March 14, 2025 • 59 mins
In this episdoe Kathleen shares about her struggle between her left-brain approach to UFO research and her more recent attempts using non-conventional methods, which really began with stuying alleged alien communications through "contactee" Kevin Briggs. Marden also critques AARO (All-Domain Anomoly Resolution Office); and reveals why full disclosure of an ET presence may not, sociologically, be a smart approach. Kathleen discusses surveys she was involved with which indicated that people of faith would be more open to ET contact than atheists or agnostics - a conclusion I personally struggle to understand.
Kathleen Marden's lifelong pursuit of UFO and extraterrestrial contact research stems from her personal connection to the 1961 Betty and Barney Hill abduction. This experience ignited decades of dedicated investigation, archival research, and advocacy, including placing the Hills' records at the University of New Hampshire.
With a background in education and sociology, she transitioned into a leading UFO researcher and author, contributing significantly to MUFON's Experiencer Research Team and participating in four large-scale studies on experiencers. Marden's extensive publications, include two editions of Captured! The Betty and Barney Hill UFO Experience, Science Was Wrong (also published in Chinese) and Fact, Fiction, and Flying Saucers, The Alien Abduction Files, Extraterrestrial Contact: What to do When You’ve Been Abducted (also published in French), and two editions of Forbidden Knowledge.
Her work as an advocate highlights her commitment to understanding and supporting individuals who have experienced contact with non-human entities. She has appeared as an on-camera expert on sixty two television and video productions, and innumerable radio shows, and podcasts. Additionally, she has lectured at conferences across the United States and in several foreign countries. Find Kathleen at www.kathleen-marden.com.
☕️ Review and rate wherever you listen to podcasts.
Please help the YouTube 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
HALF LIGHT documentary: https://tubitv.com/movies/678744/half-light
Kathleen Marden's lifelong pursuit of UFO and extraterrestrial contact research stems from her personal connection to the 1961 Betty and Barney Hill abduction. This experience ignited decades of dedicated investigation, archival research, and advocacy, including placing the Hills' records at the University of New Hampshire.
With a background in education and sociology, she transitioned into a leading UFO researcher and author, contributing significantly to MUFON's Experiencer Research Team and participating in four large-scale studies on experiencers. Marden's extensive publications, include two editions of Captured! The Betty and Barney Hill UFO Experience, Science Was Wrong (also published in Chinese) and Fact, Fiction, and Flying Saucers, The Alien Abduction Files, Extraterrestrial Contact: What to do When You’ve Been Abducted (also published in French), and two editions of Forbidden Knowledge.
Her work as an advocate highlights her commitment to understanding and supporting individuals who have experienced contact with non-human entities. She has appeared as an on-camera expert on sixty two television and video productions, and innumerable radio shows, and podcasts. Additionally, she has lectured at conferences across the United States and in several foreign countries. Find Kathleen at www.kathleen-marden.com.
☕️ Review and rate wherever you listen to podcasts.
Please help the YouTube 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
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 (00:13):
However you are and whenever you are, Welcome back everyone
to Coffee in UFOs. Cheers. This is a great night.
We have a returning guest, one of my absolute favorites,
Kathleen Martin, and we're going to cover the gamut of research.
Kathleen is one of the most prolific speakers, authors, and
(00:39):
one of the most knowledgeable people on the subject of
UFOs e T and experiencers contact. Tonight, we're going to
review a lot of that, but also Kathleen, I have
some some different questions for her tonight that I've not
asked before, so that'll be fun. And we also talk
(01:00):
about briefly a survey that she's working on that will
give us a little bit more insight into the phenomena.
As a friendly reminder, if you listen to this podcast
on YouTube, please know that we are also available wherever
you listen to your podcast regularly, any platform out there,
all the major platforms, we are there. Coffee and UFOs
(01:22):
is also rebroadcast on the Unex Network every Thursday night
eleven pm Pacific Time and two am Eastern Time Friday mornings,
and of course, as I speak, I'm clicking the go
live button on Instagram, So if you are an Instagram
or and you want to check it out there, you
can do that. Normally we are a YouTube video streaming
(01:47):
and Facebook video streaming, but hopefully we'll get some more
views on Instagram. The podcast continues to grow, and I
really appreciate all of your support, your comments, your feedback,
your questions when we have guests. All that really helps.
If you are a fan, if you could please click
the like button on this video, hit subscribe, click the
notification button, all that really helps. And if you listen
(02:09):
to the podcast version, if you can give a review
and rate, I would great greatly appreciate that. So thank
you everyone so much, and now we're going to bring
our esteemed guest on, Kathleen Martin. Hey, Kathleen, welcome back.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
Thank you, Alan. It's great to be back with you.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
It's a pleasure as always over the years. You know,
there are a number of guests that I asked to
come back on the show, and every time, not only
is an interesting conversation, but it's a pleasant one. You know,
you Peter Robbins, Cheryl Costa, some of the others that
it's just really nice to know that they're good people
out there in this field, and like we were talking
(02:49):
about before we went on, you know good and honest people,
and you're one of them. And I really appreciate that
very quickly as a refresher for those who may not know. Actually,
Kathleen Martin's lifelong pursuit of UFO and extraterrestural contact research
stems from her personal connection to the nineteen sixty one
(03:12):
Betty and Barney Hill abduction. This experience ignited decades of
dedicated investigation, archival research, and advocacy, including placing the Hills
records at the University of New Hampshire. With a background
in education and sociology, she's transitioned into a leading UFO
researcher and author, contributing significantly to Muffon's Experiencer research team
(03:38):
and participating in four large scale studies on experiencers. Martin's
extensive publications include two editions of Captured the Betty and
Barney Hill UFO Experience, Science Was Wrong, also published in
Chinese and fact fiction, and Flying Saucers, The Alien Abduction Files,
(03:58):
Extraterrestural Contact What Do You Do? What to Do when
You've Been Abducted? Also published in French, and two editions
of forbidden knowledge. Her work as an advocate highlights her
commitment to understanding and supporting individuals who have experienced contact
with non human entities. She has appeared as an expert
(04:20):
on camera on sixty two television and video productions, and
innumerable radio shows and podcasts. Additionally, she has lectured at
conferences across the United States and in several foreign countries.
Kathleen's website is kathleen dashboard dot com. So, Kathleen, we
(04:41):
were talking about this survey that you're working on, and
there's more to come regarding the survey. Can you tell
us what the scope is? Yes?
Speaker 3 (04:50):
Well, a person who has now become a friend of
mine began as a psycho therapy and an ordained minister
who had applied to Muffon's Experiencer research team when I
was the director. I was the director for ten years,
(05:12):
and so we were keeping a list of people who
were qualified, licensed, insured, etc. Professionals who were willing to
take clients, not for free. They were professionals who were
(05:34):
being paid for their services, but they were trained, they
were knowledgeable, and they could help experiences. So that's how
our relationship began, and it eventually expanded into an experiment
that she wanted to do with Kevin Briggs. You might
(06:00):
have heard his name. He lives here in central Florida
and he has been an experiencer since he was a
little boy in the UK, and he has the ability
to communicate with ET's And so I was invited along
with Denise Stoner, to be some of the first people
(06:24):
to investigate this, to experiment with it. You know, have
the background that I have and that Denise has. Requires evidence.
You know, we're still evidence based, even though you know
that this phenomenon goes far beyond the nuts and bolts.
Speaker 1 (06:50):
Yes, it's evasive.
Speaker 3 (06:52):
Yes, yes, So we worked with Kevin once a month
for two years and we were able to meet this
council of so called extraterrestrials. We could not see them,
Kevin channeled them, but we were able to get scientific evidence.
Speaker 1 (07:18):
That's the trick, right, because anyone could say that they're channeling.
How do you know for sure?
Speaker 3 (07:23):
Right? He could have been delusionally, could have been hoaxing,
could have been a debunker out to destroy our careers
and their reputations. That you know, you have to be
careful about things like that.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
And I was never going to mention what we did.
It was just going to be a secret.
Speaker 3 (07:43):
But over time I decided to write about it, and
it's in some of the chapters in my newest two books,
Forbidden Knowledge, Volumes one and two. So we were able
to record a temperature increase in the area of the
(08:06):
room where the entity was up to ten degrees when
that entity entered, and just around that entity, not in
the rest of the room.
Speaker 1 (08:19):
Like a like a distinct area.
Speaker 3 (08:22):
A yes, in the distinct area right around Kevin's body,
and he he was drenched in perspiration and exhausted when
when this entity left. So as they're higher vibrational entities
and that is what makes them so hot and then
(08:45):
makes Kevin so hot.
Speaker 1 (08:47):
So almost like crossing or using energy in such a
way to cross a barrier, and that somehow it's like
an electromagnetic very strong or okay, yeah.
Speaker 3 (09:01):
Very very strong electromagnetic field. We felt this very strong
tingling sensation in our bodies when this was taking place.
We also had the opportunity to observe craft, to have
weird things happen in our homes that had never happened before.
(09:26):
A lot of different things. But I thought that the
information that they gave us. They answered one hundred and
twenty of our questions and was very important because it
told us about the agenda of these entities, whether I
mean they claim to be extraterrestrials. We ask them if
(09:47):
they're extraterrestrials, and they say, well, extraterrestrial to.
Speaker 2 (09:52):
You, to us, yes, you know.
Speaker 3 (09:56):
So I don't know the interdimensionals are they? I really
I don't know, but I know that this was a consciousness,
and probably more than one.
Speaker 2 (10:08):
They claimed to be the Council of Fate.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
How do we differentiate something like that between someone having
a religious experience? There are people who said that I've
seen a vision of Jesus and that sort of thing.
Is there a similarity? Do we distinguish it somehow?
Speaker 2 (10:23):
Well?
Speaker 3 (10:24):
I can tell you that one of the cases that
I worked on was given to me by the granddaughter
of Rear Admiral Herbert Knowles, and he was from Maine.
