NASA Whistleblower: “We Systematically Suppress UFO Data!”

This episode is brought to you by Google Chrome. You think you know a browser, but Gemini and Chrome? That's new. It can help you with practically anything on the web, like restoring a vintage motorcycle from a 50-page restoration block, or finally break down that long article you've had open for weeks. Gemini and Chrome is here for it. Ready to make anything online make sense? There's no place like Chrome. Check responses, setup required, compatibility and availability varies 18+. They're not coming in from another star system every other Tuesday. They're present here. There are handfuls of people doing weird things here and there. Those people are all over the place. Some of them I knew when I was at NASA have come to talk to me and said, oh yeah, I was interested, or I know something about this or that. Have you met anybody working on the crafts themselves? I've met people who claim to have worked on them or seen them. Really? So yeah. So the question I've had is why, when we had the NASA commission, why was there no second? I think it's because of the way we've been working on this. We've been working on this for a long time. insane no now what are you doing he's talking about events from 1966 and i heard about it in 1988 and the professor that told me in 1988 about this was said that it is happening so this has been going on for 20 years and no one's paying any attention to this i mean the army's still not the military's still not mobilized and worrying about this and i thought there is something really wrong here and and i and i spent some time thinking about it i was up late that night teaching class early right i didn't barely slept but i'm thinking about it and i thought i mean it's either nonsense and the people who are in charge of our nuclear missiles are people we shouldn't be trusting with anything or this is actually real which makes more sense considering the amount of time that's involved a 20-year time span and um and nobody's reacting to it maybe because they all think it's nonsense and i thought this is extremely dangerous we're going to get blindsided by something if we're not careful and i thought somebody ought to look into this and i thought i'm going to start looking into this ufo business what's all what what is here how real is this how possible is this and i so i so that's when i started looking into it and i was and i had actually given a talk in our department like a year later after i looked into it somewhat i thought this is actually really interesting so i gave a talk in our physics department about it just an informal talk and um and the room was packed i mean we i don't know how many people can actually sit in that room but it was well over the fire limit right i mean we had people sitting cross-legged right up to the front screen and um and i the talk went on there were so many questions i talked with for almost three hours and and most people just stayed for it because everybody was like oh my god i'm going to do this and everybody was really interested and i thought yeah see this is interesting i mean this is an interesting problem here and it's not that simple and then of course a year after that the new york times article comes out and um and i thought well somebody has to be somebody ought to study this and i thought well shoot you just do it yeah i should do it and the nuclear link i could see that being the perfect gateway for uh rigorous scientists like yourself because i think science and in the conventional sense has to be repeatable you need you know every time you drop this pen it needs to fall in sort of the same way for it to be science right and so i think the nuclear link is a version of that with ufos where ufos seem to show up across nuclear bases not only in the u.s but all over the world and and that's that's one thing that worried me once i looked into it i thought wow this is happening in the soviet union this is happening in france this is happening in england we were talking before the show i'm paying homage to leno which is a town next to their fukushima prefecture where they have they're famous for their nuclear spill in 2011 they have their civilian energy grid and ufos were reported to show up there they have a whole museum dedicated to ufos right vice did a documentary on them in 2022 and it's the town in japan that's obsessed with ufos and it's right next to this nuclear there was a netflix encounter episode i think episode four focused on that as well and malmstrom where you mentioned that is the site of tons and tons of activity you have bob salas obviously in in 67 but before that you had this this echo flight incident you know i think it was like uh very it was 10 days before or something one was march 16th one was march 24th then you have uh john mills this retired missile technician in the early 90s seeing a bunch of ufos there you even have an interview with this guy chris langan which say what you will about the guy he says he has the highest iq in the world he seems a little cocky to me but he's just offhand he's saying he's seen ufos and he's seen them around malmstrom uh air force base on the ufo thing i was working for the forest service not too far from malmstrom air force base one day i was up there in a forest service pickup truck at a certain campground and i was there and suddenly i look up and i say suddenly it was just in the sky i became aware that it was up there and i looked up there's this huge spheroidal you know but elliptical not not a perfect spheroid like a saucer that was turned partially on its side right and so it's just this recurring trope from all these uncorrelated sources uh robert hastings who wrote the book ufos and nukes got into this whole subject because his father was actually uh um working at malmstrom base and um he was learning radar theory from one of the radar operators there uh bob hastings was while he was a janitor he was in high school and the radar operator was like we're tracking some of these unknowns you should take a look and then that that was it for him he was hooked and he dedicated his life to studying this stuff yeah so yeah yeah it's cool i was maybe three years ago we were down in louisiana visiting my in-laws for for mardi gras and so we're it was february and we're grill outside grilling right and um and i was grilling with my wife's uncle matt and he had his aiden his air force cap on and i and i spotted malmstrom air force base on his air force cap and i was like oh my god i'm gonna die i'm gonna die i'm gonna die i'm gonna die i'm gonna die i'm gonna die i was like uncle matt you were there you were in the air force and you were at malmstrom you were at malmstrom and he goes yeah i was stationed in malmstrom when were you there and he goes uh like 1971 through 74 or something like that and early 70s and i said did you ever hear anything about ufo incursions at nuclear weapon sites he goes oh that happened all the time these things would come in and shut down the nuclear weapons and he was going on and on about this and i like like it's common knowledge yep right and and and i was like oh my god i'm how how is it congress is just finding out about this right and my wife's uncle matt has known this since 1971 this is something to worry about right and i was so excited i i told him okay can you tell my wife this because i'm tired of being the only crazy person but but it was his response was amazing oh yeah this happened all the time and like like it's nothing right so on the one hand you have ufo showing up around our most important assets or nuclear assets with people who are on the prp program who literally like they have to report if they're on ibuprofen these are people who work at the nuclear basis so they're the picture of mental health and of sound mind and they all see tic tac saucers orbs you know shutting down nukes right there's that and then there's the idea that the u.s government might have saucers and hangers right do you think it's clear that this is happening the nuclear thing yeah that's that's clear absolutely clear yeah do you think the u.s government has saucers and hangers and we have a an active reverse engineering program for nuts and bolts physical craft i think that's probably true i've heard this from enough people who've done that kind of work for years now that that's probably the case yeah have you met anybody working on the crafts themselves i've met people who've claimed to have worked on them or seen them really so yeah anybody that you can mention or no i shouldn't do that okay these are these are whispers that you get every now and again did you find them believable though yeah entirely believable yeah really yeah no you didn't sense any sort of deception no no one of the most believable things i've heard is well have you been able to figure anything out no we don't know we don't know what anything is or how anything works yes that was my most and and i was like all right that makes sense interesting yeah so it's like um you know giving an iphone to a a caveman or something something like that yeah interesting i mean it seemed it seems like the the tech any technologies they've got from it are just you know surface level type stuff oh this is some interesting material what's it made of that that level if if i were on the inside i would probably want somebody like you working on this sort of thing i would love to be working on this but i'm not not black work i'd love to work on this in the open okay have you ever been contacted to do black work uh i had the opportunity to to have clearance when i worked at nasa okay but but i turned it down because you've always wanted to do things in an open transparent way i'm a scientist and i want to and this and one of the benefits of being a scientist is we share information we work together we cooperate do you think that and yeah there's some competition but there's a lot of collaboration as well so and that's very healthy do you think that's part of what's held back the legacy ufo program back if if it's held back at all it's because you've got 10 people closeted working on one thing and they don't get extra information that you might need to get interesting ideas you know the more people get involved the more people get involved the more people get involved the more people you have working on a problem the more diversity of ideas you're going to get and do you think that there are certain scientific things that you can't work on in the kind of civil side you know open world of science without receiving backlash ufos is one of them yeah yeah we there was some backlash some backlash when we started working on ufos it is you mentioned on danny jones that you've had various friends work on anti-gravity sort of backlash threatened threats and things like that yeah too that's scary that's very strange yeah what do you think that is with the anti-gravity stuff i really have no idea i mean i you know you can jump to conclusions and say well because somebody doesn't want other people discovering things that they know about and have control over i mean you could jump to that conclusion but i don't i don't actually know what the situation is it's hard to tell doesn't that feel like the base case conclusion like if you if somebody's getting threatened over discrimination or something like that i don't know i don't know i don't know i don't discovering a thing. Um, It would seem like there'd be some group on the inside that would be tracking people trying to discover a thing that they're already aware of, right? Yeah, exactly. That seems like the Occam's razor easy explanation. Yeah, I mean, it leads to a whole sets of conspiracy theories, right? And it's difficult. Yeah. Yeah, I've done deep dives on this guy like Townsend Brown, who I'm really fascinated with. And I talk about him probably too much for the audience always laughs when I talk. But, you know, I find him to be really interesting because I do think he made breakthroughs in the world of gravity, this sort of Byfield-Brown effect, which is, I think, a very simple experiment. But have you looked into that at all? I haven't looked into that much at all. You have limited time. That's the problem. I've got stacks of books I want to read and things I want to look at. Yeah. It's just you have to pick and choose. And I think that's one reason why you don't have academics in the past looking into UFOs. Because. Well, I spend time on something that's probably nonsensical when you can be spending time on something that is probably going to pay off. And I think that's the calculation most people are doing. And how do you. Except at this point, I don't think it's nonsensical. So the payoff's huge. Right. How do you think UFOs fly? I have no idea. They're very strange in a lot of ways. First, the. How many ways are they strange? Right. The speeds and accelerations are crazy, right? The accelerations, nobody's going to survive that. So the equipment isn't going to survive it. So, you know, in the Nimitz case, we estimated the acceleration of the Tic Tac dropping from 28,000 feet to sea level in 0.75 seconds or so, 0.78 seconds. It's about 5,000 G's of acceleration minimum, right? 