Oct. 13/25 - UFO Discussion with Tom Whitmore

Tom Whitmore is a former member of MUFON's Board of Directors, retired as of 2022, and now spends his time looking into the secrets of the mysteriious Majestic-12 group. On the UFO side, Tom believes Disclosure is being hindered by those in Government who are trying to steer the UFO conversation back underground.

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/spaced-out-radio--1657874/support.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:03):
Hello and welcome to the radio and podcast side of
spaced Out Radio tonight. My name is Dave Scott. We're
glad to have you here, as Tom Whitmore is going
to come in to talk some UFOs as so much more.
We are in roll call on our YouTube side right
now as we say hello to Matthew Goodka, nice to
see you, Deadfish, good to have you back here. And
Luscious Jewels, nice to see you. And who's decks number

(00:27):
fourteen in your programs? Starting at center ice from Stockholm, Sweden.
Lars Johnson. There he is. It's already got three goals
in the first four games of the season. He's red
hot right now. All right, BENO, how are you? And
we are caught up.

Speaker 2 (00:43):
Hey.

Speaker 1 (00:43):
We want to remind everybody the super chat is O
but it's a wonderful way to support what we do
on this show. Hi there, Jeff Knox, how you doing
as well? You could join our YouTube membership which supports
us as well, and of course you could shop at
our spaced Out Radio store. We do not have a
people no ugly swag, so make sure you check it
on up. It's that time of the night where I

(01:05):
ask all of you to throw your horns up. Let's rock.

Speaker 3 (01:14):
Are you ready to hear your misted voice of the Knights?
He's here, The choirs is ready fuseless. Let's point our.

Speaker 4 (01:30):
Ears tools so you can come in Knights when together,
my friends. Oh LA's time for spaced Out Radio with death.

Speaker 1 (01:49):
Scotch from the mountains of Central British Columbia to you
listening around the world. This, my friends, is spaced Out Radio.
I am your host, Dave Scott, sitting in the Captain's
chair of SR Headquarters. We welcome you to tonight's show
on our terrestrial affiliates around North America, digitally on every

(02:11):
major podcast network. Our website spaced Out Radio dot com.
We have a plethrough features for you. Rock out to bumblefoot,
read the news wire, check out our swag as well.
You can follow us on Exit spaced Out Radio, Instagram
at spaced Out Radio Show, and on Patreon in the
Space Travelers Club. Tonight's show is brought to you by

(02:34):
Chive Charities. Help make the world ten percent happier by
visiting Chime Charities today. You can find them on our website.
We have an amazing show coming up for you tonight,
as Tom Wickmore is going to be here. He's formerly

(02:56):
a move On. He's currently doing a big study on
his own about Majestic twelve, but he wants to talk
some UFOs tonight. Just hang out. Then in our number
three we are going to bring in Swamp Dweller for
another spooky story. We're going to follow that up with
the UFO Wizard, Josh Rutledge coming on in for the
UFO Report. So let's get right to it, shall we.

(03:18):
Tom Whitmore is a former director of MOUFON and a
veteran UFO researcher. He is deep diving into one of
the greatest mysteries in UFO history, the Majestic twelve documents.
With decades of investigative experience and knowledge of this, Tom
is someone who has found a new passion in trying
to find out what really happened with MJ twelve, did

(03:39):
it even exist? And what are the government secrets around it.
Tom is also a UFO buff. He is somebody who
when he was part of MUFON a number of years ago,
sat on the board of directors. He was somebody who
is very involved with trying to bring transparency to the
UFO subject. He is a man on mission trying to

(04:01):
figure out the mysteries that are right behind our noses.
We can smell them, we could taste them, but we
just can't figure out where they are hidden. Let's bring
them on in, Tom Whitmore. It is always a pleasure
to have you on Spaced out Radio, my friend. How
are you?

Speaker 2 (04:19):
Thank you? David's great to see you again, and it's
great to see your new studio. I like your bigfoot
You're it's very lit up there. I like your Texas
cap and there's a lot going on there in your studios.
So I'm glad to be here.

Speaker 1 (04:37):
Well, I figured I would wear my Texas hat for you,
because you are a proud Texan, and I figured, you know,
and I'd show you a little bit of love, you know,
because you do mean a lot to me, and you
know you have been a real central figure of knowledge
for me when you know, I might be going a
little bit hey wire, or I might be going a
little bit on off the rails on some of my

(04:58):
little conspiracy theories that I have, but you are a
voice of reason, and you know, somebody who never gets
too high or gets too low. But the one thing
we do have in common is that you absolutely love
the UFO subject. You are somebody who comes from the
business world. How did the UFO world fall into your lap?

Speaker 2 (05:21):
I was into UFI well, I wasn't really into UFOs,
but I first got interested when I was only twelve
years old because I was at a friend's house and
they had some Donald Keyhoe books on the shelf, and
I started reading those and that initiated my interest in

(05:41):
the subject. And there wasn't a lot going on in
the late sixties, and then the Air Force got out
of the UFO business. There was a big flap in
nineteen seventy three, but I didn't hear the details about it.
But I had always been reading a lot about especially

(06:03):
current European history, and I got into studying Russia and
the Soviet Union, and I learned a lot about intelligence
and espionage that way. Then in the nineteen eighties, I
happened to see the UFO Cover Up Live program, which

(06:24):
piqued my interest. Then when the MJ twelve documents came out,
that intersected with my interest in intelligence and espionage. Because
when I saw the MJ twelve documents, I immediately thought
that it had something to do with intelligence, and around
nineteen ninety I started to get active. I was really

(06:45):
reading up on the subject, and I became a member
of MUFON, and after a couple of years, after several years,
I was welcomed onto the board of MOUFON and I
was on the board of Moufon for very long time.
But I was able to keep up with a lot
of what was going on, and I knew all of

(07:06):
the MUFON executive directors. And this went on until twenty
twenty two when I retired. Now from the board. Now,
I retired from full time employment in twenty nineteen, and
I moved to Washington, d C. To be able to
do research at the National Archives and at the Library

(07:26):
of Congress, and I did both and I had a blast.
I loved it. I loved writing the Metro downtown, going
down there, being right next to the Supreme Court and
the Capitol, and going to the National Archives. But then
COVID came along and the government shut down and I
couldn't do anything with the government offices, and I got

(07:48):
home sick. So I moved back here to San Antonio,
and when I was still on the board with Moufon,
I spent a month during the summer at Turtling with
Texas because I have relatives there, and I wrote my
first research paper actually sitting in Big Ben National Park,

(08:10):
and that started a trend. I've written six research papers
so far. But when I got back to San Antonio,
I decided I just need to write a book. And
my book is focused on the history of the MJ
twelve controversy and some perspectives on MJ twelve and that's
what I'm devoting my retirement years too. I've made a

(08:34):
pledge to myself that I'm going to see this through
to the end. It's going to be a long process
because I'm only on chapter four and I want to
write at least twenty chapters. Oh my, so here I am.

Speaker 1 (08:46):
Here you are. You know, it's funny that you mentioned
UFO Live, because I believe it's the thirty seventh anniversary
of that today.

Speaker 2 (08:57):
Yes, and I've that's one of the things of research
on my current chapter. I've titled my fourth chapter Disclosure
because because of the appearance of the various MJ twelve documents,
the Aquarius telex and the Carter briefing document, the Eisenhower

(09:18):
briefing document, the Truman Forrestall memo and the Cutler twenty
memo and then the UFO Cover Up Live show. So
all of these things occurred during the nineteen eighties, and
one of my first tasks and my research during this
segment has been researching the UFO Cover Up Live program,

(09:39):
and I've learned a lot about it. There's probably a
lot more to learn, but it's been so it's been
so long since it came on that there are probably
some details I'm missing. For example, Tracy Tormat was a
writer for that program and he was central in it,
and of course he he's to cease now. Unfortunately.

Speaker 1 (10:04):
I want to ask you just, you know, because this
show is totally unscripted, and we you know, right before
the show, you said, Dave, I just want to talk
some UFOs like, no subject, let's just have a chat,
and that's what we're going to do. And these are
my favorite type of shows to do. Top But why
do you think in your mind there has been such

(10:24):
a magnitude of cover up of this subject over the decades.

Speaker 2 (10:33):
I think nuclear nuclear weapons and nuclear war has had
a lot to do with it because the government, the CIA,
and the Air Force and the military branches had been
very focused on defending the United States, especially during the

(10:56):
fifties and sixties and seventies and eighties, by developing a
nuclear arsenal. And for one thing, they had to make
sure that they didn't have an accidental firing of a
nuclear missile, and they couldn't have an accidental detonation of
an atomic bomb. And at the same time they had

(11:20):
to defend against a nuclear attack attack mainly from the
Soviet Union. I think that that was their primary focus,
of their primary responsibility. UFOs were there, and they, on
a public basis, were an annoyance and somehow, I don't

(11:42):
know how or why the Air Force allowed itself to
get into this position, but they morphed into a position
where they were responding to public UFO reports and they
hated it. They absolutely hated it. So what they did
was they just gave any explanation for UFO sighting that

(12:05):
they could think of. We all know the swamp gas
and all that, and publicly they convinced the scientific community
and the media and academia that there was nothing to UFOs.
Now at the same time, I think covertly they were

(12:28):
recording UFO sightings, they were filing them and maybe even
studying and analyzing them for anything that was affecting the military.
And also I think that they probably collected a lot
of information that they probably threw away, they cast off,
They either threw it away or they warehoused it and

(12:50):
they've forgotten about it. So on that side of it,
I think that the military branches have had absolutely no
interest in being publicly engaged in UFOs, and we're seeing
that played out even today in this disclosure movement that
we're seeing from the public.

Speaker 1 (13:12):
Do you think the reason why they're keeping it out
of the public spectacle or do not want it is
because there are true secrets that they have that they
do not want to talk to us about. Namely, maybe
they have made contact, maybe they have had crash retrievals
that we hear so many of these eyewitnesses coming out
and seeing this, I mean, what is your thoughts.

Speaker 2 (13:37):
I became convinced in the early nineties that there had
been UFO recoveries because as a UFO person, and I'm
a UFO believer, I was brought up on Leonard's Strainfield
and I had read all of his status reports. So

(13:58):
I personally think that I have been thinking that there
have been recoveries of UFOs and bodies and all of
that good stuff. And it only stands to reason that
if there have been UFO recoveries, that would be super secret.
I mean, they would just have such a tight lid

(14:18):
of security on it that as little old people in
the public have have no way of getting to it.
And hints have been dropped from time to time with
people that have looked into this and tried to get
to the bottom of it, that you don't know what
you're dealing with, and just stay out of it.

Speaker 1 (14:40):
Should we stay out of it? Though? I mean even
during your time with mof ON, I mean, were you
guys ever told to stick keep your noses clean, keep
your noses clear, stop digging.

Speaker 2 (14:54):
I've never been told that.

Speaker 1 (14:55):
Now.

Speaker 2 (14:57):
John Schusser, who I had known for years and who
I considered to be a dear friend, and he's very elderly,
very elderly now and very frail. But he when I
started this, uh, this research project, you know, he did
he said watch your back. But I haven't seen any
indication that anyone is watching me other than just being

(15:20):
a citizen and you know, being a little bit in
the public. You know, I go on programs like Yours,
Dave and other programs, and occasionally I'll go I'll go
on a Twitter space, but I've never had I personally
have never had any indication like that, And I don't
know of any other move on board members or move

(15:42):
on members that have been warned off. Now they don't
have to be that direct. I think that if a person,
it all depends on whether you're in possession of classified information.
That's where the rubber meets the road, and so you know,
if you are in possession of classified information and you're

(16:05):
not supposed to be, then you might get a visit
from the FBI or you might get into trouble. Now,
I'm just a civilian. Ninety five percent of all the
information that I glean is from open sources, and then
I have some other contacts that I've developed in the
UFO field that I have received some information from. But

(16:27):
the only reason why I'm holding it back is because
I don't want to spoil the book.

Speaker 1 (16:34):
So, getting back to the government side of this, should
the public believe that somewhere they are hiding some sort
of UFO technology, and if that is the case, where
do you think they're hiding it.

Speaker 2 (16:54):
I think if the public pays attention to what the
congress people have been seeing, I think they could they
could be inclined to believe that this could be the case. Now,
I think there are good indications that a lot of

(17:14):
people have taught to both House members and Senate members,
people that have direct knowledge of these things. You know
of recovered UFOs of legacy back engineering programs of bodies
and all that, and even masses of UFO data that

(17:36):
has been collected by you know, the massive national security state.
So I really do think that if people were aware
of the amount of activity that's gone on in terms
of informing kind of in a back channel the congressional people,
that there is reasonable reason to believe that it is true. Now,

(18:02):
even recently this summer, there were two articles that came
out in the Wall Street Journal popooing this whole thing
and talking about Yankee Blue. And they've been showing pictures
of saucers, you know, air Force officers and military people
and putting fear of God in them and all this.
And I think it remains to be seen how much

(18:23):
of that is really true. But this is just my
personal opinion, but I think that there are so called
whistleblowers that would like to come forward, but they don't
feel that they have the adequate legal protections to come
forward publicly, but they are informing you informally in the background.

Speaker 1 (18:46):
Now, I may take a little bit of heat from
this time, and you may not agree with me on this,
but I will ask you because you're a man of
respect to me in this world. I don't personally think
outside of me be David Grush, that we have had
a true whistle blower. I think we've had a lot

(19:07):
of experiencers. I think we've had a lot of people
who've seen things, but not in the term of what
whistle blower truly means towards bringing quality information to the
public in order to break this story wide open. What
would you consider a whistle blower.

Speaker 2 (19:31):
Edward Snowden is a good example of a whistleblower. And
he had information on the data that the NSA was
collecting on US citizens, just surveillance of US citizens, which
he felt was unconstitutional. And he had all this information

(19:56):
that he wanted to break the story into in with
some journalists. And I believe he was either living in
I think he was in Singapore or somewhere in the
Far East. He was scared to death, and he managed
to get a couple of journalists to meet with him.

