Dr. Michael P Masters

None

Episode Transcript

(00:10):
Government's tonight, Military's tonight, eventhe mainstream media denights, but they are
here, and we've been queer fora very long time. The Mutual UFO
Network has been on the flock lines, uncovering the truth since nineteen sixty nine,
and now we're sharing that truth withyou. Welcome, you'll faw what's

(00:33):
up with your hosts Kabi Page,Shane Hearn, and Tara guid Dukes exclusively
on the KGr A Digital Broadcasting Network, Wondering What's up? Sorrow We he

(00:55):
It is Tuesday night, and Iam so excited to be back. We've
had a little bit of hiatus here. I hope you guys have all been
enjoining your summer. I know it'sbeen like a heat wave across the country,
so hopefully you're staying cool out there. Speaking of cool, we have
some big changes in the show andI'm excited to share all this with you.
We have a fabulous new co host, Shane Hurd, and I'm so

(01:19):
excited he's going to be joining us. Unfortunately, we're gonna be missing Christoperno
and Jerry and Jenna. They aremoving actually this fall to a new show
right here on KGRA, and Iwish them the best on there. I
actually prepared a little video about Christopernoand if we can just share that really

(01:41):
quick before I get to the otherintros, I would like to do that,
so Tera, if you can rollthat, Christoper noo oh hi,
Hi everybody. I'm writing Valentine's letterright now, so excuse me. We
got a great show for you tonight. I actually I have wrote a letter
about the skunk. He said,my dear Valentine, after twenty seven years

(02:05):
of marriage, I wanted you tobe recognized for all the great things you
do, and had saw this andI wanted you to see how much I
care for you on Valentine's There Therefore, I want to give you a skunk
ape foot Happy Valentine's Day. Chris, No, he watched popcorn. He's

(02:28):
so excited about Kathleen Martin being onthe show today. He watched popcorn and
gets some constipated and I'm not goingto go through so absolutely no popcorn for
him. Jesus. The next daythe house, you gotta go. I
gotta get the gas mask. Andanyways, I'm so about Kathleen Martin being
on She and of course there's funnyalways keeps us laughing. Chris de Perno,

(02:49):
State Director of New York. Welcome, Chris. Hello. I'm a
little worried about Jerry. He starteddrinking. Oh no, you got a
bottle of hockey? He says,he will do the show where out he
says, he's very upset. He'sgot a bottle of vodka. He said,
the last guy, the last guythat did all the chucking in the
vaka, he wanted to try it. And now he's become a freaking alcoholic.

(03:12):
I don't know anyways, best wishesfor Jerry. Keep him in your
prayers. God, j Alien,he's got to go to double a alcoholic
Alien. Get it, alcoholic Alien. Oh no, what are you drinking
there, Chris, Just let's bringon Christoperno. He is a state director

(03:37):
for New York and is also onthe eart and he is with special guests.
Well are kind of like our silentfourth and fifth host. Jerry and
Jenna. Welcome, Chris, howyou been? Hello? Hello, Hello,
my little more fun flying a saucerthere. Hey, Jenna's been.
We founder We missed him. Theywere they were looking for that thing and

(04:01):
Lake Haran. She was bubbling tothe top and they were able to pick
her up. They got her back, brought her back by. Well,
the postal service was a little slow. That's why they actually got her a
lot sooner. But they mailed her. They mailed her, They mailed her.
You would have thought she web cameby. Cony expressed the way that

(04:24):
the UFO is a lot faster.He never a sleet rain snow, but
maybe an alien will stop the USpostal service. So anyway, she's back.
Jerry's a little said, thought hewas gonna go out carousing this weekend,
but I guess he's staying home.He's feeling good, except for her
still broke. He's still got abroken wing white cast. He'll never go

(04:48):
hot air balloon and again for sure. Hey, we gotta Chris and Jerry
and Jenna, and we wish youthe best on UFO Crossfire that's coming this

(05:12):
fall. Right here on KGRA,you are listening to Mouf on What's Up
Radio, the show that says Discoverystarts with curiosity, and Curiosity starts with
mufon. Brought to you by kgR a dB dot com. I hope
you get over to their website andcheck out all their awesome new content and
all their old archives shows as well. There's so many great changes happening with

(05:33):
KGRA, including some of the changeswe're making here, and we're so excited
to have Shane hurt On with ustoo. As always, we are endorsed
by Moufon. Like I said,I am your host, Katie Paige,
Colorado, MUFON State Director. Tonightwe have a very special guest. So
the next few weeks I want tobe basically highlighted and showcasing some of our

(05:54):
speakers that we're going to be havingup at the upcoming Mupon Symposium, which
is just creeping up on, creepingup on us here. It's coming to
Cincinnati, Ohio August twenty fourth throughthe twenty seventh, So I hope to
see you guys out there at themouf On Symposium. Doctor Michael Masters will
be one of our future guest speakersthere, and of course there's a few

(06:15):
spots still available for the Field InvestigatorTraining which will be taking place on that
Thursday. So I hope to seeyou all out at the symposium. Another
event that's coming up I wanted toshare is the Phenomenicon. I have a
lot of good friends that will bespeaking there, out there in Vernal,
Utah that is September sixth through theninth, and that is always a cool

(06:35):
event out there talking about locations ofhigh strangeness, so be sure to check
that out as well. I wouldlike to now bring in my wonderful co
host. We have Tara Diulis.You can see Tara on Sky Tour Live
with Mark D'Antonio right here on KGRA. How you do on terra? What's
the temperature like there in Arizona.Oh, it's nice and warms. It's

(06:59):
time to stay in side these days. But we had a little rain today
so it was nice, so thatcools things off. What's been the hottest
temperature so far this summer? Ithink it's been one sixteen eighteen I think,
but we've had a couple of those. I don't want to brag,
but literally I almost turned on theheat last night up here on the Rocky
Mountains. It was fifty seven degreeslast night, and I'm thinking this is

(07:23):
great, and I was thinking aboutyou, Well, are you so excited?
Oh? Bill, I gotta jumpin. I gotta jump in because
when I went to Arizona, itwas awesome tower that picked me up at
the airport yes, and mentioned theheat. I was like, oh my

(07:45):
gosh, it's like so insane.It really is. It's like so hot.
It's like it just blows on youand you gotta be out. But
it was Tyler, thank you somuch. It was awesome me you,
Shane heard, Shane heard, Stayand everybody else. It was so fun.

(08:11):
I also want to thank Christa Pernellfor his role here on the move
on What's Up Show? He willbe missed for sure, but he's gonna
have a show in the fall.Yeah. Okay, So I love debate.
Who else is on your UAP crossfirebill? Combat to Cobra who had
a show on Cage r Ray yearsago. He took a hiatus because he's

(08:33):
so busy. So who beyond DonEcker, the One and only Don and
Martin Willis. This is going tobe an interesting panel show discussing the ladies
that's going on in the UAP fieldwith these hearings that are going to be
upcoming because they are there's more,right, ye, all this news that

(08:56):
were being overwhelmed with exciting time.Did you guys hear about the articles?
They were talking about it on MartinShow and PERU seven foot armored aliens.
I was like, what the heckis going on? So yeah, coming
back, Shane, welcome to themove fa on. What's up family?

(09:18):
And it was a pleasure meeting youas well and looking forward to seeing you
again. All right, I'm outof here, thank you, Thanks Bill.
All right. So, like Billsaid, we have Shane Heard.
I want to read his bio,but before we bring Shane on. Shane
Heard has spent his government career inthe fields of civil engineering, geographic information

(09:41):
systems, and information technology technologies andis a graduate of Arizona State University Certified
Public Manager Program. As a memberof the Space Race Generation, he has
been a lifelong space and science nerdand sci fi geek. Those words come
directly from Shane, not me.I'm not calling him a nerd or geek.

(10:03):
It was a Phoenix lights incident inhis hometown of Phoenix, Arizona that
sparked his interest in ufology. Sincethat time he has studied the subject and
ultimately, in twenty fifteen, hejoined Moufon He become a field investigator in
twenty seventeen. He is now aStar team member and an art team member,
which is the experience or resource team, and he was recently appointed the

(10:28):
Assistant State Director of Arizona Moufon forPhoenix. In June twenty twenty, he
published his first book entitled Unidentified AerialPhenomenon, A Beginner's guy to researching UFOs.
He is a musician, a carguy, an amateur astronomer, a
horse owner, enjoys a good bourbonnow and again, and is now our

(10:50):
esteemed co host Shanehard welcome to theshow, and welcome to move on myself.
We're so excited to have you here. And lot's not forget the awesome
beard and must dash, which isa signature. Look. Well, thanks
a lot, you guys. Imean, it's a total privilege and honored
to be part of this. I'mso excited for it. I know we're

(11:11):
going to have some fun. However, I'm not as funny as Chris.
I mean, sorry, that's nottrue. I don't believe that for a
second. We are still going tohave a grand old time on this show.
There's always something lighthearted to talk about. I know this is a serious
topic, but come on, ifyou can't kick up and have a little

(11:31):
fun, I mean, come on. Being a car guy and a bourbon
drink and we know you have someand I have some history on that too,
so oh awesome, we're gonna haveto pick his brain. That's great,
that's awesome. So Tara, whatdo you have to kick us off
tonight? Well, like our guest, today, today's mean deals with the

(11:52):
subject of time travel. And soas you can see here, the primitive
scientists are hooting unded lee as theysuccessfully try out their new time log.
So you see the caveman on thelog. Oh my god, they went
into the future. So we'll haveto ask We'll have to ask doctor Masters,
because I don't think that's possible goinginto the future. But really fun,

(12:13):
really fun, and those guys didn'tturn into the grays. They're still
like sporting the caveman. Look.That would be me on the back of
the lord, like exhausted. Ohthat tunnel is hard. That's funny.
That's great. Good one, well, good one. Yeah, it's cool.
So found on Etsy. I havethese found on Etsy? Are these?

(12:35):
Sorry? I thought of these alienhead pennies and their charms that can
be worn as a pin or apendant and they're individually crafted by a skilled
artisan and these, oh, youknow, along with anything else can be
found on Etsy and they're about twentysix dollars apiece, so make sure you

(12:56):
check that out and fun little giftsfor friends. I need to get one
of those for the is it theMega millions tonight? That's like one of
the highest jackpots, So everybody havetheir tickets. Do we all valve that
if any of us here on theshow wins it, we're spreading the wealth?
Okay, yes, the love thewealth. Hopefully it's a lot of
the wealth and stuff. But ifwe're wealthy, we got to make sure

(13:20):
that we stay hydrated. Right,So an important reminder in these heat,
this desert heat. There you go, Katie. Water is so important to
our health and because you can becomedehydrated so quickly, right, So hidrate
your cells and boost your immune system, and choose your flavor of fuel Up
and use the handy shaker and drinkto good health. They have They have

(13:46):
wake for morning, play for duringthe day, and rest for rejuvenation.
So you can visit our website atfuel up, gg slash move on fuelip
got Gigi slash move I'm sorry aboutthat and find out all the offers that
they have. So it's it's reallycool. So that's that stuff does get

(14:07):
you going in the morning. Ihave some in my cupboard and when I'm
feeling the extra drowsy, like thecaveman on the log, slammed down some
fuel up. It's awesome. Soso I want to ask Shane, what
have you heard? What's going ontoday? What's what have you heard lately?