5,000 G's. 5,000 G's is insane. The new F-35 fighter jets, their wings rip off at 13 G's. You know, most missile frames can't handle more than a, a missile can't maneuver at more than about 35 G's. And the frame isn't going to survive more than 60 G's. And now you've got this Tic Tac thing accelerating at 5,000 G's. That's not possible. I mean, equipment won't survive. So now this leads you to think the only solutions. You've got to be playing with inertia somehow. You've got to be playing with gravity somehow. And so that leads you down the path of general relativity and warp drive and that way of thinking, right? Do you have like a propulsion modality that you like best when it comes to UFOs? No, I don't exactly. So then, but then the other problem is power. If you look at energies and power involved, the amount of power for that Tic Tac dropping is something like, what was it? It was 1,100 gigawatts of power. You know, I remember back to the future with Doc, Doc Brown, 2.1 gigawatts. Like that's crazy or something. This thing was 1,100 gigawatts, right? I mean, this is. And he had, he had Mr. Fusion, which was a nuclear fusion machine. That's right. Yeah. So this is more power. The Tic Tac maneuver took more power than the total nuclear power output of the United States. Wow. Wow. And that's in that Tic Tac in the size of an F-18. I mean, that's. That's crazy. You think you know a browser, but Gemini and Chrome, that's new. Check responses, setup required, compatibility and availability varies 18 plus. And so now, how do you. How do you get your head around that? So let's say they can deal with that kind of power. For some reason, they have access to that much energy. Equipment is never 100% efficient. So a 1% inefficiency. So most of the things we make are like 20% efficient at best, right? So let's say they're really good at this. They can get to 99% efficiency. That means you've got a 1% inefficiency. 1% of 1,000 gigawatts is like 11 gigawatts of power. That means 11 gigawatts of power is going into waste heat. The thing would melt. So now what's happening? Are they really more efficient than 99%? Or do we have something wrong? Are we looking at this the wrong way maybe? Maybe they're not actually moving in such a way that takes that much power. Do you have any theories? I don't. I don't exactly. Warp drive is certainly on the table. But that too is messy because we don't know enough about how, since there has been theoretical work done on warp bubbles, we don't really know how these would interact with matter. So what does a warp bubble do in an atmosphere? We don't, nobody's, I don't think has looked into that. So these things are strange because they don't appear to, be interacting with the atmosphere at all. There's no sonic boom. There's no fireball. There's no sound in many cases. Uh, the underwater UFOs, you've even got more in, you should, should be a much more friction there. These things are moving the, the one with the H the, the New Zealand frigate in 1980s, the H M N C S Southland, um, had an 800 foot long USO following it. And it was about two. Kilometers behind the ship and actually closed that distance in 25 seconds and went under the ship and drained all the batteries, trained all the power from the ship and you've got a clear, the, the width of this thing was about 150 feet in diameter is cylindrical shaped object, 800 feet long. So it's, so it's, what is that? That's 30% longer than the largest, um, Russian sub, which would be the typhoon class subs, right? So it's 30% bigger than a typhoon class sub, the thing closed. This is two kilometers in 25 seconds. This gives you an Excel, a crazy acceleration, right? Underwater. The top speed is something like 3,500 miles an hour, and you've got to clear a 150 foot diameter cylinder, two kilometer long cylinder of water out of the way to move this thing into in 25 seconds, how water had to go somewhere water's not compressible. So you would have had waves. Coming up, um, that did not happen. So the thing is acting like it's not even interacting with the water yet. We have sonar records from this, which means sonar works by water molecules, banging on things, right. And bouncing off. So the water molecules are bouncing off this thing, but it's not interacting with the water all at the same time. How, how this works. I have no explanation for this. Um, but that's the data now. Now, what do you do? Interesting. It's really perplexing. These things are really not simple. Yeah. Do you think you've ever studied UFO parts? Um, my colleague, Matthew should, August has been working on studying debris from purported crashes. Really? Yeah. He has a new technique for, um, detecting isotopes, um, using neutron activation. So he's developed this technique and he's been. Working on this furiously for the last couple of months. Neutron activations. How is that different than mass spec? Um, mass spec, you basically, you, um, typically you, you dissolve the material in nitric acid and then you spray it into a, into a, some electric plates that basically electrify it, ionize it, and then you shoot it into a magnetic field. That constant magnetic field, the thing will move in a circle. So, and the radius of the circle depends on the mass. So then it hits a screen depending on where the mass is changes, where it hits the screen. So you can measure the mass of the isotopes inside that spray. And to back up for the audience, um, Isotope differences are, are neutron differences in various elements. And if you were to find some, you know, isotope ratios in a material that don't occur naturally on earth and don't pattern match to asteroids, that would be this really exciting, you know, possible smoking gun that the thing is actually a UFO. Right, exactly. Well said, summarize that very nicely. Yeah, that's exactly it. And, um, so Matthew's technique is different. He basically irradiates the material with neutrons with, with a neutron source and basically creates, um, heavier isotopes with these extra neutrons. And, um, and then he watches them decay back into the, the states that they were in before. So he can tell what the isotopes. Yeah. He created were, and then he can infer what they were originally, um, from that. And it's non-destructive because the, they, they did came back to where they were and, um, pretty quickly. And, um, and you're not doing it to most of the material. You're only, you know, reading thousands of these atoms rather than as compared to Avogadro's number for the whole sample. Right. So amazing. I mean, Gary Nolan is also doing this at Stanford. He's using mass spec. He uses mass spec. So it's cool to see that there's, you know, there are updates even on his work, as far as this material analysis, the. The UFO Legacy Program has to be keeping tabs on what you guys are doing. That would be my guess, right? Right, right, right. Like, you'd want some sort of, like, civilian, like, the smartest, like, you know. Yeah, I know there's interest in Matthew's work. He's had contact with government people. Okay. I can't really talk about those details, but. Okay. Are the parts, like, arts parts, the parts that. Some of them were arts parts, but he's had other ones, too. He's had material from Ukraine and Israel and all over, yeah. Interesting. Yeah. Yeah, arts parts, it's this rumor that Art Bell, right, eventually ended up in possession of this material that I think was from the, was it from the Roswell crash? Some of it's from Roswell, yeah, yeah. And the material in Art Bell, obviously, famous coast to coast, you know, amazing, you know, radio show host that reached, you know, 10 to 15 million people every night, super into UFOs, and it's so interesting that he received these pieces because he, you know, he's so passionate about this stuff. I believe one of the pieces is magnesium bismuth, is that right? Yeah, yeah. Because that's what Nolan has as well. I find this really interesting because in the Bifield-Brown effect with Townsend-Brown, the anti-gravity stuff, and I don't have any, I have a little bit of evidence that Townsend-Brown might have been involved in one UFO crash retrieval, but I don't have a, I mostly have evidence that he figured out an anti-gravity modality, but magnesium, or bismuth rather, is constantly talked about, bismuth, because bismuth is a high-carb. So it stores and discharges easily a lot of electromagnetism, and that, in the Bifield-Brown effect, if you use that as the insulator between the two, you know, negative and positive electrodes, that creates greater thrust. So I find it fascinating that you have UFO parts that in the only anti-gravity, or in one of the few anti-gravity experiments that we know of, it creates more thrust in that experiment. That seems really significant to me. Right. And the other interesting thing is that it has nanolayers of the bismuth and magnesium, and one of the two is paramagnetic and the other is diamagnetic. So they have two very different magnetic properties, which is interesting. So a lot of the modern work that we do in material science on, like, spintronics and this sort of thing basically is dealing with magnetic spins with diamagnetic and paramagnetic materials. So a lot of the new breakthroughs in material science is related to these types of materials as well. So this is interesting stuff. Super interesting. Yeah. Gary was also, when I was at his lab, he showed me some of the pieces, and he mentioned that some of these materials might be able to micro-size waveguides for terahertz power. And do you think that that's true? Do you think these pieces are able to do that? Yeah, I don't know if that's possible. That we haven't looked into. Okay. And I know what Matthew's done, but I don't think that he's looked into it. I don't think he's looked into that at all. Yeah. What is one scientific truth that you adamantly believe that conventional science disagrees with you vehemently on? Oh. That's a good question. I don't know if I have an answer immediately. You can dwell on it if you want for the movie if it comes up. Yeah, I might have to think about that. What do I, what do I, what, hmm, interesting. Yeah, I don't know if, I don't know if there is one exactly. Yeah. At, at, at NASA, um, you mentioned the people there weren't really into UFOs. How, how does, how do you square that with all this lore of them being interested in UFOs and like, I don't know, you have like, um, Diana Pasolka. Have you ever read her book, American Cosmic? So she has this NASA mission controller who I guess now is public, but his name, his name is Tim Taylor. And, you know, he's going around taking them to crash, UFO crash sites. Right. Seems extremely read into. Any sort of UFO program that exists. There are, there are individuals at NASA who are interested in that. And since I've gotten interested and been vocal about it, I've had some of the, some of them I knew when I was at NASA have come to talk to me and said, oh yeah, I was interested. Or I knew, I know some, something about this or that. Yeah. Yeah. It's so strange because it, yeah, you have Hal Pabenmeier who was a, I think he was both CIA and NASA showing up at Chris Bledsoe's door when he starts to attract UFOs. Right. Which is very, it's like. Yeah. Well, people come, kind of come out of the woodwork. You find that, you know, I've now had a couple people from NASA I find out were interested in remote viewing. Hmm. Like I wouldn't have thought that when I was back, you know, when I worked there, but. Interesting. Yeah. Is there a, when were they, are they doing remote viewing in a professional capacity at NASA? Well, yeah. So, I don't know. I don't want to tell on anybody, but some of this is actually public, but nobody's noticed. So, one of the people at NASA has actually written a CIA training manual for remote viewing. Really? Yeah. But this is, this is public? Yeah. Okay. Well then, well, we can, people are going to look it up. You can figure out who it is. Okay. All right. All right. Yeah. No, I actually, I was, yeah, there was a, yeah, so, but. Well, if it's public, it's, you