Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Stanford's doctor Gary Nolan just revealed why he didn want
to analyze those controversial tridactyl mommies from Peru while simultaneously
making breakthrough discoveries about consciousness as an interface with non
human intelligence. These are two completely different research tracks that
are reshaping our understanding of the phenomenon. Today, we're breaking
(00:22):
down two major interviews from this week, where Nolan discusses
his separate investigations, the scientific problems with the tridactyl specimen
analysis and his groundbreaking consciousness interface research. As always, you
can find the sources in my detailed articles at ufoews
dot co along within the description box below. Hey followers,
I'm Christina Gomez and welcome to this episode of UFO
(00:44):
News Updates.
Speaker 2 (00:45):
Now. One of the things that I found interesting were
the fingerprints that seem to be of a different character
than you would expect from human or monkey. So if
we were considering if these things were constructed, you know,
or hoaxed, the fact that they have fingerprints is interesting.
Speaker 1 (01:11):
Doctor Nolan's analysis of the Peruvian tridactal specimens focused purely
on biological and forensic science. While speaking with Vinnie Adams
on his show, disclosure team, he identified specific anomalies that
caught his scientific attention, fingerprints that don't match human or
known primate characteristics. However, Nolan makes clear distinctions about these specimens.
(01:36):
Some are obviously constructed, while others showed genuine age through
carbon dating. And let me provide a little bit of
important context here. I recently spoke with the research team
from Peru and they clarified a crucial detail about this
particular controversy. The Peruvian Ministry of Culture confiscated what they
determined were constructed dolls from an airport shipment. However, ministry
(02:00):
then used these confiscated dolls to make a broader claim,
arguing that because these particular specimens were fake, all the
bodies in the research team's possessions must also be fraudulent.
And this represents a significant logical leap that the research
team is now challenging through an active lawsuit. The team
(02:21):
maintains that the confiscated dolls are separate from the overall
larger specimens that have undergone extensive analysis. And I've covered
this entire controversy in detail through my Nasca body series
and interviews on my channel, and I will link that
playlist in the description box below for anyone wanting the
(02:42):
full background on the entire situation. When it comes to
genetic explanations, no one explained that single mutilations like the
polydactyl can't account for the complex anonomical features observed. As
you noted, evolution doesn't work quite like that. Genetic modifications
across the genome would be required, making this a much
(03:04):
more complex biological question than simple finger count variations, which
biologist Ricardo Ranguel goes into detail on that specifically on
the body Maria, which has now been explained is actually
a male instead of a female.
Speaker 2 (03:20):
You can't do good science in under the public glare
because people who want results and updates every week or
every other week, what they're doing is risking putting under
duress the people who are trying to give the information.
(03:43):
Because you'll give information, you say I think it might
be this, and then a week later you might think
something different, but it's too late because the Daily Mail
has already said Stanford Scientist sequences Alien Day. So people
asked I saw in your thread many times, you know,
(04:06):
have I been asked to study the mummy? The mummies?
And yes, I mean I probably a few dozen times,
and by various people, but by serious people able to
actually enact an outcome with the mummies or with money
(04:27):
behind it. The first time I was asked, one of
the requirements was that I would every moment would be filmed,
and I said, no, I'm not going to be filled.
And this is not the Kardashians, that's not science is done.
My students certainly wouldn't put up with it, and Stanford
(04:50):
wouldn't allow it.
Speaker 1 (04:51):
That is the explanation as to why Nolan declined to
analyze the specimens. Nolan estimated five million dollars would be
needed for proper analysis, funding multiple research teams, ensuring appropriate controls,
and preparing for peer reviewed publication, and he suggests that
competent scientists in South America could settle the matter in
(05:13):
one or two years, but they need proper resources and
protection from media pressure. Now completely separate from the tridactal specimens,
Nolan has been conducting brain imaging studies of UAP witnesses,
and this research emerged from his work with the Pentagon
analyzing individuals who reported health effects about UAP encounters.
Speaker 2 (05:37):
The majority of the receiver aspects of human interaction with
these whatever they are, alleged joy image and entities involve
meditative states or frankly, psychedelic drugs that change how your
(05:57):
brain functions, and the skeptic, the real skeptic, not the
ones that tweet NonStop, would say all of that's because
they're hallucinating getting their own drugs, or the scientist would
say it allows you to access alternative states of consciousness.
Speaker 1 (06:19):
As documented in his previous Stanford research and mentioned on
the Lito files, this consciousness research focuses on measurable brain
state changes during alleged encounters, and Nolan's data shows consistent
patterns involving suppression of the default mode network, essentially the
brain sense of self, and when this network is suppressed
(06:41):
through meditation, psychedelics, or other means, individuals report accessing different
states of awareness. Which approach do you think is more
valuable traditional forensic analysis of physical specimens or brain imaging
studies of witnesses. Let me know your thoughts in the
comments below.
Speaker 2 (06:59):
And so, suddenly, having backed myself into this corner, AI
pops up, which now enables me to look at all
of this data with truly superhuman capability and contextualize the
data phony. So I actually now have on my shoulder
both the devil and the Angel of AI that can
(07:21):
whisper in my ear and help me understand what the
data means. But they are the same as colleague extra colleagues,
YT Institute Z or Alpha, who I have to listen
to what they are telling me and I try to
put it all together into a picture that makes sense.
But now I don't have to make those phone calls
(07:43):
or be friends with that person on the other side
of the planet who's the expert in this, because the
expert now is the AI.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
AI is revolutionizing both areas of Nolan's research. For consciousness research,
AI helps analyze complex brain image data sets for material analysis.
It enables processing of massive spectral data that was previously
beyond human capabilities. His brain imaging studies reveal that individuals
(08:10):
with certain genetic variants may have enhanced sensitivity to electromagnetic
fields or other environmental factors, and his research implies that
developing human consciousness capabilities could be crucial for future contact scenarios.
If consciousness truly serves as an interface mechanism, then understanding
(08:30):
and training these abilities becomes essential for humanity's development. Meanwhile,
his materials and specimen analysis focuses on determining whether physical
evidence represents genuinely anomalist biology or technology, and these forensic
questions require traditional scientific methods, proper funding, and protection from
(08:53):
media sensationalism. Doctor Nolan's work demonstrates how serious UAP research
requires multiple distinct approaches operating simultaneously. The key insights is
that breakthrough understanding may come from consciousness research rather than
physical artifacts or vice versa. Do you think consciousness based
(09:15):
research or physical evidence analysis is more likely to provide
breakthrough insights into the UFO phenomena and should these investigations
remain separate or be integrated? Leave your thoughts in the
comments below. I'm Christina Gomez and that is it for today.
I will see you next time. Be safe and remember
(09:36):
keep your eyes on the skies. If you enjoyed today's show,
(09:57):
hit that like button and if you're not subscribed, what
are you waiting for? Hit notification bell as I do.
Daily UFO news and updates, fresh VAP stories, government disclosures,
and breaking developments land here every single day.