He retired there with his wife Helen, and was friendly
(10:46):
with Wilbert Smith from the Canadian government, and he and
Wilbert Smith were secretly working on a communication experience with
these non humans. So it was essentially the same kind
of thing. I never would have entertained the possibility of
(11:09):
even doing an experiment except for that these people of
very high standing had done it and gathered information, gathered
evidence that it was real.
Speaker 1 (11:27):
If I recall correctly, didn't Wilbert Smith write a memo
confirming shared information between the US and Canada and confirmed
the existence of these alleged extraterrestrials.
Speaker 3 (11:39):
Yes, he was on an official trip to Washington and
he went to the Canadian embassy and this was information
that he received at the Canadian embassy, and so that.
Speaker 2 (11:52):
Was very important.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
This ended up being a much bigger deal because the
Canadian government was involved. My aunt and uncle were involved
with This was after Wilbert's death that they were invited
to Admiral Knowles's home, but the Canadian military was there,
(12:15):
and Wilbert Smith's widow, Merle was there, and you know,
so there was a lot going on undercover. And I've
written about that in Forbidden Knowledge as well. It's very
a very very interesting story. So, you know, to get
(12:38):
back to how I what I'm doing with doctor Melanie Barton,
she is, as I said, an ordained minister, but she
no longer works in the ministry because she's become more spiritual.
(12:59):
And I think a lot of this has to do
with the experiment that we worked on over two years,
that you know, this kind of thing changes people statistically.
We know that in the studies that we've done, people
tend to become more spiritually oriented. Not to say that
(13:23):
the spiritualists like that religion of spiritualism, but spiritual in
the way they conduct their lives, their attitudes change, the
way they perceive others in the world changed. That kind
of thing. It happened to me too, It happened to
everyone who participated in the study.
Speaker 1 (13:45):
Happened When did it happen to you? When was that
sort of inflection point?
Speaker 3 (13:50):
Oh gosh, Well, we began the study in twenty sixteen,
and I was highly skeptical at first, but as one
of those entities formed a relationship with me and came
into my home and I could feel his presence and
(14:12):
he communicated with me telepathically, it just sort of happened.
Whenever that happened, that strong, tingling sensation, it's the sensation
of tremendous love and it makes you feel ecstatic, and
(14:33):
that was part of it. It was the messages that
we received the explanations, the ets, concern about human behavior
about our planet. I think all of that combined together,
and it's sort of changed my direction because I've been
(14:54):
very left brained before. I'd worked extraordinarily well with Stanton
Friedman on left brain.
Speaker 1 (15:03):
Stuff research, yeah, research, Yes.
Speaker 3 (15:06):
We wrote three books together. And then I could not
really succeed in a meditatiative state, attempting a meditative state,
doing the things that I needed to do in order
to be able to communicate and to have a relationship
(15:30):
with these entities. And so I had to do I
had to give up all of that, those cautionary measures
that were in play, saying no, don't go beyond this point.
You're going to lose your reputation. People are going to
think you're a cooop. You've gone off the deep end,
(15:51):
you know, like.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
People have accused, you know, like of anyone who goes
beyond just the nuts and bolts, like, oh, now you're
going paranormal. But that's not really what it is for you.
Speaker 2 (16:03):
It's all related.
Speaker 1 (16:05):
It's all related.
Speaker 3 (16:06):
If you know enough, if you learn enough, you find
out that it's all related. Now, when I began in
this field, I was completely nuts and bolts that's what
I was looking for, That's what I did exclusively.
Speaker 2 (16:23):
And I was.
Speaker 3 (16:25):
Thinking the same thing that a lot of people think
about paranormal investigators, you know, people who look beyond the physical.
And it was the evidence that led me into the
direction that I've gone into now.
Speaker 2 (16:46):
And with.
Speaker 3 (16:48):
Doctor Mark, doctor Melanie Barton, I invited her to join
me in working on a survey on religious belief in
extraterrestrial life. And so we had fifty questions, very simple
(17:16):
anyone from the general public could could had to complete
the first twenty five. The ones from twenty five to
fifty were for those who had had some kind of
an experience with non human intelligence. And it wasn't just ets.
(17:41):
There were all sorts of things. I was really amazed
at the range from fairies to angels to Jesus and
apparitions and all sorts of things. And we looked at
people's religions, and we looked at people's levels of education,
(18:08):
and so we're in the process now of doing a
statistical study, a statistical analysis, comparative analysis on these one
thousand and five.
Speaker 2 (18:24):
Surveys that we have.
Speaker 3 (18:25):
It's an extraordinary amount of work and it's very tiring.
I can do two to four a day.
Speaker 1 (18:33):
And what's interesting though, is that that that is nuts
in Bold's work, right, I mean, it may be our
normal ish, but it's still nuts in Bolt's research.
Speaker 3 (18:44):
Like you, background is in sociology, so I studied this,
you know, I did this in college and I worked
on a survey in college. So yeah, I love that
kind of thing. It does become tedious when you're doing
the analysis. But we have also invited an academic to
(19:08):
work with us, and so he is going to begin
his work as soon as the academic year is over
at the college where he teaches. And so I'm really
excited about this because my memory of statistical analysis is
(19:30):
not a level of current experience is not there. You know,
this was a very long time ago when I was
in college, and even though I've worked on others, we
had statisticians.
Speaker 2 (19:46):
Who worked with us. So now we have.
Speaker 3 (19:48):
Another statistician and I'm really excited about that because there's
going to be an AI analysis as well, So we'll
have what I have done and then AI and we
should get some really good information. And the thing that
(20:11):
really drew me to this, I think in the beginning
was I was thinking about people of various religions and
the congressional hearings on U A p S and thinking
what impact will disclosure have on people of faith and
(20:34):
what can we do to help people of faith? And
so we're getting some really interesting information regarding their belief
systems and what they can accept, what they cannot accept, or.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
They can just become atheists. And then well some of
them were.
Speaker 3 (20:58):
We also had that category is and agnostics and even
no particular religion.
Speaker 1 (21:08):
Well, here here's an interesting question. Do you think that
it would be easier for the atheist or the religious
person of faith to come to accept a reality like this.
Speaker 3 (21:24):
All except for the very conservative Protestant Christians? Okay, uh,
seemed to be okay with it. But the atheists are
having even more difficulty, not.
Speaker 1 (21:41):
With the extraterrestrial idea, but with this other level of
consciousness contact.
Speaker 2 (21:49):
Oh, the consciousness condo.
Speaker 1 (21:51):
Is that what you're saying, because because like like like
Neil de grasse Tyson, right, he might he may be
tough to come around to the evidence that we have,
but I would imagine that like if we could prove
it to him, he'd just be like, okay, you know,
it wouldn't wouldn't hurt his like, it wouldn't affect his
worldview other than now he knows more about the universe.
(22:13):
Do you know what I mean?
Speaker 3 (22:15):
Okay, I was talking about belief in extraterrestrial life elsewhere
and the idea that we might be visited by extraterrestrial life.
What was their reaction to this idea? Did they believe
that the government had done studies on UFOs ups, extraterrestrial
(22:43):
life that kind of thing, and so, yeah, it was
the atheist agnostics and the highly conservative Christians who had
the most difficulty.
Speaker 1 (22:56):
Yeah, I'm just I'm really shocked because, you know, because
so many scientists are are atheists an agnostics, and I
would think that that, you know, should that reveal to
come to be, that they would be quick to just say, Okay, cool,
there's extraterrestials out there, they've been visiting us.
Speaker 3 (23:14):
Well, I think that for some of them there's a
lot of pushback. They don't want to accept the idea.
They have throughout their careers. I thought of this as
a taboo subject, something that scientists don't do. A scientist
(23:38):
at Harvard said to Stanton Friedman, you can't be a scientist.
Scientists don't believe that UFOs are real, that it's a
nuclear physicist.
Speaker 1 (23:48):
You can't believe as if it's a matter of faith.
Speaker 3 (23:51):
Right, as if it's a matter of faith, which is
absolutely ridiculous. But you know, there's been so such a
taboo for so many years that I'm sure that a
lot of scientists and academics are having difficulty getting over
that hump a little bit, I would say, apprehensive about
(24:18):
what happens if it all changes and we go back
to the way it was. And I have come forward
and expressed an interest in this, and now am saying
that I have evidence that this is real, what will
happen to my career?
Speaker 1 (24:34):
Right? So it's almost like a forward projection of one's
current quandary. Meaning I think that philosophically, most scientists would,
especially if you're cosmologists, you would accept that extratrescles exist.
(24:55):
But it's almost like when you're asking them those questions,
they're behaving like they're answering this future question. Now, it's
like they're kind of stuck in this cage in their
mind of this is a taboo. I can't even speculate
into the future about it.
Speaker 3 (25:15):
That has been a problem in the past, and I
think that for many people, they're hanging on to that problem.
It was also a challenge for me in moving beyond
the strictly accepted even though it was on the fringe
accepted scientific analysis of the evidence to do the experiment
(25:43):
that I worked on to look beyond the nuts and bolts.
So there's always you know that question that for ten
years there were no television shows that brought in de
bunkers and gave false information at the end of every
show to dissuade the public from believing what was just
(26:10):
presented in the show. And I thought that was wonderful.
A lot of experiencers went public for the first time,
they had been quiet for years. They got we're heading
toward disclosure. It's okay to talk about it now. And
I think it helped a lot of people. But now
(26:32):
we're getting that pushback again. Congress wants to push forward,
but the Pentagon does not, and so it is creating
problems for some people.
Speaker 1 (26:47):
I do want to follow that line a little bit,
but I just want to quickly congratulate Chouldy, Harris and
Chat who just finished an undergrad in sociology. So congratulations Shouldy.
