UAP-Congress Bombshells Pt3/3: Gold on NASA Data, Dr. Anna on UAP Tech Advances

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome back to later files from Chris Lado, retired F
sixteen pilot, and this is part two. I want to
cover the sections I missed in the blockbuster UEP disclosure
hearing on one May twenty twenty five. It really was amazing.
But we'll go through some of the interesting things that happened,
and then i'll cover the final section that I didn't cover.

(00:21):
So if you haven't watched part one, go ahead and
check that out. Link is in the description. And now
let's get to part two. Okay, So first thing I
want to cover is the photo that Lou shared. So
he says clearly that it was unverified, but he says,
there's this giant object. It was taken. The image was

(00:41):
taken from an cockpit at twenty one thousand feet and
he says the object could be six hundred to one
thousand feet in diameter and it looks like it's Paradolia
if you look here. Mickwest immediately came out and said, yeah,
why doesn't why does Lou share? This is not good
at finding this stuff, and I think Lou won't do

(01:02):
it again because as we look here, you can find
the coordinates relatively easily. Right the community is very good
at finding this stuff, and so they found the coordinates
on Google Earth thanks to Justin. He shared this with
me from UAP Society YouTube and if you look, those
are the coordinates and you can manipulate it in Google

(01:23):
or to get the exact angle from where it was
taken from at twenty one thousand feet and so it
shows one giant crop circle right that would have looked light,
and then there was a darker crop circle underneath it.
So it really gave the optical illusion that it was
a giant craft with a shadow. And I don't know

(01:45):
would it looked like that in person maybe, but it
seems like as you're flying by it wouldn't you see
that the shadow wouldn't change. So was this done on
purpose or not? Sure? But either way, I know Lou did.
He shared another photo wasn't in a forum this large right,
So I don't think he will do this again, surely,

(02:06):
you know it's too bad. I think he will definitely recover.
He's a tough guy who's on my show just recently
and he said, if you're not failing, you're not trying
hard enough, you're not risking enough. But in this case, yeah,
I'm sure he will not do this again, and he'll
get the photos verified, at least sending them out to
the community, right because immediately, you know, the debunking community

(02:29):
will go after and seriously analyze every image that Lou shares, right,
So I think he must have had access to other images.
Look at Eric Delgada's video from an airline cockpit, right,
That's what he wanted to talk about here. Lou did
was an airline cockpit and that interview on my channel

(02:50):
is amazing from with Eric Delgado, and he has a
video eight minute long video of an ORB. He has
another witness with him who was a previous fifteen pile it.
So that is just a great example. So I think
there are other amazing examples to show that airline pilots
are seeing these things, and it's not just military aircrew.
So I think Luke could have made that could have

(03:13):
made that point without sharing this unverified photo. So unfortunate.
I'm sure he will not do that again. And of
course that's all they're talking about right on X not
only the blockbuster information that came out Chris Mellon's unbelievable arguments.
You know, why are we seeing any of the UEP
radar data. Why have none of the videos he's seen

(03:34):
been released? Why haven't they been shared with Aero, etc.
As well as Eric Davis just saying outright, yeah, we
have the craft. We don't know how it really works,
but we definitely have it the meta materials all that,
and then Kurt McConnell talking about how we really need
better whistleblower protections, as well as Tim Galladett sharing that
he received many stories as well as his first hand

(03:56):
interaction with go Fast. He's already talked about that in
the previous year. But still, yeah, Blockbuster Burtherson's they're asking
fantastic questions. So anyway, go check out part one. This
will be part two. I just wanted to cover that image,
which is unfortunate. The next thing I noticed is that
so Tim Gaydett talked about climate science and he came

(04:20):
out against it, saying that there is no global warming.
And I've already gotten comments saying that, you know, I'm
brainwashed by the global warming elite and everything. But I
think it's it's pretty clear that we are in a
current extinction. If you look at the level of extinctions
going on, just how many species have been lost its

(04:41):
mirrors or is very close to the past five major
extinctions we've had on this planet. And you can also
look at ice core data and that seems pretty legitimate.
So yeah, I think we should definitely look at it
from both angles. I'm not saying that we can't make
an argument that it's not human ind used, but I

(05:02):
think the argument that it is human inducing we are
in an Anthropocene major extinction event, I think is to
me seems pretty clear. But that being said, look at
the video. They already got marked as they got the
little uh oh climate change if you can read that,

(05:23):
so it says there they got this little climate change banner.
It says United Nations. Climate change refers to long term
shifts and temperatures and weather patterns. Human activities have been
the main driver of climate change, primarily due to the
burning of fossil feels like coal, oil, and gas. And yeah,
it is super annoying when you get these banners on YouTube,
and it always comes with any sort of anti mainstream argument,

(05:46):
and I think maybe YouTube should just stop putting these
things out there. And it's there, you know, trying to
stop misinformation, et cetera. But information is still information. You
can make the argument. I would listen to Tim Galliadtz's argument.
He obviously knows at least much more than the average Joe. Right,
he was National Oceanic Atmospheric one star admiral. He did

(06:11):
that for his entire career, so I do put more
weight in his arguments and will listen. You know, that
would be great if we aren't causing climate change. I
would feel much better about being a human. But I
think there's a lot of science going the other way
as well, And we saw for decades that you know,
fossil fuel industry did fund a lot of pretty sketchy

(06:35):
studies that were done. So anyway, I thought it was
funny that they got a little marked there, and if
you mention it, that's all the people talk about. So
try and look through those things and listen to the
actual information. So I missed in the first part the
actual opening statements, and the audio is pretty bad. So
I have the I have the captions turned on, and

(06:57):
I'll try and fix the audio after so it'll be better.
But let's try and listen to the opening statements from
representative and Pauline A. Luna.

Speaker 2 (07:06):
See, actually we were book directly, so appreciating for being
here as well in all of your hard work as
you know, until really the last Congress, I think the
Representative Richette that was actually leading out the investigations fully
on his own, So credit do works deserved, mister Burks.
It's been really I think at Pronials fight, we do
have an opportunity right now where we are seeing not

(07:27):
just a complete and a complete push for transparency out
of the current administration on this topic, but also too
we have bi.

Speaker 3 (07:34):
Cameral and Buyers were on this.

Speaker 2 (07:36):
So thank you very much for love for your health
and then also to the experts and people being there
stays and testify and really to tell us and help
lead us out early out.

Speaker 3 (07:46):
We are with us again. This is the community effort.

Speaker 2 (07:49):
This is not just you know, Democrat, Republican they even
just an American thing, right, There's a massive push for
this for a good reason. We know recently in working
with the National Archives, we were able to actually update
on the our archized website all things UAP there will
continue to be document stand and updated and beyond that
tab at citizen journalists can actually go forward do the
research yourself, help us ask the tough questions and then

(08:11):
I can also tell you that we have posted dates
for the next UAP hearing. We are going to be
doing two what is going to be government focused. We
are asking various appointing. I don't want to release the
names yet, but we have been getting a good response
on them. Those uses soon as well as military and
our former military that will be coming forward. Also to

(08:32):
note that we were told by one of mister Berlinson's
staffers that's helping us so lead up this investigation, I
got someone that wants to come forward.

Speaker 3 (08:41):
In regards to a crash the treatment program. So that's pretty.

Speaker 2 (08:44):
Interesting to hear someone going on record about that. Obviously,
we've had a lot of people try to dispel the
research that the UAP community has done, and so we're
just thinking at the fact of letting the American people
in religio world with that.

Speaker 3 (08:56):
But I'd also like.

Speaker 1 (08:57):
To, okay, just stop it. So already she's released some
great information. So it sounds like there's a website that
they're going to start posting up data. That's awesome. So
it's not just AERO that we're waiting for to release information.
It looks like they're going to do it on their own,
So that's awesome, so pumped for that. Love to see that.

(09:19):
And then she said they're going to have two hearings,
so great to get that information as well, and they're
publishing the dates on that. All I've heard about is
the May thirteenth hearing. But now we have two more hearings,
so after this, but now we'll have real hearings. And
she said one it'll be government focused, and it sound
like the other one will be military, and that we
will have someone from the crass retrieval program. So I

(09:40):
wonder if that will be Jake Barber. If Jake Barbara
will go and go under oath, would you also have
Matthew Brown there? That would be amazing. That's what we
had in twenty twenty three, right David Grush came out,
he made the interview with Russ Coltart and then a
month later he went did the hearing. So yeah, it's

(10:02):
going to be an exciting next month.

Speaker 3 (10:06):
Thank you, thank you, Anna.

Speaker 4 (10:11):
I first want to just say thank you again to
Tim of leading the charge on.

Speaker 5 (10:16):
This when it wasn't when it wasn't popular, It was.

Speaker 4 (10:21):
Involved and took a lot of courage and and we
all recognize that nice wanted to acknowledge that. And I
want to say thank you to Anna for her leadership.
And I'll tell you she is amazing to work with.
She is very humble in her attitude and approach. She
doesn't she likes to, you know.

Speaker 5 (10:37):
Where the people that other people join in.

Speaker 4 (10:39):
The credit and she is a very gracious, good near.
I want to say thank you to everyone that has
come forward, you know, for the move to trenology, to
mister Brush and others that have thinking boulders, mister Grace.

Speaker 6 (10:59):
Who to taking the whole step and.

Speaker 4 (11:03):
You know, at the risk of their reputation and their career.
There's a lot of people that sacrificed their career in
order to get information out to the American people. We're
grateful for it as well for the cooperation and workating
with Tulsea Gabbert.

Speaker 5 (11:20):
And whose Director's Initiatives group.

Speaker 4 (11:22):
Is actively harmonized the classification guides to facilitate responsible releases.

Speaker 6 (11:28):
She's been very affected with the jik assassination records and others.

Speaker 1 (11:33):
Okay, just pause it there. So already Barlaston was just
awesome in this in this hearing as a cover in
part one, so he mentions here and thanks Tim guy
Adept for coming out when it was difficult to do.
I think it's still difficult to do. Right. We don't
have people just coming out of the woodwork. And you'll

(11:55):
see Kirk McConnell talks about that in part one, and
it's interesting he mentions Tulca Gabbett here talking about the
classification guides, because that that was a major point that
Chris mellon said, is that the classification guide completely changed.
And we all saw, right, you could foia, you could
get information. Greenwolves was making some traction, and then all

(12:15):
of a sudden, the Navy came out and said anything
related to UAP is classified. And that's just freaking ridiculous.
It's so it's so ridiculous. And so we really do
need that classification guide rewritten, and that alone should push
a lot of this to get unclassified, because why have
we not seen any real videos? Right, all we've seen

(12:36):
is clearly debunked videos from aero.

Speaker 4 (12:41):
So and then the last thing I want to say
is that this is not a one time thing. This
will not be It's clearly this is not one time
data enough, this is this is a systemic change to
the process and the way that we are transparent with
the American people. Did that.

Speaker 6 (13:00):
On legislation that well, then we'll put that into practice.
And again, thank you Revering for being here. I'm looking
forward to the day's hearing.

