September 16, 2025 • 67 mins
Travis Walton and Jennifer Stein discuss new perspectives on the the 1975 Turkey Springs UFO encounter and alleged alien abduction. We addressed misinformation and how to reveal the dishonest debunker. The Walton case remains one of the best civilian UFO cases. It has stood the test of time against decades of scrutiny. It was also revealed that Travis is working on a script for a possible new film to betray Travis' and the seven loggers experience. Stein is the director of the documentary, TRAVIS: THE TRUE STORY OF TRAVIS WALTON. Jennifer and Travis will be hosting the upcoming Sky Fire Summit this October 17 through the 20th. To learn more visit: https://sedonamufon.org/skyfire-summit/
☕️Please subscribe help the channel grow.
SUBSCRIBE, like, comment, and click the YouTube Notification Bell so you don’t miss a show. Thank you! https://www.youtube.com/mysticlounge
Please review and rate Coffee & UFOs wherever you listen to podcasts
HALF LIGHT documentary: https://tubitv.com/movies/678744/half-light
☕️Please subscribe help the channel grow.
SUBSCRIBE, like, comment, and click the YouTube Notification Bell so you don’t miss a show. Thank you! https://www.youtube.com/mysticlounge
Please review and rate Coffee & UFOs wherever you listen to podcasts
HALF LIGHT documentary: https://tubitv.com/movies/678744/half-light
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
Welcome back to coffee and UFOs. This is Alan B. Smith.
You're a grateful host. We have two great guests today.
We have Travis Walton and Jennifer Stein joining us. It's
been fifty years since the famous Turkey Springs UFO encounter
and abduction or alleged abduction, and we're gonna talk to
(00:34):
Travis and Jennifer about that to find out, you know,
in retrospect, where are we what has changed? Has your
perception of the encounter altered in any way? And where
are we going? Actually, you might think that fifty years
is a long time to study a subject and to
scrutinize it, to challenge it. And even though it's withstood
(01:00):
the test of the most ardent or even let's say
dishonest skepticism, the skeptics still keep coming at it. And
I don't want to spend too much time on skepticism
because I know that Travis gets inundated with these questions
all the time. But we will touch on it in
just a moment, as well as so many other aspects. Jennifer, Travis, welcome,
(01:21):
Thank you. So Jennifer, tell us a little bit about
the upcoming event. Very briefly, and then we'll talk more
about the actual case.
Speaker 2 (01:30):
Sure, I'll be happy to.
Speaker 3 (01:32):
So we're celebrating the fiftieth anniversary and honoring Travis. It'll
be a four day conference. We're doing actually several events,
and if people who are listening want to know the
full perspective and to review this, they can go to
Sedona mofon dot org. Of course, moofon stands for the
Mutual UFO Network, so it's mufon, So sedonamoffon dot org.
(01:56):
And the name of the conference is called the Skyfire Summit,
so right, And it begins on October Friday night, October seventeenth,
so almost one month from about now, and it'll go
Friday night, all day Saturday, half a day Sunday, and
half a day Monday. So people have time to kind
(02:16):
of do some other things while they're in Codona and
have time to visit with Travis. We have a couple
of we have one nice dinner group where we're all
going to gather if people want to sign up and
come to that, but they don't have to, and it
should be really fun. And then on the actual anniversary,
we're screening the film Travis The True Story Travis Walton
(02:36):
at the Sedona Film Festival with a three pm and
a five pm encounter, and already knows people coming in
from like many states just to come to that because
they can't.
Speaker 2 (02:47):
Come to the conference.
Speaker 3 (02:48):
And then the eighth of November we're doing something in Phoenix.
Speaker 2 (02:52):
With Phoenix Move on.
Speaker 1 (02:53):
You've got a lot going on, but rightly so, because
it's been fifty fifty years, and so we should really,
you know, take the time to appreciate that. And by
the film, you mean your documentary, correct, Travis, the true
story right that is, in my opinion, hands down lead
the best documentary, the most comprehensive on the subject. And
(03:14):
I really appreciate that. So, Travis, it's been fifty years.
Do you appreciate how other people see what you did
as something truly significant, really an important act for you?
Speaker 4 (03:32):
And the other Definitely, I value the vastly increased acceptance.
At the same time, I welcome the skeptics because usually
they've got nothing to stand on and they don't even
know the facts. So the opportunity to give them a
few facts, it's a lot better than this sort of
(03:58):
unspoken skepticism that's just ignorant, you know.
Speaker 1 (04:03):
Yeah, well, I was just talking to Jennifer about.
Speaker 4 (04:05):
That on say It.
Speaker 1 (04:08):
Yeah, well, I was just talking to Jennifer about that too.
That some people say, uh, you know, just let them be,
ignore the debunkers, ignore the naysayers, and I say, no,
you can't, because they win these little battles and they
convince people along the way that this is something that
is untrue or absurd or doesn't have any legitimate evidence.
(04:32):
And if you don't go out there, and if you
don't take the time to counter it, you're losing that
many more, that many more minds, And sadly, a lot
of those people will just parrot, you know, what the
the skeptics are saying or the debunkers are saying, and that.
Speaker 4 (04:47):
You know, and they don't know that the skeptics have
been discredited. The current skeptic, you know, told blatant lie
in order to deceive Mike about the things that I
had some he said, but I had recorded the conversation
could prove he was lying, and my main detractor, it
(05:09):
came out, had been exposed. Some other researchers dug in
and found out that he had been investigated by the
FBI quite thoroughly. There's like thirty pages of investigation that
they had. You know, basically he discreditated himself because he
(05:31):
was being accused by the FBI of giving classified information
to our enemies. Editor of Aviation Week in Space Technology,
the guy was under great suspicion. Lots of pages of interviews.
(05:57):
I'd love to see what's under those blacked out sections.
The Freedom of Information Act never gives you the whole thing,
you know, the third or fourth or sometimes three fourths
of the pages is all blacked out. But that was
Philip Class's legacy is to be exposed as being investigated
by the FBI, who turned that investigation over to the CIA.
Speaker 1 (06:23):
So Philip Class was accused of leaking secret confidential information.
Speaker 4 (06:32):
Yeah, at least I don't know what else was under
that blocked out parts of the record, but.
Speaker 1 (06:44):
That's a significant charge.
Speaker 4 (06:48):
It's there for anybody to get. I didn't apply through
the Freedom of Information Act to get that file, but
anybody can get it and see that what I'm saying
is true.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
Where are the files that are they publicized online where
anyone can look at them.
Speaker 4 (07:06):
I forget the lady's name. I think it was a
lady who downloaded that and sent me a coffee.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
Yeah, there's a fellow also Greenberg, John Greenberg, I think
has Black Vault.
Speaker 2 (07:19):
He has a lot of information up. You could google
there and look there.
Speaker 4 (07:23):
What I need to do is just make copies of
it and send it out to a few people, let
them distribute.
Speaker 1 (07:29):
Yeah, okay, yeah, I'm going to go look that up.
I'd really like to see those files.
Speaker 3 (07:34):
What's interesting, I think is that when someone is under
investigation like that, they could maybe more easily be manipulated.
And it seems to me that Philip was manipulated because
I've gone in and read his files at the American
Philosophical Society, and you can see the car who he
corresponded with closely, who he was friends with, and it
(07:58):
was people who like Donald men who was the head
of astronomy at Harvard, and Richard Condon was his name,
Richard Condon who did the Condon Report from the University
of Colorado. So when you see the people he was
cohorting with and communicating with and in a like mind with,
and the types of semi professional organizations he was involved with,
(08:25):
it's clear that he was being paid to debunk all
UFO subjects and he went after many.
Speaker 2 (08:31):
Cases besides Travis's, Like, you know.
Speaker 4 (08:35):
One thing I have to keep bringing up and pointing
out is that even though he devoted parts of several books,
hours and hours of badgering interviews with the other guys
on my crew, not a word to me. He never
bothered to call me one time.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
Well two things. I well in regard to that, Travis,
so Jen, But what you're saying is interesting depending on
the date of when the FBI initially investigated him, that
could be very telling. Because Philip Class just was irrationally
trying to debunk. It was like an obsession beyond reason.
(09:16):
So there seemed like there was an external force pushing
him to debunk. And so if that's the case, that
that he got caught by the FBI and they coerced
him into doing that, or you know, made a deal, whatever.
Speaker 4 (09:27):
Well, he made a fool of himself from a Larry
King show screaming Mike Roger here. I mean, you know,
that's what does that do for his credibility? You know,
not much? Right at Mike Rogers over there talking to
the host, but not a word to me even even.
Speaker 3 (09:50):
Still, and that's on YouTube, So any of your listening
sure can go look it up Larry King Live with
Mike Rogers and Travis Walton. I think it was nineteen
ninety t or nineteen two something like that. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (10:03):
Well, you know, just recently Steve Pierce was about a
week and a half ago or two weeks ago. He
was interviewed by Margie k who owns the ONEX Network,
which this podcast is rebroadcast on. And there's a couple
of things that Steve said that I thought was interesting,
and this kind of ties into the debunker Ryan Gordon
when in terms of how people speak and how people
(10:25):
phrase phrase things. But you know, he he did reconfirm,
you know that class was calling him over and over
again trying to get him to accept ten thousand dollars
to say it was a hoax, and he said that
he spoke to his wife and his wife was like, well,
and He's like it's not true. She's like that, I
don't want to spend the money.
Speaker 4 (10:45):
You know.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
So over the years people have tried to I think
twist Steve Pearce's words, just like they've done with Mike Rogers,
you know, because he said also said on the podcast,
he said that during the five days, Travis that you
were missing after the abduction. He said that your brother
Dwayne would quote knock people over just to get in
(11:07):
front of the camera. Everyone else would be running away
and he'd be running towards the camera. Now, now, if
I were a debunker, I would take that and I
would out of context and I would use that and
to to say, look, this is what he's saying that
it was all about the attention Dwayne was in on
the conspiracy to fake a UFO. But that's not what
(11:28):
Steve was saying. He was just that was just Steve's
way of being like, this is what I observed, whether
right or wrong.
Speaker 4 (11:34):
You know, they was aggressive towards people who expressed critical
opinions without any information to base it on. So you're
going to say that, I'm going to say this, you know,
he's a very forceful personality. But Steve also said he
(11:56):
never knocked anybody over, that's for sure.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Yeah, I think literally right. But it was in the
same interview he also said regarding the UFO that you
all saw, he said, this is true. This is the
gospel truth. This is what I saw. No matter how
people try to twist what people. You know, all of
you have said over the years all have have reiterated
(12:22):
the fact that no, this is this is a true story,
This is what happened. Travis. Why do you think, why
do you think people have a really hard time at
least accepting the idea that this could have happened.
Speaker 4 (12:36):
Well, it's kind of strange people. You know, they've become
accustomed living in a tiny universe. They don't understand the
size of the universe. Just basic astronomy tells you that
their idea that humans are the only life in the
in the cosmos is just outrageously unlikely. That that's the
(13:01):
preposterous claim that humans are the only living thing out here.
And all those trillions of stars, those billions of galaxy
literally millions, I mean they the refined telescope, they pointed
it at the emptiest spot in the sky and saw
literally hundreds of galaxies, not just stars, galaxies like the
(13:25):
Milky Way with thousands and thousands of stars and so
and many of them vastly older than us. What we
see in the night sky is light that was emitted
years ago. If the entire universe had been destroyed and
swept away, we wouldn't know it for years, because it
(13:51):
takes that long for the light to get here.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
When you were on board this object, you saw these
kind of humanoid like creatures. Does that cause you to
fall more into the camp of panspermia that that genetic
DNA is that we have is somewhat common.
Speaker 4 (14:14):
No, Actually, it's more likely that there's something similar to
what's called parallel evolution. You know, we have the flying
squirrel here, which is a mammal in the United States,
and then in Australia they have the what they call it,
it's it's a similar creature, but it's a marsupial. Many
(14:37):
examples like that the Dasmanian tiger look so Tasmanian wolf
resembles a wolf, but yet it is a marsupial, so
completely divergent line going back millions of years, and yet
resembles in behavior and formation and everything just so much
(15:03):
like a wolf.
Speaker 1 (15:04):
Yeah, that you would have like bilateralism and other kind
of like similar traits and characteristics. That that makes sense
under similar environments. And and we could see in so
many planets now have we know that there's some water
planets out there, you know, there's rocky planets out there,
and if they have similar conditions, it would make sense
that whatever you know where where DNA starts as these
(15:29):
nucleic acids, and then they evolve into more complex proteins
that under the pressures of that environment, you know, it
would make sense. You need eyes, you need symmetry. These
are all things we see throughout nature.