know, interesting. Yeah. That's fascinating. And, and that person did it before they came to NASA, but, but are currently, or were, were NASA. They may be retired now at this point. You know, they also have a patent, I believe in 2003, on a barrel-shaped asymmetric capacitor. And they put, they say this is, we're talking about Thomas Townsend Brown. Oh, yeah. That, that works interesting too. Yeah. It's very interesting. Yeah. There are these, there are handfuls of people doing weird things here and there. Right. And it's. Yeah. And they've been, I mean, you, and once I've gotten involved with this, I find that those people are all over the place and they're all studying things they're not supposed to be studying, which is. Yeah. Fascinating. On that patent, that NASA patent, I believe Larry Smalley has his name there. He's a University of Alabama, Huntsville. He was the physics chair and under him was a woman named Ning Li. And she was studying, I think, like a superconductor based, you know, a kind of weight reduction via kind of anti-gravity. I think she, she called it gravitons, gravity particles. Mm-hmm. Would, would cause this sort of effect. And, you know, obviously, you know, groundbreaking sort of controversial claim. And she speaks about this at some sort of MITRE Corporation event. And then she kind of, you know, goes dark, I think gets a security clearance. But her physics, she leaves and starts a company. I think it's called Anti-Gravity LLC or something. And then her physics chair, Larry Smalley, goes and joins her, which I think is, lends credence to the actual findings. Right. That's interesting. Her physics chair leaves. I mean, you, you know, academia, like it's kind of, okay, everybody's got to be high conviction at that point. Yeah. Yeah. You don't leave a tenured position. And then his name shows up on a patent around a barrel-shaped asymmetric capacitor, which is town, and it's talking about Townsend Brown. And I'm like, okay, what's going on? That's interesting. Yeah. Wow. I find it fascinating. Yeah. But, but I mean, one question I have is you have all these names pop up, right? And you have, you know, how put off is obviously like seems so at the center of so much UFO physics. Um, but a lot of, a lot of the names that pop up in, in UFO science, quote unquote, uh, it's almost like there's some sort of like substructure of a lot of these like mega structure. So like NASA, I don't like, it almost seems like what you're saying is there is no official knowledge of UFOs, but it's like these people within NASA that are extremely interested in this stuff. How do you square that with like, you watch the age of disclosure and it's like, we have a legacy program, which. And you would, that implies some sort of like, you know, it's like super well coordinated different thing. Yeah. So like what I always try to ask that I try to press on people here. Is it like, is there a program or is it like this hermetic substructure where people come together via synchronicities or just people doing things? Um, I mean, that's one thing, I mean, scientists tinker as well. Right. Yeah. And, and NASA isn't like that now, but when I worked there, which was the early 2000s, you still were able to do like blue sky research as, as long as, I mean, the requirement was you had to convince your area lead that this was in line with NASA's missions basically in some way. And so, um, so, and that's all you had to do. And so then you could go off and work on this project, you know, now, and, and while I worked there near the end of the time I worked there during the Bush administration, they started what they called full cost accounting where they have to account for all their costs. So now, now you have to, you have to account for the time you spend on things. And, and if you're doing that, then you can't do this blue sky research on this. You can't do this little thing on the side. So for example, one of the things that we tried to do on the side, so this was a, um, yeah, why not? We, we had, I was interested in the, the Roswell, um, story and I was struck by the fact that the picture, you know, Jesse Marcel says one thing about the, the material and, and sounds entirely believable. And then they get the picture in the newspaper with General Ramey with what clearly is aluminum foil and balsa wood in the picture. Right. And, and you look at that picture and you think there's no way anybody's going to mistake that for any kind of craft debris. So what was Jesse Marcel thinking? Or was it as They claim that they switched the debris, right? And I think it's more likely they switched the debris. Well, Marcel claimed that the real UFO debris was off to the side, right outside of the frame of that photo. Right outside of the frame. Did he say that? I don't remember that. He also said he brought it home and that his son played with it. He showed it with his son. Yeah. So I think he would know the difference. He would know the difference, right. So then there's the picture of General Ramey, and he's holding a memo that you can see in the photographs. And it's clearly stamped top secret. And I thought, what does that memo say? And so me and one of my colleagues at NASA, because I was in the intelligent systems division, so our job was to develop machine learning systems to analyze data. And so we were doing a lot of work with imagery. I worked with Hubble imagery. And I thought, why don't we try cleaning up this memo and see what the memo says? So we actually wrote. We wrote the algorithms to actually read this memo. And I wrote them, got them running, and we're testing them. And we just didn't have the computer power at the time. It was a 300 megahertz machines we were working on. And, you know, we couldn't use the supercomputer for this. So we couldn't get away with that. Right. We could get away with using the 300 megahertz computer on this. And it just didn't have the computing power and computing time to do it. So we abandoned the. But we had thought that we were going to, you know, our little dream was, all right, we're going to figure out what this memo says, and then we're going to publish it as a NASA publication. But it's going to be buried as an example. We're going to, the publication will be on our methodology and our algorithm. And then we'll have several examples. And one of them will be the Roswell memo. And then we'll make it public and make it an official NASA publication. Right. That was our little plan. I love it. Our sneaky plan. I love it. And it just didn't work out. It didn't work out because we couldn't analyze that imagery. Right. But this is, but this is what's going on behind the scenes. And I probably a lot of government labs, people are doing stuff like this, you know, maybe not trying to publish it, but, but trying to figure out if they can get something to work or try something interesting. Over the last couple of months, we've been designing the new American Alchemy merch drop. And I'm excited to say that the 2025 winter drop is finally ready. We now have 30 uniquely designed pieces that really reflect what America has to offer. This drop includes epic t-shirts, long sleeves, crewnecks, hoodies, tapered sweatpants, hats, totes, mugs, and tumblers. The Fukushima Japan pieces, for example, have detailed left chest embroidery. The morning of earth designs went through multiple revisions to get the fit exactly right. And the iron horse tee is something I think will be a hit for anyone who loved the UFO cowboy or our atomic age shirts from our last drop. We cut a lot of things that didn't meet our standards. And we're really, really proud of each of these items. Everything is pretty limited. So there's no endless restocks. Once it's gone, it's entirely gone. If you missed anything from our original drops and you want to go out and represent, now's the time to go grab something. So go to AmericanAlchemyMerch.com to check it all out. It can help you with practically anything on the web, like restoring a vintage motorcycle from a 50-page restoration block or finally break down that long article you've had open for weeks. So it's like there is this UFO truth. You have, you know, various crashes, you have various maybe scientific frameworks that are not public, and then you just have a bunch of vigilante efforts and little. Pockets and compartments, like attempting things. You got people, smart people trying things. And it's, you know, I think what, you know, John, I think it was John Stewart said, isn't it amazing what scientists can do when no one makes them stop? And I think that's all it is. It's no one's making them stop and they're discovering things. And some of them are useful, some aren't. And some are really interesting and some they feel they probably shouldn't talk about. Yeah, I think that it's that simple. Yeah. In a lot of cases. Yeah, it's so fascinating. You have an interest. You have an interesting theory around water worlds and, you know, water being this really important kind of variable for UFO transport. Do you want to explain that? Yeah. Well, there's a few. Yeah. So it has two aspects. The first one is, is why, you know, I was at one point wondering why are there so many USOs, submerged, unidentified submerged craft? Why is that such a big thing? And when you think about living on a planet, living under an atmosphere is horrible. It's difficult. The weather is, the conditions change every day. They change daily, you know, hourly even. And I'm coming down here from Albany, I'm down here to Austin. You know, we had snowstorm this weekend in Albany or north of Albany. I drove through it from Montreal to Albany through a snowstorm. And now we're down here. It's, what, 60 degrees and sunny, and I hope to go to the botanical garden before I leave or something, right? So the atmospheres are very, are quite variable. And now you go from Earth to Venus, Venus's atmosphere has 100 times the air pressure on Earth, which would crush you. And it's about 800 degrees Fahrenheit. And actually, I was at NASA Ames when the Magellan probe was doing radar mapping of Venus. And we were perplexed because the mountaintops would become radar reflective at times, and then it would fade, and then they would become reflective again and fade. And we were like, "What's going on with these mountaintops?" And realized they would become reflective when the temperature would drop. So the temperature would drop, the mountaintops would become radar reflective, and they realized what was happening is vaporized lead and bismuth was making, was actually making snowfall. And so it was actually snowing lead and bismuth snow on the mountaintops. I mean, imagine what that would, I can't imagine what that would look like to have metal snow. I want to go there and actually see that. But that's what they think, that's a cold day in hell, by the way, when you've got metal snow raining on the mountaintops. So that's what Venus's atmosphere is like, right? And then you go to Mars, and Mars has 1/100th the atmospheric pressure of Earth. So you need a space suit. And it's cold. You know, 100 degrees below zero Fahrenheit, something like that. Colder than Antarctica temperatures. So now comparing Venus to Mars, the temperature difference is a factor of 10,000. Different. It's huge. And now you consider a water world. Water is only liquid from 0 degrees Celsius to 100 degrees Celsius, right? So you've got, as long as you have liquid water, you are in that temperature. You're in that temperature range. You're not going out of it. And so it's much more stable temperature-wise. The pressure varies with depth dramatically. I mean, atmospheric pressure varies with atmospheric height as well, but because water's so much more dense, it's much more dramatic. So you can control what pressure you like by controlling the depth. And water has such a high heat capacity, the temperature doesn't change that much. You don't have the temperature fluctuations. So water temperature. So water temperature that you do in air temperature. So it's a much more stable environment. You're protected from solar radiation. You're protected from ultraviolet rays. You're protected from cosmic rays. You're protected from small meteorites, at least. And it's a great place to hide. Electromagnetic waves don't travel far in water. So you can't see far. You can't detect things with electromagnetism very well. Which is why we use it. That's why we use sonar, right? And so it's a great place to hide. Yeah. So there's every reason to go to the water. It's fascinating. So if you were like a Kardashev three or four scale civilization and you wanted to colonize a bunch of