Speaker 1 (13:12):
Okay, yeah, this is a systemic process. That's what we need. Classification. Guy, Like,
it's that boring work that everyone skips over and complains about,
but that's the work that needs to be done to
actually declassify all this stuff. Right, the only way you
can fight at bureaucracy is with better bureaucracy, I think,
or just changing it, but chain sawing it. Everybody freaks out.

Speaker 7 (13:37):
Thanks John for being here.

Speaker 6 (13:38):
I'll be very very flue.

Speaker 7 (13:40):
Thank you for the introduction my colleagues up here is
very kind words.

Speaker 8 (13:44):
I'm not sure what that's all about. Big I'm buying
piece is just sign if we'll get home today.

Speaker 9 (14:00):
But it is a pleasure of being here, and I
want to thank the people that are They're sitting right there,
some dear friends of mine, people in.

Speaker 7 (14:06):
The media and elsewhere. They are always gaming me. And
we don't agree on a bad young thing.

Speaker 9 (14:11):
Retically, we do agree that this is the biggest covert
of our lifetime.

Speaker 7 (14:17):
And we need to get the bottom of it.

Speaker 9 (14:19):
And I'm losing felt folks who all out there that
we believe for so many years, people that believe like
we did, and I live in the shadows. And when
you bring it up, you get criticized, people say all
kinds of off of things about you that then I'm
over mad.

Speaker 7 (14:39):
We know these things cover up and ball that that.
Don't let off of it. So thank you all for
being here. What's good?

Speaker 1 (14:52):
Yeah, Tim burchey Man, he's so good. I'm so glad.
You know all those people were re elected. Yeah, I
mean it shows right, it's it gives you traction. People
will support you. So I hope more Congress people can
speak out and realize that, you know, this is a
topic people are very passionate and interested in.

Speaker 7 (15:15):
Well, what I'd like to do is because time is precious,
especially for the members. Obviously they have a real job
to do. This is part of it, but they've had
a whole lot of other responsibilities. So that said, I'd
like to first begin by thanking specifically Representative Luna from
the thirteenth District, if I'm not mistaken, of Florida for
her leadership on this, particularly in this formerly and on
this topic, this impossible if it was not full Representative

(15:38):
Luna in her pursuing the truth she has as she
has served her country quite honorably, and her husband as well,
if you've been in the military, mad about across him.
So on. We have a very grateful nation. Man, Thank
you for what you continue to do, your continued service
to this nation and that of your family. It is
greatly appreciated, and your service specific spoiled militaristly. Thank you.

(16:03):
The second I led to thank Representative Parlson, somewhat newer
to this topic than some of the other folks maybe
on the Senate side and even the outside, who has
also changed in truth and transparency within the American government.
I would refer to him as a healthy skeptic, which
I think has worked. Always give you an open mind,

(16:23):
a lot of the data to speak for itself. And
in my interactions we have Representative Parlston, I've seen him
to me every time and exclusively are honorable and truthfully,
and he is now gotten. I think it's translated into
the form you see here the media. President, We're going
to have a very interesting conversation today, and again this
is a little possible because the three individuals up here.

Speaker 6 (16:46):
So if you have time later on I need, I would.

Speaker 7 (16:49):
Suggest you you give him a good deal of thanks
for what he's doing for intersh And last is certainly
not least in representative tim Orship from Tennessee, who has
hitting this topic for quite some time at great personal
risk to his political career. As most of you know,
that's home thing that are politicians into what is risen,

(17:12):
especially when it comes to the collection time and represented
for CHET, I would probably define him as bringing a
working man's perspectives and have common sense perspective to the bureaucracy,
be called Washington d C. Certainly breath of fresh air
and at champions for again truth and transparency for a

(17:33):
government and for our institutions. So that's said, like to
offer quick brunt of applause for them.

Speaker 1 (17:42):
I would say Burlason is just feeling it right. That's
he's probably the most effective because he really does have
the skeptical mainstream perspective, but he's obviously very intelligent. He
does know science. From the questions he's asked, I think
he is not eligible and yeah, I think he will
be very beneficial to this. And you notice he stays

(18:05):
through I believe the whole conference, right. I still haven't
gotten to the second part. We'll cover that in a
little bit, or the last part the innovation panel. But
he stays the whole time, and he is he is
dialed in, asking, asking the questions, really interested, and that's
what that's what we need, right, That's what that's all
we're asking for, is a you can be skeptical, that's fine,

(18:26):
but at least be interested and respectful. And so I
think Burlison will be very effective for convincing if he
if we can convince Burlison, right, if all these whistleblowers
convinced Burlison, then he will probably be the best mouthpiece
for disclosure.

Speaker 6 (18:47):
Delights. To thank the panelists that are with us here today,
he came back.

Speaker 7 (18:53):
My drill sturgy voice. If I need too. We're going
to have three separateceptions with panelists with supremely that I guess.
I'm not sure there's ever been assembled a panel like
this in front of the American people. And I don't
say that likely because I've been part of a lot
of It means a lot a lot of the beings both

(19:14):
in the intelligence community, within the national security apparatus. We
have elements from academia, elements from the scientific community, elements
from the National security are, elements from the intelligence community,
all speaking here today to you about what they know

(19:35):
regarding the un new topic. The assembly here is is
dare I say possibly eveness or I'm truly honored to
be with me here today. I here moderator. Real quick
reminder for paneless I'd like to when you're asking me
a question, try to keep it within Try to keep
it within three minutes. Eric, if a suden to go

(19:58):
beyond that, I might have to of the conversation you
want did to some other questions, because we do have
a lot of panelists and I also have a tendency
to talk a lot, so I'm going to try to
keep myself in check as well. But panelists, and try
to keep your responses to three minutes. Some panelists have
for you in presentation, So for those who go to presentation,

(20:18):
we'll do the presentation first and then we'll be followed
up with questions and of course a state members for Congress.

Speaker 6 (20:24):
If you have any question or any time, please feel.

Speaker 7 (20:26):
Free to ask them. We will we certainly have our
panelists address those questions. For you. One more reminder, again,
a security minder. I always said it before, but for
everybody who's coming here after, I'm going to be asking questions.
Some of those would be very pointed questions. For those
of you who have a security clearance or who have
held at the security clearance. I asked that you'd please

(20:48):
be mindful that this is an unclassified venue and not
to discuss classified information. For the record, none let's look
good in an orange jumpsuit. Certainly I don't, so if
you want to be mindful of that. And I'd also
like to thank the medium, thank each and every one
to do for being here. I know this is a
topic that for quite some time was frog statement taboo.
This would have been considered courier suicide for any respectable

(21:11):
journalists to cover this topic, just like it is for
politicians and are elected leaders of this nation. And times
are changing. Times you're changing because of you. So I
I'm wanting to do a hearty thank here to the
members of media who are covering this. And last, but
not least, and probably perhaps most important, I would like
to thank each and every one of you in the audience,

(21:32):
each and every one of you, This turning in each
eever wanting to do. That's watching this, each and every
one of you that might be sitting on your sofa
at home or running dinner table and are interested in
this topic. And I've asked questions. This is because of you.
Our elected officials put this on, because of you not
being and not even our sking guests because of you.

Speaker 1 (21:55):
I think he's actually right though, the only way it
is going to change is to change the mainstream perspective.
You know, when it when you can say it at
a party and it's not laughed at and it's not
a joke. I think that's when we'll probably see some
actual real change. And I we are not there yet.

(22:16):
You can't. You can't say it like, say it at
the next party where you're not around your UFO buddies,
if you have even UFO buddies. I don't even have
any UFO buddy. It's all online, right, Say in real
life when you're not at a convention. Say it and
see if you how how serious you're taken.

Speaker 7 (22:37):
And that's you tell me something. That means democracy is working, folks,
That means transherency is working. That means we the people
are worth That's a lot. That's that's profound. This is
Democracy Mansion and you're watching it. So I want to
say each and every one of you, and I also
want to think you created with the staff here in

(22:57):
Long Hill that put this, help put this together, coordinate this.
I know to do it asume, but thank you so
much for being patient with us and helping us with
the audio, visual and the media and the seating is
very much appreciated. So with that, let's go ahead and again,
shall we.

Speaker 1 (23:18):
Okay, I let'ld say if they should work on the
audio next time, and it'd be nice if we could
see the slides, so just I know it's not easy,
but just from for improvement. I'm sure they know that.

Speaker 7 (23:32):
So I'd like to introduce the first of our panelists here.
It is doctor and Logan.

Speaker 1 (23:38):
Okay, awesome, So go to part one of my show
and you will check it out and then you can
see basically all the way to innovation panel and that
we'll cover that now. So he introduces Avy Lobe, and
now let's go to the innovation panel. I haven't watched that,

(24:00):
as you seem.

Speaker 7 (24:01):
We can probably stay all day with just one chanelist alone,
lots of discussion.

Speaker 6 (24:06):
We are barely scans his service here.

Speaker 7 (24:10):
The next discussion is really going to be part of
a scientific discussion. So the two pens you have here
are experts in their own fields and recognize as a
as a global leader in their particular expertise.

Speaker 1 (24:27):
Okay, So, like I said, Burlison's still there, man. So
look at that. He's taken three hours and forty five
minutes of his day, so four hours of his day.
He's definitely interested in this topic. Also, we have Avvey
Lobe sitting next to Ryan Graves. Okay, so that's that's
interesting see them talking. Maybe Ryan can tell them, yeah,

(24:49):
it's not you know, it was real.

Speaker 7 (24:53):
It was real.

Speaker 1 (24:53):
Kimbal was the UAP. You also have Leslie Kane sitting
between James Fox and Steve Bassett. I thought that was cool.

Speaker 7 (25:05):
I'd like to do first is introduced Miss Anna Brady Sts,
founding partner at American Detech, former s B, a innovation
advisor for Kaufman Coffin Fellow, and on the UA Community
Advisory Board. But what you may not know is that, uh,
Miss Grady Sts is deeply involved with the National Science Foundation,

(25:33):
and that involvement really includes looking at pioneering new ways
to invest American talents and scientific talents and into new
and emerging areas of science. Right, where do we where
do we decide to put our amount our effort in
the next twenty years?

Speaker 6 (25:52):
Where do we get that in terms of investment? What
does that look like?

Speaker 7 (25:56):
Right? And how do we how do we force ourselves
and think outside of the box to be creative? Don't
invent it to Martin's technology. Invent the technology after tomorrow.
And it's that type of creative thinking that has traditionally
kept this country ahead of everybody else. And I asked

(26:17):
him to when she when she speaks, this is what
she has to say, because this isn't my fainting. This
is the future, not just this topic, but any topic
requiring innovasion. I mean, if you don't innovate Saturday, if
you don't Staturday in comparison, that's just a bottom line, right,
who live in a competitive world?

Speaker 6 (26:37):
The next individual is a call it your friend mine.
Mister Mike Gold, mister white Gold.

Speaker 7 (26:43):
He is President of the.