Speaker 4 (15:40):
And the Drake equation is an old astronomical formula do
you estimate the number of possible life supporting planets in
the universe. And they have had to vastly upgrade the
results of that equation because the conclusion of astronomers is
(16:07):
virtually every star has about a dozen planets. Back back
before that, they thought maybe that even to have planets
around going around a star was had a certain low
level of likelihood, and they based their numbers in the
equation on that. But you might wonder, how do they
(16:30):
know that it is so much more likely now? Well,
they developed a technique to detect planets going around stars
that they cannot see. When a planet would orbit that
star and pass between us and the star, there would
be a momentary percentage of dip in the light emitted
(16:55):
reaching us from that star, and it was at uniform intervals.
They were able to sort this out and actually know
the time of the orbit of of that particular planet
going around that star.
Speaker 1 (17:10):
Yeah, well a question I'm just gonna shift here for
a moment from KM. Does Travis ever have PTST type feelings?
Now we know we know, Travis, you've spoken of that
in the past. Or has time eased the sensitions?
Speaker 4 (17:27):
Both, it has eased it. And you know, I'm surprised
at my reaction to some close sightings.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
So you you.
Speaker 4 (17:38):
Thought I've gotten over it, But but.
Speaker 1 (17:43):
What what what triggers it? Experienced?
Speaker 4 (17:45):
Dreams, just uh, post traumatic stress? I guess you know
that I buried in my mind and not I thought
about consciously. My conscious mind is you know, Okay, this
is not the terrifying thing that I thought it was,
(18:07):
which is a logical, rational ordering of what I've seen,
But mine still goes back to the original trauma.
Speaker 1 (18:18):
Yeah. That's the thing with trauma or any kind of
you know, subconscious you know, you know, effects of programming
and even habits. It's like you can rationally know that
that I shouldn't feel this way, or there's no need
to feel this way or to behave this way, and
yet it continues. Do you do you do anything? Do
you meditate? Do you know anything to help it?
Speaker 4 (18:41):
I work, I bury myself in activities that have nothing
to do.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
With fair enough. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (18:50):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (18:50):
Do you do you ever regret you? Do you regret
you know, coming out and or do you feel like
it was worthwhile?
Speaker 4 (18:56):
I regret getting out of that truck. Sure, absolutely, And
I wrestled with the idea of just shut up and
go away, let them think what they want, you know,
they'll forget about it.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (19:11):
I think a really important point that people need to
remember about Travis and all the boys in this crew.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
They never had a choice Salen of coming forward.
Speaker 3 (19:20):
I mean, Travis was suspected of hiding and deceiving the
police and disappearing, right. Nobody believed what really happened, so
as soon as he reappeared, I mean, the attention was
on him, and then the boys and the crew were
accused of murdering him, so they couldn't be secret either.
I mean when it broke in the news, people need
to remember this broke as a possible homicide story, a
(19:44):
UFO story, and a missing person story, like all three together,
and people were like, what you know, why right?
Speaker 1 (19:52):
And not one of the other six sawyers under police
questioning when they were suspected of covering up a murder. Okay, okay, okay,
find it's a hook. It's a hoax, a hook like
no one did that.
Speaker 3 (20:03):
And because because they were so suspected of murdering Travis,
they underwent these lide detection tests, which.
Speaker 2 (20:11):
Never ever happens in the UFO case.
Speaker 3 (20:15):
I mean to have that overlaying with this, it's like
the evidence just piles up right, a.
Speaker 4 (20:22):
Mind administered by state police. But you know, there were
physical traces at the site that were largely ignored, and
you know, a lot of evidence just they just looked
the other way and said, well never mind.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
Yeah, well there's another thing again.
Speaker 4 (20:38):
They'd rather not believe. They'll find a way to justify it.
Speaker 1 (20:41):
Yeah, of course. Of course. Another thing that Steve Pierce
said was that he has some singular question that he
wants to ask you under under the polygraph exam. Uh,
but he's he says it has to be a surprise
question because that's the only way to know if your
answer is true or false. And I have to comment
(21:05):
on that that that's not how polygraph exams we.
Speaker 4 (21:10):
Yeah, no, that's that's the problem. If they were to
successfully put questions in there that were surprising or might
anger me, that might register is a deception when it's
not that at all. And there's there are lots of
polygraph supposed pretenders, like a TV show I was on
(21:34):
once it was just totally absolutely violating every rule of calligraphy.
But the ones that I and the crew took more
than once were from law enforcement to state police. The
subsequent tests I took were were from people that tested
(21:55):
the people for the FBI and CIA at very.
Speaker 1 (21:58):
High level was a firm out of Pennsylvania.
Speaker 3 (22:01):
I think, well, there was a firm that made comments
about it out of New York valuated some of the
polygraph tests that were done.
Speaker 4 (22:11):
Yes, the Global Polygraph are the ones that declared this
fraudulent TV show to be fraudulent, and they basically went
out of business. They were being sued by another woman
that was falsely represented on the show as having cheated
on her husband, and so they had to be facing
(22:35):
a lawsuit from her.
Speaker 1 (22:37):
So, Chris, can you tell us a little bit about
that that that period right after your return, I know
you and your brother were trying to get some kind
of medical attention. Can you can you clarify who who
you first met up with that was supposed to give
provide medical attention.
Speaker 4 (22:59):
Well, the primary researchers in the field at that time
was APRO, the Aero Phenomena Research Organization, the oldest largest organization.
They had many legitimate scientists in their membership and legitimate
(23:22):
academic credentials. The hypnosis I did from doctor Harder, the
tests that were rendered, like, for example, when I was
placed in for a brain scan, the technician was not
told who I was, so it was totally blinded. There
(23:44):
couldn't be any bias in favor of finding something unusual.
And this is Barrows Neurological, which is one of the
top brain trauma centers in the world, and they discovered
in an odd a wave pattern. I still have the report,
(24:13):
but I repeated the test later and that had gone away.
I don't know what that bisynchronous wave alternating from front
to back was, what that meant, and I I'd like
to look into and see what people today might interpret that,
(24:35):
but it disappeared by the time I did another MMR.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
Do you call it a bisynchronous wave?
Speaker 4 (24:42):
Pardon?
Speaker 1 (24:43):
Did you call it a bisynchronous wave?
Speaker 4 (24:46):
Yeah? Bye, I'm just quoting them. Bisynchronous wave alternating from
front to back. I'm quoting the technicians report.
Speaker 1 (24:56):
That's that's really interesting. I'm just writing it down as
a note because I definitely look into that. Uh, wasn't
it originally correctly, I'm wrong the Ground Saucer Watch that
that initially got involved.
Speaker 4 (25:11):
Yeah, a competitor for Apro.
Speaker 2 (25:14):
Yeah, both were involved, both.
Speaker 1 (25:17):
Had records, Oh of course, but Ground Spasiter watched. Were
they not there on the ground first before Apro? Or
was Apro there first?
Speaker 4 (25:26):
They they're probably all after hit the news, But Ground.
Speaker 3 (25:35):
Ground Saucer Watch was competitive with APRO and they wanted
to discredit APRO because they wanted the story. So there
was some When you read the documents, you can see
that there was some manipulation going on back and forth,
and they were being competitive and claiming they were the
ones that had the right information and everyone else was wrong,
(25:56):
which wasn't true.
Speaker 1 (25:58):
But were they resentful? I was when you started working
with the Lorenzens or Apro.
Speaker 4 (26:05):
Oh, certainly, and you know, very insulting and I got
a lot of totally unnecessary kinds of comments made. You know,
they actually did some unethical things and I can't recall
the details of that interaction, right now I could go
look it up. I was asked recently, you know who
(26:28):
have you been interviewed by that I would recognize somebody significant.
I don't collect that kind of information in my mind.
Speaker 1 (26:39):
Like a ufologist or media.
Speaker 4 (26:44):
Actually it was my doctor. This was during a medical exam.
But I could have said, well, Leonard Nomoy, dan Akroyd,
you know I was on his show. You know, his
show was being filmed. Studio was within walking distance of
(27:04):
the bombed out building. No, I mean we walked over
there and there was a just giant smoking crater in
the from nine to eleven.
Speaker 1 (27:18):
Okay, we have a question. Did you did you meet
Coral Lorenzen?
Speaker 4 (27:25):
Me?
Speaker 1 (27:26):
Yeah, you yeah, So that's the answer. That's fascinating. She
really is a legend in the field. What was your
impression of her when when you met her?
Speaker 4 (27:38):
Well, she was a driving force. Jim Lorensen looked the
part of the scientist, but so he was kind of
the front man for the organization. But she was pretty
(27:58):
intense personality.
Speaker 1 (28:01):
Okay, if you could go back in time, knowing what
you know more now about about science and the abilities
we have to test for things and technologies, if you
could go back in time now and apply certain tests
whatever that might be, to yourself, to the location. What
(28:22):
would you do to add to the data, Well.
Speaker 4 (28:26):
You know, I would will into repeat some of those
tests at the highest level, especially if my detractors were
willing to be tested themselves, because so many of them
resorted to falsehood and distortion in order to build their case.
Speaker 1 (28:45):
Of course. Yeah. And from my mind, I'm also thinking,
I'm wondering, perhaps you already this was already done, but
not to my knowledge, did anyone test for like ionizing radiation,
you know, anything electromagnetic anomal at the time.
Speaker 4 (29:00):
Yeah, there were things that were tested at the site
of that nature, all kinds of tests being run.
Speaker 2 (29:08):
Mike.
Speaker 3 (29:09):
Mike Rogers recounts that many times his interview that there.
Speaker 4 (29:13):
Was because he was there observing these tests. Of course
I wasn't nowhere around.
Speaker 1 (29:17):
But yeah, yeah, Mike said, there was a guy with
someone with a Geiger counter and other things.
Speaker 3 (29:23):
Okay, and when they tested the truck and they tested
the hard hats, it went off, you know, the radar
ratings went right way up because there was still evidence
of that on the truck and the hard hats.
Speaker 4 (29:37):
But the scientist or the operator of the machine gets
angry and stomps off because this was not what he
wanted to hear. Or you know, he just gave Mike
a suspicious look because you know, he had double radiation
level of background radiation on him.
Speaker 3 (29:59):
We're not were who those people were because they did
not identify themselves to the crew.
Speaker 4 (30:04):
There were people there here that were of.
Speaker 1 (30:13):
Unknown Sure, sure, well, I mean, gosh, it's it's it's
the open woods. I mean, I'm I'm sure so many
people got up there at the time and they I'm
sure they didn't really have it quarantined off the way
they should have did. Was that was that too early
for for APRO to have have been on site or
was that ap a part of those early walks into
(30:34):
the into the woods?
Speaker 3 (30:35):
And no, there was a gentleman and I interviewed him,
although he didn't make it into the total film, blanking
on his name at the moment, but he was part
of APRO and he was there as part of the search.
Speaker 2 (30:48):
Okay, so they were there.
Speaker 3 (30:50):
They did have a couple of representatives, but not that many.
I mean, Tucson is where the Lorenzens lived and Snowflake.
Speaker 2 (30:59):
Is about and a half to five hours away.
Speaker 3 (31:02):
So it wasn't an easy drive to go up there
for an afternoon, you know for sure.
Speaker 1 (31:08):
Yeah, Travis, good question here, do you still have the
clothing from the event.
Speaker 4 (31:15):
I My brother had the presence of mind. I guess
some of the researchers that told him to do this.
But as soon as I was returned, he had me
remove my clothing, put it in a new, clean plastic bag,
seal it up for later analysis. And that would have
been really important. But through that in the back of
(31:38):
the trunk and they got torn open, and the value
of that was dismissed. After that was never followed up on.
Speaker 1 (31:49):
You know, in the face of the answer is the
answer is no.
Speaker 4 (31:53):
Accusations just ridiculous.
Speaker 1 (31:56):
It would be interesting to have that, right, that would be.
Speaker 4 (32:01):
Well, the kinds of claims that were totally refuted still
didn't discredit the discreditors. You know, they said, oh, Travis
was never anywhere near there any phone booth. He was
hiding in the cabin with his mother, which is just
pure lies. Well, the sheriff was notified by the operator
(32:29):
listened in on my screams, and he dispatched deputies who
went to the phone booth, got there too late. Duyenne
had already rescued me, but they dusted for Prince. But
the operator was able to tell them where where I'd
made the call from, which was the middle phone in
(32:52):
those three phone booths. And a little interesting story on
that is that it became kind of a landmark. And
I was talking with a guy that worked for the
phone company there in the middle the middle phone was missing,
and I said, well, you know that was the middle one,
(33:13):
was the one I called on. He says, well, we
got another phone booth over there in the in the equipment. Shit,
I'll go get it. So we went over there and
got it and hooked it up, and when he opened
the coin box, all the money was pre nineteen seventy five,
so you know, could have been the same one.