That's awesome in regards to you do, oh gosh, the
arrow invests alleged investigation into the UFOs. What do you
(27:14):
think there's a an honest motive behind Arrow or is
Arrow just a prop for for some ulterior motive or
just to placate the public.
Speaker 3 (27:30):
Well, my concern has been the difference as time has
gone on, because these are funded yearly.
Speaker 2 (27:40):
So you had us app and then you had.
Speaker 3 (27:48):
Was the one that Loue Arizondo ran a tip and
then you know, you finally get to Arrow and the
name of the nomina changes. It becomes a little more
amorphous each time. I was very much in favor of
(28:08):
an honest paper on all of the government studies that
have been done on UFOs, dating back to the beginning
of their studies in the forties, and so I knew
that this was going to happen, and I was hoping
(28:32):
that they would be honest. I have the statistics I wrote,
and Stanton wrote about this in our book Fact Fiction
and Flying Saucers. It's the history of government involvement in
the investigation of UFOs, their major studies, their findings, their
decision to cover up their findings, Why and who was
(28:54):
involved in the cover up. So I know the real statistics,
but the Arrow report lied.
Speaker 2 (29:03):
They told the.
Speaker 3 (29:04):
Same old lies. And that's very, very disappointing to me
that you know, we're I'm paying their salary, you're paying
their salary. We're all funding their work, and why would
we want to fund lies. They just want to close
(29:24):
this down. I think they do not want the public.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
Involved in this. They never have.
Speaker 3 (29:32):
They want to go back to the point where you know,
people were seeing something in the sky that everyone was
told was just fuzzy and then and we were not
being visited by extraterrestrial life and oh yeah, it could
(29:57):
be anything.
Speaker 2 (30:00):
Light birds.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
Well, I have to say, actually, there was a report
that had come out and report a study that had
come out this past summer by a couple of scientists,
and they made a really good case for ball lightning
and how it behaves kind of oddly and it can
kind of like do like a zigzag, you know, kind
of effect. And I thought, you know, that's one of
the more the more clear and supported offerings, skeptical offerings,
(30:28):
not de bunker offerings, but like an honest offering for
some things that you might see in the sky, you know,
just like now someone sees starlink and they think it's
a UFO, right. I think it's possible that even the
UFO that I saw when I was younger could actually
have been ball lightning, because it was a glowing dot
(30:49):
in the distance, and the way it moved was very odd.
It stopped on a dime, that sort of thing. So
it can't I can't rule it out.
Speaker 2 (30:56):
How do you feel about conditions?
Speaker 3 (30:58):
Yeah, the weather conditions have to be just right, and
it doesn't last for long.
Speaker 2 (31:03):
It just lasts for seconds.
Speaker 3 (31:06):
Read the material on this written by doctor James MacDonald
from University of Arizona. He did a great deal of study.
He was a meteorological physicist, very high standing. Philip Class,
(31:29):
who you know, the most prolific anti UFO propagandist of
the twentieth century, presented that as a possibility, and he
was talking about television antennas and ball lightning on television
antennas and on electrical lines. And I even tried to
(31:51):
suggest that my uncle Barney Hill was looking at ball
lightning and when he was actually looking at a off
that was hovering on hundred feet overhead and seeing figures
inside that craft, humanoid figures that's.
Speaker 2 (32:12):
Not ball lightning.
Speaker 3 (32:13):
Class said, well, you know, in ball lightning you might
have some darker areas that could pull my mind.
Speaker 1 (32:21):
It's funny. It's funny. Brought up James McDonald because I
have writ in front of me and if you can
see it on there. But I was just reading his
scientist critique on the the Condon Report right here. Uh,
and yeah, he's a he's a great debunker de bunker.
He was, Yeah, I think we need more of that,
(32:45):
and we need more scientists, and thankfully we do have
you know, Gary Nolan, Jacques Vallet out there. I had
Kevin Kanooth on the show not too long ago, and
one of the most exciting things was for me, it's
just a geek out thing, I guess, but it wasn't he.
It was another scientist at a Moufon nineteen ninety two.
(33:06):
I think Moufon symposium had presented it the explanation of
how a car could get the engine can shut down
in the presence of a UFO and then suddenly the
magically just turned back on. You know, it's a very
hollywood thing, but he broke down the science of how
that's actually possible, and that's what we need because I
(33:29):
think that if the public heard more of that, then
it would be something a little bit more tangible and
not just some fantastical story. You know, that's someone I'm told.
Speaker 3 (33:38):
Yeah, And we now have doctor John Blitch entering the field,
Lieutenant colonel retired and he had has a master's degree
in robotics and a master's in PhD in cognitive psychology.
I've known him for several years and he's just begun
to speak on show.
Speaker 2 (34:00):
He has a new.
Speaker 3 (34:01):
Book or a book coming out, his first book on
this topic, and I think that he's going to have
a lot to contribute.
Speaker 1 (34:09):
That's great, That's very exciting. Yeah, here's a speaking of fantasy.
I don't know if you've heard, but they are planning
on rebooting, not rebooting, but continuing The X Files with
new cast, a little bit of the old cast, kind
of passing the torch sort of thing. Were you at
X File's viewer back in the day.
Speaker 2 (34:31):
I watched it once in a while.
Speaker 1 (34:34):
Okay. My question to you is, or was going to
be in a series like The X Files moving forward
when they bring it back, what would you like to
see on that popular television sort of program different than
how they you know, told those stories in the past
(34:55):
or just what would you like to see they've not
seen before.
Speaker 3 (34:58):
Yeah, there was the believe her, and there was believer,
but there was always some some reason to make you believe.
I would love to see the evidence brought forth.
Speaker 2 (35:14):
Real cases.
Speaker 3 (35:17):
With the tremendous amount of evidence that has been collected,
that kind of thing.
Speaker 1 (35:24):
So like, really really used the real world evidence and
build that into the cases on the.
Speaker 3 (35:31):
Other episodes, fictional case, but use the real world evidence
that we have.
Speaker 1 (35:40):
That's very cool. They did a little bit of that.
But but what I'm imagining is almost like the Blue
Book series, the Project blue Book series, and now that
was you know, fantasy.
Speaker 2 (35:51):
You know, I.
Speaker 3 (35:54):
Stopped watching that when they portrayed my uncle Barney as
uh a crazy a truck driver who was psychotic and
and was going took in a gun to Project blue
Book and was going to kill Oh I didn't even
get to that end.
Speaker 2 (36:12):
Oh my gosh.
Speaker 3 (36:13):
And then then my aunt was his black wife because
my aunt was white, and so they completely distorted it
and and you know, made made Barney look psychotic and
it was just it was terrible because my uncle was
a man of very high standing in his community. He
(36:35):
really cared about his reputation and his behavior reflected that.
And they were US Rights Commission Yeah, you know that
kind of thing. They were activists and uh political, politically involved,
(36:57):
and I refused to watch the show after they created
such an unseemly distortion of who they were.
Speaker 1 (37:10):
And he also after the incident, he was reticent to
really kind of you know, open up about it, right,
So he was he certainly was raised individual.
Speaker 2 (37:24):
No, not at all.
Speaker 3 (37:25):
He he just told Betty not to tell anybody that
no good could come of it. He wanted to forget
about it as quickly as possible and not to pursue it.
Speaker 1 (37:38):
Do you think good has come of it in the
long run.
Speaker 3 (37:42):
No, really, not for my family, not for Betty, not
for Barney, because I think because it's not just a
UFO siding. The UFO siding, it was a spec tacula
UFO siding was on two different radar arrays, one in Newington,
(38:06):
New Hampshire, and one in Vermont, seventeen miles from where
they were in the White Mountains. And so that part
of it is fine. But as soon as you talk
about extraterrestrial non human entities and all of the weird
(38:29):
stuff that goes along with that.
Speaker 2 (38:30):
Because it's very weird.
Speaker 3 (38:34):
The government, the military does not want any of that
to be known by the general public.
Speaker 1 (38:46):
Yeah, speaking of that, recently, we were discussing the Cash
landrum case, and in that case, the close encounter resulted
in what seems to have been some sort of radiation exposure. Yes,
(39:06):
Benny and Barney, you know, didn't seem to have like
such an extreme uh like you know, hair falling out
and that in the case of like like Betty.
Speaker 3 (39:18):
Cash, so right, because there was a difference in the
craft and Betty Cash was there standing too close. I
wrote about this in fact fiction Influenxas. And she was
standing in front of her car as this aerial vehicle
(39:40):
was hovering overhead sort of dropping this molten whatever flaming
substance down. Her car was so hot that when she
went to open the car door, she burned her hand.
Speaker 2 (39:58):
Uh you uh.
Speaker 3 (40:03):
It was just a horrific kind of experience for those
two women and that little boy who had radiation poisoning
and lost their hair burns. Betty developed cancer and died.
She was never able to work again. Yeah, you know,
it was it was my aunt and uncle were lucky.
(40:26):
They had some negative consequences in terms of breathing their lungs.
Speaker 2 (40:34):
Their dog.
Speaker 3 (40:36):
Grew a fungal infection on her back, maybe related to
whatever was deposited onto Betty's dress powdery substance.
Speaker 1 (40:49):
Yes, but they did come close to this craft room
in fact taking aboard, And I guess that's what I
wonder is like, is it is it really well? It
is directional where you're positioned when the craft lands, or
or do you think that maybe that craft, that the
Cash and Lantern craft was actually maybe a terrestrial technology.
Speaker 3 (41:12):
I've wondered about that. Yeah, I think there's a good
chance it was a terrestrial nuclear technology because I know
that we were working on things like nuclear airplanes and
that sort of thing in that timeframe, and so there's
a good chance that it belonged to us.
Speaker 1 (41:35):
Yeah, all right, So do you think that there is
a future for disclosure coming from the others, whoever they
whatever they might be, or do you think that it's
on us to disclose it based on your recent study,
(42:02):
you know, and your your consciousness connection.