Speaker 10 (26:45):
Civil and International Space at Red Water, member of the
NASA UAP Independent Study Team, former NASA Associated Administrator for
Space Policy and Partnerships, form acting Associated Administrator for the
Office of International and Introagency Relations and Senior Advisor to
the Administrator for International and Legal Affairs. Former Vice president

(27:08):
for Civil Space at Maxar Technologies Farmer, director of PC
Operations and Business Groups, that the Abul of Aerospace might
remember the order from somewhere else and that involved him
and last certain novels as a member of NASA, and
I praig to say a mission manager, let's be part

(27:29):
of James.

Speaker 7 (27:31):
I did that right.

Speaker 6 (27:32):
I've got two things wrong too, the foreign today. So
I want to be figure to write find her.

Speaker 1 (27:36):
So I had Mike on the show, interviewed just a
few weeks ago. He had COVID actually, and he was
getting construction done on inside his house and his family
was there. So it was an interview in his car,
but it gave a full hour of his time. And
so what I think he's going to argue for, and
I think this is fantastic to put it on the stage,

(27:59):
is that someone at NASA does the two things that
the NASA Independent UAP Study Team asked them to do
right from their final recommendations. And the first thing is
to go back and systematically look through the NASA archives.
NASA has tons of videos that are unclassified, right, they're

(28:22):
already published on the internet, and to go back and
systematically review those. A lot of people have said, yeah,
they're not going to put the interesting videos up on there. Yes,
but what if they missed some, right, or maybe there
are interesting videos up there. So we said to go
back and look through that. The second recommendation they had
from the study team, and that was the point of
the study team is to figure out what is the

(28:42):
best way to get UAP data for NASA. The second
way is to do the Aviation Safety Reporting System to
use that as a tool, and that is a anonymous
reporting system, so commercial pilots could use it. So Ryan Graves, well,
I'm sure we'll be talking to Mike Gold after this,
and I'm sure they've talked before this. So that needs

(29:03):
that needs to happen and could definitely help. So let's
see what he says.

Speaker 6 (29:08):
Recovery and turning. They would let me close to the fire ignition.

Speaker 11 (29:12):
So I was the architect of the Artist is a
global partnership for fifty four countries exploring new.

Speaker 6 (29:18):
Wars, and you.

Speaker 7 (29:20):
Excellently and that's it, right.

Speaker 6 (29:22):
The Explored Explored moves Moon.

Speaker 7 (29:24):
Mars, there is a something pres There was an estimate
done that the future of man man kind start our species.
It's not here. And in fact, if you were to
look at the financial opportunities, it was estimated that at
one times ten to the eighteenth eighteenth power amount of

(29:47):
money is this this world has ever been closely in
all its time of modern civilization.

Speaker 6 (29:54):
It's multiplying that by factor at eighteen.

Speaker 7 (29:56):
And that's the value of their resources and why within
me inner asteroids right, So, so the future is there.
As a microbiologist and immunologist, there's one primary directly of
all life systems, you know, and that's who expand. If
you don't expand, you will perish. In fact, you can
look at a pea tradition, if you put the right

(30:18):
amount of nutrients, bacteria will do the same. Take a plane,
give it nutrients of water, it will grow and take over.
That is the primary director of all life and we
are no exception to that. So if you got in mind,
is that these individuals are going to talk to you
about about the importance of this topic via can topic
and how it relates to the scientific community. And my

(30:41):
mistaken that you have your presentation for so relate to
turn over Vermal welcome mark two guests or.

Speaker 6 (30:47):
Sess teen guests? And do you manage your presentation? You're
gonna do the just a questions answered? Yeah, okay, Mike,
I want to and those stuff as you started. Okay, yeah,
yeah great.

Speaker 11 (31:06):
In terms of expansion, I can tell you my doctor
says I'm expanding far too much, saying a lot of trouble.
Thank you so much for you, not only Forday, but
for all you have done to the pusher stop if
you are an American hero as well as the commressman
in many others from this room, from the journalist and
the scientists and the advocates.

Speaker 6 (31:25):
Why I was.

Speaker 11 (31:26):
It's just an honor to hear and appreciate what everyone
has done. Also, thank you red Wire directors. Let me
on the meeting early there was a wonderful discussion.

Speaker 6 (31:35):
I think this is going to be a lot more exciting.
If I could point you to my opening slide that is.

Speaker 11 (31:39):
Actually an image taken my Blue Ghost moonor Lander with
Red Wire artist cameras. I'm going to get in why
that is such an extraordinary image in a moment. But
before we get there, we were having a discussion about
substances and what these new substance will like new material
is what the LAP technology.

Speaker 6 (31:59):
It would be.

Speaker 11 (32:00):
And I've been given the challenging, if not an envy
of all task but saying how could UAP technology impact
innovation without knowing flight that LAP technology is even fundamentally
So what I'd like to try and me today is
give you an example of how micro gravity is impact

(32:20):
and innovation and really almost every industrial field, and how
that would be transformative. I don't know if actually trust
and civilizations you're using this, I think they likely would be,
but I think this is an example of how a
fundamental shift and technology can change everything. Our company, red
Wire has been conducting experimentals on the International Space Station

(32:41):
on the Space Show.

Speaker 6 (32:42):
For literally decades.

Speaker 11 (32:44):
We have along one hundreds of experiments over the past
thirty flow levels years. We have eleven experiments acting on
the International Space Station right now, more than any other company.
You see Senator Josh Lynn learning one of our experiments there, the.

Speaker 6 (32:57):
First one left.

Speaker 11 (32:58):
I'd like to show you because the body fabrication facility
of the PFF or.

Speaker 5 (33:02):
Grated APTIVI said, bred Wires, you can play the video please.

Speaker 11 (33:06):
This is by the way over four hundred pound payloaded
roof table and our facility in Greenville, Indiana much easier
to handle an orbit. That astronaut and a cuts fan
working very what you call coffee twenty time speed. But
he's installing what is a biofabrication unit, and that system

(33:28):
has allowed us to manufacture human tiss in space. It
resulted in the first human miniscus being printed in space.

Speaker 6 (33:40):
Who needs a meniscus?

Speaker 12 (33:42):
More exactly, this.

Speaker 6 (33:47):
Is the impact of Michael gravity.

Speaker 11 (33:48):
That if you tried to create that niscus on Earth,
and again a recovery attorney, so I can put it simply,
it swishes you couldn't do that gravity environments on space
per se. It's the lack of gravity that allows incredibly
the things.

Speaker 1 (34:04):
Okay, so first, I can't believe I didn't know lou
as a background in microbiology. I need to look into that. Yeah,
and then Mike is funny, right he threw in a
couple of singers and usually around his expanding waistline. I
think he made a first joke about that in my
interview with him. The funny thing is they're they're printing

(34:27):
the human tissue right using micro gravity, but human tissue
grows just fine, and gravity like it really does happens
billions of times. It seems like there is probably a
better way to do it.

Speaker 6 (34:41):
Such point of.

Speaker 3 (34:42):
The success.

Speaker 11 (34:44):
We printed live cardiovascular tissue and we brought it back
throw the International Space Station. Still a lot I think
what this could mean for people, stop rising heart disease,
the creation of heart patches, and of course the goal
of all of this is ultimately to create whole organs

(35:05):
in space.

Speaker 1 (35:06):
I mean, that would be amazing though, right if that's
the best way we can do it. Access to space
is about to get very very cheap with Starship. It's
going to drop it by one hundred fold at least
maybe one thousandfold, and so I think in the very
near future we will have space manufacturing. So this would

(35:27):
be amazing. I still think you could just grow a
meniscus if you knew, like Michael Levin says, how to
program regeneration. He can regenerate planarians. Actually, why couldn't you
regenerate or reprogram human stem cells. If you can reprogram planarians.

Speaker 6 (35:45):
How many of us have had.

Speaker 11 (35:46):
Friends relatives die well waiting on the organ donation. This
could change all of that. Additionally, because we were using
your own stem cells to create the tissue with the organs,
we would avoid the dangerous and expensive anti rejection therapies
that you go through. So we see how much gravity

(36:06):
kind of dramatic impact in terms of life sciences. Also pharmaceuticals,
red Wire has flown twenty eight pill boxes.

Speaker 6 (36:16):
These are systems where we take pharmal supicals drugs.

Speaker 11 (36:19):
Why the sea crystals and sea crystals, by the way,
they're like a salur dough starting.

Speaker 6 (36:24):
Kid, They're what the drugs are made out.

Speaker 11 (36:27):
And when you create sea crystals in like the gravity,
they're larger, more uniform, and that results in drugs with
better reficues, better large tim fewer.

Speaker 5 (36:38):
Side of this, here's an example that is very near
to ear to my heart.

Speaker 7 (36:42):
Insulin.

Speaker 6 (36:43):
We partnered with Eli Lilly.

Speaker 11 (36:45):
We flew insulin over on the left side of that.
That's when insulin seam crystals look like. Can you create
daughter over on the right side, that's what installin looks
like in space seed crystals. Again, I got a d
mis and biologies of high school. Even eye can tell
the difference between one and the other. And because of

(37:05):
those larger or uniform physicals, you could have a version
of insulin where you've seen versions of cancer treatment drugs
that whereas you have to go from chemotherapy that will
be exected again long painful, your potential will get to
a version of the drug of where it could be
administering Worland.

Speaker 6 (37:22):
So a tremendous difference here relative to the pharmaceuticle except it.

Speaker 11 (37:26):
By the way, it's not just us who know this
is China, and the Chinese have the space station. They're
going after this thing research, so it kind of covers more.
The dice is to look at the international space stations
replacing it for the commercial space station. This revolution with
biotech micro gravity is going to happen. The only question
is it going to happen here in American free world?

(37:48):
Where is it going to be happening in China? And
I do not want to be buying my next generation
in pharmaceuticals and drugs from the Chinese. So we need
to continue to support this and to create new developments.
But this is just like sciences biotecht you get micro
draft will impact seven conductors the same principles. When you
full on crystals in space, you can create new types
of semi conductors. That are know how we're tolerant of heat. Agriculture,

(38:13):
you can create seeds, new types of plants that can
flourish in the desert. We have a green as that
we're flying in space.

Speaker 6 (38:21):
Looking at any of that efforts, you see that there.
We also have.

Speaker 11 (38:25):
Systems with those called ze layer fiber, whereas new type
of hybri optic that could be incredibly more powerful. Again
and every aspect of our technological society wouldn't be changed
by this innovation. Is the something to do AP are using.
Is this new substances that they're using. I don't know, perhaps,
but you see how this field will revolutionize every even

(38:49):
and I believe in the future the leaders micrograd will
not only be leaders in economics, but in national security
as well. As a matter of facts, where the customer
for that was some Uniform Services University because a number
one injury to our many women.

Speaker 6 (39:05):
Uniform are miniscus stators that I would like to talk about.

Speaker 11 (39:10):
Who wants to see some unclassified data, right, let's talk
about some imagery that we're getting for NASA.

Speaker 5 (39:16):
As Lou mentioned, I was.

Speaker 11 (39:17):
Proud to be a member of NASA's UAP Intends studenteen.
We had some very common sense refugations. One of which
that I testified here laws not too long ago side
the great gou Alsano and others, was that we need
to go into the NASA archives, get an imagery, review.