Speaker 1 (33:33):
Interesting. Yeah, the thing with the clothing is what you
would like to be able to test for, is you know,
maybe residual you know, molecular changes due to you know,
because you were hit, you were hit by some kind
of energy that you know, emitted from this craft. So
you do wonder if there was some kind of you know,
(33:57):
atomic exchanges you know, that took place, maybe you could
test for at that level. Have you experienced. This is
from Catbrooks in chat. Have you experienced any sort of
scans that revealed that you had implants or any other
kind of alterations physically.
Speaker 4 (34:20):
I'd have to think about that. You know, they the
brain scans and whatnot. They were taken, you know, right
after I came back. Was were you know, anomaloust in nature?
(34:41):
But nobody knew how to interpret that. It's a part
of a medical record. If that could be compared to
normal readings, and that could be interesting.
Speaker 3 (34:57):
I don't think anyone was looking for implants tonight time five.
You know, we'ple have to remember this was an early,
early on case yea nineteen seventy five. Nobody also talked
about meeting two different species in the same incident, right,
And people weren't talking about abductions, not really. I mean,
(35:18):
there was the Betty and Barney Hill case, but that
was way out there and no very early and very unusual.
Speaker 4 (35:25):
So sure people were maybe maybe abduction is an unfortunate
word to start with, because they're not I mean, they
could easily capture people who take them away, but I
don't think that's what they're after. And most of the
interaction is I think just my opinion, more in the
(35:47):
nature of other than my case, just something that is
not we're here kind of a thing. You know. I've
made the point that with that kind of technology, they're
capable of doing everything that they are doing here and
remain undetected. And it's not like they're slapping their foreheads
(36:10):
saying humans spotted us again, We'll have to be more
careful next time. It's always on the verge of a
kind of approvability that is designed to uh inform the
non alarm.
Speaker 1 (36:27):
It's I suspect that it's on their conditions.
Speaker 2 (36:32):
Yeah, always right, uh.
Speaker 1 (36:35):
And you know there's that controversy. I don't know if
you follow this, Travis, but you know the the Aztec
Ufo crash that allegedly took place, also the Trinity crash,
all within a short period of time of roswell, and
it's it does seem improbably improbable that that the aliens
would just whoopsie, you know, you know, drop three UFOs.
(36:59):
But if we think about it from from their terms,
if they are have their own process of introducing themselves
to us, maybe that was the beginning. It was, you know,
letting us know or letting our government know that they're around,
and here's a little something you can work on while
we slowly disclose ourselves to you. How do you how
(37:20):
do you feel about that theory?
Speaker 4 (37:22):
Well, it probably didn't work out too well for the Aliens,
similar to the Europeans entering the Jungles and saying we
come in peace, and that will wind up being killed.
The uh, the perceived threat could have triggered unfortunate kinds
(37:47):
of In other words, these so called crashes could have
been shut shootdowns. And you don't see that kind of
stuff happening as much anymore because they're you know, prepare
for that on both sides.
Speaker 1 (38:02):
Yeah, I have a question from anonymous says, over the years,
have you had an occasion, had a moment of memory
that surprised you?
Speaker 4 (38:13):
Yeah? But I try to stick to the stuff I
can prove that I have other witnesses, some kind of
corroborating evidence.
Speaker 1 (38:24):
Well, I suppose could a memory recalled a a puzzle
piece or a link to help to help you make
sense of something?
Speaker 4 (38:35):
Yeah, you know, I could relate a childhood incident. But
you know, the skeptics could just take the position my
sister does it was a dream? I say, no, this
(38:55):
was not like any dream I've ever had in my life.
You know, I was awakened this creature, this being. I
didn't call it an alien. I just said, this little
man with a big white bald head and big eyes
was picking up my bedroom and I chased him.
Speaker 3 (39:21):
This was this was a childhood experienced, Travis remembers decades
before a logging.
Speaker 4 (39:28):
And I never ever said, Okay, maybe it was a
dream or anything like that, and I never connected it
to the alien phenomenon. But that's was the description you
would have.
Speaker 1 (39:42):
Yeah. Yeah, so by that theory, you would have been
dreaming for five days in a fire tower, right, hallucinating hallucinating, Yeah, yeah,
well that was one theory.
Speaker 4 (39:59):
You know that the crew was having a drug party
out there, but there was a whole bunch of them.
Speaker 1 (40:05):
Those you know, I hate to say but that those
are from people who haven't done drugs. But for those
of us who have done drugs, people don't we know
that that's not the case.
Speaker 4 (40:13):
Yeah yeah, but you know, to try to explain it
as ball lightning, you know, well there's a lot of
lightning up there, but you know, it doesn't fit the
description of what happened, And there's so many things, you know.
I mean, even the main skeptics tried to immediately say, well,
(40:35):
we checked the astronomical charts in Jupiter was prominent at
the time. We were not seeing some especially bright star
up in the sky in the distance. That's not that's
not it doesn't fit the description at all. But every
kind of alternative explanation that you can think of has
(40:58):
been offered up because anything is preferable to acknowledge.
Speaker 1 (41:06):
Yeah, well, that that's the trick that a lot of
the bunkers use, is they select a cherry pick one
aspect of a of a complex.
Speaker 4 (41:15):
Story. They would be more accepting if they give up
on the constant interpretation that this is invading monsters. See,
if it's invading monsters, you have to explain it away
to get rid of the fear. But you know, visitors
(41:36):
is a more appropriate description. Invading monsters is definitely alarmist
and contributes to denial.
Speaker 1 (41:46):
Well, Travis, are you familiar with the god of the gaps?
You know, fallacy or theory. It's like historically, when the
scientist and mathematician, physicists, whatever you know, comes across, you know,
that's to a point where they can't explain any further
and then they say, well, at this point God, God
must step in and adjust the equation, or maybe it's
(42:09):
God that steps in and does this, And then science
continues on and eventually solves the problem until the next thing,
you know comes up and then you go, oh, it
must be God. I think there's there's a skeptic of
the gap version. You know, the inverse occurs with the skeptics.
Speaker 4 (42:25):
Well, like I say, every alternative explanation you can think of,
and you know that this was some kind of deception
that the devil was imposing on the crew. Was was one,
There's lots of them, but like I say, desperate cold
(42:46):
for alternative explanations, it gets pretty wild.
Speaker 1 (42:50):
Yeah, and comments Jingis says, plus, after logging all day,
to know if you would have the stamina to want
to party, that's a good point. And if you did,
most likely you you would probably have some drinks to
to kind of like just calm the nerves down or something. Yeah,
(43:13):
were you were you a drinker back then, Trevis?
Speaker 4 (43:17):
No, No, I've never been much of a drinker. You know,
you might pretend to to be able to go to
the party and socialize and stuff like that, but I
think that was one of the questions that the Sheriff's
department reported. Immediately, he said, I wondered if they were
(43:39):
drunk or stone or something, and I didn't see any
trace of that. And I was looking And that's the
words right out of the sheriff's mouth. He was studying
the crew to see if there was any signs of intoxication.
Speaker 1 (43:55):
Are you a coffee guy or a tea guy?
Speaker 4 (43:59):
I don't even drink coffee anymore. I drink water. This
is good stuff.
Speaker 1 (44:07):
The best thing, Jennifer. You know with all these events
that are coming up, Skyfire Summit, which is it looks
really good. What do you what do you people expect,
you know, when they when they go to the event.
Speaker 3 (44:24):
Well, we're using a byline or a subtitle called secrecy transparency.
I mean, we just had our third major congression two
days ago Tuesday, right, I think today's Thursday when we're
videotaping this interview. So we are now living in a
(44:45):
world where disclosure is apparent. I think we're living in
a post disclosure world. You can say that with its
disclosure with a big D or disclosure with a little D.
We can talk about the ships and we can talk
about the crafts, it appears, but anyone who talks about
contact and or consciousness tends.
Speaker 2 (45:07):
To be attacked and debunked.
Speaker 3 (45:09):
So that's still going on and we've experienced that firsthand
as well as people like Kathleen Martin have. You know,
other major contact stories have been receiving major ridicule in
the last five or six years. So it's no longer
you know, acceptable to talk about contact, but you can
talk about.
Speaker 1 (45:29):
You know, the crafts. And well, if I may interject there,
actually I don't know if you saw the UAP hearing
a couple of days ago, not yet just clips. Okay,
So the previous hearing or one or two ago, Ryan
Graves was was describing a cuboidal type of craft, like
a circle within a or a cube within a circle, right,
(45:50):
kind of bizarre. In this recent one, there was another
description of a craft that multiple eyewitnesses that was like
are read almost lucent cube, you know it was it
was described and this is a military personnel my doing
that that are on the record under oath, you know,
describing the surface being something like a molten lava, which
(46:12):
we've heard historically in past UFO reports from decades ago.
So I I would say that as the public hears
that more of these UFOs just aren't some silvery, you know,
shell shaped thing, that that there's all these weird aspects
and these you know, other traits that seem very out
(46:32):
of this world, that in a sense you're kind of
bumping up against the strangeness as thing, and and that
opens the door, I think to having more conversation about,
you know, contact with these extraterrestrials or whatever they may be.
Speaker 3 (46:48):
Yes, Yes, So our conference title is called Secrecy to Transparency,
and what we're really hoping to do is give the
general public an overview.
Speaker 2 (46:59):
So we're hoving Don Schmidt come in and.
Speaker 3 (47:01):
We're discussing Roswell, We're discussing Jay Allen Heinich. We're discussing
the eighty years really of secrecy of this subject until
it finally came out of the box. We're discussing potentially
what went on right after the Second World War with
Nazis moving to Antarctica. There's lots of evidence of that.
Even the Admiral Bird story is very important, Like what
(47:26):
was Admiral Bird doing going to southam you know, to
the Antarctic in nineteen forty seven after we won the
war with the fleet of fourteen ships, and why did
he come back with the damaged ship.
Speaker 2 (47:38):
And dead men? Who was he at war with?
Speaker 4 (47:41):
You know?
Speaker 3 (47:41):
So there are things that the general public do not know,
you know, and sometimes you just need to unpack.
Speaker 2 (47:49):
Those boxes and discuss those things. And that's what we
intend to be doing at the conference as well.
Speaker 4 (47:55):
As are not limited to flying dis spheres and especially
tic tac shaped objects are pretty common. I know people
that I believe they have seen those forms, but then
some are just like you were saying, you know that
it's we have a limited ability to even describe it.
Speaker 1 (48:19):
Right, That's a very good way to put it. I
want to get this question in from Kathleen. She asks,
when you're on the ship, what do the walls look
like specifically?
Speaker 4 (48:32):
Well, initially they were just a sort of a mat
metallic that shifted with my position, becoming more of a
screen viewing. I don't know, either a map or a
view of where it was at at the time.
Speaker 2 (48:52):
Did the walls also light up when you were walking
through the hallways? Did it light as you walked through
the hallways?
Speaker 4 (48:58):
No, I was lit from the ceiling. It was just
a gloating ceiling.
Speaker 3 (49:02):
But I found it very interesting when Travis described being
in the central room that we kind of referred to
as a navigation room.
Speaker 2 (49:11):
As he's trying to find a way out of the craft.
Speaker 3 (49:13):
Right after he pushes the beings away and he jumps
off the table and screens and yells at them. Right
then he tries to follow a way out of the
craft and he walks into a round room. There was
some kind of proximity sensor in there, because the outside
walls of this room were round and solid. But as
he got close to the chair in the middle of
the room, everything became a star like planetarium, the walls,
(49:38):
the ceiling, the chair itself that sat with controls in
the middle of the room. And then as he backed
away from it, it went back to being a solid
wall and a solid floor, But as he got closer
to the chair, it became a planetarium of sorts three
hundred and sixty degree planetarium, flows, ceiling, walls all around him.
Speaker 1 (50:00):
We're approaching we have, you know, a similacra of that
kind of technology with led lights and and that sort
of thing. But we're getting closer to that, to that
place where we probably will have plasma walls that can
change the visual, the lights, the shape. You know, maybe
another fifty to twenty years from now. But the fact
(50:22):
that you witnessed these strange characteristics back then and reported
them back then, did you have any like reference points
to draw from when you were on the ship, like
like like architectural or something you've read or something you've seen.