other planets, water is the perfect hideout spot. It's evidence. Just go to water. Yeah. Well, that's the other thing. So you only have a couple of choices, right? So if you're going to go to colonize another star system, you've got to carry everything you need. Right. To do it with you. Right. So getting. Already the traveling is hard. It's going to be hard for anybody. But bringing everything you need to build up a base or some kind of settlement is going to be extra difficult. So you really have a few options and water worlds we now know are relatively common. We have several water worlds in our solar system. Most of them are frozen moons, icy surfaces, but there's oceans underneath, right? So you can either plan to colonize. You can either just plan to stay in your spaceships, right? We're just going to live in our spaceships. That's probably the easiest thing to do, right? Or to colonize airless worlds like the moon, which is no different than staying in your spaceship. But then the other option is to live on a planet. And if you want to live on a planet to access its resources, you're either going to go with an airless world and stay in your spaceship. Or the next most reasonable choice. The next most reasonable choice could be to go to water. Yeah. And so it's also evidence, as you said, of this kind of Goldilocks temperature zone. I think water is specifically unique as well, because the way that hydrogen and oxygen bond in an H2O molecule is a perfect crystal lattice structure. And so it's unique in that the solid form of it is actually less dense than the liquid form of it. So you end up with these worlds that don't flood because you end up with a lot of ice. And so that's fascinating as well. And then I think that the final thing on the UFO front is you're talking about tons and tons of power. If you were to theoretically break hydrogen and oxygen bonds in H2O, you would get a ton of power. Yeah, you can use water for storing energy that way. Yeah, or for fuel. And then seas have dissolved minerals in them. So you could, I mean, it's not a fast process, but you could extract any kind of mineral you want. Any. Any atom you want, you can probably pull out of seawater. You know, whether you can do it fast enough to get a substantial amount is really the question. But that would be easier than mining, right? Do you think there are UFO bases in our oceans? Tim Burchett recently said there are five oceanic hotspots across the world. We have a higher propensity of sightings around these five or six, I believe, deep area, deep water areas. And so to me. It just, it creates a question there. Do you think there are UFO bases? I think that's probably, that's probably the best bet. Really? Yeah. And you went to Catalina, right? I went to Catalina, yeah. Which is one of the, it's off the coast of Southern California. And a lot of people think it's this UFO hotspot. There's a great book. I think it's called Underwater or Undersea UFO Base by Preston Dennett. Right. And there's a ton of history in the region. And so what did you find when you went out there? Yeah, well, we, we spent, we spent five days on a rooftop in Laguna Beach and watching the skies. And, and it's all documented in the, the movie A Tear in the Sky. So, and the movie best documents what the, basically how the mission progressed. Right. And so it's one of the first, you know, universities supported. Right. UFO data collection missions that, that we know of has happened. Right. So, so there's a lot of excitement. There's a lot of excitement in that movie. And that's real excitement. Right. Yeah. And, and we did see, we did see some interesting things that, and so here comes some spoilers. So, and, and so I'm going to spoil things twice. So, so there's, at one point there's a bright light that's seen from the team in Catalina Island, which was across the Catalina Channel. We had two, two teams. They spotted this bright light that was moving and they said, it's too bright to be a satellite. It's, it's, you know, going in this direction. So we're, we're looking for it as well. So we recorded this object and then it just abruptly disappears. And which is very strange. And, and the problem with documentaries is that, yes, it takes a long time to make a film, maybe a year to two years in some cases. Um, science takes a lot longer, a lot slower. And, um, so the scientific study of what the data we collected took a lot longer and that got published just last year. So our mission was what in 2021, tear in the sky, I think came out in 2023, something like that. And our scientific paper on the mission came out just this summer. Um, Matthew Shadagas was the first author of that paper. And so we found that. But that bright light was the space station. Um, why didn't we figure that out earlier? The app we were using to track satellites didn't take into account daylight savings time. A stupid mistake, right? That we shouldn't have made, but this is your first time doing this sort of thing. And you make, and I remember telling Matthew on our way out. Space station looks weird, by the way. And it looks really weird. It looks like a UFO. Yeah. And I remember telling Matthew on the airplane, he, you know, we were both excited. Oh, this is going to be so much fun. Think, imagine what we can see. And I said. Yeah, but the problem is we're just up. What we're probably going to learn is what not to do. And that's really what happened that first mission. We learned how not to do it. Um, but Matthew is the one who figured out it was the space station. He put it all together and he actually took the pixel size on the camera. And then, um, knowing the altitude of the space station figured out how big the space station should be. And he was within one foot of the side of the space. So the space station, it's really a nice analysis. He does put it in the appendix and, um, and yeah, something to be proud of the fact that, yeah, we identified it to be the space station and actually proved it. Right. So that's cool. Um, and other, another event that happened was these, um, one of the FLIR cameras was showing these objects dropping into the sea. And, um, and I was actually at the time looking through night vision goggles. Um, and I was actually at the time looking through night vision goggles. This didn't end up in the movie and people were too excited about the FLIR camera to hear me shouting about the night. I was telling people, put on your night vision goggles and look over here. Um, but I saw something actually drop and hit the water in infrared. Whoa. Um, you get that on video? No, no. I was just looking through the goggles, watching for things. And, um. But it was through infrared. It was in infrared. Yeah. And then, then, um, and I think they tried to simulate this in the film, but it's not simulated properly. They showed this thing hovering. It wasn't a destroyer. It just dropped. Wow. But, but the FLIR cameras recorded things dropping into the sea. And we, um. So you think you saw a UFO? I don't know what I saw actually, but because, but I was excited because it happened about the same time the FLIR camera was showing things dropping. But then we figured out later that the FLIR camera was actually malfunctioning. And that's, and that's a failure mode of the FLIR cameras. We actually talked to the engineers who was on design. Is seeing something drop. Yeah. These things falling down is actually a failure mode. Oh, so maybe it was an issue with the camera. So, so. The FLIR camera recording we had was not something dropping into the sea. Um, I don't know what I saw and probably will never know because you can't, it has to be reproducible, right? You have to be able to see it again and try different things. Is there a best sensor modality if you're trying to spot UFOs? I think as many sensors as you can. Is there one? Different kinds. Say you had to pick one and you had to, you know, what, what, what would you pick? If I picked one, I would try. Oh, that's tough. I think I would go with a FLIR camera. FLIR camera is a good choice for a few reasons. One, you get a visual record of the object. It's not a very good visual record because it's going to be blurry because it's infrared. I've heard people complain, oh, the Navy produces all these, these blurry photos of UFOs. Well, they're infrared images. What do you expect? I've heard scientists say this and you want to slap them upside the head and say, what did you think was going to happen? And so, you know, but the other benefit of is for, with the FLIR cameras, you can measure. You can measure the temperature of the object because you're picking up infrared emissions, right? So those, that black body infrared spectrum actually gives you the temperature of the object. Yeah, where, where white hot comes from. Yeah. So now, so, so not only do you get a visual record of the object, but you get its temperature too, which is, which is in, you get extra pieces of information for that. So for that reason, I probably would choose a FLIR camera. Is there a sighting or a crash that you rank as? Highest conviction as far as your analysis of it, that like you, you are convinced that this happened. Oh. You think, you know, a browser, but Gemini and Chrome, that's new. It can help you with practically anything on the web, like restoring a vintage motorcycle from a 50 page restoration block, or finally break down that long article you've had open for weeks. There. Check responses set up required compatibility and availability. Various 18 plus. I would have to say the most convincing one is one of the most hard to believe ones. It's, um, JL airlines, 60 JL, 1628. It was a Japan airlines cargo flight piloted by captain Kenju Tarauchi. This is the sketch Tarauchi drew of what? He says he saw in his window that night. And this Japanese television graphic is based on his description. This is just a small space. We can see a big flame. This one is the size of a carrier. So, motherships. And I, and I remember, I remember that being on the nightly news. I remember watching, it was on NBC, Tom Brokaw, Connie Chung. I remember that being on the news and being, holy shit, there's giant. Aircraft carrier sized, walnut shaped UFO followed that Japanese airlines for 45 minutes across Alaska. Wild. Give us the whole sequence. Yeah. So, these guys, so the Japanese airlines, they, it's a, it's not a passenger jet. It's a 747. They are transporting Bouchelet Nouveau. Yep. They got wine in the back. Let the skeptics rejoice. No, the pilots were not drunk on Bouchelet Nouveau. It's just a silly thing. They're drunk. Just transporting it. Yeah. They're just transporting it. And they're flying across Alaska and, and first flight. I don't remember all the events. Several things happened. They actually saw several UFOs. First, these rectangular things show up in front of the ship and have these lights that go up and down, shining light into the cockpit. And the pilots could feel the heat from the light of these objects. And they're, like, scanning or, you know, like that kind of behavior. And they follow in front of the plane for some time. And then this giant walnut-shaped object shows up that's something like four 747s in length. Right, so this thing's the size of an aircraft carrier. And the pilot said that when it was in front of the plane, he couldn't see anything but the craft. It's that big, so it's unmistakable. I mean, and he's screaming at air traffic control, you know, what do I do about this? And they're not picking it up on radar. And so it was later found that military height-finding radar was picking it up. And so that radar actually, those radar records actually got collected. And so this walnut-shaped craft basically followed the 747 for about 45 minutes. It stayed about seven kilometers away, but it would go from one side of the plane to the other. It was bouncing around from one side to the other. And we analyzed its speed and acceleration just crudely based on the description of what it was doing. So it would go, so at one point it would be at like one o'clock, and then the next sweep of the radar, which is about 12 seconds or so, would be at six o'clock. And so we were using those, that information to estimate speeds and accelerations. Daniel Kumbay, another physicist, physicist from the Niels Bohr Institute, actually took the radar. I didn't know that we could get our hands on the radar measurements when we published that paper, but he actually got the radar data and he analyzed that. He was analyzing the jumps and he found that the object was accelerating at, took several jumps, different accelerations at different times. But there were