(14:28):
Yeah? I love it? Yeah, so have you guys heard that.
On July twenty six, twenty twentythree, the highly anticipated Congressional hearing
held by the sub Subcommittee on NationalSecurity, the Border, and Foreign Affairs
feature testimony of two former US Navypilots and a former intelligence offerser who worked

(14:54):
with the UAP Task Force. Ithink we got a little clip of that
too. If you believe we havecrashed craft stated earlier, do we have
the bodies of the pilots who pilotedthis craft? As I've stated publicly already
in my News Nation interview, biologicscame with some of these recoveries. Yeah,

(15:16):
were they, I guess human ornon human? Biologics? Non human?
And that was the assessment of peoplewhich recknowledge on the program I talked
to that are currently still on theprogram. And was this documentary reverences,
video photos, eyewitness like, howwould that be determined? The specific documentation.
I would have to talk to youin a skiff about Wow, you

(15:43):
guys were muted. I'm not muted, Shane, is me? I think
Shane's muted? Shane, You're let'sunmute Shane here, let's see can you
do that? I think I cango there you Shane? All right,
now we can hear you. Shane. Nope, we're still muted. There.

(16:10):
I wonder what, well, whatdo you think about that? Katie?
Well, you know I'm hold on. Must try and get him unmuted,
Mike. But in the heck o, there we go. All right,
Okay, nobody touching anything. Ido. I do have a ghost
in the house lately. I'm tellingyou, I'm not even joking and serious

(16:30):
infected Shane. All right, SoShane, what do you think about the
hearings? He's muted again. I'mtelling you, I'm not touching anything.
I'm not touching it. That's weirdanyway, Sarah. Okay, there is

(16:52):
uh the the congressional head the congressionalhearing went off, and when I observed
it, I thought that each ofthe witnesses gave good answers to what I
thought were some pretty good questions,and from that whole thing are a lot
of takeaways, but I was justgoing to highlight three that I thought were

(17:15):
pretty good, and the first beingthat of government transparency. And I think
that's really important and I think TimBurchett, one of the panel members there,
he said that this is an issueof transparency and if we can't trust
a government that doesn't trust its people. So I think this is a good
lesson for us in ufology. We'rekind of focused on the UFO part,

(17:38):
but it's good for us to beaware that politicians see this in a slightly
different way, and this is oneof the big issues to them, is
that transparency. And I think that'sa real down to earth issue that we
all know are affected by and canget behind. So I thought that was
one thing that was interesting. Yeah. The other one is light safety and

(18:02):
flight safety, not just from amilitary perspective, because you know, both
Ryan Graves and Dave Fraber were commentingcommenting on that, and it's important for
those military pilots, of course,but I've always thought all along it isn't
this a big issue for the commercialairline industry. I mean, we're talking

(18:23):
millions of lights a year, andthose planes don't have two people in him,
they have two hundred or three hundred, hundred or five hundred. I
mean, the potential for disaster isso great there. And so I was
really glad to see that someone likeRyan Graves, now that he retired,
he's pushing the issue forward and hestarted an advocacy organization called Americans for Safety

(18:47):
Safe Aerospace, and I think that'sa pretty important issue. And then also
Dave Fraber, you know, hehad commented that on the case that he
saw in the two thousand and fourmimits case that's so called TikTok video,
he says that what he saw defiescurrent material science, and I think that's

(19:07):
pretty accurate. If you can imaginehundreds of G forces on whatever that craft
was or whatever those materials are,do we even have anything that could sustain
that? And then he said,you know this, this to him was
one of the most important UFO sidingsin history, and he wanted to make
the point that not only were thereradar systems and optical cameras and these other

(19:30):
things, they had four sets ofhuman eyeballs on that thing. So in
his mind, that was a verystrong case. And I agree when you
have that kind of of support,and he just said, I want everyone
to know that this is not ajoke. And so coming from someone of
his caliber, I appreciated, youknow, that sort of certainty on his
part. And then the last thingco yeah, I'll hold question still.

(19:56):
Okay, yeah, because what youguys think the last was just obviously the
big important one, and it's thepotential reality of others. Right. So,
Dave Grush, he's a whistleblower behindthis. There is a process called
a PPD nineteen urgent Concern filing thathe filed with the intelligence community, in

(20:18):
fact the Inspector General there. Andwhat he said during that hearing when he
came forward that you know, itwas based on credible information others had conveyed
to him about an alleged government programinvolved in the recovery of craft of non
human origin. And then he reallywent there when he also said that non

(20:44):
human biologics were also recovered. Sothat's pretty fantastic, right, And and
these are the things that the UFOcommunity has has felt we were accurate for
a very long time. But nowwe're getting some whistleblower testament and it's not
just Dave Grush, there's others.And now I know the one thing that
frustrated people was that often and hehad to say, hey, I can't

(21:10):
comment on that have to be ina skiff or you know it's classified,
and that that is frustrating. Butjust know this that through that formal process
of submitting that PbD nineteen that youknow, his leadership had to approve this,
Inspector General had to approve this,and he has provided names, dates,

(21:33):
places, corporations, the things thatwe would probably consider proof for extremely
strong evidence. It's there, wejust can't see it yet. And so
I'm hoping that in time, eitherthrough declassification, perhaps a league or some
other means, that we're going toget better and more information that supports these

(21:53):
claims. But the bottom line isis pretty fantastic. I'm looking for the
proof, you know, for thatto come, and when it does,
I'll be as as thrilled as anyone. But anyways, what do you guys
think? Yeah, I was happyto hear Favor say, you know,
I think they was at thirty pilotshe said that came forward but he made

(22:17):
it clear that there were there werehundreds more. You know, they're just
focusing on that. And I'm gladthat he made that clear because i mean,
just go look at our historical documentsand we have boxes of pilot reports
that have been seen for decades.So I'm glad that he made a point
to say that. I thought greatquestions were asked and answered, So I

(22:37):
think it's another important step. Whatdo you think, Tara, Well,
I agree with what everything you guyshave said. I was impressed with the
intelligence of the questions and how itseemed like everybody was was basically involved.
It wasn't like they were at themeeting and thought it was ridiculous. They
took it seriously. And what Ialso is exciting to me is I want

(23:00):
to know about the gray cubes insidethe clear spheres, and you know,
I want to know what they're seeingand more information about that. And he
talked about the tic TACs and theydidn't really have any manner of propulsion,
but there if he said, ifyou looked at it closely, you could
see two little things on the backof the object. So we don't know
what that was. And so ifthis information does come out, there's so

(23:22):
much cool stuff we could learn fromit and grow from I think, right.
I mean, they say a clearsphere, but they're obviously seeing something
that they can identify a sphere ora cube within a sphere. So I,
like you, Tara, found thatfascinating. We have, through move
on, gotten reports of these cubes, and you know, I've had one
of a cube yet, Yeah,the cube. So I found that interesting

(23:45):
and well. I also thought itwas interesting though that they said they weren't
really deep briefed or questioned, andthat made me automatically think, well,
maybe they're not getting deepbriefed or questionedbecause somebody high up knows. Maybe it's
ours. Maybe we do have thattechnology, and it's just a hand people.
Handful of people are in the nose, so there's always that angle too.

(24:06):
I don't know, it's all prettyexciting, well, isn't there See
they talked about a group of eightor something that these programs we don't know
about, and the Congress doesn't knowabout because it's there's everything's supposed to be
passed through them if they're doing something, and that is in lieu of going
to Congress. And it seems likethere's an issue there and so I'd like

(24:27):
to know more about that. Soanyway, it was great. It's fantastic
that the discussions out there, andpersonally, that's the most interesting discussion I've
seen on it in a long,long, long time. Yes, yes,
for sure, thank you Shane forbringing it that discussion up. That's
important and it's just another step onthat long road we are all on.

(24:49):
So yeah, so let's see.I think I have a quick case of
the week and then Tara, Ithink you have some exciting news, and
then we're going to bring on ourspecial guest, doctor Masters here in a
moment. So I have a friendthat actually did this case out there in
Arizona. Actually, so this iscase of the week. It's case number

(25:11):
one to three zero six two three. It was a Category one case.
It occurred on April twenty six,twenty twenty three, at eight o five
pm by Lake Havasu, Okay inArizona, and basically they were looking in
the dark sky and noticed a whiteorb of flying west to east at an

(25:33):
undetermined altitude. It had no blinkingnavigation lights and was flying at a slower
speed than commercial aircraft. I filmedit with my phone camera and zoomed in.
Now, what I want to saya little hint for all those if
it's okay to zoom in on objectsin Shane, you wrote the book on
this, so you correct me ifI'm wrong here. But if you're going
to zoom in, zoom out too, so we get a good estimate,

(25:57):
like so you can see the housetops and the tree tops and those kind
of things, because this one's prettyzoomed in. But what's interesting about this
one there was another case that sameday, an hour and a half earlier,
that also traveled in the same direction, so around Lake Havasu. But
it was a V formation, soit could have shaped shifted. I don't

(26:18):
know, but the fact that therewere two is kind of interesting. The
flight radar showed no planes in thearea, no satellites or anything like that,
so this was closed as an unknownlight anomaly in the sky. So
if we can run that video,I have one, and then I slowed
it down for number two. Allright, the house, so you could

(27:36):
see it a little bit better witha little bit lightened. That second video
there, it's a bit shorter.I cut it down enhanced. I think
it says M. H. Mhm. Your muted Katie. There you

(28:15):
are so strange. Everybody's muted,Shane. You're there there, I'm here
all right, Hello everyone, everythinggoing on? Welcome Shane. Now Shane's
muted again. What did you think, Terra of the video? Well?

(28:38):
I thought it was strange because it'sit's hard to tell because you didn't have
like the the building below. ButI liked the end of it. And
the end of it. You couldsay, oh, that is strange.
You know at the beginning you don'treally know so exactly do you think,
Shane. Yeah, it's good tohave in an image just like some of

(29:00):
the foreground or background, so thatyou can kind of interpret scale, right,
because if you just see a whitelight on a back black background,
say that three times fast, youknow, it's really hard to understand how
large it is and how fast it'smovie and all that stuff. So yeah,
it's really great. I agree withyou, Katie. It's good to

(29:22):
to zoom in if you can,but to zoom back out as well,
and just you know, think ofyourself as you're collecting data that can be
analyzed in an investigation, and sothe more that you can collect, the
better it is. So Yeah,that's that's a good case. And I
mean think how many lights in thesky cases do we get? I mean,
it's right. Yeah, here's here'sanother note, and I think this

(29:48):
is important too, is to lookat the credibility of the witness. So
this witness was in the Air Forcefor eleven years, uh, went to
college and also was a police officerin California for twenty two year and is
now retired. So also want tolook at the credibility of a witness in
this case. So he's a prettygood observer, I would say, being
in the Air Force for all thoseyears. So yeah, kind of interesting.