Speaker 4 (50:46):
No, actually, you know, I've seen science fiction shows here
and there, you know, cartoons and whatnot, and nothing had
depicted what I was seeing. It was just like so
like nothing I had seen before. And some of it,
you know, the larger room did seem like something that
(51:09):
could be military or you know, it seemed very powerful.
Speaker 3 (51:17):
A mention for this question if people are interested in
seeing just the short little clip that we do have
in the longer version of the film about Travis's Onboard
the Craft experiences and memories, There is like a five
or eight minute clip at the movie site called Travis
waltonthmovie dot com and you can go to the debunking
(51:37):
page and then scroll through the list of videos there.
And we did put up on Board the Craft Experiences.
Speaker 1 (51:44):
I've got another question from chat, has Travis ever experienced
any paranormal happenings in his home. Like Kathleen Martin.
Speaker 5 (51:58):
What kind of experiences power noormal?
Speaker 1 (52:03):
You know, it's like have you had any kind of strained,
high strangeous experiences? You know, not beyond the experience with
the craft.
Speaker 4 (52:12):
It's an amazing, amazing world. But you know, I try to
keep my reports to things that I can document people
that experienced it with me at least, you know.
Speaker 1 (52:22):
Sure. Well, the thing is a lot of people who
have contacts, or experience or close encounter experience with UFOs
or entities allegedly extraterrestrials. They report that somehow that has
opened something in their consciousness that that then they after
that event, begin to experience you know, what you would
(52:43):
call a power normal.
Speaker 4 (52:46):
Well, if it's affected by my will, I was definitely
struggling to block such things. On a way back from
a Moofon conference in New Brunswick, New Brunswick, what was.
Speaker 3 (53:10):
I always think of Irvine that it was somewhere in
southern California when it.
Speaker 4 (53:15):
Starts with a B yeah, burbank. Yeah. There was a
conference there and uh Jan Harzan had just become head
of Moufon and he was giving us talk there. Tracy Tormay,
the screenwriter for Fire in the Sky, was also there,
and so me, my son, and my girlfriend attended and
(53:41):
we were headed home and we encountered a gigantic black triangle.
Speaker 1 (53:50):
Uh.
Speaker 4 (53:52):
It came right at us. I mean, first spotted it
was just a light in the distance, and it came
so quick that it went from just being visible as
a single light source to three on each of the
points of the triangle, and it abruptly stopped right over
the top of us. Impossible level of deceleration. It sort
(54:16):
of tipped up a little bit on the front, but stopped,
and then it rotated ninety degrees to its right towards
the Pacific, and then shot off in that direction again
impossible acceleration es, especially for something gigantic huge. It could
have been a quarter mile across. And I'd never reported
(54:39):
that with just the three of us, but by the
next morning, fifteen witnesses who didn't know each other it
all reported it to a UFO reporting site, which means
many more people saw that didn't report it, And it
was charted on the map. There's circles with numbers in
them all around where we were reporting. Just what we
(55:01):
saw and I didn't know each other at all.
Speaker 1 (55:05):
There's nothing like corroboration. It is everything in this field.
Have you heard of Jake Barber, the Air Force pilot.
Speaker 4 (55:16):
Okay, so that's the name of He's.
Speaker 1 (55:19):
A recent whistleblower. He came out and he explained his
experience as being a very emotional one. He said he
felt like as his job was to recover a craft
and transport it, he said that he felt like there
was something coming from a craft that was affecting him emotionally,
(55:42):
like he couldn't control it. He didn't understand it. It
was very like a psychic powers, how he described it.
Did you experience anything at all in that brief time
before that that beam of light hit you?
Speaker 4 (55:56):
Well, I did feel a strange sort of energy, but
I don't know whether that was just the strangeness of
the light. The sounds, it was bizarre sound. But if
(56:18):
if you know, you know there were you know, even Steve,
one of the crewmen, thought that the reason I left
the truck was because I was giving in to mind control.
And he was, you know, because the girls would say,
(56:39):
how come you didn't get out of the truck, And
he says, well, it was mind control, and I was
too strong for it, and Travis was too weak, and
so I very jokingly said, Steve, the mind control was
the other way around. I was resisting the command to
stay in the truck. But I don't think there was
(57:00):
any mind control at that point, And the absence once
I regained consciousness of that kind of effect may have
been because I was so severely injured that I was
not receptive to any sort of But there was no
(57:21):
verbal communication. They didn't respond to my screens or the
questions at all. But it occurred to me years later
that the reason that people misinterpret their presence as being
hostile is because they don't use facial expression as part
(57:44):
of their communication. If they're truly telepathic, they don't need
a smile.
Speaker 1 (57:49):
Total, especially Americans. You know, we're quite the gregarious and
open and friendly people. And so if you meet another
person or species that is is not so.
Speaker 4 (58:01):
Well humans to express things, and when you see somebody
whose stonefaced, we interpret that as hostility. So aliens I
think are miss miss and unintentionally misrepresented themselves by not
being able to express it anything with their face.
Speaker 1 (58:25):
Okay, I have one more technical question.
Speaker 4 (58:28):
I'm not saying I have that on the authority.
Speaker 1 (58:32):
No, it's an interesting theory. I have one more technical
question for you. So the there is some debate about
what the craft actually looked at because there were some
early drawings that were very kind of rigid like, rather
than a smooth craft, smooth shaped saucer crass. So how
(58:53):
why are some of those drawings look like it's more
angular versus.
Speaker 4 (58:58):
Oh that was the way, Well it was. I did
have angular edges out at the rim of it, but
the other craft I saw later was more much more rounded.
Speaker 1 (59:13):
Yeah, because I know, like I'm looking up at the
Travis The True Story of Travis Walton you poster, and
like this, it looks like a smooth surface all around,
but with these sort of bars dividers. Is that what
you mean by.
Speaker 4 (59:28):
Rigid or well, I don't believe that aerodynamics is a
part of their formula. I think that this is just
my theory, But I think they fly rapidly, instant acceleration,
very high speed, without screaming through the air or any
of the sort of conventional reactions the atmosphere would put
(59:52):
on a craft. So the the functionality of certain shape
probably has more to do with their purposes than in
anything to do with aerodynamics.
Speaker 3 (01:00:12):
Will I will clarify that those drawings that we used
in the film and that are on the poster are
very specific drawings. Both Alan Smith and Mike Rogers did
those drawings from what they saw, and that when Travis
walked out of the craft once he was on board
this craft, he walked out of it inside some kind
(01:00:33):
of other place.
Speaker 2 (01:00:35):
We don't know what it was.
Speaker 3 (01:00:36):
Was it a mothership, was it a hangar for you know,
a big ship, or was it underground base. We have
no idea, but he walked off of that craft and
then saw it and confirmed it's the same craft he
saw in the forest. But it wasn't lit up at
that point. But that's a very specific drawing done based
on seven eyewitness accounts.
Speaker 1 (01:00:58):
You said, Alan Smith, Alan Dallas, I wasn't there.
Speaker 4 (01:01:03):
Row around.
Speaker 1 (01:01:06):
So if I can, if you can leave us with
one thought, both Travis and Jennifer, we'll start with Travis.
Leave us with one thought. What would it be, what's
important to you? What needs to be said, or it
doesn't even have to be related to UFOs.
Speaker 4 (01:01:22):
My main message is first, get the facts. Is it true,
is it accurate? And is it all of the information
before you even begin forming any kind of opinion, because
without the facts, you got nothing.
Speaker 2 (01:01:43):
All right, Yeah, I would say something very similar. Read
Travis's book.
Speaker 3 (01:01:49):
You know, look at the data, look at the history,
you know, even the history of.
Speaker 2 (01:01:55):
The forest sight and things like that.
Speaker 3 (01:01:57):
We documented it in twenty fourteen with Ben Hansen, and
now people have gone back and actually destroyed the evidence
in the forest because they're trying.
Speaker 2 (01:02:06):
To hide it.
Speaker 1 (01:02:07):
Wait, wait, wait, wait, I did not know this.
Speaker 3 (01:02:10):
Yes, I went back in December of this past year,
in two thousand and four with Travis and another podcaster
researcher out of the Phoenix area who's doing a little
promo special about Travis. We discovered that the tree stumps
that we had videotaped in twenty fourteen had been set
on fire. Somebody poured gasoline on them, most likely set
(01:02:33):
them on fire and hatcheted them up with a hatchet
because they wanted to destroy the evidence.
Speaker 2 (01:02:39):
It was there. So people will go to ex dreams
to destroy the evidence.
Speaker 3 (01:02:44):
But look at what has been documented and then trust
your instincts. You know, do your own homework. Don't let
someone else tell you something that you haven't verified yourself
and trust your instincts. You want you to read it
and us it's pretty clear.
Speaker 1 (01:03:03):
Oh yeah, yeah, Travis, again, your book is one of
I would say it's one of the pre eminent anti debunking,
anti debunker, debunking the debunker books. You know, it's not
just your story, the amount of research and counter arguments
that you offer to call them out on their fallacies.
(01:03:25):
It's it's the best. I love it.
Speaker 4 (01:03:27):
Well, thank you. Some of the best arguments happened after
the book was finished. But maybe maybe all the.
Speaker 1 (01:03:35):
Do another another another edition. What about what about another movie?
Speaker 4 (01:03:40):
Should we ever expect another movie? Oh?
Speaker 2 (01:03:43):
Great, that would be great.
Speaker 1 (01:03:44):
Will it be a little bit more accurate?
Speaker 4 (01:03:47):
That was the point?
Speaker 1 (01:03:49):
H okay? And so are you are you being hard
news about that? Are you saying we're not going forward
unless it's yeah, yeah, okay, Oh that's exciting. That's very exciting.
Speaker 3 (01:03:58):
Well, we don't have a producer for it yet, but boy,
it would be great if.
Speaker 4 (01:04:01):
We did the script is complete, because that's what they're
streaking there.
Speaker 2 (01:04:08):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (01:04:08):
I think that's what Ryan Gordon was misrepresenting himself when
he first approached the guy.
Speaker 2 (01:04:13):
He was saying he was interested in doing.
Speaker 3 (01:04:15):
That, which you know, they'd all be loved to be,
you know, further verified, and it wasn't going to happen.
Not with Ryan Gordon. He was there for a different intention,
but led them astray.
Speaker 1 (01:04:29):
Agreed. Yep. All right, Well, thank you guys so much.
I really appreciate this.
Speaker 3 (01:04:35):
Thank you for paying attention to Travis's story, Alan, because
you have written on it as well yourself. You're one
of the few podcasters that really saw between the lines
and didn't just jump on the debunking bandwagon as so
many other people have. And you're able to discern where
the truth is getting twisted because you know Travis's story
(01:04:55):
so well. So I have a lot of respect for you, Alan,
and thank you so much for this opportunity.
Speaker 1 (01:05:01):
Thank you.
Speaker 4 (01:05:02):
Get the facts, I mean, look at the evidence.
Speaker 1 (01:05:05):
Get the facts. Yes, yep, one hundred percent. And and
just really quickly to that point, to any listeners who
want to listen to, uh, the interview I did with
Mike Rogers, Like literally the day that that video was
posted by Ryan Gordon, I called Mike and we we
jumped on and did an impromptu you know, conversation, and
Mike debunked it all on his own, and I just
(01:05:27):
want people to know that all seven laggers have been consistent.
The words have sometimes been twisted, but this is hands
down the best UFO case in my opinion, civilian UFO
case that there is. So thank you everybody for joining tonight.
I really appreciate it. I thank you Travis, Thank you Jen.
If you have any questions at all, please just email
(01:05:48):
me at Mystic Underscore Lounge at aol dot com, or
you can follow me on coffee and UFO's podcast on Instagram.
Until next time, everyone, peace in love and live in
the mystery.
Speaker 4 (01:06:01):
Great show. It's good to be in earthly. I wish
more of us would think of ourselves that way.
Speaker 3 (01:06:15):
I don't have a problem with skeptics.
Speaker 2 (01:06:17):
It's de bunkers that are on some other level that
I don't understand.
Speaker 4 (01:06:24):
But there's.
Speaker 3 (01:06:40):
Essentially an inference of a change in local gravity. Saucer
shaped craft and they're hovering over the water.
Speaker 4 (01:07:00):
Blue Book Special Report fourteenth.
Speaker 1 (01:07:01):
The better the quality of the siting, the more likely
to be unexplainable.
Welcome back to coffee and UFOs. This is Alan B. Smith.