Speaker 3 (42:04):
I'm curious, right, and you know these psionics experiments that
are going on there are so many people who are
going out and doing successful ce fives that and calling
craft in so people who have the ability to meditate
(42:25):
to control themselves like play is Stephen Greer's tones, and
that helps as well. But there are protocols that you
have to follow and people have had success doing that,
so that that's been good. A lot of people are
(42:49):
excited about that.
Speaker 2 (42:51):
I think. I don't know.
Speaker 3 (42:52):
The ETS said that when more than fifty percent of
the Earth's population is aware that they exist, then they
will announce their presence.
Speaker 1 (43:04):
So it's a it's a critical mess kind of a situation.
Speaker 2 (43:07):
Yes it is, But I don't know.
Speaker 3 (43:09):
Maybe they've gotten pushed back lately because I've heard that
there might be a change in what they said they
were going to do.
Speaker 1 (43:18):
Are they going to tariff us? Is that what's happening? Like, well,
we're changing our mind again, Gosh, I really hope that
that that's not the case. I hope that they, if
indeed they are wanting to make contact at some point,
that they, you know, will stick stick to that. Interesting then,
because it it never occurred to me that you could
(43:41):
frame the Betty and Barney Hill case now your your
aunt and uncle as maybe they should have kept it
to themselves because you know, it was damaging in so
many ways. And I wonder, is that how we should
maybe think about the UFO reality? Is it? We think
(44:03):
it's the right thing to do, right. We think that truth, transparency,
understanding the nature of reality, these are all important things.
But is it is it? Would it be a mistake
to open up that door.
Speaker 3 (44:18):
I've always been apprehensive about revealing all of this information
full disclosure to the public. You know, on shows like this,
I'm preaching to the choir. I I give information to
people who are seeking that information, but I never try
(44:38):
to convince the public of anything, you know, So that's
my stance on it. I I do believe that there
should be some limited disclosure by the government, and there
has been in the congressional hearings on UAPs, there has
(45:05):
been some very good disclosure, and there has been disclosure
that has caused great problems with for the individuals who
disclosed information about non human tissue and crash landings.
Speaker 1 (45:25):
Well, has I reached out to you or anyone from
the government recently?
Speaker 2 (45:29):
No?
Speaker 1 (45:30):
No, okay? And well, I guess if we consider the
fact that they're really only looking at cases in the past. Yeah,
I know that the last twenty years that one of.
Speaker 3 (45:41):
My studies, George Knapp, was going to pass one of
my studies over to doctor James Lukatski, who was ahead
of Ossap. But no one has approached me in an
official capacity.
Speaker 1 (45:59):
What is your take on President Trump? Do you think
he will push for disclosure?
Speaker 2 (46:08):
I don't know. He said he would.
Speaker 1 (46:13):
Too, but that's not happening for whatever reason or it's limited.
Speaker 2 (46:18):
Right, because.
Speaker 3 (46:20):
The problem is, as far as we're concerned in receiving information,
the military works under confidentiality agreements, so they have all
of the different levels of confidentiality to above top secret
(46:43):
code word and they and when you have information that's
categorized as something that is only going to be discussed
in a skiff or not discussed at all, or only
with people with need to know, that's information that they
can they can keep classified, that they could make the
(47:09):
decision never to release.
Speaker 1 (47:13):
I do wonder, you know, could you use an executive
order knowing that it would be denied, and then take
it to the courts and then and then see see
what happens there, because that at best maybe that would
just expose little crack.
Speaker 3 (47:31):
Well, I think the constitutional lawyer Danny Shehan is active
in and this kind of thing in pushing uh you know,
opening opening the can of disclosure. Yeah, maybe the can
(47:51):
of worms. But uh two for limited disclosure to prevent
and catastrophic disclosure.
Speaker 1 (48:02):
Sure, because that would be the responsible thing to do.
Speaker 3 (48:08):
It would be the responsible thing to.
Speaker 1 (48:10):
Do based on your studies, and as you know, from
a sociological point of view, I guess you do think
that full disclosure could lead to sympanic.
Speaker 3 (48:23):
Yes, because people would be terrified that the ets were going.
Speaker 2 (48:29):
To take them to Yeah.
Speaker 3 (48:32):
And you know, if you go to the internet, there's
a lot of very frightening information. People seem to thrive
on fear in the Internet. And the key to having
a relationship with these non humans is to move beyond
fear and to project love toward them. That's what they
(48:53):
respond to. They have big problems with human emotions. People
who are become violent end up receiving violence back.
Speaker 2 (49:10):
A lot of times.
Speaker 3 (49:13):
I have photographs of experiencers who are black and blue
from head to toe who I've heard from military officers,
police officers who were really treated very poorly, roughed up,
but they it was their behavior in a sense, they
(49:37):
were defending themselves. They had the right, I suppose to
defend themselves. What was happening was against our laws, and
they were very angry. But you're not going to get
anywhere with these non humans if you behave in that manner,
because they just think of you as of the hairy
(50:02):
ape who has gone berserk. And you do much better
and can establish a relationship and communicate if you can
be more on equal footing with them, to express this art,
(50:24):
project love from your consciousness in their direction, to behave
in a kind manner.
Speaker 1 (50:35):
Yeah, it reminds me a little bit of AI. How
AI kind of mimics it human behavior, right, So you
get these random aberrations where it's insulting or saying something
terrible to somebody, all because all it's really doing is
just reflecting the world that we've created online and it's
(50:56):
pulling from that. So it's almost a mirror in many ways.
I wonder you had mentioned earlier, just a moment ago,
that you have all these people online that are caught
up in these fear driven conspiracy theories about what extra
thresholds could be their demons or you know, who knows what,
(51:18):
And I wonder would disclosure actually have been easier, you know,
forty plus years ago, before the well, before the Internet,
because now you have just this fertile ground of misinformation
and trolling and fear mongering that people will then kind
(51:40):
of pull from that and transpose that onto disclosure and
interpret it in the most misinformed and misguided way.
Speaker 3 (51:54):
Yeah, and going back almost eighty years, there was a
discussion at the pan gone about disclosure, and some of
the military generals wanted disclosure, higher ranking officers, whereas others
(52:15):
for reasons of their Christian beliefs, did not want disclosure,
and they went out. And that's happening again. I'm sad
to say that it's happening again, and I'm not very
optimistic about continued funding of the pro UFO oriented programs
(52:45):
in the DEIA.
Speaker 1 (52:51):
Do you think that because since arrow Is the report
in the New York Times article has come out and
we've had this ongoing discussion, we've had the Navy implement
new protocols for reporting UAP. There seems to have been
some acceptance of this.
Speaker 3 (53:09):
Now, yes, yes, there has been some when it comes
to reporting technology advanced technology.
Speaker 1 (53:20):
I see, okay, yeah, yeah, all.
Speaker 3 (53:22):
Right, but not when it comes to talking about non
human tissue and UFP crashes.
Speaker 1 (53:33):
Yeah, that's a interesting way to put a non human tissue.
So just everyone knows that you are back speaking of
the physical. Yes, you're back out there, you're speaking, you're
doing engagements, which is awesome, and you have upcoming in
April eleventh through the thirteenth, the thirty seventh Ozark Mountain
UFO Conference. Your title of your speak is presentation is
(53:57):
et presence a multi discil but disciplinary assessment. Can you
tell us a little bit about what that means.
Speaker 3 (54:07):
Yeah, so I'm going to be examining it through several
different lenses, you know, as a UFO investigator, researchers from
a scientific point of view, covering findings of some leading scientists,
(54:27):
to a religious point of view, and how this impacts
the religious community. Maybe some studies that have been done
by the religious communities, particularly the Catholic Church. They've been
the most interested in this, and all the way down
(54:49):
to the congressional hearings and the military pushback and what's
going on presently.
Speaker 1 (54:56):
That's fantastic. Have you ever had a chance to speak
with Yes.
Speaker 3 (55:01):
I have, Yes, I met her several years ago.
Speaker 2 (55:05):
It was oh more than.
Speaker 3 (55:08):
Several now, I guess it was quite a long time
ago when she was writing a book about Chris Bledsoe
and I was with Chris, and I was with her
and a lot of different researchers at a gathering in Pennsylvania,
Bucks County, Pennsylvania, and that's where I met her. We
(55:32):
sat together on a bus, had a bus ride together,
and she discussed her work with me, and I discussed
mine with her.
Speaker 1 (55:40):
Somehow, bus rides are always good for conversations.
Speaker 2 (55:43):
Yes, plane rides too.
Speaker 3 (55:45):
I had had a chance to ride next to doctor
Claude Swanson on a plane one time, and that was
that was wonderful. It was great, a great conversation.
Speaker 1 (55:56):
I liked. That's awesome.
Speaker 2 (55:58):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (55:58):
I had emailed Diana and we emailed back and forth
a couple of times. It's like, well over a year ago.
It never came, never came together. But hopefully one day,
you know, I'll have her on the podcast, because that's
really interesting it is. It's coming from it from a
very different angle as a former Catholic, you know, I
see that through a different lens. Like you said, is
(56:22):
there anything else you can leave us with? Any last
thoughts before before we go.
Speaker 3 (56:29):
Boy, I'm just so happy to be back and working
again and speaking with you this evening. If you go
to my website, it's it's right there in front of you,
Kathleen dashmargin dot com. I've completely revamped the website on
a lot of new information that hasn't wasn't there before,
(56:51):
and my upcoming speaking engagements so there albeit at Roswell
too this year, and looking forward to that fourth of
July weekend. So I hope to see everybody at one
of these two places. That would be terrific. And I
have something like three television shows coming out and one
(57:13):
movie coming out this spring.
Speaker 1 (57:15):
Okay, nice, all right, we'll be on the lookout. Okay,
all right, Thank you, Kathleen. I really appreciate it, and
I'm glad you're back.
Speaker 2 (57:22):
At Thank you. Thank you so much.