Speaker 6 (39:36):
It, make it public, and look at what we've got.

Speaker 5 (39:40):
This is an example that hit the internet not too
long ago.

Speaker 3 (39:43):
Is it TikTok?

Speaker 6 (39:44):
It's all mors.

Speaker 12 (39:46):
I don't know.

Speaker 6 (39:47):
I'm not qualified to say, but someone should be looking
at or we should be collecting and callingting the data.
Here's one that's even more interesting to me. Luner for
lies and love.

Speaker 11 (39:59):
This is something on that we first saw with the
surveyor systems. This name a globe that we're seeing on
the horizon of the moon. We saw the robotic surveyors
and what do you see? And the other latting aside
are sketches that Apollo astronauts today of this phenomena, a
glowing dome, streaks of light shooting it out from the

(40:22):
lunar surface.

Speaker 5 (40:23):
Pretty extraordinary.

Speaker 6 (40:25):
And then most recently this was when cover Splide with the.

Speaker 11 (40:30):
Blue Goose system, which is nastiest commercial of the Payload
Services program CLIPS, a wonderful public private partnership.

Speaker 6 (40:37):
To reach the Moon with the red Wire artist cameras.
We took this image of the lunar arison below.

Speaker 11 (40:46):
What you might hear if you go on a NASCID
website or talk to some in the scientific community is
that this effect is from dust that has been electrostatically
charged and then levitated to create this impact. Now again,
I'm not saying one way or the other, but doctor

(41:07):
I should go back and him credit.

Speaker 5 (41:11):
Doctor. I'm gonna I'm gonna mess up his name. I
apologize to the slides.

Speaker 11 (41:17):
But a wonderful professor who's been associated with UAP Disclosure
Fund and doing work on the toffic, why do we
these slides? And I can tell you NASA's own research
other systems is putting some big question mars as, even
if there is enough dust create is.

Speaker 1 (41:35):
Okay? So interesting? So far didn't. I don't really like
the first part of his brief when he it seemed
more like a red Wire commercial. I don't know, or
at least I think people could I could argue against it,
but I guess I could see I could see his
argument for the Innovation board, right, if that's what you
need to talk about. So that's why he started with
that there's this image from Mars, and it almost could

(42:00):
be the paradilia effect that we that I mentioned at
the beginning of this, where you could just have a
dark colored object that looks like it's giving a shadow. Right,
So this could be a rock in the distance a
little bit a few meters in the distance, and then
this could be another discoloration of rock, and now that
would look like possibly a flying object, and that's where

(42:24):
you could easily determine that from another camera.

Speaker 3 (42:26):
Right.

Speaker 1 (42:26):
That's why we definitely need multiple images of something to
confirm what single photo is not going to It's not
going to prove anything. I think, even a single video
unless the precedence is unbelievable, right from military systems, it's
not going to prove it. You need multi spectral and
that's why I love the radar captures that of the

(42:49):
recent Tiktak right, because they have radar, they have visual,
and they have the fleer. So that's three spectrums. So
that's why I think it's so powerful. I'd never heard
of this, right, I've seen this image, but it's interesting.
He talks about the shadows going the opposite direction, shadows
of lunar rocks point in the wrong direction impossible lighting
of the surface through Venetian blinds effect. So what he

(43:11):
said is it could be dust in the air raised
electrostatically makes it look green, and so electrostatically. It seems
like a lot of these UAPs are using some form
of electrostatics. And if you remember, I think my most
popular video this year was actually on NASA scientists determining
that there is a small force based on electrostatics, and

(43:34):
so that would be a new force that we haven't understood.
You know, it's not a kinematic force. It's based on
electrostatic So that would be like some sort of warp drive.
Although if you do look, we do have photon pressure.
You can push something in space as Avy Lob talked about,
is pushed by the Sun's rays, right, pushed by sunlight. Again,

(43:57):
how is that kinematics? And it's yeah, they say that
I love this again and I railed against our current
understanding of physics in part one. But also think about
this is so photons as we understand them, photons again
never have been directly observed. We just note their effects
and then we postulate that a photon solves that. They

(44:18):
say photons are massless particles. Right, I also talked about
space time, and we don't know where Inershi comes from.
Photons are massless particles, right, and yet they can induce
a force right masstimes acceleration. They can induce a force
on objects in space, so through photon pressure. So how
is something that is massless induce a force? And that's

(44:42):
where they say, Oh, it's a photon, is a particle
and a wave, that's what they say. So that's why
because it's a wave, because it's massless, but it can
induce a force like a particle. And so again it's
one of those just givens that a photon has no
mass and yet it can impart of force. Right, how

(45:02):
is that possible? And they square this corner using all
these complicated mass that you can't possibly understand, right, or
you can, but once you've gone down that road so far,
is it's almost like you're brainwashed into thinking yeah, of
course that's how it is so interesting. I thought this
image was interesting, and like you mentioned, it is the
archives of NASA.

Speaker 11 (45:24):
Right, if there is enough dust create is event which
looks unlikely, and that it dust could be electrostatically charged
to cause what I mean looks like the seven sunrise,
and that's not the sun, by the way, it's below
the horizon. I mean, that is an explordinary image. And

(45:46):
by the way, when I first saw this picture just
likes that Alaget on the Moon and what you're seeing
is light refreshing occurring due to I don't know, so
I don't know what this is. Is it don't Is
it some type of natural phenomenon that we don't understand
or burgler? But I'll tell you definitely it's a unidentified

(46:11):
anomalist phenomena which bears amilte and bears understanding. And this
is a good example too of even if it's a
natural or prosaic phenomena, there's something extraordinary we should be
doing intimate, we should be studying it and understanding and
on the off chance that does turn out to be

(46:32):
something extraordinary, I mean, we need to know what is
occurrent here. Additionally, there's another shot publicly available from an
ask archives.

Speaker 6 (46:44):
You've seen some energy of the triangular UAPs in the past.
What's that to three satellite that's from the moon that's
up seventeen We have the picture images from a follows.

Speaker 12 (47:02):
A few of us saw something like that last Friday,
extraordinary three clans.

Speaker 1 (47:10):
What is it?

Speaker 6 (47:11):
I don't know, you know, honestly, you know what that is.

Speaker 1 (47:18):
I know what the debunking argument will be will be
a reflection on the class through the window.

Speaker 6 (47:26):
Why are we not investigators?

Speaker 11 (47:28):
And what I would ask if our brave members of
Congress move here is, again with relatively little effort and mind,
we should be leveraging aim to go into the NASA archives.
So much of this is been digitized more every day
and can doctor who you of what's available. We spend

(47:49):
so much time here just biably so talking about classified material,
what's being hidden, Yet there's a treasure trove of data
that is not a smoking on certainly is fascinating and
words we're looking at and applying the scientific men to
and these images that you're seeing here in a year's

(48:09):
more of another UAP from more of potentially stolen hinge
stringe structures.

Speaker 5 (48:17):
On when are anomalies that look like whodas capitals?

Speaker 11 (48:21):
Any I'm saying necessarily all of these have extraordinary explanations.

Speaker 6 (48:26):
Maybe some of them don't, maybe some of them do,
but it's certainly is worth of an effort to investigate, and.

Speaker 1 (48:33):
We're not doing that right now what so, yeah, this
is amazing. I wish you'd opened with this actually and
then went into the other into the his other argument.
I think this is a lot stronger, and probably the
first part may have turned people off.

Speaker 6 (48:49):
I think because of.

Speaker 11 (48:51):
The stigma, this pernicious figma that prevents us from tastic
and certain that's what we annoy.

Speaker 6 (48:57):
It needs your help that I have many friends and
ask them that are interested in my stuff, ask.

Speaker 5 (49:01):
Me in going from that.

Speaker 11 (49:04):
They need top cover and that's the way. It's so
grateful to the offline to talk more about.

Speaker 5 (49:09):
What we can do when you're doing as administrator coming
in and.

Speaker 6 (49:11):
This isn't going and cost a lot of money. This
could be done for very low time, very lit laffort.
Inter results could be extraordinary.

Speaker 1 (49:21):
Finally, is weird And I think that's awesome, Right, that's
exactly what I was hoping for. Well, see if he
mentioned the Aviation Safety Reporting System, but just talking direct
to the congress person in a live open forum, right,
so everyone sees where the information came from. And yeah,
now direct NASA. So this must put pressure on NASA, right.

Speaker 6 (49:42):
That's technology.

Speaker 11 (49:43):
I just wanted for levels and relatives to what it
takes to travel in space three days to the seven
to ten months to Mars. I can tell you exposure
to radiation very much, quite dangerous and challenging. Seventy seventy
thousand years to talk in the senatory our closest start.
I mean, that's worse than my flights, Like you're not

(50:04):
even rough, and then one point seven million years to
get to where we've seen this in the biolutely going
to explore space, we're going to need some invam technology.
And here were already spent some time discussing the alque
Berry warp drive. This was the Mexican physicist into the

(50:26):
initial work, moving then within demonstrated science and for Eric
datas here. But but this is no extraordinary science that
they can warp drive put into this. The challenge with
Albery's warp drive is that it when required roughly the
mass and Jupiter converted into energy to operate. I had

(50:47):
a sheady suburban and that was not too efficient.

Speaker 6 (50:49):
This would even more difficult.

Speaker 1 (50:53):
What I mean, look at the same thing. Right, We
basically had Lord Kelvin right before the Right Brothers flew
and he was head of the Science Society of the
UK Right, arguably the furthest forward thinking organization on the
planet in just a few years before the Right Brothers flew,

(51:17):
he said. He argues, it will be impossible for heavier
than air flight. So basically, if you tried to cross
the ocean, right, you're crossing it on a ship at
that point, it's going to take many months. And then look,
if you use a different method, if you fly based

(51:39):
on things that your current science thinks is impossible, which
is heavier than air flight, all of a sudden it
takes a few hours. Right, You go from months of
time or at least many weeks to a few hours.
And look at that. And the point is it's a
form of method that is outside of our current understanding
of science, and our current understanding of science in nineteen

(52:02):
hundred was heavier than air flight is impossible from Lord
Kelvin famous quote. And then of course every revolutionized.

Speaker 11 (52:11):
The scientist at Nash what was then overse tweaked basically
the architecture of the ALGAEBRAI works life and perhaps a
thousand ways to get that to anson the work the
mass of the v W.

Speaker 6 (52:24):
You know, something that we could work. So these are
the kinds of technologies.

Speaker 13 (52:29):
That if there is a revitic system sometime of explordinary technology,
we must have it and to reverse those distances and
have America and our international departures lead in space that explorations.

Speaker 1 (52:42):
So he said, they tweaked it and it went from
the mass of Jupiter to a VW. It's quite the tweak.

Speaker 11 (52:52):
Additionally, energy, I mean, if we are sitting on extraordinary technologies,
the eurofoid energy the task in the effect as we discussed,
I think it was a good we could do in
terms of stating the environments of the economy creating a
post scarcity society. It would be extraordinary and it would
be wonderful. And let me just end by saying the

(53:15):
reverse of that is, we do not want to fall
behind China relative to leveraging extraordinary technology.