(30:11):
I think he would recognize maybe whata satellite or a traditional aircraft would
be, so kind of anomalous,you know. And I can't wait next
week, just a little teaser here, a big wave of sitience in Texas.
So I'm going to try and getsome together for that next week.
But Tara, do you have sothe Mufon Mars project was at the Muffon
Archive Research and redacting team and Tarawas a part of that, and there's

(30:33):
going to be some news about that. Do you want to share that,
Tara? Yes, I'm so excitedbecause the Mars Pardon. The archives and
historical cases are going to be releasedfor research later this year. And it
was such an interesting project to bea part of, and it took us
a few years to redact thousands ofdigitized files. And what I have for

(30:57):
you today is a glimpse of what'sto So this is a little teaser.
Here is a case that occurred inIllinois in December of nineteen seventy eight.
Is a historical case, but wehave a newspaper article that reports a sighting
by two junior high school students whoare driving along a major highway when they

(31:17):
noticed a bright light in the sky. Well, we happen to have the
Mars case that that file goes alongwith. So that's what's cool about the
Mars project. There's all sorts ofdifferent pieces that go into them, and
they're all from very historic files.So these girls saw a tube black object

(31:37):
about the size of a commercial airplane. And here is the witness sketch that
was attached to the report, whichis very cool. And I noticed if
you turn it the other way,it kind of looks like a telephone pole,
which is interesting. But it wasa two black object. You see
that so, and then there's thethat's how they drew it, so I

(31:59):
believe though it says white lights asthe leading edge of it. And there's
a poll. Okay, so interestingthey isn't that interesting? So they watched
the object, they saw the objectthey were driving, and they the object
moved in closer to the car.And here is the sketch they drew of
that event. They stated that itcrossed over their path, turned around a

(32:21):
short distance, and then returned totheir vehicle, and from a distance of
about ten to fifteen feet above thecar, the object made a complete circle
over their heads and then it shotoff across the horizon. Was gone in
just a couple of seconds. Well, telephone poles don't do that, no,
unless they're the big mark of whatis the gigawatts or electricity and the

(32:45):
investigay, yeah, it could havebeen, but apparently there was. It
was clear then calm that day.By the way, the investigation revealed that
the girls were reliable witnesses and whowere truly fearful of the incident. So
ver So, you can look formore information about the release of these Mars
archives and historical cases of the Yutcomingfun Symposium. So from that's going to

(33:09):
be some big exciting news. Littleteaser teaser teaser. Thank you guys,
Yeah, well, thank you forsharing that. Arra, what do you
guys think. I think it's timeto bring in doctor Michael Masters. I'm
so excited. Let me read hisbio him and let's do it all right.
Doctor Michael Masters as a professor ofbiological anthropology at Montana Technological University in

(33:32):
Butte, Montana. His current researchprogram centers on hominin evolutionary anatomy, human
variation, archaeology, biomedicine, andinvestigating the UFO phenomenon. Regarding the latter.
In twenty nineteen, he published IdentifiedFlying Objects, a multidisciplinary scientific approach

(33:54):
to the UFO phenomenon, which examinesthe premise that UFOs and aliens may be
our human descendants returning from the futureto visit and study their own hominin evolutionary
past. In twenty twenty two,he published that Extra Tempestrial Model, which

(34:15):
analyzes well documented cases of abduction andother contact modalities in the context of this
time travel hypothesis and other theories putforth to elucidate that this complex and mysterious,
This complex and mysterious phenomenon. Hismost recent book, Revelation the Future

(34:37):
Human Past, again focuses on UFOsin the framework of this extra tempestrial model,
but in the format of a satiricaltime travel science fiction novel. So
that's his new book, right there, Revelation the Future Human Past. Please

(34:57):
welcome to the show, Doctor Michaelma Usters. Move on, people,
what's up? Hey, Hey,what's what's up? Move on? I
ain't chunking no more. I workedout my leg the switch back to my
old camera for oh, okay okay. I saw you disappeared there for a
minute, but I just thought itwas part of the miss mysterious No.

(35:20):
That was actually production scenario was bornto craft for about fifteen twenty minutes.
But it's the opposite of missing time, Like I was actually there for three
hours but only felt like fifteen.Why I was so happy. I'm so
happy we grabbed you for our firstepisode. Back in our first episode here,
the one and only Shane Hurt Iheard the two of you were like

(35:44):
cruising around and you're convertible throwing backsome whiskey. Is that I have a
picture of that terra not on theOh yes, yes, yes, down
hold on and whiskey. They arelook at them. And that was that

(36:04):
was just before it got like onehundred and fifty degrees out. That was
actually a nice day. It wasonly like a hundred and ten that day.
I think. Yeah, beautiful weatherthe next metro area. Yeah,
no, two bourbon guys in theCamaro. That was a It was a
fun talk with your shades. Yeah, shades. That's awesome. So you're

(36:30):
going to be one of our featuredspeakers at this year mouf On Symposium,
so you're not only gonna be withthe three of us mouf audience, but
a whole bunch. So I kindof wanted to start you out, Doctor
Masters with kind of you know whatyour presentation, what you're going to be
talking about there, and you cangive us a sneak peek. Well the

(36:53):
title because as you're aware, thethe whole topic at this your symposium as
friend or foe, which I feelis a very important question and it you
know, it's kind of comes upfrom time to time with the threat narrative
and somewhat benevolent things these beings seemto do. So I think it's cool

(37:14):
that we're focusing on that entirely,especially because there's a lot of people that
are probably paying attention for the firsttime, and or you know, they
grew up watching all of the moviesabout alien invasions and whatnot. So I
know that's been in the mind ofa lot of people I've met, and
numerous ones have told me, youknow, if they are us from the
future, then I no longer fearan alien invasion. It sort of helped

(37:37):
calm some fears that people had fromchildhood, simply because you know, if
they're us, why would they attackus? Why would they kill it?
So there's a number of questions.We can't just look at the phenomenon with
rose tinted glasses. There are negativethings that happen, But I'll be looking
at you know, some some sortof anecdot total stuff to some extent,

(38:00):
some things people have told me intheir personal experience. But also we can
learn a lot from you know,statistical analyzes that have been carried out on
this too, like talk about thedoctor gra Mitchell Free study, for instance,
and what they've found related to thevalance of these interactions, if they
are positive or negative. So yeah, I'm not you know, I'm not

(38:22):
fully on the side of friend,which is why the title of my presentation
is friend question Martin, because Idon't know, nobody knows, but the
things I'm going to lay out sortof seemed to indicate that they are more
friendly than not. And obviously it'shard to summarize all of those and a

(38:43):
brief synopsis like this, but hopefullypeople will come. I think it's going
to be a really great conference allaround. I agree. I agree,
absolutely so, doctor Masters. Solet's talk about this. See, you're
proposing that the biological in to theseI guess, or the biological things in
these crafts might be our descendants fromthe future, And in your book,

(39:07):
I thought it was interesting, andI'm wondering if you can just touch on
that, because why would someone fromour future want to come back to our
past when they probably couldn't go backhome again? And what is the thoughts
on that? And is that reallya theoretical possibility that that's what's happening.
Well, no, I think travelthrough time is the same as traveling through

(39:29):
space, especially in the block universemodel, which is the most conventional model
among philosophers and physicists with regard tohow time space works. They're sort of
inseparable. But if you can moveto the past, you can move to
the future. In fact, that'ssort of the opposite of what a lot
of people get hung up on,is that we haven't yet proven how to

(39:52):
move to the past, but movingto the future is easy. For instance,
Scott Kelly when he was in theInternational Space Station, for you're removed
ever so slightly into the future justbecause of less gravity close to Earth,
because that does cause gravitational time dilationand slows time down relative to others.

(40:12):
So yeah, if we could travelat very high speed relative to the speed
of blate, or hang out nextto a black hole or large supermassive object,
then we would age more slowly andtherefore go into the future of everyone
else in global spacetime. But no, I think I think it's actually probably
going to happen sooner than later.And if we are reverse engineering these craft,

(40:37):
they clearly have the ability to manipulatespacetime or engineer the spacetime metric is
how Putoff says because the G forces, for instance, I don't think it'd
be possible to withstand those G forcesunless they were manipulating space time around these
craft. Like what we see asthis, you know, ten thousand miles
an hour, instant right turn oracceleration deceller ration. Probably inside the craft

(41:00):
they feel nothing at all, andit probably helps them fly circles around us.
I think it's one of the reasonswhy the threaten narrative doesn't make that.
I think a lot of that isbecause they're manipulating space time in what
Jim Piston called a sphere of itsaround these craft. And there's so many
other cases they talk about in mysecond book, especially where clearly time is

(41:22):
moving at a different rate in proximityof these machines. People like Corporal Armando
Valdez. They found that the treesin and around where Travis Walton was abducted
grew at an increased rate. LendaJones and then Manchester, UK. She
sees the grass growing very rapidly rightbelow her feet as she's running from this
thing. So there's a lot ofindications that they do manipulate spacetime. It's

(41:45):
probably an intric kate and highly integratedaspect with our propulsion system, partly because
of the g forces thing, butfurther reasons as well. So I think
once we start flying these things,and they've probably figured out already that they're
time machines. They posted something onTwitter the other day about Commander George Hoover

(42:07):
who called them that he said,we know we're talking about this thing that's
more likely extra temporal. It's atime machine, and the beans inside are
most likely even us from the futureon the same planet. So even back
in nineteen forty seven, people werestarting to recognize that, and Herman o'berth
and others involved in the Roswell crashrecognize that characteristics. We have this expression

(42:30):
that form follows function, and theycould see, with no knowledge of what
this thing is, that the formof it indicated the function of backward time
travel capabilities. Then obviously the beanslook like us. But just real quick,
and I'm getting long winded here,the circle back to your original question.
I don't think. I don't thinkthe beans inside are always future humans.

(42:55):
And I talked about this in bothmy books that there seemed to be
some division where some are more likerobots droids, and some may even be
biologically engineered droids, so they're humanlike but maybe not entirely human. How
we would classify a human, whichI think plays in to the classification scheme
they've been using for these congressional hearings. What Grush said over and over or

(43:21):
what he said with Nancy Mace Ithink was her her name, that the
assessment was, and he was kindof tenuous on this, but the assessment
was they were non human based onphotographs. And you know, then he
throughout the skift thing again. ButI think there's a good chance that if
you're and and maybe you know theysent this back to crash, maybe that
was that spark that started this wholething that becomes us that we send back.