You're a grateful host. We have two great guests today.
We have Travis Walton and Jennifer Stein joining us. It's
been fifty years since the famous Turkey Springs UFO encounter
and abduction or alleged abduction, and we're gonna talk to
(00:34):
Travis and Jennifer about that to find out, you know,
in retrospect, where are we what has changed? Has your
perception of the encounter altered in any way? And where
are we going? Actually, you might think that fifty years
is a long time to study a subject and to
scrutinize it, to challenge it. And even though it's withstood
(01:00):
the test of the most ardent or even let's say
dishonest skepticism, the skeptics still keep coming at it. And
I don't want to spend too much time on skepticism
because I know that Travis gets inundated with these questions
all the time. But we will touch on it in
just a moment, as well as so many other aspects. Jennifer, Travis, welcome,
(01:21):
Thank you. So Jennifer, tell us a little bit about
the upcoming event. Very briefly, and then we'll talk more
about the actual case.
Speaker 2 (01:30):
Sure, I'll be happy to.
Speaker 3 (01:32):
So we're celebrating the fiftieth anniversary and honoring Travis. It'll
be a four day conference. We're doing actually several events,
and if people who are listening want to know the
full perspective and to review this, they can go to
Sedona mofon dot org. Of course, moofon stands for the
Mutual UFO Network, so it's mufon, So sedonamoffon dot org.
(01:56):
And the name of the conference is called the Skyfire Summit,
so right, And it begins on October Friday night, October seventeenth,
so almost one month from about now, and it'll go
Friday night, all day Saturday, half a day Sunday, and
half a day Monday. So people have time to kind
(02:16):
of do some other things while they're in Codona and
have time to visit with Travis. We have a couple
of we have one nice dinner group where we're all
going to gather if people want to sign up and
come to that, but they don't have to, and it
should be really fun. And then on the actual anniversary,
we're screening the film Travis The True Story Travis Walton
(02:36):
at the Sedona Film Festival with a three pm and
a five pm encounter, and already knows people coming in
from like many states just to come to that because
they can't.
Speaker 2 (02:47):
Come to the conference.
Speaker 3 (02:48):
And then the eighth of November we're doing something in Phoenix.
Speaker 2 (02:52):
With Phoenix Move on.
Speaker 1 (02:53):
You've got a lot going on, but rightly so, because
it's been fifty fifty years, and so we should really,
you know, take the time to appreciate that. And by
the film, you mean your documentary, correct, Travis, the true
story right that is, in my opinion, hands down lead
the best documentary, the most comprehensive on the subject. And
(03:14):
I really appreciate that. So, Travis, it's been fifty years.
Do you appreciate how other people see what you did
as something truly significant, really an important act for you?
Speaker 4 (03:32):
And the other Definitely, I value the vastly increased acceptance.
At the same time, I welcome the skeptics because usually
they've got nothing to stand on and they don't even
know the facts. So the opportunity to give them a
few facts, it's a lot better than this sort of
(03:58):
unspoken skepticism that's just ignorant, you know.
Speaker 1 (04:03):
Yeah, well, I was just talking to Jennifer about.
Speaker 4 (04:05):
That on say It.
Speaker 1 (04:08):
Yeah, well, I was just talking to Jennifer about that too.
That some people say, uh, you know, just let them be,
ignore the debunkers, ignore the naysayers, and I say, no,
you can't, because they win these little battles and they
convince people along the way that this is something that
is untrue or absurd or doesn't have any legitimate evidence.
(04:32):
And if you don't go out there, and if you
don't take the time to counter it, you're losing that
many more, that many more minds, And sadly, a lot
of those people will just parrot, you know, what the
the skeptics are saying or the debunkers are saying, and that.
Speaker 4 (04:47):
You know, and they don't know that the skeptics have
been discredited. The current skeptic, you know, told blatant lie
in order to deceive Mike about the things that I
had some he said, but I had recorded the conversation
could prove he was lying, and my main detractor, it
(05:09):
came out, had been exposed. Some other researchers dug in
and found out that he had been investigated by the
FBI quite thoroughly. There's like thirty pages of investigation that
they had. You know, basically he discreditated himself because he
(05:31):
was being accused by the FBI of giving classified information
to our enemies. Editor of Aviation Week in Space Technology,
the guy was under great suspicion. Lots of pages of interviews.
(05:57):
I'd love to see what's under those blacked out sections.
The Freedom of Information Act never gives you the whole thing,
you know, the third or fourth or sometimes three fourths
of the pages is all blacked out. But that was
Philip Class's legacy is to be exposed as being investigated
by the FBI, who turned that investigation over to the CIA.
Speaker 1 (06:23):
So Philip Class was accused of leaking secret confidential information.
Speaker 4 (06:32):
Yeah, at least I don't know what else was under
that blocked out parts of the record, but.
Speaker 1 (06:44):
That's a significant charge.
Speaker 4 (06:48):
It's there for anybody to get. I didn't apply through
the Freedom of Information Act to get that file, but
anybody can get it and see that what I'm saying
is true.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
Where are the files that are they publicized online where
anyone can look at them.
Speaker 4 (07:06):
I forget the lady's name. I think it was a
lady who downloaded that and sent me a coffee.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
Yeah, there's a fellow also Greenberg, John Greenberg, I think
has Black Vault.
Speaker 2 (07:19):
He has a lot of information up. You could google
there and look there.
Speaker 4 (07:23):
What I need to do is just make copies of
it and send it out to a few people, let
them distribute.
Speaker 1 (07:29):
Yeah, okay, yeah, I'm going to go look that up.
I'd really like to see those files.
Speaker 3 (07:34):
What's interesting, I think is that when someone is under
investigation like that, they could maybe more easily be manipulated.
And it seems to me that Philip was manipulated because
I've gone in and read his files at the American
Philosophical Society, and you can see the car who he
corresponded with closely, who he was friends with, and it
(07:58):
was people who like Donald men who was the head
of astronomy at Harvard, and Richard Condon was his name,
Richard Condon who did the Condon Report from the University
of Colorado. So when you see the people he was
cohorting with and communicating with and in a like mind with,
and the types of semi professional organizations he was involved with,
(08:25):
it's clear that he was being paid to debunk all
UFO subjects and he went after many.
Speaker 2 (08:31):
Cases besides Travis's, Like, you know.
Speaker 4 (08:35):
One thing I have to keep bringing up and pointing
out is that even though he devoted parts of several books,
hours and hours of badgering interviews with the other guys
on my crew, not a word to me. He never
bothered to call me one time.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
Well two things. I well in regard to that, Travis,
so Jen, But what you're saying is interesting depending on
the date of when the FBI initially investigated him, that
could be very telling. Because Philip Class just was irrationally
trying to debunk. It was like an obsession beyond reason.
(09:16):
So there seemed like there was an external force pushing
him to debunk. And so if that's the case, that
that he got caught by the FBI and they coerced
him into doing that, or you know, made a deal, whatever.
Speaker 4 (09:27):
Well, he made a fool of himself from a Larry
King show screaming Mike Roger here. I mean, you know,
that's what does that do for his credibility? You know,
not much? Right at Mike Rogers over there talking to
the host, but not a word to me even even.
Speaker 3 (09:50):
Still, and that's on YouTube, So any of your listening
sure can go look it up Larry King Live with
Mike Rogers and Travis Walton. I think it was nineteen
ninety t or nineteen two something like that. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (10:03):
Well, you know, just recently Steve Pierce was about a
week and a half ago or two weeks ago. He
was interviewed by Margie k who owns the ONEX Network,
which this podcast is rebroadcast on. And there's a couple
of things that Steve said that I thought was interesting,
and this kind of ties into the debunker Ryan Gordon
when in terms of how people speak and how people
(10:25):
phrase phrase things. But you know, he he did reconfirm,
you know that class was calling him over and over
again trying to get him to accept ten thousand dollars
to say it was a hoax, and he said that
he spoke to his wife and his wife was like, well,
and He's like it's not true. She's like that, I
don't want to spend the money.
Speaker 4 (10:45):
You know.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
So over the years people have tried to I think
twist Steve Pearce's words, just like they've done with Mike Rogers,
you know, because he said also said on the podcast,
he said that during the five days, Travis that you
were missing after the abduction. He said that your brother
Dwayne would quote knock people over just to get in
(11:07):
front of the camera. Everyone else would be running away
and he'd be running towards the camera. Now, now, if
I were a debunker, I would take that and I
would out of context and I would use that and
to to say, look, this is what he's saying that
it was all about the attention Dwayne was in on
the conspiracy to fake a UFO. But that's not what
(11:28):
Steve was saying. He was just that was just Steve's
way of being like, this is what I observed, whether
right or wrong.
Speaker 4 (11:34):
You know, they was aggressive towards people who expressed critical
opinions without any information to base it on. So you're
going to say that, I'm going to say this, you know,
he's a very forceful personality. But Steve also said he
(11:56):
never knocked anybody over, that's for sure.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Yeah, I think literally right. But it was in the
same interview he also said regarding the UFO that you
all saw, he said, this is true. This is the
gospel truth. This is what I saw. No matter how
people try to twist what people. You know, all of
you have said over the years all have have reiterated
(12:22):
the fact that no, this is this is a true story,
This is what happened. Travis. Why do you think, why
do you think people have a really hard time at
least accepting the idea that this could have happened.
Speaker 4 (12:36):
Well, it's kind of strange people. You know, they've become
accustomed living in a tiny universe. They don't understand the
size of the universe. Just basic astronomy tells you that
their idea that humans are the only life in the
in the cosmos is just outrageously unlikely. That that's the
(13:01):
preposterous claim that humans are the only living thing out here.
And all those trillions of stars, those billions of galaxy
literally millions, I mean they the refined telescope, they pointed
it at the emptiest spot in the sky and saw
literally hundreds of galaxies, not just stars, galaxies like the
(13:25):
Milky Way with thousands and thousands of stars and so
and many of them vastly older than us. What we
see in the night sky is light that was emitted
years ago. If the entire universe had been destroyed and
swept away, we wouldn't know it for years, because it
(13:51):
takes that long for the light to get here.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
When you were on board this object, you saw these
kind of humanoid like creatures. Does that cause you to
fall more into the camp of panspermia that that genetic
DNA is that we have is somewhat common.
Speaker 4 (14:14):
No, Actually, it's more likely that there's something similar to
what's called parallel evolution. You know, we have the flying
squirrel here, which is a mammal in the United States,
and then in Australia they have the what they call it,
it's it's a similar creature, but it's a marsupial. Many
(14:37):
examples like that the Dasmanian tiger look so Tasmanian wolf
resembles a wolf, but yet it is a marsupial, so
completely divergent line going back millions of years, and yet
resembles in behavior and formation and everything just so much
(15:03):
like a wolf.
Speaker 1 (15:04):
Yeah, that you would have like bilateralism and other kind
of like similar traits and characteristics. That that makes sense
under similar environments. And and we could see in so
many planets now have we know that there's some water
planets out there, you know, there's rocky planets out there,
and if they have similar conditions, it would make sense
that whatever you know where where DNA starts as these
(15:29):
nucleic acids, and then they evolve into more complex proteins
that under the pressures of that environment, you know, it
would make sense. You need eyes, you need symmetry. These
are all things we see throughout nature.
Speaker 4 (15:40):
And the Drake equation is an old astronomical formula do
you estimate the number of possible life supporting planets in
the universe. And they have had to vastly upgrade the
results of that equation because the conclusion of astronomers is
(16:07):
virtually every star has about a dozen planets. Back back
before that, they thought maybe that even to have planets
around going around a star was had a certain low
level of likelihood, and they based their numbers in the
equation on that. But you might wonder, how do they
(16:30):
know that it is so much more likely now? Well,
they developed a technique to detect planets going around stars
that they cannot see. When a planet would orbit that
star and pass between us and the star, there would
be a momentary percentage of dip in the light emitted
(16:55):
reaching us from that star, and it was at uniform intervals.
They were able to sort this out and actually know
the time of the orbit of of that particular planet
going around that star.
Speaker 1 (17:10):
Yeah, well a question I'm just gonna shift here for
a moment from KM. Does Travis ever have PTST type feelings?
Now we know we know, Travis, you've spoken of that
in the past. Or has time eased the sensitions?
Speaker 4 (17:27):
Both, it has eased it. And you know, I'm surprised
at my reaction to some close sightings.
Speaker 1 (17:37):
So you you.
Speaker 4 (17:38):
Thought I've gotten over it, But but.
Speaker 1 (17:43):
What what what triggers it? Experienced?