(20:17):
He had he went through various and sundry security procedures
to make sure that he wasn't detected by any other party.
And now he's living in Russia. And I think he's
a perfect example of a true whistleblower. And you can't
I can't blame anyone from the military industrial complex or

(20:40):
the intelligence agencies for not wanting to go public when
they risk they're risking their careers, they're risking their pensions,
they're risking their family stability, they are risking legal liability,
criminal liability. You know, It's it's easy to say that
these people should come forward and tell what they know,

(21:03):
so that they so that we know of people that
have direct information, but it's really too much to ask
given the Espionage Act and all of the other national
security laws that are in existence that keep if there
are UFO secrets, UFO secrets secret, and any other classified

(21:25):
information secret.

Speaker 1 (21:28):
We have about three minutes to go before we have
to go to break at the bottom of the hour.
Tom Whitmore is our guest tonight on spaced out radio.
We're talking just some UFO subjects today. Tom. The way
I look at these people who have come out, I
do believe they're brave. I do believe that they have
a story to tell. I do believe that, you know,

(21:48):
they are potentially seeing things that should not be there,
you know. I mean we look at Dylan Borland about
the black triangle that he saw, you know, while outside
on a break while he was serving for the Air Force,
And I look at stories like this and I think, wow,
you know, black triangle that could be human, that could

(22:11):
be non human depending on the size of it and
everything like that. Do you think a lot of these
whistleblowers actually know what could be alien technology compared to
US technology.

Speaker 2 (22:25):
I personally do. But it's just like they've let's say
there's some kind of a big crime and they're trying
to find the authorities, are trying to find the perpetrator,
and they ask for the public's health help. They get
all these phone calls and emails and tips, and some

(22:47):
of them are phoning, you know, some of them are
fake people just trying to get attention. And I think
that the congress, people in the Senate and the House
they and I think timber Chad has mentioned this. You know,
they get these fake, fake whistleblowers coming in, But that's
only part of the story because I think that there

(23:09):
are real, real people that would testify if they had
the proper legal protections. And it's the sad state of
affairs is that I don't think that Congress has come
out with those legal protections that the whistleblowers need.

Speaker 1 (23:28):
And I would agree with you on that. I really
do agree that there has to be better whistleblower protection
in order to try and and you know, have some
of these incredibly knowledgeable, gifted people come on out with
this top But if we're dealing with something that is
beyond all scopes of government, how do they even know

(23:50):
what they're whistle blowing on? And I'll need about a
thirty second answer on that.

Speaker 2 (23:57):
There's a lot of compartmentation, that's how the military and
the intelligence agencies work. So a lot of folks that
are in that area they know something, but they don't
know everything. But if you got enough people to testify
from different areas, you start to get you start to

(24:17):
get a critical mass on that. And I think that
people know what they knew in particular about what they
were dealing with.

Speaker 1 (24:26):
All right, Tom whitmore, we got them for another ninety
minutes here on spaced out Radio, formerly a move On
currently independent researcher on the MJ twelve documents. We're talking
to UFOs tonight, Little Tommy wentmore. We love them around here.
This is spaced out Radio. We'll be right back. All right,

(25:04):
we're clear. Good start, Tom, that went really quick.

Speaker 2 (25:12):
Wit sure did mm hmm. I like your beard Dave.

Speaker 1 (25:16):
Thank you, thank you. It's getting a little fuzzy. Almost
needs a trim again, almost needs a trim again. That's
all right, that's all right. Let's see here, Jules. I'll

(25:41):
last that an hour or two for you. Beno with
the comment of the night, Tom is nice.

Speaker 2 (25:51):
Well, I try to be.

Speaker 1 (25:53):
Tom is nice.

Speaker 2 (25:57):
Too. Much of the UFO world isn't right.

Speaker 1 (26:02):
I would agree with you on that one. I totally
agree with you on that one.

Speaker 2 (26:12):
There's a big knife fight going on right now between
Lewis Alizondo went with disclosure, Mike and Tupic br and
Red Panda.

Speaker 1 (26:28):
I have not been following it to be blunt. I uh,
it's not.

Speaker 2 (26:36):
A good use of anyone's time.

Speaker 1 (26:38):
About six eight months ago. No goodness, it was about
a year ago. Now, I just said it was. I'm
done with it. I'm just done with it. Like it's
just it's not worth It's not worth the time anymore.

(27:00):
It just really isn't.

Speaker 2 (27:03):
Do I have time to get a glass of water?

Speaker 1 (27:06):
Yeah? You got about three and a half minutes?

Speaker 5 (27:09):
Okay, alright, let's go here. M hm.

Speaker 1 (27:43):
H Kurt M. How you doing? H Ward and Dragon,
Nice to see you.

Speaker 2 (28:07):
H A j.

Speaker 1 (28:19):
Nice to see you. Wow you medic Canadians said mistake America.
Nice for you, KURTV. Good for you. Excuse me, mm hmmm.

(29:02):
Got about a minute and a half. Tom, Okay, dude,

(29:28):
Blue Cruise, how you doing. I've never had my Facebook

(30:02):
or email checked, Kurt, I would say that's highly untrue.
All right, big thank you tonight to Kitty, Kenny Whack
and UAP Thompson for the great super chats. We greatly
appreciate your love and support. Jeff Steve Garvey is here.

(30:25):
He'll hit a home run for you. It is playoff
time and here we go. Here we go with the

(30:48):
second half hour of spaced out Radio tonight. My name
is Dave Scott. We're glad to have you with us
as we talk UFOs with mister Whitmore coming up here momentarily.
But first we want to remind all of you that
if you missed portions of this show or others, you
can always check out our free archives on YouTube or
any major podcast network. Our website spaced out Radio dot com.

(31:11):
We have a plethora of features for you. Rock out
to bumblefoot, read the news wire, check out our swag
as well. You can follow us on Exit, spaced Out Radio, Instagram,
at spaced Out Radio Show, and on Patreon. In the
Space Travelers Club. Tom Whitmore is here. He's an independent
researcher into the MJ twelve category of strangeness when it

(31:34):
comes to the cover up of UFOs. We're just having
a good UFO subject tonight. Tom. Thank you so much
for being here. We greatly appreciate your time.

Speaker 2 (31:43):
Thank you for having me on, Dave. It's good to
be here again. It's good to be in touch.

Speaker 1 (31:48):
We were talking whistleblowers right before the break, and you know,
it kind of leads me to think of what's going
on on a lot of the social media platforms regarding whistleblowers.
Who's coming out who's not Jason Sands about a year
and a half ago now made a very public open
remark about him allegedly whistleblowing about what he came in

(32:10):
contact with. He did that on an X space. Do
you think that these people coming out in such a
public form is healthy for moving the subject forward?

Speaker 2 (32:23):
Yes, I think it's healthy if they're credible. And sometimes
you get into this pattern where some person comes out
with a very interesting story, very interesting claim, and then
over time the story grows and things are added to

(32:47):
the story that weren't there to begin with, and after
several years the person has almost destroyed his or her
credibility by enlarging and embellishing on the original story. So
I think it's very important if a person is serious
about going public with a story, that's not risky for them,

(33:10):
you know, legally if they go public that they you know,
they stick with the basic story that they started with.

Speaker 1 (33:20):
What about Okay, let me ask you this, what would
be the perfect whistleblower in the UFO world? Who are
what would they have to be?

Speaker 2 (33:32):
I think the the Snowden pattern might work. In other words,
a person has documents, has evidence, maybe photographs, maybe films,
maybe documents, but has to go out out of country

(33:56):
somewhere that that person is not vulnerable, and gets with
journalists like Edward Snowden did and gets the information out
that way. Now, the Snowden material did make national exposure,

(34:18):
but are people worried about that? Now? It's like we
all just move on with our lives. And meanwhile, the
government has the technological capability, I believe, to surveil just
about everything that we do online and in communications, telephone, whatever,

(34:40):
and they take of It's not that they're spying on
us personally, but they're just vacuuming up, sucking up all
of this information and storing it in huge databases so
that if they need to use it later they will.
But I think maybe if a person could walk out

(35:02):
with enough proof, enough really direct evidence and maybe even proof,
and be in a position where they can't be accessed legally,
then that might work. And it's interesting that you take
someone like Gary McKinnon in the UK. Now, I don't

(35:25):
know if he got into something that's really truly you know,
extraterrestrial or you know, the US having spaceships and all that.
I don't know if that's true, but I do know
that he got into, I think a d O D system,
and the US government wanted him bad. They tried for

(35:47):
years to extradite him to the United States, and thankfully
the British government didn't comply. So I think maybe a
pattern like that might work.

Speaker 1 (36:01):
Explain to people who Gary McKinnon is. For people who
may not know.

Speaker 2 (36:07):
I'm not expert, but he's a British citizen and he's
I don't know if he's an amateur or professional computer hacker,
but he accessed a DoD system and he found certain
things in the system that indicated that there was there

(36:31):
was a space force before there was a space force,
and that there were well basically extraterrestrial officers and ships
listed in some government inventory or another. And because he

(36:52):
had broken into this DoD computer system, the US government
wanted to prosecute him, and they wanted him extradited to
the United States.

Speaker 1 (37:07):
Do you think that the government has some sort of
access to deniability because they have moved pretty much everything
that we may know of into private hands.

Speaker 2 (37:24):
I think some of it has been moved into private hands.
I think some of it has been destroyed, and some
of it is kept in locations that are not accessible
except for a very few people that are read in
or that have the authority to access it that I

(37:49):
do that there has been a line of thinking actually
for many years, because I started hearing about this way
back in the nineties that the government had transferred the
UFO research into into private industry. But what they can

(38:09):
do is, and I think something that can be done is,
let's say you're a scientist and you receive something, say
it's a gadget or maybe it's some biologic biologics, and
you're asked to analyze it and write a report, but

(38:32):
you're not told the whole story. A person's not given
the whole picture. They're asked to only study, analyze, and
report on one little part of it, and they may
not even know where it comes from or what it's for.
They're just studying what they've been given. And I think

(38:53):
there are a million different ways that all of this
evidence can be hidden, stored and concealed in ways that
we the public just can't get to. We just can't
get to it.

Speaker 1 (39:08):
Normally, I don't really bring up comments from our chat
room because I normally deal with questions, but here's an
interesting comment from one of our YouTube listeners Ramona who
is saying, I get the feeling the disclosure movement was
a psiah to split the UFO scene. I found that
a very interesting comment. What's your thoughts on this?

Speaker 2 (39:30):
That goes into what I call the double principle. And
that's why part of the reason why I've been so
fascinated with the MJ twelve, the MJ twelve issue, because
when the MJ twelve documents came out, if the government
had recovered a craft at Roswell, then in one respect,

(39:57):
and if the documents came from a government agency, and
that doesn't mean that they're authentic documents in and of themselves,
they could have been a deception created by a government agency.
But given that it served two purposes. On the one hand,
a type of disclosure occurred. In other words, ideas and

(40:21):
memes were being introduced into the public that have now
become widespread, while at the same time dividing the UFO
community and dividing the public and discrediting certain people within
the UFO community. So you can accomplish two or more

(40:41):
things at the same time by doing by engaging in
one activity, and I call it the double principle, you're
basically killing you know, killing two birds with one stone.

Speaker 1 (40:58):
And that makes sense, you know, But when we look
at the disclosure movement, you know, Tom, prior to twenty seventeen,
I remember people like Victor Vigiani and and people like
Steve Bassett saying, if we could get one guy from
the inside, one person from the inside who could come

(41:21):
on out and say this is really what's going on,
it would break this story wide open. And for a
time it did when lou Elizondo came out, okay, but
it seems to have been pushed back under the rug.
And many of the people who were into ufology prior
to twenty seventeen, yourself included, myself included. It really was

(41:45):
about disclosure, saying we want answers, we want to know
the secrets of what's going on. Then the UAP thing
came out to cover up the UFO side, and then
all of a sudden, Disclosure with this new popularity, you know,

(42:05):
really took to X and exploded there and really moved
the ball forward on a public level. But really the
new people who are finding this were basically saying, look,
I don't care what kind of disclosure we get. Let's
just get something. Let's get something that makes sense saying

(42:29):
that these objects are real, And I think that's dangerous
on a personal level, that we shouldn't be satisfied with
the government saying, you know, these UAPs are real or
these UFOs are real. We need answers to so many
questions that have been you know, hinging upon this movement

(42:51):
for a long time. And I don't think you know
that the government is willing to give them up at
this time. So what is your appeal towards the disclosure movement?

Speaker 2 (43:04):
Well, that's exactly the problem day because something something that
could be done is the Secretary of Defense could hold
a news conference at the Pentagon and say we have
this data and they could just be talking about electronic

(43:27):
and sensor data that they have of objects coming in
and going out of the Earth's atmosphere and admitting that
they have this data and that they know that this
anomalous activity is occurring, they have proof of it.

Speaker 1 (43:46):
Okay.

Speaker 2 (43:47):
So if they did that, if they had to say
a news conference and someone someone of authority, like the
Secretary of Defense, it would raise a million questions the
press if they do their job, and that's not always
the case, unfortunately, but if they do their job, they'd

(44:07):
be on that and there would be ten thousand more
questions that they would want answers to. So I don't
think the government wants to get into that now, I
will say, And I don't think I'm off base at
all that I think the Defense Department is doing everything
that it can from letting this whole disclosure movement and

(44:29):
disclosure trend get out of hand, and I think they're
doing a pretty good job of it.

Speaker 1 (44:35):
Do you think, then, because there is a conspiracy in
the UFO world, that there are many bad actors, bad
apples that are feeding false information towards the public that
has gone through names like doctor Stephen Greer, or lou
Ellisondo or Chris Mellon or even researchers have been, you know,

(44:58):
asked if they are false information plants. What's your thoughts
on that? Do you think those people are out there
in such a small community.