Speaker 1 (57:24):
Okay, and thank you everybody for joining us tonight. Wow. Yeah,
that was that was a great conversation. I'm gonna have
to go back and listen to some of that. Thank
you very much to Race Hobs and Margie k at
the ONEX Network for rebroadcasting this podcast every Thursday night,
eleven pm Pacific time to a m. Eastern Time on Fridays,
(57:50):
and I want to thank the love of my life.
I don't do that enough on this podcast because I
do episodes and you know it takes a lot of
time and work to put this together. So I just
want to thank her because you know, she's everything to me.
So I love you, and to all of you who
joined in the chat and share your comments, I appreciate
you all so much for keeping this going. And Coffee
(58:13):
and UFOs is the podcast numbers are going up, so
I appreciate it and thank you all again. I will
post what the next guest will be soon on social media.
You can follow me on at Coffee and UFO's podcasts
on Instagram and on Blue Sky. Until next time, everyone,
peace and love and live in the mystery.
Speaker 4 (58:41):
It's good to be in urgently and I wish more
of us would think of ourselves that way.
Speaker 2 (58:49):
And I don't have a problem with skeptics. It's de bunkers
that are on some other level that I don't.
Speaker 4 (58:55):
Understand, especially an inference of a change in local gravity.
Speaker 3 (59:23):
Saucer shaped craft and they're hovering over the water. Bull
Book Special Report fourteenth.
Speaker 1 (59:36):
The better the quality of the sighting, the more likely
to be unexplainable,
However you are and whenever you are, Welcome back everyone
to Coffee in UFOs. Cheers. This is a great night.
We have a returning guest, one of my absolute favorites,
Kathleen Martin, and we're going to cover the gamut of research.
Kathleen is one of the most prolific speakers, authors, and
(00:39):
one of the most knowledgeable people on the subject of
UFOs e T and experiencers contact. Tonight, we're going to
review a lot of that, but also Kathleen, I have
some some different questions for her tonight that I've not
asked before, so that'll be fun. And we also talk
(01:00):
about briefly a survey that she's working on that will
give us a little bit more insight into the phenomena.
As a friendly reminder, if you listen to this podcast
on YouTube, please know that we are also available wherever
you listen to your podcast regularly, any platform out there,
all the major platforms, we are there. Coffee and UFOs
(01:22):
is also rebroadcast on the Unex Network every Thursday night
eleven pm Pacific Time and two am Eastern Time Friday mornings,
and of course, as I speak, I'm clicking the go
live button on Instagram, So if you are an Instagram
or and you want to check it out there, you
can do that. Normally we are a YouTube video streaming
(01:47):
and Facebook video streaming, but hopefully we'll get some more
views on Instagram. The podcast continues to grow, and I
really appreciate all of your support, your comments, your feedback,
your questions when we have guests. All that really helps.
If you are a fan, if you could please click
the like button on this video, hit subscribe, click the
notification button, all that really helps. And if you listen
(02:09):
to the podcast version, if you can give a review
and rate, I would great greatly appreciate that. So thank
you everyone so much, and now we're going to bring
our esteemed guest on, Kathleen Martin. Hey, Kathleen, welcome back.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
Thank you, Alan. It's great to be back with you.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
It's a pleasure as always over the years. You know,
there are a number of guests that I asked to
come back on the show, and every time, not only
is an interesting conversation, but it's a pleasant one. You know,
you Peter Robbins, Cheryl Costa, some of the others that
it's just really nice to know that they're good people
out there in this field, and like we were talking
(02:49):
about before we went on, you know good and honest people,
and you're one of them. And I really appreciate that
very quickly as a refresher for those who may not know. Actually,
Kathleen Martin's lifelong pursuit of UFO and extraterrestural contact research
stems from her personal connection to the nineteen sixty one
(03:12):
Betty and Barney Hill abduction. This experience ignited decades of
dedicated investigation, archival research, and advocacy, including placing the Hills
records at the University of New Hampshire. With a background
in education and sociology, she's transitioned into a leading UFO
researcher and author, contributing significantly to Muffon's Experiencer research team
(03:38):
and participating in four large scale studies on experiencers. Martin's
extensive publications include two editions of Captured the Betty and
Barney Hill UFO Experience, Science Was Wrong, also published in
Chinese and fact fiction, and Flying Saucers, The Alien Abduction Files,
(03:58):
Extraterrestural Contact What Do You Do? What to Do when
You've Been Abducted? Also published in French, and two editions
of forbidden knowledge. Her work as an advocate highlights her
commitment to understanding and supporting individuals who have experienced contact
with non human entities. She has appeared as an expert
(04:20):
on camera on sixty two television and video productions, and
innumerable radio shows and podcasts. Additionally, she has lectured at
conferences across the United States and in several foreign countries.
Kathleen's website is kathleen dashboard dot com. So, Kathleen, we
(04:41):
were talking about this survey that you're working on, and
there's more to come regarding the survey. Can you tell
us what the scope is? Yes?
Speaker 3 (04:50):
Well, a person who has now become a friend of
mine began as a psycho therapy and an ordained minister
who had applied to Muffon's Experiencer research team when I
was the director. I was the director for ten years,
(05:12):
and so we were keeping a list of people who
were qualified, licensed, insured, etc. Professionals who were willing to
take clients, not for free. They were professionals who were
(05:34):
being paid for their services, but they were trained, they
were knowledgeable, and they could help experiences. So that's how
our relationship began, and it eventually expanded into an experiment
that she wanted to do with Kevin Briggs. You might
(06:00):
have heard his name. He lives here in central Florida
and he has been an experiencer since he was a
little boy in the UK, and he has the ability
to communicate with ET's And so I was invited along
with Denise Stoner, to be some of the first people
(06:24):
to investigate this, to experiment with it. You know, have
the background that I have and that Denise has. Requires evidence.
You know, we're still evidence based, even though you know
that this phenomenon goes far beyond the nuts and bolts.
Speaker 1 (06:50):
Yes, it's evasive.
Speaker 3 (06:52):
Yes, yes, So we worked with Kevin once a month
for two years and we were able to meet this
council of so called extraterrestrials. We could not see them,
Kevin channeled them, but we were able to get scientific evidence.
Speaker 1 (07:18):
That's the trick, right, because anyone could say that they're channeling.
How do you know for sure?
Speaker 3 (07:23):
Right? He could have been delusionally, could have been hoaxing,
could have been a debunker out to destroy our careers
and their reputations. That you know, you have to be
careful about things like that.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
And I was never going to mention what we did.
It was just going to be a secret.
Speaker 3 (07:43):
But over time I decided to write about it, and
it's in some of the chapters in my newest two books,
Forbidden Knowledge, Volumes one and two. So we were able
to record a temperature increase in the area of the
(08:06):
room where the entity was up to ten degrees when
that entity entered, and just around that entity, not in
the rest of the room.
Speaker 1 (08:19):
Like a like a distinct area.
Speaker 3 (08:22):
A yes, in the distinct area right around Kevin's body,
and he he was drenched in perspiration and exhausted when
when this entity left. So as they're higher vibrational entities
and that is what makes them so hot and then
(08:45):
makes Kevin so hot.
Speaker 1 (08:47):
So almost like crossing or using energy in such a
way to cross a barrier, and that somehow it's like
an electromagnetic very strong or okay, yeah.
Speaker 3 (09:01):
Very very strong electromagnetic field. We felt this very strong
tingling sensation in our bodies when this was taking place.
We also had the opportunity to observe craft, to have
weird things happen in our homes that had never happened before.
(09:26):
A lot of different things. But I thought that the
information that they gave us. They answered one hundred and
twenty of our questions and was very important because it
told us about the agenda of these entities, whether I
mean they claim to be extraterrestrials. We ask them if
(09:47):
they're extraterrestrials, and they say, well, extraterrestrial to.
Speaker 2 (09:52):
You, to us, yes, you know.
Speaker 3 (09:56):
So I don't know the interdimensionals are they? I really
I don't know, but I know that this was a consciousness,
and probably more than one.
Speaker 2 (10:08):
They claimed to be the Council of Fate.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
How do we differentiate something like that between someone having
a religious experience? There are people who said that I've
seen a vision of Jesus and that sort of thing.
Is there a similarity? Do we distinguish it somehow?
Speaker 2 (10:23):
Well?
Speaker 3 (10:24):
I can tell you that one of the cases that
I worked on was given to me by the granddaughter
of Rear Admiral Herbert Knowles, and he was from Maine.
He retired there with his wife Helen, and was friendly
(10:46):
with Wilbert Smith from the Canadian government, and he and
Wilbert Smith were secretly working on a communication experience with
these non humans. So it was essentially the same kind
of thing. I never would have entertained the possibility of
(11:09):
even doing an experiment except for that these people of
very high standing had done it and gathered information, gathered
evidence that it was real.
Speaker 1 (11:27):
If I recall correctly, didn't Wilbert Smith write a memo
confirming shared information between the US and Canada and confirmed
the existence of these alleged extraterrestrials.
Speaker 3 (11:39):
Yes, he was on an official trip to Washington and
he went to the Canadian embassy and this was information
that he received at the Canadian embassy, and so that.
Speaker 2 (11:52):
Was very important.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
This ended up being a much bigger deal because the
Canadian government was involved. My aunt and uncle were involved
with This was after Wilbert's death that they were invited
to Admiral Knowles's home, but the Canadian military was there,
(12:15):
and Wilbert Smith's widow, Merle was there, and you know,
so there was a lot going on undercover. And I've
written about that in Forbidden Knowledge as well. It's very
a very very interesting story. So, you know, to get
(12:38):
back to how I what I'm doing with doctor Melanie Barton,
she is, as I said, an ordained minister, but she
no longer works in the ministry because she's become more spiritual.
(12:59):
And I think a lot of this has to do
with the experiment that we worked on over two years,
that you know, this kind of thing changes people statistically.