(43:45):
Who's going to volunteer to do that? So I think even if the
creatures inside were biologics, they hadhuman like characteristics, no doubt about that,
but they could have been biologically engineered. And then the next question as
well, who made them? Andbecause of the time characteristics of these ships,
I think it was probably future humansthat made them. Nobody volunteered to

(44:07):
go back and die in this thing, so they sent these very human like
looking things, which in reverse engineeringthe technology, maybe we're figuring out a
lot about genetic engineering too. Fromwhat we find out from the genetics of
these things that were probably structured fromour own genome. So I think there's
I've had to evolve my thinking onthis a lot lately because there's a lot

(44:28):
going on. But I do thinkfuture humans are at the root of it,
but I think there's also other thingsgoing on. Doctor Michaels masters up.
You know, it's kind of hardfor a lot of Please call me
Mike, it's easier. So,you know, a lot of people have

(44:50):
trouble getting their head around the conceptof time travel. One of the things
they point out is the I thinkit's called the Grandfather paradox. Do you
comment on that and how you knowyour theory works around that? Well,
it's not even my theory works aroundThat's how the universe works around that.
And I actually went back and readsome sections from my first book just actually

(45:17):
I finished it today, partly becauseI've been listening to some of the stuff
that's been coming out of my mouth, and I was like, what kind
of a metaphysical realm? You knowthat I didn't expect to be at.
And the book was very reductionist,materialistic, but still kind of you know,
pushed into the consciousness realm and Easternmysticism and whatnot, because I think

(45:39):
it's very highly integrated. But onething I realized from going back through those
sections on time travel is that andI recommend everybody read it. I come
back to it at the end ofmy second book as well. The last
two chapters talk about the block universemodel. Because it's not just my theory.
It's not my idea about how timeworks. I took what we have

(46:02):
now and tried to inform the bestI could how it relates to this phenomenon.
But obviously we're missing things. Physicistsnow astrophysicists, they still don't know
what time is until an emergent phenomenon. We don't know what is fundamental that
emerges from so all of us arekind of at this place where we're like,
well, you know, we're figuringit out. But the block universe

(46:27):
model does make sense, and Ididn't talk at all about the many worlds
interpretation of quantum mechanics. I circledback to that my second books. I
think it is important, especially inthe context of cataclysms and things like that.
But as far as the block universemodel goes, there is no paradox.
There's no consistency. Paradox is whenyou go back, because you're not
changing anything. To answer your question, Shane, you only get paradox when

(46:52):
there's change, and in the blockuniverse model, you can't change anything because
you're going back and doing what you'vealways already done. Those moments are structured
as highly integrated pieces across the fabricof space time, and you're just fulfilling
what you are always going to doin that moment. The only reason it
looks like you're changing something is becauseof how you perceive it in your own

(47:15):
mind. You're like, Oh,I'm going back to the past obviously and
changed something that past already happened,That past already exists prior to you ever
going back and doing it. Oh, you're doing is going back and interjecting
the thing that's already there. You'rejust walking through fulfilling those moments. You
get home, everything's the same becausenothing changed. You just did what you

(47:37):
were always going to do at thattime. And it's this very simple logical
explanation for the universe that again almostall philosophers and physicists outside the many worlds
interpretation camp, they all adhere toit, and it makes sense. You
don't see it in movies very oftenbecause it's harder to write a script around
that, but it's most likely theway the universe works. Wow, is

(48:00):
blown. First of all, Iwant I want to commend you, Mike
that you actually go back and somepeople believe that once you put something out
there and you write something in abook, that you have to believe that
forever. And I really admire thefact that you went back or reread some
of your stuff and maybe have achange of heart about some different things.

(48:21):
So that's what Yeah, well,hang on, let me comment on that
real quick. Is I put alot of those in the second book too,
and not just from stuff that Irealized, but things people told me,
things that I overlooked that seemed obviousonce I was informed about that.
Indeed, that one right there,the extra tempestrum, I didn't write it
only because of that, but itwas a good chance to say, oh,

(48:42):
wow, I overlooked this. Iwas dumb. How did I not?
Really? And I call myself outon it, put it in this
book, did it again with thislast book? And yeah, going back
and listening to the first book afterfour and a half years, it's like,
yeah, I mean it still holdsit holds up and I think it
even bolsters a lot of what we'reseeing. But I've evolved my perception of

(49:02):
all of it tremendously since then,so it's kind of good to go back
to those roots a little bit.Well. I admire you for that.
Speaking of evolution, I mean,we all evolve, and that's why we're
all here, is to continue tolearn and grow, and for you to
actually look back and make those changesas very commendable. But my question to
you talking about these timelines and thepast has already written, so we can't

(49:24):
go back. What about the multiversewhere you know there's a Kadie back in
the past that made spaghettios on Augustthe eleventh, and then there's one that
made a stake. I mean,what do you make of that theory?
As well? The multiverse where there's, you know, instead of my water
in here, I do have abourbon. I mean, and on and

(49:45):
on and on. What do youthink of that? And maybe you know
in that universe I have water insteadof bourbon. There's a smart one in
this show. I was hoping youwould have one with me, but it's
showever, so I figure, whois to say I'm not lying? It

(50:13):
I don't know. It's an importantquestion, and like I said, I
didn't even talk about it my firstbook because one, there's no evidence whatsoever.
It's all theoretical, it's all mathematics. And we shouldn't discount that because
a lot of theories do eventually cometo grow into something that is more tangible

(50:34):
than just whatever a physicist pulls outof their ascid any given time. But
the issue is that then we doget into change, you know, and
then we get into situations we havea bifurcation of the timeline, and a
lot of people in this camp thinkthat even just dipping into the past a
second you land or break into thatplace, you create quantum decoherence and separate

(50:58):
timelines. You create that ranching.It's you know, and in this theory
everything's possible. There's us in allthese different iterations. There's millions of universes
without us even in them. There'salso issues with the law of conservation of
mass. How do you have theentire universe recreate itself? How does it

(51:19):
become two separate things from one thing? You know, you can't have mass
become something else without being reformed fromthe mass that came before. So there's
just there's a lot of issues withit, not just in the context of
theory. You know, string theoryseems to have sort of had an ebb
and flow and it's got us closerand then it's been pulled back. But
really it just comes down to thesimplest explanation, and that's what I've tried

(51:42):
to do with this theory as awhole is offer up sort of an Occam's
razor approach with regard to the factthat we know we're here. You know,
I've had this long evolution physiologically,morphologically, technologically, it's been an
acceleration. It's likely to continue accelerating, and you know, it doesn't interject
extra terrestrials, It doesn't interject thingsother than what we know from our deep

(52:06):
past. So it was the samething with taking a stance and joining the
very large group. Again, it'sthe most conventionally held notion of how the
universe works, joining the block universecamp and saying, actually, this really
does make sense with regard to whatwe see with the UFO phenomenon. So

(52:28):
it's not that I completely write itoff. I also don't write off extra
terrestrials or any of the other theoriesI'm gonna post in a couple of days.
My mouf on Phoenix talk that Ijust got in the mail the other
day, where it's the first hour, is entirely about that maybe they're all
the same thing. We're just missingone very important variable that ties it all

(52:50):
together. So do you think thatthey're You kind of touched on this before,
but maybe you could elaborate. Ifthey're coming back in time and it
is us, it seems like itwould make most sense that they would send
some artificial intelligence AI, and likeyou said, these constructed perhaps biological beings
or something. And it kind ofposes the question that I've heard a lot

(53:15):
of people ask, you know,what if we already are AI, and
you know, as is it necessarilynot us from the future, If these
are are getting these AI or gettingbeings, I mean, it could be
us, right or yeah, Imean, at that point, it really
just comes down to how we definehuman. To this point, we can

(53:37):
see a very clear evolutionary trajectory throughyou know, bifurgating from other mammals about
sixty five million years ago, goingup into the trees. Everyone else stayed
in the trees. Guerrillas more orless game down to the head too,
because they're huge. But we camedown intentionally and stayed down or the only

(53:57):
habitual biped and that took place aboutsix or eight million years ago. I
feel like Bill's counting us down tosomething. We have a Yeah, we
have ours. Three minutes, allright, cool? Thanks Bill. I
just saw that. I thought itwas I thought it was seconds because I
was seeing I was like, Icannot wrap this up in three No,
No, it's good. I'm gladyou did so. Yeah, three minutes

(54:22):
easy, pec. So we seethat this evolution is happening. It's going
to happen. We see elements ofwhat we're doing now with our culture and
physiology and our physical evolution evolving intoculture environments. Could easily understand how they're
doing that too, but with bettercapabilities to manipulate our genome, better abilities

(54:43):
to manipulate their own genome, tohybridize with us if we are the same
species, and then yeah, touse AI for some of the dirty work.
Like a lot of the small grazerthought to be these sort of lifeless
but biologically consciously controlled droids of sort, we're actual repe bots like in the
Charles Hickson and Calvin Parker case inPascagoula, where they were taken by an

(55:05):
actual robot, you know, thatdidn't have any physical characteristics consistent with the
humans. So yeah, I don'tthink we should expect them all to look
the same. They don't look thesame. But I do think we can
still look at it through the lensof the future, even looking back into
our own past with our own futureperceptions, and start to wrap our heads
around some of the nuances of thisphenomenon. Very cool. That's an excellent,

(55:30):
excellent answer. And since we havejust you know, another minute or
two before break, I'm going touse this time to talk about your three
books really quickly. The first bookof Tarra if you want to put that
up, Identified Flying Objects, amultidisciplinary scientific approach to UFO phenomenon. And

(55:50):
the second book this one and thisis one I've been this one. Are
they all on audio book, Mike? I think they all first two.
I just hired some voice actors whoare currently doing the voices for the third.
I can't do it all myself becausethere's like ten characters. But well,
yeah, the first two and Iread them, I read them and
produced them myself because people seem toprefer that. Yeah, I've been listening

(56:14):
to that second one. I wasvery impressed that you narrated to that yourself.
I'm like, holy, how fabulousand produced. That's amazing. How
many takes did that take you?Because I literally, well you you heard
my intro. I can't even reada paragraph with message I threw. I
threw expert t and pestrial in theirtoys, just a mess with you.

(56:35):
Yeah, yeah, thank you,thank you for that. Yeah, I
appreciate that. I probably read thewhole book about fifteen times and recording that,
because it's not just you screw somethingup, Like there's these pops when
you use a high quality mic,there's all kinds of little sounds. The
first one I did in my office, So there's students walking by, banging
against the window. So yeah,you can you can cut those out if

(56:58):
it's during a breath. You can'tout of the mount when you're talking.
So there's dogs barking, chickens,lawn bowers. I commend you for that.
So it is break time. Wewill see you on the other side
of the break. Hang in there, and I want to talk more about
AI. Hey, remember the newkg R RADB app is now available on

(57:31):
iOS and Android devices. Gain ondemand access to any KGr RA DV programming.
Download any show directly to your mobiledevice to listen or watch on the
go, Go to the app storeand search KGRRA DV. Move On is

(57:53):
a voice of thousands of like mindedpeople who want to see change. We
speak up against UFOC. We engagegovernments and agencies around the world on the
topic. We share information with thepublic through our journal, website, newsletters,
social media, and even our ownTV channel. When you join moufhon,
you add your voice to the cause. Few things are more important in

(58:16):
our time than understanding the UFO question. Join moufon find your friends. Did

(58:36):
you know seventy five percent of Americansare chronically dehydrated. If you struggle with
focus, run low on energy,or when it's time to finally sleep,
you simply can't. This can allbe linked to dehydration, and fuel Up
has the answer. Our proprietary formulacontains the finest cellular hydration with the strongest
immune enhancing natural ingredients. The fuelUp system is made up of read different,

(59:00):
incredibly tasting varieties. Wake kickstart yourday with a jolt of caffeine.
Play boosts focus while hydrating your cells. Rest not only helps you relax,
but also rejuvenate your cells while yousleep. Here's what our clients have to
say. I really don't miss mycoffee and you can tell the difference.
So I'm gonna take it for theenergy I'm taking for the play. I'm

(59:21):
gonna take it all day and itworks. That's the thing. It works.
We love it. Take the FuelUp Challenge now, where we offer
a fuel of Difference money back guaranteefuel Up for Life. You're listening to

(59:44):
the KGr A Digital Broadcasting Network.We provide unparalleled coverage of trending news in
the world of uphology, cryptoszoology,and paranormal phenomenon. Whether you're watching our
video live stream or listening to oneof our audio programs, you are getting

(01:00:07):
the best from world renowned researchers andhosts guiding you through topics the mainstream won't
touch. Miss one of your favoriteprograms, no problem. Head over to
the members area at kgra a dBdot com for access to our massive library

(01:00:28):
of award winning content. Make contactstay connected only at kg r A dB
dot com. Get to dance again. I'm miss doing that, you know.