Speaker 2 (45:10):
There are two aspects to that day. In the nineteen eighties,
Bill Moore, who was a prominent UFO researcher at the time,
he gave a talk at the nineteen eighty nine MUFON
Symposium in which he admitted that he had served as
an informant for the government, and what he did was

(45:32):
he informed on what certain other UFO searchers and what
other UFO groups were doing, and he was mostly reporting
to the Air Force Office of Special Investigations. And that
just that was like a hydrogen bomb being dropped on

(45:52):
the UFO community because UFO people had never really thought
that way, thought about the government that way. They thought
that government was hiding and covering up UFO information, but
they weren't really believed. They weren't really thinking that the
government had informers within their own ranks. So now today

(46:13):
with social media, I mean, it's it's completely it's completely
wide open. Anybody can get on Facebook or Twitter or
Instagram or whatever and hide behind some handle, you know,
choose any name they want or any word they want.
You don't really know who it is, and they can
be stirring up trouble or putting out misinformation, dividing one

(46:38):
person against another, dividing one group against another, uh and
putting out disinformation or misinformation. You can it's happening right
in front of us. You could you can watch it
real time. So it's so so much easier now for
that to be done.

Speaker 1 (46:59):
Okay, but let's fast forward this just for a couple
of minutes here though. Okay, the UFO community by and
large is an extremely small community, tom. It is a
community of passionate people, people seeking knowledge, people who have
a love for this subject. But if you were, say,

(47:19):
to place it against any other hobbyist type of group
out there on social media, be maybe the same, maybe
a little bit smaller. My question then, is why would
there be so many alleged government assets putting disinformation out

(47:41):
there for a community that is relatively small and relatively
even more uninformed outside of their own experiences.

Speaker 2 (47:52):
Two. What I think i've a term, I think I've
heard you usday is to control the narrative. And in
the nineteen eighties, the UFO world was even smaller than
it is now, and they had people like Bill Moore

(48:12):
and others. Because Bill Moore said he knew of several
other people that had been recruited as informants. But Bill
Moore and others were informing and reporting back to AFOSI
and maybe other government agencies. And that was before we
had social media. So and I asked, I asked a

(48:37):
certain person this question. I said, Look, if the government
wanted to know what the UFO people were doing back
in the eighties. Wouldn't it make more sense for them
to want to know what There are groups that they
have radios and they watched military aircraft, and they go

(48:58):
to air shows and they they pick up military aircraft
on their radios and communicate about it. I said, wouldn't
they be more interested in that than the UFO people?
And the answer I got was, well, we did that too.
So even though the UFO community may be a relatively

(49:18):
small group, we could just be one drop in a
much larger bucket.

Speaker 1 (49:25):
And what do you mean, explain that one drop in
a much larger bucket.

Speaker 2 (49:30):
In other words, government agencies are monitoring various and sundry
groups that are either directly related to the development of
US technology or peripherally related to US technology. And there
are a lot of people that are interested in a

(49:53):
number of different aspects, and they're all different kinds of
technologies from radio, radar and radio and and UH sensor
sensor technology, satellites, so on and so forth that are
probably being monitored by by several government agencies. I'll give

(50:13):
you an example. Uh, there are some people that track satellites.
That's their hobby. Yes, And in one instance, a couple
of people that were uh tracking a classified satellite and
talking about it with other people, other hobbyists in that area,

(50:36):
and actually caused the government, the n ro O or
whoever was responsible for it, to change the to change
the location of the satellite to change its orbit because
they knew these people were watching. So what I'm trying
to say is it's not just UFO people.

Speaker 1 (50:56):
Is disclosure possible.

Speaker 2 (51:01):
It seems to me that if there was going to
be big D disclosure that the various groups in society
would have to be prepared. The religious communities would have
to be prepared for it, the media would have to
be prepared, the academic communities would need to be prepared,

(51:27):
the scientific community would need to be prepared. The entertainment
companies would need that. And I haven't seen any direct
evidence that that's going on because and that's part of
the problem, because if they did start trying to read

(51:47):
these groups in and get them ready for Big D disclosure,
that that information would get out. There's no way that
you could keep that secret, and rumors would fly and
we would know about it before the disclosure was ever made.
And I don't see any evidence that that's being done.

Speaker 1 (52:06):
See. I feel I'm in a little bit of a
conundrum personally because I do believe UFOs are here. I
do believe UFOs are real. Okay. I have had my
own experiences tom as you know, and as I've shared
on this show over the last decade, that have really
impacted what I do in my life on a daily basis.

(52:27):
It's changed me the last number of years. You know,
I've spent the last decade chasing you know, this story down,
like many people have. And I just wonder, though, after
some of the people I've met, people that I have
dealt with, people who understand how black ops work, the

(52:48):
military works, so on and so forth, I now wonder
whether or not that this is something that is not
only here, but is also a major combination with technology
that we don't know, places like Lockheed or Boeing or

(53:12):
McDonald douglas technologies they may have that we don't quite understand.
And I often wonder if we're getting ripped off because
of this alleged disclosure movement, because of them not want
to give up the secrets of what they actually have.

(53:34):
For toys flying in the sky.

Speaker 2 (53:38):
Yeah, there can be throw offs from alien technology. Let's
say a major government contractor has a saucer in a
secret hanger somewhere and they can't figure out how the
propulsion works. They can't figure out how the things work,

(53:59):
but the ideas it gives it prompts ideas and creativity
and innovation, and they develop technologies and products that somewhat
mimic the capabilities of the alien technology. Okay, there could
be throwbacks in that. And I've also been told very

(54:21):
recently by a prominent person in the community a scientists
that if the patent office gets something that they think
that they don't want, the government doesn't want our adversaries
to know about, they classify it and then it's basically
filed away and no one ever gets to use it.

(54:44):
So that's another aspect of the problem.

Speaker 1 (54:47):
Tom. Hold right there. We're going to go to break.
One hour down, one hour to go with Tom whittmore
independent researcher, loves his UFO subject loves MG twelve, And
we're going to get back to Tom here right after
the break.

Speaker 2 (55:05):
This is faced out right now with hopes Dave Scott.

Speaker 1 (55:24):
All right, Tom, we are clear, we're going to turn
things over to the Dirty One and the Gremlin to
see how things are going. Tom we got about five
and a half minutes.

Speaker 2 (55:34):
Okay, great, Thanks.

Speaker 1 (55:37):
Hello dirty folks, Hello Dave. Sorry about that, folks.

Speaker 6 (55:41):
Didn't need to have Gredma's but showing to everybody. But
sometimes that's what happens when you've got cats and they're rowdy.

Speaker 7 (55:51):
I'm luckily enough to be able to provide them two sources.

Speaker 6 (55:55):
Of income, so let me stay at their house.

Speaker 1 (55:58):
It's nice. Hm.

Speaker 7 (56:06):
I'm just whipping up a quick little Halloween drawing because
I've been making a a few Halloween cartoons and everything
for cat fuzz in my mouth, for some friends and
family and everything. So I figured I would do another one.

Speaker 2 (56:25):
And scooting one in once a week.

Speaker 6 (56:28):
So this is this is the third one that I'm doing.

Speaker 4 (56:34):
That's uh.

Speaker 6 (56:36):
I watched I watched Halloween three again tonight.

Speaker 2 (56:39):
It was great.

Speaker 6 (56:40):
One of my favorite Halloween.

Speaker 7 (56:41):
Films, probably the best out of all the entire quote
unquote Halloween films.

Speaker 6 (56:46):
When it was Boh Cat's when it was originally.

Speaker 7 (56:52):
Supposed to be U Anthology of Horror Films of different
varieties said it before a million times. Halloween t is
my favorite.

Speaker 6 (57:01):
And I watched again, and I'm going to do a
little how many days to Halloween and then just plug
it all over the place and share my cartoons with people.

Speaker 7 (57:15):
I regret to form anybody. There's no aliens or a
big Foot in this one. This is probably a first
getting reprimented from Dave. I'm not going to get my
monthly slice of pizza from Dave now, if anybody wants
to know, I drug cartoons for Dave and he pays
me one slice of pizza per month. It was also

(57:44):
Canadian Thanksgivings this weekend, so Happy Thanksgiving to all the
Canadians listening, and.

Speaker 6 (57:54):
That includes myself. Happy Thanksgiving their dirty filth.

Speaker 7 (58:04):
You know, one of these days we'll have some kind
of day when the aliens show up and.

Speaker 6 (58:11):
Won't be quite Thanksgiving, but maybe at least my gas
but we'll go down a little bit. Basically, I'm just
gonna truw.

Speaker 7 (58:20):
This happy little Halloween three jack lantern. And if you
haven't watched it before, I was just watching Halloween three.
There's nothing to do with Michael Myers. It's one of
the best in the entire series. Cat fuzz On there again, inevitable. Yeah,

(58:46):
it's quite interesting for an alter style horror movie.

Speaker 6 (58:51):
Plus it's got tom Atkins. If it's got tom Atkins,
you can't go wrong. It's impossible.

Speaker 7 (58:57):
So for some of our younger listeners, tom Atkins is
a great actor and just he knocked out of the
park and every single film he's ever written in. And
oddly enough, my internet somehow went to some kind of
elevator music.

Speaker 6 (59:16):
So this is great.

Speaker 2 (59:17):
I'm just drawing.

Speaker 6 (59:19):
Halloween pumpkin thing is some elevator music in the background.

Speaker 7 (59:25):
It's coloring that that date sheet up here.

Speaker 6 (59:29):
I believe it's eighteen days so Halloween.

Speaker 1 (59:32):
I remember correctly.

Speaker 6 (59:39):
More cat hair. That's an inevitable thing when you live
with spragus. Oh wait, there's a grimblin again. Hello, buddy boy.
He doesn't know if he's coming up or what he's doing.
He's orange.

Speaker 1 (59:53):
So yeah, how's the gargoyle?

Speaker 6 (01:00:00):
The gargoyle is curled up on the side of the
window here getting the last little bit of that October air.

Speaker 1 (01:00:06):
Yeah, are you getting ready to lock the windows soon?

Speaker 7 (01:00:11):
For the most part, yes, it's like grimlin Are dave,
I'm gonna go no swearing mode?

Speaker 1 (01:00:17):
Are you down to uh single digits? Yes?

Speaker 6 (01:00:23):
It was y ten today.

Speaker 1 (01:00:25):
I think we topped out at like four degrees today.

Speaker 6 (01:00:30):
Gruesome.

Speaker 1 (01:00:31):
Yeah, most of the time in the mountains. One all right,
dirty philth Thank you and do us a favor before
you leave. Tell everybody where they could find your new book.

Speaker 7 (01:00:51):
Just typing Crypty Cartoons on Amazon to be by close
Mike nar Volume one and two. Buy one for yourself
and one for your mom it. Make sure you call
your mom tonight and tell you.

Speaker 1 (01:01:01):
Lover right on. Thank you tonight so far to Uap
Thompson and Kitty Caddy Wack for the great super chats.
We greatly appreciate your love and support of spaced Out Radio.
If you haven't yet and you're brand new here, do
us a favor hit subscribe ring that bell. We are
here seven days a week, and here we go with

(01:01:24):
our number two. Here we go with our number two
of spaced Out Radio. Tonight. My name is Dave Scott.
Thank you very much for tuning us on in wherever

(01:01:45):
you are on this beautiful planet we call Earth. Hello
to everyone listening in on our terrestrial affiliates around North
America digitally on every major podcast network our website spaced
out radio dot com. We have a plethro features for you.
Rock out to bumblefoot, read the news wire, check out

(01:02:06):
our swag as well. Follow us on x at spaced
Out Radio, Instagram at spaced Out Radio Show, and on Patreon.
In the Space Travelers Club, the Desert Clam has set
the password for tonight in the SR Space Travelers Club
Kaco Tapia cacotopia is your password. Use it wisely. Space

(01:02:28):
Travelers as a clam sits the password each and every
night right here on spaced Out Radio. Let's get to
our guest tonight. Tom Whitmore is formerly of the MOOF
on Board of Directors, retiring in twenty twenty two. He
is down independent researcher looking into the MJ twelve documents
and he's here to talk some UFOs tonight and Tom,

(01:02:48):
we always appreciate when do you take time for us.
Thank you very much.

Speaker 2 (01:02:53):
Thank you, David. I'm having a lot of fun tonight.
It's good to be here.

Speaker 1 (01:02:57):
We're always having fun with you, my friend, We really are. Tom.
We talked a little bit about disclosure on the back
end of the last half hour of the show and
moving forward, where do you see this subject going? Where
do you want it to go? And what's the reality
of it.

Speaker 2 (01:03:16):
I know where I want it to go, but I'm
a pessimist and I'm afraid I suspect that this will
fade away over time because of the stonewalling of the
executive branch and the legislative branch. And the executive branch

(01:03:38):
are separate parts of the government. They have separate responsibilities,
and the executive branch can simply just not supply information
that the legislative branch wants. Now. Having said that, I
think we have a lot of reason to hope in

(01:04:00):
that the last time there were government hearings on the
legislative side was in the nineteen sixties, and a lot
of the activity that occurred during the nineteen eighties by
Bill Moore and the so called Aviary was in the
hope that they could incite a government or legislative investigations

(01:04:27):
into the UFO reality because they believed that the executive
branch was covertly in covering up the UFO reality, and
they hoped that they could get something going in the Congress.
And that didn't happen. And that was forty years ago,
and I think we need to be thankful in a

(01:04:48):
way because since twenty twenty two, there have been six
congressional hearings. There was one in May of twenty twenty
two in the House, in April two, twenty twenty three
in the Senate, in July of twenty twenty three in
the House, in November twenty twenty four in the House,

(01:05:09):
November twenty twenty four in the Senate, in September this
year twenty twenty five in the House. That's six hearings
when there hasn't been a hearing since the nineteen sixties.
So I think we can be thankful for that, But
are the is it going to continue? Are they are
the House and the Senate people are going to realize

(01:05:30):
that the executive the executive offices just aren't going to cooperate.

Speaker 1 (01:05:38):
Do you think that this subject was pretty much dead
in the water the minute politics got involved.

Speaker 2 (01:05:48):
That is a that is a consideration because for the legislators,
I think the political dynamics are much more relevant than
even on the executive side, because there's the so called
deep state, and those are the people that remain no

(01:06:09):
matter who's in office. They're the career professionals, the career
technocrats within the Department of Defense and within the intelligence agencies,
and within the corporate sphere. But on the legislative side,
the people in the House have to worry about getting
re elected every two years, and the Senate does not

(01:06:33):
have quite that much pressure, but they have to take
into consideration the effect that getting too involved in the
UFOs might have. And I think most congress people don't
want to be involved with the UFO subject, and that's
where the political site comes in. They have to worry
about getting re elected and they don't want to be

(01:06:55):
ridiculed with a subject that has been that's been inclined
to be viewed by the public as marginal.