Speaker 4 (17:45):
Dreams, just uh, post traumatic stress? I guess you know
that I buried in my mind and not I thought
about consciously. My conscious mind is you know, Okay, this
is not the terrifying thing that I thought it was,
(18:07):
which is a logical, rational ordering of what I've seen,
But mine still goes back to the original trauma.
Speaker 1 (18:18):
Yeah. That's the thing with trauma or any kind of
you know, subconscious you know, you know, effects of programming
and even habits. It's like you can rationally know that
that I shouldn't feel this way, or there's no need
to feel this way or to behave this way, and
yet it continues. Do you do you do anything? Do
you meditate? Do you know anything to help it?
Speaker 4 (18:41):
I work, I bury myself in activities that have nothing
to do.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
With fair enough. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (18:50):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (18:50):
Do you do you ever regret you? Do you regret
you know, coming out and or do you feel like
it was worthwhile?
Speaker 4 (18:56):
I regret getting out of that truck. Sure, absolutely, And
I wrestled with the idea of just shut up and
go away, let them think what they want, you know,
they'll forget about it.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (19:11):
I think a really important point that people need to
remember about Travis and all the boys in this crew.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
They never had a choice Salen of coming forward.
Speaker 3 (19:20):
I mean, Travis was suspected of hiding and deceiving the
police and disappearing, right. Nobody believed what really happened, so
as soon as he reappeared, I mean, the attention was
on him, and then the boys and the crew were
accused of murdering him, so they couldn't be secret either.
I mean when it broke in the news, people need
to remember this broke as a possible homicide story, a
(19:44):
UFO story, and a missing person story, like all three together,
and people were like, what you know, why right?
Speaker 1 (19:52):
And not one of the other six sawyers under police
questioning when they were suspected of covering up a murder. Okay, okay, okay,
find it's a hook. It's a hoax, a hook like
no one did that.
Speaker 3 (20:03):
And because because they were so suspected of murdering Travis,
they underwent these lide detection tests, which.
Speaker 2 (20:11):
Never ever happens in the UFO case.
Speaker 3 (20:15):
I mean to have that overlaying with this, it's like
the evidence just piles up right, a.
Speaker 4 (20:22):
Mind administered by state police. But you know, there were
physical traces at the site that were largely ignored, and
you know, a lot of evidence just they just looked
the other way and said, well never mind.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
Yeah, well there's another thing again.
Speaker 4 (20:38):
They'd rather not believe. They'll find a way to justify it.
Speaker 1 (20:41):
Yeah, of course. Of course. Another thing that Steve Pierce
said was that he has some singular question that he
wants to ask you under under the polygraph exam. Uh,
but he's he says it has to be a surprise
question because that's the only way to know if your
answer is true or false. And I have to comment
(21:05):
on that that that's not how polygraph exams we.
Speaker 4 (21:10):
Yeah, no, that's that's the problem. If they were to
successfully put questions in there that were surprising or might
anger me, that might register is a deception when it's
not that at all. And there's there are lots of
polygraph supposed pretenders, like a TV show I was on
(21:34):
once it was just totally absolutely violating every rule of calligraphy.
But the ones that I and the crew took more
than once were from law enforcement to state police. The
subsequent tests I took were were from people that tested
(21:55):
the people for the FBI and CIA at very.
Speaker 1 (21:58):
High level was a firm out of Pennsylvania.
Speaker 3 (22:01):
I think, well, there was a firm that made comments
about it out of New York valuated some of the
polygraph tests that were done.
Speaker 4 (22:11):
Yes, the Global Polygraph are the ones that declared this
fraudulent TV show to be fraudulent, and they basically went
out of business. They were being sued by another woman
that was falsely represented on the show as having cheated
on her husband, and so they had to be facing
(22:35):
a lawsuit from her.
Speaker 1 (22:37):
So, Chris, can you tell us a little bit about
that that that period right after your return, I know
you and your brother were trying to get some kind
of medical attention. Can you can you clarify who who
you first met up with that was supposed to give
provide medical attention.
Speaker 4 (22:59):
Well, the primary researchers in the field at that time
was APRO, the Aero Phenomena Research Organization, the oldest largest organization.
They had many legitimate scientists in their membership and legitimate
(23:22):
academic credentials. The hypnosis I did from doctor Harder, the
tests that were rendered, like, for example, when I was
placed in for a brain scan, the technician was not
told who I was, so it was totally blinded. There
(23:44):
couldn't be any bias in favor of finding something unusual.
And this is Barrows Neurological, which is one of the
top brain trauma centers in the world, and they discovered
in an odd a wave pattern. I still have the report,
(24:13):
but I repeated the test later and that had gone away.
I don't know what that bisynchronous wave alternating from front
to back was, what that meant, and I I'd like
to look into and see what people today might interpret that,
(24:35):
but it disappeared by the time I did another MMR.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
Do you call it a bisynchronous wave?
Speaker 4 (24:42):
Pardon?
Speaker 1 (24:43):
Did you call it a bisynchronous wave?
Speaker 4 (24:46):
Yeah? Bye, I'm just quoting them. Bisynchronous wave alternating from
front to back. I'm quoting the technicians report.
Speaker 1 (24:56):
That's that's really interesting. I'm just writing it down as
a note because I definitely look into that. Uh, wasn't
it originally correctly, I'm wrong the Ground Saucer Watch that
that initially got involved.
Speaker 4 (25:11):
Yeah, a competitor for Apro.
Speaker 2 (25:14):
Yeah, both were involved, both.
Speaker 1 (25:17):
Had records, Oh of course, but Ground Spasiter watched. Were
they not there on the ground first before Apro? Or
was Apro there first?
Speaker 4 (25:26):
They they're probably all after hit the news, But Ground.
Speaker 3 (25:35):
Ground Saucer Watch was competitive with APRO and they wanted
to discredit APRO because they wanted the story. So there
was some When you read the documents, you can see
that there was some manipulation going on back and forth,
and they were being competitive and claiming they were the
ones that had the right information and everyone else was wrong,
(25:56):
which wasn't true.
Speaker 1 (25:58):
But were they resentful? I was when you started working
with the Lorenzens or Apro.
Speaker 4 (26:05):
Oh, certainly, and you know, very insulting and I got
a lot of totally unnecessary kinds of comments made. You know,
they actually did some unethical things and I can't recall
the details of that interaction, right now I could go
look it up. I was asked recently, you know who
(26:28):
have you been interviewed by that I would recognize somebody significant.
I don't collect that kind of information in my mind.
Speaker 1 (26:39):
Like a ufologist or media.
Speaker 4 (26:44):
Actually it was my doctor. This was during a medical exam.
But I could have said, well, Leonard Nomoy, dan Akroyd,
you know I was on his show. You know, his
show was being filmed. Studio was within walking distance of
(27:04):
the bombed out building. No, I mean we walked over
there and there was a just giant smoking crater in
the from nine to eleven.
Speaker 1 (27:18):
Okay, we have a question. Did you did you meet
Coral Lorenzen?
Speaker 4 (27:25):
Me?
Speaker 1 (27:26):
Yeah, you yeah, So that's the answer. That's fascinating. She
really is a legend in the field. What was your
impression of her when when you met her?
Speaker 4 (27:38):
Well, she was a driving force. Jim Lorensen looked the
part of the scientist, but so he was kind of
the front man for the organization. But she was pretty
(27:58):
intense personality.
Speaker 1 (28:01):
Okay, if you could go back in time, knowing what
you know more now about about science and the abilities
we have to test for things and technologies, if you
could go back in time now and apply certain tests
whatever that might be, to yourself, to the location. What
(28:22):
would you do to add to the data, Well.
Speaker 4 (28:26):
You know, I would will into repeat some of those
tests at the highest level, especially if my detractors were
willing to be tested themselves, because so many of them
resorted to falsehood and distortion in order to build their case.
Speaker 1 (28:45):
Of course. Yeah. And from my mind, I'm also thinking,
I'm wondering, perhaps you already this was already done, but
not to my knowledge, did anyone test for like ionizing radiation,
you know, anything electromagnetic anomal at the time.
Speaker 4 (29:00):
Yeah, there were things that were tested at the site
of that nature, all kinds of tests being run.
Speaker 2 (29:08):
Mike.
Speaker 3 (29:09):
Mike Rogers recounts that many times his interview that there.
Speaker 4 (29:13):
Was because he was there observing these tests. Of course
I wasn't nowhere around.
Speaker 1 (29:17):
But yeah, yeah, Mike said, there was a guy with
someone with a Geiger counter and other things.
Speaker 3 (29:23):
Okay, and when they tested the truck and they tested
the hard hats, it went off, you know, the radar
ratings went right way up because there was still evidence
of that on the truck and the hard hats.
Speaker 4 (29:37):
But the scientist or the operator of the machine gets
angry and stomps off because this was not what he
wanted to hear. Or you know, he just gave Mike
a suspicious look because you know, he had double radiation
level of background radiation on him.
Speaker 3 (29:59):
We're not were who those people were because they did
not identify themselves to the crew.
Speaker 4 (30:04):
There were people there here that were of.
Speaker 1 (30:13):
Unknown Sure, sure, well, I mean, gosh, it's it's it's
the open woods. I mean, I'm I'm sure so many
people got up there at the time and they I'm
sure they didn't really have it quarantined off the way
they should have did. Was that was that too early
for for APRO to have have been on site or
was that ap a part of those early walks into
(30:34):
the into the woods?
Speaker 3 (30:35):
And no, there was a gentleman and I interviewed him,
although he didn't make it into the total film, blanking
on his name at the moment, but he was part
of APRO and he was there as part of the search.
Speaker 2 (30:48):
Okay, so they were there.
Speaker 3 (30:50):
They did have a couple of representatives, but not that many.
I mean, Tucson is where the Lorenzens lived and Snowflake.
Speaker 2 (30:59):
Is about and a half to five hours away.
Speaker 3 (31:02):
So it wasn't an easy drive to go up there
for an afternoon, you know for sure.
Speaker 1 (31:08):
Yeah, Travis, good question here, do you still have the
clothing from the event.
Speaker 4 (31:15):
I My brother had the presence of mind. I guess
some of the researchers that told him to do this.
But as soon as I was returned, he had me
remove my clothing, put it in a new, clean plastic bag,
seal it up for later analysis. And that would have
been really important. But through that in the back of
(31:38):
the trunk and they got torn open, and the value
of that was dismissed. After that was never followed up on.
Speaker 1 (31:49):
You know, in the face of the answer is the
answer is no.
Speaker 4 (31:53):
Accusations just ridiculous.
Speaker 1 (31:56):
It would be interesting to have that, right, that would be.
Speaker 4 (32:01):
Well, the kinds of claims that were totally refuted still
didn't discredit the discreditors. You know, they said, oh, Travis
was never anywhere near there any phone booth. He was
hiding in the cabin with his mother, which is just
pure lies. Well, the sheriff was notified by the operator
(32:29):
listened in on my screams, and he dispatched deputies who
went to the phone booth, got there too late. Duyenne
had already rescued me, but they dusted for Prince. But
the operator was able to tell them where where I'd
made the call from, which was the middle phone in
(32:52):
those three phone booths. And a little interesting story on
that is that it became kind of a landmark. And
I was talking with a guy that worked for the
phone company there in the middle the middle phone was missing,
and I said, well, you know that was the middle one,
(33:13):
was the one I called on. He says, well, we
got another phone booth over there in the in the equipment. Shit,
I'll go get it. So we went over there and
got it and hooked it up, and when he opened
the coin box, all the money was pre nineteen seventy five,
so you know, could have been the same one.
Speaker 1 (33:33):
Interesting. Yeah, the thing with the clothing is what you
would like to be able to test for, is you know,
maybe residual you know, molecular changes due to you know,
because you were hit, you were hit by some kind
of energy that you know, emitted from this craft. So
you do wonder if there was some kind of you know,
(33:57):
atomic exchanges you know, that took place, maybe you could
test for at that level. Have you experienced. This is
from Catbrooks in chat. Have you experienced any sort of
scans that revealed that you had implants or any other
kind of alterations physically.
Speaker 4 (34:20):
I'd have to think about that. You know, they the
brain scans and whatnot. They were taken, you know, right
after I came back. Was were you know, anomaloust in nature?
(34:41):
But nobody knew how to interpret that. It's a part
of a medical record. If that could be compared to
normal readings, and that could be interesting.
Speaker 3 (34:57):
I don't think anyone was looking for implants tonight time five.