We know that in the studies that we've done, people
tend to become more spiritually oriented. Not to say that
(13:23):
the spiritualists like that religion of spiritualism, but spiritual in
the way they conduct their lives, their attitudes change, the
way they perceive others in the world changed. That kind
of thing. It happened to me too, It happened to
everyone who participated in the study.
Speaker 1 (13:45):
Happened When did it happen to you? When was that
sort of inflection point?
Speaker 3 (13:50):
Oh gosh, Well, we began the study in twenty sixteen,
and I was highly skeptical at first, but as one
of those entities formed a relationship with me and came
into my home and I could feel his presence and
(14:12):
he communicated with me telepathically, it just sort of happened.
Whenever that happened, that strong, tingling sensation, it's the sensation
of tremendous love and it makes you feel ecstatic, and
(14:33):
that was part of it. It was the messages that
we received the explanations, the ets, concern about human behavior
about our planet. I think all of that combined together,
and it's sort of changed my direction because I've been
(14:54):
very left brained before. I'd worked extraordinarily well with Stanton
Friedman on left brain.
Speaker 1 (15:03):
Stuff research, yeah, research, Yes.
Speaker 3 (15:06):
We wrote three books together. And then I could not
really succeed in a meditatiative state, attempting a meditative state,
doing the things that I needed to do in order
to be able to communicate and to have a relationship
(15:30):
with these entities. And so I had to do I
had to give up all of that, those cautionary measures
that were in play, saying no, don't go beyond this point.
You're going to lose your reputation. People are going to
think you're a cooop. You've gone off the deep end,
(15:51):
you know, like.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
People have accused, you know, like of anyone who goes
beyond just the nuts and bolts, like, oh, now you're
going paranormal. But that's not really what it is for you.
Speaker 2 (16:03):
It's all related.
Speaker 1 (16:05):
It's all related.
Speaker 3 (16:06):
If you know enough, if you learn enough, you find
out that it's all related. Now, when I began in
this field, I was completely nuts and bolts that's what
I was looking for, That's what I did exclusively.
Speaker 2 (16:23):
And I was.
Speaker 3 (16:25):
Thinking the same thing that a lot of people think
about paranormal investigators, you know, people who look beyond the physical.
And it was the evidence that led me into the
direction that I've gone into now.
Speaker 2 (16:46):
And with.
Speaker 3 (16:48):
Doctor Mark, doctor Melanie Barton, I invited her to join
me in working on a survey on religious belief in
extraterrestrial life. And so we had fifty questions, very simple
(17:16):
anyone from the general public could could had to complete
the first twenty five. The ones from twenty five to
fifty were for those who had had some kind of
an experience with non human intelligence. And it wasn't just ets.
(17:41):
There were all sorts of things. I was really amazed
at the range from fairies to angels to Jesus and
apparitions and all sorts of things. And we looked at
people's religions, and we looked at people's levels of education,
(18:08):
and so we're in the process now of doing a
statistical study, a statistical analysis, comparative analysis on these one
thousand and five.
Speaker 2 (18:24):
Surveys that we have.
Speaker 3 (18:25):
It's an extraordinary amount of work and it's very tiring.
I can do two to four a day.
Speaker 1 (18:33):
And what's interesting though, is that that that is nuts
in Bold's work, right, I mean, it may be our
normal ish, but it's still nuts in Bolt's research.
Speaker 3 (18:44):
Like you, background is in sociology, so I studied this,
you know, I did this in college and I worked
on a survey in college. So yeah, I love that
kind of thing. It does become tedious when you're doing
the analysis. But we have also invited an academic to
(19:08):
work with us, and so he is going to begin
his work as soon as the academic year is over
at the college where he teaches. And so I'm really
excited about this because my memory of statistical analysis is
(19:30):
not a level of current experience is not there. You know,
this was a very long time ago when I was
in college, and even though I've worked on others, we
had statisticians.
Speaker 2 (19:46):
Who worked with us. So now we have.
Speaker 3 (19:48):
Another statistician and I'm really excited about that because there's
going to be an AI analysis as well, So we'll
have what I have done and then AI and we
should get some really good information. And the thing that
(20:11):
really drew me to this, I think in the beginning
was I was thinking about people of various religions and
the congressional hearings on U A p S and thinking
what impact will disclosure have on people of faith and
(20:34):
what can we do to help people of faith? And
so we're getting some really interesting information regarding their belief
systems and what they can accept, what they cannot accept, or.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
They can just become atheists. And then well some of
them were.
Speaker 3 (20:58):
We also had that category is and agnostics and even
no particular religion.
Speaker 1 (21:08):
Well, here here's an interesting question. Do you think that
it would be easier for the atheist or the religious
person of faith to come to accept a reality like this.
Speaker 3 (21:24):
All except for the very conservative Protestant Christians? Okay, uh,
seemed to be okay with it. But the atheists are
having even more difficulty, not.
Speaker 1 (21:41):
With the extraterrestrial idea, but with this other level of
consciousness contact.
Speaker 2 (21:49):
Oh, the consciousness condo.
Speaker 1 (21:51):
Is that what you're saying, because because like like like
Neil de grasse Tyson, right, he might he may be
tough to come around to the evidence that we have,
but I would imagine that like if we could prove
it to him, he'd just be like, okay, you know,
it wouldn't wouldn't hurt his like, it wouldn't affect his
worldview other than now he knows more about the universe.
(22:13):
Do you know what I mean?
Speaker 3 (22:15):
Okay, I was talking about belief in extraterrestrial life elsewhere
and the idea that we might be visited by extraterrestrial life.
What was their reaction to this idea? Did they believe
that the government had done studies on UFOs ups, extraterrestrial
(22:43):
life that kind of thing, and so, yeah, it was
the atheist agnostics and the highly conservative Christians who had
the most difficulty.
Speaker 1 (22:56):
Yeah, I'm just I'm really shocked because, you know, because
so many scientists are are atheists an agnostics, and I
would think that that, you know, should that reveal to
come to be, that they would be quick to just say, Okay, cool,
there's extraterrestials out there, they've been visiting us.
Speaker 3 (23:14):
Well, I think that for some of them there's a
lot of pushback. They don't want to accept the idea.
They have throughout their careers. I thought of this as
a taboo subject, something that scientists don't do. A scientist
(23:38):
at Harvard said to Stanton Friedman, you can't be a scientist.
Scientists don't believe that UFOs are real, that it's a
nuclear physicist.
Speaker 1 (23:48):
You can't believe as if it's a matter of faith.
Speaker 3 (23:51):
Right, as if it's a matter of faith, which is
absolutely ridiculous. But you know, there's been so such a
taboo for so many years that I'm sure that a
lot of scientists and academics are having difficulty getting over
that hump a little bit, I would say, apprehensive about
(24:18):
what happens if it all changes and we go back
to the way it was. And I have come forward
and expressed an interest in this, and now am saying
that I have evidence that this is real, what will
happen to my career?
Speaker 1 (24:34):
Right? So it's almost like a forward projection of one's
current quandary. Meaning I think that philosophically, most scientists would,
especially if you're cosmologists, you would accept that extratrescles exist.
(24:55):
But it's almost like when you're asking them those questions,
they're behaving like they're answering this future question. Now, it's
like they're kind of stuck in this cage in their
mind of this is a taboo. I can't even speculate
into the future about it.
Speaker 3 (25:15):
That has been a problem in the past, and I
think that for many people, they're hanging on to that problem.
It was also a challenge for me in moving beyond
the strictly accepted even though it was on the fringe
accepted scientific analysis of the evidence to do the experiment
(25:43):
that I worked on to look beyond the nuts and bolts.
So there's always you know that question that for ten
years there were no television shows that brought in de
bunkers and gave false information at the end of every
show to dissuade the public from believing what was just
(26:10):
presented in the show. And I thought that was wonderful.
A lot of experiencers went public for the first time,
they had been quiet for years. They got we're heading
toward disclosure. It's okay to talk about it now. And
I think it helped a lot of people. But now
(26:32):
we're getting that pushback again. Congress wants to push forward,
but the Pentagon does not, and so it is creating
problems for some people.
Speaker 1 (26:47):
I do want to follow that line a little bit,
but I just want to quickly congratulate Chouldy, Harris and
Chat who just finished an undergrad in sociology. So congratulations Shouldy.
That's awesome in regards to you do, oh gosh, the
arrow invests alleged investigation into the UFOs. What do you
(27:14):
think there's a an honest motive behind Arrow or is
Arrow just a prop for for some ulterior motive or
just to placate the public.
Speaker 3 (27:30):
Well, my concern has been the difference as time has
gone on, because these are funded yearly.
Speaker 2 (27:40):
So you had us app and then you had.
Speaker 3 (27:48):
Was the one that Loue Arizondo ran a tip and
then you know, you finally get to Arrow and the
name of the nomina changes. It becomes a little more
amorphous each time. I was very much in favor of
(28:08):
an honest paper on all of the government studies that
have been done on UFOs, dating back to the beginning
of their studies in the forties, and so I knew
that this was going to happen, and I was hoping
(28:32):
that they would be honest. I have the statistics I wrote,
and Stanton wrote about this in our book Fact Fiction
and Flying Saucers. It's the history of government involvement in
the investigation of UFOs, their major studies, their findings, their
decision to cover up their findings, Why and who was
(28:54):
involved in the cover up. So I know the real statistics,
but the Arrow report lied.
Speaker 2 (29:03):
They told the.
Speaker 3 (29:04):
Same old lies. And that's very, very disappointing to me
that you know, we're I'm paying their salary, you're paying
their salary. We're all funding their work, and why would
we want to fund lies. They just want to close
(29:24):
this down. I think they do not want the public.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
Involved in this. They never have.
Speaker 3 (29:32):
They want to go back to the point where you know,
people were seeing something in the sky that everyone was
told was just fuzzy and then and we were not
being visited by extraterrestrial life and oh yeah, it could
(29:57):
be anything.