Speaker 1 (01:07:06):
The reason why I asked that, Tom is because we
see people like congress people timbershett Anapoulina Luna with her
conspiracy club, Nancy Mace has been a part of it,
Christian Jillibrand has been a part of it from the Senate.
Marco Rubio was even a part of it right at
the beginning. But we see these people talking very tough

(01:07:29):
that there is this major secret that needs to come out,
Yet they're not really talking publicly with the people who
really would be in the know, so to speak. If
you were on that conspiracy club and wanting to hold hearings.
Who would be your top four that you would want

(01:07:50):
to interview for information that could really help this case,
rather than another person who served who saw you fall
well on a base.

Speaker 2 (01:08:03):
Yeah. Well, part of the problem is we don't know
who those people are because they haven't come forward publicly.
But some logical people would be some National Security directors,
former CIA directors, National Reconnaissance Office, Defense Intelligence Agency. You know,

(01:08:27):
there are something like sixteen different intelligence agencies associated with
the US government now, but those are some of the
obvious ones. And it wouldn't hurt to get some testimony
from Admiral Wilson, of the famous Admiral Wilson interview. And
he won't like me saying that, but I think that

(01:08:50):
he knows something, or he at least found out something.
But as for other people that have direct knowledge that
have worked on these so called legace programs and reverse
engineering programs, we don't necessarily know who they are, So
I can't really give you any other names than some
of the obvious ideas, like the directors of the MSA, THEDIA,

(01:09:13):
the CIA, the National Security Council, and so on and
so forth.

Speaker 1 (01:09:17):
See, you make a lot of sense with Admiral Wilson
or Eric Davis. Both of these people have had the
Wilson Davis memos and notes put in as evidence to
this in the first hearings that they ever had on this,
and the fact that neither of those two have been
called to testify is kind of shocking in my opinion.

(01:09:39):
What about yours.

Speaker 2 (01:09:42):
I don't know about Eric Davis. Now, I can understand
Admiral Wilson because for people that aren't familiar with it
yet arose because Eric Davis was able to interview Admiral
Wilson and have a a confidential conversation with him, and

(01:10:04):
Eric Davis wrote up his notes of the conversation and
he distributed to those notes to other people that were
associated with Robert Bigelow of KNIDS, and it was never
intended to become public. What happened was a famous astronaut,

(01:10:27):
edgar Mitchell, had a copy in his files, and when
edgar Mitchell passed away, a friend of his who was
a space space enthusiast, got a hold of some of
edgar Mitchell's files and took them home with him. Who
and this person happens to be an Australian in Australia

(01:10:51):
and an Australian researcher who I know is I consider
to be a friend, was able to go through the
files and he recovered that transcript of the interview between
Eric Davis and Admiral Wilson, and then he tried to
pass it on to Grant Cameron. But anyway, it ended

(01:11:14):
up on the Internet and ended up becoming public. It
was never intended to become public in the first place,
but it did. And Admiral Wilson specifically said in the
interview he said, look, if this ever becomes public, I'll
deny it, and he has denied it, so I don't.
I don't. It would be awkward for the Congress to

(01:11:37):
call him to testify unless he was willing, and I'm
not sure it would be fair to call him to testify,
like you know, as it to be subpoena to do so.
I don't. I don't know if that would be fair
to him.

Speaker 1 (01:11:54):
But if you want to get answers, sometimes you have
to follow through on threats, and the threat of being
subpoena it might be something that is warranted for a
situation like this, And that's what also makes me wonder
since they're not really doing that. Then, to me, this

(01:12:14):
is just a big charade of what is going on.
It reminds me of the nineteen or the two thousand
and one you know, so called UFO hearings that took place,
you know that doctor Stephen Greer put on, where yeah,
you had these people come out, but nothing was really
brought forward, There was no information given. It was just

(01:12:37):
a big show piece. And isn't that what maybe this
conspiracy club is doing right now is just a big showcase.

Speaker 2 (01:12:47):
In some ways it is. But I beg to differ
with the attitude that some people have come out that,
for example, Representative Luna is not doing enough to bring
forward or disclosure. In fact, one journalist even called or
a liar. I take the opposite view. I think that
we should work with them and be supportive of any

(01:13:09):
and all congress people that are willing to pursue this subject.
It's been far too difficult to get any congressional interests
at all for you know, since the nineteen sixties, actually
since nineteen forty seven, and now we do have some
Congress people that are interested and are trying to have hearings,

(01:13:31):
and just because a legislator wants to have UFO hearings,
it may be difficult for that person to get those
hearings going because they have to work with the leadership
in the House and the leadership in the Senate. And
if the Speaker of the House or whoever the people
in authority are in the legislator lature, unless they agree

(01:13:54):
to it and allow it, they may not be able
to get hearings. So I believe that we should work
with and be supportive of any and all congressional people,
both on the House and the Senate side, that are
willing to delve into this disclosure issue.

Speaker 1 (01:14:13):
And I understand it would completely agree with that if
they were actually talking to people of relevancy. You know,
when Mike Gold came out and spoke about NASA, he
wasn't interested in talking about UFOs. He was interested in
talking about get NASA more funding. They didn't even bring
up the farce of a report that NASA had put out.

(01:14:36):
They you know, lou Elizonda was there and basically was saying, well,
if you want that information, you got to read my book.
It was like a part of his Book of the
Month club. You know, now I'm being a little bit
harsh when I say that on both ends, but that
was the reality to it. If you want answers, why
wouldn't you go to the people who have answers rather

(01:14:58):
than the people who haven't.

Speaker 2 (01:15:02):
Well, But here, here's what the thing is, Dave. As
far as I can tell, we don't know what conversations
representatives and senators are having behind the scenes. We're only
we might get some indications and we might hear some rumors,

(01:15:23):
but they're pretty tight lipped. And this one journalist that
I'm referring to, who will you know, scout the halls
and approach them in the halls and try to get comments.
The legislators are pretty tight lipped about what they're doing
behind the scenes. They have to be careful to a

(01:15:43):
certain extent because they don't want information getting out that
either might embarrass them or might jeopardize their ability to
have a hearing. So, you know, it is a game,
and it is politics, and it's not everything that we've
hoped for. And I do believe that the executive branch
is stonewalling and doing everything they can from uh to

(01:16:07):
not to lose control of the narrative. And yes, it
is a show and there're shenanigans and games. But we've
got at least we have something, and at least we
have some congressional people that are willing to try to
have hearings, and I just believe that we should be
supportive of them and of anyone else that will testify.

(01:16:28):
I mean, maybe Lou Elexando is not everything that we
we've hoped for, but I think that we should be
supportive of Lou Alizondo. I personally have shaken I've shaken
his hand, I've looked him in the eye, I've made
comments to him, I've met him in meetings, and I
believe that he's an honorable person and that he and

(01:16:50):
that he's honestly trying to bring disclosure forward. But he's
also cagey about what he will talk about and reveal,
because the Skies have to be careful. If they reveal
any classified information, they could get in trouble.

Speaker 1 (01:17:07):
Very true. Would you would you do that over a
beer in his new bar?

Speaker 2 (01:17:14):
Well, I'd be drinking diet coke, But yeah, yeah, I would.
I've been drinking many, many, many years ago. That's why
I'm still here.

Speaker 1 (01:17:28):
True true, that true, that the idea behind it though
of you know, kind of You're right, we don't know
what is happening behind the scenes, then why go public
with it If you can't talk about it publicly, Why
go public? Why why lead the public into temptation? Biblically,

(01:17:54):
we're not even supposed to lead people into temptation, yet
this is exactly with what they're doing.

Speaker 2 (01:18:02):
I think that we have to remember that there are
the UFO, there's the UFO lobby, the UFO believers, the
enthusiasts like me, which you have correctly pointed out is
a small segment of the population, and then there's everyone else.
And so we UFO people, we follow each and every

(01:18:25):
little development in this whole disclosure issue, and we become hopeful,
and we've become dissatisfied, and we become discouraged, and so
on and so forth. The general public isn't even following this.
I don't think they even care.

Speaker 1 (01:18:43):
I would agree with you on that. I don't think
the general public cares at all. They otherwise they would
have taken it up a little bit more, I really do.
But I do know this that I'm going to be
asking us some of these same questions in a few
days time when we interview Matt Laslow from Ascopol who's

(01:19:03):
been a diligent researcher of the UFO subject in Washington, DC,
and I think that will be quite a learned experience
to have him on the air to see what is
really going on publicly with this subject. We got about
five minutes to go before we need to go to break.
Here at the bottom of the hour. Tom Whitmore is

(01:19:24):
our guest tonight on Spaced Out Radio. Tom MJ twelve.
This is a love and a passion for you in
researching this subject. You've been doing it now for a
number of years. You've kind of made it your personal
man tra to learn about this. For people who don't
know what Majestic twelve was, give us a quick explanation.

Speaker 2 (01:19:47):
Majestic twelve. The idea of Majestic twelve arises out of
certain documents that were introduced into the UFO public and
into the larger public, allegedly revealing that there had been
a recovery of a UFO in Roswell in nineteen forty seven,

(01:20:10):
and that a select committee of SCIENTUS government people was
formed to study the problem, and that they worked in
complete total secrecy regarding the problem and essentially managed the

(01:20:30):
UFO problem since nineteen forty seven. It was comprised of
twelve people. Thus MJ twelve and these documents that came
out in the nineteen eighties introduced this whole concept. Now,
the documents themselves are questionable. They are not authentic government

(01:20:53):
issued documents. For example, if you get a document from
the National Archives, it has a stamp on it that
it's been declassified and it has been released officially. None
of the MJ twelve documents are like that, but they
might point towards certain things that may be true. And

(01:21:17):
there were a number of documents, like I've mentioned, the
Aquarius Telex, the Carter Briefing Document, the Eisenhower Briefing Document,
the Truman Forestall Memo, and the Color twenty memo. Those
all came out in the eighties and that introduced this
whole idea of MJ twelve, a secret committee of government scientists,

(01:21:38):
government military, and government people that managed the UFO problem
after the recovery of a UFO in nineteen forty seven.

Speaker 1 (01:21:47):
Why is it important to the UFO world today.

Speaker 2 (01:21:54):
Well, I love UFO history. I'm a history guy, even
though I don't have a dary in history, and I
don't walk around saying that I'm a historian, but I
love Ufo history and I feel like I do understand
some perspective, and I think and the thing that has
gotten to me, Dave, is the whole idea that a

(01:22:17):
government agency would go to the trouble to create these
kinds of documents and introduce them into the UFO community.
That to me is fascinating. Why why are they doing
that and why are they messing with the UFO community
in that way? And I've seen enough evidence to satisfy

(01:22:38):
me that something has been going on in terms of
certain government agencies wanting to mess around with the UFO community.
I live and breathe this stuff.

Speaker 1 (01:22:52):
I think we all kind of live and breathe that
the history of it all is pretty fantastic. To Meg
well sits in that what I like to call the
UFO Pandora's box that is sitting somewhere in the middle
of the Pentagon. And I just want to, you know,
make notice, not to pat my own back or anything,
but I was usually the term UFO Pandora's box way

(01:23:14):
before Chris Mellon said it about two years ago. So
I just want to clarify that that I didn't steal
it from him. But I believe there is this UFO
Pandora's Box sitting in the Pentagon somewhere, that includes what
happened at Roswell, that includes MJ twelve, that includes all
of these different crash sites, retrievals, you know, situations, whether

(01:23:38):
or not Bob Lazar worked at Area fifty one, whether
or not Eisenhower did or did not meet extraterrestrials at
an Air Force base trading humans for technology. I think
in the Road to disclosure, I think they are trying
to protect that Pandora's Box from ever being exposed. Thirty

(01:23:59):
second answer on that.

Speaker 2 (01:24:00):
Top, Yeah, they sure are, because I mean, think of
the Pandora's Box myth, you know the I think it's
an old Greek myth. But once Pandora opened the box,
the demons came out, and once they came out, you
can't put them back in, and you lose control of
the situation. You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube,

(01:24:25):
you can't unring the bell, and so you know, you
have to keep a lid on Pandora's Box. And I
think that that is what has been done. If there
was a saucer recovered in nineteen forty seven. I think
that is what has been done since then. It's a
I call it a pattern of denial and deception, and

(01:24:48):
it's still going on to this day.

Speaker 1 (01:24:51):
Well, we're going to go in the next half hour,
we're going to talk a little bit about MG twelve.
We're also going to get into some audience question with
Tom went Moore. Next.

Speaker 8 (01:25:09):
You're listening to space, don't you with your host Dave Scott.

Speaker 1 (01:25:24):
All Right, we're clear, Okay, man, this is flying no by.

Speaker 2 (01:25:34):
Sure is I hope I'm answering your questions.

Speaker 1 (01:25:40):
You are doing fantastic, absolutely fantastic, as per usual.

Speaker 2 (01:25:45):
But I could talk for hours.

Speaker 1 (01:25:51):
Me too.

Speaker 2 (01:25:56):
You said you're out in the forest today.

Speaker 1 (01:25:58):
I was out in the forest. So I'm still a
little stunned over that giant black bear I saw. Yes,
it was a black bear, not a sasquatch.

Speaker 2 (01:26:10):
You guys go out in the forest just to hang
out or yeah, my dad has never seen a giant
bull moose.

Speaker 1 (01:26:19):
But we're too we're too far into the hunting season
now to have them come out in the middle of
the day.

Speaker 2 (01:26:30):
So you have to be care You have to be
careful around them too.

Speaker 1 (01:26:33):
Oh yeah, moose actually kill more people than bears annually.
Uh huh, yeah, they're they're an angry soul in a
in an awkward body.

Speaker 2 (01:26:47):
Yes, but sure is it where you live? Is it
really densely forested?