You know, we'ple have to remember this was an early,
early on case yea nineteen seventy five. Nobody also talked
about meeting two different species in the same incident, right,
And people weren't talking about abductions, not really. I mean,
(35:18):
there was the Betty and Barney Hill case, but that
was way out there and no very early and very unusual.
Speaker 4 (35:25):
So sure people were maybe maybe abduction is an unfortunate
word to start with, because they're not I mean, they
could easily capture people who take them away, but I
don't think that's what they're after. And most of the
interaction is I think just my opinion, more in the
(35:47):
nature of other than my case, just something that is
not we're here kind of a thing. You know. I've
made the point that with that kind of technology, they're
capable of doing everything that they are doing here and
remain undetected. And it's not like they're slapping their foreheads
(36:10):
saying humans spotted us again, We'll have to be more
careful next time. It's always on the verge of a
kind of approvability that is designed to uh inform the
non alarm.
Speaker 1 (36:27):
It's I suspect that it's on their conditions.
Speaker 2 (36:32):
Yeah, always right, uh.
Speaker 1 (36:35):
And you know there's that controversy. I don't know if
you follow this, Travis, but you know the the Aztec
Ufo crash that allegedly took place, also the Trinity crash,
all within a short period of time of roswell, and
it's it does seem improbably improbable that that the aliens
would just whoopsie, you know, you know, drop three UFOs.
(36:59):
But if we think about it from from their terms,
if they are have their own process of introducing themselves
to us, maybe that was the beginning. It was, you know,
letting us know or letting our government know that they're around,
and here's a little something you can work on while
we slowly disclose ourselves to you. How do you how
(37:20):
do you feel about that theory?
Speaker 4 (37:22):
Well, it probably didn't work out too well for the Aliens,
similar to the Europeans entering the Jungles and saying we
come in peace, and that will wind up being killed.
The uh, the perceived threat could have triggered unfortunate kinds
(37:47):
of In other words, these so called crashes could have
been shut shootdowns. And you don't see that kind of
stuff happening as much anymore because they're you know, prepare
for that on both sides.
Speaker 1 (38:02):
Yeah, I have a question from anonymous says, over the years,
have you had an occasion, had a moment of memory
that surprised you?
Speaker 4 (38:13):
Yeah? But I try to stick to the stuff I
can prove that I have other witnesses, some kind of
corroborating evidence.
Speaker 1 (38:24):
Well, I suppose could a memory recalled a a puzzle
piece or a link to help to help you make
sense of something?
Speaker 4 (38:35):
Yeah, you know, I could relate a childhood incident. But
you know, the skeptics could just take the position my
sister does it was a dream? I say, no, this
(38:55):
was not like any dream I've ever had in my life.
You know, I was awakened this creature, this being. I
didn't call it an alien. I just said, this little
man with a big white bald head and big eyes
was picking up my bedroom and I chased him.
Speaker 3 (39:21):
This was this was a childhood experienced, Travis remembers decades
before a logging.
Speaker 4 (39:28):
And I never ever said, Okay, maybe it was a
dream or anything like that, and I never connected it
to the alien phenomenon. But that's was the description you
would have.
Speaker 1 (39:42):
Yeah. Yeah, so by that theory, you would have been
dreaming for five days in a fire tower, right, hallucinating hallucinating, Yeah, yeah,
well that was one theory.
Speaker 4 (39:59):
You know that the crew was having a drug party
out there, but there was a whole bunch of them.
Speaker 1 (40:05):
Those you know, I hate to say but that those
are from people who haven't done drugs. But for those
of us who have done drugs, people don't we know
that that's not the case.
Speaker 4 (40:13):
Yeah yeah, but you know, to try to explain it
as ball lightning, you know, well there's a lot of
lightning up there, but you know, it doesn't fit the
description of what happened, And there's so many things, you know.
I mean, even the main skeptics tried to immediately say, well,
(40:35):
we checked the astronomical charts in Jupiter was prominent at
the time. We were not seeing some especially bright star
up in the sky in the distance. That's not that's
not it doesn't fit the description at all. But every
kind of alternative explanation that you can think of has
(40:58):
been offered up because anything is preferable to acknowledge.
Speaker 1 (41:06):
Yeah, well, that that's the trick that a lot of
the bunkers use, is they select a cherry pick one
aspect of a of a complex.
Speaker 4 (41:15):
Story. They would be more accepting if they give up
on the constant interpretation that this is invading monsters. See,
if it's invading monsters, you have to explain it away
to get rid of the fear. But you know, visitors
(41:36):
is a more appropriate description. Invading monsters is definitely alarmist
and contributes to denial.
Speaker 1 (41:46):
Well, Travis, are you familiar with the god of the gaps?
You know, fallacy or theory. It's like historically, when the
scientist and mathematician, physicists, whatever you know, comes across, you know,
that's to a point where they can't explain any further
and then they say, well, at this point God, God
must step in and adjust the equation, or maybe it's
(42:09):
God that steps in and does this, And then science
continues on and eventually solves the problem until the next thing,
you know comes up and then you go, oh, it
must be God. I think there's there's a skeptic of
the gap version. You know, the inverse occurs with the skeptics.
Speaker 4 (42:25):
Well, like I say, every alternative explanation you can think of,
and you know that this was some kind of deception
that the devil was imposing on the crew. Was was one,
There's lots of them, but like I say, desperate cold
(42:46):
for alternative explanations, it gets pretty wild.
Speaker 1 (42:50):
Yeah, and comments Jingis says, plus, after logging all day,
to know if you would have the stamina to want
to party, that's a good point. And if you did,
most likely you you would probably have some drinks to
to kind of like just calm the nerves down or something. Yeah,
(43:13):
were you were you a drinker back then, Trevis?
Speaker 4 (43:17):
No, No, I've never been much of a drinker. You know,
you might pretend to to be able to go to
the party and socialize and stuff like that, but I
think that was one of the questions that the Sheriff's
department reported. Immediately, he said, I wondered if they were
(43:39):
drunk or stone or something, and I didn't see any
trace of that. And I was looking And that's the
words right out of the sheriff's mouth. He was studying
the crew to see if there was any signs of intoxication.
Speaker 1 (43:55):
Are you a coffee guy or a tea guy?
Speaker 4 (43:59):
I don't even drink coffee anymore. I drink water. This
is good stuff.
Speaker 1 (44:07):
The best thing, Jennifer. You know with all these events
that are coming up, Skyfire Summit, which is it looks
really good. What do you what do you people expect,
you know, when they when they go to the event.
Speaker 3 (44:24):
Well, we're using a byline or a subtitle called secrecy transparency.
I mean, we just had our third major congression two
days ago Tuesday, right, I think today's Thursday when we're
videotaping this interview. So we are now living in a
(44:45):
world where disclosure is apparent. I think we're living in
a post disclosure world. You can say that with its
disclosure with a big D or disclosure with a little D.
We can talk about the ships and we can talk
about the crafts, it appears, but anyone who talks about
contact and or consciousness tends.
Speaker 2 (45:07):
To be attacked and debunked.
Speaker 3 (45:09):
So that's still going on and we've experienced that firsthand
as well as people like Kathleen Martin have. You know,
other major contact stories have been receiving major ridicule in
the last five or six years. So it's no longer
you know, acceptable to talk about contact, but you can
talk about.
Speaker 1 (45:29):
You know, the crafts. And well, if I may interject there,
actually I don't know if you saw the UAP hearing
a couple of days ago, not yet just clips. Okay,
So the previous hearing or one or two ago, Ryan
Graves was was describing a cuboidal type of craft, like
a circle within a or a cube within a circle, right,
(45:50):
kind of bizarre. In this recent one, there was another
description of a craft that multiple eyewitnesses that was like
are read almost lucent cube, you know it was it
was described and this is a military personnel my doing
that that are on the record under oath, you know,
describing the surface being something like a molten lava, which
(46:12):
we've heard historically in past UFO reports from decades ago.
So I I would say that as the public hears
that more of these UFOs just aren't some silvery, you know,
shell shaped thing, that that there's all these weird aspects
and these you know, other traits that seem very out
(46:32):
of this world, that in a sense you're kind of
bumping up against the strangeness as thing, and and that
opens the door, I think to having more conversation about,
you know, contact with these extraterrestrials or whatever they may be.
Speaker 3 (46:48):
Yes, Yes, So our conference title is called Secrecy to Transparency,
and what we're really hoping to do is give the
general public an overview.
Speaker 2 (46:59):
So we're hoving Don Schmidt come in and.
Speaker 3 (47:01):
We're discussing Roswell, We're discussing Jay Allen Heinich. We're discussing
the eighty years really of secrecy of this subject until
it finally came out of the box. We're discussing potentially
what went on right after the Second World War with
Nazis moving to Antarctica. There's lots of evidence of that.
Even the Admiral Bird story is very important, Like what
(47:26):
was Admiral Bird doing going to southam you know, to
the Antarctic in nineteen forty seven after we won the
war with the fleet of fourteen ships, and why did
he come back with the damaged ship.
Speaker 2 (47:38):
And dead men? Who was he at war with?
Speaker 4 (47:41):
You know?
Speaker 3 (47:41):
So there are things that the general public do not know,
you know, and sometimes you just need to unpack.
Speaker 2 (47:49):
Those boxes and discuss those things. And that's what we
intend to be doing at the conference as well.
Speaker 4 (47:55):
As are not limited to flying dis spheres and especially
tic tac shaped objects are pretty common. I know people
that I believe they have seen those forms, but then
some are just like you were saying, you know that
it's we have a limited ability to even describe it.
Speaker 1 (48:19):
Right, That's a very good way to put it. I
want to get this question in from Kathleen. She asks,
when you're on the ship, what do the walls look
like specifically?
Speaker 4 (48:32):
Well, initially they were just a sort of a mat
metallic that shifted with my position, becoming more of a
screen viewing. I don't know, either a map or a
view of where it was at at the time.
Speaker 2 (48:52):
Did the walls also light up when you were walking
through the hallways? Did it light as you walked through
the hallways?
Speaker 4 (48:58):
No, I was lit from the ceiling. It was just
a gloating ceiling.
Speaker 3 (49:02):
But I found it very interesting when Travis described being
in the central room that we kind of referred to
as a navigation room.
Speaker 2 (49:11):
As he's trying to find a way out of the craft.
Speaker 3 (49:13):
Right after he pushes the beings away and he jumps
off the table and screens and yells at them. Right
then he tries to follow a way out of the
craft and he walks into a round room. There was
some kind of proximity sensor in there, because the outside
walls of this room were round and solid. But as
he got close to the chair in the middle of
the room, everything became a star like planetarium, the walls,
(49:38):
the ceiling, the chair itself that sat with controls in
the middle of the room. And then as he backed
away from it, it went back to being a solid
wall and a solid floor, But as he got closer
to the chair, it became a planetarium of sorts three
hundred and sixty degree planetarium, flows, ceiling, walls all around him.
Speaker 1 (50:00):
We're approaching we have, you know, a similacra of that
kind of technology with led lights and and that sort
of thing. But we're getting closer to that, to that
place where we probably will have plasma walls that can
change the visual, the lights, the shape. You know, maybe
another fifty to twenty years from now. But the fact
(50:22):
that you witnessed these strange characteristics back then and reported
them back then, did you have any like reference points
to draw from when you were on the ship, like
like like architectural or something you've read or something you've seen.
Speaker 4 (50:46):
No, actually, you know, I've seen science fiction shows here
and there, you know, cartoons and whatnot, and nothing had
depicted what I was seeing. It was just like so
like nothing I had seen before. And some of it,
you know, the larger room did seem like something that
(51:09):
could be military or you know, it seemed very powerful.
Speaker 3 (51:17):
A mention for this question if people are interested in
seeing just the short little clip that we do have
in the longer version of the film about Travis's Onboard
the Craft experiences and memories, There is like a five
or eight minute clip at the movie site called Travis
waltonthmovie dot com and you can go to the debunking
(51:37):
page and then scroll through the list of videos there.
And we did put up on Board the Craft Experiences.
Speaker 1 (51:44):
I've got another question from chat, has Travis ever experienced
any paranormal happenings in his home. Like Kathleen Martin.
Speaker 5 (51:58):
What kind of experiences power noormal?
Speaker 1 (52:03):
You know, it's like have you had any kind of strained,
high strangeous experiences? You know, not beyond the experience with
the craft.
Speaker 4 (52:12):
It's an amazing, amazing world. But you know, I try to
keep my reports to things that I can document people
that experienced it with me at least, you know.