Speaker 3 (53:25):
I don't know if there's any attact out there.

Speaker 11 (53:27):
There may be, there might not be, but can be
risk falling behind the Chinese reverse engineering if there is
such a technology.

Speaker 1 (53:37):
But of course that's why we're keeping it secret. It's
obviously just replace the you know, keep the red the
same and make that Russia, and now we move forward
like maybe maybe we'll release it and then they replaced
it with China, and they're like, no, we can't, No,
we can release this information. And that's precisely why they're
not releasing any disinformation is because of that sector. That's exactly.

Speaker 6 (54:01):
And this is again where this love is so fridicious.
But I'm sure Shana has it.

Speaker 14 (54:08):
Still officials working on this twenty four seven wordinated, whereas
us separating as compartmentalized and my team working.

Speaker 11 (54:18):
On it is content working on it. No, we cannot
risk losing communist China because we can't take this issue seriously.

Speaker 6 (54:30):
We must not let a lack of vision turn into
a lab of.

Speaker 1 (54:37):
Thankfully, Okay, okay, I guess it was good.

Speaker 12 (54:45):
He won.

Speaker 1 (54:46):
He finished very strong, for sure, and he gave his
initial intro on red wire, so that was interesting. Interesting.
When I talked with him, he didn't mention anything about
red Wire. It was just all about NASA. Also, he
didn't mention the Avation and Safety Reporting system. Maybe maybe
I'll talk about in the question.

Speaker 7 (55:03):
All right, well, thank you for the representation posts again
times of the essence. So I'm going to make these
uh sting as possible if I yeah, questions actually about that,
so at least that does work.

Speaker 12 (55:19):
Oh, well, I just wanted to say I really appreciate
brankful work you've done micro gravity, and he certainly for
you know, any of these craft that are both you know,
that are in space above the one government, they have.

Speaker 3 (55:30):
That access to microgravity should they choose to use it.

Speaker 12 (55:35):
At our firm, American Team Tech, we're very focused on
a number of areas of deep technology, including space tech,
energy and advanced by really one of our co founders
of Aspara, they believe they identified a cancer hill switch,
and I know you've worked together. We're talking yeah, cancer
kill switch and mincro gravity. So just you know, for
pharmaceuticals that access to micro gravity, you see the aging

(56:00):
in nine days and it would take a year interrestrially
for tumor.

Speaker 3 (56:04):
So that ability is speed up net iteration on drug
development is very important. So we've got some.

Speaker 12 (56:11):
Really interesting people that we work with, a CTO coming
out of NASA, a branch chief coming out of space
for some very high growth entrepreneurs.

Speaker 3 (56:20):
We also work with some leaders you know.

Speaker 12 (56:23):
As our advisors and venture partners in the UNP space
because we see the keys you know, of these areas
of technology to drive that abundance that competitive advantage, you know,
and just societal benefits. So people like we're you know,
we're fortunate to have as our advisor help Kushav and
also to work with people like Julian moss Bridge and

(56:46):
Lyon Graves and Diane Fincapsin, so I know that they
are acting in so many areas of technology but also
in uIP. And so how did we come in my
former roles which which I thank you so much for
that kind of turned which I've completed. My roles in
the US government where I was the co chair alongside

(57:06):
NASA of the US Space Economy Interagency Working Group where
you worked with Exceptional Innovation Forward, UAP Forward and open
leaders across the interagency. And those meetings are public, they're
available online. US Space Distructor's.

Speaker 3 (57:22):
Day, and that was a day of about, you know, ten.

Speaker 12 (57:26):
Sometimes twelve hours of presentations on in space, biotechnology, in space, semiconductors,
US launch, also UAP, also Advanced Consciousness, AI, communications, and satellites.
So there was actually interagency leadership that HO co hosted

(57:48):
this UAP leading content from NASA, Space FORCEDE, DHHS, Air Force.
These were all very senior people, NSP and SPA. So
while I would say that in years pass before this
great movement where it's transparency and gratitude for those in

(58:09):
the room really led that, you know, since the twenty
seventeen timeframe and before, time has changed, and innovation is
not about unfortunately because we want everybody to come along,
you know, we appreciate you know this great once you
get beyond fifty percent, innovation and science are not about consensus.

Speaker 3 (58:30):
This isn't we don't wait to get to fifty one percent.
This is the leaders are doing this.

Speaker 12 (58:38):
The fast followers are also doing this, and the reasons
why they're doing this is because they're sitting in rooms
groups of people. We had an extended electrodynamics group of
leaders from across the interagency and also the private sector,
and they were working on advanced energy.

Speaker 3 (58:58):
They were working on a.

Speaker 12 (59:00):
Communications They are funding entrepreneurs while at NSF Public Awards
we funded and I funded companies working on what the
entrepreneurs later described as UAP adjacent or UAP inspired technologies.
One of those actually with a multiple of those people

(59:20):
have spoken having worked on programs that they can't go
any great depth about, but certainly others are undertaking that
private sector research where It's not about it being classified first.

Speaker 3 (59:34):
And this, but the point on how do you how
do you.

Speaker 12 (59:39):
Get your communications back and forward to Mars, you know,
without dealing with the forty minute latency?

Speaker 5 (59:46):
How do you do that?

Speaker 3 (59:47):
And what are the approaches for breaking those barriers?

Speaker 12 (59:50):
How do you achieve this energy abundance and not more
efficient launch capability. So it was these conversations on what
can be achieved what's already been in some cases declassified
in terms of work in outcomes, or was never classified,
really led to conversations where we invited experts who then said,

(01:00:11):
do you want my sended electro dynamics presentation, you want.

Speaker 3 (01:00:16):
My UA presentation? We said, you know, we'd like both
of those, and so that what that led.

Speaker 12 (01:00:22):
To was receiving that tremendous presentation from Hal from Charles Jason,
from others and saying, actually.

Speaker 3 (01:00:33):
Can give us more people.

Speaker 12 (01:00:35):
And so they game that those types of presentations to
hundreds of people, and what we found with those entrepreneurs
was this was the highest level of engagement we have
got in any field of science or technology. I've seen
people in the audience who are part of it shaking
their heads yes. So the entrepreneurs were so eager in

(01:00:55):
scientists to engage in the UAP science and technology, and
as a frame of reference when we talk about disruptive technology,
I've worked with a few of them because I've had
the opportunity to fund around four hundred companies to work
with thousands of entrepreneurs. Those companies from just a quarter
billion a quarter billion plus put out have gone on

(01:01:16):
to raise eight point five billion fall on finance and
seventeen point five billion in total market cap just in
the early years. That's coming out of a place that
the program, who is not the UAP program, but a program,
it is catalyzed well over three hundred and fifty billion
dollars you know, from well less than twenty.

Speaker 3 (01:01:36):
Prov twelve billion put out over several decades.

Speaker 12 (01:01:39):
So these entrepreneurs, oftentimes these highest growth ones, regardless of
what they're working, and it can be batteries, they're told
never going to work.

Speaker 3 (01:01:49):
We will have batteries, right.

Speaker 12 (01:01:51):
People will say a higher performing battery. Here's why it's
not gonna work. So these entrepreneurs are used to being
told no and why not, and they still build things.
What's happening today, not just in America but around the
world is the first time I saw all these experiences
was overseas. Is people are seeing ultra advanced craft that

(01:02:11):
are higher performing. And for people that are building the
highest performing craft and the highest performing energy, they are
not trying to unsee what they have seen, you know,
and they caught on a wide range of sensors. There
is the classified sensors, and then there's the sensors like this.
We have imagery, you know, on our phones from going

(01:02:34):
out and seeing things.

Speaker 1 (01:02:36):
So I think that the fiam So, she's made some
great arguments so far, and I think we are on
the cusp of the actual space age right because up
until probably the next few years, it's been impossible to
get to space. It was just cost prohibitive. And now
you're going to see with Starship, which the technology has

(01:02:57):
essentially been proven out. They just need to figure out
the heat shields. I was at the second launch of
Starship when the booster exploded. Man, it was so awesome.
It was like this perfect circle, perfect spherical explosion I've
never seen. And what you'll see is when the cost
of space drops by one hundredfold, Like she mentioned, there,
you're manufacturing and what Mike was talking about is that

(01:03:21):
guy can move around that machine, right, four hundred and
fifty pounds on Earth, and now he's just moving it
around in space. You could see a future where all
of our manufacturing goes to space. Right, Why not put
it in space? Why take up precious land on Earth
where we could make Earth into this ecological paradise and

(01:03:42):
then put all your dirty manufacturing up in the space
where it weighs nothing. The other important points you mentioned
there is they're not waiting, And I think that's a
huge point where if we can get mainstream thought to say,

(01:04:03):
oh wait a minute, this is possible, then you're just
going to get more and more entrepreneurs who are saying,
you know what, I don't care. I'm going to go
and do do it anyway. Right, Like Faraday said, he's
just going to do the experiments. He wasn't a theoretical scientist.
He was an experimentalist. So you're going to get all
these people out there, entrepreneurs saying okay, look, if it

(01:04:24):
is true and the government has known about this and
is just not sharing any the information, then can we
do it on our own? And so yeah, it puts
huge pressure on the government. This is the discovery aspect
of disclosure. You know, I think Lester Nare, who runs
the UAP Disclosure Fund, I don't know if he runs it,
but he definitely works on it. Is that he said

(01:04:47):
there's two efforts. Discovery is what you're seeing by Skywatcher,
by Galileo. It's these civil you know, not related to
government efforts and they're going to just go find the information.
And then you have the disclosure effort, which is working
inside the government that we saw really from the first
two panels. So both of these efforts will put huge

(01:05:07):
pressure on disclosure.

Speaker 12 (01:05:09):
Put this to build things is what's driving this and
what would be the right levels to.

Speaker 3 (01:05:17):
Really go after this?

Speaker 12 (01:05:18):
You know, this is something that a few of us
have spoken about. But my backgrounds also as a strategist,
so we do a lot of strategy in math and
I used to be in ECG and the question of
if you're building the highest performing systems, what type of
resources would you put in place? So if we look

(01:05:39):
at you know, and I'm sharing kind of casually googled
numbers so we can get to better definition, but how
much money went into the iss our long term in
space laboratory, some of the numbers onlines made that it
was well over seventy billion for the US part of that,
and then with other nations contributions it might be one

(01:06:00):
fifty billion. What was the cost of the Apollo program
that was twenty six billion, you know, you know, from
the sixties to the seventies, some estimates put that at
inflation adjusted well well over two hundred perhaps two hundred
and fifty billion dollars. So if you were to ask
me today what is the right amount of money to

(01:06:24):
be investing in these ull trap high performing technologies, these
Manhattan style of projects, it's well into the hundreds of
billions of dollars. That's the right answer today. Whether the
US makes that investment or whether somebody else does. We
are talking about advantage for multi trillion dollar markets, So

(01:06:46):
some would say perhaps we made the right investments over time,
we've invested those tens of billions of those hundreds of billions,
And if we have, how do we celebrate the accomplishments
that might have come out of those pros.

Speaker 3 (01:07:01):
How do we give the recognition to those.