Speaker 1 (01:26:56):
Yes?

Speaker 2 (01:26:57):
Oh that's nice because that's how I am British Columbia being.

Speaker 1 (01:27:02):
Yeah, it's it's very forested up here. It's a you know,
like for me to get into the deep forest is
probably a fifteen minute drive away. Yeah, it happens quick.

Speaker 2 (01:27:31):
How did you end up living there?

Speaker 1 (01:27:33):
Day?

Speaker 2 (01:27:35):
I mean where you live now?

Speaker 1 (01:27:39):
How did I move up here?

Speaker 2 (01:27:40):
Yeah?

Speaker 1 (01:27:42):
Interesting story. H During my daytime career, I was working
at a place where I was getting bullied pretty heavily
by ownership. I was in a situation where Sun was
taking over from Dad and son was an arrogant cuss

(01:28:10):
to say the least. And I got to the point
where I started having panic attacks and really bad anxiety
and depression and it started to affect my health. And
decided one day to throw a darted a dartboard. And

(01:28:32):
I remember being up here a couple of times with
my dad going fishing when I was a kid and
really liked the fact of living in a small town.
It intrigued me. So talked to a mentor of mine
in my field and he's like, wouldn't you know that

(01:28:53):
I'm on my way to that town right now. I
called him, and so it was kind of like it
was meant to be. Okay, you know. But I've learned
a lot about myself being up here. I think I'm
a better person living up here than I was down

(01:29:15):
near the Vancouver area. I'm a happier person, that's for sure,
you know. Yeah, I started hunting last year. Yeah, I
still am extremely green about that. About hunting, I don't

(01:29:42):
I have my deer tags, but I don't see myself
taking a deer because number one, I don't know how
to clean it. But number two, I really like deer.
I really like I love it when they're in my yard,
you know what I'm saying. So I I don't see
myself taking a deer or a bear because I really

(01:30:03):
like black bears too. But you know, is what it is.
I normally I go hunting for gross because I've equated
them to like wild chickens. So ten seconds here, Tom,
thank you, Kitty Thompson, Nicole j Ceo and Shaq for

(01:30:24):
the super chats. Thank you to our new subscribers. Here
we go, Here we Go with the second half of

(01:30:47):
spaced Out Radio. My name is Dave Scott. We greatly
appreciate you tuning us on in and enjoying tonight's show
on UFOs with Tom Whitmore. We want to remind all
of you that if you missed portions of this show
or others, our archives are always free on YouTube or
any major podcast network. Our website spased out radio dot com.

(01:31:09):
We have a plethora of features for you. Rockout to bumblefoot,
read the newest wire, check out our swag as well.
You can follow us on exit s, based out Radio,
Instagram It's based out Radio show, and on Patreon. In
the Space Travelers Club Final time tonight, Tom Whitmore is here.
He is researching MJ twelve, Majestic twelve. Was it real?

(01:31:33):
Was it not? Tom? This is still the great debate
on whether or not MJ twelve truly existed. Many believe
it was just a farce. It you don't.

Speaker 2 (01:31:46):
You could certainly make a case for that. You can
make a case well that it's it's an either or question.
Either MJ twelve existed or it didn't. If it existed,
it either had something to do with UFOs or it didn't.

(01:32:07):
And it's possible that there was an MJ twelve that
didn't have anything to do with UFOs. Maybe it had
something to do with technological development in another area, you know,
and like I mentioned, the whole question of nuclear warfare,
radar communications, all kinds of technological things. Now, in looking

(01:32:31):
at the list of the MJ twelve members, it seems
that if it wasn't UFOs, that the development of a
high altitude spycraft would be something that the people that
are on the list, it might make sense for them
to be concerned with that. But the problem is in

(01:32:54):
nineteen forty seven, that was way before we had even
the first utube. The two aircraft didn't come into play,
I think until nineteen fifty five or so, so that's
eight long years from nineteen forty seven. One person has
asserted that MJ twelve had something to do with continuity

(01:33:16):
of government, and continuity of government is really related to again,
nuclear war and being able to maintain the government's functions,
possibly underground inside a mountain in case of nuclear war.
But when I look at the list, of the alleged
to MJ twelve members. I just don't think that fits.

(01:33:40):
I mean, why would you need an astronomer like Donald
Menzel concerned with continuity of government? So there are various
ways to look at it. I do think that if
the government acquired a saucer, one or more saucers over
the years, that there's a whole matrix of government agencies

(01:34:04):
and you have the National Security Council, and you have
the Defense Department, and then all of these other agencies
in the executive branch, and I think there may have
been a matrix of people that were read in on
various levels of the problem. But somewhere, and assuming that
it's true, if we assume that it's true that there

(01:34:26):
was a UFO or more than one UFO recovered that
somewhere and there, some group had to have been able
to put it all together and know, you know, everything
that the government does know about it. And that's where
you get into the question of is there an MJ
twelve or something like it now in the rumor mill

(01:34:48):
and and you know, just talk on the street on
the UFO street that if there was an MJ twelve,
it's the name of it. Has changed over the years.
For I remember back in the nineteen nineties people were
talking about COM twelve. I've heard Zenith mentioned, and I've heard,

(01:35:12):
you know, a couple of other names so and they
do seem to be associated with astronomical type things like
Zodiac and Zenith and that kind of thing. And I
do think that if this problem exists, like I think
it does, there are certain people that are read in

(01:35:34):
and know quite a bit, probably one or more people
in the National Security Council, and plausible deniability comes into
play because if the president, even though he probably can't
be refuse the information if he demands it, he's actually
better off if he's not read in, because then he

(01:35:56):
can honestly say that he doesn't know, and that provides
its plausible deniability, and that is an important principle in government,
in government administration.

Speaker 1 (01:36:10):
We've seen this happen before Tom where many of these
projects that allege to be around UFOs have their name changed.
And the reason why is it is for deniability. It's
like when Immaculate Constellation came out through Michael Schellenberger and

(01:36:30):
Jeremy Corbel In talking to a couple people that I
know who worked on the dark black ops side of things.
They said, Look, they can deny that program all they want,
because by the time something like that hits public, they've
already changed the name to it. They've already changed the name,
so that way they have complete deniability. What do you mean,

(01:36:52):
there's nothing about Immaculate Constellation or maybe even MJ twelve
or Majestic twelve because they changed the name to it
and it gives them deniability. Do you think that that
maybe happened with Majestic twelve? Well?

Speaker 2 (01:37:08):
Sure, and the government, well the military in particular is
constantly reorganizing, and they're shifting responsibilities and tasks around from
one group to another, and they're renaming this and they're
renaming that. And I almost wonder if they do that

(01:37:29):
on purpose to keep our adversaries off base, and to
even keep the public off base. And if you take
any particular military function within that matrix, if you go
back in the history, you'll see the name change and
the nomenclature change a number of times over a fairly

(01:37:53):
you know, ten twenty thirty years. It will change, it
will morph, it will evolve, and this I think is
a reality of the situation. And here's another thing, Dave,
if you ask a question of someone in the know,

(01:38:13):
you have to ask it exactly correctly, or they can say, well,
you know you're wrong, or it doesn't exist unless you
get the nomenclature.

Speaker 1 (01:38:24):
Exact through FOYA correct through.

Speaker 2 (01:38:29):
FOYO, or if you have some kind of an insight contact.
And Bill Moore ran into that. I think that certain
people would answer certain questions if if you ask the
questions in a certain way, and you had to ask
it in the right way, and it had to be
exactly correct in the type of in the way the

(01:38:51):
question was asked.

Speaker 1 (01:38:53):
Right. So how is it or how would you be
able to get that deep in information about MJ twelve
if it allegedly does no longer exist.

Speaker 2 (01:39:12):
There's the rumor mill. There are problems in my research.
And when I write when I finally finished this and
I write the introduction, I mean, I'm gonna I'm trying
to be straightforward because there are problems in researching something
like this, And for example, a lot of what I'm

(01:39:37):
studying happened forty years ago. Some of the sources, some
of the really key sources now are deceased. Other people
won't cooperate or they're unavailable. There are a few that
are still active. And I know that this is related

(01:39:57):
to classified information where or another, whether it has to
do with recovered UFOs or not. This whole business of
one or more government agencies interacting with UFO researchers and
UFO groups is if if you if you're talking about
the government files that are related to that, it's still classified.

(01:40:20):
I filed an f O I a several months ago
based on what I believe was a correct project name
at a correct operational name, and the end the answer
I got back was, uh, that's still classified and we

(01:40:41):
can neither confirm nor deny this. Well, what does that
tell you? You know? But the information is properly classified.
So I know that things related to this, to the
m J twelve controversy are classified, even though m J
twelve possibly never existed or may may have possibly had
nothing to do with UFOs.

Speaker 1 (01:41:05):
What's your thoughts on the Aurora spy plane.

Speaker 2 (01:41:11):
I think that it existed, and it was tested, it
was used, and maybe it was discontinued. It just got
to be too difficult to operate. Planes like that have
to use will allegedly use a very special kind of

(01:41:33):
fuel and there were particular problems associated with it, and
when you're traveling that fast, you know, there's a lot
of friction in the atmosphere going in and out of
the atmosphere, and they are really serious, substantial technical problems.

(01:41:54):
And I do think it was tested, and I think
it was used a certain amount, but then I think
it may have been discontinued in terms of what we
think aur Aurora was Now. I don't know what they're
doing now or what they have now.

Speaker 1 (01:42:09):
Do you think that was tied at all the MJ twelve.

Speaker 2 (01:42:14):
It could be. It could be that part of the
function of a group like in the MJ twelve, and
I mean AFOSI, the Air Force Office of Special Investigations,
part of their responsibility is maintaining security around these classified
programs that are being run by the Air Force. And

(01:42:36):
so they you know, you have security which is telling
people to shut up and not talk about it, and
they signed security oaths and they signed nondisclosure agreements and
all this. But they also create deception problem programs and
they they even put out disinformation. So yeah, the answer is.

Speaker 1 (01:43:00):
Us, I never knew that would have been tied to it. Interesting,
All right, let's get to some audience questions. T Bone
is asking what is your opinion of people who are
researching this project, like Ross Coltheart.

Speaker 2 (01:43:20):
I know Ross. I don't talk to him often, but
I think he's a he's a good man. I think
he's sincere, he got the UFO bug, and he's a
journal He's a journalist at heart, and he I think
that he works out of the journalistic mindset of we

(01:43:43):
got to get the big story. We got to go
out and get the big story. And I think he's
constantly trying to do that. And sometimes generalists journalists, not
just Ross Gilthart, but other journalists, they'll hype up their
their headlines and their stories, you know, to get that

(01:44:03):
on the ear. But I think he's a good man
and I think he's searching after truth as all of
us are.

Speaker 1 (01:44:11):
All right. Another audience question here, Derek is asking why
did different superpowers in the world stop testing atomic weapons?
In your opinion, I.

Speaker 2 (01:44:24):
Think they learned enough about how the weapons operate, how
they work, that it wasn't necessary to do anymore testing.
There has been you know, there had been testing underground
in the US for years. Afterwards, there was a certain
amount of naivety about nuclear radiation. After the bombs came out,

(01:44:50):
and you know, they were setting these bombs off in
Nevada and setting huge bombs off out in the Pacific.
All this radiation and fall out was going into the
atmosphere and it was just it was crazy when you
when you consider all of the nuclear weapons that have

(01:45:11):
been that have been detonated, and it just makes common
sense to stop doing that. Now. Having said that, there
are certain countries that want to have nuclear weapons too,
and they're going they're going to test them one way
or another. And it's interesting. It's interesting to note that

(01:45:32):
Robert Oppenheimer recommended that they simply run models of detonations
rather than actual nuclear detonations. And Robert Oppenheimer had said
that the atom bomb is shit, and it's just, uh,
it's it's just, you know, it creates more problems than

(01:45:55):
it solves.

Speaker 1 (01:45:59):
Moving on to another question, let's go over to Jules here,
who is asking what do you think the repercussions would
be for false whistleblowing.

Speaker 2 (01:46:09):
I don't think that Congress people would go to the
trouble of trying to make a referral to the Justice
Department for a false whistle blower unless it was so
egregious that it caused too many people, too many problems.
And it's kind of like police work. You could get
in trouble for filing a false police report, you know,

(01:46:32):
something like that. But as far as these false whistle
blowers go, I think it's just an annoyance.

Speaker 1 (01:46:42):
All right, one of your favorites and my favorites, let's
go to Katie Page. Do you think the secrecy around
UFOs is more about technology or the phenomena itself.

Speaker 2 (01:46:56):
Well, first of all, I want to give a shout
out to Katie, and I want to give a shout
out to Catherine, my friend, and I want to give
a shout out to Nicole all my friends. And as
far as about secrecy around UFOs, I think it's about both. Now,
the technology is alleged, we have to believe, without proof

(01:47:19):
or even direct evidence, that the government or private industry
is in possession of the technology. But as far as
the phenomenon goes, there have been far too many sightings
and reports over the last eighty years to just ignore
it and say that UFOs don't exist. And with all
the technology that the US government has within the military

(01:47:43):
and the intelligence agencies, their ability to collect data. You know,
I think there's a lot of it is about that.
So I think it's about both.

Speaker 1 (01:47:55):
Jules is asking do you think the paris strangeness exhibited
by the phenomena is abilities to is abilities possessed by
beings or manufactured technology of quantum mechanical engineering.

Speaker 2 (01:48:13):
I think we'd have to be sitting in a room
with the technology in front of us, with people that
are smart enough to figure out something about it. And
we've you know, we've basically heard two things. One line
is they can't figure anything out, they haven't made any
progress with it. And then the other rumor is, you know,

(01:48:34):
we've got our own craft going into the space and
going to the Moon and going to Mars and all this,
and they've known how to operate it for a long time.
As far as quantum mechanical engineering, quantum is a popular
term in the UFO community, and I think that very
few people in the UFO community understand what quantum is about.

(01:48:57):
I certainly don't.

Speaker 1 (01:49:03):
Let's go to Ramona the Pentagon already admitted that the
UFO phenomena exists. Isn't this disclosure?

Speaker 2 (01:49:14):
Well, if you want to think that way. I mean, yeah,
you can find one person made some remark on Fox
News or something like that, but that's that's different than
someone holding a press conference and making an announcement and
backing it up with evidence with charts, photographs, documents, briefing papers,

(01:49:38):
so on and so forth. Just because some former government
official makes an offhand remark saying that you know that
he or she believes that the UFO phenomenon is real,
I mean, that's fine. I'm not against it, but I
don't consider that to be official disclosure.

Speaker 1 (01:49:59):
Right, let's go to Tony here. I watched the film
of Contact last night. I wondered if the Brazilian authorities
and ESA are subject of FOYA. I don't think Tom
would know that, but every government is subject to FOYA.
You have to read their constitution, all right. I do
have a question from Nicole. Do you think the false

(01:50:22):
whistleblowers are possible counter intelligence operations that have fooled these sources? Tom?

Speaker 2 (01:50:30):
Some of them could be, some of them could be,
And there is a function within the Air Force at
least and maybe some of the other military branches. But
they have people that are They may be actors, they

(01:50:52):
may be kN men, they may be just weird that
they employ for various over purposes. And now I'm not
saying that that proves that they're putting false people over
to the legislative branch, but I don't think you can
eliminate that possibility. Like I've said, I think that the

(01:51:17):
DoD and the executive branch is doing everything they can
to control the narrative and to keep a lid on this.

Speaker 1 (01:51:27):
We got three minutes to go, Tom, and obviously you
know this is a major story that will continue to develop,
at least in our world. Where does it go, say,
the next couple of months before the end of twenty
twenty five, what do you see happening?

Speaker 2 (01:51:48):
I think for a really truly serious investigation, like with
a special council type or special special prosecutor type, that
they're to be political advantage on the legislative side, because
if you look at Watergate, the Democrats didn't like Nixon,

(01:52:11):
and when Watergate came along, they were able to use
that to force Nixon out of office. And all of
the Watergate investigations were basically politically motivated because it gave
the Democrats a political advantage. I'm not seeing any way
that any political party at this point would gain any

(01:52:34):
political advantage by getting into a really truly serious UFO
investigation with special counsel and special prosecutor types subpoenating people
and even possibly people being prosecuted out of it. I
just don't see that right now. I'm sorry. It's not
because I don't want disclosure. I want disclosure as badly

(01:52:55):
as anybody out there. But I'm also a little bit
of a pessimist.

Speaker 1 (01:53:01):
I think we're all a little bit of a pessimist
when it comes to this right now. To be blunt,
you know, it's very tough for any of us really
to be able to handle what is going on. It's
hard to see the positive side of this anymore. It
really is. There's the romantic side, tom where we all

(01:53:22):
want to be able to say, hey, we participated in this,
we were able to help bring this out. But then
there's a reality side to it that I don't think
many of us fully understand because the real story of
it has never been told.

Speaker 2 (01:53:39):
That's right, And even on another live stream tonight, Louel
Asondo showed up on another live stream and he said
that there really is a whole lot going on behind
the scenes and that he expects some developments to arise
in the future. I hope that he's wrong, and I do.

(01:54:02):
I do think there is quite a bit going on
behind the scenes. The question is will any of it
become public? I can't answer that.

Speaker 1 (01:54:11):
Well either can I. We'll just have to wait and
see my friend. Yes, Tom Whitmore, tell everybody where they
could get a hold of you.

Speaker 2 (01:54:20):
I have a blog on WordPress. It's Tom Whitmore Blog.
That's all one word. Tom Whitmore Blog dot WordPress dot bg.

Speaker 1 (01:54:31):
Tom Whitmore Blog at WordPress dot or dot WordPress dot com.
Coming up next to hour three, we have Swamp Dweller
than the Wizard. You're listening to spaced Out Radio with
your host Dave Scott. Good job tonight, Tom, Thank you,

(01:55:07):
Thanks Dave.

Speaker 2 (01:55:10):
On your show.

Speaker 1 (01:55:10):
Anytime you want to come on. You know that that's
why you're the man.

Speaker 2 (01:55:15):
Okay. I do want to keep in touch.

Speaker 1 (01:55:17):
Of course, we'll call you soon. Okay, all right, brother,
you take care, good night, good night, Tom Whitmore. Everybody,
Uncle Tommy W. Moore. He'll be in Vegas for our
fan event next May, so make sure if you want
to hang out with Sweet Tommy, come out and uh
come out to Vegas with us. He'll be there, all right,

(01:55:39):
I'll be right.

Speaker 9 (01:55:39):
Back US, USA, USA, USA, m.

Speaker 1 (02:00:16):
All right, I'm back. Let's bring in the wizard. What
do you say, Wizard, what do you say? Dave, live
in the dream, My man, live in the dream. I
hear you, man. You know, spend some nice time out

(02:00:45):
in the forest today. Yeah, yeah, the sight. No, No,
won't go there without anybody. Just too dangerous there. Fairs
did see a monster black bear there though. Holy cow,
he was big. He was about three hundred yards away
from us. Literally, one of the biggest bears I've ever seen. Yeah,

(02:01:14):
funny story. I was on my honeymoon. Hold that thought.
We'll get to it when we return. Keep that thought, though.
Here we go. Third and final hour of spaced Out

(02:01:38):
Radio is now underway. My name is Dave Scott, and
we are hanging on out with our good friends like
you tuning us in each and every night. We appreciate that. Hey,
we want to say hello to everyone listening in on
our terrestrial affiliates around North America, digitally on every major
podcast network our website spaced Out Radio. We have a

(02:02:01):
plethora of features for you. Rock out to bumblefoot, read
the news wire, check out our swag as well. You
can follow us on Exit, spaced Out Radio, Instagram, at
spaced Out Radio Show, and on Patreon. In the Space
Travelers Club, the Desert Clam has set the password for
tonight in the sor Space Travelers Club Tacotopia. Tacotopia is

(02:02:26):
your password. Use it wisely. Space Travelers as a clam
sets the password each and every night right here on
spaced Out Radio, Let's head to the swamp.

Speaker 10 (02:02:37):
Hello and welcome to spaced Out Radios Swamp. I'm swamp dweller,
and tonight I'm going to take you on a mystic
journey of the unn sharing tales of monsters, legends, and nightmapes.
Welcome to the space Out Radio Swamp.

Speaker 11 (02:02:54):
For this next case, we need to travel back to
nineteen ninety two in the city of Columbia, South Caro.
Columbia is a rather large city with an estimated population
of around one hundred and thirty two thousand people. Columbia
is also the state capitol is in the center of
the Columbia metropolitan area, which boast upwards of eight hundred

(02:03:15):
and fifty thousand residents. It is safe to say, in
an area with so many people living their lives, it
is no doubt that some may go missing in broad daylight.
Unfortunately for Dale Dinwidie, she would be one of the
many who seemingly vanish in a crowd of people. On
September twenty third, nineteen ninety two, Dale and a group

(02:03:36):
of her friends were attending a U two concert. For
those who are not aware or may not know, or
were born after two thousand, U two is an Irish
rock band from the mid seventies. The show was happening
at the ever buzzing Williams Bryce Stadium, home to the
South Carolina game Cocks college football games. This stadium currently

(02:03:58):
holds over eight thousand people, but in nineteen ninety two
it had the capacity to sit around seventy three thousand,
still a lot of people. The concert went on until
about eleven fifteen pm. Then Dale and her friends decided
to head toward the Five Points area of Columbia. They
went to a popular nightclub in the area at the

(02:04:19):
time named Jungle Gyms. It is rather unclear what happened
that night, as sometime during the hour and a half
they were there, Dale would get separated from her group
of friends. Around one am on September twenty fourth, the
group left the club and assumed Dale had called her
parents or had gotten a ride home. Sadly, this was

(02:04:41):
not the reality of the situation. Dale was still in
the nightclub, unaware her friends had left without her. Dale
could be seen on surveillance footage asking a bouncer if
they had seen her friends. Sometime around one thirty am,
she stopped talking with the bouncer and was seen walking
north on Harden Street. Consequently, Dale has never been seen

(02:05:05):
or heard from again. Dale Dinwiddie is a Caucasian female
with brown hair and brown eyes. She was twenty three
at the time of her disappearance and weighed approximately ninety
six to one hundred pounds and was about five feet tall.
She was last seen wearing a forest green sweatshirt, a

(02:05:25):
blue nylon LLL bean jacket tied around her waist, faded
blue jeans, and sneakers. Now I realize there is not
a ton of information behind this case, but that is
exactly why I chose to cover this one now, as
I feel there is so much being left out or
kept from the public. There have been multiple theories thrown
around as what happened to Dale dinwitdie, the most popular

(02:05:48):
theory being well abduction or murder. This is the primary
theory that most investigators have gotten behind. Some people close
to the story insist Dale had to have been taken
by someone who knew her, or potentially a stalker or
stranger who had been following her for some time. Many
have stated that it would be very unlikely for Dale
to enter a stranger's vehicle on her own accord, leaving

(02:06:10):
many to think she was familiar with whoever she got
in the vehicle with. It does look like the lack
of clues in this case indicate Dale's disappearance was likely
a carefully planned event. Investigators have gone on record to
say anyone who kidnapped her own impulse would most likely
have been sloppy, leaving behind clues. To me, this is

(02:06:30):
not necessarily a solid argument, and as with the lack
of witnesses, we clearly have a lack of clues, which
does not mean the potential abduction was planned or unplanned
at all. The absence of evidence does not mean the
evidence of absence. I am unsure of where I lean
in this case, but I can say there have been
a few suspects over the years. A popular suspect who

(02:06:52):
was investigated was a man named Ronaldo Javier Rivera. He
confessed to killing four women in Georgia, suspected to have
been behind many more. What made Rivera a solid suspect
was that he was a violent killer who had lived
in the area at the time Dale disappeared. He was
even attending the University of South Carolina in nineteen ninety two.

(02:07:16):
The university is not terribly far from the Five Points
area Dale was last seen, outside of the possibility of
him being in the area, though no evidence has ever
been found linking him to the crime, and at the
end of the day, Dale and her family deserve answers
and closure. Over the years, investigators have followed up on
thousands of tips, many of which are somewhat useful, but

(02:07:39):
there are quite a few that border un ridiculous. Many
properties have been searched after reports of foul odors and
deer bones were dug up. Ground penetrating radar, scent dogs
and more have all been dispatched and used to aid
officials in lighter news. Dale's dental records and DNA all

(02:08:00):
on record. If her remains are ever found she will
likely be identified. Even though odds are slim that this
case will be solved, I see no reason to not
share this in hopes as someone possibly knowing something. There
is still a twenty thousand dollars reward for anyone with
information that solves this case. If you, or anyone you

(02:08:20):
may know have any information regarding to Dale Dinwoodie's whereabouts,
please call the Columbia Police Department at eight oh three
five four five three five zero zero.

Speaker 1 (02:08:34):
Thank you swamp Dweller for another creepy story. If you
want more just like that, head on over to his
YouTube channel Swamp Dweller hit subscribe, ring that bell and
you get thousands right there to choose from. It's time
for the UFO Wizard.

Speaker 12 (02:08:48):
Says Almighty Zify records.

Speaker 2 (02:08:55):
Bows and makes his best.

Speaker 1 (02:08:58):
Just the UFO Wizard returns for another week here on

(02:09:18):
spaced Out Radio. Josh Rutledge, it is always great to
have you here, my friend. How you doing.

Speaker 12 (02:09:24):
I'm doing fantastic, Dave. I'm pretty sure when I get
together with you guys, hopefully next year in Vegas, I've
got to play that song when I walk in to
where everybody is just.

Speaker 1 (02:09:36):
You know, I will make sure that happens. I will
totally make sure that happens.

Speaker 12 (02:09:41):
How about that pipe it over the speakers in whatever
hotel or whatever we're gonna.

Speaker 1 (02:09:46):
Stay in, So that would be amazing, just amazing. Went
hunting with my dad today. Yeah, and we're driving down
the logging roads literally see one of the big black
bears I have ever seen. We were about three hundred
yards away and we're just cruising along it, maybe four

(02:10:08):
or five miles an hour, and all of a sudden,
I looked straight ahead and I'm like, holy cow, what
is that? Is that a cow? Is that a horse? No?
It was a giant black bear. Man, and this thing
was looking at us, and we were looking at it,
and we're looking so Dad, get your camera out, and
then all of a sudden, it's like, yeah, screw you humans,

(02:10:29):
I'm out of here, ran around the corner and then
disappeared into the trees. Man, dude, there's something beautiful about
what scenarios like that happen.

Speaker 12 (02:10:40):
Yeah, so funny story. I'm my honeymoon, which was gosh,
almost twenty years ago. We gone to Gatlinburg, Tennessee, which
is for some reason, seems to be like the top
honeymoon spot if you're you know, get married in Kentucky
or a sea or Indiana or Ohio. Anyways, it's a

(02:11:04):
very pretty area in the Appalachian Mountains. We had driven
up to Klingman's Dome, which is kind of a rock feature.
You can walk up to the top of it and stuff,
and it's really cool. You see the reason why they're
called the Smoky Mountains because there's like this missed smoky
you know, cloud stuff pouring over the top of the mountain.
So we're coming back down and there is a what

(02:11:28):
I assume is a mama bear and three cubs that
had clambered down one side. It was crossing the road
and get ready to go down the other side. So
I come to a stop to let them go. My
wife's like, get out and I'll take your picture. I'm like,
I am not getting out and standing in next to
a mama bear in her three you want me to

(02:11:49):
get mauled to death.

Speaker 1 (02:11:53):
There are certain things you just don't do. Yeah, that
is one of them.

Speaker 12 (02:11:58):
Yeah, yeah, it's uh And I bring it up all
the time. And so, like I was, we were going
somewhere the other day and it was this really kind
of dark and windy road and it was kind of
in the mountains and stuff, and so I said, what
do you what are you gonna do if we like
round a corner and sasquatches standing there, and she's like,

(02:12:19):
we I'm gonna get I'm gonna ask you to get
out and something black.

Speaker 1 (02:12:24):
So that's what you do. Not a black bear, a sasquatch, yes,
you know, but a bear of any kind, no, you
just don't do it, especially cubs, like it's you know.

Speaker 9 (02:12:38):
Yeah.

Speaker 12 (02:12:41):
But anyways, so good, good camp, good good hunting, though
you bag anything.

Speaker 1 (02:12:49):
Got a couple of grouse, that's what we were looking for.
I have no idea what that is. It's like a
wild chicken, okay, the science of a a smaller size
of a wild chicken, gotcha? Okay? Yeah, tastes almost the
same quail around here. Like a quail, yes, except with

(02:13:10):
the fancy without the fancy feather on into a little
little hoop thing on top. Yeah, like the the danglefish,
but not as ugly. That's pretty much it. Pretty much it. No,
it was a good day anytime I get to spend
with my dad. We had five hours just driving and chatting.
It was amazing.

Speaker 12 (02:13:31):
Yeah, my my parents are coming out to visit us
in December, and I'm looking forward to it. It's been
a little over a year, maybe almost two years since
I've seen my parents, so it would be good.

Speaker 1 (02:13:43):
Right on, right on, You've been following up what's going
on in the UFO world. What do you got for
us tonight? Yep.

Speaker 12 (02:13:50):
So start off with the Senate passed their version of
the NDAA. There was absolutely no mention U A P
anything within their version, which you know, we I think,

(02:14:10):
you know, people had hinted at the possibility of it
not being there, so where you know, for those that
may not be familiar with the process, I was not.
I had to look it up. So from here it
goes to a special committee will get stood up to
basically reconcile the House version of the Senate version, and
then that'll produce the final version that then goes to

(02:14:33):
the President to be signed. So one could only hope,
because that committee will be made up of members of
both the Senate and the House, that somebody will advocate
to leave that you know, U a P disclosure protection
information within that that amendment within the final version. But

(02:14:56):
I mean we we honestly, can't start that process until
the I don't want to get you know, we'll stay
away from politics, but we can't start that process until
the government shutdown.

Speaker 1 (02:15:05):
Ends, and we don't know when that's gonna happen. So
are you surprised that there was no really inclination of
UFO slash UAP funding on it. Not really.

Speaker 12 (02:15:17):
I mean you look at like all the attention that
this topic has gotten from US Congress has been from
House members for whatever reason. The Senate doesn't seem to care. So,
uh well, I guess the very first hearing, I think
Chuck Schumer was a part of that, and I think

(02:15:39):
he's in the Senate side, so you know, there, I
guess there's some interest, or maybe he just sponsored it
because you had to have a ranking member in order
to do so.

Speaker 1 (02:15:48):
I don't know, But.

Speaker 12 (02:15:50):
Yeah, it doesn't surprise me that it's not there, and honestly, honestly,
it won't surprise me if it doesn't make it into
the final version. There just seems to be a handful
of people who really want to see the truth come
out and a vast majority who don't.

Speaker 1 (02:16:12):
Why do you think there is still such holdback on
this topic if it's been a great part of discussion
within the governmental world for the last number of years.

Speaker 12 (02:16:25):
You know, it could be a matter of, uh, there
are bigger fish to fry in someone's eyes, or it
could be you know, a combination of that and not
giving the topic a.

Speaker 1 (02:16:41):
Sincere like.

Speaker 12 (02:16:42):
Look, you know, if if you're a Senate member and
you've not really followed along with any of the stuff
that's been going on with the hearings or anything, you know,
maybe maybe it flies against your you know, religious beliefs.

Speaker 1 (02:16:58):
You know.

Speaker 12 (02:16:59):
I guess there could be an number of different reasons
why people on the Senate side have not given it,
you know, the kind of the time of day, as
far as like why it why these things continue to stall?

Speaker 1 (02:17:14):
I mean, I think.

Speaker 12 (02:17:15):
It's it's it seems, you know, this is a matter
of you know, does causation equal correlation? Sorry, does correlation
equal causation? I set it backwards, you know, does the
uh not including you know, this new whistleblower protection you know,
as it relates to U A P within the final version,

(02:17:37):
does that equate to people in the government, you know,
taking a hard stance against information, you know, new information
being released, or is it simply that they're ignorant on
the topic, or ignorant on the need for the information
to come out, or just genuinely don't care. It's not

(02:18:03):
you know, we know, I'm sure, Dave, we know people
who are intelligent people, but yet when it comes to
this topic, they just don't care for whatever reason.

Speaker 1 (02:18:14):
Just general people.

Speaker 12 (02:18:16):
So, I mean, I'm sure that there's a good segment
of that represented within Congress.

Speaker 1 (02:18:23):
I would I would agree with you on that. And
the problem is, the love of the military industrial complex
has a lot more pull than the love of the
UFO complex.

Speaker 12 (02:18:34):
Yeah, don't say UFO complex. We're all going to get
wrapped up in in in straight jackets and putting padded rooms.
We all have the UFO complex, Dave. But no, I agree, well,
and I would say that, you know, if if the
recent you know, whether you want to call them whistleblowers
or not, but if the recent testimony that we've heard

(02:18:57):
from people like grush Uh and others is true, then
the government has been attempting to reverse engineer craft for
you know, a long time, and all of that is
probably caught up in the military industrial you know, complex.
So the you know, the idea that somehow releasing this

(02:19:22):
information will spawn, you know, new opportunities related to UFO UAP.
I don't think is true, because they've always been there,
just kept secret and hidden behind closed doors. So the
only the only benefit I think in the government in
bringing any of this stuff forward is if they want

(02:19:42):
to basically outsource the the research side of you know,
they they've had them for sixty years and all they've
gotten is this far, and they need to read. They
want a crowdsource basically, you know, let's get science to
help us figure this thing out. But I also think
that they've been doing it this way for sixty years.

(02:20:05):
You know, I'm a I'm gonna I'm a process consultant
in my in my day job, and one of the
things we hear as process consultants a lot is, well,
it's you know, it's always been done this way. Well,
you know, you know, my job is to come in
and tell you why that's not a good idea to

(02:20:26):
just keep doing it because it's always been done that way.
But the government doesn't seem to really hold that same idea.
They want to it's always been done this way, and
that's just the way it's going to be and we're
never going to change until someone comes along and makes
us change.

Speaker 1 (02:20:43):
This is the third year in a row this Schumer
round spill has been shut out or not whitewashed by
people playing politics above them. It seemed going into this
one that both Schumer and Rounds had stated that they
didn't expect it to get further than it has in

(02:21:05):
the past. You know, it's like they just don't have
the confidence that this is going to go through, but
they're going to keep pushing through, which I can commend
Schumer Rounds in doing. But at some point is it
going to just fall on deaf ears that they're even
doing this or do you see a point maybe next

(02:21:26):
year or the year after, where they're just gonna say,
we're not even going to bother. I don't know.

Speaker 12 (02:21:32):
I mean you would think that what's the old adage,
you know, the definition of insanity is doing the same
thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
I mean, this is the third year. If it doesn't
go through this year, I would imagine they've reached that
definition of insanity. I mean, I would imagine most politicians
probably would have abandoned it after being rejected two times

(02:21:54):
in a row.

Speaker 1 (02:21:55):
So you know, I don't know.

Speaker 12 (02:21:58):
I think that I honestly think that the people who
are involved with these hearings have, like us, invested interest
in seeing the information they've even they've ever had experiences themselves,
or they have a close relative who has, and so
because of that personal investment, not only from a political perspective,

(02:22:23):
but just for their own personal investment, I think that's
why that's I think that's what it's pushing it forward.
They they've developed the UFO complex and they and they
want to see this information come to light. And I
would have I would imagine and probably this is true
if they've been into a skiff with any of these folks.
They know far more than we know, and that knowing

(02:22:48):
of what they know may be what is driving them
to continue to push on the topic.

Speaker 1 (02:22:57):
It's interesting to know what they know. That's the big thing.
That's the million dollar question right now there. What do
they know? Yeah? And I don't.

Speaker 12 (02:23:07):
I don't know that we'll ever know what they know,
simply because it's all you know that.

Speaker 1 (02:23:13):
That's the the other thing that's included.

Speaker 12 (02:23:15):
In you know, the house version for this up stuff
is not just protection for whistleblowers, but it's a need
to really overhaul the class the you know, classification process
so that not everything that has any you know, U
or an A or a P in the title or
in the context gets blumped up as classified. So that's

(02:23:37):
another piece is you know, in order for us to
know what they know, what they know would have to
be declassified to some level. So the only way that's
going to happen, I think, is if this goes through
and it gets you know, there's a real push or
a requirement for them to look at and declassify documents.
But you know, if you read the context too, within

(02:23:59):
the AMN minute, it says they have twenty five years
to declassify documents. Now maybe that's because there's a crap
ton of documents and it would take them that long
to do it. I don't know, but I would hope
that they would. It would be a trickle, you know,
a slow release if you will have documents that have
been declassified, with the twenty five year mark being the

(02:24:21):
end of you know, that declassification activity.

Speaker 1 (02:24:26):
And on that note, Josh, we're gonna get you to
hold on right there, the UFO report with the Wizard
Josh Rutledge continues on spaced Out Radio in the final half.

Speaker 8 (02:24:36):
Out, and this is spaced out Radio, and your host's
name Scott.

Speaker 1 (02:25:00):
M all right, buddy, we're clear, all right, h like Boswell,
how you doing?

Speaker 9 (02:25:21):
M hm m hm hm m.

Speaker 13 (02:25:29):
M all right, all right, Well look up some look

(02:25:53):
up some of the wording from that amendment.

Speaker 1 (02:25:55):
There was a question our time. I was talking about
it in the chat, so I'm trying to get that
someone ice m.

Speaker 9 (02:26:24):
M m h.

Speaker 12 (02:26:46):
Y Ice.

Speaker 1 (02:27:06):
About three and a half minutes, buddy, Okay. So I

(02:27:38):
presented Phoenix to move on this past weekend. Yeah, how'd
that go? Tell me about it? It was really good.

Speaker 12 (02:27:45):
Had around sixty five to seventy people show up, so
that's not bad. I'm actually tied with Mark D'Antonio.

Speaker 1 (02:27:51):
That's about having people. He has come through so nice
and I was a little nervous.

Speaker 12 (02:27:58):
I finished my slides early, but we ended up going
to like almost sixty minutes for Q and A. It
was fantastic discussion. Everybody was engaged, like asking questions left
and other like. There wasn't a there wasn't a time
when I didn't finish answering one question that another person
to three people shoot their hand.

Speaker 1 (02:28:16):
Up and have a questions. So yeah, it was fantastic.
What'd you talk about. I'm gonna be putting a YouTube.

Speaker 12 (02:28:25):
Out on it.

Speaker 2 (02:28:26):
But it is.

Speaker 12 (02:28:29):
My theory that somehow electromagnetic fields, either created by UFO
craft or used by UFO craft, stimulate tangential phenomena to occur.
So like when there's a UFO in the area, now

(02:28:52):
all of a sudden, we get kind of bleed through,
Like we get more SaaS squash reports, we get culture
geist reports, we get ghosts, side is increased, stuff like that,
And so it's looking at really the phenomena as a
whole and not just singling in on just one specific
aspect of the phenomena. And I got a lot of

(02:29:15):
cool stuff data reports. I've thrown it all into Google Earth.
I got lay and involves lay lines. I've got some
lay line overlays in Google Earth. And I'm mapping reports,
you know, in association to lay lines, and I'm calling
these things convergences. So like there's the infield convergence where

(02:29:36):
the infield poultrygeist was. Also around the same time there
was humanoid sightings in Wales, there were fay or faery
sidings north of London. So again it's just like there's
somehow this is all related, and it seems to all
these different reports also are in really close proximity to
lay lines, so I think there's some connection there. So,

(02:29:59):
like I said, I'm basically put my presentation together out
on YouTube the next couple of days and so.

Speaker 1 (02:30:06):
People can see what my theories are. All right, we
got about fifteen seconds. Thank you tonight to t Bone,
Shaq Fiale, Jco Number one Thompson and Kitty Kaddy Wack
for the super chat tonight. We greatly appreciate your love,
and here we go with the final half hour. Everybody,

(02:30:46):
Final half hour is now under way on spaced Out Radio.
My name is Dave Scott. Thank you for tuning us in.
We appreciate you loving us each and every night right
here on the show. Hey, we want to remind all
of you before we bring the Wizard back that if
you've missed most of this show or others, you can
always check out our free archives on YouTube or any

(02:31:08):
major podcast network. Our website spaced out radio dot com.
We have a plethroa of features for you. Rock out
to Bumblefoot, Read the news wire check out our swag
as well. You can follow us on Exit spaced Out Radio, Instagram,
at spaced Out Radio Show, and on Patreon in the
Space Travelers Club. Here we go the UFO Wizard Josh

(02:31:31):
Rutledge with us once again. How you doing, my friend.

Speaker 12 (02:31:36):
Again, Dave doing just fantastic. You know, even though there's
not like a lot of activity right now in the
UFO world, that's still like there's enough floating around. And
there's some teasers, teasers about some stuff that's supposedly coming
by the end of the year.

Speaker 1 (02:31:54):
I don't know if you've seen that or not. Well,
what do you what do you got for these teasers?
What do you mean by this? Yeah?

Speaker 12 (02:32:00):
So, according to Ross Coultheart and another guy named Pavel
et Bara, they have it on good authority word on
the street that Agent Disclosure will be on Prime Video
in November December.

Speaker 1 (02:32:15):
Of this year. Wow, how do you feel about that?
I just hope that the weight hit will be worth it.

Speaker 12 (02:32:26):
They you know, they they talked it up when it
was premiered at the like in Texas or something at
that convention, and everybody, everybody raved about it, I guess,
and I'm just I just want to see it. I
just I'm ready to see it. What I am worried about, though,
is that most of the content within it has already
basically come out via other means over the last you know,

(02:32:50):
year or so since they started talking about it. But yeah,
I just I just want to see it what it
is and what it contains.

Speaker 1 (02:32:58):
And you know, my my bring finds patterns.

Speaker 12 (02:33:03):
That's one thing I'm really good at, and so I'm
really interested to see specifically what people say and don't
say to see it, like what other linkages or connections
that my brain might establish that you know, maybe other
people haven't thought about yet or are explored yet. So
that's what I'm really looking forward to, is any It's

(02:33:24):
just an increase in information provided to me that I
can then, you know, remember and file away for use
at a later point.

Speaker 2 (02:33:34):
Now.

Speaker 1 (02:33:34):
Each Disclosure is a movie slash documentary that was made
a number of months ago. It was released, I believe
it was at the Dallas or some Texas you know
movie weekend whatever they call those things, you know, where
they show a bunch of movies and documentaries. And yeah,

(02:33:54):
it was like a film festival or film festival, that's
the words I'm looking for it's late man, we're in
We're in the final half hour of the show, so
thank you for that. Brain has been working overload today.
But it did have a great critical acclaim and it
had I believe over thirty people and government people coming

(02:34:16):
out talking about how this was the next big frontier
and that this is real and people need to start
paying attention. And then for some reason, they just couldn't
get anybody to pick it up. Not a single film
industry company would would pick up the film, which was
kind of shocking but kind of interesting at the same time. Yeah,

(02:34:41):
I know that, Like I know, there was a few
people that made offers.

Speaker 12 (02:34:45):
I think NewsNation via Russ Coulthart made an offer to
actually air it on NewsNation, and I heard somebody else
I can't remember who, but somebody else with a pretty
significant following made, you know, an offer to air it
on their channel. I mean, obviously they would benefit from

(02:35:06):
the views, I'm sure, but but yeah, I mean, it's
it was really weird that, like you say, it got
really good reviews from the people who saw it, but
yet no one.

Speaker 1 (02:35:18):
Would pick it up.

Speaker 12 (02:35:19):
And what really, what really I think shocks me the
most about that is that just about every major streaming
platform has released their own version, if you will, of
what this is. Maybe not to this extent with thirty four,
you know, senior US officials going on record, but their

(02:35:40):
own kind of disclosure esque type documentary.

Speaker 1 (02:35:45):
So you know, I say, maybe it's one or two things.

Speaker 12 (02:35:50):
Either A they've got their own projects in the works
and to host this would be to undermine those other projects.
Or B the folks that put it out I can't
remember who created it, but they may be making too
high of demands.

Speaker 1 (02:36:10):
Of whoever's going to air I ultimately air it.

Speaker 12 (02:36:14):
I do know that from other folks that have tried
to go through the process of getting stuff, and like
Prime Video and Netflix, it's a very intensive, long process
to get things into the library on those two platforms.
So maybe they've been trying or working on it for
the past few months and just been kept quiet because

(02:36:36):
they don't know when it's ever actually going to happen.

Speaker 1 (02:36:41):
Here's the other thing about the video. And I have
talked to critics about it, okay, and they have basically said,
there's nothing new in this. It's the same information the
same talking heads that we are all used to put
into one film, and I think if people do their

(02:37:05):
homework on the subject, they're going to see these same
faces saying the exact same thing. We don't know where
they're from, we don't know how they're invading our airspace.
This is a threat that we need to take seriously, like, great,
you're doing that, wonderful. Well, I watched the movie. Absolutely,
I'll watch the movie. But are we going to get

(02:37:27):
anything different?

Speaker 12 (02:37:30):
So this is where we've talked about this before. This
is a prime example of in my opinion, this is
not made for the UFO community. This is made for
people who are either on the fence or just snunch
non believers to try to get them to see the light.
If you will, it'll be great. The community will watch

(02:37:53):
it and that will help support its continued availability on
whatever platform it's on. But it's really meant for, like
I said, the general public who are on the fence.
Here's thirty four senior US officials who are going on
the record who are convinced that the government has covered

(02:38:14):
up the existence of non human intelligence for eighty years.
That is going to entice the on the fence people
to watch it, and maybe that'll also entice them to
then want to get involved and pressure people to reveal
more information. I mean, ultimately, it is an opportunity to

(02:38:36):
grow the UFO community. Like we, You and I we've
been steeping in this in this topic for a long time.
So for us, it probably is not going to contain
anything new. But I bet you there's a good portion
of your audience that would get something new out of

(02:38:56):
it that they haven't heard or seen before.

Speaker 1 (02:39:01):
And You're right, we often do forget that a lot
of these movies are made for people who are not
in this community. They are made to educate those outside
of the community, and I think that brings up a
very logical logical point. It really does. At some point, though,

(02:39:25):
how many of these documentaries do we have? James Fox
has made a couple, Yeah, Okay, Dan Farah who made
the Aged Disclosure, there's one. There are numerous documentaries over
the last number of years. Doctor Stephen Greer's made two
or three that all say the same thing, most of

(02:39:48):
them using the same people. Yep. And I think it.

Speaker 2 (02:39:53):
So.

Speaker 12 (02:39:54):
I've got a really good friend who does channeling stuff
for our community.

Speaker 1 (02:40:01):
She does it. She's actually been on your show quite
a few times. Devs shocked.

Speaker 12 (02:40:07):
I think, you know, yeah, So when I first started
doing similar things, you know, channeling and stuff like that,
and I was putting that content out, I was talking
to her and I said, I'm concerned that what I'm
putting out is just stuff that somebody has already said.
And she came back and she said, well, if you

(02:40:28):
look at it from a you know, let's say, a
frequency perspective, there will be people who resonate with me
who didn't resonate with her, and the people who resonate
with the next person that didn't resonate.

Speaker 1 (02:40:39):
With me or her.

Speaker 12 (02:40:40):
And so I think in that regard, it's a matter
of saturation. If they can saturate enough with a lot
of the You're right, it is a lot of the
same content or the same people saying the same things
on different documentaries. But if they can get it out
there enough from different people in different formats and different
links and different you know, background music and special effects

(02:41:02):
and so on and so forth, they're going to reach
a broader audience of people.

Speaker 1 (02:41:07):
Even though it's the same content. It still is a
saturation effort. Do we not, though, at some point, need
to start bringing some sort of of new information to
the table though, yeah, we do.

Speaker 12 (02:41:31):
Uh and And I think, I honestly think that we
will get some new information in this age of disclosure
document or document document whatever I can we can't speak now, documentary.
I think that, But I I don't know that it'll
be like obvious in Flashing Lights. I think it'll be

(02:41:57):
something where you have to listen. You have to maybe
heard the same person give a testimony some other ways,
some other place, or appear on a podcast or appear
on a radio show and talk about something, and then
you hear them in the documentary either contradicting themselves or
presenting it in a slightly different way. And that's where
I'm saying, like you you have to really listen. I think,

(02:42:22):
you know, in the in the hearing with with Grush,
there was more said by him not saying or answering
questions than there was of him actually answer opening his mouth.
That saying in saying answers, like everything that he said
I couldn't talk. I could talk to you about that
in the skiff should be treated as an affirmative and

(02:42:45):
the response. So I think there's gonna be stuff like
that in the document. In the documentary where it's either
non answers or half answers, but those non answers or
half answers should indicate to us as the community as affirmatives.

Speaker 1 (02:43:05):
I get that. I can appreciate that. However, we have to,
you know, without sounding, you know, like the guy who's
always like, you know, it's not enough, it's not enough.
I don't want to be that guy. But at some
point we need more, you know, And I hate to

(02:43:30):
say that I'm getting. I'm getting like all of these
skeptics out there who are like, where's the proof, where's
the evidence? You know, the old saying extraordinary claims need
extraordinary evidence. At some point, though, we have to stop
with the basic conversations because that's what it is. It's

(02:43:50):
basic conversation. Yeah, but I guess my.

Speaker 12 (02:43:57):
Response back to the the statement extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence,
is that extraordinary evidence has been provided, but the people
who are cynical and really don't want to accept any evidence.
There's no amount of quote unquote proof that can ever

(02:44:19):
be provided that will sway those people.

Speaker 1 (02:44:21):
I agree with you on that point. I totally agree
with you on that point. I've stated that on the
show many a times. There is no proof or evidence
that will make everybody happy. What's going to excite you
is going to enrage others in this field, right and now,

(02:44:43):
with AI being as advanced as it is, there's no
way we could ever trust another video. There's no way
you could trust audio. There's no way you could trust
a photograph unless you are the person taking it and
you know it's true.

Speaker 12 (02:45:00):
We've talked about that before that I think, you know,
for the vast majority of people, the only way they're
ever going to be swayed is when they have their
own experience.

Speaker 1 (02:45:09):
And but I but I think the the.

Speaker 12 (02:45:13):
The precursor to that experience is just flipping the switch
in your mind and you may not even realize that
you do it, but just flipping the switch in your
mind to say, oh, maybe that is possible, and that's
all it takes. And then suddenly, like in a dark world,

(02:45:34):
you're you're a you're a beacon of light, and the
phenomenon will find you and it will present itself to you,
probably when you least expect it. But you know, the
only way to get people to have that, you know,
that moment of flipping that switch to you know, to
be for it to be possible, even just possible, UH

(02:45:57):
is to saturate the field with as much content and
documentary and details as possible. I mean, we're already starting
to see a little bit of the effects of this,
because I can tell you that, you know, at my
current employer, most people I work with are open to
talking about the phenomenon. They've had an experience of their

(02:46:21):
own within you know, some realm, not necessarily UFOs, but
an experience of their own. And when they know that
I investigate for a moof on or I have a
podcast where I talk about the subject, they're more open
to talk about it themselves. So you know, that's only
the case because of the continued saturation of good evidence

(02:46:43):
and quote unquote you know, qualified people coming forward to
present what they are able to present. Now I understand
exactly what you mean. We need more data, we need
more evidence, we need more quote unquote proof, and I

(02:47:04):
think I think we will get there. But it is
a slow, glacier slow process to get this information out.

Speaker 1 (02:47:18):
The drip continues. As what you were saying, Yep, the
drip continues. You need that on a shirt, Dave, have
a disclosure coffee pot, and then it's sitting in a percolator.
The drip continues. Speaking of which, here's a funny story

(02:47:39):
for you. A lot of the logos that I get
for my for my SR store on our website. I
use this website, paid a bunch of money to have
access to those been using this site for about a
year and a half, never an issue until I get

(02:48:01):
an email today stating that I am under copyright infringement
for their logos and using them on our shirts. Wow,
now they want me to pay another bunch of money
in order to have those shirts licensed. Yeah, I'm like,

(02:48:25):
for a year and a half, I paid for a
premium membership, a premium lifetime membership in order to get this,
and now I'm getting dinged by this man. It's going
to be an extra like five hundred bucks a year
for me. Hey, I it's almost that point. I might

(02:48:46):
have to get rid of all my shirts now and
redo them all through AI.

Speaker 12 (02:48:53):
That just means that all of your existing shirts that
anybody has are collector's items. Yes, yes, there's marketing and everything, Dave.

Speaker 1 (02:49:05):
Yeah, oh I know. So I'm going to get them
to send me a list of the ones that I'm
allegedly copyright infringed on and I will toast those shirts.
You also should.

Speaker 12 (02:49:20):
Just confirm and contact the company directly, like you look
up their contact information and you contact the company and
ask them if that email is legitimate, because it could
also be a scammer.

Speaker 1 (02:49:34):
I already did today. Okay, I've already done that because
that was the first thing that came to my mind
was Okay, which ones you know? Is this a scammer not?
And so I actually went on the website and I said,
I've got an email from you guys saying that I'm
in copyright infringement, and you know, like, what's going on here?

(02:49:56):
What is going on here? What is your bos? And
they confirm that the email was true. You know, that's unfortunate.
I hate that for you. It happens, it happens. So
what I'm gonna have to do is find out which
logos pull them down and then go to AI and

(02:50:20):
make my own. Yep, it's kind of silly for them
to do that, But what do you do? What what
can you do? What can you do?

Speaker 12 (02:50:35):
You get your vintage sores swag?

Speaker 1 (02:50:38):
Now right, I'm sure, I'm sure they're going to try
and nail me on everything, right, but what do you do?
Nothing I can do about it. I'm sure it was
you know if it's just like one you know, and
it's one of those letters man where it's like, if
you do not respond to this within thirty days, we

(02:50:59):
will look at taking you know, legal action towards your company.
Well average Josh, Where can everybody find you?

Speaker 2 (02:51:13):
Uh?

Speaker 12 (02:51:13):
You can go to my website our oh r Mystic
journeys dot com. Everything is linked from my website and
I actually have the opportunity now on the website where
you can book a private dowsing session with me if you'd.

Speaker 9 (02:51:30):
Like to do that.

Speaker 1 (02:51:32):
I douse with you, my friend, I totally doose with you. Yeah.

Speaker 12 (02:51:38):
Now, we got to a lot of great information and
did it at the move On camp out here in Phoenix.
I did a couple of weeks back, got a lot
of great content came through on the dowsing rods. It's
a fantastic experience for sure.

Speaker 1 (02:51:52):
I love it And don't forget hit subscribe Mystic Journeys
on YouTube. That is Josh's channel. Make sure you hit
subscribe there because he does great work there. Josh outstanding
way to kick off your week on sor we greatly
appreciate you, my friend, and thank you very much as
we say good night to the UFO Wizard and hello

(02:52:14):
to mister Ron Bumblefoot. Thal Rocket in the background with
little brother is watching. Bumblefoot is the official music of
spaced Out Radio. Rocket us in and out of every
single show. Get your horns up for the guitar God
himself special. Thanks everybody listening in, at work, at home,
in your cars, wherever you may be. Thank you to

(02:52:36):
everyone in our chat rooms tonight, YouTube, Twitch, lgap, Facebook, spreaker,
LinkedIn the Space Travelers Club, and on x hashtag spaced
Out Radio. Remember this show is copyright by spaced Out

(02:52:57):
Radio it Bigfoot Broadcasting Limited. Thank you so much for
choosing the share your eating with us, because together, my
friends watching, we own the night. Mister Bumblefoot. We need
a favor, We need you to take us home. Yes,

(02:53:25):
the Woo train has docked for the night, but soon,
my friends, we shall ride again. Your seats are always available,
your tickets never expire, and if you want to bring
a friend, we've got room for them too. Good Night, everybody,