three, three of them were, the accelerations were greater than 9,000 Gs. One of them was like 11,000 Gs. And the top speed he estimated to be 250,000 miles an hour. And at 250,000 miles an hour, you can get to the moon in 54 minutes. Whoa. That's, that's not a joke. So you've got something the size of an aircraft carrier that could get to the moon in less than an hour, right? That's basically what you've, you're dealing with here. So that's what, and we have, and we have the radar data from that. You have the radar data? That's amazing. I didn't know that. That's amazing. Yeah. John Callahan, who was the FAA chief of accidents and investigations, actually reviewed the case. And then Reagan, President Reagan's scientific team and the CIA showed up and they wanted all the data. No way. And so they came to collect the data. Callahan copied it and put it in a box that he just put under his desk. And so he had a copy of it and he didn't turn that over. So they got. And that's public now? And now that's public. Whoa. He held onto it for like 20 years. And then when he retired, he made it public. Good for him. Yeah. He's a hero, right? Kind of. Yeah. Yeah. But he said, so when he was in the meeting with Reagan's scientific team, they were all excited. They said, we've never had 45 minutes of radar data from one of these things before. Wow. And so, so that exists. But, but from that radar data, it's accelerating at 10,000 Gs, 250,000 miles an hour. And, and you can actually see the position of the plane on the radar. That is remarkable. And at the one point where the plane actually does a 360 to try to shake this thing, you can actually see that on the radar. So the radar is working. Are the pilots still alive? Yeah, I think so. I want to get in touch with them. Yeah, I'm sure. The one pilot was actually fired. Okay. For going public with it. He was fired and had his license taken away. And then several years later it was reinstated. That's horrible that he was fired for that. I mean, what do you, I suppose you experienced something that kind of traumatic and worldview shattering. What would lying about it be a better thing to do for flight safety? Yeah, right. That's really the question. Just ignore it. Yeah, that's crazy. Fascinating. You know, there's that audio recording of Steven Spielberg, I believe, talking about his trip to the White House and they do a viewing of E.T. Right. I've heard this. Yes. And Reagan says, you know, a lot of you in this room know, that everything on that screen there that you just watched is true. And he just stood up and he looked around the room almost like he was doing a head count and he said, I want to thank you for bringing E.T. to the White House. We really enjoyed your movie. And then he looked around the room and he said, and there are a number of people in this room who know that everything on that screen is absolutely true. And he said it without smiling. But he said that and everybody laughed, by the way, the whole room laughed because he presented it like a joke but he wasn't smiling because he said it. And so, yeah, it's pretty interesting, right? It's interesting, right? Yeah. Well, that's fascinating that people from his scientific team, I mean, it sounds like they were pretty aware of this to say, oh, we've never had 45 minutes but it's like, that implies, okay, you're sitting on maybe, you know, shorter clips of UFOs. Yeah, they've got something. They've got something, yeah. I mean, Alaska is a hot spot historically as well. I believe Nathan Twining who's head of Air Material Command responsible for all aircraft development of the Air Force wrote the famous Twining memo in 1947 saying UFOs are not visionary nor fictitious. Right. He, I believe they had like an observation program going on in Alaska and then just recently you had, it was this weird sequence of events but in early 2023 you had the Chinese spy balloon and then right after that you had this bizarre, you know, these things seem to show up and like jam, you know, the radars of these F-22s and one of them specifically was in Alaska and crashed and I've heard some very strange things around this specific craft. I've heard things like it reassembled itself and was seen in the air over Canada. Bizarre. I've heard something, I've heard something about deleted emails involving this specific craft on the National Military Command Center servers. So I don't know. It seems like there's something there and something strange about this craft and this was also in Alaska. Right. Who knows? That's amazing. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, it's amazing to know that, you know, his scientific, Reagan's scientific team had gotten that data. What did they do with it? What is, you know, what are their reports? I would like to see that. You know, the, you know, disclose those. That would be interesting, you know, alone. The Kecksburg, Pennsylvania UFO crash. Yeah, 1965. Yeah, and my, my dad's cousin, Donald Hornig, he was later the president of Brown University was, was on, he was the scientific advisor to presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson. What? Yeah, that was my dad's, my dad's cousin did that. In fact, he, he's the person who, he designed the, the electronic triggers for the, the plutonium bomb. Whoa. In the Manhattan Project. What was his name? Donald Hornig. Whoa. And, and the night before the first test in Trinity, the, he was, Oppenheimer gave him a sidearm and had him babysit the bomb up in the tower during a thunderstorm. What? And, and I was surprised that they didn't put that in the movie Oppenheimer because it's an awesome story, but the movie's about Oppenheimer, not about the Manhattan Project. But, but he was, yeah, so that was, and his wife was, but his wife, his wife was in the movie. Lily Hornig was in the movie. She was the woman who came from Harvard and some of the things she actually said, she told us this at dinner once we visited her in Rhode Island when she was still alive, but she said when she got to Los Alamos and was being interviewed for a position, they asked her how fast she typed and she goes, they don't teach typing at Harvard. And they used that line in the movie, which was great. Whoa. That is fascinating. So, but I, but so I mentioned that because, because Donald Hornig was, was the chief scientific advisor to President Johnson who was president during the Kecksburg crash. And I found, I had actually found a document about the Kecksburg UFO and Donald Hornig was listed as being present. And I thought, oh my God. And I, I didn't, never got to meet him. And, and I did, I did ask his wife Lily about it, but she didn't know. What document? I don't know. I, I don't know. Maybe I have to look for it. There was some kind of, some kind of summary about the Kecksburg crash and something, it was some kind of government summary. Official, official government document? It was official, yeah. Yeah. And, and. But he was listed as being present, which he should have been. So I was like, well, this is all pretty authentic. But that's, that's even absent the fact that he's your dad's cousin, which is a remarkable synchronicity. The fact that a, the presidential science advisor is on site at a UFO crash. Yeah. Is amazing unto itself. Oh, that's true. Yeah. That's a good point. That's a really big deal. I think Eric Walker was supposed, supposedly present as well at the Kecksburg crash. was the um i believe president of penn state and he was kind of a material science guy i don't know if you know anything about him but he's an interesting guy wow who like seems to imply to many researchers ufo researchers that he's very aware of the majestic 12 and what they do and you know who knows right i don't know do you lend credence to any of those sorts of stories the idea that there's sort of an elite military scientific uh i can't i i wouldn't be surprised if they were true yeah um i don't know if i would just jump on believing they're true without any evidence but yeah but you know if i was if i found out they were true i wouldn't it wouldn't shock me at all well it's like if the ufo issue is real and understood at the highest levels of government of course they would have some sort of elite body that's kind of group of and if it's not a formal group there's probably informal groups and yes all that sort of thing yeah yeah do you think you know we've mentioned nuclear connection a bunch in this uh conversation do you think that uh not only ufos are just showing up around nuclear sites but that the secrecy uh involved in the atomic energy commission and the department of energy uh overlays ufo secrecy and that the program is somehow bound up in you know atomic stuff well that's a good question too yeah it's not clear how i mean what it what it looks like the the an scu did a study of this of ufos monitoring nuclear sites and so it looks like whoever's behind the whole ufo business whoever these guys are have been performing you know surveillance this whole time they're surveilling us and it's intelligent surveillance they know what they're doing and in fact the scu study showed that not only do you so when they compared ufo sightings at nuclear sites compared to nearby military bases and nearby population centers and the nuclear sites have more you know in the early 40s had more um ufo sightings than any of the other places whoa nearby so it shows that it's statistically significant that they're hanging out at nuclear sites yeah now what's weird about it is that they are present at the nuclear sites before we before they were totally constructed yes and before they had nuclear material there radioactive material there yeah so while some of these sites were being built ufos were present that's definitely right now you're like wait a minute how did they know that something important is going to be there right how do they know what they know there's something about nuclear that they're really concerned with or interested in there's i think in 1945 there's a pilot named bud clem and he's flying over hanford plutonium base and it was like yeah before the thing was fully up right and he's seeing ufos and the uh robert hastings has an interview with him when i got down and they told us that this boat he was out there right over the hanford ordnance works and directed the lieutenant commander brown to take off and challenge him and i think i mentioned him in our paper i've got the um we published a paper this year on the scientific study of uap it basically goes through the history of how people have tried to study this and i and i mentioned bud clem's sightings at hanford there yeah it's so it's so fascinating that that connection is and there are all these theories you can one can have one is that they're sort of doing some sort of intelligence recon or something and then another is that they're just protecting their resources somehow the earth maintaining itself in its current form is is important or maybe we're a resource you know humans are a resource to them and so they need to intervene and ensure you know things don't we don't blow ourselves up or something but it's it's really hard to say i mean i know like the age of disclosure lou elizondo you know kind of crew like they talk about it as far as like uh they're monitoring our ability to achieve energy breakthroughs so that would be the tip of the spear of energy breakthroughs like high energy physics occurs in the national labs in your you know atomic sites and that sort of thing and you know we could we could break out of our our cage or something if we if we achieve some unlock and so they're various humans are a hot mess right and so if they if they're present in the universe in our neighborhood and then right now they don't have to deal with us directly but if we go out there they might have to deal with us i think stanton friedman put it this way it's kind of like you've got a neighborhood where you've got this one house on the block with crazy neighbors there's always the police are always there there's screaming and yelling and things breaking and you can hear that going on in the house in the block and then one day the neighbors come out of the out of the house and they're in the yard and now you have to deal with them right and so he was he was describing human the humanity this way and i thought that's pretty good pretty good description yeah no that that feels pretty pretty apt to me i want to talk because you're in a i think very unique vantage point as somebody who uh is at the intersection and then kind of very speculative ufo you know interest uh there are a couple of interesting objects of interest of late