Speaker 12 (01:07:03):
Scientists, those people who have served, who perhaps have not
been able to speak about their work.

Speaker 3 (01:07:09):
How do we derive value from that, how.

Speaker 12 (01:07:11):
Do we say these pieces that might have been constrained
because you didn't have access to the tools everybody else
has access to on the outside and the collaboration, how
can we bring the pieces in a way that is
respectful to national security and increases resilience in abundance?

Speaker 3 (01:07:30):
And I am concerned. I mean, I appreciate that. I
think many of us want transparency, but also how.

Speaker 12 (01:07:38):
Do we make that so the people who may have
worked in this want to come forward, you know, So
if we're offering them, oh, you built something, you give
your resources, and here's some punishment. But that's going to
be hard to get the technology out, you know. And
there's lots of ways that could be brought fully forward.
It could be anonymized into a centralized clearinghouse. If there

(01:07:58):
is valuable technology there that can help people in the
United States and around the world, let's celebrate what's been
built and let's build the gaps that are there so
we see tremendous opportunity. The races on some would say
those are exceptionally large programs. Many of us have seen

(01:08:19):
these this wide range and phenomena, be they craft, be
they orbs. These the reason it matters. So sometimes the
first time you see this phenomena, it's a point of
interest and you say, wow, you know, I've kind of
thought there was a lifeblok planet, whether it's life blob
planet or advanced terrestrial technology.

Speaker 3 (01:08:37):
But you think, well, okay, interesting, Now back to our
to day to day.

Speaker 6 (01:08:41):
What do we do with this?

Speaker 12 (01:08:43):
And so a number of us came to because our
core roles were advanced energy, advanced computation, advanced biology. The
answer was people who are working in their core fields
of biotechnology want them. They're seeing some of the potential
pass forward through this UAP and gas and technology.

Speaker 3 (01:09:03):
Can we classify it today?

Speaker 5 (01:09:05):
I don't know how.

Speaker 12 (01:09:07):
I mean, there are parts that we can say stay
away from this due to this risk. But the challenge
on some of this is if you were to say, well,
classify UAP technology, you just got to stop working on it.
For people that are familiar with the science and the technology,
there are elements of this that are relevant to quantum
and quantum entanglement. So what does that mean for our

(01:09:29):
national posture on quantum AI is interwove.

Speaker 6 (01:09:33):
Them with this.

Speaker 12 (01:09:34):
You talk about microgravity and advanced materials. So do we
just not do certain layering or advancement of certain materials
because they've been found in crash retrieval. We are not
able to walk back because this is so interwoven. So
saying that UAP is off limits, that's like saying, let's
go home. Let's say, you know, maybe can we still

(01:09:55):
use fire? You know, maybe maybe you know, once they'll
get into it, you know, if you still use rocks.
So many of the fields of technology would be off limits.

Speaker 3 (01:10:04):
So honestly, we don't.

Speaker 12 (01:10:05):
Know how to you know, this idea, We don't Once
you're in that, you don't even know. It's like saying
stop using that. So the entrepreneurs are getting inspired, they're
seeing things, and so this is kind of humorous to scientists.
So we both appreciate that people are talking about crash
retrievals and reverse engineering. Are there crash retrievals? Well, are

(01:10:27):
there crashes? I mean, there's deer retrievals where I live.

Speaker 3 (01:10:30):
I mean, a crash seems a lot more interesting than
a deer to pick up. And anybody who knows.

Speaker 12 (01:10:36):
An engineer says, and the first time you see anything
of interest, you're cnally be a reverse engineering.

Speaker 3 (01:10:41):
So whether that happens inside government programs or whether it
happens out in the streets.

Speaker 12 (01:10:46):
Americans and people around the world are seeing this phenomena,
and those that build things are saying, you know, what
would we build together?

Speaker 3 (01:10:55):
So we've seen these on a number of occasions.

Speaker 12 (01:10:58):
We've brought some high ranking scientists down to folks who
are able in spots where they show up more frequently.
And it's worth noting that there are people a number
of groups of people who are currently pulling in or
attracting craft, you know, and other phenomena, and some.

Speaker 3 (01:11:18):
People just happen to see them. I'm looking run at eer.

Speaker 12 (01:11:21):
We saw a lot of these, but so there are
people that have seen these infrequently. There are people who
have seen these on a day to day basis. When
we've spoken with scientists, you know, over the past year
or two, and so this is is coming out of
places that someone would see us the scientific establishment and
ken can we talk about this?

Speaker 6 (01:11:39):
Can we not?

Speaker 12 (01:11:39):
You know? And some of these conversations hadn't taken place
as openly when they did.

Speaker 3 (01:11:44):
What we found was, well, we go into room. So
we talked with people who are innovators.

Speaker 12 (01:11:48):
They're usually it's usually thirty to fifty percent of people
will share that they've seen our experience and almost omena,
and sometimes they say, oh, no, I haven't seen any
and then they said, well, you know I did see
this or over a football field and you know it
was huge. And then so people have seen things, and
we have to have the conversation with laters in science

(01:12:10):
where we said, by the way times have changed, there's
all this great work it's been done towards disclosure.

Speaker 3 (01:12:16):
And when we started talking.

Speaker 12 (01:12:17):
To people about it, or we might have thought it
was one in twenty or one in one hundred, seems
like it's world.

Speaker 5 (01:12:23):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:12:24):
So what I've found my own, my own minor experiments,
if you will, is it's around one in eight. I
think around one in eight people have actually seen something.
Let's see what she says here.

Speaker 3 (01:12:35):
Like one in three or two in three or maybe
three and three and three three people.

Speaker 1 (01:12:40):
Well one in three, Okay, that's a lot you see
at certain events. She did mention skywatcher people's minds changing. Yeah,
and that's why they can't come out and officially say hey,
this is legit, because immediately it would be like fire
sale on news science people aren't.

Speaker 12 (01:13:01):
Talking about it, and so that so we've had the conversation,
which is it is not credible or viable to act
like this isn't going on.

Speaker 3 (01:13:12):
So it's it's a little We use the analogy that
it's a little.

Speaker 6 (01:13:15):
Bit like whale watching.

Speaker 12 (01:13:16):
It's both normal to if you live by the coast Homelin,
but if you live by the coast and you have
access to get out of the water, you know, there's
a percentage of people who would have seen whales.

Speaker 3 (01:13:26):
There's a percentage who haven't. It's normal both ways.

Speaker 12 (01:13:29):
And nothing to feel like, you know, special or not special,
you know, regardless, but it's ubiquitous. So if you can't
go in front of a room of people, you know,
if you've seen that, and it's if you we said, listen,
people are saying this. They no So to be credible,
you do need to acknowledge it's out there. There's so

(01:13:50):
much data. There's so much people have on their iPhones.
You know, there's so many people who will speak to
the programs on the high side there end. But the
low side, you know, is not waiting for a three men.
They're not the fortune one. The US government can lead this.
We can try and figure out what benefit we have
from the great work people in this country and perhaps

(01:14:11):
around the world have.

Speaker 5 (01:14:12):
Done, or people are ready to move forward.

Speaker 12 (01:14:15):
And when I was in government, I used to receive
proposals without going into the details in any of them.
You know, in various fields of technology where people think
they're the mole lifers say any idea, you have to
believe me.

Speaker 3 (01:14:29):
Dozens of people were working at the same time.

Speaker 12 (01:14:31):
So this is something that right now, people in this country,
around the world, there are so many people that are
deeing beer.

Speaker 3 (01:14:39):
Of builders, and a number of them are already building
these things up.

Speaker 12 (01:14:43):
So just because you don't see it doesn't mean that
it isn't happening all over the place.

Speaker 1 (01:14:48):
That was my same experience in government.

Speaker 12 (01:14:50):
Right.

Speaker 1 (01:14:51):
I worked in simulator systems for a few years and
we went to make all these new updates. We spent
years working on making updates the F sixteen simulator system
that we made. And then I went to find out
that there are sixteen separate simulator systems run on different architecture,
different software, different companies, sixteen running software for the same platform. Right,

(01:15:17):
there's minor variations in different F sixteens depending where you are,
But you can change all those stuff. You can easily
change that stuff with software. You don't need sixteen different variations,
and they're all stove piped. And we couldn't share information
between subsidiaries of Lockheed right. We couldn't get information on
the simulator system from Lockheed ar Row because Lockheed Arrow
is not the same as Lockheed Martin. It's a subsidiary

(01:15:40):
and they would not share with each other. We also
noticed when we gave software, the software was owned by
the government, and we gave it to these companies. It
would come back inside saying like Boeing proprietary, That's what
I would say, And all of a sudden it was
their proprietary software because they worked on it even though
it was our software, and we gave them the contract
and we paid them as the government to work on

(01:16:01):
this stuff all separated. So I did this effort to
try and combine it into to merge all of it
back so the government owned the software and then there
was one base software system based on the actual code
inside the jet. But then what happens is we move, right,
the temporary military officers have to move. We move on,
and who has left the bureaucrats and the civilian and

(01:16:25):
what are they going to do who knows, but I
know what the contractors are going to do, and they're
going to maximize profits. And it's not even the contractors
on that we worked with. It's the executives right, the
ones writing the contracts that determine the money for the shareholders,
and that's really where it all goes to crop. But yeah,
for sure, so many people work on this. Great to hear.
I love that. I love the way she's talking about

(01:16:47):
this so awesome, both in.

Speaker 3 (01:16:48):
This country and abroad. So if we need to lead,
if we want to lead, we need to be active.
So I'm looking.

Speaker 12 (01:16:55):
We always listen with respect to innovators and entrepreneurs, and
I want to thanks many of you for sharing what
you've seen.

Speaker 3 (01:17:03):
Uh, there is an opportunity. I expect more scientists.

Speaker 12 (01:17:06):
They're going to be engaging directly with the phenomena, and
as scientists, they're going to be doing experiments and methods.

Speaker 3 (01:17:13):
Okay, So you want to talk about something that people
talk even less about than UAPs.

Speaker 12 (01:17:19):
So the thing that was even more of a third
rail than UAPs is the sources and methods for someone.

Speaker 3 (01:17:25):
So as you're hearing about.

Speaker 12 (01:17:26):
There's a number of teams that are working column this phenomena,
and they're talking about all these different things.

Speaker 3 (01:17:31):
Some of them have these, okay, ultra exotic protocols.

Speaker 12 (01:17:35):
And then one of the one of the groups that
we want to visit with some scientists, their protocol was prayer.

Speaker 3 (01:17:43):
And it was not some exotic thing. It was that
our father, that Hail Mary, you know, conversation. And I'm
not trying to constrain it to any any.

Speaker 12 (01:17:52):
Denomination or any faith or life thereof, because I think
one of the hesitancies people have is they don't they
want this to be for everybody, and not not to
be specific for a linked of one thing, but source
of the methods. When we're talking science, there are people
through meditation or very you know, day by day prayer
for falling in.

Speaker 3 (01:18:12):
These crafts, you know, in these orbs. So it's science.
Let's talk about what it is and then obsessive.