(01:01:00):
Okay, we are back. Socan everybody hear me? Okay,
I can hear you. None ofus are just Shane's muted again the ghosts.
There's a ghost in Shane's box.So back to the AI question.

(01:01:22):
I think it's an excellent question becauseI have a specific question for you.
So back he left his fan on? Is that what I said? Okay?
So back on the ranch, thehigh strangest ranch of Colorado from my
childhood days, there was this thatwas drawn. Okay, these strange looking

(01:01:43):
I call him the to be guysnow, somebody asked me on a podcast.
I've I've ever named him, buthe's too by guy for now.
But he's kind of an AI guy. And my question for you why,
I have two questions, two partquestions. Do you think that they could
be coming back in time meaning theAI type? Maybe they're partially AI.
Are they coming back to maybe changewhere we're headed with AI? Uh?

(01:02:07):
Maybe do you know what I'm saying, like trying to change or alter the
timeline? And is that possible?I mean? And if that's the case,
would it they be sort of uuh kind of changing changing the way?
How what they become. Maybe wedon't like what we become, and

(01:02:27):
we're trying to go back and changeit, I guess is what I'm trying
to ask you. Oh interesting,Well, as I as I mentioned earlier,
as per my previous email, youcan't change anything at least as far
as we understand it now in theBlock universe model. But it is possible.

(01:02:49):
And you know this, this wasbatted around for a while by by
Frank Milburne and Ross Court that thereare competing factions and ones coming back to
stop a cataclysm. Another group isyou know, trying to let it happen
because their existence is dependent on that, which it was a very big part
of my last book, you know, because it's a really interesting storyline.

(01:03:13):
But you could bring it into thisquestion of the Block universe and the many
world's interpretation, and only in thatmany world's interpretation can you have that change.
But then you also run into theissue and I didn't mention this earlier
when I was comparing the two theories, is how do you get back to
your timeline? You know, ifthey're jumping among timelines, which one is
theirs? Which one do they wantto live in? Do they just abandon

(01:03:36):
the old timeline, will say screwthis, We're gonna go back and make
one change that this new timeline isgreat, and everybody's like, no,
don't do that. We live here, this is our timeline. We have
families and stuff. I don't knowif you have FCC rules or not,
so so, yeah, I meanthat they had interjects change. Anytime you
have change, you get paradox,and so that that's a big question.

(01:03:58):
Are are they trying to do that? I remember the Nolan Fella Gary Nolan
said at that Salt conference mentioned thistoo, that some could be time travelers,
some could be AI. Question thenwho made the AI, because they
don't just make themselves on fish makingAI out there, but they're still probably
humans making them. But once theydo have enough control over their existence,

(01:04:20):
Yeah, they could be doing allthe same things that we're doing if they
sort of acquire something akin to consciousness, which seemingly all living things have potentially
all matter as consciousness since it's mostlyempty space and there's probably that bridge to
the other side, so to speak. But yeah, I don't know if

(01:04:41):
if part of it is autonomously orif they are doing the bidding of the
future humans still, and in thePascagoula case, it certainly seemed like that.
In the Whitley Stebric case, theones that initially abducted him in his
bedroom he likened too sort of roboticsmall grays with you know, like a
breastplate for protection and stuff like that, But a lot of people describe them

(01:05:05):
as is not really having that soul. Meanwhile, the taller grays, the
nors, whatever the hell you wantto call them, they're all priversions of
humans in some respect. They havea very deep, deep soul penetrating consciousness
that is likely where we're going.We already see that. We already see
that with the way we've evolved overtime, with the way consciousness and empathy

(01:05:27):
is evolved. And I think that'sa big part of where we're at right
now with these divisions and societies.We have empathetic people, and we have
selfish people. You know, there'sones that see ourselves and others and have
largely you know, experienced ego deathin some respect, not just because of
psychedelics or because of near death experiences, but they just realize that we're part

(01:05:47):
of something bigger. Meanwhile, otherpeople are focused on vengeance, and selfishness,
and you know, our world strugglesbecause of that, because of the
tragedy of the Commons and many otherthings related to it. So yeah,
I think that in the future willbecome the highly empathetic, highly conscious beings

(01:06:11):
and maybe even abuse some of theserobots, these AI with certain aspects of
that if it is possible. Wow, really good answer. That's amazing.
You stop seeing that we're hearing alot about AI, you know, even
today, and people are you know, very concerned about it and it's impact,

(01:06:34):
and you know, this is thissomething that that could hear? What
what are you? What's kind ofyour take about our current position with AI
and where it could go. Yeah, I think my current view is mostly
structured from memes that I see.I'll go ahead and put that out there.

(01:06:58):
Most of my view of reality isstructured on funny, really funny.
I think that's a majority of us. Yeah, for sure, I'm just
gonna laugh, you know, I'mgonna admit it. But yeah, the
most reset one that cracks me upis is how, you know, we
were told that robots would save usfrom annual labor, and now they're writing
the poems and the movies and thebooks, and we're all stuck doing that

(01:07:23):
stuff, which isn't the future anyof us wanted. And it's probably a
big part of why the writers strike'sgone on so long, because all the
coders are like, all right,we don't need these writers anymore and those
writers anymore. So yeah, itsucks in that respect. As far as
like I robot will Smith scenarios wherewe're going to develop a robot that comes

(01:07:44):
up and slaps Chris Rock across theface at the Grammys or something. I
don't know if that's gonna happen,but hopefully. I don't know. I
would watch that episode of the Grammys, but I do think that, yeah,
it's gonna be an important part ofwhere we're going as a species.
We're going to use them no matterwhat. And I do think we're already
seeing that if these are future humans, there's indications that we are, and

(01:08:09):
we do and we will depending onwhere you're looking at it at which point
in time. So yeah, Isay, I don't know. I think
the fears that we won't be ableto control it is. Is that what
you're asking, Like, that's thething. Yeah, I mean that's possible.
Just make a kill switch you know, yeah, as long as as

(01:08:33):
long as we don't, they don'tbecome smart enough to get rid of the
kill switch, right, I mean, because that's just to tell them about
it a little. See, that'swhy you're the doctor. I'm already convinced
that we're already there. There'll bea leak somewhere. Somebody will leak out
the location of the kill switch.I don't know. I always turned a

(01:08:57):
futurama for for knowledge that I wentto how the Future will unfold with robots
because Bender wants to kill all humansand there's you know Bender, your dog
is Bender your dog? No,No, I did think about naming my
dog Bender though dog. My dog'snamed Indica. Indica. Oh, oh

(01:09:20):
love it. Some of you mightknow that reference I do reference that.
So Mike, I have a questionfor you. So with your your experience,
you know, I know you're aninstructional lecturer, and do you what
do you think about can you talkabout us being the Grays in the future?

(01:09:43):
Bill Bill Skywatcher had a great question. Do you think those are us
would be become underground dwellers perhaps lackof sunlight or are there water changes?
What has happened to the Earth thathas made us look so different. I
mean, I understand we might notneed our muscles to do things to get
scrawnier, but why such a drasticchange or is it a vast amount of

(01:10:05):
time? Yeah, well, itdepends on what amount of time we're talking
about. If we're talking about tensof thousands, hundreds of thousands of years,
No, those characteristics aren't really thategregious like skinny Bob. I mean,
given the accelerating weight of change toour cranial facial morphology and the biggest

(01:10:26):
trends For those who haven't read mybooks aren't familiar with the theory is that
we've had encephalization and increase in thesize of our brains. There for an
increasing cranial capacity, and mostly inthe parietal lobes. They've expend a media
laterally, especially more recently with modernhumans characterized by what's known as neurocranial globularity.

(01:10:47):
We have these big balb as heads, but importantly our brains also moved
out over top of the eyes thatcaused bays of crannial flexing. Our mid
and lower facial anatomy got smaller andretracted, largely because the brain came out
and expanded. There's less time andspace for facial growth once that happens,
and our whole head had rotate downonce we stood up started walking up right,

(01:11:11):
whereas our quadrupedal, our quadrupedal cousins, and also the common ancestor of
those that looks much more like achimpanzee still has had much more in line
with the rest of its body becauseit's oriented towards the visual plane. But
as all of these things happened,we started to get bigger brain, smaller
faces. So, and this isa point I apparently became reaware of after

(01:11:36):
reading my own book over the lastfew days, a very important part of
this. It's a very long termtrend that just carried on because of the
runaway brain, runaway brain train,which I clearly overused in that first book.
So, yeah, it's going tohappen no matter what what I did

(01:11:58):
try to avoid to get the bills. Question, is any speculation about what
happpens? Do we live underground?Do we live in space? I hear
this all the time. People getlike a glimpse of this theory and they
go, oh, it's because welived in space or we played jazz guitars,
so we got really long fingers orwe you know, the nukes came
and we had to go undergrounds.Then our eyes got bixed a little like

(01:12:19):
maybe I don't know. It's notmy job to speculate as to what the
future looks like and what environmental pressuresare going to contribute to those These have
just happened regardless, and I dothink like one thing I mentioned Nolan's Salt
Salt talk where you know, maybethis I don't remember where it was,

(01:12:40):
but somebody mentioned something about like,well, if you know, if they're
just these ephemeral beans, they don'thave a physical form, which is bogus
because clear as we're talking about physicalthings, both in their craft and their
physical form, they're trying to makethemselves look more like us. So we
recognize them. We haven't. Wehaven't recognized and we thought there's space aliens

(01:13:00):
for a really long time, andif that is what they're trying to do,
look exactly like us, you know, why look like this thing that
happens to look like something from tensof thousands of years in our future.
Regarding the gray specifically, who canalso interbreed with us, we can make
these hybrids and make people that dolook like us, and I do think
those people are walking amongst us,and it's just a product of this hybridization

(01:13:24):
program they have where they have thephysical form that we have, but they
possess the telepathy and the higher consciousness, the mesmerization abilities, and everything else
that comes with it. So Ithink there's again a lot going on.
I'm not trying to boil it downto anything, but I do think a
lot of it does start with ourfuture. Interesting. I'm glad you mentioned

(01:13:45):
the apes and that because I wantedto ask you about Sasquatch. Do you
have an opinion on if, perhapsyou know, why didn't Sasquatch evolve like
we did and he could he orthey be an extraterrestrial species in of themselves?
What is your opinion on that?Mic? Well, two thoughts.