Speaker 2 (30:00):
Light birds.
Speaker 1 (30:02):
Well, I have to say, actually, there was a report
that had come out and report a study that had
come out this past summer by a couple of scientists,
and they made a really good case for ball lightning
and how it behaves kind of oddly and it can
kind of like do like a zigzag, you know, kind
of effect. And I thought, you know, that's one of
the more the more clear and supported offerings, skeptical offerings,
(30:28):
not de bunker offerings, but like an honest offering for
some things that you might see in the sky, you know,
just like now someone sees starlink and they think it's
a UFO, right. I think it's possible that even the
UFO that I saw when I was younger could actually
have been ball lightning, because it was a glowing dot
(30:49):
in the distance, and the way it moved was very odd.
It stopped on a dime, that sort of thing. So
it can't I can't rule it out.
Speaker 2 (30:56):
How do you feel about conditions?
Speaker 3 (30:58):
Yeah, the weather conditions have to be just right, and
it doesn't last for long.
Speaker 2 (31:03):
It just lasts for seconds.
Speaker 3 (31:06):
Read the material on this written by doctor James MacDonald
from University of Arizona. He did a great deal of study.
He was a meteorological physicist, very high standing. Philip Class,
(31:29):
who you know, the most prolific anti UFO propagandist of
the twentieth century, presented that as a possibility, and he
was talking about television antennas and ball lightning on television
antennas and on electrical lines. And I even tried to
(31:51):
suggest that my uncle Barney Hill was looking at ball
lightning and when he was actually looking at a off
that was hovering on hundred feet overhead and seeing figures
inside that craft, humanoid figures that's.
Speaker 2 (32:12):
Not ball lightning.
Speaker 3 (32:13):
Class said, well, you know, in ball lightning you might
have some darker areas that could pull my mind.
Speaker 1 (32:21):
It's funny. It's funny. Brought up James McDonald because I
have writ in front of me and if you can
see it on there. But I was just reading his
scientist critique on the the Condon Report right here. Uh,
and yeah, he's a he's a great debunker de bunker.
He was, Yeah, I think we need more of that,
(32:45):
and we need more scientists, and thankfully we do have
you know, Gary Nolan, Jacques Vallet out there. I had
Kevin Kanooth on the show not too long ago, and
one of the most exciting things was for me, it's
just a geek out thing, I guess, but it wasn't he.
It was another scientist at a Moufon nineteen ninety two.
(33:06):
I think Moufon symposium had presented it the explanation of
how a car could get the engine can shut down
in the presence of a UFO and then suddenly the
magically just turned back on. You know, it's a very
hollywood thing, but he broke down the science of how
that's actually possible, and that's what we need because I
(33:29):
think that if the public heard more of that, then
it would be something a little bit more tangible and
not just some fantastical story. You know, that's someone I'm told.
Speaker 3 (33:38):
Yeah, And we now have doctor John Blitch entering the field,
Lieutenant colonel retired and he had has a master's degree
in robotics and a master's in PhD in cognitive psychology.
I've known him for several years and he's just begun
to speak on show.
Speaker 2 (34:00):
He has a new.
Speaker 3 (34:01):
Book or a book coming out, his first book on
this topic, and I think that he's going to have
a lot to contribute.
Speaker 1 (34:09):
That's great, That's very exciting. Yeah, here's a speaking of fantasy.
I don't know if you've heard, but they are planning
on rebooting, not rebooting, but continuing The X Files with
new cast, a little bit of the old cast, kind
of passing the torch sort of thing. Were you at
X File's viewer back in the day.
Speaker 2 (34:31):
I watched it once in a while.
Speaker 1 (34:34):
Okay. My question to you is, or was going to
be in a series like The X Files moving forward
when they bring it back, what would you like to
see on that popular television sort of program different than
how they you know, told those stories in the past
(34:55):
or just what would you like to see they've not
seen before.
Speaker 3 (34:58):
Yeah, there was the believe her, and there was believer,
but there was always some some reason to make you believe.
I would love to see the evidence brought forth.
Speaker 2 (35:14):
Real cases.
Speaker 3 (35:17):
With the tremendous amount of evidence that has been collected,
that kind of thing.
Speaker 1 (35:24):
So like, really really used the real world evidence and
build that into the cases on the.
Speaker 3 (35:31):
Other episodes, fictional case, but use the real world evidence
that we have.
Speaker 1 (35:40):
That's very cool. They did a little bit of that.
But but what I'm imagining is almost like the Blue
Book series, the Project blue Book series, and now that
was you know, fantasy.
Speaker 2 (35:51):
You know, I.
Speaker 3 (35:54):
Stopped watching that when they portrayed my uncle Barney as
uh a crazy a truck driver who was psychotic and
and was going took in a gun to Project blue
Book and was going to kill Oh I didn't even
get to that end.
Speaker 2 (36:12):
Oh my gosh.
Speaker 3 (36:13):
And then then my aunt was his black wife because
my aunt was white, and so they completely distorted it
and and you know, made made Barney look psychotic and
it was just it was terrible because my uncle was
a man of very high standing in his community. He
(36:35):
really cared about his reputation and his behavior reflected that.
And they were US Rights Commission Yeah, you know that
kind of thing. They were activists and uh political, politically involved,
(36:57):
and I refused to watch the show after they created
such an unseemly distortion of who they were.
Speaker 1 (37:10):
And he also after the incident, he was reticent to
really kind of you know, open up about it, right,
So he was he certainly was raised individual.
Speaker 2 (37:24):
No, not at all.
Speaker 3 (37:25):
He he just told Betty not to tell anybody that
no good could come of it. He wanted to forget
about it as quickly as possible and not to pursue it.
Speaker 1 (37:38):
Do you think good has come of it in the
long run.
Speaker 3 (37:42):
No, really, not for my family, not for Betty, not
for Barney, because I think because it's not just a
UFO siding. The UFO siding, it was a spec tacula
UFO siding was on two different radar arrays, one in Newington,
(38:06):
New Hampshire, and one in Vermont, seventeen miles from where
they were in the White Mountains. And so that part
of it is fine. But as soon as you talk
about extraterrestrial non human entities and all of the weird
(38:29):
stuff that goes along with that.
Speaker 2 (38:30):
Because it's very weird.
Speaker 3 (38:34):
The government, the military does not want any of that
to be known by the general public.
Speaker 1 (38:46):
Yeah, speaking of that, recently, we were discussing the Cash
landrum case, and in that case, the close encounter resulted
in what seems to have been some sort of radiation exposure. Yes,
(39:06):
Benny and Barney, you know, didn't seem to have like
such an extreme uh like you know, hair falling out
and that in the case of like like Betty.
Speaker 3 (39:18):
Cash, so right, because there was a difference in the
craft and Betty Cash was there standing too close. I
wrote about this in fact fiction Influenxas. And she was
standing in front of her car as this aerial vehicle
(39:40):
was hovering overhead sort of dropping this molten whatever flaming
substance down. Her car was so hot that when she
went to open the car door, she burned her hand.
Speaker 2 (39:58):
Uh you uh.
Speaker 3 (40:03):
It was just a horrific kind of experience for those
two women and that little boy who had radiation poisoning
and lost their hair burns. Betty developed cancer and died.
She was never able to work again. Yeah, you know,
it was it was my aunt and uncle were lucky.
(40:26):
They had some negative consequences in terms of breathing their lungs.
Speaker 2 (40:34):
Their dog.
Speaker 3 (40:36):
Grew a fungal infection on her back, maybe related to
whatever was deposited onto Betty's dress powdery substance.
Speaker 1 (40:49):
Yes, but they did come close to this craft room
in fact taking aboard, And I guess that's what I
wonder is like, is it is it really well? It
is directional where you're positioned when the craft lands, or
or do you think that maybe that craft, that the
Cash and Lantern craft was actually maybe a terrestrial technology.
Speaker 3 (41:12):
I've wondered about that. Yeah, I think there's a good
chance it was a terrestrial nuclear technology because I know
that we were working on things like nuclear airplanes and
that sort of thing in that timeframe, and so there's
a good chance that it belonged to us.
Speaker 1 (41:35):
Yeah, all right, So do you think that there is
a future for disclosure coming from the others, whoever they
whatever they might be, or do you think that it's
on us to disclose it based on your recent study,
(42:02):
you know, and your your consciousness connection.
Speaker 3 (42:04):
I'm curious, right, and you know these psionics experiments that
are going on there are so many people who are
going out and doing successful ce fives that and calling
craft in so people who have the ability to meditate
(42:25):
to control themselves like play is Stephen Greer's tones, and
that helps as well. But there are protocols that you
have to follow and people have had success doing that,
so that that's been good. A lot of people are
(42:49):
excited about that.
Speaker 2 (42:51):
I think. I don't know.
Speaker 3 (42:52):
The ETS said that when more than fifty percent of
the Earth's population is aware that they exist, then they
will announce their presence.
Speaker 1 (43:04):
So it's a it's a critical mess kind of a situation.
Speaker 2 (43:07):
Yes it is, But I don't know.
Speaker 3 (43:09):
Maybe they've gotten pushed back lately because I've heard that
there might be a change in what they said they
were going to do.
Speaker 1 (43:18):
Are they going to tariff us? Is that what's happening? Like, well,
we're changing our mind again, Gosh, I really hope that
that that's not the case. I hope that they, if
indeed they are wanting to make contact at some point,
that they, you know, will stick stick to that. Interesting then,
because it it never occurred to me that you could
(43:41):
frame the Betty and Barney Hill case now your your
aunt and uncle as maybe they should have kept it
to themselves because you know, it was damaging in so
many ways. And I wonder, is that how we should
maybe think about the UFO reality? Is it? We think
(44:03):
it's the right thing to do, right. We think that truth, transparency,
understanding the nature of reality, these are all important things.