Speaker 1 (01:18:18):
That's great. I'm so glad Ivy Low is sitting right there.
I know he was there, and I know he saw this,
and I hope she's looking right at him, like there
you go, man, we can show you. I don't know,
she might be looking at him. Maybe they're making eye
contact right now. But there you go avy consider that

(01:18:45):
there he is right there. So she I mean she
was looking I don't know, maybe she's looking this general
or maybe she's looking right at Ave and look Ryan
Graves scooted over. He got We called it man spacing
right is every other in the fighter community. You don't
sit right next to another dude, it's in stupid.

Speaker 7 (01:19:01):
Yeah, So first question actually is, yeah, so there was
a recent statement by a government official and the kind
of went a those I think it was a few
weeks ago where they said we are now leading space fight.
We got the lead to many space time. So I'll
let that sing him for a moment, that it's an
official statement by the US government representative. You can elaborate

(01:19:26):
on that.

Speaker 12 (01:19:26):
Well, there's certainly been publicly visible funding that has gone
into that, and I'll say a couple of things before
I would say, there's a much better expert in the audience,
doctor Julian lost Bridge.

Speaker 3 (01:19:39):
In terms of space time work.

Speaker 12 (01:19:43):
Also, that's something that doctor Hall talk with space time
metric engineering has been very active in so there's been
plenty of work on that and.

Speaker 3 (01:19:53):
There's a lot that's going on.

Speaker 1 (01:19:56):
So the backhop of that, yeah, again, railed on space time. Right,
what is space time When you say they say space
time metric, right, and that sounds all fancy. That's just
like the ex coordinate of the three dimensional space time
coordinates that they made, right, and the Minkowsky geometry. So

(01:20:18):
space time metric is just like if I get it,
it's just like the up down. That's the metric, right,
That's all it is. When you talk about space time metric,
it's just the coordinate system for how light is gonna
bend on how matter will move, right, That's it. So
it sounds all complicated like space time metric, but all

(01:20:39):
it is is a coordinate and space time is really
just like a coordinate system. So that the null geodesics
the National Stience Foundation.

Speaker 12 (01:20:50):
Sorry, just one quick to say, but by the way,
we also a few of us were also maybe several
us in a row about over a year ago, were
on the National Mall at the National Academy of Scientists
where it was National Space Week and there were some
presenters from around the world, and that.

Speaker 3 (01:21:09):
Also included a representative from.

Speaker 12 (01:21:13):
The Chinese government, presumably the CCP, and the presentation that
they were putting up included requests for do you want
to work with people on I believe it was space
time metric engineering, it was gravitational control, and it was
also an alien lifelible plant, amongst other things like renewables.

(01:21:37):
So the Chinese are literally coming down to the national
mall and saying, Hi, come talk to us about this,
you know, and so.

Speaker 3 (01:21:46):
Come on seriously.

Speaker 12 (01:21:47):
Another thing that they said, by the way, you know,
in terms of many of us have been advocating for
much higher levels of capital to go into innovation and
also into ish space and frastructure, which does not have
access to the terrestrial financial tools like debt.

Speaker 3 (01:22:05):
So if you buy a house, most people that.

Speaker 12 (01:22:07):
Are making a smaller down payment twenty percent, five percent whatever,
they can do more of a minimum. In space, it's
typically you've got to front all of the money up front,
can you. If you're not going to build a hospital
for the individual patient, you need to have the financial model.

Speaker 3 (01:22:23):
So anyways, when I was trying to figure out what
was the space.

Speaker 12 (01:22:26):
Budget for China, they wouldn't tell me. But the gentleman
did look at me in disdain. You know, he's talking
to all of you. He said, when we look at
putting up a space station, we view that does that
cost the same amount of money as putting down a
couple of kilometers of metro.

Speaker 3 (01:22:44):
Basically, we're going to do that all day, every day.

Speaker 12 (01:22:47):
So if we can't figure out how to make the
investments to win in these par informational markets for abundance,
for societal benefits and for economic growth and gain, to
be loved, so this is it.

Speaker 3 (01:23:02):
So the people that are moving forward are moving forward.

Speaker 12 (01:23:04):
We really hope that the the US government fortune one,
you know, is able to share some of the great
work that's been done, you know.

Speaker 3 (01:23:12):
Previously across all these fields. But private sectors moving forward.

Speaker 1 (01:23:18):
Boom, it's amazing. I love it. I love she sits
back to she's like grabbing the microphone. Amazing, amazing speaker. Yeah,
and I think that's fantastic. And she mentioned China there.
China will be moving forward and they will be putting investments.
I think Starship is going to change the game though,
and they don't have starship. China doesn't have it yet.

(01:23:40):
How long will it take them to build one? Probably
not that many years. They're good at copying.

Speaker 6 (01:23:46):
We're going to have times only two very quick questions.

Speaker 7 (01:23:48):
We're already way over our time and we have to
unfortunately render this groove back over, So so let me finish.
I've got two years and afterwards, if you want to
get their guess, you can. We're not going to have
time to open it up right now for for public questions.

Speaker 12 (01:24:02):
I have.

Speaker 7 (01:24:02):
Let me get to this real quick and if we
could our guests completely the interests seemed as possible before
we actually had a crum. Let me start with you, Anna.
The National Science Foundation has been a fundamental pillar of
some of America's revolutionary technology and concepts for many decades.

(01:24:24):
How can the NSF help the government now conserving the topic?
What UAPs?

Speaker 3 (01:24:31):
Well?

Speaker 12 (01:24:31):
I guess one of the things that's just publicly visible
is that we have been when I was formally at NSF,
I would just say that there's lots of publicly visible
content of us being very forward on the topic, listening
to innovators, working with strong colleagues from across the inter agency.
So I think that NSF has shown an NSF leadership

(01:24:54):
has also just been extremely supportive.

Speaker 3 (01:24:57):
So I just want to be very clear. I left
the government because.

Speaker 12 (01:25:00):
I'm excited about building things in the private sector, and
I've only ever received the greatest support in collaboration from
my injury agency colleagues and from the agency that I worked.
We were extremely forward on all areas of innovation, but
certainly UAP fits within that, including are pubably visible awards
that were made to find the UAP science.

Speaker 3 (01:25:20):
There are plenty. There's great people that are highly supportive,
particularly over the end.

Speaker 7 (01:25:26):
Very encouraging you, Mike.

Speaker 6 (01:25:29):
Last question.

Speaker 7 (01:25:32):
You were on the NASTY UAP Independent Study Team. My
question for you is one point of recommendations of the
NASA UAP Independent Study Team and how those recommendations, How
should those recommendations be implemented.

Speaker 1 (01:25:48):
I'm sure I believe Mike probably gave them that question
that hey asked me this question. If you didn't, that's
an amazing questions still from loust.

Speaker 6 (01:25:57):
Time, thank you back question. I'll hold us on it too.

Speaker 11 (01:26:00):
Of those recommendations, we already discussed going through the NASA
archives with an AI and mL.

Speaker 6 (01:26:06):
System to get the data.

Speaker 11 (01:26:08):
A few examples we wished we were able to show
today again which could be quite extraordinary candidly in their companies,
and we even volunteer to do that work for the answer.
But the second one, and I really appreciate my showing
that photo which was taken by a commercial appliment and
one of the greatest appropements I had when I was
on the UND at a study team was I was
asking the FAA how.

Speaker 6 (01:26:29):
Many reports promersion files are those reports? The artifized how
was in track of that? And my live confusion, confusion
and no straight answers. And here I like to give
credits to r RAC again.

Speaker 11 (01:26:43):
For suggesting that we leverage nass's Aviation Safety Reliance System ASRS,
which has been operating for decades, has hundreds of thousands
of cases, and this is a confidential system where apios
crew cannot all in about safe the anomalies that they've experience.

(01:27:04):
It's worth phenomenally we should be leveraging this system for
the affording of UP. It could be quickly, it could
be done efficiently, and the amount of the data that
we will receive would be amazing. Additionally, the releases that
I show you was from MOERS that uportunately Enable Service
program Public riving partnerships have driven all of this. I'm

(01:27:27):
so excited for the democratization of space and the data
that we look at from that. This was just one
example today as space exploragin red black. Other companies move forward,
all with our own cameras, all with their own systems,
We're going to get a lot more.

Speaker 6 (01:27:44):
Data, but ASTILL holds on to a lot of it.

Speaker 11 (01:27:47):
So for example, with what I presented, we need the
raw data, we need timestamps, we need data in a format.

Speaker 6 (01:27:54):
That we can do true academic research.

Speaker 11 (01:27:57):
So if we were just to those two things, and
again important from Congress, I think push that, I think
ask and.

Speaker 6 (01:28:05):
Play a tremendously important role, and particularly the.

Speaker 11 (01:28:08):
Aviation community and eric space community, the amount of data
that we get I think will completely shift the lovelesshistication.

Speaker 6 (01:28:16):
Mstop.

Speaker 1 (01:28:17):
That's a great point. And yeah, like I SA, like
I said at the beginning, I expected him to talk
about the ASRS, and yes, that would have saved lou
on this right, because you have many volunteers. I interviewed
a MOFON volunteer. He went through his exact protocol, what
he goes into, they're trained and most of the things

(01:28:37):
he looks through right, like, over well over ninety percent
of the cases he looks at is something just really
strange optical illusions. He can see basically space flares from
starship launches, et cetera. Just crazy things that you know,
people don't normally see but can turn out to be

(01:28:59):
mundane examples like that Paradolia or however you say Paradalia
where you have interesting optical illusions. Right, So they can
go through that and find the really key cases, right,
and you can look through I'll put a link in
the description to that investigator, but basically he found he's
found now two actual anomalous cases right out of all

(01:29:22):
the ones he's looked at. So most of them are
going to be mundane things, right over ninety percent are
going to be mundane explanations, yes, but we're interested in
the ones that are not. You know, people say Nick Pope,
I believe, says five percent, and so yes, we need
more data. And then we have the volunteers. People will
sift through all that stuff. They enjoy it. It's fun

(01:29:45):
and you can find those gold the five percent of
the gold, like Mike Gold says.

Speaker 15 (01:29:50):
And I think there's also probably the one year to
thirty hours of some of that formward interagency content in
Space to Structures Day and the Ecosystemic Futures podcasts between
Diane in the Wrong here today, So thank you Diane
for helping get that information.

Speaker 11 (01:30:07):
I who'll say that we feel less authoristic than a
hand on a relative adoption. In other as, I said
during my testimony that particularly academics, members of the n
SVUAP and invented the studying team corected right, not for
saying you ape real, but for just having the temerity
of even reviewing the topic.

Speaker 6 (01:30:29):
You can't say science in that environ And part of
the reason that calling photographers the.

Speaker 11 (01:30:33):
Help is there's still a great deal of skenthesis, even
just advance in careers that get in and just for
having again the temerity.

Speaker 1 (01:30:41):
And research for so it's so ridiculous, right, it's so unscientific,
Like the scientists are saying, how can you look into that?
It's ridiculous. And then you look back in history and
it's always it's always been that way, like the mainstream
argument's always proven wrong at some fundamental level. And the
move on investigator is on Trust. I don't want to

(01:31:01):
get his name wrong, but Ron Trust.