(01:14:10):
One, I like your drawings,and two I have a very unpopular opinion
about sasquatch. Oh well, that'swhy I said that in case you didn't
want me to continue, No continue, permission permissioned? Yeah, all right.
So I don't think Bigfoot exists inthis time and in this reality as

(01:14:38):
an actual extant mammal who would clearlybe primate if they were, because they're
not only primate technically by definition,they be haminan because they're upright walking.
We are the only ones that dothat. That's how we define the hominent
lineages. That we are habitually bypetal. So to have another habitually by
petal, but more primitive, withmore ancestral traits, as we said,

(01:15:02):
more hair, kind of a lumberinggay big feet. I don't know if
big feet was an ancestral trait ornot compare. I mean, we look
at foot morphology all the time,but not really size, just the orientation
of the different metatarsuls and everything.So anyway, I don't think they exist

(01:15:25):
for two main reasons. One,and this is the most important one for
me, is that all primates aresocial and curious, so they would have
to live in big enough groups tosustain themselves, i e. Find mates,
find food, make big enough populationsthat their offspring could find mates.

(01:15:46):
But then the curiousness thing, likeeven orangutans would kind of peek around corners
and they were known as the oldman in the forest. I think that's
what orangutan means, actually, theold man in the Forest and Borneo and
Sumatra because they have these you know, big faces, big round faces,
and they look wrinkly, but theywould still come out, you know,

(01:16:08):
and and they're very smart, inquisitivepeople. I show this video in my
intro anthro class where there's this onewild orangutan not even domesticated but wild that
saw women washing clothes next to astream and just came and started washing clothes
with them. And now every timeshe washes clothes, this female orangutan wild

(01:16:30):
will come and sit with them,do the exact same thing once you see
apec Ape do and wash clothes withthem, just because it finds joy in
that, and it's inquisitive enough andsmart enough that it can do that.
So it just doesn't make sense tome how sasquatch could be so primy and
so much like us but not beseen all the time, like checking things

(01:16:53):
out or hanging out the barding shotswith us, or going through our dumpsters
or something. It just it doesn'tmake sense. I have come to think,
and I'd said this before, andI used to get pushback from people
that there was a connection between UFOsand Bigfoot's Ask squat JETI whatever you want
to call them. I think peoplehave come around to that a little bit

(01:17:13):
more. And in that case,I could see how that might happen,
because if there is a manipulation ofspace time, and maybe a severe manipulation
of space time, or even youknow, an interdimensional aspect to this,
because we're talking about between the fourthdimension as interdimensional too, I think those
are kind of one and the same. Then maybe it's possible that something kind
of gets pulled in. But Idon't think they're extant, living creatures in

(01:17:39):
this time on this planet. Andpeople hate it when I say that,
and I get a lot of hatemail. I believe it or not,
I agree with you, but Ithink they're connected to UFOs. I think
there are a species in of themthemselves, an extraterrestrial species. I do.
I agree with that. Well,I don't think UFOs are extraterrestrial,

(01:18:01):
so I guess we don't technically agreewith the ultra dimensional. I'd say our
our theories overlap, but there's alsosome diverge in there. I would I
would go as far as that theymight be extra dimensional. And I had
some friends at Rice University that theythis is the second hand, but one

(01:18:28):
of their friends who they trusted.Again, it was getting far away from
the original source, saw this thingmaterialized like it's just its legs, and
then it's top was like this weirdspinning thing like in the show Dark how
he moves between times, and thenit fully materialized as a sasquatch and ran
off into the woods. You know, Like, like if that's true and

(01:18:51):
this wasn't necessarily associated with the UFOthat I'm aware of. Again, this
is like third hand information, butthat scenario, as crazy as it sounds,
still seems more believable to me thanthis self sustaining population of large primates
that we just don't see. Ijust I don't see. I have to
agree with that too. But doyou think they're extras true? I mean

(01:19:15):
they're about to be best friends.Yeah, no, I don't think so.
I don't know that they're extraterrestrial.Were best friends. Now we're getting
up against Katie. Well, youknow, I grew up in the Pacific
Northwest and that, you know,growing up believing bigfoots were real and that
whole thing. And and when Ifirst started hearing people linking them to UFOs

(01:19:40):
and making crazy, I'm like,that's stupid, you know, stop doing
that, you'll be smirching them,you know. But in time and when
you really start thinking about the observationsthat are made, the behaviors that you're
seeing, and then lack of thingssuch as you know, a sustainable community,
bones, scat and all those things. Yeah, you know you're you're

(01:20:01):
thinking of the second thing I wasgoing to mention, and I failed to
mention that. So yes, youleft out yeah the bones and yeah,
yeah, you usually you know,are full of I have a I have
a poop focus. You and Iknow each other well enough that most of
my conversations do come. You guyshave go with the job, right,
you have not what you're saying though, real quick, I want to hear

(01:20:25):
that. Well, I'm just gonnasay I actually sort of overlap with all
of you guys. Now that mythinking has changed is is that there's no
question that they appear right. There'sphotos, there's video, there's they make
noises, they break things, there'sfootprints, so there's a physical reality to
them. But all indications are thatthey can't be living their lives here because

(01:20:50):
there would be much more evidence,like you talked about. But I think
the concept that they can come intoour reality and go out, which I
think we're really talking about interdimensionality there, you know, is a possible thing.
And when you even look at likethe skin Walker ranch and the accounts
there where this portal opens and thisbig foot looking thing steps out and and

(01:21:15):
you know, goes across the ranch, I mean there's you know, it's
an anecdotal and stuff, but itjust again I had to change my thinking
because of the evidence and you know, and the logic that you apply.
So you know, I'm in agreementthat's most likely some kind of interdimensionality.
And are they related to UFOs oris that coincidental? I don't know,

(01:21:40):
And you don't always hear reports ofUFOs linking to bigfoot accounts, so I
don't know if that's what they could. They could have with the origination point
too, where you know, theyevent spacetime enough that something came through a
portal or whatever you want to callit, and then it exists on its
own, like where the hell amI? You know, I just watched
the Super Mario Brothers movie the daybecause I got kids and they get sucked

(01:22:03):
through this tube and it's like mushroomseverywhere, sweet, you know, and
I'd love to see happens with thisgeneration when they grow up a psilocybin,
they're gonna be like, this feelsfamiliar. Jack Black taught me about this
when I was a kid. ButNo, the other thing too is,
you know, maybe they're messing withus. The trickster element is very much

(01:22:24):
in play here that maybe they're they'repicking up again Epithecus from like I don't
know, one hundred and seventy fivethousand years ago in East Asia or whenever
they existed, probably much longer agothan that. I haven't studied this a
lot because it hasn't been on myradar. But pick them up from whatever
time they do exist, drop themoff, let them run around in a

(01:22:45):
place that people will see them,and especially if they're looking for them,
that'd be even cooler. But thenthey're all sitting up there laughing a little
bit, you know, like,oh, we showed them the thing they
are looking for, and we're theones that made it, and now it's
just funny for all of us.So I don't know, maybe that could
be the connection with UFOs too,because clearly, like like I heard somebody
say recently, duncan Trustle I thinkwas his name, like all the intelligent

(01:23:12):
people he's met are funny, youknow, so if we're talking about the
super intelligent race of entities, theyweren't discussing the context of future humans.
But why wouldn't we expect future humansto be very very funny people. If
they're intelligent and they're bored with thebenality of reality like the rest of us
are, why wouldn't they do stufflike that just to have a little bit

(01:23:32):
of fun with the past, Andespecially at a time when we're getting so
close to realizing who they are andwhat they are and what they're doing,
why not interject a little bigfoot justto screw with us. I could totally
stend doing that. That was myquestion to you, actually was you know,
we have a unique sense of humor, and do you think that the

(01:23:53):
US in the future has that senseof humor? And I particularly, I
mean, you don't hear a lotabout that with abduction case is in that
that these entities have senses of humor, especially are AI types. They are
quite serious and almost you know,work worker bots. So you think the
sense of humor is going to goalong with us? Well, I mean,

(01:24:14):
who had the experience would be myquestion I would answer that question the
question and one thing I talked aboutin my second book is the memories too.
And this comes back to circle backto the friend versus Fox thing,
because the correlation with the screen memories, the UFO amnesia, the UFO apathy,

(01:24:38):
erasing people's memories completely seems to correlatewith whether or not they had a
good time, if they're freaking out, if they're screaming the whole time,
Everything seemingly is released and erased totry to help them be able to cope
with it, because they do haveto go back and integrate into reality.
Meanwhile, you have people who arelike, well this is weird, but

(01:25:00):
sweet, what the hell's going onup here? You know what kind of
tech to go back there? Canwe go see that room? And they
are allowed to remember everything. Theyget tours of the ship, they're hanging
out with these people, they're sittingdown at desks with them, having conversations.
So yeah, I think the valanceof the interaction is important for that.
So yeah, if you're talking aboutsomeone who has picked up they're in
le probe, they had eggs andsperm extracted and they have no idea what's

(01:25:24):
going on. They hate it.That's going to be a very different situation
in a very different way that theyconvey things, mostly because they can't convey
any of it. So I thinkit depends on who that's coming from and
sort of what their own experience was. Right, Well, Mike, I
have a question for you then onthat line. So as we evolve,

(01:25:46):
you know, it's our you're we'retalking about sense of humor, but a
lot of these experiences or contacts orwhatever you want to say, deal with
telepathy and senses that we apparently somepeople say we might have over seventy to
eighty senses, but they're just sounderdeveloped when we have a few that are
really being used. And is itpossible that in the future our senses have

(01:26:09):
become so developed that it's us comingback and they, you know, it's
talk about the language perhaps and howthey can talk to everybody on the planet,
And how is that telepathy? Whatother senses might be affected because of
that over time? Yeah, that'sa fantastic question. So I do strongly

(01:26:31):
feel that telepathy is a capability ofeveryone. And my first book had a
conversation with Jeffrey Crapol, who's aprofessor of Religious Studies at Rice University who
was informed about my book. Hewas reading it or kind of talking back
and forth. He's like, cool, cool, cool, cool, cool,
Wait a minute, and he washe was angry about my materialistic interpretation

(01:26:59):
of eelempathy, and it wasn't myinterpretation, it's just and he eventually realized
that I kind of have to dothis in my position in the year twenty
nineteen when this book came out,and Star already in twenty twelve, and
I was very cautious about tying thingsthat we might be able to do in
the future with things we have now. Technologically we have brain to brain communication

(01:27:21):
even back then with libits and otherpeople's research. So I was looking at
it in that context, but theneventually came to the conclusion, and largely
because we don't all have brain implants, that this is just an aspect of
our consciousness. And so he waslike, all right, cool, cool,
cool, cool, And then wehad a couple more like hey,