that kind of you know hit that intersection the first i want to talk about is actually this discovery of um beatrice via real at stockholm university who you know i had the pleasure of interviewing her and she was looking at the palomar observatory which was the most you know in use observatory you know in the kind of mid-century in the u.s it's in san diego and she found over a hundred thousand in an eight-year period what appeared to be ufos mirror like objects little transients light flashes and um they seem to actually be correlated with nuclear sites too there's like a follow-up study that they're 68 more likely to show up a day before or after a nuclear detonation um so this is just fascinating study and and nobody in credentialed conventional physics world has debunked it it's been peer-reviewed right and you have people like sabina hossenfelder and brian keating you know people you don't think of as like ufo nuts right like going on you know youtube and saying like this actually seems kind of intriguing so what do you make of it no it's i mean her that's the vasco project i mean it's an excellent idea for a project you've got all of these photographic plates from the 1940s that um that if you have something in orbit you might pick you might be able to detect it in a photograph right so that's the that's the premise um and she she published a few early papers which i found really interesting the one you know the ones where you have a several of them like in a line or something like this and i thought i think that's fascinating um it's tough the most recent papers with a hundred thousand that's hard to believe that would that's a little shocking um that makes me worry that you really have to double your efforts to look to make sure there's not an artifact issue that you haven't considered well it's it was a hundred thousand between 1949 and 1957 the reason you'd ended in 1957 is because sputnik goes up right so it's pre-satellites which is that's remarkable and it's they're all in geostationary orbit geo so it's like the you know outer earth's orbit so it's i think it's it's pretty remarkable that does seem really high as he says there could be an error rate of up to 30 or something so that's a you know it's a big margin yeah but what what's remarkable is like when she put this out the main detraction the main way people tried to kind of straw man or or you know beat beat this thing was they said uh you know uh these have to be plate defects these have to be sort of you know the the the astronomical plates you know uh have all sorts of weird you know chemical issues over long periods of time and sort of stains and issues and then you know those could look like transients or ufos but then she followed up on the study and she said is there a so obviously you have the sun it's hitting the earth and then you have the shadow of the earth right you have a kind of a dark side of the earth she said is um you know are these objects dropping off on the dark side of the earth when they shouldn't be being illuminated by the sun i think that's the idea that's right are they physical objects are they reflecting off the sun a and b if they're plate defects plate defects would not play favorites between the earth's shadow and you know the the sun side of the earth right you should have the plate defect right it should be constant it would be completely proportional and constant yeah and so uh she found a uh you know a serious drop off and so that seems like pretty significant it's interesting yeah certainly it's interesting i think it's um it's one of the the i mean the hallmark of science is right so what you need to have is you need to have other other labs look at those plates and actually do the study try to replicate the study and i think that's what needs to happen and that's what she's beautiful about her kind of orientation towards this whole thing is she's now saying you can go look at the data for yourself so the the raw data i think is online now for people to oh it's not online okay it will be it will be okay you've tried to get it okay okay okay then she says she's putting it online she's working on yeah yeah yeah and then i think that the next holy grail would be you'd want it from another observatory and you'd want the actual transients to line up one-to-one ideally right at least with some correlation that would be really conservatories that would be ideal yeah so yeah totally agree there's work to be done there but i'm pretty intriguing i think yeah it is intriguing it is yeah yeah yeah it was an it's a nice idea for a project i mean it's a you've got all of these photographic records and to go through them i mean just to look for transients in the first place i mean transients would be anything that you don't have a good explanation for so there's potential for lots of discoveries there not just things are opening the earth so this episode is brought to you by google chrome you think you know a browser but gemini and chrome that's new it can help you with practically anything on the web like restoring a vintage motorcycle from a 50 page restoration blog or finally break down that long article you've had open for weeks gemini and chrome is here for it ready to make anything online make sense there's no place like chrome check responses set up required compatibility and availability varies 18 plus do you think ufos come from space or do you think they are sort of you know going through wormholes you know or or time travelers absolutely no idea they're they are i think that many of them that we see that are observed by people are actually coming from earth presently you know carl sagan once quipped i think it's extremely doubtful that somebody is arriving from international from interstellar space every other tuesday you know he made something like that i think it's extremely doubtful that somebody is like that's you know basically saying that i don't think that he didn't say interstellar travel was impossible it wasn't going to happen every other tuesday is basically what he was saying it's not going to be common and i think he's right they're not they're not coming in from another star system every other tuesday they're they're present here yeah and um that's why i think there's probably bases underwater is your best bet yeah or maybe somewhere else in the solar system but we know that they can't be more than in many cases they can't be more than a light day away because they showed up right in front of them and they're not coming in from another star system every other the next so when you had the fukushima disaster they showed up the next day so if they're coming from another star system it would take years for the for the same any signal any information about fukushima to get out to that star system and then years for them to come but for them to come unless fast and light communications and travel as possible or something like that but yes in general relativity it would need to be they're probably coming from earth in that case interesting do you know of any interesting space-based encounters of ufos like nasa encounters that's also a good question so um i know a few of them there's well there's several cosmonauts have reported seeing things in space and that's important to them oh i can't i'm blanking on his name right now of course it's a long russian name that i'm not familiar with starts with an a but they actually had a craft pull up alongside of them whoa after orbit and they took pictures um the cosmonaut drew a picture of the object whoa because the pictures all got confiscated by the so not gargarin the not gargarin no it's not gargarin oh i'll check this out okay okay okay and he drew a ufo he drew a picture of what they took photographs of whoa what what mission was this do you know i don't know i think it was one when they were going to um one of the beginning early space stations wow yeah this thing pulled up it had it had windows it had windows and pulled up and followed them for part of the orbit and then left whoa yeah which is awesome yeah i talked to alan bean i met him and talked to him he was from apollo 12 and he said that when he went up to sky lab they were on sky lab i think it's 1977 ish um they actually photographed a red flashing light what is sky lab for the sky lab was one of our early space stations okay and um and they actually saw a red flashing light that followed them for part of their orbit and then disappeared really yes and they had photographs of that what did he say happened to the photographs oh they're actually public oh they are online okay wow i mean it's a big problem you're photographing a light in the sky and it's a handheld camera sure on a spaceship through a window and yeah it's a bouncy and blurry and yeah but it's a red light that seems to be funny and it's a red light that seems to be funny and it's a red light that seems to be funny and But it's a red flashing light in space. Nobody puts lights on satellites. First, you don't need them. And second, it's more weight. You know, every ounce is going to cost you a crazy amount of money. Also, satellites back then weren't doing proximity operations. No, they weren't. They were just following predictable orbits. And they weren't changing orbits. They weren't changing orbits. They weren't moving around either. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So that's a big deal. So that whole thing is very strange. Yes. Yeah. And then you have the Gemini 11 mission, where from the transcripts, the astronauts were working, and something flew over their—Houston asked, did something just fly over you? And they say, affirmative, weird, weird, weird. And then there's something like six minutes of no transcript, right? But when the thing flew over them— When the object flew over them, it drained one of their battery stats. Charlie Stack got drained. So Stack C got drained. So it's almost a classic UFO sighting. They see an object in space. It flies over their ship and then drains their batteries, right? And so that's in the transcripts of Gemini 11. Wow. And that's public. That audio is public. That's public as well, yeah. And now, so the question I've had is why, when we had the NASA commission— Yeah. Why was there no section on what astronauts have seen in space? I mean, Story Musgrave, a shuttle pilot, also talked about seeing things like snakes. Wow. Things writhing around in space. Really? Yeah. None of that mentioned in the NASA Commission's report. So bizarre. And so you've got, and then you have, what is there, the mission, the Soviet mission to Phobos, where their craft got disabled. The last picture shows an object like a fin in the, like a tail fin of a plane looks like in the picture. Whoa. That's the last picture it took. And then the whole thing was disabled. The whole thing was disabled. And Gemini 11 also looks like the audio, like there was some sort of power interference or something as well, right? Right, right. Like electromagnetic interference? There's multiple events in space that weren't even mentioned in the NASA Commission report. Why? Shouldn't that be of interest? They all sign NDAs, right? Right. Astronauts. Oh, I don't know what they do. I believe they do. Yeah. So do you think, I mean, you were at NASA. Do you think NASA is sort of systematically covering this stuff up? I would have no idea. Because the other interesting thing from Beatrice Villareal is she said she was in touch with a current NASA person who said that NASA tracks what they call uncorrelated targets all the time. So these are, you know, sort of, you know, noise. Well, they're not necessarily alien spaceships, right? But it's, but. Yeah, but. These are things that should be reported. Figure out what they are. If you don't know what they are and you've got a, if you've, if you're running a commission on unidentified aerial phenomenon and you've got a bunch of unidentified things, you should talk about them. Totally. But also, apparently the uncorrelated targets are systematically tracked by Space Force. Right. And not by, according to this insider. Again, I don't, I don't know if this is true, but that's really interesting. All of our government documents on these. Things, even the recent ones, barely have any information in them. Meanwhile, the French in 1999 put out the Cometa report, which was a hundred pages or something, right? Yeah, that's just crazy. Yeah, it was like 10 pages. The French have a UFO research group officially called Gaipan, which, unlike Aero, doesn't gaslight the population. They, you know, admit that this stuff is real and are open about it. That's right. Yeah. Yeah, Cometa report's final