Speaker 6 (01:31:05):
I think it's.

Speaker 11 (01:31:05):
Incumbent of all of us to push for real science,
the object to science.

Speaker 6 (01:31:10):
Overcome that stigma.

Speaker 11 (01:31:11):
Let's get from the data, because our colleagues, our national
security may be commending on.

Speaker 3 (01:31:16):
And I think you contributed so much.

Speaker 12 (01:31:18):
So what I would say is some of the things
that you experience, you know, or that Loue you know,
and Chris and others experience, there.

Speaker 3 (01:31:26):
Is that body of having been able to point to
those leaders.

Speaker 12 (01:31:30):
So we have the advantage of being able to point
to your study, you know, into this private work, so
you know. And again I think there's the opportunity for
the government, but I wouldn't say that it's it's not
There are industries that move forward that are not orded
by the government. But I think just to be something

(01:31:50):
very important that came out because sometimes.

Speaker 3 (01:31:52):
If we say, oh, you ain't key this, you ain't
key that.

Speaker 12 (01:31:55):
There's going to be some great technologies that come out
of that that is very full, healthy, you know, and
good care.

Speaker 6 (01:32:01):
So I think.

Speaker 3 (01:32:03):
Something that I got briefed on.

Speaker 12 (01:32:06):
In an unclassified just informal note classification level environment and
both in personal capacity, but then I later brought that
person into brief others in the agency, is there real
and meaningful technologies that have come from these programs.

Speaker 3 (01:32:23):
And I think with a lot of this information, you're
going to.

Speaker 12 (01:32:25):
See that you know, the story about it has been
in the Internet for decades perhaps, So what I have
though on from a very credible source was that, yes,
there are people who say that this came out of
doing waiting programs. What we talked about lasers and semi conductors,

(01:32:46):
and that was so important. You know, semi conductors the
top ten companies today a sinix point five trillion dollar
industry we all benefit from and underpins our global economy.

Speaker 3 (01:33:00):
That is something and it's not just oh, may people
will get something.

Speaker 12 (01:33:03):
It's that they're tremendous people to build things, you know,
multi classified and unclassified environments. And that's been you know,
put out by so many authors and people in the news,
but some are in environment so we can say this
is taken seriously and those people have told the government
and yes, there's been real advantage on some of these
most important core technologies from coming from a crash.

Speaker 1 (01:33:25):
For tables, well that's amazing. Yeah, if you look at
our semiconductors, right, it really comes down to silicon. And
we talked in the in part one. They really they
asked about meta materials and how is it, how is
it made, how are the materials actually made? If you
looked at some materials before you had known about semiconductors

(01:33:46):
and you saw it was just made of silicone, layers
of silicone. You know, could that have lead you led
you towards semiconductors, You know, because semiconductors work on what
we understand of quantum effects. Right, Basically, you have a
zero or a one, there's nothing in between. It's a
discrete levels, that's it. So that the logic gate is

(01:34:07):
a zero or a one, and it effectively jumps across that.
I took a hardcore physics class at the Air Force
Academy and we went into semiconductors, and I mean, the
math gets really strange. It's all just letters at that point.
And I would argue, we still don't understand how that works,

(01:34:28):
and we stilln't understand discrete levels and how semiconductors have
actually even work, right, But ultimately it comes down to silicone.
And the reason we can keep making smaller and smaller
chips right down to nine nanometers and then seven nanometers
and then four nanometers. The reason we're able to just
continue boosting the processing power More's law, et cetera, is

(01:34:50):
because of silicone. Right, If silicon did not have that ability,
if silicone was not here on the planet, we would
definitely not have the amazing computer breakthroughs that we have,
So that is really interesting. I did not know semiconductors
came from that. I mean, I guess you could see lasers, right,
because they always use like light technology laser kind of

(01:35:11):
beams coming down from ueps. But semiconductors makes a great argument, right,
and that would see I could see how that would
happen if you have meta material and then you're analyzing
it and you say, what are these layers of silicone? Right,
and then they're doping it?

Speaker 3 (01:35:25):
Right?

Speaker 1 (01:35:25):
You know, is it doped with certain materials? Do you
know that you can you should dope the silicone with
germanium and other things like that? Did they learn that
from looking at these advanced materials? That's really interesting. The
other thing I really enjoyed about her talk probably one
of my favorite from this whole part, from this whole hearing,

(01:35:48):
she even talked about the consciousness aspect, right, somebody finally
mentioned it, saying, yeah, sources and methods like skywatcher, can
you attract these attract these craft attract these objects? And
she said by using prayer, right, really interesting, and she
mentioned there and then she talked basically kind of talked
out of it, but she at least mentioned it, said clearly, yeah,

(01:36:09):
there are sources and methods, and I think.

Speaker 6 (01:36:12):
To get the government to take it seriously, we need
to engage the content.

Speaker 11 (01:36:16):
We've got to get outside the uat bubble and Dan
farre is a tremendous movie age disclosure of this movie
Blue Story and Anyway Story and himself.

Speaker 6 (01:36:25):
We may strap if we can touch the publk.

Speaker 11 (01:36:28):
If we can get them engage, we can get from
the same information if we just saw I.

Speaker 6 (01:36:33):
Think that would be completely transformed.

Speaker 7 (01:36:36):
Well, let me's just times first of all, thank you
since hearing for your participation. It was a fantastic conversation.
Let me leave you a couple of thoughts here by
name before we said Finn the farewell. One recommendation that
we made to Congress is the generation of a national
intelligence strategy that would be culminated on an annual basis.

(01:36:57):
Just i'd beg for our parts. It's a system of
the perfected riding and then right on the heels of that,
a national strategy every year. Annual strategy along UAP and
drone basically any untributed objects set in our skies. We
should have a strategy for it, because we're seeing both
of them the combat field and even in the streets

(01:37:18):
of New York, we're seeing technologies that we we can't
really explain and frankly, could be used against us in
a very inferious way if we don't get a handle
in it. Two, what I'd like to do is propose,
and hopefully Congress at some point we'll be open to this,
that we should to a form at this every year
for the American public and for the media, and allow
Congress to get to a lot of things and ask

(01:37:41):
the questions that they normally wouldn't be able to catch
and bring in the Department of Justice and the intelligence community,
the Department Defense and being them won here. Why not
right sitting down here in front of American people, by
the boy, look at it. You're paid their paychecks. Angles
right kind of owe you some answers, and they owe
Congress and mansters.

Speaker 1 (01:38:01):
I'm just so happy to see who up there. And
I know he obviously everyone makes mistakes, and that photo well,
I'm sure they'll just rag on him about that photo
and why did he present it and etc. But you know,
he's dedicated he's focused and he's going to stick with it.
And seeing him behind the podium of the House of Representatives,

(01:38:26):
it's going to send a message around the world, I think.
And you are going to have more people taking this
seriously and they will be overseas, right at some point,
like she mentioned there, the Chinese are asking this. It's
just going to continue to ratchet up the pressure and
just keep ratcheting it. Right. It's like this just a slow,
systematic army ground game, right, And he's from the army,

(01:38:48):
and so it's awesome. Yeah, I hope we see this
every year.

Speaker 7 (01:38:54):
I would else you say, please, what are your members
of Congress studies or if you like what Representative Burleson
and Representative Luna and Borshett and others have done here today,
let them know, right, they need to hear this, and
so other members of Congress can see this and say, hey,
that works right, tell them that they need to hear

(01:39:14):
that feedback. Unlessen, you don't want what you say, but
that would be my suggested last But on these I
want to thank specifically there are members of Congress because
at the end of the day that you're representatives, they
represented this country. They are very much part of this country,
and they are the reasons why you're all here today

(01:39:36):
and when you're here. They have facilitated this, they have
sponsored this, they have gone another way to put their
political careers potential with Jeffrey, if you've been having this
conversation for you, so if you appreciate this, let them know.
And last but on these thank you to every one
of you. Again, our friends in the media, the folks

(01:39:59):
that came over here on cases, came from across the
world and traveled here very long distances to be with
us here today. Thank you very much. It's very meaningful
and we're all here. Is Fenning Bedford, so that said,
let's give a round applause for all. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:40:32):
My overall thoughts is that was just a blockbuster hearing,
not a hearing, I guess. It was a meeting, but
amazing work everyone involved. I wish I was there. Yeah,
I'll try and get to a future one. They could
be really exciting to talk to all these people in
person and really thank the Congress people. And they are

(01:40:55):
our representatives, like you said, and they do listen to people,
So yeah, call in. When I talked to Lester Nare,
he said it definitely makes a difference. I talked to
James Fox. He said, the biggest thing we can do
is talk to our congress people. Apart from watching his show,
his movies, obviously, the biggest way we can help is

(01:41:16):
by calling the Congress people and letting them know that
you do care about it, right, and they are supposed
to listen to the will of the people, and they
definitely listen to the will of voters if you say
it's one of your major issues. So I thought I
wasn't super excited about the Innovation Fund, right. I mean,

(01:41:38):
I already heard from Mike Gold, pretty much knew what
he was going to say. I know he's a great speaker,
so I was more interested to hear like Eric Davis
and Chris Mellan, but they were great speakers. So Mike
Gold and Anna I've never seen her before, but very
excited to hear her thoughts and just just to speak

(01:42:00):
in a public forum like that, saying giving kind of
a push to entrepreneurs out there, saying yeah, don't wait
for the government. Right. The government is not going to
is not going to lead on this. Obviously, they're held
back by fear stigma, decades of bureaucratic tape and so

(01:42:22):
don't wait for them, just move forward. I thought that
was really exciting. And she mentioned the consciousness aspect, which
we hadn't heard really at all any of the hearings. Right,
this is the first real mention we've seen in a
official manner. And she also mentioned Skywatcher. She didn't mention
them by name, but she said there are organizations and

(01:42:43):
that's what Skywatcher is doing. So civil organizations just getting
more exposure. And I think, yeah, it's only going to
continue from here. I don't see this movement just like
dying somehow. It'd be great to have more Congress people there,
more bipartisan Congress. I don't know if any Democrats were

(01:43:04):
there actually, so that's unfortunate. But like Paulina Luna said,
we're going to get two more hearings and so awesome.
It's like a fire hose. Now there's just like so
much information it's difficult to keep up. So thanks for
your support. Consider subscribing if you'd like this video, and

(01:43:25):
I could definitely use the support. And if you want
background information, go to patreon dot com fort slash Chris
Lado and support for as little as five bucks a month.
It definitely makes a difference. You can also get marched
there and you can also become a YouTube member here
in YouTube and you'll get early access to the videos.
So thanks again. Come to later File's discord to continue

(01:43:47):
the discussion and check out our sister channel, EUEP Society.
Have a great rest of your day. Piece

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}UAP-Congress Bombshells Pt3/3: Gold on NASA Data, Dr. Anna on UAP Tech Advances

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce

All Episodes

UAP-Congress Bombshells Pt3/3: Gold on NASA Data, Dr. Anna on UAP Tech Advances

Stuff You Should Know