(01:27:42):
wait a minute moments, But no, I do think it's an aspect of
our brains, as an aspect ofour highly evolved consciousness that we all have
the ability to use. We justdon't know how we haven't unlocked those sectors
of our mind. I wouldn't evensay brain, I would just say mind,
or we haven't gotten to the pointwe're able to use those. But

(01:28:04):
we can still communicate telepathically with thesebeads. We can absolutely do that without
any technology in our heads. Soyeah, I do think it's an aspect
of consciousness. I think it overlapsewith the phenomenon in a way. That
is probably a big part of whyit's taking so long to get disclosure,

(01:28:24):
because it depends on how far yougo. I mean, if we're talking
about highly evolved humans from millions ofyears ago, which I've never even said
that until right now, we couldbe talking about a purely conscious entity.
You know, we could be talkingabout light as the thing that this was
all structured around the entire time thatmakes its way into all kinds of religious

(01:28:48):
texts and things like enlightenment and seeinglight and near death experiences and being able
to see timeless views all around us. I think all of it's probably related,
but I do think that there's atime component to it, and it
will kind of make sense. WhitleyStreamer pointed this out too in one of

(01:29:08):
his books that I think it wasconvenient actually that a photon is timeless.
Everything in the known universe is structuredaround that thing as a particle and wave
it. But it's the speed limitof the universe. That's everything, you
know. And then you have toask about the simulation. I thought,
this is are we just inside amainframe and we're just seeing the movement of

(01:29:31):
all of these fiber optic you know, information channels. But it's it's a
lot more complicated than people think,and and I'm I'm still eons away from
understanding it. Thank you. Well. I think one thing too, is
is that you know, we allkind of evolved when we first get an

(01:29:57):
interest in this topic. At leastfor me, it was very nice and
bolts. It's like, hey,what's that metal machine flying in the air,
right and the traditional biological entity init. But you know, as
you get deeper into the subject andyou learn more, you begin to realize
and sort of embrace the woo wooside of it, right, that and

(01:30:18):
that's what you know, I thinkyou're talking about is all I do too?
Can we change that word because itdoesn't think I think woo who applies
to a lot of like crazy ideas. But there's also we have to start
We're gonna have to start making adistinction, like as I was just saying,
there's a lot of things involved inthis and involved consciousness and your death

(01:30:39):
experiences and psychedelic trips and and sorry, the only reason I'm latching on of
this is because Katie hates it too, and she's had this show longer than
anybody as far as I can tell. Now, WOO, I think I
like who. I think who shouldbe defined as all these who should be
defined words we use instead. Well, I think WOO still applies to like

(01:31:03):
crazy stuff people say. But myunderstanding Shane, from what you were saying,
is that a lot of this isn'tWOO. It's like you go down
this rebel you start with like likeAmy Michel said, jacques Ville is mentor
that you start with UFOs and nextto the United studying aramistics, like we
go in this direction of like Easternphilosophy and religion and stuff that's not WOO.

(01:31:27):
That's probably what it actually is,and a lot of stems from it,
and that I think that's what youwere saying. I think Katie and
I are just trying to separate thoseYeah, yeah, no, I agree
with you, And that's exactly whatI was saying, is it. The
term I'll use instead is consciousness.You know, that whole pathway where where
you know it's it's not as wellstudied, it's not as well understood.

(01:31:49):
But again the observation is indicating thatyou know, there there is this less
tangible force or part of this wholephenomena that actually that's where the answers probably
lie. You know, it's noteven the mechanical or whatever, it's it's
beyond that, and that's you know, the new frontier. Really yeah,

(01:32:14):
I completely agree. I mean,I think there is a technical component things
are being reverse engineered. But butlike I was saying earlier too, like
they can't fully understand how this craftworks without that mindset, you know,
without that evolved consciousness, without knowledgeof space time that we don't yet have.
So unless they're getting very specific instructionsabout how to reverse engineer it,

(01:32:39):
which is possible arguably if we've hadcontact with them overtly since the forties.
But no, I completely agree,Shaate. I think it's and I don't
even think we should separate them inthe context of the technology and the more
philosophical side, anthropological side. Youknow, I think there's a lot of
overlap. And but can you imagineyou imagine trying to be the agents of

(01:33:01):
disclosure right now where it's like allof these things we're talking about, and
we're like, how do we tellpeople that are just watching, like sex
Island and stuff? Where are weas a species? Are we ready to
have No, we're obviously, butit's happening. So some of us are

(01:33:24):
somebody, most likely the visitors themselves, are initiating this process, and they're
the ones in the middle are like, what do we do? And then
they have to worry about their politicalcareers whether or not they were out in
front of this. It's so funto watch with some based knowledge of what's
going on. I agree with youguys though, Unless we humans, unless

(01:33:45):
we can conceive something, it doesn'texist. We have to conceive it and
have the thought and think it foranything to be in existence, including extraterrestrials
or us from whatever you want tolabel them. Ask watch all of it,
and so what is your opinion thanMike about us being part of the

(01:34:08):
creation of all the the word we'renot going to say the WOO. And
and also can you elaborate a littlebit more on your opinions and beliefs on
the simulated universe theory? Are youalive with well? Can I ask for
clarification on the WOU questions? Theydon't? Yeah? Yeah, And how

(01:34:30):
like, the more I've studied andthe more I've researched all these different phenomenon,
the more it seems to me thatthe observer or the experiencer really plays
an important role in in the sightingand the abduction, in the phenomenon itself.
And I'm wondering if you are wecreating it? Are we creating the

(01:34:53):
phenomenon? My question is do youconsider that WOO or a part of what's
actually probably happening? I think it'snormal. Who are normal? Woo?
I don't know. I guess yeah, that's a sure. And that's what
makes it hard to really say oneway or another. But I think even

(01:35:14):
in the last three years, likethree years ago, maybe that was who
Now is it? I mean,and this is what's going to keep happening,
Is that a lot of things thatwe're just always wrote off as being
crazy are gonna kind of maybe bereal. A lot of things that we
wrote off as crazy. We're probablyinsane and they won't be, you know.

(01:35:36):
And there's certain people have been peddlingstuff for decades because they're filling a
void. We tried to alien thegaps the same way we guided the gaps
over the last five six thousand years, and that definitely happened with regard to
this phenomenon. That's what I considerwho is where people are just jumping out
there pulling something that do we haveFCC rules here or not? I don't

(01:35:58):
know. Are we syndicated on aradio show? That's a good question.
Could Phil Bill I think we're good. I'm talking language, so you pull
something on your ass and say here, I found the answer to everything.
Aliens are just whatever the how Ipulled out of my ass. Like we've

(01:36:19):
already started to separate that the conversationthat we're having now, even on UFO
Twitter, is far more informed thanfive six, seven years ago. I
mean, I haven't been involved inthis conversation, but I've been watching it
my entire life since I was acognizant human. At the same time,
you get baptized because you are consideredto have logic. As soon as I

(01:36:41):
got logic boom straight into the UFOsbecause it is a very logical thing,
and that's why I don't see thewoo as being I'm really glad we had
this conversation because I do think weneed to separate it. So the stuff
people put out their ass wooit aside, you know, cast it aside,
not worth talking about. But thereare a lot of things, especially related

(01:37:01):
to time and space and consciousness andthe interactions with each other and the hive
mind and manifesting things or at leasthaving pre cognitive understandings about what's going to
be manifested, which has been myexperience my entire life. And at what
point do you say, did Imanifest this or did I know what is
going to happen because I saw thatfuture and now I'm just doing the thing
that I saw. So I thinkthere is a lot involved in that question.

(01:37:26):
But I definitely don't think that anyof that should be cast aside.
It's I think we're far too asa society. That's going to be one
of the last things we talk about. But again, that might be in
five years. Look at the speedat which this is happening, you know,

(01:37:46):
I think that's on the table andthat's where we're going. But it's
going to be one of the laterit's the dessert. It's the nice tart
at the end of the long disclosuredinner. Right. It's like, we
have a Woo list, and whatyou're saying is kind of like things that
used to be considered a little woofactor, like even deja vou like anymore,

(01:38:10):
like a rap song about this toget it's not even on the moon
list anymore. That's just kind oftop ten. It's like now we call
it a glitch in the matrix.It's just a glitch in the matrix that
reminds men. Never answered your lastquestion about the matrix, which I will

(01:38:31):
probably not answered because I don't knowenough about it, but I did just
come to the realization that if anyof this is going to happen, there's
there's mouthpieces, right like Tom DeLong, the Woo is gonna have to be
the Woo tank clam. We needmore. I'm serious. I'm serious about

(01:38:55):
this because we need people to reacheverybody. You know, that's true,
and there's you know, Tom Delong'sgot a following, He's only reaching certain
people. When you think about theentire global population. So, and I'm
not saying everybody should just be anartist of some sort appened. I've loved
the Woutang clamp sun On concert threetimes, so when you say Woo,
I say Wu Tang. But Ido think that it's gonna take that same

(01:39:17):
sort of Tom DeLong model spread acrossor maybe not. Actually, maybe we
don't need everybody to be on board. Maybe there is a division that's supposed
to happen where we don't have TravisTritt trying to give disclosure, you know,
or I'm just pulling names out ofmy head right right, But maybe
it doesn't have to be everybody involved. Maybe there is something happening where there's

(01:39:41):
a little a split. You know, you're paying attention or you're not.
And I've heard this a lot overthe last couple of weeks, like people
passionately saying it like are you payingattention? I almost feel like we feel
like there's a split. I don'tknow what do you guys think about that?
Well, Michael, I want toask you about ac Semian about you
know, there's really this like theywere saying in even the meetings, the

(01:40:05):
congressional hearing meetings that it's science andengineering need to get involved in this subject
as well. And so I knowyou're involved in that, but you know,
what about the research that's going on. It used to be such a
stigma that you couldn't you know,your tenure might be, you know,

(01:40:26):
at risk if you talked about UFOsor did any research on it, or
could you get funds to do research? And and you with you being in
that kind of role, is theremore awareness happening in our in our universities,
our education system, and what aboutscience and engineering? I think science
and engineering at this point, ifwe were talking about crash retrievals and back

(01:40:50):
engineering is completely irrelevant because we've alreadyhad science material scientists specifically engineers, mechanical
engineers, electrical engineers, probably alot of physicists already doing this trying to
figure out what these things are andhow they work. So anybody to try
to jump into it now is probablyseventy to ninety years behind. So I

(01:41:14):
don't think that that's important at all. There are other aspects of this phenomenon
that are unknown that might be importantand maybe they could contribute something. Yes,
the stigmas, definitely, Waned.I have benefited from that tremendously,
especially recently. Like I mentioned,I think in my second book, I'll

(01:41:41):
the chair of my department when Iasked him about this, you know,
I was like, Hey, I'mthinking about publishing this book, and he
was like, yeah, you should. This is exactly what we should be
doing as scientists. And I've calledout a lot of scientists over the years
who aren't, who don't care,or who turn a blind eye, who