But is it is it? Would it be a mistake
to open up that door.
Speaker 3 (44:18):
I've always been apprehensive about revealing all of this information
full disclosure to the public. You know, on shows like this,
I'm preaching to the choir. I I give information to
people who are seeking that information, but I never try
(44:38):
to convince the public of anything, you know, So that's
my stance on it. I I do believe that there
should be some limited disclosure by the government, and there
has been in the congressional hearings on UAPs, there has
(45:05):
been some very good disclosure, and there has been disclosure
that has caused great problems with for the individuals who
disclosed information about non human tissue and crash landings.
Speaker 1 (45:25):
Well, has I reached out to you or anyone from
the government recently?
Speaker 2 (45:29):
No?
Speaker 1 (45:30):
No, okay? And well, I guess if we consider the
fact that they're really only looking at cases in the past. Yeah,
I know that the last twenty years that one of.
Speaker 3 (45:41):
My studies, George Knapp, was going to pass one of
my studies over to doctor James Lukatski, who was ahead
of Ossap. But no one has approached me in an
official capacity.
Speaker 1 (45:59):
What is your take on President Trump? Do you think
he will push for disclosure?
Speaker 2 (46:08):
I don't know. He said he would.
Speaker 1 (46:13):
Too, but that's not happening for whatever reason or it's limited.
Speaker 2 (46:18):
Right, because.
Speaker 3 (46:20):
The problem is, as far as we're concerned in receiving information,
the military works under confidentiality agreements, so they have all
of the different levels of confidentiality to above top secret
(46:43):
code word and they and when you have information that's
categorized as something that is only going to be discussed
in a skiff or not discussed at all, or only
with people with need to know, that's information that they
can they can keep classified, that they could make the
(47:09):
decision never to release.
Speaker 1 (47:13):
I do wonder, you know, could you use an executive
order knowing that it would be denied, and then take
it to the courts and then and then see see
what happens there, because that at best maybe that would
just expose little crack.
Speaker 3 (47:31):
Well, I think the constitutional lawyer Danny Shehan is active
in and this kind of thing in pushing uh you know,
opening opening the can of disclosure. Yeah, maybe the can
(47:51):
of worms. But uh two for limited disclosure to prevent
and catastrophic disclosure.
Speaker 1 (48:02):
Sure, because that would be the responsible thing to do.
Speaker 3 (48:08):
It would be the responsible thing to.
Speaker 1 (48:10):
Do based on your studies, and as you know, from
a sociological point of view, I guess you do think
that full disclosure could lead to sympanic.
Speaker 3 (48:23):
Yes, because people would be terrified that the ets were going.
Speaker 2 (48:29):
To take them to Yeah.
Speaker 3 (48:32):
And you know, if you go to the internet, there's
a lot of very frightening information. People seem to thrive
on fear in the Internet. And the key to having
a relationship with these non humans is to move beyond
fear and to project love toward them. That's what they
(48:53):
respond to. They have big problems with human emotions. People
who are become violent end up receiving violence back.
Speaker 2 (49:10):
A lot of times.
Speaker 3 (49:13):
I have photographs of experiencers who are black and blue
from head to toe who I've heard from military officers,
police officers who were really treated very poorly, roughed up,
but they it was their behavior in a sense, they
(49:37):
were defending themselves. They had the right, I suppose to
defend themselves. What was happening was against our laws, and
they were very angry. But you're not going to get
anywhere with these non humans if you behave in that manner,
because they just think of you as of the hairy
(50:02):
ape who has gone berserk. And you do much better
and can establish a relationship and communicate if you can
be more on equal footing with them, to express this art,
(50:24):
project love from your consciousness in their direction, to behave
in a kind manner.
Speaker 1 (50:35):
Yeah, it reminds me a little bit of AI. How
AI kind of mimics it human behavior, right, So you
get these random aberrations where it's insulting or saying something
terrible to somebody, all because all it's really doing is
just reflecting the world that we've created online and it's
(50:56):
pulling from that. So it's almost a mirror in many ways.
I wonder you had mentioned earlier, just a moment ago,
that you have all these people online that are caught
up in these fear driven conspiracy theories about what extra
thresholds could be their demons or you know, who knows what,
(51:18):
And I wonder would disclosure actually have been easier, you know,
forty plus years ago, before the well, before the Internet,
because now you have just this fertile ground of misinformation
and trolling and fear mongering that people will then kind
(51:40):
of pull from that and transpose that onto disclosure and
interpret it in the most misinformed and misguided way.
Speaker 3 (51:54):
Yeah, and going back almost eighty years, there was a
discussion at the pan gone about disclosure, and some of
the military generals wanted disclosure, higher ranking officers, whereas others
(52:15):
for reasons of their Christian beliefs, did not want disclosure,
and they went out. And that's happening again. I'm sad
to say that it's happening again, and I'm not very
optimistic about continued funding of the pro UFO oriented programs
(52:45):
in the DEIA.
Speaker 1 (52:51):
Do you think that because since arrow Is the report
in the New York Times article has come out and
we've had this ongoing discussion, we've had the Navy implement
new protocols for reporting UAP. There seems to have been
some acceptance of this.
Speaker 3 (53:09):
Now, yes, yes, there has been some when it comes
to reporting technology advanced technology.
Speaker 1 (53:20):
I see, okay, yeah, yeah, all.
Speaker 3 (53:22):
Right, but not when it comes to talking about non
human tissue and UFP crashes.
Speaker 1 (53:33):
Yeah, that's a interesting way to put a non human tissue.
So just everyone knows that you are back speaking of
the physical. Yes, you're back out there, you're speaking, you're
doing engagements, which is awesome, and you have upcoming in
April eleventh through the thirteenth, the thirty seventh Ozark Mountain
UFO Conference. Your title of your speak is presentation is
(53:57):
et presence a multi discil but disciplinary assessment. Can you
tell us a little bit about what that means.
Speaker 3 (54:07):
Yeah, so I'm going to be examining it through several
different lenses, you know, as a UFO investigator, researchers from
a scientific point of view, covering findings of some leading scientists,
(54:27):
to a religious point of view, and how this impacts
the religious community. Maybe some studies that have been done
by the religious communities, particularly the Catholic Church. They've been
the most interested in this, and all the way down
(54:49):
to the congressional hearings and the military pushback and what's
going on presently.
Speaker 1 (54:56):
That's fantastic. Have you ever had a chance to speak
with Yes.
Speaker 3 (55:01):
I have, Yes, I met her several years ago.
Speaker 2 (55:05):
It was oh more than.
Speaker 3 (55:08):
Several now, I guess it was quite a long time
ago when she was writing a book about Chris Bledsoe
and I was with Chris, and I was with her
and a lot of different researchers at a gathering in Pennsylvania,
Bucks County, Pennsylvania, and that's where I met her. We
(55:32):
sat together on a bus, had a bus ride together,
and she discussed her work with me, and I discussed
mine with her.
Speaker 1 (55:40):
Somehow, bus rides are always good for conversations.
Speaker 2 (55:43):
Yes, plane rides too.
Speaker 3 (55:45):
I had had a chance to ride next to doctor
Claude Swanson on a plane one time, and that was
that was wonderful. It was great, a great conversation.
Speaker 1 (55:56):
I liked. That's awesome.
Speaker 2 (55:58):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (55:58):
I had emailed Diana and we emailed back and forth
a couple of times. It's like, well over a year ago.
It never came, never came together. But hopefully one day,
you know, I'll have her on the podcast, because that's
really interesting it is. It's coming from it from a
very different angle as a former Catholic, you know, I
see that through a different lens. Like you said, is
(56:22):
there anything else you can leave us with? Any last
thoughts before before we go.
Speaker 3 (56:29):
Boy, I'm just so happy to be back and working
again and speaking with you this evening. If you go
to my website, it's it's right there in front of you,
Kathleen dashmargin dot com. I've completely revamped the website on
a lot of new information that hasn't wasn't there before,
(56:51):
and my upcoming speaking engagements so there albeit at Roswell
too this year, and looking forward to that fourth of
July weekend. So I hope to see everybody at one
of these two places. That would be terrific. And I
have something like three television shows coming out and one
(57:13):
movie coming out this spring.
Speaker 1 (57:15):
Okay, nice, all right, we'll be on the lookout. Okay,
all right, Thank you, Kathleen. I really appreciate it, and
I'm glad you're back.
Speaker 2 (57:22):
At Thank you. Thank you so much.
Speaker 1 (57:24):
Okay, and thank you everybody for joining us tonight. Wow. Yeah,
that was that was a great conversation. I'm gonna have
to go back and listen to some of that. Thank
you very much to Race Hobs and Margie k at
the ONEX Network for rebroadcasting this podcast every Thursday night,
eleven pm Pacific time to a m. Eastern Time on Fridays,
(57:50):
and I want to thank the love of my life.
I don't do that enough on this podcast because I
do episodes and you know it takes a lot of
time and work to put this together. So I just
want to thank her because you know, she's everything to me.
So I love you, and to all of you who
joined in the chat and share your comments, I appreciate
you all so much for keeping this going. And Coffee
(58:13):
and UFOs is the podcast numbers are going up, so
I appreciate it and thank you all again. I will
post what the next guest will be soon on social media.
You can follow me on at Coffee and UFO's podcasts
on Instagram and on Blue Sky. Until next time, everyone,
peace and love and live in the mystery.
Speaker 4 (58:41):
It's good to be in urgently and I wish more
of us would think of ourselves that way.
Speaker 2 (58:49):
And I don't have a problem with skeptics. It's de bunkers
that are on some other level that I don't.
Speaker 4 (58:55):
Understand, especially an inference of a change in local gravity.
Speaker 3 (59:23):
Saucer shaped craft and they're hovering over the water. Bull
Book Special Report fourteenth.
Speaker 1 (59:36):
The better the quality of the sighting, the more likely
to be unexplainable,
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
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
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com