for them to have been here any more recently,
(52:27):
like for them to have evolved here on the surface
any more recently than like a million years or so
would be would be difficult to justify because of the
lack of archaeological evidence. But in terms of developing underground,
one of the things that is interesting about this is.
Speaker 7 (52:44):
It's possible. I don't know that we have a lot of.
Speaker 4 (52:47):
Evidence of this, but it's possible that this FTL propulsion
system can actually allow you to travel through solid matter.
And we know from Slide nine and some other claims
and things that that is part of some of the
extended lore, this idea of not just passing through water
and space and air, but also passing through solid matter.
Speaker 7 (53:06):
And so the interesting thing.
Speaker 4 (53:07):
About that is that if you lived in these deep
underground caverns, it would behoove you to develop a technology
that allowed you to travel through solid matter, because you know,
otherwise you're like extremely limited to like where you can go.
I mean you have to dig massive tunnels to sort
of get out and get to the surface and what
have you.
Speaker 7 (53:24):
So that it certainly.
Speaker 4 (53:25):
Would encourage you to develop something that warps space time
instead of things that just you know, play around with
kinematics and Newton's Newtonian physics and all this.
Speaker 14 (53:37):
I would say, I would say there's definitely like there's
talks among folks that are pretty close to the UAP issue.
Speaker 3 (53:48):
Like I was talking to Sean Cahill not too long ago,
and he was saying that he's come across a few
cases that seem to point that point note that, yeah,
these craft are able to pass through solid matter like
mountains and and like you know.
Speaker 5 (54:08):
Island structures and stuff like that. Where are they going?
You know, how are they doing that?
Speaker 3 (54:15):
If this sort of like trans medium capability involves being
able to move through solid matter, like I believe it.
I mean, but I'm gonna I'm gonna jump down because
I gotta get onto some other stuff.
Speaker 5 (54:30):
But I'm gonna end the kg r A recording.
Speaker 3 (54:34):
Side of this so that we can salvage this side
of the this week.
Speaker 5 (54:40):
Next week, I don't think we'll crash. Hopefully we won't get.
Speaker 3 (54:43):
Mass reported as I suspect the first space got Yeah,
thanks everybody for jumping in coming back, and uh well
we'll get it going again next week too.
Speaker 5 (54:57):
But I feel free to continue the conversation.
Speaker 3 (55:00):
I'm just going to end the kg r A recording
side and jump down.
Speaker 5 (55:04):
Thanks guys,
Popular Podcasts
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.
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
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.