(01:42:03):
have that near jerk reaction. I'vetalked about the manufactured stigma and how we
were used to try to make itall about swamp gas and weather balloons for
so long, and we've definitely divided. A part of our role is to
divide and conquers. People trusted scientists, and then we started trusting ourselves.
And I think now we're starting torealize that we were forced out of the

(01:42:24):
conversation across a Project bluebook, ProjectGrudge, and everything else that happened.
So I'd like to circle back tomy question to you that nobody ever answered.
Do you feel like there is there'sa split? Okay, there's people
are paying attention because people are notpaying attention, trying hard not to pay

(01:42:45):
attention, and there's also people inthe middle or like which side where do
I go? You know? Isthat? Why does that exist? And
I'm asking not because I have ananswer, but I'm curious what you think.
Why is that? Is it justabout paying attention? Is there something
more happening. I think people arepaying more and more attention with these hearings

(01:43:09):
and the more it's on our newsnetworks. But what's interesting is, and
I've experienced this too, I thinkwhat happens is you have to absorb this
mind blowing information and little doses.And so, for example, I can
go to a presentation for Colorado moveOn and learn about how we have areas

(01:43:30):
four and how extraterrestrials absorb food throughtheir skin and all of this kind of
mind blowing information. And yes it'sanecdotal, we don't have proof of this,
but whatever. But at the sametime, at the end of that
two hour session, I still haveto go and do real world things.
You still have to do your job, take care of your families, worry

(01:43:53):
about your careers, and pick upmedication and creamer for your coffee, and
make dinner. And I just thinkpeople don't know what to do with the
information. I don't think it's necessarilythat they're not paying attention. What do
we do with the information once wehave it? Yeah, it's cognitive dissidents,
ontological shock. Shane, What doyou think about it? Well,

(01:44:14):
I do think that well, thiswill get a little complex. But maybe
from like a political science or socialperspective, look at look at humanity today,
right, and you could you couldsay there are I don't mean this
to sound political, but I meanyou have kind of two camps. You
have you have the spectrum of peoplethat are left and right right, you

(01:44:38):
know, more liberal and more conservantive. That happens in every nation on earth,
right, So clearly there's there's somedivergence in the ways people think and
the things that they value. Right, And that's just one example. There
could be one hundred hundred other examples. And what I think is that people,

(01:45:03):
what you know, our society inthe world is different today than it
was at any other time. Imean, we truly are changing in a
lot of ways. Maybe it ispart of the evolutionary process, but with
with what we are being kind ofbombarded with now, and it's just not

(01:45:25):
just ufology, but just anything thatthere is a sort of a tusure word
bifurcation of humanity and people. Andthere are people who are you know,
excluding things like psychopathy and things likethat. You know people, there are
more people who are more aware oflet's say, the consciousness side or the

(01:45:46):
empathetic side, and you know,relation side, and then there are other
people that that just seem very detachedfrom that, that kind of feeling and
thinking. And so, whether whetherit's ufology doing this or just our own
natural revolution evolution, there seems tobe a separating of people or of thinking

(01:46:12):
or ideas. And I don't knowif it's related to it or not,
but I mean just my point beingthat that you know, if you look
at humanity, there there are changes, There are things happening, and you
know, you can you can seeit. You can see it in people's
behaviors and the things that they have. I completely agree. That's kind of

(01:46:34):
why I asked the question because that'swhat I've seen too, but didn't want
to just say that. And ifyou think about progressive looking toward the future,
conservative looking towards the past, Ithink we're at a point right now
where we have to sort of decidewhether we're looking towards the future or looking

(01:46:54):
toward the past, and we've alwaysbeen here, but in a political realm,
not in a reality real not thatthis might be an aspect of our
upcoming reality where we choose to lookforward or look back. And it seems
like UFOs. Yeah, I agree. I don't think it's what's causing it,
but I think it's definitely something that'sdriving the wedge deeper, so to

(01:47:17):
speak. I'm of the belief Imean, first of all, this topic
is bipartisan and should be. Andsecondly, I think that division you guys
are talking about is by design.I think. I mean, it's been
my experience that we are being fedthrough mostly I hate to say it,
but mostly media right and other outletsthis division. And I have found personally

(01:47:45):
that if I go sit at atable at a conference, or sit among
friends or with you, and Ijust have a heart to heart conversation about
what we really value as humans,You're going to find that division that we
all think is out there really isthis. It's so much closer. And
I can have a judgment about somebodywho I think is this way or that
way, but when you really justhave a heart to heart, you will

(01:48:09):
find you have most things in common. Well, I really believe the division
is by divine and maybe that speaksto et and what's going to happen,
and I think it does. Yeah, I think this the fact that we
saw Matt Gates and AOC sitting nextto each other asking very informed questions where
they were clearly briefed on what washappening to be able to even ask those

(01:48:30):
questions because neither of them have probablypaid attention to this as much as we
have over the last ninety years,because obviously none of us were alive or
that long either. But no,like this is the thing is that there's
not a political element to this.That's not what I was saying. I
was talking about future looking versus pastlooking. And yes, we do tend

(01:48:55):
to clump into groups around that asa whole. But it's not Republican,
it's not Democrat, it's not independentor many of the other parties we should
have that we don't in this country. It's about this thing that transcends all
of that. It should translate nations, and I think it's going to it's
going to translate nations. The bipartisanrelationships or at least communion that we saw

(01:49:21):
on Capitol Hill recently with this talk, I think it's gonna start to trickle
into other nations too. I thinkit has to, because this is a
human thing, this is not justthis isn't a political thing, and all
these petty squabbles we've had in thepolitical realm are just going to fade away.
I think they have to. Yeah, I agreed. Yeah, Michael

(01:49:44):
kind of changed the subject a littlebit. But in one of your books
you talk about the electromagnetic anomalies andthe correlation with UFO events, and I'm
wondering if there's any science or anythingthat you know now now that would it
makes sense that if we were comingback, that we would go to where
these electromatic field, electro magnetic fieldsand our Earth are. Would we be

(01:50:09):
focusing on certain sites around the planetthat might actually have had sightings for over
two hundred years. Probably, Well, that's a great question. I don't
know. I mean, if there'ssome aspect of our Earth that requires that,
then absolutely, if they're able tojust I do strongly think that they

(01:50:33):
use the electro magnetic force to operatethese arguably time machines for a few different
reasons that I talk about in bothbooks, one having to do with the
fact to the fact that the electromagneticforce is ten of the forty times stronger

(01:50:54):
than gravity. So if you're goingto look for a force that can make
you have anti gravity capabilities, andclearly that's a good candidate. Do they
need anything on Earth? Do theyneed a place that has anomalies to actually
enter? I don't. I don'tknow, and there's no way I could

(01:51:14):
know. I guess, but maybe, I mean that could help explain things
like Skinwalker Ranch or the ranch whereKatie lived, or Chris Bledsoe's ranch.
I mean, maybe there's aspects aboutthe electromagnetism there, But I guess my
gut tells me no, my gutsays there they are in control of this

(01:51:35):
technology and they don't have to justdo that. Maybe there's places where it's
easier. What's what's her name?Cheryl Costa and and her partner looked at
a number of different places and foundthat there are there are correlates there,
there's a there, and maybe thathas something to do with it, But

(01:51:57):
I don't know. I would liketo think that if we're that advanced,
we're just going to be able todip in and dip out wherever the hell
we want, without regard to what'shappening on Earth at any time. But
I don't know that's cool. Yeah, not to mention the cows. We
didn't even talk about cow of mutilations. More should what if they do?

(01:52:24):
If they you know what I thinkmaybe maybe they were looking like we need
a biological sample. Well, theyeat cows. That's actually the main food
source for this people. These peopleat this time, we don't want to
kill anything, but if we gotto kill something, might as well be
this. And it's it's real.It's very real what they're doing to the
cows. Yeah, and other animalsas well. But and possibly, I

(01:52:47):
mean I just didn't so so probablytalked about human mutilations, talk about friend
or foe. I mean, youknow, that's going to be a super
interesting theme for this year. Sposedthis. There might even be a couple
might even come to this to cuff. Oh. I know, I'm just
thinking that in my mind. Canyou imagine sitting around lunch and dinner having

(01:53:10):
this. I mean, this isgoing to be the topic I think of
the whole weekend. No, I'mglad they're doing it. I think it's
great. It's a really important question. And yeah, there's there's no right
answer, and it also depends onwhat your interaction is. Who they are,
where they come from, when theycome from. But we're all gonna
be We're not gonna be talking pasteach other when we talk about the same

(01:53:31):
thing, but hopefully coming to somesort of agreement. And yeah, I
can't wait. I think it'll bea really fun conference. Yeah. I
think when you try to put humanmotives on on other species, it's very
difficult to do that. We don'tknow, I mean even for us,

(01:53:51):
what we consider good and bad isjust our perspective. Thing. That's a
big part of my talk is howdo we define this? We look at
what we do to other animals too, and a research capacity and yeah,
there's a lot of questions. Ithink it's gonna come up, and it
should. It's something we should allbe talking about. So I'm really glad
that they're structuring this conference around that. I can't wait. I'm so glad

(01:54:14):
that you all be there, exceptfor you, Shane, you stuck.
Yeah, what the heck man?What the heck man? I thought we
were thought we were friends. Comeout from my talk all the way across
a ride on my horse. Iknow it's three flights for me, three
flights and I know and in themorning, I know we only have a

(01:54:39):
couple of minutes left. But Shanejust mentioned his horse and that just made
me think. So I'm thinking,Okay, we possibly evolve into the grays
and other do our do the animalsalso involved? I mean the do the
lions and the horses? Do theylook strange too? Not that he did
you look strange, but to me, you do you know, do they

(01:55:00):
evolve like that as well? Areyou asking me? Mike? Mike,
Mike, Yeah, you gave meone minute to ask that. Yeah,
go now, I'll answer that nexttime. I'll answer that in Cincinnati.
O clip, give you the firstquestion and then Q and I. After
much I'll be the plans in theaudience, Tiger and Lyon. That's awesome.

(01:55:29):
No, that's an interesting question.All right now everybody has to come
to the symposium, so they keepgoing answer to that question. Oh my
gosh, well, doctor Mike Masters, it's been I went formal again because
it's the end of the show.But it's been a pleasure having you on
and I'm so glad we stagged youand I didn't even get to the clip.
You send a little video clip ofa program you just did in another

(01:55:51):
language, and I had to givegold. I put the close caption it's
all in Russian. I put theclose captions on. It was it was
fast. See that, that's sofunny. I'm gonna go watch it because
I was just like, yeah,I have no idea what they're talking about.
Yeah, put the close captioning onfuture technology. Well, thank you

(01:56:18):
for being here. Thank you toour listeners. Shane, it's a pleasure
to have you on the show.Next week we feature another yeah, another
speaker from the Move On Symposium,which is Mike Clelland and he's fascinating his
research on the owls and his friendor foe will be a great discussion with
him as well. So I hopeto see you next Tuesday night, Tara,

(01:56:40):
thank you, Thank you to Billsky Watch our Louis. We will
see you all next Tuesday night.And move on. What's up? Don't
forget to report your what's up?Report him to move on and have a
great night everybody. Bye bye,