analysis from 1999 was that. Was that. Is that. Yeah, these things could be alien spacecraft. There might be a base somewhere in our solar system. And the U.S. is probably hiding information. So fascinating. And that's what they actually said. And the United States is probably covering up information. And that was their other research. That was their official report. That was their official report, yeah. That's amazing. So, and then, and I believe the head of their CIA, former head of their CIA, Elaine Juliet, was extremely interested in UFOs. And publicly to this day is like this big, you know, UFO proponent. So, they have a long history. So, Gemini 11, that was Pete Conrad was the astronaut? Yeah, Conrad and Gordon. And Gordon. Yeah. And did they come back and say, we saw a UFO? Did they say anything? I don't think so. Okay. Yeah. I mean, because that's the other, look, I've looked into all the moon landing stuff. And I just actually had Joe Rogan on the podcast, which was a big honor. He kind of was the first person to be in our spaceship set. Which we just built, which is really cool. Yeah. And I just couldn't think of anybody better for that. And we talked about a lot of the moon landing weirdness, you know, in the presentation of the moon landing. And I think neither of us are suggesting that definitively, like, the U.S. didn't go to the moon. I think you can, you know, the inverse of that. You can say definitively the presentation of whatever happened is weird. And it was sanitized and manufactured. And it was manicured and presented in a bizarre way. And there was definitely some, you know, managing of that that was going on. That's obvious. And so I wonder if, you know, maybe we did actually attempt or go. and maybe we just saw ufos along the way or maybe there's something very ontologically weird about the trip to space that's hard to come back with as far as a revelation to the public or something i don't know but um i mean edgar mitchell came back talking about having an epiphany of how we're all connected in the you know you know thinking about different way of thinking about the universe and humanity but then after that he was very very much um involved with ufos yeah he grew up in roswell grew up in roswell apollo 14 astronaut and he had gotten and so because he was an apollo astronaut he got to hear all sorts of things about roswell from people from at all levels he's very close with vernon von braun who seemed really interested in ufos as well as the father of our of our space program essentially vernon von braun's mentor was herban herman oberth who who gave a lecture in 1954 on ufos after so many witnesses have seen the so-called flying saucer their existence cannot longer be denied i believe that these flying objects come from another solar system i have his notes and his lecture notes and in there he mentions that he has they he has seen numerous radar measurements of their speeds up to 19 kilometers a second which is about 40 000 miles an hour he also says that the rocket program was helped and he was basically the father of german rocketry and he said that it was aided by these these non-human beings so that's great yeah yeah but that so that's that's going back to 19 so 1954 we knew that these things traveled at spacecraft speeds we already knew that in 1954 and and why are we playing catch up just now yeah why did this why did this take a half a century to unfold it's really crazy well proof that um nasa you know probably knows something a thing or two internally about the ufo stuff and i know this is something you've looked into and i think my buddy chris ramsey might be doing an interesting follow-up with you on on all this stuff but oh yeah chris right there's um there's a the simpkinson photo around gemini 11 that play and there's maybe the best ufo photo you could ever ask for it's like a perfect ufo photo in fact i have the book uh right here i'm gonna i'm gonna take it i'll grab it sure so we have we have this um this simpkinson nasa ufo archive and this photo which is like maybe the best ufo photo of all time um if it's real and it comes from gemini 11 and you you figured out that this was a gemini 11 photo right um well ed wilson knew that oh okay ed wilson did okay yeah but it actually says on it says strange object as seen by the astronauts of gemini 11 i think that's what it says underneath on the lithograph so it's a so what he found was and that was a lithograph which is a printing a printed photograph and they printed them um kind of like a lithographs kind of like a um comic book is printed with all the dots right which makes it horrible to analyze if you're trying to find stars in that picture you're you were so out of luck i mean several of us were trying to identify stars and things like this in that picture and you just can't do it is that a ufo um i actually i i so what i my best assessment of what that image shows is that it is probably a mock-up of what the astronauts claim to have seen and um why is that your assessment because um ed actually found the original photograph in the university of arizona archives that shows earth with that cloud pattern in the background and there's no ufo there now of course it's easy to claim well now so erase the ufo from that picture um and it doesn't now of course doing an image analysis like that on on a scanned negative right where you don't know what kind of process and it's jpeg which is um a lossy encoding and all this these types of image analysis problems so it's not great it's not great for doing an image analysis on but i found no evidence that anything was erased from that picture and um and and that picture actually is showing the end of the tether experiment so so nas the gemini project gemini meaning twins was all about docking can we actually dock with another spacecraft in space and so gemini 11 was the last one of the series and a unique one in that their goal was to go up literally launch and dock within one orbit so what they were doing previously they'd go and they'd get up into orbit and then they'd maneuver to dock but the trick was can we just go up and dock and that's what they tried to do with the gemini 11 and they were successful and after they docked they um then were tethered to the other craft and they did a tethering and they did a tether experiment where they actually got the two crafts spinning like this i'm going to knock things over got the two crafts spinning on a tether and then um and did experiments to see how stable that is and what goes wrong and um so they had just finished that experiment and they had just released the other craft the unmanned craft and that's in the picture that the background of that lithograph is from and there's no indication that the astronauts saw any ufo at that time in the transcripts they were busy with the you know yeah they're busy with the tether experiment so when was the because you just said earlier that then the ufo sighting yeah the weird thing that happened happened an hour later which would put it in another orbit right two-thirds of an orbit so you did some forensic investigating and realized that the timing was timing's off for for when they actually did see the ufo so the big problems with that being a real picture are are first the the um first we don't have a picture of the uf we don't have an actual photograph of the ufo we don't just have the lithograph um there doesn't seem to be any evidence of tamper those that photograph being tampered with um there was no indication that they saw a ufo at that time and the ufo they did see happened an hour later yeah so so so what's your best explanation as to how that photo surfaced at all with the ufo what i suspect happened is is it's i i think that what that photo is is exactly what it says under the photo what's printed there strange object as seen by gemini 11 astronauts i think it's a mock-up to show what the astronauts saw and but didn't photograph was that officially published in some nasa thing no it wasn't officially published anywhere which was it made it interesting it was found in scott simpkinson was a nasa engineer okay um he was he was actually the first engineer hired by nasa whoa i think and his nickname was scotty everybody called him scotty and i can't and i can't help but think is there any connection between scott simpkinson scotty and scotty and the enterprise i don't know but he was very well known right in the 50s and 60s so there might be a connection that's fascinating yeah well it sounds like he's kind of as insidery as it gets yeah and the fact that he you know you find in his in his design some of the spacecraft i mean design some of the spacecraft so if there's some sort of even if it's an artist's rendition where they're so he had he he had and he had a collection of his nasa files he and his secretary emily ertel had a collection of of their nasa files and um and then when he died and she died they were made public and they were put to auction and ed wilson bought them that's wow that's how he got them and he discovered the lithograph amongst them well if there's a painting of a ufo i don't know if there's a painting of a ufo i don't know if there's a painting of a ufo in that photo and it's found in his records that implies that there's almost institutional nasa knowledge of the fact that the gemini 11 astronauts did see something i think well and and they that's what's said in the transcript so even if it's painted on it's like this inside joke or way to commemorate this very real event it's not this way to record what happened as best they can yeah that's fascinating that's so interesting why none of this is mentioned in the nasa commission's report i have no idea did they not maybe they didn't know i mean it's possible they didn't know i don't know who knows i mean speaking of nasa obstruction 3i atlas uh you know we have this manhattan sized object that is now uh uh come around back around the sun and it is headed towards jupiter it's going to pass the earth uh december 19th so this might be out by the time um you know it's it's already sort of passed um so so what do you what do you think is going on with this object you have like most of the astronomical community basically like ignoring it or saying it's so you know it doesn't matter whatever and then you have avi lobe going crazy going on literally every single podcast that exists saying you know 40 chance that this is an alien craft and you know it could be it could be a harbinger of you know either the messiah or you know it could be an invader or something so what what's going on yeah that's i mean and nasa as is is did this stupid gaslighting press conference where i was honestly a little skeptical of some of Avi's statements. I felt like he was like extrapolating and, you know, jumping to conclusions. But I ended up, I wanted to side with Avi after watching this gaslighting NASA thing. Well, first, NASA press conferences are the absolute worst. You want to geek out a little bit, Tom? You were geeking out so expertly, Nikki, to begin with. I was, I was. Embracing the geek. That was fabulous. I mean, every, even when I was at NASA, you wait for this press conference. Oh, there's going to be some exciting news about something. And it's not very exciting. No. And you're always, and part of the problem is that your expectation for excitement from NASA is way too high, right? And unreasonably high. So that's part of the problem. So I can't, not all the blame should go to NASA for that. But the press conferences are always quite, I mean, part of it also is science is kind of boring. And if you're, so if you're giving a press conference about science, that might be, that's often kind of boring. But you should expect a photo that's better resolution than what amateur astronomers are taking of 3I Atlas. It's like this fuzzy. Yeah, but it's hard if you've got, you've got a, you've got a spacecraft in orbit around Mars designed to image the surface of Mars and you're trying to use it to image something much further away. That's tough. Right. But then crowds, if you're the official government body and you get billions in funding every year, then find the amateur astronomer that can do it and do it. Work with them. Contra, you have the money. Yeah, they'll do it. You got the money. That would be nice. That'd be nice. Yeah. I mean, I'm not surprised that we can't get a good image of it. That's, that's hard to do. I mean, 3I Atlas is, is weird and I don't know, I mean, why the astronomical, astronomical society won't or community won't recognize that is kind of strange. I mean, maybe it is, are they kind of quieted by Avi being so loud about it being, possibly an alien craft that could be part of it. They don't want to get into this mess. But, but it's a weird thing. I mean, yeah, great, easy to say comet, but when it came back around from around the sun, if I'm remembering right, I mean, these are numbers that I not horribly invested in remembering, but it was only like 4% water vapor as it came back around. That's hardly any, the things, comets are dirty snowballs. They're made of water. 