Speaker 1 (52:22):
Sure. Well, the thing is a lot of people who
have contacts, or experience or close encounter experience with UFOs
or entities allegedly extraterrestrials. They report that somehow that has
opened something in their consciousness that that then they after
that event, begin to experience you know, what you would
(52:43):
call a power normal.
Speaker 4 (52:46):
Well, if it's affected by my will, I was definitely
struggling to block such things. On a way back from
a Moofon conference in New Brunswick, New Brunswick, what was.
Speaker 3 (53:10):
I always think of Irvine that it was somewhere in
southern California when it.
Speaker 4 (53:15):
Starts with a B yeah, burbank. Yeah. There was a
conference there and uh Jan Harzan had just become head
of Moufon and he was giving us talk there. Tracy Tormay,
the screenwriter for Fire in the Sky, was also there,
and so me, my son, and my girlfriend attended and
(53:41):
we were headed home and we encountered a gigantic black triangle.
Speaker 1 (53:50):
Uh.
Speaker 4 (53:52):
It came right at us. I mean, first spotted it
was just a light in the distance, and it came
so quick that it went from just being visible as
a single light source to three on each of the
points of the triangle, and it abruptly stopped right over
the top of us. Impossible level of deceleration. It sort
(54:16):
of tipped up a little bit on the front, but stopped,
and then it rotated ninety degrees to its right towards
the Pacific, and then shot off in that direction again
impossible acceleration es, especially for something gigantic huge. It could
have been a quarter mile across. And I'd never reported
(54:39):
that with just the three of us, but by the
next morning, fifteen witnesses who didn't know each other it
all reported it to a UFO reporting site, which means
many more people saw that didn't report it, And it
was charted on the map. There's circles with numbers in
them all around where we were reporting. Just what we
(55:01):
saw and I didn't know each other at all.
Speaker 1 (55:05):
There's nothing like corroboration. It is everything in this field.
Have you heard of Jake Barber, the Air Force pilot.
Speaker 4 (55:16):
Okay, so that's the name of He's.
Speaker 1 (55:19):
A recent whistleblower. He came out and he explained his
experience as being a very emotional one. He said he
felt like as his job was to recover a craft
and transport it, he said that he felt like there
was something coming from a craft that was affecting him emotionally,
(55:42):
like he couldn't control it. He didn't understand it. It
was very like a psychic powers, how he described it.
Did you experience anything at all in that brief time
before that that beam of light hit you?
Speaker 4 (55:56):
Well, I did feel a strange sort of energy, but
I don't know whether that was just the strangeness of
the light. The sounds, it was bizarre sound. But if
(56:18):
if you know, you know there were you know, even Steve,
one of the crewmen, thought that the reason I left
the truck was because I was giving in to mind control.
And he was, you know, because the girls would say,
(56:39):
how come you didn't get out of the truck, And
he says, well, it was mind control, and I was
too strong for it, and Travis was too weak, and
so I very jokingly said, Steve, the mind control was
the other way around. I was resisting the command to
stay in the truck. But I don't think there was
(57:00):
any mind control at that point, And the absence once
I regained consciousness of that kind of effect may have
been because I was so severely injured that I was
not receptive to any sort of But there was no
(57:21):
verbal communication. They didn't respond to my screens or the
questions at all. But it occurred to me years later
that the reason that people misinterpret their presence as being
hostile is because they don't use facial expression as part
(57:44):
of their communication. If they're truly telepathic, they don't need
a smile.
Speaker 1 (57:49):
Total, especially Americans. You know, we're quite the gregarious and
open and friendly people. And so if you meet another
person or species that is is not so.
Speaker 4 (58:01):
Well humans to express things, and when you see somebody
whose stonefaced, we interpret that as hostility. So aliens I
think are miss miss and unintentionally misrepresented themselves by not
being able to express it anything with their face.
Speaker 1 (58:25):
Okay, I have one more technical question.
Speaker 4 (58:28):
I'm not saying I have that on the authority.
Speaker 1 (58:32):
No, it's an interesting theory. I have one more technical
question for you. So the there is some debate about
what the craft actually looked at because there were some
early drawings that were very kind of rigid like, rather
than a smooth craft, smooth shaped saucer crass. So how
(58:53):
why are some of those drawings look like it's more
angular versus.
Speaker 4 (58:58):
Oh that was the way, Well it was. I did
have angular edges out at the rim of it, but
the other craft I saw later was more much more rounded.
Speaker 1 (59:13):
Yeah, because I know, like I'm looking up at the
Travis The True Story of Travis Walton you poster, and
like this, it looks like a smooth surface all around,
but with these sort of bars dividers. Is that what
you mean by.
Speaker 4 (59:28):
Rigid or well, I don't believe that aerodynamics is a
part of their formula. I think that this is just
my theory, But I think they fly rapidly, instant acceleration,
very high speed, without screaming through the air or any
of the sort of conventional reactions the atmosphere would put
(59:52):
on a craft. So the the functionality of certain shape
probably has more to do with their purposes than in
anything to do with aerodynamics.
Speaker 3 (01:00:12):
Will I will clarify that those drawings that we used
in the film and that are on the poster are
very specific drawings. Both Alan Smith and Mike Rogers did
those drawings from what they saw, and that when Travis
walked out of the craft once he was on board
this craft, he walked out of it inside some kind
(01:00:33):
of other place.
Speaker 2 (01:00:35):
We don't know what it was.
Speaker 3 (01:00:36):
Was it a mothership, was it a hangar for you know,
a big ship, or was it underground base. We have
no idea, but he walked off of that craft and
then saw it and confirmed it's the same craft he
saw in the forest. But it wasn't lit up at
that point. But that's a very specific drawing done based
on seven eyewitness accounts.
Speaker 1 (01:00:58):
You said, Alan Smith, Alan Dallas, I wasn't there.
Speaker 4 (01:01:03):
Row around.
Speaker 1 (01:01:06):
So if I can, if you can leave us with
one thought, both Travis and Jennifer, we'll start with Travis.
Leave us with one thought. What would it be, what's
important to you? What needs to be said, or it
doesn't even have to be related to UFOs.
Speaker 4 (01:01:22):
My main message is first, get the facts. Is it true,
is it accurate? And is it all of the information
before you even begin forming any kind of opinion, because
without the facts, you got nothing.
Speaker 2 (01:01:43):
All right, Yeah, I would say something very similar. Read
Travis's book.
Speaker 3 (01:01:49):
You know, look at the data, look at the history,
you know, even the history of.
Speaker 2 (01:01:55):
The forest sight and things like that.
Speaker 3 (01:01:57):
We documented it in twenty fourteen with Ben Hansen, and
now people have gone back and actually destroyed the evidence
in the forest because they're trying.
Speaker 2 (01:02:06):
To hide it.
Speaker 1 (01:02:07):
Wait, wait, wait, wait, I did not know this.
Speaker 3 (01:02:10):
Yes, I went back in December of this past year,
in two thousand and four with Travis and another podcaster
researcher out of the Phoenix area who's doing a little
promo special about Travis. We discovered that the tree stumps
that we had videotaped in twenty fourteen had been set
on fire. Somebody poured gasoline on them, most likely set
(01:02:33):
them on fire and hatcheted them up with a hatchet
because they wanted to destroy the evidence.
Speaker 2 (01:02:39):
It was there. So people will go to ex dreams
to destroy the evidence.
Speaker 3 (01:02:44):
But look at what has been documented and then trust
your instincts. You know, do your own homework. Don't let
someone else tell you something that you haven't verified yourself
and trust your instincts. You want you to read it
and us it's pretty clear.
Speaker 1 (01:03:03):
Oh yeah, yeah, Travis, again, your book is one of
I would say it's one of the pre eminent anti debunking,
anti debunker, debunking the debunker books. You know, it's not
just your story, the amount of research and counter arguments
that you offer to call them out on their fallacies.
(01:03:25):
It's it's the best. I love it.
Speaker 4 (01:03:27):
Well, thank you. Some of the best arguments happened after
the book was finished. But maybe maybe all the.
Speaker 1 (01:03:35):
Do another another another edition. What about what about another movie?
Speaker 4 (01:03:40):
Should we ever expect another movie? Oh?
Speaker 2 (01:03:43):
Great, that would be great.
Speaker 1 (01:03:44):
Will it be a little bit more accurate?
Speaker 4 (01:03:47):
That was the point?
Speaker 1 (01:03:49):
H okay? And so are you are you being hard
news about that? Are you saying we're not going forward
unless it's yeah, yeah, okay, Oh that's exciting. That's very exciting.
Speaker 3 (01:03:58):
Well, we don't have a producer for it yet, but boy,
it would be great if.
Speaker 4 (01:04:01):
We did the script is complete, because that's what they're
streaking there.
Speaker 2 (01:04:08):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (01:04:08):
I think that's what Ryan Gordon was misrepresenting himself when
he first approached the guy.
Speaker 2 (01:04:13):
He was saying he was interested in doing.
Speaker 3 (01:04:15):
That, which you know, they'd all be loved to be,
you know, further verified, and it wasn't going to happen.
Not with Ryan Gordon. He was there for a different intention,
but led them astray.
Speaker 1 (01:04:29):
Agreed. Yep. All right, Well, thank you guys so much.
I really appreciate this.
Speaker 3 (01:04:35):
Thank you for paying attention to Travis's story, Alan, because
you have written on it as well yourself. You're one
of the few podcasters that really saw between the lines
and didn't just jump on the debunking bandwagon as so
many other people have. And you're able to discern where
the truth is getting twisted because you know Travis's story
(01:04:55):
so well. So I have a lot of respect for you, Alan,
and thank you so much for this opportunity.
Speaker 1 (01:05:01):
Thank you.
Speaker 4 (01:05:02):
Get the facts, I mean, look at the evidence.
Speaker 1 (01:05:05):
Get the facts. Yes, yep, one hundred percent. And and
just really quickly to that point, to any listeners who
want to listen to, uh, the interview I did with
Mike Rogers, Like literally the day that that video was
posted by Ryan Gordon, I called Mike and we we
jumped on and did an impromptu you know, conversation, and
Mike debunked it all on his own, and I just
(01:05:27):
want people to know that all seven laggers have been consistent.
The words have sometimes been twisted, but this is hands
down the best UFO case in my opinion, civilian UFO
case that there is. So thank you everybody for joining tonight.
I really appreciate it. I thank you Travis, Thank you Jen.
If you have any questions at all, please just email
(01:05:48):
me at Mystic Underscore Lounge at aol dot com, or
you can follow me on coffee and UFO's podcast on Instagram.
Until next time, everyone, peace in love and live in
the mystery.
Speaker 4 (01:06:01):
Great show. It's good to be in earthly. I wish
more of us would think of ourselves that way.
Speaker 3 (01:06:15):
I don't have a problem with skeptics.
Speaker 2 (01:06:17):
It's de bunkers that are on some other level that
I don't understand.
Speaker 4 (01:06:24):
But there's.
Speaker 3 (01:06:40):
Essentially an inference of a change in local gravity. Saucer
shaped craft and they're hovering over the water.
Speaker 4 (01:07:00):
Blue Book Special Report fourteenth.
Speaker 1 (01:07:01):
The better the quality of the siting, the more likely
to be unexplainable.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Ruthie's Table 4
For more than 30 years The River Cafe in London, has been the home-from-home of artists, architects, designers, actors, collectors, writers, activists, and politicians. Michael Caine, Glenn Close, JJ Abrams, Steve McQueen, Victoria and David Beckham, and Lily Allen, are just some of the people who love to call The River Cafe home. On River Cafe Table 4, Rogers sits down with her customers—who have become friends—to talk about food memories. Table 4 explores how food impacts every aspect of our lives. “Foods is politics, food is cultural, food is how you express love, food is about your heritage, it defines who you and who you want to be,” says Rogers. Each week, Rogers invites her guest to reminisce about family suppers and first dates, what they cook, how they eat when performing, the restaurants they choose, and what food they seek when they need comfort. And to punctuate each episode of Table 4, guests such as Ralph Fiennes, Emily Blunt, and Alfonso Cuarón, read their favourite recipe from one of the best-selling River Cafe cookbooks. Table 4 itself, is situated near The River Cafe’s open kitchen, close to the bright pink wood-fired oven and next to the glossy yellow pass, where Ruthie oversees the restaurant. You are invited to take a seat at this intimate table and join the conversation. For more information, recipes, and ingredients, go to https://shoptherivercafe.co.uk/ Web: https://rivercafe.co.uk/ Instagram: www.instagram.com/therivercafelondon/ Facebook: https://en-gb.facebook.com/therivercafelondon/ For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iheartradio app, apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.