4% water? Well, no, no. What is this thing? It's got iron or it's got nickel, but no iron. Iron and nickel come together. I mean, they're, they're next to each other on the periodic table. To separate iron and nickel, you're going to need some weird, some difficult processes to separate these two. Meteorites, metal meteorites are always iron, nickel, meteorites. So now you've got something that's nickel and not iron. This is a weird thing. And it suggests some weird, weird processes that went into its formation. Has an anti-tail, not just a tail. It's got a tail and an anti-tail. It's, yeah, there's, there's a lot to worry about here. And and I suspect, I mean, if from, from a practical standpoint, clearly this is something that we don't know much about. Yeah. And so just claiming it's a comet and throwing up your hands and walking away is stupid. Just, just flat out stupid and ignorant. Um, to say it's an inter, to say it's an alien spacecraft. Well, I mean, yeah, that's, you don't have a lot of evidence for that either. So that's tough too. Um, but it is something we ought to study. And I remember there were several people who were saying, well, it's not worth studying. I'm like, no, this is an interstellar object that tells us what the conditions are like around another star system. Yeah. This is something you should study. If you're going to spend money to study another one of our asteroids over an interstellar object, that's not worth something from another star system. What's there's nothing reasonable about that. That's the problem with this whole conversation around UFOs is you have on the one hand, most conventional astronomers, not even looking at the data set often around, like I see these guys, I think this Piers Morgan just had on this guy, I think David Kipping or something. He seems like a really good, you know, David seems like a really actually, I loved his episode on Rogan. Yeah. Exoplanet guy, really smart on that dimension. But like this data set that we're talking about with UFOs showing up around nuclear weapons, just like totally ignorant of it. And like he's talking about UFOs, but it's like as if they have to be things that are traveling from from space. And I don't even think he's probably familiar with a lot of the NASA cases, you know, because these seem like anecdotal, small sample size, you know, conspiratorial things. I would argue that the nuclear thing is a ubiquitous global pattern. It's a huge deal that you have to contend with as a scientist. Right. So you end up with these people who like, again, don't want to like knock him like super smart, conventional guy, but like is mired in kind of current astronomical data around UFOs and just won't really look at it. And it's all relying on, you know, it's all like, well, if the government has something, they should release it or something, but can't look at the open source stuff. And then on the other side, it's people who are sure that it's extraterrestrial. They're here. They're star seeds, probably, you know, and we have all the it's like you're jumping super to conclusions. You're not just following the evidence. Yeah. Yeah. So it's, it's those two, it's there's no like middle path of like, this is the evidence. It's like dealing with a scientific, it's like a scientific community with bipolar disorder. Yes. It's like, yeah, it's crazy. Yeah. It's, it's really difficult. The, I mean, the best, the, the, the quote that comes to mind is from Stanton Freeman, who said, if you're a scientist and a professional, you need to do your homework before you open your mouth. Period. That's it. If you haven't done your homework, if you haven't researched it, then you, you have nothing to say. You have nothing to share. And, and you can't go with the excuse that I hear time and time again. Well, I don't, that's mostly nonsense and I don't have time to read nonsense. Well, then why are you finding the time to talk about, argue against nonsense? You can find the time to argue against nonsense without looking into the nonsense. I mean, that's, but you can't find the time to research it. And then, and first, first response to that, first, it's not nonsense. This is something that, this is a phenomenon that people have seen for centuries, centuries. I mean, you had Richard Dolan on and he just put out a book on, on UFOs in water, underwater UFOs. And his case is going back to the 1800s. These are the same things. They, they're coming, balls of light coming out of the water, hovering next to the ship, following the ship, and then taking off into the clouds. Same things. Yes. And for, since the 1800s and this, nobody in the 1800s is making this up to sound like what somebody reported last week. No, totally. And you have, you have third world places now, like in third world countries where it's like these people like Virginia, James Fox just got back from Brazil. He keeps going back and like this whole town, uncorrelated disparate sources, they all report this cigar shaped tic-tac, like object crashing and, and three beings coming out, you know, two of one of which was captured and, and, and taken to a hospital. And everybody working at the hospital says that they saw the being in one neuroscientist who's still alive to this day, goes on record, says he's staring the being in the face for four minutes. Yeah. And this guy's alive. And you have this whole town, there's a saucer in the town dedicated to UFOs. What they, none of these people are making a penny. Some of them were offered briefcases of cash to shut up about this thing. So, so like, why, like explain to me why they would lie. Like it's ridiculous. It's actually absurd. I wish I could see a UFO. So somebody could offer me shit to shut up. Yeah. Right. Yeah. Yeah. I'll take it. That's a good deal. Maybe that's what's happening with some of the scientists. Yeah. Well, maybe, maybe because I want like somebody like a Neil deGrasse Tyson, you know, like why he goes on these podcast tours and he's just, he'll just, it's the same thing over and over again, which is like no high resolution imagery. And, you know, it's like, you know, why don't we have, and we were, you know, why aren't we drowning in imagery? Cause and you have high resolution pictures of quasars, right? I don't think so, but they exist, but they exist. I mean, we don't have high resolution pictures of exoplanets either yet. David Kipping and I study them. Yes. I mean, come on. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, why or ask the average person to, why is it a scientist through when they come to this topic, they throw their brains out the window and then open their mouths. It's, it's, it's maddening. Yeah. I think there's some sort of, well, I think unorthodox and independent thinking. Don't scale with IQ. And so there are a lot of people that can be shepherded into bad frameworks and to not even looking at certain stigmatized topics because ideas are fashion statements and those are bad fashion or whatever, even though they can like do well on an SAT or something. And so that, I think that's a really, you know, not well understood thing. And so you think of this priestly citadel as like infallible when it comes to thinking about these things. But in fact, they can be shepherded into, you know, in some ways they can be shepherded even more easily because they think they're so smart. They think they can't be tricked or something. Right. And it's just, I don't know. I think it's sad because there are all these first principles argument. So you can, you can, you can go at, you know, Neil deGrasse Tyson with around, you know, red shifts and blue shifts and, you know, gravitational perturbations that will like, you know, cause issues with general optical photography, you know, and, you know, it's like, he wouldn't have anything to say after that. He would just say, well, it can't be, it can't be. So like there's, there's that's, that ends of the conversation with a person like that, you know? So it's extremely frustrating. I'm sure you deal with it because you have to straddle academia and this sort of more crazy world of UFOs. I've been in numerous discussions where the academic person I've been talking to just throws their brain out the window and stops thinking. If I talk about something else, another scientific topic, they're fine. But this, they just seem to stop thinking. It's very odd. You're in upstate New York. Do you think, you're in the general vicinity of Stony Brook University. Do you think they have anything to do with UFOs? I don't know of anything going on at Stony Brook. At Stony Brook? Okay. Because they, yeah, they have, I don't know, a bunch of interesting, they have like differential geometry stuff going on. And, you know, they have Jim Simons is like a big guy there. Yeah, no, Stony Brook has a great physics department, but I don't think they do anything with UFOs. With UFO stuff. Okay. Because David Spurgeon. David Spurgeon, who's Jim Simons, you know, foundation guy. So Jim Simons is like runs, he just passed away, ran the best performing hedge fund in the U.S. over, you know, a 30 year period. You know, Renaissance Technologies, the Medallion Fund. And before that, he was an NSA codebreaker and also like a brilliant physicist who's contributed a lot to fundamental physics and like Yang Mills and, you know, interesting stuff. So. My former colleague, Eric Weinstein, has suspected that maybe he has something to do with the UFO question or something. And that there may be the Renaissance Technologies sort of printing money and then they're putting it towards, you know, the UFO, the UFO question. And I honestly, I thought all of that was kind of conspiratorial and ridiculous until 2022 happened. There's a NASA UAP panel. And then David Spurgeon, who's, you know, Jim Simons top science advisor, runs the Science Foundation. Yeah, he wrote, he was the main author. On the NASA UAP review panel. Right. So I'm like, what's going on? Is there some sort of connection there? I don't know. Because we were just talking about all the weird NASA data and that seems to be like, you know, it seems like it might be suppressed or something. So. Yeah. Who knows? Well, this has been a pleasure, Kevin. I really love talking to you. And yeah, I wish you the best of luck with all of your interesting work at University of Albany. Oh, thank you. Thank you. And is there anything you'd like to plug or anything the audience can help? Kind of promote or support that helps you out? Well, our work at UAlbany would be great to support. We just got a generous donation from Tony Gorman, who's a local businessman. And that has really given us a big boost. And we can always use a little more boost. So if anybody wants to donate tax-free to UAlbany for our work on UAPs. That'd be awesome. That's awesome. And yeah, one of the few academic institutions that is actually systematically looking into this question. So we're basically, Matthew Shadagas and I, and, you know, we were original members with UAPX. And now UAPX has been disbanded and moved to UAlbany. And it's now UAlbany Project X. And Matthew Shadagas and I and Professor Cecilia Levy has joined us as well. Awesome. And we're, and the grant, the gift we got has created an endowment, which will fund us in perpetuity to some degree. So we have, we are here to stay. Wow. Love it. It's exciting. Well, excited to see, you know, as you make breakthroughs on a go forward basis and would love to have you back and really appreciate you coming out here. Thank you so much for having me. Alchemist. Did you enjoy that? If you want the full picture, head over to the American Alchemy Magazine we just launched on Substack. That's where we deep dive into all sorts of crazy topics that we don't have time to fit into every video with weekly articles, exploring all of the strange, forgotten and conspiratorial corners of space, history, and high weirdness. So join up today at our free or paid tiers on Substack. I am including the full link in the description of this video. Thank you so much for joining us on this episode of the American Alchemy Magazine. We'll see you next time. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye.